The URL can be used to link to this page

cmd072021EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPROVED MINUTES July 20, 2021 ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Mike Nelson, Mayor Susan Paine, Council President Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember Luke Distelhorst, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember (arrived 7:02 p.m.) Vivian Olson, Councilmember Laura Johnson, Councilmember ALSO PRESENT Brook Roberts, Student Representative 1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE STAFF PRESENT Phil Williams, Public Works Director Patrick Doherty, Econ. Dev & Comm. Serv. Dir. Dave Turley, Finance Director Rob English, City Engineer Zack Richardson, Stormwater Engineer Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Scott Passey, City Clerk Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator Dave Rohde, GIS Analyst The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Nelson in the Council Chambers, 250 5t1i Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. Mayor Nelson explained this is the first hybrid meeting and recognized there may be some technical challenges. 2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Councilmember L. Johnson read the City Council Land Acknowledge Statement: "We acknowledge the original inhabitants of this place, the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and their successors the Tulalip Tribes, who since time immemorial have hunted, fished, gathered, and taken care of these lands. We respect their sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and we honor their sacred spiritual connection with the land and water." 3. ROLL CALL City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present with the exception of Councilmember Buckshnis (who arrived at approximately 7:02 p.m.) 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. (Councilmember Buckshnis was not present for the vote.) 5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 20, 2021 Page 1 Mayor Nelson described the procedures for audience comments. Mike McCausland, Edmonds, explained he has a legal conforming duplex on his property on 3rd Avenue North. The east property line is on 6' Avenue North and the west property line is on 3rd Avenue North. The City's Public Works Department is planning to install a stormwater rain garden along his property line in the right-of-way on 6t' Avenue North. He is opposed to the rain garden and believes his rights as a property owners are being compromised as well as taken advantage of. He was surprised to learn the proposed rain garden, which impacts private property, does not require signage advising of the project and to allow public comment as the City would require from any private development. He discussed his opposition to the rain garden with Public Works Director Phil Williams, Public Works Engineer Zack Richardson, Planning Division Manager Rob Chave and the Mayor's Executive Assistant Carolyne LaFave; no resolution to his opposition has been reached. As he was unable to find a source to formally address his opposition, he was bringing his concerns to the City Council. The proposed rain garden takes away development opportunity for his property and the ability to add a driveway entrance to his property off 6' Avenue North. As measured by himself with a tape measure, the lot size is just under 12,000 square feet but could be slightly larger. The current zoning is single family RS-6 6,000 square foot minimum lot size. In accordance with the GMA, and optimum economic land use, his property lends itself well to subdivision into two lots for two single family homes. There is a development under construction on Daley and 4t' Avenue doing the exact same thing. Taking away the ability to reasonably install a driveway eliminates the feasibility of subdividing this property. Email correspondence with Mr. Richardson advised he would still have the option to install a driveway by building a bridge over the rain garden or with offset mitigation, both at his expense. He questioned the City allowing him to build a bridge in the public right-of-way as well as why any expense would be his responsibility since the City is building something that impacts his property. He pointed out the same issue would arise if he wanted to install a garage in his backyard or an accessory dwelling unit. Ken Reidy, Edmonds, commented it was good to be back in Council Chambers. He explained Edmonds adopted the power of initiative and referendum in 1985. A unanimous vote is required to pass an emergency ordinance. Council has long acted like an emergency ordinance can be passed with a super majority vote. Tonight Council is discussing an ordinance creating the Edmonds Rescue Plan. The discussion involves Ordinance 4189; the City has long acted as if Ordinance 4189 was effective June 23, 2020 but that is not true because the vote on Ordinance 4189 was not unanimous. He requested disclosure during tonight's meeting regarding how this mistake will be addressed. Tonight the Council is also discussing a resolution adopting Council Rules of Procedure. The proposed rules include a new Code of Conduct adopted by motion on January 26, 2021. There is a Code of Ethics that applies to all elected officials, but is not enforced and no procedures or policies exist to govern enforcement. The City's personnel policies contain a general Code of Conduct; all employees are expected to treat the public as their most valued customer. He questioned who doesn't reply to emails from their most valued customer. Via a public records request, he obtained an email from the former Finance Director to the Mayor seeking permission to reply to an email he sent last year; he never received a reply. Mr. Reidy continued, the Code of Conduct for City Council adopted earlier this year says that no Councilmember shall dominate proceedings. Despite this, a Councilmember made a seven -minute comment during last week's Council meeting that was not specific to the item on the agenda. He questioned what happened the next time a Councilmember wanted to do the same. He requested the Council advise their constituents how existing rules and codes will be enforced before adopting new Council Rules of Procedure. The proposed rules state public comment time cannot be donated by one speaker to another; he questioned why when it had been allowed in the past. The City Council needs more time to review the proposed Council Rules of Procedure for completeness; the proposed rules discuss items requiring four votes but are silent on items requiring a unanimous vote. Considering all the mistakes made since 1985, he requested a section for items that require a unanimous vote be included. He Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 20, 2021 Page 2 requested the Council add a rule granting a speaker one additional minute if the City Attorney or City Staff address the public comments after the comment is made. City Council represents citizens and citizens should get the last word before decisions are made. William Lighter stated he was not a resident of Edmonds and was speaking on the Perrinville Creek restoration project and the use of federal COVID funds for improvements on Perrinville Creek. The $3.7M is a good start to repair the damage to Perrinville Creek caused in large party by the fish -killing, flow -splitting weir installed by the City of Edmonds to basically benefit two property owners. That fish - killer weir has been a drain on the City's expenses and the ductal iron pipe under the BNSF tracks is badly corroded. He documented that and spoke before the Council nine years ago. The culvert has only gotten worse since then. A track failure and a derailment into Browns Bay would be catastrophic, not only the potential loss of human life but also environmental damage caused by the contents of numerous railcars carrying bulk and crude entering Puget Sound as well as chemicals on the tracks. Replacing the culvert and removing the flow splitter on Perrinville Creek is a good start but more needs to be done, particularly to replace the culvert on Talbot Road above the BNSF tracks which also obstructs fish passage and salmon migration. He commended the City for spending the money to repair and replace the culvert under the railroad tracks and hoped the City could find the money and resources to do more to replace the culvert under Talbot Road. Natalie Seitz, Edmonds, commented on the lack of public investment in SR-99 communities. She disclosed that she is White and lives in the SR-99 community and that some of her comments align with her interests but are not related to her specifically. She was very frustrated by the Council's discussion of the Civic Center playfield Park Construction contracts. She questioned how she should respond to a call to action to pay more than just lip service to the blatant inequity of this park that is in and of itself lip service. Functionally, Councilmember L. Johnson said with her comments what all other Councilmembers present said with their votes and their silence; it does not matter. The equity of this decision does not matter because lots of decisions, time and money had already been invested, hundreds if not thousands of decisions to redevelop Civic Center Playfield and invest more public funds in an area that is already briming with parks. Each one was an opportunity to consider the location, size and scope and each fell short. Looking at the 2021 Edmonds Capital Projects Map, this project is hardly isolated in demonstrating where the City chooses to spend public funds. This is not a mistake, it is institutional; when institutional inequities align with greater concentration of minorities and people of color, it is known as institutional racism. She encouraged the City and Council to look at its decision -making process to identify and address why SR-99 communities continue to receive little public investment in light of the proportion of the population it represents. However, if it is not enough to matter for any individual decision, nothing will change. It is not enough to matter that the Civic Center Playfield contract does not include a parking lot for all the people in the SR-99 communities that the City fantasies will regularly access and benefit from this park. It is not enough to matter that when the City chooses to build nearly all the 2021 capital projects and $15M on this park, the value of nearby properties and businesses increase and that is how public investment becomes concentrated private wealth in the Bowl. Ms. Seitz continued, it is not enough to matter that if it not under the direct supervision of the City of Edmonds, it does not count by code as parks when the City Council and other residents identify assets of neighboring jurisdictions as good enough to serve the SR-99 corridor communities. The insinuation that the dilapidated play structure north of Lake Ballinger or adding a single park bench at Mathay Ballinger somehow nullifies the $15M investment in active recreation park facilities is insulting. The City and Council should serious reflect on why this conversation was entertained for the SR-99 corridor. She was dumbfounded by the July 6t1i meeting minutes; the City Council does not need SR-99 communities to articulate that money needs to be spent on the betterment of the SR-99 neighborhoods in the PROS Plan. This is a City contrived precondition to receiving public funds. Research indicates that complaint based governance leads to inequitable and racist results. The City should immediately prepare and make public Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 20, 2021 Page 3 a GIS analysis and maps of population density race in association with park facilities and let that be the backbone of the PROS Plan public engagement. The City is currently conducting a survey that asks people to prioritize between park redevelopment, one dollar sign, and building parks, three dollar signs. It means nothing without showing people the information that the majority of parks are located in one area of the City or that redevelopment of Civic Center is $15M. Jenny Anttilla, Edmonds, said Ms. Seitz's comments are very valid. It is great the City purchased Civic Field a few years ago, but she did not see the point of exceeding the estimates so more money is owed and she preferred to downgrade the design and keep it an open area and not spend $15.5M as that is too much and there are other areas of the City that need help. She commented some policies happened in 2020 and 2021 that were against the residents and business owners; for example, a decision was made to close Main Street on Saturdays and Sundays even though the shops were opposed to a 2-day closure and preferred a 1-day closure. The City did not listen to the shops which she did not think was fair. Many decisions have been made during COVID that citizens would have liked to speak on such as the new tree policy. She recalled 6-7 years ago Council Chambers were flooded with residents who did not agree with the tree policy that the Council just passed. Because the public could not attend meetings, the tree policy passed even though a lot of Edmonds residents did not support it. She concluded it was important for Councilmembers running for office this year or in the future to remember that residents don't forget. 6. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: 1. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 13, 2021 2. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS AND WIRE PAYMENT 3. APPROVE 128-SF DEDICATION AT NORTHWEST CORNER OF 4TH AVE N & DALEY S 4. OKTOBERFEST EVENT CONTRACT 5. MAY 2021 MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT 6. JERRIE BEVINGTON 3 MONTH EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT 7. NEW BUSINESS 1. PRESENTATION OF STORMWATER MANAGEMENT CODE (ECDC 18.30) UPDATE Mr. Richardson reviewed: Why are we updating the code now? o NPDES Permit with State requires codes to protect surfaces water from development which meets or exceeds standards prescribed by Ecology. o New permit requires that the City update to newest Ecology standard by July 2022. o Staff aiming for effective date of January 1, 2022, for clarity in applicability timelines. o Ecology's newest manual (2019 SWMMWW) has minimal substantive changes since previous version (2014); most revisions are organizational changes. o See Ecology documents Executive Summary of the 2019 Revisions and Crosswalk: 2014- 2019 SWMMWW for additional information of Ecology driven changes. How is ECDC related to Ecology Manual Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 20, 2021 Page 4 o Ecology issues their manual (2019 SWMMWW) o City makes minor local modifications via the Edmonds Stormwater Addendum (Addendum) o City updates ECDC 18.30 to adopt the new manual as modified in the Addendum o Some provisions are required by Ecology o Some items are optional add-ons for City of Edmonds o City provisions cannot be less stringent than Ecology standard and cannot be less stringent than previous version (without Ecology approval) Drainage Review 101 o Drainage mitigation is required when projects exceed certain thresholds of new plus replaced hard surfaces and/or clearing limits. o Hard surfaces are traditional impervious surfaces, plus other compacted surfaces including gravel roadways and pervious pavements. o Replaced hard surfaces are any surfaces where the subgrade material below the surface is exposed temporarily during the construction operation. o Category 1 — Minimum Requirements (MR) 1 — 5 apply ■ 2,000 SF new plus replace hard surfaces, OR ■ 7,000 SF of land disturbing activity (clearing) o Category 2 — Minimum Requirements 1 — 9 apply ■ 5,000 SF new plus replace hard surfaces, OR ■ Converts 0.75 acres of vegetation to lawn/landscaped area, OR ■ Converts 2.5 acres of native vegetation to pasture o Minimum Requirement #5 (LID) ■ Applies to all projects that require drainage review (over 2,000 SF hard surfaces). ■ Focuses on erosion flows; 2-year storm and below. ■ Requires the use of infiltration if feasible ■ Predominant way we get storm water mitigation in Edmonds o Minimum Requirement #6 (Water quality) ■ Requires 5,000 SF of pollution generating hard surfaces (ie. drivable pavement; does not include roofs in most cases) ■ Requires treatment of runoff specific to removing contaminants. o Minimum Requirement #7 (Flow control) ■ Requires 10,000 SF of hard surfaces (or more than 0.1 cfs increase in discharge from site) ■ Big vaults/detention; this is the traditional way of storm water management where we try to match historic flow rates. ■ Infiltration is required to be used for flow control if applicable How's it working? o Switched permit tracking systems at beginning of 2020; reviewed single family building permit data since that date through the start of June 2021. ■ This didn't capture plats as a whole project but reflects the mitigation required for each individual home within a plat. ■ Focused on main BMP where multiple BMPs were proposed. 0 52 projects required drainage review 0 2 applied dispersion as main BMP 0 22 applied an infiltration -based BMP 0 5 applied a perforated pipe connection 0 22 applied Edmonds -specific detention BMP 0 1 qualified for direct discharge What's changing? o Most changes are updates to match Ecology reorganization and/or to provide clarity where staff have experienced commonly missed or misinterpreted information by manual users & designers. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 20, 2021 Page 5 o See 2022 ECDC 18.30 and Stormwater Addendum Summary of Changes in agenda packet ■ Direction from Ecology (Orange) = Ecology prescribed/required ■ Direction from Staff (White) = Staff -proposed clarification, reorganization, or update without substantial change/impact ■ Direction from Staff (Green) = Staff -proposed change with potential impacts o Staff seek direction on staff -proposed changes with potential impacts prior to moving code for State approval and permitting. ■ Department of Commerce and SEPA approval required prior to formal Council adoption. Change #1: New connections of existing hard surfaces o Old: Current code allows for connection of existing hard surfaces on case -by -case basis with a focus on maintaining City pipe capacity. o New: Staff propose revisions to require new connections of existing hard surfaces to be treated like new hard surfaces requiring full drainage mitigation. ■ Note that this is specific to new connections; where residents have an existing connection, they are permitted to replace the connection in -kind without any mitigation requirements. o Staff Opinion: These new connections of existing surfaces are still new or altered impacts to the City system and any surfaces water they drain to; they should be mitigated for as new impacts. o Potential Impacts: This may limit homeowner options when working on homes without development or expansion. However, the impacts of allowing every pre -drainage -code residence or business to connect to our system would be continuation of the negative impacts of unmitigated historic development and detrimental to staff ability to manage the capacity of our systems in the future. Change #2: Removing Edmonds Way as a direct discharge basin o Old: Current code recognizes the Edmonds Way drainage basin as a partial direct discharge basin with reduced requirements for LID (MR #5) and flow control (MR #7) o New: Staff propose revisions to remove all exemptions for the Edmonds Way basin, resulting in equal application of all drainage code requirements to the Edmonds Way basin. o Staff Opinion: The Edmonds Way drainage pipe (WSDOT) is known to overflow to the Edmonds Marsh under certain conditions; since this demonstrates a capacity issue and now discharges to a non -manmade water body, the direct discharge exemption should no longer apply. o Potential Impacts: This simply means that projects within the Edmonds Way basin comply with the exact same requirement as the rest of the City. Change #3: Increasing protection of Perrinville Creek o Old: Current code applies the drainage code uniformly to all areas of City, including the Perrinville Creek Basin. o New: Staff propose revisions to increase the retrofit requirement for LID and increase the flow control standard within the Perrinville Creek basin (only). ■ Retrofit (applies to existing unmitigated surfaces to remain): 25% _> 50% ■ Flow control: Match 50-year peak => Match 100-year peak (ie. King County Level 3 Standard) o Staff Opinion: The Perrinville has been beaten up by past development and needs better protections. The change in flow control standard is typical for impacted water ways and the retrofit requirement attempts to rectify some of the past abuses on the creek. Staff believe it's fair to ask the residents who have directly benefitted from the impacts on the creek to chip in a little extra towards its recovery. o Potential Impacts: Flow control will have minimal impacts; larger projects will have larger detention facilities with minimal impacts and cost on already large budgets. However, the Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 20, 2021 Page 6 retrofit requirement has the potential to impact homeowners who are not necessarily developing and may become cost -limiting to smaller projects in this basin. Change #4: Detention preferred over perforated pipes o Old: Current code adopted the Ecology BMP list for MR #5 and then added an Edmonds - specific detention BMP to the end of the list, making its priority less than that of a perforated pipe connection. o New: Staff propose revisions to elevate the Edmonds -specific detention BMP to be considered before a perforated pipe connection. o Staff Opinion: Perforated pipes connection are only used when infiltration is already found undesirable for some reason; because of this fact, they are of very little mitigation benefit and often get proposed in dangerous or undesirable locations. Staff have run flow comparisons to demonstrate that the detention option generates far more desirable decreases in the flow rates for sites this condition would apply to. o Potential Impacts: At a minimum detention would be anticipated in nearly all cases where drainage review is required. Detention systems may add some cost to developing compared to the perforated pipe connections but will go much further in protecting the City system and surfaces waters. What's Next? o Staff is requesting comments from the City Council. ■ We are requesting comments now, prior to beginning the permitting and approval process. o Approvals Needed ■ Department of Commerce ■ SEPA ■ No Ecology review o Public Input ■ SEPA comment period required ■ Public hearing required before final approval/adoption ■ Additional workshops, as directed/if needed. o Questions/concerns: Zachary.Richardson@edmondswa.gov Council President Paine what Mr. Richardson expected to see in the next update of Ecology Stormwater Management Manual. Mr. Richardson responded Ecology will begin that process soon. Personally, he would like to see the existing codes updated to address climate change. Councilmember Buckshnis thanked Mr. Richardson for responding to her emailed questions. She referred to the proposed changes and asked about the associated costs that will be borne by the homeowner. She asked about costs related to Change #1. Mr. Richardson answered it depends on the site and the conditions. That change will upfront trigger the need for a geotechnical engineer to do an infiltration test, which will cost at least $1,000-2,000, one of the larger costs. He would need to do further research to determine the associated cost. Councilmember Buckshnis referred to Change #2, Removing Edmonds Way as a direct discharge basin, relaying her understanding that as development occurs along Edmonds Way it would no longer be treated as a direct basin due to flooding along SR-104. Mr. Richardson answered it was not done to target any center of development. When he was first hired, he was unaware of that overflow and once he discovered it, this was identified as an important update to the code. It is entirely driven by the overflow that occurs at the marsh and the need to protect the marsh. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if the Dayton Street pump station, a costly addition to the stormwater system, had an impact on the Edmonds Way flooding. Mr. Richardson answered this is the WSDOT line, the Edmonds Way basin is carried down into the WSDOT basin which now overflows into the marsh. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 20, 2021 Page 7 Councilmember Buckshnis referred to Change #3, and asked if there have been discussions with Lynnwood due to development occurring there that impacts Edmonds. Mr. Richardson answered there have not been a lot of discussions yet due to interest in fixing the immediate Perrinville issue first, but is on the list of things to do. He was not aware of what Lynnwood was doing in this round of updates. Councilmember Buckshnis recalled there have been efforts in the past to get Lynnwood to join WRIA 8 so they understand the importance of salmon recovery, stormwater, etc. and they have not been interested because they indicate they have no waterfront when in fact the Edmonds waterfront is their waterfront. Councilmember Buckshnis referred to Change #3 and the cost to homeowners of requiring larger detention facilities. Mr. Richardson answered in this case, the homeowner will have already triggered drainage review so a lot of the costs will have been incurred by the project. For a homeowner retrofit, it was 50% of the area, a relatively small area, approximately 40 feet of 24" pipe. The flow control would be for bigger volumes and a similar percentage of the budget because it is a larger system and much larger budget. It will not affect the average homeowner as it requires 10,000 square feet. Councilmember Buckshnis recalled putting in a detention pond in a southeast Portland home that was less than 10,000 square feet, but was related to flooding and aged infrastructure. With regard to Change #4, she agreed perforated pipes can cause a lot of problems. She observed the minimum requirement was perforated pipes and the proposal was to do more than that. Mr. Richardson answered the proposal is to recommend Edmonds -specific detention BMP be considered before a perforated pipe connection. Councilmember Buckshnis thanked Mr. Richardson for the compete packet. Councilmember L. Johnson referred to #9 and #25, new connections over 25,000 square feet to be handled like a new project. She asked whether a process should be considered to document cumulative connections for all categories. She asked if that would be a worthwhile undertaking or would it have negligible impact. Mr. Richardson answered the drainage code used to include cumulative impact language which would address what Councilmember L. Johnson referenced, where someone could piecemeal smaller projects in sequence. That was really hard to track because often there were no permits for that work. That is one of the reasons the retrofit requirement was created, tackling 25% of everything could mitigate against that without tracking it. Councilmember L. Johnson commented the impact would be unknown if they were unpermitted. Mr. Richardson explained most end up being caught by code enforcement; if is over 2,000 square feet, drainage review is required and if it is over 2,000 square feet it has to be documented in the list. He noted under 2,000 square feet often does not require a permit. A one of the Councilmembers impatiently waiting on a code rewrite, Councilmember Olson said she appreciated the work that went into this significant code rewrite. It may be boring to the public but it was exciting to her. Mayor Nelson asked if staff had gotten sufficient direction from Council. Mr. Richardson responded he did not hear much objection. If the Council was comfortable with the changes, he will move forward with them and return to Council for formal adoption. Councilmember Buckshnis said she wanted a better understanding of the cost implications of the changes. She understood the importance of stormwater, but there is also stormwater mitigation in the tree code. Mr. Richardson offered to provide costs. 8. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. ORDINANCE CREATING THE EDMONDS RESCUE PLAN FUND Economic Development/Community Services Director Patrick Doherty reviewed: Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 20, 2021 Page 8 American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) o The ARPA was passed by Congress and signed into law by President Biden on 3/11/21 ARPA and provides funds to cities, allowing for the funds to be used to: ■ respond to the COVID-19 emergency or its negative economic impacts, including assistance to households, small businesses, and nonprofits or aid to impacted industries such as tourism, travel, and hospitality; ■ provide premium pay to essential workers or provide grants to employers of essential workers during the COVID-19 emergency; ■ provide government services to the extent of the reduction in revenue of such state, territory, or tribal government due to the COVID-19 emergency; or ■ make necessary investments in water, sewer, or broadband infrastructure o A Treasury Department 151-page Rule has been issued that provides more detailed guidance on the use of these funds o ARPA will provide $11,893,099 to the City of Edmonds in two tranches: ■ $5,950,087.50 was received on 6/25/21 ■ The remaining $5,943,011.50 is expected approximately one year later ■ Funds are available for expenditures incurred as of 3/3/21 and through 12/31/24. Expenditures shall be considered "incurred" if they are obligated for projects or programs completed through 12/31/26. Mr. Doherty reviewed the Edmonds Rescue Plan Fund: • The proposed Ordinance would create the Edmonds Rescue Plan Fund and set out its intended uses. Sections of the Ordinance: o Comprehensive set of "whereas" clauses that refer to the state of emergency and impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, reference to the ARPA and its requirements and public purposes. o Section 1 accepts the $11,893,099. o Section 2 renames Fund 142, the Edmonds CARES Fund, to the Edmonds Rescue Plan Fund for receipt of the funds and expenditure of the funds. o Section 3 allows for the fund to be administered by the Administrative Services Director o Section 4 sets out the six program funds for expenditure of the Edmonds Rescue Plan Fund monies: ■ Account "A" is the "Edmonds Rescue Plan City Expenditures" account into which up to $750,000 will be allocated to reimburse City expenditures associated with responding to the COVID-19 health emergency and any resurgences in the future, including staffing, equipment, and supplies related to maintaining a safe workplace for employees and the visiting public, as well as necessary capital investments, such as enhancements to HVAC filter upgrades, etc. ■ Account `B" is the "Edmonds Rescue Plan Household Support" account into which $4,150,000 from the ARPA funds shall be allocated for programs providing assistance to households earning no more than 40% of the Edmonds AMI: - Household Support: Up to $3,000,000 for Grants for housing expenses, food, medical bills, childcare, internet access, and other household expenses. Up to 400 households may receive grants of up to $2,500 in 2021 and 2022. Up to 200 households may receive grants of up to $2,500 in 2023 and 2024. - Utility Bill Support. Up to $150,000 for one-time grants in amounts up to $1,000 for up to 150 households to help defray expenses derived from outstanding City of Edmonds utilities bills. - Housing Repair. Up to $1,000,000 for one-time grants for housing repair, especially focused on energy -saving measures such as roof repair, window replacement, HVAC repair/replacement, etc. Up to 200 grants at up to $5,000 each. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 20, 2021 Page 9 REVISION TO SECTION 4(B) IN CURRENT VERSION OF ORDINANCE: Account "B" shall be the "Edmonds Rescue Plan Household Support" account into which $4,150,000 from the ARPA funds shall be allocated to reimburse those City expenditures incurred through administration of the following programs, in compliance with the ARPA eligibility criteria: 1. Household Support. Up to $3,000,000 for Grants to households earning no more than 40% of Edmonds Median Income for housing expenses, food, medical bills, childcare, internet access, and other household expenses. Up to 400 households may receive grants of up to $2,500 in 2021 and 2022. Up to 200 households may receive grants of up to $2,500 in 2023 and 2024. 2. Utility Bill Support. Up to $150,000 for one-time grants to households earning, no more than 40% of Edmonds Median Income in amounts up to $1,000 for up to 150 households to help defray expenses derived from outstanding City of Edmonds utilities bills. 3. Housing Repair. Up to $1,000,000 for one-time grants to households earning no more than 40% of Edmonds Median Income for housing repair, especially focused on energy -saving measures such as roof repair, window replacement, HVAC repair/replacement, etc. Up to 200 grants at up to $5,000 each. Account "C" shall be the "Edmonds Rescue Plan Business Support" account into which $1,125,000 to assist the business community, as follows: - General Business Support. Up to $200,000 in installments of $50,000 per year in 2021, 2022, 2023, and 2024 for general support of Edmonds small businesses, business districts and the overall business community. This includes such programs as the Edmonds Business Booster website and its programs and promotion; promotion of business districts outside Downtown through advertising, wayfinding, signage; business -support or promotional events, etc. - Tourism Support. Up to $300,000 in installments of $75,000 per year in 2021, 2022, 2023, and 2024 for support of tourism promotion. This includes enhanced local and regional advertising, support of events and special promotions, investment in facilities and/or equipment, etc. REVISION TO SECTION 4(C)(3) IN CURRENT VERSION OF ORDINANCE: 3. Small Business Support. Up to $625,000 for direct grants to small businesses most affected by the COVID-19-related economic recession. Grants will take the form of individual financial support grants (in the form of loans that are forgivable after four months of performance), totaling up to 50 at $10,000 each in 2021, with up to 25 grants of up to $5,000 each available in 2022. Eligibility criteria for these grants will include: Small businesses in Edmonds with zero to 30 employees. - Businesses must demonstrate at least a 50% loss in revenue by the end of 2020 compared to the pre -pandemic 2019 revenues. - Businesses must not have received more than $5,000 in other grants, tax credits or other financial assistance. - Businesses must be leeated outside Pe A%t$'k a E s ('QwA it9wirEdmonds" being defined as any leea4ien west of 9th Avenue bet-ween Casper-s Stfeet and Pine - Particular consideration will be given to businesses owned by people of color, women, veterans, and other minorities Account "D" shall be the "Edmonds Rescue Plan Nonprofit Organization Support" account into which $500,000 from the ARPA funds shall be allocated to assist Edmonds nonprofit organizations that have suffered substantial financial losses due to prolonged closures, cut -backs, loss of business, etc. A general call for requests will be issued, with Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 20, 2021 Page 10 requests reviewed competitively and awards based on relative need, likelihood to help an organization survive, and other sources of funds available. Small grants of up to $20,000 and totaling no more than $100,000 shall be approvable by the Mayor. Large grants of any amount over $20,000 for a total of up to $400,000 shall be approvable by the City Council. Account "E" shall be the "Edmonds Rescue Plan Job Retraining Program" account into which $600,000 from the ARPA funds shall be allocated to provide financial aid to working adults, demonstrating financial need, who seek skills training, certifications, completion of degrees or other skills enhancement at local community colleges serving Edmonds residents in the form of grants of up to $5000 per year per student to cover tuition, fees, supplies and life expenses during the period of study. Administration of this program will be conducted by the college or colleges selected under the contractual oversight of the City. The Mayor shall be authorized to enter into the corresponding contract(s) with participating colleges serving Edmonds residents. - Both Edmonds College and Shoreline Community College have indicated interest in participating in this program. - Edmonds College has highlighted its aerospace training and advanced manufacturing programs. - Shoreline Community College has highlighted its biomanufacturing and automotive programs, such as the Tesla program that provides specialized, hands-on training on vehicles that are leading the way in sustainable automotive technology. REVISION TO SECTION 4(E) IN CURRENT VERSION OF ORDINANCE: Account "E" shall be the "Edmonds Rescue Plan Job Retraining Program" account into which $600,000 from the ARPA funds shall be allocated to provide financial aid to working adults, with demonstrated financial need, who seek skills training, certifications, completion of degrees, or other skills enhancement at local community colleges serving Edmonds residents in the form of grants of up to $5000 per year per student to cover tuition, fees, supplies and life expenses during the period of study. Administration of this program will be conducted by the college or colleges selected under the contractual oversight of the City. The Mayor shall be authorized to enter into the corresponding contract(s) with participating colleges serving Edmonds residents. Account "F" shall be the "Edmonds Rescue Plan City Green Infrastructure" account in which up to $4,768,099 from the ARPA funds shall be allocated to reimburse City capital expenditures through 2026 associated with green infrastructure projects, which are prioritized in the ARPA guidelines, such as: - Edmonds Marsh Water Quality and Flood Control. Retention and treatment of surface stormwater runoff into the Edmonds Marsh to enhance the water quality of the Marsh, as well as other associated projects. Preliminary projected cost - approximately $750,000. - Lower Perrinville Creek Realignment. Retention and treatment of surface stormwater runoff in the Perrinville Creek drainage basin, intended to reduce stormwater surge flows and enhance the quality of stormwater reaching Puget Sound. Preliminary projected cost - $3,500,000. - Green Streets and Rain Gardens. Enhance existing streets throughout Edmonds by adding features that retain and/or treat stormwater runoff to reduce stormwater surges and contaminants that reach Puget Sound. Similarly, rain gardens in association with streets, parks and other public facilities may be established for these same purposes. Preliminary projected cost - $1,000,000. - All infrastructure projects and their associated budgets shall be presented to City Council for review and approval. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 20, 2021 Page 11 o Section 5 sets out the timeframe for use of the ARPA funds — from 3/31/21 till 12/31/26, with explanation of "incurred" and "obligated" expenses. o Section 6 requires any organization assisting the City in providing emergency aid to provide a quarterly written report, as well as requiring that the Administration provide quarterly reports to the City Council. o Section 7 is the "Severability" clause o Section 8 provides the effective date of the Ordinance as FIVE days after passage and publication. Mr. Doherty relayed staff s recommendation: Council approval, including additional revisions discussed tonight. Main Motion COUNCILMEMBER L. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO APPROVE AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON CREATING THE EDMONDS RESCUE FUND AND SETTING OUT ITS INTENDED USE. Amendment #1 COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO REVISE "WORKING ADULTS" IN THE FIRST SENTENCE OF SECTION E TO "PEOPLE WHO HAVE SUFFERED WORKFORCE PARTICIPATION INTERRUPTIONS." Action on Amendment #1 AMENDMENT CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Councilmember Distelhorst asked Mr. Doherty to comment on the process for future adjustments, recalling the Council approved the initial allotment of CARES funds and later made adjustments as needs changed. Mr. Doherty recognized this is a 4-5.5 year program and reports, whether quarterly, annually or as requested, will provide an opportunity to review the distribution of funds and whether any adjustments are necessary. Councilmember K. Johnson referred to Account C, and the disparity in the eligibility criteria; for example in 3.c, a business is not eligible if they received more than $5000 in grants, however, the explanation of Small Business Supports offers a loan of up to $10,000 each. Mr. Doherty answered they were not intended to be the same. The intent under #3 was grants up to $10,000; last year the Council approved a similar provision which was expanded slightly to provide $8,000 grants. One of the criteria is that the business has not receive more than $5,000. For example, if a business did not receive a City or State grant or tax credit, which some did not because they did not understand the complex provisions. It was not intended that previous grants and this potential grant would be the same amount. Councilmember Buckshnis reiterated her statement last week that it was foolish to put 42% of the ARPA funds the City receives into green infrastructure because citizens, non -profits and individuals need more money. This a 4-5.5 year program and regardless that some think the City's demographics are wealthy, some people need money. She did not agree with the eligibility requirement that prevents a business that received $5,000 from receiving another grant. The spirit of the ARPA is to rescue citizens, people and businesses that are in trouble. She will propose removing $750,000 from Item F.1 and $1 million in Item .173 and redistribute it to General Business Support, Tourism Support, Small Business Support and Nonprofit Support as well as the Retraining Program. The amounts in those accounts need to be increased and if it's later found too much has been set aside for citizens, funds can be reallocated to green infrastructure. She said $3.5M out of $11M is sufficient for green infrastructure, approximately 25%. She pointed out Household Support of $3M was 26%, Utility Support 1%, Household Repair 9%, General Business Support 1.8%, Tourism Support 2.7%, Small Business Support 5.6%, Nonprofit Support 4.5%, Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 20, 2021 Page 12 and Job Training 5.4%. She wanted a more equitable distribution so that assistance was provided to everyone. She reiterated 42% for green infrastructure for projects that have been in the CIP/CFP for a long time was foolish. Amendment #2 COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO AMEND TO REMOVE ITEM FA, MARSH WATER QUALITY AND FLOOD CONTROL, FOR $750,000, AND REDISTRIBUTE IT TO GENERAL BUSINESS SUPPORT. Councilmember Olson explained some of the most active environmental citizens are not in favor of the projects in Account F which was surprising to her so perhaps this redistribution is a good idea due to need in those other accounts. She expressed support for the amendment. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas did not support the amendment. The Council has been talking about the need to take care of the marsh at least since she has been on Council and this is a perfect opportunity to accomplish that. She did not support taking money from the marsh to give it to other sources that may need it. With regard to equity and fairness in grants, she said some people did not apply for grants, particularly those in communities where English was not their first language. Councilmember Distelhorst said the Department of the Treasury's guidance states, "Treasury encourages recipients to consider green infrastructure investments and projects to improve resilience to the effects of climate change. For example, more frequent and extreme precipitation events combined with construction and development trends have led to increased instances of stormwater runoff, water pollution, and flooding." In the previous item, staff described changes to update the stormwater code from the 50 year peak to the 100 year peak. He referred to emails from Mr. Williams regarding the stormwater/marsh water quality project that was identified by Students Saving Salmon and asked staff to speak to the specifics of this item. Public Works Director Phil Williams explained the $750,000 is for a marsh water quality project. There are a series of catch basins on the state highway where pollutants from traffic such as oil drippings, tire wear, brake wear, etc. as well as sediment run into the marsh every time it rains. This is an opportunity to do something about that. The City applied for and received a grant for $313,500 this year to be matched by $104,500 from stormwater resources to provide $418,000 to take care of those catch basins. That will either be done through bioretention or actual direct mechanical chemical treatment. These fund offer an opportunity to extend that concept to the other side of SR-104 as well as the stormwater system in Harbor Square which has a lot of the same pollutants. The primary pieces of the marsh restoration such as the daylighting of Willow Creek cannot be pursued yet because it is tied up in a property transfer issue and awaiting final cleanup of the Unocal property. The SR-104 culverts are entirely within the City's control, do involve the Unocal property and could protect the City -owned marsh. He concluded it is a good environmental project. Councilmember Distelhorst summarized it was a more comprehensive water quality treatment versus one section of it. Mr. Williams agreed. Council President Paine said she did not support the amendment, anticipating there will be future opportunities for business support via the federal government. She encouraged all businesses to take full advantage of that and other opportunities. She was hopeful the City would provide information and access to businesses. Mr. Doherty explained the City had two grant processes last year, the County had two grants process with funds available from the State and the State provided grants as well. The City did mailings, Facebook postings as well as provided information on the City's website regarding those opportunities in several languages which will be done again with these funds. He has also heard there will be grants available to businesses from other sources. Council President Paine recognized stormwater cleanup near the ferry line and marsh has been needed for years. She expressed support for leaving the funds in place as proposed. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 20, 2021 Page 13 Councilmember Buckshnis commented it was obvious that not all the information has been shared. She knew the Port has done wonders for their stormwater control and wondered if the Port would accept Mr. Williams comments about pollutants in Harbor Square. The Port has proposed a new program that they are working on with WRIA 8. She is very familiar with the Edmonds Marsh restoration and has been involved with WRIA 8 and the Salmon Recovery Council for ten years and helped get the marsh on the project watch list. She observed apparently people are not as important as stormwater. The City was recently informed that the citizen group, Save Our Marsh, will be allowed to adopt that area of SR-104. Joe Scordino informed Mr. Williams of the program that will removing invasive plants, bittersweet nightshade vines and thickets, and the City will be able to keep the tide gate open. Removal of nightshade thickets will improve the water quality. WSDOT has agreed to bring in a backhoe to assist with removal. It is preliminary to allocate these funds until there is a determination whether that project improves the water quality. This is a holistic project and she did not believe the $750,000 project considered other issues facing the City and nonprofits who have asked for $1M. She urged environmentalists on the Council to support her amendment, using the $750,000 for the human aspect of the ARPA. Councilmember L. Johnson said she also read the 151 page Treasury document which includes four categories; Category 4 states, improve stormwater infrastructure, address pollution, control non -point sources of pollution, improve resilience of infrastructure of severe weather events and create green infrastructure and protect water bodies from pollution. The intent of F.3 is water quality, flood control, retention and treatment of surface water runoff into the marsh and enhance water quality of the marsh as well as other projects. That is in the spirit of the ARPA funds. She did not support the amendment. Councilmember Olson commented when voters get their voters pamphlet and there is a group that they would have expected to support a ballot measure does not, there tends to be a bigger picture at play which is the case here. She acknowledged the administration's proposal was good, but upon vetting, it seems there may be better ways to divide the money. The Council will the opportunity to move funds in the future if necessary. From the emails the Council has received, the citizens do not support the administration's allocation. She will support the amendment. Action on Amendment #2 UPON ROLL CALL, AMENDMENT FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON, BUCKSHNIS, AND OLSON VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST, FRALEY- MONILLAS, AND L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING NO. Amendment #3 COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO AMEND THE LAST SENTENCE OF ACCOUNT E, EDMONDS RESCUE PLAN JOB RETRAINING PROGRAM, TO READ, "THE A4AVO COUNCIL SHALL BE AUTHORIZED TO ENTER INTO THE CORRESPONDING CONTRACT(S) WITH PARTICIPATING COLLEGES SERVING EDMONDS RESIDENTS." Mr. Doherty explained the reason it was proposed that the Mayor be authorized is this is the most time sensitive proposal because it was intended that this funding would be in place for the coming term which starts in September. It may be difficult to approve the contracts in time to advertise the program if Council approval is required. It was hoped by approving the program, the Council would approve the Mayor's authority to enter into the contracts. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked how much money was in this account. Mr. Doherty answered $600,000. Shoreline Community Colle and Edmonds College have expressed interest so the funds may be split evenly between the two but it also may depend on the specific requests. Councilmember Fraley- Monillas suggested indicating that part of the funding will go to Shoreline Community College and part Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 20, 2021 Page 14 will go to Edmonds College. Mr. Doherty said it would be difficult to specify those agencies in the ordinance because although Shoreline and Edmonds have expressed interest and provided examples of programs, contracts have not been negotiated. Additionally, specifying an amount to each would limit flexibility should one college have a more robust response than the other. Councilmember Fraley- Monillas observed if the contracts were not approved in time, the funding potentially would not be available until winter quarter. Mr. Doherty advised that was the potential and the intent was to have it available for fall quarter. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked Council President Paine the purpose of requiring the contracts be approved by Council. Council President Paine explained the Mayor has a $100,000 spending limit and Council authority is required over that amount. Mr. Doherty said by approving the Edmonds Rescue Plan Fund ordinance, the Council would be providing authority to the Mayor to contract for more than $100,000 in this account. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented unless the intent is to bring everything over $100,000 related to this project back to Council one by one, she did not see the purpose. She understood the $100,000 spending limit, but approval of the ordinance would authorize the Mayor to approve the contracts. She was not particularly interested in knowing about the division of funds, particularly if it delayed the ability for students to register. If the Council wants everything over $100,000 to come back to Council, that is one thing, but she did not understand this particular objection. Mr. Doherty pointed out Account D, Edmonds Rescue Plan Nonprofit Organization Support, expressly states, "Small grants of up to $20,000 and totaling no more than $100,000 shall be approvable by the Mayor. Large grants of any amount over $20,000 for a total of up to $400,000 shall be approvable by the City Council." That is because there will be more time to administer that program. The retraining account is more time sensitive which is why giving the Mayor authorization was expressly identified. As a parent familiar with college age students, Councilmember L. Johnson said she was familiar with programs at both Edmonds College and Shoreline Community College. Without knowing their offerings or the need, she did not want to specify the amount that would be provided to each school. In addition, it may be possible that Everett Community College is interested in participating. She understood that $600,000 was a lot of money and typically the Mayor has a $100,000 limit so initially she supported the amendment. However, Mr. Doherty made a good case and after further consideration and as a mom with community college age students, she knew that class registration had already started and delaying the program will make it more difficult for students to access the funds. She respected the intent of the amendment, but with this account, she agreed with the urgency. Councilmember Distelhorst asked if the intent was colleges and community colleges, and not trade or technical schools. Mr. Doherty said that was the proposal; the intent was to focus on the two that have the greatest impact on the community. Councilmember Olson referred to City jobs for which it is difficult to find employees and asked if there were particular job training opportunities the City wanted to encourage related to its needs. She recalled hearing during the last 11/2 years that there were jobs that the City has a difficult time filling. She hoped consideration would be given to training, certification or college opportunities that would fulfill those needs. Mr. Doherty said he spoke with representatives of the college foundations who described how they are changing some short-term programs and certificates due to what has happened over the last 11/2 years and the need for people to obtain greater skills to be more competitive. The colleges are responding to that, it is not just about a degree but also certification training, upskilling and reskilling. The colleges identified programs they would like to focus on, but some internal vetting will likely be required as students apply. There is a lot of flexibility and the reporting will indicate how it is received and whether changes need to be made. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 20, 2021 Page 15 Councilmember Olson asked if the way the program was set up would accommodate a program or certificate identified by a director. Mr. Doherty said the contracts with the colleges need to provide flexibility. For example, if they identify programs of focus and there is no interest from students, changes may need to be made to include other programs to ensure they are responsive to the population. Councilmember Olson referred to Washington State Ferries' inability to fill some positions that results in reduced service. She suggested training for ferry captain programs would be a good thing to make available. Councilmember Buckshnis said she was interested in including trade schools. Her next amendment related to green streets will add more to this account. She commented on a neighbor who is taking an EMT/Firefighters program which is also costly. Amendment 3A COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO AMEND TO STATE, "THE MAYOR SHALL BE AUTHORIZED WITH COUNCIL PRESIDENT OVERSIGHT TO ENTER INTO CORRESPONDING CONTRACT(S) WITH PARTICIPATING COLLEGES SERVING EDMONDS." Councilmember Buckshnis commented this would help move the process forward more quickly. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas expressed support for the amendment, noting trade schools are an important piece of this program. City Attorney Jeff Taraday asked whether the phrase "Council President oversight" meant there would be signature block for the Council President on the contract. He asked how the Council would know that oversight had been complied with. Action on Amendment 3A COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS WITHDREW THE AMENDMENT WITH THE AGREEMENT OF THE SECOND Amendment 3B COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO AMEND THE LAST SENTENCE TO READ, "THE MAYOR SHALL BE AUTHORIZED WITH COUNCIL PRESIDENT APPROVAL TO ENTER INTO CORRESPONDING CONTRACTS WITH PARTICIPATING COLLEGES OR TRADE SCHOOLS SERVING EDMONDS RESIDENTS." Action on Amendment 3B AMENDMENT CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Action on Amendment 3 (as amended) AMENDMENT CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Amendment 4 COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO AMEND TO REMOVE ITEM F.3 GREEN STREETS AND RAIN GARDENS FOR $1M. Councilmember Buckshnis explained the Edmonds Rescue Plan City Green Infrastructure includes $ 1 M for Green Streets and Rain Gardens, enhance existing streets throughout Edmonds by adding features that retain and/or treat stormwater runoff to reduce stormwater surges and contaminants that reach Puget Sound. Similarly, rain gardens in association with streets, parks and other public facilities may be Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 20, 2021 Page 16 established for these same purposes. There are important human aspects of the plan that can be supplemented such as the Job Retraining Program. Funding can be reallocated to green streets and rain gardens in the future if appropriate. Snohomish County Conservation District provides funds for rain gardens. She preferred to concentrate on increasing funding for Accounts A-E. Councilmember Distelhorst referred to the guidance from the Treasury, commenting this is related to environmental justice and looking at where problems are being fixed. If only the end of the pipe is considered and not the beginning, there will not be a great deal of improvement and funding will continue to address the results instead of preventing problems upstream. Living on an arterial with increased traffic and pollutants, he sees daily the affects that has on waterways from the top of the hill and down. He supported retaining the proposed funding and if there isn't a need for it in the coming five years as climate impacts increase, the funding can be adjusted and spent elsewhere. Council President Paine did not support the amendment because having greener roads and infrastructure helps everyone and, as Councilmember Distelhorst mentioned, it is important to address problems where they occur. Runoff down the hills in Edmonds have had negative impacts where the City touches Puget Sound and infiltrating that water uphill is a smarter, better way. These funds provide an opportunity to do green streets and rain gardens, an opportunity the City does not always have. Many neighborhoods have installed rain gardens on their own; continuing that process with the City's assistance will capture a lot of runoff before it reaches the marsh. She did not want to pass up that opportunity. Councilmember L. Johnson appreciated Councilmember Distelhorst raising the issue of environmental justice. She hoped with this funding, the City would put emphasis on underserved communities. It was stated that some neighborhoods installed their own rain gardens, something that may be harder for some. She emphasized the importance of environmental justice in the allocation of these funds. Councilmember Olson expressed support for retaining these funds. She hoped if there were more businesses and individuals in crisis than anticipated, the City would keep this funding in mind specifically for reallocation. Amendment 4A COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO AMEND BY REDUCING THE AMOUNT BY HALF TO $500,000 AND MOVE THE REMAINING $500,000 INTO SMALL BUSINESS SUPPORT FOR TOTAL A TOTAL OF $1.125M. Councilmember K. Johnson commented this is important but it is not the highest importance and there needs to be more support for small businesses. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said she will oppose this amendment for reasons previously stated. In addition, the County has indicated the State will be providing more money to small businesses and nonprofits. However, there is no money from the County or State for green streets, rain gardens or other environmental projects. She agreed with Councilmember Olson, if it looks like money is needed, funds could be reallocated. Councilmember L. Johnson pointed out the discussion is related to recovering from a pandemic which has been a crisis, but there has been an environmental crisis forever and that can keeps getting kicked down the road. While the environmental crisis may be slower moving, the can has been kicked for so long that it is now at the front door and should not be ignored. She made the case that green streets and rain gardens were equally as important and the implications of not addressing it are beyond what can be imagined. The environment is a crisis and she supported what Edmonds can do to address it. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 20, 2021 Page 17 Councilmember Olson commented one of the things in the legislation as a possible use of the funds was mental health and addiction. COVID has taken a toll and there is nothing in the proposal related to that. She was uncertain if that should be discussed in the context of this amendment or if funds for that need should be a separate discussion. She asked if the administration had a reason for not including that. Mayor Nelson encouraged Councilmembers to keep their discussion related to the amendment. Mr. Doherty said the quick answer is the City is aggressively moving forward with a social worker and human services funding to agencies. Funding was not included in this proposal as the intent was to allow those programs to address mental health, substance abuse and other issues related to social services. Councilmember Buckshnis agreed there is an environmental crisis. She has been on WRIA 8 and Puget Sound Partnership for 11 years. She agreed with the $500,000 reduction, emphasizing a number of the accounts/categories could use more money as opposed to putting aside $lM for green streets and rain gardens when they can be funded via grants from Snohomish County Conservation District. She supported reducing the amount for green streets and rain gardens, and wanted to increase funding for other categories. Action on Amendment 4A UPON ROLL CALL, AMENDMENT FAILED (2-5), COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON AND BUCKSHNIS VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST, FRALEY-MONILLAS, OLSON, AND L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING NO. Action on Amendment 4 UPON ROLL CALL, AMENDMENT FAILED (2-5), COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON AND BUCKSHNIS VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST, FRALEY-MONILLAS, OLSON, AND L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING NO. Amendment 5 COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO AMEND SECTION C.3, WITHOUT CHANGING TOTAL AMOUNT, AUTHORIZE 100 GRANTS AT $5,000 EACH IN 2021. Councilmember K. Johnson explained this would provide the maximum opportunity to help businesses; 114 business were served in 2020 and she anticipated an equal amount served in 2021 and only those who had already received $5000 would not be eligible. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked about the current proposal. Mr. Doherty it is currently 50 grants up to $10,000 each in 2021 and 25 grants up to $5,000 each in 2022 which recognizes as businesses recover, the need should diminish after 2021. If the Council approved the amendment and did not provide 100 $5000 grants, Councilmember L. Johnson asked if it could be opened up to $10,000 grants or would the funds be held to provide more grants in 2022. Mr. Doherty said if the amendment was approved, $10,000 grants would not be possible. Councilmember L. Johnson said before she could support the amendment, she needed more specifics. She assumed there was some metric for the administration choosing 50 at $10,000. If $5000 grants were not provided to 100 businesses, she questioned how those funds would be used for small business support. Mr. Doherty said many, many businesses in Edmonds have seen support. As the Economic Development Commission discussed, most businesses who understood the availability of support received a fair amount. It is believed a small number, such as 50, may have not understood the availability or applied in time. A few businesses did not qualify last year due to the criteria regarding length of time in business which is not proposed for the ARP funds. It is also believed that $10,000 to a smaller number of businesses would provide more support to those that did not receive support. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 20, 2021 Page 18 Councilmember Distelhorst observed last year's program approved up to $10,000, but due to the need, grants were reduced to $8,000 so more grants could be provided. Mr. Doherty said that is the reason for the language "up to $10,000." Due to the number of grant applications last year, the amount was reduced slightly to $8,000 to cover more businesses. The intent with this funding is to provide grants close to $10,000. Councilmember Distelhorst observed if the need was greater, there is some flexibility. Council President Paine observed the ordinance states, "...totaling up to 50 participants at $10,000 each in 2021..." She asked if the intent was up to 50 participants or up to $10,000. Mr. Doherty relayed the ordinance should state, "...totaling up to 50 at up to $10,000 each in 2021..." Action on Amendment 5 UPON ROLL CALL, AMENDMENT FAILED (2-5), COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON AND BUCKSHNIS VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST, FRALEY-MONILLAS, OLSON, AND L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING NO. Councilmember Olson referred to the category of Tourism Support in the Edmonds Rescue Plan Business Support and increasing tourism promotion while there are difficulties with staffing hospitality of all kinds. She suggested using some of the General Business Support to provide bonuses to keep businesses staffed. She suggested specifying that the tourism support be provided to arts and culture nonprofits such as the Edmonds Center for the Arts, the Arts Festival, etc. which bring people to town to visit businesses. Promoting nonprofits helps them and tourism will occur as a byproduct of their advertising. Mr. Doherty agreed a lot of the events occur associated with nonprofits but not all and certainly not all the activities such as whale watching excursions, restaurants, etc. This proposal is to promote all of Edmonds and to do more than can be done with the relatively small amount of lodging tax funds. The City has very low lodging tax revenue compared to other cities and the tourism support was intended to help augment advertising to get the word out. He did not want to limit what could be done with advertising and promotion and because so much of what occurs in the City is the result of nonprofits, they will benefit substantially from the proposal. Amendment 6 COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON, TO AMEND TO REDUCE GREEN STREETS AND RAIN GARDENS TO $500,000 AND ADD $250,000 TO ACCOUNT E, EDMONDS RESCUE PLAN JOB RETRAINING PROGRAM, AND $250,000 TO ACCOUNT D, EDMONDS RESCUE PLAN NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION SUPPORT. Councilmember Buckshnis commented both of those accounts need more funding and it can be changed in the future. She reiterated there are other grant resources for rain gardens. Councilmember Olson raised a point of order, whether that was the same motion as before. Mr. Taraday answered this motion is slightly different than the previous motion; they both take $500,000 out of the Green Streets and Rain Gardens fund, but the reallocation is different. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said she was not interested in this reallocation. Action on Amendment 6 UPON ROLL CALL, AMENDMENT FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON, BUCKSHNIS AND OLSON VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST, FRALEY- MONILLAS, AND L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING NO. Amendment 7 COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO AMEND TO REMOVE IN ACCOUNT C, SECTION 3.C, "BUSINESSES MUST NOT HAVE Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 20, 2021 Page 19 RECEIVED MORE THAN $5,000 IN OTHER GRANTS, CREDITS OR FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE." Councilmember Olson said $5,000 is arbitrary; some businesses have a lot of overhead and others do not have as much. A set dollar amount does not consider those variables. She supported removing this section. She asked how the need would be assessed, expressing support for helping viable businesses damaged by COVID who can survive with help. Mr. Doherty said it is important to have a number because a lot of businesses have received a fair amount of support via tax credits, direct grants from the City, State and County, etc. and they would potentially qualify if they experienced a 50% loss in revenue. Removing the amount would open the funding to more businesses, sending the message that there is more support than there really is. The intent was to focus on businesses that had not been assisted last year. Action on Amendment 7 COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS WITHDREW THE AMENDMENT WITH THE AGREEMENT OF THE SECOND. Councilmember Buckshnis said she wanted to ensure small businesses received funding. She recognized many businesses received assistance, but they still need more. She knew of a person who had to turn down a scholarship because he had to work in his parents' business. She asked how funds could be provided to businesses that received assistance but needed more. Mr. Doherty assured there will be more opportunity for assistance than just the City. The County, State, Economic Alliance of Snohomish County, etc. will all offer grants again. Councilmember Buckshnis referred to Section D that states, "Particular consideration will be given to businesses owned by people of color, women, veterans, and other minorities." She recalled language issues related to the availability of grants in the past. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked how many businesses there were in the City including home businesses. City Clerk Passey answered there are approximately 3,500-4,000 on the books but far more are operating that the City does not capture. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas observed if there were 3,000 businesses in Edmonds, a lot of them are home businesses which have the same issues as more visual businesses. She suggested a robust contact of all businesses in Edmonds to see who needs assistance. She knew of some home businesses that had gone out of businesses during the pandemic for a variety of reasons. There are many more businesses than the ones people see, there are businesses in the neighborhoods that people may not be aware of. Mr. Doherty said a postcard was sent to all businesses last year in five languages and he anticipated that would be done again this year. Councilmember Fraley- Monillas said due to information in the nationwide media, everyone has a better understanding of the availability of grants. She hoped some of the businesses that were not as visible would seek assistance. Amendment 9 A MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED AND SECONDED, TO AMEND TO REDUCE GREEN STREETS AND RAIN GARDENS BY $300,000 AND MOVE IT TO THE EDMONDS RESCUE PLAN JOB RETRAINING PROGRAM. Councilmember Buckshnis said the Edmonds Rescue Plan Job Retraining Program was underfunded, it provides a wonderful opportunity, and the additional funds would bring the total close to $1M. Action on Amendment 8 UPON ROLL CALL, AMENDMENT FAILED (2-5), COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON AND BUCKSHNIS VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST, FRALEY-MONILLAS, OLSON, AND L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING NO. Amendment 9 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 20, 2021 Page 20 COUNCILMEMBER DISTELHORST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO AMEND SECTION 4.C.3 TO READ, "...TOTALING UP TO 50 AT UP TO $10,000 EACH IN 2021...". Action on Amendment 9 AMENDMENT CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Action on Main Motion UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON, DISTELHORST, FRALEY-MONILLAS, OLSON, AND L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING NO. 2. 2021 ARPA BUDGET AMENDMENT ORDINANCE Finance Director Dave Turley explained the ordinance is a budget amendment to provide authorization for the administration to spend the money that the Council discussed in the previous agenda item. The ordinance that Mr. Doherty presented was a plan for how to spending the ARPA money; this ordinance is the authority to spend it. The effect on the budget would be $5,946,550 in revenue to the City and the exact same amount in expenses. Staff s recommendation is a motion to approve the ordinance as included in the packet. COUNCILMEMBER DISTELHORST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO APPROVE AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 4221 AS A RESULT OF UNANTICIPATED TRANSFERS AND EXPENDITURES OF VARIOUS FUNDS, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE Councilmember Buckshnis asked if a new Fund 142 had been created. Mr. Turley explained the CARES Fund last year was 142; it was renamed as part of the ordinance approved in the previous agenda item. The CARES Fund was in the 2020 budget which has expired. For clarity sake, the fund name was changed but the purpose is nearly identical so the fund number was retained. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mayor Nelson declared a brief recess. 3. RESOLUTION ADOPTING COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE Council President Paine introduced this item, advising City Clerk Scott Passey prepared the staff report. This has been before the Council several times. Mr. Passey relayed there was a lot of information in packet so he will highlight the background and context. With regard to the history, in 2013 the Council adopted a resolution stating the Council will follow Robert's Rules of Order for the conduct of Council meetings. In December 2013, the Council adopted another resolution adopting a Code of Conduct that applied to Council, boards, commissions and work groups. In 2015, the Council adopted a standalone Code of Ethics that applied to elected officials and appointed City volunteers. In January 2021, the Council adopted a new Code of Conduct that applies exclusively to the City Council. That Code of Conduct has been incorporated into the draft Rules of Procedure as Section 6 to consolidate all applicable rules and Code of Conduct into a single document. Mr. Passey explained the draft Rules of Procedure have been edited and refined since first introduced in 2020 when the Council was presented a draft and asked to provide proposed changes. At that time, some Councilmember provided changes, most of which were minor and helped clarify existing points. A few Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 20, 2021 Page 21 other changes proposed completely different policies or procedures; prior drafts of the Rules of Procedure in Council packets last year included all the proposed changes. In the version in tonight's packet, he chose to omit what he considered the more controversial items and allow Councilmembers to propose amendments in the regular course of the legislative process. The draft in the Council packet represents his recommendation to Council. He did not intend to speak again to the value of having comprehensive Rules of Procedure and was happy to respond to any questions. As she stated when this arose in spring 2020, Councilmember L. Johnson said she would have found this extremely helpful as an incoming Councilmember and it would be helpful for anyone considering serving on City Council as well as to inform citizens' expectations. COUNCILMEMBER L. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 1295 ADOPTING ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER FOR THE CONDUCT OF CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS, AND ESTABLISHING COMPREHENSIVE RULES OF PROCEDURE AND CODE OF CONDUCT FOR THE CITY COUNCIL. Councilmember Buckshnis found the motion very premature as the Council had not yet had a discussion. She was uncertain what information had been removed and whether or not there was a working group that worked on the Rules of Procedure. She expressed concern with attempting to push this through as a procedural issue when there were so many other issues facing the Council such as the emergency ordinance. This is a very detailed document and she was concerned with introducing a motion to approve it at 9:45 p.m. She found it very perplexing that the Council was interested in passing it instead of having a discussion. She did not support passing the resolution and wanted to know what Councilmembers had proposed, what had been included and removed from the rules, how the rules were developed, etc. She was also concerned with having only 15 minutes remaining in the meeting to discuss this when it was scheduled for 45 minutes. Councilmember Olson asked if the maker of the motion intended that the Council would vote on this tonight. Councilmember L. Johnson commented this first came to Council in the spring, it was agreed to delay it for 3 weeks and bring it back to Council. There has been quite a bit of time to review the rules and ask questions. Many Councilmembers have spoken to the need for Rules of Procedure so it was her intent to take it seriously and to consider moving forward. With the response from Councilmember L. Johnson, Councilmember Olson said she agreed with Councilmember Buckshnis' protest and asked the Council not to vote on this tonight. She was one of the Councilmembers who submitted changes that were not included in the rules in the packet and with only 15 minutes remaining, she would not have the time and opportunity to explore them. Since nearly a year has passed since Councilmembers provided that feedback, she suggested staff provide the changes that Councilmembers submitted so those proposals were not lost in the interim. She wondered if there was a better method for keeping track of past submittals. Council President Paine said the Rules of Procedure have been on and off the Council's agenda for the last year plus. The changes are not that significant and Councilmembers have had an opportunity to review them, ask questions and develop amendments throughout the process. She did not have a problem with approving the rules today, acknowledging there had not been much discussion but the Council needed to start making decisions. Councilmember Distelhorst recalled the last time this came to Council was April 20 when the Council voted to delay 3 weeks until May 4. He supported delaying it at that time to provide Councilmembers time to work on it. It has now been close to 18 months since the Council first saw the Rules of Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 20, 2021 Page 22 Procedures. He thanked Mr. Passey for his work on this and for incorporating the Council's feedback. Due to it now being 9:46 p.m., he suggested if this were delay to next week, it be at the top of the agenda and that Councilmembers do their review ahead of time so that more clear process and procedure could be added to the Council's work. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas agreed with Councilmember Distelhorst. She was exhausted from the last item and feared if the Council continued reviewing the rules, they would not make good decisions. She agreed moving it to the top of next week's agenda would be reasonable and would give Councilmembers a week to review it and draft amendments. The rules have been worked on since she was Council President in the winter of 2020. Mr. Passey pointed out the two public hearings next week take priority so it would need to be later on the agenda. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas agreed the public hearings should be done first but the Rules of Procedure should follow immediately. Councilmember Olson referred to a public comment tonight that there was no section for items that require a unanimous vote. She asked if that could be incorporated by next week. Mr. Passey answered it could if that was the will of the Council. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas raised a point of order, suggesting that would be an amendment to the motion. COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE, TO AMEND TO INCORPORATE A SECTION FOR ITEMS REQUIRING A UNANIMOUS VOTE. Councilmember Olson agreed items requiring a unanimous vote was a different process so it would be a good addition to the Rules of Procedure. Councilmember Buckshnis pointed out in April, the Council did not discuss the rules and even though it has been on the agenda many times, the Council has never really reviewed the rules. She asked who helped develop the Rules of Procedure, recalling Councilmember Fraley-Monillas' comment that Edmonds was different than Edmonds. She recalled the Code of Conduct was developed by a committee comprised of Councilmembers Olson, L. Johnson and Distelhorst. The Rules of Procedure have been around since it was brought up by Councilmember K. Johnson that the Council follow Robert's Rules of Order. It is not that the Council has been avoiding this but there are more pressing issues and generally Councilmembers should know how to operate because they all were business people who learned common sense, kindness and how to conduct business. She reiterated her interest in how the rules were created and which the amendments were removed because they were controversial. Mayor Nelson cautioned Councilmembers to keep comments related to the amendment. Councilmember Distelhorst asked if votes that require unanimous affirmation are regulated under RCW. City Attorney Jeff Taraday answered both RCW and case law. Councilmember Distelhorst asked the maker of the motion whether the if intent was to research that and develop language around the RCW and case law or to incorporate the language that was just stated. Councilmember Olson said she would leave that to Mr. Passey, but even referencing the applicable RCW would be helpful. Mr. Passey said the rules have many footnotes and references to existing statutes and governing laws. Something could be added to the rules with a footnote to the RCW. Councilmember Distelhorst expressed support for that. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said she thought the Council had agreed to take this up next week. She did not want staff making amendments based on opinions; it needs to be done via amendment. She recalled she was charged with creating a subcommittee and did not understand the point of discussing who was on it. Mayor Nelson requested Councilmembers focus their discussion on the amendment. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 20, 2021 Page 23 COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS CALLED THE QUESTION. VOTE ON THE CALL FOR THE QUESTION CARRIED (6-1); COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON VOTING NO. UPON ROLL CALL, AMENDMENT FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON, DISTELHORST, AND OLSON VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS FRALEY-MONILLAS, BUCKSHNIS, L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING NO. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DISTELHORST, TO EXTEND AN EXTRA 10 MINUTES TO 10:10 P.M. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCILMEMBER L. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO POSTPONE TO THE NEXT MEETING. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 9. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS 1. COUNCIL COMMITTEE MINUTES 10. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember L. Johnson said she wanted to take this opportunity to thank the entire City staff for everything each of them have taken on during the pandemic and shut down to keep the City running and to get the City where it is today after 16 months to meet fairly safety in person. She recognized the City for the quick pivot from the traditional model to one that proactively prioritized public health and used shift scheduling to reduce exposure and ensure that enough critical staff would be available to keep essential functions up and running. She appreciated those whose positions required they remain working in person to keep the City running which often meant they risked exposure for themselves and their family so the City could remain safe and functioning. She appreciated those who made room at home to telecommunicate which often meant hushing children, pets and sometimes partners who were home with them 24/7. In addition to their City work, many had to juggle sudden, unexpected, increased responsibilities like homeschooling, and increased diligence and attention necessary to protect the mental and physical wellbeing of family members. Much of what they had to do to accommodate was unseen and unrecognized and all too often they only heard complaints, but not appreciation. She wanted staff to know they were very, very much appreciated. Councilmember Olson thanked Councilmember L. Johnson for saying that on behalf of all Councilmembers. She has been watching the national scene regarding COVID, specifically Los Angeles who is returning to a mask mandate and Springfield, Illinois, who is overwhelmed by the highly contagious Delta variant. For those who have been waiting to ensure the vaccines are safe, there has been time to watch and see that they are. For those thinking that we are out of the woods and there is no need to be vaccinated, she assured we are not out of the woods. She urged the public to consider getting vaccinated now, tomorrow, this week, before it overwhelms the community like it has some areas. It is for the protection of the young and otherwise vulnerable who cannot get vaccinated as well as for themselves, to avoid another mask mandate, to keep schools and businesses open, and to protect the economy. She thanked those who have already gotten vaccinated and those who still can and will for the community's sake. Councilmember Olson reported the patience and persistence of the volunteer environmental stewards is paying off. Following a community meeting with WSDOT a couple weeks ago, permission has been granted to start work parties to remove the invasive nightshade growth from the Edmonds and Shellabarger Marsh along SR-104, growth that is responsible for sediment buildup that obstructs flow and contributes to flooding in the Harbor Square area. This will be a highly labor intensive effort and the community's help is actively sought. Volunteers can contact Joe Scordino at Joe.Scordino@Yahoo.com Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 20, 2021 Page 24 for a volunteer application and work party schedule. She will personal be there and looked forward to seeing others. Councilmember Buckshnis said people can also email her and she will forward it to Mr. Scordino. This is extremely exciting news and she cited numerous volunteer parties that have occurred in the past. WSDOT has offered a backhoe to pull the fence out. She congratulated the Milwaukee Bucks for winning the championship. Council President Paine welcomed everyone back, commenting it was good to be back in person. She pointed out there are different notices on the doors, one for the Council Chambers and another for the Court. She encouraged the public to enjoy summer activities safely, from Sea Jazz at the Port to the Uptown Market as well as the Arts Festival and many other activities. The variants are in the community and she did not want to test the extent of protection provided by the vaccines. She echoed Councilmember L. Johnson's thanks to City staff. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas explained she and others on the dais were wearing masks because a Councilmember had been around unvaccinated people which she felt was a very dangerous position to be in. The Health District is expecting a fifth wave to hit in October as a result of the Delta variant and they and other organizations are considering who it will affect and the death rate. She encouraged everyone to get vaccinated. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas reported Snohomish County is return to work in small, hybrid sections and the County Council has not returned to the dais. The Health District is also returning to work in small numbers, an important signal that people need to be vigilant in the coming months, particularly when school starts and unvaccinated children will be in school with vaccinated children. She relayed a warning from the Snohomish County Health District related to high levels of poisons in shellfish harvested off Puget Sound due to water temperatures. She described symptoms that may last 2-3 days and start between 4 hours to 4 days after eating contaminated shellfish. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said she was absent from last week's Council meeting and unable to vote on Civic Park due to caring for a family member following surgery. If she had been present, she would have voted yes on the Civic Park contracts. Her initial response regarding Civic Park was intentional because she wanted to begin a discussion about fairness in different areas of Edmonds, but City was way too far down the road with Civic Park to back up. There are 46 parks in Edmonds, 1 of which is on the east side with a few parking spaces. She appreciated Councilmember L. Johnson's statements last week regarding the differences between parks in east Edmonds and the Bowl. She received a number of contacts from citizens, one saying residents in east Edmonds could visit parks in Mountlake Terrace, Lynnwood and Shoreline and did not need parks in their neighborhood. A former Councilmember said residents could drive to visit parks. She referred to Natalie Seitz' public comment tonight, explaining she lives in an area that requires crossing seven lanes of traffic to reach a county park. The Council believes in representing all of Edmonds, but needs to take steps to equalize what occurs in east Edmonds and in the Bowl. A MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE AND SECONDED TO EXTEND TO 10:15 P.M. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Councilmember Distelhorst thanked Councilmember L. Johnson for her comments regarding City staff. He too appreciated all the work staff has done during the pandemic, for residents and to get Council back in person. Case rates are on the rise, almost at the peak of initial lockdown in March 2020, taking into account that over 60% of Snohomish County residents are vaccinated. He encouraged unvaccinated individuals to get vaccinated; the United States is one of the few privileged countries in the world to have vaccines readily available and there is no reason not to get vaccinated to take care of the community. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 20, 2021 Page 25 Councilmember Distelhorst thanked the Diversity Commission, Mayor Nelson and Mr. Doherty for getting the new anti -hate, bias and discrimination portal up on the City's website. As the liaison to the Diversity Commission, this issue was discussed multiple times by the commission and with community members who did not feel they had a place to report instances that may not arise to a criminal nature. He has discussed with the Diversity Commission and Mr. Doherty upgrades to ensure it is fully accessible and that its availability is robustly communicated to the community. He remarked it was nice to see everyone back in person. Councilmember K. Johnson commented it was nice to be back in person and to see audience members and staff in 3D. She encouraged the public to do their best to remain social distanced, get vaccinated and to stay safe. Student Representative Roberts recognized getting the Council back to in -person meetings was a big team effort. Echoing Councilmember L. Johnson, he thanked City staff, healthcare workers and everyone who adjusted and adapted. Although adjustments have been made, COVID is not over yet. He encouraged the public to get vaccinated if they can if they haven't already and to make safe choices because he along with many others want to be back in school in September. 11. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Nelson agreed it was wonderful to be back in person with Council, staff and audience members. He thanked staff for making it making it possible and relatively pain free. He agreed we are not out of the woods yet regarding COVID. The data from late May/early June indicated Edmonds zip codes are in the top 1-2 in Snohomish County for the highest vaccination rates, mid-70% and probably higher now. The current rate is 108/100,000; when Washington reopened it was in the 60s but has been going up for the last several weeks and is on track for a fifth wave. There are many citizens in Edmonds, Snohomish County, Washington, the United States and the world who need to get vaccinated. The latest data indicates 98% of the people hospitalized and dying of COVID are unvaccinated so clearly vaccinations save lives. He urged the public to get vaccinated. 12. ADJOURN With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:13 p.m. 1 EL NELSON, MAYOR PASSEY, ITY RK Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 20, 2021 Page 26