Interlocal Agreement Regarding Snohomish County Law and Justice Planning Office1 91Iq I Ito
? _3
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT REGARDING SNOHOMISH COUNTY
LAW AND JUSTICE PLANNING OFFICE
This agreement entered into this 14th day of September
1976 is between Snohomish Count ? y (hereinafter called the "County" and the
Cities signatory hereto:
WHEREAS, the State Office of Community Development has subcontracted to
the County by the Planning Grant Award Contract (hereinafter called "Contract")
certain law and justice planning and coordinating tasks within the region of
Snohomish County, required to be performed under State contract with the Law
Enforcement Assistance Administration pursuant to the Omnibus Crime Control
and Safe Street Act of 1968 and the Crime Control Act of 1973 (hereinafter
called "Acts"); and
WHEREAS, the County and Cities desire that the aforementioned planning
and coordinating tasks continue to be assigned to the Law and Justice Planning
Office of Snohomish County; and
WHEREAS, by Section 1B of said Contract the County has assured that the
Legislative bodies in the County will establish a regional supervisory
mechanism representative of criminal justice agencies, units of general
local government, public and private agencies maintaining programs within
the region to prevent and reduce crime and delinquency, and citizens of the
region; and by Section 4 of said Contract has represented that persons
performing the services required by the Contract shall be fully qualified
and shall be authorized to perform such services, and has designated the
professional "Regional Planner/Coordinator"; and
WHEREAS, the County has previously formed the Snohomish County Law and
Justice Planning Office (hereinafter called "Office") and designated a
Regional Planner/Coordinator within such Office, and has made said Office a
division of the Grants Administration Office in order to afford increased
fiscal and program management control;
NOW, THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed as follows:
_D __the ggptract
Section 1. As provided by Section 1B 4 the County and the Cities opt to
form � g oral Supervisory Unit" composed of two bodies consisting of: the
Board of Snohomish County Commissioners, which has final decision making
authority, except as hereinafter provided; and the Snohomish County Law and
Justice Regional Planning Committee (hereinafter called "Committee"), which
shall be representative of the criminal justice system, and the community
(as described in Section 1B of the contract) and which shall review acid advise
on all matters pertaining to law and justice planning within Snohomish County
including the preparation of annual comprehensive plans for law enforcement
and administration of justice, and making recommendations on funding projects
under the aforementioned Acts. For those funding applications for which the
local matching is being provided in whole or in part by local governments other
-1-
than the County, only after review and concurrence by such other agencies may
revisions be made to the application by the Board of County Commissioners.
Section 2. Office Tasks. The Office shall perform the following
functions pursuant to the fulfillment of the terms and conditions of the
contract:
A. Provide staff support to the Committee;
B. Assist prospective applicants in the development, preparation
and submission of applications for projects pursuant to the annual
comprehensive plan for the region and the State;
C. Certify and comment upon all applications for funding of projects
submitted to the Office by units of general local government within
the region;
D. Provide technical assistance to units of general local government
within the region in regards to the preparation of progress
reports, financial reports and requests for reimbursement;
E. Maintain familiarity with, and monitor the progress and adminis-
trative systems operations of all projects within the region which
receive financial assistance from the Acts, and advise the appli-
cant agency of any corrective action required thereto, unless the
applicant agency has otherwise assigned these responsibilities
and so advise the Committee.
F. Provide such additional work or assistance reasonable or necessary
to accomplish the purposes of the Contract as is recommended by
the Committee, directed by the Board of Snohomish County Commissioners,
and/or approved by the State Office of Community Development.
Said Office tasks shall specifically be/directed towards the fulfillment
of the purpose, responsibility, annual regional plain, assistance to applicants,
monitoring, and additional work sections of the Contract.
Secti . Regional Planner. Coordi_I,_tor. The County has designated
June Lloyd as the Snohomish County Regional Planner/Coordinator. Except in
an emergency situation, no changes in such designation shall be made without
concix. ence of the Committee.
Section 4. Planning Authorization. The County and Cities hereby
authorize the Committee as previously constituted to review and advise on
all matters pertaining to criminal justice. The Committee shall be advised
by the County of any revisions made to the plans and/or project applications
by the County, prior to the County submittal of same to the State Law and
Justice Planning Office, and of the reasons therefore, which -revisions shall
first be approved by the Committee prior to their submittal to the State Office.
Section_ 5. Local Cost. Participants to this agreement shall finance the
local share of the cost of the Planning Office; such costs shall be distributed
on the basis of population within the jurisdiction of the agency. The local
-2-
share of the cost for individual projects shall be borne by the applicant
and/or benefiting agency thereof. In computing the "local share" unpaid
shares of any non -participating government and the amount of any reimbursements
due which have not been received shall be included and distributed to all of
the benefiting agencies.
Section 6. Duration. This Interlocal Agreement shall remain in effect
so long as the State Office of Community Development continues to subcontract
the aforementioned Law and Justice Planning and Coordinating Task to the County;
provided, that the Supervisory Unit and the Office, as constituted herein,
continue to satisfy the requirements of the Acts and applicable regulations
of the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration and the State Office of
Community Development; and provided farther, that subsequent to December 31, 1976,
this Interlocal Agreement may be terminated by any party hereto, with respect
to its obligations hereto, after giving ninety (90) days notice of an intention
to terminate to the other parties at the end of any fiscal year.
SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHMGTON
ATTEST:
HENRY WHALEN, Snohomish
County Auditor and Ex-Officio CHAT
E
Clerk of the Board
Commissioner
By. CATHY SEAM, eputy Audit
Commi.sjoner
DATED: , 1976
ATTEST:
Clerk
7W-
Mayor, City of Edmonds
DATED: September 14 1976
-3-
LAW AND JUSTICE PLA1 T?NING IN WASHINGTON STATE
President Ford recently signed into law legislation reauthorizing and extending the
Law Enforcement Assistance Administration (LEAA) through Fiscal Year 1979. The
authorized appropriations will be approximately $2,500000,000, with $880,000,000
earmarked for Fiscal Year 1977 and $800,000,000 each for Fiscal Year 1978 and 1979.
The purpose of LEAA is "to provide financial and technical aid and assistance, to
encourage states and units of general local government, to develop and adopt compre-
hensive law enforcement and criminal justice plans based on their evaluation of
State and local problems of law enforcement and criminal justice." These resources
serve as a catalyst to assist state and local units of government in the examination
of the functions of the criminal justice process and problems of crime and crime
reduction. These funds will enable the development of plans which include innovative
methods designed to impact crime and problems that hinder the effective functioning
of the criminal justice process.
The major provisions and the reauthorization of the crime control act are as follows:
1. State planning agencies must be established by statute on or before
December 31, 1978.
2. State legislatures, upon their requests, are authorized to review and
comment on state comprehensive plans preliminary to the plans submission
to LEAA by the Chief Executive.
3. A set aside of $15,000,000 annually is authorized for community and anti -
crime programs through the Office of Community Crime Prevention.
4. Statewide comprehensive plans must address the prevention of crime against
the elderly.
5. Each state regional and local planning agency must assure broad participa-
tion of the planning process.
6. Approximately 20% of the LEAA Crime Control Act funds must be directed at
juvenile programs each year.
7. Legal and procedural arrangements must be developed for the award of mini
block grants to local units of governments, if in compliance with the
requirements of the act, LEAA, and the State Planning Agency.
8. Judicial planning in each state may be performed by a planning committee
established by and at the discretion of the Chief Justice. Judicial plans
will be developed in accordance with priorities established by the state
supervisory board and are subject to review and approval by the super-
visory board.
9. The placement of increased emphasis on civil rights compliance and dis-
criminatory practices related to the program.
For 1978, Comprehensive Criminal Justice Planning Expectations have been
approved. The general theme of the current planning expectations is the
minimization of burdensome regulations, red tape, and production of
massive documents. The intent is to concentrate on a planning process
which allows the unique situations and problems of each region of
Washington State to be addressed. Major emphasis is given to defining the
ingredients of a comprehensive planning process and providing definition
for what is expected in the production of the 1978 Regional Comprehensive
Criminal Justice Plans.
The Major Emphasis of the 1978 Comprehensive Criminal Justice Plan Expectations are
as follows:
1. The planning emphasis is multi -year in nature, concentrating on identify-
ing problems and the effectiveness levels of the key criminal justice
functional areas of prevention, diversion apprehension, prosecution/
defense disposition and punishment/habilitation.
2. Verification or approval of the planning process will be conducted via
onsite reviews by members of the Governor's Committee on Law and Justice
and staff of the Law and Justice Planning Office. Based upon substantial
compliance with the "planning expectations," regions will receive a target
amount of funds against which to plan.
3. Development of local/regional plan addressing the unique local problems of
juveniles, Indian reservations, cities of 10,000 or more and counties.
Criminal justice planning processes are being initiated throughout the
state. The first onsite reviews are scheduled to be conducted in the
latter two weeks of January 1977 and projects are scheduled for interim
approval during April 1977 and final approval during May 1977.
4. Development of a judicial plan under the aegis of the Chief Justice of the
state. Activities in this regard will be in accordance with statutory
provisions of the Act as amended.
Additional information regarding the law and justice program, the 1978
comprehensive criminal justice planning expectations or related activities
may be obtained from your local Law and Justice Planning Office or Dan
Greening, of the State Law and Justice Planning Office in Olympia at (206)
753-4936. Staff will be made available at your request to provide addi-
tional information at your state, regions or local meetings and to address
other concerns you may have regarding law and justice planning in Washington
state.
-3-
THESF "INUTES SUBJECT
TO S, 21BER 21 APPROVAL
EDMONDS CITY COU14CIL MINUTES
September 14, 1976
The regular meeting of the Edmonds City Council was called to order at 7:50 p.m.
by Mayor Harve Harrison in the Council Chambers of the Edmonds Civic Center. All
present joined in the flag salute.
PRESENT ABSENT STAFF PRESENT
Harve Harrison, Mayor Ray Gould J. Herb Gilbo, M.A.A.
Max Gellert Phil Clement Leif Larson, City Engineer
John Nordquist Robert Anderson Joe Wallis, City Planner
Tom Carns Marlo Foster, Police Chief
Mike Herb Harry Whitcutt, Building Official
John Wallace, City Attorney
Irene Varney Moran, City Clerk
Jackie Parrett, Deputy City Clerk
CONSENT AGENDA (7:51 p.m.)
Councilman Gellert requested that the Minutes of September 7 be removed from the
MOTION: Consent Agenda for a correction. A MOTION WAS THEN MADE BY COUNCILMAN CARNS,
SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST, TO APPROVE THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT AGENDA._
MOTION CARRIED. The remaining Consent Agenda contained the following item:
(B) Acknowledge -Receipt of Claim for Damages - Kim Robert Cramer.
Copy of claim sent immediately upon receipt to insurance company.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF SEPTEM BER 7, 1976 (Item (A) removed from Consent Agenda)
7:53 p.m.
Councilman Gellert asked that a correction be made in the minutes on page 4, the
item "PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO PLACE PARK BOND ISSUES ON BALLOT." The sentence
reading "Councilman Gellert said he could only vote in favor of a proposition
which eliminates the pool cover if the utility tax could not be a part of the
ballot." should be corrected to read "Councilman Gellert said he could only vote
for the pool cover if the utility tax were a part of the ballot title." The
minutes were then approved as amended.
COUNCIL PARTICIPATION (7:54 p.m.)
Councilman Herb said he would like to suggest placing on the agenda the question
of whether or not the organizational structure of the Parks and Recreation Depart-
ment should be reviewed. He referred to an article received from the Park Board,
entitled "Parks and Recreation --Should they Separate?" Councilman Carns felt
that as a committee is presently working on job descriptions for every department
in the City it would be better to postpone such a discussion until that project
is complete. Councilman Gellert noted, however, that the job descriptions are
based on the duties and the committee has not made any effort to concern itself
MOTION: with any reorganization. A MOTION WAS THEN MADE BY COUNCILMAN HERB, SECONDED
BY COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST, TO PLACE ON THE OCTOBER 12 AGENDA A DISCUSSION OF THE
QUESTION OF WHETHER OR NOT THE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT STRUCTURE SHOULD BE
RE-EVALUATED AND WHETHER OR NOT IT SHOULD BE REORGANIZED. MOTION CARRIED, WITH
COUNCILMAN CARNS VOTING NO. Councilman Gellert asked that copies of the referenced
.MOTION: article be distributed to the Councilmen. A MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCILMAN CARNS,
SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN GELLERT, THAT THE SAME QUESTION BE PUT BEFORE THE PARK
BOARD PRIOR TO THE OCTOBER 12 MEETING. MOTION CARRIED.
Mayor Harrison said he had been requested to sign an Interlocal Agreement Regarding
Snohomish County Law and Justice Planning Office, and June Lloyd, the Planner/ 1
Coordinator of the Snohomish County Law and Justice Planning Office, was present
to answer any questions. Chief Foster had reviewed the agreement in a memorandum
and had indicated that the cost to the City in 1977, as its match for the support
of the Snohomish County Planning Office, would be $603.16. A question was raised
about the total budget of the office and Ms. Lloyd distributed copies of the
budget. The question was also raised of representation on the part of the City.
Representation is outlined in the by-laws, but the the by-laws will be redrawn
after the signing of the agreement. A MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCILMAN HERB, SECONDED
BY COUNCILMAN GELLERT, TO AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE. INTERLOCAL_AGREEIENT
REGARDING SNOHOMISH COUNTY LAW AND JUSTICE PLANNING OFFICE, THAT THE CITY'S
FINANCING RESP014SIBILITY OF $603.16 BE MET, AND THAT THE CITY'S COST BE TAKEN FROM
THE POLICE DEPARTMENT FUND. MOTION CARRIED. Councilman Carns commented that
the background material on this had been received just this evening, and he did
not like to expend money without having time to study the material'.
City Planner Joe Wallis said that John Johnson had asked if the Mayor and Council
could go out to view his property on Saturday, September 18. Mr. Johnson's
property had been declared open space, and it had been suggested that he might want
to donate it to the City of Edmonds on his death, as he did intend to donate it to
some foundation or other entity to keep it open space. It was determined that the
Councilmen would meet at Councilman Gellert's home at 8:00 a.m., September 18,
and would then go to Mr. Johnson's property.
Mr. Wallis requested that the hearing on the Comprehensive Policy Plan, scheduled
for September 21, be removed from the agenda and said he would reschedule it at
a later date. The Planning Commission wants to examine it more thoroughly before
making a recommendation. A MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCILMAN GELLERT, SECONDED BY
COUNCILMAN CARNS, THAT THIS ITEM BE DELETED FROM THE AGENDA, TO BE RESCHEDULED BY.
THE CITY PLANNER. MOTION CARRIED.
DISCUSSION ON CLAIM FROM RICHARD WALKER (Continued from September 7) (8:35 p.m.)
M.A.A. Herb Gilbo reviewed the claim. A written report had been distributed to
the Council. City Attorney John Wallace advised that the problem the City faces
insofar as the Council authorizing any expenditure of funds for damage claims is
that there must be liability or a possibility of liability before it can do so.
He said if there is an absence of negligence there would be no liability, that the
whole system of the right of recovery is based upon fault. He said if there is no
fault, there is no duty to pay, and the City would then fall within the State
constitutional provision against gifts of city monies or credit. He said if funds
are spent to pay something for which there is no legal obligation to pay, it cannot
be construed to be anything else but a gift, and that would be a violation of the
State constitutional provision against giving any.of the city's assets, monies,
resources or credit. Councilman Gellert felt there should be some provision for
the rare incidents when neither the City nor the claimant is negligent and asked
if it was not possible to make some kind of provision for expanded liability. Mr.
MOTION: Wallace said he would have to research that. After further discussion A MOTION
(Withdrawn) WAS MADE BY COUNCILMAN CARNS, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST, THAT BECAUSE OF
THE FACT THAT LEGAL COUNSEL HAS ADVISED THAT THE CITY CANNOT PAY CLAIMS FOR
DAMAGES UNLESS THE CITY IS SHOWN TO BE NEGLIGENT, AND BECAUSE THERE IS APPARENTLY
NO NEGLIGENCE ON THE PART OF THE CITY, THAT THE CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES BE DENIED BY THE
CITY COUNCIL. Discussion followed on whether the Council should act on a claim,
and Mr. Wallace advised that the City's policy in the past has been to refer the
claims to the insurance companies and defer to their judgment, but he said the
Council had the right to review any claim. He said if the City were sued, the
insurance company would have to afford the City a defense. COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST
MOTION: THEN WITHDREW HIS SECOND, AND COUNCILMAN CARNS WITHDREW HIS MOTION. A MOTION WAS
MADE BY COUNCILMAN GELLERT, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN CARNS, THAT THE SUBJECT OF
EXPANDED LIABILITY FOR UNFORESEEN DAMAGES BE PLACED ON THE OCTOBER 5 AGENDA.
MOTION CARRIED.
DISCUSSION ON CONSENT AGENDA (9:05 p.m.)
City Clerk Irene Varney Moran reviewed the use of the Consent Agenda to date. She
felt it had been an aid in speeding up the meetings and did not feel a resolution
EDMO NDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
September 14, 1976 - Page 2
SNOHOMISH COUNTY
LAW & JUSTICE PLANNING OFFICE
4TH FLOOR - COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BLDG.
EVERETT, WASHINGTON 98201
TEL. (206) 259-9521
October 14, 1976 u a CO E� U E
D
CITY OF EDJJMONDS
BY.._.. ...... J..._.. ............
CITY 'CLERK
Ms. Irene Varney Moran
Edmonds City Clerk
City of Edmonds
Civic Center
Edmonds, WA 98020
Dear Ms. Moran:
Enclosed is your copy of the fully executed Law & Justice
Planning Interlocal Agreement for your records.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Very truly yours,
June Lloyd
Planner/Coordinator
Snohomish County Law & Justice
Planning Office
JL:dd
Enclosure