WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Seattle has reviewed the 2012 Budget and 2012-2017 CIP; and

WHEREAS, the City Council adopted a budget and a capital improvement program for 2012, through Ordinance No. 123758, on November 21, 2011; and

WHEREAS, in order to indicate the intent of the City Council in adopting the 2012 Budget and the 2012-2017 CIP the Council developed the attached SLIs; and

WHEREAS, during consideration of the 2012 Budget and 2012-2017 CIP the City Council established guidance for the development of the 2013-2014 Proposed Budget; and

WHEREAS, the City Council adopted and filed Clerk File No. 311810, which contains preliminary versions of SLIs for the 2012 Adopted Budget and the 2012-2017 Adopted CIP, and BUGS for the 2013-2014 Proposed Budget; and

WHEREAS, Clerk File No. 311810 states that in the case of a conflict between the version of a SLI or BUGS in the Clerk File and the one adopted in this Resolution, the latter controls; NOW, THEREFORE,

BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEATTLE, THAT:

Section 1. The Statements of Legislative Intent for the 2012 Adopted Budget and the 2012-2017 Adopted Capital Improvement Program, contained in Attachment #A (2012 Statements of Legislative Intent by Council Committee) to this Resolution, are hereby adopted.

Section 2. Budget Guidance Statements (BUGS) for the 2013-2014 Proposed Budget, contained in Attachment #B (Budget Guidance Statements (BUGS) for the 2013-2014 Proposed Budget) to this resolution, are hereby adopted.

Adopted by the City Council the ____ day of ____________________, 2012, and signed by me in open session in authentication of its adoption this________ day

of ______________________, 2012.

_________________________________

President ___________of the City Council

Filed by me this ____ day of ________________________, 2012.

____________________________________

Monica Martinez Simmons, City Clerk

(Seal)

Kieu-Anh King LEG 2012 SLI-BUGS Resolution 24 January 2012 Version #2

ATTACHMENTS:

A. 2012 Statements of Legislative Intent by Council Committee.

Attachment A to 2012 SLI-BUGS Resolution:

2012 Statements of Legislative Intent by Council Committee

GOVERNMENT PERFORMANCE AND FINANCE COMMITTEE

3. Seattle Center Interfund Loan Repayment Plan

SLI 32-1-A-1

Statement of Legislative Intent:

In June 2011, the City Council passed Ordinance 123644, which authorized Seattle Center to borrow up to $3 million from the City's Consolidated Cash Pool. The loan was intended to place Seattle Center in a positive cash position after some of its 2010 and 2011 collected revenues fell short of budgeted amounts. In 2012, the Council requests that Seattle Center work with the City Budget Office (CBO) to develop a repayment plan for the interfund loan and provide regular updates to the Council on repayment progress. Full repayment of Seattle Center's loan is due by December 31, 2012.

It is the Council's intent that Seattle Center, with assistance from CBO, complete the following in 2012:

* By March 31, 2012, a detailed repayment plan for Seattle Center's interfund loan. The repayment plan should describe the specific actions Seattle Center expects to undertake in 2012 in order to pay off its loan and quantify the amount of revenue associated with each action.

* By August 31, 2012, an initial report on loan repayment progress. Each loan repayment progress report should identify the amount of the loan outstanding and summarize Seattle Center's progress toward achieving the specific revenue and repayment goals articulated in the repayment plan.

* By December 31, 2012, a second and final report on loan repayment progress.

The repayment plan and progress reports should be delivered to the full memberships of the Council's Government Performance and Finance Committee (GP&F) and Library, Utilities and Center Committee (LUC). A staff presentation on the content of the repayment plan will be scheduled for a GP&F Committee meeting following the Committees' receipt of the plan. Presentations on the content of the progress reports may also be requested.

Background:

The Seattle Municipal Code (SMC) authorizes the Director of Finance to carry individual City funds, such as the Seattle Center Fund, in a negative cash position for periods of up to 90 days. For periods longer than 90 days, an interfund loan must be approved via ordinance. The Seattle Center Fund reached the 90 day threshold in April 2011 and in June the Council passed Ordinance 123644, which authorized Seattle Center to borrow up to $3 million from the City's Consolidated Cash Pool. Some of the factors contributing to Seattle Center's current financial challenges include the following:

* Nonpayment of rent by nonprofit tenants affected by the economic downturn;

* Loss of title sponsorship revenue for KeyArena; and

* Reduced rent revenues for the portion of the campus previously occupied by the Fun Forest. (These revenues will increase when the Chihuly garden exhibition opens to the public in 2012.)

Ordinance 123644 specifies that Seattle Center must repay its loan in full (principal and interest) by no later than December 31, 2012, and applies an interest rate equivalent to the current rate of return of the Consolidated Cash Pool (presently around 0.8%). Seattle Center currently estimates it will have to generate about $1 million in unbudgeted cash receipts during the remaining term of the loan in order to repay what it will have borrowed from the Consolidated Cash Pool.

Responsible Council Committee: Government Performance and Finance

Date Due to Council: Interfund loan repayment plan by March 31, 2012

First repayment progress report by August 31, 2012

Second repayment progress report by December 31, 2012

4. Inventory of staffing support provided to boards and commissions

SLI 47-1-A-1

Statement of Legislative Intent:

Council requests that the Executive provide an inventory summarizing the level of staffing and financial support that is now provided to the City's various boards, commissions and comparable advisory bodies. As the City continues to face significant financial challenges, the Council is interested in understanding whether the current staffing approach is the most cost-effective possible and whether other staffing models could be developed.

Responsible Council Committee: Government Performance and Finance

Date Due to Council: June 30, 2012

5. Report from FAS on major maintenance of mutual and offsetting benefit lease properties

SLI 58-1-A-2

Statement of Legislative Intent:

The Council requests that the Department of Finance and Administrative Services provide two reports to the Council related to major maintenance of the City's mutual and offsetting benefit (MOB) properties.

The first report, which shall be provided by March 31st, shall estimate the cost of repairs needed to building systems, including roofs, to maintain MOB properties in a tenantable condition and shall set out options for funding repairs including, but not limited to, an assessment of eligibility and availability of American Recovery and Reinvestment Act retrofit funds and uncommitted real estate excise tax revenue.

The second report, which shall be provided by June 30th, shall present a review of the present MOB situation, policies for MOB leases, and options for MOB facilities, including disposition of the property to current tenants or entities that would ensure that the buildings continue to be leased to organizations providing a public benefit. This report shall be developed with input from current tenants and shall be informed by a survey of current MOB tenants to assess their ability to pay the lesser of fair market rent or standard City rent for similar facilities.

Background:

MOB properties are buildings owned by the City and leased to tenants who provide some public service. Tenants pay fair market rent, which is divided into cash rent and service rent. Cash rent is paid in cash. Service rent is delivered in the form of services provided to the community. Examples of services provided as rent include reduced cost medical care, nutrition education, meals for the elderly, operation of foodbanks, social service referrals, and transitional housing for homeless teen mothers.

The proposed budget appropriates $1.9 million from the insurance settlement for the 2010 Sunny Jim fire for major maintenance of six mutual and offsetting benefit buildings. Lessees of these properties include: 1) the Central Area Motivation Program, 2) the Central Area Senior Center, 3) the Northwest Senior Center, 4) the Southeast Health Clinic, 5) the South Park Community Service Center, and 6) the Teen Mother Center.

Major maintenance proposed by the Department of Finance and Administrative Services (FAS) would be limited to roof replacement for each building. However, in addition to roof replacement, systems in many of these buildings also need other major maintenance. FAS has not estimated the cost of those additional repairs. The estimated cost by facility for roof replacement only, prioritized in order of deteriorated condition, is set out in the table below.

Source: FAS

Leases for these buildings are governed by the Rules Governing the City's Mutual and Offsetting Benefit (MOB) Properties (MOB Lease Rules), which were most recently amended by the Council through Resolution 27712 in 1988. These rules state that the City "shall be responsible for all normal repairs to roofs, walls, and foundations" (Emphasis Added). However, the MOB Lease Rules clearly contemplate that cash rent will cover some major maintenance.

Specifically, under the MOB Lease Rules, cash rent should be a portion of the fair market rental value determined by an appraisal performed every five years and should cover the amortized major maintenance costs over a 40 year life cycle. Additionally, after the third year of an initial lease, the MOB Lease Rules require that cash rent covers 50% of administrative and major maintenance costs. The remainder of the administrative and major maintenance costs are to be made up through General Fund support. In 2010 the Council increased the General Fund support for major maintenance of MOB facilities from $200,000 annually to $350,000 annually. FAS estimates that with the increase and with rent from tenants, the ongoing annual needed City support for major maintenance is about $129,000 more than is currently provided.

Central Staff reviewed the leases for the above facilities. The oldest lease, to the Central Area Senior Center, dates to 1974. The City entered into the most recent lease, to the Goodwill Development Association for the Teen Mother Center, in 2008. Many of these leases do not appear to be consistent with MOB Lease Rules. For example, cash rents payable under the older leases do not appear to be based on recent appraisals of fair market rent and in one newer lease the City has elected to charge only service rent.

These discrepancies reflect decisions made by previous administrations and Councils that the value of services provided by the current tenants are sufficient to cover fair market rent. However, those decisions may have compounded the challenge of adequately maintaining these City-owned buildings.

Responsible Council Committee: Government Performance and Finance

Date Due to Council: March 31 (First Report)

June 30 (Second Report)

6. A review of information technology systems and protocols Citywide to identify efficiency, effectiveness, and security improvements

SLI 75-1-A-2

Statement of Legislative Intent:

The Council requests that the Executive branch conduct a review of information technology (IT) systems and protocols Citywide to identify efficiency, effectiveness, and security improvements. This review should result in specific actionable recommendations to improve service to users, standardize systems and protocols, and achieve cost efficiencies. The review should consider any reasonable recommendations that can achieve the purposes of this review, including, but not limited to, software standardization, uniform protocols for access and use of IT systems and software, department-specific applications and approval standards for such applications.

This review covers all City departments and offices, including the utilities.

This review is not designed or intended to reduce staffing levels, although the recommendations may address that possibility. If staffing reductions are recommended, it is the Council's desire to achieve these reductions through the normal process of attrition. The review should be a collaborative process that includes the active participation of employees representing departments across City government, perhaps using an Employee Involvement Committee framework with an independent facilitator.

The Executive may seek input from interested technology companies as part of this review, including the development of recommendations. King County received input from Microsoft when a similar review of IT services was completed in 2008. If Executive should inquire from each company that provides input whether the company has an interest in securing paid services or selling products to the City.

The Executive should also consider retaining the services of outside consultants to assist with this review.

Responsible Council Committees: Public Safety, Civil Rights and Technology; Government Performance and Finance

NOTE: This SLI is listed under two Committees.

Date Due to Council: June 1, 2012 (final report and recommendations)

HOUSING, HUMAN SERVICES, HEALTH AND CULTURE COMMITTEE

7. Report to examine potential City support for a new Bruce Lee Action Museum

SLI 21-1-A-2

Statement of Legislative Intent:

The Council requests that the Office of Arts and Cultural Affairs (OACA), in cooperation with the Office of Economic Development (OED), the Department of Finance and Administrative Services (FAS), Department of Neighborhoods (DON), and other appropriate City departments, develop a report to Council examining the extent to which City (and other public agency) resources are available to support the creation and ongoing funding of a new museum to showcase Bruce Lee.

Bruce Lee (born Lee Jun-fan * * *) was a notable martial arts expert and actor who lived in Seattle in the late 1950's through mid 1960's. Upon his death in 1973 his remains were interred at Lakeview Cemetery in North Capitol Hill, adjacent to Volunteer Park. In June 2011, plans for a proposed museum at his former Hong Kong residence, developed with support of his family, were abandoned. The family has now expressed interest in developing the museum in Seattle, preferably within the City's Chinatown-International District.

The Lee Family Foundation has developed a museum concept, known as the Bruce Lee Action Museum, which envisions a building housing a significant collection of Bruce Lee memorabilia that includes personal items, writings and objects of historical significance, a meeting room, a theatre and gift shop, a cafe, research library and a space for temporary exhibits. Council sees this as a unique opportunity for the City, one that could provide both a new cultural facility showcasing a figure in Seattle's recent history, as well as a means for providing economic development and community building opportunities for the Chinatown-International District.

Once a viable plan has been brought forward for the Bruce Lee Action Museum by the Lee Family Foundation, the Council requests that a report be prepared that analyzes the following items:

1. Suitable locations for the museum that are owned by the City, or other public agency, and that could be used to locate such a standalone or mixed use facility, taking into account:

* Site availability

* Proximity to other cultural facilities

* Ease of access to the transportation network

* Location in relationship to the ChinatownInternational District

*

2. If the City or public agency does not own a suitable piece of property to house such a facility, support that could be provided by the City in assisting with private property acquisition.

3. Public and private funding strategies and sources that could provide short and long-term capital, operations and maintenance funding.

4. The direct and indirect economic impact that such a facility could have on its surrounding community, in the form of:

* Job creation

* Increased access to cultural facilities

* Economic impacts on surrounding businesses.

The City Council acknowledges that the proposed August 1, 2012 reporting date may need to be extended, if there are significant delays that prevent the presentation of a final plan to OACA.

Responsible Council Committee: Housing, Human Services, Health & Culture

Date Due to Council: August 1, 2012

8. Redevelopment of Fire Station 39

SLI 35-1-A-2

Statement of Legislative Intent:

The Council requests the Executive, including the Finance and Administrative Services Department and the Office of Housing, to develop a proposal for the future redevelopment at the site of the old Fire Station (FS) 39 in Lake City to include, at a minimum, long-term housing for low-income or formerly homeless individuals and/or families. The Executive is requested to involve community stakeholders in the development of a proposal for this site. This proposal may include the provision of services for homeless and/or low income individuals and families. The result of this work will be either a Request For Proposal (RFP) or Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for development of this site and legislation that would authorize the sale or transfer of the property for such development.

The plan for sale or transfer of the property should identify a strategy for addressing the need to replenish the Fire Facilities and Emergency Response Levy program, which by current City policy is to receive the proceeds from the sale of FS 39. The Fire Levy program financial plan includes an estimated revenue of $800,000 from this sale.

Background:

The development of the City owned FS 39 site as a shelter (in the short term) or as housing for homeless individuals and families (in the long term) was examined as part of the Council's report on alternatives for homeless services prepared in response to Resolution 31292. Due to the existing conditions of FS 39 and building code regulations, extensive and costly renovations of the building would have been required for its use as year-round shelter. Discussions were held with community members over the summer about the shelter proposal and suggestions for addressing concerns about this proposal were received by the Council and Mayor.

A proposal to allow FS 39 to be used as a winter only shelter with day services has been developed by the Seattle Union Gospel Mission (SUGM) and is now being evaluated by the City with input from the local community. It is possible that a time-limited use of FS 39 for this purpose would be allowed under the existing building code regulations and would not require the extensive renovations required if the entire building was used for year-round 24/7 shelter and services. The Department of Planning and Development (DPD), and Finance and Administrative Services (FAS) are exploring the feasibility of this proposal. SUGM would operate the facility at no cost to the City. The SUGM proposal does incorporate a number of the suggestions made by the community in an effort to respond to concerns raised by neighboring residents and businesses. This proposal would allow the FS 39 building to be used for this purpose only during the Winter months -November to end of March/April.

The Mayor and Council are supportive of the future redevelopment of FS 39 as long-term housing for low-income or formerly homeless individuals and/or families that may include the provision of services, as well. The Mayor has indicated his support for allocating $950,000 in the 2013 budget for the one-time capital costs for such redevelopment. If the property is redeveloped as low-income housing, Housing Levy funding could be used for the housing portions of the redevelopment. Housing Levy funding cannot be used for the service or commercial space or other space unrelated to the housing on site. As noted in the Council's report, development of this site as low-income housing for homeless individuals and families would be consistent with the Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness and could also provide housing for those on the street who do not have access to shelter or housing.

Responsible Council Committee: Housing, Human Services, Health & Culture

Date Due to Council: March 30, 2012

9. Monitoring and assessing HSD refugee and immigrant job readiness training, family support, community organizing and leadership development programs in 2012

SLI 50-1-A-2

Statement of Legislative Intent:

This Statement of Legislative Intent (SLI) requests the Human Services Department (HSD) to monitor and assess the impacts (if any) associated with repurposing existing funding for Immigrant and Refugee Family Support to the newly proposed Immigrant and Refugee Youth Job Readiness Training program. Recognizing that nearly 400 parents currently receive family support assistance on an annual basis, Council is interested in ensuring that to the extent possible, any loss of service delivery is mitigated through other HSD programs and potentially, if approved by voters, the Families and Education Levy (F&E Levy). In addition, HSD plans to release a Policy Advocacy and Technical Assistance Request for Investment (RFI) in 2012 that includes funding for leadership development and coalition building for people of color and refugee and immigrant communities.

HSD is requested to provide the Council with a report that includes the following:

a) Updated inventory of HSD funded immigrant and refugee family support programming that includes any City or external funding changes for these programs. This information should include a comparison of 2011 and 2012 program funding sources (City and other). This is intended to identify whether City leverage of external funding for these programs has changed and what impacts that might have on service delivery.

b) Updated information related to any F&E Levy programs that provide family support services for immigrants and refugees. This information will not be available prior to adoption of the 2012 Budget. Council will want a summary of funding and outcomes associated with the F&E Levy programs that meet the objective of providing family support services to immigrants and refugees.

c) An assessment based on feedback from agencies and service providers, community stakeholders, the City's Immigrant and Refugee Commission, and any other relevant sources regarding community family support needs. This is intended to identify whether any service gaps are emerging either as a result of repurposing of City funds or occurring in the community in general due to other factors.

d) An update of the results from the Job Readiness Training RFI with a summary of contracted performance outcomes and a progress report related to implementation. In addition to providing an update on the Job Readiness Training RFI, HSD is requested to work with the Office for Education (OFE) to integrate the job readiness program with the Families and Education Levy programming focused on immigrant and refugee youth and families in order to develop specific measurable outcomes and align and coordinate efforts to most effectively and strategically deploy limited resources. The department is expected to report on the outcome of this coordination with OFE as part of its update to Council.

e) An update of the result of the Policy Advocacy and Technical Assistance RFI with a summary of contracted performance outcomes and progress report related to the $120,000 proposed to support people of color and refugee and immigrant communities in leadership development, coalition building and other activities.

HSD is requested to coordinate information related to this SLI and consult with the appropriate City department providing staff support to the City's Immigrant and Refugee Commission prior to developing a final report for Council review. HSD is requested to provide the Council Human Services Committee with a report on the elements of this SLI no later than August 1, 2012.

Background: In 2012, HSD intends to allocate $465,000 to service providers and agencies through a competitive RFI process for a new immigrant and refugee youth job readiness training program. The plan calls for repurposing $315,000 of existing funds allocated to agencies to provide family support services to immigrant and refugees with children in school. Given the new goal of implementing an intensive and integrated approach to family support as it relates to job readiness training, this program will more narrowly focus on families with youth in the age range of 15-20.

In addition, $120,000 has been allocated in the 2012 budget to support community organizing and leadership development efforts within communities of color and immigrant and refugee communities. This funding is intended to increase the level of civic engagement and involvement in public policy making by individuals from these communities.

As a result of new funding and policy shifts, Council is interested in monitoring general immigrant and refugee programming in the context of these changes.

Responsible Council Committee: Housing, Human Services, Health & Culture

Date Due to Council: August 1, 2012

10. Require health outcomes as part of performance pay in City contracts for uninsured medical and dental services

SLI 53-3-A-1

Statement of Legislative Intent:

The Human Services Department (HSD) is requested to work with Public Health -Seattle & King County (Public Health) to develop and implement health outcomes as part of the performance pay in the City's contracts for medical and dental services for uninsured clients.

Background .

In 2011 the City provided $6,284,074 for primary medical and dental care services for uninsured Seattle residents, Medicaid access and outreach services, specialty care access services, and staffing and administrative costs including funding for a .75 FTE at Public Health who negotiates and manages the contracts with community health care clinic providers.

HSD requires performance based contracts and determines the outcomes and performance measures providers must meet in city funded programs. HSD then contracts with Public Health who in turn contracts with community health care clinic providers. In 2011 the outcomes and performance measures in the contracts were 1) the number of visits by uninsured Seattle residents, 2) the number of clients enrolled in health coverage, and 3) quality of care goals: for patients with chronic conditions such as diabetes and hypertension, those needing prenatal care, and for children who need immunizations. Additional quality of care goals may be appropriate. However, while 25% of the contract funding must be earned, currently the only performance requirements tied to reimbursement are that providers meet their targeted number of visits by uninsured Seattle residents and their targeted number of enrollments in health coverage; reimbursement is not tied to quality of care goals.

HSD is currently finalizing its Healthy Families, Healthy Communities strategic plan. The strategic plan is intended to address three charges that the Mayor's Office and City Council gave to HSD in July 2010: 1) create a seamless service delivery system, 2) reorganize and redesign HSD's contracting infrastructure and process; and 3) develop a data-driven environment that guides investments. Reviewing the City's investments for uninsured medical and dental visits to more clearly identify the health outcomes the City is investing in and tying health outcomes to performance pay is aligned with the Department's work on its strategic plan.

Timeline.

HSD is requested to work with Public Health in 2012 to require health outcomes as part of performance pay in the City's 2013 contracts for medical and dental services for uninsured Seattle residents. HSD is also requested to report back to the Council's Housing, Human Services, Health and Culture committee with the changes they will be making in the City's 2013 contracts for medical and dental services for uninsured Seattle residents by June 30, 2012.

Responsible Council Committee: Housing, Human Services, Health & Culture

Date Due to Council: By June 30, 2012

11. HSD utility low income customer enrollment and outreach

SLI 54-1-A-1

Statement of Legislative Intent:

The Council requests that the Human Services Department (HSD) submit a report that reviews its Utility Discount Program (UDP) for low income customer enrollment and outreach. The report should be developed in coordination with Seattle Public Utilities (SPU) and Seattle City Light (SCL) and include the following elements relating to HSD staffing and work processes for utility low income customer enrollment and outreach programs:

1. Compare 2012 HSD staffing, work processes and costs to 2010 staffing, work processes, and costs.

2. Show how performance targets are being met after 2011 implementation of HSD's recently updated utility low income customer enrollment work processes compared to past years.

3. Identify aspects of HSD's UDP that are working well and the aspects that could be improved to better meet performance targets and reduce costs. Recommend specific further improvements, a schedule for implementing those improvements, and a timeframe within which performance targets can be met after implementation.

Responsible Council Committee: Housing, Human Services, Health & Culture

Date Due to Council: March 31, 2012

LIBRARY, UTILITIES AND CENTER COMMITTEE

12. SPU update of tap fees and related work processes

SLI 7-1-A-1

Statement of Legislative Intent:

The Council requests that Seattle Public Utilities (SPU) submit a report that:

1) Evaluates the formula used to calculate tap fees charged when a new water service is connected to the City system, with a goal of adjusting the formula to recover to the greatest extent possible SPU's cost of providing new taps services.

2) Evaluates the work processes used to connect new water taps to the City system and identifies opportunities to conduct the work more efficiently to lower the cost of new taps services.

3) Recommends how to narrow the gap between new taps revenues and expenditures by updating the formula for calculating tap fees, reducing cost of new taps services through more efficient work processes, or both. The recommendations should seek to reduce the gap by at least $250,000 in 2013 and an additional $250,000 (for a total reduction of at least $500,000) in 2014.

Responsible Council Committee: Library, Utilities and Center

Date Due to Council: May 1, 2012

13. Review of SPU financial policies

SLI 13-1-A-1

Statement of Legislative Intent:

The Council requests that Seattle Public Utilities (SPU) submit a report that reviews its financial policies, with an emphasis on drainage and wastewater policies including the policy for the cash contribution to the capital improvement program (CIP). The report should include:

1) A summary of financial policies for SPU's Funds and an explanation of why each policy target was selected.

2) A comparison of SPU financial policies and bond ratings to those of other comparable utilities and Seattle City Light.

3) An evaluation of the Drainage and Wastewater Fund cashto-CIP policy that considers a change from a 25% CIP cash contribution to a 20% cash contribution. The evaluation should show any revenue requirement savings, the rate path through 2017 if a 20% cash-to-CIP policy were adopted and the long-term implications for debt outstanding. It also should explain any financial risks associated with such a change.

Responsible Council Committee: Library, Utilities and Center

Date Due to Council: January 31, 2012

14. SPU recycling work plan priorities

SLI 14-1-A-2

Statement of Legislative Intent:

The Council requests that Seattle Public Utilities (SPU) submit a detailed 2012 work plan for working toward Resolution 30990's goal of 60% recycling. Although progress has been made toward the City's recycling goal, detailed 2012 activities to achieve the goal are not shown in the proposed budget. The work plan requested in this Statement of Legislative Intent (SLI) should:

1) Identify base activities and new actions that contribute to achieving the recycling goal, including an estimate of the amount of contribution (in tons and % goal achievement) for each activity and a brief explanation of the criteria used to identify the actions as priorities.

2) Show funding estimates for each action and the combination of resources (SPU staff hours, consultant contracts, etc.) assigned to the actions.

3) Compare the actions in the 2012 work plan to those recommended in the draft Seattle Solid Waste Plan 2011 Revision, and explain any differences between the 2012 work plan and draft Solid Waste Plan-recommended actions.

Responsible Council Committee: Library, Utilities and Center

Date Due to Council: January 15, 2012

PARKS AND NEIGHBORHOODS COMMITTEE

15. Funding options for arts-related programs at the Department of Parks and Recreation

SLI 81-1-A-1

Statement of Legislative Intent:

The Council requests that the Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) submit a plan that details future funding options for its three arts-related programs -Downtown Arts in Parks, Langston Hughes Performing Arts Center (LHPAC) and Outdoor Neighborhood Parks -whose funding from Admissions Tax revenues will end after December 31, 2012.

In November 2010, the Council adopted Ordinance 123460, which authorized the temporary transfer (until December 31, 2012) of 25% of Admission Tax revenues appropriated to the Office of Arts and Cultural Affairs to DPR. It is Council's understanding that beginning with the 2013-2014 Proposed budget, General Subfund (GSF) or other ongoing financial support will be needed for these programs.

The plan presented by DPR should include:

1. The estimated amount of financial support for each of these programs, starting with the 2013-2014 budget, including details on GSF or nonGSF support;

2. The extent of any required program or staffing reductions to support the three programs, as of January 1, 2013;

3. The extent to which public/private partnerships can provide funding for each program;

4. Options that provide long-term financial support to maintain and operate LHPAC, including:

a. Whether expanding the use of the facility to additional arts or cultural organizations would result in greater financial stability for the facility,

b. Whether the City should contract with a non-city organization to operate the facility,

c. Whether the facility should be sold, leased or transferred to a group or organization to benefit arts or cultural organizations, or

d. Other options that provide long-term financial stability to continue operation of the facility.

Responsible Council Committee: Parks and Neighborhoods

Date Due to Council: June 1, 2012

16. Parks Long-Term Funding Options

SLI 83-1-A-1

The City Council requests that the Parks Superintendent work with the Board of Parks Commissioners andother interested community partners, the City Budget Office, the Mayor's Office, the City Attorney's Office, and Council staff in 2012 to explore potential new sources of ongoing revenue for parks operations. This work should include the preparation of two written reports for the Council's review. The written reports should include, but not be limited to: (1) information on revenue sources used to fund parks operations in other jurisdictions, (2) the pros and cons of any potential new revenue sources, (3) the amount and stability of those revenue sources, and (4) descriptions of any required changes to state or municipal law. The reports should also include a definition of parks service levels and the amount of revenue required to support those service levels. The reports should take into account the City's larger financial picture and how the options described in the reports fit in with that picture and with the city's other fiscal priorities.

The Council requests that a preliminary written report be submitted to the Council's Parks and Neighborhoods Committee by June 30, 2012. The preliminary report should include (a) a full discussion of parks service levels and their revenue requirements, and (b) a preliminary discussion of potential parks funding options. The Council requests that the final written report be submitted by January 2, 2013.

Background:

Seattle voters last approved parks levies in 2000 and 2008. Under both levies, most of the revenues raised were allocated for capital expenses, including land acquisitions and the development or renovation of parks facilities and open spaces. These new investments have increased the Department of Parks and Recreation's (DPR) operational responsibilities; however, funding for parks operations has not kept pace. Additionally, DPR's largest source of revenue, the City's General Subfund (GSF), is subject to fluctuations related to changing economic conditions and budgetary pressures. GSF support currently accounts for about two thirds of DPR's total annual revenues. Consequently, the Council is interested in identifying new, stable, ongoing revenue sources to support parks operations.

Responsible Council Committee: Parks and Neighborhoods

Date Due to Council: Preliminary report due by June 30, 2012.

Final report due by January 2, 2013.

PLANNING, LAND USE AND SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE

17. DPD Planning Division Work Program Development and Reporting

SLI 63-1-A-1

Statement of Legislative Intent:

The Council requests that the Department of Planning and Development report to the Council periodically on work program development for the Planning Division.

In the 2011 adopted budget the Council included Statement of Legislative Intent (SLI) 42-1-A-1 that directed DPD to develop a multi-year work program that could be used as a shared tool by the Council and Mayor to prioritize resources among projects in the Planning (Budget Control Level) BCL. Among other things, the Planning BCL contains functions in DPD that develop policy and regulations that are incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan, the Land Use Code, and other policy and regulatory documents that govern development of the built environment. Consistent with SLI 42-1-A-1, the Planning Division Director reports quarterly on work program development and briefs the Committee on the Built Environment (renamed the Planning, Land Use and Sustainability Committee in 2012) on proposed new projects. This budget action continues the required work program reporting.

The work program SLI 1) allows the Council to periodically monitor the Planning Division's work program development to ensure that it is consistent with Council priorities, 2) gives the Council an opportunity to provide input on mid-year work program changes, and 3) creates a forum for the Executive and the Council to arrive at shared priorities. If issues emerge for the Mayor and Council during the year, those initiatives can be considered with a better understanding as to what the trade-offs might be among existing priorities.

Frequency of Report:

The reports should be provided quarterly to the Council in advance of the quarterly supplemental budget and grant acceptance ordinances and never later than March 31st, June 30th, September 30th, and December 31st, 2012. The report may be provided concurrently with regularly scheduled reports by the DPD Director to the Planning, Land Use and Sustainability Committee.

Contents of Report:

Each report shall contain the following:

* An up-to-date work program;

* A narrative description of any new or changed projects proposed by the Executive or Council;

* Approximate FTE assignments by project; and

* A summary table identifying by project and fund source all anticipated resources likely to flow from quarterly grant acceptance and supplemental budget ordinances or from any other sources not required to be appropriated through a supplemental budget ordinance.

Consistent with Green Sheet 66-1-A-1, the first quarter report shall include a proposal for an incremental approach to the 7year Comprehensive Plan Update required by RCW 36.70A.130 that would require no more than $150,000 be expended on the effort in 2012 and would allow for Council action by 2015.

Responsible Council Committee: Planning, Land Use and Sustainability

Date Due to Council: March 31, 2012

June 30, 2012

September 30, 2012

December 31, 2012

18. DPD report to Council on Hansen permitting software replacement or upgrade

SLI 65-1-A-1

Statement of Legislative Intent:

The Council requests that the Department of Planning and Development (DPD) report to the Council by June 30, 2012 on options for replacing or upgrading the Hansen permitting software system. The Council further requests that DPD provide this report prior to issuing any requests for proposals to identify vendors for replacement software.

Background:

The budget appropriates $550,000 to the Process Improvement and Technology (PI&T) budget control level to review options for replacing or updating the Hansen permitting software system. This system was first put into operation in 2001 and replaced the 1980s era Permit Tracking System (PTS). The total cost over six years of making Hansen fully operational and migrating from PTS was approximately $11 million.

The current version of Hansen is reaching the end of its useful life and vendor support for the current version may soon be unavailable. Approximately $200,000 of the appropriation is to complete an upgrade to the Oracle database that began in 2011. Approximately $350,000 of the appropriation is to analyze options for future replacement of or upgrade to Hansen to ensure ongoing vendor support and compatibility with Windows 7 and Internet Explorer 9.

Information provided by DPD indicates that work products anticipated from the options analysis may include:

1. Defining current permitting system requirements and key business processes;

2. Identifying impacts to peripheral systems and other possible impacts related to Hansen upgrade or replacement;

3. Information Gathering -site visits with similar size and complexity jurisdictions to gather lessons learned and successes with their permitting systems;

4. Conducting requests for interest to identify potential vendor products that meet requirements;

5. Developing fit/gap analyses to determine feasible replacement solutions to fit requirements;

6. Conducting cost/benefit analyses for top options which may include:

a. Upgrading to Hansen version 8,

b. Replacement with a new vendor solution, or

c. Replacement with an in-house developed solution;

7. Recommending an approach, which includes identifying a best scenario that meets DPD business process needs with the least amount of disruption to current business;

8. Conducting a request for proposals, if needed, to identify a vendor if a replacement option is chosen; and

9. Developing a project plan, schedule, timeline, resource requirements, etc... for an upgrade project, which might be implemented in 2012 or 2013.

Responsible Council Committee: Planning, Land Use and Sustainability

Date Due to Council: June 30, 2012

PUBLIC SAFETY, CIVIL RIGHTS AND TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE

19. Test of body-mounted video cameras

SLI 23-1-A-1

Statement of Legislative Intent:

In approving the budget for the Police Department, it is the Council's intent that the Department test the use of bodymounted video cameras by police officers, and that this test inform the Mayor's 2013 Proposed Budget.

This project will begin with a test of the cameras by officers in cars assigned to traffic enforcement. This phase will last 90 days. The next phase, also 90 days, will be a test of the cameras by patrol officers in the West Precinct. One objective of these phases is to compare the quality and content of videos recorded by the body-mounted cameras to those recorded by the cameras already installed in traffic and patrol cars. Another is to begin evaluating alternative protocols for managing the use of the cameras and recordings.

It is the Council's intent that the Executive develop options for deploying body-mounted cameras soon enough to provide a basis for funding options for the 2013 Budget. The Council requests a written report from the Executive by the end of July on the results of the test. This report should describe the costs and benefits of any reasonable alternative deployments, so that the Council can evaluate this aspect of the 2013 Proposed Budget in its own deliberations.

The Council recognizes that the use of body-mounted video cameras may be subject to collective bargaining with the Seattle Police Officers' Guild.

Responsible Council Committee: Public Safety, Civil Rights and Technology

Date Due to Council: July 31, 2012

20. Neighborhood Policing Plan Update

SLI 24-1-A-1

Statement of Legislative Intent:

In approving the budget for the Police Department, it is the Council's intent that the Department update and refine the Neighborhood Policing Plan and that the Mayor propose a 2013 budget consistent with the updated plan. The Council requests that the Department provide the updated plan no later than June of 2012.

The Council expects the updated plan to be fiscally realistic. The purpose of the plan is to show how to provide the most public safety for the resources available.

This statement of intent outlines topics the updated plan should address.

Background:

The current Neighborhood Policing Plan reflects six years of discussion among the Police Department, the Executive and the Council about increasing the ability of patrol officers to improve public safety throughout the city:

In a 2006 Statement of Legislative Intent (SLI), the Council asked the Department to expedite the implementation of geographic based policing to better match patrol deployment with patrol workload in order to improve the Department's ability to respond to emergency calls and increase the amount of time patrol officers spend on proactive policing. In another 2006 SLI, the Council proposed that the Council and Executive jointly develop performance measures for the Department.

In October 2006, Resolution 30930 asked the Mayor to recommend the appropriate number of police officers for the years 2008 through 2012 based on desired public safety outcomes and to propose a 2008 budget consistent with this plan.

In March 2007, the Department issued the Neighborhood Policing Plan (NPP), which proposed to redraw patrol beats, create new patrol work shifts and add 105 patrol officers between 2008 and 2012, all to make patrol officers available when and where they are needed and to give them more time for proactive work.

In September 2007, Resolution 31014 endorsed the NPP; Resolution 30996 established performance measures for the Department; and the Mayor proposed a 2008 budget to implement the NPP. The Council approved the budget in November 2007.

In 2008 and 2009 combined the Department exceeded the hiring goals of the NPP with a net increase of 69 officers in those two years. Due to budget constraints the Department stopped hiring in mid-2010, leading to a net decrease of 44 officers in 2010 and 2011 combined. The 2012 Proposed Budget proposes no change in the number of officers. As a result, by the end of 2012, the Department will have added 25 officers over the five years covered by the NPP rather than the planned 105. Because it has not met the NPP hiring goals, it has not yet established new work shifts for patrol officers. It remains uncertain whether and when the NPP will be implemented.

Topics the updated Neighborhood Policing Plan should address:

1. Core NPP principles

The Council continues to support the core principles of the NPP:

Patrol officers should be deployed in ways that strengthen officers' sense of ownership of the neighborhoods they serve.

Patrol deployment should match workload by geography and time.

Responses to 911 calls and proactive policing should be provided equitably and dependably in all parts of the city at all times.

Proactive time should be used to achieve public safety outcomes identified by command staff and the public.

2. Measuring NPP implementation

The first three principles above imply that patrol officers in every beat in the city should have enough proactive time to address neighborhood crime problems at the times those problems can be addressed most effectively. Successful implementation of the plan should be measured in part by whether this is the case. The proactive work of specialized units within the five precincts is a valuable supplement to the proactive work of patrol officers, but is not a substitute for it.

3. Improving patrol shifts

The plan to hire 105 additional officers assumed that meeting the objectives for 911 response and proactive time would require at least 605 patrol officers. This in turn assumed that all patrol officers would work 10-hour shifts. A shift structure combining 9-hour shifts and 10-hour shifts may be more efficient, and thus may make it possible to meet the objectives with fewer patrol officers. The Council believes such a shift structure can be beneficial to individual officers as well as to the public.

4. Roles of officers outside patrol

Because the NPP would create more time for patrol officers to investigate and otherwise address neighborhood crime problems, it implies a complementary change in the roles of precinct detectives, centralized investigation units and other centralized sworn mission specialists who also address neighborhood crime problems. The City's budget situation may require that any patrol staffing requirements be met in part by transferring officers from other units into patrol rather than only by adding officers to the Department. For these reasons an updated plan should comprehend the work of sworn mission specialists as well as patrol officers.

5. Using scientific knowledge

The goal of giving patrol officers more useful proactive time is based in part on research showing that focused problem solving by officers is among the most effective forms of policing for preventing crime. The science of what works in policing has continued to progress in the years since the plan was proposed. The Department and the City should take advantage of this knowledge on a continuing basis. The recent Drug Market Initiative and the Department's intention to explore the benefits of place-based policing are excellent examples.

6. Limiting change in the number of officers

Large fluctuations in the number of officers hired each year create inefficiency in recruiting, evaluating and training new officers. When the Department meets budget by stopping hiring entirely, the number of fully trained officers continues to decline well after hiring resumes. When Mayor and Council ask the Department to meet higher staffing goals fast, the training operation must increase fast, and the quality of recruits and the quality of the training they receive may go down. For these reasons the City and the Department should limit year-to-year changes in the number of officers hired. A reasonable target may be to limit annual hiring to a range between one-third more and one-third less than the number needed to replace the officers who leave the force in the year.

Responsible Council Committee: Public Safety, Civil Rights and Technology

Date Due to Council: June 29, 2012

21. Annual reports on workforce and contracting equity

SLI 46-1-A-1

Statement of Legislative Intent:

The Council requests that the Executive present the following two reports to the Energy, Technology, and Civil Rights Committee by July 10, 2012 and July 10, 2013:

1. A joint report from the Personnel Department and the Seattle Office for Civil Rights (SOCR) on workforce equity that presents an analysis of past year results, both citywide and by individual department, provides updates on new initiatives pursued over the past year, identifies both positive steps and areas needing improvement, and recommends strategies to address challenges in reaching workforce equity.

2. A joint report from Finance and Administrative Services (FAS) and SOCR on contracting equity that presents an analysis of past year results, both citywide and by individual department, provides updates on new initiatives pursued over the past year, identifies both positive steps and areas needing improvement, and recommends strategies to address challenges in reaching contracting equity.

The reports would be submitted just before the mid-year presentations by individual departments to the Council describing their efforts to advance the City's Race and Social Justice Initiative (RSJI), including workforce and contracting equity, and would inform the Council's review of department presentations.

Responsible Council Committee: Public Safety, Civil Rights and Technology

Date Due to Council: July 10, 2012 and July 10, 2013

6. A review of information technology systems and protocols Citywide to identify efficiency, effectiveness, and security improvements

SLI 75-1-A-2

Statement of Legislative Intent:

The Council requests that the Executive branch conduct a review of information technology (IT) systems and protocols Citywide to identify efficiency, effectiveness, and security improvements. This review should result in specific actionable recommendations to improve service to users, standardize systems and protocols, and achieve cost efficiencies. The review should consider any reasonable recommendations that can achieve the purposes of this review, including, but not limited to, software standardization, uniform protocols for access and use of IT systems and software, department-specific applications and approval standards for such applications.

This review covers all City departments and offices, including the utilities.

This review is not designed or intended to reduce staffing levels, although the recommendations may address that possibility. If staffing reductions are recommended, it is the Council's desire to achieve these reductions through the normal process of attrition. The review should be a collaborative process that includes the active participation of employees representing departments across City government, perhaps using an Employee Involvement Committee framework with an independent facilitator.

The Executive may seek input from interested technology companies as part of this review, including the development of recommendations. King County received input from Microsoft when a similar review of IT services was completed in 2008. If Executive should inquire from each company that provides input whether the company has an interest in securing paid services or selling products to the City.

The Executive should also consider retaining the services of outside consultants to assist with this review.

Responsible Council Committees: Public Safety, Civil Rights and Technology; Government Performance and Finance

NOTE: This SLI is listed under two Committees.

Date Due to Council: June 1, 2012 (final report and recommendations)

TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE

22. Third Avenue Transit Corridor Initiative

SLI 114-2-A-2

Statement of Legislative Intent:

The Council requests the Executive create a task force to identify actions needed to improve the functionality, urban design, safety and security of the downtown Third Ave Transit Corridor, as well as to recommend options for addressing the impacts on tourism, economic development and social equity arising from the elimination of Metro's Ride Free Area (RFA).

Multiple City departments will need to be represented on the task force, including the Seattle Department of Transportation, Seattle Police Department, Seattle Public Utilities, Department of Planning and Development and the Office of Economic Development. Given that the impending elimination of Metro's RFA will significantly affect the corridor, King County Metro Transit will also need to be a key player in developing recommendations and a strategy for implementing those recommendations, as will representatives from the neighboring business community, the Downtown Seattle Association, non-profit service providers and other stakeholders. This effort would build on previous work conducted by the City and other agencies and stakeholders over the past few years along Third Avenue, with the goal of reassessing existing programs and previous plans in light of current conditions and the impending transit changes. The team will be tasked with identifying short term and long term actions, potential changes in policy, resource needs and possible funding sources and strategies.

In support of this effort, Council plans to appropriate additional funding for regular cleaning in the corridor and set aside one-time capital funding to support appropriate infrastructure investments. The Council looks forward to recommendations from the task force about how best to invest these dollars.

The following highlights some of the key challenges to be addressed by the task force:

* Continuing coordination with King County to mitigate the impact of the elimination of the RFA (scheduled for October 2012), both with regard to concerns about social equity and impacts on transit operations;

* Improving signage, lighting and/or other physical changes that improve visitors' feelings of safety and security;

* Identifying and implementing effective means of policing the corridor and ensuring public safety, particularly in hotspots such as Third and Lenora and Third between Pike and Pine;

* Development of a pilot "hot spot" policing initiative with identifiable outcomes and strategies to track and reduce reported and on-view criminal activity within targeted zones within the Third Avenue Transit Corridor. In developing and executing this proposal, SPD should involve relevant adjacent property owners. other government agencies, including the State Department of Corrections and King County Transit Police and other relevant stakeholders. SPD should use an evidence-based hot spot problem-solving process as described in the March 29, 2011 Office of City Auditor report " Addressing Crime and Disorder in Seattle's 'Hot Spots': What Works* "

* Integrating well-maintained transit waiting areas into the streetscape in a manner that serves transit operations and improves perceptions of public safety and security, while maintaining pedestrian access to neighboring businesses;

* Engaging adjacent building owners/businesses to coordinate and improve street edges and improve stewardship of sidewalks, building entrances and retail fronts;

* Expanding existing efforts to remove trash and clean sidewalks on a daily basis;

* Promoting increased and more vibrant retail activity; and

* Engaging low-income housing operators and social service providers in their efforts to maintain security and livability near their entrances.

Background:

On August 16, 2011, the King County Council enacted Ordinance 17169, imposing a two-year congestion reduction charge of $20 on vehicle registration renewals. The County legislation also included a provision ( Sec. 11) discontinuing the downtown RFA by October 2012. The County Executive has until May 2012 to submit to the County Council an implementation plan for elimination of the RFA. King County Metro has convened several work groups to develop the implementation plan. Seattle staff are participating in the two groups focused on human service impacts and bus speed and reliability.

The RFA was established in 1973 as part of an effort to revitalize downtown, but allowing riders to board downtown without payment has also allowed large masses of buses to move more quickly through downtown and to stay on schedule in the area where a huge proportion of the system's riders board or alight. Now that most riders carry Orca cards, buses board more quickly. However, with the high level of regional and local buses working their way through downtown, Metro and SDOT planners still have concerns about delays when the RFA ceases. Moreover, in the nearly 40 years the RFA has been in place, many human service providers have located within the RFA. Even though Metro plans to continue and expand a robust free and reduced fare ticket program, these service providers and advocates have expressed concerns about a loss of mobility for homeless and other vulnerable populations.

Additionally, Third Avenue has long had problems with poor urban design, insufficient lighting, crime, graffiti and trash on the street. A handful of storefront businesses and building entrances have become nodes for loitering, with a couple streetcorners in particular perceived to operate day and night as open-air drug markets. In the last few years there have been some high profile violent crimes on Third Avenue. All this, along with several empty storefronts, has created a popular perception that Third Avenue and the downtown commercial core as a whole are becoming more dangerous.

Downtown stakeholders have long recognized these problems. In 2007, the City of Seattle, King County Metro and the Downtown Seattle Association negotiated a Memorandum of Understanding to assign responsibilities for a long list of short-term improvements in the areas of Public Safety, Cleaning and Trash Collection, Lighting, Urban Design and Tracking Programs. The MOU was never executed. Department of Planning and Development also undertook development of an urban design study that produced a two-part set of recommendations on bus shelters, signage, glass canopies, landscaping, sidewalk improvements, storefront improvements and public art. That plan was never implemented although the recommendations were well received by stakeholders.

The City Auditor recently identified a growing body of criminology research that demonstrates that policing strategies focused on specific, small areas within neighborhoods are effective at reducing criminal activity and increasing safety in those areas. The report found that a majority of crime in Seattle occurs on a very limited number of block faces and that these locations of concentrated criminal activity do not materially change from year to year. Several block faces along the Third Avenue corridor in Downtown Seattle experience significant levels of criminal activity and the Council regularly hears concerns from residents, employees, and business and property owners regarding the level of illegal activity in specific areas.

Responsible Council Committee: Transportation

Date Due to Council: Written quarterly reports or briefings due in March 31, June 30, September 30, and December 31, 2012

Rules Governing the City's Mutual and Offsetting Benefit (MOB) Properties. Section V.H. Ibid at Section IX.A and IX.B.1. Id. at Section IX.8.

Kieu-Anh King LEG 2012 SLI-BUGS Reso ATT A 08 February 2012 Version #5

B. Budget Guidance Statements (BUGS) for the 2013-2014 Proposed Budget.

Attachment B to 2012 SLI-BUGS Resolution:

Budget Guidance Statements (BUGS) for the 2013-2014 Proposed Budget

1. Funding For Redevelopment of Fire Station 39

BUGS 35-2-A-1

Department: Finance and Administrative Services

Budget Guidance Statement:

The Council requests the Executive to include in the 2013-2014 proposed budget $950,000 in General Subfund (GSF) support to be used for the possible one-time construction costs associated with the redevelopment of Fire Station 39. These funds may be used to fund the service space in what is anticipated to be a building that houses low-income or homeless people at FS 39. SLI 35-1-A-2 describes the process that will be undertaken to develop a proposal for this project. The Mayor has indicated his intent to include this funding in the 2013 proposed budget and this request formalizes the Council's support of this funding proposal.

Date Due to Council: With 2013-2014 Proposed Budget

2. Funding for Homeless Families with Children

BUGS 42-3-A-2

Department: Human Services Department

Budget Guidance Statement:

The City Council is adopting a package of funding additions totaling $435,000 as part of the 2012 Budget that will provide additional shelter and housing services for homeless families with children. The Council is taking this action in response to reports from citizens and service providers regarding the urgent need for such services for families. The objective of the additional funding is that no family be unsheltered by the end of 2012.

The Human Services Department will provide a report by June 30, 2012 concerning the number of families served by the funding added by the Council and whether there is further need for additional assistance for homeless families. If the report shows the need for additional assistance, the Council requests the Executive to propose strategies for assisting families and funding options in the 2013 -2014 proposed budget to meet the identified need.

Date Due to Council: Report due June 30, 2012;

Proposal due, if warranted, with 2013-2014 Proposed Budget

Kieu-Anh King LEG 2012 SLI-BUGS Reso ATT B 24 January 2012 Version #1