Loading...
2010.01.26 CC Agenda Packet              AGENDA Edmonds City Council Council Chambers, Public Safety Complex 250 5th Ave. North, Edmonds ______________________________________________________________ JANUARY 26, 2010 7:00 p.m.   Call to Order and Flag Salute 1. Approval of Agenda   2. Approval of Consent Agenda Items   A. Roll Call   B. AM-2745 Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of January 19, 2010.   C. AM-2742 Approval of claim checks #116585 through #116697 dated January 21, 2010 for $437,010.24.  Approval of payroll direct deposit and checks #49027 through #49058 for the period of January 1 through January 15, 2010 for $662,656.90.   D. AM-2737 Acknowledge receipt of a Claim for Damages from Landon B. Reynolds ($3,276.16).   E. AM-2749 Community Services and Economic Development Quarterly Report – January, 2010.   F. AM-2739 Authorization for the Mayor to sign the Recycling Grant Agreement between the City of Edmonds and the Washington State Department of Ecology for 2010-2011.   G. AM-2741 Senior Center Recreational Services Agreement for 2010 for the South Snohomish County Senior Center.   3. AM-2744 (10 Minutes) Confirmation of Mayor's appointment to the Planning Board.   4. AM-2747 (15 Minutes) Update on the 2010 Budget (Mayor Haakenson).   5. AM-2743 (15 Minutes) Municipal Court 2009 Annual Report.   6. AM-2746 (15 Minutes) Public Defender Annual Report.   7. AM-2735 (30 Minutes) Proposed Ordinance relating to limitations on contributions for City Council campaigns and creating a new Chapter 1.99 of the Edmonds City Code.  Public comment will be received on this matter.   8.Audience Comments (3 minute limit per person)* *Regarding matters not listed on the Agenda as Closed Record Review or as Public Hearings.   9. (15 Minutes)Council reports on outside committee/board meetings. Packet Page 1 of 132 9. (15 Minutes)Council reports on outside committee/board meetings.   10. (5 Minutes)Mayor's Comments   11. (15 Minutes)Council Comments   Adjourn   Packet Page 2 of 132 AM-2745 2.B. Approval of 01-19-2010 City Council Minutes Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:01/26/2010 Submitted By:Sandy Chase Time:Consent Department:City Clerk's Office Type:Action Review Committee: Committee Action: Information Subject Title Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of January 19, 2010. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff It is recommended that the City Council review and approve the draft minutes. Previous Council Action N/A Narrative Attached is a copy of the draft minutes. Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: 01-19-10 Draft City Council Minutes Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 01/21/2010 01:20 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 01/21/2010 01:22 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 01/21/2010 03:01 PM APRV Form Started By: Sandy Chase  Started On: 01/21/2010 01:13 PM Final Approval Date: 01/21/2010 Packet Page 3 of 132 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes January 19, 2010 Page 1 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL DRAFT MINUTES January 19, 2010 At 6:15 p.m., Mayor Haakenson announced that the City Council would meet in executive session regarding pending claims and potential litigation. He stated that the executive session was scheduled to last approximately 30 minutes and would be held in the Jury Meeting Room, located in the Public Safety Complex. No action was anticipated to occur as a result of meeting in executive session. Elected officials present at the executive session were: Mayor Haakenson, Councilmembers Orvis, Fraley- Monillas, Plunkett, Bernheim, Peterson and Wilson. Others present were City Attorney Scott Snyder, Attorney Stephanie Croll, Attorney Grant Weed, Washington Cities Insurance Authority Executive Director Lewis Leigh, and City Clerk Sandy Chase. At 6:45 p.m., Mayor Haakenson announced to the public that an additional 30 minutes would be needed in executive session. The executive session concluded at 7:11 p.m. At 7:12 p.m., Councilmembers Orvis, Fraley-Monillas, Plunkett, Bernheim, Peterson and Wilson interviewed Kristiana Johnson, a candidate for appointment to the Planning Board. The interview was held in the Jury Meeting Room. Mayor Haakenson was also present for the interview. The regular City Council meeting was called to order at 7:19 p.m. by Mayor Haakenson in the Council Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Gary Haakenson, Mayor Steve Bernheim, Council President Michael Plunkett, Councilmember DJ Wilson, Councilmember Dave Orvis, Councilmember Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember Strom Peterson, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember (seated at 7:28 p.m.) STAFF PRESENT Al Compaan, Police Chief Stephen Clifton, Community Services/Economic Development Director Noel Miller, Public Works Director Rob Chave, Planning Manager Rob English, City Engineer Scott Snyder, City Attorney Sandy Chase, City Clerk Linda Hynd, Deputy City Clerk Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst. Jeannie Dines, Recorder 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCIL PRESIDENT BERNHEIM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCIL PRESIDENT BERNHEIM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: A. ROLL CALL B. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 5, 2010. Packet Page 4 of 132 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes January 19, 2010 Page 2 C. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 12, 2010. D. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #116197 THROUGH #116198 DATED DECEMBER 31, 2009 FOR $33,694.78, #116199 THROUGH #116394 DATED JANUARY 7, 2010 FOR $981,810.50, AND #116395 THROUGH #116584 DATED JANUARY 14, 2010 FOR $3,269,574.63. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL DIRECT DEPOSITS AND CHECKS #48989 THROUGH #49026 FOR THE PERIOD DECEMBER 16 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2009 FOR $834,922.88. E. ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES FROM THOR CHAMBERS ($268.28) AND BARBARA DEAN (AMOUNT UNDETERMINED). F. ASSIGNMENT OF CONTRACT - AID UNITS CONTRACT. G. INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR USE OF PUBLIC SAFETY BOAT BETWEEN EDMONDS, AND SNOHOMISH COUNTY FIRE DISTRICTS NO. 27 AND NO. 1. H. ORDINANCE NO. 3776 – ESTABLISHING SNOHOMISH COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT NO. 1 AS THE PROVIDER OF RESCUE OPERATIONS AT THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT. I. ORDINANCE NO. 3777 – AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF ECC 7.30.036, SEWER SPECIAL CONNECTION DISTRICTS, TO ADD A NEW SUBSECTION ECC 7.30.036(C) ESTABLISHING A SPECIAL CONNECTION FEE FOR CERTAIN PROPERTIES ON OR NEAR OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. J. RESOLUTION NO. 1220 - APPROVING THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLANS FOR THE 2010 PROCESS RELATING TO THE UPDATES OF UTILITY ELEMENTS IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THE UPDATES WILL INCLUDE: * 2010 COMPREHENSIVE STORM AND SURFACE WATER PLAN UPDATE * 2010 COMPREHENSIVE WATER PLAN UPDATE * 2010 SEWER PLAN INFILTRATION AND INFLOW STUDY WITH POLICY RECOMMENDATION FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE SEWER PLAN 3. APPROVAL OF RULES FOR THE NOMINATION/ELECTION PROCESS TO FILL VACANT CITY COUNCIL POSITION #4 City Clerk Sandy Chase read the rules for the nomination/election process that were used last year: Nominations Each Councilmember may nominate one candidate from the list of applicants by placing an “X” beside the name of the applicant of his or her choice on the form supplied for that purpose by the City Clerk, and by signing the nomination form. The City Clerk will announce and maintain a permanent record of the nominations and of the Councilmember nominating each candidate. The Election Each Councilmember may vote for one candidate by placing an “X” beside the name of the candidate of his or her choice on the ballot supplied for that purpose by the City Clerk, and by signing the ballot. The City Clerk will announce and maintain a permanent record of each ballot and who voted for each candidate. A Deadlock A deadlock occurs after each Councilmember votes the same way on three consecutive ballots. In the event the City Council should deadlock, then previous nominations are declared null and void and the Council may begin a new round of nominations. Packet Page 5 of 132 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes January 19, 2010 Page 3 COUNCIL PRESIDENT BERNHEIM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, TO APPROVE THE RULES FOR THE NOMINATION/ELECTION PROCESS TO FILL THE COUNCIL VACANCY. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. APPOINTMENT TO FILL CITY COUNCIL VACANCY. Council President Bernheim explained although the rules did not address statements by Councilmembers, Councilmembers were welcome to provide comment. Councilmembers completed the first nomination ballot. Those nominated were: Lora Petso (Councilmember Fraley-Monillas), Ron Wambolt (Councilmembers Wilson and Peterson), and Diane Buckshnis (Council President Bernheim and Councilmembers Orvis and Plunkett). Councilmember Peterson thanked everyone who applied and participated in the interview process. He described a telephone call that he, the Mayor and other Councilmembers received from Norm Olson, the late Councilmember Olson’s husband, who relayed it was Ms. Olson’s wish that Ron Wambolt fulfill the remainder of her term. Councilmember Peterson enthusiastically nominated Ron Wambolt to fulfill her wishes. Vote No. 1 was taken. The results were: four votes for Diane Buckshnis (Councilmembers Orvis, Fraley- Monillas and Plunkett and Council President Bernheim) and two votes for Ron Wambolt (Councilmembers Peterson and Wilson). Diane Buckshnis was appointed to fill the vacant City Council position #4. Mayor Haakenson administered the oath of office to Ms. Buckshnis and Councilmember Buckshnis took her seat on the dais. 5. COMBINED 2009 ANNUAL REPORTS FROM THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION AND THE PLANNING BOARD. Community Services/Economic Development Director Stephen Clifton explained in June 2009, the Council passed Ordinance No. 3735, which created an Economic Development Commission (EDC). The EDC has been meeting at least once a month and has held special meetings with the Planning Board. EDC Chair Frank Yamamoto introduced the members of the EDC: Kerry Ayers, Bruce Faires, Stacy Gardea, Don Hall, Darrol Haug, Betty Larman, Beatrice O’Rourke, Evan Pierce, David Schaefer, Rich Senderoff, Bill Vance, Rob VanTassell, Bruce Witenberg, Rebecca Wolfe, and Marianne Zagorski. Mr. Yamamoto highlighted the challenge – a budget shortfall. Projected revenues will outpace revenues and continue for the foreseeable future if nothing is done to improve revenue flow. The main goal is to help alleviate this situation and seek solutions other than levies and increased property taxes. He displayed a chart illustrating a $1.5 million deficit in 2013 which will increase to nearly $6.5 million in 2020 for an accumulative total of nearly $30 million if nothing is done and no additional revenues are identified. He displayed a chart illustrating the tax increase per household, an accumulative increase of approximately $1700 by 2020 to sustain existing services. In April 2009, the City Council passed a resolution directing staff to create an ordinance that would create a Citizens Economic Development Commission. In June 2009, the City Council passed the ordinance creating the EDC. The EDC consists of 17 members appointed by the Mayor and by each Councilmember. The EDC’s charges include: determine new strategies for economic development, identify new sources of revenue, review and consider strategies for improving commercial viability and develop tourism. The EDC also incorporated the four goals contained within the existing Economic Packet Page 6 of 132 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes January 19, 2010 Page 4 Development Plan: foster a healthy business community, revitalize the business districts, diversify the tax base and strengthen the quality of life. The EDC began by defining economic development: improve economic well being and quality of life by developing and implementing programs, processes and ideas. The members of the EDC agree there is no magic solution; a combination of ideas will be required to be successful. The key is to implement and act now on those ideas because without additional revenue, there is no successful economic development or consistent quality of life. He displayed a list of items that impact citizens’ quality of life such as clean and green environment, efficient public safety services, vibrant and diverse business climate, well managed roads and public transportation, adequate sidewalks, libraries, cultural amenities, responsible development and redevelop- ment and quality schools, noting there were many others. Citizens’ quality of life is threatened by:  Fear of change, lack of flexibility  Unaware of competition at local, state and national level  Failure to plan for the future  Ignoring past history Mr. Yamamoto described the EDC’s process to date: Three joint meetings were held with the Planning Board that included presentations from Snohomish County EDC, Port of Edmonds and three local cities of Bothell, Mountlake Terrace and Lynnwood. From those presentations, the prevalent message was that in order for economic development to succeed, strong and steady leadership from the City Council is required along with alignment of goals and visions among all including citizens,. Another important fact is that Edmonds is 96% built out. The City must be creative in the use of existing land and structures and acknowledge that future development will be primarily in the form of redevelopment. He enumerated the EDC’s proposed action items:  Act now!  Find a way for the City’s Economic Development Director position to devote full time to economic development activities.  Create a strategic plan that will focus on economic development and requires accountability.  Initiate neighborhood business/residential center plans for Westgate and Five Corners and allow for rezoning to attract new businesses and residences and avoid delays for developers.  Evaluate the Harbor Square plan and support the process to start redevelopment with public involvement.  Initiate and fund marketing plan for City-owned fiber optic network.  Appoint two Councilmembers to the EDC, not the two members currently on the City Council economic development committee in an effort to gather additional viewpoints as well as involve more Councilmembers in economic development.  The Council respond to the EDC’s proposed ideas and future direction by the EDC’s next meeting on February 17. Mr. Yamamoto concluded the EDC was a very diverse group of citizens from a variety of backgrounds and with a variety of views who are concerned about the future of Edmonds’ financial situation and growth. He urged the Council to develop a strategic plan that extends past the current Council terms that can be sustained and be viable into the future. In the short six months the EDC has been in existence, they have been able to get 17 people to agree on this list of recommendations. He urged the seven Councilmembers to agree to move forward. Every day the City fails to act costs Edmonds dollars as well as keeps the City from growing into the community it needs to be. Pointing out neighboring communities are continuing to grow and prosper, he urged the council to act now and not have the EDC be another study that sits on a shelf collecting dust. The Council has an opportunity to have a positive impact on the Packet Page 7 of 132 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes January 19, 2010 Page 5 community and now is the time. He reiterated the EDC looked forward to hearing from the Council at their February 17 meeting. Councilmember Plunkett asked for clarification on the proposed action item, “initiate neighborhood business center plans,” pointing out some work had been done with regard to Five Corners, Hwy. 99 and Firdale Village. Mr. Yamamoto explained the intent was to be prepared for the creation of mixed use areas and to allow developers to do so quickly. Councilmember Plunkett asked whether the EDC planned to make recommendations with regard to how to make the process quicker. Mr. Yamamoto answered that could be part of the upcoming process. Councilmember Plunkett referred to the proposed action item, “evaluate Harbor Square plan and support,” questioning how the Council could support development when Council may be involved in a quasi judicial process related to that development in the future. Mr. Yamamoto responded the EDC was supportive of redevelopment of Harbor Square, not necessarily a particular concept. With regard to deficit spending and the statement that annual revenues will fall below expenses in 2013 and a negative ending cash balance in 2013, Councilmember Wilson pointed out the City’s annual revenue was less than annual expenditures beginning in 2011. The Fire District 1 contract allowed those levels to be maintained through 2010. Beginning in 2011, the City will begin spending down its reserves to fund existing operations. The City will essentially be “bankrupt” in 2013 because it will run out of reserves at that point. He cautioned the Council could not wait until 2013 and needed to act soon. The City has adopted the industry standard of maintaining approximately a 15% or 2-month annual cash ending balance or approximately $5 million. He summarized the City was already in a tough spot. Councilmember Wilson inquired about the candor of the EDC meetings. Mr. Yamamoto answered the EDC was doing very well. His report and the narrative illustrated that via a combined effort, 17 people with different views and backgrounds were able to reach a unanimous decision with regard to the proposed action items. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commended the 17 members of the EDC for developing a product with goals and future suggestions. She asked the date and time of the EDC’s next meeting. Mr. Yamamoto responded it was February 17 at 6:00 p.m. Councilmember Buckshnis commended the work done by the EDC. Observing the narrative report referred to branding, she asked whether the intent was for the full-time Economic Development Director to address branding. Mr. Yamamoto answered that would be one of the tasks for that position. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if the EDC had developed any ideas with regard to branding the City. Mr. Yamamoto answered no that could be a future action item. Councilmember Wilson referred to the proposed action item to evaluate the Harbor Square plan and support the process to start redevelopment to further Edmonds’ green initiatives and asked with regard to the Antique Mall and Skippers properties, how incentives could be offered to redevelop those sites to encourage thriving businesses. He commented it was unlikely building heights would be increased in that area because there were not enough votes on the Council. Mr. Yamamoto suggested doing things smarter and doing more with what the City has. He suggested the City focus on improving the process for developers which has been done by Bothell, Mountlake Terrace and Lynnwood. Without those improvements, developers will simply go elsewhere. Councilmember Wilson commented because the fiber optics extend to the ferry, it would make sense for redevelopment of that area to include fiber optics. He anticipated that would require a voter-approved funding source. If building heights were not increased, redevelopment of that area may not pencil for a developer. He asked what amenities the City could offer as incentives for development such as a park Packet Page 8 of 132 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes January 19, 2010 Page 6 which would also require voter-approved funding. He asked whether the public or the EDC was open to considering a voter-approved bond to fund either an extension of the fiber optics or property acquisition for a park. Mr. Yamamoto responded the EDC has not discussed that in detail. Councilmember Wilson asked if Mr. Yamamoto, as a downtown merchant and Downtown Edmonds Merchants Association Chair; felt the citizens of Edmonds could support a bond or levy. Mr. Yamamoto stated he did not know. For Councilmember Orvis, Mr. Yamamoto explained a further discussion regarding the EDC’s efforts was scheduled on the Council’s retreat agenda. He suggested that would be an opportunity for a more in- depth discussion. Councilmember Peterson echoed the commendations for the work done by the EDC. Planning Board Chair Michael Bowman recalled the formation of an EDC and consideration of economic development by the Planning Board began with a discussion with Councilmember Wilson at the levy committee when he suggested consideration also be given to alternatives to raising taxes. He thanked the 17 members of the EDC and the 7 Planning Board Members, 24 people with extremely varied backgrounds, personalities and interests who were able to begin with a blank slate and do great things in a short period of time. He asked the Council to do the same, commenting some Councilmembers have “painted themselves into a corner over the years.” He encouraged the Council to be open to change because it was important to the City. Mr. Bowman explained for several months prior to beginning this process, the Planning Board gathered data regarding the hurdles facing the City, why new businesses were not coming to Edmonds, why businesses were leaving, etc. He urged the Council to provide direction regarding what they wanted, what was important to them, what they opposed, etc. before the EDC and Planning Board moved forward. He commented on issues that were confusing to the Planning Board. For example the Council voted to lower the building heights in the BD1 zone. However, the Council may not be aware that the primary difficulty with attracting new businesses to Edmonds is the building stock is not appropriate for their needs; it’s old, not the right size and costs too much to bring it up to their needs. At the same time Shoreline, Mountlake Terrace, Mill Creek, Bothell and Lynnwood are taking steps to change their cities, rebranding and developing the kind of retail space that a retailer wants. Mr. Bowman explained his wife, their partners and he opened a second C'est la Vie store at the Landing in Renton in November. That new location was turnkey and cost them far less to open than the store in Edmonds. That trend is accelerating and more and more retail space is available due to the economy and other cities’ development of new retail space. He commented recently several retailers in Edmonds have contacted them to inquire about their broker and real estate attorney, indicating they are considering moving. He summarized the challenge was not only bringing in new businesses but retaining the existing businesses. He commented some Councilmembers had never been in their store or talked to them about their business. As an example, if the Council supported tourism, he pointed out the need for another hotel and suggested the Council identify a preferred location. Mr. Bowman stated he resigned from the EDC because he was given a director position with Renton’s Art & Cultural Commission which has a 50-member Steering Committee. He commented although Renton had been the butt of jokes for many years, they were moving forward aggressively. He described their effort to site a 7-foot “Salman” sculpture (a salmon wearing a business suit) designed and constructed for them by an artist friend in Edmonds. After measuring the sculpture, staff determined it could not be sited on the sidewalk and stated a further process would be required. He was not interested in participating in another Edmonds process and instead presented the drawing to Renton’s EDC who presented it to the Council where it was approved. He summarized the Edmonds City Council’s reputation was combative, not cohesive and not pro-business. He relayed a comment from a consultant for Renton’s Arts and Cultural Commission who has worked in Edmonds who said “Edmonds is about no.” Packet Page 9 of 132 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes January 19, 2010 Page 7 Mr. Bowman concluded the EDC and the Planning Board needed the Council’s support and direction. He suggested a joint meeting where they could ask the Council specific questions and get direction from the Council regarding whether they backed the economic development initiative and whether they were interested in moving the City forward economically. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas agreed some Councilmembers had not visited businesses but was certain that would change. She pointed out Edmonds was more than the downtown corridor and there was more than one hotel in Edmonds. Mr. Bowman pointed out most people thought of Edmonds as the downtown core. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas recommended looking at the City as a whole. Councilmember Wilson pointed out five Councilmembers were serving their first term and may be less encumbered by the past. He assured no one on the Council was anti-business although he understood that may be the perception. He summarized the Council and the community was unsure “how to get there,” acknowledging it would take the effort of citizens and may require the citizens to lead the Council. Councilmember Wilson asked Mr. Bowman how the Antique Mall, Skippers and Harbor Square properties could be redeveloped within existing height limits. Mr. Bowman responded the Council gathered data from the EDC, Planning Board and citizens but as leaders they needed to establish the direction even if it was unpopular. As an example, he cited the light rail system in Portland that was fiercely opposed initially but is now extremely popular and expanding. That was the result of the City Council moving forward even though it was unpopular. The Planning Board makes recommendations to the Council that were right for the City and all citizens but it was the Council who took the heat for the final decision. He urged the Council to think about what was the best for the whole City even if a decision negatively impacted a few citizens. He reiterated his suggestion for a joint meeting of the Planning Board, EDC and the Council. With regard to how to redevelop the waterfront properties, Mr. Bowman anticipated it would be impossible to draft a plan that would satisfy all Councilmembers. Councilmember Wilson referred to the list of proposed action items, noting some such as appointing two Councilmembers to the EDC and creating a strategic plan that focuses on economic development, could easily be accomplished. Others such as evaluate the Harbor Square plan would be more difficult. He was interested in implementing the EDC’s recommendations but needed further detail on some items. He agreed with the suggestion for a joint meeting structured around a series of policy statements regarding Harbor Square, fiber optics, neighborhood centers, Stevens Hospital, etc. Councilmember Buckshnis thanked Mr. Bowman for his candor. As a former resident of the Portland area, she agreed light rail has regenerated the southeast area. She pointed out the building stock at Old Mill Town was changed but still remained vacant. The Council needs to address, 1) what was done wrong that those spaces remained vacant, 2) development outside the bowl area, 3) branding and 4) how to get retailers to be open on Sundays. Mr. Bowman agreed it was not just one issue, they were all connected. For example retailers need restaurants and the restaurants need retailers. Mayor Haakenson expressed his thanks to the EDC and the Planning Board for their great work, commenting it was amazing for 24 people to reach consensus. He encouraged the citizens of Edmonds to read the 2009 Annual Report from the EDC and Planning Board which addresses the future of the City. He emphasized the only way to effect change was for all citizens to get involved. He summarized if the City did not do something, it was going down a bad road. 6. DISCUSSION ABOUT MEMBERSHIP OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION. Councilmember Wilson commented the ordinance that created the Economic Development Commission (EDC) was silent with regard to new Councilmembers. He commented on the possibility of the EDC Packet Page 10 of 132 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes January 19, 2010 Page 8 doing their work and then the Council not approving it due to a disconnect because the representatives appointed by former Councilmembers did not reflect the views of new Councilmembers. He suggested the Council appoint new members and/or reappoint existing members to ensure the EDC represented the Council’s views. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas was concerned that making appointments at this point in the process could affect consistency within the group. She asked if there were a point at which the membership would be final. Councilmember Wilson agreed there should not be a constant change in the membership. He anticipated this would be the only time changes could be made because no new Councilmembers would be elected for two years. He planned to reappoint David Schaefer and in the next agenda item appoint Mary Monfort to replace Michael Bowman who has resigned. This was an opportunity for all Councilmembers to confirm their selections and for Councilmembers Fraley-Monillas and Buckshnis to ensure their representative reflected their views. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas pointed out if she appointed two new members, they would replace two involved members and disrupt the process. Councilmember Wilson commented if she and the Councilmember she replaced had different viewpoints, that disruption would occur sooner or later, sooner if she appointed new representatives or later if the representatives appointed by Councilmember Wambolt did not represent her views on economic development. Councilmember Buckshnis commented this Commission had a two-year duration and had been working together for six months. She anticipated making a change at this point would disrupt their cohesiveness. She declined to make any new appointments. The Council took no action on this item. 7. CONFIRMATION OF APPOINTMENT OF MARY MONFORT TO THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION. COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT, TO CONFIRM THE APPOINTMENT OF MARY MONFORT TO THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 8. PUBLIC HEARING TO RENAME KAIREZ DRIVE TO VISTA DEL MAR DRIVE. City Engineer Rob English explained last year the Vista Del Mar Homeowners Association made a request to change Kairez Drive to Vista Del Mar Drive. He displayed a map of the area, identifying Kairez Drive which is located off Olympic View Drive near Talbot Road and the 12 properties addressed on Kairez Drive. On December 15, 2009, the Council passed a resolution scheduling tonight’s public hearing on the proposed street name change. At the conclusion of this public hearing, the Council has the option of directing the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance to proceed with the street name change and to place the ordinance on a future Consent Agenda for approval. Mayor Haakenson opened the public participation portion of the public hearing. There were no members of the public present who wished to provide testimony and Mayor Haakenson closed the public hearing. COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ORVIS, TO DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE AN ORDINANCE FOR THE JANUARY 26, 2010 CONSENT AGENDA TO CHANGE KAIREZ DRIVE TO VISTA DEL MAR DRIVE. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Packet Page 11 of 132 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes January 19, 2010 Page 9 9. DISCUSSION REGARDING HOMELESS SHELTERS AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES EXCLUDING EMERGENCY SHELTERS RUN BY RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATIONS FROM THE STATE BUILDING CODE, AND ADOPTING PROCEDURES FOR THE PERMITTING OF "TENT CITY" HOMELESS SHELTERS IN CONJUNCTION WITH A RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATION. City Attorney Scott Snyder explained the Council previously adopted a resolution directing staff to be as flexible as possible in its approach to emergency shelters for the homeless and indigent. The Council passed an ordinance under Chapter 19.27 RCW that provides the maximum flexibility under the State Building Code for emergency/indigent housing. He referred to his memo that outlines staff’s dilemma; the difficulty meeting the criteria of “no threat” to human life. Unlike many other cities where churches are new buildings, the majority of Edmonds churches are older, legal nonconforming uses that do not have sprinkler systems. Under the State Building Code, transient accommodations are required to have sprinkler systems including crisis centers. The direction provided to him by the Council was to be as flexible as possible; he prepared an ordinance to exclude emergency shelters for the homeless operated by churches. The ordinance would exclude them as a class from the State Building Code and in place of the sprinkler requirement, impose alternatives such as maintaining a fire watch, requiring smoke alarms, prohibiting smoking and maintaining clear emergency exits within the State’s prescribed exiting laws. Emergency is defined as very inclement weather where the temperature is less than 33 degrees for four hours as forecast by the National Weather Service. Churches must also be otherwise legally nonconforming. The proposed ordinance provides for what the local churches requested and what the Council resolution directed. He explained many of the principles addressed in his memo would also apply to church-operated year- round, indigent housing such as a tent city. Regional advocates for the homeless have suggested the City may want to expand its exemption. In recent litigation where cities have opposed tent cities, the cities have lost. As a result, a structure for regulating while not permitting tent cities has been developed. He provided a copy of such an ordinance for the Council’s review and suggested this topic be scheduled on a future agenda. Mike Smith, Acting Fire Marshal, Fire District 1, commented he had been in discussions with Eileen Hansen, the pastor at Trinity Lutheran for approximately a year regarding implementation of emergency shelters within the Edmonds city limits. He also reviewed this topic with fire marshals in surrounding jurisdictions and a set of guidelines was developed that include a requirement for automatic fire sprinklers in the shelter area. The City’s Building Official and he also discussed the topic and developed guidelines which included the sprinkler requirement. In spring 2009 the Council passed Ordinance 3730 that allows churches to apply for a compliance permit which has a list of submittal requirements that include floor plans, entrances and exits, corridors, hallways, direction of door swing, emergency and exit lights, fire alarms, smoke detectors, and if the building has any active fire sprinklers. To date, the City has not received any compliance permit applications. He anticipated this was likely due to his not wanting to approve permits for facilities that did not have fire sprinklers. He acknowledged some surrounding jurisdictions have allowed cold weather shelters in churches without fire sprinklers. He requested an opportunity to review a compliance permit application for a church within the city limits. He did not support the Council adopting an ordinance that did not require fire sprinklers in churches operating cold weather shelters. He preferred to retain the existing ordinance, allow staff to review an application and determine whether alternatives could be developed. If that did not work, it may be necessary for the Council to pass an ordinance eliminating the sprinkler requirement. Packet Page 12 of 132 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes January 19, 2010 Page 10 Councilmember Orvis asked if a fire sprinkler system could just be installed in the portion of the church used for the shelter. Fire Marshal Smith answered it must be installed throughout the building. Councilmember Orvis asked the cost of installing a fire sprinkler system. Fire Marshal Smith estimated the cost of a sprinkler system for a commercial building at $3.50 - $5.00/square foot. Public Comment Alvin Rutledge, Edmonds, offered to provide a report regarding the number of churches operating homeless shelters. He commented Lynnwood’s City Hall is used as a last resort cold weather shelter. Next, he referred to a House Bill that would allow Ports to shelter the homeless. Rob VanTassell, Edmonds, explained he was the Director of Housing for Catholic Community Services, the largest provider of affordable housing in Washington State. One of the projects he recently worked on was in the church basement of Sacred Heart parish in Seattle. He was experienced in getting building codes and Fire Department codes to work with the church’s needs and offered to assist with that effort in Edmonds. They have also worked with parishes in Western Washington who have hosted Tent City. Councilmember Orvis asked whether it was possible for a church to self-install a fire sprinkler. Mr. VanTassell did not recommend that approach, commenting many churches have members who were qualified to install fire sprinkler systems who may be willing to do so on a cost-reduced basis. Dorothy Sacks, Edmonds, explained for the past eight months she had been volunteering for Neighbors in Need at Trinity Lutheran Church in Lynnwood. Neighbors in Need not only provides breakfast but also bus tickets, shower vouchers, food bank, etc. When doing intake, she noticed many of the people are from Edmonds, some are from Seattle and Everett. She recalled first becoming aware of the homeless when returning from living overseas in 1991; the problem has continued to get worse. She urged cities to do something constructive to eliminate the problem of homelessness. Because one never knew what was in their future, it was in everyone’s best interest to provide housing for the homeless. David Thorpe, Edmonds, appreciated the Council addressing this issue in a proactive manner. He posed several questions, 1) why are churches required to install fire sprinklers when they already hold services for hundreds of people without sprinklers, 2) will the Hearing Examiner hold a public hearing regarding siting a tent city, 3) which City staff members would be the contacts with regard to tent city, 4) and do churches have the ability to do background checks for tent city residents. He summarized he wanted further information from the City with regard to the steps to be taken prior to siting a tent city. Charlotte Lawson, Emergency Cold Weather System, Trinity Lutheran Church, Lynnwood, pointed out at every military installation in the world where there is one tent, a fire watch system is implemented. A two-person team is trained to stay awake all night holding fire extinguishers. Soldiers in the Fire Department at Fort Lewis have offered to train volunteers to provide fire watch services. She summarized installing fire sprinklers in churches was not financially feasible. Their goal was preventing the homeless from dying from the cold; they obviously did not want people to die in a fire. Phil Lovell, Edmonds, commented a definite need had been identified in the City. The City can be flexible and bend the rules to allow churches to operate an emergency cold weather shelter. He assured churches without fire sprinkler systems who hold services are fully compliant with the law because the code at the time the church was built did not require fire sprinkler systems. The proposal was for equivalency, if the letter of the code could not be met, there were means and methods to assure the safety of the use such as via a fire watch. With 38 years experience in commercial construction and a registered professional civil engineer, he acknowledged major developments created an environmental impact but the City could begin a negotiation process to produce tradeoffs which may require changes to the Comprehensive Plan and development code. Packet Page 13 of 132 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes January 19, 2010 Page 11 Rev. Eileen Hanson, Trinity Lutheran Church, Lynnwood, and Jeremiah Center at Five Corners, referred to her discussions with Fire Marshal Smith and their mutual concern with the health and safety of their shelter guests. They had not applied for a permit because the City Building Department has recommended they talk with the Fire Marshal before applying for a permit and Fire Marshal Smith has made it clear he would not approve the permit unless the building has a full sprinkler system. She relayed the cost of installing a fire sprinkler system at the Jeremiah Center was estimated at $30,000 - $50,000, making it cost prohibitive for an emergency cold weather shelter. She was inspired and encouraged by the Council’s consideration of the proposed ordinance because it ensured equivalency for the common goal of health and safety. Dave Gilbertson, Lynnwood, thanked City Attorney Scott Snyder for developing the ordinance and Councilmember Wilson for pursuing the matter. He pointed out this was not an issue solely for Edmonds but for cities throughout the nation. He referred to an email from Reverend Jean Kim that cited the need to move forward on this issue as a collective body in South Snohomish County and as a nation. He cited examples of why people become homeless including illness, lack of health insurance, job layoff, foreclosure, etc. He pointed out many of the homeless are Vietnam veterans and questioned what type of nation abandoned its veterans after they had served their country. He provided two quotes from Martin Luther King, Jr., “An individual has not started living until he can rise above the narrow confines of his individualistic concerns to the broader concerns of all humanity” and “Every man must decide whether he will walk in the light of creative altruism or in the darkness of destructive selfishness; this is the judgment. Life’s most persistent and urgent question is, what are you doing for others.” Hearing no further comment, Mayor Haakenson closed public comment. In response to Mr. Thorpe’s question why services could be held in a church without sprinkler systems, Mr. Snyder explained a change in use imposes new requirements under the Building Code. The underlying question, why its more dangerous to have eight people sleep for eight hours versus 1000 people in a building for an hour and half with open candles, is the heart of the constitutional issue. As the materials he provided state, the State’s Supreme Court has been very clear. The State’s Constitution is broader and provides greater protections than federal law in this area. The City has the obligation to use the least restrictive means of achieving its compelling interest, it cannot be uncompromising and rigid, and in reviewing what the City has done, they need to searchingly examine the interest and determine whether the interest and alternatives considered for the protections and enforcement are articulated. Constitutionally in Washington State, the care of the homeless is a recognized part of religion and as such the City must find a way to accommodate it. Staff provided an ordinance to address the emergency situation. With regard to the Fire Marshal’s concerns, he commented the evidence was in favor of addressing a temporary emergency shelter. He acknowledged a $30,000 - $50,000 investment to install fire sprinklers may be appropriate for converting a building to a permanent homeless shelter. He reiterated his suggestion for the Council to schedule consideration of a tent city ordinance this spring. Councilmember Wilson commented the ordinance did not specifically address temporary emergency shelters and he was concerned it could apply to a permanent situation. Mr. Snyder referred to Section 19.00.040(1) that defines emergency as the housing of indigent and homeless persons when the ambient temperature is forecast to be below 33 degrees for a four hour, overnight period or when wind chill or violent storms or other inclement conditions present a direct threat to the lives of homeless and other indigents. His intent in drafting the ordinance was to address the type of temporary emergency shelters that local churches seek to operate. Councilmember Wilson referred to the next sentence, “Such danger could include, but is not limited to, the threat presented by carbon monoxide poisoning for persons attempting to take shelter in cars or other vehicles with the motor running paragraph,” which would appear to suggest an emergency situation would exist when the temperatures were below 33 degrees or when one was living in a vehicle. Mr. Snyder advised if the Council felt that sentence would allow a Packet Page 14 of 132 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes January 19, 2010 Page 12 permanent homeless shelter, it could be deleted. The intent of that sentence was to identify dangers associated with living outside as well as seeking shelter in inappropriate settings. Councilmember Wilson recalled there was discussion of a limit of 14 days in order to define temporary. Mr. Snyder answered the duration of temperatures below 33 degrees would determine the length of time the shelter was operated. He used “as forecast by the National Weather Service” to allow churches to plan ahead rather than watching the thermometer. For Councilmember Wilson, Mr. Snyder explained the compliance permit would be applied for ahead of time; a church would apply once and have an annual review. Enforcement would then be a discretionary matter by the Building Official and Fire Marshal. In light of the Fire Marshal’s concerns, Councilmember Wilson supported utilizing volunteers such as Mr. VanTassell to review the City’s ordinances but to err on the side of protecting the homeless from weather rather than from fire particularly with alternatives to fire sprinklers. COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE ALTERNATIVE A, ORDINANCE NO. 3778, AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 19.00 TO ADD A NEW SECTION 19.00.040, EXCLUSION OF CHURCHES PROVIDING EMERGENCY HOUSING FOR THE INDIGENT FROM CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS. Councilmember Wilson summarized this was good policy and reflected the resolution the Council unanimously approved. He commended Rev. Hansen, Kerry St. Clair Ayers and others for their assistance. Councilmember Peterson looked forward to the discussion of emergency shelters such as tent city, noting this was an important step for the Council to take. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 10. PUBLIC HEARING ON AN INTERIM ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS REGARDING AMENDMENT OF ECDC 20.110.040(F) OF THE CITY'S CIVIL ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES RELATING TO CONTINUING FINES AND VIOLATIONS IN ORDER TO CONFORM TO POST V. TACOMA City Attorney Scott Snyder explained on October 15, 2009, the Washington Supreme Court held that the City of Tacoma civil enforcement procedures violated constitutional due process protections. The ruling was based on a continuing fine provision; once a person was found to be in violation, fines would continue to accrue. A number of the defects cited by the Court in Post v. Tacoma are not applicable to the City’s enforcement procedures. However, the City’s procedures do provide for the continuation of daily fines without specifying an appeal process. The ordinance should be clarified that such fines may continue to accrue and be addressed only after additional notice of civil violation and opportunity for appeal. Mr. Snyder advised he provided the Council his response to questions posed by Council President Bernheim as well as corrected a word in the ordinance (replacing “explanation” in Section 1 of the ordinance with “expiration.” Councilmember Orvis understood there was a right to appeal a code enforcement action to a Hearing Examiner. Mr. Snyder explained the civil enforcement process had two steps, first the Notice to Correct. The Notice to Correct could be issued by various officials with various appeal routes depending on whether it is a building code, zoning code or nuisance provision. Once a Notice to Correct is issued, if Packet Page 15 of 132 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes January 19, 2010 Page 13 not complied with or appealed, the second step is a Notice of Violation. The Notice of Violation can be appealed to the violations Hearing Examiner. Section F provides for after the Hearing Examiner has made her determination, fines continue to accrue. For example there are pending actions in Edmonds where people have accrued thousands of dollars in fines. The Supreme Court held that the person accruing the fines must be given another opportunity to appeal if they correct the situation. The interim ordinance, 1) provides a clear cut off and a new notice and opportunity so that fines do not continue to accrue and 2) offers two alternatives for the current violators – dismiss the matter entirely or give notice and an opportunity to appeal. Councilmember Orvis provided an example: if he built a garage 50 feet tall, was cited and refused to remove it and was assessed fines. The interim ordinance would provide another opportunity regarding the fines. If the person is found to be in violation, the interim ordinance would require staff to return to the Hearing Examiner, giving new notice to the person every time a new fine was imposed and providing a new appeal opportunity. Mayor Haakenson opened the public participation portion of the public hearing. Finis Tupper, Edmonds, commented there was nothing wrong with this section of the code. In fact the code enforcement section of the City’s website was one of the most informative. The ordinance is very good and outlines a three step process, an Order to Correct and following an administrative hearing if the order is not followed, staff has the opportunity to issue a Notice of Violation. The person is not obligated to appeal until the Notice of Violation is issued. He expressed concern that his email to the Council regarding this subject was ignored. He questioned why there was a continued misrepresentation of the facts. He was suspect of interim ordinances and was concerned that interim ordinances were being pushed through without public comment and very little information. He questioned the applicability of Tacoma’s code to Edmonds, pointing out Tacoma has an administrative hearing prior to the Notice of Violation. He urged the Council not to adopt the proposed interim ordinance before reviewing what other cities were doing and gathering additional information. Ken Reidy, Edmonds, was uncertain whether the City’s code was ambiguous or whether the staff did not understand its code. He suggested more attention be paid to this issue instead of a quick fix to the monetary penalty portion of the code. As someone familiar with the code enforcement process, he commented on the difficulties associated with that process and how much of it could be avoided if the City offered an administrative hearing to allow citizens to identify errors made by the City prior to the enforcement process or if the City worked with citizens in an effort to correct problems before monetary penalties were imposed. He urged the Council to ascertain that the standard due process requirements of the State and federal constitution were being met by the City’s code. He urged the Council to have the City Attorney review property rights, civil enforcement actions, etc. He cited from Post v. Tacoma, “it is sufficient to hold that where local jurisdictions issue infractions, there must be some express procedure available by which citizens may bring errors to the attention of their government and thereby guard against the erroneous depravation of their interests.” Edmonds is supposed to have an express procedure for citizens to bring errors to the attention of the City; there is supposed to be an administrative hearing but for some reason it is overlooked. The City claims an administrative hearing is represented by an appeal to a Hearing Examiner. However, requiring a citizen to pay to appeal a prejudged guilty verdict, the Notice of Civil Violation, does not qualify as an administrative hearing. He displayed a thick document prepared by the City for his appeal, commenting that did not represent an express procedure where he could point out errors made by the City. He urged the Council not to pass the ordinance until they reviewed the entire matter. He suggested the City establish an independent committee to review the code enforcement process and to use his situation as a case study. Packet Page 16 of 132 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes January 19, 2010 Page 14 Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, commented it appeared the issue of violators not paying their fines had been ongoing for quite some time and he questioned why the City had not collected on those debts. He referred to the Locke case, and agreed with Mr. Snyder’s suggestion to simply dismiss the case. He felt it was appropriate for staff to refile violations. Although Mr. Tupper discovered these errors, he doubted he would sue the City. He anticipated Mr. Tupper brought this to the City’s attention to allow staff to correct the situation. He questioned the need for an interim ordinance, citing the lack of an emergency. Alvin Rutledge, Edmonds, recalled a fence violation that was appealed to the Hearing Examiner who reversed staff’s decision. He suggested the appeal fee be refunded to a person who won their appeal. Hearing no further comment, Mayor Haakenson closed the public participation portion of the public hearing. Council President Bernheim inquired about an expedited schedule to process this ordinance via the normal procedure. Mr. Snyder estimated review by the Planning Board would take approximately 2½ months. With regard to the emergency, Mr. Snyder explained the City’s ordinance was violating the due process rights of six people by providing for continuing violations. With regard to Mr. Hertrich’s comment that Mr. Tupper raised this issue, Mr. Snyder clarified the Washington State Supreme Court ruled on the matter on October 15, 2009. He agreed with Mr. Tupper that interim ordinances were usually suspect and should be carefully considered. Due to the sensitivity of this issue, the ordinance was drafted to address only the continuing fines. He provided a copy of the proposed interim ordinance to Mr. Reidy’s attorney via email last week and instead of the usual interim ordinance process that provides for a public hearing within 60 days, the public hearing was held tonight because it was suspect. He agreed with Mr. Reidy’s suggestion to review the code enforcement process and to use the process that was followed for Mr. Reidy as a case study. The packet Mr. Reidy displayed was from the Notice of Civil Violation, not the latter ordinance. To Mr. Rutledge’s point, anyone who appealed and won was refunded their appeal fee. He summarized the interim ordinance was intended to correct a clear unconstitutional provision of the City’s ordinance that arose in October 2009 and this was the first opportunity the Council had to review it. He considered the violation of a citizen’s due process rights to be an emergency. With regard to Mr. Hertrich’s comments about Mr. Locke, Mr. Snyder explained that matter is in Superior Court. With regard to the fence issue Mr. Rutledge mentioned, staff is waiting for the expiration of the 21 day LUPA appeal period. For Councilmember Fraley-Monillas, Mr. Snyder explained under the current ordinance, once a violation is determined, penalties accrue daily forever. He recommended this be amended to provide for periodic notice and opportunity to appeal. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas inquired about the correlation between administrative hearings and the Reidy-Thuesen situation. Mr. Snyder was uncertain what correlation there was. Mr. Reidy has not been adjudged to be in violation by the Hearing Examiner and no fines are accruing. Councilmember Wilson inquired about Mr. Reidy’s suggestion to form an independent body to review the City’s code enforcement process and use his situation as a case study. Mr. Snyder suggested the Planning Board would be the appropriate body to review the City’s code enforcement procedures. One area that needed to be addressed was the three different appeal processes depending on which City official issued the Notice to Correct. Packet Page 17 of 132 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes January 19, 2010 Page 15 Councilmember Plunkett inquired about the liability posed to the City. Mr. Snyder answered the liability was a lawsuit because the City was violating their rights. He explained most of the people in violation were not paying the fine because their homes were in foreclosure. If the Supreme Court says a person has a due process right to a hearing and there cannot be continuing fines, the City needed to obey their ruling. Councilmember Buckshnis asked how long the six people had been in violation. Mr. Snyder answered some as short as six months, others as long as four years. Councilmember Buckshnis asked why this change was being proposed now. Mr. Snyder answered it was due to the Supreme Court’s October 15, 2009 ruling. COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ORVIS, TO APPROVE INTERIM ORDINANCE NO. 3779 AS AMENDED, AMENDING ECDC 20.110.040(F) OF THE CITY'S CIVIL ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES RELATING TO CONTINUING FINES AND VIOLATIONS IN ORDER TO CONFORM TO POST V. TACOMA. Councilmember Orvis observed the continual accrual of fines violated due process rights and there should be a process for a review. Councilmember Plunkett agreed the interim ordinance was appropriate to address the issue of due process. He agreed with the suggestion for the Planning Board to review the code enforcement procedures. Council President Bernheim advised he would not support the interim ordinance as it would only take a few months for a thorough review of the entire situation. He pointed out the City would of course not continue to impose the unconstitutional fines, thus this only applied to future violators. The only people who would potentially sue the City would be those that the City pursued payment of the unconstitutional fines. He did not anticipate any exposure to the City since the City would not continue to impose the unconstitutional fees. He preferred to refer the matter to the Planning Board for an expedited hearing and in the meantime voluntarily refrain from imposing the unconstitutional fines. Mr. Snyder pointed out the City turned the collection of fines to a debt collection agency who has been actively pursuing them. One of the reasons he wanted the Council to pass the interim ordinance was so he could ask for them back from the debt collection agency. Council President Bernheim asked why the City could not simply direct the collection agency to cease collection efforts. Mr. Snyder assured he had contacted the collection agency to ask them to discontinue actively pursuing the debt. Council President Bernheim concluded that was not a reason to vote in favor of the interim ordinance. MOTION CARRIED (4-2-1), COUNCIL PRESIDENT BERNHEIM AND COUNCILMEMBER WILSON VOTING NO AND COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS ABSTAINING. 11. INTERIM ORDINANCE ADOPTING A PROCEDURE FOR REVIEW OF CONSTRUCTION, ACQUISITION AND ABANDONMENT OF PUBLIC PROJECTS BY THE HEARING EXAMINER AND RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL REGARDING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE IN ORDER TO CONFORM TO THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, P. 2, EFFECT. City Attorney Scott Snyder advised this interim ordinance was in response to a complaint made by Mr. Tupper. In the 1980s the City’s Comprehensive Plan was part of the zoning code and contained a number of procedures. In the 1990s when the GMA was passed, the structure for review and approval of public projects and a variety of other processes changed dramatically and this code provision was taken out and placed in the City’s Comprehensive Plan. That left a procedural requirement in the Comprehensive Plan Packet Page 18 of 132 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes January 19, 2010 Page 16 but nothing in the ordinance. The Comprehensive Plan is not self-enforcing and there needs to be provisions in the code so that the City’s ordinances conform to the Comprehensive Plan. The City could change the Comprehensive Plan or the ordinance; the Comprehensive Plan can only be amended once a year; ordinances can be amended at any time. The interim ordinance is intended to true up the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan and the ordinance until they can be reviewed as part of this year’s Comprehensive Plan process. The ordinance attempts to mirror the language in the Comprehensive Plan provision and provides for an expedited review of all the public processes that were in the Capital Facilities Plan and the Transportation Improvement Plan. He noted there may be an appropriate role for Hearing Examiner or Council review of some projects. For example, the Comprehensive Plan does not designate specific properties for purchase for parks. The Hearing Examiner or Council may want to review that for Comprehensive Plan compliance. Council President Bernheim inquired how long it would take for the Planning Board to review this using the usual process. Mr. Snyder answered 2-4 months. COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, TO ADOPT INTERIM ORDINANCE NO. 3780, ADOPTING A PROCEDURE FOR REVIEW OF CONSTRUCTION, ACQUISITION AND ABANDONMENT OF PUBLIC PROJECTS BY THE HEARING EXAMINER AND RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL REGARDING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE IN ORDER TO CONFORM TO THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, P. 2, EFFECT. Council President Bernheim commented he was not opposed to truing up the code but did not view this as an emergency since this situation has existed for quite some time. He preferred to expeditiously send this to the Planning Board for a deliberative review rather than adopt an interim ordinance. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if the intent of the interim ordinance was for the City to pay Ogden Murphy Wallace to make the changes rather than sending it to the Planning Board for recommendation. Mr. Snyder responded he would draft the ordinance either way. Even if the Council acted tonight, a series of public processes would follow. A public hearing would be held within the next 60 days on this amendment. The interim ordinance expires in six months and the Comprehensive Plan process takes a year; therefore, the Council will be required to consider it again in July. The Comprehensive Plan process will also include a series of public hearings before the Planning Board and Council. The risk was someone filing an appeal to the Growth Management Hearings Board (GMHB). Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked what prompted this. Mr. Snyder answered Mr. Tupper filed a code enforcement complaint naming Mayor Haakenson, Mr. Bowman, Mr. Chave and himself, stating that they were not complying with the Comprehensive Plan. An outside attorney reviewed his complaint and staff agreed the Comprehensive Plan and code needed to be trued up. The provision he cited is so broad that every public project needs to be reviewed by the Hearing Examiner for compliance. He suggested when the Council reviewed fees this year, they may need to be adjusted to cover those costs. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas clarified the ordinance resolved Mr. Tupper’s issue. Mr. Snyder answered Mr. Tupper was correct, there was nothing in the zoning code to implement a Comprehensive Plan provision. Council President Bernheim clarified if anyone were to sue the City for failing to comply with this procedure, they would have an inventory of transactions that have occurred over the past 5-10 years. This fix would only true up future transactions and not cure past failures to comply. Mr. Snyder agreed the passage of time would. The only person in a position to take advantage of it was Mr. Thuesen in his appeal of the street vacation with respect to Mr. Reidy. The action would be an allegation to the GMHB Packet Page 19 of 132 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes January 19, 2010 Page 17 that the City’s zoning code was not in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and therefore is out of compliance with GMA. The remedy would be the GMHB would order the City to pass an ordinance like the proposed ordinance. MOTION CARRIED (5-1-1), COUNCIL PRESIDENT BERNHEIM VOTING NO AND COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS ABSTAINING. COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT BERNHEIM, TO EXTEND THE MEETING FOR 30 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 12. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Don Hall, Edmonds, referred to the next agenda item and suggested more information be included on the agenda so that citizens were aware it was in regard to marijuana. He supported the proposal but suggested the agenda item more accurately reflect the topic of discussion. Next, he recalled urging the Council approximately a year ago to ban plastic bags. He relayed many visitors to their store express their appreciation to Edmonds for banning plastic bags and for caring about the environment. He suggested the City take the additional step to ban Styrofoam. He acknowledged Styrofoam could not be completely banned because there were certain applications for which there was no substitute. Alvin Rutledge, Edmonds, recalled the City held development meetings on Hwy. 99 in the past. He pointed out the hotels on Hwy. 99 generate hotel/motel tax. Next he reported on the Stevens Hospital meeting with Swedish, noting that Mayor Haakenson attended that meeting. Finis Tupper, Edmonds, advised he submitted a public documents request on November 24, 2009 for grant applications and awards for money claimed in 2009. To date he has not received that information. He inquired again and was told staff needed another two weeks. He concluded it was obvious every time he approached the City with any issue, there was a policy to ignore him. He recalled a previous public documents request was lost in spam mail. He expressed concern that his identity had been disclosed with regard to the previous agenda item, noting he selected the box that stated do not disclose his identity. He clarified he did not file a complaint; he filed a request for code enforcement. He was also frustrated by his inability to schedule a meeting with a City employee and that he never received a response. He invited anyone else who had been ignored by the City to contact him at 425-778-9465. Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, questioned why one of the interim ordinances on the agenda included a public hearing and the other did not. He questioned whether the Council understood the Comprehensive Plan and suggested the Council review the Comprehensive Plan at their retreat. Next, he questioned whether the City could get a credit for the fees paid to the Hearing Examiner in months where there were no cases for her to review. With regard to amending the Comprehensive Plan once a year, he pointed out the Comprehensive Plan could also be amended at any time on an emergency basis. Ken Reidy, Edmonds, reiterated his recommendation for the City to review the code enforcement procedures and the appeal process and make improvements that would benefit the City and its citizens. He raised this issue tonight because it was logical to consider all the procedures. He reiterated his offer to share his experience with a reviewing body. With regard to the appeal packet he displayed in his earlier comments and Mr. Snyder’s comment that it related to his appeal of the Notice of Civil Violation, he explained he was strongly encouraged to pursue an appeal of an Order to Correct by the next day. He was guided down a Board of Appeals process that had nothing to do with a code enforcement action, expended a great deal of money, time and effort and the City developed the packet he displayed, wasting a great deal of private and taxpayer money on a process that made no sense. He urged the Council to make improvements to the code enforcement procedures. Packet Page 20 of 132 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes January 19, 2010 Page 18 13. PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO CITY LOBBYING PRIORITIES. Council President Bernheim explained when the Council approved its lobbying priorities at the January 5 meeting, he offered to present an additional priority. His proposal was to instruct the lobbyist to support state legislative efforts (Senate Bill 5615 and House Bill 1117) to change marijuana possession by adults from an expensive jail-time misdemeanor to a low-cost fine-paying infraction in an effort to free up diminishing law enforcement resources for more pressing priorities. COUNCIL PRESIDENT BERNHEIM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON, TO ADD ITEM 12 TO THE LOBBYING PRIORITIES, PUBLIC SAFETY, IN ORDER TO BETTER REALLOCATE LIMITED LOCAL AND STATE LAW ENFORCEMENT RESOURCES, EDMONDS SUPPORTS PASSAGE OF SB 5615 AND HB 1117 REDUCING ADULT MARIJUANA POSSESSION FROM A MISDEMEANOR TO A CIVIL INFRACTION. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (5-2), COUNCIL PRESIDENT BERNHEIM AND COUNCILMEMBERS FRALEY-MONILLAS, ORVIS, PETERSON AND BUCKSHNIS IN FAVOR; AND COUNCILMEMBERS PLUNKETT AND WILSON OPPOSED. Council President Bernheim asked whether this language could be communicated to the City’s Lobbyist Mike Doubleday as a House Committee would be voting on this tomorrow. Mayor Haakenson advised Community Services/Economic Development Director Stephen Clifton would do so. Councilmember Wilson suggested Council President Bernheim also email the nine Edmonds legislators. 14. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Haakenson reported he attended last night’s Stevens Hospital Board meeting regarding the contract with Swedish Hospital. Representatives for the doctors and union spoke in favor of the partnership and no citizens spoke in opposition to the partnership. Stevens Hospital is moving forward with the partnership and anticipate the process will be concluded by July/August. The hospital will have a new name and he was hopeful Edmonds would be included in the name. Mayor Haakenson welcomed Councilmember Buckshnis and invited her to visit his office any time. 15. COUNCIL COMMENTS Council President Bernheim thanked the City for broadcasting the Martin Luther King, Jr. video, “Montgomery to Memphis” on Monday. He regretted that technical difficulties had affected the sound quality. Council President Bernheim announced a meeting on January 28 at Trinity Place Apartments in Lynnwood for anyone interested in participating in the annual count the homeless effort in Snohomish County. He advised the subject of a Styrofoam ban was scheduled on the City Council retreat agenda as well as a discussion of the intricacies of the Comprehensive Plan. Councilmember Plunkett congratulated Councilmember Buckshnis and welcomed her to the Council. Councilmember Buckshnis thanked everyone for their support and hoped not to let anyone down. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented a lot of great people applied for the Council position. She received numerous emails from citizens about their favorite applicant. Packet Page 21 of 132 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes January 19, 2010 Page 19 Councilmember Fraley-Monillas reported she participated in a homeless march and rally in Olympia that emphasized the increase in the number of homeless since the economy has worsened and pointing out that many of the homeless in shelters are not the stereotypical homeless person. She encouraged the public to support shelters in the City and throughout the area. Councilmember Peterson congratulated Councilmember Buckshnis. He thanked the members of the public who spoke tonight regarding homelessness, pointing out it was one of the most important issues the Council would address. He invited the public to reflect on the horrific images from Haiti, summarizing homelessness was a local, national and world issue. Councilmember Orvis welcomed Councilmember Buckshnis. 16. ADJOURN With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:21 p.m. Packet Page 22 of 132 AM-2742 2.C. Approval of Claim Checks and Payroll Direct Deposit and Checks Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:01/26/2010 Submitted By:Debbie Karber Submitted For:Lorenzo Hines Time:Consent Department:Finance Type:Action Review Committee: Committee Action:Approved for Consent Agenda Information Subject Title Approval of claim checks #116585 through #116697 dated January 21, 2010 for $437,010.24. Approval of payroll direct deposit and checks #49027 through #49058 for the period of January 1 through January 15, 2010 for $662,656.90. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Approval of claim checks and payroll direct deposit and checks. Previous Council Action N/A Narrative In accordance with the State statutes, City payments must be approved by the City Council. Ordinance #2896 delegates this approval to the Council President who reviews and recommends either approval or non-approval of expenditures. Fiscal Impact Fiscal Year:2010 Revenue: Expenditure:$1,099,667.14 Fiscal Impact: Claims: $437,010.24 Payroll: $662,656.90 Attachments Link: Claim cks 1-21-10 Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 Finance Lorenzo Hines 01/21/2010 03:17 PM APRV 2 City Clerk Sandy Chase 01/21/2010 03:22 PM APRV 3 Mayor Gary Haakenson 01/21/2010 03:24 PM APRV 4 Final Approval Sandy Chase 01/21/2010 03:45 PM APRV Packet Page 23 of 132 Form Started By: Debbie Karber  Started On: 01/21/2010 10:10 AM Final Approval Date: 01/21/2010 Packet Page 24 of 132 01/21/2010 Voucher List City of Edmonds 1 10:07:41AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 116585 1/21/2010 065052 AARD PEST CONTROL 277459 1-13992 PEST CONTROL 411.000.656.538.800.410.23 63.25 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.410.23 6.01 Total :69.26 116586 1/21/2010 001030 ALLIED SYSTEMS PRODUCTS INC IN104128 SUPPLIES SUPPLIES 001.000.230.512.500.310.00 57.38 Total :57.38 116587 1/21/2010 061540 ALLIED WASTE SERVICES 0197-001173332 FS #20 - Garbage Dec 09 FS #20 - Garbage Dec 09 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 120.79 PW Garbage Dec 090197-001173420 PW Garbage Dec 09 001.000.650.519.910.470.00 24.47 PW Garbage Dec 09 111.000.653.542.900.470.00 92.97 PW Garbage Dec 09 411.000.652.542.900.470.00 92.97 PW Garbage Dec 09 411.000.654.534.800.470.00 92.97 PW Garbage Dec 09 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 92.97 PW Garbage Dec 09 511.000.657.548.680.470.00 92.94 FS #16 - Garbage Dec 090197-001173490 FS #16 - Garbage Dec 09 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 125.97 MCH Garbage Dec 090197-001174162 MCH Garbage Dec 09 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 57.40 1Page: Packet Page 25 of 132 01/21/2010 Voucher List City of Edmonds 2 10:07:41AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :793.451165871/21/2010 061540 061540 ALLIED WASTE SERVICES 116588 1/21/2010 065568 ALLWATER INC 011410037 COEWASTE DRINKING WATER 411.000.656.538.800.310.11 21.85 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.11 0.67 Total :22.52 116589 1/21/2010 073072 ALS TECHNOLOGIES INC 18201 INV#18201 EDMONDS PD 40 mm REACT PROJECTILE 001.000.410.521.400.310.00 1,204.80 Freight 001.000.410.521.400.310.00 176.28 Total :1,381.08 116590 1/21/2010 001528 AM TEST INC 57242 ICP SCAN SAMPLE NUMBERS ICP SCAN SAMPLE NUMBERS 411.000.656.538.800.410.31 300.00 Total :300.00 116591 1/21/2010 069667 AMERICAN MARKETING 10707 BRONZE PLAQUES CAST BRONZE PLAQUES:~ 127.000.640.575.500.310.00 318.80 Freight 127.000.640.575.500.310.00 9.50 9.5% Sales Tax 127.000.640.575.500.310.00 31.19 Total :359.49 116592 1/21/2010 001375 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION 061514-091101 APA MEMBERSHIP FOR DIRECTOR FOR 2010 2010 membership for Stephen Clifton 001.000.610.519.700.490.00 525.00 Total :525.00 116593 1/21/2010 064335 ANALYTICAL RESOURCES INC QA74 EDMONDS NPES TESTING 2Page: Packet Page 26 of 132 01/21/2010 Voucher List City of Edmonds 3 10:07:41AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 116593 1/21/2010 (Continued)064335 ANALYTICAL RESOURCES INC 411.000.656.538.800.410.31 130.00 Total :130.00 116594 1/21/2010 069751 ARAMARK 655-4691547 21580001 UNIFORM SERVICE 411.000.656.538.800.240.00 93.83 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.240.00 8.91 Total :102.74 116595 1/21/2010 069751 ARAMARK 655-4683835 Street Storm Uniform Svc Street Storm Uniform Svc 111.000.653.542.900.240.00 3.51 Street Storm Uniform Svc 411.000.652.542.900.240.00 3.51 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.900.240.00 0.34 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.652.542.900.240.00 0.33 Fleet Unfiorm Svc655-4683836 Fleet Unfiorm Svc 511.000.657.548.680.240.00 15.00 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.240.00 1.43 Fac Maint Uniform Svc655-4691544 Fac Maint Uniform Svc 001.000.651.519.920.240.00 40.44 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.240.00 3.84 PW Mats655-4695946 PW Mats 001.000.650.519.910.410.00 1.75 PW Mats 111.000.653.542.900.410.00 6.65 PW Mats 3Page: Packet Page 27 of 132 01/21/2010 Voucher List City of Edmonds 4 10:07:41AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 116595 1/21/2010 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK 411.000.652.542.900.410.00 6.65 PW Mats 411.000.654.534.800.410.00 6.65 PW Mats 411.000.655.535.800.410.00 6.65 PW Mats 511.000.657.548.680.410.00 6.65 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.650.519.910.410.00 0.17 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.900.410.00 0.63 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.652.542.900.410.00 0.63 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.410.00 0.63 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.410.00 0.63 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.410.00 0.64 Fac Maint Uniform Svc655-4706347 Fac Maint Uniform Svc 001.000.651.519.920.240.00 40.44 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.240.00 3.84 PW Mats655-4708175 PW Mats 001.000.650.519.910.410.00 1.75 PW Mats 111.000.653.542.900.410.00 6.65 PW Mats 411.000.652.542.900.410.00 6.65 PW Mats 411.000.654.534.800.410.00 6.65 PW Mats 4Page: Packet Page 28 of 132 01/21/2010 Voucher List City of Edmonds 5 10:07:41AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 116595 1/21/2010 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK 411.000.655.535.800.410.00 6.65 PW Mats 511.000.657.548.680.410.00 6.65 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.650.519.910.410.00 0.17 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.900.410.00 0.63 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.652.542.900.410.00 0.63 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.410.00 0.63 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.410.00 0.63 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.410.00 0.64 Total :189.34 116596 1/21/2010 069699 AUDIO VISUAL SPECIALISTS 100106 Convert MLK DVD to play on Channel 21 Convert MLK DVD to play on Channel 21 001.000.110.511.100.410.00 21.85 Total :21.85 116597 1/21/2010 073035 AVAGIMOVA, KARINE 011310 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.500.410.01 100.00 INTERPRETER FEE272 INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.500.410.01 100.00 Total :200.00 116598 1/21/2010 001702 AWC EMPLOY BENEFIT TRUST February 2010 FEBRUARY 2010 AWC PREMIUMS Fire Pension Premiums 617.000.510.522.200.230.00 4,197.55 Retirees AWC Premiums 009.000.390.517.370.230.00 27,322.73 5Page: Packet Page 29 of 132 01/21/2010 Voucher List City of Edmonds 6 10:07:41AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 116598 1/21/2010 (Continued)001702 AWC EMPLOY BENEFIT TRUST February 2010 AWC Premiums 811.000.000.231.510.000.00 257,923.80 Total :289,444.08 116599 1/21/2010 073075 BAILEY DUSKIN PEIFFLE &8366-001 99852 Dec-09 Fiber Proj Legal Fees 001.000.310.518.870.410.00 486.00 Total :486.00 116600 1/21/2010 070992 BANC OF AMERICA LEASING 011316093 COPIER RENTAL FEE COPIER RENTAL FEE 001.000.230.512.501.450.00 154.40 Total :154.40 116601 1/21/2010 002100 BARNARD, EARL 5 LEOFF 1 Reimbursement LEOFF 1 Reimbursement 617.000.510.522.200.230.00 51.00 Total :51.00 116602 1/21/2010 066891 BEACON PUBLISHING INC 7755 Civil Service vacancy - legal ad Civil Service vacancy - legal ad 001.000.220.516.210.410.00 118.80 Total :118.80 116603 1/21/2010 071854 BEARD, MELISSA 9/15/09 Tuition Reimbursement - 9/23 - 11/09 Tuition Reimbursement - 9/23 - 11/09 001.000.220.516.100.490.00 800.00 Total :800.00 116604 1/21/2010 069218 BISHOP, PAUL 236 Web Maintenance thr 1/15/2010 Web Maintenance thr 1/15/2010 001.000.310.518.880.410.00 390.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.310.518.880.410.00 37.05 Total :427.05 6Page: Packet Page 30 of 132 01/21/2010 Voucher List City of Edmonds 7 10:07:41AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 116605 1/21/2010 073062 BLUE FLAME BLD20090889 Online Permit VOID - not in city limits. Online Permit VOID - not in city limits. 001.000.000.257.620.000.00 95.00 Total :95.00 116606 1/21/2010 002500 BLUMENTHAL UNIFORM CO INC 786328 INV#786328 EDMONDS PD - COMPTON MOCK TURTLENECK SHIRTS 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 39.90 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 3.79 INV#786344 - EDMONDS PD - HARDWICK786344 5 IN 1 JACKET 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 200.00 NAMETAG 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 11.00 REFLECTIVE PANEL "POLICE" 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 8.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 21.28 HEAT STAMP 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 5.00 INV#788273 - EDMONDS PD - DRUG TEST KITS788273 NARC NIK TEST KITS "G" 001.000.410.521.910.310.00 259.50 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.910.310.00 24.65 Total :573.12 116607 1/21/2010 065739 BOBBY WOLFORD TRUCKING &038233 Storm - Dumping Fees Storm - Dumping Fees 411.000.652.542.320.490.00 26.00 Total :26.00 116608 1/21/2010 072005 BROCKMANN, KERRY BROCKMANN11826 YOGA YOGA #11826 001.000.640.575.540.410.00 109.20 7Page: Packet Page 31 of 132 01/21/2010 Voucher List City of Edmonds 8 10:07:41AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :109.201166081/21/2010 072005 072005 BROCKMANN, KERRY 116609 1/21/2010 072075 CAMPBELL, RICHARD 2010-1-2 Medical Program Director for Dec-09 Medical Program Director for Dec-09 001.000.510.526.100.410.00 1,725.00 Total :1,725.00 116610 1/21/2010 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 9599707 INV#9599707 CUST# 572105 EDMONDS PD COPIER RENTAL THRU 2/1/10 001.000.410.521.100.450.00 581.60 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.100.450.00 55.25 Total :636.85 116611 1/21/2010 067446 CEM CORPORATION 360694 466915 DRYING PADS 411.000.656.538.800.310.11 605.00 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.11 57.48 Total :662.48 116612 1/21/2010 003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY RN12091021 2954000 ARGON/NITROGEN/OXYGEN 411.000.656.538.800.450.21 33.20 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.450.21 3.15 Total :36.35 116613 1/21/2010 064840 CHAPUT, KAREN E CHAPUT11994 FRIDAY NIGHT OUT FRIDAY NIGHT OUT #11994 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 67.20 FRIDAY NIGHT OUTCHAPUT11995 FRIDAY NIGHT OUT #11995 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 53.20 Total :120.40 116614 1/21/2010 066070 CIT TECHNOLOGY FIN SERV INC 15993558 PW Copier Lease Jan 10 8Page: Packet Page 32 of 132 01/21/2010 Voucher List City of Edmonds 9 10:07:41AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 116614 1/21/2010 (Continued)066070 CIT TECHNOLOGY FIN SERV INC PW Copier Lease Jan 10 001.000.650.519.910.450.00 607.12 Total :607.12 116615 1/21/2010 063902 CITY OF EVERETT I10000043 INV#I10000043 EDMONDS PD - TRAINING COST 2010 SHARE POLICE SKILLS TRAINING 001.000.410.521.400.490.00 300.00 Total :300.00 116616 1/21/2010 019215 CITY OF LYNNWOOD 7612 MONTHLY MAINT/OPERATIONS SEWER COSTS MONTHLY MAINT/OPERATIONS SEWER COSTS 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 13,800.83 Total :13,800.83 116617 1/21/2010 070300 CODE 4 INC 7385 INV#7385 EDMONDS PD - COMPTON 12/14/09 INTERVIEW TECHNIQUES - 12/14/09 001.000.410.521.400.490.00 99.00 Total :99.00 116618 1/21/2010 065891 CONLEY, LISA CONLEY0114 PRESCHOOL ASSISTANT PRESCHOOL ASSISTANT @ MEADOWDALE 001.000.640.575.560.410.00 210.00 Total :210.00 116619 1/21/2010 062891 COOK PAGING WA 7766451 Water Pager Jan 10 Water Pager Jan 10 411.000.654.534.800.420.00 4.59 Total :4.59 116620 1/21/2010 004867 COOPER, JACK F 6 LEOFF 1 Reimbursement LEOFF 1 Reimbursement 617.000.510.522.200.230.00 1,156.80 Total :1,156.80 116621 1/21/2010 063507 COXLEY, BRUCE COXLEY011210 PHOTOGRAPHY ASSIGNMENT PHOTOGRAPHY ASSIGNMENT:~ 9Page: Packet Page 33 of 132 01/21/2010 Voucher List City of Edmonds 10 10:07:41AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 116621 1/21/2010 (Continued)063507 COXLEY, BRUCE 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 50.00 Total :50.00 116622 1/21/2010 006200 DAILY JOURNAL OF COMMERCE 88547 DAILY JOURNAL OF COMMERCE 2010 Subscription for 2010 001.000.610.519.700.490.00 220.00 Total :220.00 116623 1/21/2010 072563 DATALINK MO176039 Service & Support NetApp Storage Service & Support NetApp Storage 001.000.310.518.880.480.00 5,850.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.310.518.880.480.00 555.75 Total :6,405.75 116624 1/21/2010 073065 DENOVAN, JIM DENOVAN0115 REFUND REFUND DUE TO INSUFFICIENT REGISTRATION 001.000.000.239.200.000.00 70.00 Total :70.00 116625 1/21/2010 070683 EDMONDS MAIL & PARCEL 17883 UPS/RESOURSE LAB UPS/RECOURSES LAB 411.000.656.538.800.420.00 146.62 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.420.00 13.93 Total :160.55 116626 1/21/2010 067345 EDMONDS TOWING 0126421 Unit 101 - Towing Fees Unit 101 - Towing Fees 511.000.657.548.680.480.00 206.50 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.480.00 19.65 Unit 5 - Towing Fees0126474 Unit 5 - Towing Fees 511.000.657.548.680.480.00 122.00 9.5% Sales Tax 10Page: Packet Page 34 of 132 01/21/2010 Voucher List City of Edmonds 11 10:07:41AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 116626 1/21/2010 (Continued)067345 EDMONDS TOWING 511.000.657.548.680.480.00 11.60 Total :359.75 116627 1/21/2010 069924 EIMCO WATER TECHNOLOGIES 8451392A WIPER BOTTOM/WIPER SIDE NEOPRENE WIPER BOTTOM/WIPER SIDE NEOPRENE 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 848.00 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 80.56 Total :928.56 116628 1/21/2010 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES 051552 MAINT ON COPIER MAINT ON COPIER 001.000.230.512.500.480.00 32.01 Total :32.01 116629 1/21/2010 073076 ENTERPRISE SECURITY 60036723 Museum Alarm Monitoring ~ Museum Alarm Monitoring ~ 001.000.651.519.920.480.00 171.00 Total :171.00 116630 1/21/2010 072585 GLOBAL INDUSTRIAL EQUIP CO 103346544 INV#103346544 CUST#1051747 - EDMONDS PD 85 HOOKS & 10 HANGING BINS 001.000.410.521.400.310.00 73.95 Freight 001.000.410.521.400.310.00 20.51 INV#103350199, CUST#1051747 - EDMONDS PD103350199 CORK BULLETIN BOARD 001.000.410.521.400.310.00 27.95 Freight 001.000.410.521.400.310.00 15.77 Total :138.18 116631 1/21/2010 061410 GRCC/WETRC 102836 2454 TRAINING/AMBURGEY 411.000.656.538.800.490.71 20.00 11Page: Packet Page 35 of 132 01/21/2010 Voucher List City of Edmonds 12 10:07:41AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :20.001166311/21/2010 061410 061410 GRCC/WETRC 116632 1/21/2010 012560 HACH COMPANY 6549611 112830 LAB SUPPLIES 411.000.656.538.800.310.31 610.63 Freight 411.000.656.538.800.310.31 36.95 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.31 61.53 Total :709.11 116633 1/21/2010 013500 HINGSON, ROBERT 4 LEOFF 1 Reimbursement LEOFF 1 Reimbursement 009.000.390.517.370.230.00 4.00 Total :4.00 116634 1/21/2010 070042 IKON FINANCIAL SERVICES 81120561 Rent on reception copier from Rent on reception copier from 001.000.620.558.800.450.00 30.66 Rent on Engineering color copier from81168365 Rent on Engineering color copier from 001.000.620.558.800.450.00 443.48 Rent on large copier from81168367 Rent on large copier from 001.000.620.558.800.450.00 827.00 Total :1,301.14 116635 1/21/2010 006841 IKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS 5013285736 Maintenance agreement on large copier Maintenance agreement on large copier 001.000.620.558.800.480.00 41.30 Maintenance Agreement on Eng. color5013285737 Maintenance Agreement on Eng. color 001.000.620.558.800.480.00 365.57 Total :406.87 116636 1/21/2010 073073 JASPER, KATRINA A 0359095 REF SPAY/NEUTER REFUND INV#0359095 SPAY/NEUTER REFUND IMP#7955 12Page: Packet Page 36 of 132 01/21/2010 Voucher List City of Edmonds 13 10:07:41AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 116636 1/21/2010 (Continued)073073 JASPER, KATRINA A 001.000.000.343.930.000.00 50.00 Total :50.00 116637 1/21/2010 070902 KAREN ULVESTAD PHOTOGRAPHY ULVESTAD11818 DIGITAL PHOTOGRAPHY DIGITAL PHOTOGRAPHY #11818 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 343.00 Total :343.00 116638 1/21/2010 018760 LUNDS OFFICE ESSENTIALS 103240 Office supplies - HR Office supplies - HR 001.000.220.516.100.310.00 215.80 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.220.516.100.310.00 20.50 Total :236.30 116639 1/21/2010 018760 LUNDS OFFICE ESSENTIALS 103243 BUSINESS CARDS Erick Falk double sided Business Cards 001.000.410.521.710.310.00 40.14 Alan Hardwick Business cards 001.000.410.521.220.310.00 15.14 Kari Hovorka Business cards 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 15.14 Josh McClure Business Cards 001.000.410.521.260.310.00 15.14 David Miller Business Cards 001.000.410.521.210.310.00 15.14 Ken Ploeger Business Cards 001.000.410.521.220.310.00 15.14 R.J. Ramseur Business cards 001.000.410.521.220.310.00 15.14 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.710.310.00 3.81 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.220.310.00 4.31 9.5% Sales Tax 13Page: Packet Page 37 of 132 01/21/2010 Voucher List City of Edmonds 14 10:07:41AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 116639 1/21/2010 (Continued)018760 LUNDS OFFICE ESSENTIALS 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 1.44 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.260.310.00 1.44 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.210.310.00 1.44 Total :143.42 116640 1/21/2010 019583 MANPOWER INC 19720982 Receptionist coverage Dec. 28 thru 31. Receptionist coverage Dec. 28 thru 31. 001.000.620.558.800.410.00 316.49 Total :316.49 116641 1/21/2010 069362 MARSHALL, CITA 297 IN95581 INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.500.410.01 88.25 XY0028918; CR23774672 INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.500.410.01 88.25 CR23607; 23608673 INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.501.410.01 88.25 CR24300; 24801 24412674 INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.500.410.01 88.25 CR22567677 INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.501.410.01 88.25 CR23698; 22537693 INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.501.410.01 88.25 Total :529.50 116642 1/21/2010 020039 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO 44449496 123106800 CONNECTORS 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 120.32 14Page: Packet Page 38 of 132 01/21/2010 Voucher List City of Edmonds 15 10:07:41AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 116642 1/21/2010 (Continued)020039 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO Freight 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 5.90 12310680044517114 T STRAINERS/ALUMINUM ALLOY 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 128.92 Freight 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 21.78 12310680044667634 STRAINER 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 64.27 Freight 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 5.54 12310680044695689 SPRAY NOZZLE/STAINLESS STEEL 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 477.05 Freight 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 13.23 Total :837.01 116643 1/21/2010 070908 MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY 10152 CRIMINAL JUSTICE PROGRAM CRIMINAL JUSTICE PROGRAM 001.000.230.512.500.490.00 265.00 Total :265.00 116644 1/21/2010 068662 MINNIHAN, TERRY 3 LEOFF 1 Reimbursement LEOFF 1 Reimbursement 009.000.390.517.370.230.00 359.13 Total :359.13 116645 1/21/2010 072991 MOE, CHELSY MOE0114 MEADOWDALE PRESCHOOL SUBSTITUTE MEADOWDALE PRESCHOOL SUB~ 001.000.640.575.560.410.00 170.00 Total :170.00 116646 1/21/2010 061654 NATIONAL BARRICADE CO LLC 227653 Water/Sewer - Sign Stands, Signs, for 15Page: Packet Page 39 of 132 01/21/2010 Voucher List City of Edmonds 16 10:07:41AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 116646 1/21/2010 (Continued)061654 NATIONAL BARRICADE CO LLC Water/Sewer - Sign Stands, Signs, for 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 576.75 Water/Sewer - Sign Stands, Signs, for 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 576.75 Freight 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 7.50 Freight 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 7.50 Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 55.51 Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 55.50 Total :1,279.51 116647 1/21/2010 024302 NELSON PETROLEUM 0420233-IN 01-0000817 DIESEL FUEL 411.000.656.538.800.320.00 590.84 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.320.00 54.36 Total :645.20 116648 1/21/2010 065315 NEWCOMB, TRACY NEWCOMB12169 POWER PLAY POWER PLAY #12169 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 42.00 Total :42.00 116649 1/21/2010 024960 NORTH COAST ELECTRIC COMPANY S3169049.001 2091 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES 411.000.656.538.800.310.22 320.37 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.22 30.44 Total :350.81 116650 1/21/2010 064006 NORTH WEST INSTRUMENT SERVICES 10577 SCALE CERTIFICATION SCALE CERTIFICATION 16Page: Packet Page 40 of 132 01/21/2010 Voucher List City of Edmonds 17 10:07:41AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 116650 1/21/2010 (Continued)064006 NORTH WEST INSTRUMENT SERVICES 411.000.656.538.800.410.31 180.00 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.410.31 17.10 Total :197.10 116651 1/21/2010 070045 NORTHUP GROUP 2112 INV# 2112 EDMONDS PD 12/22/09 FIT FOR DUTY EVALUATION 001.000.410.521.100.410.00 1,200.00 Total :1,200.00 116652 1/21/2010 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 882782 INV#882782 ACCT#520437 250POL-EDMONDS PD MULTI USE COPY PAPER 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 499.35 KLEENEX TISSUES 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 66.59 YELLOW HIGHLIGHTERS 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 12.68 BLACK FLEXIGRIP RETRACT PENS 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 113.50 STENO BOOKS 6x9 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 18.48 LEGAL PADS 5x8 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 11.02 YELLOW PADS 5x11.75 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 24.88 BLUE FLEXIGRIP RETRACT PENS 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 25.02 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 73.29 INV#942835 ACCT#520437 250POL EDMONDS PD942835 HP LASERJET CARTRIDGE-LAWLESS 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 208.95 HP LASER COLOR PAPER 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 59.62 TRAY ORGANIZER - D.SMITH 17Page: Packet Page 41 of 132 01/21/2010 Voucher List City of Edmonds 18 10:07:41AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 116652 1/21/2010 (Continued)063511 OFFICE MAX INC 001.000.410.521.210.310.00 17.90 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 25.52 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.210.310.00 1.70 Total :1,158.50 116653 1/21/2010 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 943373 SUPPLIES SUPPLIES 001.000.230.512.501.310.00 99.50 SUPPLIES943420 SUPPLIES 001.000.230.512.500.310.00 11.25 SUPPLIES960385 SUPPLIES 001.000.230.512.500.310.00 107.02 SUPPLIES984325 SUPPLIES 001.000.230.512.501.310.00 152.42 Total :370.19 116654 1/21/2010 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 798198 520437 INKJET CARTRIDGES 411.000.656.538.800.310.41 69.64 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.41 6.62 520437847674 CALENDAR 411.000.656.538.800.310.41 8.76 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.41 0.83 520437898410 COPIER PAPER/PENS/DIVIDERS 411.000.656.538.800.310.41 85.29 9.5% Sales Tax 18Page: Packet Page 42 of 132 01/21/2010 Voucher List City of Edmonds 19 10:07:41AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 116654 1/21/2010 (Continued)063511 OFFICE MAX INC 411.000.656.538.800.310.41 8.10 Total :179.24 116655 1/21/2010 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 141131 PW Admin - Calendars, Markers, Steno PW Admin - Calendars, Markers, Steno 001.000.650.519.910.310.00 69.31 Water - Calendars 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 19.45 Fac Maint - Calendars 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 48.15 Street - Calendars 111.000.653.542.900.310.00 19.26 Storm - Calendars 411.000.652.542.900.310.00 20.68 Sewer - Calendars 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 22.59 Street Calendars 111.000.653.542.900.310.00 25.92 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.650.519.910.310.00 6.59 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 1.85 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 4.57 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.900.310.00 4.29 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.652.542.900.310.00 1.97 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 2.14 PW Admin - Calendar141189 PW Admin - Calendar 001.000.650.519.910.310.00 20.07 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.650.519.910.310.00 1.90 19Page: Packet Page 43 of 132 01/21/2010 Voucher List City of Edmonds 20 10:07:41AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 116655 1/21/2010 (Continued)063511 OFFICE MAX INC PW - Returns455620 PW - Returns 001.000.650.519.910.310.00 -20.07 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.650.519.910.310.00 -1.90 PW Calendars Returned455878 PW Calendars Returned 001.000.650.519.910.310.00 -10.53 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.650.519.910.310.00 -0.99 PW - Calendar, Folders, Tabs797523 PW - Calendar, Folders, Tabs 001.000.650.519.910.310.00 70.90 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.650.519.910.310.00 6.74 PW - Markers, Pens, Pencils, Erasers,871658 PW - Markers, Pens, Pencils, Erasers, 001.000.650.519.910.310.00 73.32 Sewer - Printer Ink 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 68.23 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.650.519.910.310.00 6.96 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 6.48 PW Markers871881 PW Markers 001.000.650.519.910.310.00 6.84 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.650.519.910.310.00 0.64 Water Quality- Printer Ink897905 Water Quality- Printer Ink 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 127.08 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 12.07 20Page: Packet Page 44 of 132 01/21/2010 Voucher List City of Edmonds 21 10:07:41AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :614.511166551/21/2010 063511 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 116656 1/21/2010 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 884189 Misc. office supplies including Misc. office supplies including 001.000.620.558.800.310.00 344.39 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.620.558.800.310.00 32.72 Total :377.11 116657 1/21/2010 064645 OLYMPIC MECHANICAL INC BLD20100002 Online Permit Void - not in city limits. Online Permit Void - not in city limits. 001.000.000.257.620.000.00 95.00 Total :95.00 116658 1/21/2010 066339 PACIFIC OFFICE AUTOMATION 994718 B/W Copy Overage Fee (42) B/W Copy Overage Fee (42) 411.000.654.534.800.480.00 0.19 B/W Copy Overage Fee (42) 411.000.655.535.800.480.00 0.19 B/W Copy Overage Fee (42) 411.000.652.542.900.480.00 0.19 B/W Copy Overage Fee (42) 111.000.653.542.900.480.00 0.19 Color Copy Overage Fee (1236) 411.000.654.534.800.480.00 33.28 Color Copy Overage Fee (1236) 411.000.655.535.800.480.00 33.28 Color Copy Overage Fee (1236) 411.000.652.542.900.480.00 33.28 Color Copy Overage Fee (1236) 111.000.653.542.900.480.00 33.26 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.480.00 3.18 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.480.00 3.18 9.5% Sales Tax 21Page: Packet Page 45 of 132 01/21/2010 Voucher List City of Edmonds 22 10:07:41AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 116658 1/21/2010 (Continued)066339 PACIFIC OFFICE AUTOMATION 411.000.652.542.900.480.00 3.18 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.900.480.00 3.18 Total :146.58 116659 1/21/2010 064552 PITNEY BOWES 3833100JA10 POSTAGE METER LEASE Lease 12/30 to 01/30 001.000.250.514.300.450.00 866.00 Total :866.00 116660 1/21/2010 071811 PONY MAIL BOX & BUSINESS CTR 182124 INV#182124, ACCT#2772 EDMONDS PD RADIO TO MOTOROLA FOR REPAIR 001.000.410.521.100.420.00 22.86 TASER FOR REPAIR TO TASER INT. 001.000.410.521.100.420.00 10.42 Total :33.28 116661 1/21/2010 064291 QWEST 206-Z02-0478 332B TELEMETRY TELEMETRY 411.000.656.538.800.420.00 138.52 Total :138.52 116662 1/21/2010 070955 R&R STAR TOWING 68052 INV#68052 EDMONDS PD #10-0132 TOWING 2006 HUMMER 319WAJ 001.000.410.521.220.410.00 158.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.220.410.00 15.01 Total :173.01 116663 1/21/2010 072254 RIVER OAKS COMMUNICATIONS CORP 01112010 COMCAST CABLE FRANCHISE NEGOTIATIONS Comcast Cable Franchise Negotiations 001.000.610.519.700.410.00 173.84 Total :173.84 116664 1/21/2010 069062 RONGERUDE, JOHN 7394 PUBLIC DEFENDER FEE PUBLIC DEFENDER FEE 22Page: Packet Page 46 of 132 01/21/2010 Voucher List City of Edmonds 23 10:07:41AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 116664 1/21/2010 (Continued)069062 RONGERUDE, JOHN 001.000.390.512.520.410.00 800.00 Total :800.00 116665 1/21/2010 037225 SNO CO CLERKS & FINANCE ASSOC Jan-10 Jan-2010 Mtg Chase/Hynd/Karber Jan-2010 Mtg Chase/Hynd/Karber 001.000.250.514.300.490.00 28.00 Jan-2010 Mtg Chase/Hynd/Karber 001.000.310.514.230.490.00 14.00 Total :42.00 116666 1/21/2010 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 PUD/SEAVIEW DISCONNECT/RECONNECT FEES DISCONNECT & RECONNECT FEES @ SEAVIEW 001.000.640.576.800.480.00 550.00 Total :550.00 116667 1/21/2010 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 281055956 620-001-500-3 VARIOUS LOCATIONS 411.000.656.538.800.471.62 8.37 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.471.62 0.50 Total :8.87 116668 1/21/2010 064351 SNOHOMISH COUNTY TREASURER 2009198 INV#2009198 EDMONDS PD 57.17 BOOKINGS FOR 12/09 001.000.410.523.600.510.00 5,303.09 628.50 HOUSING DAYS FOR 12/09 001.000.410.523.600.510.00 38,407.64 Total :43,710.73 116669 1/21/2010 038100 SNO-KING STAMP 44005 PW Received Date Stamp PW Received Date Stamp 001.000.650.519.910.310.00 39.27 Freight 001.000.650.519.910.310.00 3.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.650.519.910.310.00 4.02 23Page: Packet Page 47 of 132 01/21/2010 Voucher List City of Edmonds 24 10:07:41AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 116669 1/21/2010 (Continued)038100 SNO-KING STAMP Water Quality - Entered Date Stamp44036 Water Quality - Entered Date Stamp 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 39.27 Freight 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 3.00 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 4.02 Total :92.58 116670 1/21/2010 038100 SNO-KING STAMP 44004 Date stamp - reception desk. Date stamp - reception desk. 001.000.620.558.800.310.00 46.29 Date stamp for planning dept.44032 Date stamp for planning dept. 001.000.620.558.800.310.00 53.87 Total :100.16 116671 1/21/2010 038300 SOUND DISPOSAL CO 03584 RECYCLING RECYCLING 411.000.656.538.800.475.66 28.25 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.475.66 1.70 Total :29.95 116672 1/21/2010 038300 SOUND DISPOSAL CO 03583 PS Garbage PS Garbage 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 550.74 FAC Garbage03585 FAC Garbage 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 674.47 Library Garbage03586 Library Garbage 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 555.23 City Hall Garbage03588 City Hall Garbage 24Page: Packet Page 48 of 132 01/21/2010 Voucher List City of Edmonds 25 10:07:41AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 116672 1/21/2010 (Continued)038300 SOUND DISPOSAL CO 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 495.66 Total :2,276.10 116673 1/21/2010 070677 SPRINT 502779811-025 INV#502779811-025 EDMONDS PD DATA CARDS 01/07 - 02/06/10 001.000.410.521.220.420.00 169.97 Total :169.97 116674 1/21/2010 046200 STATE OF WASHINGTON Q4, 2009 Q4, 2009 Leasehold tax Q4, 2009 Leasehold tax 001.000.000.237.220.000.00 5,076.36 Total :5,076.36 116675 1/21/2010 071585 STERICYCLE INC 3000757753 INV#3000757753 CUST#6076358 EDMONDS PD MINIMUM MONTHLY SERVICE CHARGE 001.000.410.521.910.410.00 10.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.910.410.00 0.36 Total :10.36 116676 1/21/2010 068360 SUMMIT LAW GROUP 44756 INV# 44756 EDMONDS PD 09-006 INVEST. INVESTIGATION IA 09-006 001.000.410.521.100.410.00 5,806.50 Total :5,806.50 116677 1/21/2010 072790 TCC PRINTING & IMAGING 67380 CALENDAR OF EVENTS PRINTING Calendar of events printing 001.000.240.513.110.440.00 768.89 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.240.513.110.440.00 73.05 Total :841.94 116678 1/21/2010 060167 TEREX UTILITIES 099-16408 Unit 101 - Bucket Truck Rental Unit 101 - Bucket Truck Rental 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 2,240.00 25Page: Packet Page 49 of 132 01/21/2010 Voucher List City of Edmonds 26 10:07:41AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :2,240.001166781/21/2010 060167 060167 TEREX UTILITIES 116679 1/21/2010 066056 THE SEATTLE TIMES AD# 04045700 PSA ad, #09-29 PSA ad, #09-29 001.000.220.516.100.440.00 132.00 Total :132.00 116680 1/21/2010 038315 THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR 366338 City Hall Elevator Maint~ City Hall Elevator Maint~ 001.000.651.519.920.480.00 850.28 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.480.00 80.77 PS Monitoring~366339 PS Monitoring~ 001.000.651.519.920.480.00 41.90 Sr Center Elev Maint376149 Sr Center Elev Maint 001.000.651.519.920.480.00 154.98 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.480.00 14.71 Sr Center Elevator Monitoring~376150 Sr Center Elevator Monitoring~ 001.000.651.519.920.480.00 11.94 Total :1,154.58 116681 1/21/2010 072146 TRUAX, BREANNE 01062010 MONITOR FOR JOINT EDC/PB MTG Monitor for joint Economic Dev 001.000.240.513.110.490.00 36.00 Monitor for Economic Dev Commission 001.000.240.513.110.490.00 36.00 Total :72.00 116682 1/21/2010 072146 TRUAX, BREANNE TRUAX0116 ANDERSON CENTER MONITOR ANDERSON CENTER GYM MONITOR FOR DANCE 001.000.640.574.100.410.00 36.00 Total :36.00 26Page: Packet Page 50 of 132 01/21/2010 Voucher List City of Edmonds 27 10:07:41AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 116683 1/21/2010 061192 UNITED PIPE & SUPPLY 8393705 Water Inventory - ~ Water Inventory - ~ 411.000.654.534.800.341.00 609.74 Water Supplies - Super Jumbo Lids 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 863.28 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.341.00 57.93 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 82.01 Water Supplies - Super Jumbo Lid8397025 Water Supplies - Super Jumbo Lid 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 95.92 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 9.11 Total :1,717.99 116684 1/21/2010 062693 US BANK 3306 TRAINING/ZUVELA TRAINING/ZUVELA 411.000.656.538.800.490.71 249.00 VOICE RECORDER 411.000.656.538.800.310.41 74.00 MICROPHONE 411.000.656.538.800.310.41 66.95 Total :389.95 116685 1/21/2010 062693 US BANK 3363 Standard Ind & Auto Equip - Fleet Small Standard Ind & Auto Equip - Fleet Small 511.000.657.548.680.350.00 292.61 Engineered Lfiting System - Unit 31 - 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 506.49 Svc Fee 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 2.00 Benson Ind - Seaview Park Building -3405 Benson Ind - Seaview Park Building - 125.000.640.576.800.310.00 1,155.23 UPS - Fleet - Owen Equip Return Postage3546 27Page: Packet Page 51 of 132 01/21/2010 Voucher List City of Edmonds 28 10:07:41AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 116685 1/21/2010 (Continued)062693 US BANK UPS - Fleet - Owen Equip Return Postage 511.000.657.548.680.420.00 4.80 WA L&I - SeaView Park - Elect Permit 001.000.640.576.800.490.00 100.70 UPS - Fleet - Owen Equip - Return 511.000.657.548.680.420.00 4.80 Total :2,066.63 116686 1/21/2010 062693 US BANK 1000 Law seminars Kernen & Jen, Climate Law seminars Kernen & Jen, Climate 001.000.620.558.600.490.00 1,891.18 Travel Expenses for Rob English to 001.000.620.532.200.430.00 158.40 Total :2,049.58 116687 1/21/2010 069816 VWR INTERNATIONAL INC 40584218 1066294 VWR WIPERS/DETERGENT POWDER 411.000.656.538.800.310.31 132.15 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.31 12.55 106629440584221 TIP MACRO 411.000.656.538.800.310.31 81.18 Freight 411.000.656.538.800.310.31 13.30 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.31 8.97 Total :248.15 116688 1/21/2010 062812 WA CRANE AND HOIST CO INC 0008375-IN EWW 1EW REPAIR CRANE 411.000.656.538.800.480.21 380.00 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.480.21 36.10 28Page: Packet Page 52 of 132 01/21/2010 Voucher List City of Edmonds 29 10:07:41AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :416.101166881/21/2010 062812 062812 WA CRANE AND HOIST CO INC 116689 1/21/2010 045515 WABO 19530 Job posting on WABO web site Job posting on WABO web site 001.000.620.524.100.440.00 50.00 Total :50.00 116690 1/21/2010 067917 WALLY'S TOWING INC 43132 INV#43132 EDMONDS PD #10-0132 TOWING 1997 328 BMW 494UQU 001.000.410.521.220.410.00 158.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.220.410.00 15.01 Total :173.01 116691 1/21/2010 071986 WASHINGTON INDUSTRIAL 902 10/09 CO1 C-316 C-316 SECONDARY CLARIFIER #2 414.000.656.594.320.650.00 23,525.20 C-316 RETAINAGE SECONDARY CLARIFIER #2 414.000.000.223.400.000.00 -1,074.21 Total :22,450.99 116692 1/21/2010 073063 WASHINGTON WATER HEATERS BLD20090884 Online Permit overpayment. Online Permit overpayment. 001.000.000.257.620.000.00 10.00 Total :10.00 116693 1/21/2010 045912 WASPC 120202 DEC-09 ELECTRONIC MONITORING DEC-09 ELECTRONIC MONITORING 001.000.230.523.200.510.00 310.50 Total :310.50 116694 1/21/2010 061395 WASTE MANAGEMENT NW 5945345-2677-9 201-0170717-2677-6 ASH DISPOSAL 411.000.656.538.800.474.65 5,304.55 Total :5,304.55 116695 1/21/2010 067115 WHELEN ENGINEERING CO INC R16405 Fleet - Strobe Light 29Page: Packet Page 53 of 132 01/21/2010 Voucher List City of Edmonds 30 10:07:41AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 116695 1/21/2010 (Continued)067115 WHELEN ENGINEERING CO INC Fleet - Strobe Light 511.000.657.548.680.480.00 98.00 Total :98.00 116696 1/21/2010 064234 WILDWATER RIVER TOURS INC AMUNDSON11985 BALD EAGLE WATCH SKAGIT BALD EAGLE WATCH 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 476.34 Total :476.34 116697 1/21/2010 065179 WSAPT TREASURER WSAPT2010 Wash. State Assoc. of Permit Wash. State Assoc. of Permit 001.000.620.524.100.490.00 35.00 Total :35.00 Bank total :437,010.24113 Vouchers for bank code :front 437,010.24Total vouchers :Vouchers in this report113 30Page: Packet Page 54 of 132 AM-2737 2.D. Claim for Damages Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:01/26/2010 Submitted By:Linda Hynd Submitted For:Sandy Chase Time:Consent Department:City Clerk's Office Type:Action Review Committee: Committee Action: Information Subject Title Acknowledge receipt of a Claim for Damages from Landon B. Reynolds ($3,276.16). Recommendation from Mayor and Staff It is recommended that the City Council acknowledge receipt of the Claim for Damages by minute entry. Previous Council Action N/A Narrative Landon B. Reynolds 7660 199th Street SW Edmonds, WA 98026 ($3,276.16) Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Reynolds Claim for Damages Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 01/21/2010 09:21 AM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 01/21/2010 10:04 AM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 01/21/2010 10:21 AM APRV Form Started By: Linda Hynd  Started On: 01/20/2010 09:37 AM Final Approval Date: 01/21/2010 Packet Page 55 of 132 Packet Page 56 of 132 Packet Page 57 of 132 AM-2749 2.E. Community Services and Economic Development Quarterly Report Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:01/26/2010 Submitted By:Stephen Clifton Time:Consent Department:Community Services Type:Information Review Committee: Committee Action: Information Subject Title Community Services and Economic Development Quarterly Report – January, 2010. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Previous Council Action Narrative As requested by the City Council, this report provides an update on major projects currently worked on by staff of the Community Services and Economic Development Departments. Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Community Services and Economic Development Quarterly Report - January, 2010 Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 01/21/2010 03:44 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 01/21/2010 03:46 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 01/21/2010 03:48 PM APRV Form Started By: Stephen Clifton  Started On: 01/21/2010 03:39 PM Final Approval Date: 01/21/2010 Packet Page 58 of 132 City of Edmonds Community Services Department Economic Development Department Date: January 21, 2010 To: Mayor Haakenson and City Council members From: Stephen Clifton, AICP Community Services and Economic Development Director Subject: Community Services and Economic Development Quarterly Report – January, 2010 As requested by the City Council, this report provides an update on major projects currently worked on by staff of the Community Services and Economic Development Departments. Community Services I. EDMONDS CROSSING Project Description Edmonds Crossing is a regional project intended to provide a long-term solution to current operational and safety conflicts between ferry, rail, automobile, bus, and pedestrian traffic in downtown Edmonds and along State Route 104. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Federal Transit Administration (FTA), Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) (including Washington State Ferries [WSF]), and City of Edmonds propose to relocate the existing state ferry terminal from Main Street, in downtown Edmonds, to Pt. Edwards, south of the downtown core. In the process, a multimodal center would be established that would integrate ferry, rail, and transit services into a single complex. A realigned SR 104 from its current intersection with Pine Street would provide access. The new complex would provide an upgraded ferry terminal designed to meet the operational requirements for accommodating forecast ferry ridership demand; a new rail station designed to meet intercity passenger (Amtrak) and commuter rail (Sounder) service; a transit center that would meet local bus system and regional transit system loading requirements; facilities that allow both vehicular commuters and walk-on passengers to utilize various transportation modes; parking, drop-off areas, retail/ concessionaire space, waiting areas; and a system linking these facilities to allow for the safe movement of users. City of Edmonds  Community Services Packet Page 59 of 132 Significant Activities Since October 22, 2009  October, November and December, 2009 and January, 2010 – WSF staff continue to explore minimum build alternatives / options for Edmonds ferry improvements. II. SOUND TRANSIT (PHASE 1, AKA SOUND MOVE) Project Description During the past few years, Sound Transit has been implementing what is called the Sound Move Plan. One element calls for commuter rail services, otherwise known as Sounder. Commuter rail will eventually link Everett in the north with Seattle, Tacoma and Lakewood in the South, a total of 82 miles through three counties. Sounder is being implemented in three phases, one of which includes Everett to Seattle or the North Commuter Rail corridor. Three commuter rail stations exist along this corridor, i.e., Everett, Mukilteo and Edmonds. Everett-Seattle Sounder, at full operation, now calls for 8 trains per day, i.e., four round trips, and will include reverse trips. This is a reduction of two round trips from the originally proposed operational plan. Initial service will be phased in. The first roundtrip train run began in December, 2003. Edmonds Station is currently located between Main and Dayton Streets along both sides of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) tracks. The station area is also co-located with Amtrak’s Edmonds Passenger Station. The Sounder commuter rail station, once completed will include ADA accessible rail platforms, shelters, signage, lighting fixtures, hanging flower baskets, ticket vending machines. on-site parking, and Community Transit bus station. In an attempt to environmental enhance Willow Creek and Edmonds Marsh, a culvert will be installed near the Marina Beach property beneath both BNSF Railroad tracks, concurrent with the construction of a second BNSF rail line. This will allow for the eventual daylighting of Willow Creek, if funding is available. Significant Activities since October 22, 2009  January 5, 2010 – The Edmonds City Council approved a Development Agreement for Edmonds Commuter Rail Station between the City of Edmonds, Washington and Sound Transit, and an Interlocal Agreement between Sound Transit and the City of Edmonds. This is the first of four steps necessary to begin construction on the Sound Transit Commuter Rail Station. The remaining steps include issuing a building permit, soliciting for bids and awarding a contract. Sound Transit expects to begin construction sometime this spring. III. SOUND TRANSIT 2 Expanding the regional mass transit system On Nov. 4, 2008, voters of the Central Puget Sound region approved a Sound Transit 2 ballot measure. The plan adds regional express bus and commuter rail service while building 36 2 Packet Page 60 of 132 additional miles of light rail to form a 55-mile regional system. For additional information, visit http://soundtransit.org/ Significant Activities Since October 22, 2009  January 7, 2010 – City of Edmonds staff participated in a technical committee consisting of staff from jurisdictions located within north King and south Snohomish Counties. The purpose of the committee is to meet on a regular basis, with the intent of sharing information, discussing the environmental process and potential alignments of High Capacity Transit, i.e., light rail. IV. UNOCAL AKA CHEVRON SITE CLEANUP Project Description The UNOCAL property currently consists of a lower yard which currently contains petroleum contamination resulting from more than 60 years of operation. Chevron, which acquired UNOCAL, is now the entity responsible for cleaning up the site. Cleanup work at the lower yard, which began in 2007, is a continuation of remediation work that has been ongoing at the site since 2001. Chevron conducted the following work from summer 2007 through fall 2008:  Excavated soil with metals contamination exceeding Washington State Department of Ecology standards in order to protect against direct contact with the soil (such as ingestion) and impacts to the groundwater.  Excavated soil with petroleum contamination exceeding safe levels for direct contact. Excavation of this soil was for protection of groundwater and surface water.  Excavated contaminated sediment in Willow Creek, on the northern edge of the site. The primary excavation work at the lower yard (including the Willow Creek area) was complete by September 2008. Over 140,000 tons of contaminated soil and 9,000 gallons of petroleum product have been removed from the site. The lower yard site has been re-graded and reseeded. The Willow Creek area has been re-planted with native vegetation. Significant Activities since October 22, 2009  October, November and December, 2009 and January, 2010 – Monitoring of the site continues. V. EDMONDS PUBLIC FACILITIES DISTRICT Overview The City Council, pursuant to state law, approved the formation of the Public Facilities District (PFD) at its April 24, 2001 meeting. A PFD is a separate municipal corporation that has authority to undertake the design, construction, operation, promotion and financing of a Regional Center in the city. The Public Facilities District board consists of five members originally appointed by the City Council on June 19, 2001. Phase 1A renovation of the 3 Packet Page 61 of 132 original Edmonds High School Auditorium into a first class Edmonds Center for the Arts (ECA) and multipurpose facility was completed in September of 2006. Significant Activities Since October 22, 2009  October, November and December, 2009 and January, 2010 –No new information at this time. VI. SNOHOMISH COUNTY PAINE FIELD Overview On July 14, 2004, a Mead & Hunt Inc. Business Travel Survey was issued which focused on the market potential and options for Paine Field. On August 20, 2004, a Snohomish County Citizen Cabinet issued an Economic Development Final Report -Blueprint for the Economic Future of Snohomish County. Both reports put Paine Field in the regional spotlight as they highlight the possibility of using Paine Field for commercial aircraft operations, thus changing its general aviation status. Although Snohomish County Executive Aaron Reardon and some County Council members have said they do not support commercial air service at Paine Field, federal law obligates the county to accommodate commercial service. Federal law does not allow the county to prohibit or limit scheduled passenger air service. Instead, it requires that the county negotiate with the airlines in good faith to accommodate their proposed service. Horizon Airlines has indicated it wants to operate four times a day to Portland and twice per day to Spokane, using 75-seat Bombardier Q400 turboprop airplanes on both routes. Allegiant has said it plans to operate twice a week to Las Vegas, using 150-seat MD83 jet aircraft. Before airlines may begin commercial service, the FAA must amend the county’s operating certificate for Paine Field as well as the airlines’ operating specifications. The county was required to prepare an environmental assessment for FAA approval before those amendments can occur. Key points of the draft environmental assessment include: 1. Considering all current aircraft operations (take offs and landings) at Paine Field. 2. Traffic mitigation. 3. Emissions affecting air quality. The draft environmental assessment is available for review at the airport office, on the Paine Field Web site http://www.painefield.com/airserviceea.html, at www.snoco.org/departments/airport and also in local public libraries. The public now has the opportunity to review and comment on the draft environmental assessment before a final determination is made by the FAA. Comments may be submitted 4 Packet Page 62 of 132 by email to cayla.morgan@faa.gov or airserviceeacomments@snoco.org. The public comment period has been extended until Feb. 5, 2010. Significant Activities Since October 22, 2009  December 4, 2009 – A draft environmental assessment under the National Environmental Policy Act on two proposals to initiate commercial air service at Paine Field was released for public review and comment. The environmental review was conducted in response to two requests to begin commercial air service at Paine Field received by Snohomish County in 2008.  January 4, 2010 – A public hearing was held at Meadowdale High School in Lynnwood. Mayor Haakenson attended this meeting.  January 5, 2010 – A public hearing was held at the Snohomish County PUD Auditorium in Everett.  January 21, 2010 – A public hearing will be held at Kamiak High School in Mukilteo. VII. RAILROAD QUIET ZONE Overview As discussed on a few occasions, there is an expressed desire of the City Council and Port of Edmonds to establish a full or partial quite zone along the City's shoreline. A quiet zone is a section of rail line that contains one or more consecutive public crossings at which locomotive horns are not routinely sounded. Significant Activities Since October 22, 2009  October, November and December, 2009 and December, 2010 – Although there is no new information at this time, e.g., studies, reports, analysis, etc., I have been in contact with another consulting company to discuss the possibilities/feasibility of implementing a partial or full quiet zone. VIII. WASHINGTON STATE FERRIES Edmonds/Kingston Ferry Route Partnership Meeting – Reservation System Pre- Design Study Overview The Edmonds/Kingston ferry route has been selected by Washington State Ferries (WSF) to study the possibility of establishing a vehicle reservation pilot program. Edmonds/Kingston was selected because it met certain selection criteria, including technical capability, diverse customer/ridership base, customer benefit, and community traffic concerns. The Washington State Legislature asked WSF to conduct a feasibility study for the reservation system and to look at how it might be implemented on the Edmonds/Kingston route, if funded by the State Legislature. This partnership group is part of a larger effort to complete a legislated vehicle reservations pre-design report due to the Legislature before 2010 session. In response to 5 Packet Page 63 of 132 the request, WSF formed a community partnership committee composed of 17 individuals from both sides of the route representing varied interests including business and tourism; counties, cities and ports; commuters and weekend vehicle travelers; Ferry Advisory Committees and regional planning organizations. WSF is consulting with community partners on how to adapt a vehicle reservations system to the specific characteristics of the Edmonds/Kingston route. The community partnership group met at least once each month during the development of the pre-design report. The meetings were open to the public and held in Edmonds and Kingston on an alternating basis. For more information on the pre-design study, materials from the partnership meetings, and upcoming meetings, visit http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Ferries/Planning/VehicleReservations Significant Activities Since October 22, 2009  October 28, 2009 – A meeting of the Partnership was held in the Brackett Meeting Room at Edmonds City Hall. A consultant for the legislature presented on the Isle of Wight and Istanbul reservations systems, and the group discussed vehicle processing at Edmonds and Kingston terminals.  November 12, 2009 – A meeting of the Partnership was held in the Brackett Meeting Room at Edmonds City Hall. Topics of discussions included 1) vehicle reservation system overview and emerging elements of a system, 2) information technology and communications including Wave2GO, key information technology system features, regional information signage and Edmonds/Kingston local information signs, and 3) business rules including exceptional circumstances, draft program and business rules and available reservations.  December 10, 2009 – Final Meeting of Edmonds/Kingston Partnership meeting which concluded the partnership’s discussions on the potential for vehicle reservations on the Edmonds/Kingston ferry route.  January 5, 2010 – David Moseley, presented information on the Pre-Design Study to the Edmonds City Council. This was his second update to the Council on vehicle reservations as the Edmonds/Kingston route is pivotal to the pre-design study given its cross section of vehicle users including commuter, commercial and recreational.  January 11, 2010 – Final Vehicle Reservations Pre-design Study Available. The final Vehicle Reservations Pre-design Study was submitted to the Legislature and Washington State Ferries anticipates discussions on the study this session; WSF also looks forward to legislative direction on how to proceed. The study is available at www.wsdot.wa.gov/ferries/planning/vehiclereservations.htm VIII. CITY OF EDMONDS / COMCAST FRANCHISE AGREEMENT 6 Packet Page 64 of 132 Overview On July 14, 2008, the City of Edmonds received a letter dated October 22, 2008 from Stan Finley, Comcast Director of Franchising and Government Affairs (Exhibit 2) regarding renewal of the existing franchise agreement. While Comcast is asking to reach a mutually satisfactorily agreement through an informal negotiation process pursuant to Section 626 of the 1984 Cable Act, the second paragraph of the Comcast letter also states “to preserve our statutory rights to this formal procedure, this letter is our official notice to you invoking that provision.” With a record of successfully negotiating Verizon franchise agreements, several members of the North Puget Sound Consortium wish to form a new Consortium for the purposes of negotiating franchise agreements with Comcast. Jurisdictions which have been invited to participate include: Snohomish County, the Cities of Bothell, Carnation, Edmonds, Kenmore, Lake Forest Park, Mercer Island, Shoreline, Woodinville, and the Town of Woodway. Benefits of a coordinated effort include: ensuring that the public receives the maximum rights and benefits from their respective franchise agreements; better coordination of negotiations with Comcast; sharing the costs of negotiations including hiring a national consultant and attorneys to assure the citizens of each jurisdiction that their franchise is competitive, both locally and nationally; and creating a common template and negotiation strategy through the assistance of a national consultant and attorneys to maximize leverage during the negotiations. Significant Activities Since October 22, 2009  October, November and December, 2009, and January, 2010 – The North Puget Sound Consortium representatives continue to work on a draft franchise agreement template. IX. FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS ACQUISITION OF VERIZON Overview On May 13, 2009, Verizon announced plans to divest its local wireline communications system to Frontier Communications. According to a May 19, 2009 letter to the City of Edmonds from both entities, the transaction includes Verizon’s residential and small business telephone lines, internet service, long-distance voice accounts, as well as Verizon’s fiber-to- the-premises (FTTP) assets; Frontier will continue to provide video services after the completion of the merger. Similar to the process used to negotiate the Verizon and Comcast Interlocal Agreements, participating entities (Consortium) to an Interlocal Agreement have jointly contracted with River Oaks Communications and Ogden Murphy Wallace for common services as well as a mechanism for each entity to utilize the consultant’s services, as that entity sees fit, and for additional support in reviewing or negotiating the transfer to meet specific needs of each participating entity. Significant Activities Since October 22, 2009 7 Packet Page 65 of 132  November 17, 2009 – The Edmonds City Council voted to approve Ordinance No. 3763, thus approving transfer of control of the franchisee (Verizon Northwest, Inc.) to Frontier Communications Corporation.  December, 2009 and January, 2010 – The City was notified that Frontier Communications/Verizon is reimbursing the City for expenses paid related to processing the Frontier/Verizon Transfer Form 394. These include City of Edmonds payments to River Oaks Communications and Ogden Murphy Wallace. This essentially concludes the overall Frontier/Verizon process. Economic Development I. PARTNERSHIPS Goal 1, Policy 1a of the Edmonds Economic Development Plan is to promote a results- oriented permit and licensing process, which consolidates review timelines, eliminates unnecessary steps, and maintains a strong customer service approach. Significant Activities Since January 22, 2009  November 2, 2009 – The Development Services Department began implementation of online permitting. Owners and contractors can now apply for the following types of permits on-line:  Single Family Plumbing and Mechanical  Single Family Re-roof  Critical Areas The Building Division sent flyers out to the plumbing, mechanical and re-roof contractors that do work in the City, and submitted an article for Edmonds Update. Goal 1 of the Edmonds Economic Development Plan states: ”foster a healthy business community that provides employment and other economic opportunities.” Economic Development Commission Overview On June 2, 2009 – The City Council approved Ordinance 3735 which creates a new Citizens Economic Development Commission (EDC) in order to determine new strategies for economic development within the City and identify new sources of revenues. In conjunction with the Planning Board, the new commission is to review and consider strategies designed to improve commercial viability, tourism development, and activity. The ED Commission consists of 17 members appointed by Mayor Gary Haakenson and the City Council. The commission is staffed by the City’s Economic Development Director. The Commission will make recommendations to the Mayor and City Council, as well as to other City boards or commissions as appropriate, regarding economic development strategies. The 8 Packet Page 66 of 132 commission will provide an annual report to the Council in December of every year. The commission is scheduled to end on December 31, 2010. Minutes from monthly meetings (once approved by the Edmonds EDC) can be found at http://www.ci.edmonds.wa.us/EconDevMinutes.stm. Significant Activities Since October 22, 2009  October 28, 2009 – A joint meeting between the Economic Development Commission and the Planning Board took place in the Brackett meeting room. Presentations were given by Deborah Knutson, Snohomish County Economic Development Council Executive Director, and Bob McChesney, Port of Edmonds Executive Director.  November 18, 2009 – The Commission conducted its sixth public meeting in the City Hall Brackett Meeting Room. Agenda items included reports from Sub Groups 1, 2 and 3, and an update on previous studies and reports.  December 9, 2009 – A joint meeting between the Economic Development Commission and the Planning Board took place in the City Council Chambers. Presentations were given by Terrie Battuello, Bothell Assistant City Manager/Economic Development Manager, John Caulfield, Mountlake Terrace City Manager, and David Kleitsch, Lynnwood Economic Development Director. The meeting was aired on the City Government Channel twice each day for one month.  December 16, 2009 – The Commission conducted its eighth public meeting in the City Hall Brackett Meeting Room. Agenda items included discussing presentations by representatives of Bothell, Mountlake Terrace and Lynnwood, reports from Sub Groups, and focus group report.  January 6, 2010 – A joint meeting between the Economic Development Commission and the Planning Board took place in the Brackett meeting room. The main topic discussed was the Edmonds Economic Development Commission and Planning Board report.  January 19, 2010 – The Combined Economic Development Commission and the Planning Board 2009 Annual Report was submitted to the City Council, and presentations were given by the Edmonds Economic Development Commission and Planning Board Chairs during the City Council meeting. Goal 1, Policy 1f of the Edmonds Economic Development Plan states: ”Continue to partner with business and economic development organizations, and address feedback from the business community.” Significant Activities Since October 22, 2009  July, August, September and October, 2009 – See Sections II and III. II. BUSINESS EXPANSION, RETENTION, AND DIVERSIFICATION OF TAX BASE 9 Packet Page 67 of 132 Goal 1, Policy 1c of the Edmonds Economic Development Plan states: “Encourage and expand business expansion and retention programs. Goal 3 calls for diversifying the tax base and increasing revenues to support local services.” Significant Activities Since October 22, 2009  October, November, December, 2009 and January, 2010 – I continued working with property and business owners in attempts to help find leaseable space and relocate existing businesses, in addition to discussing potential leasing and redevelopment of buildings and land. III. IMPROVING BUSINESS CLIMATE Goal 2, Policy 2e of the Edmonds Economic Development Plan states: “explore options such as Business Improvement Districts/Areas (special assessment districts) as a way to help shopping areas fund marketing and beautification in a sustainable fashion. Significant Activities Since October 22, 2009  October, November and December, 2009 and January, 2010 – Representatives from the City of Edmonds and Greater Edmonds Chamber of Commerce continued to meet and discuss the possibility of establishing a Downtown Edmonds Business Improvement Area. Goal 2, Policy 2h of the Edmonds Economic Development Plan states: “Work to identify and “brand” distinct business districts, where there is a natural synergy, such as the Highway 99 International District, the Stevens Hospital Medical Corridor, and the 4th Avenue Arts Corridor.” Significant Activities Since October 22, 2009  October, November, and December, 2009 and January, 2010 – Highway 99 Enhancement Project - includes adding street lighting fixtures and artwork along the portion of Highway 99 passing through the International District. Light fixtures have been delivered to the City of Edmonds. City staff received authorization from WSDOT to utilize grant funding to prepare bid documents. Once these have been prepared, WSDOT will review for completeness. It’s possible the City will be soliciting for bids in March of 2010.  October, November and December, 2009 and January, 2010 – Frances Chapin continues to work on wayfinding signage opportunities including kiosks and locator signs. Additionally, public parking signs, utilizing the universal parking symbol, have been installed at various locations within the downtown area to direct visitors to public parking areas. Small directional signs to the Edmonds Center for Arts and Public Safety Complex have also been installed. IV. TECHNOLOGY 10 Packet Page 68 of 132 Goal 3, Policy 3b of the Edmonds Economic Development Plan states: “Leverage technology assets, such as existing fiber connections, to pursue new revenue streams.” Significant Activities Since October 22, 2009  October, November and December, 2009 and January 2010 – The Economic Development and Community Services staff continue to meet with the City’s Community Technology Advisory Committee regarding existing technology assets, e.g., fiber and communications equipment. V. TOURISM Goal 3, Policy 3g of the Edmonds Economic Development Plan states: “Expand tourism efforts to take advantage of regional trends, such as nature tourism.” Significant Activities Since October 22, 2009  October, November and December, 2009 and January, 2010 – Cindi Cruz has been working on updating the City’s “Rack Brochure” for distribution in 2010. The brochure, which is tourism related, will be distributed throughout Western Washington, e.g., hotels, Edmonds Log Cabin, Future of Flight Museum, ferry terminals, etc. Funds to pay for creation of the brochure come from lodging taxes. The draft brochure will be more colorful than past brochures and will better highlight many of the activities available to visitors and residents.  November, 2009 – “Cruising in Puget Sound, Port of Edmonds” article contained within Northwest Yachting Magazine.  December, 2009 – The City of Edmonds is now a member of Seattle’s Convention and Visitor's Bureau (CVB). As a member, the City of Edmonds will be included in each CVB publication and now has an opportunity to distribute brochures at the Convention Visitors Information Center.  January, 2010 – The Economic Development Department and Information Technology Division secured a website domain address for the purposes of establishing a tourism website and/or linking to existing City tourism related web pages, and for use in tourism related marketing efforts. VisitEdmonds.com is now a functioning web domain address and connects to a Visitor’s Guide on the City’s website. NOTE: Obtaining a web domain address is different from actually formatting and maintaining a website. At a minimum, the VisitEdmonds.com web address can be used in ads to direct people to the City's existing Visitor's Guide web pages until a tourism website or new Visitor's Guide/tourism web pages are created. I have met with Carl Nelson, Lorenzo Hines, Frances Chapin and Cindi Cruz to discuss potential updates to the Visitor Guide web pages. 11 Packet Page 69 of 132 Items of Interest  American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Significant Activities Since October 22, 2009 City’s capital maintenance overlay program In March of this year 2009, the City of Edmonds was successful in securing $1M of federal stimulus money for the City’s capital maintenance overlay program. The overlay project is anticipated to begin in late summer 2009. A total of $14.9M of federal stimulus funding for transportation improvements was distributed to Snohomish County agencies in March. The regional selection criteria were based on project readiness and how quickly the projects could begin construction. This funding will provide a much-needed temporary financial resource for the overlay program. It’s important to note that the stimulus funds will not contribute toward balancing the City’s general fund. Due to lack of revenue, the City currently has no funds budgeted in 2009 and 2010 for the citywide overlay program.  October, November and December, 2009 – The City of Edmonds completed installation of new curb ramps and street overlays along portions of Dayton Street and 212th Street using federal stimulus funding. Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) In March of this year, Energy Secretary Steven Chu announced plans to invest $3.2 billion in energy efficiency and conservation projects in U.S. cities, counties, states, territories, and Native American tribes. The Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) program, funded by President Obama’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, will provide formula grants for projects that reduce total energy use and fossil fuel emissions, and improve energy efficiency nationwide. The City of Edmonds received notification that it is eligible for a $160,200 block grant under the EECBG program. The City has until June 25, 2009 to submit an application, i.e., "claim" the grant amount, and 18 months to obligate and three years to expend the funds. This is an entitlement grant for cities over 35,000 in population, rather than a competitive grant. City staff conducted several meetings to discuss possible projects or programs that might be eligible for this type of funding and have developed a preliminary list; these projects are considered short term. City staff also participated in a DOE webcast to learn about application submittal procedures and how the funds can be used. In addition to the above, I contacted other entities such as the Port of Edmonds, Puget Sound Energy, Snohomish County PUD, Edmonds School District and Stevens Hospital, to find out whether they might have projects which are small in scale but could be included in our grant application under a partnership proposal. We are not looking to expend the grant money on a single project, and we have already identified more than enough City of Edmonds projects to expend all of the grant money (several times over). I requested representatives from these entities to share whether they have a project 12 Packet Page 70 of 132 that (1) would have benefits for the entire community, (2) could be small enough in terms of cost to fit within an overall multi-project application, and (3) would have measurable, identifiable results. Examples of projects we are considering include energy- efficient equipment retrofits, vehicle replacement, traffic signal timing, energy code training and information programs, and software that can turn off electronic equipment during late night non-working hours. The second reason I contact these entities is to explore opportunities for partnering on projects that may go beyond the funding available in this first round of block grants. US-DOE has indicated that there will be a "competitive round" of grants available, although details have not been established. We believe that grant applications emphasizing partnering on a community or regional level will be what DOE is looking for, especially those that have long-term effects and can serve as "demonstration projects" for others to access. Announcement of the EECBG opportunity was shared with, and a proposed project list was also reviewed by, the Mayor’s Climate Protection Committee. On September 22, 2009, the City was notified that the Department of Energy has awarded an Energy Efficiency Conservation Block Grant to the City of Edmonds. The award is the full amount referenced in the March 2009 eligibility announcement ($160,200). The funds will be used for the following six different projects. Announcement of the EECBG opportunity was shared with, and the attached proposed project list was also reviewed by, the Mayor’s Climate Protection Committee. Project 1 - PC Energy Management (federal funds) Purchase and install energy management software for City computers (PC's). Enables automatic shut-down and management of upgrades. The cost covered under the grant is for the purchase of the software and licenses to cover computer workstations throughout City government, linked by network at several building sites. Project 2 - Network Server Energy Upgrades – (federal funds) Purchase and install energy-efficient PC network servers, replacing old servers still in use. Estimated project cost should enable four (4) servers to be replaced. Existing servers will be taken out of service, thereby reducing overall energy usage. Project 3 - Residential & Commercial Energy Meters (federal and local non-federal funds) Purchase energy meters to support residential and commercial energy monitoring, partnering with ongoing programs operated by local utilities. Establish public information plan, coordinated with the utilities, which provides educational resources and web-based support. The meters would be available for loan to private citizens or businesses to help monitor and assess energy needs, encouraging conservation and energy reduction. This program will consist of two components: (1) the purchase of home energy meters for loan to residential households and businesses within the city, and (2) website development to promote the meter program and enable homeowners to 13 Packet Page 71 of 132 Two types of meters will be purchased, which can be loaned out as a “set.” One meter will be similar to a simple plug-in meter (e.g. the P3 International Kill A Watt EZ Electricity Usage Monitor) which allows monitoring of appliance energy consumption. The second type of meter (e.g. PowerCost Home Electricity Monitor) is a unit that will interface with the home electric utility meter, allowing monitoring of overall electrical energy used in the home. In tandem, these will allow homeowners to monitor and potentially reduce overall energy usage. The meters will be loaned out free of charge, for a defined time period, with information on usage and savings to be reported as feedback to help assess the benefits of the program. The second part of the program is an enhancement to the City’s website to promote and provide for online reporting and feedback on the effectiveness of the program. Privacy will be afforded users, but reporting will be required of residents choosing to participate in the program so as to provide some measurement of effectiveness. Project 4 - Heating System Design and Feasibility Study (federal funds) A consultant will be hired to perform an analysis and feasibility study to replace the Frances Anderson Cultural Center (a heavily used community center) steam boiler heating system with ground source heat pumps or an alternative energy- efficient heating source. The existing system is old and highly inefficient. However, because of the size and complexity of the building and its systems, the City needs to conduct an assessment and feasibility study to evaluate different energy-efficient alternatives before considering replacement of the existing system. Project 5 - Purchase Hybrid Vehicles – (federal and local non-federal funds) The City would purchase up to seven (7) hybrid vehicles to replace existing low- efficiency City vehicles. EECBG funds can only be used to fund the delta between the cost of a hybrid vehicle (or Alternative Fuel Vehicle – AFV) and the cost of a non-hybrid vehicle (or non-AFV). Existing mid-size cars and trucks/pickups would be replaced with small hybrid cars and hybrid utility vehicles (SUV’s). The average fuel efficiency of the existing vehicles ranges from 8 to 22 MPG while the new hybrid replacements provide between 32 and 50 MPG. When purchasing vehicles, the City uses Washington State contracting procedures and contract listing prices. According to the State of Washington Current Contract Information, there are two types of small sedan AFV vehicles available and one small SUV AFV vehicle available for purchase using this process. Note: It is possible that the City may consider the purchase of an electric police scooter and/or other electric sedan(s) in lieu of one or more of the hybrid 14 Packet Page 72 of 132 Project 6 - Low-Energy Lighting Retrofit – (federal funds) Existing exterior lighting of the outdoor work yard at the Public Works facility is provided by traditional, inefficient 150-watt high pressure sodium fixtures. Based on discussions with the electrical utility provider (Snohomish PUD), the City has determined that energy and cost savings are possible if the existing lights are replaced with low-energy lumen-equivalent lights, such as LED fixtures. This project would complement ongoing City efforts to replace existing lighting fixtures with more energy efficient lights. Significant Activities Since October 22, 2009  December 21, 2009 – Project 1 Software was purchased by the City. Request for payment in the amount of $4,522.38 was submitted to the Department of Energy on January 11, 2010; full reimbursement was received by the City on January 12, 2010.  December 29, 2009 – One Project 5 Hybrid Toyota Prius was delivered to the City of Edmonds. Request for payment in the amount of $9,591.88 was submitted to the Department of Energy on January 11, 2010; full reimbursement was received by the City on January 12, 2010. As mentioned above, reimbursement is for the delta between the cost of a hybrid vehicle (or Alternative Fuel Vehicle – AFV) and the cost of a non-hybrid vehicle (or non-AFV). Using this formula, a $24,616.53 vehicle, only cost the City of Edmonds $15,024.65 ($24,616.53 - $9,591.88). NOTE: The Prius replaces an older City vehicle which will be surplused and sold helping further offset the cost of the new hybrid vehicle.  Burlington Northern Santa Fe – Installation of Second Rail Line As a part of the Sound Transit’s Sound Move, Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) will be installing a second rail line alongside the existing rail line between the areas north of Downtown Edmonds and south of Marina Beach Park. During a meeting with Sound Transit earlier this year, BNSF presented a plan depicting what BNSF believes to be the final alignment and realignment of the second and existing rail lines respectively. The plan depicts Port of Edmonds and City of Edmonds leased areas in addition to what portions of the leased areas BNSF intends to take back from both entities as a result of the above mentioned activities. Upon reviewing the plan, City staff requested that BNSF survey and stake/mark in the field where the fencing (west side of tracks) is to be located. The City and Port of Edmonds submitted this request in order to begin assessing future impacts, and planning for post installation/realignment of the rail lines. As expressed on a number of occasions to BNSF, the City and Port are concerned about potential impacts related to realignment and installation of BNSF rail lines. We are 15 Packet Page 73 of 132 16 equally concerned about the amount of time the City and Port may have to react to any decision(s) made by BNSF and the potential financial impacts to our budgets. Depending on the magnitude of BNSF construction related impacts, the City and Port of Edmonds may not have the staffing and financial resources to mitigate the impacts. The City has asked BNSF if they have a mitigation fund set aside to mitigate adverse impacts, if any? To date, we have not heard back from BNSF. Based on BNSF engineering plans and field stakes, there could be negative impacts to Admiral Way and Marina Beach Park. As mentioned in the October, 2009 Community Services and Economic Development Quarterly Report, the City was in the process of securing an engineering firm in order to fully determine the impact and possibly design a new Admiral Way alignment that will maintain access to Marina Beach Park, Port of Edmonds and existing parking areas (see Significant Activities below). Regarding a timeline related to the installation of a BNSF second rail line, BNSF has indicated it intends to begin grading south of Dayton sometime during the 1st quarter of 2010 with the installation and relocation of the existing and second rail lines respectively, sometime in 2011 and 2012. Significant Activities Since October 22, 2009  October, November and December, 2009 and January 2010 – The City of Edmonds hired a consultant, i.e., Ried Middleton, to help the City and Port of Edmonds fully identify impacts likely to result by BNSF installing and relocating the second and existing rail lines, respectively. Reid Middleton conducted a field visit to view stakes installed by BNSF surveyors and prepared engineering drawings depicting the relationship of proposed new and relocated rail lines, and BNSF fencing, to existing roadways and park improvements. The drawings also include preliminary potential modifications needed to mitigate the impacts caused by future BNSF improvements. Specific modifications include the realignment of Admiral Way, sidewalk(s) and landscaping, reconfiguration of parking area to minimize loss of parking, in addition to improvements necessary to maintain access to Marina Beach Park, off-leash area, and access to Port of Edmonds. Preliminary plans would preserve most of the parking along Admiral Way (west edge of Port Dry Stack Storage Area) in addition to maintaining two way access along Admiral Way, to the Port of Edmonds work yard, and Marina Beach Park and off-leash area. City Administration formally requested, in writing, BNSF fund improvements necessary to mitigate impacts. BNSF's initial response is to not fund the mitigation improvements. As a result City administration schedule a meeting with a BNSF representative (see below).  January 12, 2010 – Mayor Haakenson, Port of Edmonds Executive Director McChesney and Commissioner Block, and I met with a BNSF representative to stress the importance and need of BNSF funding the above mentioned improvements. We are waiting to hear back from BNSF.  Community Transit SWIFT Project Significant Activities Since October 22, 2009 o November, 2009 – Community Transit SWIFT began operating. Packet Page 74 of 132 AM-2739 2.F. Recycling Grant Agreement with the Department of Ecology for 2010-2011 Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:01/26/2010 Submitted By:Kim Karas Submitted For:Noel Miller Time:Consent Department:Public Works Type:Action Review Committee: Committee Action:Approved for Consent Agenda Information Subject Title Authorization for the Mayor to sign the Recycling Grant Agreement between the City of Edmonds and the Washington State Department of Ecology for 2010-2011. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff It is recommended that City Council authorize the Mayor to sign the recycling grant agreement between Edmonds and the Washington State Department of Ecology in order to continue to fund the City's waste prevention and recycling program for 2010-2011. Previous Council Action The City of Edmonds Recycling Coordinator has sought and secured funds directly from the Washington State Department of Ecology since 1996, by means of an allocation received through the Snohomish County Solid Waste Management Division. Narrative The next biennial cycle of state funding, which supports the recycling coordinator and the City's on-going waste prevention and recycling program is written as a multi-phase agreement and provides $21,162 for the first year of work in 2010, as outlined in the Agreement under Phase I. Work performed under Phase II is eligible for reimbursement and is contingent upon the budget appropriation by the State Legislature for the 2011-2013 biennium. The grant offer represents a 75/25 match. The City's 25% match, which is budgeted under the Combined Utility Fund 411, is $7,054, for an available program funding amount of $28,216. Fiscal Impact Fiscal Year:2010 Revenue:$28,216 Expenditure: Fiscal Impact: Department of Ecology Grant $21,162. Combined Utility Fund 411: $7,054. Attachments Packet Page 75 of 132 Link: DOE Recycling Grant Agreement Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 01/21/2010 09:21 AM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 01/21/2010 10:04 AM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 01/21/2010 10:21 AM APRV Form Started By: Kim Karas  Started On: 01/20/2010 02:55 PM Final Approval Date: 01/21/2010 Packet Page 76 of 132 Grant No. G1000397 City of Edmonds 1 COORDINATED PREVENTION GRANT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY AND CITY OF EDMONDS Coordinated Prevention Grant Agreement – Grant No.: G1000397. This is a binding agreement entered into by and between the state of Washington Department of Ecology, hereinafter referred to as ECOLOGY or DEPARTMENT, and the City of Edmonds, hereinafter referred to as the RECIPIENT, to carry out the activities described herein. JURISDICTION: MAILING ADDRESS: CITY, STATE, ZIP: City of Edmonds 121 Fifth Avenue N Edmonds, WA 98020 RECIPIENT GRANT COORDINATOR: TELEPHONE: FAX: E-MAIL: Steve Fisher 425-771-0235 425-744-6057 recycleguy@ci.edmonds.wa.us RECIPIENT BILLING/INVOICE COORDINATOR: TELEPHONE: FAX: E-MAIL: Lori Cress 425-771-0240 425-771-0265 cress@ci.edmonds.wa.us ECOLOGY GRANT OFFICER: TELEPHONE: FAX: E-MAIL: Taisa Welhasch 425-649-7266 425-649-7259 taisa.welhasch@ecy.wa.gov FUNDING SOURCE MAXIMUM ELIGIBLE COST STATE GRANT SHARE LOCAL SHARE STATE MAXIMUM GRANT PERCENT FEDERAL TAX IDENTIFICATION NO. State Building Construction Account $28,216 $21,162 $7,054 75 % 91-6001244 EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE AGREEMENT January 1, 2010 EXPIRATION DATE OF THE AGREEMENT December 31, 2011 Packet Page 77 of 132 Grant No. G1000397 City of Edmonds 2 PART 1: SCOPE OF WORK The task(s) set forth below summarize the RECIPIENT’S activities to be performed under this agreement. Costs are limited to those approved by ECOLOGY as outlined in the current scope of work and budget. Deliverables must be completed by the expiration date of this agreement, including delivery of purchases, unless otherwise stated in this agreement or approved by ECOLOGY in writing. Note: The term “task” as used in this agreement is interchangeable with the term “project” as used on the online Solid Waste Information Clearinghouse. This agreement is a “Multi-Phased” agreement. Multi-phased means it will be written with a task’s full scope of work and a partial budget. Phase One of this agreement includes work performed with the budget as outlined in Phase One of section Part 2: Fund Source and Budget. Phase Two includes the remainder of work to be performed and funds are contingent upon the budget appropriation by the State Legislature for the 2011-2013 biennium. After the 2011-2013 biennial allocation is secured, ECOLOGY will initiate a formal amendment to increase funding to support Phase Two. Phase Two work is not authorized for reimbursement until a formal amendment to increase the budget is executed. RECIPIENTS are not obligated to complete Phase Two work until a formal amendment to increase the budget is approved. Any work performed or costs incurred prior to the effective date of this agreement will be at the sole expense of the RECIPIENT. The “Maximum Eligible Cost” is the maximum amount of eligible costs incurred by a RECIPIENT that can be reimbursed at a rate of 75% under this grant. *The “Estimated (total) Task Cost” is for Ecology information only. It reflects the true cost of completing the full task, including expenses beyond the Maximum Eligible Cost. CATEGORY: Waste Reduction and Recycling MAXIMUM ELIGIBLE CATEGORY COST: $ 22,572 1. TASK TITLE: Waste Reduction and Recycling Education and Outreach Maximum Eligible Task Cost: $ 22,572 Summary Description: The RECIPIENT will provide recycling outreach and technical assistance to multi-family properties, businesses and citizens within the city to increase recycling participation. The RECIPIENT will coordinate with residents, businesses, the county and certified waste haulers to continue to increase awareness and use of all recycle and reuse services, options and opportunities throughout the community. The RECIPIENT will conduct a Christmas tree- cycling activity with the Boy Scouts and a Green Business recognition activity with the local Chamber of Commerce. Packet Page 78 of 132 Grant No. G1000397 City of Edmonds 3 Goal Statement: The goal of this task is to reduce waste while increasing diversion and recycling at multi-family properties and businesses within the city of Edmonds. Outcome Statement: Over the two-year grant period, the RECIPIENT expects to respond to approximately 50 businesses and 150 citizens about reuse and recycling options. The RECIPIENT also expects that approximately 10 multi-family properties will start new recycling programs, diverting 35 tons of recyclable material from the waste stream. From Christmas tree-cycling, approximately 53 tons of organic material will be diverted. Work Plan and Activities Timeline: A quarter is defined by calendar year and begins with the first three months of the grant period. Quarter Activity Phase One Q1 Identify multi-family properties, develop outreach materials and coordinate with hauler. Coordinate and assist (with publicity) local scout troops with their Christmas tree-cycle activity. Q2 Continue providing printed public information while updating the same on the city web site. Continue to provide outreach and assistance to commercial business recycling efforts. Review proposed recycling collection areas for new and remodeled multi- family and commercial properties. Support the Chamber of Commerce Green Business recognition program. Q3 Ongoing Q4 Ongoing Phase Two Q5 Ongoing Q6 Ongoing Q7 Ongoing Q8 Ongoing. Evaluate and write final report. Method of Evaluation: The RECIPIENT will track and report quarterly, the number of responses to businesses and residents and the number of new multi-family properties (and individual units) that started using the recycle collection service. Collection data from the hauler would be used for determining total volume and/or weight of recyclables diverted and calculating any percentage of resulting increase. * Estimated (total) Task Cost: $ 45,134 Packet Page 79 of 132 Grant No. G1000397 City of Edmonds 4 CATEGORY: Organics MAXIMUM ELIGIBLE CATEGORY COST: $ 5,644 2. TASK TITLE: Commercial Food Waste Composting Maximum Eligible Task Cost: $5,644 Summary Description: The RECIPIENT will continue to provide outreach and technical assistance to restaurants and other food service businesses on food waste composting options. It is anticipated that this service will become a standard waste management option. Goal Statement: The goal of this task to increase the opportunity for food service businesses to divert the large portion of food scraps typically generated in their solid waste stream. Awareness and education of the opportunity, and coordination with the collection service will lead to an increase in participation. Outcome Statement: Over the two year grant period, the RECIPIENT expects 25 businesses to sign up for organics collection, diverting 100 tons of organics from the waste stream. Work Plan and Activities with Quarterly Timeline: Quarter Activity Phase One Q1 Promote commercial food waste composting through distribution of outreach material and site visits. Establish regular visits with participants for program monitoring and evaluation. Q2 Ongoing Q3 Ongoing Q4 Ongoing Phase Two Q5 Ongoing Q6 Ongoing Q7 Ongoing Q8 Ongoing. Evaluate and write final report. Method of Evaluation: The RECIPIENT will track and report quarterly participation, collect solid waste generation information (tons diverted), and identify barriers and particular behavioral changes needed for success. Packet Page 80 of 132 Grant No. G1000397 City of Edmonds 5 * Estimated (total) Task Cost: $ 11,284 PART 2: FUND SOURCE AND BUDGET Approved costs must be consistent with the most recently approved Spending Plan. Costs cannot exceed the agreement Budget (Part 2: Section B) without a formal amendment. To change how funds are allocated between the grant tasks, the RECIPIENT must submit a written request to ECOLOGY for a Letter Amendment. To change a scope of work or to increase/decrease a grant amount, the RECIPIENT must complete and submit a Formal Amendment Request form (ECY 070- 113). A. FUND SOURCE PHASE ONE (057/J07 9N10C) Maximum Eligible Cost: $22,572 Fund Fund Share (75%) State Share State Building Construction Account (SBCA) $16,929 Match Requirement Match Share (25%) Match Amount Cash Match 25% $5,643 Interlocal Costs 0% $0 PHASE ONE (057/J07 9N1BW) Maximum Eligible Cost: $5,644 Fund Fund Share (75%) State Share State Building Construction Account (SBCA) $4,233 Match Requirement Match Share (25%) Match Amount Cash Match 25% $1,411 Interlocal Costs 0% $0 PHASE TWO Packet Page 81 of 132 Grant No. G1000397 City of Edmonds 6 Maximum Eligible Cost: $28,202 Fund Fund Share (75%) State Share State Building Construction Account (SBCA) $21,151 Match Requirement Match Share (25%) Match Amount Cash Match 25% $7,051 Interlocal Costs 0% $0 B. BUDGET TASK Maximum Eligible Cost Phase 1 (Quarters 1-4 of the Spending Plan) Maximum Eligible Cost Phase 2 (Quarters 5-8 of the Spending Plan) Category: Waste Reduction and Recycling $ 22,572 $ 22,562 1. Task Title: Waste Reduction and Recycling Education & Outreach $ 22,572 $ 22,562 Category: Organics $ 5,644 $ 5,640 2. Task Title: Commercial Food Waste Composting $ 5,644 $ 5,640 TOTAL MAXIMUM ELIGIBLE COST $ 28,216 $ 28,202 PART 3: BUDGET CONDITIONS A. The RECIPIENT is required to provide a match of 25% of the maximum eligible cost with cash or interlocal costs. Interlocal costs are the only type of in-kind contributions that may be used as match. B. Any work performed or costs incurred prior to the effective date or after the expiration date of this agreement will be at the sole expense of the RECIPIENT. Packet Page 82 of 132 Grant No. G1000397 City of Edmonds 7 C. Overhead is eligible at a rate up to 25 percent of staff salaries and benefits for actual time spent on tasks outlined in this agreement. Salaries and benefits to administer the grant agreement are eligible (excluding time spent to write a grant application). D. To increase or decrease the budget as outlined in this grant agreement, or change the scope of work for any project outlined in this grant agreement, ECOLOGY requires a formal amendment. The RECIPIENT must complete and submit a formal amendment using the Formal Amendment Request form (ECY 070-113). E. Payments to the RECIPIENT from ECOLOGY shall be made payable to: City of Edmonds Attn: Lori Cress 121 Fifth Ave. N Edmonds, WA 98020 F. If parties other than the RECIPIENT are contributing to the local share of task costs, memoranda of understanding or other written agreements confirming the contribution shall be negotiated. These agreements shall specify the exact work to be accomplished and be signed by all parties contributing to the local match of this task. Copies of these agreements shall be made part of the RECIPIENT’S grant file and submitted to ECOLOGY. G. Spending Plans: Approved costs must be consistent with the most recently approved Spending Plan. The RECIPIENT must submit a revised Spending Plan to ECOLOGY in order to change the amount of funds spent by quarter. ECOLOGY’S grant officer will approve, by date stamp and signature, the revised Spending Plan. If quarterly spending exceeds the amount outlined on the approved spending plan, ECOLOGY reserves the right to hold payment of the overage depending on the availability of funds. Revised and approved Spending Plans are incorporated into this agreement by reference. PART 4: SPECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS A. BILLING AND REPORTING 1. Unless otherwise approved in writing by ECOLOGY, the RECIPIENT shall submit a payment request to ECOLOGY at least quarterly (by calendar year), but no more often than once per month. 2. The RECIPIENT shall submit a progress report with each payment request but no less often than quarterly. These reports shall include activities that support incurred costs shown on the C1 or C2 of the payment request, and must be submitted on-line through the Solid Waste Information Clearinghouse. 3. The RECIPIENT must provide to ECOLOGY an up-to-date Spending Plan throughout the grant period. An updated Spending Plan must be submitted when changes occur that impact quarterly spending and / or quarterly reimbursement amounts. Packet Page 83 of 132 Grant No. G1000397 City of Edmonds 8 4. The RECIPIENT must submit payment requests on approved State Invoice Voucher forms: A19-1A (ECY 060-02), Form B1 (ECY 060-3) or Form B2 (ECY 060-7), Form C1 (ECY 060-8) or Form C2 (ECY 060-9). These forms are acceptable in electronic format. The RECIPIENT must also include all backup documentation to support items listed on Form C1/C2. The budget is organized by task and therefore, the RECIPIENT shall itemize costs by task on Form C1/C2 and summarize costs by task on Form B1/B2. Forms B1 and C1 are used only when interlocal costs are used towards the 25% match. 5. For all Planning and Implementation tasks and special tasks in a solid waste enforcement grant (special tasks do not include regular solid waste enforcement work such as enforcing solid waste codes) the RECIPIENT must submit a Final Performance Analysis (FPA) report on-line through the Solid Waste Information Clearinghouse. The final report must be submitted before ECOLOGY can process a final payment request. The final payment request and the FPA are due no later than February 14, 2012 for this grant or 45 days after the grant budget is spent, whichever comes first. 6. For Solid Waste Enforcement tasks, recipients must submit their final quarterly solid waste enforcement progress report on-line through the Solid Waste Information Clearinghouse no later than February 14, 2012. Ecology will generate a summary Final Solid Waste Enforcement report from all the quarterly reports that will serve as the final report needed to close out the agreement. 7. Progress Report (for both planning and implementation and solid waste enforcement tasks) and Final Performance Analysis (FPA) can be found on the Grant Details page of the Solid Waste Information Clearinghouse once the RECIPIENT has logged on as a Registered User. For instructions on how to become a Registered User, please visit the Coordinated Prevention Grant website at http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/swfa/grants/cpg.html. B. DOCUMENTATION 1. The RECIPIENT shall submit supporting documents for all costs incurred. Documentation shall be provided in the order in which it is itemized on Form C1/C2. Supporting documentation is any document deemed relevant by ECOLOGY to establish the appropriateness of an expense listed on Form C1/C2. Please see Chapter 6 of the Program Guidelines for Coordinated Prevention Grants 2010-2011 Grant Cycle, and the Administrative Requirements for Recipients of Ecology Grants and Loans – Yellow Book, Ecology Publication #91-18 (Revised September 2005) for guidance. 2. The RECIPIENT shall maintain grant related material and supporting documents in a common file. This includes cancelled checks, invoices, purchase receipts, payroll records, time and attendance records, contract award documents, and invoice vouchers sent to ECOLOGY. The Recipient shall keep all supporting documents for audit purposes for at least three years after agreement expiration. 3. The RECIPIENT shall use the ECOLOGY provided Form E, or an equivalent time accounting document approved by ECOLOGY, to record staff hours being charged to the grant. Packet Page 84 of 132 Grant No. G1000397 City of Edmonds 9 4. ECOLOGY may request additional documentation if needed to determine if a cost will be allowed. 5. Supporting documents shall be clear and legible, and organized by task in the order it was itemized on Form C1/C2 by the RECIPIENT. C. OTHER SPECIAL TERMS 1. SOLID AND HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT PLANS Tasks must support implementation of the RECIPIENT’s local solid and hazardous waste management plans. For tasks related to updating a local solid and hazardous waste management plan, the RECIPIENT agrees to incorporate the intent of the Washington State Hazardous Waste Management Plan and Solid Waste Management Plan (Beyond Waste Plan) into the local preliminary draft plan prior to submittal to Ecology for review. The Beyond Waste plan is a 30- year plan with a clear vision to eliminate wastes and toxics whenever we can and use the remaining wastes as resources. The recipient agrees to include in their plan update, recommendations that address at least one of the following elements from the Beyond Waste Plan: moderate risk waste, organics management or green building. 2. SOLID WASTE ENFORCEMENT Solid Waste Enforcement money can only be spent on tasks that focus on enforcement of rules and regulations, and shall be used exclusively for expenses necessary to enforce applicable regulations pursuant to Chapters 70.95.220 RCW, WAC 173-350, 351 and 304. For tasks related to inspection and permitting of solid waste facilities, those facilities must be in compliance) at the time a payment request is submitted. Compliance is defined at a minimum as the RECIPIENT shall have issued a compliance schedule or have taken enforcement action to obtain compliance. The RECIPIENT must also submit copies of permits to Ecology within seven days of their issuance. Once a permit is issued, Ecology has 30 days to review each permit. Complete permit applications must be submitted to Ecology, allowing 45 days for Ecology to review and recommend for or against the issuance of a permit. The RECIPIENT must submit copies of reports for inspections conducted in the billing period with each payment request. 3. ON-LINE CONTRACTS AND GRANTS MANAGEMENT Washington State’s Office of Financial Management is developing an on-line contracts and grants management system. When the system becomes available, all new or active contracts and grant agreements must be managed in this system. The RECIPIENT agrees to register in the state vendor registration program and to use the on-line system. 4. TRAINING The RECIPIENT agrees to participate in any ECOLOGY recommended trainings related to managing agreements and preparing, processing, and receiving payments. Packet Page 85 of 132 Grant No. G1000397 City of Edmonds 10 5. MINORITY AND WOMEN’S BUSINESS PARTICIPATION The RECIPIENT is encouraged to solicit and recruit, to the extent possible, certified minority- owned (MBE) and women-owned (WBE) businesses in purchases and contracts initiated after the effective date of this agreement. Contract awards or rejections cannot be made based on MBE or WBE participation. M/WBE participation is encouraged, however, and the RECIPIENT and all prospective bidders or persons submitting qualifications should take the following steps, when possible, in any procurement initiated after the effective date of this agreement: a) Include qualified minority and women's businesses on solicitation lists. b) Assure that qualified minority and women's businesses are solicited whenever they are potential sources of services or supplies. c) Divide the total requirements, when economically feasible, into smaller tasks or quantities, to permit maximum participation by qualified minority and women's businesses. d) Establish delivery schedules, where work requirements permit, which will encourage participation of qualified minority and women's businesses. e) Use the services and assistance of the State Office of Minority and Women's Business Enterprises (OMWBE) and the Office of Minority Business Enterprises of the U.S. Department of Commerce, as appropriate. f) The RECIPIENT should report payments made to qualified firms to ECOLOGY at the time of submitting each invoice. Please include the following information on ECOLOGY provided form (Form D). g) Name and state OMWBE certification number (if available) of any qualified firm receiving funds under the invoice, including any sub-and/or sub-subcontractors. h) The total dollar amount paid to qualified firms under this invoice. 6. PROCUREMENT AND CONTRACTS a) The RECIPIENT shall provide written certification that it will follow its standard procurement procedures and/or applicable state law in awarding contracts; RECIPIENTS with no formal procurement procedures must certify that they have complied with the "Standards for Competitive Solicitation," found in Part V of the Administrative Requirements for Recipients of Ecology Grants and Loans – Yellow Book, Ecology Publication #91-18 (Revised September 2005). b) Upon issuance, the RECIPIENT shall submit a copy of all requests for qualifications (RFQs), requests for proposals (RFPs), and bid documents relating to this grant agreement to ECOLOGY’S grant officer. Packet Page 86 of 132 Grant No. G1000397 City of Edmonds 11 c) Prior to contract execution, the RECIPIENT shall submit all draft documents and a copy of the draft proposed contract to the ECOLOGY’S grant officer for review and approval. Following the contract execution, the RECIPIENT shall submit a copy of the final contract to your ECOLOGY assigned grant officer. d) Unless a specific purchase of equipment or real property is already written into the grant agreement, the RECIPIENT must submit a written request to the DEPARTMENT to purchase any equipment or real property (Property) with a single unit purchase price of $5,000 or more. The request shall include the justification for the purchase of the property, the total cost, the intended use, and the anticipated useful life of the property. The request must be approved in writing by the DEPARTMENT prior to the purchase. 7. USE OF EXISTING CONTRACTS The RECIPIENT may use existing contracts that conform to adopted procurement procedures and applicable state laws. The RECIPIENT shall notify ECOLOGY if it used contracts entered into prior to the execution of the grant agreement for performance of grant- funded activities. The RECIPIENT shall submit a copy of the contract to its assigned ECOLOGY grant officer. The grant eligibility of products or services secured by the RECIPIENT under existing contracts used to perform the scope of work in this agreement must be deemed allowable and reasonable by ECOLOGY prior to cost reimbursement. 8. PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT MANAGEMENT AND DISPOSITION The RECIPIENT must develop an inventory control system, including physical inventory to document the ongoing use, a serial or vehicle identification number (VIN) and location of the equipment. The inventory shall be submitted to the DEPARTMENT annually while the equipment is in use. The RECIPIENT shall investigate, document, and report to the ECOLOGY any loss, theft or damage upon discovery of such conditions. The RECIPIENT will follow manufacturer recommended maintenance procedures to keep the property in good operating condition. The RECIPIENT shall submit a written request to the ECOLOGY for any intent to change the use of the equipment as outlined in this grant agreement, including uses past the expiration date of this agreement. Disposition of the equipment shall be determined by the ECOLOGY and documented in writing. A copy of the determination will be provided to the RECIPIENT upon expiration of the grant agreement. The ECOLOGY may authorize the RECIPIENT to: o If the equipment is necessary for the continued operation of the project or other projects administered through ECOLOGY, the grant officer may instruct the recipient to retain the equipment with no further compensation to Ecology. o If the project has no further significant use for the equipment, the grant officer may instruct the recipient to retain or sell the equipment and pay Ecology an amount equal to ECOLOGY’s share of the current fair market value, sale proceeds or other price agreed upon by the grant officer. o The grant officer may instruct the recipient to transfer title to Ecology or to a third party named by Ecology who is eligible under existing statutes. Packet Page 87 of 132 Grant No. G1000397 City of Edmonds 12 9. TASK INCOME Any income directly generated as a result of the activities funded by this grant shall be reported as a credit against the expenses of that activity, as required by ECOLOGY’S Administrative Requirements for Ecology Grants and Loans, Ecology Publication #91-18 (Revised September 2005). 10. ALL WRITINGS CONTAINED HEREIN This agreement, including the “General Terms and Conditions,” the latest approved Spending Plan, Program Guidelines – Coordinated Prevention Grants 2010-2011, and ECOLOGY’S Administrative Requirements for Ecology Grants and Loans, Ecology Publication #91-18 (Revised September 2005), contain the entire understanding between the parties, and there are no other understandings or representations except as those set forth or incorporated by reference herein. No subsequent modification(s) or amendment(s) of this grant agreement shall be of any force or effect unless in writing, signed by authorized representatives of the RECIPIENT and ECOLOGY and made part of this agreement. 11. ARCHEOLOGICAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES The RECIPIENT shall take reasonable action to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effects to the archeological or cultural resources. RECIPIENT shall immediately cease work and notify ECOLOGY if any archeological or cultural resources are found while conducting work under this agreement. In the event that historical or cultural artifacts are discovered at the project site, the RECIPIENT shall also notify the state historic preservation officer at the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation at (360) 586-3065. Applicability of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) may require the RECIPIENT to obtain a permit pursuant to Chapter 27.53 RCW prior to conducting on-site activity with the potential to impact historic properties (such as invasive sampling, dredging, or cleanup actions). 12. PRECEDENCE In the event of inconsistency in this agreement, the inconsistency shall be resolved by giving precedence in the following order: (a) applicable federal and state statutes and regulations; (b) Scope of Work and most current approved Spending Plan; (c) Special Terms and Conditions; (d) Coordinated Prevention Grant Program Guidelines (e) any terms incorporated herein by reference including the Administrative Requirements for Ecology Grants and Loans, Ecology Publication #91-18 (Revised September 2005); and (f) the General Terms and Conditions (SS-010 Rev. 04/04). Part 5: GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS: Pertaining to Grant and Loan Agreements of the Department of Ecology, SS-010 Rev. 04/04 A. RECIPIENT PERFORMANCE All activities for which grant/loan funds are to be used shall be accomplished by the RECIPIENT and RECIPIENT's employees. The RECIPIENT shall only use contractor/consultant assistance if that has been included in the agreement’s final scope of work and budget. Packet Page 88 of 132 Grant No. G1000397 City of Edmonds 13 B. SUBGRANTEE/CONTRACTOR COMPLIANCE The RECIPIENT must ensure that all subgrantees and contractors comply with the terms and conditions of this agreement. C. THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARY The RECIPIENT shall ensure that in all subcontracts entered into by the RECIPIENT pursuant to this agreement, the state of Washington is named as an express third-party beneficiary of such subcontracts with full rights as such. D. CONTRACTING FOR SERVICES (BIDDING) Contracts for construction, purchase of equipment and professional architectural and engineering services shall be awarded through a competitive process, if required by State law. RECIPIENT shall retain copies of all bids received and contracts awarded, for inspection and use by the DEPARTMENT. E. ASSIGNMENTS No right or claim of the RECIPIENT arising under this agreement shall be transferred or assigned by the RECIPIENT. F. COMPLIANCE WITH ALL LAWS 1. The RECIPIENT shall comply fully with all applicable Federal, State and local laws, orders, regulations and permits. Prior to commencement of any construction, the RECIPIENT shall secure the necessary approvals and permits required by authorities having jurisdiction over the project, provide assurance to the DEPARTMENT that all approvals and permits have been secured, and make copies available to the DEPARTMENT upon request. 2. Discrimination. The DEPARTMENT and the RECIPIENT agree to be bound by all Federal and State laws, regulations, and policies against discrimination. The RECIPIENT further agrees to affirmatively support the program of the Office of Minority and Women's Business Enterprises to the maximum extent possible. If the agreement is federally-funded, the RECIPIENT shall report to the DEPARTMENT the percent of grant/loan funds available to women or minority owned businesses. 3. Wages And Job Safety. The RECIPIENT agrees to comply with all applicable laws, regulations, and policies of the United States and the State of Washington which affect wages and job safety. 4. Industrial Insurance. The RECIPIENT certifies full compliance with all applicable state industrial insurance requirements. If the RECIPIENT fails to comply with such laws, the DEPARTMENT shall have the right to immediately terminate this agreement for cause as provided in Section K.1, herein. G. KICKBACKS The RECIPIENT is prohibited from inducing by any means any person employed or otherwise involved in this project to give up any part of the compensation to which he/she is otherwise entitled or, receive any fee, commission or gift in return for award of a subcontract hereunder. H. AUDITS AND INSPECTIONS Packet Page 89 of 132 Grant No. G1000397 City of Edmonds 14 1. The RECIPIENT shall maintain complete program and financial records relating to this agreement. Such records shall clearly indicate total receipts and expenditures by fund source and task or object. All grant/loan records shall be kept in a manner which provides an audit trail for all expenditures. All records shall be kept in a common file to facilitate audits and inspections. Engineering documentation and field inspection reports of all construction work accomplished under this agreement shall be maintained by the RECIPIENT. 2. All grant/loan records shall be open for audit or inspection by the DEPARTMENT or by any duly authorized audit representative of the State of Washington for a period of at least three years after the final grant payment/loan repayment or any dispute resolution hereunder. If any such audits identify discrepancies in the financial records, the RECIPIENT shall provide clarification and/or make adjustments accordingly. 3. All work performed under this agreement and any equipment purchased, shall be made available to the DEPARTMENT and to any authorized state, federal or local representative for inspection at any time during the course of this agreement and for at least three years following grant/loan termination or dispute resolution hereunder. 4. RECIPIENT shall meet the provisions in OMB Circular A-133 (Audits of States, Local Governments & Non Profit Organizations), including the compliance Supplement to OMB Circular A-133, if the RECIPIENT expends $500,000 or more in a year in Federal funds. The $500,000 threshold for each year is a cumulative total of all federal funding from all sources. The RECIPIENT must forward a copy of the audit along with the RECIPIENT’S response and the final corrective action plan to the DEPARTMENT within ninety (90) days of the date of the audit report. I. PERFORMANCE REPORTING The RECIPIENT shall submit progress reports to the DEPARTMENT with each payment request or such other schedule as set forth in the Special Conditions. The RECIPIENT shall also report in writing to the DEPARTMENT any problems, delays or adverse conditions which will materially affect their ability to meet project objectives or time schedules. This disclosure shall be accompanied by a statement of the action taken or proposed and any assistance needed from the DEPARTMENT to resolve the situation. Payments may be withheld if required progress reports are not submitted. Quarterly reports shall cover the periods January 1 through March 31, April 1 through June 30, July 1 through September 30, and October 1 through December 31. Reports shall be due within thirty (30) days following the end of the quarter being reported. J. COMPENSATION 1. Method of compensation. Payment shall normally be made on a reimbursable basis as specified in the grant agreement and no more often than once per month. Each request for payment will be submitted by the RECIPIENT on State voucher request forms provided by the DEPARTMENT along with documentation of the expenses. Payments shall be made for each task/phase of the project, or portion thereof, as set out in the Scope of Work when completed by the RECIPIENT and approved as satisfactory by the Project Officer. The payment request form and supportive documents must itemize all allowable costs by major elements as described in the Scope of Work. Instructions for submitting the payment requests are found in "Administrative Requirements for Ecology Grants and Loans", part IV, published by the DEPARTMENT. A copy of this document shall be furnished to the RECIPIENT. Packet Page 90 of 132 Grant No. G1000397 City of Edmonds 15 When payment requests are approved by the DEPARTMENT, payments will be made to the mutually agreed upon designee. Payment requests shall be submitted to the DEPARTMENT and directed to the Project Officer assigned to administer this agreement. 2. Period of Compensation. Payments shall only be made for actions of the RECIPIENT pursuant to the grant/loan agreement and performed after the effective date and prior to the expiration date of this agreement, unless those dates are specifically modified in writing as provided herein. 3. Final Request(s) for Payment. The RECIPIENT should submit final requests for compensation within forty-five(45) days after the expiration date of this agreement and within fifteen (15) days after the end of a fiscal biennium. Failure to comply may result in delayed reimbursement. 4. Performance Guarantee. The DEPARTMENT may withhold an amount not to exceed ten percent (10%) of each reimbursement payment as security for the RECIPIENT's performance. Monies withheld by the DEPARTMENT may be paid to the RECIPIENT when the project(s) described herein, or a portion thereof, have been completed if, in the DEPARTMENT's sole discretion, such payment is reasonable and approved according to this agreement and, as appropriate, upon completion of an audit as specified under section J.6. herein. 5. Unauthorized Expenditures. All payments to the RECIPIENT may be subject to final audit by the DEPARTMENT and any unauthorized expenditure(s) charged to this grant/loan shall be refunded to the DEPARTMENT by the RECIPIENT. 6. Mileage and Per Diem. If mileage and per diem are paid to the employees of the RECIPIENT or other public entities, it shall not exceed the amount allowed under state law for state employees. 7. Overhead Costs. No reimbursement for overhead costs shall be allowed unless provided for in the Scope of Work hereunder. K. TERMINATION 1. For Cause. The obligation of the DEPARTMENT to the RECIPIENT is contingent upon satisfactory performance by the RECIPIENT of all of its obligations under this agreement. In the event the RECIPIENT unjustifiably fails, in the opinion of the DEPARTMENT, to perform any obligation required of it by this agreement, the DEPARTMENT may refuse to pay any further funds thereunder and/or terminate this agreement by giving written notice of termination. A written notice of termination shall be given at least five working days prior to the effective date of termination. In that event, all finished or unfinished documents, data studies, surveys, drawings, maps, models, photographs, and reports or other materials prepared by the RECIPIENT under this agreement, at the option of the DEPARTMENT, shall become Department property and the RECIPIENT shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any satisfactory work completed on such documents and other materials. Despite the above, the RECIPIENT shall not be relieved of any liability to the DEPARTMENT for damages sustained by the DEPARTMENT and/or the State of Washington because of any breach of agreement by the RECIPIENT. The DEPARTMENT may withhold payments for the purpose of setoff until such time as the exact amount of damages due the DEPARTMENT from the RECIPIENT is determined. Packet Page 91 of 132 Grant No. G1000397 City of Edmonds 16 2. Insufficient Funds. The obligation of the DEPARTMENT to make payments is contingent on the availability of state and federal funds through legislative appropriation and state allotment. When this agreement crosses over state fiscal years the obligation of the DEPARTMENT is contingent upon the appropriation of funds during the next fiscal year. The failure to appropriate or allot such funds shall be good cause to terminate this agreement as provided in paragraph K.1 above. When this agreement crosses the RECIPIENT's fiscal year, the obligation of the RECIPIENT to continue or complete the project described herein shall be contingent upon appropriation of funds by the RECIPIENT's governing body; Provided, however, that nothing contained herein shall preclude the DEPARTMENT from demanding repayment of ALL funds paid to the RECIPIENT in accordance with Section O herein. 3. Failure to Commence Work. In the event the RECIPIENT fails to commence work on the project funded herein within four months after the effective date of this agreement, or by any date mutually agreed upon in writing for commencement of work, the DEPARTMENT reserves the right to terminate this agreement. L. WAIVER Waiver of any RECIPIENT default is not a waiver of any subsequent default. Waiver of a breach of any provision of this agreement is not a waiver of any subsequent breach and will not be construed as a modification of the terms of this agreement unless stated as such in writing by the authorized representative of the DEPARTMENT. M. PROPERTY RIGHTS 1. Copyrights and Patents. When the RECIPIENT creates any copyrightable materials or invents any patentable property, the RECIPIENT may copyright or patent the same but the DEPARTMENT retains a royalty-free, nonexclusive and irrevocable license to reproduce, publish, recover or otherwise use the material(s) or property and to authorize others to use the same for federal, state or local government purposes. Where federal funding is involved, the federal government may have a proprietary interest in patent rights to any inventions that are developed by the RECIPIENT as provided in 35 U.S.C. 200-212. 2. Publications. When the RECIPIENT or persons employed by the RECIPIENT use or publish information of the DEPARTMENT; present papers, lectures, or seminars involving information supplied by the DEPARTMENT; use logos, reports, maps or other data, in printed reports, signs, brochures, pamphlets, etc., appropriate credit shall be given to the DEPARTMENT. 3. Tangible Property Rights. The DEPARTMENT's current edition of "Administrative Requirements for Ecology Grants and Loans", Part V, shall control the use and disposition of all real and personal property purchased wholly or in part with funds furnished by the DEPARTMENT in the absence of state, federal statute(s), regulation(s), or policy(s) to the contrary or upon specific instructions with respect thereto in the Scope of Work. 4. Personal Property Furnished by the DEPARTMENT. When the DEPARTMENT provides personal property directly to the RECIPIENT for use in performance of the project, it shall be returned to the DEPARTMENT prior to final payment by the DEPARTMENT. If said property is lost, stolen or damaged while in the RECIPIENT's possession, the DEPARTMENT shall be reimbursed in cash or by setoff by the RECIPIENT for the fair market value of such property. Packet Page 92 of 132 Grant No. G1000397 City of Edmonds 17 5. Acquisition Projects. The following provisions shall apply if the project covered by this agreement includes funds for the acquisition of land or facilities: a. Prior to disbursement of funds provided for in this agreement, the RECIPIENT shall establish that the cost of land/or facilities is fair and reasonable. b. The RECIPIENT shall provide satisfactory evidence of title or ability to acquire title for each parcel prior to disbursement of funds provided by this agreement. Such evidence may include title insurance policies, Torrens certificates, or abstracts, and attorney's opinions establishing that the land is free from any impediment, lien, or claim which would impair the uses contemplated by this agreement. 6. Conversions. Regardless of the contract termination date shown on the cover sheet, the RECIPIENT shall not at any time convert any equipment, property or facility acquired or developed pursuant to this agreement to uses other than those for which assistance was originally approved without prior written approval of the DEPARTMENT. Such approval may be conditioned upon payment to the DEPARTMENT of that portion of the proceeds of the sale, lease or other conversion or encumbrance which monies granted pursuant to this agreement bear to the total acquisition, purchase or construction costs of such property. N. SUSTAINABLE PRODUCTS In order to sustain Washington’s natural resources and ecosystems, the RECIPIENT is encouraged to implement sustainable practices where and when possible. These practices include use of clean energy, and purchase and use of sustainably produced products (e.g. recycled paper). For more information, see www.ecy.wa.gov/sustainability.. O. RECOVERY OF PAYMENTS TO RECIPIENT The right of the RECIPIENT to retain monies paid to it as reimbursement payments is contingent upon satisfactory performance of this agreement including the satisfactory completion of the project described in the Scope of Work. In the event the RECIPIENT fails, for any reason, to perform obligations required of it by this agreement, the RECIPIENT may, at the DEPARTMENT's sole discretion, be required to repay to the DEPARTMENT all grant/loan funds disbursed to the RECIPIENT for those parts of the project that are rendered worthless in the opinion of the DEPARTMENT by such failure to perform. Interest shall accrue at the rate of twelve percent (12%) per year from the time the DEPARTMENT demands repayment of funds. If payments have been discontinued by the DEPARTMENT due to insufficient funds as in Section K.2 above, the RECIPIENT shall not be obligated to repay monies which had been paid to the RECIPIENT prior to such termination. Any property acquired under this agreement, at the option of the DEPARTMENT, may become the DEPARTMENT'S property and the RECIPIENT'S liability to repay monies shall be reduced by an amount reflecting the fair value of such property. P. PROJECT APPROVAL The extent and character of all work and services to be performed under this agreement by the RECIPIENT shall be subject to the review and approval of the DEPARTMENT through the Project Officer or other designated official to whom the RECIPIENT shall report and be responsible. In the event there is a dispute with regard to the extent and character of the work to be done, the determination of the Project Officer or other designated official as to the extent and character of the work to be done shall govern. The RECIPIENT shall have the right to appeal decisions as provided for below. Packet Page 93 of 132 Grant No. G1000397 City of Edmonds 18 Q. DISPUTES Except as otherwise provided in this agreement, any dispute concerning a question of fact arising under this agreement which is not disposed of in writing shall be decided by the Project Officer or other designated official who shall provide a written statement of decision to the RECIPIENT. The decision of the Project Officer or other designated official shall be final and conclusive unless, within thirty days from the date of receipt of such statement, the RECIPIENT mails or otherwise furnishes to the Director of the DEPARTMENT a written appeal. In connection with appeal of any proceeding under this clause, the RECIPIENT shall have the opportunity to be heard and to offer evidence in support of this appeal. The decision of the Director or duly authorized representative for the determination of such appeals shall be final and conclusive. Appeals from the Director's determination shall be brought in the Superior Court of Thurston County. Review of the decision of the Director will not be sought before either the Pollution Control Hearings Board or the Shoreline Hearings Board. Pending final decision of dispute hereunder, the RECIPIENT shall proceed diligently with the performance of this agreement and in accordance with the decision rendered. R. CONFLICT OF INTEREST No officer, member, agent, or employee of either party to this agreement who exercises any function or responsibility in the review, approval, or carrying out of this agreement, shall participate in any decision which affects his/her personal interest or the interest of any corporation, partnership or association in which he/she is, directly or indirectly interested; nor shall he/she have any personal or pecuniary interest, direct or indirect, in this agreement or the proceeds thereof. S. INDEMNIFICATION 1. The DEPARTMENT shall in no way be held responsible for payment of salaries, consultant's fees, and other costs related to the project described herein, except as provided in the Scope of Work. 2. To the extent that the Constitution and laws of the State of Washington permit, each party shall indemnify and hold the other harmless from and against any liability for any or all injuries to persons or property arising from the negligent act or omission of that party or that party's agents or employees arising out of this agreement. T. GOVERNING LAW This agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Washington. U. SEVERABILITY If any provision of this agreement or any provision of any document incorporated by reference shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions of this agreement which can be given effect without the invalid provision, and to this end the provisions of this agreement are declared to be severable. V. PRECEDENCE In the event of inconsistency in this agreement, unless otherwise provided herein, the inconsistency shall be resolved by giving precedence in the following order: (a) applicable Federal and State statutes and regulations; (b) Scope of Work; (c) Special Terms and Conditions; (d) Any terms incorporated herein by reference including the "Administrative Requirements for Ecology Grants and Loans"; and (e) the General Terms and Conditions. Packet Page 94 of 132 Grant No. G1000397 City of Edmonds 19 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties sign this Agreement: STATE OF WASHINGTON CITY OF EDMONDS DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY __________________________________ _____________________________ Laurie G. Davies Date Signatory Date Program Manager Waste 2 Resources ______________________________ Printed Name and Title of Signatory Approved as to form only Assistant Attorney General Packet Page 95 of 132 AM-2741 2.G. Senior Center Recreational Services Agreement 2010 Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:01/26/2010 Submitted By:Brian McIntosh Time:Consent Department:Parks and Recreation Type:Action Review Committee: Committee Action: Information Subject Title Senior Center Recreational Services Agreement for 2010 for the South Snohomish County Senior Center. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Authorize Mayor to sign the agreement. Previous Council Action none Narrative The City of Edmonds has a long-standing relationship with the South Snohomish County Senior Center to assist in providing recreational services at the Senior Center. Annually the City of Edmonds agrees to contribute to the recreational services and programs provided by the Senior Center to benefit Edmonds citizens. $60,000 was budgeted for both 2009 and 2010 in the current adopted City budget. There are no major changes in the 2010 Agreement. Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Recreation Services Agreement Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 01/21/2010 09:21 AM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 01/21/2010 10:04 AM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 01/21/2010 10:21 AM APRV Form Started By: Brian McIntosh  Started On: 01/21/2010 08:48 AM Final Approval Date: 01/21/2010 Packet Page 96 of 132 RECREATIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT 2010 BETWEEN THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON AND THE SOUTH COUNTY SENIOR CENTER The following is an agreement between the CITY OF EDMONDS, Washington (hereinafter referred to as the "City"), a municipal corporation, and the SOUTH COUNTY SENIOR CENTER, INC. (hereinafter referred to as the "Senior Center"), a non-profit organization organized under the laws of the State of Washington. W I T N E S S E T H 1. The City agrees to pay the Senior Center for the calendar year 2010 the sum of sixty thousand dollars ($60,000) in equal installments of five thousand dollars ($5,000) on or before the fifteenth of each month. 2. In consideration of said funds the Senior Center agrees to provide and augment the recreational activities of the City by providing recreational and social service programs to senior citizens of Edmonds. The parties agree that it is to the mutual benefit of both signators hereto to have the Senior Center plan and program said recreational and social service activities for senior citizens of Edmonds rather than the City establishing a separate recreational program of its own due to the economies and efficiencies that may be achieved by such mutual cooperation between the parties. All programs of the Center shall be available to eligible Edmonds citizens at the same cost, if any, or at a reduced rate below that to which such programs are available to the general senior population. 3. The funds received by the Senior Center under this Agreement shall be used exclusively for the purposes of providing recreational and social service programs or to help fund recreational classes and social service programs for senior citizens of Edmonds for the calendar year 2010. Any funds not so used shall be refunded to the City and the failure to utilize the funds for the purposes enumerated in this agreement shall be grounds for termination of this agreement without notice by the City. The Senior Center shall account for the expenditures of all such funds received by it from the City on an annual or more frequent basis and shall provide a statement in the form prescribed by the City through its Finance Director, or other authorized official, evidencing the nature and manner of expenditures of these funds and providing the City with substantiation that these funds have been used for the purposes enumerated. The Senior Center shall maintain its financial records in accordance with generally accepted accounting practice and shall make such records available for inspection during normal business hours by the City, the State Auditor or their designee(s). In the event the Senior Center expends any of these funds for purposes other than enumerated, and such expenditures are deemed to be a violation of the provisions of the Constitution or the laws of the State of Washington, the City may, at its alternative, {WSS759635.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } 1 Packet Page 97 of 132 4. The Senior Center agrees to protect, indemnify and save the City, its officers, agents and employees harmless from and against any and all injury or damage to the City or its property, and also from and against all claims, demands and causes of action of every kind and character arising directly or indirectly or in any way incident to, in connection with, or arising out of or under the terms of this Agreement, caused by the fault of the Senior Center, its agents, employees, representatives or subcontractors. The Senior Center specifically promises to indemnify the City against claims or suits brought under Title 51 RCW by his employees or subcontractors and waives any immunity that the Senior Center may have under that title with respect to the City. The Senior Center further agrees to fully indemnify the City from and against any and all costs of defending any such claim or demand to the end that the City is held harmless therefrom. This section shall not apply to damages or claims resulting from the sole negligence of the City, in which event the laws of the State of Washington shall govern the parties’ respective liabilities. 5. The Senior Center shall secure and maintain in full force and effect during performance of all work pursuant to this agreement a policy of comprehensive general liability insurance providing coverage of at least $1,000,000 per occurrence and $3,000,000 aggregate for personal injury; $250,000 per occurrence and aggregate for property damage. Such policy shall list the City as a named insured and shall include a provision prohibiting cancellation of said policy except upon thirty (30) days written notice to the City. Certificates of coverage shall be delivered to the City within fifteen (15) days of execution of this document. 6. The Senior Center shall be and is an independent contractor and nothing herein shall be interpreted to create an employment relationship between the City and the Senior Center or with any employee of either the City or the Senior Center with respect to employees of the other party. The Senior Center agrees to hold harmless and indemnify the City from any and all employee related costs arising from or out of a claim by any of its employees against the City of Edmonds for wages, costs or benefits relating to such employee's employment by the Senior Center. 7. The Senior Center agrees to maintain current records containing the residence addresses of the persons who utilize the services during the calendar year of the contract and provide a yearend report on total number of Edmonds residents accessing services and the true and actual numbers of service hours provided to all clientele. 8. Either party may terminate this Agreement without cause upon providing 30 days written notice to the other Party; PROVIDED, that the City may terminate this Agreement effective immediately for breach of paragraph 3 or 5. Termination shall not affect the Senior Center’s obligation to protect, indemnify, and hold harmless the City as provided hereunder. This agreement shall be automatically renewed for each successive year unless revoked in writing by one of the parties prior to November 30th of the current year; unless terminated as provided herein. {WSS759635.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } 2 Packet Page 98 of 132 {WSS759635.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } 3 DATED this _______ day of ____________, 2010. CITY OF EDMONDS: SOUTH COUNTY SENIOR CENTER, INC. By: Mayor Gary Haakenson Its: ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Sandra S. Chase, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY By: W. Scott Snyder Packet Page 99 of 132 AM-2744 3. Planning Board Confirmation Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:01/26/2010 Submitted By:Linda Carl Submitted For:Gary Haakenson Time:10 Minutes Department:Mayor's Office Type:Action Review Committee: Committee Action: Information Subject Title Confirmation of Mayor's appointment to the Planning Board. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Previous Council Action The Council rejected the Mayor's previous appointment of Lois Broadway for the appointment to the Planning Board; therefore, the Mayor reviewed those who interviewed and now has selected Kristiana Johnson for appointment. Narrative Kristiana will fill the alternate position, which expires in December 2012. Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Application Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 01/21/2010 01:11 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 01/21/2010 01:15 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 01/21/2010 01:20 PM APRV Form Started By: Linda Carl  Started On: 01/21/2010 12:00 PM Final Approval Date: 01/21/2010 Packet Page 100 of 132 Packet Page 101 of 132 AM-2747 4. Update on the 2010 Budget Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:01/26/2010 Submitted By:Sandy Chase Submitted For:Mayor Gary Haakenson Time:15 Minutes Department:City Clerk's Office Type:Information Review Committee: Committee Action: Information Subject Title Update on the 2010 Budget (Mayor Haakenson). Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Previous Council Action Narrative Mayor Haakenson will give a report on the 2010 Budget at this evening's meeting. Fiscal Impact Attachments No file(s) attached. Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 01/21/2010 03:00 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 01/21/2010 03:05 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 01/21/2010 03:08 PM APRV Form Started By: Sandy Chase  Started On: 01/21/2010 02:57 PM Final Approval Date: 01/21/2010 Packet Page 102 of 132 AM-2743 5. Municipal Court Annual Report Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:01/26/2010 Submitted By:Doug Fair Time:15 Minutes Department:Municipal Court Type:Information Review Committee: Committee Action: Information Subject Title Municipal Court 2009 Annual Report. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Previous Council Action Narrative Please refer to the attached 2009 Annual Report and charts. Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: 2009 Annual Report Link: 2009 Annual Report Charts Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 01/21/2010 01:11 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 01/21/2010 01:15 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 01/21/2010 01:20 PM APRV Form Started By: Doug Fair  Started On: 01/21/2010 11:05 AM Final Approval Date: 01/21/2010 Packet Page 103 of 132 EDMONDS MUNICIPAL COURT 2009 COUNCIL REPORT _______________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ Filings Our filings have increased over the past five years. However, our 2009 year-end total of 7,853 exceeded the total filings from 2008 by only 71 filings. This represents a leveling of the growth we have experienced since 2005. Revenues and Expenses In 2009 our gross revenues totaled $1,247,883. This was a minute increase in gross revenues of $4,309 over 2008. Given the economic downturn of 2009, I am pleased that our gross revenues remained stable. The resulting net revenue, after reimbursements to the State, was $865,657. On the expense side of the ledger, the Court spent $724,975 which was about 4% below our original budget estimate. As a result, net revenues exceeded expenditures in 2009 by $140,682. This is an increase of about 8% over 2008. This year, at the suggestion of Council, I compared expenses to the original budget, not the adjusted budget so there are larger variations then in past reports. The expense categories that are substantially over budget are in minor equipment and repair and maintenance. There were a couple of items in these categories that should have been allocated to repair and maintenance judicial as they were purchased from court improvement funds. If we allocate those Packet Page 104 of 132 funds to the appropriate category, then minor equipment comes in under budget and repair/maint goes from 452% over budget to 142% over budget. This was not done this year because the repair and maintenance judicial category was a new category that was added after these items had been categorized. Passports Since March of 2002, when the Edmonds Municipal Court received its Passport Agent Designation Certificate from the US Bureau of Consular Affairs, we have processed 8,566 passport applications. Going into last year we were uncertain as to the demand for passports due to the uncertainty regarding the Olympics, passport requirements and license requirements for cross-border traffic. The new licenses that meet federal requirements appear to have lowered the demand for passports. Last year, the Court processed only 800 applications, grossing $20,000. That is the lowest revenue generated by the passport program since its inception in 2002. EHM and SCRAM Monitoring The Edmonds Municipal Court utilizes Electronic Home Monitoring (EHM) as a jail alternative. This enables the judge to be more flexible when determining jail options. EHM eligibility is determined by using written criteria based on a statutory scheme developed for felony offenses. We monitor some EHM through our probation department. A defendant pays the Court $15 a day for the EHM equipment that the court rents for $5.75, leaving a $9.75 monetary gain per diem. The amount a defendant pays is based on a sliding scale so that those who are less fortunate still have the opportunity to receive EHM. In 2009 Packet Page 105 of 132 income exceeded expenses by $7,814 and 40 defendants utilized this program saving 1,266 jail days. We also outsource some EHM because of equipment compatibility issues. We do not collect any money on the outsourced EHM. However, we do save the amount of money that would be spent were these defendants in jail. In 2009 53 defendants used the outsourced EHM program saving 1,334 jail days. We also use an alcohol sensor-monitoring bracelet called a SCRAM bracelet. This device routinely monitors a defendant for the consumption of alcohol and immediately reports any violations. This is a useful tool in providing a pre-trial release option for defendants who might otherwise be held in custody. In 2009 36 defendants utilized this program saving 3,884 jail days. In 2009 the City of Edmonds paid $61.11 a day for a defendant who was incarcerated in the Snohomish County Jail. In addition, every time a defendant reports to the Snohomish County Jail a one-time booking fee of $90.76 is charged to the City. The City of Lynnwood charged $65 a day with a $10 booking fee. These expenses were saved when EHM or SCRAM is ordered in lieu of jail. In 2009, 129 defendants served 6,484 days using EHM and SCRAM. Using the most conservative estimates ($61.11 a day without booking fees) the citizens of Edmonds saved $396,237 had all of those days been served in jail. In reality, not all of those days would be saved. Some of the EHM is required by statute on DUI and physical control cases. We did not track those separately but we will do so for 2010 and beyond. Also, some of the SCRAM defendants may have made bail so they would not have been in custody for the entire time they were on a SCRAM bracelet. Packet Page 106 of 132 Community Service In addition to EHM, the Court offers community service options to defendants. A defendant may provide eight hours of service to a local non-profit agency in lieu of a day of jail. Community Service is ideal for a defendant who has received a short jail sentence on a minor offense. It provides an excellent alternative to using jail space and spending tax dollars to house offenders. This program provides an opportunity to “give-back” to our community. In 2009, 263 defendants provided 9,836 hours of community service. This was a savings of 1,229 jail days and saved the City $74,921 in jail costs. This is a large increase over past reports. Part of this was an increase in use and part was an effort on our part of tracking the days more accurately. Court Improvement Account Funds As you may recall, the City receives money from the State by virtue of having the judicial position an elected position. The City has received $29,911 from the State since 2006. This money has been set aside in a court improvement account. To date, $21,304.39 has been expensed from this account. Between 2006 and 2008 these funds were used to make the following improvements:  Pour concrete steps and handrail outside the back entrance to the administrative office.  Provide a keyless entry to the backdoor and chambers.  Reconfigure the probation office for increased safety by routing probationers through an outside door, not the main entrance to the Court’s administrative office.  Offset payments on an update to the security alarm system used in the public safety facility. Packet Page 107 of 132 In 2009 we purchased “panic buttons” for use by clerks and the judge. These buttons notify emergency dispatch that there is an emergency in this room and to dispatch officers to the courtroom facility. These alarms can be made available to the council or hearings examiners for use during their public meetings in this room. In addition, we purchased wireless headsets for three staff members. These staff members spend a significant amount of time on the phone. The wireless headsets enabled them to continue to move about the office while still on the phone. They are able to copy documents and retrieve files without being tethered to their desks. Finally, and most importantly, we purchased all of the equipment necessary to conduct video hearings with the Snohomish County jail. This will serve numerous purposes: It will increase the number of calendars for incarcerated individuals and hopefully reduce the jail budget; it should reduce the transportation costs of bringing prisoners down here; and it will increase the safety factor as we will be bringing far fewer prisoners down to court. The increase in the number of calendars may result in a request for a contract renegotiation from the Prosecutor and the Public Defender. They currently staff one in-custody calendar per week. There will be two video calendars on a weekly basis. Staffing and Workload The Court employs an administrator, a probation clerk and five full- time clerks. The part-time clerk resigned her position in March and, due to the budget situation, she was not replaced. In 2005 the staff processed 5,318 cases. In 2009 we processed 7,853 cases. That is an increase of 47% over five years. The Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) has calculated the judicial Packet Page 108 of 132 workload to be .93 of a judicial full-time equivalent (FTE). It is currently set at .55 judicial FTE. Not only has the Court been able to absorb the increased caseload without an increase in staffing or increasing the judicial FTE percentage, we are actually doing it with less staffing and less experienced staff. As you may recall, we hired two replacement clerks at the end of 2008. It generally takes about five years to fully train a court clerk. However, these new clerks hit the ground running and have done a great job. These new clerks, together with a very experienced cadre of existing clerks, have done an exemplary job in meeting an ever-increasing workload. Even if case levels continue to rise, we may not need to request a staff increase in the near future. Part of this optimism stems from the pending implementation of electronic ticketing. This will provide staff time-savings because the ticket information will be entered only once: electronically by the officer at the time the citation is issued. Currently, clerks must reenter all the information into the database once a ticket is filed with the Court. Despite this optimism, the Court cannot continue to absorb increases in workload indefinitely. If caseloads continue to rise then staffing issues will need to be addressed at some point. The disparity between the current judicial FTE and the AOC calculated workload should also be addressed in the next year or two. Packet Page 109 of 132 F I L I N G S CO M P A R I S O N O F Y E A R T O Y E A R F I L I N G S FI L I N G S J a n F e b M a r c h A p r i l M a y J u n e J u l y A u g S e p t O c t N o v D e c T o t a l 20 0 9 5 7 0 7 3 4 8 0 5 6 0 9 7 0 9 7 1 5 6 4 8 5 1 5 7 9 3 5 3 5 6 9 7 5 2 3 7 , 8 5 3 20 0 8 7 2 1 7 3 8 7 2 1 5 8 0 6 8 8 6 6 2 6 5 0 4 9 5 7 8 4 6 1 5 5 7 5 5 5 3 7 , 7 8 2 20 0 7 5 0 1 5 5 0 5 7 5 4 6 8 5 1 2 5 1 7 4 7 5 5 1 1 4 3 0 5 7 0 5 3 4 3 6 7 6 , 0 1 0 20 0 6 8 8 1 7 6 7 6 5 7 5 7 1 7 7 3 6 0 8 6 1 6 5 6 5 4 1 0 4 9 9 4 2 0 4 2 7 7 , 1 9 4 20 0 5 3 3 4 3 2 8 3 6 4 3 5 5 4 7 9 5 2 2 3 7 9 3 8 5 4 3 5 6 2 2 5 4 8 5 6 7 5 , 3 1 8 Pa c k e t Pa g e 11 0 of 13 2 CA S E F I L I N G S B Y Y E A R F O R 2 0 0 5 T O 2 0 0 9 20 0 9 I T I N P P D W I C T C N T O T A L 20 0 8 I T I N P P D W I C T C N T O T A L Ja n 31 1 6 1 1 5 1 3 7 8 4 7 5 7 0 Ja n 54 1 9 2 3 1 6 7 6 5 6 7 2 1 Fe b 49 0 6 8 2 1 1 8 4 6 1 7 3 4 Fe b 56 5 1 7 3 3 1 1 6 6 4 6 7 3 8 Ma r 59 5 1 1 6 3 1 0 7 2 5 4 8 0 5 Ma r 49 1 8 4 4 1 7 1 0 7 5 4 7 2 1 Ap r 38 7 3 1 0 4 8 5 5 5 2 6 0 9 A pr 39 1 4 3 3 9 8 3 6 0 5 8 0 Ma y 5 0 1 2 9 3 9 5 9 4 5 7 0 9 Ma y 4 7 0 6 5 9 1 6 7 1 6 6 6 8 8 Ju n e 4 3 6 6 1 1 8 1 0 6 5 8 0 7 1 5 Ju n e 4 1 1 7 9 8 1 6 6 8 6 2 6 6 2 Ju l 36 3 9 1 3 7 8 6 8 6 3 6 4 8 Ju l 27 8 9 1 8 3 1 3 9 3 7 4 6 5 0 Au g 25 1 4 1 3 7 1 2 5 7 5 4 5 1 5 A ug 22 5 7 1 4 5 1 0 5 1 5 7 4 9 5 Se p 36 6 2 2 8 2 1 3 6 1 6 9 7 9 3 Se p 53 7 1 1 1 0 8 6 7 2 5 0 7 8 4 Oc t 34 9 8 6 8 1 1 4 6 5 3 5 3 5 Oc t 32 4 4 1 5 0 1 3 5 9 6 5 6 1 5 No v 35 9 3 1 8 6 1 0 6 8 7 1 6 9 7 No v 31 3 5 1 2 6 5 6 5 6 1 5 7 5 De c 2 7 1 9 1 2 6 8 5 8 5 1 5 2 3 D e c 3 9 3 3 3 9 7 5 5 5 6 5 5 3 TO T A L S 4 6 7 9 6 9 1 5 1 1 1 2 3 7 7 1 7 0 0 7 8 5 3 T O T A L S 4 9 3 9 9 0 1 0 4 1 1 3 9 8 6 6 7 0 7 7 7 8 2 20 0 7 I T I N P P D W I C T C N T O T A L 2 0 0 6 I T I N P P D W I C T C N T O T A L Ja n 1 6 8 5 2 1 5 1 6 5 3 4 4 5 0 1 J a n 5 0 5 9 2 4 9 2 3 5 1 4 4 8 8 1 Fe b 2 4 8 3 1 8 9 8 5 4 4 8 5 5 0 F e b 3 6 0 1 1 3 1 2 6 5 1 2 7 7 6 7 Ma r 2 5 7 5 1 8 3 1 0 6 4 5 6 5 7 5 M a r 3 4 8 9 1 7 5 2 0 4 6 5 9 6 5 7 Ap r 2 3 6 4 1 0 6 9 6 8 4 5 4 6 8 A pr 27 9 6 2 0 0 1 5 3 9 3 2 5 7 1 Ma y 3 5 4 3 4 6 1 4 5 7 3 8 5 1 2 Ma y 46 5 6 1 7 7 9 6 8 4 8 7 7 3 Ju n e 3 3 7 6 5 7 6 6 0 5 1 5 1 7 Ju n 30 1 1 1 8 9 1 3 5 1 5 3 6 0 8 Ju l 27 6 1 0 5 5 1 0 5 5 6 9 4 7 5 Ju l 28 2 8 1 8 6 8 6 0 7 2 6 1 6 Au g 30 1 9 9 0 1 0 5 5 4 6 5 1 1 A ug 26 2 6 1 8 6 1 9 4 6 4 6 5 6 5 Se p 24 1 1 7 6 9 1 1 4 7 4 5 4 3 0 Se p 14 6 6 1 6 6 1 0 4 1 4 1 4 1 0 Oc t 35 9 9 6 7 8 7 8 4 9 5 7 0 Oc t 22 2 2 1 5 6 1 2 5 4 5 3 4 9 9 No v 35 2 1 8 4 2 1 6 5 9 4 7 5 3 4 No v 18 1 0 1 5 8 1 4 3 3 3 4 4 2 0 De c 19 9 7 3 4 9 8 1 3 7 3 6 7 De c 20 0 5 1 1 0 1 4 4 6 5 2 4 2 7 TO T A L S 3, 3 2 8 9 6 1 , 1 5 3 1 2 7 7 3 1 5 7 5 6 , 0 1 0 TO T A L S 3, 5 5 1 6 9 2 , 2 6 4 1 6 3 5 8 6 5 6 1 7 , 1 9 4 20 0 5 I T I N P P D W I C T C N T O T A L Ja n 24 4 2 1 8 5 2 2 4 3 3 3 4 Fe b 22 3 4 3 4 6 2 4 3 7 3 2 8 Ma r 23 2 5 2 6 1 5 3 2 5 4 3 6 4 Ap r 23 1 1 3 6 5 3 0 5 2 3 5 5 Ma y 36 0 5 2 0 6 2 6 6 2 4 7 9 Ju n 38 9 5 2 7 9 2 2 7 0 5 2 2 Ju l 21 4 8 3 6 5 2 8 8 8 3 7 9 Au g 25 7 1 2 2 8 6 1 6 6 6 3 8 5 Se p 30 4 1 0 3 7 3 1 5 6 6 4 3 5 Oc t 19 8 8 3 2 5 7 2 9 5 5 6 2 2 No v 21 2 7 2 4 0 9 2 9 5 1 5 4 8 De c 17 1 1 2 2 9 9 8 2 3 5 4 5 6 7 TO T A L S 3 , 0 3 5 7 9 1 , 1 2 6 8 4 2 9 6 6 9 8 5 , 3 1 8 I T I n f r a c t i o n T r a f f i c , IN I n f r a c t i o n N o n - T r a f f i c , PP Pa r k i n g , DW I D r i v i n g W h i l e I n t o x i c a t e d , CT Cr i m i n a l T r a f f i c , CN Cr i m i n a l N o n - T r a f f i c Pa c k e t Pa g e 11 1 of 13 2 R E V E N U E S CO M P A R I S O N O F Y E A R T O Y E A R R E V E N U E S CH E C K J a n F e b M a r c h A p r i l M a y J u n e J u l y A u g S e p t O c t N o v D e c T o t a l 20 0 9 1 0 6 , 5 5 9 9 8 , 1 2 3 1 2 3 , 7 4 0 1 1 3 , 8 7 3 1 0 3 , 3 2 0 1 5 7 , 5 7 8 6 5 , 0 4 7 9 1 , 6 1 3 9 6 , 4 9 6 9 6 , 9 8 6 8 5 , 1 6 3 1 0 9 , 3 8 5 1 , 2 4 7 , 8 8 3 20 0 8 8 8 , 2 9 6 1 1 4 , 9 9 0 1 0 8 , 6 3 2 1 1 2 , 6 8 2 1 1 3 , 5 6 6 1 0 2 , 7 4 3 1 1 8 , 6 4 4 9 7 , 3 0 3 9 3 , 5 2 5 1 1 7 , 0 7 0 8 4 , 7 6 7 9 1 , 3 5 6 1 , 2 4 3 , 5 7 4 20 0 7 7 6 , 8 9 1 7 3 , 1 9 2 8 3 , 4 8 7 7 7 , 8 9 4 7 9 , 3 8 4 8 7 , 7 4 6 8 7 , 5 7 9 9 2 , 4 9 6 9 0 , 8 8 6 9 4 , 2 6 7 8 5 , 3 2 4 8 4 , 2 1 8 1 , 0 1 3 , 3 6 3 20 0 6 6 8 , 7 4 6 9 7 , 7 4 7 8 5 , 7 1 1 7 9 , 7 5 1 7 8 , 7 9 1 8 5 , 3 0 5 8 1 , 9 8 0 9 3 , 5 3 3 8 1 , 9 5 5 7 4 , 0 3 5 5 9 , 6 4 4 6 1 , 8 7 7 9 4 9 , 0 7 5 20 0 5 4 3 , 9 3 4 5 6 , 8 4 0 6 8 , 0 4 6 5 3 , 9 4 0 5 5 , 6 9 3 5 5 , 7 5 7 5 1 , 4 8 2 6 9 , 6 3 4 6 3 , 8 1 4 6 0 , 7 0 9 7 3 , 4 9 2 6 4 , 1 9 8 7 1 7 , 5 3 9 Pa c k e t Pa g e 11 2 of 13 2 E D M O N D S M U N I C I P A L C O U R T R E V E N U E S T A T U S 0 1 / 0 1 / 0 9 t o 1 2 / 3 1 / 0 9 E D M O N D S M U N I C I P A L C O U R T R E V E N U E S A p p r o p r i a t i o n Y e a r - t o - D a t e B a l a n c e P r c t C o l l e c t e d 3 3 6 . 0 1 0 . 2 9 0 . 0 0 J U D I C I A L S A L A R Y C O N T R I B U T I O N - S T A T E 1 3 , 0 0 0 9 , 7 1 7 3 , 2 8 3 7 4 . 7 5 % 3 3 6 . 0 6 0 . 2 6 0 . 0 0 C R I M I N A L J U S T I C E - S P E C I A L P R O G R A M S 3 1 , 7 9 3 3 3 , 5 6 1 - 1 , 7 6 8 1 0 5 . 5 6 % 3 3 6 . 0 6 0 . 5 1 0 . 0 0 D U I - C I T I E S 7 , 3 3 7 1 3 , 3 3 3 - 5 , 9 9 6 1 8 1 . 7 2 % 3 3 8 . 1 2 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 S H A R E D C O U R T C O S T S 9 , 0 0 0 3 , 0 4 8 5 , 9 5 2 3 3 . 8 7 % 3 4 1 . 3 2 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 C O U R T R E C O R D S E R V I C E S 9 0 0 3 3 8 6 7 3 . 7 1 % 3 4 1 . 6 2 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 M U N I C . - D I S T . C O U R T C U R R E X P E N 6 0 0 2 7 7 3 2 3 4 6 . 2 3 % 3 4 1 . 9 9 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 P A S S P O R T S A N D N A T U R A L I Z A T I O N F E E S 3 0 , 0 0 0 2 1 , 0 2 5 8 , 9 7 5 70.08% 3 4 2 . 3 3 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 A D U L T P R O B A T I O N S E R V I C E C H A R G E 1 1 9 , 0 0 0 9 9 , 2 1 7 1 9 , 7 8 3 83.38% 3 4 2 . 3 6 0 . 0 1 0 . 0 0 E L E C T R O N I C M O N I T O R I N G 1 9 , 0 0 0 1 2 , 5 8 8 6 , 4 1 2 66.25% 3 4 2 . 3 6 0 . 0 3 0 . 0 0 E L E C T R O N I C M O N I T O R D U I 1 0 , 0 0 0 3 , 6 9 6 6 , 3 0 4 36.96% 3 4 2 . 3 7 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 B O O K I N G F E E S 6 , 9 0 0 7 , 6 1 2 - 7 1 2 1 1 0 . 3 2 % 3 4 2 . 9 0 0 . 0 2 0 . 0 0 C R I M C O N V F E E D U I 6 , 7 0 0 7 1 7 5 , 9 8 3 10.70% 3 4 2 . 9 0 0 . 0 2 0 . 0 0 C R I M C O N V F E E C T 4 , 4 0 0 7 , 2 8 2 - 2 , 8 8 2 1 6 5 . 5 0 % 3 4 2 . 9 0 0 . 0 3 0 . 0 0 C R I M C O N V F E E C N 1 , 9 0 0 3 , 2 3 4 - 1 , 3 3 4 1 7 0 . 2 1 % 3 5 2 . 3 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 P R O O F O F V E H I C L E I N S P E N A L T Y 1 0 , 0 0 0 9 , 2 9 3 7 0 7 92.93% 3 5 3 . 1 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 T R A F F I C I N F R A C T I O N P E N A L T I E S 5 6 , 0 0 0 6 3 , 6 3 5 - 7 , 6 3 5 1 1 3 . 6 3 % 3 5 3 . 1 0 0 . 0 2 0 . 0 0 B C T R A F F I C I N F R A C T I O N 2 6 0 , 0 0 0 2 8 7 , 2 6 5 - 2 7 , 2 6 5 1 1 0 . 4 9 % 3 5 3 . 7 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 N O N - T R A F F I C I N F R A C T I O N P E N A L T I E S 6 , 0 0 0 6 , 6 4 7 - 6 4 7 1 1 0 . 7 8 % 3 5 3 . 7 0 0 . 0 2 0 . 0 0 O T H E R I N F R A C T I O N S ' 0 4 5 0 0 1 , 7 6 6 - 1 , 2 6 6 3 5 3 . 2 0 % 3 5 4 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 P A R K I N G I N F R A C T I O N P E N A L T I E S 1 2 , 0 0 0 3 9 , 0 2 5 - 2 7 , 0 2 5 3 2 5 . 2 1 % 3 5 4 . 0 0 0 . 0 1 0 . 0 0 P R - H A N D I C A P P E D 7 , 0 0 0 4 , 4 2 5 2 , 5 7 5 63.21% 3 5 4 . 0 0 0 . 0 3 0 . 0 0 P A R K I N G I N F R A C T I O N L O C 1 0 0 4 2 0 - 3 2 0 4 2 0 . 0 0 % 3 5 5 . 2 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 D W I P E N A L T I E S 6 , 0 0 0 8 , 1 0 9 - 2 , 1 0 9 1 3 5 . 1 5 % 3 5 5 . 8 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 O T H E R C R I M I N A L T R A F M I S D E M P E N 2 , 0 0 0 1 7 0 1 , 8 3 0 8.50% 3 5 5 . 8 0 0 . 0 1 0 . 0 0 C R I M I N A L T R A F F I C M I S D E M E A N O R 8 / 0 3 4 7 , 0 0 0 5 4 , 5 3 3 - 7 , 5 3 3 1 1 6 . 0 3 % 3 5 6 . 9 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 O T H E R N O N - T R A F M I S D E M E A N O R P E N 1 , 6 0 0 6 0 5 9 9 5 37.81% 3 5 6 . 9 0 0 . 0 4 0 . 0 0 O T H E R N O N T R A F F I C M I S D . 8 / 0 3 1 3 , 0 0 0 1 3 , 5 0 8 - 5 0 8 1 0 3 . 9 1 % 3 5 6 . 9 0 0 . 0 8 0 . 0 0 C O U R T D V P E N A L T Y A S S E S S M E N T 9 0 0 1 , 7 2 8 - 8 2 8 1 9 2 . 0 0 % 3 5 7 . 3 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 C R I M I N A L C O S T S - R E C O U P M E N T S 1 1 0 , 0 0 0 1 0 7 , 0 8 1 2 , 9 1 9 97.35% 3 5 7 . 3 1 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 J U R Y D E M A N D C O S T 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0.00% 3 5 7 . 3 3 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 P U B L I C D E F E N S E R E C O U P M E N T 3 5 , 0 0 0 3 6 , 8 9 4 - 1 , 8 9 4 1 0 5 . 4 1 % 3 5 7 . 3 5 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 C O U R T I N T E R P R E T E R C O S T 3 0 0 3 4 5 - 4 5 1 1 5 . 0 0 % 3 5 9 . 9 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 M I S C F I N E S A N D P E N A L T I E S 2 5 , 0 0 0 1 3 , 9 4 6 1 1 , 0 5 4 55.78% 3 6 9 . 9 0 0 . 0 3 0 . 0 0 N S F F E E S - M U N I C I P A L C O U R T 5 0 0 9 2 0 - 4 2 0 1 8 4 . 0 0 % G r a n d T o t a l 8 5 3 , 5 3 0 8 6 5 , 6 5 7 - 1 2 , 1 2 7 1 0 1 . 4 2 % Pa c k e t Pa g e 11 3 of 13 2 E D M O N D S M U N I C I P A L C O U R T E X P E N D I T U R E S T A T U S R E P O R T 0 1 / 0 1 / 0 9 T H R O U G H 1 2 / 3 1 / 2 0 0 9 2 3 0 . 5 1 2 . 5 0 0 C O U R T O F F I C E A p p r o p r i a t i o n Y e a r - t o - D a t e E x p e n d i t u r e s B a l a n c e P r c t U s e d 2 3 0 . 5 1 2 . 5 0 0 . 1 1 0 . 0 0 S A L A R I E S 3 8 2 , 5 2 6 3 4 1 , 6 5 3 4 0 , 8 7 3 8 9 . 3 1 % 2 3 0 . 5 1 2 . 5 0 0 . 1 2 0 . 0 0 O V E R T I M E 1 , 8 0 0 1 , 1 5 3 6 4 7 6 4 . 0 6 % 2 3 0 . 5 1 2 . 5 0 0 . 2 3 0 . 0 0 B E N E F I T S 1 1 8 , 7 4 6 1 0 0 , 9 8 8 1 7 , 7 5 8 8 5 . 0 5 % 2 3 0 . 5 1 2 . 5 0 0 . 3 1 0 . 0 0 S U P P L I E S 6 , 0 0 0 7 , 4 2 0 - 1 , 4 2 0 1 2 3 . 6 7 % 2 3 0 . 5 1 2 . 5 0 0 . 3 5 0 . 0 0 M I N O R E Q U I P M E N T 1 , 5 0 0 4 , 0 3 8 - 2 , 5 3 8 269.20% 2 3 0 . 5 1 2 . 5 0 0 . 4 1 0 . 0 0 P R O F E S S I O N A L S E R V I C E S 2 7 , 0 0 0 3 0 , 0 5 8 - 3 , 0 5 8 111.33% 2 3 0 . 5 1 2 . 5 0 0 . 4 1 0 . 0 1 P R O F S V C S - I N T E R P R E T E R 1 6 , 0 0 0 1 9 , 3 7 7 - 3 , 3 7 7 121.11% 2 3 0 . 5 1 2 . 5 0 0 . 4 2 0 . 0 0 C O M M U N I C A T I O N S 0 1 , 3 9 4 - 1 , 3 9 4 0.00% 2 3 0 . 5 1 2 . 5 0 0 . 4 3 0 . 0 0 T R A V E L 2 , 0 0 0 9 9 9 1 , 0 0 1 49.95% 2 3 0 . 5 1 2 . 5 0 0 . 4 5 0 . 0 0 R E N T A L / L E A S E 3 0 0 1 5 4 1 4 6 51.33% 2 3 0 . 5 1 2 . 5 0 0 . 4 8 0 . 0 0 R E P A I R / M A I N T 4 5 0 2 , 0 3 6 - 1 , 5 8 6 452.44% 2 3 0 . 5 1 2 . 3 0 5 . 1 0 R E P A I R & M A I N T E N A N C E J U D I C I A L 0 8 , 5 8 0 - 8 , 5 8 0 0.00% 2 3 0 . 5 1 2 . 4 8 0 . 1 0 R E P A I R & M A I N T E N A N C E J U D I C I A L 0 2 , 5 8 8 - 2 , 5 8 8 0.00% 2 3 0 . 5 1 2 . 5 0 0 . 4 9 0 . 0 0 M I S C E L L A N E O U S 2 , 0 0 0 2 , 2 4 5 - 2 4 5 112.25% 2 3 0 . 5 1 2 . 5 4 0 . 4 9 0 . 0 0 M I S C - J U R Y 2 , 4 0 0 1 , 7 2 2 6 7 8 71.75% T O T A L C O U R T O F F I C E 5 6 0 , 7 2 2 5 2 4 , 4 0 5 3 6 , 3 1 7 93.52% 2 3 0 . 5 1 2 . 5 0 1 P R O B A T I O N 2 3 0 . 5 1 2 . 5 0 1 . 1 1 0 . 0 0 S A L A R I E S 1 0 8 , 0 1 5 1 1 1 , 0 0 1 - 2 , 9 8 6 102.76% 2 3 0 . 5 1 2 . 5 0 1 . 1 2 0 . 0 0 O V E R T I M E 1 , 0 0 0 1 , 4 0 9 - 4 0 9 140.90% 2 3 0 . 5 1 2 . 5 0 1 . 2 3 0 . 0 0 B E N E F I T S 4 6 , 4 3 3 4 8 , 3 2 9 - 1 , 8 9 6 104.08% 2 3 0 . 5 1 2 . 5 0 1 . 3 1 0 . 0 0 S U P P L I E S 1 0 , 0 0 0 1 3 , 0 8 6 - 3 , 0 8 6 130.86% 2 3 0 . 5 1 2 . 5 0 1 . 3 5 0 . 0 0 S M A L L E Q U I P M E N T 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0.00% 2 3 0 . 5 1 2 . 5 0 1 . 4 1 0 . 0 1 P R O F S V C S - I N T E R P R E T E R 1 2 , 0 0 0 1 3 , 4 1 8 - 1 , 4 1 8 111.82% 2 3 0 . 5 1 2 . 5 0 1 . 4 2 0 . 0 0 C O M M U N I C A T I O N S 0 2 0 5 - 2 0 5 0.00% 2 3 0 . 5 1 2 . 5 0 1 . 4 3 0 . 0 0 T R A V E L 5 0 0 2 2 3 2 7 7 44.60% 2 3 0 . 5 1 2 . 5 0 1 . 4 5 0 . 0 0 R E N T A L / L E A S E 1 , 7 0 0 1 , 6 1 5 8 5 95.00% 2 3 0 . 5 1 2 . 5 0 1 . 4 8 0 . 0 0 R E P A I R S & M A I N T E N A N C E 4 0 0 3 1 0 9 0 77.50% 2 3 0 . 5 1 2 . 5 0 1 . 4 9 0 . 0 0 M I S C E L L A N E O U S 4 0 0 4 8 3 - 8 3 120.75% 2 3 0 . 5 2 3 . 2 0 0 . 5 1 0 . 0 0 H O M E M O N I T O R I N G - I N T E R G O V T L S V C 1 4 , 0 0 0 1 0 , 4 9 1 3 , 5 0 9 74.94% T O T A L P R O B A T I O N 1 9 4 , 7 4 8 2 0 0 , 5 7 0 - 5 , 8 2 2 102.99% G R A N D T O T A L E D M O N D S M U N I C I P A L C O U R T 7 5 5 , 4 7 0 7 2 4 , 9 7 5 3 0 , 4 9 5 95.96% Pa c k e t Pa g e 11 4 of 13 2 P A S S P O R T R E V E N U E P A S S P O R T R E V E N U E F R O M 2 0 0 2 T O 2 0 0 9 Ye a r J a n F e b M a r c h A p r i l M a y J u n e J u l y A u g S e p t O c t N o v D e c T o t a l 20 0 9 18 7 5 1 8 2 5 2 2 0 0 1 6 2 5 2 0 0 0 2 8 0 0 1 3 2 5 1 8 2 5 1 4 0 0 1 3 2 5 5 5 0 1 2 5 0 2 0 , 0 0 0 20 0 8 3, 6 9 0 2 , 5 8 0 2 , 5 0 0 1 , 9 7 5 1 , 9 2 5 1 , 9 0 0 1 , 4 7 5 1 , 6 5 0 1 , 1 0 0 1 , 3 7 5 1 , 6 0 0 1 , 0 2 5 2 2 , 7 9 5 20 0 7 6, 2 4 0 4 , 7 1 0 4 , 3 2 0 3 , 9 0 0 3 , 0 3 0 3 , 0 9 0 2 , 6 7 0 3 , 1 8 0 1 , 7 7 0 2 , 4 9 0 1 , 5 6 0 2 , 4 3 0 3 9 , 3 9 0 2, 0 0 6 2, 8 5 0 2 , 7 0 0 3 , 0 9 0 1 , 7 8 9 1 , 8 1 1 2 , 1 3 0 1 , 9 2 0 1 , 8 9 0 1 , 6 1 0 1 , 9 6 0 2 , 3 7 0 3 , 0 0 0 2 7 , 1 2 0 2, 0 0 5 3, 1 5 0 3 , 7 8 0 3 , 8 1 0 3 , 8 7 0 3 , 5 1 0 3 , 2 1 0 2 , 5 5 0 2 , 3 1 0 1 , 8 5 0 1 , 8 9 0 1 , 2 9 0 2 , 1 3 0 3 3 , 3 5 0 2, 0 0 4 6, 3 6 0 5 , 4 3 0 5 , 2 5 0 4 , 0 8 0 3 , 1 8 0 2 , 9 1 0 3 , 5 7 0 3 , 6 0 0 2 , 3 1 0 2 , 0 7 0 2 , 3 7 0 3 , 0 9 0 $ 4 4 , 2 2 0 2, 0 0 3 1, 9 8 0 4 , 6 5 0 4 , 2 0 0 4 , 3 8 0 4 , 8 3 0 3 , 5 6 0 3 , 3 1 0 2 , 8 8 0 3 , 1 9 0 2 , 7 6 0 2 , 0 4 0 3 , 4 8 0 $ 4 1 , 2 6 0 2, 0 0 2 0 0 7 3 5 1 , 6 0 5 1 , 8 1 5 1 , 3 6 5 1 , 5 9 0 3 , 2 7 0 1 , 8 3 0 3 , 1 5 0 2 , 1 3 0 3 , 5 4 0 $ 2 1 , 0 3 0 To t a l $249,165 AP P L I C A T I O N S P R O C E S SE D F R O M 2 0 0 2 T O 2 0 0 9 Ye a r J a n F e b M a r c h A p r i l M a y J u n e J u l y A u g S e p t O c t N o v D e c T o t a l 20 0 9 75 7 3 8 8 6 5 8 0 1 1 2 5 3 7 3 5 6 5 3 2 2 5 0 8 0 0 20 0 8 12 3 1 0 3 1 0 0 7 9 7 7 7 6 5 9 6 6 4 4 5 5 6 4 4 1 8 8 7 20 0 7 20 8 1 5 7 1 4 4 1 3 0 1 0 1 1 0 3 8 9 1 0 6 5 9 8 3 5 2 8 1 1 , 3 1 3 20 0 6 95 9 0 1 0 3 6 0 6 0 7 1 6 4 6 3 5 4 6 5 7 9 1 0 0 9 0 4 20 0 5 10 5 1 2 6 1 2 7 1 2 9 1 1 7 1 0 7 8 5 7 7 6 2 6 3 4 3 7 1 1 , 1 1 2 20 0 4 21 2 1 8 1 1 7 5 1 3 6 1 0 6 9 7 1 1 9 1 2 0 7 7 6 9 7 9 1 0 3 1 , 4 7 4 2, 0 0 3 66 1 5 5 1 4 0 1 4 6 1 6 1 1 1 9 1 1 0 9 6 1 0 6 9 2 6 8 1 1 6 1 , 3 7 5 2, 0 0 2 0 0 2 5 5 4 6 1 4 6 5 3 1 0 9 6 1 1 0 5 7 1 1 1 8 7 0 1 To t a l 8,566 Pa c k e t Pa g e 11 5 of 13 2 E L E C T R O N I C H O M E M O N I T O R I N G 20 0 5 T O 2 0 0 9 E H M 2 0 0 9 E H M 2 0 0 8 Mo n t h C O S T C o l l e c t P r o f i t D a y s J a i l S a v i n g M o n t h C O S T C o l l e c t P r o f i t D a y s J a i l S a v i n g Ja n 74 2 2, 4 4 5 1 , 7 0 3 12 9 7 , 8 8 3 Ja n 1, 0 6 4 2 , 0 6 0 99 6 185 1 1 , 0 5 7 Fe b 1, 1 7 3 2, 2 5 5 1 , 0 8 2 20 4 1 2 , 4 6 6 Fe b 88 0 2 , 4 5 0 1, 5 7 0 153 9 , 1 4 5 Ma r 1, 3 1 7 4, 7 3 5 3 , 4 1 8 22 9 1 3 , 9 9 4 Ma r 99 5 2 , 1 9 0 1, 1 9 5 173 1 0 , 3 4 0 Ap r 1 , 1 4 4 1, 1 8 5 4 1 19 9 1 2 , 1 6 1 Ap r 73 6 1 , 4 7 5 73 9 128 7 , 6 5 1 M a y 7 5 9 78 5 2 6 13 2 8 , 0 6 7 Ma y 77 1 2 , 1 0 0 1, 3 3 0 134 8 , 0 0 9 Ju n 58 30 5 2 4 8 10 61 1 Ju n 77 1 1 , 6 3 5 86 5 134 8 , 0 0 9 Ju l 12 7 67 5 5 4 9 22 1 , 3 4 4 Ju l 55 2 1 , 1 4 5 59 3 96 5 , 7 3 8 Au g 3 6 8 52 0 1 5 2 64 3 , 9 1 1 Au g 31 1 1 , 1 3 5 82 5 54 3 , 2 2 8 Se p 51 8 1, 1 5 5 6 3 8 90 5 , 5 0 0 Se p 77 0 1 , 5 6 5 79 5 134 8,009 Oc t 42 0 72 6 3 0 7 73 4 , 4 6 1 O c t 78 2 6 4 5 ( 1 3 7 ) 136 7,752 No v 3 4 5 13 3 ( 2 1 2 ) 60 3 , 6 6 7 No v 39 7 - ( 3 9 7 ) 69 3,933 De c 31 1 17 5 ( 1 3 6 ) 54 3 , 3 0 0 De c 49 5 1 , 1 5 5 66 1 69 3,933 TO T A L 7 , 2 7 9 1 5 , 0 9 3 7 , 8 1 4 1 , 2 6 6 7 7 , 3 6 5 TO T A L 8, 5 2 1 $ 17 , 5 5 5 $ 9, 0 3 4 1,465 $ 86,804 $ E H M 2 0 0 7 E H M 2 0 0 6 Mo n t h C O S T C o l l e c t P r o f i t D a y s J a i l S a v i n g M o n t h C O S T C o l l e c t P r o f i t D a y s J a i l S a v i n g Ja n 88 6 2, 0 6 5 1, 1 8 0 15 4 8, 7 7 8 Ja n 1, 4 3 2 3, 6 8 5 2, 2 5 3 249 14,193 Fe b 1, 5 7 0 3, 9 7 0 2, 4 0 0 27 3 15 , 5 6 1 Fe b 2, 0 1 3 4, 6 0 5 2, 5 9 3 350 19,950 Ma r 1, 5 0 7 1, 8 7 5 36 9 26 2 14 , 9 3 4 Ma r 1, 8 5 7 3, 7 5 5 1, 8 9 8 323 18,411 Ap r 7 5 3 1, 6 2 5 87 2 13 1 7, 4 6 7 Ap r 1, 7 0 2 3, 1 5 6 1, 4 5 4 296 16,872 Ma y 8 6 8 1, 6 8 5 81 7 15 1 8, 6 0 7 Ma y 1, 3 9 2 2, 7 7 4 1, 3 8 3 242 13,794 Ju n 67 9 1, 1 7 5 49 7 11 8 6, 7 2 6 Ju n 77 6 1, 4 6 5 68 9 135 7,695 Ju l 40 3 84 5 44 3 70 3, 9 9 0 Ju l 29 9 98 5 68 6 52 2,964 Au g 6 2 7 2, 0 5 0 1, 4 2 3 10 9 6, 2 1 3 Au g 1, 1 7 9 2, 7 2 5 1, 5 4 6 205 11,685 Se p 1, 2 8 8 3, 8 8 0 2, 5 9 2 22 4 12 , 7 6 8 Se p 1, 8 5 7 4, 1 9 0 2, 3 3 3 323 18,411 Oc t 1, 4 1 5 3, 1 8 0 1, 7 6 6 24 6 1 4 , 0 2 2 Oc t 1, 8 1 7 3, 0 6 5 1, 2 4 8 316 18,012 No v 1, 5 7 6 3, 3 2 5 1, 7 5 0 27 4 1 5 , 6 1 8 No v 97 2 2, 3 0 0 1, 3 2 8 169 9,633 De c 69 0 1, 6 7 5 98 5 12 0 6 , 8 4 0 De c 56 4 95 0 38 7 9 8 5 , 5 8 6 TO T A L 1 2 , 2 5 9 $ 2 7 , 3 5 0 $ 1 5 , 0 9 1 2 , 1 3 2 $ 1 2 1 , 5 2 4 $ T O T A L 1 5 , 8 5 9 $ 3 3 , 6 5 5 $ 1 7 , 7 9 7 $ 2 , 7 5 8 $ 1 5 7 , 2 0 6 $ E H M 2 0 0 5 M o n t h C O S T C o l l e c t P r o f i t D a y s J ai l S a v i n g Ja n 86 8 1, 5 8 4 71 6 15 1 7, 5 5 0 Fe b 1, 1 2 1 2, 5 9 2 1 , 4 7 0 19 5 9, 7 5 0 Ma r 75 3 1, 1 6 5 41 2 13 1 6, 5 5 0 Ap r 20 1 42 5 2 2 4 35 1 , 7 5 0 Ma y 40 8 84 0 4 3 2 71 3 , 5 5 0 Ju n 40 8 84 0 4 3 2 71 3 , 5 5 0 Ju l 74 2 1, 7 3 0 98 8 12 9 6, 4 5 0 Au g 1, 6 8 8 2, 8 7 6 1 , 1 8 8 26 0 1 3 , 0 0 0 Se p 1, 4 4 8 3, 1 4 4 1 , 6 9 6 25 8 1 2 , 9 0 0 Oc t 1, 0 6 3 1, 9 4 0 87 7 18 7 9, 3 5 0 No v 66 7 1, 8 4 5 1 , 1 7 8 11 6 5, 8 0 0 De c 55 2 1, 0 9 0 53 8 96 4 , 8 0 0 TO T A L 9, 9 2 0 $ 20 , 0 7 1 $ 1 0 , 1 5 1 $ 1, 7 0 0 $ 85 , 0 0 0 $ Pa c k e t Pa g e 11 6 of 13 2 AM-2746 6. Public Defender Annual Report Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:01/26/2010 Submitted By:Sandy Chase Time:15 Minutes Department:City Clerk's Office Type:Information Review Committee: Committee Action: Information Subject Title Public Defender Annual Report. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Previous Council Action Narrative James Feldman, Public Defender, will be present at the meeting to give a report. Attached is a letter/report submitted by Mr. Feldman. Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: 01-26-10 Letter from James Feldman, Public Defender Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 01/21/2010 01:20 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 01/21/2010 01:22 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 01/21/2010 03:01 PM APRV Form Started By: Sandy Chase  Started On: 01/21/2010 01:18 PM Final Approval Date: 01/21/2010 Packet Page 117 of 132 Packet Page 118 of 132 Packet Page 119 of 132 Packet Page 120 of 132 Packet Page 121 of 132 Packet Page 122 of 132 Packet Page 123 of 132 Packet Page 124 of 132 AM-2735 7. Limitations on Contributions for City Council Campaigns Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:01/26/2010 Submitted By:Jana Spellman Submitted For:Council President Bernheim Time:30 Minutes Department:City Council Type:Action Review Committee: Committee Action: Information Subject Title Proposed Ordinance relating to limitations on contributions for City Council campaigns and creating a new Chapter 1.99 of the Edmonds City Code. Public comment will be received on this matter. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Previous Council Action An initial discussion of campaign finance limits took place at the November 17, 2009 Council Meeting. Exh. 1: 11/17/09 Council Minutes Narrative Council President Bernheim has placed this item on the agenda for discussion and possible action. Exh. 2: Memo from Council President Bernheim with proposed ordinance. Exh. 3: 01-22-10 Council President Bernheim email regarding campaign contribution limits. Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Exh. 1 11-17-2009 CM Link: Exh. 2 Bernheim Memo-Proposed Ord Link: Exh. 3 Bernheim Email re: Campaign Contribution Limits Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 01/21/2010 11:32 AM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 01/21/2010 11:36 AM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 01/21/2010 01:20 PM APRV Form Started By: Jana Spellman  Started On: 01/19/2010 03:11 PM Final Approval Date: 01/21/2010 Packet Page 125 of 132 Final Approval Date: 01/21/2010 Packet Page 126 of 132 Packet Page 127 of 132 Packet Page 128 of 132 City of Edmonds City Councilman Steve Bernheim January 22, 2010 Memo to Edmonds City Council re: Proposed Campaign Contribution Limits Date: November 9, 2009 Summary of Campaign Contribution Limit Proposal: Attached is a draft, short ordinance providing for campaign contribution limits for city council and mayoral elections. A candidate's own funds and volunteer services would not count, but in-kind and cash contributions would be limited to $750. The operative language is found in section 3 of the proposal: (a) No candidate shall accept or receive during the election cycle, campaign contributions totaling more than $750.00 from any person. (b) The limitations in this section shall apply to all contributions except: (1) a candidate's contributions of his/her own resources to his/her own campaign; (2) the value of volunteer services; or (3) publicly donated funds under provisions authorizing public funding of local campaigns. Background: Contributions to City Council and Mayor races now are literally unlimited: anyone from anywhere may contribute an unlimited amount (except that no one may give more than $5,000 during the last three weeks before the election). Though Edmonds is Washington’s 19th largest city, according to Chris Fyall’s July 29, 2009 Everett Herald article, “Edmonds’ council elections, … regularly rank among Washington’s most expensive. In 2005, Edmonds featured the state’s 10th most expensive council election. In 2007, it was ninth.… Already, the candidates have raised $1.58 for every person in Edmonds. On a per capita basis, it gives Edmonds the state’s fourth most expensive council election, behind just Seattle, Olympia and Shoreline.” This year, seven candidates raised $125,000 for City Council races. The two most expensive campaigns together spent more than $58,000.In 2007, ten candidates (including the Mayor’s race) raised over $175,000. Historically, the record contribution for Edmonds City Council races is $4,380 given by an Edmonds print shop manager. The most expensive race spent more than $37,000. Most city council candidates announced their general support for limiting campaign contributions at the South County Senior Center candidate forum on Monday, August 10, though a maximum contribution amount was not specified by any candidate. My proposed limit of $750 permits the voters of Edmonds to limit the influence of large single donors, whether corporate or individual, local or from out-of-state or foreign countries and, though not perfect, is better than the current situation permitting unlimited contributions from anyone, anywhere. My concern is not so much with the contributions we have recorded as with the possibility of larger contributions ahead. Enforcement: Violations of the ordinance would be a class 3 misdemeanor enforceable in Edmonds Municipal Court. Violations would be detected from contribution reports filed with the state Public Disclosure Commission. Exhibit 2 Memo from Council President Bernheim Proposed Ordinance 3 pages Packet Page 129 of 132 2 ORDINANCE NO. ___ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS RELATING TO LIMITATIONS ON CONTRIBUTIONS FOR CITY COUNCIL CAMPAIGNS AND CREATING A NEW CHAPTER 1.99 OF THE EDMONDS MUNICIPAL CODE. A new Chapter 1.99, "Limits on Campaign Contributions," is hereby added to Title 1 of the Edmonds Municipal code, to read as follows: Chapter 1.99 LIMITS ON CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS 1.99.010 Definitions. For purposes of this chapter, the definitions found in RCW 42.17.020 as currently enacted or as hereafter amended or recodified and interpretations thereof published in Title 390-05 WAC are hereby adopted by reference, except that: (a) "Election cycle" means the combination of the general or special election and the primary election for the office in question and begins on the date an individual becomes a candidate for such office as defined in subsection (e) below and ends on the date that candidate files his or her final report pursuant to RCW 42.17.080(2). (b) To "accept" or "receive" a contribution means the receipt of a contribution, deposit of funds with other campaign funds, and report of the contribution to the Public Disclosure Commission, except when a candidate returns the contribution to the contributor within five business days of the date on which it is received by the candidate or political committee. (c) "Person" includes an individual, partnership, joint venture, public or private corporation, association, federal, state, or local governmental entity or agency however constituted, candidate, committee, political committee, political party, executive committee thereof, or any other organization or group of persons, however organized. (d) "Public Disclosure Commission" means the Washington State Public Disclosure Commission, established under RCW 42.17.350, or its successor. Packet Page 130 of 132 3 (e) "Candidate" is defined in RCW 42.17.020. 1.99.020 Application. These limits shall apply to candidates in any election for the Edmonds City Council or for Mayor of the City of Edmonds. 1.99.030 Contribution limits. (a) No candidate shall accept or receive during the election cycle, campaign contributions totaling more than $750.00 from any person. (b) The limitations in this section shall apply to all contributions except: (1) a candidate's contributions of his/her own resources to his/her own campaign; (2) the value of volunteer services; or (3) publicly donated funds under provisions authorizing public funding of local campaigns. 1.99.050 Enforcement. Any violation of this Act shall be a class 3 misdemeanor and shall be enforceable by the Police Department of the City of Edmonds and any proceedings to enforce such Ordinance shall be brought in the municipal court of the city of Edmonds. Packet Page 131 of 132 Chase, Sandy From: Stephen A. Bernheim [steve@stevebernheim.com] Sent: Friday, January 22, 2010 11:35 AM To: Chase, Sandy Subject: Fw: campaign contribution limits and Supreme Court 1/22/2010 sandy, is it too late to include the below message with today's agenda packet on the campaign contribution limit proposal ? bernheim. ----- Original Message ----- From: Stephen A. Bernheim To: Jana Spellman ; DJ Wilson ; Michael Plunkett ; Dave Orvis ; Strom Peterson ; Adrienne Fraley-Monillas Cc: Gary Haakenson ; Jana Spellman ; W. Scott Snyder Sent: Friday, January 22, 2010 11:34 AM Subject: campaign contribution limits and Supreme Court Hi! In case anyone was asking, "How does yesterday's Citizens United Supreme Court case affect Bernheim's proposed campaign contribution limit ordinance?" the answer is "not at all." In Citizens United yesterday, the Supreme Court said federal prohibitions on independent, corporate election- related activities and expenditures violate constitutional rights to free speech . The court struck down the federal law because it restricted speech based on the identity of the speaker and because it prohibited corporations from engaging in certain electioneering activities other than making campaign contributions. The case did not involve contributions to candidates' campaigns, and the Court referred favorably to prior Supreme Court precedent, Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976) which upheld the constitutionality of limits on direct contributions to candidates. My proposal imposes limits only on direct contributions to candidates' campaigns, the limit that was upheld in Buckley. My proposal is not a speech restriction based on the identity of the speaker or the content of the speech and does not restrict in any way corporate campaign contributions that would be contrary to Citizens United, nor does it in any way prohibit independent, non-campaign expenditures by anyone. If anyone would care to review the decision, let me know and i'll send you the .pdf. You can find it on the web at www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-205.pdf. Steve Bernheim Edmonds City Council # 6 http://www.ci.edmonds.wa.us/cp6.stm 512 Bell St. Edmonds WA 98020 Council Office Hours: after 4:30 p.m. 425-744-3021 (desk/message) 425 712 8418 (fax) 206 240 5344 (cell) council@stevebernheim.com Packet Page 132 of 132