The URL can be used to link to this page

2011.04.19 CC Agenda Packet AGENDA EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL Council Chambers, Public Safety Complex 250 5th Ave. North, Edmonds APRIL 19, 2011 6:00 p.m. - Executive session regarding labor negotiations. (Jury Meeting Room) 6:30 p.m. - Meeting with candidates for appointment to the Planning Board. (Jury Meeting Room) AM-3883 Information for meeting with Planning Board candidates. 7:00 p.m. - Call to Order and Flag Salute 1. (5 Minutes) Approval of Agenda 2. (5 Minutes) Approval of Consent Agenda Items A.Roll Call B. AM-3866 Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of April 5, 2011. C. AM-3881 Approval of claim checks #124759 through #124902 dated April 7, 2011 for $2,141,127.63, and claim checks #124903 through #125018 dated April 14, 2011 for $215,589.91. Approval of payroll direct deposit and checks #50320 through #50349 for the period March 16, 2011 through March 31, 2011 for $638,444.25. D. AM-3884 Acknowledge receipt of a Claim for Damages submitted by Linda Baker ($8,700.51). E. AM-3870 Operations policy for Shell Valley emergency access road. F. AM-3846 Authorization to surplus and sell Police Department equipment. G. AM-3848 Close out subcontract 87898, Puget Sound Small Vessel PRND (Preventive Radiological/Nuclear Detection). Packet Page 1 of 299 H. AM-3879 Senior Center Recreational Services Agreement. I. AM-3872 Authorization for Mayor to sign the contract with the Edmonds-South Snohomish County Historical Society for the 2011 Edmonds Market. J. AM-3871 Authorization for the Mayor to sign the contract with the Edmonds Arts Festival Association for the 2011 Edmonds Arts Festival. K. AM-3873 Authorization for the Mayor to sign the contract with the Greater Edmonds Chamber of Commerce for the 4th of July parade and fireworks display. L. AM-3874 Authorization for the Mayor to sign the contract with the Greater Edmonds Chamber of Commerce for the 2011 Taste of Edmonds. M. AM-3876 Authorization for the Mayor to sign the contract with the Greater Edmonds Chamber of Commerce for the 2011 Classic Car Show. N. AM-3869 Authorization for Mayor to sign utility easements for the Lift Station 2 Improvements Project. O. AM-3868 Traffic Impact Fee Annual Report. P. AM-3885 Quarterly report regarding fiber optic opportunities. Q. AM-3847 Ordinance - Adopt by reference RCW 9A.56.063, making or possessing motor vehicle theft tools. 3. (10 Minutes) AM-3880 Update by Community Transit. 4. (45 Minutes) AM-3875 Public hearing on proposed Code amendment to ECDC 20.20 (Home Occupations). Proposed changes include shifting the process from Type 3-B (Hearing Examiner Review) to Type 2 (Staff Decision) while retaining notice and appeal rights. Also proposed are changes that would set limits for potential home occupations, as well as establishing new rules for urban farmers and artist studios. 5.Audience Comments (3 minute limit per person)* *Regarding matters not listed on the Agenda as Closed Record Review or as Public Hearings. 6. (30 Minutes) AM-3878 Discussion of Levy Options. 7. AM-3867 Report on City Council Committee Meetings of April 5 and April 12, 2011. 8. (5 Minutes) Mayor's Comments 9. (15 Minutes) Council Comments ADJOURN Packet Page 2 of 299 AM-3883 Item #: City Council Meeting Date: 04/19/2011 Time: Submitted For:Mike Cooper Submitted By:Kim Cole Department:Mayor's Office Review Committee: Committee Action: Type:Action Information Subject Title Information for meeting with Planning Board candidates. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Council interviews of two candidates for two openings on the planning board. Mayor recommends Neil Tibbott to fill the open vacancy of the Planning Board. Mayor recommends William Ellis to fill the vacancy for Planning Board Alternate. Previous Council Action Narrative Attachments William Ellis Neil Tibbott Mayor Planning Board Appointment Letter Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Final Approval Sandy Chase 04/14/2011 01:10 PM Form Started By: Kim Cole Started On: 04/14/2011 10:47 AM Final Approval Date: 04/14/2011 Packet Page 3 of 299 Packet Page 4 of 299 Packet Page 5 of 299 Date: April 15, 2011 To: Council President Peterson, City Council members From: Mike Cooper, Mayor Subject: I am pleased to announce my appointment of Neil Tibbott to the vacant position on the Planning Board and request that he be placed on the April 19th meeting agenda for a confirmation interview. Planning Board Appointment of Neil Tibbott As you are aware, Neil most recently served on the city Transportation Advisory Committee for several years. In addition, he has a broad background in community service and education that will make him a valued addition to the board. I am sure you will agree with me that Neil will be a welcome addition and look forward to having you confirm him. Thank you very much for your consideration. CITY OF EDMONDS Mike Cooper CITY HALL • THIRD FLOOR MAYOR EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (425)771-0246 • FAX (425)771-0252 OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Packet Page 6 of 299 AM-3866 Item #: 2. B. City Council Meeting Date: 04/19/2011 Time:Consent Submitted By:Sandy Chase Department:City Clerk's Office Review Committee: Committee Action: Type:Action Information Subject Title Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of April 5, 2011. 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. Attachments 04-05-11 Draft City Council Minutes Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Mayor Mike Cooper 04/14/2011 09:06 AM Final Approval Sandy Chase 04/14/2011 09:08 AM Form Started By: Sandy Chase Started On: 04/13/2011 10:50 AM Final Approval Date: 04/14/2011 Packet Page 7 of 299 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 5, 2011 Page 1 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL DRAFT MINUTES April 5, 2011 The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Cooper in the Council Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Mike Cooper, Mayor Strom Peterson, Council President Steve Bernheim, Councilmember D. J. Wilson, Councilmember (arrived 7:03 p.m.) Michael Plunkett, Councilmember Lora Petso, Councilmember Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember STAFF PRESENT Al Compaan, Police Chief Gerry Gannon, Assistant Police Chief Stephen Clifton, Community Services/Economic Development Director Phil Williams, Public Works Director Carrie Hite, Parks & Recreation Director Rob Chave, Planning Manager Leonard Yarberry, Building Official Debi Humann, Human Resources Director Frances Chapin, Cultural Services Manager Stephen Koho, Treatment Plant Manager Renee McRae, Recreation Manager Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Sandy Chase, City Clerk Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst. Jeannie Dines, Recorder 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. (Councilmember Wilson was not present for the vote.) 2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS Councilmembers Plunkett and Fraley-Monillas requested Item F be removed from the Consent Agenda. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETSO, TO APPROVE THE REMAINDER OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. (Councilmember Wilson was not present for the vote.) The agenda items approved are as follows: A. ROLL CALL B. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF MARCH 22, 2011. C. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #124514 THROUGH #124626 DATED MARCH 24, 2011 FOR $637,329.90, AND CLAIM CHECKS #124627 THROUGH #124758 DATED MARCH 31, 2011 FOR $184,819.96. Packet Page 8 of 299 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 5, 2011 Page 2 D. ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES SUBMITTED BY CLAUDINE LAPIERRE-MACDONALD (AMOUNT UNDETERMINED). E. APPROVAL OF 2011 TAXICAB OPERATOR'S LICENSE FOR YELLOW CAB OF WASHINGTON. G. APPROVAL OF FINDINGS REGARDING THE MARCH 15, 2011 CLOSED RECORD REVIEW OF THE HEARING EXAMINER’S RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE A FENCE HEIGHT VARIANCE FOR PUD (FILE NO. PLN20100070). H. ORDINANCE NO. 3838 – AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF THE EDMONDS CITY CODE, SECTION 3.05.110, RELATED TO TRANSFER AUTHORITY WITHIN THE EQUIPMENT RENTAL FUND. I. RESOLUTION NO. 1248 – REGARDING THE CITY OF EDMONDS PARTICIPATING IN FIRST LADY MICHELLE OBAMA'S "LET'S MOVE!" CAMPAIGN ITEM F: APPROVAL OF A SITE LEASE FOR ROOF SPACE ON THE FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER AND AN ENERGY SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH THE EDMONDS COMMUNITY SOLAR COOPERATIVE TO FACILITATE CONSTRUCTION OF A 75 KW COMMUNITY SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEM. AUTHORIZATION FOR THE MAYOR TO SIGN THESE AGREEMENTS IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE SAME FORM AS PRESENTED. Councilmember Plunkett referred to the roof warranty in Section 7.4 of the Facility Site Lease Agreement, observing the Co-op intends to install the solar panels with the assistance of installers and the manufacturer and hopefully keep the warranty in place. He referred to a memo to the Council from Public Works Director Phil Williams that states the Co-op does not want to take responsibility if the warranty is violated despite best efforts to install the panels. Mr. Williams agreed, noting in addition to the information in the Council packet, staff received a letter from Soprema, the roof manufacturer, that outlines the steps the City must follow that would lead to a presumption of the warranty remaining in place. The steps include their being present to see how the panels are installed, their approving how the panels are installed, use of a particular layer to create a barrier between the frames of the solar units and the roof, and having a structural analysis done. If all those things are done, there is a presumption that the roof warranty will remain. He explained the City will learn whether the roof is covered when a claim is made against the warranty. The letter from the manufacturer sets the City up to make a good case that unless it can be shown that a leak in the roof was caused by the solar panels, the warranty would be honored. If a leak is caused by the panels, the warranty will not be honored but the proponents have insurance that would cover the City. Councilmember Plunkett acknowledged the Co-op had insurance but according to the agreement, they will not be held liable for the roof even if after all the terms are met, the roof is damaged. Mr. Williams explained the insurance is there for that purpose as well as many other broader purposes. If it can be shown that the panels caused a failure of the roof, any consequent damage of that failure would be covered by the Co-op’s insurance. The Co-op does not want to be liable for a future decision by Soprema not to honor the roof warranty simply because of the panels, regardless of whether it can be proven they caused damage. Councilmember Plunkett summarized the Co-op will not be responsible for the roof other than insurance. Mr. Williams agreed. Councilmember Plunkett referred to language in Section 11 of the Facility Site Lease Agreement, “at all times during the term of this agreement, leasee and leasor shall each at its own respective cost and expense…” and asked what additional insurance costs were anticipated for the City. Mr. Williams answered that is a placeholder for the City’s participation. If the City has insurance, it is their obligation Packet Page 9 of 299 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 5, 2011 Page 3 to maintain that insurance. The Co-op will have insurance as required by the agreement and assume all the costs for that insurance. For Councilmember Plunkett, City Attorney Jeff Taraday explained he did not draft the agreement but it is largely the same as was presented to the Council previously. The insurance provisions in the lease refer to the insurance provisions in the solar agreement. The solar agreement states participation in a governmental insurance pool qualifies as insurance coverage usual and typical for the customer. The City’s participation in the WCIA insurance pool is all the City needs to do as far as obtaining insurance for the purpose of the agreements. The City is not under any obligation to purchase additional insurance. Councilmember Plunkett asked whether the Co-op had applied for a bond to insure removal of the system from the roof. Mr. Williams answered the Co-op had obtained quotes from a bonding company. That will be part of the checklist before any physical construction occurs on the roof. A number of issues will be addressed in the design including the structural analysis, the roof warranty, etc. Councilmember Petso thanked everyone who spoke with her over the past few weeks. She explained she did not vote in favor of this a few weeks ago due to her concerns with an apparent inequity in the lease rate versus what the amount of public space might generally be rented particularly for a private project that was capable of producing a revenue stream. Her second issue dates back a decade ago when the Parks Director explained it was the City’s obligation to make the Frances Anderson Center (FAC) safer for the thousands of people who use the building. That launched the City on a decade-long series of improvements including electrical and seismic upgrades. She is now being asked to approve a project without knowing how it will affect the seismic upgrade. She understood that question cannot be answered yet because Co-Op does not want to invest in a structural evaluation until they have a site secured; conversely, she does not want to commit to the project, only to learn it will undo millions in seismic improvements. She summarized those were the reasons she voted no previously and the reasons she would vote no again tonight. Councilmember Wilson commented when the Council last reviewed the agreements, he suggested he had several changes to make. The previous agreement was provided to the Council the Friday before the Tuesday meeting; he received it the Monday before the meeting. When he reviewed the agreement, there was language that committed the City to guaranteeing all potential revenue for the project which he felt was inappropriate. That language has since been removed from the agreement. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if leasing the roof for perhaps below market rate is a gift of public funds. Mr. Williams agreed the lease payment is a nominal amount, $249/year. For the solar project to be located on the City-owned roof space, there needs to be a lease and a functioning, legal lease requires financial consideration. There has not been any suggestion that the lease amount is market rate; it would be difficult to establish the market rate for unused roof space on a public building. This is the first request the City has had and there are few other examples to establish the market rate. In determining a reasonable total compensation package to the City to allow the project to be located on the roof, he suggested the Council look beyond the $249/year lease payment and look at the Energy Services Agreement where through conservative estimating, it is estimated the City will benefit approximately $31,000+ over the 10 year term of the lease agreement. That is the benefit to the City, not the $249/year lease payment. The policy question for the Council is whether those amounts represent reasonable financial consideration to the City to enter into these agreements compared to the risks the City assumes under the agreements. Councilmember Buckshnis asked Mr. Taraday whether renting below market rate was a gift of public funds. Mr. Taraday answered there is not a readily identifiable cost for leasing a roof, therefore, it is not clear that these rents are below market. Assuming for the sake of argument they are slightly below market, if someone were to allege this is an unconstitutional gift of public funds, the Supreme Court has Packet Page 10 of 299 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 5, 2011 Page 4 made it clear that they do not generally delve into the consideration in a contract such as this. If a legislative body such as the Edmonds City Council decides this contract is the right thing for Edmonds, it is unlikely to be overturned by a court on the grounds that it is a gift of public funds. One would need to show proof that the City intends to gift or that the return is grossly inadequate. Although he has not done a detailed, factual investigation of roof lease rates, he did not conclude that this would be violating the constitution as a gift of public funds. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas referred to an email from Parks & Recreation Director Carrie Hite regarding rates charged by other cities that indicated the value Edmonds will receive over the 10 year lease is more than other cities receive. Ms. Hite explained the City of Bellevue recently sent out an RFP to lease 140,000 square feet of roof space on the Bellevue Service Center. The compensation they requested for the lease is $2000 in upfront cost to assist with the cost of negotiating the lease and $100/month lease payment for the life of a 10-year lease. Bellevue is interested in a community solar project and the total compensation would be $14,000 for the life of a 10 year lease for a 140,000 square foot area. Ms. Hite explained there is a community solar project in Poulsbo via a partnership with the school district. Her research found that community solar cooperative is paying $2,210/year for 7500 square feet of roof space. The total payment to the school district for the 10 year lease would be $22,100. The discrepancy is whether there are energy savings. Her research found PSE is providing 10 cents/KWh and they will be purchasing solar power from the community solar project at a commensurate rate. There is a clause in the contract that does not escalate that rate more than 3 cents/KWh per year. If PSE rates increase more, savings can be realized. Ms. Hite explained Bainbridge Island has a very small, phased project. The first phase is a 5 kilowatt system installed by a private community solar cooperative on school district property. The community solar cooperative does not lease the space; in lieu of a lease, the school district receives the ownership of the system and energy from the system. She summarized these are examples of other community solar projects throughout the State. It is very new and there are not a lot of examples. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas summarized Edmonds will be charging rent of approximately $3000/year. Ms. Hite answered the lease rate is $249/year and the City will receive an energy credit of approximately $31,000 over a 10 year period. She summarized Edmonds would receive $31,000 over 10 years, Poulsbo would receive $22,000 and Bellevue would receive $14,000. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if the solar project will affect the seismic upgrades that were made to the FAC. Mr. Williams answered that will be addressed as part of the structural analysis done during design. There will be no construction on the roof until that question is definitively answered by professionals. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if that was addressed in the contract. Mr. Williams answered it was. Councilmember Plunkett asked where in the contract it was addressed. Building Official Leonard Yarberry explained as part of the building permit review for the installation of the panels, the seismic ability of the structure or any other structural components could not be reduced. The existing building code requires they be maintained or improved. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO APPROVE ITEM F (AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE SOLAR ENERGY FACILITIES SITE LEASE AGREEMENT AND THE SOLAR POWER ENERGY SERVICES AGREEMENT). Packet Page 11 of 299 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 5, 2011 Page 5 COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETSO, TO AMEND THE SOLAR ENERGY FACILITIES SITE LEASE AGREEMENT, PAGE 5, SECTION 7.4, ROOF WARRANTY, TO ADD THE FOLLOWING, “IF WARRANTY IS REVOKED BY ROOFING MANUFACTURER, COOPERATIVE SHALL BE LIABLE FOR THE ROOF.” Council President Peterson observed if the design of the project voids the roof warranty, the project does not go forward. Mr. Williams agreed. Council President Peterson asked if the Co-op’s insurance will cover a roof leak that occurred in the next ten years if the roof manufacturer claimed the warranty is void because of the solar panels. Mr. Williams answered their insurance would be responsible for any damage that resulted. Council President Peterson advised he would not support the amendment as that language is already in the agreement. Councilmember Plunkett commented the fact that insurance might cover a leak did not speak to losing the warranty. If the City lost the warranty on the roof, the Co-op is not responsible. Mr. Williams expressed concern with the broadness of the amendment, pointing out there could be other reasons Soprema may not honor the warranty other than the solar panels on the roof. Councilmember Plunkett agreed it was broad, explaining his belief that the entity responsible for installing the solar panels should be responsible for the warranty of the roof. Mayor Cooper asked Mr. Taraday to comment on how Councilmember Plunkett’s amendment would change the intent of Section 7.4. Mr. Taraday responded as he understood Councilmember Plunkett’s amendment, the Cooperative would become the new warrantor of the roof. Under the amendment, if anything happened to the roof, the City would first seek relief from the roof manufacturer but if relief was not provided by the roof manufacturer, the City would seek relief from the Co-op. Councilmember Plunkett clarified the intent would be for the term of the contract, not forever. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked what other things could void the roof warranty. Mr. Williams answered there is language in the warranty that is open to interpretation such as the level of maintenance to maintain the warranty such as no build up of any organic matter, bird feces, etc. The extent to which they enforce those provisions in honoring the warranty is unknown. The extent to which they honor the warranty is unknown until a claim is made. The term of the warranty is now 7 years because 3 years have elapsed on the 10 year warranty. If during the next 7 years the roof leaks and the City makes a claim against the warranty and the manufacturer does not honor the claim, they will need to cite a reason for not honoring the warranty. They could site one of the other reasons in the warranty or try to claim the failure of the roof was somehow the result of the solar panels. The City would then reference the letter from the manufacturer regarding the steps that needed to be taken to maintain the warranty. He reiterated the extent to which the manufacturer honors the warranty is unknown until a leak occurs; it is a moot issue if a leak does not occur within the 7 years remaining on the warranty. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas understood Councilmember Plunkett’s interest in the Co-op taking responsibility if the roof warranty was voided due to damage from the solar panels. She suggested a friendly amendment to add language such as “outside the parameters of general maintenance.” Councilmember Plunkett did not accept Councilmember Fraley-Monillas’ suggestion as a friendly amendment. Council President Peterson asked whether the entire FAC roof was covered by the warranty. Mr. Williams answered the warranty covers the sections of the roof that were replaced by Soprema in 2008. Council President Peterson asked if there were sections of the roof that were currently under warranty where solar panels will not be installed. Mr. Williams answered that was likely, noting the project would be built in phases as Sun Slices are sold and revenue available to build/install the panels. Packet Page 12 of 299 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 5, 2011 Page 6 Council President Peterson asked whether the intent of Councilmember Plunkett’s motion was for the Co- op to cover the warranty on parts of the roof where there were no solar panels. Councilmember Plunkett answered the effect the solar panels will have on the roof in general is unknown. He acknowledged his intent was for the part of the roof where the solar panels were located. Council President Peterson commented this is already addressed via the Co-op liability insurance. If the warranty is not continued, the Co-op’s insurance would cover the roof if there was a leak. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked what happened if the roof warranty is voided due to the City’s failure to do maintenance on the portions of the roof where the solar panels are located. Councilmember Plunkett answered in that instance he would suggest an executive session to discuss. Mayor Cooper suggested the Council confine their deliberations to the motion and amendment rather than what may happen if there is a claim. Mr. Williams commented it is unknown whether the Cooperative will sign the agreement if the amendment passes. AMENDMENT FAILED (2-5), COUNCILMEMBERS PLUNKETT AND PETSO VOTING YES. COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO AMEND THE SOLAR ENERGY FACILITIES SITE LEASE AGREEMENT, PAGE 7, SECTION 10.2.1, BOND FOR REMOVAL, REPLACE “GRANTOR” IN THE FIRST SENTENCE WITH “CITY COUNCIL.” Mr. Taraday advised Grantee and Grantor in that section should be changed to Leasee and Leasor. Mayor Cooper clarified the amendment would be to replace Leasor with City Council. Councilmember Buckshnis asked whether this would go through the City Council due to the importance. Mr. Taraday answered he was not certain what was typical for Edmonds; in other cities’ bond forms are typically reviewed by the City Attorney and staff but not taken to the City Council. Councilmember Bernheim commented on the Pt. Edwards area where the developer illegally removed trees and the subsequent tightening of tree removal regulations and requirement that the developer post a bond to rehabilitate the hillside, a matter that was handled administratively. He preferred to leave the matter of the bond to the administration, noting the Council should not micromanage this project any more than any other project. UPON ROLL CALL AMENDMENT FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS PLUNKETT, PETSO AND FRALEY-MONILLAS VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS WILSON, BERNHEIM AND BUCKSHNIS AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON VOTING NO. Councilmember Plunkett thanked Mr. Williams for his work on this project and answering everyone’s questions. He advised he would not support the motion. Councilmember Wilson echoed Councilmember Plunkett’s praise of Mr. Williams. He supported the motion, noting the project has intrinsic value beyond the dollars and cents and it is the type of leadership that the Edmonds community wants to take. Although he felt the benefits outweigh the downside, he highlighted the following concerns: • Solar Covenant, 10.2.4, gives the leasee the sole judgment to tell the City what to do with regard to creating a structure that blocked the sun on the solar panels. He did not like abdicating all authority to an outside entity beyond the City but was hopeful if there was ever a time something needed to be built that blocked the sun or a tree across the street grew, the matter could be resolved amicably. Packet Page 13 of 299 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 5, 2011 Page 7 • There is no termination without cause. The City is locked in for ten years. If the City goes away, the Co-op must be notified. If the Co-op sells or changes ownership, they do not have to notify the City. • In the Solar Agreement there is language, “customer is requested to keep such discretionary maintenance to the months of October through March.” He read that as optional and if maintenance was necessary during the summer, it could be done. Councilmember Wilson advised he was not nor did he plan to become a member of the Co-op and requested all Councilmembers disclose if they were members of the Co-op or intended to become a member. Council President Peterson advised he is not currently a member of the Co-op but once the motion passes, he has every intention of becoming a member. He was waiting to become a member until after the agreements were approved to avoid a conflict of interest. Councilmember Plunkett commented a Councilmember could financially gain from this project. Acknowledging that Council President Peterson would join the Co-op because he supported solar power rather than for financial gain, he asked how it would not be a conflict when a Councilmember could benefit financially. Mr. Taraday rephrased the question, whether there would be a conflict of interest if a member of a legislative body who was not in a position to gain financially, became in a position to financially gain after the vote was taken. He asked for an opportunity to look up the statute. Councilmember Plunkett observed it was up to the individual Councilmember, not the Council. Mr. Taraday agreed the conflict of interest provisions applied to each Councilmember individually. Councilmember Plunkett suggested it would be up to Council President Peterson whether he wanted Mr. Taraday to provide additional information. Councilmember Buckshnis suggested Council President Peterson would need to recuse himself from future votes on matters related to the solar project. Council President Peterson clarified he would need to recuse himself from any quasi judicial matters related to the solar project but on legislative matters, he would answer to the voters. Councilmember Petso advised she did not intend to participate in the Co-op. If Councilmembers became members, it may appear that was the reason the Council did not bargain harder on lease rates. She hoped to have an opportunity to participate personally in solar power in the future but not via this project. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas advised she would support the motion but did not plan to become a member of the Co-op. She viewed the project as an important part of the community and it was the right thing to do. THE VOTE ON THE MAIN MOTION CARRIED (5-2), COUNCILMEMBERS PLUNKETT AND PETSO VOTING NO. 3. REPORT ON NEW ENERGY CITIES ACTION PLAN. Council President Peterson reported the New Energy Cities program was first introduced to the Council in January 2010. The Council allocated $15,000 for a 1½ day workshop with Climate Solutions. That workshop was held on January 27 and 28 with nearly 60 participants. Participants included congressional staff, county staff, Port commissioners, school district personnel, local builders, city staff, members of PUD and PSE and a number of interested citizens. During the workshop the Climate Solutions team showed an energy map to illustrate sources and uses of energy in the City and the corresponding carbon footprint. From that participants began the development of a roadmap for the City which the Climate Solutions team used to create an action plan. It will be a three phase action plan that he anticipated will be Packet Page 14 of 299 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 5, 2011 Page 8 complete in late April/early May. He will provide the action plan to the Council prior to providing it to the public. Next steps include, 1) community/public engagement, 2) project development such as energy efficiency in City buildings and the Main Street project, 3) investigating public and private financing options, and 4) investigating policy initiatives. The Council already discussed some of the policy initiatives at their retreat. The participants at the workshop also developed some policy initiatives that he will present to the Council. He summarized he and the 60 participants believe the City’s money was well spent and anticipated the Council would be impressed with the action plan. The action plan will provide a roadmap toward becoming more energy efficient and less reliant on dirty forms of fuel. To the extend the action plan contained elements the Council would need to implement, Councilmember Wilson suggested a draft document be provided to the Council prior to preparation of a final document. Mayor Cooper clarified the document would be a report from the consultant with recommended actions. Council President Peterson clarified it is a final report with suggestions and recommendations. Mayor Cooper advised he may recommend the Council adopt some of the actions in the consultant report. 4. PUBLIC HEARING TO SURPLUS UTILITY ASSETS. Public Works Director Phil Williams explained there is a statutory requirement that a public hearing be held regarding the surplussing of utility assets. He referred to a list of equipment that staff proposes be surplussed such as gearboxes, motors, heat exchangers, and spare parts. He acknowledged some of the items were new such as spare parts for equipment that has been replaced. The items are primarily from the wastewater utility. He requested authorization to surplus the items either via an auction house or eBay, whichever is the most financially rewarding. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if any of the items can be recycled or donated such as the TV. Mr. Williams answered if a monetary return is not possible either through the auction house or eBay, recycling would be the next choice. Councilmember Buckshnis observed the TV was listed as scrap and asked if that meant no effort would be made to sell it. Mr. Williams advised scrap would include recycling. If it could be donated as a working item, that would be the third choice following a financial return. Mayor Cooper opened the public hearing. There were no members of the public present who wished to provide testimony. Mayor Cooper closed the public hearing. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 1249, DECLARING LISTED ASSETS, PURCHASED FOR UTILITY PURPOSES, TO BE SURPLUSSED TO THE NEEDS OF THE CITY AND AUTHORIZING THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR TO SELL SUCH SURPLUS ASSETS. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. (Councilmember Fraley-Monillas was not present for the vote.) 5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Don Hall, Edmonds, announced that Garden Gear, now Garden Gear & Gallery, at 102 5th Avenue North will be celebrating its 15th anniversary on Thursday, April 7 from 5:30 – 7:30 p.m. with food from local businesses including cupcakes by Frosted Cakes and Cupcakes, cheese from the Resident Cheesemonger, chocolate from Nana’s, as well as wine from Arista’s. They are offering 15% off all store purchases April 7 – 10 and drawings for a $25 gift certificate, a set of 3 OXO hand tools, and a fully planted spring planter. Garden Gear also encourages the public to visit their newly designed website at www.garden- gear.com for specials and promotions and to join their Facebook page. He recognized his wife, a talented artist and business owner. Packet Page 15 of 299 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 5, 2011 Page 9 Al Rutledge, Edmonds, referred to a March 22 hearing in Olympia regarding Lake Ballinger and an Interlocal Agreement between the City and Mountlake Terrace scheduled on next week’s Consent Agenda. He requested a report be provided regarding the March 22 hearing. Next, he pointed out the City has won several awards over the last ten years for their budget process. Mr. Rutledge then commented on property the City purchased for a park and an adjacent parcel was purchased by Burnstead Construction. There is an appeal underway which may result in the Burnstead property being available for purchase. He suggested a levy include funds to purchase that property. Frank Yamamoto, Edmonds, Chair of the Economic Development Commission (EDC), thanked the City for working with the EDC. He relayed the EDC’s unanimous recommendation to advertise/issue the Request for Proposal for a Strategic Plan (Agenda Item 7) and urged the Council to approve advertising/issuing the RFP. Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, referred to Agenda Item 8, advising he lives across the street from a BN zone and the existing setback and green area provides a great buffer for a commercial use in a residential zone. He did not support changing the setback in the BN zone. Next, he expressed disappointment in the Council’s inaction that condoned the vote by Council President Peterson. He suggested it would be illegal if Council President Peterson promoted a rezone on property he owned that would increase the value of the property. Similarly, Council President Peterson’s vote on the solar project was illegal. He objected to Council President Peterson promoting the solar project without previously mentioning that he would profit from the project as a future member of the Co-op. He objected to what he viewed as Council President Peterson using the taxpayers’ money for personal benefit. Steve Worthington, Edmonds, was shocked at Council President Peterson’s announcement of his intention before the vote was taken because he felt it tainted the entire process. Next, he commented the Council had involved itself in a very poor agreement that contained several unknowns. For example, the City expects to receive $31,000 over 10 years from the difference between 8 cents and 5 cents/KWh. However, the agreements do not mandate a certain level of KW production, there is no requirement for the Co-op to establish 75,000 KW. There are references to avoiding shade, areas that are unusable due to pipes and phased installation; therefore, the income stream from the project is unpredictable. He referred to the estimate of production in Exhibit B, which when multiplied by 3% was $21,000 over 10 years rather than $31,000. Further, if the cost escalates at 3% and the PUD rate remains static, the benefit to the City decreases. He suggested the roof top could be valued via an MIA opinion and that the City seek a competitive bid for the roof lease. He also suggested the proposed solar panels were not the latest generation and three and four later generation panels were available but would not be used. He anticipated this may be an antiquated operation in five years. 6. REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE AGREEMENT FOR LEGAL REPRESENTATION OF INDIGENT DEFENDANTS. Councilmember Petso relayed when this was reviewed by the Finance Committee, she disclosed that the City’s Public Defender, Jim Feldman, was her neighbor. She asked if she was required or had the option not to participate in this item since Mr. Feldman was her neighbor. Mr. Taraday advised unless there was some close familial relationship, the fact that they live in the same neighborhood did not disqualify her. Human Resources Director Debi Humann explained the current Agreement for Representation of Indigent Defendants between the City and Feldman & Lee expired December 31, 2010. An interim agreement was approved by Council allowing for the continuation of the service until a new agreement was negotiated and approved. The revised final agreement was reviewed by the Finance Committee on March 8. The Committee expressed a desire for comparable data which was included in the Council packet. The Committee also discussed video arraignments and the savings associated with that practice. The Council Packet Page 16 of 299 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 5, 2011 Page 10 packet contains research conducted by Assistant Police Chief Gerry Gannon regarding those savings. The Council packet also contains a copy of the new final agreement as well as the old version for comparison. The new Agreement is identical to the former with two exceptions; 1) the "Scope of and Payment for Legal Services to be Rendered" language, and, 2) amendments being considered regarding court rules related to the assignment of a lawyer. The former Agreement was funded on a "per case basis" with additional charges for special appearances and appeals. Mr. Feldman would agree to continue his Agreement on a "per case" basis but suggests that the City may prefer a flat monthly amount that would be all inclusive of other costs and fees. On an annual basis, it appears the flat monthly amount inclusive of additional fees would result in a slight savings over the per case fee structure with additional fees and costs. The revised final agreement reflects the monthly flat rate amount and language regarding possible changes to Washington State Supreme Court rules. Feldman & Lee have not increased their rates since at least January 1, 2002. Ms. Humann requested the Council approve the new final agreement between Feldman & Lee and the City. Councilmember Petso asked whether the per case basis would be more favorable if the State allowed a different processing of Driving While License Suspended (DWLS). Mr. Feldman answered if DWLS were not filed as a criminal case, they would not be involved in the process and would not charge on a per case basis. The Supreme Court has not yet defined caseload limitations with regard to when a case starts. Councilmember Petso summarized the City may not be able to avoid per case charges for DWLS depending on what the Supreme Court decides. Mr. Feldman agreed. Councilmember Petso referred to the comparables, noting Feldman & Lee represents several cities and some other cities have a significantly different per case cost than Edmonds, one of them as low as $69/case. Mr. Feldman answered the driving force for the per case amount was volume; having an attorney in court for 8 hours was different than one attorney handling one 2-hour case. For example when they provided public defender services for Bothell, they were paid an hourly rate to handle one case on an in-custody calendar versus in Edmonds where they might handle 30-40 cases on a calendar. Councilmember Petso noted the per case rate for Mountlake Terrace is $100 or $75,000/year based on their caseload. Edmonds would pay $130/case. Mr. Feldman explained Mountlake Terrace shares a calendar with Mill Creek and they share the calendar costs. Councilmember Plunkett asked whether City Attorney Jeff Taraday had reviewed the contract. Mr. Taraday responded he did not negotiate the contract but had reviewed it as part of the packet and did not have any concerns with it. Councilmember Petso expressed her preference to continue the per case fee in hope that the caseload could be reduced by eliminating DWLS cases. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETSO, TO AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE CONTRACT WITH THE PROVISION FOR A PER CASE FEE. Councilmember Petso commented the costs on a per case basis and a flat monthly fee were similar. There is a chance that a different process may be implemented for DWLS which would reduce the number of cases, making a per case basis less expensive. Packet Page 17 of 299 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 5, 2011 Page 11 Councilmember Fraley-Monillas inquired about the difference between the per case and flat monthly fee. Councilmember Bernheim advised the flat rate was $151,000 versus approximately $156,000 for the per case rate. Mayor Cooper clarified the language in Section 4a on Page 2 of the agreement regarding a fixed monthly fee of $12,625 per month would be replaced with the language in the previous agreement, $130 per case. Ms. Humann pointed out it would also include arraignment fees and other costs as listed. Councilmember Bernheim preferred the per case basis, noting if the police did not arrest as many people, costs would go down. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 7. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION TO ADVERTISE/ISSUE REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) FOR A STRATEGIC PLAN. Community Services/Economic Development Director Stephen Clifton explained in the past two decades, the City of Edmonds has engaged the public in a variety of efforts to shape the community’s future via the City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan, Transportation Plan, Economic Development Plan, Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan, the Community Cultural Plan, etc., and implementation of specific community projects. However, an overarching comprehensive strategic planning and visioning process for the community has not been accomplished. In recent years, there has been increasing interest in creating a community wide vision and strategic plan. On June 2, 2009, the Edmonds City Council passed Ordinance 3735, which amended the Edmonds City Code, Title 10, adding a new Chapter 10.75 Citizens Economic Development Commission (EDC). In March 2010, the Edmonds City Council approved Resolution 1224, which expressed support for the EDC to move forward with its six higher priority recommendations. One of those proposals was for the City Council to commit to development of a strategic plan and reviewing and updating the plan annually, ideally corresponding with the Council retreat. This includes setting goals and continually assessing progress metrics and to develop a community vision that addresses a balance between quality of life and growth objectives. In December 2010, the City Council expressed strong support by approving funding to pay for a strategic planning process and preparation of a plan for Council consideration. A draft RFP for a Strategic Plan was routed to the City Council, Mayor Cooper, Department Directors, EDC, and Planning Board to solicit comments. Comments were incorporated into the final RFP draft and discussed during a March 16, 2011 EDC meeting. The Commission expressed unanimous support to forward the RFP final draft to the City Council for review and authorization to issue the RFP. Regarding the funding to pay for the preparation of a Strategic Plan, the following funding sources were identified and approved during 2011 budget process: • $60,000 – Salary savings from delaying the hiring of a Development Services Director in 2011 • $20,000 – Economic Development Department • $ 7,500 – Development Services Department Professional Services Line Item • $12,500 – City Council contingency fund An Economic Development Commission Strategic Planning Process Initiative Report, prepared by the EDC Strategic Planning and Visioning subgroup and endorsed by the EDC, was posted to the City’s website last year. This document provides an overview of the purpose of preparing a strategic plan. He noted the RFP does not contain dates due to the uncertainty regarding when it would be approved by the Packet Page 18 of 299 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 5, 2011 Page 12 Council. Following Council approval, he will insert dates. He anticipated approximately a six week process from issuing the RFP to issuing the contract. In response to interest expressed by the Council in participating in the overall strategic planning process during the 2011 budget process, he invited a Councilmember to participate in the interview and review committee. A similar invitation will be extended to the Planning Board and the EDC. Mr. Clifton advised Mill Creek issued a RFP for a Strategic Plan in February 2011. Mill Creek’s Community Development Director advised they received ten proposals and have selected a consultant. Mill Creek’s Community Development Director recommended including two retreats, one at the beginning with the City Council, Planning Board, EDC and staff to understand the overall process the consultant proposes. A second retreat would be held near the end of the process to discuss the focus of the Strategic Plan and issues the City Council wants addressed in the final draft. Councilmember Buckshnis, liaison to the EDC, expressed her support for developing a strategic plan. She commented on research the EDC has done regarding other cities that have strategic plans. She summarized this is the perfect time to figure out the City’s future. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO AUTHORIZE ADVERTISING/ISSUING THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR A STRATEGIC PLAN. Councilmember Wilson expressed support for the motion, reiterating the concerns he voiced during the budget process. His confidence in the ability to keep a plan off the shelf is dependent on the buy-in from the Council. The Council has not demonstrated that buy-in yet and although the Council has done things when asked, they have never been asked to do anything of substance. He acknowledged the $100,000 funding was substantive but the Council’s feedback has seldom been invited and is sometimes rebutted. If that is not addressed he feared the product would have a lot of stakeholder buy-in but no Council buy-in and the plan would be shelved and budget decisions would be made in a vacuum. He has asked that Mr. Clifton and Mr. Yamamoto be acutely sensitive to the amount of buy-in from the Council and if the Council was not providing buy-in, for them to determine a way for the Council to do so. He did not recall receiving the draft RFP. Mr. Clifton assured he had forwarded the draft to the City Council and others for input. In an effort to engage the City Council, he extended an invitation for a Councilmember, Planning Board Member and Economic Development Commissioner to participate on the interviewing/screening committee to select a consultant. He agreed that without Council buy-in, the Council could not be expected to adopt the plan. It will be important to talk with the consultant regarding ways to engage the Council as the process proceeds. He anticipated the overall process will take 8-9 months. Councilmember Petso advised she voted against allocating funds to this project but since the Council approved it, she was committed to participating and would support the motion and the process. She expressed her concern with the process and whether the result would be usable and representative. She referred to Mr. Clifton and her email exchange earlier this week that illustrates the problems; she responded to a survey regarding the Westgate area where she was asked her preference between asphalt storefronts, storefronts on the curb and storefronts on the curb with business activity. A conclusion was drawn from her response that she preferred eliminating the setback of buildings in that area which is possibly not her preference. She relayed her concern that one of the options was not beautifully landscaped public space in front of the buildings. She cautioned against wasting money with questions that mean different things to different people and favored public input and conclusions that were reflective of the community’s desires. THE VOTE ON THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Packet Page 19 of 299 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 5, 2011 Page 13 8. PROPOSED INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE RELATED TO THE BN ZONE. Mr. Clifton explained on March 24, 2011 he sent an email to the Council regarding the possibility of adopting an interim code amendment that would allow buildings to be placed closer to rights-of-way in the BN zone. While the City has been making progress with the University of Washington and the Cascade Agenda on area planning for the Five Corners and Westgate commercial centers, staff recently learned of a potential redevelopment project planned for a key location at SR-104 and 100th Avenue West. Under the existing zoning (BN), a new building located at Westgate is required to set back at least 20 feet from any street. This is counter to the direction the UW study has indicated people want their neighborhood commercial centers to go, and is clearly inconsistent with existing city design objectives enumerated in the Comprehensive Plan design objectives for location and layout of parking: • C.2.a. Create adequate parking for each development, but keep the cars from dominating the streetscape. C.2.b. Improve pedestrian access from the street by locating buildings closer to the street and defining the street edge. • C.2.c. Improve the project’s visibility from the street by placing parking to side and rear. • C.2.d. Provide direct pedestrian access from street, sidewalk, and parking. He also cited design objectives for building entry locations: • C.5.a. Create an active, safe and lively street-edge. • C.5.b. Create a pedestrian friendly environment. • C.5.c. Provide outdoor active spaces at entry to retail/commercial uses. • C.5.d. Provide semi-public/private seating area at multi-family and commercial entries to increase activity along the street. Although work on the University of Washington Special District Study will not be completed until this summer, preliminary polling done during initial public work sessions indicated a strong interest in moving neighborhood commercial buildings toward the street. The prospective development at Westgate has indicated the existing code requires them to locate their building at least 20 feet from the street front, which in turn requires them to place a drive aisle and parking between the street and their building. This also affects building entry, forcing it to be oriented away from the street. If a code change reducing the required setback were in place, the site designers have indicated that they would be willing to move their building near the street, and this would in turn improve their ability to fit parking and drive aisles on their site and meet other city code requirements. Given this background, staff is recommending adoption of the proposed interim zoning ordinance. The interim zoning ordinance would reduce the minimum 20-foot street setback to 5 feet to enable expansion of walkways and/or addition of landscaping or pedestrian activity areas, not just having buildings right up against property lines. He noted some sidewalks widths in the Westgate area are no more than 4 – 4½ feet. Setting the buildings back 5 feet allows the walkways to be widened which the developer has stated they are willing to do. He invited Planning Manager Rob Chave to provide graphic illustrations depicting how existing code and proposed amendments could affect the proposal. Councilmember Wilson requested staff identify what the proposed development has committed to. Mr. Chave answered it is speculative because they have not yet applied; they have only had a preliminary conference. He explained the current BN zoning requires buildings be set back at least 20 feet from the property street fronts. This is generally inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and with the current direction being developed for Westgate and Five Corners. Packet Page 20 of 299 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 5, 2011 Page 14 Mr. Chave displayed a graphic of the current BN setback requirements which, 1) pushes buildings into the site, 2) encourages placement of parking or drive aisles between building and street, and 3) results in the building poorly relating to the street front and discourages pedestrian access. He displayed a graphic of the proposed interim zoning ordinance that brings buildings closer to the street and produces a better result via, 1) the building relating better to the street front, 2) reducing traffic vs. pedestrian conflicts, and 3) providing a larger area for walkways, landscaping and pedestrian amenities. Under the current zoning, the landscaped and pedestrian area is very small. Staff’s concern is that if this continues, pedestrian/traffic conflicts will worsen and it does not set the stage for future development. Mr. Clifton explained the UW study of Westgate and Five Corners is likely to lead to very different codes. Staff fears that a development that is counter to the direction of that study will result in a lost opportunity. The property owner wants to proceed and cannot wait for the UW process to be completed. The only way staff could think to address it was via an interim zoning ordinance. Councilmember Petso recalled Mr. Chave’s comment that the interim zoning ordinance which has a 5- foot setback would result in more landscaped area, however, with a 20-foot setback, a developer has up to 20 feet for a landscaped area. Mr. Chave explained with reduced setback the landscaped area is moved up to the street front. He clarified the 20 foot setback is not a landscape area, it is an area where buildings cannot be located but there can be parking, etc. and the landscaping is typically very minimal and does not enhance the street edge. The existing sidewalks in Westgate range from 7 feet to 4½ feet which is one of the reasons walking in those intersections feels dangerous. Councilmember Petso referred to the example provided by Mr. Hertrich during public comment where there is far more than 5 feet of landscaping. Mr. Chave agreed it depends on the location. Councilmember Petso asked whether this ordinance would apply to all Neighborhood Business zones in the City. Mr. Chave answered it would. Councilmember Wilson commented there was tremendous opportunity and tremendous peril via the proposed interim zoning ordinance. He was excited anyone wanted to build a project particularly on one of the most importance corners although he was less excited that it was another bank. He voiced frustration that the Council used to hear it was difficult to do planning because staff was so busy permitting projects. Now staff is being reactive to a proposal that is among the most important to the community due to its location on a central thoroughfare. Since this building is likely to be there for decades, he suggested more time be taken to figure out what makes sense. Although he was inclined to support the interim zoning ordinance, he suggested perhaps it needed to be so restrictive that nothing happened until the process was complete to ensure the zone reflects the community’s vision. He suggested a moratorium may be appropriate. The City has made a tremendous investment in what Westgate will look like and it would be unfortunate if development was piecemeal because the City could not act quickly enough. He summarized this seemed like a bad approach to one of the most important corners in the City. Mr. Clifton agreed it was a matter of timing; a developer wants to acquire the site and staff does not know the details of the terms of the Purchase and Sale agreement. The developer was unwilling to wait until the Five Corners/Westgate studies are complete but they were willing to wait until staff presented an interim zoning ordinance to the Council. He explained staff discussed a moratorium but Edmonds has a reputation for being anti-development and there is concern about the message that sends to the development community. Instead, staff proposed a more palatable option, an interim zoning ordinance that reflects the intent of the Comprehensive Plan to put the buildings closer to the streetscape. He emphasized to the developer that by proposing this interim zoning ordinance to the City Council, staff was risking their reputation. If the building was constructed and it looked bad, it would affect staff’s credibility. He shared Councilmember Wilson’s frustration, noting staff was trying to make the best of an awkward situation. Packet Page 21 of 299 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 5, 2011 Page 15 Because of the lack of new development and the very marginal economic development from a new bank on one of the City’s most important corners – no sales tax generation, slight property tax increase, some construction sales tax – and it will do nothing to foster pedestrian activity, particularly if the building is separated from the other building by a driveway, Councilmember Wilson anticipated a moratorium may be appropriate particularly if the applicant is unwilling to work with the City. He requested City Attorney Jeff Taraday draft moratorium language so that he could amend the interim zoning ordinance tonight so that either in practice or actuality a moratorium would be enacted. Mr. Clifton referred to Councilmember Wilson’s comment that the applicant was unwilling to work with the staff, advising the contrary is true. The developer is willing to wait for the interim zoning ordinance process and have developed concepts for staff review if the interim zoning ordinance is approved. The applicant’s engineer and architect have been working well with staff. Councilmember Wilson asked why the developer did not propose a development agreement. Mr. Clifton answered staff is considering a development agreement process but there is no underlying language to allow modification of code provisions within a BN zone. Councilmember Wilson pointed out the developer is not willing to wait until the UW study is completed. Mr. Clifton answered the timeline following completion of the Five Corners/Westgate study is uncertain, it could take the Council a great deal of time to debate the issue. The developer is not willing to agree to a protracted process. Councilmember Wilson commented a 3-month moratorium may be appropriate. Councilmember Bernheim expressed his opposition to a moratorium, commenting the City has lived with this code for decades. He did not see a big differences in the design with a 5-foot versus a 20-foot setback; whether the bank is located in the middle of the asphalt or the edge would not make or break Edmonds. He disagreed with the emergency declaration in Section 3, “The City Council, in order to ensure that its long-term planning efforts are not frustrated by the vesting of a development application, declares an emergency…” He preferred to fast track the proposal through the Planning Board. Although he wanted the developer to build in Edmonds, he did not want to change the zoning laws in a midnight effort in order to accommodate them. Instead of a comprehensive code rewrite, he preferred to revise the existing code and identify areas that needed to be updated. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented she was less concerned about the location of the building and more concerned with the fact that the proposed interim zoning ordinance would affect all BN zones. She suggested the developer should have researched this prior to purchasing the property. With regard to Edmonds being anti-development, she pointed out there has been a great deal of interest in development in Five Corners, Westgate and Highway 99. She expressed concern that a proposal was made in the packet received by the Council on Friday and a decision to change all the BN zones was expected on Tuesday to accommodate one developer. Mr. Clifton stressed it was not the developer who was asking for this revision; it was proposed by City staff in response to their pre-application design. The developer prepared a plan that meets the code. Staff saw their plans and agreed it did not meet the intent of the Comprehensive Plan which resulted in the proposed interim zoning ordinance. With regard to his comment regarding Edmonds being anti-development, Mr. Clifton explained that is what he hears from the development community. He agreed the City has made great strides in the past couple years to change that reputation and it is changing as evidenced by businesses beginning to relocate to Edmonds. His comment was in response to a potential moratorium which may add to the City’s anti- development reputation. Councilmember Buckshnis agreed with Councilmember Bernheim’s comment about the emergency declaration. She agreed a 5-foot setback would look better than a 20 foot setback but did not view it as an emergency. She suggested allowing the process to proceed and fast tracking it through the Planning Board. She supported updating the codes but did not see this as an emergency. Packet Page 22 of 299 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 5, 2011 Page 16 Council President Peterson thanked Mr. Clifton for clarifying this was staff’s idea and not the developers. The developer is willing to put the building in the middle of the parking lot and have a drive through around it. Councilmember Wilson’s point that the building will be here for decades is the reason he supports the interim zoning ordinance. Putting the building in the middle with a drive-through around it limits future business opportunities for the building. Moving the building to the corner would allow another business to locate in the building as well as future opportunities to generate tax revenue. To the question of why it has not happened sooner, he pointed out a process is underway with the UW students and Cascade Land Conservancy. Council President Peterson acknowledged this was not the most pedestrian-friendly intersection, due in part to the narrow sidewalks. He asked whether there was an opportunity to widen the sidewalks via this proposal. Mr. Clifton answered the architect working on the project stated the developer is willing to widen the sidewalk abutting the building. Landscaping would be placed between the widened sidewalk and the building. Council President Peterson commented that was a great opportunity. Because of its location, the building had implications for the future because designs of other building would look to that corner building. He acknowledged it may not be the ideal building but absent a building moratorium, which he did not support, or this interim zoning ordinance, the result would be a bad building in the middle of a parking lot. The proposed interim zoning ordinance would result in a far better design. If constructed under the existing code, the building would have very limited use. To the comment that Edmonds is anti-development, Councilmember Plunkett stated Edmonds is not anti- development nor has it ever been. Outside the recent recession, Edmonds has had more variety of stores and restaurants, and a more lively downtown. The issue is not the substance but the process and the unknown implications on other BN zones. Fore example, how the proposed interim zoning ordinance would affect the developer of a multi family structure in a BN zone who may not want the building at the lot line. Councilmember Plunkett questioned how the proposed interim zoning ordinance would look to the individual who was told they had to wait a year for a Comprehensive Plan amendment to allow a duplex. He recalled there had been other developers who wanted to “jump the queue” in order to construct a building the way they wanted to. He recalled a building on Sunset that requested special dispensation but was later built without it. He expected the interim zoning ordinance from Mr. Clifton in his role as Economic Development Director but did not expect the Council to rezone the BN zone based on one property. He recalled the Yacht Club as another example of a developer who did not want to wait for a Comprehensive Plan change and the Council unanimously declined their request. He summarized as a rule the Council had not allowed a proposal for a specific location to jump the queue let alone a rezone. He did not support proceeding without going through the process, particularly in light of the Five Corners/Westgate study that was underway. COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON, TO APPROVE INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 3839. Councilmember Wilson preferred to put this on hold. Rather than do so via moratorium, he suggested the following motion to do so in practice: COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED TO AMEND THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT IN THE BN ZONE TO TEN FEET. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. Councilmember Wilson commented the interim zoning was better than the existing zoning. He agreed with the process concerns but felt the City was between a rock and a hard place. Packet Page 23 of 299 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 5, 2011 Page 17 COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED TO INCLUDE IN TABLE A, SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, AN ADDITIONAL COLUMN THAT REQUIRES 8-FOOT SIDEWALKS ON THE STREET. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND Council President Peterson observed the existing sidewalks are approximately 4½ feet wide. Mr. Chave advised in that general location, sidewalks widths vary from 7 to 4½ feet. Engineering indicated the standard in that location is 7-10 feet. He relayed Mr. Williams’ indication that the engineering sidewalk standard in other BN locations was 7-10 feet. The standard in the Westgate area is a landscaping strip between the sidewalk and the street. Because there has been little redevelopment in this area, the old practice of the sidewalk at the street remains. With the development of this site, staff’s preference is, if there is enough room, to provide a planting strip between the sidewalk and the street. Council President Peterson asked whether the engineering standard is a requirement. Mr. Chave answered it is enforceable during development review. Council President Peterson observed they would be required to have at least a 7-foot sidewalk and a 10-foot sidewalk is possibility. Mr. Chave answered there are often obstacles such as utility poles, etc. that result in the sidewalk necking down at the intersection. Development review will consider the amount of space available, landscaping, location for the building, public access points, etc. Council President Peterson reiterated the developer is not trying to jump the queue; the developer is happy to build the building according to the code. Staff suggested the interim zoning ordinance in view of the process that is leading to a similar design. The Council can sit back and wait for the process and the developer can construct the building to the current code which will result in a lot of asphalt, a building that is not pedestrian friendly and moderately wider sidewalks in front of a drive through. This is an opportunity for an interim zoning ordinance that will allow development to move forward while the process continues. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if a development agreement could be used to work through the zoning issue. Mr. Chave answered under the existing code development agreements are completely optional on the part of the developer. They can commit to a certain design that is consistent with the code. For example, if the setback is reduced to 5-feet, the developer could restrict themselves within that parameter. Under the existing 20-foot setback, the developer cannot offer a development agreement that would reduce the setback to 5 feet. As part of the interim zoning ordinance, the Council could add a clause allowing the setback to be reduced to 5 feet with a development agreement. He was uncertain whether the developer would agree to that. Mr. Taraday advised the interim zoning ordinance could be modified to allow the reduction to a 5-foot setback, require a maximum setback and require a development agreement. Councilmember Buckshnis observed that suggestion would still change the zoning in all the BN zones. Her concern was there had not been enough research regarding the impact of the interim zoning ordinance on the other BN zones. She asked whether the Council could require a development agreement with a 5- foot setback. Mr. Chave answered the City could not force a development agreement on an applicant. Parameters can be established in the code to lead a developer to want to do a development agreement but they cannot be forced into a development agreement. Mr. Taraday commented if the choice is a moratorium or developing pursuant to a development agreement, that would probably be defensible. Mr. Chave observed it would be untried legal ground. Councilmember Buckshnis asked how long it would take to have the interim zoning ordinance reviewed by the Planning Board. Mr. Chave estimated a minimum of three months. Councilmember Wilson commented even if the Council adopted the interim zoning ordinance, it would not prevent the developer from constructing the building with its back to that intersection with the entry facing the parking lot. Mr. Clifton referred to language in the agenda packet that the interim zoning Packet Page 24 of 299 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 5, 2011 Page 18 ordinance was intended to move the building up to the property line if the back of the building faces the right-of-way. He has requested the architect ensure windows would face Edmonds Way and a portion of 9th Avenue to ensure it had the appearance of the front of the building. A preliminary revised plan shows the front of the bank facing Edmonds Way with a secondary entrance from the parking lot. Mr. Chave referred to the footnote in the ordinance that refers to the design objectives regarding location, entry, etc. Councilmember Wilson commented his 4-year old son often accompanies him to the bank. When he pointed out that a bank may soon replace the gas station, his son cried, saying there are already so many banks and he wanted the gas station to stay. This process should be educational to the Council with regard to other properties such as the old Skippers site and the near waterfront; people can develop those sites under the existing zone and the result may not be what the community envisions. Mr. Clifton commented in the current banking industry, he does not assume a building will retain its existing tenant and looks to future uses. With the building closer to the street, it could house a restaurant, a retail store, etc. He advised the building would look nearly the same whether it was located in the center or closer to the street other than the additional windows the architect included under the new scenario. Council President Peterson commented the larger setback with the building surrounded by a drive- through limits future tenants. MOTION FAILED (2-4), COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON AND COUNCILMEMBER WILSON VOTING YES. Mayor Cooper declared a brief recess. 9. DISCUSSION OF LEVY OPTIONS Council President Peterson advised discussion of levy options is scheduled as a placeholder on the Council agenda every other week. The deadline to place a levy on the August ballot is May 24. The Council packet also contains the election deadlines and costs. Mayor Cooper provided a PowerPoint regarding his levy proposal, advising the material in the PowerPoint was largely the same as was provided in his memo to the Council. Mayor Cooper explained the theme of his levy proposal was Safe Neighborhoods, Safe Streets and Parks for Everyone. He explained if nothing is done, by the end of 2012, the City will be below the one month reserve the Council adopted with the 2011 budget. He noted he rounded numbers so they would not necessarily match the spreadsheets. Mayor Cooper recognized the work done in 2009 by the Levy Committee chaired by Councilmember Wilson and the work done in 2010-2011 by the Levy Committee chaired by Councilmembers Plunkett and Buckshnis, particularly the work done by then Finance Director Lorenzo Hines and Citizen Levy Committee Member Mr. Haug that was presented to the Council a few weeks ago. He applied his version of political reality as far as what the voters might be willing to approve to what staff indicated the City needed. As a result the amount he proposes be included in a levy is significantly less than the need. Mayor Cooper reviewed his proposal for a 4-year levy on the August ballot: • 35 cents/$1000 Assessed Value • $2.25 million first year starting in 2012 • Increases 2.5% each year • $2.314 million in 2013 • $2.372 million in 2014 • $2.431 million in 2015 Packet Page 25 of 299 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 5, 2011 Page 19 He described the cost to the average Edmonds homeowner: • Average residential value $375,000 in 2011 (down from $403,000 in 2010) • $131.25/year in 2012 • $10.94/month in 2012 Mayor Cooper outlined his proposed spending plan: • Safe Neighborhoods $210,000/year o Restore and Redefine Crime Prevention Program • 1 civilian crime analyst and .5 FTE support staff • $129,000/year o Restore one entry level Police Officer • Not funded by Council in prior budget • $81,000/year • Safe Streets $704,000/year ($0.11) o About 4 lane miles per year of overlays o Less than half the projected annual need for overlays • Parks for Everyone $102,000/year o Yost Pool Operations $51,000 o Flower Program $51,000 • Remainder of levy funds: o Maintains current level of Operations through 2015 o Finishes 2015 with the Council mandated one month reserve Mayor Cooper reviewed the following summary: Priority $ Proposed $ Needed Police $210,000 $ 210,000 Streets $704,000 $1,500,000 Parks $102,000 $ 285,000 Deferred Maintenance on City-owned Buildings 0 $ 250,000 Reserves/Operations (at current level)s $1,234,000 $1,234,000 ECA Bond Debt 0 $ 200,000 TOTAL $2,250,000 $3,679,000 per $1000 35 cents 57 cents Mayor Cooper clarified if the economy does not improve, the City will need to talk to the public again about long term financing at the end of 4 years. He advised 35 cents generates approximately $2 million which is approximately the amount the City has lost due to the recession. How the Council prioritizes the amounts is an important discussion for the Council; his proposed priority was a way to get the conversation started. He explained the $285,000 in parks needs did not include any capital; it was only deferred maintenance in the parks system such as resurfacing tennis courts, etc. With regard to the August versus November ballot, Mayor Cooper advised there were a number of reasons he preferred August but the primary reason is that knowing the outcome of the levy in August will allow for better budget planning. He suggested the Council discuss their priorities. Council President Peterson reiterated this is the first of many discussions regarding levy options. Packet Page 26 of 299 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 5, 2011 Page 20 COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO EXTEND THE MEETING FOR 30 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Councilmember Wilson thanked Mayor Cooper for his levy proposal, noting the former Mayor was good at a number of things but he would not have brought a levy proposal to the Council. The Council has shown they are interested in a levy but cannot quite get there on their own without some mayoral leadership. Councilmember Buckshnis expressed her appreciation for Mayor Cooper’s levy proposal. She observed benefit costs were reduced and asked if that was due to the savings from AWC. Mayor Cooper advised the $320,000 reduction due to insurance savings was reflected in the 2012 forecast. Councilmember Buckshnis inquired about the $700,000 increase for transfers. Mayor Cooper proposed the ballot title transfer the $700,000 from the General Fund and into the Street Fund for overlays. Councilmember Buckshnis advised the Citizen Levy Committee will provide a recommendation. The Committee did not realize Mayor Cooper planned to propose fast tracking a levy to an August election. She expressed concern with the projections that utilized budget numbers. For example, she anticipated there was more than $2.1 million in ending working capital balance. Mayor Cooper explained it was his intent as soon as the Interim Finance Director completed the numbers, to have a new forecast with the 2010 actuals prepared. He agreed as the process moved forward in whatever configuration a levy takes, the forecasts need to be based on yearend actuals for 2010and not yearend projections. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked the cost of a special election in August. Mayor Cooper clarified August is not a special election; the primary election is in August. The cost depends on the number of measures on the ballot. City Clerk Sandy Chase answered it is also based on population. She referred to the guide for election costs in the Council packet, advising the cost for Edmonds 26,000 registered voters would be close to $48,000 if there were only three other jurisdictions in the election. She anticipated there would be more in the August election which would reduce the City’s cost. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked why Mayor Cooper prioritized 2.5 FTE for the Police Department when Human Resources has indicated they need additional staff and she was certain the Economic Development Department would like to have additional dedicated staff. Mayor Cooper acknowledged that although additional staff was needed in Finance and Human Resources, he anticipated in today’s economy where there is 10.3% unemployment in Snohomish County structuring a levy to add administrative FTE was in critical danger of failing compared to asking voters to restore critical positions in public safety. With prudent budgeting there may be an opportunity to add those FTEs during the budget process if a levy passed. He clarified the items in his proposal were items he suggested funds be dedicated to. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked for clarification regarding the proposal for 1 civilian crime analyst and .5 FTE support staff. Mayor Cooper answered the Police Department recommends 1.5 FTE to operate that critical program. He noted the Council could choose not to allocate funds to that program or include it in the reserve/operations line and fund it in the budget. He included it because public safety is important to the community, may help convince the voters to support a levy and is a needed service. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if the cost would be the same if the City put a smorgasbord of levy issues on a ballot such as a general levy, a parks levy, a streets levy, etc. Mayor Cooper answered the Council could put as many propositions as they wanted on the ballot; that was not his recommendation. Ms. Chase advised last year the auditor indicated the cost would not increase if there were additional ballot measures. Councilmember Buckshnis suggested the City could do five propositions such as ECA, parks, Yost Pool, police, etc. Packet Page 27 of 299 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 5, 2011 Page 21 Councilmember Wilson cautioned against putting more than one proposition on the ballot at one time. In his experience, the more questions there are on a ballot, the less likely any are to pass. To Councilmember Fraley-Monillas’ point, the Council and community has made public safety their number one priority in the Comprehensive Plan. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas clarified she was not questioning hiring a police officer; her question was the civilian crime analyst and the .5 FTE support staff. Mayor Cooper advised the crime analyst and the reconfiguration of the Crime Prevention Program is important to the overall public safety mission of the Police Department. Regardless of how a levy is packaged to the voters, slightly more than $1 million/year needs to be set aside to ensure a one month reserve in four years. In reality, the City also needs to set aside $200,000/year for the ECA bond debt. He advised the $100,000 the Council budgeted in 2011 for the ECA bond debt is not in the long term forecast. Council President Peterson commented he wanted to include funds in the levy for economic development/investment in the arts to help stabilize that resource in order to realize a return on investment in the future. Supporting institutions that are valuable as community assets as well as revenue generating assets in the future will pay dividends in the future. Mayor Cooper invited Councilmembers to inform him of items they would like to have included in levy scenarios. Councilmember Petso requested Council President Peterson schedule one or more public hearings on levy options in order to gather public feedback. She supported Councilmember Buckshnis’ proposal for multiple levies to allow voters to support specific items. She supported placing multiple levies on the ballot, noting any levy the voters passed would help. Some voters may welcome the opportunity to vote on specific levies and it may provide an opportunity for people passionate about an issue to help pass that specific levy. She invited the public to indicate whether they wanted an opportunity to vote on individual levies or whether they preferred one levy. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas observed the ECA bond was a known debt. Mayor Cooper explained the City paid the 2010 debt and there is $100,000 in the budget for 2011 but the debt is likely to be closer to $200,000 in 2011. He included the ECA in his list of priorities because it is the City’s debt. Regardless of whether the voters pass a levy, that bond debt will need to be considered in the 2012 budget. If the ECA bond debt is not included in a levy it will be funded in some other manner via the City’s budget. Councilmember Wilson reported he planned to make a proposal to the ECA this Friday that will suggest the City fund the $200,000 over the 4-years prior in exchange for structural changes at the ECA that will bring about greater transparency and a better structural alignment. He requested the Mayor develop a scenario that includes the $200,000 for the ECA debt in addition to the other priorities and $60,000 for the senior center. Mayor Cooper advised $64,000 is approximately 1 cent. Councilmember Wilson advised the City already allocates $60,000 to the Senior Center and that could be deducted from the proposed $704,000 for streets. Mayor Cooper recognized the Council could package a levy however they wanted. There are some items he feels strongly about such as police, streets and parks. Without funding for parks, streets and safety, the mission of the City is not fulfilled. Councilmember Wilson advised Councilmembers Buckshnis, Fraley-Monillas and he were joined by approximately 20 people at a special Public Safety & Human Resources Committee meeting before tonight’s Council meeting to discuss employee medical benefits. That discussion included recognition that addressing medical benefits in a way that maintains existing benefits at a reduced cost would send an important message to the voters. Packet Page 28 of 299 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 5, 2011 Page 22 Councilmember Plunkett preferred more funding for capital and maintenance and less for operating. The City’s ongoing expenses are labor and medical costs. If the increase is not slowed, he would have difficulty asking citizens to tax themselves for operating expenses. He was enthusiastic about maintenance/capital. Mayor Cooper responded he intentionally did not include large capital projects in his levy proposal because if the voters approved a levy and the City shows them they can be accountable, the City is in a better position to ask for bond issues for large projects such as the swimming pool and other major capital expenses. Councilmember Plunkett reiterated his enthusiasm for maintenance/capital but not for operating when the City has not gotten its largest operating expense under control. Mayor Cooper offered to meet with Councilmembers to talk about specific items or scenarios. Council President Peterson advised the next discussion of levy options will be on the April 19 agenda. Mayor Cooper advised he would endeavor to have the new forecasts prepared using yearend 2010 numbers. Council President Peterson advised he will be scheduling a discussion item on the April 26 agenda regarding the possible reallocation of REET funds. The legislature is also considering legislation that may provide more flexibility in the use of REET funds. 10. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Cooper reported on April 15 Mr. Williams, Mr. Koho and he will host a tour and conversation with a group of business and government leaders from Beijing, China. They will be in Seattle for a few weeks and are coming to Edmonds specifically to see the processes used in the wastewater treatment plant. Mayor Cooper reported the Regional Fire Authority (RFA) Planning Committee held their first organizational meeting last week where they adopted rules and established committee appointments. Councilmember Wilson will serve on the Level of Service Committee, Councilmember Petso will serve on the Finance Committee and he will serve on the Communications Committee. The Planning Committee consists of seven cities and two Fire Districts, a total of nine jurisdictions, the largest group to date in the State to put together a RFA. Mayor Cooper advised he will send Council President Peterson a memo tomorrow with his appointments to fill the Planning Board vacancies. He requested the Council interview them at the next available meeting. Mayor Cooper reported on a leak in the basement of the Anderson Center on Sunday as a result of a broken water line under a sink. The Fire Department responded and City staff pumped out 6 inches of water in parts of the basement. He thanked City staff for the time they took to ensure the Center could continue to operate. There was not a great deal of damage other than water on carpets that can be dried out. The water lines under the sinks have since been replaced. Mayor Cooper advised the State House released their capital and operating budget. Edmonds did not fare as badly as expected in the operating budget; 3.5% of the liquor tax profits were taken as well as 3.5% from a number of other pass through accounts, most of which were criminal justice accounts from which Edmonds does not receive a great deal of money. Rumor is the Senate will cut much deeper than the House. The bad news is none of the City’s capital or transportation requests were included in the House budget. Senators Shin and Chase are working hard to get funding for the Main Street project. Two or three of the City’s Public Works Trust Fund projects have survived. Given the $5 billion that had to be cut, Edmonds fared much better than other agencies. Packet Page 29 of 299 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 5, 2011 Page 23 11. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Buckshnis congratulated Garden Gear & Gallery on 15 years in Edmonds. Councilmember Wilson explained the Council tasked the Public Safety & Human Resources Committee with addressing inflation in medical benefits. The Committee is considering how to maintain the same or better benefits at the same or lower cost. Following their next meeting when the Committee will take comments from the leadership of the City’s labor unions, he planned to seek formal direction from the Council in the form of a resolution that the Committee is on the right path. Councilmember Wilson explained he is involved in healthcare public policy in his day job and hosts the largest healthcare public policy event in Washington and Alaska. He received an email today stating he had an inherent conflict of interest. He asked that those emails be forwarded to the Council and requested Councilmembers inform him if they felt he had a conflict of interest. As a taxpayer he had an interest in the City lowering its expenses and did not think he had a conflict of interest due to his work in healthcare. He noted when the City’s benefit committee retained a broker who went to market and talked to United Healthcare, Etna, Regence, Premera, Cigna, etc.; he has a relationship with all of them. When it is time for a vote, he will obviously recuse himself. In addition his wife works in healthcare and he was upset that the person who emailed him did an extensive background search on his wife. He invited Councilmembers to advise him if they felt that his work in healthcare public policy or his wife working in healthcare were a conflict of interest. Council President Peterson advised the RFA Committee decided each city could have an alternate. The City’s three members on the RFA Committee are up for reelection this year. With the slight chance that all the members could be leaving, he offered to serve as the alternate. Councilmember Wilson suggested delaying a decision to appoint an alternate. He would prefer not to have an alternate because it sent the wrong message about the level of commitment. He clarified the Committee decided that alternates would be allowed but it was not a requirement. 12. ADJOURN With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:33 p.m. Packet Page 30 of 299 AM-3881 Item #: 2. C. City Council Meeting Date: 04/19/2011 Time:Consent Submitted For:Jim Tarte Submitted By:Nori Jacobson Department:Finance Review Committee: Committee Action: Approve for Consent Agenda Type:Action Information Subject Title Approval of claim checks #124759 through #124902 dated April 7, 2011 for $2,141,127.63, and claim checks #124903 through #125018 dated April 14, 2011 for $215,589.91. Approval of payroll direct deposit and checks #50320 through #50349 for the period March 16, 2011 through March 31, 2011 for $638,444.25. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Approval of claim checks and payroll direct deposit & checks. Previous Council Action N/A Narrative In accordance with the State statutes, City payments must be approved by the City Council. Ordinance #2896 delegates this approval to the Council President who reviews and recommends either approval or non-approval of expenditures. Fiscal Impact Fiscal Year:2011 Revenue: Expenditure:2,995,161.79 Fiscal Impact: Claims $2,356.717.54 Payroll $638,444.25 Attachments Claim Checks for 4-7-11 Claim Checks for 4-14-11 Claim Checks for 4-14-11a Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Finance Jim Tarte 04/14/2011 01:46 PM City Clerk Sandy Chase 04/14/2011 01:54 PM Mayor Mike Cooper 04/14/2011 01:55 PM Final Approval Sandy Chase 04/14/2011 02:00 PM Packet Page 31 of 299 Form Started By: Nori Jacobson Started On: 04/14/2011 09:02 AM Final Approval Date: 04/14/2011 Packet Page 32 of 299 04/07/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 1 7:54:23AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124759 4/1/2011 065459 THE HERALD SUBSCRIPTION 4-10-11 ANNUAL SUBSCRIPTION 04/11-04/12 EDMONDS ANNUAL SUBSCRIPTION - DAILY PAPER 001.000.410.521.100.490.00 174.00 Total :174.00 124760 4/7/2011 072627 911 ETC INC 176027 MAR-11 911 DATABASE MAINT March-11 911 database maint 001.000.310.518.880.480.00 101.50 Total :101.50 124761 4/7/2011 070322 A&A LANGUAGE SERVICES INC 101410 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.501.410.01 149.80 INTERPRETER FEE81010 INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.501.410.01 173.55 INTERPRETER FEE92210 INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.501.410.01 174.10 Total :497.45 124762 4/7/2011 065052 AARD PEST CONTROL 00000292768 MEADOWDALE CLUBHOUSE RODENT CONTROL RODENT CONTROL @ MEADOWDALE CLUBHOUSE 001.000.640.576.800.480.00 82.12 RODENT CONTROL00000292794 RODENT CONTROL 001.000.640.576.800.480.00 93.08 Total :175.20 124763 4/7/2011 065052 AARD PEST CONTROL 00000292587 1-13992 PEST CONTROL 411.000.656.538.800.410.23 69.00 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.410.23 6.56 1Page: Packet Page 33 of 299 04/07/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 2 7:54:23AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :75.56124763 4/7/2011 065052 065052 AARD PEST CONTROL 124764 4/7/2011 066417 AIRGAS NOR PAC INC 101112838 M5Z34 CAL GAS 411.000.656.538.800.310.22 27.50 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.22 2.61 Total :30.11 124765 4/7/2011 073620 ALLWEST UNDERGROUND INC 19814 Sewer - Plug Rental for 220 Alder St Sewer - Plug Rental for 220 Alder St 411.000.655.535.800.450.00 212.10 7.7% sales tax 411.000.655.535.800.450.00 16.17 Total :228.27 124766 4/7/2011 069829 AMIDO, BENJAMIM AMIDO13705 UKULELE CLASSES UKULELE #13705 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 226.80 Total :226.80 124767 4/7/2011 069751 ARAMARK 655-5472408 UNIFORM SERVICES PARK MAINTENANCE UNIFORM SERVICES 001.000.640.576.800.240.00 25.02 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.240.00 2.38 Total :27.40 124768 4/7/2011 069751 ARAMARK 655-5460327 21580001 UNIFORM SERVICE 411.000.656.538.800.410.23 67.38 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.410.23 6.40 21580001655-5472416 UNIFORM SERVICE 411.000.656.538.800.240.00 67.38 2Page: Packet Page 34 of 299 04/07/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 3 7:54:23AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124768 4/7/2011 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.240.00 6.40 Total :147.56 124769 4/7/2011 073394 ARONSON SECURITY GROUP INC WO-SEA-4270 Library - Power Supply Library - Power Supply 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 25.00 Freight 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 17.17 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 4.01 Total :46.18 124770 4/7/2011 071124 ASSOCIATED PETROLEUM 0174644-IN 01-7500014 DIESEL 411.000.656.538.800.320.00 7,806.84 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.320.00 741.64 Total :8,548.48 124771 4/7/2011 001801 AUTOMATIC WILBERT VAULT CO 17687 BURIAL SUPPLIES BURIAL SUPPLIES: LYONS 130.000.640.536.200.340.00 678.00 BURIAL SUPPLIES17768 BURIAL SUPPLIES: WALKER 130.000.640.536.200.340.00 678.00 BURIAL SUPPLIES17831 BURIAL SUPPLIES: FEDOROVICH 130.000.640.536.200.340.00 393.00 Total :1,749.00 124772 4/7/2011 073035 AVAGIMOVA, KARINE 1171 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.501.410.01 100.00 INTERPRETER FEE1172 3Page: Packet Page 35 of 299 04/07/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 4 7:54:23AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124772 4/7/2011 (Continued)073035 AVAGIMOVA, KARINE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.500.410.01 100.00 Total :200.00 124773 4/7/2011 069076 BACKGROUND INVESTIGATIONS INC COE0311 Background check services Background check services 001.000.220.516.100.410.00 110.00 Total :110.00 124774 4/7/2011 061659 BAILEY'S TRADITIONAL TAEKWON BAILEYS13527 TAEKWON DO CLASSES TAEKWON DO #13527 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 81.90 TAEKWON DO #13531 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 218.40 CONTINUING TAEKWON DO #13421 001.000.640.575.540.410.00 1,307.44 CONTINUING TAEKWON DO #13425 001.000.640.575.540.410.00 708.30 Total :2,316.04 124775 4/7/2011 066891 BEACON PUBLISHING INC 5644 DISPLAY AD/CEMETERY DISPLAY AD - EDMONDS BEACON 3/10 130.000.640.536.200.440.00 108.00 Total :108.00 124776 4/7/2011 069218 BISHOP, PAUL 397 WEB SITE MAINTENANCE Web Site Maintenance 001.000.310.518.880.410.00 390.00 Prepare & modify sample "Thumbs Up for 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 829.83 Total :1,219.83 124777 4/7/2011 068484 CEMEX LLC 9421172005 Storm - Dump Fees Storm - Dump Fees 411.000.652.542.320.490.00 677.37 4Page: Packet Page 36 of 299 04/07/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 5 7:54:23AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124777 4/7/2011 (Continued)068484 CEMEX LLC Storm Dump Fees9421198031 Storm Dump Fees 411.000.652.542.320.490.00 67.15 Street - Asphalt, Concrete9421198032 Street - Asphalt, Concrete 111.000.653.542.610.310.00 728.38 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.610.310.00 69.19 Total :1,542.09 124778 4/7/2011 003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY RN03111014 HELIUM FOR GYMNASTICS PARTIES HELIUM FOR GYMNASTICS BIRTHDAY PARTY 001.000.640.575.550.450.00 11.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.575.550.450.00 1.05 Total :12.05 124779 4/7/2011 073616 CFO SELECTIONS LLC 6739 Professional services - Jim Tarte (3/28 Professional services - Jim Tarte (3/28 001.000.310.514.100.410.00 4,843.75 Total :4,843.75 124780 4/7/2011 073430 CHUPRINA, LARISSA CHUPRINA13380 UKRAINIAN EGG DECORATING UKRAINIAN EGG DECORATING #13380 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 81.25 UKRAINIAN EGG DECORATING #13381 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 178.75 Total :260.00 124781 4/7/2011 019215 CITY OF LYNNWOOD 8564 Street - Signal Maint Through 12/31/10 Street - Signal Maint Through 12/31/10 111.000.653.542.640.510.00 401.35 MONTHLY MAINT/OPERATIONS SEWER COSTS8576 MONTHLY MAINT/OPERATIONS SEWER COSTS 411.000.655.535.800.472.00 13,800.83 5Page: Packet Page 37 of 299 04/07/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 6 7:54:23AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :14,202.18124781 4/7/2011 019215 019215 CITY OF LYNNWOOD 124782 4/7/2011 019215 CITY OF LYNNWOOD 8575 INV 8575 CUST #1430 EDMONDS PD VERIZON CHARGES FOR NARC 104.000.410.521.210.420.00 50.90 Total :50.90 124783 4/7/2011 035160 CITY OF SEATTLE 2-533584-460571 WATER USEAGE FOR THE MONTH Water Useage for the Month of March 11 411.000.654.534.800.330.00 450.00 Total :450.00 124784 4/7/2011 071389 COASTAL WEAR PRODUCTS INC 2282 Unit - 138 - Tube Brooms, Gutterbrooms Unit - 138 - Tube Brooms, Gutterbrooms 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 2,331.12 Freight 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 25.00 Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 209.69 Total :2,565.81 124785 4/7/2011 004095 COASTWIDE LABS W2298006 005302 TRASH LINERS 411.000.656.538.800.310.23 162.99 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.23 15.48 Total :178.47 124786 4/7/2011 073292 COBURN, KAI COBURN0331 VOLLEYBALL GYM ATTENDANT VOLLEYBALL GYM ATTENDANT @ EDMONDS CC 001.000.640.575.520.410.00 60.00 Total :60.00 124787 4/7/2011 070323 COMCAST 0721433 CEMETERY BUNDLED SERVICES BUNDLED SERVICES FOR CEMETERY OFFICE 130.000.640.536.200.420.00 113.81 6Page: Packet Page 38 of 299 04/07/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 7 7:54:23AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :113.81124787 4/7/2011 070323 070323 COMCAST 124788 4/7/2011 062891 COOK PAGING WA 8271293 WATER PAGER pagers-water 411.000.654.534.800.420.00 4.24 Total :4.24 124789 4/7/2011 065683 CORRY'S FINE DRY CLEANING APR 2011 DRY CLEANING/LAUNDRY - MAR- EDMONDS PD DRY CLEANING/LAUNDRY 03/2011 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 839.55 Total :839.55 124790 4/7/2011 005965 CUES INC 342612 Sewer - TV Truck Parts Sewer - TV Truck Parts 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 599.97 Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 38.00 Total :637.97 124791 4/7/2011 070230 DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING 3/8/11 - 4/6/11 STATE SHARE OF CONCEALED PISTOL State Share of Concealed Pistol 001.000.000.237.190.000.00 342.00 Total :342.00 124792 4/7/2011 029900 DEPT OF RETIREMENT SYSTEMS March 2011 DRS MARCH 2011 DRS CONTRIBUTIONS March 2011 DRS Contributions 811.000.000.231.540.000.00 138,238.97 Penalty for R. Ramseur late payment 001.000.410.521.220.110.00 5.55 Total :138,244.52 124793 4/7/2011 068591 DOUBLEDAY, MICHAEL 03312011 STATE LOBBYIST FOR MARCH 2011 State lobbyist charges for March 2011 001.000.610.519.700.410.00 4,135.00 Total :4,135.00 124794 4/7/2011 070244 DUANE HARTMAN & ASSOCIATES INC 11-1812.2 E1FA.SERVICES THRU 3/27/11 7Page: Packet Page 39 of 299 04/07/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 8 7:54:23AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124794 4/7/2011 (Continued)070244 DUANE HARTMAN & ASSOCIATES INC E1FA.Services thru 3/27/11 412.200.630.594.320.410.00 11,383.00 E9FB.TASK ORDER 11-01 TALBOT RD SURVEY11-1827.1 E9FB.Task Order 11-01 Talbot Road Survey 412.200.630.594.320.410.00 2,500.00 Total :13,883.00 124795 4/7/2011 073037 EDMONDS ACE HARDWARE 001551/1 WATER DEPT Water - Supplies 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 24.48 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 2.33 FAC MAINT001552/1 Parks - Batteries 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 11.98 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 1.14 FAC MAINT001554/1 Fac Maint - Broom Supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 11.49 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 1.09 FAC MAINT001555/1 PS - Supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 14.56 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 1.38 Total :68.45 124796 4/7/2011 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 6-01127 WWTP WATER WWTP WATER 411.000.656.538.800.473.64 103.55 WWTP WATER6-01130 WWTP WATER 411.000.656.538.800.473.64 25.63 8Page: Packet Page 40 of 299 04/07/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 9 7:54:23AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124796 4/7/2011 (Continued)008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION WWTP WATER6-01140 WWTP WATER 411.000.656.538.800.473.64 771.53 Total :900.71 124797 4/7/2011 072951 ENECON USA 61926 CHEMCLAD/ENECLAD SUPER BOND CHEMCLAD/ENECLAD SUPER BOND 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 2,435.00 Freight 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 150.00 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 231.33 Total :2,816.33 124798 4/7/2011 071967 ENG, STEPHEN ENG13523 BEGINNING TAEKWON DO BEGINNING TAEKWON DO #13523 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 168.00 Total :168.00 124799 4/7/2011 067599 EWING ELECTRIC INC M836 Courts - Emergency Power Upgrade 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.230.512.500.350.10 743.38 Courts - Emergency Power Upgrade 001.000.230.512.500.350.10 7,825.07 Total :8,568.45 124800 4/7/2011 066378 FASTENAL COMPANY WAMOU22541 Unit 79 - Supplies Unit 79 - Supplies 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 6.95 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 0.66 Total :7.61 124801 4/7/2011 009895 FELDMAN, JAMES A 33111 PUBLIC DEFENDER FEE PUBLIC DEFENDER FEE 9Page: Packet Page 41 of 299 04/07/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 10 7:54:23AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124801 4/7/2011 (Continued)009895 FELDMAN, JAMES A 001.000.390.512.520.410.00 12,440.00 Total :12,440.00 124802 4/7/2011 070271 FIRST STATES INVESTORS 5200 319618 TENANT #101706 4TH AVE PARKING LOT RENT 4th Avenue Parking Lot Rent for April 001.000.390.519.900.450.00 300.00 Total :300.00 124803 4/7/2011 070855 FLEX PLAN SERVICES INC 173714 April 2011 - Section 132 plan fees April 2011 - Section 132 plan fees 001.000.220.516.100.410.00 25.00 Total :25.00 124804 4/7/2011 011900 FRONTIER 425-712-0647 IRRIGATION SYSTEM IRRIGATION SYSTEM 001.000.640.576.800.420.00 42.49 MEADOWDALE PRESCHOOL425-745-5055 MEADOWDALE PRESCHOOL 001.000.640.575.560.420.00 60.79 Total :103.28 124805 4/7/2011 011900 FRONTIER 425-771-0158 FS # 16 FS #16 001.000.651.519.920.420.00 168.57 CITY HALL FIRE ALARM SYSTEM425-776-6829 CITY HALL FIRE ALARM SYSTEM 001.000.651.519.920.420.00 226.08 Total :394.65 124806 4/7/2011 069350 GARNEY, RENEE 31611 TRAVE REFUND FOR COURT TRAINING TRAVE REFUND FOR COURT TRAINING 001.000.230.512.500.430.00 197.63 Total :197.63 124807 4/7/2011 012198 GFOA 0153002 MEMBERSHIP #53553002 Memebership D Sharp 10Page: Packet Page 42 of 299 04/07/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 11 7:54:23AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124807 4/7/2011 (Continued)012198 GFOA 001.000.310.514.230.490.00 250.00 Total :250.00 124808 4/7/2011 071945 GILL-ROSE, SUE GILL ROSE13256 WATERCOLOR CLASSES WATERCOLOR #13256 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 369.60 Total :369.60 124809 4/7/2011 063137 GOODYEAR AUTO SERVICE CENTER 099432 Unit 413 - Tires Unit 413 - Tires 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 343.08 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 32.59 Unit 86/90 - Tires099600 Unit 86/90 - Tires 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 429.12 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 40.77 Unit 6 - Tires099602 Unit 6 - Tires 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 247.74 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 23.54 Unit 86/90- Tire Disposal099603 Unit 86/90- Tire Disposal 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 81.00 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 7.70 Total :1,205.54 124810 4/7/2011 012199 GRAINGER 9491698073 PS - V Belts PS - V Belts 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 87.94 9.2% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 8.10 11Page: Packet Page 43 of 299 04/07/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 12 7:54:23AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :96.04124810 4/7/2011 012199 012199 GRAINGER 124811 4/7/2011 073533 H2NATION PUBLISHING INC 2007 INSTALLATION & WEB DEVELOPMENT Installation & development of Joomla 001.000.310.518.880.410.00 2,700.00 Installation & development of Joomla 001.000.240.513.110.410.00 2,700.00 Total :5,400.00 124812 4/7/2011 068011 HALLAM, RICHARD 23 LEOFF 1 Reimbursement LEOFF 1 Reimbursement 009.000.390.517.370.230.00 262.66 Total :262.66 124813 4/7/2011 012900 HARRIS FORD INC 116089 Unit 338 - Relay, Kits Unit 338 - Relay, Kits 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 46.83 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 4.45 Unit 132 - Hardware116132 Unit 132 - Hardware 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 5.66 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 0.54 Unit 132 - Sensor116135 Unit 132 - Sensor 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 45.41 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 4.31 Unit 93 - Filter Assembly116400 Unit 93 - Filter Assembly 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 136.55 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 12.97 Unit 93 - Latch116405 Unit 93 - Latch 12Page: Packet Page 44 of 299 04/07/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 13 7:54:23AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124813 4/7/2011 (Continued)012900 HARRIS FORD INC 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 14.40 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 1.37 Unit 680 - Pump Assembly116466 Unit 680 - Pump Assembly 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 190.44 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 18.09 Unit 134 - Indicator Assembly116550 Unit 134 - Indicator Assembly 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 24.87 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 2.36 Unit 648 - Bearing Assembly, Seal,116711 Unit 648 - Bearing Assembly, Seal, 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 408.47 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 38.80 Unit 680 - Core ReturnCM116466 Unit 680 - Core Return 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 -70.00 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 -6.65 Total :878.87 124814 4/7/2011 064721 HATZENBUHLER, HAROLD 25 LEOFF 1 Rieimbursement LEOFF 1 Rieimbursement 617.000.510.522.200.230.00 105.00 Total :105.00 124815 4/7/2011 072184 HAUSS, BERTRAND CT Grant March CT GRANT.SMART COMMUTER.MARCH INCENTIVES CT Grant.Smart Commuter.March Incentives 001.000.390.517.900.490.00 80.00 Total :80.00 13Page: Packet Page 45 of 299 04/07/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 14 7:54:23AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124816 4/7/2011 010900 HD FOWLER CO INC I2871745 Water Inventory - w-mtrliddi-02-030 Water Inventory - w-mtrliddi-02-030 411.000.654.534.800.341.00 668.00 Water - Supplies - Meter Boxes, Meter 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 4,493.40 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.341.00 63.46 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 426.87 Total :5,651.73 124817 4/7/2011 006030 HDR ENGINEERING INC 276788-H E4GA.SERVICES THRU 2/26/11 E4GA.Services thru 2/26/11 412.300.630.594.320.410.00 3,002.52 Total :3,002.52 124818 4/7/2011 013500 HINGSON, ROBERT 24 LEOFF 1 Reimbursement LEOFF 1 Reimbursement 009.000.390.517.370.230.00 11.46 Total :11.46 124819 4/7/2011 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 3130801 6035322500959949 CLEANER 411.000.656.538.800.310.59 95.48 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.59 9.07 60353225009599494043984 LUMBER 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 12.66 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 1.20 60353225009599498562072 STEEL RING/QK LINK 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 8.88 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 0.84 14Page: Packet Page 46 of 299 04/07/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 15 7:54:23AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124819 4/7/2011 (Continued)067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 60353225009599499085016 CONDUIT 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 23.85 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 2.27 Total :154.25 124820 4/7/2011 070042 IKON 84485107 C/A 467070-1003748A4 Finance Copier Rental 3/22/11-4/21/11 001.000.310.514.230.450.00 454.07 Additional BW & Color Copies 1/25/11 - 001.000.310.514.230.450.00 93.15 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.310.514.230.450.00 52.00 Total :599.22 124821 4/7/2011 070042 IKON 84485109 COPIER LEASE PARK MAINTENANCE COPIER LEASE 001.000.640.576.800.450.00 24.37 Total :24.37 124822 4/7/2011 066256 IMSA NW CERTIFICATION 20110317-9 Street - Sign & Markings Class and Exam Street - Sign & Markings Class and Exam 111.000.653.542.310.490.00 840.00 Sign & Markings Class for K Harris 411.000.652.542.400.490.00 350.00 Total :1,190.00 124823 4/7/2011 073548 INDOFF INCORPORATED 1847689 Misc. office supplies including green Misc. office supplies including green 001.000.620.558.800.310.00 226.80 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.620.558.800.310.00 21.56 Total :248.36 15Page: Packet Page 47 of 299 04/07/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 16 7:54:23AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124824 4/7/2011 068952 INFINITY INTERNET 2960831 PRESCHOOL INTERNET ACCESS MEADOWDALE PRESCHOOL INTERNET ACCESS 001.000.640.575.560.420.00 15.00 Total :15.00 124825 4/7/2011 065873 ITE WASHINGTON STATE SECTION ITE Conference HAUSS.2011 ITE QUAD SECTION CONF Hauss.2011 ITE Quad Section Conference 001.000.620.532.200.490.00 125.00 Total :125.00 124826 4/7/2011 069264 J & K ASSOCIATES 1353 Street - 20" Speading Disc Assembly Street - 20" Speading Disc Assembly 111.000.653.542.660.310.00 640.00 Freight 111.000.653.542.660.310.00 80.00 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.660.310.00 68.40 Total :788.40 124827 4/7/2011 015233 JOBS AVAILABLE A08012 Finance Director ad (#11-13) Finance Director ad (#11-13) 001.000.220.516.100.440.00 262.50 Total :262.50 124828 4/7/2011 073618 KANZLER, JENNIFER KANZLER0331 REFUND REFUND DUE TO MEDICAL REASONS 001.000.000.239.200.000.00 22.73 Total :22.73 124829 4/7/2011 072728 KAVADAS, JANET KAVADAS13430 PERSONAL TRAINING WEIGHT ROOM ORIENTATION #13434 001.000.640.575.540.410.00 10.50 PERSONAL TRAINING #13430 001.000.640.575.540.410.00 28.00 Total :38.50 124830 4/7/2011 072650 KCDA PURCHASING COOPERATIVE 3470741 INV 3470741 CUST EDMONDS PD 16Page: Packet Page 48 of 299 04/07/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 17 7:54:23AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124830 4/7/2011 (Continued)072650 KCDA PURCHASING COOPERATIVE 10 CASES OF COPY PAPER 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 233.40 HANDLING FEE 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 35.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 22.17 Total :290.57 124831 4/7/2011 068711 LAWN EQUIPMENT SUPPLY 3011-346 LAWN EQUIPMENT SUPPLIES TRIMMER HANDLE, FUEL GUARD 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 20.35 Freight 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 14.10 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 3.27 Total :37.72 124832 4/7/2011 072059 LEE, NICOLE 461 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.500.410.01 100.00 Total :100.00 124833 4/7/2011 069634 LEXISNEXIS 1201641-20110331 INV 1201641-20110331 EDMONDS PD SEARCHES & REPORTS - 03/11 001.000.410.521.210.410.00 71.15 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.210.410.00 6.76 Total :77.91 124834 4/7/2011 018980 LYNNWOOD HONDA 741475 SUPPLIES SUPPLIES FOR MOWER REPAIR 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 81.58 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 7.75 17Page: Packet Page 49 of 299 04/07/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 18 7:54:23AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :89.33124834 4/7/2011 018980 018980 LYNNWOOD HONDA 124835 4/7/2011 069362 MARSHALL, CITA 1023 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.500.410.01 87.65 INTERPRETER FEE1024 INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.390.512.520.410.00 87.65 INTERPRETER FEE1025 INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.501.410.01 87.65 Total :262.95 124836 4/7/2011 020039 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO 79829247 123106800 V-BELTS 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 150.88 Freight 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 6.27 12310680080904873 SANDING BELTS/GREASE GUN/BATTERIES~ 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 997.96 Freight 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 18.45 Total :1,173.56 124837 4/7/2011 072010 MEISER, GARLAND MEISER0405 PICKLE BALL LEAGUE SUPERVISOR PICKLE BALL LEAGUE SUPERVISOR @ 001.000.640.575.520.410.00 60.00 Total :60.00 124838 4/7/2011 072223 MILLER, DOUG MILLER0329 SOFTBALL FIELD ATTENDANT SOFTBALL FIELD ATTENDANT 001.000.640.575.520.410.00 160.00 Total :160.00 124839 4/7/2011 072492 MOLINA, NILDA MOLINA13515 ZUMBA ZUMBA #13515 18Page: Packet Page 50 of 299 04/07/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 19 7:54:23AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124839 4/7/2011 (Continued)072492 MOLINA, NILDA 001.000.640.575.540.410.00 994.00 Total :994.00 124840 4/7/2011 021983 MOTOR TRUCKS INC 110223263 Unit 14 - Step Unit 14 - Step 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 54.12 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 5.14 Unit 106 - Kit1-10223797 Unit 106 - Kit 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 71.09 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 6.75 Total :137.10 124841 4/7/2011 072746 MURRAY SMITH & ASSOCIATES 11-1196-2 E1JA.SERVICES THRU 2/28/11 E1JA.Services thru 2/21/11 412.100.630.594.320.410.00 22,200.81 E1JA.SERVICES THRU 2/28/1111-1199-2 E1JA.Services thru 2/28/11 412.100.630.594.320.410.00 5,140.15 E1JA.Services thru 2/28/11 112.200.630.595.330.410.00 3,947.65 Total :31,288.61 124842 4/7/2011 064570 NATIONAL SAFETY INC 0292372-IN Sewer - Calibration Stations for Gas Sewer - Calibration Stations for Gas 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 1,515.00 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 143.94 Total :1,658.94 124843 4/7/2011 070788 NETRIVER INC 53783 WEBHOSTING FOR PUGET SOUND BIRD FEST 2ND Webhosting for Puget Sound Bird Fest 120.000.310.575.420.410.00 35.85 19Page: Packet Page 51 of 299 04/07/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 20 7:54:23AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :35.85124843 4/7/2011 070788 070788 NETRIVER INC 124844 4/7/2011 068451 NORTHEND TRUCK EQUIPMENT INC 1024889 Unit 11 - Fabricate and Install Fold Unit 11 - Fabricate and Install Fold 511.000.657.548.680.480.00 600.00 8.6% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.480.00 51.60 Unit 22 - Install Ladder1024905 Unit 22 - Install Ladder 511.000.657.548.680.480.00 300.00 8.6% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.480.00 25.80 Total :977.40 124845 4/7/2011 061013 NORTHWEST CASCADE INC 1-267255 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL HONEY BUCKET RENTAL: HAINES WHARF PARK 001.000.640.576.800.450.00 57.00 Total :57.00 124846 4/7/2011 025690 NOYES, KARIN 000 00 203 HPC Minutes on 3/10/11. HPC Minutes on 3/10/11. 001.000.620.558.600.410.00 160.00 PB Minutes on 3/23/11.000 00 205 PB Minutes on 3/23/11. 001.000.620.558.600.410.00 320.00 Total :480.00 124847 4/7/2011 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 392260 INV#392260 ACCT#520437 250POL EDMONDS PD 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 12.50 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.910.310.00 2.43 HP TONER C4096A (ANDERSON) 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 107.49 HANGING FOLDERS (BLACKBURN) 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 24.08 20Page: Packet Page 52 of 299 04/07/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 21 7:54:23AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124847 4/7/2011 (Continued)063511 OFFICE MAX INC PREMIUM PHOTO PAPER 001.000.410.521.910.310.00 25.60 Total :172.10 124848 4/7/2011 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 522152 ASSORTED COPY PAPER ASSORTED C0PY PAPER, TAPE 001.000.640.574.100.310.00 271.28 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.574.100.310.00 25.77 Total :297.05 124849 4/7/2011 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 409951 OFFICE SUPPLIES Office Supplies 001.000.250.514.300.310.00 296.23 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.250.514.300.310.00 28.14 Total :324.37 124850 4/7/2011 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 402801 PW -Supplies PW -Supplies 001.000.650.519.910.310.00 22.64 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.650.519.910.310.00 2.15 Total :24.79 124851 4/7/2011 026200 OLYMPIC VIEW WATER DISTRICT 0054671 23700 104TH AVE W 23700 104TH AVE W 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 13.45 23700 104TH AVE W0060860 23700 104TH AVE W 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 75.98 Total :89.43 124852 4/7/2011 069873 PAPE MACHINERY INC 1734555 Unit 106 - V Belt, Belt Tension Unit 106 - V Belt, Belt Tension 21Page: Packet Page 53 of 299 04/07/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 22 7:54:23AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124852 4/7/2011 (Continued)069873 PAPE MACHINERY INC 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 192.25 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 18.26 Total :210.51 124853 4/7/2011 073019 PARAGON HEATING BLD20110203 Overpayment of online plumbing permit Overpayment of online plumbing permit 001.000.000.257.620.000.00 20.00 Total :20.00 124854 4/7/2011 008400 PETTY CASH - EPD EPD PETTY CASH4/1/11 EPD PETTY CASH 4/1/11 1/21/11 SCSPCA BREAKFAST MTG - MEAL - 001.000.410.521.100.430.00 15.00 PRINTING - PLOEGER PROMOTION 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 2.71 TREATS 1/25/11 POLICE FOUNDATION - 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 3.99 MAIL DRE APPLICATION - AJ COLLINS 001.000.410.521.100.420.00 9.81 MAIL BADGES TO ENTENMANN ROVIN FOR 001.000.410.521.100.420.00 7.82 REFRESHMENTS - TRAINING COORDINATOR 001.000.410.521.400.310.00 10.47 REFRESHMENTS - BACKGROUND CLASS - BARD 001.000.410.521.400.310.00 10.47 PACKING SUPPLIES FOR EVIDENCE TO BE 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 27.35 PURCHASE 2 LAPD RIOT HELMETS - SAMPLES 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 50.00 TREATS FOR 2/22/11 POLICE FOUNDATION 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 7.98 PARKING @ KC COURTHOUSE 11-0676 - DJ 001.000.410.521.210.490.00 10.00 8 PACKS OF 9V BATTERIES - EAGER 001.000.410.521.910.310.00 45.96 22Page: Packet Page 54 of 299 04/07/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 23 7:54:23AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124854 4/7/2011 (Continued)008400 PETTY CASH - EPD 3/18 SCSPCA BREAKFAST MTG - MEAL - 001.000.410.521.100.430.00 10.00 EXPRESS MAIL CHECK TO LAPD FOR 001.000.410.521.100.420.00 18.30 MAIL PAGERS TO USA MOBILITY - THOMPSON 001.000.410.521.100.420.00 10.67 PETTY CASH OVERAGE 001.000.000.369.900.000.00 -1.00 Total :239.53 124855 4/7/2011 073231 POLYDYNE INC 593838 101859 POLYMER 411.000.656.538.800.310.51 7,436.00 Total :7,436.00 124856 4/7/2011 071811 PONY MAIL BOX & BUSINESS CTR 191895 2000 UPS GROUND 411.000.656.538.800.420.00 29.13 Total :29.13 124857 4/7/2011 065021 PRINTING PLUS 69938 WRITE ON THE SOUND GRAPHICS GRAPHICS/WRITE ON THE SOUND AD 123.000.640.573.100.490.00 31.00 9.5% Sales Tax 123.000.640.573.100.490.00 2.95 Total :33.95 124858 4/7/2011 071911 PROTZ, MARGARET PROTZ13388 FELDENKRAIS FFELDENKRAIS #13388 001.000.640.575.540.410.00 178.50 FELDENKRAIS WORKSHOP #13391 001.000.640.575.540.410.00 87.50 Total :266.00 124859 4/7/2011 046900 PUGET SOUND ENERGY 0230757007 PARK & BUILDING MAINTENANCE SHOP 23Page: Packet Page 55 of 299 04/07/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 24 7:54:23AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124859 4/7/2011 (Continued)046900 PUGET SOUND ENERGY PARK & BUILDING MAINTENANCE SHOP 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 354.16 200 Dayton St-Vacant PW Bldg3689976003 200 Dayton St-Vacant PW Bldg 411.000.654.534.800.470.00 580.96 MEADOWDALE CLUBHOUSE5254926008 MEADOWDALE CLUBHOUSE 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 366.90 Fire Station # 165322323139 Fire Station # 16 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 1,124.78 SEWER LIFT STATION #95672895009 SEWER LIFT STATION #9 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 32.85 Total :2,459.65 124860 4/7/2011 070809 PUGET SOUND EXECUTIVE 11-169 COURT SECURITY COURT SECURITY 001.000.230.512.500.410.00 2,751.88 Total :2,751.88 124861 4/7/2011 030780 QUIRING MONUMENTS INC 116579 INSCRIPTION INSCRIPTION: WALKER 130.000.640.536.200.340.00 80.00 Total :80.00 124862 4/7/2011 069062 RONGERUDE, JOHN 7566 PUBLIC DEFENDER FEE PUBLIC DEFENDER FEE 001.000.390.512.520.410.00 2,000.00 Total :2,000.00 124863 4/7/2011 073066 SAFARILAND LLC I11-040410 I11-040410 EDMONDS PD 40MM EXACT IMPACT SPONGE-SMOKELESS 001.000.410.521.220.310.00 318.00 Freight 24Page: Packet Page 56 of 299 04/07/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 25 7:54:23AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124863 4/7/2011 (Continued)073066 SAFARILAND LLC 001.000.410.521.220.310.00 36.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.220.310.00 30.21 Total :384.21 124864 4/7/2011 067076 SEATTLE PUMP AND EQUIPMENT CO 11-748 Unit 106 - 8" Vac Tube Unit 106 - 8" Vac Tube 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 405.60 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 38.53 Unit 106 - Heavy Duty Cuffed Rubber11-792 Unit 106 - Heavy Duty Cuffed Rubber 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 1,345.00 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 127.78 Unit 106 - Vactor Hose End (6)11-869 Unit 106 - Vactor Hose End (6) 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 328.50 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 31.21 Total :2,276.62 124865 4/7/2011 066738 SETCOM CORPORATION 8218 Unit 405 - Helmet Extension Cable, Unit 405 - Helmet Extension Cable, 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 250.00 Freight 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 8.77 Total :258.77 124866 4/7/2011 066748 SNO CO DEPT OF INFO SERVICES I000269191 FEB-2011 CABINET & RACK SPACE RENTAL Cabinet & Rack space rental for 001.000.310.518.880.420.00 600.00 Total :600.00 124867 4/7/2011 037303 SNO CO FIRE DIST # 1 Q2-2011 Q2-2011 FIRE SERVICES CONTRACT PAYMENT 25Page: Packet Page 57 of 299 04/07/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 26 7:54:23AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124867 4/7/2011 (Continued)037303 SNO CO FIRE DIST # 1 Q2-2011 Fire Services Contract Payment 001.000.390.522.200.510.00 1,550,830.50 Total :1,550,830.50 124868 4/7/2011 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 2013-2711-1 610 PINE ST 610 PINE ST 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 30.02 750 15TH ST SW/EDMONDS2015-5730-3 750 15TH ST SW/CEMETERY 130.000.640.536.500.470.00 374.23 750 15TH ST SW/CEMETERY2016-1027-6 750 15TH ST SW/CEMETERY 130.000.640.536.500.470.00 16.17 750 15TH ST SW/CEMETERY2021-6153-5 750 15TH ST SW/CEMETERY 130.000.640.536.500.470.00 129.14 Total :549.56 124869 4/7/2011 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 126954421 2019-9517-2 9805 EDMONDS WAY/WESTGATE 411.000.656.538.800.471.62 31.04 Total :31.04 124870 4/7/2011 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 200124873 SIGNAL LIGHT 9933 100TH W SIGNAL LIGHT 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 52.79 SIGNAL LIGHT 23800 FIRDALE AVE201103561 SIGNAL LIGHT - 23800 Firdale Ave 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 55.47 SIGNAL LIGHT 660 EDMONDS WAY201563434 SIGNAL LIGHT 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 51.78 23190 100TH W SCHOOL CROSSWALK LITE201703758 23190 100th W School Crosswalk Lite 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 50.43 26Page: Packet Page 58 of 299 04/07/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 27 7:54:23AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124870 4/7/2011 (Continued)037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 STREET LIGHTING (150 WATTS = 183 LIGHTS201711785 Street Lighting (150 Watts = 183 lights 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 1,429.64 MUNICIPAL ST LIGHTS (200WATTS:303 LITES)202529186 MUNICIPAL ST LIGHTS (200WATTS:303 LITES) 111.000.653.542.630.470.00 2,649.74 MUNICIPAL ST LIGHTS (400WATTS:13 LITES)202529202 MUNICIPAL ST LIGHTING (400WATTS:13 111.000.653.542.630.470.00 184.24 MUNICIPAL ST LIGHTS (100WATTS:2029 LITE)202576153 MUNICIPAL ST LIGHTS (100WATTS:2029 LITE) 111.000.653.542.630.470.00 13,810.47 MUNICIPAL ST LIGHTS (250WATTS:58 LITES)202579488 MUNICIPAL ST LIGHTS (250WATTS:58 LITES) 111.000.653.542.630.470.00 596.97 Total :18,881.53 124871 4/7/2011 037376 SNO CO PUD NO 1 0390003958 ACCT 000600009120 Advanced Contact fee on jointly owned 001.000.310.518.870.410.00 35.19 Total :35.19 124872 4/7/2011 063941 SNO CO SHERIFFS OFFICE I000269210 INV I000269210 CUST # SSH00095 EDMONDS 2/28/11 - 10 HRS RANGE USE @ $50/HR 001.000.410.521.400.410.00 500.00 Total :500.00 124873 4/7/2011 037521 SNO CO TREASURER 00479000100302 2011 FIRST HALF SURFACE WATER TAX 2011 Surface Water Charges 23009 88th 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 263.49 Total :263.49 124874 4/7/2011 065910 SNOCOM 911 COMMUNICATIONS 749 Q2-2-11 COMMUNICATIONS QUARTERLY SERVICES 001.000.390.528.600.510.00 186,301.18 27Page: Packet Page 59 of 299 04/07/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 28 7:54:23AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124874 4/7/2011 (Continued)065910 SNOCOM 911 COMMUNICATIONS QUARTERLY SERVICES 411.000.654.534.800.510.00 5,883.20 QUARTERLY SERVICES 411.000.655.535.800.510.00 3,922.12 Q2-2011 NEW WORLD PROJECT757 Q2-11 New World Project 001.000.390.528.600.510.00 32,818.00 Total :228,924.50 124875 4/7/2011 067609 SNOHOMISH COUNTY CITIES AWC Leg Recept 2-11 AWC Leg Recept/Meal 2/16/11 ~ AWC Leg Recept/Meal 2/16/11 ~ 001.000.110.511.100.430.00 60.00 Snohomish County Cities Dinner Mtg -SCC - 3-24-2011 Snohomish County Cities Dinner Mtg - 001.000.110.511.100.430.00 35.00 Total :95.00 124876 4/7/2011 038300 SOUND DISPOSAL CO 103587 DISPOSAL FEES PARK MAINTENANCE DISPOSAL SERVICES 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 569.63 Total :569.63 124877 4/7/2011 038300 SOUND DISPOSAL CO 103584 RECYCLE RECYCLE 411.000.656.538.800.475.66 29.95 Total :29.95 124878 4/7/2011 038300 SOUND DISPOSAL CO 103583 garbage & recycle for PS garbage & recycle for PS 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 550.68 garbage & recycle for FAC103585 garbage & recycle for FAC 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 674.47 garbage & recycle for Library103586 garbage & recycle for Library 28Page: Packet Page 60 of 299 04/07/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 29 7:54:23AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124878 4/7/2011 (Continued)038300 SOUND DISPOSAL CO 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 592.78 garbage & recycle-City Hall103588 garbage & recycle-City Hall 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 459.89 Total :2,277.82 124879 4/7/2011 038410 SOUND SAFETY PRODUCTS 2410986-01 Sewer - Exchanged jeans - Difference Sewer - Exchanged jeans - Difference 411.000.655.535.800.240.00 1.25 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.240.00 0.12 Storm - Work Sweatshirt - J Ward4182048-01 Storm - Work Sweatshirt - J Ward 411.000.652.542.900.240.00 64.00 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.652.542.900.240.00 6.08 Total :71.45 124880 4/7/2011 073549 STERRETT CONSULTING LLC 0902-02 Consulting Services Jan-Feb. 2011 - Consulting Services Jan-Feb. 2011 - 001.000.620.558.600.410.00 3,250.80 Total :3,250.80 124881 4/7/2011 068619 SWENSON, LINDA 1220 MAY-AUG 2011 CRAZE DESIGN SUMMER CRAZE DESIGN 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 1,410.25 Total :1,410.25 124882 4/7/2011 040917 TACOMA SCREW PRODUCTS INC 18931369 100323 THREADED ROD/COUPLING 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 48.91 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 4.65 Total :53.56 124883 4/7/2011 073621 TANIMURA, NAOAKI TANIMURA13396 KENDO 29Page: Packet Page 61 of 299 04/07/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 30 7:54:23AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124883 4/7/2011 (Continued)073621 TANIMURA, NAOAKI KENDO #13396 001.000.640.575.540.410.00 474.50 Total :474.50 124884 4/7/2011 040916 TC SPAN AMERICA 55324 Fleet - Work Jackets Fleet - Work Jackets 511.000.657.548.680.240.00 135.00 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.240.00 12.83 Total :147.83 124885 4/7/2011 009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY 148134-3/31/2011 GIS Analyst ad, (#11-10) GIS Analyst ad, (#11-10) 001.000.220.516.100.440.00 319.20 Parks Maintenance Mechanic ad (#11-12) 001.000.220.516.100.440.00 145.69 Finance Director ad (#11-13) 001.000.220.516.100.440.00 145.69 Total :610.58 124886 4/7/2011 009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY 1730807 NEWSPAPER ADS 4/5 Hearing (Surplus Assets) 001.000.250.514.300.440.00 51.72 Total :51.72 124887 4/7/2011 027269 THE PART WORKS INC 306593 PW - Elect parts PW - Elect parts 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 49.94 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 4.74 Total :54.68 124888 4/7/2011 071550 THE PROP SHOP 39614 Boat- Outboard Repairs Boat- Outboard Repairs 511.000.657.548.680.480.00 70.00 30Page: Packet Page 62 of 299 04/07/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 31 7:54:23AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124888 4/7/2011 (Continued)071550 THE PROP SHOP 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.480.00 6.65 Total :76.65 124889 4/7/2011 066056 THE SEATTLE TIMES 042483000 Finance Director ads, #11-13 (2 Sundays) Finance Director ads, #11-13 (2 Sundays) 001.000.220.516.100.440.00 764.46 Total :764.46 124890 4/7/2011 038315 THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR 827266 CITY HALL ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE CITY HALL ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE 001.000.651.519.920.480.00 908.61 001.000.651.519.920.480.00 86.32 MONITORING-PS827267 monitoring-PS 001.000.651.519.920.480.00 44.29 SENIOR CENTER ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE835599 SENIOR CENTER ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE 001.000.651.519.920.480.00 163.81 001.000.651.519.920.480.00 15.56 Total :1,218.59 124891 4/7/2011 070744 TIGER OAK PUBLICATIONS INC 2011-58684 TOURISM AD IN APRIL 2011 SEATTLE MAG Tourism ad in Seattle Magazine April 120.000.310.575.420.440.00 500.00 Total :500.00 124892 4/7/2011 061192 UNITED PIPE & SUPPLY 8635141 Water Meter Inventory - Water Meter Inventory - 411.000.654.534.800.342.00 4,635.90 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.342.00 440.41 Water Meter Inventory -8635142 31Page: Packet Page 63 of 299 04/07/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 32 7:54:23AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124892 4/7/2011 (Continued)061192 UNITED PIPE & SUPPLY Water Meter Inventory - 411.000.654.534.800.342.00 4,635.90 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.342.00 440.41 Water Supplies- Resetters, Curb Stops,8635914 Water Supplies- Resetters, Curb Stops, 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 3,334.25 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 316.76 Water - Adaptors8639093 Water - Adaptors 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 107.40 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 10.20 Water Inventory - m-meter-01-0108639227 Water Inventory - m-meter-01-010 411.000.654.534.800.342.00 4,719.20 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.342.00 448.33 Water - Returned Adaptors8640083 Water - Returned Adaptors 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 -206.00 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 -19.57 Water -Adaptors8640452 Water -Adaptors 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 107.40 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 10.20 Total :18,980.79 124893 4/7/2011 068724 US HEALTHWORKS MED GROUP OF WA0354194-WA Water Dept - 1 DOT Water Dept - 1 DOT 411.000.654.534.800.410.00 65.00 32Page: Packet Page 64 of 299 04/07/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 33 7:54:23AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :65.00124893 4/7/2011 068724 068724 US HEALTHWORKS MED GROUP OF WA 124894 4/7/2011 069592 USA MOBILITY WIRELESS U0298897C INV#U0298897C ACCT#0298897-0 EDMONDS PD PAGER SERVICE 03/27-04/26/11 001.000.410.521.100.420.00 163.48 Total :163.48 124895 4/7/2011 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS 0962150457 C/A 571242650-0001 Blackberry Cell Phone Service Bld Dept 001.000.620.524.100.420.00 100.07 Blackberry Cell Phone Service City Clerk 001.000.250.514.300.420.00 57.06 Blackberry Cell Phone Service Court 001.000.230.512.500.420.00 193.16 Blackberry Cell Phone Service Planning 001.000.620.558.600.420.00 57.06 Blackberry Cell Phone Service Econ 001.000.610.519.700.420.00 57.06 Blackberry Cell Phone Service 001.000.620.532.200.420.00 344.68 Blackberry Cell Phone Service Facilities 001.000.651.519.920.420.00 138.75 Blackberry Cell Phone Service Finance 001.000.310.514.230.420.00 57.06 Blackberry Cell Phone Service HR 001.000.220.516.100.420.00 57.36 Blackberry Cell Phone Service IT 001.000.310.518.880.420.00 324.07 Blackberry Cell Phone Service Mayor's 001.000.210.513.100.420.00 157.13 Blackberry Cell Phone Service Parks Dept 001.000.640.574.100.420.00 57.65 Blackberry Cell Phone Service Police 001.000.410.521.220.420.00 1,108.80 Blackberry Air Cards Police Dept 001.000.410.521.220.420.00 788.39 33Page: Packet Page 65 of 299 04/07/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 34 7:54:23AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124895 4/7/2011 (Continued)067865 VERIZON WIRELESS Blackberry Cell Phone Service PW Admin 001.000.650.519.910.420.00 114.42 Blackberry Cell Phone Service PW St Dept 111.000.653.542.900.420.00 68.13 Blackberry Cell Phone Service PW Fleet 511.000.657.548.680.420.00 57.36 Blackberry Cell Phone Service PW Water/ 411.000.654.534.800.420.00 56.01 Blackberry Cell Phone Service PW Water/ 411.000.655.535.800.420.00 56.00 Blackberry Cell Phone Service Sewer Dept 411.000.655.535.800.420.00 102.11 Blackberry Cell Phone Service WWTP 411.000.656.538.800.420.00 115.58 Blackberry Cell Phone Service Water 411.000.654.534.800.420.00 144.24 Total :4,212.15 124896 4/7/2011 064858 VISITORS GUIDE PUBLICATIONS 11-0117 TOURISM AD IN SNOHOMISH CO VISITOR GUIDE Tourism ad in Snohomish County 120.000.310.575.420.440.00 2,295.00 Total :2,295.00 124897 4/7/2011 064858 VISITORS GUIDE PUBLICATIONS 11-0112 VISITORS GUIDE LISTING VISITORS GUIDE LISTING - ARTS PAGE 123.000.640.573.100.440.00 250.00 Total :250.00 124898 4/7/2011 073552 WELCO SALES LLC 5090 SUPPLIES SUPPLIES 001.000.230.512.501.310.00 116.18 Total :116.18 124899 4/7/2011 073619 WESTMORELAND, ANGELA WESTMORELAND0329 REFUND CLASS REFUND PER PATTY 34Page: Packet Page 66 of 299 04/07/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 35 7:54:23AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124899 4/7/2011 (Continued)073619 WESTMORELAND, ANGELA 001.000.000.239.200.000.00 29.82 Total :29.82 124900 4/7/2011 071631 WILLIAMS, SUE WILLIAMS13581 CROCHET 101 CROCHET 101 #13581 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 32.50 Total :32.50 124901 4/7/2011 073479 WU, THOMAS 1105 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.500.410.01 100.00 Total :100.00 124902 4/7/2011 051280 ZEP MANUFACTURING COMPANY 63036746 Sewer - Supplies Sewer - Supplies 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 202.80 Freight 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 37.50 Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 15.62 Total :255.92 Bank total : 2,141,127.63144 Vouchers for bank code :front 2,141,127.63Total vouchers :Vouchers in this report144 35Page: Packet Page 67 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 1 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124903 4/8/2011 066256 IMSA NW CERTIFICATION 20110317-9 Street - Sign & Markings Class and Exam Street - Sign & Markings Class and Exam 111.000.653.542.310.490.00 840.00 Sign & Markings Class for K Harris 411.000.652.542.400.490.00 350.00 Total :1,190.00 124905 4/14/2011 066417 AIRGAS NOR PAC INC 101125982 M5Z34 CYLINDER RENTAL 411.000.656.538.800.450.21 65.70 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.450.21 6.24 Total :71.94 124906 4/14/2011 065568 ALLWATER INC 040711038 COEWASTE DRINKING WATER 411.000.656.538.800.310.11 22.52 Total :22.52 124907 4/14/2011 069751 ARAMARK 655-5484650 UNIFORM SERVICES PARK MAINTENANCE UNIFORM SERVICES 001.000.640.576.800.240.00 25.02 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.240.00 2.38 Total :27.40 124908 4/14/2011 069751 ARAMARK 655-5484657 21580001 UNIFORM 411.000.656.538.800.240.00 67.95 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.240.00 6.46 Total :74.41 124909 4/14/2011 069751 ARAMARK 655-5464962 STREET/STORM UNIFORM SVC Street Storm Uniform Svc 1Page: Packet Page 68 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 2 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124909 4/14/2011 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK 111.000.653.542.900.240.00 5.00 Street Storm Uniform Svc 411.000.652.542.900.240.00 5.00 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.900.240.00 0.48 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.652.542.900.240.00 0.47 FLEET UNIFORM SVC655-5464964 Fleet Uniform Svc 511.000.657.548.680.240.00 43.00 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.240.00 4.09 FAC MAINT UNIFORM SVC655-5472409 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 MATS655-5477079 PW MATS 001.000.650.519.910.410.00 1.01 PW MATS 111.000.653.542.900.410.00 3.84 PW MATS 411.000.654.534.800.410.00 3.84 PW MATS 411.000.652.542.900.410.00 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 2Page: Packet Page 69 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 3 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124909 4/14/2011 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.410.00 0.37 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.652.542.900.410.00 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 STREET/STORM UNIFORM SVC655-5477080 Street Storm Uniform Svc 111.000.653.542.900.240.00 5.00 Street Storm Uniform Svc 411.000.652.542.900.240.00 5.00 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.900.240.00 0.48 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.652.542.900.240.00 0.47 FLEET UNIFORM SVC655-5477082 Fleet Uniform Svc 511.000.657.548.680.240.00 10.00 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.240.00 0.95 FAC MAINT UNIFORM SVC655-5484651 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 MATS655-5489379 PW MATS 001.000.650.519.910.410.00 1.01 PW MATS 111.000.653.542.900.410.00 3.84 PW MATS 411.000.654.534.800.410.00 3.84 3Page: Packet Page 70 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 4 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124909 4/14/2011 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK PW MATS 411.000.652.542.900.410.00 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 411.000.654.534.800.410.00 0.37 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.652.542.900.410.00 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 Total :194.64 124910 4/14/2011 064343 AT&T 425-776-5316 PARKS FAX MODEM PARKS FAX MODEM 001.000.640.576.800.420.00 44.53 Total :44.53 124911 4/14/2011 001527 AWWA AWWA 2011 Dues 2011 Annual Dues - J Waite, Noel Miller 2011 Annual Dues - J Waite, Noel Miller 411.000.654.534.800.490.00 1,805.00 2011 Annual Dues - K Kuhnhausen 411.000.654.534.800.490.00 78.00 Total :1,883.00 124912 4/14/2011 002500 BLUMENTHAL UNIFORMS & EQUIP 849559-80 INV#849559-80 CREDIT PANTS-DAWSON RETURN UNIFORM PANTS 001.000.410.521.700.240.00 -52.95 4Page: Packet Page 71 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 5 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124912 4/14/2011 (Continued)002500 BLUMENTHAL UNIFORMS & EQUIP 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.700.240.00 -5.03 INV#849559-81 EDMONDS PD - DAWSON849559-81 UNIFORM PANTS 001.000.410.521.700.240.00 52.95 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.700.240.00 5.03 INV#864780 EDMONDS PD - NAMETAGS864780 NAMETAGS-BARD 001.000.410.521.400.240.00 16.50 NAMETAGS-LAWLESS 001.000.410.521.100.240.00 16.50 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.400.240.00 1.57 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.100.240.00 1.57 INV#864797 EDMONDS PD - LEE864797 5.11 JACKET 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 229.00 NAMETAGS-LEE 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 11.00 HEAT STAMP LETTERS 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 5.00 REFLECTIVE POLICE PANEL 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 8.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 24.04 INV#864797-01 EDMONDS PD - LEE864797-01 TURTLE NECK SHIRT 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 19.95 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 1.90 INV#867422 EDMONDS PD - ROBINSON867422 TIE BAR W/SEAL & LETTERS 5Page: Packet Page 72 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 6 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124912 4/14/2011 (Continued)002500 BLUMENTHAL UNIFORMS & EQUIP 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 16.95 NAVY TIE 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 9.90 TURTLE NECK SHIRTS 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 39.90 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 6.34 INV#868730 EDMONDS PD - POFF868730 RAIN PANTS 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 99.99 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 9.50 Total :517.61 124913 4/14/2011 002840 BRIM TRACTOR CO INC IL34984 Unit 18 - Bowl Part Unit 18 - Bowl Part 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 21.22 Freight 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 7.50 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 2.73 Total :31.45 124914 4/14/2011 003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY LY167203 2954000 ARGON/OXYGEN/COOLANT 411.000.656.538.800.450.21 131.53 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.450.21 12.49 2954000RN03111015 CYLINDER RENTAL 411.000.656.538.800.450.21 36.50 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.450.21 3.47 Total :183.99 6Page: Packet Page 73 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 7 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124915 4/14/2011 073616 CFO SELECTIONS LLC 6755 Jim Tarte's serivices (Interim Finance Jim Tarte's serivices (Interim Finance 001.000.310.514.100.410.00 4,906.25 Total :4,906.25 124916 4/14/2011 066070 CIT TECHNOLOGY FIN SERV INC 19051043 COPIER LEASE PW copier lease for PW 001.000.650.519.910.450.00 643.07 Total :643.07 124917 4/14/2011 019215 CITY OF LYNNWOOD 8587 INV#8587 CUST#45 EDMONDS PD - NEXTEL NEXTEL PHONES - NARCS 104.000.410.521.210.420.00 57.39 Total :57.39 124918 4/14/2011 022200 CITY OF MOUNTLAKE TERRACE 2128 SUMMER CRAZE POSTAGE EDMONDS PORTION OF SUMMER CRAZE POSTAGE 001.000.640.574.200.420.00 6,509.07 Total :6,509.07 124919 4/14/2011 073135 COGENT COMMUNICATIONS INC APR-11 C/A CITYOFED00001 Apr-11 Fiber Optics Internet Connection 001.000.310.518.870.420.00 916.20 Total :916.20 124920 4/14/2011 062975 COLLISION CLINIC INC 17265 Unit 413 - Door Repairs Unit 413 - Door Repairs 511.000.657.548.680.480.00 167.40 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.480.00 15.91 Total :183.31 124921 4/14/2011 068815 CORRECT EQUIPMENT 24036 Sewer - Lift Station - Breathing Cable Sewer - Lift Station - Breathing Cable 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 388.50 Freight 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 5.72 7Page: Packet Page 74 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 8 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124921 4/14/2011 (Continued)068815 CORRECT EQUIPMENT 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 37.45 Sewer - Lift Stations- Screws,24042 Sewer - Lift Stations- Screws, 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 514.67 Freight 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 10.91 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 49.93 Total :1,007.18 124922 4/14/2011 072189 DATASITE 68987 INV#68987 - EDMONDS PD SHREDDING 3/15/11-64 GAL TOTE 001.000.410.521.100.410.00 40.00 Total :40.00 124923 4/14/2011 061570 DAY WIRELESS SYSTEMS - 16 149974 Unit 680 - Radio Repairs Unit 680 - Radio Repairs 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 65.00 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 6.18 Unit 680 - Radio Repairs150034 Unit 680 - Radio Repairs 511.000.657.548.680.480.00 286.25 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.480.00 27.20 Total :384.63 124924 4/14/2011 047450 DEPT OF INFORMATION SERVICES 2011030113 CUSTOMER ID# D200-0 Scan Services for March 2011 001.000.310.518.880.420.00 1,679.24 Acrobat 10 license for PD detectives 001.000.410.521.210.410.00 386.32 CUSTOMER ID# D200-0CM2011010109 Scan Services credit on account 8Page: Packet Page 75 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 9 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124924 4/14/2011 (Continued)047450 DEPT OF INFORMATION SERVICES 001.000.310.518.880.420.00 -1,876.96 Total :188.60 124925 4/14/2011 006635 DEPT OF LICENSING 0107883 Records for Mike Thies - Code Records for Mike Thies - Code 001.000.620.558.800.490.00 5.12 Total :5.12 124926 4/14/2011 064531 DINES, JEANNIE 11-3191 MINUTE TAKING 04/05 Council Minutes 001.000.250.514.300.410.00 357.00 Total :357.00 124927 4/14/2011 007253 DUNN LUMBER 548750 LUMBER LUMBER 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 102.20 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 9.71 Total :111.91 124928 4/14/2011 031060 ELECSYS INTERNATIONAL CORP 095139 RADIX MONTHLY MAINT AGREEMENT Radix Monthly Maint Agreement -~ 411.000.654.534.800.480.00 152.00 Total :152.00 124929 4/14/2011 071640 EVERGREEN ID SYSTEMS LLC 5679 DTC 400 - ID badge machine belt kit DTC 400 - ID badge machine belt kit 001.000.220.516.100.490.00 10.00 Repair of DTC 400 - Id badge machine 001.000.220.516.100.490.00 228.00 Freight 001.000.220.516.100.490.00 15.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.220.516.100.490.00 24.04 Total :277.04 9Page: Packet Page 76 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 10 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124930 4/14/2011 072544 EVERGREEN REFRIGERATION BLD20100803 Online permit outside city jurisdiction. Online permit outside city jurisdiction. 001.000.000.257.620.000.00 105.00 Total :105.00 124931 4/14/2011 066378 FASTENAL COMPANY WAMOU22676 Unit M16 - Supplies Unit M16 - Supplies 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 14.52 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 1.38 Unit M-16WAMOU22687 Unit M-16 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 3.41 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 0.32 Total :19.63 124932 4/14/2011 009815 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC 0288034 Sewer - Supplies Sewer - Supplies 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 82.73 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 7.86 Total :90.59 124933 4/14/2011 011900 FRONTIER 425-744-1681 SEAVIEW PARK IRRIGATION MODEM SEAVIEW PARK IRRIGATION MODEM 001.000.640.576.800.420.00 42.37 SIERRA PARK IRRIGATION MODEM425-744-1691 SIERRA PARK IRRIGATION MODEM 001.000.640.576.800.420.00 41.71 GROUNDS MAINTENANCE FAX MODEM425-776-5316 GROUNDS MAINTENANCE FAX MODEM 001.000.640.576.800.420.00 109.97 Total :194.05 124934 4/14/2011 011900 FRONTIER 425 771-5553 03 0210 1014522641 07 10Page: Packet Page 77 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 11 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124934 4/14/2011 (Continued)011900 FRONTIER AUTO DIALER 411.000.656.538.800.420.00 95.26 03 0210 1079589413 10425 NW1-0060 AUTO DIALER 411.000.656.538.800.420.00 41.47 03 0210 1099569419 02425 NW1-0155 TELEMETRY 411.000.656.538.800.420.00 218.12 Total :354.85 124935 4/14/2011 011900 FRONTIER 425-AB9-0530 1ST & PINE CIRCUIT LINE PT EDWARDS 1st & Pine Circuit Line for Pt Edwards 411.000.655.535.800.420.00 40.75 Total :40.75 124936 4/14/2011 068265 FRONTIER ONLINE 30230346 WATER - BROADBAND SERVICE Water- Broadband Service for 411.000.654.534.800.420.00 79.99 Total :79.99 124937 4/14/2011 073627 GETAWAY MEDIA CORP 2442 INTERNET AD AT NORTHWEST TRAVEL ADVISOR Internet tourism ad at 120.000.310.575.420.440.00 274.00 Total :274.00 124938 4/14/2011 072515 GOOGLE INC 2406919 INTERNET ANTI-VIRUS & SPAM MAINT FEE Internet Anti-Virus & Spam Maint Fee - 001.000.310.518.880.480.00 1,046.66 Total :1,046.66 124939 4/14/2011 073625 GREEN FUTURES LAB, UW 06-9132-EDMOND Professional services for community Professional services for community 001.000.620.558.600.410.00 15,372.32 Total :15,372.32 124940 4/14/2011 068302 HALFON CANDY COMPANY 365863 CANDY FOR EGG HUNT 11Page: Packet Page 78 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 12 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124940 4/14/2011 (Continued)068302 HALFON CANDY COMPANY EGG HUNT CANDY 001.000.640.574.200.310.00 304.52 Total :304.52 124941 4/14/2011 013140 HENDERSON, BRIAN 26 LEOFF 1 Reimbursement LEOFF 1 Reimbursement 009.000.390.517.370.230.00 170.00 Total :170.00 124942 4/14/2011 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 1040164 city park - supplies city park - supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 6.28 museum - supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 7.62 fac. maint - supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 17.52 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 2.98 fac. maint - heat gun1086942 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.350.00 6.64 fac. maint - heat gun 001.000.651.519.920.350.00 69.94 storm water - plant stake1086996 storm water - plant stake 411.000.652.542.400.310.00 3.57 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.652.542.400.310.00 0.34 Storm - Supplies1087138 Storm - Supplies 411.000.652.542.400.490.00 39.97 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.652.542.400.490.00 3.80 fac. maint - mirror1572401 fac. maint - mirror 12Page: Packet Page 79 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 13 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124942 4/14/2011 (Continued)067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 8.96 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 0.85 fac. maint - supplies2033697 fac. maint - supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 22.15 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 2.10 city hall - supplies2033761 city hall - supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 2.98 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 0.28 parks - greenhouse supplies2033773 parks - greenhouse supplies 001.000.640.576.810.310.00 20.74 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.810.310.00 1.97 water - supplies2084310 water - supplies 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 55.87 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 5.31 fac. maint - supplies2096768 fac. maint - supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 6.94 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 0.66 public safety bldg - supplies2282161 public safety bldg - supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 24.78 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 2.35 traffic control - wrench and socket set3082131 13Page: Packet Page 80 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 14 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124942 4/14/2011 (Continued)067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES traffic control - wrench and socket set 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 77.69 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 7.38 yost pool - supplies3100943 yost pool - supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 66.94 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 6.36 library - supplies34048 library - supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 28.55 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 2.71 fac. maint - supplies4972924 fac. maint - supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 91.74 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 8.72 traffic control - supplies5031735 traffic control - supplies 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 24.72 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 2.35 library - supplies5034887 library - supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 17.24 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 1.64 fac. maint. - supplies5041254 fac. maint. - supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 20.65 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 1.96 14Page: Packet Page 81 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 15 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124942 4/14/2011 (Continued)067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES fac. maint - supplies5045557 fac. maint - supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 14.24 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 1.35 fac. maint - return5273792 fac. maint - return 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 -19.97 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 -1.90 fac maint. - supplies5282120 fac maint. - supplies 001.000.651.519.920.350.00 129.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.350.00 12.26 sewer - supplies595416 sewer - supplies 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 47.76 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 4.54 City Hall - Finance - Lamp6043642 City Hall - Finance - Lamp 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 19.97 Fac Maint - Spray 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 12.98 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 3.13 parks greenhouse - supplies7032865 parks greenhouse - supplies 001.000.640.576.810.310.00 59.10 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.810.310.00 5.61 city hall - supplies7032959 city hall - supplies 15Page: Packet Page 82 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 16 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124942 4/14/2011 (Continued)067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 7.35 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 0.70 parks - grey tie8032731 parks - grey tie 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 7.95 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 0.76 fac. maint - supplies8032750 fac. maint - supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 24.17 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 2.30 fac. maint - supplies8034398 fac. maint - supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 19.97 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 1.90 city park - gutter supplies8034420 city park - gutter supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 37.55 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 3.57 water - supplies8095630 water - supplies 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 17.91 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 1.70 sewer - supplies8282433 sewer - supplies 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 84.97 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 8.07 yost pool - moss9044994 16Page: Packet Page 83 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 17 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124942 4/14/2011 (Continued)067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES yost pool - moss 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 50.94 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 4.84 sewer - supplies9085014 sewer - supplies 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 18.36 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 1.74 library - supplies9282409 library - supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 17.96 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 1.71 public safety - supplies9282421 public safety - supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 11.60 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 1.10 Total :1,288.44 124943 4/14/2011 073411 HORIBA JOBIN YVON INC 90313144 INV#90313144 - EDMONDS PD STANDARD MAGNETIC APPLICATORS 001.000.410.521.910.310.00 484.00 HANDLING CHARGE 001.000.410.521.910.310.00 7.26 Freight 001.000.410.521.910.310.00 7.84 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.910.310.00 47.41 Total :546.51 124944 4/14/2011 070896 HSBC BUSINESS SOLUTIONS 8941 Fac Maint - Latex Gloves, Paper Towels Fac Maint - Latex Gloves, Paper Towels 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 460.49 17Page: Packet Page 84 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 18 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124944 4/14/2011 (Continued)070896 HSBC BUSINESS SOLUTIONS Fac Maint - Latex Gloves, Dispensers, 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 375.44 Total :835.93 124945 4/14/2011 060165 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC 22030 E1FE.SERVICES THRU 3/26/11 E1FE.Services thru 3/26/11 412.200.630.594.320.410.00 965.00 Total :965.00 124946 4/14/2011 070042 IKON 84516712 Rent on reception copier for billing Rent on reception copier for billing 001.000.620.558.800.450.00 30.66 Rent on Engineering copier. Biling84555990 Rent on Engineering copier. Biling 001.000.620.558.800.450.00 443.48 Rent on large copier for billing period84555991 Rent on large copier for billing period 001.000.620.558.800.450.00 827.00 Total :1,301.14 124947 4/14/2011 006841 IKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS 5017704046 Meter charges for large copier for Meter charges for large copier for 001.000.620.558.800.450.00 73.27 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.620.558.800.450.00 6.96 Meter charges on Engineering color5017704047 Meter charges on Engineering color 001.000.620.558.800.450.00 922.75 Total :1,002.98 124948 4/14/2011 073548 INDOFF INCORPORATED 1817662 Misc. office supplies including 50 Misc. office supplies including 50 001.000.620.558.800.310.00 135.74 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.620.558.800.310.00 12.92 18Page: Packet Page 85 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 19 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124948 4/14/2011 (Continued)073548 INDOFF INCORPORATED Misc. office supplies including 2 sets1851920 Misc. office supplies including 2 sets 001.000.620.558.800.310.00 301.67 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.620.558.800.310.00 28.66 Misc. office supplies including back1852001 Misc. office supplies including back 001.000.620.558.800.310.00 52.99 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.620.558.800.310.00 5.03 Total :537.01 124949 4/14/2011 014940 INTERSTATE BATTERY SYSTEMS 782047 Fleet - Return Clamps Fleet - Return Clamps 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 -14.45 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 -1.37 Fleet Shop Supplies - Connectors, Mini783832 Fleet Shop Supplies - Connectors, Mini 511.000.657.548.680.311.00 108.33 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.311.00 10.29 Total :102.80 124950 4/14/2011 064400 KOHO, STEPHEN 1458 TRAINING/PARKING/KOHO TRAINING/PARKING/KOHO 411.000.656.538.800.430.00 11.00 Total :11.00 124951 4/14/2011 073611 LARSEN, STEPHEN 31011 MARKET VALUE 20719 86TH PL W Market value assessment for 20719 86th 411.000.652.594.380.620.00 256.80 Market value assessment for 20719 86th 411.000.652.594.380.610.00 218.20 19Page: Packet Page 86 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 20 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :475.00124951 4/14/2011 073611 073611 LARSEN, STEPHEN 124952 4/14/2011 067725 LES SCHWAB TIRE CENTER 203769 Unit 132 - Alignment Unit 132 - Alignment 511.000.657.548.680.480.00 28.50 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.480.00 2.71 Total :31.21 124953 4/14/2011 073603 LIGHTHOUSE LAW GROUP PLLC APR-11 04-11 LEGALS FEES 04-11 Legal fees 001.000.360.515.100.410.00 32,000.00 Total :32,000.00 124954 4/14/2011 066064 LISTEN AUDIOLOGY SERVICE INC 2725 Annual Hearing testing - 57 employees @ Annual Hearing testing - 57 employees @ 001.000.220.516.100.490.00 969.00 Fuel/mileage charge 001.000.220.516.100.490.00 45.00 Total :1,014.00 124955 4/14/2011 068957 LYNN PEAVEY COMPANY 238143 INV#238143 CUST#980012 EDMONDS PD DIFF-LIFT LIFTING TAPE 1.5 X 60 001.000.410.521.910.310.00 129.50 Freight 001.000.410.521.910.310.00 19.50 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.910.310.00 14.16 Total :163.16 124956 4/14/2011 018950 LYNNWOOD AUTO PARTS INC 627116 unit 11 - wheel cap unit 11 - wheel cap 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 6.64 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 0.63 unit 11 - wheel cap627149 20Page: Packet Page 87 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 21 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124956 4/14/2011 (Continued)018950 LYNNWOOD AUTO PARTS INC unit 11 - wheel cap 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 3.32 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 0.32 unit 31 - oil supplies627522 unit 31 - oil supplies 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 66.83 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 6.35 unit 27 - oil change627645 unit 27 - oil change 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 33.50 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 3.18 unit 27 - oil627695 unit 27 - oil 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 7.79 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 0.74 unit 27 - oil627733 unit 27 - oil 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 46.74 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 4.44 unit 31 - hose end627741 unit 31 - hose end 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 38.35 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 3.64 unit 31 - coolant resevoir627745 unit 31 - coolant resevoir 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 7.29 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 0.69 21Page: Packet Page 88 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 22 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124956 4/14/2011 (Continued)018950 LYNNWOOD AUTO PARTS INC unit 38 - curved radiator628067 unit 38 - curved radiator 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 15.20 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 1.44 unit 93 - filters628123 unit 93 - filters 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 47.11 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 4.48 unit 18 - filter, supplies628217 unit 18 - filter, supplies 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 8.36 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 0.79 unit 537 - wiper blades628242 unit 537 - wiper blades 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 12.82 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 1.22 unit 10 - starter fluid, silicone628447 unit 10 - starter fluid, silicone 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 12.43 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 1.18 unit 22 - oil change628486 unit 22 - oil change 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 49.56 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 4.71 unit 22 - fuel filter628512 unit 22 - fuel filter 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 11.08 9.5% Sales Tax 22Page: Packet Page 89 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 23 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124956 4/14/2011 (Continued)018950 LYNNWOOD AUTO PARTS INC 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 1.05 unit 106 - oil filters628641 unit 106 - oil filters 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 24.61 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 2.34 unit 106 - filters628783 unit 106 - filters 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 21.66 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 2.06 unit 31 - weather strip629125 unit 31 - weather strip 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 10.49 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 1.00 unit 998 - door hinge pin629343 unit 998 - door hinge pin 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 6.17 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 0.59 unit 39 - flashers629638 unit 39 - flashers 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 11.79 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 1.12 Total :483.71 124957 4/14/2011 019582 MANOR HARDWARE 348182-00 Water - Supplies Water - Supplies 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 4.00 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 0.38 Total :4.38 23Page: Packet Page 90 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 24 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124958 4/14/2011 061900 MARC 0439362-IN 00-0902224 DESCALER/NEUTRALIZING AGENT 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 113.90 Freight 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 20.59 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 12.78 Total :147.27 124959 4/14/2011 019650 MASTER POOLS OF WASHINGTON INC 56546 YOST POOL SUPPLIES BIOGUARD ANTI FOAM 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 24.95 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 2.37 Total :27.32 124960 4/14/2011 021983 MOTOR TRUCKS INC 1-10223446 unit 22 - supplies unit 22 - supplies 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 496.26 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 45.66 unit 22 - supplies1-10223447 unit 22 - supplies 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 56.00 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 5.32 unit 106 - hose1-10223873 unit 106 - hose 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 12.36 Freight 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 25.00 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 3.55 unit 22 - service1-10224467 unit 22 - service 511.000.657.548.680.480.00 1,109.79 24Page: Packet Page 91 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 25 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124960 4/14/2011 (Continued)021983 MOTOR TRUCKS INC 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.480.00 102.10 unit 22 - thermostat1-10224562 unit 22 - thermostat 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 46.16 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 4.39 Total :1,906.59 124961 4/14/2011 073623 NACWA SSIAC201182 000003316O SEWAGE SLUDGE INCINERATOR COALITION 411.000.656.538.800.410.11 5,000.00 Total :5,000.00 124962 4/14/2011 065508 NAMOA 2011 NAMOA CONF 2011 NAMOA CONF REG - EDMONDS PD (3) CONF REG. - HARBINSON 001.000.410.521.400.490.00 150.00 CONF REG. - FALK 001.000.410.521.400.490.00 150.00 CONF REG. - ROTH 001.000.410.521.400.490.00 150.00 Total :450.00 124963 4/14/2011 064570 NATIONAL SAFETY INC 0292748-IN Sewer - Supplies Sewer - Supplies 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 12.35 Freight 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 8.46 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 1.98 Total :22.79 124964 4/14/2011 024302 NELSON PETROLEUM 0449421-IN Unit 106 - Rando HD Unit 106 - Rando HD 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 66.90 25Page: Packet Page 92 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 26 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124964 4/14/2011 (Continued)024302 NELSON PETROLEUM 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 6.36 Fleet Supplies - Rando HD0450037-IN Fleet Supplies - Rando HD 511.000.657.548.680.311.00 66.67 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.311.00 6.34 Total :146.27 124965 4/14/2011 024960 NORTH COAST ELECTRIC COMPANY s3895758.001 2091 BREAKER 411.000.656.538.800.310.22 60.76 9.2% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.22 5.59 Total :66.35 124966 4/14/2011 025217 NORTH SOUND HOSE & FITTINGS 39853 CITYEDMTRE HOSE & FITTINGS 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 353.34 Freight 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 25.85 9.2% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 34.89 Total :414.08 124967 4/14/2011 064006 NORTH WEST INSTRUMENT SERVICES 11199 INV#11199 - EDMONDS PD ANALYTICAL & PRECISION BALANCE 001.000.410.521.910.410.00 270.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.910.410.00 25.65 Total :295.65 124968 4/14/2011 066391 NORTHSTAR CHEMICAL INC 20039 260 SODIUM BISULFITE 411.000.656.538.800.310.54 1,400.70 26Page: Packet Page 93 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 27 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124968 4/14/2011 (Continued)066391 NORTHSTAR CHEMICAL INC 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.54 133.07 Total :1,533.77 124969 4/14/2011 061013 NORTHWEST CASCADE INC 1-270999 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL HONEY BUCKET RENTAL: CIVIC FIELD 001.000.640.576.800.450.00 189.87 Total :189.87 124970 4/14/2011 073563 OFFICES OF SHARON RICE HEARING 13 Hearing Examiner Services for Feb. 2011. Hearing Examiner Services for Feb. 2011. 001.000.620.558.600.410.00 1,155.00 Hearing Examiner expenses for Feb. 2011.13-EXP Hearing Examiner expenses for Feb. 2011. 001.000.620.558.600.490.00 12.82 Total :1,167.82 124971 4/14/2011 073221 ORCHID CELLMARK INC 010-053497 INV#010-053497 - EDMONDS PD EVIDENCE SAMPLES CASE #10-3736 001.000.410.521.210.410.00 610.00 EVIDENCE SAMPLES CASE #10-3779 001.000.410.521.210.410.00 610.00 EVIDENCE SAMPLES CASE #11-0814 001.000.410.521.210.410.00 610.00 Total :1,830.00 124972 4/14/2011 066339 PACIFIC OFFICE AUTOMATION C87506 B/W copy overage fee (2395 overage) B/W copy overage fee (2395 overage) 411.000.654.534.800.480.00 11.96 B/W copy overage fee (2395 overage) 411.000.655.535.800.480.00 11.96 B/W copy overage fee (2395 overage) 411.000.652.542.900.480.00 11.96 B/W copy overage fee (2395 overage) 111.000.653.542.900.480.00 11.95 27Page: Packet Page 94 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 28 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124972 4/14/2011 (Continued)066339 PACIFIC OFFICE AUTOMATION Color copy overage fee (2164 Copies) 411.000.654.534.800.480.00 64.09 Color copy overage fee (2164 Copies) 411.000.655.535.800.480.00 64.09 Color copy overage fee (2164 Copies) 411.000.652.542.900.480.00 64.09 Color copy overage fee (2164 Copies) 111.000.653.542.900.480.00 64.08 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.480.00 7.23 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.480.00 7.23 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.652.542.900.480.00 7.23 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.900.480.00 7.21 Total :333.08 124973 4/14/2011 027165 PARKER PAINT MFG. CO.INC.023014609 PAINT SUPPLIES PAINT & PAINT THINNER 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 42.88 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 4.07 Total :46.95 124974 4/14/2011 008350 PETTY CASH - PARKS & REC PCASH0413 PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT GYMNASTICS CLEANING SUPPLIES 001.000.640.575.550.310.00 49.00 PRESCHOOL SUPPLIES 001.000.640.575.560.310.00 8.77 PRESCHOOL SUPPLIES 001.000.640.575.560.430.00 2.00 PANTS FOR RANGER UNIFORM 001.000.640.574.350.240.00 33.56 PRESCHOOL SUPPLIES 28Page: Packet Page 95 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 29 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124974 4/14/2011 (Continued)008350 PETTY CASH - PARKS & REC 001.000.640.575.560.310.00 4.37 DISCOVERY PROGRAM BATTERIES 001.000.640.574.350.310.00 25.16 DISCOVERY DAYCAMP SUPPLIES 001.000.640.574.350.310.00 0.97 DISCOVERY PROGRAM SUPPLIES 001.000.640.574.350.310.00 36.12 Total :159.95 124975 4/14/2011 072384 PLAY-WELL TEKNOLOGIES PLAYWELL13664 LEGO SPRING BREAK CAMP LEGOS SPRING BREAK CAMP #13663 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 2,500.00 Total :2,500.00 124976 4/14/2011 069198 PNCWA WESTERN WA REGION 2011-EDM MEMBERSHIP DUES PNCWA/OPERATORS MEMBERSHIP DUES PNCWA/OPERATORS 411.000.656.538.800.490.00 110.00 Total :110.00 124977 4/14/2011 064167 POLLARDWATER.COM-EAST I295753-IN Water - Chlorine Water - Chlorine 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 81.80 Freight 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 62.66 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 13.72 Total :158.18 124978 4/14/2011 030400 PUGET SOUND CLEAN AIR AGENCY 11 038 S Q2-2011 CLEAN AIR ASSESSMENT 2Q 2011 Clean Air Assessment per RCW 001.000.390.531.700.510.00 6,088.25 Total :6,088.25 124979 4/14/2011 073628 PULTS, HANNAH PULTS040711 RANGER-NATURALIST ASSISTANT RANGER-NATURALIST ASSISTANT 4/4 - 29Page: Packet Page 96 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 30 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124979 4/14/2011 (Continued)073628 PULTS, HANNAH 001.000.640.574.350.410.00 211.58 Total :211.58 124980 4/14/2011 030780 QUIRING MONUMENTS INC 116810 INSCRIPTION INSCRIPTION: JENSEN 130.000.640.536.200.340.00 80.00 MONUMENT INSCRIPTION116811 UPRIGHT INSCRIPTION: MURPHY 130.000.640.536.200.340.00 140.00 Total :220.00 124981 4/14/2011 064291 QWEST 206 Z02-0478 332B TELEMETRY TELEMETRY 411.000.656.538.800.420.00 452.90 Total :452.90 124982 4/14/2011 069477 ROTARY OFFSET PRESS INC 20626 SUMMER CRAZE PRINTING SUMMER CRAZE PRINTING 001.000.640.574.200.490.00 6,128.68 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.574.200.490.00 582.23 Total :6,710.91 124983 4/14/2011 072214 RT CORPORATION SI-151592 RT3659 PT SAMPLES 411.000.656.538.800.310.31 785.45 Freight 411.000.656.538.800.310.31 25.00 Total :810.45 124984 4/14/2011 073066 SAFARILAND LLC I11-045067 INV#I11-045067 - EDMONDS PD POLY TAPE 1.5X125 001.000.410.521.910.310.00 102.50 PLAIN GLUE CARTRIDGES 001.000.410.521.910.310.00 32.71 30Page: Packet Page 97 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 31 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124984 4/14/2011 (Continued)073066 SAFARILAND LLC Freight 001.000.410.521.910.310.00 14.99 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.910.310.00 12.85 Total :163.05 124985 4/14/2011 069593 SAFELITE FULFILLMENT INC 813357 Unit 252 -Windhield Repair Unit 252 -Windhield Repair 511.000.657.548.680.480.00 29.95 Total :29.95 124986 4/14/2011 067802 SAN DIEGO POLICE EQUIP CO 596953 INV#596953 CUST#0001733 - EDMONDS PD FED-TRU T223A AMMO 001.000.410.521.400.310.00 2,211.30 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.400.310.00 210.07 Total :2,421.37 124987 4/14/2011 066964 SEATTLE AUTOMOTIVE DIST INC 03-099245 unit 132 - brake supplies unit 132 - brake supplies 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 311.19 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 29.56 unit 88 - resistor asm-bl03-099640 unit 88 - resistor asm-bl 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 7.75 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 0.74 unit 90 - belt, gasket, motorad03-099969 unit 90 - belt, gasket, motorad 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 37.13 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 3.53 unit 38 - v-belt03-100658 unit 38 - v-belt 31Page: Packet Page 98 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 32 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124987 4/14/2011 (Continued)066964 SEATTLE AUTOMOTIVE DIST INC 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 28.75 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 2.73 unit 20 - battery03-100873 unit 20 - battery 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 168.92 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 16.05 unit 10 - spark plug, pcv valve03-101587 unit 10 - spark plug, pcv valve 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 12.69 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 1.21 unit 134 - battery03-103438 unit 134 - battery 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 78.42 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 7.45 unit 40 - ignition switch03-103844 unit 40 - ignition switch 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 13.81 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 1.31 unit 134 - battery03-103891 unit 134 - battery 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 78.42 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 7.45 unit 134 - alternator03-104413 unit 134 - alternator 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 152.75 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 14.51 unit 39 - switch03-104476 32Page: Packet Page 99 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 33 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124987 4/14/2011 (Continued)066964 SEATTLE AUTOMOTIVE DIST INC unit 39 - switch 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 81.93 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 7.78 unit 134 - v-belt, supplies03-104508 unit 134 - v-belt, supplies 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 126.11 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 11.98 unit 379 - element, filter, screen03-104513 unit 379 - element, filter, screen 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 38.08 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 3.62 battery return05-377853 battery return 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 -67.43 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 -6.41 oil seal and v-belt return05-380032 oil seal and v-belt return 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 -43.03 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 -4.09 Total :1,122.91 124988 4/14/2011 073622 SEATTLE POWDER COAT 066689 DECK SCREENS DECK SCREENS 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 1,448.00 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 137.56 Total :1,585.56 124989 4/14/2011 067076 SEATTLE PUMP AND EQUIPMENT CO 11-891 Unit 31 - Tire Repair Supplies Unit 31 - Tire Repair Supplies 33Page: Packet Page 100 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 34 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124989 4/14/2011 (Continued)067076 SEATTLE PUMP AND EQUIPMENT CO 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 1,851.92 Freight 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 173.96 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 192.46 Total :2,218.34 124990 4/14/2011 036509 SIGNATURE FORMS INC 1111292 INV#1111292 ACCT#CEDM - EDMONDS PD DOG LICENSE APPLICATIONS 001.000.410.521.700.310.00 253.81 Freight 001.000.410.521.700.310.00 8.66 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.700.310.00 24.93 Total :287.40 124991 4/14/2011 036950 SIX ROBBLEES INC 14-228433 Unit 11 - Brake Supplies Unit 11 - Brake Supplies 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 204.64 9.2% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 18.83 Total :223.47 124992 4/14/2011 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 2003-2646-0 1000 EDMONDS ST 1000 EDMONDS ST 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 30.02 930 9TH AVE N2022-5063-5 930 9TH AVE N 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 30.02 Total :60.04 124993 4/14/2011 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 110355199 2002-0255-4 24400 HIGHWAY 99/RICHMOND PARK 411.000.656.538.800.471.62 29.28 9.5% Sales Tax 34Page: Packet Page 101 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 35 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124993 4/14/2011 (Continued)037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 411.000.656.538.800.471.62 1.76 2019-2988-2123637374 8421 244TH ST SW/RICHMOND PARK 411.000.656.538.800.471.62 29.28 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.471.62 1.76 2025-7952-0160046464 VARIOUS LOCATIONS 411.000.656.538.800.471.62 6.79 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.471.62 0.46 Total :69.33 124994 4/14/2011 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 201690849 TRAFFIC SIGNAL 900 PUGET DR Traffic Signal - 900 Puget Dr 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 30.02 TELEMETRY SYSTEM201790003 TELEMETRY SYSTEM 411.000.654.534.800.470.00 30.51 Total :60.53 124995 4/14/2011 063941 SNO CO SHERIFFS OFFICE INMATE MEDS 03/11 INMATE MEDICAL 03/11 - EDMONDS PD INMATE MEDICATIONS MARCH 2011 001.000.410.523.600.310.00 819.64 Total :819.64 124996 4/14/2011 006630 SNOHOMISH COUNTY I000270302 SOLID WASTE CHARAGES SOLID WASTE CHARGES 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 326.00 Total :326.00 124997 4/14/2011 064351 SNOHOMISH COUNTY TREASURER 2011-605 INV#2011-605 EDMONDS PD 88 BOOKINGS - MAR 2011 001.000.410.523.600.510.00 7,920.00 685.67 HOUSING DAYS - MAR 2011 35Page: Packet Page 102 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 36 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124997 4/14/2011 (Continued)064351 SNOHOMISH COUNTY TREASURER 001.000.410.523.600.510.00 42,854.38 23.5 WORK RELEASE - MAR 2011 001.000.410.523.600.510.00 987.00 INV#2011-605 REFUND DISBUTED CHARGESREFUND CHARGES 18 HOUSING DAYS-GARNER 2-11 001.000.410.523.600.510.00 -1,125.00 1 HOUSING DAY-GARNER 1-11 001.000.410.523.600.510.00 -62.50 BOOKING - GARNER 1-11 001.000.410.523.600.510.00 -90.00 12 HOUSING DAYS-SCHECHTER-11-10 001.000.410.523.600.510.00 -750.00 Total :49,733.88 124998 4/14/2011 072374 SOUND HARLEY-DAVIDSON 173246 Unit 405 - Paint Supplies Unit 405 - Paint Supplies 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 1,003.98 8.6% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 86.34 Total :1,090.32 124999 4/14/2011 038410 SOUND SAFETY PRODUCTS 4180896-01 Storm - Work Jeans - R Wichers Storm - Work Jeans - R Wichers 411.000.652.542.900.240.00 164.00 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.652.542.900.240.00 15.58 Total :179.58 125000 4/14/2011 046200 STATE OF WASHINGTON 1Q-11 LEASEHOLD TAX 1Q-11 LEASEHOLD TAX LIABILITY 1Q-11 LEASEHOLD TAX LIABILITY 001.000.000.237.220.000.00 5,093.62 Total :5,093.62 125001 4/14/2011 071585 STERICYCLE INC 3001362645 INV#3001362645 CUST#6076358 EDMONDS PD MINIMUM MONTHLY SERVICE CHARGE 36Page: Packet Page 103 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 37 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 125001 4/14/2011 (Continued)071585 STERICYCLE INC 001.000.410.521.910.410.00 10.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.910.410.00 0.36 Total :10.36 125002 4/14/2011 072555 SYSTEMS DESIGN WEST LLC ED0411 MAR-11 POSTAGE FOR PRIVATE STATEMENTS EMS Billing Services-Postage Private 001.000.510.526.100.420.00 0.88 Total :0.88 125003 4/14/2011 072772 T E BRIGGS CONSTRUCTION CO E6DB.RetRelease E6DB.RETAINAGE RELEASE E6DB.Retainage Release 112.200.000.223.400.000.00 22,384.97 E6DB.Retainage Release 125.000.000.223.400.000.00 6,323.48 Total :28,708.45 125004 4/14/2011 073629 TDS AKA BRIDGESTONE AMERICAS 801-2593 Unit 132 - 2 Tires Unit 132 - 2 Tires 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 350.00 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 33.06 Total :383.06 125005 4/14/2011 009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY 03312011 NEWSPAPER ADS Council Agendas 001.000.250.514.300.440.00 1,186.71 Special Ad 001.000.240.513.110.440.00 182.00 Total :1,368.71 125006 4/14/2011 009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY 1731033 Panera/PLN20110002 Legal Notices. Panera/PLN20110002 Legal Notices. 001.000.620.558.600.440.00 62.04 Odgers/PLN20110001 Legal Notices.1731038 37Page: Packet Page 104 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 38 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 125006 4/14/2011 (Continued)009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY Odgers/PLN20110001 Legal Notices. 001.000.620.558.600.440.00 62.04 O'Reilly/Bld20100654 Legal Notices.1731376 O'Reilly/Bld20100654 Legal Notices. 001.000.620.558.600.440.00 74.08 Total :198.16 125007 4/14/2011 073581 TRUAX, KAILEY TRUAX0409 GYM MONITOR GYM MONITOR FOR SATURDAY NIGHT DANCE 001.000.640.574.100.410.00 24.00 Total :24.00 125008 4/14/2011 061192 UNITED PIPE & SUPPLY 8639583 Sewer -Supplies - Couplings, Plugs, Ells Sewer -Supplies - Couplings, Plugs, Ells 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 283.68 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 26.95 Sewer - Couplings8639586 Sewer - Couplings 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 116.72 Freight 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 11.89 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 12.22 Sewer - Tees, Supplies8639587 Sewer - Tees, Supplies 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 281.30 Freight 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 14.71 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 28.12 Sewer - Couplings8640386 Sewer - Couplings 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 38.81 9.5% Sales Tax 38Page: Packet Page 105 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 39 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 125008 4/14/2011 (Continued)061192 UNITED PIPE & SUPPLY 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 3.68 Total :818.08 125009 4/14/2011 044300 US POSTAL SERVICE Permit 1039 Postage for Permit 1036 - 2011 WQR Postage for Permit 1036 - 2011 WQR 411.000.654.534.800.420.00 2,500.00 Total :2,500.00 125010 4/14/2011 044960 UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOC CTR 1030114 utility locates March 2011 utility locates March 2011 411.000.654.534.800.410.00 59.81 utility locates March 2011 411.000.655.535.800.410.00 59.81 utility locates March 2011 411.000.652.542.900.410.00 61.63 Total :181.25 125011 4/14/2011 069889 VETERINARY SPECIALTY CENTER 131094 INV#131094 - EDMONDS PD - DASH RADIOGRAPHIC STUDY THORAX 001.000.410.521.260.410.00 236.65 RADIOGRAPH INTERPRETATION 001.000.410.521.260.410.00 35.80 CBC CHEMISTRIES 001.000.410.521.260.410.00 102.00 SURGICAL ANESTHESIA GROUP 001.000.410.521.260.410.00 304.05 CAUDECTOMY IN ADULT PARTIAL 001.000.410.521.260.410.00 358.18 HISTOPATHOLOGY REPORT-FBX 001.000.410.521.260.410.00 168.35 CONSULTATION SURGERY GENERAL 001.000.410.521.260.410.00 59.00 TRAMADOL 50 MG TAB 001.000.410.521.260.310.00 18.85 HOSPITALIZATION LEVEL 1 39Page: Packet Page 106 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 40 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 125011 4/14/2011 (Continued)069889 VETERINARY SPECIALTY CENTER 001.000.410.521.260.410.00 52.01 BIOHAZARD FEE 001.000.410.521.260.410.00 5.25 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.260.310.00 1.79 Total :1,341.93 125012 4/14/2011 065035 WASHINGTON STATE PATROL I11008212 INV#I11008212 EDM301 BACKGROUND CHECKS 03/2011 001.000.000.237.100.000.00 269.50 Total :269.50 125013 4/14/2011 070796 WEED GRAAFSTRA & BENSON INC PS 24 C/A 4181-01M Reidy/Theusen conflict matter 001.000.360.515.100.410.00 1,702.00 Total :1,702.00 125014 4/14/2011 073552 WELCO SALES LLC 5097 BUSINESS CARDS FOR PD & DEV SERVICES Business Cards-Ken Gaydos250-00262 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 17.20 R.T. Smith250-00262 001.000.410.521.220.310.00 17.20 M.K. Moore250-00262 001.000.410.521.220.310.00 17.20 Caroline L. Thompson250-00262 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 17.20 Leif Bjorback250-00262 001.000.620.558.800.310.00 17.20 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 3.27 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.220.310.00 3.27 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.620.558.800.310.00 1.63 40Page: Packet Page 107 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 41 8:11:44AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :94.17125014 4/14/2011 073552 073552 WELCO SALES LLC 125015 4/14/2011 073552 WELCO SALES LLC 5091 Water Quality - Notice Window Envelope Water Quality - Notice Window Envelope 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 144.80 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 13.76 Total :158.56 125016 4/14/2011 073552 WELCO SALES LLC 5098 WINDOW ENVELOPES FINANCE DEPT Window Envelopes Finance Dept 001.000.310.514.230.310.00 369.55 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.310.514.230.310.00 35.11 Total :404.66 125017 4/14/2011 073624 WILLIAMS FORM ENGINERRING CORP 186168 19245 COATING CHOCKFAST 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 549.75 Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 47.28 Total :597.03 125018 4/14/2011 064213 WSSUA TREASURER 569 UMPIRING UMPIRING OF MEN'S AND CO-ED GAMES 001.000.640.575.520.410.00 1,386.00 Total :1,386.00 Bank total :215,426.71115 Vouchers for bank code :front 215,426.71Total vouchers :Vouchers in this report115 41Page: Packet Page 108 of 299 04/14/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 1 8:42:00AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 124904 4/8/2011 069350 GARNEY, RENEE 31611 TRAVEL REFUND FOR COURT TRAINING TRAVE REFUND FOR COURT TRAINING 001.000.230.512.500.430.00 163.20 Total :163.20 Bank total :163.201 Vouchers for bank code :front 163.20Total vouchers :Vouchers in this report1 1Page: Packet Page 109 of 299 AM-3884 Item #: 2. D. City Council Meeting Date: 04/19/2011 Time:Consent Submitted By:Linda Hynd Department:City Clerk's Office Review Committee: Committee Action: Type:Action Information Subject Title Acknowledge receipt of a Claim for Damages submitted by Linda Baker ($8,700.51). Recommendation from Mayor and Staff It is recommended that the City Council acknowledge receipt of the Claim for Damages by minute entry. Previous Council Action N/A Narrative A Claim for Damages was submitted by the following individual: Linda Baker 700 Main Street Edmonds, WA 98020 ($8,700.51) Attachments Baker Claim for Damages Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Mayor Mike Cooper 04/14/2011 05:42 PM Final Approval Sandy Chase 04/14/2011 05:45 PM Form Started By: Linda Hynd Started On: 04/14/2011 03:33 PM Final Approval Date: 04/14/2011 Packet Page 110 of 299 Packet Page 111 of 299 Packet Page 112 of 299 AM-3870 Item #: 2. E. City Council Meeting Date: 04/19/2011 Time:Consent Submitted For:Ed Sibrel Submitted By:Megan Cruz Department:Engineering Committee:Public Safety Type:Action Information Subject Title Operations policy for Shell Valley emergency access road. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Council approve the proposed Operations Policy. Previous Council Action On April 5, 2011, the PS/HR Committee reviewed this item and recommended it be placed on the consent agenda for the April 19, 2011 Council meeting. On February 22, 2011, Council authorized the Mayor to sign Addendum #4 to the Professional Services Agreement with Perteet Engineering, to complete design of the Shell Valley Emergency Access Road. Narrative On January 27, 2011 a neighborhood meeting was held to solicit input from residents of Shell Valley. The meeting was very well attended and the residents were generally receptive to the project. A separate line of discussion developed regarding the criteria for opening the access roadway, independent of the construction of the road. This discussion was carried forward to the February 22, 2011 Council meeting, where Council recommended Public Works present an Operations Policy governing the closure and opening of the roadway to the Public Safety Committee. Attachments Attachment 1-Staff Report Attachment 2-Operations Policy Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Engineering Robert English 04/13/2011 05:16 PM Public Works Phil Williams 04/14/2011 10:47 AM Police Al Compaan 04/14/2011 12:25 PM Fire Department John Westfall 04/14/2011 04:16 PM City Clerk Sandy Chase 04/14/2011 04:21 PM Mayor Mike Cooper 04/14/2011 05:42 PM Final Approval Sandy Chase 04/14/2011 05:45 PM Form Started By: Megan Cruz Started On: 04/13/2011 Final Approval Date: 04/14/2011 Packet Page 113 of 299 March 31, 2011 / Staff Report CITY OF EDMONDS 121 - 5TH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, ENGINEERING DIVISION ADVISORY REPORT SHELL VALLEY EMERGENCY ACCESS ROAD OPERATIONS To: Phil Williams, Public Works Director Rob English, City Engineer From: Ed Sibrel, Senior Engineering Technician Date: March 29, 2011 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page I. INTRODUCTION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................2 A. OPERATAIONS POLICY ................................................................................................................................. 2 B. ROAD CLOSURE METHODS .......................................................................................................................... 2 II. OPERATIONS POLICY ...................................................................................................2 A. SUMMARY 1. BOWDOIN ACCESS CLOSURE ......................................................................................................... 2 2. BOWDOIN ACCESS RE-OPENING .................................................................................................... 2 3. EMERGENCY ACCESS CLOSURE .................................................................................................... 2 4. EMERGENCY ACCESS RE-OPENING ................................................................................................ 2 B. DISCUSSION…………………………………………………...........……………………………………...2 III. EMERGENCY ACCESS ROAD CLOSURE METHODS……………………………3 A. BOLLARDS……………………………………………………………………………………………...….3 B. BICYCLE CHICANES……………………………………………………………………………………..…3 C. GATES…………………………………………………………………………………………………...…3 D. CONCLUSION………………………………………………………………………………………………3 IV. ATTACHMENTS ..............................................................................................................3 Packet Page 114 of 299 - 2 - INTRODUCTION AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. Operations Policy Based on the Summaries, Discussions, Conclusions, and Attachments in this report we recommend APPROVAL of the attached Operations Policy. B. Road Closure Methods Based on Summaries, Discussions, Conclusions, and Attachments in this report we recommend BOLLARDS as the road closure method of choice: II. OPERATIONS POLICY A. Summary Bowdoin access closure: The standard access road (being the south end of Pioneer Way) will be closed when Public Works determines its continued use by the motoring public to be hazardous. This is a continuation of current procedure. Bowdoin access re-opening: When the access from Bowdoin Way is both free of ice and snow hazards, it will be reopened. Emergency access opening: The Shell Valley Emergency Access Road will be opened during weather events that represent an increased hazard from ice or snow accumulation. “Increased hazard” will be understood to occur when the Street Division begins responding to an existing or potential event by applying de-ice or anti-ice chemicals to Edmonds streets on a city- wide basis. Additionally, Edmonds Police Department and Fire District One can open and close the emergency access road as needed without limit to facilitate their operational needs. Emergency Access re-closure: The emergency access will be re-closed at the end of a weather- related event when available forecasts indicate night-time temperatures will not drop below 30 degrees Fahrenheit with available or predicted moisture, and the standard access from Bowdoin is free of snow and ice hazards. B. Discussion The operations policy represents the best efforts of the Edmonds public works and fire and safety organizations to meet public safety criteria while also respecting wishes of the residents of the neighborhood. The impetus behind the project was the recognition that closing the neighborhood access during dangerous driving conditions may also serve to delay or curtail fire, paramedic or police response to the neighborhood. The residents of Shell Valley understand this concern and have been generally supportive of the project’s overall goals. Residents of the terminal end of Pioneer Way have also expressed a desire to keep the character and composition of their portion of the Shell Valley neighborhood intact. Public Works understands and respects the wishes of these residents however there is a larger concern for public safety that the City must also consider in its deliberations. Packet Page 115 of 299 - 3 - At present, the closure of the only access to the Shell Valley neighborhood from Bowdoin Way due to inclement weather, is of a 'last resort' consideration – it is not one that is taken lightly by the City – there is no other portion of the City similarly encumbered by such a closure. The proposed emergency access road would ameliorate most, but not all of the safety concerns regarding access to and from the neighborhood. Particular attention must be paid to periods of inclement weather when the standard access to the neighborhood remains open. This leaves some days when the road is open, yet is difficult to drive in a safe manner. In the past, deciding to do so was a risk the Shell Valley residents calculated with seasonal regularity. However the existence of the new emergency access changes this calculation. Now the additional condition -- difficult-to-drive-safely-but-not-road-closure-worthy -- must now be considered regarding the standard access from Bowdoin. It is also the intent of the Operations Policy to address this condition by offering a safer alternative access to the neighborhood. III. ROAD CLOSURE METHODS A. Bollards Bollards – short, vertical posts used to direct or restrict traffic -- were the original design element to facilitate the closure of the emergency access road. Inexpensive, replaceable, and offered in a number of designs, bollards are also the sturdiest method of traffic restriction. During the neighborhood meeting of January 27, 2010, there was some discussion by the residents as to their adequacy to the task. The Public Works responded they would study other methods of closure. B. Bicycle Chicanes There is no standard industry term for bicycle chicanes, which are also interchangeably called baffle gates and crossing gates. Typically installed where shared use paths and trails cross arterial roads, bicycle chicanes are offset, overlapping gates designed to slow bicycles prior to the road crossings by forcing a weaving route through them. Several were initially installed along Snohomish County’s Centennial Trail between the Cities of Snohomish and Arlington. There were concerns with ADA accessibility, issues with tandem bicycles and bikes with trailers that made their utility suspect, as well as a propensity to attract collisions from the beginning. After several years of complaints, the chicanes were replaced with bollards. C. Swinging Gates Swinging gates, of the kind currently closing the approach path to the project, were also considered. Sturdy and readily available in many designs, swinging gates also have the advantage of being easily and quickly opened. In areas that have successfully used them, pedestrian and bicycle access is maintained via a narrow path around the gate. The chief disadvantage of gates with regards to this project is twofold: 1) on the north end of the project, at Main Street, the shoulders of the emergency access slope steeply away from the roadway, so that there is no room for a pedestrian/bicycle route around a gate; 2) on the south end of the project through the narrow existing access path, City-owned property is very narrow, and the required route would be outside of City property. D. Conclusion After due consideration of the advantages and disadvantages of each of the foregoing methods of road closure, a decision to pursue Bollards as the design method will be pursued. IV. ATTACHMENTS A. Operations Policy Packet Page 116 of 299 City of Edmonds 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (425) 771-0220 FAX(425) 771-0221 Website: www.ci.edmonds.wa.us PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Operations Policy -- Shell Valley Emergency Access Road PAGE(s) 1 of 1 Date: Subject: The Shell Valley Neighborhood is currently served by a single access route from Bowdoin Way. This route, Pioneer Way, is a narrow, winding, very steep roadway in its initial descent from Bowdoin, which can make it difficult to navigate in wet or freezing conditions. In freezing conditions particularly, the roadway can become hazardous to the point that the City on occasion has closed the road. Long term residents of the neighborhood have adjusted to such closures by parking their vehicles on Bowdoin Way in advance of icebound weather. However, closing the roadway during dangerous driving conditions may also serve to delay / curtail fire and aid access to the neighborhood. There does exist a walking trail from Yost Park to the west that small aid units can utilize to access Shell Valley, but larger units are not expected to successfully navigate the trail. The Shell Valley Emergency Access Road, City Project No. E7CB, will be a 15-foot-wide paved accessway that joins the north end of Pioneer Way to Main Street, approximately 300 feet to the north. The roadway will be utilized by fire and aid agencies during those weather events in which the principal access road is closed, as well as on an as-needed basis by those same agencies. Additionally, during the times the principal access via Pioneer Way from Bowdoin is closed, the roadway will be accessible for the neighborhood to use. At all other times, the emergency accessway will be closed to motorized traffic, and will be used exclusively as a pedestrian and bicycle path. The intent of this policy will be to establish a procedure for managing the operations of the emergency access road, and clarifying the necessary and sufficient conditions for opening the roadway during severe weather. Policy: It shall be the policy of the City of Edmonds to open the Shell Valley Emergency Access Road during weather events that represent an increased hazard from ice or snow accumulation. To meet that goal the road will be opened when the Street Division begins responding to an existing or potential event by applying de-ice or anti-ice chemicals to Edmonds streets. When those operations begin on a city-wide basis the road will be opened for weather-related reasons. During those times residents of Shell Valley are encouraged to use this direct connection to Main Street. If the Pioneer Way access from Bowdoin is closed at any time during a weather-related emergency, the emergency access will then be the only approved access into and out of the Shell Valley neighborhood. The emergency access road will be re-closed at the end of a weather-related event when 1) available forecasts indicate night-time temperatures will not drop below 30 degrees Fahrenheit with available or predicted moisture, and 2) the standard access from Bowdoin Way is both open and free of ice and snow hazards. If there is no moisture forecast and none existing on the Bowdoin Way entrance to Shell Valley the standard access will remain open independent of temperature. Decisions to open and close the roads will be made by Street Division staff using these criteria. To facilitate emergency response, the Edmonds Police Department and Fire District One can open and close the emergency access road at any time as needed. Approved:______________________________ Phil Williams, Public Works Director Packet Page 117 of 299 AM-3846 Item #: 2. F. City Council Meeting Date: 04/19/2011 Time:Consent Submitted By:Gerry Gannon Department:Police Department Committee:Public Safety Type:Action Information Subject Title Authorization to surplus and sell Police Department equipment. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Approve for consent agenda. Previous Council Action Public Safety Committee approved this agenda item for the consent agenda. Narrative The Police Department is requesting authorization to surplus and sell, or to dispose of, equipment which the department no longer needs. The equipment list was circulated to City departments in January 2011 with no interest expressed in the items. The equipment includes a number of Polaroid or 35 mm cameras, outdated or unneeded office equipment, broken equipment, and expired ballistic vests. The Police Department requests authorization to dispose of the equipment as follows: • Sell all of the working equipment through Property Bureau, which runs an on-line auction site. The Police Department has contracted with Property Bureau since 2003. • Recycle, if possible, or throw away broken items or items rejected by Property Bureau. • Return the expired ballistic vests to the manufacturer, or to a fiber recycler. This will keep the vests out of landfills and safely dispose of them. Estimated residual or resale value of the items to be surplused was obtained by checking Ebay, Property Bureau and other on-line listings for the used equipment. Attachments Surplus Equipment Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date City Clerk Sandy Chase 04/12/2011 02:41 PM Mayor Mike Cooper 04/14/2011 09:06 AM Final Approval Sandy Chase 04/14/2011 09:08 AM Form Started By: Gerry Gannon Started On: 04/06/2011 Final Approval Date: 04/14/2011 Packet Page 118 of 299 Packet Page 119 of 299 Date Asset/Tag #Property Description Brand Model #Serial #Condition Purchase Price Purchase Date Est. FMV (net disposal costs) Minimum Price (if applicable) Intended Disposal Method Notes Oct-10 2 sliding door lock set New unknown $20 Auction Oct-10 Car club w/ keys New $18 $18 Auction Sep-10 EPD 2904 35 mm Camera Canon EOS ELAN II 1556401 Works unknown 1998 $125 Auction $109-$175 on Amazon and B&H Photo Sep-10 35 mm Camera Canon AF-10 82009150 Works unknown 2003 est.$20 Auction Sep-10 35 mm Camera Canon AF-10 82008587 Works unknown 2003 est.$20 Auction Sep-10 35 mm Camera Canon AF-10 82008754 Works unknown 2003 est.$20 Auction Sep-10 35 mm Camera Canon AF-10 82008585 Works unknown 2003 est.$100 Auction Sep-10 35 mm Camera Canon AF-10 82009141 Works unknown 2003 est.$100 Auction Sep-10 EPD 2908 35 mm Camera Polaroid 3000AF Works unknown 1998 $5 Auction Sep-10 EPD 2936 35 mm Camera Polaroid 3000AF Works unknown 1998 $5 Auction Sep-10 EPD 2930 35 mm Camera Polaroid 3000AF Works unknown 1998 $5 Auction Sep-10 EPD 2934 35 mm Camera Polaroid 3000AF Works unknown 1998 $5 Auction Sep-10 35 mm Camera Polaroid 3000AF Works unknown 1998 $5 Auction Sep-10 EPD 2809 35 mm Camera Polaroid 3000AF Works unknown 1998 $5 Auction Sep-10 35 mm Camera Polaroid 3000AF Works unknown 1998 $5 Auction Sep-10 EPD 2729 35 mm Camera Polaroid 3000AF Works unknown 1997 est.$5 Auction Sep-10 EPD 3405 35 mm Camera Vivitar BV35DB Works unknown 2002 $10 Auction Sep-10 EPD 3395 35 mm Camera Vivitar BV35DB Works unknown 2002 $10 Auction Sep-10 35 mm Camera Vivitar BV35DB Works unknown 2002 $10 Auction Sep-10 35 mm Camera w/ Sigma 100-300 mm lens Canon Rebel 2000 EOS (21)64047261 (camera); 3016537 (lens) Works $490 2002 $75 Auction Sep-10 Camera lens Quantaray 28-90 mm 1011950 Works unknown $75 Auction Sep-10 EPD 2909 Camera w/case and attachments Polaroid Spectra AF Works unknown 1998 $40 Auction Sep-10 Copy Machine Panasonic FP7750 JIEKF662340 Works 1996 $0 Auction, recycle or throw out Former Finance machine; little or no market for resale Sep-10 EPD 3206 Fax Machine Canon Laser Class 2060 UKJ07452 Works unknown 2000 $100 Auction Includes 2 toner cartridges @ $20 Sep-10 EPD 3184 Flash Canon 380EX Speedlite 000310 Works unknown 2000 $90 Auction Used on Internet for $90-$110 Sep-10 EPD 2384 Radar Falcon E52 FF11322/TF108 29 Works 1995 $100 Auction Sep-10 EPD 2028 Television Sylvania AC/DC Remote 64487023 Works unknown 1991 est. $5 Auction Ebay LCDs going for $15 Dec-10 EPD 33 Typewriter Swintec 8014-S S69307017 Works 310$ 1987 Auction Dec-10 EPD 34 Typewriter Swintec 8014-S S69307639 Works 310$ 1987 Auction Packet Page 120 of 299 Date Asset/Tag #Property Description Brand Model #Serial #Condition Purchase Price Purchase Date Est. FMV (net disposal costs) Minimum Price (if applicable) Intended Disposal Method Notes Dec-10 EPD3824 LCD TV Monitor Sharp Aquos 702866609 Works, but corner of screen broken. $2,992 2007 $125 Auction Ebay w/broken screen $125-250 Sep-10 EPD 2029 VCR Player Goldstar VCP4200M BEJ9QKA2750 Works unknown 1991 est.$20 Auction Ebay Goldstar VCRs from $10-$70 Oct-10 Truck/van car club Used unknown $25 Auction, recycle Oct-10 EPD 3083 Digital Camcorder Canon Optura Used, no batteries $1,511 1999 $75 Auction Oct-10 Radar speed nbs,metal sign,tuning fork K-BAnd 291690 Used, no batteries $0 Recycle or throw out Oct-10 Portable heater Used unknown $0-5 Auction, recycle or throw out New heaters available for $20 Dec-10 EPD 2627 Canon camera Canon EOS-ELAN 7806098 Used unknown 1996 $75 Auction Oct-10 Fan White/Westi nghouse Used unknown $0-5 Auction, recycle or throw out New personal fans available for $10 Dec-10 EPD 2969 Microfilm printer Canon 60 M320443003 Used, worn $4,000 1998 $0-400 Auction, recycle or throw out Vendor would not take in trade. $400 on Ebay. Sep-10 Digital Camera Olympus Camedia C- 3020 Unknown $686 2002 $75 Auction Oct-10 EPD 3151 Phone Pro Amp Hello Direct 1560 Pro 1560A19323233 Unknown unknown 1999 $10-25 Auction, recycle, or throw out Oct-10 EPD 2028 TV w/ remote Sylvania 64487023 Unknown unknown $0-$10 Auction, recycle, throw out circa 1990's Oct-10 EPD 2029 VHS player/remote GoldStar BEJ9QKA2750 Unknown unknown $0-$10 Auction, recycle, throw out circa 1990's Sep-10 Video Camera Sony Handycam Hi8 202396 Unknown unknown 1995 $150 Auction Sep-10 EPD 2299 Video Camera Sony Handycam Hi8 1081717 Unknown unknown 1995 $150 Auction Sep-10 EPD 2685 Microcassette Recorder Sony M527V 1828488 Unknown 1997 $10 Auction, recycle or throw out Can buy new for $25-35 Sep-10 EPD 3579 Digital Camera Canon A95 426333573 Broken $299 2005 $0 Recycle or throw out Sep-10 EPD 3572 Digital Camera Canon A95 326340763 Broken $321 2005 $0 Recycle or throw out Sep-10 EPD 3571 Digital Camera Canon A95 326340764 Broken $321 2005 $0 Recycle or throw out Sep-10 EPD 3575 Digital Camera Canon A95 426325662 Broken $299 2005 $0 Recycle or throw out Packet Page 121 of 299 Date Asset/Tag #Property Description Brand Model #Serial #Condition Purchase Price Purchase Date Est. FMV (net disposal costs) Minimum Price (if applicable) Intended Disposal Method Notes Sep-10 EPD 3570 Digital Camera Canon A95 326227145 Broken $321 2005 $0 Recycle or throw out Sep-10 EPD 3578 Digital Camera Canon A95 426318053 Broken $299 2005 $0 Recycle or throw out Sep-10 EPD 3569 Digital Camera Canon A95 326337144 Broken $321 2005 $0 Recycle or throw out Sep-10 EPD 2775 Modem Motorola VRM600 508SXW0396 Broken 1997 $0 Recycle or throw out Sep-10 EPD 3414 Radar Decatur Genesis VPD GVPD1831 Broken $1,713 2003 $0 Recycle or throw out Dec-10 EPD 3560 Radar gun Decatur Genesis GHD-03630 Broken unknown $0 Recycle or throw out Dec-10 EPD 3415 Radar gun Decatur Genesis VPD 1834 Broken unknown $0 Recycle or throw out Sep-10 EPD 2678 Typewriter Brother WP1700MDS J8D318064 Broken unknown 1996 est.$0 Recycle or throw out Sep-10 Typewriter Panasonic KX-E4000 Broken unknown $0 Recycle or throw out Sep-10 EPD 3079 Ballistic Vest ABA XT3A-2 Expired $0 Return to manufacturer Nov-10 EPD 3336 Ballistic Vest ABA XT3A2 Expired $0 Return to manufacturer Dec-10 EPD 3345 Ballistic Vest ABA XT3A-2 02004839A/4840Expired unknown 2002 -$ Return to manufacturer Jan-11 SWAT Vest Safariland 1172646 Expired Return to manufacturer Mar-11 EPD 211 Ballistic Vest 2nd Chance Y2T-205 460000 Expired $203 1986 $0 Return to manufacturer Mar-11 EPD 215 Flack Jacket 2nd Chance Y2WT 460681 Expired $489 1986 $0 Return to manufacturer Mar-11 EPD 2463 SWAT Vest 9508F0078 Expired 1995 $0 Return to manufacturer Mar-11 EPD 3548 Ballistic Vest ABA XTRM-3A-FS 4092290 Expired 707$ 2004 $0 Return to manufacturer Mar-11 EPD 3549 Ballistic Vest SpecPlate XTRM-3A-FS 4095223 Expired 707$ 2004 $0 Return to manufacturer Mar-11 EPD 3568 Ballistic Vest ABA XTRM-3A-FS 5033456 Expired 707 2005 $0 Return to manufacturer Packet Page 122 of 299 AM-3848 Item #: 2. G. City Council Meeting Date: 04/19/2011 Time:Consent Submitted By:Gerry Gannon Department:Police Department Committee:Public Safety Type:Action Information Subject Title Close out subcontract 87898, Puget Sound Small Vessel PRND (Preventive Radiological/Nuclear Detection). Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Approve this agenda item authorizing the Mayor to sign the close out contract. Previous Council Action On April 5, 2011, the Public Safety Committee approved this agenda item for the April 19th, consent agenda. Narrative The Edmonds Police Department participated in a Puget Sound Regional program with the Department of Homeland Security for radiological detection. This program provided training and overtime cost recovery during our participation. The contract period has run its course and requires a closeout of the contract with Battelle, Pacific Northwest Division, (Battelle), in operation of the Pacific Northwest Laboratory. The department is asking for Council approval for the Mayor to sign the contract close out material. The close-out contract was reviewed by the City Attorney and is approved as to form. Attachments DNDO Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date City Clerk Sandy Chase 04/12/2011 02:41 PM Mayor Mike Cooper 04/14/2011 09:06 AM Final Approval Sandy Chase 04/14/2011 09:08 AM Form Started By: Gerry Gannon Started On: 04/06/2011 Final Approval Date: 04/14/2011 Packet Page 123 of 299 Packet Page 124 of 299 Packet Page 125 of 299 Packet Page 126 of 299 Packet Page 127 of 299 Packet Page 128 of 299 AM-3879 Item #: 2. H. City Council Meeting Date: 04/19/2011 Time:Consent Submitted By:Carrie Hite Department:Parks and Recreation Review Committee: Community/Development Services Committee Action: Approve for Consent Agenda Type:Action Information Subject Title Senior Center Recreational Services Agreement. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Authorize Mayor to sign 2011 Senior Center Recreational Services Agreement Previous Council Action Forwarded from CSDS committee for consent. Narrative Attached is a copy of the agreement. Attachments 2011 Senior Center Agreement Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date City Clerk Sandy Chase 04/14/2011 09:00 AM Mayor Mike Cooper 04/14/2011 09:06 AM Final Approval Sandy Chase 04/14/2011 09:08 AM Form Started By: Carrie Hite Started On: 04/14/2011 08:40 AM Final Approval Date: 04/14/2011 Packet Page 129 of 299 RECREATIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT 2011 BETWEEN THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON AND THE SOUTH COUNTY SENIOR CENTER The following is an agreement between the CITY OF EDMONDS, Washington (hereinafter referred to as the "City"), a municipal corporation, and the SOUTH COUNTY SENIOR CENTER, INC. (hereinafter referred to as the "Senior Center"), a non-profit organization organized under the laws of the State of Washington. W I T N E S S E T H 1. The City agrees to pay the Senior Center for the calendar year 2011 the sum of sixty thousand dollars ($60,000) in equal installments of five thousand dollars ($5,000) on or before the fifteenth of each month. 2. In consideration of said funds the Senior Center agrees to provide and augment the recreational activities of the City by providing recreational and social service programs to senior citizens of Edmonds. The parties agree that it is to the mutual benefit of both signators hereto to have the Senior Center plan and program said recreational and social service activities for senior citizens of Edmonds rather than the City establishing a separate recreational program of its own due to the economies and efficiencies that may be achieved by such mutual cooperation between the parties. All programs of the Center shall be available to eligible Edmonds citizens at the same cost, if any, or at a reduced rate below that to which such programs are available to the general senior population. 3. The funds received by the Senior Center under this Agreement shall be used exclusively for the purposes of providing recreational and social service programs or to help fund recreational classes and social service programs for senior citizens of Edmonds for the calendar year 2011. Any funds not so used shall be refunded to the City and the failure to utilize the funds for the purposes enumerated in this agreement shall be grounds for termination of this agreement without notice by the City. The Senior Center shall account for the expenditures of all such funds received by it from the City on an annual or more frequent basis and shall provide a statement in the form prescribed by the City through its Finance Director, or other authorized official, evidencing the nature and manner of expenditures of these funds and providing the City with substantiation that these funds have been used for the purposes enumerated. The Senior Center shall maintain its financial records in accordance with generally accepted accounting practice and shall make such records available for inspection during normal business hours by the City, the State Auditor or their designee(s). In the event the Senior Center expends any of these funds for purposes other than enumerated, and such expenditures are deemed to be a violation of the provisions of the Constitution or the laws of the State of Washington, the City may, at its alternative, Packet Page 130 of 299 discontinue all further payments hereunder and/or seek restitution of those sums which have been unconstitutionally expended by the Senior Center. 4. The Senior Center agrees to protect, indemnify and save the City, its officers, agents and employees harmless from and against any and all injury or damage to the City or its property, and also from and against all claims, demands and causes of action of every kind and character arising directly or indirectly or in any way incident to, in connection with, or arising out of or under the terms of this Agreement, caused by the fault of the Senior Center, its agents, employees, representatives or subcontractors. The Senior Center specifically promises to indemnify the City against claims or suits brought under Title 51 RCW by its employees or subcontractors and waives any immunity that the Senior Center may have under that title with respect to the City. The Senior Center further agrees to fully indemnify the City from and against any and all costs of defending any such claim or demand to the end that the City is held harmless therefrom. This section shall not apply to damages or claims resulting from the sole negligence of the City, in which event the laws of the State of Washington shall govern the parties’ respective liabilities. 5. The Senior Center shall secure and maintain in full force and effect during performance of all work pursuant to this agreement a policy of comprehensive general liability insurance providing coverage of at least $1,000,000 per occurrence and $3,000,000 aggregate for personal injury; $250,000 per occurrence and aggregate for property damage. Such policy shall list the City as a named insured and shall include a provision prohibiting cancellation of said policy except upon thirty (30) days written notice to the City. Certificates of coverage shall be delivered to the City within fifteen (15) days of execution of this document. 6. The Senior Center shall be and is an independent contractor and nothing herein shall be interpreted to create an employment relationship between the City and the Senior Center or with any employee of either the City or the Senior Center with respect to employees of the other party. The Senior Center agrees to hold harmless and indemnify the City from any and all employee related costs arising from or out of a claim by any of its employees against the City of Edmonds for wages, costs or benefits relating to such employee's employment by the Senior Center. 7. The Senior Center agrees to maintain current records containing the residence addresses of the persons who utilize the services during the calendar year of the contract and provide a yearend report on total number of Edmonds residents accessing services and the true and actual numbers of service hours provided to all clientele. 8. Either party may terminate this Agreement without cause upon providing 30 days written notice to the other Party; PROVIDED, that the City may terminate this Agreement effective immediately for breach of paragraph 3 or 5. Termination shall not affect the Senior Center’s obligation to protect, indemnify, and hold harmless the City as provided hereunder. This agreement shall be automatically renewed for each successive year unless revoked in writing by one of the parties prior to November 30th of the current year; unless terminated as provided herein. Packet Page 131 of 299 DATED this _______ day of ____________, 2011. CITY OF EDMONDS: SOUTH COUNTY SENIOR CENTER, INC. By: Mayo r Mike Cooper Its: ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Sandra S. Chase, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY By: Sharon Cates, Lighthouse Law Group Packet Page 132 of 299 AM-3872 Item #: 2. I. City Council Meeting Date: 04/19/2011 Time:Consent Submitted By:Renee McRae Department:Parks and Recreation Review Committee: Community/Development Services Committee Action: Approve for Consent Agenda Type:Action Information Subject Title Authorization for Mayor to sign the contract with the Edmonds-South Snohomish County Historical Society for the 2011 Edmonds Market. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Authorize the Mayor to sign the contract for the 2011 Edmonds Market. Previous Council Action The contract was reviewed at the CSDS Meeting on 4/12/11 and authorization was given to place it on the Council Consent Agenda for 4/19/11. Narrative There are no significant changes to this annual contract. Attachments 2011 Market Contract 04-12-11 CSDS Committee Minutes Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date City Clerk Sandy Chase 04/13/2011 04:46 PM Mayor Mike Cooper 04/14/2011 09:06 AM Final Approval Sandy Chase 04/14/2011 09:08 AM Form Started By: Renee McRae Started On: 04/13/2011 03:35 PM Final Approval Date: 04/14/2011 Packet Page 133 of 299 {WSS780893.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } 1 CONTRACT CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON AND EDMONDS-SOUTH SNOHOMISH COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY May 7-October 1, 2011 The following is an agreement between the CITY OF EDMONDS (hereinafter referred to as the “City”), and the EDMONDS-SOUTH SNOHOMISH COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY (hereinafter referred to as the “Historical Society”). WHEREAS, the Edmonds South County Historical Society has operated in the past a spring and summer market providing a marketplace for Edmonds residents to display their wares which uniquely promotes artists and other small business persons and their products; WHEREAS, the City Council finds that in addition to providing an opportunity for economic development and a recreational resource to the citizens of Edmonds, the event promotes tourism to the community and could provide an initial springboard for the development of a small business; WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the considerations the City provides are more than adequately recompensed by the promises of the Historical Society and the public benefit to be derived from this agreement; NOW, THEREFORE, 1. Responsibilities of City. 1.1 Garden Market (May 7 through June 25): City shall provide up to 40 parking spaces located on the south and west sides of the police parking lot for farmer/producer based vendors. 1.2 Summer Market (July 2 through October 1): City shall provide use of the right of way, Bell Street between 5th and 6th Avenues and 5th Avenue between Bell and Main Streets, by the Historical Society for the “Summer Market” event, each Saturday (Exception: No Summer Market during Taste of Edmonds, Saturday August 13.) 1.3 All use and configuration of tents and other temporary facilities used in this event shall be inspected and reviewed prior to the event by Edmonds Fire Marshal or designated representative, in accordance with the provisions of the Open Air Market Ordinance. Tarps, tents, canopies and covers shall be tested and labeled for fire resistance. Also, provisions of State and local law shall be adhered to insure that no lasting or permanent damage shall be done to any public facility or property. The Fire Marshal and City in accordance with its lawful authority under statute and ordinance may use its discretion to cancel such event or to prohibit the attendance of the general public in certain areas which is a violation of state law or local ordinance. 1.4 City shall install Summer Market banners as provided by Historical Society at approved sites. Historical Society shall obtain a Street Banner Permit and pay the required fee. 1.5 City shall install appropriate “No Parking Saturdays” signage on both 5th Avenue South and Bell Streets in late June and provide portable street barriers. Packet Page 134 of 299 {WSS780893.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } 2 2. Historical Society promises in consideration of the use of the facilities and services above described: 2.1 Set up hours begin at 6:00 a.m. on Saturdays on 5 th Avenue and 7:00 a.m. on Saturdays on Bell Street. During the Garden Market, the sections of the Police parking lot not used by the Market will be reserved for police parking only. Parking restrictions will be posted and vendor and customer parking shall not be allowed in this area. Violators may be towed at their own expense. For Summer Market - parking restrictions shall be posted indicating violators will be towed. Police Department will attempt to notify owners. If not located by 6:30 a.m. police will proceed to have violating vehicles towed. During the Garden and Summer Market, the designated parking spaces in the City Hall parking lot reserved for the Mayor and Directors will be restricted. Parking restrictions will be posted in these areas and vendor and customer parking shall not be allowed in these areas. Violators may be towed at their own expense. For Summer Market street barricades are in place at 6:00 a.m. on Saturday and removed by 5:00 p.m. Historical Society shall obtain necessary Street Use Permits for Summer Market. 2.2 The Historical Society shall provide a Certificate of Insurance evidencing commercial general liability insurance written on an occurrence basis with limits no less than $1,000,000 combined single limit per occurrence and $5,000,000 aggregate for personal injury, bodily injury and property damage. City shall be named as an additional insured on the Commercial General Liability insurance policy and a copy of the endorsement naming City as additional insured shall be attached to the Certificate of Insurance. The insurance policy shall contain a clause stating that coverage shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respects to the limits of the insurer’s liability. The City shall be named as an insured on the Histo rical Society’s General Liability insurance policy. The insurance policy shall contain, or be endorsed to provide that the Historical Society’s insurance coverage shall be primary insurance. Any insurance, self-insurance, or insurance pool coverage maintained by the City shall be in excess of the Historical Society’s insurance and shall not contribute to it. The Historical Society shall provide a certificate of insurance evidencing the required insurance before using the property described herein. Insurance shall be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best rating of not less than A:VII. 2.3 The Historical Society agrees that the Market is a public event. The Historical Society further agrees that areas constituting the City-Provided Site that are covered under this Agreement, including but not limited to public right of way, streets, sidewalks, parks, parking lots, gardens, meeting halls and squares, are traditional public forums. As a result, the Historical Society shall permit citizens attending events open to the general public at City-Provided Site during the Market to exercise therein their protected constitutional right to free speech without interference. Packet Page 135 of 299 {WSS780893.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } 3 2.4 The City has enacted Ordinance 3749 restricting the use of single-use plastic checkout bags. The restrictions do not apply to plastic bags used to carry out cooked food or provided solely for produce, bulk food or meat. The Historical Society will encourage its vendors to comply with the purposes of the ordinance by utilizing paper bags or encouraging the use of reusable totes whenever practicable. 2.5 The Historical Society shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers harmless from any and all claims, injuries, damages, losses or suits, including attorney fees, arising from or in connection with the Historical Society’s performance, or nonperformance, of this Agreement, except to the extent that claims, injuries, damages, losses or suits are caused by the sole negligence of the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. This promise to indemnify and hold harmless shall include a waiver by the Historical Society of the immunity provided under Title 51 RCW, but only to the extent necessary to fully effectuate this promise. This provision shall survive the termination and/or expiration of this Agreement. 2.6 Neither Historical Society nor any officer, agent, or employee shall discriminate in the provision of service under this contract against any individual, partnership, or corporation based upon race, religion, sex, creed, place of origin, or any other form of discrimination prohibited by federal, state or local law. 2.7 In addition, the parties acknowledge that pursuant to the provisions of Initiative 901 as codified in Chapter 70.160 RCW (herein after the “smoking ban”), smoking is prohibited in indoor areas, within 25 feet of vents or entrances and in outdoor areas where public employees of the City, and employees of any vendor at the event or of the contracting organization are required to be. This general description of the provisions of the initiative is included for the purpose of reference and is not intended to expand or contract the obligations created by the smoking ban. The Historical Society warrants that it will comply with the smoking ban and will utilize the services and advice of the Snohomish County Health District in assuring compliance during the event described in this agreement. 2.8 Historical Society agrees to the following days and general operating hours: Garden Market: Saturdays, May 7 through June 25, 2011 Summer Market: Saturdays, July 2 through October 1, 2011 (No Market August 13, due to Taste of Edmonds). Historical Society agrees to the following hours of operation: Garden Market open: 9:00 a.m.-2:00 p.m. Set up: 7:00 a.m.-9:00 a.m. Takedown: 2:00 p.m.-3:30 p.m. Summer Market open: 9:00 a.m.-3:00 p.m. Set up: 6:00 a.m.-9:00 a.m. (6:00 a.m. start on 5th Avenue; 7:00 a.m. start on Bell Street) Takedown: 3:00 p.m.-4:30 p.m. Packet Page 136 of 299 {WSS780893.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } 4 2.9 City shall have no responsibility or liability for the provision of security services nor shall it be liable for any loss or damage incurred by Historical Society or the participants in this event. 2.10 Historical Society shall provide fire watch for all times in and around the booths and displays open to the general public as part of this event. 2.11 Historical Society shall provide sufficient portable sani-cans. Sani-cans will be discretely placed at a location(s) to be agreed upon by the City and the Historical Society. The City agrees to allow the use of one space in the parking lot south of City Hall to be used for the placement of two sani-cans for the length of the “Summer Market” (July 2 to October 1, 2011). Individual vendors are responsible for packing out all of their own garbage. Historical Society may deposit up to twelve (12) thirty-three gallon bags of garbage generated in their area in dumpster west of City Hall. 2.12 Upon the completion of the event, Historical Society shall make adequate provisions for the cleanup and restoration of all sites rented or provided under terms of this agreement. 2.13 Historical Society shall pay City all permit fees, in accordance with provisions of open air market, Ordinance #3015, for the above-mentioned facilities use and services at least ten (10) days prior to the event. 2.14 Colored flags or banners may not be placed in the existing holes in the public sidewalk designated for the American flag program. 3. Miscellaneous. 3.1 Entire agreement, integration and amendment. This agreement contains the entire agreement and understanding between the parties relating to the rights and obligations created hereby, and supersedes all prior and contemporaneous negotiations, understandings, and agreements, written or oral, between the parties. Any prior discussions or understandings are deemed merged with the provisions herein. This agreement shall not be amended, assigned or otherwise changed or transferred except in writing with the express written consent of the parties hereto. Any action to interpret or enforce this agreement shall be brought before the Superior Court of Snohomish County, Washington, and the parties agree that, as between them, all matters shall be resolved in that venue. 3.2 Force majeure. Parties shall not be liable for failure to perform or delay in performance due to fire, flood, strike or other labor difficulty, act of God, act of any governmental authority, riot, embargo, fuel or energy shortage, car shortage, wrecks or delays in transportation, or due to any other cause beyond Parties reasonable control. In the event of delay in performance due to any such cause, the date of delivery or time for completion will be extended by a period of time reasonably necessary to overcome the effect of such delay. 3.3 Miscellaneous. Nothing in this Agreement shall be interpreted to or in fact create an agency or employment relationship between the Parties. No officer, official, agent, employee or representative of Historical Society shall be deemed to be the same of the City for any purpose. Historical Society alone shall be solely responsible for all acts of its officers, officials, agents, employees, representatives and subcontractors during the performance of this Agreement. Packet Page 137 of 299 {WSS780893.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } 5 DATED this ______ day of ________________ 2011. CITY OF EDMONDS: EDMONDS-SOUTH SNOHOMISH COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY: Mayor Mike Cooper By: Its: Date: ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Sandra S. Chase, City Clerk OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: Sharon E. Cates Packet Page 138 of 299 M I N U T E S Community Services/Development Services Committee Meeting April 12, 2011 Elected Officials Present: Staff Present: Council Member Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Chair Phil Williams, Public Works Director Council Member Michael Plunkett Rob English, City Engineer Jerry Shuster,Stormwater Eng Program Mgr Kernen Lien, Associate Planner Renee McRae, Recreation Manager Carrie Hite, Parks, Rec. & Cultural Services Director The committee convened at 7:00 p.m. A. FEMA Biological Opinion Mr. Lien gave a brief explanation of the item, including laying out the City's three options to comply with the the upcoming FEMA deadline. The Councilmembers asked questions regarding floodplains and Staff showed a map that indicated the small floodplain areas in Edmonds. The Councilmembers agreed with the Staff recommendation to go with compliance option number 3 (Permit-by-Permit compliance) and forwarded it to the full Council's consent agenda. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. B. Authorization for the Mayor to sign the contract with the Edmonds-South Snohomish County Historical Society for the 2011 Edmonds Market. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. C. Authorization for the Mayor to sign the contract with the Edmonds Arts Festival Association for the 2011 Edmonds Arts Festival. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. D. Authorization for the Mayor to sign the contract with the Greater Edmonds Chamber of Commerce for the 4th of July parade and fireworks display. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. E. Authorization for the Mayor to sign the contract with the Greater Edmonds Chamber of Commerce for the 2011 Taste of Edmonds. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. Packet Page 139 of 299 CS/DS Committee Minutes April 12, 2011 Page 2 2 F. Authorization for the Mayor to sign the contract with the Greater Edmonds Chamber of Commerce for the 2011 Classic Car Show. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. G. 2011 Senior Center Agreement ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. H. Authorization for the Mayor to sign utility easements for the Lift Station 2 Improvements Project. Mr. English reviewed the scope of the Lift Station 2 project and discussed how operating and maintaining the existing lift station is difficult given the age and current location of the facility. He explained to the committee that the value of the easements were determined by the Appraisal Group of the Northwest and the cost would be paid by sewer utility rates (412 utility fund). There were follow-up questions on the project and how this project is tied to the City’s sewer system. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. I. Quarterly Public Works Capital Project Report. Mr. English, reviewed the Quarterly Public Works Capital Project Report with the Committee. He explained that the purpose of the report is to provide the committee with information on projects managed by the Public Works Department. ACTION: None. J. Traffic Impact Fee Annual Report. Mr. English reviewed the 2010 traffic impact fee report and answered questions from the committee on the current amount of traffic impact fees, how they are assessed and what type of projects qualify for impacts fees. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. The meeting adjourned at 8:05p.m. Packet Page 140 of 299 AM-3871 Item #: 2. J. City Council Meeting Date: 04/19/2011 Time:Consent Submitted By:Renee McRae Department:Parks and Recreation Review Committee: Community/Development Services Committee Action: Approve for Consent Agenda Type:Action Information Subject Title Authorization for the Mayor to sign the contract with the Edmonds Arts Festival Association for the 2011 Edmonds Arts Festival. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Authorize the Mayor to sign the contract for the 2011 Edmonds Arts Festival. Previous Council Action The contract was reviewed at the CSDS Meeting on 4/12/11 and authorization was given to place it on the Council Consent Agenda for 4/19/11. Narrative There are no significant changes to this annual contract. Attachments 2011 Arts Festival Contract 04-12-11 CSDS Committee Minutes Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date City Clerk Sandy Chase 04/13/2011 04:46 PM Mayor Mike Cooper 04/14/2011 09:06 AM Final Approval Sandy Chase 04/14/2011 09:08 AM Form Started By: Renee McRae Started On: 04/13/2011 03:32 PM Final Approval Date: 04/14/2011 Packet Page 141 of 299 {WSS780880.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } 1 CONTRACT CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON AND EDMONDS ARTS FESTIVAL ASSOCIATION, INCORPORATED June 9 - June 22, 2011 The following is an Agreement between the CITY of EDMONDS (hereinafter referred to as the "CITY"), and the EDMONDS ARTS FESTIVAL ASSOCIATION, INCORPORATED (hereinafter referred to as the "FESTIVAL ASSOCIATION"). WHEREAS, the Edmonds Arts Festival Association, Inc. has for many years sponsored a public event known as the Edmonds Arts Festival which provides educational and artistic benefits to the citizens of Edmonds; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that in addition to providing an educational opportunity, the Edmonds Arts Festival showcases Edmonds’ artists and helps promote tourism and thereby the economy of Edmonds; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the considerations to be provided to the Festival by the City are more than adequately recompensed by the compensation provided by the Edmonds Arts Festival Association and from the public benefits received by the citizens of the City; NOW, THEREFORE, 1. Responsibilities of the City. (Certain Festival Association obligations included). 1.1 From 10:00 p.m., June 9 to 5:00 p.m., June 21, 2011, City shall provide Rooms: 206, 207, 208, 209, 112, 113, 114, 115, and 123 of the Frances Anderson Center. The Frances Anderson Center gym shall be provided from 1:00 p.m., June 9 to 12:00 midnight, June 20, 2011. Gym shall be available for use by 8:00 a.m., Tuesday, June 21, 2011. Under no circumstances shall Festival Association have access to the Sculptor's Workshop, Rooms 210 and 211. 1.2 City shall provide the Library Plaza Room from 8:00 a.m., Thursday, June 9 until 12:00 midnight, Monday, June 20, 2011 at which time the Festival Association agrees to have the carpet professionally cleaned so that it is dry and ready for set up at 6:00 a.m., Tuesday, June 21, 2011. 1.3 All of the rooms identified herein shall be under the exclusive control of the Festival Association during the period identified due to the high value of the arts and crafts works that shall be located therein. The Festival Association requests that the City limit people traffic not related to the Festival Association activities to a minimum. Two sets of the required keys plus three additional room keys will be checked out to the Festival Association President, or designee, who shall be responsible for security of all Festival Association displays and supplies. The Festival Association may cover the vending machines from 12:00 noon, June 15 through June 19, 2011. Packet Page 142 of 299 {WSS780880.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } 2 1.4 During the evening of June 15, 2011, the Festival Association shall have exclusive control of the hallways serving the rooms it is allowed to use for that evening starting at 5:00 p.m. During this time, the Festival Association shall hold the Annual Preview Party from 5:30 p.m. to 12:00 midnight. The Fire Department will do an inspection of the tented area prior to the start of the party for life safety issues. Alcoholic drinks may be served at the Preview Party, so long as Festival obtains all required state licenses and approvals to serve alcohol. The lighted display shall be reserved for the use of the Festival Association. City shall provide ample trashcans for the evening of June 15, 2011. Clean up is the responsibility of the Festival Association. 1.5 City shall provide the Frances Anderson ball field, playfield, courtyard and amphitheater, and the Edmonds Plaza from Noon, June 15 through 5:00 p.m., June 20, 2011. The playfield shall be provided for Artwork Booths. The Festival Association shall have the exclusive use of the playfield and the baseball diamond from 8 a.m., June 15 through 12:00 midnight, June 20, 2011. It is recognized that the City may choose to sprinkle the field prior to the Festival to reduce dust as watering the field is the only means the City has to control dust. The sprinkling system shall be turned off by 8:00 a.m., June 15, 2011. Festival Association agrees to reduce the size of the infield cover to cover the infield only. In addition to the Playfield, the Festival Association shall be provided the paved area west of the outdoor stage for the food concession area. The Library Plaza to the west of the Anderson Center shall be used for special functions suitable to the area. Festival Association shall utilize and shall be provided up to fifteen (15) picnic tables at the concession area and up to fifteen (15) garbage cans around the outside area, and shall provide the City with a schematic drawing of where the garbage cans and picnic tables are to be placed by June 1. The Festival Association shall provide two volunteers for eight hours each to assist with the moving and placement of picnic tables and garbage cans and shall provide a truck and volunteers to move and set up the information booths. Festival Association shall be responsible for providing a dumpster for trash and grease traps for waste water disposal. Festival Association shall provide the City with a list of supplies (trash can liners, paper towels, etc.) which the City shall order. The Festival Association will pay the invoice for all supplies in a timely fashion. City shall check the stage to insure that it is in safe and usable condition. 1.6 Eighth Avenue shall be closed between Main Street and Dayton Street for an additional food concession area and eating tables from 8:00 a.m., June 15, through 12:00 noon, June 20, 2011. City shall provide and install safety barriers at both ends of the closed street. The Festival Association shall obtain a street closure permit as a part of its obligations under paragraph 2.9. 1.7 Except as provided below, Festival Association shall have exclusive use of the parking lot between the Anderson Center and the Edmonds Library for permit parking from June 15 through June 20, 2011, provided however that the Festival Association shall allow handicap permit parking in marked stalls. Festival Association shall provide up to eight parking permits and marked stalls for Library staff/patrons. City shall provide official handicapped parking signs. One load/unload space each will be marked on Dayton and Main Street, and up to two spaces on 8th Avenue. Packet Page 143 of 299 {WSS780880.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } 3 1.8 The Festival Association shall have exclusive use of the Civic Center dirt soccer/football field (excluding all turf areas) from 2 p.m., June 15 until 8 a.m., Monday, June 20, 2011. The field will be used exclusively for all-day parking of exhibitors and staff. Entrance adjacent to Boys & Girls Club prohibited except in an emergency. 1.9 City shall install Festival street banners at all approved sites. One additional banner on the east wall of the Frances Anderson Center will be installed by City. 1.10 City shall provide fifteen (15) amps of electrical service to each duplex outlet: the Festival Association must supply any additional power. A Festival Association representative and a City representative from Public Works will meet prior to June 9, 2011, to draw up an interior and exterior electrical plan. Festival Association is responsible for notifying PUD of hookups and schedule inspection of temporary panels. Festival Association must have temporary panels and power poles removed by 12:00 Noon, Wednesday, June 22, 2011. The Festival Association shall not draw power from the Frances Anderson Center. 2. Responsibilities of the Festival Association. 2.1 The Festival Association will operate the Edmonds Arts Festival consistent with its educational purposes and shall not illegally discriminate in the provision of the event or in its entrance requirements against any person or organization in violation of state or federal statute or local ordinance. 2.2 In addition, the parties acknowledge that pursuant to the provisions of Initiative 901 as codified in Chapter 70.160 RCW (herein after the "smoking ban"), smoking is prohibited in indoor areas, within 25 feet of vents or entrances and in outdoor areas where public employees of the City, and employees of any vendor at the event or of the contracting organization are required to be. This general description of the provisions of the initiative is included for the purpose of reference and is not intended to expand or contract the obligations created by the smoking ban. The Festival Association warrants that it will comply with the smoking ban and will utilize the services and advice of the Snohomish County Health District in assuring compliance during the event described in this agreement. 2.3 The Festival Association agrees that the Edmonds Arts Festival is a public event. The Festival Association further agrees that areas provided by the City Site that are covered under this Agreement, including but not limited to public right of way, streets, sidewalks, parks, parking lots, gardens, meeting halls and squares, are traditional public forums. As a result, the Festival Association shall permit citizens attending events open to the general public during the Edmonds Arts Festival to exercise therein their protected constitutional right to free speech without interference on City property. 2.4 The City has enacted Ordinance 3749 restricting the use of single-use plastic checkout bags. The restrictions do not apply to plastic bags used to carry out cooked food or provided solely for produce, bulk food or meat. The Festival Association will encourage its vendors to comply with the purposes of the ordinance by utilizing paper bags or encouraging the use of reusable totes whenever practicable. Packet Page 144 of 299 {WSS780880.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } 4 2.5 The Festival Association shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers harmless from any and all claims, injuries, damages, losses or suits, including attorney fees, arising from or in connection with the Festival Association’s performance, or nonperformance, of this Agreement, except to the extent that claims, injuries, damages, losses or suits are caused by the sole negligence of the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. This promise to indemnify and hold harmless shall include a waiver by the Festival Association of the immunity provided under Title 51 RCW, but only to the extent necessary to fully effectuate this promise. This provision shall survive the termination and/or expiration of this Agreement. 2.6 The Festival Association shall provide a Certificate of Insurance evidencing insurance written on an occurrence basis with limits no less than $3,000,000 combined single limit per occurrence and $3,000,000 aggregate for personal injury, bodily injury and property damage. The City shall be named as an additional insured on the Commercial General Liability insurance policy and a copy of the endorsement naming City as additional insured shall be attached to the Certificate of Insurance. The insurance policy shall contain a clause stating that coverage shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respects to the limits of the insurer’s liability. The City shall be named as an insured on the Festival’s General Liability insurance policy. The insurance policy shall contain, or be endorsed to contain that the Festivals insurance coverage shall be primary insurance. Any insurance, or insurance pool coverage maintained by the City shall be in excess of the Festival’s insurance and shall not contribute to it. The Festival shall provide a certificate of insurance evidencing the required insurance before using the premises described herein. Insurance shall be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best rating of not less than A:VII. 2.7 Displays and artworks shall not be hung from conduits or sprinkler pipes. Exits and exit signage shall not be obstructed except with specific approval of the Fire Marshal or his designee. Nothing shall be attached to any piece of art displayed by the City, or on any metal surface, within the Edmonds Art Festival premises made available by the City to the Festival Association and covered by this Agreement. The Festival Association shall be responsible for removing all paint, wires, and modifications made to the building for the Festival and restoring the premises to its original condition. No stakes shall be used on grassy areas of the Plaza. A Festival Association representative shall meet with a member of the City's Parks and Recreation Department prior to June 9, 2011 and on June 22, 2011 to inspect the facility to document the “original” and post event condition of the Anderson Center, the Plaza Rooms, and outside areas. 2.8 Festival Association shall be responsible for picking up all trash and removing all items and equipment related to the Festival by 5:00 p.m., June 21, 2011. This includes the grounds as well as the buildings. City shall provide the Festival Association with one mop, pail, and broom to use for cleanup, supplies for the toilet facilities, and keys to dispensers. The Festival Association will provide sufficient portable sani-cans and wash stations. The Festival Association will take over cleaning and stocking the restrooms from 5:00 pm, June 15 to 5:00 pm, June 20, 2011. Packet Page 145 of 299 {WSS780880.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } 5 2.9 Festival Association shall provide manpower to assist relocating City equipment and furniture to the storage rooms. Also, City clients shall have access to the weight room (200A) for drop-in use up until 2:00 p.m., Wednesday, June 15, 2011, and starting again at 8:00 a.m., Monday, June 20, 2011. The clients shall use the alternate Main Street entrance (no access through the gym). City shall secure the hallway between the gymnasium and the weight room by 12:00 noon, Friday, June 10. The hallway must be opened by 3:00 p.m., June 15 and must remain open, clear and unobstructed for egress during the Festival. 2.10 Festival Association shall be responsible for all required city and state permits. The Festival Association shall fill out Street Banner Permit with fees provided for by this agreement. All permits will be arranged through a City's designated representative. The Festival Association is responsible for obtaining any necessary permits for serving alcohol on the premises from the state. 2.11 The Festival Association shall post "NO DOGS" signs on the Festival grounds and the Civic Center Field as per City Ordinance. The Festival Association shall notify vendors of this ordinance as part of their registration instructions, and also inform vendors that this ordinance will be enforced. This provision shall not apply to service animals for the disabled. 2.12 The Festival Association shall be responsible for cleaning rugs, floors, stairs, and otherwise restoring the buildings to their original condition, including professional cleaning of the Plaza Room carpet, rooms 201, 209, 112 (if used), 114 and main floor hallway, elevator lobby and ramp. The Festival Association shall pay for special cleaning of all paved food concession areas, restore all areas to their original condition, and wash east-facing windows on the first and second floor of the Frances Anderson Center by 4:00 p.m., Wednesday, June 22. (Care must be taken particularly with the Daycare windows below ground level which have exhaust fans that are not able to be sealed). The Festival Association shall hot water power wash the Plaza and all pedestrian walkways around the amphitheater and Frances Anderson Center as well as the Library Plaza area and steps to the Library parking lot. Power washed materials (litter, etc.) must be collected and disposed of and not pushed to adjacent areas. Disposal of waste water shall be according to the City policy using grease traps provided, cleaned and picked up, by the Festival Association. 2.13 The Festival Association shall provide a fire watch for all times the buildings and displays are open to the general public. The Edmonds Fire Marshall or representative shall inspect the Frances Anderson Center with the Festival Association President, or designated representative, prior to June 10, 2011 and any potential problems will be noted and reported prior to Fire Marshall's briefing. At 9:00 a.m., June 15, 2011 Fire Marshall shall brief designated representatives of the Festival Association of the location and use of fire apparatus in the Anderson Center and Library Plaza Rooms. The Festival Association President and appointed representatives will be the responsible Festival Association individuals for performing fire prevention and fire watch activities. 2.14 The Festival Association shall insure that: Packet Page 146 of 299 {WSS780880.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } 6 2.14.1 Kilns, barbecues, forges and other sources of heat shall be insulated from turfed areas to prevent the heat from killing the grass and sterilizing the soil. All heat producing appliances in locations other than the food vending area shall be approved by the Fire Department and may require conditions for their acceptable use. Food vendor installations will be inspected prior to Festival opening. Tarps, tents, canopies and covers shall be listed and labeled for flame resistance. 2.14.2 Vehicles shall only be allowed on turfed areas to load and unload, with adjacent streets and Civic Center Soccer Playfield (dirt field) used for parking during the Festival. Food Court concessions will use the Main Street entrance for loading and unloading. The Festival Association shall notify all individual residents of the affected areas of 8th Avenue and provide general notice to all the citizens of the closure of 8th Avenue. 2.14.3 The Festival Association will provide gate control and parking supervision to ensure orderly and efficient parking, and restrict parking to the sand/dirt surface within the track area. Use of the jogging track, tennis courts, softball field, and Boy’ & Girls’ Club activities should not be impacted. The Festival Association may be charged time and/or materials to return the area to its original condition. 2.15 The Festival Association shall submit a cleaning/damage deposit of $1,000.00 to the City prior to May 5, 2011. The deposit shall be refunded to the Festival Association if, upon inspection, all is in order, or a prorated portion thereof as may be necessary to reimburse the City for loss or cleaning and supply costs. 2.16 The Festival Association shall pay the City a fee of $4,604.00 ($3,650 for Anderson Center, under stage storage, Plaza Room and environs and $954 for Civic Field) for the use and services of the above mentioned facilities in this Contract, pay directly to the contractor for supplies provided through the City for the actual cost of supplies furnished by the City within thirty (30) days of mailing of a final bill by the City. All fees are due by May 5, 2011. 2.17 Notices. All requests for additional services and concerns of the Festival Association shall be directed by the Festival Association President to the City's designated representative, Renée McRae (425.771.0232). 3. Miscellaneous. 3.1 Entire agreement, integration and amendment. This agreement contains the entire agreement and understanding between the parties relating to the rights and obligations created hereby, and supersedes all prior and contemporaneous negotiations, understandings, and agreements, written or oral, between the parties. Any prior discussions or understandings are deemed merged with the provisions herein. This agreement shall not be amended, assigned or otherwise changed or transferred except in writing with the express written consent of the parties hereto. Any action to interpret or enforce this agreement shall be brought before the Superior Court of Snohomish County, Washington, and the parties agree that, as between them, all matters shall be resolved in that venue. Packet Page 147 of 299 {WSS780880.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } 7 3.2 Force majeure. Parties shall not be liable for failure to perform or delay in performance due to fire, flood, strike or other labor difficulty, act of God, act of any governmental authority, riot, embargo, fuel or energy shortage, car shortage, wrecks or delays in transportation, or due to any other cause beyond Parties reasonable control. In the event of delay in performance due to any such cause, the date of delivery or time for completion will be extended by a period of time reasonably necessary to overcome the effect of such delay. 3.3 Miscellaneous. Nothing in this Agreement shall be interpreted to or in fact create an agency or employment relationship between the Parties. No officer, official, agent, employee or representative of Festival Association shall be deemed to be the same of the City for any purpose. Festival Association alone shall be solely responsible for all acts of its officers, officials, agents, employees, representatives and subcontractors during the performance of this Agreement. DATED this _______ day of __________________, 2011. CITY OF EDMONDS: EDMONDS ARTS FESTIVAL ASSOCIATION By: Mayor Mike Cooper Its: Date: ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED Sandra S. Chase, City Clerk OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: Sharon E. Cates Packet Page 148 of 299 M I N U T E S Community Services/Development Services Committee Meeting April 12, 2011 Elected Officials Present: Staff Present: Council Member Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Chair Phil Williams, Public Works Director Council Member Michael Plunkett Rob English, City Engineer Jerry Shuster,Stormwater Eng Program Mgr Kernen Lien, Associate Planner Renee McRae, Recreation Manager Carrie Hite, Parks, Rec. & Cultural Services Director The committee convened at 7:00 p.m. A. FEMA Biological Opinion Mr. Lien gave a brief explanation of the item, including laying out the City's three options to comply with the the upcoming FEMA deadline. The Councilmembers asked questions regarding floodplains and Staff showed a map that indicated the small floodplain areas in Edmonds. The Councilmembers agreed with the Staff recommendation to go with compliance option number 3 (Permit-by-Permit compliance) and forwarded it to the full Council's consent agenda. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. B. Authorization for the Mayor to sign the contract with the Edmonds-South Snohomish County Historical Society for the 2011 Edmonds Market. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. C. Authorization for the Mayor to sign the contract with the Edmonds Arts Festival Association for the 2011 Edmonds Arts Festival. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. D. Authorization for the Mayor to sign the contract with the Greater Edmonds Chamber of Commerce for the 4th of July parade and fireworks display. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. E. Authorization for the Mayor to sign the contract with the Greater Edmonds Chamber of Commerce for the 2011 Taste of Edmonds. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. Packet Page 149 of 299 CS/DS Committee Minutes April 12, 2011 Page 2 2 F. Authorization for the Mayor to sign the contract with the Greater Edmonds Chamber of Commerce for the 2011 Classic Car Show. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. G. 2011 Senior Center Agreement ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. H. Authorization for the Mayor to sign utility easements for the Lift Station 2 Improvements Project. Mr. English reviewed the scope of the Lift Station 2 project and discussed how operating and maintaining the existing lift station is difficult given the age and current location of the facility. He explained to the committee that the value of the easements were determined by the Appraisal Group of the Northwest and the cost would be paid by sewer utility rates (412 utility fund). There were follow-up questions on the project and how this project is tied to the City’s sewer system. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. I. Quarterly Public Works Capital Project Report. Mr. English, reviewed the Quarterly Public Works Capital Project Report with the Committee. He explained that the purpose of the report is to provide the committee with information on projects managed by the Public Works Department. ACTION: None. J. Traffic Impact Fee Annual Report. Mr. English reviewed the 2010 traffic impact fee report and answered questions from the committee on the current amount of traffic impact fees, how they are assessed and what type of projects qualify for impacts fees. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. The meeting adjourned at 8:05p.m. Packet Page 150 of 299 AM-3873 Item #: 2. K. City Council Meeting Date: 04/19/2011 Time:Consent Submitted By:Renee McRae Department:Parks and Recreation Review Committee: Community/Development Services Committee Action: Approve for Consent Agenda Type:Action Information Subject Title Authorization for the Mayor to sign the contract with the Greater Edmonds Chamber of Commerce for the 4th of July parade and fireworks display. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Authorize the Mayor to sign the contract for the 4th of July parade and fireworks display. Previous Council Action The contract was reviewed at the CSDS Meeting on 4/12/11 and authorization was given to place it on the Council Consent Agenda for 4/19/11. Narrative There are no significant changes to this annual contract. Attachments July 4 Contract 04-12-11 CSDS Committee Meeting Minutes Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date City Clerk Sandy Chase 04/13/2011 04:46 PM Mayor Mike Cooper 04/14/2011 09:06 AM Final Approval Sandy Chase 04/14/2011 09:08 AM Form Started By: Renee McRae Started On: 04/13/2011 04:20 PM Final Approval Date: 04/14/2011 Packet Page 151 of 299 1 CONTRACT THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON AND GREATER EDMONDS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE Monday, July 4, 2011 The following is an agreement between the CITY OF EDMONDS (hereinafter referred to as “City”) and the GREATER EDMONDS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE (hereinafter referred to as “Chamber”). WHEREAS, the Chamber proposes to conduct a public celebration honoring Independence Day - 4th of July through a parade and fireworks display; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that it is in the public interest to participate in the sponsorship of such events by providing the consideration set forth in this agreement in order to enhance the safety of the public celebrations for its citizens and to offer a reasonable alternative to the use of private fireworks which the Council finds in many situations to be unsafe; NOW, THEREFORE 1. Responsibilities of the City City shall provide: 1.1 Use of City streets as diagrammed in Exhibit A - Parade Route, for parade to occur on July 4, 2011. City will provide traffic barriers and will set up and take down sound system to be located at the Edmonds Theater. City shall put up banners at approved sites. 1.2 Use of Civic Center Playfield for setup to start at 9:00 a.m. and Fireworks to occur at approximately 10 p.m., July 4, 2011. 1.3 Use of 6th Avenue South between Bell Street and Sprague Street from 6:00 p.m. until 11:00 p.m. 1.4 Barricades at 6th Avenue South and Bell and 6th Avenue South and Sprague. 1.5 A power hookup at the west end of the grandstand and power for the band. 1.6 Two signs at each entrance to the Park indicating no fireworks or alcohol allowed. 1.7 City is responsible for stringing flags, caution tape or line that clearly delineates spectator areas from fireworks staging areas. 2. Responsibilities of the Chamber In consideration of the above, Chamber agrees: Packet Page 152 of 299 2 2.1 To assume all responsibility for coordination of the 4th of July Parade including: Hire off-duty police officers to police the route. Assure that all participants are informed of and abide by the parade rules to insure that no participants draw people viewing the parade onto the parade route. 2.2 To obtain the necessary Street Banner Application (from Public Works 425-771- 0235) and Parade Permit (Police Department 425-771-0200). Fees for the preceding two permits will be waived for this event. A Street Use Permit is not needed. Chamber will ensure that pyrotechnic provider submits Application for Fireworks Display Permit accompanied by a $30.00 public display permit fee (Edmonds Fire Marshal 425-771-0215). A copy of their State pyrotechnic license shall be provided with their application. The Chamber shall obtain ASCAP and any other copyright licenses necessary. 2.3 To provide for security and sani-cans along the parade route and fireworks display. 2.4 To pick up, deliver, and return to storage in City Park gazebo and Parks Maintenance area all needed 3’ X 10’ and 10’ X 10’ staging sections. 2.5. To hook up electrical power made available by the City at the west end of the grandstand. 2.6 To provide 10 yards of sand for the pyrotechnic display and provisions for cleanup and removal after the event. 2.7 To assume all responsibility for fireworks display. A State-licensed pyrotechnics operator shall abide by local ordinance and make necessary permit applications for local approval. State guidelines and operational requirements shall be adhered to for safe operation of fireworks. 2.8 To authorize a maximum of three stationary self-contained vendors on closed sections of 5th or Main Streets off the parade route. No vendors will be authorized along the parade route. To authorize not more than ten vendors on 6th Avenue South between Bell Street and Sprague for the evening fireworks. Vendors shall operate at specified locations and shall not block park entrances or fire hydrant. Vendors must be self-contained; no power hookups are available for vendors. Vendors are responsible for having appropriate permits and for compliance with all local and state requirements. 2.9 To provide a Certificate of Insurance evidencing commercial general liability insurance written on an occurrence basis with limits no less than $1,000,000 combined single limit per occurrence and $2,000,000 aggregate for personal injury, bodily injury and property damage. City shall be named as an additional insured on the Commercial General Liability insurance policy and a copy of the endorsement naming the City as additional insured shall be attached to the Certificate of Insurance. The insurance policy shall contain a clause stating that coverage shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer’s liability. The City shall be named as an insured on the Chamber’s General Liability insurance policy. The insurance policy shall contain, or be endorsed to contain that the Chamber’s insurance coverage shall be primary insurance. Any insurance, self insurance, or insurance pool coverage maintained by the City shall be excess of the Chamber’s insurance and shall not contribute to it. The Chamber shall provide a certificate of insurance evidencing the required Packet Page 153 of 299 3 insurance before using the property described herein. Insurance shall be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best rating of not less than A:VII. 2.10 To remove all garbage to the size of a cigarette butt, including metal and litter debris, equipment, and any and all other items made necessary by or used in the provision of this event. 2.11 The Chamber agrees that the 4th of July celebration is a public event. The Chamber further agrees that areas constituting the City-Provided Site that are covered under this Agreement, including but not limited to public right of way, streets, sidewalks, parks, parking lots, gardens, meeting halls and squares, are traditional public forums. As a result, the Chamber shall permit citizens attending events open to the general public at City-Provided Site during the 4th of July celebration to exercise therein their protected constitutional right to free speech without interference. 2.12 The City has enacted Ordinance 3749 restricting the use of single-use plastic checkout bags. The restrictions do not apply to plastic bags used to carry out cooked food or provided solely for produce, bulk food or meat. The Chamber of Commerce will encourage its vendors to comply with the purposes of the ordinance by utilizing paper bags or encouraging the use of reusable totes whenever practicable. 2.13 The Chamber shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers harmless from any and all claims, injuries, damages, losses or suits, including attorney fees, arising from or in connection with the Chamber’s performance, or nonperformance, of this Agreement, except to the extent that claims, injuries, damages, losses or suits are caused by the sole negligence of the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. This promise to indemnify and hold harmless shall include a waiver by the Chamber of the immunity provided under Title 51 RCW, but only to the extent necessary to fully effectuate this promise. This provision shall survive the termination and/or expiration of this Agreement. 2.14 In addition, the parties acknowledge that pursuant to the provisions of Initiative 901 as codified in Chapter 70.160 RCW (herein after the "smoking ban"), smoking is prohibited in indoor areas, within 25 feet of vents or entrances and in outdoor areas where public employees of the City, and employees of any vendor at the event or of the contracting organization are required to be. This general description of the provisions of the initiative is included for the purpose of reference and is not intended to expand or contract the obligations created by the smoking ban. The Chamber warrants that it will comply with the smoking ban and will utilize the services and advice of the Snohomish County Health District in assuring compliance during the event described in this agreement. 2.15 The Chamber shall be responsible to restore all public spaces to their original condition, including removing and disposing of any and all litter and trash. 3. Miscellaneous. 3.1 Entire agreement, integration and amendment. This agreement contains the entire agreement and understanding between the parties relating to the rights and obligations created hereby, and supersedes all prior and contemporaneous negotiations, understandings, and agreements, written or oral, between the parties. Any prior discussions or understandings are deemed merged with the provisions herein. This agreement shall not be amended, assigned or otherwise changed or transferred except in writing with the express written consent of the parties hereto. Any action to Packet Page 154 of 299 4 interpret or enforce this agreement shall be brought before the Superior Court of Snohomish County, Washington, and the parties agree that, as between them, all matters shall be resolved in that venue. 3.2 Force majeure. Parties shall not be liable for failure to perform or delay in performance due to fire, flood, strike or other labor difficulty, act of God, act of any governmental authority, riot, embargo, fuel or energy shortage, car shortage, wrecks or delays in transportation, or due to any other cause beyond Parties reasonable control. In the event of delay in performance due to any such cause, the date of delivery or time for completion will be extended by a period of time reasonably necessary to overcome the effect of such delay. 3.3 Miscellaneous. Nothing in this Agreement shall be interpreted to or in fact create an agency or employment relationship between the Parties. No officer, official, agent, employee or representative of the Chamber shall be deemed to be the same of the City for any purpose. The Chamber alone shall be solely responsible for all acts of its officers, officials, agents, employees, representatives and subcontractors during the performance of this Agreement. DATED this ______ day of ________________, 2011. CITY OF EDMONDS: GREATER EDMONDS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE: Mayor Mike Cooper Jan Vance, Executive Director ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Sandra S. Chase, City Clerk OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: Sharon E. Cates Packet Page 155 of 299 5 Packet Page 156 of 299 6 4th of July Parade Participant’s Map Booths will be on the west side of 6th. They will not block entrances or fire hydrants. Civic Center Playfield Sp r a g u e B e l l 6th Avenue Greater Edmonds Chamber of Commerce 4th of July Fireworks and Evening Festivities Vendor Area on 6th Ave. N Packet Page 157 of 299 M I N U T E S Community Services/Development Services Committee Meeting April 12, 2011 Elected Officials Present: Staff Present: Council Member Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Chair Phil Williams, Public Works Director Council Member Michael Plunkett Rob English, City Engineer Jerry Shuster,Stormwater Eng Program Mgr Kernen Lien, Associate Planner Renee McRae, Recreation Manager Carrie Hite, Parks, Rec. & Cultural Services Director The committee convened at 7:00 p.m. A. FEMA Biological Opinion Mr. Lien gave a brief explanation of the item, including laying out the City's three options to comply with the the upcoming FEMA deadline. The Councilmembers asked questions regarding floodplains and Staff showed a map that indicated the small floodplain areas in Edmonds. The Councilmembers agreed with the Staff recommendation to go with compliance option number 3 (Permit-by-Permit compliance) and forwarded it to the full Council's consent agenda. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. B. Authorization for the Mayor to sign the contract with the Edmonds-South Snohomish County Historical Society for the 2011 Edmonds Market. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. C. Authorization for the Mayor to sign the contract with the Edmonds Arts Festival Association for the 2011 Edmonds Arts Festival. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. D. Authorization for the Mayor to sign the contract with the Greater Edmonds Chamber of Commerce for the 4th of July parade and fireworks display. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. E. Authorization for the Mayor to sign the contract with the Greater Edmonds Chamber of Commerce for the 2011 Taste of Edmonds. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. Packet Page 158 of 299 CS/DS Committee Minutes April 12, 2011 Page 2 2 F. Authorization for the Mayor to sign the contract with the Greater Edmonds Chamber of Commerce for the 2011 Classic Car Show. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. G. 2011 Senior Center Agreement ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. H. Authorization for the Mayor to sign utility easements for the Lift Station 2 Improvements Project. Mr. English reviewed the scope of the Lift Station 2 project and discussed how operating and maintaining the existing lift station is difficult given the age and current location of the facility. He explained to the committee that the value of the easements were determined by the Appraisal Group of the Northwest and the cost would be paid by sewer utility rates (412 utility fund). There were follow-up questions on the project and how this project is tied to the City’s sewer system. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. I. Quarterly Public Works Capital Project Report. Mr. English, reviewed the Quarterly Public Works Capital Project Report with the Committee. He explained that the purpose of the report is to provide the committee with information on projects managed by the Public Works Department. ACTION: None. J. Traffic Impact Fee Annual Report. Mr. English reviewed the 2010 traffic impact fee report and answered questions from the committee on the current amount of traffic impact fees, how they are assessed and what type of projects qualify for impacts fees. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. The meeting adjourned at 8:05p.m. Packet Page 159 of 299 AM-3874 Item #: 2. L. City Council Meeting Date: 04/19/2011 Time:Consent Submitted By:Renee McRae Department:Parks and Recreation Review Committee: Community/Development Services Committee Action: Approve for Consent Agenda Type:Action Information Subject Title Authorization for the Mayor to sign the contract with the Greater Edmonds Chamber of Commerce for the 2011 Taste of Edmonds. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Authorize the Mayor to sign the contract for the 2011 Taste of Edmonds. Previous Council Action The contract was reviewed at the CSDS Meeting on 4/12/11 and authorization was given to place it on the Council Consent Agenda for 4/19/11. Narrative The Chamber Executive Director, Craig Cooke, and Edmonds Council Member Michael Plunkett met with a representative of the Belmont Condominium Owners Association, on January 31, 2011 to discuss their concerns with the Taste layout. As a result of that meeting the following changes have been made to the layout: 1) the generator formerly located at 6th and Bell is being moved one block west to the north side of Bell; and 2) the sani-cans are moved from the east side of 6th to the west side of 6th. There are no significant changes to the contract. Attachments 2011 Taste Contract 04-12-11 CSDS Committee Minutes Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date City Clerk Sandy Chase 04/13/2011 05:00 PM Mayor Mike Cooper 04/14/2011 09:06 AM Final Approval Sandy Chase 04/14/2011 09:08 AM Form Started By: Renee McRae Started On: 04/13/2011 04:26 PM Final Approval Date: 04/14/2011 Packet Page 160 of 299 {WSS780888.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } 1 CONTRACT CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON AND GREATER EDMONDS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE August 10-16, 2011 The following is an agreement between CITY OF EDMONDS (hereinafter referred to as the “City”), and the GREATER EDMONDS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE (hereinafter referred to as the “Chamber”). WHEREAS, the Greater Edmonds Chamber of Commerce has for a number of years conducted a public event known as “A Taste of Edmonds” and proposes to do so again in 2011; and WHEREAS; the City Council finds that A Taste of Edmonds provides distinct benefits to the City by showcasing Edmonds’ restaurants and other local businesses while providing a unique recreational opportunity for its citizens; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that such an event enhances tourism and promotes economic development as well as providing an opportunity for good clean fun to its citizens; NOW, THEREFORE, 1. Responsibilities and Rights of City 1.1 City shall provide use of surfaces of Civic Center Field (excluding the tennis courts), Bell Street including Centennial Plaza between 5th & 6th Avenues, and 6th Avenue from Bell Street north to Daley Street, and south approximately 80’ to first drive on west side for use by Chamber for the “Taste of Edmonds” event, so as to allow for the following: (a) The event setup shall begin on Wednesday, August 10, 2011, at 8:00 a.m. on Civic Center Field. (b) All surfaces listed shall remain available to the “Taste of Edmonds” until final cleanup by Tuesday, August 16, 2011, at noon. (c) City shall designate eight (8) additional handicapped parking spaces to be located in an area to be agreed upon by City and Chamber officials with barricades to be in place at close of business (5pm) Wednesday, August 10, 2011. 1.2 All use and configuration of structures, booths and other permanent or temporary facilities used in the event may be inspected and reviewed by City Fire Chief, Police Chief, Building Official and Parks and Recreation Director or their designees to determine the facilities in use comply with the provisions of State and local law, as well as to insure that no lasting or permanent damage shall be done to any public facility or property. 1.3 Edmonds Fire Marshal shall inspect the facilities prior to the opening to the general public on or before 10:00 a.m., August 12, 2011, as the parties shall agree and note all potential problems. Prior to the opening of the event, Chamber shall correct all problems related to fire safety. In the event that such problems are not corrected, City may at its sole discretion cancel such event or prohibit the attendance of the general public in certain areas, if in the opinion of the Fire Marshal and at the sole Packet Page 161 of 299 {WSS780888.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } 2 discretion of City, any violation or other condition that threatens life, health or property has not been corrected. 1.4 City shall provide barricades and barricade placement and removal for the event. 1.5 City shall provide padlocks as required on location for tennis courts and other areas from which public access is restricted during the Taste of Edmonds. City shall also provide removal of the padlocks. 1.6 City shall provide water access behind the opening between booths 187 and 188 for use by the food vendors. 1.7 City shall provide access to storage area of portable stage to beer garden at time of stage installation and at time of stage removal. 1.8 City shall remove fencing on east side of Boys & Girls Club basketball courts. 1.9 City shall provide basketball hoop removal and re-installation on basketball courts located near the Boys & Girls Club building. 1.10 City shall install Taste of Edmonds street banners as provided by Chamber at approved sites. Chamber shall obtain a Street Banner Permit and pay the required fee. 1.11 City has the right to check the noise level of any amplified sound equipment or other source and require that the volume be reduced if it exceeds the safety limits recommended by the Seattle King County Department of Health or levels set forth in the ordinances of the City of Edmonds. 1.12 City shall provide and oversee police supervision of the event under the command of the Chief of Police or his designee. Police staffing levels and fees to be paid to the City will be mutually determined by the Chief of Police, or his designee, and the Chamber Executive Director. 2. Responsibilities and Rights of Chamber 2.1 The Chamber shall provide a Certificate of Insurance evidencing commercial general liability insurance written on an occurrence basis with limits no less than $1,000,000 combined single limit per occurrence and $2,000,000 aggregate for personal injury, bodily injury and property damage. City shall be named as an additional insured on the Commercial General Liability insurance policy and a copy of the endorsement naming the City as additional insured shall be attached to the Certificate of Insurance. The insurance policy shall contain a clause stating that coverage shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respects to the limits of the insur er’s liability. The City shall be named as an insured on the Chamber’s General Liability insurance policy. The insurance policy shall contain, or be endorsed to contain that the Chamber’s insurance shall be the primary insurance. Any insurance, self insurance, or insurance pool coverage maintained by the City shall be excess of the Chamber’s insurance and shall not contribute to it. The Chamber shall provide a certificate of insurance evidencing the required insurance before using the property described herein. Insurance shall be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best rating of not less than A:VII. 2.2 The Chamber agrees that the Taste of Edmonds is a public event. The Chamber further agrees that areas constituting the City-Provided Site that are covered under this Agreement, including but not limited to public right of way, streets, sidewalks, parks, parking lots, gardens, meeting halls and squares, are traditional public forums. As a result, the Chamber shall permit citizens attending events Packet Page 162 of 299 {WSS780888.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } 3 open to the general public at City-Provided Site during the Taste of Edmonds to exercise therein their protected constitutional right to free speech without interference in a designated free speech zone that does not violate fire and ADA codes. 2.3 The City has enacted Ordinance 3749 restricting the use of single-use plastic checkout bags. The restrictions do not apply to plastic bags used to carry out cooked food or provided solely for produce, bulk food or meat. The Chamber of Commerce will encourage its vendors to comply with the purposes of the ordinance by utilizing paper bags or encouraging the use of reusable totes whenever practicable. 2.4 The Chamber shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers harmless from any and all claims, injuries, damages, losses or suits, including attorney fees, arising from or in connection with the Chamber’s performance, or nonperformance, of this Agreement, except to the extent that claims, injuries, damages, losses or suits are caused by the sole negligence of the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. This promise to indemnify and hold harmless shall include a waiver by the Chamber of the immunity provided under Title 51 RCW, but only to the extent necessary to fully effectuate this promise. This provision shall survive the termination and/or expiration of this Agreement. 2.5 Chamber may in its discretion limit the participation of any vendor who produces duplication in order to adequately recognize limitations of space, failure to comply with applicable State or local health, liquor, or other requirements of law, and in order to provide an adequate and interesting diversity compatible with the recreation of the citizens of Edmonds. 2.6 Neither Chamber nor any officer, agent, or employee shall discriminate in the provision of service under this contract against any individual, partnership, or corporation based upon race, religion, sex, creed, place of origin, or any other form of discrimination prohibited by federal, state or local law. 2.7 In addition, the parties acknowledge that pursuant to the provisions of Initiative 901 as codified in Chapter 70.160 RCW (herein after the "smoking ban"), smoking is prohibited in indoor areas, within 25 feet of vents or entrances and in outdoor areas where public employees of the City, and employees of any vendor at the event or of the contracting organization are required to be. This general description of the provisions of the initiative is included for the purpose of reference and is not intended to expand or contract the obligations created by the smoking ban. The Chamber warrants that it will comply with the smoking ban and will utilize the services and advice of the Snohomish County Health District in assuring compliance during the event described in this agreement. 2.8 Chamber shall obtain any necessary Street Use and Parks Facility Use Permits and pay the required fees. (See site plan attached as Exhibit “A”). 2.9 Chamber shall restrict field parking to approved areas. Chamber shall have security at permit parking entrance area to limit public access. City has the right to close the parking area for the event if parking is not limited to the agreed upon area. 2.10 Chamber shall ensure that all booths/beer garden/wine garden have the necessary state permits for serving and selling alcohol. Chamber agrees to make its best effort to prevent service of alcohol to minors, including segregation of the beer garden and wine garden, posting security at the entrances of the beer garden and wine garden and checking identification in accordance with common practice. Chamber shall obtain any copyright licenses necessary for presenting licensed live and recorded music. Packet Page 163 of 299 {WSS780888.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } 4 2.11 Chamber agrees to the following general open hours of the Taste: Friday, August 12, 2011: 11:00 a.m.-10:00 p.m. Saturday, August 13, 2011: 11:00 a.m.-10:00 p.m. Sunday, August 14, 2011: 11:00 a.m.-7:00 p.m. Chamber agrees to keep the hours of operation in the Beer Garden and Wine Garden within the following schedule: Friday, August 12, 2011: 11 a.m.-10:00 p.m. (Last call 9:30 p.m., no service after 9:45 p.m.) Saturday, August 13, 2011: 11:00 a.m.-10 p.m. (Last call 9:30 p.m., no service after 9:45 p.m.) Sunday, August 14, 2011: 11:00 a.m.-7:00 p.m. (Last call 6:30 p.m., no service after 6:45 p.m.) 2.12 Chamber shall provide any and all security services necessary during the night time hours (night time hours being defined as those hours which the event is not in operation), sufficient to reasonably secure the area and facilities provided. City shall have no responsibility or liability for the provision of security services nor shall it be liable for any loss or damage incurred by Chamber or the participants in this event. 2.13 Chamber shall provide a fire watch for all times in and around the booths and displays open to the general public as a part of this event. 2.14 Chamber shall provide a sufficient number of portable sani-cans and wash stations (approximately 35 sani-cans, 2 of which must be handicapped accessible, and a minimum of 5 wash stations). 2.15 Chamber shall provide fence installation and removal at the Beer Garden and Wine Gardens. 2.16 Chamber is responsible for contracting with appropriate vendors for power. No power is available from the Civic Center complex. 2.17 Chamber shall provide labor and equipment for the portable Beer Garden pouring station (PS) to: (1) pickup the PS elements at the City’s storage location, (2) set up the PS, (3) take down the PS, (4) cleanup the PS elements, and (5) return the PS elements to the City’s storage location. 2.18 Garbage service shall be contracted and paid for by Chamber. 2.19 Upon the completion of the event, Chamber shall make adequate provisions for the cleanup and restoration of all sites rented or provided under the terms of this agreement, including steam cleaning and pressure washing whenever required for all hard surfaces impacted by the event. Storm drains are to be covered with filter fabric to capture grease and debris. 2.20 Cleanup areas include area as described in paragraph 1.1 and all streets immediately surrounding the event perimeter. Packet Page 164 of 299 {WSS780888.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } 5 2.21 All garbage to the size of a cigarette butt, debris, litter, equipment, and any other and all other items made necessary by or used in the provision of this event shall be picked up and removed by 12:00 noon, Tuesday, August 16, 2011. 2.22 A final inspection of the event area shall be conducted by City Parks Maintenance Division to determine if all areas are clean and returned to their original condition. 2.23 Chamber shall submit a cleaning/damage deposit of $1,500.00 to City prior to Wednesday, July 13, 2011. The deposit shall be refunded to Chamber if, upon inspection, all is in order, or a prorated portion thereof as may be necessary to reimburse City for loss or cleaning costs. 2.24 Chamber shall pay City all permit fees for the above-mentioned facility use ($792.00 facility rental) prior to Wednesday, July 13, 2011, and shall reimburse City for the actual costs of supplies or services furnished by City, unless otherwise established, within thirty (30) days of mailing of a final bill by the City. 2.25 Colored banners or flags may not be placed in the existing holes in the public sidewalk designated for the American flag program. 3. Miscellaneous. 3.1 Entire agreement, integration and amendment. This agreement contains the entire agreement and understanding between the parties relating to the rights and obligations created hereby, and supersedes all prior and contemporaneous negotiations, understandings, and agreements, written or oral, between the parties. Any prior discussions or understandings are deemed merged with the provisions herein. This agreement shall not be amended, assigned or otherwise changed or transferred except in writing with the express written consent of the parties hereto. Any action to interpret or enforce this agreement shall be brought before the Superior Court of Snohomish County, Washington, and the parties agree that, as between them, all matters shall be resolved in that venue. 3.2 Force majeure. Parties shall not be liable for failure to perform or delay in performance due to fire, flood, strike or other labor difficulty, act of God, act of any governmental authority, riot, embargo, fuel or energy shortage, car shortage, wrecks or delays in transportation, or due to any other cause beyond Parties reasonable control. In the event of delay in performance due to any such cause, the date of delivery or time for completion will be extended by a period of time reasonably necessary to overcome the effect of such delay. 3.3 Miscellaneous. Nothing in this Agreement shall be interpreted to or in fact create an agency or employment relationship between the Parties. No officer, official, agent, employee or representative of Chamber shall be deemed to be the same of the City for any purpose. The Chamber alone shall be solely responsible for all acts of its officers, officials, agents, employees, representatives and subcontractors during the performance of this Agreement. Packet Page 165 of 299 {WSS780888.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } 6 DATED this ______ day of ________________, 2011. CITY OF EDMONDS: GREATER EDMONDS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE: Mayor Mike Cooper Jan Vance, Executive Director ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Sandra S. Chase, City Clerk OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: Sharon E. Cates Packet Page 166 of 299 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X B E L L S T . 6TH AVE. 7TH AVE. A L L E Y X X X X X X X X X X X X X X A L L E Y G R A N D S T A N D X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 6 T H A N D B E L L G A T E C E N T E N N I A L G A T E B O Y S A N D G I R L S C L U B S H E D X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X P L A Y G R O U N D K I D S S T A G E T I G E R M A Z E S L I D E M A I N S T A G E X X X X X X X X X X BEER TRUCK S E R V I N G v e n d e r s STAGE 40x20 2 Sani-Can 1 Sink 1 3 S a n i - C a n s 2 S I N K 7 T H A V E G A T E M M Parking Parking S P R A G U E F I R E V I P T E N T S 1 6 S a n i - C a n s 3 S I N K S BUS ZONE BUS ZONE BUS ZONE BUS ZONE BUS ZONE BUS ZONE BUS ZONE A R T S & R V G a r b a g e F r e e z e r R e f e r H o l l y w o o d L i g h t s G e n e r a t o r # 1 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X R E D G A T E Y E L L O W G A T E G R E E N G A T E T A B L E S X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X B E E R G A R D E N C R A F T S B E L L S T . 6TH AVE. K I D S B A N D T E N T A R E A X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X S T A T I O N P O L I C E D E P A R T M E N T X X X X X X X X X X X F I R E H Y D R A N T S T R E E T D R A I N S i d e w a l k X X X X X X X X 2 S a n i C a n s 9 8 1 7 9 1 8 3 1 8 4 1 8 5 1 8 6 1 8 7 2 0 6 2 0 7 2 0 8 2 0 9 2 1 0 2 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 3 2 1 4 2 1 5 2 1 6 2 1 7 2 1 8 2 1 9 2 2 0 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 4 2 2 5 2 2 6 2 2 7 2 2 8 2 2 9 2 3 0 2 3 1 2 3 2 2 3 3 2 3 4 2 5 5 2 5 6 2 5 0 2 5 1 2 5 2 2 5 3 2 5 4 1 5 1 2 7 8 2 7 9 2 8 0 2 8 1 2 8 2 2 8 3 2 8 4 2 8 5 2 8 6 2 8 7 2 8 8 3 3 7 3 3 6 3 3 5 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 1 3 3 0 3 4 7 3 4 6 3 4 5 3 4 4 3 4 3 3 4 2 3 4 1 3 4 0 3 3 8 3 4 8 2 9 8 2 9 7 2 9 6 2 9 5 2 9 4 2 9 3 2 9 2 2 9 1 3 0 8 3 0 7 3 0 6 3 0 5 3 0 4 3 0 3 3 0 2 3 0 1 1 5 4 1 5 5 2 0 4 2 0 2 2 0 1 2 0 0 1 9 9 1 9 8 1 9 2 1 9 3 1 9 5 1 9 6 2 4 9 2 3 5 2 3 6 2 3 7 2 3 8 2 3 9 2 4 0 2 4 6 2 4 5 2 4 4 2 4 3 2 4 2 2 4 1 2 4 7 2 4 8 1 4 8 1 5 6 1 5 7 A T M 1 5 3 1 4 9 1 5 0 3 1 8 3 1 7 3 1 6 3 1 5 3 1 4 3 1 3 3 1 2 3 1 1 3 2 8 3 2 7 3 2 6 3 2 5 3 2 4 3 2 3 3 2 2 3 2 1 2 9 0 3 0 0 3 1 0 3 2 0 2 5 7 2 5 8 K M P S P O N I E S 2 6 1 2 6 0 2 5 9 I N F L A T A B L E S C O M M E R C I A L / I M P O R T A R E A V E N D O R P A R K I N G X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 9 S a n i - C a n s 2 6 2 2 6 3 2 6 4 2 6 5 2 6 6 2 6 7 2 6 8 2 6 9 2 7 0 2 7 1 2 7 2 2 7 7 2 7 6 2 7 5 2 7 4 2 7 3 X X X X X X X X X X X D I S P L A Y A R E A 5 0 ' x 8 0 ' X X X X X X X X X X X X X X E N T E R A N C E 3 5 8 3 5 7 3 5 6 3 5 5 3 5 4 3 5 3 3 5 2 3 5 1 3 5 0 2 8 9 2 9 9 3 0 9 3 1 9 3 2 9 3 3 9 3 4 9 X X X X X X X X X X X X 2 0 3 1 9 1 1 9 0 1 8 9 1 8 8 1 6 6 1 6 5 1 6 4 1 6 3 1 6 2 1 6 1 1 6 0 1 5 9 1 5 8 1 7 2 1 7 1 1 7 0 1 6 9 1 6 8 1 6 7 W I N E T E N T 2 0 x 1 0 X X X V E N D O R R V P A R K I N G X X X X X X X S K A T E P A R K 1 2 5 x 5 0 3 6 8 3 6 7 3 6 6 3 6 5 3 6 4 3 6 3 3 6 2 3 6 1 3 6 0 3 5 9 6 5 4 3 2 1 T i c k e t T i c k e t 9 7 9 5 9 4 9 3 9 2 9 1 9 0 8 9 8 8 8 7 8 6 8 5 8 4 8 3 8 2 8 1 8 0 7 9 7 8 7 7 7 6 7 5 7 4 7 3 7 2 7 1 7 0 6 9 6 8 6 7 6 6 6 5 6 4 6 3 6 2 6 1 6 0 X X X X X B E E R S T A G E P A R K I N G D I S P L A Y A R E A 1 5 2 T i c k e t B A N D T E N T T R A I L E R B A N D T E N T SERVICE R0AD R V P A R K I N G 1 0 3 1 0 2 1 0 1 9 9 1 4 7 1 4 6 1 4 5 1 4 4 1 4 3 1 4 2 1 4 1 F I R E H Y D R A N T 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0 2 1 2 2 2 3 2 4 2 5 2 6 2 7 2 8 2 9 3 0 3 1 3 2 3 3 3 4 3 5 3 6 3 7 3 8 3 9 4 0 4 1 4 2 4 3 4 4 4 5 4 6 4 7 4 8 4 9 5 0 5 1 5 2 5 3 5 4 5 5 1 0 0 5 6 5 7 5 8 5 9 9 6 1 0 4 1 0 5 1 0 6 1 0 7 1 0 8 1 0 9 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 3 1 1 4 1 1 5 1 1 6 1 1 7 1 1 8 1 1 9 1 2 0 1 2 1 1 2 2 1 2 3 1 2 4 1 2 5 1 2 6 1 2 7 1 2 8 1 2 9 1 3 0 1 3 1 1 3 2 1 3 3 1 3 4 1 3 5 1 3 6 1 3 7 1 3 8 1 3 9 1 4 0 D I A P E R T E N T 1 1 S a n i - C a n s D I N I N G T E N T # 1 4 0 x 2 0 D I N I N G T E N T # 2 3 0 x 2 0 X X X X X S E C U R I T Y T E N T 1 0 x 1 0 G A R D E N X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X T U A L I P C A S I N O 1 0 x 2 0 X 2 S I N K 2 S I N K 1 S I N K 1 S a n i - C a n s 2 S I N K 2 S a n i - C a n s 1 S I N K T E N T G e n e r a t o r # 3 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X B i k e R a c k F e n c e F e n c e w a s h t r a i l e r 2 S a n i - C a n s 1 S I N K 1 S I N K 1 S a n i - C a n s 2 S I N K 2 0 5 1 9 7 2 ' s p a c e 6 ' s p a c e 6 ' s p a c e 6 ' s p a c e 1 8 2 1 9 4 1 8 0 1 S a n i - C a n 1 S i n k 3 0 x 1 6 G e n e r a t o r # 2 2 S I N K 1 8 1 S R O B E E R T R A I L E R 8 x 1 4 P R E M I U M B E E R 1 0 x 1 0 G A T E G A T E S E R V I C E G A T E 1 S a n i - C a n s 1 S I N K A T A S T E O F E D M O N D S 2011 A TASTE OF EDMONDS Packet Page 167 of 299 M I N U T E S Community Services/Development Services Committee Meeting April 12, 2011 Elected Officials Present: Staff Present: Council Member Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Chair Phil Williams, Public Works Director Council Member Michael Plunkett Rob English, City Engineer Jerry Shuster,Stormwater Eng Program Mgr Kernen Lien, Associate Planner Renee McRae, Recreation Manager Carrie Hite, Parks, Rec. & Cultural Services Director The committee convened at 7:00 p.m. A. FEMA Biological Opinion Mr. Lien gave a brief explanation of the item, including laying out the City's three options to comply with the the upcoming FEMA deadline. The Councilmembers asked questions regarding floodplains and Staff showed a map that indicated the small floodplain areas in Edmonds. The Councilmembers agreed with the Staff recommendation to go with compliance option number 3 (Permit-by-Permit compliance) and forwarded it to the full Council's consent agenda. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. B. Authorization for the Mayor to sign the contract with the Edmonds-South Snohomish County Historical Society for the 2011 Edmonds Market. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. C. Authorization for the Mayor to sign the contract with the Edmonds Arts Festival Association for the 2011 Edmonds Arts Festival. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. D. Authorization for the Mayor to sign the contract with the Greater Edmonds Chamber of Commerce for the 4th of July parade and fireworks display. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. E. Authorization for the Mayor to sign the contract with the Greater Edmonds Chamber of Commerce for the 2011 Taste of Edmonds. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. Packet Page 168 of 299 CS/DS Committee Minutes April 12, 2011 Page 2 2 F. Authorization for the Mayor to sign the contract with the Greater Edmonds Chamber of Commerce for the 2011 Classic Car Show. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. G. 2011 Senior Center Agreement ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. H. Authorization for the Mayor to sign utility easements for the Lift Station 2 Improvements Project. Mr. English reviewed the scope of the Lift Station 2 project and discussed how operating and maintaining the existing lift station is difficult given the age and current location of the facility. He explained to the committee that the value of the easements were determined by the Appraisal Group of the Northwest and the cost would be paid by sewer utility rates (412 utility fund). There were follow-up questions on the project and how this project is tied to the City’s sewer system. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. I. Quarterly Public Works Capital Project Report. Mr. English, reviewed the Quarterly Public Works Capital Project Report with the Committee. He explained that the purpose of the report is to provide the committee with information on projects managed by the Public Works Department. ACTION: None. J. Traffic Impact Fee Annual Report. Mr. English reviewed the 2010 traffic impact fee report and answered questions from the committee on the current amount of traffic impact fees, how they are assessed and what type of projects qualify for impacts fees. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. The meeting adjourned at 8:05p.m. Packet Page 169 of 299 AM-3876 Item #: 2. M. City Council Meeting Date: 04/19/2011 Time:Consent Submitted By:Renee McRae Department:Parks and Recreation Review Committee: Community/Development Services Committee Action: Approve for Consent Agenda Type:Action Information Subject Title Authorization for the Mayor to sign the contract with the Greater Edmonds Chamber of Commerce for the 2011 Classic Car Show. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Authorize the Mayor to sign the contract for the 2011 Classic Car Show. Previous Council Action The contract was reviewed at the CSDS Meeting on 4/12/11 and authorization was given to place it on the Council Consent Agenda for 4/19/11. Narrative There are no significant changes to this annual contract. Attachments 2011 Car Show Contract 04-12-11 CSDS Committee Minutes Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date City Clerk Sandy Chase 04/14/2011 09:00 AM Mayor Mike Cooper 04/14/2011 09:06 AM Final Approval Sandy Chase 04/14/2011 09:08 AM Form Started By: Renee McRae Started On: 04/13/2011 04:55 PM Final Approval Date: 04/14/2011 Packet Page 170 of 299 1 CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF EDMONDS AND THE GREATER EDMONDS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE September 11, 2011 The following is an agreement (“Agreement”) between CITY OF EDMONDS ("City"), and the GREATER EDMONDS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ("Chamber"). WHEREAS, the Chamber has proposed to hold a public event known as the Edmonds Chamber of Commerce Classic Car Show (“Classic Car Show” or “Event”); and WHEREAS; the City Council finds that “Classic Car Show” provides distinct benefits to the City by showcasing the City while providing a unique recreational opportunity for its citizens; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that such an event enhances tourism and promotes economic development as well as providing an opportunity for good clean fun to its citizens; NOW, THEREFORE, 1. City and Chamber agree that: 1.1 City shall provide use of the following surfaces by Chamber for the Classic Car Show: “Center Round” around the fountain in downtown Edmonds at 5th Avenue and Main Street, Main Street from the East side of its intersection with 3rd Avenue to the West side of its intersection with 6th Avenue, 4th Avenue S. from the South side of its intersection with Bell Street to the North side of its intersection with Dayton Street, and again from the South side of its intersection with Dayton Street to approximately 100 feet south down 4th Avenue, 5th Avenue, from the North side of its intersection with Walnut Street to the North side of its intersection of the northern leg of Bell Street, Dayton Street, from the West side of 5th Avenue to the East side of 4th Avenue, City Hall parking lot located immediately South of the City Hall building at 121 5th Avenue N and the parking lot under City Hall. (The above areas shall be hereinafter referred to as the “City-Provided Site.”) 1.2 One or several days before the Event, City shall place signs so as to clear the City- Provided Site of all vehicles from 2:00 a.m. on the date of the event until 7:00 p.m. on the same day. Packet Page 171 of 299 2 1.3 City shall provide barriers near the following 13 locations for street closures required to contain the City-Provided Site described in Paragraph 1.1: Pine and 5th, to close 5th Avenue north to Walnut, Maple and 5th, to close Maple Street east of 5th Avenue Dayton and 6th, to allow local access only on Dayton between 6th Avenue & 5th Avenue Dayton and 5th, to close 5th Avenue north and south of Dayton Street Dayton and 5th, to close Dayton west of 5th Avenue Dayton and 4th, to close Dayton east of 4th Avenue Walnut and 5th, to close 5th Avenue north and south of Walnut Street Main and 5th, to close 5th Avenue to the most northern portion of Bell Main and 6th, to close Main Street west of 6th Avenue Main and 3rd, to close Main Street east of 3rd Avenue 4th and Bell, to close 4th Avenue south of Bell Street 4th and Dayton, to close 4th Avenue north and south of Dayton Street; and On 4th, to close 4th Avenue 100 ft. immediately south of Dayton 1.4 City shall arrange for access control of 5 th Avenue South at Walnut Street from 8:30 a.m. until 11:30 a.m. on the date of the Event. Chamber will be responsible for paying the actual cost of the overtime wage incurred by the City of the police officer to be stationed at the intersection. This intersection will not be closed to general traffic east and west, but access will be controlled and may be limited during this time period to allow for the safe staging of Event vehicles. There will be a committee member at the intersection with the police officer to designate which vehicles will be part of the Event. 1.5 Above barriers shall be delivered so as to allow Chamber to position such barriers at 5:00 a.m. the day of the Event. The number of barriers left by City at each of the eight locations shall be sufficient to provide adequate street closure. Chamber shall remove same barriers at 7:00 p.m. on the same day. 1.6 City shall also provide street closure barriers for the purpose described in Paragraph 1.7 near the following intersections: Maple Street and 6th Avenue, to close Maple west of 6th; and Alder Street and 6th Avenue, to close Alder west of 6th. 1.7 Chamber shall position such barriers at 5:00 a.m. the day of the Event so as to provide adequate street closures and prevent traffic from 6th Avenue to turn onto Maple Street or Alder Street from 5:00 a.m. until 10:00 a.m. Chamber shall remove such barriers at 10:00 a.m. on the same day. 1.8 On the day of the event, Chamber shall place traffic cones on the center-dividing line of 5th Avenue between Pine Street and Walnut Street from 5:00 a.m. until 10:00 a.m. 1.9 Chamber shall obtain any necessary Street Use Permits and pay the required fees. Police, Fire, and Public Works will meet with Chamber of Commerce officials to resolve any Packet Page 172 of 299 3 remaining or potential issues of traffic control and barricades prior to the event, but shall have no authority to waive the requirements of city ordinance or state law. 1.10 The Chamber shall be permitted to establish and operate five outdoor dining gardens within the City-Provided Site during the Event. These gardens shall not exceed 15 x 25 in dimension, and shall be fenced in a manner that clearly establishes and distinguishes their boundaries. Maximum capacity of the dining gardens shall be determined by the City of Edmonds Fire Department. Dining gardens shall provide tables, chairs and umbrellas for use by their diners. No alcohol shall be served or permitted in the dining gardens. Food and non-alcoholic drinks may be served in the dining gardens, but no food preparation shall be permitted therein. Dining gardens shall be sponsored by local restaurants, and shall be located near each sponsoring restaurant. Dining gardens shall open no earlier than 4AM and shall close no later than 5PM during the Event. 1.11 All use and configuration of structures, booths and other temporary facilities used in the event shall be inspected and reviewed by City Fire Chief, Police Chief, Building Official and Parks and Recreation Director or their designees to determine whether the facilities in use comply with the provisions of State and local law, as well as to insure that no lasting or permanent damage shall be done to any public facility or property. City Fire Marshal shall inspect the facilities prior to the opening to the general public on or before 7:00 a.m., September 11, 2011, as the parties shall agree and note all potential problems. Prior to the opening of the event, Chamber shall correct all problems. In the event that such problems are not corrected, City may at its sole discretion cancel such event or prohibit the attendance of the general public in certain areas, if in the opinion of the Fire Marshal and at the sole discretion of City, anything that threatens life, health or property shall appear. 1.12 City has the right to check the noise level of any amplified sound equipment or other source and require that the volume be reduced if it exceeds the safety limits recommended by the Snohomish County Department of Health or levels set forth in the ordinances of the City of Edmonds. 2 Chamber Responsibilities In addition to the above and in consideration of the use of the facilities and services above described, Chamber agrees to the following: 2.1 The Chamber shall provide a Certificate of Insurance evidencing commercial general liability insurance written on an occurrence basis with limits no less than $1,000,000 combined single limit per occurrence and $2,000,000 aggregate for personal injury, bodily injury and property damage. City shall be named as an additional insured on the Commercial General Liability insurance policy and a copy of the endorsement naming City as additional insured shall be attached to the Certificate of Insurance. The insurance policy shall contain a clause stating that coverage shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respects to the limits of the insurer’s liability. The City shall be named as an insured on the Chamber’s General Liability insurance policy. The insurance policy shall contain, or be endorsed to contain that the Chamber’s insurance coverage shall be primary insurance. Any insurance, self-insurance, or insurance pool coverage maintained by the City shall be excess of the Chamber’s insurance and shall not contribute to it. The Chamber shall provide a certificate of insurance evidencing the required insurance before using the property described herein. Insurance shall be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best rating of not less than A:VII. Packet Page 173 of 299 4 2.2 The Chamber agrees that the Classic Car Show is a public event. The Chamber further agrees that areas constituting the City-Provided Site that are covered under this Agreement, including but not limited to public right of way, streets, sidewalks, parks, parking lots, gardens, meeting halls and squares, are traditional public forums. As a result, the Chamber shall permit citizens attending events open to the general public at City-Provided Site during the Classic Car Show to exercise therein their protected constitutional right to free speech without interference. 2.3 The City has enacted Ordinance 3749 restricting the use of single-use plastic checkout bags. The restrictions do not apply to plastic bags used to carry out cooked food or provided solely for produce, bulk food or meat. The Chamber of Commerce will encourage its vendors to comply with the purposes of the ordinance by utilizing paper bags or encouraging the use of reusable totes whenever practicable. 2.4 The Chamber shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers harmless from any and all claims, injuries, damages, losses or suits, including attorney fees, arising from or in connection with the Chamber’s performance, or nonperformance, of this Agreement, except to the extent that claims, injuries, damages, losses or suits are caused by the sole negligence of the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. This promise to indemnify and hold harmless shall include a waiver by the Chamber of the immunity provided under Title 51 RCW, but only to the extent necessary to fully effectuate this promise. This provision shall survive the termination and/or expiration of this Agreement. 2.5 In addition, the parties acknowledge that pursuant to the provisions of Initiative 901 as codified in Chapter 70.160 RCW (herein after the "smoking ban"), smoking is prohibited in indoor areas, within 25 feet of vents or entrances and in outdoor areas where public employees of the City, and employees of any vendor at the event or of the contracting organization are required to be. This general description of the provisions of the initiative is included for the purpose of reference and is not intended to expand or contract the obligations created by the smoking ban. The Chamber warrants that it will comply with the smoking ban and will utilize the services and advice of the Snohomish County Health District in assuring compliance during the event described in this agreement. 2.6 Chamber shall provide any and all security services necessary to reasonably secure the area and facilities provided, including the City-Provided Site. City shall have no responsibility or liability for the provision of security services nor shall it be liable for any loss or damage incurred by Chamber or the participants in this Event. 2.7 Chamber shall provide a fire watch for all times in and around the booths and displays open to the general public as a part of this Event. 2.8 Chamber shall provide sufficient wash stations and approximately 12 sani-cans that may be placed on site the night preceding the Event. Garbage service, if necessary, shall be contracted and paid for by Chamber. 2.9 Upon completion of the Event, Chamber shall make adequate provisions for the cleanup of all sites provided under the terms of this agreement so as to restore them to the same state of cleanliness as existed the night prior to the Event. Cleanup of all relevant street pavements shall be Packet Page 174 of 299 5 completed by 7:00 p.m. on that day. Cleanup of sidewalks shall be completed by 11:00 p.m. on tha t day. Cleanup areas include the City-Provided Site as described in Section 1 and all streets immediately surrounding the Event perimeter. A final inspection of the Event area shall be conducted by a designated City official to determine if all areas are clean and returned to their original condition. 2.10 Chamber shall pay City all permit fees for the above-mentioned facility use and services at least ten (10) days prior to the Event, and shall reimburse City for the actual costs of supplies or services furnished by City (excluding those agreed to in Section 1) within thirty (30) days of mailing of a final bill by the City, provided such supplies and services are approved and listed by all parties to this Agreement in a signed addendum to this Agreement prior to the date which they purport to be required. 2.11 Colored banners or flags may not be placed in the existing holes in the public sidewalk designated for the American flag program. 3. Miscellaneous. 3.1 Entire agreement, integration and amendment. This Agreement contains the entire agreement and understanding between the parties relating to the rights and obligations created hereby, and supersedes all prior and contemporaneous negotiations, understandings, and agreements, written or oral, between the parties. Any prior discussions or understandings are deemed merged with the provisions herein. This Agreement shall not be amended, assigned or otherwise changed or transferred except in writing with the express written consent of the parties hereto. Any action to interpret or enforce this Agreement shall be brought before the Superior Court of Snohomish County, Washington, and the parties agree that, as between them, all matters shall be resolved in that venue. 3.2 Force majeure. Parties shall not be liable for failure to perform or delay in performance due to fire, flood, strike or other labor difficulty, act of God, act of any governmental authority, riot, embargo, fuel or energy shortage, car shortage, wrecks or delays in transportation, or due to any other cause beyond parties reasonable control. In the event of delay in performance due to any such cause, the date of delivery or time for completion will be extended by a period of time reasonably necessary to overcome the effect of such delay. 3.3 Termination. The City shall have the right, in its sole and absolute discretion, to unilaterally terminate this Agreement should the same become necessary to protect public health, safety or welfare; in which case, the City shall provide written notice of the same to the Chamber. 3.4 Miscellaneous. Nothing in this Agreement shall be interpreted to or in fact create an agency or employment relationship between the parties. No officer, official, agent, employee or representative of Chamber shall be deemed to be the same of the City for any purpose. The Chamber alone shall be solely responsible for all acts of its officers, officials, agents, employees, representatives and subcontractors during the performance of this Agreement. Packet Page 175 of 299 6 DATED this ______ day of ________________, 2011. CITY OF EDMONDS: GREATER EDMONDS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE: Mayor Mike Cooper Jan Vance, Executive Director ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Sandra S. Chase, City Clerk OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: Sharon E. Cates Packet Page 176 of 299 M I N U T E S Community Services/Development Services Committee Meeting April 12, 2011 Elected Officials Present: Staff Present: Council Member Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Chair Phil Williams, Public Works Director Council Member Michael Plunkett Rob English, City Engineer Jerry Shuster,Stormwater Eng Program Mgr Kernen Lien, Associate Planner Renee McRae, Recreation Manager Carrie Hite, Parks, Rec. & Cultural Services Director The committee convened at 7:00 p.m. A. FEMA Biological Opinion Mr. Lien gave a brief explanation of the item, including laying out the City's three options to comply with the the upcoming FEMA deadline. The Councilmembers asked questions regarding floodplains and Staff showed a map that indicated the small floodplain areas in Edmonds. The Councilmembers agreed with the Staff recommendation to go with compliance option number 3 (Permit-by-Permit compliance) and forwarded it to the full Council's consent agenda. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. B. Authorization for the Mayor to sign the contract with the Edmonds-South Snohomish County Historical Society for the 2011 Edmonds Market. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. C. Authorization for the Mayor to sign the contract with the Edmonds Arts Festival Association for the 2011 Edmonds Arts Festival. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. D. Authorization for the Mayor to sign the contract with the Greater Edmonds Chamber of Commerce for the 4th of July parade and fireworks display. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. E. Authorization for the Mayor to sign the contract with the Greater Edmonds Chamber of Commerce for the 2011 Taste of Edmonds. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. Packet Page 177 of 299 CS/DS Committee Minutes April 12, 2011 Page 2 2 F. Authorization for the Mayor to sign the contract with the Greater Edmonds Chamber of Commerce for the 2011 Classic Car Show. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. G. 2011 Senior Center Agreement ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. H. Authorization for the Mayor to sign utility easements for the Lift Station 2 Improvements Project. Mr. English reviewed the scope of the Lift Station 2 project and discussed how operating and maintaining the existing lift station is difficult given the age and current location of the facility. He explained to the committee that the value of the easements were determined by the Appraisal Group of the Northwest and the cost would be paid by sewer utility rates (412 utility fund). There were follow-up questions on the project and how this project is tied to the City’s sewer system. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. I. Quarterly Public Works Capital Project Report. Mr. English, reviewed the Quarterly Public Works Capital Project Report with the Committee. He explained that the purpose of the report is to provide the committee with information on projects managed by the Public Works Department. ACTION: None. J. Traffic Impact Fee Annual Report. Mr. English reviewed the 2010 traffic impact fee report and answered questions from the committee on the current amount of traffic impact fees, how they are assessed and what type of projects qualify for impacts fees. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. The meeting adjourned at 8:05p.m. Packet Page 178 of 299 AM-3869 Item #: 2. N. City Council Meeting Date: 04/19/2011 Time:Consent Submitted For:Pam Lemcke Submitted By:Megan Cruz Department:Engineering Committee:Community/Development Services Type:Action Information Subject Title Authorization for Mayor to sign utility easements for the Lift Station 2 Improvements Project. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Authorize Mayor to sign utility easements. Previous Council Action On April 12, 2011, the CS/DS Committee reviewed this item and recommended it be placed on the consent agenda for approval. Narrative Lift Station 2 is located on private property adjacent to Shell Creek between Cary Road and Melody Lane. The lift station has been in operation for over 40 years and has exceeded its expected useful life since replacement parts are difficult, if not impossible, to obtain. The City plans to build a new station and will relocate the facility away from the creek to improve maintenance access and reduce the risk of a sewer overflow to Shell Creek. The City will also construct a new waterline within the same area to provide a looped water system and improve water service. New permanent utility easements and temporary construction easements are required from the current property owner, Mr. Rex Thomas Strickland, to construct the project. The acquisition includes a sewer easement of 2,962 SF, a water line easement of 4,954 SF and temporary construction easement of 6,679 SF. The City hired Appraisal Group of the Northwest to complete an appraisal of the easements. The appraiser established a value of $42,500 for all of the easements needed to complete the project. Negotiations with the property owner began in December 2010 and the owner initially thought the offer was low and he hired his own appraiser. The property owner is now willing to accept $42,500 for the easements if the City agrees to pay $2,500 to cover the cost of his appraisal. Staff is recommending the approval of this settlement and a total payment of $45,000 to complete the acquisition of the utility easements. The recommendation is based on the anticipated costs for the City to pursue condemnation, if the settlement is not approved. The easement costs will be funded by the 412 Utility Fund. Attachments Attachment 1 - Sewer Easements Attachment 2 - Water Easements Attachment 3 - Temporary Construction Easements Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Packet Page 179 of 299 Engineering Robert English 04/13/2011 04:11 PM Public Works Phil Williams 04/14/2011 10:47 AM City Clerk Sandy Chase 04/14/2011 10:50 AM Mayor Mike Cooper 04/14/2011 01:55 PM Final Approval Sandy Chase 04/14/2011 02:00 PM Form Started By: Megan Cruz Started On: 04/13/2011 Final Approval Date: 04/14/2011 Packet Page 180 of 299 P a c k e t P a g e 1 8 1 o f 2 9 9 P a c k e t P a g e 1 8 2 o f 2 9 9 P a c k e t P a g e 1 8 3 o f 2 9 9 P a c k e t P a g e 1 8 4 o f 2 9 9 P a c k e t P a g e 1 8 5 o f 2 9 9 P a c k e t P a g e 1 8 6 o f 2 9 9 P a c k e t P a g e 1 8 7 o f 2 9 9 P a c k e t P a g e 1 8 8 o f 2 9 9 P a c k e t P a g e 1 8 9 o f 2 9 9 P a c k e t P a g e 1 9 0 o f 2 9 9 P a c k e t P a g e 1 9 1 o f 2 9 9 P a c k e t P a g e 1 9 2 o f 2 9 9 P a c k e t P a g e 1 9 3 o f 2 9 9 P a c k e t P a g e 1 9 4 o f 2 9 9 P a c k e t P a g e 1 9 5 o f 2 9 9 P a c k e t P a g e 1 9 6 o f 2 9 9 P a c k e t P a g e 1 9 7 o f 2 9 9 P a c k e t P a g e 1 9 8 o f 2 9 9 P a c k e t P a g e 1 9 9 o f 2 9 9 P a c k e t P a g e 2 0 0 o f 2 9 9 P a c k e t P a g e 2 0 1 o f 2 9 9 P a c k e t P a g e 2 0 2 o f 2 9 9 P a c k e t P a g e 2 0 3 o f 2 9 9 P a c k e t P a g e 2 0 4 o f 2 9 9 P a c k e t P a g e 2 0 5 o f 2 9 9 P a c k e t P a g e 2 0 6 o f 2 9 9 P a c k e t P a g e 2 0 7 o f 2 9 9 P a c k e t P a g e 2 0 8 o f 2 9 9 P a c k e t P a g e 2 0 9 o f 2 9 9 P a c k e t P a g e 2 1 0 o f 2 9 9 AM-3868 Item #: 2. O. City Council Meeting Date: 04/19/2011 Time:Consent Submitted For:Robert English Submitted By:Megan Cruz Department:Engineering Committee:Community/Development Services Type:Information Information Subject Title Traffic Impact Fee Annual Report. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff None. For information only. Previous Council Action On April 12, 2011, the CS/DS Committee reviewed this item and recommended it be placed on the consent agenda for approval. Narrative In 2004, the City authorized the collection of Traffic Impact Fees to help pay for transportation projects that are needed to serve new growth and development. Pursuant to Section 18.82.080(C) of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC), Attachment 1 is an accounting of the Traffic Impact Fee Fund for the year ending December 31, 2010. The City collected a total of $34,741.17 in traffic impact fees and interest of $132.07 during 2010. These revenues combined with the 2010 beginning fund balance of $100,281 resulted in total available funding of $135,022. On the expense side and in accordance with section 18.82.100 of the ECDC, the traffic impact fee fund paid $42,087.29 for the annual debt service to the Public Works Trust Fund (PWTF) for the 220th Street SW Improvements Project. The remaining balance of $93,067 combined with 2011 earnings is available to make future debt service payments on the 220th Street SW project or applied to other eligible transportation projects such as the Five Corners Roundabout. Attachments Attachment 1-Traffic Impact Fee Log Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Engineering Robert English 04/13/2011 03:35 PM Public Works Phil Williams 04/14/2011 10:47 AM Finance Jim Tarte 04/14/2011 01:46 PM City Clerk Sandy Chase 04/14/2011 01:54 PM Mayor Mike Cooper 04/14/2011 01:55 PM Final Approval Sandy Chase 04/14/2011 02:00 PM Form Started By: Megan Cruz Started On: 04/13/2011 Final Approval Date: 04/14/2011 Packet Page 211 of 299 20 1 0 2010 Da t e P e r m i t N u m b e r R e c e ip t Nu m b e r A p p l i c a n t / S i t e A d d r e s s F e e A m o u n t F u n d N a m e Tr a n s a c t i o n Re f e r e n c e Am o u n t Tr a n s f e r r e d Cumulative Total 01 / 0 1 / 1 0 Be g i n n i n g B a l a n c e $ 1 0 0 , 2 8 1 . 1 9 01 / 0 5 / 1 0 0 9 - 0 8 4 1 0 5 0 4 1 1 Th e H e a l t h & W e l l n e s s C l i n i c 21 9 2 0 7 6 t h A v e W , # 2 0 3 $2 , 7 2 0 . 4 5 $103,001.64 01 / 2 5 / 1 0 0 9 - 0 7 8 5 0 5 0 5 0 1 Gi l b e r t C o n s t r u c t i o n 81 0 1 4 t h S t . S W $8 4 0 . 7 2 $103,842.36 04 / 0 6 / 1 0 08 - 0 2 8 7 05 0 9 3 6 Ja n t z B u i l d i n g - J a n t z I n v e s t m e n t 54 7 D a y t o n S t r e e t $5 , 2 4 5 . 0 0 $109,087.36 04 / 3 0 / 1 0 10 - 0 2 4 1 05 1 0 8 3 In d e p e n d e n c e A u t o S a l e s 23 0 2 9 H i g h w a y 9 9 $1 , 5 2 7 . 3 2 $110,614.68 05 / 0 4 / 1 0 10 - 0 2 4 1 05 1 1 0 0 In d e p e n d e n c e A u t o S a l e s 23 0 2 9 H i g h w a y 9 9 $2 0 0 . 0 0 $110,814.68 05 / 1 7 / 1 0 10 - 0 1 5 7 05 1 1 6 1 Ro b e r t C a n a a n 71 1 3 - 2 1 0 t h S t . S W $8 4 0 . 7 2 $111,655.40 06 / 0 3 / 1 0 10 - 0 2 5 8 05 1 2 4 5 Cl e a r w a t e r H o m e s , L L C 80 0 8 - 2 4 0 t h S t . S W $8 4 0 . 7 2 $112,496.12 06 / 1 7 / 1 0 10 - 0 2 9 3 05 1 3 3 1 Ce l t i c C o w b o y B B Q , L L C 21 1 0 4 - 7 0 t h A v e W , # B $2 0 0 . 0 0 $112,696.12 06 / 2 3 / 1 0 10 - 0 0 4 7 05 1 3 5 0 St o n e H a r b o u r , L L C 87 1 8 2 0 0 t h S t . S W $8 4 0 . 7 2 $113,536.84 06 / 3 0 / 1 0 10 - 0 2 9 1 05 1 3 8 8 Cl e a r w a t e r H o m e s , L L C 80 1 0 - 2 4 0 t h S t . S W $1 , 1 9 6 . 3 3 $114,733.17 06 / 3 0 / 1 0 AJ 1 0 0 0 8 9 (4 2 , 0 8 7 . 2 9 ) $ $72,645.88 Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n I m p a c t F e e R e c e i p t s a n d F u n d s T r a n s f e r D a t a R e c o r d Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n I m p a c t F e e F u n d A c c o u n t N u m b e r : 1 1 2 . 5 0 2 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 5 . 8 6 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 RE C E I P T S TR A N S F E R S PW T F A n n u a l Lo a n P a y m e n t Pa g e 1 Pa c k e t Pa g e 21 2 of 29 9 20 1 0 2010 Da t e P e r m i t N u m b e r R e c e ip t Nu m b e r A p p l i c a n t / S i t e A d d r e s s F e e A m o u n t F u n d N a m e Tr a n s a c t i o n Re f e r e n c e Am o u n t Tr a n s f e r r e d Cumulative Total Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n I m p a c t F e e R e c e i p t s a n d F u n d s T r a n s f e r D a t a R e c o r d Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n I m p a c t F e e F u n d A c c o u n t N u m b e r : 1 1 2 . 5 0 2 . 0 0 0 . 3 4 5 . 8 6 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 RE C E I P T S TR A N S F E R S 07 / 2 6 / 1 0 10 - 0 4 2 3 05 1 5 2 9 Am b e r S a l i n a s P h o t o g r a p h y 51 4 M a i n S t r e e t , # B $1 , 9 6 6 . 1 9 $74,612.07 08 / 0 6 / 1 0 10 - 0 4 0 0 05 1 6 1 3 Ed w a r d J o n e s 13 0 0 O l y m p i c V i e w D r i v e $1 , 4 7 6 . 3 0 $76,088.37 08 / 2 7 / 1 0 10 - 0 5 1 5 05 1 7 8 0 Bi l l T h e B u t c h e r 32 3 M a i n S t r e e t $4 6 4 . 0 0 $76,552.37 08 / 3 0 / 1 0 10 - 0 4 4 4 05 1 7 8 8 Ra n d y & J u d y C l a r k 11 2 6 V i e w l a n d W a y $8 4 0 . 7 2 $77,393.09 08 / 3 0 / 1 0 10 - 0 5 3 5 05 1 7 9 4 Ro b ' s B B Q P i t 61 0 5 t h A v e S , # E $1 7 5 . 5 6 $77,568.65 09 / 2 0 / 1 0 10 - 0 4 2 9 05 1 8 9 5 Ki n t z / W u , S c o t t / J e n f e n g 22 5 2 2 - 9 5 t h P l a c e W e s t $8 4 0 . 7 2 $78,409.37 09 / 2 2 / 1 0 10 - 0 2 4 8 05 1 9 0 7 Gr o w W i t h U s L e a r n i n g C e n t e r s 66 5 E d m o n d s W a y $3 , 9 1 0 . 7 4 $82,320.11 11 / 0 3 / 1 0 10 - 0 4 8 5 05 2 1 6 3 Dr . K i t t s , D D S - O l d M i l l t o w n 20 1 - 5 t h A v e S , # 1 0 3 $7 , 3 7 2 . 8 0 $89,692.91 11 / 0 4 / 1 0 08 - 0 9 3 8 05 2 1 6 8 No r t h C r e s t 4 U n i t C o n d o 62 0 G l e n S t r e e t $1 , 0 5 6 . 2 4 $90,749.15 11 / 0 8 / 1 0 10 - 0 6 1 7 05 2 1 8 8 Ma r k & B r o o k G r a y 85 0 8 - 1 8 4 t h S t r e e t S W $8 4 0 . 7 2 $91,589.87 11 / 1 6 / 1 0 10 - 0 7 6 0 05 2 2 4 3 DJ M I n v e s t m e n t s 83 0 4 - 1 9 6 t h S t r e e t S W $1 , 3 4 5 . 2 0 $92,935.07 20 1 0 I n t e r e s t E a r n e d $1 3 2 . 0 7 $93,067.14 $93,067.14 20 1 0 Y E A R - E N D B A L A N C E Pa g e 2 Pa c k e t Pa g e 21 3 of 29 9 AM-3885 Item #: 2. P. City Council Meeting Date: 04/19/2011 Time: Submitted For:Jim Tarte Submitted By:Carl Nelson Department:Finance Committee:Finance Type:Information Information Subject Title Quarterly report regarding fiber optic opportunities. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff For Information Previous Council Action Resolution 1234 - Support of Continued Development of Fiber Optic Opportunities as a Source of City Revenue. The Finance Committee reviewed the quarterly report on 04-12-11 and recommended placing the report on the City Council Consent Agenda. Narrative The August 24, 2010 presentation of "Edmonds Fiber Optic Broadband Initiative - Background and Update" resulted in Resolution 1234 - setting the policy to review Fiber Optic "opportunity that serves the interest of the citizenry of Edmonds" and requiring quarterly reports to the Finance Committee. Progress has been made and local private businesses, the Edmonds Center for the Arts, and the Port of Edmonds are considering using City of Edmonds fiber for a portion of their business needs. SNOCOM has been presented with a contract for provision of internet services and we are awaiting their response. Attachment 1 shows a March 31st snapshot of expenditures to date (minor changes may occur due to quarter end postings) and, using these numbers, Attachment 2 shows the estimated break even date of April 2015 remains reasonable. It should be noted that either the SNOCOM service provision or the other potential local business partners will move up the estimated break even date. The arguments before the State Court of Appeals occured in January and an opinion is expected this summer. The City of Seattle has followed through on their support of the appeal effort and to date, has reimbursed $24,249.08 of legal fees (thus reducing the City's Professional Services expenditures). Expenditures for the 2011 Fiber Optic Budget have been proceeding as expected. The bulk of that amount will cover ISP charges (approx $13,200), equipment maintenance ($2,500), lease/rental of network software and PUD poles ($4,000). $5,000 has been set aside for Professional Services for specialized network configuration should the need arise in 2011. Attachments Attachment 1 Packet Page 214 of 299 Attachment 2 Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date City Clerk Sandy Chase 04/14/2011 05:40 PM Mayor Mike Cooper 04/14/2011 05:42 PM Final Approval Sandy Chase 04/14/2011 05:45 PM Form Started By: Carl Nelson Started On: 04/14/2011 Final Approval Date: 04/14/2011 Packet Page 215 of 299 20 0 6 2 0 0 7 20 0 8 20 0 9 20 1 0 20 1 0 20 1 1 2011 (as of Mar 30) Ti t l e / O b j e c t Ac t u a l s A c t u a l s A c t u a l s A c t u a l s A c t u a l s B u d g e t e d Bu d g e t e d P r e l i m A c t u a l s 31 0 S U P P L I E S - $ - $ - $ 7 , 8 8 8 . 9 9 $ - $ 7, 8 8 8 . 9 9 $ 1, 0 0 0 . 0 0 -$ 7,888.99 $ 35 0 S M A L L E Q U I P M E N T - - - 1 7 , 3 3 6 . 1 7 1, 4 6 3 . 6 2 1, 0 0 0 . 0 0 18 , 7 9 9 . 7 9 0. 0 0 - 18,799.79 $ 41 0 P R O F E S S I O N A L S E R V I C E S 7, 7 9 5 . 6 8 34 , 8 8 6 . 8 7 76 , 3 7 0 . 3 9 93 , 1 1 6 . 0 2 46 , 8 2 6 . 3 6 54 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 25 8 , 9 9 5 . 3 2 5, 0 0 0 . 0 0 3,864.20 262,859.52 $ 42 0 C O M M U N I C A T I O N S - - 3 4 , 1 8 6 . 0 6 43 , 9 3 2 . 9 5 21 , 1 0 9 . 4 4 25 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 99 , 2 2 8 . 4 5 13 , 2 0 0 . 0 0 2,748.60 101,977.05 $ 45 0 R E N T A L / L E A S E - - - 4 , 5 5 2 . 9 3 3, 9 4 8 . 0 0 - 8, 5 0 0 . 9 3 4, 0 0 0 . 0 0 - 8,500.93 $ 48 0 R E P A I R S & M A I N T E N A N C E - - - 2 , 4 5 6 . 3 9 11 4 . 4 6 3, 6 0 0 . 0 0 2, 5 7 0 . 8 5 2, 5 0 0 . 0 0 - 2,570.85 $ 49 0 M I S C E L L A N E O U S - - 6. 0 5 60 0 . 0 0 2, 7 7 2 . 4 7 - 3, 3 7 8 . 5 2 0. 0 0 - 3,378.52 $ 64 0 E Q U I P M E N T - 1 2 6 , 2 4 8 . 0 0 - - - - 1 2 6 , 2 4 8 . 0 0 0. 0 0 - 126,248.00 $ To t a l 7, 7 9 5 . 6 8 16 1 , 1 3 4 . 8 7 11 0 , 5 6 2 . 5 0 16 9 , 8 8 3 . 4 5 76 , 2 3 4 . 3 5 6,612.80 $ 532,223.65 $ re i m b u r s e m e n t ( a ) ( 2 0 , 8 7 4 . 0 8 ) (2 0 , 8 7 4 . 0 8 ) ‐33 7 5 Est:(24,249.08) 55 , 3 6 0 . 2 7 50 4 , 7 3 6 . 7 7 507,974.57 Fi b e r O p t i c B u d g e t ( P a g e 3 1 o f 2 0 0 9 / 2 0 1 0 B u d g e t ) 29 2 , 0 6 2 . 0 0 1 9 7 , 2 0 0 . 0 0 1 1 3 , 6 0 0 . 0 0 8 3 , 6 0 0 . 0 0 25 , 7 0 0 . 0 0 Di f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n b u d g e t a n d e x p e n d i t u r e s (1 8 1 , 4 9 9 . 5 0 ) $ (2 7 , 3 1 6 . 5 5 ) $ (5 8 , 2 3 9 . 7 3 ) $ (2 8 , 2 3 9 . 7 3 ) $ (2 3 7 , 0 5 5 . 7 8 ) $ (19,087.20)$ (256,142.98)$ (2 6 7 , 0 5 5 . 7 8 ) $ af t e r b u d g e t a d j a) At t a c h m e n t 1 Total as of 3/31/2011 20 1 0 Pr o f e s s i o n a l Se r v i c e s fi g u r e s ta k e in t o co n s i d e r a t i o n re i m b u r s e m e n t by pr o j e c t pa r t n e r s to t a l i n g $2 0 , 8 7 4 . 0 8 th r o u g h 12 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 0 . Ci t y o f E d m o n d s Fi b e r P r o j e c t C o s t s FY 2 0 0 6 - 2 0 1 0 To t a l a s o f 12 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 0 Pa c k e t Pa g e 21 6 of 29 9 AT T A C H M E N T 2 Co s t s in cu r r e d to da t e : De s c r i p t i o n 7/ 2 8 / 2 0 1 0 1 2 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 0 3 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 1 $7 , 8 8 8 . 9 9 $ 7, 8 8 8 . 9 9 $7,888.99 Sm a l l Eq u i p m e n t : Sm a l l sc a l e pu r c h a s e s fo r sw i t c h i n g an d ro u t i n g eq u i p m e n t (a c c e s s o r i e s ) ne c e s s a r y to ex p a n d th e ne t w o r k s ab i l i t y to ac c o m m o d a t e ad d i t i o n a l pa r t n e r s . $1 7 , 3 3 6 . 1 7 18 , 7 9 9 . 7 9 $18,799.79 Pr o f e s s i o n a l Sv c : Co n s u l t i n g fo r Co n f i g u r a t i o n , De s i g n , In s t a l l , Le g a l fe e s an d co n s u l t i n g fe e s fo r th e Pr o g r a m Di r e c t o r . (J u l y 22 n d MO U wi t h Ci t y of Se a t t l e wi l l re d u c e th i s by $2 0 , 2 4 5 . 3 8 ) $2 3 6 , 4 3 9 . 1 1 $ 23 8 , 1 2 1 . 2 4 $ 238,610.44 Co m m u n i c a t i o n s : Fe e s pa i d to th e re g i o n a l fi b e r co n s o r t i u m fo r sh a r e d co s t s of ce r t a i n as s e t s an d fe e s pa i d fo r In t e r n e t ac c e s s . $9 2 , 9 0 2 . 8 2 99 , 2 2 8 . 4 5 $101,977.05 Re n t a l & Le a s e : Po l e re n t a l $8 , 0 0 7 . 4 3 8, 5 0 0 . 9 3 $8,500.93 Re p a i r & Ma i n t e n a n c e : Fe e s pa i d to th e re g i o n a l fi b e r co n s o r t i u m fo r sh a r e d Ma i n t e n a n c e of ce r t a i n as s e t s as we l l as re p a i r s to wh o l l y ow n e d fi b e r as s e t s . $2 , 5 7 0 . 8 5 2, 5 7 0 . 8 5 $2,570.85 Mi s c e l l a n e o u s $6 2 8 . 5 2 3, 3 7 8 . 5 2 $3,378.52 Eq u i p m e n t : Fi b e r co n s t r u c t i o n & Eq u i p m e n t co s t s as s o c i a t e d wi t h es t a b l i s h i n g se r v i c e an d co n n e c t i o n of ne w pa r t n e r s to th e ne t w o r k . $1 2 6 , 2 4 8 . 0 0 $ 12 6 , 2 4 8 . 0 0 $ 126,248.00 TO T A L Co s t s to Da t e $4 9 2 , 0 2 1 . 8 9 $5 0 4 , 7 3 6 . 7 7 $507,974.57 Es t i m a t e d On g o i n g Ex p e n d i t u r e s : Pe r Mo n t h 7 / 2 8 / 2 0 1 1 1 2 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 0 3/31/2011 On g o i n g co s t s of $1 9 6 / m o n t h fo r po l e re n t a l an d co n s o r t i u m du e s $1 9 6 $2 , 3 5 2 $3 , 3 3 2 $588 In t e r n e t Se r v i c e Pr o v i d e r $1 , 0 0 0 $1 2 , 0 0 0 $1 7 , 0 0 0 $3,000 Ci s c o Ma i n t e n a n c e $2 , 0 0 0 $2 , 0 0 0 TO T A L S $1 6 , 3 5 2 $2 2 , 3 3 2 $3,588 Re c u r r i n g sa v i n g s or re v e n u e s im p l e m e n t e d : It e m To t a l Re v e n u e Pe r Mo n t h 7 / 2 8 / 2 0 1 0 1 2 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 0 3 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 1 Re p l a c e m e n t of (2 ) T ‐1' s to Ci t y Of f i c e s Be g a n 1/ 2 0 0 7 $1 , 1 0 0 $3 4 , 1 0 0 $3 9 , 6 0 0 $42,900 Vi d e o Ar r a i g n m e n t ‐ re d u c t i o n tr a n s p o r t a t i o n (F e b 20 1 0 es t i m a t e ) $2 , 7 5 0 $1 6 , 5 0 0 $3 0 , 2 5 0 $38,500 Vi d e o Ar r a i g n m e n t – re d u c t i o n in Ja i l Da y s $2 , 7 6 9 $1 6 , 6 1 4 $3 0 , 4 5 9 $38,766 TO T A L SA V I N G S $ 6 , 6 1 9 $ 6 7 , 2 1 4 $ 1 0 0 , 3 0 9 $ 1 2 0 , 1 6 6 Ne t R i v e r (s t a r t i n g Ja n 20 0 7 , in c r e a $4 8 , 5 0 0 $1 , 5 0 0 $4 8 , 5 0 0 $5 6 , 0 0 0 $ 6 0 , 5 0 0 TO T A L BE N E F I T TO CI T Y $4 8 , 5 0 0 $8 , 1 1 9 $ 1 1 5 , 7 1 4 $ 1 5 6 , 3 0 9 $ 1 8 0 , 6 6 6 BA L A N C E ($ 3 7 6 , 3 0 7 . 8 9 ) ( $ 3 4 8 , 4 2 7 . 7 7 ) ( $ 3 2 7 , 3 0 8 . 5 7 ) Ye a r to pa y of f : 4. 6 4. 3 4.0 Li k e l y pa y of f da t e : 3 / 1 8 / 2 0 1 5 7 / 2 4 / 2 0 1 5 4 / 2 0 / 2 0 1 5 Sa v i n g s / R e v e n u e s as of Co s t s as of : It e m It e m Su p p l i e s : Mi s c e l l a n e o u s pu b l i s h i n g of pl a n s , do c u m e n t s an d dr a w i n g s in su p p o r t of th e pr o j e c t s ma j o r di r e c t i v e s . Ye a r l y an d "T o da t e " Co s t s as of : Pa c k e t Pa g e 21 7 of 29 9 AM-3847 Item #: 2. Q. City Council Meeting Date: 04/19/2011 Time:Consent Submitted By:Gerry Gannon Department:Police Department Committee:Public Safety Type:Action Information Subject Title Ordinance - Adopt by reference RCW 9A.56.063, making or possessing motor vehicle theft tools. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Adopt by reference RCW 9A.56.063, Possessing Motor Vehicle Theft Tools. Previous Council Action Public Safety Committee approved this agenda item for the consent agenda. Narrative During 2007, the state legislature added RCW 9A.56.063 making it illegal to make or possess auto theft tools, a gross misdemeanor. The intent of the statute was to assist in deterring auto theft. Our officers continue to come across individuals that are in possession of auto theft tools. Since the city has not adopted RCW 9A.56.063 the suspects cannot be prosecuted in Edmond's Municipal Court. Staff is asking that the City Council approve adopting RCW 9A.56.063. The RCW is included in an attachment for reference. If adopted the new ordinance will be found under EMC 8.36.010 The attached draft ordinance has been approved by the City Attorney as to form. Attachments Ordinance - RCW 9A.56.063 RCW 9A.56.063 Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date City Clerk Sandy Chase 04/12/2011 02:41 PM Mayor Mike Cooper 04/14/2011 09:06 AM Final Approval Sandy Chase 04/14/2011 09:08 AM Form Started By: Gerry Gannon Started On: 04/06/2011 Final Approval Date: 04/14/2011 Packet Page 218 of 299 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING ECC 5.36.010 TO ADOPT BY REFERENCE A STATUTE CRIMINALIZING THE MAKING OR POSSESSING OF MOTOR VEHICLE THEFT TOOLS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds (“City”) has jurisdiction to prosecute gross misdemeanors within the City; and WHEREAS, the Municipal Court of the City (“Municipal Court”) has jurisdiction to adjudicate only citations for criminal violation that violate City ordinance or Edmonds City Code (“ECC”); and WHEREAS, the City may, by reference, adopt non-felony criminal codes in the Revised Code of Washington (“RCW”) into the ECC, NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Amended. ECC 5.36.010 Theft, UIBC and related crimes. is hereby amended to read as follows (new text is shown in underline 5.36.010 Theft, UIBC and related crimes. ): The following statutes of the state of Washington, including all future amendments, are adopted by reference as if set forth in full herein: RCW 9A.56.010 Definitions 9A.56.020 Theft – Definition, defense 9A.56.050 Theft in third degree 9A.56.060 (1)(2)(3)(5) Unlawful issuance of checks or drafts 9A.56.063 Making or possessing motor vehicle theft tools Packet Page 219 of 299 9A.56.140 Possessing stolen property – Definition, credit cards, presumption 9A.56.170 Possession stolen property in the third degree 9.54.130 Restoration of stolen property – Duty of officers 9A.56.180 Obscuring identity of a machine 9A.56.220 Theft of cable television services 9A.56.230 Unlawful sale of cable television services 9A.56.240 Forfeiture and disposal of device used to commit violation 9A.56.250 Civil cause of action 9A.56.260 Connection of channel converter 9A.56.270 Shopping cart theft Section 2. Severability Section 3. . 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 APPROVED: . This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifically 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 MIKE COOPER ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE Packet Page 220 of 299 APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: BY JEFFREY B. TARADAY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. Packet Page 221 of 299 SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. __________ of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the ____ day of ___________, 2011, 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, AMENDING ECC 5.36.010 TO ADOPT BY REFERENCE A STATUTE CRIMINALIZING THE MAKING OR POSSESSING OF MOTOR VEHICLE THEFT TOOLS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; 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 ________________, 2011. CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE 4817-0645-4025, v. 3 Packet Page 222 of 299 RCW 9A.56.063 Making or possessing motor vehicle theft tools. (1) Any person who makes or mends, or causes to be made or mended, uses, or has in his or her possession any motor vehicle theft tool, that is adapted, designed, or commonly used for the commission of motor vehicle related theft, under circumstances evincing an intent to use or employ, or allow the same to be used or employed, in the commission of motor vehicle theft, or knowing that the same is intended to be so used, is guilty of making or having motor vehicle theft tools. (2) For the purpose of this section, motor vehicle theft tool includes, but is not limited to, the following: Slim jim, false master key, master purpose key, altered or shaved key, trial or jiggler key, slide hammer, lock puller, picklock, bit, nipper, any other implement shown by facts and circumstances that is intended to be used in the commission of a motor vehicle related theft, or knowing that the same is intended to be so used. (3) For the purposes of this section, the following definitions apply: (a) "False master" or "master key" is any key or other device made or altered to fit locks or ignitions of multiple vehicles, or vehicles other than that for which the key was originally manufactured. (b) "Altered or shaved key" is any key so altered, by cutting, filing, or other means, to fit multiple vehicles or vehicles other than the vehicles for which the key was originally manufactured. (c) "Trial keys" or "jiggler keys" are keys or sets designed or altered to manipulate a vehicle locking mechanism other than the lock for which the key was originally manufactured. (4) Making or having motor vehicle theft tools is a gross misdemeanor. [2007 c 199 § 18.] Notes: Findings -- Intent -- Short title -- 2007 c 199: See notes following RCW 9A.56.065. Packet Page 223 of 299 AM-3880 Item #: 3. City Council Meeting Date: 04/19/2011 Time:10 Minutes Submitted For:Council President Peterson Submitted By:Sandy Chase Department:City Clerk's Office Review Committee: Committee Action: Type:Information Information Subject Title Update by Community Transit. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Information only. Previous Council Action N/A Narrative Todd Morrow, Chief of Strategic Communications, will present an update on Community Transit. Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Mayor Mike Cooper 04/14/2011 09:06 AM Final Approval Sandy Chase 04/14/2011 09:08 AM Form Started By: Sandy Chase Started On: 04/14/2011 09:02 AM Final Approval Date: 04/14/2011 Packet Page 224 of 299 AM-3875 Item #: 4. City Council Meeting Date: 04/19/2011 Time:45 Minutes Submitted By:Gina Coccia Department:Planning Committee:Community/Development Services Type:Action Information Subject Title Public hearing on proposed Code amendment to ECDC 20.20 (Home Occupations). Proposed changes include shifting the process from Type 3-B (Hearing Examiner Review) to Type 2 (Staff Decision) while retaining notice and appeal rights. Also proposed are changes that would set limits for potential home occupations, as well as establishing new rules for urban farmers and artist studios. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Approve the proposed code amendment as shown in the attached ordinance (Exhibit 1). Previous Council Action The Community Services/Development Services Council Committee met on May 11, 2010 to discuss the issues involved with the current home occupation code (contained in Exhibit 3) and referred the issue to the Planning Board for study. The Planning Board met on July 17, October 13, and November 10, 2010, and recommended a draft code for the Council's review. The Council held a public hearing on January 4, 2011, and directed staff to prepare a final ordinance for Council consideration. On February 15, 2011, Council voted to reconsider its initial decision and refer an updated staff draft of the ordinance to Committee for review. On March 8, 2011, the Commitee reviewed the draft ordinance and referred the issue back to the full Council for a public hearing and action (see Exhibit 3). Narrative Council held a public hearing and provided direction to staff to develop a final ordinance amending the home occupation chapter of the Edmonds Community Development Code in January, 2011. On February 15, 2011, the Council voted to reconsider its initial action, and referred the issue to the Council's Community Sevices/Development Services Committee for further review. The current draft ordinance was developed by staff in response to the hearing and Council comments from January 4, 2011. The Committee reviewed the staff draft on Mary 8, 2011, and after discussion, referred the issue to the full Council for a public hearing and action. Exhibit 1 contains the current draft ordinance, as reveiwed by the Committee, and is different than what has been portrayed in recent public comments. The overall intent of the amendment is to support home-based work while preserving the residential character of neighborhoods. Problems with the existing code include (1) an inordinately high cost for applying for some home occupations (applying to the Hearing Examiner costs a total of $1550, which is disproportionate to the amount of activity associated with a typical home occupation), (2) no provision for art studios or limited home farm produce sales, and (3) unclear guidance concerning what types of home occupations are generally permissible. The current draft ordinance contained in Exhibit 1 provides for the following: Packet Page 225 of 299 The current draft ordinance contained in Exhibit 1 provides for the following: 1. The basic types of home occupations permitted with no public notice are not being changed, and are not at issue. These are the typical ones where there is simply someone working in their own home with no additional client or employee visits. 2. Whenever a home occupation is proposed that involves an employee or client visit, the Hearing Examiner requirement is replaced with a lower-cost process (Type 2 staff decision, costing $585). The Type 2 application requires public notice to be given to properties within 300 feet of the property. A notice of application is provided, along with a comment period, before any decision is issued. Conditions of approval may be applied to an application. An appeal of the staff decision may be made to the Hearing Examiner. 3. New limitations are placed on visits to a home occupation. A maximum of one employee is allowed, and client visits are limited to one per hour. There is no provision to exceed these limits; this is more limiting than the current code, which provides no objective upper limits on either employees or visits. We believe that the provisions outlined above are consistent with the Council discussion on January 4, 2011, and provide for a more affordable, slightly streamlined process in exchange for more limitations on the types of home occupations that are approvable in a neighborhood setting. The updated regulations also address emerging city priorities of encouraging locally-based economic activity (e.g. local produce and art studios supporting the arts community) consistent with city sustainability goals. It is worth noting that the current draft can in no way be thought of as allowing 'strip malls' in neighborhoods. Retail sales are still prohibited, as they always have been, and the proposed draft actually proposes an upper limit to activity that is not part of the current code. Attachments Exhibit 1 - Staff Draft Ordinance Exhibit 2 - Summary of Provisions Exhibit 3 - Meeting Minutes Exhibit 4 - Existing ECDC 20.20 Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Planning Department Rob Chave 04/14/2011 11:53 AM City Clerk Sandy Chase 04/14/2011 01:10 PM Mayor Mike Cooper 04/14/2011 01:55 PM Final Approval Sandy Chase 04/14/2011 02:00 PM Form Started By: Gina Coccia Started On: 04/13/2011 Final Approval Date: 04/14/2011 Packet Page 226 of 299 0006.90000 WSS/gjz 1/11/11 ORDINANCE NO. _______ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF THE EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE TO REPEAL AND REENACT CHAPTER 20.20 HOME OCCUPATIONS , AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. WHEREAS, the City is in the process of reviewing the provisions of the Edmonds Community Development Code in order to update appropriate sections, and WHEREAS, the provisions relating to home occupations was referred by the Edmonds City Council Community Services/Development Services Committee to the staff and Planning Board for review on May 22, 2010, and WHEREAS, this matter was discussed by the Planning Board at its meetings of July 14 and October 14, 2010, and a public hearing was held by the Planning Board on November 10, 2010, and WHEREAS, revisions to the chapter were forwarded to the City Council with the recommendation that certain changes referenced in the Planning Board minutes of November 10, 2010 be enacted, and WHEREAS, the City Council deems it to be in the public interest and consistent with its Comprehensive Plan to make certain changes to the Home Occupations revisions to allow and encourage certain limited business activities in residential zones subject to the restrictions set forth in the proposed chapter, NOW, THEREFORE, Packet Page 227 of 299 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Edmonds Community Development Code is hereby amended by the repeal and reenactment of chapter 20.20 Home Occupations Chapter 20.20 to read as follows: HOME OCCUPATIONS Sections: 20.20.000 Purpose. 20.20.010 Home occupation. 20.20.020 General regulation. 20.20.030 Permit. 20.20.000 Purpose. A home occupation is generally an economic enterprise operated within a dwelling unit, or buildings accessory to the dwelling unit which are incidental and secondary to the residential use of the dwelling unit, including the use of the dwelling unit as a business address in the phone directory or as a post office mailing address. The purpose of this chapter is to allow residents to carry on home occupations on their property while guaranteeing neighboring residents freedom from excessive noise, excessive traffic, nuisance, fire hazard and other possible potential negative impacts from the maintenance of a commercial use within a residential neighborhood. The purpose of this chapter is to permit two types of home use occupations while prohibiting other commercial uses in residential neighborhoods. Commercial enterprises employing only the residents of a structure which are operated entirely within the structure are intended to be permitted activities. The City’s Community Sustainability Element of the Comprehensive Plan encourages local business and reductions in the city’s overall greenhouse gas emissions, so this chapter seeks to encourage home-based work and business activities while preserving the character of residentially-zoned neighborhoods by limiting the number of customers and employees permitted to visit the home occupation. Packet Page 228 of 299 20.20.001 Home occupation. A home occupation may be conducted as a permitted secondary use in any residential zone of the city subject to the following regulations: A. A home occupation shall be a permitted use if it: 1. Is carried on exclusively by a family member residing in the dwelling unit; and 2. Is conducted entirely within the structures on the site, without any significant outdoor activity; and 3. Uses no heavy equipment, power tools or power sources not common to a residence; and 4. Has no pickup or delivery by business related commercial vehicles which exceeds 20,000 pounds gross vehicle weight (except for the U.S. Mail and standard UPS/FedEx sized delivery vehicles); and 5. Creates no noise, dust, glare, vibration, odor, smoke or other impact adverse to a residential area beyond that normally associated with residential use; and 6. Does not include any employees outside of the family members residing at the residence, including but not limited to persons working at or visiting the subject property; and 7. Complies with all performance criteria established pursuant to ECDC 17.60.010. 8. Does not park or store more than one commercial vehicle or any commercial vehicle over 10,000 pounds licensed gross vehicle weight per dwelling unit pursuant to ECDC 17.50.100. B. A home occupation which does not meet one or more of the requirements of subsection (A) of this section may be approved as a staff approval (Type II decision) if the home occupation will not harm the character of the surrounding neighborhood as evidenced by meeting all of the following criteria: Packet Page 229 of 299 1. The temporary and permanent keeping of animals associated with a home occupation must comply with all provisions of Chapter 5.05 ECC (Animal Control) and ECDC Title 16; and 2. The home occupation will not include storage, display of goods, building materials and/or the operation of building machinery, commercial vehicles or other tools, unless it meets all of the following criteria: a. Is wholly enclosed within a structure or building, b. Does not emit noise, odor or heat, and c. Does not create glare or emit light from the site in violation of the city’s performance criteria; and, 3. Does not create a condition which injures or endangers the comfort, or pose health or safety threats to persons on abutting properties or streets; and 4. Does not include visits to the site from more than one non-resident employee per day; and 5. Does not include visits from customers in excess of one vehicle per hour; and 6. Does not include visits from customers between the hours of 9:00 pm and 8:00 am; and 7. If visits to the site are to be made by either an off- site employee or customer, on-site parking shall be provided for at least three (3) vehicles; and 8. No parking or storage is provided for more than one commercial vehicle or any commercial vehicle over 10,000 pounds licensed gross vehicle weight per dwelling unit pursuant to ECDC 17.50.100. C. Urban farming. 1. Urban farming is defined as the display or sale of edible farm products or fresh produce grown on-site. Packet Page 230 of 299 2. A home occupation for urban farming not meeting the criteria of ECDC 20.20.010(A) may be approved as a Type II decision if it meets all of the criteria contained in ECDC 20.20.010(B), except that: a. Condition 20.20.010(B)(5) does not apply. An applicant for a home occupation for the sale of on-site farm products or produce shall be required to submit a site plan showing how any visitors to the site can be accommodated without creating a traffic hazard or nuisance to adjoining properties. b. The general prohibition of the display of goods and requiring the business to be wholly enclosed within a building in ECDC 20.20.010(B)(2) do not apply to the display or sale of edible farm products or produce, so long as the display is removed during non-operating hours. D. Artist Studio. 1. An artist studio is defined as the display or sale of hand-made products (artwork) that are produced on-site. Items or artwork created off site is not included in this definition. 2. A home occupation for an artist studio not meeting the criteria of ECDC 20.20.010(A) may be permitted as a Type II decision if it meets all of the criteria contained in ECDC 20.20.010(B), except that: a. Condition 20.20.010(B)(5) does not apply. An applicant for a home occupation for an artist studio shall be required to submit a site plan showing how any visitors to the site can be accommodated without creating a traffic hazard or nuisance to adjoining properties. b. The display or sale of hand-made artwork shall remain completely enclosed within a building pursuant to ECDC 20.20.010.A.2. 20.20.020 General regulation. A. Sale or Display of Goods. No goods shall be sold or rendered on the premises except instructional materials pertinent to the home occupation (e.g., music books), or as Packet Page 231 of 299 described above in ECDC 20.20.010(C) for Urban Farming or ECDC 20.20.010(D) for Artist Studio. Display or storage of goods outside the premises or in the window thereof is prohibited, except related to an Urban Farming display located entirely on the subject property. Such farm or produce display shall be removed during the hours it is not in operation. B. Signs. A sign is permitted in conjunction with a home occupation approval and shall not exceed four square feet in size. The sign area shall be calculated as part of, not in addition to, the total sign area permitted on the site. A building permit and a Type II conditional use permit are required for any proposed commercial signage in a residential zone. C. Reasons for Denial. A home occupation is a special exception to the zoning ordinance and the applicant has the burden of persuasion that he/she comes within the stated purposes and criteria of this chapter. The following are among common reasons for denial but are not intended to be exclusive: 1. The on-street or on-site parking of trucks or other types of equipment associated with the home occupation; 2. The littered, unkempt and otherwise poorly maintained condition of the dwelling site; 3. Visits to the site are made by more than one vehicle per hour, such as a contractor or business operation that includes multiple employees meeting at the site to collect materials or equipment that will be used at another location. 4. Noncompliance with the criteria of this chapter or conditions of approval or other provisions of city ordinance; and/or 5. The proposal cannot be conditioned in order to meet the criteria and findings of the chapter. 20.20.030 Permit. All permits for home occupations are personal to the applicant and shall not be transferred or otherwise assigned to any other person. The permit will automatically expire Packet Page 232 of 299 when the applicant named on the permit application moves from the site. The home occupation shall also automatically expire if the permittee fails to maintain a valid business license or the business license is suspended or revoked. The home occupation shall not be transferred to any site other than that described on the application form. Section 2. 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 MIKE COOPER 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 233 of 299 SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. __________ of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the ____ day of ___________, 2011, 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, AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF THE EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE TO REPEAL AND REENACT CHAPTER 20.20 HOME OCCUPATIONS, 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 ________________, 2011. CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE Packet Page 234 of 299 Ho m e Oc c u p a t i o n Am e n d m e n t s Ho m e Oc c u p a t i o n Am e n d m e n t s Cu r r e n t C u r r e n t Staff Co d e D r a f t Am e n d m e n t Ho m e oc c u p a t i o n wi t h no vi s i t s Pe r m i t t e d Pe r m i t t e d wi t h no vi s i t s Co s t ~ $1 , 5 5 0 ~ $5 8 5 Pu b l i c No t i c e / Co m m e n t Ye s Y e s He a r i n g Ye s Ye s (o n ap p e a l ) He a r i n g Ye s Ye s (o n ap p e a l ) Li m i t a t i o n s (h o u r s , vi s i t s , No – Se t by he a r i n g Ye s – U p p e r limits bl h d d (h o u r s , vi s i t s , em p l o y e e s ) No Se t by he a r i n g es t a bl is h e d in co d e EXHIBIT - 2 Pa c k e t Pa g e 23 5 of 29 9 M I N U T E S Community Services/Development Services Committee Meeting March 8, 2011 Elected Officials Present: Staff Present: Council Member Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Chair Rob Chave, Planning Manger Gina Coccia Phil Williams, Public Works Director Rob English, City Engineer The committee convened at 6:30 p.m. A. Proposed Ordinance amending Edmonds Community Development Code 20.20, Home Occupations.. Rob Chave introduced this item, explaining that the current staff draft contained in the Committee’s packet was derived from the Council hearing and discussion in January, and is therefore different than the hearing draft (which contained options for the Council to consider). Rob pointed out that there appears to be some misunderstandings as to what is being proposed, and what is allowed under current code. He pointed to the summary table, emphasizing that retail sales are not allowed in neighborhoods either under existing code or in the new draft, and that the new draft proposes some upper limits on home occupations that are not reflected in the current open-ended code standards. The new code also provides for some uses, such as art studios and home farming, that are not addressed under current code. It was also discussed that the cost of applying would be reduced, since the decision would be a staff decision instead of having to go to the Hearing Examiner; public notice and an opportunity to appeal would still be a part of the process. Chair Fraley-Monillas remarked that she felt communication was part of the problem, and that perhaps a more extensive description of the proposal, and how it differs from existing code, could be included in a new hearing advertisement. She agreed that it would be appropriate to schedule a public hearing with the Council on the staff draft. ACTION: This item – including the current staff draft of the ordinance – should be scheduled for a public hearing at the Council. The advertising should be as descriptive as possible. B. Report on bids opened February 15, 2011 for the Alderwood Intertie and Reservoir Improvement Project, award a contract in the amount of $224,286.66 to Omega Contractors, Inc. and appropriate an additional $164,000 to the 2011 412-100 Water Utility Fund to construct the project. Rob English, City Engineer, informed the committee about the bids received for the project and the scope of improvements to be completed. The project will improve the Alderwood supply station and upgrade existing vents and access points at the Seaview and Yost Reservoirs. The construction budget was reviewed and the funding to pay for the project was discussed. Chair Fraley-Monillas asked if the City received water from Seattle at a different station and Phil Williams explained that the Seattle water was only for back-up purposes. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. Packet Page 236 of 299 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes February 15, 2011 Page 1 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES February 15, 2011 At 6:00 p.m., Mayor Cooper announced that the City Council would meet in executive session regarding labor negotiation strategy. He stated that the executive session was scheduled to last approximately one hour and would be held in the Jury Meeting Room, located in the Public Safety Complex. No action was anticipated to occur as a result of meeting in executive session. Elected officials present at the executive session were: Mayor Cooper, and Councilmembers Bernheim, Fraley-Monillas, Buckshnis, Peterson, Petso and Wilson. Others present were City Attorney Scott Snyder, Human Resources Director Debi Humann, Public Works Director Phil Williams and City Clerk Sandy Chase. The executive session concluded at 6:57 p.m. The regular City Council meeting was called to order at 7:02 p.m. by Mayor Cooper in the Council Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Mike Cooper, Mayor Strom Peterson, Council President Steve Bernheim, Councilmember D. J. Wilson, Councilmember Lora Petso, Councilmember Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember Michael Plunkett, Councilmember (arrived 7:42 p.m.) ALSO PRESENT Peter Gibson, Student Representative STAFF PRESENT Gerry Gannon, Assistant Police Chief Phil Williams, Public Works Director Lorenzo Hines, Finance Director Rob Chave, Planning Manager Debi Humann, Human Resources Director Rob English, City Engineer Scott Snyder, City Attorney Sandy Chase, City Clerk Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst. Jeannie Dines, Recorder 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Council President Peterson requested Agenda Item 6 be moved to follow Item 3. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETSO, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. (Councilmember Plunkett was not present for the vote.) 2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. (Councilmember Plunkett was not present for the vote.) The agenda items approved are as follows: A. ROLL CALL B. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 8, 2011. Packet Page 237 of 299 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes February 15, 2011 Page 5 unsightly and in danger of collapse. The building was declared a total loss by the insurance company and there is apparently a dispute regarding value. She was hopeful the City Council could assist them in remedying the situation. Ron Wambolt, Edmonds, asked how the 11 applicants for City Attorney were reduced to the 4 the Council interviewed. He has been unable to determine what other firms applied or what process was used. 5. PUBLIC HEARING ON RECONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING HOME OCCUPATIONS, EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE (ECDC) 20.20. Planning Manager Rob Chave explained the Council held a public hearing on Home Occupation amendments on January 4, 2011. Following the public hearing, the Council provided direction to staff and staff has been drafting amendments for further Council discussion. On January 14, the Council voted to reconsider and hold a public hearing to reconsider the January 4 vote. He provided a comparison of the current code and the current draft amendment Current code Current Staff Draft Amendment Home Occupation with no visitors Permitted Permitted Cost $1550 $585 Public Notice/Comment Yes Yes Hearing Yes Yes (on appeal) Limitations (hours, visits, employees) No (set by Hearing Examiner) Yes (upper limits established in code) Mr. Chave explained in the current process, because the code is silent with regard to conditions, staff must develop a “rule of thumb” to assist the Hearing Examiner in applying conditions. At the January 4 public hearing there was interest in establishing standard conditions for home occupations. Under the proposed draft amendments, the upper limits would be codified. The proposed amendments also address art studios and small urban farms. Under the current code they are allowed as a home occupation but none of the art work or produce could be sold on site. For example, if the City held an art studio tour, people could visit the art studio but the artist could not sell their artwork. He clarified the amendments were not before the Council for consideration tonight. He noted there were several misconceptions as a result of the public hearing. The goal is to streamline and simplify the process as well as provide more certainty for home occupations. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked whether home occupations could locate anywhere in the City. Mr. Chave answered yes, the code applies citywide. Local circumstances are considered for specific home occupations; that would not change. It is possible in some locations if there is not adequate parking that additional conditions will be applied or a home occupation denied. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas observed if staff’s recommendation is not approved, there will be no change to the current situation. The only change will be the cost. Mr. Chave responded the amendments provided by staff provide a more streamlined process (staff decision rather than Hearing Examiner), public notice will be the same, ability to comment on an application remains the same, and additional standards (upper limits) will be established in the code. If the Council does not approve amendments, the situation with regard to art studios and urban farms continues to exist. Packet Page 238 of 299 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes February 15, 2011 Page 6 City Attorney Scott Snyder explained the Council voted to reconsider their January 4 motion and that motion is now on the table (to direct the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance to implement the Planning Board’s recommendations as amended). If the vote on the motion fails, the Council will proceed with the public hearing and the Council can make a new motion and proceed with deliberations. Mayor Cooper clarified if the motion is approved, the agenda item is concluded and staff will proceed as directed on January 4. Councilmember Wilson summarized the process: On January 4 the Council amended the Planning Board recommendation and directed staff to prepare an ordinance implementing the Planning Board’s recommendations. The Council then passed a motion to reconsider the motion. The Council is now voting again on the January 4 motion. Councilmember Buckshnis explained she brought the motion to reconsider because January 4 was not a good time for a public hearing. Subsequent to the Council’s decision she received at least 25 emails objecting to the amendments to home occupation regulations and 1 email in support of the amendments. She assumed citizens were not aware the home occupation regulations were being expanded. Councilmember Plunkett commented he opposed this the first time and was happy to vote again. Councilmember Wilson commented he typically was deferential to public comment when so many emails were received on a topic. However, whoever was organizing the opposition was providing poor information because the comments and concerns were not reflective of the proposed amendments. For example the amendments will not turn every residential neighborhood into a strip mall as has been suggested. The amendments clarify what can already occur and propose limitation such as the number of employees. He summarized many of the concerns raised by the public were wholly unfounded. Council President Peterson echoed Councilmember Wilson’s comments. He agreed the timing of the public hearing may have added to the sense of misinformation. As Mr. Chave explained, the amendment will make it easier for the average citizen to access the process via a staff decision rather than the Hearing Examiner. The proposed process provides more direct communication with staff, notice will still be provided to neighbors as well as the fee reduced from $1550 to a more reasonable $585. Student Representative Gibson referred to Exhibit 1 that states no vehicles can visit the property or business between 9:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. He asked whether someone could park their vehicle and walk to the residence between those hours. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas pointed out the community has not been sufficiently educated regarding the amendments if the Council is receiving numerous emails. Councilmember Buckshnis advised the emails and telephone calls she received were from people who watch City Council meetings on TV. She preferred the home occupation regulations remain as they currently exist until the public can be better educated. Mayor Cooper restated the motion now on the table: TO DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE AN ORDINANCE TO IMPLEMENT THE PLANNING BOARD’S RECOMMENDATIONS AS AMENDED. Mayor Cooper clarified a yes vote reaffirms the action the Council took on January 4 to direct staff to bring back the ordinance as amended. A no vote starts the process over. Packet Page 239 of 299 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes February 15, 2011 Page 7 UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS WILSON AND BERNHEIM AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS PETSO, PLUNKETT, FRALEY-MONILLAS AND BUCKSHNIS VOTING NO. Mayor Cooper opened the public participation portion of the public hearing. Dr. Jonathan Bannister, Edmonds, Executive Director, Pacific Northwest Budo Association, requested the Council support the changes proposed by staff to ECDC 20.20 with regard to home occupations. He has been an instructor of Japanese martial and cultural arts for more than 30 years. He is internationally accredited to teach Aikido, classical swordsmanship, calligraphy and flower arranging and would like to share his knowledge and enthusiasm for the arts by offering private, one-on-one instruction in his home. Instruction would be limited to one person per hour 9:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. He is located on an arterial street, requires no signage, has ample off-street parking, and his facilities are modern and up to code. The arts he teaches are practiced in silence and he will not offer regular classes. The scale of activity contemplated is modest and in keeping with the sensibilities of the community. In January 2010 he applied for a Type IIIB conditional use permit but was deterred by the $1550 application fee. He urged the Council to support the staff’s and Planning Board’s recommendation for a home occupation administrative permit. The proposal is the result of more than a year of careful discussion and consideration by many parties that included ample opportunity for public review and comment. The amendment streamlines the process, reduces fees and facilitates the licensing of home occupations that likely would be permitted under any circumstance. Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, commented the issue was dollars versus neighbors’ rights. He anticipated the previous speaker would have groups of people visiting his home which results in additional traffic. He referred to Councilmember Bernheim’s comment that remedies were available if problems developed or the character of the neighborhood changed, advising he had not found any remedies in the code to address problems. He anticipated if problems arose, the business would get their way after talking to staff and neighbors would be forced to appeal, costing them more than the original applicant paid. He suggested appeals be to the City Council and have no fee. Next, he objected to the hours of operation, commenting the hours in the construction noise ordinance were more restrictive. He preferred to retain the existing regulations that allow one office, one employee, and no signs, as such businesses were not visible to the neighborhood. He feared the proposed amendments would result in residential neighborhoods that function like a commercial zone. He objected to any change that altered the character of his neighborhood. Al Rutledge, Edmonds, pointed out on February 17, 2009 the Council increased fees. He inquired about the cost of a home occupation application in 2009. Hearing no further comment, Mayor Cooper closed the public participation portion of the public hearing. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas was supportive of generating tax dollars for Edmonds and did not want to prevent citizens from creating a business in their home. She was concerned that at least the 15-40 people who provided comment have been given the wrong impression. She was uncertain how to educate the public. She received emails from citizens expressing concern with businesses locating in their neighborhood, however, businesses can already locate in neighborhoods. Council President Peterson agreed with Councilmember Fraley-Monillas regarding the difficulty educating the public. Two public hearings have been held and three people spoke at each one; Dr. Bannister and Mr. Hertrich spoke at both, Mr. Rutledge spoke at one and Mr. Spellman spoke at one. There were also public hearings at the Planning Board. He was uncertain how the Council could further educate the public; the Council is elected to study issues and make decisions. He did not think it was Packet Page 240 of 299 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes February 15, 2011 Page 8 feasible to hold meetings in neighborhoods throughout the City in an effort to educate the public. He was frustrated the Council made a decision and was now changing its mind based on a couple dozen emails. He preferred to educate the people who had expressed concerns one at a time rather than allow them to derail the process. COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON, TO ADOPT THE ORIGINAL ORDINANCE RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING BOARD. As the original Planning Board ordinance was not included in the packet, Councilmember Wilson suggested delaying further discussion and amendments to a future meeting. His goal by making the motion was to put the matter back in play and not let it drop. Mr. Chave agreed with continuing the ordinance to a future date, explaining the Council has not yet seen the ordinance that was drafted in response to the public hearing. Staff tried to take the suggestions regarding reducing the cost of the application and streamlining the process, retaining public notice and addressing art studios and urban farms. He asked whether the Council wanted to have another public hearing. Councilmember Wilson commented if there were four votes to not talk about this anymore, he was open to that option as well. COUNCILMEMBER WILSON WITHDREW HIS MOTION WITH THE AGREEMENT OF THE SECOND. COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BERNHEIM, FOR THE COUNCIL TO CONSIDER THE STAFF-RECOMMENDED ORDINANCE WITH THE CHANGES MR. CHAVE REFERENCED ON A FUTURE DATE. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETSO, TO REFER THE ORDINANCE TO THE COMMUNITY SERVICES/DEVELOPMENT SERVICES COMMITTEE FIRST. Mayor Cooper ruled that Councilmember Buckshnis’ motion took precedence over Councilmember Wilson’s motion. Councilmember Plunkett was intrigued by the idea of reducing the cost of an administrative review. However, along the way it became something else that he was unable to support. He looked forward to an opportunity for the Community Services/Development Services (CS/DS) Committee to review the proposed amendments. Council President Peterson reiterated this is the second public hearing before the Council and the matter has been reviewed by the CS/DS Committee at least once before as well as reviewed by the Planning Board. He was uncertain what new light would be shed by two Councilmembers reviewing it again. He preferred the ordinance be presented to the full Council. Councilmember Buckshnis anticipated a lot of light would be shed on the issue. After received 25 emails, she felt it was important to listen to the public. Councilmember Plunkett pointed out there are different Councilmembers on the CS/DS Committee than were on the Committee when the matter was reviewed previously. He did not recall that the Council was provided a strike out version comparing the original code to the changes recommended by the Planning Packet Page 241 of 299 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes February 15, 2011 Page 9 Board. He questioned how the intent to reduce the $1550 fee to $585 became amendments that would significantly impact residential communities. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas anticipated having the matter reviewed by the CS/DS Committee would allow consideration of options, the appeal process, etc. Councilmember Bernheim supported staff developing an ordinance on January 4; the ordinance simply expands the use of home occupations and gives people living in residential areas more flexibility to use their home for a business in order to maximize economic development. He viewed the amendments as economic development. He disagreed the issue was dollars versus neighbor’s rights, noting often neighbor’s rights are associated with dollars. Some of the complaints about the proposal were that it would reduce property values. He viewed it as neighbor’s rights against neighbor’s rights; no one has a right to prevent a neighbor from using their home as a home occupation, subject to the City’s regulations. He believed the critics of the amendments were exaggerating the negative consequences. With regard to remedies, if negative consequences arise and neighborhoods are crowded with cars, children are prevented from playing in the street, neighborhood character changes and there are signs everywhere, they can be addressed via additional amendments. He summarized this was a good, progressive idea and although the opposition was heartfelt, the negative consequences are exaggerated. Councilmember Wilson encouraged the CS/DS Committee to present the Council a work product and not just let it languish. MOTION CARRIED (5-2), COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON AND COUNCILMEMBER BERNHEIM VOTING NO. Council President Peterson advised this will be scheduled on the March 8 CS/DS Committee agenda. 7. CONFIRMATION OF MAYOR'S APPOINTMENT AND APPROVAL OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER SERVICES. Human Resources Director Debi Humann explained the City’s previous Land Use Hearing Examiner elected not to renew their contract at the end of 2010. The City created an RFQ/RFP and advertised for a new Hearing Examiner. Four applicants applied for the position, two applicants moved forward to the interview phase, Olbrechts & Associates and Sound Law Center. Interviews were held November 29, 2010. The interview panel selected Olbrechts & Associates as the City’s new Land Use Hearing Examiner pending contract approval and confirmation by City Council. The Council packet contains a copy of the Professional Service Agreement with Olbrechts & Associates. The contract has been reviewed by legal and Planning. The main change from the previous contract is a change in the fee structure from a fixed flat monthly fee to an hourly rate with an annual cap in an attempt to lower contract costs. She requested Council approval of the Professional Services Agreement. Councilmember Petso referred to Mr. Olbrechts’ comment in his application materials that he intended to use Mr. Snyder as a backup Hearing Examiner. Ms. Humann advised that was discussed with Mr. Olbrechts and he does not plan to use Mr. Snyder. Mayor Cooper referred to his memo to Council today clarifying that Mr. Olbrechts raised that issue during the interview and stated because Ogden Murphy Wallace was the City Attorney, he would not use him as a backup. Councilmember Petso advised that fact was not reflected in the contract document. Mr. Snyder advised Mr. Olbrechts left Ogden Murphy Wallace approximately six months ago and did not ask him whether he wanted to serve as backup Hearing Examiner. The contract does not mention his acting as a backup. The Packet Page 242 of 299 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes January 4, 2011 Page 1 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES January 4, 2011 At 6:15 p.m., Mayor Cooper announced that the City Council would meet in executive session regarding threatened litigation and labor negotiations. He stated that the executive session was scheduled to last approximately 1 hour and 45 minutes and would be held in the Jury Meeting Room, located in the Public Safety Complex. No action was anticipated to occur as a result of meeting in executive session. Elected officials present at the executive session were: Mayor Cooper, and Councilmembers Bernheim, Plunkett, Fraley-Monillas, Buckshnis, Peterson, Petso and Wilson. Others present were City Attorney Scott Snyder, Assistant Police Chief Jim Lawless, and City Clerk Sandy Chase. The executive session concluded at 7:05 p.m. The regular City Council meeting was called to order at 7:08 p.m. by Mayor Cooper in the Council Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Mike Cooper, Mayor Strom Peterson, Council President Steve Bernheim, Councilmember D. J. Wilson, Councilmember Michael Plunkett, Councilmember Lora Petso, Councilmember Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember ALSO PRESENT Peter Gibson, Student Representative STAFF PRESENT Jim Lawless, Assistant Police Chief Stephen Clifton, Community Services/Economic Development Director Lorenzo Hines, Finance Director Rob Chave, Planning Manager Gina Coccia, Planner Scott Snyder, City Attorney Sandy Chase, City Clerk Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst. Jeannie Dines, Recorder 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mayor Cooper requested Item 13, Discussion and Potential Action on a Proposed Resolution Creating a Planning Committee to Consider a Regional Fire Authority, be moved to Item 8A. COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON, 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 DECEMBER 21, 2010. C. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #123003 THROUGH #123023 DATED DECEMBER 21, 2010 FOR $389,972.56, AND #123024 THROUGH #123171 DATED DECEMBER 29, 2010 FOR $247,255.55. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL DIRECT DEPOSIT AND CHECKS #50107 THROUGH #50135 DATED DECEMBER 20, 2010 FOR $621,822.20. Packet Page 243 of 299 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes January 4, 2011 Page 4 Council President Peterson suggested since a great deal of Councilmember Buckshnis’ time is taken by her leadership of the Citizen Levy Committee and both issues are on parallel tracks, another Councilmember be appointed to the RFA planning committee. COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. 1243, REPLACING COUNCILMEMBER ADRIENNE FRALEY-MONILLAS WITH COUNCILMEMBER LORA PETSO. Councilmember Plunkett asked whether more than three people could serve on the planning committee such as citizens. Mayor Cooper answered the statute that created RFAs is very clear that the planning committee consist of three elected officials from each jurisdiction. Their meetings are subject to the Open Public Meetings Act. He remarked Fire District 1 has three Fire Commissioners on the planning commission, Fire Chief Widdis and other staff routinely attend the meetings. Because three members of the Fire District Board of Commissioners constitutes a quorum, the planning committee meetings are noticed as a special meeting. Citizens cannot be voting members of the committee but it is beneficial to have citizen input at the planning committee meetings. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 9. PUBLIC HEARING ON HOME OCCUPATIONS (ECDC 20.20) - A PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENT THAT ADDRESSES THE ISSUES OF PERMIT TYPE, PROCESS AND COST, INCLUDING THE DEGREE THAT CUSTOMERS, EMPLOYEES OR SIGNAGE SHOULD BE PERMITTED FOR HOME OCCUPATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES (FILE NO. AMD20100016). Planner Gina Coccia explained ECDC was currently under review and amendments are proposed to meet the following purposes: streamline the home occupation process, reduce fees to small business owners, support home based work and preserve the residential character of neighborhoods. On May 11, 2010 the Community Services/Development Services Committee directed staff to work with the Planning Board on this issue. The Planning Board discussed this item at their July 14 and October 14 meetings and the Code Enforcement Officer provided his opinions at the October 14 meeting. Minutes of the Planning Board meetings are contained in Exhibit 4. The Planning Board held a public hearing on November 10 and forwarded a recommendation to the Council which is contained in Exhibit 1. ECDC 21.40.040 defines home occupation as an economic enterprise operated within a dwelling unit or buildings accessory to a dwelling unit incidental and secondary to the residential use of the dwelling unit including the use of a dwelling unit as a business address in the phone directory or as a post office mailing address. Currently when home occupation applications are submitted to the City Clerk’s office, they are routed to various departments for consideration of compliance with applicable codes. Under the current process, a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is available for any business that does not meet all the home occupation criteria in Title 20.20. A CUP requires a public hearing before the Hearing Examiner and costs $1,550. One of the proposed changes is an Administrative CUP, a Type II administrative staff decision with a fee of $585. Ms. Coccia reviewed existing criteria for permitting a home occupation contained in Exhibit 2: 1. Is carried on exclusively by a family member residing in the dwelling unit; and 2. Is conducted entirely within the structures on the site, without any significant outside activity; and 3. Uses no heavy equipment, power tools or power sources not common to a residence; and 4. Has no pickup or delivery by business related commercial vehicles (except for the U.S. Mail) which exceeds 20,000 pounds gross vehicle weight; and 5. Creates no noise, dust, glare, vibration, odor, smoke or other impact adverse to a residential area beyond that normally associated with residential use; and Packet Page 244 of 299 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes January 4, 2011 Page 5 6. Does not include any employees outside of the family members residing at the residence, including but not limited to persons working at or visiting the subject property; and 7. All performance criteria established pursuant to ECDC 17.60.010 Ms. Coccia referred to a matrix in Exhibit 3 that compares other cities’ home occupations review processes. For example, Shoreline allows one non-family employee, Lynnwood allows one customer per hour between 9:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. but no employees or vehicles on or near the site, and Mercer Island does not have a land use process for home occupations, it is complaint driven. The Planning Board also considered new definitions; a home occupation for urban farming is defined as the display or sale of edible farm products or fresh produce grown onsite, an artist studio, defined as the display or sale of handmade products, artwork that is produced on site. Items or artwork created offsite are not included in the definition. She proposed the following process change: staff would evaluate proposals to ensure adequate parking for customers and employees, appropriate signage scale and design, protect the neighborhood from degradation from vehicles parking offsite, indiscrete signage. The administrative CUP Type II application process is currently used for accessory dwelling units and tree cutting permits. When evaluating how the code could/should be changed she suggested the Council and citizens consider more examples of home occupation such as a construction company, part-time music teacher, busy massage therapist, part-time hair dresser, an accounting firm, or a martial arts instructor with a home studio. The Planning Board asked themselves several questions – which types of businesses would a neighbor or passerby notice? Which types of impacts are important to consider in a neighborhood setting? How could the code be rewritten so that neighbors do notice an impact to the residential quality? How should the City regulate home occupations? What is the difference between visits from employees and customers? What impacts would urban farmers and artist studios have? Home occupation is a permitted secondary use in all R zones; the primary use must still be residential. The Planning Board and staff agree a $1,550 Type III-B CUP heard by the Hearing Examiner is not necessarily appropriate. Staff can conduct the same review via a Type II permit to analyze proposals on a case-by-case basis. Public notice, public comment periods and a sign are still required as part of the Type II process. Ms. Coccia explained the intent of residential zones was to protect residential uses from noise, odor, dust and heavy truck traffic that may result from more intense uses. The proposed changes would outright allow employees, customers and signage. The Planning Board considered whether that would fit with residential zones. She summarized the proposed changes in Exhibit 1 would allow some things to be permitted outright such as customers and employees which would streamline the process. Under the current process, a home occupation that included employees and/or customers would require a CUP. Another option would be to retain the current code and only change the process. Ms. Coccia reviewed the changes proposed in Exhibit 1: 1. Reference to the City’s Community Sustainability Element of the Comprehensive Plan was added to the Purpose section (20.20.000). 2. One employee would be permitted outright (20.20.010.A.6). Currently no employees are permitted to visit the site. This is a major change to the code. 3. Reference to the commercial vehicle standards from ECDC 17.50.100 was inserted, warning folks that a separate review process is required if they would like to have a commercial vehicle in excess of 10,000 pounds GVW. Packet Page 245 of 299 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes January 4, 2011 Page 6 4. The home occupation could have one visit by a vehicle per hour between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. (20.20.010.A.9). This implies that the vehicle could contain more than one customer. Currently no customers are permitted to visit the site. This is a major change to the code. 5. A section was deleted that explains how a business license can be revoked if it is found that a customer visited the premises, because it is recommended that the code be amended to allow customers. 6. If a business can not meet the permitted use criteria outright, then a conditional use permit is required. The process was changed (ECDC 20.20.010.B) so that the conditional use permit review is administrative and conducted by staff as a “Type II” permit ($585) instead of going to the Hearing Examiner for review ($1,550). This is a major change to the code. 7. A section was deleted that describes how traffic from customers should not be generated from outside the neighborhood (ECDC 20.10.010.B.5). This is impossible to document and enforce. 8. Regulations added that require not more than one employee to visit per day, not more than one customer vehicle per hour, and prohibits customers from coming to visit at night between 9:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. The Code Enforcement Office stated at the Planning Board meeting this is on the honor system and impossible to enforce. 9. Regulations added that require the applicant to prove there is sufficient parking (for three vehicles) if they would like to have customers or employees. 10. Two new definitions were created: “Urban Farming” and “Artist Studio” along with associated regulations (20.10.010.C and 20.10.010.D). 11. A section on prohibited home occupations was deleted. 12. Commercial signage in residential zones was discussed. Currently, the sign code allows residents to erect a 4 square foot sign in residential zones (e.g. “The Smith Family”) without a building permit, but the home occupation code did not allow commercial signs outright (e.g. “Smith’s Accounting Services”). A section was changed to clarify that commercial signage would be allowed, so long as the total residential signage does not exceed the allowed 4 square feet. Also, that a building permit is required so review can be conducted. 13. The current code allows for an applicant to ask the Hearing Examiner for anything that isn’t outright permitted with their conditional use permit application. The Planning Board agreed that the process should be changed to allow staff to conduct the conditional use permit review. Ms. Coccia explained one detail may have been overlooked during the last draft revision. As written, the recommended code does not allow the applicant to ask staff for anything that is not outright permitted; Sections 20.20.010.B.4, 2020.010.B.5 and 20.20.010.B.6 place limitations on customers and employee visits. Staff recommends the City Council hold a public hearing on this topic to discuss the pros and cons of each potential change, and at the conclusion of the public hearing, direct the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance to implement the Planning Board’s recommendation. Councilmember Plunkett asked whether there was a standard for the number of customers per hour under the existing CUP process. Ms. Coccia answered no; it was part of the review. Councilmember Plunkett referred to the proposed change that would require the applicant to prove there is sufficient parking. He asked how an applicant proved they had sufficient parking, what is the definition of sufficient parking and was the parking required to be off-street. Ms. Coccia answered under the current CUP process, the applicant submits a site plan and identifies where vehicles could be parked onsite. At the public hearing additional on-street parking may be referenced. Under the proposed administrative CUP, she anticipated an applicant could submit with their business license application a site plan that shows available parking. Packet Page 246 of 299 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes January 4, 2011 Page 7 Councilmember Plunkett asked whether under the proposed staff review the parking could be onsite or offsite. Ms. Coccia answered parking was required to be provided onsite. Councilmember Plunkett clarified the requirement was parking for three vehicles onsite. Councilmember Plunkett anticipated making three amendments and asked whether this item would need to be referred back to the Planning Board. City Attorney Scott Snyder answered following the public hearing, the Council could refer changes to the Planning Board or the Council could approve changes as long as they were within the range of alternatives considered by the Planning Board. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if the proposed changes would affect all zones. Ms. Coccia answered only R zones, single family and multi family residential. Councilmember Buckshnis observed enforcement was complaint based or the honor system. Ms. Coccia stated that is the current process. Councilmember Buckshnis commented other areas promote co-op artist studios and shared office space. She asked how this issue arose, if it was an effort to reduce greenhouse emissions or promote home businesses. Ms. Coccia stated the City frequently has to inform home occupation applicants that they are unable to have customers unless they complete the $1,550 CUP process. Councilmember Buckshnis asked how many people have objected. Ms. Coccia referred to testimony at the Planning Board public hearing. Student Representative Gibson inquired about the height limit for signage. Ms. Coccia advised the sign code chapter, ECDC 20.60 contains sign regulations. Student Representative Gibson referred to the proposed restriction on vehicles visiting the residence from 9:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m. and asked if customers could walk to the residence during those hours. Ms. Coccia answered the Planning Board discussed customers and it was changed to vehicles. She agreed that was unclear. Mayor Cooper opened the public participation portion of the public hearing. Jonathan Bannister, Edmonds, Executive Director, Pacific Northwest Budo Association, expressed his support for the changes proposed by staff to ECDC 20.20 with regard to home occupations. As stated in his remarks to the Planning Board, he has been a martial arts and cultural arts instructor for many years. Until two years ago, he operated a very successful school in Seattle which collapsed due to the economic downturn. He now has a small number of students who would like to continue practicing in his home studio. He described his practice of martial arts since the age of 8, traveling the world teaching tens of thousands of people. He wanted to bring students to Edmonds because it is a remarkable place for those interested in artistic endeavors and he would like to bring the refined arts he has studied to Edmonds. The practices he engages in are very self-disciplined, quiet and would contribute to the quality of life in Edmonds. He expressed his gratitude to the efforts of staff and the Council who brought this issue forward. He also expressed his admiration and satisfaction with the Planning Board’s process. Rick Spellman, Edmonds, expressed his vehement opposition and great concern with the proposed changes to the home occupation section of the ECDC. The changes have the potential over time to completely and permanently erode the single family residential zones which also devalue Edmonds neighborhoods. He found it unfair to residents who purchased homes in single family zones for the purpose of what the zones have to offer – single residential, family-friendly neighborhoods – to abruptly change the zone to allow business-oriented traffic, noise and pollution. He disagreed that limiting the number of trips to home occupation businesses will preserve the character of residentially zoned neighborhoods, finding the proposal would disrupt the peace, quiet and clean air of single family, friendly residential areas and not preserve its character. The proposed change would allow 13 vehicles to visit a home occupation between 8:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. plus one employee vehicle. If there were three allowed businesses in a neighborhood that would equate to 84 trips per day. The proposal does not limit the number of home occupation businesses allowed in a neighborhood; a single block, dead-end street or cul- Packet Page 247 of 299 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes January 4, 2011 Page 8 de-sac could be greatly impacted. He posed several questions such as 13 customers arriving in the first 4 hours, how a business would be closed to customers if the number of vehicles were exceeded for the day, and whether most homes had driveway space for three vehicles. With only one Code Enforcement Officer in the City he anticipated affected neighbors would be required to provide enforcement, pitting neighbors against each other. He was dismayed that the Planning Board had allowed such a vague a proposal with such questionable benefit to be approved. He summarized it may be called home occupation zoning but he felt it was commercial zoning. (Councilmember Fraley-Monillas left the meeting at 8:00 p.m.) Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, agreed with Mr. Spellman’s comments. He recalled concern in the past with customers visiting a dentist who operated his practice in Talbot Park. He suggested Councilmembers consider how they would react if a home occupation were located in their neighborhood. He suggested this be the beginning of the discussion, publicizing the matter and holding a second public hearing, anticipating more citizens would testify in the future. He questioned the size of vehicles that would be allowed to visit the residence, the size of allowed signage, and groups visiting a business versus one customer per hour. He suggested this topic needed further review. Mayor Cooper closed the public participation portion of the public hearing. Councilmember Plunkett referred to the comment that this was an abrupt change, pointing out there were permitted home occupations in neighborhoods today. Ms. Coccia explained the proposed changes would allow customers and employees outright. Councilmember Plunkett asked whether a home occupation could currently have customers. Ms. Coccia explained they could not without an approved CUP. Councilmember Plunkett commented a citizen such as Dr. Bannister could have a home occupation with customers today as long as he obtained a CUP. Councilmember Plunkett explained this topic began with a conversation he had with Dr. Bannister regarding the $1,550 expense of a CUP. The original concept was to allow staff review of a CUP to reduce the cost. He asked whether the existing code could be retained and simply change it to a staff- equivalent CUP. He asked what constituted a staff-equivalent CUP. Ms. Coccia explained a Type II administrative staff decision is a CUP and property owners within 300 feet of the property are notified, a sign is placed on the property and notice is published the same as a public hearing. If a neighbor wanted to appeal the staff decision, it would be heard by the Hearing Examiner at a public hearing. Councilmember Plunkett asked whether the applicant would be required to pay an appeal fee to the Hearing Examiner. Ms. Coccia answered the appellant would pay the appeal fee. Councilmember Plunkett summarized a home occupant applicant would pay a $585 fee for the Type II review and the neighbors would be notified. Ms. Coccia explained neighbors with concerns/comments could contact staff before the close of the comment period. Staff would analyze their concerns in the staff report and reach a decision. If any party of record disagrees with the decision, they have the right to appeal. Councilmember Plunkett observed the Council could theoretically retain the provisions in the existing code and the Type II review would lower the cost from $1,550 to $585. Ms. Coccia agreed. Councilmember Petso asked if a CUP could be revoked if “something went wrong” such as groups of customers visiting a business. Ms. Coccia stated it would become a code enforcement issue at that point. Councilmember Plunkett asked how revising the fee could be accomplished. Mr. Snyder advised fees were established via resolution; if the Council instructed, staff could revise the fee and schedule it on a future agenda. Packet Page 248 of 299 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes January 4, 2011 Page 9 Councilmember Bernheim commented in spite of comments regarding negative effects of home occupations, he was supportive of expanding the availability of a home occupation to residents. He remarked the agenda memo was one of the best he had seen and included a redline version of the code, background materials, etc. If problems developed such as vehicles interfering with the neighborhood character or too many businesses opening that changed the character, there were remedies available. He commented the reason for increasing the availability of home occupations was due to the number of people out of work who are unable to legally have a home occupation that has an employee. He experienced that difficulty himself. He anticipated residential neighborhoods would have more professional activities in the future. Councilmember Wilson agreed with Councilmember Bernheim’s comments. COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BERNHEIM, TO DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE AN ORDINANCE TO IMPLEMENT THE PLANNING BOARD’S RECOMMENDATIONS. COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETSO, TO AMEND EXHIBIT 1, PAGE 2, ITEM 6 TO DELETE THE AMENDED LANGUAGE SO THAT IT READS, “DOES NOT INCLUDE ANY EMPLOYEES…” Councilmember Wilson recalled he originally started his business in his home. He did not have any customers but hired an employee and an intern who worked in an extra room. When he learned he could no longer operate a successful business with an employee and an intern working in a room, he rented an office but he was able to grow his business by starting with one employee and an intern in his home. His neighbors on both sides have home occupation businesses. He acknowledged the intent of the amendment was good but in his experience, if a business was doing well enough to have 13 customer visits a day, they would need an outside office to serve more customers. He did not want to prohibit people from growing their business by prohibiting employees. The concerns are legitimate but in his experience were more likely theoretical than practical. Councilmember Petso did not perceive the amendment as prohibiting people from growing their business. The code states a home occupation can be approved outright without employees; for a person to grow their business and add an employee would require a Type II review process. Councilmember Bernheim stated he would not support the amendment as one employee was a small number and in these difficult economic times, home occupations were important. He doubted neighbors would be asking staff to review the impact of one employee on their neighborhood’s character. Mayor Cooper stated his wife has a home occupation but has no customers that visit their residence or any employees. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION TIED (3-3), COUNCILMEMBERS PETSO, PLUNKETT AND BUCKSHNIS VOTING YES; AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON AND COUNCILMEMBERS WILSON AND BERNHEIM VOTING NO. (Councilmember Fraley- Monillas was not present for the vote.) MAYOR COOPER VOTED NO, AND THE AMENDMENT FAILED (3-4). COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT MOVED TO AMEND EXHIBIT 1, PAGE 2, ITEM 9 TO READ, “DOES NOT INCLUDE VISITS FROM CUSTOMERS IN EXCESS OF ONE VEHICLE EVERY TWO HOURS PER HOUR…” MOTION FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BERNHEIM, TO AMEND EXHIBIT 1, PAGE 3, ITEM 7, TO READ, “IF VISITS TO THE SITE ARE TO BE Packet Page 249 of 299 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes January 4, 2011 Page 10 MADE BY EITHER AN OFF-SITE EMPLOYEE OR CUSTOMER, ON-SITE PARKING SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR AT LEAST TWO (2) THREE (3) VEHICLES; AND” Student Representative Gibson asked if the change assumed the homeowner had another parking space as the proposal for three parking spaces provided parking for the homeowner, one employee and one customer. Ms. Coccia explained any single family residential zone was required to provide two onsite parking spaces which may be stacked. The intent of the proposal was to allow two stacked spaces in the driveway and one additional space for a total of three. Councilmember Plunkett summarized the intent of the proposed language was to accommodate a total of three vehicle regardless of who they belonged to. Ms. Coccia agreed. COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT WITHDREW HIS MOTION WITH THE AGREEMENT OF THE SECOND. Councilmember Plunkett referred to Exhibit 1, page 5, Item B regarding signs and asked if signs remained a CUP, could Item B be changed to a Type II review. Ms. Coccia agreed it could. COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETSO, TO AMEND EXHIBIT 1, PAGE 5, ITEM, B TO READ, “A SIGN IS PERMITTED IN CONJUNCTION WITH A TYPE II PERMIT.” Councilmember Wilson asked if the proposed language allows a sign with a home occupation permit and continues the existing authority under the CUP to allow a sign. Ms. Coccia explained a commercial sign is currently not permitted outright; a sign can be allowed via a CUP. Councilmember Plunkett clarified the proposed language would allow a sign outright. Ms. Coccia agreed, noting it also clarifies the difference between a commercial sign in a residential zone. Councilmember Plunkett summarized his amendment split the difference and would allow a sign via a Type II administrative staff decision. Councilmember Wilson supported home occupations but did not support allowing signs. The current code states a sign can be permitted via the CUP process which costs $1,550. The proposed language allows a 4 square foot sign and Councilmember Plunkett’s proposal is to split the difference. He preferred not to allow any signs for a home based business without a CUP process. Councilmember Bernheim expressed his opposition to the amendment, commenting a 4 square foot sign was very small. Councilmember Plunkett explained he proposed the amendment assuming the main motion would pass. If the Council was willing to give more scrutiny to signs as Councilmember Wilson suggested, he preferred to be more stringent. COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT WITHDREW THE AMENDMENT WITH THE AGREEMENT OF THE SECOND. COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO AMEND TO RETAIN THE EXISTING LANGUAGE IN EXHIBIT 1, PAGE 5, ITEM B, “A SIGN IS PERMITTED IN CONJUNCTION WITH A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.” Planning Manager Rob Chave pointed out the existing language allows via a CUP a home occupation to have an additional 3 square feet allocated to the home occupation sign. The proposed language states a home occupation sign is permitted but it is counted as part of the total 4 square feet allowed on residential property. The proposed language expanded the ability for a home occupation sign but restricted the total to 4 square feet and would not allow a total of 7 square feet of signage. Councilmember Wilson observed under the existing language a home occupation could have a total of 7 square feet of signage via a CUP. Packet Page 250 of 299 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes January 4, 2011 Page 11 Councilmember Wilson suggested the Council vote on the intent of the amendment and staff revise the ordinance accordingly, not allowing a total of 7 square feet and limiting signage to 4 square feet and require a CUP process. Council President Peterson clarified under the proposed language a home occupation could have a 4 square foot sign and could request a larger sign via a CUP. Under the existing language and the amendment, no sign was allowed without a CUP process. He asked whether the intent was to limit all residential home occupation signs. Councilmember Plunkett answered yes; his intent was to limit signs to a total of 4 square feet. Council President Peterson asked whether the amendment would also require an amendment to the sign code to limit a home occupation sign to 4 square feet. Councilmember Plunkett agreed that was his intent. Mr. Snyder relayed his understanding of the motion was to allow a home occupation sign via a CUP. There was not a proposal to change the last sentence in that item nor was there a proposal to change the 4 foot maximum in the sign code. The 4 square foot maximum would continue to apply and a portion of the sign could be used to reference a business if approval was granted via the CUP process. Councilmember Plunkett agreed that was his intent. Mr. Snyder summarized there would still be a 4 square foot limit regardless but the business could only be mentioned in the sign with a CUP. Councilmember Bernheim commented a homeowner could have a 4 square foot sign now; the only change was making it illegal to have the home occupation on that sign without a CUP. He was opposed to the amendment, preferring that people be allowed to have small signs that state anything they want including advertising their home business. Councilmember Plunkett clarified a sign advertising a home business would not be illegal, it would be conditional. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (4-2), COUNCILMEMBERS BUCKSHNIS, PLUNKETT, WILSON AND PETSO VOTING YES; AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON AND COUNCILMEMBER BERNHEIM VOTING NO. (Councilmember Fraley-Monillas was not present for the vote.) Councilmember Buckshnis asked whether neighbors were notified of a home occupation. Ms. Coccia answered there would be notification via a Type II administrative staff decision. The change was from a public hearing before the Hearing Examiner to a staff review; there would still be notification. MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED (4-2), COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT AND COUNCILMEMBER PETSO VOTING NO. (Councilmember Fraley-Monillas was not present for the vote.) 10. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Finis Tupper, Edmonds, referred to Councilmember Wilson’s questions of the Public Works Director Phil Williams following his comments at the last Council meeting regarding leakage from the City’s water system. He referred to the 2009 Water Efficiency Reports available on the Washington State Department of Health website that indicates Edmonds annual water leakage is 7.6%. He disputed Mr. Williams’ contention that the water leakage rates of other water purveyors were similar; Olympic View reported 4.4%, Alderwood Water reported 6.6% and Everett reported 2.3%. He asserted that in 2002 the City Council asked staff to look for leaks; he has been unable to ascertain who the City hired to look for the leaks. Next, he referred to the approval of an addendum to the Hearing Examiner service agreement on the December 21 Consent Agenda. The agreement has a non-assignment clause; he disagreed with the City Attorney’s determination that the new corporation was a successor entity, explaining if the old corporation was being dissolved and had no property or liabilities the new corporation was not a Packet Page 251 of 299 APPROVED DECEMBER 8TH CITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING BOARD MINUTES November 10, 2010 Chair Lovell called the meeting of the Edmonds Planning Board to order at 7:02 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Public Safety Complex, 250 – 5th Avenue North. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT Philip Lovell, Chair John Reed, Vice Chair Kevin Clarke Todd Cloutier Kristiana Johnson Valerie Stewart STAFF PRESENT Rob Chave, Planning Division Manager Mike Clugston, Planner Gina Coccia, Planner Karin Noyes, Recorder READING/APPROVAL OF MINUTES BOARD MEMBER STEWART MOVED THAT THE MINUTES OF OCTOBER 27, 2010 BE APPROVED AS AMENDED. BOARD MEMBER CLARKE SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA Chair Lovell added three items to the agenda under New Business: Planning Board Guidelines, Planning Board Student Representative, and Planning Board Vacancies. AUDIENCE COMMENTS No one in the audience expressed a desire to address the Board during this portion of the meeting. PUBLIC HEARING ON HOME OCCUPATIONS (ECDC 20.20) – A PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENT THAT ADDRESSES THE ISSUES OF PERMIT TYPE, PROCESS AND COST, INCLUDING THE DEGREE THAT CUSTOMERS, EMPLOYEES OR SIGNAGE SHOULD BE PERMITTED FOR HOME OCCUPATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES. (FILE NUMBER AMD20100016) Ms. Coccia reviewed the attachments in the Staff Report as follows:  Attachment 1 – Draft Code Amendments  Attachment 2 – Planning Board Meeting Minutes of October 13, 2010  Attachment 3 – Public Hearing Notice  Attachment 4 – Map of Arterial and Collector Streets Ms. Coccia recalled that on May 11th the City Council’s Community Services/Development Services Committee directed staff to work with the Planning Board to amend the home occupation code language. The intent of the proposed changes is to streamline the home occupation permit process, reduce fees to small business owners, support home-based work as a way for the City to be more sustainable, and preserve the residential character of the neighborhoods. The Planning Board Packet Page 252 of 299 APPROVED Planning Board Minutes November 10, 2010 Page 2 discussed the proposed amendments previously on July 14th and October 13th. The purpose of tonight’s hearing is to solicit public comment regarding the proposed amendments. At the conclusion of the public hearing and the Board’s deliberation, staff would invite the Planning Board to forward a recommendation to the City Council for action. She noted that the Home Occupation chapter (ECDC 20.20) was last revised 17 years ago under Ordinance 2951. Ms. Coccia reviewed the current definition for “home occupation” and explained that the current process requires a person who wants to operate a business out of their home to submit an application for a home occupation business license, which carries a fee of $100. A conditional use permit would also be required for any business that does not meet all of the home occupation criteria. A conditional use permit costs $1,550 and requires a public hearing before the Hearing Examiner. The proposed amendments include evaluating whether an administrative conditional use permit, which costs $585, would be equally as effective. Ms. Coccia further explained that, as per the current code, a home occupation shall be permitted if it meets the following criteria:  Is carried on exclusively by a family member residing in the dwelling unit.  Is conducted entirely within the structures on the site without any significant outside activity.  Uses no heavy equipment, power tools or power sources not common to a residence.  Has no pickup or delivery by business related commercial vehicles (except for the U.S. Mail) which exceeds 20,000 pounds gross vehicle weight.  Creates no noise, dust, glare, vibration, odor, smoke or other impact adverse to a residential area beyond that normally associate with residential uses.  Does not include any employees outside of the family members residing at the residence, including but not limited to persons working at or visiting the subject property.  Meets all performance criteria established pursuant to ECDC 17.60.010. Ms. Coccia reported that staff researched how home occupations are regulated in other jurisdictions and learned the following:  Shoreline allows one non-family employee to visit the site.  Lynnwood allows one customer per hour and no employees or vehicles are permitted on or near the site.  Mercer Island has no land use process for home occupations. Their regulations are complaint driven.  Woodinville allows limited customers and employees.  Mukilteo allows one employee.  Edmonds allows no employees and no customers. As discussed earlier by the Commission, Ms. Coccia said staff is proposing two new definitions:  Urban Farming – A home occupation for urban farming is defined as the display or sale of edible farm products or fresh produce grown on site. Selling products that are produced off site would not be permitted.  Artist Studio – A home occupation for an artist studio is defined as the display or sale of hand-made products (artwork) that are produced on site. Items or artwork created off site would not be included in the definition. Ms. Coccia referred to Attachment 4, which is a map identifying all of the collector and arterial streets in the City. She explained that staff considered options for mitigating potential traffic impacts associated with home occupations. The current code requires a conditional use permit for home occupations that include employees or customers. Conditional Use Permit applications are heard by the Hearing Examiner, and the fee is $1,550. If the goal is to ensure that customers and employees visiting a home occupation do not create a significant impact to the surrounding neighborhood, another option is to allow one employee outright if the home occupation is located on an arterial or collector street. Ms. Coccia asked that the Board consider the following questions:  What types of businesses would they notice if they were a neighbor or passerby?  What types of impacts are important in a neighborhood setting?  How could the code be rewritten so that neighbors do not notice an impact to their residential quality of life? Packet Page 253 of 299 APPROVED Planning Board Minutes November 10, 2010 Page 3  How should the City regulate home occupations?  What are the differences between visits from employees and customers?  A home occupation is a permitted secondary use in single-family zones. The primary use is still residential. How much should the permits cost? To help the Board review the above questions, Ms. Coccia shared examples of how the proposed code language would be applied in various scenarios:  Scenario 1 – A Massage Therapist with Customers. This home occupation would be permitted outright on Olympic View Drive because it is a minor arterial. However, if the use were located on Talbot Road, an administrative conditional use permit would be required. The cost of the conditional use permit would be $585, and a public notice would be required. The administrative decision would be appealable to the Hearing Examiner.  Scenario 2 – Urban Farmer. This type of home occupation would be allowed to have customers in excess of one vehicle per hour if located on 196th Street. The application would be reviewed through the business license process as long as a site plan can demonstrate that sufficient parking would be available. The regulations would be the same if the home occupation were located on Bowdoin Way.  Scenario 3 – Accountant and One Employee, Occasional Customers, and Signage. If this type of home occupation were located on 220th Street, it would be permitted outright as a secondary use, but the commercial sign would require a conditional use permit. If the home occupation were located on Olympic Avenue, an administrative conditional use permit would be required for employees, customers and signage. Ms. Coccia advised that the Board still needs to consider whether employees should be permitted the same as customers. They should also discuss whether commercial signs should require an administrative conditional use permit. She requested specific feedback regarding the following proposed changes:  Allowing home occupations on arterials and collectors to have a single employee and/or one customer per hour. If the Board feels this is appropriate, the draft proposal must be revised to reflect the change.  Otherwise requiring staff-approved conditional use permit for home occupations seeking customers, employees, and/or signage in residential areas not on a collector or arterial street. Staff could evaluate the proposal to ensure that there is adequate parking for customers/employees and that the signage is appropriate in scale and design. This would help protect the neighborhood from degradation by vehicles parking off site or by indiscreet signage, while saving the business owner extra time and $965 in permitting fees.  Allowing urban farmers and artist studios as long as a site plan, which is submitted with the business license application, can sufficiently reflect that the site should be able to accommodate additional vehicles (more than the two required for the primary residential use) in order to reduce impacts to the neighbors.  Allowing commercial wall signage through a home occupation staff-approved conditional use permit and subsequent building permit. Currently, one would have to apply for review by the Hearing Examiner in order to have signage. However, section 20.20.020.B of the current draft proposal could be clearer on the process for obtaining a commercial sign. In response to Chair Lovell’s request for clarification, Ms. Coccia explained that, as per the current code, home occupations are permitted as secondary uses if they meet all the criteria in ECDC 20.20.010.A. Only a business license ($100) would be required. Home occupations that do not meet all of the criteria are required to obtain a conditional use permit ($1,550). As per the draft proposal, applicants would be required to obtain an administrative conditional use permit ($585) if the use does not meet all of the criteria. The application would only go before the Hearing Examiner for review if an appeal to the administrative conditional use permit is filed. She noted that administrative conditional use permits cost much less than a conditional use permit that is heard by the Hearing Examiner. Chair Lovell referred to the matrix comparing the home occupation requirements for various jurisdictions. He noted that Woodinville has a process that costs $5,305. Ms. Coccia noted that the matrix was actually included as part of the October 13th Staff Report. She explained that a planner from Woodinville was unable to clearly explain their complicated process, and he noted that no one actually applies for this particular permit. Vice Chair Reed reminded the Board that setting fee Packet Page 254 of 299 APPROVED Planning Board Minutes November 10, 2010 Page 4 amounts is not within their purview. Ms. Coccia clarified that if the Board recommends approval of the amendment to change home occupation permits from Type IIIB (Hearing Examiner) to Type II (Administrative) decisions, the cost would be reduced from $1,550 to $585. Vice Chair Reed emphasized that the proposed amendment does not identify a fee amount. Vice Chair Reed referred to Section 20.20.010.A, which lists the criteria a home occupation application must meet in order to be permitted outright without a conditional use permit, and noted that only a business license would be required for these uses. Section 20.20.010.B outlines the process for reviewing home occupation applications that do not meet the criteria found in Section 20.20.010.A. He noted that Type II (administrative) decision are appealable to the Hearing Examiner. He questioned why the proposed language calls out the type of permit (Type II) rather than using the term administrative conditional use permit. Mr. Chave explained that staff tries to use the permit type reference wherever possible to avoid confusion in the code. However, the matrix in ECDC 20.02 identifies Type II decisions as staff approved conditional use permits that are appealable to the Hearing Examiner. Board Member Stewart referenced Sections 20.20.101.A.9, 20.20.010.B.5 and 20.20.020.C.3, which are inconsistent in how they describe the number of vehicles and/or people allowed to visit a home occupation. She reminded the Board that one goal of the proposed amendments is to minimize potential traffic impacts to neighborhoods. She also reminded them of the City’s Community Sustainability Element, which encourages alternative modes of transportation. She suggested the real intent is to limit the number of vehicle trips to a home occupation, and not the number of people. Therefore, she recommended the language in these three sections be changed to be consistent and to make the intent clear. The remainder of the Board concurred. Board Member Johnson suggested the Board consider following the example provided by Mercer Island, which regulates the employees and customers on a complaint basis. She recalled that at a previous meeting, the City’s Code Enforcement Officer, Mike Thies, indicated that he does not go out and count the number of visitors that come to a home occupation. Instead, issues are addressed on a complaint basis. She referred to the map provided in the Staff Report (Attachment 4) to identify collector and arterial streets in Edmonds. She noted that the functional classification map in the packet is out of date. It as updated and adopted in 2009 as part of the Transportation Element. Bowdoin Way is actually a collector street, and there are areas on 220th Street Southwest where parking is not allowed. Therefore, staff’s theory that the impacts would be less on arterial and collector streets that have higher functional classifications is illogical because there is an inverse relationship between land use and mobility. The higher the functional classification, the less likely there will be adequate on- street parking space to serve a home occupation. Since the home occupation code is enforced on a complaint basis, she suggested it would be appropriate to provide a qualitative measure that speaks about impacts to the residential neighborhood quality and addresses what actually occurs in the City. For example, to maintain a neighborhood quality, no more than two on-site vehicles at a time may visit the home occupation during business hours. Mr. Chave explained that qualitative standards are difficult to implement because there is no consistency and predictability. The City cannot tell someone that a home occupation is acceptable in one neighborhood and not another. Some residents may feel a home occupation fits into the neighborhood and some will not. The notion of limiting visitors to one per hour for home occupations is intended to keep traffic volumes commiserate with what is expected for a single-family residence (10 trips per day). Because there is already more traffic on collector and arterial streets than typical neighborhood streets, staff believes it would be appropriate to allow one visitor and one employee per hour without requiring an administrative conditional use permit. He summarized that the issue is less about available parking and more about traffic and the overall level of activity. He noted that a home occupation would be required to provide three off-street parking spaces regardless of the type of street it is located on. Board Member Johnson observed that allowing one visitor per hour could potentially triple the number of trips per day for a single-family residence. From her personal experience, she believes that some types of home occupations, such as a piano teacher, would not create significant impacts, even if located on cul-de-sacs. She reminded the Commission that the City’s intent is to encourage and promote home occupations. Board Member Clarke observed that it is challenging to have flexible codes that recognize different social and economic trends. Originally, the City consisted of the urban downtown core, with the occasional merchant living above his/her shop. This morphed into suburbia where residential neighborhoods were developed outside of the urban areas. The single-family Packet Page 255 of 299 APPROVED Planning Board Minutes November 10, 2010 Page 5 neighborhoods were designed for residential uses and did not allow business uses. In many cases, the infrastructure is very residential in character and designed to be residential friendly to allow children to play risk free, etc. Residential development on arterial and/or collector streets is a different type of arrangement and these property owners recognize that the volume and speed of traffic is much different. Board Member Clarke observed that residential neighborhoods have changed in recent years. It is not uncommon for electricians, plumbers, etc. to park their vehicles in residential neighborhoods. They either work from an office in their home, or they bring their vehicles home after work. He has also observed situations where truck drivers actually park their rigs in residential neighborhoods. Ms. Coccia emphasized that large trucks are not permitted to park in residential neighborhoods. Trucks that are under 20,000 pound gross weight are allowed. A conditional use permit would be required for a home occupation to park larger vehicles. Board Member Clarke agreed but noted that the code is only enforced on a complaint basis. He suggested that the weight of a vehicle has no relationship to its nuisance value. He noted that the impacts are the same whether a person works out of their home and commutes to various jobs or works from a different location and brings the vehicle home in the evenings. Therefore, the standards should be consistent for both types of uses. As proposed, only an electrician who works out of his/her home would be required to obtain a business license. Ms. Coccia pointed out that a business license is required for all home occupations. Board Member Clarke agreed but noted that is the only distinguishing factor between the two uses. The nuisance or size of the vehicle would likely be the same in both cases. Board Member Clarke also referred to a situation where a single-family property owner works on cars as a commercial enterprise. Ms. Coccia noted that this would not meet the criteria for a home occupation unless the activity takes place within an enclosed structure. Mr. Chave explained that an individual would be allowed to work on a car on his property without obtaining a business license, as long as he/she does not accept payment for the work. If they receive payment for their work, a business license would be required. He agreed that the impact to the neighborhood would be the same in both situations. Board Member Clarke expressed his belief that a subdivision with only one way in and out and with no clear street pattern is not really appropriate for commercial vehicles. Sometimes even mail carriers have difficulty getting through because there is no parking available on the streets. When there are open ditches, narrow streets, and very little on-street parking, it will be a real challenge for commercial vehicles to safely maneuver. He referred to the Capital Hill and Green Lake neighborhoods in Seattle where it is difficult to drive a car through much less park on the street because many of the single-family residential structures are now rented out to numerous individuals. He concluded that the home occupation standards must be balanced with what is going on in the community. Vice Chair Reed recalled the Board’s previous discussion about the nuisance regulations, which is a separate set of regulations that deal with some of the issues raised by Board Member Clarke regarding parking and how many people can live in a single-family residential unit. The nuisance ordinance is enforced on a complaint basis. Chair Lovell said Board Member Clarke’s point is well taken that there is a delicate balance between the rights of an individual private property owner and mitigating impacts of certain uses on the surrounding property owners. Mr. Chave said this issue is one reason staff introduced the idea of allowing home occupations on arterial and collector streets to have one employee without requiring a conditional use permit. He referred to Section 20.20.010.B.7, which states that three on- site parking spaces must be provided if visits to the site are made by either an off-site employee or customer. The standard off-site parking requirement for single-family residential development is two spaces per unit. Ms. Coccia noted the Board’s discussion has focused on how the amendments would be applied in single-family zones, but they should keep in mind that, as proposed, the home occupation section would also apply in multi-family zones. Michelle Noble, Edmonds, said she has been a massage therapist for 13 years and moved to Edmonds 1½ years ago, just a few months before her first child was born. Some people can argue that she should have checked the code first, but she assumed she would be allowed to operate a massage business out of her home. Now that she is ready to go back to work, she discovered she would not be allowed to do so unless she obtains a conditional use permit at a cost of $1,550, which is prohibitive for her family at this time. She said she is glad the Board is considering changes that make home occupations more achievable in Edmonds. Packet Page 256 of 299 APPROVED Planning Board Minutes November 10, 2010 Page 6 Ms. Noble referred to Board Member Clarke’s earlier comments about how residential and commercial areas have changed over the years. She said the current trend is towards home occupations that allow people to live and work in the same structure. She said she understands that traffic and signage are issues of concern, and that the small town charm of the community should be preserved. However, having the ability to obtain needed services from her neighborhood makes for a rich community. She said she hopes her business can be part of that. She said it would be difficult for her to get back into her business if she has to rent space outside of her home. She noted that she has space to park at least four cars on site, and she anticipates she would see up to five clients, three to four days per week. She suggested that since there is already a process in place for reviewing business licenses, it should not cost significantly more for staff to look at the factors associated with her home occupation and approve a conditional use permit to allow her to serve one customer at a time. Dr. Jonathan Bannister, Executive Director, Non-Profit Pacific Northwest Budo Association, said he is a four-year resident of Edmonds. He stated his full support for the changes proposed by staff related to home occupations. The proposed amendments are a move in the right direction. He also went on record as support the provision that home occupations visitors should be locate don arterial and collector streets. He said he was opposed to home occupation signage in excess of 24” x 48” in single-family residential zones. He said he supports the proposal that home occupations be allowed one customer per hour, but that one additional off-street parking space must be provided. He said he feels the hours of operation should match the noise ordinance restrictions that apply to any other type of activity in single-family residential zones (8 a.m. to 10 p.m.) Mr. Bannister explained that he has been a Japanese martial and cultural arts instructor for 27 years and has won numerous awards from arts organizations and civic leaders for his efforts to promote the arts and friendship between the people of the United States, Canada and Japan. He said he currently teaches two days a week at the Spartan Center in Shoreline, primarily the peaceful art of Aikido and a non-combative martial discipline of laido (Japanese swordsmanship). He also offers specialty classes in bonsai, Japanese traditional flower arranging, and Japanese brush calligraphy. Up until two years ago, he had a thriving school in Seattle, which graduated 74 black belts and introduced thousands of students to the beautiful traditional culture of Japan. However, he was forced to close his school due to the economic downturn, and he remains only partially employed. He said his students continue to train as best they can in recreation department classes in Shoreline, and they have managed to remain dedicated to their arts. Their small club continues to field artists who win awards and recognition in both national and international events. Mr. Bannister said he is dedicated to the personal mission of sharing the arts that have given him so much joy with the community. Japanese martial and cultural arts offer wonderful recreational opportunities, as well as fostering a social and civic mission that encourages character development, harmonious cooperation, peaceful conflict resolution, global citizenship, and abiding appreciation for natural and artistic beauty. He said he would like to support his small club of dedicated members by offering private instruction in his home in Edmonds. He explained that the scope of his endeavor would be something akin to that of a music teacher. Individual instruction would be offered at a rate of one person per hour. His home is connected to an arterial street, and they would require no signage. In addition, there is ample off-street parking and the facility is modern and up to code. Also, the formal cultural arts are practiced in relative silence, and he can foresee no negative impacts to the neighborhood. Mr. Bannister summarized that he is eager to bring his life-long experience in Japanese cultural arts to Edmonds in the form of a home occupation. He attempted to apply for a Type III-B Conditional Use Permit last year, but he was advised that the application would cost $1,500. Because their club is a non-profit that has been starved nearly to death during the recessions, they do not have the resources to put in to the application process. Cultural arts education is not able to command high rates for instructional services. With their limited student base, it would take nearly a year to recoup such an expense. He said he wants to obtain the property permits, and he strongly supports the proposal to offer Type II administration conditional use permits to small home occupations such as he envisions. The $585 cost would be more manageable and would allow them to recoup the investment in a few months. THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE HEARING WAS CLOSED. Packet Page 257 of 299 APPROVED Planning Board Minutes November 10, 2010 Page 7 Vice Chair Reed recalled that the Board has discussed the proposed amendments on two previous occasions, and they received good input from the public. He expressed his belief that the Board should be able to formulate a recommendation to the City Council at the conclusion of their discussion unless they want to make significant changes. Chair Lovell complimented staff for doing a good job of preparing draft language for the public hearing. He suggested the Board forward a recommendation of adoption to the City Council, with the recommendation that they consider reducing the fee for an administrative conditional use permit to $200. This would be similar to the fee charged by other jurisdictions for similar types of permits. He expressed his support for the proposed amendments given the economic conditions and the fact that the City is trying to promote home occupations as an element of sustainability. Board Member Cloutier suggested that before a motion is made to forward the amendments to the City Council, the Board should address the questions raised by staff. He summarized that the Board previously agreed that the language should be consistent as it relates to customers and vehicles. He suggested it would be appropriate to allow one vehicle per hour and then let common sense be the enforcement. The Board agreed that Sections 20.20.010.A.9, 20.20.010.B5, and 20.20.020.C.3 should all be changed to read, “visits from customers in excess of one vehicle per hour.” Vice Chair Reed referred to Board Member Johnson’s earlier recommendation and explained that one reason to set limits is to give people an idea of what the City expects. If the City does not have any qualifications, they will be stuck with what they get. Limiting customers to one vehicle per hour communicates to citizens regarding the amount of additional traffic that would be allowed. It provides guidance to people who want to establish home occupations. Board Member Cloutier pointed out that, in the end, code enforcement is complaint driven. Board Member Johnson said she is not opposed to some quantifiable measures, but those proposed in the draft amendments are not logical and not enforceable. The measures should be more directly tied to the residential nature of the neighborhood. She recommended the language be based more on current reality, which is that the code is enforced on a complaint-driven basis. If a home occupation is found to be incompatible with a neighborhood, people should be invited to contact the City to share their concerns, which could be defined in terms of nuisances or impacts. Unless you can actually measure what you are trying to regulate, it does not seem like a good way to go. Chair Lovell expressed his belief that removing the limit on the number of vehicles per hour would be counterproductive. Board Member Johnson countered that if the City wants to encourage the regulation of home occupations, they should take out this measure and replace it with a measurable standard that is fair and can be applied consistently and equally. Chair Lovell observed that if the language does not specifically limit the number of vehicles per hour, the City would not have the ability to address complaints they receive about a home occupation creating too much traffic. Board Member Johnson recalled that Mr. Thies previously indicated that the majority of complaints the City receives regarding home occupations are related to contractors and landscapers who have employees that tend to congregate at the start of the work day. He also discussed that homeowners could have Tupperware parties out of their homes, but they cannot be distributors unless they obtain a business license. She referred to Section 20.20.020.C, which lists the types of uses they want to avoid. She suggested that this section could be used as a basis for determining the appropriateness of a home occupation permit. Chair Lovell shared his belief that limiting customers to one vehicle per hour would set a reasonable benchmark for measurement. If the City does not have something to measure against, staff will not have clear direction as to what they are trying to create. He noted that Section 20.20.020.C is a list of reasons for denial, and he presumes that this same list could be used as a basis for revoking a home occupation permit. However, he felt it would be unreasonable to allow a neighboring property owner to cite Item C.3 (more than one vehicle per hour) as a reason to revoke a permit just because occasionally the vehicles coming to the business overlap. Board Member Johnson said that, currently, the code does not allow a home occupation to have any vehicles, customers or employees associated. This is too strict, and the current proposal should be revised to address complaints the City receives most frequently. Board Member Stewart summarized that Board Member Johnson is suggesting a subjective approach related to residential quality. The problem with that approach is that everyone has a different perception of quality and what they want to occur Packet Page 258 of 299 APPROVED Planning Board Minutes November 10, 2010 Page 8 on their neighborhood street. It is important to have guidelines to serve as a benchmark so staff can base their ruling on the code requirements. Board Member Clarke suggested the issue is not as simple as the proposed amendments make it seem. The home occupation regulations apply to both single-family and multi-family residential zones, and some condominium and neighborhood associations have private covenants that prohibit business uses. People who purchase homes in these developments have an expectation that the covenants will be enforced. He expressed concern about allowing certain types of uses in all residential zones, when they are specifically prohibited by some neighborhood covenants. Mr. Chave agreed that some private covenants run counter to what the City’s code allows, but this is not something the City can regulate. The City does not enforce private covenants. Board Member Clarke also expressed concern that if home occupations are allowed in multi-family residential zones, there could be, in theory, home occupations in most or all of the condominiums in a development. Mr. Chave agreed that would be true as per the current proposal. He advised that the Board could decide that the rules for home occupations in multi- family residential zones should be different than those for single-family residential zones. For example, because a higher density is already allowed and traffic is more significant, they could restrict home occupations in the multi-family residential zones from having customers. Ms. Coccia requested the Board consider the following points as they continue their discussion:  Is it necessary to allow both customers and employees outright, and what are the differences between these two types of visitors? She recommended the Board include the provision that allows employees or customer visits outright if a home occupation is located on an arterial or collector street. This provision was not included in the current proposal because it had not yet been discussed by the Board.  What is the importance of signage to the business owner and the impacts to the neighbors? The current code does not allow commercial signage in single-family residential zones without a conditional use permit. Perhaps commercial signs should be prohibited in order to maintain the residential character of the neighborhood. Mr. Chave recalled that, at their last meeting, the Board discussed that it would be appropriate to allow commercial signage for home occupations, as long as it is no greater than 4 square feet in size. This would be consistent with the size of residential signage already allowed by code in single-family residential zones. Ms. Coccia noted that this concept was incorporated into the draft proposal.  If the Board is unhappy with the threshold proposed by staff (arterial and collector streets), they could require an administrative conditional use permit for all home occupations. If this were the case, staff would review all home occupation permit applications. Those that would not have employees or customers would be approved outright. Board Member Clarke said he is concerned about allowing wall signs in single-family residential zones. He also asked if the code would allow the signs to be illuminated. Mr. Chave explained that the current code requires a conditional use permit for commercial signs in single-family residential zones, and the content is limited to business identification. The single- family residential zone allows residential signage of up to four square feet in size and the content is not regulated. Board Member Stewart expressed her belief that it is not in keeping with the character of the residential neighborhood to allow commercial signage. She expressed her belief that signage would not really be necessary in a residential community. Vice Chair Reed pointed out that the words “conditional use permit” should be deleted from the first sentence of Section 20.20.020.C. Mr. Chave agreed. Board Member Johnson asked staff to explain the fee associated with a business license to operate an artist studio or urban farm as a home occupation. Ms. Coccia answered that an applicant would apply for a business license, which has an associated fee of $100. The home occupation permit request would be reviewed by staff as part of the business license process. If an application meets all of the criteria in Section 20.20.010.A, staff would approve the permit without a conditional use permit. The total cost of the permit would be $100. If an application does not meet the criteria in Section 20.20.010.A, an administrative conditional use permit would be required at a cost of $585. Board Member Cloutier voiced his belief that it would be appropriate to allow home occupations to have one employee, regardless of whether it is located on an arterial/collector street or not. He felt it would be no different than having someone Packet Page 259 of 299 APPROVED Planning Board Minutes November 10, 2010 Page 9 visit a single-family home. He also said he is comfortable that staff’s proposal to allow one customer per hour without a conditional use permit if the home occupation is located on an arterial or collector street would adequately address traffic issues. He suggested that Section 20.20.010.A.6 be changed to read, “Does not include more than one employee outside of the family members residing at the residence.” To address the Board’s concern about the definition of “family,” Mr. Chave advised that the code defines “family” as “related individuals or up to five unrelated individuals.” He noted that this definition is based on the Federal Fair Housing Law requirements. Board Member Johnson said she does not want to tie the “one customer per hour” provision to the type of street it is located on. She shared her experience with an artist studio that is located off Talbot Road. The owner has a long driveway and sufficient parking space to accommodate customers without impacting the neighbors. Board Member Cloutier pointed out that, as proposed, art studios and urban farmers would be allowed one customer per hour regardless of location. Board Member Johnson suggested the Board eliminate Section 20.20.010.A.9, which requires an administrative conditional use permit for home occupations with customers that are not located on arterial or collector streets. She reminded the Board of their desire to encourage home-based businesses, and having a lower fee would be a step in the right direction. The remainder of the Board concurred. Board Member Cloutier suggested that small commercial signs be allowed for home occupations because he felt traffic would be reduced if people could easily locate their destination without having to circle back around. He felt that a limitation of 4 square feet in size would be sufficient to identify a business. He recommended the word “wall” be removed from the first sentence in Section 20.20.020.B to read. The majority of the Board concurred. Mr. Chave advised that he would double check the code to make sure illuminated signs are prohibited in residential zones. Board Member Cloutier noted that the Board previously agreed to change the threshold for requiring a conditional use permit. Therefore, staff’s third question is no longer an issue. Home occupation applications that do not meet the criteria in Section 20.20.010.A (as modified) will be required to obtain an administrative conditional use permit, which would provide an opportunity for public input regarding the application. Board Member Clarke recalled staff’s earlier request for direction regarding temporary structures associated with home occupations. Ms. Coccia said her comments were related to an urban farmer type of home occupation, in which the business owner sets up a small stand to sell items they produce on site. Mr. Chave pointed out that permits would not be required for temporary stands, and they would not have to meet the setback requirements. However, they would have to be taken down each night. He noted that these standards are found in the “temporary structure” section of the code. Permanent structures would only be allowed if the structure can meet all of the requirements of the zone. VICE CHAIR REED MOVED THAT THE BOARD FORWARD THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO ECDC 20.20 (HOME OCCUPATIONS) TO THE CITY COUNCIL AS REVISED WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL. BOARD MEMBER CLOUTIER SECONDED THE MOTION. Board Member Johnson recalled that when the Board initially discussed the proposed amendments, they talked about several exceptions to the rule, one being the annual artist tour and art sales that result in more than one customer per hour. She asked what the City’s positions would be on these types of events. Ms. Coccia noted that these uses are temporary and sponsors do not typically apply for a business license. Therefore, the City does not regulate the uses. Chair Lovell agreed that these types of events would not be construed as home occupations. Instead, they would be one-time events. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Chair Lovell recommended the Board forward a recommendation to the City Council asking them to consider reducing the administrative conditional use permit fee, which is currently set at $585. Mr. Chave explained that fees are set at an amount that allows the City to recover their administrative costs. A Hearing Examiner process is more costly than a staff decision, but there is a cost associated with staff decisions, as well. Packet Page 260 of 299 APPROVED OCTOBER 27TH CITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING BOARD MINUTES October 13, 2010 Vice Chair Reed called the meeting of the Edmonds Planning Board to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Public Safety Complex, 250 – 5th Avenue North. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT John Reed, Vice Chair Todd Cloutier Kristiana Johnson Valerie Stewart BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT Philip Lovell, Chair (Excused) Kevin Clarke STAFF PRESENT Rob Chave, Planning Division Manager Gina Coccia, Planner Mike Clugston, Planner Brian McIntosh, Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Director Mike Thies, Code Enforcement Officer Rich Lindsay, Parks Maintenance Manager Karin Noyes, Recorder READING/APPROVAL OF MINUTES BOARD MEMBER CLOUTIER MOVED FOR APPROVAL OF THE SEPTEMBER 22, 2010 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES AS AMENDED. BOARD MEMBER STEWART SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA Item 7c (Home Occupations) was placed before Item 7a (Wireless Telecommunication Facilities). The remainder of the agenda was accepted as presented. AUDIENCE COMMENTS There was no one present to address the Board during this portion of the meeting. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING ON RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO THE STREET TREE PLAN ELEMENT OF THE EDMONDS STREETSCAPE PLAN Mr. McIntosh reviewed that on July 14, 2010 staff presented recommendations, and the Planning Board provided input for updating the Street Tree element of the Streetscape Plan. A hearing was held on August 11, 2010. Due to the number of suggestions, the Board agreed to continue the hearing to a later date so that the document could be updated prior to the Board’s final recommendation to the City Council. He reminded the Board that the Street Tree Element was approved by the City Council in 2006 as part of the Edmonds Streetscape Plan. Mr. McIntosh explained that, in response to concerns regarding removal and replacement of street trees, particularly in the downtown, the City Council requested a review of the Street Tree Plan element. This review was held on May 26, 2009 and concluded with the City Council recommending changes to better reflect current practices in removing and replanting trees, specifically the caliper of replacement trees. Subsequent to the May 26th meeting, the question of replacing or retaining the mature trees at and near 5th Avenue and Dayton Street was discussed several times throughout the last summer and fall. At Packet Page 261 of 299 APPROVED Planning Board Minutes October 13, 2010 Page 4 recognized that the main thrust of the proposed amendments is to address trees in the downtown that have gotten so large they are damaging the sidewalks, yet people do not want them to be removed. He referred to the list contained in the proposed Street Tree Plan, which provides guidelines for where street trees can be located. He expressed his belief that these guidelines would severely limit a property owner’s ability to plant trees. He recommended the Board start over and create a simpler document that identifies the goal, as well as the types of trees that are allowed and those that are not. If too much language is included in the plan, the average citizen might not take the time to review the document. THERE WAS NO ONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO EXPRESSED A DESIRE TO ADDRESS THE BOARD. THEREFORE, THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE HEARING WAS CLOSED. Vice Chair Reed referred to the last sentence in the “Design” section on Page 120, which states that blocking of business signage, marquees and window displays should be avoided. BOARD MEMBER CLOUTIER MOVED THAT THE BOARD FORWARD THE RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO THE STREET TREE PLAN ELEMENT OF THE STREETSCAPE PLAN AS PROPOSED, WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL. BOARD MEMBER STEWART SECONDED THE MOTION. Board Member Cloutier reminded Mr. McIntosh that he agreed to review the written recommendations submitted by Ms. Paine and determine if any of them are appropriate for inclusion at this time. Board Member Johnson commended Mr. McIntosh for doing an excellent job of incorporating all of the issues and concerns raised at the last public hearing. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. On behalf of the Board, Vice Chair Reed expressed appreciation for the years of service Mr. McIntosh has provided to the City and the Parks Department. He wished him success in his retirement. Mr. McIntosh commented that the current Board, as well as previous Boards, has always been advocates for parks, recreation, and cultural services, and he appreciates their efforts as a Parks Board. CONTINUED DISCUSSION ON HOME OCCUPATIONS (FILE NUMBER AMD20100016) Ms. Coccia explained that the purpose of the proposed amendments is to streamline the process and criteria and to support home-based businesses while preserving the residential character of the neighborhoods. As requested by the Board, she announced that Mr. Thies, Code Enforcement Officer, was present to answer questions from the Board and to give examples of the types of businesses for which he receives the most complaints. She referred the Board to the draft document, which was recently updated to incorporate the Board’s comments from their last discussion. She specifically invited the Board to comment regarding the following:  A new definition was added for the term, “urban farming.” An example of an urban farmer is someone who has chickens and wants to sell eggs.  Staff is leaning towards limiting the number of customers and the time frame for which they would be allowed to visit home occupations. She suggested they review the various types of potential home businesses (piano teachers, massage therapists, real estate agents, etc.), and identify how this type of limitation would impact these activities.  Should employees be allowed to visit the home occupation site? If so, what should the parking requirement be to ensure there is adequate space for customers and employees to park without impacting the neighborhood? The current code requires three parking spaces for home occupations, but tandem parking spaces will be counted.  The current draft adds criteria for which a home occupation could be approved. All applications that meet the criteria found in Section 20.20.010.A would be outright permitted and a business license would be issued. All other home occupation applications could be approved as a staff decision based on the criteria in Section 20.20.010.B. Staff decisions are appealable to the Hearing Examiner. The current code requires home occupations in the latter category to go before the Hearing Examiner for approval, and the application cost is $1,500.  Section 20.20.010.A.4 indicates that no pickup or delivery by business-related commercial vehicles is allowed, except for the U.S. Mail and standard UPS/Fed Ex sized delivery trucks. It also states that residents would not be allowed to Packet Page 262 of 299 APPROVED Planning Board Minutes October 13, 2010 Page 5 park more than one commercial vehicle or any commercial vehicle over 10,000 pounds licensed gross vehicle weight per dwelling unit. The language makes reference to ECDC 17.60.010, which relates to commercial vehicles.  Section 20.20.015 was deleted to avoid creating a long list of prohibited businesses.  ECDC 20.60 is related to signs and allows up to four square feet of signage in residential zones. She questioned if the Board wants to address the issue of signage as part of the home occupations chapter. As currently drafted, a home occupation would be allowed a sign that does not exceed three square feet in size, but it can only contain the name and address of the residence. She questioned if the Board wants to restrict the content of signs associated with home occupation businesses. Ms. Coccia invited the Board to share their comments and suggestions so that the draft document could be finalized and forwarded to the SEPA review process. Once the SEPA review has been completed, the draft proposal would come before the Board for a public hearing as early as next month. Mr. Chave reminded the Board that the City Council directed them to consider options to reduce the cost of home occupation permits. At this time, the process has three levels of review: those that are permitted outright, those that are staff decisions, and those that require Hearing Examiner review. The proposed change would eliminate the Hearing Examiner as one of the permitting bodies, but there would still be the option of appealing some home occupation decisions to the Hearing Examiner. The purpose of the proposed language is to reduce the cost of obtaining a home occupation permit by eliminating the requirement for Hearing Examiner review, which is a costly process. Mr. Chave referred to ECDC 20.20.015, which is a list of home occupations that are presumed to be inappropriate, but not necessarily prohibited. He said it is often awkward for staff to explain why certain types of uses have been singled out. He suggested the existing code language is out of date and inconsistent with the current trend of people moving their offices into home settings. However, he suggested the new code language should specifically prohibit retail uses, which are not appropriate in home occupation settings, with two possible exceptions. Urban farmers should be allowed to sell the produce they grow on their property, which would be consistent with the City’s Community Sustainability Element that encourages the production of locally grown produce. They should not be allowed to sell produce that is grown off site. In addition to urban farmers, the code could allow art studios, which are not uncommon in residential areas in other jurisdictions. He reminded the Board that art is prominently mentioned in the City’s Comprehensive Plan, and this would be a good time to incorporate it as a potential home occupation if the Board deems it appropriate. Board Member Stewart questioned if the Board would be in favor of allowing an artist to sell jewelry or some other type of art from a home occupation. Board Member Cloutier expressed his belief that this type of use would be appropriate, as long as they do not have studio tours, which invite certain parking and noise issues. Mr. Chave suggested the City could require home occupations to show plans for how they would provide ample parking to accommodate visitors to the site. In addition, they could require that displays come down during non-operating hours. Mr. Chave has considered the option of limiting the hours of operation for home occupations from 8 a.m. to 9 p.m., recognizing that businesses such as music teachers are not limited to normal working day hours. He suggested it seems reasonable to allow only one customer per hour, since this would not likely cause a disturbance in the neighborhood. Board Member Stewart suggested that rather than limiting a home occupation to one customer per hour, it would be more appropriate to limit the number of vehicles per hour. She shared an example of a family therapist who may have more than one client in an hour, but not more than one vehicle. Board Member Johnson said she would like to hear from Mr. Thies about the more practical aspect of code enforcement and what the history has been related to home occupations. Mr. Thies explained that there are very few violations associated with most home occupations, but there are some that are problematic. The number of vehicles coming to a site is regulated based on the honor system because staff cannot sit in front of a site to count the number of vehicles that visit a home occupation each day and determine if a code violation is occurring. He said the City has more ability to enforce parking requirements. Vice Chair Reed questioned if limiting the number of visitors is a waste of time if the City cannot enforce the provision. Mr. Thies answered that most people follow the regulations, but they do receive complaints when neighbors think a home occupation exceeds the number of vehicles allowed. When staff explains how difficult it is to enforce the requirement, people often question why it even exists in the code. Packet Page 263 of 299 APPROVED Planning Board Minutes October 13, 2010 Page 6 Board Member Johnson asked Mr. Thiess to share examples of code enforcement issues related to home occupations. Mr. Thies said that just a few weeks ago, someone complained about an electric company that is operated out of a home. The business owner eliminated his office space and moved the business into his home. The neighbors complained because it appears he is running a large business in a residential neighborhood. This situation was easier to enforce. A more confusing situation occurred three weeks ago when a man and his friends were building a recreational vehicle in his driveway. While it appeared to be a home occupation, he had no proof. The most he could do was ask the man to tone it down and finish the job quickly. Vice Chair Reed asked how many code enforcement violations Mr. Thies receives each year related to home occupations. Mr. Thies answered that he receives between 10 and 15 each year. Usually, they are related to construction type businesses (tree removal, landscaping, etc.) because they typically have larger equipment. Mr. Chave said that, in his experience, the more obvious violations tend to have a higher nuisance value for the neighborhood. The City does not typically receive complaints about home occupations that are quiet, such as music teachers. Board Member Johnson suggested that the code should be more specific about things they do not want to see and less specific on home occupations that are considered the norm. She cautioned that they should not over regulate something that isn’t a problem, yet they need to address the things that are truly neighborhood concerns. Mr. Chave said that is generally what staff is trying to do. There may be some ability to identify certain home occupations that are simply not permitted such as contractor operations where a number of people gather and there is storage of equipment. But they also should consider limiting the number of vehicles allowed per hour, even if it is difficult to enforce. If they identify a standard, most people will adhere to the regulations. If they have no standard, some people may abuse the situation. He said Mr. Thies has had good success in addressing problems by reminding people of the rules. The issue is how heavy handed should the City be and what are the goals. The Community Sustainability Element encourages more local and home-based activities. Board Member Johnson pointed out that, as currently written, the code does not allow even one customer to come to a home occupation. Mr. Chave answered that a home occupation that has customers or clients would require a higher level of permit review. If the permitting process is too onerous, people may decide not to obtain the required permits. Making it easier to obtain the permits encourages people to meet the requirements of the code. Board Member Stewart asked staff to explain the difference between the two types of home occupation permits proposed in the draft document. Mr. Chave answered that certain types of home occupations (those that meet the criteria in Section 20.20.010.A) would be permitted outright as a business license, and others would require a conditional use permit, which would involve a more extensive review by staff based on the criteria in Section 20.20.010.B. Staff decisions require public notice and can be appealed to the Hearing Examiner. Board Member Stewart expressed concern that the $500 charge for the staff review may discourage some businesses from obtaining the required licenses. She suggested that if the City wants to encourage home occupations, they could make the criteria in Section 20.20.010.A more generous, such as allowing employees or more than one customer per hour. This would result in fewer home occupation applications that require a conditional use permit. Mr. Chave agreed that is one option the Board could consider. Vice Chair Reed questioned if Section 20.20.020.A (sale or display of goods) adequately addresses the issue of retail sales associated with home occupations. Mr. Chave pointed out that Section 20.10.010.B.2 regulates the display of goods associated with home occupations and would adequately address the types of retail sales discussed earlier (urban farming and art studios). He explained that a general prohibition on retail sales would have a broader application. The code should be written so that retail uses are not allowed, regardless of the type of home occupation permit, unless they are associated with urban farming or art studios. Vice Chair Reed referred to Section 20.20.020.B, which states that while signs would be allowed in conjunction with a home occupation, they cannot exceed three square feet and can only contain the name and address of the residence. Board Member Cloutier expressed his belief that sign content should not matter, as long as the size is limited to three square feet. It would be helpful if a home occupation were allowed to identify its location so people can find the right house. Mr. Chave explained that the current code allows residential property owners to have up to four square feet of signage. Section 20.20.020.B would allow up to three square feet of the allowed signage to be related to the home occupation. The Board Packet Page 264 of 299 APPROVED Planning Board Minutes October 13, 2010 Page 7 agreed that the content of the sign should not be limited, as long as the total sign area remains small. Mr. Chave agreed that it would be easy to enforce this type of regulation. Vice Chair Reed pointed out that it is not within the Board’s purview to recommend approval of changes in the permit fee structure. Mr. Chave agreed but added that the Board could certainly forward a recommendation to the City Council that they consider a change if they believe it is appropriate. Board Member Johnson referred to Section 20.20.010.A.8 related to parking and storing of commercial vehicles. She asked if this provision would speak to Board Member Clarke’s previously-mentioned concern about large vehicles parking on the street in his neighborhood. Mr. Thies pointed out that large vehicles are not allowed to park on the streets in residential neighborhoods between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. However, residents are allowed to park one large vehicle in their driveway. Board Member Cloutier questioned the difference between a 10,000 pound commercial vehicle and a very large recreational vehicle. Mr. Thies said the issue is usually related to signage. Only large vehicles that are used for commercial purposes are regulated as such. Board Member Johnson referred to Section 20.20.010.A.9, which limits a home occupation to no more than one customer per hour. She recalled that her music lessons were only ½ hour long, which means her teacher could teach two students in one hour. She suggested that if the regulation is not going to be enforced, they should explain the guideline differently. Perhaps they should allow two customers per hour, except for urban farming and art home occupations. Board Member Cloutier said another option would be to allow only one customer at a time. Mr. Chave explained that engineering standards estimate that single-family dwelling units generate approximately 10 trips per day, so a limit of one customer per hour would not be out of line with what currently takes place in single-family neighborhoods. However, two or three customers per hour could generate more than the neighborhood residents are willing to tolerate. He said he anticipates that customers for urban farms and art studios would likely come from pass-by traffic. He said one option is to allow a few more vehicles per hour if a home occupation is located on an arterial where there is already a higher level of traffic. However, allowing two or more vehicles per hour on a cul-de-sac would create a noticeable impact. Board Member Johnson questioned if it would be appropriate to regulate the number of customers per day rather than per hour. Mr. Chave cautioned against making the requirements too complicated. Vice Chair Reed suggested it would be more appropriate to regulate the number of visits or vehicles rather than the number of customers, and the remainder of the Board concurred. Board Member Johnson pointed out that Section 20.20.010.B.7 requires an applicant to provide at least three on-site parking spaces if they anticipate customers and/or employees would come to the site. Mr. Chave pointed out that the standard parking requirement for single-family residential zones is two parking spaces per unit. However, tandem parking can be counted in the total number of spaces. Board Member Johnson pointed out that houses built in the 1960’s and earlier typically have one-car garages, and property owners utilize on-street parking spaces to meet their additional parking needs. The Board directed staff to bring the draft document back for a public hearing on November 10th. CONTINUED DISCUSSION ON PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO ECDC 18.05 AND 20.50 CLARIFYING DEFINITIONS AND PROCESSES FOR REGULATION OF WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES (FILE NUMBER AMD20100004) Mr. Clugston referred the Board to the attachments in the Staff Report. He also referred to the new document submitted by Richard Busch, President of the Northwest Wireless Association, titled “Integrated Site Code Classifications,” which document would replace Attachment 2 in the Staff Report. He reminded the Board that, at their last meeting, they agreed to participate in a self-guided driving tour to see the Edmonds wireless communication sites for themselves. He provided a PowerPoint presentation of each of the sites on the tour, as well as examples from other municipalities. He pointed out the good and bad qualities of each one. He noted that most of the wireless facilities in Edmonds are monopoles, retrofits on existing utility poles and on buildings. Some are camouflaged. Although not required by the current code, the Board could consider a provision that requires the facilities to be camouflaged. Mr. Clugston explained that the AT&T wireless facility located on the building at 546 Alder Street (Commodore Condominiums) is not a permitted use based on the existing code. He suggested the Board should discuss whether or not it Packet Page 265 of 299 APPROVED JULY 28th CITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING BOARD MINUTES July 14, 2010 Vice Chair Lovell called the meeting of the Edmonds Planning Board to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Public Safety Complex, 250 – 5th Avenue North. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT Philip Lovell, Vice Chair Kevin Clarke Todd Cloutier Kristiana Johnson John Reed Valerie Stewart STAFF PRESENT Rob Chave, Planning Division Manager Gina Coccia, Planner Brian McIntosh, Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Director Rich Lindsay, Parks Maintenance Manager BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT Michael Bowman, Chair READING/APPROVAL OF MINUTES BOARD MEMBER REED MOVED THAT THE MINUTES OF JUNE 23, 2010 BE APPROVED AS AMENDED. BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA No changes were made to the agenda. AUDIENCE COMMENTS There was no one in the audience to address the Board during this portion of the meeting. PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO ECDC 20.110.040(f) RELATING TO MONETARY PENALTIES TO COMPLY WITH CHANGES IN WASHINGTON LAW BY PROVIDING NOTICE TO ALL PENALTY ASSESSMENTS AND ECDC 20.110.040(D) TO CLARIFY APPEAL PROCEDURES TO SUPERIOR COURT (FILE NUMBER AMD20100005) Mr. Chave pointed out that City Attorney Snyder discussed the proposed amendments previously with the Board, and the outline of the intent of the amendments was provided in his memorandum. The intent is to bring the code language up to date with current Washington State law and Superior Court procedures. Board Member Reed questioned if the 3rd and 4th “whereas” statements on the second page of the draft ordinance (Attachment 2) are really necessary. He suggested that these may no longer be accurate statements. Mr. Chave said the language was contained in the original interim ordinance that was adopted by the City Council. If the Board recommends that the content of the proposed amendment is appropriate, the City Attorney would update the ordinance before it is forwarded to the City Council. Packet Page 266 of 299 non-conforming, big issues come up when an owner wants to make improvements or changes. He observed that because of the irregular platting that has occurred in some neighborhoods in the City, there has been significant hostility amongst neighbors. There can be significant impacts to surrounding properties when lots are allowed to subdivide as a result of the zoning change that occurs with annexation. He suggested they must carefully balance all of the concerns. Ms. Coccia reminded the Board that the public would be invited to comment on any subdivision applications that are submitted. Mr. Chave pointed out that the difference in size between the current RS-9600 zoning and the proposed RS-8 zoning is small enough and the lots are large enough that the lots could be subdivided with either designation. Board Member Clarke agreed with Board Member Reed that the adjacent properties that are part of Edmonds are zoned differently than the proposed RS-8. Therefore, the City would not be criticized if they were to zone the subject property using the same pattern. Mr. Chave referred to the zoning map and noted that there are small sections of RS-8 sprinkled throughout the northern portion of the City. He suggested that the plotting pattern of the subject properties is different enough to merit a different zoning designation. Board Member Clarke said that prior to the annexation of his neighborhood, the response for emergency service from the County was terrible. They would have done anything to annex into a City that could provide faster response. He summarized that taxation is not typically an issue; those who are interested in annexation are seeking better service and the opportunity to elect their own local government representatives. DISCUSSION ON CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS FOR HOME OCCUPATIONS (FILE NUMBER AMD201000016) Ms. Coccia explained that when home occupation applications are submitted to the City, various departments review the proposed scope of work and how it complies with applicable City codes. As long as a proposed business meets the criteria in ECDC 20.20, the Planning Division can sign off on the business license application as it relates to the zoning standards. Businesses that cannot meet all the basic home occupation criteria must change their proposal to meet the code or apply for and obtain a conditional use permit. She noted that the standard fee for a home occupation business license is $100. However, if a conditional use permit and public hearing is required, the fee for the process jumps to about $1,500. Ms. Coccia said the chief complaint heard by staff about home occupation requirements is the fee. She suggested one option for addressing the concern is to change the process so that home occupations that require more review are handled as staff- approved conditional use permits rather than a conditional use permit requiring Hearing Examiner review. This would reduce the fee to about $500. She noted that administrative conditional use permits are also used for accessory dwelling unit permits and tree cutting permits. Public notice would still be required and a permit could be conditioned, but the decision would ultimately be made by staff. Ms. Coccia said another option would be to streamline the permitting of home occupations that should logically fit within neighborhood settings by clarifying the standards for approvable home occupations. For example, home occupations that have only a single off-site employee or not more than one customer coming to the site per hour could be permitted as part of a normal home occupation review. Ms. Coccia suggested the Board review the current codes and processes related to home occupations, compare them to other jurisdictions, and determine if an administrative conditional use review process would be more appropriate than a conditional use permit that requires a public hearing at three times the cost. She noted that the City Council’s Community Services/Development Services Committee has recommended further discussion about streamlining the process and keeping it simple. Staff is seeking feedback from the Board in order to proceed toward a public hearing proposal. Vice Chair Lovell requested more information about the breaking point where staff determines a conditional use permit would be required. Mr. Chave referred to ECDC 20.20.010 (A), which outlines the criteria used to evaluate a home occupation application. If an application does not meet all of the criteria, a conditional use permit would be required. ECDC 20.20.010(B) identifies the criteria used to evaluate conditional use permits. He observed that it would be difficult for many home occupations to strictly comply with all of the criteria. Packet Page 267 of 299 Board Member Stewart reminded the Board that based on the Community Sustainability Element, the City is trying to create a more favorable environment for home occupations. She hopes the regulations can be made more flexible. Mr. Chave said music teachers and accountants are good examples of typical home occupations that receive little or no objection from adjacent property owners. These could be approved via an administrative conditional use permit process. However, the City has had enforcement problems with home occupations that employ multiple people such as real estate offices. These types of home occupations could require a conditional review and public hearing before the Hearing Examiner. The key is to establish a threshold such as one visitor per hour or a certain number of clients per hour. He suggested the threshold be tied to the typical traffic that is generated by a single-family home, which is about 10 trips per day. Board Member Johnson said the current code language contains a provision that says if you have evidence of even one visitor, the business license could be revoked. She asked how many licenses have been revoked for this reason. Mr. Chave said he could not think of a situation of this type. The most common case is that a home occupation license would be denied for this reason. He noted that very few home occupation applications have been sent to the Hearing Examiner. He said he suspects that many home occupations are “flying under the radar” and have not created a problem in the neighborhood. Board Member Stewart said that given the current economy and City goals related to sustainability, they need to make it possible for people to work out of their home. She suggested that limiting the clients to one per house may be too restrictive. Perhaps a better approach would be to allow no more than one car per hour. Mr. Chave cautioned that it is important to hold down the scale of home occupation uses to a reasonable level and to avoid negative impacts such as noise. He observed that more and more people are working from home a certain number days a week rather than going into the office. Home occupation regulations that are too restrictive do not encourage flexible work hours, etc. Ms. Coccia said Attachment 2 is a matrix comparing the City’s current regulations with those of other jurisdictions in the region. She noted that most of them allow one non-family employee or customer. Board Member Clarke said he finds it extremely frustrating that he lives in a neighborhood that has covenants, conditions and restrictions that prohibit commercial uses from being conducted inside the homes, but the City has taken the position that it will not interpret private covenants. As part of the proof of application, an individual should be required to prove that there are no private restrictions on the property that prohibit home occupations. Even though people read the title and understand the restrictions when they purchase their property, they often break the rules knowing that the only way to enforce the requirement is for a neighbor to sue. He said it is unfair for the City to allow a use that is not legally permitted by the covenants associated with the property. Mr. Chave reminded the Board that the City does not enforce private covenants. Board Member Johnson asked if the City has an enforcement process for home occupations. Mr. Chave answered affirmatively, but the City does not enforce private covenants. Board Member Clarke suggested that his concern could be addressed if the criteria for a home occupation permit requires an applicant to prove there are no private restrictions or conditions that prohibit home occupations. Mr. Chave agreed to solicit a response from the City Attorney regarding this issue. Board Member Clarke said he knows of a situation in his neighborhood where a home occupation cannot meet any of the criteria in ECDC 20.20.010(A). The business transports recreational vehicles with a large capacity pick up truck which is often parked in front of his living room window. The use violates several covenants such as storage of recreational vehicles, but it is being permitted by the City. Across the street from him is an electrician who parks his commercial vehicle on his property. In subdivisions with small lots and very little setback requirements, these types of uses can be very imposing to surrounding property owners. He suggested they look more carefully at the code requirements rather than simply making them broader. He further suggested that staff provide examples so the Board can determine whether or not the criteria is adequate to address most situations in the City. Mr. Chave suggested the Board invite the Code Enforcement Officer to participate in the discussion. He observed that Board Member Clarke’s concerns are more nuisance issues than problems with the home occupation provisions. Board Member Johnson said she learned a lot about the home occupation provisions by reading the Staff Report. She learned that in her particular neighborhood a piano teacher went through the process to obtain a conditional use permit, yet Packet Page 268 of 299 another neighbor was illegally operating a business that has many people coming and going. She stressed that education and enforcement issues must be addressed. Board Member Cloutier observed that cost is the number one factor that discourages people from applying for the necessary home occupation permits. He suggested that if the financial cost were lower and the guidelines were clearer, more people would submit applications for the required permits. This would allow the City to have a better understanding of what is going on and they could start to see the correlation between approved home occupations and the associated uses to identify necessary changes. A proper checklist would be helpful to applicants, as well. He summarized his belief that the City should do what they can to encourage applications to be submitted. Mr. Chave said it would be less costly for the City to have a simpler process rather than increasing enforcement. Board Member Reed asked if every home occupation is required to obtain a permit. Ms. Coccia said they are required to obtain a business license through the City Clerk’s office. However, a conditional use permit would only be required if the use cannot meet the criteria set forth in ECDC 20.20.010(A). Board Member Reed said he found the document confusing because the word “permit” is used over and over again, and it is not meant to refer to a document, but to what is allowed. He suggested the term be changed to “allowed” if it is not talking about an actual permit. Board Member Reed said it is important to preserve the sanctity of neighborhoods in the City, but it is also important to encourage opportunities for economic development. He said he finds the current regulations to be too tight, but he is not sure how far they should be loosened. Mr. Chave suggested a discussion with the Code Enforcement Officer would be helpful in this regard. Board Member Clarke observed that with changes in technology, companies are downsizing their office space and having their employees work from home. As the economic base evolves to a service employment base, they will see more and more of these situations. Board Member Johnson said it is important for the City to encourage people to have their businesses at home legally. They should encourage them to apply for the correct licenses and permits. This can be done by having reasonable rules that allow them to work without impacting the neighborhood. Technology and economic circumstances have changed significantly since the current code language was written 17 years ago. She suggested the Board could be creative and come up with code language that allows an administrative process that can readily adapt to current situations. This would also avoid situations where people have to either go before the Hearing Examiner for a conditional use or operate the home occupation without the required permits. Ms. Coccia pointed out that delivery services such as UPS, Federal Express, etc. cannot be regulated by the City. The deliveries referred to in the code language are related to those that require vehicles larger than a standard UPS truck. She noted that more and more people are trying to operate web-based businesses from their home. They don’t have products stored in their homes, but they coordinate the shipment of merchandise from one site to another. Board Member Stewart said another reason to encourage home businesses is that they want to reduce the number of vehicle trips to reduce emissions. One positive step is to encourage home occupations so people do not have to drive to work. She encouraged the Board to keep this positive aspect in mind. The code language should be flexible, yet also protect the character of the neighborhoods. She expressed her position that if she lived in a neighborhood with covenants, she would like the City to honor the requirements. Board Member Johnson expressed her belief that the existing code requirements are so restrictive that they force people to disobey or ignore them. Board Member Clarke inquired if any consideration is given to the street patterns. Trucks associated with home occupations could create circulation issues. While some residential neighborhoods have free flowing traffic and capacity for street parking, most residential plats do not have wide enough streets to accommodate on-street parking, particularly for large vehicles. Ms. Coccia agreed and said that the Engineering Department reviews conditional use applications and provides feedback regarding traffic. Mr. Chave said the code could probably include rules that accomplish the same thing. For example, home occupations above a certain threshold could be required to locate on a collector or arterial streets. The Board agreed that the next step would be to discuss their issues and concerns with the Code Enforcement Officer, and then provide direction to staff to develop a proposal. Staff agreed to provide some alternatives for the Board to consider when they continue their discussion. Vice Chair Lovell summarized that the goal of the proposed amendments it to make the process simpler without requiring Hearing Examiner review. Mr. Chave said that rather than requiring a Hearing Packet Page 269 of 299 Examiner review, a conditional use application could be a staff decision with notice. He noted that most business licenses do not require notice, but another alternative would be to require notice only for businesses that propose to have people coming to the home. He summarized that staff supports an amendment that would move away from automatically sending home occupation applications to the Hearing Examiner since this is a costly process. Board Member Clarke asked about the penalty for operating a home occupation without a license. Mr. Chave said it becomes a code enforcement issue. There is no automatic monetary penalty. The person would be required to apply for a business license, and the City has the ability to increase fees up to five times for violations. If the situation is the result of an inadvertent mistake, they do not assess a higher fee. But if they know that a person blatantly violated the permit requirement, a higher fee would be assessed. Board Member Clarke said that if they are going to make it easier to obtain a home occupation permit, they should also increase the penalty for those who try to avoid the permit requirement. REVIEW OF EXTENDED AGENDA The Board did not provide any comments regarding the extended agenda. ELECTION OF PLANNING BOARD OFFICERS BOARD MEMBER STEWART NOMINATED BOARD MEMBER LOVELL AS CHAIR OF THE BOARD. BOARD MEMBER CLOUTIER SECONDED THE NOMINATION. THE NOMINATION WAS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY, WITH BOARD MEMBER LOVELL ABSTAINING. BOARD MEMBER LOVELL NOMINATED BOARD MEMBER REED AS VICE CHAIR OF THE BOARD. BOARD MEMBER CLARKE SECONDED THE MOTION. THE NOMINATION WAS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS Chair Lovell did not provide any comments during this portion of the meeting. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS Board Member Reed announced that the public/private Washington State Ferry Partnership’s deadline for proposals for the lot adjacent to Skippers was June 30th, and no proposals were received for an overhead crossing in exchange for the lot. The appraisal of the property was approximately $1.5 million and was based on a statement from the bank that they received two offers of $1 million for the Skippers property. It was determined that the best option is to hold the property until the economy improves. He said he would like the City to work with the Washington State Department of Transportation and Burlington Northern Santa Fe to create a walking avenue from downtown to the waterfront that does not go in front of the ferry. Board Member Clarke advised that his employment requires a lot of travel that he has no control over. This has resulted in his absence from a number of Board meetings. He said he reviews the Commission materials that are distributed for each meeting. He said he loves being part of the Board and appreciates the opportunity to work with such a talented group of people. He indicated he does not intend to resign at this time. He observed that when he first joined the Board, previous Board Member Guenther missed several meetings for work related responsibilities, yet Mr. Rutledge never commented on his absences. He suggested that Mr. Rutledge appears to have a personal issue with him. Board Member Clarke recalled previous comments made by Al Rutledge regarding the issue of naming parks and putting up plaques to recognize people who submit potential names for parks. He explained that Mr. McIntosh has worked diligently to try and communicate the issues surrounding Mr. Rutledge’s concerns. The bottom line is that the park naming policy is very specific, and both times the committees followed the letter of the law. They have named two parks after individuals rather than groups of people. When Hickman Park was named and dedicated, there was a ceremony that recognized individuals Packet Page 270 of 299 P a c k e t P a g e 2 7 1 o f 2 9 9 P a c k e t P a g e 2 7 2 o f 2 9 9 Chapter 20.20 HOME OCCUPATIONS Sections: 20.20.000 Purpose. 20.20.010 Home occupation. 20.20.015 Prohibited home occupations. 20.20.020 General regulation. 20.20.030 Permit. 20.20.000 Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to allow residents to carry on home occupations on their property while guaranteeing neighboring residents freedom from excessive noise, excessive traffic, nuisance, fire hazard and other possible potential negative impacts from the maintenance of a commercial use within a residential neighborhood. The purpose of this chapter is to permit two types of home use occupations while prohibiting other commercial uses in residential neighborhoods. Commercial enterprises employing only the residents of a structure which are operated entirely within the structure and which require no deliveries or other traffic are intended to be permitted activities. Other occupations such as music teachers, newspaper delivery and other commercial activity which are intended to serve the neighborhood and which promote traffic only within the neighborhood as opposed to attracting traffic to the neighborhood from outside, are also intended to be permitted uses. A home occupation is generally an economic enterprise operated within a dwelling unit, or buildings accessory to the dwelling unit which are incidental and secondary to the residential use of the dwelling unit, including the use of the dwelling unit as a business address in the phone directory or as a post office mailing address. 20.20.010 Home occupation.* A home occupation may be conducted as a permitted use in any residential zone of the city subject to the following regulations: A. Home occupation shall be a permitted use if it: 1. Is carried on exclusively by a family member residing in the dwelling unit; and 2. Is conducted entirely within the structures on the site, without any significant outside activity; and 3. Uses no heavy equipment, power tools or power sources not common to a residence; and 4. Has no pickup or delivery by business related commercial vehicles (except for the U.S. Mail) which exceeds 20,000 pounds gross vehicle weight; and 5. Creates no noise, dust, glare, vibration, odor, smoke or other impact adverse to a residential area beyond that normally associated with residential use; and EXHIBIT - 4 Packet Page 273 of 299 6. Does not include any employees outside of the family members residing at the residence, including but not limited to persons working at or visiting the subject property; and 7. All performance criteria established pursuant to ECDC 17.60.010. Any permit granted to such an occupational use shall be immediately voidable upon proof of any visit to the site in excess of the standards provided in paragraphs A(4) and A(6) of this section or any visits by a customer, client or other persons purchasing goods or services from the home occupation. Proof of one such occurrence shall be sufficient to void the permitted use provided under this section and thereby requiring the home occupation to meet the permitting provisions hereinafter contained in this chapter. An example of an out right permitted home occupation is a writer or artist who develops a book or art work and does not show the work from the home. B. A home occupation which does not meet one or more of the requirements of subsection (A) of this section may be approved as a conditional use permit (Type III-B decision) pursuant to Chapter 20.05 ECDC and the procedures set forth in Chapter 20.06 ECDC, if the home occupation: 1. Will not harm the character of the surrounding neighborhood; 2. The temporary and permanent keeping of animals associated with home occupation must comply with all provisions of Chapter 5.05 ECC (Animal Control) and ECDC Title 16; 3. Will not include storage, display of goods, building materials and/or the operation of building machinery, commercial vehicles or other tools, unless it meets the following criteria: a. Is wholly enclosed within a structure or building, b. Does not emit noise, odor or heat, and c. Does not create glare or emit light from the site in violation of the city’s performance criteria; 4. Does not create a condition which injures or endangers the comfort, or pose health or safety threats of persons on abutting properties or streets; and 5. Will not generate traffic from outside of the neighborhood nor excessive intra- neighborhood traffic or necessitate excessive parking beyond that normally associated with a residential use; and all performance criteria established by ECDC 17.60.010 are met. Any permit granted to such a home occupation shall be immediately voidable upon proof of any visit to the site by any client, patient or customer in excess of the standard established through the conditional use permit process, and proof of one such occurrence shall be sufficient to void such permit in any proceeding under ECDC 20.100.040 relating to review of approved permits. [Ord. 3783 § 10, 2010; Ord. 3775 § 10, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 52, 2009]. EXHIBIT - 4 Packet Page 274 of 299 *Code reviser’s note: Ordinance 3783 amends interim Ordinance 3775 amending ECDC 20.20.010(B). Ordinance 3775 expires July 5, 2010. 20.20.015 Prohibited home occupations. Certain home occupations depend for their economic viability upon the sale or provision of services to persons throughout the city or the regional community rather than the neighborhood in which they reside thereby attracting to a neighborhood traffic beyond that generally associated with the neighborhood or intra-neighborhood traffic. Such home occupations which depend upon travel to the site by customers, clients or patients are specifically prohibited. A. The following occupational uses shall be presumed to generate such traffic: 1. The offices of any doctor of medicine, dentist, orthodontist, chiropractor or other health care professional licensed under the state of Washington (excluding licensed massage therapists); 2. The offices of any person engaged in the practice of law; 3. The offices of any veterinarian; and/or 4. Any structure used for the retail sale of goods, except as expressly permitted by ECDC 20.20.020(E) as an adjunct to a permitted use. B. The presumption established by subsection A of this section shall be rebuttable, but the applicant shall have the burden of proving that no commercial traffic will be generated by clients, patients or customers. Any permit granted to such an occupational use shall be voidable upon proof of any visit to the site by a client, patient or customer, and proof of one such visit shall be sufficient to void such permit and any proceeding under ECDC 20.100.040 relating to the review of approved permits. C. The limited sale of services on site by occupations other than those listed in subsection A of this section shall be permitted so long as: 1. All performance criteria established by ECDC 17.60.010 are met and the conditional use permit issued pursuant to ECDC 20.20.010(B) and Chapter 20.05 ECDC are met; and 2. The home occupation is advertised, intended and/or in fact attracts traffic only from the residential neighborhood in which it is located, does not create traffic in excess of normal residential levels, and is not intended or designed to create additional traffic into the neighborhood by attracting clients or customers from beyond the neighborhood. Examples of home occupations which might qualify for a permit include the musical instruction of pupils in clearly defined and limited numbers which does not generate traffic from outside of the residential neighborhood in which it is located nor in excess of normal residential levels or operating as a news carrier from a residential home in which the only outside traffic is delivery of papers to the site by the news agency. EXHIBIT - 4 Packet Page 275 of 299 D. Home occupations which employ any individual outside of resident family where the employee(s) work at or visit the subject property shall be prohibited in any planned residential development or individual lot thereof. [Ord. 3465 § 4, 2003]. 20.20.020 General regulation. A. Sale or Display of Goods. No goods shall be sold or rendered on the premises except instructional materials pertinent to the home occupation (e.g., music books). Display or storage of goods outside the premises or in the window thereof is prohibited. B. Signs. A sign is permitted in conjunction with conditional use permit approval and does not exceed three square feet in size and shall contain only the name and address of the residence. C. Reasons for Denial. A home occupation conditional use permit is a special exception to the zoning ordinance and the applicant has the burden of persuasion that he/she comes within the stated purposes and criteria of this chapter. The following are among common reasons for denial but are not intended to be exclusive: 1. The on-street or on-site parking of trucks or other types of equipment associated with the home occupation; 2. The littered, unkempt and otherwise poorly maintained condition of the dwelling site; 3. Noncompliance with the criteria of this chapter or conditions of approval or other provisions of city ordinance; and/or 4. The proposal cannot be conditioned in order to meet the criteria and findings of the chapter. 20.20.030 Permit. All permits for home occupations are personal to the applicant and shall not be transferred or otherwise assigned to any other person. The permit will automatically expire when the applicant named on the permit application moves from the site. The home use occupation shall also automatically expire if the permittee fails to maintain a valid business license or the business license is suspended or revoked. The home occupation shall not be transferred to any site other than that described on the application form. [Ord. 2951 § 1, 1993]. This page of the Edmonds City Code is current through Ord. 3792, passed April 20, 2010. Disclaimer: The City Clerk's Office has the official version of the Edmonds City. Users should contact the City Clerk's Office for ordinances passed subsequent to the ordinance cited above. City Website: http://www.ci.edmonds.wa.us City Telephone: (425) 771-0245 Code Publishing Company EXHIBIT - 4 Packet Page 276 of 299 AM-3878 Item #: 6. City Council Meeting Date: 04/19/2011 Time:30 Minutes Submitted For:Council President Peterson Submitted By:Jana Spellman Department:City Council Review Committee: Committee Action: Type:Information Information Subject Title Discussion of Levy Options. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Place a levy on the August ballot. Previous Council Action Council created a Levy Review Committee in 2010 and has received periodic updates. Mayor Cooper presented a Power Point Presentation regarding his levy proposal at the April 5, 2011 Council Meeting. A discussion by the Council followed after his presentation. Attach 1 - Mayor's Final 2011 levy memo to council Attach 2 - 2011 exhibit a.pdf Attach 3 - Mayor's Levy Calc 35 cents 03282011.pdf Attach 4 - Election Deadlines Attach 5 - Election Costs 2011 Election Guide Attach 6: April 5, 2011 Draft Council Minutes Narrative Continued discussion regarding placing a levy on the ballot. Attachments Attach 1 - Mayor's Final 2011 levy memo to council Attach 2 - 2011 exibit a Attach 3 -Mayor's Levy Calc 35 cents Attach 4 - Election Deadlines Attach 5 - Election Costs 2011 Election Guide Attach 6 - Draft 4-5-11 Council Minutes Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date City Clerk Sandy Chase 04/14/2011 09:22 AM Mayor Mike Cooper 04/14/2011 01:55 PM Final Approval Sandy Chase 04/14/2011 02:00 PM Form Started By: Jana Spellman Started On: 04/14/2011 Final Approval Date: 04/14/2011 Packet Page 277 of 299 Packet Page 278 of 299 Date: March 30, 2011 To: Council President Peterson From: Mike Cooper, Mayor Subject: Levy Proposal Over the past two years our city council has discussed the idea of placing a levy on the ballot so the voters could be given the opportunity to decide if they want Edmonds to restore services with citizen groups formed to advise council and on three separate occasions I have recommended council move forward to the ballot. The most recent committee has put many long hours into this effort, but no consensus before council. Today I am bringing you a recommendation and asking that you place it before the voters on the August 16 I am recommending a four year levy focused on “ Streets, and Parks For Everyone at $.35/$1000 of accessed evaluation and indexed with a 2.5% increase on an annual basis. This will increase our revenue $2.26 million in 2012. “Safe Neighborhoods, Safe Streets, and • Safe Neighborhoods Police Department and fund the vacant unfunded police officer position at a cost of $210,000/year. • Safe Streets - Dedicate $704,000/year is important to note that this is less than half the annual need of $1.5 million/year. • Parks for Everyone This money would insure that our stream and that we c short fall at Yost Pool. While this covers important essentials it does not fund the roughly $285,000 in deferred maintenance to park facilities. In addition to these dedicated action items, we will have en comply with the council mandated one month ending cash This is sustained for the duration of the four year levy. CITY OF EDMONDS CITY HALL • THIRD FLOOR EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (425)771 OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Incorporated August 11, 1890 Sister City / Hekinan, Japan Peterson, City Council members Over the past two years our city council has discussed the idea of placing a levy on the ballot so the voters could be given the opportunity to decide if they want Edmonds to restore services with more revenue. There have been two separate citizen groups formed to advise council and on three separate occasions I have recommended council move forward to the ballot. The most recent committee has put many long hours into this effort, but no consensus recommendation has come before council. Today I am bringing you a recommendation and asking that you place it before the voters on the August 16th ballot. a four year levy focused on “Safe Neighborhoods, Safe For Everyone”. If approved by the voters the levy would start at $.35/$1000 of accessed evaluation and indexed with a 2.5% increase on an annual basis. This will increase our revenue $2.26 million in 2012. borhoods, Safe Streets, and Parks For Everyone” Action Plan Safe Neighborhoods – Restore our Crime Prevention Program in the Police Department and fund the vacant unfunded police officer position at a cost of $210,000/year. edicate $704,000/year or $.11/$1000 to street is important to note that this is less than half the annual need of $1.5 for Everyone – Dedicate $102,000/year or $.016/$1000 to parks. This money would insure that our flower program has a dedicated funding stream and that we can cover the approximately $50,000/year revenue short fall at Yost Pool. While this covers important essentials it does not fund the roughly $285,000 in deferred maintenance to park facilities. In addition to these dedicated action items, we will have enough in reserve the council mandated one month ending cash balance requirement. This is sustained for the duration of the four year levy. CITY OF EDMONDS THIRD FLOOR (425)771-0246 • FAX (425)771-0252 OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Over the past two years our city council has discussed the idea of placing a levy on the ballot so the voters could be given the opportunity to decide if they want more revenue. There have been two separate citizen groups formed to advise council and on three separate occasions I have recommended council move forward to the ballot. The most recent committee has recommendation has come before council. Today I am bringing you a recommendation and asking that you orhoods, Safe . If approved by the voters the levy would start at $.35/$1000 of accessed evaluation and indexed with a 2.5% increase on an Action Plan Restore our Crime Prevention Program in the Police Department and fund the vacant unfunded police officer position at a overlays. It is important to note that this is less than half the annual need of $1.5 Dedicate $102,000/year or $.016/$1000 to parks. program has a dedicated funding approximately $50,000/year revenue short fall at Yost Pool. While this covers important essentials it does not fund the roughly $285,000 in deferred maintenance to park facilities. ough in reserves to balance requirement. Mike Cooper MAYOR Packet Page 279 of 299 Incorporated August 11, 1890 Sister City / Hekinan, Japan While this proposed action cannot rebuild of our workforce needs, do all major projects, or catch up all of the deferred maintenance needs for our city facilities, it does position us to be healthy over the next four years without further cutting needed service. During that four year period we must focus together on a plan to generate the needed long term revenue. I look forward to working with you in the coming months to put a package before the voters that has unanimous approval from the council. Packet Page 280 of 299 Packet Page 281 of 299 30 - M a r - 1 1 Ci t y o f E d m o n d s : S t r a t e g i c O u t l o o k 20 0 9 20 1 0 20 1 0 20 1 0 20 1 1 20 1 2 20 1 3 20 1 4 2015 2016 RE V E N U E Ac t u a l s Bu d g e t Ac t u a l s a s o f 07 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 0 YE E s t . B u d g e t O u t l o o k O u t l o o k O u t l o o k O u t l o o k O u t l o o k Be g i n n i n g C a s h ( W o r k i n g C a p i t a l ) B a l a n c e 1, 4 9 7 , 8 6 0 1 ,27 3 , 2 6 5 2, 1 6 7 , 1 5 6 2, 1 6 7 , 1 5 6 2, 8 1 5 , 3 1 3 2, 9 9 9 , 0 3 6 3, 9 6 7 , 3 6 3 4, 3 4 4 , 4 3 0 4,108,782 3,411,342 Pr o p e r t y T a x 13 , 8 2 8 , 9 0 1 14 , 1 4 7 , 0 8 4 7, 1 3 0 , 5 6 8 13 , 6 8 8 , 9 7 0 13 , 6 0 9 , 4 8 2 15 , 8 6 3 , 9 4 3 15 , 9 9 2 , 3 0 4 16 , 1 9 6 , 9 3 0 16,442,802 14,200,858 Re t a i l S a l e s T a x 4, 4 1 4 , 8 7 4 5, 5 1 9 , 9 4 9 2, 4 9 9 , 2 0 4 4, 3 7 1 , 2 0 3 4, 5 2 4 , 1 9 5 4, 6 1 4 , 6 7 9 4, 7 0 6 , 9 7 2 4, 8 0 1 , 1 1 2 4,897,134 4,995,077 Ot h e r S a l e s & U s e T a x 54 3 , 7 3 1 66 5 , 9 0 1 30 8 , 7 1 2 54 3 , 7 3 1 54 6 , 7 9 7 55 2 , 4 3 1 55 8 , 1 2 6 56 3 , 8 8 0 569,696 575,573 Ut i l i t y T a x 5, 9 5 3 , 0 2 8 5, 2 2 5 , 3 1 1 3, 5 7 5 , 5 0 2 6, 2 3 9 , 5 0 0 6, 4 4 1 , 9 6 2 6, 5 0 6 , 3 8 2 6, 5 7 1 , 4 4 5 6, 6 3 7 , 1 6 0 6,703,531 6,770,567 Ot h e r T a x e s 30 1 , 6 3 3 29 7 , 5 0 0 15 8 , 3 4 3 30 6 , 4 5 7 31 1 , 9 8 2 31 7 , 6 1 1 32 3 , 3 4 7 32 9 , 1 9 1 335,146 341,213 Li c e n s e s / P e r m i t s / F r a n c h i s e 1, 0 2 3 , 0 1 7 1, 4 1 8 , 2 1 3 96 6 , 9 4 8 1, 0 2 6 , 2 2 3 1, 0 3 7 , 8 1 3 1, 0 4 8 , 1 2 5 1, 0 5 8 , 5 3 9 1, 0 6 9 , 0 5 7 1,079,681 1,090,411 Co n s t r u c t i o n P e r m i t s 44 8 , 6 1 2 68 8 , 9 9 1 25 9 , 5 6 6 44 3 , 1 2 5 44 7 , 0 1 6 45 0 , 9 4 6 45 4 , 9 1 6 45 8 , 9 2 5 462,974 467,064 Gr a n t s 13 3 , 4 2 5 4, 6 4 4 19 1 , 1 7 8 21 0 , 4 7 6 4, 4 1 0 - - - - - St a t e R e v e n u e s 72 5 , 8 8 8 75 2 , 4 2 6 36 9 , 4 3 5 74 4 , 0 7 9 74 6 , 8 0 3 74 3 , 6 7 8 74 8 , 3 1 0 75 2 , 9 7 4 757,670 762,399 In t e r g o v ' t S e r v i c e C h a r g e s 1, 3 4 8 , 7 4 3 37 8 , 1 8 4 86 , 8 7 1 10 6 , 5 7 8 86 , 0 4 3 88 , 1 9 4 90 , 3 9 9 92 , 6 5 9 94,975 97,349 In t e r f u n d S e r v i c e C h a r g e s 1, 3 1 8 , 7 7 3 98 0 , 4 6 9 28 8 , 5 3 6 1, 3 5 5 , 0 5 9 1, 3 8 8 , 9 3 5 1, 3 9 5 , 8 8 0 1, 4 0 2 , 8 6 0 1, 4 0 9 , 8 7 4 1,416,923 1,424,008 Ch g s . f o r G o o d s & S e r v i c e s 2, 3 0 7 , 3 9 0 3, 5 7 4 , 7 8 4 2, 0 6 7 , 7 1 1 2, 7 9 6 , 9 8 1 2, 2 4 8 , 5 4 5 2, 2 9 0 , 0 9 6 2, 3 3 3 , 0 2 6 2, 3 7 7 , 3 5 1 2,423,091 2,470,264 Fi n e s & F o r f e i t s 67 4 , 6 3 3 64 0 , 3 0 0 32 2 , 0 8 7 61 6 , 5 0 0 66 7 , 1 0 0 68 1 , 9 2 4 69 7 , 0 8 2 71 2 , 5 8 0 728,428 744,632 Mi s c R e v e n u e s 53 1 , 8 9 0 2, 2 8 9 , 1 3 3 2, 4 6 1 , 8 9 6 2, 0 7 4 , 5 7 1 44 3 , 5 3 7 42 8 , 1 1 0 43 7 , 9 1 4 44 7 , 9 5 4 458,238 468,770 An n u a l R e v e n u e 33 , 5 5 4 , 5 3 8 36 , 5 8 2 , 8 8 9 20 , 6 8 6 , 5 5 7 34 , 5 2 3 , 4 5 3 32 , 5 0 4 , 6 2 0 34 , 9 8 1 , 9 9 9 35 , 3 7 5 , 2 3 8 35 , 8 4 9 , 6 4 7 36,370,290 34,408,187 Ex e c u t i v e S u m m a r y - C u r r e n t F o r e c a s t Ch a n g e s i n C a s h ( W o r k i n g C a p i t a l ) $ 0 . 3 5 L e v y - $ 2 . 3 M w / 2 . 5 % C P I / F Y 2 0 1 2 - 2 0 1 5 An n u a l R e v e n u e 33 , 5 5 4 , 5 3 8 36 , 5 8 2 , 8 8 9 20 , 6 8 6 , 5 5 7 34 , 5 2 3 , 4 5 3 32 , 5 0 4 , 6 2 0 34 , 9 8 1 , 9 9 9 35 , 3 7 5 , 2 3 8 35 , 8 4 9 , 6 4 7 36,370,290 34,408,187 An n u a l R e v e n u e G r o w t h 2. 9 % - 5 . 8 % 7 . 6 % 1 . 1 % 1 . 3 % 1.5%-5.4% To t a l R e v e n u e 35 , 0 5 2 , 3 9 9 37 , 8 5 6 , 1 5 4 22 , 8 5 3 , 7 1 3 36 , 6 9 0 , 6 0 9 35 , 3 1 9 , 9 3 2 37 , 9 8 1 , 0 3 5 39 , 3 4 2 , 6 0 1 40 , 1 9 4 , 0 7 8 40,479,071 37,819,529 20 0 9 20 1 0 20 1 0 20 1 0 20 1 1 20 1 2 20 1 3 20 1 4 2015 2016 Ex p e n s e s b y F u n c t i o n Ac t u a l s Bu d g e t Ac t u a l s a s o f 07 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 0 YE E s t . Bu d g e t Ou t l o o k O u t l o o k O u t l o o k O u t l o o k O u t l o o k Sa l a r i e s a n d W a g e s 17 , 7 5 1 , 6 2 6 13 , 3 9 4 , 2 0 2 7, 1 2 5 , 4 8 1 12 , 5 1 2 , 5 1 6 12 , 7 8 0 , 6 3 2 13 , 2 2 0 , 1 4 6 13 , 4 8 7 , 4 8 3 13 , 7 6 0 , 3 7 4 14,038,946 14,323,325 Be n e f i t s (1 ) 5, 4 6 4 , 5 3 6 5, 00 7 , 7 9 6 3, 0 5 3 , 5 6 7 3, 8 2 0 , 9 1 2 4, 2 7 8 , 9 2 4 4, 3 0 8 , 7 1 8 4, 5 9 3 , 6 1 4 4, 9 0 2 , 0 8 1 5,236,364 5,598,935 Su p p l i e s 51 5 , 9 3 3 58 4 , 3 6 6 33 6 , 9 4 4 45 9 , 6 1 1 58 0 , 2 9 7 70 7 , 8 7 9 72 5 , 5 7 6 74 3 , 7 1 6 762,308 781,366 Se r v i c e s (1 ) 3, 4 5 7 , 8 2 1 3 ,62 7 , 5 6 6 2, 2 1 2 , 8 9 6 4, 4 2 8 , 6 7 5 3, 6 9 8 , 2 8 4 3, 2 8 9 , 3 4 2 3, 4 0 8 , 4 1 7 3, 5 3 3 , 8 3 2 3,666,063 3,684,080 In t e r g o v ' t 2, 0 1 9 , 3 1 0 8, 2 9 7 , 4 0 5 5, 9 5 6 , 7 0 1 8, 1 8 2 , 2 7 8 8, 3 3 2 , 9 1 6 8, 8 2 7 , 5 1 6 9, 0 7 2 , 2 4 2 9, 3 2 4 , 2 8 9 9,583,898 9,851,323 Ca p i t a l 41 , 6 4 3 30 , 0 0 0 - - - - - - - - De b t S e r v i c e 1, 6 7 2 , 8 0 4 1, 4 2 3 , 9 5 1 24 3 , 2 0 2 1, 4 2 3 , 7 4 9 1, 4 5 2 , 2 8 4 1, 4 4 5 , 9 1 7 1, 4 4 6 , 8 8 3 1, 4 7 5 , 9 3 5 1,382,617 1,404,463 Tr a n s f e r s 1, 2 3 9 , 3 2 0 1, 2 6 6 , 1 8 9 1, 1 5 7 , 5 7 2 2, 2 7 8 , 3 3 7 80 9 , 7 7 8 1, 8 1 6 , 6 7 6 1, 8 5 6 , 5 4 2 1, 9 2 7 , 4 7 1 1,969,494 1,239,970 In t e r f u n d 79 0 , 0 9 9 91 4 , 4 8 9 35 3 , 6 9 0 76 9 , 2 1 8 38 7 , 7 8 2 39 7 , 4 7 7 40 7 , 4 1 3 41 7 , 5 9 9 428,039 438,740 To t a l E x p e n s e s 32 , 9 5 3 , 0 9 1 34 , 5 4 5 , 9 6 4 20 , 4 4 0 , 0 5 3 33 , 8 7 5 , 2 9 6 32 , 3 2 0 , 8 9 7 34 , 0 1 3 , 6 7 2 34 , 9 9 8 , 1 7 0 36 , 0 8 5 , 2 9 6 37,067,729 37,322,203 Ex p e n s e G r o w t h 2. 8 % - 4 . 6 % 5 . 2 % 2 . 9 % 3 . 1 % 2.7%0.7% Cu r r e n t R e s o u r c e s 33 , 5 5 4 , 5 3 8 36 , 5 8 2 , 8 8 9 20 , 6 8 6 , 5 5 7 34 , 5 2 3 , 4 5 3 32 , 5 0 4 , 6 2 0 34 , 9 8 1 , 9 9 9 35 , 3 7 5 , 2 3 8 35 , 8 4 9 , 6 4 7 36,370,290 34,408,187 To t a l E x p e n s e s 32 , 9 5 3 , 0 9 1 34 , 5 4 5 , 9 6 4 20 , 4 4 0 , 0 5 3 33 , 8 7 5 , 2 9 6 32 , 3 2 0 , 8 9 7 34 , 0 1 3 , 6 7 2 34 , 9 9 8 , 1 7 0 36 , 0 8 5 , 2 9 6 37,067,729 37,322,203 An n u a l B a l a n c e 60 1 , 4 4 7 2, 0 3 6 , 9 2 5 24 6 , 5 0 4 64 8 , 1 5 7 18 3 , 7 2 3 96 8 , 3 2 7 37 7 , 0 6 7 (2 3 5 , 6 4 9 ) (697,439) (2,914,016) En d i n g C a s h ( W o r k i n g C a p i t a l ) B a l a n c e (2 ) 2, 1 6 7 , 1 5 6 3 , 3 1 0 , 1 9 0 2 , 4 1 3 , 6 6 0 2 , 8 1 5 , 3 1 3 2 , 9 9 9 , 0 3 6 3 , 9 6 7 , 3 6 3 4 , 3 4 4 , 4 3 0 4 , 1 0 8 , 7 8 2 3 , 4 1 1 , 3 4 2 4 9 7 , 3 2 6 Ta r g e t E n d i n g C a s h ( W o r k i n g C a p i t a l ) B a l a n c e (3 ) 2, 7 4 6 , 0 9 1 2, 87 8 , 8 3 0 NA 2 , 8 2 2 , 9 4 1 2, 6 9 3 , 4 0 8 2, 8 3 4 , 4 7 3 2, 9 1 6 , 5 1 4 3, 0 0 7 , 1 0 8 3,088,977 3,110,184 (1 ) C o n t a i n s F D 1 c o n t r a c t p a y m e n t ( $ 4 . 6 M a s o f 7 / 3 1 / 1 0 ) a n d f i r e f i g h t e r p a y o u t ( $ 7 8 2 K , r e f l e c t e d i n t h e b e n e f i t s l i n e p e r G / L ) Le v y R e v 2 , 2 5 7 , 7 6 8 2, 3 1 4 , 2 1 2 2, 3 7 2 , 0 6 8 2,431,369 (2 ) C o n t a i n s a 2 0 0 9 a d j u s t m e n t o f $ 6 8 K t o a l l o w c a s h b a l a n c e t o t i e w i t h C A F R B a l a n c e S h e e t w o r k i n g c a p i t a l . (3 ) G F O A r e c o m m e n d s t a r g e t e n d i n g c a s h s h o u l d b e 1 t o 2 m o n t h o f e x p e n d i t u r e s . A o n e m o n t h t a r g e t i s d i s p l a y e d . Pa c k e t Pa g e 28 2 of 29 9 This guide is for informational purpose only and does not take the place of local, state or federal laws. RCW, WAC and county code notations are offered as a reference for additional research only. 23 Local Voters’ Pamphlet Snohomish County publishes a local voters’ pamphlet featuring candidates and issues for Primaries and General Elections. Each candidate is encouraged to submit a statement and photo to be included in the local voters’ pamphlet. All candidate statements and photos must be submitted electronically. is 200 words. Bold and/or italicized print is permissible. Errors in spelling or grammar will submitted statement is more than 200 words, the Auditor will attempt to notify the candidate and/or their representative in order to edit the emailed to the candidate prior to publication. Statements may be rejected if the submitted statement contains obscene, vulgar, profane, scandalous, libelous, or defamatory language. If the statement is rejected, an appeal process is outlined in the Snohomish County Local Voters’ Pamphlet Administrative Rules available in the Candidate photographs must have been taken within the last 2 years and may not include any uniform, judicial robes, hats or brand insignias. Any district with a resolution on the Primary or General Election ballot must participate in the local voters’ pamphlet unless a waiver is granted by the County Council. Districts must submit an deadline, that discusses what the resolution changes if it passes. The names of the pro and con committee members are also due at that time. For more information regarding local voters’ pamphlet due dates and procedures, please contact the Elections Division at (425) 388-3321. Primary Election Date August 16, 2011 Resolution due May 24, 2011 Pro/Con Appoints due May 24, 2011 Pro/Con Rebuttals due June 10, 2011 Candidate Statements June 15, 2011 General Election Date November 8, 2011 Resolution due August 16, 2011 Pro/Con Appoints due August 16, 2011 Pro/Con Statements due August 30, 2011 Pro/Con Rebuttals due September 2, 2011 Candidate Statements August 24, 2011 Local Voters’ Pamphlet Deadlines This guide is for informational purpose only and does not take the place of local, state or federal laws. RCW, WAC and county code notations are offered as a reference for additional research only. 9 Election Costs Jurisdictions are responsible for sharing in the cost of elections in which they have a race or issue on the ballot (RCW 29A.04.410). The cost sharing model includes a minimum $50 fee as well as a portion of all costs associated with the election. If there is only one jurisdiction on the ballot, they will be responsible for the entire cost of the election. The cost of an election is calculated by the been invoiced, received and paid. Election and mailing costs (i.e. envelopes, postage, and ballots); legal advertising costs; other consumable supply costs; and elections overhead. The individual jurisdiction’s cost of an election is based on the total number of jurisdictions with a race or issue on the ballot and the number of registered voters in each of those jurisdictions. In most cases one can assume that the more jurisdictions that appear in an election the more cost to a jurisdiction will be. Jurisdictions that have an account with the Snohomish County Treasurer will have their portion of election costs drawn automatically election. A statement with the amount taken will be sent to each jurisdiction. Jurisdictions that do not have accounts with the Snohomish County Treasurer will be sent an invoice with a request for prompt payment. Questions regarding election costs or the process for calculating individual jurisdictions portions should be directed to the Snohomish County Elections Manager, Garth Fell at 425-388-3625. jurisdictions placing issues before voters in a Special Election that costs $200,000 to administer: Jurisdictions Registered Voters Portion Jurisdiction’s Portion of Costs A 1,000 .01 $2,000 B 24,000 .024 $48,000 Totals 100,000 1.00 $200,000 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 5, 2011 Page 18 ordinance was intended to move the building up to the property line if the back of the building faces the right-of-way. He has requested the architect ensure windows would face Edmonds Way and a portion of 9th Avenue to ensure it had the appearance of the front of the building. A preliminary revised plan shows the front of the bank facing Edmonds Way with a secondary entrance from the parking lot. Mr. Chave referred to the footnote in the ordinance that refers to the design objectives regarding location, entry, etc. Councilmember Wilson commented his 4-year old son often accompanies him to the bank. When he pointed out that a bank may soon replace the gas station, his son cried, saying there are already so many banks and he wanted the gas station to stay. This process should be educational to the Council with regard to other properties such as the old Skippers site and the near waterfront; people can develop those sites under the existing zone and the result may not be what the community envisions. Mr. Clifton commented in the current banking industry, he does not assume a building will retain its existing tenant and looks to future uses. With the building closer to the street, it could house a restaurant, a retail store, etc. He advised the building would look nearly the same whether it was located in the center or closer to the street other than the additional windows the architect included under the new scenario. Council President Peterson commented the larger setback with the building surrounded by a drive- through limits future tenants. MOTION FAILED (2-4), COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON AND COUNCILMEMBER WILSON VOTING YES. Mayor Cooper declared a brief recess. 9. DISCUSSION OF LEVY OPTIONS Council President Peterson advised discussion of levy options is scheduled as a placeholder on the Council agenda every other week. The deadline to place a levy on the August ballot is May 24. The Council packet also contains the election deadlines and costs. Mayor Cooper provided a PowerPoint regarding his levy proposal, advising the material in the PowerPoint was largely the same as was provided in his memo to the Council. Mayor Cooper explained the theme of his levy proposal was Safe Neighborhoods, Safe Streets and Parks for Everyone. He explained if nothing is done, by the end of 2012, the City will be below the one month reserve the Council adopted with the 2011 budget. He noted he rounded numbers so they would not necessarily match the spreadsheets. Mayor Cooper recognized the work done in 2009 by the Levy Committee chaired by Councilmember Wilson and the work done in 2010-2011 by the Levy Committee chaired by Councilmembers Plunkett and Buckshnis, particularly the work done by then Finance Director Lorenzo Hines and Citizen Levy Committee Member Mr. Haug that was presented to the Council a few weeks ago. He applied his version of political reality as far as what the voters might be willing to approve to what staff indicated the City needed. As a result the amount he proposes be included in a levy is significantly less than the need. Mayor Cooper reviewed his proposal for a 4-year levy on the August ballot: • 35 cents/$1000 Assessed Value • $2.25 million first year starting in 2012 • Increases 2.5% each year • $2.314 million in 2013 • $2.372 million in 2014 • $2.431 million in 2015 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 5, 2011 Page 19 He described the cost to the average Edmonds homeowner: • Average residential value $375,000 in 2011 (down from $403,000 in 2010) • $131.25/year in 2012 • $10.94/month in 2012 Mayor Cooper outlined his proposed spending plan: • Safe Neighborhoods $210,000/year o Restore and Redefine Crime Prevention Program • 1 civilian crime analyst and .5 FTE support staff • $129,000/year o Restore one entry level Police Officer • Not funded by Council in prior budget • $81,000/year • Safe Streets $704,000/year ($0.11) o About 4 lane miles per year of overlays o Less than half the projected annual need for overlays • Parks for Everyone $102,000/year o Yost Pool Operations $51,000 o Flower Program $51,000 • Remainder of levy funds: o Maintains current level of Operations through 2015 o Finishes 2015 with the Council mandated one month reserve Mayor Cooper reviewed the following summary: Priority $ Proposed $ Needed Police $210,000 $ 210,000 Streets $704,000 $1,500,000 Parks $102,000 $ 285,000 Deferred Maintenance on City-owned Buildings 0 $ 250,000 Reserves/Operations (at current level)s $1,234,000 $1,234,000 ECA Bond Debt 0 $ 200,000 TOTAL $2,250,000 $3,679,000 per $1000 35 cents 57 cents Mayor Cooper clarified if the economy does not improve, the City will need to talk to the public again about long term financing at the end of 4 years. He advised 35 cents generates approximately $2 million which is approximately the amount the City has lost due to the recession. How the Council prioritizes the amounts is an important discussion for the Council; his proposed priority was a way to get the conversation started. He explained the $285,000 in parks needs did not include any capital; it was only deferred maintenance in the parks system such as resurfacing tennis courts, etc. With regard to the August versus November ballot, Mayor Cooper advised there were a number of reasons he preferred August but the primary reason is that knowing the outcome of the levy in August will allow for better budget planning. He suggested the Council discuss their priorities. Council President Peterson reiterated this is the first of many discussions regarding levy options. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 5, 2011 Page 20 COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO EXTEND THE MEETING FOR 30 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Councilmember Wilson thanked Mayor Cooper for his levy proposal, noting the former Mayor was good at a number of things but he would not have brought a levy proposal to the Council. The Council has shown they are interested in a levy but cannot quite get there on their own without some mayoral leadership. Councilmember Buckshnis expressed her appreciation for Mayor Cooper’s levy proposal. She observed benefit costs were reduced and asked if that was due to the savings from AWC. Mayor Cooper advised the $320,000 reduction due to insurance savings was reflected in the 2012 forecast. Councilmember Buckshnis inquired about the $700,000 increase for transfers. Mayor Cooper proposed the ballot title transfer the $700,000 from the General Fund and into the Street Fund for overlays. Councilmember Buckshnis advised the Citizen Levy Committee will provide a recommendation. The Committee did not realize Mayor Cooper planned to propose fast tracking a levy to an August election. She expressed concern with the projections that utilized budget numbers. For example, she anticipated there was more than $2.1 million in ending working capital balance. Mayor Cooper explained it was his intent as soon as the Interim Finance Director completed the numbers, to have a new forecast with the 2010 actuals prepared. He agreed as the process moved forward in whatever configuration a levy takes, the forecasts need to be based on yearend actuals for 2010and not yearend projections. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked the cost of a special election in August. Mayor Cooper clarified August is not a special election; the primary election is in August. The cost depends on the number of measures on the ballot. City Clerk Sandy Chase answered it is also based on population. She referred to the guide for election costs in the Council packet, advising the cost for Edmonds 26,000 registered voters would be close to $48,000 if there were only three other jurisdictions in the election. She anticipated there would be more in the August election which would reduce the City’s cost. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked why Mayor Cooper prioritized 2.5 FTE for the Police Department when Human Resources has indicated they need additional staff and she was certain the Economic Development Department would like to have additional dedicated staff. Mayor Cooper acknowledged that although additional staff was needed in Finance and Human Resources, he anticipated in today’s economy where there is 10.3% unemployment in Snohomish County structuring a levy to add administrative FTE was in critical danger of failing compared to asking voters to restore critical positions in public safety. With prudent budgeting there may be an opportunity to add those FTEs during the budget process if a levy passed. He clarified the items in his proposal were items he suggested funds be dedicated to. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked for clarification regarding the proposal for 1 civilian crime analyst and .5 FTE support staff. Mayor Cooper answered the Police Department recommends 1.5 FTE to operate that critical program. He noted the Council could choose not to allocate funds to that program or include it in the reserve/operations line and fund it in the budget. He included it because public safety is important to the community, may help convince the voters to support a levy and is a needed service. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if the cost would be the same if the City put a smorgasbord of levy issues on a ballot such as a general levy, a parks levy, a streets levy, etc. Mayor Cooper answered the Council could put as many propositions as they wanted on the ballot; that was not his recommendation. Ms. Chase advised last year the auditor indicated the cost would not increase if there were additional ballot measures. Councilmember Buckshnis suggested the City could do five propositions such as ECA, parks, Yost Pool, police, etc. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 5, 2011 Page 21 Councilmember Wilson cautioned against putting more than one proposition on the ballot at one time. In his experience, the more questions there are on a ballot, the less likely any are to pass. To Councilmember Fraley-Monillas’ point, the Council and community has made public safety their number one priority in the Comprehensive Plan. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas clarified she was not questioning hiring a police officer; her question was the civilian crime analyst and the .5 FTE support staff. Mayor Cooper advised the crime analyst and the reconfiguration of the Crime Prevention Program is important to the overall public safety mission of the Police Department. Regardless of how a levy is packaged to the voters, slightly more than $1 million/year needs to be set aside to ensure a one month reserve in four years. In reality, the City also needs to set aside $200,000/year for the ECA bond debt. He advised the $100,000 the Council budgeted in 2011 for the ECA bond debt is not in the long term forecast. Council President Peterson commented he wanted to include funds in the levy for economic development/investment in the arts to help stabilize that resource in order to realize a return on investment in the future. Supporting institutions that are valuable as community assets as well as revenue generating assets in the future will pay dividends in the future. Mayor Cooper invited Councilmembers to inform him of items they would like to have included in levy scenarios. Councilmember Petso requested Council President Peterson schedule one or more public hearings on levy options in order to gather public feedback. She supported Councilmember Buckshnis’ proposal for multiple levies to allow voters to support specific items. She supported placing multiple levies on the ballot, noting any levy the voters passed would help. Some voters may welcome the opportunity to vote on specific levies and it may provide an opportunity for people passionate about an issue to help pass that specific levy. She invited the public to indicate whether they wanted an opportunity to vote on individual levies or whether they preferred one levy. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas observed the ECA bond was a known debt. Mayor Cooper explained the City paid the 2010 debt and there is $100,000 in the budget for 2011 but the debt is likely to be closer to $200,000 in 2011. He included the ECA in his list of priorities because it is the City’s debt. Regardless of whether the voters pass a levy, that bond debt will need to be considered in the 2012 budget. If the ECA bond debt is not included in a levy it will be funded in some other manner via the City’s budget. Councilmember Wilson reported he planned to make a proposal to the ECA this Friday that will suggest the City fund the $200,000 over the 4-years prior in exchange for structural changes at the ECA that will bring about greater transparency and a better structural alignment. He requested the Mayor develop a scenario that includes the $200,000 for the ECA debt in addition to the other priorities and $60,000 for the senior center. Mayor Cooper advised $64,000 is approximately 1 cent. Councilmember Wilson advised the City already allocates $60,000 to the Senior Center and that could be deducted from the proposed $704,000 for streets. Mayor Cooper recognized the Council could package a levy however they wanted. There are some items he feels strongly about such as police, streets and parks. Without funding for parks, streets and safety, the mission of the City is not fulfilled. Councilmember Wilson advised Councilmembers Buckshnis, Fraley-Monillas and he were joined by approximately 20 people at a special Public Safety & Human Resources Committee meeting before tonight’s Council meeting to discuss employee medical benefits. That discussion included recognition that addressing medical benefits in a way that maintains existing benefits at a reduced cost would send an important message to the voters. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 5, 2011 Page 22 Councilmember Plunkett preferred more funding for capital and maintenance and less for operating. The City’s ongoing expenses are labor and medical costs. If the increase is not slowed, he would have difficulty asking citizens to tax themselves for operating expenses. He was enthusiastic about maintenance/capital. Mayor Cooper responded he intentionally did not include large capital projects in his levy proposal because if the voters approved a levy and the City shows them they can be accountable, the City is in a better position to ask for bond issues for large projects such as the swimming pool and other major capital expenses. Councilmember Plunkett reiterated his enthusiasm for maintenance/capital but not for operating when the City has not gotten its largest operating expense under control. Mayor Cooper offered to meet with Councilmembers to talk about specific items or scenarios. Council President Peterson advised the next discussion of levy options will be on the April 19 agenda. Mayor Cooper advised he would endeavor to have the new forecasts prepared using yearend 2010 numbers. Council President Peterson advised he will be scheduling a discussion item on the April 26 agenda regarding the possible reallocation of REET funds. The legislature is also considering legislation that may provide more flexibility in the use of REET funds. 10. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Cooper reported on April 15 Mr. Williams, Mr. Koho and he will host a tour and conversation with a group of business and government leaders from Beijing, China. They will be in Seattle for a few weeks and are coming to Edmonds specifically to see the processes used in the wastewater treatment plant. Mayor Cooper reported the Regional Fire Authority (RFA) Planning Committee held their first organizational meeting last week where they adopted rules and established committee appointments. Councilmember Wilson will serve on the Level of Service Committee, Councilmember Petso will serve on the Finance Committee and he will serve on the Communications Committee. The Planning Committee consists of seven cities and two Fire Districts, a total of nine jurisdictions, the largest group to date in the State to put together a RFA. Mayor Cooper advised he will send Council President Peterson a memo tomorrow with his appointments to fill the Planning Board vacancies. He requested the Council interview them at the next available meeting. Mayor Cooper reported on a leak in the basement of the Anderson Center on Sunday as a result of a broken water line under a sink. The Fire Department responded and City staff pumped out 6 inches of water in parts of the basement. He thanked City staff for the time they took to ensure the Center could continue to operate. There was not a great deal of damage other than water on carpets that can be dried out. The water lines under the sinks have since been replaced. Mayor Cooper advised the State House released their capital and operating budget. Edmonds did not fare as badly as expected in the operating budget; 3.5% of the liquor tax profits were taken as well as 3.5% from a number of other pass through accounts, most of which were criminal justice accounts from which Edmonds does not receive a great deal of money. Rumor is the Senate will cut much deeper than the House. The bad news is none of the City’s capital or transportation requests were included in the House budget. Senators Shin and Chase are working hard to get funding for the Main Street project. Two or three of the City’s Public Works Trust Fund projects have survived. Given the $5 billion that had to be cut, Edmonds fared much better than other agencies. AM-3867 Item #: 7. City Council Meeting Date: 04/19/2011 Time: Submitted By:Sandy Chase Department:City Clerk's Office Review Committee: Committee Action: Type:Information Information Subject Title Report on City Council Committee Meetings of April 5 and April 12, 2011. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff For information. Previous Council Action N/A Narrative Attached are copies of the following City Council committee meeting minutes: •04-05-11 Public Safety/Human Resources Committee •04-12-11 Community Services/Development Services Committee •04-12-11 Finance Committee Note: The 04-12-11 meeting scheduled for the Public Safety/Human Resources Committee was canceled. Attachments 04-05-11 Public Safety/Human Resources Committee Minutes 04-12-11 CSDS Committee Minutes 04-12-11 Finance Committee Minutes Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Mayor Mike Cooper 04/14/2011 09:06 AM Final Approval Sandy Chase 04/14/2011 09:08 AM Form Started By: Sandy Chase Started On: 04/13/2011 10:52 AM Final Approval Date: 04/14/2011 Page 1 April 5, 2011 Public Safety/Human Resources Committee CITY OF EDMONDS PUBLIC SAFETY/HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE MINUTES APRIL 5, 2011 Committee Members Present: Council Member D.J. Wilson Council Member Diane Buckshnis Others Present: Council Member Adrienne Fraley Monillas, Police Chief Al Compaan, Assistant Police Chief Jim Lawless, Assistant Police Chief Gerry Gannon, HR Director Debi Humann, Recreation Services Manager Renee McRae, Environmental Education Coordinator Sally Lider, Cultural Services Manager Frances Chapin, Recreation Coordinator Tammy Rankins, Engineering Technician 2 JoAnne Zualuf, Executive Assistant Cindi Cruz, Cultural Services Assistant Kris Gillespie, Office Supervisor/SEIU Shop Steward Sue Johnson, Engineering Technician 3 Ed Sibrel, Parks & Recreation Director Carrie Hite, Fire Marshal John Westfall, City Attorney Jeff Taraday, City Clerk Sandy Chase, City Engineer Rob English, Public Works Director Phil Williams, Building Official Leonard Yarberry Public Present: Jack Loos, Volunteer Health Benefits Committee Consultant Roger Hertrich The meeting was called to order at 5:30 pm. MINUTES Council Member D.J. Wilson started the meeting by having all attendees introduce themselves. After introductions were made, Council Member Wilson explained that he served as a delegate on the labor council for the Edmonds Community College union and was present at the bargaining table [during those contract negotiations]. Council Member Wilson further stated that from his experience with negotiations, he would prefer to have had more flexibility [with regard to subjects of bargaining] and he expressed concerns about AWC being a “good” partner for the City. When it comes to benefits, it is his goal to provide the same services and benefits [as AWC] at the same cost or at a lower cost. Council Member Wilson stated that it is also his goal [and possibly that of Council Member Diane Buckshnis] to “do more with less.” Council Member Wilson explained that at the last HR Committee meeting a discussion was held regarding the best health care insurance options for the City. At that meeting, Volunteer Consultant Jack Loos spoke to the subject (see minutes of that meeting) and the recommendation of the HR Benefits Committee was reviewed. Council Member Wilson stated that he came up with a self-funded insurance model [to share] and that the goal of tonight’s meeting was to review the self-funded model and to have a conversation amongst the committee members, Volunteer Consultant Loos and HR Director Humann (prior to having a further conversation with the rest of council) to determine the problems associated with a self-funded plan, to understand how it really works, and to clear up any misconceptions about self-funded plans. Council Member Wilson provided a memo to the committee members, Volunteer Consultant Loos and HR Director Humann. Council Member Wilson stated that it was his intention to provide the memo and template of the self- funded insurance model to council. Council Member W ilson explained that it was his understanding that the City’s Health Benefits Committee, with the assistance of Volunteer Consultant Loos and the Consultant/Broker Wells Fargo, went to market to see what healthcare insurance options were available. The goal of the Health Benefits Committee was to find reasonable plans but not to increase the city’s current healthcare insurance costs. Council Member Wilson pointed out that [in his opinion] Wells Fargo only solicited information from the big insurance companies such as Regence and Premera which do not primarily handle self-funded plans. Council Member Wilson further stated that he believes there is no way that the City can get a good self-funded insurance model without Page 2 April 5, 2011 Public Safety/Human Resources Committee talking to self-funding experts, which would involve a third party administrative committee (with some additional involved costs). Council Member Wilson pointed out that under the current fully-funded structure (AWC plan), there will always be a 10-13% increase in costs each year and the City will not be able to change the benefit options under the current plan. Council Member Wilson also summarized that the Health Benefits Committee suggested staying with AWC for 2011 and possibly 2012 and opting to go with the HealthFirst plan, which would save the City some money. Council Member Wilson explained that, as he understood it, the majority of costs for health insurance premiums for each dollar paid (60-65%) are spent on patient care costs while the remaining 30-35% of each dollar is spent on administrative costs, profit, taxes and reserves, etc. The basic “premise “of self-funded insurance is to cut out the administrative costs and possibly keep the additional savings [if there are any] with the City. If there is a surplus (or “extra” money) additional programs for benefits may be offered with the savings such as smoking cessation, etc. Council Member Wilson stated that the next premise of self-funding is to diversify risk by having a larger risk pool to dilute the risk. Premiums are based on risk and we may be in a higher risk class. Council Member Wilson explained that another key element in moving to a self-funded plan is to examine employee utilization costs (history of what types of services are used by employees such as in vitro fertilization) for the last three years. Council Member Wilson also pointed out that in order for self-funding to work, there has to be enough in “reserves” [money held by the City to pay out on healthcare claims]. Under the current structure, the City spends $2.7M in premium costs that will continue to escalate with the CPI (cost of living increases). Council Member W ilson emphasized that his concern is not with the necessary expense involved in paying for patient care services but with the 30-35% that could be saved with a self-funded plan model. Council Member Wilson explained that in his self- funded model, the estimate is that 75% of costs would be spent on patient care services. If a third party administrator (TPA) was retained to handle the self-funded insurance plan, it would cost approximately $100,000 a year and this could possibly be done without the City having to obtain a loan for reserves. Council Member Wilson further explained that stop-loss coverage would be purchased to create a maximum out-of- pocket cost for the City for each claim cost and that he thought that when the City was previously self-funded, the City did not have stop-loss coverage. HR Director Humann pointed out that the City did have stop-loss coverage when it was self-insured previously. Council Member Wilson stated that he found a carrier for stop loss coverage with a $40,000 stop loss coverage plan at an annual cost of $280,000. Council Member Wilson explained that if no changes are made with regard to health insurance plans, the City will have a $2.7M cost anyway. Using the self-funded model in comparison (with 75% of costs for patient care) and adding back in the cost of paying for claims through a TPA as well as stop loss coverage, the total cost would be approximately $2.4M, with an estimated savings to the City of $275,000. Council Member Wilson further discussed his good working relationships with various insurance brokers that he feels are credible, etc. as well as not putting himself in a situation that would cause a conflict of interest [with his self-insurance background]. Council Member Wilson further explained that one of the issues is that the TPA (without a claims history) would likely place the City into the highest risk pool possible (1.5 -2 times what our cost is now) but that we may, over time, get the money that is not paid out on claims back (provided that we did not incur a number of catastrophic healthcare claims that would reach the stop loss limit) by having the unspent funds placed in a trust fund. Council Member Wilson further discussed how accruing the unspent funds (after 6 years) may create a considerable savings to the City. Council Member Wilson estimated that by years three and four (with a claims history), the self-funded model could be adjusted actuarially to reflect the lower healthcare insurance cost and savings to the City. In summary, Council Member Wilson stated that the only feasible way the City could continue on the fully-funded Regence Plan under the AWC model is to spend more money or to cut benefit levels and City premium costs by switching to Healthfirst. Volunteer Consultant Loos stated that he does not claim to be an expert in self-funded insurance but it is clear that insurance companies are “out to make money.” In Volunteer Consultant Loos opinion, overhead costs are “dramatic” and tend to comprise at least 50% of the total costs for healthcare premiums. Additionally, self-funded reserves must be established and it needs to be determined as to what amount that should be. In a consortium pool like Page 3 April 5, 2011 Public Safety/Human Resources Committee AWC, the City is currently placed in a risk pool with all of the other cities that may skew the risk pool (creating higher costs for the City). Volunteer Consultant Loos stated that one of the unknown pieces of information is whether or not we are benefitting from the current risk pool or not (since it is likely that half of the cities are paying higher than the average cost for premiums and the other half is likely paying lower than the average cost for premiums based on the combined risk pool). Council Member Wilson opined that this is why it will be important to see our claims history (utilization review). Volunteer Consultant Loos stated that some of the concerns with self-funded insurance are: 1) the unknown impacts of future Federal healthcare legislation; 2) annual and lifetime maximum healthcare insurance limits no longer being in place; 3) dependent children being eligible for coverage now through age 26; 4) the Mental Health Parity Act – requiring mental healthcare coverage level to be the same as for other conditions; 5) healthcare purchasing cooperative options in 2015; 6) budget constraints; 7) an unstable population or workforce due to economic conditions including the possibility of layoffs. Council Member Wilson pointed out that under our current health insurance plan, every additional benefit must be paid for. Under the self-funded model, it may be possible for all kinds of additional benefits to be available that may not be utilized very often. Council Member Diane Buckshnis inquired as to whether the increase in medical costs (as Council Member Wilson notes in his self-funded model) will always be at 13% per year. Council Member Wilson explained that the rate of medical inflation in the last twenty years (with the exception of the 1990’s) has caused the average to be around 13%. Volunteer Consultant Loos explained that it was important to distinguish between the CPI and the increase in medical costs; the increase in healthcare premiums each year is not based on the CPI. HR Director Humann pointed out that the average increase in healthcare premiums has been about 10% for the last few years. Council Member Buckshnis inquired as to whether self-funding would require that the City had $4.6M in reserves to start. There was some discussion that followed between Council Member Wilson and Council Member Buckshnis about the $3M that is currently being paid out in healthcare insurance premiums and the usage of the $1.3M associated with transitioning the fire department to Fire District 1. Council Member Buckshnis inquired as to how the stop loss policy works and Council Member Wilson explained that stop loss coverage limits the City’s liability for the amount paid out on a claim within a specific period of time not to exceed a set cost ceiling per claim. Volunteer Consultant Loos further clarified that, when speaking about aggregate stop loss, the stop loss insurance carrier determines what they think the insured’s total claims costs will be then they add an additional 25% to the total cost to the insured. Council Member Wilson stated that currently, if there is a benefit that is not covered under AWC Regence Plan A, the individual users of the plan have to pay for that benefit out of pocket. With a Benefits Committee under self-funding, the City has the ability to choose additional benefits to add to the plan. Council Member Buckshnis inquired as to who the members of the committee would be. Volunteer Consultant Loos clarified that the Benefits Committee members would have the authority to make benefits decisions (not reporting to council) with confidentiality. There was a question from one of the attendees about self-funded insurance possibly having greater costs to the City than what is projected in the self-funded model. Council Member Wilson stated that a more realistic threat to increased costs to self-funding is finding out that our risk pool is higher than the population at large (or average). Council Member Wilson stated that he believes two important self-funding questions to consider are: 1) Does the City want to take the cash flow “hit” now to start; and 2) do we think we have an employee population which wants to be actively engaged in their healthcare insurance plan. Recreation Manager Renee McRae stated that, having participated in self-insurance before at the City, she would have some concerns with the unknown risk pool under a self-funded plan. Ms. McRae also stated that she heard the HealthFirst plan has significantly reduced benefits from our current Plan A. HR Director Humann explained that while there are $10 co-pays under the Healthfirst plan, and the hospital coverage level is 90% as opposed to 100% under Regence Plan A with a maximum out of pocket of $1000 for hospital stays, on the offset, routine and preventative care are covered under Healthfirst at 100%. These services are currently not covered under the current Regence Plan A (including well-adult and child visits, etc.) which results in significant out of pocket for most users. Page 4 April 5, 2011 Public Safety/Human Resources Committee HR Director Humann stated that every employer does need to look at healthcare insurance costs. The City was self-funded several years ago and HR Director Humann stated that she served on the Appeal/Benefits Committee. This committee was very difficult to operate because it is made up of employees and the culture is such that a benefit could be asked for, but if it was denied, it made it very hard to continue on with the model due to “guilt” factors (of disallowing employee benefits) even though it was not fiscally responsible and based on good cause. HR Director Humann stated this experience was a learning one and that better planning would have helped the committee. One example is when the group decided to add benefits such as well-baby examinations, $250 toward physicals (for every covered employee and dependent), in addition to adding orthotics without any actuarial research. The cost of these additional services greatly impacted and “bankrupted” the plan. HR Director Humann said that the principle of self-funding is an excellent way to select benefits and contain costs of a healthcare insurance plan. HR Director Humann said her main concern about self-funding, however, is in the timing. With Federal legislation coming down the pipeline as well as having a smaller employee population size (and potential layoffs without the levy passing nor having the additional employees from the former fire department) along with the minimal size of the HR staff, self-funding may not be feasible. Even with a TPA with the prior self-funded plan at the City, the HR staff spent a lot of time on appeals, claims issues and working with Finance, etc. Council Member Wilson inquired as to whether or not Finance paid for all claims under the self-funded plan. HR Director Humann stated that she didn’t handle that part, but believed they approved the claims. HR Director Humann asked if the City moves $1M to front the self-funded plan, will it bring the City closer to having to do layoffs since the money to do so is not a readily liquid asset. HR Director Humann stated that she is very concerned because while she believes that the long-term impact of self-funded insurance is very beneficial, in the current economic condition, how is it possible to fund this. The timing, the cost, the employee base and lack of HR staffing are all factors [in her opinion]. Council Member Wilson stated that the issues that HR Director Humann brought up are all reasons to bring forth a levy and that these very issues could help support one. Additionally, it is clear that more HR staff is needed and going through the budget process could assist with this. HR Director Humann asked (if a self-funded model is the health insurance proposal) would it not be expected that a proposal would have to go out to the market in order to come up with a self-funded plan to propose to the Council and the unions. She further stated that if we know what the plan model is (HealthFirst with 100% hospital coverage), and with HR putting together a census, shouldn’t the next step be to take that information to the market and seek hard numbers for consideration. Council Member Wilson stated that in theory, the union could be provided with the Healthfirst plan benefit level [under a self-funded plan] and not have to pay AWC the 30% overhead. There was some discussion that followed about the Appeals/Benefits Committee process. Council Member Wilson stated that he is not in favor of an internal Appeals/Benefits Committee. There was some discussion that followed about the idea/need of bringing a self-funded proposal forward to council/unions. Council Member Wilson expressed to the attendees that the $1.3M from the transition of the fire department to Fire District 1 has been “earmarked” for the council’s interest in self-funded health insurance. Recreation Services Manager McRae pointed out that a decision has not been made by council at this point to commit to self-funded health insurance. HR Director Humann asked for clarification as to benefits usage under a self-funded model- are the benefits paid for only when accessed. Council Member Buckshnis stated that [in her opinion] it would be important to have experts on the Benefits Committee. HR Director Humann responded that one of the values of the self-funded plan is to have employee input on the process. By having an external Benefit Committee without employee participation, it may take away from this and it would appear, in fact, that we (as a city) could not make the plan choices for our program but that they would be decided by the external Benefit Committee. Council Member Wilson stated that the appeals process only pertains to certain claims and that if needed, the committee can examine line items for each service. Assistant Police Chief Gannon asked if retiree health insurance coverage was available to retirees if the City switches to a self-funded plan. HR Director Humann stated that COBRA would be offered, but that it is not a legal Page 5 April 5, 2011 Public Safety/Human Resources Committee requirement to provide subsidized retiree healthcare plan options (although it is unlikely that the City would not consider this). Engineering Technician Ed Sibrel pointed out that there are considerable software and security requirements (regarding HIPAA regulations) that would be required that would require additional costs with the self-funded plan that need to be kept in mind. In closing, Council Member Wilson stated that the committee would resume discussion about the healthcare insurance plan (self-funded) on the second Tuesday in May @ 5:30 pm. Council Member Wilson strongly encouraged the union attendees to take the memo he provided on self-funded insurance to share with their union members. The following action was taken regarding the remaining items scheduled on the agenda: 1. Authorization to surplus and sell Police Department equipment. Action: Forward to City Council consent agenda with recommendation to approve. 2. Adopt by reference RCW 9A.56.063, making or possessing motor vehicle theft tools. Councilmember Wilson asked that this item be placed on the committee agenda for April 12th, however Councilmember Buckshnis said she felt it could be placed on the consent agenda as it was a matter of adopting an existing RCW. Assistant Chief of Police Gannon gave a brief explanation of the agenda item. Councilmember Wilson agreed that the item could be placed on the consent agenda for the next regular City Council meeting. Action: Forward to City Council consent agenda with recommendation to approve. 3. Close out Subcontract 87898, Puget Sound Small Vessel PRND (Preventive Radiological/Nuclear Detection), DNDO Action: Forward to City Council consent agenda with recommendation to approve. 4. Discussion regarding self-funded medical insurance This item was discussed earlier in the meeting and will also be scheduled on the May 10 Committee Agenda. 5. Discussion of compensation consultant This item was forwarded to the April 12 Committee Agenda. 6. Discussion of new council staff position related to budget/financials/insurance. This item was forwarded to the April 12 Committee Agenda. 7. Operations policy for Shell Valley emergency access road. Action: Forward to City Council consent agenda with recommendation to approve. The meeting adjourned at approximately 6:50 p.m. M I N U T E S Community Services/Development Services Committee Meeting April 12, 2011 Elected Officials Present: Staff Present: Council Member Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Chair Phil Williams, Public Works Director Council Member Michael Plunkett Rob English, City Engineer Jerry Shuster,Stormwater Eng Program Mgr Kernen Lien, Associate Planner Renee McRae, Recreation Manager Carrie Hite, Parks, Rec. & Cultural Services Director The committee convened at 7:00 p.m. A. FEMA Biological Opinion Mr. Lien gave a brief explanation of the item, including laying out the City's three options to comply with the the upcoming FEMA deadline. The Councilmembers asked questions regarding floodplains and Staff showed a map that indicated the small floodplain areas in Edmonds. The Councilmembers agreed with the Staff recommendation to go with compliance option number 3 (Permit-by-Permit compliance) and forwarded it to the full Council's consent agenda. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. B. Authorization for the Mayor to sign the contract with the Edmonds-South Snohomish County Historical Society for the 2011 Edmonds Market. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. C. Authorization for the Mayor to sign the contract with the Edmonds Arts Festival Association for the 2011 Edmonds Arts Festival. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. D. Authorization for the Mayor to sign the contract with the Greater Edmonds Chamber of Commerce for the 4th of July parade and fireworks display. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. E. Authorization for the Mayor to sign the contract with the Greater Edmonds Chamber of Commerce for the 2011 Taste of Edmonds. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. CS/DS Committee Minutes April 12, 2011 Page 2 2 F. Authorization for the Mayor to sign the contract with the Greater Edmonds Chamber of Commerce for the 2011 Classic Car Show. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. G. 2011 Senior Center Agreement ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. H. Authorization for the Mayor to sign utility easements for the Lift Station 2 Improvements Project. Mr. English reviewed the scope of the Lift Station 2 project and discussed how operating and maintaining the existing lift station is difficult given the age and current location of the facility. He explained to the committee that the value of the easements were determined by the Appraisal Group of the Northwest and the cost would be paid by sewer utility rates (412 utility fund). There were follow-up questions on the project and how this project is tied to the City’s sewer system. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. I. Quarterly Public Works Capital Project Report. Mr. English, reviewed the Quarterly Public Works Capital Project Report with the Committee. He explained that the purpose of the report is to provide the committee with information on projects managed by the Public Works Department. ACTION: None. J. Traffic Impact Fee Annual Report. Mr. English reviewed the 2010 traffic impact fee report and answered questions from the committee on the current amount of traffic impact fees, how they are assessed and what type of projects qualify for impacts fees. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. The meeting adjourned at 8:05p.m. FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES April 12, 2011 7:07 p.m. Present: Councilmember Petso Councilmember Bernheim Staff: Carrie Hite, Parks and Recreation Director Carl Nelson, CIO Public: Ron Wambolt Roger Hertrich Bruce Witenberg Councilmember Petso called the meeting to order at 7:07 p.m. in the Jury Meeting Room. B. Discussion on Park Impact Fees Ms. Hite explained an impact fee is a fee charged by a city or county to developers to pay the costs of providing public facilities or improving existing ones needed as a result of the new development. She emphasized impact fees could only be used for facilities needed for new growth. For Edmonds, anything in the Park, Recreation and Open Space Plan could not be funded by a park impact fee; a new plan would need to be developed to define facilities needed for new development. She provided a range of park impact fees in other jurisdictions and provided the formula for calculating park impact fees: 1. Value of parks & recreation inventory divided by current population = capital Investment per person 2. Capital investment per person multiplied by forecast population growth = value needed for growth 3. Value need for growth less value of existing capacity = investment needed for growth 4. Investment needed for growth less city investment for growth = investment to be paid by growth 5. Investment to be paid by growth multiplied by growth population = growth cost per person 6. Growth cost per person multiplied by average person per dwelling unit = impact fee per dwelling unit Ms. Hite provided a comparison of Edmonds’ residential development history and estimated impact fee projections for 2007-2010 (using Mukilteo’s impact fee amount). She noted a teardown is not subject to a park impact fee unless it is replaced by more than the original density. Councilmember Petso summarized based on the estimates, had the City been charging a park impact fee since 2007, the City would have approximately $300,000 to invest in recreational facilities within 6 years of the date they were collected. Ms. Hite summarized park impact fees are one tool; she encouraged the Council to consider other tools such as establishing a metropolitan park district, park levy or bond, etc. Councilmember Petso asked whether the City’s Park, Recreation and Open Space Plan was written prospectively and accounted for growth. Ms. Hite explained the City’s Plan was deficit-based rather than growth-based. Councilmember Bernheim expressed his support for fees on new growth to pay for services. Action: Ms. Hite will develop estimates that could be used to calculate an impact fee for presentation at the May Finance Committee meeting. She will also research statutory requirements for establishing a park impact fee. Finance Committee Minutes, Page 2 A. Quarterly Report Regarding Fiber Optic Opportunities Mr. Nelson reviewed Fiber Project Costs 2006-2010 and Return on Investment. Staff is pursuing local private businesses who are interested in fiber optics. The ECA and the Port are interested in connecting. A contract for administrative services has been presented to SNOCOM; staff is awaiting their response. The return on investment is on track; breakeven approximately April 2012. One unexpected expenditure in 2010 was a $2500 permit to cross Sound Transit property to run fiber to the Port. Sound Transit required the use of their contractor who quoted the project very high ($41,000 versus $5,000-$12,000 estimate) so that is not being pursued. This will delay hooking up the Port. Mr. Nelson reported the argument before the State Court of Appeals occurred in January and an opinion is expected June/July. Action: Schedule Quarterly Report on the Consent Agenda C. Monthly General Fund Update No representatives from the Finance Department were present. Action: Recognizing that this is at least the second month that a report has not been provided, Councilmember Bernheim offered to speak with Mayor Cooper about having a Finance Department representative attend the next Finance Committee meeting. D. Update on Financial Policies and Reporting No representatives from the Finance Department were present. Councilmember Petso relayed the origin of this item was an email from Councilmember Buckshnis asking whether the financial policies should be postponed until a new Finance Director is hired. Councilmember Petso preferred to take advantage of whatever Mayor Cooper and Councilmember Bernheim developed with former Finance Director Lorenzo Hines as well as the expertise of the City’s temporary Finance Director and a new Finance Director. Action: Councilmembers Petso and Bernheim will schedule a meeting with the City’s temporary Finance Director Jim Tarte and Mayor Cooper to outline financial policies and implementation of current policies. E. Public Comments Ron Wambolt, Edmonds, commented having no one here from Finance was a missed growth opportunity for staff members. He recalled former Finance Director Kathleen Junglov often had finance staff accompany her to Finance Committee meetings. Bruce Witenberg, Edmonds, Board Member of Visiting Nurse Services of the Northwest, reported Dan Dixon, Swedish VP of External Affairs, indicated Swedish Edmonds is interested in talking with the City about the Strategic Plan and fiber optics. Mr. Nelson reported when Swedish was planning the purchase of Stevens, they already had contracts with other vendors for high speed broadband. Those contracts have 1-2 years remaining; staff is discussing opportunities with them related to fiber optics. Adjournment – The meeting adjourned at 7:38 PM.