Form revised: July 12, 2011

FISCAL NOTE FOR NON-CAPITAL PROJECTS

Department:	Contact Person/Phone:	CBO Analyst/Phone:
Seattle Public Utilities	Bob Gambill /4-5969	Karen Grove/4-5805

Legislation Title:

AN ORDINANCE relating to Seattle Public Utilities; authorizing the transfer of approximately 173 acres located in Section 30, 31, and 32, Township 22 North, Range 8 East W.M., to the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe in satisfaction of the City’s obligations under the Cedar River Settlement Agreement; and declaring said property to be surplus to the City’s needs and not required for continued utility needs.

Summary of the Legislation:

This ordinance would declare as surplus and authorize the transfer of ownership of City land adjacent to the Cedar River Watershed to the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (MIT). 

Background:  

A provision of the 2006 Cedar River Settlement Agreement between the City and MIT states the City will seek to acquire ownership of Yakima Pass property from the United States Forest Service and transfer that ownership to the MIT.  After futile attempts to acquire ownership of the Yakima Pass parcel, Seattle Public Utilities offered the MIT land which would provide the tribe better access to land it owns outside the Cedar River Watershed.  In 2010, the MIT passed an ordinance authorizing it to accept the property offered by Seattle Public Utilities in lieu of the Yakima Pass parcel and, thereby, fulfilling that provision of the Cedar River Settlement Agreement.  

Please check one of the following:

__X__ This legislation does not have any financial implications.

Other Implications:

a) Does the legislation have indirect financial implications, or long-term implications?

No

b) What is the financial cost of not implementing the legislation?

This legislation could save the utility money and resources by making possible the transfer of property it already owns as opposed to property, such as Yakima Pass, which SPU would have to acquire before transferring to the Tribe. 

c) Does this legislation affect any departments besides the originating department? 

No

d) What are the possible alternatives to the legislation that could achieve the same or similar objectives?

SPU could transfer an alternative parcel of property to MIT.   The alternative piece of property would have to meet similar objectives and qualities to meet MIT needs.

e) Is a public hearing required for this legislation? 

Yes

f) Is publication of notice with The Daily Journal of Commerce and/or The Seattle Times required for this legislation?

No

g) Does this legislation affect a piece of property?

Yes

h) Other Issues:

None

List attachments to the fiscal note below:

Exhibit A – Proposed transfer of a portion of the Cedar River Watershed to the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (map)

This map is for informational purposes only and is not intended to modify the legal description in Attachment A to the Ordinance