11/16/1999 City CouncilEDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES
NOVEMBER 16, 1999
The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Barbara Fahey in the
Library Plaza Room, 650 Main Street, followed by the flag salute.
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Barbara Fahey, Mayor
Thomas A. Miller, Council President
Gary Haakenson, Councilmember
Dave Earling, Councilmember
John Nordquist, Councilmember
Michael Plunkett, Councilmember
Jim White, Councilmember
Dick Van Hollebeke, Councilmember
ALSO PRESENT
Christie Lee, Student Representative
1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
STAFF PRESENT
Tom Tomberg, Fire Chief
Greg Wean, Assistant Police Chief
Ray Miller, Development Services Director
Peggy Hetzler, Administrative Services Director
Rob Chave, Planning Manager
Noel Miller, Public Works Director
James Walker, City Engineer
Arvilla Ohlde, Parks and Recreation Director
Debbie Dawson, Animal Control /Code Enfor.
Michael Karber, City Attorney
Sandy Chase, City Clerk
Jeannie Dines, Recorder
Mayor Fahey requested the addition to the Agenda of a discussion item on the City approach to reduce
Local Improvement District (LID) 215 and LID 216 assessments if actual costs are below final
assessments.
Change to COUNCIL PRESIDENT MILLER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WHITE, TO
Benda ADD A DISCUSSION ON THE CITY APPROACH TO REDUCE LOCAL IMPROVEMENT
DISTRICT (LID) 215 AND LID 216 ASSESSMENTS IF ACTUAL COST$ ARE BELOW FINAL
ASSESSMENTS TO THE AGENDA AS ITEM 7A. MOTION CARRIED.
COUNCILMEMBER HAAKENSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WHITE,
FOR APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED.
2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
Councilmember Haakenson requested Items B and C be removed from the Consent Agenda.
COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT
MILLER, FOR APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED.
The agenda items approved are as follows:
(A) ROLL CALL
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 16, 1999
Page 1
17�
prove (D) APPROVAL OF CLAIM WARRANTS #35898 THROUGH #37307 FOR THE WEEK OF
in, I NOVEMBER 8,1999, IN THE AMOUNT OF $385,633.96
rrants
nville (E) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE
LID Sanitary PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH CHS ENGINEERS, INC. FOR
Sewer PERRINVILLE LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (LID) SANITARY SEWER
mprove.
IMPROVEMENTS DESIGN PROJECT
8'" Ave. W/ (I REPORT ON FINAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS FOR THE 78TH AVENUE WEST / 212TH
212" St. SW STREET SW CROSSWALK LIGHTING PROJECT AND COUNCIL ACCEPTANCE OF
Crosswalk
PROJECT
WWTP
umace (G) REPORT ON QUOTES RECEIVED FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF SHOP FURNACE
AT TREATMENT PLANT AND AWARD TO LODESTAR COMPANY, INC. ($5,982, Not
Including Sales Tax)
Item B: Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of November 6 1999
COUNCIL PRESIDENT MILLER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER VAN
HOLLEBEKE, TO REVISE THE NOVEMBER 6 MINUTES TO REFLECT THAT
COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST WAS ABSENT. MOTION CARRIED.
pprove
11/6/99 COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT MILLER,
Minutes as
Corrected TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 6, 1999 AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED,
COUNCILMEMBER HAAKENSON ABSTAINED. (Councilmember Haakenson abstained due to
his absence from the November 6 meeting.)
Item C• Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of November 9,, 1999
Councilmember Haakenson advised he was absent from the November 9 meeting and would abstain
from the vote.
Council President Miller requested the November 9 minutes reflect the statement he made at the meeting
that Councilmember Earling's absence was due to his speaking at a State Transportation meeting in
Yakima, Councilmember Haakenson's absence was due to a pre - planned vacation, and Councilmember
Approve White's late arrival was due to his attending a, family function.
11/9/99
Minutes as COUNCIL PRESIDENT MILLER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER VAN
Corrected HOLLEBEKE, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 9 AS AMENDED. MOTION
CARRIED, COUNCILMEMBERS HAAHENSON AND EARLING ABSTAINED.
Hearing 3. ANNUAL REPORT FROM HEARING EXAMINER RONALD McCONNELL
Examiner
Annual Ronald McConnell, Hearing Examiner, reported the number of cases he prepared this year has
Report
increased dramatically and may reach as many as 83. The average number of cases he has prepared over
the past three years has been 45 -49. He commented more difficult properties are being developed which
results in more complex cases. He, noted there have also been more appeals and requests for
reconsideration this year.
Councilmember Van Hollebeke asked why there have been more appeals and requests for
reconsideration. Mr. McConnell answered a number of the appeals have been SEPA appeals where staff
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 16, 1999
Page 2
has made a Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance (MDNS) and the neighbors want a full EIS.
He reiterated many cases are somewhat complex due to issues such as view blockage and the
development of sensitive areas.
Councilmember' Van Hollebeke referred to a recent situation presented to the Council regarding timing
of an appeal and the process of notification. He ,asked Mr. McConnell if there were more
effective /timely methods of notifying parties of the Hearing Examiner's decision and for clarifying the
timeline for an appeal. Mr. McConnell answered some jurisdictions have a date specific written on the
appeal report which may resolve some confusion. Councilmember Van Hollebeke requested Mr.
McConnell provide information regarding what other jurisdictions in the area do and make suggestions
for improving communication.
Mayor Fahey expressed her appreciation to Mr. McConnell for the service he provided to the City during
the past year. She advised that Mr. McConnell's request to increase the retainer from $2,835 per month
to $3,120 to compensate for the anticipated increase in the caseload has been included in the 2000
proposed budget. She advised Mr. McConnell is under contract with the City for the next three years and
he has indicated his desire and ability to continue. Mayor Fahey expressed her appreciation for his
knowledge of the City's codes and the competency of his reports.
Public 4. PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO EDMONDS COMMUNITY
Hearing— DEVELOPMENT CODE CHAPTER 0.35 ANIMALS. THE PURPOSE OF THIS PUBLIC
ECDC HEARING IS TO GATHER PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE CITY'S LAND USE REGULATIONS
Chapter
17.35, GOVERNING ANIMALS. LAND USE REGULATIONS DETERMINE HOW MANY ANIMAL S
Animals MAY BE KEPT IN EACH ZONING CLASSIFICATION. THESE REGULATIONS HAVE NOT
BEEN REVIEWED FOR MANY YEARS, AND PUBLIC COMPLAINTS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED
BY THE CITY IN RECENT YEARS CONCERNING SOME TYPES OF ANIMALS (E.G.
HORSES, CHICKENS) KEPT IN SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS.
Mayor Fahey asked if any Councilmember felt they would be unable to participate in the process. There
were no disclosures made by any Councilmember. Mayor Fahey asked if any member of the audience .
objected to the participation of any Councilmember. There were no objections voiced. Mayor Fahey
described the process for the hearing, indicating each member of the public would be given three minutes
to speak.
Planning Manager Rob Chave explained a citywide mailing had been done to explain and advertise the
public hearing. He said the focus of the public hearing was on the land use aspects of the animal
regulations. Although the Edmonds City Code (ECC) also contains provisions, formerly known as the
,animal control regulations, pertaining to how animals are kept on property, the land use aspects of the
animal regulations addresses the types of animals and the number. The revisions to the land use code
that were advertised were the minimum changes the Council wanted to have considered but the intent
was to ensure the public had an opportunity to address any of the possible changes being considered. For
example, one of the significant changes being considered in the draft is that the keeping of horses would
be permitted, grandfathered in, but once that animal died or was removed from the property, that use
must cease. The Council is particularly interested in input regarding this provision as another option
would be to allow horses or other hoofed animals to be kept indefinitely as long as the land use was
established and grandfathered.
,Mr. Chave explained the other significant change to the existing land use provisions is with poultry,
which are currently not permitted. They have been considered to be grandfathered in if they existed prior
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 16, 1999
Page 3
to the placement of the prohibition in the land use code. For example, if the use of chickens had been
established on a property under Snohomish County regulations and that use continued, the property
owner would still be allowed to keep chickens. The draft revisions circulated via the citywide mailer
addresses chickens the same as horses; if a grandfathered use existed, it would be allowed to continue as
long as those animals remained on the property. 'If a chicken was removed or died, it could not be
replaced. He acknowledged. this created interesting enforcement challenges.
Mr. Chave advised there was no change proposed in the number of small domesticated animals (dogs,
cats, rabbits, etc.) that can be kept, that number remained at three. He said a number of
technical /defmitional.changes were also proposed to clarify categories certain animals were in.
Councilmember White asked who developed the proposed land use regulations. Mr. Chave answered at
the Council's last work session, two drafts were considered, one developed by the Planning Board and
one as a result of discussion at the Community Services Committee. At the conclusion of those
discussions, it was decided a nearly status quo regarding small domestic animals would be advertised for
this public hearing. He said one of the options explored by the Planning Board was expanding the
number of small domestic animals allowed to five. Mr. Chave advised that City Attorney Michael
Karber had been involved in the drafting of the ordinances and has been involved in discussions with the
Police Department and Animal Control regarding their regulations as they relate to the land use code..
City Attorney Michael Karber explained the current code allows three small domesticated animals. A
change is proposed to increase the number of small domesticated animals allowed in a multifamily zone
from one to three. The rationale for the change. was it was not appropriate to differentiate between
multifamily and single family regarding the keeping of small domesticated animals. Mr. Chave said the
change also recognizes that most multifamily situations have their own restrictions on pets.
Councilmember White did not recall the Council taking a position on the number of small domesticated
animals. Mr. Chave agreed this was not the Council's draft; the intent was to seek testimony regarding
the issues.
Councilmember Haakenson asked if sheep were considered covered animals. Mr. Chave answered yes.
He referred to the definition of a covered animal, "hoofed animals usually found on farms including but
not limited to horses, ponies, mules, donkeys, bovine animals, sheep, goats, lama and/or swine including
pot bellied pigs." He read the definition of small domesticated animals, "animals commonly and
normally kept or owned in association with a residential unit. Small domesticated animals.include dogs,
cats, rabbits, other similar domesticated animals. Small domesticated animals shall not include poultry
or covered animals."
Mayor Fahey opened the public participation portion of the public hearing.
Hank Krist, 3 Park Place, Edmonds, said the draft indicated the Council had declared the City a
developed urban community, primarily of residential character. With that definition in mind and the
current regulations, he encouraged the City to enforce the current laws and prohibit the keeping of all
poultry, as the keeping of poultry was more consistent with a farm rather than an urban community. If
the City was not willing to prohibit the keeping of all poultry, he recommended further consideration be
given to paragraph b of Section 17.35.040 which reads, "in the event that the covered animal or poultry
dies or is removed or absent from the premises for a continuous period ' of more than 180 days, the
continued keeping of that animal or of a new or replacement animal shall not be permitted. He said this
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 16, 1999
Page 4
section presented enforcement difficulties due to the difficulty in determining when a chicken was
replaced. He suggested a resident keeping poultry register the number of poultry with the City and a date
1 -2 years in the future be determined when all poultry would be prohibited in the City. He pointed out
the draft did not include a limit on the number of poultry although the number of cats and dogs were
limited to three. He felt it was appropriate to also limit poultry to three. He said the limit of three
cats /dogs was too low and many families are violating the current regulations. He said horses seem to be
well regulated now and did not see a need to change those regulations.
Sandra Avanessian, 20505 Maplewood Drive, Edmonds, spoke in opposition to the portion of the draft
that prohibited replacement of an animal that died, stating this would deprive her of her constitutional
right to enjoy her property. The purpose of the ordinance according to the proposed language was to
resolve conflict between the keeping of animals, of various types and the quiet use and enjoyment of
property and to establish a balance between the rights of animal owners and other residents of the City.
She questioned the use of the word "quiet" as toys, cars and tools are often noisier than animals. She
said the City may enact zoning regulations for the public health, safety and welfare, but they must be
aimed at achieving a legitimate public interest, be reasonably necessary to achieve that purpose, and not
be unduly oppressive to the landowner. She said the ordinance is not the only reasonable method to
protect against conflicts and the use and enjoyment of property as the same can be achieved through lot
size, etc. She pointed out Seattle does not ban horses or cows in residential neighborhoods but limits lot
size and number of animals. She said Bellevue allows horses on some of the most valuable real estate in
the city. She said her family purchased their property in 1949 with the expectation of keeping horses as
they have done continuously. The lot is sufficiently large and she felt banning a previous use was unduly
oppressive. She did not wish to develop her property as she enjoyed the open space and neighbors are
likely glad she is preserving the open .space. As the owner and taxpayer of the property, she expected the
City to protect her quiet use and enjoyment of her property.
Glenn Loboudger, 15920 72M Avenue W, Edmonds, described the loss of a lamb as a result of an
attack by two neighborhood rogue dogs. The regulations as proposed would not allow them to replace
the lamb. He said they have adequate land for the sheep they have kept on their property for 28 years.
He commented people who visited the lambs as children are returning with their children. He
recommended the Council allow replacement of a covered animal.
Christine Landerholm, 723 Melody Lane, Edmonds, requested the Council respect the right of
property owners to determine how their land will be used. She urged the Council to be forward - thinking
about the preservation of historic land use, particularly the lot at the end of Melody Lane. She said there
are two horses there who do no harm, do not contribute to any noise or air pollution, do not create odors,
pose no danger of disease transmission and are a use compatible with residential land use. She felt the
horses were beneficial as they contributed to a very unique, pastoral, serene setting in their
neighborhood. The proposed land size of 20,000 square feet per animal is sufficient to support adequate
waste disposal. The vegetation surrounding the pastureland at Melody Lane is sufficient to prevent run-
off and protect Shell Creek.
Sarah Landerholm, 723 Melody Lane, Edmonds, who lives next to the horses owned by Ashley Previs
and her family, said she likes to visit, ride, feed and groom the horses. She said the horses do not smell
bad and do not attract flies. She questioned how anyone could not like the horses and hoped there were
no changes made in the law that make owning a horse harder because she wanted to own a horse.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 16, 1999
Page 5
Judy Cody, 9406 216"' Street SW, Edmonds, said limiting each household to three pets was not the
solution to animal control. She said the law penalizes responsible pet owners who are able to care for
more than three pets and whose pets have not been nuisances. She said there are not enough good homes
for all the pets who need them and if some families can accommodate more, they should be allowed to
do so. She said in recent years she has encountered more and more lost/abandoned pets. She said the
responsibility of finding new homes for lost/abandoned pets was previously done by PAWS but the City
has recently contracted with Adix who may not have the same agenda as PAWS. She said license tags
were a useless means of tracking citizens' pets and recommended the City contract with local
veterinarians to insert chips in all pets via a one -time registration. She also recommended all pets be
required to be spayed or neutered.
Dayne Richard, 802 Main Street, Edmonds, said he often visits the horses owned by Katie and Ashley
Previs. He said the horses could not be a nuisance because they are loving, nice and calm. He
questioned why anyone would want the horses to leave. He liked the horses even though they were not
his and urged the Council to think about how Ashley and Katie Previs feel about them. He
recommended the horses be allowed to stay.
Koorash Mansourzadeh, 906 Hindley Lane, Edmonds, said the Previs' horses feel safe on Melody
Lane. He said Mrs. Previs has had the horses since she was 12 and questioned why anyone would want
to ban horses from Edmonds. He urged the Council not to have horses removed from the City.
Derek Huff, 810 Hindley Lane, Edmonds, who lives near the horses, said the horses are a big part of
his life. He said it would be a mistake to get rid of the horses as many people enjoy them. If the horses
are removed, many people will be disappointed and it would be very sad. He urged the Council to
consider the number of people who do not want the horses removed.
Arya Mansourzadeh, 906 Hindley Lane, Edmonds, said when he saw the Previs' horses, he knew that
Ashley, Loren and Mr. and Mrs. Previs took good care of them. He liked Edmonds because people can
keep horses, lamas and other farm animals. He said it would also. be sad if the Previs' horses were
removed. He said the horses mean a lot to Mrs. Previs as she has had them since she was a teenager.
Curtis White, 9123 206th Street SW, Edmonds, said the proposed animal ordinance was too restrictive.
He did not think an ordinance for animals should make the rules the same for a downtown condominium
and for houses that have %2 acre of land. Although it may not be appropriate for a person living in a
downtown condominium to have two dogs and two cats, it may be appropriate for a person living on a
acre of land. This also applied to horses, goats, lamas, cows, chickens or turkeys, animals that currently
live in the City. He said the rule should be that animals cannot harm the neighborhood or disturb
neighbors. He said .the rules should not prohibit horses if a resident has adequate space for it. Instead,
the rules should make residents responsible for how they impact their neighbors. The proposed
ordinance does not give animal owners an opportunity to be responsible. He said Edmonds residents are
responsible and will be good neighbors; if not, the animal control officer can address it.
Ralph Turner, 8716 Talbot Road, Edmonds, spoke in favor of allowing any property owner to keep
any of the animals designated as hoofed animals, bovine, etc. if there are strict regulations and they do
not harm anyone. He pointed out the lamb Mr. Loboudger lost was as important to him as a dog. He
said it was crucial that children have the opportunity to be around animals and objected to depriving
them of that experience. He said the definition of Edmonds' as urban is not an achievement and only
results in the City becoming a suburb of Seattle. He felt it was more important to preserve open areas to
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 16, 1999
Page 6
maintain some of Edmonds' charm. He said a calf that numerous children petted at the Monroe State
Fair is being raised in Edmonds and has solidified the neighborhood. The calf is now 2000 lbs. but is as
affectionate as many dogs. He stressed further restrictions should not be enacted and the charm of
Edmonds retained by allowing animals in the City.
Katie Previs, 19305 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds, said she currently keeps horses on Melody Lane
and has had horses here since she was 11 years old, over 30 years. She acknowledged keeping the horses
is a difficult commitment but it is very important to the children. They haul the horses to other property
to ride and were not asking to be allowed to ride the horses in the City. Under the new ordinance, the
horses cannot be replaced or another horse purchased. She stressed her family and her animals are her
passion and urged the City not to change the regulations.
Ashley Previs, 19305 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds, one of the owners of the horses on Melody
Lane, said it was a bad idea to ban horses from Edmonds because horses have been in the City for over
50 years. As a small child, she loved to visit the horses and now has her own horse and loves riding with
her family. She felt it was good to have horses in the community because people like to watch them and
feed them. She thanked the people who supported their keeping the horses.
Jacob Greene, 303 Skyline Drive, Edmonds, said horses are similar to other pets as they are peaceful
and fun to watch. He felt horses should be allowed to stay in Edmonds and urged the Council to allow
the Previs to be allowed to keep their horses.
Paige Huff, 810 Hindley Lane, Edmonds, said she understood the City was considering a change in the
law that would eventually not allow horses to be kept in Edmonds. She said Katie Previs has kept her
horses since she was 11 years old and loves them and takes great care of them. She said many people on
their street visit and feed the horses. As she has always wanted to own a horse, it is nice to help care for
them. She said all horses should be allowed to remain in Edmonds. She compared this matter to voting
and the need to consider the majority of votes, which in this instance were in favor of the horses. She
said most people want the horses to stay and encouraged the City to consider letting the horses stay.
Diana Reed, 704 Melody Lane, Edmonds, said when she first purchased her house in 1967, there were
horses, quail, pheasant, nesting Bald Eagles, possums, etc. and it was a wonderful place to raise her
daughter. When she returned to the house in 1997, she was delighted to find there were still horses, that
the community had grown with more children and Edmonds had not become a suburban community
filled with strangers. She said the charm of Edmonds includes the community. She recalled when horses
could be ridden in the City and other animals that were kept at businesses in the City. She said the
horses are well cared for and add a dimension to the area. She hoped an ordinance would not dictate how
landowners could use their property as long as the peace and quiet of the neighborhood was not
disturbed. She acknowledged one neighbor in their area -wanted some changes made but now felt the
issues that concerned him had been resolved.
Tim Crosby, 1028 7th Avenue S, Edmonds, said they have a lot of cats in their neighborhood, many
who use their sandbox and their vegetable garden as a litter box. In addition, they have witnessed cats
killing birds, causing them to remove their birdfeeder. He referred to health concerns from cat waste.
As cats are not licensed and allowed to roam free, he questioned whether they were considered domestic
animals or wild animals. He said cats already have cost them money (covers for their sandbox) and an
Edmonds Animal Control Officer recently informed him that 75% of their time is spent dealing with cats
but there is no revenue from cat licenses. He was told he could purchase a cat trap and Animal Control
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 16; 1999
Page 7
would remove the animal, another cost to him and to the City. He questioned what he could do about
cats and whether the expenditure on cats was fiscally responsible for the City.
Scott Forslund, 20314 84" Place W, Edmonds, said his issue was not about the Previs' horses, it was
with the definition of Edmonds as urban residential and the idea that that definition should be promoted
and protected. He referred to other areas that are urban residential, each with their own character, and
questioned if that was what residents wanted Edmonds to become. He agreed with the .City regulating
public properties or improper impacts on public property by private individuals but felt the proposed
regulations were bad public policy, may be unconstitutional, were a horrible vision of what the City
could still be, and sent a bad message to children about what is important. He urged the City to abandon .
the proposed regulations.
Jim Adix, 21100 72nd Avenue W, Edmonds, urged the Council not to adopt the new proposal,
observing animals mean different things to different people and are a part of everyone's lives. He said
they deal with 50 -60 dogs and cats each day that are boarded by their owners. Although the City is
urban, it can still have a bit of rural life. He described feeding 100 -300 ducks that visit his property each
morning and evening. He encouraged the City to allow residents to keep horses or whatever animal they
want. He said many of their customers currently have more than three animals. Mayor Fahey asked Mr.
Adix to comment on the keeping of fowl. Mr. Adix said there was no reason why a resident should not
keep chickens or other animals. He said children enjoy animals and he did not want the animals to be
forced to leave Edmonds.
Lynn Adix, 21100 72nd Avenue W, Edmonds, pointed out irresponsible pet ownership was the real
issue. She said the existing Animal Control works well in Edmonds and.. residents should use it. She
stated people should be required to keep their pets in a responsible manner rather than prohibiting the
animal.
Alvin Rutledge, 7101 Lake Ballinger Way, Edmonds, said there has been a small increase in animals
in the City. He pointed out the City lacked land management standards. Due to potential controversy
over whatever alternative is ultimately selected, he urged the Council to base their decision on hard data
not opinions and judgment.
Elaine Yard, 9209 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds, said for many years they have enjoyed both
wildlife and domestic animals. She pointed out unfortunate events occur in children's lives and said pets
help children occupy their interest and take their focus off those unfortunate events. She urged the
Council to remember that everyone has different "likes;" they like Edmonds which is now a small urban
town.
Roger Hertrich, 1020 Puget Drive, Edmonds, said property owners should have the right to do as they
wish on their property as long as it does not constitute a nuisance, health, or safety problem to other
citizens. He said the proposed ordinance was a prohibition based on the fact the Edmonds is an urban
town. He suggested no animals be prohibited but rather the City strictly enforce nuisance clauses,
possibly revising the nuisance clauses to improve enforcement. He agreed the keeping of animals or
fowl depended on the property size but said the existing regulations address that issue.
Lars Olsen, c/o 561 Pine, Edmonds, found the ordinance to be quite unusual as the ordinance did not
regulate horses but referred to them as covered animals. The ordinance did not indicate dogs or cats,
they were referred to as small domesticated animals and the ordinance referred to a house as a residential
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 16, 1999
Page 8
dwelling unit. He said the ordinance was couched in definitions. He referred to the Constitution, Bill of
Rights and the pursuit of happiness and questioned the Council's authority to regulate private property.
If the Council regulated animals in this way, he hoped the people would start a recall petition and remove
Councilmembers from office. He recommended the City.not meddle in private affairs and regulate only
the corporate affairs of the City.
Kevin Clarke, 23924 107 " Place W, Edmonds, pointed out multifamily development is permitted in
the BC zone and recommended animal regulations for that zone be considered. He cautioned the City on
limiting the number of animals as well as enacting a grandfather clause, pointing out many horses are
maintained better than some dogs. He stressed the way animals are cared for is more important than the
number or type. He said it was inappropriate to limit pot bellied pigs as many are kept as indoor pets and
are nearly as common as dogs. He explained the City is made up of areas previously part of
unincorporated, Snohomish County and people moved to those areas because they were semi - rural. He
said grandfathering would not be effective even over 20 years and residents should be allowed to keep
their animals particularly on larger lots.
Carol Hahn, 1031 2" Ave S; Edmonds, said they have always had cats and dogs, and previously had
pigs, goats, chickens, ducks, cows, etc. She said children should not have to go to a zoo to see a cow,
horse, goat or pig. These animals can live comfortably on numerous lots in Edmonds and should not be
restricted to residents who have had them previously. She pointed out there is room for animals on her
'/2+ acre property and someone purchasing the property should be allowed to have the animals they are
able to maintain. She urged the City to regulate how animals are cared for and not the number and type.
Hearing no further comment, Mayor Fahey closed the public participation portion of the public hearing.
She explained the proposed changes were developed as a result of citizen requests, She observed the
people who originated many of the proposals and spoke to the Planning Board about them were not
present to provide their point of view. She stressed the Council was not necessarily interested in
changing the character of Edmonds but were only responding to concerns. She thanked citizens for
speaking about the quality of life they would like maintained in Edmonds and thanked the children who
participated in the process. She clarified staff is seeking guidance from the Council regarding the
proposed amendments.
Councilmember White said the purpose of the public hearing was to receive public comment on the
public's view and observed the public had clearly indicated their views. He said the ordinance is
proposed as a zoning ordinance under the Edmonds Community Development Code, a premise that is
erroneous. He objected to the purpose as stated in the ordinance that "the City Council finds and
declares the City of Edmonds is a developed urban community of primarily residential character." He
observed the issue before the Council is whether Edmonds should "take the first step on a slippery slope"
by adopting a zoning ordinance that states in Edmonds certain things cannot be done with property. He
said this represented an intrusion into people's fundamental rights to do with their property what they
chose. He acknowledged there are limits on what one can do with their property. He said the,question is
whether the Council should intrude on the lives of citizens and indicate they do not accept citizens'
ability to be responsible citizens and regulate themselves regarding the keeping of animals and preempt
their right to even try by passing an ordinance. He pointed out Edmonds City Code (ECC) Section 5.05
defines ,the parameters under which an animal in the City must be kept and is the only ordinance that
should govern this issue. He recommended the focus be on regulating the nuisance or impact of keeping
animals on neighbors. If a resident allows their animals to become a nuisance, Section 5.05 of ECC
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
.November 16, 1999
Page 9
addresses it. He recommended staff be directed to eliminate the proposed .ordinance and consider
Section 5.05 of ECC, expanding if necessary what is allowed and how it is allowed.
Councilmember Van Hollebeke said the reason this issue was so concerning to him was because it has
been one of the most repetitive items before the Council, during his four year term. as well as has been
reviewed by the Planning Board and staff for countless hours. Councilmember Van Hollebeke said he
was not opposed to animals and agreed the concept of grandfathering may not be appropriate. His
concern was how to protect residents' property rights as well as their right to a peaceful and tranquil life.
He said a rooster crowing in the early morning hours or a dog barking incessantly did not represent his
idea of peaceful surroundings. He recalled residents arguing that their rights were being. trampled or
their freedom being squelched. Although many feel Animal Control should be able to address this issue,
Animal Control is one of many items considered for elimination due to funding cuts as a result of I -695.
He agreed with Councilmember White's comments and welcomed suggestions so this item could be
resolved to the satisfaction of the majority of residents.
Councilmember Haakenson said before the public hearing, the idea of disallowing the replacement of a
horse that died was ludicrous to him and nothing he heard this evening changed that opinion other than
expanding that belief to any covered animal. He referred to an option provided by staff, "horses would
still be permitted in single family zones, but only the specific animals that are there now. The land use
would be discontinued when the current animals died or were removed from the property. Another
option would be to allow any existing horse land uses to continue so long as any horse is kept on the
property (i.e. not limit the use to the existing animals, so that existing horse pastures could be continued
indefinitely)." He recommended this option be used to include all covered animals, not just horses. He
agreed with Mr. Turner's comments regarding the calf that children and adults in the neighborhood
watched grow and supported having the calf replaced if necessary. However, the proposed ordinance
would not allow replacement.
Councilmember White disagreed with the direction Councilmember Haakenson recommended staff take
as it continues to tell property owners what they can and cannot do with their property regardless of the
size of their property and regardless of the impacts on the neighborhood. He pointed out if someone
chose to move into the City and demolished an adjacent house so they would have adequate space for a
cow, horse or goat, that would be prohibited by the City's ordinances. Further, the City's ordinances
would prohibit the addition of arhorse in the future on a property where a horse does not currently exist.
He stressed the creation of a zoning ordinance overstepped what the Council should be considering as
this is not a zoning issue but a health and safety issue.
Councilmember Haakenson agreed with Councilmember, White's comments and assumed if the property
was of a large enough size that, a horse or covered animal would be allowed, it should be allowed
whether it was grandfathered or not.
Council President Miller shared Councilmember White's concerns and viewed this issue as one of
property rights and responsible pet ownership. He recommended the first sentence of 17.35.010 be
deleted (The City Council finds and declares that the City of Edmonds is a developed urban community
of primarily residential character) and the language in Section 17.35.030 deleted to allow any number of
domesticated animals. He said the size of property would determine the number of animals. Regarding
the keeping of poultry, he preferred poultry not be permitted. Regarding covered animals, he
recommended the last sentence of Section B be deleted (In the event the covered animal or poultry dies
or is removed or absent from the premises for a continuous period of more than 180 days, the continued
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 16, 1999
Page 10
keeping of that animal or of a new or replacement animal shall not be permitted.). Council President
Miller said he did not favor chickens in a residential area and if anything were limited to three, it should
be the chickens.
Councilmember White disagreed with Council President Miller, stating there was no difference between
the keeping of a chicken, horse, or cow, it was still government telling people what they -can and cannot
do with their property. If the chicken, horse, cow, or dog created a nuisance and interfered with the
neighbor's right to enjoy his/her property, that should be regulated. He stressed there was no basis to
presume the keeping of a chicken would necessarily lead to an offensive interaction with neighbors or
have negative effects on the neighbor's property. Council President Miller agreed if the chickens are
kept in an area that did not disturb their neighbors but said a number of residents contacted him pointing
out the difficulties chickens cause. He said fundamentally he agreed this was an issue of property rights.
Councilmember Earling struggled with the issue of someone purchasing a house near a pasture
containing an animal and. knowing that animal exists, versus someone purchasing a home, in a
neighborhood that does not currently have horses and a horse is later added to the neighborhood, thereby
changing the character of a neighborhood. He agreed with Council President Miller's comments
regarding the keeping of poultry. He believed fundamentally in private property rights, commenting
people have the right to keep animals on their property but people without animals have the right to quiet
enjoyment of their property. He said the question is how to police the problem.
Councilmember White said it would be appropriate to return this issue to the Planning Board who
originally reviewed the ordinance and presented a significantly revised ordinance without input from the
Council.
Council President Miller disagreed with returning this issue to the Planning Board and suggested it be
returned to Council Committee. Councilmember White noted this issue had been reviewed by both the
Community Services/Development Services and the Public Safety committees. Council President Miller
said he would pursue the matter with the Chair of the appropriate Council Committees.
As there was no more discussion regarding this matter, Mayor Fahey declared a brief recess.
Upon reconvening, Mayor Fahey advised that during the recess the City Attorney recommended the
discussion on the City approach to reduce Local Improvement District (LID) 215 and LID 216
assessments be moved from Item 7A to Item 4A.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT MILLER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WHITE, TO
MOVED ITEM 7A TO ITEM 4A. MOTION CARRIED.
LID 215 and 4A. DISCUSSION ON THE CITY APPROACH TO REDUCE LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
LID 216 (LM) 215 AND LID 216 ASSESSMENTS IF ACTUAL COSTS ARE BELOW FINAL
ssessments ASSESSMENTS
City Engineer Jim Walker explained with the passage of I -695, the City's bond counsel recommended
the City close the LIDs prior to doing the project, using best estimates, placing contingencies and
establishing the dollar cost at this time. He said the disadvantage is this action locks the price in place
and presents some risk to the City although it is believed to be a minor risk as there is sufficient
contingency to cover any unexpected events. It was more likely that the entire amount anticipated to be
received from residents participating in the LID would not need to be spent. Staff recommends the
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 16, 1999
Page 11
I
Council inform the residents participating in the LIDS that it was the City's intent to reduce the
assessment if costs are lower than established by the final assessment roll. He advised the bond counsel
also recommended a Guarantee Fund be established which may save money by making thq bonds more
favorable to the market.
Councilmember Haakenson questioned the word, "significantly" in the recommended action, "Council
moves to express its intent to reduce the assessments proportionately if the actual LID costs for LID 215
and LID 216 come in significantly lower than estimated." City Attorney Karber advised the reason
significantly was included was because if the amount was only slightly lower, the administrative costs of
determining the proportional reduction in the assessment may not equate to the reduction. Mr. Walker,
agreed bond counsel's recommendation was that if the cost was a minor amount, $20 -$30 per resident,
more money may be spent processing the reduction. Although it will be a Council decision, staff
recommends refunding any significant amounts.
COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
HAAKENSON, FOR THE RECOMMENDED ACTION FOR THE COUNCIL TO EXPRESS ITS
INTENT TO REDUCE THE ASSESSMENTS PROPORTIONATELY IF THE ACTUAL LID
COSTS FOR LID 215 AND LID 216 COME IN SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER THAN ESTIMATED.
MOTION CARRIED.
Public 5. PUBLIC HEARING ON THE 2000 BUDGET
Hearing on
2000 Budget Administrative Services Director Peggy Hetzler displayed the General Fund revenues /expenditure
forecast trend presented to the Council on November 1 illustrating beginning cash of $1.2 million,
projected revenues of $21.7 million, expenditures of $22.5 million resulting in an excess of expenditures
over revenues of $741,000 leaving an ending cash balance in the General Fund of $476,000. She
referred to the revised budget presented following the. passage of I -695 illustrating the decline in
revenues due to lost MVET and Sales Tax Equalization funding and not including any new revenue
sources or increase in property taxes, and only a modest cost of living increase associated with existing
revenue sources. The revised expenditures budget of $20.3 million resulted in an elimination of $2.2
million in expenditures that were originally requested. A significant amount of the reduction was
proposed staff reductions. The revised budget included a similar deficiency between expenditures and
revenues of approximately $783,000 and an ending cash balance of $434,000.
Ms. Hetzler reviewed an itemization of input received from the November 6. Council budget workshop
when the Council was presented each department's itemized list of reductions including staff
eliminations that would be accomplished via layoffs or the elimination of vacant positions. During the
presentations, Council gave direction to proceed with identifying the amount of revenue associated with
a 3% property tax increase, a utility tax on the sewer utility, reallocating the existing telephone utility tax
from the emergency reserve fund to the General Fund, and calculating the excess in the Emergency
Reserve fund that might be available for funding in -2000. The combined total of those revenue sources
and the transfer from the Emergency Reserve was $793,500. The Council also directed staff to
determine the amount of additional revenue to 1) avoid layoffs in 2000 (approximately $566,000), 2)
restore all Public Safety positions including vacant and support positions ($631,000), 3) put in place the
Fire Battalion Chief positions ($211,000), 4) restore funding to the Senior Center, Alliance and the
downtown flower program ($115,000), 5) increase the Council Contingency, .Fund ($100,000), 6)
maintain current service levels ($2,172,230) and 7) maintain current staffing levels ($971,340).
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 16, 1999
Page 12
Ms. Hetzler explained the City's General Fund Emergency Reserve Fund and Council Contingency fund,
which will have a combined balance of approximately $2.5 million at the beginning of 2000. She said
the City's unwritten policy has been to maintain at least 5% of the General Fund Operating Budget in the'
form of emergency reserves. Assuming the budget is $21 million, the required reserves to maintain the
'56/o reserve is $1,050,000. Thus there would be approximately $453,000 available for reprogramming
into the General Fund. She said the previous overhead identified a slightly smaller transfer from the
Emergency Reserve Fund, however, as much as $453,000 would be available from the Emergency
Reserve if the Council chose to use those funds.
Ms. Hetzler reviewed revenues that are available to the City, explaining the impact of a 1% property tax
increase on the median home value in the City of $235,000 would be $5, at 6% the impact would be
approximately $31. As the Council approved a 3% property tax increase in 1999 rather than the
maximum 6 %, the City has the legal capacity to recapture that property tax funding. She illustrated
revenues that can be generated via utility taxes, noting the only utility tax available to the City is on its
own internal sewer utility as a tax on a private utility requires a 60 -day notice period before a utility tax
can be imposed. She explained an annual business license excise tax of $50 would generate $82,000 and
an annual business excise tax of $100 would generate approximately $165,000. She displayed revenues
associated with transport fees, noting the City is not currently able to impose those. Revenue from the
telephone utility tax has been dedicated to the Emergency Reserve fund in the past but the Council may
wish to consider reallocating these funds to the General Fund. An increase in permitting fees will be
presented to the Council by the Planning Department at a future meeting.
Ms. Hetzler explained approximately $1 million of the $2.2 million in budget reductions submitted by
each department to offset reductions in revenue, represented staff reductions. She displayed the total
dollar cost of employees that would have to be laid off ($566,000) and the vacant positions that could be
eliminated ($405,000) totaling $970,000 in staff reductions. She said that amount did not include the
elimination of the Battalion Chiefs which brought the total staff reductions to well over $1 million.
Councilmember Van Hollebeke clarified the 1 -6% property tax increase did not represent a 1 -6%
increase to a resident's entire property tax, it was restricted to only the City's portion of the property tax.
Ms. Hetzler said the City's portion of the existing property tax on a house with a median value of
$235,000 was approximately $519.
Ms. Hetzler explained funds from a non - resident business license fee, a 3% property tax increase, the
utility tax on sewer, reallocation of the telephone utility tax, and a transfer from the Emergency Reserve
provides total available resources of $810,000. Based on consensus at the November 15 budget
workshop, she developed costs associated with the Council's priority for funding requests. These
included the amount to 1) avoid layoffs in 2000 (approximately $566,000), 2) restore funding to the
Senior Center, the Alliance and the downtown flower program ($115,000), and 3) restore the Community
Services Director position ($104,000), for a .total of $785,000,' leaving $25,300 available for other
program usage.
Ms. Hetzler recalled another request made at the November 15 budget workshop was the amount
necessary to restore the Public Safety vacancies, overtime, and support positions ($251,000): Utilizing
the $25,300 available funds, an additional $225,000 would be necessary to accomplish the Public Safety
restorations.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 16, 1999
Page 13
Councilmember Plunkett did not recall there had been consensus on the priorities Ms. Hetzler presented.
Ms. Hetzler acknowledged consensus may not have been the appropriate term, and stated that this
scenario was mentioned frequently.
Councilmember Haakenson asked if the funds to restore the Community Services Director position was
at the high end of the salary range. Mayor Fahey answered the salary was the mid -range plus benefits,
professional memberships, etc. for the position. Councilmember Haakenson requested staff provide the
range for the position.
Ms. Hetzler displayed how new revenues and funding options impacted the budget, resulting in a deficit
of $757,000 that can be addressed via the use of beginning cash, ending the year with an ending cash
balance of $460,000. She pointed out establishing no new revenue sources and the Legislature not
developing a funding substitute for the Sales Tax Equalization will cause the deficit' to grow to $1
million in 2001 and to $2.4 million in 2002.
Ms. Hetzler displayed the US Consumer Price Index (CPI) for August — 2.3 %, the Seattle CPI — 2.9%
and the implicit price deflator — 1.42 %.
Mayor Fahey opened the public participation portion of the public hearing.
COUNCILMEMBER WIHTE , MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER VAN
HOLLEBEKE, TO EXTEND THIS ITEM FOR 10 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED. .
David Orvis, 21118 77�h Place W #103, Edmonds, spoke in defense of the Battalion Chief and other
Public Safety positions that have been identified for possible cuts. Although he understood'the budget
was tight, he recommended the human toll of the cuts must be considered. He pointed out cuts in Public
Safety can have a human toll on the entire populous of the City. He said it was unfair for the Fire
Department to be targeted with the largest percentage.cut in the budget. While other departments have
been asked to identify cuts of 8 %, the Fire Department was asked to identify cuts of 13 %, much of this
due to the elimination of the Battalion Chiefs and laying off a firefighter. He urged the Council to
restore funding for these positions. He stressed the importance of the Battalion Chiefs, explaining new
federal safety regulations require four firefighters at a scene before they enter a home. Currently, each
fire station in the City has three firefighters; a Battalion Chief was added. so that one station would have
four firefighters and to enable the four firefighters to serve as the fourth person if another station with
only three firefighters were dispatched to a fire. He said cutting funding to the Battalion Chiefs
endangered citizens and the safety of firefighters. He also urged the City to 'consider Police positions,
commented the City is making use of attrition to cut the Police budget. He recommended a high priority
be placed on restoring the two police officers cut from the budget.
Councilmember Haakenson asked Mr. Orvis how he proposed to fund the Battalion Chiefs. Mr. Orvis
said several funding sources had been identified. Councilmember Haakenson asked if. he supported
increasing property taxes to 6 %. Mr. Orvis answered no, and recommended the funding sources
identified be prioritized. Councilmember Haakenson observed the $231,000 funding requirement would
require a like cut in another area. Mr. Orvis agreed that would be necessary. He stressed the Fire
Department's budget was being cut the most, by .13 %.
Al Rutledge, 7101 Lake Ballinger Way, Edmonds, advised he submitted two proposals, one for the
flower program and one for Yost Pool. He said the Public Safety positions should be restored. He said
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 16, 1999
. Page 14
another public hearing will be held in December when the Council must vote on the property tax
increase.
Roger Hertrich, 1020 Puget Drive, Edmonds, disagreed with Mr. Orvis' suggestion to add Battalion
Chiefs, pointing out employees should not be added while employees are being cut from other
departments. He said this was an opportune time to move forward with Fire Department consolidation.
He disagreed with the proposal to restore funding to the Senior Center, Alliance and flower program.
Although the Senior Center is a deserving facility, he was uncertain of the funding allocated to that
purpose. He disagreed with providing $45,000 in funding to the Alliance when those funds could be
used for an essential City employee. He said the flower program has been one of Edmonds best
advertisements but has been funded and unfunded numerous times in the past based on budget
circumstances. He said the flower program could be funded by a business LID for those businesses that
profit from the flowers in.the business area.
Kevin Clarke, 23924 107" Place W, Edmonds, pointed out 49% of Edmonds voters voted against I-
695, indicating they were willing to continue to pay the current license tab fees. He said it was an easy
political position to run for office and say you will not increase taxes because no one wants to increase
taxes. He questioned whether those who have taken that position have ever run a business, commenting
he knew what it was like to lay off half his office in one day due to budget cuts. He said the property tax
bill on a $235,000 house is approximately $2,200 of which nearly 5% goes to the City of Edmonds. A
6% increase is approximately $31, nowhere near 3% of the entire taxes on a $235,000 home. He said if
this fact is clearly demonstrated to the public, they will understand their dollars are simply being
transferred to the City and they would likely support a 6% increase as well as recapturing the property
taxes not levied last year. An increase from 3% to 6% represents $180,000 in revenue to the City but
only a $31 increase in property taxes. He said the City was working hard to reallocate resources based
on priorities. Mr. Clarke said the people prioritize the budget. As a business owner at 2 °a and Main, he
was willing to pay a $100 business tax to maintain his office in Edmonds. He reiterated if the numbers
were explained to residents, they would understand what a 3% or 6% increase meant and how it affected
their budget.
COUNCILMEMBER HAAKENSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WHITE, TO
EXTEND DISCUSSION OF THIS ITEM 20 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED.
Katherine Segura, Edmonds, director of the South County Senior Center, explained the funds allocated
to the Senior Center are used for services and programs that benefit seniors in the Edmonds community.
The services include health enhancement, preventative programs, college classes, a full -time social
worker, a five -day a week hot lunch nutrition program, etc. The Senior Center is requesting $38,000 in
the 2000 Budget. She stressed the Senior Center provides a vital service to the community.
Elaine Yard, 9209 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds, questioned the substantial reduction in the Fire
Department budget in view of fires, shooting, landslides, floods, etc. that may occur in the City. She also
questioned reducing funding to the Search and Rescue program and Police to benefit the flower program.
She questioned the $75,000 funding for the public art project at the fountain roundabout site when
funding for public safety is being sacrificed.
Mayor Fahey clarified the $75,000 to replace public art in the downtown is a restricted donation from the
art festival community to fund that project. She stressed those funds are not public moneys and cannot
be used to fund anything else. If a decision is made not to place public art. in the downtown location, the
donor retains the $75,000 to use however they wish.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 16, 1999
Page 15
Mayor Fahey closed the public participation portion of the public hearing.
In response to Ms. Yard's comments, Councilmember Haakenson said at the November 15 budget
workshop, the Council restored police and fire funding in the budget with the exception of two vacant
police officers positions, a part-time vacant cadet position, and not replacing a police staff assistant who
is retiring. Those positions and -the three Battalion. Chiefs are the only positions not funded in police and
fire.
Councilmember Earling said although he has been a strict protector of the City's Reserve Fund, he was
agreeable to utilizing some of those funds to ensure jobs could be retained in the City for at least another
year. He said retaining jobs was a priority the Council should consider because it is a resource that is
highly valued. He supported utilizing the $335,000 conservative amount from the'Emergency Reserve to
avoid employee layoffs this year.
In response to Councilmember Plunkett's comments regarding lack of consensus on budget priorities,
Council President Miller said when he summarized the discussion at the November 15 budget discussion,
he stated there was consensus on that scenario and did not hear any objection. He, said four of the seven
Councilmembers have begun to identify revenue and expenditures that they can agree upon. The next
step is to identify the $225,000 necessary to restore the public safety positions. He was unwilling to take
additional funds from the Emergency Reserve Fund as utilizing the $335,000 leaves only 5% or
approximately two weeks in operating expenses. He was willing to consider restoring the public safety
positions via a property tax above 3 %, acknowledging there was consensus for 3% but was not certain
there was consensus for 6 %. He requested any changes in classification of positions be delayed to allow
the new mayor to do an assessment during his first 90 days to determine whether any classification or
personnel changes should be made.
Councilmember Van Hollebeke said the three Battalion Chiefs were new positions and not positions that
currently exist. Therefore, not instituting the Battalion Chiefs was not reducing the Fire Department
budget. He pointed out all budget considerations have been on the premise that no relief whatsoever will
come from the State Legislature, assuming the full impact of I -695 ($1.5 million) is the City's
responsibility to remedy. He was hopeful this would not be the case and urged citizens to encourage the
State Legislators to develop remedies.. Should the State Legislature identify funding, the City could add
positions but the Council's responsibility now is to maintain existing positions. He pointed out Edmonds
has fewer employees per capita than any other city in the region and already runs "lean and mean." He
said the Council had an obligation to its citizens as well as. its employees to maintain existing positions
before adding new positions.
COUNCILMEMBER EARLING MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCU MEMBER VAN
HOLLEBEKE, TO EXTEND THE MEETING FOR 20 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED.
Citizens to Bill Rengstorf, 821 Laurel Way, Edmonds, provided an update from Citizens to Save the Gazebo. He
ave the explained since last appearing before the Council, they have placed petitions in over 78 businesses from
azcbo Olympic View Drive to Firdale Village and have collected. many complete petitions and spoken to
numerous people who want to save the gazebo. He pointed out the gazebo was on the front page of the
most recent edition of The Edmonds Paper. He said the group would remain active and engaged as they
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 16, 1999
Page 16
were energized by the thanks of many people for undertaking an effort to save the gazebo. He. looked
forward to the meeting on November 30.
Mayor Fahey explained a public hearing regarding art selection for the fountain roundabout is scheduled
for November 30. In the past, the City Attorney has cautioned the Council they should not take public
testimony regarding an issue that is scheduled for a public hearing when others are not present to
respond. She said the Council could not accept testimony regarding that item tonight due to the public,
hearing scheduled for November 30.
itiz_ to Eva Lano, 8017 212 "' St. SW #5, Edmonds, said Edmonds has been her hometown for 63 years and. she
Save the I is proud of the City. After watching everything that has left the City, she said citizens need to build on
Gazebo what is left or it will be lost too. She said the gazebo is beautiful and goes with the Carnegie Library that
the City is so fortunate to have. She said the gazebo, flowers, light standards, are indicative of a past,
more loving and gentle era. She said people move to Edmonds for what has been preserved.
azebo Carol Hahn, 10312" Avenue SE, Edmonds, submitted written comments regarding the gazebo as she
was unable to attend the public hearing on November 30. She urged the Council to read her letter.
Alvin Rutledge, 7101 Lake Ballinger Way, Edmonds, recommended the City adopt an ordinance,
similar to one in other cities, regarding teal estate persons on the Council. He advised the Log Cabin
b Cabin committee submitted a letter to the Council requesting funding and plans to present further information
at the next budget public hearing.
Elaine Yard, 9209 Olympic View Drive (also known as Maplewood Private Road #1), Edmonds,
stated that residents will be sending Council President Miller a response to his October 19 letter and will
continue to attend Council meetings to inform the Council of their progress until "we hit the railroad
tracks."
Swamp Randy Anderson, 211 Railroad Avenue, Edmonds, announced the Swamp Creek & Western Railroad
Creek & ' Club's open house at the Edmonds Amtrak Station on December 11, from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. He said
Western representatives from the Victoria Clipper and other groups will be at the open house and their 400 -foot
Railroad
Club's open HO scale layout will be in operation. Other events include Santa and a Toys for Tots drive where donors
House of a new toy will receive a coupon for travel on Amtrak. Councilmember White commented their model
railroad display layout is fabulous.
Roger Hertrich, 1020 Puget Drive, Edmonds, referred to Item #7, and suggested the Council delay any
uaget proposals for consultants until the City's budget is settled and it is determined whether there is enough
money in the budget. He said when he referred to the restoration of funding for the Senior Center,
Alliance, and flower program, he was uncertain of the amount allocated to the Senior Program. Upon
learning the amount was $38,000, he endorsed the allocation to the Senior Center less the standard 8%
reduction. The balance of the $114,000 should be eliminated from the budget. Regarding Mayor
Fahey's comments on the restriction on speaking on a topic that is scheduled for public hearing, he said
there is no restriction on subject material unless there is a legal situation that prevented it. He said the
only restriction is the three- minute time limit. He felt it was unfair to force those who do not understand
the system not to speak.
ooaway Kevin Clarke, 23924 107 1' Place W, Edmonds, requested the City's new mayor review the video tape
Meadows of, the meeting two weeks ago, particularly City Attorney Scott Snyder's comments regarding citizens in
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 16, 1999
Page 17
C
the south end of the City who have "grandstanded in front of the Council." He was offended by a
publicly paid employee lecturing him regarding his opportunity to discuss something that is important to
him, his house. He agreed residents were incensed that evening but the next day, the trees were cut. The
City did not provide him notice that there were plans to cut his tree and questioned if the City.had this
right without giving him the opportunity to have it pruned professionally. Now that every tree has been
cut in the 20 -foot strip, trees that it was not necessary to remove by their plan, people are driving there to
look at the site. These. people are behind his house day and night. He was frustrated because the permit
was for emergency access to be constructed as needed and it is not needed. He was frustrated the
Council could do nothing about this. He urged mayor -elect Haakenson to determine why elected
officials could not help citizens be protected against private enterprise destroying private property. He
recommended the Council talk to Mr. Snyder about lecturing citizens who have the right to speak about
something that means something to them, their homes.
ADB 7. REQUEST TO PROCEED WITH ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD GUIDELINES
Guidelines CONSOLIDATION STUDY AND AUTHORIZATION TO ISSUE REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
Consolida-
tion Study
Planning Manager Rob Chave explained this issue was discussed with the Community
Services/Development Services committee in October including some of the recommendations from the
consultant study. The desire to undertake the consultant project to consolidate the design guidelines was
highlighted at the committee meeting, a high priority identified by the ADB and the Planning Board.
When the Community Services/Development Services committee expressed interest in moving forward
with this project, $10,000 in planning professional services was identified that could be allocated to this
study. He said these funds had been earmarked for an historical survey but it is believed the ADB study
is more important. In discussions with the Finance Department, it appears $15,000 will be left in
Planning Department salaries due to administrative changes that have occurred. The balance of the
request ($10,000 of the $35,000 total for the study) could be allocated from the $10,000 that was
budgeted this year but not .spent for Virtual Reality. The recommended action is to authorize the
issuance .of a request for proposals; another alternative would be to delay until the budget process is
complete. He said issuing the request for proposal now would allow the project to get underway by the
first of the year.
Councilmember White observed there was nothing in the RFP that obligated the Council to. accept the
proposal. Mr. Chave agreed, noting the RFP could contain language indicating it was subject to
available funding.
COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER VAN
HOLLEBEKE, TO APPROVE THE REQUEST FOR FUNDING AND AUTHORIZE STAFF TO
DRAFT AND ISSUE THE REP.
Council President Miller said he could not support this action, knowing the Council is still trying to
resolve issues in the budget including restoring public safety. The City is already using $335,000 from
its Emergency Reserve and he could not dedicate $35,000 from what would have been cash carryover to
a consultant study.
Councilmember Van Hollebeke shared Council President Miller's concern but pointed out the request for
proposals did not require spending money, that decision could be made in January. He recalled the
Council unanimously stated when Cedar River Associates made their presentation, that this was an
extremely well thought out plan and he felt it was a very important step for the City.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 16, 1999
Page 18
Council President Miller did not disagree the study was a good thing but said the timing was very poor.
MOTION CARRIED, COUNCIL PRESIDENT MILLER OPPOSED.
8. MAYOR'S REPORT
Mayor Fahey congratulated the newly elected Mayor and Councilmembers. She reported she and
Mayor -elect Haakenson have already begun working on the transition. He has begun attending Cabinet
meetings as well as other meetings he will be participating in as the Mayor. She looked forward to the
coming six weeks until he took office.
9. COUNCIL REPORTS
xcused COUNCIL PRESIDENT MILLER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER VAN
bsences HOLLEBEKE, TO EXCUSE COUNCILMEMBER HAAKENSON FROM THE NOVEMBER 6
COUNCIL MEETING AND COUNCILMEMBER EARLING FROM THE NOVEMBER 9
COUNCIL MEETING. • MOTION CARRIED, COUNCILMEMBERS HAAKENSON AND
EARLING ABSTAINED.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT MILLER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT,
TO EXCUSE COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST FROM THE NOVEMBER 6 BUDGET
WORKSHOP. MOTION CARRIED, COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST ABSTAINED.
nnual Tree Council President Miller reported the Greater Edmonds Chamber of Commerce's annual tree lighting
Lighting ceremony at Centennial Plaza is planned for November 27, beginning with carolers at 4:00 p.m., the tree
lighting at. 5:00 p.m. and Santa until 7:00 p.m.
Councilmember Earling congratulated his fellow Councilmembers who were re- elected and
Councilmember Haakenson . on his election as Mayor and looked forward to working with new
Councilmembers Petso and Orvis. He was glad the election was over and hoped everyone was able to
move on.
Health Councilmember Nordquist reported at a Health District Board meeting this morning, some members
District mentioned a presentation made by State Representative Mike Cooper at the Lynnwood City Council
regarding the plans for the Legislature, including a possible increase in the sales tax. He suggested Mr.
Cooper make a presentation to the Council. He reported the Health District is facing a $2 million
reduction in their budget. City Clerk Sandy Chase advised that Mr. Cooper is scheduled to speak to the
Council on November 23.
Councilmember Haakenson appreciated working with Mayor Fahey. He commented while on vacation
°odway in Mesa, Arizona, he met a resident of the Woodway Meadows area who lived on the alley and wanted to
Meadows
know what could be done about it. Councilmember Haakenson recalled he was told two weeks ago that
no trees would be cut in the alley and was awaiting an answer from staff regarding why the trees had now
been cut.
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:40 p.m.
BARBARA S. FAHEY, MAYOR SANDRA S. CHASE, CITY CLERK
«.
Edmonds City Council Approved. Minutes
November 16, 1999
Page 19
AGENDA
; EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL
PLAZA MEETING.ROOM - LIBRARY BUILDING
650 MAIN STREET
7:00 -10:00 P.M.
7:00 P.M. - CALL TO ORDER
FLAG SALUTE
1.
2.
(A)
(B)
(C)
(D)
(E)
(F)
(G)
3. (15 Min.)
NOVEMBER 16, 1999
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
ROLL CALL
APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 6, 1999
APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 9, 1999
APPROVAL OF CLAIM WARRANTS #35898 THROUGH #37307 FOR THE WEEK OF NOVEMBER 8,
1999, IN THE AMOUNT OF $385,633.96.
AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
AGREEMENT WITH CHS ENGINEERS, INC. FOR PERRINVILLE LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
(LID) SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS DESIGN PROJECT
REPORT ON FINAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS FOR THE 78TH AVENUE WEST / 212TH STREET SW
CROSSWALK LIGHTING PROJECT AND COUNCIL ACCEPTANCE OF PROJECT
REPORT ON QUOTES RECEIVED FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF SHOP FURNACE AT TREATMENT
PLANT AND AWARD TO LODESTAR COMPANY, INC. ($5,982, Not Including Sales Tax)
ANNUAL REPORT FROM HEARING EXAMINER RONALD McCONNELL
4. (2 Hours) PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING PROPOSED AMENDMENTS -TO EDMONDS COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT CODE CHAPTER 17.35, ANIMALS. THE PURPOSE OF THIS PUBLIC HEARING IS TO
GATHER PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE CITY'S LAND USE REGULATIONS GOVERNING ANIMALS.
LAND USE REGULATIONS DETERMINE HOW MANY ANIMALS CAN BE KEPT IN EACH ZONING
CLASSIFICATION. THESE REGULATIONS HAVE NOT BEEN REVIEWED FOR MANY YEARS, AND
PUBLIC COMPLAINTS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED BY THE CITY IN RECENT YEARS CONCERNING
SOME TYPES OF ANIMALS - (E.G. HORSES, CHICKENS) KEPT IN SINGLE FAMILY
NEIGHBORHOODS.
5. (20 Min.) PUBLIC HEARING ON THE 2000 BUDGET
6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS (3 Minute Limit Per Person)
7. (5 Min.) REQUEST TO PROCEED WITH ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD GUIDELINES CONSOLIDATION
STUDY AND. AUTHORIZATION TO ISSUE REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
8. (5 Min.) MAYOR'S REPORT
9. (15 Min.) COUNCIL REPORTS
Parking and meeting rooms are accessible for persons with disabilities. Contact the City Clerk at (425) 771 -0245 with 24 hours advance
notice for special accommodations. The Council Agenda appears on Chambers Cable, Channel 46. Delayed telecast of this meeting
appears the following Wednesday at noon and 7: 00 p.m., as well as Friday and Monday at noon on Channel 46