Fiscal Note for Year 1998-2001 Conservation Futures Levy Proceeds

 

 

Department:

Parks and Recreation

Contact Person/Phone:

Donald Harris 684-8018 or Bill Blair 684-7786

DOF Analyst/Phone:

Marilynne Gardner 233-5109

 

Legislation Title: AN ORDINANCE relating to Conservation Futures Levy proceeds; authorizing the Mayor to amend the Interlocal Cooperation Agreement between The City of Seattle and King County that was authorized by City Ordinance 114978, and authorizing deposit into the City’s General Subfund and 2000 Parks Levy Fund of 2000 and 2001 allocations from King County Conservation Futures Levy proceeds.

 

Summary of the Legislation: The legislation would authorize two amendments of an existing interlocal agreement with King County, adding nine projects to the list of King County-approved acquisition projects and governing reimbursements totaling $3,600,000 allocated by King County to the City in 2000 and 2001 from proceeds of the Conservation Futures Levy (CFL).  $500,000 of the reimbursements would be deposited in the General Subfund (00100) for expenditures on the Hitt’s Hill acquisition project.  The balance would be deposited in the 2000 Parks Levy Fund (33850).

 

Background (Include justification for the legislation and funding history, if applicable):

Amendment O, authorized in September 2001 by King County Ordinances 14212 and 14213, adds the Delridge Open Space, Leschi Natural Area Addition, Me-Kwa-Mooks Natural Area Additions, Thornton Creek Natural Area Additions, Fremont Peak Park, Hitt’s Hill, Linden Orchard, and Northgate Park Projects to the list of Projects in the CFL Interlocal Agreement, with grant funding totaling $3,400,000; $300,000 of this is for the Hitt’s Hill Project.

 

Amendment P, authorized in December 2000 and May 2002 by King County Ordinances 14018 and 14369 respectively, adds the Hitt’s Hill Project to the list of Projects in the CFL Interlocal Agreement, with grant funding of $200,000; this amount is in addition to the amount awarded in 2001.

 

In adopting the 2001 Budget, the City Council allocated $700,000 from the General Fund to take advantage of a time-sensitive opportunity to acquire the Hitt’s Hill property, a 3-˝ acre parcel that was the largest undeveloped green space in Columbia City.  The Council’s expectation was that the General Fund would be reimbursed during 2001 and 2002 by a number of sources including the Conservation Futures Tax allocated by King County (2001-2002 City Council Budget Action Green Sheet #24).  At this time, however, because the Citywide Review Committee rejected the Hitt’s Hill acquisition for a Neighborhood Matching Fund grant due to the fact that the property had already been acquired prior to the request for funding and because an allocation from the Parks Levy Opportunity Fund was not recommended for the same reason, it is unclear if or when the remaining $200,000 will be reimbursed. 

 

Public Private Partnership Review Status: 

Is the project referenced in the legislation subject to P4 review?  If yes, identify P4 review to date. 

Not applicable.

 

Is the legislation subject to public hearing requirements?  If yes, what public hearings have been held to date?

Not applicable.

 

Fiscal Sustainability Issues (related to grant awards):

Not applicable.

 

Estimated Expenditure Impacts:

FUND     (List # and/or Account)

2002      

2003      

2004

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TOTAL

 

 

 

           

One-time $

0

 

On-going $

0

 

Estimated Revenue Impacts:

FUND     (List # and/or Account)

2002

2003      

2004

General Subfund  (00100)

$500,000

 

 

2000 Parks Levy Fund (33850)

$3,100,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

TOTAL

$3,600,000

 

 

 

One-time $

3,600,000

 

On-going $

0

 

Estimated FTE Impacts:

FUND     (List # and/or Account)

2002      

2003      

2004

None

0

0

0

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TOTAL

0

0

0

 

# Full Time

0

 

# Part Time

0

 

# TES

0

 

Do positions sunset in the future?  If yes, identify sunset date?

Not applicable.

 

Other Issues (including long-term implications of the legislation):

Not applicable.