2010.06.01 CC Agenda Packet
AGENDA
Edmonds City Council
Council Chambers, Public Safety Complex
250 5th Ave. North, Edmonds
______________________________________________________________
JUNE 1, 2010
7:00 p.m.
Call to Order and Flag Salute
1. Approval of Agenda
2. Approval of Consent Agenda Items
A. Roll Call
B. AM-3109 Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of May 25, 2010.
C. AM-3105 Approval of claim checks #119126 to #119246 dated May 27, 2010 for $511,626.90.
D. AM-3103 Acknowledge receipt of Claims for Damages from Verizon (amount undetermined), and Erin
Graafstra ($6,994.26).
3. AM-3100
(5 Minutes)
Community Service Announcement - Greater Edmonds Chamber of Commerce / 4th of
July Events.
4. AM-3102
(20 Minutes)
Mike Doubleday - Washington State Legislative Session Recap.
5. AM-3106
(30 Minutes)
Public hearing, followed by action, renewing interim zoning Ordinance No. 3769, which
defined Temporary Homeless Shelter and identified zoning districts where temporary
homeless shelters are permitted.
6. AM-3107
(20 Minutes)
Public hearing, followed by action, renewing Interim Ordinance 3779, amending the
provisions of ECDC 20.110.040(F), Monetary Penalties, clarifying the impact of the
amendment on existing code enforcement actions.
7. AM-3108
(20 Minutes)
Public hearing, followed by action, renewing interim Ordinance 3780, adopting certain
procedures with respect to the abandonment, construction and authorization of public
projects and street vacations and dedications.
8. AM-3088
(30 Minutes)
Public hearing, followed by action, on a proposed Ordinance amending Edmonds
Community Development Code Title 19, adopting updated International Building
Codes.
9.Audience Comments (3 minute limit per person)*
*Regarding matters not listed on the Agenda as Closed Record Review or as Public Hearings.
10. AM-3101
(10 Minutes)
Reconsideration of funding source for Climate Solutions New Energy Cities.
Packet Page 1 of 196
11. (5 Minutes)Mayor's Comments
12. (15 Minutes)Council Comments
ADJOURN
Packet Page 2 of 196
AM-3109 2.B.
Approve 05-25-10 City Council Minutes
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:06/01/2010
Submitted By:Sandy Chase Time:Consent
Department:City Clerk's Office Type:Action
Review Committee:
Committee Action:
Information
Subject Title
Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of May 25, 2010.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
It is recommended that the City Council review and approve the draft minutes.
Previous Council Action
N/A
Narrative
Attached is a copy of the draft minutes.
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: 05-25-10 Draft City Council Minutes
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 05/27/2010 12:10 PM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 05/27/2010 12:14 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 05/28/2010 08:27 AM APRV
Form Started By: Sandy
Chase
Started On: 05/27/2010 12:08
PM
Final Approval Date: 05/28/2010
Packet Page 3 of 196
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 25, 2010
Page 1
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL DRAFT MINUTES
May 25, 2010
At 5:30 p.m., Mayor Haakenson announced that the City Council would meet in executive
session regarding pending litigation. He stated that the executive session was scheduled to last
approximately 90 minutes and would be held in the Police Training Room, located in the Public
Safety Complex. Elected officials present at the executive session were: Mayor Haakenson, and
Councilmembers Plunkett, Fraley-Monillas, Buckshnis, Peterson and Wilson. Others present
were Attorney Grant Weed, Attorney Stephanie Croll, and City Clerk Sandy Chase. The
executive session concluded at 6:46 p.m.
The regular City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Haakenson in the
Council Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag
salute.
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Gary Haakenson, Mayor
Strom Peterson, Council President Pro Tem
D. J. Wilson, Councilmember
Michael Plunkett, Councilmember
Dave Orvis, Councilmember
Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember
Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember
ELECTED OFFICIALS ABSENT
Steve Bernheim, Council President
ALSO PRESENT
Graham Marmion, Student Representative
STAFF PRESENT
Jim Lawless, Assistant Police Chief
John Westfall, Fire Marshal
Debi Humann, Human Resources Director
Sandy Chase, City Clerk
Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst.
Jeannie Dines, Recorder
1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT, TO
APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items
approved are as follows:
A. ROLL CALL
B. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF MAY 18, 2010.
Packet Page 4 of 196
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 25, 2010
Page 2
C. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #118986 TO #119125 DATED MAY 20, 2010 FOR
$532,678.53. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL DIRECT DEPOSIT AND CHECKS #49268
THROUGH #49309 FOR THE PAY PERIOD OF APRIL 15 - APRIL 30, 2010 FOR
$645,555.20. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL DIRECT DEPOSIT AND CHECKS #49310
THROUGH #49358 FOR THE PAY PERIOD OF MAY 1 - MAY 15, 2010 FOR $623,745.94.
D. RESOLUTION NO. 1231 - THANKING COUNCILMEMBER DAVE ORVIS FOR HIS
SERVICE.
E. ORDINANCE NO. 3793 OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, REPEALING
ORDINANCE NO. 3592, ADOPTING A BIENNIAL BUDGET PROCESS,
AUTHORIZING REVERSION TO THE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 35A.33 RCW
WITH RESPECT TO THE PREPARATION OF A BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011,
AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE.
3. PRESENTATION OF RESOLUTION AND PLAQUE TO COUNCILMEMBER DAVE ORVIS.
Council President Pro Tem Peterson read a resolution thanking Councilmember Orvis for his service on
the City Council from January 2000 through May 31, 2010 and wishing him success in his and his
family’s future. He presented Councilmember Orvis a plaque in recognition of his service.
Councilmember Plunkett commented he first met Councilmember Orvis when he was a resident making
comment to the Council regarding his interest in keeping property taxes at or below the rate of inflation,
which he succeeded in doing as a Councilmember. He envied Councilmember Orvis’ elevation to the role
of citizen. He recalled Councilmember Orvis’ efforts to prohibit casinos in Edmonds, explaining at one
time casinos were allowed in any commercial zone and a casino owner had expressed interest in locating
a casino at the site of the Antique Mall. Councilmember Orvis and others collected 5,000 signatures on a
petition and submitted the petition to the Council. The Council subsequently approved a ban on casinos in
Edmonds.
Councilmember Plunkett recalled Meadowdale residents’ interest in a walkway on 76th and
Councilmember Orvis’ efforts that made that a reality via grant funds to connect a walkway to the park
above Haines Wharf. He cited Councilmember Orvis’ efforts to preserve the charm and character of
Edmonds, noting he was easy to work with and never took personal umbrage or personal shots at other
Councilmembers. He wished Councilmember Orvis well in his future endeavors and thanked him for his
service.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas expressed her admiration for Councilmember Orvis’ work on the
Council. Although the quietest and most unemotional member of the Council, she recognized him for
thinking through things before speaking, a model she hoped to emulate. She cited the importance of his
work with the Snohomish Health District, particularly his tenacity and consistency. She admired his
decision to resign to focus on his family.
Councilmember Buckshnis wished Councilmember Orvis good luck.
Councilmember Wilson commented whenever Councilmember Orvis spoke, he was sincere and well
informed. He recalled the first time Councilmember Orvis and he met was in 2001 when they discussed
Brightwater and how to obtain more funding for park acquisition and sidewalk construction. He
recognized Councilmember Orvis’ steadfastness, commenting although they sometimes disagreed, he
would miss Councilmember Orvis on the Council.
Packet Page 5 of 196
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 25, 2010
Page 3
Council President Pro Tem Peterson commented although Councilmember Orvis and he had an exciting
campaign, he knew once he was appointed to the Council, that that was behind them. Although they have
disagreed on occasion, he respected his opinion, recognizing that it was well thought out and sincere. He
was especially impressed with his work with the Snohomish Health District, noting the importance of
helping those less fortunate.
Mayor Haakenson expressed his appreciation for Councilmember Orvis’ service. He commented that
Councilmember Orvis’ decision to resign to focus on his family illustrated his priorities were in the right
place.
Councilmember Orvis recalled when Council President Pro Tem Peterson was appointed, he was quoted
as saying an appointment was the political equivalent of marrying your sister, noting his resignation was
creating an appointment situation. He explained his decision to resign was to spend more time with his
family as he could no longer meet both responsibilities.
Councilmember Orvis referred to Edmonds’ historic small town charm, commenting since he has been on
the Council, the citizens and the Council have banned gambling, bought Marina Beach Park, built the
Edmonds Center for the Arts, constructed numerous sidewalk and pathway projects, rebuilt 220th, and
said no to taller buildings. He hoped the community and the Council would continue to say no to taller
buildings especially on the waterfront.
Councilmember Orvis cited New Haven, Connecticut as an example of a city that decided eliminating
historic structures would be good for economic development. An activist, Suzette Kilo, lost her Supreme
Court case to prevent the city’s use of eminent domain to purchase and demolish her historic home and
replace it with a new building. Unfortunately, the ultimate result was the destruction of a historic area of
the city and an empty lot due to New Haven’s inability to finance the new buildings. He urged the
Council to retain the historic small town charm, views and open space in Edmonds, noting Edmonds’
strength was its small town charm, its waterfront, its commitment to the arts, not taller buildings.
Edmonds economic future depends on preserving its small town charm and he anticipated in future
elections Councilmembers would be evaluated on their ability to preserve its small town charm.
Councilmember Orvis thanked Senior Executive Council Assistant Jana Spellman, City Clerk Sandy
Chase and all City staff; the Council and Mayor; the people of Edmonds who elected him and gave him
the honor of serving on the Council for the past ten years; and his wife, Martha, for her support during his
ten years on the Council.
4. RECEPTION IN HONOR OF COUNCILMEMBER DAVE ORVIS.
At 7:22 p.m., Mayor Haakenson recessed the Council to a reception in honor Councilmember Orvis. The
meeting was reconvened at 7:35 p.m.
Councilmember Orvis left the meeting at the conclusion of the reception.
5. 2010 RECOMMENDATION FROM THE CITIZENS' COMMISSION ON COMPENSATION OF
ELECTED OFFICIALS.
Mayor Haakenson left the dais during discussion of this item.
Council President Pro Tem Peterson thanked the Commission for their work.
Packet Page 6 of 196
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 25, 2010
Page 4
Deb Anderson, Chair, Citizens’ Commission on Compensation of Elected Officials, introduced the
members of the Commission: Lisa Gallucci, Janice Flaagan, Alan Doman, Anne Ball, Dilys Rosales, and
Norma Middleton. She explained the Commission was established in 1999 and is composed of 7
members. The Commission meets every even year and their recommendations are to be filed with the
City Clerk by the first Monday in May. The Commission task is to review elected officials’ compensation
(Council, Mayor and Municipal Court Judge) and recommend adjustments so that citizens of the highest
quality may be attracted to public service. Any approved compensation changes for Councilmembers will
become effective with the new Council terms beginning January 1, 2012. The compensation of the Mayor
and Judge may be altered during their term.
Historically, compensation for City employees per the Council’s Non-Represented Compensation Policy
has been determined by comparing acceptable cities by population in Pierce, King and Snohomish
Counties. The Citizens’ Commission used seven cities above and below Edmonds by population; cities
above are Kirkland, Redmond, Shoreline, Lakewood, Auburn, Renton and Kent, cities below are
Sammamish, Puyallup, Marysville, Lynnwood, Bothell, University Place and Burien. The Commission
used the following comparable data in their review of Mayor and Council compensation:
• City population
• Form of government
• Position, responsibilities and scope of work
• Edmonds historical compensation information
• Current compensation and benefits
• FTEs
By population, out of the 14 comparable cities, Edmonds ranked 8 by population. By FTE, Edmonds
ranks 11th out of the 14 comparable cities, below the median. She noted the Commission determined FTE
was relevant as it provided insight into various cities’ workloads and could increase demand on the
position of Mayor. She pointed out Sammamish, Burien, and University Place have lower FTE because
they contract out most city work.
Ms. Anderson explained the Council adopted the Non-Represented Compensation Policy which strives to
maintain equity in pay for all employees, offers competitive salaries to attract high level applicants, offers
internal equity to foster long term retention of valuable employees and rewards meritorious job
performance for deserving individuals. The Policy is based on maintaining salary ranges at the median
when compared to cities of similar size in King, Pierce and Snohomish Counties. This Policy has been in
place for approximately ten years.
With regard to the Mayor’s compensation, she explained when the Commission made their
recommendation in 2008, the compensation level for the position of Mayor was at the 39th percentile, well
below the median. In 2010, the compensation level has slipped farther behind and is currently at the 36th
percentile. When compared to the 14 cities, the position of Mayor in Edmonds ranked second to last or
13th. Edmonds City Code 10.80 states that the Commission’s mandate is to review compensation for
elected officials to ensure that the citizens of the highest quality are attracted to public service. The
proposed increases recognize that the current Mayor’s compensation is significantly below similar
jurisdictions in both salary and benefits. In addition to more generous salary structures, many of the
comparable cities also provide either a deferred compensation benefit or car allowance or both.
Ms. Anderson provided a chart illustrating the Mayor’s salary 1988 – 2010, noting the level of
compensation had not changed since 2008. She explained in 2008 the Commission recommended the
following:
• Increasing the Mayor’s salary by 3.5% effective July 1, 2008, increasing the salary to $104,963
Packet Page 7 of 196
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 25, 2010
Page 5
• A 3.5% increase effective July 1, 2009 increasing the salary to $108,637
• Add a monthly $400 deferred compensation contribution in addition to the base rate, increasing
the Mayor’s salary by $4800/year.
The 2008 Commission felt the increases were warranted and conservative based on the position’s 2008
ranking at the 39th percentile.
In lieu of the 2008 Commission’s recommendation, the Council proposed and approved the following:
• Increase the compensation of the Mayor by $983/month to an annual salary of $113,210 effective
July 1, 2008 (Ordinance No. 3685)
• Effective July 1, 2009, increase the compensation of Mayor to $125,000, a 10.4% increase
• The July 1, 2009 increase was later delayed to January 1, 2011 (Ordinance No. 3733)
The 2010 Commission recommends the following compensation for the position of Mayor:
• Ordinance No. 3733 adopted by Council on May 20, 2008 move forward with a July 1, 2010
modified implementation date. This action will increase compensation for the position of Mayor
to $125,000, moving the compensation to the 40th percentile which is still well below the median.
• A market rate adjustment of 2% effective January 1, 2011
• A market rate adjustment of 2% effective January 1, 2012
The market adjustments are warranted as the salary for the position of Mayor is still well below the 50th
percentile.
With regard to Council salaries, Ms. Anderson displayed a chart of Council salaries 1988 – 2010, pointing
out Council salaries had not changed since 2002. She noted in addition to the base rate, each
Councilmember earns $50 per meeting per month up to maximum of 8 meetings per month or an
additional $400/month as well as benefits.
When the Commission made their recommendation in 2008, the compensation level for Councilmembers
was 52%, slightly above the median. In 2010, the compensation level has moved to the median at the 50th
percentile. When compared to the 14 cities, Council positions in Edmonds ranked 7th, the median.
Because Council positions are paid at the median, the Commission recommends no compensation change
for 2010 and 2011.
With regard to the Municipal Court Judge, Ms. Anderson explained in 2006 the Council required the
position of Edmonds Municipal Court Judge become an elected position which brought it under the scope
of the Citizens’ Commission on Compensation for Elected Officials. Establishing the position as an
elected position qualified the City to receive reimbursement from State court improvement account funds.
As an incentive to attract quality Municipal Court Judges, cities were given an opportunity to receive
funds if they paid judges at least 95% of the salary set for District Court Judges. The Edmonds Municipal
Court Judge position is currently part time, 0.55 FTE, and the Commission recommends the following:
• Maintain compensation at 95% of the salary of District Court Judge
• No increase in 2010 in accordance with State Salary Commission
• If necessary during 2011, increase compensation to maintain 95% requirement
Ms. Anderson concluded that while the Commission was well aware of the current economic climate and
how the economy has specifically affected the City of Edmonds, the Commission took the scope of their
work from the Edmonds City Code which states it is the policy of the city of Edmonds to base the
compensation of elected officials on realistic standards so that elected officials of the City may be
compensated according to the duties of their office and so that citizens of the highest quality may be
Packet Page 8 of 196
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 25, 2010
Page 6
attracted to service. While the commission feels their recommendations are reasonable based on market
analysis, it was outside the Commission’s scope to determine the budgetary constraints toward
implementing their recommendations. The Commission respectfully acknowledged that budget
implementation was the City Council’s function; however, the Commission implores the Council to take
their recommendations seriously.
Councilmember Buckshnis commented the Commission did not differentiate between City Manager and
Mayor. Ms. Anderson stated their analysis looked at the City Manager and the Mayor together because in
Edmonds’ the position of Mayor functions as both the City Manager and Mayor. Councilmember
Buckshnis observed the Commission equated them as one in the same, however, a City Manager reports
to the City Council and has many more reporting requirements. Ms. Anderson responded they were
considered the same in the Commission’s analysis.
Councilmember Buckshnis pointed out Shoreline, who has a City Manager, has a FTE of 143. She
questioned whether their FTE was lower because a City Manager was more efficient. Councilmember
Wilson responded Shoreline did not have their own Fire Department, Police Department or Sewer
Department. Councilmember Buckshnis concluded Shoreline was not really comparable to Edmonds. She
asked if the Commission compared like cities with regard to job responsibilities. Ms. Anderson responded
the Commission compared like cities based on population, form of government, position responsibilities
and scope of work, historical compensation information, current compensation and benefits, and FTE.
Councilmember Buckshnis asked the median salary of an Edmonds’ resident. Ms. Anderson responded an
individual citizens’ salary was not relative to the Commission’s scope of work.
Councilmember Buckshnis asked why cities in closer proximity to Edmonds were not used in the
comparison such as Mukilteo, Everett, Mountlake Terrace, and Kingston. Ms. Anderson explained the
Commission used the Council approved Non-Represented Compensation Policy to determine the
comparison cities by population in Pierce, King and Snohomish Counties.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas observed the Commission provided information regarding how
Edmonds ranked with the other 14 cities by population and FTE. The Commission referenced how the
Mayor’s salary ranked with the other 14 cities but the Mayor’s/City Manager’s compensation in the other
14 cities was not provided. Ms. Anderson referred to a list of the Mayor’s compensation in the 14 cities,
citing for example the salary of Kent’s City Manager was $13,487/month and Lakewood’s was
$12,380/month. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas suggested it would be helpful for the Council to have
the population, FTE and Mayor’s salary comparison with other cities. Human Resources Director Deb
Humann responded the Commission discussed providing the Council all the data considered and decided
it was the Commission’s responsibility to provide a recommendation based on the data and did not
provide all the data used in making their recommendation. It could be provided if the Council desired.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas suggested a list of the Mayor’s/City Manager’s compensation of the 14
other cities would be helpful to compare it to the number of staff supervised and city population.
Councilmember Wilson asked the deadline for the Commission to provide their recommendation. Ms.
Humann responded the deadline per City Code was for the Commission to submit their recommendation
by the first Monday which was accomplished. Councilmember Wilson asked whether the Commission
could do additional research if the Council requested. Ms. Humann answered it was not precluded by
code but had not been done in the past. She offered to provide the Council additional information.
With regard to the selection of comparable cities, Councilmember Wilson referenced the City’s policy of
paying at the 50th percentile and asked whether the Council adopted the list of comparable cities. Ms.
Packet Page 9 of 196
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 25, 2010
Page 7
Humann responded the policy states comparable cities in Pierce, King and Snohomish County that are
directly above and below by population. When she conducts the salary survey for City staff, she uses nine
cities including Edmonds, four above and four below. Councilmember Wilson asked whether it was
appropriate to revisit that policy in light of the differences in governmental structure between cities. Ms.
Humann answered how compensation was determined varied by city; some incorporate salaries of private
partnerships with the City, others use a percentage of other cities’ compensation, etc.
Councilmember Wilson suggested it may be appropriate in the future to do an “apples to apples”
comparison as much as possible. He understood the logic of comparing a strong Mayor to a City Manager
observing that method had a fundamental flaw. He preferred to compare Edmonds’ Mayor to other strong
Mayors even if the cities were not the four above and below with regard to population. He recognized the
similarities between a strong Mayor and a City Manager but anticipated a City Manager was a different
job and a different level of compensation than a strong Mayor. He suggested staff remind the Council of
this issue prior to the Citizens’ Commission on Compensation of Elected Officials beginning their work.
Council President Pro Tem Peterson asked if the cost of living in different cities was considered, noting
the cost of living in Kirkland was different than Burien. Ms. Humann responded that was not considered.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked whether compensation provided by State or County was
considered. Ms. Humann answered County and Fire District salaries were considered in Fire Department
comparables. She anticipated King County and other jurisdictions’ salaries would be considered in the
salary survey for the Police negotiations because when staff leaves, they usually are hired by those
agencies. She concluded State and County salaries were not considered in the Non-Represented Salary
Policy. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked whether State or County salaries were considered in
comparing compensation for positions such as Parks & Recreation. Ms. Humann answered no; there was
adequate information available from other cities for Teamster and SEIU employees.
Ms. Humann asked what additional information the Council wished her to provide. Councilmember
Fraley-Monillas requested the annual salary of the Mayor or City Manager for the comparable cities and
an indication whether the city had a strong Mayor or City Manager. Ms. Anderson explained the
Commission only compared base salary because the compensation package such as deferred
compensation, benefits, etc. varied widely between cities.
Councilmember Wilson commented it was appropriate to request that information if there were at least
four Councilmembers interested in increasing the Mayor’s salary. He did not support the Commission’s
recommendation to increase the Mayor’s salary and proposed repealing the ordinance that deferred the
Mayor’s increase to July 1, 2011. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas advised she would like to have the
information she requested.
Councilmember Buckshnis commented salaries were part of the information the proposed levy committee
would be reviewing. She did not support an increase in the Mayor’s salary.
Councilmember Wilson explained when the Council discussed increasing the Mayor’s salary in 2008, he
supported the increase, recalling Councilmember Wambolt made a very compelling case for the increase
at that time. The Mayor’s $113,000 salary is an appropriate level. When the economy fell off a cliff in
September 2008, the Council passed an ordinance to postpone the second increase. He suggested the
Council direct staff to return with a repeal of Ordinance 3733 that had postponed the Mayor’s salary
increase from $113,000 to $125,000. When the economy improved, the Council could revisit the Mayor’s
compensation.
Packet Page 10 of 196
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 25, 2010
Page 8
COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT,
THAT THE COUNCIL RESOLVE TO DIRECT STAFF TO PREPARE A REPEAL OF
ORDINANCE NO. 3733, THE ORDINANCE THAT DEFERRED THE MAYOR’S SECOND PAY
RAISE TO $125,000 AND BRING IT BACK FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION.
Councilmember Wilson acknowledged the questions regarding comparing the salary of a City Manager to
a strong Mayor were valid He appreciated Ms. Anderson’s comment that it was the Council’s
responsibility to consider the budgetary pressures. If the Council planned to ask the voters to approve a
levy, it was important to avoid large salary increases. He envisioned providing a pay raise to a City
Manager in order to retain him/her; however, as a political figure, it was a symbolic gesture to ask the
Mayor to forego a future pay increase. He concluded in this economic climate and the potential for a levy,
it was prudent to forego a pay increase for the Mayor.
Council President Pro Tem Peterson understood Councilmember Wilson point and the difficulty of the
politics and symbolism. Conversely, the Commission’s work indicates the difficulty of an apples to
apples comparison. He pointed out the importance of attracting quality people to the Mayor’s position,
noting although the Mayor’s position was political, it required a great deal of work. He noted Edmonds’
205 FTE with a population of 40,000 compared to Lynnwood’s 455 FTE with a population of 35,000,
questioning which manager had the more difficult job; the manager managing more people or the
manager managing fewer people doing more work. He agreed with the Commission’s recommendation
and did not support the motion.
MOTION CARRIED (4-1), COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TEM PETERSON VOTING NO.
COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TEM
PETERSON, TO ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITIZENS’ COMMISSION ON
COMPENSATION OF ELECTED OFFICIALS REGARDING THE MUNICIPAL COURT
JUDGE.
Councilmember Plunkett asked why this action was necessary. Ms. Humann explained the Council never
passed an ordinance establishing the Judge’s compensation at 95% of the salary of a District Court Judge;
a dollar amount representing the Judge’s salary had been incorporated in the annual salary ordinance.
Councilmember Wilson asked how Snohomish County District Court Judge’s salaries were established.
Ms. Humann answered the amount was set by the State Citizens’ Commission on Compensation of
Elected Officials. She explained in order to qualify for court improvement account funds from the State,
the Municipal Court Judge’s salary must be maintained at 95% of a District Court Judge’s salary.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Ron Wambolt, Edmonds, referred to email communication with Councilmember Buckshnis prompted
by a levy proposal he sent to Councilmember on May 11. He qualified his proposal with three
assumptions, 1) approximately $600,000 in Fire District 1 receipts would be returned to the General
Fund, 2) pay increases for 2011 and 2012 be limited to 2.5% versus the 3.5% in the forecast, and 3) the
ending balance for each year would be no lower than $3 million. Councilmember Buckshnis disagreed
with his assumptions, stating that was how misinformation got disseminated. He acknowledged
Councilmember Buckshnis’ right to disagree with his assumptions, however, in the context they were
provided, they were not misinformation. In a series of emails that followed, that was the last reference to
the levy proposal and Councilmember Buckshnis proceeded to criticize him for other alleged failings
including why he had not audited the Fire District 1 numbers and that if he had listened to her and others,
Packet Page 11 of 196
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 25, 2010
Page 9
it may have been possible to save the City $1 – $1½ million. Councilmember Buckshnis arrived at that
conclusion via a flawed analysis by totaling expenses that included compensation and not other expenses
incurred by Fire District 1. He suggested if Councilmember Buckshnis audited Fire District 1 costs, she
would find the contract with Fire District 1 was a bargain for Edmonds. Next, he disagreed with
Councilmember Buckshnis’ assertion that $400,000 was removed from the REET fund, commenting she
did not understand the 2009 REET statement. Finally she insulted him with a statement that it was no
wonder he did not get past the primary and speculated he had a problem with intelligent women. He
quoted from an email by Councilmember Fraley-Monillas, “do not waste your time Diane with him, he
still thinks he is on Council as evident by attending every event and meeting possible...you need to
consider his age and his need to remain involved no matter if he is correct or not. Kind of sad.” Mr.
Wambolt invited the public to email him at RRWambolt@msn.com to read the emails.
Al Rutledge, Edmonds, reported today’s Lake Ballinger Forum meeting was cancelled. The next
meeting is scheduled for June 22 at 2:00 p.m. in Mountlake Terrace. Next, he reported 32%-35% of
Edmonds residents were seniors. The City needs to provide services for both seniors and the younger
generation.
Don Hall, Edmonds, referred to Agenda Item 7, Formation of a Levy Committee, commenting the
Council had already formed a levy committee, the 60+ member Levy Review Committee that met last
year. The discussion regarding the levy was simply a continuation of those people’s thoughts. He
acknowledged that although the numbers may have changed, he doubted the conclusion had changed –the
City needs a levy. The elected Councilmembers were the bottom line and needed to make the decision
regarding a levy. There was not enough time to form committees, gather information and report to the
Council. He supported Councilmember Wilson’s suggestion for the Council to meet every Thursday and
to involve the public during those meetings. He urged the Council to get on with it and do what they had
to do to get a levy passed.
Ray Martin, Edmonds, asked whether the increase in the Mayor’s salary had been resolved. He was
informed the Council had not approved a salary increase for the Council or Mayor. He commended
Councilmember Orvis, a fine gentleman, an honest, straight shooter with a personal code of honor who
was true to himself. He was saddened to learn Councilmember Orvis had been accused of assaulting his
son and was insulted when he learned Mayor Haakenson and Councilmember Wilson had recommended
he resign. He noted Councilmember Orvis was subsequently acquitted of the charges.
Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, echoed Mr. Martin’s concern with Mayor Haakenson and Councilmember
Wilson’s request that Councilmember Orvis resign. Next, he referred to his comments at that May 18
Council meeting that building permits were down 58% and plan check fees were down 42%, noting the
meeting minutes did not reflect his comment that the number of employees had not been reduced
correspondingly. With regard to the Mayor’s salary, he recommended the Council reconsider the method
used to compare the Mayor’s salaries, suggesting neighboring cities such as Mukilteo, Everett and
Mountlake Terrace be used and that the type of revenue each city collected be considered such as sales
tax versus property tax. He suggested the Council instruct staff to develop a new policy for comparing
salaries. He anticipated the employees who took furloughs during the last year would not appreciate the
Mayor receiving a pay increase.
7. CONTINUED DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL ACTION ON THE FORMATION OF A LEVY
COMMITTEE.
Councilmember Plunkett explained this was a continued discussion from last week regarding the
formation of a 7-member levy committee comprised of a member appointed by each Councilmember. He
explained Mayor Haakenson would be presenting a very bare-boned budget in October, a budget that did
Packet Page 12 of 196
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 25, 2010
Page 10
not assume a levy increase. The Finance Committee proposes the levy committee consider the following,
1) augmentation of the General Fund, 2) capital targets of opportunity, 3) take public comment, and 4)
receive additional direction from the Council as information is developed and presented to the levy
committee. The intent would be a levy in February 2011 with the outside possibility of a levy in
November 2010. He explained Councilmembers were welcome to meet with the committee. He supported
the Finance Committee’s original recommendation, to form a 7-member levy committee.
COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS,
THAT STAFF MAKE THE ANNOUNCEMENT THAT THE COUNCIL IS FORMING A LEVY
COMMITTEE MADE UP OF SEVEN PEOPLE, EACH CHOSEN BY ONE COUNCILMEMBER.
Councilmember Buckshnis reported she watched last week’s meeting on television and wanted to respond
to the issues raised by Councilmember Wilson. She pointed out Consent Agenda Item E changed the
budget from a two-year budget to a one-year budget. In an effort to compare and contrast the proposed
levy committee to last year’s 60+ member levy review committee, she acknowledged the hours
Councilmember Wilson spent organizing information that was presented to the committee. She remarked
whenever there was a revenue issue, there was a corresponding expense issue; because revenues have
declined, expenses must also be reduced. She envisioned this levy committee as a citizen-friendly
committee similar to the committee used by Redmond and Portland, Oregon. She envisioned questions
such as were raised last week about the attorney’s fees could be investigated by this committee. Rather
than a tour of the City’s operations that was provided to last year’s levy review committee, she envisioned
this committee would be interactive and educate citizens and look at salaries of non-union employees
compared to cities close to Edmonds and cities with a similar tax structure. The levy committee would
consider the future of Yost Pool and the Senior Center. She concluded the committee needed to consider a
variety of issues and it was necessary to take time to investigate revenues and expenses. She commented
the committee could be more than 7 people if others wanted to help, comparing it to the Economic
Development Committee that had 17 members who met in subcommittees.
Councilmember Wilson commented the model used for last year’s levy review committee was a model
used by other cities such as Lake Forest Park. He cautioned the Council not to underestimate the amount
of time a levy committee takes, noting someone needed to be responsible for guiding the conversation. A
levy committee would require some structure and whoever led the committee needed to be willing to put
in the time. He did not support the motion, reiterating the Council was the committee and it was the
Council’s responsibility to make the decisions. If the Council needed additional information, it was their
responsibility to ask for it, not the citizens, particularly when no structure had been established for
obtaining information. He recalled an ordinance was passed to form both last year’s levy review
committee and the Economic Development Committee, thereby establishing a clear structure.
Councilmember Wilson pointed out of the items Councilmembers Plunkett and Buckshnis identified for
the levy committee to discuss, none of them solved the revenue problem. He agreed discussing Yost Pool
and the Senior Center were important; however, it did not address the operational shortfall. Although it
was worthwhile to discuss changing the salary compensation policy, it did not address the operational
shortfall. He agreed with taking public comment, noting that also did not address the operational shortfall.
He summarized none of the rationales identified for forming the levy committee addressed the operational
shortfall. He agreed with increased transparency, better reporting of financial data, and forecasting best
case/worst case scenario, however, none of that addressed the operational shortfall.
If the intent was a levy committee, Council President Pro Tem Peterson questioned why the committee
would be discussing salaries and overtime, noting those were topics more appropriately discussed by a
budget committee. He recalled during last year’s Council retreat, the Council discussed overtime versus
salaries and it was discussed as background information by last year’s levy review committee. He agreed
Packet Page 13 of 196
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 25, 2010
Page 11
attorneys’ fees and consultants’ fees were important budget discussions but did not relate to a levy.
Recognizing that the timeframe for formulating a levy and placing it on the ballot was rapidly shrinking,
he was hesitant to add another layer of bureaucracy when the Council itself was an excellent committee to
make those decisions. For those reasons as well as the lack of clarity regarding the structure of the levy
committee, he did not support the motion. For example, Councilmember Plunkett’s motion stated it would
be a seven member committee; Councilmember Buckshnis said the committee could be larger. He
acknowledged the need to discuss both revenues and expenses but did not see how talking about salaries
and overtime in the Police Department would solve the City’s overarching financial issues.
Councilmember Plunkett commented his motion was to establish a committee of seven people. He
assumed Councilmember Buckshnis meant other people could participate; the committee would be seven
people. He pointed out one of the purposes of the levy committee was augmenting the General Fund
budget which did address the shortfall. He anticipated the budget Mayor Haakenson will present in
October would need to be augmented, likely via a levy. He disagreed with Council President Pro Tem
Peterson, commenting he had not yet reached the conclusion that a levy was needed. He acknowledged
the Council took votes on a levy last year, but in the end he did not support moving forward with a levy.
He did not support moving forward with a levy now until labor negotiations had been completed, noting
labor was 65-70% of the City’s budget. He questioned how the Council could recommend a budget when
65-70% of the budget was undetermined. He was unable to support a levy until he had an opportunity to
review a no levy increase budget and learn what may need to be augmented and until he had a better
understanding of future labor costs. In the meantime, the levy committee could review the issues and
provide new perspective and new ideas. He acknowledged the ultimate decision with regard to a levy was
made by the Council. He did not anticipate a levy committee would adversely affect the process and
would in fact provide more information.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas was perplexed by the comment that salaries and overtime were not part
of the levy decision-making process. Because salaries were such a major portion of the City’s budget, she
did not anticipate being able to formulate a levy until negotiations had been concluded because that
process would identify how much money was needed. She envisioned part of the levy committee’s charge
would be to determine what to spend money on and what levy monies were needed for. She was
perplexed by the comments against forming a levy committee.
To Mr. Hall’s comments regarding the previous levy committee, Councilmember Fraley-Monillas pointed
out things had changed dramatically since the levy review committee began their work. She recognized
that all but one of the levy review committee subcommittees were in favor of a levy. However, the
Council chose not to place a levy on the ballot at that time. The situation has now changed again and a
levy committee was needed to consider what things could be funded via a levy. She disagreed with those
who felt last year’s levy review committee resulted in adequate community input. She concluded there
was time for a levy committee to review the issues. She was wary of preparing a levy prior to the
completion of labor negotiations, fearing without that information the levy amount could either be too
much or too little. She recognized the concern with a levy committee holding up the process, commenting
what was delaying the process was the upcoming labor negotiations.
Councilmember Buckshnis clarified the reason she wanted the levy committee to discuss staffing and
overtime was the City spent $1.2 million in overtime for Police and Fire last year. The 2010 budget
includes two new positions in the Police Department. Her goal was to understand whether the overtime
was necessary or whether a third person should be hired in the Police Department. She summarized the
levy committee would seek answers to these and other questions. She pointed out responses from finance
staff has been slower than in the past; for example staff has not responded to a question she asked in
March regarding $400,000 in REET that was taken out to bring the forecast in line. She summarized the
levy committee was about citizen involvement, understanding the City’s finances and educating citizens.
Packet Page 14 of 196
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 25, 2010
Page 12
Council President Pro Tem Peterson agreed with the importance of getting numbers, having a better
understanding and having financial information available on the City’s website. He recalled one of the
advantages of last year’s 60+ member levy review committee was that it was comprised of volunteers
who were not appointed by Councilmembers. One of the disadvantages of each Councilmember
appointing a member to the levy committee was the likelihood that the person each Councilmember
appointed would support his/her viewpoint. He recognized that labor was a major part of the City’s
budget, pointing out the City was basically a service industry and people are necessary to provide those
services. He emphasized that even if the Council held every employee to a 0% increase, a levy would still
be needed. He envisioned whatever increase was agreed to during labor negotiations would not
substantially change the bottom line in a few years.
Council President Pro Tem Peterson disagreed with waiting to complete labor negotiations before making
a decision regarding a levy, envisioning once labor negotiations were completed, something else would
arise. Although he agreed last year to postpone the levy, the Council agreed at that time that a levy was
imperative in the near future, a situation that has not changed and if anything, has worsened due to the
economic climate. He wanted to formulate a levy as quickly and as transparently as possible and did not
support the Council using a levy committee as a filter.
Councilmember Wilson commented this was his third year on the Council and he deals with governments
extensively in his day job. During his first year on the Council he thought he knew much more than he
did. In his third year on Council, he continues to learn that he knows far less than he likes to think he
does. When he was first elected, he voted in a manner that reflected his trust in the more senior
Councilmembers. Although he sometimes disagreed with Councilmember Plunkett as well as with Mayor
Haakenson, he always listened to their viewpoints because they were senior members. With six
Councilmembers in their first term, he recommended Councilmembers be better listeners and for
Councilmember Plunkett and Mayor Haakenson to provide their viewpoint. He acknowledged sometimes
he has had to take votes without complete information and sometimes he did not get answers from staff in
a timely manner. He was confident the seven members of a levy committee would not get their questions
answered any more quickly than a Councilmember. He beseeched Councilmembers Buckshnis and
Fraley-Monillas to work with the Council and for Councilmember Plunkett and Mayor Haakenson to
provide leadership.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented she was listening to the recommendation made by the senior
member of the Council, Councilmember Plunkett. To Council President Pro Tem Peterson’s comment
that a levy would still be necessary even if no raises were provided, she questioned how the amount of the
levy would be determined. She did not understand the rush, recommending the Council take the time
necessary to determine what things should and should not be paid for. For example, there was a problem
if the City was spending over $1 million in overtime rather than filling regular positions as it was cheaper
to fill regular positions and pay benefits than pay overtime. She summarized it was her responsibility as
an elected official to ensure a levy was the right thing for the citizens. She was not willing to approve a
levy without adequate information regarding how much money a levy needed to generate and what a levy
would fund.
Council President Pro Tem Peterson asked whether formal direction would be provided to staff or the
committee regarding a report they would provide. Councilmember Plunkett responded initial direction
was outlined in last week’s packet. While the committee was being formed in the next 2-3 weeks, he
anticipated the Finance Committee in conjunction with the Council could provide direction.
Packet Page 15 of 196
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 25, 2010
Page 13
Councilmember Buckshnis referred to her narrative that identified areas the committee would review. She
recommended citizens who apply for the levy committee understand financial statements, modified
accrual accounting, cash flows and financial modeling if possible and have the ability to conduct research.
Councilmember Plunkett advised the Council would approve the direction given to the committee.
Council President Pro Tem Peterson asked whether there was a timeframe for the committee to gather
information and provide a recommendation. Councilmember Plunkett answered there was not.
Mayor Haakenson observed if the motion passed, Senior Executive Council Assistant Jana Spellman
would issue a press release announcing the Council was forming a 7-member levy committee, He asked
when the Council would appoint the 7 members. Councilmember Plunkett asked how long was typically
provided for application to a committee and City Clerk Sandy Chase advised a two week period was
usually provided. Councilmember Plunkett clarified the Council was accepting applications for
appointment to the levy committee.
Councilmember Wilson suggested the qualifications Councilmember Buckshnis cited be included in the
motion. Councilmember Plunkett agreed.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if the qualifications were desirable or if it was up to each
Councilmember. Councilmember Buckshnis answered it would be up to each Councilmember to make
their selection.
Mayor Haakenson clarified in two weeks after applications have been submitted, each Councilmember
will select one person.
Councilmember Wilson inquired about the implementation of the levy committee such as the frequency
of their meetings, how they would get their questions answered, how questions from the committee and
the Council would be prioritized, whether Ms. Spellman would staff the committee and forward questions
to staff, how the committee’s work would be facilitated, etc. Mayor Haakenson acknowledged confusion
with the timeline based on comments that a decision would not be made regarding a levy until the budget
was presented in October and until labor negotiations were completed which may not be until 2011. He
questioned why a levy committee would begin meeting any time soon with those restrictions. Without
knowing the structure of the committee or the frequency of their meetings, he anticipated someone would
need to take minutes of their meetings, write down the committee’s questions and refer them to staff and
staff would do their best to provide answers.
Councilmember Buckshnis commented she had obtained a number of financial reports and a great deal of
information had been provided via public records requests such as Ms. Bloom’s request regarding the
City Attorney expenses. She summarized it was simply a matter of the committee organizing itself and
establishing a framework. The sooner the committee met and the more information they disseminated to
the public, the better. She did not anticipate placing a levy on the ballot in November 2010.
MOTION CARRIED (3-2), COUNCILMEMBERS WILSON AND PETERSON VOTING NO.
8. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR EDMONDS CENTER FOR THE
ARTS.
Council President Pro Tem Peterson explained one of the funding sources for the Edmonds Center for the
Arts’ (ECA) capital campaign were funds from Snohomish County designated for arts organizations
throughout the County and due to the economy, some of those revenues have not been realized. As a
Packet Page 16 of 196
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 25, 2010
Page 14
result several arts organizations, including the ECA, are seeking replacement funds. The Snohomish
County Lodging Tax Fund has a reserve available and they are in the process of creating an allocation
process to distribute those funds to arts organizations and Public Facilities Districts throughout
Snohomish County.
Council President Pro Tem Peterson requested the Council sign a letter of support to be sent to the
Snohomish County Council who will make the ultimate decision regarding allocation of the funds. He
read the letter stating the Edmonds City Council’s support of the ECA and the Edmonds Public Facilities
District (EPFD) in the upcoming allocation process of the unallocated Snohomish County Lodging Tax
funds. The letter cited the ECA’s $3 million contribution to the local economy and South Snohomish
County and the ECA’s dependence on the support of patrons and local and County government. The letter
urged the Council to support an allocation of the Snohomish County Lodging Tax Fund to the ECA,
noting the ECA provided a home for many important Snohomish County arts organizations including the
Cascade Symphony Orchestra, Olympic Ballet Theater, Sno-King Community Chorale, and Edmonds
Community College and established Edmonds and Snohomish County as a true arts community.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TEM PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
WILSON, THAT THE CITY COUNCIL SIGN THE LETTER.
Councilmember Wilson highlighted the statement in the letter that the ECA requires the lodging tax funds
from Snohomish County, pointing out the debt on the ECA is guaranteed by the City. Because the ECA
does not generate enough to cover operations and debt service, another source needs to be identified. If
another source is not identified, the City is responsible for the debt service. He urged the citizens of
Edmonds to communicate with their Snohomish County Council representative Mike Cooper and
Snohomish County Executive Aaron Reardon to urge them to allocate the lodging tax funds to the ECA.
If funds are not allocated to the ECA, the debt service will be part of the budget discussion this fall,
approximately $186,000 annually, the equivalent of two police officers.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
9. COUNCIL REPORTS ON OUTSIDE COMMITTEE/BOARD MEETINGS.
Council President Pro Tem Peterson reported the Edmonds Public Facilities District meeting included
discussion regarding the above letter. The PFD Board and the Executive Director Joe McIalwain are
working diligently to identify funds to cover the capital debt. Despite the economy, the ECA staff,
volunteers, and board have done a remarkable job keeping operations in the black; an amazing feat for a
performing arts center particularly in this economy. He urged citizens to support the ECA.
Councilmember Wilson reported he attended 11 meetings during the last month in his capacity as a
Councilmember. He highlighted the Lake Ballinger Forum, advising the Forum is in line for $4.2 million
in federal funds for capital improvements and to keep all the jurisdictions involved. The existing
Interlocal Agreement will terminate in June and a new Interlocal Agreement will be presented to the
Council in June. The Lake Ballinger Forum is a national model and senior leadership from the
Department of Ecology (DOE) plan to attend the June meeting so that DOE and Governor Gregoire can
promote the model in Washington as well as nationally.
With regard to the Parking Committee, Councilmember Plunkett reported Parking Enforcement Officer
Debbie Dawson issued 197 violations in March due in part to working nights during March. He cautioned
violators that parking enforcement was 24/7. He relayed Councilmember Fraley-Monillas plans to change
several items in the Parking Code at the recommendation of Officer Dawson. The Committee
Packet Page 17 of 196
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 25, 2010
Page 15
recommended an additional handicapped parking zone south of Dayton on 5th. The Committee has also
asked the Municipal Court to research why they dismissed 13 parking violations.
Councilmember Buckshnis reported the Friends of the Edmonds Marsh made a report to the Port. With
regard to WRIA 8, she commented on efforts to move daylighting of Willow Creek from their ten year
plan to their three year plan and to invite the Port to participate in WRIA 8.
10. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
Mayor Haakenson invited the public to the Edmonds Memorial Cemetery’s annual Memorial Day event
on May 31 at 11:00 a.m.
11. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Council President Pro Tem Peterson invited the public to attend the Jazz Connection, presented by the
Edmonds Daybreakers Rotary and the ECA, on Saturday, May 29.
Councilmember Wilson expressed his appreciation to Councilmember Orvis for his service.
Councilmember Wilson commented one of the lessons of the recession was that government needs to
reinvent itself and figure out how to provide services differently and more smartly, often referred to as
Government 2.0. An example of that is the Fire District 1 contract. The model of focusing services in a
municipal corporation like a Fire District that only provides fire services makes sense. Although the City
has taken some of those steps, the Council is having difficulty with determining a levy, also part of
Government 2.0, making the case to voters regarding a levy every 2-5 years. He suggested over the next
12-18 months consideration be given to forming a Parks District such as Metro Parks Tacoma, a Parks
District that explicitly funds parks. He noted the City took a similar action years ago when it reverse
annexed the Edmonds Library into the Sno-Isle Library System. The formation of a Parks District would
require voter approval of its formation and to elect representatives. With the formation of a Parks District,
the City would no longer be responsible for parks and the City’s costs would diminish considerably. As a
result the City could lower its costs and possibly lower taxes.
Councilmember Wilson also suggested the Council consider reverse annexing into Fire District 1.
Currently, citizens do not have an elected voice on Fire District 1 because they do not elect Fire
Commissioners; the contract is managed by Mayor Haakenson. He acknowledged fire service in Fire
District 1 would cost Edmonds citizens far more via reverse annexation than the current cost of fire
service. However, the City could lower its costs without the responsibility for the $6+ million contract
with Fire District 1. Fire District 1 is reviewing via allowances in State law how they can establish a
graduated cost for service that would allow for example a single family home to have a lower fire rating
than a nursing home. He urged the Council to think about ways to restructure government. He suggested
citizens peruse the Tacoma Metro Parks and Fire District 1 websites and consider whether direct
representation would provide more benefits.
Councilmember Plunkett referred to a comment he made a few weeks ago regarding postponing a vote to
change the City to a City Manager form of government. He clarified his intent was to move the vote on
that change to February 2011 to prevent a change in the form of government in the vortex of at least three
important issues. He has requested Council President Bernheim schedule Council direction on the matter
on a future agenda.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented substantial public records requests have been submitted
again over the past week for emails dating back five months or longer, requiring the employment of
Packet Page 18 of 196
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 25, 2010
Page 16
additional staff to assist with gathering that information. She planned to propose hiring temporary staff to
make all emails available on the City’s website to avoid public records requests for emails. She
commented this level of public records requests had never occurred in the past and they are originating
from specific individuals.
Councilmember Buckshnis reported on her trip to Lithuania where she met with Central Bank
representatives. Central Bank did not engage in any derivatives and have not had to close any banks or
put money into their banking system. She commented on the tremendous impact the economic downturn
has had on tourism.
Student Representative Marmion announced the Edmonds-Woodway High School May 26 Art Show that
features two local artists and promotes the work of high school art students.
12. ADJOURN
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 9:35 p.m.
Packet Page 19 of 196
AM-3105 2.C.
Approval of Claim Checks
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:06/01/2010
Submitted By:Lorenzo Hines Time:Consent
Department:Finance Type:Action
Review Committee:
Committee Action:Approved for Consent Agenda
Information
Subject Title
Approval of claim checks #119126 to #119246 dated May 27, 2010 for $511,626.90.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
Approve
Previous Council Action
N/A
Narrative
The following City claims are submitted for approval by the City Council in accordance with
current law.
Fiscal Impact
Fiscal Year:2010
Revenue:
Expenditure:$511,626.90
Fiscal Impact:
Claims: $511,626.90
Attachments
Link: Claim cks 5-27-10
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 05/26/2010 04:32 PM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 05/26/2010 04:36 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 05/26/2010 04:38 PM APRV
Form Started By: Lorenzo
Hines
Started On: 05/26/2010 04:08
PM
Final Approval Date: 05/26/2010
Packet Page 20 of 196
05/26/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
1
3:00:23PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
119126 5/27/2010 061029 ABSOLUTE GRAPHIX 510415 POOL T-SHIRTS
T-SHIRTS FOR YOST POOL STAFF
001.000.640.575.510.310.00 257.35
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.575.510.310.00 24.45
Total :281.80
119127 5/27/2010 066054 ADIX'S BED & BATH FOR DOGS AND JUNE 2010 ANIMAL BOARDING FOR 6/10 EDMONDS AC
ANIMAL BOARDING FOR 06/10
001.000.410.521.700.410.00 2,032.66
Total :2,032.66
119128 5/27/2010 065413 ALPINE TREE SERVICE 2070 MAPLEWOOD PARK TREE CLEANUP
CLEAN BROKEN TOPS FROM MAPLE TREE/TRIM
001.000.640.576.800.480.00 225.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.480.00 21.38
PINE RIDGE PARK TREE TOPPING2071
TOPPING OF 2 TREES @ PINE RIDGE PARK
001.000.640.576.800.480.00 175.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.480.00 16.63
CEMETERY TREE REMOVAL2072
TAKE DOWN DEAD LOCUST TREE, HAUL AWAY
130.000.640.536.200.410.00 1,150.00
9.5% Sales Tax
130.000.640.536.200.410.00 109.25
YOST PARK TREE REMOVAL2073
YOST PARK TREE REMOVAL & TRIMMING,
001.000.640.576.800.480.00 1,750.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.480.00 166.25
Total :3,613.51
119129 5/27/2010 069751 ARAMARK 655-4920327 UNIFORM SERVICES
1Page:
Packet Page 21 of 196
05/26/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
2
3:00:23PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
119129 5/27/2010 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK
PARK MAINTENANCE UNIFORM SERVICES
001.000.640.576.800.240.00 41.70
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.240.00 3.96
Total :45.66
119130 5/27/2010 069751 ARAMARK 655-4920331 21580001
UNFORM SERVICE
411.000.656.538.800.240.00 67.13
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.240.00 6.38
Total :73.51
119131 5/27/2010 069751 ARAMARK 655-4900911 Street/Storm Uniform Svc
Street/Storm Uniform Svc
111.000.653.542.900.240.00 9.69
Street/Storm Uniform Svc
411.000.652.542.900.240.00 9.69
9.5% Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.900.240.00 0.92
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.652.542.900.240.00 0.92
Fleet Uniform Svc655-4900912
Fleet Uniform Svc
511.000.657.548.680.240.00 6.00
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.240.00 0.57
PW Mats655-4912845
PW Mats
001.000.650.519.910.410.00 1.01
PW Mats
111.000.653.542.900.410.00 3.84
PW Mats
411.000.652.542.900.410.00 3.84
PW Mats
2Page:
Packet Page 22 of 196
05/26/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
3
3:00:23PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
119131 5/27/2010 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK
411.000.654.534.800.410.00 3.84
PW Mats
411.000.655.535.800.410.00 3.84
PW Mats
511.000.657.548.680.410.00 3.83
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.650.519.910.410.00 0.10
9.5% Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.900.410.00 0.37
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.652.542.900.410.00 0.37
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.410.00 0.37
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.410.00 0.37
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.410.00 0.34
Fleet Uniform Svc655-4912847
Fleet Uniform Svc
511.000.657.548.680.240.00 5.85
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.240.00 0.56
Fac Maint Uniform Svc655-4920328
Fac Maint Uniform Svc
001.000.651.519.920.240.00 32.17
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.240.00 3.06
PW Mats655-4924765
PW Mats
001.000.650.519.910.410.00 1.01
PW Mats
111.000.653.542.900.410.00 3.84
PW Mats
411.000.652.542.900.410.00 3.84
3Page:
Packet Page 23 of 196
05/26/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
4
3:00:23PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
119131 5/27/2010 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK
PW Mats
411.000.654.534.800.410.00 3.84
PW Mats
411.000.655.535.800.410.00 3.84
PW Mats
511.000.657.548.680.410.00 3.83
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.410.00 0.34
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.650.519.910.410.00 0.10
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.410.00 0.37
9.5% Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.900.410.00 0.37
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.652.542.900.410.00 0.37
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.410.00 0.37
Fleet Uniform Svc655-4924767
Fleet Uniform Svc
511.000.657.548.680.240.00 5.85
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.240.00 0.56
Total :120.08
119132 5/27/2010 071124 ASSOCIATED PETROLEUM 0074651-IN Fleet Unleaded Gas 7700 Gal
Fleet Unleaded Gas 7700 Gal
511.000.657.548.680.340.11 17,599.12
St Excise Tax Gas, WA Oil Spill
511.000.657.548.680.340.11 3,040.73
Diesel 1500 Gal
511.000.657.548.680.340.10 3,430.35
St Excise Tax Diesel, WA Oil Spill
511.000.657.548.680.340.10 592.37
WA St Svc Fees
4Page:
Packet Page 24 of 196
05/26/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
5
3:00:23PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
119132 5/27/2010 (Continued)071124 ASSOCIATED PETROLEUM
511.000.657.548.680.340.10 40.00
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.340.10 3.80
Total :24,706.37
119133 5/27/2010 064343 AT&T 7303860502001 425-744-6057 PUBLIC WORKS
Public Works Fax Line
001.000.650.519.910.420.00 1.91
Public Works Fax Line
111.000.653.542.900.420.00 7.25
Public Works Fax Line
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 7.25
Public Works Fax Line
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 7.25
Public Works Fax Line
511.000.657.548.680.420.00 7.25
Public Works Fax Line
411.000.652.542.900.420.00 7.23
Total :38.14
119134 5/27/2010 001835 AWARDS SERVICE INC 73880 SOFTBALL AWARDS
SOFTBALL AWARDS
001.000.640.575.520.310.00 203.50
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.575.520.310.00 19.34
Total :222.84
119135 5/27/2010 001702 AWC EMPLOY BENEFIT TRUST June JUNE 2010 AWC PREMIUMS
06/10 Fire Pension AWC Premiums
617.000.510.522.200.230.00 4,197.55
06/10 Retirees AWC Premiums
009.000.390.517.370.230.00 27,322.73
06/10 AWC Premiums
811.000.000.231.510.000.00 259,842.74
5Page:
Packet Page 25 of 196
05/26/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
6
3:00:23PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :291,363.021191355/27/2010 001702 001702 AWC EMPLOY BENEFIT TRUST
119136 5/27/2010 069218 BISHOP, PAUL 282 WEB SITE MAINTENANCE
Web site maintenance
001.000.310.518.880.410.00 520.00
Total :520.00
119137 5/27/2010 003075 BNSF RAILWAY COMPANY BNSF Permit 1 E9FB/E0FA.BNSF TEMP OCCUPANCY PERMIT
E9FB/E0FA.BNSF Temp Occupancy Permit
412.200.630.594.320.410.00 600.00
Total :600.00
119138 5/27/2010 065739 BOBBY WOLFORD TRUCKING &33301 BRUSHWOOD RECYCLING
RECYCLE BRUSHWOOD @ MARINA BEACH
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 26.00
Total :26.00
119139 5/27/2010 066578 BROWN AND CALDWELL 14124482 C-311
C-311 ODOR CONTROL PROJECT
414.000.656.594.320.410.10 6,379.75
Total :6,379.75
119140 5/27/2010 003001 BUILDERS SAND & GRAVEL 290642 CRUSHED
CRUSHED ROCK
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 265.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 25.18
Total :290.18
119141 5/27/2010 072988 BUNTTING INC C198 Retainage Retainage
Retainage
116.000.000.223.400.000.00 6,069.83
Total :6,069.83
119142 5/27/2010 071766 CAMPBELL, CONNIE CAMPBELL12670 CHUCKANUT BAY KAYAK TOUR
CHUCKANUT BAY KAYAK TOUR #12670
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 124.20
6Page:
Packet Page 26 of 196
05/26/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
7
3:00:23PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :124.201191425/27/2010 071766 071766 CAMPBELL, CONNIE
119143 5/27/2010 069813 CDW GOVERNMENT INC 1B249PR COMPUTER PARTS
Parts for computer in Police Dept
001.000.310.518.880.310.00 603.34
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.310.518.880.310.00 57.31
Total :660.65
119144 5/27/2010 070144 CEDAR GROVE COMPOSTING INC 210845 TWO-WAY TOPSOIL
TWO WAY TOPSOIL
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 192.50
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 14.82
Total :207.32
119145 5/27/2010 068484 CEMEX 9419220813 Roadway - Asphalt
Roadway - Asphalt
111.000.653.542.310.310.00 596.80
9.5% Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.310.310.00 56.70
Roadway - Liquid Asphalt9419220814
Roadway - Liquid Asphalt
111.000.653.542.310.310.00 892.44
9.5% Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.310.310.00 84.78
Roadway - Dump Fees9419248794
Roadway - Dump Fees
411.000.652.542.320.490.00 111.25
Asphalt
111.000.653.542.310.310.00 704.01
9.2% Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.310.310.00 64.40
Roadway - Asphalt9419326762
Roadway - Asphalt
111.000.653.542.310.310.00 420.00
7Page:
Packet Page 27 of 196
05/26/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
8
3:00:23PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
119145 5/27/2010 (Continued)068484 CEMEX
9.5% Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.310.310.00 39.90
Total :2,970.28
119146 5/27/2010 073249 CG ENGINEERING, PLLC 12042 On-call Struct Eng for Bld Div
On-call Struct Eng for Bld Div
001.000.620.524.100.410.00 167.50
Total :167.50
119147 5/27/2010 064690 CHAMPION BOLT & SUPPLY INC 520000137 9999
NITRILE GLOVES
411.000.656.538.800.310.31 199.80
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.31 18.99
Total :218.79
119148 5/27/2010 064840 CHAPUT, KAREN E CHAPUT12537 FRIDAY NIGHT OUT
FRIDAY NIGHT OUT #12537
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 117.60
Total :117.60
119149 5/27/2010 073243 CHAVEZ-ALVIZO, LETICIA CHAVEZ-ALVIZO0511 REFUND
REFUND OF DAMAGE DEPOSIT FOR MEADOWDALE
001.000.000.239.200.000.00 300.00
Total :300.00
119150 5/27/2010 019215 CITY OF LYNNWOOD 7910 INV#7910 CUST#45 - EDMONDS PD
NEXTEL PHONES - NARCS 04/2010
104.000.410.521.210.420.00 56.61
Total :56.61
119151 5/27/2010 065519 CITY OF LYNNWOOD ADV MOTOR OPS INV ADV. MOTORCYCLE OPS - EDMONDS PD
ROTH - ADV. MOTORCYCLE OPS
001.000.410.521.400.490.00 50.00
FALK - ADV. MOTORCYCLE OPS
001.000.410.521.400.490.00 50.00
8Page:
Packet Page 28 of 196
05/26/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
9
3:00:23PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
119151 5/27/2010 (Continued)065519 CITY OF LYNNWOOD
HARBINSON - ADV MOTORCYCLE OPS
001.000.410.521.400.490.00 50.00
Total :150.00
119152 5/27/2010 035160 CITY OF SEATTLE 100115 1-218359-279832
2203 N 205TH/METER 762972
411.000.656.538.800.471.62 15.44
Total :15.44
119153 5/27/2010 063389 CLAY, JON 1347 TRAVEL/CLAY/TRAINING
TRAVEL/CLAY/TRAINING
411.000.656.538.800.430.00 107.00
Total :107.00
119154 5/27/2010 004095 COASTWIDE LABS W2191999 SUPPLIES
SEAT COVERS, LINERS, TOILET TISSUE, ETC.
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 1,079.36
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 102.54
Total :1,181.90
119155 5/27/2010 004095 COASTWIDE LABS W2192376 Library - Supplies
Library - Supplies
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 20.79
Fac Maint - Towels, Magic Eraser,
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 453.23
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 45.03
Fac Maint - Roll TowelsW2192376-1
Fac Maint - Roll Towels
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 30.99
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 2.94
Total :552.98
119156 5/27/2010 005965 CUES INC 325569 Sewer - Scews, Washers
9Page:
Packet Page 29 of 196
05/26/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
10
3:00:23PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
119156 5/27/2010 (Continued)005965 CUES INC
Sewer - Scews, Washers
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 110.61
Freight
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 8.16
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 11.28
Total :130.05
119157 5/27/2010 061570 DAY WIRELESS SYSTEMS - 16 42170 Unit EQ63EQ - Radios & Programming
Unit EQ63EQ - Radios & Programming
511.100.657.594.480.640.00 939.50
Freight
511.100.657.594.480.640.00 15.00
9.5% Sales Tax
511.100.657.594.480.640.00 90.68
Total :1,045.18
119158 5/27/2010 006626 DEPT OF ECOLOGY 2449 SLENKER/OPERATOR CERTF
SLENKER/OPERATOR CERTF
411.000.656.538.800.490.00 50.00
Total :50.00
119159 5/27/2010 064531 DINES, JEANNIE 10-3100 MINUTE TAKING
05/18 Council Minutes
001.000.250.514.300.410.00 291.00
Total :291.00
119160 5/27/2010 072582 DORSE AIR PORDUCTS S1317848.001 PS - Cabinet Fan
PS - Cabinet Fan
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 205.38
9.2% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 18.89
Total :224.27
119161 5/27/2010 007253 DUNN LUMBER 33394 Fac Maint - Truck Supplies - Brushes,
Fac Maint - Truck Supplies - Brushes,
10Page:
Packet Page 30 of 196
05/26/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
11
3:00:23PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
119161 5/27/2010 (Continued)007253 DUNN LUMBER
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 57.38
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 5.45
Total :62.83
119162 5/27/2010 073037 EDMONDS ACE HARDWARE 001134/1 PARKS & REC
GAS CANS
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 29.97
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 2.85
PARKS & REC001138/1
HOOKS
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 4.58
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 0.44
PARKS & REC001140/1
HOOKS, ETC.
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 6.36
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 0.60
Total :44.80
119163 5/27/2010 073037 EDMONDS ACE HARDWARE 001136/1 Fac Maint - Unit 26 - Pencil Compass,
Fac Maint - Unit 26 - Pencil Compass,
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 38.76
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 3.68
PW -Street Bay - Ant Bait001137/1
PW -Street Bay - Ant Bait
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 4.99
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 0.47
Fac Maint Unit 26 - Ext Cord , Fasteners001139/1
Fac Maint Unit 26 - Ext Cord , Fasteners
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 30.89
11Page:
Packet Page 31 of 196
05/26/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
12
3:00:23PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
119163 5/27/2010 (Continued)073037 EDMONDS ACE HARDWARE
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 2.93
PW - Ant Bait001141/1
PW - Ant Bait
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 4.99
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 0.47
Total :87.18
119164 5/27/2010 007675 EDMONDS AUTO PARTS 21963 SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 29.99
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 2.85
SUPPLIES22068
BLACK SILICONE
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 12.88
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 1.22
Total :46.94
119165 5/27/2010 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 3-01808 LIFT STATION #11
LIFT STATION #11
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 23.80
MEADOWDALE CLUB HOUSE3-03575
MEADOWDALE CLUB HOUSE
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 204.95
LIFT STATION #123-07525
LIFT STATION #12
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 58.66
LIFT STATION #153-07709
LIFT STATION #15
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 23.80
LIFT STATION #43-09350
LIFT STATION #4
12Page:
Packet Page 32 of 196
05/26/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
13
3:00:23PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
119165 5/27/2010 (Continued)008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 56.62
LIFT STATION #103-09800
LIFT STATION #10
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 29.92
LIFT STATION #93-29875
LIFT STATION #9
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 31.97
Total :429.72
119166 5/27/2010 066378 FASTENAL COMPANY WAMOU19912 Fac Maint - Truck Supplies
Fac Maint - Truck Supplies
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 75.37
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 7.16
Fac Maint - SuppliesWAMOU19917
Fac Maint - Supplies
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 95.35
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 9.06
Total :186.94
119167 5/27/2010 009815 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC 1767759 17983
PIPE FITTINGS
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 334.78
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 31.80
179831767759-1
PIPE FITTING/COUPLINGS
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 841.00
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 79.89
Total :1,287.47
119168 5/27/2010 073244 FERGUSON, SUSAN FERGUSON0513 REFUND
REFUND DUE TO INSUFFICIENT REGISTRATION
13Page:
Packet Page 33 of 196
05/26/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
14
3:00:23PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
119168 5/27/2010 (Continued)073244 FERGUSON, SUSAN
001.000.000.239.200.000.00 37.00
Total :37.00
119169 5/27/2010 072932 FRIEDRICH, KODY FRIEDRICH12561 IRISH DANCE CLASSES
IRISH DANCE 13+ #12561
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 87.75
IRISH DANCE 13+ #12565
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 178.75
IRISH DANCE FOR KIDS #12603
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 143.33
Total :409.83
119170 5/27/2010 061589 GALLS INC 510601801 INV#510601801 ACCT#3736713 - EDMONDS PD
5.11 SLEET BOOTS (HAWLEY)
001.000.410.521.260.240.00 116.99
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.260.240.00 11.11
Total :128.10
119171 5/27/2010 011210 GC SYSTEMS INC 000022956A Water - Seat O Rings, Stems, Seats
Water - Seat O Rings, Stems, Seats
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 1,110.00
Freight
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 9.69
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 106.37
Total :1,226.06
119172 5/27/2010 012190 GORSUCH, BRUCE GORSUCH12140 VOLLEYBALL SKILLS
INTERMEDIATE VOLLEYBALL SKILLS #12140
001.000.640.575.520.410.00 490.00
Total :490.00
119173 5/27/2010 012199 GRAINGER 9246030697 SAFETY CABINET
SAFETY CABINET, SELF CLOSE, 2 DOOR, 60
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 1,292.00
14Page:
Packet Page 34 of 196
05/26/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
15
3:00:23PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
119173 5/27/2010 (Continued)012199 GRAINGER
Freight
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 155.68
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 137.53
Total :1,585.21
119174 5/27/2010 012199 GRAINGER 9246030705 Library - 6V Batteries
Library - 6V Batteries
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 204.52
Freight
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 13.76
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 20.74
Fac Maint - Folding Hand Truck9250729366
Fac Maint - Folding Hand Truck
001.000.651.519.920.350.00 110.12
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.350.00 10.46
Fac Maint - Industrial Lube9250904639
Fac Maint - Industrial Lube
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 28.42
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 2.62
Total :390.64
119175 5/27/2010 067798 GREAT NORTHERN WORKWEAR &642028 DISCOVERY PROGRAM SUPPLIES
DISCOVERY PROGRAM CAPS WITH LOGOS
001.000.640.574.350.240.00 90.00
Freight
001.000.640.574.350.240.00 7.50
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.574.350.240.00 8.97
Total :106.47
119176 5/27/2010 012560 HACH COMPANY 6728499 112830
15Page:
Packet Page 35 of 196
05/26/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
16
3:00:23PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
119176 5/27/2010 (Continued)012560 HACH COMPANY
LAB SUPPLIES
411.000.656.538.800.310.31 722.88
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.31 36.95
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.31 72.19
Total :832.02
119177 5/27/2010 070042 IKON FINANCIAL SERVICES 82178518 INV#82178518 467070-1005305A3 EDMONDS PD
COPIER RENTAL 05/13-06/12/10
001.000.410.521.100.450.00 340.00
ADDITIONAL IMAGES
001.000.410.521.100.450.00 154.17
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.100.450.00 46.95
Total :541.12
119178 5/27/2010 064655 INNOVATIVE VACUUM SERVICES INC S16662 Storm - 4th & Dayton Storm Drain
Storm - 4th & Dayton Storm Drain
411.000.652.542.400.480.00 1,086.25
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.652.542.400.480.00 103.19
Total :1,189.44
119179 5/27/2010 014940 INTERSTATE BATTERY SYSTEMS 764953 Shop Supplies - Fuse, Connectors, Rings
Shop Supplies - Fuse, Connectors, Rings
511.000.657.548.680.311.00 24.65
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.311.00 2.34
Shop Supplies - Batteries, Pipe Sealant765293
Shop Supplies - Batteries, Pipe Sealant
511.000.657.548.680.311.00 32.75
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.311.00 3.11
Shop Supplies - Circuit Breakers765367
16Page:
Packet Page 36 of 196
05/26/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
17
3:00:23PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
119179 5/27/2010 (Continued)014940 INTERSTATE BATTERY SYSTEMS
Shop Supplies - Circuit Breakers
511.000.657.548.680.311.00 29.50
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.311.00 2.80
Unit M16 - Boat Cable766051
Unit M16 - Boat Cable
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 56.55
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 5.37
Shop Supplies - Cable Ties, Lugs,766500
Shop Supplies - Cable Ties, Lugs,
511.000.657.548.680.311.00 82.00
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.311.00 7.79
Total :246.86
119180 5/27/2010 066913 KDL HARDWARE SUPPLY INC 427612 Fac Maint - Return Keyed Door Knobs
Fac Maint - Return Keyed Door Knobs
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 -178.80
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 -16.99
Fac Maint - Keyed Door Knobs429149
Fac Maint - Keyed Door Knobs
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 184.80
Freight
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 5.62
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 18.09
Total :12.72
119181 5/27/2010 073245 KIM, TRACY KIM0510 REFUND
CUSTOMER REQUESTED REFUND
001.000.000.239.200.000.00 92.00
Total :92.00
17Page:
Packet Page 37 of 196
05/26/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
18
3:00:23PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
119182 5/27/2010 069355 KLEINFELDER INC 643913 C-311
C-311ODOR CONTROL PROJECT
414.000.656.594.320.410.10 809.80
Total :809.80
119183 5/27/2010 064400 KOHO, STEPHEN 1458 TRAVEL/KOHO
TRAVEL/KOHO
411.000.656.538.800.430.00 310.80
Total :310.80
119184 5/27/2010 068677 KONECRANES AMERICA INC SEA00485782 Sewer - Equipment Repairs and Handling
Sewer - Equipment Repairs and Handling
411.000.655.535.800.480.00 780.82
Unit 106 - RepairsSEA00485847
Unit 106 - Repairs
511.000.657.548.680.480.00 380.00
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.480.00 36.10
Total :1,196.92
119185 5/27/2010 068024 KRUCKEBERG BOTANIC GARDEN KRUCKEBERG12647 GARDEN WORKSHOP
GARDEN WORKSHOP #12647
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 52.50
Total :52.50
119186 5/27/2010 017050 KWICK'N KLEEN CAR WASH 05172010-01 INV#05172010-01 EDMONDS PD
45 CAR WASHES @ $5.03 - 04/10
001.000.410.521.220.480.00 226.35
Total :226.35
119187 5/27/2010 060132 LAB SAFETY SUPPLY 1015439008 Traffic - Trfc Brr Poly Cade - 4@
Traffic - Trfc Brr Poly Cade - 4@
111.000.653.542.640.310.00 2,064.00
Freight
111.000.653.542.640.310.00 296.97
Total :2,360.97
18Page:
Packet Page 38 of 196
05/26/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
19
3:00:23PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
119188 5/27/2010 018760 LUNDS OFFICE ESSENTIALS 104253 OFFICE SUPPLIES
Office Supplies
001.000.250.514.300.310.00 319.91
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.250.514.300.310.00 30.39
OFFICE SUPPLIES104315
Business Cards~250-00241
001.000.640.574.100.490.00 19.16
Todd Cort250-00241
001.000.640.574.100.490.00 19.16
JoAnne Zulauf250-00241
001.000.620.558.800.310.00 19.16
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.574.100.490.00 3.64
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.620.558.800.310.00 1.82
Total :413.24
119189 5/27/2010 018980 LYNNWOOD HONDA 704807 SPARK PLUGS, SPRAYER
SPARK PLUGS, MOWERS
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 136.89
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 13.00
Total :149.89
119190 5/27/2010 020039 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO 55631606 123106800
SUMP PUMP FLOAT SWITCH
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 -64.54
12310680055631607
SUMP PUMP FLOAT SWITCH
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 -64.54
12310680055661252
STRUT MOUNT CLAMP/PIPE FITTING/GLUE
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 162.64
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 11.04
19Page:
Packet Page 39 of 196
05/26/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
20
3:00:23PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
119190 5/27/2010 (Continued)020039 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO
12310680055835838
FLANGE/GASKETS
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 203.50
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 6.54
Total :254.64
119191 5/27/2010 020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENT ALL INC 107577 131
ALUMINUM
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 34.00
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 3.23
Total :37.23
119192 5/27/2010 024302 NELSON PETROLEUM 0428609-IN Fleet Filter Inventory
Fleet Filter Inventory
511.000.657.548.680.340.40 13.45
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.340.40 1.27
Total :14.72
119193 5/27/2010 072700 NETWORK HARDWARE RESALE LLC 292673 COMPUTER HARDWARE
Computer hardware parts
001.000.310.518.880.350.00 1,830.00
Freight
001.000.310.518.880.350.00 19.78
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.310.518.880.350.00 1.88
Total :1,851.66
119194 5/27/2010 065315 NEWCOMB, TRACY NEWCOMB12374 FUN FACTORY
FUN FATORY #12374
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 287.00
Total :287.00
119195 5/27/2010 066391 NORTHSTAR CHEMICAL INC 11348 260
20Page:
Packet Page 40 of 196
05/26/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
21
3:00:23PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
119195 5/27/2010 (Continued)066391 NORTHSTAR CHEMICAL INC
SODIUM BISULFITE
411.000.656.538.800.310.54 609.00
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.54 57.86
Total :666.86
119196 5/27/2010 061013 NORTHWEST CASCADE INC 1-123102 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL: EDMONDS ELEMENTARY
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 189.87
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL1-125153
MADRONA ELEMENTARY HONEY BUCKET RENTAL
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 101.20
Total :291.07
119197 5/27/2010 067868 NW TANK & ENVIRONMENTAL 28437 Fleet Tank Repairs
Fleet Tank Repairs
511.000.657.548.680.480.00 765.00
Total :765.00
119198 5/27/2010 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 597278 INV#597278 ACCT#520437 250POL EDMONDS PD
CDR RECORDABLE DISCS
001.000.410.521.220.310.00 85.65
10x13 KRAFT CATALOG ENVELOPES
001.000.410.521.910.310.00 372.30
DYMO D LABEL CASSETES
001.000.410.521.910.310.00 60.85
DYMO 3/4" LABELING TAPE
001.000.410.521.910.310.00 84.85
AVERY WHITE COPIER LABELS
001.000.410.521.910.310.00 151.30
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.310.00 8.14
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.910.310.00 63.57
21Page:
Packet Page 41 of 196
05/26/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
22
3:00:23PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :826.661191985/27/2010 063511 063511 OFFICE MAX INC
119199 5/27/2010 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 6200068 WRITE ON THE SOUND SUPPLIES
WRITE ON THE SOUND SUPPLIES: FOLDERS,
117.100.640.573.100.310.00 215.28
9.5% Sales Tax
117.100.640.573.100.310.00 20.45
LABELS655579
LABELS
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 25.54
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 2.43
LABELS690322
LABELS
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 44.82
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 4.25
TONER694349
TONER
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 101.41
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 9.63
Total :423.81
119200 5/27/2010 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 549646 PW Admin & Water Quality - Shipping
PW Admin & Water Quality - Shipping
001.000.650.519.910.310.00 37.13
PW Admin & Water Quality - Shipping
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 37.13
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.650.519.910.310.00 3.53
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 3.53
PW Supplies - Copy paper585463
PW Supplies - Copy paper
001.000.650.519.910.310.00 399.80
22Page:
Packet Page 42 of 196
05/26/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
23
3:00:23PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
119200 5/27/2010 (Continued)063511 OFFICE MAX INC
Monthly Planner Admin
001.000.650.519.910.310.00 11.71
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.650.519.910.310.00 39.09
Total :531.92
119201 5/27/2010 064070 PALMATIER, LISA PALMATIER0524 REIMBURSEMENT
REIMBURSEMENT FOR CEMETERY BOARD
130.000.640.536.500.310.00 83.47
Total :83.47
119202 5/27/2010 072303 PERFORMANCE LEADERSHIP 219 INV# 219 EDMONDS PD MAXIMIZE YOUR MESSAG
3 REG (2@$250, 1 FREE) - BARKER,
001.000.410.521.400.490.00 500.00
Total :500.00
119203 5/27/2010 071983 PICKELBALL STUFF LLC 11106 PICKLEBALL SUPPLIES
PICKLEBALLS
001.000.640.575.520.310.00 22.80
Freight
001.000.640.575.520.310.00 6.42
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.575.520.310.00 2.78
Total :32.00
119204 5/27/2010 064552 PITNEY BOWES 3833100MY10 POSTAGE METER LEASE
Lease 04/30 to 05/30
001.000.250.514.300.450.00 866.00
Total :866.00
119205 5/27/2010 069198 PNCWA WESTERN WA REGION 5/24/2010 TRAINING/PALADA/SLENKER/SEBERS/GARCIA/AM
TRAINING/PALADA/SLENKER/SEBERS/GARCIA/AM
411.000.656.538.800.490.71 775.00
Total :775.00
119206 5/27/2010 029117 PORT OF EDMONDS 03870 CITY OF EDMONDS STORMWATER
23Page:
Packet Page 43 of 196
05/26/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
24
3:00:23PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
119206 5/27/2010 (Continued)029117 PORT OF EDMONDS
Pier StormWater Rent for May 2010
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 1,665.96
UNIT F1 B1 FUEL04371
Fire Boat - Fuel
511.000.657.548.680.320.00 153.15
Total :1,819.11
119207 5/27/2010 064088 PROTECTION ONE 2422756 Library - Up Grade Fire Panel
Library - Up Grade Fire Panel
001.000.651.519.920.480.00 646.06
Total :646.06
119208 5/27/2010 071911 PROTZ, MARGARET PROTZ12532 FELDENKRAIS WORKSHOP
FELDENKRAIS WORKSHOP #12532
001.000.640.575.540.410.00 73.50
Total :73.50
119209 5/27/2010 068900 PUGET SOUND PARTNERSHIP May 25, 2010 RENTAL REIMBURSEMENT
Brackett Room reimbursement
001.000.000.362.420.000.00 1,200.00
Total :1,200.00
119210 5/27/2010 062178 PUMP INDUSTRIES INC 61892 BEARING/SEAL/CHOKER RING/GASKET
BEARING/SEAL/CHOKER RING/GASKET
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 2,468.00
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 165.62
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 250.19
Total :2,883.81
119211 5/27/2010 062657 REGIONAL DISPOSAL COMPANY 001756 Storm - Sweep Dump Fees
Storm - Sweep Dump Fees
411.000.652.542.320.490.00 873.49
Total :873.49
24Page:
Packet Page 44 of 196
05/26/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
25
3:00:23PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
119212 5/27/2010 067003 SCHOETTLE, GEORGE 051210 CPR TRAINING
CPR TRAINING
411.000.656.538.800.490.71 360.00
Total :360.00
119213 5/27/2010 072733 SCHWING BIOSET INC 61406422 31000560
SCREWS FOR SCHWING PUMP
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 10,991.12
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 651.87
Total :11,642.99
119214 5/27/2010 066964 SEATTLE AUTOMOTIVE DIST INC 03-049633 Unit 251 - Drum/Rotors, Disc Brake Pads
Unit 251 - Drum/Rotors, Disc Brake Pads
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 37.31
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 3.54
Total :40.85
119215 5/27/2010 071502 SLENKER, ROBERT 2449 TRAVEL/SLENKER/TRAINING
TRAVEL/SLENKER/TRAINING
411.000.656.538.800.430.00 76.00
Total :76.00
119216 5/27/2010 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 2006-5164-4 600 3RD AVE S
600 3RD AVE S
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 887.62
18500 82ND AVE W2007-1403-8
18500 82ND AVE W
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 77.94
250 6TH AVE N2008-6924-6
250 6TH AVE N
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 191.88
23700 104TH AVE W2011-8453-8
23700 104TH AVE W
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 157.62
8030 185TH ST SW2011-9708-4
25Page:
Packet Page 45 of 196
05/26/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
26
3:00:23PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
119216 5/27/2010 (Continued)037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1
8030 185TH ST SW
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 388.92
8030 185TH ST SW2011-9708-4
8030 185TH ST SW
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 102.80
100 DAYTON ST2012-3682-5
100 DAYTON ST
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 360.55
603 3RD AVE S2013-8327-0
603 3RD AVE S
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 29.51
251 6TH AVE N2014-5305-7
251 6TH AVE N
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 147.84
600 3RD AVE S2021-1448-4
600 3RD AVE S
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 117.49
1341 9TH AVE N2022-5062-7
1341 9TH AVE N
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 29.51
Total :2,491.68
119217 5/27/2010 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 113525100 2030-9778-7
WWTP ELECTRICITY
411.000.656.538.800.471.61 24,244.68
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.471.61 1,454.69
Total :25,699.37
119218 5/27/2010 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 200468593 LIFT STATION #4 8311 TALBOT RD
LIFT STATION #4
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 426.05
4 WAY LIGHT 101 9TH AVE S200592954
SIGNAL LIGHT
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 29.51
26Page:
Packet Page 46 of 196
05/26/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
27
3:00:23PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
119218 5/27/2010 (Continued)037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1
200 DAYTON ST-OLD PW BLDG200638609
200 Dayton St-Vacant PW Bldg
411.000.654.534.800.470.00 727.32
SIGNAL LIGHT 200 3RD200678019
SIGNAL LIGHT
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 52.71
SEAVIEW RESERVOIR 18520 90TH W200739845
SEAVIEW RESERVOIR
411.000.654.534.800.470.00 31.54
4 WAY LIGHT 9600 BOWDOIN WAY201147063
SIGNAL LIGHT
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 43.52
BLINKING LIGHT201431244
BLINKING LIGHT
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 31.55
LIBRARY201551744
LIBRARY
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 1,874.01
TRAFFIC LIGHT 117 3RD AVE S201572898
SIGNAL LIGHT
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 137.40
4 WAY LIGHT 901 WALNUT201782646
SIGNAL LIGHT
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 51.43
Public Works201942489
Public Works
001.000.650.519.910.470.00 73.56
Public Works
411.000.654.534.800.470.00 279.52
Public Works
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 279.52
Public Works
511.000.657.548.680.470.00 279.52
Public Works
411.000.652.542.900.470.00 279.54
27Page:
Packet Page 47 of 196
05/26/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
28
3:00:23PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
119218 5/27/2010 (Continued)037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1
Public Works
111.000.653.542.900.470.00 279.52
PUBLIC SAFETY COMPLEX202291662
PUBLIC SAFETY COMPLEX
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 4,255.16
LIGHT 120 5TH N202389375
SIGNAL LIGHT
111.000.653.542.630.470.00 15.37
CITY HALL202439246
CITY HALL
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 2,216.70
Total :11,363.45
119219 5/27/2010 064351 SNOHOMISH COUNTY TREASURER 2010068 INV#2010068 - EDMONDS PD
51.25 BOOKINGS FOR 04/10
001.000.410.523.600.510.00 4,612.50
481.50 HOUSING DAYS FOR 04/10
001.000.410.523.600.510.00 30,093.75
37 WORK RELEASE DAILY MAIN FEES
001.000.410.523.600.510.00 1,554.00
WORK RELEASE FEES INMATES PD
001.000.410.523.600.510.00 -620.00
Total :35,640.25
119220 5/27/2010 073109 SNYDER ROOFING OF 10-W018-4 M-051
RETAINAGE
414.000.656.594.320.410.10 1,550.00
Total :1,550.00
119221 5/27/2010 060371 STANDARD INSURANCE CO June 2010 JUNE 2010 STANDARD INSURANCE
00/10 Standard Insurance
811.000.000.231.550.000.00 13,637.46
Total :13,637.46
119222 5/27/2010 061782 STATE TREASURER 312 000 093 001 0005 MASTER LICENSE RENEWAL 2010 - ~
28Page:
Packet Page 48 of 196
05/26/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
29
3:00:23PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
119222 5/27/2010 (Continued)061782 STATE TREASURER
MASTER LICENSE RENEWAL 2010 - ~
511.000.657.548.680.490.00 120.00
Total :120.00
119223 5/27/2010 040480 STUSSER ELECTRIC 2338-477132 44-26789
ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 40.18
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 3.82
Total :44.00
119224 5/27/2010 068360 SUMMIT LAW GROUP 46179 INV#46179 EDMONDS PD 20119 000003 JHC
INVESTIGATION 5.4 HOURS @$250/HR
001.000.410.521.100.410.00 1,350.00
Total :1,350.00
119225 5/27/2010 073242 SUPERIOR CLEANING &, RESTORATION25611 CITY PARK RESTROOM ARSON RESTORATION
CITY PARK RESTROOM ARSON RESTORATION
125.000.640.576.800.480.00 3,084.21
9.5% Sales Tax
125.000.640.576.800.480.00 293.00
Total :3,377.21
119226 5/27/2010 040917 TACOMA SCREW PRODUCTS INC 18903261 Water - Supplies
Water - Supplies
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 8.50
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 0.81
Total :9.31
119227 5/27/2010 040916 TC SPAN AMERICA 51997 GYMNASTICS SHOW T-SHIRTS
GYMNASTICS SHOW SHIRTS
001.000.640.575.550.310.00 702.90
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.575.550.310.00 66.78
GYMNASTICS SHOW T-SHIRTS51998
29Page:
Packet Page 49 of 196
05/26/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
30
3:00:23PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
119227 5/27/2010 (Continued)040916 TC SPAN AMERICA
T-SHIRTS FOR SPRING GYMNASTICS SHOW
001.000.640.575.550.310.00 891.58
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.575.550.310.00 84.71
Total :1,745.97
119228 5/27/2010 027269 THE PART WORKS INC 283669 SUPPLIES
VALVES, KITS, ETC.
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 747.43
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 71.00
Total :818.43
119229 5/27/2010 038315 THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR 195360 Library - Service Coverage outside of
Library - Service Coverage outside of
001.000.651.519.920.480.00 3,651.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.480.00 346.86
Total :3,997.86
119230 5/27/2010 069673 TRANSTECH ELECTRIC INC 3822 Street Light Pole Removal @ 702 9th N
Street Light Pole Removal @ 702 9th N
111.000.653.542.630.480.00 1,835.00
9.5% Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.630.480.00 174.33
Total :2,009.33
119231 5/27/2010 072146 TRUAX, BREANNE 05192010 MONITOR FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COM MTG
Monitor for Economic Development
001.000.240.513.110.490.00 36.00
Total :36.00
119232 5/27/2010 066842 TSI 14437 EDMO00
VFD CONTROL PANEL
411.000.656.538.800.480.22 7,880.00
9.5% Sales Tax
30Page:
Packet Page 50 of 196
05/26/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
31
3:00:23PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
119232 5/27/2010 (Continued)066842 TSI
411.000.656.538.800.480.22 748.60
Total :8,628.60
119233 5/27/2010 070774 ULINE INC 32523762 INV#32523762 CUST#2634605 EDMONDS PD
5x7 1/2 CLASP ENVELOPES
001.000.410.521.910.310.00 81.00
GROCERY BAGS 3-1/2x2-3/8x6-7/8
001.000.410.521.910.310.00 55.00
Freight
001.000.410.521.910.310.00 20.50
Total :156.50
119234 5/27/2010 061192 UNITED PIPE & SUPPLY 8416359 Meter Inventory - m-mtrtrpl-0.626-010
Meter Inventory - m-mtrtrpl-0.626-010
411.000.654.534.800.342.00 1,466.76
Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.342.00 126.14
Water - Supplies - Meter Box Lids,8418058
Water - Supplies - Meter Box Lids,
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 1,316.64
Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 113.23
Water Inventory - w-setterbyp-02-0108425531
Water Inventory - w-setterbyp-02-010
411.000.654.534.800.341.00 1,711.88
Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.341.00 147.22
Total :4,881.87
119235 5/27/2010 062693 US BANK 3348 APWA Program Monthly Meeting - N Miller
APWA Program Monthly Meeting - N Miller
001.000.650.519.910.490.00 37.00
APWA - Annual Public Works Week
001.000.650.519.910.490.00 40.00
Svc Fees
31Page:
Packet Page 51 of 196
05/26/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
32
3:00:23PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
119235 5/27/2010 (Continued)062693 US BANK
001.000.650.519.910.490.00 2.00
IMSA - Cert Renewals for C Hiatt, T3355
IMSA - Cert Renewals for C Hiatt, T
111.000.653.542.900.490.00 120.00
Svc Fees3355
Svc Fees
111.000.653.542.900.490.00 2.00
Fisheries Supply - Fleet- Boat Supplies3363
Fisheries Supply - Fleet- Boat Supplies
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 78.06
Mobile Equip Sys- Unit 31 - Gasket,
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 66.24
Fisheries Supplies - Boat - Wire
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 99.50
WA St Lic - Boat Lic Fees
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 24.25
Marine Power - Boat - Oil Lines
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 47.34
Magic Toyota - Unit 99 - Relay
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 103.35
Fisheries Supplies - Boat M-16 - Fire
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 49.56
Fisheries Supplies - Boat M-16 -
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 18.29
Edmonds Ace Hdwr - Boat m-16 - Steel
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 8.75
Seton Name Plate Co - PS - Accessible3405
Seton Name Plate Co - PS - Accessible
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 63.57
Guardian Security - Old PW Monthly Fees
001.000.651.519.920.480.00 55.00
PW VISA3546
Verizon - MCH Scan Line monthly and
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 416.23
US Plastics - Storm - Supplies
32Page:
Packet Page 52 of 196
05/26/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
33
3:00:23PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
119235 5/27/2010 (Continued)062693 US BANK
411.000.652.542.320.310.00 260.47
Automotive Training Group -
511.000.657.548.680.490.00 370.00
Sign Warehouse - Sign Shop - Pre Mask
111.000.653.542.640.310.00 56.19
Sign Warehouse - Sign Shop - Transfer
111.000.653.542.640.310.00 70.19
Contract Furnishings Mart - Library -
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 85.74
USPS - Storm - Return Postage to Sigh
411.000.652.542.900.420.00 30.11
Svc Fees
111.000.653.542.900.310.00 4.48
Svc Fees
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 4.48
Svc Fees
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 4.60
Water - Amer Pub Wks - Over Pmt on3546
Water - Amer Pub Wks - Over Pmt on
411.000.654.534.800.490.00 -10.00
Total :2,107.40
119236 5/27/2010 064423 USA BLUE BOOK 141240 Freight
Freight
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 -26.81
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 -2.55
Sewer - 4" Fiberglass Tile Probes145781
Sewer - 4" Fiberglass Tile Probes
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 47.88
Freight
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 45.43
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 8.86
33Page:
Packet Page 53 of 196
05/26/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
34
3:00:23PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :72.811192365/27/2010 064423 064423 USA BLUE BOOK
119237 5/27/2010 069592 USA MOBILITY WIRELESS T0298897E INV#T0298897E - EDMONDS PD
PAGER/MESSAGING 05/27-06/26/10
001.000.410.521.100.420.00 157.78
Total :157.78
119238 5/27/2010 044960 UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOC CTR 0040099 utility locates April 2010
utility locates April 2010
411.000.654.534.800.410.00 78.00
utility locates April 2010
411.000.655.535.800.410.00 78.00
utility locates April 2010
411.000.652.542.900.410.00 80.35
Total :236.35
119239 5/27/2010 011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST 425-206-7147 LIBRARY SCAN ALARM
LIBRARY SCAN ALARM
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 15.01
WATER - 8505 BOWDOIN425-672-6030
LS line set up fees
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 137.85
FLEET MAINTENANCE FAX LINE425-672-7132
FLEET MAINTENANCE FAX LINE
511.000.657.548.680.420.00 101.83
TELEMETRY STATIONS425-712-0417
TELEMETRY STATIONS
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 26.71
TELEMETRY STATIONS
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 26.71
P/W FIRE ALARM, FAX LINE & 2 SPARE LINES425-712-8251
P/W FIRE ALARM, FAX LINE & 2 SPARE LINES
001.000.650.519.910.420.00 14.69
P/W FIRE ALARM, FAX LINE & 2 SPARE LINES
111.000.653.542.900.420.00 73.47
P/W FIRE ALARM, FAX LINE & 2 SPARE LINES
34Page:
Packet Page 54 of 196
05/26/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
35
3:00:23PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
119239 5/27/2010 (Continued)011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 61.71
P/W FIRE ALARM, FAX LINE & 2 SPARE LINES
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 61.71
P/W FIRE ALARM, FAX LINE & 2 SPARE LINES
511.000.657.548.680.420.00 82.28
MEADOWDALE CLUB HOUSE FIRE ALARM LINE425-745-4313
Meadowdale Club House Fire Alarm Line
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 201.44
TELEMETRY LIFT STATIONS425-775-1534
TELEMETRY LIFT STATIONS
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 160.31
TELEMETRY LIFT STATIONS
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 297.72
PUBLIC SAFETY FIRE ALARM425-775-2455
PUBLIC SAFETY FIRE ALARM
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 50.06
Radio Line between Public Works & UB425-775-7865
Radio Line between Public Works & UB
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 53.42
LS 7425-776-2742
LS 7
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 30.56
LS 8425-778-5982
LS 8
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 54.79
PUBLIC WORKS C0NNECTION TO 911425-RT0-9133
Public Works Connection to 911
001.000.650.519.910.420.00 5.48
Public Works Connection to 911
111.000.653.542.900.420.00 20.81
Public Works Connection to 911
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 20.81
Public Works Connection to 911
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 20.81
Public Works Connection to 911
35Page:
Packet Page 55 of 196
05/26/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
36
3:00:23PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
119239 5/27/2010 (Continued)011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST
511.000.657.548.680.420.00 20.81
Public Works Connection to 911
411.000.652.542.900.420.00 20.78
Total :1,559.77
119240 5/27/2010 062812 WA CRANE AND HOIST CO INC 0009390-IN EWW 1EW
REPAIR/CRANE
411.000.656.538.800.480.21 570.00
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.480.21 54.15
Total :624.15
119241 5/27/2010 049500 WEST PUBLISHING 820625541 CODE UPDATES
RCW Supplements
001.000.250.514.300.310.00 638.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.250.514.300.310.00 60.64
Total :698.64
119242 5/27/2010 065256 WHITESAVAGE & LYLE, INC.WHITESAVAGE0524 EDMONDS FLOWER POLE ARTWORK - #1
PAYMENT #1: FLOWER POLE ARTWORK
117.200.640.575.500.410.00 330.00
Total :330.00
119243 5/27/2010 073018 WILCO-WINFIELD 109349 GARDEN SUPPLIES
RANGER PRO, DYNAMARK BLUE
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 191.50
Freight
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 31.72
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 18.20
Total :241.42
119244 5/27/2010 069969 WILLIAMS, PAMELA WILLIAMS0524 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT
MILEGE REIMBURSEMENT FOR CLASSROOM
001.000.640.574.350.430.00 45.50
36Page:
Packet Page 56 of 196
05/26/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
37
3:00:23PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :45.501192445/27/2010 069969 069969 WILLIAMS, PAMELA
119245 5/27/2010 067465 WOOD, JULIA WOOD11957 GYROKINESIS
GYROKINESIS #11957
001.000.640.575.540.410.00 65.00
Total :65.00
119246 5/27/2010 063008 WSDOT 0159 PURCHASING, BIDDING & CONTRACT MGMT CLAS
Hauss & Sibrel-Purchasing, Bidding &
001.000.620.532.200.490.00 200.00
Total :200.00
Bank total :511,626.90121 Vouchers for bank code :front
511,626.90Total vouchers :Vouchers in this report121
37Page:
Packet Page 57 of 196
AM-3103 2.D.
Claims for Damages
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:06/01/2010
Submitted By:Sandy Chase Time:Consent
Department:City Clerk's Office Type:Action
Review Committee:
Committee Action:
Information
Subject Title
Acknowledge receipt of Claims for Damages from Verizon (amount undetermined), and Erin
Graafstra ($6,994.26).
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
It is recommended that the City Council acknowledge receipt of the Claims for Damages by
minute entry.
Previous Council Action
N/A
Narrative
Claims have been received from the following:
Verizon
CMR Claims Department
P.O. Box 60770
Oklahoma City, OK 73146-0770
(Amount Undetermined)
Erin Graafstra
22716 - 121st Dr. NE
Arlington, WA 98223
($6,994.26)
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: Verizon Notice of Claim
Link: Graafstra Claim for Damages
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 05/24/2010 02:58 PM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 05/24/2010 03:00 PM APRV
Packet Page 58 of 196
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 05/25/2010 09:05 AM APRV
Form Started By: Sandy
Chase
Started On: 05/24/2010 02:55
PM
Final Approval Date: 05/25/2010
Packet Page 59 of 196
Packet Page 60 of 196
Packet Page 61 of 196
Packet Page 62 of 196
AM-3100 3.
Community Service Announcement
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:06/01/2010
Submitted By:Jana Spellman
Submitted For:Council President Bernheim Time:5 Minutes
Department:City Council Type:Information
Review Committee:
Committee Action:
Information
Subject Title
Community Service Announcement - Greater Edmonds Chamber of Commerce / 4th of July
Events.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
Previous Council Action
Narrative
Community Service Announcement - Greater Edmonds Chamber of Commerce / 4th of July
Events.
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
No file(s) attached.
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 05/26/2010 04:32 PM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 05/26/2010 04:36 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 05/26/2010 04:38 PM APRV
Form Started By: Jana
Spellman
Started On: 05/20/2010 03:55
PM
Final Approval Date: 05/26/2010
Packet Page 63 of 196
AM-3102 4.
Mike Doubleday - Washington State Legislative Session Recap
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:06/01/2010
Submitted By:Stephen Clifton Time:20 Minutes
Department:Community Services Type:Information
Review Committee:
Committee Action:
Information
Subject Title
Mike Doubleday - Washington State Legislative Session Recap.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
Previous Council Action
Narrative
Mike Doubleday will be attending the June 1, 2010 City Council meeting to provide an overview
of the most recently held Washington State legislative session. Additionally, this meeting will
offer an opportunity for the City Council to discuss preliminarily legislative agenda items
which Mr. Doubleday could incorporate into a draft legislative agenda to be presented this fall to
the City Council.
For citizens reviewing this agenda item, attached is an April, 2010 Final State Legislative Report I
provided to the City Council on April 23, 2010.
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: Attachment 1 - Mike Doubleday Final 2010 State Legislative Report
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 05/24/2010 02:58 PM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 05/24/2010 03:00 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 05/25/2010 09:05 AM APRV
Form Started By: Stephen
Clifton
Started On: 05/24/2010 10:56
AM
Final Approval Date: 05/25/2010
Packet Page 64 of 196
Mike Doubleday
Doubleday Government Relations
April 2010
Final 2010 State Legislative Report
City of Edmonds
Packet Page 65 of 196
2
CITY OF EDMONDS 2010 STATE LEGISLATIVE AGENDA/
OUTCOMES 4
Bills that Passed in 2009 Affecting Edmonds
1. State Revenue Package 8
2. Local Government Fiscal Flexibility 10
3. Storm Water Funding for Local Governments 10
4. Operating Budget Funding 11
5. Supplemental Transportation Budget 11
6. High Density Urban Development 12
7. Amending the Transportation Benefit District Statute 13
8. Extending the Deadlines for Review and Evaluation of 13
Comprehensive Land Use Plans and Development
Regulations for Three Years
9. Upgrading the E-911 System 14
10. Campaign Contribution Limits for Local Government Officials 14
11. Clarifying the Integration of the Shoreline Management Act 14
with the Growth Management Act
12. Allowing Cities to Direct Requestors to their Web Site 15
for Public Records
13. Housing Homeless Persons on Property Owned or 15
Controlled by a Church
14. Rental Housing Inspection Programs 16
15. Restructuring the three Growth Management Hearings Boards 17
into One Board
16. Creating Community Facilities Districts 17
17. Disclosure of Public Records Containing Information Used to 18
Locate or Identify Employees of Criminal Justice Agencies
18. Amending Local Revitalization Financing 18
19. Alternative City Assumption and Tax Authority Provisions 18
Pertaining to Water—Sewer Districts
20. Allowing Local Governments to Create Golf Cart Zones 19
Bills that Did Not Pass That Would Have Affected Edmonds
1. Large Commercial Airport Siting 20
2. Expansion of the Wrongful Death Statute 20
Packet Page 66 of 196
3
3. Street Utility 21
4. Limiting Automated Traffic Safety Cameras 22
5. Changing Timing of Impact Fee Payments 22
6. Creating a Cap on Hearing Examiner Fees 23
7. Privatization of State Liquor Stores 23
8. Financing Operations and Capital Needs of Transit Agencies 24
9. Reclassifying Possession of 40 Grams or Less of Marijuana from a
Misdemeanor to a Class 2 Civil Infraction 24
10. Cap and Trade/Climate Change 25
Packet Page 67 of 196
4
City of Edmonds 2010 State Legislative Agenda /
Outcomes
City of Edmonds
2010 State Legislative Agenda
TOP PRIORITY
1. Transportation
• Ferry Terminal
WSDOT’s Public Private Partnership Office released a Request for
Proposals (RFP) in early January to sell WSF’s property (parking lot)
just north of the Skipper’s property near the ferry terminal. The RFP
would require the developer to work with the City and WSF on an
agreeable project to eliminate the traffic-pedestrian problem at the
ferry terminal. WSDOT has since briefed the council on the proposal.
- Seek state assistance to address Edmonds’ ferry
terminal issues, e.g., queuing and vehicular storage, vehicular and
pedestrian accessibility/safety, pedestrian overpass, etc. The Edmonds
Ferry Terminal is the only ferry terminal in the Washington State Ferry
system that interfaces with a heavily used railroad corridor.
• Transportation Benefit District (TBD) – Support changes to the TBD
statute that clarifies that any City transportation improvement project
and/or program contained within a Transportation Plan is eligible for
Transportation Benefit District funds. 2SHB 1591 has been signed by
the Governor. It allows projects in a city’s comprehensive plan as an
allowable use for TBD funding (see page 13).
Packet Page 68 of 196
5
2. Shell Valley Community Emergency Access Road Funding
• Work to secure funding in the supplemental transportation budget to
help pay for construction of an emergency access road from the Shell
Valley subdivision to Main Street in Edmonds. There is $250,000 for
this project in the supplemental transportation budget which has been
signed the Governor (see ESSB 6381 on page 11).
3. Phase II Storm Water Funding
• Seek additional state funding for cities, including Edmonds that must meet
Phase II storm water requirements. Funding for cities was provided in the
supplemental capital budget to assist cities in meeting the NPDES mandate
(see page 10).
4. Lake Ballinger
• Support Lake Ballinger Watershed Forum’s multi-jurisdictional
approach to addressing water quality and drainage issues. The City
decided against moving forward on this request in 2010.
5. Airport Siting
• Monitor legislation that seeks to site a new commercial airport in the
Puget Sound region. SB 6304 was introduced by not heard this year.
(see page 20).
6. LEOFF 1 Medical Liability
• Seek help from the State Actuary to identify the liability for medical
and long-term care costs for LEOFF 1 retirees, by jurisdiction, and
pursue options for providing financial assistance to local governments
for this liability. There was no change to the 2009-11 biennial budget
which provided $25,000 for an actuarial evaluation of local
governments’ liabilities for Law Enforcement Officers’ and Fire
Fighters’ Retirement System plan post-retirement medical benefits.
Packet Page 69 of 196
6
SECONDARY PRIORITY
1. Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions Legislation
• Monitor legislation to reduce greenhouse gas emissions through land
use regulations. ESHB 2538 was signed by the Governor. It
encourages cities to provide for compact development. (See page 12).
2. Taping Local Governments Executive Sessions
• Monitor legislation requiring local governments to tape executive
sessions. There was no bill introduced on this subject in 2010 and the
2009 taping bill was not advanced.
3. Public Records Requests
• Support and monitor legislation to provide some relief for cities and
other governmental agencies related to public records requests. SSB
6367 was signed by the Governor; it permits cities to direct requestors
to an agency website for information (see page 15).
4. Aerospace Industry
• Support the Washington State Aerospace Partnership and other
stakeholder groups in developing a unified strategy to ensure that
Washington State remains the leading location in the world for
aerospace.
5. Street Utility
• Monitor legislation creating a local option street utility for cities, based
on per trip charges. HB 2618, sponsored by Rep. Liias did not pass
(see page 21).
6. Climate Change
• Support legislation that collaboratively addresses climate change.
Last year’s major bill on this subject, SB 5735, was not advanced in
2010, and no other greenhouse gas emissions bills were advanced.
7. Brokered Natural Gas
• Monitor legislation that reinstates the ability of cities, like Edmonds, to
tax brokered natural gas. ESHB 3179 was signed by the Governor. It
permits cities to continue to tax brokered natural gas (see page 10).
Packet Page 70 of 196
7
8. Revenue Flexibility
• Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) - Support revision to the usage of REET
that provides consistency between the 1st and 2nd
quarter REET. This
issue was not addressed although it was in early versions of ESHB
3179 (local governments’ fiscal flexibility bill).
9. Infrastructure Financing and Transportation
General Infrastructure
i. Local Revitalization Financing (LRF), and
– Continue working with other local jurisdictions to
maintain and expand tools to assist cities with infrastructure needs, such
as:
ii Local Infrastructure Financing Tool (LIFT).
Transportation Improvement Board
– Maintain or expand existing grant
and loan programs such as the Transportation Improvement Board (TIB)
and the Public Works Trust Fund. The Local Revitalization Financing
statute was amended in E2SSB 6609 to allow other taxing districts to limit
their property tax contribution to the revitalization area, and to allow the
sponsoring local government to issue revenue bonds (see page 18).
An effort to consolidate TIB with other agencies did not pass, although the
issue will be studied in the 2010 interim.
10. Puget Sound Partnership
• Monitor the activities of the Puget Sound Partnership and participate
in their discussions about likely region-wide taxing district legislation
in 2011 to fund the Partnership Action Agenda. The Puget Sound
Partnership’s budget increased from $11.3M to $14.5M for the
remainder of the biennium due to the addition of federal funds.
11. Public Health
• Support legislation that provides a predictable, dedicated funding
source to County governments to fund public health and provide
services to residents of both incorporated and unincorporated areas.
The public health system has deteriorated due in part to uncertain
funding that has not kept pace with inflation, population growth and
the emergence of new health problems. An early effort to tax candy
for public health funds did not advance (HB 2388). A sales tax on
candy was included in the final revenue bill (E2SSB 6143).
Packet Page 71 of 196
8
Bills that Passed in 2010 Affecting Edmonds
1. State Revenue Package (E2SSB 6143), Senator Prentice, 11th
District, South
Seattle, Renton, Skyway
On the 30th
• Increased revenues - $757 million
day of the special session, the Legislature passed a revenue bill to
address a $2 .8 billion revenue shortfall for the remainder of the 2009-11 biennium
(ending June 30, 2011). The long-debated solution contains the following
elements:
• Spending reductions - $840 M
• Increased federal funds - $633 M
• Use of other funds - $328 M
• Use of reserves - $256 M
Some of the revenue increases will bring additional funding to cities in 2011 as
follows:
1. tax avoidance transactions - $2..8 M
2. livestock nutrients - $395,000
3. repealing the sales tax exemptions for bottled water and candy $23.7 M
4. PUD privilege tax clarification - $1.3 M
The state Department of Revenue (DOR) estimates the total revenue impact to
local governments (cities and counties, about 80% to cities) as follows:
• FY 2010 - $220,000
• FY 2011 - $28.2 M
• FY 2012 - $30.3 M
• FY 2013 – $33.0 M
• FY 2014 – 9.4 M
• FY 2015 - $9.8 M
The elements of the revenue package, with the sections affecting cities in bold, are
listed below (see next page for chart):
Packet Page 72 of 196
9
Tax Provision/Suspension of
Exemption
Explanation 2009-11 estimated revenue to the state
Minimum nexus standards specifies nexus standards for state B&O
tax of businesses domiciled outside
Washington but doing business inside
Washington:
$84.7M
Tax avoidance transactions closes methods used to avoid use tax
and real estate excise taxes
$8.5M
Modifying first mortgage deduction the first mortgage interest deduction
for banks is disallowed
$3.6M
Direct seller B&O exemption eliminates the B&O exemption for
firms selling into Washington using
direct seller’s representatives
$155M
B&O tax on manufacturing certain
agricultural products
limit s the B&O “preferential” tax for
meat processing to manufacturers
$4.1M
Sales tax exemption for livestock
nutrient equipment and facilities
suspends this exemption for three
years, commencing July 1, 2010
$1.3M
B&O tax on corporate directors disallows the B&O tax exemption for
corporate directors
$2.1M
Tax debts: corporate liability allows state DOR to pursue uncollected
taxes of a terminated or insolvent
limited liability business from the chief
executive or chief financial officer
$1.1M
Sales and Use tax on bottled water imposes sales tax on sales of bottled
water for three years, May 1, 2010, to
June 30, 2013:
$32.6M
Sales tax on candy and gum imposes permanent sales tax on sales
of candy and gum commencing June
1, 2010
$30.5M
PUD privilege tax clarification “gross revenue” for the tax applies to
all charges for electricity
$1.2M
Temporary B&O Surcharge on service
businesses
service businesses’ B&O
rate is increased from 1.5% to 1.75% for
three years: July 1, 2010 to June 30,
2013; the small business tax credit is
increased
$242M
Limiting the B&O exemption for
property management salaries
Repeals the B&O exemption for
amounts received by a property
management company from the owner
of a property for gross wages and
benefits paid to on-site personnel
$6.9M
Temporary Beer Tax increase increases the beer tax by 50 cents per
gallon for three years, June 1, 2010 to
June 30, 2013; the increase does not
apply to the first 60,000 barrels
produced by small brewers
$59M
Temporary carbonated beverages tax
increase
increases the tax on carbonated
beverages by 2 cents per 12
ounce bottle for three years,
July 1, 2010 to June 30, 2013
$33.5M
Limiting the bad debt deduction limits the bad deduction for bad debts
(no person purchasing an installment
sales contract may claim this deduction
$1.7M
Packet Page 73 of 196
10
2. Local Government Fiscal Flexibility (ESHB 3179) Rep. Springer, 45th
District, Kirkland area
This bill was an AWC priority and allows cities and counties some flexibility in
existing revenue authority as follows:
• Allows cities in Snohomish County to impose, with voter approval, a
public safety sales tax of 0.1% if Snohomish County does not go to the
ballot for their existing 0.3% sales tax authority by the end of 2010; the
combined county-city sales tax pursuant to this authority may not exceed
0.3%. The legislation also eliminates the non-supplant language for this
revenue source, which will add to our uses for this funding,
• Eliminates the non-supplant language in the 0.1% criminal justice sales tax
in Snohomish County,
• Allows gambling revenue to be used for general public safety programs,
as opposed to current law which restricts this revenue to local gambling
enforcement programs.
• There is also a provision in the bill allowing cities who formerly taxed
brokered natural gas including Edmonds
to once again tax that product (a
state Court of Appeals court last year disallowed cities from imposing the
tax).
3. Storm water Funding for Local Governments (Supplemental Capital
Budget (ESHB 2836), Rep. Dunshee, 44th
District, southeast Snohomish
County
The storm water bill, HB 3181, that raised the toxics waste tax from the current 0.7
to 1.5% (its’ last iteration was a 0.4% raise over 4 years) was not passed by the
Legislature. Instead, storm water funding to help local governments meet the
NPDES mandates is included in the supplemental capital budget as follows (this
is one year funding):
• About $8 million is designated as grants to local government to meet
staffing levels to comply with the federal mandate; this funding should
equal about $70,000 for each Phase I and II NPDES jurisdiction,
• The remaining money, about $40 million, must be allocated to local
governments through a grant process to fund projects or activities that
mitigate or prevent contamination of storm water.
This is Model Toxic Control Act (MTCA) funding that was diverted to assist with
the operating budget deficit last year.
Packet Page 74 of 196
11
4. Operating Budget Funding (ESSB 6444), Senator Prentice, 11th
District,
South Seattle, Renton, Skyway
• Puget Sound Partnership
Funding is increased for the Puget Sound Partnership for the remainder of the
biennium from $11.3M to $14.5M. The additional funding is federal dollars. In
addition, the capital budget included funding for a number of clean up projects
on Puget Sound.
• State Shared Revenues
The Liquor Revolving Account
, which is the liquor profits and taxes shared with
local government, is reduced from $80M to about $69M for the remainder of the
biennium; however, an additional $18M was included in last year’s 2009-11
budget for local governments. Still, cities will experience a slight reduction in this
funding for the remainder of the biennium.
The Municipal Criminal Justice Assistance Account
is slightly increased to
$27.2M from the biennial passed amount of $25.6M.
5. Supplemental Transportation Budget, (ESSB 6381), Senator Haugen,
Senate Transportation Committee Chair, 10th
District, Camano and
Whidbey Islands
A few items in the supplemental transportation budget passed by the Legislature
are of importance to Edmonds:
• in section 204(5), the Joint Transportation Committee (JTC) conduct a
study “to establish a statewide blueprint for public transportation that
will serve to guide state investments in public transportation. At a
minimum, the study should include an assessment of unmet operating
and capital needs of public transportation agencies, the state role in
funding the unmet needs, and the priorities for state investments.”
The JTC will convene a “public advisory panel” to provide input for
the study. There are no city representatives on the panel but “other
individuals deemed appropriate (see section 205(5)(c)(i-xi), page 12 of
ESSB 6381). The report is due December 1, 2010;
• in section 204(8), the JTC will evaluate services from the
Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) and similar agencies (e.g.
County Road Administration Board), this review responds to the
Packet Page 75 of 196
12
Governor’s recommendation to consolidate smaller transportation
agencies as part of an effort to streamline state government;
• the Transportation Commission may impose a ferry surcharge effective
July 1, 2011 (section 205),
• As part of its development of the statewide transportation plan, the
Transportation Commission shall review prioritized projects from PSRC
and submit the review along with its recommendations to the House and
Senate transportation committees by January 1, 2011. (section 205; this list
could be the basis for a transportation revenue package which may be
enacted in the 2011 session),
• The DOT Aviation Division shall develop guidelines for consultation
procedures and a process to assist cities and counties to identify land uses
that may be incompatible with airports and airport operations, and to
encourage the adoption of comprehensive plan policies and development
regulations consistent with such land uses (section 214; similar language
was in SB 6603, a bill that was not enacted);
• $2 million is provided for “scoping unfunded state highway projects” to
ensure that a well-vetted list is available for future program funding
discussions (section 220);
• DOT must report to the legislature by November 1, 2011, statistics
regarding on-time arrival and departure status for ferries on a route-by-
route and month-by-month basis. The report must include reasons for
any delay over ten minutes. The statistics must be displayed on the WSF
website and on each ferry and terminal (section 222);
• $250,000 is provided solely for the Shell Valley emergency access road and
bicycle/pedestrian path (section 308(17)).
6. High Density Urban Development (ESHB 2538), Rep Upthegrove, 33rd
District, Des Moines, Burien
This bill was the successor to the 2009 bill that mandated cities near a transit
station to achieve a density minimum of 50 units per acre. That bill was opposed
by cities and died.
ESHB 2538 encourages cities planning under GMA to include compact
developments in their comprehensive plans. The bill further requires the
development of a non project environmental impact statement for any compact
development in a comp plan.
Packet Page 76 of 196
13
7. Amending the Transportation Benefit District (TBD) Statute (2SHB 1591),
Rep. Upthegrove, 33rd
District, Burien, Des Moines
The bill clarifies that “transportation improvement” means in addition to any
project contained in the transportation plan of the state or regional transportation
planning organization (RTPO), any project contained in the transportation plan of
a city, county, or any jurisdiction eligible to be included in a TBD.
The bill also clarifies that TBDs are authorized to impose impact fees for
transportation improvements within the district that are constructed by any
entity, not only for those improvements constructed by the TBD itself.
The bill also establishes that TBDs that impose a voter-approved sales tax after
July 1, 2010, are authorized to impose the sales tax beyond the 10-year limitation
if the tax revenues are dedicated to the repayment of general obligation bonds.
8. Extending the Deadlines for Review and Evaluation of Comprehensive
Land Use Plans and Development Regulations for Three Years (SSB 6611)
Senator Pridemore, 49th
District, Vancouver
The Growth Management Act (GMA), enacted in 1990 and 1991, obligated cities
planning under the Act to update their comprehensive plans and development
regulations every seven years (in King county). The last update was due
December 1, 2004; therefore the next update was due December 1, 2011.
SSB 6611 slips the 2011 date to December 1, 2014, but every seven years
thereafter, so the update beyond 2014 will be due December 1, 2021.
Jurisdictions that comply with the revision deadlines, demonstrate substantial
progress toward compliance with the schedules for development regulations that
protect critical areas, or comply with three-year extension provisions, are eligible
to receive financial assistance from the Public Works Assistance Account the
Water Quality Account.
Packet Page 77 of 196
14
9. Upgrading the E-911 System (SSB 6846), Senator Brandland), 42 District,
Bellingham area
As of January 1, 2011, counties may increase the 911 tax on telephone lines from
.50 (50 cents) to .70 and the state may increase their same tax from .20 to .25. The
state money will allow the 911 system to modernize to an Internet Protocol
Network: the system only works for voice now, meaning text messages will not
work with the system. The county money will upgrade the equipment so that
messages from the new system will be accepted.
10. Campaign Contribution Limits for Local Government Officials (SSB 6344),
Senator Fairley, 32nd
District, Lake Forest Park area
Campaign contribution limits, per the 1992 Fair Campaign Practices Act, are
expanded to include all city council and mayoral offices. Contributions from an
individual, a union, or business may not exceed $800 per election to a candidate
for city council or mayor (same as the limits for state and legislative offices).
Political party contributions are limited to .80 (80 cents) per registered voter in the
candidate’s jurisdiction for the election cycle. The Public Disclosure Commission
(PDC) adjusts these limits for inflation every even-numbered years.
Existing local campaign contribution limits may continue to apply as long as the
contribution limits don exceed the limits set by the PDC.
11. Clarifying the Integration of the Shoreline Management Act (SMA) with
the Growth Management Act (GMA), (EHB 1653), Representative
Simpson, 47th
District, Kent, Auburn, Covington, Maple Valley
The GMA is the comprehensive land use planning framework for cities and
counties in Washington. The SMA governs the use of state shorelines. A 2008
state Supreme Court case left it unclear which statute controlled procedures
inside shorelines until a new SMA master plan is approved by the state
Department of Ecology (DOE).
EHB 1653 says development regulations adopted under GMA to protect critical
areas within shorelines of the state apply within shorelines until the DOE
approves one of the following:
• a comprehensive master program update,
Packet Page 78 of 196
15
• a segment of a master program relating to critical areas, or
• a new of amended master program, provided the master program is
approved by DOE on or after March 1, 2002.
12. Allowing Cities to Direct Requestors to their Web Site for Public Records
(SSB 6367), Senator Hatfield, 19th
District, Grays Harbor area
The Public Records Act requires that all state and local governments make all
public records available for public inspection and copying unless they fall within
statutory exemptions.
SSB 6367 permits public agencies to provide a requestor an internet address and
link on the agency’s website to the specific records requested. If the requester
cannot access records through the internet, the agency must provide hard copies
or allow the requester to view copies on the agency computer.
13. Relating to Housing Homeless Persons on Property Owned or Controlled
by a Church (ESHB 1956), Representative Williams, 22nd
District, Olympia
area
The city or county regulation of homeless encampments on church property has
been an issue in Olympia for a number of years.
In ESHB 1956, a “religious organization” is authorized to host temporary
encampments for the homeless on any real property owned or controlled by the
organization.
Cities and counties are prohibited from the following in regulation homeless
encampments:
• enacting ordinances or regulations that impose conditions other than
those necessary to protect the public health and safety and do not
substantially burden the decisions or actions of a religious organization
providing homeless housing,
• imposing permit fees in excess of the actual costs associated with the
review and approval of the required permit applications, or
• requiring a religious organization to obtain insurance pertaining to
liability of a city with regard to the homeless persons housed on the
Packet Page 79 of 196
16
church property or otherwise requiring the organization to indemnify the
city against such liability.
Local governments are granted immunity from civil liability for damages arising
from permitting decisions and activities occurring in homeless encampments.
ESHB 1956 does not supercede current consent decrees or negotiated settlements
entered into between a public agency and a religious organization prior to July 1,
2010, pertaining to the homeless encampment.
14. Rental Housing Inspection Programs, (SSB 6459), Senator Hobbs, 44th
District, Snohomish, Lake Stevens area
The City of Pasco had adopted a mandatory local rental housing inspection
program. Apartment owners and landlords objected and brought the issue to
Olympia.
Pursuant to SSB 6459, cities may require landlords to provide a certificate of
inspection as a business license condition. A ”certificate of inspection” means a
verification by a qualified inspector that the landlord has not failed to fulfill any
substantial obligation that endangers or impairs the health or safety of a tenant.
A city may only require a certificate of inspection every three years.
Generally, multi-unit rental properties are inspected by a sampling based on a
number of units, or the property owner may elect to have all the units inspected.
If a rental property is asked to provide a certificate of inspection for a sample unit
and a selected unit fails an initial inspection, the city may require all unites to
provide a certificate of inspection. A city may also require all units to provide a
certificate of inspection if a rental property has had conditions that endanger or
impair the health or safety of a tenant reported since the last required inspection.
If a rental property owner does not agree with the findings of an inspection
performed by a city the city is required to offer an appeals process.
Packet Page 80 of 196
17
15. Restructuring the three Growth Management Hearings Boards into One
Board (SSB 6214), Senator Haugen, 10th
District, Camano and Whidbey
Islands
Pursuant to SSB 6214, the three regional Growth Management Hearings Boards
(GMHB) are abolished and consolidated into a single Growth Management
Hearing Board. The new consolidated board will consist of seven members,
appointed by the Governor for six-year terms from three regions of the state: two
members each from Central Puget Sound, Eastern Washington and Western
Washington.
Petitions for review filed with the consolidated board must be heard and decided
by a regional three-member panel, with membership on the panels selected from
among the full membership of the consolidated GMHB. A majority of the
regional panel members selected to hear and decide a case must reside within the
region in which the case arose. The Central Puget Sound regional panel will
decide matters pertaining to the cities and counties in King, Pierce, Snohomish,
and Kitsap counties.
16. Creating Community Facilities Districts (ESSB 6241), Senator Kilmer, 26th
District, Gig Harbor area
Community Facilities Districts (CFD) are authorized and designed to provide
financing for community facilities and local, subregional, and regional
infrastructure. A CFD is created by a petition approved by a city or county in
which the district is located. The petition must:
• Be approved by 100% of the district’s landowners all of whom requesting
that their property be subject to assessments,
• Explain the object and plan of the district and the specific facilities to be
financed.
A CFD is independently governed by a Board of Supervisors. The legislative
authority approving the CFD must approve appointments to the Board. A CFD
may acquire, finance and sell real and personal property, levy assessments, issue
revenue and assessment bonds, and finance the cost of any facility with an
estimated life of five years or longer. A CFD may finance planning and design
work, water systems, streets and parking facilities, areas for pedestrian,
equestrian, or bicycle use, bus systems, and numerous other facilities. Special
assessments may be imposed by the CFD on privately owned real property
Packet Page 81 of 196
18
within the district to finance the facilities and improvements authorized by the
CFD.
17. Disclosure of Public Records containing information used to locate or
identify employees of criminal justice agencies (ESHB 1317), Rep. Kessler,
24th
District, Hoquiam, Aberdeen areas
Photographs and month and year of birth in personnel files of employees and
workers of criminal justice agencies (including city police departments) are
added to the Public Records Act as exempt from public inspection and copying.
However, news media shall access to the photographs and date of birth
information.
18. Local Revitalization Financing (LRF) for Local Governments (E2SSB 6609),
Senator Kastama, 25th
District, Tacoma area
The Legislature created the Local Revitalization Financing (LRF) program for
local governments in 2009. Pursuant to the program, a city (or county or port
district), may create a “revitalization area,” sell bonds to make improvements in
the revitalization area, and then use the increase in sales taxes and property taxes
from within the revitalization area to pay off the bonds.
E2SSB 6609 modified the LRF program slightly as follows:
• Six projects not funded in the initial round of state contributions to LRF
projects were funded,
• A participating taxing district, other than the sponsoring taxing district,
may limit its’ property tax contributions through an interlocal agreement,
and
• The sponsoring local government may issue revenue bonds to pay for the
improvements in the revitalization area.
19. Alternative City Assumption and Tax Authority Provisions pertaining to
Water—Sewer Districts (SHB 2990), Representative Pettigrew, 37th
District, South Seattle area
Under current law, cities can assume a water-sewer district without a public vote.
However, cities cannot levy a utility tax on customers of water-sewer districts
inside the city boundaries.
Packet Page 82 of 196
19
Pursuant to SHB 2990, a city in King County with a population between 80,000
and 85,000 as certified on April 1, 2009 (City of Renton), can enter into an
interlocal agreement with a water-sewer district allowing the city to impose a
utility tax on the gross revenues of the water-sewer district. If the city levies the
tax and adopts a resolution to assume all or part of the district, the city in
consultation with the district must complete a feasibility study, jointly and
equally funded by the city and the district, regarding the assumption of the
district. The study is not necessary if the board of the water-sewer district
consents to the assumption by the city.
Following the study, an assumption must be placed on the ballot and must be
approved by the voters residing within the district. The act expires on January 1,
2015.
20. Allowing Local Governments to Create Golf Cart Zones (SSB 6207),
Senator Haugen, 10th
District, Camano and Whidbey Islands
Cities and counties may create golf cart zones by ordinance. The ordinance
would allow the use of golf carts on public roads that have speed limits of 25
mph or less. Golf carts are defined as gas-powered or electric-powered four-
wheeled vehicles that cannot attain a speed higher than 20 mph, designed for use
on a golf course.
Local jurisdictions that create golf cart zones may restrict the operation of golf
carts to daylight hours and may prohibit the operation of golf carts in designated
bicycle lanes that are within the golf cart zone.
Packet Page 83 of 196
20
Bills That Did Not Pass in 2010 That Would Have Affected Edmonds
1. Large Commercial Airport Siting (SB 6304), Senator Keiser, 33rd
District,
Des Moines, SeaTac Airport area
SB 6304, introduced by Senator Keiser from the SeaTac airport area, mandated
that cities in which there is a planned commercial service airport (defined as an
airport that receives scheduled passenger service and enplanes 10,000 or more
passengers annually) must include in their comprehensive plans the creation of
aviation protection zones of at least 7 miles around the future facility.
Incompatible uses such as housing, K-12 facilities, and hospitals may not be sited
within this zone.
The bill also included funding for a consultant who was to identify the location of
the next primary commercial service airport in the state.
I expect additional work on this bill during the 2010 interim.
2. Expansion of the Wrongful Death Statute (2ESSB 6508), Senator Fairley,
32nd
District, Lake Forest Park area
The Legislature has provided for legal action and recovery of damages for a
person’s wrongful death. These actions are 1) general wrongful death statute, 2)
child death statute, 3) general survival statute, and 4) special survival statute.
The last iteration of this bill made the following changes to existing statutes:
• Allowed a wrongful death action by the parents of a deceased adult child
if the parents had “significant involvement in the adult child’s life.”
Present law allows a parents’ action if the parents are financially
dependent upon the adult child for support;
• In such cases, this bill permitted damages for economic and noneconomic
damages. Current statutory law does not list the damages recoverable
although case law lists some damages: this bill was an extension of case
law damages.
• The child death statute was amended to provide that each parent,
separately from the other, is entitled to recover for his or her own loss
regardless of marital status.
Packet Page 84 of 196
21
• The special survival statute was amended to allow for the recovery of
noneconomic damages.
This version of the bill did not allow joint and several liability to apply against
state and local governments, so that each public agency would be liable for their
proportion of fault.
The bill was opposed by cities as a potentially quite large increase in wrongful
death payments.
3. Street Utility (HB 2618/SB 6616), Representative Liias, 21st District,
Edmonds, Lynnwood, Mukilteo area, and Senator Jacobsen, 46th
District,
NE Seattle
The bill permitted cities to establish a jurisdiction-wide street maintenance utility
(SMU) and to impose charges to fund the maintenance, preservation, and
operation of streets. The SMU is based on a per trip charge rate.
SMU rates would apply to residents, businesses, governmental entities and other
users in the SMU service area. SMU rates must be uniform for the same class of
ratepayers and must be established using sound engineering principles; SMU
rates may take into account the following:
• A base level of operations cost component
• User location
• Time of use
• Number and type of vehicle associated with the household unit,
government entity, or business
In addition to findings of need and rate schedules, the city ordinance establishing
the SMU must:
• Create a SMU advisory committee,
• A referendum procedure for the ordinance, and
• Appeal provisions allowing ratepayers to challenge a rate, a rate
classification, and the base rate.
Permissible uses for the SMU were maintaining, operating, and preserving
streets, bridges, gutters, curbs, and sidewalks. Rates may be phased in.
Packet Page 85 of 196
22
4. Limiting the Use of Automated Traffic Safety Cameras (HB 2780),
Representative Hurst, 31st
District, SE King County area
Under current law, cities are authorized to use automated traffic safety cameras
(sometimes referred to as “photo radar”) under specific statutory conditions,
among them that the compensation paid to the equipment vendor must be based
on the value of the equipment and services rendered and not upon a portion of
the fine.
Some legislators maintained that cities were charging exorbitant rates for
intersection red light violations and were reducing the yellow light time to catch
more violators.
HB 2780 did the following:
• The yellow light duration is required to be at least four seconds at any
intersection where an automated traffic safety camera is installed.
• The fine for an infraction generated by an automated traffic safety camera
is limited to $25.
• Limited the process by which a registered owner declared that they were
not operating the vehicle at the time of the infraction.
5. Changing Timing of Impact Fee Payments (ESHB 3067), Representative
Williams, 22nd
District, Olympia area
Under current law, GMA counties may assess developers an impact fee that
provides partial payment for public facilities needed to serve the new
development. Payment is generally due as a condition of development approval.
ESHB 3067 mandated that King and Snohomish counties provide a process for
the payment of impact fees as part of a covenant and not at development
approval. This process was part of a pilot project in Pierce County and in the City
of Sammamish where developers argued that more upfront payment of impact
fees discouraged development at a time when the construction industry has high
unemployment. In opposition, cities argued that cities can do this now under
current law, and this bill amounts to a mandate to delay impact fee payments.
The final iteration of the bill required the payment of the impact fee at the earlier
of 12 months after the permit issuance or at closing whichever came earlier. The
amendments also changed the word covenant to the word lien.
Packet Page 86 of 196
23
6. Creating a Cap on Hearing Examiner Fees (SB 5621), Senator Kline, 37th
District, SE Seattle
Cities and counties are authorized to hire or contract with a hearing examiner to
conduct administrative or quasi-judicial proceedings including such land use
issues as conditional uses, variances, shoreline permits, preliminary plat
approvals, and rezones. Cities and counties can charge fees for such decisions.
SB 5621 capped the hearing examiner fee at $200, the existing statutory rate
established for superior court filing fees for judicial review of an agency action.
The bill’s proponent argued the higher hearing examiner fees assessed by most
cities served as a deterrent to citizens wanting a rezone or plat approval. Cities
argued the lower fee did not cover their costs.
7. Privatization of State Liquor Stores (HB 3189), Representative Alexander,
20th District, Thurston and Lewis counties; (SB 6840) Senator Tom, 48th
District, Bellevue
Washington is one of eighteen liquor control states in which the state has a
monopoly over the distribution and sale of specified types of liquor. The state
Liquor Control Board (LCB) determines where liquor stores are established and
the number of stores in each area of the state. The LCB also appoints contract
liquor stores in areas of the state where no liquor stores are located. There are
approximately 160 state liquor stores and 155 contract liquor stores in the state.
The state “marks up” the cost of liquor and adds taxes to the cost. The resulting
“liquor profits and taxes” are distributed to the state, cities, and counties.
HB 3189 states in the intent section that it is in the best interests of the state to
consider how to implement a full contract liquor store system. The state must
convert at least 20 state liquor stores to contract stores by July 1, 2012, and convert
an additional 10 higher volume stores by July 1, 2011 on a pilot basis. The LCB
must also study the contracting out of the state’s retail sale of liquor and report to
the legislature by December 31, 2012.
Pursuant to SB 6840, the LCB, the state Department of Revenue, and the Office of
Financial Management, must present a plan to the legislature by December 1,
2010 that will cease all state liquor distribution by July 1, 2012, and that will
Packet Page 87 of 196
24
generate the same projected revenue from liquor profits and taxes in the future
for the state and local jurisdictions.
8. Financing Operations and Capital Needs of Transit Agencies (HB 2855),
Rep. Liias, 21st
District, Edmonds, Lynnwood, and Mukilteo areas
There are 28 public transit systems operating in the state. Transit systems can be
formed under different governance structures, including public transportation
benefit areas (PTBAs), metropolitan municipal corporations (Metros), county
transportation authorities, city-owned transit systems, and regional transit
authorities (RTAs).
To fund capital and operating public transportation expenses, public transit
systems are authorized to seek voter approval of up to 0.9 sales and use tax. Most
transit systems may seek voter approval of a B&O tax and a household tax in lieu
of a sales tax. Fares may be set and increased by the transit agency’s governing
body without voter approval.
Pursuant to HB 2855, the governing body of a public transit system is authorized
to impose by majority vote of the governing body up to $20 in vehicle fees on
vehicles registered to owners who reside within the boundaries of the public
transit system. Public transit systems in King, Pierce, Snohomish, and Kitsap
counties are authorized to seek voter approval of up to $30 in vehicle fees. Both
authorizations are temporary and expire in four years. The bill included
language to prevent no “stacking” of fees (only one can impose the fee) when a
public transit system overlaps with a Transportation Benefit District (TBD).
The bill also directed a study to guide future investments in public
transportation. The study language was included in the supplemental
transportation budget (ESSB 6381) discussed under Bills that Passed
.
9. Reclassifying Possession of 40 Grams of Less of Marijuana from a
Misdemeanor to a Class 2 Civil Infraction (HB 1177 / SB 5615)
Under current law, marijuana is a Schedule I controlled substance (schedule I-V,
with schedule I being the most controlled). The possession of 40 grams or less of
marijuana is a misdemeanor offense. All other offenses relating to the possession,
manufacturing, delivering or possessing with intent to deliver marijuana are
Packet Page 88 of 196
25
considered level I, class C felony offenses. The maximum punishment for a class
C felony is five years imprisonment, $10,000 fine, or both.
It is a misdemeanor offense to use drug paraphernalia to plant, cultivate, grow,
manufacture, conceal, ingest, inhale, or otherwise introduce a controlled
substance into the human body.
The punishment for a misdemeanor offense if a maximum of 90 days in jail, a fine
of $1,000, or both. In addition, all persons convicted of a misdemeanor violation
under the Uniform Controlled Substances Act must receive a mandatory
minimum punishment of no less than 24 hours in jail and a fine of no less than
$250.
Pursuant to HB 1177 and SB 5615, both bills initially introduced in 2009, it is a
misdemeanor offense for a person under the age of 18 to possess 40 grams or less
of marijuana. All other persons found guilty of possession of 40 grams or less of
marijuana are guilty of a class 2 civil infraction and must pay a $100 penalty.
It is a misdemeanor offense for a person under the age of 18 to unlawfully use
drug paraphernalia. Any person over of the age of 18 found to have unlawfully
used drug paraphernalia with marijuana and where no other controlled
substance we used is guilty of a class 2 civil infraction and must pay a $100
penalty.
Police officers do not have the authority to arrest a person who they have
probably cause to believe is committing a misdemeanor or gross misdemeanor
involving only the use of or possession of cannabis.
10. Cap and Trade/Climate Change (E2SSB 5735), Senator Rockefeller, 23rd
District, Kitsap County
Last year’s major greenhouse gas emissions reduction bill, E2SSB 5735, was not
advanced in 2010. The state is waiting for action on this issue at the federal level.
The last version of the 2009 bill had the following elements:
• Required the state Department of Ecology (DOE) to develop its "best
estimate" of emissions levels in 2012 for government agencies and persons
that emit 25,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent or greater each
Packet Page 89 of 196
26
year and calculate the emissions reductions necessary in order to meet the
2020 emission reduction requirements in the state which are:
o by 2020, overall emission reductions of greenhouse gases in the
state to 1990 levels;
o by 2035, reductions to 25% below 1990 levels;
o by 2050, reductions to 50% below 1990 levels.
• Required DOE to work with stakeholders to plan emission reduction
estimates by February 15, 2010; stakeholders may submit
recommendations on how to achieve the required emission reductions by
July 15, 2010; DOE must report to the legislature by December 1, 2010, on
how the state will achieve the required emission reductions by 2020; the
report must also assess economic sectors where reductions in greenhouse
gases cannot be realized as well as an assessment on the sectors that are
necessary to the economic vitality of the state.
Packet Page 90 of 196
27
Packet Page 91 of 196
AM-3106 5.
Renewing Interim Zoning Ordinance No. 3769
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:06/01/2010
Submitted By:Rob Chave Time:30 Minutes
Department:Planning Type:Action
Review Committee:
Committee Action:
Information
Subject Title
Public hearing, followed by action, renewing interim zoning Ordinance No. 3769, which
defined Temporary Homeless Shelter and identified zoning districts where temporary
homeless shelters are permitted.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
Approve adoption of an interim zoning ordinance extending the interim zoning provisions.
Previous Council Action
Council adopted Ordinance #3769 on December 15, 2009.
Narrative
Council adopted Ordinance #3769 on December 15, 2009 which amended the zoning code to
provide for temporary homeless shelters. By adopting the proposed ordinance, the Council will
extend the provisions while the Planning Board completes its recommendations on the issue.
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: Exhibit 1: Proposed Ordinance
Link: Exhibit 2: Ordinance 3769
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 05/27/2010 12:06 PM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 05/27/2010 12:08 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 05/27/2010 12:10 PM APRV
Form Started By: Rob
Chave
Started On: 05/26/2010 09:49
PM
Final Approval Date: 05/27/2010
Packet Page 92 of 196
{BFP788184.DOC;1\00006.900150\ } - 1 -
0006.90000
BFP/
05/12/10
ORDINANCE NO. _______
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, RENEWING INTERIM ZONING
ORDINANCE NO. 3769, WHICH DEFINED TEMPORARY
HOMELESS SHELTER AND INDENTIFIED ZONING
DISTRICTS WHERE TEMPORARY HOMELESS SHELTERS
ARE PERMITTED, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME
SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE.
WHEREAS, RCW 36.70A.390 and 35A.63.220 authorize and permit cities to
adopt and renew interim zoning regulations provided that certain conditions are met; and
WHEREAS, interim ordinance no. 3769 was adopted by the City to establish
zoning districts where temporary homeless shelters are permitted on an interim basis until the
Edmonds Planning Board can thoroughly review and recommend to the City Council a set of
permanent regulations; and
WHEREAS, despite its diligence, the Edmonds Planning Board has not been able
to finalize its review and recommendation on the issue; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Board estimates that a period not to exceed six months
is necessary to complete its review and recommendation; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on renewal of interim
ordinance no. 3769 on _______________, 2010, and after considering all testimony received,
determined to renew said interim ordinance as provided herein; NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Packet Page 93 of 196
{BFP788184.DOC;1\00006.900150\ } - 2 -
Section 1. Findings.
a) The findings as set forth in the “WHEREAS” clauses of the
instant interim ordinance are adopted and incorporated herein by
this reference.
The City Council hereby makes the following findings in
support of renewing interim ordinance no. 3769:
b) All findings by the City Council in support of interim ordinance
no. 3769 are adopted and incorporated herein by this reference.
c)
Section 2. Interim ordinance no. 3769, which was originally adopted on
December 15, 2009, is hereby renewed and made effective through December 15, 2010, unless
sooner repealed, replaced by permanent regulations or renewed by a subsequent ordinance.
Section 3. Planning Board Work Plan
Section 4.
. The Edmonds Planning Board is directed
to continue and complete its review of interim ordinance no. 3769, to conduct such public
hearings as may be necessary or desirable, and to make a recommendation on a set of final
regulations to replace interim ordinance no. 3769. The Planning Board should forward its
recommendation to the City Council in sufficient time for the City Council to consider and take
action prior to December 15, 2010 when interim ordinance no. 3769 is set to expire.
Severability
Section 5.
. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this
ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction,
such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other
section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance.
Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifi-
cally delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take effect
Packet Page 94 of 196
{BFP788184.DOC;1\00006.900150\ } - 3 -
five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the
title.
APPROVED:
MAYOR GARY HAAKENSON
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY:
BY
W. SCOTT SNYDER
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK:
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
PUBLISHED:
EFFECTIVE DATE:
ORDINANCE NO.
Packet Page 95 of 196
{BFP788184.DOC;1\00006.900150\ } - 4 -
SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. __________
of the City of Edmonds, Washington
On the ____ day of ___________, 2010, the City Council of the City of Edmonds,
passed Ordinance No. _____________. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting
of the title, provides as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, RENEWING INTERIM ZONING
ORDINANCE NO. 3769, WHICH DEFINED TEMPORARY
HOMELESS SHELTER AND INDENTIFIED ZONING
DISTRICTS WHERE TEMPORARY HOMELESS SHELTERS
ARE PERMITTED, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME
SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE.
The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request.
DATED this _____ day of ________________, 2010.
CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE
Packet Page 96 of 196
Packet Page 97 of 196
Packet Page 98 of 196
Packet Page 99 of 196
Packet Page 100 of 196
Packet Page 101 of 196
AM-3107 6.
Renewing Interim Ordinance 3779
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:06/01/2010
Submitted By:Rob Chave Time:20 Minutes
Department:Planning Type:Action
Review Committee:
Committee Action:
Information
Subject Title
Public hearing, followed by action, renewing Interim Ordinance 3779, amending the
provisions of ECDC 20.110.040(F), Monetary Penalties, clarifying the impact of the
amendment on existing code enforcement actions.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
Approve adoption of the ordinance extending the interim zoning provisions (Exhibit 2).
Previous Council Action
Council adopted Ordinance #3779 on January 19, 2010 (see Exhibit 3).
Narrative
Council adopted Ordinance #3779 on January 19, 2010 which amended the ECDC 20.110 to
clarify city enforcement actions and the process for assessing fines. By adopting the proposed
ordinance, the Council will extend the provisions while the Planning Board completes its
recommendations on the issue.
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: City Attorney Memo
Link: Proposed Ordinance
Link: Exhibit 2: Ordinance 3779
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 05/27/2010 12:06 PM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 05/27/2010 12:08 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 05/27/2010 12:10 PM APRV
Form Started By: Rob
Chave
Started On: 05/26/2010 10:01
PM
Final Approval Date: 05/27/2010
Packet Page 102 of 196
{WSS790097.DOC;1\00006.900000\ }A Member of the International Lawyers Network with independent member law firms worldwide
1601 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2100 • Seattle, WA 98101-1686 • 206.447.7000 • Fax: 206.447.0215
Web: www.omwlaw.com
MEMORANDUM
DATE: May 24, 2010
TO: Edmonds City Council
City of Edmonds
FROM: W. Scott Snyder, Office of the City Attorney
RE: Interim Ordinance -- Code Enforcement Procedures
Conformance to the City’s code enforcement procedures to the Supreme Court’s decision in Post
v. Tacoma is before the Planning Board. The Planning Board has been introduced to the subject,
will provide a long-term ordinance shortly and will be holding a public hearing. Given the
volume of matters which have been forwarded to it, it has not had an opportunity to address the
issue.
The draft interim ordinance contains an additional provision. Section 3 of the interim ordinance
was not contained in the initial ordinance. It clarifies that appeals to the Superior Court will be
taken in accordance with Chapter 36.70C RCW, the Land Use Petition Act (LUPA) process.
The existing City ordinance provides for a 10-day appeal period and does not refer to LUPA.
LUPA has a 30-day appeal period. The Code should be conformed to state statute in order to
provide better notice to your citizens of their potential appeal route.
WSS/gjz
Packet Page 103 of 196
{WSS756749.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } - 1 -
0006.90000
WSS/gjz
12/30/09
R:5/18/10gjz
ORDINANCE NO. _______
AN INTERIM ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF ECDC
20.110.040(F) MONETARY PENALTIES IN ORDER TO
CLARIFY THE IMPACT OF THE AMENDMENT ON
EXISTING CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS, AMENDING
ECDC 20.110.040(D) TO CLARIFY APPEAL PROCEDURES
TO SUPERIOR COURT, PROVIDING FOR NOTICE
PURSUANT TO RCW 36.70A.106, AND FIXING A TIME
WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE.
WHEREAS, the Washington State Supreme Court in its decision in Post v.
Tacoma, 217 P.3d 1179 (2009) has determined that code enforcement procedures which provide
for continuing penalties without the opportunity for appeal is a violation of due process; and
WHEREAS, Chapter 20.110 ECDC provides for specific notice of violation
[ECDC 20.110.040(A)(2)] and of repeat violations [ECDC 20.110.040(B)(2)]; and
WHEREAS, the code enforcement procedures also provide for notice of violation
and appeal [ECDC 20.110.040(B) and (C)]; and
WHEREAS, however, ECDC 20.110.040(F) provides for continuing violations
with the imposition of a fine without the specific provision for additional notice of hearing; and
WHEREAS, ECDC 20.110.040(D) should be clarified to specify appeal by
Chapter 35.70C RCW to provide explicit appeal information; and
WHEREAS, the City Council deems it to be in the public interest to clarify that
continuing violations shall be accompanied by additional notice of violation and opportunity for
hearing; and
Packet Page 104 of 196
{WSS756749.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } - 2 -
WHEREAS, RCW 36.70A.390 provides for the imposition of interim zoning
controls without a public hearing, subject to a public hearing within sixty (60) days; and
WHEREAS, this ordinance has been referred to the Planning Board for review
and recommendation; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Board due to a heavy work load, has begun review but
has been unable to make a recommendation; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Board estimates that an additional 60-90 days may be
required for it to hold a public hearing and to make a recommendation; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on ____________, 2010 pursuant to RCW
36.70A.390; NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. There is hereby adopted as an interim zoning control, the following
revision of ECDC 20.110.040 Enforcement Procedures
20.110.040 Enforcement procedures.
, (F) Monetary Penalties, to read as
follows:
. . .
F. Monetary Penalties. Except where a different penalty is
specifically established by this code, violations shall be assessed at
the rate of $100 per day or a portion of day thereof, for each and
every day after the service of the notice of civil violation. The
violations Hearing Examiner may also grant an extension of the
date upon which fines begin in order to allow for a reasonable
period of abatement. Such extension shall not exceed ten (10)
calendar days. Following a finding of the Hearing Examiner of the
existence of a violation at the appeal hearing on the expiration of
the appeal period, continuing fines may be assessed by the
provision of additional notice of civil violation pursuant to
20.110.040(B)(2) and an opportunity for hearing. No additional
Packet Page 105 of 196
{WSS756749.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } - 3 -
fine for a continuing violation may be assessed without the
provision of notice and the opportunity for a hearing.
. . .
Section 2. Any pending code violation which is subject to the accrual of
additional fines based upon a notice of civil violation shall be immediately stayed. At the
discretion of the Community Services Director or his/her designee, the staff may provide for
either notice of repeated violation pursuant to the provisions of 20.110.040(B)(2) followed by an
opportunity for hearing, or dismissal of the pending code enforcement action and refiling by the
provision of a new notice of civil violation under 20.110.040(B).
Section 3. Section ECDC 20.110.030 Enforcement procedures
20.110.040 Enforcement procedures
, Section D
Appeal to Superior Court is amended to read as follows:
. . .
D. Appeal to Superior Court. The determination of the
Hearing Examiner is final and shall be appealable to Superior
Court in accordance with Chapter 36.70C RCW.
Section 4. Notice of the adoption of this ordinance shall be provided to the
Washington State Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development.
Section 5. Effective Date
APPROVED:
. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifi-
cally delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take effect
five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the
title.
MAYOR GARY HAAKENSON
Packet Page 106 of 196
{WSS756749.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } - 4 -
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY:
BY
W. SCOTT SNYDER
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK:
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
PUBLISHED:
EFFECTIVE DATE:
ORDINANCE NO.
Packet Page 107 of 196
{WSS756749.DOC;1\00006.900000\ }- 5 -
SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. __________
of the City of Edmonds, Washington
On the ____ day of ___________, 2010, the City Council of the City of Edmonds,
passed Ordinance No. _____________. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting
of the title, provides as follows:
AN INTERIM ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING
THE PROVISIONS OF ECDC 20.110.040(F) MONETARY PENALTIES IN ORDER TO
CLARIFY THE IMPACT OF THE AMENDMENT ON EXISTING CODE ENFORCEMENT
ACTIONS, AMENDING ECDC 20.110.040(D) TO CLARIFY APPEAL PROCEDURES TO
SUPERIOR COURT, PROVIDING FOR NOTICE PURSUANT TO RCW 36.70A.106, AND
FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE.
The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request.
DATED this _____ day of ________________, 2010.
CITY C LERK, SANDRA S. CHASE
Packet Page 108 of 196
Packet Page 109 of 196
Packet Page 110 of 196
Packet Page 111 of 196
Packet Page 112 of 196
Packet Page 113 of 196
AM-3108 7.
Renewing Interim Ordinance 3780
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:06/01/2010
Submitted By:Rob Chave Time:20 Minutes
Department:Planning Type:Action
Review Committee:
Committee Action:
Information
Subject Title
Public hearing, followed by action, renewing interim Ordinance 3780, adopting certain
procedures with respect to the abandonment, construction and authorization of public
projects and street vacations and dedications.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
Approve adoption of the ordinance extending the interim zoning provisions (Exhibit 1).
Previous Council Action
Council adopted Ordinance #3779 on January 19, 2010 (see Exhibit 2).
Narrative
Council adopted Ordinance #3780 on January 19, 2010 which amended the Edmonds Community
Development Code to re-establish procedures requiring Hearing Examiner review for certain
public projects and approvals. By adopting the proposed ordinance, the Council will extend the
provisions while the Planning Board completes its recommendations on the issue.
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: Exhibit 1: Proposed Ordinance
Link: Exhibit 2: Ordinance 3780
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 05/27/2010 12:06 PM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 05/27/2010 12:08 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 05/27/2010 12:10 PM APRV
Form Started By: Rob
Chave
Started On: 05/26/2010 10:13
PM
Final Approval Date: 05/27/2010
Packet Page 114 of 196
{WSS791058.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } - 1 -
0006.90000
WSS/gjz
5/27/10
ORDINANCE NO. _______
AN INTERIM ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, ADOPTING CERTAIN PROCEDURES WITH
RESPECT TO THE ABANDONMENT, CONSTRUCTION AND
AUTHORIZATION OF PUBLIC PROJECTS, STREET
VACATIONS AND DEDICATIONS, PROVIDING FOR FILING
WITH THE WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF
COMMUNITY TRADE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT,
AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME
EFFECTIVE AND PROVIDING FOR EXPIRATION.
WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan, Effect Of Plan, Sections
B and C establishes procedure for Hearing Examiner review and advisory recommendation to the
City Council, and
WHEREAS, such provisions have been in effect for many years and, while
superseded by the City’s Comprehensive Facilities Plan and other procedures mandated by the
Growth Management Act, remain in full force and effect, and
WHEREAS, there are no implementing provisions within the City’s Community
Development Code, and the Comprehensive Plain is not self executing, and
WHEREAS, the City is obligated to maintain consistency between its
Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code in order to remain in compliance with the requirements of
the Growth Management Act, Chapter 36.70A RCW, and
WHEREAS, the Edmonds Planning Commission has scheduled a public hearing
regarding the interim ordinance but has not yet returned its recommendation, and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held June 1, 2010 regarding extension of the
Packet Page 115 of 196
{WSS791058.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } - 2 -
existing interim ordinance, and
WHEREAS, the City Council deems it to be in the public interest to:
A. Adopt interim zoning procedures to ensure compliance with the provisions
of the City’s Comprehensive Plan; and
B. Continue with review of the aforementioned provisions of the
Comprehensive Plan for review in the 2010 Comprehensive Plan amendment process, NOW,
THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The following interim zoning procedures are hereby established to be
administered in conjunction with the procedural requirements of Title 20 of the Edmonds
Community Development Code:
1.1 Public Projects
1.1.1 A proposal to construct or authorize any of the public properties
detailed in Section 1.1 which are listed on the Capital Facilities Plan, Parks Plan, Capital
Improvements Plan or other Comprehensive Plan element may be heard either individually or as
a group. The hearing before the Hearing Examiner for the construction or authorization of any
project so listed in the Comprehensive Plan shall be listed on the Hearing Examiner’s agenda,
and notice published on the City’s web site and on City bulletin boards.
No street, park or other public way, ground, place, space
or public building or structure, or utility (whether publicly or privately owned) shall be
abandoned, constructed or authorized until the Hearing Examiner has reviewed and reported to
the City Council the location, extent and consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. The Hearing
Examiner’s report shall be advisory only.
Packet Page 116 of 196
{WSS791058.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } - 3 -
1.2. Notice of the Hearing Examiner review of a public project, construction or
authorization not shown on a Comprehensive Plan element shall be individually noticed in
accord with ECDC 20.03.002. By way of illustration and not limitation, such procedures shall
include posting, published notice and mailed notice to property owners within three hundred
(300) feet of the project.
1.2. Street Vacations and Dedication. The Comprehensive Plan shall be
consulted prior to the establishment, improvement, abandonment or vacation of any street. No
dedication of any street or other area for public use shall be accepted by the City Council until its
location, character, extent and effect thereof shall be considered by the Hearing Examiner with
respect to the Comprehensive Plan. The Hearing Examiner’s report shall be provided to the
City Council with respect to the abandonment, vacation or dedication of any street or other right
of way in public use. Dedications within the short subdivision process which do not require City
Council acceptance of the dedication are exempt from this requirement. In any development
permit process which has been delegated to the Hearing Examiner under the provisions of the
Edmonds Community Development Code and includes the dedication of a street or other area for
public use, the Hearing Examiner shall consider whether the action is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan as a part of the Hearing Examiner’s determination on the underlying permit.
1.2.1 Hearing Examiner review shall be substituted for the Planning
Board review provided for in Chapter 20.65.010 during the life of this interim ordinance. The
hearing procedures and notification for any other process shall be consistent with the
requirements of ECDC Chapter 20.65 and as a Type V procedure.
1.2.2 Review of a dedication with a permit shall be processed in the
same manner as the underlying development permit.
Packet Page 117 of 196
{WSS791058.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } - 4 -
1.2.3 Street vacations shall be processed as provided in Chapter 20.70
ECDC, provided, however, that the Hearing Examiner shall hold a hearing prior to City Council
consideration.
Section 2. These interim zoning procedures are adopted pursuant to the
authorization of Chapter 36.70A RCW. A public was held on the adoption of these procedures
on June 1, 2010.
Section 3. Notice of the adoption of this interim ordinance shall be provided to
the Washington State Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development.
Section 4. Effective Date
Section 5. The adoption of an interim zoning procedure shall expire on its own
terms six months after its effective date unless extended by act of the City Council.
. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifi-
cally delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take effect
five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the
title.
APPROVED:
MAYOR GARY HAAKENSON
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY:
BY
W. SCOTT SNYDER
Packet Page 118 of 196
{WSS791058.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } - 5 -
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK:
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
PUBLISHED:
EFFECTIVE DATE:
ORDINANCE NO.
Packet Page 119 of 196
{WSS791058.DOC;1\00006.900000\ }- 6 -
SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. __________
of the City of Edmonds, Washington
On the ____ day of ___________, 2010, the City Council of the City of Edmonds,
passed Ordinance No. _____________. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting
of the title, provides as follows:
AN INTERIM ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING
CERTAIN PROCEDURES WITH RESPECT TO THE ABANDONMENT, CONSTRUCTION
AND AUTHORIZATION OF PUBLIC PROJECTS, STREET VACATIONS AND
DEDICATIONS, PROVIDING FOR FILING WITH THE WASHINGTON STATE
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY TRADE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, AND
FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE AND PROVIDING
FOR EXPIRATION.
The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request.
DATED this _____ day of ________________, 2010.
CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE
Packet Page 120 of 196
Packet Page 121 of 196
Packet Page 122 of 196
Packet Page 123 of 196
Packet Page 124 of 196
Packet Page 125 of 196
Packet Page 126 of 196
AM-3088 8.
Title 19 Revisions - Adopting Updated International Building Codes
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:06/01/2010
Submitted By:Leonard Yarberry Time:30 Minutes
Department:Building Type:Action
Review Committee:Community/Development Services
Committee Action:Recommend Review by Full Council
Information
Subject Title
Public hearing, followed by action, on a proposed Ordinance amending Edmonds
Community Development Code Title 19, adopting updated International Building Codes.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
Move to adopt the attached Ordinance adopting the 2009 International Codes and amending Title
19 of the ECDC.
Previous Council Action
Reviewed by Community/Development Services Committee
Narrative
The 2009 International Building Codes, as amended by the State, become effective statewide on
July 1, 2010.
The Ordinance attached adopts the 2009 codes as stipulated under the RCW and provides
amendments that blend the codes into the framework of the ECDC. Additionally there are some
proposed language changes to the ECDC to help eliminate redundancies, delete superseded codes
and to simplify the format. A more detailed narrative is attached.
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: Attachment 1 - Narrative
Link: Attachment 2 - Ordinance
Link: Attachment 3 - Analysis of revisions
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 05/27/2010 12:06 PM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 05/27/2010 12:08 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 05/27/2010 12:10 PM APRV
Form Started By: Leonard
Yarberry
Started On: 05/18/2010 11:52
AM
Final Approval Date: 05/27/2010
Packet Page 127 of 196
Packet Page 128 of 196
Narrative
City Council Agenda Item 8
Council meeting: June 1, 2010
Addenda item: Title 19 Revisions – Adoption of updated International Building
Codes
This item was discussed by the Community/Development Services committee on May
11th
.
In the State of Washington building codes are adopted and amended at the State level
as required by the State Building Code Act of 1974 (RCW 19.27). Building codes are
revised nationally on a 3 year cycle and these are reviewed and amended by the State
Building Code Council and adopted by the Legislature. The 2009 International Building
Codes have been adopted by the State and become effective on July 1, 2010.
Background:
Locally we adopt and amend the State Building Code so it will be become a part of our
municipal code. This allows for our own administrative control, enforcement and appeal
procedures.
The attached ordinance provides for the adoption of the codes as adopted and amended
by the State of Washington, these include the Building Code, Residential Code,
Mechanical Code, Fuel Gas Code, Plumbing Code and Energy Code. Additionally the
ordinance adopts the Existing Building Code, Property Maintenance Code and
Performance Code. These additional adoptions provide added tools to more effectively
deal with unique situations, such as historic and existing buildings, and problems
associated with dangerous and hazardous buildings.
Proposed Ordinance:
The ordinance as crafted substantially maintains the requirements of the ECDC as it is
currently written. The format has been revised to reduce the volume of code language
and to simplify its use. The attached Exhibit provides an analysis of the revisions and
helps to explain the format changes.
A separate ordinance will adopt the 2009 Fire Code and revisions to the Marina Code.
1) A significant difference is that the proposed ordinance consolidates the administration
of the adopted codes. Each adopted code has its own separate administrative section,
which can be difficult for the user to ensure they are using the correct provision. The
ordinance sets up the administrative provisions found in chapter one (1) of the
International Building Code (IBC) for administration of the Building, Residential ,
New language and changes
Packet Page 129 of 196
Mechanical and Plumbing code. The chapter has been amended as needed to make
the transition from code to code.
2) Work exempt from a permit has a couple of proposed modifications in the attached
ordinance.
a) The first draft included a revision to the retaining wall exemption. During the
committee meeting there was discussion and concern express. It my
subsequent research I noted that with the present restrictions on rockeries the
revision originally proposed is somewhat redundant. This has been removed and
the language reflects the present code language un-amended.
b) The City presently provides an exemption on residential buildings for the
replacement of windows and doors. These exemptions are specific to Edmonds
and not general code exemptions. The problems of water and moisture
infiltration from improperly installed exterior components can lead to structural
damage and well as mold problems. Additional there are specific code
provisions for windows related to fire egress, safety glazing and energy
efficiency. This was discussed during the committee meeting.
I conducted a survey of other jurisdictions to determine how they approach the
issue. Some exempt this items, other do not. Of the ones that do the most
common language provides for an exemption provided that safety glazing and/or
egress is not an issue. This then puts the responsibility back to the
contractor/homeowner. Siding and door exemptions are common and again this
type of exemption places the responsibility for proper installation on the
contractor/homeowner.
I have provided three (3) options in the proposed ordinance. This first keeps the
existing language in the ECDC. The second allows replacement to be exempt
where there is not a code requirement for fire egress windows or safety glazing.
In this option doors is exempt. The third option would eliminate the exemptions
completely and require a permit for this work.
c) The City provides a permit exemption for replacement of individual deck
members, joist, stair treads and rails. There are specific code requirements
related to proper materials, installation, sizing and safety that are pertinent to
exterior decks and railings. As with the item above I have included two options
for consideration. The first maintains the current language exempting these
items from permit. The second would eliminate the exemption.
3) In 2008 the Council provided some extensions to permits application timelines in an
effort to ease the impact of the economic environment. Then in 2009 an ordinance was
enacted to provide temporary relief on permit expiration timelines. Both of these
ordinances have specified sunset dates.
The current municipal code incorporated these two provisions by reprinting complete
code sections three times with the effective dates used to separate which was to apply
when. The attached ordinance takes those two ordinances and places them in the
introductory statement of the section. This eliminates approximately 14 pages of code
(due to repeating language) but has exactly the same effect.
Packet Page 130 of 196
4) New additions to Title 19 include the Property Maintenance Code, which replaces
the 1997 Abatement of Dangerous Buildings Code and 1997 Uniform Housing
Code. The Existing Building Code replaces the Washington State Historic
Building code that is no longer supported by the State. Finally the Performance
Code is added as a tool to assist in evaluation of complex projects that may not
lend to prescriptive code provisions.
The Council discussion on June 1st will be a public hearing, followed by Council action
on the attached adoptive ordinance.
Packet Page 131 of 196
{WSS790568.DOC;1\00006.900000\ }
5/27/2010 3:10 PM - 1 -
0006.90000
WSS/gjz
5/11/10
R:5/27/10gjz
ORDINANCE NO. _______
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, REPEALING AND ENACTING THE
PROVISIONS OF AND ENACTMENT OF CHAPTERS 19.00
BUILDING CODE; 19.05 RESIDENTIAL BUILDING CODE;
19.05 MECHANICAL CODE AND FUEL GAS CODE; 19.20
PLUMBING CODE; 19.30 ENERGY CODE; 19.40
INTERNATIONAL PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE;
CHAPTER 19.50 INTERNATIONAL EXISTING BUILDING
CODE; CHAPTER 19.55 ELECTRICAL CODE; REPEALING
CHAPTER 19.35 VENTILATION CODE RCW TO ADOPT
NEW PROVISIONS OF THE STATE BUILDING CODE AND
REVISIONS THERETO, AND TO RESTRUCTURE TITLE 19,
AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME
EFFECTIVE.
WHEREAS, Chapter 19.27 establishes the State Building code and requires each
jurisdiction to enforce the provisions of the State Building code, and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 19.27.060, the City has the ability to amend
administrative provisions of the State Code, NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The Edmonds Community Development Code Title 19 is hereby
amended by the repeal of Chapter 19.00 and the adoption of a new Chapter 19.00 relating to
Building Code, to read as follows:
Chapter 19.00
BUILDING CODE
Sections:
19.00.000 Purpose.
Packet Page 132 of 196
{WSS790568.DOC;1\00006.900000\ }
5/27/2010 3:10 PM - 2 -
19.00.005 Referenced codes
19.00.010 Conflict between codes
19.00.015 Administrative provisions
19.00.020 International Building code adopted
19.00.025 International Building code section
amendments
19.00.030 Architectural design review – Optional vesting.
19.00.040 Excluding nonconforming religious building
from certain requirements.
19.00.000 Purpose
The purpose of the codes and regulations adopted in this title is to
provide minimum standards to safeguard life, health, property and
public welfare by regulating and controlling the design,
construction, quality of materials, use and occupancy, location and
maintenance of all buildings and structures within the City of
Edmonds. It is not the purpose or intent to create or designate any
particular class or group of persons to be especially protected or
benefited, nor is it intended to create any special relationship with
any individual
19.00.005 Referenced codes
Where the following codes are referenced within any of the codes
adopted and amended in this title, they shall be substituted as
follows:
A. International Building Code” shall mean the Building Code
as adopted and amended in this title.
B. “International Residential Code” shall mean the Residential
Building Code as adopted and amended in this title.
C. “International Mechanical Code” shall mean the
Mechanical Code as adopted and amended in this title.
D. “International Fuel Gas Code” shall mean the Fuel Gas
Code as adopted in Chapter 19.27 RCW and in accordance with
the mechanical code as adopted and amended in this title.
E. “International Fire Code” shall mean the Fire Code as
adopted and amended in this title.
F. “Uniform Plumbing Code” shall mean the Plumbing Code
as adopted and amended in this title.
Packet Page 133 of 196
{WSS790568.DOC;1\00006.900000\ }
5/27/2010 3:10 PM - 3 -
G. “Washington State Energy Code” shall mean the Energy
Code as adopted and amended in this title.
H. The “National Electrical Code” shall mean the Electrical
Code as adopted and amended in this title.
I. “International Existing building code” shall mean the
existing Building Code as adopted and amended in this title.
J. International Property Maintenance Code shall mean the
property maintenance code as adopted and amended in this title.
K. International Code Council Performance Code shall mean the performance
code as adopted and amended in this title.
19.00.010 Conflict between Codes
In case of conflict among any of the codes referenced in 19.00.005
and subsequently adopted by this chapter, the first named code
shall govern over those following. In case of conflicts between
other codes and provisions adopted by this chapter, the code or
provision that is most specific, as determined by the building
official, shall apply.
19.00.015 Administrative provisions
The administrative provisions contained in Chapter 1 of the
International Building code as adopted and subsequently amended
by this chapter shall be used as the general administrative
provisions for the codes listed in 19.00.000 under A, B, C, D and
F, unless otherwise indicated.
19.00.020 International Building code adopted.
The International Building Code (IBC), 2009 Edition, published by
the International Code Council, as amended by the Washington
State Building code Council in Chapter 51-50 WAC, and as
subsequently amended by this chapter, is hereby adopted along
with Appendix Chapters E, G, H, I and J.
19.00.025 International Building Code section amendments
The following section of the IBC are hereby amended as follows:
A. Section 104.3 Notices and Orders, is amended to read: The
building official shall issue all necessary notices or orders to
Packet Page 134 of 196
{WSS790568.DOC;1\00006.900000\ }
5/27/2010 3:10 PM - 4 -
ensure compliance with this code. The building official is also
authorized to use Chapter 20.110 ECDC for code compliance in
addition to the remedies provided for in this code.
B. Section 105.1.1 Annual Permit is deleted.
C. Section 105.1.1 Demolition Permits, is added and shall
read;
Before the partial or complete demolition of any building or
structure (interior or exterior), a demolition permit shall be
obtained from the building official. The permit fee is established
pursuant to Chapter 19.70 ECDC. The applicant shall also post
with the city, prior to permit issuance, a performance bond, or
frozen fund, conforming to Chapter 17.10 ECDC herein, in an
amount to be determined by the building official to satisfy all city
requirements no later than 180 days after the issuance of the
permit. The demolition performance bond or frozen fund shall not
be released until the building official determines the following
requirements have been completed:
1 Cap Abandoned Sanitary Sewers. Septic tanks shall
be pumped, collapsed and removed and/or filled with earth,
sand, concrete, CDF or hard slurry.
2 Knock Down of Concrete Foundation Walls,
Porches, Chimneys and Similar Structures. Concrete,
bricks, cobbles and boulders shall be broken to less than
12-inch diameter. Debris left on site shall conform to IBC
Section 1804.2 for clean fill.
3 Construction debris, vegetation, and garbage
attributable to the demolition shall be removed from the
site and from unopened street right-of-way within 30 days
of written notice. No debris of any kind may be placed or
maintained on street right-of-way (including alleys) without
a permit issued pursuant to Chapter 18.60 or 18.70 of the
Edmonds Community Development Code.
4 Repair of any damage to, and restoration of, any
public property to substantially original conditions, i.e.,
alley, street, sidewalk, landscaping, water meter, utilities,
rockeries, retaining walls, etc, in accordance with this code
and the City’s engineering requirements.
5 Grading of Site Back to Original Topography
Packet Page 135 of 196
{WSS790568.DOC;1\00006.900000\ }
5/27/2010 3:10 PM - 5 -
Grades. Basements shall be filled and compacted to 90
percent as verified by a special inspector. “Structural fill” is
defined as any fill placed below structures, including slabs,
where the fill soils need to support loads without
unacceptable deflections or shearing. Structural fill shall be
clean and free draining, placed above unyielding native site
soils and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent modified
proctor, per ASTM D1557.
6 Temporary erosion control shall be installed and
maintained per Chapter 18.30 ECDC.
D. Section 105.1.2 Annual permit records, is deleted.
E. Section 105.2 Work exempt from permit, is replaced as
follows;
Exemptions from permit requirements of this code shall not be
deemed to grant authorization for any work to be done in any
manner in violation of the provisions of this code or any other laws
or ordinances of this jurisdiction. It is the applicant’s responsibility
to comply with bulk zoning code standards per ECDC Title 16 and
storm water management provisions per Chapter 18.30 ECDC.
Permits shall not be required for the following unless required by
the provisions of ECDC Title 23 or limited or prohibited by the
provisions of Chapter 19.10 ECDC:
1. Building (general):
(a) One (1) story detached accessory structures used as tool
and storage sheds, playhouses and similar uses; provided the floor
area (measured to the exterior wall or post) does not exceed 120
square feet, with a maximum eave of thirty (30) inches.
(b) Fences not over six (6) feet high; provided a permit is not
required by Chapter 17.30 ECDC.
(c) Movable cases, counters and partitions not over five (5)
feet nine (9) inches high.
(d) Retaining walls 4 feet (1,219 mm) in height or less
measured vertically from the finished grade at the exposed toe of
the retaining wall to the highest point in the wall, unless:
I Supporting a surcharge; or
Packet Page 136 of 196
{WSS790568.DOC;1\00006.900000\ }
5/27/2010 3:10 PM - 6 -
II Impounding Class I, II, III-A liquids; or
III Subject to the provisions of Chapter 23.50 ECDC or
Chapter 23.80 ECDC.
(e) Rockeries.
(f) Water tanks supported directly upon grade if the capacity
does not exceed 500 gallons and the ratio of height to diameter or
width does not exceed two (2) to one (1).
(g) Sidewalks and driveways not more than 30 inches above
adjacent grade, and not over any basement or story below and are
not part of an accessible route, provided a permit is not required by
Chapter 18.60 ECDC.
(h) Painting, papering, tiling, carpeting, cabinets, countertops
and similar finish work.
(i) Temporary motion picture, television and theater stage sets
and scenery
(j) Shade cloth structures constructed for nursery or
agricultural purposes.
(k) Prefabricated swimming pools accessory to an occupancy
in which the pool walls are entirely above the adjacent grade and
the capacity does not exceed 5,000 gallons. Hot tubs and spas less
than 5,000 gallons, completely supported by the ground.
(l) Swings and other playground equipment accessory to an
occupancy.
(m) Grading less than fifty (50) cubic yards (placed, removed or
moved within any 365-day period) unless subject to the provisions
of Chapter 23.50 ECDC or Chapter 23.80 ECDC.
(n) Repair of appliances which do not alter original approval,
certification, listing or code.
(o) Replacement or adding new insulation with no drywall
removal or placement.
(p) Replacement or repair of existing gutters or downspouts.
(q) The following types of signs are exempt from permit
requirements except that dimensional size and placement standards
Packet Page 137 of 196
{WSS790568.DOC;1\00006.900000\ }
5/27/2010 3:10 PM - 7 -
shall comply with Chapter 20.60 ECDC:
I. Replacing the panel on a previously permitted
existing wall cabinet or pole sign,
II. Repainting an existing previously permitted wood
sign,
III. Painted or vinyl lettering on storefront windows,
IV. Governmental signs, campaign signs, official public
notices, and signs required by provision of local, state, or
federal law,
V. Temporary signs announcing the sale or rent of
property and other temporary signs as described in ECDC
20.60.080,
VI. Signs erected by the transportation authorities, and
temporary seasonal and holiday displays.
(r). Television antennas less than thirty-nine (39) inches in
diameter.
2. Mechanical:
(a) Portable heating, ventilation, cooling, cooking or clothes
drying appliances
(b) Replacement of any minor part that does not alter approval
of equipment or make such equipment unsafe.
(c) Portable fuel cell appliances that are not connected to a
fixed piping system and are not interconnected to a power grid.
(d) Steam, hot or chilled water piping within any heating or
cooling equipment regulated by this code.
(d) Portable evaporative cooler
(f) Self-contained refrigeration systems containing ten(10)
pounds or less of refrigerant or that are actuated by motor of one
(1) horsepower or less.
3. Plumbing:
Packet Page 138 of 196
{WSS790568.DOC;1\00006.900000\ }
5/27/2010 3:10 PM - 8 -
(a) The stopping of leaks in drains, water, soil, waste or vent
pipe, provided that the replacement of defective material shall be
done with new material and a permit obtained and inspection
made.
4. Residential permit exemptions:
In addition the following exemptions apply for single family
dwellings:
(a) One (1) story detached accessory structures used as tool
and storage sheds, playhouses and similar uses; provided the floor
area (measured to the exterior wall or post) does not exceed 200
square feet, with a maximum eave of twelve (12) inches and
maximum height of fifteen (15) feet. Vehicle storage structures,
such as garages and carports, are not exempted except as set forth
in ECDC 19.05.010 (E)(33) for canopies.
(b) Window awnings supported by an exterior wall and do not
project more than fifty-four (54) inches from the exterior wall and
do not require additional support. ECDC Title 23 provisions shall
not apply to such awnings.
(c) Sport courts less than 2,000 square feet
(d) Dock repair of individual decking members. ECDC Title
23 provisions shall not apply.
(e) Replacement or repair of existing exterior siding. ECDC
Title 23 provisions shall not apply.
(f) (option 1 existing) Replacement or repair of existing
window or doors with no change in size or framing. ECDC Title
23 provisions shall not apply.
(option 2: Replacement or repair of existing window or
doors provided; no alteration of structural members is
required, the replacement would not require installation of
safety glazing, the installation does not affect egress
requirements. ECDC Title 23 provisions shall not apply.)
(option 3: delete the exemption)
(g) (option 1 existing) Replacement or repair of individual
decking, joists, stair treads, or intermediate rails. ECDC
Title 23 provisions do not apply.
(option 2) delete exemption.
Packet Page 139 of 196
{WSS790568.DOC;1\00006.900000\ }
5/27/2010 3:10 PM - 9 -
(h) Sidewalks and driveways not more than 30 inches above
adjacent grade, and not over any basement or story below and are
not part of an accessible route, provided a permit is not required by
Chapter 19.60 ECDC.
(i) Uncovered platforms, decks, patios, not exceeding 200
square feet in area, that are not more than thirty (30) inches above
grade at any point, are not attached to a dwelling and do not serve
the exit door required by IRC Section R311.4
(j) Canopies, as defined in ECDC 17.70.035, accessory to a
single family dwelling, with a floor area measured to the exterior
wall or post not to exceed 200 square feet, for covered storage,
carport or similar use.
F. Section 105.3.2 Time limitation of permit application, is
amended to read: (effective until November 7, 2010).
1. Applications, for which no permit is issued within 360 days
following the date of application, shall expire by limitation, and
plans and other data submitted for review may thereafter be
returned to the applicant or destroyed by the building official.
2. The building official may extend the time for action by the
applicant for a period not exceeding 360 days prior to such
expiration date.
3. No application shall be extended more than once for a total
application life of 720 days. In order to renew action on an expired
application, the applicant shall submit a new application, revised
plans based on any applicable code or ordinance change, and pay
new plan review fees.
Alternative F. Section 105.3.2 Time limitation of permit
application, is amended to read: (effective after November 7, 2010)
1. Applications, for which no permit is issued within 180 days
following the date of application, shall expire by limitation, and
plans and other data submitted for review may thereafter be
returned to the applicant or destroyed by the building official.
2. The building official may extend the time for action by the
applicant for a period not exceeding 180 days prior to such
expiration date.
3. No application shall be extended more than once for a total
Packet Page 140 of 196
{WSS790568.DOC;1\00006.900000\ }
5/27/2010 3:10 PM - 10 -
application life of 360 days. In order to renew action on an expired
application, the applicant shall submit a new application, revised
plans based on any applicable code or ordinance change, and pay
new plan review fees.
G. Section 105.3.3 Fully complete application, is added and
reads;
In accordance with the provisions of RCW 19.27.031 and
19.27.074, an applicant’s rights shall vest when a fully complete
building permit application is filed. A fully complete building
permit application is an application executed by the owners of the
property for which the application is submitted or the duly
authorized agent(s) for such owners, containing each and every
document required under the terms of these ordinances and the
IBC and is substantially complete in all respects. It is anticipated
that minor changes or revisions may be required and are frequently
made in the course of any building application review process, and
such minor revisions or changes shall not keep an application from
being deemed complete if a good faith attempt has been made to
submit a substantially complete application containing all required
components. Where required, the application and supporting
documents shall be stamped and/or certified by the appropriate
engineering, surveying or other professional consultants. A fully
complete building permit application shall be accompanied by all
fees, including but not limited to building permit fees and plan
review fees required under the provisions of this chapter and code.
H. Section 105.3.4 Concurrent review, is added and reads;
An applicant may submit an application for building permit
approval and request plan review services concurrently with, or at
any time following, the submittal of a complete application for any
necessary or required discretionary permit approval or
discretionary hearing; provided, that any building permit
application submitted concurrently with an application for
discretionary permit or approvals shall not be considered complete
unless the applicant submits a signed statement, on a form
approved by the director, which acknowledges that the building
permit application is subject to any conditions or requirements
imposed pursuant to the review and approval of any necessary or
required discretionary permit or approvals. The applicant shall
solely bear the risk of building permit submittal with discretionary
permit approval. If, after discretionary approval, the building
permit plans are modified or amended to comply with conditions
or restrictions required by any discretionary permit or approval, the
Packet Page 141 of 196
{WSS790568.DOC;1\00006.900000\ }
5/27/2010 3:10 PM - 11 -
applicant shall be solely responsible for any and all costs which
result therefrom, including but not limited to additional full plan
review fees; provided further, that any applicant-initiated changes
made after the original plan review is complete shall also require
payment of full plan review fees.
I. Section 105.5 Permit expiration and extension, is amended
to read:
1. Every permit issued under ECDC Title shall expire by
limitation 360 days after issuance, except as provided in ECDC
19.0.025J(2).
2. The following permits shall expire by limitation, 180 days
after issuance and may not be extended:
Demolition permits required by ECDC19.00.030;
Permits for Moving Buildings required by Chapter 19.60 ECDC;
Mechanical permits;
Tank removal, tank fill, or tank placement permits;
Grading, excavation and fill permits;
Water service line permits;
Plumbing permits;
Gas piping permits;
Deck and dock permits;
Fence permits;
Re-roof permits;
Retaining wall permits;
Swimming pool, hot tub and spa permits;
Sign permits;
Shoring permits;
Foundation permits.
3. Prior to expiration of an active permit the applicant may
request in writing an extension for an additional year. If the plans
and specifications for the permit extension application are the same
as the plans and specifications submitted for the original permit
application and provided there has been at least one (1) required
progress inspection conducted by the city building inspector prior
to the extension, the permit shall be extended. Permit fees shall be
charged at a rate of one half the original building permit fee to
extend the permit.
Prior to Feb. 27, 2011 if work has not started on the project, and no
code violations exist, the applicant may make a written request to
the Building Official to waive the required progress inspection in
Packet Page 142 of 196
{WSS790568.DOC;1\00006.900000\ }
5/27/2010 3:10 PM - 12 -
order to renew the permit. The written request shall provide
reasonable cause unrelated to the neglect or fault of the permittee
as to the reason work has not started on the project, and an
estimated date by which work will begin. (note that after Feb. 27,
2011 this paragraph is void)
4. If the applicant cannot complete work issued under an
extended permit within a total period of two (2) years, the
applicant may request in writing, prior to the second year
expiration, an extension for a third and final year. Provided there
has been at least one (1) required progress inspection conducted by
the city building inspector prior to the extension, the permit shall
be extended for a third and final year. In lieu of permit fees for the
third year extension, inspection fees shall be charged for the
remaining work based on the number of required inspections
remaining for the project for all city departments.
5. The maximum amount of time any building permit may be
extended shall be a total of three (3) years. At the end of any three
(3) year period starting from the original date of permit issuance,
the permit shall become null and void and a new building permit
shall be required, with full permit fees, in order for the applicant to
complete work. The voiding of the prior permit shall negate all
previous vesting of zoning or Building codes. Whenever an appeal
is filed and a necessary development approval is stayed in
accordance with ECDC 20.07.004 the time limit periods imposed
under this section shall also be stayed until final decision.
6. The building official may reject requests for permit
extension where he determines that modifications or amendments
to the applicable zoning and Building codes have occurred since
the original issuance of the permit and/or modifications or
amendments would significantly promote public health and safety
if applied to the project through the issuance of a new permit.
J. Section 105.5.1 Recommence work on an expired permit, is
added and reads:.
1. In order to recommence work on an expired permit, a new
permit application with full permit fees shall be submitted to the
building official.
2. New permit applications shall be reviewed under current
zoning and Building codes in effect at the time of complete
application submittal. If a new permit is sought to recommence
work on an expired permit, the new permit shall be vested under
Packet Page 143 of 196
{WSS790568.DOC;1\00006.900000\ }
5/27/2010 3:10 PM - 13 -
the codes in effect when an application for a new permit is
submitted which fully complies with ECDC19.00.015. When
additional plan review is required, plan review fees shall be
charged.
K. Section 107.3.3 Phased approval is amended to read:
1. The building official may issue partial permits for phased
construction as part of a development before the entire plans and
specifications for the whole building or structure have been
approved provided architectural design board approval has been
granted and a fully complete permit application for the entire
building or structure has been submitted for review.
2. Phased approval means permits for grading, shoring, and
foundation may be issued separately, provided concurrent approval
is granted by the planning manager, city engineer and fire marshal,
when applicable. No phased approval permit shall be issued unless
approved civil plans detailing the construction of all site
improvements including, but not limited to: curbs, gutters,
sidewalks, paved streets, water lines, sewer lines, and storm
drainage have been signed as approved by the city engineer.
3. With such phased approval, a performance bond shall be
posted with the city pursuant to Chapter 17.10 ECDC, to cover the
estimated cost of construction to city standards for the
improvements.
L. Section 108 Temporary Structures and Uses, is deleted
M. Section 110.3.3 Lowest floor elevation, is amended to read:
In flood hazard areas, upon placement of the lowest floor,
including the basement, and prior to further vertical construction,
the elevation certification required in Section 1612.5 shall be
submitted to the building official. Prior to final inspection
approval, the building official shall require an elevation certificate
based on finished construction prepared and sealed by a State
licensed land surveyor.
N. Section 113 Board of Appeals, is deleted and replaced by
19.80 ECDC
O. Section 501.2 Address Identification, is amended to read:
Approved numbers or addresses shall be installed by the property
Packet Page 144 of 196
{WSS790568.DOC;1\00006.900000\ }
5/27/2010 3:10 PM - 14 -
owner for new and existing buildings in such a position as to be
clearly visible and legible from the street or roadway fronting the
property. Letters or numbers on the building shall be a minimum
six (6) inches in height and stroke a minimum of .75 inch of a
contrasting color to the building base color. Where public or
private access is provided and the building address cannot be
viewed from the public way, a monument, pole or other approved
sign or means shall be used to identify the structure. This means of
premises identification does not preclude approved identification
also affixed to structure.”
P. Section 1612.1.1 Residential Structures, is added and reads:
Construction or reconstruction of residential structures is
prohibited within designated floodways, except for (i) repairs,
reconstruction, or improvements to a structure which do not
increase the ground floor area; and (ii) repairs, reconstruction or
improvements to a structure, the cost of which does not exceed 50
percent of the market value of the structure either, (A) before the
repair, or reconstruction is started, or (B) if the structure has been
damaged, and is being restored, before the damage occurred. Any
project for improvement of a structure to correct existing violations
of State or local health, sanitary, or safety code specifications
which have been identified by the local code enforcement official
and which are the minimum necessary to assure safe living
conditions, or to structures identified as historic places, may be
excluded from the 50 percent calculation.
Q. Section 3103 Temporary Structures, is deleted.
R. Section 3108.1.1 Radio, television and cellular
communication related equipment and devices, is added and reads:
A permit shall be required for the installation or relocation of
commercial radio, television or cellular tower support structures
including monopoles, guyed or lattice towers, whip antennas, panel
antennas, parabolic antennas and related accessory equipment, and
accessory equipment shelters (regardless of size) including roof
mounted equipment shelters
S. Section 3109.1 Applicability and maintenance, is amended
to read:
1. Swimming pools, hot tubs and spas of all occupancies shall
comply with the requirements of this section and other applicable
sections of this code.
Packet Page 145 of 196
{WSS790568.DOC;1\00006.900000\ }
5/27/2010 3:10 PM - 15 -
2. It is the responsibility of the owner to maintain a swimming
pool, hot tub or spa in a clean and sanitary condition and all
equipment shall be maintained in a satisfactory operating condition
when the swimming pool, hot tub or spa is in use. A swimming
pool, hot tub or spa that is neglected, not secured from public entry
and/or not maintained in a clean and sanitary condition or its
equipment in accord with manufacturers recommendations shall be
determined to be a hazard to health and safety and shall be
properly mitigated to the satisfaction of the building official.
T. Section 3109.3 Public Swimming Pools, is deleted.
U. Section 3109.4 Residential Swimming Pools, is deleted
V. Section 3109.6 Location and Setbacks, is added and reads;
Swimming pools, hot tubs and spas shall meet requirements of the
zoning code of the city of Edmonds.
1. Minimum setbacks are measured from property lines to the
inside face of the pool, hot tub or spa as required by the zoning
code for accessory structures.
2. All other accessory buildings and equipment shall meet the
normally required setbacks for accessory structures in the zone in
which they are located.
W. Section 3109.7 Tests and cross-connection devices, is
added and reads;
1. All swimming pool, hot tub and spa piping shall be
inspected and approved before being covered or concealed.
2. Washington State Department of Health approved cross
connection devices are required to be provided on potable water
systems when used to fill any swimming pool, hot tub or spa.
X. Section 3109.8 Wastewater disposal, is added and reads;
A means of disposal of the total contents of the swimming pool,
hot tub or spa (including partial or periodic emptying) shall be
reviewed and approved by the public works director.
1. No direct connection shall be made between any swimming
pool, hot tub or spa to any storm drain, city sewer main, drainage
Packet Page 146 of 196
{WSS790568.DOC;1\00006.900000\ }
5/27/2010 3:10 PM - 16 -
system, seepage pit, underground leaching pit, or sub-soil drain.
2. A sanitary tee (outside cleanout installed on the main
building side sewer line) shall be provided for draining of treated
water into the city sanitary sewer system.
Y. Section 3109.9 Inspection requirements, is added and
reads;
The appropriate city inspector shall be notified for the following
applicable inspections:
1. Footing, wall, pre-form, pre-gunite, erosion control,
underground plumbing, sanitary extension and cleanout,
mechanical pool equipment, gas piping, mechanical enclosure
location, cross connection and final inspection.
2. An initial cross connection control installation inspection is
required by the city cross connection control specialist prior to
final installation approval.
3. All backflow assemblies shall be tested by state certified
backflow assembly testers upon initial installation and then
annually thereafter. Copies of all test reports shall be submitted to
the city water division for review and approval.
Z. Section 3403.2.1 Residential Structures, is added and reads;
Construction or reconstruction of residential structures is
prohibited within designated floodways, except for (i) repairs,
reconstruction, or improvements to a structure which do not
increase the ground floor areas; and (ii) repairs, reconstruction or
improvements to a structure, the cost of which does not exceed 50
percent of the market value of the structure either, (A) before the
repair, or reconstruction is started, or (B) if the structure has been
damaged, and is being restored, before the damage occurred. Any
project for improvement of a structure to correct existing violations
of State or local health, sanitary, or safety code specifications
which have been identified by the local code enforcement official
and which are the minimum necessary to assure safe living
conditions, or to structures identified as historic places, may be
excluded in the 50 percent.
AA. Appendix E, Accessibility Requirements, is amended by
deleting sections E107, E108, E110 and E111.
Packet Page 147 of 196
{WSS790568.DOC;1\00006.900000\ }
5/27/2010 3:10 PM - 17 -
BB. Appendix G, Flood-Resistant Construction, is amended by
addition of new section;
Section G301.1(4) Where base flood elevation data has not been
provided or is not available from another authoritative source, it
shall be generated for subdivision proposals and other proposed
developments which contain at least 50 lots or 5 acres, whichever
is less.
CC. Appendix H, Signs, is amended as follows;
1. Section H101.2 Signs exempt from permits, is replaced by
ECDC 19/00.010(Q).
2. Section H101.2.1 Prohibited signs is added and reads as
follows:
a. It is unlawful for any person to advertise or display any
visually communicated message, by letter or pictorially, of any
kind on any seating bench, or in direct connection with any bench.
b. All signs not expressly permitted by Chapter 20.60 ECDC.
c. Signs which the city engineer determines to be a hazard to
vehicle or pedestrian traffic because they resemble or obscure a
traffic control device, or pose a hazard to a pedestrian walkway or
because they obscure visibility needed for safe traffic passage.
Such signs shall be immediately removed at the request of the city
engineer.
d. All signs which are located within a public right-of-way
and that have been improperly posted or displayed are hereby
declared to be a public nuisance and shall be subject to immediate
removal and confiscation per ECDC 20.60.090.
3. Sections H104 Identification, H106.1.1 Internally
illuminated signs, H107 Combustible materials, H108 Animated
devices, H109.1 Height restrictions, and H110 Roof signs are
Deleted.
DD. Appendix J, Grading is amended as follows;
19.00.030 Architectural design review – Optional vesting.
In addition to the vesting rights created by RCW 19.27.095 and
ECDC19.00.015, an applicant for development as defined in
Packet Page 148 of 196
{WSS790568.DOC;1\00006.900000\ }
5/27/2010 3:10 PM - 18 -
ECDC 20.10.010 and subject to architectural design board (ADB)
review may, at the applicant’s option, file a fully complete
augmented architectural design review application (hereinafter
“augmented ADB application”) and vest rights including
applicable permit, development and impact fees under the
provisions of the ECDC and the state Building code as adopted and
amended by the city of Edmonds, this title as then in effect, to, but
only to, the extent that the application provides full and detailed
information necessary to confirm the particular regulation to be
vested. The burden is on the applicant to provide such detail.
A. A fully complete, augmented application for architectural
design review shall consist of a complete application for
architectural design review, executed by each and every property
owner of record of the development site or their duly authorized
agent(s), accompanied by the following:
1. All fees required by ordinance, including impact mitigation
fees, to be deposited at the time such State Environmental Policy
Act (SEPA) requirements become final.
2. A site plan showing the current zoning of the development
site, the footprint of all proposed structures, the total square
footage and use of each floor, all setbacks required by either the
zoning code or state Building codes, proposed parking
configurations, and exits.
3. Elevation drawings showing the original grade of the site,
any proposed alterations to grade, the proposed height of the
structure and the number of stories.
4. A letter executed by all owners of record or their duly
authorized agent(s) detailing the proposed use in sufficient detail to
determine whether the proposed use complies with the zoning code
then in effect and with the Building code then in effect to
determine type of construction and occupancy classifications of the
IBC and IFC as those codes then in effect.
5. A building permit application, as described in IBC Section
105.3 as the same exists or is hereafter amended, and all building
permit and plan review fees as established and set forth in Chapter
19.70 ECDC; provided, that the plans required by IBC Section 106
107, as the same exists or is hereafter amended, and other
engineering documents, plans or drawings required by ECDC Title
18 may be submitted within 90 days of final ADB approval, or
final approval on appeal.
Packet Page 149 of 196
{WSS790568.DOC;1\00006.900000\ }
5/27/2010 3:10 PM - 19 -
B. Upon filing of the augmented ADB application, the
applicant shall be deemed fully vested as if a fully complete
building permit application had been filed; provided:
1. The burden shall be upon the applicant to supply all
material required by the provisions of this section and as necessary
to meet the requirements of Chapter 20.10 ECDC. The applicant
may supplement the original application in the event an application
is deemed incomplete by the development services director or
designee. Vesting shall occur only when the application is deemed
complete by the development services director. Failure to
supplement an incomplete application within 90 days of final ADB
approval shall result in forfeiture of all fees paid and no vesting
right shall attach.
2. The application shall expire along with all rights vested 180
days following the date of application if final architectural design
approval is not received.
a. The development services director or designee may issue
an extension for an additional period, not exceeding 180 days,
upon written request by the applicant(s) or their agent(s). Such
request for extension shall be filed prior to the expiration of the
original application time period. An extension shall be granted if
the architectural design board has not yet considered the
application or an appeal thereof is pending.
b. The time period shall run concurrently with the periods
established by ECDC 19.00.005 as the same exists or is hereafter
amended. No application shall be extended more than once. In
order to renew an application after expiration, the applicant shall
resubmit all required information and pay a new plan review fee.
3. The applicant shall comply with all provisions of state law
and regulation and this code regarding SEPA review. Review
periods or delays occasioned by SEPA shall stay the time periods
set by this chapter.
4. Following final ADB approval, the applicant shall file the
plans and information required by IBC Section 106 107. It is
anticipated that minor adjustments and changes may and are
usually required to the plans submitted as a result of the plan
review and administrative process; provided, that the following
changes shall not be considered “minor” and shall forfeit vesting
rights, and shall require the filing of a new application:
Packet Page 150 of 196
{WSS790568.DOC;1\00006.900000\ }
5/27/2010 3:10 PM - 20 -
a. Any substantial change not required by the terms of ADB
approval.
b. Any increase in height or total square footage or any
change which would change the occupancy classification for the
purposes of the State Building code.
5. Any decision of the city staff regarding the application
stated in this section and its interpretation shall be considered a
Type I decision appealable only to the superior court of Snohomish
County by Land Use Petition Act.
C. The rights vested by ECDC 19.00.025 I (section 105.3.3 of
IBC as amended) and this section refer only to zoning and
Building code rights protected by RCW 19.27.095.
D. These sections shall not be interpreted to create vesting
rights not protected by RCW 19.27.095 and shall not be interpreted
as a further limitation on the administrative obligations and
legislative powers of the city. By way of illustration and not
limitation, this chapter does not limit:
1. The city council’s authority to create local improvement
districts.
2. The city council’s authority to legislate life safety
requirements that are not required to recognize existing vested
rights.
3. Environmental and shorelines review and mitigation
procedures.
19.00.040 Excluding nonconforming religious building
from certain requirements.
Existing legal nonconforming churches, synagogues, mosques and
other buildings use for religious observance (hereinafter “church”
or “churches”) are hereby excluded from any requirement of the
State Building Code which would be triggered by a change of use
as specifically limited and set forth herein:
1. This change in use exclusion is limited solely to a change
in use for the provision of emergency housing to the homeless and
other indigent persons. The term “emergency” shall mean to the
housing of indigent and homeless persons when the ambient
temperature is forecast by the National Weather Service to be
Packet Page 151 of 196
{WSS790568.DOC;1\00006.900000\ }
5/27/2010 3:10 PM - 21 -
below 33 degrees for a four-hour overnight period or when wind
chill, violent storms or other inclement conditions present a direct
threat to the lives of homeless and other indigent persons without
shelter. Such danger could include, but is not limited to, the threat
presented by carbon monoxide poisoning for persons attempting to
take shelter in cars or other vehicles with the motor running.
2. In order to claim this exclusion, a church shall:
a. Be a legal nonconforming structure prior to the
provision of emergency housing for the homeless and indigent. In
the alternative, a church may establish that it has previously
provided overnight housing to members of its congregation or the
public in emergencies, for educational, religious or other purposes.
b. Maintain a “fire watch.” The term “fire watch”
shall mean the maintenance during all times when indigent housing
services are provided of a watch by paid staff or volunteers who
shall, on premises, monitor for fires or violations of no smoking
prohibitions. At least one fire monitor shall be provided for each
eight persons housed.
c. Provide an operational smoke detection system.
d. Prohibit the smoking of tobacco or similar products
on the premises and prohibit the use of any open flame in the area
in which the homeless or indigent persons are temporarily housed.
e. Maintain clear and unobstructed means of egress.
Exits must not be locked in the direction of egress unless a special
egress control device is installed in accordance with the Building
Code.
3. The application of this exclusion is intended to fulfill the
City’s obligation to provide flexibility and consider reasonable
alternatives in the application of the rigid requirements of the State
Building Code. The Building Official is directed to avoid
technical inflexibility, to consider the use of any reasonable
alternative which would provide the minimum protections required
either under the State Building Code or this exclusion and to be
flexible when considering alternative approaches to the specific
requirements set forth above. All decisions by the Building
Official shall be in writing and articulate the public interest to be
served as well as an analysis of the alternatives.
Packet Page 152 of 196
{WSS790568.DOC;1\00006.900000\ }
5/27/2010 3:10 PM - 22 -
4. These provisions are for the purpose of providing for and
promoting the health, safety and welfare of the general public. See
Chapter 19.00 Limitation of Benefitted and Protected Classes.
Section 2. The Edmonds Community Development
Code Title 19 is hereby amended by the repeal and reenactment of
Chapter 19.05 Residential Building Code to read as follows:
Chapter 19.05
RESIDENTIAL BUILDING CODE
Sections:
19.05.000 International Residential Code adopted.
19.05.010 Chapter One (1) not adopted.
19.05.020 Section amendments.
19.05.030 Manufactured home installation standards.
19.05.000 International Residential Code adopted.
The International Residential Code (IRC), 2009 Edition, published
by the International Code Council, as amended by the Washington
State Building code Council in Chapter 51-51 WAC, and as
subsequently amended by this chapter, is hereby adopted along
with Appendix Chapters A, B, C, K and R.
19.05.010 Chapter One (1) not adopted.
Chapter one (1) is not adopted. See ECDC 19.00.015
19.05.020 Section amendments.
The following sections of the IRC are hereby amended as follows:
A. Table R301.2(1) Climatic and Geographic Design Criteria,
is amended with the following criteria:
1. Ground Snow Load = 25 psf
2. Wind Speed(d) = 85 mph
3. Topographical effects(k) = No
4. Seismic Design Category(f) = D2
5. Weathering(a) = moderate
6. Frost Line Depth(b) = 18 inches
7. Termite(c) = slight to moderate
8. Winter Design Temp(e) = 27 degrees F
Packet Page 153 of 196
{WSS790568.DOC;1\00006.900000\ }
5/27/2010 3:10 PM - 23 -
9. Flood Hazard(g) = NFIP adoption 3/26/74. FIRM maps
11/8/99
10. Ice Shield Underlayment(h) = not required
11. Air Freezing Index(i) = 0-1000
12. Mean Annual Temp(j) = 50 degrees F
B. Section R324 Automatic fire sprinkler system, is added and
reads;
An automatic fire sprinkler system is required for buildings
containing five (5) or more attached dwelling units. Refer to
ECDC 19.25.040.
19.05.030 Manufactured home installation standards.
A Permit Regulations.
1. Chapter 296-150M WAC, as currently promulgated
together with any future amendments thereof, or future additions
thereto, is hereby adopted. The building official is authorized to
issue building permits and collect permit fees for the installation of
all manufactured homes that meet the requirements of this chapter,
to inspect the installation of manufactured homes, and enforce all
violations of this chapter.
2. All references to “installation permits” in Chapter 296-
150M WAC, as herein adopted by reference, shall refer to building
permits issued for the installation of manufactured homes.
3. Fees for the installation of a manufactured home shall be
set forth in Chapter 19.70 ECDC. All other applicable
development fees shall also be imposed as with any other single-
family residence.
4. Mobile homes shall be permitted only within designated
mobile home parks.
5. Pursuant to added RCW 35.21.897, 35A.21.310, 36.01.220,
and amended RCW 35.63.160 and 1998 c 239 s 1, homes built to
42 USC Section 5401 through 5403 standards (as amended in
2000) shall be regulated for the purposes of siting, in the same
manner as site-built homes, factory-built homes, or homes built to
any other approved state construction.
6. Manufactured homes to be placed within the city shall not
be older than three calendar years from the date of complete permit
application submittal. The applicant is required to provide the
Packet Page 154 of 196
{WSS790568.DOC;1\00006.900000\ }
5/27/2010 3:10 PM - 24 -
vehicle identification number (VIN) information.
7. All spaces measured from the underside of the home to
finished grade shall be enclosed with a decorative skirting.
8. Manufactured homes shall be thermally equivalent to the
current State Energy Code.
9. The minimum manufactured home size shall be at least two
fully enclosed parallel sections each not less than 12 feet wide by
36 feet long.
10. Coated metal, tin, or vinyl roofing material is not permitted.
11. Manufactured homes shall comply with all other
development standards of this code.
Section 3 The Edmonds Community Development Code is hereby amended by
the repeal and reenactment of Chapter 19.15 Mechanical and Fule Gas Code, to read as follows:
Chapter 19.15
MECHANICAL CODE AND FUEL GAS CODE
Sections:
19.15.000 International Mechanical Code adopted.
19.15.005 Amendments
19.15.010 International Fuel Gas Code adopted.
19.15.015 Amendments
19.15.000 International Mechanical Code adopted.
The International Mechanical Code (IMC), 2009 Edition,
published by the International Code Council, as amended by the
Washington State Building code Council in Chapter 51-52 WAC,
and as subsequently amended by this chapter is hereby adopted.
19.15.005 Amendments
Chapter one (1) is not adopted. See ECDC 19.00.015
19.15.010 International Fuel Gas Code adopted.
The International Fuel Gas Code, 2009 Edition, published by the
International Code Council, as amended by the Washington State
Building code Council in Chapter 51-52 WAC inclusive of NFPA
Packet Page 155 of 196
{WSS790568.DOC;1\00006.900000\ }
5/27/2010 3:10 PM - 25 -
54 and 58, and as subsequently amended by this chapter, is hereby
adopted.
19.15.015 Amendments
Chapter one (1) is not adopted. See ECDC 19.00.015
Section 4 The Edmonds Community Development Code is hereby amended by
the repeal and reenactment of Chapter 19.20 Plumbing Code to read as follows:
Chapter 19.20
PLUMBING CODE
Sections:
19.20.000 Uniform Plumbing Code adopted.
19.20.005 Amendments.
19.20.010 Evidence of potable water.
19.20.000 Uniform Plumbing Code adopted.
The Uniform Plumbing Code (UPC), 2009 Edition, published by
the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical
Officials, as amended by the Washington State Building code
Council in Chapter 51-56 WAC, and as subsequently amended by
this chapter; provided that any provisions that affect fuel gas
piping are not adopted, is hereby adopted.
19.20.005 Amendments.
A. Chapter one (1) is not adopted. See ECDC 19.00.015
B. Section 1014 Grease traps and interceptors, is deleted. See
ECC 7.90
C. Section 1016 Sand Interceptors, is deleted
D. Section 1017 Oil and flammable liquids interceptors, is
deleted.
E. Chapter 12 Fuel piping, is deleted
F. Chapter 15 Firestop protection, is deleted
19.20.010 Evidence of potable water.
Prior to the issuance of any building permit for new development,
Packet Page 156 of 196
{WSS790568.DOC;1\00006.900000\ }
5/27/2010 3:10 PM - 26 -
the building official shall require substantive evidence of an
adequate potable water supply from the purveyor of water to the
site for which a building permit is requested. For those areas lying
within the service area of the city of Edmonds water utility, the
notification from a duly authorized representative of the city's
water utility shall be sufficient; provided, nothing herein shall be
interpreted to prevent the city or any of its water purveyors from
declaring a moratorium or other water emergency limiting or
otherwise restricting the availability of adequate potable water.
Applicants relying on a well shall provide a copy of applicable
state approval for the appropriation and a current test of water
quality by a qualified laboratory.
Section 5. the Edmonds Community Development Code is hereby amended by
the repeal and reenactment of Chapter 19.30 Energy Code to read as follows:
Chapter 19.30
ENERGY CODE
Sections:
19.30.000 State Energy Code adopted.
19.30.000 State Energy Code adopted.
The Washington State Energy Code, 2009 Edition, as adopted and
amended by the Washington State Building code Council in
Chapter 51-11 WAC, is hereby adopted.
Section 5. The Edmonds Community Development Code Title 19 is hereby
amended by the repeal of Chapter 19.35 Ventilation Code
Section 6. The Edmonds Community Development Code Title 19 is hereby
amended by the repeal of Chapter 19.40 Dangerous Buildings Code and the adoption of a new
Chapter 19.40 International Property Maintenance Code to read as follows:
Chapter 19.40
International Property Maintenance Code
Sections:
19.40.000 International Property Maintenance Code
adopted.
Packet Page 157 of 196
{WSS790568.DOC;1\00006.900000\ }
5/27/2010 3:10 PM - 27 -
19.40.005 Amendments
19.40.000 International Property Maintenance Code
adopted.
The International Property Maintenance Code, 2009 Edition,
published by the International Code Council, is hereby adopted.
19.40.005 Amendments.
A. Section 102.3 Application of other codes, is amended to
read:
Repairs, additions or alterations to a structure, or changes of
occupancy shall be done in accordance with the procedures and
provisions of the codes listed in 19.00.005. Nothing in this code
shall be construed to cancel, modify or set aside any provision of
the ECDC.
B. Section 106 Violations, is deleted and replaced as follows;
Violation of any provisions of this code are subject to the Civil
Violation – Enforcement procedures in Chapter 20.110 ECDC.
C. Sections 108.2 Closing of vacant structures, 108.3
Notice, 108.4 Placarding, 108.5 Prohibited occupancy, 108.6
Abatement methods and 108.7 Record, are deleted and replaced
by the provisions of Chapter 20.110 ECDC
D. Section 111 Means of Appeal, is deleted and replaced by
ECDC section 20.110.040 C.
E. Section 302 is deleted
F. Section 303 is deleted
G. Section 308 is deleted
H. Section 309 is deleted
Section 7 The Edmonds Community Development Code Title 19 is hereby
amended by the repeal of Chapter 19.45 Housing Code and the adoption of a new Chapter 19.45
International Code Council Performance Code to read as follows:
Chapter 19.45
Packet Page 158 of 196
{WSS790568.DOC;1\00006.900000\ }
5/27/2010 3:10 PM - 28 -
INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL PERFORMANCE
CODE
Sections:
19.45.000 International Code Council Performance Code
adopted.
The International Code Council Performance Code, 2009 Edition, published by the
International Code Council, is hereby adopted.
Section 8 The Edmonds Community Development Code, Title 19, is hereby
amended by the repeal of Chapter 19.50 Historic Building code and adoption of a new Chapter
19.50 International Existing Building code, to read as follows:
Chapter 19.50
INTERNATIONAL EXISTING BUILDING CODE
Sections:
19.50.000 International Existing Building code adopted.
The International Existing Buildings Code, 2009 Edition,
published by the International Code Council, as amended by the
Washington State Building code Council in Chapter 51-50 WAC,
and as subsequently amended by this chapter, is hereby adopted.is
hereby adopted along with Appendix Chapter A (Guidelines for
the seismic retrofit of existing buildings) and Resource A
(Guidelines on fire ratings of archaic materials and assemblies).
Section 9 The Edmonds Community Development Code, Title 19, is hereby
amended by the adoption of a new Chapter 19.55 Electrical Code, to read as follows:
Chapter 19.55
ELECTRICAL CODE
Sections:
19.55.000 National Electrical Code adopted.
19.55.005 When code effective.
19.55.010 Nonliability.
19.55.015 Conflicts – How resolved.
19.55.000 National Electrical Code adopted.
Under the statutory authority of RCW 19.27.031 and 19.27.074,
the National Electrical Code, 2002 2008 Edition, as published by
Packet Page 159 of 196
{WSS790568.DOC;1\00006.900000\ }
5/27/2010 3:10 PM - 29 -
the National Fire Protection Association, is hereby adopted as the
electrical code for the city of Edmonds subject to the amendments
made herein. The State of Washington Department of Labor and
Industries, Electrical Inspection Section, Rules and Regulations for
Installing Electric Wiring and Equipment and Administrative
Rules, 2002 2008 Edition, is hereby adopted as part of the
electrical code of the city of Edmonds. [Ord. 3651 § 1, 2007].
19.55.005 When code effective.
If the state of Washington, through its duly designated electrical
inspector or inspectors, for any reason fails to continue to inspect
electrical installation, license the same or provide the standards,
the provisions of the Edmonds electrical code as amended shall be
applicable to all electrical installation in the city as if the state of
Washington had not exercised jurisdiction of any kind.
19.55.010 Nonliability.
This chapter shall not be construed to relieve or lessen the
responsibility of any person owning, operating or installing any
electrical equipment for damages to anyone injured by a defect of
the equipment, nor shall the city or its agent be held as assuming
any such liability by reason of the inspection under this code or the
certificate of inspection issued by the building department.
19.55.015 Conflicts – How resolved.
If there is any conflict between the electrical code of the city, the
National Electrical Code and/or the rules and regulations as set
forth by the state of Washington for electric wires and equipment,
then the conditions, requirements, provisions or terms which
provide, in the opinion of the building official, for the greatest
public safety shall be observed and shall control.
Section 10. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifi-
cally delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take effect
five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the
title.
APPROVED:
Packet Page 160 of 196
{WSS790568.DOC;1\00006.900000\ }
5/27/2010 3:10 PM - 30 -
MAYOR GARY HAAKENSON
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY:
BY
W. SCOTT SNYDER
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK:
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
PUBLISHED:
EFFECTIVE DATE:
ORDINANCE NO.
Packet Page 161 of 196
{WSS790568.DOC;1\00006.900000\ }
5/27/2010 3:10 PM - 31 -
SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. __________
of the City of Edmonds, Washington
On the ____ day of ___________, 2010, the City Council of the City of Edmonds,
passed Ordinance No. _____________. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting
of the title, provides as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, REPEALING AND
ENACTING THE PROVISIONS OF AND ENACTMENT OF CHAPTERS 19.00 BUILDING
CODE; 19.05 RESIDENTIAL BUILDING CODE; 19.05 MECHANICAL CODE AND FUEL
GAS CODE; 19.20 PLUMBING CODE; 19.30 ENERGY CODE; 19.40 INTERNATIONAL
PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE; CHAPTER 19.50 INTERNATIONAL EXISTING
BUILDING CODE; CHAPTER 19.55 ELECTRICAL CODE; REPEALING CHAPTER 19.35
VENTILATION CODE RCW TO ADOPT NEW PROVISIONS OF THE STATE BUILDING
CODE AND REVISIONS THERETO, AND TO RESTRUCTURE TITLE 19, AND FIXING A
TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE.
The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request.
DATED this _____ day of ________________, 2010.
CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE
Packet Page 162 of 196
1
Analysis of Revisions
This analysis examines the proposed code language listed in the left column and provides commentary in the right hand column. The commentary will reference the current code
document, which is separate. Because of the different approach used in the adoption language it was not possible to provide a useful side by side style of comparison
International Building Code (IBC)
New ECDC code reference Commentary
19.00.000 Purpose
The purpose of the codes and regulations adopted in this title is to provide minimum standards
to safeguard life, health, property and public welfare by regulating and controlling the design,
construction, quality of materials, use and occupancy, location and maintenance of all buildings
and structures within the City of Edmonds. It is not the purpose or intent to create or designate
any particular class or group of persons to be especially protected or benefited, nor is it intended
to create any special relationship with any individual
The purpose section is new. This was added as the first section to establish a regulatory scope
for the code and amendments to be adopted.
19.00.005 Referenced codes
Where the following codes are referenced within any of the codes adopted and amended in
this title, they shall be substituted as follows:
A. “International Building Code” shall mean the building code as adopted and amended
in this title.
B. “International Residential Code” shall mean the residential building code as adopted
and amended in this title.
C. “International Mechanical Code” shall mean the mechanical code as adopted and
amended in this title.
D. “International Fuel Gas Code” shall mean the fuel gas code as adopted in Chapter
19.27 RCW and in accordance with the mechanical code as adopted and amended in this title.
E. “International Fire Code” shall mean the fire code as adopted and amended in this
title.
Referenced codes was formerly listed under 19.00.000 International Building Code adopted.
This is fundamentally the same as the previous document with the following changes:
The Uniform Housing Code and Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings have not been
published since 1997 and are no longer adopted. These are replaced by the International Property
Maintenance Code, which was designed to replace these documents.
The State Historic Building Code is no longer supported by the State and is replaced by the International
Existing Building Code. This is consistent with the changes to WAC 51-50.
The Washington State Ventilation and Indoor Air Quality Code no longer exists within the WAC’s having
been replaced by the changes to the Mechanical Code.
Packet Page 163 of 196
2
F. “Uniform Plumbing Code” shall mean the plumbing code as adopted and amended in
this title.
G. “Washington State Energy Code” shall mean the energy code as adopted and
amended in this title.
H. The “National Electrical Code” shall mean the electrical code as adopted and
amended in this title.
I. “International Existing Building Code” shall mean the existing building code as
adopted and amended in this title.
J. International Property Maintenance Code shall mean the property maintenance code
as adopted and amended in this title.
K. International Code Council Performance Code shall mean the performance code as
adopted andamended in this title.
19.00.010 Conflict between Codes
In case of conflict among any of the codes referenced in 19.00.005 and subsequently adopted
by this chapter, the first named code shall govern over those following. In case of conflicts
between other codes and provisions adopted by this chapter, the code or provision that is most
specific, as determined by the building official, shall apply.
This is a new section. It is intended to establish the hierarchy of codes as laid out in RCW 19.27
19.00.015 Administrative provisions
The administrative provisions as specified in Chapter 1 of the International Building Code as
adopted and subsequently amended by this chapter shall be used as the general administrative
provisions for the codes listed in 19.00.000 under A, B, C, D and F, unless otherwise indicated
The adopted codes each have their own separate administrative chapters. This section intends to simplifiy
the administration by combining these into a single document. Chapter 1 of the IBC (as further amended)
is set up as the single administrative provisions for the Building Code, Residential Code, Mechanical Code
and Plumbing Code.
The Fire Code is separated out since it has its own special administrative needs as do the Existing Building
Code and the Property Maintenance Code.
19.00.020 International Building Code adopted.
The International Building Code (IBC), 2009 Edition, published by the International Code
Council, as amended by the Washington State Building Code Council in Chapter 51-50 WAC,
and as subsequently amended by this chapter, is hereby adopted along with Appendix Chapters
E, G, H, I and J.
This was formerly in section 19.00.000. The language has been simplified. Reference is made to
appropriate WAC 51-50.
19.00.025 International Building Code section amendments
The following sections of the IBC are hereby amended as follows
All of the section below are local amendments to the IBC as adopted by the State. For the most
part the language is the same as the current Municipal Code.
Significant difference is that all administrative provisions are now contained here instead of in
the separate code adoption sections.
Note: NC means there is no change from existing code language
Packet Page 164 of 196
3
A. Section 104.3 Notices and orders, is amended to read:
The building official shall issue all necessary notices or orders to ensure compliance
with this code. The building official is also authorized to use Chapter 20.110 ECDC for
code compliance in addition to the remedies provided for in this code.
NC
B. Section 105.1.1 Annual permit is deleted.
NC
C. Section 105.1.1 Demolition permits, is added and reads;
Before the partial or complete demolition of any building or structure (interior or
exterior), a demolition permit shall be obtained from the building official. The permit fee
is hereby established as set forth in Chapter 19.70 ECDC. The applicant shall also post
with the city, prior to permit issuance, a performance bond, or frozen fund, conforming to
Chapter 17.10 ECDC herein, in an amount to be determined by the building official to
satisfy all city requirements no later than 180 days after the issuance of the permit. The
demolition performance bond or frozen fund shall not be released until the building
official determines the following requirements have been completed:
A. Cap Abandoned Sanitary Sewers. Septic tanks are to be pumped, collapsed and
removed and/or filled with earth, sand, concrete, CDF or hard slurry.
B. Knock Down of Concrete Foundation Walls, Porches, Chimneys and Similar
Structures. Concrete, bricks, cobbles and boulders shall be broken to less than 12-
inch diameter. Debris left on site shall conform to IBC Section 1804.2 for clean fill.
C. Construction debris, vegetation, and garbage attributable to the demolition shall be
removed from the site and from unopened street right-of-way within 30 days of written
notice. No debris of any kind may be placed on street right-of-way (including alleys)
without a right-of-way permit.
D. Repair of any damage to, and restoration of, any public property to substantially
original conditions, i.e., alley, street, sidewalk, landscaping, water meter, utilities,
rockeries, retaining walls, etc.
E. Grading of Site Back to Original Topography Grades. Basements shall be filled
and compacted to 90 percent to be verified by special inspector. “Structural fill” is
defined as any fill placed below structures, including slabs, where the fill soils need to
NC
This section has been moved from 19.00.030
Packet Page 165 of 196
4
support loads without unacceptable deflections or shearing. Structural fill should be
clean and free draining and should be placed above unyielding native site soils and
compacted to a minimum of 90 percent modified proctor, per ASTM D1557.
F. Temporary erosion control is installed and maintained per Chapter 18.30 ECDC.
D. Section 105.1.2 Annual permit records, is deleted.
NC
E. Section 105.2 Work exempt from permit, is replaced as follows;
Exemptions from permit requirements of this code shall not be deemed to grant
authorization for any work to be done in any manner in violation of the provisions
of this code or any other laws or ordinances of this jurisdiction. It is the
applicant’s responsibility to comply with bulk zoning code standards per ECDC
Title 16 and storm water management provisions per Chapter 18.30 ECDC.
Permits shall not be required for the following unless subject to the provisions of
ECDC Title 23 or limited or prohibited by the provisions of Chapter 19.10 ECDC:
1. Building (general):
(a) One (1) story detached accessory structures used as tool and storage sheds,
playhouses and similar uses; provided the floor area (measured to the exterior
wall or post) does not exceed 120 square feet, with a maximum eave of thirty
(30) inches.
(b) Fences not over six (6) feet high; provided a permit is not required by Chapter
17.30 ECDC.
(c) Movable cases, counters and partitions not over five (5) feet nine (9) inches
high.
(d) Retaining walls 4 feet (1,219 mm) in height or less measured vertically from
the finished grade at the exposed toe of the retaining wall to the highest point in
the wall, unless:
a. Supporting a surcharge; or
Work exempt from a permit now includes all the permit exemptions from the building, residential,
mechanical and plumbing code in one location. Previously the exemptions were lisited under
the individual code adoption sections.
The majority of the exemptions are the same as the current ECDC. With some exceptions as
noted below.
Packet Page 166 of 196
5
b. Impounding Class I, II, III-A liquids; or
c. Subject to the provisions of Chapter 23.50 ECDC or Chapter 23.80 ECDC.
(e) Rockeries.
(f) Water tanks supported directly upon grade if the capacity does not exceed 500
gallons and the ratio of height to diameter or width does not exceed two (2) to
one (1).
(g) Sidewalks and driveways not more than 30 inches above adjacent grade, and
not over any basement or story below and are not part of an accessible route,
provided a permit is not required by Chapter 18.60 ECDC.
(h) Painting, papering, tiling, carpeting, cabinets, countertops and similar finish
work.
(i) Temporary motion picture, television and theater stage sets and scenery.
(j) Shade cloth structures constructed for nursery or agricultural purposes.
(k) Prefabricated swimming pools accessory to an occupancy in which the pool
walls are entirely above the adjacent grade and the capacity does not exceed
5,000 gallons. Hot tubs and spas less than 5,000 gallons, completely supported
by the ground.
(l) Swings and other playground equipment accessory to an occupancy.
(m) Grading less than fifty (50) cubic yards (placed, removed or moved within any
365-day period) unless subject to the provisions of Chapter 23.50 ECDC or
Chapter 23.80 ECDC.
(n) Repair of appliances which do not alter original approval, certification, listing
or code.
Packet Page 167 of 196
6
(o) Replacement or adding new insulation with no drywall removal or placement.
(p) Replacement or repair of existing gutters or downspouts.
(q) The following types of signs are exempt from permit requirements except that
dimensional size and placement standards shall comply with Chapter 20.60
ECDC:
I. Replacing the panel on a previously permitted existing wall cabinet or pole
sign,
II. Repainting an existing previously permitted wood sign,
III. Painted or vinyl lettering on storefront windows,
IV. Governmental signs, campaign signs, official public notices, and signs
required by provision of local, state, or federal law,
V. Temporary signs announcing the sale or rent of property and other
temporary signs as described in ECDC 20.60.080,
VI. Signs erected by the transportation authorities, and temporary seasonal and
holiday displays.
(r) Television antennas less than thirty-nine (39) inches in diameter.
2. Mechanical:
(a) Portable heating, ventilation, cooling, cooking or clothes drying appliances
(b) Replacement of any minor part that does not alter approval of equipment or make
such equipment unsafe.
(c) Portable fuel cell applicances that are not connected to a fixed piping system and
are not interconnected to a power grid.
Packet Page 168 of 196
7
(d) Steam, hot or chilled water piping within any heating or cooling equipment regulated
by this code.
(e) Portable evaporative cooler
(f) Self-contained refrigeration systems containing ten(10) pounds or less of refrigerant
or that are actuated by motoer of one (1) horsepower or less.
3. Plumbing:
(a) The stopping of leaks in drains, water, soil, waste or vent pipe, provided that the
replacement of defective material shall be done with new material and a permit
obtained and inspection made.
Residential permit exemptions:
In addition the following exemptions apply for single family dwellings:
(a) One (1) story detached accessory structures used as tool and storage sheds,
playhouses and similar uses; provided the floor area (measured to the exterior
wall or post) does not exceed 200 square feet, with a maximum eave of twelve
(12) inches and maximum height of fifteen (15) feet. Vehicle storage structures,
such as garages and carports, are not included except as set forth in ECDC
19.05.010E(33) for canopies.
(b) Window awnings supported by an exterior wall and do not project more than
fifty-four (54) inches from the exterior wall and do not require additional support.
ECDC Title 23 provisions do not apply.
(c) Sport courts less than 2,000 square feet
(d) Dock repair of individual decking members. ECDC Title 23 provisions do not
apply.
(e) Replacement or repair of existing exterior siding. ECDC Title 23 provisions
Packet Page 169 of 196
8
shall not apply.
(f) Replacement or repair of existing window or doors with no change in size or
framing. ECDC Title 23 provisions shall not apply.
(g) Replacement or repair of individual decking, joists, stair treads, or intermediate
rails. ECDC Title 23 provisions do not apply.
(h) Sidewalks and driveways not more than 30 inches above adjacent grade, and
not over any basement or story below and are not part of an accessible route,
provided a permit is not required by Chapter 18.60 ECDC.
(i) Uncovered platforms, decks, patios, not exceeding 200 square feet in area, that
are not more than thirty (30) inches above grade at any point, are not attached
to a dwelling and do not serve the exit door required by IRC Section R311.4
(j) Canopies, as defined in ECDC 17.70.035, accessory to a single family dwelling,
with a floor area measured to the exterior wall or post not to exceed 200 square
feet, for covered storage, carport or similar use.
Item (f) is the existing code language. Two other options are provided. There are specific code
provisions related to window replacement such as the need for safety glazing in certain
locations, the need for fire egress windows from sleeping rooms, and energy code
specifications. Additionally the improper replacement of windows and doors can lead to
moisture infiltration issues, causing structural damage and/or mold problems.
Option 2 would tighten this a bit, but leave it up to the contractor/owner to evaluate.
Replacement or repair of existing window or doors provided: no alteration of structural members
is required, the replacement would not require installation of safety glazing, the installation does
not affect egress requirements.
Option 3 would totally delete the exemption and therefore require permits for window or door
replacement.
The City of Edmonds permit exemption for replacement of individual deck members, joist, stair
treads and rails has been deleted. There are a number of serious injuries associated with
improperly constructed decks annually. Option 2 would delete this exemption
Packet Page 170 of 196
9
F. Section 105.3.2 Time limitation of permit application, is amended to read: (effective
until November 7, 2010).
1. Applications, for which no permit is issued within 360 days following the date of
application, shall expire by limitation, and plans and other data submitted for
review may thereafter be returned to the applicant or destroyed by the building
official.
2. The building official may extend the time for action by the applicant for a period
not exceeding 360 days prior to such expiration date.
3. No application shall be extended more than once for a total application life of
720 days. In order to renew action on an expired application, the applicant shall
submit a new application, revised plans based on any applicable code or
ordinance change, and pay new plan review fees.
The next couple of sections have been consolidated to simplify how the code reads and make is simpler to
use.
In 2008 the Council passed an ordinance (#3699) that provided for extensions to the normal timelines for
permit applications. This The intend was to provide some additional time in light of the economic situation
and difficulties that people were experiencing with funding of projects.
The Ordinance sets up a timeline that ends on 11/7/2010.
This ordinance was later supplemented by ordinance # 3726 that provided temporary relief from the
expiration of issued permits. (See language in section 105.5 Permit expiration and extension). The
exception allows for a request to extend a permit without having the required progress inspection if there is
a reasonable cause for the delay. This is void after Feb 27, 2011.
The current code incorporates these two ordinances by reproducing sections of the code 3 times so as to
deal with the timelines. The proposed code simplifies this by placing the time limits separate and removing
the redundant language.
Alternate F. Section 105.3.2 Time limitation of permit application, is amended to read:
(effective after November 7, 2010)
1. Applications, for which no permit is issued within 180 days following the date of
application, shall expire by limitation, and plans and other data submitted for
review may thereafter be returned to the applicant or destroyed by the building
official.
2. The building official may extend the time for action by the applicant for a period
not exceeding 180 days prior to such expiration date.
3. No application shall be extended more than once for a total application life of
360 days. In order to renew action on an expired application, the applicant shall
submit a new application, revised plans based on any applicable code or
ordinance change, and pay new plan review fees.
Section F, above, is in effect until 11/7/2010.
After 11/7/2010 alternate section F takes effect. In essence the sun setting of the ordinance.
Packet Page 171 of 196
10
G. Section 105.3.3 Fully complete application, is added and reads;
In accordance with the provisions of RCW 19.27.031 and 19.27.074, an applicant’s
rights shall vest when a fully complete building permit application is filed. A fully
complete building permit application is an application executed by the owners of the
property for which the application is submitted or the duly authorized agent(s) for such
owners, containing each and every document required under the terms of these
ordinances and the IBC and is substantially complete in all respects. It is anticipated
that minor changes or revisions may be required and are frequently made in the course
of any building application review process, and such minor revisions or changes shall
not keep an application from being deemed complete if a good faith attempt has been
made to submit a substantially complete application containing all required components.
Where required, the application and supporting documents shall be stamped and/or
certified by the appropriate engineering, surveying or other professional consultants. A
fully complete building permit application shall be accompanied by all fees, including but
not limited to building permit fees and plan review fees required under the provisions of
this chapter and code.
NC from existing ECDC
Moved from 19.00.015 to the section of IBC dealing with applications for ease of use.
H. Section 105.3.4 Concurrent review, is added and reads;
An applicant may submit an application for building permit approval and request plan
review services concurrently with, or at any time following, the submittal of a complete
application for any necessary or required discretionary permit approval or discretionary
hearing; provided, that any building permit application submitted concurrently with an
application for discretionary permit or approvals shall not be considered complete
unless the applicant submits a signed statement, on a form approved by the director,
which acknowledges that the building permit application is subject to any conditions or
requirements imposed pursuant to the review and approval of any necessary or required
discretionary permit or approvals. The applicant shall solely bear the risk of building
permit submittal with discretionary permit approval. If, after discretionary approval, the
building permit plans are modified or amended to comply with conditions or restrictions
required by any discretionary permit or approval, the applicant shall be solely
responsible for any and all costs which result therefrom, including but not limited to
NC from existing
Moved from 19.00.020 to section of IBC dealing with applications for ease of use.
Packet Page 172 of 196
11
additional full plan review fees; provided further, that any applicant-initiated changes
made after the original plan review is complete shall also require payment of full plan
review fees.
I. Section 105.5 Permit expiration and extension, is amended to read:
1. Every permit issued under ECDC Title 19 shall expire by limitation 360 days
after issuance, except as provided in ECDC 19.00.025J(2).
2. The following permits shall expire by limitation, 180 days after issuance and
may not be extended:
Demolition permits required by ECDC 19.00.030;
Permits for Moving Buildings required by Chapter 19.60 ECDC;
Mechanical permits;
Tank removal, tank fill, or tank placement permits;
Grading, excavation and fill permits;
Water service line permits;
Plumbing permits;
Gas piping permits;
Deck and dock permits;
Fence permits;
Re-roof permits;
Retaining wall permits;
Swimming pool, hot tub and spa permits;
Sign permits;
Shoring permits;
Foundation permits.
3. Prior to expiration of an active permit the applicant may request in writing an
extension for an additional year. If the plans and specifications for the permit
extension application are the same as the plans and specifications submitted for
the original permit application and provided there has been at least one (1)
required progress inspection conducted by the city building inspector prior to the
extension, the permit shall be extended. Permit fees shall be charged at a rate of
one half the original building permit fee to extend the permit.
NC from existing language.
Packet Page 173 of 196
12
Prior to Feb. 27, 2011 if work has not started on the project, and no code violations
exist, the applicant may make a written request to the Building Official to waive the
required progress inspection in order to renew the permit. The written request shall
provide reasonable cause unrelated to the neglect or fault of the permittee as to
the reason work has not started on the project, and an estimated date by which
work will begin. (note that after Feb. 27, 2011 this paragraph is void)
4. If the applicant cannot complete work issued under an extended permit within a
total period of two (2) years, the applicant may request in writing, prior to the
second year expiration, an extension for a third and final year. Provided there has
been at least one (1) required progress inspection conducted by the city building
inspector prior to the extension, the permit shall be extended for a third and final
year. In lieu of permit fees for the third year extension, inspection fees shall be
charged for the remaining work based on the number of required inspections
remaining for the project for all city departments.
5. The maximum amount of time any building permit may be extended shall be a
total of three (3) years. At the end of any three (3) year period starting from the
original date of permit issuance, the permit shall become null and void and a new
building permit shall be required, with full permit fees, in order for the applicant to
complete work. The voiding of the prior permit shall negate all previous vesting of
zoning or building codes. Whenever an appeal is filed and a necessary
development approval is stayed in accordance with ECDC 20.07.004, the time limit
periods imposed under this section shall also be stayed until final decision.
6. The building official may reject requests for permit extension where he
determines that modifications or amendments to the applicable zoning and
building codes have occurred since the original issuance of the permit and/or
modifications or amendments would significantly promote public health and safet y
if applied to the project through the issuance of a new permit.
This paragraph has been modified to include the date of 2/27/2011. This is, as noted above in 105.3.2, an
attempt to simplify and eliminate the redundant language. The intent and result remains un-affected.
J. Section 105.5.1 Recommence work on an expired permit, is added and reads:.
1. In order to recommence work on an expired permit, a new permit application
with full permit fees shall be submitted to the building official.
NC
Packet Page 174 of 196
13
2. New permit applications shall be reviewed under current zoning and building codes in
effect at the time of complete application submittal. If a new permit is sought to
recommence work on an expired permit, the new permit shall be vested under the codes
in effect when an application for a new permit is submitted which fully complies with
ECDC 19.00.015. When additional plan review is required, plan review fees shall be
charged.
K. Section 107.3.3 Phased approval is amended to read:
1. The building official may issue partial permits for phased construction as part of
a development before the entire plans and specifications for the whole building or
structure have been approved provided architectural design board approval has
been granted and a fully complete permit application for the entire building or
structure has been submitted for review.
2. Phased approval means permits for grading, shoring, and foundation may be
issued separately, provided concurrent approval is granted by the planning
manager, city engineer and fire marshal, when applicable. No phased approval
permit shall be issued unless approved civil plans detailing the construction of all
site improvements including, but not limited to: curbs, gutters, sidewalks, paved
streets, water lines, sewer lines, and storm drainage have been signed as
approved by the city engineer.
3. With such phased approval, a performance bond shall be posted with the city
pursuant to Chapter 17.10 ECDC, to cover the estimated cost of construction to
city standards for the improvements.
NC in basic language. Phased approval was previously referenced separately in the Building and
Residential codes. It is now combined.
L. Section 108 Temporary Structures and Uses, is deleted
NC
M. Section 110.3.3 Lowest floor elevation, is amended to read:
In flood hazard areas, upon placement of the lowest floor, including the basement, and
prior to further vertical construction, the elevation certification required in jSection
1612.5 shall be submitted to the building official. Prior to final inspection approval, the
building official shall require an elevation certificate based on finished construction
prepared and sealed by a State licensed land surveyor.
NC
Packet Page 175 of 196
14
N. Section 113 Board of Appeals, is deleted and replaced by 19.80 ECDC
NC
O. Section 501.2 Address Identification, is amended to read:
Approved numbers or addresses shall be installed by the property owner for new
and existing buildings in such a position as to be clearly visible and legible from
the street or roadway fronting the property. Letters or numbers on the building
shall be a minimum six (6) inches in height and stroke a minimum of .75 inch of a
contrasting color to the building base color. Where public or private access is
provided and the building address cannot be viewed from the public way, a
monument, pole or other approved sign or means shall be used to identify the
structure. This means of premises identification does not preclude
approved identification also affixed to structure.”
NC
P. Section 1612.1.1 Residential Structures, is added and reads:
Construction or reconstruction of residential structures is prohibited within
designated floodways, except for (i) repairs, reconstruction, or improvements to a
structure which do not increase the ground floor areas; and (ii) repairs,
reconstruction or improvements to a structure, the cost of which does not exceed
50 percent of the market value of the structure either, (A) before the repair, or
reconstruction is started, or (B) if the structure has been damaged, and is being
restored, before the damage occurred. Any project for improvement of a structure
to correct existing violations of State or local health, sanitary, or safety code
specifications which have been identified by the local code enforcement official
and which are the minimum necessary to assure safe living conditions, or to
structures identified as historic places, may be excluded in the 50 percent.
NC
Q. Section 3103 Temporary Structures, is deleted.
NC
R. Section 3108.1.1 Radio, television and cellular communication related equipment
and devices, is added and reads:
A permit is required for the installation or relocation of commercial radio, television or
cellular tower support structures including monopoles, guyed or lattice towers, whip
antennas, panel antennas, parabolic antennas and related accessory equipment, and
accessory equipment shelters (regardless of size) including roof mounted equipment
NC
Packet Page 176 of 196
15
shelters
S. Section 3109.1 Applicability and maintenance, is amended to read:
1. Swimming pools, hot tubs and spas of all occupancies shall comply with the
requirements of this section and other applicable sections of this code.
2. It is the responsibility of the owner to maintain the swimming pool, hot tub or spa in a
clean and sanitary condition and all equipment maintained in a satisfactory operating
condition when the swimming pool, hot tub or spa is in use. A swimming pool, hot tub or
spa that is neglected, not secured from public entry and/or not maintained shall be
determined to be a hazard to health and safety and shall be properly mitigated to the
satisfaction of the building official .
T. Section 3109.3 Public Swimming Pools, is deleted.
NC
NC
U. Section 3109.4 Residential Swimming Pools, is deleted
Reference is now made to IRC appendix G for barrier protection around pools
V. Section 3109.6 Location and Setbacks, is added and reads;
Swimming pools, hot tubs and spas shall meet requirements of the zoning code
of the city of Edmonds.
1. Minimum setbacks are measured from property lines to the inside face of the
pool, hot tub or spa as required by the zoning code for accessory structures.
2. All other accessory buildings and equipment shall meet the normally required
setbacks for accessory structures in the zone in which they are located.
NC
W. Section 3109.7 Tests and cross-connection devices, is added and reads;
1. All swimming pool, hot tub and spa piping shall be inspected and approved
before being covered or concealed.
2. Washington State Department of Health approved cross connection devices
are required to be provided on potable water systems when used to fill any
swimming pool, hot tub or spa.
NC
Packet Page 177 of 196
16
X. Section 3109.8 Wastewater disposal, is added and reads;
A means of disposal of the total contents of the swimming pool, hot tub or spa
(including partial or periodic emptying) shall be reviewed and approved by the
public works director.
1. No direct connection shall be made between any swimming pool, hot tub or
spa to any storm drain, city sewer main, drainage system, seepage pit,
underground leaching pit, or sub-soil drain.
2. A sanitary tee (outside cleanout installed on the main building side sewer line) shall
be provided for draining of treated water into the city sanitary sewer system.
NC
Y. Section 3109.9 Inspection requirements, is added and reads;
The appropriate city inspector shall be notified for the following applicable
inspections:
1. Footing, wall, pre-form, pre-gunite, erosion control, underground plumbing,
sanitary extension and cleanout, mechanical pool equipment, gas piping,
mechanical enclosure location, cross connection and final inspection.
2. An initial cross connection control installation inspection is required by the city
cross connection control specialist prior to final installation approval.
3. All backflow assemblies shall be tested by state certified backflow assembly
testers upon initial installation and then annually thereafter. Copies of all test
reports shall be submitted to the city water division for review and approval.
NC
Z. Section 3403.2.1 Residential Structures, is added and reads;
Construction or reconstruction of residential structures is prohibited within
designated floodways, except for (i) repairs, reconstruction, or improvements to a
structure which do not increase the ground floor areas; and (ii) repairs,
reconstruction or improvements to a structure, the cost of which does not exceed
50 percent of the market value of the structure either, (A) before the repair, or
reconstruction is started, or (B) if the structure has been damaged, and is being
NC
Packet Page 178 of 196
17
restored, before the damage occurred. Any project for improvement of a structure
to correct existing violations of State or local health, sanitary, or safety code
specifications which have been identified by the local code enforcement official
and which are the minimum necessary to assure safe living conditions, or to
structures identified as historic places, may be excluded in the 50 percent.
AA. Appendix E, Accessibility Requirements, is amended by deleting sections E107,
E108, E110 and E111.
NC
BB. Appendix G, Flood-Resistant Construction, is amended by addition of new section;
Section G301.1(4) Where base flood elevation data has not been provided or is not
available from another authoritative source, it shall be generated for subdivision
proposals and other proposed developments which contain at least 50 lots or 5 acres,
whichever is less.
NC
CC. Appendix H, Signs, is amended as follows;
1. Section H101.2 Signs exempt from permits, is replaced by ECDC
19.00.010(Q).
2. Section H101.2.1 Prohibited signs is added and reads;.
a. It is unlawful for any person to advertise or display any visually communicated
message, by letter or pictorially, of any kind on any seating bench, or in direct
connection with any bench.
b. All signs not expressly permitted by Chapter 20.60 ECDC.
c. Signs which the city engineer determines to be a hazard to vehicle or
pedestrian traffic because they resemble or obscure a traffic control device, or
pose a hazard to a pedestrian walkway or because they obscure visibility needed
for safe traffic passage. Such signs shall be immediately removed at the request
of the city engineer.
d. All signs which are located within a public right-of-way and that have been
improperly posted or displayed are hereby declared to be a public nuisance and
NC
Packet Page 179 of 196
18
shall be subject to immediate removal and confiscation per ECDC 20.60.090.
DD. Appendix J, Grading is amended as follows;
Section J103.2 Exemptions is deleted. See ECDC 19.00.025E(13)
NC
19.00.030 Architectural design review – Optional vesting.
In addition to the vesting rights created by RCW 19.27.095 and ECDC 19.00.015, an applicant
for development as defined in ECDC 20.10.010 and subject to architectural design board (ADB)
review may, at the applicant’s option, file a fully complete augmented architectural design review
application (hereinafter “augmented ADB application”) and vest rights including applicable
permit, development and impact fees under the provisions of the ECDC and the state building
code as adopted and amended by the city of Edmonds, this title as then in effect, to, but only to,
the extent that the application provides full and detailed information necessary to confirm the
particular regulation to be vested. The burden is on the applicant to provide such detail.
A. A fully complete, augmented application for architectural design review shall consist of a
complete application for architectural design review, executed by each and every property
owner of record of the development site or their duly authorized agent(s), accompanied by the
following:
1. All fees required by ordinance, including impact mitigation fees, to be deposited at the
time such State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) requirements become final.
2. A site plan showing the current zoning of the development site, the footprint of all
proposed structures, the total square footage and use of each floor, all setbacks required
by either the zoning code or state building codes, proposed parking configurations, and
exits.
3. Elevation drawings showing the original grade of the site, any proposed alterations to
grade, the proposed height of the structure and the number of stories.
4. A letter executed by all owners of record or their duly authorized agent(s) detailing the
proposed use in sufficient detail to determine whether the proposed use complies with the
zoning code then in effect and with the building code then in effect to determine type of
NC
Packet Page 180 of 196
19
construction and occupancy classifications of the IBC and IFC as those codes then in
effect.
5. A building permit application, as described in IBC Section 105.3 as the same exists or
is hereafter amended, and all building permit and plan review fees as established and set
forth in Chapter 19.70 ECDC; provided, that the plans required by IBC Section 106 107,
as the same exists or is hereafter amended, and other engineering documents, plans or
drawings required by ECDC Title 18 may be submitted within 90 days of final ADB
approval, or final approval on appeal.
B. Upon filing of the augmented ADB application, the applicant shall be deemed fully vested as if
a fully complete building permit application had been filed; provided:
1. The burden shall be upon the applicant to supply all material required by the provisions
of this section and as necessary to meet the requirements of Chapter 20.10 ECDC. The
applicant may supplement the original application in the event an application is deemed
incomplete by the development services director or designee. Vesting shall occur only
when the application is deemed complete by the development services director. Failure to
supplement an incomplete application within 90 days of final ADB approval shall result in
forfeiture of all fees paid and no vesting right shall attach.
2. The application shall expire along with all rights vested 180 days following the date of
application if final architectural design approval is not received.
a. The development services director or designee may issue an extension for an
additional period, not exceeding 180 days, upon written request by the applicant(s)
or their agent(s). Such request for extension shall be filed prior to the expiration of
the original application time period. An extension shall be granted if the architectural
design board has not yet considered the application or an appeal thereof is pending.
b. The time period shall run concurrently with the periods established by ECDC
19.00.005 as the same exists or is hereafter amended. No application shall be
extended more than once. In order to renew an application after expiration, the
applicant shall resubmit all required information and pay a new plan review fee.
3. The applicant shall comply with all provisions of state law and regulation and this code
regarding SEPA review. Review periods or delays occasioned by SEPA shall stay the
Packet Page 181 of 196
20
time periods set by this chapter.
4. Following final ADB approval, the applicant shall file the plans and information required
by IBC Section 106
a. Any substantial change not required by the terms of ADB approval.
107. It is anticipated that minor adjustments and changes may and
are usually required to the plans submitted as a result of the plan review and
administrative process; provided, that the following changes shall not be considered
“minor” and shall forfeit vesting rights, and shall require the filing of a new application:
b. Any increase in height or total square footage or any change which would change
the occupancy classification for the purposes of the State Building Code.
5. Any decision of the city staff regarding the application stated in this section and its
interpretation shall be considered a Type I decision appealable only to the superior court
of Snohomish County by Land Use Petition Act.
C. The rights vested by ECDC 19.00.025 I (section 105.3.3 of IBC as amended) and this section
refer only to zoning and building code rights protected by RCW 19.27.095.
D. These sections shall not be interpreted to create vesting rights not protected by RCW
19.27.095 and shall not be interpreted as a further limitation on the administrative obligations
and legislative powers of the city. By way of illustration and not limitation, this chapter does not
limit:
1. The city council’s authority to create local improvement districts.
2. The city council’s authority to legislate life safety requirements that are not required to
recognize existing vested rights.
3. Environmental and shorelines review and mitigation procedures.
Packet Page 182 of 196
21
International Residential Code (IRC)
19.05.000 International Residential Code adopted.
The International Residential Code (IRC), 2009 Edition, published by the International Code
Council, as amended by the Washington State Building Code Council in Chapter 51-51 WAC,
and as subsequently amended by this chapter, is hereby adopted along with Appendix Chapters
A, B, C, G, K and R.
Language simplified.
19.05.005 Section amendments.
Chapter one (1) is not adopted. See ECDC 19.00.015
This supports the use of IBC chapter one (1) for the administrative provisions
Packet Page 183 of 196
22
The following sections of the IRC are herby amended as follows:
A. Table R301.2(1) Climatic and Geographic Design Criteria, is amended with the following
criteria:
1. Ground Snow Load = 25 psf
2. Wind Speed(d) = 85 mph
3. Topographical effects(k) = No
4. Seismic Design Category(f) = D2
5. Weathering(a) = moderate
6. Frost Line Depth(b) = 18 inches
7. Termite(c) = slight to moderate
8. Winter Design Temp(e) = 27 degrees F
9. Flood Hazard(g) = NFIP adoption 3/26/74. FIRM maps 11/8/99
10. Ice Shield Underlayment(h) = not required
11. Air Freezing Index(i) = 0-1000
12. Mean Annual Temp(j) = 50 degrees F
These are the required design criteria for City of Edmonds.
No change from previous
B. Section R324 Automatic fire sprinkler system, is added and reads;
An automatic fire sprinkler system is required for buildings containing five (5) or more attached
dwelling units. Refer to ECDC 19.25.040.
NC
19.05.02510 Manufactured home installation standards.
A. Permit Regulations.
1. Chapter 296-150M WAC, as currently promulgated together with any future
amendments thereof, or future additions thereto, is hereby adopted by reference and
incorporated into the ECDC as if set forth herein in full. The building official is authorized
to issue building permits and collect permit fees for the installation of all manufactured
homes that meet the requirements of this chapter, to inspect the installation of
manufactured homes, and enforce all violations of this chapter.
NC
Packet Page 184 of 196
23
2. All references to “installation permits” in Chapter 296-150M WAC, as herein adopted by
reference, shall refer to building permits issued for the installation of manufactured
homes.
3. Fees for the installation of a manufactured home shall be set forth in Chapter 19.70
ECDC. All other applicable development fees shall also be imposed as with any other
single-family residence.
4. Mobile homes are permitted only within designated mobile home parks.
5. Pursuant to added RCW 35.21.897, 35A.21.310, 36.01.220, and amended RCW
35.63.160 and 1998 c 239 s 1, homes built to 42 USC Section 5401 through 5403
standards (as amended in 2000) shall be regulated for the purposes of siting, in the same
manner as site-built homes, factory-built homes, or homes built to any other approved
state construction.
6. Manufactured homes to be placed within the city shall not be older than three calendar
years from the date of complete permit application submittal. The applicant is required to
provide the vehicle identification number (VIN) information.
7. All spaces measured from the underside of the home to finished grade shall be
enclosed with a decorative skirting.
8. Manufactured homes shall be thermally equivalent to the current State Energy Code.
9. The minimum manufactured home size shall be at least two fully enclosed parallel
sections each not less than 12 feet wide by 36 feet long.
Packet Page 185 of 196
24
10. Coated metal, tin, or vinyl roofing material is not permitted.
11. Manufactured homes shall comply with all other development standards of this code.
[Ord. 3651 § 1, 2007].
International Mechanical Code and Fuel Gas Code (IMC & IFGC)
19.15.000 International Mechanical Code adopted.
The International Mechanical Code (IMC), 2009 Edition, published by the International Code
Council, as amended by the Washington State Building Code Council in Chapter 51-52 WAC,
and as subsequently amended by this chapter is hereby adopted.
Language is simplified otherwise no c hange.
19.15.005 Amendments
Chapter one (1) is not adopted. See ECDC 19.00.015
This supports the use of IBC chapter one (1) for the administrative provisions
Packet Page 186 of 196
25
19.15.010 International Fuel Gas Code adopted.
The International Fuel Gas Code, 2009 Edition, published by the International Code Council, as
amended by the Washington State Building Code Council in Chapter 51-52 WAC inclusive of
NFPA 54 and 58, and as subsequently amended by this chapter, is hereby adopted.
19.15.015 Amendments
Chapter one (1) is not adopted. See ECDC 19.00.015
Language is simplified otherwise no change.
This supports the use of IBC chapter one (1) for the administrative provisions
Uniform Plumbing Code
19.20.000 Uniform Plumbing Code adopted.
The Uniform Plumbing Code (UPC), 2009 Edition, published by the International Association of
Plumbing and Mechanical Officials, as amended by the Washington State Building Code Council
in Chapter 51-56 WAC, and as subsequently amended by this chapter; provided that any
provisions that affect fuel gas piping are not adopted, is hereby adopted.
2009 reference and language is simplified otherwise no change
19.20.005 Amendments.
Chapter one (1) is not adopted. See ECDC 19.00.015
Packet Page 187 of 196
26
Section 1014 Grease traps and interceptors, is deleted. See ECC 7.90
Section 1016 Sand Interceptors, is deleted
Section 1017 Oil and flammable liquids interceptors, is deleted.
Chapter 12 Fuel piping, is deleted
Chapter 15 Firestop protection, is deleted
19.20.010 Evidence of potable water.
Prior to the issuance of any building permit for new development, the building official shall
require substantive evidence of an adequate potable water supply from the purveyor of water to
the site for which a building permit is requested. For those areas lying within the service area of
the city of Edmonds water utility, the notification from a duly authorized representative of the
city's water utility shall be sufficient; provided, nothing herein shall be interpreted to prevent the
city or any of its water purveyors from declaring a moratorium or other water emergency limiting
or otherwise restricting the availability of adequate potable water. Applicants relying on a well
shall provide a copy of applicable state approval for the appropriation and a current test of water
quality by a qualified laboratory. [Ord. 3651 § 1, 2007].
NC
Washington State Energy Code
19.30.000 State Energy Code adopted.
The Washington State Energy Code, 2009 Edition, as adopted and amended by the Washington
State Building Code Council in Chapter 51-11 WAC, is hereby adopted.
2009 reference otherwise NC
Packet Page 188 of 196
27
International Property Maintenance Code
19.40.000 International Property Maintenance Code adopted.
The International Property Maintenance Code, 2009 Edition, published by the International Code
Council, is hereby adopted.
This is a new code adoption. The International Property Maintenance Code (IPMC) replaces the
Uniform Housing Code and the Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings, which
are deleted. The IPMC is formatted to work in conjunction with the IBC and the International
Existing Building Code (IEBC).
19.40.005 Amendments.
There are some amendments necessary to make this code work with our current enforcement
and appeal process.
A. Section 102.3 Application of other codes, is amended to read:
Repairs, additons or alterations to a structure, or changes of occupancy shall be done in
accordance with the procedures and provisions of the codes listed in 19.00.005.
Nothing in this code shall be construed to cancel, modify or set aside any provision of
the ECDC.
This makes the tie to the ECDC, which thereby links the IPMC to our zoning provisions
B. Section 106 Violations, is deleted and replaced as follows;
Violation of any provisions of this code are subject to the Civil Violation – Enforcement
procedures in Chapter 20.110 ECDC.
This section removes the violation process in the IPMC and references the processes laid out in
the ECDC.
C. Sections 108.2 Closing of vacant structures, 108.3 Notice, 108.4 Placarding, 108.5
Prohibited occupancy, 108.6 Abatement methods and 108.7 Record, are deleted
and replaced by the provisions of Chapter 20.110 ECDC
Again using enforcement process of the ECDC
D. Section 111 Means of Appeal, is deleted and replaced by ECDC section 20.110.040
C.
Appeal process of ECDC replace those laid out in IPMC
E. Section 302 is deleted
Packet Page 189 of 196
28
F. Section 303 is deleted
G. Section 308 is deleted
H. Section 309 is deleted
These sections are deleted to avoid conflict with ECDC zoning code and municipal code
nuisance regulations.
International Existing Building Code
19.50.000 International Existing Building Code adopted.
The International Existing Buildings Code, 2009 Edition, published by the International Code
Council, as amended by the Washington State Building Code Council in Chapter 51-50 WAC,
and as subsequently amended by this chapter, is hereby adopted.is hereby adopted along with
Appendix Chapter A (Guidelines for the seismic retrofit of existing buildings) and Resource A
(Guidelines on fire ratings of archaic materials and assemblies).
The International Existing Building Code (IEBC) is a new adoption. This replaces the old
Washington State Historic Building Code, which is no longer supported by the State. The Code
is adopted along with the State amendments.
Electrical Code
19.55.000 National Electrical Code adopted.
Under the statutory authority of RCW 19.27.031 and 19.27.074, the National Electrical Code,
2002 2008 Edition, as published by the National Fire Protection Association, is hereby adopted
as the electrical code for the city of Edmonds subject to the amendments made herein. The
State of Washington Department of Labor and Industries, Electrical Inspection Section, Rules
and Regulations for Installing Electric Wiring and Equipment and Administrative Rules, 2002
2008 Edition, is hereby adopted as part of the electrical code of the city of Edmonds.
Reference to the 2008 edition of the National Electrical Code. Otherwise NC
Packet Page 190 of 196
29
19.55.005 When code effective.
If the state of Washington, through its duly designated electrical inspector or inspectors, for any
reason fails to continue to inspect electrical installation, license the same or provide the
standards, the provisions of the Edmonds electrical code as amended shall be applicable to all
electrical installation in the city as if the state of Washington had not exercised jurisdiction of any
kind.
NC
19.55.010 Nonliability.
This chapter shall not be construed to relieve or lessen the responsibility of any person owning,
operating or installing any electrical equipment for damages to anyone injured by a defect of the
equipment, nor shall the city or its agent be held as assuming any such liability by reason of the
inspection under this code or the certificate of inspection issued by the building department.
NC
19.55.015 Conflicts – How resolved.
If there is any conflict between the electrical code of the city, the National Electrical Code and/or
the rules and regulations as set forth by the state of Washington for electric wires and
equipment, then the conditions, requirements, provisions or terms which provide, in the opinion
of the building official, for the greatest public safety shall be observed and shall control.
NC
Packet Page 191 of 196
AM-3101 10.
Reconsideration of Funding Source for Climate Solutions New Energy Cities
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:06/01/2010
Submitted By:Jana Spellman
Submitted For:Councilman Strom Peterson Time:10 Minutes
Department:City Council Type:Action
Review Committee:
Committee Action:
Information
Subject Title
Reconsideration of funding source for Climate Solutions New Energy Cities.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
Previous Council Action
During the May 18, 2010 Edmonds City Council Meeting, Councilmember Peterson explained
Climate Solutions is an organization working with cities throughout the northwest to create new
energy cities via reducing their reliance on fossil fuels, encouraging the use of renewable energies,
and smart grid technology, all things that the Council has advocated in recent years. Climate
Solutions provided a proposal to partner with the City on a professional basis to create a
roadmap/guideline for Edmonds to become a leadership city in energy independence. Their
proposal includes short term (in the next few months), mid-term (18 months – 5 years), and long
range planning (up to 20 years). Climate Solutions requests the City provide $15,000. For that
investment, the City will receive approximately $35,000 worth of work due to Climate Solutions’
ability to leverage their connections.
Narrative
During the discussion regarding where funding of this proposal was to come from, two sources
were identified: Council Contingency Fund and the Council's Professional Budget line item. The
Council voted to fund this proposal from the Council's professional budget line item. Council
President Bernheim later determined that the appropriate funding source is the Council
Contingency Fund and is asking that the Council reconsider and vote to fund this proposal from
the Council Contingency Fund and rescind the decision to fund it from the Council's professional
budget line item.
Attachment 1: May 18, 2010 DRAFT Edmonds City Council Minutes
Attachment 2: Document showing Council Contingency Fund Balance
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: Attach: 1 - May 18 2010 Council Minutes - Climate Solutions
Link: Attach 2: Council Contingency Fund Doc
Packet Page 192 of 196
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 05/27/2010 12:06 PM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 05/27/2010 12:08 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 05/27/2010 12:10 PM APRV
Form Started By: Jana
Spellman
Started On: 05/21/2010 09:29
AM
Final Approval Date: 05/27/2010
Packet Page 193 of 196
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 18, 2010
Page 13
10. PRESENTATION ON CLIMATE SOLUTIONS NEW ENERGY CITIES.
Councilmember Peterson explained Climate Solutions is an organization working with cities throughout
the northwest to create new energy cities via reducing their reliance on fossil fuels, encouraging the use of
renewable energies, and smart grid technology, all things that the Council has advocated in recent years.
Climate Solutions has provided a proposal to partner with the City on a professional basis to create a
roadmap/guideline for Edmonds to become a leadership city in energy independence. Their proposal
includes short term (in the next few months), mid-term (18 months – 5 years), and long range planning
(up to 20 years). Climate Solutions requests the City provide $15,000. For that investment, the City will
receive approximately $35,000 worth of work due to Climate Solutions’ ability to leverage their
connections.
In the short term, Climate Solutions will create an action plan specific to Edmonds in consultation with
government, business, environmental and community leaders as well as the public. Climate Solutions has
reviewed the City’s Sustainability Element as well as work done by Sustainable Edmonds and the
Mayor’s Climate Protection Committee. Although he has long been a supporter of this type of effort,
Councilmember Peterson noted it is clear in light of the recent environmental disaster in the Gulf of
Mexico that the public needs to take responsibility for its addiction to oil. Other advantages to this effort
include economic development, job creation, public safety and public health and investing locally.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas expressed support for the City’s participation. She asked the source of
the $15,000 expenditure. Councilmember Peterson answered options include, 1) the funds from Fire
District 1, or 2) the Council Contingency Fund. He noted although the Council dedicated the Fire District
1 funds to capital investment, he viewed the end product as an investment in infrastructure.
Council President Bernheim recalled the only appropriations from the Council Contingency Fund were
$5,000 for Cascade Land Conservancy and $5,000 for Sustainable Edmonds. Councilmember Wilson
advised the total amount in the Council Contingency Fund was $20,000. Council President Bernheim
preferred not to use the Fire District 1 funds without further discussion.
Councilmember Wilson suggested the $15,000 be taken from the ending cash balance. Although there
may be good reasons to use the Fire District 1 funds, he preferred not to set that precedence. He noted the
savings from not filling the Development Services Director position could be allocated toward this
expenditure.
Councilmember Peterson commented Cascade Land Conservancy was another excellent example of a
partnership. The City has 25 hours of staff time from Cascade Land Conservancy and they have expressed
willingness to work with the Economic Development Committee on the neighborhoods of Westgate and
Five Corners. He urged the Council to make a decision regarding Climate Solutions tonight; one of the
reasons they are able to provide Edmonds a good deal is economy of scale with other cities joining at the
same time.
Council President Bernheim expressed support for partnering with Climate Solutions but preferred to wait
until a specific funding source was identified. He suggested Councilmember Peterson provide funding
options at a future meeting including the balance in the Council Contingency Fund. Mayor Haakenson
advised there was a sufficient amount in the Council Contingency Fund for this expenditure. Council
President Bernheim expressed his support with funding from the Council Contingency Fund.
Councilmember Wilson advised approximately $76,000 was budgeted for Council professional services
and anticipated funding was available from that source. He anticipated the funds in the Council
Contingency Fund would be needed for a levy committee.
Packet Page 194 of 196
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 18, 2010
Page 14
COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, TO
ACCEPT CLIMATE SOLUTIONS’ PROPOSAL AS PRESENTED WITH FUNDS FROM THE
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PORTION OF THE COUNCIL BUDGET. MOTION CARRIED (4-
1), COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT VOTING NO.
11. DISCUSSION OF INTERNET WIRELESS ACCESS FOR COUNCIL CHAMBERS.
Council President Bernheim commented it would be useful for Councilmembers to have internet access
during Council meetings as it would allow them to access the City’s databases and codes, minutes of past
meetings, etc. He recalled the issue was raised when Councilmember Wilson was Council President and it
was resolved at the Council retreat to have internet access installed at the dais. It was originally planned
to be installed in March and was later promised for mid-May. If staff was too busy to do the installation,
he suggested the Council Assistant engage someone to do the installation.
Student Representative Marmion asked if the Ethernet ports under the dais were active. Council President
Bernheim advised they were not currently functional. He asked if City Clerk Sandy Chase had wired
internet at her seat in the Council Chambers. Ms. Chase answered certain areas in the Council Chambers
have wired internet. Mayor Haakenson advised Finance Director Lorenzo Hines was working on it and
had emailed Council President Bernheim an updated timeline. He assured staff would get it done although
it was not a top priority. The Council was welcome to hire an independent contractor. Council President
Bernheim requested Mr. Hines be removed from the project and he would coordinate it himself.
Councilmember Wilson commented the Council had given the Council President authority to move
forward expeditiously. He recognized Mr. Hines had other more important priorities. Mayor Haakenson
answered it was not Mr. Hines, it was the City’s Information Technology staff of 2½ people that do not
have time. Councilmember Wilson recognized the City was so under capitalized it did not have the
resources to undertake the Council’s requests whether it was financial data, inventorying carbon
emissions, etc. He suggested Council President Bernheim provide information to the Council regarding
hiring someone to provide internet access in Council Chambers.
12. DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON REQUEST TO MAYOR OF CITY OF EDMONDS
BY EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL FOR INFORMATION REGARDING LEGAL FEES PAID BY
THE CITY OF EDMONDS FROM JANUARY 1, 2009 THROUGH APRIL 28, 2010.
Council President Bernheim commented this was another example of accommodating the busy City staff.
He requested a printout of the 2009 legal fees from the vouchers that indicated who it was paid to, the
amount, and the description. That information would allow the Council to see what law firms are paid by
the City and for what purpose which could be used in the analysis of the City’s legal fees. He advised the
2009 budget for legal fees did not divide it into payee such as the fiber optics lawyer, bond counsel,
Ogden Murphy Wallace, etc. He expressed concern that the information he requested had not been
provided by staff and asked whether the Council supported his request for that information. He had been
offered as an alternative all the legal bills from Ogden Murphy Wallace; however, his intent was to
determine the total amount the City expended on legal services.
Mayor Haakenson assured Council President Bernheim that his request had not been ignored but as his
email stated, the Finance Department is very busy and understaffed; Mr. Hines would get to his request at
some point but it could be several months. Council President Bernheim responded he was interested in
receiving the information sooner.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas observed the answer was provided by Ms. Bloom via her public records
request. The underlying issue is an in-house attorney versus a contract attorney. Recognizing little could
be done at the present time because the City is contracted with Ogden Murphy Wallace through 2011, she
recommended the Council continue to evaluate an in-house versus a contract attorney and whether there
Packet Page 195 of 196
Pa
c
k
e
t
Pa
g
e
19
6
of
19
6