Loading...
2018 1023 Council Agenda Packet__________________________________________________________________________________________________ Moses Lake City Council Karen Liebrecht, Mayor | David Curnel, Deputy Mayor | Mike Riggs, Council Member | Don Myers, Council Member Daryl Jackson, Council Member | Ryann Leonard, Council Member| Dean Hankins, Council Member Moses Lake Civic Center – 401 S. Balsam Study Session October 23, 2018 at 6:00 p.m. Study Session – 6:00 p.m. Homelessness Issue Discussion Presented by John Williams, City Manager Summary: Discussion. The purpose of the study session is to allow the city council to discuss matters informally and in greater detail than permitted at formal council meetings. While all meetings of the council are open to the public, study sessions discussions are generally limited to the council, city staff and consultants. ______________________________________________________ Regular Meeting Agenda October 23, 2018 at 7:00 p.m. Call to Order – 7:00 p.m. Roll Call Pledge of Allegiance Summary Reports: Mayor’s Report Additional Business City Manager’s Report Citizen’s Communications – Identification Citizens who would like to address the Council must complete one of the blue speaker request cards and submit it to the City Clerk. There is a (5) minute time limit per speaker. Presentation Grant County PUD – Rate Increase Consent Agenda Motion All items listed below are considered to be routine and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Council Member requests specific items to be removed from the Consent Agenda for discussion prior to the time Council votes on the motion to adopt the Consent Agenda. #1 a.City Council Meeting Minutes dated October 9th and 13th b.Bills and Checks Issued c.Set Public Hearings for Property Tax Levy and 2019 Budget Old Business #2 Business License Amendment MLMC 5.04 – Ordinance 2911 - 2nd Presentation Motion Presented by Cindy Jensen, Finance Director Summary: Council to review and adopt ordinance as presented #3 Solid Waste Services Discussion Presented by Cindy Jensen, Finance Director New Business #4 Surplus Property Resolution 3746 Presented by Gil Alvarado, Deputy City Manager Summary: Council to review and adopt resolution as presented #5 Lodging Tax Advisory Committee Funding Recommendations Presented by Cindy Jensen, Finance Director Summary: Council to review and advise staff on how to proceed #6 Multi Family Project Authorization – Pioneer Meadows Presented by Gil Alvarado, Deputy City Manager Summary: Council to review and authorize agreement as presented #7 Property Lease Presented by Fred Snoderly, Municipal Services Director Summary: Council to review and authorize negotiation Administrative Reports Council Communications and Reports Adjournment MOSES LAKE CITY COUNCIL October 9, 2018 CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Moses Lake City Council was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Deputy Mayor Curnel in the Council Chambers of the Civic Center, 401 S. Balsam, Moses Lake, Washington. ROLL CALL Present: Deputy Mayor Curnel; Council Members Jackson, Myers, Leonard, Riggs, and Hankins. Absent: Mayor Liebrecht. Action taken: Council Member Hankins moved to excuse Mayor Liebrecht, second by Council Member Riggs. The motion carried 6 – 0. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE MSO/HIPAA Officer Todd Schanze led the Council in the Pledge of Allegiance. SUMMARY REPORTS: ADDITIONAL BUSINESS Council Member Hankins requested to have the topic of Street Widths on the next agenda. CITY MANAGER’S REPORT New Police Officers Chief Kevin Fuhr shared a brief bio and delivered oaths of office for recent Basic Law Enforcement Academy (BLEA) graduates Todd Taylor and Mitch Hohman. Budget Presentation City Manager John Williams distributed a three-year comparison of revenue and expenditures at the meeting. Secretary of State Technology Grant The City has been awarded a grant to partially fund an Electronic Contract Management Software. Action taken: Council Member Leonard moved to authorize the City Manager to accept the Secretary of State Technology Grant in the amount of $30k and to execute the Laserfiche Software Contract in the amount of $45k, second by Council Member Riggs. The motion carried 6 – 0. Surplus Property Resolution 3745 Council met in Executive Session at a prior meeting and then authorized the City Manager to execute documents for the sale of certain property. This resolution will formally surplus this property. Action taken: Council Member Hankins moved to adopt Resolution 3745 as presented at the meeting, second by Council Member Myers. The motion carried 6 – 0. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES – October 9, 2018 pg. 2 CONSENT AGENDA #1 a. City Council meeting minutes September 25, 2018. b. Claims in the amount of $701,701.28; prepaid claim checks in the amount of ($856.08), $39,650.23, and $650,864.35; claim checks in the amount of $1,260.688.86; and payroll checks in the amount of $380,665.19. c. Accept Street Light Rehab Bid Opening. d . Larson Rec Center Architecture Contract. Action taken: Council Member Hankins to approve items a, b, c, and d as presented, second by Council Member Riggs. The motion carried 6 – 0. #1 e. Surplus Generator Resolution 3744. Council Member Jackson pulled this item from Consent to request its value. Action taken: Council Member Hankins to approve item e from the Consent Agenda, second by Council Member Riggs. The motion carried 5 – 1, Council Member Jackson opposed. OLD BUSINESS #2 City Business Logo MLMC 1.16 Amendment Ordinance 2909 First presentation of the draft ordinance occurred on September 25th. The amendment will add a new logo design for official city business and move the existing logo designs to the alternate city logo section of the Code. Action taken: Council Member Leonard moved to adopt Ordinance 2909, second by Council Member Myers. The motion carried 6 – 0. NEW BUSINESS 1 OF 2 #3 Business License Amendment MLMC 5.04 The amendments bring the city regulations in line with recent state legislation. 1st presentation of the ordinance. No action taken. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS City Manager Williams advised that Council attending the AWC Regional Meeting in Kennewick this Thursday will depart with staff from City Hall at 4:00 p.m. City Clerk Debbie Burke shared that the City recently contracted with a professional codification company and the new modern version of the online Code went live on October 2nd. Deputy City Manager/Community Development Director Gil Alvarado spoke with Planning Commission members that recently reviewed street widths and they do not have an interest to investigate potential changes. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES – October 9, 2018 pg. 3 Mr. Alvarado also announced that the signs in common spaces regulation will require a change in the MLMC and safety factors need to be taken into account for some of the approved locations. Mr. Alvarado provided an update on homeless observations in other cities and what issues we have in common. Staff are working on strategies to deal with the new issues resulting from the recent 9th Circuit Court decision on the Boise, ID case. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS AND REPORTS – no action taken. EXECUTIVE SESSION Deputy Mayor Curnel called an Executive Session at 7:36 p.m. to be held for 5 minutes pursuant to RCW 42.30.110(1)(c) to consider the minimum price at which real estate will be offered for sale with potential action to follow. NEW BUSINESS 2 OF 2 Purchase and Sale Agreement A resolution to surplus this property will be presented at the next Council Meeting. Action taken: Council Member Riggs moved to authorize the City Manager to sign and execute all documents to complete the purchase and sale agreement as discussed in Executive Session, second by Council Member Jackson. The motion carried 6 – 0. ADJOURNMENT The regular meeting was adjourned at 7:45 p.m. ______________________________________ Karen Liebrecht, Mayor ATTEST____________________________________ Debbie Burke, City Clerk MOSES LAKE CITY COUNCIL – SPECIAL MEETING Saturday, October 13, 2018 CALL TO ORDER A meeting of the Moses Lake City Council was called to order at 8:30 a.m. by Mayor Liebrecht in the Council Chambers of the Civic Center, 401 S. Balsam, Moses Lake, Washington. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Liebrecht; Deputy Mayor Curnel; Council Members Jackson, Myers, Leonard, Riggs, and Hankins. STUDY SESSION City Manager John Williams, Deputy City Manager/Community Development Director Gil Alvarado, and Consultant Lloyd Halverson worked with Council to determine long and short term goals for the city. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 3:00 p.m. ______________________________________ Karen Liebrecht, Mayor ATTEST____________________________________ Debbie Burke, City Clerk Page 1 of 1 STAFF REPORT To: John Williams, City Manager From: Cindy Jensen, Finance Director Date: October 18, 2018 Proceeding Type: Consent Agenda Subject: Set Date for Public Hearings—2019 Preliminary Budget and 2019 Property (Ad Valorem) Tax Levy Legislative History: • First Presentation: October 23, 2018 • Second Presentation: • Requested Action: Motion to set a date to conduct public hearings Staff Report Summary In accordance with Washington State law it is necessary to schedule: • A public hearing to review Revenue Sources and Consideration of Legislation pertaining to Ad Valorem (Property) Tax to be levied for collection in 2018; and • Two public hearings on the 2019 Preliminary Budget. We are requesting that Council set the date of November 13, 2018 for the public hearing on the 2019 Property (Ad Valorem) Tax and the first public hearing on the 2019 Budget; and November 27, 2018 for the second public hearing on the 2019 Budget. The 2019 Preliminary Budget document will be posted on the City’s website on November 1, 2018. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends City Council set the dates for public hearings regarding the 2019 Budget and the Property (Ad Valorem) Tax levy. Page 1 of 2 STAFF REPORT To: John Williams, City Manager From: Cindy Jensen, Finance Director Date: October 18, 2018 Proceeding Type: New Business Subject: MLMC Title 5 Business Licenses amendment Ordinance 2911 Legislative History: • First Presentation: October 9, 2018 • Second Presentation: October 23, 2018 • Action: Motion Staff Report Summary Attached is a draft ordinance updating our Code to comply with the newest legislative requirements regarding business licensing. The only amendments required at this time deal with the definitions and exemptions to bring our Code in line with the model ordinance developed by the State Department of Revenue (DOR), in conjunction with the Association of Washington Cities (AWC), and the Municipal Research and Services Center (MRSC). Background For several years, DOR has been researching how to simplify the administration of municipal general business license for an applicant and improve the business climate. This led to the passage of EHB 2005 in 2017. The basic premise of the law is that the State will become a “one- stop-shop” for business licensing, and DOR will collect the local business licenses and submit it to the municipalities. The municipalities were tasked with creating a “model ordinance” for business licensing, and that was completed in June 2018. RCW 35.90.080 requires that “a city that imposes a general business license requirement must adopt the mandatory provisions of the model ordinance by January 1, 2019”. The mandatory provisions include a definition of “engaging in business within the city” that sets forth when a general business license is required; and a uniform minimum licensing threshold. The attached ordinance makes changes so that the City of Moses Lake’s regulation is in compliance with these provisions. Page 2 of 2 We are on the DOR calendar to partner with Business Licensing Services in late spring of 2019. There are several steps that we will need to go through to reach full implementation, and DOR has committed to provide training for this program change. The advantage for the individual businesses is to interact with one governmental agency (i.e. DOR) through a universal application for business licensing. Fiscal and Policy Implications There are no fiscal implications as a result of this amendment. Options Option Results • Adopt the Ordinance The Code will comply with newest legislative requirements. • Take no action. The Code will not be in compliance with legislative requirements. Beginning January 1, 2019, the City will be prohibited from enforcing general business license requirements until it adopts the model ordinance provisions set forth in RCW 35.90. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends Council adopt the Ordinance as presented. Attachment A. Ordinance 2911 Legal Review The following documents are attached and subject to legal review: Type of Document Title of Document Date Reviewed by Legal Counsel • Ordinance An Ordinance Amending Section 5.04.015 titled “Definitions” of the Moses Lake Municipal Code An Ordinance Amending Section 5.04.090 titled “Exemptions” September 17, 2018 ORDINANCE 2911 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MOSES LAKE, WASHINGTON, AMENDING CHAPTER 5.04 “LICENSING REGULATIONS” OF THE MOSES LAKE MUNICIPAL CODE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOSES LAKE, WASHINGTON ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Amendment. Moses Lake Municipal Code Chapter 5.04 titled “Licensing Regulations” is hereby amended to provide: CHAPTER 5.04 LICENSING REGULATIONS Sections: 5.04.010 Authority 5.04.015 Definitions 5.04.020 License Required 5.04.030 License - Contents 5.04.040 Application for New Business 5.04.050 Location Change 5.04.060 Term of License 5.04.070 Temporary Licenses 5.04.080 Fee Schedule 5.04.090 Certain Businesses Fee Exemptions 5.04.100 Payment of Fee - Time Limit 5.04.110 General Fund 5.04.120 Consent to Inspections and Searches 5.04.010 Authority: The provisions of this chapter shall be deemed an exercise of the authority and power of the city to license, for the purposes of regulation and revenue, all and every kind of business authorized by law and transacted and carried on within the corporate limits of the city, as provided by RCW 35A.11.020 and 35.23.440. 5.04.015 Definitions: As used in this chapter, the following words shall have the meanings set forth in this section: (1) “Business, trade or profession” means any activity or venture carried on for profit or held out as a service for fees whether paid in cash or by means of barter or trade. (2) “Engaging in business” (a) The term “engaging in business” means commencing, conducting, or continuing in business, and also the exercise of corporate or franchise powers, as well as liquidating a business when the liquidators thereof hold themselves out to the public as conducting such business. (b) This section sets forth examples of activities that constitute engaging in business in the City, and establishes safe harbors for certain of those activities so that a person who meets the criteria may engage in de minimus business activities in the City without having to pay a business license fee. The activities listed in this section are illustrative only and are not intended to narrow the definition of “engaging in business” in subsection (1). If an activity is not listed, whether it constitutes engaging in business in the City shall be determined by considering all the facts and circumstances and applicable law. (c) Without being all inclusive, any one of the following activities conducted within the City by a person, or its employee, agent, representative, independent contractor, broker or another acting on its behalf constitutes engaging in business and requires a person to register and obtain a business license. (i) Owning, renting, leasing, maintaining, or having the right to use, or using, tangible personal property, intangible personal property, or real property permanently or temporarily located in the City. (ii) Owning, renting, leasing, using, or maintaining, an office, place of business, or other establishment in the City. (iii) Soliciting sales. (iv) Making repairs or providing maintenance or service to real or tangible personal property, including warranty work and property maintenance. (v) Providing technical assistance or service, including quality control, product inspections, warranty work, or similar services on or in connection with tangible personal property sold by the person or on its behalf. (vi) Installing, constructing, or supervising installation or construction of, real or tangible personal property. (vii) Soliciting, negotiating, or approving franchise, license, or other similar agreements. (viii) Collecting current or delinquent accounts. (ix) Picking up and transporting tangible personal property, solid waste, construction debris, or excavated materials. (x) Providing disinfecting and pest control services, employment and labor pool services, home nursing care, janitorial services, appraising, landscape architectural services, security system services, surveying, and real estate services including the listing of homes and managing real property. (xi) Rendering professional services such as those provided by accountants, architects, attorneys, auctioneers, consultants, engineers, professional athletes, barbers, baseball clubs and other sports organizations, chemists, consultants, psychologists, court reporters, dentists, doctors, detectives, laboratory operators, teachers, veterinarians. (xii) Meeting with customers or potential customers, even when no sales or orders are solicited at the meetings. (xiii) Training or recruiting agents, representatives, independent contractors, brokers or others, domiciled or operating on a job in the City, acting on its behalf, or for customers or potential customers. (xiv) Investigating, resolving, or otherwise assisting in resolving customer complaints. (xv) In-store stocking or manipulating products or goods, sold to and owned by a customer, regardless of where sale and delivery of the goods took place. (xvi) Delivering goods in vehicles owned, rented, leased, used, or maintained by the person or another acting on its behalf. (d) If a person, or its employee, agent, representative, independent contractor, broker or another acting on the person’s behalf, engages in no other activities in or with the City but the following, it need not register and obtain a business license. (i) Meeting with suppliers of goods and services as a customer. (ii) Meeting with government representatives in their official capacity, other than those performing contracting or purchasing functions. (iii) Attending meetings, such as board meetings, retreats, seminars, and conferences, or other meetings wherein the person does not provide training in connection with tangible personal property sold by the person or on its behalf. This provision does not apply to any board of director member or attendee engaging in business such as a member of a board of directors who attends a board meeting. (iv) Renting tangible or intangible property as a customer when the property is not used in the City. (v) Attending, but not participating in a “trade show” or “multiple vendor events”. Persons participating at a trade show shall review the City’s trade show or multiple vendor event ordinances. (vi) Conducting advertising through the mail. (vii) Soliciting sales by phone from a location outside the City. (e) A seller located outside the City merely delivering goods into the City by means of common carrier is not required to register and obtain a business license, provided that it engages in no other business activities in the City. Such activities do not include those in subsection (d). The City expressly intends that engaging in business include any activity sufficient to establish nexus for purposes of applying the license fee under the law and the constitutions of the United States and the State of Washington. Nexus is presumed to continue as long as the taxpayer benefits from the activity that constituted the original nexus generating contact or subsequent contacts.)) (3) “Peddler” means any person whether a resident of the City of Moses Lake, or not, traveling by foot, wagon, automobile vehicle or any other type of conveyance, from place to place, from house to house, or from street to street, carrying, conveying or transporting goods, wares, merchandise, meats, fish, vegetables, fruits, garden truck, farm products or provisions, offering and exposing the same for sale, or making sales and delivering articles to purchasers, or who, without traveling from place to place, shall sell or offer the same for sale from a wagon, automotive vehicle, railroad car or other vehicle or conveyance; and further provided, that one who solicits orders and as a separate transaction makes deliveries to purchasers as a part of a scheme or design to evade the provisions of this chapter shall be deemed a peddler subject to the provisions of this chapter. However, persons who regularly exhibit samples only for the purpose of securing orders for future delivery only shall not be defined as a peddler. The word “peddler” shall include the words “hawker” and “huckster”. (4) “Person” means the singular and the plural and shall also mean and include any person, firm or corporation, association, club, co-partnership, joint venture or society or any other organization. (5) “Transient merchant”, “itinerant merchant” or “itinerant vendor” means any person, firm or corporation, whether as owner, agent, consignee or employee, whether a resident of the city or not, who engages in a temporary business of selling or delivering goods, wares and merchandise within the city, and who, in the furtherance of such purpose hires, leases, uses or occupies any building, structure, motor vehicle, tent, railroad boxcar, boat, public room in hotels, lodging houses, apartments, shops or any street, alley, lot, yard or any other place within the city, for the exhibition and sale of such goods, wares and merchandise, either privately or at public auction; provided, that such definition shall not be construed to include any person, firm or corporation who, while occupying such temporary location, does not sell from stock, but exhibits samples only for the purpose of securing orders for future delivery only. The person, firm or corporation so engaged shall not be relieved from complying with the provisions of this chapter merely by reason of associating temporarily with any local dealer, trader, merchant or auctioneer, or by conducting such transient business in connection with, as a part of, or in the name of any local dealer, trader, merchant or auctioneer. (6) “Transient business” or “itinerant business” means a business operated by a transient merchant, itinerant merchant or itinerant vendor. (7) “Bona fide charitable or nonprofit organization” means any tax exempt nonprofit corporation, association, corporation, or organization recognized by the State of Washington and Federal Government. 5.04.020 License Required: It is unlawful for any person, firm, corporation, or association to engage in any kind of business, trade or profession authorized by law, which is not licensed as a transient merchant, itinerant merchant, itinerant vendor, or the like by Moses Lake Municipal Code 5.06, and for which a license is required, as provided in this chapter, within the city, without first obtaining a license as provided for by this chapter. Any person, firm, corporation, or association owning any rental units or mobile home spaces used for residential purposes which have an on-site residential manager shall be required to obtain a business license. Any person, firm, corporation, or association owning any transient living units, mini-storage units, recreational vehicle spaces, or campground spaces shall be required to obtain a business license. 5.04.030 License - Contents: All licenses provided for in this chapter shall be issued by the Finance Director upon paying to the Finance Director the proper license fee as provided in this chapter. All licenses shall bear the name of the licensee, and shall designate the nature of the business, trade, or profession operated by the licensee; and shall also designate the location where the business, trade, or profession is carried on, the date of expiration of the license, the date of the issuance of the license, and the amount paid for the license. Each licensee shall conspicuously post such license in his place of business or office, and shall produce such license for inspection if required to do so by any authorized city official. 5.04.040 Application For New Business: If the licensee is a new business, prior to the issuance of the business license, the Finance Director shall submit the application therefor to the Fire Chief and the Building Inspector of the city for approval of the location where the licensee is to carry on the business, trade or profession, and the business license shall be issued only if the location is in compliance with building and fire codes of the city as those codes relate to existing and/or new structures. 5.04.050 Location Change: If an existing licensee desires to change the location of the business, trade, or profession from the location designated on the business license, application must be made to the Finance Director prior to the change in location and the Finance Director shall, prior to the issuance of a new business license, submit the application therefor to the Fire Chief and the Building Inspector of the city for approval of the new location where the licensee is to carry on the business, trade, or profession, and the business license shall be issued only if the location is in compliance with building and fire codes of the city as those codes relate to existing and/or new structures. There shall be no additional business license fee assessed an existing business changing its location, and the new business license issued shall carry the same expiration date. 5.04.060 Term of License: All licenses shall be for a period of one (1) year, unless otherwise provided in this chapter; such license is to begin January first of each year and terminate the following December thirty-first, and it must be renewed annually in advance. No license shall be transferable. All licenses will be renewed through the Finance Director with payment of the yearly fee. 5.04.070 Temporary Licenses: A. Licenses issued for the following businesses by the Finance Director shall be temporary and a permanent license shall not be issued by the Finance Director until the business has been approved by the Grant County Health Department, which approval must be obtained within thirty (30) days after the issuance of said temporary licenses: 1. Bakeries; 2. Cafes and restaurants; 3. Confectioneries; 4. Grocery stores; 5. Meat markets; 6. Produce stores (wholesale and retail) 7. Soda fountains; 8. Taverns; 9. Auto courts; 10. Cabin courts; 11. Hotels; 12. Trailer courts. B. If at any time any of the businesses licensed in this section do not meet with the approval of the Grant County Health Department, the license shall be revoked and shall not be reissued until such business again meets with the approval of the Grant County Health Department. 5.04.080 Fee Schedule: The business license fee shall be assessed in accordance with the adopted fee schedule for the year, payable in advance, for each business, trade or profession, conducted or carried on within the corporate limits of the city; provided, that tax exempt nonprofit companies, associations, corporations, or copartnerships of whatever kind as defined by the federal or state government, shall not be required to pay the business license fee, but, nevertheless, shall obtain a business license, without fee, if conducting a business in order to raise funds from members outside the organization. The full business license fee as assessed in accordance with the adopted fee schedule shall be prorated over four (4) quarters, payable between January 1 and March 31, three (3) quarters of total cost payable between April 1 and June 30, two (2) quarters of total cost payable between July 1 and September 31, and one (1) quarter of total cost payable between October 1 and December 31. The business license for tax exempt nonprofit companies, associations, corporations, or copartnerships of whatever kind as referred to herein shall be obtained once and shall be effective for the lifetime of the organization. This exemption is an addition to that provided in Section 5.04.090. No business, profession or trade conducted or carried on in a single location under one management or ownership shall pay more than one license fee regardless of the multiple nature of the business carried on; Provided further that no tax exempt nonprofit company, association, corporation, or copartnership of whatever kind as defined by the federal or state governments which operates or conducts a community festival or event of no more than four days in duration shall be required to obtain a business license as herein previously provided and the exemption which has been provided shall extend to the festival's or event's participants operating under sanction of said festival or event. Any business, profession or trade in more than one location within the city shall pay a license fee for each location the business, profession, or trade is conducted. 5.04.090 Certain Businesses Exemptions: Recognizing that there are locally owned and operated small or parttime businesses which would be unduly penalized by requiring licensing under this chapter and the payment of the business license fee as provided in Section 5.04.080, there is exempted from this business licensing chapter those locally owned and operated businesses, professions, or trades wherein the annual gross income is less than two thousand dollars ($2,000) per year. A fee as provided for in this chapter shall not be required in the following situations. To the extent set forth in this section, the following persons and businesses shall be exempt from the registration, license and/or license fee requirements as outlined in this chapter: (1) Any person transacting and carrying on any business which is exempt from a license fee by virtue of the Constitution of the United States, the Constitution of the State of Washington, or the laws of the United States or the state of Washington. Burden of proof is on the applicant; (2) A person making casual or isolated sales of goods or merchandise not in the course of a business at a flea market, rummage sale, yard sale, garage sale, farmer’s market, bazaar or like sale when such sales, markets or bazaars are conducted on a Friday, Saturday, Sunday or any City recognized holiday and provided also, that such flea markets, bazaars or the like shall be licensed by the City of Moses Lake for operation at the particular location indicated on that license. (3) Sales conducted by students of public or private primary and secondary schools. (4) Farmers or gardeners selling their own unprocessed farm produce grown exclusively upon lands owned or occupied by them; (5) Charitable, religious or nonprofit organizations or corporations which have received tax-exempt status under the Internal Revenue Code Section 501C(3), 26 USC 501C(3), as adopted or as hereafter amended. Any person claiming an exemption shall file with the Finance Director or designee a copy of the tax exemption status granted by the Internal Revenue Service. The Finance Director or designee shall maintain a list of all organizations who have claimed exemption. (6) Any person or business whose annual value of products, gross proceeds of sales, or gross income of the business in the city is equal to or less than $2,000 and who does not maintain a place of business within the city, shall submit a business license registration to the Finance Director or designee. The threshold does not apply to regulatory license requirements or activities that require a specialized permit. 5.04.100 Payment of Fee - Time Limit: A. All persons, co partnerships, companies, associations, or corporations who are engaged in business or in practice of their trades or professions in the city shall procure their license to operate on or before the thirty-first day of each and every January. In the event the license is not procured on or before January thirty-first of each year, a late penalty in the amount of fifty ($50.00) dollars shall be imposed and enforcement will be taken as provided for in this section. B. All persons, co partnerships, companies, associations, or corporations who commence business or practice of their trades or professions in the city after the thirty-first day of January of each and every year, shall within one month from the commencement date procure their license to operate for the current year and if the license to operate is not procured within the month, a late penalty in the amount of fifty ($50.00) dollars shall be imposed and enforcement will be taken as provided for in this section. C. When the Finance Director determines that a violation of this chapter exists, he or she may proceed against that violator using the procedures provided for in Chapter 1.20 MLMC. D. Appeals: Any enforcement taken by the Finance Director shall be appealable as provided for in Chapter 1.20 MLMC, with the informal administrative appeal authorized by section 1.20.120 to the Finance Director. 5.04.110 General Fund: All funds received by the city under the terms of this chapter shall be paid into the General Fund of the city and budgeted annually for any municipal purpose, as required by law. 5.04.120 Consent to Inspections and Searches: Every person who obtains a business license hereunder agrees to subject their place of business whether it be a building, room, cart, stand, vehicle, or stock of merchandise to inspection by city, county and health district and state officials with jurisdiction to enforce, health, safety, occupational, and tax laws. Section 2. Effective date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage and publication of its summary as provided by law. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Moses Lake, Washington, this 23rd day of October, 2018. _____________________________________ Karen Liebrecht, Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________________ Debbie Burke, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: _______________________________________ Katherine L. Kenison, City Attorney Vote: Riggs Liebrecht Myers Jackson Curnel Leonard Hankins Aye Nay Abstain Absent Date Published: October 29, 2018 Date Effective: November 2, 2018 Page 1 of 3 STAFF REPORT To: From: Date: Proceeding Type: Subject: John Williams, City Manager Cindy Jensen, Finance Director October 19, 2018 Old Business Solid Waste Service and Rate Discussion Legislative History: •First Presentation: August 14, 2018 •Second Presentation: September 11, 2018 •Requested Action: Discussion of Service Options and Rate Structure 1st Presentation Staff Report Summary Because of potential solvency issues in the Sanitation (Solid Waste) utility, staff is requesting direction from Council to balance the 2019 budget. The final Cost of Service Study (COSS) is attached. Background In response to the ongoing difficulty in balancing the Solid Waste budget, Council commissioned a cost of service study which was conducted earlier this year. The consultant, Chris Bell from Bell & Associates, presented the draft report to Council at a Study Session on August 14, 2018. Council asked for additional information to be included in the report, and the report was finalized in September. The 2018 Solid Waste balance was barely balanced before increases in both commingled recycling and the yard waste program expenses started. Council did authorize a 3% rate increase as of September 1, but this will only cover the corresponding 3% increase in the hauling contract, and doesn’t remedy the other program increases. Also in 2018, the bottom dropped out of the recycling market because of changes in the worldwide market, and we are swinging from actually earning about $20,000 from recycling in 2017 to spending about $95,000 for disposal in 2018—an increase of $115,000. We also changed Page 2 of 3 partners in the yard waste disposal program, with an additional cost of about $22,000. These increases of $135,000 roughly match how far the budget is out of balance for both 2018 and 2019. (If not addressed, it is possible that this fund will need another interfund loan to close out 2018. This would come back to Council in late December if necessary.) In September, Council authorized a change in the recycled material that would eliminate paper from the acceptable stream. In discussing this with the consultant, this action could have an unintended consequence of the current 48 gallon garbage carts not being adequate for the garbage stream, if paper is moved out of recycling to garbage. Since the 48 gallon cart service is the category that is “underbilled” according to the COSS, one way to address this change in garbage streams is to eliminate the 48 gallon garbage service, and replace the 48 gallon carts with 64 gallon carts. There are about 4,500 48 gallon cart services, and using the current difference in the rates, this would bring the monthly cost to a customer from $16.90 to $22.63 or $5.63/mo increase. This would generated additional revenue of about $300,000 for the utility. The start-up cost for purchasing 4,500 new 64 gallon carts and labor to switch out the service is estimated to also cost about $300,000. So the utility would need to borrow to cashflow the initial conversion, but then rates would recoup the cost of service. Another option is to just increase the cost of the 48 gallon cart to better match the cost of service, identified in the study to be $23.73/month, (which is a little more than the current 64 gallon service.) If we are looking just to bring in about $200,000 to eliminate the deficit and start building a prudent reserve, the 48 gallon cart would need to be raised about $3.75/month, to $20.65, which is still a discount compared to the 64 gallon cart. There are many variations of the rate structure that can be done to bring this fund back into balance. If there are other proposals, we will cost them for the next presentation Fiscal and Policy Implications Council is required to balance the Solid Waste Utility budget. Any proposed changes will need to be published in the fee schedule. Options Option Results • Move to adopt a change in the solid waste fee structure/schedule 1st Presentation, no motion required • Give staff direction to change the solid waste program or fee structure Provide staff with specific changes • Take no action The Solid Waste fund will be out of compliance with state law balanced budget requirements. Page 3 of 3 Staff Recommendation Staff recommends City Council give direction regarding any changes to the solid waste program and/or fee schedule. Attachments A. Cost of Service Report for Waste and Recycling Collection—City of Moses Lake Legal Review -- N/A Cost of Service Report for Waste and Recycling Collection City of Moses Lake Bell & Associates [Course title] Moses Lake Cost of Service Report August 2018 Table of Contents Background ..................................................................................................................................... 1 Cost of Service ................................................................................................................................ 1 Residential Collection ...................................................................................................................... 2 Recycling ........................................................................................................................................ 3 Why the Cost of Recycling Processing has Increased? ................................................................... 3 City Recycling Program ................................................................................................................... 5 Recycling Depot .............................................................................................................................. 5 Yard Debris ..................................................................................................................................... 6 Comparable Rates .......................................................................................................................... 6 Commercial Service ........................................................................................................................ 7 Recommended Steps ...................................................................................................................... 8 Recommended System Changes .................................................................................................... 8 Contract for All Services .................................................................................................................. 9 Service Procurement ..................................................................................................................... 10 Moses Lake Cost of Service Report August 2018 Bell & Associates P a g e | 1 Background The City of Moses Lake utilizes a combination of private contractors and city departments to provide waste management services to the residential and commercial customers. Administration, invoicing, and customer service are provided by the City. Collection of solid waste, recycling, and yard debris is contracted to Lakeside Disposal and Consolidated Disposal. Collected waste is disposed at the Grant County Landfill and the Moses Lake Transfer Station. Recovery of recyclable materials is completed by Waste Management in their Spokane facility. Baling and transport of the collected recycling is contracted to Lakeside Disposal. Yard debris and other organic waste collected from residential customers is processed / composted by Ovenell Farms in Quincy. Table 1 details the average number of units collected monthly by Lakeside Disposal and Consolidated Disposal. Table 1: Average Monthly Collected Units Service Units Carts / Cans Commercial Containers Drop Box Hauls Total Lakeside 6,612 836 83 7,531 Consolidated 330 37 64 431 Totals 6,942 873 147 7,962 Cost of Service For the current fiscal year, budgeted revenues for collection services was higher than the budgeted expenses for collection. However, the cost of processing commingled recycling in 2018 has substantially increased compared to 2017. The value of the collected material in 2017 was $21,653, but in 2018, the cost of processing now exceeds the value of the collected materials. For the first six months of 2018, the City has incurred $43,676 of costs to bale and process the collected materials. In 2017, the revenue from the collected material was $24 per ton, but in 2018, the cost exceeds the value by $95 per ton. This is a change of $119 per ton from the previous year. The projected cost of processing recycling for 2018 is approximately $95,000. Table 2 summarizes the financial performance of the solid waste fund for the previous years and the expected results for the current fiscal year. Table 2: SW Fund 490 Summary Results Fiscal Year 2015 2016 2017 2018 Service Revenue $3,170,920 $3,448,340 $4,002,009 $4,340,000 Recycling Revenue / (Cost) $153 $1,441 $21,653 $(95,000) Collection Expense $3,534,207 $3,573,159 $3,955,217 $4,135,243 Balance $(363,134) $(123,378) $68,445 $109,757 Not included in Table 2 is the interfund loan activity and the fund balance Moses Lake Cost of Service Report August 2018 Bell & Associates P a g e | 2 Over the previous years, the cost of providing service exceeded the revenue generated. Losses were offset by interfund loans. The reason for the losses was the rates charged for residential collection were less than the cost of providing the service. However, the losses from residential service were to be offset by charging commercial customers a rate higher than the cost of service. Commercial customers were, and still are, subsidizing residential customers. While many jurisdictions have rates that subsidize one class of customers, the method employed by the City was not well executed. Typically, the subsidization is on the smallest cart / container volume to provide a reasonable financial incentive to reduce disposed waste by diverting material to the recycling container. For residential collection, a low volume roll cart is 20 gallons, followed by the 35 gallon, 48 gallon, 64 gallon, and 96 gallon. A reliable rate method for residential service is to set the rate at the cost of service for the most popular cart volume, and to provide a subsidy from the larger volume carts to offset the reduced cost for the smaller volume cart. Since the City has only 3 cart sizes, a pragmatic approach is to set the lowest volume, the 48 gallon cart, at the cost of service and set the rate for the 64 and 96 gallon cart above the cost of service to provide a financial incentive to reduce waste volume and increase recycling. Residential Collection Contracted collection includes weekly garbage, every-other-week collection of commingled recycling, and weekly collection of yard debris from March to November. Assuming a resident sets out their garbage and recycling every week, they will set a cart out 117 times over a 12 month period: 52 times for garbage, 26 times for recycling, and 39 times for yard debris. The contracted cost per pick-up is $1.61 ($15.65 x 12 months / 117 pick-ups). The most popular cart volume is the smallest cart size available (48 gallons) with 4,474 (67%) of the 6,425 residential customers selecting it for waste disposal. The cost of service for the 48 gallon cart is detailed in Table 3. Table 3: Cost of Service Calculation for 48 Gallon Residential Service Service Component Solid Waste Recycling Yard Debris Total Cost Collection Cost ¹ $6.96 $3.48 $5.22 $15.65 Disposal / Processing ² $2.15 $1.38 $0.83 $4.36 Roll Cart Cost $0.12 $0.12 $0.12 $0.36 City Administration $2.77 $2.77 WA Refuse Tax ³ $0.59 $0.59 Total Cost $12.59 $4.97 $6.17 $23.73 Current Rate $16.41 Loss $(7.32) Table Notes 1. Annual pick-ups per service was multiplied by $1.61 and then divided by 12 months to calculate the collection cost – SW is (52 pick-ups per year x $1.61) / 12 months = $6.96 2. Assumes 36 pounds per waste set out per week, recycling averages 24 pounds per customer per month, and yard debris averages 67 pounds per customer per month. 3. Washington refuse tax is 3.6% and is assessed on the current $16.41 rate. Moses Lake Cost of Service Report August 2018 Bell & Associates P a g e | 3 Multiplying $7.32 by the 4,474 customers that have a 48 gallon cart is a monthly loss of $32,760. In addition to the loss on the 48 gallon cart, the 64 gallon cart and all of the senior cart sizes are being provided at less than the cost of service. Residents with a 96 gallon cart as well as the commercial cans / carts have rates that cover the cost of service. The combined loss on cart and commercial can collection service is approximately $30,300 per month. Table 4 details the cost of service for residential service with a 64 gallon cart. Table 4: Cost of Residential Waste Collection with a 64 Gallon Cart Service Component Solid Waste Recycling Yard Debris Total Cost Collection Cost $6.96 $3.48 $5.22 $15.65 Disposal / Processing $2.84 $1.38 $0.83 $5.05 Roll Cart Cost $0.12 $0.12 $0.12 $0.36 City Administration $2.77 $2.77 WA Refuse Tax $0.79 $0.79 Total Cost $13.48 $4.97 $6.17 $24.62 Current Rate $21.87 Loss $(2.75) Recycling As previously noted, the cost of processing recycling has increased to a point where the value of the collected material doesn’t pay for the sorting costs incurred by the material recovery facility. Table 5 compares the cost of recycling in 2017 to 2018. Table 5: Comparison of Cost for Residential Recycling Service Component 2017 2018 Collection $3.36 $3.48 Processing $(0.26) $1.38 Total Cost $3.10 $4.85 $ ▲ $1.76 Why the Cost of Recycling Processing has Increased? China was the single largest consumer of recyclable materials generated in North America. In prior years, it consumed 40% of all scrap materials sold in the US; 55% of all paper/fiber, and 51% of all recovered plastics. Most of the recyclable collected in the Pacific Northwest region were shipped to China for remanufacturing into new products & packaging. The Chinese government has taken significant unilateral actions that have completely disrupted the global market for recovered materials. Moses Lake Cost of Service Report August 2018 Bell & Associates P a g e | 4 1). Banning all Mixed Paper and Mixed Plastics: Effective January 1st, 2018, The Ministry of Environmental Protection of the People’s Republic of China (MEP) has banned the import of 21 recyclable commodities, including Mixed Paper & Mixed Plastics. The single largest commodity produced from the City’s curbside recycling program has been Mixed Paper, which comprises approximately 45% of the collected recycle tons. 2). Reduction of Contamination Threshold to 0.50%: In addition to the ban, MEP announced that effective March 2018 all scrap materials imported into China must be 99.50% pure. No material exceeding 0.50% contamination will be allowed into the country. On July 11, MEP released a proposal to completely ban imports of recovered fiber and every other form of solid waste. While all of the mixed paper and plastic have been banned, cardboard (OCC) and other high grade fiber has been exported to China. The effect of the ban has decreased OCC values. A significant amount of the #1 (PET, water bottle, pop bottle) and the #2 Clear and Colored HDPE (milk jug, detergent bottle) collected in the West is sold domestically. However, the reduced exports to China has created a glut of recyclables in the US markets. All of the collected plastics that were being exported to China don’t have market outlets. The markets for #3 through #7 plastic containers, tubs, and rigid plastic has disappeared. The primary reasons for China’s coming ban on recyclables: The Chinese government is working to develop a strong domestic collection infrastructure to supply recyclable materials to domestic mills. The Chinese government is eliminating manufacturing facilities that generate excessive pollution. The government is shutting down over 2,000 antiquated recycling plants across the country. All local material processors have changed their operations to capture marketable materials. The changes have significantly increased the amount charged to the waste and recycling haulers. Waste Management, the processor used by the City, charged $84.90 per ton in July for residential commingled recycling. An addition $25 per ton is charged to bale and transport commingled material to Spokane; therefore, the total cost is $109.90 per ton. Recent composition studies completed on the commingled mix collected in Clark County, Washington reveal a majority of the current collected materials don’t have a viable market. With state mandates enacted to divert materials, finding markets in the future for mixed waste paper and plastics is extremely difficult. All non-marketable items will end up in the landfill. Local jurisdictions can’t stop the flow of incoming materials now that these recycling programs have been implemented and customers have become accustomed to placing certain materials in the cart for recycling. With the elimination of markets for mixed waste paper and mixed plastics, the City should consider collecting materials that have a viable market to include cardboard, steel / tin cans, clean metal, aluminum cans, and #1 PET / PETE and #2 HDPE plastic bottles. Eliminating mixed waste paper from the recycling program would reduce the cost of processing; however, getting customers to change their habits will be problematic. Moses Lake Cost of Service Report August 2018 Bell & Associates P a g e | 5 City Recycling Program If recycling cost more than waste disposal, can the City end the current curbside collection program? The State’s goal is to reach 50% recycling and composting. Chapter 70.95 RCW does not mandate that each county or city adopt a 50% goal; however, each community is expected to set a goal that suits its situation, provided that the goal is based on justified and sound reasoning. Before making any decisions, the Department of Ecology (DOE) recommends that jurisdictions consider all available options to maintain their recycling program(s). Other counties and cities have instituted rate increases to offset the rising cost of commodities, adjusted the list of collected materials, increased education and outreach efforts, and increased efforts such as policing set-outs for contamination. The DOE would request that Moses Lake contract Grant County, which is the wasteshed manager, of any changes to their recycling program. The County would then notify the Department of the changes to any recycling programs, the reason(s) for the change, and a plan for either a replacement program or to reestablish the program at a future date. Grant County is currently in the process of updating the Solid Waste Management Plan, so any future changes should be incorporated prior to approval. Recycling Depot Moses Lake rate payers bear the cost to operate the recycling depot. People who live outside the City that drop off materials for recycling benefit from the inequity of the current system. While no user surveys have been completed by the City or the County, it has been observed that a growing portion of the people that use the depot live outside the City. Unlike City residents, county residents are not required to subscribe to waste collection services; therefore, many utilize the depot to dispose of recyclables. Some people also use the depot to dispose of their waste in the commingled drop box, as noted by the elevated level of contaminants and non-recyclable materials dumped in the recycling container. While the material markets are in decline and the cost of operating the depot increases, the City should consider the following steps to reduce costs. 1. Restrict the usage of the facility to City rate payers. Users would have to identify themselves as Moses Lake rate payers. 2. Collect materials that have a market value to include the following:  Cardboard  Aluminum  Steel / Tin cans  #1 Plastic (PET, water bottle, pop bottle)  #2 Clear and Colored HDPE (milk jug, detergent bottles) 3. Discontinue accepting all materials except glass. Curbside services are collected the remainder of material that are recyclable. 4. Close the depot and discontinue accepting glass in the recycle stream. Moses Lake Cost of Service Report August 2018 Bell & Associates P a g e | 6 Yard Debris Yard debris and other organic waste collected from residential customers is delivered to Ovenell Farms in Quincy to be composted at a cost of $25 per ton. As long as residents set out clean material for collection, Ovenell will provide the service. In the past, the level of contamination in the material collected from residents caused the previous service provider to discontinue accepting organic waste from Moses Lake. The City will continue to have an organic collection program as long as the residents set out uncontaminated organic material. Comparable Rates Comparing rates to neighboring jurisdictions is complicated by the base level of service. Moses Lake is the only city that has a 48 gallon cart as the base service with recycling and yard debris. None of the compared cities offer a 64 gallon roll cart for waste. Table 6 compares the City’s cost for 48 gallon and 96 gallon service to the rates charged by other jurisdictions. The service notes following the table explains the levels of service that are compared. Table 6: Comparable Residential Service Rates to Moses Lake’s Cost of Service Service Moses Lake 48 gal Moses Lake 96 gal Grant County Richland Walla Walla Yakima Waste - 48 gal cart $13.48 Waste - 32 gal cart / can $10.05 $17.60 Waste - 96 gal cart $14.89 $18.17 $23.30 $20.10 Yard Waste $6.17 $6.17 $20.00 $16.30 Richland – Waste & YD service $17.50 EOW Recycling $4.97 $4.97 $5.70 $4.76 $8.95 Service Notes: Moses Lake cost of service for the 48 gallon base service is $24.62 and the cost of service for the 96 gallon cart is $26.03. Grant County service is limited to only waste collection and is regulated through the UTC. Customers that want 32 gallon service need to provide their own can whereas the 96 gallon cart is provided by the regulated hauler. Richland’s base service is a 96 gallon cart for waste collected weekly and a 96 gallon cart for yard debris collected every-other-week (EOW). Recycling is through a subscription and is collected EOW. Walla Walla base service is 96 gallon cart collected weekly and recycling is collected EOW. The monthly rate is $28.06 ($23.30 + $4.76). Yard debris is a subscription and is collected weekly with a 96 gallon cart. Moses Lake Cost of Service Report August 2018 Bell & Associates P a g e | 7 Service Notes Continued: Yakima waste service is either a 32 gallon cart or a 96 gallon cart collected weekly. Yard debris and recycling are subscription services. Yard debris is collected weekly while recycling is EOW through Yakima Waste Systems, a UTC regulated collection company. Commercial Service The most popular level of service for commercial customers is a 2 yard container collected once a week. Customers that generate a high volume of waste may require a drop box or roll off compactor. Using industry averages for waste disposal weights, Table 7 details the cost of service for the 2 yard container and the 30 yard drop box collected once a week. Table 7: Cost of Service Calculation for Commercial Customers Service 2 yd. Container 30 yd. Drop Box Note Collection Cost $41.69 $997.74 Lakeside contracted amount Landfill Disposal $12.02 $198.33 Assumed Industry Averages City Administration $3.03 $0.98 Budgeted City costs WA Refuse Tax $2.50 $48.33 3.6% on collection rate Total Cost $59.24 $1,245.38 Current Rate $69.46 $1,342.46 Margin $10.22 $97.08 The additional revenue generated above the cost of commercial container and drop box service is calculated at $29,800 per month. Table 8 compares the monthly loss from residential service to the additional revenue generated from commercial service. Table 8: Service Revenue by Source Service Monthly Revenue Annual Revenue Cart / Can Collection $(30,311) $(363,732) Commercial Container / Drop Box Service $29,829 $357,954 Net Revenue $(481) $(5,778) While the budget, less the additional cost of recycling, has the surplus of approximately $110,000 (Table 2), comparing the costs of service with the current customer mix shows an estimated loss. Even if the fund generates $110,000 over the cost of service, the fund has generated debt from losses during the previous years. Moses Lake Cost of Service Report August 2018 Bell & Associates P a g e | 8 Recommended Steps Eliminating the loss from the residential collection rates should be completed over the next 17 months. Rather than one large increase in January, the City should increase the rates by half of the necessary amount in January 2019 and the remaining amount in January 2020. Table 9 details this approach. The additional revenue generated from the increase is approximately $219,000 annually. Table 9: Proposed Residential Collection Rate Increases Level of Service Current Rate 2019 Increase % ▲ 2020 Increase % ▲ Cost of Service 64 Gal Cart $21.87 $1.38 6.3% $1.38 5.9% $24.62 48 Gal Cart $16.41 $3.66 22.3% $3.66 18.2% $23.73 2nd Cart $12.96 $2.63 20.3% $2.63 16.9% $18.22 While it may be politically expedient to increase, or continue to increase the rates for commercial customers, that approach has not proven successful in Moses Lake because the commercial customer base is not large enough to absorb the costs. At some point, businesses will reduce service or utilize other methods such as self-hauling, to reduce their garbage costs. Recommended System Changes During this project, practices and operations were observed that are unnecessarily complicated and should be changed. While the City’s system has evolved over time, most of the operational inefficiencies can be addressed with the commencement of a new collection contract in September 2020. Here are the recommended changes: 1. Eliminate the current daily calculation fee set up in the City’s invoicing system by establishing collection rates based on the monthly cost of service. The day-use method utilized by the City was established for water usage, not waste / recycling collection. This recommendation can and should be implemented immediately. 2. Combine collection, waste disposal, recycling and yard debris processing under one service contract.  Including the disposal cost with the collection cost provides the contractor a financial incentive to select the lowest cost alternative for disposal and eliminates the additional administrative time incurred by the City to reconcile the disposal invoices from Lakeside and Consolidated.  Establish a baseline cost for processing recycling and yard debris so rate adjustments can be made by the City if necessary.  Require the contractor to provide a monthly cost for waste collection / disposal to easily calculate the Washington State refuse taxes. The refuse tax is assessed on refuse collection and disposal, not recycling. If Grant County is paying the tax on disposal, then the City is liable for the amount incurred to collect waste only. 3. Change the method for invoicing drop box / roll off compactor service. Rate should be based on the cost to haul the box / compactor plus the actual disposal cost. Moses Lake Cost of Service Report August 2018 Bell & Associates P a g e | 9  Require the contractor to invoice for drop box service independent of the City. The contractors utilize invoicing systems designed for this type of service.  Monthly reports would be submitted to the City to account for the drop box / roll off compactor service provided by the contractor. 4. Require the contractor to utilize collection trucks that are 5 years or newer.  While older trucks incur less depreciation expense, the trade-off is older trucks incur additional repair costs and leak oil / fluids / leachate (garbage juice).  Requiring newer trucks levels the bid costs because some potential proposers don’t have outdated trucks that can be relegated to Moses Lake. These proposers will need to purchase trucks to provide the services. 5. Establish a City policy to set rates at the cost of service plus a 60 day operational reserve in the fund balance. Once the reserve has been reached, the rates would be adjusted to account for the savings. Contract for All Services There are four forms of collection services that are allowed by Washington State law in the cities are as follows: Municipal: This approach utilizes municipal employees and equipment to collect waste. Contracted: Incorporated cities and towns may elect to contract with private companies for waste and recycling collection. Services provided by the contractor and regulated by the jurisdiction need to comply with RCW Chapter 70.95 (Washington State Solid Waste Management program). Certificated: With this collection method, cities are not actively involved in the management of garbage collection. Instead, it allows the UTC-certificated hauler to provide service under UTC regulation and at rates approved by the UTC. Licensed Collection: This method applies to municipalities that require private collectors to have both a city-issued license as well as a UTC certificate. This approach gives the municipality limited control over collection services and allows cities to require that important services be provided. For instance, some cities in the past have required collection companies to pick up Christmas trees, provide a semiannual residential cleanup, and provide free service to public buildings and facilities. The City should consider an exclusive contract to provide comprehensive services for collection, disposal, processing, billing and customer service. The primary role of the City would be to administer the contract. The City would stipulate the services provided as well as regulate the collection rates charged by the contractor. There is also the assumption that some administrative costs would be reduced or eliminated with the remaining costs to be covered from assessing a utility tax on future services. Cities are also allowed to assess a utility a tax on waste collection services within their boundaries. Aside from the current budgeted contracted services of collection, disposal, and processing, the City has budgeted $252,613 for administration and shared utility expenses. These costs are approximately 7% of the total budgeted expenses for collection services. The City currently is not dependent on the revenue Moses Lake Cost of Service Report August 2018 Bell & Associates P a g e | 10 generated from waste and recycling collection; therefore, the transition to an exclusive contract should not be complicated. If the City increases the residential collection rates to the cost of service, there should be adequate revenue to pay off the balance of the interfund debt incurred from 2013 to 2016 prior to the expiration of the current collection contract. Taking these actions will also reduce the impact of the transition to a full-service contract. Service Procurement If the City decides to procure collection service under a comprehensive service contract, the time from the decision to the commencement of service typically requires 24 months. There are three phases to the project. Phase 1 is planning of the requested services, drafting of the contract and RFP, and issuance of the request for services. Six to eight months should be budgeted for this phase. Phase 2 is the evaluation of the proposals, selection of the service provider, and negotiation of the contract. This phase requires four to five months to complete. Phase 3 is the implementation phase where the contractor and city work in conjunction to provide a smooth rollout of service. Depending on the requested services, this phase can vary from a few months to ten months. Truck and container procurement are usually the reason for the prolonged period in phase 3. If the City decides to contact for services at the end of the current contract, which expires in September 2020, the decision should soon be rendered. Page 1 of 2 CITY OF MOSES LAKE STAFF REPORT To: John Williams, City Manager From: Gilbert Alvarado, Deputy City Manager Date: October 18, 2018 Proceeding Type: New Business Subject: Sale of Surplus Property Resolution 3746 Legislative History: • First Presentation: October 23, 2018 • Second Presentation: • Requested Action: Motion Staff Report Summary Attached is Resolution No. 3746 declaring real property owned by the City of Moses Lake as surplus. The subject properties are no longer needed for municipal purposes as initially intended when the property was purchased and deeded to the City. The properties can be disposed of and sold in commercially reasonable manner. Background In 2017, the City Council and staff had various discussions about some of the real property assets owned by the City of Moses Lake. There was some direction given to staff to assess some of the liabilities associated with these properties and could they be considered surplus. Fiscal and Policy Implications The sale of the subject property will save the General Fund revenues that have been used to maintain the property free of weeds and debris. Page 2 of 2 Options Option Results • Consider and approve Resolution 3746 declaring surplus property. Authorize sale of subject property in a commercially reasonable manner. • Consider Resolution 3746 and not declare the subject property surplus. The real property continues to be owned and maintained by the City of Moses Lake. Staff Recommendation The City Council should consider and approve Resolution No. 3746, declaring the subject real property surplus. Attachments A. Resolution 3746 Legal Review N-A RESOLUTION NO. 3746 A RESOLUTION DECLARING CITY OWNED REAL PROPERTY AS SURPLUS AND AUTHORIZING ITS SALE IN A COMMERCIALLY REASONABLE MANNER RECITALS: 1. The City of Moses Lake no longer requires the property deeded to the city for municipal purposes, filed with the Grant County located in Section 22, Township 19 North, Range 28 East, W.M. 2. The property is legally described as follows: TX# 4941 IN GOV LOT 6 22 19 28 TX# 4941 THAT PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 6 IN SECTION 22, TOWNSHP 19 NORTH, RANGE 28 E.W.M., GRANT COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SECONDARY STATE HIGHWAY NO 7-E AND THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF THIRD AVENUE AS CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF MOSES LAKE BY DEDICATION DEED (FILED NOVEMBER 27, 1950) AUDITOR'S FILE NO. 165243, RECORDS OF GRANT COUNTY; THENCE S23°38'W ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID SECONDARY STATE HIGHWAY NO. 7-E A DISTANCE OF 425.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING S23°38'W A DISTANCE OF 60.00 FEET; THENCE S66°22'E A DISTANCE OF 180.00 FEET; THENCE N23°38'E A DISTANCE OF 60.00 FEET; THENCE N66°22'W A DISTANCE OF 180.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. RESOLVED: 1. The City of Moses Lake, Washington, declares that the real property owned by the city and described above is surplus. 2. The real property described above can be disposed of and sold in a commercially reasonable manner. Adopted by the City Council on October 23, 2018. _______________________________ Karen Liebrecht, Mayor ATTEST: __________________________________________ Debbie Burke, City Clerk Page 1 of 2 STAFF REPORT To: John Williams, City Manager From: Cindy Jenson, Finance Director Date: October 18, 2018 Proceeding Type: New Business Subject: 2019 Lodging Tax Advisory Committee Funding Recommendations Legislative History:  First Presentation: October 23, 2018  Second Presentation:  Action: Motion Staff Report Summary The Moses Lake Lodging Tax Advisory Committee (LTAC) met on September 21st and October 10th to consider the 2019 applications for funding support to eligible groups and organizations that have positive impacts on tourism in the greater Moses Lake area. The funding source is the hotel/motel tax that the City of Moses Lake receives from the State of Washington. The LTAC Committee considered all applications in accordance with the LTAC General Guidelines document with specific attention to the Project Evaluation Criteria portion of the Guidelines. The LTAC recommended that the City Council fund 12 of the 17 applications received as outlined in the attached summary. Background The Lodging Tax is an excise tax authorized by State law in RCW 67.28, Public Stadium, Convention, Arts and Tourism Facilities. The City of Moses Lake has imposed an excise tax on charges for lodging by hotels, motels, and similar business enterprises, pursuant to Chapter 82.08 RCW. In Moses Lake, the total tax on lodging is 4% (this includes the original 2% from sales tax and the additional 2% special excise tax. Fiscal and Policy Implications The City of Moses Lake’s Lodging Tax Fund is the source of city funding for tourism promotion. The city intends to maintain a reserve in the fund, and will assess how much of the fund to appropriate in a given year on an annual basis. Page 2 of 2 The revenues received from the city’s hotel/motel tax may be used for the following purposes only: 1. Tourism marketing; 2. Marketing and promotions of special events and festivals designed to attract tourists; 3. Operations and capital expenditures of tourism-related facilities owned or operated by a municipality of a public facilities district; or 4. Operations of tourism-related facilities owned or operated by Note: As of July 1, 2013, capital expenditures for tourism-related facilities owned by nonprofit organizations are no longer permitted expenditures of lodging tax funds. Options Option Results  Review and approve the LTAC funding recommendations The applicants move forward with budgeting the funding of their requests  Review and revise the LTAC funding recommendations The City Council must advise the LTAC of their revisions to the LTAC funding recommendations  Take no action The hotel/motel tax funds remain in place and continue to accrue Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council discuss and advise staff on how to proceed. Attachments A. Summary of applications and LTAC funding recommendations Legal Review N-A Pg Amount LTAC No.Proposed Use of HMT Requested Recommend LTAC Comments 1 Basin Gym Booster 1 Eastern WA State Sectionals Meet 20,000$ 10,000$ 2 Moses Lake Spring Festival 12 Moses Lake Spring Festival 48,000$ 30,000$ funding for deposit to secure better headliner 3 Moses Lake Business Association 33 Harvest Festival 3,000$ -$ attendees are local 4 Moses Lake Business Association 43 Harvest Ag Parade 3,000$ 1,000$ 5 Moses Lake Business Association 53 Holiday Tree Lighting 9,000$ 2,000$ 6 Moses Lake Business Association 63 Downtown Sip and Stroll 8,000$ 1,000$ additional advertising, event is sustainable 7 Moses Lake Business Association 73 Downtown Brews and Tunes 8,000$ 4,000$ 8 City - Museum & Art Center 83 Operations and Marketing 35,785$ 10,000$ communications and program support line items only 9 City - Parks & Recreation 167 FlowRider Surface Replacement 45,000$ -$ eligible as capital expense 10 City - Parks & Recreation 178 Regional Marketing w/GC Tourism 75,000$ -$ $35k of request added to Chamber Application #14, the rest is not targeted to the city 11 Moses Lake Chamber of Comm 198 Moses Lake LEAD 30,000$ 30,000$ 12 Moses Lake Chamber of Comm 247 Moses Lake Visitor Info Center 50,000$ 50,000$ 13 Moses Lake Chamber of Comm 255 Moses Lake Freedom Fest 50,000$ 50,000$ 14 Moses Lake Chamber of Comm 265 Moses Lake Advertising 115,000$ 150,000$ Chamber staff will meet with City Parks staff regarding additional marketing from Application #10 15 Columbia Basin Allied Arts 275 New Productions in summer and during other events 30,000$ 20,000$ 16 Visit Washington 285 Establish a Father's Day Airshow 60,000$ -$ 17 Visit Washington 303 Central WA Events Marketing 75,000$ -$ Totals 664,785$ 358,000$ Organization Page 1 of 2 CITY OF MOSES LAKE STAFF REPORT To: John Williams, City Manager From: Gilbert Alvarado, Deputy City Manager Date: October 18, 2018 Proceeding Type: New Business Subject: Multi-Family Tax Exemption Contract – Pioneer Meadows Apts. Legislative History: • First Presentation: October 23, 2018 • Second Presentation: • Requested Action: Motion Staff Report Summary Pioneer Meadows Apartments LLC, has submitted a proposal to permit a Multi-Family Housing Tax Exempt development in accordance with MLMC 18.23, Multi-Family Tax Exemption. Currently there is one other multi- family project within the corporate limits that has utilized this development tool as an in-fill incentive. Staff has been through the pre-application process with the developer and this is the next request as part of their permitting. The approval requirements for this type of project fall under MLMC 18.23. See the following: 1. Approval: If an application is approved, the applicant shall enter into a contract with the city, subject to approval by the City Council, regarding the terms and conditions of the project. Upon City Council approval of the contract, the Community Development Director shall issue a Conditional Certificate of Acceptance of Tax Exemption. The Conditional Certificate expires three (3) years from the date of approval unless an extension is granted as provided in this chapter. Background Through the Growth Management Act planning process, the State of Washington found that many cities lacked desirable, convenient, attractive, affordable, and livable places in urban centers benefiting and promoting the public health, safety and welfare to stimulate new or enhanced residential opportunities. The outcome of the State’s housing assessment was the Legislature adopted RCW 84.14, which provides in-fill incentive to cities planning under the Growth Management Act. Cities may assess their housing needs and develop new multi- family housing in urban centers that allow for special valuations and tax incentives. MLMC 18.23 requires the applicant to apply and meet certain criteria to be eligible for the Multi-Family Housing Tax exemption. Once it has been reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director, the City Page 2 of 2 Council may approve a contract with the applicant approving the terms and conditions of the project. The project will then be provided three (3) years to complete the conditions and then the final certificate will be provided and submitted to Grant County Assessor for assessment and taxation. The special valuation is effective for no more than twelve (12) years and only applies to the apartment buildings and not the underlying property, open space or community facilities (such as pool, offices, parking lots, etc.) The application has been received and accepted by the Community Development Director. The applicant is now requesting a contract and will only have three years to complete the project. This may push out the exemption as far as 2031. Fiscal and Policy Implications The estimated fiscal impact could be around $28,000 per year for twelve (12) years. This was considered when the ordinance for multi-family tax exemption was passed. Currently the City is only receiving taxes on the land that’s assessed value is $177,035 (approximately $650 in property tax per year). The project’s estimated value is $22,500,000 per the applicant. Options Option Results • Authorize the City Manager to sign the Agreement with Pioneer Meadows Apartments, LLC Project moves forward under MLMC 18.23 and property taxes are abated for twelve years. • Modify the proposed Agreement Provide staff with specific changes • Take no action Continued staff review Staff Recommendation Staff recommends the City Council consider authorizing the City Manager to sign a contract with Pioneer Meadows Apartments, LLC for the Multi-Family Housing Tax Exemption as presented. Attachments A. Multi-Family Housing Limited Tax Exemption Application and Agreement B. Vicinity Map C. Site Plan Legal Review The following documents are attached and subject to legal review: Type of Document Title of Document Date Reviewed by Legal Counsel Agreement Multi-Family Housing Limited Tax Exemption July 9, 2018 CITY OF MOSES LAKE AND PIONEER MEADOWS APARTMENTS, LLC MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING LIMITED PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is entered into this ___ day of _______________, 2018 by and between Pioneer Meadows Apartments, LLC, (hereinafter referred to as the “Owner”), and the CITY OF MOSES LAKE, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington (hereinafter referred to as the “City”). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the City has an interest in stimulating new construction or rehabilitation of multi-family housing in Residential Target Areas in order to reduce development pressure on single-family residential neighborhoods, to increase and improve housing opportunities, and to encourage development densities supportive of transit use, and WHEREAS, the City has, pursuant to the authority granted to it by Chapter 84.14 RCW, designated various Residential Target Areas for the provision of a limited property tax exemption for new multi-family residential housing, and WHEREAS, the City has, through Chapter 18.23 Moses Lake Municipal code (MLMC), enacted a program whereby property owners may qualify for a Final Certificate of Tax Exemption which certifies to the Grant County Assessor that the owner is eligible to receive a limited property tax exemption, and WHEREAS, The Owner is interested in receiving the multiple family property tax exemption for new/rehabilitated multiple family residential housing units in a Residential Target Area; and WHEREAS, The Owner has submitted to the City a complete application form for at least four (4) units of multi-family housing within a residential structure or as part of a mixed-use development. A minimum of four (4) new units must be constructed or at least four (4) additional multi-family units must be added to existing occupied multi-family housing. Existing multi-family housing that has been vacant for twelve (12) months or more does not have to provide additional units so long as the project provides at least four (4) units of new, converted, or rehabilitated multi-family housing; and WHEREAS, the Owner has submitted to the City preliminary site plans and floor plans for multi-family residential housing to be constructed on said property legally described as: Lots 1 & 2 of Pioneer Meadows Major Plat, in the City of Moses Lake, Grant County. Assessor’s Parcel Number(s) 110868051 and 110868052, commonly known as 200 E 9th Avenue and 300 E 9th Avenue, hereinafter referred to as the (“Site”), and generally referred to as Pioneer Meadows Apartments (“Project”); and WHEREAS, on August 2, 2018, the City determined that the Owner has met all the eligibility and procedural requirements to qualify for a Conditional Certificate of Acceptance of Tax Exemption as provided in Chapter 18.23 MLMC, with the exception of entering into this Agreement; NOW, THEREFORE, the City and the Owner do mutually agree as follows: 1. The City agrees to issue the Owner a Conditional Certificate of Acceptance of Tax Exemption subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 2. The Owner agrees to construct the Project on the Site as described in the most recent site plans, floor plans, and elevations on file with the City as of the date of this Agreement. 3. The project shall comply with all applicable zoning requirements, land use requirements, design review requirements and all building, fire, and housing code requirements contained in the Moses Lake Municipal Code (herein referred to as the “MLMC”) at the time a complete application for a building permit is received. 4. The project, whether new, converted, or rehabilitated multiple-unit housing, must include at least four (4) units of multifamily housing within a residential structure or as part of an urban development. 5. The Owner agrees to complete construction of the agreed upon improvements within three (3) years from the date the City issues the Conditional Certificate of Acceptance of Tax Exemption, or within any extension thereof granted by the City. 6. The Owner is requesting an __EIGHT or a __X__ TWELVE year (check one) limited property tax exemption. (If a twelve year exemption, the Owner commits to renting or selling at least twenty percent (20%) of the multifamily housing units constructed on the site as housing units affordable for low or moderate-income households as defined by RCW 84.14.020(1)a)(ii)(B)). 7. The Owner agrees, upon completion of the improvements and upon issuance by the City of a temporary or permanent certificate of occupancy, to file with the City’s Department of Community Development the following: (a) A statement of expenditures made with respect to each multi-family housing unit and the total expenditures made with respect to the entire property; (b) A description of the completed work and a statement of qualification for the exemption; and (c) A statement that the work was completed within the required three (3) year period or any authorized extension. (d) If applicable, that the project meets the affordable housing requirements as described in RCW 84.14.020. 8. The City shall determine whether the Project complies with the requirements for a Final Certificate of Tax Exemption within thirty (30) days of receipt of all materials required under Paragraph 7. The City agrees, conditioned on the Owner’s successful completion of the improvements in accordance with the terms of this Agreement and on the Owner’s filing of the materials described in Paragraph 7 above, to file an eight or twelve year, as applicable, Final Certificate of Tax Exemption with the Grant County Assessor within ten (10) days of the City’s determination that the Project complies with the requirements for a Final Certificate of Tax Exemption. Any denial of a Final Certificate of Tax Exemption shall be subject to the right of appeal set forth in MLMC 18.23.050(E). 9. The Owner agrees, within 30 days following the first anniversary of the City’s filing of the Final Certificate of Tax Exemption and each year thereafter for a period of eight or twelve years, as applicable, to file a notarized declaration with the City’s Department of Community Development indicating the following: (a) A statement of occupancy and vacancy of the multi-family units during the previous twelve (12) months; (b) A certification that the property continues to be in compliance with this Agreement; and, (c) A description of changes or improvements constructed after issuance of the certificate of tax exemption. (d) Allow the city staff to conduct an on-site verification of the declaration. 10. The parties acknowledge that the units are to be used and occupied for multifamily residential use. The parties further acknowledge that the certificate of occupancy issued by the City is for multifamily residential units. The Owner acknowledges and agrees that the units shall be used primarily for residential occupancy and any business activities shall only be incidental and ancillary to the residential occupancy. 11. If the Owner converts to another use any of the new multi-family residential housing units constructed under this Agreement, the Owner shall notify the Grant County Assessor and the City’s Department of Community Development within 60 days of such change in use. 12. The Owner agrees to notify the City promptly of any transfer of Owner’s ownership interest in the Site or in the improvements made to the Site under this Agreement. 13. For purposes of this Agreement, “Owner” shall mean the Owners’ Association of a condominium complex once such association is established which shall be responsible for all reporting requirements required herein on behalf of the owners of individual condominium units. 14. The City reserves the right to cancel the Final Certificate of Tax Exemption should the Owner, its successors and assigns, fail to comply with any of the terms and conditions of this Agreement, subject to the right of appeal set forth in MLMC 18.23.050(G). 15. Nothing in this Agreement shall permit or be interpreted to permit either party to violate any provision of Chapter 84.14 RCW or MLMC Chapter 18.23. 16. No modifications of this Agreement shall be made unless mutually agreed upon by the parties in writing. 17. The Owner acknowledges its awareness of the potential tax liability involved if and when the property ceases to be eligible for the incentive provided pursuant to this Agreement. Such liability may include additional real property tax, penalties and interest imposed pursuant to RCW 84.14.110. The Owner further acknowledges its awareness and understanding of the process implemented by the Grant County Assessor’s Office for the appraisal and assessment of property taxes. The Owner agrees that the City is not responsible for the property value assessment imposed by Grant County at any time during the exemption period. 18. In the event that any term or clause of this Agreement conflicts with applicable law, such conflict shall not affect other terms of this Agreement which can be given effect without the conflicting term or clause, and to this end, the terms of this Agreement are declared to be severable. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first above written. CITY OF MOSES LAKE PROPERTY OWNERS: _________________________________ ________________________________ John Williams, City Manager By:_____________________________ Its: _____________________________ Approved to Form __________________________________ Katherine Kenison, City Attorney Pioneer Meadows Apts, LLC Page 1 of 2 CITY OF MOSES LAKE STAFF REPORT To: John Williams, City Manager From: Fred Snoderly, Municipal Services Director Date: October 19, 2018 Proceeding Type: New Business Subject: Farm Lease Agreement for Dunes Treatment Plant Property Legislative History: • First Presentation: October 23, 2018 • Second Presentation: • Requested Action: Motion Staff Report Summary Staff has been speaking with a local farmer to lease 120 acres of land adjacent to the Dunes Treatment Plant. Staff is seeking Council to authorize the City Manager to negotiate said lease. Background The City owns land adjacent to the Dunes Treatment plant that is currently native ground. Current operation of the plant produced approximately 500 tons of biosolids annually that needs to be hauled and spread on farm ground to make room in our plant for normal operations. This currently costs the City over $100,00 annually. City would like to develop the ground next to the treatment plant to reduce costs associated with hauling the biosolids to fields located throughout the county. The lease agreement would accomplish the following: 1. City would lease approximately 120 acres to the farmer for production of crops. 2. Farmer agrees to take biosolids for use as fertilizer on the fields. Farmer will coordinate crops, planting and harvest to facilitate this use. 3. City will provide a water source and electrical power to the irrigation pivots. 4. Farmer will provide and maintain the irrigation equipment for use during the lease. Details on length of lease and who maintains ownership of the equipment at the end of the lease will be negotiated. Page 2 of 2 Fiscal and Policy Implications City will save money on annual maintenance costs at the treatment plant and generate some money from the lease. City will expend funds on providing irrigation water and extending power to the irrigation pivots. Options Option Results • Move to authorize negotiation of the lease as presented Lease will be negotiated and brought to Council for approval. • Take no action The City will not proceed with the lease and continue to haul biosolids Staff Recommendation Staff recommends City Council authorize the City Manager to negotiate the lease. Legal Review N-A