HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-13-2009 - Supplemental MaterialsCOUNCIL MEETING DATE: JULY 13, 2009
MEDINA CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA BILL
SUBJEcT/TITLE: AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SIGN THE SMP GRANT
AGREEMENT
CATEGORY:
❑ Consent ❑ Ordinance ❑ Public Hearing
® City Council Business ❑ Resolution ❑ Other - Discussion
STAFF REPORT BY: ROBERT J. GRUMBACH
BACKGROUND/SUMMARY:
Staff received this morning (Monday, July 13) the SMA Grant Agreement from the Washington State
Department of Ecology to provide funds for the city's shoreline master program update efforts. This
agenda bill compliments Item 013-5 on the agenda bill. Approval of the agreement is required to be
eligible to receive state funds. It is requested at tonight's meeting with an eye towards conducting the
outdoor inventory during the warmer summer weather and to have time for completing the SMP update
in the two years the state legislature has budgeted the funds.
The effective date of the agreement is from July 1, 2009 to June 30, 2011. The maximum grant
amount is $125,000 over three fiscal years. $100,000 of the grant is currently funded by the state
legislature for the first two fiscal years. The grant is awarded on a reimbursable basis. The City
initially pays project costs as they incur. Invoicing to Ecology is done on a monthly to quarterly basis.
The terms of the grant are for Medina to complete an update of the Medina Shoreline Management
Master Program that is developed and adopted in a manner consistent with the requirements of the
Shoreline Management Act and the Shoreline Master Program Guidelines. The funds will be used to
hire consultants to assist the city in updating its shoreline master program.
A budget amendment for expenditure of the funds from the agreement will be provided at the next
regular council meeting.
BUDGET/FISCAL IMPACT: Revenue of $27,000 in 2009;$55,000 in 2010; $18,000 in 2011
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Recommend to approve
CITY MANAGER REVIEW:
PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: MOVE TO APPROVE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SIGN THE SMA
GRANT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF MEDINA AND THE WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF
ECOLOGY
7/13/2009
a
City of Medina
Budget Status
July 13, 2009
Presented by:
Mike Bailey, City of Redmond Finance Director
Tracey Dunlap, City of Kirkland Director of Finance & Administration
Agenda
• Introductions
• 2009 Observations
• 2010 Considerations
• Some Issues for Future Review
• Finance Director Input
2
1
7/13/2009
Introductions
• Mike Bailey, CPA, City of Redmond Finance Director
PreviouslyAdministrator of Finance and Information Services for the City of Renton
and Director of Finance for the City of Lynnwood
Served as president of the Washington Finance Officers Association and is theVice
Chair of the GFOA Budget Committee
Conducts workshops and authored articles on local government finance, including
Effective Budgeting in Washington State Cities published by the AWC.
Tracey Dunlap, PE., City of Kirkland Director of Finance &
Administration
• Previously principal and shareholder in a regional financial and management
consulting firm, helping jurisdictions develop and implement cost recovery and fee
strategies, set utility rates, and improve organizational efficiency and effectiveness.
• Also worked in the private sector for a large defense contractor and a major
financial institution.
• Written articles and presented on a wide array of topics for organizations including
WFOA,APWA,APA,WABO, and AWC.
• Mike and Tracey are also contributors Finance Advisor column published
monthly on MRSC's website
2009 Observations
• The adopted budget was balanced assuming the use
of $650,000 in General Fund balance
• Projection for year-end estimates using $1.03
million in General Fund balance due to:
o $250,000 shortfall in sales tax revenue
o Net shortfall of $174,000 due to a $366,000 reduction in
licenses in permits, offset in part by $192,000 reduction in
development services expenditures
• The General Fund balance is sufficient to absorb
this use, but continued use could pose future
challenges
2
7/13/2009
2009 Observations
• Suggestions for additional analysis:
o Are there additional reduction that can be
made in development services to offset
more of the revenue shortfall?
• Does the use of reserves indicate an on-
going imbalance in operating revenues and
expenditures (an "operating gap")?
o What is a reasonable minimum fund balance
for the General Fund?
2010 Considerations
• If there is an "Operating Gap", consider
steps to close the gap, which may include:
• Expenditure reductions
• Revenue increases, such as:
• Optional Property Tax Increase/Banked Capacity
• Imposing a utility tax and/or franchise fee
• As part of the budget discussion, consider
evaluating/adopting reserve policies
3
7/13/2009
Council Questions and
Discussion
7/13/2009
Some Issues for Future Review
• Further review/adoption of fiscal
policies
• Review how interest is allocated and
used to ensure required allocations are
made and operating budget is not
vulnerable to interest rate fluctuations
Finance Director Input
• Critical Skills
o Experience in government accounting (rules are
not always the most efficient or practical)
• "Nuts and Bolts" experience (running payroll,
preparing journal entries)
o Analytical abilities
o Strong communication skills (internal and
external)
• Looking at potential candidates in our
organizations, may need to adjust salary
expectations
in
CITY OF MEDINA
FUND BALANCE ACTIVITY
JUNE, 2009
Beginning
Ending
Ending
Fund
Fund
Fund
Balance
Balance
Balance
Fund
6/1/2009
Receipts
Disbursements
Transfers
6/30/2009
6/30/2008
General
$3,311,730.25
$123,136.99
$343,686.37
-$305,000.00
$2,786,180.87
$3,068,335.53
Equip. Replace.
5,747.81
0
0
5,747.81
31,993.12
Street
-40,342.06
78,193.44
30,186.98
140,000.00
147,664.40
279,363.41
Reserve
2,276,380.33
0
0
2,276,380.33
2,276,380.33
Tree Fund
16,415.14
0
0
16,415.14
16,182.08
Capital Projects
1,177,533.21
18234.82
51,071.73
165,000.00
1,309,696.30
1,439,460.53
Non -Rev Trust
184,362.04
1,558.50
72
185,848.54
155,338.95
Total
$6.931.826.72
$221,123.75
$425.017.08
0.00
$6.727.933.39
$7.267.053.95
Total Cash & Investments June 30, 2009
Checking 153,239.51
Invest Pool 6,574,693.88
$6.727.933.39
City of Medina Annual Budget Status Prior Year Comparison as of 6/30/2009
Percent of Year Complete 50.00%
2008 2008 2008 YTD % of 2009 2009 YTD % of Projected
Budget Actual Actual Total Budget Actual Total Year End
General Fund
Beginning Fund Balance
Revenues
Property Tax
Sales Tax
Criminal Justice Funding
Licenses & Permits
Intergovernmental
Charges for Services
Fines & Forfeitures
Miscellaneous Revenue
Pass Thru Non -Revenues
2,839,677 2,839,677 2,839,677 3,011,719 3,163,000
3,163,000
2,191,253
2,204,458
1,148,091
52.4%
2,247,183
1,155,287
51.4%
2,290,380
1,072,365
1,599,044
1,005,413
93.8%
1,300,000
495,303
38.1%
1,056,295
55,000
70,187
35,055
63.7%
74,653
29,501
39.5%
74,653
901,500
682,583
339,241
37.6%
701,500
160,993
22.9%
335,500
424,741
405,529
244,888
57.7%
314,433
39,235
12.5%
314,433
22,600
12,625
6,736
29.8%
12,100
4,738
39.2%
12,100
120,000
115,334
55,278
46.1 %
130,000
54,759
42.1 %
131,422
249,200
207,420
122,114
49.0%
277,300
35,693
12.9%
142,300
225,000
259,269
171,124
76.1%
180,000
80,625
44.8%
180,000
Total Revenues
5,261,659
5,556,449
3,127,940
59.4%
5,237,169
2,056,135
39.3%
4,537,083
Expenditures
General Government
1,200,002
1,038,671
532,070
44.3%
1,158,152
572,525
49.4%
1,202,315
Gen Gov Capital Outlay
25,000
0
0
0.0%
25,000
0
0.0%
25,000
Police, Court, Jail & Emerg Prep
2,003,667
1,766,630
793,192
39.6%
2,056,005
783,693
38.1%
1,884,874
Police Capital Outlay
73,925
29,881
29,575
40.0%
44,713
48,794
109.1%
58,334
Development Services
833,195
735,953
395,767
47.5%
818,177
235,975
28.8%
626,056
Parks & Public Works
404,996
327,610
139,084
34.3%
387,817
153,248
39.5%
376,714
Parks Capital Outlay
51,500
3,046
912
1.8%
118,000
65
0.1%
118,000
Fire Protection & EMS
617,360
631,334
308,680
50.0%
667,309
333,655
50.0%
667,309
Operating Transfers Out
700,000
700,000
700,000
100.0%
610,000
305,000
50.0%
610,000
Total Expenditures 5,909,645 5,233,126 2,899,281 49.1%
Ending Fund Balance
Equipment Replacement Fund
Beginning Fund Balance
Total Revenues
Total Expenditures
Operating Transfer In
Ending Fund Balance
Street Fund
Beginning Fund Balance
Total Revenues
Total Expenditures
Operating Transfer In
Ending Fund Balance
Reserve Fund
Beginning Fund Balance
Total Revenues
Total Expenditures
Operating Transfer In
Ending Fund Balance
Tree Fund
Beginning Fund Balance
Total Revenues
Total Expenditures
Operating Transfer In
Ending Fund Balance
Capital Projects Fund
Beginning Fund Balance
Total Revenues
Total Expenditures
Operating Transfer In
Ending Fund Balance
5,885,173 2,432,954 41.3% 5,568,602
2,191,691
3,163,000
3,068,336
2,363,715
2,786,181
2,131,481
71,680
71,680
71,681
7,207
5,748
5,748
12,285
12,285
0
100.0%
0
0
0
79,480
78,217
39,687
98.4%
0
0
0
0
0
0
4,485
5,748
31,994
7,207
5,748
5,748
230,539
230,539
230,539
93,105
79,638
79,638
149,000
67,544
32,433
45.3%
141,000
103,299
73.3%
141,000
511,036
418,444
183,608
81.9%
498,995
175,273
35.1%
487,215
200,000
200,000
200,000
280,000
140,000
50.0%
280,000
68,503
79,639
279,364
15,110
147,664
13,423
1,776,380
1,776,380
1,776,380
2,276,380
2,276,380
2,276,380
0
0
0
0
0
0
500,000
500,000
500,000
100.0%
0
0
0
2,276,380
2,276,380
2,276,380
2,276,380
2,276,380
2,276,380
83,322
83,322
83,322
16,180
16,932
16,932
35,000
39,678
38,928
113.4%
15,000
100
0.7%
15,000
114,000
106,068
106,068
93.0%
0
617
0.0%
617
4,322
16,932
16,182
31,180
16,415
31,315
1,327,938
1,327,937
1,327,937
1,409,578
1,483,060
1,483,060
825,000
414,737
222,839
50.3%
529,163
142,569
26.9%
379,163
1,908,000
259,615
111,317
13.6%
2,184,116
480,932
22.0%
1,036,000
330,000
165,000
50.0%
330,000
244,938
1,483,059
1,439,460
84,625
1,309,697
1,156,223
PUBLIC COMMENT
-CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS
Public comments are encouraged and appreciated. The information and advice received from citizens helps the
City Council make the best possible decisions.
Council meetings are business meetings where City Council may hear from residents and take action on official
City business. in order to accomplish all business on the agenda and be respectful of everyone's time, council
members will not be able to engage in dialogue with individual members of the audience.
Citizens may address the City Council regarding any issue on the council agenda and any non -agenda items
related to city business. Those who have service requests or complaints are encouraged to first bring such
matters to the city manager for prompt attention and resolution.
Please complete the following information and submit completed form to City Clerk prior to the meeting.
PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY
Name: 1%
Address: P % $)� A.-C Nr
Phone:
Pursuant to RCW 42.56, this document is considered a public record. Disclosure may be required upon request.
Er I WISH TO SPEAK to the City Council on the following agenda item and/or issue:
1 Pam...-.
IN LIEU OF SPEAKING 1 request the City Clerk to include my written comments into the public
record.
Signature Required: �� � Date: 7 �13 ICE
When recognized by the presiding officer, come forward to the podium, state your name and address for the
record, and identify the topic you will be addressing. To ensure equal opportunity for the public to comment,
individual comments shall be limited to three minutes per person, per meeting. When notified that the allotted
time has expired, please promptly conclude your remarks.
The presiding officer reserves the right to change the order of speakers so that testimony is heard in the most logical groupings.
of M�p�ti
9
CITY OF MEDINA
Date: July 13, 2009
To: Medina City Council Members
From Council Personnel Committee
Subject: City Attorney Recommendation
During the 2008 Council Retreat a consensus was reached by the City Council regarding
examination of the contract for the City Attorney. The Council asked the interim City
Manager to review the contract at that time. Time and priority constraints prevented the
review until after a permanent City Manager was in place in November of 2008. During the
subsequent 2009 Council Retreat, the new City Manager asked the Council if examination of
the contract was still their preference. Consensus determined that it was.
In April, 2009 a Request for Proposals for City Attorney was published. The City received a
total of eight proposals. The City Manager formed a selection team that included:
• Donna Hanson, City Manager
• Robert Grumbach, Director of Development Services
• Rachel Baker, City Clerk
The selection team chose three firms as the top candidates through a process of proposal
review and interviews.
• Kenyon Disend (to be represented by Steve Victor)
• Ogden Murphy (to be represented by Wayne Tanaka)
• Dionne & Rorick (to be represented by Jeffery Ganson and Kathleen Haggard)
The City Manager then presented the top three candidates to the Council Personnel
Committee. The Committee conducted an interview with the intent that if, upon interview,
the committee did not agree with the staff's choice, the other two firms would be
interviewed as alternatives. Further interviews were deemed not necessary as no objections
were raised in regard to the choice and the decision was unanimous. The new City Attorney
contract was presented to the City Council for approval on June 8, 2009.
However, a majority of the council did not agree with this procedure and requested that the
other two firms be interviewed by the Council Personnel Committee. All eight of the written
proposals were then provided to the personnel committee members. Additional interviews
were scheduled and conducted on Wednesday June 17th, 2009 with the absence of one
committee member. Mayor Mark Nelson and Councilmember Robert Rudolph were present
and Councilmember Shawn Whitney was unavailable on the scheduled day.
After reviewing all of the written proposals, interviewing the top three applicants, consulting
with staff, checking on references, and conferring with the MSRC on the procedures and
evaluation criteria, the Committee is unanimous in its endorsement of the City Manager's
recommendation of Steve Victor of Kenyon Disend for the City's next City Attorney.
The reasons are as follows:
Steve Victor has been a member of the Washington State Bar for 18 years, three as Assistant
Attorney General for the State of Washington and nine as Senior Assistant City Attorney for
the City of Tacoma. His focus is on Municipal Law. He was very personable, yet professional,
in his interview. He answered questions very succinctly and yet gave thorough explanations.
He has experience in Public Records Requests involving cases more complex than any Medina
has ever witnessed. He also served as lead counsel in several significant land use planning
issues in Tacoma. Kenyon Disend law firm specializes in municipal law, and is currently the
City Attorney for the Town of Hunt's Point and a former Prosecuting Attorney for the City of
Clyde Hill. Mayors of both municipalities gave very positive feedback on their experience
with the firm. Fred McConkey even stated that "Kenyon Disend would be the last firm you'll
ever need."
Bruce Disend would be the primary backup to Steve. Bruce currently serves as City Attorney
for Duvall and Sammamish. He is also recognized as a "Washington Super Lawyer" by
Washington Law and Politics Magazine. Mike Kenyon successfully represented Medina and
Clyde Hill in the Primm case all the way to Superior Court a few years back.
Councilmember Biglow, has brought to our attention the Martindale Hubbell rating system, a
peer review rating structure for attorneys. The committee consulted with Paul Sullivan of the
MRSC. He said that in assisting cities with attorney selection, he has never seen or used the
Martindale Hubbell list. During the interview we asked Wayne
Tanaka about the Martindale Hubbell list and he didn't think it should be used as criteria for
selecting City Attorneys.
Bruce Disend was asked why he has not participated in the rating system and his answer was
that he had never seen a need to participate. Attorneys that we consulted said it more
important that we obtain good personal references from other cities that the firm or its
representative has worked for in the past. The reference checks done by both Donna Hanson
and the personnel committee were very positive.
In conclusion, the Medina City Council Personnel Committee does endorse the
recommendation of the Steve Victor and his firm of Kenyon Disend as our next city attorney.
Respectfully,
Mark L. Nelson Robert Rudolph Shawn Whitney
Mayor Councilmember Councilmember
As Chair of the Emergency Committte, I recommend that the Mayor and Council Members
approve the attached Revised Hazard Mitigation Plan Annex and accompanying Resolution
of Intention to Continue Participation in the King County Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan,
with the exception of the provision for under -grounding cable and telecommunications lines.
The most fundamental function of local gov't is public safety, and emergency preparedness
is critical, particularly in the first 72 hours after a major event.
I agree with most of the proposals are cost-effective, including
Secure all electronic equipment 2,500
Create a CERT Team and encouraging active citizen response efforts 50,000
To provide disaster supply storage at Medina City Hall 25,000 and at strategic locations
throughout the City of Medina 60,000
Bring Medina City Hall/Police Station compliant with current seismic standards 150,000
However, the citizens have spoken clearly by not passing a bond to support
undergrounding. 2(.
1.5 million (only for city? totals >$22 million, most absorbed by citizens)
,j�pe *.�, j.. o. v:ZnTe —-�^�i �F �✓sv �� �, t �o+� : (' ��k�iTG
Alternative means of com unication in an emergency or disaster situation)
Not sure the analogy to World Trade Center is appropriate J"
No evidence that that investment would save so many lives.
In disaster, neighborhood response will be more important than central govt functions;
focus should be on promoting neighborhood preparedness.
(To provide for under -grounding of cable and telecommunications lines. 1.5 million
Communications are a critical need in the event of a disaster. Continued abilities for
communication would provide the important elements of security and safety for the
community. It is difficult to put a dollar cost to the loss of a life. For this Initiative, $2.3 M is
the figure used for loss of a life based on the attack of the World Trade Center of 9/11/
2001.)