Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRegular Council Agenda Packet - 28 Jan 2013 - PdfAGENDA  RENTON CITY COUNCIL    REGULAR MEETING  January 28, 2013  Monday, 7 p.m.  1.CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2.ROLL CALL 3.PROCLAMATION a. Renton Heart Month ‐ February 2013  4.SPECIAL PRESENTATION a. Library Advisory Board Report  5.ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT 6.AUDIENCE COMMENT (Speakers must sign up prior to the Council meeting.  Each speaker is allowed five minutes.  The  first comment period is limited to one‐half hour.  The second comment period later on in the  agenda is unlimited in duration.)  When you are recognized by the Presiding Officer, please walk to  the podium and state your name and city of residence for the record, SPELLING YOUR LAST NAME. 7.CONSENT AGENDA The following items are distributed to Councilmembers in advance for study and review, and the  recommended actions will be accepted in a single motion.  Any item may be removed for further  discussion if requested by a Councilmember.  a. Approval of Council meeting minutes of 1/14/2013.  Council concur.  b. Mayor  Law  reappoints  Michael  Chen  to  the  Planning  Commission  for  a  three‐year  term  expiring 1/31/2016.  Council concur.  c. City  Clerk  submits  quarterly  contract  list  for  period  10/31/2012  through  12/31/2012,  and  expiration report for agreements expiring 1/1/2013 to 6/30/2013.  Information.  d. Court  Case  filed  by  Dorsie  Williams  v.  City  of  Renton, represented  by  Raymond  L.  Connell, Attorney for Plaintiff, alleging City negligence due to a broken sidewalk resulting in a  fall and injury.  Refer to City Attorney and Insurance Services.  e. Community  Services  Department  submits  CAG‐11‐189,  Cedar  River  Park  Parking  Lot  Lighting project; and requests approval of the project, commencement of a 60‐day lien period,  and release of retained amount of $11,983.06 to Transportation Systems, Inc., contractor, if all  required releases are obtained.  Council concur.  f. Fire and Emergency Services Department recommends approval of Amendment #6 to CAG‐09‐ 081,  accepting  $1,229,898  from  King  County  for  basic  life  support  services  for  2013  to  be  divided amongst the City ‐ $916,361, King County Fire District #25 ‐ $105,875, and King County  Fire District #40 ‐ $207,662.  Council concur. Page 1 of 144 g. Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of an agreement with the Washington  State Department of Transportation to accept Federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality  (CMAQ)  grant  funds  in  the  amount  of  $500,000  for  the  S.  7th  St.  and  Shattuck  Ave.  S.  Intersection project.  Council concur.  h. Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of an agreement with the Washington  State  Department  of  Transportation  to  accept Transportation  Improvement  Board  grant  funds in the amount of $585,230 for the S. 7th St. and Shattuck Ave. S. Intersection project.   Council concur.  i. Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of an agreement with the Washington  State Department of Transportation to accept Surface Transportation Program grant funds in  the amount of $951,000 for the Logan Ave. N. Roadway Improvements (N. Airport Way to N.  8th St.) project. Council concur.  j. Utility  Systems  Division  recommends  approval  of an  Amended  and  Restated  Solid  Waste  Interlocal Agreement with King County that extends the existing interlocal agreement (CAG‐88‐ 057) from 6/30/2028 to 12/31/2040.  Refer to Utilities Committee.  k. Utilities Systems Division submits CAG‐12‐056, SE 5th St. AC Water Main Replacement project;  and requests approval of the project, authorization for final pay estimate in the amount of  $3,608.03, commencement of a 60‐day lien period, and release of the retainage bond to B&B  Utilities and Excavating, LLC, contractor, if all required releases are obtained.  Council concur.  l. Utility Systems Division recommends approval of a contract with CH2MHill in the amount of  $179,003 for the final engineering design of the Sunset Terrace Regional Stormwater Facility  project.  Council concur.  8.UNFINISHED BUSINESS Topics listed below were discussed in Council committees during the past week.  Those topics  marked with an asterisk (*) may include legislation.  Committee reports on any topics may be held  by the Chair if further review is necessary. a. Finance  Committee:   Vouchers;  Enterprise  Asset  Management  &  EnerGov  Building  Permit  Systems  b. Planning  &  Development  Committee:   Kirkland  Townhomes  Fee  Waiver  Request;  Comprehensive Plan Update Work Program & Public Participation Plan  c. Public Safety Committee:  Pipeline Safety  9.RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES 10.NEW BUSINESS (Includes Council Committee agenda topics; call 425‐430‐6512 for recorded information.) 11.AUDIENCE COMMENT 12.ADJOURNMENT   Page 2 of 144     COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AGENDA   (Preceding Council Meeting)     COUNCIL CHAMBERS   January 28, 2013  Monday, 6 p.m.    Comprehensive Plan Update (briefing only);  Sunset Area Community Investment Strategy (briefing only)    • Hearing assistance devices for use in the Council Chambers are available upon request to the City Clerk •  CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ARE TELEVISED LIVE ON GOVERNMENT ACCESS CHANNEL 21 AND ARE RECABLECAST:  Tues. & Thurs. at 11 AM & 9 PM, Wed. & Fri at 9 AM & 7 PM and Sat. & Sun. at 1 PM & 9 PM  Page 3 of 144 3a. ‐ Renton Heart Month ‐ February 2013 Page 4 of 144 CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL Subject/Title: Reappointment to Planning Commission - Michael Chen Meeting: Regular Council - 28 Jan 2013 Exhibits: None Submitting Data: Dept/Div/Board: Executive Staff Contact: April Alexander, Executive Assistant, x6520 Recommended Action: Council concur Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required: $ N/A Transfer Amendment: $N/A Amount Budgeted: $ N/A Revenue Generated: $N/A Total Project Budget: $ N/A City Share Total Project: $ N/A SUMMARY OF ACTION: Mayor Law reappoints the following to the Planning Commission: Mr. Michael Chen, 6214 NE 5th Court, Renton, 98059, for a term that expires on January 31, 2016. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Concur with Mayor Law's reappointment of Mr. Chen to the Planning Commision. 7b. ‐ Mayor Law reappoints Michael Chen to the Planning Commission  for a three‐year term expiring 1/31/2016.  Council concur. Page 5 of 144 CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL Subject/Title: City of Renton Contract Lists: Signed 4th Quarter 2012 Six-month Expiration Report Meeting: Regular Council - 28 Jan 2013 Exhibits: List of agreements signed from October 1, 2012 through December 31, 2012; List of agreements expiring between January 1, 2013 and June 30, 2013. Submitting Data: Dept/Div/Board: City Clerk Staff Contact: Bonnie I. Walton Recommended Action: None; Information only Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required: $ N/A Transfer Amendment: $N/A Amount Budgeted: $ N/A Revenue Generated: $N/A Total Project Budget: $ N/A City Share Total Project: $ N/A SUMMARY OF ACTION: Fully executed in fourth quarter 2012 were 38 contracts, 19 addendums, 15 change orders, and 1 lease affecting 73 agreements. The six-month expiration report shows 27 agreements that will expire between January 1, 2013 and June 30, 2013. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: None; Information only 7c. ‐ City Clerk submits quarterly contract list for period 10/31/2012  through 12/31/2012, and expiration report for agreements expiring Page 6 of 144 7c. ‐ City Clerk submits quarterly contract list for period 10/31/2012  through 12/31/2012, and expiration report for agreements expiring Page 7 of 144 7c. ‐ City Clerk submits quarterly contract list for period 10/31/2012  through 12/31/2012, and expiration report for agreements expiring Page 8 of 144 7c. ‐ City Clerk submits quarterly contract list for period 10/31/2012  through 12/31/2012, and expiration report for agreements expiring Page 9 of 144 7c. ‐ City Clerk submits quarterly contract list for period 10/31/2012  through 12/31/2012, and expiration report for agreements expiring Page 10 of 144 7c. ‐ City Clerk submits quarterly contract list for period 10/31/2012  through 12/31/2012, and expiration report for agreements expiring Page 11 of 144 7c. ‐ City Clerk submits quarterly contract list for period 10/31/2012  through 12/31/2012, and expiration report for agreements expiring Page 12 of 144 7c. ‐ City Clerk submits quarterly contract list for period 10/31/2012  through 12/31/2012, and expiration report for agreements expiring Page 13 of 144 7c. ‐ City Clerk submits quarterly contract list for period 10/31/2012  through 12/31/2012, and expiration report for agreements expiring Page 14 of 144 7c. ‐ City Clerk submits quarterly contract list for period 10/31/2012  through 12/31/2012, and expiration report for agreements expiring Page 15 of 144 7c. ‐ City Clerk submits quarterly contract list for period 10/31/2012  through 12/31/2012, and expiration report for agreements expiring Page 16 of 144 7c. ‐ City Clerk submits quarterly contract list for period 10/31/2012  through 12/31/2012, and expiration report for agreements expiring Page 17 of 144 CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL Subject/Title: CRT-13-001; Dorsie Williams v City of Renton Meeting: Regular Council - 28 Jan 2013 Exhibits: Summons Complaint for Negligence Submitting Data: Dept/Div/Board: City Clerk Staff Contact: Bonnie Walton, City Clerk, x6502 Recommended Action: Refer to City Attorney and Insurance Services Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required: $ Transfer Amendment: $ Amount Budgeted: $ Revenue Generated: $ Total Project Budget: $ City Share Total Project: $ SUMMARY OF ACTION: Summons and Complaint for Negligence filed by Dorsie Williams, represented by Raymond L. Connell, Attorney for Plaintiff, v. the City of Renton regarding alleged City negligence due to a broken sidewalk resulting in a fall and injury. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: n/a 7d. ‐ Court Case filed by Dorsie Williams v. City of Renton, represented  by Raymond L. Connell, Attorney for Plaintiff, alleging City negligence  Page 18 of 144 7d. ‐ Court Case filed by Dorsie Williams v. City of Renton, represented  by Raymond L. Connell, Attorney for Plaintiff, alleging City negligence  Page 19 of 144 7d. ‐ Court Case filed by Dorsie Williams v. City of Renton, represented  by Raymond L. Connell, Attorney for Plaintiff, alleging City negligence  Page 20 of 144 7d. ‐ Court Case filed by Dorsie Williams v. City of Renton, represented  by Raymond L. Connell, Attorney for Plaintiff, alleging City negligence  Page 21 of 144 7d. ‐ Court Case filed by Dorsie Williams v. City of Renton, represented  by Raymond L. Connell, Attorney for Plaintiff, alleging City negligence  Page 22 of 144 7d. ‐ Court Case filed by Dorsie Williams v. City of Renton, represented  by Raymond L. Connell, Attorney for Plaintiff, alleging City negligence  Page 23 of 144 7d. ‐ Court Case filed by Dorsie Williams v. City of Renton, represented  by Raymond L. Connell, Attorney for Plaintiff, alleging City negligence  Page 24 of 144 7d. ‐ Court Case filed by Dorsie Williams v. City of Renton, represented  by Raymond L. Connell, Attorney for Plaintiff, alleging City negligence  Page 25 of 144 7d. ‐ Court Case filed by Dorsie Williams v. City of Renton, represented  by Raymond L. Connell, Attorney for Plaintiff, alleging City negligence  Page 26 of 144 7d. ‐ Court Case filed by Dorsie Williams v. City of Renton, represented  by Raymond L. Connell, Attorney for Plaintiff, alleging City negligence  Page 27 of 144 7d. ‐ Court Case filed by Dorsie Williams v. City of Renton, represented  by Raymond L. Connell, Attorney for Plaintiff, alleging City negligence  Page 28 of 144 7d. ‐ Court Case filed by Dorsie Williams v. City of Renton, represented  by Raymond L. Connell, Attorney for Plaintiff, alleging City negligence  Page 29 of 144 7d. ‐ Court Case filed by Dorsie Williams v. City of Renton, represented  by Raymond L. Connell, Attorney for Plaintiff, alleging City negligence  Page 30 of 144 7d. ‐ Court Case filed by Dorsie Williams v. City of Renton, represented  by Raymond L. Connell, Attorney for Plaintiff, alleging City negligence  Page 31 of 144 7d. ‐ Court Case filed by Dorsie Williams v. City of Renton, represented  by Raymond L. Connell, Attorney for Plaintiff, alleging City negligence  Page 32 of 144 CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL Subject/Title: Retention Pay Application - Cedar River Park Parking Lot Lighting Meeting: Regular Council - 28 Jan 2013 Exhibits: Notice of Completion Submitting Data: Dept/Div/Board: Community Services Staff Contact: Todd Black, Capital Project Coordinator, Ext. 6571 Recommended Action: Council concur Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required: $ 11,983.06 Transfer Amendment: $N/A Amount Budgeted: $ 334,949.00 Revenue Generated: $N/A Total Project Budget: $ 334,949.00 City Share Total Project: $ N/A SUMMARY OF ACTION: The Community Services Department submits CAG-11-189, Cedar River Park Parking Lot Lighting, for release of retainage.The project started on February 22, 2012, and was completed on May 24, 2012. The contractor did not complete all of their close-out paperwork until January 2013. The contractor, Transportation Systems, Inc., completed the terms of the contract by installing lighting improvements to Cedar River Park parking lot. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve the project, and release the retained amount of $11,983.06. All required lien releases have been obtained. 7e. ‐ Community Services Department submits CAG‐11‐189, Cedar River  Park Parking Lot Lighting project; and requests approval of the  Page 33 of 144 7e. ‐ Community Services Department submits CAG‐11‐189, Cedar River  Park Parking Lot Lighting project; and requests approval of the  Page 34 of 144 7e. ‐ Community Services Department submits CAG‐11‐189, Cedar River  Park Parking Lot Lighting project; and requests approval of the  Page 35 of 144 7e. ‐ Community Services Department submits CAG‐11‐189, Cedar River  Park Parking Lot Lighting project; and requests approval of the  Page 36 of 144 CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL Subject/Title: King County Basic Life Support (BLS) Contract January 1, 2013 - December 31, 2013 Meeting: Regular Council - 28 Jan 2013 Exhibits: King County Contract #D39144D Amendment #6 Amendment Exhibit B - 2013 EMS Proposed Budget Submitting Data: Dept/Div/Board: Fire & Emergency Services Staff Contact: Erik Wallgren, Deputy Chief/7084 Recommended Action: Council Concur Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required: $ N/A Transfer Amendment: $N/A Amount Budgeted: $ $900,000.00 Revenue Generated: $$916,361.00 Total Project Budget: $ N/A City Share Total Project: $ N/A SUMMARY OF ACTION: The 2009-2013 King County Basic Life Support (BLS) 2013 Amendment #6 to the Contract for Services from Seattle-King County Department of Public Health EMS provides a subsidy for the combined City of Renton, Fire District #25 and Fire District #40 EMS Services. These services include equipment, salaries, training and transport of patients to local hospitals. Ths one-year subsidy Amendment #6 is effective from January 1, 2013 to December 31, 2013. The combined annual amount of $1,229,898.00 (City of Renton - $916,361.00; KCFD #25 - $105,875.00; KCFD #40 - $207,662) is based on the 2013 BLS funding formula (calculations include unincorporated ratios, assessed valuation (AV) amounts, and call volume amounts). The City will be paid the total amount and the two District contracts will be reduced by their portion in 2013. This distribution of funding is the annual entitlement of the 2008-2013 King County Levy funded from Real Property Taxes. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the King County Basic Life Support Services 2013 Contract Amendment #6. 7f. ‐ Fire and Emergency Services Department recommends approval of  Amendment #6 to CAG‐09‐081, accepting $1,229,898 from King County Page 37 of 144 7f. ‐ Fire and Emergency Services Department recommends approval of  Amendment #6 to CAG‐09‐081, accepting $1,229,898 from King County Page 38 of 144 7f. ‐ Fire and Emergency Services Department recommends approval of  Amendment #6 to CAG‐09‐081, accepting $1,229,898 from King County Page 39 of 144 CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL Subject/Title: Federal Funding for South 7th Street at Shattuck Ave South Improvements Meeting: Regular Council - 28 Jan 2013 Exhibits: Local Agency Agreement Local Agency Federal Aid Project Prospectus Submitting Data: Dept/Div/Board: Public Works Staff Contact: Juliana Fries, Program Development Coordinator, x7232 Recommended Action: Council Concur Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required: $ Transfer Amendment: $ Amount Budgeted: $ $192,000 (2013)Revenue Generated: $$500,000 Total Project Budget: $ $1,185,230 (Intersection)City Share Total Project: $ -0- SUMMARY OF ACTION: The South 7th Street at Shattuck Avenue South Intersection Project was selected under the Countywide Selection Process for a Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) grant of $500,000. This federal grant, combined with the recently awarded TIB grant, will install a traffic signal at the intersection of South 7th Street and Shattuck Avenue South, add a right-turn lane on South 7th Street to provide access to the Renton Park & Ride, install new sidewalks on South 7th Street and add a landscaped planter between the travel lane and the sidewalks. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to enter into the Local Agency Agreement with the Washington State Department of Transportation for the obligation of grant funding and all subsequent agreements necessary to accomplish this project. 7g. ‐ Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of an  agreement with the Washington State Department of Transportation to Page 40 of 144 7g. ‐ Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of an  agreement with the Washington State Department of Transportation to Page 41 of 144 7g. ‐ Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of an  agreement with the Washington State Department of Transportation to Page 42 of 144 7g. ‐ Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of an  agreement with the Washington State Department of Transportation to Page 43 of 144 7g. ‐ Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of an  agreement with the Washington State Department of Transportation to Page 44 of 144 7g. ‐ Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of an  agreement with the Washington State Department of Transportation to Page 45 of 144 7g. ‐ Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of an  agreement with the Washington State Department of Transportation to Page 46 of 144 7g. ‐ Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of an  agreement with the Washington State Department of Transportation to Page 47 of 144 CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL Subject/Title: South 7th Street at Shattuck Avenue South Improvements Meeting: Regular Council - 28 Jan 2013 Exhibits: State of Washington Transportation Improvement Board and City of Renton Agreement Submitting Data: Dept/Div/Board: Public Works Staff Contact: Juliana Fries, Program Development Coordinator, x7232 Recommended Action: Council Concur Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required: $ Transfer Amendment: $ Amount Budgeted: $ $192,000 (2013)Revenue Generated: $$585,230 Total Project Budget: $ $1,185,230 (Intersection)City Share Total Project: $ -0- SUMMARY OF ACTION: The South 7th Street at Shattuck Avenue South Intersection Project was selected under the Washington State Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) for a grant of $585,230. The TIB grant, combined with the recently awarded Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) grant, will install a traffic signal at the intersection of South 7th Street and Shattuck Avenue South, add a right- turn lane on South 7th Street to provide access to the Renton Park & Ride, install new sidewalks on South 7th Street and add a landscaped planter between the travel lane and sidewalks. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to enter into the State of Washington Transportation Improvement Board and City of Renton Agreement for the obligation of grant funding and all subsequent agreements necessary to accomplish construction of this project. 7h. ‐ Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of an  agreement with the Washington State Department of Transportation to Page 48 of 144 7h. ‐ Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of an  agreement with the Washington State Department of Transportation to Page 49 of 144 7h. ‐ Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of an  agreement with the Washington State Department of Transportation to Page 50 of 144 7h. ‐ Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of an  agreement with the Washington State Department of Transportation to Page 51 of 144 7h. ‐ Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of an  agreement with the Washington State Department of Transportation to Page 52 of 144 7h. ‐ Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of an  agreement with the Washington State Department of Transportation to Page 53 of 144 7h. ‐ Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of an  agreement with the Washington State Department of Transportation to Page 54 of 144 CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL Subject/Title: Logan Ave N Roadway Imporvments (N Airport Way to N 8th Street) Meeting: Regular Council - 28 Jan 2013 Exhibits: Local Agency Agreement Local Agency Federal Aid Project Prospectus Submitting Data: Dept/Div/Board: Public Works Staff Contact: Juliana Fries, Program Development Coordinator, x7232 Recommended Action: Council Concur Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required: $ Transfer Amendment: $ Amount Budgeted: $ $800,000 (2013)Revenue Generated: $$951,000 Total Project Budget: $ $1,100,000 (Preliminary Eng)City Share Total Project: $ -0- SUMMARY OF ACTION: The Logan Avenue North Roadway Improvements (North Airport Way to North 8th Street) Project was selected under the Countywide Selection Process for a Surface Transportation Program (STP) grant of $951,000. This federal grant will provide for the design (preliminary engineering) of improvements, which include transit signal priority system, sidewalks between the Cedar River Bridge and North 4th Street, extension of the Lake Washington Trail on the west side of the Cedar River Bridge, design of the roadway pavement and an additional northbound travel lane between North 6th Street and North 8th Street. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to enter into the Local Agency Agreement with the Washington State Department of Transportation for the obligation of grant funding and all subsequent agreements necessary to accomplish this project. 7i. ‐ Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of an  agreement with the Washington State Department of Transportation to Page 55 of 144 7i. ‐ Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of an  agreement with the Washington State Department of Transportation to Page 56 of 144 7i. ‐ Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of an  agreement with the Washington State Department of Transportation to Page 57 of 144 7i. ‐ Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of an  agreement with the Washington State Department of Transportation to Page 58 of 144 7i. ‐ Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of an  agreement with the Washington State Department of Transportation to Page 59 of 144 7i. ‐ Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of an  agreement with the Washington State Department of Transportation to Page 60 of 144 7i. ‐ Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of an  agreement with the Washington State Department of Transportation to Page 61 of 144 7i. ‐ Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of an  agreement with the Washington State Department of Transportation to Page 62 of 144 7i. ‐ Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of an  agreement with the Washington State Department of Transportation to Page 63 of 144 7i. ‐ Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of an  agreement with the Washington State Department of Transportation to Page 64 of 144 7i. ‐ Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of an  agreement with the Washington State Department of Transportation to Page 65 of 144 7i. ‐ Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of an  agreement with the Washington State Department of Transportation to Page 66 of 144 CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL Subject/Title: Amended and Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement between Renton and King County Meeting: Regular Council - 28 Jan 2013 Exhibits: Issue Paper Interlocal Agreement FAQ’s Solid Waste Governance Rate Difference Between the 1988 ILA and the Amended and Restated ILA Resolution Submitting Data: Dept/Div/Board: Public Works Staff Contact: Linda Knight, Solid Waste Coordinator, x7397 Recommended Action: Refer to Utilities Committee Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required: $ N/A Transfer Amendment: $ Amount Budgeted: $ Revenue Generated: $ Total Project Budget: $ City Share Total Project: $ SUMMARY OF ACTION: King County and Sound Cities have negotiated an Amended and Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement between King County and Cities that extends Renton’s Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement of 1988 with King County by 12.5 years, from June 2028 through December 2040. This new agreement will foster cooperation in our regional solid waste system and adds several significant benefits, including liability protections for the City, and ensures lower disposal rates by allowing for longer-term bonding for capital projects. King County requires action by April 30, 2013, in order to plan for future system investments and to develop financial policies that will inform future rate studies. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve the resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Amended and Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement between King County and Cities that extends the Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement of 1988 from June 2028 to December 2040 and provides additional liability protection for the City. 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 67 of 144 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT M E M O R A N D U M DATE:January 17, 2013 TO:Randy Corman, Council President Members of Renton City Council VIA:Denis Law, Mayor FROM:Gregg Zimmerman, Administrator STAFF CONTACT:Linda Knight, Solid Waste Coordinator, x7397 SUBJECT:Amended and Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement between Renton and King County Issue: Should the City sign the Amended and Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement between King County and Cities (Amended ILA) that extends the Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement of 1988 (Existing ILA) by 12.5 years and provides for additional benefits to cities? Recommendation: Approve the resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Amended and Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement between King County and Cities that extends the Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement of 1988 from June 2028 to December 2040 and provides additional liability protection for the City. Background: King County and the Metropolitan Solid Waste Management Advisory Committee have been working together over the past two years to extend the Existing ILA, which Renton has signed. After intensive negotiations, a team of City and County representatives, including Jay Covington, has reached agreement on an Amended ILA that will foster cooperation in our regional solid waste system. This agreement extends the Existing ILA by 12.5 years, from June 2028 through December 2040, and aims to keep county disposal rates lower by allowing for longer-term bonding for capital projects. The Amended ILA includes several significant enhancements over the Existing ILA. It provides an updated liability section guided by principles from the Sound Cities Association (SCA) to protect City and county general funds from long-term liability and establishes a protocol for payment of Environmental Liabilities, if and when they arise, including the purchase of insurance and investment in reserves. The intent to protect both City and county general funds from Environmental Liabilities to the greatest extent feasible is explicit. Other improvements to the Existing ILA include: 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 68 of 144 Mr. Randy Corman, Council President Page 2 of 2 January 17, 2013 H:\File Sys\SWU - Solid Waste Utility\SWU-07 - KCSWD\SWU-07-0014 - ILA\ILA Issue Paper Council January 28 2013.docx\LKtp Commitment to the continued involvement of the City advisory group, renamed the Metropolitan Solid Waste Advisory Committee (MSWAC) ·Maintains consistency with the role of the Regional Policy Committee (RPC) as provided by the King County Charter ·An expanded role for Cities in system planning, including long-term disposal alternatives and review of financial policies ·A dispute resolution process, which includes non-binding mediation ·An acknowledgment that solid waste facilities are regional facilities and host cities and neighboring cities may receive mitigation for impacts By mid-2014, the King County Solid Waste Division will propose rates for the 2015-16 rate period. Financial policies developed in collaboration with the MSWAC will inform the rate study. To allow sufficient time to develop those policies, the county needs each City to act on the Amended ILA by April 30, 2013. While each city signs an individual ILA with King County for solid waste disposal services, the Amended ILA is designed to be applicable to all cities and requires a significant majority of cities to sign in order for the system to remain cost effective. If an individual city does not sign the extension, their existing agreement remains in effect through 2028 and they will pay higher rates reflecting the cost of shorter bond terms. Additionally, cities that choose not to sign the Amended ILA will not receive the newly negotiated benefits, including those protections related to potential environmental liability. Conclusion: The Amended and Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement between King County and Cities provides an opportunity to restate the City’s commitment to regional and cooperative management of Solid Waste. In addition this agreement provides benefits for the City as a host to one of King County’s transfer stations, as well as protection to the City’s General Fund for potential environmental liabilities associated with the City’s contributions to the county disposal system. 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 69 of 144 - 1 - AMENDED AND RESTATED SOLID WASTE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT This Amended and Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement (“Agreement”) is entered into between King County, a political subdivision of the State of Washington and the City of , a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, hereinafter referred to as "County" and "City" respectively. Collectively, the County and the City are referred to as the “Parties.” This Agreement has been authorized by the legislative body of each jurisdiction pursuant to formal action as designated below: King County: Ordinance No. __________ City: ________________________________________________ PREAMBLE A. This Agreement is entered into pursuant to chapter 39.34 RCW for the purpose of extending, restating and amending the Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement between the Parties originally entered into in ____ (the “Original Agreement”). The Original Agreement provided for the cooperative management of Solid Waste in King County for a term of forty (40) years, through June 30, 2028. The Original Agreement is superseded by this Amended and Restated Agreement, as of the effective date of this Agreement. This Amended and Restated Agreement is effective for an additional twelve (12) years through December 31, 2040. B. The Parties intend to continue to cooperatively manage Solid Waste and to work collaboratively to maintain and periodically update the existing King County 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 70 of 144 - 2 - Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan (Comprehensive Plan) adopted pursuant to chapter 70.95 RCW. C. The Parties continue to support the established goals of Waste Prevention and Recycling as incorporated in the Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan, and to meet or surpass applicable environmental standards with regard to the Solid Waste System. D. The County and the Cities agree that System-related costs, including environmental liabilities, should be funded by System revenues which include but are not limited to insurance proceeds, grants and rates; E. The County, as the service provider, is in the best position to steward funds System revenues that the County and the Cities intend to be available to pay for environmental liabilities; and F. The County and the Cities recognize that at the time this Agreement goes into effect, it is impossible to know what the ultimate environmental liabilities could be; nevertheless, the County and the Cities wish to designate in this Agreement a protocol for the designation and distribution of funding for potential future environmental liabilities in order to protect the general funds of the County and the Cities. G. The County began renting the Cedar Hills Landfill from the State of Washington in 1960 and began using it for Disposal of Solid Waste in 1964. The County acquired ownership of the Cedar Hills Landfill from the State in 1992. The Cedar Hills Landfill remains an asset owned by the County. H. The Parties expect that the Cedar Hills Landfill will be at capacity and closed at some date during the term of this Agreement, after which time all Solid Waste under this Agreement will need to be disposed of through alternate means, as determined by the 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 71 of 144 - 3 - Cities and the County through amendments to the Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan. The County currently estimates the useful life of the Cedar Hills Landfill will extend through 2025. It is possible that this useful life could be extended, or shortened, by System management decisions or factors beyond the control of the Parties. I. The County intends to charge rent for the use of the Cedar Hills Landfill for so long as the System uses this general fund asset and the Parties seek to clarify terms relative to the calculation of the associated rent. J. The County and Cities participating in the System have worked collaboratively for several years to develop a plan for the replacement or upgrading of a series of transfer stations. The Parties acknowledge that these transfer station improvements, as they may be modified from time-to-time, will benefit Cities that are part of the System and the County. The Parties have determined that the extension of the term of the Original Agreement by twelve (12) years as accomplished by this Agreement is appropriate in order to facilitate the long-term financing of transfer station improvements and to mitigate rate impacts of such financing. K. The Parties have further determined that in order to equitably allocate the benefit to all System Users from the transfer station improvements, different customer classes may be established by the County to ensure System Users do not pay a disproportionate share of the cost of these improvements as a result of a decision by a city not to extend the term of the Original Agreement. L. The Parties have further determined it is appropriate to strengthen and formalize the advisory role of the Cities regarding System operations. 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 72 of 144 - 4 - The Parties agree as follows: I. DEFINITIONS For purposes of this Agreement the following definitions shall apply: “Cedar Hills Landfill” means the landfill owned and operated by the County located in southeast King County. “Cities” refers to all Cities that have signed an Amended and Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement in substantially identical form to this Agreement. "Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan" or “Comprehensive Plan” means the Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan, as approved and amended from time to time, for the System, as required by chapter 70.95.080 RCW. “County” means King County, a Charter County and political subdivision of the State of Washington. "Disposal" means the final treatment, utilization, processing, deposition, or incineration of Solid Waste but shall not include Waste Prevention or Recycling as defined herein. 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 73 of 144 - 5 - “Disposal Rates” means the fee charged by the County to System Users to cover all costs of the System consistent with this Agreement, all state, federal and local laws governing solid waste and the Solid Waste Comprehensive Plan. "Divert" means to direct or permit the directing of Solid Waste to Disposal sites other than the Disposal site(s) designated by King County. "Energy/Resource Recovery" means the recovery of energy in a usable form from mass burning or refuse-derived fuel incineration, pyrolysis or any other means of using the heat of combustion of Solid Waste that involves high temperature (above 1,200 degrees F) processing. (chapter 173.350.100 WAC). "Landfill" means a Disposal facility or part of a facility at which Solid Waste is placed in or on land and which is not a land treatment facility. “Metropolitan Solid Waste Advisory Committee” or “MSWAC” means the advisory committee composed of city representatives, established pursuant to Section IX of this Agreement. "Moderate Risk Waste" means waste that is limited to conditionally exempt small quantity generator waste and household hazardous waste as those terms are defined in chapter 173-350 WAC, as amended. 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 74 of 144 - 6 - “Original Agreement” means the Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement first entered into by and between the Parties, which is amended and restated by this Agreement. “Original Agreements” means collectively all such agreements between Cities and the County in substantially the same form as the Original Agreement. “Parties” means collectively the County and the City or Cities. "Recycling" as defined in chapter 70.95.030 RCW, as amended, means transforming or remanufacturing waste materials into usable or marketable materials for use other than landfill Disposal or incineration. “Regional Policy Committee” means the Regional Policy Committee created pursuant to approval of the County voters in 1993, the composition and responsibilities of which are prescribed in King County Charter Section 270 and chapter 1.24 King County Code, as they now exist or hereafter may be amended. "Solid Waste" means all putrescible and nonputrescible solid and semisolid wastes including but not limited to garbage, rubbish, ashes, industrial wastes, swill, commercial waste, sewage sludge, demolition and construction wastes, abandoned vehicles or parts thereof, contaminated soils and contaminated dredged materials, discarded commodities and recyclable materials, but shall not include dangerous, hazardous, or extremely hazardous waste as those terms are defined in chapter 173-303 WAC, as amended; and shall further not include those 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 75 of 144 - 7 - wastes excluded from the regulations established in chapter 173-350 WAC, more specifically identified in Section 173-350-020 WAC. "Solid Waste Advisory Committee" or "SWAC" means the inter-disciplinary advisory forum or its successor created by the King County Code pursuant to chapter 70.95.165 RCW. “System” includes King County’s Solid Waste facilities used to manage Solid Wastes which includes but is not limited to transfer stations, drop boxes, landfills, recycling systems and facilities, energy and resource recovery facilities and processing facilities as authorized by chapter 36.58.040 RCW and as established pursuant to the approved King County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan. “System User” or “System Users” means Cities and any person utilizing the County’s System for Solid Waste handling, Recycling or Disposal. "Waste Prevention" means reducing the amount or type of waste generated. Waste Prevention shall not include reduction of already-generated waste through energy recovery, incineration, or otherwise. II. PURPOSE The purpose of this Agreement is to foster transparency and cooperation between the Parties and to establish the respective responsibilities of the Parties in a Solid Waste management System, including but not limited to, planning, Waste Prevention, Recycling, and Disposal. . 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 76 of 144 - 8 - III. DURATION This Agreement shall become effective as of ___________, and shall remain in effect through December 31, 2040. IV. APPROVAL This Agreement will be approved and filed in accordance with chapter 39.34 RCW. V. RENEGOTIATION TO FURTHER EXTEND TERM OF AGREEMENT 5.1 The Parties recognize that System Users benefit from long-term Disposal arrangements, both in terms of predictability of System costs and operations, and the likelihood that more cost competitive rates can be achieved with longer-term Disposal contracts as compared to shorter-term contracts. To that end, at least seven (7) years before the date that the County projects that the Cedar Hills Landfill will close, or prior to the end of this Agreement, whichever is sooner, the County will engage with MSWAC and the Solid Waste Advisory Committee, among others, to seek their advice and input on the Disposal alternatives to be used after closure of the Cedar Hills Landfill, associated changes to the System, estimated costs associated with the recommended Disposal alternatives, and amendments to the Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan necessary to support these changes. Concurrently, the Parties will meet to negotiate an extension of the term of the Agreement for the purpose of facilitating the long-term Disposal of Solid Waste after closure of the Cedar Hills Landfill. Nothing in this Agreement shall require the Parties to reach agreement on an extension of the term of this Agreement. If the Parties fail to reach agreement on an extension, the Dispute Resolution provisions of Section XIII do not apply, and this Agreement shall remain unchanged. 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 77 of 144 - 9 - 5.2 Notwithstanding any other provision in this Agreement to the contrary, the Parties may, pursuant to mutual written agreement, modify or amend any provision of this Agreement at any time during the term of said Agreement. VI. GENERAL OBLIGATIONS OF PARTIES 6.1 King County 6.1.a Management. The County agrees to provide Solid Waste management services, as specified in this Section, for Solid Waste generated and collected within the City, except waste eliminated through Waste Prevention or waste recycling activities. The County agrees to dispose of or designate Disposal sites for all Solid Waste and Moderate Risk Waste generated and/or collected within the corporate limits of the City which is delivered to the System in accordance with all applicable Federal, State and local environmental health laws, rules, or regulations, as those laws are described in Subsection 8.5.a. The County shall maintain records as necessary to fulfill obligations under this Agreement. 6.1.b Planning. The County shall serve as the planning authority for Solid Waste and Moderate Risk Waste under this Agreement but shall not be responsible for planning for any other waste or have any other planning responsibility under this Agreement. 6.1.c Operation. King County shall be or shall designate or authorize the operating authority for transfer, processing and Disposal facilities, including public landfills and other facilities, consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan as well as closure and post- closure responsibilities for landfills which are or were operated by the County. 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 78 of 144 - 10 - 6.1.d Collection Service. The County shall not provide Solid Waste collection services within the corporate limits of the City, unless permitted by law and agreed to by both Parties. 6.1.e Support and Assistance. The County shall provide support and technical assistance to the City consistent with the Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan for a Waste Prevention and Recycling program. Such support may include the award of grants to support programs with System benefits. The County shall develop educational materials related to Waste Prevention and Recycling and strategies for maximizing the usefulness of the educational materials and will make these available to the City for its use. Although the County will not be required to provide a particular level of support or fund any City activities related to Waste Prevention and Recycling, the County intends to move forward aggressively to promote Waste Prevention and Recycling. 6.1.f Forecast. The County shall develop Solid Waste stream forecasts in connection with System operations as part of the comprehensive planning process in accordance with Article XI. 6.1.g Facilities and Services. The County shall provide facilities and services pursuant to the Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan and the Solid Waste Transfer and Waste Management plan as adopted and County Solid Waste stream forecasts. 6.1.h Financial Policies. The County will maintain financial policies to guide the System’s operations and investments. The policies shall be consistent with this Agreement and shall address debt issuance, rate stabilization, cost containment, reserves, asset ownership and use, and other financial issues. The County shall primarily use long term bonds to finance transfer System improvements. The policies shall be developed and/or revised through 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 79 of 144 - 11 - discussion with MSWAC, the Regional Policy Committee, the County Executive and the County Council. Such policies shall be codified at the same time as the Comprehensive Plan updates, but may be adopted from time to time as appropriate outside the Comprehensive Plan process. 6.2 City 6.2.a Collection. The City, an entity designated by the City or such other entity as is authorized by state law shall serve as operating authority for Solid Waste collection services provided within the City's corporate limits. 6.2.b Disposal. The City shall cause to be delivered to the County’s System for Disposal all such Solid Waste and Moderate Risk Waste which is authorized to be delivered to the System in accordance with all applicable Federal, State and local environmental health laws, rules or regulations and is generated and/or collected within the corporate limits of the City and shall authorize the County to designate Disposal sites for the Disposal of all such Solid Waste and Moderate Risk Waste generated or collected within the corporate limits of the City, except for Solid Waste which is eliminated through Waste Prevention or waste Recycling activities consistent with the Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan. No Solid Waste generated or collected within the City may be Diverted from the designated Disposal sites without County approval. 6.3 JOINT RESPONSIBILITIES. 6.3.a Consistent with the Parties’ overall commitment to ongoing communication and coordination, the Parties will endeavor to notify and coordinate with each other on the development of any City or County plan, facility, contract, dispute, or other Solid Waste issue that could have potential significant impacts on the County, the System, or the City or Cities. 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 80 of 144 - 12 - 6.3.b The Parties, together with other Cities, will coordinate on the development of emergency plans related to Solid Waste, including but not limited to debris management. VII. COUNTY SHALL SET DISPOSAL RATES AND OPERATING RULES FOR DISPOSAL; USE OF SYSTEM REVENUES 7.1 In establishing Disposal Rates for System Users, the County shall consult with MSWAC consistent with Section IX. The County may adopt and amend by ordinance rates necessary to recover all costs of the System including but not limited to operations and maintenance, costs for handling, processing and Disposal of Solid Waste, siting, design and construction of facility upgrades or new facilities, Recycling, education and mitigation, planning, Waste Prevention, reserve funds, financing, defense and payment of claims, insurance, System liabilities including environmental releases, monitoring and closure of landfills which are or were operated by the County, property acquisition, grants to cities, and administrative functions necessary to support the System and Solid Waste handling services during emergencies as established by local, state and federal agencies or for any other lawful solid waste purpose, and in accordance with chapter 43.09.210 RCW. Revenues from Disposal rates shall be used only for such purposes. The County shall establish classes of customers for Solid Waste management services and by ordinance shall establish rates for classes of customers. 7.2. It is understood and agreed that System costs include payments to the County general fund for Disposal of Solid Waste at the Cedar Hills Landfill calculated in accordance with this Section 7.2, and that such rental payments shall be established based on use valuations provided to the County by an independent-third party Member, Appraisal Institute (MAI) certified appraiser selected by the County in consultation with MSWAC. 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 81 of 144 - 13 - 7.2.a A use valuation shall be prepared consistent with MAI accepted principles for the purpose of quantifying the value to the System of the use of Cedar Hills Landfill for Disposal of Solid Waste over a specified period of time (the valuation period). The County shall establish a schedule of annual use charges for the System’s use of the Cedar Hills Landfill which shall not exceed the most recent use valuation. Prior to establishing the schedule of annual use charges, the County shall seek review and comment as to both the use valuation and the proposed payment schedule from MSWAC. Upon request, the County will share with and explain to MSWAC the information the appraiser requests for purposes of developing the appraiser's recommendation. 7.2.b Use valuations and the underlying schedule of use charges shall be updated if there are significant changes in Cedar Hills Landfill capacity as a result of opening new Disposal areas and as determined by revisions to the existing Cedar Hills Regional Landfill Site Development Plan; in that event, an updated appraisal will be performed in compliance with MAI accepted principles. Otherwise, a reappraisal will not occur. Assuming a revision in the schedule of use charges occurs based on a revised appraisal, the resulting use charges shall be applied beginning in the subsequent rate period. 7.2.c The County general fund shall not charge use fees or receive other consideration from the System for the System’s use of any transfer station property in use as of the effective date of this Agreement. The County further agrees that the County general fund may not receive payments from the System for use of assets to the extent those assets are acquired with System revenues. As required by chapter 43.09.210 RCW, the System’s use of assets acquired with the use of other separate County funds (e.g., the Roads Fund, or other funds) 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 82 of 144 - 14 - will be subject to use charges; similarly, the System will charge other County funds for use of System property. VIII. LIABILITY 8.1 Non-Environmental Liability Arising Out-of-County Operations. Except as provided in this Section, Sections 8.5 and 8.6, the County shall indemnify and hold harmless the City and shall have the right and duty to defend the City through the County's attorneys against any and all claims arising out of the County's operations during the term of this Agreement and settle such claims, provided that all fees, costs, and expenses incurred by the County thereby are System costs which may be satisfied from Disposal Rates as provided in Section VII herein. In providing such defense of the City, the County shall exercise good faith in such defense or settlement so as to protect the City's interest. For purposes of this Section "claims arising out of the County's operations" shall mean claims arising out of the ownership, control, or maintenance of the System, but shall not include claims arising out of the City's operation of motor vehicles in connection with the System or other activities under the control of the City which may be incidental to the County's operation. The provisions of this Section shall not apply to claims arising out of the sole negligence or intentional acts of the City. The provisions of this Section shall survive for claims brought within three (3) years past the term of this Agreement established under Section III. 8.2 Cooperation. In the event the County acts to defend the City against a claim under Section 8.1, the City shall cooperate with the County. 8.3 Officers, Agents, and Employees. For purposes of this Section VIII, references to City or County shall be deemed to include the officers, employees and agents of either Party, 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 83 of 144 - 15 - acting within the scope of their authority. Transporters or generators of waste who are not officers or employees of the City or County are not included as agents of the City or County for purposes of this Section. 8.4 Each Party by mutual negotiation hereby waives, with respect to the other Party only, any immunity that would otherwise be available against such claims under the Industrial Insurance provisions of Title 51 RCW. 8.5 Unacceptable Waste 8.5.a All waste generated or collected from within the corporate limits of the City which is delivered to the System for Disposal shall be in compliance with the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (42 U.S.C. § 6901 et seq.) (RCRA), chapters 70.95 and 70.105 RCW, King County Code Title 10, King County Board of Health Rules and Regulations, the Solid Waste Division operating rules, and all other Federal, State and local environmental health laws, rules or regulations that impose restrictions or requirements on the type of waste that may be delivered to the System, as they now exist or are hereafter adopted or amended. 8.5.b For purposes of this Agreement, the City shall be deemed to have complied with the requirements of Subsection 8.5.a if it has adopted an ordinance requiring waste delivered to the System for Disposal to meet the laws, rules, or regulations specified in Subsection 8.5.a. However, nothing in this Agreement is intended to relieve the City from any obligation or liability it may have under the laws mentioned in Subsection 8.5.a arising out of the City's actions other than adopting, enforcing, or requiring compliance with said ordinance, such as liability, if any exists, of the City as a transporter or generator for improper transport or Disposal of regulated dangerous waste. Any environmental liability the City may have for 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 84 of 144 - 16 - releases of pollutants or hazardous or dangerous substances or wastes to the environment is dealt with under Sections 8.6 and 8.7. 8.5.c The City shall hold harmless, indemnify and defend the County for any property damages or personal injury caused solely by the City's failure to adopt an ordinance under Subsection 8.5.b. In the event the City acts to defend the County under this Subsection, the County shall cooperate with the City. 8.5.d The City shall make best efforts to include language in its contracts, franchise agreements, or licenses for the collection of Solid Waste within the City that allow for enforcement by the City against the collection contractor, franchisee or licensee for violations of the laws, rules, or regulations in Subsection 8.5.a. The requirements of this Subsection 8.5.d shall apply to the City's first collection contract, franchise, or license that becomes effective or is amended after the effective date of this Agreement. 8.5.d.i If waste is delivered to the System in violation of the laws, rules, or regulations in Subsection 8.5.a, before requiring the City to take any action under Subsection 8.5.d.ii, the County will make reasonable efforts to determine the parties’ responsible for the violation and will work with those parties to correct the violation, consistent with applicable waste clearance and acceptance rules, permit obligations, and any other legal requirements. 8.5.d.ii If the violation is not corrected under Subsection 8.5.d.i and waste is determined by the County to have been generated or collected from within the corporate limits of the City, the County shall provide the City with written notice of the violation. Upon such notice, the City shall take immediate steps to remedy the violation and prevent similar future violations to the reasonable satisfaction of the County which may include but not be 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 85 of 144 - 17 - limited to removing the waste and disposing of it in an approved facility; provided that nothing in this Subsection 8.5.d.ii shall obligate the City to handle regulated dangerous waste, as defined in WAC 173-351-200(1)(b)(i), and nothing in this Subsection shall relieve the City of any obligation it may have apart from this Agreement to handle regulated dangerous waste. If, in good faith, the City disagrees with the County regarding the violation, such dispute shall be resolved between the Parties using the Dispute Resolution process in Section XII or, if immediate action is required to avoid an imminent threat to public health, safety or the environment, in King County Superior Court. Each Party shall be responsible for its own attorneys' fees and costs. Failure of the City to take the steps requested by the County pending Superior Court resolution shall not be deemed a violation of this Agreement; provided, however, that this shall not release the City for damages or loss to the County arising out of the failure to take such steps if the Court finds a City violation of the requirements to comply with applicable laws set forth in Subsection 8.5.a. 8.6 Environmental Liability. 8.6.a Neither the County nor the City holds harmless or indemnifies the other with regard to any liability arising under 42 U.S.C. § 9601-9675 (CERCLA) as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA) or as hereafter amended or pursuant to chapter 70.105D RCW (MTCA) or as hereafter amended and any state legislation imposing liability for System-related cleanup of contaminated property from the release of pollutants or hazardous or dangerous substances and/or damages resulting from property contaminated from the release of pollutants or hazardous or dangerous substances (“Environmental Liabilities”). 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 86 of 144 - 18 - 8.6.b Nothing in this Agreement is intended to create new Environmental Liability nor release any third-party from Environmental Liability. Rather, the intent is to protect the general funds of the Parties to this Agreement by ensuring that, consistent with best business practices, an adequate portion of Disposal Rates being collected from the System Users are set aside and accessible in a fair and equitable manner to pay the respective County and City’s Environmental Liabilities. 8.6.c The purpose of this Subsection is to establish a protocol for the setting aside, and subsequent distribution of, Disposal Rates intended to pay for Environmental Liabilities of the Parties, if and when such liabilities should arise, in order to safeguard the Parties’ general funds. To do so, the County shall: 8.6.c.i Use Disposal Rates to obtain and maintain, to the extent commercially available under reasonable terms, insurance coverage for System-related Environmental Liability that names the City as an Additional Insured. The County shall establish the adequacy, amount and availability of such insurance in consultation with MSWAC. Any insurance policy in effect on the termination date of this Agreement with a term that extends past the termination date shall be maintained until the end of the policy term. 8.6.c.ii Use Disposal Rates to establish and maintain a reserve fund to help pay the Parties’ Environmental Liabilities not already covered by System rates or insurance maintained under Subsection 8.6.c.i above (“Environmental Reserve Fund”). The County shall establish the adequacy of the Environmental Reserve Fund in consultation with MSWAC and consistent with the financial policies described in Article VI. The County shall retain the Environmental Reserve Fund for a minimum of 30 years following the closure of the Cedar Hills Landfill (the “Retention Period”). During the Retention Period, the Environmental Reserve Fund 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 87 of 144 - 19 - shall be used solely for the purposes for which it was established under this Agreement. Unless otherwise required by law, at the end of the Retention Period, the County and Cities shall agree as to the disbursement of any amounts remaining in the Environmental Reserve Fund. If unable to agree, the County and City agree to submit disbursement to mediation and if unsuccessful to binding arbitration in a manner similar to Section 39.34.180 RCW to the extent permitted by law. 8.6.c.iii Pursue state or federal grant funds, such as grants from the Local Model Toxics Control Account under chapter 70.105D.070(3) RCW and chapter 173-322 WAC, or other state or federal funds as may be available and appropriate to pay for or remediate such Environmental Liabilities. 8.6.d If the funds available under Subsections 8.6.c.i-iii are not adequate to completely satisfy the Environmental Liabilities of the Parties to this Agreement then to the extent feasible and permitted by law, the County will establish a financial plan including a rate schedule to help pay for the County and City’s remaining Environmental Liabilities in consultation with MSWAC. 8.6.e The County and the City shall act reasonably and quickly to utilize funds collected or set aside through the means specified in Subsections 8.6.c.i-iii and 8.6.d to conduct or finance response or clean-up activities in order to limit the County and City’s exposure, or in order to comply with a consent decree, administrative or other legal order. The County shall notify the City within 30 days of any use of the reserve fund established in 8.6.c.iii. 8.6.f In any federal or state regulatory proceeding, and in any action for contribution, money expended by the County from the funds established in Subsections 8.6.c.i-iii and 8.6.d. to pay the costs of remedial investigation, cleanup, response or other action required 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 88 of 144 - 20 - pursuant to a state or federal laws or regulations shall be considered by the Parties to have been expended on behalf and for the benefit of the County and the Cities. 8.6.g In the event that the funds established as specified in Subsections 8.6.c.i-iii and 8.6.d are insufficient to cover the entirety of the County and Cities’ collective Environmental Liabilities, the funds described therein shall be equitably allocated between the County and Cities to satisfy their Environmental Liabilities. Factors to be considered in determining “equitably allocated” may include the size of each Party’s System User base and the amount of rates paid by that System User base into the funds, and the amount of the Solid Waste generated by the Parties’ respective System Users. Neither the County nor the Cities shall receive a benefit exceeding their Environmental Liabilities. 8.7 The County shall not charge or seek to recover from the City any costs or expenses for which the County indemnified the State of Washington in Exhibit A to the Quitclaim Deed from the State to the County for the Cedar Hills Landfill, dated February 24, 1993, to the extent such costs are not included in System costs. IX. CITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE 9.1 There is hereby created an advisory committee comprised of representatives from cities, which shall be known as the Metropolitan Solid Waste Advisory Committee (“MSWAC”). The City may designate a representative and alternate(s) to serve on MSWAC. MSWAC shall elect a chair and vice-chair and shall adopt bylaws to guide its deliberations. The members of MSWAC shall serve at the pleasure of their appointing bodies and shall receive no compensation from the County. 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 89 of 144 - 21 - 9.2 MSWAC is the forum through which the Parties together with other cities participating in the System intend to discuss and seek to resolve System issues and concerns. MSWAC shall assume the following advisory responsibilities: 9.2.a Advise the King County Council, the King County Executive, Solid Waste Advisory Committee, and other jurisdictions as appropriate, on all policy aspects of Solid Waste management and planning; 9.2.b Consult with and advise the County on technical issues related to Solid Waste management and planning; 9.2.c Assist in the development of alternatives and recommendations for the Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan and other plans governing the future of the System, and facilitate a review and/or approval of the Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan by each jurisdiction; 9.2.d Assist in the development of proposed interlocal Agreements between King County and cities for planning, Waste Prevention and Recycling, and waste stream control; 9.2.e Review and comment on Disposal Rate proposals and County financial policies; 9.2.f Review and comment on status reports on Waste Prevention, Recycling, energy/resources recovery, and System operations with inter-jurisdictional impact; 9.2.g Promote information exchange and interaction between waste generators, cities, recyclers, and the County with respect to its planned and operated Disposal Systems; 9.2.h Provide coordination opportunities among the Solid Waste Advisory Committee, the Regional Policy Committee, the County, cities, private waste haulers, and recyclers; 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 90 of 144 - 22 - 9.2.i Assist cities in recognizing municipal Solid Waste responsibilities, including collection and Recycling, and effectively carrying out those responsibilities; and 9.2.j Provide input on such disputes as MSWAC deems appropriate. 9.3 The County shall assume the following responsibilities with respect to MSWAC; 9.3.a The County shall provide staff support to MSWAC; 9.3.b In consultation with the chair of MSWAC, the County shall notify all cities and their designated MSWAC representatives and alternates of the MSWAC meeting times, locations and meeting agendas. Notification by electronic mail or regular mail shall meet the requirements of this Subsection; 9.3.c The County will consider and respond on a timely basis to questions and issues posed by MSWAC regarding the System, and will seek to resolve those issues in collaboration with the Cities. Such issues shall include but are not limited to development of efficient and accountable billing practices; and 9.3.d. The County shall provide all information and supporting documentation and analyses as reasonably requested by MSWAC for MSWAC to perform the duties and functions described in Section 9.2. X. FORUM INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT 10.1 As of the effective date of this Agreement, the Forum Interlocal Agreement and Addendum to Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement and Forum Interlocal Agreement by and between the City and County continue through June 30, 2028. After 2028 responsibilities assigned to the Forum shall be assigned to the Regional Policy Committee. The Parties agree that Solid Waste System policies and plans shall continue to be deemed regional countywide policies 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 91 of 144 - 23 - and plans that shall be referred to the Regional Policy Committee for review consistent with King County Charter Section 270.30 and chapter 1.24 King County Code. XI. COMPREHENSIVE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN 11.1 King County is designated to prepare the Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan (Comprehensive Plan) and this plan shall include the City's Solid Waste Management Comprehensive Plan pursuant to chapter 70.95.080(3) RCW. 11.2 The Comprehensive Plan shall be reviewed and any necessary revisions proposed. The County shall consult with MSWAC to determine when revisions are necessary. King County shall provide services and build facilities in accordance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan. 11.3 The Comprehensive Plans will promote Waste Prevention and Recycling in accordance with Washington State Solid Waste management priorities pursuant to chapter 70.95 RCW, at a minimum. 11.4 The Comprehensive Plans will be prepared in accordance with chapter 70.95 RCW and Solid Waste planning guidelines developed by the Department of Ecology. The plan shall include, but not be limited to: 11.4.a Descriptions of and policies regarding management practices and facilities required for handling all waste types; 11.4.b Schedules and responsibilities for implementing policies; 11.4.c Policies concerning waste reduction, Recycling, Energy and Resource Recovery, collection, transfer, long-haul transport, Disposal, enforcement and administration; and 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 92 of 144 - 24 - 11.4.d Operational plan for the elements discussed in Item c above. 11.5 The cost of preparation by King County of the Comprehensive Plan will be considered a cost of the System and financed out of the rate base. 11.6 The Comprehensive Plans will be “adopted” within the meaning of this Agreement when the following has occurred: 11.6.a The Comprehensive Plan is approved by the King County Council; and 11.6.b The Comprehensive Plan is approved by cities representing three-quarters of the population of the incorporated population of jurisdictions that are parties to the Forum Interlocal Agreement. In calculating the three-quarters, the calculations shall consider only those incorporated jurisdictions taking formal action to approve or disapprove the Comprehensive Plan within 120 days of receipt of the Plan. The 120-day time period shall begin to run from receipt by an incorporated jurisdiction of the Forum's recommendation on the Comprehensive Plan, or, if the Forum is unable to make a recommendation, upon receipt of the Comprehensive Plan from the Forum without recommendation. 11.7 Should the Comprehensive Plan be approved by the King County Council, but not receive approval of three-quarters of the cities acting on the Comprehensive Plan, and should King County and the cities be unable to resolve their disagreement, then the Comprehensive Plan shall be referred to the State Department of Ecology and the State Department of Ecology will resolve any disputes regarding Comprehensive Plan adoption and adequacy by approving or disapproving the Comprehensive Plan or any part thereof. 11.8 King County shall determine which cities are affected by any proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. If any City disagrees with such determination, then the City can request that the Forum determine whether or not the City is affected. Such 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 93 of 144 - 25 - determination shall be made by a two-thirds majority vote of all representative members of the Forum. 11.9 Should King County and the affected jurisdictions be unable to agree on amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, then the proposed amendments shall be referred to the Department of Ecology to resolve any disputes regarding such amendments. 11.10 Should there be any impasse between the Parties regarding Comprehensive Plan adoption, adequacy, or consistency or inconsistency or whether any permits or programs adopted or proposed are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, then the Department of Ecology shall resolve said disputes. XII. MITIGATION 12.1 The County will design, construct and operate Solid Waste facilities in a manner to mitigate their impact on host Cities and neighboring communities pursuant to applicable law and regulations. 12.2 The Parties recognize that Solid Waste facilities are regional facilities. The County further recognizes that host Cities and neighboring communities may sustain impacts which can include but are not limited to local infrastructure, odor, traffic into and out of Solid Waste facilities, noise and litter. 12.3 Collaboration in Environmental Review. In the event the County is the sole or co- Lead Agency, then prior to making a threshold determination under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), the County will provide a copy of the SEPA environmental checklist, if any, and proposed SEPA threshold determination to any identifiable Host City (as defined below) and adjacent or neighboring city that is signatory to the Agreement and that may be affected by the 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 94 of 144 - 26 - project ("Neighboring City") and seek their input. For any facility for which the County prepares an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), the County will meet with any identified potential Host City (as defined below) and any Neighboring City to seek input on the scope of the EIS and appropriate methodologies and assumptions in preparing the analyses supporting the EIS. However, nothing in this Section shall limit or impair the County's ability to timely complete the environmental review process. 12.4 Collaboration in Project Permitting. If a new or reconstructed Solid Waste facility is proposed to be built within the boundaries of the City ("Host City") and the project requires one or more "project permits" as defined in chapter 36.70B.020(4) RCW from the Host City, before submitting its first application for any of the project permits, the County will meet with the Host City and any Neighboring City, to seek input. However, nothing in this Section shall limit or impair the County's ability to timely submit applications for or receive permits, nor waive any permit processing or appeal timelines. 12.5 Separately, the County and the City recognize that in accordance with 36.58.080 RCW, a city is authorized to charge the County to mitigate impacts directly attributable to a County-owned Solid Waste facility. The County acknowledges that such direct costs include wear and tear on infrastructure including roads. To the extent that the City establishes that such charges are reasonably necessary to mitigate such impacts, payments to cover such impacts may only be expended only to mitigate such impacts and are System costs. If the City believes that it is entitled to mitigation under this Agreement, the City may request that the County undertake a technical analysis regarding the extent of impacts authorized for mitigation . Upon receiving such a request, the County, in coordination with the City and any necessary technical consultants, will develop any analysis that is reasonable and appropriate to identify impacts. The cost for such 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 95 of 144 - 27 - analysis is a System cost. The City and County will work cooperatively to determine the appropriate mitigation payments and will document any agreement in a Memorandum of Agreement. If the City and the County cannot agree on mitigation payments, the dispute resolution process under chapter 36.58.080 RCW will apply rather than the dispute resolution process under Section XII of the Agreement. XIII. DISPUTE RESOLUTION 13.1 Unless otherwise expressly stated, the terms of this Section XIII shall apply to disputes arising under this Agreement. 13.2 Initial Meeting. 13.2.a Either Party shall give notice to the other in writing of a dispute involving this Agreement. 13.2.b Within ten (10) business days of receiving or issuing such notice, the County shall send an email notice to all Cities. 13.2.c Within ten (10) business days of receiving the County’s notice under Subsection 13.2.b, a City shall notify the County in writing or email if it wishes to participate in the Dispute Resolution process. 13.2.d Within not less than twenty-one (21) days nor more than thirty (30) days of the date of the initial notice of dispute issued under Subsection 13.2.a, the County shall schedule a time for staff from the County and any City requesting to participate in the dispute resolution process ("Participating City") to meet (the “initial meeting”). The County shall endeavor to set such initial meeting a time and place convenient to all Participating Cities and to the County. 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 96 of 144 - 28 - 13.3 Executives' Meeting. 13.3.a If the dispute is not resolved within sixty (60) days of the initial meeting, then within seven (7) days of expiration of the sixty (60)-day period, the County shall send an email notice to all Participating Cities that the dispute was not resolved and that a meeting of the County Executive, or his/her designee and the chief executive officer(s) of each Participating City, or the designees of each Participating City (an “executives' meeting”) shall be scheduled to attempt to resolve the dispute. It is provided, however, that the County and the Participating Cities may mutually agree to extend the sixty (60)-day period for an additional fifteen (15) days if they believe further progress may be made in resolving the dispute, in which case, the County’s obligation to send its email notice to the Participating Cities under this Subsection that the dispute was not resolved shall be within seven (7) days of the end of the extension. Likewise, the County and the Participating Cities may mutually conclude prior to the expiration of the sixty (60)-day period that further progress is not likely in resolving the dispute at this level, in which case, the County shall send its email notice that the dispute was not resolved within seven (7) days of the date that the County and the Participating Cities mutually concluded that further progress is not likely in resolving the dispute. 13.3.b Within seven (7) days of receiving the County’s notice under Subsection 13.3.a each Participating City shall notify the County in writing or email if it wishes to participate in the executives' meeting. 13.3.c Within not less than twenty-one (21) days nor more than thirty (30) days of the date of the notice of the executives' meeting issued under Subsection 13.3.a, the County shall schedule a time for the executives' meeting. The County shall endeavor to set such 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 97 of 144 - 29 - executives' meeting a time and place convenient to all Participating Cities that provided notice under Subsection 13.3.b and to the County. 13.4. Non-Binding Mediation. 13.4.a If the dispute is not resolved within thirty (30) days of the executives' meeting, then any Participating City that was Party to the executives' meeting or the County may refer the matter to non-binding meditation by sending written notice within thirty-five (35) days of the initial executives' meeting to all Parties to such meeting. 13.4.b Within seven (7) days of receiving or issuing notice that a matter will be referred to non-binding mediation, the County shall send an email notice to all Participating Cities that provided notice under Subsection 13.3.b informing them of the referral. 13.4.c Within seven (7) days of receiving the County’s notice under Subsection 13.4.b, each Participating City shall notify the County in writing if it wishes to participate in the non-binding mediation. 13.4.d The mediator will be selected in the following manner: The City(ies) electing to participate in the mediation shall propose a mediator and the County shall propose a mediator; in the event the mediators are not the same person, the two mediators shall select a third mediator who shall mediate the dispute. Alternately, the City(ies) participating in the mediation and the County may agree to select a mediator through a mediation service mutually acceptable to the Parties. The Parties to the mediation shall share equally in the costs charged by the mediator or mediation service. For purposes of allocating costs of the mediator or mediation service, all Cities participating in the mediation will be considered one Party. 13.5 Superior Court. Any Party, after participating in the non-binding mediation, may commence an action in King County Superior Court after one hundred eighty (180) days from 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 98 of 144 - 30 - the commencement of the mediation, in order to resolve an issue that has not by then been resolved through non-binding mediation, unless all Parties to the mediation agree to an earlier date for ending the mediation. 13.6 Unless this Section XIII does not apply to a dispute, then the Parties agree that they may not seek relief under this Agreement in a court of law or equity unless and until each of the procedural steps set forth in this Section XIII have been exhausted, provided, that if any applicable statute of limitations will or may run during the time that may be required to exhaust the procedural steps in this Section XIII, a Party may file suit to preserve a cause of action while the Dispute Resolution process continues. The Parties agree that, if necessary and if allowed by the court, they will seek a stay of any such suit while the Dispute Resolution process is completed. If the dispute is resolved through the Dispute Resolution process, the Parties agree to dismiss the lawsuit, including all claims, counterclaims, and cross-claims, with prejudice and without costs to any Party. XIV. FORCE MAJEURE The Parties are not liable for failure to perform pursuant to the terms of this Agreement when failure to perform was due to an unforeseeable event beyond the control of either Party (“force majeure”). The term “force majeure” shall include, without limitation by the following enumeration: acts of nature, acts of civil or military authorities, terrorism, fire, accidents, shutdowns for purpose of emergency repairs, industrial, civil or public disturbances, or labor disputes, causing the inability to perform the requirements of this Agreement, if either Party is rendered unable, wholly or in part, by a force majeure event to perform or comply with any obligation or condition of this Agreement, upon giving notice and reasonably full particulars to 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 99 of 144 - 31 - the other Party, such obligation or condition shall be suspended only for the time and to the extent practicable to restore normal operations. XV. MERGER This Agreement merges and supersedes all prior negotiations, representation and/or agreements between the Parties relating to the subject matter of this Agreement and constitutes the entire contract between the Parties [except with regard to the provisions of the Forum Interlocal Agreement]; provided that nothing in Section XV supersedes or amends any indemnification obligation that may be in effect pursuant to a contract between the Parties other than the Original Agreement; and further provided that nothing in this Agreement supersedes, amends or modifies in any way any permit or approval applicable to the System or the County’s operation of the System within the jurisdiction of the City. XVI. WAIVER No waiver by either Party of any term or condition of this Agreement shall be deemed or construed to constitute a waiver of any other term or condition or of any subsequent breach whether of the same or a different provision of this Agreement. XVII. THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARY This Agreement is not entered into with the intent that it shall benefit any other entity or person except those expressly described herein, and no other such person or entity shall be entitled to be treated as a third-party beneficiary of this Agreement. 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 100 of 144 - 32 - XVIII. SURVIVABILITY Except as provided in Section 8.1, 8.2, 8.3, Section 8.6.c, except 8.6.ciii and Section 8.6d, no obligations in this Agreement survive past the expiration date as established in Section III. XIX. NOTICE Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, a notice required to be provided under the terms of this Agreement shall be delivered by certified mail, return receipt requested or by personal service to the following person: For the City: 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 101 of 144 - 33 - For the County: Director King County Solid Waste Division 201 South Jackson Street, Suite 701 Seattle, Washington 98104 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been executed by each Party on the date set forth below: CITY of KING COUNTY (Mayor/City Manager) King County Executive Date Date Clerk-Attest Clerk-Attest Approved as to form and legality Approved as to form and legality City Attorney King County Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Date Date 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 102 of 144 Amended and Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement between King County and Cities Frequently Asked Questions King County Solid Waste Division December 21, 2012 1. What is the timeframe for Cities to adopt the new ILA? By mid-2014 the Solid Waste Division will propose rates for the 2015/16 rate period. Financial policies developed in collaboration with the Metropolitan Solid Waste Advisory Committee will inform the rate study. To allow sufficient time to develop those policies and complete the rate study, the County needs each City to act on the ILA by April 30, 2013. 2. What is the purpose of the non-binding statement of interest? The County is asking each City to provide a non-binding statement of interest that indicates likely participation in the new ILA by January 31, 2013. This information will be helpful to the County as it moves forward with a variety of planning efforts, including updating the Draft Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan. 3. What are the capital project financing needs in 2013 and 2014? Presently, the division has $75 million in Bond Anticipation Notes (BANs) that will expire on February 28, 2012. Those BANs will be converted to long-term bonds. Later in 2013, an additional $13 million will be required for anticipated capital project expenditures. In 2014, it is anticipated that $35 million will be needed. 4. How does City participation in the new ILA affect capital project financing? Financing for transfer system capital improvements will be primarily by long-term bonds. Ensuring adequate revenue to repay the bonds is critical and that revenue is directly dependent on City participation in the system. If enough cities sign the extended ILA, the County will issue bonds of 20 years or longer (out to 2040), which will mean lower per ton fees. Conversely, if cities do not choose to extend the ILA, bonds will only be issued out to 2028, which will increase rates. A mix of longer and shorter bonds may be possible if some cities extend the ILA and others do not. 5. What are the implications for a City that chooses not to sign the new ILA? Cities that choose to remain with the original ILA that expires in 2028 will pay rates that include the additional amount needed to pay for the shorter bonds. The additional amount will be in the range of $7 to $9 per ton. Cities that choose to remain with the original ILA will also not receive the benefits of the new ILA, including those related to potential environmental liability. 6. How long do cities have to adopt the new ILA? In order to move forward with development of financial policies that will inform the 2015/16 rate period and other planning efforts, the County needs each City by April 30, 2013 to decide whether to sign the new ILA. 7. How would insurance coverage and liability reserves be established? The insurance coverage and liability reserves provided for under the new ILA would be established based on what is commercially available and determined appropriate in consultation with the Metropolitan Solid Waste Advisory Committee (MSWAC - note that the name of this committee changes in the new ILA from the Metropolitan Solid Waste Management Advisory Committee or MSWMAC). 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 103 of 144 Amended and Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement between King County and Cities Frequently Asked Questions King County Solid Waste Division December 21, 2012 8. Does this ILA lock Cities into the current Transfer System Plan? No. In the new ILA the County commits to provide facilities and services pursuant to adopted plans. The ILA also acknowledges that plans for transfer station improvements may be modified. 9. How does the ILA relate to the comprehensive solid waste management plan? The ILA provides a framework for Cities and the County to work collaboratively to maintain and update the comprehensive solid waste management plan and for adoption of the plan. Specific policies, plans, and strategies are not included in the ILA. 10. What about disposal after Cedar Hills closes? The ILA provides a framework for Cities and the County to plan for disposal post-Cedar Hills. At least seven years before the date that the landfill is projected to close, the County will seek advice and input from MSWAC and others on disposal alternatives. 11. Does the new ILA address Cedar Hills landfill rent? The ILA establishes a clear process for rent for Cedar Hills, limiting when rental payments can be changed, requiring a certified appraisal process be followed, and seeking review and comment from the Cities. It clearly states that the solid waste system shall not pay rent to the general fund for use of other county properties for transfer stations. 12. What if my City has more questions about this new ILA? If you have any questions or would like to schedule a briefing, please call or email Pat McLaughlin at 206-296-4385 or pat.mclaughlin@kingcounty.gov. 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 104 of 144 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 105 of 144 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 106 of 144 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 107 of 144 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 108 of 144 7j. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an Amended and  Restated Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement with King County that Page 109 of 144 CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL Subject/Title: Final Pay Estimate – CAG-12-056 (WTR-27-3604) SE 5th Street AC Water Main Replacement Project Meeting: Regular Council - 28 Jan 2013 Exhibits: Pay Estimate #4 (Final) Notice of Completion of Public Works Contract Submitting Data: Dept/Div/Board: Public Works Staff Contact: Andrew Weygandt, Water Utility Engineer, x7208 Recommended Action: Council Concur Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required: $ $3,608.03 (final pay est. only) Transfer Amendment: $NA Amount Budgeted: $ $3,700.00 (final pay est. only)Revenue Generated: $NA Total Project Budget: $ $500,000.00 (Acct. 425/455170)City Share Total Project: $ 100% SUMMARY OF ACTION: On May 14, 2012, Council awarded the construction contract to B&B Utilities and Excavating, LLC. Construction started on July 12, 2012, and the project was completed on September 28, 2012. The original contract amount was $296,821.65 and the final contract amount is $287,359.89. The reduction in contract amount is due to reducing the pavement restoration area from the bid amount shown on the original engineering drawings. The project was completed on schedule and within the amount budgeted. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept the project, approve the final pay estimate in the amount of $3,608.03, and release the retainage bond after 60 days, subject to the receipt of all required authorizations. 7k. ‐ Utilities Systems Division submits CAG‐12‐056, SE 5th St. AC Water  Main Replacement project; and requests approval of the project, Page 110 of 144 7k. ‐ Utilities Systems Division submits CAG‐12‐056, SE 5th St. AC Water  Main Replacement project; and requests approval of the project, Page 111 of 144 7k. ‐ Utilities Systems Division submits CAG‐12‐056, SE 5th St. AC Water  Main Replacement project; and requests approval of the project, Page 112 of 144 7k. ‐ Utilities Systems Division submits CAG‐12‐056, SE 5th St. AC Water  Main Replacement project; and requests approval of the project, Page 113 of 144 7k. ‐ Utilities Systems Division submits CAG‐12‐056, SE 5th St. AC Water  Main Replacement project; and requests approval of the project, Page 114 of 144 CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL Subject/Title: Sunset Terrace Regional Stormwater Facility Project Engineering Consultant Agreement with CH2MHill Meeting: Regular Council - 28 Jan 2013 Exhibits: Issue Paper Contract Submitting Data: Dept/Div/Board: Public Works Staff Contact: Ron Straka, Surface Water Supervisor, x7248, Hebe C. Bernardo, Surface Water Engineer, x7264 Recommended Action: Council Concur Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required: $ 179,003 Transfer Amendment: $ Amount Budgeted: $ 1,307,172 Revenue Generated: $ Total Project Budget: $ 1,307,172 City Share Total Project: $ SUMMARY OF ACTION: The purpose of the Sunset Terrace Regional Stormwater Facility Project is to retrofit approximately three acres of roadway from Sunset Boulevard, adjacent roads, and developments by providing flow control and enhanced basic water quality treatment prior to discharging into Johns Creek. The facility will consist of rain gardens and an infiltration gallery. Work to be completed under this engineering consultant agreement with CH2MHill, in the amount of $179,003, will include data collection, survey and basemap preparation, permitting support, final design of the facility, preparation of a technical information report, public outreach support, construction plans and specifications, services during bidding, and project management. In accordance with the funding agreement with the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology), the project construction and grant closeout must be completed by June 30, 2015. The Sunset Terrace Regional Stormwater Facility Project will be funded ($983,000) by Ecology’s FY 2012 Statewide Stormwater Grant Agreement No. G1200544 and the Surface Water Utility’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for the Sunset Terrace Regional Stormwater Facility Project (427.475492). The approved 2013-2014 CIP budget for the project is $1,307,172, including $983,000 of grant funding approved in 2012. The remaining project budget is for City project management and construction cost. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Engineering Consultant Agreement with CH2MHill for the final engineering design of the Sunset Terrace Regional Stormwater Facility Project, in the amount of $179,003. 7l. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of a contract with  CH2MHill in the amount of $179,003 for the final engineering design of Page 115 of 144 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT M E M O R A N D U M DATE:January 17, 2013 TO:Randy Corman, Council President Members of the City Council VIA:Denis Law, Mayor FROM:Gregg Zimmerman, Administrator STAFF CONTACT:Ron Straka, Surface Water Utility Supervisor, x7248 Hebé C. Bernardo, Surface Water Utility Engineer, x7264 SUBJECT:Sunset Terrace Regional Stormwater Facility Project Engineering Consultant Agreement with CH2MHill ISSUE: Should Council approve the Engineering Consultant Agreement with CH2MHill for the final engineering design of the Sunset Terrace Regional Stormwater Facility Project, in the amount of $179,003? RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Engineering Consultant Agreement with CH2MHill for the final engineering design of the Sunset Terrace Regional Stormwater Facility Project, in the amount of $179,003. BACKGROUND: The City of Renton completed and adopted the Sunset Community Plan and Planned Action Environmental Impact Statement which evaluated potential impacts of redevelopment in the Sunset Area and required infrastructure. As part of this effort the City developed and adopted the Sunset Area Surface Water Master Plan which identifies stormwater improvements to convey, treat, and infiltrate runoff from the existing and future land cover conditions. Recommended improvements included a regional storm water infiltration/flow control facility to be located within the proposed Sunset Park. Preliminary design work to collect data on subsurface conditions and update existing hydrologic and hydraulic analysis to refine sizing of the Sunset Terrace Regional Stormwater Facility has been completed by CH2MHill as part of the Engineering Consultant Agreement CAG-12-048, which was approved by Council on March 30, 2012. The purpose of the Sunset Terrace Regional Stormwater Facility Project is to retrofit approximately three acres of roadway from Sunset Boulevard (a high-traffic major 7l. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of a contract with  CH2MHill in the amount of $179,003 for the final engineering design of Page 116 of 144 Mr. Corman, Council President Page 2 of 2 January 17, 2013 H:\File Sys\SWP - Surface Water Projects\SWP-27 - Surface Water Projects (CIP)\27-8889 Sunset Regional SW Facility\1103 Contracts\2012-12-6 Issue Paper-Sunset.doc\HCBah arterial), adjacent roads, and developments by providing flow control and enhanced basic water quality treatment prior to discharging into Johns Creek (see attached Figure 1). The Sunset Terrace Regional Stormwater Facility Project will consist of rain gardens and an infiltration gallery. Work to be completed under the Engineering Consultant Agreement with CH2MHill will include data collection, survey and basemap preparation, permitting support, final design of the facility, preparation of construction plans and specifications, a technical information report, public outreach support, services during bidding, and project management. The project design is scheduled to start in 2013 and construction is planned to start in 2014. In accordance with the funding agreement with Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology), the project construction and grant closeout must be completed by June 30, 2015. CH2MHill was selected from the approved 2013 Utility Systems Annual Consultant Roster based on their knowledge of the Sunset Area, their previous work on the Sunset Area Surface Water Master Plan, and their experience working with the City. The Sunset Terrace Regional Stormwater Facility Project will be funded ($983,000) by Ecology’s FY 2012 Statewide Stormwater Grant Agreement No. G1200544 and the Surface Water Utility’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for the Sunset Terrace Regional Stormwater Facility Project (427.475492). The approved 2013-2014 CIP budget for the project is $1,307,172, including $983,000 of grant funding approved in 2012. The remaining project budget is for City project management and construction cost. CONCLUSION: The Sunset Terrace Regional Stormwater Facility Project will reduce the volume and peak rate of runoff from the area and improve the quality of the stormwater runoff. The Surface Water Utility recommends the City Council authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the proposed Engineering Consultant Agreement, in the amount of $179,003, with CH2MHill for the final engineering design of the Sunset Terrace Regional Stormwater Facility Project. Attachment cc:Lys Hornsby, Utility Systems Director File 7l. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of a contract with  CH2MHill in the amount of $179,003 for the final engineering design of Page 117 of 144 7l. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of a contract with  CH2MHill in the amount of $179,003 for the final engineering design of Page 118 of 144 7l. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of a contract with  CH2MHill in the amount of $179,003 for the final engineering design of Page 119 of 144 7l. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of a contract with  CH2MHill in the amount of $179,003 for the final engineering design of Page 120 of 144 7l. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of a contract with  CH2MHill in the amount of $179,003 for the final engineering design of Page 121 of 144 7l. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of a contract with  CH2MHill in the amount of $179,003 for the final engineering design of Page 122 of 144 7l. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of a contract with  CH2MHill in the amount of $179,003 for the final engineering design of Page 123 of 144 7l. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of a contract with  CH2MHill in the amount of $179,003 for the final engineering design of Page 124 of 144 7l. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of a contract with  CH2MHill in the amount of $179,003 for the final engineering design of Page 125 of 144 7l. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of a contract with  CH2MHill in the amount of $179,003 for the final engineering design of Page 126 of 144 7l. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of a contract with  CH2MHill in the amount of $179,003 for the final engineering design of Page 127 of 144 7l. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of a contract with  CH2MHill in the amount of $179,003 for the final engineering design of Page 128 of 144 7l. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of a contract with  CH2MHill in the amount of $179,003 for the final engineering design of Page 129 of 144 7l. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of a contract with  CH2MHill in the amount of $179,003 for the final engineering design of Page 130 of 144 7l. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of a contract with  CH2MHill in the amount of $179,003 for the final engineering design of Page 131 of 144 7l. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of a contract with  CH2MHill in the amount of $179,003 for the final engineering design of Page 132 of 144 7l. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of a contract with  CH2MHill in the amount of $179,003 for the final engineering design of Page 133 of 144 7l. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of a contract with  CH2MHill in the amount of $179,003 for the final engineering design of Page 134 of 144 7l. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of a contract with  CH2MHill in the amount of $179,003 for the final engineering design of Page 135 of 144 7l. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of a contract with  CH2MHill in the amount of $179,003 for the final engineering design of Page 136 of 144 7l. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of a contract with  CH2MHill in the amount of $179,003 for the final engineering design of Page 137 of 144 7l. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of a contract with  CH2MHill in the amount of $179,003 for the final engineering design of Page 138 of 144 7l. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of a contract with  CH2MHill in the amount of $179,003 for the final engineering design of Page 139 of 144 7l. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of a contract with  CH2MHill in the amount of $179,003 for the final engineering design of Page 140 of 144 7l. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of a contract with  CH2MHill in the amount of $179,003 for the final engineering design of Page 141 of 144 7l. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of a contract with  CH2MHill in the amount of $179,003 for the final engineering design of Page 142 of 144 7l. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of a contract with  CH2MHill in the amount of $179,003 for the final engineering design of Page 143 of 144 7l. ‐ Utility Systems Division recommends approval of a contract with  CH2MHill in the amount of $179,003 for the final engineering design of Page 144 of 144