OTHER IMPLICATIONS. Procurement Issues None Personnel Implications None Governance/Performance Management None Community Safety including Section 17 of Crime and Disorder Act 1998 None Policy None Environmental None
OTHER IMPLICATIONS a) Does the legislation have indirect or long-term financial impacts to the City of Seattle that are not reflected in the above? No.
OTHER IMPLICATIONS. There may be legal issues regarding the negotiation of the contract with Cosmo. The Office of the City Solicitor has prepared a separate response on this topic (Appendix 2). There are no privacy, social, or environmental implications identified.
OTHER IMPLICATIONS. Any amendment to Schedule 9 of the XXXX Agreement will be in effect until December 31, 2023. The proposed options deal only with the recycling depots and civic recycling portions of the agreement. As such, the multi-unit residential recycling program is not expected to be affected in any way. There are no privacy, social, or environmental implications identified.
OTHER IMPLICATIONS. [For Ordinance 124882 / CB 118516] Xxxx Xxxxxxxxxxxx LEG Rental Agreement Regulation and TRAO ORD V1
OTHER IMPLICATIONS a) Does the legislation have indirect or long-term financial impacts to the City of Seattle that are not reflected in the above? No. The proposed agreement continues an existing business arrangement, so no incremental changes to costs or revenues are expected. Form revised: April 30, 2015 Xxxxxx X. Xxxxxxxx, Xx. [For Ordinance 124817 / Council Bill 118441] SCL Boundary Maintenance Obligations and Ownership Agreement SUM May 21, 2015 #D1
OTHER IMPLICATIONS. Failure to delegate authority may have an impact on the quality of life for all Milton Keynes residents (stakeholders) which address issues of Human Rights, Equalities/Diversity and sustainability. Environmental crime is detrimental to the amenity of an area and results in an air of neglect on an estate/area, which in turn can lead to an increase in criminal activity. Rapid response, effective enforcement action along with a punitive payment scheme for offences committed will help to reduce the issues that environmental crimes create. Due to full costs not always being awarded by the courts and the number of FPNs being issued and paid are unknown in advance, it is impossible to forecast exact figures. However, by working closely with the courts we can highlight the costs involved with these prosecutions and the importance of full costs being awarded back to the authority. Another factor to take into consideration is that once the costs have been set/awarded through the court, the repayment is administered by them. Unfortunately, should offenders have repayment issues then this is dealt with by the court and as such MKC has no control over the repayment mechanism or period. Y Equalities/Diversity Y Sustainability Y Human Rights N E-Government Y Stakeholders Y Crime and Disorder Background Papers: Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005 Environmental Protection Act 1990 Highways Act 1980 Town & Country Planning Act 1990 Anti Social Behaviour Act 2003 Dogs (Fouling of Land) Act 1986 Criminal Damage Act 1971 Refuse Disposal (Amenities) Act 1987 Enforcement Policy Current FPN rates DEFRA guidance on Management of Shopping Trolleys SaferMK/Parish docs – Action Plan NAG priorities ANNEX Xxxxxx Keynes Council Environment Services – Safer Communities Unit Fixed Penalty Notice Standard Operating Procedure May 2010
OTHER IMPLICATIONS. (You will need to have considered other implications in preparing this report. Please indicate which ones apply?) No other implications
OTHER IMPLICATIONS a) Does the legislation have indirect or long-term financial impacts to the City of Seattle that are not reflected in the above? The proposed agreement would continue a legal framework that provides SCL the certainty of franchise rights when it operates an electrical system in the City of SeaTac. SCL’s 2015 Adopted Budget and the 2016 endorsed budget and revised strategic plan assumes that SCL continues this franchise with the associated operational and capital costs and related rate-based revenue. In addition, approval of this proposed Bill will allow SCL to continue to charge its customers in SeaTac a rate differential as specified by the City of SeaTac, and remit a contract fee to the City of SeaTac in consideration of Shoreline foregoing its rights to establish its own electric utility.
OTHER IMPLICATIONS a) Is there financial cost or other impacts of not implementing the legislation? Yes. If the legislation is not implemented, SPU is obligated to conduct the monitoring activities, and will proceed with separate agreements with WDFW, increasing soft costs for both agencies.
