OCHAA  EPHRATA CITY COUNCIL  MAYOR BRUCEREIM  MAYOR PRO-TEM WILLIAMCOE  KATILEEN MLISIOI.SARAII MDONNELL, VALII MILLARD.  MATT MOORE. TONY MORA. MARK WANKE CITY ADMINISIRNTOK MIKEWARREN  -AGENDA FOR November 3, 2021-  ZOOM CALL IN--DIAL INPHONE NUMBER 1-253-215-8782, follow prompts  City of Ephrata Meeting ID: 642-397-7833  7:00 PM  REGULAR SESSION 1. Called to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Pledge of Allegiance 4. Recording of! Meeting: No Presentations:  5. Additions or corrections to published Agenda  a. Update on Ephrata School District-Superintendent Tim Payne b. EDC Board of1 Directors Meeting of October 20, 2021  II  CONSENT AGENDA  1. Approval of Claim Fund Bills and Checks Issued 2. Approval of Council Minutes: October 20, 2021 3. Approval of Special Event Application:  a.N Miracle of Main Street/. Jungle Bell Fun Run and Parade- December 11,2021 4. Set Public Hearing for 2022 Budget--November 17,2021, and December 1., 2021  5. Set Public Hearing for November 17,2021--Request to abandon easement at 2266 Cherry Blossom  Drive.  BILLS: Allstot, McDonnell, Wanke    III STAFF.COMMITEE, & AGENCY REPORTS  IV CLOSED RECORD DECISIONS RCWCHAPTERS36 2:OPENPUBLICINPUT: NOTP PERMITTEDI  V  PUBLICHEARINGS 1.Ad Valorem Tax for 2022  VI ORDINANCES & RESOLUTION  1. Ordinançe 21-07 Ad Valorem Tax-2022  2. Ordinance 21-08 Animal Control-Definitions Chapter 8.02 3. Ordinance 21-09 Animal Control-License Requirements Chapter 8.04 4. Ordinance 21-10 Animal Control-Impound Chapter 8.06 5. Ordinance 21-11 Animal Control-Dangerous Dog Chapter 8.08 6. Ordinance 21-12 Animal Control- Miscellaneous Chapter 8.10 7. Ordinance 21-13 Animal Control- Livestock Chapter 8.12 8. Ordinance 21-14 Animal Control Penalties Chapter 8.14  VII ITEMS FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION  VIII ITEMS FOR COUNCIL ACTION  IX CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT  BILLS: Allstot, McDonnell, Wanke    CITY COUNCIL MINUTES  October 20, 2021  City Council of the City of Ephrata, Grant County Washington met in regular session on October 20, 2021. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor This meeting is also available remotely by phone using the ZOOM call in number and Members Present: Mayor Bruce Reim, Mayor Pro Tem William Coe, Council  Bruce Reim. City meeting ID.  members Mark Wanke, Matt Moore, Valli Millard, Tony Mora and City Administrator Mike Warren, City Attorney Katherine Kennison/Anna Franz, Public Works Director Bill Sangster, Community Development Director Dan Leavitt, Community Relations Director Traci Bennett, Fire Chief. Jeremy Burns, Police Chief Kurt Adkinson, and City Clerk/Finance DirectorLeslie  Kathleen Allstot  Staff Present:  Trachsler  Motion to excuse Council member McDonnell. (m/s Allstot/Wanke) Motion carried.  Pledge of Allegiance was said. This meeting is not being recorded.  No public signed up to speak.  Agenda: There were no corrections to the Agenda.  Presentations: Awards Ceremony for events of August 21, 2021. Mayor Reim read a briefnarrative of events regarding the heroic lifesaving actions of several Ephrata Police Officers and Ephrata Firefighters. They responded to a structure fire on Cottage Street and were informed that there were two people in the burning home. Officers were able to coach one individual out of the home before fire rescue arrived on the scene, the second person was in the basement. As soon as firefighters arrived Officer Hufman informed Chief Burns of the location of the second victim. Chief Burns and Lieutenant Yoder immediately entered the burning structure to search for the second victim. They located him on the spiral staircase. Chief Burns drug the victim to safety and Lieutenant Yoder executed a thorough search of the basement for further victims, finding none, he and Chief Burns began to assist with fire suppression. Patient care was immediately    administered to both victims by firefighter personnel. Both were air lifted to medical Mayor Reim commended everyone who was involved in this event and thanked them for  facilities.  their dedication and commitment to this community. Mayoral Award of Professional Excellence was presented to: Police Sergeant Kristopher Todd Hufman Police Officer. Jose Ramirez Police Officer Patrick Canady Deputy Fire Chief Anthony Graaff Fire Captain Colleen Winski Firefighter Casey Severin Medal of Honor Awards were presented to: Fire Lieutenant Maxwell Yoder Fire Chief Jeremy Burns  Council member Mora left the meeting at 7:15 p.m.  Council took a short break to allow people to take pictures and clear the room. Consent Agenda: Motion was made to approve consent agenda. (m/s Moore/Millard)  Motion carried.  Items on the consent agenda are as follows:  Claims #94029 through #94092 in the amount of $166,528.53 including and EFT Manual Checks #86102021, 87102021, 88102021, and 89102021 in the amount  in the amount of $77.04 of$3,638.17  Claims #94025 through #94028 in the amount of $760.50  EFT in the amount of $23,665.13  VOIDED Claim #46665 in the amount of $184.33 VOIDED Claim #46691 in the amount of $460.87 Minutes of the October 06, 2021 Council meeting  Special Event Applications:  American Legion Veterans Day Parade - November 11, 2021 Ephrata High School Homecoming Bonfire and Fireworks - October 20, Set Public Hearing for Ad Valorem Tax - November 3, 2021 at 7:00 p.m. 3rd Quarter Financial Report: The third quarter finance report was presented to Council. Financially, the City is doing very well, the overall revenues are 10% below budget and expenses are 25% below. Director Trachsler reviewed the highlights. Sales tax continues to set record highs and is 100% of budget.  2021    The 3rd quarter saw an uptick in building permits, 75 permits issued with 12 for Splashzone had a successful season. The extreme heat helped to drive attendance up. Comparing actual revenue to expenses, expenses were 73% higher than ERC Re-Roof: Chimney repair and repainting has been completed. The next large property tax payment will come in November and the yearly county shared fuel tax payment was received this month. Division Street has been completed along with 5th and 6th SE and Hilltop. Moratorium on disconnecting delinquent accounts was lifted by the Governor on September 30th. Tomorrow will be our first shut off for non-payment in over 18 Sewer Collection system upgrades are moving forward, no major problems to date. There have been a few delays due to workers coming down with COVID. The engineers are working on the sewer treatment plant upgrades as well as the The City received approval from Public Works Board for a pre-construction loan  new single family residences. revenue coming in.  Fuel Tax is presently 13% above budget.  months.  new reservoir and well.  for the engineering/design for the new reservoir and well.  Staff addressed Council's comments and questions.  2022 Draft Budget Update: Director Trachsler gave a brief update on the 2022 Draft Budget highlighting some of the major projects included and those items that have an Set Annual Fall Leaf Pick-Up - November 15-24, 2021: Administrator Warren reported that each year the city provides curb-side leaf pick-up service to all our residents. This helps to keep the storm drains clear and prevents them from becoming Motion to approve the Fall Leaf Pick-Up for November 15-24, 2021. (m/s  impact on the budget. There is still al lot of refining to be done.  clogged.  Millard/Allstot) Motion carried.  Parkside Estates Phase 2 Major Plat Final Approval: Director Leavitt reported that Parkside Estates Phase 2 Major Plat is a 28 residential lot subdivision and is an extension ofParkside Loop. The final plat conforms with the previously approved preliminary plat. Final approval allows for the filing of the plat with the County Auditor completing the Motion to accept and approve Parkside Estates Phase 2 Major Plat. (m/s Moore/Wanke) ERC Reroof Project - Accept Chimney Repair/Repaint: Work on the ERC Reroof and Repair project began in August with repairs to the chimney. There were a few issues with the quality of work which has been resolved. The painting contractor completed  division of property.  Council discussion ensued, motion carried.  their portion mid-September.    During the tear-off phase, it was discovered that the decking and structural wood was rotten on the backside overhang. This is being evaluated by the architect and will most Motion to accept the Chimney Repair and Chimney Painting on the ERC Reroof Project. Accept Lease Agreement with Ephrata Chamber of Commerce: This lease agreement is for the use of the front office space at the ERC and establishes the fair market value of the use oft this space and the considerations the City receives from the Chamber. Public property that is leased to non-public entities are required to pay Leasehold Excise Tax. This lease agreement falls into that category and establishes the Motion to approve and authorize Administration to execute Lease Agreement with Ephrata Chamber of Commerce. (m/s Wanke/Moore) Council discussion ensued,  likely result in a negotiated contract change order.  (m/s Coe/Allstot) Motion carried.  yearly fee that the leasehold tax is to be calculated on.  motion carried.  City Administrator Report: None at this time.  There being no further business meeting adjourned at 7:35 p.m.  Bruce Reim, Mayor  ATTEST:  Leslie Trachsler, City Clerk    DATE: October18, 2021 To: EDCOfficers, Directors8 & Ex-OfficioDirectors FROM: Brant Mayo, Executivel Director VISION: EconomicPlosperty8: Quality Growth  Grant  MISSION: To workforthe contihuedorderlygrowtnofthecrontcountyeconomy  Econonk ntCounty while improving qualityoflife  BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING 7:00AM' WED. OCTOBER 20,2021! VIRTUALONLY  BOABDMETNGAGENDA  1) Welcome & Call meeting to Order. 2) Approve! Sept. 2021 Board Meeting Minutes.. 3) Review Sept. 2021 Financial Reports.. 4) Remote Worker Certificate. 5) Report on EDC Activities. 6) Unfinished (Old) Business 7) New Business  William Coe Dale Pomeroy Juliann Dodds WSU-AWB-Others Brant Mayo/Staff Brant Mayo  a. Staffing Update  a. DraftBudget 2022 Update  8) Board Member Round Table..  Board Members William Coe  9) Adjourn  20ZIFUNUEDCMEmGs8. EVENTS  Board of Directors Board of Directors Board of Directors Annual Meeting Board of Directors  November17,2021 December15,2021 January19,2022 February16,2022 February16,2021  7:00 AM Virtual 7:00 AM' Virtual 7:00 AM' TBD 7:00 AM TBD 7:10 AM' TBD  6594 PATTON BOULEVARDNE MOSESLAKE, WA98837 IP PHONE: 509-764-6579 IFAX509-765-5161    Our Mission..To bring continued, orderly growth to Grant Our Vision..Tobet the number one resource for business  Grant County Economicl Development Council  County and promote quality of life  development Board of Directors Meeting Minutes September 15, 2021  Meeting called to order: 7:03 a.m. by President Gregg Fletcher. Freidig, Juliann Dodds, Juanita Richards, Peggy Nevsimal  Directors Present: Caralyn Bess, Dr. Terry! Leas, Dale Pomeroy, Marvin Price, Jim McCullough, Louis Szablya, Brian Meiners, Gregg Fletcher, Rob Jones, Katherine Ryf, Lars Leland, William Coe, Scott  Directors Absent: Lisa Karstetter, Cash Brown, Katherine Ryf, Cash Brown, Don Kersey, Curt Morris  Ex-Officio Directors Present: Karen Liebriecht Ex-Officio Directors Absent: Darcil Kleyn  Staff Present: Brant Mayo, Allan Peterson, Rebecca Nelson  Guests Present: Dr. Sara Thompson Tweedy, LeAnne Parton, Barry Lawson, Melissa Bethel, Charlse Featherstone, Lora Wood, Chuck Sutton, Maynard Spell, Alicia Deveraux, Susan Mann Board Meeting Minutes for. July 2021: Dr. Terry Leas moved to approve the July minutes and Louis Financial Report for. July 2021: Juliann Dodds presented the financial statement drafts, and there are no concerns at this time. AL brief audit update is still in progress; we expect to see draft  Szablya seconded; the motion passed. financials by the end of the month. Report on GCEDC Activities:  Peterson updated the! board on SBDC one-on-one meetings.  Mayo gave an update on staff changes regarding Joseph Akers resignation and Rachelle Mayo met with the county regarding the upcoming clerical changes tot the SIP program. Mayo asked thel board tol keepi in mind any upcoming drone work needed this year should There are several active projects with which the EDC continues to work.  Lange as the new hire.  be scheduled before the weather begins to turn.  Unfinished (Old) Business:  Due to the continued COVID restrictions and mandates, the economic summit is currently  on hold until further notice.  Mayo also explained the board will continue to meet via zoom.  New Business:  6594 Patton Boulevard NE I Moses Lake, WA 98837 IPhone: 509.764.6579    Our Mission.Tol bring continued, orderly growth to Grant Our Vision..To bet the number one resource for business  Grant County Economicl Development Council Staffing update Community Updates:  County and promote quality of life  development  Gregg Fletcher, Confluence Health - spikes in COVID cases have impacted the volume of patients at the clinic. The vaccine mandate has caused ai few resignations in staff. Dr. Thompson Tweedy, BBCC - resignation of instructor has caused the loss of a program Dale Pomeroy, Pomeroy Farms - Warden is currently working on infrastructure and is the Lars Leland, Port of Mattawa - lots of growth and new retail in Mattawa. Juliann Dodds, Banner Bank - there has been a significant push back from staff due to new William Coe, City of Ephrata - Ephratal housing permits have been a record high. LeAnne Parton, BBCC Foundation - has begun the Thanksgiving campaign and is excited to Eric Skaug, Skaug Bros - retail at the flooring company is up 20% and in need of more Rob. Jones, Commissioner, District 2 - fair finished up with record number in attendance. Alicia Deveraux, Skill Source - there are many new programs to help develop skills or Juanita Richards, Horizon Credit Union - some of the employees are choosing to leavea Brian Meiners, Basic American Foods -) yield and quality in crops is down this year due to  until they fill position. hub for the basin. Biden mandates.  get students back on campus. employees.  update existing skills for employment. jobl based on personal choice not to gett the vaccine.  the extreme heat waves.  Meeting Adjourned: at 8:03 a.m. by President Gregg Fletcher  Gregg Fletcher, President  Dale Pomeroy, Secretary  6594 Patton Boulevard NE MosesLake, WA 98837 IPhone: 509.764.6579        2:52PM 10/06/21 Accrual Basis  Grant County EDC Balance Sheet Asofs September 30, 2021  Sep 30,21  ASSETS Current Assets Checking/Savings 1000-1 Umqua CD- - 6624 1001 Banner Cheçking- 5426 1002 Banner Saving-8 8750 1007- GESA Savings- - 0825 1008- GESA money market-1 1047 1050- Umpqua Bank 5257 Total Checking/Savings Accounts Receivable Total Current Assets Fixed Assets TOTALASSETS LIABILITIES & EQUITY Liabilities Current Liabilities Long Term Liabilities 2300. Deferred Revenue Total Long Terml Liabilities Totall Liabilities Equity  43,985.16 25,641.84 320,242.09 5.00 260,381.80 5,650.00 655,905.89 27,650.00 683,555.89 4,002.56 687,558.45 31,800.88 69,500.00 69,500.00 101,300.88 586,257.57 687,558.45  TOTALLIABILITIES, & EQUITY  Page 1    2:51PM 10/06/21 Accrual Basis  Grant County EDC Profit & Loss September 2021  A pren  Sep21  Ordinaryl Income/Expense Inçome 4028. Membership Dues Total Income Gross Profit Expense 6000. Salaries 6010. Insurance 6005-1 Reimbursed Health Care 6005-3. Property and. Auto Total 6010. Insurance 6076. Employee Retirement 6080. Taxes 6500. Automobile 6525. Supplies 6530- Postage 6531 Garbage 6535. Professional Fee/Dues 6540- Rent/Utilites 6545. Telephone 7000. Marketing 7502 Merchant Service Fees Total Expense Net Ordinary Income Net Income  19,900.00 19,900.00 19,900.00 15,166.94 303.50 1,567.00 1,870.50 881.68 1,379.65 110.51 90.29 13.42 19.31 1,731.67 783.00 373.57 1,460.00 59.38 23,939.92 (4,039.92) (4,039.92)  Pagel    2:55PM 10/06/21 Accruai Basis  Grant County EDC Profit & Loss Budget Performance October: 2021 Oct21 Budget 0.00 0.00 6,250.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8,585.95 303.50 498.10 806.46 103.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.62 1.76 0.00 139.65 783.00 0.00 0.00  Jan-Oct21 YTDBudgel Annual Budget  Ordinary) Income/Expense Income 4028. Membership Dues 4029. SIPI Income 4030. Grant revenue 4035. CHII Income Totall Income Gross Profit Expense 5000. Bank Service Charge 6000- Salaries 6010 Insurance 6076 Employee Retirement 6080- Taxes 6500- Automobile 6505. TniangComercaD.s 6515 Mal/Patertainment 6517- Equipment 6525. Supplies 6530. Postage 6531 Garbage 6535 Professional Fea/Dues 6540. Rent/Utilites 6545. Telephone 6550. Travel  34,800.00 262,378.00 264,300.00 296,800.00  20,000.00 12,100.00 0.00  25,000.00 0,00  25,000.00 0.00  41,050.00 294,478.00 289,300.00 321,800.00 41,050.00 294,478.00 289,300.00 321,800.00  2.70 17,132.25 201,616.95 1,212.50 991.67 1,625.00 499.99 1,416.67 375.00 1,000.00 333.33 41.67 12,250.01 816.67 386.67 0.00  0.00 9,937.08 8,762,17 17,979.28 38,705.63 1,146.96 597.48 7,469.47 1,461.21 125.18 30.26 36,845.68 8,319.06 3,403.03 263.22  154.28 197,572.50 254,587.00 12,125.00 9,916.66 16,250.00 20,100.02 11,266.66 4,750.00 4,000.00 3,333.34 416.66 65,666.66 8,166.66 3,866.66 7,000.00  161.93 14,550.00 11,900.00 19,500.00 21,200.00 12,100.00 5,750.00 4,000.00 4,000.00 500.00 76,000.00 9,800.00 4,640.00 7,000.00  Pagel    2:55PM 10/06/21 AccrualBasla  Grant County EDC Profit & Loss Budget Performance October 2021 Oct:21 Budget 0.00 0.00 60.00 351.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 50.00 11,283.19 (11,283.19) 0.00 0.00 0.00 (11,283.19)  Jan-Oct21 YTDI Budget Armual Budget  66900. Reconciliation! Discrepancies 7000. Marketing 7075. Trades Shows 7501 Miscelaneous! Expense 7502. Merchant Service Fees Totall Expense Net Ordinary Income Other Income/Expense Other Income Other Expense Net Otherl Incone Net Income  0.00 4,650.00 1,147.69 0.00 358.75  0.00 8,516.66 1,500.00 0.00 500.00  0.00 9,220.00 1,500.00 0.00 600.00  38,485.80 342,819.10 375,101.76 457,008.93 2,564.20 (48,341.10) (85,801.76) (135,208.93)  125.00 415,474.97 0.00 338,820.00 125.00 76,654.97 2,689.20 28,313.87 (35,750.76)  50,051.00 141,568.00 0.00 50,051.00 141,568.00  0.00 6,359.07  Page2    Our Misslon.Tol bring continued, orderly growth to Grant Our Vislon.-Tol be the number one resource for business  Grant County Economicl Development Couneil  County and promote quality of life  development  Director's Report September 7,2021 to October 8,2021  Existing Business Development Trade Mission Update 125 Visits inj past 7months Business Recruitment and Attraction  Staff Update- Rachelle Lange, Contracted Employees  Project Zion - Manufacturing - Site visits. Close to decision. Looking in Quincy area Project Grapevine- Agriculture - Had site visit in Grant County, continuing to visit Project Moonlight- Food Manufacturer-F Project submitted to state Project New FalconManufarture/Polpouction-Supmited to the State, had follow up to do Project Tera - Manufacturing - request from the state on possible sites Project Raven - Food/Beverage Processor - Submitted several sites Project Coulomb- Clean Tech -Approached by Site Selector regarding specific area- continuing follow up with site selector, site visit early October Project Z - Aerospace - Submitted several site for Grant County Project Diamond- Production Facility - located sitei in Grant County Project Y- Clean Tech- Company has specific site in mind Project High Bar- Manufacturing, 2 site visits, several calls Project Riser- Clean Tech - Site visit, several meetings, continued dialog Project Falcon - Clean Tech - Engaged with Site Selector Project Beams-Clean Tech Project Kane - Food processing Project Black Falcon - Advanced Manufacturing Project Vision - Clean Tech - Call with Dept of Comm Project Jane - Aerospace Manufacturing Project SoRna - Clean Energy Transportation Project Singularity - Clean Precision Machining Co. Phone Call with German Co, starting the process touch base in Jan Phone Calls with Clean Energy Project looking in Grant Co.  for the site selector  Workforce Development Workforce Alliance Meetings NCWD Board Meetings  6594PATTON! BOULEVARD! NEIMOSESLAKE, "P-MMIE-N    Our Mission.-To bring continued, orderly growth to Grant Our Vislon.Tol be the number one resource for business  Grant County Economicl Development Counoil  County and promote quality of life  development  Infrastructure Development Calls with PUD on current Projects Columbia Basin RR Call Meeting with County on SIP Conversation with Natural Gas Company Communication and Investor Development Department of Comm - Visit with Staff Grant Co. Fair Grounds Planning Assoc Grant Co Homebuilders ML Rotary Presentation Conversation with potential development (solar) Calls with Real Estate Developers Grant County Planning Dept visits ADO Data Collection Webinar and Calls CBH working on Grant Magazine International Trade Call Drone work and scheduling WSBDC Weekly Calls Software Demo  WEDA Weekly Calls and Legislative Call Several CHI Calls and Meeting Meeting with Confluence Healthcare Kiwanis Meeting Grant Col Industrial Alliance ML City Visit with Muni Director and City Manager Grant County Health District Call Retall and Services Development SBDC1on1 Meetings COLI Submitted ReCon Dec. 2021planning  6594 PATTON! BOULEVARD! NEI MOSESI LAKE, "A9887/PaNES09764679/.59785161    AWWB  INSTITUTE  WASHINGION  RURAL ONLINE NITIATIVE  The Washington Rural Online Initiative (wROl)isa specialized training program that can equip rural residents with the: skills they need to compete for remote on-line jobs. Access to remote jobs with prestigious companies will create opportunities fory young people Employers across Washington are! hanging Help Wanted signs andr rural communities areas source ofmuch  without ther need to move. needed talent. 173% Remote work increase  86.2% Households haveb broadband  REMOTE WORK CERTIFICATE arrangement that does notr require employees to work fromacentrall location, instead allowing a worker to complete their assigned duties from home or other self-selected location. Remote work opportunities havei increased by: 173%: since 2005, andt the pandemic has dramatically accelerated the: shift to remote work which means that there are employment opportunities Washington State University Extension andi the AW8 Institute are partnering with Utah State University Extension to offer the Remote Worker Certificate to Washingtonresidents top prepare themt tot take advantage The 9 modules oft this 4-week course willl help) youbuild skills that make ane effective remote worker, whether as ane employee, entrepreneur, or freelancer.  believe because  Remote work  this of J  "Treally  (alsol known as telework)isawork  program, it gave me a leg up.  JUSTINE SALAZAR, AN OKANOGAN COUNTY RESIDENT WHO OBTAINED AH REMOTE WORK POSITION AFTER COMPLETINGII HE COURSE  regardless of where youl live.  ASTATEWIDE PARTNERSHIP  ofremote workopportunities.  REMOTE INITIATIVE  ONLINE WSIISSINE AWB"  UNEIN  INSTITUTE    WASHINGTON RURAL ONLINE NITIATIVE  PROGRAM DETAILS over four weeks  ENROLL TODAY To register, email course coordinator Brian Andersonat mscoAcaaNsause  The course will take approximately 30 hours There willl be one interactive workshop each week with other students and coaches The course worki is spread over 9r modules. Your willl be assignedacoacht to provide support Participants will receive a course certificate upon completion andj join ag growing network of past andj present participants, where you can sharei information and tips moving forward  during the course  ELIGIBILITY  Participation int the course requires: Areliable broadbandi internet connection Your download: speeds should be at least 10 Mbps Ifyour speed is below that youv will needt to finda ap publicly available network. Webo camera andr microphone Basic computer proficiency, including the abilityt to: Send an email  Avistafuadaton stcû  REMOTE ONLINE INITIATIVE.  WIMNNINE UNINFRNIIY  AWB" 1NSTITUTE  Download or upload files from your desktop Dol basic tasksi inav word processing ands spreadsheet program Microsoft Word, Google Docs, etc. Funds from Avistal Foundation: are availablei tol help overcome eligibility requirements for Avista service  Companies interested inl hiring Remote Worker Certificate graduates should contact AWBI Institute andconsider listingt their Remote WorkEmployment opportunitieson www.washingtonworkforeportalorg  teritoryparticipants.    Dasondirovemmen tal Studies and Services WASIINGIONSCAU IVIISTIY  EXTENSION  Evalua àtion Summary Report  Utah State University's Mastew no  Worker Professional Course    INTRODUCTION  In the Fall of2020, Washington State University's Division of Governmental Studies and Services (DGSS) entered into a formal agreement between WSU and the Columbia Basin Foundation to develop and implement a process to assess the efficacy ofUtah State University's Remote Worker curriculum. The project was led by DGSS in collaboration with representatives of Microsoft and the Greater Wenatchee Area Technology Alliance Washington State University's Division of Governmental Studies and Services (DGSS) is an outreach unit sponsored by WSU Extension and the College of Arts and Sciençes that draws upon faculty, staff and student capacity from across the University. For over fifty years, thei mission of DGSS has been to translate the resources ofthe University for public benefit through research, technical assistance and training with communities, with state, local, federal and tribal government agencies, and with select non-governmental entities. DGSS has significant experience with qualitative & quantitative methods, survey research, program evaluation and technical The goals for assessment of the Utah State University (USU) Rural Online Initiative Master Remote Work Professional Certifiçation course were to evaluate the efficacy of the program and to identify possible needs or opportunities to replace, augment or enhance the curriculum to benefit residents oft the GWATA area and the State ofWashington. Approximately thirty participants were recruited to participate in the program over the course of two months. Their participation was supported by WSU Extension, AWB, and Confluence Health. The design for the work included recruitment of both students and a pilot group of peer evaluators to participate in the USU course, assessment of their experience and perceptions of that course, assessment of supervisor perceptions ofthe impacts of course participation, and development ofap proposed plan to broadly implement a Washington Remote  (GWATA) and1 the Association of Washington Businesses (AWB).  assistance for multiple agencies at various levels.  Worker training program. METHODOLOGY  Participants in the program were recruited from and assigned to three categories: 1)GWATA recruited Confluence Health employees, 2) WSU identified Extension personnel, and 3)a group for which WSU Extension worked with the Association of Washington Business to solicit assistance from North Central Washington WorkSource tos secure rural unemployed and underemployed residents from Adams, Chelan, Grant, and Okanogan counties. The project plan included approximately ten (10) participants from each category for a total of no more than thirty (30) participants comprised the peer evaluation group. Members of this pilot group participated in one of two offerings oft the Utah State University (USU) Remote Worker course, for a total of16 participants in each course during October and November 2020. It should be noted that the peer evaluation group was not required to pay the fee usually associated with the course, and that a majority are currently working remotely and have been for some time. These two qualities may impact their evaluations of the course compared tot typical students. Where appropriate, the analysis examines those participants without remote work experience Participant evaluation of the course content and delivery included a multi-modal approach consisting of both quantitative and qualitative data çollection. DGSS developed on-line surveys, which were made available to participants via weblink on a weekly basis. Participating peer evaluators also engaged in category-specific qualitative assessment "conversations" at three points during each course. For the first group, these conversations occurred after the first two weeks of the course, at the conclusion oft the course, and two weeks after conçlusion of the course. For the second group, the timing oft the assessment conversations varied slightly due to the Thanksgiving' holiday. These conversations occurred two weeks after the start of the course, the final week of  separately to understand their experience.    the course, and 10 days after the course ended. The surveys and conversations included topic areas such as quality ofcourse content and assignments, assessment of weekly interactive workshops, quality of instruction and coaching and ease of use of the platform for participants. Lastly, DGSS researchers conducted secondary analysis of data collected by USU from our participants as part of their regular course protocol. This data included pre-test and post-test scores from our participants on Module quizzes, and an exit survey given to all participants by USU. DGSS surveys and the qualitative conversations were used to evaluate how well the USU programming addressed remote worker training, whether there is a needopportunity to replace that curriculum with a Washington product, and where there may be opportunities to augment or supplement that training, as in with pre-course skills training or with remote supervisor training. In addition, at the two weeks post-completion mark, available supervisors for the participating peer evaluators were asked via an online questionnaire to share any perceptions they had oft the impact of the course on participant performance. Secondary analysis of USU data was performed to examine participant's perceptions ofl knowledge gain on specific abilities necessary for remote work, whether respondents felt empowered to seek remote work, and whether performance on module quizzes improved from the pretest to post-test. The report which follows includes assessment data (quantitative and qualitative) and analysis based on those questionnaires, the conversations that took place during the course and data from the USU program pre-post  surveys, exit survey and participant questionnaires.  SECONDARY ANALYSIS OF UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY DATA  Master Remote Worker Professional Course (MRWP) Module Pre-Test and Post-Test Scores For each module, participants were: required to take a pre-test and post-test to assess their knowledge in the topic  area. The total number of participants across both cohorts for each module are below.  Table 1: Total. Participants per Module  Module Communication Compliance CriticalThinking Productivity RemoteJobl Development Teams Workday Workflow  Total 26 25 24 25 25 27 28 26  Mean test scores increased across all modules from the pre-test to the post-test. The largest change from pre-test top post-test was for the productivity module, followed by the compliance and workday modules. Dependent sample t-tests were conducted to determine whether these differences were significant. For all modules except Workflow, as significant difference exists between pre-test and post-test scores (please note negative T values indicate postscores were. higher than pre-scores). For these modules, post-test scores were significantly higher than pre-test scores, suggesting that the training is improving knowledge in these areas (See Figure 1 and Table 2  Below).  2    Figure 1: Mean Pre-les! and Post-tes! Scores by Module  Pre-Test Post-Test  25% 20% 19% 18% 15% 10% 5% 0%  23% 21%  19% 16%  19% 17%  20% 16%  18% 19%  18% 16%  18% 18%  Communication Compliance Critical Thinking Productivity Remote. Job Teams  Workday Workflow  Development  Table. 2: Paired T-Test Results by Module  Module Communication Compliance CriticalT Thinking Productivity Remote, Job Development Teams Workday Workflow  T(d) -2.4457(25) -8.1217(24) -6.9911(23) -10.937(24) -3.154(24) -1.5003 (26) -5.7153(27) -2.0116(25)  P-Value .021 .000 .000 .000 .004 .014 .000 .055  3    MASTER REMOTE WORKER PROFESSIONAL COURSE EXIT SURVEY  Demographics of Participants  The MRWP course included exit surveys, which were completed by 25 of the 27 participants:15 int the October cohort and 10 ini thel November cohort. The majority of participants across both cohorts were female (13, 52%) and white (17, 68%). With regard to participant age, the highest percentage of participants (9, 36%) fell into the 50 or over category. Ten participants (40%) had a graduate or professional degree. Nearly three-fourths (18, 72%) had remote work experience before enrolling in the course, and 40%(10) indicated they would seek remote work  after this course.  Satisfaction with Course Elements  Overall, there was a high level ofreported satisfaction with the course. A strong majority of participants indicated they were either satisfied or very satisfied with program coordinators, online learning modules, module assignments, module assessments, virtual workshops and slack channel communication. When comparing across these different aspects, it appears that participants were less satisfied with virtual  workshops and module assignments overall.  Figure 2: Overall Satisfaction with Course  Very Dissatistied BDissatisfied Neutral Satisfied Very Satisfied  100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 1294 10% 4% 0% 0% Program Coordinators  48% 36%  48% 32%  48% 44%  40% 32% 2094 8% 0% Module Assignments  40940%  36486% 24% 4% 0% Assessments  12% 8% 0%  4% 0% Onlinel Learning Modules  4%4% 0% Communication  Module Virtual Workshops SlackChannel    Value as a Remote Worker  The exit survey asked participants whether they felt that their value as a remote worker improved and whether they felt more empowered to seek remote work after completing the course. Nearly all participants (over 90%)  answered affirmatively to both questions.  Figure 3: Value as a Remote Worker  Yes No  100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%  8%  8%  Do you feel that your value as a remote Do you feel more empowered to seek worker has improved after completing remote work after completing the ROI the ROI program's online certificate program's online certificate course(s)?  course(s)?  Level ofl Improvement in Searching for Remote Work and Generating Income through Remote Work When examining the impact of the course on participants' perceptions ofi improvement in their ability to search for remote work and generate income through remote work, the majority of participants indicated that this ability Figure 4: Level of Improvement in Searching, for Remole Work and Generating Income through Remote Work  stayed the same.  Stayed the Same Somewhat Better Muchbetter  100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%  68%  52%  24% 24%  20% 1770  Search for ar remote job  Generate income throughremote work    While these responses may suggest that the course is not having the hoped-for impact, cross tabulations between these questions and whether aj participant had prior remote work experience suggest important differences between these groups. Table 31 below indicates that those who had no prior remote work experience more often answered that their ability to: search for ar remote job was much better after completing the course. Table 41 below indicates that those without prior remote work experience responded that their ability to generate income from  remote work was much better.  Table. 3: Prior Remote Experience and Ability to. Search for Remote Job  "Please indicate your level of improvement in your ability to manage your career. My ability 10: Search for a remote job. Much better Somewhat better Stayed the same 2 28.6% 4 22.2% 6 24%  'Havej you had remote work experience before enrolling in this course?" No Yes Total  Total 7 100% 18 100% 25 100%  5 71.4% 1 5.6% 6 24%  0 0% 13 72.2% 13 52%  Figure 5: Prior Remote Experience and Ability to Search) for Remote Job Prior remote work experience ENo prior remote work experience  100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%  71.4%  72.2%  28.6% 72.2%  5.6% Muchbetter  0.0% Stayed the Same  Somewhat better    Table 4: Prior Remote Work Experience and Ability to Generate Income through Remote Work  'Please indicate your level of improvement in your ability to manage your career. My ability 10: Generate income through remote work." 14.3% 2 11.1% 3 12%  'Have) you had remote work experience before enrolling in this course?"  Total  Much better Somewhat better Stayed the same  No Yes Total  4 57.1% I 5.6% 5 20%  2 28.6% 15 83.3% 17 68%  7 100% 18 100% 25 100%  Figure 6: Prior Remote Work. Experience and. Ability to Generating Income through Remote Work  Prior remote work experience No prior remote work experience  100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%  0370  57%  29%  11% Somewhat better  6% Muchbetter  Stayed the Same  7    Level of Improvement in Ability to Use Online Technology  When asked about improvement in their ability to use online technology, the majority ofrespondents indicated their ability stayed the same for demonstrating a task by sharing their screen, effectively explaining a task in written format, and sharing a document over video conferencing. The greatest improvement was reported for using team-messaging software with over 50% reporting that their ability to use this tool was much better. This was followed by using online project management software (36% much better and 28% somewhat better) and communicating through video conferencing (32% much  better and 28% somewhat better).  Figure 7: Level of Improvement in Ability to Use Online Technology  Stayed the Same Somewhat Better Muchbetter  100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 56% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%  56%  60%  52%  48% 40% 32% 32% 2470 28% 20% 20%  48% 28%  36% 36% 28%  24% 20%  24% 28% 16%  20%  Demonstrate a Effectively Communicating Share Edit documents Sharea Uset team Use online task bysharing explain atask throughvideo documents usingcloud documentover messaging project  my screen inwritten conterencing using cloud software  video conterencing  software management  format  software  software  Responses tot these questions do seem to differ based on prior remote work experience. For example, while a majority of overall respondents indicated that their ability to share a document over video conferencing stayed the same, cross tabulations show that while 72.2% of those with prior remote work experience indicated this ability stayed the same, only 28.6% of those without prior remote work experience reported no change in this ability. Almost 43% of them reported that this ability was much better (See Table 5 Below). As can be seen in Table 6 below, while only 11.1% oft those with remote work experience indicated that their ability to demonstrate a task by sharing their screen is much better, 57.1% oft those without prior remote work experience indiçated this ability is much better. Although the majority of respondents indicated their ability to use team messaging was much better, Table 71 below illustrates that 85.7% of those without prior remote work experience said their team messaging ability was much better compared to slightly more than a third of those without prior remote work  (38.9%).  8    Table. 5: Prior Remote Work Experience and Improvement in. Sharing Document Over Video Conferencing  'Please indicate your level of improvement inj your ability to use online technology inj your professional and personal life. My ability to: Share aa document over video conferencing. Much better Somewhat better Stayed the same  'Have) youl had remote work experience before enrolling in this course?" No Yes Total  Total 7 100% 18 100% 25 100%  3 42.9% 3 16.7% 6 24%  2 28.6% 2 11.1% 4 16%  2 28.6% 13 72.2% 15 60%  Figure 8: Prior Remote Work Experience and Improvement in Abilityto Share a Document over Video  Conferencing  Prior remote work experience No prior remote work experience  100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%  72.2%  42.9% 16.7% Muchbetter  28.6% 11.1% Somewhat better  28.6%  Stayed the Same  9    Table 6: Prior Remote Experience and Ability to Demonstrate a Task by Sharing My Screen  "Please indicate your level of improvement inj your ability to communicate digitally inj your professional. and personal life. My ability t0: Demonstrate a task bysharing my screen. Much better Somewhat better Stayed the same 3 42.9% 2 11.1% 5 20%  Have you had remote work experience before enrolling in this course?'  Total  No Yes Total  4 57.1% 2 11.1% 6 24%  0 0% 14 77.8% 14 56%  7 100% 18 100% 25 100%  Figure 9: Prior Remote Work Experience Ability to Share a Task by Sharing my Screen  Prior remote work experience No prior remote work experience  100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%  77.8%  57.1%  42.9%  11.1% Muchbetter  11.1% Somewhat better  0.0% Stayed the Same  10    Table 7: Prior Remote Work and Ability to Use Team Messaging. Software  "Please indicate your level of improvement inj your ability to use online technology inj your profèssional and personal life. Myabilityt 10: Use team messaging. sofware (ie., Slack) 10 communicate. Much better Somewhat better Stayed the same 0 0% 5 27.8% 5 20%  'Have you) had remote work experience before enrolling in this course?'  Total  No Yes Total  6 85.7% 7 38.9% 13 52%  7 100% 18 100% 25 100%  14.3% 6 33.3% 7 28%  Figure 10: Prior Remote Work. Experience and. Ability to Use Team Messaging Soflware  Prior remote work experience No prior remote work experience  100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%  85.7%  38.9%  27.8%  14.3% Stayed the Same  0.0% Somewhat better  Much better  Conclusions on MRWP Course Exit Survey  Overall, there is high amount of satisfaction with various aspects of the course. When examining improvement in specific skills, it appears that there was not much reported improvement in several skills covered ini the course when examining the data overall. However, this masks key differences between those who have had prior remote  11    experience and those who have not. Cross tabulation ofi improvements on abilities by remote work experience reveals that for several skills, a vast majority of those without prior remote work experience report that these abilities were much better after taking the course. Because the target audience for this training is those with limited or no remote work experience, this suggests that the training is effectively improving skills for this group.  DGSS DATA COLLECTION DGSS Surveys Methods  Ina addition to the surveys conducted by USU at the beginning and end of1 the course, the evaluation team surveyed course participants weekly, and conducted a final exit survey. Though many of the questions were similar between the three participant groups (Confluence, Extension, and North Central Washington), some questions were adapted to reflect the different employment circumstances between the three groups. All questions in the final survey were identical for all groups. The following analysis focuses on perceptions of the onboarding process, course tools and structure, and quality of the content. Because the target audience for this course is individuals who are seeking remote work, this analysis pays particular attention to the perspectives oft the NC WA One area of analysis that was examined was participants' perceptions of the course tools and structure. For instance, respondents were asked How easy was it to onboard (register and gel set up)j for participation in this course? Over two thirds oft those who responded indicated that the onboarding process was extremely easy or somewhat easy. Figure 1 below shows the breakdown by group. It should be noted that almost 20%of  group. Onboarding  participants found onboarding to be somewhat difficult or extremely difficult.  Figure 11: Ease ofo onboarding Somewhat easy Extremely difficult  Extremely Easy Somewhat difficult  Neither easy nor difficult  100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%  80%  38%  22%22%  20% 0%0% 0.0% Confluence  23% 14% 999.1% Total  11.1% NCWA  139132.5% Extension  12    Course Tools  Respondents were also asked about the software tools they used as part of this course, which included Canvas, Zoom, Trello, and Slack. Students were expected to complete all course activities using at least one software tool and sometimes a combination of several tools, underscoring the importance of having and possibly increasing their skillset in using the tools. Some NC WA participants faced a steeper learning curve due to varying levels of familiarity with the tools prior to the course. Fori instance, while all the NC WA participants indicated that they were not at all familiar with Slack, just 22.2% oft these participants indicated they were not at some level familiar  with Zoom.  Figure 12: Familiarity with tools Slack Trello Canvas Zoom  100% 100% 90% 88% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%  56%  33%  22% 13% 11% 0%  22% 11% 0%0%  22% 0% 0%  0% 0% 0% 0% SlighilyFamiliar  Not at all familiar  Somewhat familiar Moderately familiar Extremely familiar  After the first week of the course, when the online tools were introduced, respondents were asked toi indicate their level of agreement with several statements about the course tools. These statements included: Iunderstand how to use the course tools t0 complete course assignments and attend the weekly interactive workshops; the course lools are user-friendly; the instruction Ireceived on the use of the course tools was clear and complete; and Istill have questions about how to use the course tools. Among the NC WA participants, responses indicate a generally high level of agreement 88.9% strongly agree or somewhat agree that they understand how to use the tools to complete course assignments. This does not mean that participants were completely comfortable with use of the course tools as 22% responded that they still had questions about how to use the tools. Ini the final survey, respondents were presented a list of challenges they might have faced in completing the course. Response options included: the technology toolslapplications (ie., Zoom, Slack, Trello, Canvas) were new to me, and the lechnology loolslapplications were difficult to use. Of the respondents who completed the final survey, 30.6% indicated that the new technology tools used in the course were a challenge. No respondents  indiçated that the tools/applications were difficult to use.  13    Overall, thel NC WA participants had a positive response to the course tools and their ability to use them. This is particularly important for the NC WA group that is not currently employed remotely and may have limited experience with the tools that are used by companies to coordinate with remote workers.  Curriculum--The Modules  The course was organized into nine modules, with three modules assigned per week of the course. To evaluate the quality of the content, respondents were asked their level of agreement with several statements about each module. For this analysis, we will focus on responses to two statements: The material covered in this module helped prepare me, for remote work, and the assignments and materials associated with this module were ofhigh quality. This component of the report is again focused on responses from NC WA participants. NC WA participants evaluated the modules very highly. For modules 1-7, all NC WA respondents indicated that they strongly agreed or somewhat agreed that the modules prepared them for remote work, and that the assignments and materials were of high quality. For modules 8 and 9, 71.4% of respondents agreed on some level that the modules were of high quality, with the rest neither agreeing nor disagreeing. Among WSU Extension and Confluence participants, employed individuals who are currently working remotely, evaluations of the curriculum were less uniformly positive however, over halfofthese respondents strongly agreed or somewhat agreed that the modules were of high quality, with the exception of Module 2 (Communications), for which only 42.9% participants agreed that it was of high quality. This suggests that even those with remote work experience see the All participant groups were also asked: Understanding that it costs $199 to enroll, would you recommend. taking this course to aj friend? Over two thirds (68.4%) said they would definitely recommend or probably recommend Supervisors of participants working at Confluence Health were also surveyed. Invitations were sent to four supervisors, and two responded with one not completing the entire questionnaire. With such low numbers of respondents toi this survey, results should be interpreted with caution. The supervisor who completed the entire survey did indiçate that they thought their employees would benefit from this training, that the employee who took the course had become more confident in their ability to work remotely, and had improved in their timeliness. In addition, the respondent also agreed that supervisors at their company would benefit from at training on how to be a better remote supervisor. While this evidence is anecdotal, it does indicate positive changes in Overall, the: surveys reveal that most participants of the course rated the onboarding process and modules positively. While some were unfamiliar with the course tools initially and found them to be a challenge, after the first week most were confident that they could use them effectively. Lastly, over two thirds of participants would recommend this course to a friend at the price of$199, again suggesting that they found it to be a valuable course. Originally, three assessment conversations were planned with each of our three groups (WSU Extension, North Central Washington, and Confluence Health) for a total of 18 assessment conversations. However, for two sessions, no one participated ini the Zoom sessions, so a total of 16 assessment conversations took place, each  value of the content. Recommending the Course the course at that price point. Supervisor Survey  participants of the course. Survey Conclusions  Assessment Conversations  14    lasting approximately 30 minutes. Total participants for each session typically ranged from two to four participants. Assessment conversations were semi-structured with questions designed to facilitate conversation on key topics ofinterest to the evaluation team. Questions asked for each session and group are included in the table  below.  Issues Identified by Participants  Onboarding Process/Learning Tools in Modules 1&2  Itisi important to note that the while thel North Central Washington groups indicated that the onboarding process for the course went smoothly, participants from other groups indicated there was a knowledge gap for some participants which slowed the onboarding process. While North Central Washington participants were excited to learn new tools through the course (Slack, Canvas, Trello, etc.) and indicated that this process went well, Extension and Confluence Health participants reported that they were called upon to assist those who were unfamiliar with the various tools and learning management system int the beginning of the course in order to effectively work together on team assignments and complete those assignments on time. One Extension participant suggested "maybe make first week not sO heavy with modules..maybe one module to get feet wet on platform: people's lives right now more chaotic/many competing priorities ease people into it" (November 18, Additionally, one participant noted that they had issues using some of the course elements and received little help from program coordinators with addressing the issues. This participant stated that some course content and features were not available on Mac's Safari browser and course designers "didn't do due diligence to test on various platforms and browsers" (November 30, 2020). When trying to resolve these technical issues with program coordinators, this participant received little help and at one point was told, "T can see it,I don'tknow why you can't" (November 30, 2020). This participant was able to find their own work-around to thei issue (by using another browser) but was frustrated with the experience. In an email to the evaluation team, aj participant who was unable to complete the course stated that they also! had technology issues. This participant was told that their older Mac was not capable ofrunning course content and recommended that course designers/nstructors  2020).  better communicate technology requirements prior to the course.  15    Table 8: Assessment Questions by Group Firs! Session/Second. Session Questions What is your overall impression oft the course so far? Do you believe the training so far has been useful for those already doing remote work? Doy you believe the training as a whole would be useful for those interestedi in becoming remote workers? Please clarify... What would you say. was the most useful portion oft the training so far? Do you feel it was adequately covered? What elements oft the training so far have you actually tried/applied inj your own life outside the context of this course? Are there any components which you would like tol have spent How would you describe your interaction with the coaches? Dos youl have any suggestions or comments for us as we assess the What was your opinion of the interactive session? Was itl helpful, What was the value oft this course in your goal of obtaining How have you benefited from this course? Are there any topics/tools you feel your need more familiarity with before working remotely? The cost oft the course is currently $199, would you recommend this course for someone working remotely? What was the value ofthis course for people who are already working remotely? Ify you were going toi improve this course for people already working remotely how would you do so? Would your recommend this class to someone already working remotely? Why? Why not? What was the value oft this course for people who are already working remotely? Ify you were going toi improve this course for people already working remotely how would you do so? Would you recommend this class tos someone already working remotely? Why? Why not? Ifwe were to move forward with co-branding and co-delivering this çourse or offering another remote work course, do yous see a role for yourself? Ifso, what would that role be? Program Coordinator? Dos yous see students benefitting from this? Do yout think people in your community who are unemployed or underemployed would benefit from taking this course?  Session/Question  North Central Confluence Extension Washington Health X X X X X X X  X X X X X X X X  X X X X X X X X X  more time on? Less? value ofthis type of course? unhelpful...? Third Session Questions remote work?  X X X X  X X X  X X X X X X X  16    Final Course Modules  Perhaps unsurprisingly, opinions on the usefulness of the final modules and assignments were correlated with the current employment status of participants. For instance, those who were not currently working or actively seeking different employment (North Central Washington Participants) expressed much enthusiasm for the last modules and assignments, particularly creating their resume. A North Central Washington participant stated she was "so grateful the workforce training lady called her [to take the course)...[she) learned a lot and is going to keep learning" (November 2, 2020). Another stated that the course has inspired him. However, Extension and Confluence Health participants stated these assignments were of limited use. One participant stated, "ifmy 22- year-old son wanted to do this work and has no office experience, this course would be great as is...it feels targeted to a student who has no experience online to do remote work" (November 2, 2020). Another Confluence Health participant stated that "some information felt like al beginning job search 101 class" (November 2, 2020). Confluence Health participants and some Extension participants suggested that these modules couid indicate a natural "branch" in the curriculum where those with limited/no remote work experience could complete original çourse content and those currently working remotely (and not seeking alternative employment) could receive new content focused on their situation or use this as an opportunity to review earlier sections of the course. Others mentioned the possibility of two courses, one for beginners and those with more advanced skills. While there were some differences in opinions of the final modules related to current employment status and experience, participants across all three groups stated that the last modules were "a heavy lift" (November 2, 2020). Throughout the course, many participants indicated that modules required substantially more time than estimated. However, participants across all groups indicated this was a particular issue for the last modules, which Its should be noted that participants reported vastly different experiences with program coordinators. Some indicated they had much interaction with their program coordinators and their coordinator was helpful, especially ina addressing any questions and concerns. However, other participants indicated that they never interacted with their program coordinator, while a few indicated that their program coordinator was not responsive to questions or unable tol help them address their concerns (such as with techniçal issues). These divergent experiences can lead Additionally, while several participants indicated that the interactive sessions were valuable and many participants stated the breakout sessions were useful and even fun, participants across all groups agreed that the breakout sessions were too short to complete the tasks assigned. There was much agreement that five minutes was not enough to accomplish the tasks and achieve team building. As one North Central Washington participant stated, "Just as we got warmed up on the topic we had to go back to the full meeting." (November 2, 2020). Unfortunately, Extension participants taking the first course (October 4-31), noted that the final interactive session was not as successful as prior sessions. Part of this concern was due to content, "TI am) 65 years old and do not want to do career planning" (November 2, 2020), and part of this was due large sections of the class being disengaged. This participant noted that "not a lot of dynamic facilitation was going on for content and new ideas" (November 2, 2020). Itshould be noted that participants who took the later course, while agreeing that more time is needed for breakout sessions, did not note any particular issues with the final session's facilitation which may  required much more time and effort. Interactive Sessions and Program Coordinators  to different evaluations of the course.  indiçate this was driven more by the individual leading the session rather than content.  17    Final Comments about Course Content from Assessment Conversations  Overall, participants across the three different groups found items about the course that were helpful. How helpful depended on current employment status as those already working remotely and not actively seeking work were more likely to indicate that there were beneficial tidbits or "nuggets" ofinformation (November 30, 2020) rather than being more generally satisfied with the course. However, almost all participants indicated that the tools learned were valuable and helpful, and many indicated the need to spend more time focusing on these tools regardless of their current employment status or future goals. This included more time focused on project management tools, as many indicated more time learning Trello would be helpful and even requiring students to use Trello to manage team projects throughout the course would have been a great assignment. Itshould also be noted that all participants stated that the course and program coordinators could be more understanding of circumstances that impacted students' ability to complete tasks and assignments on time. Especially during the COVID19 pandemic, participants stated that technical issues and/or life circumstances were not taken into consideration and some participants either failed to complete the course or could not complete specific assignments. We recognize that this is a delicate balance, but more consideration and flexibility would be Lastly, several participants noted that team assignments were inconsistent and seemingly done at random through Zoom. While Zoom breakout sessions are helpful, assigning teams in this manner has several disadvantages. For instance, participants noted that several teams were unbalanced in terms oftechnological skills. For some groups, most participants had experience with technology and tools, leading to easier completion of tasks and coordination across the group. For other groups, there were far more technology novices which made completion of tasks much more difficult and reduçed enjoyment of team assignments. One participant noted that it would be beneficial to use a different method of assigning teams to ensure more consistency across teams, including in terms of skills and total number in a group (which also varied across groups). Consistent team membership across  beneficial and help with retention.  the modules would also increase team interaction according to several participants. Comments from Participants Unable to Complete the Course  Ofthe participants recruited by WSU and our partners, five did not complete the course, including three from the North Central Washington group, one from Extension and one from the Confluence Health Group. The WSU evaluation team reached out to these participants via email and asked what challenges they faced which led to them not completing the course, and how the course could better accommodate their needs.. For those currently employed, time constraints were identified as a challenge including family and work responsibilities.. From the North Central Washington group, one respondent reported they were unable to continue the course after being notified that their Mac was too old to run the course content. However, this was explained to the participant after the course had begun and after conversing with several individuals to try to resolve the problem. While few participants reported this particular problem, an Extension participant did state they also had trouble running some content on their Mac and received inadequate support to address this issue. This could indicate the need to be clearer on the technology required to take the course when individuals are: signing up, and for technical assistance dedicated to those who use Macs, such as a resource page. Another participant from this group faced eviction during the course and was unable to get internet access while homeless. Some suggestions for adjusting the course were to make assignment deadlines more flexible, allow for transfers to future sessions of the course, or having all course materials and activities on one platform. This could indicate the need to be clearer on thet technology required to take the course when individuals are signing up, and for technical assistance dedicated to those who  use Macs, such as a resource page.  18    CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS  The analysis of both USU and DGSS-collected data reveals that the remote worker course is successful, particularly fori individuals who do not have prior remote work experience. Itis important to note that two individuals recruited to participate ini the program (one from each group), were able to obtain remote work positions recently after completing the course, illustrating some important successes from this course. The analysis of pretest/post-test quiz scores shows a significant increase in performance for all but one module, indicating that participants are learning module content. In addition, the NC WA group indicated that the content and assignments of the modules were of high quality and helped them to prepare for remote employment. Unfortunately, there was no way to break down the Utah data from those who had prior remote work experience and those who did not. However, exit survey data did allow for descriptive analysis based on prior remote work experience. While exit survey analysis across all survey respondents suggested perceptions of knowledge in several skills did noti increase but stayed the same, descriptive analysis revealed that al higher percentage ofthose without prior remote experience reported their knowledge increased. While the sample of those without remote work experience is too small to generalize, this does suggest that those without prior remote experience can greatly benefit from the course. These differences are also supported by DGSS data collection efforts as North  Central Washington participants reported less familiarity with some tools. Recommendations on improvement Remote Training Recommendation 1: More Time for Onboarding and Learning New Tools  While most survey respondents indicated that the onboarding process was easy, assessment conversations revealed this may not necessarily be the case, especially for respondents with little remote work experience. Assessment conversations revealed that those with more experience were often helping novices to navigate several platforms. This suggests the need to consider adjusting the onboarding process to better account for differing technological skills of participants. Given the target audience of the course, assuming limited technological experience and adjusting the course to allow time for more onboarding and learning tools in early Additionally, while all participants were enthusiastic about learning the tools, many stated that time spent on learning these tools was insufficient and they would have liked to develop more proficiency in this area. This point is also supported by the surveys conducted by DGSS. After the first week of the course, over 20% of respondents who were not currently remotely employed still had questions about how to use the tools, and over 30% of all participants identified learning new software tools as a challenge they faced in completing the course. Allowing more time for both onboarding and these early modules will likely improve the course and knowledge retention in this area and improve performance on subsequent modules. Not only would it benefit those with limited or no remote work experience, most participants with much experience int this area felt that more focus on tools, particularly the communication and project management tools would be beneficial for those interested in and currently doing remote work. For example, a Confluence Health participant stated, *IfI was going to add to the course, it would be more interaction with the tools..ifyou hire a remote worker, training on the tech is hard." Another Confluence Health participant stated, "even for programs used ini this class, not a lot of education on the tools andj just you figure it out. Some can figure it out faster than others." This suggests that more time on these tools would be beneficial to all participants and even employers who benefit from not having to train remote Itr may also be necessary to provide technical assistance specifically for Mac users and make this assistance easily available to both participants and program coordinators to improve the course experience. Ensuring that programming can successfully run on Mac'sSafari browser would also benefit Mac users. Lastly, the USU course  modules may be necessary tol have the intended impacts.  workers on the use of these tools.  19    requires that prospective participants have access to sufficient equipment and internet access. This excludes groups of people that would' benefit greatly from the training. Development of equipment loan programs and providing broadband internet access toj participants may provide opportunities for more people to receive this This recommendation builds on the first recommendation by suggesting providing an opportunity to learn essential tools prior to the course. start date. As participants in Extension and Confluence Health indicated that several individuals struggled with learning new tools, aj pre-course assessment of current knowledge with the various tools utilized could be beneficial. This assessment could be used to direct potential course participants to pre-course learning content (via online or through apps) to learn the basics of certain programs before starting the course. This could help those taking the course to learn Module 1 and 2 course content more quickly (thus reducing the time needed to expand the onboarding and learning new tools in the beginning of the course), and place participants on more equal footing when learning these tools. This would also help ensure that other participants ini the course are not taking on al heavier workload by teaching their teammates how to use these tools Recommendation 3: More Time on Final Modules and Potential Branch to Other Content Based on assessment conversation feedback, it seems that course content is also too condensed ini the final modules. The course assignments require much time to complete adequately and more time should be allowed to adequately address these assignments. It may also be beneficial to adjust the course to take into account different goals of participants so that those who are already remote working need not complete a resume, but branch to different content that better addresses their current status and goals. This is also supported by the exit surveys which show limited knowledge gain for those who have remote work experience. While the target of the training are those with limited remote work experience, Washington State may benefit from a training that is more adaptable to those who already are doing remote work, particularly in the final module assignments. This could also potentially build from Recommendation 2 where the pre-course assessment is used to determine who should branch to different content. To address the needs of those with prior remote work experience, an advanced course Recommendation 4: More Time for Breakout Sessions and Consistent Program Coordinator Interaction As stated, overall, most participants agreed that interactive sessions were valuable and even fun, but that more time was needed for breakout sessions. This would allow for completion of tasks and better interaction between participants, which many participants indiçated, would be an added value to the course. Additionally, ensuring a more consistent experience with program coordinators and facilitators of interactive sessions would be beneficial. While it is anticipated that some participants will need more interaction with program coordinators to ensure successful completion of the course especially given the target audience, the number of participants that indicated they had little to know interaction with the program coordinators suggests an important area fori improvement. There are a growing number of courses offered online and via apps on numerous topics, and interaction interactions with both (1) other students and (2) program coordinators potentially set this course apart from other courses (especially as more become available in this content area). This can be an important value-added experience that offsets the expense of the course when compared to other courses that are completed entirely independently. Ensuring that all program coordinators reach out to participants at regular intervals could improve  training.  Recommendation 2: Pre-Course Training Opportunities and Assessments  to complete their team assignments.  could also potentially be developed.  the experience for those taking the course.  20    Recommendation on Remote Training in Washington State  First, the partnership with WorkSource in Washington State Employment Security Department was essential to the successful recruitment for this training. Kristi O'Neill was instrumental in finding individuals to take the training to provide feedback. To be successful going forward in Washington State, partnerships with various companies, groups, and agencies will be necessary. Second, there are many options for establishing a remote work training capacity in Washington State, including developing an independent course specifically for Washington State, co-branding training with Washington State, and contracting with independent companies for remote work training. However, given the immediate need to implement this training in Washington State and the considerable time it would take to develop an entirely new course, we recommend partnering with Utah State  University to co-brand and implement this training in Washington State.  21    ecevss Ln/20/2031  SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT APPLICATION  City of Ephrata 121 Alder Street SW Ephrata, WA 98823 (509) 754-4601 ph (509) 754-0912 fax  PERMIT APPROVED:  YES Date:  NO  Authorized City Signature:  1. Name of Event:Ephrata Miracle on! Chamber Main St. of Jingle Commerce Bell Fun Run Pate(s) ofl Event: December 11,2 2021  2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 8. 9.  Setup Start Time/Date: 3:00pm Event End Time: 6.00pm  Event Start Time: 3:30pm Clean Up End" Time/Date:ecpm  Sponsoring Organizationit.hn Chember afCommerce Event Coordinator/Primary Contact:Riy Wite Mailing Address:P.O. Bow 275, Ephrate WA 98823 7. Day Phone: 609-750-6183 Email: MasdaswCynatown Secondary Contact: 10. Is alcohol being served?  Cell Phone: se Fax: Phone:  YES NO X IfYES Include a copy of the State Liquor Permit.  11. Doy you wish to utilize any City property, such as a park? YES NOX  IfYES, which one(s)?chys Sireet. CSL infontoftec Couthouse 12, Will this event include Food' Vendors of any type? 13. Anticipated number of attendees? 150  YES NO  Ifyes, all vendors must apply for a Temporary Food Service Permit with the County Health District. A list  ofv vendors is required to be submitted with the appliçation.  THE PRIMARY CONTAÇT MUST LIST Al DAY OF EVENT PHONE NUMBER IF NOT LISTED ABOVE.  FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: Park & Rec. Community Development Fire  Code Enforcement Police Public Works  STAFF - INITIAL AND DATE UPON APPROVAL OR ATTACH MEMORANDUM WITH CONDITIONS.  PAYMENT. AMOUNT: RECEIVED BY:  CASH CC CHECK# DATE:  7    INDEMNIFICATION/ HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENT IN CONSIDERATION OF BEING PERMITTED TO PRODUCE THIS SPECIAL EVENT OR ACTIMITY OR USE OF ANY CITY PROPERTY OR FACILITIES IN CONNECTION WITH THIS ACTIVITY, THE UNDERSIGNED APPLICANT "INDEMNITOR") AGREES TO THE FOLLOWING: 1.THE INDEMNITOR HEREBY AGREES TO RELEASE, INDEMNIFY AND HOLD HARMLESS the City of Ephrata from any and all liability, claims, demands, causes of action, charges, expenses, and attomey fees (including attorney fees to establish the City's right to indemnity or incurred on appea!) resulting from involvement in this event whether caused by any negligent act or omission of the City or otherwise. This agreement shall not apply to any liability resulting from the sole negligence of the City. 2. The INDEMNITOR agrees to reimburse the City for any loss, theft of, or damage to City property, 3. The INDEMNITOR agrees to comply with all applicable laws, statutes, ordinances, rules and requirements including, but not limited to, not admitting more attendees than designated by Fire 4. The INDEMNITOR expressly agrees that this release and hold harmless agreement is intended to be as broad and inclusive as permitted by Washington law and that if any portion thereof is held invalid, 5. Falsification and/or misrepresentation in completing this application may result in rate adjustment or event cancellation. IUNDERSTAND THAT CHANGES TO THE ABOVE DETAILED PROGRAM the undersigned representative, have read the Special Events Application and the Policies and Procedures contained herein, and I am duly authorized by the event organization'pusiness to submit  equipment and/or facilities.  Department as safe for the particular event or facility.  notwithstanding, the balance shall continue in full legal force and effect.  REQUIRE IMMEDIATE NOTIFICATION TOCITY.  this application on its behalf. The information herein is complete and accurate.  APPLICANT:  RiaMWite PRINT NAME  Ephnta Chambere afCommeroe AUTHORIZED AGENT FOR  SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT: 12at huh  10-20-21 DATE  SIGN NAME  APPROVAL, DENIAL OR INCLUSION OF RESTRICTIONS OR SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF USE PERMIT IS AT THE SOLE DISCRETION OF THE CITY PURSUANT TO EMC 05.10. All applications Submit completed original application, along with required attachments to:  must be reviewed and approved before a permit can be issued.  OFFICE OF THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR  CITY OF EPHRATA 121 ALDER ST. SW EPHRATA, WA 98823  8    lasue Date 9222021  Cat0000023916  Non Profit Insurance Program Certificate of Coverage  THIS CERTIFICATE ISI ISSUEDA AS Al MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONVERS NOI RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AMEND, EXTENDORALTERT THEC COVERAGE AFFORDEDBY THE POLICIES BELOW.1 THIS CERTIFICATEOF COVERAGE DOESI NOT CONSTTUEACONTRACT IMPORTANTHI certhcate hokder is an ADOITIONAL INSURED, thep policyles) must be endorsed. VSUBROGRATIONIST WAIVED, subjectt tot thet torms and conditionsol the policy, certain coverage may require ane endorsement. As stalement ont this oertiticate does not confer rights lothe certlicata holder in louofs such endorsement().  BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE ORI PRODUCER, AND THE CERTIFICATEH HOLDER.  PRODUCER Clear Risk Solutions 451 DiamondDrive Ephrate, WA 98823 INBURED Ephrata Chamber of Commeroe Inc. POE Box 275 Ephrata, WA 98823 COVERAGES  COMPANIES AFFORDING COVERAGE GENERAL HABILITY American Altemative tnsurence Corponstion, etal. AUTOMOBILE UABILITY American Allemative Insurance Corporation, etal. PROPERTY Amerlcan Allemative Insurance Corporation, etal. MISCELLANEOUS PROFESSIONAL MABILITY Princeton Excess and Surplus Lines Insurance  Company  THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE! LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO1 THE INSURED! NAMED ABOVE FOR THE ÇOVERAGE PERIOD INDICATED, NOT WITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN. THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS,  EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCHPOLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAYI HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS.  TVPE OFI INBURANCE GENERAL LABILITY OCCURRENCE FORM INCLUDES STOP GAP AUTOHOBLELABILITY ANY AUTO PROPERTY  POLICYI NUMBER  POLICY EFF POLICY EXP DESCRIPTION  uMITS $5,000,000 $10,000,000 $5,000,000 $5,000,000 $50,000,000 $5,000,000 NONE $1,000,000 Excluded NONE $5,000,000 $40,000,000  DATE 6/1/2021  DATE  COMMERCIAL GENERALLIABILITY NI-2AL-0000013-12  6/1/2022 PER OCCURRENCE PERI MEMBER AGGREGATE PRODUCT-COMPIOP PERSONAL & ADV. INJURY ANNUAL POOL AGGREGATE 6/1/2022 COMBINED SINGLELIMIT ANNUAL POOLI AGGREGATE EARTHQUAKE PEROCC FLOOD PER OCC ANNUAL POOL AGGREGATE 6/1/2022 PER CLAIM ANNUAL POOL AGGREGATE  (LIABILITYIS SUBJECT TOA$150.000 SIRI PAYABLEFROMI PROGRAME FUNDS) (LIABILITYISS SUBJECT TOA$150,000 SIRI PAYABLEFROMI PROGRAMI FUNDS)  NI-2RL0000312 NI2RL0000013-12  6/12021 6/1/2021  6/1/2022 ALL RISKI PER OCCEXCL EQGFL $75,000,000  (PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TOA$150,000 SIRF PAYABLE FROMI PROGRAMFUNDS) (LIABILITY IS SUBJECT TOA$150, 000 SIRI PAYABLE FROMI PROGRAMI FUNDS) DESCRIPTION OF OPEPATOANS/LOCATONS IVEMICLEB/SPECALI EMS terms, conditions, and exclusions. Additionall Insured endorsementi is attached.  MISCELLANEOUS PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY  NIA3-RL-000000-12  6/1/2021  Regarding thel Miracle on Main Street Parade, December 11, 2021. The City ofEphrata isr named as Addltional Insured regardingt this even! only and is subjectt to policy SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBEDI POLICIES BE CANCELLED! BEFORE THE EXPIRATIONDATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED INA ACCORDANCE  CANCELLATION WITH) THE POLICY PROVISIONS. CERTIFICATE HOLDER City ofEphrata 121/ Alder SL sW Ephrata, WA 98823  AUTHORED REPREBENTATIVE  - L CL    Jingle Bell Fun Run Dec. 11 3:30 pm Leave from Basin St. & Third going north Turn left on to 4"and making the jog to Frey Rd. North on Frey and turn at marker And return in same direction.  Miracle on Main St. Parade 5:15 pm  Parade will bea a drive along as it was last year of lighted vehicles We will follow route provided, however are request to keep Basin Open will go from 4th at Lee Theater down to Division where we will Turn right and then again right on CSt. and then follow our route as listed. The route: shows us going all the way down Basin to 18"h and that is not our  Request. Basin St. if possible. Thank you.  lfk keeping Basin open from 3:30-6:00 is not possible, Iwould request a escort down  Rita Witte President/Director Chair Miracle on Main 509-750-6183    pu3r t  y  N    E  3 S  d    a  End  3D    DATE: November 3,2021 ITEM: Public Hearing  SUMMARY  1. Ad Valorem Tax for 2022- As part oft the budget process, Council is required to hold a Public Hearing on the revenues projected to be raised by Ad' Valorem Taxes to be levied upon real and personal property within it corporate limits for the upcomingyear.  BUDGET IMPACTS  1.+ +$13,374.00  RECOMMENDATION Staffrecommends: acceptance and approval of all Items. ENABLING ACTIONS Motion to. Authorize, Confirm, or Approve and Accept. All Items.  lfyou have any questions, concerns, or require additional information; please contact me prior to the meeting.    CITYOF EPHRATA STAFF REPORT Mayor and City Council Mike Warren, City Manager Finance Director Trachsler October 21, 2021 Public Hearing/Ordinances & Resolutions Ad' Valorem Taxi for 2022 Legislative History: November 3, 2021 N/A Motion to Approve Ordinance 21-07  To: From: Date: Proceeding Type: Subject:  First Presentation: Second Presentation: Requested Action:  Staff Report Summary: As part of the budget process, Council is required to hold a Public Hearing on the revenues projected to be raised by Ad' Valorem Taxes to be levied upon real and Discussion/Analysis: The City is allowed by law to increase the revenues received from Ad Valorem Taxes by 1% from the previous year's actual levy amount. This 1% is exclusive of Staff Recommendation: Council approval of Ordinance 21-07 fixing the amount of revenues to Financial Implications: An estimatedi increase in Ad' Valorem Taxes for 2022of$13,374.00  personal property within its corporate limits for the upcoming year.  additional revenues resulting from new construction and annexation. be raised by Ad' Valorem Taxes for the budget year 2022.  Attachments: A.  Ordinance: 21-07  Page 1of2    Legal Review  Thei following documents are attached and subject to legal review:  Date Reviewedby Legal Counsel  Type of Document  Title of Document  N/A  Page 2of2    ORDINANCE 21-07  AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EPHRATA, GRANT COUNTY, WASHINGTON FIXING OFTHE AMOUNT OF REVENUES FOR7 THE2022 BUDGETTO! BE RAISED BY AD VALOREMTAXESTOBE: LEVIEDI UPON REAL AND PERSONAL PROPERTY WITHIN THE CORPORATE LIMITS AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY CLERK TO CERTIFY SAID AMOUNTTO  THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS  WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Ephrata, Washington has met and considered its budget for the  calendar year 2022; and,  WHEREAS, the City's actual levy amount from the previous year was $1,337,454.00;and,  WHEREAS, the population oft the city is less than 10,000; and,  NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Ephrata do ordain that an increase in the regular property tax levy is hereby authorized for the levy to be collected in the 2022 tax year. The dollar amount of the increase over the actual levy amount from the previous year shall be $13,374.00 which is a percentage increase of 1% from the previous year. This increase is exclusive of additional revenue resulting from new construction, improvements toj property, newly constructed wind turbines, any increase in the value of state assessed property, This ordinance shall take effect 5 days after its passage, approval and publication as required by law. Passed by the City Council of the City of Ephrata, Washington, this 3rd day of November, 2021.  any annexations that have occurred and refunds made.  Bruce Reim, Mayor  ATTEST:  Leslie Trachsler, City Clerk APPROVED ASTOFORM:  Katherine Kenison, City Attorney PASSED the 3ud day of November, 2021 APPROVED the 3rd day of November, 2021 PUBLISHED the 4" day of November, 2021    DATE: November3,2021 ITEM: Ordinances & Resolutions  SUMMARY  1. Ordinance 21-07-Ad Valorem Tax -2022- The City is allowed by law to increase the revenues received from Ad Valorem Taxes by 1% from the previous year's accrual levy amount. This 1%i is exclusive of additional revenues resulting from new construction  and annexation.  2. Ordinance 21-08--Animal Control Definitions Chapter 8.02 3. Ordinance 21-09--Animal Control License Requirements Chapter 8.04 4. Ordinance: 21-10--Animal Control Impound Chapter 8.06 5. Ordinance 21-11--Animal Control Dangerous Dog Chapter 8.08 Ordinance 21-12--Animal Control Miscellaneous Chapter 8.10 7. Ordinance 21-13--Animal Control Livestock Chapter 8.12  &. Ordinance 21-14--Animal Control Penalties Chapter 8.14-1 The Municipal Code'sTitle 8--Animals was in serious need of overhaul to bring it into the present. The current codei isal hodgepodge ofedits stemming from the code's original adoption.  BUDGET IMPACTS  1. +$13,374.00 2. N/A 3. N/A 4. N/A 5. N/A 6. N/A 7. N/A 8. N/A  RECOMMENDATION Staffrecommends acceptance and approval of all Items. ENABLING ACTIONS Motion to Authorize, Confirm, or Approve and Accept All Items.  Ifyou have any questions, concerns, or require additional information; please contact me prior to the meeting.    CITY OF EPHRATA STAFF REPORT Mayor and City Council Mike Warren, City Manager Heather Rhoades 10/11/2021 Item for Council Action Title 8/ Animals Legislative History: 11/3/2021 Code Adoption  To: From: Date: Proceeding Type: Subject:  First Presentation: Second Presentation: Requested Action: Staff Report Summary  The Municipal Code's Title 8 Animals was in serious need of an overhaul to bring it into the present. The current code is a hodgepodge of edits stemming from the code's original  adoption. Discussion/Analysis  Staff has worked for 3 years with Anna Franz to come up with a current and effective Animal Code. Updated definitions, reorganization, clarifications to vague wording, and expanded protocols for potentially dangerous and dangerous dogs to minimize the city's liability.  Staff Recommendation presented. Financial Implications  Repeal the current Title 8 Animals and adopt the seven new chapters under Title 8 as  Pagelof2    Attachments A. B. C. D. E. F. G.  Chapter 8.02 Definitions Chapter 8.04 Licensing Chapter 8.06 Impound  Chapter 8.08 Dangerous Dogs and Potentially Dangerous Dogs Chapter 8.10 Miscellaneous. Animal Control Chapter 8.12 Livestock Chapter 8.14 Penalties  Legal Review  The following documents are attached and subject tol legal review:  Date Reviewedby Legal Counsel 6/9/2021  Typec of Document Policy  Title of Document  Chapter 8.02 Definitions Chapter 8.04 Licensing Chapter 8.061 Impound Chapter 8.08 Dangerous Dogs and Potentially Dangerous Dogs Chapter 8.10 Miscellaneous Animal Control Chapter 8.121 Livestock Chapter 8.14 Penalties  Page 2of2    TITLE 8 ANIMALS EPHRATAI MUNICIPAL CODE REPEAL/ADOPTION    ADOPTING A NEW CODE  0  *  DEFINITION UPDATES, FORMATTING INTO CHAPTERS  CODE UPDATES TO REFLECT CURRENTLEGAL PRACTICES  EXPANDED POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS AND DANGEROUS DOG STANDARDS    UPDATE HIGHLIGHTS  Expanded Potentially Dangerous and Dangerous Dog stipulations and regulation Household pet limits updated to allow 3 chickens in addition to the 3 dogs/dogs  Updated stray hold times Known owner stray hold for 96 hours Unknown owner stray hold for 72 hours Updated repeat stray dog protocols - microchipping Livestock chapter reflects the Livestock: section in Title 192 Zoning    POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS AND DANGEROUS DOGS  Annual registration for potentially dangerous dogs  This will enable the police department tot track these animals on a yearly basist to minimize the city's liability for allowing such animals to Additional requirements to contain potentially dangerous dogs on private property when outside unattended Proper enclosure a securely enclosed and locked pen or structure, suitable to prevent the entry of young children and designed to prevent the animal from escaping. Such pen or structure shall have secure sides and a secure top and shall also provide protection from  residey within city limits  the elements for the dog.  Updated designation process to ensure iti is fair and equitable  The decision regarding the designation willl ber made byas single person rather then twelve separate officers The owner will have the opportunity to discuss thei incident prior tot the designation being made final Appeals are heard before an unbiased hearing examiner rather than the Police Chief and then City Council    MORE USER FRIENDLY Each category now has it own chapter  8.02 Definitions 8.04 Licensing 8.06 Impound 8.08 Dangerous & Potentially Dangerous Dogs 8.10 Miscellaneous Animal Control 8.12 Livestock 8.14 Penalties  Code language updated to reflect current terminology andi industry standards  Several conflicting/vague language sections corrected    ORDINANCE NO. .21-08  AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING A NEW CHAPTER 8.02 TITLED "DEFINITIONS" OFTHEI EPHRATA MUNICIPALCODE  THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EPHRATA, WASHINGTON ORDAINS AS  FOLLOWS: follows:  Section 1. Chapter 8.02 of the Ephrata Municipal Code titled "Definitions" is adopted as  CHAPTER 8.02 DEFINITIONS  Sections:  8.02.010 Definitions 8.02.020 Chapter Supplementary  8.02.010 Definitions. When used in this title, the following words shall have the following  meanings:  A. "Abandonment" means leaving of an animal by its owner or owners or other person or persons responsible for its care or custody without making effective provisions  for its proper care.  B. "Animal" means any animal other than humans. enforce the provisions of this title.  C." "Animal Control Officer" means any person or persons empowered by the City to D. "Animal Shelter" means the facility designed by the City for the boarding and caring of any animal impounded under the provisions of this chapter or any other  ordinance or law of the State of Washington.  E."Cats"n means any animal of the species Felidae, regardless of sex.  F. "Common Areas ofa Condominium, Town House, or Apartment Buildings" means and includes but is not limited to the yards, grounds, patios, garden areas, play areas, clubhouses, swimming pools, sidewalks, walkways, common garage areas, G." "Dangerous Dog" is defined in RCW 16.08.070(2), as now enacted or hereafter  entryways, hallways, and driveways.  amended.  Ord 21-08    H. "Dog" means any animal of the species Canidae, regardless of sex.  "Dog Owner" means any person, firm, corporation, organization, or department in possession of, harboring, keeping, having an interest in, or having control or custody of a dog. "Dog Owner" or "Owner" for purposes of this Title means "Exotic Animal" means any animal which, when in its wild state, or due to its size, habits, natural propensities, training or instinct, presents a danger or potential danger to human beings and is capable of inflicting serious physical harm upon human beings, and includes inherently dangerous mammals and reptiles as follows: 1."Inherently dangerous mammal" means any live member of the Canidae, Felidae, or Ursidae families, including hybrids thereof, which, due to their inherent nature, may be considered dangerous to humans, and which includes: a. Canidae, including any member of the dog (canid) family not customarily domesticated by man, or any hybrids thereof, including wolfhybrids which are a cross between a wolf and domestic dog, but not including domestic dogs (Canis familiaris). Common names include wolf, coyote, jackal, b. Felidae, including any member of the cat (felis) family weighing over fifteen pounds (15 Ibs.) not customarily domesticated by man, or any hybrids thereof, but not including domestic cats (Felis catus). - Ursidae, including any member of the bear family, or any hybrids thereof.  persons who are at least eighteen (18) years old.  hyena, fox, and all their hybrids.  d. Nonhuman primates and prosimians.  e. All bats, skunks, foxes, raccoons, coyotes, and all other animals that are designated as unlawful and known to transmit the rabies virus to humans under WAC246-100-197, as now adopted or hereafter amended. 2. "Inherently dangerous reptile" means any live member of the class Reptilia a. Isv venomous, including but not necessarily limited to, all members of the following families: Helodermidae (Beaded Lizards including Gila Monster, Mexican Beaded Lizard); Viperidae (Vipers and Adders); Crotalidae (Pit Vipers); Atraciaspididae (Mole Vipers); Hydrophilidae (Sea Snakes); and b. Isa' "rear fanged" snake of the family Colubridae (rear fanged snakes) that are known to be dangerous to humans, including, but not necessarily limited to, all members of the following families: Dispholidus typus (Boom-slang  which:  Elapidae (Cobras).  Ord21-08    Snake); Thebtornis kirtlandii (Twig Snake); and Rhabdophis ssp. (Speckled c.Isar member of the order Crocodilia (crocodiles, alligators, and caiman) over d. - Isa member of the family Colubridae (including but not limited to green anaconda, reticulated pythons, Burmese python, albino Indian python, and African rock python) that reach over a length oft ten feet (10')in length. 3. "Potentially dangerous wild animal" as defined by Chapter 16.30 RCW as now 4. "Prohibited or protected species"is any animal or species defined under Chapter 220-610 WAC, Chapter 220-640 WAC, or 50 C.F.R. $17.11, Endangered and 5. "Exotic bird" means any bird species not on the approved captive-bred bird species defined under 50 C.F.R. $15.33, as now adopted or hereafter amended. K. "Ferret" means an animal of the species Mustela furo and as defined in WAC246- L. "Guard Dog" means a dog trained to protect persons or property by attacking or threatening to attack any person found within the area patrolled by the dog. These M. "Household pets" means dogs, cats, rabbits, mice, hamsters, hedgehogs, gerbils, parakeets, canaries, finches, captive-bred exotic birds (50 C.F.R. $15.33, as now adopted or hereafter amended), reptiles, amphibians, fish and similar small animals/fowl kept inside a residence for companionship and/or personal enjoyment so long as they are not a danger to other persons or property. All other animals are N. "Hybrid" means any mammal which is the offspring of the reproduction between any species of wild canid or hybrid wild canid and a domestic dog or hybrid wild canid, or is represented by its owner tol be a wolf hybrid, coyote hybrid, coy dog or any other kind of wild canid hybrid, or a wild felid or hybrid wild felid and a domestic cat or hybrid wild felid or is represented by its owner to be a wild felid O."Livestock" means any animal kept or raised on a farm, ranch or other spread of  Belly Keelback and Red Necked Keelback).  two feet (2') in length.  enacted or hereafter amended.  threatened wildlife, as now adopted or hereafter amended.  100-197, as now adopted or hereafter amended.  dogs must be registered with the City as a guard dog.  prohibited within the City unless otherwise provided herein.  hybrid.  land which are raised for home use, profit, or hobby.  Ord21-08    1."Large Domesticated Animal" includes but is not limited to horses, mules, donkeys, ponies, cattle, sheep, pigs, hogs, goats, llamas, alpacas, oxen, or other 2. "Small Domesticated Animal" includes but is not limited to rabbits (when not 3. "Small Domesticated Fowl" includes but is not limited to chickens, geese, P. "Mistreatment" means every act or omission which cause, or unreasonably permits the continuation of, unnecessary or unjustifiable pain or suffering. . "Neglect" means failure to provide food, water, protection from the elements, opportunity for exercise, or other care normal, usual and proper for an animal's R. "Owner or custodian" means any person, firm, partnership, corporation, trust arrangement, or the like who shall keep, maintain, control, care for, or be responsible for keeping, maintaining, or caring for any animal, or who knowingly  hoofed animals;  used as pets), miniature or teacup pigs, miniature goats.  turkeys, ducks, or other types of fowl.  health and well-being.  permits any animal to remain on premises occupied by them.  S. "Potentially dangerous dog" means:  1.A Any dog with a known propensity, tendency, or disposition to attack unprovoked, to cause injury to or to otherwise endanger the safety of humans 2. Any dog which unprovoked inflicts bites on a human or domestic animal either 3. Any dog which unprovoked chases or approaches a person upon the streets, sidewalks, or other public grounds in a menacing fashion or apparent attitude  or other domestic animals; or on public or private property; or  of attack.  T. "Proper Confinement or Control" means that while on or off the owner's property,  aj potentially dangerous dog shall either be: 1. Securely confined indoors; or  2. Secured confined in a "Proper Enclosure" as defined by RCW 16.08.070(4), as 3. While off the owner's property or otherwise in public, restrained by a chain or leash, muzzled, and under the physical control of a person over the age of eighteen (18) years who is of sufficient size and stature to control the animal.  now enacted or hereafter amended  Ord21-08    The muzzle shall be made in a manner that will not cause injury to the dog or interfere withi its vision or respiration but shall prevent it from biting any person U. "Running at Large" means to be off the premises of the owner and not under the immediate control oft the owner or other competent person authorized by the owner, by means of a leash, cord, or chain not to exceed eight (8) feet in length, except when in or on any vehicle and securely confined to such vehicle; except that, for purposes of this definition, the "premises of the owner" shall not include common areas of a condominium complex, town houses, duplexes, and apartment buildings, and any animal not in the effective control of its owner upon the common area ofa condominium complex, town house, duplex, or apartment building, or the grounds V. All other words and phrases used herein will have their commonly accepted  or animal.  thereof, shall be deemed to be running at large.  meanings.  8.02.020 Chapter Supplementary: The provisions of this chapter shall be supplementary to the  provisions of RCW Chapter 16.08 relating to dangerous dogs, RCW Chapter 49.60 relating to guide dogs and service animals, and RCW Chapter 16.30 relating to Section 2. Effective date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage PASSEDI by the City Council oft the City of Ephrata, Washington, this 3rd day of November,  dangerous wild animals.  and publication ofi its summary as provided by law.  2021.  Bruce Reim, Mayor  ATTEST:  Leslie Trachsler, City Clerk APPROVED ASTO FORM: Anna Franz, City Attorney  PASSED the 3rd day of November, 2021. APPROVED the 3td day of November, 2021. PUBLISHED the 4th day of November, 2021.  Ord21-08    ORDINANCE NO.21-09  AN ORDINANCE REPEALING EPHRATA MUNICIPALCODE CHAPTER 8.05 TITLED "ANIMAL CONTROL" AND ADOPTING A NEW CHAPTER 8.04 TITLED "LICENSE  REQUIREMENTS  THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OFI EPHRATA, WASHINGTON ORDAINS AS  FOLLOWS:  Section 1. Chapter 8.05 of the Ephrata Municipal Code titled "Animal Control" is Section 2. Chapter 8.04 of the Ephrata Municipal Code titled "Licensing Requirements"  repealed in its entirety. is adopted as follows:  CHAPTER 8.04 LICENSING REQUIREMENTS Dog License Required Rabies Vaccination Required Dog License Fee and Tag Household Pets. Exotic Animals Prohibited. License Not Required  Sections: 8.04.010 8.04.020 8.04.030 8.04.040 8.04.050 8.04.060 8.04.070  Dog License and Permit Issuance and Revocation  8.04.010 Dog License Required. It is unlawful for any person or persons to own or harbor any  dog over the age of six (6) months within the corporate limits of the City, unless such person or persons first procures a license therefore as provided in this chapter. Provided, that this requirement may waived upon certification from a licensed veterinarian that the animal, for medical reasons, should not be vaccinated for rabies. The owner of any dog, cat, or ferret shall provide proof of current rabies vaccination upon demand by any animal control officer or law enforcement officer. A. All dogs over the age of four months or dogs with a full set of canine teeth shall have a current rabies vaccination administered by a licensed veterinarian. An owner acquiring a dog shall have such a dog inoculated against rabies within the later of thirty days after the dog is brought into the city or thirty days after the dog reaches four months of age. A current rabies vaccination means that a dog vaccinated between three months to one year shall be revaccinated within one year and then revaccinated at least within every three years thereafter.  8.04.020 Rabies Vaccination Required. All dogs, cats, and ferrets shall be vaccinated for rabies.  Ord21-09    B. All cats and ferrets over the age of four months shall have a current rabies vaccination administered by a licensed veterinarian. An owner acquiring a cat or ferret or moving into the city shall have such cat or ferret inoculated against rabies within the later of thirty days after the cat or ferret is brought into the city or thirty days after the cat or ferret reaches four months of age. Cats and ferrets shall be revaccinated annually or as directed by a veterinarian.  8.04.030 Dog License Fee and' Tag. All license fees shall be as listed in the City of Ephrata Fee  Schedule in Chapter 3.35 EMC. The license fee is determined based upon the reproductive status of the dog. The City may offer a reduced rate license fee during a designated annual special event in conjunction with a rabies vaccination or microchipping clinic. The City of Ephrata shall not charge a license fee for "dog guides" or"service animals" as defined in RCW 49.60.040, as now enacted or hereafter amended. Upon the payment of such license fee to the clerk and upon being shown proof of a current rabies vaccination, it shall be the duty of the clerk to issue a license to the party making application therefor. The person licensing a dog shall verify the breed of the dog at the time of licensing and that breed name shall be recorded with the tag number. If the owner has had an electronic chip implanted into a dog or has had the dog tattooed, the owner may present evidence oft that chip or tattoo and the registration number of the chip to help identify the dog ifit needs to be identified. A. The license shall expire upon the death of the animal licensed.  B. The clerk shall, together with the license, furnish a suitable tag which shall be worn by the dog for which such license isi issued and shall bei fastened to such dogi in such manner that it can easily be inspected at all times by City authorities. Lost tags will be replaced by the clerk upon a payment of an additional fee as listed in the City of C.Itis is unlawful for any person, who for purposes of securing the license, to falsely represent the breed, age or sex of any dog, or that the dog has been spayed or D.No person may use any license for any animal other than the animal for which it E.I Its shall be the duty of the clerk to keep a record which shall include the following 1. Names, address (physical and mailing), telephone number, and driver's license or identification card number when available of any person to whom a license  Ephrata Fee Schedule, Chapter 3.35 EMC.  neutered. was issued. information:  isi issued;  2. Description and name of the dog for which the license is sought;  Ord21-09    3. Whether the dog is a male or female dog and whether the male dog has been  neutered or the female dog spayed; 4. Number of each license issued; and 5. Record of rabies vaccination.  8.04.040 Dog License and Permit Issuance and Revocation.  A. The City may revoke any animal permit or license if the person holding the permit or license refuses or fails to comply with this title, the regulations promulgated by the City of Ephrata, or any law governing the protection and keeping of animals. B. Any person whose animal permit or license is revoked shall, within ten (10) calendar days thereafter, rehome or humanely dispose of all animals owned, kept, or harbored by such person and no part of the permit or license fee shall be C.Itshall be a condition of the issuance of any permit or license that the City shall be permitted to inspect all animals and the premises where animals are kept at any time and shall, if permission for such inspection is refused, revoke the permit or D. Ift the applicant has withheld or falsified any information on the application, the E. No person who has been convicted of cruelty to animals shall be issued a permit or F. Any person having been denied a license or permit may not reapply for a period of G. Any dog impounded under the provisions of this chapter shall not be released until the owner of such dog have paid all fees and charges due and has obtained all required permits, licenses and/or registrations and has complied with any other conditions imposed by the City. The City may release a dog not currently vaccinated for rabies subject to the owner vaccinating the dog within five (5) business days from release. Failure to vaccinate the dog within the required time shall subject the owner to the penalties for failing to maintain a current rabies  refunded.  license of the refusing owner.  City shall refuse to issue or may revoke a permit or license. license to operate a commercial animal establishment.  thirty (30) calendar days.  vaccine and failure to affix license.  8.04.050 Household Pets.  A. The maximum number of household pets permitted to be kept in conjunction with  each permitted dwelling is as follows:  Ord21-09    1. Not more than the accumulative total of three of the following: dogs or cats 2. Not more than the accumulative total of fifteen of the following may be kept:  over the age of six months;  a. mice, hamsters, gerbils, hedgehogs, and ferrets;  b. pigeons, parakeets, finches, canaries and other small exotic birds and  songbirds;  C. reptiles, amphibians, and other similar animals. 3. No more than twelve rabbits per household. 4. Unlimited numbers of fish.  B. The keeping of household pets for the principal purpose of sale and profit is C.Alll household pets shall be kept and maintained in a manner which confines their D. All household pets shall be kept in such a manner sO as to not create any objectionable noise, odor or otherwise annoy or disturb the public.  prohibited.  movement and activity to the premises of the owner.  8.04.060 Exotic Animals Prohibited. It is unlawful to own or harbor an exotic animal as defined 8.04.070 License Not Required. The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to dogs used bya  in EMC Chapter 8.02.  law enforcement agency for police work, nor to dogs or cats in the custody of a veterinarian or animal shelter or animal rescuer, or whose owners are nonresidents temporarily within the city for a period not exceeding thirty (30) calendar days. Section 3. Effective date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage PASSED by the City Council oft the Cityof Ephrata, Washington, this 31d day of November,  and publication of its summary as provided by law.  2021.  Bruce Reim, Mayor  ATTEST:  Leslie Trachsler, City Clerk  Ord21-09    APPROVED ASTO: FORM: Anna Franz, City Attorney  PASSED the 3rd day of November, 2021. APPROVED the 3rd day of November, 2021. PUBLISHED the 4th day of November, 2021.  Ord21-09    ORDINANCE! NO.21-10  AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING A NEW CHAPTER 8.06TITLED IMPOUNDS" OF THE EPHRATA MUNICIPALCODE  THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EPHRATA, WASHINGTON ORDAINS AS  FOLLOWS: follows:  Section 1. Chapter 8.06 of the Ephrata Municipal Code titled "Impounds" is adopted as  CHAPTER 8.06 IMPOUNDS  Sections:  8.06.010 Impoundment Procedure Disposition  8.06.020 Fees  8.06.010 Impoundment Procedure - Disposition.  A. Any City officer designated by the Mayor to engage in animal control enforcement  may impound any animal under the following conditions: 1. Any animal that has been humanely trapped.  2. Any animal found in violation of the provisions of this title if the owner is 3. Any animal neglected or abandoned by its owner, including any animal that is found abandoned within any building, establishment, or within or on any 4. Any animal that is sick or injured and the owner is not present or able to take 5. Any animal remaining at the scene of a crime or accident and the owner has  unknown, or ifl known, if the owner is not readily available.  premises, whether public or private.  charge of the animal.  been incarcerated or hospitalized. 6. - Any animal seized by the court.  Ord21-10    7. Any potentially dangerous or dangerous dog, inherently dangerous mammal, or inherently dangerous reptile found in violation of the provisions of this title 8. Any inherently dangerous mammal or inherently dangerous reptile that has 9. Any animal that has bitten a human being up to a period of fourteen (14) days. Int the event that the Animal Control Officer has reason to suspect that an animal isr rabid, the appropriate officials of the Grant County Health District shall be notified and the Animal Control Officer shall coordinate any further activities with said health district. Said health district shall have jurisdiction over any B. The Animal Control Officer, upon impounding an animal, shall make a complete record, entering the description of each animal. If the owner of the animal is known orift the animal is identifiable by license or other identification, the Animal Control Officer shall attempt to notify the owner within forty-eight (48) hours by service or posting of notice that his/her animal has been impounded and where it may be redeemed. The reading of a license tag or the scanning for a microchip shall constitute reasonable attempts to identify the animal. The City or animal shelter shall not be liable for the failure of a scanner to detect the presence of a microchip. C. Ifthe owner is known, the animal shall be held at least ninety-six (96) hours after the attempt to notify is accomplished. Ift the owner is unknown, the animal shall be held at least seventy-two (72) hours after the time of impound. If the animal has beeni impounded pursuant to quarantine and has not been found tol be suffering from rabies, the animal shall be held at least seventy-two (72) hours after the end of the  and/or state law.  inflicted a bite or is found running at large.  matter possibly involving rabies.  quarantine period and examination by a licensed veterinarian.  D. Redemption of impounded animals.  1. Anyanimal (except potentially dangerous dogs, dangerous dogs, and inherently dangerous mammals or reptiles) impounded pursuant to the provisions of this Chapter may be redeemed by the owner or other authorized person upon payment in full of all legal charges and expenses incidental to the impoundment and boarding of the animal and by demonstrating that all conditions for the 2. Ifa domestic animal is impounded by the City more than twice during a twelve (12) month period it will be mandatory that a microchip capable of being scanned by an "AVID" or other equivalent brand microchip scanner be implanted in the animal before it is released to the owner. The owner of said animal shall incur all expenses incidental to the microchip process and shall provide written proof of said process to the animal control authority.  release of the animal have been met.  Ord21-10    3. Prior to redemption of a dog that has been declared potentially dangerous, the owner shall present proof of compliance with Section 8.08.110 and any other applicable code provision. If the owner fails to redeem the potentially dangerous dog ninety-six (96) hours after the end of any mandatory impoundment period, the dog will be considered abandoned and euthanized. 4. Prior to redemption of a dog that has been declared dangerous, the owner shall a. Present proof of the dog' 's proposed residency outside of the City limits which shall include a physical address, written verification of the dog's ownership, and written verification that the owner resides at the physical address provided as the dog'sresidence outside of the City limits. The clerk shall contact the jurisdiction of the dog's proposed residency to confirm the allowance of a dog with a dangerous designation and inform the jurisdiction's Animal Control Officer of the dog's dangerous designation. The owner, at his/her sole cost and expense, shall be responsible to comply with any stipulations the jurisdiction of the proposed ii. The owner, at his/her sole cost and expense, shall also be required to have the dangerous dog microchipped prior to its release from iii. The owner shall sign a written statement acknowledging that the dangerous dog is prohibited from being within the City limits and that, in the event the dangerous dog is found within the City limits following its release from impound, the dangerous dog will be subject to immediate seizure and impound and shall be humanely euthanized at the direction of the Animal Control Officer.  meet all oft the following conditions:  residency has for dogs declared dangerous.  impound.  5. Prior to redemption of an inherently dangerous mammal or reptile, the owner a. Present proof of the animal's proposed residency outside of the City limits which shall include a physical address, written verification of the animal's ownership, and written verification that the owner resides at the physical address provided as the animal's residence outside of the City limits. The clerk shall contact the jurisdiction of the animal's proposed residency to confirm the allowance of an inherently dangerous mammal or reptile.  shall meet all of the following conditions:  The owner, at his/her sole cost and expense, shall be responsible to comply with any stipulations the jurisdiction of the proposed residency has for inherently dangerous mammals or reptiles.  Ord2 21-10    ii. The owner shall sign a written statement acknowledging that the inherently dangerous mammal or reptile is prohibited from being within the City limits and that, in the event the inherently dangerous mammal or reptile is found within the Cityl limits following its release from impound, the inherently dangerous mammal or reptile will be subject to immediate seizure and impound and shall be humanely euthanized at the direction of the Animal Control Officer.  6. Any Dangerous Dog, Potentially Dangerous Dog, or Inherently Dangerous Animal or Reptile found in violation of this title shall be impounded at the owner's expense until all required stipulations or conditions have been met or the animal is appropriately disposed of per subsection E of this Section. The Animal Control Officer shall dispose of any Dangerous Dog, Potentially Dangerous Dog, or Inherently Dangerous Animal or Reptile in an expeditious and humane manner if the required stipulations or conditions are not corrected within twenty (20) days of notification to the Owner at the Owner's last known  address. E. Disposition of animals.  1. Animals not redeemed within the time periods as set forth herein will be considered abandoned and may be surrendered to a local rescue or humanely destroyed by euthanasia at the discretion of the Animal Control Officer. Those animals known to have bitten or which have been found to be dangerous or potentially dangerous are not eligible for surrender and will be humanely destroyed by euthanasia. However, the owner or keeper will remain responsible for payment of all legal expenses and charges incidental to the impound. a. If the failure to reclaim the pet animal is due to the owner's incarceration or incapacity, notification of incarceration or incapacity to the City will serve to extend the hold period by an additional forty-eight (48) hours. The animal may be reclaimed during that additional forty-eight (48) hour hold period by any person who has obtained the written or verbal permission of the owner to reclaim the animal, or by any person who is a legally appointed agent for the owner or keeper. Verbal permission must be provided by the owner to 2. Upon receipt of written permission from the owner animals may be surrendered to a local rescue or humanely destroyed by euthanasia without regards to the holding periods outlined herein. The owner shall remain responsible for payment of all legal expenses and charges incidental to the impound. 3. Any animal as may be determined by the Animal Control Officer or licensed veterinarian to be suffering from serious injury or disease may be humanely destroyed by euthanasia without regard to the holding periods outlined herein.  the Animal Control Officer or his/her designee.  Ord21-10    4. Any previously declared dangerous dog found within the city limits that has attached or bitten a person or another domestic animal shall be humanely 5. Inherently dangerous mammals and/or inherently dangerous reptiles which have bitten a person or another domestic animal or have been found running at large shall be humanely destroyed by euthanasia or transferred to a suitably licensed facility such as a ZOO without regard to the holding periods outlined  destroyed by euthanasia after the quarantine period.  above.  F. Opportunity for Hearing on impound fees and costs. Prior to reclaiming an impounded animal, an owner or keeper who wishes to contest the impoundment of his/her animal and/or the assessment of fees pursuant to impoundment, may utilize 1. The owner or keeper must appear inj person at the police department and request the form for contesting impoundment and fees. Ift the owner or keeper is unable to personally appear due to his/her incarceration or incapacity, he/she may provide written or verbal permission to another person to act in his/her place. Verbal permission must be provided by the owner or keeper to the Animal 2. The owner or keeper or his/her designee must complete the form and sign it 3. The owner or keeper or his/her designee must give the completed form to staff at the police department. The Mayor or his/her designee will review the form and records on file for the impoundment, will meet with the owner or keeper or his/her designee, and will decide based on all of the above whether to impose the fees for impoundment and other services as set forth in this section; to adjust the fees based on the completed form; or to not assess fees based on the completed form. The decision will be discretionary with the Mayor or his/her  the following procedure:  Control Officer or his/her designee. under penalty of perjury.  designee, and is non-appealable.  G. Waiver of Fees. The Mayor or his/her designee may waive the fees for impoundment and other services in the event of an unforeseen circumstance beyond the control of the owner in which the owner or keeper is unable to make arrangements for the immediate care of the animal, including but not limited to medical emergency, arrest, or house fire. Prior toi reclaiming an impounded animal, 1. The owner or keeper must appear in person at the police department and request the form for waiver of impound fees. If the owner or keeper is unable to personallya appear due to his/herincarceration or incapacity, he/she may provide written or verbal permission to another person to act in his/her place. Verbal  an owner or keeper may request a waiver as follows:  Ord21-10    permission must be provided by the owner or keeper to the Animal Control 2. The owner or keeper or his/her designee must complete the form and sign it 3. The owner or keeper or his/her designee must give the completed form to staff at the police department. The Mayor or his/her designee will review the form and records on file for the impoundment, will meet with the owner or keeper or his/her designee, and will decide based on all of the above whether to waive the impound fees. The decision will be discretionary with the Mayor or his/her  Officer or his/her designee. under penalty of perjury.  designee, and is non-appealable.  H. Housing fees shall be as listed in the City of Ephrata Fee Schedule as set forth in Chapter 3.35 EMC. Such fees shall include all costs of housing such animals. until the owner of such animal shall have paid all fees and charges due and has obtained Section 2. Effective date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage PASSED by the City Council of the City of Ephrata, Washington, this 3rd day of November,  8.06.020 Fees. Any animal impounded under the provisions of this chapter shall not be released  all permits, licenses, and registrations as required herein.  and publication of its summary as provided by law.  2021.  Bruce Reim, Mayor  ATTEST:  Leslie Trachsler, City Clerk APPROVED ASTO FORM: Anna Franz, City Attorney  PASSED the 3rd day of November, 2021. APPROVED the 3rd day of November, 2021. PUBLISHED the 4th day of November, 2021.  Ord21-10    ORDINANCE NO. .21-11  AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING A NEW CHAPTER 8.08 TITLED "DANGEROUS DOGS AND POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS  DOGS"  THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EPHRATA, WASHINGTON ORDAINS AS  FOLLOWS:  Section 1. Chapter 8.08 of the Ephrata Municipal Code titled "Dangerous Dogs and  Potentially Dangerous Dogs" is adopted as follows:  CHAPTER 8.08  DANGEROUS DOGS AND POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS DOGS  Sections: 8.08.010 8.08.020 8.08.030 8.08.040 8.08.050 8.08.060 8.08.070 8.08.080 8.08.090 8.08.100 8.08.110 8.08.120 8.08.130 8.08.140 8.08.150 8.08.160 8.08.170 8.08.180 8.08.190  Title Applicability Definitions Defense Procedures Evidence Final Decision Service Determination Prohibited Acts Penalties Destruction Costs Failure to Reclaim Nuisance Jurisdiction  Declaration of Dangerous Dog or Potentially Dangerous Dog  Notice of Potential Declaration  Appeal of Potentially Dangerous or Dangerous Dog Registration of Potentially Dangerous Dog Required  Notification of Status of Potentially Dangerous Dog Dog Declared Dangerous or Potentially Dangerous by Another  8.08.010 Title. The ordinance codified in this chapter shall be referred to as the Dangerous Dog  and Potentially Dangerous Dog ordinance.  Ord21-11    8.08.020 Applicability. The provisions of this chapter shall apply to adult dogs only, which  means any dog over the age of six (6) months. The declaration of Dangerous Dog or Potentially Dangerous Dog follows the dog, regardless of Ownership or change of  Ownership.  8.08.030 Definitions. The following definitions shall apply throughout this chapter:  A. "Animal Control Authority" means the department of the City charged with the responsibility of administering the provisions of this chapter, or the department and any other agency to which this responsibility is contractually delegated and which is thereby charged with the duty of enforcing the animal control laws of the City B. "Animal Control Officer" means any person or persons empowered by the City to "Dangerous Dog" is defined in RCW 16.08.070(2), as now enacted or hereafter D." "Owner" means any person, firm, corporation, organization, or department in possession of, harboring, keeping, having an interest in, or having control or  and/or with the shelter and welfare of animals. enforce the provisions of this title.  amended.  custody of an animal.  E. "Potentially Dangerous Dog" means:  1.A Any dog with a known propensity, tendency, or disposition to attack unprovoked, to cause injury to or to otherwise endanger the safety of humans 2. Any dog which unprovoked inflicts bites on a human or domestic animal either 3. Any dog which unprovoked chases or approaches a person upon the streets, sidewalks, or other public grounds in a menacing fashion or apparent attitude  or other domestic animals; or on public or private property; or  ofattack.  F." "Proper Confinement or Control" means that while on or off the Owner's property,  a Potentially Dangerous Dog shall either be: 1. Securely confined indoors; or now enacted or hereafter amended  2. Secured confined in a "Proper Enclosure" as defined by RCW 16.08.070(4), as  Ord21-11    3. While off the Owner's property or otherwise in public, restrained by a chain or leash, muzzled, and under the physical control of a person over the age of eighteen (18) years who is ofs sufficient size and stature to control the animal. G. "Running At Large" means to be off the premises of the Owner and not under the immediate control of the Owner or other competent person authorized by the Owner, by means of a leash, cord, or chain not to exceed eight (8) feet in length, except when in or on any vehicle and securely confined to such vehicle; except that, for purposes of this definition, the "premises of the Owner" shall not include common areas of a condominium complex, town houses, duplexes, and apartment buildings, and any animal not in the effective control of its Owner upon the common area of a condominium complex, town house, duplex, or apartment building, or the grounds thereof, shall be deemed to be running at large. H. "Severe Injury" means any physical injury that results in broken bones or lacerations requiring multiple sutures or cosmetic surgery. injury, or damage was sustained by a person who, at the time: occupied or owned by the Owner of the dog; or B. Was tormenting, abusing, or assaulting the dog; or C. Has, in the past, tormented, abused, or assaulted the dog; or D. Was committing or attempting to commit a crime.  8.08.040 Defense. Dogs shall not be declared Dangerous or Potentially Dangerous if the threat,  A. Was committing a willful trespass or other tort upon the property or vehicle  8.08.050 Declaration of Dangerous Dog or Potentially Dangerous Dog - Procedure.  A. The Animal Control Offiçer shall issue a notice of potential declaration to the Owner of the dog following the guidelines of service found at Section 8.08.090. Said notice will include an opportunity for the Owner to discuss the action in writing or orally with the Animal Control Officer within fourteen (14) calendar B. After the discussion or the expiration of the fourteen (14) day period, whichever comes first, the Animal Control Officer shall issue a final decision in the form of C.Ifthe dog has been impounded due to its actions, such impoundment shall continue during the pendency of the above procedure. The Owner shall be responsible for the cost ofi impoundment regardless of the outcome of the action.  days of receipt of the notice.  either a final declaration or a letter of no finding.  Ord21-11    D. The Hearing Examiner in an appeal pursuant to this Chapter can take note of and consider the Owner's failure to discuss the action with the Animal Control Officer or failure to raise any and all defenses at the discussion with the Animal Control  Officer.  8.08.060 Notice of Potential Declaration. Notice in the form of a declaration given to an Owner  in the manner described below or in Section 8.08.080: shall be prima facie evidence that the Owner acted knowingly, although notice is not the only way to prove the Owner's knowledge of the animal's propensity. Any notice of potential declaration must be in  writing and include the following: A. A description of the animal;  B. The name and address of the Owner, ifk known;  C. The whereabouts oft the animal ifit is not in the custody of the Owner; D. A brief statement of why the dog is being considered a Dangerous or Potentially E. The specific provision or provisions of Section 8.08.030(C) or (E) which the F. The restrictions that could be placed on the dog as a result ofa final declaration; G. The penalties for violation of the restrictions of a final declaration, including the possibility of destruction of the dog, civil damages assessed against the Owner, imprisonment and fines incurred by the Owner through criminal prosecution; H. The date, time and location to meet with the Animal Control Officer to discuss the  Dangerous Dog;  Animal Control Officer has found applicable;  action.  8.08.070 Evidence. Based on an investigation, the Animal Control Officer may find and declare  ad dog Dangerous or Potentially Dangerous if he or she has a reasonable belief that the dog falls within the definitions set forth in Section 8.08.030(C)or (E). For the purposes of this chapter, a reasonable belief may be supported by any of the following: A. The written complaint of a citizen who has witnessed the animal acting in a manner which causes it to fall within the detinitions in Section 8.08.030(C) or (E) and is  willing to SO testify in a court of law; or  B. Dog bite reports filed with the Ephrata Police Department; or  C.A Actions of the dog witnessed by the Animal Control Officeror any law enforcement  officer; or  Ord21-11    D. A verified report that the animal previously has been found to be either Potentially  Dangerous or Dangerous by the Animal Control Officer; or E. Other substantial evidence admissible in a court of law.  8.08.080 Final Decision. The final decision shall consist of either a final declaration or a letter  of no finding issued to the Owner. shall contain the following: 1. A description of the animal;  A. In the event the Animal Control Officer finds reason to issue a final declaration, it  2. The name and address of the Owner, if known; 3. The date and time of the meeting with the Owner, if any;  4. A brief statement of why the dog has been found to be a Dangerous or 5. The specific provision or provisions of Section 8.08.030(C) or (E) which the  Potentially Dangerous Dog;  Animal Control Officer found applicable;  6. The restrictions placed on the dog as a result of the declaration;  7. The penalties for violation of the restrictions, including the possibility of destruction oft the dog, civil damages assessed against the Owner, imprisonment and fines incurred by the Owner through criminal prosecution; 8. . A statement that the declaration can be appealed to the Hearing Examiner pursuant to Section 8.08.100 within fourteen (14) calendar days; and 9. A statement that failure to file a timely and complete notice of appeal will constitute a waiver of all rights to appeal said declaration.  B. Aletter of no finding shall include: 1. Ad description of the animal; 2. The name and address of the Owner;  3. The date and time of the meeting with the Owner;  4. Al brief summary of testimony and evidence presented at such discussion;  Ord21-11    5. A briefs summary of why the animal is not being found Dangerous or Potentially  Dangerous.  8.08.090 Service. Service of the notice of potential declaration, final declaration, or letter of no  finding shall be in writing, and shall be served on the Owner in one of the following A. Regular and certified mail, return receipt requested or delivery confirmation B. Personally delivered with proof of personal service made by written declaration under penalty of perjury by the person effecting service declaring the time, date, .E Posting the declaration on the front door of the living unit of the Owner, or person D. Publication in a newspaper of general circulation, if the Owner cannot be located  methods:  requested, to the Owner's last known address; or  and manner in which service was made; or  with right to control the animal if said Owner is not home; or  by one of the above methods.  8.08.100 Appeal of Potentially Dangerous or Dangerous Dog Determination.  A. Any Owner of a dog which has been declared Potentially Dangerous or Dangerous by the Animal Control Officer, pursuant to this section may appeal the notice by filing with the City Clerk within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the notice, a written notice of appeal. Said written notice of appeal shall be on a form provided for that purpose by the City Clerk and must contain the following items: 1.A A caption reading: "Appeal of Potentially Dangerous Dog or Dangerous Dog 2. Abriefstatement oft the finding being appealed, together with any material facts claimed to support the contentions of the appellant including but not limited to a. Specific basis on which the Owner contests the determination of] Potentially b. Any breed identification or registration paperwork, certificates, pedigrees, . Any expert testimony supporting or corroborating the Owner's assertion that the dog is not al Potentially Dangerous or Dangerous Dog;  Determination" giving the name of the appellant;  the following written information and/or documents:  Dangerous or Dangerous Dog;  or the like regarding the dog in question;  Ord 21-11    d. Anycertifications or other evidence establishing training courses completed by the dog and its Owner, such as obedience training or canine good citizen 3. A brief statement of the relief sought, and the reasons why the finding should 4. A statement acknowledging that if the Hearing Examiner finds there is sufficient evidence to support the Potentially Dangerous or Dangerous Dog determination, all costs of the appeal process, including attorney's fees, shall  training.  ber reversed, modified, or otherwise set aside.  be assessed against the Owner. 5. The current address of the appellant.  6. Av verification, by declaration under penalty of perjury, made by the appellant as to the truth of the matters stated in the appeal, pursuant to RCW 9A.72.085. B. Failure to file a timely and complete notice of appeal constitutes a waiver of all rights to an appeal under this chapter. Failure to appear for an appeal hearing shall result in a denial of the appeal and upholding of the declaration of Potentially .Upon receipt of a timely filed and completed notice of appeal, a notice of hearing shall be sent to the appellant, setting the date, time and place of the appeal hearing. D. The Hearing Examiner shall set a date and time for hearing the appeal following receipt of a timely filed and complete notice of appeal. The filing of a notice of appeal shall not stay the requirements for restraint of the dog provided to the Owner E. The appeal shall be heard before the Hearing Examiner for the City. At the hearing, the dog shall be declared Potentially Dangerous or Dangerous upon proof that the dogi is as defined in Section 8.08.030(C) or(E), as established by the probable cause standard required for the declaration of the Animal Control Officer. F. The burden shall be upon the Owner of the dog to prove one or more of the affirmative defenses set forth in 8.08.040 by aj preponderance of the evidence. G. At the hearing, the Owner of the dog found to be a Potentially Dangerous or Dangerous Dog shall be permitted to present evidence in support of the Owner's H. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Hearing Examiner shall issue a written  Dangerous or Dangerous Dog.  pursuant to this chapter.  position at the hearing. decision.  Ord21-11    1. Ifthe Hearing Examiner finds there is insufficient evidence to support the Potentially Dangerous or Dangerous Dog determination, it shall be rescinded and the restrictions imposed thereby annulled. No Hearing Examiner costs shall be assessed and any Potentially Dangerous registration fee paid shall be 2. If the Hearing Examiner finds there is sufficient evidence to support the Potentially Dangerous or Dangerous Dog determination, all costs of the appeal process, including attorney's fees, shall be assessed against the Owner. The decision of the Hearing Examiner shall be final and shall be mailed to the J. All impound fees are the responsibility of the Owner of the dog, no dog impound expense and fee(s) shall be assessed against the City of Ephrata or the Animal  refunded.  Owner.  Control Authority or Officer.  8.08.110 Registration of Potentially Dangerous Dog Required. All Potentially Dangerous Dogs  residing within the City of Ephrata must be registered to the current Owner. The fee for registration ofal Potentially Dangerous Dog shall be as listed in the City of Ephrata Fee Schedule in Chapter 3.35 EMC. Registration must be renewed annually. A. A Potentially Dangerous Dog certificate of registration shall be issued by the City Clerk to the Owner of a Potentially Dangerous Dog if the Owner presents to the 1. A proper enclosure as defined in Section 8.08.030(F) in which to confine the  City sufficient evidence of:  Potentially Dangerous Dog;  2. Proof of payment of the annual registration fee;  3. Proof that the dog has been micro-chipped within thirty (30) days of the date the declaration of Potentially Dangerous Dog was issued, including providing 4. Written acknowledgment of receipt of a copy of this chapter that includes a statement that the person acknowledging has read and understood what is required to keep a Potentially Dangerous Dog within the City and what actions  the microchip serial number.  may lead to al Dangerous Dog declaration.  B. Exemption to certificate of registration fee of Potentially Dangerous Dog. A dog that is classified as al Potentially Dangerous Dog under the provisions of this chapter may be exempted from the annual registration fee when renewing the Certificate of Registration, provided such dog has passed the Canine Good Citizen (CGC) test of the American Kennel Club (AKC) as administered by an AKC approved evaluator and has received the appropriate certificate from the AKC. Such dog shall be  Ord21-11    retested and shall pass such CGC test at least once every two (2) years in order to maintain this exemption. The burden of maintaining such certification is the sole responsibility of the Owner and the Owner shall bear all costs of obtaining and  maintaining such certification.  8.08.120 Prohibited Acts. It shall be unlawful for any person to:  A. Keep a Dangerous Dog within the City limits;  B. Fail to register a Potentially Dangerous Dog under Section 8.08.110(A) within thirty (30) calendar days of bringing the dog into the City limits. Fail to comply with the requirements of owning a Potentially Dangerous Dog as D. Allow a Potentially Dangerous Dog outside of a proper enclosure, unless the dog isr muzzled, restrained by a substantial chain or leash and under the physical control ofap person over the age of eighteen (18) years who is of sufficient size and stature to control the animal. The muzzle shall be made in a manner that will not cause injury to the dog or interfere with its vision or respiration but shall prevent it from  defined in Section 8.08.110;  biting any person or animal.  8.08.130 Penalties.  A. Violations of any of the prohibited acts under Section 8.08.120 may result in the  following penalties:  1.I Immediate confiscation of the dog:  a. The Animal Control Officer shall immediately confiscate and impound any Dangerous Dog found within the city limits in violation oft this Chapter and the Animal Control Authority shall hold the same until such time as the prohibited act is abated. The. Animal Control Officer shall serve notice upon the Owner in person or by regular and certified mail, return receipt requested, specifying the reason for the confiscation of the Dangerous Dog, that the Owner is responsible for payment of the costs of confinement and control, and that the dog will be destroyed in an expeditious and humane manner if the deficiencies for which the dog was confiscated are not corrected within twenty days. The Animal Control Officer shall destroy the confiscated Dangerous Dog in an expeditious and humane manner if any deficiencies required by this subsection are not corrected within twenty days b. The Animal Control Officer shall immediately impound any Dangerous Dog or Potentially Dangerous Dog found Running At Large as defined in  of notification.  Section 8.08.030(G).  Ord21-11    2. Civil infraction subject to aC-1 penalty.  B. Ifa Dangerous Dog of an Owner with a prior conviction under this Chapter or Chapter 18.08 RCW attacks or bites aj person or another domestic animal, the dog's Owner is guilty of a Class C felony, punishable in accordance with RCW 9A.20.021.In: addition, the Dangerous Dog shall be immediately confiscated by an Animal Control Officer, placed with the Animal Control Authority to be held in quarantine for the proper length of time, and thereafter destroyed in an expeditious C. The Owner of any dog that aggressively attacks and causes Severe Injury or death of any human, whether the dog has previously been declared Potentially Dangerous or Dangerous, shall be guilty of a Class C felony, punishable in accordance with RCW 9A.20.021. In addition, the Dangerous Dog shall be immediately confiscated by an Animal Control Officer, placed with the Animal Control Authority to be held in quarantine for the proper length of time, and thereafter destroyed in an expeditious and humane manner. It is an affirmative defense that the defendant must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that he or she was in compliance with the requirements for Ownership of a Dangerous Dog pursuant to this chapter and the person or domestic animal attacked or bitten by the defendant's dog trespassed on the defendant's real or personal property or provoked the defendant's D. Any person violating this Chapter shall pay all expenses, including shelter, food, veterinary expenses for identification or certification of the breed of the animal or boarding and veterinary expenses necessitated by the seizure of the dog for the protection of the public, and such other expenses as may be required for the  and humane manner.  dog without justification or excuse.  destruction of any such dog.  8.08.140 Destruction. Whenever the Animal Control Authority comes into possession of a  Dangerous Dog, or Potentially Dangerous Dog, they shall destroy the same if the dog is not reclaimed by the Owner in accordance with Chapter 8.06 EMC. Under no circumstances shall a Dangerous Dog or Potentially Dangerous Dog be sold or given  toa another as aj pet.  8.08.150 Costs.  A. The Owner of any dog found to be a Potentially Dangerous Dog or Dangerous Dog under this chapter shall be assessed all actual service costs expended under Section B. The Owner of any dog found to be a Potentially Dangerous Dog or Dangerous Dog under this chapter shall be assessed all costs of confinement for any dogi impounded  8.08.090.  pursuant to a violation of Section 8.08.120.  Ord21-11    C. The Owner of any dog found tol be a Potentially Dangerous Dog or Dangerous Dog under this chapter shall be assessed all costs of destruction expended for any dog  impounded and not reclaimed under Chapter 8.06 EMC.  8.08.160 Failure to Reclaim.  Whenever a dog is seized and impounded under this chapter, the failure to either reclaim the dog or to give a written surrender of the dog to the Animal Control Authority shall result in the Owner being prohibited from registering any new dogs in the City for aj period of one (1) year. This prohibition shall not apply to the renewal of  any existing dog license.  8.08.170 Nuisance. The harboring, keeping, and maintaining of a Potentially Dangerous Dog or  Dangerous Dog contrary to this chapter is aj public nuisance and is subject to abatement by judicial procedure or by a summary abatement in an emergency or life-threatening situation. If summary removal of a dog occurs, the dog shall not be destroyed before a hearing can be held concerning the removal and destruction unless public health and  safety requires otherwise.  8.08.180 Notification of Status of Potentially Dangerous Dog. The Owner ofa dog that has been  classified as al Potentially Dangerous Dog shall immediately notify the Animal Control  Authority when such dog: A. Is loose or unconfined;  B. Has bitten or otherwise injured al human being or attacked another animal;  C.Issold or given away or dies; D. Isn moved to another address; E. Isremoved from the City of Ephrata.  Priort toal Potentially Dangerous Dog being sold or given away, the Owner shall provide the name, address, and telephone number of the new Owner to the Animal Control Authority. The new Owner shall be subject to all of the requirements of this Chapter.  8.08.190 Dog Declared Dangerous or Potentially Dangerous by Another Jurisdiction.  A. Any person desiring to bring a dog to live in the City which has been previously declared to be Potentially Dangerous, Dangerous, vicious, or similar designation in another jurisdiction, under the provisions of chapter 18.08 RCW or comparable local ordinance, must notify the Animal Control Authority prior to moving the dog to the City. The person must provide all information requested by the Animal Control Authority and must comply with all restrictions imposed by the Animal Control Authority. There is no right to bring into the City a dog that has been the  Ord2 21-11    subject of a declaration or similar process in another jurisdiction and the Animal Control Authority will determine whether sucha a dog will be licensed and permitted B. Except to the extent inconsistent with this Section, an appeal from the decision of the. Animal Control Authority under this Section may be appealed in the manner set forth in Section 8.08.100. At the hearing, the presumption shall be that the previous jurisdiction's determination is correct and the burden shall be upon the appellant to demonstrate the invalidity of the prior declaration or similar process. Section 2. Effective date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage PASSEDbyt the City Council oft the Cityof Ephrata, Washington, this 3rd day of November,  tor reside in the City.  and publication of its summary as provided by law.  2021.  Bruce Reim, Mayor  ATTEST:  Leslie Trachsler, City Clerk APPROVED ASTO FORM: Anna Franz, City Attorney  PASSED the 3rd day of November, 2021. APPROVED the 3rd day of November, 2021. PUBLISHED the 4th day of November, 2021.  Ord21-11    ORDINANCE NO. 21-12  AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING A NEW CHAPTER 8.10TITLED  MISCELLANEOUS ANIMAL CONTROL"  THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EPHRATA, WASHINGTON ORDAINS AS  FOLLOWS:  Section 1. Chapter 8.10 of the Ephrata Municipal Code titled "Miscellaneous Animal  Control" is adopted as follows:  CHAPTER 8.10  MISCELLANEOUS ANIMAL CONTROL  Sections: 8.10.010 8.10.020 8.10.030 8.10.040 8.10.050 8.10.060 8.10.070 8.10.080 8.10.090  Responsibility of Owner or Custodian Running At Large Animal Bites/Injuries Confinement of Females in Heat Guard Dogs Dogs Barking Dog Feces Control Habitual Violations  Interference With Animal Control Officer  8.10.010 Responsibility of Owner or Custodian.  A. It shall be the responsibility of the owner or custodian of any animal within the corporate limits of the City to SO control and care for their animal SO as to prevent and keep that animal from being in violation of this chapter. In any proceeding to enforce the provisions of this title, it shall be conclusively presumed that the owner or custodian of any animal within the corporate limits of the City is aware of the animal's whereabouts, condition, or method of being treated and/or maintained. B. The owner or custodian of any animal within the corporate limits of the City shall ber responsible for any cost, charge, fee, or expense of any nature incurred by the City in capturing, controlling, caring for, or destroying any animal in violation of this chapter. Without limitation but by way of illustration, the following are examples of costs, charges, fees, and expenses which the owner or custodian shall be responsible to payt to the City: board charges, tranquilizer costs, euthanasia costs,  veterinary expenses.  Ord21-12    8.10.020 Running At Large.  A. Itis unlawful for any owner or custodian of any dog to permit any such dog to run loose or be at large upon any public street, highway, or public place, or upon private property owned by a person or persons other than the owner or custodian of the dog, within the corporate limits of the City unless such dog is confined and controlled by a leash, rope, device or cord not to exceed eight (8) feet in length. Such leash, rope, device, or cord shall be of such material and of such size as to ensure the custodian of the dog at the time can control and restrain the dog. Any person who elects to be at large within the corporate limits of the City with a dog or dogs contained and controlled by a leash, rope, device, or cord as provided for herein shall be in violation of this section if that person in fact does not or cannot control and contain any dog by the leash, rope, device, or cord method. B. Animals injured or killed in the street shall be considered as running at large; the Animal Control Officer may remove any such animals and, at his orl her discretion, take those needing medical attention to a veterinarian, to the animal shelter, or dispose of the remains. The owner of any such animal shall be responsible for all expenses oft the treatment and oft the impoundment. Reasonable efforts willl be made using the licensing records of the City to notify the owner or custodian of any such animal prior to the animal being treated and impounded. Injured animals may be destroyed humanely, if it is determined by the Animal Control Officer or a veterinarian that the animal has sustained critical injuries, suffering is extreme, and/or the prognosis for recovery is poor. The Animal Control shall consult with a veterinarian as to the disposition of injured animals, when the animals' prognosis  cannot be ascertained with reasonable certainty.  8.10.030 Animal Bites/Injuries. It shall be unlawful for any owner or custodian to permit an  animal to bite or injure al human or domestic animal. Any dog, cat, or other animal that has bitten any person shall bei immediately confined for a period of ten days. No animal under confinement shall be released from confinement until such release has been approved by the Animal Control Officer. The owner of any animal that has been reported asl having inflicteda al bite on any person shall, on demand of an Animal Control Officer, produce such animal for examination and quarantine as prescribed in this  section.  8.10.040 Confinement of Females in Heat. Any un-spayed female dog in the stage of estrus  (heat) shall be confined during such period of time in a house, building, or secure enclosure, and such area of enclosure shall be SO constructed that no other dog or dogs may gain access to the confined animal. Except that an owner can take the dog out of confinement sO long as on a leash and can take the dog to a show and show that dog unleashed if a requirement of the show. The Animal Control Officer shall order any un-spayed female that is in the stage of estrus (heat) and that is not properly confined or leashed or being shown unleashed at a show, or any such dog that is creating a neighborhood nuisance to be removed to a boarding kennel or to a veterinary hospital.  Ord21-12    All expenses incurred as a result of the confinement shall be paid by the owner. Failure to comply with the order of the Animal Control Officer shall be a violation of this  provision, and the animal shall then be impounded.  8.10.050 Guard Dogs. It shall be unlawful to place or maintain guard dogs in any area for the  protection of persons or property unless the following conditions are met: A. The dogs shall be confined to an enclosed area adequate to ensure that they will not  escape.  B. They shall be under the absolute control of a handler at all times.  . Warning signs shall be conspicuously posted indicating the presence of guard dogs, and such signs shall plainly show a telephone number where some person responsible for controlling such dogs can be reached at all times. D.Priort to the posting of guard dogs on any property, the person or persons responsible for the posting shall inform the supervising Animal Control Officer in writing of their intention to post such dogs, the number of dogs to be posted, the location where such dog or dogs willl be posted and the approximate length of time such dog  or dogs will be patrolling the area.  8.10.060 Dogs Barking. It shall be an infraction to keep or harbor any dog that disturbs others  by engaging in loud behavior or barking. It shall be the duty of City Police Officers or Animal Control Officers to respond to and investigate complaints of any dog which by frequent or habitual howling, yelping, or barking annoys or disturbs a neighborhood or the quiet and repose of a complainant, and shall have the authority to issue a notice of  infraction.  8.10.070 Dog Feces Control. It shall be the duty of every person who allows or takes any dog  off of that person's premises onto any public or private property of another, including but not limited to yards, lawns, sidewalks, alleys, parking strips, parks and recreational fields, to carry collection bags or equipment; to pick up or to remove; and to properly dispose of any feces produced by said dog while that dog is not upon the person's  premises.  8.10.080 Habitual Violations.  A. If, within any twelve (12) month period, a person has received three (3) notices of infraction for violations of this chapter, the Animal Control Officer may serve a written abatement notice on the person or upon the owner/keeper of the animal that is the subject of the notices of infraction. No notice of infraction which a person has properlyresponded to and is actively pending, or that was decided on the merits adversely to the City, shall be included among the three (3) notices of infraction. Service of the abatement notice shall be accomplished by issuing a Notice of  Violation and Order to Correct pursuant to EMC Chapter 1.22.  Ord21-12    B. The Notice of Violation shall, at a minimum: 1. Identify the three (3) notices of infraction;  2. Identify the provision of this chapter that authorizes the abatement notice; and 3. Describe what the person receiving the abatement notice must do to comply with its terms and the deadline for doing SO. This may include permanently transferring ownership, custody and control of the animal to another person not related to or residing with the person receiving the Notice; removing the animal from the City; or humanely causing such animal to be euthanized. C. The person receiving the abatement notice shall, upon request of the Animal Control Officer, provide the Animal Control Officer with a written statement signed under the penalty of perjury, stating how the person has complied with such abatement notice. Such person shall provide the Animal Control Officer such other information as the Animal Control Officer reasonably needs to substantiate D. In the event that the person receiving the abatement notice should fail to comply therewith, and in the furthere event that such person should not file a notice of appeal of such abatement notice as herein provided, or in the event that such person should fail to comply with such notice of abatement following affirmance thereof by a court, the animal which is the subject of such notice of abatement shall be deemed to be a public nuisance and it may be seized, impounded, and disposed of as provided in this chapter; provided, however, that the owner/keeper of such animal shall not be entitled to redeem such animal after such seizure and impoundment. interfere with, molest, hinder or obstruct an Animal Control Officer or any City employee or official in the discharge of his or her official duties under this chapter. Section 2. Effective date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage  compliance with the notice.  8.10.090 Interference With Animal Control Officer. It shall be unlawful for any person to  and publication ofi its summary as provided by law.  PASSED by the City Council of the City of Ephrata, Washington, this 3rd day of  November, 2021.  Bruce Reim, Mayor  Ord 21-12    ATTEST:  Leslie Trachsler, City Clerk APPROVED ASTO FORM: Anna Franz, City Attorney  PASSED the 3rd day of November, 2021. APPROVED the 3rd day of November, 2021. PUBLISHED the 4th day of November, 2021.  Ord 21-12    ORDINANCE NO.  ANORDINANCE ADOPTING A NEW CHAPTER 8.12 TITLED  "LIVESTOCK"  THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EPHRATA, WASHINGTON ORDAINS AS  FOLLOWS: follows: CHAPTER 8.12 LIVESTOCK  Section 1. Chapter 8.12 of the Ephrata Municipal Code titled "Livestock" is adopted as  Sections: 8.12.010 8.12.020  Purpose  Livestock Running At Large  8.12.010 Purpose. The purpose ofthis chapter ist to define the conditions under which the keeping  of livestock shall be permitted within the City of Ephrata. The intent is to ensure that negative impacts, including but not limited to, noise, odor, destruction of property, unsightliness or damage to natural resources, are minimized while still permitting Ephrata residents to keep, raise or breed a modest number oflivestock on appropriately  sized and located parcels ofl land.  8.12.020 Livestock Running At Large. Livestock running at large or being ridden or driven. Itis  unlawful for the owner or custodian or any horse, mule, donkey, oxen, goat, sheep, livestock, poultry or other animals generally regarded as farm or ranch animals to permit the same to run at large within the corporate limits of the city. A. It shall be unlawful for the owner or custodian of any of said animals to allow said animals to use, be upon or be ridden over, along or upon any public sidewalk, walkway or park within the corporate limits of the City. It shall not be unlawful for said animals to use, be upon or be ridden over, along or upon any street, alley or access way that is available to motor vehicles or bicycles unless such street, alley or access way has been designated by the Public Works Department as prohibiting such animals. Provided, such restriction against said animals using, being upon, or being ridden, over, along or upon any public sidewalk, walkway or park may be waived by the city council if SO requested or registered in connection with any fair, show,  exhibition, parade or other function generally open to the public.    B. Animals injured or killed in the street shall be considered as running at large; the Animal Control Officer may remove any such animals and, at his or her discretion, take those needing medical attention to a veterinarian, to the animal shelter, or dispose of the remains. The owner of any such animal shall be responsible for all expenses ofthe treatment and ofthe impoundment. Reasonable efforts will be made using the licensing records of the City to notify the owner or custodian of any such animal prior to the animal being treated and impounded. Injured animals may be destroyed humanely, if it is determined by the Animal Control Officer or a veterinarian that the animal has sustained critical injuries, suffering is extreme, and/or the prognosis for recovery is poor. The Animal Control Officer shall consult with a veterinarian as to the disposition of injured animals, when the animal's Section 2. Effective date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage  prognosis cannot be ascertained with reasonable certainty.  and publication ofi its summary as provided by law.  PASSED by the City Council of the City of Ephrata, Washington, this  day of  2021.  Bruce Reim, Mayor  ATTEST:  Leslie Trachsler, City Clerk APPROVED AS1 TO FORM: Anna Franz, City Attorney PASSED the APPROVED the PUBLISHED the  day of day of day of  2021. 2021. 2021.    ORDINANCE NO. .21-14  AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING A NEW CHAPTER 8.14TITLED  "PENALTIES AND ENFORCEMENT"  THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EPHRATA, WASHINGTON ORDAINS AS  FOLLOWS:  Section 1. Chapter 8.14 of the Ephrata Municipal Code titled "Penalties and Enforcement"  is adopted as follows:  CHAPTER 8.14  PENALTIES AND ENFORCEMENT  Sections: 8.14.010 8.14.020  Notice of Violation and Order to Correct  Penalty  8.14.010 Notice of Violation and Order to Correct: When the Animal Control Officer determines  that any violation of Title 8 requires further and/or additional enforcement action, he or she may proceed against that violation using the procedures provided in this section A. Notice of Violation and Order to Correct or Cease Activity. If the Animal Control Officer or any Police Officer determines that any activity or condition, related to the keeping or management of animals as set forth in Title 8 exists that does not conform to this' Title, he or she may issue al Notice of Violation and Order to Correct B. Penalties. Any violation for which a Notice of Violation and Order to Correct or Cease Activity has been issued shall be subject to the penalties provided for in EMC Chapter 1.22. The cumulative penalty provided for in EMC Chapter 1.22 shall not preclude the initiation of appropriate legal action to correct the violation. C.F Further Enforcement. The Animal Control Officer may refer the matter to the City Attorney for civil enforcement by injunction or other appropriate action. D. Compromise, Settlement, and Disposition of Disputes or Litigation. The Animal Control Officer and the City Attorney may negotiate a settlement or compromise, or otherwise dispose of a dispute or litigation when to do SO would be in the best  and EMC Chapter 1.22.  or Cease Activity as provided in EMC Chapter 1.22.  interests of the City.  Ord21-14    8.14.020 Penalty: Failure to comply with any provisions ofTitle 8 other than violations enforced  under Section 8.14.010 shall subject the violator to the following penalties as they are  defined in Chapter 1.04 of this code:  A. Failure to obtain license (8.04.010) C. Failure to affix license (8.04.030(B)) D. False representation (8.04.030(C)) E Use of license on another animal (8.04.030(D)) F. Failure to dispose of animal with revoked license (8.04.040) G. Household Pet Violation (8.04.050) H. Keeping exotic animal (8.04.060) I. Keeping dangerous dog in city limits (8.08.120(A)) J. Failure to register potentially dangerous dog (8.08.120(B)) L. Failure to confine potentially dangerous dog 8.08.0120  C-7 C-15 C-18 C-7 C-7 C-7 C-18 C-7 C-1 C-1 C-1 C-1 C-1 C-18 C-12 C-4 C-7 C-4 C-1 C-15 C-12 C-12 C-7 C-18 C-12 C-7 C-18 C-5 C-4 C-18 C-12 C-15 C-4  B. Failure to produce evidence of current rabies vaccination (8.04.020)  K. Failure to comply with aj potentially dangerous dog requirements (8.08.120(C)) M. Failure to properly muzzle /restrain potentially dangerous dog (8.08.120(D))  N. Dog running at large (8.10.020) 1. First offense  2. Second offense within 12 months 3. Each subsequent offense within 12 months O. Permitting an animal to bite or injure (8.10.030) 2. Each subsequent offense within 12 months Failure to confine female in heat (8.10.040) 2. Each subsequent offense within 12 months 2. Each subsequent offense within 12 months 2. Second offense within 12 months 3. Each subsequent offense within 12 months T. Dog Feces Control Violation (8.10.070) U. Keeping of any dog by a Habitual Violation Owner (8.10.080) V. Interference with Animal Control Officer (8.10.090) W. Livestock at large (8.12.080) 1. First offense  1. First offense  P. Failure or refusal to confine or produce a biting animal (8.10.030)  1. First offense 1. First offense S. Dogs Barking (8.10.060) 1. First offense  R. Failure to comply with guard dog restrictionsyconditions (8.10.050)  2. Each subsequent offense within 12 months Y. All Other Livestock Violations (8.12.010-080)  X. Allowing Livestock on Sidewalks, Parks, or Walkways (8.12.080(A))  Ord21-14    Section 2. Effective date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage  and publication ofi its summary as provided by law.  PASSED by the City Council of the City of Ephrata, Washington, this 3rd day of  November, 2021.  Bruce Reim, Mayor  ATTEST:  Leslie Trachsler, City Clerk APPROVED ASTOFORM: Anna Franz, City Attorney  PASSED the 3rd day of November, 2021. APPROVED the 3rd day of November, 2021. PUBLISHED the 4th day of November, 2021.  Ord21-14