The URL can be used to link to this page

2011.12.06 CC Agenda Packet AGENDA EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL Council Chambers, Public Safety Complex 250 5th Ave. North, Edmonds DECEMBER 6, 2011 6:30 P.M. - CALL TO ORDER 1. (30 Minutes) Convene in executive session regarding labor negotiations per RCW 42.30.140(4)(b). 7:00 P.M. - RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION (Flag Salute) 2. (5 Minutes) Approval of Agenda 3. (5 Minutes) Approval of Consent Agenda Items A.Roll Call B. AM-4399 Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of November 22, 2011. C. AM-4401 Approval of claim checks #129029 through #129068 dated November 21, 2011 for $559,705.28, and claim checks #129069 through #129220 dated December 1, 2011 for $392,447.78. D. AM-4355 Authorization for Mayor to sign a Professional Services Agreement with Parametrix for design services with respect to the Main Street Decorative Lighting and Sidewalk Enhancements Project. 4. (30 Minutes) AM-4403 Adoption of bond ordinances and resolution. 5. (30 Minutes) AM-4406 Public hearing on a potential amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Map that would adjust the boundaries of the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center. 6. (30 Minutes) Public hearing on a proposed Code amendment to ECDC 20.40.030 and ECDC Packet Page 1 of 297 6. (30 Minutes) AM-4407 Public hearing on a proposed Code amendment to ECDC 20.40.030 and ECDC 17.40.020 adding limited exceptions from building height limits for (1) certain solar energy installations and (2) replacement of existing rooftop equipment with energy efficient upgrades. 7.Audience Comments (3 minute limit per person)* *Regarding matters not listed on the Agenda as Closed Record Review or as Public Hearings. 8. (60 Minutes) AM-4349 Discussion on five projects related to the Capital Facilities Plan Element update (2012-2017) to the City's Comprehensive Plan and Capital Improvement Program: Five Corners Roundabout, 9th Ave transportation improvements, Traffic Calming Program, 4th Ave Cultural Corridor and Public Market. 9. (15 Minutes) AM-4397 Non Represented Salary and Benefits Study: Survey Comparators 10. (15 Minutes) AM-4404 Extension of sunset date for Citizens Economic Development Commission. 11. (5 Minutes) Mayor's Comments 12. (15 Minutes) Council Comments ADJOURN Packet Page 2 of 297 AM-4399 Item #: 3. B. City Council Meeting Date: 12/06/2011 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 November 22, 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 11-22-11 Draft City Council Minutes Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Mayor Dave Earling 12/01/2011 02:00 PM Final Approval Sandy Chase 12/01/2011 02:17 PM Form Started By: Sandy Chase Started On: 11/30/2011 03:50 PM Final Approval Date: 12/01/2011 Packet Page 3 of 297 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 22, 2011 Page 1 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL DRAFT MINUTES November 22, 2011 Following a reception at 6:30 p.m. in honor of Mayor Mike Cooper, 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 Michael Plunkett, Councilmember Lora Petso, Councilmember Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember ELECTED OFFICIALS ABSENT D. J. Wilson, Councilmember ALSO PRESENT Alex Springer, Student Representative STAFF PRESENT Al Compaan, Police Chief Stephen Clifton, Community Services/Economic Development Director Shawn Hunstock, Finance Director Carrie Hite, Parks & Recreation Director Carl Nelson, CIO 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. 2. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, 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 NOVEMBER 15, 2011. C. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #128933 THROUGH #129028 DATED NOVEMBER 17, 2011 FOR $693,738.54. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL DIRECT DEPOSIT AND CHECKS #50934 THROUGH #50956 FOR THE PERIOD NOVEMBER 1, 2011 THROUGH NOVEMBER 15, 2011 FOR $628,808.51. D. APPROVAL OF PAYMENT FOR HOLIDAY BUY BACK DAYS FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT COMMISSIONED EMPLOYEES & POLICE SUPPORT SERVICE EMPLOYEES IN THE AMOUNT OF $135,645.66 AND KELLY DAY BUY BACK FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT COMMISSIONED EMPLOYEES IN THE AMOUNT OF $37,986.29 PER UNION CONTRACTS. Packet Page 4 of 297 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 22, 2011 Page 2 E. GENERAL FUND UPDATE - SEPTEMBER 2011. F. 3RD QUARTER BUDGET REPORT 2011. G. 2012 CONTRACT FOR EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL SR. EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT. H. INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR SPECIAL WEAPONS AND TACTICS TEAM (SWAT). I. SET PROPERTY TAX LEVY RATE FOR 2012: ORDINANCE NO. 3860 PROVIDING FOR THE ANNUAL TAX LEVY BY INCREASING THE REGULAR PROPERTY TAX LEVY BY THE CURRENT 101% LEVY LIMIT, THEREBY LEVYING AN ESTIMATED REGULAR PROPERTY TAX LEVY OF $9,700,000, AN EMS LEVY OF $3,300,000 AND LEVYING $895,640 FOR VOTED INDEBTEDNESS FOR THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMPLEX, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. J. RESOLUTION NO. 1262 - IN HONOR OF MAYOR COOPER'S SERVICE TO EDMONDS. 3. PRESENTATION OF RESOLUTION IN RECOGNITION OF MAYOR MIKE COOPER. Council President Peterson read Resolution No. 1262 commending, thanking and recognizing Mayor Mike Cooper for his service to the citizens of Edmonds as Mayor, County Council Member and State Representative. Council President Peterson thanked Mayor Cooper for all he has done in a short time as Mayor. Councilmember Plunkett commented when Mayor Cooper took office, the Finance Department was in disarray and the Council had little trust in the City’s financial reporting. In a short time, Mayor Cooper brought in an interim Finance Director and with that person the Council was able to forge trust, reliability, accountability and respect with regard to the financial information that was provided to the Council. The Council is now ready to pass a budget on which there has been little question regarding the numbers. Councilmember Plunkett summarized Mayor Cooper deserves a great deal of credit for his work to rebuild the Council’s trust with the Finance Department. Councilmember Plunkett also commended Mayor Cooper for creating friendships on the Council. Although several Councilmembers did not know Mayor Cooper well before he was appointed, after serving as Mayor, most would consider him a friend. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented she has had the privilege of knowing Mayor Cooper and his wife Crystal for the past 15 years. She commended Mayor Cooper for his sense of humor while serving as Mayor, recognizing the job of a Councilmember and a Mayor often requires a sense of humor. Councilmember Petso thanked Mayor Cooper for his contribution to the City. Councilmember Bernheim echoed the previous comments, pointing out Mayor Cooper’s efforts to rebuild the trust with regard to the City’s finances was a tremendous accomplishment. He cited the numerous transportation improvements in the past year including the Community Transit lot, the Sound Transit station, the Interurban Trail and the Shell Creek emergency road as well as continued emphasis on energy conservation efforts such as solar and New Energy Cities. He summarized Mayor Cooper was a friend of government who views government as having a positive role with available tax revenues. Councilmember Buckshnis echoed the previous comments. Council President Peterson commented he had the honor of traveling to Washington D.C. with Mayor Cooper and see him take a leadership role with the federal delegation and championing Edmonds’ causes. He recognized Mayor Cooper for his steadfast work on environmental issues. He appreciated Mayor Packet Page 5 of 297 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 22, 2011 Page 3 Cooper’s leadership, friendship and guidance during a tough year. He also thanked Mayor Cooper for hiring Parks & Recreation Director Carrie Hite, a fantastic addition to the City. Mayor Cooper thanked the Council for their kind remarks, commenting it had been a pleasure to serve with them. During the past 14-15 months, he has done what he thought was in the interest of a city he came to when he was 12 years old. It would not have been possible to accomplish the things that Councilmembers mentioned without the work of the Council and City staff. He relayed that Edmonds completed the installation of its electric car charging stations more quickly than any other city that received a federal grant. That was possible due to the dedication of the Council and City staff. Mayor Cooper looked forward to spending time with his three, soon to be four, grandchildren. He recognized his wife, Crystal, for her support during his 13 years in elected office and 31 years in public service. He and his wife will travel to Olympia the first week of December to celebrate the birth of their newest granddaughter and the swearing in of their son to the Olympia City Council. His son will be the fourth generation, beginning with his grandfather, to serve in elected office. 4. ANNUAL REPORT - PROSECUTOR Jim Zachor, Zachor & Thomas, distributed an outline highlighting successes during the past year. He introduced his partner, Melanie Thomas Dane, and the primary lead attorney for Edmonds prosecution, Rachel Hunter. He described their history with Edmonds, beginning in 1995with his former partner Jeffrey Goodwin, who is now a South District Court Judge. He thanked Chief Compaan and Judge Fair for their support. Mr. Zachor commented on the increase in domestic violence cases, noting over 50% of victims recant and decline to assist with prosecution. Ms. Hunter recently tried a domestic violence case without the victim and was able to convict the defendant using a 911 tape. Their firm now has eight attorneys; two new attorneys were added in the past year, one formerly with the Snohomish County Prosecutor’s office and another formerly with the King County Prosecutor’s office. Staff from their office are available 24/7 for officers in the field. Their office is also Special Prosecutor for Snohomish County, receiving referrals from the Snohomish County Prosecutor’s office when there are conflicts. Mr. Zachor explained they have expanded their efforts in Edmonds substantially, with cases four days a week. Video hearings from the Snohomish County jail have reduced the use of police officers for transport as well as security. Lynnwood’s participation has assisted with deferring some of the costs associated with video hearings and other cities are also interested in participating. Mr. Zachor explained one of his specialties is drug and felony forfeitures. They prosecute for the South Snohomish County Narcotics Task Force that Edmonds participates in. Prosecutions increased from $3,000 last year to $13,000 this year and there are plans to continue that increase. There have been numerous car seizures and over 200 weapons have been seized and forfeited. Melanie Thomas Dane, Zachor & Thomas described video-in-custody hearings that begin in 2010. Through a collaborative effort between the court, jail staff, public defender’s office, and the judge, Edmonds is one of the first municipalities with a video-in-custody calendar with the county jail. They do video-in-custody hearings twice a week; the prosecutor, clerk and judge are in the courtroom and defendants and public defender at the county jail. They are able to resolve up to 10 cases at a time, alleviating security and budgetary issues associated with transporting defendants to court. Before video- in-custody hearings, cases were often not processed efficiently, resulting in additional jail time and additional costs. Their court time has expanded over the past ten years from one day to four days; they are also in court on Fridays when there are trials. Packet Page 6 of 297 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 22, 2011 Page 4 Ms. Dane explained they prosecute misdemeanor crimes as well as code enforcement cases and traffic infractions. She referred to their outline, advising the number of filings was criminal only and did not include code enforcement or traffic violations. They review charging decisions and work closely with the Police Department including a recent training session regarding new case law and search and seizure and report writing issues. Their office would have a much more difficult job in court if not for the City’s outstanding Police Department; their success is due to the good job done by the Edmonds Police Department. She invited Councilmembers to watch court proceedings, noting other police agencies/departments often visit Edmonds to watch the video-in-custody hearings. 5. ANNUAL REPORT – PUBLIC DEFENDER Public Defender Jim Feldman commented the biggest issue for the City in the future is the State Supreme Court’s opinion regarding standards for the number of cases a public defender can handle. The Court recently delayed their opinion until July 1, 2012. He anticipated the Court would give cities at least 18 months to budget for increased costs. He expected Edmonds’ public defender budget would double if the standards that have been proposed by the State Bar Association are passed and would require at least 4-5 attorneys. The increased caseload cited by Mr. Zachor and Ms. Dane has not adversely impacted his office and they have maintained the same staffing level. He noted fewer police officers result in fewer filings, decreasing the workload of the public defender’s office. He looked forward to another year as the City’s public defender. 6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS 32nd District State Representative Cindy Ryu, Shoreline, thanked Mayor Cooper for his service, both to the City of Edmonds and as a Shoreline firefighter. She referred to Agenda Item 9, expressing her support for the Highway 99 alignment even though the cost is considerably higher, recognizing that may be the only opportunity for Highway 99 to be an economic development corridor particularly for transit oriented development. If light rail is constructed on I-5, she was uncertain whether Metro would be able to provide east-west connections to allow riders to reach the freeway alignment without driving. She expressed appreciation for the letter from Mayor Cooper requesting light rail through Edmonds via Highway 99 be considered if a Highway 99 alignment is studied further. Don Hall, Edmonds, commended Mayor Cooper. He also spoke in favor of the following decision packages: • Financial software update – greater transparency requires up-to-date software to improve efficiency and free up staff time and possibly increase the number of fiber optic customers who generate revenue for the City. • Public Records and Document Management System – the City cannot operate efficiently with an antiquated system. As public records requests continue to increase, all records need to be quickly and easily accessible, saving time and money. The setup cost is a one-time contracted expense. The City has considered upgrading this system for least four years; continued delay costs the City money. • Parks Street Tree Maintenance Costs – a tree planting program requires accompanying maintenance to avoid problems. Removing trees due to insufficient maintenance is not a good use of City money. Mr. Hall summarized the above were things that private industry would not hesitate to fund because of savings in the long run. Next, he agreed a ban on polystyrene was the right thing to do but urged the Council not to “talk it to death” but simply do the research and pass an ordinance. He also urged the public to support small businesses on November 26 Small Business Saturday. Packet Page 7 of 297 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 22, 2011 Page 5 Matt Gamble, Edmonds, inquired about electrical vehicle charging stations, noting there was already a parking crisis downtown. He has not seen any electric vehicles using the station on 6th & Main and questioned the purpose of the charging stations, noting they are a good idea but before their time. Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, referred to Agenda Item 7, and relayed his concern with the lack of an over- the-track emergency access to the waterfront. He pointed out the resolution against coal trains identifies the problem and suggested using the whereas clauses in the resolution to identify the need for an over-the- track emergency access. Next, he thanked Mayor Cooper for providing leadership during the past 18 months and his efforts to make improvements in the City’s finance staff and financial reports. He expressed his appreciation for how well the Council and Mayor Cooper have worked together. 7. RESOLUTION AGAINST COAL TRAINS Council President Peterson explained the proposed coal train terminal in Cherry Creek near Bellingham would result in as many as 18 (9 trains each way) 1½ mile long trains traveling through Edmonds each day. The trains have multiple engines resulting in increased noise and their length and frequency could significantly delay access to the waterfront as well as exacerbate traffic congestion associated with ferry loading. Several other cities are considering a similar resolution. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 1263, A RESOLUTION STATING EDMONDS’ OPPOSITION TO TRANSPORTING COAL ACROSS WASHINGTON STATE AND ON THE BURLINGTON NORTHERN SANTA FE RAILWAY ALONG PUGET SOUND TO EXPORT FOR OVERSEAS CONSUMPTION. Councilmember Plunkett asked if the Council had been provided a presentation opposing or supporting coal trains. Council President Peterson answered no. Councilmember Plunkett summarized the only information the Council has been provided, outside individual’s research, is the proposed resolution. Council President Peterson agreed. Councilmember Buckshnis reported she has attended a few presentations regarding coal trains and suggested a presentation be provided to the Council. She planned to share the resolution with WRIA 8 and other water resource areas along the coast. She expressed support for the resolution either tonight or following an educational presentation. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas recognized there was some urgency because the Governor is currently making decisions regarding coal trains on the I-5 corridor. Her concern for Edmonds was, 1) the emergency access issue mentioned by Mr. Hertrich, and 2) environmental hazards from a potential spill from a coal train into Puget Sound and air quality/health issues from coal dust. It was her understanding the Governor planned to approve coal trains but it is the Council’s obligation to register Edmonds’ environmental, health and safety health concerns. She supported having a presentation regarding coal trains but was uncertain there was time to delay submitting the resolution to the Governor. Councilmember Petso was generally supportive of the resolution but did not have any information other than what she has read in the newspaper. She was willing to postpone approval of the resolution to allow time for a presentation. Council President Peterson explained approval of the resolution is time sensitive particularly due to the upcoming holidays. There will be a number of community forums including one on December 1 in Edmonds. He planned to work with local groups to have a presentation made to the Council and to determine if there is additional action the Council can take beyond a statement of resolution. As quickly as decisions are being made at the State level, it is important for Edmonds to take a leadership role. Packet Page 8 of 297 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 22, 2011 Page 6 THE VOTE ON THE MOTION CARRIED (5-0-1), COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT ABSTAINED. 8. RESOLUTION APPOINTING A NEW MEMBER TO THE REGIONAL FIRE AUTHORITY PLANNING COMMITTEE. Mayor Cooper, a member of the Regional Fire Authority (RFA) Planning Committee, explained that the committee meets next week, one day after he leaves office. It is important for the City to have its full delegation in place due to several important issues. In January the Council will also need to appoint a member to replace Councilmember Wilson. He recommended the Council appoint Council President Peterson to replace him on the RFA Planning Committee, joining Councilmembers Petso and Wilson. COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. 1264, APPOINTING COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON TO THE REGIONAL FIRE AUTHORITY PLANNING COMMITTEE. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 9. REQUEST TO SUPPORT AN I-5 ALTERNATIVE AS THE PRELIMINARY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE IN SOUND TRANSIT’S NORTH CORRIDOR TRANSIT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT. Community Services/Economic Development Director Stephen Clifton explained in November 2008, voters approved Sound Transit 2 (ST2). The North Corridor Transit Project portion of ST2 implements the ST2 light rail project from Northgate to the Lynnwood Transit Center. A Sound Transit alternatives analysis studied several high capacity transit options and alignments. The results of the analysis has led Sound Transit and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) to further consider two alternative light rail alignments, one along the I-5 corridor, the other a SR 99/I-5 alignment hybrid, as well as a no-build alternative for inclusion in an EIS. The City has reviewed the ST2 North Corridor Alternative Analysis in addition to attending an October 11, 2011 Environmental Impact Statement scoping meeting held in Shoreline. Both the I-5 and I-5/SR 99 hybrid light rail alternatives meet the State’s requirement for high capacity transit and both the I-5 and the I-5/SR 99 light rail hybrid alternatives, between the Northgate area in Seattle and Everett, have the capacity to accommodate the long-range plan vision of eventually connecting with Everett. The Snohomish County Infrastructure Coordination Committee (ICC) and the Cities of Mountlake Terrace, Lynnwood, Shoreline, and Seattle have expressed support for an all I-5 alignment. Edmonds staff and administration also supports this position and requests the City Council express support for an all I-5 alignment. He referred to a proposed draft November 22, 2011 letter from the City of Edmonds to Sound Transit citing support for review and consideration. Reasons cited by the ICC, Mountlake Terrace, Lynnwood and Edmonds staff supporting the I-5 alignment include the following: • An I-5 corridor would be the most efficient and effective routing to establish Link light rail service and is consistent with the original Sound Transit Long Range Vision. This option would provide light rail service to the most citizens (regionally), in the most productive corridor, at the earliest opportunity. • The I-5 alternative is the highest performing and most effective in addressing: travel time and operational efficiency, cost to implement, best performance in terms of Sound Transit’s criteria, and the least impact on the surrounding environment. • The I-5 alternative provides connections to regional centers more efficiently with a shorter travel distance and quicker travel time. Travel time for the I-5 alternative is 4 minutes faster from Lynnwood to Northgate than the I-5/SR 99 hybrid alternative. This time savings becomes especially important as the service is extended to Everett. Packet Page 9 of 297 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 22, 2011 Page 7 • The I-5 alternative has greater feasibility because its estimated costs are consistent with Sound Transit’s financial plan for this project while the 1-5/SR 99 hybrid costs are not consistent with the financial plan. The I-5 alternative is up to $590 - $670 million (total capital difference between the two alternatives in year 2010 dollars) cheaper than the 1-5/SR 99 hybrid alternative. The Sound Transit financial plan states a possible difference of up to $770 million. This savings is particularly important for future extensions of the service. • Ridership within Snohomish County along an I-5 alignment is more than 600,000 higher annually compared to the I-5/SR 99 hybrid alternative (between Northgate and Lynnwood). • The SR 99 option could result in substantial delays in connecting Snohomish County to the system within King County due to the substantial increase in cost for the SR 99 corridor related to complications with property and right of way acquisition/condemnations, utility relocations, etc. • The City of Edmonds would be most efficiently served by multiple north south transit corridors that include Commuter Rail along the west edge of Edmonds, Bus Rapid Transit along the SR 99 Corridor, and future Link light rail just east of the City of Edmonds. • In 2005, the City of Edmonds approved Resolution No.1117; Section 1.1.1 expressed support for “a planning study from Ash Way to Everett Station in Snohomish County for Link LRT, which identifies an I-5 alignment.” This is consistent with a position to support an I-5 Light Rail alignment. Support for an I-5 alignment would also be consistent with a June 24, 2006 letter from the City of Edmonds expressing support for helping fund a Mountlake Terrace Light Rail Station as part of ST2. • Going into the EIS process with a unified preliminary preferred alternative within Snohomish County will save both time and money. Although Edmonds staff support an I-5 light rail alternative, during the Sound Transit October 11, 2011 EIS Scoping meeting, Edmonds staff raised a concern about the Highway 99/I-5 hybrid alternative. More specifically, according to the Highway 99/I-5 hybrid alternative, light rail would continue northwesterly from Northgate towards SR 99 eventually connecting to SR 99 within the City of Seattle before turning northward towards and through the City of Shoreline along SR 99. At 205th/245th Street, the light rail line is depicted as turning easterly towards I-5 at which point light rail is depicted as extending northward towards Lynnwood along I-5. If a SR 99 alternative will be studied further, the City has requested that the study include extending light rail along SR 99 through the City of Edmonds and not stopping at the City’s south city limits, i.e., 205th/245th. A letter prepared on behalf of Mayor Cooper was sent to Sound Transit on October 26, 2011 to ensure that this specific concern was addressed prior to the Environmental Impact Statement Scoping comment deadline of October 31, 2011. Mr. Clifton summarized light rail transit service will be crucial to mobility in Snohomish County for decades to come. The I-5 alternative has clear advantages for Snohomish County and this is an opportune time for Edmonds to weigh in on this important decision. Sound Transit has asked various agencies to take a position on a preferred alignment. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas was disappointed to be moving away from a Hwy. 99 alignment but understood the increased cost. She appreciated the continued effort to extend light rail on the I-5 corridor. COUNCILMEMBER BERNHEIM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT, TO EXPRESS THE COUNCIL’S SUPPORT FOR AN I-5 ALTERNATIVE AS THE PRELIMINARY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE IN SOUND TRANSIT’S NORTH CORRIDOR TRANSIT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 10. ADOPTION OF THE 2012 BUDGET Councilmember Buckshnis explained today is a new day in Edmonds’ finances, financials will be prepared according to industry standards. In the past, the Animal Benefit Fund and the Council Packet Page 10 of 297 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 22, 2011 Page 8 Contingency were designated in the General Fund but were not fund appropriations. A new Animal Benefit appropriation has been created in addition to the Council Contingency budget. She displayed various reports, describing improvements that have been made to the reporting methods. She explained all projections now start with the modified working capital as a beginning fund balance and include accounts payable and accounts receivable. Citizens can now tie the numbers in the Comprehensive Annual Finance Report (CAFR) to projections. She expressed her thanks to former Interim Finance Director Jim Tarte and Finance Director Shawn Hunstock for their assistance. In the future, staff will assist with developing reserve and investment policies. Mr. Hunstock displayed the Executive Summary-Current Forecast 2012 Budget Deliberations (Strategic Outlook), explaining the General Fund beginning fund balance was added to this report to illustrate the accumulated impact of the 2012 budget under consideration as well as projections through 2016. The 2011 beginning balance of $6.8 million is from the audited 2011financial statement. He displayed a list of 2012 corrections and carry-forwards from 2011 and a list of decision packages. He noted the budget ordinance does not include the $66,000 for the 30 Year Right of Use on Fiber to County which was not included as a decision package in the 2012 preliminary budget. The spreadsheets can be updated if the Council approves funding for that item or changes/adds/deletes any other decision packages. Mr. Hunstock displayed the Executive Summary-Current Forecast from the 2012 preliminary budget and the same report updated to include corrections, adjustments and decision packages. Councilmember Plunkett referred to the updated Executive Summary-Current Forecast and asked why the 2012 column included an amount for corrections, adjustments and decision packages when the Council had not yet made decisions. Mr. Hunstock responded an assumption was made in drafting the budget ordinance to include the total of corrections, carry-forwards and decision packages which total $292,955. Councilmember Plunkett clarified the 2012 preliminary budget column on the updated Executive Summary-Current Forecast reflects all the decision packages. Mr. Hunstock answered it includes all the decision packages except the $66,000 for the 30 Year Right of Use on Fiber to County. Councilmember Plunkett asked whether the Human Resources Department included a full-time manager. Interim Human Resources/Parks & Recreation Director Carrie Hite answered Mary Ann Hardie is currently the acting Human Resources Manager; she was previously the Human Resources Analyst. Ms. Hardie has a bachelor’s degree in business and a certificate in human resources. Councilmember Bernheim recalled each department presented the Council with 2%-3% cut scenarios. Mayor Cooper explained that was part of a public workshop in late August/early September. Councilmember Bernheim asked whether those cuts were reflected in the budget. Mayor Cooper answered the 2012 preliminary budget reflects some of those cuts; an overall cut of 2% was made, but those cuts were not made across the board. Councilmember Bernheim asked if there were plans to hire a replacement Human Resources Director at the previous salary and what impact the vacancy in the Human Resources Director position had on the 2012 budget. Mayor Cooper answered any organizational decisions will be up to the new Mayor. At least two full-time staff members are needed in Human Resources however it is organized. He acknowledged a request for reorganization could result in a minimal savings but not the full Human Resources Director’s salary. He elevated Ms. Hardie to acting Human Resources Manager and consistent with policy, Ms. Hite is receiving compensation for doing more than one job. There is also an on-call consultant overseeing large projects. A decision regarding permanent staffing will need to be made as Ms. Hite can only perform both jobs for a limited amount of time. Councilmember Bernheim referred to the capital expenditure for the roundabout at Five Corners (page 156 of the 2012 preliminary budget) and asked when a motion to challenge the continuation of that Packet Page 11 of 297 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 22, 2011 Page 9 project would be appropriate. Mayor Cooper suggested it could be done when the Council considers the Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) on December 6. Mr. Hunstock explained capital projects are itemized in the budget and action could be taken as part of the budget approval. An alternative would be when the CFP and Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) are presented for Council adoption. If the project is pulled at that point, it would essentially remove the need for funding and a budget amendment would be required in 2012 to eliminate funding. Mayor Cooper pointed out if the Council makes a decision not to move forward with that project, the City will need to repay grant funds. He recommended the Council address that project during consideration of the CFP on December 6. Councilmember Buckshnis questioned the amount listed for decision packages on the Executive Summary-Current Forecast 2012 Budget Deliberations ($177,633) versus the list of decision packages that total $243,633, a difference of $66,000. Mr. Hunstock explained the $66,000 for the 30 Year Right of Use on Fiber to County was not included in the decision packages in the preliminary budget and therefore was not included in the budget ordinance. It could be added if the Council chose to fund it. Councilmember Buckshnis inquired about the $43,320 listed as the Mayor’s Budget Change in Fund Balance on the Executive Summary-Current Forecast 2012 Budget Deliberations. Mr. Hunstock answered that was taken from the preliminary budget. Councilmember Buckshnis observed with the corrections, carry-forwards and decision packages, there is a surplus due to revenues exceeding expenditures in 2011 which would allow the Council to balance the budget. Mr. Hunstock agreed the budget would be balanced in 2012 but the additional revenue is a one-time cash flow item. Councilmember Buckshnis referred to funding of the 511 Fund. Mr. Hunstock explained last week the Council made a decision to fund the B Fund for 2011. The preliminary budget did not include funding of the B Fund in 2012. Funding the B Fund in 2011 provides more flexibility not to fund it in 2012 and possibly not fund it another year in the future. Councilmember Buckshnis asked how funding of the B Fund for 2011 was reflected on Executive Summary-Current Forecast 2012 Budget Deliberations. Mr. Hunstock answered it was not reflected in that report. Councilmember Buckshnis observed there would still be a surplus at year end with funding the B Fund in 2011 as well as all the decision packages. Mr. Hunstock explained the Change in Fund Balance reflected on the Executive Summary-Current Forecast 2012 Budget Deliberations report ($668,510) will decrease as a result of the Council’s adoption of the 2011 year end budget amendment to include funding the B Fund in 2011. Councilmember Plunkett suggested scheduling a public hearing regarding the CFP on December 6. Council President Peterson recalled during the public hearing on the CFP/CIP earlier this year, the Council requested further detail regarding a several projects including the Five Corners Roundabout and signals at 9th & Caspers Street, 9th & Main and 9th & Walnut. Public Works Director Phil Williams plans to provide a detailed report on the Five Corners Roundabout and Council President Peterson suggested delaying any action on that project until staff provides their report and recommendation. He noted the financial impacts if the Council backs out of the roundabout project are significant enough that it warrants further discussion. Councilmember Plunkett recalled Planning Manager Rob Chave stating a public hearing would be required if changes were made to the CFP. Council President Peterson offered to research and suggested the Council take public comment on the CFP/CIP if a public hearing was not required. Councilmember Plunkett inquired about the salary for the positions in the Human Resources Department. Ms. Hite answered the approximate salary for the analysis position is $50,000-$60,000, the salary for the manager is $75,000-$80,000 and the salary for the director is $110,000. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 3861, ADOPTING THE 2012 BUDGET. Packet Page 12 of 297 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 22, 2011 Page 10 Mayor Cooper clarified the ordinance included all the decision packages with the exception of the $66,000 for the 30 Year Right of Use on Fiber to County. If the Council does not want to fund one of the decision packages, an amendment will be required to remove it. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT, TO AMEND THE MOTION TO ADD $66,000 FOR THE 30 YEAR RIGHT OF USE ON FIBER TO COUNTY. CIO Carl Nelson explained the City currently has a 3-year unlimited use of fiber through Blackrock. At the end of that three year period, the City will pay $500/month for that fiber. A group of cities were offered a one-time offer to pay $300,000 for the fiber, an approximately 50% discount. As cities decline to participate due to budget issues, the amount per city increases, making it less attractive for Edmonds. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS WITHDREW THE MOTION WITH THE AGREEMENT OF THE SECOND. Councilmember Plunkett pointed out if the situation changed, a budget amendment could be made to include funds in the budget. Councilmember Bernheim commented although he would like to have all the decision packages , he was uncertain how he would vote on those that could be deferred or do not involve essential services. Even $5,000-$10,000 was significant to him because a majority of the voters have indicated they want to minimize government expenditures regardless of the social benefit. He suggested if the current lawnmowers were too dangerous or falling apart, they could be stored and citizens “deal with some long, green grass next year.” He was opposed to cemetery seasonal staff, pedestrian signal head upgrade, fuel station upgrade, and the Landpride pull behind mower. He preferred to defer those items and allow the City to get by next year without them. He asked Councilmembers to state whether they felt these were important enough additions to the City’s infrastructure that they should be funded in spite of the City’s fiscal circumstances. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas preferred to look at expenditures as a whole and not these individual items. She was hesitant to remove funding for these items that department directors have argued the need for and instead suggested the Council consider other expenditure reductions over the next 6-12 months. She did not want to have overgrown grass at the City’s parks. Councilmember Petso suggested Councilmembers consider which decision packages are General Fund expenditures and which are not. The four decision packages on the bottom of the list (Walker riding lawn mower, cemetery seasonal staff, pedestrian signal head upgrade and fuel station upgrade) are not funded from the General Fund. She was not implying the Council be careless with those funds but to use that information in their decision-making process. She pointed out the finance software updates and additions and the public records/document management system may have the potential to pay for themselves over time. COUNCILMEMBER PETSO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO AMEND THE MOTION TO REMOVE THE FUEL STATION UPGRADE. Councilmember Bernheim expressed support for the amendment. Mayor Cooper advised funding for this item was not from the General Fund. Mr. Hunstock clarified it would be funded from the Equipment Replacement Fund. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked the implication of not upgrading the fuel station. Mayor Cooper recalled Mr. Williams’ report that the fuel station is aging, parts are difficult if not impossible to obtain, Packet Page 13 of 297 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 22, 2011 Page 11 and the software can no longer be upgraded to account for fuel consumption as well as staff would like. He summarized the equipment is worn out and cannot be replaced when it fails. Council President Peterson did not support the amendment. Although the City has added fuel saving vehicles to the City’s fleet, City vehicles consume tens of thousands of gallons of fuel a year. In the broad scope of controlling and tracking costs, this is a very important upgrade. He recalled the decision package also included equipment upgrades and he was supportive of any measure that would prevent a fuel spill. Not having the proper procedures in place to account for fuel could also create problems with the State auditor. He summarized the fuel station upgrade was a wise investment. Student Representative Springer echoed Council President Peterson’s opposition to the amendment. He recalled Mr. Williams stating the fuel station upgrades had been needed for years, similar to the public records/document management system. Councilmember Bernheim explained unless expenditures were removed from the budget, expenditures in 2012 will be $33.2 million compared to revenues of $32.9 million. Just because there are funds available in the reserve, he was not inclined to spend more next year than the City earned. As a friend of government he wanted to fund all the decision packages but was concerned the voters did not agree. He preferred there be some expenditures reductions to fund the decision packages. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas agreed with Councilmember Bernheim but she had been in the Public Works yard and seen the condition of the fuel station – it is an antique. She did not support the amendment to remove the fuel station upgrade. UPON ROLL CALL THE VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT FAILED (2-4), COUNCILMEMBERS PETSO AND BERNHEIM VOTING YES; AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON AND COUNCILMEMBERS BUCKSHNIS, FRALEY-MONILLAS, AND PLUNKETT VOTING NO. Mayor Cooper clarified as a result of the failed amendment, the fuel station upgrade remains in the budget. Councilmember Buckshnis referred to the Miscellaneous Contingency in the budget, suggesting its use either be restricted or it be removed from the budget. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO REMOVE THE MISCELLANEOUS CONTINGENCY IN NON- DEPARTMENTAL FROM THE BUDGET. Mayor Cooper clarified the Miscellaneous Contingency was added because the budget was trimmed to the point there was no wiggle room. The Miscellaneous Contingency would allow staff to come to Mayor and/or Council, depending on how its use is restricted, to fund items. With the removal of the Miscellaneous Contingency, budget amendments will be required to fund unanticipated expenditures. Councilmember Buckshnis explained this is the first time a Miscellaneous Contingency was included in the budget and was included due to the lean General Fund budget. She did not support having a Miscellaneous Contingency and preferred to either remove it or place additional restrictions on its use. She pointed out removing the Miscellaneous Contingency from the budget would free up $165,000. Council President Peterson did not support the proposed amendment. He explained each department previously had a contingency fund; those were eliminated and combined into one contingency fund, making it easier for the public and Council to track. He found it very short sighted to plan on using ending cash to cover unanticipated expenditures such as broken HVAC systems rather than budgeting a .5% Packet Page 14 of 297 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 22, 2011 Page 12 Miscellaneous Contingency. He concluded with a budget this size, spending only .5% for contingencies would be fantastic. If the Council wished, language could be added to ensure the Council was provided quarterly reports on the use of the contingency or its use suspended until the fourth quarter. He trusted City staff to make the right decisions with regard to the use of a Miscellaneous Contingency. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas expressed support for the amendment, pointing out the $165,000 would fund the public records/document management system and the finance software update. She preferred to use funds from a contingency rather than postponing desperately needed computer upgrades. Councilmember Petso agreed staff will feel betrayed if the Miscellaneous Contingency was removed because it was included with the understanding that the funds could be used for expenses that were beyond staff’s control. She supported the amendment because staff can always request a budget amendment for unanticipated expenditures. She concluded it did not matter whether the funds were included in the budget now or a budget amendment was made later. She recognized removing the Miscellaneous Contingency did not save any money because she agreed with Council President Peterson that that amount of unforeseen expenditures were likely to arise. City Attorney Jeff Taraday clarified the difference between a contingency fund by statute and a contingency appropriation in the General Fund which is currently included in the preliminary budget. RCW 35A.33.146 contemplates a contingency fund and it is essentially a vehicle for setting money aside for an unforeseen event. By statute, administration must request the Council’s approval to transfer funds from the contingency fund into one of the operating funds. It operates much like a budget amendment but is already included in the budget. Mayor Cooper clarified the Miscellaneous Contingency is a line item in the Non-Departmental section of the budget. He asked whether that was an appropriation under the Mayor’s direction. Mr. Taraday answered yes if it was within the General Fund. Mr. Taraday clarified if the issue was Council control rather than setting aside the money, his explanation was intended to provide a distinction between how to do it with Council control and without Council control. Mayor Cooper explained the way the Miscellaneous Contingency is currently budgeted, it does not require Council action, only the Mayor’s approval. Mr. Taraday agreed. THE VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT CARRIED (5-1), COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON VOTING NO. Mayor Cooper explained the budget ordinance currently includes the following decision packages: • Finance software updates and additions • Public records/document management system • Landpride pull behind mower • Parks street maintenance costs • Class software at Yost Pool – initial costs and maintenance • Walker riding mower • Cemetery seasonal staff • Pedestrian signal head upgrade • Fuel station upgrade Councilmember Plunkett commented he was impressed to learn the acting Human Resources Manager has a business degree and human resources certification. He has not been persuaded that another person is needed in Human Resources but was willing to learn more. COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BERNHEIM, THAT THE COUNCIL ELIMINATE FUNDING FOR THE HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR. Packet Page 15 of 297 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 22, 2011 Page 13 Councilmember Plunkett referred to Mayor Cooper’s statement that the Human Resources Department needs two FTE, commenting he was not convinced a Human Resources Director was needed rather than a Human Resources Manager who reports to the Mayor. He was open to the new administration providing his thoughts/ideas. At this time he felt a Human Resources Manager who has a business degree and a Human Resources certification was sufficient. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas inquired about the difference between a Human Resources Manager’s and Human Resources Director’s job duties, recognizing there is an approximately $35,000 difference in salary. Mayor Cooper answered personnel decisions with regard to the organization are the Mayor’s decision; the Council controls the funding. In the City’s structure, typically a manager does not report directly to the Mayor; directors report directly to the Mayor. For example, Ms. Hite is the Parks & Recreation Director; there are three managers in her departments. Mr. Williams is the Public Works Director; there are 2-3 managers in the Public Works Department. In the City’s history there have been Human Resources Managers. He summarized the Council controls the money, the Mayor typically controls the organizational chart. The Council’s control over the organizational chart can be accomplished by removing funds. Councilmember Plunkett clarified the motion was not to remove the Human Resources Director position, only to removing funding for the position. Mayor Cooper pointed out by removing funding for the Human Resources Director, the Council was funding only one position in the Human Resources Department at the level of manager. Councilmember Bernheim acknowledged the Human Resources Department requires two people. He was not convinced it required that high a pay level. He anticipated a Human Resources Manager could do the job at a $30,000 annual salary savings. He pointed out the elimination of the Fire Department reduced the number of employees the Human Resources Director was responsible for by at least 50. He recognized the importance of the Human Resources Department but felt it could be accomplished with a competent Human Resources Manager. He supported the amendment because he wanted to reduce the budget for that position by $30,000. If the incoming Mayor felt it was impossible to hire adequate human resources staff within those constraints, he could request the Council change its decision. COUNCILMEMBER BERNHEIM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT, TO AMEND THE AMENDMENT TO REDUCE THE NEXT YEAR’S BUDGET AND SUBSEQUENT BUDGETS BY $30,000. Councilmember Bernheim explained $30,000 is the difference between the currently $110,000 annual salary for the Human Resources Director and the $80,000 salary for a Human Resources Manager. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas reiterated her question regarding the difference between a Human Resources Manager and a Human Resources Director. Mayor Cooper answered in the City’s organizational chart, a manager typically does not report directly to the Mayor. However, in the City’s history, there have been instances where managers have reported directly to the Mayor. A manager typically does not have the same administrative responsibilities as a director because managers have a director supervising them. Ms. Hite explained in her municipal experience, directors usually have more experience with regard to the macro-level view of the City, policy development, relationship with Council to move items forward, and more in-depth experience as part of the executive team to assist the Council in making decisions. A manager-level position is more hands on and directly involved with day-to-day operations and not necessarily policy-level decisions. Councilmember Plunkett observed a director should have a good relationship with the Council in order to move things forward. Ms. Hite agreed that was one of the characteristics of a director. Packet Page 16 of 297 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 22, 2011 Page 14 Councilmember Petso explained the intent appeared to be to remove funding for the position, making the department subject to reorganization by the new Mayor. She felt that was better accomplished by the original amendment than the amendment to the amendment. THE VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT FAILED (1-5), COUNCILMEMBER BERNHEIM VOTING YES. Council President Peterson commented the proposed amendment constrains the incoming Mayor. He was uncertain how a city with 249 employees could operate with a Human Resources Department with a staffing level of 1 and $60,000-$70,000 in funding. Councilmember Plunkett responded the proposed amendment creates opportunity for the incoming Mayor to utilize his experience with various different public entities. Councilmember Buckshnis asked about the consultant reviewing the non-represented employee policy. Ms. Hite answered the consultant will make a presentation to the Council on December 6 regarding comparative cities for the non-represented salary survey. If agreement is reached with regard to comparative cities, the consultant will conduct the salary survey and return to the Council in January. She expected the consultant’s work to be completed in February. Both the Human Resources Analyst who is now the acting Human Resources Manager and the Human Resources Director positions are non- represented positions. Ms. Hite reported she has been working approximately 20 hours/week in the Human Resources Department and the acting Human Resources Manager Mary Ann Hardie has been working 60 hours a week to keep up with the workload. She summarized the Human Resources Department requires two full- time staff members Student Representative Springer opposed the amendment to eliminate the Human Resources Director position, anticipating the new Mayor will recommend filling the second position. Eliminating the Human Resources Director balances the budget for a period of time until a budget amendment will be needed to fund the new position. He preferred to fund the position now either with a reduced salary of $80,000 or the existing $110,000 and allow the new Mayor to make a decision regarding how to fill the position. Councilmember Buckshnis observed the proposed amendment would eliminate the Human Resources Director position but still allow two employees in Human Resources. Mayor Cooper clarified the amendment is to eliminate funding for the Human Resources Director position and does not leave enough money for more than the current employee. If the new Mayor wishes to add a person to the department, he will need to ask the Council to add the FTE to the budget. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas observed the proposed amendment would eliminate the second position from the Human Resources Department, leaving only 1 FTE in Human Resources for 200+ staff. She did not support the amendment, recognizing one person could not do the job. Councilmember Plunkett observed there were currently two employees in Human Resources; the new Mayor can propose to the Council how to move forward. The two people working in Human Resources, Ms. Hardie and Ms. Hite, will continue until the new Mayor provides his vision for the Human Resources Department. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas observed the amendment will eliminate one FTE, leaving only one staff person in Human Resources. She questioned how Ms. Hite could be counted as one of the Human Resources employees when she is the Parks & Recreation Director and only temporarily covering in Human Resources. Councilmember Plunkett responded the Human Resources Department would Packet Page 17 of 297 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 22, 2011 Page 15 continue the way it is currently operating, with Ms. Hardie and Ms. Hite, until the new Mayor makes a recommendation to the Council. Mayor Cooper clarified this budget takes effect January 1, 2011, not the day the new Mayor takes office. There are staff members in interim positions now until the Council and new Mayor make a decision on replacing the director. Approving the amendment will remove the funding for the director and require the new Mayor to present an organizational plan for staffing the Human Resources Department. Councilmember Bernheim expressed his support for the amendment and urged Councilmembers to support it. He acknowledged the Human Resources Department required two staff members but he felt it was overkill to pay $110,000/year for a director in a 2-person department. He acknowledged this reduction would not make or break the City’s budget. When the new Mayor takes office, he can present a plan for the Council’s evaluation. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas clarified the amendment is saying two staff members are needed in Human Resources but allows the new Mayor to propose a plan to the Council. Councilmember Plunkett agreed. THE VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT CARRIED (5-1), COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON VOTING NO. Mayor Cooper restated the main motion as amended: TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 3861 AS AMENDED, REMOVING THE $165,000 MISCELLANEOUS CONTINGENCY FROM THE GENERAL FUND NON-DEPARTMENTAL AND REMOVE FUNDING FOR THE HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR. Councilmember Plunkett complimented Mayor Cooper for one of the best, most efficient budgets under the most difficult, trying circumstances. Councilmember Plunkett could not remember a budget season that had so many distractions including the election, personnel issues, etc. He recalled what a struggle the budget process had been the past few years compared to this year’s efficient, effective and helpful process. He complimented Mayor Cooper for the professional, thoughtful way he went about the budget in spite of everything going on around him, keeping the City’s best interests at heart. THE VOTE ON THE MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 11. DISCUSSION REGARDING CITY POLYSTYRENE POLICY Councilmember Bernheim explained the Council previously discussed a polystyrene ban. The proposed policy does the following: 1. Bans the use of polystyrene food packaging products by the City and on City property by City tenants. 2. Requires food service merchants to make recycling available on the premises where food is sold. Councilmember Bernheim clarified the proposed policy does not ban food sales in polystyrene containers by private business. He highlighted the City’s duty to protect the environment. He noted State law establishes waste reduction as a priority of local government and requires local government to be aggressive with recycling. He further noted local government is responsible for handling the waste stream. He suggested the Council ban the use of polystyrene by the City and its tenants, and postpone the recycling requirement to a future date. He felt a polystyrene ban was a no brainer, recognizing in 20 years citizens will not be allowed to throw away single use polystyrene containers. He anticipated that would require a ban on the use of polystyrene as the public was unlikely to discontinue the use voluntarily. Packet Page 18 of 297 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 22, 2011 Page 16 COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE CITY POLYSTYRENE POLICY. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented this is a great start and she preferred to go further by banning polystyrene in general as Seattle as done. She suggested Edmonds learn from the City of Seattle’s implementation of a polystyrene ban, noting she had not heard many complaints about Seattle’s policy. She summarized this was an important environmental issue. Councilmember Petso observed Councilmember Bernheim recommended the Council only proceed with a ban on the use of polystyrene food packaging products by the City and by City tenants. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas clarified her motion was both the ban on the use of polystyrene food packaging products by the City and City tenants as well as requiring food merchants to make recycling available. MOTION CARRIED (5-1), COUNCILMEMBER PETSO VOTING NO. 12. UPDATE ON ADJUSTED STRATEGIC PLAN TIME LINE Mr. Clifton explained on October 18, 2011, he provided an update to the Council regarding the Strategic Planning and Visioning process in addition to presenting a proposal to adjust the Strategic Planning schedule; the Council expressed support for this proposal. Staff has been working with Beckwith Consulting Group (BCG) to discuss the remaining tasks and the timeline identified within the adopted scope of work as well as adjusting the overall Strategic Planning and Visioning Schedule. Adjusting the schedule will result in holding retreats later than identified within the originally adopted scope of work. The proposed calendar with adjusted dates indicates the next proposed City Council/Planning Board/Economic Development Commission Retreat will take place on January 24, 2012. In the interim, BCG is working with staff on finalizing a press release in addition to business, customer, visitor, employee, adult and youth surveys. A stakeholder list and survey are also being prepared and staff will work with BCG to schedule stakeholder interviews to take place in mid-January 2012. Internal and external scans of existing conditions related to Edmonds, the region and the state are also underway and will be presented during the January 2012 retreat. Mr. Clifton referred to an outline that indicates when surveys will be initiated, stakeholder interviews scheduled and what topics are to be discussed during the next two retreats. City administration is asking for City Council concurrence with the proposed adjusted schedule. Mr. Clifton explained the originally adopted schedule did not include as much time to conduct the stakeholder interviews, surveys, etc. The revised schedule will also allow the stakeholder interviews and surveys to occur in January/February; that information will be presented at the February 28 retreat. He anticipated the revised schedule would result in more upfront citizen input and a more ground-up approach. BCG will present the internal and external scan information at the January retreat as well as discuss how strategic planning integrates into a budgeting for outcomes/budgeting for priorities process. 13. COUNCIL REPORTS ON OUTSIDE COMMITTEE/BOARD MEETINGS Councilmember Petso reported the Lake Ballinger Forum has a project in design but construction funding has not yet been identified. She noted this project will not be a complete solution to flooding on Lake Ballinger. Packet Page 19 of 297 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 22, 2011 Page 17 Councilmember Petso reported the Public Facilities District Board adopted board member term limits, eight years and completion of a partial term. She also reported the Sound of Music Sing-along event at Edmonds Center for the Arts is sold out. Councilmember Petso reported a Regional Fire Authority 101 will be presented to the Council in early January to introduce the Council to the process. The Council has a decision point in May 2012 with regard to their commitment to proceeding with the process. Councilmember Buckshnis reported the Economic Development Commission (EDC) discussed membership on the Commission and the upcoming sunset of the Commission. She planned to request an agenda item to extend the EDC and add membership parameters with regard to attendance and requiring an application process. The Commission also discussed the form based code for Five Corners and Westgate and development agreements. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas reported on the Snohomish Health District meeting; in 2011 the District eliminated 8 FTE and now has 160-170 staff members. The District is facing many of the same issues facing the City, a reduction in grants and uncertain funding. The district is trying to balance the lack of funding with maintaining public health. She commented on the whooping cough outbreak in Snohomish County that affects children the hardest. She reminded everyone in contact with children need to have a whooping cough vaccine. This is the largest outbreak of whooping cough in Snohomish County in 30 years. 14. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Cooper reported in February/March, the Council will be provided a draft financial plan and a draft operating plan from the Regional Fire Authority Planning Committee. The Council will be asked to pass a resolution by May adopting the draft financial plan and operating plan. This is a critical checkpoint for the nine participating jurisdictions with regard to whether they want to continue toward a 2013 RFA ballot measure. Mayor Cooper provided a reminder that Saturday, November 26 is Small Business Saturday as well as the tree lighting. In recognition of Saturday’s Apple Cup, he declared tomorrow “wear your school colors day” in City Hall. He noted that the school he supports, Lindfield College Wildcats, are ranked fifth in the nation and are in the Division 3 playoffs in Dover, Delaware for a playoff game on Saturday. Mayor Cooper stated he has enjoyed getting to know Councilmembers better during the past 1½ years. He thanked staff, particularly City Clerk Sandy Chase and Community Services/Economic Development Director Stephen Clifton for their historical knowledge and their help in his early days. 15. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Bernheim thanked Ms. Hite for the great work she does, managing the Parks Department with limited resources and assisting as Interim Human Resources Director. He gifted the Mayor’s Office a No Idle Zone sign, commenting the Mayor’s Office has been a no idle zone since Mayor Cooper took office. Councilmember Buckshnis reported People for Puget Sound have two new interns, one with a bachelor of science degree from Lewis and Clark who is very interested in the habitat of saltwater to fresh and will be developing a planting program to remove invasive plants. The second intern, a student at Edmonds Community College, will be collecting baseline data for the restoration. Packet Page 20 of 297 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 22, 2011 Page 18 Councilmember Buckshnis expressed her appreciation for the work Mayor Cooper has done, particularly with regard to the City’s financials. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas thanked Mayor Cooper and assured he would be missed. Councilmember Petso thanked Mayor Cooper, expressing her appreciation for the opportunity to work with him. Council President Peterson reported he will discuss a public hearing regarding the roundabout with staff. He urged Councilmembers to talk with Public Works Director Phil Williams about the roundabout before the CFP/CIP discussion on December 6. Council President Peterson recognized Mayor Cooper for his leadership with the Climate Protection Committee as well as his many other accomplishments. He relayed that Climate Solutions is in awe at what Mayor Cooper has led the City to do. He assured Edmonds will continue to blaze that trail. 16. ADJOURN With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 9:58 p.m. Packet Page 21 of 297 AM-4401 Item #: 3. C. City Council Meeting Date: 12/06/2011 Time:Consent Submitted For:Shawn Hunstock Submitted By:Nori Jacobson Department:Finance Review Committee: Committee Action: Approve for Consent Agenda Type:Action Information Subject Title Approval of claim checks #129029 through #129068 dated November 21, 2011 for $559,705.28, and claim checks #129069 through #129220 dated December 1, 2011 for $392,447.78. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Approval of claim 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:$952,153.06 Fiscal Impact: Claims $952,153.06 Attachments Claim Checks 11-21-11 Claim Checks 12-1-11 Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Finance Shawn Hunstock 12/01/2011 11:16 AM City Clerk Sandy Chase 12/01/2011 11:25 AM Mayor Dave Earling 12/01/2011 02:03 PM Final Approval Sandy Chase 12/01/2011 02:17 PM Form Started By: Nori Jacobson Started On: 12/01/2011 08:37 AM Final Approval Date: 12/01/2011 Packet Page 22 of 297 11/21/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 1 2:52:57PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129029 11/21/2011 069751 ARAMARK 655-5872275 FAC MAINT UNIFORM SVC Fac Maint Uniform Svc 001.000.651.519.920.240.00 30.07 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.240.00 2.86 PW MATS655-5876900 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 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 SVC655-5876901 Street Storm Uniform Svc 111.000.653.542.900.240.00 5.00 Street Storm Uniform Svc 1Page: Packet Page 23 of 297 11/21/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 2 2:52:57PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129029 11/21/2011 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK 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 SVC655-5876902 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 Total :76.95 129030 11/21/2011 071653 ARNOLD, MEREDITH ARNOLD14575 STAINED GLASS ORNAMENTS STAINED GLASS ORNAMENTS #14575 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 133.00 Total :133.00 129031 11/21/2011 001702 AWC EMPLOY BENEFIT TRUST December 2011 AWC DECEMBER 2011 AWC PREMIUMS 12/11 Fire Pension AWC Premiums 617.000.510.522.200.230.00 3,613.80 12/11 Retirees AWC Premiums 009.000.390.517.370.230.00 27,475.05 12/11 AWC Premiums 811.000.000.231.510.000.00 264,228.61 Total :295,317.46 129032 11/21/2011 069218 BISHOP, PAUL 487 WEB SITE MAINTENANCE Web Site Maintenance 001.000.310.518.880.410.00 390.00 Total :390.00 129033 11/21/2011 071942 CAMPBELL, JULANN CAMPBELL14469 OIL PAINTING CLASSES OIL PAINTING #14469 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 415.80 OIL PAINTING #14473 2Page: Packet Page 24 of 297 11/21/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 3 2:52:57PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129033 11/21/2011 (Continued)071942 CAMPBELL, JULANN 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 277.20 Total :693.00 129034 11/21/2011 003255 CANINE COLLEGE CANINE14627 DOG OBEDIENCE CLASSES DOG OBEDIENCE #14627 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 336.00 Total :336.00 129035 11/21/2011 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 11439115 INV#11439115 CUST#572105 - EDMONDS PD COPIER RENTAL (4) 001.000.410.521.100.450.00 581.60 COPY CHGS FOR 4 TO 10/31/11 001.000.410.521.100.450.00 257.69 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.100.450.00 79.75 Total :919.04 129036 11/21/2011 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 11439117 C/A 572105 CONTRACT# 001-0572105-004 Finance dept copier contract charge 001.000.310.514.230.450.00 249.99 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.310.514.230.450.00 23.75 Total :273.74 129037 11/21/2011 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 11439116 CLERK'S OFFICE COPIER Clerk's office copier 001.000.250.514.300.450.00 466.97 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.250.514.300.450.00 44.36 RECEPTIONIST DESK COPIER LEASE11439119 Recept. desk copier lease 001.000.250.514.300.450.00 20.11 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.250.514.300.450.00 1.91 Total :533.35 3Page: Packet Page 25 of 297 11/21/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 4 2:52:57PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129038 11/21/2011 035160 CITY OF SEATTLE 2-533584-460571 WATER USEAGE FOR THE MONTH Water Useage for the Month of 411.000.654.534.800.330.00 1,446.20 Total :1,446.20 129039 11/21/2011 073667 COBURN, LI COBURN111711 VOLLEYBALL GYM ATTENDANT VOLLEYBALL GYM ATTENDANT @ EDMONDS CC 001.000.640.575.520.410.00 105.00 Total :105.00 129040 11/21/2011 063507 COXLEY, BRUCE 09262011 WEBSITE PHOTOGRAPHY Photography for city website - Council 001.000.310.518.880.410.00 175.00 Total :175.00 129041 11/21/2011 070230 DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING 10/26/11 - 11/21/11 STATE SHARE OF CONCEALED PISTOL State Share of Concealed Pistol 001.000.000.237.190.000.00 417.00 Total :417.00 129042 11/21/2011 029900 DEPT OF RETIREMENT SYSTEMS 00893282 Excess Compensation Benefit Invoice - Excess Compensation Benefit Invoice - 001.000.390.519.900.230.00 35,464.50 Total :35,464.50 129043 11/21/2011 064531 DINES, JEANNIE 11-3240 MINUTE TAKING 11/7 & 11/15 Council Minutes 001.000.250.514.300.410.00 303.00 Total :303.00 129044 11/21/2011 071969 EDMONDS CENTER FOR THE ARTS 148-4/29/2011 SING-A-LONG SING A LONG "SOUND OF MUSIC" 117.100.640.573.100.410.00 1,500.00 Total :1,500.00 129045 11/21/2011 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 6-02735 PUBLIC SAFETY COMPLEX-POLICE/CRT PUBLIC SAFETY COMPLEX-POLICE/CRT 4Page: Packet Page 26 of 297 11/21/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 5 2:52:57PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129045 11/21/2011 (Continued)008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 1,282.75 PUBLIC SAFETY COMPLEX-FIRE LINE6-02736 PUBLIC SAFETY COMPLEX-FIRE LINE 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 14.65 PUBLIC SAFETY COMPLEX-FIRE6-02737 PUBLIC SAFETY COMPLEX-FIRE 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 211.79 PUBLIC SAFETY IRRIGATION6-02738 PUBLIC SAFETY IRRIGATION 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 398.81 LIBRARY & SPRINKLER6-02825 LIBRARY & SPRINKLER 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 1,783.37 ANDERSON CULTURAL CENTER (FIRE DETECTOR)6-02875 ANDERSON CULTURAL CENTER (FIRE DETECTOR) 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 25.63 ANDERSON CULTURAL CENTER6-02925 ANDERSON CULTURAL CENTER 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 1,368.61 Fire Station #166-04127 Fire Station #16 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 736.96 fire sprinkler-FS #166-04128 fire sprinkler-FS #16 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 14.65 Public Works Bldg6-05155 Public Works Bldg 001.000.650.519.910.470.00 132.70 Public Works Bldg 111.000.653.542.900.470.00 504.25 Public Works Bldg 411.000.654.534.800.470.00 504.25 Public Works Bldg 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 504.25 Public Works Bldg 5Page: Packet Page 27 of 297 11/21/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 6 2:52:57PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129045 11/21/2011 (Continued)008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 511.000.657.548.680.470.00 504.25 Public Works Bldg 411.000.652.542.900.470.00 504.22 Public Works Fire Detector6-05156 Public Works Fire Detector 001.000.650.519.910.470.00 1.83 Public Works Fire Detector 111.000.653.542.900.470.00 6.95 Public Works Fire Detector 411.000.652.542.900.470.00 6.95 Public Works Fire Detector 411.000.654.534.800.470.00 6.95 Public Works Fire Detector 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 6.95 Public Works Fire Detector 511.000.657.548.680.470.00 6.94 Total :8,527.71 129046 11/21/2011 070855 FLEX PLAN SERVICES INC 185199 November 2011 (Section 125) November 2011 (Section 125) 001.000.220.516.100.410.00 25.00 Total :25.00 129047 11/21/2011 011900 FRONTIER 425-745-4313 MEADOWDALE CLUB HOUSE FIRE ALARM LINE Meadowdale Club House Fire Alarm Line 001.000.651.519.920.420.00 101.60 Radio Line between Public Works & UB425-775-7865 Radio Line between Public Works & UB 411.000.654.534.800.420.00 53.68 PUBLIC WORKS C0NNECTION TO 911425-RT0-9133 Public Works Connection to 911 001.000.650.519.910.420.00 5.48 Public Works Connection to 911 111.000.653.542.900.420.00 20.81 Public Works Connection to 911 6Page: Packet Page 28 of 297 11/21/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 7 2:52:57PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129047 11/21/2011 (Continued)011900 FRONTIER 411.000.654.534.800.420.00 20.81 Public Works Connection to 911 411.000.655.535.800.420.00 20.81 Public Works Connection to 911 511.000.657.548.680.420.00 20.81 Public Works Connection to 911 411.000.652.542.900.420.00 20.78 Total :264.78 129048 11/21/2011 071634 INTEGRA TELECOM 8987130 C/A 768328 PR1-1 & 2 City Phone Service 001.000.310.518.880.420.00 1,918.41 Tourism Toll free lines 877.775.6929; 001.000.240.513.110.420.00 0.81 Econ Devlpmnt Toll free lines 001.000.240.513.110.420.00 0.88 Total :1,920.10 129049 11/21/2011 073863 KURT & ELISABETH LORING 2-13250 RE:4201-1770368 UTILITY REFUND RE:#4201-1770368 Utility Refund due to 411.000.000.233.000.000.00 54.42 Total :54.42 129050 11/21/2011 073865 MICHELS CORPORATION E1FI.Pmt 1 E1FI.PMT 1 THRU 10/28/11 E1FI.Pmt 1 thru 10/28/11 412.200.630.594.320.650.00 65,180.20 E1FI.Ret 1 412.200.000.223.400.000.00 -3,259.01 Total :61,921.19 129051 11/21/2011 072007 NELSON, CARL Oct-11 LODGING REIMBURSEMENT FOR ACCIS CONF Lodging reimbursement for ACCIS 001.000.310.518.880.430.00 395.59 Total :395.59 7Page: Packet Page 29 of 297 11/21/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 8 2:52:57PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129052 11/21/2011 073751 OKANOGAN COUNTRY SHERIFF 10/11 Okanogan #2 10/11 OKANOGAN CO PRISONER HOUSING #2 REMAINDER OF PAYMENT FOR 10/11 001.000.410.523.600.510.00 1,000.00 Total :1,000.00 129053 11/21/2011 008350 PETTY CASH - PARKS & REC PCASH1118 PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES FOR PRESCHOOL 001.000.640.575.560.310.00 7.63 SUPPLIES FOR WRITER'S CONFERENCE 117.100.640.573.100.310.00 107.24 PRESCHOOL PHOTO DEVELOPING 001.000.640.575.560.490.00 2.08 PHOTOS 117.100.640.573.100.490.00 20.06 PARKING @ WRPA CONFERENCE IN SEATTLE 001.000.640.574.100.430.00 31.00 SUPPLIES FOR PRESCHOOL 001.000.640.575.560.310.00 32.57 SUPPLIES FOR CEMETERY BOARD 130.000.640.536.500.310.00 36.52 Total :237.10 129054 11/21/2011 064552 PITNEY BOWES 9607730NV11 POSTAGE MACHINE LEASE Lease 10/30 to 11/30 001.000.250.514.300.450.00 718.60 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.250.514.300.450.00 68.25 Total :786.85 129055 11/21/2011 068697 PUBLIC SAFETY TESTING INC 2011-4132 3rd Quarter 2011 (July - Sept) testing 3rd Quarter 2011 (July - Sept) testing 001.000.220.516.210.410.00 700.00 Total :700.00 129056 11/21/2011 073864 RIFE, SUSAN 1-23700 Overpayment refund requested by customer Overpayment refund requested by customer 8Page: Packet Page 30 of 297 11/21/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 9 2:52:57PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129056 11/21/2011 (Continued)073864 RIFE, SUSAN 411.000.000.233.000.000.00 196.61 Total :196.61 129057 11/21/2011 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 200468593 LIFT STATION #4 8311 TALBOT RD LIFT STATION #4 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 414.79 200 DAYTON ST-OLD PW BLDG200638609 200 Dayton St-Vacant PW Bldg 411.000.654.534.800.470.00 752.01 SIGNAL LIGHT 200 3RD200678019 SIGNAL LIGHT 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 55.15 LIBRARY201551744 LIBRARY 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 2,385.57 TRAFFIC LIGHT 117 3RD AVE S201572898 SIGNAL LIGHT 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 184.81 Public Works201942489 Public Works 001.000.650.519.910.470.00 88.38 Public Works 111.000.653.542.900.470.00 335.84 Public Works 411.000.654.534.800.470.00 335.84 Public Works 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 335.84 Public Works 511.000.657.548.680.470.00 335.84 Public Works 411.000.652.542.900.470.00 335.83 PUBLIC SAFETY COMPLEX202291662 PUBLIC SAFETY COMPLEX 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 4,904.59 CITY HALL202439246 9Page: Packet Page 31 of 297 11/21/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 10 2:52:57PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129057 11/21/2011 (Continued)037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 CITY HALL 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 2,587.54 Total :13,052.03 129058 11/21/2011 063941 SNO CO SHERIFFS OFFICE OCT 2011 MEDICAL OCT 2011 JAIL MEDICAL - EDMONDS PD INMATE MEDICATION OCT 2011 001.000.410.523.600.310.00 67.53 Total :67.53 129059 11/21/2011 067809 SNOHOMISH COUNTY FINANCE I000289131 2ND HALF 2011 SERS OPERATING ASSESSMENT 2nd half-2011 SERS Operating Assessment 001.000.390.525.600.510.00 97,074.39 2ND HALF-2011 SNOCOM PORTIONI000289132 2nd half-2011 SERS Operating Assessment 001.000.390.525.600.510.00 26,566.80 Total :123,641.19 129060 11/21/2011 073581 TRUAX, KAILEY 11162011 MONITOR FOR ECON DEV COMMISSION MEETING Monitor for 11/16/11 Economic 001.000.240.513.110.490.00 36.00 Total :36.00 129061 11/21/2011 062693 US BANK 3405 Electrical inspection for Milltown Electrical inspection for Milltown 132.000.640.594.760.310.00 322.60 Security for Old PW 001.000.651.519.920.480.00 55.00 Total :377.60 129062 11/21/2011 062693 US BANK 0254 CREDIT CARD TRANSACTION SIGN FOR INTERURBAN 132.000.640.594.760.310.00 3,388.00 Freight 132.000.640.594.760.310.00 540.00 CREDIT CARD TRANSACTIONS4675 10Page: Packet Page 32 of 297 11/21/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 11 2:52:57PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129062 11/21/2011 (Continued)062693 US BANK PRESCHOOL SUPPLIES 001.000.640.574.200.310.00 47.76 MILLTOWN COURTYARD PROJECT ~ 132.000.640.594.760.310.00 968.00 CEMETERY AD 130.000.640.536.200.440.00 688.00 CORKBOARD FOR PRESCHOOL 001.000.640.575.560.310.00 22.66 SOUND LIVING: ECC 001.000.640.574.350.490.00 35.00 PHOTO CONTEST MATS 117.100.640.573.100.490.00 78.31 MILLTOWN COURTYARD: CIRCULAR SAW BLADES 132.000.640.594.760.310.00 149.25 PLANNER: FRANCES CHAPIN 001.000.640.574.100.310.00 17.49 GYMNASTICS BUTTONS 001.000.640.575.550.310.00 19.90 2012 MEMBERSHIP DUES 117.100.640.573.100.490.00 150.00 Total :6,104.37 129063 11/21/2011 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS 1029897709 C/A 671247844-00001 Cell Service-Bldg 001.000.620.524.100.420.00 96.76 Cell Service-Eng 001.000.620.532.200.420.00 158.85 Cell Service Fac-Maint 001.000.651.519.920.420.00 79.28 Cell Service-Parks Discovery Program 001.000.640.574.350.420.00 13.35 Cell Service Parks Maint 001.000.640.576.800.420.00 58.85 Cell Service-PD 11Page: Packet Page 33 of 297 11/21/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 12 2:52:57PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129063 11/21/2011 (Continued)067865 VERIZON WIRELESS 001.000.410.521.220.420.00 482.67 Cell Service-PW Street 111.000.653.542.900.420.00 42.67 Cell Service-PW Storm 411.000.652.542.900.420.00 27.08 Cell Service-PW Water 411.000.654.534.800.420.00 144.42 Cell Service-PW Sewer 411.000.655.535.800.420.00 53.79 Cell Service-WWTP 411.000.656.538.800.420.00 40.05 Total :1,197.77 129064 11/21/2011 069836 VOLT SERVICE GROUP 26056842 Alecia Cox - clerical services (w/e Alecia Cox - clerical services (w/e 001.000.650.519.910.410.00 839.20 Total :839.20 129065 11/21/2011 069380 WASHINGTON CHAPTER FBINAA DEC TRAINING 12/2/11 LESSONS LEARNED-GANNON, LAWLESS LESSONS LEARNED - Lawless 001.000.410.521.400.490.00 40.00 LESSONS LEARNED - GANNON 001.000.410.521.400.490.00 40.00 Total :80.00 129066 11/21/2011 062011 WATERS, MICHAEL Nov-11 MILEAGE FOR SERVER TRAINING Mileage reimbursement for Server 001.000.310.518.880.430.00 116.00 Total :116.00 129067 11/21/2011 073137 WELCH-LANG, CAROLE LANG1119 GYM MONITOR GYM MONITOR FOR SATURDAY NIGHT DANCE 001.000.640.574.100.410.00 48.00 Total :48.00 12Page: Packet Page 34 of 297 11/21/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 13 2:52:57PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129068 11/21/2011 066678 WSDA PESTICIDE MGMT DIVISION MCGOWAN2012 PESTICIDE LICENSE RENEWAL STEVE MCGOWAN 2012 PESTICIDE LICENSE 001.000.640.576.800.490.00 33.00 Total :33.00 Bank total :559,705.2840 Vouchers for bank code :front 559,705.28Total vouchers :Vouchers in this report40 13Page: Packet Page 35 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 1 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129069 11/23/2011 060371 STANDARD INSURANCE CO December 2011 Stand DECEMBER 2011 STANDARD INSURANCE December 2011 Standard Insurance 811.000.000.231.550.000.00 13,498.39 Total :13,498.39 129070 12/1/2011 041695 3M XAM3522 TP16040 Traffic Control - Tomato Red 30" x 50 Yd Traffic Control - Tomato Red 30" x 50 Yd 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 183.75 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 17.45 Traffic Controll - Green ReflectiveTP16041 Traffic Controll - Green Reflective 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 240.00 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 22.80 Total :464.00 129071 12/1/2011 066054 ADIX'S BED & BATH FOR DOGS AND DEC 2011 ANIMAL BOARDING FOR 12/11 EDMONDS AC ANIMAL BOARDING FOR 12/11 001.000.410.521.700.410.00 2,032.66 Total :2,032.66 129072 12/1/2011 071177 ADVANTAGE BUILDING SERVICES 11-665 JANITORIAL SERVICE JANITORIAL SERVICE 411.000.656.538.800.410.23 334.00 Total :334.00 129073 12/1/2011 066417 AIRGAS NOR PAC INC 101607083 M5Z34 CARBON MONOXIDE 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 427.23 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 40.59 Total :467.82 129074 12/1/2011 065568 ALLWATER INC 111711033 COEWASTE 1Page: Packet Page 36 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 2 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129074 12/1/2011 (Continued)065568 ALLWATER INC DRINKING WATER 411.000.656.538.800.310.11 28.47 Total :28.47 129075 12/1/2011 073626 ALPHA ECOLOGICAL 1959529 PS - Pest Control PS - Pest Control 001.000.651.519.920.480.00 129.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.480.00 12.26 Total :141.26 129076 12/1/2011 063862 ALPINE PRODUCTS INC TM-120893 Traffic Control - Foil Back Traffic Control - Foil Back 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 171.00 Foil Back Construction Grade Yellow 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 171.00 Freight 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 34.90 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 35.81 Total :412.71 129077 12/1/2011 069829 AMIDO, BENJAMIM AMIDO14616 UKULELE CLASSES UKULELE #14616 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 415.80 Total :415.80 129078 12/1/2011 069751 ARAMARK 655-5848094 FAC MAINT UNIFORM SVC Fac Maint Uniform Svc - correction 001.000.651.519.920.240.00 16.73 FAC MAINT UNIFORM SVC655-5884297 Fac Maint Uniform Svc 001.000.651.519.920.240.00 30.07 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.240.00 2.86 2Page: Packet Page 37 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 3 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129078 12/1/2011 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK PW MATS655-5888820 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 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 SVC655-5888821 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 3Page: Packet Page 38 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 4 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129078 12/1/2011 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK FLEET UNIFORM SVC655-5888822 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 Total :93.68 129079 12/1/2011 069751 ARAMARK 655-5872281 21580001 UNIFORM SERVICE 411.000.656.538.800.240.00 70.36 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.240.00 6.68 Total :77.04 129080 12/1/2011 069751 ARAMARK 655-5872274 UNIFORM SERVICES PARK MAINTENANCE UNIFORM SERVICES 001.000.640.576.800.240.00 52.51 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.240.00 4.99 UNIFORM SERVICES655-5884296 PARK MAINTENANCE UNIFORM SERVICES 001.000.640.576.800.240.00 28.81 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.240.00 2.74 Total :89.05 129081 12/1/2011 071377 ARGUELLES, ERIN ARGUELLES1121 WRITER'S CONFERENCE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT FOR WRITER'S CONFERENCE 117.100.640.573.100.310.00 69.45 Total :69.45 129082 12/1/2011 071124 ASSOCIATED PETROLEUM 0240389-IN 01-7500014 DIESEL FUEL 411.000.656.538.800.320.00 6,053.50 9.5% Sales Tax 4Page: Packet Page 39 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 5 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129082 12/1/2011 (Continued)071124 ASSOCIATED PETROLEUM 411.000.656.538.800.320.00 698.43 Total :6,751.93 129083 12/1/2011 073866 ATLAS PLUMBING CONTRACTORS bld2011.0984 Refund due to duplicate permit Refund due to duplicate permit 001.000.000.257.620.000.00 165.00 Total :165.00 129084 12/1/2011 070305 AUTOMATIC FUNDS TRANSFER 62332 OUT SOURCING OF UTILITY BILLS UB Outsourcing area 500 printing 411.000.652.542.900.490.00 37.02 UB Outsourcing area 500 printing 411.000.654.534.800.490.00 37.02 UB Outsourcing area 500 printing 411.000.655.535.800.490.00 38.14 UB Outsourcing area 500 postage 411.000.654.534.800.420.00 121.01 UB Outsourcing area 500 postage 411.000.655.535.800.420.00 121.00 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.652.542.900.490.00 3.52 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.490.00 3.52 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.490.00 3.62 OUT SOURCING OF UTILITY BILLS62425 UB Outsourcing area 600 Printing 411.000.652.542.900.490.00 32.90 UB Outsourcing area 600 Printing 411.000.654.534.800.490.00 32.90 UB Outsourcing area 600 Printing 411.000.655.535.800.490.00 33.90 UB Outsourcing area Postage 600 411.000.654.534.800.420.00 112.69 UB Outsourcing area Postage 600 5Page: Packet Page 40 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 6 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129084 12/1/2011 (Continued)070305 AUTOMATIC FUNDS TRANSFER 411.000.655.535.800.420.00 112.69 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.652.542.900.490.00 3.13 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.490.00 3.13 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.490.00 3.21 OUT SOURCING OF UTILITY BILLS62504 UB Outsourcing area 300 Printing 411.000.652.542.900.490.00 149.54 UB Outsourcing area 300 Printing 411.000.654.534.800.490.00 149.54 UB Outsourcing area 300 Printing 411.000.655.535.800.490.00 154.06 UB Outsourcing area Postage 300 411.000.654.534.800.420.00 485.76 UB Outsourcing area Postage 300 411.000.655.535.800.420.00 485.75 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.652.542.900.490.00 14.21 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.490.00 14.21 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.490.00 14.63 Total :2,167.10 129085 12/1/2011 073035 AVAGIMOVA, KARINE 1128 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.501.410.01 100.00 INTERPRETER FEE810 INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.500.410.01 100.00 INTERPRETER FEE812 INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.390.512.520.410.00 100.00 6Page: Packet Page 41 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 7 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :300.00129085 12/1/2011 073035 073035 AVAGIMOVA, KARINE 129086 12/1/2011 002070 BALANCING SERVICE CO INC 13853 BALANCE FAN BALANCE FAN 411.000.656.538.800.410.21 195.00 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.410.21 18.53 Total :213.53 129087 12/1/2011 002500 BLUMENTHAL UNIFORMS & EQUIP 890905 INV#890905 - EDMONDS PD - LEE S/S UNIFORM SHIRTS 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 131.32 CLOTH NAMETAGS 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 9.90 RUBBER PIN CLUTCHES 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 3.00 DANNER ACADIA ATAC BOOTS 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 149.99 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 27.95 INV#896514 - EDMONDS PD - BARKER896514 2ND CHANCE BALLISTIC VEST 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 725.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 68.88 INV#896518 - EDMONDS PD - HONNEN896518 2ND CHANCE BALLISTIC VEST 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 725.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 68.88 INV#901499 - EDMONDS PD - MORRISON901499 CLOTH NAME TAG 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 4.95 SEW VELCRO ON BACK OF EMBLEM 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 2.50 SEW EMBLEM ON GARMENT 7Page: Packet Page 42 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 8 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129087 12/1/2011 (Continued)002500 BLUMENTHAL UNIFORMS & EQUIP 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 4.00 SEW BADGE ON GARMENT 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 2.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.220.240.00 1.28 Total :1,924.65 129088 12/1/2011 065739 BOBBY WOLFORD TRUCKING &049571 Storm - Recycle Concrete Storm - Recycle Concrete 411.000.652.542.320.490.00 425.25 Storm - Recycle Clean Brush/Wood049714 Storm - Recycle Clean Brush/Wood 411.000.652.542.320.490.00 21.00 Total :446.25 129089 12/1/2011 072005 BROCKMANN, KERRY BROCKMANN14450 YOGA CLASSES YOGA #14450 001.000.640.575.540.410.00 966.00 YOGA #14449 001.000.640.575.540.410.00 644.00 YOGA #14448 001.000.640.575.540.410.00 448.00 YOGA #14431 001.000.640.575.540.410.00 649.60 YOGA #14451 001.000.640.575.540.410.00 779.52 PILATES YOGA FUSION #14408 001.000.640.575.540.410.00 542.27 Total :4,029.39 129090 12/1/2011 071434 BRUNETTE, SISSEL BRUNETTE14614 PRENATAL YOGA PRENATAL YOGA #14614 001.000.640.575.540.410.00 268.80 Total :268.80 8Page: Packet Page 43 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 9 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129091 12/1/2011 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 11439112 CANON EQUIPMENT LEASE Canon Equipment Lease October 001.000.210.513.100.350.00 30.65 Total :30.65 129092 12/1/2011 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 11439111 Council Canon printer lease Council Canon printer lease 001.000.110.511.100.480.00 30.65 Total :30.65 129093 12/1/2011 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 11439120 Lease Planning Copier Lease Planning Copier 001.000.620.558.800.450.00 36.16 Building copier lease11439121 Building copier lease 001.000.620.558.800.450.00 36.16 Total :72.32 129094 12/1/2011 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 11439118 COPIER LEASE CHARGES COPIER LEASE CHARGES 001.000.640.574.100.450.00 273.74 COPIER LEASE CHARGES11439122 COPIER LEASE CHARGES 001.000.640.574.100.450.00 30.65 Total :304.39 129095 12/1/2011 071816 CARLSON, JESSICA CARLSON14387 ART FOR KIDZ ART FOR KIDZ: ADVENTURES IN DRAWING 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 332.64 Total :332.64 129096 12/1/2011 003328 CASCADE SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA CASCADE1128 TOURISM PROMOTION AGREEMENT TOURISM PROMOTION AGREEMENT 123.000.640.573.100.410.00 2,000.00 Total :2,000.00 129097 12/1/2011 003330 CASCADE TROPHY 31939 RECOGNITION PLAQUE 9Page: Packet Page 44 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 10 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129097 12/1/2011 (Continued)003330 CASCADE TROPHY recognition plaque for arts commission 001.000.210.513.100.490.00 30.11 Total :30.11 129098 12/1/2011 003330 CASCADE TROPHY 31866 City Charging Station - Address Plate City Charging Station - Address Plate 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 8.50 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 0.81 Total :9.31 129099 12/1/2011 003330 CASCADE TROPHY 31908 MILLTOWN COURTYARD SIGNS SIGNS @ MILLTOWN COURTYARD 132.000.640.594.760.310.00 24.50 9.5% Sales Tax 132.000.640.594.760.310.00 2.33 Total :26.83 129100 12/1/2011 073867 CAVE MAN BAR Ref000234082 LI Refund Cst #00218896 LI Refund Cst #00218896 001.000.000.257.310.000.00 50.00 Total :50.00 129101 12/1/2011 068484 CEMEX LLC 9422552234 Sewer - Asphalt Mix Sewer - Asphalt Mix 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 525.00 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 49.88 Roadway - Asphalt9422655922 Roadway - Asphalt 111.000.653.542.310.310.00 520.48 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.310.310.00 49.45 Total :1,144.81 10Page: Packet Page 45 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 11 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129102 12/1/2011 068484 CEMEX LLC 9422647834 MILLTOWN COURTYARD PROJECT MILLTOWN COURTYARD PROJECT 132.000.640.594.760.310.00 449.50 9.5% Sales Tax 132.000.640.594.760.310.00 42.70 Total :492.20 129103 12/1/2011 073747 CHARGE NORTHWEST LLC 1129 City 6 Charging System Set Ups City 6 Charging System Set Ups 001.000.651.519.920.410.00 1,170.00 Total :1,170.00 129104 12/1/2011 003710 CHEVRON AND TEXACO BUSINESS 32205864 INV#32205864 ACCT#7898305185 EDMONDS PD FUEL FOR NARCOTICS VEHICLE 104.000.410.521.210.320.00 446.85 CAR WASH NARCOTICS VEHICLE 104.000.410.521.210.320.00 5.99 Total :452.84 129105 12/1/2011 019215 CITY OF LYNNWOOD 9001 INV#9001 CUST#1655 - EDMONDS PD VERIZON INTERNET NARCS 10/11 104.000.410.521.210.420.00 43.01 Total :43.01 129106 12/1/2011 035160 CITY OF SEATTLE 1-218359-279832 METER 762972 METER 762972 411.000.656.538.800.471.62 15.39 Total :15.39 129107 12/1/2011 073573 CLARK SECURITY PRODUCTS INC SE78454301 FAC - Latch Protectors FAC - Latch Protectors 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 127.14 Freight 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 8.72 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 12.90 11Page: Packet Page 46 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 12 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129107 12/1/2011 (Continued)073573 CLARK SECURITY PRODUCTS INC Parks - G-10 LocksSE78539802 Parks - G-10 Locks 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 276.98 Freight 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 9.50 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 27.21 PS - Electric StrikeSE78570701 PS - Electric Strike 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 206.80 Freight 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 8.36 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 20.43 Total :698.04 129108 12/1/2011 004095 COASTWIDE LABS W2369326 Fac Maint - Dust Pans, Glass Cleaners, Fac Maint - Dust Pans, Glass Cleaners, 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 479.59 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 45.56 PW - VinegarW2369326-1 PW - Vinegar 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 12.44 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 1.18 Fac Maint - Seat Covers, TT, Towels,W2374925 Fac Maint - Seat Covers, TT, Towels, 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 492.95 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 46.83 Total :1,078.55 129109 12/1/2011 073654 COMMERCIAL MAINT CHEM CORP 60091 97540 DRAIN DEGREASER 12Page: Packet Page 47 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 13 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129109 12/1/2011 (Continued)073654 COMMERCIAL MAINT CHEM CORP 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 299.70 Freight 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 48.98 Total :348.68 129110 12/1/2011 063507 COXLEY, BRUCE COXLEY111811 PHOTOGRAPHY ASSIGNMENT ASSIGNMENT: PHOTOGRAPH AND RECORD 117.100.640.573.100.410.00 45.00 Total :45.00 129111 12/1/2011 069848 CRAM, KATHERINE CRAM14586 IRISH DANCE CLASSES IRISH DANCE FOR KIDS #14586 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 130.00 IRISH DANCE FOR KIDS #14587 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 52.00 Total :182.00 129112 12/1/2011 006200 DAILY JOURNAL OF COMMERCE 3256438 E1FM.RFQ ADVERTISEMENT E1FM.RFQ Advertisement 412.200.630.594.320.410.00 399.60 Total :399.60 129113 12/1/2011 073823 DAVID EVANS & ASSOC INC 311951 E1AA.SERVICES THRU 10/29/11 E1AA.Services thru 10/29/11 112.200.630.595.330.410.00 19,900.72 Total :19,900.72 129114 12/1/2011 006626 DEPT OF ECOLOGY 11292011 INCENERATOR CERTF. RENEWAL INCINERATOR RENEWAL 411.000.656.538.800.490.00 1,600.00 WASTEWATER PERMIT2012-WA0024058 WASTEWATER PERMIT 411.000.656.538.800.510.00 32,463.81 Total :34,063.81 129115 12/1/2011 006626 DEPT OF ECOLOGY 2012-WAR045513 2011 STORMWATER - MUNICIPAL STORMWATER 13Page: Packet Page 48 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 14 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129115 12/1/2011 (Continued)006626 DEPT OF ECOLOGY 2011 STORMWATER - MUNICIPAL STORMWATER 411.000.652.542.900.510.00 11,637.01 Total :11,637.01 129116 12/1/2011 007253 DUNN LUMBER 930740 Sunset Sidewalk Project - Decking Sunset Sidewalk Project - Decking 111.000.653.542.610.310.00 36.99 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.610.310.00 3.51 Milltown Courtyard Project - Supplies951295 Milltown Courtyard Project - Supplies 132.000.640.594.760.310.00 232.76 9.5% Sales Tax 132.000.640.594.760.310.00 22.11 Total :295.37 129117 12/1/2011 007253 DUNN LUMBER 968743 MILLTOWN COURTYARD PROJECT MILLTOWN COURTYARD PROJECT LUMBER 132.000.640.594.760.310.00 97.93 9.5% Sales Tax 132.000.640.594.760.310.00 9.31 Total :107.24 129118 12/1/2011 069605 EAGLE EYE CONSULTING ENGINEERS 2011025 Prof Serv for Bld 2011.0815 Premier Prof Serv for Bld 2011.0815 Premier 001.000.620.524.100.410.00 10,931.38 Total :10,931.38 129119 12/1/2011 068292 EDGE ANALYTICAL 11-15953 Water Quality - Water Samples Water Quality - Water Samples 411.000.654.534.800.410.00 1,024.00 Total :1,024.00 129120 12/1/2011 007675 EDMONDS AUTO PARTS 41669 SUPPLIES ELECTRICAL TAPE 14Page: Packet Page 49 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 15 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129120 12/1/2011 (Continued)007675 EDMONDS AUTO PARTS 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 5.96 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 0.57 SUPPLIES41892 WRENCH 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 19.99 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 1.90 SUPPLIES41996 SUPPLIES 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 4.95 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 0.47 Total :33.84 129121 12/1/2011 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 3-01808 LIFT STATION #11 LIFT STATION #11 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 27.50 MEADOWDALE CLUB HOUSE3-03575 MEADOWDALE CLUB HOUSE 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 247.11 LIFT STATION #123-07525 LIFT STATION #12 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 107.96 LIFT STATION #153-07709 LIFT STATION #15 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 27.50 LIFT STATION #43-09350 LIFT STATION #4 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 58.35 LIFT STATION #103-09800 LIFT STATION #10 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 211.75 LIFT STATION #93-29875 LIFT STATION #9 15Page: Packet Page 50 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 16 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129121 12/1/2011 (Continued)008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 29.87 Total :710.04 129122 12/1/2011 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 6-01127 WWTP WATER WWTP WATER 411.000.656.538.800.473.64 155.52 WWTP WATER6-01130 WWTP WATER 411.000.656.538.800.473.64 25.63 WWTP WATER6-01140 WWTP WATER 411.000.656.538.800.473.64 941.60 Total :1,122.75 129123 12/1/2011 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES 070288 COPIER MAINT COPIER MAINT 001.000.230.512.500.450.00 16.23 COPIER MAINT070975 COPIER MAINT 001.000.230.512.501.450.00 105.24 Total :121.47 129124 12/1/2011 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES 070796 ZSYST MK0315 PRINTER MAINTENANCE Maintenance for printers 11/21/11 - 001.000.310.518.880.350.00 312.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.310.518.880.350.00 29.64 Total :341.64 129125 12/1/2011 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES 070842 COPIER LEASE COPIER LEASE 001.000.640.574.100.450.00 7.44 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.574.100.450.00 0.71 Total :8.15 16Page: Packet Page 51 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 17 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129126 12/1/2011 067945 EMPLOYMENT SECURITY DEPT 11-117615-RDU-M6 INV#11-117615-RDU-M6 - EDMONDS PD REPORT - ROMERO #11-3582 001.000.410.521.110.410.00 7.50 Total :7.50 129127 12/1/2011 066378 FASTENAL COMPANY WAMOU24161 Sewer - Supplies Sewer - Supplies 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 6.20 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 0.59 Sewer - SuppliesWAMOU24256 Sewer - Supplies 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 29.14 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 2.77 Sewer - SuppliesWAMOU24370 Sewer - Supplies 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 16.68 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 1.58 Sunset Project - Lock for SidewalkWAMOU24488 Sunset Project - Lock for Sidewalk 111.000.653.542.610.310.00 7.70 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.610.310.00 0.73 Total :65.39 129128 12/1/2011 066378 FASTENAL COMPANY WAMOU24500 SUPPLIES SUPPLIES 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 100.98 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 9.59 Total :110.57 129129 12/1/2011 009895 FELDMAN, JAMES A 113011 PUBLIC DEFENDER PUBLIC DEFENDER 17Page: Packet Page 52 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 18 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129129 12/1/2011 (Continued)009895 FELDMAN, JAMES A 001.000.390.512.520.410.00 7,890.00 Total :7,890.00 129130 12/1/2011 063387 FEREBEE, JOAN AUG-DEC-2011 TRAVEL REFUND TRAVEL REFUND 001.000.230.512.500.430.00 146.61 TRAVEL REFUNDJAN-JULY-2011 TRAVEL REFUND 001.000.230.512.500.430.00 26.72 Total :173.33 129131 12/1/2011 009815 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC 0316074 Water - Dayton St/ Harbor Square - Water - Dayton St/ Harbor Square - 412.100.630.594.320.650.00 15,005.60 9.5% Sales Tax 412.100.630.594.320.650.00 1,425.54 Total :16,431.14 129132 12/1/2011 069469 FLINT TRADING INC 137178 Traffic Control - Cross Walk Hot Tape Traffic Control - Cross Walk Hot Tape 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 2,601.00 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 247.10 Total :2,848.10 129133 12/1/2011 072932 FRIEDRICH, KODY FRIEDRICH14589 IRISH DANCE CLASSES IRISH DANCE FOR KIDS #14589 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 72.80 IRISH DANCE 13+ #14595 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 72.80 IRISH DANCE 13+ #14599 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 493.35 Total :638.95 129134 12/1/2011 011900 FRONTIER 425-206-1108 TELEMETRY LIFT STATIONS 18Page: Packet Page 53 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 19 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129134 12/1/2011 (Continued)011900 FRONTIER TELEMETRY LIFT STATIONS 411.000.654.534.800.420.00 145.47 TELEMETRY LIFT STATIONS 411.000.655.535.800.420.00 270.16 SEAVIEW RESERVOIR425-206-1137 SEAVIEW RESERVOIR 411.000.654.534.800.420.00 26.50 TELEMETRY LIFT STATION425-206-1141 TELEMETRY LIFT STATION 411.000.654.534.800.420.00 18.53 TELEMETRY LIFT STATION 411.000.655.535.800.420.00 34.41 TELEMETRY LIFT STATION425-206-4810 TELEMETRY LIFT STATION 411.000.654.534.800.420.00 42.32 TELEMETRY LIFT STATION 411.000.655.535.800.420.00 78.58 TELEMETRY STATIONS425-712-0417 TELEMETRY STATIONS 411.000.654.534.800.420.00 26.93 TELEMETRY STATIONS 411.000.655.535.800.420.00 26.92 P/W FIRE ALARM, FAX LINE & 2 SPARE LINES425-712-8251 P/W FIRE ALARM, FAX LINE & 2 SPARE LINES 001.000.650.519.910.420.00 14.18 P/W FIRE ALARM, FAX LINE & 2 SPARE LINES 111.000.653.542.900.420.00 70.89 P/W FIRE ALARM, FAX LINE & 2 SPARE LINES 411.000.654.534.800.420.00 59.54 P/W FIRE ALARM, FAX LINE & 2 SPARE LINES 411.000.655.535.800.420.00 59.54 P/W FIRE ALARM, FAX LINE & 2 SPARE LINES 511.000.657.548.680.420.00 79.39 PUBLIC SAFETY BLDG ELEVATOR PHONE425-712-8347 19Page: Packet Page 54 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 20 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129134 12/1/2011 (Continued)011900 FRONTIER PUBLIC SAFETY BLDG ELEVATOR PHONE 001.000.651.519.920.420.00 55.22 PUBLIC SAFETY FIRE ALARM425-775-2455 PUBLIC SAFETY FIRE ALARM 001.000.651.519.920.420.00 50.41 FRANCES ANDERSON FIRE ALARM SYSTEM425-776-3896 FRANCES ANDERSON FIRE ALARM SYSTEM 001.000.651.519.920.420.00 111.10 VACANT PW BLDG 200 DAYTON ST425-778-3297 VACANT PW BLDG 200 DAYTON ST 411.000.654.534.800.420.00 19.01 VACANT PW BLDG 200 DAYTON ST 411.000.655.535.800.420.00 35.31 Total :1,224.41 129135 12/1/2011 011900 FRONTIER 425-AB8-1176 CITY PARK T1 LINE City Park T1 Line 001.000.310.518.880.420.00 417.27 Total :417.27 129136 12/1/2011 011900 FRONTIER 425 712 0423 03 0260 1032797592 07 AFTER HOURS PHONE 411.000.656.538.800.420.00 56.83 Total :56.83 129137 12/1/2011 011900 FRONTIER 425-775-1344 BEACH RANGER PHONE @ FISHING PIER BEACH RANGER PHONE @ FISHING PIER 001.000.640.574.350.420.00 54.32 YOST POOL425-775-2645 YOST POOL 001.000.640.575.510.420.00 39.06 Total :93.38 129138 12/1/2011 073821 GEODESIGN INC 26546 E1JA.SERVICES THRU 10/31/11 E1JA.Services thru 10/31/11 20Page: Packet Page 55 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 21 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129138 12/1/2011 (Continued)073821 GEODESIGN INC 412.100.630.594.320.410.00 1,316.83 Total :1,316.83 129139 12/1/2011 012199 GRAINGER 9645028227 Sewer - Supplies Sewer - Supplies 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 12.44 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 1.18 PS - Boot Brush9678562407 PS - Boot Brush 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 29.80 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 2.84 City Hall - Motor for Bathroom Fan9686823353 City Hall - Motor for Bathroom Fan 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 111.30 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 10.57 Unit 26 - Tools (replacement)9686967721 Unit 26 - Tools (replacement) 001.000.651.519.920.350.00 497.72 9.2% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.350.00 45.81 Total :711.66 129140 12/1/2011 012199 GRAINGER 9681437597 GREENHOUSE MOTOR/FAN PSC BLOWER, 115 VOLT 001.000.640.576.810.310.00 70.50 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.810.310.00 6.69 Total :77.19 129141 12/1/2011 012355 GRCC/BAT 2012 BAT BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY RENEWALS BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY RENEWAL FOR RICHARD 001.000.640.576.800.490.00 84.00 21Page: Packet Page 56 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 22 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :84.00129141 12/1/2011 012355 012355 GRCC/BAT 129142 12/1/2011 069733 H B JAEGER COMPANY LLC 125464/1 Water Supplies - Low Rise Resetters Water Supplies - Low Rise Resetters 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 1,658.88 Freight 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 25.00 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 159.97 Total :1,843.85 129143 12/1/2011 073533 H2NATION PUBLISHING INC 1228 WEB DEVELOPMENT 7/1/11-8/3/11 Web Development Service 7/1/11 - 8/3/11 001.000.310.518.880.410.00 5,962.75 Total :5,962.75 129144 12/1/2011 012560 HACH COMPANY 7497401 112830 LAB SUPPLIES 411.000.656.538.800.310.31 207.65 Freight 411.000.656.538.800.310.31 27.95 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.31 22.39 Total :257.99 129145 12/1/2011 010900 HD FOWLER CO INC I3008774 Water Supplies - Meter Boxes and Lids, Water Supplies - Meter Boxes and Lids, 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 4,712.92 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 447.73 Water Supplies - ResettersI3027357 Water Supplies - Resetters 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 1,339.80 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 127.28 Total :6,627.73 22Page: Packet Page 57 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 23 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129146 12/1/2011 069164 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY 50411840 QR898US#ABA - HP 8200 ELITE - 35 UNITS QR898US#ABA - HP 8200 Elite USDT Win7310-00156 001.000.310.518.880.350.00 22,400.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.310.518.880.350.00 2,128.00 Total :24,528.00 129147 12/1/2011 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 1034495 0205 OAK ROUND, CARPET, TUB 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 49.52 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 4.70 02052030013 TIE WIRE, REBAR, ETC. 132.000.640.594.760.310.00 127.34 9.5% Sales Tax 132.000.640.594.760.310.00 12.10 02053035845 ELBOWS, DOWNSPOUT, STRAP 132.000.640.594.760.310.00 94.61 9.5% Sales Tax 132.000.640.594.760.310.00 8.99 02054282882 SAKRETE, TARP 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 144.18 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 13.70 02055033778 FOAM TAPE 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 3.98 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 0.38 02056082949 PUMP BASIN, ETC. 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 123.05 9.5% Sales Tax 23Page: Packet Page 58 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 24 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129147 12/1/2011 (Continued)067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 11.69 02057063020 SUPPLIES 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 45.51 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 4.32 02057282742 FOAM TAPE 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 7.96 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 0.76 02058033177 CEDAR 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 8.77 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 0.83 Total :662.39 129148 12/1/2011 070042 IKON Q5554129 QUOTE ID: Q5554129 - EDMONDS PD COPIER RENTAL 11/13 TO 12/12/11 001.000.410.521.100.450.00 340.00 ADDITIONAL IMAGES 001.000.410.521.100.450.00 315.74 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.100.450.00 62.29 Total :718.03 129149 12/1/2011 006841 IKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS 5021494971 Additional copies DSD reception copier Additional copies DSD reception copier 001.000.620.558.800.450.00 7.05 Total :7.05 129150 12/1/2011 073548 INDOFF INCORPORATED 1983196 Office Supplies Dev. Serv. Dept Office Supplies Dev. Serv. Dept 001.000.620.558.800.310.00 78.21 24Page: Packet Page 59 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 25 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :78.21129150 12/1/2011 073548 073548 INDOFF INCORPORATED 129151 12/1/2011 061546 INDUSTRIAL CONTROLS SUPPLY 923976 Traffic Control - 2 Pole Relays Traffic Control - 2 Pole Relays 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 30.06 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 2.86 Total :32.92 129152 12/1/2011 072110 INFORMATION DISPLAY COMPANY 4864R1 E1AB.SPEED CHECK EQUIPMENT E1AB.Speed Check Equipment 112.200.630.595.330.410.00 18,684.00 Total :18,684.00 129153 12/1/2011 014940 INTERSTATE BATTERY SYSTEMS ED7463 INV#ED7463 - EDMONDS PD DURACELL AA BATTERIES 001.000.410.521.220.310.00 107.88 DURACELL AAA BATTERIES 001.000.410.521.220.310.00 35.96 CR123A BATTERIES 001.000.410.521.220.310.00 59.80 CR2032 BATTERIES 001.000.410.521.220.310.00 16.90 DURACELL 9 VOLT BATTERIES 001.000.410.521.220.310.00 19.69 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.220.310.00 22.83 Total :263.06 129154 12/1/2011 068396 KPFF CONSULTING ENGINEERS E2DB.58 E2DB.SERVICES THRU 6/30/11 E2DB.Services thru 6/30/11 132.000.640.594.760.410.00 34,913.98 E2DB.SERVICES THRU 7/31/11E2DB.59 E2DB.Services thru 7/31/11 132.000.640.594.760.410.00 2,408.54 E2DB.SERVICES THRU 8/31/11E2DB.60 25Page: Packet Page 60 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 26 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129154 12/1/2011 (Continued)068396 KPFF CONSULTING ENGINEERS E2DB.Services thru 8/31/11 132.000.640.594.760.410.00 2,307.92 E2DB.SERVICES THRU 9/30/11E2DB.61 E2DB.Services thru 9/30/11 132.000.640.594.760.410.00 1,907.36 Total :41,537.80 129155 12/1/2011 060132 LAB SAFETY SUPPLY 1018096523 Storm - Earplugs Storm - Earplugs 411.000.652.542.900.240.00 183.60 Freight 411.000.652.542.900.240.00 12.89 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.652.542.900.240.00 18.66 Total :215.15 129156 12/1/2011 017135 LANDAU ASSOCIATES INC 28995 E1FK.TASK ORDER 11-01 SRVC THRU 10/29/11 E1FK.Task Order 11-01 Services thru 412.200.630.594.320.410.00 7,494.18 Total :7,494.18 129157 12/1/2011 070478 LANE COMMUNICATIONS INC 1915 ECA FIBER OPTICS INSTALLATION Fiber Optics material and installation 001.000.310.518.870.410.00 1,774.50 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.310.518.870.410.00 168.58 Total :1,943.08 129158 12/1/2011 073657 LAW OFFICE OF DILLON G SMITH 111611 CONFLICT PUBLIC DEFENDER CONFLICT PUBLIC DEFENDER 001.000.390.512.520.410.00 1,200.00 Total :1,200.00 129159 12/1/2011 072059 LEE, NICOLE 769 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 26Page: Packet Page 61 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 27 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129159 12/1/2011 (Continued)072059 LEE, NICOLE 001.000.230.512.500.410.01 123.96 Total :123.96 129160 12/1/2011 018950 LYNNWOOD AUTO PARTS INC 646485 Water - Undercoat supplies Water - Undercoat supplies 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 29.76 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 2.83 Total :32.59 129161 12/1/2011 072992 LYNNWOOD ICE CENTER LYNNWOOD14643 ICE SKATING LESSONS LEARN TO SKATE #14643 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 189.00 Total :189.00 129162 12/1/2011 073868 MANDEL CONSTRUCTION SERVICES Ref000234083 LI Refund Cst #00218909 LI Refund Cst #00218909 001.000.000.257.310.000.00 125.00 Total :125.00 129163 12/1/2011 019582 MANOR HARDWARE 380660-00 Fac Maint - Unit 26 - Tools Fac Maint - Unit 26 - Tools 001.000.651.519.920.350.00 115.23 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.350.00 10.95 Total :126.18 129164 12/1/2011 069362 MARSHALL, CITA 735 NTERPRETER FEE NTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.500.410.01 88.32 INTERPRETER FEE736 INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.500.410.01 88.32 INTERPRETER FEE809 INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.501.410.01 88.32 27Page: Packet Page 62 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 28 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129164 12/1/2011 (Continued)069362 MARSHALL, CITA INTERPRETER FEE832 INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.500.410.01 88.32 INTERPRETER FEE857 INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.500.410.01 108.32 INTERPRETER FEE858 INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.390.512.520.410.00 88.32 Total :549.92 129165 12/1/2011 020039 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO 10710939 123106800 STELL CAM & GROOVE HOSES 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 252.02 Freight 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 7.33 Total :259.35 129166 12/1/2011 073187 MILES/WEAVER 227731XX TOURISM AD IN SEATTLE VISITOR GUIDE Tourism ad Seattle Visitor's Guide 120.000.310.575.420.440.00 1,500.00 Total :1,500.00 129167 12/1/2011 072746 MURRAY SMITH & ASSOCIATES 11-1196-10 E1JA.SERVICES THRU 10/31/11 E1JA.Services thru 10/31/11 412.100.630.594.320.410.00 446.00 E0JA.WATER MODELING THRU 10/31/1111-1264-2 E0JA.Water Modeling thru 10/31/11 412.100.630.594.320.410.00 576.00 Total :1,022.00 129168 12/1/2011 064570 NATIONAL SAFETY INC 0306957-IN Water/ Sewer - Work Gloves, Supplies Water/ Sewer - Work Gloves, Supplies 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 206.58 Water/ Sewer - Work Gloves, Supplies 28Page: Packet Page 63 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 29 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129168 12/1/2011 (Continued)064570 NATIONAL SAFETY INC 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 206.57 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 19.63 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 19.61 Total :452.39 129169 12/1/2011 024960 NORTH COAST ELECTRIC COMPANY S4250938.001 2091 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES 411.000.656.538.800.310.22 293.18 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.22 26.97 Total :320.15 129170 12/1/2011 065767 NORTHEND RENTAL & CONSTRUCTION 88678 6th & Main Project - Jack Rental 6th & Main Project - Jack Rental 001.000.651.519.920.350.00 35.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.350.00 3.33 Total :38.33 129171 12/1/2011 068663 NORTHERN ENERGY PROPANE 438879 Sewer Lift Stations - Propane Sewer Lift Stations - Propane 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 350.11 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 33.26 Total :383.37 129172 12/1/2011 066391 NORTHSTAR CHEMICAL INC 26364 260 SODIUM BISULFITE 411.000.656.538.800.310.54 1,380.40 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.54 131.14 Total :1,511.54 29Page: Packet Page 64 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 30 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129173 12/1/2011 061013 NORTHWEST CASCADE INC 1-384049 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL HONEY BUCKET RENTAL: PINE STREET PARK 001.000.640.576.800.450.00 112.35 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL1-384050 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL: EDMONDS ELEMENTARY 001.000.640.576.800.450.00 112.35 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL1-384051 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL: SIERRA PARK 001.000.640.576.800.450.00 112.35 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL1-384543 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL: CIVIC CENTER 001.000.640.576.800.450.00 194.62 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL1-385773 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL: HAINES WHARF PARK 001.000.640.576.800.450.00 220.77 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL1-389044 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL: HICKMAN PARK 001.000.640.576.800.450.00 310.99 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL1-389092 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL: YOST PARK 001.000.640.576.800.450.00 228.72 Total :1,292.15 129174 12/1/2011 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 268896 INV#268896 ACCT#520437 250POL EDMONDS PD CALENDAR-COMPAAN 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 9.65 DESK CALENDAR-EAGER 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 9.45 MONTHLY PLANNER-HOVARKA 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 9.75 MO DESK PAD-MANDEVILLE 001.000.410.521.910.310.00 3.35 DESK CALENDAR-MANDEVILLE 001.000.410.521.910.310.00 11.15 MONTHLY PLANNER-MANDEVILLE 001.000.410.521.910.310.00 9.65 30Page: Packet Page 65 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 31 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129174 12/1/2011 (Continued)063511 OFFICE MAX INC WALL CALENDAR-MANDEVILLE 001.000.410.521.910.310.00 12.45 MONTHLY WALL CALENDAR-CLERKS 001.000.410.521.110.310.00 8.25 DESK CALENDARS-PATROL ROOM 001.000.410.521.220.310.00 23.45 DESK CALENDAR-MACK 001.000.410.521.220.310.00 9.45 DESK CALENDAR-ROTH 001.000.410.521.220.310.00 7.50 DESK CALENDAR-MARSH 001.000.410.521.220.310.00 6.15 MO PLANNER-FROLAND 001.000.410.521.220.310.00 12.75 DESK CALENDARS-ANIMAL CONTROL 001.000.410.521.700.310.00 12.30 DESK CALENDARS-HAWLEY/MCINTYR 001.000.410.521.210.310.00 18.90 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 2.74 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.910.310.00 3.48 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.110.310.00 0.78 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.220.310.00 5.63 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.700.310.00 1.17 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.210.310.00 1.80 Total :179.80 129175 12/1/2011 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 305629 SUPPLIES SUPPLIES 31Page: Packet Page 66 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 32 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129175 12/1/2011 (Continued)063511 OFFICE MAX INC 001.000.230.512.501.310.00 455.03 Total :455.03 129176 12/1/2011 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 211812 OFFICE SUPPLIES Office Supplies 001.000.250.514.300.310.00 85.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.250.514.300.310.00 8.09 OFFICE SUPPLIES382302 Office Supplies 001.000.250.514.300.310.00 33.29 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.250.514.300.310.00 3.16 Total :129.54 129177 12/1/2011 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 201505 PW Admin - Office Supplies PW Admin - Office Supplies 001.000.650.519.910.310.00 119.22 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.650.519.910.310.00 11.32 Total :130.54 129178 12/1/2011 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 240888 Avery business card sheets for Council Avery business card sheets for Council 001.000.110.511.100.310.00 40.29 Total :40.29 129179 12/1/2011 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 318754 OFFICE SUPPLIES ELECTRIC STAPLER, KEY KLEEN SWABS, INK, 001.000.640.574.100.310.00 58.09 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.574.100.310.00 5.52 Total :63.61 129180 12/1/2011 068316 PACE ENGINEERS INC 50475 E9DA.SERVICES THRU 10/31/11 32Page: Packet Page 67 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 33 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129180 12/1/2011 (Continued)068316 PACE ENGINEERS INC E9DA.Services thru 10/31/11 112.200.630.595.330.410.00 543.34 Total :543.34 129181 12/1/2011 065787 PATRIOT DIAMOND INC 99860 Street - Prof Concrete Blade Street - Prof Concrete Blade 111.000.653.542.610.310.00 168.00 Freight 111.000.653.542.610.310.00 17.00 Total :185.00 129182 12/1/2011 063951 PERTEET ENGINEERING INC 20110010.000-3 E7AC.SERVICES THRU 10/30/11 E7AC.Services thru 10/30/11 112.200.630.595.330.410.00 33,866.95 Total :33,866.95 129183 12/1/2011 029117 PORT OF EDMONDS 03870 CITY OF EDMONDS STORMWATER Pier StormWater Rent for Nov 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 2,153.25 Total :2,153.25 129184 12/1/2011 046900 PUGET SOUND ENERGY 0101874006 LIBRARY LIBRARY 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 312.73 PARK & BUILDING MAINTENANCE SHOP0230757007 PARK & BUILDING MAINTENANCE SHOP 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 309.26 LIFT STATION #71916766007 LIFT STATION #7 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 33.81 PUBLIC SAFETY-POLICE,CRT & COUNCIL2753166004 PUBLIC SAFETY-POLICE,CRT & COUNCEL 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 490.51 Public Works2776365005 Public Works 33Page: Packet Page 68 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 34 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129184 12/1/2011 (Continued)046900 PUGET SOUND ENERGY 001.000.650.519.910.470.00 35.01 Public Works 111.000.653.542.900.470.00 133.01 Public Works 411.000.654.534.800.470.00 133.01 Public Works 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 133.01 Public Works 511.000.657.548.680.470.00 133.01 Public Works 411.000.652.542.900.470.00 133.01 MEADOWDALE CLUBHOUSE5254926008 MEADOWDALE CLUBHOUSE 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 369.24 Fire Station # 165322323139 Fire Station # 16 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 769.36 SEWER LIFT STATION #95672895009 SEWER LIFT STATION #9 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 34.48 FLEET5903085008 Fleet 7110 210th St SW 511.000.657.548.680.470.00 406.48 FIRE STATION 17 PUBLIC SAFETY6439566008 FIRE STATION 17 PUBLIC SAFETY 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 723.20 ANDERSON CENTER6490327001 ANDERSON CENTER 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 1,730.53 LIFT STATION #88851908007 LIFT STATION #8 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 54.94 FIRE STATION #209919661109 FIRE STATION #20 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 408.50 34Page: Packet Page 69 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 35 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :6,343.10129184 12/1/2011 046900 046900 PUGET SOUND ENERGY 129185 12/1/2011 046900 PUGET SOUND ENERGY 7918807004 YOST POOL YOST POOL 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 158.57 Total :158.57 129186 12/1/2011 073644 QUALITY CONTROLS CORP S6111 PROGRAMMING ELECTRICAL PROGRAMMING ELECTRICAL 411.000.656.538.800.410.22 1,324.95 Total :1,324.95 129187 12/1/2011 030780 QUIRING MONUMENTS INC 123078 BENCH/MARKER MARKER: OLKOSKI 130.000.640.536.200.340.00 1,606.00 Total :1,606.00 129188 12/1/2011 066964 SEATTLE AUTOMOTIVE DIST INC 03-132094 Fleet, Unit 23 Brake supplies Fleet, Unit 23 Brake supplies 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 65.04 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 6.18 Fleet Unit 29 Pad kit, Rotor03-132790 Fleet Unit 29 Pad kit, Rotor 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 215.36 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 20.46 Fleet Unit 131 Module kit03-132883 Fleet Unit 131 Module kit 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 256.85 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 24.40 Fleet Unit 131 - Sensor03-133108 Fleet Unit 131 - Sensor 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 40.23 9.5% Sales Tax 35Page: Packet Page 70 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 36 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129188 12/1/2011 (Continued)066964 SEATTLE AUTOMOTIVE DIST INC 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 3.82 Fleet Unit 775 - Shock / Strut03-133788 Fleet Unit 775 - Shock / Strut 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 120.54 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 11.45 Fleet Unit 29 - Cap f/tnk fil03-133933 Fleet Unit 29 - Cap f/tnk fil 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 9.08 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 0.86 Fleet Unit 338 - Starter Motor, Battery03-134205 Fleet Unit 338 - Starter Motor, Battery 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 322.80 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 30.67 Fleet unit 413 - battery03-134549 Fleet unit 413 - battery 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 70.80 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 6.73 Fleet Unit 338-Pol Sensor man l.03-134609 Fleet Unit 338-Pol Sensor man l. 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 55.41 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 5.26 Fleet Unit 413 Battery03-134611 Fleet Unit 413 Battery 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 70.15 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 6.66 Fleet Unit 648 Pump Asy Wate03-134993 Fleet Unit 648 Pump Asy Wate 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 73.67 36Page: Packet Page 71 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 37 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129188 12/1/2011 (Continued)066964 SEATTLE AUTOMOTIVE DIST INC 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 7.00 Fleet Unit 70 - Anti freeze03-135065 Fleet Unit 70 - Anti freeze 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 65.94 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 6.26 Fleet Unit 10 - V*-360 5.9 L03-135199 Fleet Unit 10 - V*-360 5.9 L 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 15.51 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 1.47 Fleet Unit 58 - Battery03-135291 Fleet Unit 58 - Battery 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 76.95 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 7.31 Fleet Unit #43 Reman Starter03-135411 Fleet Unit #43 Reman Starter 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 145.88 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 13.86 Fleet #43 Battery03-135413 Fleet #43 Battery 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 171.16 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 16.26 Fleet #81 - End Kit, Pad Kit, RR Disc03-135571 Fleet #81 - End Kit, Pad Kit, RR Disc 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 75.62 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 7.18 Fleet #132 - Pad Brake03-135719 Fleet #132 - Pad Brake 37Page: Packet Page 72 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 38 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129188 12/1/2011 (Continued)066964 SEATTLE AUTOMOTIVE DIST INC 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 42.87 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 4.07 Fleet #102 - Pad Set Frt Dis, Rotor,03-135795 Fleet #102 - Pad Set Frt Dis, Rotor, 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 170.05 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 16.15 Fleet #337 - antifreeze03-136017 Fleet #337 - antifreeze 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 33.96 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 3.23 Fleet #680 - valve assy - thr03-136021 Fleet #680 - valve assy - thr 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 84.53 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 8.03 Fleet Unit #680 - Gear ASM Strg03-136022 Fleet Unit #680 - Gear ASM Strg 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 142.99 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 13.58 Fleet #649 - Motor Asy03-136146 Fleet #649 - Motor Asy 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 47.89 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 4.55 Fleet Unit #648 - Battery03-137259 Fleet Unit #648 - Battery 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 85.58 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 8.13 Fleet Unit #681 - Cap Asy - Fuel03-139672 38Page: Packet Page 73 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 39 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129188 12/1/2011 (Continued)066964 SEATTLE AUTOMOTIVE DIST INC Fleet Unit #681 - Cap Asy - Fuel 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 16.67 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 1.58 Fleet Unit #39 - sender asy03-139722 Fleet Unit #39 - sender asy 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 8.24 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 0.78 Fleet Unit #39 - Hose-radiator, pump03-139737 Fleet Unit #39 - Hose-radiator, pump 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 104.34 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 9.91 Fleet #39 - Sender Asy03-139800 Fleet #39 - Sender Asy 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 32.89 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 3.12 Fleet Unit #649 - Motor & Fan A03-140117 Fleet Unit #649 - Motor & Fan A 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 193.95 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 18.43 Fleet Returns - Retainer Grea B13, Pad05-398867 Fleet Returns - Retainer Grea B13, Pad 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 -188.83 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 -17.94 Fleet Returns - Elemend Asy, Sensor05-400363 Fleet Returns - Elemend Asy, Sensor 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 -153.51 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 -14.58 39Page: Packet Page 74 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 40 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129188 12/1/2011 (Continued)066964 SEATTLE AUTOMOTIVE DIST INC Fleet return - Battery05-400563 Fleet return - Battery 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 -70.80 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 -6.73 Fleet returns - Gear, ASM STRG, Reman05-401594 Fleet returns - Gear, ASM STRG, Reman 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 -100.04 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 -9.50 Fleet Returns - Sender Asy, Hose05-404053 Fleet Returns - Sender Asy, Hose 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 -37.87 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 -3.60 Total :2,478.94 129189 12/1/2011 067076 SEATTLE PUMP AND EQUIPMENT CO 11-4410 Sewer - Supplies Sewer - Supplies 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 506.42 Freight 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 28.79 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 50.84 Total :586.05 129190 12/1/2011 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 200124873 SIGNAL LIGHT 9933 100TH W SIGNAL LIGHT 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 52.60 MEADOWDALE CLUBHOUSE200386456 MEADOWDALE CLUBHOUSE 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 138.91 ANDERSON CULTURAL CENTER200422418 ANDERSON CULTURAL CENTER 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 2,989.51 40Page: Packet Page 75 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 41 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129190 12/1/2011 (Continued)037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 4 WAY LIGHT 101 9TH AVE S200592954 SIGNAL LIGHT 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 31.04 LIFT STATION #12 16121 75TH PL W201265980 LIFT STATION #12 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 298.60 4 WAY LIGHT 599 MAIN ST201283892 SIGNAL LIGHT 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 53.98 LIFT STATION #11 6811 1/2 157TH PL W201374964 LIFT STATION #11 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 31.34 SIGNAL LIGHT 660 EDMONDS WAY201563434 SIGNAL LIGHT 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 51.02 LS #15 7710 168TH PL SW201594488 LIFT STATION #15 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 30.02 DECO LIGHT 413 MAIN ST201656907 STREET LIGHT 111.000.653.542.630.470.00 484.44 23190 100TH W SCHOOL CROSSWALK LITE201703758 23190 100th W School Crosswalk Lite 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 49.34 4 WAY LIGHT 901 WALNUT201782646 SIGNAL LIGHT 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 57.37 LIGHT 120 5TH N202389375 SIGNAL LIGHT 111.000.653.542.630.470.00 16.17 LOG CABIN202421582 LOG CABIN 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 227.05 Total :4,511.39 41Page: Packet Page 76 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 42 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129191 12/1/2011 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 113764831 2030-9778-7 WWTP ELECTRICITY 411.000.656.538.800.471.61 29,435.17 Total :29,435.17 129192 12/1/2011 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 0390005709 MILLTOWN COURTYARD CONDUIT & ELECTRICAL MILLTOWN COURTYARD CONDUIT AND 132.000.640.594.760.310.00 2,630.00 100 DAYTON ST2012-3682-5 100 DAYTON ST 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 420.50 750 15TH ST SW/CEMETERY2015-5730-3 750 15TH ST SW/CEMETERY 130.000.640.536.500.470.00 270.20 750 15TH ST SW/CEMETERY2016-1027-6 750 15TH ST SW/CEMETERY 130.000.640.536.500.470.00 16.17 SPRINKLER SYSTEM201762101 SPRINKLER SYSTEM 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 133.19 OLYMPIC BEACH FISHING PIER202161535 OLYMPIC BEACH FISHING PIER 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 119.12 Total :3,589.18 129193 12/1/2011 038410 SOUND SAFETY PRODUCTS 4191406-01 Fac Maint - Work Jacket - D Startzman Fac Maint - Work Jacket - D Startzman 001.000.651.519.920.240.00 49.95 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.240.00 4.75 Total :54.70 129194 12/1/2011 069997 SRI TECHNOLOGIES INC 121835 E1JF.CAPITAL PROJECT MANAGER SERVICES E1JF.Capital Project Manager Services 412.100.630.594.320.410.00 2,600.00 42Page: Packet Page 77 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 43 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :2,600.00129194 12/1/2011 069997 069997 SRI TECHNOLOGIES INC 129195 12/1/2011 009400 STELLAR INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY INC 3080580 Water Sewer - Blue Upside down paint Water Sewer - Blue Upside down paint 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 74.64 Water Sewer - Blue Upside down paint 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 74.64 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 7.09 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 7.09 Total :163.46 129196 12/1/2011 040430 STONEWAY ELECTRIC SUPPLY S100011809.002 Log Cabin - Elect Supplies Log Cabin - Elect Supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 512.92 Fac Maint - Elect Supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 292.13 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 76.48 City Hall - Elect SuppliesS100011809-001 City Hall - Elect Supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 117.06 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 11.12 City Hall - Elect SuppliesS100022453.001 City Hall - Elect Supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 71.93 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 6.83 Sewer - MotorS100023880.001 Sewer - Motor 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 53.82 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 5.11 Fac Maint - BatteriesS100032519-001 43Page: Packet Page 78 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 44 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129196 12/1/2011 (Continued)040430 STONEWAY ELECTRIC SUPPLY Fac Maint - Batteries 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 31.90 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 3.03 Total :1,182.33 129197 12/1/2011 040430 STONEWAY ELECTRIC SUPPLY S002956527.002 MILLTOWN COURTYARD PROJECT SUPPLIES MILLTOWN COURTYARD SUPPLIES: BUSHINGS, 132.000.640.594.760.310.00 658.24 Total :658.24 129198 12/1/2011 070864 SUPERMEDIA LLC 440011195349 C/A 440001304654 Basic e-commerce hosting 11/02/11 - 001.000.310.518.880.420.00 34.95 Domain forwarding 10/22/11 - 11/21/11 001.000.310.518.880.420.00 2.00 C/A 440001307733440011195366 11/2011 Web Hosting for Internet 001.000.310.518.880.420.00 34.95 C/A 430001405909440011195590 P&R Directory Listing 001.000.310.518.880.420.00 132.50 Total :204.40 129199 12/1/2011 068619 SWENSON, LINDA 1228 WINTER CRAZE DESIGN WINTER CRAZE RECREATION BROCHURE DESIGN 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 1,449.00 Total :1,449.00 129200 12/1/2011 073501 SYNAPTEC SOFTWARE INC 2630 MAINT FEE FOR PROBATION LAWBASE FOR MAINT FEE FOR PROBATION LAWBASE FOR 001.000.230.512.501.490.00 800.00 Total :800.00 129201 12/1/2011 072790 TCC PRINTING & IMAGING 73674 PRINTING OF TOURISM BROCHURES 44Page: Packet Page 79 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 45 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129201 12/1/2011 (Continued)072790 TCC PRINTING & IMAGING Printing of tourism brochures 120.000.310.575.420.490.00 3,525.51 Total :3,525.51 129202 12/1/2011 009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY 1755111 Legal Notice AMD 2011.0007 (Solar) Legal Notice AMD 2011.0007 (Solar) 001.000.620.558.600.440.00 41.40 Total :41.40 129203 12/1/2011 072572 TRENCHLESS CONSTRUCTION SERVIC 4379 MILLTOWN COURTYARD PROJECT 5TH AVENUE CROSSING @ MILLTOWN 132.000.640.594.760.310.00 7,410.00 9.5% Sales Tax 132.000.640.594.760.310.00 741.00 Total :8,151.00 129204 12/1/2011 042800 TRI-CITIES SECURITY 18344 Sewer - Supra M5 Box Sewer - Supra M5 Box 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 42.00 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 3.99 Sewer - ASSA Mort Cyl18346 Sewer - ASSA Mort Cyl 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 75.50 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 7.17 Total :128.66 129205 12/1/2011 061192 UNITED PIPE & SUPPLY 8788009 MILLTOWN COURTYARD SUPPLIES MILLTOWN COURTYARD SUPPLIES FOR TRENCH 132.000.640.594.760.310.00 4,367.34 9.5% Sales Tax 132.000.640.594.760.310.00 414.90 MILLTOWN COURTYARD PROJECT8790587 MILLTOWN COURTYARD SUPPLIES: OUTLETS 45Page: Packet Page 80 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 46 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129205 12/1/2011 (Continued)061192 UNITED PIPE & SUPPLY 132.000.640.594.760.310.00 37.12 9.5% Sales Tax 132.000.640.594.760.310.00 3.52 Total :4,822.88 129206 12/1/2011 062693 US BANK 3363 King Salmon - Gasket / Frt King Salmon - Gasket / Frt 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 63.94 Office Depot - Supply 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 17.51 Engineered Lifting Systems - Pushbutton 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 507.60 JoAnn Fabric - Unit #46 - foam 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 34.65 Total :623.70 129207 12/1/2011 062693 US BANK 3249 POSTAGE FOR MAILING PASSPORTS POSTAGE FOR MAILING PASSPORTS 001.000.230.512.500.420.00 47.50 FRED PRUOR CAREER TRAINING 001.000.230.512.500.430.00 199.00 Total :246.50 129208 12/1/2011 062693 US BANK 4831 ITUNES, GFOA WEBINAR S HUNSTOCK Apple iTunes Store - Apps for iPad 001.000.310.514.100.490.00 37.20 GFOA webinar for S Hunstock - Annual 001.000.310.514.100.490.00 180.00 Total :217.20 129209 12/1/2011 064423 USA BLUE BOOK 505382 Sewer - Float Switches Sewer - Float Switches 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 523.60 Freight 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 30.54 46Page: Packet Page 81 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 47 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129209 12/1/2011 (Continued)064423 USA BLUE BOOK 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 52.64 Total :606.78 129210 12/1/2011 069592 USA MOBILITY WIRELESS U0298897K INV#U0298897K - EDMONDS PD PAGER SERVICE 11/27 TO 12/26/11 001.000.410.521.100.420.00 47.57 Total :47.57 129211 12/1/2011 062812 WA CRANE AND HOIST CO INC 0013881-IN EWW 1EW ANNUAL INSPECTION 411.000.656.538.800.410.21 760.00 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.410.21 72.20 Total :832.20 129212 12/1/2011 067195 WASHINGTON TREE EXPERTS 06-8606 Street - Tree removal at 24129 95th Pl W Street - Tree removal at 24129 95th Pl W 111.000.653.542.710.480.00 240.00 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.710.480.00 22.80 Street - Tree Removal at 21925 95th Ave06-8607 Street - Tree Removal at 21925 95th Ave 111.000.653.542.710.480.00 160.00 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.710.480.00 15.20 Total :438.00 129213 12/1/2011 073552 WELCO SALES LLC 5303 INV#5303 - EDMONDS PD 1000 ADHESIVE MAILING LABELS 001.000.410.521.110.310.00 135.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.110.310.00 12.83 INV#5306 - EDMONDS PD5306 1100 EVIDENCE REPORT FORMS 47Page: Packet Page 82 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 48 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 129213 12/1/2011 (Continued)073552 WELCO SALES LLC 001.000.410.521.910.310.00 495.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.910.310.00 47.03 Total :689.86 129214 12/1/2011 073552 WELCO SALES LLC 5310 BUSINESS CARDS FOR PD AND CITY CLERK Business Cards-Generic250-00271 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 16.00 Don Kinney250-00271 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 16.00 Jason J. Shier250-00271 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 16.00 J.P. Robinson250-00271 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 16.00 Al Compaan250-00271 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 16.00 Gail Donnelly250-00271 001.000.250.514.300.310.00 16.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 7.60 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.250.514.300.310.00 1.52 Total :105.12 129215 12/1/2011 073552 WELCO SALES LLC 5302 LETTERHEAD LETTERHEAD 001.000.640.574.100.310.00 123.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.574.100.310.00 11.69 Total :134.69 129216 12/1/2011 049500 WEST PUBLISHING 823868900 COURT MANUAL COURT MANUAL 001.000.230.512.500.310.00 202.59 48Page: Packet Page 83 of 297 12/01/2011 Voucher List City of Edmonds 49 7:58:25AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :202.59129216 12/1/2011 049500 049500 WEST PUBLISHING 129217 12/1/2011 064008 WETLANDS & WOODLANDS 45262001 2011 MEMORIAL TREES 2011 MEMORIAL TREES & ANDERSON CENTER 127.000.640.575.500.310.00 240.00 9.5% Sales Tax 127.000.640.575.500.310.00 22.80 Total :262.80 129218 12/1/2011 066678 WSDA PESTICIDE MGMT DIVISION EDMONDS 2012 PESTICIDE RENEWAL APPLICATIONS 2012 PESTICIDE LICENSE RENEWAL FEES 001.000.640.576.800.490.00 132.00 Total :132.00 129219 12/1/2011 073479 WU, THOMAS 748 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.500.410.01 148.37 Total :148.37 129220 12/1/2011 051282 ZUMAR INDUSTRIES INC 0151935 Traffic Control - Rivets, Clamps Traffic Control - Rivets, Clamps 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 370.00 Freight 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 17.24 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 36.79 Total :424.03 Bank total :392,447.78152 Vouchers for bank code :front 392,447.78Total vouchers :Vouchers in this report152 49Page: Packet Page 84 of 297 AM-4355 Item #: 3. D. City Council Meeting Date: 12/06/2011 Time:Consent Submitted For:Pamela Lemcke Submitted By:Megan Cruz Department:Engineering Committee:Community/Development Services Type:Action Information Subject Title Authorization for Mayor to sign a Professional Services Agreement with Parametrix for design services with respect to the Main Street Decorative Lighting and Sidewalk Enhancements Project. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Authorize Mayor to sign agreement. Previous Council Action On December 14, 2010, the CS/DS Committee recommended that the approval of the Request for Qualification be placed on the consent agenda for approval at the December 21, 2010 Council meeting. On December 21, 2010, the City Council authorized staff to advertise a Request For Qualification to select a consultant team to design the project. On November 7, 2011, the CS/DS Committee reviewed this item and recommended it be placed on the consent agenda for approval. Narrative In 2010, the City was successful in securing a $725,000 grant to add historic decorative street lighting and replace sidewalks, curb and gutter on Main Street between 5th and 6th Avenues. The grant is funded by the federal transportation enhancement program and a local match is not required. The project will install 11 new light poles and 4 decorative poles with artist made elements. Planter baskets will be hung from the new poles during the summer months. The new sidewalk will improve pedestrian safety by replacing sidewalk that has been displaced by existing street trees along the corridor. The existing street trees will be removed due to the damage they are causing to the surrounding infrastructure and replaced with new street trees that are better suited for this location. Staff is currently pursuing additional work items to increase the scope of improvements within this corridor to enhance the project. The options include the addition of street furniture, a mid-block pedestrian crossing, fiber optic service, conversion of overhead power to underground and use of low impact stormwater devices and materials. Additional funding will be required for these improvements. The City received statement of qualifications from six consultants interested in designing the project. Based on the qualifications and experience of each firm, three consultants were selected for an interview. The City's selection panel chose the Engineering firm of Parametrix to complete the environmental and design phases. In May of 2011, the City executed a contract in the amount of $39,749 with Parametrix to complete the preliminary design phase for the project. The City held two meetings and received public comment and input on design elements from business and property owners. The consultant used this input and Packet Page 85 of 297 created the attached conceptual drawing for the project. The next phase of the project is to complete the environmental documentation, final design and bid documents so the project can be advertised for construction bids. The consultant's fee to complete the remaining work is $188,957 and a $15,000 management reserve is also included in the agreement for unforeseen conditions that may arise during the design phase. The agreement will be funded by the federal transportation grant and the 412 Utility Fund since the scope of services includes the design of stormwater and watermain improvements. The environmental and design phases are scheduled in 2012 and it is anticipated that construction will begin in fall 2012. Attachments Exhibit 1 - Main St Drawing Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Engineering Robert English 12/01/2011 04:56 PM Public Works Phil Williams 12/02/2011 09:55 AM City Clerk Sandy Chase 12/02/2011 10:01 AM Mayor Dave Earling 12/02/2011 12:06 PM Final Approval Sandy Chase 12/02/2011 12:10 PM Form Started By: Megan Cruz Started On: 11/08/2011 Final Approval Date: 12/02/2011 Packet Page 86 of 297 1 C1 PR O P O S E D I M P R O V E M E N T S CO N C E P T P L A N Packet Page 87 of 297 AM-4403 Item #: 4. City Council Meeting Date: 12/06/2011 Time:30 Minutes Submitted For:Shawn Hunstock Submitted By:Shawn Hunstock Department:Finance Review Committee: Committee Action: Type:Action Information Subject Title Adoption of bond ordinances and resolution. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Approval of bond ordinances and resolution. Previous Council Action City Council on February 15, 2011 adopted Ordinance No. 3837 authorizing the sale of limited tax general obligation bonds and revenue bonds. Narrative The ordinances provide for the sale of limited tax general obligation refunding bonds as well as partially refunding revenue bonds. The resolution provides for a post-issuance compliance policy now required by the Internal Revenue Service for issuers of tax-exempt bonds. One potential discussion topic is an extension of the repayment terms for the 2001B bond issue. Debt service for these bonds comes from REET money in the 126 Fund. Extending repayment terms for the bonds would save approximately $83,000 per year from 2012-2021, but would cost $166,844 overall in additional REET money. The ordinances included in the packet will allow for either option, extending the repayment terms or not, depending on which option Council chooses. Attachments LTGO Bond Ordinance Revenue Bond Ordinance Resolution Post Issuance Compliance Policy LTGO Debt Service Revenue Bonds Debt Service 2001B Bond Repayment Options Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date City Clerk Sandy Chase 12/01/2011 11:25 AM Mayor Dave Earling 12/01/2011 02:04 PM Final Approval Sandy Chase 12/01/2011 02:17 PM Form Started By: Shawn Hunstock Started On: 12/01/2011 09:36 AM Final Approval Date: 12/01/2011 Packet Page 88 of 297 Packet Page 89 of 297 Council Packet Version 11/29/11 51168850.7 CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. ____ AN ORDINANCE of the City of Edmonds, Washington, relating to contracting indebtedness; providing for the issuance of not to exceed $12,500,000 of the City’s limited tax general obligation refunding bonds to carry out the refunding of certain outstanding limited tax general obligation bonds of the City and to pay the administrative costs of such refundings and the costs of issuance and sale of the bonds; fixing or setting parameters with respect to certain terms and covenants of the bonds; appointing the Finance Director as the City’s designated representative to approve the final terms of the sale and issuance of the bonds, to appoint a refunding trustee and to take certain other actions with respect to carrying out the refundings and the issuance of the bonds; and repealing ordinance No. 3837 of the City. [Passed December 6, 2011] This document prepared by: Foster Pepper PLLC 1111 Third Avenue, Suite 3400 Seattle, Washington 98101 (206) 447-4400 Packet Page 90 of 297 Council Packet Version 11/29/11 -i- 51168850.7 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1. Findings and Determinations ................................................................................................................... 1 Section 2. Definitions ................................................................................................................................................ 2 Section 3. Purpose and Authorization of the Bonds .................................................................................................. 6 Section 4. Description of the Bonds; Appointment of Designated Representative ................................................... 6 Section 5. Bond Registrar; Registration and Transfer of Bonds. .............................................................................. 8 Section 6. Form and Execution of Bonds .................................................................................................................. 9 Section 7. Payment of Bonds .................................................................................................................................. 10 Section 8. Redemption Provisions and Open Market Purchase of Bonds. .............................................................. 11 Section 9. Failure To Redeem Bonds ...................................................................................................................... 12 Section 10. Pledge of Taxes ...................................................................................................................................... 12 Section 11. Tax Matters. ........................................................................................................................................... 13 Section 12. Refunding or Defeasance of the Bonds .................................................................................................. 13 Section 13. Bond Fund; Deposit of Bond Proceeds. ................................................................................................. 14 Section 14. Refunding of the Refunded Bonds. ........................................................................................................ 14 Section 15. Sale of Bonds ......................................................................................................................................... 17 Section 16. Official Statement. ................................................................................................................................. 17 Section 17. Undertaking to Provide Continuing Disclosure ..................................................................................... 18 Section 18. Supplemental Ordinances ....................................................................................................................... 18 Section 19. General Authorization; Delivery of Bonds............................................................................................. 18 Section 20. Severability ............................................................................................................................................ 18 Section 21. Prior Bond Authorization Repealed ....................................................................................................... 19 Section 22. Effective Date of Ordinance ................................................................................................................... 19 Packet Page 91 of 297 Council Packet Version 11/29/11 -1- 51168850.7 CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. ____ AN ORDINANCE of the City of Edmonds, Washington, relating to contracting indebtedness; providing for the issuance of not to exceed $12,500,000 of the City’s limited tax general obligation refunding bonds to carry out the refunding of certain outstanding limited tax general obligation bonds of the City and to pay the administrative costs of such refundings and the costs of issuance and sale of the bonds; fixing or setting parameters with respect to certain terms and covenants of the bonds; appointing the Finance Director as the City’s designated representative to approve the final terms of the sale and issuance of the bonds, to appoint a refunding trustee and to take certain other actions with respect to carrying out the refundings and the issuance of the bonds; and repealing ordinance No. 3837 of the City. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Findings and Determinations. The City Council of the City of Edmonds, Washington (the “City”) makes the findings and determinations set forth below. Capitalized terms have the meanings given in Section 2. (a) The Refunding Candidates. The City has previously issued the following limited tax general obligation bonds (the “Refunding Candidates”): (1) 1998 Bonds. The 1998 Bonds were issued in the original principal amount of $4,480,000 for the purpose of refunding the City’s then-outstanding Limited Tax General Obligation Bonds, 1993 and Limited Tax General Obligation Bonds, 1995. The refinanced projects include a public works building; and the acquisition and renovation of a building and adjacent parking spaces to serve as the new city hall. The outstanding 1998 Bonds are callable at any time at a price of par plus accrued interest to the date fixed for redemption. (2) 2001A Bonds. The 2001A Bonds were issued in the original principal amount of $3,045,000 for the purpose of paying a portion of the costs of making improvements to the Frances Anderson Recreational Center, replacing the Edmonds library roof, funding a sewer rehabilitation project and street improvements. The outstanding 2001A Bonds maturing on or after December 1, 2012 are callable at any time on or after December 1, 2011 at a price of par plus accrued interest to the date fixed for redemption. (3) 2001B Bonds. The 2001B Bonds were issued in the original principal amount of $2,260,000 for the purpose of purchasing certain property for park and other Packet Page 92 of 297 Council Packet Version 11/29/11 -2- 51168850.7 purposes. The outstanding 2001B Bonds maturing on or after December 1, 2012 are callable at any time on or after December 1, 2011 at a price of par plus accrued interest to the date fixed for redemption. In addition to a pledge of taxes, the City also pledged the proceeds of any grants received by the City for the purchase of park and open space property to the payment of principal of and interest on the 2001B Bonds. (4) 2002 Bonds. The 2002 Bonds were issued in the original principal amount of $7,015,000 for the purpose of paying a portion of the costs of acquiring and renovating facilities for a performing arts theatre, creating on-site parking, and constructing a meeting room for the theatre. The outstanding 2002 Bonds maturing on or after December 1, 2013 are callable at any time on or after December 1, 2012 at a price of par plus accrued interest to the date fixed for redemption. In addition to a pledge of taxes, the City also pledged to the payment of principal of and interest on the Bonds the proceeds of certain intergovernmental payments received from the Edmonds Public Facilities District and from the Snohomish County Public Facilities District under the County Interlocal Agreement, and further pledged the proceeds of certain Real Estate Excise Taxes imposed by the City under RCW 82.41.010. (b) Approval of Final Terms of the Bonds. RCW 39.46.040(2) provides that an ordinance authorizing the issuance of bonds may authorize an officer of the City to serve as the City’s Designated Representative and to accept, on behalf of the City, an offer to purchase those bonds so long as the acceptance of such offer is consistent with terms established by an ordinance that establishes, or sets parameters with respect to, the following Final Terms: the amount, date or dates, denominations, interest rate or rates (or mechanism for determining interest rate or rates); payment dates, final maturity, redemption rights, price, minimum savings for refunding bonds (if the refunding bonds are issued for savings purposes), and any other terms and conditions deemed appropriate by the City Council. (c) Finding with Respect to Refunding. The City Council finds that, upon a determination by the Designated Representative that such a refunding will result in a savings to the City as further set forth in Section 14, the Refunding Candidates may be refunded by the issuance of the Bonds. Section 2. Definitions. As used in this ordinance, the following words shall have the following meanings: (a) “1998 Bonds” means the City’s outstanding Limited Tax General Obligation Refunding Bonds, 1998, authorized by Ordinance No. 3235, passed on December 15, 1998. (b) “2001A Bonds” means the City’s outstanding Limited Tax General Obligation Bonds, 2001, authorized by Ordinance No. 3372, passed on August 21, 2001. (c) “2001B Bonds” means the City’s outstanding Limited Tax General Obligation Bonds, 2001 Series B, authorized by Ordinance No. 3388, passed on December 11, 2001. Packet Page 93 of 297 Council Packet Version 11/29/11 -3- 51168850.7 (d) “2002 Bonds” means the City’s outstanding Limited Tax General Obligation Bonds, 2002, authorized by Ordinance No. 3425, passed on November 7, 2002. (e) “Acquired Obligations” means those United States Treasury Certificates of Indebtedness, Notes, and Bonds--State and Local Government Series and other Government Obligations purchased to accomplish the refunding of the Refunded Bonds. (f) “Authorized Denominations” means $5,000 or any integral multiple thereof within a maturity. (g) “Beneficial Owner” means the owner of any beneficial interests in the Bonds. (h) “Bond Counsel” means Foster Pepper PLLC or any other nationally recognized bond counsel firm then representing the City. (i) “Bond Fund” means a special fund for the payment of the principal of and interest on any Series of Bonds created or designated by the Finance Director pursuant to this ordinance. (j) “Bond Purchase Contract” means an offer to purchase the Bonds (or any Series of Bonds) presented by an underwriter (or other purchaser) and accepted by the Designated Representative, acting on behalf of the City, setting forth certain terms and conditions of the issuance, sale and delivery of any Series of the Bonds. In the case of a competitive sale of Bonds, the offer shall mean the submitted bid (which incorporates all of the terms and conditions set forth in the Notice of Bond Sale), and the award by the Designated Representative to the successful bidder shall constitute the acceptance of the Bond Purchase Contract. (k) “Bond Register” means the books or records maintained by the Bond Registrar containing the name and mailing address of the owner of each Bond and the principal amount and number of Bonds held by each owner. (l) “Bond Registrar” means the Fiscal Agent. (m) “Bonds” means the limited tax general obligation refunding bonds issued pursuant to this ordinance. (n) “City” means the City of Edmonds, Washington. (o) “Closing Date” means the date on which a Series of Bonds is delivered to the initial purchaser or purchasers thereof upon payment in full therefor. (p) “Code” means the United States Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and applicable rules and regulations promulgated thereunder. (q) “County” means Snohomish County. (r) “County PFD” means the Snohomish County Public Facilities District. Packet Page 94 of 297 Council Packet Version 11/29/11 -4- 51168850.7 (s) “County PFD Interlocal Agreement” or “County Interlocal Agreement” means the Interlocal Agreement for Development of the Edmonds Centre [sic] for the Arts, dated November 4, 2002, by and among the City, the Edmonds PFD, the Snohomish County PFD and the County, and recorded under County recording number 200211060003. (t) “DTC” means The Depository Trust Company, New York, New York. (u) “Designated Representative” means the Finance Director, appointed in Section 3 of this ordinance to serve as the City’s designated representative in accordance with RCW 39.46.040(2). (v) “Edmonds PFD” means the Edmonds Public Facilities District. (w) “Final Terms” means the terms and conditions for the sale of any Series of Bonds including, but not limited to the amount, date or dates, denominations, interest rate or rates (or mechanism for determining interest rate or rates), payment dates, final maturity, redemption rights, price, and minimum savings for refunding bonds (if the refunding bonds are issued for savings purposes). (x) “Finance Director” means the Finance Director of the City or any other City official who succeeds to the duties now delegated to that office, or the designee of such officer. (y) “Financial Advisor” means A. Dashen and Associates of Bellevue, Washington, or any other Financial Advisor then appointed and acting as financial advisor to the City. (z) “Fiscal Agent” means the fiscal agent of the State, currently The Bank of New York Mellon, as the same may be designated by the State from time to time. (aa) “Government Obligations” has the meaning given in chapter 39.53 RCW, as it now exists or may hereafter be amended. (bb) “Intergovernmental Payments” means the amounts received by the City from the Edmonds PFD and the County PFD under the County PFD Interlocal Agreement. (cc) “Letter of Representations” means the Blanket Issuer Letter of Representations dated August 6, 1996, between the City and DTC, as it may be amended from time to time. (dd) “MSRB” means the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board. (ee) “Owners” means, without distinction, the Registered Owner(s) and the Beneficial Owner(s). (ff) “Rating Agency” means a nationally recognized rating agency or agencies, if any, providing a rating on the Bonds at the request of the City. (gg) “Real Estate Excise Taxes” means the proceeds of the real estate excise taxes imposed by the City under RCW 82.41.010. Packet Page 95 of 297 Council Packet Version 11/29/11 -5- 51168850.7 (hh) “Redemption Date” means the date or dates fixed for redemption of each series of the Refunded Bonds, respectively. (ii) “Refunded Bonds” means all or a portion of the Refunding Candidates selected by the Designated Representative to be refunded with the proceeds of the Bonds. (jj) “Refunded Bond Ordinance(s)” means the ordinance authorizing a particular issue of the Refunding Candidates, as applicable. (kk) “Refunding Candidates” means the following currently outstanding bonds of the City: Bond Issue Amount Currently Outstanding Interest Rates Final Maturity Date Call Date Authorizing Ordinance No. 1998 Bonds $1,305,000 4.30 – 4.40% 12/1/2014 12/1/2008 3235 2001A Bonds 1,835,000 4.35 – 4.90% 12/1/2021 12/1/2011 3372 2001B Bonds 1,390,000 4.90 – 5.45% 12/1/2021 12/1/2011 3388 2002 Bonds 5,970,000 3.75 – 4.90% 12/1/2026 12/1/2012 3425 (ll) “Refunding Plan” means (as further described in the applicable Refunding Trust Agreement): (1) the deposit with the Refunding Trustee of an amount of proceeds of a Series of the Bonds sufficient (together with other money of the City, if necessary) to acquire the Acquired Obligations to be held by the Refunding Trustee with cash, if necessary; (2) the application of the principal of and interest on the Acquired Obligations (and any other cash balance) to the call, payment and redemption of the specified Refunded Bonds on the applicable Redemption Date(s) at a price of par plus any accrued interest; and (3) the payment of costs of issuing the Series of Bonds and the costs of carrying out the foregoing elements of the Refunding Plan. (mm) “Refunding Trust Agreement” means a refunding trust or escrow agreement between the City and the Refunding Trustee, dated as of the Closing Date of each Series of Bonds, providing for the safekeeping of bond proceeds and the refunding certain Refunded Bonds. (nn) “Refunding Trustee” means the trustee or escrow agent, or any successor trustee or escrow agent, designated by the Designated Representative to serve as refunding trustee to carry out the Refunding Plan. (oo) “Registered Owner” means any person or entity who is the registered owner of any Bond. (pp) “Registration Ordinance” means City Ordinance No. 2451 establishing a system of registration for the City’s bonds and other obligations. Packet Page 96 of 297 Council Packet Version 11/29/11 -6- 51168850.7 (qq) “Rule” means Rule 15c2-12 promulgated by the SEC under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as the same may be amended from time to time. (rr) “SEC” means the United States Securities and Exchange Commission. (ss) “Series of Bonds” or “Bonds of a Series” or “Series” means a series of Bonds issued pursuant to this ordinance. (tt) “State” means the State of Washington. (uu) “Term Bond” means those Bonds that are designated as term bonds in the Bond Purchase Contract. (vv) “Undertaking” means a continuing disclosure agreement authorized to be executed by the Designated Representative, pursuant to Section 18 of this ordinance. (ww) “Underwriter” means the firm or firms selected by the Designated Representative as the underwriter(s) for a negotiated sale or awarded as the successful bidder in a competitive sale. Section 3. Purpose and Authorization of the Bonds. In order to achieve a cost savings for the City and to modify debt service requirements, the City Council finds it to be in the best interest of the City to authorize the issuance and sale of the Bonds for the purposes and subject to the terms and conditions described below. The City shall borrow money on the credit of the City and issue negotiable limited tax general obligation refunding bonds evidencing indebtedness for general municipal purposes to provide the funds necessary to (i) carry out the refunding of the Refunding Candidates; and (ii) pay the administrative costs of carrying out such refunding and the costs of sale and issuance of the Bonds. Section 4. Description of the Bonds; Appointment of Designated Representative. The Finance Director is appointed as the City’s Designated Representative and is authorized and directed to conduct the sale of such Bonds in the manner and upon the terms deemed most advantageous to the City, and to approve the Final Terms of the Bonds, within the following parameters: (a) Amount. The Bonds may be issued in one or more series and shall not exceed the aggregate principal amount of $12,500,000. The principal amount of any Series of Bonds (i) may exceed the principal amount of the Refunded Bonds being refunded by an amount deemed reasonably required to effect such refunding, including without limitation provision for modifying debt service requirements or for selling the Bonds at a discount, or (ii) may be less than or the same as the principal amount of the Refunded Bonds, so long as provision is duly and sufficiently made for the retirement or redemption of those Refunded Bonds. Portions of the various maturities of Bonds shall be allocated to paying the respective costs of carrying out the Refunding Plan for the appropriate series of Refunded Bonds, including a ratable share of proceeds used to pay the costs of issuance of the Bonds, in accordance with a schedule approved by the Designated Representative. Packet Page 97 of 297 Council Packet Version 11/29/11 -7- 51168850.7 (b) Date or Dates. Each Series of Bonds shall be dated as of its date of delivery to the initial purchaser, which date may not be later than December 31, 2012. (c) Denominations, Series Designation, etc. The Bonds must be issued in Authorized Denominations, shall be numbered separately in the manner and shall bear any name and additional designation as deemed necessary or appropriate by the Designated Representative. (d) Interest Rate(s). The Bonds shall bear interest at fixed rates per annum (computed on the basis of a 360-day year of twelve 30-day months) from their date or from the most recent interest payment date for which interest has been paid or duly provided for, whichever is later. One or more rates of interest may be fixed for the Bonds, which rate or rates must be in multiples of 1/8th or 1/20th of 1%, or both. No more than one rate of interest may be fixed for any one maturity. No rate of interest for any maturity may exceed 5.50%, and the “all- in” true interest cost to the City for any Series of Bonds may not exceed 5.00%. (e) Payment Dates. Interest must be payable at fixed rates semiannually (on each June 1 and December 1, or such other semiannual dates as are selected by the Designated Representative), commencing on the next such semiannual date following the issuance of the Series of Bonds. Principal must be payable annually (on each December 1, or such other annual date as is selected by the Designated Representative) commencing no earlier than the next such annual date following the issuance of the Series of Bonds. (f) Final Maturity. The Bonds allocated to carrying out a refunding to achieve a savings shall not extend over a longer period of time than the Refunded Bonds. Bonds allocated to carrying out a refunding to modify debt service requirements may mature no later than December 1, 2031. (g) Redemption Rights. The Bonds shall be issued subject to optional and mandatory redemption provisions, including designation of Term Bonds, if any, set forth in Section 9. (h) Price. The purchase price for any Series of Bonds may not be less than 95% or more than 115% of the par value of that Series. (i) Minimum Savings for Refunding Bonds. The Bonds being refunded to achieve a savings must achieve a positive net present value savings after paying all costs of issuance. The Bonds allocated to the advance refunding of the 2002 Bonds must achieve a minimum of 3.00% net present value savings over the scheduled principal and interest of the 2002 Bonds, giving consideration to the fixed maturities of the corresponding Bonds and Refunded Bonds, the costs of issuance of the Bonds, and the known earned income from the investment of the Bond proceeds in the Acquired Obligations, pending redemption of the Refunded Bonds. (j) Other Terms and Conditions. (1) The issuance of each Series of Bonds may not exceed the City’s debt capacity at the time of issuance. (2) The Bonds may be sold by either negotiated sale or by competitive bid, in accordance with Section 15. Packet Page 98 of 297 Council Packet Version 11/29/11 -8- 51168850.7 (3) The Designated Representative, in consultation with the City’s financial advisor, may determine whether it is in the City’s best interest to provide for bond insurance or other credit enhancement. With respect to bond insurance or other credit enhancement, the Designated Representative may accept, on behalf of the City, such additional terms, conditions, and covenants as may be required by the enhancement provider, if consistent with the provisions of this ordinance. (4) The Designated Representative is authorized to take such additional actions as may be necessary or convenient for the refunding of the Refunded Bonds and for the issuance of the Bonds pursuant to the terms of this ordinance, all as further set forth in Section 15 of this ordinance. Section 5. Bond Registrar; Registration and Transfer of Bonds. (a) Registration of Bonds. The Bonds shall be issued only in registered form as to both principal and interest and shall be recorded on the Bond Register. (b) Bond Registrar. The Bond Registrar shall keep, or cause to be kept, sufficient books for the registration and transfer of the Bonds, which shall be open to inspection by the City at all times. The Bond Register shall contain the name and mailing address of the Registered Owner of each Bond and the principal amount and number of each of the Bonds held by each Registered Owner. The Bond Registrar is authorized, on behalf of the City, to authenticate and deliver Bonds transferred or exchanged in accordance with the provisions of the Bonds and this ordinance, to serve as the City’s paying agent for the Bonds and to carry out all of the Bond Registrar’s powers and duties under this ordinance and City’s Registration Ordinance. The Bond Registrar shall be responsible for its representations contained in the Bond Registrar’s Certificate of Authentication on the Bonds. The Bond Registrar may become either a Registered or Beneficial Owner of Bonds with the same rights it would have if it were not the Bond Registrar and, to the extent permitted by law, may act as depository for and permit any of its officers or directors to act as members of, or in any other capacity with respect to, any committee formed to protect the rights of Beneficial Owners. (c) Transfer and Exchange of Bonds. Bonds surrendered to the Bond Registrar may be exchanged for Bonds in any Authorized Denomination of an equal aggregate principal amount and of the same interest rate and maturity. Bonds may be transferred only if endorsed in the manner provided thereon and surrendered to the Bond Registrar. Any exchange or transfer shall be without cost to the owner or transferee. The Bond Registrar shall not be obligated to exchange or transfer any Bond during the 15 days preceding any principal payment or redemption date. (d) DTC and the Book Entry System. The Bonds initially shall be registered in the name of Cede & Co., as the nominee of DTC. The Bonds so registered shall be held in fully immobilized form by DTC as depository in accordance with the provisions of the Letter of Representations. Neither the City nor the Bond Registrar shall have any responsibility or obligation to DTC participants or the persons for whom they act as nominees with respect to the Bonds regarding accuracy of any records maintained by DTC or DTC participants of any amount in respect of principal of or interest on the Bonds, or any notice which is permitted or required to Packet Page 99 of 297 Council Packet Version 11/29/11 -9- 51168850.7 be given to Registered Owners hereunder (except such notice as is required to be given by the Bond Registrar to DTC). For as long as any Bonds are held in fully immobilized form, DTC, its nominee or its successor depository shall be deemed to be the Registered Owner for all purposes hereunder and all references to registered owners, bondowners, bondholders or the like shall mean DTC or its nominee and, except for the purpose of the City’s undertaking herein to provide continuing disclosure, shall not mean the Beneficial Owners. Registered ownership of such Bonds, or any portions thereof, may not thereafter be transferred except: (i) to any successor of DTC or its nominee, if that successor shall be qualified under any applicable laws to provide the services proposed to be provided by it; (ii) to any substitute depository appointed by the City or such substitute depository’s successor; or (iii) to any person if the Bonds are no longer held in immobilized form. Upon the resignation of DTC or its successor (or any substitute depository or its successor) from its functions as depository, or a determination by the City that it no longer wishes to continue the system of book entry transfers through DTC or its successor (or any substitute depository or its successor), the City may appoint a substitute depository. Any such substitute depository shall be qualified under any applicable laws to provide the services proposed to be provided by it. If (i) DTC or its successor (or substitute depository or its successor) resigns from its functions as depository, and no substitute depository can be obtained or (ii) the City determines that the Bonds are to be in certificated form, the ownership of Bonds may be transferred to any person as provided herein and the Bonds no longer shall be held in fully immobilized form. Section 6. Form and Execution of Bonds. The Bonds shall be prepared in a form consistent with the provisions of this ordinance and state law and shall be signed by the Mayor and City Clerk, either or both of whose signatures may be manual or in facsimile, and the seal of the City or a facsimile reproduction thereof shall be impressed or printed thereon. Only Bonds bearing a Certificate of Authentication in the following form, manually signed by the Bond Registrar, shall be valid or obligatory for any purpose or entitled to the benefits of this ordinance: “Certificate Of Authentication. This Bond is one of the fully registered City of Edmonds, Washington, Limited Tax General Obligation Refunding Bonds, [appropriate year and series designation, if any], described in the Bond Ordinance.” The authorized signing of a Certificate of Authentication shall be conclusive evidence that the Bond so authenticated has been duly executed, authenticated and delivered and is entitled to the benefits of this ordinance. If any officer whose manual or facsimile signature appears on the Bonds ceases to be an officer of the City authorized to sign bonds before the Bonds bearing his or her manual or facsimile signature are authenticated or delivered by the Bond Registrar or issued by the City, those Bonds nevertheless may be authenticated, issued and delivered and, when authenticated, issued and delivered, shall be as binding on the City as though that person had continued to be an officer of the City authorized to sign bonds. Any Bond also may be signed on behalf of the City by any person who, on the actual date of signing of the Bond, is an officer of the City authorized Packet Page 100 of 297 Council Packet Version 11/29/11 -10- 51168850.7 to sign bonds, although he or she did not hold the required office on the date of issuance of the Bonds. Each Bond issued to refund the 2002 Bonds shall include on such Bond and in any disclosure document for the sale of any such Bond, substantially the following statement, as required by Section C.4 of the County PFD Interlocal Agreement: The Bonds allocated to the refunding of the 2002 Bonds (the “PFD Allocation Bonds”) are obligations of the City, payable from project payments transferred to the City by the Edmonds PFD, from certain real estate excise tax receipts and from other money of the City legally available therefor. The PFD Allocation Bonds are not obligations of the Edmonds PFD, the County or the County PFD. The Edmonds PFD, the County and the County PFD are political subdivisions of the state of Washington separate from the City. All liabilities incurred by the City incurred in connection with the Edmonds PFD shall be satisfied exclusively from the assets, credit, and property of the City and no creditor or other person shall have any right of action against or recourse to the Edmonds PFD (except to the extent of required payments under the County PFD Interlocal Agreement), the County PFD, the County, or any of their respective assets, credit or services on account of any debts, obligations, liabilities or omissions of the City. The County PFD is a municipal corporation organized under RCW 36.100.010 and Amended Ordinance No. 01-041 of Snohomish County. Amended Ordinance No. 01-041 expressly provides “All liabilities incurred by the [County PFD] shall be satisfied exclusively from the assets, credit and property of the [County PFD] and no creditor or other person shall have any right of action against or recourse to the County, its assets, credit or services on account of any debts, obligations, liabilities or omissions of the [County PFD].” Section 7. Payment of Bonds. Both principal of and interest on the Bonds shall be payable in lawful money of the United States of America. For as long as the Bonds are registered in the name of DTC or its nominee, payment of principal of and interest on the Bonds shall be made in the manner set forth in the Letter of Representations. If the Bonds cease to be in book-entry-only form, interest on the Bonds shall be paid by checks or drafts of the Bond Registrar mailed on the interest payment date to the Registered Owners at the addresses appearing on the Bond Register on the 15th day of the month preceding the interest payment date or by electronic transfer on the interest payment date. The City shall not be required to make electronic transfers except to a Registered Owner of Bonds pursuant to a request in writing (and at the sole expense of that Registered Owner) received at least 10 days before an interest payment date. Principal of the Bonds shall be payable upon presentation and surrender of the Bonds by the Registered Owners to the Bond Registrar. Packet Page 101 of 297 Council Packet Version 11/29/11 -11- 51168850.7 Section 8. Redemption Provisions and Open Market Purchase of Bonds. (a) Optional Redemption. The City’s Designated Representative may designate certain maturities of the Bonds as being subject to redemption at the option of the City prior to their respective maturities on the dates and at the prices set forth in the Bond Purchase Contract. The Designated Representative may also, in his or her discretion, designate certain maturities of the Bonds as not being subject to optional redemption prior to maturity. (b) Term Bonds. The Designated Representative may approve the designation of certain maturities of the Bonds as Term Bonds, as set forth in the Bond Purchase Contract. The City shall redeem Term Bonds, if not previously redeemed under any optional redemption provisions or purchased and surrendered for cancellation under the provisions set forth below, at a price of par plus accrued interest on the annual redemption dates and in annual redemption amounts approved by the Designated Representative. If the City redeems under the optional redemption provisions, purchases in the open market or defeases Term Bonds, the par amount of the Term Bonds so redeemed, purchased or defeased (irrespective of their actual redemption or purchase prices) shall be credited against one or more scheduled mandatory redemption amounts for those Term Bonds. The City shall determine the manner in which the credit is to be allocated and shall notify the Bond Registrar in writing of its allocation prior to the earliest mandatory redemption date for that maturity of Term Bonds for which notice of redemption has not already been given. (c) Partial Redemption. Portions of the principal amount of any Series of Bonds, in any Authorized Denomination, may be redeemed. If less than all of the principal amount of any Series of Bonds is redeemed, upon surrender of that Bond to the Bond Registrar, there shall be issued to the Registered Owner, without charge, a new Bond (or Bonds, at the option of the Registered Owner) of the same series, maturity and interest rate in any Authorized Denomination in the aggregate principal amount remaining unredeemed. (d) Selection of Bonds for Redemption. If fewer than all of the Bonds within a maturity are to be redeemed prior to maturity, Bonds shall be selected for redemption randomly within a maturity in such manner as the Bond Registrar shall determine. Notwithstanding the foregoing, for as long as the Bonds are registered in the name of DTC or its nominee, selection of Bonds for redemption shall be in accordance with the Letter of Representations. (e) Notice of Redemption. While the Bonds are held by DTC in book-entry only form, any notice of redemption shall be given at the time, to the entity and in the manner required by DTC in accordance with the Letter of Representations, and the Bond Registrar shall not be required to give any other notice of redemption. If the Bonds cease to be in book-entry only form unless waived by any Registered Owner of the Bonds to be redeemed, the City shall cause notice of any intended redemption of Bonds to be given by the Bond Registrar not less than 20 nor more than 60 days prior to the date fixed for redemption by first-class mail, postage prepaid, to the Registered Owner of any Bond to be redeemed at the address appearing on the Bond Register at the time the Bond Registrar prepares the notice, and the requirements of this sentence shall be deemed to have been fulfilled when notice has been mailed as so provided, whether or not it is actually received by the Registered or Beneficial Owner of any Bond. Packet Page 102 of 297 Council Packet Version 11/29/11 -12- 51168850.7 In the case of an optional redemption, the notice may state that the City retains the right to rescind the redemption notice and the related optional redemption of Bonds by giving a notice of rescission to the affected Registered Owners at any time prior to the scheduled optional redemption date. Any notice of optional redemption that is so rescinded shall be of no effect, and the Bonds for which the notice of optional redemption has been rescinded shall remain outstanding. In addition, the redemption notice shall be mailed or sent electronically within the same period to the MSRB consistent with the Undertaking, to any nationally recognized rating agency which at the time maintains a rating on the Bonds at the request of the City, and to such other persons and with such additional information as the Finance Director shall determine, but these additional mailings shall not be a condition precedent to the redemption of Bonds. (f) Effect of Redemption. Interest on Bonds called for redemption shall cease to accrue on the date fixed for redemption, unless the notice of redemption is rescinded as set forth above. (g) Open Market Purchase. The City further reserves the right and option to purchase any or all of the Bonds in the open market at any time at any price acceptable to the City plus accrued interest to the date of purchase. (h) Cancellation of Bonds. All Bonds purchased or redeemed under this section shall be canceled. Section 9. Failure To Redeem Bonds. If any Bond is not redeemed when properly presented at its maturity or on the date set for redemption, if applicable, the City shall be obligated to pay interest on that Bond at the same rate provided in the Bond from and after its maturity or date set for redemption until that Bond, both principal and interest, is paid in full or until sufficient money for its payment in full is on deposit in the Bond Fund and the Bond has been called for payment by giving notice of that call to the Registered Owner. Section 10. Security for the Bonds. (a) Pledge of Taxes. For as long as any of the Bonds are outstanding, the City irrevocably pledges to include in its budget and levy taxes annually within the constitutional and statutory tax limitations provided by law without a vote of the electors of the City on all of the taxable property within the City in an amount sufficient, together with other money legally available and to be used therefor, to pay when due the principal of and interest on those general obligation Bonds, and the full faith, credit and resources of the City are pledged irrevocably for the annual levy and collection of those taxes and the prompt payment of that principal and interest. (b) Additional Pledge with respect to 2002 Refunding Allocation. In addition, as required by the County Interlocal Agreement, the City expressly pledges to the payment of the principal of and interest on that portion of the Bonds allocated to the refunding of the 2002 Bonds, the following resources, in the following order: (i) proceeds of the Intergovernmental Payments received by the City under the County Interlocal Agreement received by the City as a result of the sales tax collected by the Edmonds PFD; (ii) proceeds of the Real Estate Excise Packet Page 103 of 297 Council Packet Version 11/29/11 -13- 51168850.7 Taxes imposed by the City under RCW 82.41.010; and (iii) proceeds of the Intergovernmental Payments received by the City under the County Interlocal Agreement received by the City as a result of the sales tax collected by the County PFD. Section 11. Tax Matters. (a) Preservation of Tax Exemption for Interest on Bonds. The City covenants that it will take all actions reasonably necessary and within its control to prevent interest on the Bonds from being includable in gross income for federal income tax purposes, and it will neither take any action nor make or permit any use of proceeds of the Bonds or other funds of the City treated as proceeds of the Bonds at any time during the term of the Bonds which will cause interest on the Bonds to be included in gross income for federal income tax purposes. The City also covenants that it will, to the extent the arbitrage rebate requirement of Section 148 of the Code is applicable to the Bonds, take all actions necessary to comply (or to be treated as having complied) with that requirement in connection with the Bonds, including the calculation and payment of any penalties that the City has elected to pay as an alternative to calculating rebatable arbitrage, and the payment of any other penalties if required under Section 148 of the Code to prevent interest on the Bonds from being included in gross income for federal income tax purposes. (b) Designation of Bonds as “Qualified Tax-Exempt Obligations.” The Bonds are designated as “qualified tax-exempt obligations” for the purposes of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code, if (a) the Finance Director is able to determine and certify that the Bonds are not “private activity bonds” within the meaning of Section 141 of the Code; (2) the reasonably anticipated amount of tax-exempt obligations (other than private activity bonds and other obligations not required to be included in such calculation) which the City and any entity subordinate to the City (including any entity that the City controls, that derives its authority to issue tax-exempt obligations from the City, or that issues tax-exempt obligations on behalf of the City) will issue during the calendar year in which the Bonds are issued will not exceed $10,000,000; and (b) the amount of tax-exempt obligations, including the Bonds, so designated by the City as “qualified tax-exempt obligations” for the purposes of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code during the calendar year in which the Bonds are issued does not exceed $10,000,000. Section 12. Refunding or Defeasance of the Bonds. The City may issue refunding bonds pursuant to the laws of the State or use money available from any other lawful source to pay when due the principal of and interest on the Bonds, or any portion thereof included in a refunding or defeasance plan, and to redeem and retire, refund or defease all such then- outstanding Bonds (hereinafter collectively called the “defeased Bonds”) and to pay the costs of the refunding or defeasance. If money and/or Government Obligations maturing at a time or times and bearing interest in amounts (together with money, if necessary) sufficient to redeem and retire, refund or defease the defeased Bonds in accordance with their terms are set aside in a special trust fund or escrow account irrevocably pledged to that redemption, retirement or defeasance of defeased Bonds (hereinafter called the “trust account”), then all right and interest of the Owners of the defeased Bonds in the covenants of this ordinance and in the funds and accounts obligated to the payment of the defeased Bonds shall cease and become void. The Owners of defeased Bonds shall have the right to receive payment of the principal of and interest on the defeased Bonds from the trust account. The City shall include in the refunding or Packet Page 104 of 297 Council Packet Version 11/29/11 -14- 51168850.7 defeasance plan such provisions as the City deems necessary for the random selection of any defeased Bonds that constitute less than all of a particular maturity of the Bonds, for notice of the defeasance to be given to the owners of the defeased Bonds and to such other persons as the City shall determine, and for any required replacement of Bond certificates for defeased Bonds. The defeased Bonds shall be deemed no longer outstanding, and the City may apply any money in any other fund or account established for the payment or redemption of the defeased Bonds to any lawful purposes as it shall determine. If the Bonds are registered in the name of DTC or its nominee, notice of any defeasance of Bonds shall be given to DTC in the manner prescribed in the Letter of Representations for notices of redemption of Bonds. Section 13. Bond Fund; Deposit of Bond Proceeds. (a) Bond Fund. The Bond Fund is created for the purpose of paying principal of and interest on the Bonds. The Finance Director may create such accounts within the Bond Fund as he or she may deem necessary or convenient for the tracking of each Series of Bonds. All taxes collected for and other amounts allocated to the payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds shall be deposited in the Bond Fund. (b) Deposit of Bond Proceeds. The principal proceeds and premium, if any, received from the sale and delivery of the Bonds shall be used to pay the costs of issuance of the Bonds and deposited, invested and used in accordance with the applicable Refunding Plan and Section 15 of this ordinance. Section 14. Refunding of the Refunded Bonds. (a) Selection of Refunded Bonds, Redemption Dates and Refunding Trustee. Under the terms and conditions set forth by this ordinance, the Designated Representative is authorized to select applicable Refunding Candidates to be refunded by each Series of Bonds, to designate the applicable Redemption Date and to appoint the Refunding Trustee for each Series of Bonds. The Designated Representative may choose to refund less than all of the Refunding Candidates and may serve as, or appoint separately, the Refunding Trustee for any Series of Bonds. (b) Findings and Determinations with Respect to the Refundings. Prior to approving the sale of a Series of Bonds, the Designated Representative shall identify the Refunded Bonds to be refunded by the sale of such Series, and shall make the following determinations in writing: (1) The Redemption Date is the earliest practical date or dates on which the Refunded Bonds may be called for redemption; (2) The savings that will be effected (as measured by the difference between the principal and interest cost over the life of Bonds and the principal and interest cost over the life of the Refunded Bonds but for such refunding) exceeds the minimum savings required by Section 4 of this ordinance. In determining such savings, the Designated Representative has given due consideration to the fixed maturities of the Bonds and the Refunded Bonds, the costs of issuance of the Bonds and the known earned income from the investment of the proceeds of the issuance and Packet Page 105 of 297 Council Packet Version 11/29/11 -15- 51168850.7 sale of the Bonds and other money of the City used in the Refunding Plan pending payment and redemption of the Refunded Bonds authorized by this ordinance; and (3) The Refunding Plan will be effected by the issuance and sale of the Bonds and the application of the proceeds of such Bonds (together with other money of the City, if necessary) to carrying out the Refunding Plan and that the money to be deposited with the Refunding Trustee for the Refunded Bonds in accordance with the Refunding Plan will be sufficient (together with interest earned on the Acquired Obligations) to discharge and satisfy the obligations of the City under Refunded Bond Ordinances. The City Council finds that, based on the foregoing determinations, the pledges, charges, trusts, covenants, and agreements of the City made or provided for in the applicable Refunded Bond Ordinances, immediately upon the deposit of sufficient proceeds of the Bonds with the Refunding Trustee, the Refunded Bonds shall no longer be deemed to be outstanding under the applicable Refunded Bond Ordinances. (c) Authorization for Refunding Trust Agreement. The Designated Representative and the Mayor are each independently authorized to execute and deliver to the Refunding Trustee a Refunding Trust Agreement, which sets forth the duties, obligations and responsibilities of the Refunding Trustee in connection with the Refunding Plan, provisions for payment of the fees, compensation and expenses of such Refunding Trustee, and such other provisions as may be necessary so that the Bonds are in compliance with the requirements of federal law governing the exclusion of interest on the Bonds from gross income for federal income tax purposes. (d) Call for Redemption of Refunded Bonds. The Designated Representative is authorized to call, on behalf of the City, the Refunded Bonds for redemption on their respective Redemption Date(s) in accordance with this ordinance. In addition to such other information as may be necessary or convenient, the call for redemption shall specify the name of the Refunded Bonds being called, their maturity dates, their Redemption Date(s) and redemption prices (expressed as a percentage of par, plus accrued interest), and shall be irrevocable after the Bonds are delivered to the initial purchaser thereof. The Designated Representative, the Mayor and other proper City officials are authorized and directed to give or cause to be given such notices as required, at the times and in the manner required pursuant to the Refunded Bond Ordinances, in order to effect the defeasance and redemption prior to maturity of the Refunded Bonds. (e) Use of Bond Proceeds. The proceeds of each Series of Bonds (together with other money of the City, if necessary) in an amount sufficient to carry out the Refunding Plan shall, immediately upon receipt, be deposited with the Refunding Trustee as set forth in the Refunding Trust Agreement. The Refunding Trustee shall use the money so deposited to discharge the obligations of the City relating to the Refunded Bonds under the Refunded Bond Ordinances by providing for the payment of the amounts required to be paid by the Refunding Plan. The Refunding Plan shall be carried out, and proceeds of the Bonds shall be applied, in accordance with this ordinance and the laws of the State. Packet Page 106 of 297 Council Packet Version 11/29/11 -16- 51168850.7 (f) Acquisition and Substitution of Acquired Obligations. The Refunding Trust Agreement shall authorize and direct the Trustee to purchase the Acquired Obligations (or substitute obligations) and to make the payments required to be made by the Refunding Plan from the Acquired Obligations (or substitute obligations) and money deposited with the Refunding Trustee pursuant to this ordinance. All Acquired Obligations (or substitute obligations) and the money deposited with the Refunding Trustee and any income earned on the amounts so deposited shall be held irrevocably, invested and applied in accordance with the provisions of the ordinance that authorized the Refunded Bonds, this ordinance, chapter 39.53 RCW and other applicable statutes of the State, and the Refunding Trust Agreement. All necessary and proper fees, compensation and expenses of the Refunding Trustee and all other costs incidental to the setting up of the escrow to accomplish the refunding of the Refunded Bonds and costs related to the issuance and delivery of the Bonds, including bond printing, verification fees, Bond Counsel’s fees and other related expenses, may be paid out of the proceeds of the Bonds. To the extent practicable, such obligations shall be discharged fully by the Refunding Trustee’s simultaneous purchase of the Acquired Obligations, bearing such interest and maturing as to principal and interest in such amounts and at such times so as to provide, together with a beginning cash balance, if necessary, for the payment of the amounts required to be paid by the Refunding Plan. The Acquired Obligations shall be listed and more particularly described in a schedule attached to the Refunding Trust Agreement, but are subject to substitution as set forth below. Prior to the purchase of any such Acquired Obligations, the City reserves the right to substitute other Government Obligations for any of the Acquired Obligations and to use any savings created thereby for any lawful City purpose if (i) in the opinion of Bond Counsel, the interest on the Bonds and the Bonds issued as tax-exempt obligations will remain excluded from gross income for federal income tax purposes under Sections 103, 148 and 149(d) of the Code, and (ii) such substitution shall not impair the timely payment of the amounts required to be paid by the Refunding Plan, as verified by a nationally recognized firm of independent certified public accountants. After the purchase of the Acquired Obligations by the Refunding Trustee, the City reserves the right to substitute therefor cash or Government Obligations subject to the conditions that such money or securities held by the Refunding Trustee shall be sufficient to carry out the Refunding Plan, that such substitution will not cause the Bonds or the Refunded Bonds to be arbitrage bonds within the meaning of Section 148 of the Code and regulations under such section of the Code in effect on the date of such substitution and applicable to obligations issued on the issue date of the Bonds, and that the City obtain: (i) verification by a nationally recognized independent certified public accounting firm reasonably acceptable to the Refunding Trustee confirming that the payments of principal of and interest on the Government Obligations, if paid when due, and any other money held by the Refunding Trustee will be sufficient to carry out the Refunding Plan; and (ii) an opinion from Bond Counsel to the effect that the disposition and substitution or purchase of such securities, under the statutes, rules and regulations then in force and applicable to the Bonds, will not cause the interest on the Bonds or the Refunded Bonds issued as tax-exempt obligations to be included in gross income for federal income tax purposes and that such disposition and substitution or purchase is in compliance with the statutes and regulations applicable to the Bonds. Any surplus money resulting from the sale, transfer, other disposition or redemption of the Acquired Obligations and the substitutions therefor shall be released from the trust estate and may be used for any lawful City purpose. Packet Page 107 of 297 Council Packet Version 11/29/11 -17- 51168850.7 Section 15. Manner of Sale of Bonds. The Designated Representative is authorized to engage Bond Counsel and a Financial Advisor to advise the City in connection with the issuance and sale of the Bonds. In consultation with these professionals, City officials, and other appropriate City staff and advisors, the Designated Representative shall take into account those factors that, in his or her judgment, will result in the lowest true interest cost on the Bonds to their maturity, including, but not limited to current interest rates for obligations comparable to the Bonds and determine whether to offer the Bonds for sale at competitive bid or through a negotiated sale. (a) Procedure for Negotiated Sale. If the Designated Representative determines that any Series of Bonds should be sold by negotiated sale, the Designated Representative shall solicit one or more Underwriters with which to negotiate the sale of those Bonds. The bond purchase contract for each Series of Bonds shall set forth the Final Terms of the Series of Bonds. The Designated Representative is authorized to execute the Bond Purchase Contract on behalf of the City, so long as the terms provided therein are consistent with the terms of this ordinance. (b) Procedure for Competitive Sale. A competitive sale shall include preparation of an official notice of bond sale for each Series of Bonds, setting forth parameters for the Final Terms of such sale and any other bid parameters that the Designated Representative deems appropriate consistent with this ordinance. Bids for the purchase of each Series of Bonds shall be received at such time or place and by such means as the Designated Representative directs. The Designated Representative may direct that the official bond sale or an abridged form thereof be published in such additional places as he or she deem desirable or appropriate. On the date and time established for the receipt of bids for a Series of Bonds, the Designated Representative (or his or her designee) shall open bids and shall cause the bids to be mathematically verified. The Designated Representative is authorized to award, on behalf of the City, the winning bid and accept the winning bidder’s offer to purchase the Series of Bonds, with such adjustments to the aggregate principal amount and principal amount per maturity as the Designated Representative deems appropriate, consistent with the terms of this ordinance. The Designated Representative may, in his or her discretion, reject any or all bids submitted and may waive any formality or irregularity in the bid or bidding process if he or she deems it to be in the City's best interest to do so. If all bids are rejected, the Bonds may be sold pursuant to negotiated sale or in any manner provided by law as the Designated Representative determines is in the best interest of the City, within the parameters set forth in this ordinance. CUSIP numbers will be printed on the Bonds if requested by the Underwriter, but neither failure to print CUSIP numbers on any Bond nor error with respect thereto shall constitute cause for a failure or refusal by the Underwriter to accept delivery of and pay for the Bonds in accordance with the purchase offer. All expenses in relation to the printing of CUSIP numbers on the Bonds shall be paid by the City, but the fee of the CUSIP Service Bureau for the assignment of those numbers shall be the responsibility of and shall be paid by the purchasers. Section 16. Official Statement. (a) Preliminary Official Statement Under the Rule. The Designated Representative and Mayor are each independently authorized to review and approve the information about the City contained in any preliminary official statement (the “Preliminary Official Statement”) Packet Page 108 of 297 Council Packet Version 11/29/11 -18- 51168850.7 prepared in connection with the public offering and sale of each Series of Bonds to be sold to the public; and (for the sole purpose of aiding a participating underwriter in its compliance with Section (b)(1) of the Rule, if applicable) “deem final” that Preliminary Official Statement as of its date, except for the omission of information permitted to be omitted by the Rule and approve or ratify the distribution of that preliminary official statement to potential purchasers of the Bonds. (b) Approval of Official Statement. The Designated Representative and Mayor are each independently authorized to review and approve distribution of a final official statement with respect to each Series of Bonds to be sold to the public. The City agrees to cooperate with the purchaser of such Series of Bonds to deliver or cause to be delivered, within such period as may be required by applicable law, copies of the final official statement pertaining to such Series of Bonds in sufficient quantity to comply with paragraph (b)(4) of the Rule and rules of the MSRB. Section 17. Undertaking to Provide Continuing Disclosure. To meet the requirements of paragraph (b)(5) of the Rule, as applicable to a participating underwriter for the Bonds, the Designated Representative is authorized to execute a written undertaking to provide continuing disclosure for the benefit of holders of the Bonds in substantially the form attached as Exhibit A. Section 18. Supplemental Ordinances. The City Council from time to time and at any time may pass an ordinance or ordinances supplemental to this ordinance which supplemental ordinance or ordinances thereafter shall become a part of this ordinance, in order to: (a) add covenants and agreements that do not adversely affect the interests of the holders and owners of the Bonds, or to surrender any right or power reserved to or conferred upon the City; or (b) cure any ambiguities or to cure, correct or supplement any defective provision contained in this ordinance in a manner that does not materially adversely affect the interest of the holders and owners of the Bonds. Section 19. General Authorization; Delivery of Bonds. The Designated Representative, the Mayor and other appropriate officers of the City are each authorized to do everything as in their judgment may be necessary, appropriate or desirable in order to carry out the terms and provisions of, and complete the transactions contemplated in connection with, this ordinance. The Bonds are to be printed at City expense and are to be delivered to the purchaser in accordance with the Bond Purchase Contract, with the approving legal opinion of Bond Counsel regarding the Bonds. Section 20. Severability. The provisions of this ordinance are declared to be separate and severable. If a court of competent jurisdiction, all appeals having been exhausted or all appeal periods having run, finds any provision of this ordinance to be invalid or unenforceable as to any person or circumstance, such offending provision shall, if feasible, be deemed to be modified to be within the limits of enforceability or validity. However, if the offending provision cannot be so modified, it shall be null and void with respect to the particular person or circumstance, and all other provisions of this ordinance in all other respects, and the offending provision with respect to all other persons and all other circumstances, shall remain valid and enforceable. Packet Page 109 of 297 Council Packet Version 11/29/11 -19- 51168850.7 Section 21. Prior Bond Authorization Repealed. Ordinance No. 3837 of the City authorizing the sale and issuance of general obligation bonds and revenue bonds for the purpose of refunding certain indebtedness of the City is hereby by repealed and is of no effect whatsoever. Section 22. Effective Date of Ordinance. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force from and after its passage and five days following its publication as required by law. PASSED by the City Council and APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Edmonds, Washington, at an open public meeting thereof, this 6th day of December, 2011. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: FOSTER PEPPER PLLC Bond Counsel Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Published: Effective Date: Packet Page 110 of 297 Council Packet Version 11/29/11 -1- 51168850.7 EXHIBIT A Form of CONTINUING DISCLOSURE AGREEMENT To meet the requirements of paragraph (b)(5) of Rule 15c2-12, as applicable to a participating underwriter for the Limited Tax General Obligation Refunding Bonds, 20__ (the “Bonds”) issued as of the date hereof by the City of Edmonds, Washington (the “City”), the City makes the written Undertaking set forth below, for the benefit of holders of the Bonds. Capitalized terms not defined herein have the meanings set forth in Ordinance No. ___ of the City. (a) Undertaking to Provide Annual Financial Information and Notice of Listed Events. The City undertakes to provide or cause to be provided, either directly or through a designated agent, to the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (the “MSRB”), in an electronic format as prescribed by the MSRB, accompanied by identifying information as prescribed by the MSRB: (1) Annual financial information and operating data of the type included in the final official statement for the Bonds and described in subsection (b) of this section (“annual financial information”); (2) Timely notice (not in excess of 10 business days after the occurrence of the event) of the occurrence of any of the following events with respect to the Bonds: (1) principal and interest payment delinquencies; (2) non- payment related defaults, if material; (3) unscheduled draws on debt service reserves reflecting financial difficulties; (4) unscheduled draws on credit enhancements reflecting financial difficulties; (5) substitution of credit or liquidity providers, or their failure to perform; (6) adverse tax opinions, the issuance by the Internal Revenue Service of proposed or final determinations of taxability, Notice of Proposed Issue (IRS Form 5701 – TEB) or other material notices or determinations with respect to the tax status of the Bonds; (7) modifications to rights of holders of the Bonds, if material; (8) bond calls (other than scheduled mandatory redemptions of Term Bonds), if material, and tender offers; (9) defeasances; (10) release, substitution, or sale of property securing repayment of the Bonds, if material; (11) rating changes; (12) bankruptcy, insolvency, receivership or similar event of the City, as such “Bankruptcy Events” are defined in Rule 15c2-12; (13) the consummation of a merger, consolidation, or acquisition involving the City or the sale of all or substantially all of the assets of the City other than in the ordinary course of business, the entry into a definitive agreement to undertake such an action or the termination of a definitive agreement relating to any such actions, other than pursuant to its terms, if material; and (14) appointment of a successor or additional trustee or the change of name of a trustee, if material. Packet Page 111 of 297 Council Packet Version 11/29/11 -2- 51168850.7 (3) Timely notice of a failure by the City to provide required annual financial information on or before the date specified in subsection (b) of this section. (b) Type of Annual Financial Information Undertaken to be Provided. The annual financial information that the City undertakes to provide in subsection (a) of this section: (1) Shall consist of (1) annual financial statements prepared (except as noted in the financial statements) in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles applicable to State local governmental units such as the City, as such principles may be changed from time to time, which statements shall not be audited, except, however, that if and when audited financial statements are otherwise prepared and available to the City they will be provided; (2) general obligation debt that has been authorized and the amount outstanding; (3) assessed valuation for the fiscal year; (4) regular ad valorem property tax levy rate, amount, rate limitation and percentage of tax collected during the fiscal year; and (5) amount of general fund revenues from other major tax sources; (2) Shall be provided not later than the last day of the ninth month after the end of each fiscal year of the City (currently, a fiscal year ending December 31), as such fiscal year may be changed as required or permitted by State law, commencing with the City’s fiscal year ending December 31, 2010; and (3) May be provided in a single or multiple documents, and may be incorporated by specific reference to documents available to the public on the Internet website of the MSRB or filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. (c) Amendment of Undertaking. The Undertaking is subject to amendment after the primary offering of the Bonds without the consent of any holder of any Bond, or of any broker, dealer, municipal securities dealer, participating underwriter, rating agency or the MSRB, under the circumstances and in the manner permitted by Rule 15c2-12. The City will give notice to the MSRB of the substance (or provide a copy) of any amendment to the Undertaking and a brief statement of the reasons for the amendment. If the amendment changes the type of annual financial information to be provided, the annual financial information containing the amended financial information will include a narrative explanation of the effect of that change on the type of information to be provided. (d) Beneficiaries. The Undertaking evidenced by this section shall inure to the benefit of the City and any Beneficial Owner of Bonds, and shall not inure to the benefit of or create any rights in any other person. (e) Termination of Undertaking. The City’s obligations under this Undertaking shall terminate upon the legal defeasance of all of the Bonds. In addition, the City’s obligations under this Undertaking shall terminate if those provisions of Rule 15c2-12 which require the City to comply with this Undertaking become legally inapplicable in respect of the Bonds for any reason, as confirmed by an opinion of nationally recognized bond counsel or other counsel Packet Page 112 of 297 Council Packet Version 11/29/11 -3- 51168850.7 familiar with federal securities laws delivered to the City, and the City provides timely notice of such termination to the MSRB. (f) Remedy for Failure to Comply with Undertaking. As soon as practicable after the City learns of any failure to comply with the Undertaking, the City will proceed with due diligence to cause such noncompliance to be corrected. No failure by the City or other obligated person to comply with the Undertaking shall constitute a default in respect of the Bonds. The sole remedy of any Beneficial Owner of a Bond shall be to take such actions as that Beneficial Owner deems necessary, including seeking an order of specific performance from an appropriate court, to compel the City or other obligated person to comply with the Undertaking. (g) Designation of Official Responsible to Administer Undertaking. The Finance Officer of the City (or such other officer of the City who may in the future perform the duties of that office) or his or her designee is authorized and directed in his or her discretion to take such further actions as may be necessary, appropriate or convenient to carry out the Undertaking of the City in respect of the Bonds set forth in this section and in accordance with Rule 15c2-12, including, without limitation, the following actions: (1) Preparing and filing the annual financial information undertaken to be provided; (2) Determining whether any event specified in subsection (a) has occurred, assessing its materiality, where necessary, with respect to the Bonds, and preparing and disseminating any required notice of its occurrence; (3) Determining whether any person other than the City is an “obligated person” within the meaning of Rule 15c2-12 with respect to the Bonds, and obtaining from such person an undertaking to provide any annual financial information and notice of listed events for that person in accordance with Rule 15c2-12; (4) Selecting, engaging and compensating designated agents and consultants, including but not limited to financial advisors and legal counsel, to assist and advise the City in carrying out the Undertaking; and (5) Effecting any necessary amendment of the Undertaking. Dated __________, 20__. CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Packet Page 113 of 297 Council Packet Version 11/29/11 51168850.7 CERTIFICATION I, the undersigned, City Clerk of the City of Edmonds, Washington (the “City”), hereby certify as follows: 1. The attached copy of Ordinance No. ____ (the “Ordinance”) is a full, true and correct copy of an ordinance duly passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City held at the regular meeting place thereof on December 6, 2011, as that ordinance appears on the minute book of the City; and the Ordinance will be in full force and effect five days after publication in the City’s official newspaper; and 2. A quorum of the members of the City Council was present throughout the meeting and a majority of its members voted in the proper manner for the passage of the Ordinance. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 6th day of December, 2011. CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON _____________________________________ City Clerk Packet Page 114 of 297 Council Version 11/30/11 51178550.4 CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. ____ AN ORDINANCE of the City of Edmonds, Washington, relating to the combined water and sewerage systems comprising the waterworks utility of the City; specifying, adopting and ordering the carrying out of a system or plan of additions to and betterments and extensions of the combined waterworks utility; providing for the issuance of not to exceed $16,500,000 of the City’s water and sewer revenue bonds: (a) to pay all or a portion of the costs of carrying out that Plan of Additions, (b) to carry out the refunding of the currently outstanding water and sewer revenue bonds of the City and pay the administrative costs of such refunding, (c) to fund the Reserve Requirement, and (d) to pay the costs of issuance and sale of the bonds; fixing or setting parameters with respect to certain terms and covenants of the bonds; and appointing the Finance Director as the City’s designated representative to approve the final terms of the sale and issuance of the bonds, to appoint a refunding trustee and to take certain other actions with respect to carrying out the refunding and the issuance of the bonds. [Passed December 6, 2011] This document prepared by: Foster Pepper PLLC 1111 Third Avenue, Suite 3400 Seattle, Washington 98101 (206) 447-4400 Packet Page 115 of 297 Council Version 11/30/11 -i- 51178550.4 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1 . Findings and Determinations ................................................................................................................... 1 Section 2 . Definitions ................................................................................................................................................ 2 Section 3 . Adoption of Plan of Additions ............................................................................................................... 10 Section 4 . Purpose and Authorization of the Bonds ................................................................................................ 10 Section 5 . Description of the Bonds; Appointment of Designated Representative ................................................. 10 Section 6 . Bond Registrar; Registration and Transfer of Bonds. ............................................................................ 12 Section 7 . Form and Execution of Bonds ................................................................................................................ 13 Section 8 . Payment of Bonds .................................................................................................................................. 13 Section 9 . Redemption Provisions and Open Market Purchase of Bonds. .............................................................. 14 Section 10 . Refunding or Defeasance of the Bonds .................................................................................................. 15 Section 11 . Failure To Redeem Bonds ...................................................................................................................... 16 Section 12 . Security for the Bonds; Bond Fund ........................................................................................................ 16 Section 13 . Deposit of Bond Proceeds ...................................................................................................................... 18 Section 14 . Flow of Funds ........................................................................................................................................ 18 Section 15 . Additional Covenants ............................................................................................................................. 18 Section 16 . Rate Stabilization Account ..................................................................................................................... 20 Section 17 . Separate Utility Systems ........................................................................................................................ 20 Section 18 . Refunding of the Refunded Bonds. ........................................................................................................ 21 Section 19 . Manner of Sale of Bonds ........................................................................................................................ 23 Section 20 . Parity Conditions .................................................................................................................................... 24 Section 21 . Tax Matters. ........................................................................................................................................... 24 Section 22 . Official Statement. ................................................................................................................................. 25 Section 23 . Undertaking to Provide Continuing Disclosure ..................................................................................... 25 Section 24 . Amendatory and Supplemental Ordinances. .......................................................................................... 25 Section 25 . General Authorization; Delivery of Bonds............................................................................................. 27 Section 26 . Severability ............................................................................................................................................ 27 Section 27 . Prior Bond Authorization Repealed ....................................................................................................... 28 Section 28 . Effective Date of Ordinance ................................................................................................................... 28 Packet Page 116 of 297 Council Version 11/30/11 -1- 51178550.4 CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. ____ AN ORDINANCE of the City of Edmonds, Washington, relating to the combined water and sewerage systems comprising the waterworks utility of the City; specifying, adopting and ordering the carrying out of a system or plan of additions to and betterments and extensions of the combined waterworks utility; providing for the issuance of not to exceed $16,500,000 of the City’s water and sewer revenue bonds: (a) to pay all or a portion of the costs of carrying out that Plan of Additions, (b) to carry out the refunding of the currently outstanding water and sewer revenue bonds of the City and pay the administrative costs of such refunding, (c) to fund the Reserve Requirement, and (d) to pay the costs of issuance and sale of the bonds; fixing or setting parameters with respect to certain terms and covenants of the bonds; and appointing the Finance Director as the City’s designated representative to approve the final terms of the sale and issuance of the bonds, to appoint a refunding trustee and to take certain other actions with respect to carrying out the refunding and the issuance of the bonds. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Findings and Determinations. The City Council of the City of Edmonds, Washington (the “City”) makes the findings and determinations set forth below. Capitalized terms have the meanings given in Section 2. (a) Previously Issued Bonds and Loans. The City previously issued its Water and Sewer Revenue Refunding and Construction Bonds, 1977 (which have since been retired) and in connection with such issuance reserved the right to issue Future Parity Bonds on a parity of lien with those 1977 Bonds if certain Parity Conditions are met at the time those Future Parity Bonds are issued. The currently-outstanding bonds issued on a parity of lien with those 1977 Bonds include the 1998 Bonds and the 2003 Bonds. The City also has several outstanding Loans, which are secured by a pledge of net revenues that is junior and inferior to the pledge securing the outstanding 1998 Bonds, 2003 Bonds and the Bonds authorized to be issued in this ordinance. (b) New Parity Bonds; Lien Position. After due consideration, it appears to the City Council that, in order to establish new covenants and to provide for the combining of the utility systems for purposes of debt issuance, it is in the City’s best interest to issue and sell the Bonds authorized in this ordinance in order to refund the Refunded Bonds by carrying out the Refunding Plan (as defined below) and to establish a new lien position with new covenants to be effective following the delivery of the Bonds. Packet Page 117 of 297 Council Version 11/30/11 -2- 51178550.4 (c) Purpose of Refunding. The City Council finds that certain covenants, terms and conditions of the Outstanding Parity Bonds need to be substantially modified and modernized and that it is in the best interest of the City to refund the Refunded Bonds in order to modify debt service or reserve requirements, covenants, or other terms of the bonds to be refunded, in accordance with RCW 39.53.020. The refunding is additionally expected to produce a substantial savings to the City and its ratepayers. The Refunded Bonds are identified as follows: (1) 1998 Bonds. The 1998 Bonds are currently outstanding in the par amount of $560,000, bear interest at rates from 4.80% to 4.85%, mature in 2012 and 2013, and are callable at any time at a price of par plus interest accrued to the date set for redemption. (2) 2003 Bonds. The 2003 Bonds are currently outstanding in the par amount of $1,910,000, bear interest at rates from 4.0% to 4.45%, mature in 2012, 2014, 2016, 2018, 2020 and 2022. The 2003 Bonds maturing in 2014 through 2022 are callable at any time on or after December 1, 2012 at a price of par plus interest accrued to the date set for redemption. (d) Approval of Final Terms of the Bonds. RCW 39.46.040(2) provides that an ordinance authorizing the issuance of bonds may authorize an officer of the City to serve as the City’s Designated Representative and to accept, on behalf of the City, an offer to purchase those bonds so long as the acceptance of such offer is consistent with terms established by an ordinance that establishes, or sets parameters with respect to, the following Final Terms: the amount, date or dates, denominations, interest rate or rates (or mechanism for determining interest rate or rates); payment dates, final maturity, redemption rights, price, minimum savings for refunding bonds (if the refunding bonds are issued for savings purposes), and any other terms and conditions deemed appropriate by the City Council. Section 2. Definitions. As used in this ordinance, the following words shall have the following meanings: (a) “1998 Bonds” means the City’s outstanding Water and Sewer Revenue Refunding Bonds, 1998, authorized by Ordinance No. 3191 (passed on February 17, 1998), which bonds were issued on a parity of lien with the City’s previously issued 1977 Bonds and the then-outstanding Parity Bonds. The 1998 Bonds were originally issued to advance refund the callable, new money portion of the City's outstanding Water and Sewer Revenue and Refunding Bonds, 1993, and to pay the administrative costs of such refunding and the costs of issuance and sale of such bonds. (b) “2003 Bonds” means the City’s outstanding Water and Sewer Revenue Improvement and Refunding Bonds, 2003, authorized by Ordinance No. 3425, passed on November 7, 2002 on a parity of lien with the 1977 Bonds and the then-outstanding Parity Bonds. The 2003 Bonds were issued to (a) pay costs of carrying out certain improvements to the Water and Sewer Utility, (b) carry out a current refunding of the callable portion of the City’s outstanding Water and Sewer Revenue Refunding Bonds, 1992, and pay the administrative costs of such refunding, and (c) pay the costs of issuance of the bonds Packet Page 118 of 297 Council Version 11/30/11 -3- 51178550.4 (c) “Acquired Obligations” means those United States Treasury Certificates of Indebtedness, Notes, and Bonds--State and Local Government Series and other direct obligations (including direct obligations of or obligations the principal of and interest on which are unconditionally guaranteed by the United States of America), which are purchased to accomplish the refunding of the Refunded Bonds. (d) “Adjusted Net Revenue” means Net Revenue, plus withdrawals from the Rate Stabilization Account and less deposits into the Rate Stabilization Account. (e) “Annual Debt Service” means, for any fiscal year, with respect to all Parity Bonds outstanding or maturing in that year, all amounts required to be paid in that year in respect of principal of and interest on those Parity Bonds, less all bond interest payable from the proceeds of any Parity Bonds, and less all Tax Credit Subsidy Payments to be received in that year. Parity Bonds issued as Variable Interest Rate Bonds shall be assumed to bear interest at a fixed rate equal to the higher of (i) the highest variable rate borne during the preceding 24 months by any then-outstanding Variable Interest Rate Bonds or, (ii) if no Variable Interest Rate Bonds are then outstanding, a rate determined by reference to the index to be used to determine the interest rate on the Future Parity Bonds proposed to be issued or a comparable index. (f) “Average Annual Debt Service” means, as of its date of calculation, the sum of the Annual Debt Service for the remaining fiscal years to the last scheduled maturity of the applicable issue or issues of bonds divided by the number of those years. (g) “Authorized Denominations” means $5,000 or any integral multiple thereof within a maturity. (h) “Beneficial Owner” means the owner of any beneficial interests in the Bonds. (i) “Bond Counsel” means Foster Pepper PLLC or any other nationally recognized bond counsel firm then representing the City. (j) “Bond Fund” means that special fund of the City created pursuant to Section 12 of this ordinance for the payment of the principal of and interest on all Parity Bonds. (k) “Bond Insurance Policy” means a municipal bond insurance policy issued by a Bond Insurer insuring the payment when due of the principal of and interest on Parity Bonds as provided in such policy and as approved and accepted by the Designated Representative. (l) “Bond Insurer” or “Insurer” means a bond insurance company providing a Bond Insurance Policy or Reserve Securities for any outstanding Parity Bonds. (m) “Bond Purchase Contract” means an offer to purchase the Bonds presented by an underwriter (or other purchaser) and accepted by the Designated Representative, acting on behalf of the City, setting forth certain terms and conditions of the issuance, sale and delivery of the Bonds. In the case of a competitive sale of Bonds, the offer shall mean the submitted bid (which incorporates all of the terms and conditions set forth in the Notice of Bond Sale, as they may be adjusted within the parameters of the Notice of Bond Sale and agreed upon with the winning Packet Page 119 of 297 Council Version 11/30/11 -4- 51178550.4 bidder), and the award by the Designated Representative to the successful bidder shall constitute the acceptance of the Bond Purchase Contract. (n) “Bond Register” means the books or records maintained by the Bond Registrar containing the name and mailing address of the owner of each Bond and the principal amount and number of Bonds held by each owner. (o) “Bond Registrar” means the Fiscal Agent. (p) “Bonds” means the bonds authorized to be issued by this ordinance. (q) “City” means the City of Edmonds, Washington. (r) “Closing Date” means the date on which the Bonds are delivered to the initial purchaser or purchasers thereof upon payment in full therefor. (s) “Code” means the United States Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and applicable rules and regulations promulgated thereunder. (t) “Construction Fund” means the City’s 412 Construction Fund. (u) “Coverage Requirement” means for any fiscal year, an amount of Adjusted Net Revenue at least equal to 1.25 times the Annual Debt Service in that year on all then-outstanding Parity Bonds, less the ULID Assessments due in that year and not delinquent. (v) “DTC” means The Depository Trust Company, New York, New York. (w) “Designated Representative” means the Finance Director, appointed in Section 3 of this ordinance to serve as the City’s designated representative in accordance with RCW 39.46.040(2). (x) “Final Terms” means the terms and conditions for the sale of Bonds including, but not limited to the amount, date or dates, denominations, interest rate or rates (or mechanism for determining interest rate or rates), payment dates, final maturity, redemption rights, price, and minimum savings for refunding bonds (if the refunding bonds are issued for savings purposes). (y) “Finance Director” means the Finance Director of the City or any other City official who succeeds to the duties now delegated to that office, or the designee of such officer. (z) “Financial Advisor” means A. Dashen and Associates of Bellevue, Washington, or any other Financial Advisor then appointed and acting as financial advisor to the City. (aa) “Fiscal Agent” means the fiscal agent of the State, currently The Bank of New York Mellon, as the same may be designated by the State from time to time. (bb) “Future Parity Bonds” means all revenue and other obligations of the City for borrowed money (including, without limitation, financing leases) issued or incurred after the date of the issuance of the Bonds, the payment of the principal of and interest on which constitutes a Packet Page 120 of 297 Council Version 11/30/11 -5- 51178550.4 charge or lien on the Net Revenue and ULID Assessments equal in rank with the charge and lien upon such revenue and assessments required to be paid into the Bond Fund to pay and secure the payment of the principal of and interest on the Parity Bonds. (cc) “Government Obligations” means those obligations described under the definition of government obligations in RCW 39.53.010(4), as it now reads or hereafter may be amended, and which are otherwise lawful investments for the City. (dd) “Gross Revenue” means all of the earnings and revenues received by the City from the maintenance and operation of the Water and Sewer Utility, including but not limited to: revenues from the sale, lease or furnishing of commodities, services, properties or facilities; all earnings from the investment of money in the Bond Fund that are deposited into the Principal and Interest Account; earnings from the investment of money in any maintenance fund or similar fund; all connection and capital improvement charges collected for the purpose of defraying the cost of capital facilities of the Water and Sewer Utility; and withdrawals from the Rate Stabilization Fund. However, the Gross Revenue shall not include: (a) revenues from general ad valorem property taxes; (b) principal proceeds of Parity Bonds or any other borrowings, or earnings or proceeds from any investments in a trust, defeasance or escrow fund created to defease or refund obligations relating to the Water and Sewer Utility (until commingled with other earnings and revenues included in the Gross Revenue) or held in a special account for the purpose of paying a rebate to the United States Government under the Code; (c) income and revenue which may not legally be pledged for revenue bond debt service; (d) improvement district assessments; (e) federal or state grants, and gifts from any source allocated to capital projects; (f) payments under bond insurance or other credit enhancement policy or device; (g) insurance or condemnation proceeds used for the replacement of capital projects or equipment; (h) proceeds from the sale of Water and Sewer Utility property; (i) earnings on bond proceeds in any construction fund or bond redemption fund; (j) deposits to the Rate Stabilization Fund; (k) Tax Credit Subsidy Payments; or (l) revenue from any Separate Utility System. (ee) “Independent Utility Consultant” means a professional consultant experienced with municipal utilities of comparable size and character to the Water and Sewer Utility and in such areas as are relevant to the purpose for which he or she is being retained. Such a consultant shall be deemed independent so long as he or she is not an employee or officer of the City. (ff) “Interest Payment Date” means the semiannual dates set for the payment of interest on the Bonds, as set forth in the Bond Purchase Contract. (gg) “Letter of Representations” means the Blanket Issuer Letter of Representations dated August 6, 1996, between the City and DTC, as it may be amended from time to time. (hh) “Loans” means any State of Washington Public Works Trust Fund loans, State Drinking Water Revolving Fund loans, or similar loans entered into by the City to fund improvements to the Water and Sewer Utility, the payment of which is a claim on the Net Revenue that is junior and inferior to the lien and charge of the Parity Bonds. (ii) “MSRB” means the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board. Packet Page 121 of 297 Council Version 11/30/11 -6- 51178550.4 (jj) “Maximum Annual Debt Service” means, as of the date of calculation, the maximum amount of Annual Debt Service that will mature or come due in the current fiscal year or any future fiscal year with respect to all outstanding Parity Bonds. (kk) “Maximum Interest Rate” means, with respect to any Variable Interest Rate Bond, a numerical rate of interest that is the maximum rate of interest those Future Parity Bonds may bear at any time. (ll) “Net Revenue” means the Gross Revenue, less Operating and Maintenance Expenses. (mm) “Operating and Maintenance Expenses” means all reasonable expenses incurred by the City in causing the Water and Sewer Utility to be operated and maintained in good repair, working order and condition, including payments made pursuant to contract for such service to any other municipal corporation or private entity for sewage treatment and disposal, water supply and distribution or stormwater, or other utility service (if the City combines such service into the Water and Sewer Utility), and including budget charges for the City’s administration expenses allocated to the Water and Sewer Utility, but shall not include depreciation or any taxes (or charges in lieu of taxes) levied or imposed by the City. (nn) “Outstanding Parity Bonds” means any Parity Bonds outstanding at the time of issuance of any Future Parity Bonds. As of the date of issuance of the Bonds, there will be no Outstanding Parity Bonds other than the Bonds. (oo) “Owners” means, without distinction, the Registered Owner(s) and the Beneficial Owner(s). (pp) “Parity Bonds” means any Outstanding Parity Bonds, the Bonds and Future Parity Bonds. (qq) “Parity Conditions” means the conditions precedent to the issuance of Future Parity Bonds, originally set forth in Section 16 of Ordinance No. 1957, as amended by Section 3 of Ordinance No. 2363, and as further amended and set forth in Exhibit A to this ordinance, which is incorporated by this reference. (rr) “Permitted Investments” means investments that are legal investments for the City at the time of such investment. (ss) “Plan of Additions” means the system or plan of additions and improvements to and betterments and extensions of the Water and Sewer Utility specified, adopted and ordered to be carried out by Section 3 of this ordinance. (tt) “Principal and Interest Account” means the account of that name created in the Bond Fund for the payment of the principal of and interest on the Parity Bonds. (uu) “Principal Payment Date” means the annual date set for the payment of principal of the Bonds, including the making of mandatory redemption payments for any Term Bonds, all as set forth in the Bond Purchase Contract. Packet Page 122 of 297 Council Version 11/30/11 -7- 51178550.4 (vv) “Rate Stabilization Account” means the account of that name created for the purposes described in Section 16. (ww) “Rating Agency” means a nationally recognized rating agency or agencies, if any, providing a rating on the Bonds at the request of the City. (xx) “Redemption Date” means the date or dates fixed for redemption of each issue of Refunded Bonds, respectively. (yy) “Refunded Bond Ordinance(s)” means the ordinance authorizing a particular issue of the Refunded Bonds, as applicable. (zz) “Refunded Bonds” means the following outstanding bonds of the City: Bond Issue Amount Currently Outstanding Interest Rates Maturity Dates (due Dec.1) Call Date 1998 Bonds $ 560,000 4.80 – 4.85% 2012, 2013 12/1/2007 2003 Bonds 1,910,000 4.00 – 4.45% 2012, 2014, 2016, 2018, 2020 and 2022 12/1/2012 (aaa) “Refunding Plan” means (as further described in the applicable Refunding Trust Agreement): (1) the deposit with the Refunding Trustee of an amount of proceeds of the Bonds sufficient (together with other money of the City, if necessary) to acquire the Acquired Obligations to be held by the Refunding Trustee with cash, if necessary; (2) the application of the principal of and interest on the Acquired Obligations (and any other cash balance) to the call, payment and redemption of the specified Refunded Bonds on the applicable Redemption Date(s) at a price of par plus any accrued interest; and (3) the payment of costs of issuing the Bonds and the costs of carrying out the foregoing elements of the Refunding Plan. (bbb) “Refunding Trust Agreement” means a refunding trust or escrow agreement between the City and the Refunding Trustee, dated as of the Closing Date, providing for the safekeeping of bond proceeds and the refunding of certain Refunded Bonds. (ccc) “Refunding Trustee” means the trustee or escrow agent, or any successor trustee or escrow agent, designated by the Designated Representative to serve as refunding trustee to carry out the Refunding Plan. (ddd) “Registered Owner” means the person in whose name a Bond is registered on the Bond Register. For so long as the City utilizes the book–entry system for the Bonds under the Letter of Representations, Registered Owner shall mean DTC. (eee) “Registration Ordinance” means City Ordinance No. 2451 establishing a system of registration for the City’s bonds and other obligations. Packet Page 123 of 297 Council Version 11/30/11 -8- 51178550.4 (fff) “Reserve Account” means the account of that name created in the Bond Fund for the purpose of securing the payment of the principal of and interest on the Parity Bonds. (ggg) “Reserve Securities” means, in lieu of cash and investments, any bond insurance, collateral, security, letter of credit, guaranty, surety bond or similar credit enhancement device providing for or securing the payment of all or part of the principal of and interest on Parity Bonds, issued by an institution which has been assigned a credit rating at the time that such Reserve Securities is provided, in the two highest rating categories without regard to gradations within those categories (i.e., AAA or AA). (hhh) “Reserve Requirement” means for all Parity Bonds, an amount equal to the lesser of (i) Maximum Annual Debt Service, (ii) 125% of Average Annual Debt Service, or (iii) 10% of the proceeds of the then-outstanding Parity Bonds. The Reserve Requirement may be met by a deposit of cash, Reserve Securities, or any combination of the foregoing, and the amount payable under any Reserve Securities shall be credited against the amount otherwise required to be deposited into the Reserve Account. (iii) “Rule” means Rule 15c2-12 promulgated by the SEC under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as the same may be amended from time to time. (jjj) “SEC” means the United States Securities and Exchange Commission. (kkk) “Separate Utility System” means any water supply, sewage collection or treatment, stormwater management or other utility service or facilities that may be created, acquired or constructed by the City as provided in Section 17 of this ordinance. (lll) “Sewer System” means the sanitary sewage collection and disposal system of the City, also referred to as the sewer utility. (mmm)“Sewer System Comprehensive Plan” means the Sewer General Plan prepared for the City and adopted by the City Council on December 6, 2006 pursuant to Ordinance No. 3620. (nnn) “Stormwater System” means the stormwater management utility combined into the Water and Sewer Utility pursuant to chapter 7.60 of the Edmonds City Code. (ooo) “State” means the State of Washington. (ppp) “Tax Credit Subsidy Bond” means any bond that is designated by the City as a “build America bond” or other type of tax credit bond, pursuant to the Code, and which is further designated as a “qualified bond” under Section 6431 of the Code (or under similar provisions of the Code providing for “direct-pay” tax credit bonds), and with respect to which the City expects to receive a Tax Credit Subsidy Payment. (qqq) “Tax Credit Subsidy Payment” means the amounts which the City expects to receive as a tax credit payable by the United States Treasury to the City under Section 6431 of the Code (or under similar provisions of the Code providing for “direct-pay” tax credit bonds), in respect of any bonds issued as Tax Credit Subsidy Bonds. Packet Page 124 of 297 Council Version 11/30/11 -9- 51178550.4 (rrr) “Term Bond” means those Bonds that are designated as term bonds in the Bond Purchase Contract. (sss) “ULID” means any utility local improvement district now existing or hereafter created for the acquisition or construction of additions, extensions or betterments of any portion of the Water and Sewer Utility, which additions, extensions or betterments are financed through the issuance of Parity Bonds. As used in this ordinance, the term ULID does not include any utility local improvement district created for the financing of additions, extensions or betterments by methods other than the issuance of Parity Bonds. (ttt) “ULID Assessments” means the assessments levied in any ULID, including installment payments of any assessment as well as the interest and penalties (if any) thereon, less any prepaid assessments permitted by law to be paid into a construction fund or account. (uuu) “Undertaking” means a continuing disclosure agreement authorized to be executed by the Designated Representative, pursuant to Section 18 of this ordinance. (vvv) “Underwriter” means the firm or firms selected by the Designated Representative as the underwriter(s) for a negotiated sale or awarded as the successful bidder in a competitive sale. (www) “Variable Interest Rate” means a variable interest rate or rates to be borne by a series of Future Parity Bonds or any one or more maturities within a series of Future Parity Bonds. The method of computing such a variable interest rate (or parameters with respect thereto) shall be specified in the ordinance authorizing such Future Parity Bonds, which ordinance also shall specify either (i) the particular period or periods of time or manner of determining such period or periods of time for which each value of such variable interest rate shall remain in effect or (ii) the time or times upon which any change in such variable interest rate shall become effective. (xxx) “Variable Interest Rate Bonds” means, for any period of time, Future Parity Bonds which bear a Variable Interest Rate during that period, except that Future Parity Bonds the interest rate or rates on which shall have been fixed for the remainder of the term thereof no longer shall be deemed to be Variable Interest Rate Bonds. (yyy) “Water and Sewer Utility” means the combined utility, as described in chapter 7.60 of the Edmonds City Code, including the component Water System, Sewer System and Stormwater System, together with all additions thereto and betterments and extensions thereof at any time made, and any other utility systems hereafter combined with the Water and Sewer Utility. (zzz) “Water and Sewer Utility Fund” means, together, the Water Fund, the Sewer Fund and the Stormwater Fund, each of which has previously been established by the City. (aaaa) “Water System Comprehensive Plan” means the Water System Plan prepared for the City and adopted by the City Council on December 21, 2010 pursuant to Ordinance No. 3830. Packet Page 125 of 297 Council Version 11/30/11 -10- 51178550.4 (bbbb) “Water System” means the system of water supply and transmission of the City, also referred to as the water utility. Section 3. Adoption of Plan of Additions. The City specifies, adopts and orders the carrying out of the projects described in Exhibit B as a system or plan of additions to and betterments and extensions of the Water and Sewer Utility. The Plan of Additions shall be carried out in accordance with the plans and specifications therefor prepared by the City’s engineers and consulting engineers. The City Council may modify the details of the Plan of Additions where, in its judgment, it appears advisable if such modifications do not substantially alter the purposes of that system or plan. The life of the improvements comprising the Plan of Additions is declared to be at least 25 years. The estimated cost of carrying out the Plan of Additions, including the costs of issuance and sale of the Bonds, is declared to be more than $12 million, which cost shall be paid from the proceeds of the Bonds allocated to the Plan of Additions and from other money available to the Water and Sewer Utility. Section 4. Purpose and Authorization of the Bonds. The City shall issue the Bonds in the aggregate principal amount of not to exceed $16,500,000, for the purpose of providing the funds (1) to carry out the Plan of Additions, (2) to carry out the Refunding Plan, (3) to fund the Reserve Requirement, and (4) to pay the costs of issuance of the Bonds. The Bonds shall be allocated to paying the respective costs of the Plan of Additions and to the carrying out of the Refunding Plan (including a ratable share of proceeds used to fund the Reserve Requirement and to pay the costs of issuance of the Bonds) in accordance with a schedule approved by the Designated Representative in a tax certificate or closing certificate executed in connection with the issuance of the Bonds. Section 5. Description of the Bonds; Appointment of Designated Representative. The Finance Director is appointed as the City’s Designated Representative and is authorized and directed to conduct the sale of such Bonds in the manner and upon the terms deemed most advantageous to the City, and to approve the Final Terms of the Bonds, within the following parameters: (a) Amount. The Bonds shall be issued in a single series and shall not exceed the aggregate principal amount of $16,500,000. The principal amount of Bonds allocated to the Refunding Plan (i) may exceed the principal amount of the Refunded Bonds being refunded by an amount deemed reasonably required to effect such refunding (which may reasonably include provision for bonds sold at a discount), or (ii) may be less than or the same as the principal amount of the Refunded Bonds, so long as provision is duly and sufficiently made for the retirement or redemption of those Refunded Bonds. (b) Date or Dates. The Bonds shall be dated as of their date of delivery to the initial purchaser, which date may not be later than December 31, 2012. (c) Denominations, Series Designation, etc. The Bonds must be issued in Authorized Denominations, shall be numbered separately in the manner and shall bear any name and additional designation as deemed necessary or appropriate by the Designated Representative. Packet Page 126 of 297 Council Version 11/30/11 -11- 51178550.4 (d) Interest Rate(s). The Bonds shall bear interest at fixed rates per annum (computed on the basis of a 360-day year of twelve 30-day months) from their date or from the most recent interest payment date for which interest has been paid or duly provided for, whichever is later. One or more rates of interest may be fixed for the Bonds, which rate or rates must be in multiples of 1/8th or 1/20th of 1%, or both. No more than one rate of interest may be fixed for any one maturity. No rate of interest for any maturity may exceed 5.50%, and the “all-in” true interest cost for the Bonds may not exceed 5.50%. (e) Payment Dates. Interest must be payable at fixed rates semiannually (on each June 1 and December 1, or such other semiannual dates as are selected by the Designated Representative), commencing on the next such semiannual date following the issuance of the Bonds. Principal must be payable annually (on each December 1, or such other annual date as is selected by the Designated Representative) commencing no earlier than the next such annual date following the issuance of the Bonds. (f) Final Maturity. The refunding allocation of Bonds shall not extend over a longer period of time than the series of Refunded Bonds to which that portion of the Bonds is allocated. The final maturity of the portion of the Bonds allocated to the Plan of Additions shall be no later than December 1, 2037. (g) Redemption Rights. The Bonds shall be issued subject to optional and mandatory redemption provisions, including designation of Term Bonds, if any, set forth in Section 9. (h) Price. The purchase price for the Bonds may not be less than 95% or more than 115% of the par value of the Bonds. (i) The Refundings. The Designated Representative shall have the authority described in Section 17 with respect to authorizing the refundings and carrying out the Refunding Plan. No minimum savings shall be required because the refundings are authorized in order to effect a change in covenants. (j) Sufficiency of Gross Revenues. The Bonds may not be issued unless, as of the Closing Date, the Finance Director certifies that the Gross Revenue will be more than sufficient to pay the Operating and Maintenance Expenses and to permit the setting aside out of the Net Revenue into the Bond Fund of sufficient amounts to pay the principal of and interest on the Bonds when due. (k) Other Terms and Conditions. The Bonds may be sold by either negotiated sale or by competitive bid, in accordance with Section 19 of this ordinance. The Designated Representative, in consultation with the City’s Financial Advisor, may determine whether it is in the City’s best interest to provide for bond insurance or other credit enhancement. With respect to bond insurance or other credit enhancement, the Designated Representative may accept, on behalf of the City, such additional terms, conditions, and covenants as may be required by the enhancement provider, if consistent with the provisions of this ordinance or may determine to state in the Notice of Bond Sale that any such insurance or credit enhancement is at the sole option of the winning bidder. The Designated Representative is authorized to take such additional actions as may be necessary or convenient for the refunding of the Refunded Bonds and for the issuance of the Bonds pursuant to the terms of this ordinance. Packet Page 127 of 297 Council Version 11/30/11 -12- 51178550.4 Section 6. Bond Registrar; Registration and Transfer of Bonds. (a) Registration of Bonds. The Bonds shall be issued only in registered form as to both principal and interest and shall be recorded on the Bond Register. (b) Bond Registrar. The Bond Registrar shall keep, or cause to be kept, sufficient books for the registration and transfer of the Bonds, which shall be open to inspection by the City at all times. The Bond Register shall contain the name and mailing address of the Registered Owner of each Bond and the principal amount and number of each of the Bonds held by each Registered Owner. The Bond Registrar is authorized, on behalf of the City, to authenticate and deliver Bonds transferred or exchanged in accordance with the provisions of the Bonds and this ordinance, to serve as the City’s paying agent for the Bonds and to carry out all of the Bond Registrar’s powers and duties under this ordinance and City’s Registration Ordinance. The Bond Registrar shall be responsible for its representations contained in the Bond Registrar’s Certificate of Authentication on the Bonds. The Bond Registrar may become either a Registered or Beneficial Owner of Bonds with the same rights it would have if it were not the Bond Registrar and, to the extent permitted by law, may act as depository for and permit any of its officers or directors to act as members of, or in any other capacity with respect to, any committee formed to protect the rights of Beneficial Owners. (c) Transfer and Exchange of Bonds. Bonds surrendered to the Bond Registrar may be exchanged for Bonds in any Authorized Denomination of an equal aggregate principal amount and of the same interest rate and maturity. Bonds may be transferred only if endorsed in the manner provided thereon and surrendered to the Bond Registrar. Any exchange or transfer shall be without cost to the owner or transferee. The Bond Registrar shall not be obligated to exchange or transfer any Bond during the 15 days preceding any principal payment or redemption date. (d) DTC and the Book Entry System. The Bonds initially shall be registered in the name of Cede and Co., as the nominee of DTC. The Bonds so registered shall be held in fully immobilized form by DTC as depository in accordance with the provisions of the Letter of Representations. Neither the City nor the Bond Registrar shall have any responsibility or obligation to DTC participants or the persons for whom they act as nominees with respect to the Bonds regarding accuracy of any records maintained by DTC or DTC participants of any amount in respect of principal of or interest on the Bonds, or any notice which is permitted or required to be given to Registered Owners hereunder (except such notice as is required to be given by the Bond Registrar to DTC). For as long as any Bonds are held in fully immobilized form, DTC, its nominee or its successor depository shall be deemed to be the Registered Owner for all purposes hereunder and all references to registered owners, bondowners, bondholders or the like shall mean DTC or its nominee and, except for the purpose of the City’s undertaking herein to provide continuing disclosure, shall not mean the Beneficial Owners. Registered ownership of such Bonds, or any portions thereof, may not thereafter be transferred except: (i) to any successor of DTC or its nominee, if that successor shall be qualified under any applicable laws to provide the services proposed to be provided by it; (ii) to any substitute depository appointed by the City or such Packet Page 128 of 297 Council Version 11/30/11 -13- 51178550.4 substitute depository’s successor; or (iii) to any person if the Bonds are no longer held in immobilized form. Upon the resignation of DTC or its successor (or any substitute depository or its successor) from its functions as depository, or a determination by the City that it no longer wishes to continue the system of book entry transfers through DTC or its successor (or any substitute depository or its successor), the City may appoint a substitute depository. Any such substitute depository shall be qualified under any applicable laws to provide the services proposed to be provided by it. If (i) DTC or its successor (or substitute depository or its successor) resigns from its functions as depository, and no substitute depository can be obtained or (ii) the City determines that the Bonds are to be in certificated form, the ownership of Bonds may be transferred to any person as provided herein and the Bonds no longer shall be held in fully immobilized form. Section 7. Form and Execution of Bonds. The Bonds shall be prepared in a form consistent with the provisions of this ordinance and state law and shall be signed by the Mayor and City Clerk, either or both of whose signatures may be manual or in facsimile, and the seal of the City or a facsimile reproduction thereof shall be impressed or printed thereon. Only Bonds bearing a Certificate of Authentication in the following form, manually signed by the Bond Registrar, shall be valid or obligatory for any purpose or entitled to the benefits of this ordinance: “Certificate Of Authentication. This Bond is one of the fully registered City of Edmonds, Washington, Water and Sewer Improvement and Refunding Revenue Bonds, [appropriate year and any other designation], described in the Bond Ordinance.” The authorized signing of a Certificate of Authentication shall be conclusive evidence that the Bond so authenticated has been duly executed, authenticated and delivered and is entitled to the benefits of this ordinance. If any officer whose manual or facsimile signature appears on the Bonds ceases to be an officer of the City authorized to sign bonds before the Bonds bearing his or her manual or facsimile signature are authenticated or delivered by the Bond Registrar or issued by the City, those Bonds nevertheless may be authenticated, issued and delivered and, when authenticated, issued and delivered, shall be as binding on the City as though that person had continued to be an officer of the City authorized to sign bonds. Any Bond also may be signed on behalf of the City by any person who, on the actual date of signing of the Bond, is an officer of the City authorized to sign bonds, although he or she did not hold the required office on the date of issuance of the Bonds. Section 8. Payment of Bonds. Both principal of and interest on the Bonds shall be payable in lawful money of the United States of America solely from the revenues set forth in Section 11 of this ordinance. For as long as the Bonds are registered in the name of DTC or its nominee, payment of principal of and interest on the Bonds shall be made in the manner set forth in the Letter of Representations. If the Bonds cease to be in book-entry-only form, interest on the Bonds shall be paid by checks or drafts of the Bond Registrar mailed on the interest payment date to the Registered Owners at the addresses appearing on the Bond Register on the 15th day Packet Page 129 of 297 Council Version 11/30/11 -14- 51178550.4 of the month preceding the interest payment date or by electronic transfer on the interest payment date. The City shall not be required to make electronic transfers except to a Registered Owner of Bonds pursuant to a request in writing (and at the sole expense of that Registered Owner) received at least 10 days before an interest payment date. Principal of the Bonds shall be payable upon presentation and surrender of the Bonds by the Registered Owners to the Bond Registrar. Section 9. Redemption Provisions and Open Market Purchase of Bonds. (a) Optional Redemption. The City’s Designated Representative may designate certain maturities of the Bonds as being subject to redemption at the option of the City prior to their respective maturities on the dates and at the prices set forth in the Bond Purchase Contract. The Designated Representative may also, in his or her discretion, designate certain maturities of the Bonds as not being subject to optional redemption prior to maturity. (b) Term Bonds. The Designated Representative may approve the designation of certain maturities of the Bonds as Term Bonds, as set forth in the Bond Purchase Contract. The City shall redeem Term Bonds, if not previously redeemed under any optional redemption provisions or purchased and surrendered for cancellation under the provisions set forth below, at a price of par plus accrued interest on the annual redemption dates and in annual redemption amounts approved by the Designated Representative. If the City redeems under the optional redemption provisions, purchases in the open market or defeases Term Bonds, the par amount of the Term Bonds so redeemed, purchased or defeased (irrespective of their actual redemption or purchase prices) shall be credited against one or more scheduled mandatory redemption amounts for those Term Bonds. The City shall determine the manner in which the credit is to be allocated and shall notify the Bond Registrar in writing of its allocation prior to the earliest mandatory redemption date for that maturity of Term Bonds for which notice of redemption has not already been given. (c) Partial Redemption. Portions of the principal amount of the Bonds, in any Authorized Denomination, may be redeemed. If less than all of the principal amount of the Bonds is redeemed, upon surrender of that Bond to the Bond Registrar, there shall be issued to the Registered Owner, without charge, a new Bond (or Bonds, at the option of the Registered Owner) of the same series, maturity and interest rate in any Authorized Denomination in the aggregate principal amount remaining unredeemed. (d) Selection of Bonds for Redemption. If fewer than all of the Bonds within a maturity are to be redeemed prior to maturity, Bonds shall be selected for redemption randomly within a maturity in such manner as the Bond Registrar shall determine. Notwithstanding the foregoing, for as long as the Bonds are registered in the name of DTC or its nominee, selection of Bonds for redemption shall be in accordance with the Letter of Representations. (e) Notice of Redemption. While the Bonds are held by DTC in book-entry only form, any notice of redemption shall be given at the time, to the entity and in the manner required by DTC in accordance with the Letter of Representations, and the Bond Registrar shall not be required to give any other notice of redemption. If the Bonds cease to be in book-entry only form unless waived by any Registered Owner of the Bonds to be redeemed, the City shall cause notice Packet Page 130 of 297 Council Version 11/30/11 -15- 51178550.4 of any intended redemption of Bonds to be given by the Bond Registrar not less than 20 nor more than 60 days prior to the date fixed for redemption by first-class mail, postage prepaid, to the Registered Owner of any Bond to be redeemed at the address appearing on the Bond Register at the time the Bond Registrar prepares the notice, and the requirements of this sentence shall be deemed to have been fulfilled when notice has been mailed as so provided, whether or not it is actually received by the Registered or Beneficial Owner of any Bond. In the case of an optional redemption, the notice may state that the City retains the right to rescind the redemption notice and the related optional redemption of Bonds by giving a notice of rescission to the affected Registered Owners at any time prior to the scheduled optional redemption date. Any notice of optional redemption that is so rescinded shall be of no effect, and the Bonds for which the notice of optional redemption has been rescinded shall remain outstanding. In addition, the redemption notice shall be mailed or sent electronically within the same period to the MSRB consistent with the Undertaking, to any nationally recognized rating agency which at the time maintains a rating on the Bonds at the request of the City, and to such other persons and with such additional information as the Finance Officer shall determine, but these additional mailings shall not be a condition precedent to the redemption of Bonds. (f) Effect of Redemption. Interest on Bonds called for redemption shall cease to accrue on the date fixed for redemption, unless the notice of redemption is rescinded as set forth above. (g) Open Market Purchase. The City further reserves the right and option to purchase any or all of the Bonds in the open market at any time at any price acceptable to the City plus accrued interest to the date of purchase. (h) Cancellation of Bonds. All Bonds purchased or redeemed under this section shall be canceled. Section 10. Refunding or Defeasance of the Bonds. The City may issue refunding bonds pursuant to the laws of the State or use money available from any other lawful source to pay when due the principal of and interest on the Bonds, or any portion thereof included in a refunding or defeasance plan, and to redeem and retire, refund or defease all such then- outstanding Bonds (hereinafter collectively called the “defeased Bonds”) and to pay the costs of the refunding or defeasance. If money and/or “government obligations” (as defined in chapter 39.53 RCW, as now or hereafter amended) maturing at a time or times and bearing interest in amounts (together with money, if necessary) sufficient to redeem and retire, refund or defease the defeased Bonds in accordance with their terms are set aside in a special trust fund or escrow account irrevocably pledged to that redemption, retirement or defeasance of defeased Bonds (hereinafter called the “trust account”), then all right and interest of the Owners of the defeased Bonds in the covenants of this ordinance and in the funds and accounts obligated to the payment of the defeased Bonds shall cease and become void. The Owners of defeased Bonds shall have the right to receive payment of the principal of and interest on the defeased Bonds from the trust account. The City shall include in the refunding or defeasance plan such provisions as the City deems necessary for the random selection of any defeased Bonds that constitute less than all of a Packet Page 131 of 297 Council Version 11/30/11 -16- 51178550.4 particular maturity of the Bonds, for notice of the defeasance to be given to the owners of the defeased Bonds and to such other persons as the City shall determine, and for any required replacement of Bond certificates for defeased Bonds. The defeased Bonds shall be deemed no longer outstanding, and the City may apply any money in any other fund or account established for the payment or redemption of the defeased Bonds to any lawful purposes as it shall determine. If the Bonds are registered in the name of DTC or its nominee, notice of any defeasance of Bonds shall be given to DTC in the manner prescribed in the Letter of Representations for notices of redemption of Bonds. Section 11. Failure To Redeem Bonds. If any Bond is not redeemed when properly presented at its maturity or on the date set for redemption, if applicable, the City shall be obligated to pay interest on that Bond at the same rate provided in the Bond from and after its maturity or date set for redemption until that Bond, both principal and interest, is paid in full or until sufficient money for its payment in full is on deposit in the Bond Fund and the Bond has been called for payment by giving notice of that call to the Registered Owner. Section 12. Security for the Bonds; Bond Fund. (a) Pledge of Net Revenues. The Net Revenue and ULID Assessments are pledged irrevocably to the payment of the amounts required to be paid into the Bond Fund for the payment of the Bonds and all Future Parity Bonds. This pledge shall constitute a lien and charge upon the Net Revenue and ULID Assessments prior and superior to any other charges whatsoever. (b) Bond Fund; Deposits to Bond Fund. The Water and Sewer Utility Revenue Bond Fund 2011 (the “Bond Fund”) is established within the Water and Sewer Utility Fund as a special fund of the City and shall be divided into two accounts: the Principal and Interest Account, and the Reserve Account. So long as any of the Parity Bonds are outstanding, the City obligates and binds itself to set aside and pay into the Bond Fund all ULID Assessments and, out of the Net Revenue, certain fixed amounts, without regard to any fixed proportion, namely: (1) Into the Principal and Interest Account, before each Interest Payment Date, an amount that will be sufficient, together with other money on deposit therein, to pay the interest on the Parity Bonds on the next succeeding Interest Payment Date; and (2) Into the Principal and Interest Account, before each Principal Payment Date, an amount that will be sufficient, together with other money on deposit therein, to pay the principal of the Parity Bonds on the next succeeding Principal Payment Date, including mandatory redemption amounts due on that date with respect to any Term Bonds; and (3) Into the Reserve Account, an amount sufficient that the amount on deposit in the Reserve Account satisfies the Reserve Requirement for the Parity Bonds in the time and manner required by this ordinance. Packet Page 132 of 297 Council Version 11/30/11 -17- 51178550.4 When the total amount on deposit in the Bond Fund equals the total outstanding amount of principal and interest for all Parity Bonds to the last maturity thereof, no further payment need be made into the Bond Fund. The Finance Director may create sinking fund accounts or other accounts in the Bond Fund for the payment or securing the payment of Parity Bonds as long as the maintenance of such accounts does not conflict with the rights of the owners of Parity Bonds. (c) The Reserve Account; Reserve Requirement. The City covenants and agrees that it will at all times maintain in the Reserve Account an amount (including the value of all Reserve Securities deposited therein) equal to the Reserve Requirement, except for withdrawals as authorized in this subsection, until there is a sufficient amount in the Principal and Interest Account and Reserve Account to pay the principal of and interest on all outstanding Parity Bonds, at which time the money in the Reserve Account may be used to pay any such principal and interest so long as the money remaining on deposit in the Reserve Account is not less than the Reserve Requirement calculated based on the remaining outstanding Parity Bonds. The Reserve Requirement shall be deemed satisfied by any combination of Parity Bond proceeds, Reserve Securities or other legally available money equal to the Reserve Requirement, or by the deposit of available funds of the City in approximately equal annual installments so that the Reserve Requirement is funded no later than three years after the issuance of any Future Parity Bonds. If there is a deficiency in the Principal and Interest Account in the Bond Fund to make the next upcoming payment of either principal or interest, that deficiency shall be made up from the Reserve Account by the withdrawal of amounts necessary for that purpose. Any deficiency created in the Reserve Account by reason of any such withdrawal shall then be made up from the next available payments of Net Revenue and ULID Assessments after making necessary provision for the required payments into the Principal and Interest Account. (d) Investment of Money Deposited in Bond Fund. All money in the Bond Fund may be kept in cash; deposited with an institution (as permitted by law) in an amount in each institution not greater than the amount insured by any department or agency of the United States Government; or invested in Permitted Investments or other legal investments permitted to the City maturing not later than the date when needed (for investments in the Principal and Interest Account) or the last maturity of any outstanding Parity Bonds (for investments in the Reserve Account). Income from investments in the Principal and Interest Account shall be deposited in that account. Income from investments in the Reserve Account shall be deposited in that account until the amount therein is equal to the Reserve Requirement, and thereafter shall be deposited in the Principal and Interest Account or used for other Water and Sewer Utility purposes. (e) Due Regard. The City Council declares that in creating the Bond Fund, in fixing the amounts to be paid into it, and in requiring the certification of the Finance Director as to the sufficiency of gross revenues, the City Council has had due regard for Operating and Maintenance Expenses and the debt service requirements of the outstanding Parity Bonds, and declares that it is not setting aside into the Bond Fund a greater amount than in its judgment will be available over and above such Operating and Maintenance Expenses and the debt service requirements of the outstanding Parity Bonds. Packet Page 133 of 297 Council Version 11/30/11 -18- 51178550.4 (f) Action to Compel Payments. If the City fails to set aside and pay into the Bond Fund the amounts set forth above, the Owner of any of the outstanding Parity Bonds may bring action against the City and compel the setting aside and payment. Section 13. Deposit of Bond Proceeds. On the Closing Date, a portion of the proceeds of the Bonds allocated to the refunding and sufficient to carry out the Refunding Plan, shall be deposited with the Refunding Trustee in accordance with Section 18 of this ordinance. The remaining proceeds of the Bonds shall be allocated to the new money portion of the Bonds and shall be deposited in the Construction Fund to be used to carry out the Plan of Additions. Section 14. Flow of Funds. So long as any Parity Bonds are outstanding, the City covenants that all ULID Assessments (if any) shall be paid into the Bond Fund, and the Gross Revenue shall be deposited into the Water and Sewer Utility Fund (or the respective System funds therein) to be used for the following purposes only in the following order of priority: (1) To pay Operating and Maintenance Expenses. (2) To make when due the required payments into the Principal and Interest Account in respect of interest on the Parity Bonds. (3) To make when due the required payments into the Principal and Interest Account in respect of principal of (and premium on, if any) the Parity Bonds, whether at maturity or pursuant to redemption prior to maturity. (4) To make when due all payments required to be made into the Reserve Account. (5) To make when due all payments required to be made under any reimbursement agreement with a Bond Insurer in any priority not inconsistent with this ordinance, which the City may hereafter establish by ordinance. (6) To make when due the required payments to be made into any revenue bond, note warrant or other revenue obligation redemption fund, debt service account or reserve account created to pay and secure the payment of any revenue obligations of the Water and Sewer Utility having a charge upon the Net Revenue junior and inferior to the charge thereon for the payment of the Parity Bonds. (7) Without priority, to retire by redemption or to purchase in the open market any outstanding Parity Bonds or junior lien obligations, to make necessary betterments and replacements of or repairs, additions or extensions to the Water and Sewer Utility, to make deposits into the Rate Stabilization Account, or for any other lawful purpose. Section 15. Additional Covenants. So long as any Parity Bonds are outstanding, the City covenants and agrees with the owner of each Bond at any time outstanding as follows: (a) Maintenance and Operation. The City will at all times maintain, preserve and keep the properties of the Water and Sewer Utility in good repair, working order and condition, will make all necessary and proper additions, betterments, renewals and repairs thereto, and improvements, replacements and extensions thereof, and will at all times operate or cause to be Packet Page 134 of 297 Council Version 11/30/11 -19- 51178550.4 operated the properties of the Water and Sewer Utility and the business in connection therewith in an efficient manner and at a reasonable cost. (b) Establishment and Collection of Rates and Charges. The City will establish, maintain and collect rates and charges for all services and facilities provided by the Water and Sewer Utility which will be fair and nondiscriminatory. The City will adjust those rates and charges from time to time so that: (i) the Gross Revenue will at all times be sufficient to (A) pay all Maintenance and Operation Expenses on a current basis, (B) pay when due all amounts that the City is obligated to pay into the Bond Fund and the accounts therein, (C) pay all taxes (or payments in lieu thereof), assessments or other governmental charges lawfully imposed on the Water and Sewer Utility and any and all other amounts which the City may now or hereafter become obligated to pay from the Gross Revenue by law or contract; and (ii) the Adjusted Net Revenue in each fiscal year will be at least equal to the Coverage Requirement. (c) Sale or Disposition of Utility Property. The City will not sell, lease, mortgage or in any manner encumber or dispose of all the property of the Water and Sewer Utility unless provision is made for payment into the Bond Fund of a sum sufficient to pay the principal of and interest on all Parity Bonds then outstanding. Further, the City will not sell, lease, mortgage, or in any manner encumber or dispose of (each, a “disposition”) any part of the property of the Water and Sewer Utility that is used, useful and material to the operation thereof (the “affected portion”) unless provision is made for replacement thereof or for payment into the Bond Fund of an amount which shall bear the same ratio to the amount of Parity Bonds then outstanding (less the amount of cash and investments in the Bond Fund and the accounts therein) as (i) the Net Revenue from affected portion of the Water and Sewer Utility for the twelve months preceding such disposition bears to (ii) the Net Revenue from the entire Water and Sewer Utility for the same period. Any money paid into the Bond Fund as a result of such a disposition shall be used to retire that proportion of then-outstanding Parity Bonds at the earliest possible date. (d) Books and Records. The City will maintain complete books and records relating to the operation of the Water and Sewer Utility and its financial affairs, and will cause such books and records to be audited annually, and cause to be prepared an annual financial and operating statement, which shall be provided to any owner of Parity Bonds upon request. (e) No Free Service. Except to aid the poor or infirm, to provide for resource conservation or to provide for the proper handling of hazardous materials, the City will not furnish or supply or permit the furnishing or supplying of any service or facility in connection with the operation of the Water and Sewer Utility free of charge to any person, firm or corporation, public or private, other than the City. (f) Collection of Delinquent Accounts. On at least an annual basis, it will determine all accounts that are delinquent and will take all necessary action to enforce payment of such accounts against those property owners whose accounts are delinquent. (g) Insurance. The City will at all times carry fire and such other forms of insurance on such of the buildings, equipment, facilities and properties of the Water and Sewer Utility as are ordinarily carried on such buildings, equipment, facilities, and properties by utilities engaged in the operation of similar utility systems to the full insurable value thereof, and also will carry Packet Page 135 of 297 Council Version 11/30/11 -20- 51178550.4 adequate public liability insurance at all times. The City may self insure or participate in a joint intergovernmental insurance pool or similar plan, and the cost of that insurance or self insurance shall be considered a part of Operating and Maintenance Expenses. (h) ULID Assessments. The City will promptly collect all ULID Assessments and deposit such collections into the Bond Fund to pay or secure the principal of and interest on any Parity Bonds without those ULID Assessments being particularly allocated to any particular series of Parity Bonds. Section 16. Rate Stabilization Account. The Rate Stabilization Account is established within the Water and Sewer Utility Fund. Deposits and withdrawals shall be made in accordance with this section at any time up to and including the date 90 days after the end of the fiscal year for which the deposit or withdrawal will be included as Adjusted Net Revenue for that fiscal year, as follows: (a) Deposits to the Rate Stabilization Account. The City may at any time, as determined by the City Finance Director and as consistent with the covenants contained in this ordinance, deposit into the Rate Stabilization Account amounts of Gross Revenue and any other money received by the Water and Sewer Utility and available to be used therefor, excluding principal proceeds of Parity Bonds or other borrowing. However, no deposit of Gross Revenue may be made into the Rate Stabilization Account to the extent that such deposit would prevent the City from meeting the Coverage Requirement in the relevant fiscal year. (b) Withdrawals from the Rate Stabilization Account. The City may withdraw money from the Rate Stabilization Account at any time upon authorization of the City Council (which may be by motion, resolution or ordinance) for inclusion in the Adjusted Net Revenue for any fiscal year of the Water and Sewer Utility, except that the total amount withdrawn from the Rate Stabilization Account in any fiscal year may not exceed the Annual Debt Service in that year. Earnings from investments in the Rate Stabilization Account shall be deposited in that account and shall not be included as Adjusted Net Revenue unless and until withdrawn from that account. Section 17. Separate Utility Systems. The City may create, acquire, construct, finance, own and operate one or more additional systems for water supply, sewer service, water, sewage or stormwater transmission, treatment or other commodity or utility service. The revenue of that Separate Utility System, and any utility local improvement district assessments payable solely with respect to improvements to a Separate Utility System, shall not be included in the Gross Revenue and may be pledged to the payment of revenue obligations issued to purchase, construct, condemn or otherwise acquire or expand the Separate Utility System. Neither the Gross Revenue nor the Net Revenue may be pledged to the payment of any obligations of a separate utility Separate System except that the Net Revenue may be pledged on a basis subordinate to the lien of the Parity Bonds. Packet Page 136 of 297 Council Version 11/30/11 -21- 51178550.4 Section 18. Refunding of the Refunded Bonds. (a) Authorizations with Respect to Refundings. Under the terms and conditions set forth by this ordinance, the Designated Representative is authorized to designate the applicable Redemption Dates and to appoint the Refunding Trustee for the Bonds. The Designated Representative may serve as, or appoint separately, the Refunding Trustee for the Bonds. (b) Findings and Determinations with Respect to the Refundings. Prior to approving the sale of the Bonds, the Designated Representative or other appropriate City official shall make the following determinations in writing: (1) The Redemption Date is the earliest practical date or dates on which the Refunded Bonds may be called for redemption; (2) The Refunding Plan will be effected by the issuance and sale of the Bonds and the application of the proceeds of such Bonds (together with other money of the City, if necessary) to carrying out the Refunding Plan and that the money to be deposited with the Refunding Trustee for the Refunded Bonds in accordance with the Refunding Plan will be sufficient (together with interest earned on the Acquired Obligations) to discharge and satisfy the obligations of the City under Refunded Bond Ordinances. Because the Refunded Bonds are being refunded primarily to effect a change in covenants, no minimum savings threshold is required. The City Council finds that, based on the foregoing determinations, the pledges, charges, trusts, covenants, and agreements of the City made or provided for in the applicable Refunded Bond Ordinances, immediately upon the deposit of sufficient proceeds of the Bonds with the Refunding Trustee, the Refunded Bonds shall no longer be deemed to be outstanding under the applicable Refunded Bond Ordinances and the lien and charge of the Prior Parity Bonds shall be released. (c) Authorization for Refunding Trust Agreement. The Designated Representative and the Mayor are each independently authorized to execute and deliver to the Refunding Trustee a Refunding Trust Agreement, which sets forth the duties, obligations and responsibilities of the Refunding Trustee in connection with the Refunding Plan, provisions for payment of the fees, compensation and expenses of such Refunding Trustee, and such other provisions as may be necessary so that the Bonds are in compliance with the requirements of federal law governing the exclusion of interest on the Bonds from gross income for federal income tax purposes. (d) Call for Redemption of Refunded Bonds. The Designated Representative is authorized to call, on behalf of the City, the Refunded Bonds for redemption on their respective Redemption Date(s) in accordance with this ordinance. In addition to such other information as may be necessary or convenient, the call for redemption shall specify the name of the Refunded Bonds being called, their maturity dates, their Redemption Date(s) and redemption prices (expressed as a percentage of par, plus accrued interest), and shall be irrevocable after the Bonds are delivered to the initial purchaser thereof. The Designated Representative, the Mayor and other proper City officials are authorized and directed to give or cause to be given such notices as required, at the times and in the manner required pursuant to the Refunded Bond Ordinances, in order to effect the defeasance and redemption prior to maturity of the Refunded Bonds. Packet Page 137 of 297 Council Version 11/30/11 -22- 51178550.4 (e) Use of Bond Proceeds. Proceeds of the Bonds (together with other money of the City, if necessary) in an amount sufficient to carry out the Refunding Plan shall, immediately upon receipt, be deposited with the Refunding Trustee as set forth in the Refunding Trust Agreement. The Refunding Trustee shall use the money so deposited to discharge the obligations of the City relating to the Refunded Bonds under the Refunded Bond Ordinances by providing for the payment of the amounts required to be paid by the Refunding Plan. The Refunding Plan shall be carried out, and proceeds of the Bonds shall be applied, in accordance with this ordinance and the laws of the State. (f) Acquisition and Substitution of Acquired Obligations. The Refunding Trust Agreement shall authorize and direct the Refunding Trustee to purchase the Acquired Obligations (or substitute obligations) and to make the payments required to be made by the Refunding Plan from the Acquired Obligations (or substitute obligations) and money deposited with the Refunding Trustee pursuant to this ordinance. All Acquired Obligations (or substitute obligations) and the money deposited with the Refunding Trustee and any income earned on the amounts so deposited shall be held irrevocably, invested and applied in accordance with the provisions of the ordinance that authorized the Refunded Bonds, this ordinance, chapter 39.53 RCW and other applicable statutes of the State, and the Refunding Trust Agreement. All necessary and proper fees, compensation and expenses of the Refunding Trustee and all other costs incidental to the setting up of the escrow to accomplish the refunding of the Refunded Bonds and costs related to the issuance and delivery of the Bonds, including bond printing, verification fees, Bond Counsel’s fees and other related expenses, may be paid out of the proceeds of the Bonds. To the extent practicable, such obligations shall be discharged fully by the Refunding Trustee’s simultaneous purchase of the Acquired Obligations, bearing such interest and maturing as to principal and interest in such amounts and at such times so as to provide, together with a beginning cash balance, if necessary, for the payment of the amounts required to be paid by the Refunding Plan. The Acquired Obligations shall be listed and more particularly described in a schedule attached to the Refunding Trust Agreement, but are subject to substitution as set forth below. Prior to the purchase of any such Acquired Obligations, the City reserves the right to substitute other Government Obligations for any of the Acquired Obligations and to use any savings created thereby for any lawful City purpose if (i) in the opinion of Bond Counsel, the interest on the Bonds and the Bonds issued as tax-exempt obligations will remain excluded from gross income for federal income tax purposes under Sections 103, 148 and 149(d) of the Code, and (ii) such substitution shall not impair the timely payment of the amounts required to be paid by the Refunding Plan, as verified by a nationally recognized firm of independent certified public accountants. After the purchase of the Acquired Obligations by the Refunding Trustee, the City reserves the right to substitute therefor cash or Government Obligations subject to the conditions that such money or securities held by the Refunding Trustee shall be sufficient to carry out the Refunding Plan, that such substitution will not cause the Bonds or the Refunded Bonds to be arbitrage bonds within the meaning of Section 148 of the Code and regulations under such section of the Code in effect on the date of such substitution and applicable to obligations issued on the issue date of the Bonds, and that the City obtain: (i) verification by a nationally recognized independent certified public accounting firm reasonably acceptable to the Refunding Trustee confirming that the payments of principal of and interest on the Government Obligations, if paid when due, and any other money held by the Refunding Trustee will be sufficient to carry out the Refunding Plan; and (ii) an opinion from Bond Counsel to the effect that the disposition and substitution or purchase of such securities, Packet Page 138 of 297 Council Version 11/30/11 -23- 51178550.4 under the statutes, rules and regulations then in force and applicable to the Bonds, will not cause the interest on the Bonds or the Refunded Bonds issued as tax-exempt obligations to be included in gross income for federal income tax purposes and that such disposition and substitution or purchase is in compliance with the statutes and regulations applicable to the Bonds. Any surplus money resulting from the sale, transfer, other disposition or redemption of the Acquired Obligations and the substitutions therefor shall be released from the trust estate and may be used for any lawful City purpose. Section 19. Manner of Sale of Bonds. The Designated Representative is authorized to engage Bond Counsel and a Financial Advisor to advise the City in connection with the issuance and sale of the Bonds. In consultation with these professionals, City officials, and other appropriate City staff and advisors, the Designated Representative shall take into account those factors that, in his or her judgment, will result in the lowest true interest cost on the Bonds to their maturity, including, but not limited to current interest rates for obligations comparable to the Bonds and determine whether to offer the Bonds for sale at competitive bid or through a negotiated sale. (a) Procedure for Negotiated Sale. If the Designated Representative determines that the Bonds should be sold by negotiated sale, the Designated Representative shall solicit one or more Underwriters with which to negotiate the sale of those Bonds. The Bond Purchase Contract for the Bonds shall set forth the Final Terms of the Bonds. The Designated Representative is authorized to execute the Bond Purchase Contract on behalf of the City, so long as the terms provided therein are consistent with the parameters set forth in this ordinance. (b) Procedure for Competitive Sale. A competitive sale shall include preparation of an official notice of bond sale for the Bonds, setting forth parameters for the Final Terms of such sale and any other bid parameters that the Designated Representative deems appropriate consistent with this ordinance. Bids for the purchase of the Bonds shall be received at such time or place and by such means as the Designated Representative directs. On the date and time established for the receipt of bids for the Bonds, the Designated Representative (or his or her designee) shall open bids and shall cause the bids to be mathematically verified. The Designated Representative is authorized to award, on behalf of the City, the winning bid and accept the winning bidder’s offer to purchase the Bonds, with such adjustments to the aggregate principal amount and principal amount per maturity as the Designated Representative deems appropriate, consistent with the terms of this ordinance. The Designated Representative may, in his or her discretion, reject any or all bids submitted and may waive any formality or irregularity in the bid or bidding process if he or she deems it to be in the City's best interest to do so. If all bids are rejected, the Bonds may be sold pursuant to negotiated sale or in any manner provided by law as the Designated Representative determines is in the best interest of the City, within the parameters set forth in this ordinance. (c) CUSIP Numbers. CUSIP numbers will be printed on the Bonds if requested by the Underwriter, but neither failure to print CUSIP numbers on any Bond nor error with respect thereto shall constitute cause for a failure or refusal by the Underwriter to accept delivery of and pay for the Bonds in accordance with the purchase offer. All expenses in relation to the printing of CUSIP numbers on the Bonds shall be paid by the City, but the fee of the CUSIP Service Packet Page 139 of 297 Council Version 11/30/11 -24- 51178550.4 Bureau for the assignment of those numbers shall be the responsibility of and shall be paid by the purchasers. Section 20. Parity Conditions. The City reserves the right to issue Future Parity Bonds which will constitute a charge and lien upon the Net Revenue and ULID Assessments on a parity with the Bonds if the Parity Conditions are met and complied with at the time of the issuance of those Future Parity Bonds. Nothing contained in the Parity Conditions shall prevent the City from issuing revenue obligations having a lien on the Net Revenue that is junior to the lien thereon that secures the Parity Bonds, or from pledging to pay into a bond redemption fund or account for such junior lien obligations assessments (including interest and penalties thereon) in any utility local improvement district that are levied to pay part or all of the cost of improvements being constructed out of the proceeds of the sale of such junior lien obligations. Neither shall anything contained in this ordinance prevent the City from issuing revenue obligations to refund maturing Parity Bonds for the payment of which money is not otherwise available. Section 21. Tax Matters. (a) Preservation of Tax Exemption for Interest on Bonds. The City covenants that it will take all actions reasonably necessary and within its control to prevent interest on the Bonds from being includable in gross income for federal income tax purposes, and it will neither take any action nor make or permit any use of proceeds of the Bonds or other funds of the City treated as proceeds of the Bonds at any time during the term of the Bonds which will cause interest on the Bonds to be included in gross income for federal income tax purposes. The City also covenants that it will, to the extent the arbitrage rebate requirement of Section 148 of the Code is applicable to the Bonds, take all actions necessary to comply (or to be treated as having complied) with that requirement in connection with the Bonds, including the calculation and payment of any penalties that the City has elected to pay as an alternative to calculating rebatable arbitrage, and the payment of any other penalties if required under Section 148 of the Code to prevent interest on the Bonds from being included in gross income for federal income tax purposes. (b) Designation of Bonds as “Qualified Tax-Exempt Obligations.” The Bonds shall be designated as “qualified tax-exempt obligations” for the purposes of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code, if the following conditions are met: (1) the Finance Director is able to determine and certify that the Bonds are not “private activity bonds” within the meaning of Section 141 of the Code; (2) the reasonably anticipated amount of tax-exempt obligations (other than private activity bonds and other obligations not required to be included in such calculation) which the City and any entity subordinate to the City (including any entity that the City controls, that derives its authority to issue tax-exempt obligations from the City, or that issues tax-exempt obligations on behalf of the City) will issue during the calendar year in which the Bonds are issued will not exceed $10,000,000; and (3) the amount of tax-exempt obligations, including the Bonds, so designated by the City as “qualified tax-exempt obligations” for the purposes of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code during the calendar year in which the Bonds are issued does not exceed $10,000,000. Packet Page 140 of 297 Council Version 11/30/11 -25- 51178550.4 Section 22. Official Statement. (a) Preliminary Official Statement under the Rule. The Designated Representative and Mayor are each independently authorized to review and approve the information about the City contained in any preliminary official statement (the “Preliminary Official Statement”) prepared in connection with the public offering and sale of the Bonds to be sold to the public; and (for the sole purpose of aiding a participating underwriter in its compliance with Section (b)(1) of the Rule, if applicable) “deem final” that Preliminary Official Statement as of its date, except for the omission of information permitted to be omitted by the Rule and approve or ratify the distribution of that preliminary official statement to potential purchasers of the Bonds. (b) Approval of Official Statement. The Designated Representative and Mayor are each independently authorized to review and approve distribution of a final official statement with respect to the Bonds to be sold to the public. The City agrees to cooperate with the purchaser of the Bonds to deliver or cause to be delivered, within such period as may be required by applicable law, copies of the final official statement pertaining to the Bonds in sufficient quantity to comply with paragraph (b)(4) of the Rule and rules of the MSRB. Section 23. Undertaking to Provide Continuing Disclosure. To meet the requirements of paragraph (b)(5) of the Rule, as applicable to a participating underwriter for the Bonds, the Designated Representative is authorized to execute a written undertaking to provide continuing disclosure for the benefit of holders of the Bonds in substantially the form attached as Exhibit C. Section 24. Amendatory and Supplemental Ordinances. (a) This ordinance shall not be modified or amended in any respect subsequent to the initial issuance of the Bonds, except as provided in and in accordance with and subject to the provisions of this section. (b) The City, from time to time, and at any time, without the consent of or notice to the registered owners of the Bonds, may pass supplemental or amendatory ordinances as follows: (1) To cure any formal defect, omission, inconsistency or ambiguity in this ordinance in a manner not adverse to the owner of any Parity Bonds; (2) To impose upon the Bond Registrar (with its consent) for the benefit of the registered owners of the Bonds any additional rights, remedies, powers, authority, security, liabilities or duties which may lawfully be granted, conferred or imposed and which are not contrary to or inconsistent with this ordinance as theretofore in effect; (3) To add to the covenants and agreements of, and limitations and restrictions upon, the City in this ordinance, other covenants, agreements, limitations and restrictions to be observed by the City which are not contrary or inconsistent with this ordinance as theretofore in effect; (4) To confirm, as further assurance, any pledge under, and the subjection to any claim, lien or pledge created or to be created by this ordinance of any other money, securities or funds; Packet Page 141 of 297 Council Version 11/30/11 -26- 51178550.4 (5) To authorize different denominations of the Bonds and to make correlative amendments and modifications to this ordinance regarding exchangeability of Bonds of different authorized denominations, redemptions of portions of Bonds of particular authorized denominations and similar amendments and modifications of a technical nature; (6) To modify, alter, amend or supplement this ordinance in any other respect which is not materially adverse to the registered owners of the Bonds and which does not involve a change described in subsection (c) of this section; and (7) Because of change in federal law or rulings, to maintain the exclusion from gross income of the interest on the Bonds from federal income taxation. Before the City may pass any such supplemental ordinance pursuant to this subsection, there shall have been delivered to the City and the Bond Registrar an opinion of Foster Pepper PLLC, bond counsel, or other nationally recognized bond counsel, stating that such supplemental ordinance is authorized or permitted by this ordinance and, upon the execution and delivery thereof, will be valid and binding upon the City in accordance with its terms and will not adversely affect the exclusion from gross income for federal income tax purposes of interest on the Bonds. (c) Except for any supplemental ordinance entered into pursuant to subsection (b) of this section, subject to the terms and provisions contained in this subsection (c) and not otherwise: (1) Registered owners of not less than 50% in aggregate principal amount of the Bonds then outstanding shall have the right from time to time to consent to and approve the passage by the City Council of any supplemental ordinance deemed necessary or desirable by the City for the purpose of modifying, altering, amending, supplementing or rescinding, in any particular, any of the terms or provisions contained in this ordinance; except that, unless approved in writing by the registered owners of all the Bonds then outstanding, nothing contained in this section shall permit, or be construed as permitting: (i) a change in the times, amounts or currency of payment of the principal of or interest on any outstanding Bond, or a reduction in the principal amount of redemption price of any outstanding Bond or a change in the redemption price of any outstanding Bond or a change in the method of determining the rate of interest thereon; (ii) a preference of priority of any Bond or Bonds or any other bond or bonds; or (iii) a reduction in the aggregate principal amount of Bonds, the consent of the registered owners of Bonds of which is required for any such supplemental ordinance. (2) If at any time the City shall pass any supplemental ordinance for any of the purposes of this subsection (c), the Bond Registrar shall cause notice of the proposed supplemental ordinance to be given by first class United States mail to all registered owners of the then outstanding Bonds and to Moody’s Investors Service, Inc. and Standard & Poor’s, if the Bonds are rated by those agencies, and to the Bond Insurer. Such notice shall briefly set forth the nature of the proposed supplemental ordinance and shall state that a copy thereof is on file at the office Packet Page 142 of 297 Council Version 11/30/11 -27- 51178550.4 of the Bond Registrar for inspection by all registered owners of the outstanding bonds. (3) Within two years after the date of the mailing of such notice, the City may pass such supplemental ordinance in substantially the form described in such notice, but only if there shall have first been delivered to the Bond Registrar (i) the required consents, in writing, of the registered owners of the Bonds and (ii) an opinion of bond counsel stating that such supplemental ordinance is authorized or permitted by this ordinance, and, upon the execution and delivery thereof, will be valid and binding upon the City in accordance with its terms and will not adversely affect the exclusion from gross income for federal income tax purposes of interest on the Bonds. (4) If registered owners of not less than the percentage of Bonds required by this subsection (c) have consented to and approved the execution and delivery thereof as herein provided, no owner of the Bonds shall have any right to object to the passage of such supplemental ordinance, or to object to any of the terms and provisions contained therein or the operation thereof, or in any manner to question the propriety of the passage thereof, or to enjoin or restrain the City or the Bond Registrar from passing the same or from taking any action pursuant to the provisions thereof. (d) Upon the execution and delivery of any supplemental ordinance pursuant to the provisions of this Section 24, this ordinance shall be, and be deemed to be, modified and amended in accordance therewith, and the respective rights, duties and obligations under this ordinance of the City, the Bond Registrar and all registered owners of Bonds then outstanding, shall thereafter be determined, exercised and enforced under this ordinance subject in all respects to such modifications and amendments. Section 25. General Authorization; Delivery of Bonds. The Designated Representative, the Mayor and other appropriate officers of the City are each authorized to do everything as in their judgment may be necessary, appropriate or desirable in order to carry out the terms and provisions of, and complete the transactions contemplated in connection with, this ordinance. The Bonds are to be printed at City expense and are to be delivered to the purchaser in accordance with the Bond Purchase Contract, with the approving legal opinion of Bond Counsel regarding the Bonds. Section 26. Severability. The provisions of this ordinance are declared to be separate and severable. If a court of competent jurisdiction, all appeals having been exhausted or all appeal periods having run, finds any provision of this ordinance to be invalid or unenforceable as to any person or circumstance, such offending provision shall, if feasible, be deemed to be modified to be within the limits of enforceability or validity. However, if the offending provision cannot be so modified, it shall be null and void with respect to the particular person or circumstance, and all other provisions of this ordinance in all other respects, and the offending provision with respect to all other persons and all other circumstances, shall remain valid and enforceable. Packet Page 143 of 297 Council Version 11/30/11 -28- 51178550.4 Section 27. Prior Bond Authorization Repealed. Ordinance No. 3837 of the City authorizing the sale and issuance of general obligation bonds and revenue bonds for the purpose of refunding certain indebtedness of the City is hereby by repealed and is of no effect whatsoever. Section 28. Effective Date of Ordinance. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force from and after its passage and five days following its publication as required by law and is not subject to referendum. PASSED by the City Council and APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Edmonds, Washington, at an open public meeting thereof, this 6th day of December, 2011. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: FOSTER PEPPER PLLC Bond Counsel Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Published: Effective Date: Packet Page 144 of 297 Exhibit A -1- 51178550.4 PARITY CONDITIONS As set forth in Section 20 of this Ordinance No.__ , the City may issue Future Parity Bonds on a parity with the Bonds if and only if the following conditions are met and complied with at the time of issuance of those proposed Future Parity Bonds: (1) At the time of issuance of such Future Parity Bonds, there may not be any deficiency in the Principal and Interest Account or the Reserve Account of the Bond Fund. (2) The ordinance authorizing the Future Parity Bonds must require that all ULID Assessments levied in connection with those Future Parity Bonds will be paid directly into the Bond Fund. (3) The ordinance authorizing the Future Parity Bonds shall provide for the payment of the principal thereof and interest thereon out of the Bond Fund. (4) The ordinance authorizing the Future Parity Bonds must provide for the deposit into the Reserve Account of amounts necessary to comply with the Reserve Requirement and Section 12 of this ordinance. (5) At the time of the issuance of such Future Parity Bonds, the City shall have on file, either: (a) A certificate from an Independent Utility Consultant showing that, in his or her professional opinion, the annual Net Revenue available for debt service on the Parity Bonds then outstanding and the Future Parity Bonds proposed to be issued shall, for each year, be at least equal to the Coverage Requirement. In making such certification, the Net Revenue for any 12 consecutive calendar months out of the immediately preceding 24 consecutive months shall be used, and the following adjustments may be made to the historical net operating revenue: (i) Any rate change that has taken place or been approved, may be reflected; (ii) Revenue may be added from customers actually added to the Water and Sewer Utility subsequent to the 12-month base period; (iii) Revenue may be added from customers to be served by the improvements being constructed out of the proceeds of the Future Parity Bonds to be issued; and (iv) A full year’s revenue may be included from any customer being served, but who has not been receiving service for the full period of operation used as a basis for the certificate; and (v) Actual or reasonably anticipated changes to the Operating and Maintenance Expenses subsequent to such 12-month period shall be added or deducted, as is applicable. Packet Page 145 of 297 Exhibit A -2- 51178550.4 (b) A certificate of the Finance Director showing that, in his or her professional opinion, the annual Net Revenue available for debt service on the Parity Bonds then outstanding and the Future Parity Bonds proposed to be issued shall, for each year, be at least equal to the Coverage Requirement. In making such certification, the Finance Director shall assume that (A) the proposed Future Parity Bonds will remain outstanding to their scheduled maturities, and (B) any Parity Bonds to be refunded by those Future Parity Bonds are not outstanding. The Finance Director shall not make any of the adjustments referred to above. However, if the Future Parity Bonds are being issued for the sole purpose of refunding then-outstanding Parity Bonds (including paying costs of issuance and providing for the Reserve Requirement), no coverage certification is required if, as result of the issuance of those Future Parity Bonds, (a) the Annual Debt Service on the Future Parity Bonds to be issued is not increased by more than $5,000 over the Annual Debt Service for that year of the bonds being refunded, and (b) the various annual maturities of the refunding Future Parity Bonds will not extend more than one year longer than the Parity Bonds being refunded. Furthermore, no certificate shall be required in connection with the issuance of Future Parity Bonds if the amount of such bonds proposed to be issued does not exceed the ULID Assessments levied in support of such Future Parity Bond issue by more than $5,000 plus any amount of the proceeds of such Future Parity Bonds deposited in the Reserve Account as capitalized reserve. Packet Page 146 of 297 Exhibit B -1- 51178550.4 Water System Plan of Additions: A summary of the planned additions and betterments to the water utility is as follows:  Improvements to the Alderwood Supply Station to expand its capacity and improve its operation in conjunction with the Five Corners Pump Station.  Improvements to the Five Corners Pump Station to replace old equipment, expand the capacity of the station, and improve the operation of the station in conjunction with the Alderwood Supply Station.  Improvements to the Seaview Reservoir, including ventilation system improvements and new water quality sampling equipment.  Improvements to the Yost Reservoir, including ventilation system improvements, access hatch improvements, and new water quality sampling equipment.  Recoating and related improvements to the Five Corners 3.0 MG Reservoir and 1.5 MG Reservoir.  Construction and equipping of a new pressure reducing valve station near Viewland Way and 12th Avenue to increase fire flow and provide supply redundancy in the 420 Zone.  Pressure relief improvements needed to protect the water system from potentially high pressure that could occur during certain events.  Replacement of several pressure reducing valve stations and improvements to other stations to ensure long term operation and reliability.  Installation of isolation valves on the 24-inch transmission main to minimize impacts to the system during maintenance and repairs.  Repair and replacement of water mains needed due to age and undesirable pipe material and a need to improve flows. Sewer System Plan of Additions: A summary of the planned additions and betterments to the sewer utility are as follows:  Improvements to Lift Stations 3, 4, 5, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, & 15.  Repair and replacement of sewer pipe sections needed due to age and undesirable pipe material and a need to improve flows.  Rehabilitation of existing “cured in place pipe” to address pipe integrity problems in the sewer pipe system. Stormwater System Plan of Additions: A summary of the planned additions and betterments to the stormwater management utility are as follows: Packet Page 147 of 297 Exhibit C -1- 51178550.4 Form of Continuing Disclosure Undertaking To meet the requirements of paragraph (b)(5) of Rule 15c2-12, as applicable to a participating underwriter for the Bonds, the City makes the following written Undertaking for the benefit of holders of the Bonds: (1) Undertaking to Provide Annual Financial Information and Notice of Listed Events. The City undertakes to provide or cause to be provided, either directly or through a designated agent, to the MSRB, in an electronic format as prescribed by the MSRB, accompanied by identifying information as prescribed by the MSRB: (a) Annual financial information and operating data of the type included in the final official statement for the Bonds and described in subsection (2) of this section (“annual financial information”); (b) Timely notice (not in excess of 10 business days after the occurrence of the event) of the occurrence of any of the following events with respect to the Bonds: (1) principal and interest payment delinquencies; (2) non-payment related defaults, if material; (3) unscheduled draws on debt service reserves reflecting financial difficulties; (4) unscheduled draws on credit enhancements reflecting financial difficulties; (5) substitution of credit or liquidity providers, or their failure to perform; (6) adverse tax opinions, the issuance by the Internal Revenue Service of proposed or final determinations of taxability, Notice of Proposed Issue (IRS Form 5701 – TEB) or other material notices or determinations with respect to the tax status of the Bonds; (7) modifications to rights of holders of the Bonds, if material; (8) bond calls (other than scheduled mandatory redemptions of Term Bonds), if material, and tender offers; (9) defeasances; (10) release, substitution, or sale of property securing repayment of the Bonds, if material; (11) rating changes; (12) bankruptcy, insolvency, receivership or similar event of the City, as such “Bankruptcy Events” are defined in Rule 15c2-12; (13) the consummation of a merger, consolidation, or acquisition involving the City or the sale of all or substantially all of the assets of the City other than in the ordinary course of business, the entry into a definitive agreement to undertake such an action or the termination of a definitive agreement relating to any such actions, other than pursuant to its terms, if material; and (14) appointment of a successor or additional trustee or the change of name of a trustee, if material. (c) Timely notice of a failure by the City to provide required annual financial information on or before the date specified in subsection (2) of this section. (2) Type of Annual Financial Information Undertaken to be Provided. The annual financial information that the City undertakes to provide in subsection (a) of this section: (a) Shall consist of (1) annual financial statements prepared (except as noted in the financial statements) in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles applicable to State local governmental units such as the City, as such principles may be changed from time to time, which statements shall not be audited, except, however, that if and when audited financial statements are otherwise prepared and Packet Page 148 of 297 Exhibit C -2- 51178550.4 available to the City they will be provided; (2) [references to the specific sections of the Official Statement to be inserted upon publication of the Official Statement]; (b) Shall be provided not later than the last day of the ninth month after the end of each fiscal year of the City (currently, a fiscal year ending December 31), as such fiscal year may be changed as required or permitted by State law, commencing with the City’s fiscal year ending December 31, 2011; and (c) May be provided in a single or multiple documents, and may be incorporated by specific reference to documents available to the public on the Internet website of the MSRB or filed with the SEC. (3) Amendment of Undertaking. The Undertaking is subject to amendment after the primary offering of the Bonds without the consent of any holder of any Bond, or of any broker, dealer, municipal securities dealer, participating underwriter, rating agency or the MSRB, under the circumstances and in the manner permitted by Rule 15c2-12. The City will give notice to the MSRB of the substance (or provide a copy) of any amendment to the Undertaking and a brief statement of the reasons for the amendment. If the amendment changes the type of annual financial information to be provided, the annual financial information containing the amended financial information will include a narrative explanation of the effect of that change on the type of information to be provided. (4) Beneficiaries. The Undertaking evidenced by this section shall inure to the benefit of the City and any Beneficial Owner of Bonds, and shall not inure to the benefit of or create any rights in any other person. (5) Termination of Undertaking. The City’s obligations under this Undertaking shall terminate upon the legal defeasance of all of the Bonds. In addition, the City’s obligations under this Undertaking shall terminate if those provisions of Rule 15c2-12 which require the City to comply with this Undertaking become legally inapplicable in respect of the Bonds for any reason, as confirmed by an opinion of nationally recognized bond counsel or other counsel familiar with federal securities laws delivered to the City, and the City provides timely notice of such termination to the MSRB. (6) Remedy for Failure to Comply with Undertaking. As soon as practicable after the City learns of any failure to comply with the Undertaking, the City will proceed with due diligence to cause such noncompliance to be corrected. No failure by the City or other obligated person to comply with the Undertaking shall constitute a default in respect of the Bonds. The sole remedy of any Beneficial Owner of a Bond shall be to take such actions as that Beneficial Owner deems necessary, including seeking an order of specific performance from an appropriate court, to compel the City or other obligated person to comply with the Undertaking. Packet Page 149 of 297 Exhibit C -3- 51178550.4 (7) Designation of Official Responsible to Administer Undertaking. The Finance Director of the City (or such other officer of the City who may in the future perform the duties of that office) or his or her designee is authorized and directed in his or her discretion to take such further actions as may be necessary, appropriate or convenient to carry out the Undertaking of the City in respect of the Bonds set forth in this section and in accordance with Rule 15c2-12, including, without limitation, the following actions: (a) Preparing and filing the annual financial information undertaken to be provided; (b) Determining whether any event specified in subsection (a) has occurred, assessing its materiality, where necessary, with respect to the Bonds, and preparing and disseminating any required notice of its occurrence; (c) Determining whether any person other than the City is an “obligated person” within the meaning of Rule 15c2-12 with respect to the Bonds, and obtaining from such person an undertaking to provide any annual financial information and notice of listed events for that person in accordance with Rule 15c2-12; (d) Selecting, engaging and compensating designated agents and consultants, including but not limited to financial advisors and legal counsel, to assist and advise the City in carrying out the Undertaking; and (e) Effecting any necessary amendment of the Undertaking. Dated __________, 20__. CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Packet Page 150 of 297 51178550.4 CERTIFICATION I, the undersigned, City Clerk of the City of Edmonds, Washington (the “City”), hereby certify as follows: 1. The attached copy of Ordinance No. ____ (the “Ordinance”) is a full, true and correct copy of an ordinance duly passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City held at the regular meeting place thereof on _________________, 2011, as that ordinance appears on the minute book of the City; and the Ordinance will be in full force and effect five days after publication in the City’s official newspaper; and 2. A quorum of the members of the City Council was present throughout the meeting and a majority of its members voted in the proper manner for the passage of the Ordinance. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this ____ day of ____________, 2011. CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON _____________________________________ City Clerk Packet Page 151 of 297 - 1 - RESOLUTION NO. ____ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING A POLICY FOR POST-ISSUANCE COMPLIANCE AND PROCEDURES FOR BOND ISSUES. WHEREAS, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) issued a revised Form 8038-G in September 2011 indicating issuers of tax-exempt bonds should have written post-issuance policies and procedures in place to insure compliance with various requirements of Internal Revenue Code Section 148; and WHEREAS, such policies must provide for a due diligence review at regular intervals, identification of the responsible individual to perform such review, training of the responsible individual, retention of records related to the bond issuance, procedures for identification of noncompliance in a timely basis, and procedures for taking appropriate steps if noncompliance occurs; and WHEREAS, the City currently has outstanding various tax-exempt, limited-tax general obligation bond issues; now, therefore, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Post Issuance Compliance and Procedures for Bond Issues policy is hereby adopted to be effective on December 6, 2011 and to continue in full force and effect until amended. A copy of such Post Issuance Compliance and Procedures for Bond Issues policy is attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by this reference as fully as if herein set forth. Packet Page 152 of 297 - 2 - RESOLVED this 6th day of December, 2011. APPROVED: MAYOR, DAVE EARLING ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: ________ PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: ________ RESOLUTION NO. ____ Packet Page 153 of 297 1 1. Introduction and Purpose. The purpose of this Policy is to ensure that the City of Edmonds (City) will be in compliance with the following requirements of federal securities laws and federal tax laws that apply when the City issues certain bonds: 2. Federal Securities Law. 2.1 Basic Responsibility. In the Bond Ordinance (or other bond documents), the City has agreed to provide ongoing disclosure regarding certain financial information and certain “material events” to the securities markets. This is referred to as “Continuing Disclosure”. The City’s responsibility to provide ongoing continuing disclosure to municipal securities markets is set forth in the bond ordinance or in a separate continuing disclosure agreement for each publicly sold issue of bonds. 2.2 “Obligated Person” with respect to PFD Bonds. The City is also an obligated person with respect to certain outstanding bonds issued by the Edmonds Public Facilities District and guaranteed by the City. The Finance Director will review this Continuing Disclosure Agreement and comply with it in connection with its periodic filings relating to the City’s outstanding bonds. 2.3 Responsible Official. The Finance Director shall maintain a file that includes a copy of each Continuing Disclosure Undertaking entered into by the City and shall ensure that the information required to be disclosed is disclosed in a timely fashion and that any failure to make disclosure is remedied in a timely fashion. 3. Federal Tax Law. 3.1 Basic Responsibility. In the Bond Ordinance (or other bond documents), the City has agreed to ensure that certain provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), CITY OF EDMONDS Post-Issuance Compliance Policies and Procedures for Bond Issues Subject: Post Issuance Compliance and Original Policy Date: N/A Procedures for Bond Issues Originating Department: Finance Division Last Revision Date: N/A Packet Page 154 of 297 2 will be satisfied, so that interest on the bonds will be and remain tax-exempt (or in some cases, eligible for a federal subsidy or tax credit). 3.2 Basic Rules Summary: (This is a very brief summary. Review the bond transcript and consult with Bond Counsel any time there are questions.) (a) Arbitrage Yield Restriction and Rebate Requirements. (b) Arbitrage Yield Restriction and Rebate Requirements. (1) Eligibility for Small-Issuer Exemption. The City may have been eligible for the small- issuer exemption from arbitrage rebate compliance for some of its outstanding bonds. For each such bond issue, the City will maintain records sufficient to demonstrate eligibility for this exemption. (2) Construction Fund Spending for Arbitrage Rebate Exception. The Tax Exemption and Non-Arbitrage Certificate for each bond issue details the specific spending schedule that the City expected at the time of issuance to meet for each bond issue, and this document should be retained in the bond transcript. For each bond issue, that document should be referred to by the Finance Director and project manager(s) in determining compliance with expenditure timelines. If it appears that the City is not meeting the spending exception described in that document, bond counsel should be consulted about what other exceptions may be available. (3) Refunding or Defeasance Escrows. For any refundings or defeasances, the City shall retain information and records showing that investments held in yield-restricted advance refunding or defeasance escrows for bonds, and investments made with unspent bond proceeds after the expiration of the applicable temporary period, were not invested in investments with a yield higher than the yield on the bonds. (4) Arbitrage Rebate Calculations. On or before every fifth anniversary of each bond issue that is subject to arbitrage rebate, the Finance Director shall calculate (or engage a consultant to calculate) the rebate amount (if any) due to the United States of America, and shall ensure that a Form 8038-T (including any required payment to the IRS) is timely filed and paid. (No filing need be made if no rebate is owed.) Bond counsel can provide referrals to arbitrage consultants if such assistance is needed. (c) Restrictions on Private Business Use and Private Loans. (1) Private Business Use Test. No more than 10% of the proceeds of any tax-exempt bond issue (including the property financed with the bonds) may be used for private business use, of which no more than 5% of the proceeds of the tax-exempt bond issue (including the property financed with the bonds) may be used for any “unrelated” private business use—that is, generally, a private business use that is not functionally related to the governmental purposes of the bonds.  “Private business use” means use by any person other than a state or local government unit. This includes use by business corporations, partnerships, limited liability companies, associations, nonprofit corporations, natural persons engaged in trade or business activity, the United States of America and any federal agency, as a result of ownership of the property or use of the property under a lease, management or service contract, output contract for the purchase of electricity or water, privately (or federally) sponsored research contract, Packet Page 155 of 297 3 “naming rights” contract, “public-private partnership” arrangement, or any similar use arrangement that provides special legal entitlements for the use of the bond-financed property.  “Functionally related” means used for the same function. For example, in a city office building, rental of surplus space for use as offices is related to the “office” function of the building, but rental of surplus space for a retail store is not. (2) Private Loan Financing Test. No more than the lesser of $5,000,000 or 5% of the proceeds of a tax-exempt bond issue may be used to make or finance a loan to any person other than a state or local government unit. 3.3 Compliance Procedures. (a) Ongoing Education Policy. The Finance Director shall arrange for education and ongoing training at least once every 3 years for him- or herself, for designated members of his or her staff, and for the heads of departments and key operational personnel who are responsible for managing or overseeing any bond-financed facilities, land or equipment. This may include attendance at appropriate training programs offered by, among others, the City’s bond counsel, the Washington Municipal Treasurers Association (WMTA), the Washington Finance Officers Association (WFOA) and similar organizations. (b) Regular Periodic Monitoring; Annual Review of Use. Although the City Council of the City retains final responsibility for monitoring post-issuance compliance with federal tax requirements for the City’s tax-advantaged bonds, the City Council assigns to the Finance Director of the City the primary operating responsibility for such monitoring. At least one time per year, typically immediately prior to an annual principal payment date, the Finance Director shall review the use of bond-financed property and check for compliance with the applicable federal tax requirements and shall immediately consult with bond counsel if instances of noncompliance are discovered. (c) Special Use Arrangements for Bond-Financed Property. Before the City (or any agency or department) enters into a special use arrangement with a nongovernmental person that involves bond-financed property, the City (or agency or department) must consult with the Finance Director, provide the Finance Director with a description of the proposed nongovernmental use arrangement, and determine whether that use arrangement, if put into effect, will be consistent with the restrictions on private business use of the bond-financed property. (d) Finance Director to Consult with Bond Counsel. When evaluating any such proposal, the Finance Director should consult with bond counsel as necessary regarding whether that use arrangement, if put into effect, will be consistent with restrictions on private business use of the bond-financed property. 3.4 Special Compliance Policies and Procedures for Tax-Advantaged Bonds. Prior to issuance of any tax-advantaged bonds not described in this policy (e.g., tax subsidy bonds or tax credit bonds), the Finance Director must consult with bond counsel regarding any special post-issuance compliance policies or procedures that need to be adopted. Packet Page 156 of 297 4 4. Record Retention. 4.1 Retention Policy. Written records with respect to each City bond issue (which may be in electronic form) will be maintained for as long as those bonds remain outstanding, plus three years. In the case of refunding bonds, the written records relating to the original (refunded) bonds will be kept, along with those of the refunding bonds, until the refunding bonds are no longer outstanding, plus three years. 4.2 Records to be Retained. The City will maintain the following records: (a) Transcript. The official Transcript of Proceedings for the original issuance of the bonds. (b) Investment of Bond Proceeds. Records showing how the bond proceeds were invested, including records of all purchases and sales of investments made with bond proceeds and records of earnings receipts on those investments. (c) Expenditures of Bond Proceeds. Records of all expenditures of bond proceeds (including investment earnings). This should include copies (which may be electronic) of all relevant documentation, including property purchase and construction contracts, progress payment requests, invoices, cancelled checks, payment of bond issuance costs, and records of “allocations” of bond proceeds to make reimbursement for project expenditures made before the bonds were actually issued. (d) Records of Use of Bond Financed Facilities. Records of all special use arrangements with nongovernmental persons, if any, affecting bond-financed property. These records should include copies of the pertinent leases, contracts or other documentation, and the related determination that those nongovernmental uses are not inconsistent with the tax-exempt status of the bonds that financed the property. (e) Arbitrage Rebate Exemptions. Information, records and calculations relating to the Arbitrage Exemption(s) for which each bond issue qualified. Adoption by City Council: Resolution No. _________________ Adopted on: ___________________ Packet Page 157 of 297 No v 3 0 , 2 0 1 1 9 : 1 9 p m P r e p a r e d b y A . D a s h e n & A s s o c i a t e s (F i n a n c e 6 . 0 2 2 E d m o n d s C i t y : 2 0 1 1 L T R E ) P a g e SO U R C E S AN D US E S OF FU N D S Ci t y of Ed m o n d s Li m i t e d Ta x Ge n e r a l Ob l i g a t i o n Re f u n d i n g Bo n d s , 20 1 1 Da t e d D a t e 0 2 / 0 1 / 2 0 1 2 De l i v e r y D a t e 0 2 / 0 1 / 2 0 1 2 Re f u n d i n g of 19 9 8 LT G O R e f u n d i n g R e f u n d 20 0 1 R e f u n d 20 0 2 So u r c e s : B o n d s 2 0 0 1 B Bo n d s B o n d s L T G O Bo n d s T o t a l Bo n d P r o c e e d s : Pa r A m o u n t 1 , 3 2 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 , 3 5 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 , 7 8 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 5 , 7 2 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 0 , 1 8 5,000.00 Pr e m i u m 1 7 , 1 5 1 . 3 0 7 2 , 1 7 6 . 3 5 9 5 , 1 6 4 . 9 0 3 7 5 , 8 6 7 . 1 0 5 6 0 , 3 5 9 . 6 5 1, 3 3 7 , 1 5 1 . 3 0 1 , 4 2 7 , 1 7 6 . 3 5 1 , 8 8 0 , 1 6 4 . 9 0 6 , 1 0 0 , 8 6 7 . 1 0 1 0 , 7 4 5 , 3 5 9 . 6 5 Re f u n d i n g of 19 9 8 LT G O R e f u n d i n g R e f u n d 20 0 1 R e f u n d 20 0 2 Us e s : B o n d s 2 0 0 1 B Bo n d s B o n d s L T G O Bo n d s T o t a l Re f u n d i n g E s c r o w D e p o s i t s : Ca s h D e p o s i t 0 . 9 5 0 . 3 6 0 . 0 3 0 . 4 4 1 . 7 8 SL G S P u r c h a s e s 1 , 3 1 9 , 3 6 3 . 0 0 1 , 4 0 8 , 4 1 1 . 0 0 1 , 8 5 6 , 8 9 8 . 0 0 6 , 0 2 5 , 9 8 1 . 0 0 1 0,610,653.00 1, 3 1 9 , 3 6 3 . 9 5 1, 4 0 8 , 4 1 1 . 3 6 1, 8 5 6 , 8 9 8 . 0 3 6, 0 2 5 , 9 8 1 . 4 4 10,610,654.78 De l i v e r y D a t e E x p e n s e s : Co s t o f I s s u a n c e 7 , 5 6 8 . 7 8 7 , 7 6 9 . 4 7 1 0 , 2 3 5 . 0 6 3 2 , 8 2 6 . 6 9 5 8 , 4 0 0 . 0 0 Un d e r w r i t e r ' s D i s c o u n t 9 , 2 4 0 . 0 0 9 , 4 8 5 . 0 0 1 2 , 4 9 5 . 0 0 4 0 , 0 7 5 . 0 0 7 1 , 2 9 5 . 00 16 , 8 0 8 . 7 8 17 , 2 5 4 . 4 7 22 , 7 3 0 . 0 6 72 , 9 0 1 . 6 9 129,695.00 Ot h e r U s e s o f F u n d s : Co n t i n g e n c y 9 7 8 . 5 7 1 , 5 1 0 . 5 2 5 3 6 . 8 1 1 , 9 8 3 . 9 7 5 , 0 0 9 . 8 7 1, 3 3 7 , 1 5 1 . 3 0 1 , 4 2 7 , 1 7 6 . 3 5 1 , 8 8 0 , 1 6 4 . 9 0 6 , 1 0 0 , 8 6 7 . 1 0 1 0 , 7 4 5 , 3 5 9 . 6 5 Pa c k e t Pa g e 15 8 of 29 7 Nov 30, 2011 9:19 pm Prepared by A. Dashen & Associates (Finance 6.022 Edmonds City:2011LTRE) Page 8 SAVINGS City of Edmonds Limited Tax General Obligation Refunding Bonds, 2011 Present Value Prior Refunding Refunding Refunding to 02/01/2012 Date Debt Service Debt Service Adjustments Net Cash Flow Savings @ 2.8420694% 12/01/2012 1,465,160.00 1,172,249.99 212,687.50 1,384,937.49 80,222.51 80,139.23 12/01/2013 1,338,627.50 1,245,900.00 1,245,900.00 92,727.50 88,913.74 12/01/2014 1,344,850.00 1,257,400.00 1,257,400.00 87,450.00 81,434.66 12/01/2015 938,345.00 863,300.00 863,300.00 75,045.00 67,892.70 12/01/2016 952,652.50 876,700.00 876,700.00 75,952.50 66,707.93 12/01/2017 969,880.00 894,600.00 894,600.00 75,280.00 64,186.82 12/01/2018 989,505.00 909,200.00 909,200.00 80,305.00 66,515.28 12/01/2019 1,000,950.00 927,200.00 927,200.00 73,750.00 59,372.15 12/01/2020 1,019,517.50 943,400.00 943,400.00 76,117.50 59,522.92 12/01/2021 1,040,227.50 962,800.00 962,800.00 77,427.50 58,812.40 12/01/2022 637,810.00 605,200.00 605,200.00 32,610.00 24,112.37 12/01/2023 653,822.50 620,600.00 620,600.00 33,222.50 23,857.70 12/01/2024 672,662.50 639,600.00 639,600.00 33,062.50 23,056.92 12/01/2025 693,900.00 662,000.00 662,000.00 31,900.00 21,598.92 12/01/2026 482,540.00 451,500.00 451,500.00 31,040.00 20,428.04 14,200,450.00 13,031,649.99 212,687.50 13,244,337.49 956,112.51 806,551.76 Savings Summary PV of savings from cash flow 806,551.76 Plus: Refunding funds on hand 5,009.87 Net PV Savings 811,561.63 Packet Page 159 of 297 Nov 30, 2011 9:19 pm Prepared by A. Dashen & Associates (Finance 6.022 Edmonds City:2011LTRE) Page 9 SAVINGS City of Edmonds Refunding of 1998 LTGO Bonds Present Value Prior Refunding Annual to 02/01/2012 Date Debt Service Debt Service Savings Savings @ 2.8420694% 06/01/2012 28,455.00 8,800.00 19,655.00 19,470.97 12/01/2012 538,455.00 543,200.00 ‐4,745.00 14,910.00 ‐4,634.71 06/01/2013 17,490.00 7,900.00 9,590.00 9,235.86 12/01/2013 407,490.00 397,900.00 9,590.00 19,180.00 9,106.45 06/01/2014 8,910.00 4,000.00 4,910.00 4,597.10 12/01/2014 413,910.00 404,000.00 9,910.00 14,820.00 9,148.46 1,414,710.00 1,365,800.00 48,910.00 48,910.00 46,924.13 Savings Summary PV of savings from cash flow 46,924.13 Plus: Refunding funds on hand 978.57 Net PV Savings 47,902.70 Packet Page 160 of 297 Nov 30, 2011 9:19 pm Prepared by A. Dashen & Associates (Finance 6.022 Edmonds City:2011LTRE) Page 10 SAVINGS City of Edmonds Refunding 2001B Bonds Present Value Prior Refunding Annual to 02/01/2012 Date Debt Service Debt Service Savings Savings @ 2.8420694% 06/01/2012 36,463.75 13,833.33 22,630.42 22,418.54 12/01/2012 146,463.75 150,750.00 ‐4,286.25 18,344.17 ‐4,186.63 06/01/2013 33,768.75 19,450.00 14,318.75 13,789.98 12/01/2013 148,768.75 144,450.00 4,318.75 18,637.50 4,100.99 06/01/2014 30,836.25 18,200.00 12,636.25 11,830.98 12/01/2014 150,836.25 143,200.00 7,636.25 20,272.50 7,049.44 06/01/2015 27,776.25 16,950.00 10,826.25 9,854.27 12/01/2015 152,776.25 141,950.00 10,826.25 21,652.50 9,716.20 06/01/2016 24,588.75 15,700.00 8,888.75 7,865.59 12/01/2016 159,588.75 145,700.00 13,888.75 22,777.50 12,117.85 06/01/2017 21,146.25 14,400.00 6,746.25 5,803.59 12/01/2017 161,146.25 144,400.00 16,746.25 23,492.50 14,204.43 06/01/2018 17,576.25 11,800.00 5,776.25 4,830.86 12/01/2018 167,576.25 151,800.00 15,776.25 21,552.50 13,009.30 06/01/2019 13,488.75 9,000.00 4,488.75 3,649.62 12/01/2019 168,488.75 154,000.00 14,488.75 18,977.50 11,615.15 06/01/2020 9,265.00 6,100.00 3,165.00 2,501.73 12/01/2020 174,265.00 156,100.00 18,165.00 21,330.00 14,157.07 06/01/2021 4,768.75 3,100.00 1,668.75 1,282.33 12/01/2021 179,768.75 158,100.00 21,668.75 23,337.50 16,417.83 1,829,357.50 1,618,983.33 210,374.17 210,374.17 182,029.12 Savings Summary PV of savings from cash flow 182,029.12 Plus: Refunding funds on hand 1,510.52 Net PV Savings 183,539.64 Packet Page 161 of 297 Nov 30, 2011 9:19 pm Prepared by A. Dashen & Associates (Finance 6.022 Edmonds City:2011LTRE) Page 11 SAVINGS City of Edmonds Refund 2001 Bonds Present Value Prior Refunding Annual to 02/01/2012 Date Debt Service Debt Service Savings Savings @ 2.8420694% 06/01/2012 43,375.00 18,233.33 25,141.67 24,906.27 12/01/2012 193,375.00 197,350.00 ‐3,975.00 21,166.67 ‐3,882.61 06/01/2013 40,112.50 25,650.00 14,462.50 13,928.42 12/01/2013 195,112.50 185,650.00 9,462.50 23,925.00 8,985.38 06/01/2014 36,663.75 24,050.00 12,613.75 11,809.91 12/01/2014 196,663.75 189,050.00 7,613.75 20,227.50 7,028.67 06/01/2015 32,943.75 22,400.00 10,543.75 9,597.13 12/01/2015 202,943.75 192,400.00 10,543.75 21,087.50 9,462.67 06/01/2016 28,991.25 20,700.00 8,291.25 7,336.86 12/01/2016 203,991.25 190,700.00 13,291.25 21,582.50 11,596.53 06/01/2017 24,922.50 19,000.00 5,922.50 5,094.94 12/01/2017 209,922.50 194,000.00 15,922.50 21,845.00 13,505.71 06/01/2018 20,482.50 15,500.00 4,982.50 4,167.02 12/01/2018 215,482.50 195,500.00 19,982.50 24,965.00 16,477.83 06/01/2019 15,802.50 11,900.00 3,902.50 3,172.96 12/01/2019 220,802.50 201,900.00 18,902.50 22,805.00 15,153.51 06/01/2020 10,780.00 8,100.00 2,680.00 2,118.37 12/01/2020 225,780.00 208,100.00 17,680.00 20,360.00 13,779.08 06/01/2021 5,512.50 4,100.00 1,412.50 1,085.42 12/01/2021 230,512.50 209,100.00 21,412.50 22,825.00 16,223.68 2,354,172.50 2,133,383.33 220,789.17 220,789.17 191,547.77 Savings Summary PV of savings from cash flow 191,547.77 Plus: Refunding funds on hand 536.81 Net PV Savings 192,084.58 Packet Page 162 of 297 No v 3 0 , 2 0 1 1 9 : 1 9 p m P r e p a r e d b y A . D a s h e n & A s s o c i a t e s (F i n a n c e 6 . 0 2 2 E d m o n d s C i t y : 2 0 1 1 L T R E ) P a g e 1 SA V I N G S Ci t y of Ed m o n d s Re f u n d 20 0 2 LT G O Bo n d s Present Value Pr i o r R e f u n d i n g R e f u n d i n g R e f u n d i n g A n n u a l t o 02/01/2012 Da t e D e b t Se r v i c e D e b t Se r v i c e A d j u s t m e n t s N e t Ca s h Fl o w S a v i n g s S a v i n g s @ 2.8420694% 06 / 0 1 / 2 0 1 2 1 3 6 , 7 8 6 . 2 5 7 2 , 0 3 3 . 3 3 3 , 8 4 3 . 7 5 7 5 , 8 7 7 . 0 8 6 0 , 9 0 9 . 1 7 60,338.8 9 12 / 0 1 / 2 0 1 2 3 4 1 , 7 8 6 . 2 5 1 6 8 , 0 5 0 . 0 0 2 0 8 , 8 4 3 . 7 5 3 7 6 , 8 9 3 . 7 5 ‐3 5 , 1 0 7 . 5 0 25 , 8 0 1 . 6 7 ‐34,291.50 06 / 0 1 / 2 0 1 3 1 3 2 , 9 4 2 . 5 0 1 0 7 , 4 5 0 . 0 0 10 7 , 4 5 0 . 0 0 2 5 , 4 9 2 . 5 0 24,551.10 12 / 0 1 / 2 0 1 3 3 6 2 , 9 4 2 . 5 0 3 5 7 , 4 5 0 . 0 0 35 7 , 4 5 0 . 0 0 5 , 4 9 2 . 5 0 3 0 , 9 8 5 . 0 0 5 , 2 1 5 . 56 06 / 0 1 / 2 0 1 4 1 2 8 , 5 1 5 . 0 0 1 0 4 , 9 5 0 . 0 0 10 4 , 9 5 0 . 0 0 2 3 , 5 6 5 . 0 0 22,063.27 12 / 0 1 / 2 0 1 4 3 7 8 , 5 1 5 . 0 0 3 6 9 , 9 5 0 . 0 0 36 9 , 9 5 0 . 0 0 8 , 5 6 5 . 0 0 3 2 , 1 3 0 . 0 0 7 , 9 0 6 . 82 06 / 0 1 / 2 0 1 5 1 2 3 , 4 5 2 . 5 0 1 0 2 , 3 0 0 . 0 0 10 2 , 3 0 0 . 0 0 2 1 , 1 5 2 . 5 0 19,253.43 12 / 0 1 / 2 0 1 5 3 9 8 , 4 5 2 . 5 0 3 8 7 , 3 0 0 . 0 0 38 7 , 3 0 0 . 0 0 1 1 , 1 5 2 . 5 0 3 2 , 3 0 5 . 0 0 1 0 , 0 0 9.00 06 / 0 1 / 2 0 1 6 1 1 7 , 7 4 6 . 2 5 9 9 , 4 5 0 . 0 0 99 , 4 5 0 . 0 0 1 8 , 2 9 6 . 2 5 16,190.21 12 / 0 1 / 2 0 1 6 4 1 7 , 7 4 6 . 2 5 4 0 4 , 4 5 0 . 0 0 40 4 , 4 5 0 . 0 0 1 3 , 2 9 6 . 2 5 3 1 , 5 9 2 . 5 0 1 1 , 6 0 0.89 06 / 0 1 / 2 0 1 7 1 1 1 , 3 7 1 . 2 5 9 6 , 4 0 0 . 0 0 96 , 4 0 0 . 0 0 1 4 , 9 7 1 . 2 5 12,879.30 12 / 0 1 / 2 0 1 7 4 4 1 , 3 7 1 . 2 5 4 2 6 , 4 0 0 . 0 0 42 6 , 4 0 0 . 0 0 1 4 , 9 7 1 . 2 5 2 9 , 9 4 2 . 5 0 1 2 , 6 9 8.85 06 / 0 1 / 2 0 1 8 1 0 4 , 1 9 3 . 7 5 8 9 , 8 0 0 . 0 0 89 , 8 0 0 . 0 0 1 4 , 3 9 3 . 7 5 12,037.94 12 / 0 1 / 2 0 1 8 4 6 4 , 1 9 3 . 7 5 4 4 4 , 8 0 0 . 0 0 44 4 , 8 0 0 . 0 0 1 9 , 3 9 3 . 7 5 3 3 , 7 8 7 . 5 0 1 5 , 9 9 2.34 06 / 0 1 / 2 0 1 9 9 6 , 1 8 3 . 7 5 8 2 , 7 0 0 . 0 0 82 , 7 0 0 . 0 0 1 3 , 4 8 3 . 7 5 10,963.09 12 / 0 1 / 2 0 1 9 4 8 6 , 1 8 3 . 7 5 4 6 7 , 7 0 0 . 0 0 46 7 , 7 0 0 . 0 0 1 8 , 4 8 3 . 7 5 3 1 , 9 6 7 . 5 0 1 4 , 8 1 7.82 06 / 0 1 / 2 0 2 0 8 7 , 2 1 3 . 7 5 7 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 75 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 2 , 2 1 3 . 7 5 9,654.17 12 / 0 1 / 2 0 2 0 5 1 2 , 2 1 3 . 7 5 4 9 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 49 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 2 2 , 2 1 3 . 7 5 3 4 , 4 2 7 . 5 0 1 7 , 3 1 2.50 06 / 0 1 / 2 0 2 1 7 7 , 3 3 2 . 5 0 6 6 , 7 0 0 . 0 0 66 , 7 0 0 . 0 0 1 0 , 6 3 2 . 5 0 8,170.44 12 / 0 1 / 2 0 2 1 5 4 2 , 3 3 2 . 5 0 5 2 1 , 7 0 0 . 0 0 52 1 , 7 0 0 . 0 0 2 0 , 6 3 2 . 5 0 3 1 , 2 6 5 . 0 0 1 5 , 6 3 2.69 06 / 0 1 / 2 0 2 2 6 6 , 4 0 5 . 0 0 5 7 , 6 0 0 . 0 0 57 , 6 0 0 . 0 0 8 , 8 0 5 . 0 0 6,577.84 12 / 0 1 / 2 0 2 2 5 7 1 , 4 0 5 . 0 0 5 4 7 , 6 0 0 . 0 0 54 7 , 6 0 0 . 0 0 2 3 , 8 0 5 . 0 0 3 2 , 6 1 0 . 0 0 1 7 , 5 3 4.53 06 / 0 1 / 2 0 2 3 5 4 , 4 1 1 . 2 5 4 7 , 8 0 0 . 0 0 47 , 8 0 0 . 0 0 6 , 6 1 1 . 2 5 4,801.55 12 / 0 1 / 2 0 2 3 5 9 9 , 4 1 1 . 2 5 5 7 2 , 8 0 0 . 0 0 57 2 , 8 0 0 . 0 0 2 6 , 6 1 1 . 2 5 3 3 , 2 2 2 . 5 0 1 9 , 0 5 6.15 06 / 0 1 / 2 0 2 4 4 1 , 3 3 1 . 2 5 3 7 , 3 0 0 . 0 0 37 , 3 0 0 . 0 0 4 , 0 3 1 . 2 5 2,846.31 12 / 0 1 / 2 0 2 4 6 3 1 , 3 3 1 . 2 5 6 0 2 , 3 0 0 . 0 0 60 2 , 3 0 0 . 0 0 2 9 , 0 3 1 . 2 5 3 3 , 0 6 2 . 5 0 2 0 , 2 1 0.61 06 / 0 1 / 2 0 2 5 2 6 , 9 5 0 . 0 0 2 6 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 26 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 9 5 0 . 0 0 652.09 12 / 0 1 / 2 0 2 5 6 6 6 , 9 5 0 . 0 0 6 3 6 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 63 6 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 3 0 , 9 5 0 . 0 0 3 1 , 9 0 0 . 0 0 2 0 , 9 4 6.83 06 / 0 1 / 2 0 2 6 1 1 , 2 7 0 . 0 0 1 0 , 7 5 0 . 0 0 10 , 7 5 0 . 0 0 5 2 0 . 0 0 347.00 12 / 0 1 / 2 0 2 6 4 7 1 , 2 7 0 . 0 0 4 4 0 , 7 5 0 . 0 0 44 0 , 7 5 0 . 0 0 3 0 , 5 2 0 . 0 0 3 1 , 0 4 0 . 0 0 2 0 , 0 8 1.04 8, 6 0 2 , 2 1 0 . 0 0 7 , 9 1 3 , 4 8 3 . 3 3 2 1 2 , 6 8 7 . 5 0 8 , 1 2 6 , 1 7 0 . 8 3 4 7 6 , 0 3 9 . 1 7 4 7 6 , 0 3 9 .1 7 3 8 6 , 0 5 0 . 7 5 Pa c k e t Pa g e 16 3 of 29 7 Nov 30, 2011 9:24 pm Prepared by A. Dashen & Associates (Finance 6.022 Edmonds City:2011WS) Page 2 SOURCES AND USES OF FUNDS City of Edmonds Water & Sewer Revenue & Refunding Bonds, 2011 Dated Date 12/29/2011 Delivery Date 12/29/2011 Refunding of Refunding of Water & Sewer 1998 Water & 2003 Water & Revenue Bonds, Sources:Sewer Sewer 2011 Total Bond Proceeds: Par Amount 445,000.00 1,520,000.00 11,265,000.00 13,230,000.00 Premium 5,560.20 85,057.70 777,695.25 868,313.15 450,560.20 1,605,057.70 12,042,695.25 14,098,313.15 Other Sources of Funds: Existing DSRF 154,685.38 528,363.56 683,048.94 605,245.58 2,133,421.26 12,042,695.25 14,781,362.09 Refunding of Refunding of Water & Sewer 1998 Water & 2003 Water & Revenue Bonds, Uses:Sewer Sewer 2011 Total Project Fund Deposits: Water Projects 6,700,000.00 6,700,000.00 Sewer Projects 1,100,000.00 1,100,000.00 Stormwater Projects 3,200,000.00 3,200,000.00 11,000,000.00 11,000,000.00 Refunding Escrow Deposits: Cash Deposit 0.31 0.03 0.34 SLGS Purchases 564,269.00 1,988,524.00 2,552,793.00 564,269.31 1,988,524.03 2,552,793.34 Other Fund Deposits: Debt Service Reserve Fund 34,325.21 117,245.65 868,929.14 1,020,500.00 Delivery Date Expenses: Cost of Issuance 3,111.31 10,627.36 78,761.33 92,500.00 Underwriter's Discount 3,560.00 12,160.00 90,120.00 105,840.00 6,671.31 22,787.36 168,881.33 198,340.00 Other Uses of Funds: Contingency ‐20.25 4,864.22 4,884.78 9,728.75 605,245.58 2,133,421.26 12,042,695.25 14,781,362.09 Packet Page 164 of 297 Nov 30, 2011 9:24 pm Prepared by A. Dashen & Associates (Finance 6.022 Edmonds City:2011WS) Page 7 BOND DEBT SERVICE City of Edmonds Water & Sewer Revenue & Refunding Bonds, 2011 Dated Date 12/29/2011 Delivery Date 12/29/2011 Period Ending Principal Interest Debt Service 12/01/2012 440,000 497,031.67 937,031.67 12/01/2013 490,000 530,150.00 1,020,150.00 12/01/2014 500,000 520,350.00 1,020,350.00 12/01/2015 510,000 510,350.00 1,020,350.00 12/01/2016 520,000 500,150.00 1,020,150.00 12/01/2017 530,000 489,750.00 1,019,750.00 12/01/2018 550,000 468,550.00 1,018,550.00 12/01/2019 570,000 446,550.00 1,016,550.00 12/01/2020 595,000 423,750.00 1,018,750.00 12/01/2021 620,000 399,950.00 1,019,950.00 12/01/2022 645,000 375,150.00 1,020,150.00 12/01/2023 670,000 349,350.00 1,019,350.00 12/01/2024 695,000 322,550.00 1,017,550.00 12/01/2025 725,000 294,750.00 1,019,750.00 12/01/2026 760,000 258,500.00 1,018,500.00 12/01/2027 800,000 220,500.00 1,020,500.00 12/01/2028 835,000 180,500.00 1,015,500.00 12/01/2029 880,000 138,750.00 1,018,750.00 12/01/2030 925,000 94,750.00 1,019,750.00 12/01/2031 970,000 48,500.00 1,018,500.00 13,230,000 7,069,881.67 20,299,881.67 Packet Page 165 of 297 Nov 30, 2011 9:24 pm Prepared by A. Dashen & Associates (Finance 6.022 Edmonds City:2011WS) Page 5 SAVINGS City of Edmonds Refunding of 1998 Water & Sewer Prior Refunding Present Value Debt Debt to 12/29/2011 Date Service Service Savings @ 3.4456411% 12/01/2012 302,022.50 233,207.78 68,814.72 66,843.27 12/01/2013 298,822.50 224,400.00 74,422.50 69,768.28 600,845.00 457,607.78 143,237.22 136,611.56 Savings Summary PV of savings from cash flow 136,611.56 Less: Prior funds on hand ‐154,685.38 Plus: Refunding funds on hand 34,304.96 Net PV Savings 16,231.14 Packet Page 166 of 297 Nov 30, 2011 9:24 pm Prepared by A. Dashen & Associates (Finance 6.022 Edmonds City:2011WS) Page 6 SAVINGS City of Edmonds Refunding of 2003 Water & Sewer Present Value Prior Refunding to 12/29/2011 Date Debt Service Debt Service Savings @ 3.4456411% 12/01/2012 200,510.00 149,635.56 50,874.44 49,627.45 12/01/2013 225,710.00 171,300.00 54,410.00 51,188.99 12/01/2014 224,710.00 173,800.00 50,910.00 46,275.01 12/01/2015 223,510.00 171,200.00 52,310.00 45,918.13 12/01/2016 222,030.00 168,600.00 53,430.00 45,294.32 12/01/2017 225,347.50 171,000.00 54,347.50 44,493.78 12/01/2018 222,997.50 170,600.00 52,397.50 41,446.83 12/01/2019 225,437.50 175,000.00 50,437.50 38,546.66 12/01/2020 222,172.50 169,000.00 53,172.50 39,254.06 12/01/2021 223,690.00 173,000.00 50,690.00 36,151.65 12/01/2022 224,567.50 171,600.00 52,967.50 36,489.53 2,440,682.50 1,864,735.56 575,946.94 474,686.40 Savings Summary PV of savings from cash flow 474,686.40 Less: Prior funds on hand ‐528,363.56 Plus: Refunding funds on hand 122,109.87 Net PV Savings 68,432.71 Packet Page 167 of 297 Nov 30, 2011 9:24 pm Prepared by A. Dashen & Associates (Finance 6.022 Edmonds City:2011WS) Page 10 BOND DEBT SERVICE City of Edmonds Water & Sewer Revenue Bonds, 2011 Dated Date 12/29/2011 Delivery Date 12/29/2011 Period Ending Principal Interest Debt Service 12/01/2012 110,000 444,188.33 554,188.33 12/01/2013 145,000 479,450.00 624,450.00 12/01/2014 370,000 476,550.00 846,550.00 12/01/2015 380,000 469,150.00 849,150.00 12/01/2016 390,000 461,550.00 851,550.00 12/01/2017 395,000 453,750.00 848,750.00 12/01/2018 410,000 437,950.00 847,950.00 12/01/2019 420,000 421,550.00 841,550.00 12/01/2020 445,000 404,750.00 849,750.00 12/01/2021 460,000 386,950.00 846,950.00 12/01/2022 480,000 368,550.00 848,550.00 12/01/2023 670,000 349,350.00 1,019,350.00 12/01/2024 695,000 322,550.00 1,017,550.00 12/01/2025 725,000 294,750.00 1,019,750.00 12/01/2026 760,000 258,500.00 1,018,500.00 12/01/2027 800,000 220,500.00 1,020,500.00 12/01/2028 835,000 180,500.00 1,015,500.00 12/01/2029 880,000 138,750.00 1,018,750.00 12/01/2030 925,000 94,750.00 1,019,750.00 12/01/2031 970,000 48,500.00 1,018,500.00 11,265,000 6,712,538.33 17,977,538.33 Packet Page 168 of 297 Ci t y of Ed m o n d s 20 0 1 B LT G O Op t i o n s Op t i o n s fo r Ex t e n d i n g Te r m s of 20 0 1 B Bo n d s Pr i n c i p a l I n t e r e s t D e b t Se r v i c e P r i n c i p a l I n t e r e s t D e b t Se r v i c e S a v i n g s P r i n c i p a l I n t e r e s t D e b t Se r v i c e S a v i n g s P r i n c i p a l I n t e r e s t D e b t Service S a v i n g s 20 1 2 1 1 0 , 0 0 0 $ 72 , 9 2 8 $ 18 2 , 9 2 8 $ 13 0 , 0 0 0 $ 30 , 9 8 8 $ 16 0 , 9 8 8 $ 21 , 9 3 9 $ ‐ $ 33 , 3 0 5 $ 33 , 3 0 5 $ 14 9 , 6 2 3 $ 50 , 0 0 0 $ 48,764$ 98,764 $ 84,164$ 20 1 3 1 1 5 , 0 0 0 67 , 5 3 8 18 2 , 5 3 8 13 5 , 0 0 0 25 , 9 0 8 16 0 , 9 0 8 21 , 6 3 0 13 0 , 0 0 0 28 , 7 5 3 15 8 , 7 5 3 23 , 7 8 5 60 , 0 0 0 41,773 101,773 80,765 20 1 4 1 2 0 , 0 0 0 61 , 6 7 3 18 1 , 6 7 3 13 5 , 0 0 0 24 , 8 2 8 15 9 , 8 2 8 21 , 8 4 5 15 0 , 0 0 0 27 , 7 1 3 17 7 , 7 1 3 3, 9 6 0 60 , 0 0 0 41,293 101,293 80,380 20 1 5 1 2 5 , 0 0 0 55 , 5 5 3 18 0 , 5 5 3 13 5 , 0 0 0 23 , 4 1 0 15 8 , 4 1 0 22 , 1 4 3 15 0 , 0 0 0 26 , 1 3 8 17 6 , 1 3 8 4, 4 1 5 60 , 0 0 0 40,663 100,663 79,890 20 1 6 1 3 5 , 0 0 0 49 , 1 7 8 18 4 , 1 7 8 14 0 , 0 0 0 21 , 6 5 5 16 1 , 6 5 5 22 , 5 2 3 15 5 , 0 0 0 24 , 1 8 8 17 9 , 1 8 8 4, 9 9 0 60 , 0 0 0 39,883 99,883 84,295 20 1 7 1 4 0 , 0 0 0 42 , 2 9 3 18 2 , 2 9 3 14 0 , 0 0 0 19 , 3 4 5 15 9 , 3 4 5 22 , 9 4 8 16 0 , 0 0 0 21 , 6 3 0 18 1 , 6 3 0 66 3 60 , 0 0 0 38,893 98,893 83,400 20 1 8 1 5 0 , 0 0 0 35 , 1 5 3 18 5 , 1 5 3 14 5 , 0 0 0 16 , 5 4 5 16 1 , 5 4 5 23 , 6 0 8 16 5 , 0 0 0 18 , 4 3 0 18 3 , 4 3 0 1, 7 2 3 65 , 0 0 0 37,693 102,693 82,460 20 1 9 1 5 5 , 0 0 0 26 , 9 7 8 18 1 , 9 7 8 14 5 , 0 0 0 13 , 1 3 8 15 8 , 1 3 8 23 , 8 4 0 16 5 , 0 0 0 14 , 5 5 3 17 9 , 5 5 3 2, 4 2 5 65 , 0 0 0 36,166 101,166 80,812 20 2 0 1 6 5 , 0 0 0 18 , 5 3 0 18 3 , 5 3 0 15 5 , 0 0 0 9, 2 9 5 16 4 , 2 9 5 19 , 2 3 5 17 0 , 0 0 0 10 , 1 8 0 18 0 , 1 8 0 3, 3 5 0 65 , 0 0 0 34,443 99,443 84,087 20 2 1 17 5 , 0 0 0 9, 5 3 8 18 4 , 5 3 8 16 0 , 0 0 0 4, 8 0 0 16 4 , 8 0 0 19 , 7 3 8 17 5 , 0 0 0 5, 2 5 0 18 0 , 2 5 0 4, 2 8 8 65 , 0 0 0 32,558 97,558 86,980 20 2 2 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 70 , 0 0 0 30,608 100,608 (100,608) 20 2 3 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 70 , 0 0 0 28,361 98,361 (98,361) 20 2 4 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 75 , 0 0 0 25,995 100,995 (100,995) 20 2 5 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 75 , 0 0 0 23,355 98,355 (98,355) 20 2 6 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 80 , 0 0 0 20,625 100,625 (100,625) 20 2 7 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 80 , 0 0 0 17,641 97,641 (97,641) 20 2 8 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 85 , 0 0 0 14,585 99,585 (99,585) 20 2 9 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 90 , 0 0 0 11,262 101,262 (101,262) 20 3 0 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 90 , 0 0 0 7,662 97,662 (97,662) 20 3 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 95 , 0 0 0 3,981 98,981 (98,981) 1, 3 9 0 , 0 0 0 $ 43 9 , 3 5 8 $ 1, 8 2 9 , 3 5 8 $ 1, 4 2 0 , 0 0 0 $ 18 9 , 9 1 1 $ 1, 6 0 9 , 9 1 1 $ 21 9 , 4 4 7 $ 1, 4 2 0 , 0 0 0 $ 21 0 , 1 3 7 $ 1, 6 3 0 , 1 3 7 $ 19 9 , 2 2 0 $ 1, 4 2 0 , 0 0 0 $ 576,202$ 1,996,202 $ (166,844)$ Cu r r e n t 20 0 1 B Bo n d s Op t i o n 1: Eq u a l Sa v i n g s Op t i o n 2: Fr o n t ‐lo a d e d Sa v i n g s Op t i o n 3: Extended Debt Service A. Da s h e n & As s o c i a t e s 9/16/2011 Pa c k e t Pa g e 16 9 of 29 7 ** N e w D e b t S e r v i c e S c h e d u l e * * (O p ti o n 1 : E q ua l S a v i n g s ) De s c r i p t i o n 20 1 1 Bu d g e t 20 1 1 Es t i m a t e 20 1 2 Bu d g e t 20 1 3 Ou t l o o k 20 1 4 Ou t l o o k 20 1 5 Ou t l o o k 20 1 6 Ou t l o o k 20 1 7 Ou t l o o k 20 1 8 Ou t l o o k 2019 Outlook2020 Outlook2021 Outlook Fu n d 1 2 6 R E E T 1 Be g i n n i n g B a l a n c e 3 5 8 , 6 0 1 3 5 8 , 6 0 1 2 3 8 , 8 1 9 1 5 3 , 8 4 2 1 8 1 , 6 2 3 2 2 5 , 6 4 8 5 9 5 , 9 9 7 9 7 9 , 0 5 2 1 , 3 7 6 , 1 4 1 1 , 7 8 7 , 9 8 3 2 , 2 2 0 , 5 9 1 2 , 6 5 9 , 4 7 9 Re v e n u e Lo c a l R e a l E s t a t e T a x - F i r s t 58 0 , 0 0 0 5 8 0 , 0 0 0 5 9 0 , 0 0 0 6 0 1 , 8 0 0 6 1 3 , 8 3 6 6 2 6 , 1 1 3 6 3 8 , 6 3 5 6 5 1 , 4 0 8 6 6 4 , 4 3 6 6 7 7 , 7 2 5 6 9 1 , 2 7 9 7 0 5 , 1 0 5 In v e s t m e n t I n t e r e s t 0 8 3 0 8 0 0 7 6 9 9 0 8 1 , 1 2 8 2 , 9 8 0 4 , 8 9 5 6 , 8 8 1 8 , 9 4 0 1 1 , 1 0 3 1 3 , 2 9 7 To t a l R e v e n u e 58 0 , 0 0 0 5 8 0 , 8 3 0 5 9 0 , 8 0 0 6 0 2 , 5 6 9 6 1 4 , 7 4 4 6 2 7 , 2 4 1 6 4 1 , 6 1 5 6 5 6 , 3 0 3 6 7 1 , 3 1 7 6 8 6 , 6 6 4 7 0 2 , 3 8 2 7 1 8 , 4 0 2 Ex p e n d i t u r e Miscellaneous 0500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 1 B o n d s , B - P r i n c i p a l 10 5 , 0 0 0 1 0 5 , 0 0 0 1 3 0 , 0 0 0 1 3 5 , 0 0 0 1 3 5 , 0 0 0 1 3 5 , 0 0 0 1 4 0 , 0 0 0 1 4 0 , 0 0 0 1 4 5 , 0 0 0 1 4 5 , 0 0 0 1 5 5 , 0 0 0 1 6 0 , 0 0 0 20 0 7 L t g o B o n d - P r i n c i p a l 16 , 3 8 0 1 6 , 3 8 0 1 7 , 1 6 0 1 7 , 5 5 0 1 8 , 3 3 0 1 9 , 1 1 0 1 9 , 8 9 0 2 0 , 2 8 0 2 1 , 0 6 0 2 1 , 8 4 0 2 3 , 0 1 0 2 3 , 7 9 0 19 9 8 R e f B o n d - P r i n c i p a l 36 0 , 2 9 7 3 6 0 , 2 9 7 3 7 5 , 0 0 3 2 8 6 , 7 6 7 2 9 7 , 7 9 70 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 1 B o n d s , B - I n t e r e s t 77 , 9 6 8 7 7 , 9 6 8 3 0 , 9 8 8 2 5 , 9 0 8 2 4 , 8 2 8 2 3 , 4 1 0 2 1 , 6 5 5 1 9 , 3 4 5 1 6 , 5 4 5 1 3 , 1 3 8 9 , 2 9 5 4 , 8 0 0 20 0 7 L t g o B o n d - I n t e r e s t 13 , 2 9 8 1 3 , 2 9 8 1 2 , 7 0 0 1 2 , 0 7 4 1 1 , 4 3 3 1 0 , 7 6 4 1 0 , 0 6 7 9 , 3 4 1 8 , 5 8 0 7 , 7 9 0 6 , 9 7 1 6 , 0 9 7 Fiscal A g e n t F e e s 0530 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 9 8 R e f B o n d - I n t e r e s t 57 , 1 5 9 5 7 , 1 5 9 4 1 , 8 4 6 2 5 , 7 2 1 1 3 , 1 0 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 Tr a n s f e r T o F u n d 2 3 4 - 2 0 0 2 L T G O 6 9 , 4 8 0 6 9 , 4 8 0 6 8 , 0 8 0 7 1 , 7 6 8 7 0 , 2 2 8 6 8 , 6 0 8 6 6 , 9 4 8 7 0 , 2 4 8 6 8 , 2 9 0 6 6 , 2 8 8 6 9 , 2 1 8 6 6 , 8 9 3 To t a l E x p e n d i t u r e 69 9 , 5 8 2 7 0 0 , 6 1 2 6 7 5 , 7 7 7 5 7 4 , 7 8 8 5 7 0 , 7 1 9 2 5 6 , 8 9 2 2 5 8 , 5 6 0 2 5 9 , 2 1 4 2 5 9 , 4 7 5 2 5 4 , 0 5 6 2 6 3 , 4 9 4 2 6 1 , 5 8 0 En d i n g B a l a n c e 23 9 , 0 1 9 2 3 8 , 8 1 9 1 5 3 , 8 4 2 1 8 1 , 6 2 3 2 2 5 , 6 4 8 5 9 5 , 9 9 7 9 7 9 , 0 5 2 1 , 3 7 6 , 1 4 1 1 , 7 8 7 , 9 8 3 2 , 2 2 0 , 5 9 1 2 , 6 5 9 , 4 7 9 3 , 1 1 6 , 3 0 1 Pa c k e t Pa g e 17 0 of 29 7 ** N e w D e b t S e r v i c e S c h e d u l e * * (O p ti o n 2 : F r o n t - L o a d e d S a v i n g s ) De s c r i p t i o n 20 1 1 Bu d g e t 20 1 1 Es t i m a t e 20 1 2 Bu d g e t 20 1 3 Ou t l o o k 20 1 4 Ou t l o o k 20 1 5 Ou t l o o k 20 1 6 Ou t l o o k 20 1 7 Ou t l o o k 20 1 8 Ou t l o o k 2019 Outlook2020 Outlook2021 Outlook Fu n d 1 2 6 R E E T 1 Be g i n n i n g B a l a n c e 3 5 8 , 6 0 1 3 5 8 , 6 0 1 2 3 8 , 8 1 9 2 8 1 , 5 2 5 3 1 2 , 1 0 0 3 3 8 , 8 9 2 6 9 2 , 0 7 9 1 , 0 5 8 , 0 8 2 1 , 4 3 3 , 2 8 1 1 , 8 2 3 , 5 2 3 2 , 2 3 4 , 8 9 4 2 , 6 5 7 , 9 6 9 Re v e n u e Lo c a l R e a l E s t a t e T a x - F i r s t 58 0 , 0 0 0 5 8 0 , 0 0 0 5 9 0 , 0 0 0 6 0 1 , 8 0 0 6 1 3 , 8 3 6 6 2 6 , 1 1 3 6 3 8 , 6 3 5 6 5 1 , 4 0 8 6 6 4 , 4 3 6 6 7 7 , 7 2 5 6 9 1 , 2 7 9 7 0 5 , 1 0 5 In v e s t m e n t I n t e r e s t 0 8 3 0 8 0 0 1 , 4 0 8 1 , 5 6 0 1 , 6 9 4 3 , 4 6 0 5 , 2 9 0 7 , 1 6 6 9 , 1 1 8 1 1 , 1 7 4 1 3 , 2 9 0 To t a l R e v e n u e 58 0 , 0 0 0 5 8 0 , 8 3 0 5 9 0 , 8 0 0 6 0 3 , 2 0 8 6 1 5 , 3 9 6 6 2 7 , 8 0 7 6 4 2 , 0 9 5 6 5 6 , 6 9 8 6 7 1 , 6 0 2 6 8 6 , 8 4 2 7 0 2 , 4 5 4 7 1 8 , 3 9 4 Ex p e n d i t u r e Mi s c e l l a n e o u s 0 5 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 1 B o n d s , B - P r i n c i p a l 10 5 , 0 0 0 1 0 5 , 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 , 0 0 0 1 5 0 , 0 0 0 1 5 0 , 0 0 0 1 5 5 , 0 0 0 1 6 0 , 0 0 0 1 6 5 , 0 0 0 1 6 5 , 0 0 0 1 7 0 , 0 0 0 1 7 5 , 0 0 0 20 0 7 L t g o B o n d - P r i n c i p a l 16 , 3 8 0 1 6 , 3 8 0 1 7 , 1 6 0 1 7 , 5 5 0 1 8 , 3 3 0 1 9 , 1 1 0 1 9 , 8 9 0 2 0 , 2 8 0 2 1 , 0 6 0 2 1 , 8 4 0 2 3 , 0 1 0 2 3 , 7 9 0 19 9 8 R e f B o n d - P r i n c i p a l 36 0 , 2 9 7 3 6 0 , 2 9 7 3 7 5 , 0 0 3 2 8 6 , 7 6 7 2 9 7 , 7 9 7 00 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 1 B o n d s , B - I n t e r e s t 77 , 9 6 8 7 7 , 9 6 8 3 3 , 3 0 5 2 8 , 7 5 3 2 7 , 7 1 3 2 6 , 1 3 8 2 4 , 1 8 8 2 1 , 6 3 0 1 8 , 4 3 0 1 4 , 5 5 3 1 0 , 1 8 0 5 , 2 5 0 20 0 7 L t g o B o n d - I n t e r e s t 13 , 2 9 8 1 3 , 2 9 8 1 2 , 7 0 0 1 2 , 0 7 4 1 1 , 4 3 3 1 0 , 7 6 4 1 0 , 0 6 7 9 , 3 4 1 8 , 5 8 0 7 , 7 9 0 6 , 9 7 1 6 , 0 9 7 Fi s c a l A g e n t F e e s 0 5 3 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 9 8 R e f B o n d - I n t e r e s t 5 7 , 1 5 9 5 7 , 1 5 9 4 1 , 8 4 6 2 5 , 7 2 1 1 3 , 1 0 3 00 0 0 0 0 0 Tr a n s f e r T o F u n d 2 3 4 - 2 0 0 2 L T G O 6 9 , 4 8 0 6 9 , 4 8 0 6 8 , 0 8 0 7 1 , 7 6 8 7 0 , 2 2 8 6 8 , 6 0 8 6 6 , 9 4 8 7 0 , 2 4 8 6 8 , 2 9 0 6 6 , 2 8 8 6 9 , 2 1 8 6 6 , 8 9 3 To t a l E x p e n d i t u r e 6 9 9 , 5 8 2 7 0 0 , 6 1 2 5 4 8 , 0 9 4 5 7 2 , 6 3 3 5 8 8 , 6 0 4 2 7 4 , 6 2 0 2 7 6 , 0 9 3 2 8 1 , 4 9 9 2 8 1 , 3 6 0 2 7 5 , 4 7 1 2 7 9 , 3 7 9 2 7 7 , 0 3 0 En d i n g B a l a n c e 2 3 9 , 0 1 9 2 3 8 , 8 1 9 2 8 1 , 5 2 5 3 1 2 , 1 0 0 3 3 8 , 8 9 2 6 9 2 , 0 7 9 1 , 0 5 8 , 0 8 2 1 , 4 3 3 , 2 8 1 1 , 8 2 3 , 5 2 3 2 , 2 3 4 , 8 9 4 2 , 6 5 7 , 9 6 9 3 , 0 9 9 , 3 3 3 Pa c k e t Pa g e 17 1 of 29 7 ** N e w D e b t S e r v i c e S c h e d u l e * * ( O p t i o n 3 : E x t e n d e d D e b t S e r v i c e ) De s c r i p t i o n 20 1 1 Bu d g e t 20 1 1 Es t i m a t e 20 1 2 Bu d g e t 20 1 3 Ou t l o o k 20 1 4 Ou t l o o k 20 1 5 Ou t l o o k 20 1 6 Ou t l o o k 20 1 7 Ou t l o o k 20 1 8 Ou t l o o k 20 1 9 Ou t l o o k 20 2 0 Ou t l o o k 20 2 1 Ou t l o o k 20 2 2 Ou t l o o k 2023 Outlook2024 Outlook2025 Outlook2026 Outlook Fu n d 1 2 6 R E E T 1 Be g i n n i n g B a l a n c e 3 5 8 , 6 0 1 3 5 8 , 6 0 1 2 3 8 , 8 1 9 2 1 6 , 0 6 6 3 0 3 , 2 9 3 4 0 6 , 4 6 2 8 3 5 , 4 6 2 1 , 2 8 1 , 4 8 6 1 , 7 4 0 , 5 3 9 2 , 2 1 3 , 0 5 5 2 , 7 0 4 , 7 6 1 3 , 2 1 0 , 9 2 1 3 , 7 3 7 , 7 4 3 4 , 2 7 5 , 7 2 4 4 , 8 3 0 , 4 0 3 5 , 4 0 2 , 9 7 2 5 , 9 9 3 , 8 1 1 Re v e n u e Lo c a l R e a l E s t a t e T a x - F i r s t 58 0 , 0 0 0 5 8 0 , 0 0 0 5 9 0 , 0 0 0 6 0 1 , 8 0 0 6 1 3 , 8 3 6 6 2 6 , 1 1 3 6 3 8 , 6 3 5 6 5 1 , 4 0 8 6 6 4 , 4 3 6 6 7 7 , 7 2 5 6 9 1 , 2 7 9 7 0 5 , 1 0 5 7 1 9 , 2 0 7 7 3 3 , 5 9 1 7 4 8 , 2 6 3 7 6 3 , 2 2 8 7 7 8 , 4 9 2 In v e s t m e n t I n t e r e s t 0 8 3 0 8 0 0 1 , 0 8 0 1 , 5 1 6 2 , 0 3 2 4 , 1 7 7 6 , 4 0 7 8 , 7 0 3 1 1 , 0 6 5 1 3 , 5 2 4 1 6 , 0 5 5 1 8 , 6 8 9 2 1 , 3 7 9 2 4 , 1 5 2 2 7 , 0 1 5 2 9 , 9 6 9 To t a l R e v e n u e 58 0 , 0 0 0 5 8 0 , 8 3 0 5 9 0 , 8 0 0 6 0 2 , 8 8 0 6 1 5 , 3 5 2 6 2 8 , 1 4 5 6 4 2 , 8 1 2 6 5 7 , 8 1 5 6 7 3 , 1 3 9 6 8 8 , 7 9 0 7 0 4 , 8 0 3 7 2 1 , 1 5 9 7 3 7 , 8 9 5 7 5 4 , 9 6 9 7 7 2 , 4 1 5 7 9 0 , 2 4 3 8 0 8 , 4 6 2 Ex p e n d i t u r e Mi s c e l l a n e o u s 0 5 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 1 B o n d s , B - P r i n c i p a l 10 5 , 0 0 0 1 0 5 , 0 0 0 5 0 , 0 0 0 6 0 , 0 0 0 6 0 , 0 0 0 6 0 , 0 0 0 6 0 , 0 0 0 6 0 , 0 0 0 6 5 , 0 0 0 6 5 , 0 0 0 6 5 , 0 0 0 6 5 , 0 0 0 7 0 , 0 0 0 7 0 , 0 0 0 7 5 , 0 0 0 7 5 , 0 0 0 8 0 , 0 0 0 20 0 7 L t g o B o n d - P r i n c i p a l 16 , 3 8 0 1 6 , 3 8 0 1 7 , 1 6 0 1 7 , 5 5 0 1 8 , 3 3 0 1 9 , 1 1 0 1 9 , 8 9 0 2 0 , 2 8 0 2 1 , 0 6 0 2 1 , 8 4 0 2 3 , 0 1 0 2 3 , 7 9 0 2 4 , 5 7 0 2 5 , 7 4 0 2 6 , 5 2 0 2 7 , 6 9 0 2 8 , 8 6 0 19 9 8 R e f B o n d - P r i n c i p a l 36 0 , 2 9 7 3 6 0 , 2 9 7 3 7 5 , 0 0 3 2 8 6 , 7 6 7 2 9 7 , 7 9 7 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 1 B o n d s , B - I n t e r e s t 77 , 9 6 8 7 7 , 9 6 8 4 8 , 7 6 4 4 1 , 7 7 3 4 1 , 2 9 3 4 0 , 6 6 3 3 9 , 8 8 3 3 8 , 8 9 3 3 7 , 6 9 3 3 6 , 1 6 6 3 4 , 4 4 3 3 2 , 5 5 8 3 0 , 6 0 8 2 8 , 3 6 1 2 5 , 9 9 5 2 3 , 3 5 5 2 0 , 6 2 5 20 0 7 L t g o B o n d - I n t e r e s t 13 , 2 9 8 1 3 , 2 9 8 1 2 , 7 0 0 1 2 , 0 7 4 1 1 , 4 3 3 1 0 , 7 6 4 1 0 , 0 6 7 9 , 3 4 1 8 , 5 8 0 7 , 7 9 0 6 , 9 7 1 6 , 0 9 7 5 , 1 9 3 4 , 2 5 9 3 , 2 8 1 2 , 2 3 4 1 , 1 4 0 Fi s c a l A g e n t F e e s 0 5 3 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 9 8 R e f B o n d - I n t e r e s t 57 , 1 5 9 5 7 , 1 5 9 4 1 , 8 4 6 2 5 , 7 2 1 1 3 , 1 0 3 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Tr a n s f e r T o F u n d 2 3 4 - 2 0 0 2 L T G O 6 9 , 4 8 0 6 9 , 4 8 0 6 8 , 0 8 0 7 1 , 7 6 8 7 0 , 2 2 8 6 8 , 6 0 8 6 6 , 9 4 8 7 0 , 2 4 8 6 8 , 2 9 0 6 6 , 2 8 8 6 9 , 2 1 8 6 6 , 8 9 3 6 9 , 5 4 3 7 1 , 9 3 0 6 9 , 0 5 0 7 1 , 1 2 5 6 2 , 9 4 0 To t a l E x p e n d i t u r e 69 9 , 5 8 2 7 0 0 , 6 1 2 6 1 3 , 5 5 3 5 1 5 , 6 5 3 5 1 2 , 1 8 4 1 9 9 , 1 4 5 1 9 6 , 7 8 8 1 9 8 , 7 6 2 2 0 0 , 6 2 3 1 9 7 , 0 8 4 1 9 8 , 6 4 2 1 9 4 , 3 3 8 1 9 9 , 9 1 4 2 0 0 , 2 9 0 1 9 9 , 8 4 6 1 9 9 , 4 0 4 1 9 3 , 5 6 5 En d i n g B a l a n c e 23 9 , 0 1 9 2 3 8 , 8 1 9 2 1 6 , 0 6 6 3 0 3 , 2 9 3 4 0 6 , 4 6 2 8 3 5 , 4 6 2 1 , 2 8 1 , 4 8 6 1 , 7 4 0 , 5 3 9 2 , 2 1 3 , 0 5 5 2 , 7 0 4 , 7 6 1 3 , 2 1 0 , 9 2 1 3 , 7 3 7 , 7 4 3 4 , 2 7 5 , 7 2 4 4 , 8 3 0 , 4 0 3 5 , 4 0 2 , 9 7 2 5 , 9 9 3 , 8 1 1 6 , 6 0 8 , 7 0 7 Pa c k e t Pa g e 17 2 of 29 7 AM-4406 Item #: 5. City Council Meeting Date: 12/06/2011 Time:30 Minutes Submitted By:Rob Chave Department:Planning Review Committee: Community/Development Services Committee Action: Recommend Review by Full Council Type:Action Information Subject Title Public hearing on a potential amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Map that would adjust the boundaries of the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Approve the recommendation of the Planning Board and direct the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance implementing the change (see language changes recommended in Exhibit 1). Note that the Community Services/Development Services Committee recommendation is to consider removing the single family area along 220th Street SW from being within the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center boundary, while also considering the other single family areas. Previous Council Action The City Council held a public hearing on this issue on November 1, 2011, and referred the matter to the Committee for further review. The Committee subsequently recommended that the Council hold a public hearing on removing single family-zoned and designated areas from being within the Activity Center boundary. Narrative In September of 2010, the City Council asked the Planning Board to review the boundaries of the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center during 2011. The specific request was as follows: COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON, TO PLACE REVIEW OF THE MEDICAL ACTIVITY CENTER ON THE 2011 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DOCKET. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. [see Exhibit 4, middle of page 16] The original intent of including nearby small-lot single family areas in the activity centers (both downtown and in the medical area) was to emphasize that single family areas should be considered to be part of walkable, pedestrian-oriented activity areas. In other words, given that Edmonds is dominated by single family development, the point was to indicate that wholesale changes were not necessary to zoning patterns in order to promote mixed use and pedestrian-oriented activity. After holding a public hearing, the Planning Board opted to recommend adding policy language in the plan's discussion of the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center that would further clarify this intent. Exhibit 1 includes shows the text amendment recommended by the Board. The City Council held a public hearing on this issue on November 1, 2011, and referred the matter to Committee for further review. The CS/DS Committee subsequently recommended that the Council hold a Packet Page 173 of 297 Committee for further review. The CS/DS Committee subsequently recommended that the Council hold a public hearing on removing single family-zoned and designated areas from being within the Activity Center boundary, and expressed support for removing these areas. Staff still believes the Planning Board's recommendation is the best course of action, and provides strong protection for single family neighborhoods while providing for positive linkages between these neighborhoods and nearby activity (e.g. offices and commercial areas). However, given the Committee's discussion, Staff recommends that if the Council follows the course recommended by the Committee, that only the single family area along 220th Street SW should be considered for removal from the boundary at this time. This is the area where residents have appeared to support this change, and the lot pattern in this area is less developed and less urban in character when compared to the other more established single family neighborhoods. Removing this area therefore makes some sense, since the primary fear of the residents appears to be worry over being 'targeted' by development interests. Single family areas that have already been subdivided and developed should not have these same concerns. Given the overall concept of the Activity Center -- that single family neighborhoods should be considered to be part of the larger walkable/transit-oriented community -- it would make more sense to consider removing any other single family areas only in the context of the general plan update which is scheduled to be completed by June 2015. Attachments Exhibit 1: Draft Plan Amendment Language Exhibit 2: Existing Plan Language Exhibit 3: Comprehensive Plan Map detail Exhibit 4: Planning Board Minutes Exhibit 5: City Council Minutes Exhibit 6: 11-7-11 CSDS Committee Minutes Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date City Clerk Sandy Chase 12/01/2011 03:39 PM Mayor Dave Earling 12/02/2011 11:11 AM Final Approval Linda Hynd 12/02/2011 11:45 AM Form Started By: Rob Chave Started On: 12/01/2011 Final Approval Date: 12/02/2011 Packet Page 174 of 297 Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center and Highway 99 Corridor The Medical/Highway 99 activity center is intended to encourage the development of a pedestrian and transit oriented area focused on two master planned developments, Stevens Hospital and Edmonds-Woodway High School, with a related high-intensity development corridor along Highway 99. Highway 99 is characterized by a corridor of generally commercial development with less intense uses or designed transitions serving as a buffer between adjacent neighborhoods. In contrast, the overall character of the mixed use activity center is intended to be an intensively developed mixed use, pedestrian-friendly environment, in which buildings are linked by walkways served by centralized parking, and plantings and landscaping promote pedestrian activity and a park-like atmosphere. In addition to the general goals for activity centers, the Medical/Highway 99 activity center is intended to achieve the following goals: A. Goals for the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center.  To expand the economic and tax base of the City of Edmonds by providing incentives for business and commercial redevelopment in a planned activity center;  Provide for an aesthetically pleasing business and residential community consisting of a mixed use, pedestrian-friendly atmosphere of attractively designed and landscaped surroundings and inter-connected development;  Recognize and plan for the distinct difference in opportunities and development character provided by the Highway 99 corridor versus the local travel and access patterns on local streets;  Promote the development of a mixed use area served by transit and accessible to pedestrians;  To provide a buffer between the high-intensity, high-rise commercial areas along SR 99 and the established neighborhoods and public facilities west of 76th Avenue West;  To discourage the expansion of strip commercial development and encourage a cohesive and functional activity center that allows for both neighborhood conservation and targeted redevelopment that includes an appropriate mixes of single family and multiple dwelling units, offices, retail, and business uses, along with public facilities;  To provide a pleasant experience for pedestrians and motorists along major streets and in a planned activity center, and provide a gateway along 212th Street SW into the City of Edmonds;  To provide an integrated network of pedestrian and bicycle circulation that connects within and through the activity center to existing residential areas, the high school, the hospital, and transit services and facilities. Packet Page 175 of 297 Within the activity center, policies to achieve these goals include the following: A.1. Provide street trees, buffers, and landscape treatments which encourage and support an attractive mixed use pattern of development characterized by pedestrian walkways and centralized parking. Use these same features, in concert with site and building design, to provide a transition from higher-intensity mixed use development to nearby single family residential areas. A.2. Provide a more efficient transportation system featuring increased bus service, pedestrian and bicycle routes as well as adequate streets and parking areas. Transit service should be coordinated by transit providers and take advantage of links to future high-capacity transit that develops along corridors such as Highway 99. A.3. Development should be designed for both pedestrian and transit access. A.4. Encourage a more active and vital setting for new retail, office, and service businesses, supported by nearby residents and visitors from other parts of the region. A.5. Support a mix of uses without encroaching into single family neighborhoods. Uses adjoining single family neighborhoods should provide transitions between more intensive uses areas through a combination of building design, landscaping and visual buffering, and pedestrian-scale streetscape design. A.6. Uses adjoining the Highway 99 Corridor should provide more intensive levels of mixed use development, including higher building heights and greater density. However, pedestrian linkages to other portions of the activity center – and adjoining focus areas along the Highway 99 Corridor – should still be provided in order to assist pedestrian circulation and provide access to transit. A.7. In some cases, heavy commercial development (e.g. wholesale or light industrial uses) may still be appropriate where these uses are separated from residential uses. Packet Page 176 of 297 Land Use 61 Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center and Highway 99 Corridor The Medical/Highway 99 activity center is intended to encourage the development of a pedestrian and transit oriented area focused on two master planned developments, Stevens Hospital and Edmonds-Woodway High School, with a related high-intensity development corridor along Highway 99. Highway 99 is characterized by a corridor of generally commercial development with less intense uses or designed transitions serving as a buffer between adjacent neighborhoods. In contrast, the overall character of the mixed use activity center is intended to be an intensively developed mixed use, pedestrian-friendly environment, in which buildings are linked by walkways served by centralized parking, and plantings and landscaping promote pedestrian activity and a park-like atmosphere. In addition to the general goals for activity centers, the Medical/Highway 99 activity center is intended to achieve the following goals: A. Goals for the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center. • To expand the economic and tax base of the City of Edmonds by providing incentives for business and commercial redevelopment in a planned activity center; • Provide for an aesthetically pleasing business and residential community consisting of a mixed use, pedestrian-friendly atmosphere of attractively designed and landscaped surroundings and inter-connected development; • Recognize and plan for the distinct difference in opportunities and development character provided by the Highway 99 corridor versus the local travel and access patterns on local streets; • Promote the development of a mixed use area served by transit and accessible to pedestrians; • To provide a buffer between the high-intensity, high-rise commercial areas along SR 99 and the established neighborhoods and public facilities west of 76th Avenue West; • To discourage the expansion of strip commercial development and encourage a cohesive and functional activity center that allows for redevelopment that mixes multiple dwelling units, offices, retail, and business uses, along with public facilities; • To provide a pleasant experience for pedestrians and motorists along major streets and in a planned activity center, and provide a gateway along 212th Street SW into the City of Edmonds; • To provide an integrated network of pedestrian and bicycle circulation that connects within and through the activity center to existing residential areas, the high school, the hospital, and transit services and facilities. Packet Page 177 of 297 62 Land Use Within the activity center, policies to achieve these goals include the following: A.1. Provide street trees, buffers, and landscape treatments which encourage and support an attractive mixed use pattern of development characterized by pedestrian walkways and centralized parking. Use these same features, in concert with site and building design, to provide a transition from higher-intensity mixed use development to nearby single family residential areas. A.2. Provide a more efficient transportation system featuring increased bus service, pedestrian and bicycle routes as well as adequate streets and parking areas. Transit service should be coordinated by transit providers and take advantage of links to future high-capacity transit that develops along corridors such as Highway 99. A.3. Development should be designed for both pedestrian and transit access. A.4. Encourage a more active and vital setting for new retail, office, and service businesses, supported by nearby residents and visitors from other parts of the region. A.5. Support a mix of uses without encroaching into single family neighborhoods. Uses adjoining single family neighborhoods should provide transitions between more intensive uses areas through a combination of building design, landscaping and visual buffering, and pedestrian-scale streetscape design. A.6. Uses adjoining the Highway 99 Corridor should provide more intensive levels of mixed use development, including higher building heights and greater density. However, pedestrian linkages to other portions of the activity center – and adjoining focus areas along the Highway 99 Corridor – should still be provided in order to assist pedestrian circulation and provide access to transit. A.7. In some cases, heavy commercial development (e.g. wholesale or light industrial uses) may still be appropriate where these uses are separated from residential uses. Packet Page 178 of 297 Land Use 63 B. Goals for the Highway 99 Corridor. Highway 99 occupies a narrow strip of retail and commercial uses bounded by residential neighborhoods. Historically, the corridor has developed in a patchwork of uses, without a clear focus or direction. To improve planning for the future of the corridor, the City established a task force in 2003-2004, resulting in the Highway 99 Enhancement Report and a related economic analysis. During this process, local residents were contacted and asked to participate in two focus groups to identify current problems and future aspirations for the corridor. After this preliminary survey with the residents, the City invited business owners to participate in two charrette meetings to brainstorm ideas and evaluate possible ways to induce redevelopment in the area. After concepts were developed, Berk & Associates, an economics consultant, performed a market assessment of the enhancement strategy. The following diagram summarizes the general approach that resulted from this work: a series of focus areas providing identity and a clustering of activity along the corridor, providing opportunities for improved economic development while also improving linkages between the corridor and surrounding residential areas. Packet Page 179 of 297 64 Land Use With this background in mind, specific goals for the Highway 99 Corridor include: • Improve access and circulation. Access to businesses for both pedestrians and automobiles is difficult along major portions of the corridor. The inability of pedestrians to cross the street and for automobiles to make safe turns is a critical limitation on enhanced development of the corridor into a stronger economic area. Better pedestrian crossings are also needed to support transit use, especially as Highway 99 becomes the focus of future high capacity transit initiatives. • The City should consider the different sections along the corridor and emphasize their unique opportunities rather than view the corridor as an undifferentiated continuum. Street improvements and, in some cases regulatory measures can encourage these efforts. Focus on specific nodes or segments within the corridor. Identity elements such as signage should indicate that the corridor is within the City of Edmonds, and show how connections can be made to downtown and other Edmonds locations. • Encourage development that is sensitive to surrounding neighborhoods. During the City’s Highway 99 Task Force work, residents noted that they needed a number of services that are not presently provided along the corridor. This can provide an opportunity that might be part of a larger business strategy. At the same time, new development should contribute to the residential quality of the adjacent neighborhoods. • Encourage a variety of uses and building types. A variety of uses and building types is appropriate to take advantage of different opportunities and conditions. For example, a tall hotel or large scale retail development may be an excellent addition to the south of the corridor while some small restaurants and convenience shops might cater to hospital employees, trail users and local residents near 216th Street SW. Where needed, the City should consider zoning changes to encourage mixed use or taller development to occur. Within the Highway 99 corridor, policies to achieve these goals include the following: B.1. Provide a system of “focus areas” along the corridor which provide opportunities for clusters of development, or themed development areas. Providing focus points for development is intended to help encourage segmentation of the long Highway 99 corridor into distinct activity nodes which will encourage an Edmonds character and identity for the corridor. Concepts for the different focus areas identified on the previous page include the following: Packet Page 180 of 297 Land Use 65 The “ Hospital Community and Family Retail Center” would be positioned to take advantage of its proximity to the many hospital and related medical services in the area and it would be easily reachable from the Interurban trail. The idea of an “ International District” is organized around the international flavor of development in the area combined with the concepts of visibility and internal connection. Access to the “ District” is marked by specific gateways, and the many focal points for activity in the area (and the new development in between) are connected with a strong pedestrian corr idor. The “ Residential Area Retail Center” concept allows for mixed use development while providing access and services to adjacent residential neighborhoods. Similar mixed use development, linked to surrounding neighborhoods, could occur i n the “ Commercial Redevelopment/Hotels Improvement Area.” In addition, this area has the potential to provide large sites suitable for larger commercial or mixed use development, such as hotels or large retail complexes. Internal circulation between sites is a key to development. Packet Page 181 of 297 66 Land Use B.2. Provide for pedestrian access and circulation within development focus areas, while coordinating with high-capacity transit along the Highway 99 corridor. B.3. Use traffic signals, access management, and rechannelization to facilitate pedestrian, business, and residential access while maintaining traffic capacity along SR 99. The City should work collaboratively with WSDOT on these issues, and to develop a circulation management plan. In some cases the impacts of the traffic signals can be enhanced by access management, rechannelization and other measures. B.4. New development should be high-quality and varied – not generic – and include amenities for pedestrians and patrons. B.5. Protect residential qualities and connect businesses with the local community. Pedestrian connections should be made available as part of new development to connect residents to appropriate retail and service uses. B.6. New development should be allowed and encouraged to develop to the fullest extent possible while assuring that the design quality and amenities provided contribute to the overall character and quality of the corridor. Where intense development adjoins residential areas, site design (including buffers, landscaping, and the arrangement of uses) and building design should be used to minimize adverse impacts on residentially-zoned properties. B.7. Make the corridor more attractive and pedestrian-friendly (e.g., add trees and landscaping) through a combination of development requirements and – when available – public investment. B.8. Route auto traffic to encourage efficient access to new and existing development while minimizing impacts to surrounding residential neighborhoods. B.9. Upgrade the architectural and landscape design qualities of the corridor. Establish uniform signage regulations for all properties within the corridor area which provide for business visibility and commerce while minimizing clutter and distraction to the public. B.10. The City will encourage the retention of commercial uses which provide high economic benefit to the city, such as new auto dealerships, and encourage these types of uses to locate within the Highway 99 Corridor. When these uses are proposed to be located within one of the corridor focus areas, these uses should also comply with the goals and policies outlined for each focus area. B.11. Within the Corridor, highrise nodes should be located to provide for maximum economic use of suitable commercial land. Highrise nodes should be: B.11.a. Supported by adequate services and facilities; Packet Page 182 of 297 Land Use 67 B.11.b. Designed to provide a visual asset to the community through the use of distinctive forms and materials, articulated facades, attractive landscaping, and similar techniques. B.11.c. Designed to take advantage of different forms of access, including automobile, transit and pedestrian access. B.11.d. Designed to provide adequate buffering from lower intensity uses and residential neighborhoods. Master Planned Development Master Planned Developments are areas dominated by a special set of circumstances which allow for a highly coordinated, planned development, with phasing over time. These master plans describe a special purpose and need for the facilities and uses identified, and provide a clear design which fits with the character of their surroundings. The master plans describe the land use parameters and relationships to guide future development on the sites (height, bulk, types and arrangements of uses, access and circulation). All development within areas identified in each master plan shall be consistent with the provisions of the master plan. When located within a designated activity center, development within a master plan area shall be consistent with the goals and policies identified for the surrounding activity center. The following Master Plans are adopted by reference: A. Edmonds-Woodway High School B. Stevens Hospital C. City Park D. Pine Ridge Park E. Southwest County Park F. The Edmonds Crossing project, as identified in the Final EIS for Edmonds Crossing issued on November 10, 2004. In addition to the master plans listed above, master plans can also be implemented through zoning contracts or other implementation actions, rather than being adopted as part of the plan. In these cases, the master plan must still be consistent with the comprehensive plan goals and policies for the area. Packet Page 183 of 297 2 2 0 T H S T S W 2 1 2 T H S T S W B O W D O I N W A Y O N R / W 2 1 0 T H S T S W 2 0 6 T H S T S W 2 2 2 N D S T S W 7 7 T H P L W 8 3 R D A V E W 8 2 N D P L W 2 1 3 T H P L S W 2 0 8 T H P L S W 2 1 5 T H S T S W 7 3 R D P L W 0 7 T H S T S W 2 2 1 S T P L S W W O O D L A K E D R 2 2 0 T H P L S W M A I N S T 8 3 R D A V E W 8 2 N D A V E W 2 1 1 T H P L 8 0 T H A V E W 8 2 N D A V E W 8 1 S T A V E W 7 6 T H A V E W 7 7 T H A V E W 2 0 8 T H S T S W 7 2 N D A V E W H W Y 9 9 6 8 T H A V E W 2 1 2 T H S T S W H W Y 9 9 N W T R A C T I O N R / W 2 1 6 T H S T S W 2 0 9 T H S T S W 2 1 0 T H P L S W 2 0 6 T H P L 2 1 9 T H S T S W 6 8 T H A V E W Y 9 9 2 2 0 T H S T S W 8 0 T H P L W 7 0 T H A V E W 2 1 5 T H S T S W 8 2 N D P L W 2 1 8 T H S T S W 8 0 T H A V E W 7 6 T H A V E W 7 7 T H P L W 7 8 T H A V E W S U M M I T L N W 8 5 T H P L W 2 1 9 T H S T S W 7 8 T H P L W 8 0 T H P L W 2 1 1 T H P L 7 8 T H P L W 2 1 8 T H S T S W 7 8 T H A V E W 2 0 9 T H S T S W 7 7 T H P L W 2 1 3 T H S T S W 7 8 T H A V E W 8 4 T H P L W 8 5 T H P L W 7 4 T H A V E W 2 0 8 T H S T S W 7 8 T H P L W 8 1 S T A V E W 8 2 N D A V E W 2 0 7 T H P L 7 6 T H P L W 8 2 N D P L W 2 1 4 T H P L S W 8 3 R D A V E W 7 9 T H A V E W 2 1 5 T H S T S W 8 6 T H P L W 8 1 S T P L W 2 1 5 T H P L S W 8 3 R D P L 8 6 T H A V E W 2 1 4 T H P L S W 8 2 N D A V E W 7 7 T H A V E W 8 4 T H A V E W 7 2 N D A V E W 2 2 1 S T P L S W 2 1 6 T H S T S W H W Y 9 9 6 3 R D A V E W 2 0 8 T H S T S W 2 1 0 T H S T S W 2 1 2 T H S T S W 6 6 T H A V E W 6 7 T H A V E W N W T R A C T I O N R / W 2 1 4 T H S T S W 2 1 3 T H P 2 1 5 T H S 6 7 T H A V E W 6 6 T H A V E W 2 1 6 T H S T S W 2 1 8 T H S T S W 2 1 9 T H S T S W 6 6 T H A V E W 6 4 T H A V E W 2 2 0 T H S T S W 2 2 2 N D S T 2 2 0 T H P L 2 2 1 S T P L 2 2 1 S T P L S W 6 7 T H P L W A l b i o n Me d i c a l / H i g h w a y 9 9 Ac t i v i t y C e n t e r Fi v e Co r n e r s Ed m o n d s W o o d w a y Hi g h S c h o o l St e v e n s Ho s p i t a l Ch a s e L a k e El e m e n t a r y P ar k Co l l e g e P l a c e Mi d d l e S c h o o l Packet Page 184 of 297 APPROVED Planning Board Minutes September 28, 2011 Page 8 Board Member Johnson noted that $20,000 was identified in 2012 for a Transportation Plan update. Mr. Chave explained that it is time for the City to review future land use patterns in preparation for the next Comprehensive Plan update. This money would be used to hire a consultant to help staff extend the projections in the Transportation Plan out to 2035 and perhaps beyond. However, the update will not involve reworking the policies. VICE CHAIR REED MOVED THAT THE BOARD FORWARD THE DRAFT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN AND DRAFT CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN (FILE NUMBER AMD20110006) TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL BASED ON THE COMMENTS MADE BY THE BOARD. BOARD MEMBER CLOUTIER SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. PUBLIC HEARING ON POTENTIAL AMENDMENT TO THE CITY’S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP ADJUSTING THE BOUNDARIES OF THE MEDICAL/HIGHWAY 99 ACTIVITY CENTER TO REMOVE EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY DESIGNATED AREAS FROM THE ACTIVITY CENTER (FILE NUMBER AMD20100024) Mr. Chave reviewed that at the end of 2010, the City Council asked the Board to review the boundaries of the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center during 2011. The issue was brought forward when a property owner proposed the idea of rezoning single-family zoned property along 220th Street. The subject property was located within the boundaries of the activity center, and nearby residential property owners expressed opposition to the change. These property owners mistakenly thought that because the subject property was located within the activity center, it was presumed that the zoning could be changed. Mr. Chave recalled that at a previous meeting, the Board discussed that the intent of including nearby small-lot single-family areas in both the Downtown and Medical/Highway 99 Activity Centers was to emphasize that single-family areas could be considered to be part of walkable, pedestrian-oriented activity areas. The point was to indicate that wholesale changes are not necessary to zoning patterns in order to promote mixed-use and pedestrian-oriented activity. Downtown Edmonds is a perfect example of this concept in that there are numerous single-family residential homes clustered around the commercial and multi-family residential areas, and there is a lot of pedestrian activity. The City is hoping the same thing will occur in the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center as redevelopment takes place. Mr. Chave emphasized that including single-family residential properties in the activity center does not mean that the zoning is expected to change. In fact, he reminded the Board that the City Council recently made the decision to reclassify properties on 216th Street (within the activity center) from mixed-use to single-family residential. This action argues for the integrity of having single-family residential properties included in the activity center. Mr. Chave said staff is recommending that the current activity center boundaries be maintained to include single-family residential properties. Instead, staff is proposing that the policy statements be amended to assure that the overall intent is clear. He reviewed the current activity center boundaries. Chair Lovell summarized that staff is recommending the policy statements be amended to make it clear that single-family residential properties can be located within the activity center without being threatened. The boundary would not be changed. NO ONE WAS PRESENT IN THE AUDIENCE. THEREFORE, THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Chair Lovell noted that the policy statements talk about encouraging the appropriate mixture of uses and neighborhood cohesiveness. They also talk about pedestrian corridors and other elements to encourage walkability. However, none of these issues were addressed by the new Dick’s Restaurant that was recently completed. Mr. Chave explained that not a lot can be done with a small project of this type, but the Highway 99 Task Force is currently talking about ideas for encouraging transit-oriented development for a larger area with connections to other areas of the activity center. Chair Lovell asked if the hospital has indicated support for the current activity center boundaries and the proposed amendments to the policy statements. Mr. Chave said the hospital campus is already specifically identified in the activity center. If the hospital wants to alter surrounding uses, they would have to approach the City with a request to change the Packet Page 185 of 297 APPROVED Planning Board Minutes September 28, 2011 Page 9 Comprehensive Plan, just like any other property owner. He said he does not believe the proposed change would impact the hospital. Vice Chair Reed observed that it is helpful to view the Zoning Map and Comprehensive Plan Map side by side so the sequence of zoning is evidence. He summarized that the zoning within the activity center is diverse. Mr. Chave agreed and explained that the hallmark of mixed-use development is that it does not mean a single type of development or zone. It means a mixture of zones and uses, with features and connections that work together to create the environment. It is important to emphasize that single-family residential uses are not exclusive of their surroundings, but are part of them. He clarified that changing the zoning of a single-family residential property would require not only a rezone, but a Comprehensive Plan amendment, as well. This would be true regardless of whether the property is located within the activity center or not. Chair Lovell asked if residents of the Esperance area are allowed to comment on the proposed amendment. Mr. Chave answered that all citizens, regardless of whether they are residents of Edmonds, are allowed to comment at any public hearing. Vice Chair Reed recalled that a huge crowd attended a Planning Board Meeting at which a property owner presented a proposal to rezone a pocket of single-family residential property located within the activity center. Mr. Chave clarified that he is not sure why the issue came before the Board because no rezone application was filed. The property owner was actually asking the City Council for an exception to the deadline for submitting Comprehensive Plan amendment proposals. The City Council denied the property owner’s request, and the issue never came up again. Board Member Tibbott asked why the Five Corners area was not included in the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center. Mr. Chave answered that because of its location and its unique characteristics, staff believes it should be treated as its own activity center. Board Member Johnson asked about the status of the Urban Center designation relative to Sound Transit’s evaluation of routes. Mr. Chave explained that Urban Center is a regional planning designation that has extremely high criteria in terms of population density, employment density, etc. It is possible to consider an Urban Center designation for at least a portion of the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center, but it would require extreme densities. He acknowledged that achieving an Urban Center density would give the City the ability to target regional transportation dollars; but at this point, the Highway 99 Task Force is considering taking a smaller step by looking at transit-oriented development in a couple of nodes along the Highway 99 Corridor. He added that it would be costly to perform the studies necessary to obtain an Urban Center designation. He concluded that while an Urban Center designation is not beyond the realm of possibilities, the Highway 99 Task Force believes that transit-oriented development makes more sense given the current demand. BOARD MEMBER CLOUTIER MOVED THAT THE BOARD FORWARD THE POLICY AMENDMENTS CONTAINED IN EXHIBIT 1 (FILE NUMBER AMD20100024) TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL. BOARD MEMBER TIBBOTT SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. REVIEW OF EXTENDED AGENDA Mr. Chave announced that Strategic Planning Meetings have been scheduled for the 3rd Tuesday of each month during the City Council’s regular meetings. Mr. Chave reported that Mr. Lien is working to obtain a formalized response from the Department of Ecology that they will extend the deadline for completion of the Shoreline Master Program as long as the City can show they are making progress. He also announced that information related to the Shoreline Master Program can be accessed from the new City website, which will be up and running soon. Vice Chair Reed reported that he is currently reviewing the draft article prepared by Board Member Stewart to describe the Shoreline Master Program Update process and identify how the community can get involved. Once he finishes his review, Packet Page 186 of 297 APPROVED Planning Board Minutes August 24, 2011 Page 14 Mr. Lien summarized that staff will continue to work through and revise the regulations in ECDC 24, update and finalize the restoration plan, and update and finalize the cumulative impact analysis. Once a draft SMP is available, the Board will begin the public outreach process. He recalled that Board Member Stewart has prepared a press release to notify the public of the SMP Update. City staff is working to update the City’s website, which includes a direct link to the SMP Project. A SEPA review must be done, and a 60-day notice must be posted. The Planning Board will continue to hold workshop discussions and provide direction to staff. Public hearings will be conducted at both the Planning Board and City Council levels. Board Member Stewart recommended that the Shoreline Bulk and Dimensional Standard Table (ECDC 24.40.090) be amended so the shore setback for the Urban Mixed Use III Environment is set at the more conservative range of 35 feet rather than the proposed 25 feet. She said she would like the setback even greater than 35 feet, but given the sensitive environment and the fact that it is changeable, it would be wise to have a minimum 35-foot setback requirement. Board Member Johnson thanked Executive Director McChesney, Commissioner Block and Keeley O’Connell for providing valuable input to the Commission. Their comments helped her understand the process and view the regulations in a practical environment. Ms. O’Connell clarified that she is just a single representative of Friends of the Edmonds Marsh. She said she would like to take the Board’s discussion to the entire committee for feedback before providing a formal response. She said that Friends of the Edmonds Marsh is concerned about finding the appropriate balance between public access and protecting the environment. She acknowledged that without public interaction, the desire to protect the habitat would not be as strong. On the other hand, overuse can significantly impact habitat values. She reiterated that the marsh is an extremely rare habitat remaining in Puget Sound and is absolutely essential to the recovery of salmon. It also provides essential habitat for Blue Heron, which were significantly impacted by the condominium development and are just coming back to the area. Even in its current condition, the marsh is an extremely diverse and important habitat. Restoring it to allow salmon back is vital to the recovery plan for Puget Sound. Vice Chair Reed referred to the draft press release that was prepared by Board Member Stewart. The news release is intended to inform the public of the Board’s work on the SMP Update. It could also be added to the City’s website. He suggested Board Members forward input regarding the draft press release to Board Member Stewart via email. He volunteered to meet with Board Member Stewart to summarize the main points and finalize the press release. Board Member Clarke referred to an email communication the Board Members received from Council Member Petso. At the bottom of the email was a reference about not having the City Council email back and forth since that would constitute a meeting. He asked if this same policy would apply to the Board. Vice Chair Reed said that is why he suggested that Board Members email their input directly to Board Member Stewart. He cautioned against sending the individual comments to all Board Members since this could constitute a meeting. The Board took a short break at 9:48 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 9:56 p.m. REVIEW OF MEDICAL/HIGHWAY 99 ACTIVITY CENTER BOUNDARY Mr. Chave said the Staff Report included minutes from the City Council meeting where the City Council asked the Planning Board to review the boundaries of the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center as part of the 2011 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket. He explained that the original intent of including nearby small-lot, single-family residential areas in the activity centers (both downtown and the medical area) was to emphasize that single-family areas could be considered part of walkable, pedestrian-oriented activity areas that involve a variety of uses. He advised that it was never the City’s intent that all development within the boundaries for the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center is supposed to be the same. The intent was to illustrate to the powers that be at the regional and county level that you don’t have to just have multi-family and mixed-use development in order to have walkable neighborhoods. This approach actually encourages walkable pedestrian connections between the residential areas and other parts of the activity centers. However, some single-family residential property owners now have the misunderstanding that their properties are destined to be rezoned. Mr. Chave referred to a situation where a developer expressed an interest in purchasing a single-family residential property within the southwestern corner of the activity center. Their plan was to change the Comprehensive Plan to allow the property to be rezoned to a commercial designation. Just because the property is within the activity center boundary does not mean it can be rezoned. He emphasized that a Comprehensive Plan amendment would be required in order to change the Packet Page 187 of 297 APPROVED Planning Board Minutes August 24, 2011 Page 15 zoning on a parcel that is identified on the Comprehensive Plan Map as single-family residential. He further emphasized that changing the boundaries would not change a single-family residential property’s ability to rezone. If the boundaries are redrawn to exclude the single-family residential properties from the activity center, a rezone would still require a Comprehensive Plan amendment. Whether or not the boundaries are changed, Mr. Chave said this review is helpful to get the message out that single-family residential zones can work in mixed-use, pedestrian-oriented activity centers. He recommended the Board conduct a public hearing to gather input. As part of the hearing, he would like an opportunity explain the reasons for including small-lot, single-family residential areas in activity centers. Board Member Cloutier suggested it would be helpful to explain what the intent of the activity center designation and then review the boundary based on what it is supposed to do. As an aside, it could be pointed out that the boundaries have no effect on the underlying zoning. Mr. Chave said that the activity center boundaries were intended to identify areas within the City where future growth and change was presumed to happen in the future, but restrict the growth to a certain range and mixture of uses. Activity within the mixed-use areas is likely to intensify, but the single-family areas are not expected to change. The point is to make connections between the residential areas and mixed-use commercial areas. He suggested the Board could review the policy statement and perhaps add a phrase to reinforce the idea that single-family residential can be part of the mix and multi-family residential development is not necessary to create walkable neighborhoods. Board Member Johnson said it appears the activity center extends further south on Highway 99. She suggested that staff provide a map at the public hearing to illustrate the entire activity center boundary. Mr. Chave agreed but noted that the City Council’s specific discussion was focused on the residential areas. Board Member Clarke asked staff to provide background information on the single-family residential properties that are located on 215th Street Southwest adjacent to the hospital. Mr. Chave replied that Jim Underhill, representing his small neighborhood, approached the City with a Comprehensive Plan amendment request to change the land use designation for the properties along 215th Street Southwest. The Planning Board forwarded a recommendation to the City Council not to make the change, but the City Council ultimately decided to approve the Comprehensive Plan change to designate this small area as single-family residential. He suggested the Board could argue that the City Council has already concluded that single-family residential works within an activity center. Board Member Johnson said there was a similar situation in the City of Bellevue where a small, cohesive single-family residential neighborhood was located next to Overlake Hospital. The entire neighborhood decided to sell their properties to the hospital. This involved a long public process. Mr. Chave said he would not rule out the possibility that a group of property owners would make this decision, but there are no plans to do so at this time. Board Member Johnson recalled that undeveloped parcels along 220th Street Southwest were the subject of another application. Mr. Chave noted that 220th Street is the southern boundary line of the activity center. A property owner on 220th Street approached the City with an application to rezone property that was not adjacent to the existing multi- family/commercial zones. This application raised neighborhood concern. The applicant asked for an exception to the rule that limits Comprehensive Plan amendments to once per year, and the City Council declined to entertain the amendment. Vice Chair Reed asked if staff has any idea when Swedish Edmonds Hospital will provide information regarding their proposed long-range plans. Mr. Chave said the hospital has had preliminary discussions with staff about long-range planning, but their focus now is on getting their current projects done. He agreed to check with Mr. Clifton about when the hospital’s long-range plans might come forward. He reminded the Board that the hospital’s current master plan was adopted in the late 1990’s, and it is due for an update. Mr. Chave referred to Activity Center Policy A.5, which calls for activity centers to support a mixture of uses without encroaching into single-family neighborhoods. This includes the single-family neighborhoods both within and outside of the activity center. He emphasized that wholesale changes are not necessary to zoning patterns in order to promote mixed-use and pedestrian-oriented activities. Hopefully, this assurance can be emphasized at the public hearing. Board Member Johnson said many of the people that opposed the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment idea lived across the street in Esperance. She asked if the City should coordinate their land uses in the activity center to be consistent Packet Page 188 of 297 APPROVED Planning Board Minutes August 24, 2011 Page 16 with those of the County. Mr. Chave replied that most of the County’s commercial development is also located along Highway 99, but their residential densities are generally more intense. Vice Chair Reed announced that the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center Boundaries is scheduled for a public hearing on September 28th. Staff is recommending that the Board reinforce the benefits of including single-family residential zones as part of the activity center. They could also come up with new language in the Comprehensive Plan to further emphasize the variety of uses that can exist in an activity center. Mr. Chave suggested that two options could be advertised for the public hearing: retain the current boundaries and acknowledge that single-family residential fits within the activity center and is protected by existing policies or eliminate the single-family residential properties from the activity center. Board Member Clarke noted that most of the communities within the Puget Sound area have accommodated health care related expansion by creating specific zoning, master plans, etc. The hospital is now becoming landlocked by other uses that are not medical related. He questioned how the zone could be expanded to encourage additional medical uses. Mr. Chave suggested when the hospital approaches the Board to discuss their long-range plan, the Board could ask them to identify what the City could do to further their long-range plans and what they see as far as surrounding development needs versus what might happen on their campus proper. This would give the Board an idea of what they should focus the discussion on. Hopefully, this extensive master plan update will occur within the next few years. He reminded the Board that the City is required to complete a major Comprehensive Plan update in 2014. Board Member Johnson said she attended the Citizens Economic Development Committee meeting where representatives from Swedish Edmonds Hospital provided a presentation. She learned that the hospital owns numerous properties such as the Value Village property. Board Member Clarke pointed out that Top Foods and Dicks Drive-In are located at the southwest corner of the activity center so the hospital cannot expand to the south. They cannot expand to the north either, and there is only limited property to the east. They can’t expand west because of the high school. Board Member Johnson suggested that when the Board reviews the Comprehensive Plan update, they can also look at the auxiliary land use needs. A hospital generates all types of support such as doctor’s offices, imaging facilities, and medical supply stores. It is important to ensure there is adequate land available for redevelopment or these opportunities will go elsewhere when the demand increases. Vice Chair Reed summarized that the Board’s options are to adjust the lines so that the single-family residential areas are located outside the activity center. Another option would be to retain the existing boundaries. He suggested the Board move forward with a public hearing to allow citizens to comment on the two options. He noted there are additional single-family residential neighborhoods located on the southern boundary of the activity center. He questioned if the boundary should also be redrawn to exclude these other small single-family residential areas. Mr. Chave agreed that would be appropriate. Board Member Cloutier suggested that rather than adjusting the boundaries, the activity center language could be amended to make the intent clearer. Mr. Chave agreed to suggest amendments to the activity center language to clarify the reasons for including single-family residential within the activity center. REVIEW OF EXTENDED AGENDA Vice Chair Reed referred the Board to the extended agenda. Mr. Chave noted that he would not be available to attend the special meeting the Board scheduled for September 7th. The Board’s September 14th meeting was cancelled so that Board Members could attend the kick off meeting for the Strategic Plan. He suggested the Board cancel the special meeting since the City has more time to complete the SMP update than originally anticipated. The Board agreed to cancel the special meeting as recommended by staff. Mr. Chave recalled that in the past, staff has provided a presentation to the Board regarding the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) prior to the public hearing. He noted that the public hearing is scheduled for September 28th, so September 7th would be the only opportunity for staff to provide a preview. The Board agreed that staff could provide written information by September 14th for the Board to review in preparation for the public hearing on September 28th. The Board could forward questions to staff, and staff could provide a response on September 28th prior to the public hearing. Packet Page 189 of 297 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 7, 2010 Page 12 decided that given the economic development direction from the Council, it should be considered. The Planning Board’s consideration resulted in the recommendation provided to the City Council. Council President Bernheim asked who suggested the categorical exemption for 40 parking spaces, 12,000 square foot building and 20 units? Mr. Lien stated it was staff’s suggestion. The Planning Board requested staff present proposals; that was one of several proposals considered by the Planning Board. Council President Bernheim referred to Section 20.15A.130.E.3 that states “The applicant’s proposed mitigation measures, clarifications, changes or conditions must be in writing and must be specific.” He expressed concern with the proposed additional language, “For example, proposals to “control noise” or “prevent stormwater runoff” are inadequate, whereas proposals to “muffle machinery to X decibel” or “construct 200-foot stormwater retention pond at Y location” are adequate.” Mr. Lien answered that language was taken from the model ordinance. Council President Bernheim referred to a section that states the City shall share the EIS consultant rather than the City having sole authority. Mr. Lien answered that was also taken from the model ordinance. Council President Bernheim asked why this much time was being spent on the amendment if it would have only impacted 2 projects in the past 25 years? Mr. Lien answered he was surprised by the number of projects that would not be exempt by the proposal. The Planning Board recommended this amendment as part of the SEPA update. Councilmember Buckshnis asked how long it took to complete a SEPA checklist. Mr. Lien answered it depends on the complexity of the project; it could take one to a few hours depending on the person’s familiarity with the project and how much information is included. Councilmember Buckshnis commented in view of all the other requirements, completing a checklist would not be much more burdensome. Mr. Lien answered the checklist was only part of the process. SEPA adds to the permit “hoops” a developer would need to go through. The Comprehensive Plan addresses streamlining the permit process. This was one thing that could be done to streamline the permit process. Mayor Cooper opened the public participation portion of the public hearing. Colleen McDonald, Edmonds, a resident of unincorporated Esperance within 300 feet of the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center, expressed her opposition to the proposed changes to the exemption thresholds for the Activity Center area. One of the goals for the Medical Activity Center in the City’s Comprehensive Plan is to avoid encroaching into single family neighborhoods; this proposed change would do just that. While the proposed change would only affect a small number of projects according to planning staff, the magnitude of the increase is substantial for those living next to a project; 4 houses to 20 houses, 40,000 square feet to 12,000 square feet for commercial building, and 20 parking spaces to 40 parking spaces. She pointed a large residential neighborhood was currently included in the Medical Activity Center and sections of the Center border other neighborhoods. She supported development in appropriate locations and would be willing to consider changes if there were a way to appeal an exemption; according to the current wording, an exemption was final and there was no opportunity for appeal. Approving this change would send a message to residents in neighborhood within the Medical Activity Center that commercial development was more important than preserving neighborhoods. She questioned the proposal to expand the threshold to the maximum allowed, commenting that may be appropriate for a large city but not for Edmonds. She urged the Council to vote against the proposed change in the interest of the families who live in the targeted areas. Todd Cloutier, Edmonds, commented the flexible thresholds could be omitted and the remaining changes adopted without any noticeable impact. He commented on the inappropriate use of SEPA to control development when the intent of SEPA is environmental protection. The City controls Packet Page 190 of 297 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 7, 2010 Page 13 development via the development code not by misapplication of environmental concerns to achieve development goals. He acknowledged there were real development concerns in the Medical Activity Center area and there are numerous single family residences in that area. The area needs to be reviewed in more detail, an issue separate from this SEPA proposal. A recent proposal for a large medical facility in the Medical Activity Center zone located within a residential neighborhood highlighted the problem with the boundaries of the Medical Activity Center. SEPA is not the correct tool to stop that development; the development code is. The Planning Board recommended tailoring the SEPA review level to the area, areas with proposed raised thresholds are completely built out and the environment is already understood and development regulations prevent doomsday development regulations. The expected impact of changes to the flexible thresholds is minimal. SEPA checklists are not a large burden and if there is an environmental concern, it should be addressed. He recommended adoption of the proposed SEPA changes with the exception of the new flexible thresholds. To address the real development problems in the Medical Activity Center, he recommended a reassessment of the boundaries of that area in the Comprehensive Plan as well as a review of the zoning in that area. He voiced a similar concern along Highway 99, commenting that although Highway 99 was appropriately zoned, the areas directly adjacent should be considered as a transition area. Joe St. Laurent, stated he represents James Klug, the majority land owner on this block within the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center. He relayed Mr. Klug’s concurrence with Ms. McDonalds’s and Mr. Cloutier’s comments. He stated Mr. Klug’s opposition to the proposed changes in the flexible thresholds. The neighborhood within the 200th Avenue West, 80th Avenue West, and 76th Avenue West area is a prosperous middle class neighborhood. Mr. Klug is a majority land owner on the block proposed to be developed by Kruger Clinic, Blue Star and Tony Shapiro into a 4-story, 30,000 square foot mixed commercial use medical building. This project is not a minor intrusion into the neighborhood; it will have a major impact on an area already impacted by traffic, drainage and congestion issues. It appears the City is trying to push development of this area and eliminate the middle class and affordable housing in this area for commercial enterprises that may provide minimal tax revenue to the City. If a project is exempt from SEPA, he wanted to ensure that due process was available for citizens to voice their concerns and participate in the process as well as the ability to appeal any decision. Marian Bacon, Edmonds, a resident on 220th for 48 years, explained 220th is very busy and a main corridor to Edmonds and she feared commercial development in their neighborhood would increase traffic volumes. Her neighborhood is a residential area and once businesses begin to move in, historically there is more than one business. Businesses locating in their neighborhood will reduce home values. She asked whether any Councilmember would be willing to have a commercial building across the street from their home. She concurred with the comments made by the previous speakers. Cathy Lester, Edmonds, a resident in the middle of the Activity Center, encouraged the Council to vote against the SEPA exemption in the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center. She pointed out the diversity of neighborhoods in the Activity Center that includes many single family residential homes. A blanket exemption for larger developments is not feasible in an area where there is such diversity. The larger a development proposal is, 20 homes versus 4 homes, 12,000 square feet versus 4,000 square feet, the more important it is to have a thorough review of the project and SEPA is an integral part of the process. If as the case study provided by staff states, SEPA likely would not significantly add to the review process for the formal subdivision, she suggested keeping the review process as it currently exists. She questioned the compelling reason for adopting the SEPA exemption for these two areas. She did not support any reduction in the process or public notice for development of any size. She was also uncomfortable with leaving the Department of Ecology out of the process which the exemption would do. Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, recommended the Council not approve the proposed exemptions, pointing out the benefit to the developer versus the cost to Edmonds citizens was not balanced. Greater harm was possible to the environment and citizens’ right to participate under the proposed exemption. Changes in Packet Page 191 of 297 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 7, 2010 Page 14 the Highway 99 Corridor zoning allowed nearly unlimited development; however, there are residential areas close to Highway 99 that are affected. He suggested the case study for the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center was not the correct study; the medical center and accompanying parking lot would have been a more appropriate case study. He referred to Council President Bernheim’s question regarding how this proposal originated, envisioning it was staff-driven or it was simply change for the sake of change. He suggested the number of regulations referred to in the case study created the delay in the permit process, not SEPA. Rich Senderoff, Edmonds, pointed out comments regarding the Medical Activity Center highlight concerns with the borders of that zone. He agreed with Mr. Cloutier’s suggestion to reassess the boundaries of the Medical Activity Center as well as the zoning within that area and suggested that be done before the SEPA thresholds were changed. Bruce Witenberg, Edmonds, one of two citizen representatives on the Highway 99 Task Force for Economic Development and one of seventeen commissioners on the Economic Development Commission, stated he was not speaking on either group’s behalf but as a citizen who lives in the Aurora Marketplace Neighborhood near Highway 99. He supported intelligent economic development throughout the City. He did not support economic development that did not take into consideration the impact of development on long established neighborhoods. He supported the comments made in an email from Jim Underhill, his citizen colleague on the Highway 99 Task Force as well as the comments of Ms. McDonald and others in her neighborhood who spoke against the proposed changes. He urged the Council to build in protections for single family neighborhoods that surround Highway 99 and the Medical Activity Center before embarking on a relaxation of regulations that could adversely affect long established neighborhoods. Appropriate development on Highway 99 and in the Medical Activity Center should be permitted but as that development begins to encroach on and impact surrounding neighborhoods, neighborhood protections should be in place to appropriately lessen the encroachment and impact. Hearing no further comment, Mayor Cooper closed the public participation portion of the public hearing. Councilmember Wilson asked whether a change to the Comprehensive Plan needed to be initiated by the Council or citizens. Mr. Lien answered it could come from the Council or citizens. The deadline to submit a proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment is December 31. To place an item on the docket for next year, it would need to be submitted by December 31, 2010. Councilmember Wilson asked whether the Council could request an emergency amendment be expedited this year. Mr. Lien answered it would be difficult to complete a Comprehensive Plan change by yearend. Councilmember Wilson asked whether the Council should give the Planning Board specific direction to consider the boundaries of the Medical Activity Center. Mr. Lien explained that was an issue separate from the proposed SEPA update under discussion. If the City Council chose, they could provide policy direction to the Planning Board to consider the boundaries of the Medical Activity Center. With regard to how this proposal originated, Councilmember Wilson recalled an April 21, 2009 meeting when 65 citizens on the Levy Review Committee stated, 1) we need a levy, and 2) to avoid a future levy, the City needs to work on economic development. In addition, the Council passed a resolution creating an Economic Development Commission. Within that context, it was reasonable that the Planning Board and staff would look for ways to expedite economic development. It is now 14-16 months later, there are three new Councilmembers and a new Mayor. He appreciated staff and the Planning Board asking the question, commenting it was now up to the Council to make a decision. Council President Bernheim expressed concern that major policy changes were included in the draft along with updates that were technical corrections. The proposed change to the SEPA threshold seemed like a very low priority but has consumed a great deal of staff and Planning Board time. He preferred that Packet Page 192 of 297 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 7, 2010 Page 15 planning staff work on green building codes, incentives for development based on energy efficiency, preservation of view corridors, etc. He did not support the repeal of environmental safeties to facilitate development which is what this sounded like to him. He did not support eliminating environmental policy procedures for an entire class of development in the name of economic development. Because Highway 99 and the Medical Activity Center are economic development zones did not mean they should be exempt from environmental protections. He preferred the entire City be subject to SEPA review. Council President Bernheim expressed concern that this amount of work had been done with only one presentation to the Community Services/Development Services Committee and no request for guidance from the Committee. The only City Council involvement following the presentation to the Committee was the presentation staff provided in July. He did not want the Planning Board to view this as another effort on which the Council did not act. He did not want the message to be that the Council was interested in promoting economic development by repealing environmental regulations. He acknowledged many of the technical updates were non-controversial. Councilmember Plunkett agreed the motive for the proposal was as Councilmember Wilson described but in this case the Planning Board got it wrong. He would have preferred the Planning Board bring the policy issue of whether to increase the SEPA threshold to the Council prior to providing a recommendation on the updates for consistency along with a change in the policy. That would have achieved both objectives, 1) the technical update, and 2) determining whether the Council was interested in pursuing an increase in the SEPA threshold. Councilmember Petso suggested staff return the proposal to the Council with the technical corrections and without the change in the flexible thresholds. Mr. Lien clarified the Council was not interested in repealing the 500 cubic yards that has applied throughout the City for 25 years, only the Activity Center and the Highway 99 corridor. Councilmember Petso agreed, expressing her intent to leave the policy thresholds as they are and make the other technical updates to better conform to the model ordinance. She was not proposing a change to the grading threshold. COUNCILMEMBER PETSO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, TO ASK STAFF TO BRING BACK THE SEPA UPDATES WITHOUT THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE FLEXIBLE THRESHOLD. Councilmember Peterson concurred with Councilmember Wilson’s explanation that direction for this review came from the Council as a result of the Levy Review Committee’s recommendation and the formation of an Economic Development Commission. The Council has told staff and citizen groups to look for positive economic development efforts. He emphasized the zoning would not change under the proposal to increase the SEPA threshold; SEPA is a minor part of a development proposal. As an environmentalist, he supports SEPA but wants to ensure citizens are aware that it is the development code and zoning that protects single family neighborhoods, not SEPA. He recalled the proposal by the Kruger Clinic would have required an extensive review; SEPA review would not have prevented that development. He clarified neither staff, the Planning Board nor the Council was interested in radically changing policy; the policy is in the zoning code and development code, not in the SEPA regulations. He expressed his support for the motion. Councilmember Plunkett clarified he did not mean that the Planning Board should not explore things, he was suggesting the process was wrong when major policy changes did not come to the Council first before the Planning Board spent time on it. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Packet Page 193 of 297 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 7, 2010 Page 16 Councilmember Wilson suggested redefining the boundaries of the Medical Activity Center as part of the 2011 Comprehensive Plan docket. He recalled the overwhelming lesson at the time of the Kruger Clinic’s proposal was that the Medical Activity Center was poorly defined which created conflicts between the City’s vision for the area and how it was described in the Comprehensive Plan. Councilmember Petso suggested the Community Services/Development Services Committee discuss a Comprehensive Plan amendment at their next meeting and return to Council with a plan of action. Mr. Snyder suggested a motion to docket review of the language and limits of the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center in next year’s Comprehensive Plan amendment. Councilmember Wilson clarified the Council could docket a proposed question without an answer to the question. Mr. Snyder answered yes, explaining it kept all the options open. Councilmembers Peterson and Petso expressed support for docketing review of the language and limits of the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center. COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON, TO PLACE REVIEW OF THE MEDICAL ACTIVITY CENTER ON THE 2011 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DOCKET. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Natalie Shippen, Edmonds, reiterated her question, how the ferry system plans to spend $26 million in Edmonds and why the eight elected officials in Edmonds do not know how those funds will be spent. She suspected the reason elected officials did not know the answer was because the elected officials have never asked the ferry system that question; the email Mr. Clifton sent to the ferry system stated Ms. Shippen was asking the question. The ferry system’s response has been the funds are a placeholder. Next, she asserted the City had never asked the ferry system what one improvement project would be built with the $26 million. She urged the Mayor and Council to ask the ferry system what the $26 million would be spent on. To the comment that this is far in the future, she pointed out the project would be built in 19 years, and the ferry system must know what the project is. She objected to the suggestion to appeal to the legislature with regard to this issue, anticipating they would have little interest. She assumed the project was a second slip at the main street terminal and planned to pursue discussion of the second slip and the Edmonds Crossing “crackpot scheme.” Barbara Tipton, Edmonds, Steering Committee Member of the Edmonds Backyard Wildlife Project, spoke in favor of the ordinance to create a Citizens Tree Board. Last April, Edmonds received Community Wildlife Habitat certification from the National Wildlife Federation following nearly two years of dedicated work by Laura and Paul Spehar and a committee with the support of 191 residential property owners, 5 schools and 19 parks and green zone managers who registered their properties as backyard wildlife habitats. The Tree Board will engage in several sub-projects that include, 1) developing a tree ordinance designed to preserve and protect existing trees and encourage planting of additional trees, 2) increasing community outreach and education regarding the value of trees, proper selection of trees and current methods of planting and carrying for trees, 3) working with citizen groups to organize invasive plant removal and native vegetation planting in conjunction with the Department of Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services, 4) sponsoring an annual Arbor Day event, 5) working toward achievement of Tree City USA status. Meetings will be open to the public and minutes will be filed with the City Clerk’s Office. Dr. Richard Senderoff and she met with Planning Manager Rob Chave and Parks Director Brian McIntosh who reviewed and provided input on the ordinance. The ordinance has also been reviewed by the City Attorney Scott Snyder. Once the ordinance to create the Tree Board is approved by the Council, the Mayor’s office will prepare a press release seeking applicants for the Tree Board. She encouraged all interested parties to apply. Packet Page 194 of 297 M I N U T E S Community Services/Development Services Committee Meeting November 7, 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 Rob Chave, Planning Manager Carrie Hite, Parks Director The committee convened at 6:00 p.m. A. Discussion on a potential amendment to the Comprehensive Plan map that would adjust the boundaries of the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center to remove existing single family-designated area from the Activity Center. Mr. Chave reviewed the issues discussed by the Council at the November 1st public hearing on this subject, noting that the Council referred the item to Committee to further discuss the boundaries. He reviewed the history of why the activity center concept came into being and how it was intended to reinforce walkability/transit concepts and show how single family neighborhoods were part of a mixed use activity area. The Committee invited Colleen McDonald, Jim Underhill, and Bruce Wittenberg to the table to comment. Ms. McDonald believed that the ‘activity center’ boundary encouraged developers to ask for zoning changes, while Mr. Wittenberg felt that every effort should be made to protect single family neighborhoods from the encroachment of other uses and the the activity center designation was not supporting this effort. Mr. Underhill noted that his neighborhood along 215th Street had received a plan/zoning change to single family to protect its status. Councilmember Plunkett stated that the single family residents located within the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center boundary may feel less attachment to the commercial and other uses located within the activity center than those who live downtown and are more active participants in the downtown activity center. The Committee expressed an interest in removing at least the single family area along 220th Street SW from the activity center boundary. ACTION: The Committee decided to forward the boundary issue to the full Council for a public hearing to take place the first meeting in December. B. Marina Beach BNSF Land Lease. Ms. Hite provided information on the land lease. There was no discussion. ACTION: Moved to consent agenda for approval. Packet Page 195 of 297 CS/DS Committee Minutes November 7, 2011 Page 2 2 C. Authorization for the Mayor to sign the Emergency Intertie Agreement between Seattle Public Utilities and City of Edmonds. Mr. Williams briefly reviewed the history of the water usage with Seattle Public Utilities and how the intertie connection will be used for emergency purposes in the future. The proposed intertie agreement addresses the provisions of the water usage beginning on January 1, 2012 and expiring on December 31, 2062. ACTION: Moved to consent agenda for approval. D. Authorization for Mayor to sign Addendum No. 1 to Professional Services Agreement for the Sewer Rehabilitation Project with CHS Engineers. Mr. English described the purpose and need to rehabilitate nine sewer lift stations within the City’s sewer system. An initial design contract with CHS Engineers was approved in 2009 and the project is now 95% designed. The addendum includes additional design work, right of way support and construction management services during the construction phase. The additional services in the addendum will be paid by the 412 Sewer Utility Fund. ACTION: Item will be scheduled for discussion at the next Council Meeting. E. Authorization to approve a sewer and storm easement for installation of a sewer main for the 2012 Sewerline Replacement Project. Staff is working on the 2012 Sewerline replacement program and an easement has been secured from the Port of Edmonds so the project can be constructed in 2012. The project will install approximately 1000 feet of new 8-inch diameter sewerline. ACTION: Moved to consent agenda for approval. F. Authorization to approve an easement for installation of watermain for the 2012 Waterline Replacement Project. Staff secured easements from seven property owners for the Hillcrest Lane waterline replacement project. The project will upsize and replace the existing waterline that is in poor condition and in need of replacement. ACTION: Moved to consent agenda for approval. G. Authorization for Mayor to sign a Professional Services Agreement with Parametrix for design services with respect to the Main Street Decorative Lighting and Sidewalk Enhancements Project. Mr. English and Mr. Williams discussed the planned improvements for Main Street between 5th and 6th Avenues. Staff secured a federal transportation grant in 2010 to help pay for the Packet Page 196 of 297 CS/DS Committee Minutes November 7, 2011 Page 3 3 improvements and staff is pursuing additional funding opportunities to pay for all of the improvements being considered on the project. The City executed a contract with Parametrix in May of this year for the preliminary design phase. The proposed contract will complete the environmental documentation and final design of the project. ACTION: Moved to consent agenda for approval. H. Discussion regarding city polystyrene ban. The committee requested that the discussion of a city polystyrene ban be moved to the full Council for discussion. I. Public Comments. Public comment was received. The meeting adjourned at 7:15p.m. Packet Page 197 of 297 AM-4407 Item #: 6. City Council Meeting Date: 12/06/2011 Time:30 Minutes Submitted By:Rob Chave Department:Planning Review Committee: Committee Action: Type:Action Information Subject Title Public hearing on a proposed Code amendment to ECDC 20.40.030 and ECDC 17.40.020 adding limited exceptions from building height limits for (1) certain solar energy installations and (2) replacement of existing rooftop equipment with energy efficient upgrades. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Direct the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance to implement the Planning Board's recommendation. Previous Council Action On September 20, 2011, the City Council forwarded draft amendment language to the Planning Board for consideration. Narrative The City Council forwarded draft code language to the Planning Board for review. The Council draft provided an exception for roof-mounted solar installations from building height limits, with the exception limited to an additional 36 inches in height. This proposal is consistent with existing city policies in the Community Sustainability Element, and could be beneficial in situations where buildings are at or near the height limit. The Planning Board concurred with the intent of the proposal, and also recommended a similar provision to allow for energy efficient upgrades to HVAC equipment installations that can't fit within the existing building envelope. In addition, the Planning Board felt that to enable some notice to nearby residents, such approvals should be Type 2 staff decisions with public notice, appealable to the Hearing Examiner. The draft amendment language is included in Exhibit 1. Note that the draft also includes an option under the Nonconforming Chapter that would address installations on top of non-conforming buildings. Please note that the Planning Board also recommended the Council consider setting the application fee for a Type 2 solar installation application and/or building permit at 'zero': CHAIR LOVELL MOVED THAT THE BOARD FORWARD A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT THEY SET THE FEE FOR SOLAR ENERGY INSTALLATIONS AT $0. BOARD MEMBER ELLIS SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Council sets fees by resolution. Attachments Packet Page 198 of 297 Exhibit 1: Draft Amendment Language Exhibit 2: Planning Board Minutes Exhibit 3: Residential Examples Exhibit 4: Solar Examples Exhibit 5: SCL Solar Energy Guide Exhibit 6: SCL Solar FAQ Exhibit 7: Solar Options Paper Exhibit 8: City Council Minutes Exhibit 9: Council Agenda Item from 9.20.2011 Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date City Clerk Sandy Chase 12/01/2011 04:06 PM Mayor Dave Earling 12/02/2011 11:12 AM Final Approval Linda Hynd 12/02/2011 11:45 AM Form Started By: Rob Chave Started On: 12/01/2011 03:34 PM Final Approval Date: 12/02/2011 Packet Page 199 of 297 Draft 2011.10.26 Page | 1 21.40.030 Height. A. Height means the average vertical distance from the average level of the undisturbed soil of the site covered by a structure to the highest point of the structure. (See subsection (D) of this section for exceptions to this rule.) B. “Average level” shall be determined by averaging elevations of the downward projections of the four corners of the smallest rectangle which will enclose all of the building, excluding a maximum of 30 inches of eaves. If a corner falls off the site, its elevation shall be the average elevation of the two points projected downward where the two sides of the rectangle cross the property line. (See subsection (D)(1) of this section for exceptions to this rule.) C. Accessory buildings that are attached to the main building by a breezeway, hallway, or other similar connection so that the accessory building is separated by 10 feet or less from the main building shall be considered to be part of the main building for purposes of determining the average level. For the purposes of this section, in order for an accessory building to be considered to be attached to and a part of the main building, the connecting structure must have a roof and be constructed of similar materials to both the main building and the accessory building so that it appears to be a unified and consistently designed building. D. Height Exceptions. 1. (Reserved); 2. Church steeples; 3. Elevator penthouses, not to exceed 72 square feet in horizontal section, or three feet in height, for that portion above the height limit; 4. Chimneys, not to exceed nine square feet in horizontal section or more than three feet in height, for that portion above the height limit. In RM districts, chimneys shall be clustered. No multiple‐flue chimney shall exceed 39 square feet in horizontal section. The first chimney shall not exceed nine square feet in horizontal section, and other chimneys shall not exceed six square feet in horizontal section; 5. Vent pipes not to exceed 18 inches in height above the height limit; and 6. Standpipes not to exceed 30 inches in height above the height limit. [Ord. 3728 § 2, 2009; Ord. 3654 § 1, 2007; Ord. 3569 § 2, 2005]. 7. Solar energy installations not to exceed 36 inches in height above the height limit. Such an installation may be approved as a Type II staff decision if it is designed and located in such a way as to provide reasonable solar access while limiting visual impacts on surrounding properties. 8. Replacement of existing rooftop HVAC equipment which exceeds the existing height limit, so long as the replacement equipment does not exceed the height of the existing equipment by more than 12 inches. The replacement equipment must have earned the Energy Star label. Packet Page 200 of 297 Draft 2011.10.26 Page | 2 17.40.020 Nonconforming building and/or structure. A. Definition. A nonconforming building is one which once met bulk zoning standards and the site development standards applicable to its construction, but which no longer conforms to such standards due to the enactment or amendment of the zoning ordinance of the city of Edmonds or the application of such ordinance in the case of a structure annexed to the city. Subject to the other provisions of this section, an accessory building that is not an accessory dwelling unit shall be presumptively nonconforming if photographic or other substantial evidence conclusively demonstrates that the accessory building existed on or before January 1, 1981. In the case of a property that was annexed after January 1, 1981, then the date shall be that of the effective date of the annexation of the city of Edmonds. Such presumption may be overcome only by clear and convincing evidence. B. Continuation. A nonconforming building or structure may be maintained and continued, unless required to be abated elsewhere in this chapter or section, but it may not be changed or altered in any manner which increases the degree of nonconformity of the building except as expressly provided in subsections (C) through (I) of this section. C. Historic Buildings and Structures. Nothing in this section shall prevent the full restoration by reconstruction of a building or structure which is either listed on the National Register of Historic Places, the Washington State Register of Historic Places, the Washington State Cultural Resource Inventory, or the Edmonds Register of Historic Places, or is listed in a council‐approved historical survey meeting the standards of the State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation. “Restoration” means reconstruction of the historic building or structure with as nearly the same visual design appearance and materials as is consistent with full compliance with the State Building Code and consistent with the requirements of Chapter 20.45 ECDC, Edmonds Register of Historic Places. The reconstruction of all such historic buildings and structures shall comply with the life safety provisions of the State Building Code. D. Maintenance and Alterations. 1. Ordinary maintenance and repair of a nonconforming building or structure shall be permitted. 2. Solar energy installations on buildings that exceed existing height limits. A rooftop solar energy installation mounted on a non‐conforming building that exceeds the existing height limit may be approved as a Type II staff decision if: a. The installation exceeds the existing roof height by not more than 36 inches. b. The installation is designed and located in such a way as to provide reasonable solar access while limiting visual impacts on surrounding properties. 23. Alterations which otherwise conform to the provisions of the zoning ordinance, its site development and bulk standards, and which do not expand any nonconforming aspect of the building, shall be permitted. Packet Page 201 of 297 Draft 2011.10.26 Page | 3 34. In an effort to provide modular relief, minor architectural improvements in commercial and multifamily zones may encroach into the nonconforming setback adjacent to an access easement or public right‐of‐way not more than 30 inches. Minor architectural improvements may also be permitted in nonconforming side or rear yard setbacks only if they intrude not more than 30 inches nor one‐half of the distance to the property line, whichever is less. “Minor architectural improvements” are defined as and limited to bay windows, eaves, chimneys and architectural detail such as cornices, medallions and decorative trim. Such improvements shall be required to obtain architectural design review. Nothing herein shall be interpreted to exempt such improvements in compliance with the State Building and Fire Codes. 45. Alterations required by law or the order of a public agency in order to meet health and safety regulations shall be permitted. E. Relocation. Should a nonconforming building or structure be moved horizontally for any reason for any distance, it shall thereafter come into conformance with the setback and lot coverage requirements for the zone in which it is located. Provided, however, that a building or structure may be moved on the same site without full compliance if the movement reduces the degree of nonconformity of the building or structure. Movement alone of a nonconforming building or structure to lessen an aspect of its nonconformity shall not require the owner thereof to bring the building or structure into compliance with other bulk or site development standards of the city applicable to the building or structure. F. Restoration. If a nonconforming building or structure is destroyed or is damaged in an amount equal to 75 percent or more of its replacement cost at the time of destruction, said building shall not be reconstructed except in full conformance with the provisions of the Edmonds Community Development Code. Determination of replacement costs and the level of destruction shall be made by the building official and shall be appealable as a Type II staff decision under the provisions of Chapter 20.06 ECDC. Damage of less than 75 percent of replacement costs may be repaired, and the building returned to its former size, shape and lot location as existed before the damage occurred, if, but only if, such repair is initiated by the filing of an application for a building permit which vests as provided in ECDC 19.00.015, et seq., within one year of the date such damage occurred. This right of restoration shall not apply if: 1. The building or structure was damaged or destroyed due to the unlawful act of the owner or the owner’s agent; or 2. The building is damaged or destroyed due to the ongoing neglect or gross negligence of the owner or the owner’s agents. G. Residential Buildings in Commercial Zones. Existing nonconforming buildings in commercial zones in use solely for residential purposes, or structures attendant to such residential use, may be remodeled or reconstructed without regard to the limitations of subsections (B), (E) and (F) of this section, if, but only if, the following conditions are met: 1. The remodel or reconstruction takes place within the footprint of the original building or structure. “Footprint” shall mean an area equal to the smallest rectangular area in a plane parallel to the ground in Packet Page 202 of 297 Draft 2011.10.26 Page | 4 which the existing building could be placed, exclusive of uncovered decks, steps, porches, and similar features; and provided, that the new footprint of the building or structure shall not be expanded by more than 10 percent and is found by the city staff to be substantially similar to the original style and construction after complying with current codes. 2. All provisions of the State Building and Electrical Codes can be complied with entirely on the site. No nonconforming residential building may be remodeled or reconstructed if, by so doing, the full use under state law or city ordinance of a conforming neighboring lot or building would be limited by such remodel or reconstruction. 3. These provisions shall apply only to the primary residential use on site and shall not apply to nonconforming accessory buildings or structures. 4. A nonconforming residential single‐family building may be rebuilt within the defined building envelope if it is rebuilt with materials and design which are substantially similar to the original style and structure after complying with current codes. Substantial compliance shall be determined by the city as a Type II staff decision, except that any appeal of the staff decision shall be to the ADB rather than to the hearing examiner. The decision of the ADB shall be final and appealable only as provided in ECDC 20.07.006. H. Subject to the other provisions of this section, an accessory building that is not an accessory dwelling unit shall be presumptively nonconforming if photographic or other substantial evidence conclusively demonstrates that the accessory building existed on or before January 1, 1981. In the case of a property that was annexed after January 1, 1981, then the date shall be that of the effective date of the annexation to the city of Edmonds. Such presumption may be overcome only by clear and convincing evidence. I. BD5 Zone. The BD5 zone was created in part to encourage the adoption and reuse of existing residential structures for live/work and commercial use as set forth in ECDC 16.43.030(B)(5). In the BD5 zone, conforming and nonconforming buildings may be converted to commercial or other uses permitted by ECDC 16.43.020 without being required to come into compliance with the ground floor elevation requirements of ECDC 16.43.030(B). [Ord. 3781 § 1, 2010; Ord. 3736 §§ 13, 14, 2009; Ord. 3696 § 1, 2008]. Packet Page 203 of 297 DRAFT Subject to December 14th Approval CITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING BOARD MINUTES November 9, 2011 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, Chair John Reed, Vice Chair Todd Cloutier Bill Ellis Kristiana Johnson Valerie Stewart Neil Tibbott BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT Kevin Clarke (excused) STAFF PRESENT Rob Chave, Planning Division Manager Kernen Lien, Planner Karin Noyes, Recorder READING/APPROVAL OF MINUTES VICE CHAIR REED MOVED THAT THE MINUTES OF OCTOBER 28, 2011 BE APPROVED AS AMENDED. BOARD MEMBER STEWART SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, WITH VICE CHAIR REED AND BOARD MEMBER CLOUTIER ABSTAINING. ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA The agenda was accepted as presented. AUDIENCE COMMENTS There was no one in the audience. PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENT ADDING LIMITED EXCEPTIONS FROM BUILDING HEIGHT LIMITS FOR SOLAR ENERGY INSTALLATIONS AND REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING ROOFTOP EQUIPMENT WITH ENERGY-EFFICIENT UPGRADES (FILE NUMBER AMD20110007) Mr. Chave reviewed that the City Council forwarded draft code language to the Board that would provide an exception for roof-mounted solar installations from building height limits. He recalled that when the Board last reviewed the proposed amendment, they agreed to replace the term “passive and photo-voltaic energy installations” with simply “solar energy installations. He explained that, as currently proposed, the language would allow: 1. Solar energy installations not to exceed 36 inches in height above the height limit. (ECDC 21.40.030.D.7) Packet Page 204 of 297 DRAFT Planning Board Minutes November 9, 2011 Page 2 2. Replacement of existing rooftop HVAC equipment which exceeds the existing height limit, so long as the replacement equipment does not exceed the height of the existing equipment by more than 12 inches and the replacement equipment earns the energy star label. (ECDC 21.40.030.D.8) 3. Solar energy installations on non-conforming buildings that exceed the existing height limit. A rooftop solar energy installation mounted on a non-conforming building that exceeds the existing height limit may be approved as a Type II staff decision if the installation does not exceed the existing roof height by more than 36 inches and if it is designed and located in such a way as to provide reasonable solar access while limiting visual impacts on surrounding properties. (ECDC 17.40.020.D.2.a and 2.b) Mr. Chave reminded the Board that, at their last meeting, they expressed particular interest in public input regarding whether the height exceptions should be applied to single-family residents as well as commercial or multi-family buildings. He noted that while most installations in single-family neighborhoods would be located below the peak of a pitched roof, this might not always be the case. To help the Board in their continued discussion, he offered the following observations both for and against excluding single-family zones:  Given that most of the buildings in the City are located in single-family zones, excluding the single-family zones from the proposed amendment would be a mistake if the City wants penetration in the single-family residential community.  Existing height limits are very important in residential areas where views exist. Placing solar energy installations on top of these homes could create problems.  In most cases, single-family homes have pitched roofs so it would not be practical to place solar energy equipment on top of the pitched roof. Therefore, most installations in single-family zones would be located below the peak of the roof and below the height limit.  The exception could come into play if a pitched roof is already above the existing height limit.  For flat roofs that are near or at the height limit, an additional height of 36 inches could be an issue. Mr. Chave said it could be argued that the exception proposed in ECDC 21.40.030.D.7 may not be necessary in single-family zones because there are options for placing the solar energy installations on the portion of the roof that is below the peak. However, under the current non-conforming rules, solar energy installations that are parallel to the roofline would not be allowed on buildings that already exceed the height limit, even if the installation would be located below the peak of the rooftop and below the maximum height limit for the zone. The proposed amendment to ECDC 17.40.020.D.2 is intended to address non-conforming situations. CHAIR LOVELL OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING. THERE WAS NO ONE IN THE AUDIENCE, SO THE HEARING WAS CLOSED. Chair Lovell summarized that the intent of the proposed amendment to ECDC 21.40.030.D.7 is to accommodate solar energy installations by allow them to exceed building height by no more than 36 inches. It is not intended to limit solar energy installations to a maximum height of 36 inches. Mr. Chave agreed that the proposed language allows an additional 36 inches above the height limit in which to place a solar energy installation. For example, if a building is one foot below the height limit, the owner would have four feet to work with. If a building is 1 foot over the height limit, the owner would only have two additional feet to work with. Vice Chair Reed asked the maximum height a solar energy installation would add to a flat roof structure. As an example, Board Member Cloutier pointed out that the panels installed on the Frances Anderson Center are larger than average, but they are less than three feet in height. Chair Lovell added that using the standard slope of 30 degrees, a 4-foot panel would be a little over 2 feet high. Mr. Chave summarized that three feet would accommodate most solar energy installations on flat roofs. Vice Chair Reed asked if the proposed amendment to ECDC 21.40.030.D.7 would require a building permit for all solar energy installations that exceed the height limit. Mr. Chave answered that the amendment would allow 36 inches of additional height; but typically, a permit would not be required for solar installations in single-family residential zones and there would be no aesthetic review. A building permit would only be required for larger installations. Vice Chair Reed Packet Page 205 of 297 DRAFT Planning Board Minutes November 9, 2011 Page 3 noted that ECDC 17.40.020.D.2 would allows 36 inches of additional height for solar energy installations on non- conforming buildings. However, a permit would be required and the application would be a Type II staff decision. That means that notice would be sent to surrounding property owners. Board Member Ellis commented that the permit requirement would allow staff the latitude to negotiate with the proponent to limit visual impacts. Vice Chair Reed suggested the Board consider the option of requiring a Type II permit for all solar energy installations in single-family zones. Board Member Cloutier recommended that the Type II permit should only be required for solar energy installations that exceed the height limit. He commented that potential impact to view would be limited to a small percentage of homes in the bowl area. Mr. Chave responded that there are many single-family residential property owners who are sensitive to view issues, and there are numerous examples of where view has been a significant concern. The Board agreed it would be appropriate to require a Type II Permit for all solar energy installations in the single-family zones that exceed the height limit. This would ensure a staff review and allow staff to work with proponents, if necessary, to minimize the impacts of proposed installations. Board Member Stewart observed that the permit requirement would mean additional time for the proponent. It could also place a financial burden on the proponent unless the City Council decides to waive the permit fee. She suggested the Board forward a recommendation to the City Council that the fee be waived to encourage solar energy installations in the City. Mr. Chave agreed that the $500 fee for Type II permits could significantly hinder a single-family property owner’s ability and/or desire to install solar energy equipment on his/her home. Chair Lovell asked how the City would handle complaints from adjacent property owners after a proponent has already started work on a solar energy installation. Mr. Chave explained that before the permit is granted by the City, a notice would be sent out to adjacent property owners, inviting them to comment on the proposal. If someone approaches the City as a result of the notice of application, staff would work to find reasonable solutions before issuing a decision. Staff decisions are appealable to the Hearing Examiner. Board Member Ellis asked if the City has any evidence that there is a demonstrated need for the proposed amendments. Have there been situations where a property owner was unable to install solar energy equipment because they were not allowed to exceed the height limit? Mr. Chave answered that it is not uncommon for buildings to be constructed right at the height limit, which is low in Edmonds compared to other neighboring jurisdictions. Newer buildings, in particularly, are usually constructed at or near the maximum height allowed in order to accommodate two stories. He suggested that as solar energy installations become less costly, he expects that more single-family residential property owners will become interested in the application. In addition, utility companies are encouraging solar energy use. Board Member Ellis questioned if the City would be missing an opportunity to encourage applications that are more compatible with the City and have less visual impact by applying a blanket 3-foot height waiver to solar energy installations. Mr. Chave suggested that compatibility and visual impact issues are best addressed through the building code. He explained that the International Building Code offers incentives for some forms of low-impact development, but it does not contain any language that strongly encourages the integration of solar energy into construction. He pointed out that Edmonds is a built out community. Even if a provision were inserted into the language to encourage solar energy, the provision would only apply to new construction. He emphasized that Edmonds will benefit most from retrofits that incorporate low-impact development techniques. Board Member Stewart stressed the importance of an education program that provides information and guidance to homeowners about solar energy installations. This would help the City avoid issues related to impact and compatibility with surrounding neighborhood. She suggested that many of the concerns will be addressed as more solar energy installations are done throughout the City. Board Member Ellis observed that the proposed language for ECDC 17.40.020.D.2 includes a provision that allows staff to determine where a solar energy installation should be placed on a non-conforming building. It also allows them to limit the visual impacts. He questioned if this same standard should be applied to all solar energy installations that exceed the height limit within the single-family zone. Mr. Chave agreed this would be appropriate to add this same standard to ECDC 21.40.030.D.7 so that it would apply to all situations where a solar energy installation would exceed the height limit. Packet Page 206 of 297 DRAFT Planning Board Minutes November 9, 2011 Page 4 Board Member Ellis referred to the City of Seattle’s code language, which allows up to 4 feet of additional height for solar energy installations. It also includes a specific provision that prohibits a solar installation from blocking an adjacent property owner’s solar access. He noted that the proposed language does not address the need to protect an adjacent properties solar access. Chair Lovell said he does not believe the proposed amendment would impact a significant number of single-family residential homes. Board Member Ells responded that it could particularly impact the small residential neighborhoods. Board Member Cloutier reminded the Board that setbacks requirements would limit the impacts. Mr. Chave advised that the code language allows staff to have a conversation with the applicant about whether the proposed height is necessary. He cautioned against including too many provisions in the code that require drawings, analysis and reviews because the City does not have the staff to perform the additional work. Board Member Ellis said he expects the number of applications in Edmonds to be small, with or without the proposed amendment. He said he can see a great potential for mischief (blocking views, blocking solar access to adjacent properties, unsightly installations, etc.) in some situations, particularly in single-family residential zones, yet he does not see a corresponding benefit. Mr. Chave agreed with Board Member Cloutier that given the setback requirements in the single- family residential zones, solar blockage from another solar installation would be highly unlikely. Adding a solar installation parallel to the roofline would not block anyone else’s opportunity for solar access. Board Member Ellis pointed out that if the solar installation is done parallel to the roof, then the proposed amendments would be unnecessary. Mr. Chave noted that the provision would definitely be needed to address non-conforming situations. Board Member Stewart said she can point to several benefits associated with solar energy installations. They allow property owners to reduce their carbon footprint, reduce their dependency on fossil fuels, obtain free energy, etc. She expressed her belief that solar energy is and must be a trend of the future because they are rapidly using up other energy sources. She cautioned against placing too many road blocks on solar energy installations. Board Member Ellis said he does not believe that rejecting the amendment would prevent a significant number of people from installing solar energy. Board Member Stewart predicted that once the price comes down and people become more skilled and knowledgeable about solar energy systems, the number of installations will increase significantly. She said it is highly likely that limited buildings heights will be an issue of the future unless the amendment is approved. Mr. Chave cautioned against having no height exceptions whatsoever to accommodate solar energy installations. He reminded the Board that it is not possible for property owners to obtain height variances to accommodate solar energy installations. Unless there is an exemption or a process in place to allow additional height, there will be situations where property owners are unable to install solar equipment even if it makes sense. He agreed it would be acceptable to establish standards of review, but not drop the exemption idea altogether. Chair Lovell suggested that a second sentence be added to ECDC 21.40.030.D.7 to reflect the same review process and standards found in ECDC 17.40.020.D.2. This would require a permit for any solar energy installation on any building that exceeds the height limit. Board Member Stewart asked if this would require an applicant to pay a fee for the permit and review. Chair Lovell recalled that the City Council previously recommended, and the Board concurred, that all fees for the permit should be waved. Vice Chair Reed added that even if the permit fee is waived, there would still be a fee for appeals. Chair Lovell emphasized the Board’s commitment to sustainability and recommended they push the amendment forward. Vice Chair Reed said that while he supports the concept of solar energy installations, it needs to be managed properly to avoid conflicts in the future. They need to make sure that proposals are reviewed and other alternatives are considered before a solar energy installation is allowed to exceed the height limit. BOARD MEMBER REED MOVED THAT THE FOLLOWING LANGAUGE BE ADDED TO ECDC 21.40.030.D.7: “A ROOFTOP SOLAR ENERGY INSTALLATION MOUNTED ON A BUILDING THAT EXTENDS ABOVE THE EXISTING HEIGHT LIMIT MAY BE APPROVED AS A TYPE II STAFF DECISION.” Mr. Chave suggested that if the intent of the motion is to establish a standard of review, they should incorporate the same language that is found in ECDC 17.40.020.D.2.a and 2.b. While this language is not a detailed standard for review, it does give the staff and Hearing Examiner the ability to consider impacts related to design and location as part of their decision. He suggested that the language in ECDC 17.40.020.D.2 could be revised and added to ECDC 21.40.030.D.7. He also Packet Page 207 of 297 DRAFT Planning Board Minutes November 9, 2011 Page 5 suggested that the table in the “process’ section should be updated to include solar energy installations over the height limit as Type II decisions. VICE CHAIR REED WITHDREW HIS MOTION. BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON MOVED THAT THE BOARD FORWARD FILE NUMBER AMD20110007 TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL AS PRESENTED AND UPDATED BY STAFF AND WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGE: THE LANGUAGE IN ECDC 17.40.020.D.2 WOULD BE ADAPTED BY STAFF AND APPLIED TO ECDC 21.40.030.D.7. VICE CHAIR REED SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. CHAIR LOVELL MOVED THAT THE BOARD FORWARD A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT THEY SET THE FEE FOR SOLAR ENERGY INSTALLATIONS AT $0. BOARD MEMBER ELLIS SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Board Member Reed commented that he is not sure, personally, that it would be wise for the City to waive the fee for solar energy installations given the current economic climate. However, he believes the City needs to make certain that the fees for processing the permit applications are evaluated carefully so they are not so high that they discourage and/or prevent people from installing solar energy. Mr. Chave emphasized that that the fee waiver, as proposed, would not include appeal fees. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. REVIEW OF SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM UPDATE Chair Lovell announced that the Planning Board’s article regarding the Shoreline Master Program Update (SMP) was published in the last edition of THE EDMONDS BEACON. Mr. Lien said he has not received any public response regarding the article, but they have received about 60 hits to the new SMP website. Mr. Lien advised that the Board would continue their review of the draft SMP at their next two meetings. He referred to the latest draft of Title 24, which incorporates changes identified by the Board thus far. He announced that he met recently with representatives from the Port of Edmonds and the Department of Ecology (DOE) to discuss the DOE’s recent decision to reclassify a portion of the marsh. He referenced a letter the Port of Edmonds received from David Pater, Department of Ecology, that reiterates what was said at the meeting about why a portion of the marsh was reclassified. In addition, the letter responds to questions raised by the Port about the City’s proposed new Urban Mixed Use III Environment. He reported that the meeting went well, and all parties now have a better understanding of the issue. Mr. Lien referred to the memorandum he prepared to identify the questions and suggested changes that have come up during previous Board discussions but remain unresolved. He suggested the Board review the items in the memorandum one-by- one and provide further direction to staff. Low-Impact Development Mr. Lien recalled that the topic of low-impact development (LID) has come up a number of times while reviewing the draft SMP regulations. The Board already agreed to add a policy in the Shoreline Use Element to encourage all uses and development to use LID techniques. In addition, LID is mentioned in five other places in the draft SMP, stating that LID techniques and practices should be used or encouraged where appropriate and feasible. However, at their last meeting, the Board raised a question about whether the SMP should “require” or “encourage” LID techniques. He discussed the question with Jerry Schuster, Stormwater Manager and expert on LID development, and reviewed the draft Western Washington Phase II Municipal Stormwater Permit, which lists a number of circumstances when LID techniques are considered infeasible (See Attachment 1). He found that many of the circumstances included on the list would apply to properties within the Edmonds shoreline jurisdiction. Packet Page 208 of 297 DRAFT Subject to November 9th Approval CITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING BOARD MINUTES October 26, 2011 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 Todd Cloutier Bill Ellis Kristiana Johnson Valerie Stewart Neil Tibbott BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT John Reed, Vice Chair (excused) Kevin Clarke (excused) Todd Cloutier (excused) STAFF PRESENT Rob Chave, Planning Division Manager Karin Noyes, Recorder READING/APPROVAL OF MINUTES BOARD MEMBER ELLIS MOVED THAT THE MINUTES OF OCTOBER 12, 2011 BE APPROVED AS AMENDED. BOARD MEMBER CLOUTIER SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA Chair Lovell advised that he would add several ongoing business items at the end of the agenda. AUDIENCE COMMENTS There was no one in the audience. DISCUSSION ON CODE AMENDMENT ADDING AN EXCEPTION FOR CERTAIN PASSIVE AND PHOT- VOLTAIC ENERGY INSTALLATIONS FROM BUILDING HEIGHTS (FILE NUMBER AMD20110007) Mr. Chave reminded the Board that the City Council forwarded draft code language to them that would provide an exception for roof-mounted solar installations from building height limits (ECDC 21.40.030.D.7). Staff is also recommending a provision for replacing HVAC equipment if an efficient unit cannot fit within the existing envelope (ECDC 21.40.030.D.8). In addition, he referred the Board to an optional amendment to address installations on top of non-conforming buildings (ECDC 17.40.020.D.2). As proposed, a solar energy installation on a nonconforming building that exceeds the existing height limit may be approved as a Type II staff decision, which would be appealable to the Hearing Examiner. In addition, notices would be mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the subject property. He emphasized that any of the three Packet Page 209 of 297 DRAFT Planning Board Minutes October 26, 2011 Page 2 proposed amendments can stand alone, and the Board can forward a recommendation of approval for all, some or none of the three. He noted that the Staff Report also includes examples of various solar energy installations for the Board’s information. Chair Lovell summarized that the proposed amendment to ECDC 21.40.030.D.7 would allow a building height variance to accommodate a solar energy installation, which may put the total height of the installation up to 36 inches higher than what the zone allows. Mr. Chave agreed that the proposed language would allow an extra 36 inches in height for solar installations. Chair Lovell expressed concern that the proposed language could be interpreted to mean that solar energy installations could not exceed 36 inches in height. Mr. Chave said the proposed language does not apply specifically to the height of solar equipment, but to the overall height of the structure and the solar energy installation. By contrast, he pointed out that the proposed amendment to ECDC 21.40.030.D.8 is tied directly to the height of the existing equipment. It allows replacement HVAC equipment to exceed the height of the existing equipment by up to 12 inches, as long as the replacement equipment can earn the Energy Star label. Board Member Ellis pointed out that, as proposed, if the existing equipment exceeds the height limit, the property owner would still be allowed an additional 12 inches in height to install energy efficient equipment. Chair Lovell observed that the proposed language for ECDC 21.40.030.D.7 and D.8 does not provide any design criteria to regulate the appearance of solar energy or HVAC equipment. However, the proposed amendment related to nonconforming buildings (ECDC 17.40.020.D) includes a provision that requires the installation to be designed and located in such a way as to provide reasonable solar access while limiting visual impacts on surrounding properties. He asked if the proposed language would allow a property owner to install solar energy equipment on a tower or pole. Mr. Chave explained that towers and poles are considered structures, and all structures are required to comply with the height limit. Board Member Ellis pointed out that, as currently proposed, the amendments would apply to all zones in the City, including single-family residential zones. He acknowledged that most solar energy installations in single-family residential zones would be located on pitched roofs, so height would not be an issue. However, there are some single-family homes that have flat roofs. Mr. Chave agreed that most property owners prefer to place the solar energy equipment parallel to the pitched roof. Even if that is not possible because of building orientation, the panels are typically placed below the top of the roof pitch. Board Member Ellis expressed his opinion that while the proposed amendment to ECDC 20.40.030.D.7 might be a wise policy for the commercial zones, and perhaps even the multi-family residential zones, he is not convinced it is necessary and/or wise for single-family residential zones. He said that in addition to aesthetic concerns, it is important to keep in mind that the height limits in residential zones have a very different purpose than those for commercial zones. It is important to maintain the neighborhood scale, as well. He said he is not opposed to solar energy installations in single-family residential zones, which the current code already allows. However, he is not in favor of allowing an additional 36 inches in height to accommodate the equipment. Board Member Stewart agreed with Board Member Ellis’ concern about potential impacts to single-family residential neighborhoods. She suggested the code language be amended to add a provision that requires a property owner to explore other options before the additional height is allowed. She cautioned against simply precluding single-family residential property owners from putting solar equipment on a rooftop if the structure exceeds the height limit. Board Member Johnson suggested that both concerns are valid. She suggested it would behoove the Board to explain these concerns as part of their recommendation to the City Council since the public would likely have similar comments. She also recalled that Board Member Tibbott provided examples of unsightly solar energy installations, which should also be forwarded to the City Council as part of the Board’s recommendation. While she fully supports solar energy installations, she knows there could be problems in the future and it would be best to address them ahead of time. Board Member Ellis said there is nothing in the current code language to prevent any type of solar energy installation, regardless of its design, as long as it meets the current height limit. Mr. Chave agreed that, currently, no design review is required for residential zones. Therefore, the City does not have the ability to regulate the appearance of solar energy installations that do not exceed the height limit. He agreed it is possible to not allow the additional height in single-family Packet Page 210 of 297 DRAFT Planning Board Minutes October 26, 2011 Page 3 residential zones. However, the Board should keep in mind that most roofs in single-family residential zones are pitched, and it would not make structural sense to go above the pitch of the roof. On the other hand, many commercial and multi- family residential structures have flat roofs, and some were built during a time when height limits were greater. Board Member Johnson pointed out that some of the newer contemporary single-family residential homes have flat roofs. Mr. Chave agreed and noted that the flat roof design is typically used to maximize views or square footage and still meet the height restrictions. He did acknowledge that applying the proposed amendments to single-family residential zones could result in view problems in some situations. Board Member Stewart explained that she owns an older home, with a steep pitched roof that exceeds the current height limit. They have researched options for installing solar energy to reduce their carbon footprint and use less fossil fuel. She said she is opposed to limiting the additional height provision to commercial and multi-family residential zones, only. If the City is going to be forward thinking, they need to allow people to explore solar options. However, she agreed it would be appropriate to include a provision that addresses potential concerns from uphill property owners. Chair Lovell expressed concern about creating a higher bar for single-family residential properties than for any other property in the City. He asked if it is possible to incorporated language similar to the language proposed for ECDC 17.40.020.D.2 so that solar energy installations that exceed the height limit in single-family residential zones would require a Type II permit. This would allow staff to work with the property owner to explore other options to minimize the visual impact. Mr. Chave agreed that would be one option. Board Member Ellis said that rather than amending ECDC 21.40.030.D.7 as recommended by Chair Lovell, he would prefer to simply exclude single-family residential zones from the provision. Mr. Chave explained that if single-family residential zones are excluded from ECDC 21.40.030.D.7, the proposed provision in ECDC 17.40.020.D.2 would still allow nonconforming single-family structures to exceed the height limit in order to accommodate solar energy equipment. Board Member Ellis said he is not opposed to ECDC 17.40.020.D.4 because additional standards would be applied to nonconforming structures to limit the visual impact to surrounding properties. Board Member Johnson reminded the Board that City Council Member Bernheim is the author of the proposed amendment to ECDC 21.40.030.D.7, and he is a strong advocate for solar energy. Because his home exceeds the 25-foot height limit, he installed solar panels on his garage. He may have concerns about excluding single-family zones from the proposed provision. Board Member Ellis noted that excluding single-family residential zones from ECDC 21.40.030.D.7 would not prohibit solar energy installations, as long as the equipment does not exceed the height limit. Board Member Stewart observed that Council Member Bernheim is not likely obtaining as much of the solar radiation as he could if he was allowed to place the equipment on the roof of his house. Again, she said she is opposed to a provision that prohibits solar energy installations on rooftops in single-family zones that exceed the height limit. BOARD MEMBER ELLIS MOVED THAT THE BOARD AMEND ECDC 21.40.030.D.7 TO EXCLUDE SINGLE- FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONES FROM THE HEIGHT EXCEPTION IN ECDC 21.40.030.D.7. BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON SECONDED THE MOTION. Mr. Chave suggested that that while eliminating the provision for small-lot single-family zones might be appropriate, large- lot single-family zones require greater setbacks. This may result in fewer impacts. Board Member Ellis agreed that his concern is greater for small-lot single-family zones. However, he noted that larger lots offer more options for solar energy installations other than the rooftop. Board Member Johnson said she likes the idea of presenting both options at the public hearing to solicit public feedback on each one. Mr. Chave suggested the Board could leave the language as it currently exists for the public hearing, but they could specifically ask for public feedback about the option of excluding the single-family zones from the height exception. Chair Lovell said he does not believe it is reasonable to exclude single-family residential properties These property owners should have the same benefits as other property owners in the City to implement sustainable installations such as solar energy. He expressed his belief that excluding single-family residential properties may be seen as an infringement of property rights. From an engineering standpoint, he does not anticipate that a significant number of single-family property Packet Page 211 of 297 DRAFT Planning Board Minutes October 26, 2011 Page 4 owners will install solar energy equipment. He said he would be in favor of presenting the City Council’s proposed language at the public hearing. They could also spell out alternatives and invite the public to provide their thoughts. Board Member Ellis noted that, at this time, property owners do not have a right to exceed the height limit to accommodate solar energy installations. The provision represents an expanded right that could be offered to all zones or limited to certain zones. THE MOTION FAILED 1-4, WITH BOARD MEMBER ELLIS VOTING IN FAVOR AND CHAIR LOVELL AND BOARD MEMBERS TIBBOTT, JOHNSON, AND STEWART VOTING IN OPPOSITION. Chair Lovell announced that he attended the ribbon cutting ceremony for the Frances Anderson Center solar energy installation, where it was announced that the City Council has discussed the option of waiving the permit fee for solar energy installations as an incentive. He reported that he invited those in attendance to come to the public hearing before the Planning Board and voice their opinions regarding code provisions for solar energy installations. The Board agreed it would be appropriate to present Board Member Ellis’ recommendation as one option at the public hearing. Board Member Johnson noted that there are bad examples of solar energy installations in single-family residential neighborhoods, and some jurisdictions have outright banned them. She suggested the public should be invited to voice their concerns regarding both options. Board Member Stewart suggested that the term “passive and photo-voltaic solar energy installations” in ECDC 21.40.030.D.7 and 17.40.020.D.2 should be changed to “solar energy installations” to be more inclusive and to eliminate the need to label an installation as either active or passive. Chair Lovell said he read through the materials provided in the Staff Report regarding active and passive solar energy installations, and he agreed that a more generic term would be appropriate. Chair Lovell referred to Page 11 of Seattle City Light’s Guide to Installing a Solar Electric System (Attachment 4), which specifically spells out the land use requirements for solar electric system installations in residential zones. He also noted that Page 5 of Attachment 5 states that the City of Seattle requires an electrical permit for all solar energy installations, and a building or land-use permit may also be required depending on the size and complexity of the installation. Mr. Chave noted that the Frances Anderson Center installation required a building permit because of its size and complexity. However, the City Council has expressed an interest in waiving the fee for the permit. He suggested that, as part of their recommendation, the Board could encourage the City Council to waive the fee for solar energy installation building permits when they are required. Board Member Stewart said she receives the Master Builders Association’s monthly newsletter, which provides a list of what each municipality is doing to create incentives for sustainable building. Numerous jurisdictions have already decided to waive the permit fees for solar energy installations to incentivize people to move in a more sustainable direction. BOARD MEMBER STEWART MOVED TO AMEND ECDC 21.40.030.D.2 AND ECDC 17.40.020.d.2 TO REMOVE “PASSIVE AND PHOTO-VOLTAIC.” BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON SECONDED THE MOTION. Board Member Johnson suggested that, rather than altering the language, she would prefer to use the City Council’s recommended language at the public hearing and then decide whether a change is appropriate after the hearing. Board Member Stewart expressed her concern that the current term is misleading and needs to be more encompassing. The Board also discussed whether the word “rooftop” is necessary since the installations could also be placed on poles and other structures. BOARD MEMBER STEWART MOVED TO AMEND HER MOTION TO CHANGE ECDC 21.40.030.D.7 TO READ, “SOLAR ENERGY INSTALLATIONS NOT TO EXCEED 36 INCHES IN HEIGHT ABOVE THE HEIGHT LIMIT.” SHE FURTHER MOVED TO CHANGE ECDC 17.40.020.D.2 TO READ “SOLAR ENERGY INSTALLATIONS ON BUILDINGS THAT EXCEED EXISTING HEIGHT LIMITS. A SOLAR ENERGY INSTALLATION MOUNTED ON A NONCONFORMING BUILDING OR STRUCTURE THAT EXCEEDS THE EXISTING HEIGHT LIMIT MAY BE APPROVED AS A TYPE II STAFF DECISION IF:” BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON ACCEPTED THE AMENDMENT. THE MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. Packet Page 212 of 297 APPROVED Planning Board Minutes October 12, 2011 Page 4 discussions about the marsh, but the decision to reclassify it was not made until just recently. The DOE determined that the marsh was an estuary that meets the definition of a shoreline because of the salt water influence. After additional review of available documents and studies, staff informed the DOE that the salt water influence only extends half way across the marsh. As a result of this information, the DOE agreed that only half of the marsh would be reclassified as shoreline jurisdiction. The other half would maintain the existing associated wetland classification. Staff proposed the new Urban Mixed Use III Environment to address the impacts associated with the reclassification. Chair Lovell asked if the DOE has been informed of the proposed new Urban Mixed Use III Environment. Mr. Lien answered that the DOE indicated preliminary approval of the development regulations before they were presented to the Planning Board. Mr. Chave explained that the Port of Edmonds has hired PENTEC Environmental, the consultant that helped the City develop the original SMP that identified the Edmonds Marsh as an associated wetland. They are trying to learn more about why the original designation was made and recent changes that would warrant a reclassification. They intend to present their findings to the DOE and argue that there is still good reason for the marsh to be classified as an associated wetland rather than a shoreline jurisdiction. They are working to schedule a meeting with Port representatives, Port consultants and representatives from the DOE to discuss the issue further. He said he emphasized to the Port’s consultant that it is within everyone’s best interest to get this issue resolved by the end of the year so the City can finalize the draft SMP and move forward with the public outreach program. Mr. Lien advised that the public outreach program would include information on the City’s new website (www.edmondswa.gov). The homepage would provide a direct link to the SMP Update page. He connected to the website and briefly reviewed the contents of the SMP Update page. He said the page provides a broad overview of what the SMP is and why the update is necessary. It also provides links to all the information that has been provided to date, as well as the draft SMP. In addition, it invites the public to participate in the process by advertising dates for when the issue will be discussed. Mr. Chave explained that the City’s current website would not be immediately dismantled. While people who visit the old site will not automatically be sent to the new site, the old site will contain a link to the new site. He encouraged the Board Members to visit the new site and forward their comments and suggestions to staff. Mr. Lien reviewed the proposed SMP timeline as follows:  The Board will finish working through and revising the SMP regulations (Title 24) on November 9th and December 14th.  A public outreach meeting will be scheduled for January 25th.  The Commission would have a workshop discussion to recap the public outreach meeting on February 8th.  A formal public hearing would be scheduled for March 14th. Chair Lovell asked if the Port of Edmonds has been informed of the proposed timeline. Mr. Lien said he notified the Port’s consultant of the timeline. Vice Chair Reed questioned if it would be helpful for the Board to meet again with representatives from the Port of Edmonds, Friends of the Edmonds Marsh or other interested organizations. Mr. Lien advised that a State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) notice was sent out to interested parties, including the Port of Edmonds, Friends of the Edmonds Marsh, and surrounding jurisdictions and agencies. He expressed his belief that both the Port and Friends of the Edmonds Marsh will continue to actively participate in the process. Rather than having a separate meeting for this purpose, the Board could invite their representatives to attend regularly scheduled Board meetings and provide comment. Chair Lovell added that a representative of Friends of the Edmonds Marsh also participates on the Harbor Square Steering Committee. They are aware of what is going on at the Port of Edmonds, and they have provided input. The Board had a brief discussion about the article that was prepared by Board Member Stewart and updated by Vice Chair Reed to provide information to the public about the SMP Update. Vice Chair Reed agreed to update the document one more time and send it to all Board Members via email. The Board agreed to review and finalize the document at their October 26th meeting so it could be submitted to THE EDMONDS BEACON by October 31st for publication in the November 3rd edition. PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENT ADDING AN EXCEPTION FOR CERTAIN PASSIVE AND PHOTO- VOLTAIC (PV) ENERGY INSTALLATIONS FROM BUILDING HEIGHTS (FILE NUMBER AMD20110007) Packet Page 213 of 297 APPROVED Planning Board Minutes October 12, 2011 Page 5 Mr. Chave advised that the City Council has forwarded the Board draft code language that would provide an exception for roof-mounted solar (passive and photo-voltaic energy) installations from building heights. The limitation would be for solar installations of up to 36 inches in height. He noted that the proposal is consistent with existing City policies in the Community Sustainability Element and could be beneficial to situations where buildings are at or near the height limit. He reviewed that the most recent solar installation occurred on the Frances Anderson Center. He encouraged the Board Members to visit this site to get an idea of the potential impact of solar panels. He explained that because solar installations are typically shallow, they do not significantly alter the building height. Most structures in the City can accommodate the additional height without exceeding the height limit. However, some of the older, flat-roofed buildings already exceed the current height limit. The proposed exception is intended to remove this barrier. He explained that the City’s current variance criterion is tight. Variances can only be granted to address unique site conditions that prevent a property owner from doing something that other properties are allowed to do. Variances cannot be granted for economic reasons such as solar panels to reduce energy costs. Board Member Tibbott asked if the proposed exception would apply to solar panels located below a parapet, or if the panels could be installed above a parapet to obtain a better solar angle. Mr. Chave said that, typically, parapets extend above the edge of a building, so it would depend on the height of the parapet and roof. Every situation will be different. Board Member Tibbott asked if the City has design guidelines or criteria that apply to rooftop solar installations. Mr. Chave answered that there are no general design guidelines for rooftop solar installations. However, a Certificate of Appropriateness would be required for solar installation on any building listed on the local, State or National Register of Historic Places. These applications are reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission to make sure the historic character of structures will not be altered. He noted that a Certificate of Appropriateness was required for the Frances Anderson Center installation. Board Member Tibbott expressed concern that, with the exception of historic buildings, the City would have no way to prohibit unsightly solar installations. Mr. Chave pointed out that solar panels are currently allowed on buildings in the City without any restrictions, as long as the structure does not exceed the height limit. Board Member Tibbott suggested it would make sense to provide some design guidance going forward in light of the possibility that more buildings, both contemporary and historic, will want to include solar energy panels. He noted that the exception would apply to all properties in the City, including residential. Mr. Chave noted that most residential structures have pitched rather than flat roofs. He cautioned that it would be difficult to create design criteria that do not conflict with the actual function of the installation. He pointed out that flat roof installations are very unobtrusive if they are setback from the edge of structures. To be more inclusive, Board Member Stewart suggested the draft language be changed to delete “passive and photo-voltaic solar energy.” She also noted that there are engineering requirements associated with solar energy installations to ensure a structure can support the extra load. This is particularly important for older buildings. She said she supports the proposed change as a step in the right direction, but they should be careful about how the language is written. The Board discussed that the City Council previously approved the creation of a “Green Team,” but the group has not been activated to date. Board Members Johnson and Stewart suggested that the proposed amendment would be an appropriate issue for the Green Team to resolve. Mr. Chave pointed out that activating the Green Team would take some time, and the City Council has indicated their desire that the issue be dealt with quickly. Board Member Johnson suggested that the Green Team could provide helpful information regarding current solar energy technology. Chair Lovell inquired if a permit is required for solar panel installations in the City of Edmonds. Mr. Chave agreed to research this issue and provide additional information at the Board’s next meeting. Board Member Cloutier advised that most jurisdictions do not require a permit for solar energy installations that are less than 1,000 pounds. Chair Lovell summarized that the ECDC 20.40.030.D provides a list of appurtenances that are allowed to exceed the height limit (i.e. church steeples, elevator penthouses, chimneys, vent pipes, and standpipes), and the proposed amendment would add solar energy installations to the list. Packet Page 214 of 297 APPROVED Planning Board Minutes October 12, 2011 Page 6 Once again, the Board discussed their concern that there is nothing in the Development Code that allows the City to address unsightly or inappropriate solar energy installations. As currently written, the provision would allow solar energy installations to extend three feet above the existing roofline on any building in the City and on any style of roof. The Board discussed various scenarios for potential solar panel installations on both flat and pitched roofs. They discussed various ideas for adding additional language that would allow the City to address potential design concerns. They agreed that design standards would need to be added to the Development Code if a permit and staff and/or Architectural Design Board (ADB) review are required for solar energy installations. Chair Lovell suggested that design review only be required for solar energy installations on buildings that exceed the height limit. Mr. Chave agreed this might be an appropriate option. Solar energy installations on buildings that exceed the height limit could require staff review and decision, with a public notice requirement. Appeals to the staff decision could go before the ADB. The ADB could be empowered to review alternative designs, which would involve discussions with an expert (at the expense of the applicant) to determine what is and is not feasible. He agreed to talk with the technical experts who worked on the Frances Anderson Center solar energy installation to gather additional technical information. The Board agreed this would be a good approach, and they directed staff to develop the appropriate code language to implement the concept. Board Member Stewart voiced concern about allowing members of the public to challenge staff decisions. She explained that solar energy installations are costly to design. Applicants may be discouraged from installing solar energy if there is a chance they will have to revise their plans based on an appeal. Board Member Cloutier emphasized that, as currently discussed, design review would only be required for structures that exceed the height limit. He expressed his belief that special consideration should be given in these situations because the applicant is asking for an exception to the rule. The City needs to take care how solar energy equipment is designed on taller buildings to limit the impacts. Board Member Stewart agreed that more scrutiny would be appropriate when the height limit would be exceeded. To address her concern, she suggested the permit application only require preliminary design sketches that can be changed at very little cost, if necessary. Board Member Tibbott commented that the solar energy industry has responded to complaints about unsightly equipment by providing more pleasing designs. He suggested the City should be a forerunner by requiring designs that are aesthetically pleasing. He noted there are numerous examples online of good and bad installations. The Board agreed it would be helpful for staff to provide pictures to illustrate various types of solar energy installations. Mr. Chave suggested the Board could also consider a similar exception for rooftop equipment retrofits, where the replacement meets or exceeds a certain standard. He explained that issues come up when rooftop equipment becomes outdated and a property owner wants to replace it with more energy efficient models. The new equipment does not always fit the exact box as the old equipment. A variance would be required for new equipment that exceeds the height limit. Once again, he reminded the Board that variances cannot be granted for economic reasons. The only time a variance would be granted is if an applicant can prove there is no other alternative and the equipment has to be replaced. He said it seems logical for the City to allow an exception to the height limit to accommodate equipment with a slightly different profile that is more energy efficient. He emphasized that staff is recommending an exception to the height limit of 1 foot or less. Board Member Stewart suggested the exception should allow sufficient height to increase the amount of insulation so that the energy savings is not lost. Chair Lovell pointed out that additional insulation could be added inside the building. Board Member Stewart agreed but noted that this would reduce the ceiling height, which is not desirable. She said she continues to seek ways to open people’s minds about why it is important to allow a few feet of additional height to accommodate progressive design concepts. She suggested the City should be more open to these opportunities. Board Member Cloutier suggested it would be appropriate for the City to allow an additional 1 foot in height for a property owner to replace rooftop mechanical equipment with more efficient models. However, he recommended that the height exception should be tied to an energy standard. Board Member Stewart suggested the exception should be performance based and require at least a 30% energy savings. The remainder of the Board agreed with the concept, and they directed staff to formulate appropriate code language. Packet Page 215 of 297 Re s i d e n t i a l So l a r In s t a l l a t i o n Ex a m p l e s So l a r In s t a l l a t i o n Ex a m p l e s 20 1 1 . 1 0 . 2 6 Pa c k e t Pa g e 21 6 of 29 7 Pa c k e t Pa g e 21 7 of 29 7 Pa c k e t Pa g e 21 8 of 29 7 Pa c k e t Pa g e 21 9 of 29 7 Keeping Cool With Solar at the Port of Baltimore Client MTC Logistics, Inc. and HelioSage Location Baltimore, MD Project Details 736.9 kW of PV mounted on the roof of a large refrigerated warehouse at the Port of Baltimore• The array consists of 3,136 REC modules• The entire system is clearly visible from Interstate 95• More Than Two Megawatts on One Roof Client Childress Klein and Duke Energy Location Charlotte, NC Project Details 2.174 MW on the roof of a Charlotte-area warehouse• The whole system uses nearly 9,500 solar modules• SEM crews transferred all panels from a staging area on the ground to the roof and had them put in place in just six weeks • This massive array takes up 260,544 square feet of roof space, all on one building• A Canopy of Solar in Florida for the Navy Client Sauer, Inc. and Naval Air Station Jacksonville Examples of Commercial Solar Power and Thermal Installations 3http://www.southern-energy.com/content/examples+of+commercial+solar+power+and+thermal+installatio... Packet Page 220 of 297 Location Jacksonville, FL Project Details 204 kW of PV at the Naval Air Station's Child Development Center • The canopy array provides electricity and offers shade and weather protection for the parking lot in front of the facility • Suniva-brand modules produced in the United States• Mecklenburg County Goes Big With Solar Thermal Client Mecklenburg County and SolTherm Location Various sites around Charlotte, NC Project Details 141 solar hot water collectors on five buildings:• 64 at Mecklenburg County Jail North • 32 at Metro School, which serves cognitively disabled students • 21 at the Medical Examiner's Office • 16 at Central Piedmont Community College's Culinary Arts building • 8 at Wallace H. Kuralt Centre, which houses the Department of Social Services• The rooftop featuring 64 collectors is the most SEM has ever put on a single building• Mecklenburg County will avoid using more than 1.5 million cubic feet of natural gas per year• Examples of Commercial Solar Power and Thermal Installations 4http://www.southern-energy.com/content/examples+of+commercial+solar+power+and+thermal+installatio... Packet Page 221 of 297 Solar and Wind Power Working Together Client Nypro Location Mebane, NC Project Details 222 kW rooftop PV system for one of the world's biggest employee-owned companies • The project consists of 1,008 REC 220-watt PV modules • Combined energy from the solar array and four wind turbines on site generate enough power to offset six of Nypro's massive 200-ton injection plastic molding machines • Virginia's Largest Solar Installation Client Eastern Mennonite University and Secure Futures, LLC Location Harrisonburg, VA Project Details 104 kW of PV mounted on the roof of EMU's Hartzler Library • Largest system in the Commonwealth• Unique financing system has EMU entered into 20-year power purchase agreement with Community Solar • Watch real-time solar energy production by the system! Examples of Commercial Solar Power and Thermal Installations 5http://www.southern-energy.com/content/examples+of+commercial+solar+power+and+thermal+installatio... Packet Page 222 of 297 PV & Thermal for the Marine Corps Client Marine Corps Logistics Base Albany and Suffolk Construction Location Albany, GA Project Details Two-pronged project features 50 solar thermal collectors and 75 kW of PV • SEM installed both systems and helped design the arrays with TLC Engineers• The solar installations are on the Bachelor Enlisted Quarters (BEQ) housing facility• The Power Flower Client Marbles Kids Museum Location Raleigh, NC Project Details SEM partnered with Marbles Kids Museum and Clearscapes to design and install this educational/artistic solar PV project • The 22-foot tall metal flower features a pair of 220 W Sanyo HIT modules• As the rotating structure is turned to face into/away from the sun, the flower head on top spins faster or slower, giving children a hands-on demonstration of how solar power works. • Examples of Commercial Solar Power and Thermal Installations 6http://www.southern-energy.com/content/examples+of+commercial+solar+power+and+thermal+installatio... Packet Page 223 of 297 Check out our video of the Power Flower in action!• Solar Power for NASA Client NASA and Energy Systems Group Location Langley, VA Project Details 39 kW of ground-mounted PV• First solar project at NASA's Langley Research Center• Includes a monitoring kiosk for visitors to view at the Pass & ID Station• 528 kW on the Roof of SEM's Charlotte Office Client The Carrier Center and Duke Energy Location Charlotte, NC Examples of Commercial Solar Power and Thermal Installations 7http://www.southern-energy.com/content/examples+of+commercial+solar+power+and+thermal+installatio... Packet Page 224 of 297 Project Details Assembled on top of the building where SEM leases office space for our Charlotte team • The array totals 528.08 kW, made up of nearly 2,300 panels • This system produces enough electricity to power 65 average homes • Wolfpack Red goes Green at NCSU Client North Carolina State University and Schneider Electric Location Raleigh, NC Project Details 30 Solar Thermal Water Heating Collectors• 112 Solar Pool Heating Collectors (one of the largest such systems in North Carolina)• Mounted on the roof of NCSU's Carmichael Gym• Solar Stays Local at the Vineyards Client RayLen Vineyards Location Mocksville, NC Examples of Commercial Solar Power and Thermal Installations 8http://www.southern-energy.com/content/examples+of+commercial+solar+power+and+thermal+installatio... Packet Page 225 of 297 Project Details 9.88 kilowatt solar PV system with 104 thin film modules • All companies involved in the project - racking, solar integrator, and panel manufacturer - are NC based businesses. • Danville Community Market Goes Solar Client City of Danville Location Southern Virginia Project Details 36.19 kW solar PV system• 154 roof-mounted solar panels• Project was funded by ARRA grants• Watch real-time solar energy production by the system! 5 Acres of Solar at SAS Headquarters Client SAS Headquarters Examples of Commercial Solar Power and Thermal Installations 9http://www.southern-energy.com/content/examples+of+commercial+solar+power+and+thermal+installatio... Packet Page 226 of 297 Location Cary, NC Project Details 1-megawatt solar PV system• 5,040 panels on five acres of land• SEM served as the primary contractor for SunPower on the project• One of the largest renewable energy investments in NC and the Southeast• 24-collector, roof-top solar thermal system• Provides hot water for employee cafeteria• Another 1 Megawatt Solar Farm in NC Client QVC Location Rocky Mount, NC Project Details 1-megawatt solar PV system providing clean energy to rural co-ops • SEM served as the primary contractor for SunPower on the project.• Will reduce annual energy costs by 20%• ground-breaking system at the time it was designed/installed, becoming one of the first two megawatt- sized PV systems in NC, and one of the first in the Southeast • Delta Products Client Delta Products Examples of Commercial Solar Power and Thermal Installations 10http://www.southern-energy.com/content/examples+of+commercial+solar+power+and+thermal+installati... Packet Page 227 of 297 Location Research Triangle Park, NC Project Details 30 kilowatt solar PV system• Was largest roof-mounted, corporate solar PV system in the state of NC • Glenaire Retirement Community Client Glenaire Retirement Community Location Cary, NC Project Details 6-collector pre-heating solar water heating system installed for cafeteria • Provides 20% of the cafeteria's hot water needs• Decision Support Client Decision Support Location Charlotte, NC Project Details 34 kilowatt solar PV roof-mounted system• The second SunPower PowerGuard PV installation in NC• Examples of Commercial Solar Power and Thermal Installations 11http://www.southern-energy.com/content/examples+of+commercial+solar+power+and+thermal+installati... Packet Page 228 of 297 Hanesbrands Client Hanesbrands Location Winston-Salem, NC Project Details 28-collector solar water heating system and 15 kilowatt solar PV system • SEM was awarded the project because of our proven track record and solar engineering capabilities • Solar PV Generates Power at Cherry Point Marine Corps Air Station Client Cherry Point Marine Corps Air Station Location Cherry Point, NC Project Details 55 kilowatt solar PV system • One of the largest systems owned by the Navy in the Southeast• The PV system is expected to have an annual energy production of 90,000 KWH. This is comparable to the yearly energy consumption of four average size homes • Designed to provide about 25 percent of Building 1016's energy during the day, helping displace peak energy demands. • During off-peak load hours, such as weekends, excess energy produced by the system will flow back into the grid and be purchased by the local utility company • Examples of Commercial Solar Power and Thermal Installations 12http://www.southern-energy.com/content/examples+of+commercial+solar+power+and+thermal+installati... Packet Page 229 of 297 Guide to Installing a Solar Electric System PHOTO CREDIT: BROTHERS ELECTRIC AND SOLAR This guide is designed to provide Seattle City Light customers with information on grid-connected solar electric systems. It provides background on solar electric systems, the components required, and outlines the steps to take if you want to install and interconnect a system to the utility grid. For solar questions not answered by this guide please contact Seattle City Light’s Conservation Help Line at (206) 684-3800 or by email at rescons.scl@seattle.gov. Packet Page 230 of 297 Guide to Installing a Solar Electric System 2 Contents Introduction............................................................................................................................................3 The History of Photovoltaic (PV) Technology.....................................................................................4 The Components of a Grid-Tied PV System.......................................................................................5 Siting Your System................................................................................................................................6 Selecting the Right Size System For You...........................................................................................8 Permit Requirements........................................................................................................................ 10 Costs and Incentives.......................................................................................................................... 12 Maintenance, Resale, & Recycling.................................................................................................. 15 Picking a Contractor .......................................................................................................................... 16 Installation and Incentive Checklist: 9 Steps to Solar Power...................................................... 17 Additional Resources......................................................................................................................... 20 Packet Page 231 of 297 Guide to Installing a Solar Electric System 3 Introduction Why you may want to install a solar electric system for your home or business: More and more City Light customers are showing interest in solar electric systems for their homes and businesses. Why? Solar electric systems are safe, reliable, pollution free, and use a renewable source of energy—the sun. Most systems have no moving parts and are increasingly easy to install. The option of net metering, or interconnecting a customer generating system to the utility grid, makes solar electric systems more economically viable. Landmark federal and state legislation have created new financial incentives for owning and operating a solar electric system. If you are interested in making a long-term investment to protect yourself from rising energy costs and want to reduce your personal environmental impact, now may be the time to learn more about installing a solar electric system for your home or business. Packet Page 232 of 297 Guide to Installing a Solar Electric System 4 The History of Photovoltaic (PV) Technology The first solar cell was created in 1883. It was inefficient by today’s standards, converting only 1–2% of sunlight into electricity. The breakthrough in solar cell technology came in 1954 when researchers at Bell Laboratories stumbled across the photovoltaic (or PV) properties of silicon while experimenting with new transistor technologies. Three years later, PV research began in earnest to develop an independent solar energy source for space technologies. Thanks to continuing research, modern commercial PV cells have improved to 11–15% efficiency. Historically, PV has been used extensively in areas that are not served by a power grid. As PV prices have dropped, and grid energy has become more expensive, PV systems are increasingly used in grid-tied applications.1 A solar electric or PV cell uses a semiconductor material similar to that used in computer chips to absorb sunlight and convert it into electricity. Multiple solar cells are linked together to form a module or panel. Multiple modules/panels are connected to form a PV array. There are three main types of PV panels: monocrystalline, polycrystalline, and amorphous silicon (thin film). A monocrystalline cell is the most efficient per area (produces the most power per square foot) and requires the most silicon. On the other end of the scale, amorphous silicon is the least efficient per area and requires the least amount of silicon. Most mono- and polycrystalline cells are incased in a glass panel with a metal frame. Because amorphous silicon cells use less silicon, they are more flexible and can be used in a variety of applications, including a peel-and-stick panel that adheres to a standing seam metal roof. 1 Historic summary provided by Solar Oregon, http://www.solaroregon.org/learn/solar_electric/history-of-pv, accessed February 25, 2009. Packet Page 233 of 297 Guide to Installing a Solar Electric System 5 The Components of a Grid-Tied PV System A PV System includes: 1. PV Array—Multiple PV panels installed together are called a PV array. Mounting arrays to rooftops is most common, yet they can also be located on a pole, a ground mounted rack, parking area shade covers, window awnings, etc. The PV array produces Direct Current (DC) power. 2. DC Disconnect—The DC Disconnect is a safety device that, when manually opened, stops power running from the array to the rest of the system. The DC disconnect is used during system installation and anytime your contractor needs to work on the system. 3. DC/AC Inverter—The PV array produces DC electricity, however, we use Alternating Current (AC) electricity in our buildings and power grid. The Inverter converts the DC power to AC power. 4. AC Disconnect—The AC Disconnect is another safety device and is often incorporated into the Inverter. Seattle City Light does not require an AC Disconnect on most small residential systems. (For details on this exemption, contact your Electric Service Representative—see Step 2 on the Installation and Incentive Checklist, page 17.) 5. Production Meter—The Production Meter measures the energy output (in kilowatt-hours, kWh) from your system and is used to record the amount of electricity generated. This component is not critical to power generation, but is necessary in order to take advantage of Washington State’s Production Incentive Program (as described in the Incentives section, page 12). 6. Building Breaker Box and Standard Utility Meter—Also called your building’s circuit panel or electrical service panel, the Breaker Box is where the power from the PV System enters the building. If the building is using electricity, the PV-produced electricity will be used first. If the building needs more electricity than the PV System is producing, utility grid power is automatically pulled into the building. When the PV System produces more electricity than is needed, the excess flows back out to the utility, spinning your utility billing meter backwards in the process. You earn credit for the excess power produced and can use that credit when the system is not producing energy. This process is referred to as “net metering.” Packet Page 234 of 297 Guide to Installing a Solar Electric System 6 Siting Your System A well-designed solar electric system has clear and unobstructed access to the sun for most of the day throughout the year. Siting a PV system correctly is critical in order to achieve maximum power production and thus maximum energy offset and financial return. Orientation and Tilt Optimal orientation for solar panels is true south. As you move away from true south, a system will suffer production losses, up to as much as 15–25% for panels oriented east or west. However with advancements in technology these losses are decreasing as inverter manufacturers learn how to maximize off-of-south orientations. In Seattle, solar panels produce the maximum power annually when mounted at a tilt of roughly 30 degrees. Shading Avoid shading as much as possible. Even minimal shading can significantly impact power production. You will want to consider potential shading from trees, buildings, power lines, telephone poles, and obstructions like chimneys and vent pipes.2 Your contractor should include the impact of obstructions on your power production estimate. Sloped Roof A significant portion of your system cost will be in the installation of the panels, so if you plan on replacing your roof in the next 5–7 years, consider doing that first. Otherwise, your installer will need to come back to remove the panels for the new roofing to be added, and then re-install the panels— all at your cost. Overall, you want to be sure your roof is in excellent long-term condition, because PV systems are designed to last a minimum of 20 years and many will last even longer. So, if you are unsure about the structural integrity of your roof, have it professionally inspected to verify its condition and suitability. 2 Google SketchUp is one tool that may help you model the impacts of shading. Learn more at http://sketchup.google.com/. Packet Page 235 of 297 Guide to Installing a Solar Electric System 7 Flat Roof Most residential and small commercial PV systems are installed on sloped roofs, yet it is possible to install on a flat roof. Contractors typically avoid penetrating a flat roof and instead use some sort of ballasted (weighted) means of securing the panels against wind. Building code officials will be concerned about the wind sheer and roof loading of such a system. If a flat roof system is in your future, plan to submit a professional engineer (PE) stamped drawing illustrating how the system will be secured to the building. Tracking Most residential and commercial PV installations are mounted to roofs and are fixed in place. If your system is going to be mounted on a pole or a flat roof, you have the choice of installing a tracking device. The simplest form of tracking is to seasonally adjust the tilt angle of the panels. Automatic tracking devices allow the panels to follow the sun as it moves through the sky, receiving direct light more often than a fixed system. Electrically operated and thermally operated trackers have their own costs, benefits, and drawbacks. Keep in mind that without a tracker, your PV system has no moving parts. While automatic trackers can increase production by 20–40%, they do add moving parts to the system, so there are operation and maintenance concerns to consider. Pole-mounted systems also have the additional cost of the pole installation. Learn more about all of these siting issues by reading articles in Home Power magazine: www.homepower.com. Packet Page 236 of 297 Guide to Installing a Solar Electric System 8 Selecting the Right Size System For You Three core factors affect the sizing of your system: your electricity usage, space availability on your property, and your budget. Your Electricity Usage Do you want to try to produce 100% of your power or some smaller percentage? While any excess production from month to month will carry over as a credit on your utility bill (net metering), you will not want to install a system that produces more than 100% of your power as the utility will not reimburse you for excess power produced at the end of the year.3 You may also not want to size the system too large if you are planning more energy conservation measures for the future. To determine how much power you use right now, look for the kilowatt-hour (kWh) consumption on your utility bill. Sum the kWh for the past year to get your annual electricity usage. For help understanding your bill, check out http://www.seattle.gov/light/help/#billtour. You can also use the Home Resource Profile (http://www.seattle.gov/conserve/homeprofile/) to look at your energy use over the year and potential conservation measures to reduce your usage. Space Availability The amount of unshaded, easy-to-access, space available for mounting panels will limit the size of the system. You can use In My Back Yard (IMBY), an online tool created by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory to estimate the area on your property available for mounting a system. IMBY allows you to draw a system on a map of your property and then estimates the specifications of the array given the size and orientation of your drawing. PV panels vary in their dimensions. While a vast number of PV panels are undergoing research and development, a limited number are available on the retail market. Home Power magazine (http://www.homepower.com) is one resource for comparing the various commercially available panels. Each year Home Power publishes evaluations of different panels. Local contractors will have 3 The year is defined as May 1st through April 30th by state law. Packet Page 237 of 297 Guide to Installing a Solar Electric System 9 particular brands they install regularly. When talking with them, find out which panels they use, why they like them, if the panels are UL Listed (required for electrical inspection and utility interconnection) and the panel’s warranty length. A standard industry PV panel warranty is 20–25 years, and manufacturers expect the panel will produce 80% of its rated capacity at the end of the warranty period. RESOURCE In My Back Yard (IMBY): http://nrel.gov/eis/imby RULE OF THUMB 1 kilowatt (kW) of PV panels will require approximately 100 square feet of area. If PV panels are unshaded, oriented to true south and mounted at approximately 30 degrees, they will produce approximately 900–1,000 kilowatt-hours (kWH) per year in Seattle. Your Budget It is a good idea to evaluate your budget and goals before choosing your system. Some questions to consider include: What is my budget for this project? Will I finance or pay for it out of my savings? Keep your budget in mind as you read the Cost and Incentives section of this guide (starts on page 12). Packet Page 238 of 297 Guide to Installing a Solar Electric System 10 Permit Requirements Electrical Permit Electrical permits are required for all solar electric systems and must be secured by the person doing the electrical work. In the vast majority of cases this will be your electrical contractor. Owners with the required planning and installation skills, who want to complete the installation themselves, can also obtain the electrical permit. Your contractor must submit an electrical drawing and the system will be subject to a field inspection after installation. Typical field-inspection permit fees for small systems are approximately $190. If your system design is atypical, your contractor may be required to go through a plan review. Building Permit Building permits in Seattle are required for solar arrays when any of the following apply: 1. The array weight is 1,000 pounds or more.4 2. The installation is structurally complex (determined by Dept. of Planning & Development). 3. The solar project is part of building alterations or additions valued over $4,000. 4. The solar project requires construction of stand-alone support structures valued over $4,000. RULE OF THUMB As a point of reference, a 2 kW PV system will weigh approximately 500 pounds. RESOURCE For Seattle residents, permits may be obtained at the DPD Applicant Services Center, 700 Fifth Avenue, 20th floor, (206) 684-8850, or at http://www.seattle.gov/dpd/Permits/. For electrical permit questions, contact DPD’s Electrical Technical Support at (206) 684-5383. 4 Building permits may be required if your system will be installed on a flat roof. In such an installation, specific calculations regarding roof loading and wind sheer are required. Packet Page 239 of 297 Guide to Installing a Solar Electric System 11 Land Use Requirements In Single Family, Multi-family and Residential Small Lot zones5, solar panels may be mounted to extend up to 4 feet above the zone's height limit, and/or extend up to 4 feet above the ridge of a pitched roof. Also, the total height from existing grade to the top of the solar panels may not extend more than 9 feet above the zone's height limit. In the Single Family and Residential Small Lot zones, a solar panel exceeding the zone height limit must be placed so that it does not shade the property to the North on January 21, at noon, any more than a structure built to the maximum permitted size for that zone. For assistance in determining solar exposure, please see CAM 417: Sun Chart: Determination of Solar Exposure. Set-Back Yard Requirements Ground or pole mounted PV systems cannot be located in front yards. They must be at least 15 feet from back property line and 3 feet from side property line. More specifics on set-back requirements can be found in CAM 420. RESOURCE CAMs: http://www.seattle.gov/dpd/publications/client_assistance_memos_(CAMs) 5 To determine the zoning on your property, visit http://www.seattle.gov/dpd/Research/Zoning_Maps/default.asp. Packet Page 240 of 297 Guide to Installing a Solar Electric System 12 Costs and Incentives Typical System Cost Cost depends on a number of factors. Most residential systems in Seattle are 2 to 3 kilowatt (kW) systems with an average installed cost of $8,000–$10,000 per kW for a total investment of between $16,000–$30,000. The cost is typically broken down into the following four areas: PV panels, labor, inverter, and balance of system components (racking, wiring, conduit, etc. and all permits/fees). Net Metering Your Grid Tied System If you generate more electricity over a billing period than you consume, the utility will credit your electric bill for every kilowatt-hour of electricity sent back to the power grid. The credit is applied at the retail rate for power. Net metering will continue for the life of the solar electricity installation. Washington State Sales Tax Exemption Until June 30, 2011, all solar electric systems less than 10 kW in size are exempt from the state sales taxes. From July 1, 2011, through June 30, 2013, solar electric systems less than 10 kW in size are exempt from 75% of the state sales tax. The tax exemption expires June 30, 2013. RESOURCE Your Installer will provide the required forms. Exemption legislation: RCW 82.08.02567 Washington Renewable Energy Production Incentive As of August 2006, Washington State provides financial incentives for electricity generated from renewable energy resources. Eligible electricity producing renewables include solar, wind, and anaerobic digestors (converts methane gas captured from livestock manure to electricity). The incentive is based on the total number of kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity generated between July 1 and June 30 (or the closest regular billing cycle) of the following year. Customers with eligible generation systems who have signed up for the program by submitting the Department of Revenue (DOR) application form and received certification from the DOR, will receive a letter and application Packet Page 241 of 297 Guide to Installing a Solar Electric System 13 form once per year from City Light. The letter document’s the system’s production based on City Light’s reading of the production meter. Once the customer approves the kWh amount and returns the signed application back to City Light, they will receive a check for the incentive payment. Utilities that pay customers renewable energy incentives are reimbursed by a credit on their state taxes. The program authorizes utilities to pay the following for the electricity produced by PV systems: $0.15 /kWh for a PV system with no “Made in Washington” components $0.18 /kWh for a PV system with a “Made in Washington” inverter $0.36 /kWh for a PV systems with “Made in Washington” panels $0.54 /kWh for a PV systems with “Made in Washington” panels and inverter Modules made in Washington are expected to be available in 2009/2010. The program is capped at $5,000 per year, per customer, and expires in 2020. RESOURCES Washington Legislation Renewable Energy Production Incentive—WAC 458-20-273: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=458-20-273 Washington State Department of Revenue registration form: http://northwestsolarcenter.org/5101%20q%26a.pdf Federal Income Tax Credits The federal Energy Policy Act of 2005, as amended by the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, includes provisions for individuals and businesses to claim a 30% federal income tax credit for the cost of solar installations. Tax credits apply to systems placed in service before January 1, 2016. RESOURCE For information on Federal Tax Credits, visit: http://www.dsireusa.org/ http://www.energysavers.gov/ Green Tags System owners have the option to sell their “green tags,” also known as Renewable Energy Credits (RECs) for an additional revenue source associated with the production of power. Customers may, however, choose not to sell the green tags, in order to claim the environmental benefits of the clean electricity for their own use. The REC market is very new. As demand for RECs from states, businesses, and individuals increases, we expect the value of RECs to increase as well. RESOURCE Northwest Solar Cooperative: http://www.solaroregon.org/get-involved/northwest-solar-coop Packet Page 242 of 297 Guide to Installing a Solar Electric System 14 Example Cost Calculations The examples below illustrate how the different sources of revenue and savings come together to impact the investment in a solar electric system.6 The snapshots are focused on the first five years after installation, as that is when most of the financial benefit will be received. However, savings on your energy bill through net metering will continue, for the lifetime of the system. Both examples below assume a 1 kW PV system installed for $8,000 will produce 900 kWhs per year and that the system was deemed exempt from the state’s sales tax. The examples show the financial impact of using Washington-made solar modules, and assumes the installed cost (labor, equipment and all permit fees) of both Washington-made and out-of-state panels is the same.7 Example #1 1 kW PV system (producing 900 kWh/year) PV System Installed Cost $8,000 Federal Incentives—Tax Credit, 30% of total cost $2,400 Incentive (non-WA made components)—15 cents /kWh, 5 year total $675 Net metering—Seattle City Light @ 7 cents /kWh, 5 year total $315 Green tags sales @ 2 cents/kWh, 5 year total $90 Incentives—Total after 5 years $3,480 Percent of system cost recouped after 5 years 44% Cost after 5 years of receiving incentives $4,520 Example #2 1 kW PV system (producing 900 kWh/year) —with Washington-made modules PV System Installed Cost— 1 kW PV system, producing 1000 kWh /year $8,000 Federal Incentives—Tax Credit, 30% of total cost $2,400 Incentive (non-WA made inverter)—36 cents /kWh, 5 year total $1,620 Net metering—Seattle City Light @ 7 cents /kWh, 5 year total $315 Green tags sales @ 2 cents/kWh, 5 year total $90 Incentives—Total after 5 years $4,425 Percent of system cost recouped after 5 years 55% Cost after 5 years of receiving incentives $3,575 6 To get a rough idea of total costs, including possible monthly cash flows if you finance your system, check out the Clean Power Estimator at http://kyocerasolar.cleanpowerestimator.com/kyocerasolar.htm. 7 Thanks to Mark Aalfs at Tacoma Power for the initial version of these examples. Packet Page 243 of 297 Guide to Installing a Solar Electric System 15 Maintenance, Resale, & Recycling Regular Maintenance There is very little maintenance required on a PV system with no moving parts. Some system owners wash their panels, but in the Northwest, our climate tends to take care of this chore. You may want to brush off the panels if they tend to collect leaves, but other than that, your system should operate as designed with no intervention. You can also keep track of your production by reading your production meter or checking the inverter display. Resale Value The affect of a solar system on the appraised value of your home can be hard to predict, but according to a study by ICF Consulting, every $1,000 reduction in annual energy bills increases a home’s resale value by $10,000 to $25,000. However, homes are generally valued in comparison to similarly sized and aged homes around them, and if there aren’t many solar homes in your neighborhood, the appraiser may not have a bar to measure against.8 The market for solar homes continues to grow as energy costs increase along with an increased interest in sustainable building. Recycling PV panels While it will be another 10 years until the first large number of photovoltaic panels reach the end of their life, the manufacturing members of the European association, PV CYCLE, have committed to setting up a voluntary collection and recycling scheme for end-of-life modules. They are committed to collecting a minimum of 65% of PV modules installed in Europe since 1990, and to recycling 85% of waste. Europe is leading the way and since many manufactures involved in PV CYCLE do business also in the U.S., there’s potential for a similar initiative here in North America. RESOURCE PV Cycle: http://www.pvcycle.org/ 8 http://www.realtor.org/rmodaily.nsf/0/1aab2c6905430c9f8625730c0058fd32?OpenDocument, accessed January 2, 2009. Packet Page 244 of 297 Guide to Installing a Solar Electric System 16 Picking a Contractor As with any construction project, best practices include asking these basic questions of a potential contractor: Do they have a business license? Are they licensed for the work you want them to do (mechanical, electrical, structural, etc.)? How long have they been in business? How many solar electric systems have they installed? Will they provide references? Have they attended manufacturer, trade association, or other training on solar electric installations? In comparing bids, you should consider warranty service, installed system price (equipment plus installation), system size, permit costs, and predicted energy output. It’s a good idea to check the Washington Labor and Industries website to learn more about the listed contractor, licensing status, violations, etc. The North American Board of Certified Energy Practitioners (NABCEP) runs a quality credentialing and certification program for renewable energy professionals. In order to be NABCEP certified, a practitioner must meet installation experience requirements, sign a code of ethics and pass a four- hour exam. Look for the NABCEP seal on contractors’ websites. More information about NABCEP and a list of certified installers can be found at their web site. RESOURCES Labor and Industries: http://www.lni.wa.gov/TradesLicensing/Contractors/HireCon/ NABCEP: http://www.nabcep.org/ Seattle City Light’s Solar Page: www.seattle.gov/light/solar and select “Find Solar Contractors” Packet Page 245 of 297 Guide to Installing a Solar Electric System 17 Installation and Incentive Checklist: 9 Steps to Solar Power #1 System Selection Contact contractors, schedule site evaluations, and choose your system design. Use the “Find Solar Contractors” link at www.seattle.gov/light/solar to find installers that have installed at least three PV systems in Seattle City Light’s service territory. TIP Installers typically charge $150–$300 for a site evaluation and often refund that cost with the purchase of a system. #2 Interconnection Application Contact Seattle City Light’s Conservation Help Line or visit our Solar Energy website for downloadable forms and information about connecting your new PV system to the electrical grid. Complete and submit these forms prior to installation. Once you submit your applications, a City Light representative will make a visit to your site prior to installation to mark the appropriate location for a production meter socket (socket to be installed by your installer, meter to be installed by City Light). The following forms are required: Interconnection Application & Agreement, with a “one-line” electrical diagram of the proposed system and an inverter “specification sheet” (most solar installers will complete these forms for you). Application for Electric Service—required to participate in state incentive program (includes the installation of a production meter, $59 fee, check payable to Seattle City Light). City Light Electric Service Representatives at your local (North or South) Service Centers are available to work with you or your installer to review your application submittals. RESOURCES Submit applications to Seattle City Light, Attn: Intake Desk, 1300 N. 97th Street, Seattle, WA, 98103. For questions contact Electric Service Representatives Candace Gruber at (206) 684-0791, candace.gruber@seattle.gov (projects North of Denny), or Dan Langdon at (206) 386-1678, dan.langdon@seattle.gov (for projects South of Denny). Packet Page 246 of 297 Guide to Installing a Solar Electric System 18 #3 Electrical Permit The person installing the system, typically your solar contractor, must obtain an electrical permit (specifically an Electrical Permit Application: No Plan Review). Zoning, setback requirements, roof height, and exposure may impact your installation. Contact DPD for land-use and electrical permit information if you have questions about your particular property. RESOURCES Electrical Permit Application: No Plan Review: http://www.seattle.gov/dpd/Publications/Forms/Over-the-Counter/default.asp Department of Planning & Development, Applicant Services Center, 20th floor of Seattle Municipal Tower, 700 Fifth Avenue, Seattle, WA, 98104, (206) 684-8850, www.seattle.gov/dpd/asc. NOTE Seattle City Light customers residing outside of Seattle should contact their local building department or the Washington Department of Labor and Industries for electrical permits. #4 Installation Install your solar electric system, including your production meter socket. City Light should have marked the ideal location for the production meter socket (for ease of meter reading). If you or your contractor have any questions about the marked location, please call your Service Representative (see Resources under Step 2). #5 Electrical Inspection Once installation is complete, call the Department of Planning & Development (or your local electrical permitting office if you are outside of Seattle) for an electrical inspection. New construction requires both a cover and final inspection—existing structures require only a final inspection. After passing the electrical inspection, you must notify your City Light Service Representative (same contact from Step 2). When City Light confirms your system was installed according to plan and has passed inspection, your Interconnection Agreement will be signed and a copy will be returned to you for your records. Congratulations! Once your system passes its electrical inspection, you may begin generating electricity. If you are not planning to apply for production incentives, this is your last step. #6 Production Meter Once City Light confirms that your system passed inspection, a meter technician will be scheduled to install your production meter. Packet Page 247 of 297 Guide to Installing a Solar Electric System 19 #7 Washington State Certification To be eligible for the production incentives, you must complete the Washington State Department of Revenue’s (DOR) Renewable Energy System Cost Recovery Certification form and mail or fax it to DOR as directed on the form. DOR will assign you a Tax Reporting Number (if you do not already have one), sign the form, and return the form to you along with a cover letter. Keep this form in a convenient location as you will need to submit a copy of it to City Light the first time you apply for your incentive. RESOURCE DOR Renewable Energy System Cost Recovery Certification form, visit www.seattle.gov/light/solar and click on “Install Solar” on left sidebar. #8 Apply for Federal Tax Credits Individuals and businesses that install solar electric systems are eligible for a federal tax credit of 30% of the system cost (the total of installation and materials). Individuals use Residential Energy Credits IRS Form 5695 and businesses use the Investment Credit IRS Form 3468. Updated forms can be found on the IRS website, www.irs.gov. #9 Annual Incentive Payments To monitor your production and calculate your incentive, City Light will read your production meter on the same schedule as your existing billing meter. In July of each year, Seattle City Light will mail you a letter reporting the kilowatt-hours (kWh) produced by your solar electric system during the previous 12 months and an Annual Incentive Payment form. Annual production will be based on City Light’s most recent production meter reading. For most customers, this reading will occur late May–July. The form will also document the incentive payment rate for the equipment you have installed. Customers will be asked to verify the kWh data and incentive payment by signing and returning the form to City Light. By September 30, you will be notified if your incentive application has been approved. Your incentive check will be mailed no later than December 15 of each year. First time incentive payment applications must include copies of your DOR Certification form and cover letter approving your renewable energy system. As a renewable energy generator, you must maintain all records of energy production and incentive payments received for a period of five years. City Light or DOR may review these records with five working days notice. Packet Page 248 of 297 Guide to Installing a Solar Electric System 20 Additional Resources For solar questions not answered by this guide please contact Seattle City Light’s Conservation Help Line at (206) 684-3800 or by email at rescons.scl@seattle.gov. If you want to do additional research here are some resources you may find useful: U.S. Department of Energy Solar Energy Technologies Program—a consumer resource covering solar basics, applications, and, research and development at the national level. http://www.eere.energy.gov/solar/photovoltaics.html Solar Washington—the local chapter of the American Solar Energy Society, providing events, newsletter and links posted on the web. http://www.solarwashington.org Northwest Solar Center—a program and free education service of the WSU Cooperative Extension Energy Program (206) 396-8446. http://www.northwestsolarcenter.org Solar Works in Seattle! We hope you decide to join the many Seattle area residents who are taking advantage of a local renewable resource to generate their own clean, green power. Seattle City Light is a publicly owned utility dedicated to exceeding our customers' expectations in producing and delivering low cost, reliable power in an environmentally responsible and safe way. We are committed to delivering the best customer service experience of any utility in the nation. Seattle City Light 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3200 P.O. Box 34023 Seattle, WA 98124-4023 Conservation Help Line: (206) 684-3800 August 2009 Packet Page 249 of 297 Solar Energy Install Solar Community Solar Upcoming Events Find Solar Contractors Terminology FAQ Renewable Energy Frequently Asked Questions These FAQs are not a technical guide for design or installation. For design or installation assistance we recommend that you contact an engineer, designer or contractor with solar electric experience. A solar electric system can be a substantial investment and careful planning will help ensure that you make the right decisions. Are you thinking of buying a solar electric system? What is solar electricity? Why should I buy a solar electric system? What equipment is needed? How much does a solar electric system cost? Is solar electricity a good investment? How much money will my solar electric system save? Are incentives available? Do I have a good site? Do I have enough space on my roof or property? Does the type of roof matter? What solar electric system is right for me? Is financing available? Who sells and installs solar electric systems? How do I choose among solar electric system providers? How do I choose among competing bids? What permits are required? What is net metering? What should I know about warranties? Where can I get further assistance? Are you thinking of buying a solar electric system for your home or business? More City Light customers are showing interest in solar electric systems for their homes and businesses. Why? Solar electric systems are safe, reliable, pollution free, and use a renewable source of energy - the sun. Systems have no moving parts and are increasingly easy to install. The option of net metering, or interconnecting a customer generating system to the utility grid, makes solar electric systems more economically viable. When you generate more power than you need during a billing period, you earn an energy credit for later use. Federal tax credits and state renewable energy production incentives offer additional financial benefits for owning and operating a solar electric system. What is solar electricity? Solar electricity is produced when sunlight reacts directly with semiconductor materials in solar electric cells, a process that frees electrons and creates an electrical current. Electricity is produced whenever the sun is shining, but more is produced when sunlight is intense (like on a clear sunny day) and direct (when the sun's rays are perpendicular to the solar cells). Solar electric technology, which converts sunlight directly into electricity, should not to be confused with solar thermal systems designed to heat water. Why should I buy a solar electric system? People decide to buy solar electric systems for a variety of reasons. While many would not consider solar a good financial investment, it may make sense for others who wish to invest in a more sustainable future. Some people are motivated to help preserve the earth's finite fossil-fuel resources and support the development of clean energy technologies. Others might consider solar electricity a property improvement that reduces the risk of increasing utility rates. Whatever your reason, solar energy is widely thought to be the energy source of choice for the future Benefits of solar electricity: Contact an Energy (206) 684-380 SCLEnergyAdvisor@s Printer-Friendly Versio (Adobe PDF, 420 Departments | Services | Staff Directory | My.Se a Seattle.gov This Department Your Account Your Services Energy Delivery Conservation & Renewables Environment Newsroom Careers Seattle City Light | Solar Energy | Frequently Asked Questions http://www.seattle.gov/light/Conserve/cgen/cv5_cgen5.asp 1 of 7 10/21/2011 2:35 PM Packet Page 250 of 297 No fuel (no price risk) No water No noise High reliability Low maintenance Long life Modular and expandable Short lead times What equipment is needed? A solar electric system consists of basic components for generating and delivering electricity to the home or business. There are two fundamental types of solar electric systems: independent, or "off grid" systems, and interconnected, or "grid-tied" systems. Only grid-tied systems are covered here since most customers will choose to generate electricity in parallel with Seattle City Light's distribution system. For systems less than 100 kilowatts (kW), grid-tied systems are often referred to as "net metered" systems. Commonly used components are described below. The basic building block of solar electric generation is the solar "cell." Cells are wired together to produce a "module", which looks like and is often called a "panel". (This sometimes is confusing because panels also describe solar thermal systems for heating water.) Solar electric modules range in power output from about 10 watts to 400 watts. Many recent residential applications use modules that are 200 watts or more to minimize the number of modules and amount of wiring required. A group of modules wired together form a solar "array". Various mounting rails and hardware are used to attach modules to a building or other support structure and are often called "racking". In addition to solar modules (not shown), a solar inverter, solar meter and AC & DC disconnect switches complete this solar electric system. A solar electric system tied to the utility grid also requires an "inverter"; a power electronics device that converts direct current (DC) produced by the modules into conventional alternating current (AC). Modern inverters also provide important safety features to meet the latest National Electric Code standards, as well as monitoring and diagnostic capabilities. AC and DC power disconnect switches allow components to be safely shut down and isolated from the utility grid. These are increasingly incorporated into the newest inverter models. Batteries are optional in a net metered system and are only used if a customer wants to provide backup power during utility power outages. A separate utility-grade kilowatt-hour meter, or "production meter" is also optional but is required to receive City Light renewable energy production incentives (see question below on incentives). How much does a solar electric system cost? Cost depends on a number of factors, but for conventional systems mounted on a sloped roof, cost is fairly proportional to size ranging from $5 – 8 per watt of capacity installed. Thus, a typical 3,000 watt or 3 kilowatt (kW) system would cost $15,000 – $24,000 installed. Other cost factors relate to design complexity, system configuration, equipment options, and contractor expertise. Systems that integrate solar cells into roofing or glazing materials or require special equipment to install cost more. Local solar electric providers can provide you with estimates or bids. Is solar electricity a good investment? Unlike electricity purchased month to month, solar electricity comes with an initial investment but no monthly charges. It's like paying for years-worth of electricity all at once. You'll probably appreciate having lower electric bills as you harvest "free" electricity but the initial expense of a system may be jolting. Financing may be an option to help spread out initial system costs. If we divide the initial cost of a system by the total electricity produced over 30-years, the cost of solar electricity (without incentives) is currently over 20 cents/kilowatt-hour (kWh). This is about 3 times what City Light residential customers now pay for electricity. With net metering and new federal and state incentives (see below) the economics of solar become more favorable. Remember, if reducing energy costs is your prime concern, there are many energy conservation measures that offer shorter paybacks than solar. Visit City Light's Conservation website for further information. How much money will my solar electric system save? Dollar savings will depend on how much electricity is produced, when it is produced, and whether you qualify for additional incentives (see below). You can estimate how much electricity your system will produce using the following simple "rule of thumb" for well sited (shade free) Seattle area systems: Installed wattage = kWh generated per year For example, a 3 kilowatt (3,000 watt) system will generate about 3,000 kWh in one year. Small deviations from "ideal" system orientation (due south) and tilt (30 - 45 degrees) will not affect annual performance more than about 5%. However, annual electricity production may vary by up to 20% due to annual variations in local weather. You could also ask your system provider for a written estimate of the average annual electricity production for any system proposed, which should take shading into account. Seattle City Light | Solar Energy | Frequently Asked Questions http://www.seattle.gov/light/Conserve/cgen/cv5_cgen5.asp 2 of 7 10/21/2011 2:35 PM Packet Page 251 of 297 How much is that electricity worth? There is no simple answer to this question since it depends on how much electricity you use, your current rate schedule (residential, general service, etc.) as well as how much and when you generate solar electricity. Seattle City Light net metering customers receive full retail value for their solar electricity. However, residential customers pay lower summer and first-tier rates are higher winter and second-tier rates. Since most solar electricity will be generated in the summer, it will be worth either first tier or second tier residential summer rates (currently about 5 cents and 10 cents per kWh, respectively). If you are now paying for electricity at second-tier rates, more savings will occur at this higher rate. Low electricity use at first-tier rates and any net-generation at first-tier rates will provide savings at a lower rate. Are incentives available? Yes, the following incentives are available for City Light customers. Further information is provided in the Guide to Installing a Solar Electric System. City Light Net Metering- When you install your solar electric system in compliance with City Light Interconnection Standards and sign an Interconnection Agreement, any solar electricity you generate that is not immediately needed goes back into City Light's grid, spinning the meter backwards and lowering your electric bill. Meter readings by City Light record a customer's "net" electricity use. At the end of any billing period, if overall electricity production exceeds consumption (indicated by a negative meter read) a billing credit at current retail rates is applied to your next bill. Federal Tax Incentives- The federal Energy Policy Act of 2005, as amended by the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, includes provisions for individuals and businesses to claim a 30% federal income tax credit for the cost of solar technology installations. Credit applies to the basis remaining after any utility or state incentives have been taken. Reference IRS Form 5695 for residential energy credits and IRS Form 3468 for business investment credits. Contact the U.S. Internal Revenue Service for further information. Washington State Sales Tax Exemption- Until June 30, 2011, all solar electric systems less than 10 kW in size are exempt from state sales taxes. From July 1, 2011, through June 30, 2013, solar electric systems less than 10 kW in size are exempt from 75% of the state sales tax. The tax exemption expires June 30, 2013. Renewable Energy Production Incentives- In 2006, the WA State Department of Revenue issued WAC 458-20-273 establishing rules for utilities choosing to offer renewable energy production incentives for qualifying customer generation. The program offers a base-level production incentive of 15 cents per kilowatt-hour ($0.15/kWh) capped at $5,000 per year, for individuals, businesses, or local governments that generate electricity from solar power, wind power or anaerobic digesters. Higher incentive levels are available (up to 54 cents per kilowatt-hour) if the solar electric (PV) modules panels and/or inverter are manufactured in the State of Washington. If the system is a community-solar system the base rate is 30 cents per kilowatt-hour ($0.30/kWh) with higher incentive levels if system components are made in-state. The program runs from July 1, 2005 through June 30, 2020. Ownership of the renewable energy credits or "green tags" remains with the customer-generator. Your solar electric system must be certified by the State Department of Revenue. Do I have a good site? To get the most benefit from a system, a well-designed solar electric system has clear and unobstructed access to the sun for most of the day, throughout the year. You can make an initial assessment yourself, and if the site looks promising, your solar electric provider has the tools to trace the sun's path at your site and offer a more complete assessment. Is your site free from shade by trees, roof lines, nearby buildings, or other obstructions in the surrounding landscape? Remember that an area that is unshaded during one part of the day, may be shaded during another. Even small objects, e.g. a utility or flagpole, can result in significant shade losses. As little as 10 percent shade on a module can reduce output by as much as 80 percent. Other factors aside, the best orientation (direction) for a solar electric system is south, where the sun spends most of its time, and therefore south-facing roof installations are most common. Roofs that face east or west may be acceptable but generate about 20% less electricity. Solar "trees" reach skyward in this popular Seattle Park. On flat roofs, solar modules can be mounted flat, facing up to the sky, or mounted on frames tilted south at various angles. There is less than a 5% variation from peak annual performance when modules are tilted south between 20 and 60 degrees. If a rooftop can't be used, solar modules can also be mounted on a separate structure, pole or the ground, either on a fixed or "tracking" mount that follows the sun to orient the modules for maximum performance. Other options (used most often in multifamily or commercial applications) include mounting modules on structures that offer weather protection (e.g covered walkways or canopies) or provide shade as window awnings. Seattle City Light | Solar Energy | Frequently Asked Questions http://www.seattle.gov/light/Conserve/cgen/cv5_cgen5.asp 3 of 7 10/21/2011 2:35 PM Packet Page 252 of 297 Do I have enough space on my roof or property? The amount of space needed by a solar electric system is directly related to the type and size of the system you purchase. One attractive feature of solar electricity is that systems may be sized for almost any application or power requirement. So, you should be able to find at least a small area that has good solar exposure. Of course, larger systems will provide a greater percentage of your annual electricity needs. Most residential systems now operating in Seattle range in size from 2 to 4 kilowatts (kW), but smaller or larger systems are feasible. A 1 kW watt system might require as little as 80 square feet of roof area for 5 typical modules. A 10 kW system may require as much as 1,000 square feet. If your area is limited, you might consider using more efficient solar modules, which provide more watts/unit of area but cost about the same per watt. System sizing is discussed further below and should also be discussed with your solar electric provider. Does the type of roof matter? Roof type, slope and condition may influence the solar equipment you select. While a solar electric system can be installed on any type of roof, some roof types are simpler and less expensive to work with. Typically, composition shingles and moderate to low slopes are easiest to work with. Steep, slate roofs are most difficult. In any case, an experienced solar installer will be familiar with all roof types and installation techniques that eliminate any possibility of roof leakage. Ask your installer how the solar electric system may affect your roof warranty. If your roof is older and needs to be replaced in the near future, you may want to defer installation of a solar electric system to avoid having to remove and reinstall the system. One trend in solar electric systems are solar-producing materials that can be integrated into the roof or glazing components of a building. Options include three-tab solar shingles, flat solar tiles with lap-joints, solar material that comes in rolls and lies between raised-seam metal roof sections, and thin-film solar wafers that go between two panes of glass but allow some light to pass. These materials are pricey but could offset the cost of conventional materials they replace. What solar electric system is right for me? You could examine electric bills over the past year and work with your solar electric provider to estimate the size of the system needed to achieve a certain percentage of your household's annual electricity needs. This might be a good time to consider energy efficiency measures (appliance upgrades, etc.) to lower your electricity use and boost the percentage contribution of your solar system. To qualify for net metering your solar electric system must not be larger than 100 kilowatts of peak generating capacity. A battery system to provide back-up power in case of a utility power outage may sound attractive, but add cost and complexity to the system. Batteries will require regular maintenance and more frequent replacement than most other system components. Thin film solar cells built into the glass do double duty by providing shade and electricity at the Ballard Neighborhood Service Center. Consider the "economies of scale" that can decrease the cost per watt as you increase the size of the system. For example, many inverters are sized for systems up 2.5 or 3 kilowatts, and if your array is smaller, say 1 kilowatt, you may still end up buying the same inverter. Labor costs for a small system may be nearly as much as those for a larger system. For example, your solar electric provider is likely to offer you a better price to install a 2 kilowatt system all at once, than to install a 1 kilowatt system this year and another similar system next year, since multiple orders and site visits add cost. Is financing available? Although there are some special programs available for financing solar and other renewable energy investments, the best way to finance solar electric systems for homes is through a mortgage loan. Mortgage financing options include your primary mortgage, a second mortgage such as a U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Title 1 loan, or a home-equity loan that is secured by your property. There are two advantages to mortgage financing. First, mortgage financing usually provides longer terms and lower interest rates than other loans such as conventional bank loans. Second, the interest paid on a mortgage loan is generally deductible on your federal income tax (subject to certain conditions). If you choose to install a solar electric system at the same time that you build, buy, or refinance your home, by including the cost of the solar electric system in your mortgage loan you can avoid additional loan application forms or fees. If mortgage financing is not available, look for other sources of financing, such as conventional bank loans. Remember to look for the best possible combination of low rate and long term. This will allow you to amortize your solar electric system as inexpensively as possible. The terms and conditions of your financing are likely to be the most important factor in determining the effective price of your solar electric power. Solar electric systems purchased for business applications are probably best financed through a company's existing sources of funds for capital purchases - often Small Business Administration loans or conventional bank loans. Who sells and installs solar electric systems? In some locations, finding a solar electric provider can be as simple as picking up the telephone directory and looking under "Solar Energy Equipment and Systems - Dealers." Be aware, however, that many of those listings are for solar water-heating companies. They may not be experienced in solar electric system design or installation. Similarly, many electrical contractors, although proficient in most electrical work, may not have expertise in solar electricity or residential roof-mounting techniques. Unless you are skilled in solar electric installation, you should consider hiring a reputable professional contractor with experience in installing solar electric systems. Visit the Find Solar Contractors page for a list of solar contractors with experience installing solar electric systems in Seattle City Light's service territory. Seattle City Light | Solar Energy | Frequently Asked Questions http://www.seattle.gov/light/Conserve/cgen/cv5_cgen5.asp 4 of 7 10/21/2011 2:35 PM Packet Page 253 of 297 How do I choose among solar electric system providers? Compile a list of prospective solar electric providers. You might first consider those closest to you, because the contractors travel costs might add to your system price. Next, contact these providers and find out what products and services they offer. At minimum, find out the following: Is the company properly licensed? - This usually means that either the company or a subcontractor has an electrical contractor's license. The Washington State Department of Labor and Industries website includes tools for hiring an electrical contractor. You can look up if a contractor is licensed, bonded & insured, and if they have committed any infractions. How many grid-tied solar electric systems has the contractor installed? - Experience installing grid-tied systems should be considered valuable but not mandatory. Since grid-tied systems are relatively uncommon (although this is starting to change), many contractors with solar electric experience have worked only on systems such as those that power remote homes far from the nearest utility line. These contractors may have experience with all aspects of solar electric system installation except the connection to the utility grid. Although grid-connection work is different from off-grid work, a reputable company with solar electric experience should not be eliminated just because it has not installed grid-connected solar electric systems in the past. - Other forms of documenting installer experience might include: a solar contractor specialty license issued by a local building jurisdiction; certification by a group such as a state chapter of the Solar Energy Industries Association; or, a letter from a solar electric system manufacturer stating that the installer has experience and/or training necessary to install the system properly. How do I choose among competing bids? First, ensure that all of the bids are made on the same basis. For example, comparing a bid for a system mounted on the ground with another bid for a rooftop system is like comparing apples to oranges. Bids should cover the total cost of getting the solar electric system up and running, including hardware, installation, connection to the grid, permitting, sales tax, and warranty. Bids should clearly state the maximum generating capacity of the system measured in watts or kilowatts. If possible, have the bids specify the system capacity in "AC watts" under a standard set of test conditions, or specify the output of the system at the inverter. You may want to obtain an estimate of the amount of electricity that the system will generate on an annual basis measured in kilowatt-hours. Because generation depends on climate - which varies year to year - it is unrealistic to expect a specific or guaranteed amount. A range of ± 20% is more realistic. Warranty is an important factor for evaluating bids. Some rebate programs (none in Seattle) require that systems be covered by, say, a two-year parts-and-labor written installation warranty, in addition to any manufacturers' warranties on specific components. The installer may offer longer warranties. Ask yourself, "Will this company remain in business to stand behind any manufacturer or installation warranties?" Price should not be your only consideration. Often, you get what you pay for. Remember that a solar electric company is a business just like any other, with overhead and operating expenses that must be covered. It's always possible that a low price could be a sign of inexperience. Companies that plan to stay in business must charge enough for their products and services to cover their costs, plus a fair profit margin. What permits are required? City Light customers will need an electrical permit from the Seattle Department of Planning and Development (DPD) or respective local jurisdiction, to meet City Light's requirements for net metering (see information on net metering, below). An electrical permit is required to qualify for Washington State's production incentive program. You may also need a building or land use permit depending on the size and complexity of the installation. Customer Assistance Memo (CAM) 420 by DPD is a good resource for learning more about permitting and installation requirements for solar electric systems in Seattle. If you live in a community in which a homeowners association requires approval for solar installations, you or your solar electric provider may need to submit additional plans. Typically, your solar electric provider will take care of all required permits and include the cost into the overall system price. However, in some cases, your solar electric provider may not know how much time or money will be involved in obtaining required permits. If so, this task may be priced on a time-and-materials basis, particularly if additional drawings or calculations must be provided to the permitting agency. In any case, make sure the permitting costs and responsibilities are addressed at the start with your solar electric provider. Code requirements for solar electric systems vary somewhat from one jurisdiction to the next, but most are based on the National Electrical Code (NEC). NEC Article 690 carefully spells out requirements for designing and installing safe, reliable, code-compliant solar electric systems. Because most local code requirements are based on the NEC, your building inspector is likely to rely on Article 690 for guidance in determining whether your solar electric system has been properly designed and installed. Seattle City Light | Solar Energy | Frequently Asked Questions http://www.seattle.gov/light/Conserve/cgen/cv5_cgen5.asp 5 of 7 10/21/2011 2:35 PM Packet Page 254 of 297 If you are among the first people in your community to install a grid-tied solar electric system, your local building department may not have approved one of these systems. If this is the case, you and your solar electric provider can speed the process by working closely and cooperatively with your local building officials to help educate them about the technology and its characteristics. What is net metering? "Net metering" refers to an interconnected customer generation system with a meter that reads the "net" difference between the customer's electricity generation and consumption. State law requires the 16 largest utilities in the Washington (including Seattle City Light) to offer net metering to customers for generation up to 100 kilowatts in capacity. Most utility revenue meters are already able to spin in both directions according to whether power is being consumed or generated. The net metering customer pays only the net amount of electricity that they consume for any billing period. Any excess electricity generated by the customer during a billing period is credited on the customer's next bill. Large public and commercial buildings often have plenty of opportunities to add solar electricity. City Light requires that customers install generating systems in compliance with City Light Interconnection Standards and sign an Interconnection Agreement in order to interconnect solar electric systems or other approved customer-owned generation.. It is the customer's responsibility to ensure that the solar electric provider complies with these standards. The agreement also specifies the terms and conditions under which your system will be connected and operated. If you are unclear about your obligations under this agreement, you should contact City Light for clarification. Further information is provided on City Light's Solar Energy webpage. After your solar electric system is installed, it must be inspected and "signed off" by the local permitting agency (the Department of Planning and Development in Seattle) and by Seattle City Light. Once permits, and your Interconnection Agreement are signed, you may begin operating your solar electric system. What should I know about warranties? Warranties are key to ensuring that your solar electric system will be repaired if something should malfunction during the warranty period. Be sure you know who is responsible for honoring the various warranties associated with your system - the manufacturer, provider (dealer) or installer (contractor). Your provider should disclose the warranty responsibility of each party. Know the financial arrangements, such as contractor's bonds, that assure the warranty will be honored. A warranty does not guarantee that the company will remain in business to honor the warranty. To avoid any misunderstandings, be sure to read all warranties carefully and review the terms and conditions with your provider. Under some solar rebate programs, dealers must provide documentation that specifies information on system and component warranty coverage and claims procedures. Where can I get further assistance? Seattle City Light (SCL) - Energy Advisor, 206-684-3800, SCLEnergyAdvisor@seattle.gov Seattle Department of Planning and Development (DPD) Applicant Services Center - permit application and issuance, plan review 20th floor of Seattle Municipal Tower 700 Fifth Avenue, Seattle 206.684.8850 http://www.seattle.gov/dpd/asc Public Resource Center - permit research, publications, self-help computers 20th floor of Seattle Municipal Tower 700 Fifth Avenue, Seattle 206.684.8467 http://www.seattle.gov/dpd/prc Solar Washington- the local chapter of the American Solar Energy Society, providing events, newsletter and links posted on the web http://www.solarwashington.org U.S. Department of Energy- Solar Energy Technologies Program: Photovotaics - A consumer resource which covers solar basics, uses and research & development at the national level. http://www.eere.energy.gov/solar/photovoltaics.html Renewable Energy | Business Conservation | Residential Conservation The Seattle City Light Web Team: WEBTeam.SCL@seattle.gov Seattle City Light -- 700 5th Avenue, Suite 3200, Seattle, WA 98104-5031 -- 206.684.3000 Mailing address: 700 5th Avenue, Suite 3200, P.O. Box 34023 Seattle, WA 98124-4023 SCL Home | Search SCL | Site Directory | Table of Contents | Contact Us | Top of Page News | Account Info | Conservation | Environment | Neighborhoods | Products | About Us Residential Services | Business Services | New Construction Resources | Kids Exploring Energy Seattle City Light | Solar Energy | Frequently Asked Questions http://www.seattle.gov/light/Conserve/cgen/cv5_cgen5.asp 6 of 7 10/21/2011 2:35 PM Packet Page 255 of 297 Seattle.gov Home Page Business In Seattle Living in Seattle Visiting Seattle City Services Mayor's Office City Council City Departments My.Seattle.Gov Questions / Complaints FAQs Employee Directory City Customer Service Call (206) 684-CITY (2489) CityLink Blogs Social Media Sites Data.seattle.gov © Copyright 1995-2011 City of Seattle Privacy and Security Policy Seattle City Light | Solar Energy | Frequently Asked Questions http://www.seattle.gov/light/Conserve/cgen/cv5_cgen5.asp 7 of 7 10/21/2011 2:35 PM Packet Page 256 of 297 1 SOLAR ENERGY OPTIONS FOR WESTERN WASHINGTON by: Jack Hardy, PhD President Western Solar Inc. 360-746-0859 jack@westernsolarinc.com www.westernsolarinc.com Packet Page 257 of 297 2 SOLAR ENERGY OPTIONS FOR WESTERN WASHINGTON Is it really possible to use solar energy in Western Washington? After all, our climate is cloudy and rainy much of the year. Fortunately however, this lack of winter sun is offset by generally warm and sunny summers. In fact, on an annual average, Western Washington receives about 68% as much solar energy as Southern California. Thus, a solar energy collector in Washington with a 32% greater area than one in Southern California will produce about the same amount of energy. There are many options for using solar energy. This report includes only the most cost-effective solar approaches for Western Washington State. These include solar space heating, solar hot water, and solar electric energy. We do not discuss biomass energy, wind power, or other renewable energy sources, which are also possible. In all uses of solar energy, it is important to have a location which is open to the sun on the south side without appreciable shading from about 9 in the morning until 3 in the afternoon. The effect of shading, for example from an evergreen tree, can be determined quickly using a Solar Pathfinder. This instrument is placed near the planned location of a solar collector. It provides a map of the sun's path each hour of the day and each month of the year, and can determine the percentage of the total available solar energy which will be blocked by the shading from a tree or a building. I. SOLAR SPACE HEATING Of the total energy used by an average residence, about 61% is for space heating. In Western Washington most of this can be supplied by solar energy. Solar space heating relies on the green house effect. Like a green house, a glass collecting surface transmits visible light to the interior (or collector) space. That energy is reflected at longer wave lengths of infrared energy to which glass is opaque; thus heat is trapped within the interior space. Existing homes can sometimes be retrofited to utilize solar space heating (see active heating below). However, the best approach is to incorporate “passive” solar design into the original building plan. Passive solar heating involves no fans, pumps or active circulation. It is the most cost-effective approach and is ideally suited to our climate in Western Washington, where overall winter heating demand is relatively low, nights are overcast and not extremely cold, summers are mild, and air-conditioning is not required. Our experience indicates that with proper design, about 70% of residential heating requirements in Western Washington can be obtained from passive solar heating. Solar space heating strategies should: 1) maximize winter heat gain, 2) incorporate heat storage, 3) minimize heat loss, 4) minimize summer heat gain, and 5) utilize cost- effective approaches. First, winter heat gain can be achieved using either passive or active heat collection. In passive solar heating, the building should be designed with a long east- west axis to maximize the south wall area. Relatively large areas of window glass are placed on the south wall of the house. At our latitude (49 degrees) south windows gain about 1232 Btu /square foot of glass /day on average in December. Packet Page 258 of 297 3 Active solar space heating can also be used in Western Washington. This approach relies on air or liquid collectors that concentrate the solar heat gain. Heated water is then circulated through pipes using pumps, while heated air is circulated through ducts with fans. The heat is transferred directly to the interior space or to storage for later use. Differential thermostats are generally used to control the heat flow. For example, a recent 2800 square foot home designed by Western Solar incorporates a 4 foot wide sun space with glass covering the entire south wall of the home. Inside the sun space are 42 cylinders holding a total 1786 gallons of water for thermal mass heat storage. This home derives about 70% of its annual heating requirement from solar energy. Active solar heating can also be accomplished by using hot air collectors combined with duct fans to the heated space or by using hydronic in-floor or radiant heat with roof-mounted hot water collectors. However, these two approaches are more effective in climates which have more winter sun days than Western Washington. Second, the heat gained through south windows needs to be stored and available at night or during less sunny days. This can be accomplished in a cost-effective way by using insulated concrete slab floors, masonry interior walls or interior water storage tubes. Concrete slab floors (4 to 6 inches thick) need at least 3 inches of EPS foam insulation underneath to minimize heat loss. An interior wall of 8 inch thick concrete block (voids filled) can be covered with attractive textured plaster. Water storage tubes 12 to 18 inches in diameter and 8 to 10 feet high in the interior space are very effective and store 3 times more heat per volume than concrete. Third, good solar space heating design requires minimization of heat loss through the use of good insulation, advanced framing, structurally insulated panels, insulated concrete forms, or insulated concrete block construction, high performance windows and doors and nighttime window coverings. For example, interior insulating blinds can be lowered to cover windows at night to minimize nighttime heating loss through glass windows. Fourth, to minimize summer heat gain the building should be well insulated with R-50 in the ceiling and a minimum of R-23 in the walls. Solar powered attic fans can be used to minimize attic heat accumulation. Most important however is the use of well- designed shading on south facing windows. South roof soffits or eave overhangs should be designed to provide summer shade on south windows, but allow the lower winter sun to penetrate to the interior of the building. Finally, building design and material choices need to be cost-effective. Spending $10,000 on a solar collector system to save $50 per year in heating costs may save greenhouse gas emissions, but makes little sense as an investment. Fortunately, with the right choices solar space heating can be accomplished for very little or no additional cost. A well-insulated passive solar building requires very little back-up heat. Instead of a large and expensive auxiliary heating system, heat can often be provided by a fireplace or a few radiant electric panels. South windows and good day lighting mean that electric light use is reduced. A well designed passive solar heated building can more than pay for itself. Heating costs for a 2000 square foot home in Western Washington can be reduced from a typical $852.00 a year to about $150.00 per year. With this initial savings and with Packet Page 259 of 297 4 natural gas costs increasing about 14% a year, a solar home will save more than $35,000.00 in heating costs over a 15 year period. II. SOLAR WATER HEATING About 30% of residential energy consumption is used for heating water. Thus, solar water heating provides probably the second most cost-effective use of solar energy. In the Pacific Northwest, a solar hot water system must be protected against winter freezing. The most cost-effective system uses a flat plate collector (usually roof- mounted) in which water containing nontoxic propylene glycol antifreeze circulates through copper tubing inside an insulated glass covered collector. The glycol solution coming into the collector is heated and returned to a solar storage tank containing a heat exchanger. The heat exchanger transfers the solar heated water to the hot water storage tank. From this hot water storage tank, water moves either to a second backup electric or gas heated tank or through an on-demand heater. Or in a single tank system, the solar hot water storage tank contains a backup electric heating element to maintain the desired temperature. In the summertime, solar energy provides about 100% of the water heating requirement. In the wintertime, when enough solar energy is not available, backup heat either electric or gas maintains the desired hot water temperature. A typical system with two hot water collectors can produce about 70% of the annual solar hot water requirement for a family or 2 or 3 in the Pacific Northwest. III. SOLAR ELECTRIC Solar electric panels convert sunlight to electricity. The most common type of solar panel is based on polycrystalline silicon, a semiconductor material that converts photons to electrons with an efficiency of about 15%. A number of small silicon cells are hooked together in series to make up a solar panel (also called a module). A collection of panels, often mounted on the roof or on a ground mount or pole mount system, is called an array. Direct current produced by the solar panels goes to an inverter and is converted to 120 volt alternating current for normal use. In a grid-tied system, anytime the solar panels are producing more than is being consumed in the building, electricity flows back to the utility grid, essentially running the electric meter backwards. Batteries are only required for off-grid systems or to maintain power from a grid-tied system during a power outage. In Washington State, as in most regions, net metering means that you are billed monthly only for the net amount, i.e. the amount you use minus what you feed back to the grid. So depending on its size, a solar electric system may reduce your monthly electric bill by 30%, 50%, or even 100%. Solar electricity can be used to run electric furnaces or baseboard heaters for space heating or electric hot water heaters. However, heat produced by electrical resistance is not efficient and thus is not very cost-effective. The best use of electricity is for efficient light fixtures and appliances. Solar hot water is best produced with the solar hot water technology described above. Packet Page 260 of 297 5 IV. SOLAR ECONOMICS We are frequently asked if one should wait until the price of solar technology goes down. Actually, there is no better time to invest in a solar system than now. The price of solar systems is dictated, as with most items, by supply and demand. For example, the price per watt decreased about 30% from 1991 to 2003. Then between 2003 and 2004 world supply did not keep up with demand and price levels actually increased before again dropping back almost to 1991 levels. Advances in cell technology and efficiency are occurring but very slowly. So this is a great time to invest in solar energy. Solar electric systems require little or no maintenance. There are no moving parts and the panels usually have a 25 year warranty. The inverters are warranted for at least 10 years and good quality solar batteries can last for 5 to 15 years. There is a significant initial investment for a solar electric system. For example, a 3 kilowatt grid-tied system installed may run about $28,500. However, federal, state and utility incentives offset much of cost of solar electric systems. For example, in Washington State in addition to net metering, the state requires utilities to pay the producer of solar electricity 15 to 18 cents per kilowatt hour for all the solar electricity produced, regardless of whether it is used or not. Also, on September 23, 2008 the U.S. Congress passed the “Energy Improvement and Extension Act”. This act provides, among other things, an Individual Income Tax Credit amounting to 30% of the total installed cost of solar electric systems installed from January 2009 through 2016. Also, under this act, businesses can claim the 30% Tax Credit as well as accelerated 5 year depreciation. Investment in solar space heating, hot water or electric, will increase the value of a home. According to studies in Appraisal Journal, October 1998, the selling price of homes increases about $21.00 for every $1.00 decrease in annual fuel bills. Thus a solar home that may save $700.00 per year in heating costs would have an added value of $14,593.00 compared to a traditional home. This added property value along with savings on energy, and federal and state incentives add up to a 14% annual tax-free return on investment. Of course, in addition to the financial benefits of utilizing solar energy there is the reduction in our dependence on oil imports and the reduction in green house gas emissions. For example, a 5 kilowatt solar electric system over a 25 year period will eliminate about 97 tons of carbon dioxide emissions normally produced by coal fired or oil fired power plants. This is equivalent to about 194,000 automobile miles. Solar energy in Western Washington is cost-effective, good for the environment, and buildings can be designed to use zero net energy. A case in point is a solar home in Bellingham, Washington. There passive solar heating provides most of the space heating requirement of 8,856 kilowatt hours per year. Hot water is provided by a flat-plate closed-loop solar collector system, and a solar electric system once expanded will provide about 9.3 kilowatts. This home produces as much energy as it consumes. In summary, solar energy in Western Washington can reduce your annual heating bills, increase the value of your home or business, and reduce fossil fuel greenhouse gas emissions. Packet Page 261 of 297 6 MORE INFORMATION Climate Change: Causes, Effects, and Solutions http://www.amazon.com/Climate- Change-Causes-Effects-Solutions/dp/0470850191/ref=ed_oe_p Data Base for State Incentives for Renewables and Efficiency http://www.dsireusa.org/ Solar Washington www.solarwashington.org U.S. EPA Clean Energy Program http://www.epa.gov/solar/ U.S. Department of Energy / Solar http://www.energy.gov/energysources/solar.htm Washington State University http://www.energy.wsu.edu/projects/renewables/solar.cfm Western Solar Inc. www.westernsolarinc.com Packet Page 262 of 297 P a c k e t P a g e 2 6 3 o f 2 9 7 P a c k e t P a g e 2 6 4 o f 2 9 7 P a c k e t P a g e 2 6 5 o f 2 9 7 P a c k e t P a g e 2 6 6 o f 2 9 7 AM-4349 Item #: 8. City Council Meeting Date: 12/06/2011 Time:60 Minutes Submitted For:Bertrand Hauss Submitted By:Megan Cruz Department:Engineering Review Committee: Community/Development Services Committee Action: Recommend Review by Full Council Type:Action Information Subject Title Discussion on five projects related to the Capital Facilities Plan Element update (2012-2017) to the City's Comprehensive Plan and Capital Improvement Program: Five Corners Roundabout, 9th Ave transportation improvements, Traffic Calming Program, 4th Ave Cultural Corridor and Public Market. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Add a Public Market Facility project in the Downtown Waterfront area to the 2012-2017 Capital Facilities Plan and Capital Improvement Program and approve the 2012-2017 Capital Facilities Plan and Capital Improvement Program. Previous Council Action On September 13, 2011, the CS/DS Committee reviewed the proposed 2012-2017 Capital Facilities Plan and Capital Improvement Program. On September 27, 2011, the proposed 2012-2017 Capital Facilities Plan and Capital Improvement Program were presented to the Council for review and discusion. On October 4, 2011, a Public Hearing on the Capital Facilities Plan Element Update for 2012-2017 to the City’s Comprehensive Plan and Capital Improvement Program was held and Council recommended further discussion on five projects (Five Corners Roundabout, 9th Ave transportation improvements, Traffic Calming Program, 4th Ave Cultural Corridor and Public Market) Narrative Five Corners Roundabout: This project was identified as a concurrency project in the 2002 Transportation Plan and the 2009 Transportation Plan. Under the Growth Management Act (GMA), concurrency is the requirement that adequate infrastructure be planned and financed to support the City’s adopted future land use plan. Level of Service (LOS) standards on City Streets is LOS D and LOS E on Highways of Regional Significance (such as SR-524). Intersections that operate below these LOS standards are considered deficient under concurrency. The Five Corners project (212th St. SW @ 84th Ave. W) proposes to convert an all-way stop-controlled intersection to a roundabout, to improve the traffic flow of all approaches. The intersection currently operates at LOS F and would improve to LOS B after project completion. The project is identified as a Safety / Capacity project in both the latest CIP and CFP. The City was awarded a Federal grant to fund the Design and Right-of-Way phases. The design phase began in August 2011 and is scheduled for Packet Page 267 of 297 completion, along with the Right-of-Way phase, in 2013 (no construction funding has yet been secured). 9th Ave Transportation Improvements at Caspers St, Main St. and Walnut St.: These projects were identified as concurrency projects in the 2002 Transportation Plan and the 2009 Transportation Plan. The 9th Ave. N at Caspers St. (SR-524) project proposes to convert a one-approach stop-controlled intersection to a signalized intersection, to improve intersection delay and safety. The intersection currently has a LOS C and doesn’t exceed the LOS E standard (Highways of Regional Significance) until 2025. This is why the project is not included in the 2012-2017 Capital Improvement Program and is only shown in the out years (2018-2025) in the Capital Facilities Plan. The 9th Ave. at Main St. and 9th Ave. at Walnut St. projects propose to convert all-way stop controlled intersections to signalized intersections, improving intersection delay and traffic flow. Both projects would improve the LOS during the PM peak hours from an existing LOS E (intersection delay = 48 seconds) to LOS B (intersection delay = 13 seconds). The projects are identified in the latest CFP (scheduled between 2018 and 2025). A very low cost interim solution was evaluated and adopted in the 2009 Transportation Plan that would re-stripe 9th Ave from Walnut St. to Main St. and provide two lanes in both the northbound and southbound directions. The additional travel lanes will require the removal of parking on both sides of 9th Ave within the project limits. The interim projects are in the CIP/CFP (scheduled for 2013) and the improvements result in a LOS D at 9th/Main St. and LOS C at 9th/Walnut St. Traffic Calming Program: In 2011, Council authorized $50,000 for the Traffic Calming Program. With this funding, staff conducted speed studies along 23 street segments where citizens have expressed speeding concerns in the past. Each segment was evaluated based on a set of criteria and ranked in a priority list (see attachment). The traffic calming funds are providing three radar feedback signs at: (1) Northbound Olympic View Dr.; (2) Southbound Olympic View Dr; and (3)Northbound Olympic Avenue. Funds were also used to develop a conceptual drawing of the Sunset Avenue Walkway project between Bell St. and Caspers St. The walkway project proposes to install a sidewalk and bike lane on the west side of the street by narrowing the roadway width. This project is expected to reduce speeds along this stretch (serving as a traffic calming measure) and improve the safety of the non-motorized transportation users. Based on the 2012-2017 CIP, $10,000 has been budgeted each year for this program from 2012 to 2014. In 2012, this amount will fund new speed studies / evaluations and the installation costs of traffic calming devices at one or two locations from the priority list (semi-permanent radar feedback signs that can be relocated from one location to another, bulb-outs, pedestrian refuge islands, traffic circle or speed cushions). If additional funding is provided in 2012, staff recommends funding a mid-block pedestrian crossing in the Main St. project between 5th Ave. and 6th Ave. (~ total cost: $30,000 / currently in design phase). 4th Avenue Cultural Corridor: The 4th Avenue Cultural Corridor Plan was completed and presented to City Council in 2009 as a publicly embraced project to stimulate economic activity in the downtown. Fundamental to the project was the assumption that movement of people, visitors and residents, along 4th Avenue between Edmonds Center for the Arts and the core retail district is critical for the economic vitality of downtown Edmonds. The Plan was funded in part by a federal Preserve America grant and the planning process included extensive public participation*. The 4th Avenue Plan is at a 15% level design for redeveloping the public right of way to encourage pedestrian flow and increased retail activity in this specially zoned section of the downtown. Packet Page 268 of 297 In order to proceed with implementing the plan, the City needs to survey the corridor and complete a 30% level design. With this level of design, the project is more competitive for a variety of grants from federal and state agencies. The project would ideally be coordinated with upgrades to utilities such as waterlines that the City has scheduled. Funding called out in the CFP is to initiate steps to reach the 30% level of design and then proceed with seeking grant funding in future years. The 4th Avenue Cultural Corridor is a long-term project with significant economic benefits for downtown Edmonds. In the short-term, the City is currently administering a second Preserve America grant to create a Downtown Cultural Heritage Tour with artist made interpretive signage elements that were recommended in the 4th Avenue Cultural Corridor Plan. Background: when Edmonds Center for the Arts was first proposed, the City Planning Board recognized that it would be important to make 4th Avenue a more inviting connection between the facility and the core downtown and beautification improvements were called out in the Capital Improvements Projects budget by the Parks Department. The Planning Board incorporated the idea into their downtown/waterfront activity center planning and created the BD5 zoning for the area. The 2006 Streetscape Plan update included a concept plan for an Arts Corridor on 4th. The 2008 Parks & Open Space Comprehensive Plan and the 2008 Community Cultural Plan recognizes the 4th Avenue Cultural Corridor as both a critical connection/linear park and as a unique cultural project that contributes to economic development through enhancing Edmonds’ identity as a cultural destination. *In 2007 the City applied for matching funds for planning and received a federal grant of $50,000 from Preserve America to create an Implementation and Funding Plan for the 4th Avenue Cultural Corridor. In 2008, SvR Design was selected to develop the plan. A community advisory group (CAG) first met in June 2008, followed by several more CAG meetings and two public open houses. The CAG included representatives from the Historic Preservation Commission, Arts Commission, Planning Board, property owners, residents, local business, interested citizens and community partners including Edmonds Center for the Arts, the Chamber, Edmonds Community College, the Historic Museum and the Edmonds Arts Festival Foundation. In addition to public meetings, the draft plan was presented by staff at the Arts Commission, Historic Preservation Commission, Chamber Economic Development Committee, Downtown Edmonds Merchants Association, and Rotary. SvR presented the completed Plan to Planning Board and to City Council in 2009. Downtown Year Round Public Market: This element was discussed last year with City Council. There was some interest in adding this element to the CFP. This is in alignment with the Park, Recreation, and Open Space Plan in Chapter 6, Action Plan, under recommended actions for Regional Parks, “ Acquire and develop at least seven additional acres of waterfront property and property in the Downtown Waterfront Activity Center for regional use. In addition, it is also addresses as part of Chapter 7, Funding Plan, in Project priorities of acquisition and development of downtown and waterfront property for public purposes. This element does not identify any particular property, nor have any funds identified yet. It also is important for Council to understand that it is just an idea, and staff has not proceeded to work with any community groups, the current Market association, or property owners in pursuing this idea. Adding this element to the CFP would allow staff to start to explore this further. Packet Page 269 of 297 Attachments Attachment 1 - Traffic Calming List Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Engineering Robert English 12/01/2011 06:56 PM Public Works Phil Williams 12/02/2011 09:54 AM City Clerk Sandy Chase 12/02/2011 10:01 AM Mayor Dave Earling 12/02/2011 12:07 PM Final Approval Sandy Chase 12/02/2011 12:10 PM Form Started By: Megan Cruz Started On: 11/07/2011 01:18 PM Final Approval Date: 12/02/2011 Packet Page 270 of 297 TR A F F I C C A L M I N G P R I O R I T Y L I S T FI N A L R A N K I N G St r e t c h Ro a d w a y C l a s s i f i c a t i o n S p e e d P e d . g e n e r a t o r s V o l u m e U n c o n t r o l l e d d i s t a n c e S i d e w a l k A c c i d e n t s T O T A L 1 OV D ( N B ) Co l l e c t o r 16 20 16 10 4 12 7 8 2 OV D ( S B ) Co l l e c t o r 4 20 16 10 4 12 6 6 3 Ta l b o t R d ( N B ) Lo c a l S t r e e t 30 0 4 10 4 12 6 0 4 Ol y m p i c A v . ( N B ) Lo c a l S t r e e t 12 20 12 8 4 3 5 9 5 22 8 t h S t . S W ( W B ) Mi n o r A r t e r i a l 16 10 16 6 8 3 5 9 6 3r d A v . S ( S B ) P r i n c i p a l A r t e r i a l 30 1 0 8 4 0 6 5 8 7 Bo w d o i n A v . ( E B ) Co l l e c t o r 16 10 20 8 0 3 5 7 8 Bo w d o i n A v . ( W B ) Co l l e c t o r 16 10 20 8 0 3 5 7 9 Ol y m p i c A v ( S B ) Lo c a l S t r e e t 8 20 12 8 4 3 5 5 10 22 8 t h S t . S W ( E B ) Mi n o r A r t e r i a l 12 10 16 6 8 3 5 5 11 Ta l b o t R d . ( S B ) Lo c a l S t r e e t 20 0 4 10 4 12 5 0 12 Wa l n u t A v . L o c a l S t r e e t 20 0 1 2 4 0 3 3 9 13 23 2 n d S t . S W ( b o t h ) Lo c a l S t r e e t 4 10 8 4 8 3 3 7 14 20 0 t h S t . S W Lo c a l S t r e e t 8 10 4 6 0 3 3 1 15 18 8 t h S t . S W E B ) Lo c a l S t r e e t 4 10 4 4 4 3 2 9 16 3r d A v . S ( N B ) P r i n c i p a l A r t e r i a l 0 1 0 8 4 0 6 2 8 17 Ma p l e w o o d D r . ( b o t h d i r ) L o c a l S t r e e t 0 0 1 2 4 8 3 2 7 18 18 8 t h S t . S W ( W B ) Lo c a l S t r e e t 0 10 4 4 4 3 2 5 19 21 5 1 8 9 2 nd A v e W ( N B ) Lo c a l S t r e e t 4 0 4 4 8 3 2 3 20 22 2 0 7 9 2 n d A v . W ( b o t h d i r . ) Lo c a l S t r e e t 0 0 4 4 8 3 1 9 21 So u n d v i e w D r . Lo c a l S t r e e t 0 0 4 4 8 3 1 9 22 93 r d P l . W ( b o t h d i r e c t i o n s ) L o c a l S t r e e t 0 0 4 4 0 3 1 1 23 82 t h P l . W ( b o t h d i r e c t i o n s ) L o c a l S t r e e t 0 0 4 2 0 3 9 No t e : y e l l o w h i g h l i g h t e d s t r e t c h e s a r e o n e s w h e r e 8 5 t h p e r c e n t i l e s p e e d > 8 m p h o v e r t h e s p e e d l i m i t s p e e d ( r e q u i r e m e n t t o b e c o n s i d e r e d f o r T r a f f i c C a l m i n g Pr o g r a m a s i d e n t i f i e d i n 20 0 9 T r a n s p o r t a t i o n P l a n ) . Pa c k e t Pa g e 27 1 of 29 7 AM-4397 Item #: 9. City Council Meeting Date: 12/06/2011 Time:15 Minutes Submitted By:Carrie Hite Department:Parks and Recreation Review Committee: Committee Action: Type: Information Subject Title Non Represented Salary and Benefits Study: Survey Comparators Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Council discuss and give staff guidance on survey comparators. Previous Council Action Council awarded a contract to Public Service Personnel Consultants ( PSPC) to complete a job description update, a Non represented employee market survey, and update of the Non represented compensation policy on October 18, 2011. PSPC presented the scope of work and process to Council on October 25th, 2011. Narrative PSPC will be presenting a recommendation on the survey comparators in order to proceed with the Non represented salary and benefit survey, and Non represented compensation policy update. Please see attached memo from PSPC. Attachments PSPC Memo PSPC Presentation Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date City Clerk Sandy Chase 11/30/2011 02:25 PM Mayor Dave Earling 12/02/2011 11:14 AM Final Approval Linda Hynd 12/02/2011 11:45 AM Form Started By: Carrie Hite Started On: 11/30/2011 01:59 PM Final Approval Date: 12/02/2011 Packet Page 272 of 297 Packet Page 273 of 297 Packet Page 274 of 297 Non-Represented Compensation Study December 6, 2011 Packet Page 275 of 297 Refresh: Project Scope and Deliverables City-wide classification and job description updating study as authorized by Council. Project to include direct employee participation and input. Non-represented Compensation Survey comparing City’s total compensation plans by benchmark job,as well as benefits offerings and salary policies,to the appropriate marketplace(s). Updating of compensation policies for non-represented job titles and development of updated pay structure to ensure a fair,appropriate and competitive pay system. Packet Page 276 of 297 Recommended Data Sources for Survey We recommend the City’s non-represented classifications be compared to other nearby and/or similarly-sized public employers in the immediate area,including: We will also include private sector data from published surveys for some occupations,such as finance,IT,engineering etc. Auburn Kirkland SeaTac Bellevue * Lynnwood Seattle * Bothell Marysville Shoreline Burien Puyallup Everett * Redmond Snohomish County * Issaquah Renton * King County * Kent * Sammamish * Differentials will be applied for size-sensitive occupationsPacket Page 277 of 297 Sample Base Salary Survey Illustration 4 External Aged Midpoint $% Accountant $48,530 $52,108 -$3,578 -6.87% Accountant Bellaire $63,290 Accountant Friendswood $54,868 Staff Accountant III Pearland $53,980 Accountant La Porte $48,683 Accountant Sugar Land $47,733 Accountant I Baytown $45,621 average actual Accountant Texas City $44,946 Accountant Woodlands $44,529 Accountant Houston $44,360 Accountant West University Place $43,503 No response Harris County - No response Pasadena - Individual Employer Rate:$49,151 Accountant - 5yr Private Sector ERI Salary Assessor - Houston $55,066 Published Survey Rate:$55,066 Prevailing Rate:$52,108 Survey Job Class Participant OrganizationRecommended Job Class Current Midpoint Variance9/30/11 Packet Page 278 of 297 5Benchmark Placement Illustration Accountant Prevailing Rate was $52,108; Nearest Range per Survey is Range 22 Salary Range Minimum Midpoint Maximum 17 $32,918 $41,147 $49,377 18 $34,564 $43,205 $51,845 19 $36,292 $45,365 $54,438 20 $38,106 $47,633 $57,160 21 $40,012 $50,015 $60,018 22 $42,012 $52,515 $63,018 23 $44,113 $55,141 $66,169 24 $46,319 $57,898 $69,478 25 $48,635 $60,793 $72,952 26 $51,066 $63,833 $76,599 27 $53,620 $67,024 $80,429 28 $56,301 $70,376 $84,451 29 $59,116 $73,894 $88,673 Sample Table Has 5% Between Midpoints Packet Page 279 of 297 Pay Range Illustration 6 Min: 80% of Midpoint Max: 120% of Midpoint Midpoint 100% of Pay Range Market Alignment By Position / Title Hiring Range*Journey Rate Above Market * D.O.E.5 –7 Years?Exceptional Performance Packet Page 280 of 297 Policy Development Survey comparators –model for now and future updates. Application of market data –pay structure comparisons and desired competitiveness level. Objective and sustainable in-range pay adjustments to assure retention and alleviate compression. Hiring,placement,and merit /market guidelines. Packet Page 281 of 297 Factors Influencing Pay Strategies Compensation Philosophy or Necessary Market Position Sample Factors Conservative Aggressive Talent Supply Abundant Limited Mobility Limited Portable Staffing Level Robust Lean Geography Isolated Metropolitan Competition Minimal All Around! Turnover Minimal Moderate / High Packet Page 282 of 297 Summary Questions/Comments/Discussion Packet Page 283 of 297 AM-4404 Item #: 10. City Council Meeting Date: 12/06/2011 Time:15 Minutes Submitted For:Strom Peterson and Diane Buckshnis Submitted By:Stephen Clifton Department:Community Services Review Committee: Committee Action: Type:Action Information Subject Title Extension of sunset date for Citizens Economic Development Commission. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Recommend approving attached ordinance extending the sunset date of the Economic Development Commission to December 31, 2014. Previous Council Action April 21, 2009 - The Edmonds City Council approved Resolution No. 1198 related to addressing long-term revenue challenges facing the City of Edmonds. June 2, 2009 - The Edmonds City Council approved Ordinance 3735 which amended the Edmonds City Code, Title 10, to add a new Chapter 10.75, thus creating a Citizens Economic Development Commission. October 5, 2011 - The Edmonds City Council passed Ordinance No. 3808 amending the provisions of ECC 10/75.010(B) which extended the sunset date for the Economic Development Commission one year to December 31, 2011. Narrative Following several presentations by members of the 2009 Levy Review Committee, the City Council approved Resolution No. 1198 which directed staff to create an ordinance forming a Citizens' Economic Development Commission (EDC) for the purposes of determining new strategies for economic development within the City of Edmonds, and identifying potential new sources of revenue. 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. The provisions of Ordinance establishing the EDC was to expire on December 31, 2010. As mentioned earlier, the Edmonds City Council passed Ordinance No. 3808 which extended the sunset date one year to December 31, 2011. During the November 16, 2011 EDC meeting, commissioners discussed the topic of further extending the sunset date and asked whether there is interest by the City Council to extend the sunset date. There was a consensus by EDC members that the sunset date should be extended in order to continue a concentrated effort on addressing economic development related matters, and if this were to happen, the extension time frame should exceed one year with City staff suggesting up to 3 years. Packet Page 284 of 297 suggesting up to 3 years. Regarding the appointment of EDC members, City staff is recommending that the City Council initiate a similar process used for selecting and appointing initial EDC members in year 2009. More specifically, the City would issue a press release similar to what was issued on June 4, 2009 (see attached) soliciting interested citizens to fill out and submit an application to the City. The applications would then be forwarded to the City Council for their review and consideration prior to appointing EDC members. If the City Council chooses to extend the sunset date 3yrs, the Council could also consider staggering terms, e.g., one appointment would be for 2 years and the second appointment would be for 3 years. This would work well if in the future the City Council chooses to extend the sunset date beyond a 3-year timeframe. In order to maintain some continuity on, and institutional memory within the EDC, City staff recommends encouraging existing EDC members to submit an application for reappointment. Applicants will be asked to identify whether they currently serve on the EDC. Attachments Draft Ordinance Extending the Sunset Date of the EDC to December 31, 2014 Resolution 1198 Ordinance 3735 Creating CEDC Resolution 1224 June 4, 2009 Press Release Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date City Clerk Sandy Chase 12/01/2011 04:00 PM Community Services/Economic Dev.Stephen Clifton 12/01/2011 04:07 PM City Clerk Sandy Chase 12/01/2011 04:08 PM Mayor Dave Earling 12/02/2011 11:10 AM Final Approval Linda Hynd 12/02/2011 11:45 AM Form Started By: Stephen Clifton Started On: 12/01/2011 11:17 AM Final Approval Date: 12/02/2011 Packet Page 285 of 297 - 1 - ORDINANCE NO. _______ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF ECC 10.75.010(B) IN ORDER TO EXTEND A SUNSET DATE FOR THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION FOR AN ADDITIONAL THIRTY SIX (36) MONTHS, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. WHEREAS, the Citizens Economic Development Commission was established by Ordinance No. 3735 in order to make recommendations to the City Council and the other commissions of the City in order to develop new strategies for economic development within the City and identify new sources of revenue for consideration, and WHEREAS, the Edmonds City Council deemed it appropriate to extend the life of the Commission for an additional twelve months and approved Ordinance 3808 on October 5, 2010, thus extending the sunset date of the Economic Development Commission to December 31, 2011, and WHEREAS, the continuing economic crisis affecting both the nation and the City of Edmonds has created a continuing situation in which the City Council deems it appropriate to extend the life of the Commission for an additional thirty six (36) months, NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Packet Page 286 of 297 - 2 - Section 1. The Edmonds City Code, Section 10.75.010 Commission created - membership. 10.75.010 Commission created - membership. , subsection B, relating to the Citizens Economic Development Commission is hereby amended to read as follows: . . . B. The term of appointments of Economic Development Commission members shall serve thirty six (36) months until December 31, 2014, unless that date is extended by action of the City Council. The authority for the Commission shall also automatically sunset and expire on December 31, 2014. 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 DAVE EARLING ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: BY Jeffrey B. Taraday, City Attorney FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: Packet Page 287 of 297 - 3 - EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. Packet Page 288 of 297 - 4 - 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 ECC 10.75.010(B) IN ORDER TO EXTEND A SUNSET DATE FOR THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION FOR THREE ADDITIONAL YEARS, 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 4822-1816-8334, v. 2 Packet Page 289 of 297 Packet Page 290 of 297 Packet Page 291 of 297 Packet Page 292 of 297 Packet Page 293 of 297 Packet Page 294 of 297 Packet Page 295 of 297 Packet Page 296 of 297 Press Release City of Edmonds Mayor Gary Haakenson June 4, 2009 For Immediate Release To: Edmonds City Council The Edmonds Beacon editor@edmondsbeacon.com The Edmonds Enterprise edmonds@heraldnet.com The Everett Herald newstips@heraldnet.com cfyall@heraldnet.com The Seattle Times lthompson@seattletimes.com KIRO-TV jorsillo@kirotv.com Contact: Stephen Clifton, Community Services & Economic Development Director 425.775.7724 City seeks applicants for new economic development commission (Edmonds - WA) The City Council recently authorized the formation of a citizens commission to address the specific issues related to economic development within the city of Edmonds. The Citizens Economic Development Commission will determine new strategies for economic development within the city of Edmonds; design strategies to improve commercial viability and tourism development; and identify new sources of revenue for consideration by the Edmonds City Council. In addition to its other duties, the commission will work in conjunction with the Planning Board to review and consider economic development strategies. Each councilmember may appoint up to two members; the mayor may appoint up to three members. Commission members must reside within Edmonds city limits. Meetings of the commission will be held at a time and place determined by the commission chair or a majority of the members of the commission. The commission will be in effect through December 31, 2010. Interested individuals may pick up an application at the reception desk in the lobby of City Hall located at 121 5th Ave. N., or call 425.771.0247 to receive an application by mail or email. Applications must be submitted by 4:30 p.m. on Tuesday, June 30, 2009. # # # Packet Page 297 of 297