Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2009 Council Retreat
City ofIL Renton City Council Retreat February 26-27,2009 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Merrill Gardens 232 Burnett Avenue S Renton RENTON DT11 RVE JL r:1 k 1 � AM 2 M� A Renton City Hall 1055 South Grady Way Renton, Washington 98057 rentonwa.gov Renton City Council Workshop February 26-27, 2009, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Merrill Gardens, 232 Burnett Ave S, Renton AGENDA Objective: Council discussion. Review short- and long-term budget balancing strategies, priorities of government, business plan objectives; and current initiatives for Council guidance THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 26 (7:30 a.m. Breakfast, 12:00 noon lunch) Welcome, Workshop Overview (Council President Corman, Mayor Law) • 2008-9 accomplishments, 2010 look ahead • Report: administrative retreat outcomes 1. 2009 Budget and 2010 Outlook (and beyond) (Staff lead: Iwen Wang) • Regional Economic Forecast overview: Doug Pedersen, Pedersen & Associates • Balancing 2009 • Revenue options • Long term strategies • Council discussion 2. Capital Improvement Program (Staff lead: Terry Higashiyama, Gregg Zimmerman) • Project Status and Priorities • Federal Stimulus Package 3. Annexation (Staff lead: Marty Wine, Alex Pietsch) • Status • Fiscal impact analysis: West Hill, Fairwood • Survey results: West Hill, Fairwood • State Legislative update • Council guidance FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 27 (7:30 a.m. Breakfast,12:00 noon lunch) 4. Consistency in Communications Design: Update (Staff lead: Preeti Shridhar) 5. KCLS Annexation Next Steps (Staff lead: Terry Higashiyama) 6. Key Issue Updates (All departments as needed) 7. 2009-2014 Business Plan (Staff lead: Jay Covington, All) • Priorities of Government/Renton Results • Review goals in light of major initiatives/topics discussed 8. Highlands Next Steps (Staff lead: Alex Pietsch) • Overview of Highlands Task Force work plan • Council guidance 2009 Council Retreat Fiscal Capacity Overview February 26, aoo9 Operating Budget History $110.00 M $100.00 i $90.00 $80.00 o $70.00 n $60.00 s $50.00 Chart 1: Operating Revenue/Expenditure 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 —♦-- Overall Revenue Growth Operating Expenditure 0 0 02 Chart 2: Operating Revenue 20% Overall evenue Growth 15 % Average 194-07I Average (99-07 10% 5% 0/ -5 Ln CD I� W m O r—I N M lc:l- Ln (.0 � W m a1 a1 a1 Q1 m O O O O O O O O O O 01 01 �l 01 m O O O O O O O O O O rl rl rl c-I r-I N N N N N N N CV N N 3 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Chart 3: Operating Expenditure Growth Ln lD Il_ 00 m O r-1 fV M � Ln �.D r%- 00 M 0) 01 m m m O O O O O O O O O O M m 01 0) 0) O O O O O O O O O O r-I r-i r� r-I r-I N N N N N N N (V N N Drivers of Rev/Exp Growth 1999 - 2007 Ave rage 2007 % of Weighted General Government Growth Actual Total Growth Operating Revenue Property Tax 5.7% $ 23.48 29% 1.7% Sales Tax 4.6% 19.85 25% 1.1% Uti I ity Tax 5.6% 11.46 14% 0.8% All Other Revenues 3.2% 25.36 32% 1.0% Average Rev Growth $ 80.15 100•/ 4.6% Operating Expenditure Pay/Benefit (1. 58% + 4. 11%) 5.7% $ 58.44 74% 4.2% Intergov Services 10.6% 3.16 4% 0.4% Debt and LEOFF 1 9.1% 5.33 7% 1.7% Other Exp -5.0% 12.52 16% -0.8% [Average Exp Growth $ 79.46 100% 5.5% Observations Operating expenditure grew faster than revenue and the growth rate gap widened after Zoo4 to about i%per year Expenditure caught up with revenue in2007 and will exceed revenue in2oo8 • Revenue growth rates fluctuate substantially • Expenditures are managed within a narrower range o c6 Key Revenues Driver, Economic Development Activity: New construction property tax and sales tax Permit and development fees REET (for debt service) • Program Changes (with exp impact) M Aquatic Center revenue ■ Fire Department contract .7 Key Expenditure Drivers 70%Driven by Pay/Benefit Growth FTE increase by 12%. (Population grew by 23% + service/program additions) General pay increases Pension cost increases Medical benefit cost increases 3o% Debt Services and Retiree Benefits (LEOFF i obligation) Future Operating Cost Pressure Points: jail cost Debt services LEOFF i Retiree medical benefit obligation 0 0 O C Short -Term Issue Revenue falloff Sharp decline in sales tax receipts after October Zoo8 -9.5%, -11.5%, and -15% from same period for November, December, and January. Development activity continues cool Impact on capital from lower REET and BL fees Consumer confidence, 1985 = 100 150 140 130 120 110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 Source: Conference Board 69 74 79 84 89 94 99 04 09 10 0 Short -Term Budget Issue MANUFACTURING CONSTRUCTION —*—GENERAL SALES/Misc. SERVICES }AUTOMOTIVE/GAS $2.50 - - $2.00 M I $1.50 I I j $1.00 0 n s $0.50 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 04 05 06 07 08 09 Revised 11 2009 Budget Gap Scenarios E Valley & AMC Landing Delinquent State Shared Development Admissions REET(impact Scenario Key Variables: Sale Tax Sales Tax Property Tax Utility Tax Permit Revenue Services Tax Gambling Tax CIPonly) 0= Baseline 2009 Budget -1% 745,357 -1% T% 0'I 0°/0 A 0'/0 T% 0% 1= -7% -15% -2% -00 -201/o -200/ -10'/ -50'/0 -1N -15% 2 = -12% -25% -3% .100/0 -25% -20% -20'/0 -75% -1000 -20% 3 = -19% -50% -4% -1000 -25% -20% -25% -10000/0 -10% -25% C 12 0 2009 Economic Condition Scenario 1 $140 $120 $100 M $80 I $60 $40 i 0 $20 n $0 s -$ 20 -$40 -$60 ACLud] ACival Oabenne MO.IAOo.1 rrojecteu rrojecteu rrojecteu rrojecteu rrojecteu rroiecreu 2007 2008YEND 2009 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Economy Condition: 1 2006 Actual 2007 Actual 2008 YEND Actual 2009 Baseline 2009 Eco. Cond.1 2010 Projected 2011 Projected 2012 Projected 2013 Projected 2014 Projected 2015 Projected Total Revenue Total Expenditure 74,402,130 72,544,296 82,939,098 82,089,709 93,038,385 94,497,446 100,797,028 101,498,854 96,672,933 101,498,854 99,561,560 103,161,644 102,505,894 106,389,809 106,059,994 110,183,285 109,778,020 114,141,608 113,668,687 118,273,871 117,741,247 122,589,816 Net Change in Fund Bal 1 1,857,8341 849,388 (1,459,061) (701,8261 (4,825,920) (3,600,085) (3,883,915) (4,123,291) (4,363,589) (4,605,184) (4,848,568) Fund Balance 1 11,184,684_1 12,034,072 1 10,575,011 9,873,186 4,344,1031 744,018 (3,139,897) (7,263,188) (11,626,776) (16,231,961) (21,0In 529) 13 2009 Economic Condition Scenario 3 ■ Total Revenue ■ Total Expenditure = Fund Balance $140 - $120 $100 M $80 i $60 I I $40 $20 n $0 s i --� — -$40 - -$60 Actual Actual Actual Baseline Eco. Cond. 3 Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected 2006 2007 2008YEN D 2009 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Economy Condition: 3 2006 Actual 2007 Actual 2008 YEND Actual 2009 Baseline 2009 Eco. Cond. 3 2010 Projected 2011 Projected 2012 Projected 2013 Projected 2014 Projected 2015 Projected Total Revenue Total Expenditure 74,402,130 72,544,296 82,939,098 82,089,709 93,687,106 95,171,399 100,797,028 101,498,854 92,804,562 101,498,854 95,442,790 103,161,644 98,317,992 106,389,809 101,693,953 110,183,285 105,226,655 114,141,608 108,924,509 118,273,871 112,796,443 122,589,816 Net Change in Fund Bal 1,857,834 849,388 (1,484,292) (701,826) (8,694,291) (7,718,854) (8,071,817) (8,489,332) (8,914,953) (9,349,363) (9,793,373) Fund Balance 11,184,684 1 12,034,072 1 11,816,562 1 10,436,804 1 1,742,513 1 (5,976,341) (14,048,158) (22,537,490) (31,452,443) (40,801,806) (50,595,179) 14 Summary of potential „udget Balancing Strategies General Fund Balance I I I $2,000 I Reduce fund balance policy target from 10%to 8% Capital and Special Projects I I $500 I Capital and Operating Projects Deferred Comp I I $667 I 2%, citywide, 8 month Furlough B $1,200 I Each 5 days — 2% base wage, assume 5 days Fire Transport Fee for non- residents ! J $625 Assume 25% of all transports are non-residents, XX% collectible, 8 month Increase photo enforcement program AND improve collection ratio, assume 40% increase in revenue Review 20/80 BL fee allocation Expand Photo Enforcement & increase collection $600 Increase GF portion of BL Fee from 20% to 50% $600 Citywide Reduction Subtotal $2,SW $1.867 I $1,825 �i ttt trr 2.50 $383 $4,060 [u $ 74 I Executive/Communication $25, Hex $24, Court $15, Clerk $10 AJS City Attorney (in AJLS) $1,696 $10 I Janitorial service (included in facility lease) CED 5.20 I $574 $7,021 3.00 I $214 I Hold Positions Vacant (3 FfE) Less Consultant Contract backfill. Community Services 2.00 $1,109 I $17,546 I $148 I $73k Facgity HVAC, $27 Library (Increase use of KCLS $), $40k Housing need assessment, $8k brochures HR 1.00 I $129 I $1,035 l $20 I Recruitment/Training FIS 3.00 $805 I $2,038 ($250k Capital) I Capital F&ES 9.00 $1,062 $21,306 $700 $439K in overtime reductions, reassignment of staff aides and 1/2 of the 40 hour uniformed non exempt staff, changing "minimum staffing' in Response Operations to "staffing target". Salary savings for 2 FF and one civilian position. Police l 7.80 $1,029 l $25,876 6.00 $600 Anticipated Jail ($210) and QM ($100) & Salary Savings (— 6 FfEs) PWs (General/Street) 5.00 $552 I $10,229 I $122 Delay purchase of street baddm for l Year (purchase $95k and M80 S25 k) City-wide $291 I $10,693 0.00 $250 Additional position vacancy (4 FrE, partial yearyAssume all vacant positions are in Dept reductions under alternative plan Department Reduction Subtotal 35.50 I $5,934 I $101,499 9.00 ' $2,139 18.00 $1,024 Grant Total $4,638 $1,W7 $1,024 $1,825 .. i u�, 2009 adopted budget: 35.5 FTES: 3 Exempt/mgmt, 15.7 in AFSCME , 9 in FF (864), 4 Police Guild, 3.8 Police non-com 4% Level: 9 Vacant positions: 1 Exempt/mgmt, 3 AFSCME, 3 Police Guild, 2 Police non-com 6% level: 18 additional positions: 2.5 Exempt/mgmt, 15.5 AFSCME positions. 15 Long -Term Challenge • Align revenues and expenditures for sustainable service and staffing levels Must find solution to the structural imbalance between municipal revenues and expenditures �, O C 16 Financing Capital Needs Capital Funding Goals Sustainable funding sources and levels to maintain/ preserve existing assets (Major Maintenance projects.) Remove routine maintenance (building painting, HVAC maintenance, refinishing floor etc.) from capital to operating budget? Set up system replacement reserves for major building components? Reliable funding sources for new projects General Gov't ,apital Summary Capital 1994-2008 % of 2009 % of Funding Sources/Uses Total Total Budget Total Sources: General Resources 132,105,299 42% 14,224,656 35% Mitigation 24,219,732 8% 1,409,000 3% Voted/Special Assmts 20,895,220 7% - 0% Grants/Contributions 66,675,360 21% 1%167,772 47% Project Income/Interest/Mi 21,165,189 7% 922,131 2% Bond/Loan/Sale of Assets 48,821,325 16% 51250,000 13% Total Sources 313, 882,125 100•/ 40, 973, 559 100•/ Uses: General 102, 390, 778 35% 13, 652, 000 33% Transportation 133,554,133 45% 22,6751579 55% Debt Services 60,802,515 20% 5,113,611 12% Total Uses 296,747,427 100% 41,4411190 1000/0 19 Observations Renton made nearly $300 million in capital investments over the last 15 years! ! Primarily (42%) funded by "general" capital resources (REET, Business License fees, general taxes/transfers) Use of voter approved levy/special assessments diminished over time and will be zero by 2009 Grants and external contributions made up less than anticipated percent We are paying about the same amount in debt services ($40 million non-voted/SA debts only) as we are bringing in from debt issuance ($49 million) Long -Term Challenge Create room for major maintenance projects Create room for new capital improvements 21 Capital Funding Sources A Zoo3 survey shows typical capital funding sources used by surrounding cities are: Real Estate Excise Tax Arterial Street Fuel Tax Impact Fees/Connection Charges Grants Voter approved levies (increased over the pat five years) Designate general tax revenues (B&O taxes, Business License, Construction or general Sales Tax are the most common ones.) 0 0 22 II. Revenue Tools Available to Cities 1. Increase cost recovery rate on user fees (park/rec fees and development permits/fees) 2. Business License Each 1% increase of all development permits/fees - $34k Each 1% Park/Rec fees $25k. $5/ee increase - $180k - ---- -- --- --- ------------------ - - 3. B&O Tax. Up to 0.2% of gross business receipts. Using sales tax as a gauge, 0.1% is anticipated to generate around $2.4 million. Council action but is limited by economic conditions. Council action. ------------------- Council action. General purpose General purpose - -- ------------------- General purposes ✓ Direct linkage between fees and cost of services x Affect users of those services x May only receive portion of revenue due to decreased utilization x May be viewed as inconsistent : with the economic development objective ...................... _............ _.._.............................. .......- j ✓ Current fee established in 19xx and have never been adjusted ✓ Balance the tax burden between residential and business properties. x Current fee is one of the highest in the state t x May discourage businesses to get license and increase enforcement costs ✓ Balance the tax burden between residential and business properties. x Counter to economic development goal x Few local jurisdictions utilize x High audit and collection cost H:\FINANCE\Council\2009 retreat\Capital Funding Issue paper v2.doc 4/7 23 4. Utility Tax: Above 6% 1% cross the board— $2.2 million 5. Property Tax Lid Lift: a. Single Year Lift. b. Property Tax Lid Lift: Multi Year (up to 6) Lift Up to $3.60/$1000 AV f (currently $2.37/$1000 AV, 3 rate would be higher if AV declines) 1C — $130k 1% — $310k Unless the ballot specifies a period, it raises the base permanently. The ballot can specify Council can raise tax on cable, and city operated utilities to over 6%. Simple majority voter approval is required for electric, phone, and gas. Simple majority voter approval. Can be held at special elections. Simple majority voter whether the base is raised approval. permanently, or reverts General Purposes. ✓ Balance tax burden from property tax and between residential and General purposes. ✓ ix ±x Must designate purposes, and can not supplant current funding. x .✓ back to the old base prior Primary or general to the approved lid lift. (September or November) elections only. x - x - x I commercial users. Flexible use (capital & maintenance) Generally keeps pace with inflation Tax on basic utilities are regressive Will likely impact residential areas more due to their cable TV use. _..... ...... ....... ...... _........ ........ ....... ..... ........... .... ------- More flexible in election schedule Perpetuates the imbalance of property tax weight on single family residential properties Requires annual vote, or will not keep pace with inflation Levy subject to $3.6/1,000 limit Reduces the frequency and cost of election If specified, will allow revenue to keep pace with inflation for six years at a time Perpetuates the imbalance of property tax weight on single family residential properties Limited election dates Designated use and non - supplanting Levy still subject to $3.6/1,000 limit H:\FINANCE\Coun '19 retreat\Capital Funding Issue paper v2.doc 517 0 24 �1 6. Property Tax, excess levy 1C — $130k 1% " $310k For the duration needed to retire the bonds only. 60% approval, 40% turnout 7. Special Taxing District Parks District: up to 75C :Simple majority voter per $1000 AV approval. If approved, Council forms district and Fire Authority: would free- ' appoints board/commission up around 92C' per $1000 AV 8. Local Option Vehicle = No to exceed Licensing Fee $25/vehicle/year. 9. Special assessment districts Special assessment levied against a property based on relative benefits from the improvement. Capital Acquisition and Improvement Projects For both operation and capital needs of park and recreation programs and facilities. ■ Council action. 3 Transportation purpose. ■ Estimated at $1 million +/- a year _...... _..._ �.......__..__....... .-.................... ■ Council may initiate -by LID: Capital. resolution which can be overturned if over 60% of owners object to the assessment; ■ Owner can petition Council to form LIDs/BIDS with 10% signature petition and 60% owner approval BID: Capital or operating. ✓ The last voter approved levy (for senior housing) ended in 2008 was at 5C/000 ✓ A common method of financing capital improvements ✓ Outside the $3.60 local levy limit x 60% approval requirement is more difficult to achieve --------- ............. ------------- ------------------------------- Designated funding sources for parks and recreation programs/facilities ✓ No time limit x Growth is still subject to 1% limit after levy is in place x Park levies have not received overwhelming supported in the past. ✓ Easy to administer (via state licensing renewal process.) ✓ Direct linkage between fee and services x Target of various prior voter initiatives. ._.............. _..... ........ ...... _..... ...... ......._ -_.............._................. ✓ Does not impact general tax or debt capacity; ✓ Assessment based on benefits received ✓ Cost of administration can be included in the assessment x Restrictive laws govern process, billing, terms, etc. ............................................................................. ..... H:\FINANCE\Counci1\2009 retreat\Capital Funding Issue paperv2.doc 6/7 25 10. Impact Fees Currently assessing impact /mitigating fee based on SEPA and is working on GMA impact fee. The revenue difference is not yet determined. Council action. For capital facilities that are identified in the capital facilities plan and for services demands generated from growth ✓ Growth pays for their impact ✓ Easier to administer than current structure ✓ More predictability for development ✓ Could be more flexible allowable projects* X Replace current SEPA mitigation fee, net gain is uncertain X Amount depends on development activity (hard to predict) Other Potential Revenue Sources need research: 1. Charge for streetlights — same legality concerns as Street Utility. 2. Cities are also allowed to use excess property tax (allows levy rate to exceed $3.6 for combined city, fire, library) for M&O. The vote requirement is the same as capital excess levy, but it is allowed for 1-year only, does not meet city criteria for on -going services. Current City Property Tax levy is $2.35/$1000 with roughly $1.17 used for Fire Services. With the formation of a fire authority, the city can levy up to $2.10/$1000 (including Library, or $1.60/000 w/o library). The net saving = $1.17 fire service costs avoided less $.0.25 reduction in levy rate (from $2.35 to $2.10) _ $0.92 per $1000 AV. H:\FINANCE\Coun/--n9 retreat\Capital Funding Issue paper vldoc 717 26 I. Capital Investment Program Policy Overview The Projects listed in the 2009 Capital Budget for funding are consistent with this 2009-2014 Capital Investment Program (CIP). The budget serves to specify the amount of funds available for capital investment projects by general category (e.g., wastewater utility, streets, surface water utility, water utility, etc.) during 2009. In addition to identifying specific capital Investment projects, the Capital Investment Program includes the annual cost for any capital project debt -financing measures, as well as the operating budget implications from a capital project. The budget authorizes a series of potential projects to be considered for funding. As the year progresses, some projects become ready for construction while others do not, depending on a variety of circumstances. The City Council, in coordination with city administration, will take action to approve specific projects up to the funding approved in the budget. If more funds become available, if third party funding can be arranged or capital projects are carried over into the new fiscal year due to scheduled delays, the budget can be amended. This approach responds during the year to a host of design and implementation issues, in the context of our overall financial plan. Background Renton's businesses and citizens have made a considerable investment for resources in buildings, parks, streets, sewers, water systems, equipment, and other capital investments. The preservation, maintenance, and future improvement of these facilities are primary responsibilities of the City. Planning and implementing sound capital investment policies and programs today will help preserve the investments made in the past, and provide facilities for the future. Capital Investment Expenditures meet the following criteria: 1. An expenditure classified as a capital asset. 2. An expenditure of $10,000 or more (except land) for projects and equipment. 3. A useful life of more than one year. Capital Investment Projects include: 1. New and expanded physical facilities/assets. 2. Large scale renovation and replacement of existing facilities. 3. The acquisition of land. 4. The purchase of major pieces of equipment which are not identified in the Equipment Rental/Reserve Fund and require multiple -year financing. 5. Purchases of equipment associated strictly with newly acquired facilities. The City's Comprehensive Six -year Capital Investment Plan is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the State Growth Management Act. Financial analysis of future funding sources is conducted for all proposed Capital Investment Projects. City Summary Page 1 CAPITAL INVESTMENT PROGRAM Department Heads submit Capital Project proposals. Each department is responsible for planning and prioritizing all capital project proposals within their scope of operational responsibility (see Capital Investment Project Evaluation Criteria). The Mayor, Chief Administrative Officer, and City's Administrators review and evaluate all Capital Investment Project proposals. Upon evaluation and final analysis of all proposed capital investment projects, the Mayor provides the forthcoming year's Capital Investment Program for the City Council review and adoption. The Capital Investment Program is prepared, modified and adopted annually. II. Procedure for Annual Capital Investment Program 1. Initiation Requesting Department: 1. Creates a list of the various capital investment projects to be considered. 2. Verifies that projects meet the definitions of the previously defined CIP Policy. 3. Prepares a Capital Investment Request for each project. 4. Prioritizes each proposal using the CIP Evaluation Criteria. 5. Submits request to the Finance and Information Services Department. 6. Finance Division submits a preliminary CIP to the Mayor and Chief Administrative Officer. 2. Reviews Mayor / Chief Administrative Officer / FIS Administrator: 7. Reviews Capital Investment Requests. 8. Prepares an annual Capital Investment Plan recommendation. 9. Formulates an updated Capital Investment Plan, 10. Presents the Budget and Capital Investment Plan to the City Council. City Summary Page 0 ITAL INVESTMENT ►PPOGRAM City Council: 11. Conducts a workshop at mid -year preparatory to the development and submittal of the Mayor's proposed annual budget, to consider any priorities or projects of interest. 12. Holds a public hearing to review the recommended CIP as part of the budget process. 3. Implementation City Council: 13. Conducts workshops to review the Mayor's recommendations and make changes as necessary. 14. Adopts the Capital Investment Program as part of the annual budget. Departlnent: 15. Monitors all Capital Investment Projects approved in the City's adopted annual budget. 16. If estimated project cost exceeds appropriation, submits updated project cost information and justification for increase to the Finance and Information Services Department. Chief Administrative officer: 17. Monitors the Capital Investment Plan and budgets and provides periodic status reports to the City Council FIS Administrator: 18. Provides oversight of the accounting and reporting on capital projects. 19. Generates a quarterly Capital Investment Project Summary Report of expenditures and fund balances for distribution to Mayor, Departments and City Council. 4. Closeout Department: 20. Submits to FIS Administrator notification of completion of the capital project(s). FIS Administrator: 21. Reconciles final appropriation and expenditures for each Capital Investment Project. 22. Eliminates Capital Investment Project at year-end from Capital Investment Project Summary Report. City Summary Page 3 Criteria for Evaluating Projects ■ Preservation of public health and safety. ■ Improvements required as a result of court action or federal or state regulation or to prevent court action. ■ Reduction of current maintenance expenditures and avoidance of costly future rehabilitation. ■ Preservation of existing facilities. ■ Importance for gaining or retaining industry and jobs, and promoting economic development. ■ Positive impacts (social, political, etc.) on City residents. ■ Grant/loan secured or leveraging of private funds. ■ Grant/loan available. ■ Protection of vital links in providing services to residents. ■ Demonstration that project can proceed to construction promptly. City Summary Page Cf4PITAL..INVES WT PROGRAM General Governmental CIP Funding Sources 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Operating 9,229 2,453 1,985 1,407 1,318 1,846 18,238 Bond Proceeds 3,000 0 0 0 0 0 3,000 Mitigation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grant 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Developer Contribution 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reserve/Fund Balance 5,000 0 0 0 0 0 6,000 Undetermined 0 83 110 460 5,125 125 5,903 Total Gen Gov Funding Sources 17,229 2,536 2,095 1,867 6,443 1,971 32,141 Acquisition Parking Garage at the Landing 12,500 0 0 0 0 0 12,500 Total Acquisition 12,500 0 0 0 0 0 12,500 Development Fire Station 15 0 0 0 350 5,000 0 5,350 Highlands Sub -Area Long Range Plan 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Information Services Division 1,644 2,453 1,985 1,407 1,318 1,846 10,653 Neighborhood Grant Program 85 83 110 110 125 125 638 South Lake Washington Redevelopment 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Downtown Wayfinding 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 South Correction Entity (SCORE) 3,000 0 0 0 0 0 3,000 Total Development 4,729 2,536 2,095 1,867 6,443 1,971 19,641 Total General Government CIP 17,229 2,536 2,095 1,867 6,443 1,971 32,141 City Summary Page 10 CAPITAL INVESTMENT PROGRAM J- Community Services CIP Funding Sources 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Operating 3,042 0 0 0 0 0 3,042 Bond Proceeds 2,450 0 10,000 0 0 0 12,450 Mitigation 0 1,300 0 0 0 0 1300 Grant / Intergovernmental 123 723 123 123 123 123 1,338 Developer Contribution 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ 0 Reserve/Fund Balance -7,500 0 0 0 0 0 -7,500 Undetermined 0 6,801 3,934 5,717 9,055 4,868 30,375 Total Community Services Funding Sources -1,885 8,824 14,057 5,840 9,178 4,991 41,005 Development 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Black River Riparian Forest 0 90 100 200 2,000 0 2,390 Henry Moses Aquatic Center 120 120 120 120 120 120 720 Grant Matching Program 250 250 250 250 250 250 1,500 Maplewood Community Park 0 100 300 3,000 0 3,000 6,400 New Maintenance Facility -5,050 0 10,000 0 0 0 4,950 North Highlands Community Center 0 750 1,250 0 0 0 2,000 Parks, Recreation, & Open Space Plan 0 0 0 0 0 180 180 Regis Park Athletic Field Expansion 0 4,400 0 300 3,000 0 7,700 Springbrook Trail Missing Link 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Urban Forestry Program 50 110 60 60 60 60 400 Park Master Planning 0 90 90 90 90 90 450 Highlands Library Natural Area 0 50 230 0 0 0 280 Integrated Pest Management Program 0 100 0 0 0 0 100 1-405/Talbot Road Streetscape Improvements 150 0 0 0 0 200 Offleash Dog Park Development _50 50 0 0 0 0 0 50 KC Proposition 2 Capital Expenditures Levy Fund 123 123 123 123 123 123 738 Total Development -4,407 6,333 12,523 4,143 5,643 3,823 28,058 City Summary Page �� C."PTAL INVEST Major Maintenance 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Operational Facilities 308 90 92 92 92 0 674 Leased Facilities 110 260 0 0 0 0 370 Parks General Major Maintenance 435 655 630 615 2,395 495 5,225 Public Facilities 696 805 234 269 239 12 2,255 Irrigation Renovation & Conservation 425 250 250 250 400 150 1,725 Irrigation Automation and Conservation 60 60 60 60 60 60 360 Parking Lot and Drive Repairs 90 90 50 50 60 100 440 Ball Field Renovation Program 50 50 50 75 50 50 325 Pathway, Sidewalk, Patio & Boardwalk Repairs 190 90 25 40 90 90 525 Court Repairs 40 20 20 120 20 80 300 Tree Maintenance 70 70 70 70 70 70 420 Capital Project Manager 48 51 53 56 59 61 328 Total Major Maintenance 2,522 2,491 1,534 1,697 3,535 1,168 12,947 Total Community Services CIP -1,885 8,824 14,057 5,840 9,178 4,991 41,005 City Summary Page 12 CAPIFAL INVESTMENT PROGRAM Transportation CIP Funding Sources 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Vehicle Fuel Tax (includes increase from 2005 Initiative 912) 750 765 770 775 780 785 4,625 Business License Fee 1,900 1,900 1,900 2,100 2,100 2_100 12,000 Transportation Reserves 59 0 0 0 0 0 Grants In -Hand 6,787 2,375 1,259 430 0 0 _59 10_852 Mitigation In -Hand 900 1,000 1,000 1,100 1,100 1,100 6,200 Bonds/LID's Formed 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Government Resources In -Hand 12,389 2,693 1,668 642 493 893 18,778 Grants Proposed 0 1,500 2,078 6,731 3,552 165 14,025 Other Proposed 0 97 470 1,624 728 0 2 918 Undetermined 0 1,547 2,243 8,561 12,133 13,407 37,890 Total Transportation Funding Sources 22,785 11,877 11,387 21,963 20,886 18,450 107,348 Development 1 % for the Arts 15 15 15 15 15 15 90 Arterial Circulation Program 50 250 250 250 250 250 1,300 Barrier Free Transition Plan 40 50 50 50 50 50 290 Bicycle Route Development Pgm 18 110 80 80 80 80 448 Duvall Ave NE' 1,750 0 0 0 0 0 1,750 Duvall Ave NE NE 7th to Sunset 0 5 655 2,900 2,120 445 6,125 Duvall Ave NE - King County 3,091 0 0 0 0 0 3,091 Environmental Monitoring 50 30 30 30 30 30 200 Garden Ave N Widening 10 240 0 0 2,400 2,600 5,250 GIS Needs Assessment 20 20 20 150 150 150 510 Intersection Safety & Mobility 250 250 250 250 250 250 1,500 Lake Wash. By -Park to Coulon Pk 0 0 82 138 0 0 221 Lind Ave - SW 16th-SW 43rd 3 5 0 1,914 626 0 2,548 Logan Ave Concrete Panel Repair 0 0 460 0 0 0 460 City Summary Page 1' (2009 threig1i.2014,`a:.o Development (Continued) 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Missing Links Program 25 30 30 30 30 30 175 Monterrey/NE 20th Wall Repair 0 0 30 0 0 0 30 NE 3rd/NE 4th Corridor 3 338 1,464 4,794 1,844 980 9,423 Project Development/Predesign 50 150 150 150 150 150 800 Rainier Ave -Grady Way to S 2nd 7,000 6,800 3,700 1,300 0 0 18,800 RR Crossing Safety Program 5 0 0 0 10 0 15 Sam Chastain Lk WA Tr Connect 235 0 0 0 0 0 235 School Zone Sign Upgrades 50 0 0 0 0 0 50 South Renton Project 0 50 275 0 0 0 325 SR 169 HOV -140th to SR 900 0 0 0 2,550 0 0 2,550 Strander By/SW 27th St Connect. 8,210 1,097 1,627 5,082 10,069 10,892 36,977 TDM Program 65 65 65 65 65 65 390 Traffic Efficiency Program 50 50 50 30 30 30 240 Traffic Safety Program 20 20 40 40 40 40 200 Trans Concurrency 10 10 10 40 10 30 110 Transit Program 80 275 275 275 275 275 1,455 Walkway Program 250 250 250 250 250 250 1,500 WSDOT Coordination Program 30 65 60 60 40 40 295 Total Development 21,380 10,175 9,918 20,444 18,784 16,652 97,352 * Duvall Ave NE - SR 900 to North City Limits Project includes a city utilities expenditure of $109,548 which will will not be budgeted for in Fund 317. It will be budgeted in Fund 425 (Water) and Fund 426 (Wastewater). City Summary Page 14 CAPfrAL INVESTMENT PROGRAM Kee• _ Major Maintenance 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Arterial Rehab, Program 310 326 342 359 _ 377 396 2,109 Bridge Inspection and Repair 90 330 50 55 50 50 625 Loop Replacement Program 25 30 30 30 30 _ 30 175 May Creek Bridge Replacement 20 20 10 0 530 165 Pole Program 20 20 25 25 25 25 _745 140 Sign Replacement Program 5 8 8 8 8 8 43 Street Overlay Program 685 719 755 793 833 874 4,659 Sidewalk Rehabilitation and Replacement Program 250 250 250 250 250 250 1,500 Total Major Maintenance 1,405 1,702 1,469 1,519 2,102 1,797 9,995 Total Transportation CIP 22,785 11,877 11,387 21,963 20,886 18,450 107,348 City Summary Page 1� City of Renton - Potential Annexation Area (PAA) Fiscal Analysis February 26, 2009 Overview • Purpose of analysis: determine how Renton would fund services to annexation areas if major Potential Annexation Areas (PAAs) chose to annex to Renton. What are anticipated costs and revenues for the general fund and enterprise funds? • Estimates were made by City Departments of the cost to extend Renton's existing level of service into the annexation area based on PAA characteristics (population, demographics, topography, lane miles, crime rates, surface water facilities, park acres). • Renton has now satisfied the "commencement" requirement of all three of its large annexation area. • With acceptance of the Fairwood and West Hill petitions, the City could move forward on one of these two major annexations and will exhaust the maximum two -tenths of one cent state sales tax credit under current law. • Without State Legislative action, Renton can only leverage state sales tax credit for one area. (*) Preliminary Fiscal Impacts (additional detail attached) First Year (2012) West Hill Fairwood Operating Costs ($M) (13.1) (7.3) Operating Revenues 6.9 6.6 State Sales Tax Credit* 2.5 2.5 s r il';ii ith , K "� '. , D Enterprise Fund Costs (0.9) (1.1) Enterprise Fund Revenues 0.5 0.8 Net ]Enterprise-Futiot((PA Ito) One-time costs (3.3) (3.1) Annual capital costs (4.1) (4.9) Parks (0.8) (0.7) Transportation/Streets (2.8) (3.2) Surface Water (0.5) (1.0) Summary of Assumptions • All cost estimates are subject to change due to inflation and economic conditions. • Costs are assumed to grow 4% per year, and revenues in the aggregate at 1.5% per year, with specific revenue sources growing with Renton's historical average rates. • The analysis does not include assumptions about new residential or commercial development or the potential for new revenue from the PAAs. 1 • Enterprise funds would need to use rates and fees to fund expanded services. • Sales tax credit: Current authority is for 1/10th of 1 cent of the state sales tax for each 10,000 people annexed, up to a maximum of 2/10ths of one cent for 20,000 people. This source is not available for capital. Yield is —$2.5M/year. • King County Annexation Initiative Funding re -purposed to urban parks (not available for one-time costs). • Streamlined sales tax: assumes in-store sales 60%, 40% from community and new construction (some part of that is SST). • All salaries are assumed to start at 2012 levels, with 40% benefits factor, at the C step of the range. • It is assumed that staff positions held open from Benson Hill will be filled and proposed staff additions are above 2009 unfunded levels. Assumptions: West Hill • Population increase = 14,012 or 16% increase from 2008 Renton population of 82,067 • Annexation timing: o Renton City Council sends annexation to BRB in July 2009. o Boundary Review Board process takes 6 months (complete by January 2010). o Renton City Council approves the matter to go to election; City is required to place the question on the next election, May 2010. o Voters approve annexation to the City in November 2009. o Renton accepts the election results and annexes the area effective January 1, 2011. (Extended time allows for hiring, purchasing and transition.) • Estimates for 2011 include lags in revenues and costs, and 2012 is the first steady-state year, representative of the full -year cost of service. Refined estimates for out years can be made if annexation moves forward or to sequence the effective date. • Police Services: two patrol districts with two -person patrol staffing, which could be phased back to staffing with one -person patrols after 10 years, and support for Special Operations. Additional command, traffic, animal control, investigations, evidence, records and training costs. Associated equipment, uniforms, vehicles and supplies, jail, and communications costs. • Renton recommends annexation to KCLS and places the question before City of Renton voters in late 2009 or early 2010. Renton residents vote to join the King County Library System in 2009 and no change to library services for annexation areas is expected. • Fire services are provided by the City of Renton from the Fire District 20 headquarters station. The Bryn Mawr station is not needed for response. Fire & Emergency Services are provided today by Fire District 20, staffed with 8 on -duty FTEs and volunteer response. 2005 assumption was that Renton would staff the Skyway station with one engine and one aid car, bringing greater capacity to respond to emergencies during the day, and that no response would be provided from the Bryn Mawr station. 2009 assumption is that a 4-person engine company would serve West Hill from the Skyway station. One inspector would be needed to serve the area. 2 • King County would transfer Skyway Park (play fields and restrooms) and Bryn Mawr Park (undeveloped) to Renton. Community Services would not extend after school programs into area schools or expand special events staff. • Total Public Works Maintenance costs are not complete until building and yard expansion cost can be determined. Maintenance and Transportation staff have done a cursory survey of street and surface water facilities and conditions to propose staffing for street and surface water maintenance and generate an estimated annual capital cost. For Transportation, signal upgrades, supplies, associated vehicles and planning for transportation improvements would be needed. • Skyway Water & Sewer District would continue to provide water and sewer utility service. Renton's policy is not to assume independent water and sewer districts. • Power provider and utility pole ownership remains with Seattle City Light. • Community & Economic Development assumes economic development support for the West Hill business district, additional current and long-range planning needs, and code enforcement and building inspections. • Finance & Information Services would experience growth in business licensing, particularly for home businesses, solid waste utility account growth, additional animal control and licensing work. Internally, FIS would need to provide additional Print/Mail services based on growth in City staff; computer and telecommunications setup costs and user licenses; and would add information technology staff to support computer; phone and service desk demands. Neither annexation assumes an expansion of fiberoptic network, and that facility -related improvement costs (i.e. wiring, added server, switches) are part of facilities budget. • Human Resources and Risk Management would need to address recruitment and selection; classification and compensation; employee training and development; risk management - property and liability insurance; and the potential for increased claims. In addition, HR/RM would provide employee benefits, and per -employee training costs • Administrative and Judicial Services costs include voter registration, additional support for records management, proportional increases in public defense and prosecutor costs. In the Municipal Court, a second municipal court judge is assumed with the addition of both annexation areas. • Facility assumptions: The addition of staff for West Hill would necessitate creating additional office and work space. The Renton/GVA Kidder Matthews study presented to the City Council in mid-2008 assumed that several alternatives could create capacity for approximately 100 additional staff at an approximate cost of $25M. Annual debt service for 30 years on a $25M principal totals $1.7M. o Alternative 2: Construct additional space on existing City Hall site ($20-25M gap); or o Alternative 1B: Construct new buildings downtown near garage (+/- $20M gap) Assumptions: Fairwood • Population increase of 26,729 = 33% increase from 2008 Renton population of 82,067 • Annexation timing: o Renton City Council sends annexation to BRB in July 2009. o Fairwood incorporation vote fails at the ballot in November 2009. o Boundary Review Board process takes 6 months (complete by January 2010). o Renton City Council sets the Fairwood election in July 2010 and voters approve annexation to the city at the November 2010 general election. o Renton accepts the election results and annexes the area effective July 1, 2011. (Extended time allows for hiring, purchasing and transition.) • Police Services: One patrol district. Additional command, traffic, animal control, investigations, evidence, records and training costs. Associated equipment, uniforms, vehicles and supplies, jail, and communications costs. • Renton recommends annexation to KCLS and places the question before City of Renton voters in late 2009 or early 2010. Renton residents vote to join the King County Library System and no change to library services for annexation areas is expected. • Renton Fire & Emergency Services continues as service provider, currently on contract to FD 40. This contract would end if Renton annexed. Fire & Emergency Services costs would shift to Renton's general fund. Assume that Renton Fire & Emergency Services would be the service provider to Fire District 40. The 2009 estimated contract cost to serve FD 40 is $4.6M, representing a revenue loss to Renton. The City of Renton would then need to provide services funded from Renton's General Fund, with overhead and Citywide overhead rates currently charged to the district no longer included, bringing Renton's cost to provide services to roughly $4.0 M per year. Assume one four -person engine company would serve the area 24 hours, 7 days per week. With end of contract with FD 40, assume ongoing savings of 3 positions currently funded by contract. • Estimates for 2011 are partial year, and 2012 is the first steady-state year, representative of the full -year cost of service. Refined estimates for out years can be made if annexation moves forward. • King County transfers Petrovitsky Park, Boulevard Lane Park, Renton Park, and maintenance for Soos Creek Trail to the City of Renton. Community Services would not extend after school programs into area schools or expand special events staff. • Public Works, CED, AJS, FIS staffing and costs are similar to the functions added for West Hill. • Electric and natural gas provider is Puget Sound Energy. • Facility assumptions: If Fairwood annexed, staffing needs would not warrant the construction of additional space, and the City would work to accommodate added staff into existing City Hall, 200 Mill Building, and other City facilities. Needed to complete analysis • Appropriate assumptions about phasing and timing of annexation • Baseline financial assumptions about Renton's financial condition through the year 2025 • Fleet additions and cost of replacement plan • Allocate 1%fund balance for Human Services 4 CITY OF REN. _N POTENTIAL ANNEXATION AREA (PAA) FISCAL ANALYSIS February, 2009 • penditures($000) 2011 101,499 2012 105,559 2015 118,739 2020 144,465 iceSubtotal Expenditures M 101,499 105,559 118,739 144,465 es 101,499 105,559 118,739 144,465 redit (/l�taloz/ Subtotal Revenues 101,499 105,559 118,739 144,465 Net Resources 0 0 0 0 Shortfall -(% of expenditures) • • s •2011 2012 2015 2020 s($000) 3,265 7,390 8,206 9,797 s 860 860 860 Subtotal Expenditures 3,265 8,250 9,066 10,657 rom PAA 2,377 6,640 7,412 8,844 Tax Credit 17.1 2,426 2,594 2,765Subtotal Revenues 4,803 9,234 10,177Net Resources 1,538 984of expenditures) 47% 12% 12% -17% Expenditures 587 1,111 1,250 1,520 ' Revenues 191 774 810 872 Net Resources, (M),, 1 (337) (440),, (648) • • • •M 2011 2012 2015 2020 Expe2ditures(1000) 1 105,3511 114,0601 128,195 1 155,782 Facility Costs1 1 9601 860 I 860 Subtotal Expenditures 105,351 114,920 129,055 156,642 UC.,t,Resources 104,067 112,974 126,961 154,181 e Sales Tax Credit 1 2,4261 2;594 1 2765 Subtotal Revenues 106,493 115,567 129,726 154,181 Net Resources 1,142 647 671 (4461 Shortfall (% of expenditures) 1% 1% 1% -2% One-time equipment/contracts 4,145 General Fund 1 3,182 Enterprise Funds 963 Capital program (annual) 4,128 Parks 833 Streets/Transportnhon 2,800 Surface Water 495 IN Expenditures($000) 2011 1 9,5191 2012 13,1181 2015 14,648 2020 17,636 Facility Debt Service Subtotal Expenditures 9,519 8601 13,978 8601 15,509 860 18,496 from PAA 6,795 6,932 7,366 8,165 UReurces e Sales Tax Credit 1 2,426 j Z594 j 2;765 Subtotal Revenues 9,221 9,526 10,131 8,165 Net Resources 258), 4,45 r S,378 10,33 Shortfall (% of expenditures) -3% -32% -35% -56X Expenditures($000) 456 895 1,007 1,225 ' Revenues 356 481 488 496 Net Resources, (100)i (414)' (518) (M), ($000) Service SubtotalExpenditures 2011 111,474 111,474 2012 119,572 860 120,432 2015 134,394 860 135,254 2020 163,325 860 164,185 es 7of 108,649 112,972 126,593 153,125 ax Credit 2,4. 2,594 .2,765 Subtotal Revenues 111,075 115,566 129,359 153,125 Net Resources f395J (4,866) S, 12,f expenditures) CVL -4% 4% -7% 3,896 3,376 520 4,947 667 3,270 1.010 Without Legislative action to authorize additional sales tax credit, this amount is avalabie for only one of the PAAs. 0) 2011 2012 2015 2020 216,824 233,632 262,589 319,107 tce 0 1,720 1,720 1,720 7Subtotal Subtotal Expenditures 216,824 235,352 264,309 320,827 212,716 225,946 253,554 307,306 edit(zndand3rd01^) 4,852 5,187 5,530 Sub total Revenues 217,568 231,133 259,084 307,306 Net Resources, 113 (4,219) (5,225) (13,'S21) Shortfall (% of expenditures) 0% .2% •2% -4% 022309 fiscal analysis.xls. Overview 02/23/2009 WEST HILL POTENTIAL ANNEXATION AREA FISCAL ANALYSIS: PAA SUMMARY - without sales tax credit Staf8n0 nn4Time C - V.- General Fund: Operating Costs FTE 2011-2012 2011 2012Y 201S 2020 2025 Police 51.60 $813,585 $5,301,013 $6,537,728 $7,354,055 $8,947,333 $10,885,798 Public Works (Transportation, Maintenance) 7.00 $699,000 $904,685 $919,919 $1,034,783 $1,258,972 $1,531,732 Fire & Emergency Services 19.20 $86,000 $1,960,209 $2,038,617 $2,293,167 $2,789,988 $3,394,447 Community & Economic Development 7.50 $60,000 $394,398 $788,795 $887,287 $1,079,521 $1,313,402 Community Services 9.00 $1,311,500 $395,532 $846,248 $951,914 $1,158,149 $1,409,066 Finance and Information Services 1.50 $355,912 $66,588 $133,177 $149,906 $182,262 $221,749 Human Resources & Risk Management 2.00 $50,0D0 $95,292 $190,583 $214,380 $260,827 $317,335 Administrative and Judicial Services 4.50 $0 $302,520 $605,041 $680,589 $828,040 $1,007,438 City Attorney 1.00 $0 $98,863 $197,727 $222,416 $270,603 $329,230 Facility Costs $860,067 $860,067 $860,067 1 $860,067 General Fund Operating Costs 102.30 $3,375,997 $9,519,100 $13,117,903 $14,648,465 $17,63S,762 $21,270,265 General Fund: Operating Revenues Property Tax $3,258,000 $3,306,870 $3,457,922 $3,725,165 $4,013,060 Utility Tax $1,129,000 $1,174,160 $1,320,770 $1,606,919 $1,955,063 Sales Tax $187,500 $192,188 $206,965 $234,162 $264,933 Sales Tax -Criminal Justice $265,000 $271,625 $292,510 $330,949 $374,438 State Shared Revenues $392,000 $397,880 $416,055 $448,209 $482,848 Gambling Tax $750,000 $761,250 $796,023 $857,542 $923,817 Permit Fees $273,0D0 $277,095 $289,752 $312,145 $336,269 Fines & Forfeits $414,159 $420,371 $439,573 $473,545 $510,142 Cable Franchise Fees $115,000 $119,600 $134,534 $163,681 $199,143 Recreation Fees $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Business License Fees $11,000 $11,165 $11,675 $12,577 $13,549 General Fund Operating Revenues $6,794,659 $6,932,204 $7,36S,779 $8,164,894 $9,073,262 NET OPERATING REVENUES $2,724,441 ($6,185,699)1 ($7,282,686)1 ($9,470,868 $12,197,002) Average Annual Capital Costs $M Streets Surface Water/Drainage Parks Facilities $ $ $ $ 3.27 1.01 0.67 0.86 ESTIMATED CAPITAL COSTS $ 5.81 Capital Revenues Real Estate Excise Tax Mitigation Fees Other ESTIMATED ANNUAL CAPITAL REVENUES $0.00 NET AVAILABLE FOR CAPITAL $5.81) Lane mile Increase to TIP + County CIP: Oakesdale, S 128th, S 132nd , S 133rd, Rainier, Quick Response Current capital program extended to West HIII $3M Skyway Park, $1M Bryn Mawr, 6 years Facility costs, split between two areas Assume additional debt -funded facility costs aste, Surface Water, Tech Svcs, Utility Locator 9 months in year 1 CADocuments and Settines\1V1Wine\Desktop\022309 fiscal analvsis. W HIII n�r�z nnno FAIRWOOD POTENTIAL ANNEXATION AREA FiSCAL ANALYSIS: PAA SUMMARY - without sales tax credit Staffing One -Time Julv Full Year General Fund: Operating Costs FTE 2011-2012 2011 2012 2015 2020 2025 Police 26.20 $S08,83S $1,892,864 $3,785,728 $4,258,429 $S,181,030 $6,303,516 Public Works (Transportation, Maintenance) 9.00 $1,010,000 $S67,227 $1,134,455 $1,276,107 $1,552,580 $1,888,951 Fire & Emergency Services (3.00) $86,000 ($135,264) ($270,529) ($304,308) ($370,237) ($450,450) Community & Economic Development 5.00 $77,500 $245,437 $490,875 $552,167 $671,796 $817,342 Community Services 9.00 $1,228,500 $197,766 $395,532 $444,919 $S41,312 $658,589 Finance and Information Services 1.50 $220,800 $74,088 $148,177 $166,679 $202,790 $246,725 Human Resources & Risk Management 2.00 $50,000 $121,642 $243,283 $273,661 $332,950 $405,08S Administrative and Judicial Services 3.00 $0 $251,964 $503,927 $566,BSO $689,6S9 $839,076 'City Attorney 1.00 $0 $49,432 $98,863 $111,208 $135,301 $164,615 Facility Costs $860,067 $860,067 $860,067 $860,067 General Fund Operating Costs 52.70 $3,181,635 $3,265,156 $7,390,379 $8,205,780 $9,797,249 $11,733,516 General Fund: Operating Revenues Property Tax $2,801,000 $5,602,000 $S,857,890 $6,310,611 $6,799,321 Utility Tax $797,333 $2,392,000 $2,690,675 $3,273,617 $3,982,856 Sales Tax $353,333 $1,OW,000 $1,141,504 $1,291,507 $1,461,222 Sales Tax -Criminal Justice $175,000 $525,000 $56S,368 $639,662 $723,718 State Shared Revenues $259,000 $777,000 $812,492 $875,285 $942,930 Gambling Tax $3,333 $10,000 $10,4S7 $11,265 $12,136 !Permit Fees $134,000 $402,000 $420,363 $452,850 $487,949 Fines & Forfeits $94,040 $252,120 $263,637 $294,012 $305,961 Cable Franchise Fees $75,667 $227,000 $255,344 $310,665 $377,972 ;Recreation Fees $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 'Business License Fees $4,400 $13,200 $13,803 $14,870 $16,019 Fire District 40 revenue lass ($2,330,000) ($4,620,000) ($4,620,000 ($4,620,000) ($4,620,000) General Fund rating Revenues $2,377,107 $6,640,320 $7,411,532 $9,844,344 $10,488,982 NET OPERATING REVENUES I I ($888,049) ($750,058) ($794,247) ($952,906) ($1,244,533) Average Annual Capital Costs $M Streets Surface Water/Drainage Parks Facilities $2.90 $0.50 $0.83 $0.86 ESTIMATED CAPITAL COSTS $4.99 CapttalRevenues Real Estate Excise Tax Mitigation Fees Other ESTIMATED ANNUAL CAPITAL REVENUES $0.00 NET AVAILABLE FOR CAPITAL Lane mile Increase to TIP + 140th Ave SE/Petrovitsky Current capital program extended to West Hill $3M Petrovitsky, $1M Renton Park, $1M Boulevard Lane, 6 years Facility costs, split between two areas position savings Log collections 6 months revenue growth + rate growth rate growth rate growth revenue growth + rate growth Ongoing loss) Contract 18 mo notice aste, Surface Water, Tech Svcs, Utility Locator 3 months in year 1 C:\Documents ano gs\MWine\Desktop\022309 fiscal analysis, F wood 02/23/2009 City Of Renton 00000FP and King County West Hill Potential Annexation Area Survey Summary Report Key Findings • Three -fourths (75%) of the respondents reported that they had heard about the potential annexation of their area into the Renton city limits. • Over two -fifths (41.8%) were undecided about their stand with regard to the annexation and slightly more than one- third (37%) expressed support for the annexation. • One-fourth (24.6%) reported that they were well informed about what was involved in the annexation. Two -fifths (40.8%) thought they were `somewhat informed' and the remaining (34.7%) thought that they were not informed. • Over two-thirds rated their overall quality of life in the area to be either good (49.3%) or excellent (20%) at present. • With regard to the annexation's impact on their quality of life, about two -fifths (40.8%) thought that the annexation into the City of Renton would improve their quality of life. Another two -fifths (41.8%) thought that the annexation would not affect the quality of their life and the remaining (17.5%) thought it would decrease their quality of life. Of the respondents who thought that their quality of life would improve after annexation, the top three things that they thought would improve if they became a part of the City of Renton were police services (61.5%), fire and emergency medical services (24.8%) and road maintenance (24.8 %). Of the respondents who thought that their quality of life would decrease after annexation, the top three things that they thought would get worse if they became a part of the City of Renton were property tax rates (38.6%), police services (38.6%) and fire and emergency medical services (31.4%). West Hill Potential Annexation Area Survey Summary Report The top services/issues on the respondents' `importance' list were fire and emergency medical services (mean = 4.84), police services (mean = 4.70), level of taxes and fees (mean = 4.44) and road maintenance (mean = 4.41). Storm water drainage (mean = 4.31) and neighborhood appearance (mean = 4.31) tied up for the fifth top important spot. The top five services/issues on the respondents' `satisfaction' list were fire and emergency medical services (mean = 4.39), library (mean = 4.11), storm water drainage (mean = 3.68), police services (mean = 3.65) and parks and recreation (mean = 3.44). A gap analysis was conducted to identify the gap between importance and satisfaction. These gap scores indicated the areas where the biggest discrepancy existed between what was important to respondents and how satisfied they were with each of these services/issues. As such, services/issues with the largest negative gap scores are areas where the City could focus on since they indicate those areas where expectations are being least met. With regard to this, the five services/ issues that differ most in regard to respondents' ratings on importance being higher than respondents' satisfaction rating include: level of taxes and fees (gap =-1.35), economic vitality/ shopping opportunities (gap =-1.28), road maintenance (gap _-1.28), neighborhood appearance (gap =-1.22), and quality of development (gap =-1.19). Only 8.3 % thought that the quality of government services would improve if they remained unincorporated. In contrast, close to half (47.8%) thought that the quality of government services would improve if they were annexed into the City of Renton. Over three -fifths (62.5%) reported that they were not willing to pay higher taxes to fund maintenance and repair, and expansion of streets, storm drains and parks in their neighborhood. Over three -fifths (63%) of the respondents reported getting mailings to their house was the most useful way for them to receive information about the potential for annexation. City of Renton and King County • When asked if they had to choose today, over half (56.5%) chose annexation as the best choice for their area. Of those who supported annexation, over half (55.8%) strongly endorsed their opinion (that is, rated their opinion as 6 or 7 on a 7-point scale). Of those who chose staying as it is over annexation as the best choice for the future of their area, almost three -fifths (59.2%) strongly endorsed their opinion (that is, rated their opinion as 6 or 7 on a 7-point scale). • A logistical regression analysis was performed to more fully understand the relationship of the preference and demographic variables in regard to respondents' support towards annexation. It was found that those who were more likely to support West Hill's annexation as a part of the City of Renton were those who— • Were willing to pay higher taxes to fund maintenance and repair and expansion of streets, storm drains and parks in their neighborhood • Supported annexation after they knew that - • public safety, police, fire and emergency medical response times would improve after annexation; • street maintenance and repair would improve after annexation; • the school district would not change after annexation; • their services from the King County Library System would remain the same and planned improvements to the Skyway branch would be preserved after annexation. West Hill Potential Annexation Area Survey Summary Report 3 Methodology Survey Development PRR, in collaboration with the City of Renton and King County developed questions for the telephone survey. This process involved several initial drafts of survey questions all of which were reviewed by the City's survey development team members. A final draft of the survey questions was achieved (see Appendix A) and the questions were programmed into Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing (CATI) software. The survey questions were pre -tested and monitored on the first night of the survey fielding. The pre -testing indicated that the survey questions were working well and no changes were made to the questions. The pretest surveys were included in the final sample. Survey Fielding The following steps outline the process followed in fielding the survey: • A geo-demographer applied census blocks to the West Hill area map supplied by the City of Renton. • Purchased a list of phone sample targeted to the mapped area. Administered the survey to a random sample of 400 registered voters. To reduce sample bias, a minimum of four attempts were made to establish telephone contact at different times of the day and days of the week with every randomly selected phone number. West Hill Potential Annexation Area Survey Summary Report 5 The overall margin of error was +/- 5 percent at the 95 % confidence level. The margin of error is the plus -or -minus percent figure that applies to the interval that if you had asked the question of the entire relevant population would have picked the answer chosen by the sample. The confidence level tells you how sure you can be. It is expressed as a percentage and represents how often the true percentage of the population who would pick an answer lies within the margin of error. The response rate for the survey was 23%1. The cooperation rate (defined as the percent of qualified respondents who were contacted and who completed the survey) was 64%. Using the approved American Data Processing and Analysis Association of Public Opinion Research approach, response rate is defined as the number of Data processing consisted of coding and entering quantitative completed surveys plus partial and qualitative responses. Response range and logic checks were or suspended surveys divided by -the number of completed performed in order to check for miscoded variables thereby cleaning surveys, plus partial or the final data file. Data analysis was conducted with SPSS software suspended surveys, plus qualified refusals, plus break -offs, plus (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences). no answer, plus busy signal, plus answering machine, plus soft refusals, plus hard refusals, Data analysis involved the use of appropriate descriptive statistical plus scheduled callbacks, plus techniques (frequencies, percentages and means) and explanatory unspecified callbacks. statistical techniques (in this case Cramer's V and Kendall's Tau Cramer's V is a measure of c) to test for the statistical significance of relationships between the relationship between two variables'. Throughout this report, relationships between variables variables and is appropriate to use when one or both of the that are statistically significant at the .05 level or better, and that variables are at the nominal are meaningful to an understanding of the data are reported. level of measurement. Cramer's V ranges from 0 to +1 and indicates the strength of a relarionsli p. The closer to +1, Sample Demographics the stronger the relationship between the two variables. Kendall's Tau c is a measure of Table 1 presents the sample demographics. the relationship bcnveen two variables and is appropriate to use when both of the variables Even though the sample was slightly skewed with regard to gender, are at the ordinal level of measurement. Tau c ranges age and possibly home ownership, the analysis used unweighted from-1 to+1 and indicates data for the following reasons: the strength and direction of a relationship. The accompanying a. No voter demographic data was available to use as a base "p" scores presented in this report for Cramees V and Tau for weighting. c indicate the level of statistical significance. City of Renton and King County b. When we ran crosstabs using these demographics on the other preference and attitudinal variables in the survey, we found that most relationships were not statistically significant, and those that were, were not strong relationships. Consequently, weighting the data would not alter the results in any meaningful way. TableDemographics Gendelr (n = 400- Female 61.0 Male 39.0 Age to = 400) Under 25 years 1.0 25 - 34 7.5 35 - 44 12.5 45 - 54 18.8 55 - 64 25.8 65 or older f 32.3 Refused 2.3 Household Income (2007) before. tue"s {n=400j Under $20,000 5.3 $20.,000 - $49,999 18.8 $50,000 - $74,999 18.8 $75,000 - $99,999 16.3 $100,000 and Above 13.8 Refused 27.3 Length of Residonce fn, = 400) Less than 5 years 17.5 5 - 10 years 20.0 11 - 15 years 9.3 16 - 20 years 9.0 21 years or more 43.0 Refused 1.3 .OW060hip Of'#30s([etic6fh� 460) Own 83.3 .Rent 14.3 Refused 2.5 West Hill Potential Annexation Area Survey Summary Report 7 Children (under 18 years of age) in Household (n = 397) Yes 27.0 _ N_o 72.0 Refused 1.0 Neighborhood (n = 400) Skyway 32.8 Lakeridge 25.3 Bryn Mawr 21.3 ,P,,,,Campbeli Hill 10.0 Earlington T 5.5 Skycrest 2.0 Hill Top 1.5 Panorama 0.8 Other 1.0 City of Renton and King County Results Prior Knowledge of Annexation Three -fourths (75%) of the respondents reported that they had heard about the potential annexation of their area into the Renton city limits. In addition, prior knowledge of the potential annexation was found to be significantly associated with the respondents' neighborhood, housing status, length of stay in the area, age, children (less than 18 years of age) living in the household, and household income. Those who owned their homes were much likely to have heard about the potential annexation than those who lived in rented houses. 3 Those who lived in the neighborhoods of Skycrest and Panorama", had lived longer in the areas and/or were olderlwere somewhat more likely to have heard about the potential annexation than others. Those did not have children living in their household' and/or had higher household income, were slightly more likely to have heard about the potential annexation than those who had children and/or those who had lower household incomes. Q4: Have you heard about the potential annexation of your area Into Renton city limits? Base: All respondents who participated in the survey 3 Cramer's V= .320; p = .000 n=400 4. Cramer's VT .27*7; p ; .000 ■ No 75% S Kendatt's Tau-c = 0.277; Yes P = .Q40 07 S Kenditl.s Tau-c = 0.244; p .U00 7 Cramer's V .157, p - .002 8 Kendall's Tlau-c = 0.182; p M .0.02 West Hill Potential Annexation Area Survey Summary Report 9 While a little over two -fifths (41.8%) of the respondents were undecided about their stand with regard to the annexation at the very beginning of the survey, a little less than two -fifths (37%) expressed support for the annexation. The remaining one -fifth (21.S%) were against the annexation of their area into the Renton city limits. 4LG% QS: At this point would you say you are: Base: Ali respondents who participated In the survey n - 400 oAgainst annexation Into the City of Renton ® For annexation into the City of Renton e Undecided With regard to their perception of being informed about what was involved in the annexation, only one-fourth (24.6%) reported that they were well-informed. Two -fifths (40.8%) of the respondents thought they were "somewhat informed" and the remaining (34.7%) thought that they were not informed at all. Q& Would you say you are: Well Informed, Somewhat Informed or Not Informed about what is involved in the annexation of an unincorporated area into a city? Base: All respondents who participated in the survey n = 400 24.6% o Not informed © Somewhat Informed _1*.8% _j(qr__ O wellinformed In addition, respondents' perception of being informed about what was involved in the annexation was found to be statistically related with the respondents' neighborhood, housing status, length of stay in the area, age, children (less than 18 years of age) living in the household and household income. Those who lived in the v Cramees V= .167,, p-,030 neighborhood of Earlington9 and who owned their home10 were to Cmmer'sV= .204, p = .0Q0 somewhat more likely to report that they were well-informed about 10 City of Renton and King County what was involved in the annexation than those who lived in other neighborhoods and/or those who lived in rented houses. Those had lived longer in the area", were older 12, did not have children living in their household13 and/or had higher household incomes4 were slightly more likely to report that they were well-informed about what was involved in the annexation than others. Quality of Life Over two-thirds of the respondents rated their overall quality of life in the area to be either good (49.3%) or excellent (20%) at present. In addition, respondents' perception of their current quality of life in the area was found to be statistically related with their neighborhood, housing status, age and household income. Those who lived in Earlington were much more likely to perceive their current quality of life in the area as "good" or "excellent" as compared to those who lived in other neighborhoods.0 Those who owned their home were somewhat more likely to perceive their current quality of life in the area as "good" or "excellent" as compared to those who lived in rented houses.16 Those were older" and/or had higher household income18 were slightly more likely to perceive their current quality of life in the area as "good" or "excellent" as compared to others. Q8: How would you rate the overall quality of life in your area? Base: All respondents who participated in the survey n = 400 Ekceftent Good Fair Poor 0 10 20 30 40 s0 60 Percent With regard to the annexation's impact on their quality of life, about two -fifths (40.8%) thought that the annexation into the City of Renton would improve their quality of life. Another two -fifths (41.8%) thought that the annexation would not affect the quality of their life and the remaining (17.5%) thought it would decrease their quality of life. Y. x Kendull's Tau- = 0.165; p = ,000 xz Kendall's'rau-c-0.185; P = .00'0 13 Cramer's V= .148; p = .014 14 Kendall's Taut = 0.195; P = •000 r5 Cramer's 4- .4251 P G .000 1:6 Cramer's V- .203; P = .001 17 Kendall.'s Thu-c - 0.104; p=.00B i8 Kendall`s Tea-c = 0.105; p = .033 West Hill Potential Annexation Area Survey Summary Report 1 i Q9: How do you think being annexed as part of the City of Renton would impact your quality of life? Base: All respondents who participated in the survey n = 400 1. o Decrease the quality of life 402% t u Not affect the quality of life 4. u Improve the quality of I& Of the respondents who thought that their quality of life would improve after annexation, the top 3 things that they thought would improve if they became a part of the City of Renton were police services (61.5%), fire and emergency medical services (24.8%) and road maintenance (24.8%). 12 City of Renton and King County Q10a: What would you say are the top 3 things about becoming part of the City of Renton that would IMPROVE the quality of life where you live? Ig Police services 99 <n 26.8% 61.5% Fire and emergency medical services 40 10.8% 24.8% Road maintenance 40 10.8% 24.8% Community image 30 8.1% 18.6% Property tax rate 28 7.6% 17.4% Economic vWity l shopping opporturiities 28 7.6% 17.4% Parks and recreation 19 5.1 % 11.8% ` Library 13 3.5% 8.1 % Storm water drainage 12 3.3% 7.5% Quality of development 11 3.0% 6.8% Government/ City Services (permits/social services) 10 2.7% 6.2% Open space preservation 7 1.9% 4.3% Traffic congestion ^Density of development. 7 5 1.9% 1.4% 4.3% 3.1 % Culture / arts, museum and special events 4 1.1% 2.5% Utilities 4 1.1% 2.5% Schools 4 1.1% 2.5% Expenses/ Cost of Living 1 0.3% 0.6% Other 7 1.9% 4.3% 'fatal 3.69 100.0% 229..2% Of the respondents who thought that their quality of life would decrease after annexation, the top 3 things that they thought would get worse if they became a part of the City of Renton were property tax rates (38.6%), police services (38.6%) and fire and emergency medical services (31.4%). West Hill Potential Annexation Area Survey Summary Report 13 Q10b: What would you say are the top 3 things about becoming part of the City of Renton that would DECREASE the quality of life where you live? ResponsesPercent of Police services 27 18.1% 38.6% Property tax rate 27 18.1 % 38.6% Fire and emergency medical services 22 14.8% 31.4% Library 12 8.1% 17.1% Community image 12 8.1% 17.1% ' Utilities 7 4.7% 10.0% Government/ City Services (permits/social services) 6 4.0% 8.6% Quality of development 5 3.4% 7.1% Expenses/ Cost of Living 5 3.4% 7.1% Schools 4 2.7% 5.7% Storm water drainage 3 2.0% 4.3% Density of development 3 2.0% 43% Economic vitality / shopping opportunities 2 1.3% 2.9% `Traffic congestion 2 1.3% 2.9% Road maintenance 1 0.7% 1.4% Culture / arts, museum and special events 1 0.7% 1.4% Other 10 6.7% 14.3% Totat 149 10D. i% 212.9% Satisfaction with and Importance of Current Services/Issues The following key results were found with regard to respondents' importance of and satisfaction with each of these current services/ issues. While the respondents were asked to rate each of the services/issues on a 5 point scale for importance and satisfaction, a rating of 4 and above on the scales was considered as important or satisfactory. 14 City of Renton and King County a Storm Water Drainage • Over four -fifths (80.8%) of the respondents found this service to be important. Over half (56%) of the respondents expressed satisfaction with this service. • The level of importance that the respondents attached to this service was found to be statistically related to their gender and length of stay in the area. It was found that women were somewhat more likely to find the service more important than men." In addition, the longer the respondent had lived in the area, the slightly less likely he/she was to find storm water drainage to be an important service.20 • The level of satisfaction that the respondents expressed with this service was found to be significantly associated to children (less than 18 years of age) living in their household. It was found that those who did not have children living in their household were slightly more likely to be satisfied with this service than those who did.21 • Library • Over three -fourths (76%) of the respondents found this service to be important. Over two-thirds (68.3%) of the respondents expressed satisfaction with this service. • The degree of importance that the respondents attached to this service was significantly related to their gender, housing status and household income. Women were somewhat more likely to find the service more important than men 22 Respondents who rented an apartment in the area were slightly more likely to find this service more important than those who owned a house in the area.2' With regard to household income, iy Cmwprs V= .203.;p =.003 those who had a lower household income were slightly more likely to find this service more important than 20 Kendali's Tau-c _-0.087; those who had higher incomes.:, P=.oz1 zI c amen s v= .179; p - .015 • The level of satisfaction with library services was found to be statistically associated to respondents' length of 22 Cramerk Vr- 240; p .OUO stay in the area, household income and gender. The 13 Cramert v- .I79; p = .015 longer one had lived in the area, the slightly more 4 _KendoWsT'au-c--.161; p - .000 satisfied he/she was with the service.21 With regard to household income, (with the exception of people who zs Kendall's'1'au-e = 084; p ::.029 West Hill Potential Annexation Area Survey Summary Report 15 26 Kendall's Tau-c =-.134; p = .004 27 Cramer's V .181; p = .015 28 Crameesv=.1ss;p=.011 zg Kendall's Tau-c = -.081; p = .042 3o Kendall's Tau-c = -.111; p = .004 31 Csamees V= .173, p = .020 3 z Cramer's V= .220; p = .001 33 Xendall's Tau-c = .096; p = •020 34 Grainm's V= .171; p = .023 had a household income of less than $20K) those who had a lower household income were slightly more likely to be satisfied with this service than those who had higher incomes.26 Also, women reported slightly greater satisfaction with this service than men.27 e Parks and recreation • Almost three -fourths (74.6 %) of the respondents found this service to be important. Two -fifths (41.9%) of the respondents expressed satisfaction with this service. • The level of importance that respondents attached to this service was significantly associated with their housing status, length of stay in the area, age and gender. Those respondents who owned an apartment in the area21 and/or who were younger21 were slightly more likely to find it more important than others. With the exception of those who have lived in the area for 5 to 15 years, the shorter the length of time one had lived in the area, the slightly more important he/she found the service to be.30 Women were slightly more likely to find this service more important than men.31 • The level of satisfaction with this service was statistically related to children (less than 18 years of age) living in respondents' households. It was found that those who did not have children living in their household were somewhat more satisfied with this service than those who did.32 • Police services • The vast majority (93.4%) of the respondents found this service to be important. Over half (53.8%) of the respondents expressed satisfaction with this service. • The degree of satisfaction with police services was also statistically associated with respondents' age and gender. Those respondents who were older found the service slightly more satisfactory than those who were younger.33 Women expressed slightly more satisfaction with the service than men.34 16 City of Renton and King County • • Fire and Emergency Medical Services • The vast majority (96.5%) of the respondents found this service to be important. Over four -fifths (83.1%) of the respondents expressed satisfaction with this service. • The level of importance that the respondents attached to this service was statistically related to their gender. Women were somewhat more likely to find fire and emergency medical services more important than men.35 • The level of satisfaction with fire and emergency medical services was significantly associated with respondents' age. With the exception of people between the ages of 55 to 64 years, the older one was, the slightly more satisfied he/she was with this service.36 Level of Taxes and Fees • Over four -fifths (82.6%) of respondents found this issue to be important. Less than one-third (30.3%) of the respondents expressed satisfaction with this issue. • The level of importance that the respondents attached to this issue was statistically related to children (less than 18 years of age) living in their household and their gender. It was found that those who had children living in their household were slightly more likely to find this issue important than those who did not.37 Women were slightly more likely to find this issue more important than men.38 Road Maintenance • More than four -fifths (84.5%) of the respondents found this service to be important. Over one-third (35.5%) of the respondents expressed satisfaction with this service. • The respondents' level of satisfaction with road maintenance was statistically associated with their length of stay in the area. The longer one had lived in the area, the slightly more satisfied he/she was with this service.39 35 Cramer'. V= �W; p = .000 36 Kendall's T9u-e = .099 p = .d07 37 CramV .19d; p - .007 38 Crawer's V- .165; p = .032 39 TCendaTl's Tau-c = .106; p = .008 West Hill Potential Annexation Area Survey Summary Report 17 • Open Space Preservation • Almost three -fourths (72%) of the respondents found this issue to be important. Over one-third (35.8%) of the respondents expressed satisfaction with this issue. • The degree of importance that the respondents attached to open space preservation was statistically related to their gender. Women were much more likely to find the issue of open space preservation more important than men.40 • Economic Vitality/Shopping Opportunities • Over three -fourths (77.9%) of the respondents found this issue to be important. Over one-third (34.6%) of the respondents expressed satisfaction with the issue. • The level of importance that the respondents attached to economic vitality/shopping opportunities was significantly associated with their housing status. It was found that those who rented an apartment in the area were slightly more likely to find this issue important than those who owned their home." • Quality of Development • Over three -fourths (76.6%) of the respondents found this issue to be important. Over one-fourth (25.5%) of the respondents expressed satisfaction with the issue. • The level of satisfaction over this issue was statistically related to children (less than 18 years of age) living in respondents' households. It was found that those who did not have children living in their household were slightly more satisfied with this issue than those who did.42 • Density of Development • Two-thirds (65.8%) of the respondents found this issue to be important. Almost one-third (32%) of the respondents expressed satisfaction with the issue. • The degree of importance that the respondents attached 40 Cramer's V= .299; p = -OM to the issue was statistically related to their age. Those 41 Cr nxesV=.1S7;p=.050 who were older were slightly more likely to find it 42 Crsmees V= .161; p = .045 more important than those who were younger.43 43 Keadall's Tau-c - .081; p = .047 18 City of Renton and King County • The respondents' level of satisfaction with the issue was significantly related to their housing status, children (less than 18 years of age) living in the household and gender. It was found that those who did not have children living in their household were somewhat more satisfied with this issue than those who did." Those who owned their home were slightly more satisfied with this issue than those who rented an apartment 45 Women expressed slightly more satisfaction with the issue than men'' • Neighborhood Appearance • Over four -fifths (82.6%) of the respondents found this issue to be important. One-third (33.5%) of the respondents expressed satisfaction with this issue. Mean Importance Scores, Mean Satisfaction Scores and Gap Analysis The top services/issues on the respondents' `importance' list were fire and emergency medical services (mean = 4.84), police services (mean = 4.70), level of taxes and fees (mean = 4.44) and road maintenance (mean = 4.41). The following services are tied for the fifth top importance spot: storm water drainage (mean = 4.31) and neighborhood appearance (mean = 4.31). The five services/issues that figured at the bottom of the respondents' importance list were density of development (mean = 4.11), parks and recreation (mean = 4.19), open space preservation (mean = 4.20), economic vitality/shopping opportunities (mean = 4.22), and library (mean = 4.23). The top five services/issues on the respondents' `satisfaction' list were fire and emergency medical services (mean = 4.39), library (mean = 4.11), storm water drainage (mean = 3.68), police services (mean = 3.65) and parks and recreation (mean = 3.44). The five services/issues that figured at the bottom of the respondents' satisfaction list were economic vitality/shopping opportunities (mean = 2.94), quality o f development (mean = 3.06), neighborhood appearance (mean = 3.09), level of taxes and fees (mean = 3.09), and road maintenance (mean = 3.13). 44 cromees V= m3; p - :0o1 45 Cramer .'s V= .185; p = .015 46 Cramerk V= .162, p = .W West Hill Potential Annexation Area Survey Summary Report 19 A gap analysis was conducted to identify the gap between importance and satisfaction. These gap scores indicated the areas where the biggest discrepancy existed between what was important to respondents and how satisfied they were with each of these services/issues. As such, services/issues with the largest negative gap scores are areas where the City could focus on since they indicate those areas where expectations are being least met. With regard to this, the five service&/issues that differ most in regard to respondents' ratings on importance being higher than respondents' satisfaction rating include: level of taxes and fees (gap = -1.35), economic vitality/shopping opportunities (gap =-1.28), road maintenance (gap = -1.28 ), neighborhood appearance (gap =-1.22), and quality of development (gap =-1.19). (See figure on following page for full gap analysis.) If remaining unincorporated would cause the gap to continue or widen, this may also be an area of communication in West Hill by the County. 20 City of Renton and King County Gap Analysis of Mean Importance Scores and Mean Satisfaction Scores Base: All respondents who particitpated in the survey n = 400 Le vel of 7xesar eii -- - F 1 Economic WtaliOq%h PPS&' OP r Road Hance us i Neigh orhood p nae Qu zlityofDevc Po cles D 4YofD Opej r Space P on I rks and n s Water Are and Emerge cyMedical Servlces Library -2.00 -1.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 O Gap © Mean Satisfaction Scare O Mean Importance Score West Hill Potential Annexation Area Survey Summary Report 21 Quality of Government While almost three -fifths (59.2%) of the respondents thought that the quality of the government services would stay the same if their area were to remain as unincorporated King County, one-third (32.5%) thought that the quality of government services would get worse. Only 8.3% thought that the quality of government services would improve if they remained unincorporated. In contrast, close to half (47.8%) thought that the quality of government services would improve if they were annexed into the City of Renton. This difference (39.5%) indicates a huge leap in the number of respondents who were in support of the annexation as against staying unincorporated especially when they thought about the quality of government services. Q12 -13: Do you feel the quality of government services would - Base: All respondents who participated in the survey n = 400 � I Improve 7.8 SttW the 59.2 same .,...,..... 323 32.5 Get worse „ , .......... 19.9 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Percent o Remain unincorporated Ring County El Annexed into the City of Renton Additionally, respondents' perception of the quality of government services if their area were to remain unincorporated King County was found to be statistically related to their housing status. Those who rented their apartment were slightly more likely to perceive improvement while staying unincorporated than those who owned their home." 47 Cramer's V= .176i p = .003 22 City of Renton and King County I Annexation Impacts on Preference for Annexation or Remaining Unincorporated The following key results were found with regard to annexation impacts on respondents' preferences: • Change in Address When asked if they knew that by becoming part of the City of Renton the city name of their address would change from Seattle to Renton, a little over half (52.8%) of the respondents reported preferring staying as is over annexation. • School District When asked if they knew that by becoming part of the City of Renton their school district would not change a little over half (52.8%) of the respondents reported preferring annexation over staying as is. Street Maintenance and Repair When asked if they knew that by becoming part of the City of Renton street maintenance and repair would improve, close to two-thirds (65.5%) of the respondents reported preferring annexation over staying as is. • Public Safety, Police, Fire and Emergency Medical Response Times When asked if they knew that by becoming part of the City of Renton public safety, police, fire and emergency medical response times would improve, over two-thirds (68.8%) of the respondents reported preferring annexation over staying as is. ® Parks and Recreation Services When asked if they knew that by becoming part of the City of Renton their area would have more and better parks over time and access to recreation services, over three -fifths (61.5%) of the respondents reported preferring annexation over staying as is. Additionally, respondents' preference for annexation after knowing that annexation would lead to more parks and recreation services was found to be statistically related to their length of stay in the area. With West Hill Potential Annexation Area Survey Summary Report 23 the exception of people who have lived in the area for 16 to 20 years, the shorter the length of time one had lived in the area, the slightly more likely they were to support annexation in light of better parks and recreation services.11 • King County Library System When asked if they knew that their services from the King County Library System would remain the same and planned improvements to the Skyway branch would be preserved, over half (SS.S%) of the respondents reported preferring annexation over staying as is. Q14-19: If you knew that becoming part of the City of Renton would have the following impacts, would you prefer to - Base: All respondents who participated in the survey n = 400 Address change from Seattle to Renton No change to school district Services from the King County Library System remain same &planned improvements to the Skyway branch are preserved More & better parks over time & access to recreation services Improvement in street maintenance & repair Improvement In public safety, pollcefire & emergency medical response times 0 20 40 60 Percent u Become part of the City of Renton 48 Kendall's Tau-c = .118; p _ .026 w Stay part of unincorporated Ktng County 5 i5.5 68.8 80 24 City of Renton and King County a Willingness to Pay Higher Taxes Over three -fifths (62.5%) of the respondents reported that they were not willing to pay higher taxes to fund maintenance and repair, and expansion of streets, storm drains and parks in their neighborhood. Respondents' willingness to pay higher taxes was found to be statistically related to their household income. The higher the household income, the slightly more likely one was to be willing to pay higher taxes to fund maintenance and repair, and expansion of streets, storm drains and parks in their neighborhood." Q20: Would you be willing to pay higher taxes to fund maintenance and repair and expansion of streets, storm drains and parks in your neighborhood? Base: All respondents who partidpated in the survey Communication Over three -fifths (63%) of the respondents reported that getting mailings to their house was the most useful way for them to receive information about the potential for annexation. Another 17% reported that the internet with email updates was the most useful way to receive annexation information. 49 Kendaff's Tau-c� .137; p x .032 West Hill Potential Annexation Area Survey Summary Report 25 Q23: What is the most useful way for you to receive information about the potential for annexation? Base. All respondents who participated In the survey n = 400 Mailing to my house Internet with email updates Open house community meeting Small group meeting In my neighborhood Insertln Renton Reporter Other Not interested In receiving Information about this Doorto-doorvisitsfrom neighbors 0 20 40 60 80 Percent Current Opinion toward Annexation When asked again at the end of the survey if they had to choose today, over half (56.5%) of the respondents chose annexation as the best choice for their area. Of those who supported annexation, over half (55.8%) strongly endorsed their opinion (that is, rated their opinion as 6 or 7 on a 7-point scale). Q21: if you had to choose today, what do you think Is the best choice for the future of your area? Base: All respondents who participated in the survey fJ n=400 f` oBecome part ofthe ` City of Renton 0 Stay part of unincorporated ling County 26 City of Renton and King County Of the remaining (43.5%) who chose staying as is over annexation, almost three -fifths (59.2%) strongly endorsed their opinion (that is, rated their opinion as 6 or 7 on a 7-point scale). Q22:On a scale of i to 7 with 1 being very weak and 7 being very strong, how strongly do you believe that the best thing for the future of your area would be to - Sam: All respondents who participated in the survey Verystrong 6 5 4 3 Z Very weak 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Percent • Become partof the Cttyof Renton (n = 226) Stay part of unincorporated King County (n =174) Regression Analysis Since cross -tabulation analysis investigates the relationship between only two variables at a time without controlling for other variables or any interaction effects, logistical regression analysis was performed to more fully understand the relationship of the preference and demographic variables in regard to respondents' support towards annexation. It was found that those who were more likely to support West Hill's annexation as a part of the City of Renton were those who: • Supported annexation after they knew that public safety, police, fire and emergency medical response times would improve after they were incorporated into Renton City limits (29.7 times more likely to support annexation). West Hill Potential Annexation Area Survey Summary Report 27 Supported annexation after they knew that street maintenance and repair would improve after they were incorporated into Renton City limits (5.9 times more likely to support annexation). • Supported annexation after they knew that the school district would not change after they were incorporated into Renton City limits (4.4 times more likely to support annexation). • Were willing to pay higher taxes to fund maintenance and repair and expansion of streets, storm drains and parks in their neighborhood (3.4 times more likely to support annexation). Supported annexation after they knew their services from the King County Library System would remain the same and planned improvements to the Skyway branch would be preserved after they were incorporated into Renton City limits (2.9 times more likely to support annexation). These five variables accounted for SS% of the variance in support for annexation of West Hill area into Renton City limits. 28 City of Renton and King County Appendix A West Hill Potential Annexation Area Survey Hello, my name is and I'm calling on behalf of the City of Renton and King County. I want to assure you that this is not a sales call. We would like to ask you a few questions about the possible annexation of your area into the City of Renton and your input would be greatly appreciated. Do you have 10-12 minutes to share your thoughts? (If yes, thank and continue. If no, ask about rescheduling. If still no, thank and disconnect.) Today, as part of unincorporated King County your area is managed by the county and special fire, library and utility districts. If annexed, your area would get services from the City of Renton and the Skyway Water and Sewer District. This is an opportunity to share your thoughts about this issue. Your answers will remain completely anonymous. There are a few questions I would like to ask you first to make sure you qualify for our survey. Screening Questions 1. Are you a Washington State registered voter? • Yes • No NOTE TO INTERVIEWERS —ATTEMPT TO GET 400 REGISTERED VOTERS. IF UNABLE TO GET 400 VOTERS FILL REMAINDER OF SAMPLE WITH NON -VOTERS, BUT WITH A QUOTA OF AT LEAST 200 VOTERS. 2. In the last four elections, how many have you voted in? • 4 • 3 • 2 • 1 • None West Hill Potential Annexation Area Survey Summary Report 29 3. Please tell me your zip code (record zip code; acceptable zip codes are 98178 and 98057); if not in our list of qualifying zip codes - Thank you for your time, you are not part of the area we are targeting for this survey.) Prior Knowledge of Annexation 4. Have you heard about the potential annexation of your area into Renton city limits? • Yes • No 5. At this point would you say you are: • For annexation into the City of Renton • Against annexation into the City of Renton • Undecided 6. Would you say you are: Well Informed, Somewhat informed or Not Informed about what is involved in the annexation of an unincorporated area into a city? • Well informed • Somewhat informed • Not informed • Don't know • Quality of Life 7. Which of the following best describes the area in which you live? (rotate and read, must pick only one) • Bryn Mawr • Lakeridge • Skyway • Campbell Hill • Earlington • Skycrest • Hill Top • Panorama • Other (specify) 30 City of Renton and King County 8. How would you rate the overall quality of life in your area? • Excellent • Good • Fair • Poor 9. How do you think being annexed as part of the City of Renton would impact your quality of life? Would you say it would: • Improve the quality of life, • Not affect the quality of life (skip to Q11) • Decrease the quality of life 10. What would you say are the top 3 things about becoming part of the City of Renton that would (insert improve or decrease from Q9) the quality of life where you live? (Do not read) • Library • Parks and recreation • Police services • Fire and emergency medical services • Property tax rate • Community image • Road maintenance • Storm water drainage • Open space preservation • Economic vitality/shopping opportunities • Traffic congestion • Culture/arts, museum and special events • Quality of development • Density of development • Other (specify) West Hill Potential Annexation Area Survey Summary Report 31 Satisfaction with and Importance of Current Services/Issues 11. 1 am now going to read to you a list of items. Please tell me on a scale of 1 to 5 how important each item is to you (with 1 = very unimportant and 5 = very important). I will also ask you to tell me on a scale of 1 to 5 (with 1 = very dissatisfied and 5 = very satisfied) how satisfied you currently are with each item. (Rotate and read items. Allow a "not applicable" and a "don't know" category for each item.) • Storm water drainage • Library • Parks and recreation • Police services • Fire and emergency medical services • Level of taxes and fees • Road Maintenance • Open space preservation • Economic vitality/shopping opportunities • Quality of development • Density of development • Neighborhood appearance (enforcement of property maintenance codes) 12. If annexed into the City of Renton do you feel the quality of government services would: (rotate) • Improve • Stay the same • Get worse • Don't know (Do not read) 13. If your area were to remain unincorporated King County do you feel the quality of government services would: (rotate) • Improve • Stay the same • Get worse • Don't know (Do not read) 101 32 City of Renton and King County Annexation "Impacts" on Preference 14. If you knew that by becoming part of the City of Renton the city name on your address would change from Seattle to Renton, would you prefer to: (rotate and read) • Become part of the City of Renton; or • Stay part of unincorporated King County 15. If you knew that by becoming part of the City of Renton your School District would Not change, would you prefer to: (rotate and read) • Become part of the City of Renton, or • Stay part of unincorporated King County Impacts Continued (rotate Qs 16-20) (Please read) Annexation to the City of Renton would result in some changes to government services. For the following list of services, please tell us whether that change would make you more or less likely to support annexation to the City of Renton. 16. If you knew that by becoming part of the City of Renton street maintenance and repair would improve, would you prefer to: (rotate and read) • Become part of the City of Renton, or • Stay part of unincorporated King County 17. If you knew that by becoming part of the City of Renton public safety — police, fire and emergency medical response times would improve, would you prefer to: (rotate and read) • Become part of the City of Renton, or • Stay part of unincorporated King County 18. If you knew that by becoming part of the City of Renton your area would have more and better parks OVER TIME and ACCESS TO recreation services, would you prefer to: (rotate and read) • Become part of the City of Renton, or • Stay part of unincorporated King County West Hill Potential Annexation Area Survey Summary Report 33 19. If you knew that your services from the King County Library System would remain the same and planned improvements to the Skyway branch would be preserved, would you prefer to: (rotate and read) • Become part of the City of Renton, or • Stay part of unincorporated King County 20. Generally, annexation results in a lower overall tax burden, but Renton would not have funding to make near -term capital improvements. Would you be willing to pay higher taxes to fund maintenance and repair and expansion of streets, storm drains and parks in your neighborhood? • No • Yes Current Opinion toward Annexation 21. If you had to choose today, what do you think is the best choice for the future of your area? Would you say: • Become part of the City of Renton, or • Stay part of unincorporated King County 22. On a scale of 1 to 7 (with 1 being very weak and 7 being very strong), how strongly do you believe that the best thing for the future of your area would be to (insert answer from Q21)? (IF DON'T KNOW, PROBE FOR BEST GUESS) Communication 23. What is the most useful way for you to receive information about the potential for annexation? (rotate and read) • Internet with email updates • Door-to-door visits from neighbors • Open house community meeting • Small -group meeting in my neighborhood • Mailing to my house • Insert in Renton Reporter • Not interested in receiving information about this • Other (specify) 34 City of Renton and King County Demographics Your survey answers to the next few questions will remain completely confidential and your answers will be combined with those of others for analysis purposes. 24. Do you own or rent your home? • Own • Rent 25. How many years have you lived in this area? _ (RANGE IS 0 TO 97; 98 = DON'T KNOW; 99 = REFUSED) 26. Which age group are you in? Would you say • Under 25 years of age • 25-34 • 35-44 • 45-54 • 55-64 • 65 or older • Refused 27. Do you have children less than 18 years of age living at home with you? • No • Yes • Refused 28. Which of the following income ranges includes your household's total pre-tax 2007 income? • Less than $20,000 • $20,000 to less than $50,000 • $50,000 to less than $75,000 • $75,000 to less than $100,000 • $100,000 or more • Refused 29. Record respondent gender • Male • Female West Hill Potential Annexation Area Survey Summary Report 35 Appendix B. Result Tables 04: Have you heard about the potential annexation of your area Into Renton city limits? Cumulative Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent a o 100 26.0 29.0 A Yes 3W 75.0 75.0 100.0 Total 400 100.0 100.0 05: At this point would you say you are: Froouencv Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid a not annexation Into the City of Renton 85 21 3 21.3 21 3 For annexation into the City of Renton 148 37A 37 0 58.3 Undecided 167 412 41.8 100.0 Total 400 100.0 100.0 06: Would you any you are: Well informed. Somewhat Informed or Not Informed about what Is involved In the annexation of an unincorporated area Into a city? Fro uonc Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid Not informed 137 34.3 34.7 34.7 Somewhat informed 161 40.3 402 76.4 Well informed 97 24.3 24.6 100.0 Total 395 98.8 100.0 Missing Don't know 5 1.3 Total 400 100.0 07: Which of the following best describes the area in which you live? Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid ryn awr 66 21.3 21.3 21.3 l.akeridge 101 25.3 253 46.5 Skyway 131 32.8 32,6 79.3 Campbell Hill 40 10.0 10A 89.3 Eerlington 22 5.5 64 94,8 Skycrest 8 2.0 2,0 96.8 Hip Top 6 1.5 1.6 98.3 Panorama 3 _8 _8 990 Other 4 1.0 1.0 1000 Total 400 100.0 100.0 West Hill Potential Annexation Area Survey Summary Report 37 08: How would you rate the overall quality of life In your area? Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid oor 28 7.0 7.0 7.0 Fair 95 23,8 23.8 30.8 Good 197 493 49.3 80.0 Excellent sty 20.0 20.0 1W.0 Total 400 100.0 100.0 09: How do you think being annexed as part of the City of Renton would impact your quality of life? Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid ecrease the quality ol 70 17.6 17.6 17.6 life Not affect the quality of life 167 41.8 412 69.3 Improve the quality of life 163 40.8 402 100.0 Total 400 100.0 100.0 Q10a: What would you say are the top 3 things about becoming part of the City of Renton that would Improve the quality of life where you live? Res onses Percent of Cases N Percent TopThrWhingsil Library 13 3.6% 8.1 % Parks and recreation 19 5.1 % 11.8% Police services 99 26.8% 61.5% Fire and emergency 40 10.8% 24.8% medical services Property tax rate 28 7.6% 17,4% Community image 30 8.1 % 18.6% Road maintenance 40 10.8% 24.8% Storm water drainage 12 3.3% 7.6% Open space preservation 7 1.9% 4.3% Economic vitality 1 28 7.6% 17.4% shopping opportunities Traffic congestion 7 1.9% 4.3% Culture / arts, museum 4 1,1 % 2,6% and special events Quality of development 11 3.0% 6.8% Density of development 6 1.4% 3.1 % Other 7 1.9% 4.3% Government/ CRY Services (permits/social 10 2.7% 6.2°% services) Utilities 4 1.1 % 2.6% Schools 4 1.1% 2.5% Expenses/ Cost of Living 1 .3% .6% Total 369 100.0% 229.2% 8, Group 38 City of Renton and King County 010b: What would you say are the top 3 things about becoming part of the City of Renton that would decrease the quality of life where you live? Responses Percent of Cases N Percent op hree rags" Library 12 8.1 % 17.1 % Police services 27 18.1 % 38.6% Fire and emergency medical services 22 14.8% 31.4% Property tax rate 27 18.1 % 38.6% Community image 12 8.1 % 17.1 % Road maintenance 1 .7% 1.4% Storm water drainage 3 2.0% 4.3% Economic vitality / 2 1.3% 2.9% shopping opportunities Traffic congestion 2 1.3% 2.9% Culture / arts, museum and special events 1 .7% 1.4% Quality of development 6 3.4% 7.1 % Density of development 3 2.0% 4.3% Other 10 6.7% 14.3% Government/ City Services (permitstsocial 6 4.0% 8.6% services) Utilities 7 4.7% 10.0% Schools 4 2.7% 6.7% Expenses/ Cost of Living 6 3.4% 7.1 % Total 1 149 1 100.0% 1 212.9% a. Group 011a1: On a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 meaning very unimportant and 5 meaning very Important. how Important is storm water drainage to you? Fre uenc Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid Very unimportant 19 4.8 43 43 2 10 2.6 2.6 7A 3 46 11.5 11.8 19.2 4 93 23.3 23.8 43.0 Very important 223 55.8 67.0 100,0 Total 391 97.8 100.0 Missing Not applicable 3 .8 Don% know 6 IS Total 9 2.3 Total 400 100.0 West Hill Potential Annexation Area Survey Summary Report 3'p Q11a2: On a scale ofIto 5 wkh 1 meaning very dissatisfied and 5 meaning very satisfied, how satisfied are you currently with storm water drainage? Fre uengL Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent a d ery disiatisfie 27 6.8 70 71) 2 43 10.8 11.1 18.1 3 100 25.0 25.8 43.9 4 112 28.0 28.9 72.9 Very satisfied 105 2613 27.1 100.0 Total 387 96.8 100.0 Missing Not applicable 7 1.8 Don't know 6 1.6 Total 13 3.3 Total 400 100A Q11b1: On a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 meaning very unimportant and 5 moaning vary Important, how Important is library to you? Frequency Percent. Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid ery unimportant 16 4.0 4.1 4.1 2 25 6.3 6A 10.6 3 62 13.0 13.4 24.0 4 83 20.8 21.4 46.4 Very important 212 53.0 54.6 100.0 Total 380 97.0 10010 Missing Not applicable 8 2.0 Don't know 4 1.0 Total 12 3.0 Total 400 100.0 Q11b2: On a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 meaning very dissatisfied and 5 meaning very satisfied. how satisfied are you currently with library? Freauencv Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid Very dissatisfied 15 3,8 4,0 4A 2 30 7.6 8.0 12.0 3 74 18.6 13.7 31.7 4 93 23.3 24.8 56.5 Very setistied 163 40.8 43.6 100.0 Total 375 93.8 100.0 Missing Not applicable 17 43 Don'tknow 8 2,0 Total 26 6,3 Total 400 100.0 40 City of Renton and King County 011c1: On a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 meaning very unimportant and 5 meaning very Important, how Important Is parks and recreation to you? Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid ery unimportant 11 2. 2.8 2.8 2 8 2.0 2.1 4.9 3 79 19.8 20.4 25.3 4 117 29.3 30.2 56.6 Very important 172 43.0 44.4 100.0 Total 387 96.8 10010 Missing Not applicable 9 2.3 Donl know 4 1.0 Total 13 3.3 Total 400 100.0 Q11c2: On a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 meaning very dissatisfied and 5 meaning very satisfied, howsatlsfied are you currently with parks and recreation? Fre uenc Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid Very- issati le 38 9.6 10.1 10.1 2 44 11.0 11.7 21.8 3 137 34.3 36.3 58.1 4 97 24.3 25.7 83.8 Very satisfied 61 15,3 16.2 100.0 Total 377 94.3 100.0 Missing Not applicable 15 3.8 Don't know 8 2.0 Total 23 5.8 Total 400 100.0 Q11d1: On a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 meaning very unimportant and 5 meaning very important. haw important is police services to you? Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid Very unimportant 10 2.5 2.55 2.5 2 4 110 1.0 3.5 3 15 3.8 3.8 7.3 4 48 11.8 11.6 18.9 Very important 321 80.3 81.1 100.0 Total 396 99.0 100.0 Missing Not applicable 1 .3 Don1 know 3 .8 Total 4 1.0 Total 400 100,0 West Hill Potential Annexation Area Survey Summary Report 41 011 d2: On a "a of 1 to 5 with 1 meaning very dissatisfied and 5 meaning very satisfied, how satisfied are you currently with police services? Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid ery dissatisfied 26 6.6 6. 2 46 11 A 11.9 18.6 3 107 262 27.6 46.3 4 104 26.0 26.9 73.1 Very satisfied 104 26D 26,9 100A Total 387 %A 100.0 Missing Not applicable 6 1.3 Don1 know $ 2.0 Total 13 3.3 Total 400 100.0 Q1101: On a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 meaning very unimportant and 5 meaning very important, how Important In fire and emergency medical services to you? Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent a i ery un mportant F29 1.0 1.0 1.D3 2.5 2.6 3.5 4 7.3 7.3 102 Very important 356 89.0 89.2 100.0 Total 399 99A 100.0 Missing Don't know 1 .3 Total 400 100.0 011 e2: On a scale of 1 to $ with 1 meaning very dissatisfied and 5 meaningvery satisfied, howsatlsfied are you currently with fire and emergency medical services to you? Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent -Valid Very dissatisfied 10 2.6 2.6 2.6 2 6 1.5 1.5 4.1 3 60 12,6 12.9 17,0 4 108 27D 27,8 44,7 Very satisfied 215 63.8 55.3 100A Total 389 97.3 100.0 Missing Not applicable 1 .3 Don1 know 10 2.6 Total 11 2.8 Total 400 100.0 42 City of Renton and King County Q11f1: On a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 meaning very unimportant and 5 meaning very Important, how important is level of taxes and fees to you? Frequancv Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid ery unimportant 9 2.3 2,3 23 2 10 2.6 2.6 43 3 48 12,0 12.4 17.4 4 83 202 21.5 383 Very important 236 59.0 61.1 100.0 Total 386 96.6 100.0 Missing Not applicable 6 1.6 Don't know 8 2.0 Total 14 34 Total 400 100.0 Q111[2. On a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 meaning very dissatisfied and 5 meaning very satisfied, how satisfied are you currently with level of taxes and fees? Fre uenc Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid ery Rissatitfied so 14.6 16.0 15.0 2 57 14.3 142 29.8 3 164 38.5 39.9 69.7 4 76 18.8 19.4 89.1 Very satisfied 42 10.5 10.9 10U Total 386 96.5 100.0 Missing Not applicable 6 1.3 Don'tknow 9 2.3 Total 14 3.6 Total 400 100.0 01191: On a seats of 1 to 5 with 1 meaning very unfmporCard and 5 meaning very Important. how important is road Maintenance to you? Freauency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid Very unimportant 10 2.5 2..6 2.5 2 4 1.0 1.0 3.5 3 47 11.8 11.9 15.4 4 98 24.5 24.8 40.3 Very important 236 69D 69.7 100.0 Total 396 98.8 100.0 Missing Not applicable 3 .8 Don't know 2 .6 Total 5 1.3 Total 400 100.0 West Hill Potential Annexation Area Survey Summary Report 43 Q11g2: On a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 meaning very dissatisfied and 5 meaning very satisfied, how satisfied are you currently with road Maintenance? Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid Very dissatisfied 42 10.5 10.7 10.7 2 69 17.3 17.5 28.2 3 143 35.8 36.3 US 4 95 23.8 24.1 88.6 Very satisfied 45 11.3 11.4 100.0 Total 394 98.5 100.0 Missing Not applicable 3 .8 Don't know 3 .8 Total 6 1.6 Total 400 100.0 Q11h1: On a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 meaning very unimportant and 5 meaning very Important. how important Is open space preservation to you? Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid ery unimportant 10 2.5 Is 2.6 2 26 6.3 6.6 9.2 3 71 172 18.7 28.0 4 101 26.3 26.6 64.6 Very important 172 43.0 45.4 1 W.0 Total 379 94.8 100.0 Missing Not applicable 6 1.6 Donl know 15 3.8 Total 21 6.3 Total 1 400 1 100.0 Q11h2: On a scale of 1 to 5 with i meaning very dissatisfied: and 5 meaning very satisfied, how satisfied are you currently with open space preservation? Fre uenc Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent a id ery dissWilefled 31 7.8 8.4 8A 2 60 15.0 16.2 24.6 3 147 36.8 39.6 64.2 A 75 18.8 20.2 84A Very satisfied 58 14.6 16.6 100.0 Total 371 92.8 100.0 Missing Not applicable 11 2.6 Don`t know 18 4.6 Total 29 7.3 Total 400 100.0 44 City of Renton and King County 01111: On a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 meaning very unimportant and 5 meaning very Important, how important is economic vitality /shopping opportunities to you? F Percent Vaud Percent Cumulative Percent Valid Very unimportant _tEMencY 16 3.8 3.8 3.8 2 21 5.3 5.3 9.1 3 51 12.8 12.9 22.1 4 97 24.3 24.6 46.7 Very important 210 62S 63.3 100.0 Total 394 98.6 100.0 Missing Not applicable 4 1.0 Don't know 2 .6 Total 6 IS Total 400 100.0 Q112: On a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 meaning very dissatisfied and 5 meaning very satisfied, how satisfied are you currently with economic vitality / shopping opportunities to you? iLemency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid ery iss a .1 2 60 15.0 15 4 40.6 3 97 24.3 24.9 65.4 4 74 18.5 19.0 84.4 Very satisfied 61 15.3 15.6 loon Total 390 97.5 100.0 Missing Not applicable 6 1.5 Don't know 4 1.0 Total 10 2.6 Total 400 1o0n Q11j1: On a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 meaning vary unimportant and 5 moaning very Important, how important Is quality of development to you? Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid Very unimportant 16 3.8 3.3 3.9 2 16 4.0 4.2 8.1 3 58 14S 16.2 23.4 4 109 27.3 2016 62.0 Very important 183 46.8 48.0 100.0 Total 381 35.3 100.0 Missing Not applicable 6 1.6 Don't know 13 3.3 Total 19 4.8 Total 400 100.0 West Hill Potential Annexation Area Survey Summary Report 45 Q11j2: On a iscale of 1 to 5 with 1 meaning very dissatisfied and 5 meaning very satisfied. how satisfied are you currently with quality of development? Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid ery ssati re 51 12,8 13.4 13:4 2 82 20.6 21.6 35.0 3 150 37,5 39.5 74.5 4 63 16.8 16.6 91.1 Very satlstied 34 8.5 8.9 100.0 Total 380 95.0 100.0 Missing Not applicable 5 1.3 Don't know 15 3.8 Total 20 6.0 Total 400 100.0 Q11k1: On a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 moaning very unimportant and 5 meaning very Important, how Important Is density of development to you? Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent a tVery unimportant 19 6.1 5. 2 27 6.8 72 12.3 3 82 20.5 212 342 4 80 20.0 21.4 55.6 Very important 166 41.6 44.4 100.0 Total 374 93.5 100.0 Missing Not applicable 8 2.0 Don't know 18 4.5 Total 26 6.6 Total 400 1 1€10.0 Q11k2: On a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 meaning very dhsatisfied and 5 meaning very satisfied, how satisfied are you currently with density of development? Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid Very dissatisfied 49 12.3 13.2 13.2 2 71 17.8 19.1 323 3 133 33.3 35.8 68.0 4 70 17B 18.8 66.8 Very satisfied 49 12.3 13.2 100.0 Total 372 93.0 100.0 Missing Not applicable 9 2.3 Don't know 1$ 4.8 Total 28 7.0 Total 400 100.0 46 City of Renton and King County Q1111: On a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 meaning very unimportant and 5 meaning very important, how Important Is neighborhood appearance (enforcement of property maintenance codes) to you? Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid Very unimportant 13 3.3 3.3 3.3 2 13 3.3 33 6.6 3 43 10.8 10.9 17,A 4 106 26.3 26.6 43.5 Very Important 222 55.5 56.1 1W.0 Total 356 99.0 100.0 Missing Not applicable 2 .5 Don't know 2 .5 Total 4 1.0 Total 400 100.0 Q1112: On a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 meaning very dissatisfied ends meaning very satisfied, howsatisfied areyou currently with neighborhood appearance (enforcement of property maintenance codes)? Fre uenc Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid Very dissatisfied 48 12,0 12.2 12.2 2 69 17.3 17.5 29.7 3 145 36.3 36.8 66.6 4 85 21.3 21.6 88.1 Very satisfied 47 11.8 11.9 100.0 Total 394 98.5 100.0 Missing Not applicable 3 .8 Don't know 3 .6 Total 6 1.6 Total 400 1 100.0 West Hill Potential Annexation Area Survey Summary Report 47 At a glance- Importance of Current Services/ Issues Very unim ortant 2 3 4 Very important Total Storm water drainage Count 19 10 46 93 223 391 % 4.9% 2.6% 11.8% 23.8% 67.0% 100.0% Library Count 76 25 52 83 212 388 % 4.1 % 6.4% 13.4% 21 A% 64.6% 100.0°% Parks and recreation Count 11 8 79 117 172 387 % 2.8% 2.1 % 20A% 30.2% 44.4% 100.0% Police services Count 10 4 15 46 321 396 % 2.5% 1.0% 3.8% 11.6% 81.1 % 100.0% Fire and emergency medical services Count 4 10 29 356 359 % 1.0% 2.5% 7.3% 89.2% 100.0% Level of taxes and fees Count 9 10 48 83 236 386 % 2.3% 2.6% 12.4% 21.5% 61.1 % 100.0% Road maintenance Count 10 4 47 98 236 395 % 2.5% 1.0% 11.9°% 24.8% 69.7% 100.0% Open space preservation Count 10 25 71 101 172 379 % 2.6% 6.6% 18.7% 26.6% 45.4% 100.0% Economie vitality / shopping opportunities Count 15 21 Si 97 210 394 % 3.8% 5.3% 12.9% 24.6% 53.3% 100.0% Quality of development Count is 16 58 109 183 ! 381 °% 3.9% 4.2% 15.2% 28.6% 48.0% 100.0% Density of development Count i9 27 82 80 166 374 % 5.1 % 7.2% 21.3% 21.4% 44.4% 100A% Neighborhood appearance (enforcement of Count 13 13 43 105 222 396 property maintenance codes) % 1 3.3% 1 3.3% 1 103% t 26.5% 1 56.1 % 1 100.0% r1 iv n x 0 a cn a 1< cn 3 3 z At a glance. Satisfaction with Current Senricesilssues Very dissatisfied 2 3 4 Very satisfied Total Storm water drainage Count 27 43 100 112 105 387 % 7.0% 11.1 % 25.8% 28.9% 27.1 % 100.0% Library Count 15 30 74 93 163 375 % 4.0% 8.0% 19.7% 24.8% 43.5% 100.0% Parks and recreation Count 38 44 137 97 61 377 % 10.1% 11.7% 36.3% 25.7% 16.2% 100.0% Police services Count 26 46 107 104 104 387 % 6.7% 11.9% 27.6% 263% 26.3% 100.0% Fire and emergency medical services Count 10 6 50 108 216 389 % 2.6% 14% 123% 27.8% 553% 100.0% Level of taxes and fees Count 58 57 164 75 42 386 % 15.0% 14.8% 393% 19.4% 10.9% 100.0% Road maintenance Count 42 69 143 95 45 394 % 10.7% 17.6% 36.3% 24.1% 11.4% 900.0% Open space preservation Count 31 60 147 75 58 371 % 8.4% 16.2% 39.6% 20.2% 15 6% 100.0% Economic vitality / shopping opportunities Count 98 60 97 74 61 390 % 25.1% 15.4% 243% 19.0% 15.6% 100.0% Quality of development Count 51 82 150 63 34 380 % 13.4% 21.6% 39.5% 16.6% 83% 100.0% Density of development Count 49 71 133 70 49 372 % 13.2% 13.1 % 352% 18.8% 13.2% 100.0% Neighborhood appearance (enforcement Count 48 69 146 85 47 394 of property maintenance codes) % 12.2% 17.5% 36.8% 21.6% 113% 100.0% 012: If annexed into the City of Renton, do you feel the quality of government services would - Fre usn Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Vand Got worse 71 17.8 13.9 19.9 Stay the same 116 28A 32.3 62.2 Improve 170 424 47.8 100.0 Total 366 89.0 100.0 Missing Don't know 44 Ilia Total 400 100.0 Q13: If your area were to remain unincorporated King County, do you feel the quality of government services would - Fre uenc Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid et worse 125 31.3 32.5 32.5 Stay the same 228 57.0 592 91.7 Improve 32 8.0 8.3 100.0 Total 386 96.3 100.0 Missing Don't know 15 3R Total 400 100.0 Q14: if you knew that by becoming part of the City of Renton, the city name on you address would change from Seattle to Renton, would you prefer to. Fre usnc Percent Valid Pamnt Cumulative Percent WPM e pars City of Renton the City 189 47.3 47.3 473 Stay part of unincorporated 211 52.8 62.8 100.0 ICino County Total 400 100.0 100.0 Q15: If you knew that by becoming part of the City of Renton, your school district would not change, would you prefer to - Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent a i e part of 211 52.8 52.8 52.8 City of Renton the C City Stay part of unincorporated 189 47.3 47.3 100.0 IGng County Total 400 100.0 100.0 50 City of Renton and King County 016: If you knew that by becoming part of the City of Renton, street maintenance and repair would improve, would you prefer to. Frequency Percent Valid Percent cumulative Percent Vilid Become part of the City of Renton 262 66.6 66.6 654 Stay part of unincorporated 138 34.5 34.5 100.0 King County Total 400 100.0 100.0 Q17; If you knew that by becoming part of the City of Renton, public safety, police fire and emergency medical response times would Improve, would you prefer to. Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid ecome part of the City of Renton 275 68.6 68.8 68.6 Stay part of unincorporated 126 31.3 31.3 100.0 Wng County Total 400 100.0 100.0 018: If you know that by becoming part of the City of Renton, your area would have more and better pence over time and access to recreation services, would you prefer to - Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid ecome part the City of Renton 2 46 61.5 61.5 61.6 Stay part of unincorporated 164 38.6 38.5 100.0 King County Total 400 100.0 100.0 019: If you knew that your services from the King County library System would remain the same and planned Improvements to the Skyway branch would be preserved, would you prefer to. Frequency Percent Valid Percent cumulative Percent Valid Become part the City of Renton 220 65.0 65.0 55.0 Stay part of unincorporated 180 45.0 45.0 100.0 King County Total 400 100.0 100.0 West Hill Potential Annexation Area Survey Summary Report 51 At a glance- (014-19): If you knew that by becoming part of the Ctty of Renton, the following Impacts would taker place, would you preferto- Become part of the City of Renton Stay part of unincorporated tfin County Total Address would change from Seattle to Renton Count 189 211 400 % 47.3% 52.8% 100.0% School district would not change Count 211 189 400 % 62.8% 47.3% 100.0% Sire at maintenance and repair would improve Count 262 138 400 % 65.5% 34.5% 100.0% Public safety, police, fire and emergency medical response times would Count 275 125 400 improve % 68.8% 31.3% 100.0% Area would have more and better parks over time and access to Count 246 154 400 recreation services % 61 S% 38.5% 100.0% Services from the King County Library System would remain the same Count 220 ISO 400 and planned Improvements to the Skyway branch would be preserved % 55.0% 45.0% 1 100.0% 020: Would you be willing to pay higher taxes to fund maintenance and repair and expansion of streets, storm drains and parks in your neighborhood? Cumulative Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent Valid o 260 62.5 62.6 62.6 Yes 150 37.6 37.6 100.0 Total 400 100.0 100.0 021: if you had to choose today, what do you think is the best choice for the future of your area? Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid City pa oray of Renton the C 226 56.6 56.6 56.6 Stay part of unincorporated 174 43.6 43.6 100.0 King County Total 400 100.0 100.0 022ec On a scale of 1 to 7 with 1 being very weak and 7 being very strong, how strongly do you believe that the best thing for the future of your area would be to become part of the City of Renton? Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid ery week 2 .9 2 3 1.3 1.3 2.2 3 5 2.2 2.2 4.4 4 27 113 11.9 16.4 6 63 27.9 27.9 44.2 6 47 202 20.8 66.0 Very strong 79 36.0 36.0 100.0 Total 1 226 1 100.0 1 1000 Q22be On a scale of 1 to 7 with 1 being very weak and 7 being very strong, how strongly do you believe that the best thing for the future of your area would be to stay part of unincorporated King County? Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid Very weak 6 3.4 3A 3A 2 1 .6 .6 4.0 3 12 6.9 63 10.9 4 16 3.2 3.2 20.1 5 36 20.7 20.7 40.8 6 26 143 143 65.7 Very strong 77 443 44.3 100.0 Total 174 100.0 100.0 West Hill Potential Annexation Area Survey Summary Report 53 023: What Is the most useful way for you to receive information about the potential for annexation? Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid nsert in Renton Reporter 14 3.6 3.6 3.6 Mailing to my house 262 63.0 63D 66.6 Small -group meeting in 18 4.8 4.8 71.3 my neighborhood Open house community 29 7.3 7.3 70.6 meeting Door-to-door visits from 4 1.0 1.0 79.5 neighbors Internet with email 68 17.0 17.0 96.6 updates Not interested in receiving 7 1.8 1.8 98.3 information about this Other 7 1.8 1.8 100.0 Total 400 100A 100.0 024: Do you own or rent your home? Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid e51 57 1 .3 14.6 14.6 Own 333 03.3 85.4 100.0 Total 390 97.5 100.0 Missing Refused 10 2.6 Total 400 100.0 025, How many years have you lived in this area? Fre uenc Percent Vaud Percent Cumulative Percent slid ass than 5 years 70 17.5 17.7 17.7 5 to 10 years 80 20.0 20.3 38.0 11 to 16 years 37 9.3 9.4 47.3 16 to 20 years 36 9.0 9.1 56S 21 years or more 172 43.0 43.5 100.0 Total 395 98.8 100.0 Missing Refused 6 1.3 Total 400 1 100.0 54 City of Renton and King County 026: Which age group are you In? Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid n er 29 years of age 4 1.0 1.0 1.0 26 - 34 30 7.5 7.7 8.7 35 - 44 50 12.5 12.8 21.6 46 - 64 76 18.8 19.2 40.7 55 - 64 103 25A 26.3 67.0 65 or older 129 32.3 33.0 100.0 Total 391 97.8 100.0 Missing Refused 9 2.3 Total 400 100.0 Q2T: Po you have children less them 18 years of age living at home with you? ,.Erq_queg4;y,, Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid o 288 72.0 72.7 72.7 Yes 108 27.0 27.3 100.0 Total 396 99.0 100.0 Missing Refused 4 1.0 Total 400 100.0 Q28: Which of the following income: ranges includes your household's total pre ax 2008 Income? Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative PerdaM Valid ss 19an M 21 63 2 7.2 $20DW to less than $500M 75 18.8 25.8 33.0 $60d300 to less than $76pw 75 18.8 25.8 58.8 $76,000 to less than $100DW 65 16.3 22.3 81.1 $100,000 or more 56 13.6 18.5 100.0 Total 291 72.8 100.0 Missing Refused 109 27.3 Total 400 100.0 QZ9: Gender Cumulative Fro uenc Percent Valid Percent Percent Valid Male 166 39.0 39.0 - 39.0 Female 244 61.0 61.0 100.0 Total 400 100.0 100.0 West Hill Potential Annexation Area Survey Summary Report 55 SEATTLE WASHINGTON DC 1109 First Ave. #300 1000 Potomac St NW, 5th Floor Seattle, WA 98101 Washington, DC 20007 T 206.623.0735 F 206.623.0781 T 202.3381961 F 202.338.1960 Hello, May I speak with Renton and King County Fairwood PAA Survey Final Draft 2 <respondent's name from the voter list>? My name is and I'm calling on behalf of King County and the City of Renton. I want to assure you that this is not a sales call. We would like to ask you a few questions about the possible annexation of your area into the City of Renton or the incorporation of your area in a new city called Fairwood. Your input would be greatly appreciated. Do you have 10-12 minutes to share your thoughts? (If yes, thank and continue. If no, ask about rescheduling. If still no, thank and disconnect.) Today, as part of unincorporated King County your area is managed by the County and special fire, library and utility districts. If annexed, your area would get services from the City of Renton and the Skyway Water and Sewer District. If incorporated, your area would be managed by the local City of Fairwood government and would continue to get services from existing service districts. This is an opportunity to share your thoughts about this issue. Your answers will remain completely confidential. Please be aware that eventually you will have a chance to vote on this issue. There are a few questions I would like to ask you first to make sure you qualify for our survey. Screening Questions 1. Are you a Washington State registered voter? ❑ Yes ❑ No (terminate) 2. In the last four elections, how many have you voted in? ❑ 4 ❑ 3 ❑ 2 ❑ 1 ❑ None Prior Knowledge and Reason 3. Have you heard or read anything about your area joining another city, or becoming its own city? ❑ Yes ❑ No 4. At this point would you say you are in favor of: (rotate and read first 3 choices) ❑ Annexation into the City of Renton ❑ Creating a new city of Fairwood ❑ Staying as is as a part of unincorporated King County ❑ Undecided (skip to Q6) 1 Renton and King County Fairwood PAA Survey Final Draft 2 5. Please provide the top 3 reasons why you favor (insert annexation/staying as is/creating a new city from Q4)? (Do not read) ❑ Improved governance ❑ Improved library ❑ Improved police services ❑ Improved land use and zoning regulations ❑ Improved community image ❑ Improved property tax rate ❑ Improved fire and emergency medical services ❑ Improved road maintenance ❑ Improved economic vitality/shopping opportunities ❑ Improved culture/arts, museum and special events ❑ Other (specify) Quality of Life 6. When people ask you what town you live in what do you tell them? Would you say: (rotate and read) ❑ Renton ❑ Fairwood ❑ King County ❑ Other (specify) 7. As compared to nearby cities, do you think the overall level of public services in your area is: ❑ Better ❑ About the same ❑ Worse ❑ Don't know 8. How would you rate the overall quality of life in your area? Would you say: ❑ Excellent ❑ Good ❑ Fair ❑ Poor (Rotate Q 9 and Q 10) 9. How do you think being annexed as part of the City of Renton would impact your quality of life? Would you say it would: ❑ Improve the quality of life, ❑ Not affect the quality of life 2 Renton and King County Fairwood PAA Survey Final Draft 2 ❑ Decrease the quality of life ❑ Don't know 10. How do you think becoming the new city of Fairwood would impact your quality of life? Would you say it would: ❑ Improve the quality of life, ❑ Not affect the quality of life ❑ Decrease the quality of life ❑ Don't know Satisfaction with and Importance of Current Services/Issues 11. 1 am now going to read to you a list of items. Please tell me on a scale of 1 to 5 how important each item is to you (with 1 = very unimportant and 5 = very important). I will also ask you to tell me on a scale of 1 to 5 (with 1 = very dissatisfied and 5 = very satisfied) how satisfied you currently are with each item. (Rotate and read items. Allow a "not applicable" and a "don't know" category for each item.) ■ Library ■ Police services ■ Community image ■ Level of taxes and fees ■ Fire and emergency medical services ■ Road maintenance ■ Storm water drainage ■ Parks and recreation ■ Quality and density of development ■ Traffic congestion ■ Other (specify) (Rotate Q 12, Q 13 and Q14) 12. If annexed into the City of Renton do you think the quality of public services would: (rotate) ❑ Improve ❑ Stay the same ❑ Get worse ❑ Don't know (Do not read) 13. If your area were to remain unincorporated King County do you think the quality of public services would: (rotate) ❑ Improve ❑ Stay the same ❑ Get worse 3 Renton and King County Fairwood PAA Survey Final Draft 2 ❑ Don't know (Do not read) 14. If your area was created into a new city of Fairwood do you think the quality of public services would: (rotate) ❑ Improve ❑ Stay the same ❑ Get worse ❑ Don't know (Do not read) Annexation "Impacts" on Preference (rotate Qs 15-22) (Please read) Annexation to the City of Renton or becoming the new city of Fairwood would result in some changes to public services. For the following list of services, please tell us whether that change would make you prefer annexation to the City of Renton, becoming the new city of Fairwood, or staying as part of unincorporated King County. 15. If you knew that by becoming part of the City of Renton or that by becoming the new city of Fairwood your library services would continue as is within the King County Library System, would you prefer to: (rotate and read) ❑ Become part of the City of Renton ❑ Stay as is (part of unincorporated King County) ❑ Create a new city of Fairwood 16. If you knew that by becoming part of the City of Renton or by becoming the new city of Fairwood your area would have increased police patrol services, while the fire and emergency medical response times will remain the same as they are now, would you prefer to: (rotate and read) ❑ Become part of the City of Renton ❑ Stay as is (part of unincorporated King County) ❑ Create a new city of Fairwood 17. If you knew that by becoming a part of the City of Renton new development in your area would be less dense, based on current plans, compared to what King County allows; and that by becoming a city of Fairwood the new local government would likely retain the King County zoning until a city comprehensive plan is completed, would you prefer to: (rotate and read) ❑ Become part of the City of Renton ❑ Stay as is (part of unincorporated King County) ❑ Create a new city of Fairwood 18. If you knew that by becoming part of the City of Renton over time your area would have more parks with active resources such as ball fields and play equipment and access to M Renton and King County Fairwood PAA Survey Final Draft 2 recreation services; and that by becoming a city of Fairwood parks would not change from what they are now, would you prefer to: (rotate and read) ❑ Become part of the incorporated City of Renton ❑ Stay as is (part of unincorporated King County) ❑ Create a new city of Fairwood 19. If you knew that by becoming part of the City of Renton that overall, the taxes and fees you pay would decrease slightly; and that by becoming the new city of Fairwood the tax and fee levels would stay the same, would you prefer to: (rotate and read) ❑ Become part of the incorporated City of Renton ❑ Stay as is (part of unincorporated King County) ❑ Create a new city of Fairwood 20. If you knew that King County was planning to decrease budgets for public services, would you prefer to: (rotate and read) ❑ Become part of the incorporated City of Renton ❑ Stay as is (part of unincorporated King County) ❑ Create a new city of Fairwood 21. If you knew that King County was planning to increase taxes for public services, would you prefer to: (rotate and read) ❑ Become part of the incorporated City of Renton ❑ Stay as is (part of unincorporated King County) ❑ Create a new city of Fairwood 22. If you knew that by becoming part of the City of Renton your street address would not change; and that by becoming the new city of Fairwood the city name on your address would change from Renton to Fairwood, would you prefer to: (rotate and read) ❑ Become part of the City of Renton ❑ Stay as is (part of unincorporated King County) ❑ Create a new city of Fairwood Current Opinion 23. If you had to choose today, what do you think is the best choice for the future of your area? Would you say: (rotate and read first 3 choices) ❑ Become part of the City of Renton ❑ Stay as is (part of unincorporated King County) ❑ Create a new city of Fairwood ❑ Undecided (Skip to Q26) 24. And which would be your second choice? 5 Renton and King County Fairwood PAA Survey Final Draft 2 25. On a scale of 1 to 7 (with 1 being very weak and 7 being very strong), how strongly do you believe that the best thing for the future of your area would be to (insert answer from Q23)? (IF DON'T KNOW, PROBE FOR BEST GUESS) Communication 26. What is the one most useful way for you to receive information about the future of your area? (rotate and read) ❑ Internet with email updates ❑ Door-to-door visits from neighbors ❑ Open house community meeting ❑ Small -group meeting in my neighborhood ❑ Mailing to my house ❑ Fairwood Community News ❑ Renton Reporter ❑ Not interested in receiving information about this ❑ Other (specify) Demographics (Please read) Your survey answers to the next few questions will remain completely confidential and your answers will be combined with those of others for analysis purposes. 27. Do you own or rent your home? ❑ Own ❑ Rent 28. How many years have you lived in this area? _ (RANGE IS 0 TO 97; 98 = DON'T KNOW, 99 = REFUSED) 29. Which age group are you in? Would you say: ❑ Under 25 years of age ❑ 25-34 ❑ 35-44 ❑ 45-54 ❑ 55-64 ❑ 65 or older ❑ Refused 30. Do you have children less than 18 years of age living at home with you? FE111111110. n Renton and King County Fairwood PAA Survey Final Draft 2 ❑ Yes ❑ Refused 31. Which of the following income ranges includes your household's total pre-tax 2008 income? ❑ Less than $15,000 ❑ $15,000 to less than $50,000 ❑ $50,000 to less than $75,000 ❑ $75,000 to less than $100,000 ❑ $100,000 to less than $150,000 ❑ $150,000 or more ❑ Refused 32. Record respondent gender: ❑ Male ❑ Female 7 CONSISTENCY IN COMMUNICATION DESIGN City of d Previous city of Renton publications Diverse subject matter but no cohesive design standard, inconsistent logo use and no unified presence. • No cohesive design standard • Inconsistent city logo use • No unified city presence • Inconsistent placement of website and other key information • Design inconsistent between city departments; sometimes inconsistent within same department • Brochures/flyers being designed by engineers, administrative staff and wide range of staff • Printed material is not always best communication strategy or use of limited resources 7" "'Program MF RENTON i R'ry. 6' fL.a 111 �u 13 ?Id7 Ave S . i�.bhba tl Ka1Lmd be rF SW L OWAmSE 17 d }II Fn: IC51147M! .. rr.d.asw City of Renton A Guide to 1 andlordrrenant Issues RIGWMOFAL TENANn '�,+ •im.e m ewertal by mr r�Acl do hate ft L"F"bF R'Onm.1 bk i XgEI m W116e 44b1 bm6ie! ��9'h9ee h>..�=mbe of �rti� urws•.r� ��M.,4rA r�yr4 yr JOf J� CiN SEE== N__ FlexPass Program Menu tZSstw�"Nq.1.111+. �n ln,FR I" tYbla.s�Rt 311.1 b4�1n rrdn y�I.rle �rlT sir �.+. l Recent City of Renton publications Diverse subject matter with numerous color choices and distinctive representation, while subsequently providing cohesive design standard, a more consistent logo use and unified presence. • Create high -quality professional publications without expending additional resources while leveraging our "brand" • Consistent use of city brand, city logo and "Ahead of the Curve" • "Branding" consistent and cohesive, while allowing diversity with color choices to differentiate departments and/or events • Consistent placement of website and other key information • Templates allow consistent look that is replicable by any/all members of trained communications team • Design lends itself well to photographs and many diverse functions, including posters, brochures, flyers, and Power Point presentations • Use of "Wave" with city logo pulls from well established design elements such as city's website Awdenm :. iMODW" 4 M M1Mt N Mti.n GA �Oienton Heart Month Whose Life Could You Save? ...l�rr...wrrn.awx Own.i....Yn i... D.r.r. Mk.. wn M...YY CM.Iw.-.1.1a 1M .r.T .r _ aivan nits. ir5i iit 117t rtu?7i ••14 ' M1s�wh +rnu.w��.:arn."1 _ w4.wr V. ��rnr Templates HEADLINE Subhead (or) Main Message Who, What, When, Where, Why For morn Inf—don -" ronlomra.9o9 Place WEB S(TE here IW pl—b fit 9-0 19M.ra t) Place WAVE here )ppYmM [elan mII.DN) DON'T FORGET LICENSE YOUR PET — w�M ®Mrr�%r«.�.. w.aufwa.enlrlao.® X ®®® f}ytY¢taN..�Y City's current letterhead and business cards Current business cards, etc.: • Out-of-date e-mail addresses • Outdated color paper stock • Lack of consistency, with several variations of business cards (e.g. gold foil on some, printed others) • Complicated and more expensive printing process • "Ahead of the Curve" marketing campaign logo not included on business cards C'FT'\ OF RF Y7Y/ti Wrr\' OF ""11' Proposed new city letterhead and business cards New business cards, etc.: • Includes new e-mail addresses • Utilizes same "family" of paper, therefore no additional cost for transition to new paper • Designed entirely in-house, so no additional costs for re -design • Creates consistency throughout various departments • New stationery and envelopes designed to match city's new business cards • New business cards, stationary and envelopes will be transitioned into service without incurring additional costs Proposed new business cards, stationery and envelopes to be unveiled Friday... • Streamlines printing process and potentially saves cost • Includes "Ahead of the Curve" marketing campaign logo Councilmember Councilmember Don Perrson Randy Corman Councilmember Terri Briere Councilmember _— Marcie Palmer Councilmember King Parker Councilmember Greg Taylor ML- Councilmember Rich Zwicker Preliminary Draft Agenda City of Renton/King County Library System Meeting February 25, 2009 Buildings: Downtown library Highlands library (location) Replacing Skyway Benson Hill/East Kent Fairwood expansion Current agreements: Benson Hill payments Cross -use payments Integration of operations into KCLS: Facilities Staff Collections Interim service (after the election, before the effective date): Contract for service Capital project financing: When (how soon) would the city want to work on buildings? What would a financing package look like? Timeline: Assuming a November (of some year) election.... Chapter 27.12 RCW: Public libraries Page 1 of 2 27.12.360 Annexation of city or town into rural county library district, island library district, or intercounty rural library district — Initiation procedure. Any city or town with a population of one hundred thousand or less at the time of annexation may become a part of any rural county library district, island library district, or intercounty rural library district lying contiguous thereto by annexation in the following manner: The inclusion of such a city or town may be initiated by the adoption of an ordinance by the legislative authority thereof stating its intent to join the library district and finding that the public interest will be serve thereby. Before adoption, the ordinance shall be submitted to the library board of the city or town for its review and recommendations. If no library board exists in the city or town, the state librarian shall be notified of the proposed ordinance. If the board of trustees of the library district concurs in the annexation, notification thereof shall be transmitted to the legislative authority or authorities of the counties in which the city or town is situated. [1982 c 123 § 13; 1981 c 26 § 3; 1977 ex.s. c 353 § 1.] 27.12.370 Annexation of city or town into library district — Special election procedure. The county legislative authority or authorities shall by resolution call a special election to be held in such city or town at the next special election date according to RCW 29A.04.321, and shall cause notice of such election to be given as provided for in RCW 29A.52.351. The election on the annexation of the city or town into the library district shall be conducted by the auditor of the county or counties in which the city or town is located in accordance with the general election laws of the state and the results thereof shall be canvassed by the canvassing board of the county or counties. No person shall be entitled to vote at such election unless he or she is registered to vote in said city or town for at least thirty days preceding the date of the election. The ballot proposition shall be in substantially the following form: "Shall the city or town of ...... be annexed to and be a part of ...... library district? YES ............ r- NO............ r „ If a majority of the persons voting on the proposition shall vote in favor thereof, the city or town shall thereupon be annexed and shall be a part of such library district. [2006 c 344 § 19; 1982 c 123 § 14; 1977 ex.s. c 353 § 2.] Notes: Effective date -- 2006 c 344 §§ 1-16 and 18-40: See note following RCW 29A.04.311. 27.12.380 Annexation of city or town into library district — Withdrawal of annexed city or town. The legislative body of such a city or town which has annexed to such a library district, may, by resolution, present to the voters of such city or town a proposition to withdraw from said library district at any general election held at least three years following the annexation to the library district. [1982 c 123 § 15; 1977 ex.s. c 353 § 3.] http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=27.12&full=true 02/06/2009 Chapter 27.12 RCW: Public libraries Page 2 of 2 27.12.390 Annexation of city or town into library district — Tax levies. The annual tax levy authorized by RCW 27.12.050, 27.12.150, and 27.12.420 shall be imposed throughout the library district, including any city or town annexed thereto. Any city or town annexed to a rural library district, island library district, or intercounty rural library district shall be entitled to levy up to three dollars and sixty cents per thousand dollars of assessed valuation less any regular levy made by such library district in the incorporated area, notwithstanding any other provision of law: PROVIDED, That the limitations upon regular property taxes imposed by chapter 84.55 RCW shall apply. [1982 c 123 § 16-,1977 ex.s. c 353 § 4.] 27,12.395 Annexation of city or town into library district — Assumption of liabilities. (1) All liabilities of a city or town that is annexed to a rural county library district or intercounty rural library district, which liabilities were incurred for the purpose of or in the course of acquiring, operating, or maintaining a library or libraries, may, if provided for in the ordinance providing for annexation and in the resolution of the district consenting to annexation, pass to and be assumed by the rural county library district or intercounty rural library district. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the city or town has incurred any voted bonded indebtedness for the purpose of acquiring, operating, or maintaining a library or libraries, and if the indebtedness is outstanding at the time of the annexation, the voted bonded indebtedness shall not be assumed by the annexing district. (2) Notwithstanding subsection (1) of this section, if the annexed city or town has outstanding at the time of the annexation any voted bonded indebtedness incurred for the purpose of acquiring, operating, or maintaining a library or libraries, a special election may be called by the board of trustees of the rural county library district or intercounty rural library district, to be held at the next general or special election held in the applicable county or counties, for the purpose of affording the voters residing within the area of the district outside the annexed city or town an opportunity to assume the voted bonded indebtedness of the annexed city or town upon the assent of three -fifths of the voters. [1985 c 392 § 1.] http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=27.12&full--true 02/06/2009 CITY OF RENTON 2.008 SPECIAL EVENTS & COST SUMMARY Total of Event City Costs 4 of July* $83,172.59 $83,172.59 River Days $395,882.57 $120,235.24 Holiday Lights $76,954.00 $7,569.00 Total $556,009.16 $210,976.83 *4t" of July did not have a title sponsor. 2007 SPECIAL EVENTS & COST SUMMARY Total of Event City Costs 4 of July* $83,294.56 $55,294.56 River Days $411,611.00 $1266.00 Holiday Lights $82,597.00 $18,797.00 Total $577,502.56 $2009397.56 City of Renton Community Services Department Recreation/RCC/Human Services/Sr. Center/ Library/Parks/Facilities/ Golf Course Volunteer Hours Month: December 08 Total # of Vol. Total # of all Vo. Hours Account Number Account Name 5750.0053.22.000006 Comm Center Instructor P/T Intermt Industrial Insurance 5750.0050.22.000006 Community Center Intermt Industrial Insurance 5750.0028.22.000006 Carco Intermt Industrial Insurance 16 68 5740.0023.22.000006 Dev Disabled P/T Intermt Industrial Insurance 90 405 5740.0020.22.000006 Parks & Recreational Sery Intermt P/T Intermt Industrial Insurance 2 14.75 (004) 5590.0030.22.000006 Human Sery Intermt Industrial Insurance 139 1353 5550.0008.22.000006 Sr. Center Intermt Industrial Insurance 13 62.25 (106) 5720.0020.22.000006 Library Intermt Industrial Insurance 20 78 (106) 5750.0030.21.000006 Museum Intermt Industrial Insurance 5180.0010.22.000006 Facilities Intermt Industrial Insurance 5760.0010.22.000006 Parks Intermt Industrial Insurance 5760.0065.22.000006 Golf Course Maintenance Intermt Industrial Insurance 5730.0010.22.000006 Resource and Events Intermt Industrial Insurance Total Vol. Total Hours Volunteer Chore ServicesNolunteer Trailer 280 1981 Volunteer projects Mary Webley 6824 Library shelving videos, DVD,Books, uppacking and processing,Talk Time, Reading to dog program & Children's Library programs Shawn Daly 6639 Sr. Activity Center Coffee Bar, Welcome desk, Reception desk, Nutrition, Meals on Wheels, Breakfast with Santa Donna Eken 6715 Youth Athletics Youth Basketball Sean Claggett 6715 Specialized Rec Special Olym. , Thursday Night Social Dororta Rhan 255-2330 Museum Assisting with progrants Jeff Nasset 6740 Parks Tim Lawless 6600 Human Services General Office Assistance & housing repair Tom Puthoff 6766 Renton Youth Council Total Hours Factor _ Total 1981 Minimum Wage $8.07 $15,986.67 1981 Independent Sector $19.51 $38649.31 YTD Hours 26,767.75 - $ 622,238.80 2008 Ivar's Inc. The current Ivar's contract includes Ivar's, Kidd Valley, and the Gene Coulon Beach snack bar. The total sales for 2008 was $1,732,556.69. The monthly rent is $9,166 or $110,000 per year. The leasehold tax is 12.84% and totals $9,746.43. The contract calls for $20,000 for special events, which covers our summer concert series. The City then receives 12% of the gross amount over 1.1 million dollars in annual sales. In 2008 this amounted to $75,906. The Holiday Lights is $60,000 of this and the remaining $15,906 goes directly to general fund revenue. The total amount of revenue to the City is• Rent $110,000.00 Leasehold tax $9,756.43 Events $20,000 Additional revenue above 1.1 million $75,906.00 Since 1938 i January 9, 2009 • Inc. City of Renton Finance Department 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Re: Annual Sales for Coulon Park Ivar's Seafood Bar, Snack Bar, and Kidd Valley 2008 SFB Snack Bar KV January 51,035.16 22,379.32 February 72,909.65 29,884.08 March 85,145.70 35,976.37 April 86,038.99 41,362.72 May 102,404.32 753.71 51,299.24 June 154,267.43 5,169.12 79,091.31 July 157,906.34 7,111.25 86,400.73 August 139,111.25 4,394.74 73,595.42 September- 134,085.36 63,553.26 October 71,855.14 28,109.09 November 51,144.78 20,323.30 December 55,720.24 21,528.67 Totals 1,161,624.36 17,428.82 553,503.51 Total Annual Sales 1,732,556.69 12% of Sales Over $ 1,100,000.00 75,906.80 12;84°fo :L e.sehold 9,746i43 Tax Total % Rent Due. 85,653.24 I certify that the above sales amounts are accurate and in accordance with the sales provisions in the lease. Sincerely, �.. -� 4a" I. Johnson Accounts Payable I? `I &0.- -, Bob Donegan �J President is Pier 54 • SeattlemA om nA . ?no—,ca-r,<cnn - n..... -wni cnf%e POLICE DEPARTMENT Key Issue Updates School Resource Officer Program The Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS Office) has announced the availability of funding under the COPS Hiring Recovery Program (CHRP). The COPS Office will receive the funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Application materials are scheduled to be available before the end of March. CHRP grants will provide 100 percent funding for approved entry-level salaries and benefits for 3 years (36 months) for newly -hired, full-time sworn officer positions (including filling existing unfunded vacancies) or for rehired officers who have been laid off, or are scheduled to be laid off on a future date, as a result of local budget cuts. At the conclusion of federal funding, grantees must retain all sworn officer positions awarded under the CHRP grant. The retained CHRP-funded position(s) should be added to the grantee's law enforcement budget with state and/or local funds, over and above the number of locally - funded positions that would have existed in the absence of the grant. The School Resource Officer (SRO) program is scheduled to be eliminated after the current 2009/09 school year. These four positions were part of the 2009 Budget reductions. Both the Mayor and I have discussed this reduction with the School District looking for ways to soften the impact. This grant opportunity will hopefully enable us to reinstate the program at the current level. It is our plan to develop a partnership with the School District to share the expense of this program after the three year funding cycle ends. Renton: The center of opportunity in the Puget Sound Region where families and businesses thrive o o The City of Renton, in partnership and 'W" communication with residents, businesses, and schools, is dedicated to: „ ■ Providing a healthy, welcoming atmosphere where citizens choose to live, raise families, and take pride in their community ■ Promoting planned growth and economic vitality ■ Valuing our diversity of language, housing, culture, backgrounds and choices ■ Creating a positive work environment e Meeting service demands through innovation and commitment to excellence usime-ss Plam Goallo''i -2014 Meet the service demands that contribute to the livability of the community Prioritize services at levels that can be sustained by revenue Plan, develop and maintain quality services, infrastructure, and amenities Respond to growing service demands while meeting the unique requirements of a diverse population through partnerships, innovation,and outcome management Retain a skilled worldorce by making Renton the municipal employer of choice Balance develppment with environmental protection Manage growth through sound urban planning Foster development of vibrant, sustainable, attractive, mixed -use neighborhoods in established urban centers Uphold a high standard of design and property maintenance throughout the city Provide a balance between housing and high -quality jobs Maintain services to current residents while welcoming annexation areas that desire to become pad of Renton RENTON. THE CENTER of OPFORTUoff�. � � 4 �•a tic i s L �. Influence decisions that impact the city Demonstrate leadership by developing and maintaining partnerships and investment strategies with other jurisdictions that improve services Aggressively pursue transportation and other regional improvements and services that improve quality of life Advocate Renton's interests through state and federal lobbying efforts Promote Strong Neighborhoods Support the vitality and positive appearance of neighborhoods through community involvement Encourage and partner in the development of quality housing choices for people of all ages and income levels Ensure the safety, health, and security of citizens through effective service deffvery Promote pedestrian and bicycle linkages between neighborhoods and community focal points Promote citywide economic development Promote Renton as the progressive, opportunity - rich city in the Puget sound region Capitalize on growth opportunities through bold and creative economic development strategies Recruit and retain businesses to ensure a dynamic, diversified employmentbase Continue redevelopment efforts downtown, in the Highlands, -and South Lake Washington urine-ss Plan Actions • 2009-2014 Meet the service demands that contribute to the livability of the community 2009-2014 Actions: • Deveiap a long-term strategy to meet staff facility needs including the potential of construction of a new city hall in downtown Renton (that improves efficiency by centralizing City staff, enhances services and convenience for residents and other customers, and contributes to the continued revrtalization of the City's historic business district) • Design and construct a new Maintenance Facility -Design and construct a Fire & Emergency Services facility to enhance service levels in Kennydale and other neighborhoods in the northern portion of the City. • Develop a plan to increase public access and enjoyment of the Cedar River through the City's Urban Center. • Complete and implement the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan which identifies needs and funding for acquisition and development • Enact the recommendations of the Renton Library Master Plan that provide the desired level of service for library customers. • Develop and implement on-line systems to improve customer service and increase options for how residents get City services. • Improve the City's Fire Rating to reduce insurance costs. • Establish a CERT Team in each Community Planning Area to better prepare business and residents in the case of an emergency. • Implement a Community Planning initiative to align the Cttys Comprehensive Plan with related activities by geographic areas of the City through engagement with the communities themselves. • Establish service delivery standards through the development of a Fire and Emergency Services Master Plan. • Complete the Renton History Museum's Master Plan and review the recommendations. Manage growth through sound urban planning 2009-2014 Actions: • Develop a plan by which large scale annexations could occur without negatively impacting the existing City over time. • Review and update development regulations and mitigation fees to balance sound land use planning, econI development and env ronmental protection while improving efficien- cies • Complete the State -mandated Shoreline Master Program update • Develop 'low -impact" and "green" development incentives Influence decisions that impact the City of Renton 2009-2014 Actions: • Work with the State Legislature and King County to extend or develop funding mechanisms to offset the anticipated cost of future large-scale annexations. • Work with The Boeing Company and other aerospace companies to increase the number of industry related jobs in Renton. • In partnership -40r other cities: build a regional misdemeanant correctional facility. • Work with the King County Ferry District to ensure a future passenger ferry route on Lake Washington serves Renton. • Aggressively pursue development of a Bus Rapid Transit network along the Interstate 405 corridor. • Pursue a concept for a streetcar or another mode of meaningful high capacity transit connecting South Lake Washington, Downtown, and the Longac: a, Commuter Rail Station. (refer to Transportation Committee) • Increase the frequency and number of bus routes connecting the Renton Highlands and The Landing and Downtown Renton. • Enhance the partnership between the City and the Renton School District by pursuing joint operating agreements for like services and other potential efficiencies. • Develop strategies to improve response times for advanced life support services. • Partner with King County and neighbor cities to mitigate the impact of FEMI updated FIRM map. Promote strong neighborhoods 2009-2014 Actions: • Work with the Renton Housing Authority and Renton School District to redevelop the North Highlands Community Center and other publicly -owned properties in the Harrington neighborhood to expand affordable housing capacity, while improving the services and amenities available to the neighborhood. • Review the recommendations of the Highlands Task Force and work to improve the quality of file in the neighborhood • Develop and implement an •Affordable Housing' Initiative with the goal of increasing the capacity of housing units affordable to people at various income levels throughout the City. • Improve the sense of safety in the community. • Complete regional trails through Renton including the Lake Washington, Springbrook I Interurban, and Cedar River Tralls. • Through existing capital improvement planning, improve pedestrian connections city-wide, including the connection of The Landing to the Harrington neighborhood. • Coordinate with the various arts groups in the City to establish a cultural arts master plan. • Achieve 'Tree City USA' status. • Create forums and strategies to better engage the City's diverse population. • Investigate the ways that a historic preservation plan could contribute to maintaining Rentods distinct character. Promote citywide economic development 2009-2014 Actions: • Aggressively pursue the redevsbpnrent of the Duendall Terminals and Pan Abode properties to their highest and best use. • Aggressively pursue redevelopment of the Sound Ford, Bryant MotorslDon-a-Lisa Hotel, and Stoneway properties. • Aggressively recruit new high-pm5ii and high -wage employers to locate in marquee dice development opportunities in Renton. • Direct ndevelopment of the Landing -Phase II properties to their highest and best use, while mitigating irrrpacts to the sunoundirig neighborhood. • Engage key dawntarn property owners and encourage the ttinety redevelopment andlor rertovatiAn of aging hutMings. • Through a pu dprivate partnership, establish facilities for the use of seaplane and land -based airetatt. '0RENTON. THE CENTEROF i DI FT City of Rento.. Business Plan Goals & Actions 2010 - 2015 Meet the service demands that contribute to the livability of the community (1/2) Action Lead Dept Status Suggested Revision Develop a long-term strategy to meet staff facility needs Community Services (Facilities) and CED Study completed in 2008, on hold until future need. including the potential of construction of a new city hall in downtown Renton Ethat improves efficiency by centralizing City staff, enhances services and convenience for residents and other customers, and contributes to the continued revitalization of the City's historic business district.) Design and construct a new Maintenance Facility. Community Services (Facilities) Pending financial dollars. Design and construct a Fire & Emergency Services facility Fire and Community Services (Facilities) Land purchased in 2001. Sufficient budget for staffing Consider postponing the implementation timeframe into to enhance service levels in Kennydale and other unlikely in six year time frame. the future phase of the Business Plan. neighborhoods in the northern portion of the City. Develop a plan to increase public access and enjoyment CED and Community Services (Parks Capital Visioning effort will be included in City Center Review major transportation corridors in the Urban of the Cedar River through the City's Urban Center. Improvement) and PW (Transportation) Community Plan and further developed in Parks, Center for function (example: SR 900 one way couplet) Recreation and Open Space Plan and land use compatibility. Complete and implement the Parks, Recreation and Community Services (Parks Capital Improvement) Anticipated Q2 2009 commencement Open Space Plan which identifies needs and funding for acquisition and development. Enact the recommendations of the Renton Library Community Services (Library), AJS (Mayor's Office) Per 2/2o City Council discussion: pursue annexation to Implement plan to annex to the King County Library Master Plan that provide the desired level of service for King County Library System System library customers. Develop and implement on-line systems to improve FIS (IS, Finance), A1S (Clerk, Courts), CED (Dev Implemented: customer service and increase options for how residents Srvcs), Community Services (Recreation, Parks), Online building permit Fall 2008 (via eGov) get City services. and Police, New modules of Recreation on-line registration System In Progress: Online license renewal: anticipated Fall 2009 Online vendor selection rosters spring 2009 Online public record access Exploring: Utility billing/acct info access options (software upgrade) Online GIS data (Enterprise GIS initiative). Online court payment and c:\documents and settings\ssakdy.renton\desktop\2009 biz plan status revised (no marks).doc 1/8 February 23, 2009 DRP`7T Meet the service demands that contribute to the livability of the community (2/2) Action Lead Dept Status Suggested Revision Improve the City's Fire Rating to reduce insurance costs. FES The national group that performs insurance ratings is modifying its process to modernize it and give credit for activities such as accreditation. Though the State of Washington has the Washington Survey and Rating Bureau, efforts to ensure that Washington State keeps pace with new changes are on -going. The department is active in both monitoring and influencing these decisions. Establish a CERT Team in each Community Planning Area FES (Emergency Management) There are currently two organized CERTs in to better prepare business and residents in the case of an neighborhood, with additional trained residents across emergency. the city. Additionally, businesses continue to show interest in establishing "business CERTs. As the Community planning initiative takes shape, additional teams will be trained and established in planning areas. Implement a Community Planning initiative to align the CED (Planning) and Community Services, Parks, COW discussion scheduled for 3/16/09. Initiate City Implement a Community Planning initiative to better City's Comprehensive Plan with related activities by Recreation, and Open Space Plan Center Community Plan effort Q2 2009. align the City's planning efforts with the services it geographic areas of the City through engagement with provides and the desires of the community. the communities themselves. Establish service delivery standards through the FES The first phase of the Master Plan (establishment of EMS development of a Fire and Emergency Services Master call volume projections based on demographics) has Plan. been postponed due to budget reduction. Complete the Renton History Museum's Master Plan and Community Services (Museum) Gyroscope Inc. selected as consultant, contract In None review the recommendations. progress :\documents settings\ssakdy.renton\desktop\2009 biz plan status revised (nc .rks).doc 2/8 February 23, 2009 DRAFT Manage growth through sound urban planning Action Lead Dept Status Suggested Revision Develop a plan by which large scale annexations could AILS (Mayor's Office) and CED Fairwood and West Hill Annexations have "commenced" Consider developing a new action: Develop and occur without negatively impacting the existing City over per Council acceptance of petitions 1/26/09. Actively implement a West Hill Community Transition Plan — a time. pursuing extension and expansion of State Sales Tax long term strategy to enlist intergovernmental, non- credit in 09 Legislature. Fairwood Annexation to occur profit and corporate support for the revitalization of the after Incorporation decision (11/09?). West Hill vote in West Hill Potential Annexation Area. 2010? Annexation in late 2011/early 2012? Working to develop a long term, multi agency approach to service provision in the West Hill to bring about community revitalization and phasing of services and costs to the City. Review and update development regulations and CED (Planning) and Community Services Consultant selected. Commence process in Ql '09. mitigation fees to balance sound land use planning, Estimated completion: Q4 '09/Ql '10 economic development and environmental protection while improving efficiencies. Complete the State -mandated Shoreline Master Program CED (Planning) and Community Services Parks Draft inventory/technical information completed. Policy update. development in Ql/Q2'09. Estimated adoption Q4'09. Develop "low -impact" and "green" development CED (Planning) LID in Title IV Docket. Analyze in 2009 and adopt in 2010. incentives. Green building incentives in 2010. c:\documents and settings\ssakdy.renton\desktop\2009 biz plan status revised (no marks).doc 3/8 February 23, 2009 DRP'-T Influence decisions that impact the City of Renton (1/2) Action Lead Dept Status Suggested Revision Work with the State Legislature and King County to AILS (Mayor's Office) and CED (Leg Affairs) See annexation discussion above. Significant State extend or develop funding mechanisms to offset the lobbying effort underway in 2009 Legislature to extend anticipated cost of future large-scale annexations. State Sales Tax Credit. Need to further develop West Hill Community Transition Plan and enlist intergovernmental support. rcn (ED) PW (Ai.n8.i1 Othe.. o....ulaF....GFdinati GlaFi fy that ..dusI at ..... in.1USUV Fnl..tn.1 numheF ...... et!Rgs established with Boeing. Ai.nnh lease negetiatieFis '..... RdeF Aetiyeljobs'nn .. R An..nase C�.WFes Ail.2. n Gn an.- [Malin engagemeRt with etheF RenM.n . eempaAles to e the of Renton, (Move to the Economic Development Goal) deyel..pment" GAaI In partnership with other cities, build a regional Police SCORE PDA is formed in Spring 2009 with 7 member Implement SCORE facility development plan and set misdemeanant correctional facility. cities to provide over 680 beds to serve both member aside funding for startup and contingency when possible. and contracting cities starting 2011. Work with the King County Ferry District to ensure a CED (ED), PW (Transportation), and Community Renton slated for early ferry service landing at Southport, future passenger ferry route on Lake Washington serves Services perhaps as early as 2010. Ridership analysis underway to Renton. assist in determination of destination(s). Aggressively pursue development of a Bus Rapid Transit PW (Transportation) Continue to advocate for the HOV to HOV connection network along the Interstate 405 corridor. between 1-167 and 1-405. Pending outcome of the Renton to Burien Light Rail Study, begin implementing BRT using remaining ST2 funding. Pursue a concept for a streetcar or another mode of CED (Planning, ED) and PW (Transportation) Renton-to-Burien Light Rail planning money in adopted Plan for future high capacity transit investments and meaningful high capacity transit connecting South Lake ST2. Use Community Planning to determine best route, ensure that they are built in a timely manner, consistent Washington, Downtown, etc. Also, Metro Transit Now Partnership pending to with community desires. extend route 110 to Coulon Park area. Increase the frequency and number of bus routes PW (Transportation) and CED (ED) Participate in regional decisions on changes in transit connecting the Renton Highlands and The Landing and service arising out of revenue changes. Need to address Downtown Renton. Highlands needs with Metro pending outcome of current funding for service. Enhance the partnership between the City and the AILS (Mayor's Office), Community Services (Parks, Renton School District by pursuing joint operating Recreation), Police, et al agreements for like services and other potential efficiencies :\documents settings\ssakdy.renton\desktop\2009 biz plan status revised (nL rks).doc 4/8 February 23, 2009 DRAFT Influence decisions that impact the City of Renton (2/2) Action Lead Dept Status Suggested Revision Develop strategies to improve response times for Fire&ES Working with King County and other EMS providers to Modify goal to read: "Develop strategies to improve advanced life support services. influence the placement of advanced life support services cardiac survival rates through influencing the placement in South King County. Also, exploring "Public Access of advanced life support services as well as Defibrillation" as a method of continuing to increase implementation of additional public access defibrillation cardiac survival in Renton. resources. Partner with King County and neighbor cities to mitigate PW (Utilities) To make clearer to the public, consider to changing the impact of FEMA's updated FIRM map. "updated FIRM map" to "updated flood plain map." c:\documents and settings\ssakdy.renton\desktop\2009 biz plan status revised (no marks).doc 5/8 February 23, 2009 Promote strong neighborhoods (1/2) Action Lead Dept Status Suggested Revision Work with the Renton Housing Authority and Renton CED (ED), Community Services (Parks, Human RSD was not ready to make any decisions regarding School District to redevelop the North Highlands Services, Recreation) potential changes in use for the adjacent school property Community Center and other publicly -owned properties and remaining acreage would not support all the needs in the Harrington neighborhood to expand affordable for the park and allow sufficient room for RHA to develop housing capacity, while improving the services and housing. Alternatively, RHA moving forward with amenities available to the neighborhood. potential design/development of RHA-owned property in the Highlands. Review future potential consolidation and/or relocation of community center(s) as part of proposed RHA Sunset Terrace redevelopment. Revisit potential collaboration and/or co -located affordable housing/parks/community facilities with the RSD as their related capital facility plans are developed. Review the recommendations of the Highlands Task CED (Planning, ED), Community Services (Parks, Council adopted Task Force recommendations by Implement the Highlands Force and work to improve the quality of life In the Recreation), PW (Transportation, Utilities), Police, resolution 1.5.09. Work plan to be presented to Council neighborhood. Fire at February planning workshop. Highlands Task Force members to be invited to participate in Parks, Rec and Open Space Plan. Develop and implement an "Affordable Housing" CED (ED), Community Services (Human Services) Council revised the Multi -Family Property Tax Exemption Consider removing "Develop and" and focus on initiative with the goal of increasing the capacity of program to further incentivize affordable housing implementation. housing units affordable to people at various income projects and established Housing Opportunity Fund and levels throughout the City. earmarked $200,D00 in 2008. Staff now working to identify potential projects, prepare application, and solicit proposals for staff review and Council approval. Improve the sense of safety in the community. Police Difficult to measure the status of this goal. Taking into This goal originated from the results of a survey that was consideration the annexation, the violent crime rate is conducted last year. Perhaps we can conduct another about the same as in 2007, and the property crime rate survey to see if the perception has changed. continues to fall. Code Enforcement has been effective in improving the sense of safety. The private security officers at the Transit Center have increased the sense of safety in that community. Our newly implemented graffiti abatement program can also assist in the feeling of safety. With the annexation, we have more officers on the street giving visual sense of safety. :\documents settings\ssakdy.renton\desktop\2009 biz plan status revised (no ....,rks).doc 6/8 February 23, 2009 DPAFT Promote strong neighborhoods (2/2) Action Lead Dept Status Suggested Revision Complete regional trails and missing links through PW (Transportation), Community Services (Parks Springbrook Trail Boardwalk to be completed in 20D9. Recommend KC Trail expansion levy funds for grant Renton including the Lake Washington, Springbrook / CIP) Connection from Black River Riparian Forest to Green match and design and construction. Add -new Interurban, and Cedar River Trails. Complete Trails River Trail in Tukwila as part of County -wide Lakes to Master Plan. Sound Trail system be recommended for Fed grant application. Continue extending Logan Ave bike lane for continuous trail connection around Lake Washington. Adopt Master Plan 1st quarter 2009 Through existing capital improvement planning, improve PW (Transportation) Planning level study under way in 1st quarter of 09. pedestrian connections city-wide, including the connection of The Landing to the Harrington Neighborhood. Coordinate with the various arts groups in the City to CED (ED) Funding for Master Plan was allocated In 2009. Scope of establish a cultural arts master plan. work drafted. Initiate planning effort in 2009, complete in 2010. Achieve "Tree City USA" status. Community Services (Parks) Application submitted, and also working on urban forestry plan for council consideration/adoption in 2009. Create forums and strategies to better engage the City's Communications/Community Services (Human Partnered with Renton Technical College Community diverse population. Services) festival in 2008; Developed emergency preparedness DVD in 8 languages and working on providing the information to non-English community; initiate program in 2009 for ADA web compliance; initiate program in 2009 to identify needs and best strategies to communicate with Renton's non-English speaking population Investigate the ways that a historic preservation plan CED (Planning), Community Services (Museum) Historic Preservation to be included in Community could contribute to maintaining Renton's distinct Planning Initiative character. c:\documents and settings\ssakdy.renton\desktop\2009 biz plan status revised (no marks).doc 7/8 February 23, 2009 DRP "rT Promote citywide economic development Action Lead Dept Status Suggested Revision Aggressively pursue the redevelopment of the Quendall CED (ED) Planning for Quendall Terminals development and clean Terminals and Pan Abode properties to their highest and up is underway, with EPA record of decision as early as bes', :se. 2010 and site ready for development in 2012. Pan Abode development proceeding. First phase (hotel) to be completed by Summer 2011. State Capital Budget request for infrastructure and trail submitted and under consideration by 2009 Legislature. Aggressively pursue redevelopment of the Sound Ford, CED (ED) Ongoing marketing of Sound Ford site. Don -A -Lisa hotel Bryant Motors/Don-a-Lisa Hotel, and Stoneway was removed in 2008. CA Zone amendments completed properties. in 2008 support mixed use vision for Bryant Motors site. Comp Plan Amendment to increase allowable housing density at Stoneway site (COR zone) under consideration In 2009. Aggressively recruit new high -profile and high -wage CED (ED) Pursued Russell Investments opportunity. Other employers to locate in marquee office development recruitment efforts included Coinstar, Aviation Partners, opportunities in Renton. GM Nameplate, Microscan (retention), FAA (retention). Direct redevelopment of the Landing -Phase II properties CED (ED, Planning) Significant efforts with Duke Realty and Marriott to their highest and best use, while mitigating impacts to developments failed due to national economic crisis. the surrounding neighborhood. Engage community through City Center Community Plan. Engage key downtown property owners and encourage CED (ED) Met with several property owners and potential the timely redevelopment and/or renovation of aging developers. Economic realities make near term buildings. redevelopment challenging. Through a public/private partnership, establish facilities PW (Transportation/ Airport), CED Received conceptual interest from Northwest Seaplanes for the use of seaplane and land -based aircraft. in 2008. Work with The Boeing Company and other aerospace CED (ED), PW (Airport), Others Regular coordination meetings established with Boeing. Clarify that It is "aerospace Industry related jobs" that companies to increase the number of industry related Airport lease negotiations underway. Actively are sought. Consider moving to "Promote citywide jobs in Renton. participating in Aerospace Futures Alliance and State economic development" Goal advocacy to support the industry. Have increased engagement with other Renton aerospace companies. :\documents settings\ssakdy.renton\desktop\2009 biz plan status revised (nc . ks).doc 8/8 February 23, 2009 Highlands Action Plan The Highlands Task Force presented 24 recommendations to Council in December 20o8. These recommendations are divided into three categories based on their status in relation to existing department work programs: • 2009 Work Program Items- contains four recommendations that could be easily folded into an existing work program scheduled for 2009. • Items to Integrate into Existing Work Programs- contains thirteen recommendations ranked as high, medium, or low priorities, in which one or more of the following situations apply: it may partially be included in a City work program, it may be closely related to an existing City work program, or it may be on a long-term City work program without a clear indication of funding or scheduling. • New Work Program Items- contains seven ranked recommendations that involve the initiation of a new work program and funding. Each of the items contains a detail page with the information from staff regarding the necessary tasks, budget, and timing issues involved in implementing the recommendations. The tables below are a guide to the detail pages for each recommendation. 2009 Work Program Items Task Force Recommendation Lead Department Detail Page(s) Focus on parks planning in the Highlands Community Services 8 Provide for the recreation needs of seniors in Community Services 9 the Highlands Community Services and Support expansion of the Highlands Library 10 Administrative and Judicial Services (AJS) Develop a package of redevelopment incentives Community and Economic 11 for the Highlands Develo ment (CED) C Items To Integrate Into Existing Work Programs Task Force Recommendation Lead Department Detail Page(s) _ HIGH priority- Expand business and Police 12 neighborhood safety and crime awareness programs HIGH priority- Strengthen and develop CED 13 provisions for code enforcement CED HIGH priority- Use streetscape prototypes in 14 planning and permitting operations HIGH priority- Engage in a formal planning CED 15 effort that includes community visioning to determine the direction of future plans, policies, and implementation HIGH priority- Add "down light" pedestrian- CED 16 scale lighting standards to the Highlands design regulations MEDIUM priority- Start public outreach AJS. Police, Fire and 17-18 campaign Emergency Services, and Community Services MEDIUM priority- Emphasize "Good CED and Community 19 Neighbor" practices Services MEDIUM priority- Focus on business CED 20 retention and enhancement in the Highlands MEDIUM priority- Evaluate location criteria CED 21 for the methadone clinic LOW priority- Create and manage a list of Community Services, and 22 groups and organizations that serve Renton AJS residents, with the purpose of publicizing information about those groups and their need for volunteers and community support CED 23 LOW priority- Implement Low Impact Development storm water standards LOW priority- Develop programs that utilize Community Services 24 animals to help kids build self confidence and self-esteem LOW priority- Create a strategic plan for CED 25 business district improvement E9 101 101 0 New Work Program Items Task Force Recommendation Lead Department Detail Page(s) #1 -Create a community "third place" CED and 26-7 Community Services #2- Develop a package of major infrastructural Public Works 28 improvements in the Highlands #3- Develop a sidewalk repair program in the Public Works 29 Highlands #4 (tie)- Advocate for Boulevard Public Works 30 Improvements for Sunset Boulevard #4 (tie)- Utilize the many public spaces and Community Seivices, 31 walkways in the Highlands for a useable public Public Works, Police and purpose CED #6- Develop a first-time home buyer program CED 32 for the City #7- Investigate the possibility of a sub -regional Public Works 33 storm water drainage facility 3. Implementation Recommendations for Council` 1. Start with the easiest tasks to complete. A number of recommendations require a one-time City effort, and most can be accomplished with existing staff resources before the end of 20o9. Accomplishing these tasks is a very straightforward way to show the City's intent to make progress in the Highlands: • Develop a package of redevelopment incentives for the Highlands (2009 work program) • Strengthen and develop provisions for code enforcement (high priority) • Use streetscape prototypes in planning and permitting operations (high priority) • Add "down light" pedestrian -scale lighting standards to the Highlands design regulations (high priority) • Evaluate location criteria for the methadone clinic (medium priority) • Implement Low Impact Development storm water standards (lows priority) 2. Initiate recommendations that will require on -going support. Some of the Task Force recommendations envision projects, programs, or plans that will require on -going staff support. All but one of these recommendations include initiatives that will not only result in improvements within the Highlands, but improvements for neighborhoods city-wide. Each of these items can be initiated within 2009 using existing staff resources. However, the question of on -going support should be re -assessed during the 2010 budgeting process. At that time, ' 4 staff can report on the extent that these recommendations can be initiated under existing staffing and funding levels, and make specific requests on what it will take to fully implement these tasks. • Expand business and neighborhood safety and crime awareness programs (high priority) • Start public outreach campaign (medium priority) • Emphasize "good neighbor" practices (medium priority) • Focus on business retention and enhancement in the Highlands (medium priority) • Create and manage a list of groups ... to publicize information about the need for volunteers and community support (low priority) 3. Initiate planning for the big idea. The big idea from the Highlands Phase II Task force was to create a community "third place." This was the #1 priority new item for the City to initiate, and the actual implementation of this item could include the implementation of other recommendations as well. Although there are several major planning efforts recommended by the Task Force, such as a major parks planning effort, community planning, and boulevard planning, it makes sense to begin working on the third place concept now. Each of these major planning efforts will take two or more years to complete. Creation of a 0 % V ��li r��.rl �� ■■ ��■.i��1■■i��p- yr' ' •�1��.�_ ■o i■ ■I■ mf. ■ ■i■■1 an.nn■t■■E!■N n ►�`1111111iffemn pEllomIIL' in' �111 rl11J1111r11lr1 ■: �.. i ■■�.r.:rlm ■�Illrrl;. �dlllllln; � �'ti n a coo . -ir m=, twmlUlP � � � �1 i � *i i� ]ml ■tl■ram rl� —111 a� ■'rsc! ■11 fig !!:- ■�=i n■ o _� „IIt■ p� 4gas same 0 ME 0 � ■■■t • --or ad a Eli ■■� ��1•1•ll ■rtlil�Yl11It1 t■■n'�►i►� "► looll . d:,, ■ ni ill■i �i�a i:: C�Ii i■ :� C�� �` ' a /" n� i �;:: p�lle .. ■ems ... _ ■ ®i i■ �lll■ ri w r� —� -� t■ =02 no ME al • G1,.0 He:8■.ter �— - il■ �u ■tr rf i5of ♦ ,In WIN` i . Ira no as urn G �( �..Aaa win �r :-a �: , / �� epow Iwme WHIM tor i:vNonni 10 1 r �rr: ■■11■23 ma ■ -. ■ .W ■■ .ram-_ !IN N10 h,1::in iiuio /::■IIIIIIC m } :� nnuuu :Inn�i Munn. vu maym ;ap �� �: pp nnunu m m �unlr+ J @1nO�:■iHill �� r/ �■ �i �� -�=�WI� =,��■0 ii }ri =m ���Jnhy ('p�:•.��■r.��ilir. n all IImc IEF, C= ■. • ►•�' . cp WON -■ ��.:� :� ■gym■■�:i� ■■� 1t :-::•.'�j. r.►�R +fin ■MJ y u q, 6i� C Gi't� ..r4� ��ij�� S*7 r - IiYnl •�Ius—MillI ����,v,��� ii 9 ll ruriii In 0 so MW aim mom Me No HIF ■ j 1 9 on; ■WU C. IlNnmpA `r. communit} gathering place and focal point is a strong idea, and supported by the Center Village policies in the Comprehensive Plan, no matter what the outcome of the other planning initiatives. The Highlands is uniquely situated to begin this process because there are several large areas of publicly owned property that could be used (or possibly leveraged) to create the "third place." (Please see attached map Public and Open Space: Highlands Task Force Boundary on page 5). As the Renton Housing Authority makes plans to redevelop it's Sunset Terrace site, there may be an especially unique partnership opportunity. Planning for the third place will involve a number of steps, including choosing a site and deciding what type of gathering place or facility would be located there. Staff recommends using some of the Highlands set aside money to fund a community based planning charette to ansiver these questions. Based on the outcome of this exercise, plans could be made to implement the creation of the third place, including obtaining necessary funding. Up to $50,000 of the $1.5 million Highlands fiend should be set aside for visioning and implementation planning of the third place. 4. Begin design work on Sunset Boulevard improvements. The City has already initiated a study for pedestrian improvements to Sunset Boulevard between the Landing and the Highlands. Similar to the concept of the "third place", Boulevard Improvements on Sunset are a good idea that need not wait for future planning efforts to be effective. Staff recommends setting aside $300,000 of the designated $1.5 million for the Highlands toward design work for improvements to Sunset Boulevard. This would provide Sunset Boulevard with planning equivalent to work that is currently being done for the NE 3rd/NE 01 corridor. 5. Begin work on two major infrastructure improvements. Staff recommends that a portion of the $1.5 million Highlands set -aside be earmarked for two recommended infrastructure improvements that are likely to provide significant impact for the community. Both projects would provide infrastructure that the community needs, as well as provide incentives for further revitalization of the neighborhood. In addition, the sub -regional storm water facility has potential to be coordinated with the "third place" development. Develop a sidewalk repair program in the Highlands (#3 priority for new items)- $250,000 to bolster the city-N,\ride sidewalk repair program for the strategic repair of Highlands sidewalks Investigate the possibility of a sub -regional storm water drainage facility (#7 priority for new item)- $200,000 to fiend a feasibility study and planning for such a facility 6. Coordinate remaining infrastructure recommendations with future planning efforts. The Task Force recommended a very large set of infrastructure improvements for the Highlands including installation of sidewalks, undergrounding electrical ,\Tires, planting street trees, and creating an on integrated system of walkways and pathways. To the extent that money is available to conduct such studies, the City should pursue studying the feasibility of implementing these recommendations, including an accurate assessment of costs and financing options. Results from these reports could be used in coordination with information gained through the parks planning and community planning processes, to make informed, community -based decisions about major infrastructure investments in the Highlands. • Develop a package of major infrastructural improvements in the Highlands (#2 priority for new items)- integrate into Community Planning • Utilize public spaces and walkways... for a useable public purpose (#4 (tie) priority for new items)- integrate into Parks planning effort 7. Save remaining fund balance for the construction of capital improvements. The remaining balance from the $1.5 million Highlands set aside (approximately $700,000) could be used toward the construction of capital improvements in the Highlands. Capital improvements could include construction projects related to the development of the third place, or any of the various infrastructure improvements recommendations. 8. Recognize that the City's role is limited for some recommendations. A couple recommendations made by the Highlands Task Force will not be pursued by the City, including: • Develop programs that utilize animals to help kids build self confidence and self-esteem (low priority) • Develop a first-time home buyer program for the City (#6 priority for new items) Neither of these programs were high priorities of the Task Force. The animal related programming has a very limited City role and would be best organized by a non-profit or community group. In 20o8, the City Council discussed the possibility of a first-time home buyer program in the context of the Affordable Housing Initiative. That type of program was rejected in favor of the current programs and incentives that the City uses to support the creation of affordable housing. Table of Proposed Allocation of the $i.S million Highlands Fund Project Proposed Allocation Visioning and conceptual design for the "third place" and related infrastructural improvements $50,000 Design and planning for Sunset Boulevard corridor improvements $300,000 Sidewalk repairs in the Highlands $250,000 Feasibility study and planning of sub -regional storm water facility $200,000 Implementation of future capital improvements $700,000 Focus on parks planning in the Highlands N 2009 Work Program Item Task Force Recommendation Include the following considerations during the 2009 update of the Parks, Recreation, Open Space, and Trails Plan: • Redevelop pla1fields to a standard that would make them useable for many different types of users- and for extended hours • Utilize public -private partnerships in park development • Partner with Renton School District to jointly develop and maintain park facilities and play fields • Put more active programming in existing Highlands parks • Consider lighting trails, walkways, and parks • Consider the multi -cultural and multi-lingual needs of the Highlands community in facilities planning and recreational programming Lead Department Community Services- Parks and Recreation Goal Build upon the park and recreation assets in the Highlands to improve quality of life in the neighborhood. General Task Consider Task Force recommendations in planning efforts related to the update of the Parks, Recreation, Open Space, and Trails Plan in 2009. Task Details Responsible Budget Timing Staff Task A- Update of Parks, Leslie Betlach, A budget of $i5o,000 has already been 2009- Recreation, Open Space, and Parks Director allocated for this item for 2009. 2010 Trails Plan. Task B-Identify and prioritize No special budget is needed, 2010 and newly identified prioritization can be accommodated beyond improvements for the six -year into existing staff time. Funding for Capital Facilities Plan. projects will become part of the budget process. Task C- Identify operating Jerry Rerecich, No special budget is needed, this can be 2olo and funding for newly identified Recreation accommodated into existing staff time. beyond programming needs. Director Funding for operating needs will become part of the budget process. 0 Provide for the recreation needs of seniors in the Highlands I 2009 Work M-ogram Item Task Force Recommendation Consider putting a satellite Senior Center in the Highlands to reach large senior population. Programming and acthrities for seniors could be integrated into existing parks and facilities now. Consider the multi -cultural and multi-lingual needs of seniors in the Highlands when planning facilities and establishing programming. When the library, a neighborhood center, or other City facility redevelops, consider creating facility space specifically for seniors. Lead Department Community Services- Parks, Recreation, and Facilities Goal Provide sen-ices to the large population of seniors in the Highlands within the neighborhood. (Currently there is bus service two days per week to transport senior to the Renton Senior Activity Center). General Task Consider Task Force recommendation in planning efforts related to the update of the Parks, Recreation, Open Space, and Trails Plan in 2009. Reach out to the large senior population in the Highlands to better asses their needs. Task Details Responsible Staff Budget Timin Task A- Update of Parks, Leslie Betlach, Parks A budget of $15o,000 has already 2009- Recreation, Open Space, Director been allocated for this item for 2010 and Trails Plan. 2009. Task B-Identify and Peter Renner, Facilities No special budget is needed, 2010 and prioritize newly identified Director, Leslie Betlach, prioritization can be beyond improvements for the six- Parks Director, and Jerry accommodated into existing staff year Capital Facilities Rerecich, Recreation time. Funding for projects will Plan. Director become part of the budget process. Task C- Identify operating Jerry Rerecich, Recreation No special budget is needed, this 2010 and funding for newly Director can be accommodated into beyond identified programming existing staff time. Funding for needs. operating needs will become part of the budget process. 9 O Support expansion of the Highlands Library 2009 Work Program Item Task Force Recommendation Pair a new Highlands library with multi -use and multi -generational facilities that proNride meeting spaces, a senior center, and a family center. Lead Department Community Services- Library and Administration Administrative and Judicial Services Goal Use City investment in the development and redevelopment of public facilities in the Highlands to assist in neighborhood revitalization. General Task Consider the Task Force recommendation in upcoming decisions about library service and in future parks and recreation facility planning. Background Presentation was given to City Council on Februar- ' 2, 2009 regarding the next steps for the Renton Library System, with the recommendation made by the Committee of the Whole to pursue annexation into the King Count) Library System. Task Details Responsible Staff Budget Timing Task A- Draft an interlocal Terry Higashiyania, No special budget is 2009- agreement with KCLS, incorporating Community Services needed- can be 2010 Council recommendations, to Administrator, Bette accommodated into determine next steps in exploring Anderson, Library Director, existing staff time. annexation to that system. and Marty Wine, Assistant CAO Task B- Prepare resolution for 2009- Council to adopt that states it is the 2010 Ci 's interest to join KCLS. Task C- Library Board review of 2009- recommendation. 2010 Task D- Public vote on whether to The cost is 2009- join KCLS. undetermined for these tasks. 20 Task E- Public involvement process 2010- to locate new library facilities. 2011 10 Develop a package of redevelopment incentives for the � Highlands 2009 Work Program Item Task Force Recommendation Create incentives for redevelopment, including, but not limited to: parking requirement reductions, density bonuses, infrastructural improvements, reduced hook-ups and other fees, tax breaks, and construction of a sub -regional storm water drainage system. Include incentives specifically for the provision of good sidewalks and pedestrian amenities and for the provision of new or rehabilitated, secured affordable housing. Commission a study that analyzes barriers that may prevent redevelopment in the Highlands. It should also include a cost benefit analysis of possible incentives. Identify a Community Revitalization area in which incentives will be applied. Lead Department Community and Economic Development- Economic Development and Planning Goal Make the Highlands and attractive place for investment through the application of development incentives and targeted public investment. General Task Implement a work program to create development incentives to spur revitalization of the Highlands. An interdepartmental team will be utilized to review potential redevelopment incentives. Task Details Responsible Staff Budget Timing Task A- Suzanne Dale Estey, _ No special budget is needed to fund Initiate in first Analyze Economic Development ivork for 2009. quarter of 2009. existing Director and Chip redevelopment Vincent, Planning Director incentives and investments in the Hi hlandS. Task B- Initiate in Designate a second quarter revitalization of 2009. area for further study. Additional funding may be needed if Initiate before Task C- Study and propose an outside consultant is used to the end of 2009. additional conduct a study of redevelopment incentives for incentives (estimated $35,000). redevelopment. 0 11 Expand business and neighborhood safety and crime awareness programs High Priority Task Force Recommendation Increase block watch program participation. Start a safe house program. Sponsor a Porch Light Network. Apply CPTED (Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design) to neighborhood problem areas. Provide technical expertise and training for the community, staff support for programs, and program set up expenses. Sponsor incentives or giveaways for program participants, such as: whistles, light timers, light bulbs, coupons, etc. Lead Department Police Goal Improve the feeling of safety and security in the Highlands. General Task Police programming in these areas is well established and on -going, including prevention programs for residents, businesses, multi -family housing. Budget is used each year to fund safety and awareness giveaways. Any additional funding iwould be for additional outreach and programming in the Highlands. Any new programming could - become available to neighborhoods city-wide. At this time, the Police department does not recommend pursuing a "safe house" program due to implementation problems N\Tith similar programs in other jurisdictions. 0 Task Details Responsible Staff Budget Timing Task A- Additional Terri Vickers and All of the existing, on -going programs would On - outreach to Cyndie Parks, Police require no additional budget and are already going. neighborhood and Community a part of staff responsibilities for 2oog. A community groups in Programs budget allocation of $1o,000 in 2010 could the Highlands. Coordinators be used to fund additional staff time and the distribution of additional literature and Task B- Work with On - interested groups on incentives in the Highlands area. going. initiating community - based safety and crime awareness programs. 12 Strengthen and develop provisions for code enforcement High Priority Task Force Recommendation Develop code to limit parking in yards to surfaced areas such as: concrete, asphalt, or framed gravel. Create an impervious surface standard in the R-8 and R-14 zones. Develop code to limit parking in unimproved right-of-ways. Develop a minimum property maintenance code. Lead Department Community and Economic Development- Code Enforcement and Planning Goal Improve the appearance of the Highlands neighborhood by implementing codes that address troublesome issues. General Task Implement work program to amend Renton Municipal Code. The minimum property maintenance code has already been substantially drafted by the City Attorney's office. Code changes would have an effect city-wride. Task Details Responsible Staff Budget Timin Task A- Include this Chip Vincent, Planning No special budget is Initiate in the first item in the Title IV Director, Neil Watts, needed, the 2oog docket quarter and docket amendments. Development Services amendments are already complete by the Director, and Mark Barber, budgeted. last quarter of City Attorney 2009. 13 C", Use streetscape prototypes in planning and permitting operations High Priority Task Force Recommendation Develop streetscape prototypes for residential, commercial, and mixed use areas and insert them into the Development Regulations. Lead Departments Community and Economic Development- Planning Community Services - Parks Goal Ensure the ease and predictability of permitting high quality development. General Task Implement a work program to develop streetscape prototypes, drawing on the knowledge of an interdepartmental team that includes Teny Flatley, Urban Forester. Code changes would have an effect city-NAride. Task Details Responsible Staff Budget Timing Task A- Include this Chip Vincent, Planning No special budget is Initiate in the first item in the Title IV Director, and Terry needed, the 2oog docket quarter and complete docket amendments. Flatley, City Forester amendments are already by the last quarter of budgeted. 2009. 14 Engage in a formal planning effort that includes community visioning to determine the direction of future plans, policies, and implementation High Priority Task Force Recommendation Set aside staff time and resources to engage in a community planning effort that includes the Highlands study area. Develop a public participation plan as one of the first steps in the planning process to ensure early and continuous public involvement. Hold a series of "town meetings" on increasingly specific subjects with City Council participation encouraged. Visioning should include the following topics: • What should the Highlands be like in 20 years time? • What is the role of (social and economic) diversity in maintaining a unique, healthy, and vibrant neighborhood? • What character is desired for the Highlands? • What type of architecture or design is desired for this area? • Where and how should the Highlands fit into local and regional growth strategies? • What is the community's vision of a ivalkable community? • What can be done to cooperatively develop the property owned by the City, the Renton School District, and the Renton Housing Authority into a mixed -use project with affordable housing and recreation? - • How can business areas be improved and enhanced?_ . • What is the neighborhood's vision for community space within the Highlands neighborhood? • Conduct a visual preference survey to help determine the preferred style and design of improvements in the Highlands. Lead Department Community and Economic Development- Planning Goal Conduct Community Planning in the Highlands area. General Task Include the topics recommended by the Task Force as considerations in planning efforts. An interdepartmental team will be utilized at each step. Task Details Responsible Staff Budget Timing Task A- Develop Chip Vincent, No special budget is Community Planning Areas will be Community Planning needed for either step, established through a public process in Planning Areas. Director as long as Community Planning is included in 2009. Task B- Initiate A Community Plan area including the Community Plan CED's yearly budget. Highlands could be considered for that includes the initiation during 201o. The Community Highlands area. Planning process could take 18-24 months. O 15 0 O Add "down light" pedestrian -scale lighting standards to the Highlands design regulations High Priority Task Force Recommendation Add standards for pedestrian -scale lighting to the Urban Design Regulations (RMC 4-3- ioo) districts `D' and `E'. Lead Department Community and Economic Development- Planning Goal Ensure the safety, and walk -ability of sideivalks in the Highlands. General Task Implement a work program to amend the Renton Municipal Code. Code changes would have an effect on new development city-v6de and may be best implemented in all design districts. Task Details Responsible Budget Timing Staff Task A- Include this item Chip Vincent. No special budget is needed, Initiate in the fast in the Title IV docket Planning Director the 20og docket amendments quarter and complete amendments. are already budgeted. by the last quarter of 2009. 16 Start public outreach campaign Medium Priority Task Force Recommendation Develop an outreach program and materials to inform public about calling 911, parking enforcement, and about existing Police department programs. Develop outreach and educational materials about how government works, what taxes pay for, and how residents can make the most of City government. Educate residents and businesses about their responsibilities to the community, including topics such as the responsibility to maintain vegetation and sidewalks in front of their properties. Provide educational materials about how to care for vegetation, in coordination with Urban Forestry Planning efforts. Make information easily accessible via the internet on the City's website and in alternate formats for those who do not use the internet. Use Channel 21 to post information as well. Provide translated materials that are available in different languages and geared around cultural differences. Develop a City speaker's bureau to get information out to community groups. Use the Neighborhood Program to get information out to community groups and individuals. Lead Department Administrative and Judicial Services- Community Relations, and (as applicable):_. Police; Fire and Emergency Services; Community Services Goal Educate and inform the public to better utilize government services, encourage civic involvement, and spur pride of ownership in the Highlands. General Task Implement and fund an outreach program on rights and responsibilities of residents and government. This public education campaign would benefit the public city-NAde. Many of the materials needed for such outreach have already been developed. Such materials are currently distributed through several methods including: the City web site, Renton Reporter, press releases, newsletters, community events, and Neighborhood Program picnics. (see following page for task details) 17 Task Details Responsible Staff Budget Timing Task A- Develop Preeti Shridhar- Many of the messages Some timing depends upon materials on the topics Communications Director related to emergency budget allocation, but the listed above. (Some of and (as applicable): services and emergency following programs are the resources needed Bill Flora- Fire and preparedness are already scheduled for 2009: for public outreach on Emergency Services, Terry prepared and would not these topics are already Flatley- Community require additional budget ist quarter 2009- initiate available.) Services, Terri Vickers and or staff time. Nvripe out graffiti campaign Cyndie Parks- Police An extensive 911 campaign and campaign on Department. would require a budget responsibility during snow allocation of $1o,000. conditions; 2nd Quarter 2009- initiate Task B- Distribute Preeti Shridhar- A special fund would need materials via internet, Communications Director. to be established in the program for ADA web community events, 2oio budget to support the compliance and distribute direct mail. print and mail costs for emergency preparedness this task. Cost is currently DVD in eight languages; undetermined. 3rd quarter 2009- initiate campaign on sidewalk education and initiate expansion of use of Channel 21 for outreach. Begin development of outreach program for non-English speakers. Emphasize "Good Neighbor" practices Medium Priority Task Force Recommendation Distribute Code Compliance "Good Neighbor" brochures through utility bills or through events like neighborhood picnics. Consider printing them in different languages. Maintain a list of community groups that can offer senrice and assistance to property owners who are in need. Help groups establish more neighborhood associations in the Highlands. Lead Department Community and Economic Development- Code Compliance and Neighborhood Program Community Services- Human Sences Goal Empower residents to participate in the clean up and beautification of their neighborhoods. General Task Fund additional outreach to the Highlands neighborhood to support code enforcement. Many of the steps below will benefit the public city-wride. Volunteers can be used as needed to help in this task. Task Details Responsible Staff Budget Timing Task A- Evaluate language Karen Bergsvik, Human Human Services has This is part of a city-wide translation issues. Services Manager and $1o,000 in 2009 initiative to look at the Preeti Shridhar, budget for translation of City materials. Communications interpreters and It should be accomplished by Director translators. the end of 2009. Task B- Develop and Karen Bergsvik, Human Undetermined. A list of available resources maintain list of community Services Manager. and non-profit groups is groups and non -profits that already maintained by Human can offer service and Services. It may not be assistance. possible to maintain a list that includes community groups. Task C- Work with Norma McQuiller, Part of the on -going The Neighborhood Program interested groups to Neighborhood Program work of the has a goal to establish two to establish neighborhood Coordinator Neighborhood three new neighborhood associations. Program, no organizations within the study additional funding is area by the end of 2009. needed. 2009. Task D- Plan volunteer Bonnie Rerecich, Some funding for events to engage Resource and Funding this exists in the neighborhoods and other Manager volunteer program. community volunteers to clean up a specified area. wt C Focus on business retention and enhancement in the Highlands Medium Priority Task Force Recommendation Work with the Chamber of Commerce to form a committee of businesses in the Highlands. Use Economic Development staff to assist the Highlands Business Committee in organizing events to draw the community such as: sidewalk sales, open air markets, ethnic celebrations, business receptions, business fairs, group marketing and advertising, cooperative events (like DowntoN-vn's artwalk, holiday and seasonal celebrations, or themed events). Work NAth the Chamber of Commerce to put together a City of Renton business guide that is broken down by neighborhood. Talk with the US Postal Service about installing a drive through mail box in the Highlands shopping area on Sunset. Lead Department Community and Economic Development- Economic Development Goal Support business development in the Highlands by encouraging people to shop there for goods and services. General Task Develop business development program focused on the Highlands. Task Details Responsible Budget Timing Staff Task A- Suzanne Dale No special budget is Two or three coordination meetings Coordinate with Estey- needed, work can be with the Chamber of Commerce and the Chamber of Economic accommodated in staff one community event can be organized Commerce on Development time. by the end of 2oo9. Goals for on -going development of Director coordination for events can be a new Highlands established in 2oio. Business Committee. Task B- Not possible with current The Chamber Guide is currently Organize a staff levels. organized around type of service and business guide only includes members- encourage by Chamber/business community to neighborhood. develop a comprehensive guide privately. Task C- Initiate No special budget is Initiate contact in the first quarter of discussion with needed, work can be 2009. US Postal accommodated in staff Service. time. 20 Evaluate location criteria for the methadone clinic Medium Priority Task Force Recommendation Investigate state and federal requirements for locating this facility. Look at how other jurisdictions regulate such uses. Develop a city-wide plan for regulating such uses. Find out what the existing methadone clinic needs from a location and see if there is an alternate location for it outside of the Highlands Lead Department Community and Economic Development- Economic Development and Planning Goal Relocate the methadone clinic to a less residential area. General Task Implement a work program to review this use. Task Steps Responsible Staff Budget Timing Task A- Investigate state Suzanne Dale Estey, No special budget is needed, the This step is and federal Economic work can be accommodated into completed. requirements. Development Director budgeted staff time. Task B- Work with Initiate in the property owner and first quarter of clinic on alternatives. 2009. Task C- Evaluate location Initiate before change. the end of 2009. 21 0 Create and manage a list of groups and organizations that serve Renton residents, with the purpose of publicizing information about those groups and their need for volunteers and community support. Low Priority Task Force Recommendation City staff should partner i,6th the Chamber of Commerce, Renton Community Foundation, and REACH (Renton Ecumenical Association of Churches) to develop a list of organizations and groups that serve Renton residents and then contact these organizations to see if they need volunteers. Information about groups that need volunteers should be publicized in a variety of ways, including: print and teleNrision media, the City's website, and inserts iArithin utility bills. Lead Departments Community Sen ices- Administration (Volunteer Program) Administrative and Judicial Services- Mayor's Office (Communications) Goal Educate residents and businesses about opportunities to volunteer in the Renton community. General Task Some of this information is already being compiled by City departments and various community entities. The main task is to compile and maintain the information on a single web page. This recommendation has city-NAde benefits. Parts of this task can utilize community volunteers. Task Details Responsible Staff Budget Timing Task A- Gather information and Bonnie Rerecich, Undetermined. Dependent identify the many groups that already Resource and upon available maintain this information. United Funding Manager staff resources Way already maintains a similar website that may suit the Cit y's needs. Task B- Add any additional information or web links to the "Community Opportunities" page already created by Community Semites. Task C- Maintain the information on the web a e. Task D- Publicize the "Community Preeti Shridhar, Can be Depends upon Opportunity" page in print and Communications accommodated into completion of electronically. Director existing staff time tasks A, B, and and resources. C. 22 Implement Low Impact Development storm water standards Low Priority Task Force Recommendation Adopt a Low Impact Development storm water standards ordinance for the City of Renton. Lead Department Community and Economic Development- Planning Goal Create incentives for "green" building and infrastructure in the Highlands. General Task Revise the Renton Municipal Code to include low impact storm water development standards. This would benefit not just the Highlands, but neighborhoods city-wide. An interdepartmental team will be utilized at each step, including the expertise of Ron Straka of the storm water utility. Task Steps Responsible Staff Budget Timing Task A- Assemble Chip Vincent, Title IV Docket Initiate with 20o9 Title IV Docket Interdepartmental team to Planning amendments are amendments in 2009. This will determine scope of work. Director already budgeted. require significant code writing work that may not be Task B- Write code with assistance of accomplished until 2010. Interdepartmental team. N EO 23 (1 Develop programs that utilize animals to help kids build self confidence and self-esteem Low Priority Task Force Recommendation Work in partnership N� ith local schools or a non-profit agency to start a program that allows regular encounters between children and pets, such as the Read to a Dog program. Lead Department Community Semites- Library and Recreation Goal Provide community based programs to build confidence and self-esteem in children. General Task Read to a Dog program is already available at Main Renton Library. This task could include expansion of this program or initiation of new programming involving animals. However, staff does not recommend pursuing this program, as it is most appropriately managed by a non-profit group or community organization. Task Details Responsible Staff Budget Timing Task A- );valuate options Jerry Rerecich, Recreation Director and Undetermined. Undetermined. for such a program. Bette Anderson- Library Director Task B- Implement the program. 24 Create a strategic plan for business district improvement Low Priority Task Force Recommendation Develop short and long-range economic development strategies for the improvement of the Highlands Business Areas in coordination with businesses, property owners, and the Chamber of Commerce. Include all business areas in the Highlands in the analysis to get an accurate picture of market conditions and opportunities. Lead Department Community and Economic Development- Economic Development Goal Create a thriving business and shopping district in the Highlands. General Task Create and implement strategies for business district improvement in conjunction with city-wide economic development activities. Task Details Responsible Staff Budget Timing Task A- Identify elements Suzanne Dale No special budget is needed, Initiate and complete of the city-wide Economic Estey, Economic the work can be in 2009. Development Strategic Plan Development accommodated into budgeted that are relevant to the Director staff time. Highlands. Chip Vincent- Task B- Use the Community No special budget is needed This step will be Planning process to engage Planning for Community Planning, as completed with the in further visioning and Director long as it is included in the Community Plan that planning for business budget, but if a market study is encompasses the district improvement, and needed from a consultant Highlands area to identify implementation. some additional funding might (target date to be necessary (estimated initiate: 2010). 35,000). 25 Create a community "third place" *1 Priority Task Force Recommendation Economic Development staff should work with commercial businesses, the Renton Housing Authority, and other property owners in the Highlands to investigate the possibility of creating a community "third place" within the commercial area or within a publicly owned space. The idea is to create a multi -functional community space that could be used for formal or informal gatherings and meetings. The Task Force elaborated on this idea in the Example Implementation section of their final report. This concept is really a master idea that can be used to integrate the implementation of several of the recommendations. A "third place" is a social space in which people gather that is neither home nor workplace. It could be a publicly or privately owned space (e.g. a park or a shopping center both could be third places). A number of large, underutilized parcels within the study area may be suitable for the creation of a third place, including: land near the North Highlands Neighborhood Center, land near the Highlands Neighborhood Center and Community Park, Sunset Terrace or other sites controlled b} the Renton Housing Authority, or land within the commercial area. Lead Department Community and Economic Development- Economic Development Community Seivices- Parks and Recreation Goal Use City resources to create a community focal point and gathering space in the Highlands. General Task Implement a work program to investigate the creation of a "third place." An interdepartmental team will be utilized at each step. This recommendation is really a master recommendation of the Task Force and has the potential to include within it several of the recommendations. (see following page for task details) 26 Task Details Responsible Staff Budget Timing Task A- Evaluate Suzanne Dale Estey, Some of this work can Initiate in 2009 through opportunities and options Economic be accommodated into economic development for creating the third Development existing staff time. contacts and the 2009- place including: private Director. Jerry However, if a public 2010 Parks, Recreation, and public locations, type Rerecich, Recreation charette process is Open Space and Trails of facilities, service area. Director, and Leslie Betlach, Parks used, the City should allocate money from Plan update. Task B- Council chooses a Get information to strategy. Director the Highlands set aside Council in time for 2010 for this. budget decision making. Task C- Implementation To be determined To be determined 2010 or later. of Council action. based on chosen based upon chosen strategy strategy. Money should be allocated from the Highlands set aside to fund the design of the third place. 27 Develop a package of major infrastructure improvements in the Highlands *2 Priority Task Force Recommendation Contract ,"rith a consultant to study the feasibility of an infrastructure package that would underground power lines, build new sidewalks on both sides of the street, plant street trees, and provide street lights in the Highlands. Include information on how such a project could be financed. Lead Department Public Works- Transportation Goal Install streetscape improvements to increase pedestrian comfort and safety and to beautify the Highlands. General Task Study the feasibility and financing options for these improvement and report back to Council for further decision making. An interdepartmental team will be utilized to review recommendations. Decisions about implementation of such a program could be integrated into Community Planning in the Highlands. Task Details Responsible Staff Budget Timing Task A- Put together Peter Hahn, Deputy No special budget is needed to fund Initiate in ltit scope of work for this Public Works this step, it can be incorporated into quarter 2010. stud),. Administrator existing staff time. Task B- Conduct Funding for this study will need to Initiate in 21a study. be allocated in the 2010 budget quarter of adoption process. 2010. Task C- Report back No special budget is needed to fund Initiate before to Council for this step, it can be incorporated into the end of decision makin . existing staff time. 2010. LE Develop a sidewalk repair program in the Highlands *3 Priority Task Force Recommendation Use existing sidewalk repair inventory to prioritize projects in the Highlands. To the extent possible, coordinate repairs with new sidewalk installations. Lead Department Public Works- Maintenance Services Goal Improve and repair Highlands sidewalks at a faster rate than is currently accommodated in the city-wride program. General Task Fund additional sidewalk repairs in the Highlands. Task Details Responsible Staff Budget Timing Task A- Evaluate Bill Wressell, Pavement No special budget is required for Initiate in isc and prioritize Management this step, it can be incorporated quarter 2009. sidewalk repair Technician and Jayson into existing staff time. projects. Grant, Maintenance Services Worker Task B- Put The existing annual sidewalk 2oio budget together funding maintenance program is already process. package. budgeted for $250,000 city-wide for 2009. Additional budget could be allocated during the 2010 budget process. Task C- Begin Bill Wressell, Pavement Up to $1oo,000 is already Initiate implementing a Management allocated for 2009. implementation in Highlands focused Technician and Jayson summer/fall 2009. repair program. Grant, Maintenance Up to $250,000 for 2010 is Services Worker recommended to be allocated from the $1.5 million Highlands fund. 101 SO 29 Advocate for Boulevard Improvements for Sunset Boulevard *4 (tie) Priority Task Force Recommendation Work with Washington State Department of Transportation to create a Boulevard Improvement Plan for Sunset Boulevard. This would include wider sidewalks, street trees and landscaping, and street and sidewalk lighting at a minimum. Public art, pedestrian safety, and pedestrian amenities should also be considered. Ideally, boulevard improvements should be planned from the I-405 overpass east to City limits, with special emphasis between the overpass and Union Ave NE. The first phase of improvements should be installed between Edmonds Ave NE and NE 12th Street. Lead Department Public Works- Transportation Goal Implement a Boulevard Improvement Plan for Sunset Boulevard from the Landing to the eastern City limits. General Task Support a Boulevard Improvement Plan with City policies and plans, such as the Six - Year Transportation Improvement Plan. An interdepartmental team will be utilized. Task Details Responsible Staff Budget Timing Task A- Put together scope of Jim Seitz- Design and No special budget is required isc quarter work for Boulevard Planning Program for this step, it can be 2009. Improvements for Sunset. Supervisor incorporated into existing staff time. Task B- Get Sunset Jim Seitz- Design and No special budget is required 2nd quarter Improvements on the six -year Planning Program for this step, it can be 2009. Transportation Improvement Supervisor incorporated into existing Program. staff time. Task C- Begin study and Jim Seitz- Design and $300,000 will be needed to Depends upon design work. conduct this work. budget allocation. Task D- Look for grant funding Suzanne Dale Estey- No special budget is required Initiate in or legislative assistance. Economic for this step, it can be 2009. Development Director incorporated into existing staff time. 01 Utilize the many public spaces and walkways in the Highlands for a useable public purpose #4 (tie) Priority Task Force Recommendation Conduct a detailed inventory of all open spaces and public spaces in the Highlands study area (including the ownership status of these spaces). Apply CPTED (Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design) principles to evaluate the safety of these sites as part of the inventory. Use the vision developed through a community planning effort to select spaces for further development as parks, trails, and open spaces. Sell the spaces not selected for fixture development to partially fund program implementation. Lead Department Community Services- Parks Public Works- Utilities (Property Management) and Transportation (Design) Police Community and Economic Development- Planning Goal Enhance the walkability of the Highlands by linking existing open spaces into a safe, well -managed, system of walkways. General Task Implement and fiend a work program to review and upgrade public spaces in the Highlands. An interdepartmental team will be utilized at each step. Task Details Responsible Staff Budget Timing Task A- Conduct Chip Vincent, Planning Undetermined at this time. Information from the the inventory Director with Community Parks, Recreation, Open Services (Parks) and Space, & Trails Plan in Public Works (Property 2009-2010 can be used Services) as part of this process. Incorporate in to Community Plan Task B- Apply Terri Vickers and Cyndie Review of development Upon completion of CPTED principles Parks, Community applications and application Task A- inventory. Program Coordinators of CPTED principles is already a part of budgeted staff time Additional $1o,000 would support the additional staff time needed. Task C- Integrate Chip Vincent, Planning No special budget is needed This step will be decision making Director, Leslie Betlach, as long as Community completed through a and funding Parks Director, and Planning is included in the Community Plan for the options into the Interdepartmental Team annual budget process. Highlands area (target Community start: 20io) and build Planning process off of the work included in the Parks Plan. 31 Ee Develop a first-time home buyer program for the City *6 Priority Task Force Recommendation Develop a program that supports first-time homebuyers in the City of Renton. Gear the program toward eligible buyers who have limited incomes or who work as civil servants. Set aside funding or land to assist non-profit organizations in providing affordable housing in Renton. Set up cooperative agreements with banks to help support and fiend this program. Program details and contact information should be available on the City's website. Lead Department Community and Economic Development- Economic Development Goal Support and encourage a supply of housing in Renton that is affordable to civil servants. General Task Implement and fund a first-time homebuyer program which will benefit the Highlands, but also be applicable city-wide. Such a program was explored in 20o8, and therefore staff does not recommend proceeding with this task based on Council's direction at the time. Task Details Responsible Staff Budget Timing Tasl: A- Evaluate the options for Suzanne Dale-Estey, No special budget is needed, Initiate at this type of program in the context Economic the work can be direction of of the City's Affordable Housing Development accommodated into Council. Initiative. Director budgeted staff time. Task li- Provide further information to Council for decision making. Task C- Implementation of Council would need to Depends Council action. assign budget depending on upon their action. Council action. 32 Investigate the possibility of a sub -regional storm water drainage facility *7 Priority Task Force Recommendation Contract with a consultant to study the feasibility of a sub -regional storm water drainage facility that would serve the Highlands. Look specifically at how such facilities could be integrated into other public projects, private projects, and public open spaces (such as parks and schools). Evaluate the public benefits of such a facility, as well as its use as an incentive for future development. Lead Department Public Works- Storm water utility Goal Use a sub -regional approach to storm water drainage to support compact and efficient urban development in the Highlands, as well as help facilitate incentives for private investment. General Task Study and report back to Council for further decision making. An interdepartmental team will be utilized. Task Details Responsible Budget Timi Staff Task A — Council approves Surface Ron Straka, Council approves transfer of Q4 Water Utility funding for Sub- Utility $200,000 in the Surface Water 2009 Regional Storm Water Facility study Engineering Utility Capital Improvement Supervisor Program budget from the Highlands Reserve Fund for consultant design work. Task B-Surface Water Utility, in Q1/Q2 conjunction with an 2010 interdepartmental/ interagency design team, selects consultant, develop project scope of work and Council approves the consultant contract for the study Task C- Conduct study. Coordinate Q2/Q3 study with other planned City 2010 projects, Renton Housing Authority, and with any potential private development project that the facility could serve. 33 0 Task C- Complete the study to No special budget is needed for Q3 determine feasibility, facility reporting back to council, the work 2010 conceptual design, size, costs and can be accommodated into budgeted funding options for final design and staff time. However, if a construction. Report back to determination is made to proceed Council for decision making. with final design and construction of such a facility, funding would need to be allocated. 34