Municipal Research News

MRSC Publications › News › Municipal Research News - March 1998

Note: Some of the information on this archival Web page may no longer be current.

Municipal Research News

Resources for Local Government
March 1998

Articles

The Year 2000 Challenge
Heads Up - Emerging Information for Local Governments
City/County Sales Tax Equalization Certification for 1998
Records Retention Schedules
Web News
Amendments to SEPA Rules
Utilities and Developer Contributions
Ask MRSC
Resource Sharing - Information Partnership Program
New Acquisitions

The Year 2000 Challenge

"Year 2000 Challenge," "Millennium Bug," "New Year’s Evil," all terms relating to the same big question. What will happen to the world of computing once the clock strikes January 1, 2000? Will massive chaos ensue when computers mistakenly interpret the year as 1900 or 1980, or some other equally incorrect date? Or will technology experts exterminate the problem "bug" before time runs out?

How Did This Happen?

In reality, the Year 2000 bug is not a "bug" at all, but the result of purposeful decisions that made sense once upon at time. Until recently, computer memory and storage were costly and in short supply. Therefore, computer programs universally were designed to store calendar years as double digits only. Back then, programmers assumed the applications would be replaced long before the calendar change could cause a catastrophe.

However, many of those old programs, as well as antiquated hardware, are still in use today. This is one of those good news/bad news situations. Good news because we have gotten an exceptional return on our investment; bad news because those old programs and antiquated hardware must be modified or replaced. Consequently, the issue at hand is actually no one’s fault, yet is the concern of all who use computers or embedded chip devices.

Why the Rush?

The Year 2000 date problem is not just a software application issue; both hardware and software canbe affected. Since most organizations use technology from multiple vendors, it is critical to test the entire computing system. Once problem areas have been identified, every application program that stores or references a two-digit year date must be changed to four digits. While in theory converting to four-digit file formats is straightforward, the testing and confirming of an entire computing system can be a time consuming and tedious task.

Thorough testing of a computing system includes the Basic Input Output System (BIOS), the system operating all software applications, and the hardware timers. Conversion from two-digit year dates to four digits may require rewriting code modules, creating separate programs to perform date calculations as the current applications run, and/or discarding and replacing old software and hardware.

What Should Users Do?

As of April 1, 1998, there will be only 640 days left. The Year 2000 date problem is real. It is a serious issue with a rigid deadline. Following are some suggested steps to take:

Establish organizational awareness of problems and issues;
Assess Year 2000 compliancy of all computerized systems including embedded chip systems like HVAC, traffic signals, irrigation systems, etc.;
Take action - Modify, Replace, or Archive;
Build in Year 2000 compliance when acquiring systems, equipment, and services;
Contract for remediation of existing systems and equipment;
Test and certify all computerized systems.

Above all - get going! Without advance consideration, planning, and most of all action, many computing systems that perform calculations based on dates will wreak havoc with governments’ ability to continue to provide services and can put agencies at financial risk.

Dianah Neff
Chief Information Officer, City of Bellevue

Internet Sites providing information on Year 2000 issues:

The Year 2000 Web Site / www.year2000.com - The premier technical/vendor site. Extensive content, including articles, current events, and news.
Public Technology, Inc. / www.pti.nw.dc.us - The technology arm for the National League of Cities,National Association of Counties, and the International City/County Managers Association. Vast information on Year 2000 for local governments.
Information Technology Association of America(ITAA) / www.itaa.org - ITAA is a leading industry trade association. Its site is rich with government information and analytical papers.
Comlinks (Alan Simpson) / www.comlinks.com - A well-organized, multi-faceted site devoted primarily to the Year 2000 problem.

Heads Up
Emerging Information for Local Governments

This column is designed to present information about interesting new trends and developments affecting local governments.

The Friday Update

In order to communicate more effectively with its citizens and other interested groups, Coos Bay, Oregon, created an electronic newsletter called The Friday Update. Each week, Coos Bay's five departments submit articles to the City Manager's Office where they are compiled, edited, and formatted for publication. The Friday Update is also used to compliment city officials, city staff, and citizens for accomplishments deserving recognition. The Newsletter is e-mailed weekly to local residents, officials, and other groups that are interested in the city of Coos Bay The Friday Update has strengthened the city's image as an organization that is eager to reach out to and share valuable information with the community. For more information contact: Bill Grile, City Manager (541) 269-8912.

Downspout Disconnection Program

Portland, Oregon, found a way to deal with excess rainwater and pollutants overflowing into major waterways. One factor contributing to this problem was that roof water from homes drained from residents' downspouts directly into the sewer pipes. By disconnecting the downspouts from the sewer standpipe and diverting the water into residents' yards, millions of gallons of roof water can now be removed from the sewer.

The city encourages homeowners to do the disconnection themselves by paying for each approved disconnection. Also, volunteers from community organizations are trained and paid to disconnect the downspouts. This approach not only provides an incentive for local residents to take a role in improving water quality, but also provides community groups with resources for projects and programs. For more information contact: J. Lauren Norris, Community Outreach Coordinator (503)823-3086.

Federal Welfare Law

A survey of 34 cities by the U.S. Conference of Mayors reports that many of America's largest cities won't be able to supply enough jobs or support services to put welfare recipients to work under the new federal welfare law. The one exception is Washington, D.C.

Is Tacoma the High-Tech Town of the Future?

About four months ago, the city of Tacoma agreed to Tacoma City Light's plan to provide, through fiber-optic cable, its own cable service and high-speed cable Internet access to its customers. This service will hopefully be available sometime this year.

Shortly thereafter, Tele-Communications Inc. announced it would improve its cable service to Tacoma customers by offering TCI's high-speed cable modem Internet service. This service would allow computers continuous Internet connection via a cable similar to the one that connects a television.

At the same time, US West announced that by June they plan to provide Tacoma residents access to its high-speed Internet service via asymmetric digital subscriber line (ADSL) phone lines.

If all these plans come to fruition, Tacoma residents will have the best selection of high-tech connections to the Internet of anyone in the state. (In addition to these high-tech Internet connections, Tacoma residents will have access to 62 cable channels and the option of new digital channels providing them with a vast array of programming choices.) Gee, have fun Tacoma!

Congratulations to the Washington Cities Insurance Authority (WCIA) for compliance in all areas examined by the State Auditor’s Office in 1997.

The WCIA provides comprehensive and Economical liability insurance to its 87 members, cities and towns from Aberdeen to Zillah and interlocal entities such as emergency services coordinating agencies.

The report on the audit was released in early January. Like all completed audit reports, it is available from the State Auditor’s Office, (360) 902-0370, or on the Auditor’s Office Web site, http://www.wa.gov/sao/.

City Sales Tax Equalization Certification for 1998

The sales tax equalization payments certified for 1998 are given in the table. The 70 percent per capita figure for the first half cent of the 1997 sales tax collections, to which payments were equalized for 1998, is $57.48. This is a bit higher than our forecast of $56.82. Every jurisdiction that earned a per capita sales tax for the first half cent that is less than this amount will receive an equalization payment in 1998 that makes up the difference. The Department of Revenue multiplied this difference by each city's April 1, 1997 population. If your city levied both half cents of the sales tax for the entire year, the department doubled the amount to calculate the total for which your city is certified. Remember, however, in 1998, as in 1996 and 1997, there will not be enough money to fully equalize your sEcond half cent. Cities that levy only the first half cent of the sales tax are guaranteed the amounts shown in the table. Cities that levy both half cents will receive less than that shown in the table.

How's the sales tax equalization forecast doing? In January of the last two years we were almost right on target with the prior year's Budget Suggestions forecast. This was really amazing (or dumb luck) since most of the pieces of the forecast, especially the amount cities will be certified for, involve a lot of guessing. This year we are off by quite a bit. But the good news is that it is in the direction that is favorable to cities.

Recall that the whole issue is one of supply and demand. Other things being equal, if the "supply" of the motor vehicle excise tax (MVET) is higher than forecast, the percentage cutback necessary to balance will be less. Conversely, if the equalization cities had a better prior year than we forecast, then they will be certified for ("demand") less equalization, so the supply goes farther. We forecast that cities levying the sEcond half cent would receive about 60 percent of the amount they were certified for (i.e., would be cut back 40 percent), averaging out to their receiving 80 percent on the full cent of the sales tax. We are now forecasting that cities will receive about 76 percent of the amount they are certified for on the sEcond half cent. This averages out to 88 percent on the full half cent, or a 12 percent cutback. We used a fairly conservative growth rate for MVET. The cutback may well turn out to be less.

So how did we get so far off? Well, the last two quarters' receipts of the MVET were higher than we anticipated, raising the base on which we estimated the receipts for 1998. In addition, the equalization cities, on average, earned much more sales tax than we forecast, so our forecast of the amount for which they would be certified (their "demand") was way too high. Excluding the new cities, Lakewood and Edgewood, the per capita sales tax of the equalization cities grew faster than that of cities that did not qualify for equalization. This is truly an amazing result, and the only explanation that we can think of is that construction was booming in many equalization cities.

We will update this forecast in Budget Suggestions for 1999. Outstanding issues are (1) the rate of growth shown by MVET during the coming three quarters, and (2) how much sales tax is earned by the new cities of Maple Valley and Covington.

Judy Cox
Finance Consultant

County Sales Tax Equalization Certification for 1998

Although cities and towns will not receive the full amount for which they are certified (because there will not be enough money in their account), counties are guaranteed to receive the amounts listed below. If your county is not listed, that means you did not qualify for equalization this year.

Each quarter the motor vehicle excise tax that is deposited in the county equalization account will be apportioned among the qualifying counties. Distributions will be made until each county has received the amount for which it was certified. These quarterly payments will not be for equal amounts. Expect your third quarter payment (July) to be smaller than the first two, and your fourth quarter payment (October) could well be zero.

Adams		$20,930.66
Asotin		132,969.77
Columbia		468,989.24
Douglas		272,734.28
Ferry		215,423.82
Garfield		488,040.24
Grays Harbor		15,034.09
Island		625,728.74
Lincoln		227,135.88
Mason		700,273.52
Okanogan		398,380.55
Pacific		108,514.50
Skamania		101,704.43
Stevens		746,333.98
Thurston		1,115,477.62
Wahkiakum		440,818.92
Yakima		67,591.40


TOTAL		$6,146,081.65

Total Amount Certified for 1998

Airway Heights	$155,615.38	McCleary	123,009.50
Albion	71,915.67	Medical Lake	205,947.21
Algona	58,235.94	Mercer Island	968,203.14
Almira	8,081.16	Mesa	5,566.53
Anacortes	56,878.41	Metaline	8,335.08
Asotin	46,754.41	Mill Creek	211,564.90
Bainbridge Island	777,930.54	Millwood	26,625.46
Battle Ground	9,138.94	Montesano	25,248.79
Beaux Arts	17,724.62	Mossyrock	14,685.34
Benton City	131,459.19	Mountlake Terrace	1,340,220.03
Black Diamond	86,396.67	Moxee	59,217.91
Bonney Lake	300,451.74	Mukilteo	749,281.32
Bremerton	7,662.56	Naches	8,398.70
Bridgeport	190,300.87	Napavine	97,085.89
Brier	600,730.34	Nespelem	10,118.84
Buckley	196,813.86	Newcastle	534,525.62
Bucoda	55,142.90	Nooksack	65,276.04
Burien	120,011.94	Normandy Park	636,763.96
Carbonado	63,722.44	North Bonneville	48,549.12
Carnation	8,845.85	Northport	30,834.68
Cashmere	140,050.99	Oak Harbor	617,597.32
Castle Rock	16,585.26	Oakesdale	34,282.96
Cathlamet	6,773.47	Oakville	41,714.52
Cheney	326,139.21	Orting	207,557.11
Chewelah	59,999.16	Pacific	236,838.65
Clyde Hill	215,211.83	Palouse	63,188.95
Colfax	13,264.47	Pateros	25,515.02
College Place	637,573.93	Pe Ell	51,819.23
Colton	29,648.65	Pomeroy	47,397.90
Conconully	13,723.89	Prescott	10,826.76
Concrete	33,329.26	Pullman	687,131.20
Connell	163,905.04	Rainier	103,847.07
Cosmopolis	74,924.37	Raymond	93,087.14
Coulee Dam	78,127.14	Reardan	20,561.05
Creston	20,949.65	Richland	872,554.45
Cusick	5,505.75	Ridgefield	51,677.17
Darrington	59,467.58	Riverside	23,826.22
Davenport	29,404.76	Rock Island	35,533.92
Dayton	116,508.11	Rockford	27,488.42
Des Moines	2,108,574.67	Rosalia	40,711.13
Duvall	146,133.01	Roslyn	66,549.66
Edgewood	1,051,740.42	Royal City	55,912.37
Edmonds	423,100.61	Ruston	66,685.44
Electric City	88,599.89	Sedro-Woolley	59,147.07
Elma	18,254.83	Selah	111,568.41
Elmer City	31,723.15	Shoreline	1,994,686.20
Endicott	28,918.12	Soap Lake	92,059.98
Entiat	39,039.71	South Bend	73,689.54
Ephrata	29,139.65	South Cle Elum	26,863.23
Everson	73,823.44	South Prairie	44,731.97
Fairfield	18,851.66	Sprague	20,674.75
Farmington	13,221.07	Springdale	11,643.96
Federal Way	415,311.31	Starbuck	8,142.49
Ferndale	23,281.23	Steilacoom	566,823.60
Fircrest	496,323.52	Sultan	121,117.25
Forks	105,864.31	Tekoa	42,094.18
Garfield	43,374.99	Tenino	67,855.63
George	7,822.89	Tieton	4,165.06
Gold Bar	98,298.52	Toppenish	428,190.45
Goldendale	46,264.11	Uniontown	17,190.36
Grandview	357,266.22	University Place	2,436,325.32
Granger	199,178.46	Vader	44,758.42
Hamilton	23,779.01	Waitsburg	86,010.99
Harrah	35,397.93	Walla Walla	273,439.25
Harrington	30,840.07	Wapato	185,985.43
Hartline	15,575.02	Warden	122,444.28
Hatton	13,358.16	Washougal	182,906.18
Hoquiam	520,056.50	Washtucna	21,400.76
Ilwaco	4,046.42	Waterville	84,589.24
Index	5,901.59	Waverly	3,382.00
Ione	7,515.07	West Richland	626,594.76
Kahlotus	15,692.20	Westport	32,153.15
Kettle Falls	69,557.68	White Salmon	24,973.99
Kittitas	78,709.18	Wilbur	13,239.30
Krupp	4,504.80	Wilkeson	36,720.43
La Center	18,917.39	Wilson Creek	749.46
Lacey	11,337.66	Winlock	24,068.21
Lake Forest Park	1,153,227.46	Woodway	24,261.15
Lake Stevens	191,797.40	Yacolt	15,650.55
Lakewood	3,638,298.66	Yarrow Point	67,971.49
Lamont	8,447.18	Zillah	119,731.38
Latah	7,222.73
Lyman	10,084.58	Total	$33,856,210.73
Mabton	158,884.55
Malden	26,228.06	Note: Maple Valley and Covington are not
Mansfield	29,623.98	not included in the table because their
Marcus	14,031.00	equalization works differently than that for
Mattawa	124,403.14	other cities until they have a full calendar
		year's history of data.

Records Retention Schedules

All public records are the property of the state of Washington. They must be preserved, stored, transferred, destroyed, or disposed of only in accordance with the guidelines established by the state (see chapter 40.14 RCW). The Secretary of State, Archives and Records Management Division, has responsibility, along with a state records committee, for developing retention schedules for all public records. The Division recently released the first edition of the Local Government General Records Retention Schedules and Records Management Manual. This new manual applies to all local government agencies and supersedes the previous manual and schedules that were published for cities and towns.

The new local government manual standardizes retention policy for commonly held administrative, fiscal, governance, and operational records. New sections were added for electronic mail, environmental quality for agency-owned property, hazardous materials administration, land ownership and access rights, sewage treatment plants, solid waste management, surface water drainage and flood control, and training and staff development. Sections for accounting, administration, building and land use code enforcement, electric power utilities, electronic information, fire protection, public works/engineering, sewer, and water were significantly revised and expanded.

According to the state Records Management Division, specific schedules for county auditors were recently sent to counties. The specific schedules for county treasurers and assessors will be released in early spring.

The complete Local Records Retention and Management Manual is viewable and "downloadable" from MRSC's Web site at www.mrsc.org/recordsmanual. MRSC will be adding the specific schedules for auditors, treasurers, and assessors to the Web site as soon as they are received. Additional information about these schedules can be obtained from your regional archivist or from Jeanne Wagner, Local Records and Publications Specialist, at (360) 586-4901.

Questions & Answers

How can we contact our regional State Archives office?

There are five regional branches located around the state:

Central Branch in Ellensburg, Tim Eckert-Regional Archivist, (509) 963-2136;
Eastern Branch in Cheney, Richard Hobbs-Regional Archivist, (509) 359-2476;
Northwest Branch in Bellingham, James Moore-Regional Archivist, (360) 650-3323;
Puget Sound Branch in Seattle, Mike Saunders-Regional Archivist, (206) 439-3793;
Southwest Branch in Olympia, Wayne Lawson-Regional Archivist, (360) 753-1684.

If my agency has established a local records control program with individual records retention schedules previously approved by the Local Records Committee, does the new general schedule automatically amend and supersede the individual schedule?

No, the new schedules do not supersede specific schedules adopted by local governments. However, the Records Management Division encourages local governments to compare their own specific schedules with the newly-issued state schedules. If you have concerns about changes or the continued application of an approved individual records retention schedule, you should contact your city or prosecuting attorney.

Must audio tape recordings be made of all official proceedings?

Minutes must be prepared for every regular and special meeting, except executive sessions, as defined by the Open Public Meetings Act (see RCW 42.32.030). There does not appear to be any legal requirement that audio tape recordings be made of general meetings of the legislative body. However, tape recordings may be required by local ordinance or rule of procedure.

If your council or commission does make a tape recording of public meetings, then that tape must now be retained for six years, even if the purpose for tape recording is simply to assist the clerk in preparing minutes. Note also, that different rules apply to quasi-judicial proceedings and to public hearings where specific findings are required and a record may need to be made for judicial review. Questions on whether audio tapes need to be made of particular hearings or proceedings should be discussed with your city or prosecuting attorney.

Pam James
Legal Consultant

Web News (www.mrsc.org)

The MRSC Web site continues to grow rapidly - more topics, more municipal codes, and more users (25,000 per month and counting). We have added a large number of new pages in the last quarter including sample ordinances on use of credit cards; the sales tax equalization certification for 1998; the implicit price deflator chart; a 1997 city population, property tax, and sales tax table; and information on control of graffiti, fireworks regulations, and historic preservation. We have also posted the Local Government General Records Retention Schedule & Records Management Manual from the Office of the Secretary of State, Division of Archives and Records Management.

In the coming months, we will be adding information on fire services, water rights, rural lands, and sections of the Washington State Model Design and Construction Management Manual. Also, there will be an addition of a new series of county pages including revenue sources for counties, county basics, county structure, and county officials' roles and responsibilities.

Regular users of the MRSC Web site know that each month we post a Focus Section on our main page, highlighting items that we think may be of special interest to you. Recently, we began including an "Inquiry of the Week" in the Focus Section to provide you with answers to new or frequently asked questions. These questions and responses are then added to a comprehensive database of frequently asked questions, "Ask MRSC," which you can access from the left-hand column of the main page.

Look for us at some upcoming statewide conferences including the municipal clerks’ (WMCA) conference in Wenatchee on March 18 and 19, and the annual June conferences of the AWC and WSAC where we will be demonstrating the MRSC Web site.

In an effort to extend the reach of our Web site to small cities, we will be conducting two Internet classes for city officials in April at the Big Bend Community College in Moses Lake. One class will be held during the day, and a sEcond in the evening for elected officials who cannot attend during the day. The classes will cover searching the MRSC Web site, locating local government information on the Web, and interacting with state agencies via the Web. Watch for an announcement in the mail if your city is located in Grant or a surrounding county. If this pilot is successful, we may schedule additional classes around the state.

Fred Ward
Information Services Specialist

Amendments to SEPA Rules

In November, the Department of Ecology extensively amended its State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA) regulations contained in chapter 197-11 WAC. The amendments integrate Growth Management Act requirements with those of SEPA and alter certain SEPA procedures to conform to 1995 regulatory reform legislation (chapter 347, Laws of 1995). As a result of these amendments, local governments are required to revise their local SEPA procedures to be consistent with the amended regulations within 180 days of their effective date. The amendments were effective on November 10, 1997. The Department of Ecology's home page provides "Interim Guidance" (http://www.wa.gov/ecology/cp/guidncn4.html) regarding the regulatory changes, as well as an updated, draft model SEPA ordinance (http://www.wa.gov/ecology/cp/modelrev.html), which can also be viewed through links at MRSC's Web page.

The revisions to the SEPA regulations are the subject of one of MRSC's new "Focus" short publications, which should appear in your mailboxes soon.

Utilities and Developer Contributions

Let's see now, do we charge them a voluntary latecomer's fee and let them recover?

Or do we impact them with a connection fee and let them mitigate?

Or do we . . .

City-owned sewer and water utilities have these basic means of accepting direct contributions from developers in financing extensions and improvements due to growth:

recovery contracts
connection fees
voluntary mitigation
impact fees

Confusion often exists as to the underlying statutes and their applicability to given development situations.

Recovery Contracts

Recovery contracts (sometimes called latecomer's agreements or reimbursement agreements ), authorized under chapter 35.91 RCW, allow construction of utility system improvements by a private landowner(s), with reimbursement by other private landowners who may later connect to the city's system and benefit from those improvements. Included within the definition of water and sewer facilities eligible for reimbursement under the statute are "construction of storm, sanitary, or combination sewers, pumping stations, and disposal plants, water mains, hydrants, reservoirs, or appurtenances" within the city or within ten miles from the city limits. Extension of water or sewer facilities outside of the boundaries of a city or town may be subject to potential review by a boundary review board under chapter 36.93 RCW.

Utility system improvements by a developer should always be in accordance with the city's master utility plans and constructed in conformance with city standards. The developer first enters into a recovery contract with the city, then constructs the improvements. The city inspects and accepts for maintenance the constructed facilities. City engineering staff must review and certify actual costs of design and construction, including any permit and review fees. Chapter 35.91 RCW provides for a period not to exceed 15 years for reimbursement to the developer under the recovery contract, which must be recorded. The developer and other property owners subject to the recovery contract also pay connection fees, as described below.

Assessments to other property owners in the area covered by a reimbursement agreement must be fair and equitable. Any of a number of cost allocation methods can be used, so the city should not limit its engineering staff to any one method in the enabling ordinances. While not specifically required by statute, a public hearing (with appropriate notice to affected property owners) on the assessment reimbursement area and method of assessment is a good idea.

Connection Fees

Connection fees (sometimes called system development charges or facilities charges) are authorized under RCW 35.92.025. Property owners (including developers) connecting to the system bear their equitable share of the cost of the entire water or sewer system. Connection fees are in addition to the actual cost of the connection (meter installation, inspection and testing, service connections, etc.). Most cities compute their connection fees by establishing the total value of the physical plant and converting it to an equivalent residential unit (ERU), which is then applied uniformly to all connections. If a city constructs a system improvement itself, the value of the improvement is added to the total physical plant for purposes of the ERU computation. The cost of donated facilities (those constructed by developers under recovery contracts or developer extension agreements) is not to be included in the total physical plant value for the purposes of computing connection charges. Interest on the value of the constructed plant is also allowed, within the limits noted in the statute. Computations are based upon the historical cost of the utility system and not upon what the system would cost to rEconstruct today. System depreciation need not be included in the computation.

There is no time limit on use of connection fees, but funds collected must be spent on projects included in the master plan of the utility for which the connection fees were collected. Computation of equitable and defensible connection fees will be the subject of a future Municipal Research News article. Also, the concept of local facilities charges versus general connection fees will be explored.

Voluntary Mitigation

RCW 82.02.020 states that, except for impact fees as provided for in RCW 82.02.050 -82.02.090, a municipal corporation cannot impose taxes, fees, or charges on the construction or rEconstruction of buildings or on the development, subdivision, classification, or reclassification of land. However, this does not preclude dedications of land or easements within a proposed development that the municipal corporation can demonstrate are reasonably necessary as a directresult of the proposed development.

Further, this section does not prohibit voluntary agreements that allow a payment in lieu of a dedication of land or to mitigate a direct impact that has been identified as a consequence of the proposed development. Any such voluntary agreement is subject to the following provisions:

The payment must be held in a reserve account and may only be expended to fund a capital improvement agreed upon by the parties to mitigate the identified, direct impact;
The payment must be expended in all cases within five years of collection; and
Any payment not so expended must be refunded with interest at the rate applied to judgments to the property owners of record at the time of the refund; however, if the payment is not expended within five years due to delay attributable to the developer, the payment must be refunded without interest.

A municipal corporation cannot require any payment as part of such a voluntary agreement that cannot be established as reasonably necessary as a direct result of the proposed development or plat. This statute does not affect the ability of a county, city, or town to impose water, sewer, natural gas, drainage utility, and drainage system charges (connection fees) if such charges do not exceed the proportionate share of such utility or system's capital costs which the county, city, or town can demonstrate are attributable to the property being charged.

Impact Fees

Under RCW 82.02.050 - 82.02.100, counties, cities, and towns that are required or choose to plan under The Growth Management Act are authorized to impose impact fees on development activity as part of the financing for public facilities. Impact fees can only be imposed for system improvements that are reasonably related to the new development and cannot exceed a proportionate share of the costs of the system improvements. Also, they can be used only for system improvements that will reasonably benefit the new development. Impact fees may be collected and spent only for the public facilities defined in RCW 82.02.090: (a) public streets and roads; (b) publicly owned parks, open space, and recreation facilities; (c) school facilities; and (d) fire protection facilities in jurisdictions that are not part of a fire district.

Note in the preceding paragraph that the only utility function for which impact fees may be assessed is fire protection. A development activity may, in itself, cause fire protection impacts to a city's water system in terms of increased supply, storage, and transmission mains. Distribution mains and fire hydrants are normally required in any development.

Impact fees are to be retained in special interest-bearing accounts for each type of public facility for which impact fees are collected. Impact fees for system improvements are to be expended only in conformance with the capital facilities plan element of the comprehensive plan. These fees must be used within six years of receipt, unless there is an extraordinary reason for fees to be held longer than six years.

Summary

Now we know what to do. We'll let the developer do a recovery contract for the water and sewer main extensions. Then we'll collect the connection fees and reimbursement assessments from people as they come in for building permits. There's no need for voluntary mitigation as the development doesn't have any major direct impacts. But he does need to pay the fire protection impact fees we set up last year.

John Carpita
Public Works Consultant

The following related information is available from MRSC:

MRSC Web Site

Impact Fee Ordinance Listing (http://www.mrsc.org/subjects/planning/impact.htm)
Capital Facility Financing (http://www.mrsc.org/subjects/planning/capital.htm)
Searchable Municipal Codes (http://www.mrsc.org/codes.htm)

Selections from the MRSC Library on Utilities and Developer Contributions

Developer Reimbursement Contracts - Latecomer Charges under the Water and Sewer Facilities Act (RCW 35.91), [compilation], MRSC Library, 1993. [U 3.5200 D455 1993]
Development Impact Fees: Policy Rationale, Practice, Theory, and Issues, edited by Arthur C. Nelson, Chicago, Planners Press, 1988. [PL 2.1420 D58 1988]
Impact Fee Information [compilation], MRSC Library, Jan 1994. [PL 2.1420 I491 1994 Pt. 1 & 2]
A Practitioner's Guide to Development Impact Fees, James C. Nicholas, Arthur C. Nelson, and Julian Conrad Juergensmeyer, Chicago, Planners Press, American Planning Association, c1991. [PL 2.1420 P755 1991]
"Special Connection Fees, Latecomer Charges and LID Waivers; Some Comments on RCW 35.91.020 and 35.92.025 and Pending Spokane Legislation," Robert Beaumier, Legal Notes, MRSC Information Bulletin No. 446, June 1987. [L 1.2000 L525 no.446]
"System Development Charges and Developer Reimbursement Agreements, PW-208," Public Works Department Policy and Procedures, City of Port Angeles, 1994. (U 4.3000)
"Voluntary contribution agreement," City of Issaquah, Washington, no date. [PL 7.4400 V655 c.1**]

Ask MRSC

This column contains summaries of recent inquiries answered by MRSC consultants.

Affirmative Action - Has the provision in RCW 35.22.650 relating to minority contracting been overruled by case law?

No. This statute relates to contracts for public works projects in sEcond class cities, towns, and code cities with a population less than 20,000. It relates to minority-owned businesses. Although there have been some cases nationally that relate to the validity of affirmative action programs, the statute has not been repealed by the legislature or struck down by the state courts, and thus should still be followed.

Americans with Disabilities Act - Who should have access to personnel medical records that are confidential under the ADA?

To protect the confidentiality of medical records under the ADA, an employer should place such records in a separate, locked file and should have a designated person(s) with access to the medical files. The EEOC's Technical Assistance Manual of the Employment Provisions (Title I) of the Americans with Disabilities Act provides exceptions to this confidentiality requirement, including: "Supervisors and managers may be informed about necessary restrictions on the work or duties of an employee and necessary accommodations." There are additional exceptions related to first aid and safety personnel, government officials investigating compliance with the ADA, providing information to state workers compensation offices, and to insurance companies in certain circumstances.

Americans with Disabilities Act - Is a city or county required to have an "ADA coordinator"?

Section 35.107(a) of the ADA Title II implementing rules requires a public entity that employs 50 or more people to designate at least one employee to coordinate its efforts to comply with Title II (discrimination in public services) and to investigate any complaints of ADA-related discrimination.

Annexation - If the signatures on an annexation petition are filed within six months, can the annexation process itself take longer than six months?

Yes. RCW 35A.01.040(8) and RCW 35.21.005(8) provide that signatures on an annexation petition are valid for six months from the date of signing, and are to be stricken from the petition if older than six months as of the date the petition is filed with the city. Once the petition and signatures have been verified by the certifying officer, the signatures are valid for as long as the annexation is pending, including any review by a boundary review board or court appeal.

CPI/IPD - What are the components for the Consumer Price Index (CPI) and the Implicit Price Deflator (IPD)and why are they so different in magnitude?

The Consumer Price Index includes a fixed market basket of goods that a typical consumer might purchase including: (1) food & beverages; (2) housing; (3) apparel; (4) transportation; (5) medical care; (6) entertainment; and (7) other goods and services. The price levels of this fixed basket of goods and services are a measure of inflation commonly used for labor agreements andentitlements. The CPI measures are administered by the Federal Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The Implicit Price Deflator is a different measure within the National Income and Product Accounts kept by the Federal Bureau of Economic Analysis. The IPD provides a method of measuring changes in the Economy's average price level. It is based on all final goods and services currently produced in the Economy, thus avoiding limitations of the CPI.

Food Bank - Is there a specific state statute allowing a city to operate a food bank?

No specific statute indicates that a city may operate a food bank, but RCW 74.04.040 provides authority for a city to establish a program or policy for the care, support, and relief of needy persons. A food bank would be such a program, and MRSC has held that this is a proper public purpose.

Growth Management - Does the Growth Management Act require a review of comprehensive plans every five years?

Yes. This is in RCW 36.70A.130, which was amended in 1997.

Leasing of City-Owned Land for Telecommunications Facility - Does a city or county need to use either a short plat or binding site plan procedure when processing a long term-lease of city land for the siting of a telecommunications tower?

There is no statutory exemption that removes such long-term leases from the requirements of chapter 58.17 RCW. Therefore, cities and counties should require either a short plat or a binding site plan procedure. (See the definitions in RCW 58.17.020 and the exemptions listed in RCW 58.17.040.)

Local Option Fuel Tax - May counties levy a local option fuel tax for local transportation improvements?

Yes, the authority has been in place since 1990, through RCW 82.80.010. Any county may levy a local option fuel tax of up to 10% of the state motor vehicle fuel tax (currently $0.23 per gallon). The commission or council must first approve the measure, then have it approved by a majority of the voters. The proceeds are then distributed to the county and its cities and towns based on a formula. The formula distributions are made according to the population of each jurisdiction within the county, with the unincorporated area receiving an amount equal to 1.5 times its population. To date, no counties have levied this tax.

Open Public Meetings - Can nonresidents be prohibited from speaking during the open comment section of a regular council or commission meeting?

Probably not. By opening the meeting to receive comments from the audience, the council or commission is in effect creating a "public forum" and restrictions based on residency in this context may violate free speech rights. Anyone who does speak, however, would be subject toany rules adopted by the council or commission, such as time limits, decorum, etc.

Records Retention - Does the Local Government Records Retention Schedule allow a city to dispose of or return a land use application that has been withdrawn by the applicant?

No. The term "public record" applies to any type of document received by a local government during the course of public business (RCW 40.14.010 and WAC 434-610-010). Once an application becomes a "public record" it must remain in the custody of the agency in which it was received. It cannot be released to individuals except for disposition pursuant to law or as otherwise provided by law. See RCW 40.14.070 and WAC 434-615-020.

Records Retention - Must a terminated employee's personnel file and confidential medical file be stored separately?

There is no specific federal or state law that requires this, but MRSC recommends that these files be kept separately for the duration of the required record retention period.

Vehicle Reimbursement - What is the maximum amount that a city or county may pay as reimbursement for an employee's use of his/her own vehicle without having it count as taxable income?

The IRS figure for 1998 is 32.5 cents per mile.

Vesting and Annexed Lands - Do the land use restrictions of the county apply if a subdivision application was submitted and approved by the county and then the property was annexed by the city?

It appears that the land use restrictions of the county probably do apply in this situation. A recent Court of Appeals case, Schneider Homes v. City of Kent, 87 Wn.App. 774 (1997), involved this issue. The court in that case analyzed the vested rights doctrine as it applies in this state. The court held that vested rights of a property owner do survive an annexation by a city. This case is now being appealed to the state Supreme Court.

Also, the case of Noble Manor Co. v. Pierce County, 133 Wn.2d 269 (1997) held that development rights do vest for a subdivision at the time of a complete application. The vesting is not limited to just the right to divide the property but also the right to develop in accordance with the development regulations in place at the time of the application.

Resource Sharing
Information Partnerhsip Program

I mentioned in the last newsletter how materials collected from the Information PartnershipProgram are often turned into bound compilations. Well, these paper compilations are going electronic! Those of you who have access to the World Wide Web can now start accessing electronic versions of compiled sample ordinances and policies on a variety of subjects including Meal/Travel Reimbursement Policies, Credit Card Use Policies, E-mail and Internet Usage Policies and more! For a more complete list of our electronic policy compilations, visit our Web site at www.mrsc.org/library/compilat.htm.

The Information Partnership Program seeks current materials from the cities, towns and counties of Washington. The materials received provide answers and support to the challenges faced by municipalities every day. You may order the materials below by contacting the MRSC library at 1-(800)-933-6772 or (206) 625-1300, fax (206) 625-1220, or e-mail us at mrsc@mrsc.org. Due to space limitations, the list below is not complete. A comprehensive list of IP materials received may be requested from the library or viewed on our Web site at www.mrsc.org/library/rshare.htm.

We encourage you to make this list available to those departments who would benefit from its contents.

Bonus Pay Policies for Employees and Officials (Personnel)

Anacortes Resolution No. 1289 adopting an employee recognition program [2 p.], 1997 (PE 4.2000); Coupeville-Employee suggestion program rules and procedures and sample suggestion form [3 p.], 1997 (PE 8.3100); Ellensburg-1997 employee bonus recommendations [7 p.],1/97 (PE 4.2000); Federal Way- Performance based pay plan, 1998 goal setting [7 p.], 1/98 (PE 7.2400); Grand Coulee Dam- Longevity pay policy [2 p.], n.d. (PE 7.5400); Longview-Resolution No. 1504 relating to terms of employment and benefits for employees of the city [40 p.], 11/12/92 (PE 6.0500); Oak Harbor-Ordinance No. 1076 establishing awards for city employees and creating new chapter 2.35 of municipal code [3 p.], 12/25/96 (PE 4.2000); Port Angeles-Employee incentive programs and sample forms [7 p.], 1997 (PE 8.3100)

Building/Facilities Policy & Procedures Manual

Auburn-Manual of Policies and Procedures for Auburn Park and Recreation Board [28 p.], 1995 (P 6.0000); Leavenworth-Policy for use of council chambers (w/form) [2 p.], n.d. (PP 3.7000)

Interlocal Agreements Regarding Criminal Justice Responsibilities (Per Rcw 39.34.180) (Public Safety)

Anacortes-Jail facility use agreement [5 p.], 9/96 (PS 7.5100); Auburn-Combined regional emergency services unit (S.W.A.T.) operational agreement [7 p.], 1992; Narcotics task force operational agreement [13 p.],1988; Violent Crimes Task Force memorandum of understanding [14 p.], 1995 (PS 6.7100); Bellevue-Contract for jail services between Bellevue and King County [18 p.]. 1987 (PS 7.5100); Colville-Interlocal court services agreement between Colville andStevens County [3 p.], 9/97 (PS 2.4000); Des Moines-Contract for jail services with Kent [6 p.,] n.d.; Contract for jail services with Puyallup [8 p.], 1993 (PS 7.1500); Electronic home monitoring agreement with Puyallup [5 p.], 1993 (PS 2.8100); Ellensburg-1997 agreement for jail services between Kittitas County and City of Ellensburg [7 p.], 1997 (PS 7.5100); Federal Way-Interlocal agreement for jail and health services with Kent [4 p.],10/96 (PS 7.1500); Longview-Agreement for use of jail facilities between City of Longview and Cowlitz County [16 p.], 3/12/97 (PS 7.5100); Olympia- Agreement for use of jail facilities between Olympia and Thurston County [6 p.]; 4/93 (PS 7.1500); Omak-Criminal justice funding survey [51 p.], 1997; Interlocal governmental agreement for criminal justice services between Omak and Okanogan County [6 p.], 1993 (PS 7.1500); Port Angeles,-Agreement for prisoner confinement services between Clallam County and City of Port Angeles [5 p.], 10/96; Agreement for prisoner confinement services between City of Forks and City of Port Angeles [4 p.],1/98 (PS 7.5100); Electronic home monitoring procedure [7 p.], 10/97 (PS 2.8100); Ordinance 2957 establishing electronic home detention as a means of confinement [2 p.],4/97 (PS 2.8100); Poulsbo- UI Task Force mutual aid agreement and interlocal agreement between Kitsap County governments [11 p.]. 4/9/97; Interlocal drug task force agreement by and between Kitsap County, Bainbridge Island, Bremerton, Port Orchard, Poulsbo, and Shelton [17 p.], 5/97 (PS 6.7000); Kitsap County/Poulsbo contract for incarceration of city prisoners [7 p.], 2/97 (PS 7.5100); Raymond-Contract for boarding prisoners between Pacific County and City of Raymond [4 p.],1/98 (PS 7.5100); Law enforcement communication services agreement between Pacific County and City of Raymond [3 p.], 2/95. (PS 7.1500); South Bend/Raymond Drug Task Force interlocal agreement [ 6 p.], 8/96 (PS 6.7000); Shelton-Interlocal Drug Task Force agreement between Kitsap and Mason Counties, cities of Bainbridge Island, Port Orchard, Poulsbo, and Shelton and the Washington State Patrol [10 p.], 1997 (PS 7.1500); Tumwater-Agreement for use of jail facilities between Thurston County and City of Tumwater [6 p.], 1/96 (PS 7.5100); Wilbur- Agreement for police dispatch and related services between Wilbur and Lincoln County [2 p.], n.d.; Interlocal government contract between Wilbur, Washington and Lincoln County for jail, district court and prosecutor services [9 p.], n.d. (PS 7.1500); Winthrop-Interlocal government contract between the Town of Winthrop and Okanogan County for criminal justice services [ 5 p.],n.d. (PS 7.1500); Yakima-Interlocal corrections/detention agreement with Yakima County [9 p.], 1/98 (PS 7.5100).

Landscaping Manuals/Standards (Parks & Planning)

Dupont-Restated right-of-way maintenance agreement [11 p.], 1990 (S 5.0000); Federal Way-Comprehensive park, recreation and open space plan [1 vol.], 11/95 (P 3.2000 F4 C65 1995); Kirkland-Parks maintenance standards [1 vol.], 1994 (P 4.0000 K53 P35 1994); Omak-Landscape guidelines [49 p.],1997 (PL 10.1200 O47 L35 1997**); Poulsbo-Chapter 18.55 Poulsbo Municipal Code - Landscaping standards [12 p.] (PL10.1200); Shelton-Shelton Municipal Code Chapter 20.60 - Landscaping and screening [8 p.], n.d. (PL 10.1200).

Snow Removal / Ice Control Plans (Public Works)

Bellevue-Ice & snow response [10 p. + 1 col. map], 12/97. (S 2.2300); Colville-Street Department snow information [1 p.], n.d. (S 2.2300); Des Moines-Snow and ice removal memorandum [4 p.],1997 (S 2.2300); Ellensburg-Snow removal and salt application memo [ 1 p.],1993 (S 2.2300); Kirkland-Snow and ice program policies and procedures [6 p.],n.d. (S 2.2300); Leavenworth- Standard operating procedures for snow removal and ice control [3 p.], 12/93 (S 2.2300); Olympia- Snow and ice control manual [24 p.], 12/97 (S 2.2300); South Cle Elum-Snow plowing policy [1 p.], n.d. (S 2.2300); Yakima-Winter 96'/97' snow report and memos [20 p.], 2/97-5/97 (S 2.2300); Winter operations plan 1997/98 [28 p.] 1997 (S 2.2300 Y33 W55 1997)

New Acquisitions

This list contains new publications, ordinances, and other materials recently received by the MRSC library. We also prepare a more comprehensive list of new acquisitions each month which is posted on our Web site at http://www.mrsc.org/library/newacq.htm . If you would like to borrow one or more of these publications, please contact Julie Hersum in our library at (206) 625-1300.

Economic Development

Bids: Business Improvement Districts, Lawrence O. Houstoun, Jr., Urban Land Institute, International Downtown Association, Washington, D.C., 1997, viii, 232 p., ill., photos (col.). [LID 5.1000 B855 1997]

Economic Development: Marketing for Results, Eric P. Canada, IL. Blane, Canada Ltd., 1995, iii, 148 p. + appendix. A manual on how to employ marketing techniques within your Economic development plan. [ED 4.3000 E35 1995]

Harvesting Hometown Jobs: The New Small Town Guide to Local Economic development, National Center for Small Communities, 2nd ed., Washington, D.C., 1997, 157 p., ill. [ED 3.2000 H355 1997]

Tourism - Lynnwood Ordinance No. 2158 establishing a tourism advisory committee and its membership, passed 10-97. (ED 5.4000)

Elections

Initiative and Referendum - Monroe Ordinance No. 1118 adding Chapter 1.12, "Initiative and Referendum" to municipal code, passed 11/97. (E 5.0000)

Environment

Critical and Sensitive Areas - Clark County Ordinance No. 1997-05-34 adding Chapter 13.60, "Geologic Hazard Areas Regulations" [erosion, stormwater, steep slope, landslide, seismic/earthquake] to county code, passed 5-97. (EN 4.0000)

Dune Protection - Ocean Shores Ordinance No. 629 adds a new chapter to the municipal code to be known as the Ocean Dunes Protection Act to regulate and protect the uses of dunes areas located on city-owned property, passed 1-98. (EN 6.3100)

Tire Noise - Covington Ordinance No. 65-98 makes it unlawful to operate a motor vehicle so as to cause certain tire noise; squealing, screeching or other sound from the tires in contact with the ground or other roadway surface because of rapid acceleration or excessive speed around corners or other such reason, passed 1-98 (EN 7.3400)

Finance

Activity-based Costing and Management: Issues and Practices in Local Government, Barbara Weiss, Chicago, IL, Government Finance Officers Association, 1997, v, 72 p. [F 2.0000 A373 1997]

Admissions Tax - Lacey Ordinance No. 1074 provides for an admissions tax, passed 12-97. (F 5.1510)

Marketing Your Budget: Creative Ways to Engage Citizens in the Bottom Line, Dr. Frank Benest, Tampa, FL, Innovation Groups, 1997, 72 p. + appendices, ill. [F 3.0000 M36 1997]

Government Administration

Building Citizen Involvement: Strategies for Local Government, Mary L. Walsh, NLC Leadership Training Institute, Washington, D.C., ICMA, 1997, 125 p. [G 1.6000 B85 1997]

Electronic Records Retention: an Introduction, David O. Stephens & Roderick C. Wallace, Prairie Village, KS, ARMA International, 1997, viii, 131 p. A comprehensive guide to electronic record retention and the laws and technologies involved. [G 9.4000 E45 1997]

Handbook of Local Government Administration, edited by John J. Gargan, New York, Marcel Dekker, 1997, xiii, 556p. A comprehensive overview textbook on administration and management practices in the local public sector. [G 9.0000 H35 1997]

Harnessing Information Technology for Your City, National League of Cities, Advisory Council, Washington, D.C., 1997, 34 p. Explores the role of information technology in local governments and their communities. [IS 0.0009 H36 1997**]

Human Services

Health Policy for Low-income People in Washington, Len Nichols, Leighton Ku, Stephen Norton, Susan Wall, The Urban Institute, Washington, D.C., 1997, 62 p. Examines Washington State's progress in coping with the Federal government's devolution of responsibility for health care, income security, employment and training programs, and social services. [H 4.5500 H43 1997]

Out of Sight, out of Mind: Homeless Children and Families in Small-town America, Yvonne M. Vissing, Lexington, KY, University of Kentucky, 1996, xii, 271 p., ill. [H 4.1500 O87 1996]

"Welfare Reform: One Year Later," by Cynthia Pantazis, Public Management, November 1997, pp. 10-15. (H 4.5000)

Information Systems

Beyond Maps: GIS and Decision Making in Local Government, John O'Looney, Ed.D., Ph.D., Washington, D.C., ICMA, 1997, 151 p. A guide to using GIS systems as a tool for public decision making. [IS 9.0000 B48 1997]

The Digital Economy: Promise and Peril in the Age of Networked Intelligence, Don Tapscott, New York, McGraw-Hill, 1996, xviii, 342 p. An examination of the changing state of the world from a manufactured based to digital based Economy. [IS 0.0009 D54 1996]

The Year 2000 Problem: When the Clock Turns, Be Ready!, edited by Renee M. Winsky and Nathan M. Ridnouer, Washington, D.C., National League of Cities, 1997, 24 p. [IS 2.3000 Y43 1997]

Land Use Planning

Landscape Guidelines - Omak, WA, 1997, 49 p. [PL 10.1200 O47 L35 1997**]

"Neotraditional Development: A Legal Analysis," by S. Mark White and Dawn Jourdan, Land Use Law, August 1997, pp. 3-11. (PL 14.2000)

On Borrowed Land: Public Policies for Floodplains, Scott Faber, Cambridge, MA, Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, 1996, 32 p., col. ill. [PL 8.3200 O5 1996**]

Online Resources for Planners, Sanjay Jeer, November 1997, Chicago, American Planning Association, 1997, 126 p., ill. A comprehensive guide to planning resources on the Internet's World Wide Web. [PL 0.0003 PAS 474/475 1997]

Streets and the Shaping of Towns and Cities, Michael Southworth and Eran Ben-Joseph, New York, McGraw-Hill, 1997, vii, 184 p., ill. Explores the changing nature of street design in America and how street standards effect neighborhood character and livability. [S 2.1000 S87 1997]

Tourism Planning: Basics, Concepts, Cases, Clare A. Gunn, 3rd ed., Washington, D.C., Taylor & Francis, 1994, xxvii, 460 p., ill. A guide to land use planning strategies aimed at attracting and maintaining tourism. [ED 5.4000 T676 1994]

Vacationscape: Developing Tourist Areas, Clare A. Gunn, 3rd ed., Washington, D.C., Taylor & Francis, 1997, 196 p., ill. A guide to the concept of community tourism and environmentally friendly development. [PL 8.3122 V33 1997]

Licensing and Regulation

Brew Pubs - Tukwila Ordinance No. 1814 amends zoning code to permit brew pubs, passed 11-97. (LR 54.6000)

Chauffeur's License - Vancouver Ordinance No. M-3317 establishes more objective standards for granting or revoking a chauffeur's licenses, passed 8-97. (LR 88.0000)

Parks and Recreation

Facility Planning for Physical Education, Recreation, and Athletics, Richard B. Flynn, editor and contributing author, Reston, VA, American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, 1993, xi, 251 p., ill. [P 6.0000 F34 1993]

Parks: Design and Management, Leonard E. Phillips, New York, McGraw-Hill, 1995, ix, 227 p., ill. Covers design of playgrounds, parking lots, trails, walls, and bridges; management of public relations, vandalism, volunteers, planting, xeriscaping, composting, and pests; and provides detailed recommendations for plant selection. [P 4.0000 P37 1995]

Personnel

Employee Recognition Program - Lakewood Ordinance No. 143 authorizes the manager to establish a program, passed 11-97. (PE 8.3100)

New Strategies for Public Pay: Rethinking Government Compensation Programs, Howard Rasher, Charles Fay, and Associates, San Francisco, CA, Josses-Bass, 1997, xxiv, 340 p. Addresses the issue of compensation as an employee motivator for good performance and an alternative to pay. [PE 7.0000 N49 1997]

Workplace Violence: Awareness and Prevention for Employers and Employees, State of Washington Department of Labor and Industries, October 1997, Olympia, WA, 1997, 18 p. + appendices. [PE 4.6310 W66 1997]

Public Safety

Civil Enforcement - Kitsap County Ordinance No. 209-1997 decriminalizes certain offenses; provides procedure for the investigation of suspected violations and enforcement of other ordinances, passed 7-97 (PS 7.4150)

Fixing Broken Windows: Restoring Order and Reducing Crime in Our Communities, George L. Kelling & Catherine M. Coles, forward by James Q. Wilson, New York, Free Press, 1996, xvi, 319 p. Examines how reducing public disorder through aggressive community policing can reduce serious crime in communities. [PS 7.1200 F59 1996]

Graffiti Removal - Cashmere Ordinance No. 898 declares graffiti to be a nuisance and establishes procedures for graffiti removal, passed 5-97. (PS 7.1100)

Sex Offender Registration and Community Notification: Guidelines for Washington State Law Enforcement, Washington Association of Sheriffs & Police Chiefs Sexual Offender Notification Model Policy Work Group, November 1997, Olympia, WA, 1997, 1 vol. (various pagings). [PS 7.4210 S48 1997]

Public Works

Manhole Inspection and Rehabilitation, prepared by the Committee on Manhole Rehabilitation of the Pipeline Division of the American Society of Civil Engineers, New York, American Society of Civil Engineers, 1997, x, 74 p., ill. [US 2.2000 M355 1997]

Public Works Inspectors' Manual, Silas B. Birch, Jr., 5th ed., BNi Building News, 1996, 711 p. Complete operational and technical guidebook for professionals responsible for inspecting public works construction for city, county, state and federal agencies. [PW 1.2000 P73 1996]

Standard Plans for Public Works Construction, American Public Works Association, Southern California Chapter, Associated General Contractors of California, Anaheim, CA, BNi Building News, 1997, 1 v., looseleaf. [PW 2.1000 S831 1997]

Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, American Public Works Association, Southern California Chapter, Associated General Contractors of California, Anaheim, CA, BNi Building News, 1997, 761 p. [PW 2.1000 S832 1997]

Telecommunications

Guidance on Sharing Freeway and Highway Rights-of-way for Telecommunications, AASHTO Task Force on Fiber Optics on Transportation Rights-of-Way, Washington, D.C., 1996, 44 p. [FR 17.0000 G75 1996]

Telecommunications - Right-of-Way - Pierce County Ordinance No. 16-124 adopts a new chapter 12.34 of the Pierce County Code, Telecommunications Users of Pierce County Rights of Way, passed 12-97. (FR 14.1000)

Transportation

Automated Enforcement Systems - Spokane Ordinance No. C-32036 amends code to provide for the use of automated traffic enforcement systems - certificate of innocence - identification process, passed 11-97. (T 1.0000)

Camping - Public Property - Vancouver Ordinance No. M-3323 prohibits camping and storage of personal property on or in any street, park or publicly owned parking lot or publicly owned area; prohibits occupying a vehicle for the purpose of camping while the vehicle is parked in any street, park or publicly owned lot, passed 10-97. (T 3.9600)

Unattended Minors - Kelso Ordinance No. 97-3372 makes it unlawful to leave children under the age of 8 years in a parked vehicle unattended by a person 12 years or older, passed 10-97. (PS 7.4271)

Clarification

Thanks to George Mack, Bond Counsel with Foster Pepper & Shelfelman, for pointing out theneed for this clarification.

In the Ask MRSC column of the December newsletter, we posed the following question: "May a city or county issue a voter-approved general obligation bond to pay for a fire truck?" Our answer was "No. Voter-approved bonds may only be used for 'capital purposes, which shall not include the replacement of equipment . . . ' RCW 84.52.056." See Art. 7, §2, Washington Constitution.

This answer is only partially correct and should have been elaborated on. At issue is what constitutes a "replacement?" Obviously, if a new truck is added to your existing fleet, it is not a replacement and voter-approved excess tax levy general obligation (G.O.) bonds may be used as financing. Conversely, if a municipality buys a new truck and surpluses and sells the old one, there may be a problem. If the new truck serves the same function as the old one, it would likely be considered a replacement under RCW 84.52.056 and the state constitution and ineligible for financing with voter-approved debt to be paid from excess levies. If a city or county buys a new fire truck, but keeps the old one as a reserve or uses it for training purposes, the purchase is probably not a replacement and voter-approved unlimited tax bonds may be used.

Always check out your particular situation with your bond counsel. He or she will determine whether your planned purchase is a replacement or not. And remember, nonvoted (councilmanic) bonds and voted debt not payable from excess tax levies may be used for any fire equipment purchase, whether it is a replacement or not. However, the debt service must be paid by the general fund.

Municipal Research & Services Center of Washington
2601 Fourth Ave, Ste 800
Seattle, WA 98121-1280
Tel (206) 625-1300 - E-Mail mrsc@mrsc.org - Web http://www.mrsc.org