Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
09/04/96 AGENDA
BREM~RTON CITY COUNCIL 239 4TH STREET BREMERTON, WA 98337 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA SEPTEMBER 4, 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 the request of a Council member,i~r% _~ Minutes - August 14, 1996 Minutes - August 21, 1996 Bid Award Recommendation Cardlock Fueling And Fuels #AB96-188 ~ #AB96-189 ~ ~CLAIMS/CHECK REGISTERS ~OUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS 5. %MAYOR'S REPORT 6. ~UBLIC RECOGNITION -- (Comments Limited to 3 Minutes) NEW BUSINESS ~. Appointment of Debra L. Jackson To The Community Development Block Grant Advisory Committee Appointment Of Drake Evans To The Community Development Block Grant Advisory Committee Professional Services Agreement For Scott Alexander, Golf Professional Gold Mountain Golf Complex Bid Award To Ace Paving Company For 14TH Street Reconstruction - Park Avenue To Sheldon Blvd. Wastewater Treatment Plant Odo~Contro~ Project (V42152000) Amendments Number~ and 1~ To Professional Services Agreement With R. W. Beck (CONTINUED NEXT PAGE) #AB96-191 97 #AB96- #AB96-193 ~3 #AB96-194 5~ ~. 'rlT~NCES Ordinance #4566 (Second Reading) Authorizing #AB96-185 The Issue Of $346,938.50 LID Bonds And Accepting The Purchase Offer Of Seafirst Bank Ordinance #4567 (Second Reading) To amend #AB96-187 The "Administration" Section Of The Bremerton Zoning Ordinance 67 I10 Ordinance (First Reading) Amending The 1996 Budget (Budget Adjustments #96-13, 96-15 through 96-26 Ordinance (First Reading) Acknowledging A Revised Employee Expenses Reimbursement Policy 9. REI~LUTION ~. Resolution #2557 Acknowledging A Revised Vehicle Use Policy # B96-198 /$/ 10. PUBLIC HEARING 6:00 PM OR LATER A. Revisions To City Charter #AB96-199 /~O AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL 1. SUBJECT: MINUTES - AUGUST 14, t996 FOR AGENDA OF:September 4, 1996 ORIGINATING DEPT: City Council ORIGINATOR: John Law~ President DATE SUBMITTED: 8-26-96 2. CLEARANCES: (comment on back if necessary) ENDORSEMENT MAYOR INFORMATION__ APPROVED BY coUNcIL P ' NT FOR SUB_~TAL: COUNCIL PRESIDENT'~ 4. SUMI4_A_~Y STATEMENT AND REOUIREMENT FOR'COUNCIL ACTION: 8. RECOM24ENDATION: 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: PULLED TABLED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: 10. NOTICE OF ACTION APPROVED __ DISAPPROVED DATE: AMENDED 2A 11. AGENDA ~ILL NO: TAPE f~1398 UNAPPROVED DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES AUGUST 14~ 1996 #0030 #0046 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, August 14, 1996, at 5:30 P.M., with Council President John Law presiding. Council members present were Bob Winters, Carlos Montgomery, Sherril Huff-Menees, David Fart, Richard Neville, Lon Overson, Cecil McConnell, and A1 Colvin. Also present were City Attorney Ian Sievers and City Clerk Kathleen McCluskey. The meeting opened with the Pledge of Allegiance led by Council President Law and Invocation given by Councilman A1 Colvin. President Law made the following announcements: (1) Council held a Study Session prior to the Council meeting to discuss "Fee Waiver for Olympic Course at Gold Mountain"; (2) Council will hold a Study Session immediately following the Council meeting to discuss "Comprehensive Plan Amendments including Harrison Neighborhood Plan". (3) Council will hold an Executive Session immediately following the Study Session to discuss "Review of Personnel Performance". (4) Council will hold a Study Session 12:30 P.M., to discuss "Fletcher Transition". on August 15, 11:15 A.M. Wright, Inc., Ownership CONSENT AGENDA A. Minutes - July 31, 1996 #AB96-170 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 August 14, 1996, the Council does approve for payment those vouchers included and further described as follows: 200473 through 200662 in the amount of $224,372.70. COUNCIL MEMEER REPORTS Mr. Winters attended an awards presentation at the Redmond Elementary School on August 8th. The program was arranged to thank the many members of the Puget Sound Housing and Community Development Departments. He especially thanked Marylyn Waibel and TAPE #1398 city Council Reg. Mtg. August 14, 1996 Page 2 of 20 Minutes Debbie Peavler-Stewart for their hard work in administering the City of Bremerton's community Block Grant Program. Mr. Mont~omez7 reported the August 9th Concert on the Boardwalk drew a good crowd and the next scheduled concert will be held on August 16. On August 12 he attended the dedication of the Volleyball Court at Pendergast Regional Park. He was pleased to see clean-up activity taking place at the corner of 6th & Veneta. Mrs. Huff-Menees reported she has heard some very positive comments from parents about how much their children have enjoyed the Park Department's summer programs. The Parks Department has had record n,,mhers of children participate in their various activities. Mr. Farr was saddened over two Police officers recently injured in a vehicle accident while pursuing a suspected criminal. He acknowledged how Police Officers are placed in dangerous situations protecting the public, and the affect it can have on their families. He hoped the Police Officers recover quickly from their injuries. Mr. Neville thanked the Parks Department for the resurfacing of the tennis courts at llth & Warren Avenue. He reminded everyone of "KIDS DAY ON THE BOARDWALK,', August 16, 1996, 11:00 AM - 3:00 PM. Mr. Mcconnell announced the next District #2 Neighborhood Meeting will be held on September 10, at Fire Station #3 on Olympus Avenue. Mr. Cclvi~ congratulated the winners of the Bremerton Area Chamber Of Commerce Thunderbird Award: Dick Brinkerhoff, owner of Brinkerhoff's Appliance Centers; Robert Schneidler, President and Chief Executive Officer of Kitsap Physician Service Health Plans; and Reverend Lawrence R. Robertson, Pastor of Emmanual Apostolic Church. He announced the next District #1 Neighborhood Meeting will be held on September 19, 1996, 7:00 P.M., at the Sheridan Park Community Center, with Mayor Horton as the guest speaker. Mr. Law reminded residents of District #3 there will be no District #3 Neighborhood meeting in August; however, there will be a District meeting on September 17. Regarding a concern about tall grass and overgrown vegetation at the former Puget Sound transfer substation at 16th & Nipsic, this site was turned over to a subsidiary of Puget Power...Western Pacific Properties. He has been unsuccessful in getting Western Pacific Properties to remove the overgrown vegetation, but the tall grass has been removed. He emphasized Puget Power is a fantastic neighbor to the City, but he has had difficulty reaching anyone at Western Pacific Properties to resolve this matter. He will continue to make every effort to make contact with that company. 3 TAPE #1398 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes August 14, 1996 Page 3 of 20 NAYOR'B REPORT Mayor Lynn Horton suggested Mr. Law contact the Fire Department and solicit their help in resolving the problem of overgrown vegetation at the Western Pacific Properties site. At the previous Council meeting, Roy McInnis reported an incident involving two of his grandchildren becoming locked in a vehicle on a very hot day, and his concern over the City's emergency personnel's slow response to the mother's call to 911. After Mayor Horton reviewed the call record from CENCOM, it was determined that the person receiving the call gave it a "5" priority rating, meaning it was considered a iow ranking call, which delayed getting the information to emergency personnel. According to CENCOM's policies, anytime there is an issue in which children are involved, it is to be a high priority call. As a result of their ranking the call a priority "5", it took several minutes before a call was dispatched to the Bremerton Police Department to request a "slim jim" to gain access to the locked vehicle. The response from the Police Officer was negative, so the Bremerton Fire Department was toned out to respond to the emergency call. The Bremerton Fire Department was on the scene five minutes after the last response from the Police Officer, making a total time of 12 minutes from the time the 911 call was made. Police Chief Du Fresne indicated they have discussed this issue with the Manager of CENCOM, who will have further discussions with the person receiving the 911 call, because their handling of the call was against CENCOM's own policy involving small children. Mayor Horton reported she anticipates the opening of the Arvon pocket park in the next two weeks. Also, the city is in the final stages of putting together a skateboard park near the Swimming Pool in East park, and should be open in the near future. Mayor Horton introduced Tammy, Kitsap County Fair And Rodeo Queen. Oueen T,mm¥ gave a run down of the Kitsap County Fair schedule of events, and invited everyone to come and enjoy the planned activities and entertainment starting on August 21. Mayor Horton administered the Oath Of Office to Police Officer John Jerome. Police Chief Paul Du Fresne reported the injured officers were responding to a robbery where shots had been fired, and because of air bags in the vehicles, the officers received minimal injuries for the seriousness of the crash. That same evening, other Police Officers identified and apprehend the driver of the vehicle involved in the robbery, and that investigation is proceeding. He also emphasized the serious nature of Police work, and the fact that it can put them in danger. He expressed his appreciation to families of Police Officers, who have to live with the knowledge that their family member's work can bring them into dangerous TAPE #1398 City Council Reg. Mtg. August 14, 1996 Page 4 of 20 Minutes situations. Chief Du Fresne was pleased to report the City organized a team of officers to participate in the Kitsap Rifle And Revolver Club "Courage Challenge", an annual pistol shoot that involves law enforcement teams from throughout the region. The City's team, made up of John Jerome, Russell Holt, Daniel Fatt, and Luis Olan, took the top prize at that event. In the past, he has always worked at Police agencies involved in competitive shooting, and Bremerton has not had that tradition. He would like to see Bremerton Police officers continue to participate in such events, and believes the City has an excellent foundation for a group with the above named officers. PUBLIC P~COGNITION Jack Lefcoski, Kitsap Lake, stated a group has been formed and incorporated to work toward keeping weeds out of the 14 Kitsap County lakes (13 County lakes and 1 Bremerton lake). He provided handouts to Council members relating to the weed problems in all of the County lakes and urged them to read the information. Gord¥ Byrd reported he attended the Concert on the boardwalk and Concert in Evergreen Park. He also related an incident that he was involved in that brought about Kitsap Transit criminally prosecuting him for a charge that he believes is untrue. Del Knauss raised the following questions (quoted verbatim except for the addition of the word "Question"): Item 1 - Minutes from the July 8, 1996, Sinclair Landing Association Meeting of the Board of Directors, paragraph 6 talks about Wycoff Park, City Hall Park, and Evergreen Park. Question - are we getting rid of these parks or improving these parks? Question - what about parks property at the former Bremerton Lumber site and the Salvation Army site? Question - is the City selling these properties or trading them, and what happens to replacing the income from these properties, if we do sell them? Question - since the minutes mentioned City Hall Park, does this mean we are moving City Hall? Item 2 - I requested minutes from Randy /Witt concerning the Gateway CAC Committee. I received a February 21st, 1996 meeting s~mmary. What I am concerned about, even though it doesn't show in the one summary I have received, is that I am hearing talk that this committee and several Council members are still considering one-waying Burwell and Sixth Street. I want to remind Council you did vote against this. Question - is this true and who is pushing it the CAC Committee,SLA, Mayor Horton or certain Council members? Question - will Council member Huff-Menees step down when it comes to any votes on the Gateway issue since her husband, Jerry, is on 5 TAPE #1398 City Council Reg. Mtg. August 14, 1996 Page 5 of 20 Minutes this committee? Question - who is appointing committees in this city, the Mayor, Randy witt or Parametrix? Also, I'd like to request the Council to collect all correspondence and minutes concerning the Gateway Committee meetings because I do not feel I received everything from Randy Witt. Item 3 - On August 2, 1996, my son and I were at the McCormick WOODS Golf Course. We happened to see several Council members, Port Commissioners, County commissioners, Transit officials, Parametrix officials, SLA members and Mayor Horton attending what appeared tome some sort of meeting. Some of the people spotted were Sherril Huff-Menees, Carlos Montgomery, A1 Colvin, David Farr, Lon Overson, Richard Neville, Don Pratt, Fred Schoneman, Jeff Peacock, Phil Best and Richard Hayes. Question - why was this meeting not announced to the public? Question - was this meeting to discuss the downtown development? Question - why wasn't this meeting mentioned in last weeks Council reports? Question - are we starting to have secret meetings concerning downtown development? Question - who paid for this meeting, taxpayers or members attending? Question - does this mean now that you have had a meeting where there was a quorum of Council members that you should di~ulge the discussions you had before voting on any issues that might relate to this meeting." Elizabeth Buell expressed her appreciation for the bench placed in the hallway outside of the City Council Chambers. Carol Atkinson, Bremerton Main Street Association, announced the last Concert on the Boardwalk will be held on August 16. She displayed the 1996 Blackberry Festival poster ?A - WESTSOUND COMMUNITY ACCESS TELEVISION CONTRACT. #1%B96-157 The attached Interim Services Agreement transfers management of governmental programming to Westsound Community Access Television (WCAT). As you will recall, the City entered into an Inter- governmental Cooperation Agreement with the County to establish a non-profit community access management organization. A Board of Conveners (local residents) with the assistance of a consultant and County and city staff, developed the Articles of Incorporation and By-Laws in 1995. They selected, through an open application process, the first Board of Directors for the new corporation in September 1995. Since that time, the new board has met on a regular basis and hired the new WCAT Executive Director, Doyle Detroit, in May 1996. The actual transition to WCAT will take place in the Fall. In the interim, in order to assure a smooth transition, it is recommended that WCAT assume management responsibility for BCAT and the employees currently managed by the City. We will continue to TAPE #1398 City Council Reg. Mtg. August 14, 1996 Page 6 of 20 Minutes receive the same services. This contract is for the period 8/01/96 to 12/31/96, and provides for monthly payments to WCAT of the funds currently budgeted for salaries for the 1.5 employees, and part- time funds for Bob Neal's continuing services to Inside Bremerton. The remaining funds, approximately $7,000, will be used to upgrade equipment in the Council Chambers. The attached agreement is solely for the provision of governmental services. At the conclusion of our negotiations, an Operating Agreement will be presented to Council, which will cover the over- all operation and management of Public, Education, and Governmental Access. The County has concluded franchise negotiations and signed an agreement with WCAT. DoYle Detroit, Manager of WCAT, assured the City Council that WCAT will continue the services the City is currently receiving and adding to them slowly as they work through the change over process. She emphasized the cooperative manner in which TCI has worked with WCAT and offered the use of their studio for another year, if needed. She is also in the process of looking at upgrading TV cameras and microphones in the City Council Chambers. Elizabeth Buell raised a concern microphone may be defective because says. that Councilman Huff-Menses it is hard to hear what she Mr. Montgomez-f asked Ms. Doyle to consider situating a TV camera so that members of the audience can be shown as well. MS. Doyle stated that idea has already been discussed and included in her proposal to the Director Of Administrative Services. She is looking at the possibility of using robotics TV cameras in the Council Chambers, which could be managed by one individual from within the equipment booth. Mr. Colvin asked under the new setup for cable access television will Bremerton City Council meetings be telecast throughout the County? Ms. Detroit explained most of WCAT's work with the County will begin when the interconnect between Falcon Cablevision and TCI Cablevision is completed. That interconnect involves a 6-month calendar, and notice was given to Falcon by Debby Broughton, Kitsap County Director Of Administrative Services, to beqin the interconnect on June 21. Ms. Detroit anticipates it could ~ake 4-5 months before the actual interconnect enabling both systems to see the same programming at exactly the same time. Mr. Winters referenced page 2 of the contract.. Section 1, and asked if rerunning the City Council meetings on Thursday was being dropped? Joan Dinqfield, WCAT Board member, stated no, it was her understanding the additional airing of Council meetings would continue. Mr. Winters suggested that the contract be amended to TAPE #1398 City Council Reg. Mtg. August 14, 1996 Page 7 of 20 Minutes include the re-running of Council meetings would be maintained. He asked Ms. Dingfield's opinion in keeping Bremerton's Citizens Advisory Cable committee? Ms. Di~ field stated she anticipated WCAT having a great deal of citizen involvement for both the City of Bremerton and throughout the County. This is an organization that is very dependent upon volunteers. Mr. Winters asked if robotics type television cameras are used, what happens to the fine volunteers that are gaining experience to possibly go into professional filming/camera work? Ms. Det_~oit stated such individuals may be used in the control room operating the robotics cameras; and many buildings are using this type of equipment. She has no intention of have "staff only" in the control room. In addition, she hires from the volunteer pool. MT. Neville stated his excitement over WCAT becoming a reality, and seeing it progress into the County-wide stage; and everything in the City's current access program would continue, with more added as time goes on. He is anxious to view Kitsap County Commissioner meetings on TV. Ms. Detroit stated her Board of Directors has tasked her with the idea of having three access channels within three years. Mr. Mcco~nell referenced Section 7 - Termination of the Contract, and questioned if it was appropriate to have the right of termination with 30 days written notice, but to avoid termination by curing any such breach within 90 days of notification? K&thleen McCluske¥, City Clerk, explained the original language came from a longer term contract, which she had hoped to have in place sooner, and if that had happened, that particular language would have made more sense. Ian 8ieve~s, City Attorney, suggested having 5-days for correcting a breach. MT. M¢Connell asked what happens to the system if the contract is terminated for one of the listed reasons? Mrs. M¢Cluskey explained the "operating agreement" council will have before them in the near future will address that issue. And, that agreement specifies that the City's contribution and the County's contribution to WCAT is returned to them proportionately, which means that all of the assets of the corporation, equipment, money, etc. If the City terminated the contract, we would get the City's share back and then the option would be to contract with someone else or start it up again and operate it ourselves. Mr. Mc~on_~nell stated then Channel 12, as we know it today, could cease to exist for Bremerton, if the contract was terminated. Mrs. M¢~luske_/ stated yes, if the contract was terminated, the City would have a designated cable access channel. She suggested changing curing of the breach to 10 or 14 days, which would make more sense in the context of this shorter term contract. Ms. D__~n~field emphasized the amount of cooperation WCAT has received from the City and the County, which is very encouraging to their Board Of Directors. #1761 TAPE #1398 City Council Reg. August 14, 1996 Page 8 of 20 Mtg. Minutes Mr. F&rr thanked Ms. Dingfield, on behalf of the City Council, for the amount of time she has donated to the formation of WCAT. President Law stated he was optimistically looking forward when there will be three government/education channels, but questioned if he understood correction that at this point to have more than one channel in Bremerton, TCI would have to rewire or take over one of the existing channels? Ms. Detroit stated Mr. Law was correct, and she anticipates TCI will probably be thinking in those lines as they have more product to sell. There is a strong interest in programming on an educational access channel that would have programming for credit ...telecourses, which would benefit the community. She believes the first expansion channel to come will be an educational access channel. M/S/C/U(Neville/Winters) to approve the interim contract with WCAT to provide governmental programming with the noted changes of the City Council meetings to shown weekly and rerun at least once each week; and under Section 7 - termination, the curing of a breach time be changed to 14-days upon notification. ?B - LEASE/AGREEMENT WITH ONE-COMM CORPORATION FOR USE OF CITY OWNED PROPERTYt ~AB96-171 The City Council is requested to approve the Lease/Agreement between the City and One-Comm for lease of City owned property adjacent to Old Belfair Highway for purposes of constructing and establishing a communications receiving and transmitting facility. One-Comm desires lease of the property for five years, following which an option may be exercised for an additional five years. Initial payment will be $5,400.00 per year, and will change subject to local CPI upon the anniversary date of the lease. Ian 8ievers, City Attorney, noted Council was provided an additional insert, a single paragraph, which is substitute text under Paragraph 4 (d) Additional Consideration. That paragraph deals with rent, base rent, utility charges, and rent increases under (c) and (d) was an additional consideration for the City or CENCOM to locate a transmitter onto the facilities constructed by OneComm; and the substitute tax simply elaborates on that additional. Public comment - none. Mr. Overson stated he expects the City has a rather valuable site, and that it provides an opportunity for a tower that would reach areas of the region that cannot be reached any other way. It concerned him that the City was leasing out a valuable City asset for an annual rate of $5,400. Paul Lucas, Public Works & Utilities Department, stated $5,400 per year for that particular site does TAPE #1398 City Council Reg. Mtg. August 14, 1996 Page 9 of 20 Minutes seem cheap at first glance; however, that price will increase, plus the fact the City will have an antenna site on' the tower, at no charge, for CENCOM purposes. Additionally, should OneComm decide to sublet any additional space on the tower, the City of Bremerton would receive revenues (annually) on that activity, on a frequency basis. There is an industry standard of $250 per frequency. Mr. Lucas noted OneComm has stated they will just be constructing the tower and using it for their own purposes the first year. Mr. Winters stated when he attended the AWC Annual Conference in June 1996, a presentation was made to the conference delegates that alerted governmental bodies about the siting of cellular towers because of the new data that is being developed as part of the wireless technology. The information given stressed there is a lot of money to be made in this business, and it is being made at the expense of the taxpayers' property with the industry using up 40% of it and making tons of money. He asked Mr. Lucas what he used to base the $5,400 annual lease amount? Mr. Luoas stated it was based on an average of what the City is charging for other sites at the present time. The range of tower site leases is $130.00 per month to $2,200 per month, with the average being $620 per month. Mr. Winters stated the state of data communication through digital technology and the movement of that industry is much faster than government. The City is using up to 8% of usefulness at this point and well over 40% is being used in the private sector. He referenced the city of Clyde Hill and the fact their Municipal Code states that the permits and leases shall be issued on an annual basis only, but the City of Bremerton is willing to give OneComm's desired lease of the property for five years with an option for a second five years, at $5,400. He will not support approving a five-year lease unless it was at a much higher rate, and he highly recommended the City further study digital technology. Mr. Colvin asked the City Attorney if the additional five years was at an escalating cost? Mr. Sievers explained the cost would increase annually based on a cost of living (CPI) increase. There is an option that can be exercised by OneComm for a second five year term and what they have done to start the rent for the second five year term is either to apply the same CPI index for the 6th year or take the current price charged by King County for a comparable site. A survey was taken as to what other jurisdictions were charging, and a Rate Policy was received from King County. The City's beginning rate of $5,400 was well within the factor for a comparable site in King County; however they did say they were reviewing their policies on these types of sites and were confident within five years they would be on top of the industry and have state-of-the-art lease prices. The city of Clyde Hill does have a short term mandated in their Municipal Code; however, their only lease site is on a facility and in a building that is owned by the (O TAPE #1398 city Council Reg. Mtg. August 14, 1996 Page 10 of 20 Minutes City or jointly with the city of Bellevue. The City's situation is different in that it is a different kind of lease and rate structure in that the developer is leasing a piece of raw timbered ground and will require OneComm to put in roads, utilities, buildings and tower. At least the typical investment accounting approach to this is that they need a longer term to amortize their investment; however, in the case of Clyde Hill, the site existed on a city owned facility. In Mr. Lucas's answer to Mr. Overson's question, the City's charge on current leases are approximately $180 - $200 per transmitter on the City's facility, which is comparable to the charges by Clyde Hill. The City will charge, on the proposed lease, if OneComm decides to sub-lease additional transmitter spots. Mr. C01vinquestioned in the event of change of circumstances, what provisions are provided within the contract to allow the City to change the cost of leasing? Mr. 8ievers stated he could not disagree with Mr. Winters' point about this being a fast evolving industry, which is his concern with a long term lease, but in Mr. Sievers' opinion that is balanced with the cost of the investment by OneComm. He believes, based on conversations with King County, that their figures for leases have gone up faster than the average cost of living, but we don't know how fast the market for these leases will go and the best estimate made at this time is cost of living indicator, but giving another review after five years. Mr. Winters stated Mr. Sievers stated King County may be the leader in this technology or may have fallen behind. In reality, from his biased opinion, finds that those individuals speaking before the delegates at the AWC Annual Conference, i.e. Medina City Attorney, Planning Consultant for Medina, and Clyde Hill city Clerk, are moving faster on this issue than King County. He pointed out within the Clyde Hill lease agreement it states that all improvements constructed by the lessee shall become the property of the town upon their installation. The City's proposed agreement states: "OneComm may. at any time, includinq any time it vacates the premises, remove Onecomm's improvements, equipment, fixtures and all OneComm's personal DroDertv from the premises, but OneComm shall not be required to remove any foundations for the tower or ec~/iDment shelter nor underground cable conduit." He believes the City should take the position that once OneComm develops the facilities on the City's public land, all remains as City of Bremerton property. Mr. 8ievers stated he believed that point could possibly be used for further negotiations. Mr. Neville asked the location of Clyde Hill. Mr. Winters explained Clyde Hill borders Bellevue and the reason Clyde Hill was being used as a reference point is because of their expertise in writing an agreement for this type of lease. Mr. Neville noted Mr. Sievers stated this contract is equal in monetary value as one the in Clyde TAPE #1398 city Council Reg. August 14, 1996 Page 11 of 20 Mtg. Minutes Hill that ~rovides leases for multiple transmitters. He asked Mr. Winters if he had a recommendation for the length of a contract? Mr. WinteN~ stated one year. MN. Neville doubted someone would want to develop a site under a one-year contract with the added expense of constructing the tower. From the information provided, he was under the assumption a road already existed to the site. Mr. Winters asked if Mr. Neville was aware as to how much money this industry is making? ~. Neville stated no and asked Mr. Winters if he knew that information? MN. Wintmrs stated it amounts to many millions of dollars. Also, the City of Clyde Hill had several other companies interested in securing space on their tower. The key to the information on this issue provided at the AWC Conference was for cities to maintain control of the public's right-of-way to gain revenue through the use of the land, air space or the conduit in the ground. And, that is why a one year lease is recommended. Ma¥oN Lynn HoNton assured the City Council that she felt confident that the City Clerk, in her negotiation of the proposed lease, would pursue the most benefit for the City. She also pointed out Bremerton is not the Bellevue area. If the City had a population base of one million, she could see the City commanding a higher revenue from the tower. Additionally, OneCommwill not have their equipment up and ready to go until a years time, and would not derive any benefit from a one-year contract. She believes the Administration is tracking this issue and potentially at some point the City can achieve a higher revenue source for leasing such sites. But, she did not believe this was the time, and if the City made the conditions too stringent, the company could walk way from this offer. MN. Overso~ asked if this corporation is a business operation where by the City can derive some tax benefit? He did not want anyone to confuse income between the lease of space and the business activity. Steve Meadows, representing OneComm Inc., commended City staff on negotiating the proposed lease. OneComm corporation is not in the business of building a communication site and leasing it for the sake of leasing as a real estate entity. They are in the business of operating a large communication facility, which incorporates cellular phone operation, and dispatch radio, but on a digital secure format, paging and messaging all with one hand held unit. The company understands the community's best interest is served by the co-location of users on a singular tower, if possible. That is why the proposed structure is a lattice type and offers attachment buoys for future operators. OneComm has received inquiries from many operators regarding the availability of tower space. The City has incorporated a very good control such that they can achieve additional rental income. OneComm is not interested in recouping a real estate return and their only TAPE #1398 City Council Reg. August 14, 1996 Page 12 of 20 Mtg. Minutes expectation from another operator is to not interfere with their needs and to recover some of the costs related to the construction of the facility. In regard to the $5,400 per year lease amount, the price per square foot on a normal capitalized valuation of that income is in excess of $26.00 for that land. They are not building a major road to the site, but will build a spur road to access this particular area; and they will be bringing in utilities to the site as well. The overall investment cost in this project is quite expensive and he anticipates it will come to approximately $400,000, which is not a n~,mher they can recover in a one-year time frame. The properties referred to by Mr. Winters in the Clyde Hill area are existing improved properties and the wireless operators are not having to make the initial construction investment. He urged the City Council to view this proposal with a favorable response. Mr. Overson stated then as a business OneComm would be paying appropriate taxes, which would be the primary benefit for the public. Mr. Fart asked if the proposed building would be a modular type structure on a permanent foundation? Mr. Meadows explained the shelter would be prefabricated concrete approved by the State of Washington and the tower itself will be a lattice type structure and constructed on site. Mr. Fart asked Ms. McCluskey the amount of the tax revenue to the City, i.e. B&O, sales tax, etc., as a result of the business? Kathleen MoCluske¥, City Clerk, stated she was not sure there would be additional B&O taxes on their business operation. She did not know how to apportion business conducted through the use of that tower. The City does receive the 12.8% Leasehold Tax on all of those sites. Mr. Mea4ows explained there is no accounting system that can estimate how much traffic is going through any particular entity at any particular time. OneComm does pay all State type taxes. As Ms. McCluskey pointed out, they are paying the additional Leasehold Tax, which directly benefits the City. Mr. Montgomery questioned the actual location of the site? Mr. Lucas stated the site is off the old Belfair Highway in the watershed just north of the Forestry Division. Mr. Montgomery asked if there would be any runoff into the Union River from construction activities? Mr. Luoas stated no. TAPE #1399 Mr. Winters stated he wanted to see OneComm do business in Bremerton and to see the City's tax base increase, but he wanted it to be done fairly. He believed Ms. McCluskey stated she was not quite sure if the City would receive additional revenues from the business other than the lease amount and Leasehold tax. He wanted to be shown where in the lease agreement the City will collect #0180 TAPE #1399 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes August 14, 1996 Page 13 of 20 additional percentages of the gross revenue that is created by the sub-letting of the antennas onto the tower. He believes this is not an accounting question, but a billing system to the users of the antenna. He saw nothing in the agreement that entitled the City to any percentage of that business. Mr. Simvers stated the lease for the sublet leases that may come about during OneComm's lease is open and there may be a way to assess a lease payment based on gross revenue. OneCommcannot sublease space on the tower without the City's consent and subject to a sublease fee. He has not found any lease from the jurisdictions they looked at that did assess based on gross revenue, they were all at a "flat fee" rate. Mr. Meadews re-emphasized OneComm is not in the business of making money off of subleases. They looked at the possibility of locating on an existing tower, but due to their needs they could not. Mrs. Huff-Melees asked if OneComm had any competitors desiring to lease the subject site? F~r. Luoas stated no. Mr. MoCom~ell asked if the tower installation/equipment would adversely impact TV reception in the Bremerton area? Mr. Meadows stated no. Mr. Colvin asked how OneComm made their income? Mr. Meadows explained their business is targeted towards business and service oriented organizations. They make their money by increasing usership and have been in operation in Western Washington since July of 1994. Coverage of their service is from the Canadian border to below Portland and then further across the country. Mr. Colvin asked if OneComm's balance sheet was available to the City of Bremerton? Mr. Meadows stated that information should be available. Mr. Luoas gave a brief statement on how the City currently handles subleasing of tower space and their monitoring procedure. M/S/C(Farr/Colvin) to approve and authorize the Mayor to execute the same, subject to City Administrative Policies and Procedures. Mr. Meville asked for clarification that the site is a 45' x 45' piece of property, and none of the roadway is being leased? Mr. Lucas stated the size of the site was correct and OneComm is building the access to the site from the City's road located in that general vicinity. Mr. Colvin asked who will maintain the road? Mr. Lucas stated the City would maintain the City's road, but OneComm is responsible for keeping their access road clear and free of any debris. ~ explained all of the users of the site have a clause in their contract that they contribute to the maintenance of the main road. #0339 TAPE #1399 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes August 14, 1996 Page 14 of 20 Mr. Overson asked if the City Council will get a review of this at the 5-year option extension? Mr. Sievers stated yes. Mr. Overson wanted assurance that before this contract is extended in five years, it will come back before Council. Mr. 8ievers stated he felt it would be good to review with Council what the comparable King County site charges are for their tower spaces. If it is lower than the simple cost of living escalator, then that would be the price. Mr. Lucas noted additional contracts the City has currently outstanding are being monitored prior to the expiration date and renegotiating even on an extension of an existing contract prior to bringing it before Council for approval. Vote on motion: Motion carried. In Favor: Opposed: Colvin, Montgomery, Huff-Menees, Farr, Neville Overson, McConnell, Winters, Law 7C APPROVAL OF SINCLAIR LANDING PROJECT RESPONSIBILITIES BY HOWARD S. WRIGHT, INC., #AB96-172 On August 25, 1995, the City endorsed the selection of Fletcher Wright, Inc. following a request for proposals for the Bremerton Waterfront and Intermodal Terminal Project by Resolution 2517. On December 20, 1995, the City approved a Memorandum of Understanding with Fletcher Wright, Inc. and Sinclair Landing Association to advance the Sinclair Landing Project proposed by Fletcher Wright. Fletcher Wright, Inc. was selected on the basis of its design, engineering, project management, and financial resources. This firm has reorganized to recreate the Howard S. Wright Construction Company, and has transferred full responsibility for the Sinclair Landing Project to this new firm. Howard S. Wright will provide the City and other public partners with essentially the same management team and depth of resources that were offered by Fletcher Wright, Inc. Ian Sievers stated the city Council held a Study Session where this was presented and a representative spoke to the issue. Public comment - none. M/S/C/U(Farr/Montgomery) to City accepts the assumption of all rights and responsibilities of Fletcher Wright, Inc. by Howard S. Wright Construction Company for the Bremerton Waterfront Redevelopment and Intermodal Terminal Project and all subsequent agreements and letters of intent executed between the City and Fletcher Wright, Inc. Mr. Montqomer~ noted this is only a change in name from Fletcher Wright to Howard S. Wright, and Fletcher Challenge will continue to TAPE #1399 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes August 14, 1996 Page 15 of 20 back the Sinclair Landing project. Mr. Sievers stated that was his understanding, and more importantly than the financial backing, is the retention of the management team involved in the project. Mr. Winters stated he fully supports the Sinclair Land project as well as this housekeeping procedure; however, he finds it odd that on August 15, 11:15 A.M., Council will meet with representatives from Howard S. Wright Construction to confirm what is being voted on at this time. Mr. Overson stated part of the purpose of the social gathering held on August 2 at McCormick Woods was to meet some of the leaders of the Howard S. Wright corporation, specifically Mr. Johnson. Another meeting was scheduled on August 15 with some of the management to further clarify any concerns about the change in ownership. Based on the knowledge he has gained up to this point, he feels confident this is merely a housekeeping item, and the project is still moving forward with vigor and potential super beneficial results to the City. He strongly supports this proposal. Mrs. Huff-Menees stated in regard to the meeting scheduled for August 15, some of the principals the City has been working with, Craig Norsen and Mark Johnson from the Seattle office, asked different representatives from the City if they would like to meet with Mr. Duff, who is with the parent company and the Council's response was yes. In addition, the event held at McCormick Woods was a social event, and so far, legally, Council members are still entitled to attend such activities. Mr. Montqomery stated he and Mr. Colvin were the first Council members to arrive at the McCormick Woods event and he assured the public that not at any one moment did five members of the City Council ever get together. In fact, he doubted there were five Council members in attendance at any one time. Mr. Colvin echoed Mr. Montgomery's comments. Vote on motion: Motion Carried. In Favor: Abstain: Overson, Neville, Farr, Huff-Menees, Law, McConnell, Colvin, Montgomery Winters 7D - GORST AREA SEWER FEASIBILITY STUDYt ~AB96-175 The Bremerton/Kitsap County Health Department has declared the Gorst Area of Kitsap County to be a severe public health hazard due to failing on-site sewer systems. The Cities of Bremerton and Port Orchard, in cooperation with Sewer District #5, and the Port of Bremerton, have agreed to participate in a feasibility study to sewer the Gorst and industrial areas. The study will include the TAPE #1399 City Council Reg. Aug]/st 14, 1996 Page 16 of 20 Mtg. Minutes wastewater treatment facilities of Bremerton and Port Orchard/Sewer District #5. The request before the City Council is to approve the participation of the City of Bremerton in the feasibility study to a maximum amount of $22,500.00. Mayor Lynn Morton stated the Bremerton/Kitsap County Health Department surveyed the Gorst sewer area about 10 years ago, to look at the prevailing septic systems, and found a number of systems that were failing. Since that time, not much has been done to alleviate the situation. This last year the Department re- surveyed the area and actually expanded the number of properties surveyed to see how the septic systems were holding up. Once again, they determined a number of systems are indeed failing. There are two sewer systems in the area: (1) Port Orchard Sewer District #5; (2) City of Bremerton. The Gorst area, although in the County, cannot be serviced by a sewer system from Kitsap County. At some point down the road, Kitsap County may be looking at a new sewer system in the South Kitsap area, but estimates that may still be 5-10 years away. In the meantime, the health situation feeding into Sinclair Inlet continues unabated. It is logical that not only would Bremerton be one entity to provide a sewer system, but also the outfall for the existing sewer treatment plant goes into Sinclair Inlet, and it is imperative that Bremerton, as a jurisdiction, do everything that it can to ensure that the environmental viability of Sinclair Inlet increases. If we don't, there is the possibility that at sometime in the future, the State may request additional regulations. Also, she considers us all stewards of Sinclair Inlet because our community surrounds it. When the Health Department approached Bremerton officials to see what they might do to look at the situation, it was recommended that a consortium of entities and individuals be formed to look at the area, including McCormick Woods, Anderson Hill area, Port of Bremerton, Olympic View Landfill, and the surrounding property. At the meeting, everyone felt very committed to not let another 10 years go by before the problem was addressed. The issue before Council tonight is to look at a feasibility study of the area to see which entity or entities would be best to provide sewer service for the greater Gorst area, in the most economic way possible. The total estimate for the feasibility study is $150,000, and the contribution from the City of Bremerton would be 15%, or $22,500.00. She believes this will be money well spent. John Thomas, citizen, suggested that if pipes are placed from the sewer treatment plant to Gorst, that a second set be placed at the same time, and making the pumping stations a little bit bigger in order to start pumping outflow up to the Golf Course as a source of irrigation. Mayor Horton responded that a water re-use study is being performed right now, and ways are being looked at to determine ways of treating and utilizing the water. TAPE #1399 City Council Reg. Mtg. August 14, 1996 Page 17 of 20 Minutes M~. McConnell asked who are the members of the local improvement d~istrict discussed in the Memorandum of Understanding? What if it is not formed in the required 6 years? M&¥or Horton responded that she did not know who would be members of the U.L.I.D., that is part of what the study would look at. Ian Sievers stated the "6 years" is not part of the binding contract at this point, and is only an intention of the parties. Ma¥0r Horton stated the participants who have been meeting are resolved to sewer the area, and would like to move forward. Mr. McCo~ell stated he hopes they do consider Mr. Thomas' suggestion. Mr. Winters thanked the Mayor for initiating this action, and he fully approves. Mr. Overson inquired if this proposal should include a budget adjustment? Xathlee~ McCluske¥, City Clerk, stated the funding is already contained in the Professional Services line item of the Wastewater Department. Mr. Overson expressed concern that this situation is representative of Kitsap County and/or the Health Department not doing their job. Legally, anyone with a known point source of pollutants should be closed down. He questioned if a $150,000 feasibility study is really necessary to determine who should be on sewers, when they should be on sewers, and which ones they should be on. This should not be that difficult to determine. Mayor Horto~ stated in the immediate Gorst area, those comments are correct, but there are other players outside of the immediate area, and she believes somewhere there will be a service dividing line. Mr. Colvi~ questioned who pays for the L.I.D? Would the City pay? Mayor Horton stated the participants would pay, although the City has put in a small percentage in an ordinance, that the City could participate. Mr. Colvin asked the capacity of the City's sewer treatment plant, and how much higher can it go? Gene Sampls¥, Public Works and Utility Director, stated Bremerton is at about 70% of its capacity, and one of the things the study will determine is how much capacity is required to address the issues for sewering these areas. That is why an alternative may be to split the service area between both plants. In that event, there would probably be two L.I.D.'s, one for each service area. The City would be a participant, because the City does own property in the subject area. Mr. Montaomez~ stated in previous discussions with Mr. Sampley, he learned that the plant does have the capacity, but as a result of the study, depending on what type of industry is put out there, will determine who gets what. It is his understanding that District #5 does not have the capacity. With all of the hookups they need to have south of their plant, they will have problems. #1097 #1161 #1195 TAPE #1399 City Council Reg. Mtg. August 14, 1996 Page 18 of 20 Minutes Mr. Samnle¥ stated Sewer District #5 is in an expansion situation right now; and their concern is what that capacity is going to be reserved for. They are contributing the same amount as Bremerton to this study. Concerning Bremerton's capacity, it is correct that any one industry could come in and consume a considerable portion of the available capacity. The State requires the City to go into a planning stage for expansion when 80% capacity is reached, and preliminary work has already been started. Mr. Fart stated he appreciates the fact the city is only paying 15% of the cost of the study, and is cooperating with other entities. M/S/C/U(Farr/Colvin) to approve and authorize the Mayor to execute the same, subject to city Administrative Policies and Procedures. Mr. Overson doesn't agree with the way this is being proposed, but he does support it. He believes the citizens of Bremerton will get their money's worth. 8A - ORDINANCE NO. 4564 (SECOND RE~DING) EXTENDING PROCEDURES FOR L~ND USE PERMIT HEARINGS. #AB96-169 Public comment - none. INTERIM M(Montgomery) to not pass Ordinance No. 4564 on second reading, extending interim procedures for Land Use Permit Hearings and amending Ordinance No. 4550. Motion failed for lack of second. M/S/C(Overson/Colvin) to pass Ordinance No. 4564 on second reading, extending interim procedures for Land Use Permit Hearings and amending Ordinance No. 4550. Vote on motion: Motion Carried. In Favor: McConnell, Colvin, Winters, Huff- Menees, Farr, Neville, Overson, Law Opposed: Montgomery 8B - ORDINANCE (FIRST READING) TO ESTABLISH SEWER FRONT FOOTAGE FEES FOR NORTHL~KE WAY= PROVIDE CONDITIONAL REBATES OF SURCHARGES UPON i~NNEXATION; ~ ~ENDING ORDINANCE NO. 4529. ~AB96-174 This request for an ordinance amendment adds two new sections: (1) New Article II.(a)(2) (c) for a change to the Assessment Rates under "Front Footage Fees". This would only affect those properties not included in Utility Local Improvement District (ULID) #327 and assesses a $64.30 charge per foot. (2) New Section 2 for a conditional rebate of surcharges paid by owners outside City limits who have applied for and are receiving City utility services. The rebate would be made if annexation into TAPE #1399 City Council Reg. Mtg. August 14, 1996 Page 19 of 20 Minutes the city limits occurred within 12 months from the date fees were paid. Method of rebate would be as outlined in the Outside Utilities Agreement. Mr. samDle¥ stated this Agenda Bill addresses two issues: (1) the issue of latecomers who have recently jointed the Kitsap Lake sewer extension that was recently completed; (2) L.I.D. #327, the properties on Northlake Way. The City has received requests from property owners in that area to be hooked up to the sewer. His department reviewed the cost as close as possible to the cost per foot basis for a front footage fee that could apply to latecomers and calculated that to be $64.30 per foot (minimum 50 foot frontage), which would equalize their cost for hooking up to the sewer with the city residents involved in the L.I.D. The County properties were invited into the U.L.I.D. initially and chose not to participate. Under the City current ordinance, without this modification those hook ups could be made at $12.00 per foot for County residents and $8.00 per foot for City residents. The second issue was one in which they have had some discussion at staff level and with Mayor Horton. The Mayor has initiated the policy, subject to Council's approval, that would reimburse the County surcharge on front footage and facility fee, which is a 50% surcharge, for those properties that would be incorporated into the City within 12 months of annexation. It does not affect the retail rates that would be paid until such time those properties would be annexed. This would be an incentive to try to encourage property owners to cooperate together to bring about an annexation that has some order to it. He urged Council to approve the proposal as presented. Gord¥ BYr4 asked what was the basis for the difference between the $8.00 per foot fee and the $12.00 per foot fee? Mr. Sa~ple¥ explained both the sewer and water utilities have been developed primarily for the benefit of the citizens of Bremerton. It is common practice throughout the country to have a surcharge to those users that are outside of the corporate limits of the City. That surcharge on hook up fees is normally 50%, so the City is basically following established procedures in most entities. The $8.00 fee is the rate established for front footage fee and the 50% surcharge fee amounts to $4.00, thereby making the non-resident fee of $12.00 per square foot. Mr. Overson questioned if it was legal for the City to ask non-city residents, who wished to hook up to City sewer and be part of ULID #327, to pay 8 times the amount per foot than anyone else? I&D Siever~, City Attorney, stated Mr. Sampley may want to explain the basis for this particular utility fee. Front footage billing #1554 TAPE #1399 City Council Reg. August 14, 1996 Page 20 of 20 Mtg. Minutes is to reimburse the average actual cost of the main installation. A separate classification was set up because a more precise actual cost of the main fronting the County properties was developed. Mr. Overson stated the city does not charge most citizens actual costs. ~ stated it should be pointed out that this particular sewer extension went the full length of Northlake Way in order to reach the U.L.I.D. area and all of the parties were invited to participate. He emphasized the real issue is one of equity. Mr. Overson asked, based on equitability standpoint, did Mr. Sievers believe the fee would stand up to scruteny? Mr. Sievers stated possibility the city's other rates are too low, but the fact that some people are getting a break doesn't mean the City can't charge these persons more accurate assessment of the front footage fee. Mr. McConnell asked the cost of the front footage fee for the U.L.I.D. participants? Mr. SamDle¥ explained the parties in the U.L.I.D were assessed a per hook up assessment amounting to approximately $5,300 per lot. Mr. Winters asked who came up with the idea to create an equity incentive? Mr. Sample¥ stated he and his staff, with Tim Richard leading the charge, were concerned with the late hook ups and pursued development of the proposed fees. Mr. Winters complimented the Mayor and staff for developing incentives for the public and ways for them to become involved in the system. M/S/C/U(Winter/Colvin) to approve ordinance on first reading, establishing a conditional rebate for utility services provided to individuals outside the city limits upon annexation into the City of Bremerton within a prescribed period of time, and amending "Front Footage Fees" for those properties not included in Utility Local Improvement District (ULID) #327; and amending Ordinance No. 4529. Presi4ent Law thanked the TV camera crew for their services: Erin Daniels, James Noble, Mike Pebbles, and Nadine Price. With no further business meeting adjourned at 7:56 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 1. SUBJECT: MINUTES - AUGUST 21, 1996 FOR AGENDA OF: 9-4-96 ORIGINATING DEPT: Czty council ORIGINATOR: DATE SUBMITTED: fi-3D-q6 2. C__~: (comment an back if necessary) 3. EXHIBITS: ENDORSEMENT__ INFORPLATION __ APPROVED BY coLrNcIL P~DENT FOR ~SUBMITT~-L: I~AYOR coLrNcIL PRESIDENT//~ 4. SO~4M3%RY STATEFFENT A~D REOUtREMENT FOR'COUNCI~ACTION. 8. RECOM]4ENDATION: RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: ENFORCEMENT OFFICIkL: EXPIP~ATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: PULLED TABLED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: 10. NOT%CE OF ACTION APPROVED DISAPPROVED DATE: ~ENDED TAPE #1400 UNAPPROVED DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINDTES AUGUST 21~ 1996 #0028 #0041 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, August 21, 1996, at 5:30 P.M., with Council President John Law presiding. Council members present were Richard Neville, Lon Overson, Cecil McConnell, and A1 Colvin. Council members Bob Winters, Carlos Montgomery, Sherril Huff- Menees, and David Farr were absent. Also present were City Attorney Ian Sievers and City Clerk Kathleen McCluskey. The meeting opened with the Pledge of Allegiance led by Council President Law and Invocation given by Mr. Ken Friesen, Secondary Principal at Kings West School. President Law announced Agenda Item 9B was pulled off the Agenda. CONSENT AGENDA A. Minutes - August 7, 1996 #AB96-175 M/S/C/U(Neville/Colvin) 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/McConnell) on August 21, 1996, the Council does approve for payment those vouchers included and further described as follows: 200684 through 200859 in the amount of $263,764.09; and Regular Payroll for the period ending 8-15-96, in the amount of $727,246.24. COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS Mr. Colvin announced the next District #1 Neighborhood Meeting will be held on September 19, 7:00 P.M., at the Sheridan Park Recreation Center. He encouraged all senior citizens, who were concerned about the Scotch broom, to attend the District #1 meeting to thank Mayor Horton for her part in getting rid of the Scotch broom and to bring ideas as to what should be planted as replacement plants. Mr. Neville announced the Engineering Department will hold a public meeting on August 27, 6:00 - 7:30 P.M., at Olympic College North Conference Room to discuss removal of parking on planting strips in the Highland District between llth Street and 13th Street and TAPE #1400 city Council Reg. August 21, 1996 Page 2 of 8 Mtg. Minutes Pleasant Avenue between llth Street and 13th Street. Additional information about this meeting can be obtained by calling the Engineering Department 478-5270, Mark Souza, Senior Engineer - 478- 5272, or the City Council Office 478-5280. Mr. Law announced the next District #3 Neighborhood Meeting is scheduled for September 17, 7:00 P.M., at the Senior Center 7A - APPOINTMENT OF SCOTT PURL TO THE DISABILITY ACTION COMMITTEE, #0193 #0024 ~AB96-176 There are vacancies on the Disability Action Committee. recommended Scott Purl be appointed to the Committee. It is MaYor Horton stated Scott Purl is a full time student at Olympic College and has been involved with the Department Of Vocational Rehabilitation as a volunteer for ADA compliance. Scott served as the AWARE Club President of disabled students, facility and administration that are concerned about issues of disability in higher education. Scott is a disabled individual, so he understands the challenges of people with disabilities. She believes he will be an asset to the Disability Action Committee and urged Council to confirm Scott's appointment as presented. Public comment - none. Mr. Neville stated he was pleased that Scott Purl applied for this position and taking time when he is a student to serve his community. M/S/C/U(Neville/Colvin) to confirm the appointment of Scott Purl to the Disability Action Committee. 7B - APPOINTMENT OF WILLIAM WADE TO THE DISABILITY ACTION COMMITTEE. #AB96-177 There are vacancies on the Disability Action committee. It is recommended William Wade be appointed to the Committee. Mayor Lynn Norton stated William Wade is a Disability Placement Specialist and an Employment Counselor with Washington State Employment Security Department. His background includes a Bachelors D~gree in Psychology and Work force Education. Mr. Wade has been actively involved in the community through the Silverdale Chamber Of Commerce - Military Affairs Committee. She believes Mr. Wade will also be an asset to the Disability Action Committee and urged Council's confirmation based on the information presented. Public comment - none. M/S/C/U(Overson/McConnell) to confirm the appointment of William TAPE #1400 City Council Reg. August 21, 1996 Page 3 of 8 Mtg. Minutes Wade to the Disability Action Committee. MAYOR,S Ma¥0r Lynn Horton announced on August 24, 12:00 noon, a Dedication Ceremony will be held for a new Skating facility located on the lower portion in front of the Jarstad Aquatic Center. The Youth Council held fund raising events and donated in excess of $3,500 towards this project. Mayor Horton reported on a very successful "Kids Day on the Boardwalk" held on August 16. On a sad note, Mayor Horton announced today she received information from Congressman Norm Dicks' Office and the Under Secretary of the Navy that the City of Bremerton was not selected as the final home of the USS Missouri. The No. #1 choice was Honolulu, Hawaii and the Under Secretary assured her that the decision was based on merit and following review by many people, there was a unanimous consensus that Honolulu had an outstanding proposal and deemed better than Bremerton's proposal. The Under Secretary also indicated that a couple of other ships will be surplused and Bremerton would have a good chance being the recipient of one should Bremerton decide to apply. At this point, she had not had the opportunity to discuss that possibility with members of the community nor Congressman Dicks. She did have the opportunity to speak with Craig Norsen of Fletcher Challenge and he indicated their commitment to the Sinclair Landing project even though Bremerton was not successful in being awarded the USS Missouri. She extended a note of appreciation to Congressman Norm Dicks, Earl Smith, Executive Director of the EDC, Sven Colvie, loaned Executive from Boeing, and Randy McGreal. She felt strongly that this community can be proud of the fact that we have been a home to the USS Missouri for many years and she does not believe any other community will be as good a home to the USS Missouri as the City of Bremerton. PUBLIC RECOGNITION Reverend Cleveland Williams announced the Martin Luther King Scholarship Fund of Kitsap County is sponsoring Constitution Day Luncheon on September 15, 1996, 1:30 P.M., at the Bayview Inn. Admission to this event is $15.00 per person. Car01 Atkinson, Bremerton Main Street Association, invited everyone to the Bremerton Blackberry Festival on Labor Day weekend (September 1 and 2). The festival will feature two days of free entertainment including a Childlren's stage, hydro plane display, food and craft booths, and the NINA, a 1492 replica of the Columbus ship, will be at the Bremerton Marina. TAPE #1400 city Council Reg. Mtg. Aug]/st 21, 1996 Page 4 of 8 Minutes Matthew Palermini and sha~anonKraetsoh announced Harrison Memorial Hospital will hold a Blood Drive, in their auditorium, on August 26, 11:00 AM - 1:00 PM, 1:45 PM - 5:00 PM. Donors will also have the opportunity to joint the National Marrow Donor Registry. Charlie Brown expressed concern that City Council meeting minutes downloaded from the Internet contain names, addresses and telephone numbers of individuals, which he felt presented a potential opportunity for harassment. 7C - CHANGE ORDER ~3~ ~OLD MOUNTAIN~OLFCOURSE EXPANSION--PHASE 1, f~B96-278 This Change Order #3 is a two part change order for the overall additive cost of $33,371.40. Part I - Erosion control to control site erosion through the months of November '95 through April ~96. Cost: $31,849.90. Part II - Extruded concrete curbing on the asphalt cart paths to channel stormwater runoff and control travel of golf carts on the slopes. Cost: $1,521.50. Dan Miller, Project Manager, stated this is the final change order for the Gold Mountain Golf Course expansion project and within the contingency budget. Public comment - none. Mr. Overson asked the dollar figure for the golf course expansion? Mr. Miller stated he worked within a budget of 5.3 million dollars, which also took into account the cart storage area, new parking area, and ground maintenance buildings. Mr. Oversonquestioned how much under budget was the project? Mr. Miller explained he was under budget by $17,000 and the course will be opening six months ahead of schedule. Mr. Overson complimented Mr. Miller on his management of the project. He noted there are concerns that funding for part 1 (erosion control) was overstepping the letter of the law so far as contract changes, but under the urgency of the situation he believed Mr. Miller had no other alternative. Mr. Neville pointed out that under part 1 (expenditure of $31,849) the City received 2,000 lined feet of 4-inch pipe, dewatering pump, electric generator, construction of additional settling ponds, sand bags, straw mulch, silt fencing, quarry rock, approximately 75,000 s.f. of plastic sheeting and associated labor. He emphasized the fact that Mr. Miller saved the City money by not having the erosion of soils flow into the nearby stream, which could have brought about a fine from the Department of Ecology. Mr. Miller reiterated his pre-planning for erosion control for the project by factoring in $28-30,000 to provide needed control. The project was covered #0936 #1179 TAPE #1400 City Council Reg. August 21, 1996 Page 5 of 8 Mtg. Minutes through the six months of winter with multiple 100 year storms occurring. Mr. Colvin pointed out for the public's benefit that this information had been presented to Council at various Council Study Sessions and Committee meetings. M/S/C/U(McConnell/Colvin) to approve and. authorize the Mayor to execute Change Order #3 in the amount of $33,371.40, subject to City Administrative Policies and Procedures. 8A - RESOLUTION NO. 2553. TEMPORARY FEE WAIVER FOR THE OLYMPIC COURSE AT GOLD MOUNTAIN. %AB96-179 As a marketing tool to promote the opening of the new Olympic Course at Gold Mountain, the Parks & Recreation Department, with unanimous approval of the Golf Complex Board of Directors, recommends a temporary waiver of fees for the Olympic Course at Gold Mountain as defined in Exhibit (1). This recommendation deviates from the fee requirements defined by Resolution 2532. Jim Spencer, Parks and Recreation Director, announced the grand opening of the new Olympic Course is scheduled for September 13, which is well in advance of the original target date. As a means of promoting the course, they are proposing waiving the green fees to those participating on September 13 and additionally on September 14, 15 and 16 when the course would be made available to the general public on a first-come-first-serve basis using their normal tee time policy. He noted one correction to the resolution.., the "Media Day" will be September 7th instead of September 12. The basic thinking for giving "course play" at no cost is a way to introduce people to the course, who will help market the course. Public comment - none. Mr. Neville asked what must someone do to get to play free? Mr. Spencer explained they will be using the usual tee time policy, which would be making a reservation for a tee off time seven days prior to the date. Mr. Neville asked if one person could make a reservation for a complete foursome or does each one have to make their own reservation? Mr. Spencer stated one person could make a tee time for a foursome. Mr. Neville asked if there were any restrictions on media participants? Mr. Spencer explained they will be targeting as many media personnel as possible in the Seattle, Tacoma and local area. Mr. Neville asked if participation on September 13 was by invitation only? Mr. Spencer stated yes. M/S/C/U(McConnell/Colvin) to adopt Resolution No. 2553, setting forth for marketing purposes a temporary waiver of the fee TAPE #1400 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes August 21, 1996 Page 6 of 8 structure for the Olympic Course at Gold Mountain as defined in Resolution No. 2532; including the modification of the "Media Day" to September 7, 1996. 9A - ORDINANCE NO. 4565 (SECOND RE/%DING) TO ESTABLISH SEWER FRONT FOOT~GE FEES FOR NORTHLAKE WAY= PROVIDE CONDITIONAL REBATES OF SURCWa/~ES UPON ANNEXATION; AND AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 4529, %1~B96- 174 Don Schultz, Kitsap County resident, stated he is a County resident and his property borders on the north edge of Northlake Way and Chico Way. He is interested in a rebate and what conditions and/or steps might be necessary to successfully annex his property into the city to take advantage of the sewer hookup. Early on during the U.L.I.D. process he became acquainted with Jack Lefcoski and he made numerous phone calls to the City inquiring about joining the Kitsap Lake Sewer U.L.I.D., which at that time he was told he could not because he was not a City resident. In January 1994, he sent a letter to Terrie O'Neill, Municipal Services Coordinator, requesting that his property be annexed into the City. The response he received from the City was a "denial" because annexing a single property would create an irregular boundary. He has since applied again, in writing, on July 12; however, he has not received a response to that request. He asked if he understood correctly that when someone like him signs an Outside Utility Agreement it would mean giving limited power of attorney that they might become City residents as per receiving utility services? Ian Sievers, City Attorney, stated that was correct, the limited power of attorney is for signing various petitions and letters of intent for annexation. Mr. Schultz stated he did not know if the timing of signing an Outside Utility Agreement and giving it to the Utility Department and having it recorded would have any consequence. He believed Mr. Sampley, Public Works and Utilities Director, stated at the previous meeting that the latecomer's fee was $12.00 per foot; however Mr. Schultz believes that amount should be $13.77, and that was what he hoped he would have to pay as a "latecomer" when he hooked up to the sewer. He did fill out, sign and notarized an Outside Utility Agreement in October 1995, in order to be ready to hook up to the sewer. Since that time, he has not been able to pay the fee and hook up to the sewer because the fee had not been set. He asked if the latecomers fee will be $13.77 when he signed up for it or is it now $64.30 per foot? On July 19 he paid a fee for one of his parcels at the rate of $64.30 per foot. He emphasized a rebate would be secondary to his main concern to get the process started to annex his property into the City. He is a real advocate of the sewer line because of his concern for Kitsap Lake and he is aware of what failed septic systems are doing to the lake. On another issue, his property fronts Nortlake Way 184 feet and he #1555 TAPE #1400 City Council Reg. August 21, 1996 Page 7 of 8 Mtg. Minutes fronts chico Way approximately 300 feet. When he purchased the property over 20 years ago, shortly thereafter he hooked up to City water, paying the appropriate fees. Since then, he has short platted the property and his son has acquired an adjoining piece, which is approximately 150 feet fronting on Chico Way. Now that it is a new lot, there is a $600+ charge that will have to be paid for that water main installation again. If he had known that would happen, he would have paid for the meter ($1,000), and would have saved the $600+. The only other alternative would be to spend $50.00 and re-short plat back, which does not make a lot of sense. He felt he was paying twice for the water frontage and didn't feel it was fair even though his son owns the lot. Finally, Mr. Schultz stated he works for Kitsap County and through that association he posed some questions to some County Engineers regarding the engineering logic and design problems with side sewers, lateral sewer designs, particular to his case. If this was a County project, he could save approximately $5,000 hooking up his four lots verses the way he must abide by City of Bremerton ordinance. He knew that was the situation and his only recourse is to complain. He sympathizes with developers on the frustrations they feel dealing with multiple ordinances in such a close area. Presi4ent Law noted Mr. Schultz's concerns/questions covered a wide area and he requested the City Attorney and other departments involved to contact Mr. Schultz in answering his questions. He assured Mr. Schultz Council would like to see him annexed into the City; however, such a commitment could not be made at this meeting. Mr. overson noted the City Council members, at the Council level, enact certain events, requirements and fees believing they will be applied in a manner that benefits all, but not always understanding how they will be applied. Occasionally, a situation comes up like Mr. Schultz's, which he believes should be handled on a case-by- case basis. He encouraged President Law to encourage the departments to be proactive with Mr. Schultz's situation and with the solution. Mr. Neville stressed Mr. Sampley, Director of Public Works, has worked with the public previously on fee increases if the person had applied prior to the change going into effect, thereby being charged the old price, not the new cost. He was sure Mr. Sampley can and will work with Mr. Schultz on this issue. M/S/C/U(McConnell/Colvin) to pass Ordinance No. 4565 on second reading, establishing a conditional rebate for utility services provided to individuals outside the City limits upon annexation into the City of Bremerton within a prescribed period of time, and amending "Front Footage Fees" for those properties not included in TAPE #1400 city Council Reg. Mtg. August 21, 1996 Page 8 of 8 Minutes Utility Local Improvement .District (ULID) #327; and amending Ordinance No. 4529. Prssid______ent Law thanked the TV camera crew for their services: Dave Noble, Mike Pebbles and Nadine Price. With no further business meeting adjourned at 6:22 P.M. KATNLEEN L. McCLUSKEY, City Clerk JOHN E. LAW, Council President City of Bremerton KLM/JL/me cc: Normal Distribution File/Vault 3o AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Bid Award Recommendation Cardlock Fueling and Fuels FOR AGENDA OF: ~- ~- P~ ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT Purchasi~ ORIGINATOR: Gil J©hn~ DATE SUBMITTED: 08/19~6 2. CLEAA~ANCES: (comment on back 3. EXHIBITS: if necessary) Administrative Services ~1 Specifications City Treasurer ~ ~ ~ _ Public Works Council Fiscal & Budget Council Operations ENDORSEMENT~c 2~/~RM~TION APPROVED BY CO[Jix~ESIDENT ~O~ 4. $~Y STATEMENT AND REOUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTIQN: Requests for Bids were prepared, advertised, distributed and received in accordance with accepted Call For Bids procedures for vehicles and equipment Cardlock Fueling services and fuels for City owned vehicles for a three year term commencing September 1, 1996. Bids were requested for the lowest overall margin above the average range of the weekly Oil Price Information Service (OPIS), Seattle. Bids were received from two firms and recorded as follows: Regular Super Diesel Unleaded Unleaded Cents Per Gallon Wilkins Distribution .034 .043 .044 Grenley Stewart .068 .048 .064 8. RECOMMENDATION: That a three year contract for vehicle fuels and cardlock services be awarded to Witkins Distributing Company as to specifications and low bid. 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: G. Johnson ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL:G. Johnson EXPIRATION DATE:08/31/99 REVIEW DATE: 06/01/99 10. PULLED TABLED APPROVED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: NOTICE OF ACTIQN DISAPPROVED A24ENDED DATE: 11. AGENDA BILL NO: 2c 2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS: IMPACT OF NON-PASSAGE: Buy vehicle fuels at retail. No accounting system. 6. IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS, FACILITIES, EOUIPMENT OR OTHER Current contract with Wilkins Distributing Company· Pricing was based on the following margins: Diesel .035 Regular Unleaded .044 Super Unleaded .065 Estimated annual expenditure $140,900.00 7. RESEARCH SOURCES: TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR GASOLINE AND DIESEL FUELS & DISPENSING FACILITY SERVICES The City of Bremerton operates a fleet of approximately 278 vehicles using the following fuels: Diesel 60 Regular Unleaded 208 Super Unleaded 10 Experienced annual usage: Gallons Diesel 40,000 Regular Unleaded 89,000 Super Unleaded 5,000 Gallonage shown is for estimating purposes only and does not represent guaranteed or implied quantities or order for fuels. The "mix" of use is presented for estimating purposes only. Octane Ratings are/shall be those commonly accepted as the industry standard prescribed by vehicle manufacturers. The dispensing facility for all commodities included herein shall be within a five (5) minute drive of the City of Bremerton Fleet Maintenance Facility, 100 Oyster Bay Road, Bremerton. A. CARD LOCK SYSTEM The following specifications pertain to the "Card Lock" system and represent what the City considers to be the minimum acceptable standard. Police Patrol division and Fire Department Fire Suppression division have the option to use a single card system. A Card must be issued for each vehicle. Cards will be issued using the City's four (4) digit vehicle number assigned when the vehicle is purchased. The City Purchasing Division will advise the contractor when new or replacement cards are required. b. Vehicle and Personnel Cards must be provided within seven (7) calendar days following request from the City Parchasing Division. All vehicles are assigned to their respective departments. Each department will be assigned a separate account number. At the time of fuel delivery there must be electronic identification of the City employee receiving the fuel. All reports shall be submitted by department (account number) and vehicle number. Reports shall include miles per gallon for each vehicle. The system must have the capability to produce reports requested by the City in a variety of sorts, including but not limited to: a. By department (account) b. By vehicle c. By driver d. By date of purchase e. By grade of gasoline The City will accept and pay invoices monthly. The City does not pay from statements. Contractor shall submit monthly bills in a format that includes: Billing Period Dates Invoice Number Department (Name & Account Number) Dates and time of purchase Vehicle number Driver Name & ID Number Odometer Reading Miles Per Gallon Product Gallons delivered by grade Price per Gallon by grade Plus Margin per gallon Extended Price All fueling receipts shall be posted in dated order for each vehicle by department and include the information shown in 7. above. B. AVAILABILITY OF SERVICES The following specification pertains to hours and conditions of service, access and are predicated on the City's need to respond to its citizens emergency needs regardless of hour, day or weather conditions, including acts of nature. Access and use of fueling services shall be twenty-four (24) hours per day, seven days each week including holidays. A twenty-four (24) hour emergency telephone number will be posted and clearly visible on the pumps or at another appropriate on-site location with instructions as to how to contact the Contractor to report emergencies or service failure. Contractor will provide twenty-four (24) hour repair service coverage. Service response time shall be no longer than two (2) hours from the time the call is placed. Contractor agrees to provide the City with an uninterrupted source of fuels in the event of emergencies caused wholly or in part by embargoes, civil unrest, national emergency, acts of nature or re-implementation of allocations. Contractor shall provide and demonstrate emergency power generation sufficient to insure continued operation of pumps and accounting systems in the event of natural or catastrophic events that disrupt normal electrical operation of the facility. Allocations and availability of fuels shall be not less than one hundred percent (100.0%) of fuels purchased during the past full year on a monthly average basis. Preference may be given to firms offering card lock services throughout western Washington. Availability of interstate services is desireable. C. PRICING AND BASIS OF BID AWARD The contract will be awarded for a three (3) year term beginning September 1, 1996. Thereafter, the City retains the oplion to extend the contract annually for up to three (3) additional one year terms. Bids will be received and a contract awarded on an All or None basis. The contract will not be split between two contractors. Bidder must bid, and provide, all fuel products listed on proposal form. Products provided shall be priced at the average range of Oil Price Information Service (OPIS) Weekly Pad Report. Bidders shall specify a firm, fixed margin above the average range price listed for Seattle, as reported in the publication. These margins will be used tbr bid evaluation. The weekly per gallon price shall be determined by adding the "margin bid" (for each type of fuel) to the average 35 listed price OPIS PAD 4/5 REPORT for Seattle, published weekly, except for the last week in June and December. Bids will be evaluated using margin bid applied to Experienced Annual Usage for all products combined. The lowest average overall margin, based on Experienced Annual Usage, will be used to determine award. Margins bid shah be fixed for the term of this agreement including any contract extension periods. Contractor will be responsible for all set-up and materials costs for initializing the system for City use, including required vehicle and driver cards. 3(o AGENDA BILL BREMBRTON CITY COUNCIL 1. SUBJECT: Appointment to the Community Development Block Grant Advisory Committee FOR AGENDA OF: September 4. 1996 ORIGINATING DEPT: Executive ORIGINATOR: Mayor Hor ~on DATE SUBMITTED: August 29. 1996 (comment on back if necessary) Application for Appointment ENDORSEMENT. INFORMATIDN / APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRES-I~NT FOR SUBMITTAL: 4. SU~94ARY STATEMENT AND REOUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ~%~C-TION: There are vacancies on the Community Development Block Grant Advisory Committee. It is recommended that Debra L. Jackson be appointed to fill one of the vacancies. 8. RECOMMENDATION: Motion to confirm the appointment of Debra L. Jackson to the Community Development Block Grant Advisory Committee. 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL:~yn~ ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: PULLED TABLED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: 10. NOTICE OF ACTION APPROVED DISAPPROVED DATE: AMENDED 11. AGENDA BILL NO: ~'-- /~I 2. CLEARANCE cOMMENTS: 5. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE: APPLICATION fOR CITY BOARDS/COMMISSIONt~TCOMMITTEE NOTE: As an applicant for a City Board, Commission or Committee, your name, address, and telephone number will be available to the press and public. You will be contacted before any action is taken on your appointment. (Please type or print clearly) NAME: ~ ~, HOME ADDRESS: occu. ON: EDUCATION: f-~.~, ~-3~,~.,~ ~,, PROFESSIONAL/COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES: kOC~L ~F~CfiS {namo ~ phono number}: I AM () () () () () () INTERESTED IN SERVING ON (please check one or more): Disability Action Committee Civil Service Commission (18 yrs. & older) Urban Forest Committee Cable Communications Advisory Committee Community Development Block Grant Advisory Committee Youth Council Safe Streets Steering Committee Planning Commission (18 yrs. & older) Parks & Recreation Commission Ethics Commission Parking Advisory Board Solid Waste Management Bremerton Housing Authority Board of Appeals, Housing/Building Codes Special Committees as needed Is this an applica{ion for reappointment? J~ If yes, how many years have' you served on this commission/committee7 PLEASE RETURN TO: Mayor's Office :)39 4th Street Bremerton, WA 98337 Signature Applications be reviewed periodically to determine continued availability. information may be put on back. Additional pertinent AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Appointment to the Community Development Block Grant Advisory Committee FOR AGENDA OF: S~ptPmh~ a~ lqQ~% ORIGINATING DEPT: ~w~,,~v~ ORIGINATOR: M~ynr ~nrtNn DATE SUBMITTED: AuKust 29, 1996 2. ~: (comr~ent on back 3. if necessary) EXHIBITS: Application for Appointment ENDORSEMENT INFORMOkTION APPROVED BY COUNCIL ~T F?R~ITTAL: YOR g COUNCI PRESIDEMT There are vacancies on the Community Development Block Grant Advisory Committee. It is recommended that Drake Evans be appointed to fill one of the vacancies. Motion to confirm the appointment of Drake Evans to the Community Development Block Grant Advisory Committee. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL:Mayor Horton ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: PULLED TABLED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: 10. ~ APPROVED DISAPPROVED __ DATE: AMENDED 2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS: 5. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE: 6. IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS, FACILITIES, EOUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES: APPLICATION FOR CITY BOARDS/C'OMMISSIONSiCOMMITTEE NOTE: As an applicant for a City Board, Commission or Committee, your name, address, and telephone number will be available to the press and public. You will be contacted before any action is taken on your appointment. DATE: PHONE: (Please type or print clearly) NAME: ~/~/q EL---- HOME ADDRESS: /'~ OCCUPATION: (H) (W) EDUCATION: ~ ~ ~-.?)-~ ¢ {~ {~-, PROFESSIONAL/COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES: LOCAL REFERENCES (name & phone number): () () () () () () S'w 3 INTERESTED IN SERVING ON (please check one or more): Disability Action Committee ( Planning Commission (18 yrs. & older) Civil Service Commission (18 yrs.& older) ( Parks & Recreation Commission Urban Forest Committee ( Ethics Commission Cable Communications Advisory Committee ( Parking Advisory Board Community Development Block Grant ( Solid Waste Management Advisory Committee ( Bremerton Housing Authority Youth Council ( Board of Appeals, Housing/Building Codes Safe Streets Steering Committee ( Special Committees as needed Is this an applicat'ion for reappointment? I',,)O If yes, how many years have. you served on this commission/committee7 ~ PLEASE RETURN TO: Mayor's Office 239 4th Street Bremerton, WA 98337 Signature Applications be reviewed periodically to determine continued availability. information may be put on back, Additional pertinent AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL 1. SUBJECT: Professional Service Agreement Scott Alexander, Golf Professional Gold Mountain Golf Complex CLEARANCES: (comm~sary) City Attorney City Clerk City Treasurer Parks Fiscal and Budget Council Operations FOR THE AGENDA OF 4 September 1996 ORIGINATING DEPT: Parks and Recreation ORIGINATOR:Jim Spencer DATE SUBMITTED:27 August 1996 3. EXHIBITS: Professional Services Agreement for Golf Professional at Gold Mountain Golf Complex ENDORSEMENT ~<~ ~O~IATION_ APPROVED BY CITY C~'~/SUBMITTAL: 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REOUIREMENTS FOR COUNCIL ACTION: A provision within the current Professional Services Agreement with Scott Alexander, requires re-negotiation of the agreement as a result of the opening of the Olympic Course at Gold Mountain. It is the request, therefore, of the Gold Mountain Board of Directors for council to approve the attached revised agreement. This agreement covers the time period 1997 through 2001 and provides compensation at the rate of 10% of Greens fees revenue net of sales tax. Scott Alexander has been at Gold Mountain for over ten (10) years and has been one of the key factors in the course's success. Over the last (4) years Gold Mountain has averaged 72,013 players per year. Approval of the attached Professional Service Agreement. 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL:Jim Spencer, Director ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: Jim Spencer, Director EXPIRATION DATE: 31 December 2001 REVIEW DATE: PULLED TABLED N c N APPROVED DISAPPROVED DATE: AMENDED 11. AGENDA BILL NO: qb- ~ 2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS: 5. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE The City would be out of compliance with the requirements of the current Professional Service Agreement with Mr. Alexander. 6. IMPACT ON STAFFING. BUDGETS. FACILITIES. EOUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES; The compensation values identified in the new Professional Service Agreement are consistent with the financial model associated with course expansion. 7. RESEARCH RESOURCES: 2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS: 5. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE The City would be out of compliance with the requirements of the current Professional Service Agreement with Mr. Alexander. 6. IMPACT ON STAFFING. BUDGETS. FACILITIES. EOUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES: The compensation values identified in the new Professional Service Agreement are consistent with the financial model associated with course expansion. 7. RESEARCH RESOURCES: PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of , 1997, by and between the CITY OF BREMERTON, hereinafter referred to as "City", and SCOTT ALEXANDER, hereinafter referred to as "Professional". W I TN E S SETH: WHEREAS, the City is desirous of engaging the services of the Professional; and WHEREAS, the Professional is desirous of undertaking the duties of the Professional for the City; NOW, THEREFORE, the parties, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements contained herein, agree as follows: 1. TERM: The city hereby engages the services of the Professional as the City Professional for the golf courses operated by it as the Olympic Course at Gold Mountain and the Cascade Course at Gold Mountain for a term of five (5) years, commencing on January 1, 1997 and terminating December 31, 2001, during which time the Professional shall be on active duty at the Gold Mountain Golf Complex. The Director of Parks and Recreation, may extend this contract for an additional two (2) year term at any time following completion of three years. 2. DUTIES OF THE PROFESSIONAL: a. The Professional shall devote his attention and energies to the performance of duties as golf professional for the City during the term of this Agreement at a minimum rate of 1920 hours annually, exclusive of vacations. He shall conduct himself at all times and in all matters in accordance with the standards accepted for golf professionals as established by the PGA. b. In cooperation with the Director of Parks and Recreation ALEX-3.PSA - Agreements Disk 1 - 8/2/96 and Golf Course BOard, the Professional shal~ schedule all golf tournaments and shall initiate and promote golf activities at the Gold Mountain Golf Complex. c. Professional shall report directly to the Director of Parks and Recreation and work closely with the Greens Superintendent. The Professional and Greens Superintendent shall mutually agree upon the open and start of play daily with the Director resolving any conflicts. d. The Professional shall attend all meetings of the Golf Course Board of Directors. The Professional may recommend and submit changes in policies and procedures to the Golf Course Board of Directors at any regular meeting. e. The Professional shall cooperate with the players at the Gold Mountain Golf Complex, as well as the Golf Course Advisory Committee and other player organizations and render professional advice, opinions, assistance and services as required. f. Professional shall maintain a good credit rating in all commercial transactions so as not to discredit the reputation or name of the City of Bremerton. g. Professional shall supervise, direct and train a staff, including a minimum of three professionals, in the PGA program, so as to perform duties and meet requirements for sales, rentals and services which are, in the opinion of the City and Professional, necessary. ho handling, carts. i. special Professional shall operate and maintain a service for the sales, and leasing of golf equipment and for leasing of Professional agrees to be available to attend regular and meetings of the Golf Course Board, Parks and Recreation ALEX-$.PSA - Agreements Disk 1 - 8/2/96 Commission and CiLy Council, and shall be ~'epared to discuss issues and ideas of interest to the Professional and City. j. Professional shall be responsible to the City for the collection and daily remittal of all monies at the golf course belonging to the City including, but not limited to greens fees. Professional shall provide to the City daily reports of golf activity and receipts in a format to be provided by the Director of Parks and Recreation and City Treasurer, and shall structure his accounting system in a method satisfactory and acceptable to the City of Bremerton. k. Professional agrees to keep the course facilities staffed on a daily basis throughout the year, except that operation on the following days shall be at Professional's option: Thanksgiving, Christmas, and days the Greens Superintendent closes the course due to inclement weather. 1. Professional must provide a course marshal a minimum of forty (40) hours per week for the months October through February, and 80 hours per week for the months of March through September. In case of extended periods of inclement weather, this requirement can be waived by mutual agreement of the Director of Parks and Recreation and the Professional. m. Professional shall supervise all golf activities in connection with outside parties and shall provide members of the golfing Public with adequate services, as may be required. 3. Duties of the city: The City agrees: a. To furnish Professional, for his use and sole occupancy, all necessary facilities for the operation of his business as set forth herein, including areas of the Gold Mountain Golf Complex ALEX-3.PSA - Agreements Disk 1 - 8/2/96 clubhouse premises ~or a golf shop operation a~ club repair, golf club services, business office, including utilities. The cost of maintaining these areas as well as common areas, shall be the responsibility of the Professional. b. To furnish 4,000 square feet of covered storage for power golf carts. c. To furnish and maintain a practice and teaching range. d. To consider recommended changes in policies and procedures through its Golf Course Board and to submit them to the Mayor and Council. e. To budget and provide janitorial supplies. f. To budget and provide advertising approved by the Director of Parks and Recreation. 4. Compensation: In addition to other renumeration herein indicated to be received by the Professional under Item #5, Concessions, the Professional shall be paid for his services the annual sum of ten percent (10%) of greens fees and private cart fees revenue net of sales tax. 5. Concessions: In addition to performing the duties required under Section 2 herein, Professional shall be given the exclusive privilege and shall be required during the term hereof, to operate the following concessions on the Club premises: i. Sale of Merchandise - The Professional shall have the exclusive right to sell merchandise on the City's property with the obligation upon the Professional to maintain a proper stock adequate to serve the playing public. The Professional shall set and post business hours for the golf shop according to the season. ii. Rentals - the Professional agrees to provide power ALEX-3.PSA - Agreefl~nts Disk 1 - 8/2/96 golf carts for l~se by the golfing public. The Professional and/or his assistants shall be responsible for the leasing of power golf carts. The Professional may also, at his discretion, rent golf clubs or other equipment. iii. Golf Range - The Professional shall be responsible for the operation of the golf range. He shall have the exclusive right to rent practice balls in the area provided by the City of Bremerton for that purpose. The Professional shall be responsible for providing and maintaining dispensing machines, retrieval and washing equipment. The Greens Superintendent shall be responsible for grass cutting and maintenance of said area. iv. Golf Instruction The Professional and his staff shall have the exclusive right to give golf lessons at the location of the Gold Mountain Golf Complex. Charges for such lessons shall be fixed by the Professional. v. Other - The Professional shall have the exclusive right to remove and salvage all golf balls from all water hazards on the City's property. b. As lease payment for pro shop and the golf cart storage facility, the Professional shall pay $1750.00 quarterly, plus the current leasehold tax, and 6% of golf cart rentals and 8% of driving range fees. Should these facilities above be enlarged in any manner, the terms of this provision may be renegotiated between the parties. 6. TOURNAMENT PLAY: The Professional shall have the right and is expected to represent the City of Bremerton in various golf tournaments. He shall submit his tournament schedule for information to the Director of Parks and Recreation. In the event he qualifies, he shall have the right to play in the U.S. Open, ALEX-3.PSA - Agreements Disk 1 - 8/2/96 Masters, the PGA Nauional Championship, and the-Club Professionals' Championship, or any tour event held locally. 7. TERMINATION: This Agreement will terminate upon the happening of any of the following events: a. Upon its normal termination if not renewed. b. Upon the death of the Professional. c. Upon twenty (20) days written notice by the City of termination for good and sufficient cause including, but not limited to, the following: i. The physical disability of the Professional which substantially prevents the Professional from performing his duties for a continuous period of one (1) month or for an aggregate of three (3) months in any calendar year. ii. Continuing inattention or neglect of duties. iii. Suspension from the PGA for more than thirty (30) days. iv. Conviction of a gross misdemeanor or felony. v. Major damage or destruction of the golf course property, structures or equipment that is the subject of this Agreement, when the City decides not to rebuild, and that damage or destruction will prevent Professional from substantially performing his obligation under this Agreement. In the event of termination of this Agreement by reason of death, the Professional shall be paid his compensation to and including the month of death or, in the event of disability, shall be paid to the last day of the month in which termination occurs. In the event of termination, and at the Professional's option, the Professional may elect to have the City purchase and Professional sell, all merchandise at Professional's cost, less ALEX-3.PSA - Agreements Disk 1 - 8/2/96 depreciation, and to pay the same to Pr~esslonal, or his representative, within thirty (30) days of the date of the notice of such election. Should Professional simply abandon any items set forth above, they shall immediately become the property of the city. 8. BREACH: In the event that either party claims that the other is guilty of a substantial breach of any of the provisions of this Agreement, a conference will be called between the parties and every reasonable effort shall be made to reach an amicable solution. At said conference, either party shall be entitled to have representatives present. Either party shall have thirty (30) days from notice within which to correct any activity or conduct claimed by the other to have constituted a substantial breach of this Agreement. In the event that either party shall, within said thirty (30) day period, fail to either correct the activity claimed to constitute a substantial breach of this Agreement, or notify the other party in writing their denial of said substantial breach of this Agreement, then in such event this Agreement shall cease and terminate as of the expiration of said thirty (30) day period. 9. NOTICE: Any notice required or permitted to be given under this Agreement shall be sufficient if in writing and sent by registered or certified mail, in the case of the Professional to his residence, and in the case of the City to the Director of Parks and Recreation, 239 Fourth Street, Bremerton, Washington 98337. 10. CONSTRUCTION: This Agreement shall be controlled by the laws of the State of Washington. 11. SEVERABILITY: The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision hereof shall in no way affect the validity or ALEX-3.PSA - Agreements Disk 1 - 8/2/96 enforceability of uny other provision. 12. WAIVER: Failure to insist upon strict compliance with any terms, covenants or conditions of this Agreement shall not be deemed a waiver of such, nor shall any waiver or relinquishment of such right or power at any time be taken to be a waiver of any other breach. 13. MODIFICATION: any of the provisions Any waiver, alteration or modification of of this Agreement or cancellation or replacement of this Agreement shall not be valid unless in writing and signed by the parties. 14. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR: Professional is an independent contractor and neither the Professional, nor the City, shall have the right to act for or on behalf of the other, or to incur debts binding on the other for any purpose. The Professional shall supervise and direct the work as provided using his best skills and attention. The solely responsible for the means, methods, for in this Agreement Professional shall be techniques, sequences and procedures for coordinating all portions of the work contemplated by this Agreement. 15. INDEMNITY: Professional agrees to defend, indemnify and save harmless the City, its appointed and elected officers and employees, from and against any and all liability, loss, costs, damage and expense, including costs and attorney fees in defense thereof because of actions, claims or lawsuits for damages resulting from personal or bodily injury, including death at any time resulting therefrom, sustained or alleged to have been sustained by any person or persons and on account of damage to property, arising or alleged to have arisen directly or indirectly out of or in consequence of or the performance of this Agreement, ALEX-3.PSA - Agreements Disk I - 8/2/96 whether such inju~_es to persons or damage tu property is due to the negligence of Professional, his subcontractors or agents. This provision shall be inapplicable to the extent the City is judicially found solely negligent for such damage or injury. 16. INSURANCE: Professional agrees to purchase and keep in force, from his own funds, comprehensive public liability insurance including products liability, for the benefit of Professional and City jointly against liability for property damage or bodily injury at the golf course facility caused by negligence of the Professional or his employees in the amount of not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00). A copy of the certificate of insurance shall be filed with the City Risk Manager. Such policy shall name City as an addition insured and shall be primary and noncontributing with any insurance carried by City. The policy shall further provide that it shall not be cancelled or altered without twenty (20) days prior written notice to City. 17. ENTIRE AGREEMENT: This Agreement contains the entire agreement between the parties. 18. NONDISCRIMINATION: Professional shall not discriminate in employment or services to the public on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, marital status or disability in employment or the provision of services. 19. LIENS AND INSOLVENCY: Professional shall not allow any property of the City to become encumbered with liens of any sort by reason of his action or omission. Should the Professional become insolvent or declare bankruptcy, this Agreement shall terminate on the happening of such event. 20. REMEDIES: Rights under this Agreement are cumulative; the failure to exercise on any occasion any right shall not operate to ALEX-3.PSA - Agreen~nts Disk 1 - 8/2/96 forfeit such right .n another occasion. The us~ ~f one remedy shall not be taken to exclude or waive the right to use another. 21. BOND: Professional shall secure, at his own expense, a fidelity bond in the amount of Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00). Bond shall be approved as to form by the city This Dishonesty Attorney. 22. AUDIT: to time as the Professional shall permit the City, from time City deems necessary, to inspect and audit in Bremerton, Washington, at any reasonable time, all pertinent books and records of Professional and any other person or entity that has performed work in connection with or related to Professional's services under this Agreement to verify the accuracy of accounting records and shall supply the City with, or shall permit the City to make, a copy of any books and records and any portion thereof, upon the City's request. Professional shall ensure that such inspection, audit and copying right of the City is a condition of any contract, agreement or other arrangement under which any other person or entity is permitted to perform work in connection with or related to professional's services under this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF BREMERTON SCOTT ALEXANDER LYNN S. HORTON, Mayor DEPARTMENTAL APPROVAL: Professional JIM SPENCER Director of Parks and Recreation ALEX-3.PSA - Agreements Disk 1 - 8/2/96 AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL 1. SUBJECT: FOR AGENDA OFt September 4, 1996 14th Street Reconstruction Park Avenue to Sheldon Blvd - ORIGINATING DEPT: Public Works/Utilities Bid Award ORIGINATOR: R. Witt, Ciw Engineeg/~/~'X DATE SUBMITTED: August 2 l, 1996 2. CLEARANCES: (comment on back it~~/~_~,~, ~.~--- 3. EXHIBITS Director, Public Works/Utilities ~' ~'/~-~'~ ~ 1. Vicinity Map Director, Parks & Recreation ~_ . ~;2j~ ~.~--~--~. -2. City Attorney ~ ~ (~ City Treasurer ~ 1 Council Budget & Finance Committee ~ ~'""~ ~/c'a/v~ t Operations Committee ~ ~/~ Purchasing Agent 2~ 3~ -, . APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FI~S~MITI'AL: ENDORSE_..,ME, JqT/[ INFOI~/~ATION MAYOR~.-~ -d~. 7-k.( . COUNCIL PRES1DENT~,/'~-'''~' 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: Bids were opened for the 14th Street Relocation Project on August 19, 1996. One bid was received for this project from Ace Paving Company in the amount of $68,043.50. The Engineer's estimate for this project ;vas $68,000. Total project construction cost including construction inspection, surveying, management and contingency is $85,054.38. The action before the City Council is approval ora contract for the construction of the 14th Street Relocation with Ace Paving Company. 8. RECOMMENDATION: The City Council approve a contract for $68,043.50 with Ace Paving Company fbr construction of the 14th Street Relocation Project and authorize the Mayor to execute the same. 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: Director Public Works & Utilities Director Public Works & Utilities PULLED TABLED 10. NOTICE OF ACTION APPROVED DISAPPROVED AMENDED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE DATE: I1. AGENDA BILL NO: q_~- I q/~ CLEARANCE COMMENTS: IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE: The relocation of 14th Street will not be performed at this time. o IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS, FAC1LITIES~ EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES: Staffing: 250 hours for inspection, project management and surveying. Budget Construction of this project is included as part of the Evergreen Park - Phase I project 1996 budget and sufficient funds exist to do this work. An expenditure from the Real Estate Excise Tax Fund of $85,054.38 is necessary. Design of this project was included in the 14th Street Relocation 1996 budget. Facilities/Equipment: No impact. 7. RESEARCH SOURCES %582 5'7 CLEARANCE COMMENTS: IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE: The relocation of 14th Street will not be performed at this time. IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS, FACILmES, EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES: S_taffing: 250 hours for inspection, project management and surveying. _Budget Construction of this project is included as part of the Evergreen Park - Phase I project 1996 budget and sufficient funds exist to do this work. An expenditure fi'om the Real Estate Excise T~.x Fund of $85,054.38 is necessary. Design of this project was included in the 14th Street Relocation 1996 budget. _Facilities/Equipment: No impact. 7. RESEARCH SOURCES 96582 WARREN AVE BRH SJECT ,OUND NAVAL SHIPYARD VICINITY HAP AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL I. SUBJECT: FOR AGENDA OF: WWTP Odor Control Project (V42152000) ORIGINATING DEPT: ~ . Amendments Number 9 and ,la5 to Professional Services ORIGINATOR: Agreement with RW. Begk DATE SUBMITTED: 2. CLEARANCES: (conanent on baci~ Director, Public Works/Utilities City Attorney City Treasurer Council Budget & Finance Committee Operations Committee September 4, 1996 August 27, 1996 EXH1BITS A. Amendment B. Amendment ENDORSEME. NT~_INFOp0dATION APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT F,OR~MITTALk._/ MAYOR~ ;,dl/_/_ -- COUNCIL PRESIDENT k~/_~-~' 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: The City has negotiated amendments numbered ~ and ~ to the Professional Services Agreement with RW. Beck on the Wastewater Treatment Plant Odor Control Project. Amendment ~O is,a no cost amendment which modifies the method of compensation from salary times a multiplier basis~o a cost plus fixed fee basis. This change will satisfy the Department of Ecology grant requirements. Amendment #I,0 provides a budget allowance of $60,000 for additional construction management and start-up assistance. This is required because of additional time required by the consultant to monitor the contractor during completion of the project. Staff recommends approval of both amendments. 8. RECOMMENDATION: That the Mayor is authorized and directed to execute amendments number 0 and t,02to the Professional Ser~Sces Agreement with R.W. Beck for engineering services on the Wastewater Treatment Plant Odor Control Project 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: City Engineer N/A PULLED TABLED 10.NOTICE OF ACTION APPROVED DISAPPROVED ANIENDED COUNCIL DI]?,ECTIVE DATE: 11. AGENDA Blt~L NO: ~2 - 1 9 S 2. CLEARANCE COMI~LENTS: IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE: Non-passage of amendment ~ will prevent the City from receiving grant funds for R.W. Beck's involvement in the dechlorination project. Non-passage of amendment #I,0 will require that RW. Beck immediately discontinue construction management services on the project. o IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS, FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES: Amendment/~ will have no impact on staffing or budget. Amendment #1~ will require an increase in the budget allocated to the R.W. Beck contract The City has established a net increase to the number of working days allowed to the contractor, with a substantial completion and final completion date of August 29, 1996. Contractor work after this time will be assessed liqu!~Jated damages. The liquidated damages will cover approximately one-half of the value of Amendment #1,0', assuming the full time allowed in the amendment (October) is used. 7. RESEARCH SOURCES 96592'~bk AMENDMENT NO. 8 AMENDED PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT amends the "PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT" for the WWTP Odor Control Improvements between the City of Bremerton and R. W. BECK, Inc. approved by the Bremerton City Council on May 18, 1994. WITNESSETH: Phase IV Construction Administration The reference Agreement is amended to modify the salary times a multiplier basis of compensation established for construction administration to a cost plus a fixed fee basis as shown in Attachment A. R. W. Beck shall not be required to provide services in excess of the budget estimate amount unless additional funding is provided by the City. There is no change in the project budget as a result of this Amendment. The not-to- exceed amount for the Professional Services Agreement remains $2,043,545.87. The remaining terms of the Professional Services Agreement not inconsistent with this Amendment shall remain in full force and effect. All invoices beginning with the invoice for services rendered in August 1996 will be in a cost plus a fixed fee format. O:~IUFNAGELq<RH275.DOC 8/~7/96 1 ATTACHMENT A Bremedon Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvements Task No. Description 0101 Phase IV Services - Project Mgmt 0102 Phase IV Services - Contract Admin 0103 Phase IV Services - Sec/Clerical 0105 Task 2B Prep of Contract Doc 0106 Task 2C Construction Progress Mtgs 0107 Task 2D Submitlal Review 0108 Task 2E Routine Constr Mgmt Svcs 0109 Task 2F Construction Record Dwgs 0111 Task 3A On-Site Observations 0112 Task 3B Field Expenses 0113 Phase IV Services - Constr Group 0114 Greeley and Hansen 0115 Electrical Submittal Review 0116 Electrical Routine Constr Mgmt Svcs Total Labor Cost Overhead Fee Labor 7,779.72 13,265.98 3,647.13 24,692.84 249.34 425.17 116.89 791.40 1,227.53 2,093.19 575.47 3,896.19 2,572.00 4,385.77 1,205.75 8,163.52 20,379.39 34,750.93 9,553.86 64,684.18 33,908.61 57,820.97 15,896.36 107,625.94 41,946.87 71,527.81 19,664.70 133,139.38 747.33 1,274.34 350.35 2,372.02 62,680.42 56,013.73 20,569.21 139,263.35 2,856.85 4,871.49 1,339.29 9,067.63 5,114.95 8,722.01 2,397.89 16,234.85 6,922.58 11,804.38 3,245.31 21,972.27 186,385.59 266,955.79 78,562.20 531,903.57 Expenses Total 667.14 25,359.98 8.37 799.77 148.31 4,044.50 2,889.05 11,052.57 1,408.62 66,092.80 4,006.06 111,632.00 6,903.10 140,042.48 248.78 2,620.80 406.46 139,669.81 3,150.33 3,150.33 58.09 9,125.72 62,326.53 62,326.53 399.84 16,634.69 553.75 22,526.02 83,174.43 615,078.00 Shown as if Cost Plus Fixed Fee (using 170.52 office overhead rate and .89364 field overhead rate, and .1732959 profit rate) Project actually billed at 3.174 (1.38 x 2.30) times actual labor for office and 2.2218 (1.38 x 1.61) times actual labor for field. Total amount billed through July 31, 1996 using above-mentioned labor factors is $585,092.63. AMENDMENT NO. 8 IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto executed this Agreement the date and year indicated. R. W. BECK, INC. APPROVED: Virgil G~ l~[eedel, ~)irector of Operations Date: CITY OF BREMERTON APPROVED: ATTESZ Lynn Horton, Mayor Date: Ka thleen McCluskey, Clerk Date: Dw.E~PEugetie Sam~O.VAL: Director of Public Works and Utilities Date: ~//z f/~'4 APPROVED AS TO FORM: lan R. Sievers, City Attorney Date: O:~IUFNA G E LX~KRH275.D O C 8/Z7/96 2 AMENDMENT NO. 9 AMENDED PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT amends the "PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT" for the WWTP Odor Control Improvements between the City of Bremerton and R. W. BECK, Inc. approved by the Bremerton City Council on May 18, 1994. WITNESSETH: Phase IV Construction Administration The reference Agreement is amended to extend the duration of Phase IV Construction Administration services from 13 to 17 months (June 1, 1995 through October 31, 1996) due to the construction contractor's utilization of the full allotment of 360 calendar days, plus an estimated additional 130 days to final completion of construction. The current budget authorization for Phase IV services is sufficient to cover services provided through July 31, 1996 plus the yet to be completed work of as-built drawing preparation and the remaining work of subconsultant Greeley and Hansen. An increase of $60,000 in the not-to-exceed amount for Phase IV services to be provided in the three months of August, September and October 1996 is made part of this agreement as indicated below. Task Labor Cost Overhead Fee Expenses Total 0101 Project Mgmt 1,077.50 1,837.36 505.13 180.00 3,600.00 0102 Contract Admin 119.72 204.15 56.13 20.00 400.00 0103 Clerical 209.51 357.26 98.22 35.00 700.00 0106 Progress Mt~ 2,993.07 5,103.78 1,403.15 500.00 10,000.00 0107 Submittal Review 448.96 765.57 210.47 75.00 1,500.00 0108 Routine Constr Mgmt 4,489.60 7,655.67 2,104.73 750.00 15,000.00 0111 On-Site Observations 9,406.79 8,406.28 3,086.93 1,100.00 22,000.00 0112 Field Expenses 0 0 0 400.00 400.00 0115 Elect. Submittal Review 119.72 204.15 56.13 20.00 400.00 0116 Elect. Routine Constr 1,795.84 3,062.27 841.89 300.00 6,000.00 Mgmt Totals I20'660'71 I27,596.49 I 8,362.78 I 3,380.00 II 60,000.00 R. W. Beck shall not be required to provide services in excess of the budget estimate amount unless additional funding is provided by the City. The not-to-exceed amount for the Professional Services Agreement is increased to $2,103,545.87 by this Amendment. The remaining terms of the Professional Services Agreement not inconsistent with this Amendment shall remain in full force and effect. O :kHUFNAG E LkKF, H276. D O C AMENDMENT NO. 9 IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto executed this Agreement the date and year indicated. R. W. BECK, INC. APPROVED: Virgil G. Meedel, Director of Operations CITY OF BREMERTON APPROVED: ATTEST: Lynn Horton, Mayor Date: Kathleen McCluskey, Clerk Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Director of Public Works and Utilities Date: lan R. Sievers, City Attorney Date: O:XHUFNA G EL~°, H 276. DOC 2 AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL 1. SUBJECT: ORDINANCE NO. ~/5~ AUTHORIZING THE ISSUE OF A $8,~ Lid BOND AND ACCEPTING THE PURCHASE OFFER OF SEAFIRST BANK FOR AGENDA OF: August 28, 1996 /~ OR G NATING DEPT:Treasure~.r . ~ tJ ORIGINATOR: R. Hanna ~ DATE SUBMITTED: August 16, 1996 ~ Comment of back if necessary) Council Fiscal & Budget ~.~'Y~,~ 3. EXHIBITS: Proposed Ordinance Draft Official Statement Bond Purchase Offer (at Council meeting) ENDORSEMENTS ~ INFORMATION APPROVED BY C.~0~L PRESIDE..NT F~DR-~UBMITTA COUNCIL PRESIDENT ~ · 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: The proposed Ordinance will authorize a bond issue which will finance the construction of LID's No. 327 and 328. The bonds will be repaid from the assessments paid by the adjoining property owners as stipulated in the Ordinances which adopted the respective assessment rolls. 8. RECOMMENDATION: MOT!C;.' TC A~VRG¥'~ 0;4 F',F'.OT F.;-ADiNG ...... "" '""- "'"" MOTION TO PASS ON SECOND READING ORDINANCE NO./7",,¢'¢, ~ . 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICiAL:Treasurer ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: Mayor EXPIRATION DATE:Sept. 1,2011 REVIEW DATE: N/A PULLED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: 10. NOTICE OF ACTION TABLED APPROVED DISAPPROVED 11. AGENDA BILL NO: AMENDED __ 8A CLEARANCE COMMENTS: 5. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE: These LID's will be financed with City rather than external money, 6. IMPACT ON STAFFING. BUDGETS. FACILITIES. EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES: Budgeted. 7. RESEARCH SOURCES: Bond Counsel. Negotiations with underwriting bank. LID NO 327 AND 328 ASSESSMENT ROLL AND PREPAYMENTS ASSESSMENT ROLL PREPAYS BALANCE TO FINANCE LID 327 349,243.23 LID 328 107,157.90 28,641,00 78.516.90 TOTA~ 456,401.13 113.979.82 BOND NO. 1 BOND NO. 2 thru 68 7,421.31 5,000.00 7,421.31 335.000.00 crl"Y OF BREMERTON LID NO. 327 WEST KITSAP LAKE SEWER ASSESSMENT NO. TOTAL RECEIVABLE ACTIVITY D~ ASSESSMENT JULY 8, 1996 PREPAYMENT FIRST YEAR INTEREST TOTAL ACTIVITY FINAL ROLL .Pi~StCJP LE 349,243.23 0.00 (85,096.63) (242.19) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 263,904.41 !NTE R F_,S.T_ 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 T_OTAL 349 349 264 263 263 263 263 263 263 263 263 263 263 263 263 263 263 263 263 263 263 263 263 263 263 263 263 263 263 263 263 263 263 263 263 263 263 263 263 263 263 243.23 243.23 146.60 904.41 904.41 904.41 904.41 904.41 904.41 904.41 904.41 904.41 904.41 904.41 904.41 904.41 904.41 904.41 904.41 904.41 904.41 904.41 904.41 904.41 904.41 904.41 904.41 904.41 904.41 904.41 904.41 904.41 904.41 904.41 904.41 904.41 904.41 904.41 904.41 904.41 904.41 75) FILE=LID327 CITY Of BREMERTON LID328 WH EATON WAY ASSESSMENT NO. TOTAL RECEIVABLE ACTIVITY DATE REFEREr~_c_E P~JJAOJPJ.~ INTEREST PENALTY INT, ASSESSMENT JULY 8, 1996 PREPAYMENT FIRST YEAR INTEREST TOTAL ACTIVITY FINAL ROLL 107,157.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 (28,641.00) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 78,516.90 0.00 0.00 T~T_AL 107,157.90 107,157.90 78,516.90 78,516.90 78,516.90 78,516.90 78,516.90 76,516.90 78,516.90 78,516.90 78,516.90 78,516.90 78,516.90 78,516.90 78,516.90 78,516.90 78,516.90 78,516.90 78,516.90 78,516.90 78,516.90 78,516.90 78,516.90 78,516.90 78,516.90 78,516.90 78,516.90 78,516.90 78,516.90 78,516.90 78,516.90 78,516.90 78,516.90 78,516.90 78,516.90 78,516.90 78,516.90 78,516.90 78,516.90 78,516.90 78,516.90 71 AN ORDINANCE relating to local improvement districts; amending Ordinance No. 4450; establishing Consolidated Local Improvement District No. 327/328 and Consolidated Local Improvement Fund, District No. 327/328; fixing the amount, form, date, interest rates, maturity and denominations of the Consolidated Local Improvement District No. 327/328 Bonds; providing for the sale and delivery thereof to Bank of America NW, N.A., doing business as Seafirst Bank in Seattle, Washington; and fixing the interest rate on local improvement district assessment installments. W~EREAS, the City Council of the City of Bremerton, Washington (the "City"), by Ordinance No. 4450, formed Local Improvement District No. 327 ("LID 327"), intending it to be a local improvement district for sewer utility purposes, but by clerical error had named LID 327 as Utility Local Improvement District No. 327; and WHEREAS, the City wishes to confirm the correct name of LID 327 as Local Improvement District No. 327; and WHEREAS, the City heretofore has created Local Improvement Districts Nos. 327 and 328 for various purposes; and WHEREAS, RCW 35.45.160 authorizes the establishment of consolidated local improvement districts for the purpose of issuing bonds only and provides that if the governing body of any municipality orders the creation of such consolidated local improvement district, the money received from the installment payment of the principal of and interest on assessments levied within the original local improvement districts shall be deposited in a consolidated local improvement district bond redemption fund to be used to redeem outstanding consolidated local improvement district bonds; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF BREMERTON DO ORDAIN: Section 1. Amendment of Ordinance No. 4450. Section 3 of Ordinance No. 4450 shall be amended to read as follows: "Section 3. There is hereby established and created a local improvement district, utility Local Improvement District No. 327. Payment of the costs and expense of the improvement herein ordered to be assessed shall be paid from available city funds. The collections of special assessments, interest and penalties thereon shall be deposited in the City fund incurring the expense of constructing the improvements.', Section 2. Consolidation of Local Improvement Districts. The 30-day period for making cash payments of assessments without interest in LID No. 327 expired on August 12, 1996, and the total amount of assessments paid in cash was $80,821.63, leaving a balance of assessments unpaid on the assessment roll in the sum of $268,421.60. The 30-day period for making cash payments of assessments without interest in LID No. 328 expired on August 5, 1996, and the total amount of assessments paid in cash was $28,641.00, leaving a balance of assessments unpaid on the assessment roll in the sum of $78,516.90. For the purpose of issuing bonds only, those local improvement districts of the City established by the following ordinances, respectively, the 30-day period for making cash payment of assessments without interest in each local improvement district having expired as described above 7.3 in the case of the assessments for each local improvement district, are consolidated into a consolidated local improvement district to be known and designated as Consolidated Local Improvement District No. 327/328: Local Improvement District No. Created by Ordinance No. 327 4450, as amended 328 4460 Section 3. Bond Fund. There is created and established in the office of the City Treasurer for Consolidated Local Improvement District No. 327/328 a special consolidated local improvement district fund to be known and designated as Consolidated Local Improvement Fund, District No. 327/328 (the "Bond Fund"). All money presently on hand representing collections pertaining to installments of assessments and interest thereon in each of the local improvement districts listed in Section 2 shall be transferred to and deposited in the Bond Fund, and all collections pertaining to assessments on the assessment rolls of those local improvement districts when hereafter received shall be deposited in the Bond Fund to redeem outstanding Consolidated Local Improvement District No. 327/328 bonds. Section 4. Authorization and DescriDtion of Bonds. Consolidated Local Improvement District No. 327/328 bonds (the "Bonds") shall be issued in the total principal sum of $346,938.50, being the total amount on the assessment rolls of Local Improvement Districts Nos. 327 and 328 remaining uncollected after the expiration of the 30-day interest free prepayment periods. The Bonds shall be dated September 1, 1996, shall mature on 0252216.02 -3- 7'/ September 1, 2011, and shall be numbered from 1 to 69, inclusive, in the manner and with any additional designation as the Bond Registrar (collectively, the fiscal agencies of the State of Washington located in Seattle, Washington, and New York, New York) deems necessary for the purpose of identification. Bond No. 1 shall be in the denomination of $6,938.50 and Bonds Nos. 2 to 69, inclusive, shall be in the denomination of $5,000.00 each. Interest shall be computed on the basis of a 360-day year of twelve 30-day months. The Bonds shall bear interest, payable annually on September 1 of each year beginning September 1, 1997, in accordance with the following schedule: Bond Numbers Interest (inclusive) Amounts Rates [INSERT MATLTRITY OR BOND SCHEDULE] Section 5. Reqistration and Transfer of Bonds. The Bonds shall be issued only in registered form as to both principal and interest and shall be recorded on books or records maintained by the Bond Registrar (the "Bond Register"). Such Bond Register shall contain the name and mailing address of the owner of each Bond and the principal amount and number of each of the Bonds held by each owner. Bonds may be transferred only if endorsed in the manner provided thereon and surrendered to the Bond Registrar. The transfer of a Bond shall be by the Bond Registrar's receiving the Bond to be transferred, cancelling it and issuing a new certificate in the form of the Bonds to the transferee after registering the 0252216.02 name and address of the transferee on the Bond Register. The new certificate shall bear the same Bond number as the transferred Bond but may have a different inventory referen6e number or control number. Any exchange or transfer shall be without cost to the owner or transferee. The Bond Registrar shall not be obligated to exchange or transfer any Bond during the 15 days preceding any principal payment or redemption date. Section 6. Payment of Bonds. Both principal of and interest on the Bonds shall be payable solely out of the Consolidated Local Improvement Fund, District No. 327/328 (the "Bond Fund"), and from the Local Improvement Guaranty Fund of the City, and shall be payable in lawful money of the United States of America. Interest on the Bonds shall be paid by check or draft mailed to the registered owners on the interest payment date at the addresses appearing on the Bond Register on the 15th day of the month preceding the interest payment date. Principal of the Bonds shall be payable upon presentation and surrender of the Bonds by the registered owners at either of the principal offices of the Bond Registrar, at the option of the owners. Section 7. Redemption Provisions. The City reserves the right to redeem the Bonds prior to their stated maturity on any interest payment date, in numerical order, lowest numbers first, at par plus accrued interest to the date fixed for redemption, whenever there shall be sufficient money in the Bond Fund to pay the Bonds so called and all earlier numbered Bonds over and above the amount required for the payment of the interest payable on that interest payment date on all unpaid Bonds. 0252216.02 Ail Bonds redeemed under this section shall be cancelled. Section 8. Notice of RedemDtion. The City shall cause notice of any intended redemption of Bonds to be given not less than 15 nor more than 30 days prior to the date fixed for redemption by first-class mail, postage prepaid, to the registered owner of any Bond to be redeemed at the address appearing on the Bond Register at the time the Bond Registrar prepares the notice, and the requirements of this sentence shall be deemed to have been fulfilled when notice has been mailed as so provided, whether or not it is actually received by the owner of any Bond. Interest on Bonds called for redemption shall cease to accrue on the date fixed for redemption unless the Bond or Bonds called are not redeemed when presented pursuant to the call. In addition, the redemption notice shall be mailed within the same period, postage prepaid, to Bank of America NW, N.A., doing business as Seafirst Bank, at its principal office in Seattle, Washington, or its successor, and to such other persons and with such additional information as the City Treasurer shall determine, but these additional mailings shall not be a condition precedent to the redemption of Bonds. Section 9. Failure to Redeem Bonds. If any Bond is not redeemed when properly presented at its maturity or call date, the City shall be obligated to pay interest on that Bond at the same rate provided in the Bond from and after its maturity or call date until that Bond, both principal and interest, is paid in full or until sufficient money for its payment in full is on deposit in the Bond Fund and the Bond has been called for payment by giving notice of that call to the registered owner of each of those unpaid Bonds. 77 Section 10. Form and Execution of Bonds. The Bonds shall be printed, lithographed or typed on good bond paper in a form consistent with the provisions of this ordinance and state law, shall be signed by the Mayor and the City Clerk, either or both of whose signatures may be manual or in facsimile, and the seal of the City or a facsimile reproduction thereof shall be impressed or printed thereon. Only Bonds bearing a Certificate of Authentication in the following form, manually signed by the Bond Registrar, shall be valid or obligatory for any purpose or entitled to the benefits of this ordinance: CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION This Bond is one of the fully registered City of Bremerton, Washington, Consolidated Local Improvement District No. 327/328 Bonds described in the Bond Ordinance. Washington State Fiscal Agency Bond Registrar By Authorized Signer The authorized signing of a Certificate of Authentication shall be conclusive evidence that the Bond so authenticated has been duly executed, authenticated and delivered and is entitled to the benefits of this ordinance. If any officer whose facsimile signature appears on the Bonds ceases to be an officer of the City authorized to sign bonds before the Bonds bearing his or her facsimile signature are authenticated or delivered by the Bond Registrar or issued by the City, those Bonds nevertheless may be authenticated, issued and delivered and, 0252216 . 02 -7- when authenticated, issued and delivered, shall be as binding on the City as though that person had continued to be an officer of the City authorized to sign bonds. Any Bond also may be signed on behalf of the City by any person who, on the actual date of signing of the Bond, is an officer of the City authorized to sign bonds, although he or she did not hold the required office on the date of issuance of the Bond. Section 11. Bond Reqistrar. The Bond Registrar shall keep, or cause to be kept, at its principal corporate trust office, sufficient books for the registration and transfer of the Bonds which shall be open to inspection by the City at all times. The Bond Registrar is authorized, on behalf of the City, to authenticate and deliver Bonds transferred or exchanged in accordance with the provisions of the Bonds and this ordinance, to serve as the City's paying agent for the Bonds and to carry out all of the Bond Registrar's powers and duties under this ordinance and City Ordinance No. 3862 establishing a system of registration for the City's bonds and obligations. The Bond Registrar shall be responsible for its representations contained in the Bond Registrar's Certificates of Authentication on the Bonds. The Bond Registrar may become the owner of Bonds with the same rights it would have if it were not the Bond Registrar and, to the extent permitted by law, may act as depository for and permit any of its officers or directors to act as members of, or in any other capacity with respect to, any committee formed to protect the rights of Bond owners. 0252216.02 -8- Section 12. Bonds Neqotiable. The Bonds shall be negotiable instruments to the extent provided by RCW 62A.8-102 and 62A.8-105. Section 13. Preservation of Tax Exemption for Interest on Bonds. The City covenants that it will take all actions necessary to prevent interest on the Bonds from being included in gross income for federal income tax purposes, and it will neither take any action nor make or permit any use of proceeds of the Bonds or other funds of the City treated as proceeds of the Bonds at any time during the term of the Bonds which will cause interest on the Bonds to be included in gross income for federal income tax purposes. The City certifies that it has not been notified of any listing or proposed listing by the Internal Revenue Service to the effect that it is a bondissuer whose arbitrage certifications may not be relied upon. Section 14. Small Governmental Issuer Arbitrage Rebate ExceDtion and Desiqnation of Bonds as "Qualified Tax-ExemDt Obliqations." The City finds and declares that (a) it is a duly organized and existing governmental unit of the State of Washington and has general taxing power; (b) no Bond which is part of this issue of Bonds is a "private activity bond" within the meaning of Section 141 of the United States Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"); (c) at least 95% of the net proceeds of the Bonds will be used for local governmental activities of the City (or of a governmental unit the jurisdiction of which is entirely within the jurisdiction of the City); (d) the aggregate face amount of all tax-exempt obligations (other than private activity bonds and other obligations not required to be included in such 0252216.02 --9- fO calculation) issued by the City and all entities subordinate to the City (including any entity which the City controls, which derives its authority to issue tax-exempt obligations from the City or which issues tax-exempt obligations on behalf of the City) during the calendar year in which the Bonds are issued is not reasonably expected to exceed $5,000,000; and (e) the amount of tax-exempt obligations, including the Bonds, designated by the City as "qualified tax-exempt obligations" for the purposes of Section 265(b) (3) of the Code during the calendar year in which the Bonds are issued does not exceed $10,000,000. The City therefore certifies that the Bonds are eligible for the arbitrage rebate exception under Section 148(f) (4) (D) of the Code and desig/lates the Bonds as "qualified tax-exempt obligations" for the purposes of Section 265(b) (3) of the Code. Section 15. Use of Bond Proceeds. The accrued interest on the Bonds received from the Bond purchaser shall be deposited in the Bond Fund and used to pay debt service on the Bonds on the first interest payment date. The principal proceeds of the Bonds shall be used to repay certain City funds used to carry out improvements in Local Improvement Districts Nos. 327 and 328, and to pay the costs of issuance of the Bonds. Until needed to pay those costs, the City may invest principal proceeds temporarily in any legal investment, and the investment earnings may be retained in the respective local improvement district funds or accounts therein and be spent for the purposes of those funds probably will be exempt from rebate this year. 0252216.02 -10- Section 16. Approval of Bond Purchase Contract. Bank of America NW, N.A., doing business as Seafirst Bank of Seattle, Washington, has presented a purchase contract (the "Bond Purchase Contract") to the City offering to purchase the Bonds under the terms and conditions provided in the Bond Purchase Contract, which written Bond Purchase Contract is on file with the City Clerk and is incorporated herein by this reference. The City Council finds that entering into the Bond Purchase Contract is in the City's best interest and therefore accepts the offer contained therein and authorizes its execution by City officials. The Bonds will be printed at City expense and will be delivered to the purchaser in accordance with the Bond Purchase Contract, with the approving legal opinion of Foster Pepper & Shefelman, municipal bond counsel of Seattle, Washington, regarding the Bonds printed on each definitive Bond. Bond counsel shall not be required to review and shall express no opinion concerning the completeness or accuracy of any official statement, offering circular or other sales material issued or used in connection with the Bonds, and bond counsel's opinion shall so state. The proper City officials are authorized and directed to do everything necessary for the prompt delivery of the Bonds to the purchaser, including without limitation the execution of the Official Statement on behalf of the City, and for the proper application and use of the proceeds of the sale thereof. Section 17. Fixinq Interest Rate on Assessments. The interest rate on the installments and delinquent payments of the special assessments in Local Improvement Districts Nos. 327 and 328 0252216.02 -11- have been fixed at the rate of 8.2% per annum pursuant to Ordinances Nos. 4560 and 4559, respectively. Section 18. Effective Date of Ordinance. This ordinance shall take effect ten days following its passage and publication. APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton, Washington, this 28th day of August, 1996. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton, Washington, this 4th day of September, 1996. APPROVED this __ day of JOHN LAW, Council President , 1996. ATTEST: LYNN HORTON, Mayor KATHLEEN McCLUSKEY, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: George M. Mack, Bond Counsel Publication Date: Ordinance Number: -12- I, KATHLEEN L. McCLUSKEY, City Clerk of the City of Bremerton, Washington, certify that the attached copy of Ordinance No. is a true and correct copy of the original ordinance passed on the 4th day of September, 1996, as that ordinance appears on the Minute Book of the City. DATED this __ day of , 1996. Kathleen L. McCluskey City Clerk -13 - PRELIm' IRY OFFICIAL STATEMENT DATED AUGU? _, 1996 In the opinion of Bond Counsel, a )y the City of Bremerfon, Washington (the 'City') with applicable requirements of the Internal Revenue Code of t986, as amended (the "Code'), including arbitrage and arbitrage rebate requirements, interest on the Bonds is excluded from gross income of registered owners for federal income tax purposes under existing federal law and is not an item of tax preference for purposes of the alternative minimum tax applicable to indi~duals, Hoover, while interest on the Bonds also is not an item of tax preference for purposes of the alternative minimum tax appliCable to corporations, interest on the Bonds received by corporations is taken into account in the computation of adjusted current eamiogs for purposes of the alternative minimum tax applicable to corpoFations, interest on the Bonds received by certain corporations may be subject to an environmental tax, interest on the Bonds received by certain S corporations may be subject to tax. ar)d interest on the Bonds received by foreign corporations with United States branches may be subject to a foreign branch profits tax. Receipt of interest on the Bonds may have other federal tax consequences for certain taxpayers. See the captions 'TAX EXEMPTION" and 'CERTAIN OTHER FEDERAL TA.~ CONSEQUENCES" herein. CITY OF BREMERTON KITSAP COU~N_TY,~N CONSOLIDATED LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 327~328 BONDS Dated: September 1. 1996 Due: September 1,2011 The City of Bremerton, Washington (the "City') Local Improvement District No. 327/328 Bonds, (the "Bonds") will be issued in istered form in the denomination of $5,000 each with the exception of Bond No. I which will be issued in the amount of Principal of the Bonds will be paid upon presentation and surrender of the Bonds, at maturity or early redemption ed Maturities" below}, by the registered owners at the principal corporate offices of the Fiscal Agent of the State of Washington (the 'Paying Agent"}, currently Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, Seattle, Washington and The Bank of New York, New York, New York. Interest on the Bonds will be paid commencing September 1, 1997 and on September 1 of each year thereafter to the maturity or earlier redemption of the Bonds. Interest on the Bonds will be paid by check or draft of the Paying Agent mailed on the payment date to the registered owners at the addresses appearing on the Bond Register on the last business day of the month immediately preceding each interest payment date. ESTIMATED REDEMPTION SCHEDULE ~ Estimated Estimated Redemption · Principal Bond Redemption Principal Bond September 1 Amount Numbers Rate Price September 1 Amount Numbers 1997 2004 1998 2005 1999 2006 2000 2007 2001 2008 2002 2009 2003 Rate Price The amount of Bonds to be retired each year is an estimate only. Depending on the rate of payment of assessments, Bonds may be called eadier or later than shown, but in no event later than September 1,2011. Redemption: The City reserves the right and option to redeem the Bonds prior to their stated maturity date in numerical order, lowest number first, on any interest payment date commencing September 1, 1997, at par plus accrued interest to the date fixed for redemption whenever there shall be sufficient money in the Consolidated Local Improvement Fund District No. 327/328 to pay the Bonds so ca[led and all earlier numbered Bonds over and above the amount required for the payment of the interest on all unpaid bonds. See "DESCRIPTION OF THE BONDS" herein. Security: The Bonds are special limited obligations of the City, are payable from assessments in Consolidated Local Improvement District No. 327/328. The Bonds are further secured by the City's Local Improvement Guaranty Fund. See "SECURITY" and "LOCAL IMPROVEMENT GUARANTY FUND" herein. The Bonds are not a general obligation indebtedness of the City. The City has designated the Bonds as "qualified tax-exempt obligations" under Section 265(b)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. See "CERTAIN OTHER FEDERAL TAX CONSEQUENCES" herein. The Bonds are subject to the approving legal opinion of Foster, Pepper & Shefelman, Seattle, Washington, Bond Counsel. The Bonds, in definitive form, are expected to be available for delivery in Seattle, Washington on ,1996. This cover page contains certain information for quick reference only. It is not a summary of this issue. Investors must read the entire Official Statement to obtain information essential to making an informed investment decision. Representations Neither the City nor the Underwriter have authorized any dealer, broker, salesperson or other persons to give any information or make any representations other than those made in this Preliminary Official Statement, and, if given or made, such other information or representations must not be relied upon as having been authorized by the City or the Underwriter. This Preliminary Official Statement does not constitute an offer to sell, nor shall there be any sale of the Bonds by any person in any jurisdiction in which it is unlawful for such person to make such a sale. The information contained in this Preliminary Official Statement has been obtained from City officials and other sources believed to be reliable. Neither a representation, warranty nor guarantee is made by the Underwriter as to the accuracy or completeness of any information in this Preliminary Official Statement and nothing contained in this Preliminary Official Statement is or shall be relied upon as a promise or representation by the Underwriter. The delivery of this Preliminary Official Statement does not imply that the information contained herein is correct as of any time subsequent to the date of the Preliminary Official Statement as shown on the cover page. Disclosure Statement The City will deliver to the Underwriter at the time of delivery of the Bonds a signed statement substantially to the effect that this Preliminary Official Statement, as of its date and as of the date of the Bonds, neither contains any untrue statement of a material fact nor omits to state any material fact necessary to make the statements therein, in light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading in any material respect and that there has not been any material adverse change in the normal operations or financial condition of the City nor, to the best of the City's knowledge; in the general economy of the City since the date of the Preliminary Official Statement. Secondary Market It has been the practice of the Underwriter to maintain a secondary market in municipal bonds which it sells. The Underwriter intends to engage in secondary market trading of the Bonds, subject to applicable securities laws. The Underwriter, however, is neither obligated to engage in secondary trading nor to repurchase any of the Bonds at the request of the registered owners thereof and no assurance can be given that a secondary market for the Bonds will be available. In connection with the offering of the Bonds, the Underwriter may over-allot or effect transactions that stabilize or maintain the market price of the Bonds at a level above that which might otherwise prevail in the open market. Such stabilizing, if commenced, may be discontinued at any time. This Preliminary Official Statement, as of its date, is in a form that is expected to be "deemed final" by the City for purposes of SEC Rule 15c2-12(b)(1) but is subject to revision, amendment and completion in a final Official Statementthat will be available within seven (7) days of the sale date of the Bonds. ii CITY OF BREMERTON 239 4TH STREET RREMERTON, WASHINGTON 98310 MAYOR Lynn Honon TERM EXPIRES DECEMBER 31 1997 CITY COUNCIL erril Huff-Me. jt~--~ Colvin rrie Dawkins Richard Neville Lon Overson Robert Winters Carlos Montgomery Ch~rperson 1997 Member 1997 Member 1999 Member 1999 Member 1997 Member 1997 Member 1999 Member 1997 Member 1999 APPOINTED OFFICIALS Richard Hanna Kathleen McCluskey John Koch Ian Sievers Gene Sampley Randy Witt Treasurer Administrative Services Director/City Clerk Auditor Attorney Director, Public Works & Utilities Engineer BOND COUNSEL Foster Pepper & Shefelman Seattle, Washington UNDERWRITER Bank of America, NW, N.A. doing business as Seafirst Bank Capital Markets Division Seattle, Washington iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Introduction ........................................................................................................................... Description of the Bonds ....................................................................................................... l Purpose .................................................................................................................................. 2 Authorization ........................................................................................................................ 2 Security ................................................................................................................................. 3 Transferability ....................................................................................................................... 3 Guaranty Fund ....................................................................................................................... 3 Impact of State Homestead Exemption ................................................................................. 4 No Default ............................................................................................................................. 4 Future Financings .................................................................................................................. 4 Local Improvement Districts ................................................................................................ 4 LID No. 327/328 Description ................................................................ ~ .............................. 5 Map of LID No. 327 ............................................................................................................. 7 Map of LID No. 328 ............................................................................................................. 8 General and Economic Information ...................................................................................... 9 Tax Exemption ...................................................................................................................... 14 Certain Other Federal Tax Consequences ............................................................................. 14 Preservation of Tax Exemption ............................................................................................. 15 Absence of Material Litigation ............................... : ............................................................. 15 Approval of Bond Counsel ................................................................................................... 15 Conflicts of Interest ............................................................................................................... 16 Continuing Disclosure ........................................................................................................... 16 Underwriting ......................................................................................................................... 17 Concluding Statement ........................................................................................................... 17 Form of Bond Counsel Opinion ........ Appendix A iv NEW ISSUE NEGOTIATED PRELIM 'RY OFFICIAL STATEMENT DATED AUGUE 7, 1996 RATING: Not Applied For CITY OF BREMERTON KITSAP COUNTY, WASHINGTON $ 342,421.31 CONSOLIDATED LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 327/328 BONDS Dated: Seotember 1,. 1996 Due: September 1,2011 The City of Bremerton, Washington (the "City") LocaJ Improvement Distdct No. 327/328 Bonds, (the 'Bonds') will be issued in fully registered form in the denomination of $5,000 each with the exception of Bond No. 1 which will be issued in the amount of $ 7,421.31. Principal of the Bonds will be paid upon presentation and surrender of the Bonds, at maturity or early redemption (see 'Estimated Maturities' below), by the registered owners at the principal corporate offices of the Fiscal Agent of the State of Washington (the 'Paying Agent"), currently The Bank of New York, New York, New York and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, Seattle, Washington, successor by merger to First Interstate Bank of Washington, N.A., Seattle, Washington Interest on the Bonds will be paid commencing September 1, 1997 and on September 1 of each year thereafter to the maturity or earlier redemption of the Bonds. Interest on the Bonds will be paid by check or draft of the Paying Agent mailed on the payment date to the registered owners at the addresses appearing on the Bond Register on the last business day of the month immediately preceding each interest payment date. ESTIMATED REDEMPTION SCHEDULE OF TERM BONDS Estimated Estimated Redemption Principal Bond Redemption Principal Bond September 1 Amount Numbers Rate Price September 1 Amount Numbers 1997 $32,421.31 1-6 2004 $ 25,000.00 39-43 1998 30,000.00 7-12 2005 25,000.00 44-48 1999 30,000.00 13-18 2006 25,000.00 49-53 2000 25,000.00 19-23 2007 25,000.00 54-58 2001 25,000.00 24-28 2008 25,000.00 59-63 2002 25,000.00 29-33 2009 25,000.00 64-68 2003 25,000.00 34-38 Rate Price The amount of Bonds to be retired each year is an estimate only. Depending on the rate of payment of assessments, Bonds may be called earlier or later than shown, but in no event later than September 1,2011. Redemption: The City reserves the right and option to redeem the Bonds prior to their stated matudty date in numerical order, lowest number first, on any interest payment date commencing September 1, 1997, at par plus accrued interest to the date fixed for redemption whenever there shall be sufficient money in the Consolidated Local Imprevement Fund District No. 327/328 to pay the Bonds so called and ali eadier numbered Bonds over and above the amount required for the payment of the interest on all unpaid bonds. See "DESCRIPTION OF THE BONDS" herein. Security: The Bonds are special limited obligations of the City, are payable from assessments in Consolidated Local Improvement District No. 327/328. The Bonds are further secured by the City's Local Improvement Guaranty Fund. See 'SECURITY" and "LOCAL IMPROVEMENT GUARANTY FUND" herein. The Bonds are not a general obligation indebtedness of the City. The City has designated the Bonds as "qualified te~-exempt obligations" under Section 265(b)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. See "CERTAIN OTHER FEDERAL TAX CONSEQUENCES" herein. The Bonds 'are subject to the approving legal opinion of Foster, Pepper & Shefetman, Seattle, Washington, Bond Counsel. The Bonds, in definitive form, are expected to be available for delivery in Seattle, Washington on 1996. This cover page contains ce~ain information for quick reference only. It is not a summary of this issue. Inve~tors must read the entire Official Stalement to o~ain information essential to making an infonwed investment decision. Representations Neither the City nor the Underwriter have authorized any dealer, broker, salesperson or other persons to give any information or make any representations other than those made in this Preliminary Official Statement, and, if given or made, such other information or representations must not be relied upon as having been authorized by the City or the Underwriter. This Preliminary Official Statement does not constitute an offer to sell, nor shall there be any sale of the Bonds by any person in any jurisdiction in which it is unlawful for such person to make such a sale. The information contained in this Preliminary Official Statement has been obtained from City officials and other sources believed to be reliable. Neither a representation, warranty nor guarantee is made by the Underwriter as to the accuracy or completeness of any information in this Preliminary Official Statement and nothing contained in this Preliminary Official Statement is or shall be relied upon as a promise or representation by the Underwriter. The delivery of this Preliminary Official Statement does not imply that the information contained herein is correct as of any time subsequent to the date of the Preliminary Official Statement as shown on the cover page. Disclosure Statement The City will deliver to the Underwriter at the time of delivery of the Bonds a signed statement substantially to the effect that this Preliminary Official Statement, as of its date and as of the date of the Bonds, neither contains any untrue statement of a material fact nor omits to state any material fact necessary to make the statements therein, in light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading in any material respect and that there has not been any material adverse change in the normal operations or f'mancial condition of the City nor, to the best of the City's knowledge, in the general economy of the City since the date of the Preliminary Official Statement. Secondary Market It has been the practice of the Underwriter to maintain a secondary market in municipal bonds which it sells. The Underwriter intends to engage in secondary market trading of the Bonds, subject to applicable securities laws. The Underwriter, however, is neither obligated to engage in secondary trading nor to repurchase any of the Bonds at the request of the registered owners thereof and no assurance can be given that a secondary market for the Bonds will be available. In connection with the offering of the Bonds, the Underwriter may over-allot or effect transactions that stabilize or maintain the market price of the Bonds at a level above that which might otherwise prevail in the open market. Such stabilizing, if commenced, may be discontinued at any time. This Preliminary Official Statement, as of its date, is in a form that is expected to be "deemed final" by the City for purposes of SEC Rule 15c2-12(b)(1) but is subject to revision, amendment and completion in a final Official Statement that will be available within seven (7) days of the sale date of the Bonds. CITY OF BREMERTON 239 4TH STREET BREMERTON, WASHINGTON 98310 MAYOR Lynn Ho~on TERM EXPIRES DECEMBER31 1997 CITY COUNCIL John Law A1 Colvin David Fart Sherril Huff-Menees Cecil McConnell Carlos Montgomery Richard Neville Lon Overson Robert Winters Chairperson 1997 Member 1997 Member 1999 Member 1997 Member 1999 Member 1999 Member 1997 Member 1999 Member 1997 APPOINTED OFFICIALS Richard Hanna Kathleen McCluskey John Koch lan Sievers Gene Sampley Randy Witt Treasurer Administrative Services Director/City Clerk Auditor Attorney Director, Public Works & Utilities Engineer BOND COUNSEL Foster Pepper & Shefelman Seattle, Washington UNDERWRITER Bank of America, NW, N.A. doing business as Seafirst Bank Capital Markets Division Seattle, Washington iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I~b'oduction .................................................................................................................................... 1 Description of the Bonds ................................................................................................................ 1 Purpose ........................................................................................................................................... 2 Authorization ................................................................................................................................. 2 Security .......................................................................................................................................... 2 Transferability ................................................................................................................................ 3 Guaranty Fund ............... : ................................................................................................................ 3 Impact of State Homestead Exemption .......................................................................................... 4 No Default ...................................................................................................................................... 4 Future Financings ........................................................................................................................... 4 Local Improvement Districts ......................................................................................................... 4 CLID NO. 327/328 Description ..................................................................................................... 5 CLID NO. 327/328 ........................................................................................................................ 6 Map of LED No. 327 ...................................................................................................................... 7 MAP OF LID NO. 328 .................................................................................................................. 8 General and Economic Information ............................................................................................... 9 Tax Exemption .............................................................................................................................. 14 Certain Other Federal Tax Consequences ..................................................................................... 14 Preservation of Tax Exemption ..................................................................................................... 15 Absence of Material Litigation ..................................................................................................... 15 Approval of Bond Counsel ........................................................................................................... 15 Conflicts of Interest ....................................................................................................................... 16 Continuing Disclosure ................................................................................................................... 16 Underwriting ................................................................................................................................. 17 Concluding Statement ................................................................................................................... 17 PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL STATEMENT THE CITY OF BREMERTON KITSAP COUNTY, WASHINGTON $342,421.31 CONSOLIDATED LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 327/328 BONDS INTRODUCTION The City of Bremerton, Kitsap County, Washington (the "City"), a municipal corporation duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Washington, furnishes this Official Statement in connection with the offering of $342,421.31 principal amount of Consolidated Local Improvement District ("CLID") No. 327/328 Bonds (the "Bonds"). This Official Statement provides information concerning the City and the Bonds. DESCRIP~ON OFTHEBONDS Principal Amount, Dates, Interest Rates, and Maturities The Bonds will be issued in the principal amount of $342,421.31, will be dated September 1, 1996, and will mature on September 1,2011. The Bonds will bear interest as set forth on the front cover hereof, payable on each September I, commencing September 1, 1997, until redeemed. Interest will be computed on the basis of a 360-day year comprised of twelve 30-day months. Form and Denomination The Bonds will be issued in fully registered form as to both principal and interest in the denomination of $5,000 each, except for Bond No. 1, which will be in the amount of $7,421.31. Early Redemption The City reserves the right and option to redeem the Bonds prior to their stated maturity date on any interest payment date commencing September 1, 1997, in ascending numerical order, lowest numbers first, at par plus accrued interest due to the date of redemption, whenever there is sufficient money in Consolidated Local Improvement Fund District No. 327/328 (the "Bond Fund") to pay the Bonds so called and all earlier numbered bonds over and above the amount required for the payment of the interest due on all unpaid Bonds. ESTIMATED REDEMPTION SCHEDULE Estimated Estimated Redemption Principal Bond Redemption Principal Bond September 1 Amount Numbers Rate Price September 1 Amount Numbers 1997. $32,421.31 1-6 2004 $25,000.00 49-42 1998 30,000.00 7-12 2005 25,000.00 44-48 1999 30,000.00 13-18 2006 25,000.00 49-53 2000 25,000.00 19-23 2007 25,000.00 54-58 2001 25,000.00 24-28 2008 25,000.00 59-63 2002 25,000.00 29-33 2009 25,000.00 64-68 2003 25,000.00 34-38 Rate Price Notice of Redemption Notice of any such redemption of the Bonds will be given not less than 15 nor more than 30 days prior to the date fixed for redemption, by fa'st class mail, postage prepaid, to the Owners of each Bond to be redeemed at their respective addresses appearing on the Bond Register on the day notice is mailed. The requirements of notification will be deemed to be complied with when notice is mailed as provided by Ordinance No. __ (the "Bond Ordinance") whether or not it is actually received by the Owner of any Bond. If such notice shall have been given and the City shall have set aside, on the date fixed for redemption, sufficient money for the payment of all Bonds called for redemption, the Bonds so called shall cease to accrue interest after such redemption date, and all such Bonds shall be deemed not to be outstanding hereunder for any purposes, except that the Owners thereof shall be entitled to receive payment of the redemption price and accrued interest to the redemption date from the money set aside for such purpose. Registrar, Paying Agent and Transfer Agent Both principal of and interest on the Bonds are payable in lawful money of the United States of America. Principal of the Bonds will be paid by the Fiscal Agent of the State of Washington (the "Registrar," the "Paying Agent" and the "Transfer Agent") to the Registered Owner of the Bonds whose name appears on the Bond Register maintained by the Registrar upon presentation and surrender of the Bonds at either the principal officers of the Fiscal Agent in Seattle, Washington or New York, New York. Interest on the Bonds will be paid by check or draft of the Registrar mailed to the registered owners whose names appear on the Bond Register 15 days prior to the interest payment date. Currently, the Fiscal Agent of the State of Washington is The Bank of New York, New York, New York and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, Seattle, Washington, successor by merger to First Interstate Bank of Washington, N.A., Seattle, Washington. PURPOSE The proceeds of the Bonds will be used to make sanitary sewer extensions and improvements as follows: For LID No. 327, sanitary sewer service will be extended along Northlake Way and West Kitsap Lake Road. · For LID No. 328, sanitary sewer service will be extended along Wheaton Way. AUTHORIZATION LID No. 327 was created by Ordinance No. 4450 passed by the City Council on March 16, 1994. LID No. 328 was created by Ordinance No. 4460 passed by the City Council on May 13, 1994. The final assessment roll for LID No. 327 was approved and confirmed by Ordinance No. 4560 passed by the City Council on June 26, 1996. The final assessment roll for LID No. 328 was approved and confirmed by Ordinance No. 4559 passed by the City Council on June 19, 1996. The Bonds are issued pursuant to Washington State Law, Chapter 39.50 RCW and the Bond Ordinance pas.sed by the City Council on September __, 1996. SECURITY The Bonds are secured by special assessments levied against property within the boundaries of LID No. 327/328 (the "District") and are payable out of the Consolidated Local Improvement Fund District No. 327/328 (the "Bond Fund"). The assessments enjoy a lien on the improved and 2 q4 unimproved properties within the District superior to mortgages and other encumbrances, junior only to any lien for general property taxes. The assessments are payable in th/rteen equal annual installments. The interest rate on the installment payments of special assessments in the District is established to be a rate which exceeds the effective interest rate on the Bonds one-half of one pement. Property owners may elect to accelerate or pay in full the balance of their assessments on any annual payment date. If property owners fall to make assessment payments when due, the City can pursue foreclosure and sale of the liened property for which delinquencies occur to recover unpaid assessments, interest and penalties. The Bonds will be guaranteed by and to the extent of monies in the City's Local Improvement Guaranty Fund (the "Guaranty Fund") in accordance with the laws of Washington State. Bondowner remedies against the City are confined to mandating City officials to perform their statutory duties in enforcing assessments and applying proceeds thereof, and applying Guaranty Fund monies to the payment of principal and interest on the Bonds. TRANSFERABILITY The registered ownership of any Bond may be transferred, but no transfer of any Bond shall be valid unless it is surrendered to the Registrar, with the assignment form appearing on such Bond duly executed by, or accompanied by a written instrument of transfer in form satisfactory to the Registrar duly executed by the Registered Owner or such Registered Owner's duly authorized agent. Upon such surrender, the Registrar shall cancel the surrendered Bond and shall authenticate and deliver, in exchange and without charge to the new Registered Owner therefor (other than any governmental fees or taxes payable on account of such transfer), a new Bond or Bonds in any authorized denomination of an equal aggregate principal amount, naming as Registered Owner the person(s) designated as the assignee(s) or transferee(s). The Registrar shall not be obligated to transfer any Bond during the 15 days preceding its maturity or redemption date. The City and the Registrar, each in its discretion, may deem and treat the Registered Owner of each Bond as the absolute owner thereof for all purposes, and neither the City nor the Registrar shall be affected by any notice to-the contrary. GUARANTY FUND The laws of the State of Washington provide that a city must establish a Local Improvement Guaranty Fund for the purpose of guaranteeing the payment of its Local Improvement District bonds, notes and warrants issued to pay for any LID ordered in the City or in any area wholly or partly outside its corporate boundaries. As of June 30, 1996, the outstanding City of Bremerton LID bonds, notes, and/or warrants total $205,000. The current balance in the City's Guaranty Fund is $109,487 as of June 30, 1996. For the purpose of maintaining the Local Improvement Guaranty Fund, every city is required, at the time of making its annual budget and tax levy, to provide for the levy of a sum sufficient, along with the other sources available to the fund, to pay any warrants issued against the fund during the preceding fiscal year and to establish a balance therein, provided that the levy in any year shall not exceed the greater of a) 12% of the outstanding obligations guaranteed by the fund or b) the total amount of delinquent assessments and interest accumulated on the delinquent assessments before the levy as of September 1, whichever is greater. The taxes levied for the maintenance of the Local Improvement Guaranty Fund shall be in addition to and, if need be, in excess of ail statutory and charter limitations applicable to tax levies in any city or town, as long as the total tax levies for the General Fund and Guaranty Fund do not exceed $3.60/$1,000 of assessed valuation. The City of Bremerton's regular levy rate for 1996 is $3.33/$1,000 of assessed valuation. IMPACT OF STATE HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION The State Homestead Exemption, pursuant to RCW 6.13, permits any head of a family to protect a certain portion of the homestead (residence) from forced sale. On January 4, 1982, the Court of Appeals of the State of Washington, Division I, filed its decision in the Ci'ty of Algona vs. Sharp, et al, wherein it announced that the filing for a homestead exemption before a scheduled foreclosure sale of residential property valued at $20,000 (the then amount of the statutory homestead exemption) or less effectively exempted that property from a forced sale to enfome delinquent special assessments in a special benefit assessment district such as a local improvement district or utility local improvement district. The collection of special assessments to pay the Bonds of this issue may be enfomed against any residential property only to the extent that the foreclosure sale proceeds of that property exceed the amount of the statutory exemption (currently $30,000). The City's records show that there are no residential properties located within CLID No. 327/328 having an assessed value of $30,000 or less. NO DEFAULT The City of Bremerton has not defaulted on any notes or bonds since the LID Guaranty Fund was established, nor any other obligation previously issued. LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS Local improvement projects are initiated either by petition of property owners or by resolution of the City Council. Projects must conform to those local improvements described in RCW 35.43.040. The Council sets the boundaries of the area to receive special benefits from the improvement projects; this area is referred to as a Local Improvement District. If the project is initiated by petition, the petition describes the boundaries. The Council passes a resolution declaring its intention to initiate the improvement project and orders the preparation of an engineering report. The engineering report describes the project, estimates the cost and lists the affected properties. It may also specify the formula for apportioning the cost. The determination of feasibility and benefits are based on this report. Before the improvement project is approved, a public notice and hearing is required (RCW 35.43.125). Notices are mailed to the affected property owners as well as published. The notice provides each owner with the proposed project description and an estimate of benefits and costs. After the hearing the Council will determine whether the LID should be formed. For LIDs initiated by the Council without a petition, within thirty days after passage of the Ordinance forming the District, property owners representing at least sixty percent of the proposed assessments protest LID formation the improvement district becomes ineffectual. Within a period of thirty days following the 30 day protest period a lawsuit challenging the LID formation may be filed. Upon completion of construction, the final costs may be determined and assessments calculated and levied after a hearing. The method of assessment is also selected at this time. When a property owner receives a notice of assessment, he or she has the option of making a cash payment in full or making installment payments. This assessment liability places a lien against the property whereby the property owner is responsible for paying the assessment in installments as prescribed by Council. There is no pre-payment penalty. Payments may be made without penalty or interest during a period of thirty days following the publication of notice of collection of Note assessments. 4 RCW 35.50.030 states that if, on the first day of January in any year, two installments of any local improvement assessment are delinquent, or if the final installment has been delinquent for more than one year, the City must commence foreclosure proceedings shall ensue in the Superior Court of the County in which the LID is located. The proceedings shall be commenced on or before March 1st of the year, after 30 days prior notice to the owner, by f'fling a certificate describing the property, date of delinquency and name of the owner with the clerk of the court. A summons is published in the local paper once each week for six weeks, requiring the owner to answer it within 60 days. If them is no answer, a default is declared and the court may enter a judgment of the foreclosure and sell the property. RCW 35.50.010 states, "The lien shall be paramount and superior to any other lien or encumbrance theretofore or thereafter created except a lien for general taxes." CUD NO. 327/328 DESCRIPTION LID No. 327 was created for the purpose of constructing the necessary sewer system, together with any and all other work in connection therewith as may be necessary to make such. improvement a complete job. The improvement area includes West Kitsap Lake Road and Northlake Way. The total assessed value of the property in LID No. 327 is estimated at $10,567,189. LID No. 327 is comprised of 78 parcels and 65 property owners. Individual assessments range from $4,517 to $5,370. Zoning for LID No. 327 is in 100% single-family residential. The final assessment roll for LID No. 327 was $349,243~23. There were prepayments in the total amount of $85,338.82, resulting in a balance of $263.904.41. LID No. 328 was created for the purpose of constructing the necessary sewer system improvements, together with any and all other work in connection therewith. The improvement area includes most of Block 30 along Wheaton Way. The total assessed value of the property in LID No. 328 is estimated at $1,243,900. LID No. 328 is comprised of 11 parcels and 11 properly owners, one of which is the City of Bremerton. Individual assessments range from $3,658 to $33,650 (on an individual assessed valuation of $282,500). Zoning for LID No. 328 is 100% small commemial. The final assessment role of LID No. 328 is $107,157.90 There were prepayments in the total amount of $28,641.00 resulting in a balance of $78,516.90. 5 CLID NO. 327/328 FINANCIAL INFORMATION Final Assessment Roll per Ordinances No. 4559 & 496O Less: Prepayments Roll Balance after Prepayments LID No. 327 LID No. 328 Total $349,243.23 $107,157.90 $456,401.13 (85,338.82) $263,904.41 (28,641.00) $78,516.90 (113.979.82) $342,421.31 Assessed Value of the CLID No. 327/328 $10,567,189 Number of Parcels 78 Average Assessed Value per Parcel $135,476.78 Average Assessment per Parcel $4,477.48 Assessments as a Percentage of Assessed Value 3.31% Ratio of Assessed Value to Final Assessment Roll 40.0 Balance $1,243,900 $11,811,089 11 89 $113,081.82 $132,709 $9,741.63 $5,128.10 8.62% 3.86% 15.8 34.5 6 MAP OF LID NO. 327 LID BOUNDARY LEGEND LID NUMBER ASSESSORS TAX LOT NUMBER 7 MAP OF LID NO. 328 .il Z~ GENERAL AND ECONOMIC INFORMATION The City The City of Bremerton, is located on Puget Soun, pproximately 15 miles west of Seattle and 35 miles north of Tacoma. The largest city in K ~p County (the "County"), Bremerton was incorporated in 1901 and has an estimated 1996 population of 38,370. Kitsap County, covering 393 square miles of land, has the following other incorporated areas: Bainbridge Island (population 18,350), Port Orchard (population 6,610) and Poulsbo (population 6,070). Military Presence. The economy of the City is closely tied to the United States Navy. The Puget Sound Naval Shipyard in Bremerton ("PSNS") is the largest Naval shipyard on the Pacific Coast and is the only West Coast shipyard capable of working on nuclear ships. With over 10,008 civilian employees, 8,954 militm3, personnel, and 225 contractors, the skipyard is also the only facility capable of decommissioning and recycling nuclear submarines which are being disassembled in accordance with Strategic Arms Limitations Treaties. The Naval Supply Center is another local mihtary facility in the City, with about 200 employees. Located a few miles north of the City of Bremerton is the Naval Submarine Base at Bangor. The Base serves as a home base for Trident submarines and provides employment to 3,111 civilians. Additibnally, 5,632 military and 1,665 contracted personnel are employed at the Base. As the only operational base of its kind, it is considered important to the country by the Department of Defense. Another military installation located near the City is the Naval Undersea Warfare Engineering Station at Keyport. The station tests and maintains torpedoes, provides maintenance support for fire control equipment and mines, and provides other engineering-related services for undersea warfare. The Undersea Warfare Station employs approximately 3,500 civilian, 300 military and 1,400 contracted personnel. Base closures in other geographic regions outside of Washington have had a positive impact on growth in the City and Kitsap County. Five naval commands are scheduled to move to Bangor from out-of-state. The most significant of these is the Ocean Systems Engineering Command which is anticipated to bring 700 employees to the County. Approximately 520 housing units at Bangor and 170 housing units in Bremerton's Jackson Park have received funding (combined total of both projects is $65.6 million) and are being built to house additional military personnel being assigned to bases in the area. The Navy currently has a waiting list of approximately 1,900 families for military housing. Current PSNS Projects. The aircraft carrier USS Nimitz, lead ship in the world's largest class of aircraft carriers, and its escort ships are temporarily homeported in Bremerton. The USS Nimitz is just completing a complex overhaul. Current Navy plans have the USS Nimitz leaving the Puget Sound Area in 1997 when it becomes due for a refueling overhaul. The nuclear cruisers USS Arkansas and USS California and three combat support ships, USS Camden, USS Sacramento and the newly commissioned USS Rainier are also homeported at the shipyard. The USS Abraham Lincoln and USS Carl Vinson, both Nimitz class aircraft carriers, each with crews of over 3,000 personnel (net of air wing personnel), are currently being overhauled at the shipyard and are expected to be re-homeported either in Everett or Bremerton at the completion of that overhaul since their current home ports are being closed. The USS Abraham Lincoln recently arrived at Bremerton and the USS Carl Vinson is expected to arrive in late 1996 for overhaul. The Navy is currently completing a $20 million capital project on 17 acres west of downtown to be used primarily for Navy administration. 9 Other Major Employers The Port of Bremerton operates the Bremerton National Airport and the 560-acre Olympic View Industrial Park, both located approximately 10 miles southwest of the City. The park includes 22 fa-ms which employ a total of approximately 500 people. The Port is beginning development of a 90-acre high tech business park nearby. Several companies are planning expansions near or adjacent to the Bremerton National Airport, including an aircraft parts recycling company, and an electro-mechanical products manufacturer that needs 50,000 to 70,000 square feet of building space and which would employ up to 65 people within five years. Bremerton National Airport is the largest airport in the County, with a 6,200-foot runway and full instrumentation and lighting systems. The airport can handle ail generai aviation aircraft and most transport and military planes. Charter passenger and air freight services are available to SeaTac Airport, the major international airport in the Puget Sound area. The airport is currently undergoing improvements. As part of the redevelopment of the City of Bremerton waterfront, the City of Bremerton Parks Department recently completed an inner-harbor park project featuring the decommissioned destroyer USS Turner Joy, which is being used as a floating museum. The park also includes a 46,000 square-foot boardwalk, harbor tour boat and ticket office. An adjacent floating pier that is used as a fishing pier, a 70-slip marina and breakwater was built by the Port of Bremerton and the Washington State Department of Fisheries in 1993. Health care needs are met by several facilities in the Bremerton area including the Naval Hospital - Bremerton with 370 employees and Harrison Memoriai Hospitai in Bremerton with 1,350 employees. A number of nursing homes and retirement complexes are aiso located in Bremerton. In late 1993, Harrison Memorial completed a $20.5 million expansion which doubled the number of operating rooms; expanded the laboratory and administration areas; and provided additional space for patient education and an outpatient mentai health clinic. Olympic College is a two-year public community college located in Bremerton, with an enrollment of approximately 4,310 (full-time equivalents). The college offers associate of arts degrees in four fields, as well as adult education and non-credit courses, and began a four year degree program (cailed 2-Plus-2) in 1994. The 2-Plus-2 degree program is associated with the University of Washington, Tacoma branch. The Olympic College campus will be expanding in the years ahead due to a private donation of 20 acres of land for that purpose near Poulsbo. New Developments Among the projects recently completed or proposed for development in Bremerton are the following: A master plan for the development of Bremerton's downtown waterfront, known as Sinclair Landing, is being developed. A combination of public and private uses is foreseen for this project, including: a transit center, new ferry terminal, expansion of the waterfront park, expansion of the marina, a new terminal for passenger-only ferries, parking, retail use, restaurants, offices, an 80-room inn, a six-plex cinema and multi-family housing, all connected with pedestrian corridors. A not-for-profit corporation would be the owner of the public portion of the project. Once the plan is finalized, the project is expected to take three years to complete at a cost of $130 million. At this time it is not known when this project will be completed. The Washington State Department of Transportation ("DOT") provides ferry services between Seattle and Bremerton. Bremerton became the headquarters for all ferries with routes south of Seattle in 1994. DOT is designing a new $21.3 million ferry terminal for Bremerton, for construction after the year 2000. Wai-Mart recently completed a new store in East Bremerton and Poulsbo. 10 Two Safeway superstores were recently completed; one in East Bremerton. and the other in the City. The Bremerton Black Entrepreneurs Association is reviving the Roxy Theatre in downtown Bremerton for use as a concert hall and for other live entertainment. Following are economic indicators of the City and the County. CITY OF BREMERTON AND KITSAP COUNTY POPULATION t Kitsap Number of City of Other Kitsap County County Resident Armed Bremerton Incorporated Unincorporated Total Forces Personnel2 1996 38,370 31,210 155,120 224,700 N/A3 1995 39,610 29,915 151,075 220,600 11,916 1994 35,920 28,625 148,655 213,200 9,716 1993 36,380 28,160 145,460 210,000 11,817 1992 38,990 27,405 139,205 205,600 15,631 1991 37,040 26,639 4 132,821 196,500 12,310 1990 38,142 12,913 138,676 189,731 15,050 TAXABLE RETAIL SALES Year Ki~ap Coun~ CiW of Breme~on 1995 $1,768,304,057 $ 451,277,414 1994 1,774,185,000 461,026,409 1993 1,658,975,823 422,329,475 1992 1,551,862,692 409,553,37t 1991 1,438,615,382 390,094,567 Source: Washington State Office of Financial Management and U.S. Census. 2 Estimated. 3 Not Available 4 The large increase is due to the annexation of the unincorporated areas of Bainbridge Island to the new City of Bainbridge Island. 5 Source: Washington State Department of Revenue 11 MAJOR TAXPAYERS IN THE CITY OF BREMERTON! Tax=aver Puget Sound Power and Light US WEST Inc. HMI, Inc. Michael Connolley Viewcrest Villages Limited Partnership Charles & Joan Haselwood Overlake Management Company Merit Company Homing Thiery Partnership Bremerton Cascade Associates Business Electric Utility Telecommunications Developer Olympic College Business Svcs Apartments Retail Retail Retail Apartments Apartments Assessed Valuetion $ 22,603,320 16,370,144 9,817,460 8,022,400 7,800,000 7,010,000 6,000,000 5,865,000 5,765,000 5,400,000 SEATTLE-BREMERTON FERRY TRAFFIC STATISTICS 2 Year Number of Vehicles Number of Passengers 1995 751,266 1,545,417 1994 719,125 1,456,706 1993 676,031 1,399,354 1992 667,251 1,493,650 1991 659,827 1,439,648 KITSAPCOUNTYWASHINGTONSTATEAND USA LABOR FORCEANDAVERAGE ANNUALUNEMPLOYMENT4 Kitsa= County Unemelovment as a Percent of Labor Resident Civilian Average Annual Total Kitsap County Year Labor Force Unemployment Employment (%) 1995 90,900 6,000 84,900 5.5 1994 89,500 5,400 84,100 6.0 1993 90,1 O0 6,000 84,100 6.7 1992 88,900 5,400 83,500 6.1 1991 85,800 4,200 81,600 4.9 1990 84,600 3,400 81,200 4.1 Force United Washington States (%) (O/o) 6.4 5.6 6.4 6.1 7.5 6.8 7.5 7.4 7.5 6.7 6.3 5.5 Source: K/tsap County Assessor's Office. 2 Source: Washington State department of Transportation, Marine Division 4 Source:Washington State Department of Employment Security 12 KITSAP COUNTY, WASHINGTON STATE AND USA INCOME ESTIMATES] Total County Per Capita Income Personal income Kitsap Year ($000) County Washington USA 1994 $4,246,000 $ 19,264 $ 22,526 $ 21,896 1993 4,081,000 18,962 21,832 20, 812 1992 3,923,000 18,607 21,313 20,147 1991 3,601,000 17,971 20,168 19,201 1990 3,323,997 17,318 19,268 18,677 Source: U.S. Department of Commerce and Washington State Office of Financial Management. I3 /05' TAX EXEMPTION Exclusion from Gross Income In the opinion of Bond Counsel, assuming compliance by the City with applicable requirements of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"), including arbitrage and arbitrage rebate requirements under Section 148 of the Code, interest on the Bonds is excluded from gross income of registered owners for federal income tax purposes under existing federal law and is not an item of tax preference for purposes of the alternative minimum tax applicable to individuals. Corporate Alternative Minimum Tax While interest on the Bonds also is not an item of tax preference for purposes of the alternative minimum tax applicable to corporations, under Section 55 of the Code, tax-exempt interest, including interest on the Bonds, received by corporations is taken into account in the computation of adjusted current earnings for purposes of the alternative minimum tax applicable to corporations (as defined for federal income tax purposes). Under the Code, alternative minimum taxable income of a corporation will be increased by 75% of the excess of the corporation's adjusted current earnings (including any tax-exempt interest) over the corporation's alternative minimum taxable income determined without regard to such increase. A corporation's alternative minimum taxable income, so computed, that is in excess of an exemption of $40,000, which exemption will be reduced (but not below zero) by 25% of the amount by which the co.~oration's alternative minimum taxable income exceeds $150,1900, is then subject to a 20% rmnlmum tax. Corporate Environmental Tax Section 59A of the Code imposes for tax years beginning on or before January 1, 1996, an environmental tax of 0.12% ($1.20 per $1,000) on the amount of a corporation's alternative minimum taxable income (increased for certain book income and adjusted current earnings, including any tax-exempt interest) that exceeds $2,000,000. Tax on Certain Passive Income of S Corporations Under Section 1375 of the Code, certain excess net passive investment income, including interest on the Bonds, received by an S corporation (a ~orporation treated as a partnership for most federal tax purposes) that has Subchapter C earnings and profits at the close of the taxable year may be subject to federal income taxation at the highest rate applicable to corporations if more than 25% of the gross receipts of such S corporation is passive investment income. Foreign Branch Profits Tax Interest on the Bonds may be subject to the foreign branch profits tax imposed by Section 884 of the Code when the Bonds are owned by, and effectively connected with a trade or business of, a United States branch of a foreign corporation. CERTAIN OTHER FEDERAL TAX CONSEQUENCES Bonds Are "Qualified Tax-Exempt Obligations for Financial Institutions" Section 265 of the Code provides that 100% of any interest expense incurred by banks and other financial institutions for interest allocable to tax-exempt obligation acquired after August 7, 1986, will be disallowed as a tax deduction. However, if the tax-exempt obligations are obligations other than private activity bonds, are issued by a governmental unit that, together with all entities subordinate to it, does not reasonably anticipate issuing more than $10,000,000 of tax-exempt obligations (other than private activity bonds and other obligations not required to 14 be included in such calculation) in the current calendar year, and are designated by the governmental unit as "qualified tax-exempt obligations," only 20% of any interest expense deduction allocable to those obligations will be disallowed. The City is a governmental unit that, together will all subordinate entities, reasonably anticipates issuing less than $10,000,000 of tax-exempt obligations (other than private activity bonds and other obligations required to be included in such calculation) during the current calendar year, and has designated the Bonds as "qualified tax-exempt obligations" for purposes of the 80% financial institution interest expense deduction. Therefore, only 20% of the interest expense deduction of a financial institution allocable to the Bonds will be disallowed for federal income tax purposes. Reduction of Loss Reserve Deduction for Property and Casualty Insurance Companies Under Section 832 of the Code, interest on the Bonds received by property and casualty insurance companies will reduce tax deductions for loss reserves otherwise available to such companies by an amount equal to 15% of tax-exempt interest received during the taxable year. Effect on Certain Social Security and Retirement Benefits Section 86 of the Code requires recipients of certain Social Security and certain Railroad Retirement benefits to take receipts or accruals of interest on the Bonds into account in determining gross income. Other Possible Federal Tax Consequences Receipt of interest on the Bonds may have other federal tax consequences as to which prospe6tive purchasers of the Bonds may wish to consult their own tax advisors. PRESERVATION OF TAX EXEMPTION The City covenants, by Bond Ordinance, that it will take all actions necessary to prevent interest on the Bonds from being included in gross income for federal income tax purposes, and it will neither take any action nor make or permit any use of proceeds of the Bonds or other funds of the City treated as proceeds of the Bonds at any time during the term of the Bonds which will cause interest on the Bonds to be included in gross income for federal income tax purposes. The City certifies that it has not been notified of any listing or proposed listing by the Internal Revenue Service to the effect that it is a bond issuer whose arbitrage certifications may not be relied upon. ABSENCE OF MATERIAL LITIGATION There is no litigation of any kind now pending or, to the knowledge of the City, threatened to restrain or enjoin the issuance or delivery of the Bonds or in any manner questioning the proceedings and authority under which the Bonds are issued or affecting the ability of the City to pay the principal of or the interest on the Bonds. APPROVAL OF BOND COUNSEL Legal matters incident to the authorization, issuance and sale of Bonds by the City are subject to the approving legal opinion of Foster Pepper & Shefelman, Bond Counsel. A copy of the opinion of Bond Counsel will be printed on the Bonds. Bond Counsel has reviewed this document only to confirm that the portions of it describing the Bonds and the City's authority to issue them conform to the Bonds and the applicable laws under which they are issued. 15 /07 CONFLICTS OF INTEREST Some or all of the fees of the Underwriter and Bond Counsel are contingent upon the issuance and sale of the Bonds. Furthermore, Bond Counsel from time to time serves as counsel to the Underwriter with respect to issuers other than the City and transactions other than the issuance of the Bonds. None of the council members or other officers of the City have interests in the issuance of the Bonds that are prohibited by applicable law. CONTINUING DISCLOSURE Basic Undertaking to Provide Annual Financial Information and Notice of Material Events To meet the requirements of the United States Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") Rule 15c2-12 (b) (5) (the "Rule"), as applicable to a participating underwriter for the Bonds, the City will undertake (the "Undertaking") for the benefit of holders of the Bonds to provide or cause to be provided, either directly or through a designated agent, to each nationally recognized municipal securities information repository designated by the SEC in accordance with the Rule CNRMSIR") and to a state information depository, if any, established in the State of Washington (the "SID"), timely notice of the occurrence of any of the following events with respect to the Bonds, if material: (i) principal and interest payment delinquencies; (ii) non-payment related defaults; (iii) unscheduled draws on debt service reserves reflecting financial difficulties; (iv) unscheduled draws on credit enhancements reflecting financial difficulties; (v) substitution of credit or liquidity providers, or their failure to perform; (vi) adverse tax opinions or events affecting the tax-exempt status of the Bonds; (vii) modifications to rights of holders of the Bonds; (viii) Bond calls (other than scheduled mandatory redemption of Term Bonds); (ix) defeasances; (x) release, substitution, or sale of property securing repayment of the Bonds; and (xi) rating changes. Type of Annual Financial Information Undertaken to be Provided. The annual financial information that will be provided with respect to each issue of local improvement district ("LID") bonds covered by the Undertaking will consist of (i) the aggregate total amount of unpaid assessments in the LID; (ii) the aggregate total assessed valuation for property tax purposes of all property within the LID subject to assessment; (iii) the ratio of the aggregate total unpaid assessments with respect to property in the LID subject to assessment to the aggregate assessed valuation for property tax purposes of the property in the LID subject to assessment; (iv) the fair market value of investments in the City's LID guaranty fund; (v) the total amount of delinquent assessment payments in the LID; (vi) the principal amount of bonds redeemed on the most recent interest payment date; and (vii) the remaining principal amount of the bonds outstanding. The annual financial information may be provided in single or multiple documents, and may be incorporated by reference to other documents that have been filed with each NRMSIR and the SID, or, if the document incorporated by reference is a "final official statement" with respect to other obligations of the City, that has been filed with the MSRB. Amendment of Undertaking The Undertaking is subject to amendment after the primary offering of the Bonds without the consent of any holder of any Bond, or of any broker, dealer, municipal securities dealer, participating underwriter, rating agency, NRMSIR, the SID or the MSRB, under the circumstances and in the manner permitted by the Rule. 16 /o8' The City will give notice to each NRMSIR or the MSRB and the SID, of the substance (or provide a copy) of any amendment to the Undertaking and a brief statement of the reasons for the amendment. If the amendment changes the type of annual financial information to be provided, the notice also will include a narrative explanation of the effect of that change in the type of information to be provided. Termination of Undertaking. The City's obligations under the Undertaking shall terminate upon the legal defeasance of all of the Bonds. In addition, the City's obligations under the Undertaking shall terminate if those provisions of the Rule which require the City to comply with the Undertaking become legally inapplicable in respect of the bonds for any reason, as conf'm'ned by an opinion of nationally recognized bond counsel or other counsel familiar with federal securities laws delivered to the City, and the City provides timely notice of such termination to each NRMSIR or the MSRB and the SID. Remedy for Failure to Comply with Undertaking. If the City or any other obligated person falls to comply with the Undertaking, the City will proceed with due diligence to cause such noncompliance to be corrected as soon as practicable after the City learns of that failure. No failure by the City of other obligated person to comply with the Undertaking will constitute a default in respect of the Bonds. The sole remedy of any holder of a Bond will be to take such actions as that holder deems necessary, including seeking an order of specific performance from an appropriate court, to compel the City or other obligated person to comply with the Undertaking. UNDERWRITING All of the Bonds are being purchased by the Underwriter for % of the par value and will be reoffered at an average price of __%, which results in an underwrfing spread of __%. The Underwriter intends to offer the Bonds to the public at the offering prices set forth on the cover page of this Official Statement. The Underwriter may allow concessions from the public offering prices to certain dealers who may reallow concessions to other dealers. After the initial public offering prices may be varied from time to time by the Underwriter. CONCLUDING STATEMENT All estimates, assumptions, statistical information and other statements contained herein, while taken from soumes considered reliable, are not guaranteed by the City or the Underwriter. So far as any statement herein includes matters of opinion or estimates of future expenses and income, whether or not expressly so stated, they are intended merely as such and not as representations of fact. The information contained herein should not be construed as representing all conditions affecting the City or the Bonds. Additional information may be obtained directly from the City or the Underwriter. The foregoing statements relating to the Bond Ordinance and other documents are in all respects subject to and qualified in their entirety by provisions of such documents. 17 AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL 1. SUBJECT: ~RDINANCE FORAGENDA OF: A~6 To amend the "Administration" section of the ORIGINATING DEPT: DCD/Planninq~ Bremerton Zoning Ordinance. ORIGINATOR: Ron W. Hough DATE SUBMI'I-I'ED: Auq. 20, 1996 2. CLEARANCE~..-'(0~'t"..,~ck if necessary) City Attor~'~- ¥' Operations C~~ 3. EXHIBITS: Staff Report Revised "Aministration" section draft. Ordinance. Planning Commission Minutes (8/13/96) E.DORSEME.TX ,N O.R .AT,O. APPROVED BY COU.C,L PyS ..T FOR L: MAYOR ~,~-~ ,~, ~-~ - COUNC..RES~DE.T L~d-'~~- 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCI AL-~'C;ION: The "Administration" section of the Zoning Ordinance contains the procedures for processing most land use permits. The proposed revisions will classify those permits into four "types", will simplify the advertising and notification requirements for each type, will standardize the steps in permit processing, and will amend and clarify permit approval criteria. The proposed changes also incorporate the requirements of ESHB 1724. These changes wilt improve our notice requirements, will provide a "consolidated process" for multiple permits, and will integrate SEPA (environmental review) with the Site Plan Review process. The Bremerton Planning Commission, following several study sessions and a special meeting on August 13, recommends City Council approvat of the proposed amendments. 8. RECOMMENDATION: City Council passage of the Ordiannce{on second readinq. 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: 10. NOTICE OF ACTION: PULLED TABLED APPROVED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: DISAPPROVED DATE: AMENDED ~11. AGENDA BILL NO: (~(O- [~7 2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS: 5. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE: Bremerton has an interim ordinance in effect to comply with the mandates of ESHB 1724, which had a compliance date of April 1, 1996. The proposed amendments will cover the 1724 requirements by making the necessary changes within our Zoning Ordinance where they belong. The changes are much more specific than the interim ordinance and will provide clear requirements that are easier to understand and implement through the permitting process. Non-passage means the interim ordinance will remain in effect, or be extended as necessary, as our way of complying with 1724. Since the intedm ordinance is very general, the exact rules for the permitting process will continue to be difficult and unclear. 6. IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS. FACILITIES. EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES: In some ways, the proposed changes will reduce the time and hours needed to process permits by combining permits, integrating SEPA, and reducing the number of hearings and appeals. In other ways, the requirements for "clock watching" (to ensure the 120-day permit process) and additional notification requirements will add somewhat to the staff work load. Either way, the overall effect of the proposed changes should minimal on City staff and budgets. 7. RESEARCH SOURCES: ESHB 1724 -- Regulatory Reform Act Pilot Projects (state grants) for 1724 Implementation: City of Olympia City of Mill Creek City of Kennewick Clark County Pierce County Ill STAFF REPORT Amendments to the "ADMINISTRATION" section of the Bremerton Zoning Ordinance --- BMC Chapter 21.02 OF ~ ~ ~ Ron W. Hough, Planning Manager · DCD/Planning · 360-478-5275 ~ August 22, 1996 INTRODUCTION: The Bremerton Zoning Ordinance underwent a major revision in 1988. Following adoption of the City's new Comprehensive Plan in April 1995, a new review was begun to correct inconsistencies between the maps and texts of the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance. Earlier this summer we adopted three revised sections of the Zoning Ordinance and a revised Zoning Map. Other sections are currently undergoing review and revision. Of immediate concern is the City's need to comply with ESHB 1724, the Regulatory Reform Act. In the spirit of"streamlining", 1724 mandated a number of changes to our permitting process. We must offer an optional "consolidated" process that allows several applications to be processed simultaneously as a package. We must integrate our environmental review (SEPA) with site plan review, give specific notice for various steps in the process, and decide most permits within 120 days. We must also limit the number of public hearings. In May of this year, the City Council adopted Interim Ordinance No. 4550 to comply with ESHB 1724. It provided general guidance and coverage of the new law while the Zoning Ordinance was being amended. The interim ordinance was extended with the passage of Ordinance No. 4564 on August 14. The Administration section of the Zoning Ordinance contains the application requirements, approval criteria for various types of permits, notification and public meeting/hearing requirements, and other general processing procedures. DCD staff and the Planning Commission have been drafting amendments to this section for the past several months. The Planning Commission held several study sessions to consider the proposed amendments and made a recommendation for City Council approval during a special meeting on August 13, the minutes of which are attached hereto. The Commission reconsidered its recommendation during its regular meeting of August 20, recommending that the open record public hearings for Types II and III applications be conducted by the Planning Commission. Staff Report --- Page 1 The City Council considered all staff and Planning Commission proposals at a study session on Wednesday, August 21. As a result of that meeting, the following proposals will be offered at the August 28 public hearing as the preferred alternative that best meets the objectives of 1724 as well as the needs of the City: Type I decisions: (simple permits, minor amendments, plan review, etc.) ~: Administrative decisions-- no predecision hearing required. * One local appeal-- heard by Planning Commission in open hearing. Type II decisions: (short plats, variances, special exceptions, interpretations, etc.) ~ Administrative decisions -- no predecision hearing is required. · One local appeal --- heard by City Council in open hearing. Type III decisions: (Subdivisions, rezones, PUDs, dev. agreements, etc.) ~ Staff makes recommendation directly to City Council. · City Council holds open record public hearing and makes decision. Type IV decisions: (Legislative-- exempt from 1724 requirements) Staff makes initial recommendation to Planning Commission. Commission holds open record hearing and makes recommendation. City Council holds open record hearing and makes final decision. NOTE: The draft text of the Administration section included with this staff report has been adjusted to include the process suggested above. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS: The following is a summary of the changes that are proposed for the Administration section of the Bremerton Zoning Ordinance: 1. P. 2: Categorized land use decisions into four types --- plus shorelines. 2. P. 6: Standardized processing procedures for each permit category type -- table. 3. P. 8: New section on "planned actions" that are already proposed in other documents. 4. P. 9: Provided an "optional" Consolidated Permit Process. 5. P. 9: Pre-application conferences encouraged, and required for consolidated process. 6. P. 9: Clarified process for "technical review" prior to Determination of Completeness. 7. P. 9: New process for Determination of Completeness --- within 28 day of submittal. 8. P. 10: Notice of Application --- described on P. 10 and 15 with table on p. 16. 9. P. 10: Public Meeting --- purpose and description. 10. P. 11: Standardized the Public Comment Period. 11. P. 11: Notice of Public Hearing--- described on P. 11 and 17. 12. P. 11: Notice of Decision -- two types required. Staff Report --- Page 2 13. 14. 15. 16. P. 11: New requirements for for a complete Project Permit Application. P. 12: Public Hearings -- Types of meetings and procedures better defined. la) Open Record Public Hearing lb) Public Meeting lc) Study Session P. 13: Section on Decisons outlines how decisions are made, by whom, and findings. P. 14: New section on Time Limits on Decisions describes the 120-day limit on project permits, limits on closed and open record appeals, etc. 17. P. 15: New Notice section provides details on when, how, and the contents of different types of required public notices. Notice of Applicafion table on P. 16. 18. P. 17: New Public Hearing notice requirements listed and procedures outlined. 19. P. 19: Added a new table to summarize notice requirements. 20. P. 21: New section on Development Agreements --- state guidelines coming later. 21. P. 22: Revised format for the sections dealing with the most common types of land use permits, including Special Use Permit, Variance, Special Exception, Rezone, Development Regulation Amendment, Site Plan Review, and Appeal. 22. Permit section format is as follows for most permits: Authority Applicant >- Procedure Criteria for Approval (Worded to be answered "YES") Conditions of Approval Lapse of Approval 23. Special Use Permit: P. 22 24. 25. The proposal must be found consistent with the Comp. Plan --- not "substantively consistent" as presently worded. Either it is consistent, or it isn't. The "substantial relationship to the public welfare" test was removed because it tends to question the use rather than the design or other physical characteristics. Allowing the use (by SUP) was decided when the Zoning Ordinance was adopted and shouldn't be questioned again during the SUP request. SUP is good for one year with one 6-month extension possible. Variance: P. 23 The justification for a Variance would include a hardship related to an existing improvement on or adjacent to the site. Item la), P. 23 ~ Cannot be used "to grant relief for a personal or financial hardship or inconvenience." P. 24: (d)(7) > Requires that other solutions, uses, or design options be considered. (d)(8). Special Exception: P. 24 Tightened up the criteria. We want to grant relief "when a regulation is found to be inappropriate to the situation and/or results in an unreasonable inconvenience or difficulty in the use or development of the property." Staff Report --- Page 3 >- New criteria include "...result in enhanced use of the site" and "...other innovative improvement that will be cleady beneficial to the subject property and neighborhood." Results must "be compatible with the design and development characteristics of similar properties in the neighborhood and zone." >~ Can't be approved to solve problems of a personal or financial nature. 26. Rezone: (P. 25) Small area or single-parcel rezones are quasi-judicial. Large areas are legislative. Must be consistent (not substantively consistent) with the Comp. Plan. This should be easier with the Plan/Zone consistency table in Chapter V. Added a criterion to accommodate a phasing process. (d)(2) The often difficult criterion "substantial relation to the public interest or welfare" has been replaced with "Is there a public need for the proposed Rezone that will clearly benefit the local neighborhood and/or the community of Bremerton." > Added a criterion to discourage "spot zones". 27. Development Regulation Amendment: (P. 26) Modified to accommodate all land use and development regulations so we're not limited to only the Zoning Ordinance. >- This is legislative -- Both the Commission and Council get open record hearings. ~ Approval Criteria simple -- consistency with the Comp. Plan and other codes. 28. Site Plan Review: (P. 27) Applies to all new development with flexibility built into the process so that small projects aren't put through the same scrutiny as large ones. Site Plan is part of most applications. Conceptual, speculative or other independent Site Plan may also be reviewed -- but a fee will be charged. Site Plan list of requirements modified a little here and there. Criteria for approval simplified. If everything meets code, it gets approved. No determinations of whether or not it is detrimental to the neighborhood, a safety hazard, protection of neighboring properties, etc. All of those considerations should be dealt with through existing code requirements during the plan review. >- Conditions may be attached to the approval. Plan approval is good for one year. It becomes void if building permits are not applied for or construction has not begun. 29. Appeal: (P. 30) >- Standard appeal period of 14 days. Defines "parties of record" who are allowed to bring an appeal. Modified timing of decisions and a new specific list of the contents of an appeal. 1724:ch-10.SR Staff Report --- Page 4 //5 ORDINANCE NO. 7' AN ORDINANCE adopting the revised ADMINISTRATION section of Chapter 21.02 of the Bremerton Municipal Code. WHEREAS, major revisions to Bremerton's Official Zoning Ordinance were adopted in November 1988; and WHEREAS, ESHB 1724, the Regulatory Reform Act, mandated a number of changes to the City's land use and development permitting process, including a 120-day time limit on some permit approvals, new notification requirements, integration of SEPA and site plan review, limitations on the numbers and types of public hearings, and others; and WHEREAS, the City of Bremerton passed Interim Ordinance No. 4550 to meet the State's April 1, 1996 compliance deadline, and extended the interim ordinance by passage of Ordinance No. 4564 on August 14, 1996; and WHEREAS, the Bremerton Planning Commission has reviewed the requirements of ESHB 1724 and the Administration section of BMC Chapter 21.02 and, following several study sessions and a special meeting on August 13, 1996, recommended City Council adoption of the revised Administration section; now, therefore, THE CITY OF BREMERTON DOES HEREBY ORDAIN: Section 1. Repeal/New Sections. Sections 21.02.850 through 21.02.945 of the Bremerton Municipal Code are hereby repealed and the following new sections are adopted to read as set forth in Exhibit "A", attached hereto. 21.02.850 21.02.855 21.02.860 21.02.865 21.02.870 21.02.875 21.02.880 21.02.885 21.02.890 21.02.895 21.02.900 21.02.905 21.02.910 21.02.915 21.02.920 2I .02.925 Type I Administrative Decisions Type II Administrative Decisions Type III City Council Decisions Type IV Legislative Decisions Shoreline Decisions Planned Actions General Processing Procedures Project Permit Application Public Heatings Decisions Time Limits on Decisions Notice Development Agreements Special Use Permit Variance Special Exception 21.02.930 21.02.935 21.02.940 21.02.945 Rezone Development Regulation Amendment Site Plan Review Appeal Section 2. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect ten (10) days from passage and publication. APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this , 1996. day of PASSED by the City Councilofthe City ofBremegonthis , 1996. day of JOHN E. LAW, Council Presidem APPROVED this day of ,1996. LYNN HORTON, Mayor ATTEST: KATHLEEN McCLUSKEY, City Clerk Effective Date: Publication Date: Ordinance No: ZO-COD:ZO-ADMIN.ORD Chapter 21.02 BREMERTON DEVELOPMENT CODE ADMINISTRATION 21.02.850 21.02.855 21.02.860 21.02.865 21.02.870 21.02.875 21.02.880 21.02.885 21.02.890 21.02.895 21.02.900 21.02.905 21.02.910 21.02.915 21.02.920 21.02.925 21.02.930 21.02.935 21.02.940 21.02.945 Type I Administrative Decisions Type II Administrative Decisions with Notice Type HI City Council Decisions Type IV Legislative Decisions Shoreline Decisions * Permit Processing (table) Plarmed Actions General Processing Procedures (a) Detexmination of Proper Procedure (b) Optional Consolidated Permit Process (c) Pre-application Conference (d) Official File (e) Technical Review (f) Determination of Completeness (g) Incomplete Application (h) Notice of Application (I) Public Meeting (j) Notice of Public Hearing (k) Notice of Decision Project Permit Application Public Hearings Decisions Time Limits on Decisions Notice (a) Determination of Completeness (b) Notice of Application * Contents of Notice of Application (table) (c) Notice of Appeal (d) Notice of Public Hearing (e) Notice of Decision (f) Notice of Final Decision (g) Optional Public Notice * Notice Requirements Table Development Agreements Special Use Permit Variance Special Exception Rezone Development Regulation Amendment Site Plan Review Appeal Page 2 2 3 4 4 6 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 10 I0 10 11 12 13 14 14 14 15 16 16 16 17 17 18 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 29 ADMINISTRATION: Page 1 21.02.850 TYPE I --- ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS (a) Actions: The following permits and approvals involvd direct application of adopted codes and standards with many of the decisions made immediately at the customer counter. The decisions are administrative and public notice is not required. An asterisk (*) denotes permits and approvals that are excluded from the 120-day processing and notification requirements of this section. (0 (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) Building and sign permits.* Home occupation.* Land uses permitted outfight. Structures permitted outfight. Boundary line adjustment.* Minor amendment to approved PUD. Minor amendments to other permits. Temporary emergency wetland or stream permits.* SEPA exempt:* -- Cleating less than 2 acres. -- Grading less than 100 cu. yds. L~ndscape plan. Site Plan Review. Recreational vehicle 90-day permit.* Final decision: The Director's decision shall be final when issued for purposes of appeal. (c) Appeal: Type I decisions may be appealed to the Planning Commission within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the decision. The Commission will conduct an open record appeal heating. 21.02.855 TYPE II --- ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS WITH NOTICE Actions: The following permits and approvals require limited public notice. Pre- decision comments are encouraged and the Director may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the request. (1) Short Subdivision (short plat) (2) SEPA Determination. (3) Wetland or stream assessment. (4) Wetland or stream development permit. (5) Variance. (6) Administrative Special Use Permit. (7) Zoning Ord. Special Exception. (8) Design Review. (exempt from 120 day processing requirement) (9) Plan or Code Interpretation. (10) Minor alteration of approved plat. ADMINISTRATION: Page 2 (b) (c) Decision format: The decision shall be in a written format that clearly indicates the findings of fact, evaluation of approval criteria, conclusions, the decision, any conditions of approval, and any maps, designs, site plans, or other related graphic materials. Final Decision: The Director's decision (or SEPA Official's decision in the case of a SEPA-related action) is final when issued, for purposes of appeall Appeal: Type II decisions may be appealed to the City Council within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of decision. The City Council will conduct an open record appeal hearing. 21.02.860 TYPE III --- CITY COUNCIL DECISIONS (a) Actions: The following actions may be approved, approved with conditions, denied, or remanded by the City Council following an open record pre-decision public hearing, unless noted otherwise. Public notice is required for Type III actions. Recommendations will be provided by the Planning Commission following a public meeting. Staffmay conduct additional neighborhood meetings when required or when otherwise warranted by the Director for public information or data gathering purposes. An asterisk (*) denotes actions that are exempt from the 120-day permit processing requirement. (1) Preliminary Subdivision Plat. -(2) Final Subdivision Plat. (3) Vacation of existing subdivision. (4) Vacation o f street right-of-way. * (5) Surplus or sale of other public property. * (6) Planned Unit Development (PUD). (7) Major amendment to a previously approved Type III decision. (8) Binding Site Plan. (9) Non-administrative Special Use Permit. (10) Rezone for specific properties or small area. (11) Development Agreement. * (b) Decision Format: Type III decisions shall be made by resolution, ordinance, or other form appropriate to that particular decision and suitable for recording. (c) Final Decision: Type III decisions are made by the City Council and are final when issued for purposes of appeal. (d) Appeal: Type III decisions may be appealed to Superior Court within the fourteen (14) day appeal period, or on the effective date of the ordinance, whichever is longer. ADMINISTRATION: Page 3 150 21.02.865 TYPE IV --- LEGISLATIVE DECISIONS (a) Actions: The City Council may approve, modify, or deny the following legislative decisions following an open.pre-decision public hearing. These decisions are exempt from the 120-day processing and single open record heating rules and most will be considered by the Planning Commission in open public hearing prior to making its recommendation to the City Council. Public notice is required. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) Annexation. Urban Renewal Plan. District, community, neighborhood, or other speciaI area plan. Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Development regulation adoption or amendment. Zoning Map Amendment (other than single lot or small area rezones). (b) Decision Format: Type IV decisions shall be made by ordinance. (c) Final Decision: Type IV decisions are made by the City Council following its open record public hearing and are final when issued, for purposes of appeal. (c) Appeal: Type IV decisions may be appealed to Superior Court within the fourteen (14) day appeal period, or on the effective date of the ordinance, whichever is longer. 21.02.870 SHORELINE DECISIONS (a) Actions: The following are subject to the requirements of Bremerton's Shoreline Master Program but shall be decided within 120 days. Recommendations and heatings shall be conducted as described in the "Permit Processing" table that follows. (1) (2) (3) (4) (s) Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Shoreline Conditional Use Permit Shoreline Variance Shoreline Permit Revisions Shoreline Master Program Amendments (b) Decision Format: Completion of a prepared form or statement of findings, conclusions and the decision of the approving body. Adoption of and amendments to the Shoreline Master Program shall be made by ordinance. (c) Final Decisions: (i) Substantial Development Permits and amendments to existing permits are decided administratively, in the same manner as other Type II permits. ADMINISTRATION: Page 4 (d) (2) Conditional Use Permits and Variances are decided by the Planning Commission and may be approved, rejected, or modified by the Department 0f Ecology. A neighborhood meeting or study session is optional. (3) All Shoreline Permit decisions must be submitted simultaneously to the applicant, the Department of Ecology (DOE), and to the attorney general. DOE may approve or disapprove the permit. (4) Shoreline Master Program Amendments are decided by the City Council and may be approved, rejected, or modified by the Department of Ecology. Appeals: An appeal of a local shoreline permit decision may be filed with the City Council first, with a second appeal to the Shorelines Hearings Board (SHB), or may be filed directly with'the SHB. (1) Decisions on Substantial Development Permits, Variances and Conditional Use Permits may be appealed to the City Council within fourteen (14) days of the date of the decision, and considered in an open record appeal hearing, or (2) Those decisions listed in (d)(1) above or City Council decisions on appeals of earlier decisions, may be appealed to the Shorelines Hearings Board by filing a Petition for Review within twenty-one (21) days of the date of the Department of Ecology's review and decision. (3) The decision of the Department of Ecology pertaining to the adoption of, or amendment to, the Shoreline Master Program may be appealed to the Central Puget Sound Gro~vth Management Heatings Board per RCW 36.70A.250 through 320. (4) Appeals to the City Council shall be decided within thirty days of the filing date. Appeals to the Shoreline Hearings Board will be decided within 180 days. ADMINISTRATION: Page 5 PERMIT PROCESSING Plan. Comm. Plan. Comm. Plan. Comm. City Council DECISIONS Admin. Admin Public Open Open Open Recommend Decision Meeting Hearing Hearing Hearing Recommend Recommend Decision Decision Type I Decisons az az (on appeal) Type II Decisions >- Short Subdivision az :g (on appeal) >- Variance az az (on appeal) >~ Admin. SUP az * (on appeal) ~ Z.O. Spec. Exception az * (on appeal) >- Minor Plat Amend. az az (on appeal) ~- SEPA Determination az * (on appeal) >- Env. Area Determin. * $ (on appeal) ~- Design Review az az (on appeal) >- Interpretation az az (on appeal) Type III Decisions :~ Prelim. Subdiv. Plat az az az >- Final Subdiv. Plat * az az >- Vacation of Subdiv. az az * >- Planned Unit Dev. * az az >- PUD Major Amend. az * az :~ Binding Site Plan az az az >- Non-admin. SUP az az az ~ Rezone * * az >- Develop. Agreement az az :~ Type IV Decisions > Annexation az ..... az >- Urban Renewal Plan $: az az ~- Dist./Neigh. Plan az az az ~ Comp. Plan Amend. 8: az az ~- Dev. Reg. Adopt. az az az ~- Dev. Reg. Amend. az az az Shoreline Decisions ~- Sub. Dev. Permit ..... * .......... * (on appeaL) >' Cond. Use Permit * .......... az az (on appeal) >- Variance az .......... 8: az (on appeal) >- Permit Revision ..... az .......... 8: (on appeal) >- Master Pro.am az ..... az ..... az Amendment (legislative) ADMINISTRATION: Page 6 I;3 21.02.875 PLANNED ACTIONS A Planned Action does not require a threshold determination nor the preparation of an environmental impact statement under State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). However, an environmental checklist may be requested as part of the initial application to help disclose, review and mitigate environmental impacts through the Site Plan Review process. Co) To qualify as a "Planned Action", a project action must: Be a clearly designated or proposed action within a plan, ordinance or resolution that was adopted by the City, and be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; (2) Have had any significant impacts adequately addressed in an environmental impact statement prepared in conjunction with the City's Comprehensive Plan or related neighborhood, subarea, urban renewal, or other special area plan; (3) Be a subsequent or implementing project for proposals contained in the Comprehensive Plan or related plans; (4) Be located within the City limits or Urban Growth Area; and (5) Not be an essential public facility, as defined in RCW 36.70A.200. (c) Planned actions may be limited to certain types of development, to specific geographical areas of the City, and/or to a time period identified in the ElS, plan, ordinance or resolution that designated the planned action. (d) Project review of a planned action shall not address its appropriateness nor question the basis of its proposal in a comprehensive plan or other adopted document. Project review shall be used to identify specific project design and conditions relating to the character of development, such as the details of site plans, related public facilities and services, payment of impact or other fees, or other measures that may be needed to mitigate probable adverse environmental impacts. 21.02.880 GENERAL PROCESSING PROCEDURES (a) Determination of proper procedure: (1) The Director or his/her designee shall determine the proper procedure for the processing of each development application. (2) Disputes shall be resolved in favor-of the higher category of decision (Type I-IV). ADMINISTRATION: Page 7 (c) (a) (e) (f) (3) A permit or approval involving the siting or development of important public facilities or utilities, or related to the use of public areas or facilities for public purposes, may be excluded from the 120-day permit process by passage of a resolution that presents the special circumstances that warrant a different process. Optional Consolidated Permit Process: An application that involves two or more permits or procedures may be processed one of two ways, at the option of the applicant: (1) Individually according to the established process for each permit or approval; or (2) Collectively under the highest category of decision (Type I-IV) required for any part of the application. This Consolidated Review process may combine an open record pre-decision hearing on one or more permits with an open record appeal hearing on other permits. Pre-application Conference: With the exception of Type I approvals, a conference with DCD staff to preview proposals and explain the application requirements and procedures prior to submitting an application is required. Anyone choosing the Consolidated Permit Process must also begin with a pre-application conference. Official File: The Department shall establish an official file containing all applications, correspondence, and other materials related to the application(s). The file is a public record and available for inspection at DCD during normal working hours. Technical Review: (1) Most Type II, III, and IV applications w/Il be distributed to other City departments, agencies, and interested organizations for their review and comment during a specified comment period of 14 days. The comment period may be as long as 30 days if necessary for the review of unique or complex applications. (2) The review shall include both land use and environmental impact analysis so that the goverrumental and public reviews will run concurrently. An appeal of a SEPA determination, other than a Declaration of Significance (DS), will be heard at the open record pre-decision public hearing. (3) The technical review shall determine consistency of the project with applicable plans and regulations in at least these four areas: (1) the type-of land use allowed; (2) the level (density or intensity) of development allowed; (3) the adequacy of needed -infrastructure; and (4) the character of the proposed development, as determined by its compliance with specific development standards and/or guidelines. Determination of Completeness: Within twenty-eight (28) days of acceptance of a project permit application, the City shall mail or personally provide a written notice of completeness to the applicant which states that the application is complete or incomplete. ADMINISTRATION: Page 8 (g) (i) (1) A complete application will meet the basic submission requirements and include other application requirements contained in this chapter and any data determined to be reasonably necessary by the Director or through the pre-application conference. (2) An application shall be deemed complete if the City does not provide a written determination within 28 days of submittal. (3) The Determination of Completeness shall not preclude the City fi:om requesting additional information or studies that may be required later, or resulting from changes to the proposal. Incomplete Application: (1) The Determination of Completeness shall provide 90 days for the applicant to submit the information necessary to make an application complete. (2) If the applicant does not provide the necessary information within 90 days, or refuses in writing to do so, the application shall lapse and may not be resubmitted for one full year. (3) If the application has lapsed for any reason prior to becoming a complete application, the application fees unrelated to the technical review and Determination of Completeness shall be refunded, if requested by the applicant. Notice of Application: This notice shall be issued for Type II and III project permit applications, within 14 days of the Determination of Completeness. It is not required for Type I or IV applications, nor for other exempt project permits. (See Section 21.02.905(b) Notice.) Public Meeting: If not specifically required for a particular permit, the Director may initiate a public meeting to be conducted by City staff, the Plarming Commission, neighborhood organization, or other appropriate body. (a) Purpose: To explain the proposal, discuss its characteristics and alternatives, and receive questions and comments from citizens or other interested parties. (b) Informal Meeting: The meeting may be held in the Council Chambers of City Hall or in any other suitable location and shall be conducted informally. It may be referred to as a study session, neighborhood meeting, or other public meeting, but shall not be conducted as a formal public heating. If not a requirement of the body conducting the meeting, the meeting need not be recorded electronically. Written minutes or a meeting summary shall be produced and made part of the record. (c) Notice: Shall be posted in accordance with Section 21.02.905(b)(3). ADMINISTRATION: Page 9 (J) (k) (1) Public Comment Period: (1) A comment period of at least fourteen (14) days but not longer than thirty (30) days shall follow the Notice of Application and be specified in that Notice, except that a twenty (20) day comment period shall be provided for Shoreline permits. (2) The City may accept written comments at any time prior to the close of the open record pre-decision heating, or prior to the decision on the project permit if no hearing is required. Notice of Public Hearing: Notice for all applications that require a public heating and all appeals that will be heard in an open record hearing shall be given public notice at least ten (10) days prior to the date of hearing, as provided in Section 21.02.905(d). Notice of Decision: (1) A written Notice of Decision shall be issued within ten (10) days of any Type II decision and any shoreline permit decision, and will be followed by an appeal period of fourteen (14) days. (2) The Notice of Final Decision follows all local appeals and City Council decisions. It shall be issued following all Type III and IV decisions and at the conclusion of all local appeals of Type II decisions and shoreline permit decisions. This notice must be issued within 120 days, as adjusted, following the Determination of Completeness. 21.02.885 PROJECT PERMIT APPLICATION (a) Basic Information: The following information shall be provided for all development- related applications, unless found by the Director to be unnecessary for the particular application: (1) Completed application form for the permit(s) requested. (2) Legal description for the subject property. (Assessor's plat map ahd the parcel's account number may be adequate in most cases.) (3) Vicinity Map showing the location of the subject property and including surrounding major streets, shorelines and other reference points. (4) A Site Plan of the subject property if any physical changes will result from approval of the request. ADMiNISTRATION: Page 10 la.7 (5) (6) (7) (8) Mailing labels with names and addresses of all owners of record of parcels within the notification radius for the type of permit requested (not required for Type I). At the applicant's option, DCD staffwill provide this service for an additional fee. The names, addresses, and phone numbers of the applicant and all owners of the subject property, along with a signed letter or other verification of the owner(s) consent to the application. An Environmental Checklist, Enviroumentai Impact Statement, wetlands or stream delineation, or other necessary environmental documentation. Any additional information that may be specifically required for the permit being considered or that has been determined by the Director as reasonably necessary for a decision on the application(s). A survey may be required to resolve questions pertaining to property lines, locations of structures, etc. (9) The application fee(s) for the permit(s) requested. 21.02.890 PUBLIC HEARINGS (a) Definitions: (b) Open Record Public Hearing: Permits that require a pre-decision public hearing shall be heard by the designated heatings body. The hearing shall afford everyone present the opportunity to comment on the proposal prior to the decison. (2) Public Meeting: City staff or the Planning Commission may conduct meetings to explain proposals and/or gather information and comments from the residents of specific areas or neighborhoods on either quasi-judicial or legislative proposals and plans. Informal public participation shall be encouraged and documented. The information gathered shall be used to formulate a recommendation to the decision- making body but shall not be the record upon which the decision is made for a project permit. (3) Study Session: The Planning Commission or City Council may conduct study sessions to discuss procedures, plan details, development proposal alternatives, or other matters that demand staff clarification or study. A study session is not a permit requirement but is often followed by a public hearing or other required action. Although a study session is an open meeting, it is not a public hearing where public comment is taken. Pre-decision and appeal open record public hearings shall be conducted by the City Council in accordance with its roles for public hearings and appeals. ADMINISTRATION: Page 11 10-8 (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) In hearing matters, including appeals, that require application of law and determination of facts which predominantly affect particular parties rather than the public generally, or a class or group, the hearing body sits as a quasi-judicial body and will conduct the hearing in accordance with established rules for such hearings. An open record public hearing is intended to supplement other materials and complete the record on the application. Testimony will be accepted from the public, evidence and arguments will be heard, and new material will be entered into the record. Type IV decisions are legislative, not quasi-judicial, and exempt from the 120-day processing requirement and the limitation on the number of open record hearings. They may include open record hearings before both Planning Commission and City Council. When two or more public agencies must conduct public hearings on an application, the hearings shall be combined and held within the local jurisdiction whenever possible. Staff Support: The Director shall: (1) Schedule an application for public heating when required. (2) Provide the required public notice. (3) Provide a single Staff Report stating all of the decisions made as of the date of the report, including recommendations on project permits in the consolidated permit process that do not require an open record pre-decision hearing. The report shall describe the alternatives that were considered, forward testimony and comments that were given, evaluate the approval criteria, and state any mitigation required or proposed under the development regulations or the City's authority under SEPA. If the threshold determination, other than a determination of significance (DS), has not been issued previously, the report shall include or append this determination. The staff report may function as the permit for a Type I or II administrative decision. (4) Provide the required Notice of Decision. 21.02.895 (a) (b) DECISIONS Burden of Proof: The applicant has the responsibility of providing all maps, materials, and other documentation required for the processing of the application and demonstrating that the project or request meets the City's regulations and approval criteria. Decision Hierarchy: Decisions on applications of different types that are being processed under the optional consolidated permit process shall be made together by the highest ADMINISTRATION: Page 12 (c) (d) (e) decision maker or decision-making body. Permit Decision: The decision on a permit application shall be to approve, conditionally approve, or deny the application. Appeal Decision: The decision on an appeal shall be to affn-m, reverse or remand the decision that is being appealed. Decision goes with the Land: Approval of any development application applies only to the specific property for which it was approved. It does not go with the owner or applicant and may not be transferred to any other property or structure. General Findings: In addition to findings addressing the approval criteria for a specific permit, all proposals must meet the following tests to be approved or recommended for approval: (1) (2) The proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and other adopted plans. The propoal conforms to all applicable City development regulations, minimum standards, and design guidelines. 21.02.900 TIME LIMITS ON DECISIONS (ai Final Decisions on all Type I, II, and III decisions shall be made w/thin 120 days of the City's acceptance of a complete application. (Issuance of a Determination of Completeness is not necessary for Type I applications.) (b) The 120-day clock shall stop during the following periods: (1) A period during which the applicant has been requested to correct plans, perform required studies, or provide additional information. The clock stops at the time the applicant is notified of the requests and resumes when the request has been satisfied, per Section 21.02.880(f). (2) Any period during which an Environmental Impact Statement is being prepared following a Determination of Significance. The applicant and City shall agree in writing to a time period for completion of the EIS. (3) Any period required to process an administrative appeal ora project permit. The clock may stop for a period of up to ninety (90) days for an open record appeal hearing and up to sixty (60) days for a closed record appeal. This period begins on the filing date of the appeal and ends on the date of the Notice of Decision. The parties may agree to an extension of the appeal period. ADMINISTRATION: Page 13 13o (c) (d) (e) (f) (4) Any other extension of time mutually agreed upon by the City and applicant. Time limits do not apply if a project permit application: (1) Requires an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan or a development regulation. (2) Requires approval of a Fully Contained Community, a Master Planned Resort, or the siting of an essential public facility. (3) Is substantially revised by the applicant. The clock begins when a new Letter of Completeness is issued. If the City is unable to comply with any of the time limits provided herein, it shall provide written notice to the applicant (or appellant), along with a statement of reasons why the time limits could not be met and an estimated date for the anticipated action. A Type I or II approval shall become void if not acted upon within one year unless stated otherwise at the time of approval or within a related development agreement. A six-month extension may be granted by the Director if requested in writing prior to the expiration date. An applicant may not submit an application that is substantially the same as an application that was denied until at least one full year has passed since the denial. 21.02.905 NOTICE Requirements for notices for different types of permits and approvals is shown in the Notice Requirements table. (a) Determination of Completeness: Provided by regular mail to applicant only. This notice triggers the 120-day permit approval clock. (b) Notice of Application: Shall be provided as follows: (1) Timing: Notice shall be given within fourteen (14) days following the issuance of the Determination of Completeness and at least fifteen (15) days prior to a scheduled open record pre-decision public hear/ng. '(2) Distribute: Notice shall be given to affected City departments and mailed to agencies with jurisdiction or that may be significantly impacted. The Secretary of Transportation shall be notified of preliminary subdivision plats when adjacent to the right-of-way of any State highway or within two miles of the boundary of a state or municipal airport. The secretary must respond within fifteen days. ADMINISTRATION: Page 14 131 (3) (4) (5) Post: Notice shall be posted in at least one location on or adjacent to the subject property and clearly visible and legible from an adjacent street or public area. Publish: A summary of the Notice of Application shall be published in the City's official newspaper of general circulation. If the notice includes a Notice of Public Hearing, it shall include the requirements for that notice as well. Notice Contents: The table entitled "Contents of Notice of Application" describes the minimum contents of the notice: CONTENTS OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION DISTRIBUTE I POST Date of~ initial application. :~ Date of the Letter of Completeness ~ Date of the Notice of Application ~ Description of the proposed project and its location ~ :~ (include map when appropriate) List of all permits/approvals that are part of the ~ ~: application package Identification of other permits needed, if any, not ~ included in the application Identification and location of any known related ~ environmental documents Time limitations for the public comment period and statement of the right of any person to submit :~ ~ comments or to request notification of the decision Statement of the public's right to participate in public ~ :~ meetings and hearings, when scheduled Statement of any appeal rights ~ :~ Date, time and place of any scheduled public meeting ~ ~ or hearing SEPA threshold determination and scoping notice in ~ ~ the case of a Determination of Significance (DS) Name and phone number of staff contact person. ~: ~ ADMINISTRATION: Page 15 (c) Notice of Appeal: Shall follow the same procedure as the Notice of Application, except the issues of the appeal will be presented rather than the details of the application. (d) Notice of Public Hearing: (D Timing: Notice shall be given at least ten (10) days prior to any pre-decision or appeal public hearing. (2) Distribute: If a hearing notice was not included in the Notice of Application, a Notice of Public Hearing for a legislative approval shall be mailed to outside agencies with jurisdiction and to anyone who has requested notice. Notices of quasi-judicial hearings shall be distributed to the owners of record of all parcels within a radius of three hundred (300) feet of the subject parcel and also to affected agencies and anyone who has requested notice. (3) Post: Notice for a quasi-judicial hearing shall be posted in at least one location on or adjacent to the subject property and clearly visible and legible from an adjacent street or public area. Posting is not required if the hearing notice was included earlier in the posted Notice of Application. (4) Publish: Notice shall be published in the City's official newspaper of general circulation (5) Notice Contents: The Notice of Public Hearing shall include at least the following, as applicable: Name of the applicant/appellant or representative. Location of the site (vicinity description, address or legal description). Nature of the proposed use or development and requested permits. Nature of the appeal and relief sought (in the case of an appeal). Date, time and place of the scheduled public hearing. Statement that all interested persons may appear and provide testimony. Instructions for submittal of written comments or other exhibits. Where and when staff report and related materials are available for revie~v. How copies of related materials may be obtained. Name and phone number of a staff contact person. (e) Notice of Decision: (1) Timing: Shall be issued within ten (10) days of most Type II decisions and all shoreline permit decisions. ADMINISTRATION: Page 16 (2) Distribute: Shall be provided to the applicant or appellant and to any person who, prior to the rendering of the decision, requested notice of the decision or submitted substantive oral or written comments on the application or appeal. (3) Post: Not required. (4) Publish: Notice shall be published one time in the City's official newspaper of general circulation. (Shoreline permits may require additional notice.) (5) Notice Contents: The Notice may be a copy of the report or decision on the project permit application and shall include, when available, the SEPA threshold determination, the permit decision, conditions of approval, and general procedures and time limits to file an appeal. Notice of Final Decision: Must be issued within 120 days following the Determination of Completeness, and providing for adjustments per Section 21.02.90~(b). The same procedures as required for the Notice of Decision shall be followed, except that this notice is only issued following a Type III or IV decision and at the conclusion of all local appeals of a Type I or II decision or a shoreline permit decision. Optional Public Notice: In addition to required public notice, the City may provide public notice of applications, meetings, hearings or decisions to other individuals or organizations known to be interested or possibly affected by the subject proposal. Failure to provide optional notice shall have no effect on the validity of the permitting process or the ultimate decision on an application. ADMINISTRATION: Page 17 NOTICE REQUIREMENTS Determination Notice of DECISIONS of Notice of Pre-decision Notice of Notice of Notice of Compl,eteness Application Public Hearing Decision Appeal Final Decision Type I Decisons No None ' No No Yes If appealed Type II Decisions appeals to Council :~ Short Subdivision Yes Yes No Yes Yes If appealed >- Variance Yes Yes No Yes Yes If appealed ~- Admin. SUP Yes Yes No Yes Yes If appealed >- Z.O. Spec. Exception Yes Yes No Yes Yes If appealed > Minor Plat Amend. Yes Yes No Yes Yes If appealed >- SEPA Determination Yes No No Some cases Yes Ifappealed >- Env. Area Determin. No No No Yes Yes If appealed >- Design Review Yes Yes No Yes Yes If appealed ;~ Interpretation No No No Yes Yes If appealed Type III Decisions appeals to court >- Prelim. Snbdiv. Plat Yes Yes Yes No No Yes >- Final Subdiv. Plat Yes Yes Yes No No Yes :~ Vacation of Subdiv. Yes Yes Yes No No Yes ~ Planned Unit Dev. Yes Yes Yes No No Yes >- PUD Major Amend. Yes Yes Yes No No Yes >- Binding Site Plan Yes Yes Yes No No Yes >- Non-admin. SUP Yes Yes Yes No No Yes >- Rezone Yes Yes Yes No No Yes >- Develop. Agreement Yes No Yes No No Yes ADMINISTRATION: Page 18 Determination Notice of ACTIONS of Notice of Public Notice of Notice of Notice of Completeness Application Hearing Decision Appeal Final Decision Type IV Decisions appeals to court >- Annexation No Yes Yes No No Yes >- Urban Renewal Plan No Yes Yes No No Yes >- Dist./Neigh. Plan No Yes Yes No No Yes >- Comp. Plan Amend. No Yes Yes No No Yes >- Dev. Reg. Adopt. No Yes Yes No No Yes >' Dev. Reg. Amend. No Yes Yes No No Yes Shoreline Decisions >- Sub. Dev. Permit Yes Yes No Yes Yes If appealed >- Cond. Use Permit Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes If appealed >- Variance Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes If appealed >- Permit Revision Yes Yes No Yes Yes If appealed >- Master Program Yes Yes Yes Yes No * YES Amendment Appeals of Master Program decisions are heard by the Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board. ADMINISTRATION: Page 19 21.02.910 Co) (d) DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS The City may enter into a development agreement with a person having ownersl~p or control of real property within the City limits, or outside the City limits but within the Urban Growth Area as part of a proposed annexation or service agreement. The agreement shall set forth the development standards and other provisions that shall apply to, goveru, and vest the development, its land uses, and mitigation of the development's impacts for the duration of the specified period, co~istent with applicable policies and goals of the City of Bremerton. The development agreement shall specify the following, as applicable to the project: (1) All major project components, including the specific uses to be allowed, residential densities, c6nunercial or industrial site and floor areas, off-street parking, etc. (2) Landscaping, buffers, parks, recreation areas, open space and sin~l~r features. (3) Provision for affordable housing. (4) Required mitigation measures, development conditions, a~d other requirements of project approval. ($) Financial azrangements, incinding any required impact fees, in-lieu fees, inspection fees, dedications, financial contributions, and reimbursement provisions, if any. (6) Design and development standards to be applied to the project, incinding architectural treatment, maximum heights, setbacks, landscaping, drainage, utilities, parking, signage, and any others. (7) Review procedures, phasing program, and criteria for project decisions. (8) The build-out or vesting period during which the agreement will be in effect. (9) Any other appropriate requirements or procedures that are based on City policies, rules, regulations, or standards. The agreement may impose new or different regulations to the extent necessary to resolve a threat to public health or safety. Enforceability: A development agreement, including all development standards, is enforceable during its term by any party to the agreement. The agreement protects the approved development from changes to the zoning or other development regulations that may be adopted during the term of the agreement. ADMINISTRATION: Page 20 137 (e) Form and Processing: (1) Development agreements shall be in a form provided by the City Attorney's office. The City Attorney shall review and approve all proposed agreements prior to consideration by the City Council. (2) A development agreement shall be approved as a Type III decision by the City Council following an open record public hearing. (3) The agreement shall be recorded with the real property records of Kitsap County and shall be binding on the parties and thek successors during its term. 21.02.915 SPECIAL USE PERMIT (a) Authority: A land use that is designated "SUP" in specific zones in the Land Use Tables of Section 5 of these regulations may be permitted on sites within those zones, provided all identified adverse impacts of the specific use can be eliminated or reduced to an acceptable level through design or conditions of approval of the Special Use Permit. (b) Applicant: Any property owner or the owner's agent may apply. (c) Procedure: A Special Use Permit is processed in accordance with the procedures outlined in section 21.02.880 and the notice requirements of section 21.02.905. An Administrative SUP does not require a public hearing and is processed as a Type II application. A SUP that may have significant impacts beyond the immediate site, that is of neighborhood- or community-wide interest, or that may be of a sensitive or controversial nature, may be classified a Non-administrative SUP by the Director and processed as a Type III application. (d) Criteria for Approval: A Special Use Permit may be approved if all of the following questions can be answered "YES": (1) Is the proposal consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and either designated "SUP" in the Zoning Ordinance, or is being processed as an "Unlisted Use"? (2) Will the proposal comply with all applicable development standards and requirements, including the availability of all needed utilities and services? (3) Will the proposal, along with any mitigation measures or other conditions of approval, avoid significant adverse environmental consequences? (4) Will the proposal be compatible with adjacent uses and surrounding neighborhood? Does the proposal comply with all other criteria or design guidelines that are applicable to the specific use or type of development? ADMINISTRATION: Page 21 (e) Conditions of Approval: Such conditions as site orientation, fencing, buffering, parking location, lighting, access, hours of operation, or others may be imposed as conditions of approval if needed to prevent adverse impacts and/or ensure compatibility with the surrounding area. Lapse of Approval: If not acted upon within one year from the date of decision, the SUP approval shall expire. Expiration is automatic and notice is not provided. The Director may grant a single written six-month extension upon a showing of good cause, provided the applicant submits a written request for such extension prior to expiration. 2 1.02.920 (a) (b) (c) (d) VARIANCE Authority: A Variance from a specific provision of the City's development regulations may be approved to grant relief when those requirements result in an unusual or unreasonable hardship due to the physical characteristics of the site or existing improvements on or adjacent to the site. A Variance may not be granted to alter a definition or interpretation, nor to change or mrcumvent adopted permtt processing procedures. Applicant: Any property owner or the owner's agent may apply. Procedure: A Variance is processed in accordance with the procedures outlined in section 21.02.880 and the notice requirements of section 21.02.905 and is approved administratively. A Variance may be approved if all of the following questions can Criteria for Approval: be answered "YES": (1) (2) (3) (4) (6) Will the proposal avoid conflicts with the City's Comprehensive Plan? Will the variance accommodate a use or structure that is allowed by the zoning? Will the Variance benefit the surrounding neighborhood and/or avoid significant adverse impacts on other properties and residents? Will the Variance, along with any proposed mitigation measures or conditions of approval, minimize adverse environmental impacts? Is the Variance necessary to overcome a hardship related to the size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings of the subject property, or related to a legal nonconformity that may exist on or adjacent to the site? Will the Variance allow a development or improvement that is consistent with that of similar properties in the vicinity and zone? ADMINISTRATION: Page 22 (7) Is the Variance needed to solve a specific code-related design problem and not to grant relief for a personal or financial hardship or inconvenience? (e) (8) Have other solutions, uses, or design options that might achieve a similar result without the need for a Variance been evaluated and rejected? Conditions of Approval: Conditions may be imposed as conditions of approval if needed to prevent adverse impacts and/or ensure compatibility with the surrounding area. Lapse of Approval: If not acted upon within one year from the Notice of Final Decision, the Variance approval shall expire. Expiration is automatic and notice is not provided. The Director may grant a written six-month extension upon a showing of good cause, provided the applicant submits a written request for such extension prior to expiration. 21.02.925 SPECIAL EXCEPTION (a) Authority: A Special Exception from a specific provision of the City's development regulations may be approved to grant relief when the regulation is found to be inappropriate to the situation and/or results in an unreasonable inconvenience or difficulty in the use or development of the property. The Special Exception process encourages creative design solutions to site planning problems and does not require the presence of physical obstacles to development, as required for a Variance. Special Exceptions shall not be granted to residential densities, to definitions or interpretations, nor to permit processing procedures. Applicant: Any property owner or the owner's agent may apply. (c) Procedure: A Special Exception is processed in accordance with the procedures outlined in section 21.02.880 and the notice requirements of section 21.02.905 and is approved administratively as a Type II decision. (d) Criteria for Approval: A Special Exception proposal may be approved if all of the following questions can be answered "YES": (1) Will the proposal avoid conflicts with the City's Comprehensive Plan? (2) Will the Special Exception benefit the surrounding neighborhood and/or avoid significant adverse impacts on other properties and residents? (3) Will the Special Exception, along with any proposed mitigation measures or conditions of approval, minimize adverse environmental impacts? (4) Will the Special Exception result in the enhanced use of the site for a development, expansion of an ex/sting structure, or other innovative improvement that will be ADMINISTRATION: Page 23 //4o (e) clearly beneficial to the subject property and neighborhood? (5) Will the resulting improvements will be compatible with the design and development characteristics of similar properties in the neighborhood and zone? (6) Have other solutions, uses, or design options that might achieve a similar result without the need for a Special Exception been evaluated and rejected? (7) Is the Special Exception needed to solve a design problem or to allow a unique or innovative design, and not to grant relief for a personal or financial nature? Conditions of Approval: Conditions may be imposed as conditions of approval if needed to prevent adverse impacts and/or ensure compatibility with the surrounding area. Lapse of Approval: If not acted upon within one year from the Notice of Final Decision, the Special Exception approval shall expire. Expiration is automatic and notice is not provided. The Director may grant a written six-month extension upon a showing of good cause, provided a written request for such extension is submitted prior to expiration. 21.02.930 REZONE (a) Authority: The City Council may approve a change in zoning classification of property ~vithin the City limits by passage of an ordinance, following a public heating, provided the new zone is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and adopted approval criteria. Approval of a Rezone results in a change to the Official Zoning Map. (b) Applicant: The following may initiate a Rezone: (1) Private party: The owners, or their designated agents, representing at least seventy-five percent (75%) of the assessed valuation of the area proposed for rezoning. (2) City: The Bremerton Planning Commission or City Council may initiate a Rezone upon passage of a resolution of intent. (c) Procedure: A single-parcel or small area rezone is a quasi-judicial action that is processed in accordance with the procedures outlined in section 21.02.880 and the notice requirements of section 21.02.905. (2) The Staff Report shall include a recommendation for City Council action. ADMINISTRATION: Page 24 (d) (3) The Planning Commission shall review the proposal and initial staff recommendation at a public meeting and forward its own recommendation for City Council action. (4) The City Council shall make the decision following an open record public hearing, and after considering the recommendation of the Planning Commission, all oral and written testimony, and comments from the public, other agencies and City departments. Criteria for Approval: A Rezone may be approved if all of the following can be answered "YES": (1) Is the proposed Rezone consistent with the Comprehensive Plan? (See Section 21.02.245 "Plan/zoning consistency" of this code.) (2) Is the Rezone justified for one or more of the following reasons? It is in the public interest to approve the Rezone to accommodate needed changes within the immediate vicinity or neighborhood. It will correct a zone classification or boundary that was inappropriate when established. It is a planned step in a phasing process to gradually bring zoning into consistency with the 20-year Comprehensive Plan when appropriate. It will place or remove an overlay zoning designation without affecting the underlying zoning. (3) Is there a public need for the proposed Rezone that will clearly benefit the local neighborhood and/or the community of Bremerton? (4) Are all essential public facilities and services available and adequate, or can be made available, to serve the types and levels of development permitted in the requested zone? (5) Will the area being proposed for rezoning become part of a larger zoning district or form a new district which will not be considered an isolated "spot zone"? 21.02.935 DEVELOPMENT REGULATION AMENDMENT (a) Authority: The City Council may approve by passage of an ordinance, a change to the text of any City of Bremerton development regulation, including the Zoning Ordinance, large area amendments to the Zoning Map, Shoreline Master Program, Sensitive Areas Ordinance, and others. These are Type IV legislative decisions and exempt from the processing, timing, and other requirements for quasi-judicial permits. ADMINISTRATION: Page 25 Co) (c) (d) Applicant: The City Council, Planning Commission, Mayor, City department, agency, or other interested party may initiate an amendment to a development regulation: Procedure: The Planning Commission will conduct an open record public hearing for all amendments that are proposed to land use, environmental, or other related regulations and shall make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council, following its own open record public hearing, may approve, approve w/th modifications, deny, or remand the proposal for additional study. Criteria for Approval: The City Council may approve an amendment if the following questions can be answered "YES": (1) Is the proposed change consistent and compatible with the Comprehensive Plan? (2) Will the proposed change be consistent with all other provisions of the affected code and avoid conflicts with other codes? 21.02.940 (a) (b) (c) SITE PLAN REVIEW Applicability: (1) (2) (3) A technical site plan review shall be conducted for all projects that involve new development or expansion of existing structures or other exterior improvements that will change the physical condition of the site. The intent of the review is to ensure that the proposal meets all site development requirements of applicable regulations. Site plan application requirements and the extent of the review shall be adjusted to the size, nature and complexity of the development proposal. Applicant: Same as the applicant for the related building or development permits. Review Procedures: A Site Plan shall be submitted as part of the application for a proposal that involves a new or modified structure, or other physical improvements or changes to its site. Site Plan Review shall be included as one step in the processing of the requested permit(s) and a separate fee is not required. (2) A request to review a conceptual, speculative, or other Site Plan that is not part of a development application shall be treated as an independent application and shall be accompanied by a Site Plan Review fee. ADMINISTRATION: Page 26 (d) (3) A cursory review of a conceptual or sketch plan during a pre-application conference shall be provided at no charge to assist the potential applicant. Such review shall not be an official review for decision-making purposes. (4) The Site Plan shall be reviewed for consistency with applicable regulations and development standards. Based on the size and complexity of the project, the Director shall determine whether the review is done by DCD s~-f or by the Technical Review Committee consisting of representatives from all affected departments and agencies. Application Requirements: A Site Plan Review shall include the following components. The Director may waive one or more of these requirements when it is clear that the information obtained would not be relevant or helpful to an informed decision. (1) Vicinity Map: Shall show the subject property in relation to all other properties and major s~xuctures within a two-hundred fifty (250) foot radius of the property. (2) (3) Site Plan: [] Shall contain the following information: Location, size, bulk, height, number of stories, and use of all structures and areas on the subject parcel, both existing and proposed. Existing and proposed pedestrian walkways, bikeways, parks, playgrounds, recreational areas, activity centers, landscaped areas, and other areas and facilities of a public or recreational nature. Existing and proposed utility systems, drainage structures, fire hydrants, and related features. An environmental summary, including such features as shorelines, bulkheads, creeks, culverts, wetlands, steep slopes, unstable soils, rock outcroppings, significant trees, other "sensitive areas", etc. gl All property lines, easements, fences, walls, signs, and other points of reference. [] Other information, maps or data that is helpful or that was requested at the pre-application conference to better understand the nature and scope of the proposal and its impacts on surrounding properties, people, and land uses. Parking Plan: The following information may be shown on the Site Plan or provided as a separate parking plan, and shall include: [] Al1 parking spaces, aisles, handicapped and motorcycle spaces, loading spaces, transit facilities, and parking lot access and internal circulation. [21 Dimensions of all parking areas, spaces, driveways, setbacks, distances from curb cuts to intersection comers, and similar details. ADMINISTRATION: Page 27 (e) (4) (6) Landscape Plan: A plan showing the locations of all ex/sting trees ap.d other vegetation proposed to remain, all proposed new trees and other vegetation, and the overall plan for landscaping the entire site. This information may be shown on the Site Plan or may be a separate plan. Narrative: A written explanation of the proposal, including: Calculations of gross residential density, size of the site in square feet, and square footage of structures, parking areas, landscaped and recreational open space areas. Elevations and~or perspective drawings of proposed structures and other major improvements being proposed. Identification of parties responsible for the continued care and maintenance of all common open space, buffers, and similar areas. Fl The specific nature of any agreements, covenants, or other provisions that govern or affect the proposal. Signatures, mailing addresses, and phone numbers of all owners of record or agents of the subject property. Maps: All maps shall be drawn to scale, legible, in a reproducible black and white format no larger than 1 8" x 24", and shall include a north arrow and a title block that consists of at least the following: The map title and name of the related project application. Name and registration stamp (if necessary) of the person preparing the maps. Signature line for City approval and date of approval. Criteria for Approval: A Site Plan that complies with all applicable land use and development requirements and guidelines shall be approved. Decision & Appeal: (1) The Director or his/her designee may approve, approve subject to conditions, or reject a Site Plan. (2) A rejection shall be accompanied by a written explanation of the deficiencies and a deadline (90 days suggested) for submittal of any additional information that is needed to complete and approve the Site Plan. (3) An admirdstrative decision on a Site Plan may be appealed to Superior Court. ADMINISTRATION: Page 28 (g) (i) Recording of Decision: A Site Plan that was approved with conditions intended to remain with the land or project longer than one year, or indefinitely, shall be recorded with the Kitsap County Auditor. Typically, a Site Plan will be implemented and satisfied as development occurs and will remain active as long as construction is taking place. Time Limits on Approval: (1) With the exceptions of a Binding Site Plan, a PUD, or a project covered by a Development Agreement, Site Plan approval shall become void if building permits are not applied for or construction has not begun within one (1) year. The expiration is automatic and notice is not given. (2) The specific conditions of a Binding Site Plan, Planned Unit Development, or Development Agreement may specify different times or a phasing program for development. (3) The Director may grant one six-month extension in writing to the one~year approval period of a non-binding Site Plan upon good faith shown, provided the applicant requests the extension in writing prior to the expiration date. Compliance Required: No person shall violate or fail to comply w/th an approved Site Plan or any conditions thereof. Nor shall a building permit be valid for any structure which violates or fails to comply with any approved Site Plan for the parcel(s) on which such structure is to be located. 21.02.945 APPEAL (a) (b) Finality of Decision: (1) Those land use and development decisions that are subject to administrative appeal shall become final unless an appeal is filed within fourteen (14) days of the date of the decision, or the date of the Notice of Decision when such notice is given. City Council decisions shall be final when issued. (2) A Zoning Ordinance Interpretation may be appealed at any time. Appealable Decisions: (1) Type I administrative decisions may be appealed to the Planning Commission. (2) Type II administrative decisions with notice may be appealed to the City Council. (3) Type III City Council decisions may be appealed to Superior Court. ADMINISTRATION: Page 29 /¢6, (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (4) Type IV legislative decisions may be appealed to Superior Court. (5) Shoreline Substantial Development Permits, Variances and Conditional Use Permits may be appealed within fourteen (14) days to the City Council, or within twenty-one (21) days to the Shorelines Hearings Board. Parties of Record: Only parties of record may initiate an appeal to the Planning Commission (Type I) or City Council (Type II). Parties of record shall include: (1) ~ne applicant. (2) Anyone who participated in a public meeting on the application. (3) Anyone who submitted written comments concerning the application (excluding persons who have only signed petitions or mechanically produced form letters). Time to File: An appeal to the Planning Conunission, City Council or Superior Court must be filed within fourteen (14) days following issuance of the written decision. Other requirements apply to appeals to the Shorelines Hearings Board. All local appeals may be delivered to the Department of Community Development (DCD) by mail, personal delivery, or by FAX before 5:00 PM on the last business day of the appeal period (see: Computation of Time, section "£' below). Timing of Decisions: (1) An open record appeal shall be decided within ninety (90) days from the date the complete appeal was filed. (2) Should an occasion arise that would require a closed record appeal hearing, such an appeal shall be decided within sixty (60) days. Computation of Time: For purposes of computing the time for filing an appeal, the day the decision is rendered shall not be included. The last day of the appeal period shall be included unless it is a Saturday, Sunday, a day designated by RCW 1.16.050 or by the City's ordinances as a legal holiday, then it also is excluded and the filing must be completed on the next business day. Content of Appeal: An administrative appeal shall not be accepted unless it is written, accompanied by the required appeal fee, and contains at least the following information: (1) Appellant's name, address and phone number. (2) Appellant's statement describing his or her standing, as a party of record, to appeal. ADMiNISTRATION: Page30 (i) (3) Identification of the application which is the subject of the appeal. (4) Statement of grounds for appeal and the facts upon which the appeal is based. (5) Statement of the relief sought, including the specific nature and extent. (6) A statement that the appellant has read the appeal and believes the contents to be tree, followed by the appellant's signature. Effect: The timely filing of an administrative appeal shall stay the effective date of the decision until such time as the appeal is either decided or withdrawn. Notice of Appeal: The Director shall provide public notice of the appeal as provided in the Public Notice section of this code. The appellant shall bear the burden of proving the administrative decision was not supported by substantial evidence. 1724:ch-10.bdc Amended: Aug. 29, 1996 ADMiNISTRATION: Page 31 Bremerton Planning Commission MINUTES August 13, 1996 STUDY SESSION: Chairman Wayne Olsen called this public study session to order at 4:20 pm in the offices of the Bremerton Permit Center, located at 286 Fourth Street in Bremerton. Commissioners present were Robinson, Dingfield, Boyd, Stone, Adams and Olsen. Others in attendance were City Council President John Law, Councilman Montgomery, City Attorney lan Sievers, Planning Manager Ron Hough, Senior Planner Kay Wilson, and Building Development Specialist James Coombes. The purpose of this study session was to discuss the revised draf~ of the "Administration" section of the Bremerton Zoning Ordinance. The draft included a number of changes and new permit processing procedures dictated by ESHB 1724. Of greatest concern was the processing of Type III decisions. The proposal called for the City Council to make the decisions, following an open record public hearing. The Planning Commission's role would be to hold an earlier "public meeting", which might be a study session or neighborhood meeting, but not a public hearing. The Commission would then make a recommendation for Council action. The City Attorney felt that the Planning Commission could conduct public meetings to discuss issues informally and not have those meetings be confused with more formal public hearings. The 1724 legislation is loose enough to allow that kind of flexibility. Even so, some Commissioners were uneasy about using an informal meeting process to gather public input on quasi-judicial proposals. Some felt the public would not participate but would save their energy for the Council's open public hearing. The options were to (1) recommend the proposal that includes public Commission meetings and recommendations, (2) remove the Commission from any involvement in Type III decisions, or (3) ignore the mandate of 1724 and recommend that a public hearing be held by both the Commission and City Council for Type III decisions. The Study Session was adjoumed at 5:00 pm. SPECIAL MEETING: Chairman Olsen called this Special Meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 5:04 pm in the offices of the Bremerton Permit Center. Attendance was the same as for the study session. Page I Following a very brief discussion of the Type III decision process, Commissioner Boyd moved that the Planning Commission hold public hearings on Type III decisions before making recommendations to the City Council. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Adams. Following additional discussion, the motion passed with four affirmative votes (Boyd, Adams, Stone and Dingfield). Commissioners Robinson and Olsen abstained. Robinson's reason for abstaining was a lack of information about how the heatings would be structured. Mr. Hough proposed a fast track schedule for adoption of the revisions. The schedule would have the draft distributed to the Council this week and would include a Council public hearing on August 28. Hough suggested a City Council study session prior to the hearing and proposed August 21, following the regular Council meeting. Councilman Law agreed with that proposal. The Commission continued to review the proposed changes to the Administration section of the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Hough answered questions and accepted comments and suggestions for minor changes. No major or significant changes were made and the document will be "cleaned up" to correct grammar and typographical errors before distribution to the City Council. This special meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 5:18 pm. Ron ~_. Hough Acting Secretary ~qa~e oIs~n, Chair Date Page 2 /5-O AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. AMENDING THE 1996 BUDGET FOR AGENDA OF: Sept. 4, 1996 /~ ORIGINATING DEPT:Treasurer / ./ ORIGINATOR: R. Ha~ DATE SUBMITTED:August 21,19~6 ~- ~ Comment of back if necessary) 3. EXHIBITS: Dir. Administr~./~~-Q~---~ Proposed Ordinance City Attorr'~ ~,~--~.~,~-~-- Supporting Budget Adjustment Forms Fiscaland Budget Comm. ~(~~ J[~ ~'~"7~v~' ENDORSEMENTS ,~ , INFORMATION APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FOR SUBMITTA COUNCIL PRESIDENT~--~~ 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: A number of actions have been taken by the City which need to be incorporated into the Budget in order for the document to remain an accurate projection of Ci~ financial activit,/. 8. RECOMMENDATION: Motion to approve Ordinance amending the 1996 Budget on first reading. Motion to pass Ordinance No. __ on second reading. 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFiCIAL:Treasurer ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: Mayor EXPIRATION DATE: 12/31/96 REVIEW DATE: N/A PULLED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: TABLED 10. NOTICE OF ACTION APPROVED DISAPPROVED 11. AGENDA BILL NO: AMENDED__ 8C 2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS: 5. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE: The 1996 Budget will not accurately project anticipated financial activity of the City. Several previously authorized actions will exceed current appropriations. 6. IMPACT ON STAFFING. BUDGETS. FACILITIES. EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES: As indicated in the attachments. 7. RESEARCH SOURCES: 1996 Budget Adjustment Requests. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE amending Ordinance No. 4552 relating to the budget of the City of Bremerton for Fiscal Year 1996 THE CITY OF BREMERTON DOES ORDAIN: SECTION 1: Section 1 of Ordinance No. 4552 is hereby amended as follows: That the financial budget for the City of Bremerton, to wit: "Official Budget for the year 1996, City ofBremerton", now on file in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Bremertort, be and the same is hereby approved and adopted, and the respective amounts provided for in said budget for the several funds of the City of Bremerton, be and the same are hereby fixed and adopted as follows: ESTIMATED REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES FOR THE YEAR 1996 FUND# 001 101 102 103 104 105 106 108 109 110 112 201 3O5 307 308 401 407 451 481 503 DESCRIPTION AMOUNT General Arterial Street ................................................. 2,506,156 City Street .................................................... Contingency Reserve ............................................ 733,500 Civic Improvement/Stadium ..................................... 155,000 Parking System Revenue ........................................ 664,638 Comm. Development Block Grant ............................. 1,374,000 Abatement Revolving Fund ...................................... 414,000 Real Estate Transfer Tax ........................................ 885,000 Police Special Projects ............................................ 43,199 Parks Facility Construction ........................................ G. O. Bonds ................................................... 1,024,787 Waterfront Parks Consturction .................................... 31,300 Fire Department Capital ......................................... 314,570 Pendergast Regional Park Const ................................. 119,000 Water Operating ............................................. 10,040,073 Municipal Golf Course ........................................ 4,224,012 Wastewater Operating ........................................ 15,268,985 Stormwater Operations ........................................ 1,258,715 Risk Management ............................................. 1,898,000 22,434,813 2,080,190 98,446 510 601 621 622 623 624 Equipment Rental Reserve ..................................... 2,~.57,79'1 Cemetery Perpetual Care ........................................ 123,500 Local Improvement Dist. Guaranty .............................. 116,000 Roosevelt Capital Asset ......................................... 356,000 Gift and Donations Fund .......................................... 32,400 Employee Medical Insurance Reserve ............................ 555,000 2,508,649 GRAND TOTAL ESTIMATED REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES:... ,,vv,,v,,.vve~° ',a', ~ o~ $69,259,933 Of the total revenue, the sum of $4,703,968 is the estimated amount to be received fi.om a $3.8020 levy per $1,000 of assessed valuation of all property within the city limits of the City of Bremerton as set forth in Ordinance No. 4532. APPROVED by the City Council on the first reading this day of August, 1996. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton, signed by the Mayor and attested by the City Clerk in authentication of such passage this day of September. 1996. APPROVED this JOHN E. LAW, Council President day of Sevtember, 1996 ATTEST: LYNN HORTON, Mayor KATHLEEN L. McCLUSKEY, City Clerk EFFECTIVE DATE: PUBLISHED: ORDINANCE NO: 1996 AMENDING ORDINANCE NO;2 SUMMARY OF BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS 001 GENERAL 101 ARTERIAL STREET 102 STREET 103 CAPITAL RESERVE 104 CIVIC IMPROVEMENT 105 PARKING SYSTEM REVENUE 106 C.D.B.G. 108 ABATEMENT REVOLVING FUND 109 REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX 110 POLICE SPECIAL PROJECTS 112 PARKS FACILITY CONSTRUCTION 201 GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND 305 WATERFRONT PARKS CONSTRUCT[ON 307 FIRE DEPARTMENT CAPITAL 308 PENDERGAST REGIONAL PARK CONST. 401 WATER OPERATING 407 GOLF COURSE 451 WASTEWATER OPERATING 481 STORMWATER OPERATING 503 RISK MANAGEMENT 510 EQUIPMENT RENTAL RESERVE 601 CEMETERY PERPETUAL CARE 621 LID GUARANTY 622 ROOSEVELT CAPITAL ASSET 623 DONATIONS FUND 624 EMPLOYEE MEDICAL INSURANCE RES. CURRENT NET 1996 BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS $22,005,161 $429,652 2,506,156 2,070,390 9,800 733,500 155,000 664,638 1,374.000 414,000 885,000 43,199 96,000 2,446 1,024,787 31.300 314,570 119,000 10,040,073 4,224,012 15,268,985 1,258,715 1,898,000 2,457,794 50,855 123.500 116,000 356,000 32,400 555,000 TOTAL AMENDED BUDGET $22,434,813 2,506,156 2,080,190 733,500 155,000 664,636 1,374,000 414,000 885,000 43,199 98,446 1.024,787 31,300 314,570 119,000 10,040,073 4,224,012 15,268,985 1,258,715 1,898,000 2,508,649 123,500 116,000 356,000 32,400 555,000 $68,767,180 $492,753 $69,259,933 CITY OF BREMERTON BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REQUEST R~questing Department: community DEVELOPMENT SOURCE OF FUNDS: ~egular Salaries 524.2016-51010 Amount $15,000 USE OF FUNDS: Professional Services 524.2016-54110 Amoynt $15,000 NARRATIVE: Due to the loss of one full-time employee who filled the Building Official position, two county employees were hired on a temporary basis to fill the void in the Building Department. One of these county employees was subsequently hired as a full time permanent employee of DCD. The cost of her temporary time while still on the county payroll ~as $2,741. The second employee works as an inspector for Bremerton DCD and will continue to do so until vacancies at DCD are filled. To date, the cost for these professional services is $4146. In addition, plan reviews for buildin~ hermits which were n~ by DCD staff._~_..duri~ f2=~~th~s ~ime~4 ~peri°d were submitted to an outszde' engmneerin' ~ fzrm' at $1200.00- epartmehYf-fea~f'~'gnat~e~'~)ate /~-f/Y?ff& Director Signature Treasurer Comments: ~ mmended ~ Not Recommended Mayor Comments: Treasurer's Signature - Date /~ Recommended Approved ~-] Not Recommended [-~ Denied Fiscal & Budget Committee Comments: Recommended Approved Not Recommended Denied M~yor's Signature Date - F~scal & Bu-~get Committee Signature IYG CITY OF BREMERTON BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REQUEST NO. Requesting Department: STREET FUND NO. 102 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Descri~3tion Increase: Beginning Cash NARRATIVE: Amount 9,800 USE OF FUNDS: Descri.otion 96-15 Amount Increase: Capital Projects 9,800 This adjustment will provide expenditure authority necessary to complete two improvements to the Public Works Complex site. The improvements include the pedmiter fence and drainage improvements. Departmer~ Hea'~ Si{~[~"re Director Signature Treasurer Comments; Date ~ecommended Mayor Comments: Not Recommended Treasurer's Signatbre Date .~Recommended Approved Not Recommended Denied Fiscal & Budget Committee Comments: Recommended ~ Not Recommended Approved ~ Denied M,~yor's Signature / Date Fiscal & Budget Cor~miffee Signature Date Requesting Department: SOURCE OF FUNDS: CITY OF BREMERTON BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REQUEST PARK DEPT. - GENERAL FUND Description Amount Increase: Donations 2,000 Reduce: Supplies & Services 1,800 Total 3,800 NARRATIVE: NO. USE OF FUNDS: Descriotion Increase: Capital ~ q ¥ . 7 ~ 5 / - ,~-~ ~/~:~ 96-16 Amount 3,800 This adjustment will allow the replacement of a copy machine at the Senior Center. The old machine is no longer functional. Department Head Signature Treasurer Comments: Date m~or'Signature~ ~"~Recommended Mayor Comments: Not Recommended Treasurer's Signature Date ~Recommended Approved Denied Fiscal & Budget Committee Comments: Not Recommended Mayor's' Signature Date ~. Recommended Not Recommended CITY OF BREMERTON BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REQUI=ST No. 96-17 Requesting Department: TRANSPORTATION DEPT. - GENERAL FUND and EQUIPMENT RENT SOURCE OFFUNDS: ~ Amount Beginning Cash 100,000 Sale of Old Cars ~ Total 125,000 Decrease: Reduce Ending Cash 60,000 Sale of Old Cars 15.000 Total 75,000 USE OF FUNDS: New Patrol Cars 125,000 New Fire Cars 75,000 This adjustment will provide expenditure authority necessa~ to allow for the replacement of five police cars which were unexpectedly removed from front line service for mechanical reasons. Staff wishes to replace three Fire Dept. cars at the same time to maintain standardization within the fleet. Department Head Signature Treasurer Comments: Date })ire~or Signature L/ Date ~'"~commended Mayor Comments: Not Recemmeni~i~'~-' Treasurer's Sign"a{ure Date Recommended Approved Not Recommended Denied Fiscal & Budget Committee Comments: Recommended Approved Date Not Recommended ['~ Denied Fiscal& B'bdg~Cbr~ittee Signature Date CITY OF BREMERTON BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REQUEST Requesting Department: Parks DEPARTMENT - GENERAL FUND SOURCE OFFUNDS: DescdDtion Amount INCREASE REVENUES: Timber Sales Insurance Recoveries 1,000 2,851 Total 3,851 USE OF FUNDS: Description INCREASE EXPENDITURES: Equipment Purchases NARRATIVE: Amount 3,851 This adjustment will all~[the expenditure of unplanned revenue from two sources; first is $1,000 from the sale of wind-downed trees in NAD Park and the second is an insurance recovery for water damaged tables. The revenue will be used to purchase replacement tables and maintenance equipment for the department. Department Head Signature Date (~ector Signatu~a/ Treasurer Comments: Date ~'~commended Mayor Comments: Not Recommended Treasurer's Signature ~.. Date zz~ Rec°mmended ~ N°t Rec°mmended ~'~ //~.~ Approved ~ Denied ~ ,~,,,~. Ma~for's Signature Fiscal & Budget Committee Comments: Date [-~ Recommended [~ Not Recommended ~] Approved ~ Denied FiScal & Budge~C~ilee Signature / Date Requesting Department: CITY OF BREMERTON BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REQUEST ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES - GENERAL FUND No. 96-19 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Description BANK LOAN Amount 237,700 USE OF FUNDS: Description Amount REDUCE MAINTENANCE COSTS (9,000) COMPUTER REPLACEMENT 243,500 DEBT ISSUE COSTS %~;-. ~ ~ 3.200 TOTAL 237,70O NARRATIVE: This adjustment will provide expenditure authority necessary for the financing and acquisition of the City's new computer system. Department Head Signature Date Director Signature Treasurer Comments: Date ~commended ~-~ Not Recommended Mayor Comments: Treasurer's Signature % Date Recommended Approved ~-~ Not Recommended ~ Denied Fiscal & Budget Committee Comments: ~ Recommended ~ Not Recommended ~-~ Approved ~ Denied M a~yor's Signature Date · & Budget Cor~lj.ttee Sigr~ature ~-ate CITY OF BREMERTOK BUDQLrr ADJU~'I'MENT REQUESt Requesting Department: c~,.,.~-~-7' SOURCE OF FUNDS: No funds i~volved Amend organization listing. 1. Delete Building Official 2. Delete Planner 001-16 NARRATIVE: USE OF FUNDS: 001-16 No funds involved Add Building. Development Permits Manager Add Building Development Specialist II The reorganization of the City ~ermitting process requires job descriptions which are more systems and customer service oriented. ~hese two job description changes a~co~lish this goal. Department Head Signature Date Treasurer Comments: Director Signature Date Recommended ~ Not Recommended Mayor Comments: Treasurer's Signature Date Recommended Approved Not Recommended Denied Fiscal & Budget Committee Comments: Mayor's Signature Date Recommended Approved ~-1 Not Recommended F--1 Denied Fiscal & Budget Committee Signature Date Requesting Department: CITY OF BREMERTON BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REQUEST POLICE DEPT. 001-20 No. 96-21 SOURCE OF FUNDS: DescriDtion CONTRACT REVENUE Amount 17,920 USE OF FUNDS: DescriDtion PERSONNELCOSTS Amount 17,920 NARRATIVE: This adjustment will provide necessary expenditure authority to carry out the scope of the contract between the City and the Housing Authority for reduction of gang activity. Department Head Signature Treasurer Comments: Date Director Signature Date ~mmended Not Recommended Treasurer's Signature Mayor Comments: Recommended Approved Not Recommended Denied Fiscal & Budget Committee Comments: Signature Date Recommended Approved [~] Not Recommended [~ Denied Fiscal & Bu g-~et Committee Signature Requesting Department: SOURCE OF FUNDS: CITY OF BREMERTON BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REQUEST POLICE SPEClAL PROJECTS FUND 110 No. 96-22 Reduce Ending Cash Amount 2,600 Remaining Endina Cash = $19.599 NARRATIVE: USE OF FUNDS: increase Capital Equipment Amount 2,600 This adjustment will allow the purchase of an alarm system which is attached to a digital pager. This item is necessa~ for the safety of the Special Operations covert narcotics buys. It is used by most of the narcotics divisions in the State as a safety measure for the officers and confidential informants. D~'pa~rtment Hea(~VSign~at~re Date Treasurer Comments: Director Signature Date ~Recommended Not Recommended Mayor Comments: TreasureCs S ig'?lat~m~ ~ Recommended Approved Not Recommended Denied Fiscal & Budget Committee Comments: M~yor's Signature Date ~-~ Recommended ~-~ Not Recommended ~ Approved ~--~ Denied Fiscal & Budget Committee Signature Date Requesting Department: CITY OF BREMERTON BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REQUEST Community Deve lo[~nent SOURCE OF FUNDS: oo1- 6 333.- - - Intergovec [ aL~ental Revenue Washington State CTED. NARRATIVE: Amount £40,000 USE OF FUNDS: ~ 001-16 558. 2016 Long Range Planning g40,000 The City has been awarded a Planning and Enviror[nental Review Fund Grant to develop a S. pecific Area Plan for the Charleston C~[uudnity. This grant will be matched by 1996 Department Head Signature Date Director Signature Treasurer Comments: Date [~ Recommended [---] Not Recommended Mayor Comments: Date Recommended Approved Not Recommended Denied Fiscal & Budget Committee Comments: Mayor's Signature Date Recommended Approved r---] Not Recommended [----] Denied Fiscal & Budget Committee Signature Date Requesting Department: CITY OF BREMERTON BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REQUEST NO, PARK FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION FUND NO. 112 96-24 SOURCE OF FUNDS: DescriDtion Increase: Insurance Recoveries Reduce: Other Park Imp, Projects Amount 2,446 5,554 8,000 USE OF FUNDS: Description Increase: Security Fence Project Amount 8,000 NARRATIVE: This adjustment will allow the replacement of the security fence at the vehicle storage area of the Sheridan Department Head Signature Treasurer Comments: Date Director Signature Date Recommended Mayor Comments: Not Recommended Treasurer's Signature Date ~ Recommended ~ Not Recommended [~ Approved [~ Denied Fiscal & Budget Committee Comments: Mayor's Signature ~'~ Recommended ~ Approved Not Recommended Denied Fiscal & Budget Committee Signature Date Requesting Department: CITY OF BREMERTON BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REQUEST GENERAL FUND -POLICE DEPARTMENT No. 96-25 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Description Amount STATE SHARED REVENUE CRIMINAL JUSTICE 3,181 REDUCE SUPPLIES &'SERVICES INVESTIGATION 11,282 COMMUNITY RESOUR 1.218 15,681 USE OF FUNDS: Description Amount INCREASE: SAFE POLICY PROGRAM 1,063 ALIVE SHELTER 899 COMMUNITY RESOURCES EQUIP. 13,719 15,681 NARRATIVE: This adjustment increases the State cdminal justice funding from the preliminary estimates to the final allocations and corrects allocation of the innovative strategy funds within the Police Dept. budget. D~partment Head Signature Treasurer Comments: Date Director Signature Date ~mended ~-~ Mayor Comments: Not Recommended ~ ~ Treasurer's Signature Recommended Approved Not Recommended Denied Fiscal & Budget Committee Comments: [~Recommended ~ Not Recommended Approved [-~ Denied £ Date Fis"d'al & Bucl"gE~t Committee Signature Date CITY OF BREMERTON BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REQUEST No. 96-26 Requesting Department: Public ~rks SOURCE OFFUNDS: Equil:ment Rental Reserve Fund 510 365.2100 $35,854.48 NARRATIVE: USE OF FUNDS: Purchase Scat Trak 594.4846.56410 $31,~oo One time funds received from Petrolet~n Products Antitrust Litigation $2,998.48 and City Hardship Assistance Account Distribution $32,856.00 Department Head Signature Treasurer Comments: Date Director~ignature [~ Recommended g - Mayor Comments: Not Recommended reasurers Signature \ Date Recommended Approved Not Recommended Denied Fiscal & Budget Committee Comments: M~yor's Signature Date Recommended Approved Not Recommended Denied AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE No. 1. SUBJECT: FOR AGENDA OF: Sept. 4., 1996 Acknowledging a revised Employee ORIGINATING DEPT: Human Resources Expense Reimbursement Policy. ORIGINATOR: Jim Meith DATE SUBMITTED: Aug. 14, 1996 : (Comment on back if necessary) 3. EXHIBITS: Proposed resolution, ordinance and policy. CITY A~TTORNE~ Old ordinance and policy. OPERATIONS COMMITTEE YOR COUNCIL P S DEN% - 4. SUMMARY STATeMeNT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: The current "Employee Expense Reimbursement" policy can only be changed by City Council approval. There is a need to update and revise the policy. Further, by repealing the existing ordinance any future changes can be appropriately done by administration. 8. RECOMMENDATION: a. Motion to approve at the first reading and pass on the second reading Ordinance No. repealing section 3 of Ordinance No. 4374. RESOLUTI.0N TO BE ACTED UPON FOLLOWING SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE_ . D. Motlon to approve Resolution No. acknowledging a revised Employee Expense Policy. 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: EXPIBATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: PULLED [] TABLED [] APPROVED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: 10. NOTICE OF ACTION [] DISAPPROVED [] AMENDED [] DATE:~ 11. AGENDA BILL NO.: ~&- ~ 7 (OVER) 2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS: 5. IMPACT OF NON-PASSAGE: Administration would not be able to function as efficiently. 6. IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS, FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES: None. 7. RESEARCH SOURCES: 17o ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE repealing Section 3 of Ordinance No. 4374. TIlE CITY OF BREMERTON DOES lt~.REBY ORDAIN: Section 1. Repeal. Section 3 of Ordinance No. 4374 "Expense Policy Confirmed" shall be repealed in its entirety. 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. JOHN E. LAW, President City Council APPROVED this day of ,1996. LYNN HORTON, Mayor ATTEST: KATHLEEN L. McCLUSKEY City Clerk 17/ RESOLUTION NO. Acknowledging a revised Employee Expense Reimbursement policy. WItrEREAS, it is to the benefit of the citizens of Bremerton, City employees, City administration and the City Council to establish a uniform City policy for the Employee Expense Reimbursement; and WIt3EREAS, the Mayor has established a revised Employee Expense Reimbursement Policy which addresses guidelines for authorization and reimbursement of job-related expenses; BE IT RESOLVED BY THF, CITY COUNCIL OF I'HE CITY OF BREMERTON: That the Council ask the Audit Committee to direct the City Auditor to perform periodic audits and report on the effectiveness of, and the City's adherence to, the Employee Expense Reimbursement policy; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that any future revisions to the Employee Expense Reimbursement policy will be reported to the Council by the Mayor. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this day of ,1996. JOHN E. LAW, President City Council APPROVED this day of _, 1996. ATTEST: LYNN HORTON, Mayor KATHLEEN L. McCLUSKEY City Clerk CITY OF BREMERTON Human Resources Policy INDEX E~'v'eCTIVE DATE: Oct. 15, 1996 APPROVED Administrative REVIEW DATE: 3-1 REVISED DATE: Aug. 21, 1996 REFERENCE City of Bremerton PURPOSE The purpose of this policy is to provide guidelines for authorization and reimbursement of job-related expenses. POLICY It is the responsibility of the City to provide reimbursement to employees for expenses incurred in the performance of duties related to employment with the City. The guidelines in this policy provide for such Reimbursement. If the employee decides, at his or her own discretion, to exceed the guidelines, it will be done at the employee's own expense. All reimbursable expenses will be at the level that represents the lowest cost to the City. Employees are reminded that monies reimbursed for expenses are public funds. It is the employee's responsibility to use the funds for approved purposes and to properly document expenditures. Employees will use City funds in a conservative, reasonable and a responsible manner. Reimbursement will not be allowed for expenses determined to be unreasonable by the Department Head. Reimbursement will be made by check after approval by the City Council, except where the amount to be reimbursed is less than $25.00, in which case reimbursement may be made by petty cash, upon aplSroval of the Department Head or designee. ALLOWABLE EXPENSES Mileage -- For employees using personal vehicles, mileage will be reimbursed at the rate currently in effect by the Internal Revenue Service. Airline Tickets -- All airline tickets will be purchased at the most economical rates available at the time of booking. Meals -- Reasonable meal costs will be reimbursed on actual receipts, or as required by an applicable labor agreement. Reimbursement for alcoholic beverages will not be made and, if included in receipts, must be clearly deducted or isolated fxom allowable expenses. Family members or guests' meals are not reimbursable. EMPREIM. POL 8/5/96 PAGE 1 OF 3 173 To qualify for meal allowance, the employee must be on City business. If an employee is attending a meeting or conference where meals are included, reimbursement for substitute meals will not be 'made and should not be requested, except in the case of a bona fide religious or medical dietary restriction. Lodging - Reasonable lodging will be reimbursed on actual receipts, or as required by applicable labor agreement. Lodging will be reimbursed at the single-occupancy rate, unless two or more employees are sharing accommodations. When an employee attends a conference or meeting at a specific hotel, the actual room rate (single-occupancy) will be reimbursed. Documentation of the conference rate and receipts are required. The rate should be the most economical that is practical. A Department Head may direct an employee to stay at a lower cost facility, if such facility is located near the conference site. Miscellaneous Expenses -- Reasonable out of pocket expenses incurred in conjunction with City business will be reimbursed, with the approval of the Department Head. NON REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES Employee expenses of a personal nature will not be reimbursed. Non employees may accompany employees on City travel subject to the following guidelines: The City incurs no more expense than would be paid to the employee traveling alone; Meal receipts must clearly segregate costs for the employee from his or her family; Lodging will be reimbursed at the single-occupancy rate. If receipts are billed at double or multiple occupancy, the employee must submit documentation of the single occupancy rate and will be responsible for paying the difference. Employees WILL NOT transport a non employee in any City-owned vehicle on City business, without the PRIOR approval of the Department Head or designee. PER DIEM Employees may elect to be paid a per diem rate in lieu of actual meal and lodging expenses, when travel requires an overnight stay. The per diem rate is $40.00 per day or as set by an labor agreement. Receipts are not PAGE 2 OF 3 required for per diem allowances. REUVlBURSEMENT Employees requesting reimbursement, will submit the appropriate expense reimbursement voucher to the Department Head or designee no later than 30 calendar days following the date on which such expense was incurred. Vouchers for reimbursement not presented in a timely manner may be denied payment by the City. Except as stated below, all reimbursement requests must be supported by itemized receipts or invoices which include: 1. Date of service 2. Vendor name and address location 3. Amount of charges 4. Number of persons; If more than one, must be named on the invoice/receipt. Receipts or invoices are not required for ordinary out of pocket expenditures such as taxi fare, parking, ferry tolls, etc. APPROVALS Up to $500 total estimated cost of travel - Department Head. More than $500 total estimated cost of travel - Mayor. Travel that is both out of State and is more than 200 miles - Mayor. ADVANCE TRAVEL REVOLVING FUND Employees may be advanced funds to pay travel costs, lodging, meals and registration fees. A "Request for Travel Authorization - Advance" must be submitted to Accounts Payable in the Treasurer's Office at least three(3) working days in advance of departure. PAGE 3 OF 3 175 ORDINANCE NO. ~z~ 7~/ AN ORDINANCE repealing provisions of the Municipal Code establishing wages, hours and benefits, chapters 2.36,2.40,2.44 and 2.52 of the Bremerton Municipal Code, and re, codifying City Hall hours and holidays. THE CITY OF BREMERTON DOES YgEREBY ORDAIN: Section 1. Repeal. The following Chapters of the Bremerton Municipal Code are hereby repealed in their entirety: Chapter 2.36 SALARIES. Chapter 2.40 EMPLOYEES -HOURS, VACATIONS, SICK LEAVE Chapter 2.44 EMPLOYEES -RETIREMENT AND PENSIONS Chapter 2.52 EMPLOYEES EXPENSES Section 2. New Chapter. A new chapter, 2.02 CITY BUSINESS HOURS, is adopted to read as follows: 2.02.010 CITY OFFICE HOURS. Ail offices of the City shall be kept open for the transaction of business during nine hours scheduled between the hours of seven-thirty a.m. and five p.m. of each business day from Monday through Friday of each week, holidays excepted, unless amended by City Council resolution. City Hall shall be closed on Saturday, Sunday and holidays. 2.02.020 LEGAL HOLIDAYS. (a) The following holidays are adopted as legal holidays for the City: The first day of January (New Year's Day); the third Monday of January (Martin Luther King's Birthday); the third Monday of February (President's Day); the last Monday of May (Memorial Day); the Fourth day of July (Independence Day); the first Monday in September (Labor Day); the eleventh day in November (Veteran's Day); the fourth Thursday and Friday in November (Thanksgivi[~g holiday); the twenty-fifth day of December (Christmas Day); and any other day designated by public proclamation of the Chief Executive of the State as a legal holiday or as a day of thanksgiving. (b) Whenever any legal holiday falls upon a Sunday, the following Monday shall be a legal holiday, and whenever any legal holiday falls upon a Saturday, the preceding Friday shall be a legal holiday. Section 3. Expense Policy Confirmed. 'Employment Expense Reimbursement', Policy 3-1 of the City's Administrative Policy and Procedures Manual, shall remain in full force and effect unless amended by Council resolution or Council approved Collective Bargaining Agreement. APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this ,,Q-,~ day of ~ Ct~C~, ,1992. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this ~- ~ day of LYIqN HORTON, Council President APPROVED this ~..t// day of ~7/~.' , 1992. LOUIS MENTOR, Mayor AT'FEST: KATHLEEN McCLUSKEY, City Q~erk /77 CITY OF BREMERTON ADMINISTRATIVE POLICIES ~ PROCEDURES SUBJECT: FILE UNDER SECTION: NO. EMPLOYEE EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 3-1 EFFECTIVE DATE: January I5, 1992 APPROVED BY: CITY COUNCIL - May 4, 1982 POLICY Whenever it becomes necessary for an elective or appointive official or employee of the City to travel away from his designated post of duty while engaged on official business, and s/he is authorized by the Department Head to use his/her personally owned automobile for such travel, s/he shall be reimbursed at a mileage rate that is in accordance with the reimbursement rate currently in effect for business related travel by the Internal Revenue Service. Reimbursement for mileage shall be submitted on the Claim for Expenses form and must include the destination, the number of miles driven and the purpose of the trip, for each day that mileage is claimed. When properly authorized and approved, officers and employees shall be entitled to reimbursement when they are required to make out of pocket expenditures (not to exceed $25.00 per item) for ordinary and necessary out of pocket expenditures such as taxi fare, parking, ferry tolls, etc. Such expenditures shall be made only where it is not feasible to use the established purchasing procedures or when the need arises on an emergency basis. Proper documentation is required of such expenditures (when practical) in order to qualify for reimbursement. If any such expenditures exceeds the $25.00 limit, it shall be subject to City Council approval at the discretion of the City Auditor. officers and employees may, when properly authorized, be reimbursed for the cost of meals incurred within the City or at other normal areas of employment while they are conferring, consulting or otherwise meeting with non-city specialists, technicians, executives or others. Such expenses must be necessarily incurred in the performance of the official duties of the municipal officials and employees. Reimbursement will be allowed for the cost of meals incurred by volunteer commission members and Council approved committees, provided that such costs are necessary to the conduct of City business and are reasonable in amount, officials and employees may be reimbursed for the reasonable cost of a meal when they are called out on an emergency after normal working hours to perform vital City services. Such reimbursement shall be in accordance with the current non-uniform employee's union agreement. ~EMPLOYEE EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 3-1 Page-2- If persons other than the claimant are included on the reimbursement request, they shall be listed by name and title. Identification of elected or appointed officials by group, such as Civil Service Commission, shall be sufficient. All employees must be identified individually. Under no circumstances will reimbursement be made for expenses incurred on behalf of any person, group or commission that is not an elected or appointed official or employee of the City. Expenditures for which reimbursement will not be made include but are not limited to the following: Liquor Expenses of a spouse or other person not authorized to receive reimbursement under this policy. For each meeting or trip that expenses are incurred, the official or employee shall indicate, on the "Claim for Expenses", the purpose of the meeting/trip. Each meal (for which reimbursement is requested) must be supported by proper documentation which shall accompany the claim. Claims for employee expenses shall be approved by the appropriate person (Department Head or Mayor) in writing on the claim form prior to being submitted. The following is established as guideline for meal expenditures: Breakfast $ 5.00 Lunch $ 8.00 Dinner $13.30 Reimbursement for meals will not exceed $26.30 per day in total; unless the additional expense incurred is deemed to have been necessary. This amount shall be adjusted at the end of each year based on the Consumer Price Index for all urban consumers. Tips and gratuities shall not exceed 15% of the cost of the meal. Proper documentation shall include any of the following: a bill, invoice, cash register receipt, or other corroborative evidence of the transaction. Employee incurred expenses for lodging (while out of town on city business) will be reimbursed by the City only for the employee submitting the claim when the following conditions are met: Original documentation supporting the expense is submitted with the claim. Such documentation shall be in the form of a bill, invoice, cash register receipt or other evidence of the transaction. EMPLOYEE EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 3-1 Page-3- The purpose of the trip is indicated, in writing, on the claim form o Written approval is obtained from the appropriate person (Department Head or Mayor) and indicated on the claim form. The daily limit for reimbursement of lodging expense shall be $40.00 within Washington State, provided that this.limit may be exceeded when the additional expense is justified or deemed necessary. Reimbursement for out of state lodging expenses will be based upon amounts deemed reasonable for the geographical location. As an acceptable alternative to the limits as set forth above, the employee may elect the per diem method of reimbursement. To claim per diem, the official or employee need only obtain and submit a receipt for the hotel/motel where s/he stayed overnight. If an alternative mode of lodging is chosen such as a camper, trailer, or relative's house, other corroborative evidence of the overnight stay shall be submitted. The per diem rate will be $40.00 per day. No City official or employee shall be entitled to receive any expenses provided for in this chapter until s/he shall have first set forth on forms prescribed by the Division of Municipal Corporations in the Office of the State Auditor the amount thereof and the nature of the business transacted. Any intent to defraud the City of Bremerton by falsely claiming expenses will constitute cause for immediate termination. AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL 1. SUBJECT: RESOLUTION N0.~b-~ Acknowledging a revised Vehicle Use Policy. FOR AGENDA OF: Sept. 4. 1996 ORIGINATING DEPT: HUman Resources ORIGINATOR: Jim Meith DATE SUBMITTED: Aug. 14, 1996 2. C~N~S: (Comment on back if necessary) CITY ATTORNEY FISCAL-& BUDGET, COMMITTEE OPERATIONS COMMITTEE ENDORSEMENT~ I~TION [] YOR .... 3. EXHIBITS: Proposed resolution and policy. Old resolution and policy. APPROVED BY COUNCIL ~D~UBMITTAL: COUNCIL PRESIDENT 4. SUM/~a~RY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: The current "Vehicle Use Policy" can only be changed by city Council approval. There is a need to update and revise the policy. Further, by repealing the existing resolution any future changes can be appropriately done by administration. 8. RECOMMENDATION: Motion to approve Resolution No. Vehicle Use Policy and repeal Resolution No. acknowledging a revised 2285. 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: 10. NOTICE OF ACTION PULLED [] TABLED [] APPROVED [] DISAPPROVED [] AMENDED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: [] DATE: 11. AGENDA BILL NO.: (OVER) 9A CLEARANCE COMMENTS: 5. IMPACT OF NON-PASSAGE: Administration would not be able to function as efficiently. 6. IMPACT ON STAFFINGt BUDGETS, FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES: None. 7. RESEARCH SOURCES: RESOLUTION NO. Acknowledging a revised Vehicle Use Policy and Repealing Resolution No. 2285. WHEREAS, it is to the benefit of the citizens of Bremerton, City employees, City adm~istration and the City Council to establish a uniform City policy for the use of City owned vehicles; and WHEREAS, the Mayor has established a revised Use of City Owned Vehicle Use Policy which addresses both the general and specific uses of the vehicles; WHEREAS, it is the intern of the Council that the use of City owned vehicles will be limited exclusively to those instances when it is necessary to conduct City business. WHEREAS~ it is not the intent of the Council that the use of City owned vehicles be considered a benefit for employees. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON: That the Council ask the Audit Committee to direct the City Auditor to perform periodic audits and report onthe effectiveness ot~ and the City's adherence to, the vehicle use policy; and That the City Council repeal Resolution No. 2285 in its emirety. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that any future revisions to the Use of City Owned Vehicle policy will be reported to the Council by the Mayor. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this day of , 1996. JOHN E. LAW, Presidem City Council APPROVED this day of ,1996. ATTEST: LYNN HORTON, Mayor KATHLEEN L. McCLUSKEY City Clerk INDEX EFFECTIVE DATE: Jan. 24, 1990 I APPROVED Administrative REVIEW DATE: Aug. 2, 1996 3-07 REVISED DATE: Aug. 15, 1996 REFERENCE B.M.C. 2.96 PURPOSE The City may provide city vehicles for use by City employees. This policy defines appropriate uses of City vehicles by employees. POLICY City-owned vehicles will be used exclusively for the conduct of municipal business. Use of a vehicle will be authorized by the Mayor, Department Head or designee where the normal operation of the department requires the transportation of employees, materials and/or equipment in order to effectively and efficiently accomplish the work responsibilities of the City. All employees operating City vehicles will be appropriately licensed. ASSIGNMENT OF POOL VEHICLES Vehicles may be assigned to an employee on the following basis: 1. The normal operations of a City department extend beyond the established work headquarters and/or work hours. 2. Employees who, on a continuous basis, have primary and/or who require supervisory responsibilities (first call-out) in case of an emergency and whose immediate response is required to save life or property. 3. Employees who are on call in case of an emergency and/or require special tools and equipment in their assigned vehicles in order to perform their emergency duties. Assigned vehicles will only be used in the conduct of City business. Incidental personal stops may be allowed by Department policy. STATIONING VEHICLE AT EMPLOYEE' S RESIDENCE VEHICLE.CTY 8/8/96 PAGE 1 OF 2 ATTACHMENTS When authorized by the Mayor or designee, City vehicles may be stationed at the residence of the individual to whom assigned, during non-working hours. Authorization will be based on the written recommendation of the Department Head, except when required by a Labor Agreement. The recommendation must include the following: 1. reasons for the request, 2. the benefits to the City, 3. costs/savings analysis, 4. potential and probable consequences that will resuk if an employee does not bring vehicle home, 5. any other pertinent information. Vehicles stationed at the residence of an employee will be locked and secured when not in use. Employees will not perform any maintenance on City vehicles on off-duty time. ~F~L~G All employees will use City refueling facilities, whenever practicable. A Department Head may approve the use of City credit cards and/or cash for refueling away from City refueling facilities. PAS SENGERS No one other than City employees or persons under arrest will be allowed in a City vehicle, unless authorized by the Department Head or designee. UNFORESEEN CIRCUMSTANCES A Department Head or designee may authorize use of a City vehicle for an employee to take home, due to an unforeseen circumstance. For example, an unanticipated work requirement or an emergency when the employee's normal mode of transportation home is not available. None. VEHICLE.CTY 8/9/96 PAGE 2 OF 2 RESOLUTION NO. ~ -% F5 ADOPTING a Vehicle Use Policy and Repealing Resolution #2041. WHEREAS, it is to the benefit of the citizens of Bremerton, city employees, City administration and the City Council to establish a uniform City policy for the use of City vehicles; and WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Bremerton has requested the Mayor to establish a uniform policy which addresses both the general and specific uses of the vehicles; and WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Bremerton desires to have approval authority for changes to the City's vehicle use policy; ncxq, therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON That the Council of the City of Bremerton endorses and approves the vehicle use policy established by the Mayor, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit "A" hereto; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council ask the Audit Committee to direct the City Auditor to perform periodic audits and report to Council on the effectiveness of, and the city's adherence to, the vehicle use policy; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that no changes will be made to the Vehicle Use Policy without prior Council approval. PASSED b~%the City Council of the City of Bremerton day of ~ ~pd/A~-~ , 1990. / LYN~ HORTON, President City Council this APPROVED this day of LOUIS MENTOR, Mayor ATTEST: KA~HLEEN L. McCLUSKEY, City Clerk CITY OF BREMERTON ADMINISTRATIVE POLICIES AND PROCEDURES SUBJECT: FILE UNDER SECTION: NO. VEHICLE USE POLICY PERSONNEL 3-7 EFFECTIVE DATE: APPROVED BY: JANUARY 24, 1990 RESOLUTION #2285 1. PURPOSE: The purpose is to establish a uniform policy on the use of City vehicles. 2. RESPONSIBILITIES: A. The Mayor and department heads are responsible to insure implementation of this policy. B. Department heads are ~esponsible for monitoring the implementation of this policy and to maintain driver, safety and usage records. All records will be summarized monthly and available for audit at all times.' 3. GENERAL: A. Policy: City owned or leased vehicles are for use by authorized City employees and officials in the discharge of their responsibilities to the City. Vehicles will not be used in support of a private enterprise and vehicles will not be used for the personal convenience of the employee. Department heads are responsible to insure that each driver has a current valid Washington State Driver's License, appropriate heavy equipment certification, a satisfactory driving history as evidenced by a Department of Motor Vehicles records check and has attended a scheduled City sponsored Defensive Driving Course. B. Purchase of Vehicle Fuel: Ail City departments will use City refueling facilities or keycards as authorized. C. Repair of Vehicle: For purposes of consolidated record management and preventive maintenance/safety management, repair of all City vehicles will be through the Transportation Department. As long as the City maintains repair capability at the Municipal Garage, all cost effective repair within the ability of the garage will be done by the City. Work beyond the capability of the Municipal Garage will be contracted out for the most favorable rate available within the constraints of time. The Transportation Department will maintain supporting records to justify all contract work. Repair logs will be retained by the Transportation Department. Repair of fire and utility peculiar equipment will be the responsibility of the Fire Department and Utility respectively. VEHICLE USE POLICY 3-7 Page 2 4. VEHICLE USAGE: A. Daily Use: Daily use is defined as the use of a vehicle to conduct the official business of the City. The department head will be held accountable for authorized daily use of vehicles assigned to their personnel. The allowable vehicle use for City business may include occasional convenience which is incidental to the performance of an employee's official duties. City vehicles may not be used for personal business such as shopping or banking. In those situations where the department head has daily use requirements which are unique to the department, e.g., police requirement to transport and pick up prisoners outside the City, the department head will establish policies which provide controlled use, monitoring and documentation of usage and approvals. B. On-Call Authorization: The following individuals or departments are authorized to use City vehicles to commute. The principal justifications are the need for immediate response after hours in circumstances in which travel is required directly to the work site or scene of an accident/incident, when radio communication is needed. The Mayor. The Police Chief or his designee. U__~Q~: The Director, or his designee, Assistant Director, the Forestry Supervisor, and the on-call Utility Service. ~: The ~ S~.p~t or his designee. ~: Officer on-call for the purpose of responding to emergency call-outs. ~: The Fire Marshall. The on-call Electronic Technicians. Chief, Deputy Chiefs, and Fire C. Other Authorizations: Other individuals may be authorized to use a City vehicle to commute for periods of time not to exceed sixty (60) days as approved by the Mayor in writing. D. Contingent Authorization: 1. With the prior approval of the department head, personnel attending out-of-town meetings that entail arriving home late in the evening or departure early in the morning are authorized to commute with a City vehicle. VEHICLE USE POLICY 3-7 Page 3 2. In an unforeseen circumstance when a City employee is required to work beyond the normal day and that the employee utilizes modes of transportation that are not available at the later hour. i. e., ferry, bus, carpool, the department head can approve use of a City car. 3. With the department head approval, commercial credit cards and/or cash receipts may be used in evidence of refueling in route and away from the City refueling facilities. Credit cards may be obtained from the Purchasing Agent as necessary. E. Restrictions: 1. Commuting is defined as travel by the shortest route between work and the regular residence of the employee. 2. The commuting distance shall miles from City limit boundaries. have the Mayor's approval. not exceed five (5) A~y exceptions must 3. Water utility personnel authorized to commute shall not exceed five (5) miles from Water Utility Service area. Any exceptions shall have the approval of the Mayor. 5. VEHICLE SAFETY: If, while operating a City owned vehicle or privately owned vehicle in the performance of official duties, an employee is involved in an accident resulting in personal injury or property damage, he or she shall: A. Request that all parties and property concerned remain at the scene of the accident, if possible, until a law enforcement representative has released them; B. Refrain from any discussion of the accident with anyone other than the investigating law enforcement representative, appropriate City officials and representatives of his or her ow~ insurance company if the employee's privately owned vehicle is involved. c. Complete a "Damage to City Property" form for all accidents and submit to the Risk manager within twenty-four (24) hours. 6. ASSET VERIFICATION: Annually, the Department Head will sight inspect each vehicle and verify location and condition of the vehicle preliminary to the insurance cycle. Exceptions will be reported to the Mayor. 1. ~: Revisions to City Charter AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL FOR AGENDA OF: ORIGINATING DEPT: ORIGINATOR: DATE SUBMITTED: Council I.Sievers, 8/29 City A~ 2. ~: (Comment on back if necessary) 3. EXHIBITS: N!A . Council Study Sessions COUNCIL COMMITTEE Draft Revised Charter ENDORSEMENT [] INFORMATION [] APPROVED BY COUNCIL ~L~ENT FOR SUBMITTAL: = 4. SUMM3%RY STATEMENT AND REOUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: The revised charter removes redundant and inconsistent language, updates th current language to reflect changes in state law, such as the election of th municipal court judge, and clarifies a number of ambiguous passages. A secon emphasis is to remove the majority of references to administrative organization, including position titles and duties of officers and employees. A summary of substantive changes is attached as a coversheet to the draft. The first hearing will provide an opportunity for public input and incorporatio of changes to the draft. A resolution refering the revised charter to the Novembe general election will be considered the following week. 8. ~: Hearing of Sept. 4th- No action 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: IOA PULLED [] TABLED [] APPROVED [] DISAPPROVED [] AMENDED [] DATE: I'to Charter Revision Summary Sec 3: Definitions section added. Sec 6: Judge is included as an elected official~ One year residency requirement added for elected officials. Sec 7: Sets a deadline for redistricting prior to election; council members displaced by redistricting are allowed to serve out their terms. Sec 10: Allows for continuity of city government is several vacancies occur at the same time. Sec 11: Council President will serve as Mayor pro tem to fill an unanticipated need during the mayor's absence. Sec 15: Procedures for shortening notice and effective dates on emergency ordinances are clarified using state emergency appropriations as a model. Sec 18: Replaces mayor on the Auditing Committee with an additional citizen member. Sec 31: Reduces civil service commissioner residency requirement from three years to one year. Removes police and fire chiefs from civil service. Sec 37: Removes restriction on exclusive franchises. Limits term restrictions to franchises. CHARTER OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON ARTICLE I. Name, Boundaries, Powers, ~hts ,~,.d L~,~b[l;;.i~, Definitions Section I - Name: The corporate nme of this City ~h,~l| b,~ is BREMERTON. Section 2 - Boundaries: The existing boundaries of this,~.~y ........ ~.,...,...... as .,,.y ....t, ....... and may be changed in the manner provided by law. Section 3 - Definitions: As used in this Charter, unless the context indicates otherwise: (1) Gender - The inclusion of male or female gender shall not avoid the intent of gender neutrality. (2~ RCW - Means the Revised Code of Washington, and refers to any subsequent amendments to statutes referenced in this Charter. (3) Residence - Residence within any territory inclnded in. annexed to, or consolidated with the City is construed to have been residence .within the City. (4) Shall - Means mandatory. (5~ May - Means optional. Section., - · ~,.~, ~, ~s ,,~ ,~ ,~ ~14ulllLlg~ 4 - R~ghts and Powers. By ~d in ~e co.orate n~e, ~e Ciw shall have pe~e~al succession: d~g~cc, and all powers of a First Class ciw; mav sue and be sued in all coups and proceedings; use a co.orate seal approved by its legislative body; and~ bv and ~rou~h its legislative body~ may contract and be contracted ~; may purchase~ lease~ receive, or othe~ise acquire real ~d pe~onal prope~ of eve~ kind, and use~ enjoy, hold, lease, control~ convey or othe~se dispose of it for the co~on benefit. Section 4 ~ - Powers - How Exercised: All poxvers of this Ci~, ~less o~e~ise provided in this Cha~er, shall be exercised by, ~ou~ md ~der ~e direction of a mayor, who shall be the City administrator, and nine council members wh6~shall constitute the City Council (hereafter referred to as Council) and be the legislative body of the City. The Mayor and Council shall be subject to the control and direction of the people at all times by means of the initiative, referendum and recall provided for in this Charter. ARTICLE II. Elective Officers Section 5 - Officers - Election and Term The elective officers of this City shall be ten eleven in number: The Mayor and Municipal Judge, who shall be elected by majority vote from the City at large, and nine part-time members of the-C-ity Council, who shall be elected by majority vote from each of their respective districts. Kit }, ....... ' ............. ih Cit~ ,~,o,~,,.,,~,~,s ,~,,. .... ,,~ ,,~,,,,. No person shall be eligible for election to any City office, unless he is a citizen of the United States and has resided in Bremerton for at least one year preceding election, except the Municipal Judge, who need only be a citizen and reside in Kitsap County and licensed to practice la~v in the State of Washington. Candidates for Council must also be residents of their respective districts at the time of filin~. The Mayor shall continuously reside within the City and Council members shall reside continuously within their district during their elective terms, except as provided in Section 7 of this Charter. The terms of all elective officers shall commence on the first day in January following their election and shall be for a period of four years aiid. until their successors are elected and have qualified. - .............. the 1997 election positions 1.3.5.7 and 9 shall stand for election, and remaining positions will stand for election in 1999. Thereafter municipal elections shall be held biennially and the requisite Council members shall be elected for four year terms. Section 7 - Change in Districts: Council may chan~e the boundaries of existing districts by ordinance to make each as equal in population as practicable, so long as redistricting is approved forty-five days before the fourth Monday in July. No chan~e in the boundaries of districts shall affect the terms of any council members; they shall serve out their terms representing the district for which they were elected even though such chance of district boundaries may result in more than one council member residing in the same district. Section 8 - Compensation - Reimbursement: ~ The compensation and benefits of the Mayor, Municipal Judge and council members shall be fixed by ordinance and may be revised fi.om time to time. but any change in council members compensation shall not be applicable t,o council members serving the remainder of unexpired ter~. The Mavor's and Judge's compensation mav be increased during a term of office. .(~ The Mayor, Municipal Judge and council members shall receive reimbursement for their necessary expenses incurred in the performance of the duties of their office as provided to City management and professional employees. Section -~ 9 - Vacancies;: Events Creating: 6 The position of an elected officer shall becom~ vacant upon the occurrence of any of the following events:. ~ (1) Death. (2) Resignation. (3) Judicially declared incompetency. (4) Failure to maintain residency as required by Charter. (5) Failure to qualify within t~vo days after the beginning of the (6) Continuous absence from the City for more than 30 thirty days during a b~s o, h,~, term of office without consent of ~ Council, unless on business of the City. (7) Conviction of or the plea of guilty to a felony: or to a crime involving moral turpitude, or an offense involving the oath of office. Section ~ 10 - Vacancies, IIo~v ,qlted Filling: ~ A vacancy in the office of the Mayor or Council shall be filled for the remainder of the unexpired term. if any, at the next municipal general election, al..,~,'o.,,.,,,~,.~. ~,y ,.~ ,..,,.y ....,ou.,... ,.,.,~. ~.,..,, .vv,~.,~,~ or the remaining members ofd,e Co,~,~il, thereof by a majority vote, shall appoint a qualified person to fill the vacancy until the person elected to serve the remainder of the unexpired term takes office. '~' (2) If, after thirty days, ;.he have passed since the occurrence of a vacancv, Council is unable to agree upon a person to.be appointed to fill a vacancy in the Council iioii~io3$ to the Mayor, x~l~o shall make the appointment from among the persons nominated bv members of the Council i-,ic~nbcr p~o tc,~q~o~e tqom (3~ If at anv time the membership of Council is reduced below a quorum, the remalnine members, if any, shall appoint the requisite number of qualified persons to create a quorum who will appoint 8 qualified persons to fill the remaining vacancies. The appointees shall serve until persons are elected to serve the remainder of the unexpired terms at the next available special election unless there is an earlier available general election. 4L~ If no council members remain, the Mayor shall appoint quatified persons to temporarily fill the vacancies and a special election to fill the remainder of the unexpired terms shall be called unless there is an earlier available general election. The appointees shall serve until persons arc elected to fill the remainder of the unexpired terms. (5) In the event all Council positions and the Mayor's position become vacant, the Municipal Judge, or the Governor of the State of Washington if the position of Judge is vacant, shall appoint a qualified person as Acting Mayor. The Acting Mayor shall perform, and appointees shall serve, pursuant to subsection four above. (63 A vacancy in the office of Municipal Judge shall be filled bv the Mayor for the remainder of the unexpired term. subiect to Council confirmation. Section 11 - Pro Tempore Appointment: LD Annually at the first meeting of Council, or when needed to fill a vacancy, the members thereof, bv major/tv vote, shatl designate one of their number as Council President to serve as Mayor Pro Tempore, to serve at the request of the Mayor, or to fill an unanticipated need in the absence or temporary disability of the Mayor. (23 The Mayor Pro Tempore shall perform all duties of the Ma/or, except he may only remove appointive officers subject to Council confirmation after the Mayor h~ been absent for thirW consecutive days, at which time the Mayor Pro Tempore may remove such persons subiect to any applicable law, rule. or regulation relating to civil service, with the approval of Council maiorit'v plus one: (3) The Mayor may appoint qualified persons to serve as Municipal Judge pro tempore pursuant to RCW 3.50.090. ARTICLE III. Legislation .md Admhii~[~ Mimi Section 8 - O, g.mh.ttlu, uf Cuu,i,.[l .,,id El~,.ti,,,i .f M.,yv,: 12 - Powers Vested in Council: 10 ToO 11 the Subject of appropriations. Council shall have power to organize and regulate its internal affairs, to define the functions, power, and duties of the City's officers and employees: to fix the compensation and working conditions of such officers and employees and establish and maintain civil service or merit systems, retirement and pension systems not in conflict with state law or this Charter. Council may adopt and enforce ordinances relating to and regulating its local or municipal affairs and appropriate to the ~ood of the ~overnment of the City, and, pursuant to state law. may impose penalties of fine. or imprisonment, or both. for the violation of such ordinances constituting a misdemeanor or ~oss misdemeanor as provided therein. Cotmcil may provide that violation of such shall constitute a civil violation subject to a monetary penalty. Council shall have all leeislative powers possible for a city or town to have under the Constitntion of this State. Bvwav of illustration and not 12 in limitation, such powers may be exemised in regarrlto acquisition, sale, ownership, improvement, maintenance, protection, restoration, regulation, use, leasing, disposition, vacation, abandonment or beautification of public ways, real proper'e? of all kinds, waterways, sU-ucmres, or any other improvement or use of real or personal property. Such powers may be exercised in regard to all aspects of collective bargaining, in the rendering of social, cultural, recreational, educational, governmental, or corporate services, including operating and supplying of utilities and municipal services commonly or conveniently rendered bv cities or towns. In addition and not in limitation, Council shall have any authority given to any class of municipality or all municipalities of this state, such authority to be executed in the manner provided, if any, bv the granting statute. Within constitutional limitations, Council shall have within the City corporate limits all powers of taxation for local purposes allowed bv state law. Section 13 - Council Meetings - Public Notice of Meeting Agendas: ~) Council shall meet at least once each week. ~2~ Council shall meet at a place within the corporate limits of the City, at such times as may be fixed bv ordinance or resolution. ~ A maioritv of Council constitutes a quorum. ~ Meetings of Council shall be presided over bv the member 13 selected as Council President. Appointment of a Co,.~ncil President shall not in any way abridge the President's riqht to vote on matters coming; before Council at such meeting;s. ~ In the absence of the City Clerk or Deputy Clerk or other qualified person appointed by the Clerk, a council member ma,/perform the duties of Clerk at such meeting while retaining rights to participate and vote during the meeting. Section 14 - Open Meetings - Requisites: All meetings of Council and City boards commissions and committees shall be open to the public except as excluded by 42.30 RCW or this Charter. (2~ Conditions for attendance: time and place; procedures for interruption, adjournments, continuances; executive sessions; adoption of ordinances, rules and regulations: and prohibition of secret ballots shall be as prescribed within Chapter 42.30 RCW: except members of the body, bv announcement one week in advance, may reschedule a meeting falling on a legal holiday of any day within the same week as originally scheduled. (3) Council. bv ordinance, shall establish a procedure for notifvin~ the public of upcomin~ open meetings and agendas. 14 Section 13 - E,,~;h,g Cla~ie 15 - Ordinances - Styles - Requisites - Veto: ~ The enact~g clause of all ordin~ces shall be h, ~I,~ ~o,d~ a~ follows: "~e Ciw of Bremeaon does ordain". No ordinance shall contain more ~ one subiect and that must be clearly expressed in its title. ~ No ordinance, or any section or subsection thereof, or any municipal code section or subsection shall be revised or amended, unless the new ordinance sets forth the revised ordinance or the amended section or subsection at full length. 15 3~ All leg/slat/on and appropriation of money shall be by ordinance, save where there is a special fund created for a particular purpose; payments from such funds shall be made on order of the Council. Every ordinance and resolution shall be in writing and if requested by a member of Council or any person in attendance shall be read in full at a Council meeting before a vote is taken thereon, and upon every such vote the yeas and nays shall be called and recorded. (4~ Except as otherwise provided in this Charter, every ordinance '.Ju~ u~ut~ CiiiC~gCn~.y - J: shall have two public hearings. Amendments or revisions ,Mthin the scope of the ordinance may be made durin~ either hearing; without reintroduction. At least one week shall elapse between the introduction and the final passage of thcaiiy 16 ~,, ,~,~ ~,,:~ ........ No ordinance shall take effect until thirty days after the date of its publication or an earlier date at least ten days after publication stated in the ordinance, except as provided below: (a) Upon thc happening of any non-debatable emergency as enumerated in RCW 35.33.081, Council may adopt nn ordinance addressin~ the emergency or appropriatin~ funds not available in thc annual budget to meet it by a vote of one more than thc m~iotitv of all members of Council. statina the facts constitutine the emeraencv. Such ordinance shall become effective at passaae without notice or heating, but requires publication in the official newspaper. (b) Ordinances addressing public emeraencies not specificall_v_ enumerated in RCW 35.33.081 or appropriating funds to meet such emeraencies which could not have been anticipated in the annual budaet, may be appropriated bv ordh~ance dec}arin~ m~ emergency and statin~ the facts constituting the emero_enc,/. Such ordinance shall not be voted on until five days have elapsed after its introduction, and shall require the 17 vote of one more than the major/tv of all members of Council for passage. Any taxpayer of the City may appear at the meetin~ at which the emergenc~ ordinance is to be voted on and be heard for or against the adoption of it. The ordinance shall become effective upon passaqe and publication. (c) Initiative ordinances adopted bv the voters of the City shall take effect at the time fixed therein or. if no such time is desienated within ten days after the official canvass of the ballots pursuant to state ~8 (5) Every ordinance that passes Council in order to become valid must be presented to the Mayor. If approved, it shall be sie:ned, but if not, it shall be returned with xwitten obiections to Council who shall cause the obiections to be entered on the record and proceed to reconsideration thereof. If upon reconsideration, a maioriW plus one of the whole membership favor its passa~,e, the ordinance shall become valid notwithstanding the Mayor's veto. The Mayor's veto with respect to budlqet measures shall extend to specific items only, and not to the whole bud,;et. If the Mayor fails for ten days to either approve or veto an ordinance, it shall become valid without approval. Ordinances shall be si~ned by the Mayor and attested bv the City Clerk. Section 16 - Ordinances - Authentication and Recording: The Cie,, Clerk shall authenticate and record in full in a properlv indexed book or file kept for the purpose of retaining all ordinances and resolutions adopted bv Council. Copies of such shall be available for inspection bv the public. Section 17 - Publication of Ordinances or Summary of Ordinances: Promptly after adoption, the text Of each ordinance or a summary of the content of each ordinance shall be published at least once in the City's 19 o__fi- '1 newspaper except bond ordinances which - '~.ybe oublished bv title alone. For the purpose of this section, a summary shall mean a brief description which succinctly describes the main points of the ordinance. Publication of a summary shall include notice that the full text is avaiiable from the City Clerk. An inadvertent mistake or o~ission in publ shing the text or a summary of the content of an ordiffance shall not render the ordinance invalid. Section 18 - City Auditor: There shall be an Auditin~ Committee consistin~ of two Council members and an independent Certified Public Accountant to be designated bv Conncil, and two Bremerton residents selected bv the designated members of the Auditine Committee. The Auditin~ Committee shaIl appoint a City Auditor who shall serve at the pleasure of' the Committee. The City Auditor shall only be removed bv the maioriw vote of the entire membership of the Committee sittin~ as a whole. ARTICLE IV. Administration 20 S_& .n 19 - Duties and Authority of the Mayo The Mayor: 1.(D_ Shall be the chief executive and administrative officer of the Ciw in charge of all departments and employees. (2) Shall see that all taws and ordinances are faithfully enforced and that law and order are maintained in the City. (3) Shall have general supervision of the administration of city government and all city interests. (4) Shall see that all contracts and a~eements made with the City or for its use and benefit are faithfully kept and performed, and to this end. may cause any legal p~/ocedures to be instituted and prosecuted in the name of the City. subject' to approval bv majoriW vote of ail members of Council. (5) Shall report to Council, in a public meetine, concerning the affairs of the City and its financial and other needs, and shall make recommendations for Council consideration and action. (6) Shall prepare and submit to Council a proposed budget. (7) Shall be the official and ceremonial head of the City and shall represent the Ciw. except that xvhen illness or other duties prevent the Mayor's attendance at an official function and the Mayor Pro Ternpore is unavailable, a member of Council or some other suitable person may_ be designated bv the Mayor to represent the Ciw on such Occasion. ~ Shall devote full-time, during business hours, to the sen, ice of the Ciw and shall not hold an,,' other public office except notarv public. Section 20 - Appointive Officers - Duties - Compensation: 21 :21{ T_! ppointive officers shall be those provided '~v City Charter or ordinance and shall include a City Clerk. The office of City Clerk may be merged with any other compatible appointfv~ The Fire Chief shall be Fire Marshall/of the City. The author/tv, duties and qualifications of all appointive officers shall be prescribed by charter or ordinances, and the compensation of appointive officers shall be prescribed bv ordinance. Section 21 - Appointment and Removal of Officers and Employees - Terms: The Mayor shall have the power of appointment and removal of all appointive officers and employees, except the City Auditor, City Attorney, Court employees and Council employees, subject to any applicable law. rule or retaliation relating to civil service. Council employees who serve at the pleasure of the Council may only be removed bv a maiorit~ Cbhncil sittine as a whole. The head ora department or office of the City eovemment may be authorized bv the Mayor to appoint and remove subordinates in such departments or office, subject to any applicable civil service provisions. All appointments of City officers and employees shall be made on the basis of ability and training or experience in the duties of the position, and in compliance with provisions of any merit system applicable to the City. Confirmation bv Council of appointments of officers may be required bv ordinance. Appointive officers shall be without a definite term unless a term is established for such office bv law or ordinance. Section 22 - Oath of Officers and Employees: ~ . Any office?'i entenna upon the performance of his duties, may be 22 re_~ zd to take an oath or affirmation as may be p: -ibed bv ordinance for the faithful performance of his duties as a condition of employment. Section 34- 2.23 - City Attorney: The Legal Department of the Ci .t'y shall consist of a City Attorney, appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by the Council, and such assistants as the budget will allow. All must be duly licensed attorneys of the State of Washington in accordance with state statute or court rule. The City Attorney shall be a full-time in-house City Attorney, who shall have no outside practice or clients. The City Attorney may be removed by the Mayor, with the concurrence of a majority ofqne Council sitting as a whole, or by the Council alone, provided that removal by the Council alone shall require a 2/3 vote of the entire Council. Thc City Attorney may remove his assistants at as-his pleasure. Section 3! 2._.~4 - Legal Advisor: The City Attorney shall be legal advisor of all officers, commissions, boards and committees dcpa,-h,c~ts of the City and shall bring and prosecute all actions wlxich may be directed by the Mayor or Council, and defend the Ci~' in all actions against it and any action in which the City., any past or present emplovec, officer, board, cot:nmittee~commission~* _v~.i. me.~a .... ~s' a party as a result of acts or omissions in the aood faith performance of the citx,'s business as determined bv Council. Section 33 25- Special Counsel: Council may at any time employ other or special counsel, whose 23 cot ~safion shall be fixed by it at the time of emp' ment m'rg'agemem, to take charge of special matters or to assist the City Attorney. 24 ARTICLE V. Finance Section -2-3 2._~6- Organization: a-.The Mayor shall have charge of finance and shall be responsible for the custody and management of thee City assets. Th,. ~.u. appoint a ~ty .-xumtu~ ~.,, ~... 5¢~¢ a~. Sec[' ~ ~ C2 ............... ' 26 Section -25 27 - Receipt, Custody, and Disbursement of Funds: oo.u~,. ,, .... ,..~,~, ..... All pa~ents authorized by ~ Co.cji shall be ~y ~ .... ~,,, u9o,i oy .,~ ,,~ .... , signed by the Mayor and Ci~ Clerk. The Ci~ Treasmer shall receive and k~p all monies due ~d ~lon~g to ~e Ci~, md all trust f~ds held by the Ci~, ~d shall keep m acc~ate detailed accost of the same in such mamer as to show the exact ~mcial ~ndition of the Ci~. ~ ................. ............................ by St 1 The Ci~ Treasurer shall~ at the close of each month, report to the Ci~ Council all the monies received and disbursed during the month. Section 28 - Fiscal Year: The City's fiscal year shall be the calendar year. Section 59-2_.~_9 - Public Utilities: The City shall have power to own and operate any public utility and may purchase, construct, condemn or acquire any public utility provided by law, and may make any additions or betterments or extensions of any existing utility, and the provision there£or shall be by ordinance which shall specify and adopt the plan or system proposed and declared the estimated cost tbereof. Any ordinance providing for a newly owned and 27 op~ :d utility shall be submitted for ratificatk r rejection to the ~, . qualified voters oft~e City at a general or s~"~]al election called for that purpose. Provided, however, that an ordinance providing for the extension, enlargerment or improvement of an existing utility shall conform to"RCW 35.92.070 and~:~h'ly be submitted to the voters as required thereby. Sectimi 25.1 - ' ....... 28 Office of Cits Cleck 29 ARTICLE t-~ Vi.._~. Civil Service Section ~ 3~ - Commission, Cce~tion of: There is hereby established a Civil Se~ice Co~ission of five members, ~hich who shall be appointed by the Mayor and approved by Councd, and ,, ...... ~.,,- ........ ~ ................ , who shall be citizens of the United States, residents of the CiW for at least fbi cc on~ yems hm~cdia[cly preceding such appointnmm Co~tT'. The te~ ofo~ce of such commissioners shall be for t~ee years on staggered te~s.; ~.,~p, ,,,.~ vacancies in the co~ission shall be filled by the Mayor and approved by ~ Council for the unexpired temp. Any member of said co~ission may be removed from office for incompetency, incompatibiliW or dereliction of duW, ~ malfeasance in office, or other good caus~ after charges in writing have been prefexed, due notice 3O gi and a full hearing had in Superior Court ur such hearing: is waived in writine. Section 35 31 - Commission, Rules and Powers: ar. (1) The Commission ~,i;.h ;.Ii,. ,w~,~o. al to£;.li~ C. vuii~.il, shall make such rules and regulations for the conduct of its business and to enforce the purposes of this article as shall be necessary and proper. br. (2) The P ....,m,.l Dh,.,.[,,, Commission shall provide for the · classification of all employees C;'.CCk,[[ii,~ ~,,~kill,.d d,~y labo, ,~ff~.t.t,.d ,-.,rl,o.~,.,. ,~ v,,o~ idcd fo~ ii, :.h,. Civ il $~, vi,.,. R~l,.~. subject to this Article. c: 3~ All full paid employees of the Fire dclJaihiiciit and Police departments of the CIG', except the Chiefs, shall be included under the provisions of this Article, and all existing provisions of State law pertaining to such employees shall be substantially complied with by the Commission. All other full time employees shall be included under the provisions of this Article unless excluded in Section 33. dr 1~4) Tile Commission, among other things, shall provide for open competitive mid fi,.t` examination as to fitness, ,d~i,.h iiidy bt. lin~itt`d tu ~,.OiUuti~ti,~l c..an,in.ti,~,i~ for an eligibility list from xvhich vacancies shall be filled; for a period of probation before employment is made permanent; and for promotion on the basis of merit. 31 cx:. _ :ncc, and record. Promotional processin~t :~g fees shall not be charged. ~ ~ Employe~"s within the scope of this Article who arc in office at thc time of the adoption of this Charter shall retain their positions, unless removed for cause. ~ The Commission, among other things, shall provide/'or rules and procedures to ensure employees due process in regard to any proposed disciplinary action. Section ~6 32 -~crc~r-y Civil Service Officer: The Commission shall provide for the selection of a civil service officer bv the Mayor, with Council confirmation who shall also serve 32 Section 39 33 - Classification of Service: (40 There shall be excepted from the operation of this article the ~ uu~,., u,4,,~ u,,,.., ,,,..,.,~, elected officmls, management and professional appointed positions excluded bv ordinance unless otherwise provided bv this Article. all non-salaried members of appointive boards and commissions, and any other employee exempted from the operation of this Article by the Commission. ARTICLE IX.I VII. Boards aad ~ Commission and Committees Section 40 34 - Member Residency Requirement: The Mayor shall appoint all boards, commissions and committees established bv ordinance or charter, except the Audit Committee. with Council confirmation as required bv ordinance. All members of boards ami: commissions and committees established by ordinance or charter shall be residents of the City for at least one year prior to appointment, unless other',vise provided by ordinance o, cha~x~.~-. Any member of a board ,a,d .. commission and committee established by ordinance or charter who is not a resident of the City at the time this pr ,ion takes effect shall serve out the balance he term for which '- - ' as appointed 1974. 1974. Official Bo.id~ 34 ARTICLE XII VIII. Recall. Initiative and Referendum Section 45 3~5 - Recall: The holder of any elective office may be recalled and removed from said office as provided by la~ in 29.82 RCW. Section 36 - Initiative and Referendum: The powers of initiative and referendum shall be exercised in the "' gh manner set forth in RCW >>. 17.240 throu 3~. No ordinance heretofore or herea£ter enacted by vote of the people shall be amended or repealed by the Council unless such amendato~ 35 or /ealing ordinance shall be submitted to the L. ~fied electors for their approval or rejection in the same manner as is required by this Charter in respect to the submission of an ordinance initiated or referred. 36 37 ARTICLE ^, · IX. Franchises Section 53 3'/- Franchises - Term - Renewal: No ,~.,,.lu~i v,~ franchise, ,ight ,,~ p, i, il~ shall ever be ~anted, nor fi ~,ddsc, ri~ht ~, v,i,iL~ ~i .... for a te~ longer than ten years, excepting upon a majority vote of the electors, and in no event will a franchise c~cr be ~anted for a period longer than fifW years, no, aiiy franchise ,igh[ or prix ilcgc b~ renewed or extended until xvithin txvo years of the expiration thereo[ Section ~4 3~ - Franchise - Compensation - Publication: All franchises shall be granted by ;l~c ' : ordinance and shall speci~ plainly the streets or other public places or 38 pa. hereof to which they apply, and no franchit mil be provided without provision for proper compensation to the City therefor. Th~ Council shall adopt such mode of determining the compensation to be paid by such grantee or assigiis as it shall determine to be reasonable ,~, ........ ,~,~. Every applicant for a franchise shall bear alt expenses of advertising and submitting the proposed ordinance, including the expense of election, if any. Section 55 39 - Franchise - Council Rights: The grant of every franchise shall be made expressly subject to the condition that the Council shall have the right with respect to any franchise so granted to hear and determine what are just, fair and reasonable rates, fares and charges for public service unless regulated bv the State or Federal qovernment, and to order that only reasonable charges shall be imposed; to require reasonable extensions of any public service system; to make such rules and regulations as may be required to secure adequate and proper ser,,'ice, and to provide sufficient accommodation for the public; to repeal, amend or modify the same; to cancel, forfeit and abrogate the same if the franchise ,i~ht, oi privilege is not operated or exercised in full accordance with its provisions, or any part thereof, or at all; to acquire by purchase or 39 co: nnation upon a majority vote of the elector' - the use of the City itself or its inhabitants, the property of the grantee at a fair and just value, which shall not include any valuation of the franchise, right oF p, lvilcg.., which shall thereupon terminate. Section 56 40- Franchise -Transfers: No franchise shall be transferred, sold or leased without the consent of the Council, under such rules and regulations as the Council may impose. ARTICLE XVtI X._: Miscellaneous Section 60 41- Legal Continuity: All.ordinances and resolutions 7n ~,~ ,~,. ~.,,~. ;.i,,~¢ consistent ~vith this iii force remain in effect until amended or repealed or until they expire 40 230 by itation. All rights and obligations in favor r ' ~r against the City. existing at the time this Charter shall go into effect, shall continue without modification. All street and other improvements, all vacations of public stxeets, alleys or places, all assessments for improvements, all suits and actions in court, all fines and forfeitures and all other matters relating to the City that may have been begun and not completed, shall be completed according to the charter, ordinances and law existing prior to the time this Charter shall go into effect, and all taxes and assessments levied and remaining unpaid when this Charter shall wil~l go into effect, shall be collected as provided by ordinances and laws existing and in effect at the time same were levied. Section 6-2. 42 - Employment Conthiuity: Whenever by the provisions of this Charter duties and functions o,.,~,, ar~e transferred to some other a different 41 de[ nent, board crf o_rr office, the employees engr ~1 in the performance of such duties and functions at the time this Charter shall goers into effect, shall be transferred accordingly and be deemed to have been regularly appointed to the respective positions involved in the performance of such duties and functions, until removed therefrom in accordance with the provisions of this Charter. 1974. 42 Section 66(aj~ 43 - Report - Requisites of Claim - Time_ Li__mitations: All claims for damages for personal injuries or for injuries to property sustained by any act of the City. or any officer, agent, servant, or employee, must be presented to ~ Council and filed with the City Clerk within the time specified by State Law. All such claims for damages must be in writing and verified and must accurately locate and describe the act causing the injury, describe the injury, giving the residence for six (6) months last past of the claimant and contain the items of damage claimed. No action shall be maintained against the City for any clab~s a~claim..for to.__5~ damages until the~ainc c_laim has n ~at~d to filed with t4w City Council_gr the officer designated bee grc~ by ordi~nance_and sixty (60) days have elapsed after such presentation. ARTICLE XVIII XI.._: Amendments Section 6~ 44- Conform to State Law: Amendments of this Charter shall folloxv and conform to the procedures set forth in the State Constitution and Laws of the State of Washington. 43