The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About11/14/2012 AGENDA aI ? IvP CITY COUNCIL 345 6th Street, Suite 600, Bremerton, WA 98337 ❑ Phone (360) 473 -5280 ** *AMENDED * ** NOVEMBER 14, 2012 CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION 4:00 PM in MAYOR'S CONFERENCE ROOM (Please note earlier start-time and new location for this meeting only...) The Study Session is open to the public but there will be no opportunities for input or participation, no action is anticipated during the Study Session, and the content of these items is subject to change If approved by Council, the items will be placed on the December 5, 2012 Council Meeting Agenda A NO PRESENTATION PLANNED -The following items are budgeted items or have been reviewed by the appropriate Council Committee 1 Contract Modification for long -term groundwater monitoring at former Chevron Property — Tom Knuckey, City Engineer, Public Works & Utilities Department 2 Agreed Order with Department of Ecology for monitoring and reporting at former Chevron Property — Tom Knuckey, City Engineer, Public Works & Utilities Department 3 Ordinance to repeal Chapter 2 43 of the Bremerton Municipal Code (BMC) regarding the Gold Mountain Complex Board of Directors — Wyn Birkenthal, Parks & Recreation Director B FULL DISCUSSION ITEMS 4 2012 United Way Campaign Briefing — Shannon Conn, City Clerk 5 Adopt Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council (KRCC) Interlocal Agreement 2012 Amendments — Mary McClure, KRCC Executive Director 6 Appointment of Public Works Administration Division Manager at a Step Higher than Rate 1 in Band 11 - Chal Martin, Public Works & Utilities Director (Action is anticipated...) 7 Utility Rate Study "Fee Structure & Classifications" — Becky Hasart, Financial Services Director, FCS Group, and Utility Rate Study Advisory Committee 8 BUDGET WORKSHOP: No discussion held C GENERAL COUNCIL BUSINESS D ADJOURN STUDY SESSION ® Amencans with Disabilities Act accommodations provided upon request Those requiring special accommodations should contact the City Cleric's Office at (360) 473 -5323 by noon on the Monday preceding the Council meeting AGENDA BILL CITY OF BREMERTON ?P&D CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Appointment of Public Works Study Session Date 11/14/2012 Administrative Division Manager at a step COUNCIL MEETING Date 11/14/2012 higher than Rate 1 in Pay Band 11 Department Public Works & Utilities Presenter Chal Martin Phone 473 -5315 SUMMARY: The Director of Public Works & Utilities proposes to fill the vacant Public Works Administrative Division Manager position with Milenka Hawkins -Bates Mrs Hawkins - Bates' career spans 10 years in the public sector including 5 years experience as the Public Works Director and 5 years as the Administrative Assistant to the Public Works Director for the City of Sonoma, California The Director has negotiated a starting salary with the applicant and proposes making this appointment at Rate 4 in Pay Band 11 Per BMC 2 50.032(a), City Council must approve the initial salary of a newly hired person d the starting salary exceeds Rate 1 ATTACHMENTS: Resume, Letter of Engagement outlining the negotiated terms of her employment with the City of Bremerton, and a copy of Pay Band 11 FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount). Position is fully funded APPROVALS: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE DIRECTOR MAYOR RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve the hire of Milenka Hawkins -Bates at Rate 4 in Pay Band 11 STUDY SESSION ACTION: ❑ Consent Agenda ❑ Ge eral Business ❑ Public Hearing COUNCIL PRESIDENT COUNCIL ACTION: KApprove ❑ Deny ❑ Table ❑ Continue ❑ No Action Forth Updated 11/02/2011 i I I N G p^4 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS & UTILITIES Te136R473 =5315- Far 360- 473 -5278 , et " 100 Oyster Bay `Bremerton, WA 98312 F November 13, 2012 Mdenka Hawkins -Bates Dear Mrs Hawkins -Bates It is with great pleasure that I confirm your appointment to the position of Public Works Administrative Division Manager This letter will serve to confirm your employment with the City of Bremerton as follows Position Administrative Division Manager Department Public Works & Utilities Effective Date December 31, 2012 Rate of Pay $5,923 46 Monthly (Band 11, Rate 4) — Contingent Upon Council Approval Appointment/Removal Authority Director of Public Works & Utilities Benefits Per Bremerton Municipal Code 2 50 Please sign on the next page indicating your acceptance of our offer of employment as outlined above, and return to Charlotte Belmore in our Human Resources Office at 345 6"' Street, Suite 600 Bremerton, WA 98337 Sincerely, Ecu Chal Martin Director of Public Works & Utilities • Page 2 November 13, 2012 I, Mdenka Hawkins- Bates, hereby accept employment with the City of Bremerton as the Administration Division Manager, effective December 31, 2012 under the terms and conditions set forth in this Letter of Engagement SIGNATURE. Mdenka Hawkins -Bates Date RESUME Milenka Hawkins-Bates Sonoma, CA 95476 OBJECTIVE To be named the City of Bremerton Administrative Division Manager for Public Works Present Appointed to the position of Public Works Director, April 12, 2008 April 12, 2008 City of Sonoma Public Works January 2, 2008 Acting Public Works Director Responsibilities include planning, directing and reviewing the activities and operations of the Public Works Department; I serve as the principal liaison to the Sonoma County Water Agency, San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board and other outside agencies Work with staff to develop, plan and implement department goals, objectives, policies and procedures Assist in the preparation of the City's long -range public works infrastructure plans and programs. Prepare agenda items for the City Council and other boards and commissions Responsible for the preparation and implementation of department budgets and provide revenue protections and cost controls, project funds needed for staffing, equipment, materials and supplies for water, parks, streets and cemeteries Coordinate department activities with those of other departments, the City Engineer and outside agencies and organizations Provide staff assistance to the City Manager and City Council, prepare and present staff reports and other necessary correspondence. Participate in the development of the Departments work plan, assign work activities, projects and programs Monitor workflow, review and evaluate work products, methods and procedures Assist with the preparation of the capital improvement budget, prepare estimates and reports for construction projects, plan and recommend projects for the City's five -year capital improvement plan Establish construction inspection procedures; Review status of projects with the Public Works Inspectors and City Engineer and provide direction as needed Assist with the preparation of applications for State and Federal funding for construction projects, and administer projects in accordance with grant approvals Continuously monitor and evaluate the efficiency and effectiveness of service delivery methods and procedures. Routinely assess and monitor department workload Identify opportunities for improvement and take action to implement change. Respond to and resolve difficult and sensitive citizen inquiries and complaints. Involve all departments of Public Works in disaster preparedness planning activities m Bates Page 2 December 28, 2007 - City of Sonoma Public Works October 2007 Acting Assistant Public Works Director Aged as the Public Works Director in his absence Responsible for seeing that routine, scheduled public work tasks were accomplished and that staff response to service requests, complaints and emergencies were appropriate in terms of response time and follow -up action Ensure that administrative and capital projects assigned to the Public Works Department met established benchmarks and that regular reporting deadlines were met, especially to Regional, State and Federal regulatory agencies Represented the Public Works Director at City and area -wide meetings in his absence. October 2002- City of Sonoma Public Works October 2007 Administrative Assistant to the Public Works Director Administrative Assistant to the Public Works Director Areas of emphasis included broad application of environmental and regulatory programs. Departments receiving direct assistance for programs, funding, and infrastructure maintenance included Water, Parks, Street, and Cemetery. (Please see attached addendum for more comprehensive list of projects and responsibility involvement. October 2002 - Transportation & Logistics Consultant January 2001 Harwood Lumber Products, Branscomb, CA Annual savings achieved $ 250,000 Savings to the annual operating budget achieved by restructuring the shipping, trucking and freight departments Procedures were evaluated, employees participated and new vendor opportunities were identified. September 2000 - Sales Manager March 1997 Sierra Pine Ltd. Weyerhaeuser Company Particleboard Mill, Springfield, OR Member of upper management team Successfully managed order file to suit needs of mill and customers Responsibilities included remote inventories, export documentation and packaging program. Supervised in house staff of three and twenty -four remote sales managers. Transidoned Customers and staff through seamless acquisition of Composite Products Division from Weyerhaeuser Co to Sierra Pine Ltd March 1997 - Transportation a Logistics Analyst October 1989 Weyerhaeuser Company, Federal Way, WA Negotiated $350,000 Demurrage Savings with Union Pacific Railroad, negotiated rail freight and railcar leasing contrails Developed on-tims shipping incentives for Southern Pacific Railroad Led department in Customer Service achievements and initiated company wide Recognition & Awards Program ReceNW *Nine Dot" Award for thinking outside of my duties and responsibilities, also received Railroad Recognition Service Award. Prepared Business Disaster Recovery Plan for Department, led department through disaster recovery training exercises. May 1987 — Human Resource Manager March 1984 Green River Sportswear, Tacoma, WA Broad range of responsibilities for 250 employees Screening, hiring, training, payroll, and disciplinary actions Initiated safety programs, reported on OSHA and tracked Affirmative Action EDUCATION Completing Bachelor of Science, Business Administration City University of Seattle, Bellevue, WA TRAINING ■ Negod dng — Gelling to YES • Leadership Institute, (Four Week course over ■ Erosion & Sedrnent Control 1 year) Federal Way, WA ■ Construc lim Site Inspection ■ Protect Management -Covey ■ Illicit Discharge and Detectiori Etinanallm ■ Effective Reports, Proposals, & Memos ■ Site Inspection to Itiiat Dis Imp ■ Various micro-Soft Courses • Grant Writing & Preparation ■ Sbmwa* Podudon Prevention Plan • Arclfiew — GISIGPS Training for Mum ■ Excel 1, 11, Advanced • AWWA — Dare to Prepare Golfing your ■ AWWA— Emergency Response Training UBity Ready for the Worst ■ Vector & Mosqulto Control ■ Water Security Trahing — VSAT Business r ■ ARQCB — Limiting Air Emissions SKILLS ■ Rged Management • Report Preparation • Faditahon & Mediation ■ Cammunkahon Verbal & Written ■ Analytical Analysis ■ Pubtic Spealdng ■ Leader" ■ Crganumbonal Skis ■ Profkaent in Word, Excel, PowerPoint, ■ Total Quality Management (TQM) Publisher, Access, Web appfi d^ Arc • Budget Development & Control View GISIGPS, MOMs ■ Pr=rement INTERESTS Winemaking, Soccer Coach, Sonoma Valley Untied Soccer League (ages 6-12) Gardening, Sailing, Camping, Sluing, Reading ADDENDUM City of Sonoma, Public Works Departrnent Projects & Responsibilities • NPDES Phase 11 Storm Water Management Plan (SWK" o Re -wrote SWMP for Regional Water Quality Control Board ( RWCCB) Acceptance o Developed Ordinance for Stormwater Management & Discharge o Developed Construction Site Runoff Control Guidelines o Implemented Best Management Practices (BMPs) on schedule with plan o Responsible for City's Annual Report to the RWQCB • Annual Report used by RWQCB as an example for other Phase II Communities o Leader of Phase 11 Community Work Group - Napa, Solano, Sonoma Storrnwater Agencies o Conducted restaurant, business, and construction site inspections for stonnwater compliance o Investigated and reported actions taken with Illicit Discharge complaints o Participated In TMOL Grant/ Project with various agencies o Participated in Sonoma Creek Watershed Grant, various agencies o Participated in Critical Coastal Project — Sonoma Creek, vanous agencies • Implemented and managed Graffiti Abatement Task Force • Implemented and managed Adopt A Bike Path Program • Participated in the 2007, Participated and Managed 2010, 2012 Water Connection Charge and Rate Study • Participated in the 2005, Managed 2010 Urban Water Management Plan • Negotiate purchased water delivery and rates Tracked City Well and Purchased water usage • Participated and wrote Vulnerability Assessment Plan for Water Departrnent / OES • Managed State required Backflow Prevention Program • Annually wrote and maintained Bacteriological Sampling Plan for Department of Health Services (DHS) • Prepared Water Quality Report for Department of Public Health • Documented, tracked and reported on water quality complaints o Wrote and submitted annual Consumer Confidence Report (CCR) DPH requirement • Tracked Valve Activation & Fire Hydrant testing • RFP/ RFQ Contract Document preparation • Integrated Pest Management Program OPM) • Managed the budget process and planning Routinely met budget revenue projections o Initiated and maintained `Our Water Our World' (OWOW) program at local hardware stores • Automatic Meter Read Project (AMR) Pilot Program & Implementation • Manage Special Events • Tracked property damages, initiated property damage claims • Explored Grant opportunities, submitted Grant documents, received Grants, and administered Grants • Tracked and Implemented cydk: programs in all divisions of public works • Appointed as a rnember of the Budget Advisory Committee and Water Technical Advisory Committee • Member of the Sonoma Valley Groundwater Basin Advisory Committee • Received with Water Department American Water Works Assoc (AW WA) Energy Savings Award I CITY OF BREMERTON MANAGEMENT, PROFESSIONAL, CONFIDENTIAL & FIDUCIARY SALARY PLAN - 2013 CPI Adjusted Base 0 00% - Effective 1 -1 -13 PAY S ALARY BANC TITLE BASE RATE 1 RATE 2 RATE 3 RATE 4 RATE 5 RATE 6 RATE 7 RATE 8 14 ASSISTANT FINANCE OFFICER MONTH 6,22334 6,53842 6,70188 6,86944 7,041 18 7,21720 7,39760 7 582 56 PUBLIC WORKS & UTILITY FINANCE MANAGER SEMI -MONTH 3,11167 3,26921 3,35094 3,43472 3,52059 3,60860 3,69880 3,79128 ANNUAL _ _ _7_4,680 08 78,481 04 _ 80,422_56 82,433 28 84,49416 86,60640_ 88,77120 90,990 72 2EMI -MO DEF COMP 12447 13077 134.041 13739 140 82 144.34 147 98 161 65 13 ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY I MONTH 5,92346 622334 6,37894 6,53842 6,70188 6,86944 7,04118 7.21720 FLEET MANAGER SEMI -MONTH 2,96173 3,11167 3,18947 3,26921 3,35094 3,43472 3,52059 3,60860 ANNUAL _ _ 71,081 82 74,680 08 76,547 28 78,461 04 80,422 56 82,43328 84,49418 86,60640 SEMI -MO DEF COMP - 11847 - - 124 47 - 127 68 13077 - 13404 13739 140 82 144.34 12 ATHLETICSIRECREATION MANAGER MONTH 5,63806 5,92346 6,07158 6,22334 637894 6,53842 6,70188 6,86944 CDBG ADMINISTRATOR SEMI -MONTH 2,81903 2,961 73 3,03579 3,11167 3 189 47 3,26921 3,35094 3 434 72 PARKS MAINTENANCE MANAGER ANN 8 72 71,08152 72,858 98 74,680 08 76,547 28 78,461 04 80,422 56 82,433 28 1 POLICE SUPPORT MANAGER SEMI -MO DEF COMP 11276 118 47 12143 - - 124 47 127 58 130 77 13404 197 39 RISK MANAGEMENT SPECIALIST 11 ADMINISTRATION DIVISION MANAGER MONTH 5,36638 5,63806 5,77900 5,92346 6,07158 6,22334 6,37894 6,63842 EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT SEMI -MONTH 2,68319 2,81903 2,88950 2,96173 3.03579 3.11167 3,18947 3,26921 LEGISLATIVE ASSISTANT ANNUAL _ 64,39888 67,888 72 6_9,348 00 71,081 52 7_2,88898 74,68008 76,54728 78,48104 PARALEGAL SEMI -MO DEF COMP 10733 112.78 11558 118 47 121A3 12447 127 Be 130 77 PARK DEVELOPMENT PLANNER PUBLIC ACCESS MANAGER SENIOR PLANNER 10 BUDGET ANALYST MONTH 5,10778 5,36638 5,50056 5,63806 5,77900 592346 6,07158 6,22334 CDBG COORDINATOR SEMI -MONTH 2,55389 2,68319 2 750 28 2,81903 2,88950 2,96173 3,03579 3,11167 HR ANALYST II ANNUAL _ 81,293 38 64, 66,006 72 67,656 72 69,348 00 71,081 52 72,85896 74,680 08 PROSECUTOR II SEMI-11110 DEF COMP 10216 10733 11001 - 11276 11888 118A7 - - _ 12143 - 124.47 9 MONTH 4,88166 5,10778 5,23548 5,36638 5,500 56 5,63806 5,77900 5,92346 SEMI -MONTH 2,43083 2,56389 2,61774 2,68319 2,75028 2,81903 2,88950 2,96173 ANNUAL 58,339 92 8_1,293 36 62,82576 64,396 56 66,00672 67,656 72 69,348 00 71,081 52 SEMI -MO DEF COMP 9723 10216 10471 1073 11001 11278 115 58 118A7 8 BKAT PRODUCTION ADMINISTRATOR MONTH 4,62742 4,86166 4,98322 5,10778 5,23548 5,36638 5,50056 5,63806 CITY CLERK SEMI -MONTH 2,31371 2,43083 2,49161 2,55389 2,61774 2,68319 2,75028 2,81903 CIVIL SERVICE OFFICER/HR ASSISTANT ANNUAL 55,52_9 04 58,339 92 59,79864 61,293_38 62,825_76 64,39656 66,006 72 _ 87,656 72 HR ANALYST SEMI -MO DEF COMP 92 "1 9723 9968 10216 104.71 10733 11001 11278 7 CDBG PROGRAM SPECIALIST MONTH 4,404 42 4 627 42 4,74308 4 861 66 4 983 22 5,10778 5,23548 5,36638 PROSECUTOR I SEMI -MONTH 2,202 21 2,31371 2,37164 2,43083 2,49161 2,55389 2,61774 2,68319 ANNUAL 52,953 04 55,52904 5_8,918 96 58,339_92 59,79864 61,293 36 62,828 76 64,396 56 8EMI-MO DEF COMP 8809 9265 94 - 97 - 23 9988 10216 104.71 10733 6 MONTH 4,192 18 4 404 42 451454 4,62742 4,74308 4,86166 498322 5,10778 SEMI -MONTH 2,09609 2,202 21 2,25727 2,31371 2,37154 2.43083 2,49161 2,55389 ANNU _ 80,306 16 52,85_3 04 5 55,829 04 88,91696 58,339 92 89,798 64 61,293 36 SEMI -MO DEF COMP 8384 8809 9029 9255 9488 9723 9988 10216 5 LEGAL ASSISTANT II MONTH 3,99018 4,192 18 4,29702 4,40442 4,51454 4,62742 4,74308 4,88166 SEMI -MONTH 1,99509 2,09809 2.14851 2,202 21 226727 2,313 71 2,37154 2,43083 ANNUAL 47,88216 50,3 5 52,85304 54,174A8 55,52904 88,91696 56,339 92 SEMI -W DEF COMP 7980 8384 8594 8809 9029 9256 9486 9723 4 LEGAL ASSISTANT I MONTH 3,79790 3,99018 4,08994 4,192 18 4,29702 4,40442 4,51454 4,62742 SEMI -MONTH 1,89895 1,99509 2,04497 2.09809 2,14851 2,202 21 2,25727 2,31371 ANNUAL _ 48,574 80 47,88218 49,079 28 50,30616 51,564 24 52,853 04 54,174 48 55,829 04 SEMI -MO DEF COMP 7596 79801 81801 63 841 85 54 8809 90291 92 55 11/14/2012 age D O — - - Water, Wastewater and Stormwater Utilities Rate Study Joint City Council/ Utility Advisory Committee Workshop November 14, 2012 Presented ese ed by Angie Sanchez Virnoche, Principal /Project Manager Sergey Tarasov, Project Consultant ° 4 ICS GROUP Overview Kickoff Meeting May 23 Utility Advisory Committee meeting Sept. 11 Utility Advisory Committee meeting Oct. 19 Council workshop October 24 - Additional Information requested at meeting - Addressed previously or on handout Tonight's discussion - Rate design alternatives O FCS GROUP Page 2 1 11/14/2012 � n Residential Bi- Monthly Bill Impact Summary . EM I M I -° Base Case $ 17 34 $ 1907 $ 20601 $ 2225 $ 2347 $ 2476 $ 2551 Sl - 100% Debt Shaped 1734 19 07 2041 21 84 2293 24 OS 24 80 MgK g2NZEft jamn. 7SM Mo s' Base Case 1 $100 23 $100 23 $103 74 $107 37 $111 13 $114 46 $117 89 Sl - 100% Debt Shaped 100 23 100231 101 73 103261 1048 10638 1 10798 17 °� EM M8 91F Base Case $ 3752 $ 41 12 $ 4507 $ 4940 $ 5335 $ 5762 $ 61 65 Sl -100% Debt Shaped 3752 1 40 52 43 76 47 26 4998 528, 55 90 Notes •Stormwater rates are per ISU -Wastewater Residential bi- monthly bill assumes 9 HCF of billed flow (4 5 HCF monthly) *No Increase to wastewater rates in 2013 *Water Residential monthly bill assumes a 5/8" meter with 12 HCF of water (6 HCF monthly) > FCS GROUP Page 3 Total Residential Bill Impact Summary M Base Case 1 $15509 1 $160431 $16941 1 $179011 $187 95 1 $196 8 205 0 4 $5 S1 - 100% Debt Shaped 1 55 09 1 159831 16591 1 172361 1777 1833 188 67 Base Case $ 1 $ 534 $ 898 $ 961 1 $ 893 $ 8 89 $ 821 S1 - 100% Debt Shaped 4 74 608 6 46 536 5 59 536 %M affl .gaftamm ftwx1l am I EDO I G4°17K3 fit" 8 °!M MD Base Case $ 1 $ 267 $ 449 1 $ 4 80 1 $ 4 47 1 $ 4 45 $ 410 S1 - 100% Debt Shaped 237 304 323 268 280 268 t> FCS GROUP Page 4 2 11/14/2012 RATE DESIGN .,> FCS GROUP Page 5 Rate Design Objectives & Key Factors • Collects the required level of revenue • Reflect policy level decisions related to affordability, stability and administration • Proposed Storm and Wastewater rates: - No rate structure changes at this time - Increases applied equally to each rate component (fixed and /or variable charges) • Proposed Water rates: - Recalibrate blocks to match City specific usage patterns - Two and three block rate structure options •> FCS GROUP Page 6 3 c 11/14/2012 Stormwater Rate Design (Base Case) Residential (per account) $ 1734 $ 1907 Low Income Senior /Disabled (per account) 1058 11 64 Duplex (2 Meters - per account) 874 961 Commercial (per ISU) 1734 1907 Public School Districts (per account) 1734 1907 Notes • ISU = impervious surface unit equivalent to 2 500 square feet of impervious surface area • Additional CSO charges apply to Residential and Commercial customers based on downspout connection • Water quality and quantity credits are available for Non Residential customer • Additional penalties may apply to Non Residential accounts without onsite detention hFCS GROUP Page 7 Stormwater Bill Comparison Residential Bi- Monthly Stormwater Bill $3000 $2500 m $2000 $1500 $1000 m $500 $- `oo- � o pa S a �oQ �Oti'' ¢�ey �z °� �p o oa a�¢A raga � Q �i o " o`�Po ot Q o ° � dk �e CP q q > FCS GROUP g 4 11/14/2012 Wastewater Rate Design (Base Case) Single Family (per account) OMMD M. $ 6252 $ 6252 No rate increase in Low Income (per account) 3878 3878 2013 Multi Family (includes duplex per unit( 4952 4952 Commercial I (per account) 9242 9242 Commercial II (per account) 9402 9402 Commercial III (per account) 93 10 93 10 Single Family •. $ 4 19 $ 4 19 Increasing the Low Income Senior /Disabled Outside multiplier to 0- 10 /bi- monthly - - 1 5 would generate Over 10 bi- monthly 4 19 4 19 an additional Multi - Family 4 19 4 19 $254,000 in 2013 Commercial 432 432 Commercial 11 686 686 Commercial III 553 553 Notes Outside city multiplier of 1 15 times the Inside city charges O FCS GROUP Page 9 Wastewater Bill Comparison Residential Bi- Monthly Wastewater Bill (900 cf or 9 HCF) $180 $160 = $140 $120 t $100 o $80 — $60 m $ao - $ 20 IHH'HH S- S�oco��ac �o�PCy'o�Q oJC QoJ��ra�ooO\a�Q 0c�oo J�� eS S °JCa te O �� ac �� o Q v � Notes one cubic foot (cf) = 7 48 gallons, 100 cf or 1 hcf or ccf = 748 gallons FCS CROUP 10 5 v 11/14/2012 Water Rate Design (Base Case) 1 5/9 $ 2276 $ 2494 Meter charges are the some 1 2602 2852 1 5 3698 4053 for all classes 7 49 68 5445 3 9424 10329 4 175 16 191 98 6 62278 68257 8 2 274 84 249322 2013 rates maintain current 10' 8 113 32 889220 17 30 500 66 33 428 72 structures with equal increases PSNS Contract Rafe 44 535 88 48 811 321 to each rate component Residential BT 0-20 HCF $ 1 23 $ 1 35 B2 Over 20 HCF 1 39 1 52 Low Income Senior /Disabled B1 0.10 HCF B2 11 20 HCF 1 23 1 35 B2 Over 20 HCF 139 152 Notes Non Residential 134 147 • Outside City multiplier of 1 5 times the City Parks /Recreation Dept Irrigation 0 67 0 73 Inside charges Gold Mountain Golf Course Complex Irr 090 099 PSNS Contract Rate 1 431 156 • Additional rates available for fire t) FCS GROUP Page 11 � srSi� � Residential Commodity Charge Alternatives • Option 1: 3 - block structure — Block 1 average winter usage (10 ccf indoor use) — Block 2 2 times summer usage (28 ccf) — Block 3 excess usage ( >28 CC F) • Option 2: 2 - block structure (existing) — Adjust blocks to existing trends • Block 1 average annual usage (12 ccf) • Block 2 excess usage ( >12 ccf) > FCS GROUP Page 12 6 11/14/2012 Residential Usage Trends (Bi- Monthly) Residential Bi- Monthly Bills Average Use 12 HCF 7 000 6000 Winter Use 10 HCF 5000 — Summer Use 14 HCF t 4 000 _I g 3000 - --- - - ---- - - _- i m 2000 1000 HCF Option 1 Opflon 2 BI- Monthly Blocks 900.0 . o o • o 10 28 28+ 12 12+ Distnbut ion ofBills 63267. 2844% 831% 1000D% 7029 2971% 1000017 Distribution of Volume 551876 39 16% 5667. 100 OD% 6533% 346 1000076 Distnbutlon of Usage 682 897 484 632 70 076 1 237 605 808 541 429 064 1 237 605 > FCS GROUP Page 13 Residential Current Structure Across the Board Adjustment o B1 (0-20) $ 1 35 B2 20 1 + 1 52 7 T 6�aD � @ 4 $ 2768 $ 3034 $ 266 $ 1 33 6 3014 3303 289 1 45 8 3260 3573 313 1 56 10 3506 3843 337 1 68 12 3752 41 12 360 1 80 14 3998 4382 384 1 92 20 4736 51 91 455 227 25 5431 5952 521 261 50 8906, 9761 1 855, 427 $> FCS GROUP 14 7 11/14/2012 Residential Option 1: 3 -Block Structure oa - o o- rxe G09P BI (0 -10) $ 1 30 B2 (10 1 -28) 1 49 B3 (28 1 +) 1 87 o e . U @ 4 $ 2768 $ 3016 $ 248 $ 1 24 6 30 14 3276 262 1 31 8 3260 3537 277 1 38 10 3506 3797 291 1 46 12 3752 4096 344 1 72 14 3998 4394 396 1 98 20 4736 5289 553 277 25 5431 6035 604 302 50 1 89061 10599 16931 846 `) FCS GROUP Page 15 Residential Option 2: 2 -Block Structure ffo B1 (0 -12) $ 1 30 B2 (12 1 +) 1 60 E°7 e g 2 4 $ 2768 $ 3014 $ 246 $ 1 23 6 3014 3274 260 1 30 8 3260 3534 274 1 37 10 3506 3794 288 1 44 12 3752 4054 302 1 51 14 3998 4374 376 1 88 20 4736 5334 598 299 25 5431 61 33 702 351 50 8906 10130 1224 6 12 Q> FCS GROUP Page 16 8 11/14/2012 Y Water Bill Comparison Residential Bi- Monthly Water Bill (1200 CF or 12 HCF) $9000 $8000 $7000 k $6000 r $5000 c $4000 $30 00 $20 00 $1000 IHHH H�HH H a� B OO c ,4 �o & Q "¢ a� c� �� o P oo ° � � Q ti r o�� O�� Q a te° O 0 3 � 'L� � L s a � o a a`' °JCa ¢F¢�oF¢�` °cam e e � ¢ 0 Notes one cubic foot (cf) = 7 48 gallons, 100 cf or 1 hcf or ccf = 748 gallons > FCS GROUP 17 Non - Residential - Current Structure Across the Board Adjustment On tfift &@am Q�) galam ME"@ 58 10374 11370 $ 996 $ 498 Commercial (1 ") 115 18012 19741 1729 865 230 33422 36631 3209 1604 225 33848 37097 3249 1625 Multi Family (1 5') 450 63998 701 42 61 44 3072 900 1,24298 1,36231 11933 5966 255 391 38 42895 3757 1879 Irrigation (2 ") 510 73308 80346 7038 35 19 1020 1,41648 1,55246 13598 6799 FCs GROUP 18 9 11/14/2012 , ids Combined Utility Bi- Monthly Bill Comparison Edmonds Lynnwood Puyallup Lacey Bremerton Current i PortOrchard Bremerton 2013 2 Block Bremerton 2013 3 Block O Water Bremerton 2013 ATB O Wastewater Longview I O Storm I Olympia Poulsbo Gig Harbor Bainbridge Port Angeles Snohomish $ $25 $50 $75 $100 $125 $150 $175 $200 $225 $250 $275 A +F GROUP 19 Next Steps • Council direction - Overall rate increase • Base case or shaped debt2 - Rate design option for water • Existing rate structure • 3 Block commodity charge • Revised 2 block commodity charge • Incorporate changes and begin public outreach • Next meeting? Q+0 GROUP Poge20 10 r City of Bremerton Utilities Rate Study Quest a nd Responses from Council Workshop — October 24, 2012 1. What entities did not respond to the survey? Puyallup and Walla Walla Walla Walla has responded since the last Council Meeting and is included in the updated slide deck 2. Provide names of comparable WA utilities on slide 7 Snapshot of local participants 2 Marysville, 3 Everett, 4 Lacey, 5 Kennewick 6 Bellingham 7 Yakima 8 Walla Walla (added in new slide deck) 3. What is the cost of different types of treatment? Treatment operating costs are presented in terms of least amount of O &M to highest 0 &M The costs for individual utilities may vary based upon the elevation of the source and required pumping into their distribution system Capital costs would also proceed in this order as well, but capital costs are also site specific i Disinfection only (groundwater systems) ii UV plus disinfection for residual maintenance iii Direct Filtration (higher cost due to backwashing pumping and air compressor requirements), may also require additional chemical addition to enhance filtration, and solids disposal for backwash solids iv Membrane or Conventional treatment (flocculation /sedimentation plus filtration) 4. Number of employees Water /Wastewater? Water 36 Wastewater 26 5. What is the number of additional staff needed for Watershed? 4 Employees manage the watershed and other utility lands, also includes biosolids management and other non - watershed responsibilities 6. What is the cause of the reduction in O &M Costs from 2007? Information requested in 2012 was for an average of 5 years while 2007 was based on 2006 specific data In addition, 2012 data for the water system did not include forestry associated O &M to compare more closely with other WA entities Also in 2006 we did about $140,000 of reservoir coatings but did not do any of this work in 2011 or 2012 Coatings have been budgeted in Water 0 &M in the past but from now on will be in the CIP 7. Update the 2012 regional survey information to include Bremerton's data from 2007 See updated slides — handout City of Bremerton Utilities Rate Study Questions from Council Workshop — October 24, 2012 S. Increase the scale for WA specific survey See updated presentation for additional figure showing WA information specifically 9. What is the average age of the system? Range of pipe from pre -1950s to current day, i Greater than 50% is at least 1950s or older 10. What was the cause for breaks /failures? Do we know? Primarily mechanical failures points, etc Most of our water main breaks occur on the older cast iron pipe 11 What is the percent of the bill that represents taxes? Refer to information provided by Becky Hasart on taxes for other WA cities- email to City Council November 8 12 Approximately what cost is associated with CSO? For an average bill of 4 50 hcf per month of billed sewer the CSO portion would be around $16 25 13 Provide information related to conservation programs and impacts. Conservation impacts are due to a number of factors such as weather, economy, demographic changes (declining household size) and conservation initiatives such as building code changes, improved — technology/ efficiency, incentivized pricing, education programs and the 1992 Energy Policy Act that required efficient water fixtures 450 400 - T m 350 d 300 - - - - o � 8 250 - - c o 200 - P�J g 150 - - m 100 _ _ _ Q 50 0 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Year of Home Construction The Water Use Efficiency rule requires that all water systems evaluate their water use and implement a plan for efficiency The level of the program depends upon the current state of the system (metered accounts and water loss being the high focus areas) See attached comparison of Conservation Programs as described in the recent respective Water System Plans for each water system Seven categories are shown that conservation programs address, Page 3 J City of Bremerton Utilities Rate Study Questions from Council Workshop — October 24, 2012 and the reported water use reduction is also shown From recent rate studies completed in 2010 -2012 utilities around the region (Oregon, Washington, Idaho) are experiencing reduction in consumption of 4 0% to 6 0% per year (annual average) 14 Provide the list of annual escalation factors used in rate study. ct32GM M EM 00 06 ow M3 General Cost Inflation 223% 223% 223% 2237o 2 23% 223% Construction Cost Inflation 5 OD% 5005. 500% 5 00% 5007o 5009 Labor Cost Inflation 150% 3 00% 3007o 300% 300% 300% Benefit Cost Inflation 1000% 1000% 1000% 1000% 1000% 1000% Investment Interest 075% 075% 100% 100% 1 00 100% Storm Growth 081% 081% 081% 081% 081% 081% Based on In -City population growth Wastewater Growth 081% 081% 081% 081% 081% 081% Based on In City population growth Water Weighted Average Revenue Growth -0109; -0097. -009% 1 -010% -006% 1 027% Accounts Total System 099% 100% 100% 100% 101% 1 00 Accounts In City Only 081% 081% 081% 081% 081% 081% Accounts City System 1 04 104% 104% 104% 104% 1 055o Demand SF -040% -0 40% -040% -041% -041% -041% Used in conjunction with customer Demand MF -020% -0209 -020 -045% 00576 -020% statistics to project the Water Demand Comm -020% -020% -020% -0 20% -0 20% -020% Weighted Average Revenue Growth Demand Irr -020% -020% -020% -0 20% -020% -0 20% Demand PSNS -338% 3 50% 3 63% 377% 3 92% -087% No Escalation 0005. 0 OD% 1 000% 1 0 Of . 0 00% 1 0 00% 15 What are the annual percentage rate increases being evaluated? Base Case 000% 10007o 8 00% 800% 55076 550% 300% 470976 S1 - 100% Debt Shaped 0 00 1000% 7 00% 700% 5007o 5 00% 300% 4301% W @M== r rJ f fl 9�D e l Base Case 0 00% 000% 3 50% 3507o 350% 3 00% 300% 17 62% S1 - 100% Debt Shaped 000% 000 1 50% 1 50% 150% 1 50% 150% 77376 Base Case 000% 96 0% 9607o 960% 800% 8 00% 700% 1431% S1 - 100% Debt Shaped 000% 800% 800% 800% 575% 575% 575% 489776 16 Consider the idea of increasing wastewater rates for 2013 instead of no increase f i• Mu Base Case 0 00 %• 90@ 2 60% 2 60% 2 60% 260% 26070 260% !6787.0' 5% S2 - 100% Debt Shaped 000 1 10% 1 10% 1 10% i 10% 1 10% 1 10% C go@ I MG I M@ I i• i" Base Case $ 100 23 $ 102 84 1 $ 105 51 $ 108 25 $ 111 07 113 96 $ 116 92 Sl - 100% Debt Shaped 1 00 23 101331 10245 10357 10471 10587 107 03 Base Case $ - $ 261 1 $ 267 $ 274 $ 281 $ 289 $ 296 Sl - 100% Debt Shaped 1 10 1 11 1 13 1 14 1 15 1 16 17 Provide capital improvement plan The CIP in the rate study focused on initial 6 years (see detail attached) Study will be updated to show rolling 6 year capital improvement plan The City has also provided a handout comparing capital projects in the budget to what was used in the rate study Page 4 City of Bremerton Utilities Rate Study Questions from Council Workshop — October 24, 2012 18 Are annexations included in CIP? Annexations are not included in CIP until such time that the annexations occur The appropriate funding mechanism will be evaluated at that time 19 Is SKIA included in the capital Plan? Any projects related to SKIA in the 6 year capital plan used in the rate study are assumed to be 100% developer donated meaning there is no rate impact 20 How many customers are using the City's low income rate now? The information provided from the billing system indicates 414 for Water, 426 for Sewer, and 364 for Storm Page 5 City of Bremerton Utilities Rate Study Questions from Council Workshop — October 24, 2012 Stormwater 6 -Year CIP detail maa Brentwood Dr & Oyster Bay Culvert $ 250 000 $ 250,000 City Culverts 63 000 50 000 50 000 50 000 50 000 50 000 313,000 Collection Systems 50 000 50 000 50 000 50 000 50 000 50 000 300,000 Storm Drainage Replacement Program 120 000 120 000 120 000 120 000 120 000 120 000 720,000 Eagle Ave Storm Drain 75 000 500 000 575,000 Eastpark Stormwater Outfall 50 000 800 000 850 000 Kitsap Way Supplemental Culvert 75 000 450 000 525,000 5th St - Chester to Veneta (with Kiwaros Park) 10 000 10,000 Anderson Cove 450 000 10 000 460 000 Monette Business Area 10 000 10,000 11 th St PI and Washington Outfoll 50 000 150 000 200,000 Marine Drive and Kelley Road storm system 50 000 250 000 300 000 Price Road conveyance replacement 100000 100,000 W estpark Oyster Bay Outfali at OB -1 150 000 800 000 950 000 Stormwater Management PlanU date 30000 80000 110,000 Total CIP $ 783,000 $1,335,000 $1,595,000 $1,020 000 $ 470,000 $ 470,000 $5 673 000 External Funding Grants /CIAC 596 000 450 000 - - 1 046 000 Net CIP $ 187,000 S 885,000 $1595000 1 $1,020,000 $ 470,000 1 $ 470000 I $4,627,000 Growth CIP 328 250 7475 710 000 1 462 500 287 500 37 500 1 2,573,250 R&R CIP 454 750 5875%01 885 000 557 500 182500 '432500 3,099,750 Page 6 _ r City of Bremerton Utilities Rate Study Questions from Council Workshop — October 24, 2012 Wastewater 6 -Year CIP detail @3:=GW=( am MG mo M8 r r Beach main and Critical Force main Cleaning $ 75 000 $ 200 000 $ 200 000 $ 20D 000 $ 675 000 Beach Main Replacement from ESTP to 16 -inch Siphon 1 250 000 1 250 000 WA Ave Sewer Replacement 250 000 2 500 000 2 750 000 Sheldon Blvd Sewer Replacement & CE3 Upgrade 125 000 1 000 000 1 125 000 Oyster Bay Beach Sewer 250 000 1 ODD 000 1 250 000 Digester Heat Exchanger #1 & #2 Replacement 62 000 62 000 Grout Annular Space of SW Bremerton FM 200 ODD 200 000 Improvement Between Schley and Fr Street 50 000 50 000 Improvement on Homer Jones 50000 50,000 Metal Storage Warehouse (40x80) 50000 50000 Miscellaneous Equipment 20 000 20 000 20 000 20 000 20 000 20 000 120 000 Primary Clarifier #I & 2 Dnve Replacement 70 000 70 000 Secondary Clarifier #1 & 2 Dnve Replacement 80 000 80 000 Substandard Main Replacement Program 350 000 350 000 350 ODO 350 ODO 350 000 350 000 2 100 000 Wastewater Reuse 250 000 250 000 W WTP and Pump Station Improvement Program 650 000 700 ODD 700 ODO 700 000 700 000 700 000 4 150 000 Westside WWTP Outfoll 150000 2500000 2650000 ESTPOutfall 100000 450000 550000 East & West Brem UGA Sewerage ULID Development 50 ODO 50 000 East & West Brem UGA Sewerage ULID Dgn & Const 2 000 000 2 000 ODD 4 000 000 Tracyton Blvd Cleaning Access and Capacity Analysis 500 ODD 500 000 SKIA Sewer Design & Construction ULID Dgn & Const 725 000 4 750 000 5 475 000 Replace Surge Tank at W B -6 125 000 125 000 Replace or rehabilitate 10 -inch SS under Secondary Clarifier 150 ODO 500 000 650 000 CIPP Line existing 54 -inch SD under Secondary Clarifier 250 000 250 000 Pacific Ave 6th to 11th SS Rehabilitation 550000 550 000 Cl PP repair of failing Sewers 75 000 525 000 600 000 Primary Effluent Pumps - drive replacement 1 2500001 1 1 1 1 1 250 000 r r ma r r r Primary Effluent Line Rehabilitation 50 ODO 400 000 450 000 Replace Drives on RAS Pumps 125000 125 000 Emergency Generator Installation at EB3 50 OOD 50 000 Emergency Generator Installation at OB5 &6 125 000 125 000 Recoat Aluminum Covers on the Primary Clarifiers and Biofifier 25 OOD 250 ODO 275 000 Saltwater Infillration Elimination 75 000 75 000 Storage Warehouse at W WTP 450 ODO 450 000 Cherry Ave SS 25 000 25 000 Flex Net 750 ODO 750 000 1 500 000 Phinney Bay & Ostrich Bay SS Extenstion 75 000 1 500 ODO 1 575 000 Replace Surge Tank at CE -1 300 000 300 000 BiofiBer Upgrade 1 200 000 1 200 000 Abandon beach sewer north of Manette Bridge 200 000 2 OOD 000 2 200 000 Address infrastructure downstream on KLl 300 000 300 000 Replace Penthouse HVAC for Bldg 400 25000 25 000 Replace KL2 Engine Generator 85 ODO 85,000 Replace PE Pump Suction and Discharge Valves 400000 400000 Replace RAS Pumps 150 000 150 000 Replace CW2 pumps 200 000 200 000 Upgrade SCADA 150 000 150 000 Identity nt source removal from beach lines 150 000 150 000 Total CIP 5 555 000 S 5 977 000 S 5 125 000 S 8 045 000 10 970 000 4 020 000 39 692 000 External Funding ULID /CIAC 150 000 200 OOD 75 000 1 550 000 6 750 000 20000001 10 725 000 Net CIP 5,405000 5,777000 5050,000 6495,000 4 220 000 3 2,020,000 28 967 000 Growth CIP 745 000 1 630 000 1 217 500 4 317 500 1 8 542 500 3 030 000 19,482,500 R &R CIP 4 810 000 4 347 000 3 907 500 3 727 500 2 427 500 990 000 20 209 500 Page 7 f City of Bremerton Utilities Rate Study Questions from Council Workshop — October 24, 2012 Water 6 -Year CIP detail Substandard Water Main Replacement $ 200 000 $ 700 000 $ 200 000 $ 200 000 $ 200 000 $ 700 000 $ 2 200 000 Distribution Main Improvements 100 000 300 000 300 000 300 000 300 000 300 000 1 600 000 Machinery/Equipment - Water Resources 125 000 125 000 125 000 125 000 125 000 125 000 750 000 Machinery/Equipment - Utility Operations Mgr 20 000 20 000 20 000 20 000 20 000 20 000 120 000 Machinery/Equipment - Forestry 20 000 20 000 20 000 20 000 20 000 20 000 120 000 Taps 70 000 70 000 70 000 70 000 70 000 70 000 420 000 Meter Replacement 150 000 150 000 150 000 150 000 150 000 150 000 900 000 Meter Replacement Large 100 000 100 000 100 000 100 000 100 000 100 000 600 000 Fire Hydrants 20 000 20 000 20 000 20 000 20 000 20 000 120 000 Reservoir Coatings 230 000 110 000 240 000 240 000 240 000 240 000 1 300 000 Forestry Road Maintenance and Abandonment 20 000 20 000 20 000 20 000 80 000 Warren Avenue Bridge Main Seismic Upgrade Main Rep 1 700 000 1 700 000 Emergency Source Upgrade 100 000 100 000 Upgrade SCADA 100 000 100 000 50 000 250 000 Watershed Land Purchase 150000 150000 Generator /Auto Transfer Switch Oyster Bay 100 000 100 000 Oyster Bay Public Works Consolidation 250 000 250 000 R23 TM /DM Corrosion Correction 50 000 50 000 Pacific Avenue WM Replacement - 6th to 11th 500 000 500 000 Jarstad Park - Trail /Facilities Improvements 10 000 10 000 Upgrade Cook Rd Booster Station 40 000 40 000 Anderson Creek Fish Passage 150000 150000 Pressure Relief Valves 75 000 75 000 75 000 225 000 McKenna Falls Channel Modification 150000 150000 7e Hardening of Casad Dam Overflow 200 000 200 000 Property Purchace for Re -Dnll Well 9 100 000 100 000 Anderson Creek Groundwater Rule CT Compliance 150 000 150 000 Casad Dam Electrical Upgrade 40 000 40 000 Upgrade Well Disinfection to Hypo 50 000 150 000 200 000 Caustic Tank Replacement at CCF 50 000 50 000 100 000 Decomsston Tenn Lakes Valve 50 000 50 000 Metering System Upgrade 1 000 000 1 000 000 1 000 000 3 000 000 24 -in TM at Res 4 Outlet 150 000 1 500 000 1 650 000 Redundancy 24 C Street from Oyster Bay to National 250000 250000 Well 22 Pump and Controls /PS 17 200 000 200 000 Sherman Heights Watermain Cure in Place 150 000 750 000 900 000 Resery oir 8 Drain 30 000 30 000 Marine Drive Watermain 1 000000 1 000000 Replace travelling screens at McKenna Falls Intake 100000 100000 Well 18 Pump and Motor 100000 100000 HVAC Upgrade at Forestry Office 12 000 12 000 Total CIP 4 017,000 $ 2 950 000 $ 2 590 000 $ 4 040 000 1 S 3 425 000 1$2945000 $19,967,000 External Funding ULID /CIAC 10000 10000 Net CIP 4,007,000 2,950,000 2 590,000 4,040 000 $3,425000 $2945000 1995 7 000 Growth CIP 602 500 757 500 917 500 1 117 500 842 500 642 500 1 4 880 000 R &R CIP 3 414 500 2 192 500 1 672 500 2 922 500 2 582 500 2 302 500 15,087 000 Page 8 Comparison of Conservation Programs as described in the recent respective Water System Plans for each water system Category City Marysville Walla Bellingham Everett Kennewick Lacey Puyallup Yakima Walla 56% metered, CIP projects 15,000 flat rate scheduled for accounts, 2015 -2016 to Meters Voluntary Metering provide meters ■ ■ ® ■ ■ ■ Program to help to unmetered provide meters to customers SF residences In compliance, In compliance, Data Collection except for flat rate except for flat ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ customers (non- rate customers metered) (non- metered) Distribution System WUE Goal, > ■ ■ ■ ® Pending, > ® Adopted as a Leakage (< 10%) 13% 16% WUE goal, 17% Setting Goals ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Metering Program In compliance, Efficiency Program is mayor portion of except for flat ■ ■ ® ■ ■ ■ WUE program rate customers (non-metered) Demand Forecast ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Performance Reports ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Projected Reduction in 12% 5 80% 1% 730% 120% 1770% 2% Water Use No Information r 11/13/2 November i4, zoiz E�r�m�r��+r� �einchmarki�,g F�ep�rt �itg� �+�+ur�cil �fl�c�rk 5essi+�n t} � r Benchm�r�in Prc�c�ss Identify Key CQm ►are fi�o Guidance on Performance 1 4du t Improvements Indicators 11/13/2012 Key Performance € a r WATER WASTEWATER • O &M Expenses 13 O &M Expenses • Accounts per FTE o Accounts per FTE System Integrity a System Integrity • Water Loss ° Overflows • Breaks ® System Complexity °Breaks ® System Complexity • Line Length • MGDTreated ° Line Length • Number of Tanks /Pump ° MGDTreated Stations ° Number of Lift Stations R Utility Bill Cost o Utility Bill Cost Compare to In'dustry 3 z 0 2007 Qualserve Survey o Sets baseline for comparison Contains National and Regional data Contains data by customer base 0 2012 Local Survey • Sent survey to e Bellingham, Everett, Kennewick, Lacey, Marysville, Puyallup, Walla Walla, Yakima • Most were very responsive and interested, z have not been returned • Will provide those who participated their comparison 4 2 11/13/2012 Guid o n Imp o Identify areas where improvement has been made a Identify additional areas for future improvement o Set goals and plan to achieve those goals 5 Sample Parameter Bremert n Data z o7 � ' Bremerton Data 2012 Western 1 • Q ualserve 2007 I 1 • 25% Perco ntile 1 ' 75% Percentile M Median 1 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 3 11/13/2012 Sna pshot of P articip a nts Data Bremerton- 2 3 R r 4 ry 5 6 7 8 umberof Water Treatment Plants 2 1 1 4 2 1 - 1 4 , ater Treatment Process Unfiltered Membrane Direct Chlorination only Membrane Direct Direct Unfiltered supply UV Filtration Filtration (groundwater) Filtration Filtration Filtration Supply Ozon nnual Average of Water Delivered (MG1 70 53 Soo 605" ors 97 9 2 °r' I P+ 9 6 94 urface Water Supply y y y N y y y y roundwate Supply f r' R y Y 1e x , N, 4; Y, y"' � N 'y y umberof Wells 13 7 0 19 2 0 4 7 umber of Water Reservoir 17' < <E 8 -0 " 8 10 X1 114 p 5 _ �3 umber of Water Pump Stations 14 3 4 10 11 14 4 1 des of Water P,peline t �, 300 296'x' 450 " - 390," 379 396 k 300 '� _ n 179 umber of Water Customer Amounts 18 463 18 975 25 954 23 088 22 411 25 542 18 941 10 560 umberofwholesaleaccounts t s4 13 �: 127h 0 `�0 °_ %S '� ,0er z r 4w nual Average of Wastewater Treated 5 49 19 N/A 55 122 11 53 MG) umber of Wastewater Treatment l ' ry adh0es j t - 2 1 2 ti ., N/A ,U umber of Wastewater Lit Stations 39 15 37 49 16 27 10 6 dkE� Wtat 1pelme -172 4 , 210 - 345 , #r ' u a 206 266 314 350, 3 �. '� 143 r Customer 10 464 18 360 25 000 15 803 17 517 25 938 26 245 8400 W Parameters Customer Accounts per Employee I Bremerton Data Number of 1 zoo, 1 2022 customer accounts per CustomerAccounts Per Employee employee has increased 20% from 2007 1 0 200 400 600 800 1000 # Accounts/# Employees O •• 4 S 4 ` 11/13/2012 Water Staff �- • . ; Bremerton Data ' number of ' 2007 ' 2022 facilities (wells, I WTF, pump Staff per T NumberofFaallties -Water station, dam, tanks) as i compared to WA peers I JResults in a low i number of staff perfacility for 0 05 1 15 1 # Employees /Sum of WTPs, Wells, Pump Stations, Tanks similar numbers of staff ` 9 Water - ° • - - P arameters Em Bremerton Data :Slight increase 2007 ' 2032 in MGD of Treated Water per MGDperEmployee Employee from i 2007 r uAdditional staff is required for ,I Bremerton to manage the 0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 MGD of Treated Water / #Employees watershed and supply faciIities Zo 5 11/13/2012' Water Parameters O&M, • perAccount Bremerton Data JO &M Costs per ; 3007 ; 1011 Account have ' decreased from O &MperAmount 2007to 2012 i JIncreased R &R i may increase this ratio 0 100 zoo 300 000 Soo $ 0 &M Expense /p Accounts 11 Water Parameters Bremerton Data ❑Similar to O&M 3007 t 1011 per account, O &M per MG water has O &M per MG of Water been reduced II i JO &M per MG for 2012 is at the median for WA i and national 2007 values 0 Soo 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 $O &M Expense /MG of Water Treated fa- -e e • 11 6 11/13/2012 O&M Expense per • P arame t ers Tr Bremerton Data ��t 1 1 ld Br emerton has , 200, , 2022 numerous pump ' stations and tanks O &M per PS and Tank due to topography I , of the area i I f. JBremerton was the lowest of the g utilities surveyed 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 O &M Expense (51,000) /Sum of Number of Pump Stations Plus Tanks 13 W W a t er Disrup P Bremerton Data ❑Disru tions are P , 200 , 2022 unplanned outages for greater than 4 Disruptions per 1000 Customers hours uDisruptions in WA ' ®■1■ II ■ti1�■ ' are well below national values I'Disruptions in 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Bremerton were a Disruptions (Loss of Water) /1,000 Customers reduced from 2007 to 2012 ,,; a • 14 7 11/13/2012 Water Parameters • Breaks i Li At Data 4i At the higher ' 1007 ' 2012 end of the WA surveyed entitles Distribution System integnty (Leaks and Breaks per 100miles) but below the I median nationally I ' JAddltlonal R &R Investment may help to reduce the leaks and breaks 0 10 20 30 40 so 60 70 4 of Breaks and Leaks /100 miles of Pipe 1 5 Parameters • Percentage Bremerton Data jWAo are lo %for i 1 water loss and Bremerton is 1 2007 1 2011 still well below io % 1 UCalculation of water loss Water Loss includes master meter production information and comrlation of billing records and known water uses (fire i fighting, flushing, etc) DOlder meters "slow down" overtime and I ' may not record all usage L]System is an "older" system and continues to age - Additional R &R Investment may help to reduce this 0 2 4 6 B 10 12 14 16 percentage Percent of Water Loss/Total Water Treated 16 8 11/13/2012 Parameters Water • • p. Bremerton Data ®As an unfiltered, ; 2007 ; 2012 water supply, actively track and Complaints per 1000 Customers monitor customer complaints r feedback r 1 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 R Complaints /1,000 Customers ~ 1 7 Water Parameters Single Family Residential Usage Bremerton Data USFR usage Is at ' ' usage 2007 I 2012 the low end of the r i range Single Family Residential Usage ❑i3 % decrease in residential i usage i LlIndlcates that I Individual customer i usage Is below median for those surveyed o so 100 160 200 260 300 Gallons per Day Usage per Single family Residiential Unit ❑Conservation ®Education 18 9 11/13/2012 Parameters Water Average Residential Monthly Cost Bremerton Data uAt the low end of i the range for all ( 2007 ( 2012 comparison categories Avg Residential Monthly Cost JNeed to consider that water use is also at the low end of comparables and i water use drives this comparison JSllght increase from I i 2007 to 2022 but well o 10 20 30 40 50 below the 2 5% Average Residential htonthly Bill ($) percentile for WA comparisons lg Parameters Cost per 7500 gallons (10 ccf) Bremerton Data JDiffers from the ' i Average Residential 2007 2012 Bill comparison to more directly Cost per 75W gal (10 od) evaluate the cost per gallon ❑Lower end of the range ❑Less spread in the I ranges since this metric normalizes 0 5 10 is 20 25 30 35 40 water use Monthly Cost ($) per 7,500 gallons 130 afl information 20 10 11/13/2012 Wastewater Parameters 21 Wastewater ' • per s • Parameters Bremerton Data ZiSlight increase ; 200 ; 2022 in number of ' accounts per Accounts per FTE-Sewer employee since 2007 i i LIM the low end of the WA range and at the median 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 of similar S Ze d pAcwunts /# Employees customer base 22 11 i 11/13/2012 Wastewater MGO Pr ocessed/Treated p. P arameters oe Bremerton Data ,- IMGDTreated per i 2007 1012 Employee has I i Increased since 2007 MGD per Employee -Sewer JHlgh end of slmllarlyslzed UM lnll-jq� operation by customer count JBremerton also has i successful CSO program that Is not reflected Inflow 0 01 02 03 04 05 (volume) comparison MGD Processed / # Employees of staff levels 23 Wastew St . - F Par Bremerton Data LiHlgher number of ' ' ' 300, ' 1012 facilities as , I compared to WA peers Staff per Total Numberof Faalities -Sewer ❑Compare this slide with the previous slide of MGD Processed per employee to see a that Bremerton has I i more facilities to manage than peers 0 02 04 06 08 1 12 14 16 for similar volumes #Employees /Sum of Number of Treatment Plants and LdtStations of water to treat 2 4 12 11/13/2012 Wastewater Parameters i O&M perAccount ' Bremerton Data ' J 'y 1 O& M per 1 2007 1 1012 account isjust ' above the median O &MperAaount -Sewer for WA and has 1 been reduced 1 1 from 2007 I I I ' 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 v $ O &M Expense /Number of Accounts 25 Wastewater O&M per MG Treated Parameters Bremerton Data ❑SlmilartoO &M I 1 i 2007 1 2012 per account, O &M per MG Treated O &MperMG -Sewer has also been 1 reduced 1 i 1 $0 $1,000 $2000 $3000 $4000 $5000 $ O &M Expense /MG of Treated Wastewater i the 26 13 11/13/2012 Wastewater O&M per MG Treat . ed-WA Range Parameters Bremerton Data La5(m(IartoO &M ° ° � zoo7 aou per account, O &M per MG Treated O &MperMG -Sewer has also been ° reduced ° W�stern Data ° i $2000 $2200 $2400 $2600 $2800 $3000 $ O &M Expense /MG of Treated Wastewater 6 • •• se e.- 27 W Parameters • • p er F Bremerton Data iiH(gh number of 1 2007 1 2022 facilities as I ' compared to WA O&MperLS peers, so less ° O &M per facility ' results ° ° ° ° ° 0 100 200 300 400 Soo 600 700 0 &M Expense ($1,000) /Sum of Number of Lift Stations 28 14 11/13/2012 Wastewater • P i pe line P Bremerton Data JJust below the ; 3007 ; 3011 median of the O &M costs per O &M per Mile of Pipeline -Sewer miles of pipeline in WA I ' I I � $0 $5000 $10000 $15000 $20000 $25 000 $30000 $35000 $40000 $O &M Expense /Miles of Pipe 29 Wastewater Breaks/Failures per loo miles P Bremert on Data ®Number of 1 1 100, ' 1011 breaks /failures ' has been reduced Collection System Integri (breaks/failures pe r IW miles) since zoo? o5till at the high end forWA but in a comparable range nationally 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Number of Breaks /loo miles of pipe 49 30 15 11/13/2012• Wastewater Average Residential Monthly Cost Parameters Bremerton Data i Wastewater bill 1 2007 ' 2011 Includes CSO I ' charge, survey Avg Residential MonthlyCostSewer participants did not JCSO charge pushes residential bill to the higher end of bills 0 10 20 30 40 so 60 70 Average Residential Monthly Cost (S) i 3 1 Water Parameters Summary ® Low number of staff per facility o Increased number of accounts per employee ® Low O &M costs c3 Low range of customer bills • Minimal disruptions and customer complaints • Slight increase in water loss 31 16 11/13/2012 Wastewater Parameters Summary • Lower number of staff per facility • O &M costs have been reduced in both O &M per facility and O &M per account • Lowest 0 &M cost per facility as compared to WA peers • Customer bills include CSO charge 33 Questions? 17 ______________________________________________________________ CITY COUNCIL 345 6th Street, Suite 600, Bremerton, WA 98337 Phone (360) 473-5280 * * * A M E N D E D * * * NOVEMBER 14, 2012 CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION & BUDGET WORKSHOP 4:00 PM in MAYOR’S CONFERENCE ROOM (Please note earlier start-time and new location for this meeting only…) The Study Session is open to the public but there will be no opportunities for input or participation; no action is anticipated during the Study Session; and the content of these items is subject to change. If approved by Council, the items will be placed on the December 5, 2012 Council Meeting Agenda: A. NO PRESENTATION PLANNED - The following items are budgeted items or have been reviewed by the appropriate Council Committee: 1. Contract Modification for long-term groundwater monitoring at former Chevron Property – Tom Knuckey, City Engineer, Public Works & Utilities Department 2. Agreed Order with Department of Ecology for monitoring and reporting at former Chevron Property – Tom Knuckey, City Engineer, Public Works & Utilities Department 3. Ordinance to repeal Chapter 2.43 of the Bremerton Municipal Code (BMC) regarding the Gold Mountain Complex Board of Directors – Wyn Birkenthal, Parks & Recreation Director B. FULL DISCUSSION ITEMS 4. 2012 United Way Campaign Briefing – Shannon Corin, City Clerk 5. Adopt Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council (KRCC) Interlocal Agreement 2012 Amendments – Mary McClure, KRCC Executive Director 6. Appointment of Public Works Administration Division Manager at a Step Higher than Rate 1 in Band 11 - Chal Martin, Public Works & Utilities Director (Action is anticipated…) 7. Utility Rate Study “Fee Structure & Classifications” – Becky Hasart, Financial Services Director; FCS Group; and Utility Rate Study Advisory Committee 8. BUDGET WORKSHOP: Continued discussion on the City of Bremerton 2013 Proposed Budget – Becky Hasart, Financial Services Director; and Caroline Tompson, Budget Analyst C. GENERAL COUNCIL BUSINESS D. ADJOURN STUDY SESSION Americans with Disabilities Act accommodations provided upon request. Those requiring special accommodations should contact the City Clerk’s Office at (360) 473-5323 by noon on the Monday preceding the Council meeting. AGENDA BILL CITY OF BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Agreed Order with Ecology for Long-Term Monitoring and Reporting at the Former Chevron Property Study Session Date: November 14, 2012 COUNCIL MEETING Date: December 5, 2012 Department: PW&U Engineering Presenter: Tom Knuckey Phone: 473-2376 SUMMARY: The City has completed remedial construction as required under Agreed Order DE- 07TCPHQ-5024 at the former Chevron property. Per the terms of the order, the City is committed to on-going groundwater monitoring until contamination levels drop to MTCA A levels – for planning purposes this is estimated to be achieved in 5-years. Ecology has requested the City execute a second Agreed Order (DE-12TCPHQ-9509) which quantifies monitoring and reporting requirements. The second Agreed Order makes the City eligible to expend grant funds for the first year of monitoring. The requested action is approval of Agreed Order DE-12TCPHQ-9509. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Council Summary; 2. Agreed Order. FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): The 2012 budget is $80,000 and the 2013 requested budget is $30,000. Projected 2013 expenditures will exceed the budget; therefore, a mid- year budget adjustment is anticipated. STUDY SESSION AGENDA: ☒ No Discussion ☐ Full Presentation STUDY SESSION ACTION: ☐ Consent Agenda ☐ General Business ☐ Public Hearing RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve Agreed Order DE-12TCPHQ-9509 and authorize the Mayor to finalize and execute the document with substantially the same terms and conditions as presented. COUNCIL ACTION: Approve Deny Table Continue No Action Form Updated 11/02/12 Former Chevron Property Long-term Groundwater Monitoring Page 1 of 3 FORMER CHEVRON PROPERTY LONG-TERM MONITORING COUNCIL SUMMARY Background: In 2007, the City executed Agreed Order DE-07TCPHQ-5024 with Ecology for cleanup of the former Chevron property. The cleanup construction was completed in two phases; the initial phase was performed in 2009 and consisted of injection of a chemical oxidizing reagent in the lower yard (north half of the site), and excavation and removal of small contamination “hot spots” in the upper yard (south half of the site.) The second phase was performed in 2011 and consisted of injection of additional oxidizing reagent at hot spots remaining in the lower yard. The chemical injection approach was selected since the mass excavation alternative for the entire site was very expensive ($5.7M) and was only eligible for a 75% grant, compared to the selected alternative ($1.1M) which was grant funded at 90%. Ongoing Work at the Property: The injected chemicals coupled with naturally occurring bacteria will continue to reduce residual contamination at the site for years. Remaining work is limited to groundwater monitoring and reporting to track the reduction of contamination until MTCA A levels are reached – for planning purposes, it is estimated this will be achieved in 5-years. On-going groundwater monitoring was previously committed to in the initial Agreed Order and associated Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study. Given completion of the “Interim Action” (the remediation construction), Ecology has proposed we execute a second Agreed Order for the site – this order would formalize the scope and schedule for on-going groundwater monitoring, reporting, and outline institutional controls (use restrictions) for the site. The second agreed order would also make the City eligible for grant funding under a separate remedial action grant for the first year of monitoring and reporting at the site. Existing Contract with Parametrix: In January, 2011, the City executed a contract with Parametrix for Professional Services, Field Services and Laboratory services associated with completing the remedial work described above. At the time of execution of this contract, follow-on long-term monitoring was anticipated; however, the amount of monitoring could not be quantified and so it was not included in the contract. First Agenda Bill: Contract Modification with Parametrix, Inc for Long-term Groundwater Monitoring and Reporting The consultant scope of work is to develop required reports and perform long- term groundwater monitoring until contamination levels drop to MTCA A levels. For the contract, this is estimated to be achieved in 5-years. The consultant scope includes the following:  First year (Dec 2012 – Dec 2013) – the consultant work includes work plan preparation and 2 semiannual groundwater sampling events (January Former Chevron Property Long-term Groundwater Monitoring Page 2 of 3 and July – wet and dry events) and reports submitted to Ecology; total cost is $60,000. Assuming approval of the Second Agreed Order, this work would be eligible for grant funding at 90%.  Second through fourth years (2014 - 2016) – the consultant work includes semiannual groundwater sampling events and reports; this work is not grant eligible.  Fifth year (2017) – the consultant work includes 4 quarterly groundwater sampling events and a final report; this work is not grant eligible. The initial contract was for $123,786, the proposed modification is for $225,256 for a new contract total of $349,042. Second Agenda Bill: Agreed Order with Ecology for Long-Term Monitoring and Reporting at the Former Chevron Property While the existing Agreed Order obligated the City to perform long term monitoring, the actual monitoring was not quantified (number of wells to be monitored, number of sampling events per year), and the type of institutional controls to be put on the property was not quantified. Ecology has requested the City execute a second Agreed Order on the property to formalize these issues. The advantage to the City is that upon execution of the Agreed Order, the City becomes eligible for an Ecology grant to reimburse 90% of the costs associated with the first year of monitoring, reporting, and other activities associated with the property. Financial Summary: Anticipated project costs are presented below – costs include both City labor and reimbursement of Ecology for their labor which is not grant eligible: 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Project Cost (1) 70,500 54,500 38,500 38,500 38,500 78,500 Consultant Fee (2) 15,900 (3) 48,000 32,000 32,000 32,000 72,000 Grant Reimbursement 55,000 45,500 9-11 Committee Donation 4,500 Net Expense 11,000 9,000 38,500 38,500 38,500 78,500 Notes: (1) Project costs include an estimated $2,500 City and $4,000 Ecology costs per annum from 2013 - 2017. (2) The 2012 fee is from both the existing contract, and proposed Contract Modification. (3) Includes $6,900 in expenses from prior to amendment. Former Chevron Property Long-term Groundwater Monitoring Page 3 of 3 The expenditure forecast presented above is not consistent with the CIP and budget request due to project delays resulting from delays in receiving the Agreed Order from Ecology. A 2013 mid-year budget adjustment is anticipated to account for the projected $24,500 shortfall in expenditure authority. AGENDA BILL CITY OF BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Contract Modification No. 1 to Former Chevron Property Remediation Contract with Parametrix. Study Session Date: November 14, 2012 COUNCIL MEETING Date: December 5, 2012 Department: PW&U, Engineering Presenter: Tom Knuckey Phone: 473-2376 SUMMARY: The City has completed remedial construction as required under Agreed Order DE- 07TCPHQ-5024 at the former Chevron property. The cleanup construction was completed in two phases with injection of a chemical oxidizing agent being the primary removal method in the lower yard. Per the terms of the order, the City is committed to on-going groundwater monitoring until contamination levels drop to MTCA A levels – for planning purposes this is estimated to be achieved in 5-years. The requested action is modification of the consultant contract to perform groundwater monitoring and reporting to Ecology over a 5-year term. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Council Summary; 2. Contract Modification. FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): The 2012 budget is $80,000 and the 2013 requested budget is $30,000. Projected 2013 expenditures will exceed the budget; therefore, a mid- year budget adjustment is anticipated. STUDY SESSION AGENDA: ☒ No Discussion ☐ Full Presentation STUDY SESSION ACTION: ☐ Consent Agenda ☐ General Business ☐ Public Hearing RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve Contract Modification No. 1 to the Professional Services Agreement with Parametrix, Inc., in the amount of $225,256 (including sales tax) and authorize the Mayor to finalize and execute the document with substantially the same terms and conditions as presented. COUNCIL ACTION: Approve Deny Table Continue No Action Form Updated 11/02/12 Former Chevron Property Long-term Groundwater Monitoring Page 1 of 3 FORMER CHEVRON PROPERTY LONG-TERM MONITORING COUNCIL SUMMARY Background: In 2007, the City executed Agreed Order DE-07TCPHQ-5024 with Ecology for cleanup of the former Chevron property. The cleanup construction was completed in two phases; the initial phase was performed in 2009 and consisted of injection of a chemical oxidizing reagent in the lower yard (north half of the site), and excavation and removal of small contamination “hot spots” in the upper yard (south half of the site.) The second phase was performed in 2011 and consisted of injection of additional oxidizing reagent at hot spots remaining in the lower yard. The chemical injection approach was selected since the mass excavation alternative for the entire site was very expensive ($5.7M) and was only eligible for a 75% grant, compared to the selected alternative ($1.1M) which was grant funded at 90%. Ongoing Work at the Property: The injected chemicals coupled with naturally occurring bacteria will continue to reduce residual contamination at the site for years. Remaining work is limited to groundwater monitoring and reporting to track the reduction of contamination until MTCA A levels are reached – for planning purposes, it is estimated this will be achieved in 5-years. On-going groundwater monitoring was previously committed to in the initial Agreed Order and associated Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study. Given completion of the “Interim Action” (the remediation construction), Ecology has proposed we execute a second Agreed Order for the site – this order would formalize the scope and schedule for on-going groundwater monitoring, reporting, and outline institutional controls (use restrictions) for the site. The second agreed order would also make the City eligible for grant funding under a separate remedial action grant for the first year of monitoring and reporting at the site. Existing Contract with Parametrix: In January, 2011, the City executed a contract with Parametrix for Professional Services, Field Services and Laboratory services associated with completing the remedial work described above. At the time of execution of this contract, follow-on long-term monitoring was anticipated; however, the amount of monitoring could not be quantified and so it was not included in the contract. First Agenda Bill: Contract Modification with Parametrix, Inc for Long-term Groundwater Monitoring and Reporting The consultant scope of work is to develop required reports and perform long- term groundwater monitoring until contamination levels drop to MTCA A levels. For the contract, this is estimated to be achieved in 5-years. The consultant scope includes the following:  First year (Dec 2012 – Dec 2013) – the consultant work includes work plan preparation and 2 semiannual groundwater sampling events (January Former Chevron Property Long-term Groundwater Monitoring Page 2 of 3 and July – wet and dry events) and reports submitted to Ecology; total cost is $60,000. Assuming approval of the Second Agreed Order, this work would be eligible for grant funding at 90%.  Second through fourth years (2014 - 2016) – the consultant work includes semiannual groundwater sampling events and reports; this work is not grant eligible.  Fifth year (2017) – the consultant work includes 4 quarterly groundwater sampling events and a final report; this work is not grant eligible. The initial contract was for $123,786, the proposed modification is for $225,256 for a new contract total of $349,042. Second Agenda Bill: Agreed Order with Ecology for Long-Term Monitoring and Reporting at the Former Chevron Property While the existing Agreed Order obligated the City to perform long term monitoring, the actual monitoring was not quantified (number of wells to be monitored, number of sampling events per year), and the type of institutional controls to be put on the property was not quantified. Ecology has requested the City execute a second Agreed Order on the property to formalize these issues. The advantage to the City is that upon execution of the Agreed Order, the City becomes eligible for an Ecology grant to reimburse 90% of the costs associated with the first year of monitoring, reporting, and other activities associated with the property. Financial Summary: Anticipated project costs are presented below – costs include both City labor and reimbursement of Ecology for their labor which is not grant eligible: 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Project Cost (1) 70,500 54,500 38,500 38,500 38,500 78,500 Consultant Fee (2) 15,900 (3) 48,000 32,000 32,000 32,000 72,000 Grant Reimbursement 55,000 45,500 9-11 Committee Donation 4,500 Net Expense 11,000 9,000 38,500 38,500 38,500 78,500 Notes: (1) Project costs include an estimated $2,500 City and $4,000 Ecology costs per annum from 2013 - 2017. (2) The 2012 fee is from both the existing contract, and proposed Contract Modification. (3) Includes $6,900 in expenses from prior to amendment. Former Chevron Property Long-term Groundwater Monitoring Page 3 of 3 The expenditure forecast presented above is not consistent with the CIP and budget request due to project delays resulting from delays in receiving the Agreed Order from Ecology. A 2013 mid-year budget adjustment is anticipated to account for the projected $24,500 shortfall in expenditure authority. CONTRACT MODIFICATION 1 Project Number: CONTRACT MODIFICATION AGREEMENT NO. 1 BETWEEN THE CITY OF BREMERTON AND PARAMETRIX PROJECT Former Chevron Property Remediation CONSULTANT Parametrix, Inc. DATE December 5, 2012 THIS CONTRACT MODIFICATION AGREEMENT SPECIFICALLY AMENDS THE FORMER CHEVRON PROPERTY REMEDIATION AGREEMENT (the "Contract") entered into between the City of Bremerton and Parametrix on January 27, 2011 All provisions in the Contract shall remain in full force and effect except as expressly modified by this document. For valuable consideration and by mutual consent of the parties, the modifications to the Contract are as follows: I. Section I. Scope , is modified as follows: See Amended Scope of Work attached as Exhibit A) Section II. Term , is modified as follows: The Consultant shall complete the work described in this Contract Modification Agreement by December, 2017. Section III. Compensation , is modified as follows: The original contract amount was One Hundred Twenty Three Thousand Seven Hundred Eighty-Six Dollars ($123,786.00). The City shall pay the Consultant for the additional work described above, based on time and materials, an amount not to exceed Two Hundred Twenty Five Thousand Two Hundred Fifty-Six Dollars ($225,256.00) for a total amended contract amount of Three Hundred Forty Nine Thousand Forty-Two Dollars ($349,042.00), including this Contract Modification. II. Consultant accepts all requirements of this Contract Modification by endorsing below. Consultant further agrees that this Contract Modification constitutes full and final settlement of all of the Consultant’s claims for contract time and for all costs of any kind, including without limitation, costs of delays related to any work either covered or affected by this Contract Modification, claims related to on-site or home office overhead, or lost profits. This Contract Modification does not limit the City’s right to bring a claim for past performance. CONTRACT MODIFICATION 2 Project Number: The undersigned consultant approves the foregoing Contract Modification as to the changes, if any, in the contract price specified for each item, including any and all supervision costs and other miscellaneous costs relating to the change in work, and as to the extension of time allowed, if any, for completion of the entire work due to said Contract Modification. This document will become a supplement of the contract and all provisions will apply hereto. It is understood that this Contract Modification shall be effective when approved by the City of Bremerton. The parties whose names appear below warrant that they are authorized to enter into a contract modification that is binding on the parties of this contract. In addition, Consultant warrants that it has or will inform the surety of this change, and shall take appropriate action to modify any bonds required under the contract to address this change. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Contract Modification on the day and year first written above. City Engineer / Public Works Director approved to process Initials and Date CONSULTANT. THE CITY OF BREMERTON By By Patty Lent Its Its Mayor DATE: DATE: APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST: Bremerton City Attorney City Clerk NOTICES TO BE SENT TO: NOTICES TO BE SENT TO: Dave Dinkuhn Tom Knuckey, PE Senior Engineer City Engineer Parametrix City of Bremerton Engineering Department 4660 Kitsap Way, Suite A 3027 Olympus Drive Bremerton, WA 98312 Bremerton WA, 98312 360-377-0014 360-473-2376 R:\LEGAL\Contracts\FORMS\Contract Modification (2003).doc City of Bremerton 233-1896-098 Scope of Work 1 October 2012 Former Chevron Property Remediation, Amendment No. 01 EXHIBIT A – SCOPE OF WORK City of Bremerton Professional Services Agreement for Former Chevron Property Remediation Amendment No. 01 - Long Term Monitoring INTRODUCTION This Scope of Work (SOW) describes Parametrix’s proposal for five years of Long-Term Monitoring (LTM) at the Former Chevron Property. The work will be performed under Amendment No. 01 to our existing Professional Services Agreement dated January 27, 2011. The tasks described here are part of the selected cleanup action described in the Draft Cleanup Action Plan (DCAP) developed for the site in coordination with the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology). The LTM activities include preparation of work plans, installation and development of a new groundwater monitoring well, four years of semi-annual groundwater sampling, and one year of quarterly groundwater sampling conducted during the fifth year. Following each sampling effort, a summary technical memorandum will be prepared; a final Summary Report will be prepared at the end of the five-year monitoring period that will summarize the results of all monitoring events. We anticipate that a portion of the work described here will be funded by a Remedial Action Grant from Ecology. The grant funded work will include work plan preparation and long term monitoring for the first year. The grant application is being developed concurrently with this SOW. Parametrix shall not initiate work until the grant is approved by Ecology. If the grant is not approved, the City of Bremerton (City) shall retain right to terminate any Professional Services Agreement executed based on this SOW. TASK 1 – PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Goal To provide for overview and direction of task activities in a manner that allows for the delivery of the project in accordance with the scope, schedule, and budget. Approach Specific work elements will include:  A combination of in-house reviews and monthly progress reports will be used to deliver elements of work described in this Scope of Work.  Weekly calls or meetings with the City’s project manager to update progress.  Management of subcontractors. Deliverables City of Bremerton 233-1896-098 Scope of Work 2 October 2012 Former Chevron Property Remediation, Amendment No. 01 Parametrix anticipates the following work products for this task:  Routine correspondence, schedule and budget updates, and status reports on progress of work. Assumptions The task budget is based on the following assumptions:  Project management and administration tasks will be performed through the project period, which will end on October 31, 2017.  Monthly project update calls will be attended by the project manager. TASK 2 – WORK PLANS Goal Prepare project work plans as required by Ecology under the site’s Agreed Order. Approach The following activities will be performed:  The required work plans that will be prepared for the project include:  Long-Term Monitoring Sampling and Analysis Plan: Describes well installation procedures, sampling methods, analytical program, and QA/QC procedures for long-term monitoring.  Updated Public Participation and Health and Safety Plans: Updates to these existing project plans will be prepared as appropriate.  Institutional Controls Plan: Describes procedures to be implemented to protect human health and the environment at the site. Includes an Environmental Covenant to be recorded with the property title.  Final Cleanup Action Plan: We will finalize the existing Draft Cleanup Action Plan (DCAP). Following public comment, the three project plans listed above will be incorporated into the DCAP and a Final Cleanup Action Plan will be prepared. Deliverables The following deliverables will be submitted under this task:  Draft and Final Work Plans as described above. Assumptions The task budget is based on the following assumptions: City of Bremerton 233-1896-098 Scope of Work 3 October 2012 Former Chevron Property Remediation, Amendment No. 01  Sampling will be conducted in all eleven Lower Yard wells for all five years. The Sampling and Analysis Plan will include a provision allowing the City to request a reduction in the number of wells sampled and/or a reduction in the number of analyses performed. Such request would require justification based on the results of the preceding long-term monitoring results.  Up to two 2-hour meetings will be held with the City and Ecology via telephone to discuss approaches and comments to the draft work plans.  Draft work plans will be submitted electronically in PDF format. Two hardcopies of final plans will be submitted to Ecology and one hardcopy will be submitted to the City. Final hardcopy submittals will include a CD with electronic copies in PDF format. TASK 3 – LTM FIELD WORK AND REPORTING Goal To complete the required LTM sampling and reporting in accordance with the Sampling and Analysis Plan. Approach The following activities will be performed:  Installation and development of a new monitoring well (MW20R) downgradient of existing well MW27 and cross gradient of MW09R. The purpose of the new well will be to assess the extent of the contaminated groundwater plume in this area and will represent a conditional point of compliance. Development will be accomplished by surging and over pumping.  Collection of four years of semi-annual rounds (eight field events) of groundwater samples from eleven wells. Following the initial four-year monitoring period, one year of quarterly groundwater samples (four field events) will be collected from the same eleven wells.  Additional survey effort to map the elevation of the new well.  Following each LTM sampling effort, the results will be presented in a technical memorandum with supporting tables and figures as appropriate. Deliverables The following deliverables will be submitted under this task:  Technical memoranda following each monitoring event. Assumptions The task budget is based on the following assumptions:  Well installation and development can be accomplished by one field staff in two 8-hour days. City of Bremerton 233-1896-098 Scope of Work 4 October 2012 Former Chevron Property Remediation, Amendment No. 01  Each sampling effort can be accomplished by one field staff in three 10-hour days.  Development and purge water from the wells will be disposed of at the City’s WWTP using a City vactor truck.  The LTM sampling results memoranda will be prepared within six weeks of completion of each groundwater monitoring event for City review and submittal to Ecology.  The draft results memoranda will be submitted electronically in PDF format to the City for review. Two hardcopies of the final documents will be submitted to Ecology and one hardcopy will be submitted to the City. Final hardcopy submittals will include a CD with an electronic copy of the final documents in PDF format. Laboratory Data will be provided to Ecology in Environmental Information Management (EIM) format. TASK 4 – FIVE-YEAR SUMMARY MONITORING REPORT Goal To compile and report the results of the five-year monitoring program and verify that natural attenuation continues to occur at the site or to demonstrate that cleanup levels have been met. Approach The following activities will be performed:  Preparation of a summary report describing the results of the first five years of the LTM program, including supporting figures and tables and any proposed changes to the monitoring program. Deliverables The following deliverables will be submitted under this task:  Draft and Final Five-Year Summary Report Assumptions The task budget is based on the following assumptions:  One face-to-face 4-hour meeting will be held with Ecology and/or the City to discuss and finalize the Five-Year Summary Report.  A single round of comments each from the City and Ecology will be required to finalize the Five- Year Summary Report.  The Five-Year Summary Report will be submitted electronically in PDF format. Two hardcopies of the final documents will be submitted to Ecology and one hardcopy will be submitted to the City. Final hardcopy submittals will include a CD with an electronic copy of the final documents in PDF format. Laboratory Data will be provided to Ecology in EIM format. City of Bremerton 233-1896-098 Scope of Work 1 October 2012 Former Chevron Property Long-Term Monitoring EXHIBIT B Schedule Work Element Completed By Notice to Proceed December 17, 2012 Draft Work Plans December 31, 2012 Final Work Plans January 2013 1st Semi-Annual Groundwater Sampling Event January 2013 2nd Semi-Annual Groundwater Sampling Event July 2013 3rd Semi-Annual Groundwater Sampling Event January 2014 4th Semi-Annual Groundwater Sampling Event July 2014 5th Semi-Annual Groundwater Sampling Event January 2015 6th Semi-Annual Groundwater Sampling Event July 2015 7th Semi-Annual Groundwater Sampling Event January 2016 8th Semi-Annual Groundwater Sampling Event July 2016 1st Quarterly Groundwater Sampling Event October 2016 2nd Quarterly Groundwater Sampling Event January 2017 3rd Quarterly Groundwater Sampling Event April 2017 4th Quarterly Groundwater Sampling Event July 2017 Draft 5-Year Summary Monitoring Report August 2017 Final 5-Year Summary Monitoring Report September 2017 Project Close Out October 2017 City of Bremerton 233-1896-098 Scope of Work 1 October 2012 Former Chevron Property Long-Term Monitoring EXHIBIT C Budget Task 1 Project Management and Administration ......................................................................... $9,296 Task 2 Work Plans .................................................................................................................... $18,692 Task 3 Long-Term Monitoring Activities ................................................................................ $186,656 Task 4 Five-Year Summary Monitoring Report ........................................................................ $10,612 TOTAL ....................................................................................................................... $225,256 NOTES: The estimated fees shown above were determined on a cost plus multiplier basis; these fees shall not be exceeded without prior written approval by the City. Personnel hourly rates shall be determined as follows: Direct salary x 3.1 not to exceed $150.00. Subconsultants, sampling supplies, and equipment rental shall be subject to a 5 percent markup. Total estimated costs reflect an anticipated 3 percent annual escalation. A breakdown of costs is provided in the attached budget spreadsheet. Client: City of BremertonProject: Former Chevron Prop ‐ Long Term MonitoringBUDGET DETAILSr ConsultantSr EngineerHydrogeologist IIIBremerton Support ServiceCADD SupervisorPuyallup WordprocessingBremerton Survey CrewCorp Finance Project AccountantBurdened Rates: $150.00 $136.83 $92.97 $66.77 $97.34 $62.00 $167.40 $82.15Phase Task DescriptionLabor Dollars Labor Hours01 Project Management $8,771 68 8 303001 PM $8,771 68 8 303002 Work Plans $17,504 176 48 76 16 14 2201 Long Term Mon Plan $4,797 50 8 28 4 6 402 Update PPP & HASP $3,683 40 4 24 4 4 403 Institutional Control Plans $4,283 34 28 2 2 204 Final Cleanup Action Plan $4,741 52 8 24 6 2 1203 LTM Activities $93,328 892 62 676 76 36 36 601 Install 1 New Well & Develop $4,148 40 2 28 4 602 LTM Groundwater Sampling $89,180 852 60 648 72 36 3604 Five Year LTM Report $9,868 88 8 12 44 8 8 801 Report $9,868 88 8 12 44 8 8 8Hour Totals1,224 16 152 796 100 58 66 6 30Escalation Amt: $12,385 $309 $1,817 $8,328 $695 $555 $364 $0 $318Labor Totals: $129,471 $2,709 $22,615 $82,332 $7,372 $6,201 $4,456 $1,004 $2,782DIRECT EXPENSES:AmountDescriptionAmount$2,100 B & W 8.5 x 11 $299$71,443 Color 11 x 17 $52$179 55 Gallon Drums $74$73,722Allocated Expenses (6% of Labor) $7,768Filters $2,079Genarator Rental $105Horiba Rental $2,993Peristaltic Pump Rental $2,835PPE $420Pump Tubing $1,260Shipping $3,969Waterra Rental $210Expense Total: $22,063$225,256Applied Professional Services, Inc.Subconsultant Total:Project Total:ESN NorthwestSUBCONSULTANTSSubconsultant NameOnSite Environmental, Inc.March 19, 2012 Current:10/18/2012 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Expenditures Expenditures as of 9/13/12 $17,849 Soil Stabilization Construction $38,500 PMX Amendment; 6/21/12 - 12/31/12 $9,000 Ecology; 9/14/12 - 12/31/12 $2,500 COB; 10/12/12 - 12/31/12 $2,500 Consultant Fee $48,000 $32,000 $32,000 $32,000 $72,000 Ecology $4,000 $4,000 $4,000 $4,000 $4,000 COB $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 Total Expenditure $70,349 $54,500 $38,500 $38,500 $38,500 $78,500 Revenue RA Grant (Note 1)$54,969 $45,450 9-11 Memorial Donation $4,500 Total Revenue $59,469 $45,450 $0 $0 $0 $0 NET FUND EXPENSE $10,880 $9,050 $38,500 $38,500 $38,500 $78,500 Note 1 - The Oct, 2012 +/- amendment to the grant adds a long-term monitoring task, but doesn't add additional grant dollars. The avail- able grant amount as of 1/1/2012 was $101,204 AGENDA BILL CITY OF BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Ordinance repealing Ch. 2.34 of BMC “Gold Mtn. Golf Board of Directors Study Session Date: Nov.14th, 2012 COUNCIL MEETING Date: Dec. 5th, 2012 Department: Parks and Rec. Presenter: Wyn Birkenthal Phone: 473-5752 SUMMARY: The advent of the Council’s Public Safety and Parks Committee and the change to consolidated management of the Gold Mountain Golf Complex no longer require the separate committee known as the Gold Mountain Board of Directors. ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): Time savings from Parks, Public Works, Finance and Golf course contracted management staff STUDY SESSION AGENDA: ☒ No Discussion ☐ Full Presentation STUDY SESSION ACTION: ☐ Consent Agenda ☐ General Business ☐ Public Hearing RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to pass Ordinance No._____ repealing chapter 2.34 of the BMC related to the Gold Mountain Golf Complex Board of Directors. COUNCIL ACTION: Approve Deny Table Continue No Action Form Updated 11/02/12 1 Gold Mountain Golf Complex Board of Directors - Repealed ORDINANCE NO. ________ AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City of Bremerton, Washington, repealing Chapter 2.34 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled “Gold Mountain Golf Complex Board of Directors.” WHEREAS, the current provisions of Chapter 2.34 of the Bremerton Municipal Code relating to the Gold Mountain Golf Complex Board of Directors are no longer required due to the upcoming change in management of the golf course; and WHEREAS, the Public Safety & Parks Committee is an appropriate forum for reviewing the operations of the golf course; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to repeal in its entirety Chapter 2.34 of the Bremerton Municipal Code relating to the Gold Mountain Golf Complex Board of Directors; NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Chapter 2.34 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Gold Mountain Golf Complex Board of Directors" is hereby repealed in its entirety: Chapter 2.34 GOLD MOUNTAIN GOLF COMPLEX BOARD OF DIRECTORS 2.34.010 ESTABLISHED. There is established a Gold Mountain Golf Complex Board of Directors, hereinafter referred to as "Board," which shall act as an advisory body to the Director of Parks and Recreation, Mayor, and City Council. 2.34.020 MEMBERSHIP AND TERMS OF OFFICE. (a) The Board shall consist of ten (10) members with six (6) voting members and four (4) ex officio, nonvoting members as follows: (1) Two (2) Council members appointed by the Council President; (2) The Director of Parks and Recreation; (3) The Director of Public Works and Utilities; (4) The Director of Financial Services; (5) The City Forestry Manager; (6) The Golf Contract Administrator (ex officio, nonvoting); (7) The two (2) golf professionals (ex officio, nonvoting); and (8) The Greens Superintendent (ex officio, nonvoting). 2 Gold Mountain Golf Complex Board of Directors - Repealed (b) The Board members shall remain seated until resignation or until removed by the City Council. Members of the Board serve at the pleasure of the City Council and may be removed by the City Council at any time. (c) The positions assigned and the number of members constituting the Board membership as set forth herein may be reassigned and reconstituted by the City Council at any time without further amendment to this chapter. 2.34.030 SALARIES AND PERSONAL EXPENSES. The members of the Board shall receive no salaries or other remuneration for their services in such capacity, but shall be entitled to reimbursement of expenses incurred by them in the discharge of their official duties as may be authorized by city policy. 2.34.040 MEETINGS. The Board shall establish a regular meeting day and time for its Board meetings. The Director of Parks and Recreation, or his or her designee, shall serve as Chair of the Board. A majority of the full membership shall constitute a quorum for conducting business. Any action to be taken by the Board shall require the concurrence of a simple majority of the members of the Board qualified to vote. 2.34.050 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES. The Board shall have the following duties and responsibilities: (a) To set administrative policies and rules for the operation of the Gold Mountain Golf Complex; (b) To recommend fee structures and annual budget to the City Council for approval; and (c) To submit reports to the City Council as requested by the Council regarding all activities of the Board. 2.34.060 RULES AND PROCEDURES. The Board may establish rules and procedures for conducting business. SECTION 2. Severability. If any one or more sections, subsections, or sentences of this Ordinance are held to be unconstitutional or invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Ordinance and the same shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 3. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force ten (10) days from and after its passage, approval and publication as provided by law. PASSED by the City Council the___________ day of ____________________, 2012 _________________________________ JIM McDONALD, Council President 3 Gold Mountain Golf Complex Board of Directors - Repealed Approved this ________ day of ________________________, 2012 _________________________________ PATTY LENT, Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: __________________________________ ________________________________ SHANNON CORIN, City Clerk ROGER A. LUBOVICH, City Attorney PUBLISHED the________ day of ______________________, 2012 EFFECTIVE the_________day of ______________________, 2012 ORDINANCE NO. ____________ R:\Legal\Legal\Ordinances\Parks\BMC 2.32 Gold Mountain Board of Directors-repealed.doc AGENDA BILL CITY OF BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Adopt Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council Interlocal Agreement 2012 Amendments. Study Session Date: 11/14/2012 COUNCIL MEETING Date: 12/05/2012 Department: KRCC Presenter: Mary McClure Phone: SUMMARY: This is a housekeeping item. The Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council (KRCC) Interlocal Agreement from 2001 has a provision the agreement will be reviewed by legal counsel every 10 years. KRCC has complied with this provision and proposes revisions to the Interlocal Agreement through a 2012 Amendment. ATTACHMENTS: 2012 KRCC proposed revisions to the ILA. FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): None STUDY SESSION AGENDA: ☐ No Discussion ☒ Full Presentation STUDY SESSION ACTION: ☐ Consent Agenda ☐ General Business ☐ Public Hearing RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to adopt the proposed amendments to the Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council Interlocal Agreement and authorize the Mayor to finalize and execute the amendment with substantially the same terms and conditions as presented. COUNCIL ACTION: Approve Deny Table Continue No Action Form Updated 11/02/12 2012 Amendments 1 KITSAP REGIONAL COORDINATING COUNCIL INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between the undersigned parties pursuant to provisions of the Interlocal Cooperation Act of 1967, Chapter 39.34 RCW. WHEREAS, the undersigned members recognize the need and desirability to participate in a forum for intergovernmental coordination, cooperation, and consultation among member agencies in order to bring about a continuous and comprehensive regional planning process and efficient service delivery; and WHEREAS, the undersigned members desire jointly to undertake continuous, cooperative study and planning of regional and governmental issues of mutual interest, including but not limited to development, land use, housing, capital facilities, service, utilities, finances, public buildings, water supply, water distribution and drainage, air and water pollution, parks and recreation, transportation planning, and economic development; and WHEREAS, it is the belief of the undersigned members that regional deliberations, planning, and review can best be achieved with the creation of a separate legal entity whose function and activities are subject to policy direction from the undersigned member agencies according to the provisions of this Agreement; and WHEREAS, the State Growth Management Act (GMA) requires local jurisdictions to coordinate and ensure consistency when developing comprehensive land use plans and the undersigned members desire to establish the Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council as a separate legal entity to facilitate coordination and consistency of comprehensive land use plans as required by the GMA; and WHEREAS, the undersigned members desire to use the Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council for developing County-wide Planning Policies (CPPs) under the GMA as a framework to guide Kitsap County and cities situated within the County in developing their comprehensive land use plans. THEREFORE, in consideration of mutual promises and covenants herein it is hereby agreed: I. NAME This Agreement establishes the KITSAP REGIONAL COORDINATING COUNCIL (“Council”), a separate legal entity since 2001. II. DURATION The Agreement shall remain in force and effect perpetually or until terminated by majority vote of the member agencies. Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council 2012 Amendments 2 III. DEFINITIONS For the purpose of this Interlocal Agreement, the following terms have the meaning prescribed to them in this section unless the context of their use dictates otherwise: A. “Member agency” means a voting and dues paying municipal or other government entity located within Kitsap County which is a party to this Agreement. B. “State” means the State of Washington. C. “Region” means the territory physically lying within the boundaries of Kitsap County. D. “Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council” or “Council” means the separate legal entity established by this Agreement to represent member agencies to carry out those powers and managerial and administrative responsibilities delegated pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. E. “Majority vote” means more than one-half of the votes cast when a quorum is present and must include a majority of votes from County commissioners and a majority of votes from the representatives of at least two separate cities. F. “Executive Board” shall mean the representatives of member agencies of the Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council identified in Article IV.B. of this Agreement. G. “Cost Allocation” means annual dues (the annual allocation among Member agencies of the cost of Council operations determined by the Executive Board for the purposes of calculating members’ obligations to contribute to the funding of Council operations for the year, and for the purposes of calculating obligations and distributions in the event of withdrawal or termination). H. “Ex Officio Member” means a non-voting, non-dues paying member of the Council. I. “Two-thirds majority vote” means a majority vote and also requires a majority of votes from County commissioners and a majority of votes from the representatives from at least two separate cities. J. “Associate Member” means a member of the Council which is not a party to this Agreement and who enters into a separate agreement with the Council that establishes the Associate Member’s level of participation in Council activities. K. “Executive Director” is the person appointed by the Executive Board to accomplish the work plan developed by the Executive Board. 2012 Amendments 3 IV. MEMBERSHIP AND REPRESENTATION A. Membership. Membership (except for Associate Members and Ex Officio Members) is established by execution of this Agreement and payment of any required cost allocation as established by the Executive Board. B. Executive Board. The Executive Board is comprised of the following representatives of member agencies: 1. County Government: three (3) members of the Kitsap County Board of Commissioners; 2. City Governments: a. The Mayor of each city having a population of 10,000 persons or less; b. The Mayor and one (1) member of the City Council of each city having a population between 10,001 persons and 30,000 persons; c. The Mayor and two (2) members of the City Council of each city having a population greater than 30,000 persons; d. A city with a Council/Manager form of government may select one (1) member of the City Council instead of a Mayor. The number of additional City Council members representing the city shall be as described in 2(a-c) above. 3. Port of Bremerton: one (1) representative consisting of a Port Commissioner. 4. City Council, and Port of Bremerton representatives may be selected by whatever means established by each specific member agency for a two (2) year term. C. The determination of the population of cities will be the most recent annual population estimate of cities and towns prepared by the Washington State Office of Financial Management. D. A municipal or government entity or a federally recognized Indian Tribe that desires to become a member of the Council must obtain permission to do so by majority vote of the Executive Board. The required permission applies to any entity that wishes to become a Member or Ex Officio Member. A municipal or government entity or a federally recognized Indian tribe that wishes to become an Associate Member must obtain permission to do so by a majority vote of the Executive Board, and must present a draft agreement for the Executive Board’s consideration, establishing the proposed terms, duties, powers and privileges for Associate Member status. 2012 Amendments 4 V. POWER, AUTHORITY, AND PURPOSE This Agreement does not confer additional substantive powers or authorities on member agencies. The powers and authorities conferred herein are limited to the powers that each member agency is authorized by law to perform. The Council has the following power, authority, and purpose: A. Provide a regional forum for regional deliberations and cooperative decision- making by the region’s elected officials in order to bring about a continuous and comprehensive planning process, and foster cooperation and mediate differences among governments throughout the region. B. Consistent with the GMA, coordinate and ensure consistency when developing comprehensive land use plans. C. Consistent with the GMA, develop CPPs to be used as a framework to guide the County and the Cities in developing their comprehensive land use plans; D. Coordinate actions to provide for the distribution of state and federal grant funds, including but not limited to federal transportation funding, community development block grants, and low income housing grants. E. Undertake continuous, cooperative study and planning of regional and governmental problems of mutual interest, including but not limited to development, land use, housing, capital facilities, services, utilities, finances, public buildings, water supply, water distribution and drainage, air and water pollution, parks and recreation and transportation planning. F. Coordinate actions to provide for a sustainable economy and environment for the region. G. Carry out such other planning and coordinating activities authorized by majority vote of the Council including participation in other forums and organizations. H. Establish Bylaws, to be amended from time to time, that govern the procedures of the Council. The Bylaws, as may be amended, are incorporated into this Agreement by this reference as if fully set forth herein. I. Appoint the Executive Director. I.J Contract for administrative services and Enter enter into other agreements as deemed appropriate and/or necessary to implement this Agreement. J K. Purchase, receive, lease, take by gift, or otherwise acquire, own, hold, improve, use and otherwise deal in and with real or personal property, or any interest therein, in the name of the Council. 2012 Amendments 5 K L. Sell, convey, mortgage, pledge, lease, exchange, transfer, and otherwise dispose of its property and assets. L.M Sue and be sued, complain and defend, in all courts of competent jurisdiction in the Council’s name. M.N. To engage in any other activity necessary to further the Council goals and purposes to the extent authorized by chapter 39.34 RCW. N.O. Apply for such federal, state, or private funding of any nature as may become available to assist the organization in carrying out its purposes and functions. O.N Identify and examine issues relating to such as governance, growth policies, development standards, service provision, revenue-cost sharing and municipal annexations in urban growth areas. P.O. Strive to represent the consensus of views on growth management and planning issues among member agencies. The Council makes recommendations on behalf of those jurisdictions to multi-county regional agencies and State government on behalf of member agencies, on proposed changes to multi-county regional plans, state plans and laws. Q.P Represent the views or position of member agencies within the County on issues of consistency or the resolution of conflicts related to the multi-county regional growth strategy and transportation plan. R.Q. Make appointments to committees and boards of multi-county regional organizations (e.g. Puget Sound Regional Council, Peninsula Regional Transportation Planning Organization) where appointments are requested to represent more than one member agency of the Council. Members appointed to such committees and boards shall represent the consensus of the views of the Council. If consensus is not reached on a particular issue, the members appointed to such committees and boards shall represent the majority and minority views of the Council, in order to accurately portray the status of discussions on that issue. T. Employ personnel, adopt personnel policies, terminate personnel, and all other associated powers necessary for and relevant to employment matters. S.U Review the this interlocal Interlocal agreement Agreement no fewer than every 10 years with the assistance of legal counsel. VI. FINANCING A. Cost Allocation. All members shall pay the annual cost allocation as described in the Bylaws. If payment by a member is not paid timely after notice of the cost allocation is received, the member is subject to having its membership status revoked by majority vote of the Executive Board. 2012 Amendments 6 B. Local Government Accounting. All services and transfers of property to the Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council shall be paid and accounted for in accordance with RCW 43.09.210. VII. FISCAL YEAR AND BUDGET A. The Fiscal Year. The fiscal year shall coincide with the calendar year. B. Adoption of Budget. By September of each year the Executive Board shall adopt a draft annual work program, budget, and cost allocation for the ensuing fiscal year that identifies anticipated activities, goals, revenues, and expenditures for completing the work program. The final work program, budget, and cost allocation for the ensuing year shall be adopted by the Executive Board no later than November of each year. After the Council has approved the final budget it is forwarded to the County for inclusion as a distinct agency fund within the Kitsap County Budget. No increase or decrease to the final budget shall occur without the approval of the Executive Board. C. Notice of Budget. On or before September 30, the Executive Board shall provide written notice of the ensuing year’s draft budget, work plan, and cost allocation to the designated representative(s) of each member agency. On or before November 30, the Executive Board shall provide written notice of the final budget, work plan, and cost allocation adopted for the ensuing fiscal year to the designated representative(s) of each member agency. D. Accounting, Budgeting, and Reporting. The Council shall be subject to the Budgeting Accounting & Reporting System (BARS) applicable to Category 1 local governments. E. Fiscal Agent. Kitsap County shall be the fiscal agent for the Council. After approved by the Executive Board, the Executive Board shall forward the final budget to the County for inclusion as a distinct agency fund within the Kitsap County Budget known as the Operating Fund of Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council. The Council may retain a fiscal agent. The fiscal agent may be a member agency who shall serve and be subject to removal, pursuant to the terms and conditions as established by agreement between the fiscal agent and the Council. F. Contracting. All contracts made by or on behalf of the Council shall be in accordance with state law, including, but not limited to: Chapter 39.04 RCW, and Chapter 42.23 RCW, and Chapter 42.24 RCW. VIII. WITHDRAWAL FROM AGREEMENT Any member agency has the right to withdraw from this Interlocal Agreement by giving the Executive Board six (6) months prior written notice. Unless otherwise provided by future agreement, any member agency that withdraws shall remain responsible for its financial and other obligations with regard to Council activities until the effective date of withdrawal and with regard to agreements to which the Council is a party and which exist at the time of such notice of withdrawal. Withdrawal by one member agency to this Interlocal Agreement shall not terminate the Agreement as to any other remaining member agencies. Except as provided in Article IX of this Agreement, any member agency that withdraws from this Agreement forfeits any rights it 2012 Amendments 7 may have to the Council’s assets; provided, however, such forfeiture shall not take effect if the Council dissolves within one (1) year of the date of the withdrawal notice. IX. DISPOSAL OF ASSETS Upon dissolution of the Council, any Council assets, after payment of all liabilities, costs, expenses, and charges validly incurred under this Agreement, shall be distributed to member agencies which are members of the Council on the date of dissolution. Distribution of assets shall be in proportion to the funding formula for cost allocation as described in the Bylaws, in accordance with Article VI.B. of the Agreement, and existing at the time of dissolution. The debts, liabilities, and obligations of the Council shall not constitute a debt, liability, or obligation of any member agency. If assets cannot reasonably be distributed in proportion to the funding formula, the Council shall declare the assets to be surplus, and shall offer the assets for sale according to the requirements of chapter 43.19 RCW, and shall distribute the proceeds from the sale in proportion to the funding formula established by the Executive Board in accordance with Article VI.B. of this Agreement. X. LIABILITY AND INSURANCE A. Any loss or liability to third parties resulting from negligent acts, errors, or omissions of the Council, Member agencies (excluding Associate Members), Ex Officio Members, and/or employees while acting within the scope of their authority under this Agreement shall be borne by the Council exclusively, and the Council shall defend such parties, at its cost, upon request by the member agency, ex officio agency, and/or employee. B. The Executive Board shall obtain commercial general liability, and auto liability insurance coverage for the Council, Executive Board, and any staff employed by the Council, at levels no less than $1 million single occurrence and $2 million aggregate for each type of liability that is insured. The policy shall name each member agency, and their respective elected officials, officers, agents, and employees as additional insured’s. The Executive Board shall annually evaluate the adequacy of the Council’s insurance coverage. C. The Executive Board shall require that all contractors and subcontractors utilized by the Council obtain insurance coverage consistent with Article X.B. XI. LEGAL REPRESENTATION The Council may retain legal counsel. Legal counsel may be an employee of a member agency, an outside entity, or an individual. In the event of a conflict of interest, the Council may retain substitute or additional legal counsel. The Kitsap County Prosecuting Attoney’s Office shall provide day-to-day legal advice and act as legal counsel for the Council and its appointees: provided that in the event a conflict exists between the Council and its appointees and any other client represented by the Prosecutor’s Office, then the Bremerton City Attorney’s Office shall provide such representation; and provided further that in the event a conflict exists between the Council and its appointees and both a client represented by the Prosecutor’s Office and a client represented by the Bremerton City Attorney’s Office, then the attorney for the Cities of Bainbridge Island, Port Orchard, or Poulsbo shall provide such representation; and provided further that in the event a conflict exists between the Council and its appointees and a client 2012 Amendments 8 represented by the Prosecutor’s Office, and a client represented by the attorneys of the cities, the Council may retain outside legal counsel in that matter only. Additionally, and regardless of whether a conflict of interest exists as described in the preceding sentence, the Council may retain outside legal counsel concerning any matter the Council deems appropriate. Retained counsel shall serve, and be subject to removal, pursuant to the terms and conditions established by agreement between legal counsel and the Council. An adjustment in cost allocation to Members will be made if the Council retains outside legal counsel. XII. ENTIRE AGREEMENT This Agreement supersedes all previous Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council interlocal agreements and all prior discussions, representations, contracts, and/or agreements between the parties relating to the subject matter of this Agreement and constitutes the entire contract between the parties. XIII. MODIFICATION Except as provided by Article XIX, the terms of this Agreement shall not be altered or modified unless agreed to in writing by all member agencies and such writing shall be executed with the same formalities as are required for the execution of this document. XIV. WAIVER The failure of any party to insist upon strict performance of any of the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall not be construed to be a waiver or relinquishment of same, but the same shall be and remain in full force and effect. XV. NOTICE Except as provided in Article XVIII of this Agreement, any notice required by this Agreement shall be made in writing to the representative(s) identified in Article IV.B. of this Agreement with a copy of such notice provided to the Executive Director. Notice is effective on the third day following deposit with the U.S. Postal Service, regular mail. XVI. SEVERABILITY If any of the provisions of this Agreement are held illegal, invalid or unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall remain in full force and effect. XVII. CHOICE OF LAW AND VENUE This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Washington, both as to its interpretation and performance. Any action at law, suit in equity, or other judicial proceeding arising in connection with this Agreement may be instituted and maintained only in a court of competent jurisdiction in Kitsap County, Washington. 2012 Amendments 9 XVIII. CLAIMS A. Any claim for damages made under chapter 4.96 RCW shall be filed with the Chair of the Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council, c/o the Clerk of the Kitsap County Board of Commissioners, 614 Division Street, MS-4, Port Orchard, Washington, 98366. B. Upon receipt of a claim for damages, or any other claim, a copy of the claim will be provided by the Clerk of the Board to the Executive Director and to each member of the Executive Board. XIX. EXECUTION AND FILING A. Counterparts. The parties agree that there shall be multiple original signature pages of this Agreement distributed for signature by the necessary officials of the parties. Upon execution, the executed original signature pages of this Agreement shall be returned to the Clerk of the Kitsap County Board of Commissioners, who shall file an executed original of this Agreement with the Kitsap County Auditor. The Clerk of the Board shall distribute duplicate conformed copies of the Agreement to each of the parties. Parties that sign on as Members at a later date will provide original signature pages of this Agreement to the Clerk of the Kitsap County Board of Commissioners, who shall file the signature pages provided with the Kitsap County Auditor. The Clerk of the Board shall distribute duplicate conformed copies of the signature pages filed later, to each of the parties. Addition of parties at a later date will not constitute a modification under Section XIII of this Agreement. B. Later Approval and Filing. Later approval and filing of this Agreement by additional parties as set forth in Article IV, Section D, shall be deemed an authorized amendment to the Agreement already on file with the Kitsap County Auditor, without the need for reconsideration and approval by parties that have already approved and executed the Agreement. XX. EFFECTIVE DATE This Agreement shall go into effect among and between the parties upon its execution by all of the parties, as evidenced by the signatures and dates affixed below and upon its filing with the County Auditor as provided in Article XIX. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been executed by each party on the date set forth below: Executed this ___ day of _______________, 2012. CITY OF BAINBRIDGE ISLAND Debbi Lester, Mayor 2012 Amendments 10 Executed this ___ day of _______________, 2012. CITY OF BREMERTON Patty Lent , Mayor Executed this ___ day of _______________, 2012. CITY OF PORT ORCHARD Tim Matthes, Mayor Executed this ___ day of _______________, 2012. CITY OF POULSBO Becky Erickson, Mayor Executed this ___ day of _______________, 2012. PORT OF BREMERTON Larry Stokes, President Executed this ______ day of __________________, 2012. ATTEST: KITSAP COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ROBERT GELDER, Chair CHARLOTTE GARRIDO, Commissioner Dana Daniels, Clerk of the Board JOSH BROWN, Commissioner 2012 Amendments 11 APPROVED AS TO FORM: Bainbridge Island City Attorney Bremerton City Attorney Port Orchard City Attorney Poulsbo City Attorney Port of Bremerton Attorney Deputy Prosecuting Attorney for Kitsap County AGENDA BILL CITY OF BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Appointment of Public Works Administrative Division Manager at a step higher than Rate 1 in Pay Band 11 Study Session Date: 11/14/12 COUNCIL MEETING Date: 11/14/12 Department: Public Works & Utilities Presenter: Chal Martin Phone: 473-5315 SUMMARY: The Director of Public Works & Utilities proposes to fill the vacant Public Works Administrative Division Manager position with Milenka Hawkins-Bates. Mrs. Hawkins-Bates’ career spans 10 years in the public sector including 5 years experience as the Public Works Director and 5 years as the Administrative Assistant to the Public Works Director for the City of Sonoma, California. The Director has negotiated a starting salary with the applicant and proposes making this appointment at Rate 4 in Pay Band 11. Per BMC 2.50.032(a), City Council must approve the initial salary of a newly hired person if the starting salary exceeds Rate 1. ATTACHMENTS: Resume, Letter of Engagement outlining the negotiated terms of her employment with the City of Bremerton, and a copy of Pay Band 11. FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): Position is fully funded. STUDY SESSION AGENDA: ☐ No Discussion ☒ Full Presentation STUDY SESSION ACTION: ☐ Consent Agenda ☐ General Business ☐ Public Hearing RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve the hire of Milenka Hawkins-Bates at Rate 4 in Pay Band 11. COUNCIL ACTION: Approve Deny Table Continue No Action Form Updated 11/02/12