Loading...
2012.11.05 CC Agenda Packet              AGENDA EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL Council Chambers ~ Public Safety Complex 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds MONDAY, NOVEMBER 5, 2012             6:45 P.M. CALL TO ORDER / FLAG SALUTE   1.(5 Minutes)Roll Call   2.(15 Minutes)Meet with candidate for appointment to the Architectural Design Board.   3.(5 Minutes)Approval of Agenda   4.(5 Minutes)Approval of Consent Agenda Items   A.AM-5232 Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of October 23, 2012.   B.AM-5233 Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of October 30, 2012.   C.AM-5231 Approval of claim checks #135144 through #135275 dated November 1, 2012 for $131,486.85. Approval of payroll direct deposit & checks #51772 through #51787 for $462,236.65, benefit checks #51788 through #51799 & wire payments of $195,441.47 for the period October 16, 2012 through October 31, 2012.   D.AM-5218 Approval of list of Edmonds' businesses applying for renewal of their liquor license with the Washington State Liquor Control Board, October 2012.   E.AM-5217 Confirm Architectural Design Board candidate Cary Guenther to the Architectural Design Board.   F.AM-5219 Authorization for Mayor to sign agreement with Edmonds Public Facilities District regarding display of Chihuly artwork.   G.AM-5237 Community Services/Economic Development Department Quarterly Report - October, 2012.   5.(5 Minutes) AM-5220 Proclamation in honor of Bill Brayer, founder of MS Helping Hands. Packet Page 1 of 266   6.(5 Minutes) AM-5236 Video Annotation of Agendas   7.(10 Minutes) AM-5234 Closed record review of a "Type IV-B" rezone application initiated by owners Sid Odgers and Ken Darwin to change the zoning designation for their properties located at 8609/8611/8615 244th Street SW from Single Family Residential "RS-8" to Multiple Residential "RM-2.4."  The Comprehensive Plan designation for these properties was amended last year from "Single Family Urban 1" to "Multi Family Medium Density."   8.(10 Minutes) AM-5229 Public hearing on Ordinance No. 3894 - An Interim Zoning Ordinance that would allow farmers markets in Business Commercial (BC) and Business Downtown (BD) Zones.   9.The following public hearing will be rescheduled to a later date:  Public hearing on the addition of a transportation corridor study of State Route 104, between the Interurban Trail (76th Ave. W) and the ferry terminal, to the 2013-2018 Capital Improvement Program.   10.(20 Minutes) AM-5226 Public Hearing on 2013 revenue sources including property taxes.   11.(20 Minutes) AM-5225 Public Hearing on 2013 budget.   12.(20 Minutes) AM-5227 2013 Property Tax Ordinance   13.Audience Comments (3 minute limit per person)* *Regarding matters not listed on the Agenda as Closed Record Review or as Public Hearings   14.(45 Minutes) AM-5230 Nonrepresented Compensation Policy   15.(20 Minutes) AM-5235 Adoption of Utility Rate Ordinance    16.(5 Minutes) AM-5228 Report on results of bond refinancing.   17.(5 Minutes)Mayor's Comments   18.(15 Minutes)Council Comments   ADJOURN   Packet Page 2 of 266    AM-5232     4. A.              City Council Meeting Meeting Date:11/05/2012 Time:  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 October 23, 2012. Recommendation Review and approval. Previous Council Action The 10-23-12 City Council Meeting Minutes were removed from the 10-30-12 City Council Agenda in order to allow Shawn Hunstock, Finance Director, to provide recommended corrections. Narrative Shawn Hunstock, Finance Director, recommends corrections be made to pages 4, 5, 6, and 7 of the draft minutes.  The corrections are highlighted in the version of the draft minutes found in Exhibit 1. Exhibit 2 is the final version of the draft minutes that incorporates these recommended changes. Attachments Exhibit 1 - 10-23-12 Draft City Council Minutes Highlighting Corrections Exhibit 2 - 10-23-12 Draft City Council Minutes / Final Incorporating Recommended Changes Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Mayor Dave Earling 11/02/2012 11:04 AM Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase 11/02/2012 11:07 AM Form Started By: Sandy Chase Started On: 11/01/2012 11:09 AM Final Approval Date: 11/02/2012  Packet Page 3 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 23, 2012 Page 1 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL DRAFT MINUTES October 23, 2012 The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:01 p.m. by Mayor Earling in the Council Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Dave Earling, Mayor Strom Peterson, Council President Frank Yamamoto, Councilmember Joan Bloom, Councilmember Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember Lora Petso, Councilmember Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember ELECTED OFFICIALS ABSENT Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember STAFF PRESENT Stephen Clifton, Community Services/Economic Development Director Phil Williams, Public Works Director Shawn Hunstock, Finance Director Rob Chave, Acting Development Services Dir. Carl Nelson, CIO Rob English, City Engineer Renee McRae, Recreation Manager Deb Sharp, Accountant Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Sandy Chase, City Clerk Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst. Jeannie Dines, Recorder 1. ROLL CALL – MOTION TO EXCUSE COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS City Clerk Sandy Chase called the roll. All Councilmembers were present with the exception of Councilmember Buckshnis. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER YAMAMOTO, TO EXCUSE COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETSO, TO ADD REPORT ON CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETINGS AS AGENDA ITEM 7A. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCILMEMBER PETSO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCILMEMBER PETSO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER YAMAMOTO, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: A. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF OCTOBER 16, 2012. B. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #134853 THROUGH #135000 DATED OCTOBER 18, 2012 FOR $521,809.97 (REPLACEMENT CHECK #134899 $150.00). APPROVAL OF PAYROLL DIRECT DEPOSIT & CHECKS #51749 THROUGH #51762 FOR $501,784.91, BENEFIT CHECKS #51763 THROUGH #51771 & WIRE PAYMENTS OF $218,969.64 FOR THE PERIOD OCTOBER 1, 2012 THROUGH OCTOBER 15, 2012. Packet Page 4 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 23, 2012 Page 2 4. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, referred to last week’s Council meeting, commending the Council on their perceptiveness regarding the choices and decisions with regard to the Main Street underpass. He noted the Council apparently did not have the same information that Mayor Earling had on that subject. He recommended in the future when the Mayor has an idea that might work for City, he discuss it with the Council first. 5. OCTOBER 2012 BUDGET AMENDMENT ORDINANCE. Finance Director Shawn Hunstock highlighted several amendments, noting further detail regarding the amendments is contained in the Council packet: • Two items related to staffing, one in Finance and one in Planning • Work performed by the accounting system software vendor to make changes to the City’s chart of accounts, required by State Auditor’s Office • Two amendments related to the fiber project • Cost of the vehicle propane conversion that was previously approved by Council • Transfer $2500 from the Criminal Investigation Fund to the Drug Enforcement Fund and close the Criminal Investigation Fund • Minor corrections to the July budget amendment related to debt refinancing Councilmember Petso recalled discussion last week about adding spending authority for the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC). Mr. Hunstock distributed information regarding the HPC amendment. He explained the HPC met yesterday to formally adopt a budget for 2012; this would be an addition to the October budget amendment to allow the HPC to begin fundraising activities and set up revenue and expenditure accounts for printing their calendar. Councilmember Johnson reported she attended the HPC meeting. The HPC plans to distribute a 2013 calendar; this budget amendment will assist with that. She referred to the budget amendment related to the promotion of Kernen Lien from Associate Planner to Senior Planner, recognizing Mr. Lien’s ability to perform a variety of highly complex land development and Comprehensive Plan studies; he is always prepared and professional and has been very helpful to the Planning Commission. Councilmember Johnson thanked Mr. Lien for his hard work. Councilmember Yamamoto asked whether the HPC had sufficient funds to cover the costs of printing the calendar. Mr. Hunstock explained the HPC plans to seek sponsorships for the calendar which will provide more than enough to pay for the cost of printing. The calendars will not be printed until sufficient funds have been received to cover the cost of printing. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETSO, TO APPROVE ORDINANCE NO. 3897, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 3893 AS A RESULT OF UNANTICIPATED TRANSFERS AND EXPENDITURES OF VARIOUS FUNDS. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 6. LAKE BALLINGER/MCALEER CREEK WATERSHED FORUM UPDATE Public Works Director Phil Williams explained the forum, comprised primarily of representatives from Mountlake Terrace, Edmonds and Lake Forest Park, seeks to analyze and eventually solve problems related to Lake Ballinger and McAleer Creek, primarily focusing on flooding issues and eventually water quality and habitat issues. During the last nine months, the lobbyist the cities hired has been working on those two issues, seeking funding from, 1) Water Resources Development Act (WRDA), and/or 2) direct Packet Page 5 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 23, 2012 Page 3 appropriations at the congressional level. There has been a great deal of publicity related to Lake Ballinger; representatives from local legislative offices representing the cities as well as Congressman Jim McDermott and Congressman Rick Larsen have toured the site and looked at the issues. The primary work product, being done by Mountlake Terrace with Edmonds providing some funding, is developing a design to replace the three culverts that currently convey lower McAleer Creek out of Lake Ballinger and through the I-5 cut. The culverts impede the flow of water out of the lake which allows lake levels to rise. Removing the restrictions will allow the water to flow out more quickly which will prevent lake levels from rising. He anticipated Mountlake Terrace will put the project out to bid in the spring (replacing the culverts with two open bottom arch culverts and a bridge on the Nile property in Mountlake Terrace). The governor’s office asked the forum to submit a state capital budget request; the amount agreed upon was $750,000. Because the State’s highest priority in managing stormwater and flood waters is incorporating low impact development techniques, that will be the focus of the project. Mr. Williams reported Councilmember Petso, who has represented the Council on the forum, is stepping down; Council President Peterson has offered to be the new representative. Councilmember Petso commented one of the unusual aspects of the Lake Ballinger project is the City may be asked to contribute funds for a project on private property in another jurisdiction in order to address flooding of properties in Edmonds. She preferred projects be done on public property whenever possible. Mr. Williams responded he did not anticipate the City would fund a project on private property in another jurisdiction. Funds will be divided equally between the three jurisdictions to fund projects within each city. The intent is to spend the money in a manner that has the greatest possible impact on the reduction of flooding, independent of where it is located. 7. BUDGET WORK SESSION Finance Director Shawn Hunstock explained staff will maintain a list of proposed changes to the budget and a spreadsheet illustrating the positive/negative impact of any proposed changes. He reviewed the budget schedule: • October 30 o Budget Work Session • November 5 o Public hearing on revenue sources including property taxes o Public hearing on 2013 budget • November 20 o Public hearing on 2013 budget o 2013 budget adoption Budget Overview Mr. Hunstock referred to page 17 of the 2013 budget, explaining a series of policies are included in the budget document. Some policies were included in past budgets and others are policies the Council adopted over the past year, such as the reserve policy and investment policy. He encouraged Councilmembers to review the policies and inform him of any suggested changes that would then be included with adoption of the final budget. He referred to page 18 of the budget, explaining during the 2011 audit, the Auditors asked for the City’s capitalization policy. After much research, staff discovered the City did not have such a policy. The Capital Asset Policy that has been included in the City’s Annual Financial Statement for several years was included in the 2013 budget. This policy has never been formally adopted as a policy; it will be presented to the Finance Committee prior to yearend. Packet Page 6 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 23, 2012 Page 4 Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if Councilmembers should hold proposed amendments until the meeting when the Council discusses adoption of the budget. Mr. Hunstock suggested Councilmembers email him any suggested changes to the policies. He will provide the Council a strikethrough/underlined version of proposed changes. Staff will also maintain a comprehensive list of proposed amendments. Once all amendments have been proposed, he suggested Council prioritize the list so that all amendments have equal consideration. Councilmember Petso recalled during prior budgets, amendments were proposed in advance identifying the Councilmember that proposed it. The list of amendments was then posted so citizens and Councilmembers have an opportunity to review the amendments. She suggested using that procedure. Mr. Hunstock agreed that could be done and offered to identify the Councilmember proposing the amendment on the spreadsheet where the impact of the proposed amendment on the budget is illustrated. Mr. Hunstock referred to page 21, an updated Strategic Outlook 2010-2017. The 2013 budget is balanced with total revenues of approximately $32.9 million and approximately $32.9 million in expenditures. He explained the 2010 ending fund balance on the Strategic Outlook does not equal 2011 beginning fund balance. The reason is there have been changes in accounting standards that define fund balance and the fund balance in the General Fund. It was decided not to include any reconciliation on the Strategic Outlook in the budget document but could be done later if the Council wishes. He distributed a reconciliation to illustrate the numbers tie to the City’s audited financial statements. Mr. Hunstock relayed a comment from Councilmember Buckshnis about the use of increases in fund balance the last two years and a projected increase in 2012; $786,000 in 2010, $780,000 in 2011, and an estimated $307,000 in 2012. Mr. Hunstock referred to the August Financial Report presented at the October Finance Committee meeting. He pointed out the fund balance in the General Fund decreased from $5.7 million to $3.5 million. Most of that is related to funding the Contingency Reserve Fund; $2 million was moved from the General Fund into the Contingency Reserve Fund 012. In addition $1.9 million in the Emergency Financial Reserve Fund as well as the $1.3 million set aside from the sale of fire assets were moved into the Contingency Reserve Fund 012 which now has a balance of approximately $5.3 million. Mr. Hunstock relayed another question which was whether the B Fund, the operations and maintenance portion of the Equipment Rental Fund, was funded. He explained the B Fund contributions were funded in the 2013 budget. The General Fund component of that is $301,000; all funds total $525,000. The B Fund was not funded in 2011 2009 and 2012. It is the opinion of Public Works and the fleet maintenance professionals that the City cannot go another year without funding the B Fund. Mr. Hunstock relayed another question regarding cost of living adjustments (COLA) included in the 2013 budget. He explained the 2013 budget includes 2% for all employees, represented and non-represented. He distributed and briefly reviewed a history and projection of COLAs. The 2% COLA for nonrepresented employees in 2013 is approximately $60,000. In response to a question from Councilmember Buckshnis regarding utility taxes and REET, Mr. Hunstock explained the projections for utility taxes have been changed and the budget for REET has been increased. As reflected in the August Financial Report, gas utility taxes are lower than budgeted in 2012; the 2013 budget for gas utility tax has been lowered. He summarized the 2013 utility tax budget reflects changes that have occurred during 2012 and to the extent those changes can be projected to continue. Mr. Hunstock relayed a question from Councilmember Petso regarding the property tax outlook in 2017. He explained the reason for the decrease is the last year of the voted bond levy is 2016 which reduces property taxes by approximately $900,000 in 2017. Councilmember Petso asked whether the corresponding debt service obligation was also satisfied at that time. Mr. Hunstock agreed it was. Packet Page 7 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 23, 2012 Page 5 Mr. Hunstock relayed another question regarding benefit expenses shown on the Strategic Outlook, increasing from $4.041 million in 2012 to $4.153 million. He explained when the deficit of $1.5 million was projected for 2013, it included an 11% increase in the AWC health insurance premiums. Savings were accomplished via a different health insurance plan, estimated to save $333,000 which exceeds the target of $250,000. The difference between the 2012 costs and 2013 is only approximately $20,000; the $333,000 savings is between the 2012 costs2013 costs with United HealthCare and the projected increase in AWC health insurance premiums. The savings is partially offset by a significant increase in the PERS contribution rates which increased from 7.21% 9.6%9.03%. The net result when comparing 2012 to 2013 is a cost increase due to the modest savings in health insurance offset by the increase in PERS contribution rates. Councilmember Yamamoto asked about grants reflected in the Strategic Plan. Mr. Hunstock responded amounts in 2010 and 2011 are actual grants received. Most of the grant activity does not occur in the General Fund; grants are typically in the Street Fund and REET Funds. Grant opportunities arise throughout the year and typically actual grant revenue is higher than the amount included in the budget. He offered to provide details regarding the $209,434 received in grants in 2010. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas inquired about Fines and Forfeitures. Mr. Hunstock answered forfeitures are deposits that were surrendered, etc. Most of the revenue in Fines and Forfeitures is penalties, traffic citations, court items, etc. Accountant Deb Sharp agreed it was primarily fines, very little is forfeitures. Mr. Hunstock referred to page 25, a graph and list of employee count by department. He corrected the Court 2013 budget; it should be 6.5 FTE, not 7.0. Councilmember Bloom asked Mr. Hunstock to explain the chart in more detail. Mr. Hunstock explained it is 2013 budgeted positions by department. Most of the reductions relate to the Voluntary Separation Incentive Program (VSIP), staffing changes related to across-the-board reductions or department reorganizations. Councilmember Bloom asked about the .5 FTE in City Council. Mr. Hunstock answered that is the part-time Senior Executive Council Assistant. Councilmember Petso referred to page 26, Property Tax New Construction, and requested a column be added showing the property revenue from the new construction assessment. Mr. Hunstock referred to page 27, 2013 Revenue Summary – All Funds, explaining this is a new chart that shows prior year actuals, the 2012 budget, 2012 estimate, 2013 budget, change between 2013 and 2012 budget and change between 2013 and 2012 estimate. He relayed a question from Councilmember Petso regarding the 2012 estimates in the two REET funds. The difference in the 125 Fund is it includes funds transferred from the General Fund related to Haines Wharf which were approved by the Council. There typically is a difference in the revenue between the two REET funds due to grant revenue. Mr. Hunstock explained a few changes to page 27 related to the bond refinancing will be required before the final budget is adopted by Council. The recent bond refinancing was very successful; the anticipated savings of $1.4 million was actually $1.9 million due to very low interest rates, 1.69%. The budget was developed using the assumption of $1.4 million savings. Most of the savings occur in the future but there are some savings in 2013. He distributed information regarding the savings related to the bond refinancing. In the General Fund there is a savings of $7,500 in 2013; it could be allocated for other purposes or added to reserves. Councilmember Petso referred to a significant increase in the Firemen’s Pension Fund shown on page 27. She asked whether that was a permanent increase or a one-time increase. Mr. Hunstock responded it was more than likely a permanent increase. He will address that issue later in his presentation. Packet Page 8 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 23, 2012 Page 6 Councilmember Bloom asked about the Memorial Tree Fund, noting there is a limited amount in the fund on page 27 but page 29 reflects a beginning fund balance of $17,673. Mr. Hunstock explained the $17,673 is fund balance, page 27 is revenue and page 28 is expenditures. No activity is budgeted in that account in 2013 other than $27 in interest. He suggested any specific questions be asked during review of the Parks & Recreation budget next week. Mr. Hunstock referred to page 29, and the $123,223 transferred from the General Fund to the Contingency Reserve Fund. He explained the target the Council adopted for the Contingency Reserve is 16% of General Fund revenues which changes as revenues change. The $123,223 transfer funds the Contingency Reserve at $5.4 million, slightly short of the 16% target. To the extent funds are available, he proposed increasing that allocation to meet the 16% target. The current amount is approximately $73,000 short of 16% of General Fund revenue. Mr. Hunstock explained all the pages after page 29 are new information added to the 2013 budget document. He referred to page 37, 2012 Property Tax Rates by Jurisdiction. He pointed out the City receives a small portion of property taxes collected; just under 21% for the regular property tax levy, EMS levy and voted bond levy. The City’s regular property tax levy for 2012 was $1.66. For Councilmember Petso, Mr. Hunstock advised the City Bonds on the pie chart on page 37 should be 1.5%. Council President Peterson commented the labels on the pie chart did not appear to be correct as the size of the slices did not match the percentage. Mr. Hunstock agreed that needed to be corrected and assured the percentages in the table on page 38 were correct. He distributed additional information regarding the City’s property tax levy that was distributed at the October Finance Committee meeting. With regard to Councilmember Petso’s early comment regarding the property tax from new construction, Mr. Hunstock advised the 2013 projection is $49,000, based on the value of new construction of $28 million. The regular property tax levy for 2013 is $1.76 including the 1% allowable increase ($96,000) as well as new construction, total 2013 revenue is approximately $9.8 million. With declining assessed values, EMS levy revenue is declining; the estimated collection is $2,775,000, a decrease of approximately $110,000 from the prior year which more than offsets the 1% increase in regular property taxes. The decrease represents banked capacity. To the extent the City is not able to increase the EMS levy by 1% per year due to the $0.50 cent limitation, the difference between what can be collected and the amount the City otherwise would have collected based on the prior year plus 1% becomes banked capacity that can be used later should assessed values increase. He confirmed with the Snohomish County Assessor’s Office that the City has approximately $965,000 in banked capacity, the cumulative decrease in the EMS levy from the time it was adopted and decreased assessed values. Councilmember Petso asked if this was expected to be the last decline in assessed values. Mr. Hunstock expected there will likely be one more small decline. There is a 2-year delay; the money the City receives in 2012 is based on 2010 transactions that are assessed in 2011 and collected in 2012. There is anecdotal evidence of improvement; realtors are receiving multiple offers, inventory is declining, etc. He suggested some of that change occurred in 2011 so there may be some increase in 2013 that will be collected in 2014. The budget represents approximately a 4.6% decline in assessed values from the prior year. Mr. Hunstock referred to page 39, Sales Tax Distribution by Government Entity, pointing out the small amount the City receives; on the total sales tax of 9.5%, the City’s portion is 0.85%. Page 40 illustrates Retail Sales Tax Collection by Sector; the largest contributor is Motor Vehicle and Parts Dealers. Of the $4.6 million the City collected in sales tax in 2011, nearly $4.7just over $1 million was from Motor Vehicle and Parts Dealers. Construction, the second largest source of sales tax revenue, also provides a large portion of sales tax but it is typically one-time activities. Packet Page 9 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 23, 2012 Page 7 Mr. Hunstock referred to decision packages on page 43, advising CIO Carl Nelson and Public Works and Engineering staff will address the decision packages related to their departments during review of their budgets. The decision package related to the PROS Plan can be discussed next week during review of the Parks & Recreation budget. In response to a question regarding whether the cost of the PROS Plan could be spread over two years, Mr. Hunstock recalled Ms. Hite mentioned it would be possible to spread the update over 2013 and 2014. He cautioned that does not solve the issue because the expense is still $125,000; if the cost is split between the two years and the $62,000 savings is spent elsewhere, that amount will need to be budgeted in 2014 to complete the update. Councilmember Petso asked about the fiber-related decision packages. CIO Carl Nelson explained the Fiber Optic Customer Development is related to having someone pursue approximately 100 businesses that have been identified along the fiber route. The cost would be spread over two years. The anticipated revenue per customer is approximately $200-$700/month depending on the customer’s needs. The Diverse Fiber Route to Hwy. 99 decision package is a second route of fiber from downtown Edmonds to Hwy. 99. There is a diverse route from Hwy. 99 to downtown but not from downtown out in the event the system goes down. Some of the customers who have been explored asked about a diverse route from the downtown area. A diverse route would also allow an approximately $20,000 reduction in City phone charges. The goal is to begin building the diverse route out of downtown; the first route would be from the Wastewater Treatment Plant to the Edmonds Cemetery and then to Hwy. 99. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked about providing fiber optics to the medical corridor near Swedish- Edmonds. Mr. Nelson answered there was an inquiry from UW Heart Center near Swedish Edmonds but their 5-year lease did not provide a reasonable payback. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked about other medical offices near Swedish-Edmonds such as a hand clinic near McDonalds and another building behind Krueger Clinic. Mr. Nelson advised pursuing those potential users is the intent of the Customer Development decision package. Mr. Williams described the Engineering FTE decision package. The Transportation Plan, adopted in 2009, the Water and Stormwater Plans adopted in 2010 and the Wastewater Plan anticipated to be adopted in 2013, all have capital improvement programs. The City has also received numerous grants and that work needs to be delivered. There are not enough people in the City’s engineering department, currently 12 people, to do that work. The goal would be to staff up to do that work which would be about half the cost of hiring a consulting firm. He anticipated there was at least 3+ years of work. Councilmember Petso asked if grant funds covered an outside consultant. Mr. Williams answered a grant was a fixed sum; doing the work in-house for less money would free up funds for contingencies. The proposal is to fund the person with capital funds in the Water, Storm and Sewer Utility. Councilmember Petso commented it is really not a savings if the work is grant funded. Mr. Williams responded an increase in costs could lead to a City cost; any cost savings are beneficial. For Councilmember Bloom, Mr. Williams explained the decision package is for a Capital Projects Manager or an Engineering Tech III; the final decision will be made in consultation with the Human Resources Department to match the scope of the job to the job description. Consultants will potentially be hired in the future to produce and update plans. Mr. Hunstock referred to page 46, a comparison of 2011 actuals, 2012 budget, 2012 estimate and 2013 budget. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if the amounts included benefits. Mr. Hunstock answered yes, the amounts included all costs. He explained these are department totals. Each department’s budget includes the divisions and total expenditures for each division which correspond to the chart on page 46. Packet Page 10 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 23, 2012 Page 8 Mr. Hunstock referred to the organizational chart on page 48, advising each department now has an organizational chart. In the past the organization chart only listed functional areas, they now list positions. City Council (page 48) Council President Peterson distributed copies of the City Council budget narrative that was sent via email earlier today. He highlighted increases in the City Council budget for Council salaries, communications and the Council Contingency Fund. Councilmember Petso commented the entire General Fund balance, apart from the $5 million in reserve, is available to the Council as a contingency. She asked if the intent of budgeting a Council Contingency was to authorize the Council President to expend the funds without Council authority. Council President Peterson explained the intent of the Council Contingency Fund, as has been done in the past, is to provide funds for Council specific actions such as hiring outside legal counsel, consultants, etc. He assured this is not a Council President specific fund; the Council Contingency Fund allows the Council to allocate funds to certain items rather than doing so via a budget amendment. Mr. Hunstock explained $25,000 was budget in 2012 and is also budgeted in 2013. The 2012 estimate, $5,000, relates to legal counsel hired for the closed record appeal. Councilmember Petso recalled she was told any funds budgeted in the General Fund were available for expenditure at Administration’s discretion. Mr. Hunstock answered technically yes; however, Senior Executive Council Assistant Jana Spellman as well as his staff ensure any expenditures from the Council Contingency Fund are approved by the City Council. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked about overtime in the City Council budget, $6,200 in 2011, $7,200 estimated in 2012 and $6,600 budgeted in 2013. She recalled Council President Peterson’s explanation that some of the overtime was due to lengthy Council meetings. She suggested adding hours to the part-time staff person rather than paying overtime. Council President Peterson explained the part- time Council staff also works part-time in Development Services; she works 40 hours/week split between two departments. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas suggested the person work within their 40 hours, 20 for Council and not pay $7,200 in overtime. Council President Peterson suggested if time spent at Council meetings were part of the Senior Executive Council Assistant’s 20/hours a week, there would be limited time remaining for other Council related projects and office tasks. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas recognized most of the overtime is expended on Tuesday nights to video Council meetings. She suggested discussing this further in the future. Council President Peterson noted the $7,200 is time and a half; $5,000 is straight time for that service. Councilmember Petso asked about professional services, noting a portion of it was City Attorney. It was her understanding the City Attorney was a flat fee and should not matter how much the Council utilized the City Attorney. Council President Peterson advised a portion of the City Attorney’s fee is included in the City Council budget. The Council meeting minute taker is also included in professional services. City Clerk Sandy Chase advised the minute taker is funded from the City Clerk’s budget other than a small portion for the Council retreat. Councilmember Yamamoto advised Mr. Nelson and he are studying options to upgrade the videoing of Council meetings to make them live stream which may also address overtime and staffing issues. Mr. Hunstock advised that functionality will be demonstrated at the November 5 Council meeting. Councilmember Bloom referred to the purpose statement that states the City Council’s time commitment ranges from 25-32 hours per week. She noted that is significantly different than what is stated in the Packet Page 11 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 23, 2012 Page 9 Council manual. She suggested the Council manual be changed as 25-32 hours is much closer to reality rather than the 12-18 hours stated in the Council manual. Mr. Hunstock advised the 25-32 hour time commitment has been in the budget narrative for some time. Mayor's Office (page 50) Mr. Hunstock advised the organizational chart will be revised before the budget process is finalized to reflect the 3.5 FTE that report to the City Clerk as well as the Human Resources Analyst who reports to the Human Resources Manager. He referred to page 51 that lists the programs, Office of the Mayor, Human Resources, City Clerk and City Attorney. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas recalled Mayor Earling canceled out of state travel and asked how that affected the 2013 budget. Mayor Earling explained staff can ask to attend an in-state conference; often staff pay their own room and board and the City pays the conference fee. Mr. Hunstock noted many departments have decreases in their travel budgets; he assumed that was due to in-state training. Mr. Hunstock referred to the Office of the Mayor’s budget on page 53. Mayor Earling commented there were few increases. The two exceptions are travel and rental/lease. The increase in rental/lease is due to a cost increase and that amount is spread between Community Services, the Mayor’s office and Human Resources. The increase in travel is conferences that may be beneficial to the City. He only attended one conference this year in Vancouver; the cost was $400-$500. Mr. Hunstock advised the decrease in salaries was due to a somewhat lower salary for the Mayor’s Executive Assistant. Employee Parking Permit Fund (page 145) Mr. Hunstock explained this is downtown business employee parking permits. The interfund transfer relates to a transfer to the General Fund for the City Clerk Office’s administration of the parking permit program. Sister Cities Commission (page 162) Mr. Hunstock explained this fund has been administered by the Parks & Recreation Department in the past. Mayor Earling explained due to the reduction in staffing in Parks & Recreation, it will be administered by the Mayor’s Office in 2013. Fire Pension Fund (page 180) Mr. Hunstock explained there are two funds related to fire retirees. The 617 Fund is pre-LEOFF 1 fireman’s pension fund. To the extent firefighters hired before LEOFF 1 have different benefits than LEOFF 1, this fund pays the difference. The Fire Insurance Premium Tax was not funded in 2011 but was budgeted in 2012 and 2013. This fund pays a portion of the cost of an actuarial study done every two years and updated annually. Between both funds, $25,000 was budgeted for the actuarial study; the actual cost was approximately $8,000. The firm hired to do the actuarial study also does the actuarial study for the City’s MEBT plan so they are familiar with the City and Snohomish County. Councilmember Petso asked how many pre-LEOFF retirees there are. Mr. Hunstock answered there are four. Councilmember Petso asked what happens to the remaining fund balance when there are zero pre- LEOFF employees. Mr. Hunstock answered more than likely there will not be any fund balance left. He displayed an excerpt from the actuarial study, pointing out the four individuals in the pre-LEOFF fund are fairly expensive. The total liability that is not funded is $1.4 million. The City is on a pay-as-you-go basis with this fund as well as the LEOFF Medical Insurance Fund 009. As benefits are paid out, a transfer from the General Fund is budgeted to pay for the benefits. None of accumulated liabilities are prefunded. One of Councilmember Buckshnis’ questions was whether retirement benefits related to these two funds are funded; he explained neither fund is anywhere near fully funded. Fund 009 has a $428,000 fund balance that is rolled over and there are accumulated liabilities of $8.2 million related to long term care and health insurance benefits for LEOFF 1 retirees and their surviving spouses. Packet Page 12 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 23, 2012 Page 10 Councilmember Petso commented medical and long term care expenditures depend on longevity. The pension obligation will remain and be paid from the 617 Fund. Mr. Hunstock answered that is based on the actuarial study as well. The expenditures are based on projected lifespans of the individuals and their surviving spouses. The pre-LEOFF employees entered fire service prior to 1978. If the liabilities in Fund 617 disappear, Councilmember Petso asked whether the funds can be used for other purposes. Mr. Hunstock answered they can be used but he did not expect the liability to go away any time soon. He offered to provide the Council a copy of the actuarial study. City Clerk (page 56) Mr. Hunstock explained most of the changes relate to implementation of the across-the-board budget reductions. City Clerk Sandy Chase highlighted the following reductions: • $65,270 professional services expenditure in 2012 related to implementation of document management system • $20,000 reduction in advertising, eliminating publication of display ads for City Council and Planning Board agendas in the Everett Herald • $2,000 reduction in postage • $1,000 reduction in travel City Attorney (page 38) Mr. Hunstock explained the City Attorney contract is a 4-year fixed rate. The Police Chief is in discussions with the provider of prosecutorial services; the budgeted amount may change by yearend. As the prosecuting attorney’s contract expires in December 2012, he expected a contract extension before yearend and a proposal for a change in the cost. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked whether the expenditures for other law firms were reflected and whether they were budgeted by department. Mr. Hunstock answered it depends on the nature of the contract; for example, the contract with Summit Law Office related to the bargaining process was funded by Non-Departmental as there are limited funds in the Human Resources budget to absorb such costs. Legal costs typically would be funded by the department’s budget. For example, legal representation related to the closed record review was in the Council budget. Councilmember Petso asked whether the City Attorney’s contract is charged entirely to the Mayor’s department. Mr. Hunstock answered a portion of the cost is charged to the City Council budget. Municipal Court (page 60) Municipal Court Judge Doug Fair explained most of the adjustments were related to the requested across- the-board reduction. The biggest reduction is in salaries, half of one Clerk. He explained the Police Department is currently down one traffic officer; the traffic division writes 75% of traffic tickets. When that officer returns in November, the court’s caseloads will increase. He hoped to be able to restore the 0.5 FTE Court Clerk. Mayor Earling declared a brief recess. Community Services/Economic Development (page 92) Community Services/Economic Development Director Stephen Clifton explained the 2013 Economic Development budget includes $16,000 for professional services, down $3,000 from the previous $19,000 budget. There is a significant reduction from the 2012 estimate due to the one-time expenditures for the Strategic Plan consultant. The advertising budget is proposed to be reduced from $30,000 to $24,000, a $6,000 reduction. Packet Page 13 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 23, 2012 Page 11 The Community Services budget includes a reduction of $10,254 in professional services. That amount was previously budgeted for an on-call environmental attorney; City Attorney Jeff Taraday has indicated his firm can provide those services. There is also a minor reduction in interfund rental. Multimodal Transportation Fund (page 132) Mr. Clifton explained the fund has a balance of $55,000. The monies are used for local match for any activities requested by Washington State Ferries (WSF) or the federal government. There is typically an 80/20 or 70/30 split between WSF or federal funds and the City’s match. Hotel/Motel Tax Fund (page 144) Mr. Clifton projected revenue of $70,000 in 2013. Council President Peterson recalled some of those funds have been allocated to the Edmonds Center for the Arts in the past. Councilmember Bloom advised that allocation was increased to $12,500 in 2013 at the ECA’s request. Finance and Information Services (page 62) Mr. Hunstock advised the organizational chart reflects some of the reorganization of the department but not everything. The plan for reorganizing IT is to upgrade either the Network Support Technician, the Information Systems Specialist or the GIS Analyst to an IT Supervisor as well as add a half-time IT Assistant. There will be an open, competitive process between the three individuals to select the IT Supervisor. The intent of the upgrade and the additional halftime IT Assistant is to backfill for most of the duties related to Mr. Nelson’s current position. Mr. Hunstock advised he will take on some of the responsibility for IT as well. The addition of the Accounting Supervisor in the Finance Department will allow him to devote time to IT responsibilities. The two Accounting Technicians and the two Utility Accounting Technicians will report to the Accounting Supervisor; the Accountant, Accounting Supervisor, and IT Supervisor will report to him. Mr. Hunstock referred to page 64, explaining most of the changes relate to across-the-board reductions. The increase in salaries is related to two positions added to the Finance Department in April 2012, nonrepresented compensation for his position and the projected increase in costs related to reclassification of an Accountant to the Accounting Supervisor position. The overtime budget for 2013 has been eliminated entirely; he was uncertain that would be feasible but that was the goal. There were also increases in benefits related to increases in salaries and the increase in the PERS contribution. The reduction in professional services budget by eliminating the contract for sales tax monitoring is offset by a consultant to review the cost allocation plan. The State Auditor’s Office has indicated that will be an area of focus for all cities next year. The result of reviewing the cost allocation plan will be to provide a basis for allocating costs to the utility funds and other funds. Allocations are currently done based on estimates. Councilmember Petso expressed concern that a reduction in sales tax monitoring would result in lower revenues. Mr. Hunstock explained the plan for 2013 is to increase the use of technology such as the utility data base, business license data base, property tax information from the Assessor’s Office and data from the Department of Revenue (DOR). IT staff will prepare comparisons of the information in those four sources to ensure businesses in Edmonds are reporting sales in Edmonds to DOR. Currently a third party consultant only compares businesses located in Edmonds that apply for State business licenses who have not applied for a City business license and notifies DOR of any discrepancies. Councilmember Petso commented a portion of sales tax revenue is also collected by the Public Facilities District. Fiber Optic Project (page 65) Mr. Nelson explained this is a status quo budget and allows the fiber optic project to continue to deliver service. Packet Page 14 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 23, 2012 Page 12 Information Services (page 66) Mr. Nelson referred to Mr. Hunstock’s explanation of the reorganization. The most significant change is the Microsoft enterprise agreement is entering the fourth year of a five year plan and fees decrease by $4,000-$5,000. The budget also reflects a reduction in the purchase of desktop computers; enough have been purchased to support Windows 7. Councilmember Bloom commented the limited mailbox size reduces Councilmembers’ and staff’s productivity and asked when that would be resolved and whether it would be impacted by the department reorganization. Mr. Nelson advised a server is being tested; the limitation on mailbox size will be eliminated within the next two months. Councilmember Bloom asked whether the reorganization will impact information available on the City’s website. Mr. Nelson answered it should not be. The GIS Analyst has been assisting staff and the consultant who developed the website will also provide assistance. Non-Departmental (page 68) Mr. Hunstock explained a potential cost increase of 2% or $124,000 has been budgeted for the Fire District contract. The potential cost increase for 2013 is unresolved at this time. The City did not learn of the cost increase last year until February. There are also discussions underway regarding potential staffing changes in the three fire stations. Councilmember Petso relayed her understanding that staffing levels were guaranteed under the contract. Mr. Hunstock agreed they are. The current staffing levels could be retained but there may be opportunities for different staffing levels for medics that would spread the coverage better among the three fire stations and potentially decrease one position in each station. Mr. Hunstock relayed a question from Councilmember Buckshnis regarding the effect of the bond refinancing. He explained all the debt service has been updated as a result of the bond refinancing other than the previously identified $7,500 savings due to the low interest rates. Councilmember Yamamoto inquired about the Voter Registration budget. Mr. Hunstock explained costs vary based on the number of Councilmembers on the ballot, type of election, whether there are items on the primary ballot, etc. There is some potential for an August ballot item related to the Regional Fire Authority (RFA). The budgeted amount is based on the number of Councilmembers up for reelection, the voters’ pamphlet, etc. Councilmember Yamamoto inquired about the $35,000 budget for Election Costs. Mr. Hunstock answered that amount is budgeted for the three Councilmembers on the ballot; the remaining costs are the cost of the general election, voter pamphlet, and potentially an August ballot item related to the RFA. Mr. Hunstock referred to a question from Councilmember Buckshnis regarding the $417,000 transfer to the Risk Management Reserve Fund. Although the policy states the Fund will be funded by 2014, the transfer was included in the 2013 budget due to the potential for a number of claims against the City to reach closure in 2013 such as the Precision Earthworks claim and two Human Resources related claims. The City currently has $244,000 set aside for all claims. In response to Councilmember Buckshnis’ question about funds budgeted for projected legal fees, Mr. Hunstock explained there are no funds allocated other than the $244,000 in the Risk Management Reserve Fund. To the extent any of those claims reach closure in 2013, the $244,000 will not last long and is the reason for fully funding the Risk Management Reserve Fund in the 2013 budget up to the 2% target, bringing it up to $661,000. He noted that amount is less than one of the claims pending against the City. Councilmember Petso asked how the 2012 surplus would be used, recalling in 2011 the Council chose to use the 2011 surplus as a contribution to the B Fund and not budget the B Fund for the following year. Packet Page 15 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 23, 2012 Page 13 She asked if that could be done with the 2012 surplus. Mr. Hunstock answered it is possible but would bring the General Fund very close to a deficit. The Strategic Outlook (page 21) shows a projected surplus of $307,000; that entire amount would be required to fund the B Fund which was not included in the 2012 budget. As illustrated in the August Financial Report, with the transfer of $2 million to the Contingency Reserve Fund, the fund balance in the General Fund is getting lower and lower. That will need to be analyzed each month in the future. He referred to page 31, Change in Ending Fund Balance – All Funds, which illustrates an estimated 2013 ending fund balance of $1.7 million. Councilmember Petso observed if the General Fund balance dropped to $1.7 million by yearend, that amount is in addition to the $5.2 million in the Contingency Reserve. Mr. Hunstock agreed. Mr. Hunstock relayed the $220,000 budgeted for the ECA Contingency Reserve is a decrease of $30,000 from 2012. ECA Executive Director Joe McIalwain estimates that amount could be reduced to $190,000, providing an additional $30,000 that could be added to reserves or budgeted for other expenditures. Mr. Taraday referred to the Public Defender line item, a significant increase over what has historically been budgeted for the public defender. He recommended discussing this further in the future as there are ways to work with the Police Department and Prosecuting Attorney to reduce that amount to zero. LEOFF Medical Insurance Reserve Fund (page 128) Mr. Hunstock explained the $600,000 transfer, an increase over the 2011 transfer of $376,000, maintains a fund balance of approximately $300,000. If the Council chose, it is possible to draw down the fund balance by transferring a lower amount but a $600,000 transfer would be required the following year. Risk Management Reserve Fund (page 130) Mr. Hunstock referred to the $417,000 transfer from the General Fund for a total fund balance of $661,000. To the extent that claims are concluded in 2013, that amount will not last long. Councilmember Petso suggested changing the policy to establish a range as recommended by the City Attorney and the Mayor rather than a percentage of General Fund revenues. Mr. Hunstock agreed that would be appropriate; he suggested 2% was not a realistic target but was better than what previously existed which was zero. Councilmember Petso commented it seemed to duplicate the Contingency Reserve but she understood the reason for the Risk Management Reserve. Mr. Hunstock pointed out the Strategic Outlook does not include replenishing the $661,000 Risk Management Reserve. The Council may want to discuss replenishing the fund after pending claims are paid. Contingency Reserve Fund (page 131) Mr. Hunstock explained as previously mentioned, there is a $122,000 transfer in from the General Fund to this fund that is intended to assist with meeting the 16% target. To the extent that funds are available, he recommended increasing the $122,000 transfer. He emphasized there is no expenditure appropriation in the budget; the money cannot be used or moved without affirmative action by the Council. LID Fund Control, LID Guaranty Fund (pages 165-166) Mr. Hunstock explained some LID funds are still being collected. In 2012 the balance in the LID Guaranty Fund was transferred to the Risk Management Reserve Fund. If any funds are received, he recommended a budget amendment to transfer to the Reserve Fund or the General Fund. LTGO Bond Fund (page 167) Mr. Hunstock explained the savings from the bond refinancing have been incorporated into the 2013 budget with the exception of $28,000 of additional savings. That will be updated before the Council takes action on the budget. Packet Page 16 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 23, 2012 Page 14 Development Services (page 96) Acting Development Services Director Rob Chave referred to page 97, explaining the largest reductions are in salaries and benefits which reflects the loss of an employee in Building Services via the VSIP. The Assistant Building Official position is eliminated and the Building Official assuming some of those duties. He referred to other small reductions which require staff to do more electronic distribution of documents. For example materials have been available at Planning Board meetings; that will be changed to providing a single public copy. Although that could be viewed as negative, the positive is it will encourage people to study materials prior to the meeting. Mr. Chave explained professional services are also significantly reduced. For example Building has historically sent projects out during peak work periods; if building activity increases significantly, staff will be swamped. To the extent revenue is generated by that activity, the Council may be asked to restore professional services funding. He noted reductions in travel result in less training; efforts are made to take advantage of online training or local training opportunities. He noted professional services in the Development Services Admin support the online permit system. The reduction in professional services makes it difficult to do any enhancements. In the future more permit activity will be online. Staff may request funding from the Council for some future enhancements. The reduction in professional services may also affect Planning Board minutes. Although the narrative states Planning Board minutes will be reduced from two meetings/month to one, the actuality is a reduction to the equivalent of one meeting a month by reducing meetings to one a month during slow periods. Staff also plans to monitor the Hearing Examiner budget; the 2012 actual will be approximately 2/3 of budget. If that occurs in 2013, the funds could be used to fully fund minute taking. If savings are not available, Planning Board minutes may be reduced to summary minutes. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked about interfund rental. Mr. Chave answered that is for vehicles, the Development Services Department’s contribution to the A and B Fund. He noted vehicles were previously assigned by division; vehicles are now pooled to encourage use of electric vehicles. Councilmember Bloom recalled there were funds allocated in 2006 or 2007 for the City Attorney and the former Development Services Director to work on a code rewrite which she noted did not happen other than small portions. The need to update the code costs the City money in terms of efficiency, enforcement, etc. She asked how the code rewrite will be done with fewer staff, fewer Planning Board meetings, etc. Mr. Chave recalled $120,000 was budgeted at one time; the City Attorney and Development Services Director decided to save money by doing portions of the code rewrite in-house and using the remaining funds to hire a consultant which unfortunately was not done. Councilmember Bloom summarized the code rewrite is very important to the financial future of the City and can reduce potential lawsuits. Mr. Chave shared Councilmember Bloom’s concern and suggested the Council retreat include discussion regarding the status of the code rewrite and ideas for moving forward. Councilmember Bloom expressed concern about delaying work on the code rewrite until 2014. Mr. Chave stated a consultant to assist with a code rewrite would cost $100,000-$150,000. He was unsure where the funds could be identified in the 2013 budget. He suggested elements of the rewrite could be prioritized. Mr. Hunstock explained next week’s Council meeting will include the Police Department, Human Resources, Parks & Recreation and Public Works budgets. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETSO, TO EXTEND THE MEETING FOR 15 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 7A. REPORT ON CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETINGS OF OCTOBER 9, 2012 Councilmember Johnson reported the Historic Preservation Commission has met twice this month and will meet a third time on Thursday. Packet Page 17 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 23, 2012 Page 15 Councilmember Yamamoto reported on the SnoCom meeting. Work is continuing on the New World system. Councilmember Bloom reported the SeaShore Transportation Committee discussed their legislative agenda and electric vehicles pay their fair share because they do not pay gas tax. The Tree Board plans to discuss code language at their next meeting Councilmember Bloom reported the Public Safety & Personnel Committee discussed Council procedures and developed a list of issues to address. Examples of issues include the Council has not adopted Roberts Rules of Order, the Council President’s authority in setting agendas, the committee chair’s role in setting agendas, reading of citizen emails. The committee plans to continue their discussion regarding Council procedures at their next meeting. Councilmember Bloom reported the Economic Development Commission (EDC) meeting included discussion regarding retail only in BD1. The meeting was advertised as a joint EDC/Planning Board meeting but only two Planning Board Members attended. The EDC had a good discussion but much of it had been discussed by the Planning Board and the discussion did not advise the topic. Councilmember Petso reported the Council approved everything on the Parks, Planning and Public Works Committee’s agenda with the exception of discussion regarding design guidelines and the two new buildings on Edmonds Way. The Committee discussed a variety of issues associated with the buildings such as height limits, setback, lot coverage and zoning; she has received numerous citizen complaints about the buildings. The building on the corner is zoned BC - Edmonds Way; no other lots have that zoning. The other building to the west is zoned RM - Edmonds Way; there are two other lots with that zoning. The Committee agreed to research the ordinances that put those zones in place. She asked for Council approval for her to meet with Mr. Chave and Mr. Taraday to discuss eliminating or modifying those zones and an emergency moratorium to prevent land use applications while that effort is underway. Two other Councilmembers expressed interest. Councilmember Petso commended Mr. Hunstock for his efforts on the RFA Finance Committee. She relayed the RFA Committee is continuing their discussions regarding a fire benefit charge. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas reported the Parking Committee is interested in additional parking on the waterfront for commuter trains riders. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas reported on the Snohomish Health Board meeting and Budget Committee meetings. Mayor Earling reported Sound Transit is trying to locate another light rail maintenance base; one site has been identified in Snohomish County and four to five sites have been identified on the eastside. Lynnwood passed a resolution expressing concern with the site tentatively identified adjacent to the Park & Ride at 44th & 200th. A major portion of that property is owned by the Edmonds School District and there are other plans for the property. 8. REPORT ON OUTSIDE COMMITTEE/BOARD MEETINGS Reports were provided under Agenda Item 7A. 9. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Earling complimented Mr. Hunstock’s organizational skills related to the budget presentation; the presentations have been much smoother than when he was on the Council. Mayor Earling requested Mr. Hunstock pass his accolades on to Ms. Sharp and the Finance Department staff. Packet Page 18 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 23, 2012 Page 16 10. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked Mr. Taraday to develop a cheat sheet on Roberts Rules of Order. Mr. Taraday answered he would be happy to once the Council adopted Roberts Rules as part of their procedures. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked what parliamentary procedure the Council followed during its meetings. Mr. Taraday answered Resolution No. 292. He offered to email the resolution to Councilmembers. Councilmember Petso echoed Councilmember Bloom’s comments about mailbox size. She apologized to anyone who emailed her when email was down on Monday afternoon; she eventually received the emails but not timely. She looked forward to resolving the mailbox size issue. Councilmember Petso asked Mr. Taraday to advise what constitutes an illegal meeting; for example meetings via email, if the Council decided something last week and four of them as still discussing it, etc. She also asked for clarification regarding sending a blind copy versus an email to more than two Councilmembers. Councilmember Bloom pointed out Resolution No. 292 and a variety of other attachments are included in the Public Safety & Personnel Committee’s October 16 agenda. Council President Peterson relayed a number of citizens have stopped him on the street, come into his shop or contacted him to express their appreciation for the new buildings on Edmonds Way, a vast improvement over the prior condition of the site. Councilmember Yamamoto expressed his appreciation for everyone’s support, email, letters, and cards following his surgery. He echoed Mayor Earling’s comments regarding the Finance Department’s efforts on the budget. Councilmember Johnson reminded Main Street is open and encouraged people to attend the third Thursday art walk and visit the businesses on Main Street. The project will be complete next month. 11. ADJOURN With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:16 p.m. Packet Page 19 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 23, 2012 Page 1 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL DRAFT MINUTES October 23, 2012 The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:01 p.m. by Mayor Earling in the Council Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Dave Earling, Mayor Strom Peterson, Council President Frank Yamamoto, Councilmember Joan Bloom, Councilmember Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember Lora Petso, Councilmember Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember ELECTED OFFICIALS ABSENT Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember STAFF PRESENT Stephen Clifton, Community Services/Economic Development Director Phil Williams, Public Works Director Shawn Hunstock, Finance Director Rob Chave, Acting Development Services Dir. Carl Nelson, CIO Rob English, City Engineer Renee McRae, Recreation Manager Deb Sharp, Accountant Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Sandy Chase, City Clerk Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst. Jeannie Dines, Recorder 1. ROLL CALL – MOTION TO EXCUSE COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS City Clerk Sandy Chase called the roll. All Councilmembers were present with the exception of Councilmember Buckshnis. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER YAMAMOTO, TO EXCUSE COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETSO, TO ADD REPORT ON CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETINGS AS AGENDA ITEM 7A. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCILMEMBER PETSO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCILMEMBER PETSO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER YAMAMOTO, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: A. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF OCTOBER 16, 2012. B. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #134853 THROUGH #135000 DATED OCTOBER 18, 2012 FOR $521,809.97 (REPLACEMENT CHECK #134899 $150.00). APPROVAL OF PAYROLL DIRECT DEPOSIT & CHECKS #51749 THROUGH #51762 FOR $501,784.91, BENEFIT CHECKS #51763 THROUGH #51771 & WIRE PAYMENTS OF $218,969.64 FOR THE PERIOD OCTOBER 1, 2012 THROUGH OCTOBER 15, 2012. Packet Page 20 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 23, 2012 Page 2 4. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, referred to last week’s Council meeting, commending the Council on their perceptiveness regarding the choices and decisions with regard to the Main Street underpass. He noted the Council apparently did not have the same information that Mayor Earling had on that subject. He recommended in the future when the Mayor has an idea that might work for City, he discuss it with the Council first. 5. OCTOBER 2012 BUDGET AMENDMENT ORDINANCE. Finance Director Shawn Hunstock highlighted several amendments, noting further detail regarding the amendments is contained in the Council packet: • Two items related to staffing, one in Finance and one in Planning • Work performed by the accounting system software vendor to make changes to the City’s chart of accounts, required by State Auditor’s Office • Two amendments related to the fiber project • Cost of the vehicle propane conversion that was previously approved by Council • Transfer $2500 from the Criminal Investigation Fund to the Drug Enforcement Fund and close the Criminal Investigation Fund • Minor corrections to the July budget amendment related to debt refinancing Councilmember Petso recalled discussion last week about adding spending authority for the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC). Mr. Hunstock distributed information regarding the HPC amendment. He explained the HPC met yesterday to formally adopt a budget for 2012; this would be an addition to the October budget amendment to allow the HPC to begin fundraising activities and set up revenue and expenditure accounts for printing their calendar. Councilmember Johnson reported she attended the HPC meeting. The HPC plans to distribute a 2013 calendar; this budget amendment will assist with that. She referred to the budget amendment related to the promotion of Kernen Lien from Associate Planner to Senior Planner, recognizing Mr. Lien’s ability to perform a variety of highly complex land development and Comprehensive Plan studies; he is always prepared and professional and has been very helpful to the Planning Commission. Councilmember Johnson thanked Mr. Lien for his hard work. Councilmember Yamamoto asked whether the HPC had sufficient funds to cover the costs of printing the calendar. Mr. Hunstock explained the HPC plans to seek sponsorships for the calendar which will provide more than enough to pay for the cost of printing. The calendars will not be printed until sufficient funds have been received to cover the cost of printing. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETSO, TO APPROVE ORDINANCE NO. 3897, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 3893 AS A RESULT OF UNANTICIPATED TRANSFERS AND EXPENDITURES OF VARIOUS FUNDS. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 6. LAKE BALLINGER/MCALEER CREEK WATERSHED FORUM UPDATE Public Works Director Phil Williams explained the forum, comprised primarily of representatives from Mountlake Terrace, Edmonds and Lake Forest Park, seeks to analyze and eventually solve problems related to Lake Ballinger and McAleer Creek, primarily focusing on flooding issues and eventually water quality and habitat issues. During the last nine months, the lobbyist the cities hired has been working on those two issues, seeking funding from, 1) Water Resources Development Act (WRDA), and/or 2) direct Packet Page 21 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 23, 2012 Page 3 appropriations at the congressional level. There has been a great deal of publicity related to Lake Ballinger; representatives from local legislative offices representing the cities as well as Congressman Jim McDermott and Congressman Rick Larsen have toured the site and looked at the issues. The primary work product, being done by Mountlake Terrace with Edmonds providing some funding, is developing a design to replace the three culverts that currently convey lower McAleer Creek out of Lake Ballinger and through the I-5 cut. The culverts impede the flow of water out of the lake which allows lake levels to rise. Removing the restrictions will allow the water to flow out more quickly which will prevent lake levels from rising. He anticipated Mountlake Terrace will put the project out to bid in the spring (replacing the culverts with two open bottom arch culverts and a bridge on the Nile property in Mountlake Terrace). The governor’s office asked the forum to submit a state capital budget request; the amount agreed upon was $750,000. Because the State’s highest priority in managing stormwater and flood waters is incorporating low impact development techniques, that will be the focus of the project. Mr. Williams reported Councilmember Petso, who has represented the Council on the forum, is stepping down; Council President Peterson has offered to be the new representative. Councilmember Petso commented one of the unusual aspects of the Lake Ballinger project is the City may be asked to contribute funds for a project on private property in another jurisdiction in order to address flooding of properties in Edmonds. She preferred projects be done on public property whenever possible. Mr. Williams responded he did not anticipate the City would fund a project on private property in another jurisdiction. Funds will be divided equally between the three jurisdictions to fund projects within each city. The intent is to spend the money in a manner that has the greatest possible impact on the reduction of flooding, independent of where it is located. 7. BUDGET WORK SESSION Finance Director Shawn Hunstock explained staff will maintain a list of proposed changes to the budget and a spreadsheet illustrating the positive/negative impact of any proposed changes. He reviewed the budget schedule: • October 30 o Budget Work Session • November 5 o Public hearing on revenue sources including property taxes o Public hearing on 2013 budget • November 20 o Public hearing on 2013 budget o 2013 budget adoption Budget Overview Mr. Hunstock referred to page 17 of the 2013 budget, explaining a series of policies are included in the budget document. Some policies were included in past budgets and others are policies the Council adopted over the past year, such as the reserve policy and investment policy. He encouraged Councilmembers to review the policies and inform him of any suggested changes that would then be included with adoption of the final budget. He referred to page 18 of the budget, explaining during the 2011 audit, the Auditors asked for the City’s capitalization policy. After much research, staff discovered the City did not have such a policy. The Capital Asset Policy that has been included in the City’s Annual Financial Statement for several years was included in the 2013 budget. This policy has never been formally adopted as a policy; it will be presented to the Finance Committee prior to yearend. Packet Page 22 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 23, 2012 Page 4 Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if Councilmembers should hold proposed amendments until the meeting when the Council discusses adoption of the budget. Mr. Hunstock suggested Councilmembers email him any suggested changes to the policies. He will provide the Council a strikethrough/underlined version of proposed changes. Staff will also maintain a comprehensive list of proposed amendments. Once all amendments have been proposed, he suggested Council prioritize the list so that all amendments have equal consideration. Councilmember Petso recalled during prior budgets, amendments were proposed in advance identifying the Councilmember that proposed it. The list of amendments was then posted so citizens and Councilmembers have an opportunity to review the amendments. She suggested using that procedure. Mr. Hunstock agreed that could be done and offered to identify the Councilmember proposing the amendment on the spreadsheet where the impact of the proposed amendment on the budget is illustrated. Mr. Hunstock referred to page 21, an updated Strategic Outlook 2010-2017. The 2013 budget is balanced with total revenues of approximately $32.9 million and approximately $32.9 million in expenditures. He explained the 2010 ending fund balance on the Strategic Outlook does not equal 2011 beginning fund balance. The reason is there have been changes in accounting standards that define fund balance and the fund balance in the General Fund. It was decided not to include any reconciliation on the Strategic Outlook in the budget document but could be done later if the Council wishes. He distributed a reconciliation to illustrate the numbers tie to the City’s audited financial statements. Mr. Hunstock relayed a comment from Councilmember Buckshnis about the use of increases in fund balance the last two years and a projected increase in 2012; $786,000 in 2010, $780,000 in 2011, and an estimated $307,000 in 2012. Mr. Hunstock referred to the August Financial Report presented at the October Finance Committee meeting. He pointed out the fund balance in the General Fund decreased from $5.7 million to $3.5 million. Most of that is related to funding the Contingency Reserve Fund; $2 million was moved from the General Fund into the Contingency Reserve Fund 012. In addition $1.9 million in the Emergency Financial Reserve Fund as well as the $1.3 million set aside from the sale of fire assets were moved into the Contingency Reserve Fund 012 which now has a balance of approximately $5.3 million. Mr. Hunstock relayed another question which was whether the B Fund, the operations and maintenance portion of the Equipment Rental Fund, was funded. He explained the B Fund contributions were funded in the 2013 budget. The General Fund component of that is $301,000; all funds total $525,000. The B Fund was not funded in 2009 and 2012. It is the opinion of Public Works and the fleet maintenance professionals that the City cannot go another year without funding the B Fund. Mr. Hunstock relayed another question regarding cost of living adjustments (COLA) included in the 2013 budget. He explained the 2013 budget includes 2% for all employees, represented and non-represented. He distributed and briefly reviewed a history and projection of COLAs. The 2% COLA for nonrepresented employees in 2013 is approximately $60,000. In response to a question from Councilmember Buckshnis regarding utility taxes and REET, Mr. Hunstock explained the projections for utility taxes have been changed and the budget for REET has been increased. As reflected in the August Financial Report, gas utility taxes are lower than budgeted in 2012; the 2013 budget for gas utility tax has been lowered. He summarized the 2013 utility tax budget reflects changes that have occurred during 2012 and to the extent those changes can be projected to continue. Mr. Hunstock relayed a question from Councilmember Petso regarding the property tax outlook in 2017. He explained the reason for the decrease is the last year of the voted bond levy is 2016 which reduces property taxes by approximately $900,000 in 2017. Councilmember Petso asked whether the corresponding debt service obligation was also satisfied at that time. Mr. Hunstock agreed it was. Packet Page 23 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 23, 2012 Page 5 Mr. Hunstock relayed another question regarding benefit expenses shown on the Strategic Outlook, increasing from $4.041 million in 2012 to $4.153 million. He explained when the deficit of $1.5 million was projected for 2013, it included an 11% increase in the AWC health insurance premiums. Savings were accomplished via a different health insurance plan, estimated to save $333,000 which exceeds the target of $250,000. The difference between the 2012 costs and 2013 is only approximately $20,000; the $333,000 savings is between the 2013 costs with United HealthCare and the projected increase in AWC health insurance premiums. The savings is partially offset by a significant increase in the PERS contribution rates which increased from 7.21% 9.03%. The net result when comparing 2012 to 2013 is a cost increase due to the modest savings in health insurance offset by the increase in PERS contribution rates. Councilmember Yamamoto asked about grants reflected in the Strategic Plan. Mr. Hunstock responded amounts in 2010 and 2011 are actual grants received. Most of the grant activity does not occur in the General Fund; grants are typically in the Street Fund and REET Funds. Grant opportunities arise throughout the year and typically actual grant revenue is higher than the amount included in the budget. He offered to provide details regarding the $209,434 received in grants in 2010. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas inquired about Fines and Forfeitures. Mr. Hunstock answered forfeitures are deposits that were surrendered, etc. Most of the revenue in Fines and Forfeitures is penalties, traffic citations, court items, etc. Accountant Deb Sharp agreed it was primarily fines, very little is forfeitures. Mr. Hunstock referred to page 25, a graph and list of employee count by department. He corrected the Court 2013 budget; it should be 6.5 FTE, not 7.0. Councilmember Bloom asked Mr. Hunstock to explain the chart in more detail. Mr. Hunstock explained it is 2013 budgeted positions by department. Most of the reductions relate to the Voluntary Separation Incentive Program (VSIP), staffing changes related to across-the-board reductions or department reorganizations. Councilmember Bloom asked about the .5 FTE in City Council. Mr. Hunstock answered that is the part-time Senior Executive Council Assistant. Councilmember Petso referred to page 26, Property Tax New Construction, and requested a column be added showing the property revenue from the new construction assessment. Mr. Hunstock referred to page 27, 2013 Revenue Summary – All Funds, explaining this is a new chart that shows prior year actuals, the 2012 budget, 2012 estimate, 2013 budget, change between 2013 and 2012 budget and change between 2013 and 2012 estimate. He relayed a question from Councilmember Petso regarding the 2012 estimates in the two REET funds. The difference in the 125 Fund is it includes funds transferred from the General Fund related to Haines Wharf which were approved by the Council. There typically is a difference in the revenue between the two REET funds due to grant revenue. Mr. Hunstock explained a few changes to page 27 related to the bond refinancing will be required before the final budget is adopted by Council. The recent bond refinancing was very successful; the anticipated savings of $1.4 million was actually $1.9 million due to very low interest rates, 1.69%. The budget was developed using the assumption of $1.4 million savings. Most of the savings occur in the future but there are some savings in 2013. He distributed information regarding the savings related to the bond refinancing. In the General Fund there is a savings of $7,500 in 2013; it could be allocated for other purposes or added to reserves. Councilmember Petso referred to a significant increase in the Firemen’s Pension Fund shown on page 27. She asked whether that was a permanent increase or a one-time increase. Mr. Hunstock responded it was more than likely a permanent increase. He will address that issue later in his presentation. Packet Page 24 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 23, 2012 Page 6 Councilmember Bloom asked about the Memorial Tree Fund, noting there is a limited amount in the fund on page 27 but page 29 reflects a beginning fund balance of $17,673. Mr. Hunstock explained the $17,673 is fund balance, page 27 is revenue and page 28 is expenditures. No activity is budgeted in that account in 2013 other than $27 in interest. He suggested any specific questions be asked during review of the Parks & Recreation budget next week. Mr. Hunstock referred to page 29, and the $123,223 transferred from the General Fund to the Contingency Reserve Fund. He explained the target the Council adopted for the Contingency Reserve is 16% of General Fund revenues which changes as revenues change. The $123,223 transfer funds the Contingency Reserve at $5.4 million, slightly short of the 16% target. To the extent funds are available, he proposed increasing that allocation to meet the 16% target. The current amount is approximately $73,000 short of 16% of General Fund revenue. Mr. Hunstock explained all the pages after page 29 are new information added to the 2013 budget document. He referred to page 37, 2012 Property Tax Rates by Jurisdiction. He pointed out the City receives a small portion of property taxes collected; just under 21% for the regular property tax levy, EMS levy and voted bond levy. The City’s regular property tax levy for 2012 was $1.66. For Councilmember Petso, Mr. Hunstock advised the City Bonds on the pie chart on page 37 should be 1.5%. Council President Peterson commented the labels on the pie chart did not appear to be correct as the size of the slices did not match the percentage. Mr. Hunstock agreed that needed to be corrected and assured the percentages in the table on page 38 were correct. He distributed additional information regarding the City’s property tax levy that was distributed at the October Finance Committee meeting. With regard to Councilmember Petso’s early comment regarding the property tax from new construction, Mr. Hunstock advised the 2013 projection is $49,000, based on the value of new construction of $28 million. The regular property tax levy for 2013 is $1.76 including the 1% allowable increase ($96,000) as well as new construction, total 2013 revenue is approximately $9.8 million. With declining assessed values, EMS levy revenue is declining; the estimated collection is $2,775,000, a decrease of approximately $110,000 from the prior year which more than offsets the 1% increase in regular property taxes. The decrease represents banked capacity. To the extent the City is not able to increase the EMS levy by 1% per year due to the $0.50 cent limitation, the difference between what can be collected and the amount the City otherwise would have collected based on the prior year plus 1% becomes banked capacity that can be used later should assessed values increase. He confirmed with the Snohomish County Assessor’s Office that the City has approximately $965,000 in banked capacity, the cumulative decrease in the EMS levy from the time it was adopted and decreased assessed values. Councilmember Petso asked if this was expected to be the last decline in assessed values. Mr. Hunstock expected there will likely be one more small decline. There is a 2-year delay; the money the City receives in 2012 is based on 2010 transactions that are assessed in 2011 and collected in 2012. There is anecdotal evidence of improvement; realtors are receiving multiple offers, inventory is declining, etc. He suggested some of that change occurred in 2011 so there may be some increase in 2013 that will be collected in 2014. The budget represents approximately a 4.6% decline in assessed values from the prior year. Mr. Hunstock referred to page 39, Sales Tax Distribution by Government Entity, pointing out the small amount the City receives; on the total sales tax of 9.5%, the City’s portion is 0.85%. Page 40 illustrates Retail Sales Tax Collection by Sector; the largest contributor is Motor Vehicle and Parts Dealers. Of the $4.6 million the City collected in sales tax in 2011, just over $1 million was from Motor Vehicle and Parts Dealers. Construction, the second largest source of sales tax revenue, also provides a large portion of sales tax but it is typically one-time activities. Packet Page 25 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 23, 2012 Page 7 Mr. Hunstock referred to decision packages on page 43, advising CIO Carl Nelson and Public Works and Engineering staff will address the decision packages related to their departments during review of their budgets. The decision package related to the PROS Plan can be discussed next week during review of the Parks & Recreation budget. In response to a question regarding whether the cost of the PROS Plan could be spread over two years, Mr. Hunstock recalled Ms. Hite mentioned it would be possible to spread the update over 2013 and 2014. He cautioned that does not solve the issue because the expense is still $125,000; if the cost is split between the two years and the $62,000 savings is spent elsewhere, that amount will need to be budgeted in 2014 to complete the update. Councilmember Petso asked about the fiber-related decision packages. CIO Carl Nelson explained the Fiber Optic Customer Development is related to having someone pursue approximately 100 businesses that have been identified along the fiber route. The cost would be spread over two years. The anticipated revenue per customer is approximately $200-$700/month depending on the customer’s needs. The Diverse Fiber Route to Hwy. 99 decision package is a second route of fiber from downtown Edmonds to Hwy. 99. There is a route from Hwy. 99 to downtown but not from downtown out in the event the system goes down. Some of the customers who have been explored asked about a diverse route from the downtown area. A diverse route would also allow an approximately $20,000 reduction in City phone charges. The goal is to begin building the diverse route out of downtown; the first route would be from the Wastewater Treatment Plant to the Edmonds Cemetery and then to Hwy. 99. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked about providing fiber optics to the medical corridor near Swedish- Edmonds. Mr. Nelson answered there was an inquiry from UW Heart Center near Swedish Edmonds but their 5-year lease did not provide a reasonable payback. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked about other medical offices near Swedish-Edmonds such as a hand clinic near McDonalds and another building behind Krueger Clinic. Mr. Nelson advised pursuing those potential users is the intent of the Customer Development decision package. Mr. Williams described the Engineering FTE decision package. The Transportation Plan, adopted in 2009, the Water and Stormwater Plans adopted in 2010 and the Wastewater Plan anticipated to be adopted in 2013, all have capital improvement programs. The City has also received numerous grants and that work needs to be delivered. There are not enough people in the City’s engineering department, currently 12 people, to do that work. The goal would be to staff up to do that work which would be about half the cost of hiring a consulting firm. He anticipated there was at least 3+ years of work. Councilmember Petso asked if grant funds covered an outside consultant. Mr. Williams answered a grant was a fixed sum; doing the work in-house for less money would free up funds for contingencies. The proposal is to fund the person with capital funds in the Water, Storm and Sewer Utility. Councilmember Petso commented it is really not a savings if the work is grant funded. Mr. Williams responded an increase in costs could lead to a City cost; any cost savings are beneficial. For Councilmember Bloom, Mr. Williams explained the decision package is for a Capital Projects Manager or an Engineering Tech III; the final decision will be made in consultation with the Human Resources Department to match the scope of the job to the job description. Consultants will potentially be hired in the future to produce and update plans. Mr. Hunstock referred to page 46, a comparison of 2011 actuals, 2012 budget, 2012 estimate and 2013 budget. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if the amounts included benefits. Mr. Hunstock answered yes, the amounts included all costs. He explained these are department totals. Each department’s budget includes the divisions and total expenditures for each division which correspond to the chart on page 46. Packet Page 26 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 23, 2012 Page 8 Mr. Hunstock referred to the organizational chart on page 48, advising each department now has an organizational chart. In the past the organization chart only listed functional areas, they now list positions. City Council (page 48) Council President Peterson distributed copies of the City Council budget narrative that was sent via email earlier today. He highlighted increases in the City Council budget for Council salaries, communications and the Council Contingency Fund. Councilmember Petso commented the entire General Fund balance, apart from the $5 million in reserve, is available to the Council as a contingency. She asked if the intent of budgeting a Council Contingency was to authorize the Council President to expend the funds without Council authority. Council President Peterson explained the intent of the Council Contingency Fund, as has been done in the past, is to provide funds for Council specific actions such as hiring outside legal counsel, consultants, etc. He assured this is not a Council President specific fund; the Council Contingency Fund allows the Council to allocate funds to certain items rather than doing so via a budget amendment. Mr. Hunstock explained $25,000 was budget in 2012 and is also budgeted in 2013. The 2012 estimate, $5,000, relates to legal counsel hired for the closed record appeal. Councilmember Petso recalled she was told any funds budgeted in the General Fund were available for expenditure at Administration’s discretion. Mr. Hunstock answered technically yes; however, Senior Executive Council Assistant Jana Spellman as well as his staff ensure any expenditures from the Council Contingency Fund are approved by the City Council. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked about overtime in the City Council budget, $6,200 in 2011, $7,200 estimated in 2012 and $6,600 budgeted in 2013. She recalled Council President Peterson’s explanation that some of the overtime was due to lengthy Council meetings. She suggested adding hours to the part-time staff person rather than paying overtime. Council President Peterson explained the part- time Council staff also works part-time in Development Services; she works 40 hours/week split between two departments. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas suggested the person work within their 40 hours, 20 for Council and not pay $7,200 in overtime. Council President Peterson suggested if time spent at Council meetings were part of the Senior Executive Council Assistant’s 20/hours a week, there would be limited time remaining for other Council related projects and office tasks. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas recognized most of the overtime is expended on Tuesday nights to video Council meetings. She suggested discussing this further in the future. Council President Peterson noted the $7,200 is time and a half; $5,000 is straight time for that service. Councilmember Petso asked about professional services, noting a portion of it was City Attorney. It was her understanding the City Attorney was a flat fee and should not matter how much the Council utilized the City Attorney. Council President Peterson advised a portion of the City Attorney’s fee is included in the City Council budget. The Council meeting minute taker is also included in professional services. City Clerk Sandy Chase advised the minute taker is funded from the City Clerk’s budget other than a small portion for the Council retreat. Councilmember Yamamoto advised Mr. Nelson and he are studying options to upgrade the videoing of Council meetings to make them live stream which may also address overtime and staffing issues. Mr. Hunstock advised that functionality will be demonstrated at the November 5 Council meeting. Councilmember Bloom referred to the purpose statement that states the City Council’s time commitment ranges from 25-32 hours per week. She noted that is significantly different than what is stated in the Packet Page 27 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 23, 2012 Page 9 Council manual. She suggested the Council manual be changed as 25-32 hours is much closer to reality rather than the 12-18 hours stated in the Council manual. Mr. Hunstock advised the 25-32 hour time commitment has been in the budget narrative for some time. Mayor's Office (page 50) Mr. Hunstock advised the organizational chart will be revised before the budget process is finalized to reflect the 3.5 FTE that report to the City Clerk as well as the Human Resources Analyst who reports to the Human Resources Manager. He referred to page 51 that lists the programs, Office of the Mayor, Human Resources, City Clerk and City Attorney. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas recalled Mayor Earling canceled out of state travel and asked how that affected the 2013 budget. Mayor Earling explained staff can ask to attend an in-state conference; often staff pay their own room and board and the City pays the conference fee. Mr. Hunstock noted many departments have decreases in their travel budgets; he assumed that was due to in-state training. Mr. Hunstock referred to the Office of the Mayor’s budget on page 53. Mayor Earling commented there were few increases. The two exceptions are travel and rental/lease. The increase in rental/lease is due to a cost increase and that amount is spread between Community Services, the Mayor’s office and Human Resources. The increase in travel is conferences that may be beneficial to the City. He only attended one conference this year in Vancouver; the cost was $400-$500. Mr. Hunstock advised the decrease in salaries was due to a somewhat lower salary for the Mayor’s Executive Assistant. Employee Parking Permit Fund (page 145) Mr. Hunstock explained this is downtown business employee parking permits. The interfund transfer relates to a transfer to the General Fund for the City Clerk Office’s administration of the parking permit program. Sister Cities Commission (page 162) Mr. Hunstock explained this fund has been administered by the Parks & Recreation Department in the past. Mayor Earling explained due to the reduction in staffing in Parks & Recreation, it will be administered by the Mayor’s Office in 2013. Fire Pension Fund (page 180) Mr. Hunstock explained there are two funds related to fire retirees. The 617 Fund is pre-LEOFF 1 fireman’s pension fund. To the extent firefighters hired before LEOFF 1 have different benefits than LEOFF 1, this fund pays the difference. The Fire Insurance Premium Tax was not funded in 2011 but was budgeted in 2012 and 2013. This fund pays a portion of the cost of an actuarial study done every two years and updated annually. Between both funds, $25,000 was budgeted for the actuarial study; the actual cost was approximately $8,000. The firm hired to do the actuarial study also does the actuarial study for the City’s MEBT plan so they are familiar with the City and Snohomish County. Councilmember Petso asked how many pre-LEOFF retirees there are. Mr. Hunstock answered there are four. Councilmember Petso asked what happens to the remaining fund balance when there are zero pre- LEOFF employees. Mr. Hunstock answered more than likely there will not be any fund balance left. He displayed an excerpt from the actuarial study, pointing out the four individuals in the pre-LEOFF fund are fairly expensive. The total liability that is not funded is $1.4 million. The City is on a pay-as-you-go basis with this fund as well as the LEOFF Medical Insurance Fund 009. As benefits are paid out, a transfer from the General Fund is budgeted to pay for the benefits. None of accumulated liabilities are prefunded. One of Councilmember Buckshnis’ questions was whether retirement benefits related to these two funds are funded; he explained neither fund is anywhere near fully funded. Fund 009 has a $428,000 fund balance that is rolled over and there are accumulated liabilities of $8.2 million related to long term care and health insurance benefits for LEOFF 1 retirees and their surviving spouses. Packet Page 28 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 23, 2012 Page 10 Councilmember Petso commented medical and long term care expenditures depend on longevity. The pension obligation will remain and be paid from the 617 Fund. Mr. Hunstock answered that is based on the actuarial study as well. The expenditures are based on projected lifespans of the individuals and their surviving spouses. The pre-LEOFF employees entered fire service prior to 1978. If the liabilities in Fund 617 disappear, Councilmember Petso asked whether the funds can be used for other purposes. Mr. Hunstock answered they can be used but he did not expect the liability to go away any time soon. He offered to provide the Council a copy of the actuarial study. City Clerk (page 56) Mr. Hunstock explained most of the changes relate to implementation of the across-the-board budget reductions. City Clerk Sandy Chase highlighted the following reductions: • $65,270 professional services expenditure in 2012 related to implementation of document management system • $20,000 reduction in advertising, eliminating publication of display ads for City Council and Planning Board agendas in the Everett Herald • $2,000 reduction in postage • $1,000 reduction in travel City Attorney (page 38) Mr. Hunstock explained the City Attorney contract is a 4-year fixed rate. The Police Chief is in discussions with the provider of prosecutorial services; the budgeted amount may change by yearend. As the prosecuting attorney’s contract expires in December 2012, he expected a contract extension before yearend and a proposal for a change in the cost. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked whether the expenditures for other law firms were reflected and whether they were budgeted by department. Mr. Hunstock answered it depends on the nature of the contract; for example, the contract with Summit Law Office related to the bargaining process was funded by Non-Departmental as there are limited funds in the Human Resources budget to absorb such costs. Legal costs typically would be funded by the department’s budget. For example, legal representation related to the closed record review was in the Council budget. Councilmember Petso asked whether the City Attorney’s contract is charged entirely to the Mayor’s department. Mr. Hunstock answered a portion of the cost is charged to the City Council budget. Municipal Court (page 60) Municipal Court Judge Doug Fair explained most of the adjustments were related to the requested across- the-board reduction. The biggest reduction is in salaries, half of one Clerk. He explained the Police Department is currently down one traffic officer; the traffic division writes 75% of traffic tickets. When that officer returns in November, the court’s caseloads will increase. He hoped to be able to restore the 0.5 FTE Court Clerk. Mayor Earling declared a brief recess. Community Services/Economic Development (page 92) Community Services/Economic Development Director Stephen Clifton explained the 2013 Economic Development budget includes $16,000 for professional services, down $3,000 from the previous $19,000 budget. There is a significant reduction from the 2012 estimate due to the one-time expenditures for the Strategic Plan consultant. The advertising budget is proposed to be reduced from $30,000 to $24,000, a $6,000 reduction. Packet Page 29 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 23, 2012 Page 11 The Community Services budget includes a reduction of $10,254 in professional services. That amount was previously budgeted for an on-call environmental attorney; City Attorney Jeff Taraday has indicated his firm can provide those services. There is also a minor reduction in interfund rental. Multimodal Transportation Fund (page 132) Mr. Clifton explained the fund has a balance of $55,000. The monies are used for local match for any activities requested by Washington State Ferries (WSF) or the federal government. There is typically an 80/20 or 70/30 split between WSF or federal funds and the City’s match. Hotel/Motel Tax Fund (page 144) Mr. Clifton projected revenue of $70,000 in 2013. Council President Peterson recalled some of those funds have been allocated to the Edmonds Center for the Arts in the past. Councilmember Bloom advised that allocation was increased to $12,500 in 2013 at the ECA’s request. Finance and Information Services (page 62) Mr. Hunstock advised the organizational chart reflects some of the reorganization of the department but not everything. The plan for reorganizing IT is to upgrade either the Network Support Technician, the Information Systems Specialist or the GIS Analyst to an IT Supervisor as well as add a half-time IT Assistant. There will be an open, competitive process between the three individuals to select the IT Supervisor. The intent of the upgrade and the additional halftime IT Assistant is to backfill for most of the duties related to Mr. Nelson’s current position. Mr. Hunstock advised he will take on some of the responsibility for IT as well. The addition of the Accounting Supervisor in the Finance Department will allow him to devote time to IT responsibilities. The two Accounting Technicians and the two Utility Accounting Technicians will report to the Accounting Supervisor; the Accountant, Accounting Supervisor, and IT Supervisor will report to him. Mr. Hunstock referred to page 64, explaining most of the changes relate to across-the-board reductions. The increase in salaries is related to two positions added to the Finance Department in April 2012, nonrepresented compensation for his position and the projected increase in costs related to reclassification of an Accountant to the Accounting Supervisor position. The overtime budget for 2013 has been eliminated entirely; he was uncertain that would be feasible but that was the goal. There were also increases in benefits related to increases in salaries and the increase in the PERS contribution. The reduction in professional services budget by eliminating the contract for sales tax monitoring is offset by a consultant to review the cost allocation plan. The State Auditor’s Office has indicated that will be an area of focus for all cities next year. The result of reviewing the cost allocation plan will be to provide a basis for allocating costs to the utility funds and other funds. Allocations are currently done based on estimates. Councilmember Petso expressed concern that a reduction in sales tax monitoring would result in lower revenues. Mr. Hunstock explained the plan for 2013 is to increase the use of technology such as the utility data base, business license data base, property tax information from the Assessor’s Office and data from the Department of Revenue (DOR). IT staff will prepare comparisons of the information in those four sources to ensure businesses in Edmonds are reporting sales in Edmonds to DOR. Currently a third party consultant only compares businesses located in Edmonds that apply for State business licenses who have not applied for a City business license and notifies DOR of any discrepancies. Councilmember Petso commented a portion of sales tax revenue is also collected by the Public Facilities District. Fiber Optic Project (page 65) Mr. Nelson explained this is a status quo budget and allows the fiber optic project to continue to deliver service. Packet Page 30 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 23, 2012 Page 12 Information Services (page 66) Mr. Nelson referred to Mr. Hunstock’s explanation of the reorganization. The most significant change is the Microsoft enterprise agreement is entering the fourth year of a five year plan and fees decrease by $4,000-$5,000. The budget also reflects a reduction in the purchase of desktop computers; enough have been purchased to support Windows 7. Councilmember Bloom commented the limited mailbox size reduces Councilmembers’ and staff’s productivity and asked when that would be resolved and whether it would be impacted by the department reorganization. Mr. Nelson advised a server is being tested; the limitation on mailbox size will be eliminated within the next two months. Councilmember Bloom asked whether the reorganization will impact information available on the City’s website. Mr. Nelson answered it should not be. The GIS Analyst has been assisting staff and the consultant who developed the website will also provide assistance. Non-Departmental (page 68) Mr. Hunstock explained a potential cost increase of 2% or $124,000 has been budgeted for the Fire District contract. The potential cost increase for 2013 is unresolved at this time. The City did not learn of the cost increase last year until February. There are also discussions underway regarding potential staffing changes in the three fire stations. Councilmember Petso relayed her understanding that staffing levels were guaranteed under the contract. Mr. Hunstock agreed they are. The current staffing levels could be retained but there may be opportunities for different staffing levels for medics that would spread the coverage better among the three fire stations and potentially decrease one position in each station. Mr. Hunstock relayed a question from Councilmember Buckshnis regarding the effect of the bond refinancing. He explained all the debt service has been updated as a result of the bond refinancing other than the previously identified $7,500 savings due to the low interest rates. Councilmember Yamamoto inquired about the Voter Registration budget. Mr. Hunstock explained costs vary based on the number of Councilmembers on the ballot, type of election, whether there are items on the primary ballot, etc. There is some potential for an August ballot item related to the Regional Fire Authority (RFA). The budgeted amount is based on the number of Councilmembers up for reelection, the voters’ pamphlet, etc. Councilmember Yamamoto inquired about the $35,000 budget for Election Costs. Mr. Hunstock answered that amount is budgeted for the three Councilmembers on the ballot; the remaining costs are the cost of the general election, voter pamphlet, and potentially an August ballot item related to the RFA. Mr. Hunstock referred to a question from Councilmember Buckshnis regarding the $417,000 transfer to the Risk Management Reserve Fund. Although the policy states the Fund will be funded by 2014, the transfer was included in the 2013 budget due to the potential for a number of claims against the City to reach closure in 2013 such as the Precision Earthworks claim and two Human Resources related claims. The City currently has $244,000 set aside for all claims. In response to Councilmember Buckshnis’ question about funds budgeted for projected legal fees, Mr. Hunstock explained there are no funds allocated other than the $244,000 in the Risk Management Reserve Fund. To the extent any of those claims reach closure in 2013, the $244,000 will not last long and is the reason for fully funding the Risk Management Reserve Fund in the 2013 budget up to the 2% target, bringing it up to $661,000. He noted that amount is less than one of the claims pending against the City. Councilmember Petso asked how the 2012 surplus would be used, recalling in 2011 the Council chose to use the 2011 surplus as a contribution to the B Fund and not budget the B Fund for the following year. Packet Page 31 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 23, 2012 Page 13 She asked if that could be done with the 2012 surplus. Mr. Hunstock answered it is possible but would bring the General Fund very close to a deficit. The Strategic Outlook (page 21) shows a projected surplus of $307,000; that entire amount would be required to fund the B Fund which was not included in the 2012 budget. As illustrated in the August Financial Report, with the transfer of $2 million to the Contingency Reserve Fund, the fund balance in the General Fund is getting lower and lower. That will need to be analyzed each month in the future. He referred to page 31, Change in Ending Fund Balance – All Funds, which illustrates an estimated 2013 ending fund balance of $1.7 million. Councilmember Petso observed if the General Fund balance dropped to $1.7 million by yearend, that amount is in addition to the $5.2 million in the Contingency Reserve. Mr. Hunstock agreed. Mr. Hunstock relayed the $220,000 budgeted for the ECA Contingency Reserve is a decrease of $30,000 from 2012. ECA Executive Director Joe McIalwain estimates that amount could be reduced to $190,000, providing an additional $30,000 that could be added to reserves or budgeted for other expenditures. Mr. Taraday referred to the Public Defender line item, a significant increase over what has historically been budgeted for the public defender. He recommended discussing this further in the future as there are ways to work with the Police Department and Prosecuting Attorney to reduce that amount to zero. LEOFF Medical Insurance Reserve Fund (page 128) Mr. Hunstock explained the $600,000 transfer, an increase over the 2011 transfer of $376,000, maintains a fund balance of approximately $300,000. If the Council chose, it is possible to draw down the fund balance by transferring a lower amount but a $600,000 transfer would be required the following year. Risk Management Reserve Fund (page 130) Mr. Hunstock referred to the $417,000 transfer from the General Fund for a total fund balance of $661,000. To the extent that claims are concluded in 2013, that amount will not last long. Councilmember Petso suggested changing the policy to establish a range as recommended by the City Attorney and the Mayor rather than a percentage of General Fund revenues. Mr. Hunstock agreed that would be appropriate; he suggested 2% was not a realistic target but was better than what previously existed which was zero. Councilmember Petso commented it seemed to duplicate the Contingency Reserve but she understood the reason for the Risk Management Reserve. Mr. Hunstock pointed out the Strategic Outlook does not include replenishing the $661,000 Risk Management Reserve. The Council may want to discuss replenishing the fund after pending claims are paid. Contingency Reserve Fund (page 131) Mr. Hunstock explained as previously mentioned, there is a $122,000 transfer in from the General Fund to this fund that is intended to assist with meeting the 16% target. To the extent that funds are available, he recommended increasing the $122,000 transfer. He emphasized there is no expenditure appropriation in the budget; the money cannot be used or moved without affirmative action by the Council. LID Fund Control, LID Guaranty Fund (pages 165-166) Mr. Hunstock explained some LID funds are still being collected. In 2012 the balance in the LID Guaranty Fund was transferred to the Risk Management Reserve Fund. If any funds are received, he recommended a budget amendment to transfer to the Reserve Fund or the General Fund. LTGO Bond Fund (page 167) Mr. Hunstock explained the savings from the bond refinancing have been incorporated into the 2013 budget with the exception of $28,000 of additional savings. That will be updated before the Council takes action on the budget. Packet Page 32 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 23, 2012 Page 14 Development Services (page 96) Acting Development Services Director Rob Chave referred to page 97, explaining the largest reductions are in salaries and benefits which reflects the loss of an employee in Building Services via the VSIP. The Assistant Building Official position is eliminated and the Building Official assuming some of those duties. He referred to other small reductions which require staff to do more electronic distribution of documents. For example materials have been available at Planning Board meetings; that will be changed to providing a single public copy. Although that could be viewed as negative, the positive is it will encourage people to study materials prior to the meeting. Mr. Chave explained professional services are also significantly reduced. For example Building has historically sent projects out during peak work periods; if building activity increases significantly, staff will be swamped. To the extent revenue is generated by that activity, the Council may be asked to restore professional services funding. He noted reductions in travel result in less training; efforts are made to take advantage of online training or local training opportunities. He noted professional services in the Development Services Admin support the online permit system. The reduction in professional services makes it difficult to do any enhancements. In the future more permit activity will be online. Staff may request funding from the Council for some future enhancements. The reduction in professional services may also affect Planning Board minutes. Although the narrative states Planning Board minutes will be reduced from two meetings/month to one, the actuality is a reduction to the equivalent of one meeting a month by reducing meetings to one a month during slow periods. Staff also plans to monitor the Hearing Examiner budget; the 2012 actual will be approximately 2/3 of budget. If that occurs in 2013, the funds could be used to fully fund minute taking. If savings are not available, Planning Board minutes may be reduced to summary minutes. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked about interfund rental. Mr. Chave answered that is for vehicles, the Development Services Department’s contribution to the A and B Fund. He noted vehicles were previously assigned by division; vehicles are now pooled to encourage use of electric vehicles. Councilmember Bloom recalled there were funds allocated in 2006 or 2007 for the City Attorney and the former Development Services Director to work on a code rewrite which she noted did not happen other than small portions. The need to update the code costs the City money in terms of efficiency, enforcement, etc. She asked how the code rewrite will be done with fewer staff, fewer Planning Board meetings, etc. Mr. Chave recalled $120,000 was budgeted at one time; the City Attorney and Development Services Director decided to save money by doing portions of the code rewrite in-house and using the remaining funds to hire a consultant which unfortunately was not done. Councilmember Bloom summarized the code rewrite is very important to the financial future of the City and can reduce potential lawsuits. Mr. Chave shared Councilmember Bloom’s concern and suggested the Council retreat include discussion regarding the status of the code rewrite and ideas for moving forward. Councilmember Bloom expressed concern about delaying work on the code rewrite until 2014. Mr. Chave stated a consultant to assist with a code rewrite would cost $100,000-$150,000. He was unsure where the funds could be identified in the 2013 budget. He suggested elements of the rewrite could be prioritized. Mr. Hunstock explained next week’s Council meeting will include the Police Department, Human Resources, Parks & Recreation and Public Works budgets. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETSO, TO EXTEND THE MEETING FOR 15 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 7A. REPORT ON CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETINGS OF OCTOBER 9, 2012 Councilmember Johnson reported the Historic Preservation Commission has met twice this month and will meet a third time on Thursday. Packet Page 33 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 23, 2012 Page 15 Councilmember Yamamoto reported on the SnoCom meeting. Work is continuing on the New World system. Councilmember Bloom reported the SeaShore Transportation Committee discussed their legislative agenda and electric vehicles pay their fair share because they do not pay gas tax. The Tree Board plans to discuss code language at their next meeting Councilmember Bloom reported the Public Safety & Personnel Committee discussed Council procedures and developed a list of issues to address. Examples of issues include the Council has not adopted Roberts Rules of Order, the Council President’s authority in setting agendas, the committee chair’s role in setting agendas, reading of citizen emails. The committee plans to continue their discussion regarding Council procedures at their next meeting. Councilmember Bloom reported the Economic Development Commission (EDC) meeting included discussion regarding retail only in BD1. The meeting was advertised as a joint EDC/Planning Board meeting but only two Planning Board Members attended. The EDC had a good discussion but much of it had been discussed by the Planning Board and the discussion did not advise the topic. Councilmember Petso reported the Council approved everything on the Parks, Planning and Public Works Committee’s agenda with the exception of discussion regarding design guidelines and the two new buildings on Edmonds Way. The Committee discussed a variety of issues associated with the buildings such as height limits, setback, lot coverage and zoning; she has received numerous citizen complaints about the buildings. The building on the corner is zoned BC - Edmonds Way; no other lots have that zoning. The other building to the west is zoned RM - Edmonds Way; there are two other lots with that zoning. The Committee agreed to research the ordinances that put those zones in place. She asked for Council approval for her to meet with Mr. Chave and Mr. Taraday to discuss eliminating or modifying those zones and an emergency moratorium to prevent land use applications while that effort is underway. Two other Councilmembers expressed interest. Councilmember Petso commended Mr. Hunstock for his efforts on the RFA Finance Committee. She relayed the RFA Committee is continuing their discussions regarding a fire benefit charge. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas reported the Parking Committee is interested in additional parking on the waterfront for commuter trains riders. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas reported on the Snohomish Health Board meeting and Budget Committee meetings. Mayor Earling reported Sound Transit is trying to locate another light rail maintenance base; one site has been identified in Snohomish County and four to five sites have been identified on the eastside. Lynnwood passed a resolution expressing concern with the site tentatively identified adjacent to the Park & Ride at 44th & 200th. A major portion of that property is owned by the Edmonds School District and there are other plans for the property. 8. REPORT ON OUTSIDE COMMITTEE/BOARD MEETINGS Reports were provided under Agenda Item 7A. 9. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Earling complimented Mr. Hunstock’s organizational skills related to the budget presentation; the presentations have been much smoother than when he was on the Council. Mayor Earling requested Mr. Hunstock pass his accolades on to Ms. Sharp and the Finance Department staff. Packet Page 34 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 23, 2012 Page 16 10. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked Mr. Taraday to develop a cheat sheet on Roberts Rules of Order. Mr. Taraday answered he would be happy to once the Council adopted Roberts Rules as part of their procedures. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked what parliamentary procedure the Council followed during its meetings. Mr. Taraday answered Resolution No. 292. He offered to email the resolution to Councilmembers. Councilmember Petso echoed Councilmember Bloom’s comments about mailbox size. She apologized to anyone who emailed her when email was down on Monday afternoon; she eventually received the emails but not timely. She looked forward to resolving the mailbox size issue. Councilmember Petso asked Mr. Taraday to advise what constitutes an illegal meeting; for example meetings via email, if the Council decided something last week and four of them as still discussing it, etc. She also asked for clarification regarding sending a blind copy versus an email to more than two Councilmembers. Councilmember Bloom pointed out Resolution No. 292 and a variety of other attachments are included in the Public Safety & Personnel Committee’s October 16 agenda. Council President Peterson relayed a number of citizens have stopped him on the street, come into his shop or contacted him to express their appreciation for the new buildings on Edmonds Way, a vast improvement over the prior condition of the site. Councilmember Yamamoto expressed his appreciation for everyone’s support, email, letters, and cards following his surgery. He echoed Mayor Earling’s comments regarding the Finance Department’s efforts on the budget. Councilmember Johnson reminded Main Street is open and encouraged people to attend the third Thursday art walk and visit the businesses on Main Street. The project will be complete next month. 11. ADJOURN With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:16 p.m. Packet Page 35 of 266    AM-5233     4. B.              City Council Meeting Meeting Date:11/05/2012 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 October 30, 2012. Recommendation Review and approval. Previous Council Action N/A Narrative Attached is a copy of the draft minutes. Attachments 10-30-12 Draft City Council Minutes Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Mayor Dave Earling 11/01/2012 04:35 PM Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase 11/01/2012 04:46 PM Form Started By: Sandy Chase Started On: 11/01/2012 01:09 PM Final Approval Date: 11/01/2012  Packet Page 36 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 30, 2012 Page 1 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL DRAFT MINUTES October 30, 2012 The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Earling in the Council Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Dave Earling, Mayor Lora Petso, Council President Pro Tem Frank Yamamoto, Councilmember Joan Bloom, Councilmember Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember (arrived 7:06 p.m.) Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember ELECTED OFFICIALS ABSENT Strom Peterson, Council President STAFF PRESENT Al Compaan, Police Chief Jim Lawless, Assistant Police Chief Stephen Clifton, Community Services/Economic Development Director Phil Williams, Public Works Director Shawn Hunstock, Finance Director Carrie Hite, Parks & Recreation Director Carl Nelson, CIO Renee McRae, Recreation Manager Mary Ann Hardie, Human Resources Manager Debra Sharp, Accountant Frances Chapin, Cultural Services Manager Rob English, City Engineer Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Sandy Chase, City Clerk Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst. Jeannie Dines, Recorder 1. ROLL CALL – MOTION TO EXCUSE COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON City Clerk Sandy Chase called the roll. All Councilmembers were present with the exception of Council President Peterson and Councilmember Johnson. COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETSO, TO EXCUSE COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON FROM TONIGHT’S MEETING. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETSO, TO EXCUSE COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON FROM TONIGHT’S MEETING. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS Councilmember Petso requested Item A, Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of October 23, 2012, be removed from the Consent Agenda. Finance staff has requested an opportunity to review and make corrections to the minutes and return them for approval at a subsequent meeting. Packet Page 37 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 30, 2012 Page 2 COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO APPROVE THE REMAINDER OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: B. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #135001 THROUGH #135143 DATED OCTOBER 25, 2012 FOR $605,749.78 (REPLACEMENT CHECK #135136 $130.00). C. 2012-2013 EDMONDS POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION LAW ENFORCEMENT COMMISSIONED EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT. (Councilmember Johnson arrived at 7:06 p.m.) COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO RESCIND THE MOTION TO EXCUSE COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. (Councilmember Johnson was not present for the vote.) 4. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Dale Hoggins, Edmonds, on behalf of himself and Betty Deebach Gaeng, invited everyone to observe Veteran’s Day at the Edmonds Memorial Cemetery and Columbarium on November 10 at 1:00 p.m. for a guided tour of veterans’ gravesites and memorials. Over 400 veterans from Edmonds and Snohomish County, whose military service date back to the Civil War, are buried or memorialized in the cemetery. On Veteran’s Day, each veteran site is marked with a flag or country. Both he and Betty are Edmonds High School graduates and members of the Alderwood Manor Heritage Association. Ms. Deebach Gaeng is a superior genealogical researcher and the author/compiler of the book, Etched in Stone, that contains the biography of the men whose names are etched on the memorial monument in front of the Edmonds Museum. He invited anyone with questions to contact him; his phone number is in the telephone book. Ron Wambolt, Edmonds, referred to the 2013 budget, crediting Mayor Earling with presenting a budget that balances revenues and expenses. He thanked Finance Director Hunstock for producing a first class budget package, particularly the comparison of the 2013 budget to up-to-date estimates for 2012 rather than comparing to 2012 budget figures. He pointed out 2012 wages are estimated to be over budget and exceed 2011 by 5.9%. The 2013 budget includes represented and nonrepresented employees’ salary ranges; he suggested this be expanded in the future to include actual salaries. A balanced budget means changes in service levels; he suggested citizens review the service level implications included in the Mayor’s budget memo. The 2013 budget projects a General Fund balance at the end of 2013 of $3.9 million in excess of the 16% Contingency Reserve Fund. Prudent use of some of that balance is an option, particularly for one-time expenses such as the code rewrite and as backup for the Risk Management Reserve Fund. Balancing the budget without service cuts or tax increases will be impossible as long as City employees receive annual COLAs plus 5% step increases until they reach the top of their salary range. For 2013, those increases are expected to amount to 7% for represented and nonrepresented employees. One solution is to reduce the number of employees; another alternative is to do as Fire District 1 did, seek concessions from the union, preventing layoff of some firefighters. The long term solution is to reduce headcount by obtaining efficiencies by amalgamating municipalities. He urged the public to attend the November 5 and 20 hearings on the budget and speak to the Council about the budget. Don Hall, Edmonds, referred to the bargaining agreement approved on the Consent Agenda, stating it should have been discussed as an agenda item on tonight’s meeting. Other cities, counties and the state inform citizens about the details in the bargaining agreements. He summarized it was wrong to approve the bargaining agreement on the consent agenda when the Council was interested in open government. Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, referred to an Edmonds Beacon article written by former Fire Chief Tom Tomberg suggesting the Council reconsider their decision regarding the underpass. He noted while Mr. Packet Page 38 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 30, 2012 Page 3 Tomberg was the City’s Fire Chief, he never heard him express a need for a tunnel or for pedestrian access across the railroad tracks. Next, Mr. Hertrich reported when the City of Bremerton built a similar underpass they experienced a number of cost overruns; it disrupted the business district and Bremerton now has an annual cost to support the tunnel. He summarized the tunnel was a poor example of open government as no studies have been done and there has been no public participation. He suggested contacting officials in Bremerton to learn more about their experience. 5. MEDICAL INSURANCE COVERAGE CHANGE Reporting Human Resources/Parks & Recreation Director Carrie Hite explained this item is a recommendation for the Mayor to sign several forms in the packet regarding the medical insurance coverage change. She explained staff has been exploring options to change medical insurance since April. Goals included, 1) cost savings, 2) identifying a similar plan, and 3) access to claims data. The City’s current preferred provider is AWC Trust. The recommendation is to change insurance to United Health Care, using Mercer as a broker. Staff has had many discussions regarding this change with employees and negotiations with SEIU, Teamsters, EPOA and law support. There has been very positive feedback from employees; all the bargaining units have agreed with the exception of Teamsters who will be discussing it tomorrow although they have indicated preliminary support for the change. Council action is required tonight as the City has until November 1 to withdraw their announcement to AWC to change medical insurance; notice was provided to AWC on July 1. She referred to additional information distributed to the Council to clarify the employer pays 100% of premiums only for EPOA and law support; other employees pay 10% of their premiums. Information distributed to Council also includes an Acceptance of Insurance letter from United Health Care accepting Edmonds as insured. That confirmation was not available when the Council packet was prepared. Ms. Hite recommended the Council authorize the Mayor to sign the agreements to allow staff to move forward on November 1. Open enrollment will be November 1-30; insurance is effective January 1, 2013. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN AGREEMENTS ALLOWING THE CITY TO CHANGE MEDICAL PPO HEALTH COVERAGE FOR EMPLOYEES. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 6. DISCUSSION REGARDING THE VOLUNTARY SEPARATION INCENTIVE PROGRAM (VSIP) Mayor Earling explained this program, which allows employees to voluntarily separate from the City, was presented to the Council in August. Nine employees originally expressed interest; six were accepted given the program criteria; one employee subsequently withdrew. The intent of VSIP is to reduce salary expenditures by eliminating positions. The goal was to achieve a savings of $400,000; actual savings will be $488,731. One of the positions is paid by the Combined Utility Fund ($86,760) for a total savings of $575,491. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked about the salary amount and medical benefits employees will receive. Mayor Earling answered it varies based on the length of service. The program announcement in the Council packet includes a formula for calculating salary and COBRA health benefits based on four levels, 0-5 years of service, 6-10 years, 11-15 years, and 15+ years. Councilmember Buckshnis asked about Mayor Earling’s efforts to ensure there are no voids in departments where an employee has left via the VSIP. Mayor Earling explained a considerable amount of time has been devoted to redistributing workloads in departments where an employee is leaving via VSIP. All departments feel the workloads have been adequately redistributed. Councilmember Buckshnis asked Packet Page 39 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 30, 2012 Page 4 how work will be distributed in IT when CIO Carl Nelson leaves via the VSIP. Mayor Earling answered Finance Director Shawn Hunstock will assume some of those duties. Ms. Hite clarified there have been some service level cuts via the VSIP. For example in the Parks & Recreation Department, the Office Supervisor is participating in VSIP; her position will be eliminated and the Cultural Arts Assistant Position will be moved into an Administrative Assistant position to provide support for arts, the director and payroll. The result is internal cuts as well as cuts to the arts program. Councilmember Johnson inquired about the hours paid out at separation. Mr. Hunstock explained it is the balance of vacation, annual leave at separation and the appropriate portion, according to the bargaining unit contract, of any sick leave or accrued comp time balance. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO APPROVE THE VOLUNTARY SEPARATION INCENTIVE PROGRAM AND INCENTIVE PAYOUTS FOR THOSE VOLUNTEERING TO SEPARATE FROM THE CITY. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 7. BUDGET WORK SESSION Finance Director Shawn Hunstock advised responses to Council questions at the October 23 budget work session will be provided at the November 6 meeting prior to the public hearing. Councilmember Buckshnis suggested Council questions be posted on the City’s website so that citizens are aware that Councilmembers have asked a number of global questions in addition to questions asked at the October 23 meeting and that will be asked tonight. Mr. Hunstock answered that could be done. Mr. Hunstock referred to a question regarding allocation of the savings due to bond refinancing, explaining a $1.4 million savings was originally anticipated from the GO bond refinancing. Due to the low interest rates, a savings of $1.9 million was realized over the life of the bonds. He will provide more details at next week’s Council meeting during a presentation regarding the bond refinancing. The savings were allocated in accordance with the source of the original debt service. For example, the 2002 bonds issued for the benefit of the Edmonds Center for the Arts (ECA), the City provided an 8% match from REET revenue; with the bond refinancing, 8% of any savings attributable to that bond issue are returned to the REET fund. Mayor Earling reminded Council that the 2013 budget is balanced. He requested any additions to the budget be balanced with a revenue source or other budget reduction. Mr. Hunstock noted all the organization charts in the 2013 budget document reflect the elimination of positions via the VSIP. Police Department – Total Department (page 70) Mr. Hunstock referred to the organization chart, explaining this organizational chart, reflects a total reduction of four FTE, one position eliminated via VSIP and three others. Mr. Hunstock referred to page 71, explaining this chart reflects the total Police Department budget by division. He pointed out Prisoner Care was moved to the Non-Departmental Budget. In addition to moving Prisoner Care to Non-Departmental, the budget for Prisoner Care was also reduced from the amount budgeted in 2012 ($531,050) to $486,000, a decrease of $45,000. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked why Prisoner Care was moved to Non-Departmental. Mr. Hunstock responded Non-Departmental is used for uncontrollable expenses or expenses related to multiple departments. For example, Citywide Insurance is a Non-Departmental expense. With regard to Packet Page 40 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 30, 2012 Page 5 Prisoner Care, although the Police arrest individuals, sentencing and the length of time served is done by another department. Dispatch, Public Defender, etc. are other examples of Non-Departmental expenses. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked whether there was a mechanism/tool to identify the department for expenses that were moved to Non-Departmental. Mr. Hunstock advised that could be added if the Council wished. There is reference on the Prisoner Care page that the expense was moved to Non-Departmental. At the time expenses were moved to Non-Departmental, he assumed that was noted in the department section of the budget document. This is the only expense that was moved to Non-Departmental this year. Councilmember Buckshnis commented that she agreed with the statement that the collective bargaining agreement should have been an agenda item. She then pointed out the police overtime budget (page 72) increased $50,000 and asked whether an employee contract could be drafted with the Police Chief and Assistant Police Chief to incentivize them to reduce/eliminate overtime. Mr. Hunstock explained page 72 reflects $453,000 in overtime in 2011; the 2012 estimate is $370,000. The 2013 budget is $420,000. He clarified overtime costs are expected to be lower than budget. Police Chief Al Compaan pointed out the 2013 overtime budget of $420,000 was the same as the 2012 budget. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if there were ways to reduce Police Department overtime. Chief Compaan pointed out the 2012 estimate was $370,000, a decrease of $80,000 compared to 2011 actuals. He summarized the Police Department is doing the best they can to reduce overtime. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas suggested the 2013 budget for overtime be $370,000 if the 2012 estimate is $370,000. Mr. Hunstock answered the 2013 budget for overtime could be decreased based on the 2012 estimate although the 2012 estimate is a projection and not a guarantee. Chief Compaan explained some of the overtime is reimbursable via grants for emphasis enforcement and other purposes. Overtime is unpredictable; for example last Friday’s shooting resulted in overtime. The $420,000 budgeted for overtime provides some cushion; if the cushion is removed, the Police Department still needs to do the work and will request the additional funds via a budget amendment. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if a cushion of less than $50,000 could be provided. Chief Compaan answered it is a roll of the dice because overtime is unpredictable. He assured overtime money is never wasted; it is managed as carefully as possible. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas relayed her understanding that without a cushion or with less of a cushion, the Police Department may have to request a budget amendment. Chief Compaan agreed. Councilmember Buckshnis asked whether having one less assistant chief and one less sergeant will result in less or more overtime. Chief Compaan answered it would not make a difference with one less assistant chief position as that was a nonrepresented position. The impact on overtime due to the loss of one sergeant and two police officers is unknown. Theoretically there could be a reduction in overtime if a certain amount of overtime is attributable to each position but the need for overtime is unpredictable. Police– Administration (pages 74-75) Mr. Hunstock referred to page 75, explaining the numbers reflect the loss of one assistant chief position. The reason Interfund Rental increased is the B Fund in the General Fund is being funded in the amount of approximately $300,000. That was not funded in 2009 or 2012. It is the opinion of Public Works and fleet staff that funding could not be skipped a third year. All funds with equipment have funds included in their budget in 2013 to fund the B Fund for maintenance of the City’s rolling stock. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas referred to the travel budget for the total department (page 72), relaying $26,000 was budgeted in 2012, the 2012 estimate is $15,200, and the 2013 budget is $26,000. She expressed concern the 2013 travel budget was $10,000 over the 2012 estimate. Chief Compaan answered the 2013 budget is $26,000, the same as the budget for 2012. The $15,200 estimate for 2012 is likely low Packet Page 41 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 30, 2012 Page 6 when compared to 2011. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas suggested a reduction of four FTE in the Police Department would also reduce travel expenses. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas referred to the Training budget on page 71, assuming that was training for the entire department. Mr. Hunstock explained page 71 is the budget by division, not object code; the Training line may include other expenses in addition to training such as travel, etc. Page 72 is by object code; the totals on page 71 correspond to the totals on page 72; it is simply a different way of dividing up the Police Department budget. Councilmember Petso recalled when the departments made their initial budget presentation, the Police Department indicated the Street Crimes Unit would be eliminated. She asked the impact of losing that department. Chief Compaan answered three of the four positions that are being eliminated are in Field Services; one sergeant who is participating in the VSIP and two police officers, one of which has been vacant and the other via a planned retirement. To maintain staffing for uniformed patrol services, operations in the Street Crimes Unit were suspended. The Street Crimes Unit consisted of a sergeant and two police officers who worked plain clothes patrol, targeting burglary emphasis, registered sex offenders, prostitution, vehicle prowls, etc. Since beginning operation in 2009, the unit made nearly 400 arrests for a variety of crimes and was very instrumental in addressing the Puget Sound-wide burglaries last year. They were a wonderful interface between uniformed patrol and the detective unit and good at interfacing with similar units in other Police Departments. He was disappointed the Street Crimes Unit was being eliminated but tough decisions had to be made. He summarized he was not happy about any of the cuts but each department was required to do its part. He was hopeful at some point the Street Crimes Unit could be reinstated. Responding to Councilmember Petso, Chief Compaan stated there was still a robust uniform patrol that responds to 911 calls. It does eliminate some flexibility in targeting the type of crimes he described. Police Department – Records Management (page 76) Chief Compaan explained the $85,000 reduction in salaries should be reflected in Patrol. There has been a sergeant in Street Crimes and in Records Management. The sergeant in Records Management is participating in the VSIP. The sergeant in Street Crimes will transition into Records Management, net loss of one sergeant. Councilmember Buckshnis asked Chief Compaan to describe Holiday Buyback and if it affects overtime. Chief Compaan explained Holiday Buyback is payment for the 11 holidays that Police Department staff work. It is a required provision of the collective bargaining agreements. It does not affect overtime. Holiday Buyback is part of the salary amount for pension contributions required by the State. Councilmember Buckshnis asked whether the reduction in health insurance was reflected in the Police Department budget. Mr. Hunstock answered the health insurance change was not yet reflected in the Police Department budget; when the 2013 budget was prepared, EPOA had not yet approved the change to United Health Care. An offset, also not included, is the deferred comp contribution that is part of the collective bargaining agreement. Councilmember Buckshnis asked for an updated comparison. Mr. Hunstock agreed, advising preliminary estimates are approximately $15,000 for the entire department. Police – Investigation (page 77) Councilmember Fraley-Monillas relayed a question from Councilmember Johnson regarding the low amount shown for 2012 estimated benefits ($169,650). Mr. Hunstock advised staff will research that. Police – Patrol (page 79) Councilmember Yamamoto observed with the additional $85,000 savings from Records Management, total salary savings in Patrol are $160,000. Chief Compaan agreed. Packet Page 42 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 30, 2012 Page 7 Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked whether the Police Department still had a dive team. Chief Compaan answered yes; Fire District 1 has the boat. Mr. Hunstock pointed out the increase in the Interfund Rental budget was due to funding the B Fund, the increase is $161,496. Police – Special Operations (page 80) Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked whether this was different than the Street Crimes Unit. Chief Compaan answered Special Operations is expenses related to participation in SWAT. Police – K-9 Unit (page 81) Councilmember Buckshnis pointed out the 2013 benefit budget was much higher than 2012 estimate. Mr. Hunstock pointed out two changes that are not reflected; the change in health insurance offset by the deferred comp contribution. As wages increase, typically benefits also increase. There were also increases in other benefits such as L&I. Benefits may also be impacted by the person in the position; for example the health insurance premium for a single person is $600/month versus $2000/month for a married person with two dependents. Police – Crime Prevention (page 82) Chart shows prior year actuals only. No Council questions. Police – Youth Services (page 83) Chart shows prior year actuals only. No Council questions. Police – Training (page 84-85) Chief Compaan referred to the $20,000 decrease in Miscellaneous; it was anticipated the Police Department would pay the Washington Criminal Justice Training Commission $10,000 for each of the two new hires who attended the academy; expenses were not as high as the State originally indicated. The balance in Miscellaneous is training and travel expenses. Police – Ordinance Enforcement (page 86) Councilmember Buckshnis asked where revenue generated from licenses and tickets was reflected in the budget. Mr. Hunstock answered it depended on the type of revenue. He referred to Total Revenue by Fund (page 27) and Revenue by Type (page 32). Revenue from licenses could be in Licenses and Permits and tickets could be under Fines and Penalties. Councilmember Buckshnis commented if she wanted to increase animal licenses from $5 from $7.50 to help Animal Control be sustainable, the increased revenue would just “flow into the bucket.” Mr. Hunstock agreed. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if revenue from parking tickets was included in the “big revenue bucket.” Mr. Hunstock agreed and explained cities do not track revenue by department in the General Fund. Based on the type of revenue, some revenue can be associated with certain departments such as permits. Police – Traffic (page 87) There were no Council questions. Police – Property Management (page 88) There were no Council questions. Police – Prisoner Care (page 89) Mr. Hunstock advised this was moved to Non-Departmental. Packet Page 43 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 30, 2012 Page 8 Police – Dispatch (page 90) Mr. Hunstock advised this is the General Fund contribution to replace police radios and mobile computers. This was not funded in 2012 but is funded in 2013. Drug Enforcement Fund (page 134) Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if there would be impact on the Police Department budget if the marijuana sale and distribution initiative passes. Chief Compaan stated staff has not researched it much. If it passes, there will be a lot of unanswered questions such as the federal government’s response. Oregon has a similar initiative on their ballot; a recent poll indicated that initiative is unlikely to pass. Chief Compaan thanked Finance Department staff, particularly Mr. Hunstock and Ms. Sharp, for their assistance with reviewing the Police Department budget. He invited Councilmembers to email him any additional questions. Mayor – Human Resources (page 54-55) Mr. Hunstock explained some of the changes in the Human Resources budget are related to the addition of a Human Resources Analyst position authorized by Council earlier this year. The decrease in Professional Services primarily relates to not having the 2012 cost of the compensation consultant. Mr. Hunstock relayed a question from Councilmember Buckshnis regarding wages for Ms. Hite as the Reporting Director for Human Resources. He explained that cost is included in the Human Resources budget. Ms. Hite explained the Salaries budget includes a Human Resources Manager, a Human Resources Analyst which is currently being recruited, and 5% Reporting Director Special Duty Pay. Ms. Hite relayed the impact of the 4% cut in the Human Resources budget: • Reduction in supplies • Eliminated onsite employee flu shots • Reduced advertising budget • Reduced budget for citywide tuition reimbursement program Councilmember Petso asked how long Ms. Hite would be the Reporting Director for Human Resources. Ms. Hite responded the Council passed an ordinance related to Special Duty Pay for one year; it is up to the Mayor whether it would be for a year or end sooner. If it ended sooner, the Mayor would need to determine reporting duties for the Human Resources Department. Councilmember Petso asked about the Human Resources Analyst’s duties. Ms. Hite explained in the absence of a Human Resources Analyst, the City has utilized temporary personnel. The Human Resources Analyst will assume the duties of the temporary personnel as well as provide Human Resources expertise. She anticipated the Human Resources Analyst would minimize her work in the department as well as allow the Human Resources Manager to work at a manager/policy level. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if a manager must report to a department head or could they report to the Mayor. Ms. Hite stated the organization is up to the Mayor. It would have been difficult to have the Human Resources Manager report to the Mayor during the past year due to the number of large, difficult projects such as job description updates, personnel policies, Police contract, medical insurance, etc. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas recalled previously there was only a Human Resources Manager and a Human Resources Analyst. She was unsure who the Human Resources Manager reported to at that time. Ms. Hite stated it is vital to have a Reporting Director for Human Resources as there are a lot of projects that need a higher analysis and policy-level thinking. She understood that previously the Administrative Packet Page 44 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 30, 2012 Page 9 Services Director provided oversight of Human Resources. She noted there was a great deal of work to be done in Human Resources and she was uncertain if directly reporting to the Mayor would be effective. Councilmember Buckshnis thanked Ms. Hite for doing double duty. It was her understanding that the policy stated six months. Ms. Hite answered acting duty was six months; the ordinance the Council passed in April was one year for special duty. She explained acting duty was if there was a director position listed; the Council eliminated the Human Resources Director position. When then-Mayor Cooper requested she oversee the Human Resources Department, she was an acting director until January when the position was eliminated. In April the Council passed an ordinance related to special duty pay, specifically for a person who took on special duties, for up to a year. Councilmember Buckshnis asked whether the personnel policy needed to be updated. Ms. Hite answered the special duty will be included in the updated personnel policies that will be presented to the Council shortly. Councilmember Buckshnis asked whether Ms. Hite spent 95% of her time in Parks & Recreation and 5% in Human Resources. Ms. Hite answered she did not. Councilmember Petso suggested the Professional Services budget could be reduced and asked if there were any union negotiations in 2013. Ms. Hite answered the only negotiations is law support; that contract expires December 2012. The cost of the compensation consultant was removed; there has always been an amount in the Professional Services budget for special projects, negotiations or additional assistance in the Human Resources department. She pointed out the 2011 actual for Professional Services is $26,298 and the 2013 budget is $25,000. The $67,000 in the 2012 budget and the $57,000 in the 2012 estimate reflect decision packages for the compensation consultant. Councilmember Petso assured she was not implying that she did not appreciate Ms. Hite’s service in Human Resources. She recalled when the Council discussed reorganizing the Human Resources Department, comparable cities only had a manager and analyst and no director. She questioned if the 5% special duty pay and split duties would continue indefinitely. Ms. Hite responded the split duties would not continue indefinitely. The budget includes funds for a Reporting Director for Human Resources, whoever that is. She was uncertain that most comparable cities do not have a Human Resources Director; most comparable cities have more than two people in their Human Resources Department and often have 3-5. She offered to provide the Council further information. Mayor Earling agreed with Ms. Hite, the majority of comparable cities have more than two employees in Human Resources. He pointed out Ms. Hite had a considerable amount of experience and understanding of Human Resources issues from her prior employment in Kirkland. Parks & Recreation – Total Department (page 104-105) Ms. Hite explained the 2013 Parks & Recreation and Cultural Services budget is similar to 2012, less a 4.5% cut. She highlighted the cuts: • Reduce seasonal parks labor – reduces corner flower beds, mowing, landscaping, trash pickup and restroom cleaning • Reduce irrigation at neighborhood parks and ball fields – reduces water costs and need for mowing • 1.5 FTE reduction at Frances Anderson Center – reduces recreation office hours and decreases service level in arts program • Suspend General Fund Arts Fund transfer of $15,000 until 2015, required by ordinance – eliminates one summer concert, the arts scholarship program and use revenues from the Write on the Sound Conference to fund arts programs • Reduce beach range program, results in limited summer beach patrols, closing the visitor station at the fishing pier and reducing programs Packet Page 45 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 30, 2012 Page 10 Ms. Hite pointed out the 2013 budget includes a decision package for the Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan. The cost to update the plan, including the Community Cultural Plan update, is $125,000. The PROS Plan expires in May 2014; to qualify for State grants such as the grant the City received for the Interurban Trail, the PROS Plan must be current. She proposed beginning the update in mid-2013 to include a public process in order to capture Edmonds citizens’ wants, needs and desires. The decision package requires hiring a consultant; the cost could be spread over two years. If the Council only funded half the cost of the update in 2013, Mr. Hunstock cautioned the other half is not programmed into the 2014 projection. To the extent that half the expense is delayed until 2014 and the funds used for a another permanent cost in 2014, there will be impacts to the 2014 budget and beyond. Ms. Hite referred to the Cemetery Maintenance/Improvement Fund (pages 154-155), explaining the fund balance was used in 2012 and 2013. After 2013, the fund balance will be reduced to $15,000 and consideration will need to be given to a subsidy to allow the cemetery to operate at its current level. Ms. Hite explained the Parks & Recreation budget was developed with the same service level at Yost Pool. Yost Pool revenue in 2012 was $124,000; direct cost expenditures were $107,000 but that does not include Park maintenance staff, chemicals, utilities, water, etc. which total $88,000. Including all costs, the subsidy to Yost Pool is approximately $72,000. In talking with other Parks & Recreation Directors, she recognized pool subsidies are common other than for leisure pools that have a lot of play features. Pools promote healthy activity and citizens prioritize them and are willing to pay for them. Councilmember Buckshnis asked how the funds generated by Write on the Sound are currently used. Ms. Hite responded the funds go into the Art Fund which is also used for arts programing. The proposal is to only use those funds for arts programming which resulted in one less concert and cuts to the arts scholarship program. Councilmember Buckshnis expressed concern with the proposed 80% cut to the flower program when the Adopt-A-Flower Basket program was very successful, generating $13,300. She asked if consideration had been given to Adopt-A-Corner for businesses and other measures that would allow the community to contribute. Ms. Hite agreed that was a possibility. She noted the reduction on page 105 was a very small portion of the cost of the flower program. The most expensive portion of the flower program is the two FTEs and the nursery to grow the flowers. The comment that the flower program was cut by 80% is not accurate; the cut is to seasonal labor associated with the flower program. There are still two FTEs associated with the flower program. Councilmember Buckshnis referred to the reduction from the 2012 estimate of $34,977 to $8,394. Ms. Hite responded the flower program is a $170,000 program. Mr. Hunstock explained there are expenses in other funds in addition to the General Fund related to the flower program. There are two FTEs funded in the Parks Department that work in the flower program whose cost is reflected in the General Fund, not the flower program. If the cost of the two FTEs was included in the flower program, the program would be subsidized by $150,000. Councilmember Buckshnis suggested passing the hat at free concerts. Ms. Hite agreed that was a great idea. She noted the former City Attorney had concern with accepting cash in the park; she will work with Mr. Taraday on that issue. Councilmember Petso asked about the reduction in hours at the Frances Anderson Center (FAC). Ms. Hite answered the hours at the FAC will be reduced by five hours a week, primarily evening and Saturday drop-in hours; the FAC will close at 1:00 p.m. on Saturdays. Councilmember Petso asked if the reduction would affect people coming to the FAC in the evening to shoot hoops. Ms. Hite answered it is possible. Parks & Recreation – Administration (page 107) Mr. Hunstock explained, as Ms. Hite mentioned, there is a 0.5 FTE reduction and a small decrease in Professional Services. Packet Page 46 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 30, 2012 Page 11 Councilmember Bloom asked for the definition of professional services. Mr. Hunstock offered to provide the generic description of the type of expenses paid under professional services. Professional services differ depending on the division; in Finance, the sales tax auditing/monitoring is a professional service. Councilmember Bloom asked what professional services were cut. Ms. Hite answered professional services in Parks & Recreation vary by division. In the administration budget, the professional services are monitors for contracted staff who monitor buildings during off-hour rentals. This line item is being reduced due to a transition to hired hourly staff, which is less expensive than contract staff. Parks & Recreation – Recreation & Cultural Services (page 108) Mr. Hunstock pointed out there has been a $59,000 reduction in this division. Ms. Hite advised this category covers many recreation programs including children and adult classes, dance classes, camps, etc. The budget for 2013 for this division is $907,000; revenues total $691,000. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked about supplies, observing 2011 actuals were $1,947, the 2012 budget was $33,506, the 2012 estimate is $16,000 and 2013 budget is $20,835. Ms. Hite responded these are recreational supplies. In 2012 the City received a Verdant grant to cover the supplies for the Cross-Fit Kids Camp. Enrollment was not as high as anticipated and not as much was expended on supplies. The 2013 budget anticipates spending some grant funds for recreational supplies. Councilmember Fraley- Monillas commented the grant funds are not shown. Ms. Hite answered the grant funds are included in the $691,000 revenue she cited. The 2012 budget included an explanation regarding the Verdant grant. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if consideration had been given to asking Verdant for a grant to subsidize Yost Pool. Ms. Hite answered staff has had several discussions with Verdant regarding several programs. Verdant is interested in new health-related programs, not necessarily paying for current programs. Verdant supported Hospital District-wide free swim lessons for all third graders. The City sent out swim vouchers to all third graders that were reimbursed by Verdant. Parks & Recreation – Discovery Program (page 109) Due to cuts in this program, Ms. Hite advised the budget for salaries should be approximately $37,900, instead of $65,246; and benefits should be $8,247 instead of $8,643. The 2013 budget total expenditure is $51,582. The revenue for this program area is $24,000. Mr. Hunstock advised the savings will be reflected on the spreadsheet of all the changes either Council or Administration has identified. Councilmember Buckshnis asked whether consideration has been given to getting the groups to become non-profit, like Off Leash Area Edmonds that stewards the dog park and the City only picks up garbage. Ms. Hite answered that is always a possibility and worthy of exploration and discussion. Councilmember Bloom asked if Parks & Recreation would exceed the 4% across-the-board reduction with this additional reduction. Ms. Hite answered $10,000 was cut from this budget, the numbers simply do not reflect that. Councilmember Bloom commented she was aware budget cuts were necessary but this environmental program seems like a good program. Ms. Hite agreed it was an excellent program, well loved by the community as is the flower program, park maintenance, etc. The portion of the program that goes into classrooms that has a broad impact on school children was retained. Councilmember Petso asked if this program still had some utility program funding. Ms. Hite answered it does, it funds half the recreation coordinator who oversees this program. Her salary is not in this budget, it is in the Recreation & Cultural Arts budget. The salaries in this division are for the Ranger Naturalist and the summer Beach Rangers and Interpretive Specialist. Packet Page 47 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 30, 2012 Page 12 Parks & Recreation – Aquatics (page 110) Ms. Hite advised the revenue for this division in 2012 was $123,000; 2013 revenue is projected to be $126,000. There is a surplus of revenue to operations, but that does not include Parks maintenance, chemicals or utility costs. Parks & Recreation – Athletics (page 111) Ms. Hite advised the revenue for this budget is $110,000. Parks & Recreation – Day Camps (page 112) Ms. Hite advised the revenue for this program area is $109,000. Parks & Recreation – Fitness (page 113) Ms. Hite advised the revenue for this program area is $95,000. Parks & Recreation – Gymnastics (page 114) Ms. Hite advised the revenue for this program area is $133,000. Mr. Hunstock pointed out most of the recreation programs generate revenue; cutting a program that generates revenue does not result in any savings. Parks & Recreation – Meadowdale Preschool (page 115) Ms. Hite advised the 2013 budget for salaries should be $25,628; the total cost is $32,638. Proposed 2013 revenue for this program area is $39, 280. Parks & Recreation – Parks Maintenance (pages 116-117) Ms. Hite advised there is no revenue generated by this program area. She previously described cuts made to this program area. Parks & Recreation – Flower Program (page 118) Ms. Hite advised there is also approximately $30,000 budgeted in the REET 125 for the flower program as well as funds in the General Fund. Municipal Arts Fund (pages 141-142) Ms. Hite answered $15,000 is transferred from the General Fund by ordinance to this fund. That is one of the Parks & Recreation Department proposed cuts. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if the ordinance would be presented to the Finance Committee. Ms. Hite answered yes; an amendment to the ordinance will be required to suspend the transfer until 2015. Councilmember Bloom asked about the $80,000 in professional services. Ms. Hite answered it is for the Write on the Sound Conference which generates revenue. She offered to provide Council revenues figures from the 2012 Write on the Sound Conference. Councilmember Petso referred to professional services ($11,000 in 2011, $30,000 estimated for 2012, yet the 2012 and the 2013 budget is $80,000). Cultural Services Manager Frances Chapin advised most of the $80,000 was a set-aside for a public art project on the exterior of the Senior Center building that the Arts Commission felt was a priority; because of other projects, it has not proceeded. The amount varies year to year. Memorial Street Tree Fund (page 143) Councilmember Bloom asked what the fund is for and how it is allocated. Ms. Hite answered Parks Maintenance Manager Rich Lindsay recalled this fund was established when the Street Tree Plan was Packet Page 48 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 30, 2012 Page 13 adopted. Revenue from citizens who want to support the Street Tree Program is collected in this fund. Funds are expended from this fund and from Parks maintenance for street trees; there is not a consistent method. Youth Scholarship Fund (page 146) Councilmember Bloom expressed concern with reducing scholarships for summer recreational programs. Ms. Hite clarified expenditures from the fund are not being reduced; the fund balance will be used to continue providing the same scholarship levels. Staff will seek donations to replenish the fund. Tourism Promotional/Arts Fund (page 147) There were no Council questions. REET 2 – Parks Improvement Fund 125 (page 148) Councilmember Petso recalled Ms. Hite said some of the funding for the flower program was from one of the REET funds. She asked how that was possible in that the flower program was not a capital expense. Ms. Hite answered the State Legislature passed legislation two years ago (expires in 2015) that allowed the use of REET for Parks operations and maintenance. The City has often funded the flower program from REET. That was an issue in an audit prior to the passage of that legislation and the REET fund had to be replenished. Of the $36,000 in supplies, $30,000 is the flower program, and $6,000 is flower poles. Councilmember Petso pointed out there was only $29,000 budgeted for supplies. Ms. Hite indicated she would research that. If the Council found reductions in the flower program unacceptable, Councilmember Petso asked if funding from the REET Parks Improvement Fund could be increased. Ms. Hite answered the Council could but it would impact other projects including set-asides for larger projects and/or the fund balance. REET 1 – Special Capital/Parks Acquisition Fund 126 (page 149) Mr. Hunstock pointed out the budget and actuals for debt principal and interest have decreased which reflects the impact of the bond refinancing. This included the anticipated $1.4 million savings which was actually a $1.9 million savings. This page will be updated to reflect the additional savings in 2013. Councilmember Bloom referred to the $200,000 budgeted for purchase of land. She asked what land was being purchased. Ms. Hite answered it was a placeholder in the event an opportunity to purchase land arose. She acknowledged it was not a lot of money but was an amount that could fit in this budget. Gifts Catalog Fund (pages 150-151) Ms. Hite advised the Adopt-A-Flower Basket revenue was allocated in this fund. Those funds can be used for the flower program in 2013. Cemetery Maintenance/Improvement Fund (page 154) Ms. Hite reiterated her previous comments that the fund balance is reduced to $15,000 in 2013. Parks Construction Fund (page 156) Ms. Hite advised due to the success of community donations for the Hazel Miller Plaza, the CIP identified an $80,000 transfer from the Parks Construction Fund back to REET 125 Fund. Mr. Hunstock advised that will be reflected in the 2012 estimate. Councilmember Bloom asked about the $1,887,500 in the 2013 budget for professional services. Ms. Hite responded the Parks Construction Fund is used to receive grants and transfers from REET. The 2013 budget includes City Park; staff expects a $500,000 State grant if the State does not cut the budget for WWRP grant program. Another $500,000 is allocated in the CIP for City Park Revitalization as well as $300,000 in donations staff plans to seek for the project, a total of $1.3 million. The budget also includes Packet Page 49 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 30, 2012 Page 14 Dayton Street Plaza. The other $500,000 is for the Senior Center parking lot which is subject to a CBDG grant. The cost of those projects is all professional services as the work on the projects is outsourced. Mr. Hunstock referred to a project list on page 182. Parks Trust Fund (pages 158-159) There were no Council questions. Cemetery Maintenance Trust Fund (page 160) Councilmember Fraley-Monillas relayed the Cemetery Maintenance Trust Fund was established by ordinance. She asked whether use of the funds were restricted only by ordinance or were there other restrictions. Ms. Hite answered it was her belief there were other regulations on the trust. City Attorney Jeff Taraday advised he would need to research it; the fact that it is identified as a trust rather than a fund implies there are restrictions. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas agreed with researching it, noting it has a balance of $800,000. Ms. Hite noted there is merit in building the trust large enough so the interest can be used as a self-sustaining structure for the cemetery. If the capital is spent and that structure eroded, an ongoing subsidy of the cemetery will be required. She noted other cemeteries have a similar trust and use the interest to maintain their cemetery. Mr. Hunstock commented investment income has been limited in recent years. Staff recently began purchasing CDs which provide a significantly higher return. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked about the annual cost to maintain the cemetery including staff. Ms. Hite answered the cost to maintain the cemetery is $150,000/year; that includes one FTE and supplies. Revenue is approximately $120,000/year. The City has been subsidizing the cemetery by approximately $30,000/year since the FTE was moved to the Cemetery Maintenance/Improvement Fund. It was her understanding the Cemetery Sexton was originally funded by the General Fund; when cuts were made in 2009, the budget for that position was moved to the Cemetery Maintenance/Improvement Fund. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas suggested the $800,000 fund balance could fund the $30,000/year subsidy for 5-10 years until the economy improves, particularly when consideration is being given to closing parks, eliminating programs, or staff layoffs or reducing services further. Ms. Hite agreed that can be investigated; the Cemetery Maintenance/Improvement Fund is balanced for 2013 which leaves time for that research. Mr. Hunstock said the goal is to cover the subsidy with investment income. Mayor Earling declared a brief recess. Public Works & Utilities (page 120-121) Public Works Director Phil Williams reviewed 2013 project priorities: • Water o Complete design, bidding, and construction of the 2013 water main replacement program including 7,500 feet of new mains (1.5 miles) and 80 new or replaced services - $2.1 million o 7.5% rate increase in accordance with the 2010 Water Comprehensive Plan • Wastewater o Lift Station Improvement Program - update/replace 12 of the City’s 14 wastewater pumping stations - $3.55 million o Design and construct over 5,000 feet of sewer main replacements - $3,000,000 o 5% Rate increase as a ramp-up to a new CIP from the upcoming Wastewater Comprehensive Plan In response to a question regarding grants, Mr. Williams explained there are few grants for utilities as rates can be set to generate revenues. There are loans available; staff is pursuing a $4.5 million Public Works Trust Fund Loan. He continued his review of 2013 projects/priorities: • Stormwater o SW Edmonds Drainage Project (238th /104th) - $650,000 o Vactor Waste Decant Facility - $300,000 Packet Page 50 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 30, 2012 Page 15 o New NPDES Permit Compliance date - 08/01/2013 o Upgrade and revise maintenance procedures and frequencies o Incorporate low impact development (LID) into development codes o 8.0 % rate increase in accordance with the 2010 Stormwater Comprehensive Plan • Transportation o Finalize design, bid, and construct the Five Corners Roundabout - $3,124,000 cost increased from $2.5 million to $3 million due to inclusion of replacement of the old cast-iron waterlines in the intersection in the 2013 Waterline Replacement Program, funded by the Water Utility o Complete design/ROW in 2012/2013 for 228th/Hwy. 99 safety and access improvement - $720,000 ($4,073,000 Construction 2014) o Complete Design/begin ROW 76th/212th - $450,000 o Begin detailed design of Sunset Avenue Walkway - $88k – 2013 ($901k – 2014) Mr. Williams emphasized the need to establish an on-going source of revenue for street preservation (pavement preservation) - $1,500,000 per year. Mr. Williams displayed and reviewed the Administration/Facilities/Engineering budget (page 122), pointing out the 85% increase in Interfund Rental to fund the B Fund. He reviewed the following: • Administration (page 123) o Executive Assistant position reduced to 0.8 FTE saving $11,000+ • Facilities (page 125) o $52,000+ savings target reached through anticipated energy savings from the upcoming ESCO project and line item cuts. o Line item cuts will sharply reduce minor upgrades and replacements, i.e. carpet, paint, cabinets, etc. o Continue operating down one custodial position o Will need to do a budget amendment either now or in 2013 for the FAC Roof • Engineering (page 124) o Need to deliver numerous significant capital projects in 2013 and beyond in all three utilities and transportation. 2013 budget includes a decision package for an additional project manager position fully paid for by savings, less expensive by half compared to hiring a consultant o Off-setting revenue from the Utilities for development review related to the City’s rights-of- way, will meet $52,000+ budget savings target. Interfund charges increased With regard to the above offset, Mr. Hunstock explained to the extent development review is done for a utilities-related purpose, the Utility Fund would reimburse the General Fund for that cost. It is not shown as a budget reduction in the General Fund but as a General Fund revenue. Councilmember Petso recalled funding for the decision package for an additional person in Engineering was to be from the Utility Fund only. She asked if the funding should be split if the person oversaw transportation projects. Mr. Williams agreed whatever projects are assigned to the new position, that capital project will be charged, not the General Fund. Mr. Hunstock explained in the list of decision packages, the cost is allocated 1/3 to each Utility Fund; it would be to capital projects within each of those Utility Funds. Mr. Williams assured if the person was assigned to a transportation project, their time/costs would be charged to the transportation project, which likely would be funded by a transportation grant. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if the additional engineer FTE was included in the budget. Mr. Hunstock answered none of the decision packages are included in the budget. Packet Page 51 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 30, 2012 Page 16 Councilmember Fraley-Monillas found it difficult to cut police while adding an engineer. Mr. Williams commented the decision package stands on its own merits because it will save money. These are funded projects for which the project management will be done by a new staff person or a consultant. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked about the funding source for the projects. Mr. Williams answered they have grant funding or capital funding via the utility. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas expressed interest in researching this further. Water Fund 421(page 168) Mr. Williams explained the Water Fund is presented differently in the 2013 budget than it was in the past. The sheet on page 169 includes both water capital and water maintenance. Previously the O&M for all three utilities was contained in Fund 411, Combined Utility Fund. He pointed out the beginning fund balance included assets such as the waterlines; of the $17.6 million in the 2013 budget, there is approximately $5 million in cash. He referred to Revenue Bond Proceeds in the 2012 estimate, explaining that was unlikely to occur in 2012 and would more likely be $4.7 million in 2013. Storm Water Fund (page 171) Mr. Williams explained similar to the Water Fund, the Revenue Bond anticipated to be issued in 2012, will be issued in 2013. Sewer / WWTP Fund (pages 174-175) Mr. Williams referred to $3.8 million in Revenue Bonds in the 2012 estimate, anticipating the Revenue Bond will likely be replaced with a $4.5 million Trust Fund Loan at 1% interest for 20 years. He will provide further information regarding capital projects upon completion of the Wastewater Comprehensive Plan. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas referred to a document provided by South Snohomish County Cities that indicated Edmonds’ sewer and water rates are considerably lower than surrounding cities. Mr. Williams agreed Edmonds’ sewer rates are quite favorable. He referred to page 175, $6.5 million in expenditures for sewer and treatment plant capital projects. Equipment Rental Fund (page 177) Mr. Williams referred to 2012 estimated Interfund Income of $1,052,791 and $1,344,372 for the 2013 budget which reflects funding of the B Fund in 2013. The difference is the General Fund portion of the B Fund contribution, approximately $300,000. Mr. Williams provided a rate comparison of the average monthly single family utility bill changes (based on 500 cf/month without taxes): Utility Bill 2012 2013 Difference Water fixed fee $20.60 $22.15 $1.55 Water/HCF/748 gal $10.70 $11.50 $0.80 Sewer $25.32 $26.59 $1.27 Stormwater $10.47 $11.31 $0.84 Total $67.09 $71.55 $4.46 Taxes 2012 2013 Difference Water fixed fee $3.85 $4.14 $0.29 Water/HCF/748 gal $2.00 $2.15 $0.15 Sewer $2.53 $2.66 $0.13 Stormwater $1.05 $1.13 $0.08 Total $9.43 $10.08 $0.65 Grand Total $76.52 $81.63 $5.11 (6.7%) Packet Page 52 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 30, 2012 Page 17 Councilmember Buckshnis asked why the Street Fund was asking for an additional $100,000 from the General Fund. Mr. Williams answered revenue sources for the Street Fund, gas tax and TBD revenues are declining or not increasing, yet costs increase which does not leave enough money for operations and maintenance. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if the $100,000 would be returned if the legislature increases the Councilmanic TBD authority. Mr. Williams answered if approved by the legislature, it would give cities with a TBD the option of adding an additional $20. Approval by the TBD Board would be required. An additional $20 vehicle license fee would generate an additional $600,000/year. He suggested the additional revenue could be used to make up the difference between revenues and expenses for O&M and the balance be used for some pavement preservation. Councilmember Buckshnis asked whether the new apartments on Edmonds way would increase the population and the annual vehicle fee collected by the TBD. Mr. Williams did not assume the 89 apartments generated 170 new residents; some were likely from elsewhere in Edmonds. He summarized the City’s population is not increasing. Councilmember Buckshnis expressed appreciation for Mr. Hunstock breaking out the enterprise funds and for including beginning fund balances, revenues and expenditures. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if there would be an additional cost for fast tracking the Transportation Element to include an underpass. Mr. Williams answered hiring a consultant to fast track the Transportation Element would require funding. The source that was most likely to be receptive to a request for funding for a project was the Freight Mobility Board; unfortunately, the opportunity to make that request was last week. The City could apply for funding again in 1-2 years. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if it was prudent to include a project in the CFP/CIP without having it in the Transportation Element. Mr. Williams answered the Comprehensive Plan was last updated in 2009; it will be updated again in 2015. The Comprehensive Plan could be amended to include that project; typically Comprehensive Plan updates occur every six years. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if the Comprehensive Plan amendment could be fast tracked to include the underpass so it can be included in the CFP/CIP. Mr. Williams stated the schedule could be compressed, and noted the funding opportunity that existed is no longer available, although he acknowledged there may be other funding opportunities. COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO EXTEND THE MEETING FOR 15 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Williams relayed a question from Councilmember Yamamoto regarding rental of City buildings such as the Library, Boys and Girls Club, Museum, etc. Mr. Williams explained the library pays its own electric bill and direct labor costs for custodial work, the City pays the gas bill, and SnoIsle pays no rent. Neither the Boys and Girls Club nor the Museum pay rent. There is approximately $900/month in rental revenue from the old Public Works building, the Chamber of Commerce pays some rent on space they occupy in City Hall, and $200/month for the cabin. Mr. Williams summarized: • Public Works Department met and exceeded budget reduction targets for 2013 • Utility rate adjustments for 2013 are budgeted at 7.5% Water, 8% Stormwater, 5% Sewer • Engineering Division Decision Package Councilmember Bloom asked if there was one page that summarized Public Works and what budget reductions were made: Mr. Williams responded Public Works and Utilities only have three subfunds that the General Fund contributes to, Administration, Facilities and Engineering (page 120). In Packet Page 53 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 30, 2012 Page 18 Administration, an $11,000 savings was realized by reducing the Executive Assistant position to 0.8 FTE. In Facilities, the $52,000 savings will be reached through anticipated savings from the ESCO project and line item cuts such as carpet and paint. In Engineering, the $52,000 savings will be from interfund transfer from Utilities to the General Fund for development review. He noted the propane conversion will save approximately $60,000/year in fuel costs and will be reflected in several department budgets. Councilmember Bloom asked how many engineers there are in Public Works, noting the decision package was for another engineer. City Engineer Rob English answered there are 12 FTEs in Engineering; 4 licensed professional engineers including him; the remainder are capital project managers, technicians and an administrative assistant. The position in the decision package would be an engineering technician or a capital project manager. Councilmember Bloom asked Mr. Williams to explain why he was proposing a decision package. Mr. Williams advised the water, wastewater and storm water utilities have numerous capital projects; those projects need to be managed. In addition there are numerous transportation projects with grant funding that need to be delivered in the next 3+ years. Rather than hire consultants for three years at a much higher rate, it would be preferable to hire an internal staff member to provide those services. The only reason is to save the City money. Councilmember Bloom referred to the need for a code rewrite which affects all departments. She found it difficult to allocate funds for an engineer for Public Works without first addressing code issues and when Development Services was cutting one FTE. Mr. Hunstock explained it is not allocating funds to an engineering-type position that could be used for something else. The expense will occur; the money will either be paid to consultants at a higher rate or expended on a staff person at a lower rate. Councilmember Petso referred to the utility rate increases, noting the water and stormwater have previously been presented to the Council; the 5% sewer rate increase is new. She asked whether a public hearing is required for a rate increase. Mr. Williams advised the change in the rates must be done by ordinance. That is scheduled for November 5. Councilmember Petso asked whether Council has authorized construction of the Five Corners roundabout or only the design. Mr. Williams answered it is in the CIP; the Council approved the CIP, and funding is available. Councilmember Petso asked whether the contract had been awarded. Mr. Williams answered once the project is bid in the spring, a construction contract will be presented to the Council. Councilmember Petso asked about funding the City received for 5th Avenue and whether similar funding could be obtained for other streets. Mr. Williams answered the Interagency Coordinating Committee (ICC) prioritizes federal funding allocated by Puget Sound Regional Council. The ICC recommended some funds be set aside for preservation; every jurisdiction had an opportunity to apply for funds. The waterline project on 5th from Elm to Walnut was used as a match to the grant funds to overlay the corridor as well as upgrade ADA ramps. COUNCILMEMBER PETSO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO EXTEND THE MEETING FOR 15 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Hunstock advised next week’s Council meeting includes two public hearings, one on revenues and the other on the 2013 budget. He will provide a list of proposed changes and their impact on the 2013 budget at next week’s meeting. The Council can prioritize the list or wait until budget deliberations on November 20. 8. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Earling looked forward to thousands of children coming downtown on Halloween. Due to concerns with limited lighting on Main Street between 5th and 6th, 100 flashlights will be provided at both ends of the street. Packet Page 54 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 30, 2012 Page 19 9. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Petso corrected the statement she made last week regarding the zoning of the new buildings on Edmonds Way; the building that has two additional properties with like zoning is the building to the east, the larger building. Incentives in the current code allow a base height of 25 feet, 15 additional feet for a 4-foot setback and other requirements and an additional 5 feet for architectural features, which allows a 45 foot tall building. She met with staff and Mr. Taraday last week to discuss the zoning. There is staff support for having the Planning Board review the two zones to ensure the result of the incentive zoning is the desired outcome. She suggested a moratorium also be adopted so that development applications are not received while the Planning Board is conducting their review. Even if the Planning Board’s review was expedited, it would not be completed until at least January. Councilmember Petso recommended the referral to the Planning Board and a moratorium be discussed at the next committee meeting. She advised approval of four Councilmembers was necessary for City Attorney Jeff Taraday to draft a moratorium ordinance for view at the committee. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas advised the next committee meeting is November 13. If the Planning Board can review the code by January, that leaves only six weeks, three of which are holidays. She agreed it needed to be discussed at the committee meeting. Mayor Earling clarified staff was supportive of Planning Board review but took no position on a moratorium. Councilmember Buckshnis commented she has had a number of conversations recently with fellow Councilmembers, citizens, Mayor Earling, the City Attorney and some Directors regarding what she classified as process issues rather than issues of substance. Recently the Public Safety/Personnel Committee has been looking over a number of resolutions that in her opinion deal with processes. For example, Resolution 292, dated 1974, that outlines how Council meetings should be run rather than using Roberts Rules of Order, the thirteen ranking motions, meeting procedures, how Councilmembers should conduct themselves during and outside of meetings. This committee also tasked itself with editing the City’s job descriptions. Although she was not criticizing the committee for taking on the tremendous task of updating policies and procedures, there have been little to no problems for years. She expressed concern with nitpicking or micromanaging which is not the Council’s role as legislators. She acknowledged she was micro-managing a bit when she realized there were no finance policies or procedures in place. However, she did not write those policies or procedures; she merely asked and provided examples and continued to ask until they were done. She viewed that role as substantive and the process was left to the staff. Councilmember Buckshnis was not concerned whether she would be remembered for not knowing the parliamentary procedures found in Roberts Rules of Order or the thirteen ranking motions or other issues in the manual. When she retired, she wanted to be remembered for: • Her persistent challenges to the City’s financial team to change its financial reporting so that every fund is identified and every report reconciles. • For making staff create policies and procedures so that another Haines Wharf cost overrun will never occur. • For requiring significant changes to the City’s budget amendments to ensure correct versions, correct numbering and that each amendment is documented and explained and that all numbers reconcile. In this regard the Finance Committee can fully vet the document and instances such as removing the Police holiday buyback which was similar to union furlough would not have slipped Packet Page 55 of 266 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 30, 2012 Page 20 through the cracks via the amendment approved around midnight in a Council meeting and thus causing some resentment among the other unions. • For putting the citizen’s voices back into land use decisions. • For requiring the first ever reserve policies for this City. • For, unfortunately, having to sanction a fellow Councilmember when it was clear he did not act in the best interest of the City. Councilmember Buckshnis explained she did not care if she was criticized for not remembering Roberts Rules of Order or how to handle herself as instructed in Resolutions 292, 1150 or other outdated instructions in the manual. She planned to ask Council President Peterson to bring the outdated resolutions (292, 853, 1150) forward in the upcoming weeks to allow the Council to determine if they want to remove those items. Councilmember Buckshnis also expressed interest in reconsidering the executive session note taking the Council tasked Mr. Taraday with crafting. She was the fourth vote in support and has now done her own research because she was never supplied any empirical evidence or commentary regarding what other cities are doing other than to hear the guest speakers. After speaking with a few prominent Mayors, former Councilmembers, and a few fellow Councilmember friends, she changed her view and would like to bring it back for reconsideration. Councilmember Buckshnis referred to the cat containment law which is being discussed by the Public Safety & Personnel Committee. Whatever the outcome, she supported having a public hearing as Councilmembers Petso and Fraley-Monillas requested. She relayed comments made during the Halloween Howl at the dog park, about “sneaking in the cat containment rescission along with the off- leash dog park laws.” She pointed out that just because tickets are/were not issued, does not mean the law is/was not enforced. Although only one “scoop the poop” ticket has ever been issued, using the same logic, should that law be rescinded too? She summarized these are substance versus process issues. She preferred the Council stop micro-managing staff and the Mayor. She concluded her comments and urged everyone to pray for the people and animals on the East Coast. 10. ADJOURN With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:28 p.m. Packet Page 56 of 266    AM-5231     4. C.              City Council Meeting Meeting Date:11/05/2012 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 #135144 through #135275 dated November 1, 2012 for $131,486.85. Approval of payroll direct deposit & checks #51772 through #51787 for $462,236.65, benefit checks #51788 through #51799 & wire payments of $195,441.47 for the period October 16, 2012 through October 31, 2012. Recommendation Approval of claim, payroll and benefit direct deposit, checks and wire payments. 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:2012 Revenue: Expenditure:789,164.97 Fiscal Impact: Claims $131,486.85 Payroll Employee checks and direct deposit $462,236.65 Payroll Benefit checks and wire payments $195,441.47 Total Payroll $657,678.12 Attachments Claim Checks 11-1-12 Packet Page 57 of 266 Project Number 11-1-12 Payroll Summary Oct 16-31 Payroll Benefit Oct 16-31 Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Finance Shawn Hunstock 11/01/2012 01:01 PM City Clerk Sandy Chase 11/01/2012 01:06 PM Mayor Dave Earling 11/01/2012 01:11 PM Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase 11/01/2012 04:46 PM Form Started By: Nori Jacobson Started On: 11/01/2012 08:44 AM Final Approval Date: 11/01/2012  Packet Page 58 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 1 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 135144 11/1/2012 041695 3M XAM3522 TP66668 Traffic Control- 2 rolls 30x50Yd Black Traffic Control- 2 rolls 30x50Yd Black 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 367.50 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 34.92 Total :402.42 135145 11/1/2012 064622 A.I.R. EMISSIONS 121012 Unit 20,21,22,31,43,46,98,106,138,304 Unit 20,21,22,31,43,46,98,106,138,304 511.000.657.548.680.480.00 332.00 Total :332.00 135146 11/1/2012 074246 ADDICOTT ROOFING INC BLD20120793 Applicant withdrew permit/not doing job Applicant withdrew permit/not doing job 001.000.000.257.620.000.00 80.00 Total :80.00 135147 11/1/2012 066054 ADIX'S BED & BATH FOR DOGS AND NOV 2012 ANIMAL BOARDING FOR 11/2012 EDMONDS AC ANIMAL BOARDING FOR 11/2012 001.000.410.521.700.410.00 2,097.71 Total :2,097.71 135148 11/1/2012 068857 AMEC EARTH & ENVIRONMENTAL INC K11572004 E9FB.SERVICES THRU 9/28/12 E9FB.Services thru 9/28/12 412.200.630.594.320.410.00 3,685.42 Total :3,685.42 135149 11/1/2012 001375 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION 035353-1285 Rob Chave 2013 Membership. Rob Chave 2013 Membership. 001.000.620.558.600.490.00 600.00 Planning Advisory Service & Zoning040706-1285 Planning Advisory Service & Zoning 001.000.620.558.600.490.00 940.00 Planning Advisory Service & Zoning040706-1285A Planning Advisory Service & Zoning 1Page: Packet Page 59 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 2 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 135149 11/1/2012 (Continued)001375 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION 001.000.620.558.600.490.00 500.00 Gina Janicek 2013 Membership.162458-1285 Gina Janicek 2013 Membership. 001.000.620.558.600.490.00 294.00 Total :2,334.00 135150 11/1/2012 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES 655-6465157 UNIFORM SERVICES PARK MAINTENANCE UNIFORM SERVICES 001.000.640.576.800.240.00 28.22 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.240.00 2.68 Total :30.90 135151 11/1/2012 069451 ASTRA INDUSTRIAL SERVICES 00127901 DC Bypass for Treatment Plant DC Bypass for Treatment Plant 411.000.656.538.800.480.21 86.00 Water Quality Supplies 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 18.28 Freight 411.000.656.538.800.480.21 7.42 Freight 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 1.58 Total :113.28 135152 11/1/2012 001777 AURORA PLUMBING & ELECTRIC E16778 PLUMBING SUPPLIES VALVE, ELL, TEE, ETC. 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 157.63 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 14.97 Total :172.60 135153 11/1/2012 070305 AUTOMATIC FUNDS TRANSFER 66737 OUT SOURCING OF UTILITY BILLS UB Outsourcing area #100 Printing 411.000.652.542.900.490.00 89.94 UB Outsourcing area #100 Printing 2Page: Packet Page 60 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 3 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 135153 11/1/2012 (Continued)070305 AUTOMATIC FUNDS TRANSFER 411.000.654.534.800.490.00 89.94 UB Outsourcing area #100 Printing 411.000.655.535.800.490.00 92.67 UB Outsourcing area #100 Postage 411.000.654.534.800.420.00 302.07 UB Outsourcing area #100 Postage 411.000.655.535.800.420.00 302.06 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.652.542.900.490.00 8.54 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.490.00 8.54 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.490.00 8.81 OUT SOURCING OF UTILITY BILLS66804 UB Outsourcing area #400 Printing 411.000.652.542.900.490.00 123.73 UB Outsourcing area #400 Printing 411.000.654.534.800.490.00 123.73 UB Outsourcing area #400 Printing 411.000.655.535.800.490.00 127.47 UB Outsourcing area #400 Postage 411.000.654.534.800.420.00 416.71 UB Outsourcing area #400 Postage 411.000.655.535.800.420.00 416.71 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.652.542.900.490.00 11.76 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.490.00 11.76 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.490.00 12.10 Total :2,146.54 135154 11/1/2012 073035 AVAGIMOVA, KARINE 1091 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 3Page: Packet Page 61 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 4 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 135154 11/1/2012 (Continued)073035 AVAGIMOVA, KARINE 001.000.230.512.500.410.01 100.00 Total :100.00 135155 11/1/2012 001702 AWC EMPLOY BENEFIT TRUST AWC-Sittauer/Myers NOVEMBER AWC FOR SITTAUER AND MYERS Sittauer(2026.70) and Myers (1385.09 811.000.000.231.510.000.00 3,411.79 Total :3,411.79 135156 11/1/2012 072455 BEAR COMMUNICATIONS INC 4140162 City Radio Programming & Handling City Radio Programming & Handling 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 1,492.19 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 141.76 City Radios Programming & handling4151876 City Radios Programming & handling 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 998.64 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 94.87 Total :2,727.46 135157 11/1/2012 065739 BOBBY WOLFORD TRUCKING &053997 Storm - Recycle Concrete Charges Storm - Recycle Concrete Charges 411.000.652.542.320.490.00 204.75 Total :204.75 135158 11/1/2012 074251 BRUCE & CHRISTIANE ULNESS 4-10625 REFUND DUE TO CUSTOMER OVERPAYMENT Refund due to customer overpayment 411.000.000.233.000.000.00 1,000.00 Total :1,000.00 135159 11/1/2012 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 12222589 FLEET COPIER Fleet Copier 10/1-10/31/12 511.000.657.548.680.450.00 33.02 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.450.00 3.14 PW ADMIN COPIER12222590 4Page: Packet Page 62 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 5 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 135159 11/1/2012 (Continued)073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES PW Office Copier for10/1-10/31/12 001.000.650.519.910.450.00 68.55 PW Office Copier for10/1-10/31/12 111.000.653.542.900.450.00 38.85 PW Office Copier for10/1-10/31/12 411.000.652.542.900.450.00 38.85 PW Office Copier for10/1-10/31/12 411.000.654.534.800.450.00 27.42 PW Office Copier for10/1-10/31/12 411.000.655.535.800.450.00 27.42 PW Office Copier for10/1-10/31/12 511.000.657.548.680.450.00 27.41 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.650.519.910.450.00 6.51 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.900.450.00 3.69 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.652.542.900.450.00 3.69 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.450.00 2.61 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.450.00 2.61 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.450.00 2.59 WATER SEWER COPIER12222591 Water Sewer Copier 10/1-10/31/12 411.000.654.534.800.450.00 70.68 Water Sewer Copier 10/1-10/31/12 411.000.655.535.800.450.00 70.68 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.450.00 6.72 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.450.00 6.71 5Page: Packet Page 63 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 6 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :441.15135159 11/1/2012 073029 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 135160 11/1/2012 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 12220874 Contract charge for Planning Dept's Contract charge for Planning Dept's 001.000.620.558.800.450.00 33.02 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.620.558.800.450.00 3.14 Total :36.16 135161 11/1/2012 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 12220865 Lease Council Office copier/printer Lease Council Office copier/printer 001.000.110.511.100.450.00 30.65 Total :30.65 135162 11/1/2012 068484 CEMEX LLC 9424706951 Roadway - Asphalt Roadway - Asphalt 111.000.653.542.310.310.00 355.00 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.310.310.00 33.74 Street - Sidewalk Cement9424730899 Street - Sidewalk Cement 111.000.653.542.610.310.00 228.94 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.610.310.00 21.75 Roadway - Asphalt9424774071 Roadway - Asphalt 111.000.653.542.310.310.00 500.00 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.310.310.00 47.51 Water - Asphalt9424825924 Water - Asphalt 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 314.50 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 29.88 Street - Sidewalk Cement9424869315 Street - Sidewalk Cement 6Page: Packet Page 64 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 7 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 135162 11/1/2012 (Continued)068484 CEMEX LLC 111.000.653.542.610.310.00 208.13 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.610.310.00 19.77 Total :1,759.22 135163 11/1/2012 003710 CHEVRON AND TEXACO BUSINESS 36123941 INV#36123941 ACCT#7898305185 EDMONDS PD FUEL FOR NARCS VEHICLE 104.000.410.521.210.320.00 173.51 TAX EXEMPT FILING FEE 104.000.410.521.210.320.00 1.74 Total :175.25 135164 11/1/2012 063902 CITY OF EVERETT I12002953 Water Quality - Water Lab Analysis Water Quality - Water Lab Analysis 411.000.654.534.800.410.00 680.40 Total :680.40 135165 11/1/2012 019215 CITY OF LYNNWOOD 9708 INV#9708 CUST#1655 -EDMONDS PD VERIZON INTERNET SERVICES 9/12 104.000.410.521.210.420.00 40.03 INV#9716 CUST#45 -EDMONDS PD9716 NEXTEL (VERIZON) NARC PHONE 9 104.000.410.521.210.420.00 65.92 INV#9718 CUST#47 -EDMONDS PD9718 PRISONER R&B FOR AUG 2012 001.000.410.523.600.510.00 1,202.92 Total :1,308.87 135166 11/1/2012 022200 CITY OF MOUNTLAKE TERRACE 2388 E2FD.1/2 COSTS OF MCALEER CREEK CULVERT E2FD.1/2 Costs of McAleer Creek Culvert 412.200.630.594.320.410.00 3,715.28 Total :3,715.28 135167 11/1/2012 004095 COASTWIDE LABS W2483874 SUPPLIES LINERS, TOILET TISSUE,SEAT COVERS 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 1,273.30 7Page: Packet Page 65 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 8 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 135167 11/1/2012 (Continued)004095 COASTWIDE LABS 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 120.96 GRAFFITI REMOVERW2483874-1 GRAFFITI REMOVER 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 251.77 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 23.92 Total :1,669.95 135168 11/1/2012 073667 COBURN, LI COBURN102512 VOLLEYBALL GYM ATTENDANT VOLLEYBALL GYM ATTENDANT 001.000.640.575.520.410.00 140.00 Total :140.00 135169 11/1/2012 065891 CONLEY, LISA CONLEY102412 PRESCHOOL SUB PRESCHOOL SUB 10/24/12 001.000.640.575.560.410.00 5.00 Total :5.00 135170 11/1/2012 004867 COOPER, JACK F 74 LEOFF 1 Reimbursement LEOFF 1 Reimbursement 617.000.510.522.200.230.00 87.50 Total :87.50 135171 11/1/2012 072278 CUETER, THAYER CUETER16103 TIP TOE WITH TARANTULAS TIP TOE WITH TARANTULAS #16103 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 96.80 Total :96.80 135172 11/1/2012 072189 DATASITE 29100 SHRED COURT FILES SHRED COURT FILES 001.000.230.512.500.490.00 50.00 Total :50.00 135173 11/1/2012 064531 DINES, JEANNIE 12-3310 MINUTE TAKING 10/23 City Council Minutes 8Page: Packet Page 66 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 9 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 135173 11/1/2012 (Continued)064531 DINES, JEANNIE 001.000.250.514.300.410.00 348.00 Total :348.00 135174 11/1/2012 073772 DIRECT MATTERS 52256 SUPPLIES SUPPLIES 001.000.230.512.501.310.00 440.00 Total :440.00 135175 11/1/2012 014430 DMH INDUSTRIAL ELECTRIC INC 481523 PS - Magnetek Repairs PS - Magnetek Repairs 001.000.651.519.920.480.00 334.00 9.2% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.480.00 30.73 Total :364.73 135176 11/1/2012 061384 DRIFTWOOD PLAYERS DRIFTWOOD2012 TOURISM PROMOTION AGREEMENT DRIFTWOOD PLAYERS TOURISM PROMOTION 123.000.640.573.100.410.00 2,000.00 Total :2,000.00 135177 11/1/2012 070244 DUANE HARTMAN & ASSOCIATES INC 10-2035.4 E3GA.SERVICES THRU 10/21/12 E3GA.Services thru 10/21/12 412.300.630.594.320.410.00 3,246.49 E3JA.SERVICES THRU 10/21/1212-2034.4 E3JA.Services thru 10/21/12 412.100.630.594.320.410.00 1,562.00 E3JA.T.O. 12-05 SERVICES THRU 1012-2062.2 E3JA.T.O. 12-05 Services thru 10/21/ 412.100.630.594.320.410.00 2,284.27 Total :7,092.76 135178 11/1/2012 007253 DUNN LUMBER 1514186 E1FD.WASH STATION SUPPLIES E1FD.Pressure Treated Hem/Fir 2x4 8 412.200.630.594.320.410.00 15.69 E1FD.Studs 412.200.630.594.320.410.00 6.82 9Page: Packet Page 67 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 10 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 135178 11/1/2012 (Continued)007253 DUNN LUMBER E1FD.White wood studs 412.200.630.594.320.410.00 93.90 9.5% Sales Tax 412.200.630.594.320.410.00 11.06 E1FD.WASH STATION SUPPLIES1518209 E1FD.Wood screw all purpose outdoor 412.200.630.594.320.410.00 31.34 E1FD.White wood studs 412.200.630.594.320.410.00 62.60 E1FD.Studs 412.200.630.594.320.410.00 17.05 9.5% Sales Tax 412.200.630.594.320.410.00 10.54 E1FD.WASH STATION SUPPLIES1519220 E1FD.Collated Nails 412.200.630.594.320.410.00 30.67 9.5% Sales Tax 412.200.630.594.320.410.00 2.91 Total :282.58 135179 11/1/2012 065892 EAF FOUNDATION EAFF1022 REFUND FOR BIRD BEST DESIGN FEE REFUND FOR DESIGN FEE NOT USED FOR BIRD 001.000.000.239.200.000.00 200.00 Total :200.00 135180 11/1/2012 007675 EDMONDS AUTO PARTS 16188 Sewer - Bulb Sewer - Bulb 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 35.00 Freight 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 8.50 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 4.13 LS 7 - Supplies16392 LS 7 - Supplies 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 52.41 10Page: Packet Page 68 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 11 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 135180 11/1/2012 (Continued)007675 EDMONDS AUTO PARTS 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 4.98 Total :105.02 135181 11/1/2012 073461 EDMONDS EDUCATION ASSOCIATION EEA1022 REFUND OF DAMAGE DEPOSIT REFUND OF DAMAGE DEPOSIT 001.000.000.239.200.000.00 200.00 Total :200.00 135182 11/1/2012 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 1-00575 CITY PARK CITY PARK 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 429.88 BRACKETT'S LANDING RESTROOM1-00825 BRACKETT'S LANDING RESTROOM 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 992.31 SPRINKLER1-00875 SPRINKLER 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 44.81 CITY PARK SPRINKLER METER1-02125 CITY PARK SPRINKLER METER 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 65.13 290 MAIN STREET1-03710 290 MAIN STREET 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 32.11 SPRINKLER1-03900 SPRINKLER 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 105.77 SPRINKLER1-05125 SPRINKLER 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 85.45 GAZEBO IRRIGATION1-05285 GAZEBO IRRIGATION 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 29.57 CORNER PARK1-05340 CORNER PARK 11Page: Packet Page 69 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 12 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 135182 11/1/2012 (Continued)008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 115.93 EDMONDS CITY PARK1-05650 EDMONDS CITY PARK 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 29.57 PARKS MAINTENANCE SHOP1-05675 PARKS MAINTENANCE SHOP 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 915.41 EDMONDS CITY PARK1-05700 EDMONDS CITY PARK 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 115.93 CORNER PARK1-09650 CORNER PARK 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 52.43 SW CORNER SPRINKLER1-09800 SW CORNER SPRINKLER 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 123.56 PLANTER1-10780 PLANTER 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 93.07 CORNER PLANTER ON 5TH1-16130 CORNER PLANTER ON 5TH 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 98.15 CORNER PARKS1-16300 CORNER PARKS 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 281.05 118 5TH AVE N1-16420 118 5TH AVE N 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 39.73 CITY HALL TRIANGLE1-16450 CITY HALL TRIANGLE 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 236.00 6TH & MAIN PLANTER BOX1-16630 6TH & MAIN PLANTER BOX 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 72.75 5TH & DAYTON ST PLANTER1-17475 12Page: Packet Page 70 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 13 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 135182 11/1/2012 (Continued)008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 5TH & DAYTON ST PLANTER 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 115.93 PINE STREE PLAYFIELD1-19950 PINE STREE PLAYFIELD 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 60.21 1141 9TH AVE S1-36255 1141 9TH AVE SOUTH 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 29.57 870 CASPERS ST2-25150 870 CASPERS ST 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 37.19 875 CASPERS ST2-25175 875 CASPERS ST 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 44.81 SPRINKLER2-28275 SPRINKLER 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 93.07 18200 OLYMPIC VIEW DR2-37180 18200 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 41.32 820 15TH ST. SW7-05276 820 15TH ST. SW 130.000.640.536.500.470.00 121.17 Total :4,501.88 135183 11/1/2012 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 2-26950 LIFT STATION #3 1529 NORTHSTREAM LN LIFT STATION #3 1529 NORTHSTREAM LN 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 62.73 LIFT STATION #2 702 MELODY LN2-29118 LIFT STATION #2 702 MELODY LN 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 42.27 LIFT STATION #2 702 MELODY LN2-29119 LIFT STATION #2 702 MELODY LN 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 100.84 13Page: Packet Page 71 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 14 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :205.84135183 11/1/2012 008705 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 135184 11/1/2012 031060 ELECSYS INTERNATIONAL CORP 108332 RADIX MONTHLY MAINT AGREEMENT Radix Monthly Maint Agreement - 411.000.654.534.800.480.00 152.00 RADIX MONTHLY MAINT AGREEMENT109092 Radix Monthly Maint Agreement - 411.000.654.534.800.480.00 152.00 Total :304.00 135185 11/1/2012 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES 080979 COPIER LEASE COPIER LEASE 001.000.640.574.100.450.00 20.15 Total :20.15 135186 11/1/2012 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES 080911 METER READING Recept. desk copier 6/21-7/21 001.000.250.514.300.450.00 15.77 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.250.514.300.450.00 1.50 Total :17.27 135187 11/1/2012 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES 080917 WATER SEWER COPY USE Water Sewer Copy Use-370 B/W,297 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 11.14 Water Sewer Copy Use-370 B/W,297 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 11.13 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 1.06 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 1.06 PW COPY USE080918 PW Copy Use - 5186 B/W, 2547 Color 001.000.650.519.910.310.00 48.36 PW Copy Use - 5186 B/W, 2547 Color 111.000.653.542.900.310.00 27.40 14Page: Packet Page 72 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 15 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 135187 11/1/2012 (Continued)008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES PW Copy Use - 5186 B/W, 2547 Color 411.000.652.542.900.310.00 27.40 PW Copy Use - 5186 B/W, 2547 Color 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 19.34 PW Copy Use - 5186 B/W, 2547 Color 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 19.34 PW Copy Use - 5186 B/W, 2547 Color 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 19.36 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.650.519.910.310.00 4.59 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.900.310.00 2.60 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.652.542.900.310.00 2.60 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 1.84 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 1.84 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 1.84 Total :200.90 135188 11/1/2012 071967 ENG, STEPHEN ENG15806 TAEKWON DO TAEKWON-DO #15806 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 108.00 Total :108.00 135189 11/1/2012 066378 FASTENAL COMPANY WAMOU26845 Traffic Control - Supplies Traffic Control - Supplies 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 6.81 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 0.65 Traffic Control - SuppliesWAMOU26849 Traffic Control - Supplies 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 55.95 15Page: Packet Page 73 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 16 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 135189 11/1/2012 (Continued)066378 FASTENAL COMPANY 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 5.32 Fire BoatWAMOU26874 Fire Boat 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 0.63 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 0.06 Total :69.42 135190 11/1/2012 009815 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC 0355245 Meter Inventory - #2027 M-METER-02 Meter Inventory - #2027 M-METER-02 411.000.654.534.800.342.00 2,798.00 #2034 - M-METEROMNI-01.5-030 411.000.654.534.800.342.00 2,424.00 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.342.00 496.09 Total :5,718.09 135191 11/1/2012 010660 FOSTER, MARLO 72 LEOFF 1 Reimbursement LEOFF 1 Reimbursement 009.000.390.517.370.230.00 37.77 LEOFF 1 Reimbursement 009.000.390.517.370.290.00 7,755.00 LEOFF 1 Reimbursement79 LEOFF 1 Reimbursement 009.000.390.517.370.230.00 151.80 Total :7,944.57 135192 11/1/2012 072932 FRIEDRICH, KODY FRIEDRICH15885 IRISH DANCE CLASSES IRISH DANCE 13+ #15885 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 64.00 IRISH DANCE 13+ #15888 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 98.00 Total :162.00 16Page: Packet Page 74 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 17 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 135193 11/1/2012 011900 FRONTIER 425-712-0647 IRRIGATION SYSTEM IRRIGATION SYSTEM 001.000.640.576.800.420.00 35.17 Total :35.17 135194 11/1/2012 011900 FRONTIER 425-771-0158 FIRE STATION #16 ALARM AND FAX LINES FIRE STATION #16 ALARM AND FAX LINES 001.000.651.519.920.420.00 166.24 CITY HALL ALARM LINES 121 5TH AVE N425-776-6829 CITY HALL FIRE AND INTRUSION ALARM 001.000.651.519.920.420.00 111.74 Total :277.98 135195 11/1/2012 069350 GARNEY, RENEE 101212 TRAVEL REFUND FOR COURT TRAINING TRAVEL REFUND FOR COURT TRAINING 001.000.230.512.500.430.00 83.81 Total :83.81 135196 11/1/2012 068617 GLEISNER, BARBARA GLEISNER15755 TAI CHI CLASSES TAI CHI #15755 001.000.640.575.540.410.00 165.00 TAI CHI #15753 001.000.640.575.540.410.00 170.00 TAI CHI #15751 001.000.640.575.540.410.00 620.00 QIGONG #15759 001.000.640.575.540.410.00 152.00 QIGONG #15757 001.000.640.575.540.410.00 302.50 Total :1,409.50 135197 11/1/2012 072515 GOOGLE INC 1493750 C/A #396392 MESSAGE DISCOVERY BILLING Internet Anti-Virus &Spam Maint Fee 001.000.310.518.880.480.00 463.00 Total :463.00 17Page: Packet Page 75 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 18 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 135198 11/1/2012 012199 GRAINGER 9947101284 Library - Seal Bearing assembly Library - Seal Bearing assembly 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 123.42 Fac Maint - Battery 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 8.98 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 12.57 PS - Batteries9947234366 PS - Batteries 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 29.14 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 2.76 FAC - Supplies9952103415 FAC - Supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 82.20 9.2% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 7.56 FAC - Motor9952103423 FAC - Motor 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 172.20 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 16.36 City Hall - Toggle Switch9955612941 City Hall - Toggle Switch 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 5.22 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 0.50 Total :460.91 135199 11/1/2012 071368 HEFFERAN, BRIGITTE HEFFERAN15895 CALLIGRAPHY CALLIGRAPHY: POINTED PEN #15895 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 257.40 CALLIGRAPHY:CONTINUING COPPERPLATE 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 257.40 Total :514.80 18Page: Packet Page 76 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 19 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 135200 11/1/2012 013500 HINGSON, ROBERT 75 LEOFF 1 Reimbursement LEOFF 1 Reimbursement 009.000.390.517.370.230.00 15.00 Total :15.00 135201 11/1/2012 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 1043495 0205 TAPE, SPRAY PAINT, WRENCH,ETC 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 86.87 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 8.25 02051043497 SEAL, STRIPS 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 45.38 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 4.31 02051045884 PEAT 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 22.54 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 2.14 02052040818 NOZZLE, ETC. 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 16.51 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 1.57 02052045618 LASHING STRAP 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 7.97 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 0.76 02053561482 SPRAY PAINT 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 16.74 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 1.59 02055035696 19Page: Packet Page 77 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 20 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 135201 11/1/2012 (Continued)067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES STAPLE GUN 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 20.97 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 1.99 02055091419 SOD STAPLES, HOSE REPAIR 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 76.29 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 7.25 02056035429 HARDWARE CLOTH, STAPLES 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 20.51 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 1.95 02058081746 BRUSH, MASKING PAPER, ETC. 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 57.04 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 5.42 02058200207 PEAT 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 22.54 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 2.14 Total :430.73 135202 11/1/2012 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 1063474 PW - Supplies PW - Supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 27.63 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 2.62 Fac Maint - Shop - Supplies2043191 Fac Maint - Shop - Supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 8.88 9.5% Sales Tax 20Page: Packet Page 78 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 21 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 135202 11/1/2012 (Continued)067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 0.84 FAC - Plastic Bags2072577 FAC - Plastic Bags 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 4.72 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 0.45 Traffic Control -Signal Maint Supplies280315 Traffic Control -Signal Maint Supplies 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 21.96 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 2.09 Traffic Control - Paint Truck Supplies30031 Traffic Control - Paint Truck Supplies 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 65.88 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 6.26 City Park Bldg - Supplies3040553 City Park Bldg - Supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 83.56 Fac Maint - Tool - Nailer 001.000.651.519.920.350.00 229.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 7.94 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.350.00 21.75 Street - Wheel Barrow3040671 Street - Wheel Barrow 111.000.653.542.310.310.00 84.97 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.310.310.00 8.07 Fac Maint Unit 95 - Truck Stock32509 Fac Maint Unit 95 - Truck Stock 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 24.91 9.5% Sales Tax 21Page: Packet Page 79 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 22 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 135202 11/1/2012 (Continued)067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 2.37 FS 20 - Supplies4033848 FS 20 - Supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 13.21 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 1.25 Yost Pool - Chem Pump & Supplies43724 Yost Pool - Chem Pump & Supplies 001.000.651.519.920.350.00 99.11 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.350.00 9.42 City Park - Awning Supplies5033596 City Park - Awning Supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 17.14 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 1.63 Unit eq87wq - Supplies5033634 Unit eq87wq - Supplies 511.100.657.594.480.640.00 11.74 9.5% Sales Tax 511.100.657.594.480.640.00 1.12 Cemetery - Post Supplies5049981 Cemetery - Post Supplies 130.000.640.536.500.310.00 69.41 9.5% Sales Tax 130.000.640.536.500.310.00 6.59 City Park Bldg - Supplies6033390 City Park Bldg - Supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 58.91 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 5.60 City Park Bldg - Supplies6033462 City Park Bldg - Supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 17.97 22Page: Packet Page 80 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 23 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 135202 11/1/2012 (Continued)067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 1.71 PS - Paint Supplies6047226 PS - Paint Supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 14.25 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 1.35 Storm - Talbot Rd Drain - Supplies6047347 Storm - Talbot Rd Drain - Supplies 411.000.652.542.400.310.00 6.50 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.652.542.400.310.00 0.62 City Park Bldg - Awning and Supplies6049603 City Park Bldg - Awning and Supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 185.55 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 17.63 City Park Bldg - Supplie Returned6272126 City Park Bldg - Supplie Returned 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 -24.97 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 -2.37 Traffic Control - Paint Truck Supplies6586347 Traffic Control - Paint Truck Supplies 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 29.88 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 2.84 FS 16 - Drain Fitting7071363 FS 16 - Drain Fitting 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 6.02 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 0.57 Fac Maint - Stock7095483 Fac Maint - Stock 23Page: Packet Page 81 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 24 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 135202 11/1/2012 (Continued)067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 22.08 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 2.10 Boys and Girls Club Shop Bldg -Supplies8041787 Boys and Girls Club Shop Bldg -Supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 19.89 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 1.89 PS - Paint rollers8046692 PS - Paint rollers 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 17.82 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 1.69 WWTP - Door Hardware8071060 WWTP - Door Hardware 411.000.656.538.800.310.12 8.26 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.12 0.78 Traffic Control - Supplies8561787 Traffic Control - Supplies 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 37.22 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 3.54 PS - Paint Supplies85909 PS - Paint Supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 35.11 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 3.34 PW - Sink Aerator85939 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 1.39 PW - Sink Aerator 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 14.67 Sewer TV Truck - Supplies9030536 24Page: Packet Page 82 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 25 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 135202 11/1/2012 (Continued)067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES Sewer TV Truck - Supplies 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 5.41 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 0.51 Traffic Control - Blades Supplies9043984 Traffic Control - Blades Supplies 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 9.98 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 0.95 Storm - Talbot Rd Wood Supplies9046434 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.652.542.400.310.00 1.47 Storm - Talbot Rd Wood Supplies 411.000.652.542.400.310.00 15.44 Street - Forming Stakes9046614 Street - Forming Stakes 111.000.653.542.610.310.00 93.00 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.610.310.00 8.84 Street - Supplies9065415 Street - Supplies 111.000.653.542.310.310.00 6.97 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.310.310.00 0.66 Traffic Control - Supplies9073180 Traffic Control - Supplies 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 47.05 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 4.47 PS - Supplies9083214 PS - Supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 6.76 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 0.64 25Page: Packet Page 83 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 26 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :1,528.51135202 11/1/2012 067862 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 135203 11/1/2012 072047 ICLEI M2012-4505 Membership for City 2013. Membership for City 2013. 001.000.620.558.600.490.00 600.00 Total :600.00 135204 11/1/2012 073548 INDOFF INCORPORATED 2171804 Copy paper - 3rd floor Copy paper - 3rd floor 001.000.610.519.700.310.00 24.01 Copy paper - 3rd floor 001.000.220.516.100.310.00 24.00 Copy paper - 3rd floor 001.000.210.513.100.310.00 23.99 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.610.519.700.310.00 2.28 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.220.516.100.310.00 2.28 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.210.513.100.310.00 2.28 Total :78.84 135205 11/1/2012 015280 JONES, KENTON 76 LEOFF 1 Reimbursement LEOFF 1 Reimbursement 009.000.390.517.370.230.00 486.00 Total :486.00 135206 11/1/2012 073924 KEARNS, JESSIKA CHRISTINE KEARNS15776 TAEKWON-DO CLASSES TKO 15776 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 120.00 TKO 15772 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 66.00 Total :186.00 135207 11/1/2012 016600 KROESENS INC 20306 INV#20306 - EDMONDS PD -MANDEVILLE SKETCHERS SHOES-MANDEVILLE 26Page: Packet Page 84 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 27 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 135207 11/1/2012 (Continued)016600 KROESENS INC 001.000.410.521.910.240.00 72.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.910.240.00 6.84 #20995CM-CR FOR RETURNED SHOES20995cm SHOES RETURNED - COLLINS 001.000.410.521.110.240.00 -62.50 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.110.240.00 -5.94 Total :10.40 135208 11/1/2012 017050 KWICK'N KLEEN CAR WASH 10082012-03 City Car Washes City Car Washes 511.000.657.548.680.480.00 10.06 Total :10.06 135209 11/1/2012 073136 LANG, ROBERT LANG1028 PLAZA ROOM MONITOR PLAZA ROOM MONITOR 10/28/12 001.000.640.574.100.410.00 90.00 Total :90.00 135210 11/1/2012 072059 LEE, NICOLE 786 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.501.410.01 111.72 Total :111.72 135211 11/1/2012 061814 LEYDA, SHERRIE 91412 TRAVEL REFUND FOR COURT TRAINING TRAVEL REFUND FOR COURT TRAINING 001.000.230.512.501.430.00 98.69 Total :98.69 135212 11/1/2012 074181 MADSEN, DAWN MADSEN16121 IRISH DANCE FOR KIDS IRISH DANCE FOR KIDS #16121 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 25.00 IRISH DANCE FOR KIDS #16124 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 84.00 27Page: Packet Page 85 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 28 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :109.00135212 11/1/2012 074181 074181 MADSEN, DAWN 135213 11/1/2012 069362 MARSHALL, CITA 1023 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.500.410.01 88.32 INTERPRETER FEE1024 INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.501.410.01 88.32 Total :176.64 135214 11/1/2012 019920 MCCANN, MARIAN 71 LEOFF 1 Reimbursement LEOFF 1 Reimbursement 009.000.390.517.370.290.00 4,677.75 LEOFF 1 Reimbursement77 LEOFF 1 Reimbursement 009.000.390.517.370.290.00 2,000.00 Total :6,677.75 135215 11/1/2012 021890 MICONTROLS INC 803340 FAC - Actuator and Supplies FAC - Actuator and Supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 188.39 Freight 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 9.90 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 18.84 Total :217.13 135216 11/1/2012 072223 MILLER, DOUG MILLER102412 GYM MONITOR GYM MONITOR FOR 3 ON 3 BASKETBALL 001.000.640.575.520.410.00 140.00 GYM MONITORMILLER103012 GYM MONITOR FOR COED VOLLEYBALL AT 001.000.640.575.520.410.00 30.00 Total :170.00 135217 11/1/2012 020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENT ALL INC 157780 GATES BELTS GATES BELTS 28Page: Packet Page 86 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 29 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 135217 11/1/2012 (Continued)020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENT ALL INC 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 33.84 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 3.21 Total :37.05 135218 11/1/2012 020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENT ALL INC 156532 Traffic Control - Propane Traffic Control - Propane 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 35.60 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 3.38 Traffic Control - Propane156580 Traffic Control - Propane 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 24.08 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 2.29 Traffic Control - Propane156856 Traffic Control - Propane 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 24.43 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 2.32 Traffic Control - Propane156913 Traffic Control - Propane 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 42.58 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 4.05 Total :138.73 135219 11/1/2012 073494 NATTERSTAD, LAUREN 100812 TRAVEL REFUND FOR COURT TRAINING TRAVEL REFUND FOR COURT TRAINING 001.000.230.512.500.430.00 173.32 Total :173.32 135220 11/1/2012 024001 NC POWER SYSTEMS CO SECS0550859 Unit 63 - Switch Unit 63 - Switch 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 62.72 29Page: Packet Page 87 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 30 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 135220 11/1/2012 (Continued)024001 NC POWER SYSTEMS CO Freight 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 15.93 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 7.47 Total :86.12 135221 11/1/2012 024302 NELSON PETROLEUM 0483737-IN Fleet - Filter Inventory Fleet - Filter Inventory 511.000.657.548.680.340.40 114.76 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.340.40 10.90 Unit 138- Filters0484660-IN Unit 138- Filters 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 61.10 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 5.80 Total :192.56 135222 11/1/2012 061013 NORTHWEST CASCADE INC 1-554665 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL HONEY BUCKET RENTAL:HAINES WHARF PARK 001.000.640.576.800.450.00 220.77 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL1-557987 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL AT HICKMAN PARK 001.000.640.576.800.450.00 587.88 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL1-557999 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL YOST PARK 001.000.640.576.800.450.00 310.99 Total :1,119.64 135223 11/1/2012 025690 NOYES, KARIN 000 00 334 Planning Board Minutes on 10/24/12. Planning Board Minutes on 10/24/12. 001.000.620.558.600.410.00 320.00 Total :320.00 135224 11/1/2012 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 835955 INV#835955 ACCT#520437 250POL EDMONDS PD 30Page: Packet Page 88 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 31 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 135224 11/1/2012 (Continued)063511 OFFICE MAX INC CD-ROM ENVELOPES 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 7.52 BUBBLE CD MAILERS 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 18.41 RETRACTABLE BLUE PENS 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 18.70 RETRACTABLE BLACK PENS 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 47.28 3X3 POST IT NOTES 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 25.94 DESK TOP CALCULATOR 001.000.410.521.110.310.00 10.49 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 11.20 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.110.310.00 1.00 INV#877613 ACCT#520437 250POL EDMONDS PD877613 CD-R 100 PK 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 17.13 BLUE GEL PENS 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 10.80 HEAVY DUTY 3 HOLE PUNCH 001.000.410.521.110.310.00 31.60 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 2.66 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.110.310.00 3.00 Total :205.73 135225 11/1/2012 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 956524 OFFICE MAX FRONT DESK POST IT NOTES POST IT NOTES 001.000.640.574.100.310.00 16.29 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.574.100.310.00 1.55 31Page: Packet Page 89 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 32 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :17.84135225 11/1/2012 063511 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 135226 11/1/2012 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 803234 OFFICE SUPPLIES Office Supplies 001.000.250.514.300.310.00 158.13 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.250.514.300.310.00 15.02 OFFICE SUPPLIES819905 Returned office supplies 001.000.250.514.300.310.00 -70.91 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.250.514.300.310.00 -6.74 OFFICE SUPPLIES824262 Office Supplies 001.000.250.514.300.310.00 79.12 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.250.514.300.310.00 7.51 Total :182.13 135227 11/1/2012 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 749909 PW Office Supplies - tape disp, PW Office Supplies - tape disp, 001.000.650.519.910.310.00 37.82 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.650.519.910.310.00 3.59 PW Office Supplies820532 PW Office Supplies 001.000.650.519.910.310.00 7.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.650.519.910.310.00 0.67 PW Supplies823709 PW Supplies 001.000.650.519.910.310.00 8.56 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.650.519.910.310.00 0.82 Total :58.46 32Page: Packet Page 90 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 33 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 135228 11/1/2012 068709 OFFICETEAM 36280468 Deborah Pinney -HR Assistant services Deborah Pinney -HR Assistant services 001.000.220.516.100.410.00 525.36 Deborah Pinney -HR Assistant services36422227 Deborah Pinney -HR Assistant services 001.000.220.516.100.410.00 525.36 Deborah Pinney -HR Assistant services36470242 Deborah Pinney -HR Assistant services 001.000.220.516.100.410.00 525.36 Deborah Pinney -HR Assistant services36520304 Deborah Pinney -HR Assistant services 001.000.220.516.100.410.00 525.36 Deborah Pinney -HR Assistant services36565121 Deborah Pinney -HR Assistant services 001.000.220.516.100.410.00 525.36 Total :2,626.80 135229 11/1/2012 072876 OPENSHAW, DOUG OPENSHAW1026 REFUND REFUND DUE TO INSUFFICIENT REGISTRATION 001.000.000.239.200.000.00 52.00 Total :52.00 135230 11/1/2012 002203 OWEN EQUIPMENT COMPANY 00065648 Unit 106 - Oil, Fuse Plug Unit 106 - Oil, Fuse Plug 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 412.43 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 39.18 Unit 66 - Supplies00065652 Unit 66 - Supplies 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 62.72 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 5.96 Total :520.29 135231 11/1/2012 063588 PACIFIC POWER PRODUCTS CO 6348654-00 Unit 11 - Trans Repairs Unit 11 - Trans Repairs 33Page: Packet Page 91 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 34 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 135231 11/1/2012 (Continued)063588 PACIFIC POWER PRODUCTS CO 511.000.657.548.680.480.00 3,211.89 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.480.00 305.13 Total :3,517.02 135232 11/1/2012 069873 PAPE MACHINERY INC 8296863 Unit 138 - Parts Unit 138 - Parts 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 279.88 Freight 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 14.98 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 28.01 Total :322.87 135233 11/1/2012 065051 PARAMETRIX INC 14-79281 E1FD.SERVICES THRU SEPTEMBER E1FD.Services thru September 2012 412.200.630.594.320.410.00 6,754.64 Total :6,754.64 135234 11/1/2012 027279 PATRICK & CO 859330 INV#859330 ACCT#26925 -EDMONDS PD DOG & PET LICENSE TAGS 001.000.410.521.700.310.00 216.00 WET TUMBLING LICENSES 001.000.410.521.700.310.00 20.00 Freight 001.000.410.521.700.310.00 27.00 Total :263.00 135235 11/1/2012 063951 PERTEET ENGINEERING INC 20110010.000-14 E7AC.SERVICES THRU 09/30/12 E7AC.Services thru 09/30/12 112.200.630.595.330.410.00 6,783.27 Total :6,783.27 135236 11/1/2012 074250 PHYLLIS WEISHAAR 2-08725 #4245-1961841 UTILITY REFUND #4245-1961841 Utility refund due to 34Page: Packet Page 92 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 35 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 135236 11/1/2012 (Continued)074250 PHYLLIS WEISHAAR 411.000.000.233.000.000.00 70.39 Total :70.39 135237 11/1/2012 064735 PNWS - AWWA 1390 WWUC Dues 2012 WWUC Dues 2012 411.000.654.534.800.490.00 500.00 Total :500.00 135238 11/1/2012 068697 PUBLIC SAFETY TESTING INC 2012-4669 3rd Quarter 2012 Testing Fees - PD 3rd Quarter 2012 Testing Fees - PD 001.000.220.516.210.410.00 700.00 Total :700.00 135239 11/1/2012 046900 PUGET SOUND ENERGY 7918807004 YOST POOL YOST POOL 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 153.61 Total :153.61 135240 11/1/2012 046900 PUGET SOUND ENERGY 010-187-400-6 SNO-ISLE LIBRARY 650 MAIN ST /METER SNO-ISLE LIBRARY 650 MAIN ST /METER 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 125.40 CITY PARK BUILDING 600 3RD AVE S023-075-700-7 CITY PARK BUILDING 600 3RD AVE S 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 145.60 LIFT STATION #7 71 W DAYTON ST191-676-600-7 LIFT STATION #7 71 W DAYTON ST 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 20.29 CIVIC CENTER 250 5TH AVE N /METER275-316-600-4 CIVIC CENTER 250 5TH AVE N /METER 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 71.23 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW277-636-500-5 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW 001.000.650.519.910.470.00 14.46 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW 111.000.653.542.900.470.00 54.94 35Page: Packet Page 93 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 36 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 135240 11/1/2012 (Continued)046900 PUGET SOUND ENERGY PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW 411.000.654.534.800.470.00 54.94 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 54.94 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW 511.000.657.548.680.470.00 54.94 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW 411.000.652.542.900.470.00 54.96 OLD PUBLIC WORKS 200 DAYTON ST368-997-600-3 OLD PUBLIC WORKS 200 DAYTON ST 411.000.654.534.800.470.00 179.25 MEADOWDALE CLUBHOUSE 6801 N MEADOWDALE525-492-600-8 MEADOWDALE CLUBHOUSE 6801 N MEADOWDALE 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 223.17 FIRE STATION # 16 8429 196TH ST SW532-232-313-9 FIRE STATION # 16 8429 196TH ST SW 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 296.37 LIFT STATION #9 8001 SIERRA DR /567-289-500-9 LIFT STATION #9 8001 SIERRA DR / 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 35.65 FLEET MAINTENANCE BAY 21105 72590-308-500-8 FLEET MAINTENANCE BAY 21105 72 511.000.657.548.680.470.00 132.38 FIRE STATION #17 275 6TH AVE N /643-956-600-8 FIRE STATION #17 275 6TH AVE N / 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 316.13 FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER 700649-032-700-1 FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER 700 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 1,007.77 LIFT STATION #8 107 RAILROAD AVE885-190-800-7 LIFT STATION #8 107 RAILROAD AVE 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 32.96 FIRE STATION #20 23009 88TH AVE W991-966-110-9 FIRE STATION #20 23009 88TH AVE W 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 93.38 36Page: Packet Page 94 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 37 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :2,968.76135240 11/1/2012 046900 046900 PUGET SOUND ENERGY 135241 11/1/2012 062657 REGIONAL DISPOSAL COMPANY 003773 Storm - Dump Fees Storm - Dump Fees 411.000.652.542.320.490.00 1,255.42 Total :1,255.42 135242 11/1/2012 006841 RICOH USA INC 5024025598 Meter charges for reception copier for Meter charges for reception copier for 001.000.620.558.800.450.00 7.55 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.620.558.800.450.00 0.72 Total :8.27 135243 11/1/2012 067447 RILEY, CHARLES H.73 LEOFF 1 Reimbursement LEOFF 1 Reimbursement 009.000.390.517.370.230.00 394.05 Total :394.05 135244 11/1/2012 065784 RUDD COMPANY INC INV-120091 Traffic Control - Supplies Traffic Control - Supplies 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 1,139.65 Freight 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 9.71 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 109.19 Total :1,258.55 135245 11/1/2012 074248 SALES MAKERS INC 31573 CALENDARS FOR COURTROOM CALENDARS FOR COURTROOM 001.000.230.512.500.310.00 37.16 Total :37.16 135246 11/1/2012 073959 SALGADO, ANGELICA SALGADO15868 ZUMBA CLASSES ZUMBA #15868 001.000.640.575.540.410.00 213.30 37Page: Packet Page 95 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 38 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :213.30135246 11/1/2012 073959 073959 SALGADO, ANGELICA 135247 11/1/2012 068489 SIRENNET.COM 0143346-IN Unit EQ73PO - Mounting Unit EQ73PO - Mounting 511.100.657.594.480.640.00 54.95 Total :54.95 135248 11/1/2012 036950 SIX ROBBLEES INC 14-258844 Unit EQ85SD - Extinquishers Unit EQ85SD - Extinquishers 511.100.657.594.480.640.00 93.02 9.5% Sales Tax 511.100.657.594.480.640.00 8.84 Total :101.86 135249 11/1/2012 060889 SNAP-ON INDUSTRIAL ARV / 18252370 Fleet Shop - Sockets Fleet Shop - Sockets 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 32.63 Freight 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 14.95 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 4.53 Total :52.11 135250 11/1/2012 037303 SNO CO FIRE DIST # 1 9/12/12 FUEL REIMBURSE FD FOR BOAT FUEL FUEL FOR PD USE OF FD BOAT 001.000.410.521.220.310.00 10.39 Total :10.39 135251 11/1/2012 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 200663953 131 SUNSET AVE 131 SUNSET AVE 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 161.65 23202 EDMONDS WAY200943348 23202 EDMONDS WAY 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 136.41 50 RAILROAD AVE201054327 50 RAILROAD AVE 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 80.60 38Page: Packet Page 96 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 39 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 135251 11/1/2012 (Continued)037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 100 RAILROAD AVE2021-3965-5 100 RAILROAD AVE 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 45.36 24000 78TH AVE SW202620415 24000 78TH AVE W 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 31.68 Total :455.70 135252 11/1/2012 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 2002-0291-9 LIFT STATION #8 113 RAILROAD AVE LIFT STATION #8 113 RAILROAD AVE 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 283.83 TRAFFIC LIGHT 23602 76TH AVE W2002-7495-9 TRAFFIC LIGHT 23602 76TH AVE W 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 37.51 TRAFFIC LIGHT 22000 76TH AVE W2004-9315-3 TRAFFIC LIGHT 22000 76TH AVE W 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 46.40 TRAFFIC LIGHT 9730 220TH2007-4860-6 TRAFFIC LIGHT 9730 220TH ST SW 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 30.64 DECORATIVE LIGHTING 115 2ND AVE S2009-1385-3 DECORATIVE LIGHTING 115 2ND AVE S 111.000.653.542.630.470.00 43.31 TRAFFIC LIGHT 20408 76TH AVE W2011-9222-6 TRAFFIC LIGHT 20408 76TH AVE W 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 32.29 LIFT STATION 7403 BALLINGER WAY2014-2731-7 LIFT STATION 7403 BALLINGER WAY 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 30.64 LIFT STATION #7 121 W DAYTON ST2015-3292-6 LIFT STATION #7 121 W DAYTON ST 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 315.49 FIRE STATION #20 23009 88TH AVE W2020-7719-4 FIRE STATION #20 23009 88TH AVE W 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 823.04 39Page: Packet Page 97 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 40 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 135252 11/1/2012 (Continued)037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 TRAFFIC LIGHT 22400 HWY 99 /METER2022-8909-6 TRAFFIC LIGHT 22400 HWY 99 /METER 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 102.75 TRAFFIC LIGHT 21530 76TH AVE W2023-5673-9 TRAFFIC LIGHT 21530 76TH AVE W 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 36.67 LIFT STATION #1 105 CASPERS ST2024-9953-9 LIFT STATION #1 105 CASPERS ST 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 744.09 Total :2,526.66 135253 11/1/2012 067609 SNOHOMISH COUNTY CITIES Oct. 17, 2012 CM Fraley-Monillas attend Sno Cnty CM Fraley-Monillas attend Sno Cnty 001.000.110.511.100.490.00 35.00 Total :35.00 135254 11/1/2012 038410 SOUND SAFETY PRODUCTS 4205852-01 Water - Work Jeans (5) - S Leonard Water - Work Jeans (5) - S Leonard 411.000.654.534.800.240.00 218.69 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.240.00 20.78 Total :239.47 135255 11/1/2012 074230 SREIBERS, GAYLE TBD Refund 10.29.12 Out of Area TBD Refund 10.29.12 Out of Area TBD Refund 10.29.12 631.000.000.344.900.000.00 20.00 Total :20.00 135256 11/1/2012 074247 STATE ROOFING INC BLD20120909 On line permit - not in City. On line permit - not in City. 001.000.000.257.620.000.00 80.00 Total :80.00 135257 11/1/2012 040430 STONEWAY ELECTRIC SUPPLY S100312394.001 Traffic Control - 3 Pc KO Seal Traffic Control - 3 Pc KO Seal 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 16.05 40Page: Packet Page 98 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 41 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 135257 11/1/2012 (Continued)040430 STONEWAY ELECTRIC SUPPLY PW - Maint - Ext Adapt 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 18.57 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 1.53 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 1.76 FAC - Elect Supplies (Intermatic)S100329754.001 FAC - Elect Supplies (Intermatic) 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 169.49 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 16.10 PS - Elect SuppliesS100330108.001 PS - Elect Supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 55.82 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 5.30 Total :284.62 135258 11/1/2012 070864 SUPERMEDIA LLC 440011514006 C/A 440001304654 Basic e-commerce hosting 10/02/12 - 001.000.310.518.880.420.00 34.95 C/A 440001307733440011514016 Oct/2012 Web Hosting for Internet 001.000.310.518.880.420.00 34.95 Total :69.90 135259 11/1/2012 065578 SYSTEMS INTERFACE INC 14010 Water - Flow Meter Checkout Water - Flow Meter Checkout 411.000.654.534.800.480.00 98.00 Water/Sewer Auto Dialer Troubleshooting14033 Water/Sewer Auto Dialer Troubleshooting 411.000.654.534.800.410.00 491.50 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.410.00 46.69 Water - Yost - Flow Meter Parts for14048 41Page: Packet Page 99 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 42 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 135259 11/1/2012 (Continued)065578 SYSTEMS INTERFACE INC Water - Yost - Flow Meter Parts for 411.000.654.534.800.480.00 1,170.29 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.480.00 111.18 Total :1,917.66 135260 11/1/2012 009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY 1798316 NEWSPAPER AD Hearing on Rev. Sources 001.000.250.514.300.440.00 36.12 NEWSPAPER AD1798318 Ord. 3896 001.000.250.514.300.440.00 25.80 NEWSPAPER AD1798320 Ord. 3895 001.000.250.514.300.440.00 24.08 NEWSPAPER AD1798386 Ord. 3894 001.000.250.514.300.440.00 37.84 NEWSPAPER AD1798387 Public Hearing-2013 Budget 001.000.250.514.300.440.00 34.40 NEWSPAPER AD1798415 Closed Record-Odgers/Darwin 001.000.250.514.300.440.00 51.60 NEWSPAPER AD1798517 Hearing-CIP/Trans. Study 001.000.250.514.300.440.00 41.28 Total :251.12 135261 11/1/2012 065459 THE HERALD SUBSCRIPTION 10015985 1 Yr Subscription - PW Admin - 11/11 1 Yr Subscription - PW Admin - 11/11 001.000.650.519.910.490.00 195.00 Total :195.00 135262 11/1/2012 027269 THE PART WORKS INC 345225 Fac Maint/Library Split - Flush Valve 42Page: Packet Page 100 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 43 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 135262 11/1/2012 (Continued)027269 THE PART WORKS INC Fac Maint/Library Split - Flush Valve 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 44.78 Freight 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 9.31 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 5.14 Total :59.23 135263 11/1/2012 073749 THE WATERSHED COMPANY 2012-0768 E9FB.SERVICES THRU 10/16/12 E9FB.Services thru 10/16/12 412.200.630.594.320.410.00 5,129.95 Total :5,129.95 135264 11/1/2012 074249 THORNQUIST, LINDA LINDA THORNQUIST Conference expenses for Linda Conference expenses for Linda 001.000.620.524.100.430.00 571.73 Total :571.73 135265 11/1/2012 041960 TOWN & COUNTRY FENCE INC 45479 PS - Hand Rail Installation PS - Hand Rail Installation 116.000.651.519.920.480.00 6,852.08 9.5% Sales Tax 116.000.651.519.920.480.00 650.95 Total :7,503.03 135266 11/1/2012 042750 TRIBUZIO, WALLACE 78 LEOFF 1 Reimbursement LEOFF 1 Reimbursement 009.000.390.517.370.230.00 98.00 Total :98.00 135267 11/1/2012 042800 TRI-CITIES SECURITY 19322 Street- Keys for Unit 66 Street- Keys for Unit 66 111.000.653.542.310.310.00 7.00 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.310.310.00 0.67 43Page: Packet Page 101 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 44 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :7.67135267 11/1/2012 042800 042800 TRI-CITIES SECURITY 135268 11/1/2012 063939 TYLER TECHNOLOGIES INC 045-73484 EDEN CASHIERING EQUIPMENT -UB COUNTER EDEN Cashiering Reader,Cash Drawer 411.000.652.542.900.310.00 1,411.33 EDEN Cashiering Reader,Cash Drawer 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 1,411.33 EDEN Cashiering Reader,Cash Drawer 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 1,411.34 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.652.542.900.310.00 134.08 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 134.08 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 134.07 EDEN CASHIERING SHIPPING &HANDLING CHGS045-75449 Freight 411.000.652.542.900.310.00 83.33 Freight 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 83.33 Freight 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 83.34 Total :4,886.23 135269 11/1/2012 062693 US BANK 3355 Cable Org - Traffic Control - Banding Cable Org - Traffic Control - Banding 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 300.94 Water - Guide Books3439 Water - Guide Books 411.000.654.534.800.490.00 483.64 Total :784.58 135270 11/1/2012 069922 WA TRUST FOR HISTORIC PRESERV ROBERT CHAVE Membership 1/1-12/31/2013. Membership 1/1-12/31/2013. 001.000.620.558.600.490.00 100.00 44Page: Packet Page 102 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 45 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :100.00135270 11/1/2012 069922 069922 WA TRUST FOR HISTORIC PRESERV 135271 11/1/2012 073552 WELCO SALES LLC 5688 BUSINESS CARDS FOR FINANCE & Business cards-Sarah Mager250-00289 001.000.310.514.100.310.00 19.16 Mike Bower250-00289 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 19.16 Douglas F. Compton250-00289 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 19.16 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.310.514.100.310.00 1.82 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 3.64 Total :62.94 135272 11/1/2012 073552 WELCO SALES LLC 5689 Engineering envelopes. Engineering envelopes. 001.000.620.558.800.310.00 217.75 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.620.558.800.310.00 20.69 Total :238.44 135273 11/1/2012 074226 WOOD, LISA WOOD15878 BELLY DANCE CLASS BELLY DANCE CLASS 15878 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 120.00 Total :120.00 135274 11/1/2012 064213 WSSUA TREASURER 32 OCTOBER OFFICIATING FEES OFFICIATING OF MEN'S GAMES IN OCTOBER 001.000.640.575.520.410.00 990.00 Total :990.00 135275 11/1/2012 073479 WU, THOMAS 1016 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.500.410.01 147.68 Total :147.68 45Page: Packet Page 103 of 266 11/01/2012 Voucher List City of Edmonds 46 8:11:22AM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount Bank total :131,486.85132Vouchers for bank code :front 131,486.85Total vouchers :Vouchers in this report132 46Page: Packet Page 104 of 266 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Funding Project Title Project Accounting Number Engineering Project Number FAC Edmonds Museum Exterior Repairs Project c327 E0LA FAC Senior Center Roof Repairs c332 E0LB General SR99 Enhancement Program c238 E6MA General SR104 Telecommunications Conduit Crossing c372 E1EA PM Dayton Street Plaza c276 E7MA PM Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor c282 E8MA PM Interurban Trail c146 E2DB PM Marina Beach Additional Parking c290 E8MB PM Senior Center Parking Lot & Landscaping Improvements c321 E9MA STM 2012 Citywide Storm Drainage Improvements c382 E2FE STM Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives c374 E1FM STM Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study c380 E2FC STM NPDES m013 E7FG STM Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement c376 E1FN STM Public Facilities Water Quality Upgrades c339 E1FD STM Storm Contribution to Transportation Projects c341 E1FF STM Stormwater Development Review Support (NPDES Capacity)c349 E1FH STM Stormwater GIS Support c326 E0FC STM SW Edmonds-105th/106th Ave W Storm Improvements c336 E1FA STM Talbot Road/Perrinville Creek Drainage Improvements c307 E9FB STM Lake Ballinger Associated Projects 2012 c381 E2FD STM North Talbot Road Drainage Improvements c378 E2FA STM SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System c379 E2FB STR 100th Ave W/Firdale Ave/238th St. SW/Traffic Signal Upgrade c329 E0AA STR 2009 Street Overlay Program c294 E9CA STR 2011 Residential Neighborhood Traffic Calming c343 E1AB STR 226th Street Walkway Project c312 E9DA STR 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements i005 E7AC STR 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements c368 E1CA STR 76th Avenue West/75th Place West Walkway Project c245 E6DA STR 9th Avenue Improvement Project c392 E2AB STR Caspers/Ninth Avenue/Puget Drive (SR524) Walkway Project c256 E6DB STR Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W)c342 E1AA STR Main Street Lighting and Sidewalk Enhancements c265 E7AA Revised 11/1/2012Packet Page 105 of 266 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Funding Project Title Project Accounting Number Engineering Project Number STR Shell Valley Emergency Access Road c268 E7CB STR Sunset Walkway Improvements c354 E1DA STR Transportation Plan Update c391 E2AA SWR 2012 Sanitary Sewer Comp Plan Update c369 E2GA SWR 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project c398 E3GA SWR Alder/Dellwood/Beach Pl/224th St. Sewer Replacement c347 E1GA SWR Alder Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation c390 E2GB SWR BNSF Double Track Project c300 E8GC SWR City-Wide Sewer Improvements c301 E8GD SWR Lift Station 2 Improvements (Separated from L/s 13 - 09/01/08)c298 E8GA SWR OVD Sewer Lateral Improvements c142 E3GB SWR Sewer Lift Station Rehabilitation Design c304 E9GA WTR Sewer, Water, Stormwater Revenue Requirements Update c370 E1GB WTR 2010 Waterline Replacement Program c363 E0JA WTR 2011 Waterline Replacement Program c333 E1JA WTR 2012 Waterline Overlay Program c388 E2CA WTR 2012 Waterline Replacement Program c340 E1JE WTR 2013 Waterline Replacement Program c397 E3JA WTR 5th Avenue Overlay Project c399 E2CC WTR 76th Ave W Waterline Extension with Lynnwood c344 E1JB WTR AWD Intertie and Reservoir Improvements c324 E0IA WTR Edmonds General Facilities Charge Study c345 E1JC WTR Main Street Watermain c375 E1JK WTR OVD Watermain Improvements c141 E3JB WTR Pioneer Way Road Repair c389 E2CB WTR PRV Station 11 and 12 Abandonment c346 E1JD Revised 11/1/2012Packet Page 106 of 266 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number) Funding Engineering Project Number Project Accounting Number Project Title STR E0AA c329 100th Ave W/Firdale Ave/238th St. SW/Traffic Signal Upgrade STM E0FC c326 Stormwater GIS Support WTR E0IA c324 AWD Intertie and Reservoir Improvements WTR E0JA c363 2010 Waterline Replacement Program FAC E0LA c327 Edmonds Museum Exterior Repairs Project FAC E0LB c332 Senior Center Roof Repairs STR E1AA c342 Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W) STR E1AB c343 2011 Residential Neighborhood Traffic Calming STR E1CA c368 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements STR E1DA c354 Sunset Walkway Improvements General E1EA c372 SR104 Telecommunications Conduit Crossing STM E1FA c336 SW Edmonds-105th/106th Ave W Storm Improvements STM E1FD c339 Public Facilities Water Quality Upgrades STM E1FF c341 Storm Contribution to Transportation Projects STM E1FH c349 Stormwater Development Review Support (NPDES Capacity) STM E1FM c374 Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives STM E1FN c376 Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement SWR E1GA c347 Alder/Dellwood/Beach Pl/224th St. Sewer Replacement WTR E1GB c370 Sewer, Water, Stormwater Revenue Requirements Update WTR E1JA c333 2011 Waterline Replacement Program WTR E1JB c344 76th Ave W Waterline Extension with Lynnwood WTR E1JC c345 Edmonds General Facilities Charge Study WTR E1JD c346 PRV Station 11 and 12 Abandonment WTR E1JE c340 2012 Waterline Replacement Program WTR E1JK c375 Main Street Watermain STR E2AA c391 Transportation Plan Update STR E2AB c392 9th Avenue Improvement Project WTR E2CA c388 2012 Waterline Overlay Program WTR E2CB c389 Pioneer Way Road Repair WTR E2CC c399 5th Avenue Overlay Project PM E2DB c146 Interurban Trail STM E2FA c378 North Talbot Road Drainage Improvements STM E2FB c379 SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System STM E2FC c380 Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study STM E2FD c381 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects 2012 STM E2FE c382 2012 Citywide Storm Drainage Improvements Revised 11/1/2012Packet Page 107 of 266 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number) Funding Engineering Project Number Project Accounting Number Project Title SWR E2GA c369 2012 Sanitary Sewer Comp Plan Update SWR E2GB c390 Alder Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation SWR E3GA c398 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project SWR E3GB c142 OVD Sewer Lateral Improvements WTR E3JA c397 2013 Waterline Replacement Program WTR E3JB c141 OVD Watermain Improvements STR E6DA c245 76th Avenue West/75th Place West Walkway Project STR E6DB c256 Caspers/Ninth Avenue/Puget Drive (SR524) Walkway Project General E6MA c238 SR99 Enhancement Program STR E7AA c265 Main Street Lighting and Sidewalk Enhancements STR E7AC i005 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements STR E7CB c268 Shell Valley Emergency Access Road STM E7FG m013 NPDES PM E7MA c276 Dayton Street Plaza SWR E8GA c298 Lift Station 2 Improvements (Separated from L/s 13 - 09/01/08) SWR E8GC c300 BNSF Double Track Project SWR E8GD c301 City-Wide Sewer Improvements PM E8MA c282 Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor PM E8MB c290 Marina Beach Additional Parking STR E9CA c294 2009 Street Overlay Program STR E9DA c312 226th Street Walkway Project STM E9FB c307 Talbot Road/Perrinville Creek Drainage Improvements SWR E9GA c304 Sewer Lift Station Rehabilitation Design PM E9MA c321 Senior Center Parking Lot & Landscaping Improvements Revised 11/1/2012Packet Page 108 of 266 PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number) Funding Project Accounting Number Engineering Project Number Project Title WTR c141 E3JB OVD Watermain Improvements SWR c142 E3GB OVD Sewer Lateral Improvements PM c146 E2DB Interurban Trail General c238 E6MA SR99 Enhancement Program STR c245 E6DA 76th Avenue West/75th Place West Walkway Project STR c256 E6DB Caspers/Ninth Avenue/Puget Drive (SR524) Walkway Project STR c265 E7AA Main Street Lighting and Sidewalk Enhancements STR c268 E7CB Shell Valley Emergency Access Road PM c276 E7MA Dayton Street Plaza PM c282 E8MA Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor PM c290 E8MB Marina Beach Additional Parking STR c294 E9CA 2009 Street Overlay Program SWR c298 E8GA Lift Station 2 Improvements (Separated from L/s 13 - 09/01/08) SWR c300 E8GC BNSF Double Track Project SWR c301 E8GD City-Wide Sewer Improvements SWR c304 E9GA Sewer Lift Station Rehabilitation Design STM c307 E9FB Talbot Road/Perrinville Creek Drainage Improvements STR c312 E9DA 226th Street Walkway Project PM c321 E9MA Senior Center Parking Lot & Landscaping Improvements WTR c324 E0IA AWD Intertie and Reservoir Improvements STM c326 E0FC Stormwater GIS Support FAC c327 E0LA Edmonds Museum Exterior Repairs Project STR c329 E0AA 100th Ave W/Firdale Ave/238th St. SW/Traffic Signal Upgrade FAC c332 E0LB Senior Center Roof Repairs WTR c333 E1JA 2011 Waterline Replacement Program STM c336 E1FA SW Edmonds-105th/106th Ave W Storm Improvements STM c339 E1FD Public Facilities Water Quality Upgrades WTR c340 E1JE 2012 Waterline Replacement Program STM c341 E1FF Storm Contribution to Transportation Projects STR c342 E1AA Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W) STR c343 E1AB 2011 Residential Neighborhood Traffic Calming WTR c344 E1JB 76th Ave W Waterline Extension with Lynnwood WTR c345 E1JC Edmonds General Facilities Charge Study Revised 11/1/2012Packet Page 109 of 266 PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number) Funding Project Accounting Number Engineering Project Number Project Title WTR c346 E1JD PRV Station 11 and 12 Abandonment SWR c347 E1GA Alder/Dellwood/Beach Pl/224th St. Sewer Replacement STM c349 E1FH Stormwater Development Review Support (NPDES Capacity) STR c354 E1DA Sunset Walkway Improvements WTR c363 E0JA 2010 Waterline Replacement Program STR c368 E1CA 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements SWR c369 E2GA 2012 Sanitary Sewer Comp Plan Update WTR c370 E1GB Sewer, Water, Stormwater Revenue Requirements Update General c372 E1EA SR104 Telecommunications Conduit Crossing STM c374 E1FM Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives WTR c375 E1JK Main Street Watermain STM c376 E1FN Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement STM c378 E2FA North Talbot Road Drainage Improvements STM c379 E2FB SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System STM c380 E2FC Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study STM c381 E2FD Lake Ballinger Associated Projects 2012 STM c382 E2FE 2012 Citywide Storm Drainage Improvements WWTP c383 WWTP WWTP ReRoof Project WTR c388 E2CA 2012 Waterline Overlay Program WTR c389 E2CB Pioneer Way Road Repair SWR c390 E2GB Alder Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation STR c391 E2AA Transportation Plan Update STR c392 E2AB 9th Avenue Improvement Project WTR c397 E3JA 2013 Waterline Replacement Program SWR c398 E3GA 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project WTR c399 E2CC 5th Avenue Overlay Project STR i005 E7AC 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements STM m013 E7FG NPDES Revised 11/1/2012Packet Page 110 of 266 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Funding Project Title Project Accounting Number Engineering Project Number STR 100th Ave W/Firdale Ave/238th St. SW/Traffic Signal Upgrade c329 E0AA STR 2009 Street Overlay Program c294 E9CA WTR 2010 Waterline Replacement Program c363 E0JA STR 2011 Residential Neighborhood Traffic Calming c343 E1AB WTR 2011 Waterline Replacement Program c333 E1JA STM 2012 Citywide Storm Drainage Improvements c382 E2FE SWR 2012 Sanitary Sewer Comp Plan Update c369 E2GA WTR 2012 Waterline Overlay Program c388 E2CA WTR 2012 Waterline Replacement Program c340 E1JE SWR 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project c398 E3GA WTR 2013 Waterline Replacement Program c397 E3JA STR 226th Street Walkway Project c312 E9DA STR 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements i005 E7AC WTR 5th Ave Overlay Project c399 E2CC STR 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements c368 E1CA WTR 76th Ave W Waterline Extension with Lynnwood c344 E1JB STR 76th Avenue West/75th Place West Walkway Project c245 E6DA STR 9th Avenue Improvement Project c392 E2AB SWR Alder Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation c390 E2GB SWR Alder/Dellwood/Beach Pl/224th St. Sewer Replacement c347 E1GA WTR AWD Intertie and Reservoir Improvements c324 E0IA SWR BNSF Double Track Project c300 E8GC STR Caspers/Ninth Avenue/Puget Drive (SR524) Walkway Project c256 E6DB SWR City-Wide Sewer Improvements c301 E8GD STM Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives c374 E1FM PM Dayton Street Plaza c276 E7MA WTR Edmonds General Facilities Charge Study c345 E1JC STM Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study c380 E2FC FAC Edmonds Museum Exterior Repairs Project c327 E0LA STR Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W)c342 E1AA PM Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor c282 E8MA PM Interurban Trail c146 E2DB STM Lake Ballinger Associated Projects 2012 c381 E2FD SWR Lift Station 2 Improvements (Separated from L/s 13 - 09/01/08)c298 E8GA Revised 11/1/2012Packet Page 111 of 266 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Funding Project Title Project Accounting Number Engineering Project Number STR Main Street Lighting and Sidewalk Enhancements c265 E7AA WTR Main Street Watermain c375 E1JK PM Marina Beach Additional Parking c290 E8MB STM North Talbot Road Drainage Improvements c378 E2FA STM NPDES m013 E7FG SWR OVD Sewer Lateral Improvements c142 E3GB WTR OVD Watermain Improvements c141 E3JB STM Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement c376 E1FN WTR Pioneer Way Road Repair c389 E2CB WTR PRV Station 11 and 12 Abandonment c346 E1JD STM Public Facilities Water Quality Upgrades c339 E1FD PM Senior Center Parking Lot & Landscaping Improvements c321 E9MA FAC Senior Center Roof Repairs c332 E0LB SWR Sewer Lift Station Rehabilitation Design c304 E9GA WTR Sewer, Water, Stormwater Revenue Requirements Update c370 E1GB STR Shell Valley Emergency Access Road c268 E7CB General SR104 Telecommunications Conduit Crossing c372 E1EA General SR99 Enhancement Program c238 E6MA STM Storm Contribution to Transportation Projects c341 E1FF STM Stormwater Development Review Support (NPDES Capacity)c349 E1FH STM Stormwater GIS Support c326 E0FC STR Sunset Walkway Improvements c354 E1DA STM SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System c379 E2FB STM SW Edmonds-105th/106th Ave W Storm Improvements c336 E1FA STM Talbot Road/Perrinville Creek Drainage Improvements c307 E9FB STR Transportation Plan Update c391 E2AA Revised 11/1/2012Packet Page 112 of 266 PROJECT NUMBERS (Phase and Task Numbers) Phases and Tasks (Engineering Division) Phase Title ct Construction ds Design pl Preliminary sa Site Acquisition & Prep st Study ro Right-of-Way Task Title 196 Traffic Engineering & Studies 197 MAIT 198 CTR 199 Engineering Plans & Services 950 Engineering Staff Time 970 Construction Management 981 Contract 990 Miscellaneous 991 Retainage stm Engineering Staff Time-Storm str Engineering Staff Time-Street swr Engineering Staff Time-Sewer wtr Engineering Staff Time-Water prk Engineering Staff Time-Park Packet Page 113 of 266 Payroll Earnings Summary Report City of Edmonds Pay Period: 559 (10/16/2012 to 10/31/2012) Hours AmountHour Type Hour Class Description NO PAY LEAVEABSENT111 16.00 0.00 SICK LEAVESICK121 709.00 21,777.31 VACATIONVACATION122 1,007.62 31,913.08 HOLIDAY HOURSHOLIDAY123 48.00 1,496.15 FLOATER HOLIDAYHOLIDAY124 16.00 381.07 COMPENSATORY TIMECOMP HOURS125 246.88 7,279.57 Police Sick Leave L & ISICK129 279.00 9,202.31 BEREAVEMENTBEREAVEMENT141 18.00 645.36 Kelly Day UsedREGULAR HOURS150 110.00 3,545.09 COMPTIME AUTO PAYCOMP HOURS155 120.01 4,859.19 COUNCIL BASE PAYREGULAR HOURS170 0.00 4,200.00 COUNCIL MEETING PAYREGULAR HOURS171 128.00 1,600.00 COUNCIL OTHER MEETINGREGULAR HOURS172 56.00 700.00 COUNCIL AGENDA PAYREGULAR HOURS173 0.00 100.00 COUNCIL PRESIDENTS PAYREGULAR HOURS174 0.00 100.00 REGULAR HOURSREGULAR HOURS190 16,991.00 513,197.00 FIRE PENSION PAYMENTSREGULAR HOURS191 4.00 3,542.87 ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVEREGULAR HOURS195 104.00 3,355.43 LIGHT DUTYREGULAR HOURS196 192.00 6,047.95 OVERTIME-STRAIGHTOVERTIME HOURS210 12.00 347.47 WATER WATCH STANDBYOVERTIME HOURS215 48.00 2,099.98 STANDBY TREATMENT PLANTMISCELLANEOUS216 16.00 1,428.48 OVERTIME 1.5OVERTIME HOURS220 311.50 18,042.68 OVERTIME-DOUBLEOVERTIME HOURS225 10.25 569.49 WORKING OUT OF CLASSMISCELLANEOUS410 0.00 252.61 SHIFT DIFFERENTIALSHIFT DIFFERENTIAL411 0.00 877.85 RETROACTIVE PAYRETROACTIVE PAY600 0.00 855.51 ACCRUED COMPCOMP HOURS602 71.50 0.00 ACCRUED COMP TIMECOMP HOURS604 116.25 0.00 ACCRUED COMP TIMECOMP HOURS606 2.00 0.00 ACCREDITATION PAYMISCELLANEOUSacc 0.00 23.10 ACCRED/POLICE SUPPORTMISCELLANEOUSacs 0.00 155.51 BOC II CertificationMISCELLANEOUSboc 0.00 78.48 TRAINING CORPORALMISCELLANEOUScpl 0.00 132.76 11/01/2012 Page 1 of 2 Packet Page 114 of 266 Payroll Earnings Summary Report City of Edmonds Pay Period: 559 (10/16/2012 to 10/31/2012) Hours AmountHour Type Hour Class Description CERTIFICATION III PAYMISCELLANEOUScrt 0.00 667.88 DETECTIVE PAYMISCELLANEOUSdet 0.00 92.61 Detective 4%MISCELLANEOUSdet4 0.00 768.66 EDUCATION PAY 2%EDUCATION PAYed1 0.00 753.49 EDUCATION PAY 4%EDUCATION PAYed2 0.00 805.66 EDUCATION PAY 6%EDUCATION PAYed3 0.00 5,140.56 FAMILY MEDICAL/SICKSICKfmls 280.25 8,194.26 K-9 PAYMISCELLANEOUSk9 0.00 199.14 LONGEVITY PAY 2%LONGEVITY PAYlg1 0.00 1,932.42 LONGEVITY PAY 4%LONGEVITY PAYlg2 0.00 1,339.20 LONGEVITY 6%LONGEVITY PAYlg3 0.00 4,908.09 Longevity 1%LONGEVITYlg4 0.00 592.43 Longevity 3%LONGEVITYlg5 0.00 65.67 Longevity .5%LONGEVITYlg6 0.00 237.13 Longevity 1.5%LONGEVITYlg7 0.00 358.21 Longevity HourlyLONGEVITYlgh 0.00 0.00 MOTORCYCLE PAYMISCELLANEOUSmtc 0.00 185.22 5% OUT OF CLASSMISCELLANEOUSooc 0.00 248.63 Public Disclosure SpecialistMISCELLANEOUSpds 0.00 43.78 PHYSICAL FITNESS PAYMISCELLANEOUSphy 0.00 1,694.13 PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS SERGEANMISCELLANEOUSprof 0.00 141.98 SPECIAL DUTY PAY 5%MISCELLANEOUSsdp 0.00 271.58 ADMINISTRATIVE SERGEANTMISCELLANEOUSsgt 0.00 141.98 SICK LEAVE ADD BACKSICKslw 539.05 0.00 TRAFFICMISCELLANEOUStraf 0.00 291.71 Total Net Pay:$462,236.65 $667,880.72 21,452.31 11/01/2012 Page 2 of 2 Packet Page 115 of 266 Benefit Checks Summary Report City of Edmonds Pay Period: 559 - 10/16/2012 to 10/31/2012 Bank: front - Union Bank Direct DepositCheck AmtNamePayee #DateCheck # 51788 11/05/2012 mebt AST TTEE 74,640.34 0.00 51789 11/05/2012 epoa EPOA-1 POLICE 1,219.00 0.00 51790 11/05/2012 epoa4 EPOA-4 POLICE SUPPORT 117.00 0.00 51791 11/05/2012 flex FLEX-PLAN SERVICES, INC 464.17 0.00 51792 11/05/2012 jhan JOHN HANCOCK 1,625.06 0.00 51793 11/05/2012 pb NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTION 3,329.05 0.00 51794 11/05/2012 cope SEIU COPE 72.00 0.00 51795 11/05/2012 seiu SEIU LOCAL 925 3,329.26 0.00 51796 11/05/2012 sdu STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT 250.00 0.00 51797 11/05/2012 uw UNITED WAY OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY 314.00 0.00 51798 11/05/2012 icma VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS 304884 1,433.33 0.00 51799 11/05/2012 wadc WASHINGTON STATE TREASURER 13,986.00 0.00 100,779.21 0.00 Bank: wire - FRONTIER BANK Direct DepositCheck AmtNamePayee #DateCheck # 1966 11/05/2012 aflac AFLAC 4,294.92 0.00 1969 11/05/2012 front FRONTIER BANK 90,158.84 0.00 1970 11/05/2012 oe OFFICE OF SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT 208.50 0.00 94,662.26 0.00 195,441.47 0.00Grand Totals: Page 1 of 111/1/2012 Packet Page 116 of 266    AM-5218     4. D.              City Council Meeting Meeting Date:11/05/2012 Time:Consent   Submitted For:Dave Earling Submitted By:Carolyn LaFave Department:Mayor's Office Review Committee: Committee Action:  Type: Action  Information Subject Title Approval of list of Edmonds' businesses applying for renewal of their liquor license with the Washington State Liquor Control Board, October 2012. Recommendation Please approve the list of Edmonds' businesses applying for renewal of their Washington State liquor licenses. Previous Council Action Narrative The City Clerk's Office, the Police Department, and the Mayor's Office have reviewed the attached list and have no concerns with the Washington State Liquor Control Board renewing the liquor licenses for the listed businesses. Attachments WSLCB_Oct_2012 Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase 10/30/2012 09:08 AM Mayor Dave Earling 10/30/2012 09:23 AM Form Started By: Carolyn LaFave Started On: 10/26/2012 01:48 PM Final Approval Date: 10/30/2012  Packet Page 117 of 266 Packet Page 118 of 266 Packet Page 119 of 266 Packet Page 120 of 266 Packet Page 121 of 266 Packet Page 122 of 266    AM-5217     4. E.              City Council Meeting Meeting Date:11/05/2012 Time:Consent   Submitted For:Dave Earling Submitted By:Carolyn LaFave Department:Mayor's Office Review Committee: Committee Action:  Type: Action  Information Subject Title Confirm Architectural Design Board candidate Cary Guenther to the Architectural Design Board. Recommendation Mayor Earling recommends Cary Guenther's confirmation to the Architectural Design Board. Previous Council Action Narrative Mayor Earling has met and interviewed Architectural Design Board candidate Cary Guenther and is recommending his appointment to the Architectural Design Board in Position #7 - Planner. Mr Guenther holds an architecture license in 4 states, has over 30 years of experience in architecture, is a former 10 year Edmonds Planning Board member, and has lived in Edmonds for many years. The position Mr. Guenther will be filling was vacated in June 2011 by Val Kendall and has been unfilled since then. Mayor Earling believes Mr. Guenther will be an excellent addition to the Architectural Design Board. Attachments Cary_Guenther_ADB_App Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase 10/30/2012 11:29 AM Mayor Dave Earling 10/30/2012 01:20 PM Form Started By: Carolyn LaFave Started On: 10/26/2012 01:10 PM Final Approval Date: 10/30/2012  Packet Page 123 of 266 Packet Page 124 of 266    AM-5219     4. F.              City Council Meeting Meeting Date:11/05/2012 Time:Consent   Submitted By:Frances Chapin Department:Parks and Recreation Review Committee: Committee Action:  Type: Action  Information Subject Title Authorization for Mayor to sign agreement with Edmonds Public Facilities District regarding display of Chihuly artwork. Recommendation Authorize Mayor to sign agreement. Previous Council Action 9/11/12  Finance Committee recommended forwarding proposed donation of Chihuly artwork from EAFF to City to full Council and to schedule a public hearing per the Percent for Art ordinance. 10/02/12  City Council public hearing and acceptance of the gift of glass artwork by Dale Chihuly from the Edmonds Arts Festival Foundation. Narrative A presentation was given at City Council on 10/2/12 regarding the Edmonds Arts Commission recommendation for City Council to accept the donation of Chihuly artwork from the Edmonds Arts Festival Foundation.  Staff stated that an agreement would be put in place between the City and the Edmonds Public Facilities District for the ongoing display of the artwork at the Edmonds Center for the Arts.  The attached agreement prepared by the City Attorney outlines the responsibilities of the PFD to continue to provide the exhibit space in the stairwells, provide general maintenance, ensure reasonable security precautions and adequate signage, and to inform the City of any maintenance issues.  The City will insure the artwork as part of the Public Art Collection, include the pieces in any updated Public Art brochures, and work with the PFD to improve signage.  The agreement was approved by the PFD board on 10/25/12. Attachments Agreement Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date City Clerk Sandy Chase 11/01/2012 08:56 AM Mayor Dave Earling 11/01/2012 09:09 AM Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase 11/01/2012 01:06 PM Packet Page 125 of 266 Form Started By: Frances Chapin Started On: 10/29/2012 06:46 PM Final Approval Date: 11/01/2012  Packet Page 126 of 266 1 AGREEMENT Between CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON AND EDMONDS PUBLIC FACILITIES DISTRICT For the Display of Chihuly Artwork The following is an agreement (“Agreement”) between the CITY OF EDMONDS (hereinafter referred to as the "City"), and the EDMONDS PUBLIC FACILITIES DISTRICT (hereinafter referred to as the "PFD") (collectively, the “Parties”) for the display of certain artwork. WHEREAS, the Edmonds City Council has accepted, on behalf of the City, the donation of two pieces of art created by Dale Chihuly (the “Artwork”) in custom cases and wishes to continue to have the Artwork displayed at the Edmonds Center for the Arts (“ECA”) facility; and WHEREAS, the PFD has agreed to keep the Artwork on exhibit at the ECA facility; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises, covenants, conditions and performances set forth below, the Parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Responsibilities of the PFD. 1.1 The PFD will continue to provide the space currently designated on the stairwells at the ECA facility for the exhibition of the Artwork in the cases. 1.2 The PFD will be responsible for the general maintenance of the display cases, such as changing light bulbs as necessary and keeping the cases clean. 1.3 The PFD will inform the City of any need to move or repair the Artwork or the display cases before any such action is undertaken. If any issue arises in connection with the Artwork other than maintenance of the display cases, the PFD will refer such issues to the City of Edmonds Arts Commission. 1.4 The PFD will take reasonable precautions to ensure the security of the Artwork, such as keeping the display cases locked when not being cleaned or maintained, and locking all exterior entrances to the ECA facility during non-business hours. 1.5 The PFD will work with the City to ensure that the signage provided for the Artwork is adequate. 2. Responsibilities of the City. 2.1 The City will bear all costs associated with placing the Artwork on display at the ECA facility, and will work with the PFD to ensure that the signage provided for the Artwork’s display cases is adequate. Packet Page 127 of 266 2 2.2 The City will include a description of the Artwork in its citywide public art tour brochure when it is next revised. 2.3 The City will obtain and keep in place all necessary insurance for the Artwork. 2.4 The City shall defend, indemnify and hold the PFD, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers harmless from any and all claims, injuries, damages, losses or suits, including attorney fees, arising from or in connection with the PFD’s performance, or nonperformance, of this Agreement, except to the extent that claims, injuries, damages, losses or suits are caused by the sole negligence of the PFD, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. This promise to indemnify and hold harmless shall include a waiver by the City of the immunity provided under Title 51 RCW, but only to the extent necessary to fully effectuate this promise. This provision shall survive the termination and/or expiration of this Agreement. 3. Miscellaneous. 3.1 Term/Termination of Agreement. The Parties agree that the PFD will keep the Artwork on display at the ECA facility for an indefinite period. Either party may terminate this Agreement at any time and for any reason upon giving the other party written notice of such termination no fewer than ten (10) business days in advance of the effective date of said termination. 3.2 Relationship between the Parties. Nothing in this Agreement shall be interpreted to or in fact create an agency or employment relationship between the Parties. No officer, official, agent, employee or representative of one party shall be deemed to be the same of the other party for any purpose. The PFD and the City shall each be solely responsible for all acts of its officers, officials, employees, volunteers and representatives during the performance of this Agreement. 3.3 Entire agreement, integration and amendment. This Agreement contains the entire agreement and understanding between the Parties relating to the rights and obligations created hereby, and supersedes all prior and contemporaneous negotiations, understandings, and agreements, written or oral, between the Parties. Any prior discussions or understandings are deemed merged with the provisions herein. This Agreement shall not be amended, assigned or otherwise changed or transferred except in writing with the express written consent of the Parties hereto. Any action to interpret or enforce this Agreement shall be brought before the Superior Court of Snohomish County, Washington, and the Parties agree that, as between them, all matters shall be resolved in that venue. Packet Page 128 of 266 3 3.4 Notices. Notices required by this Agreement shall be provided as follows: Notices to the City of Edmonds shall be sent to the following address: City of Edmonds 121 5th Avenue N Edmonds, WA 98020 Notices to the Edmonds Public Facilities District shall be sent to the following address: Edmonds Public Facilities District 410 Fourth Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020 Receipt of any notice shall be deemed effective three days after deposit of written notice in the U.S. mails, with proper postage and properly addressed. DATED this _______ day of __________________, 2012. CITY OF EDMONDS: EDMONDS PUBLIC FACILITIESDISTRICT: By: David O. Earling, Mayor Its: ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED Sandra S. Chase, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Office of the City Attorney Packet Page 129 of 266    AM-5237     4. G.              City Council Meeting Meeting Date:11/05/2012 Time:Consent   Submitted By:Stephen Clifton Department:Community Services Review Committee: Committee Action:  Type: Information  Information Subject Title Community Services/Economic Development Department Quarterly Report - October, 2012. Recommendation Previous Council Action Narrative The attached report provides an update on major projects currently worked on by staff of the Community Services and Economic Development Departments. Attachments Community Services/Economic Development Department Quarterly Report - October 2012 Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date City Clerk Sandy Chase 11/02/2012 10:08 AM Mayor Dave Earling 11/02/2012 10:59 AM Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase 11/02/2012 11:02 AM Form Started By: Stephen Clifton Started On: 11/02/2012 09:50 AM Final Approval Date: 11/02/2012  Packet Page 130 of 266 City of Edmonds Community Services Date: October 26, 2012 To: Mayor Earling and City Council members From: Stephen Clifton, AICP Community Services and Economic Development Director Subject: Community Services and Economic Development Quarterly Report – October, 2012 As requested by the City Council, this report provides an update on major projects currently worked on by staff of the Community Services and Economic Development Departments. Community Services I. EDMONDS CROSSING Project Description Edmonds Crossing is a regional project intended to provide a long-term solution to current operational and safety conflicts between ferry, rail, automobile, bus, and pedestrian traffic in downtown Edmonds and along State Route 104. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Federal Transit Administration (FTA), Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) (including Washington State Ferries [WSF]), and City of Edmonds propose to relocate the existing state ferry terminal from Main Street, in downtown Edmonds, to Pt. Edwards, south of the downtown core. In the process, a multimodal center would be established that would integrate ferry, rail, and transit services into a single complex. A realigned SR 104 from its current intersection with Pine Street would provide access. The new complex would provide an upgraded ferry terminal designed to meet the operational requirements for accommodating forecast ferry ridership demand; a new rail station designed to meet intercity passenger (Amtrak) and commuter rail (Sounder) service; a transit center that would meet local bus system and regional transit system loading requirements; facilities that allow both vehicular commuters and walk-on passengers to utilize various transportation modes; parking, drop-off areas, retail/ concessionaire space, waiting areas; and a system linking these facilities to allow for the safe movement of users. Significant Activities Since July, 2012 • July, August, September and October, 2012 – No significant activities on the SR 104 Edmonds Crossing Pt. Edwards project. City of Edmonds Community Services Department Economic Development Department Packet Page 131 of 266 2 Underpass Concept • July 11, 2012 – A “Don’t Block our Beach” rally took place at Brackett’s Landing South Park. A press release was issued and at least 200 Edmonds citizens interested in BNSF train conflict issues attended. The City’s Public Works Director presented conceptual images of an underpass beneath the rail lines at Main Street and the Mayor highlighted the concept in his remarks while cautioning that further study and feasibility analysis would be required before any decisions could be made; he also noted that his highest priorities are to address public safety as it relates to people and vehicles crossing the existing and planned second BNSF rail lines, providing emergency access to both sides of the rail line(s), and finding ways to address potential impacts from the estimated increase in trains traveling north/south. I also attended the event and was available to answer questions raised about Edmonds Crossing or the proposed underpass concept. Additionally, attendees included the Washington State Ferries Assistant Secretary of Transportation David Moseley, Senator Paul Shin, Senator Mary Helen Roberts, Representatives Liias, Ryu, and Kagi, and City Council members Buckshnis, Johnson, Yamamoto, Peterson, and Fraley Monillas. Edmonds Beacon, My Edmonds News, Edmonds Patch, the Daily Herald, and two Seattle television stations, among other sources, covered the event. • September 11, 2012 – The underpass concept was presented to the City Council Planning Public Works and Parks (PPP) Committee as part of the Capital Improvement Program/Capital Facilities Program (CIP/CFP) agenda. • October 2, 2012 – The underpass concept was presented to the City Council PPP Committee as part of the CIP/CFP agenda. A significant discussion regarding the at- grade rail issues occurred. • October 10, 2012 – The Planning Board conducted a public hearing on the Capital Facilities Plan Element update for 2013-2018 to City’s Comprehensive Plan and the Capital Improvement Program for 2013-2018. The Board recommended the City Council adopt the 2013-2018 CIP and CFP. • October 16, 2012 – The underpass minimum build variant/concept was presented to the Edmonds City Council as part of the CIP/CFP Program presentation. The City Council voted to refer the project to the Transportation Comprehensive Plan, so that citizen input could be obtained to vet the project. • October 23, 2012 – The Edmonds City Council removed the underpass concept/study. • October 25, 2012 – The City of Edmonds withdrew a grant application to the Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board in addition to cancelling a scheduled October 25, 2012 interview. II. SOUND TRANSIT (PHASE 1, AKA SOUND MOVE) Project Description During the past several years, Sound Transit has been implementing what is called the Sound Move Plan. One element calls for commuter rail services, otherwise known as Packet Page 132 of 266 3 Sounder. Commuter rail will eventually link Everett in the north with Seattle, Tacoma and Lakewood in the South, a total of 82 miles through three counties. Sounder is being implemented in three phases, one of which includes Everett to Seattle or the North Commuter Rail corridor. Three commuter rail stations exist along this corridor, i.e., Everett, Mukilteo and Edmonds. Everett-Seattle Sounder, at full operation, now calls for 8 trains per day, i.e., four round trips, and will include reverse trips. This is a reduction of two round trips from the originally proposed operational plan. The first roundtrip train run began in December, 2003. Located between Main and Dayton Streets along both sides of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) tracks and co-located with Amtrak’s and Community Transit, Edmonds Commuter Rail Station includes ADA accessible rail platforms, shelters, signage, lighting fixtures, hanging flower baskets, ticket vending machines, on-site parking, and Community Transit bus station. Significant Activities since July, 2012 • July, August, September and October, 2012 – One issue that has been raised since the opening of the project is parking. More specifically, the City has received many complaints from people not being able to find parking within the Sound Transit parking lot. In response to inquiries about the parking situation, I have noted in recent e-mails to commuters that the parking loss is a result of constructing the Sound Transit Edmonds Station. In order to accommodate a limited Phase 1 budget, and install necessary amenities such as rail platforms, walkways, a community transit station, etc., only a limited amount of parking is available between the rail lines and private property/WSDOT parking lot abutting the east edge of the project. Much of the parking within proximity of the WSF Ferry Terminal and downtown/waterfront areas has a three hour limit; the purpose is to ensure that those areas surrounding popular attractions such as waterfront beaches, underwater dive park, restaurants……….in addition to commercial and residential areas, have parking stalls that are available to all users at least every three hours and not utilized for all day parking. The City realizes that this is problematic for those trying to commute using transit options or for those riding a WSF ferry wishing to leave their car on the east side of Puget Sound, but a balance needs to be achieved for all users. City staff recognized early in the planning process that Sound Transit would need to eventually provide additional parking for the Sound Transit Edmonds Station project. This is why I worked with Sound Transit staff to include voter approved project Sound Transit N23A into Sound Transit 2 project. The project includes adding up to 300 parking stalls for a permanent Sound Transit Edmonds Station. Unfortunately, the Sound Transit Board has removed this project from the list, at the objection of the City, due to the economy and reductions in the collection of sales taxes. The City and Sound Transit have discussed how Sound Transit intends to start planning for additional parking. • August, 2012 – To assist with parking demand, the Port of Edmonds agreed to open their north lot (just south of Dayton Street between the BNSF rail lines and Admiral Way) to Packet Page 133 of 266 4 any user for a daily rate. Although the primary purpose is to benefit all users/drivers, commuters using Sound Transit could also use this lot. • July, August, September and October, 2012 – Sound Transit has been and is currently working with the City and nearby property owners to identify additional potential parking stalls. • November 1, 2012 – The City of Edmonds issued a press release announcing a proposed agreement between Salish Crossing, LLC and Sound Transit to increase parking at the Edmonds Sounder Commuter Rail Station (Edmonds Station). The proposal will go before the Sound Transit Board on Nov. 15, 2012. The proposed agreement calls for creating an additional 103-space surface lot at 190 Sunset Avenue South (south end of the Antique Mall site). Salish Crossing will own and maintain the facility. The additional parking will supplement 156 spaces currently provided at Edmonds Station. Although the target date for opening the lot is May 1, 2013, the City has asked Sound Transit and Salish Crossing, LLC if they could find a way to provide access to some of the 103 stalls earlier than May 1; we are hopeful this will happen. III. SOUND TRANSIT 2 Expanding the regional mass transit system On Nov. 4, 2008, voters of the Central Puget Sound region approved a Sound Transit 2 ballot measure. The plan adds regional express bus and commuter rail service while building 36 additional miles of light rail to form a 55-mile regional system. For additional information, visit http://soundtransit.org/. Significant Activities since July, 2012 • July, August, September and October, 2012 – Sound Transit is preparing to extend light rail from Northgate to Lynnwood, which voters approved as part of the Sound Transit 2 Plan in 2008 along with funding to continue planning future service all the way to Everett. This project relies on competing for and receiving significant federal funding. The Sound Transit Board took a major step by confirming that light rail is the best mode of transit and Interstate 5 is the right corridor to study based on ridership, travel times, service levels and cost. Construction is currently underway on a light rail extension to the University of Washington scheduled to open in 2016, followed by service to Northgate targeted for opening in 2021. Voter-approved additions will bring 36 new miles of service to the north, south and east, creating more than 50 miles of regional light rail service. IV. UNOCAL AKA CHEVRON SITE CLEANUP Project Description The UNOCAL property currently consists of a lower yard which currently contains petroleum contamination resulting from more than 60 years of operation. Chevron, which acquired UNOCAL, is now the entity responsible for cleaning up the site. Cleanup work at the lower yard, which began in 2007, was a continuation of remediation work that has been ongoing Packet Page 134 of 266 5 at the site since 2001. Chevron conducted cleanup work from summer 2007 through fall 2008 and has since been monitoring the site since. Significant Activities since July, 2012 • July, August, September and October, 2012 – Interim actions have addressed most of the contamination at the site. Chevron Environmental Management Company, on behalf of Unocal, is performing a Feasibility Study to assess remedial alternatives to cleaning up contamination that remains. Chevron EMC, Ecology, Washington State Ferries, and the Edmonds Citizen’s Awareness Committee continue to meet at key points during the study to discuss the work. The draft Feasibility Study is due to Ecology at the end of 2013. Once the Study is finalized, Ecology will select cleanup actions to be taken at the Site. The selected actions will be presented to the public in a draft Cleanup Action Plan. V. EDMONDS PUBLIC FACILITIES DISTRICT Overview The City Council, pursuant to state law, approved the formation of the Public Facilities District (PFD) at its April 24, 2001 meeting. A PFD is a separate municipal corporation that has authority to undertake the design, construction, operation, promotion and financing of a Regional Center in the city. The Public Facilities District board consists of five members originally appointed by the City Council on June 19, 2001. Phase 1A renovation of the original Edmonds High School Auditorium into a first class Edmonds Center for the Arts (ECA) and multipurpose facility was completed in September of 2006. Significant Activities Since July, 2012 • July, August, September and October, 2012 – City staff have been attending Edmonds Center for the Arts PFD Board meetings and task force meetings. • September, 2012 –Edmonds Center for the Arts kicked off its fifth season. • October 2, 2012 – Joe McIalwain, Edmonds Center for the Arts Executive Director, provided a quarterly report to the Edmonds City Council. VI. SNOHOMISH COUNTY PAINE FIELD Overview On July 14, 2004, a Mead & Hunt Inc. Business Travel Survey was issued which focused on the market potential and options for Paine Field. On August 20, 2004, a Snohomish County Citizen Cabinet issued an Economic Development Final Report-Blueprint for the Economic Future of Snohomish County. Both reports put Paine Field in the regional spotlight as they highlight the possibility of using Paine Field for commercial aircraft operations, thus changing its general aviation status. Although Snohomish County Executive Aaron Reardon and some County Council members have said they do not support commercial air service at Paine Field, federal law obligates the county to accommodate commercial service. Federal law does not allow the county to Packet Page 135 of 266 6 prohibit or limit scheduled passenger air service. Instead, it requires that the county negotiate with the airlines in good faith to accommodate their proposed service. Horizon Airlines has indicated it wants to operate four times a day to Portland and twice per day to Spokane, using 75-seat Bombardier Q400 turboprop airplanes on both routes. Allegiant has said it plans to operate twice a week to Las Vegas, using 150-seat MD83 jet aircraft. Before airlines may begin commercial service, the FAA must amend the county’s operating certificate for Paine Field as well as the airlines’ operating specifications. The county was required to prepare an environmental assessment for FAA approval before those amendments can occur. Significant Activities Since July, 2012 • September 14, 2012 – The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) released its Final NEPA Environmental Assessment (Final EA) examining the potential impacts of commercial air at Snohomish County’s Paine Field Airport. VII. RAILROAD QUIET ZONE Overview As discussed in the past, there is an expressed desire of the City Council and Port of Edmonds to establish a full or partial quite zone along the City's shoreline. A quiet zone is a section of rail line that contains one or more consecutive public crossings at which locomotive horns are not routinely sounded. Significant Activities Since July, 2012 • July, August, September and October, 2012 – No new information at this time. VIII. CITY OF EDMONDS / COMCAST FRANCHISE AGREEMENT Overview With a record of successfully negotiating Verizon franchise agreements, several members of the North Puget Sound Consortium formed a Consortium for the purposes of negotiating franchise agreements with Comcast. Jurisdictions invited to participate include: Snohomish County, the Cities of Bothell, Carnation, Edmonds, Kenmore, Lake Forest Park, Mercer Island, Shoreline, Woodinville, and the Town of Woodway. Benefits of a coordinated effort include: ensuring that the public receives the maximum rights and benefits from their respective franchise agreements; better coordination of negotiations with Comcast; sharing the costs of negotiations including hiring a national consultant and attorneys to assure the citizens of each jurisdiction that their franchise is competitive, both locally and nationally; and creating a common template and negotiation strategy through the assistance of a national consultant and attorneys to maximize leverage during the negotiations. Significant Activities Since July, 2012 • July, August, September and October, 2012 – Michael R. Bradley with Bradley & Guzzetta, LLC (a Lighthouse Law Group subcontractor) and I have completed negotiations with Comcast related to renewal of the existing Franchise Agreement; we are working to schedule this item on a City Council agenda for review of the final draft agreement. Packet Page 136 of 266 7 Economic Development I. PARTNERSHIPS Goal 1, Policy 1a of the Edmonds Economic Development Plan is to promote a results- oriented permit and licensing process, which consolidates review timelines, eliminates unnecessary steps, and maintains a strong customer service approach. Significant Activities Since July, 2012 • July, August, September and October 2012 – The Public Works Director, Interim Development Services Director, Building Official, and other staff have been meeting with me to discuss potential changes in operations to improve development review efficiencies. One process that has been highly successful and very well received by the development community is meeting with developers, at no cost, prior to submitting a formal preliminary development review application. This allows a developer team to learn about various issues related to their proposal prior to investing large sums of money into a formal design and permitting process. I attend these meetings regularly to introduce myself to developers and their representatives, learn about proposals, and to discuss possible solutions to any potential obstacles that arise. Goal 1 of the Edmonds Economic Development Plan states ”foster a healthy business community that provides employment and other economic opportunities.” Significant Activities Since July, 2012 • July, August, September and October, 2012 – Economic Development staff continue recruiting businesses to, and helping businesses expand or relocated within, the City of Edmonds. Businesses which have recently found the City of Edmonds an attractive place to open or expand include: The Hotel Group (relocation), Edmonds Eye Care (relocation), Averetek, Red Petal Cakes, Jack Murphy’s Pub, Foundation for International Services, Key Bank, Rusty Pelican Restaurant, ArtSpot, Otherworlds, Embellishments, Semantics Art Gallery (expansion), Cheesemonger’s Table (relocation and expansion), Las Brisas (relocation and expansion) and other specialty retailers and restaurants. The old Shuck’s/Oreilly building at the intersection of Hwy 99 and 220th Street is also being renovated and the landlord is seeking tenants. Economic Development Commission Overview On June 2, 2009 – The City Council approved Ordinance 3735 which creates a new Citizens Economic Development Commission (EDC) in order to determine new strategies for economic development within the City and identify new sources of revenues. In conjunction with the Planning Board, the new commission is to review and consider strategies designed to improve commercial viability, tourism development, and activity. The ED Commission consists of 17 members appointed by the Mayor and the City Council. The commission is staffed by the City’s Economic Development Director and Executive Assistant. Frances Chapin and Rob Chave also attend regularly. The Commission is to make recommendations to the Mayor and City Council, as well as to other City boards or Packet Page 137 of 266 8 commissions as appropriate, regarding economic development strategies. Minutes from monthly meetings (once approved by the Edmonds EDC) can be found at http://www.ci.edmonds.wa.us/EconDevMinutes.stm. Significant Activities Since July, 2012 • July 18, 2012 – The Edmonds EDC reconvened with 10 new members and met in the City Hall Brackett Meeting Room. The commission discussed the purpose and mission of the EDC; was provided an overview of past economic development activities, programs, projects and opportunities and EDC/Planning Board proposed initiatives/priorities and future goals. Election of a Chair and Vice Chair was also discussed. • August 15, 2012 – The Edmonds Economic Development Commission conducted a meeting in the Brackett Meeting Room. The commission discussed the status of: Harbor Square Redevelopment Process, Main Street Project, 5 Corners/Westgate Special District Studies, Strategic Planning process, Highway 99 Enhancement Project, Community Technology Advisory Committee, and Sports Tourism. Additional topics included future goals, and possible election of Chair and Vice Chair. • September 19, 2012 - The Edmonds Economic Development Commission conducted a meeting in the Brackett Meeting Room. The commission discussed volunteering for sub-committee assignments; possible review and updating of the Economic Development Plan; Economic Development incentives; and updates were provided for: Harbor Square Redevelopment Process, Main Street Project, 5 Corners/Westgate Special District Studies, Strategic Planning process, Highway 99 Enhancement Project, Community Technology Advisory Committee, and Sports Tourism. Additional topics included BD Zones – Removal of 15 foot step-back and future goals. • October 17, 2012 - The Edmonds Economic Development Commission conducted a meeting in the Brackett Meeting Room. Updates were provided for: Harbor Square Redevelopment Process, Main Street Project, 5 Corners/Westgate Special District Studies, Strategic Planning process, Highway 99 Enhancement Project, and Community Technology Advisory Committee. Additional topics included sub- committee outline/development of sub-group methods, limiting office on the first floor within the BD1 Zone (see page 9 and 10 under Goal 2, Policy 2i), etc. • July, August, September and October, 2012 – The Strategic Plan is moving forward. As mentioned in e-mails to the City Council, Planning Board and Economic Development Commission, a subgroup consisting of a few members from each body met to review and discuss a draft document (72 preliminary plan actions placed under 10 strategic objectives) prepared Beckwith Consulting Group. The subgroup agreed to take the proposed 10 strategic objective categories and create instead fewer broader overall strategic objectives - no changes were made to the individual 72 plan action narratives themselves or percentages calculated by Tom Beckwith. Mr. Beckwith reviewed the proposed five broader strategic objectives and found them to very good and useful. Added to the table are columns which reference how long participating parties might work on plan actions, e.g., 1, 12, 12-36, 24-60 Packet Page 138 of 266 9 months, etc., or ongoing, and the complexity related to each. This is called the base document. The draft updated base document has been provided to Mr. Beckwith so he can begin thinking about how to prepare a framework/report that will be presented to the Planning Board and EDC at a joint meeting, prior to being presented to the full City Council. I’ve asked that the report be framed in such a way that would allow participating parties to clearly identify ways to implement strategic objectives and that the document is easily readable and not overly dense. One item that will be important to highlight within the report, and relates to what Mr. Beckwith has stated in the past, is that lower priority items/plan actions don’t necessarily mean people are against them, it simply means they are not higher priorities at this time. Goal 1, Policy 1f of the Edmonds Economic Development Plan states: ”Continue to partner with business and economic development organizations, and address feedback from the business community.” Significant Activities Since July, 2012 • July, August, September and October, 2012 – I continue attending monthly Edmonds Chamber of Commerce Economic Development Committee meetings, Downtown Edmonds Merchants Association (DEMA) meetings, and Downtown Business Improvement District committee meetings in order to share information about City issues and hear about Chamber and DEMA issues/concerns. II. BUSINESS EXPANSION, RETENTION, AND DIVERSIFICATION OF TAX BASE Goal 1, Policy 1c of the Edmonds Economic Development Plan states: “Encourage and expand business expansion and retention programs. Goal 3 calls for diversifying the tax base and increasing revenues to support local services.” Significant Activities Since July, 2012 • July, August, September and October, 2012 – I continue working with property and business owners in attempts to help find leasable space in addition to discussing potential leasing and redevelopment of buildings and land. The City is close to issuing a permit for a new Swedish Edmonds Oncology center. Goal 2, Policy 2i of the Edmonds Economic Development Plan states: “Create synergy for commercial businesses where possible, for example, by implementing a “retail core” area in the downtown.” Significant Activities Since July, 2012 • Amendments to Downtown BD Zones - The Planning Board discussed four potential amendments to the downtown BD zones during meetings on March 9, March 23, April 13, April 27, and June 8, 2011. During the June 8, 2011 Planning Board meeting, the Board voted 7-0 (with amendments) to forward a recommendation to Packet Page 139 of 266 10 approve the proposed amendments to the City Council. For additional information, see the Planning Board agenda webpage which contains a staff memorandum, draft code language, and June 8, 2011 Planning Board minutes. On July 26, 2011, the City Council held a public hearing on the four potential amendments to Downtown BD Zones and discussed these items further during City Council meetings held on August 9 and 23, 2011. One of the amendments included limiting office only uses in ground floor storefronts of the designated street frontages within the BD1 zone. On September 27, 2011, the City Council voted against this amendment. The City Council discussed this topic again on October 4, 2011. On February 7, 2012, the City Council discussed reconsideration of this issue and studying it further. • August 6, 2012 – The City Council voted to have the issue of limiting office only uses in ground floor storefronts of the designated street frontages within the BD1 zone to the August 14, 2012 Parks, Planning and Public Works Committee as a discussion item and to reschedule before the full council at the following City Council meeting. • August 14, 2012 – The City Council Planning, Parks and Public Works committee discussed the issue of limiting office only uses in ground floor storefronts of the designated street frontages within the BD1 zone. • August 21, 2011 – The Edmonds City Council voted to refer the issue of limiting office only uses to the Planning Board and Economic Development Commission, more specifically what kind of office only uses should be limited and any other proposals the EDC and Planning Board feel are appropriate. • October 17, 2012 – During the Edmonds Economic Development Commission meeting, the commission discussed the topic of limiting office only uses in ground floor storefronts of the designated street frontage. The Planning Board was invited to attend this meeting. This topic will be discussed further during the next EDC meeting which has been moved from November 21 to November 26, 2012 due to the Thanksgiving holiday. • See comments in Section III below about a proposed Downtown Business Improvement District. III. IMPROVING BUSINESS CLIMATE Goal 2, Policy 2e of the Edmonds Economic Development Plan states: “explore options such as Business Improvement Districts/Areas (special assessment districts) as a way to help shopping areas fund marketing and beautification in a sustainable fashion.” Significant Activities Since July, 2012 • July, August, September and October, 2012 – The Downtown Edmonds Business Improvement District Committee continues to meet and discuss the possible establishment a Downtown Edmonds Business Improvement District (BID). The BID Committee is nearing the point at which they can present this proposal to the City Council. Packet Page 140 of 266 11 Goal 2, Policy 2h of the Edmonds Economic Development Plan states: “Work to identify and “brand” distinct business districts, where there is a natural synergy, such as the Highway 99 International District, the Stevens Hospital Medical Corridor, and the 4th Avenue Arts Corridor.” Significant Activities Since July, 2012 • Highway 99 Enhancement Project: includes adding street lighting fixtures and artwork along the portion of Highway 99 passing through the International District. The main project components include the following: • Replace 6 cobra head light poles with decorative poles that have attached artist made pedestrian level light lanterns and banner signage – east side. • Replace 7 cobra head light poles with decorative poles that have attached standard pedestrian level lights and banner signage – east side both north and south of original 6. • Add at least 3 new pedestrian level lights on west side near an island at 76th Avenue. • Resurface island at 76th Avenue, add new ADA curb ramps, and install sculptural lantern artwork with solar panel. • Replace service cabinet. The goal is to create a visual gateway and identity for the Edmonds International District while enhancing the pedestrian experience and safety. • September 27, 2012 – A groundbreaking event took place on 76th Avenue near Highway 99. IV. TECHNOLOGY Goal 3, Policy 3b of the Edmonds Economic Development Plan states: “Leverage technology assets, such as existing fiber connections, to pursue new revenue streams.” Significant Activities Since July, 2012 • July, August, September and October, 2012 – The Economic Development and Community Services staff continue to meet monthly with the City’s Community Technology Advisory Committee (CTAC) regarding existing technology assets, e.g., fiber and communications equipment. Annual revenue generated by leasing access to the City’s fiber network is approximately $34,000. • Streaming and Chaptering of City Council meetings – City Staff and Carl Nelson, Chief Information Officer in particular, have been exploring options for streaming City Council meetings via the internet. Go to EdmondsWa.gov or the link http://www.edmondswa.gov/government/public-involvement/public-notices/meeting- agendas-and-materials.html, click on Meetings/Agenda, then September 18, 2012 City Council meeting to view an example. The link http://edmondswa.swagit.com/play/10312012-540/#6 will also connect you directly to the example. One significant benefit is the ability to assign a link that connects a user directly to an agenda item. This will allow a user to view the topic he/she is looking for Packet Page 141 of 266 12 instead of having to watch the Government Channel on TV and waiting for an agenda item, or purchasing a DVD of a City Council meeting. V. TOURISM Goal 3, Policy 3g of the Edmonds Economic Development Plan states: “Expand tourism efforts to take advantage of regional trends, such as nature tourism.” Significant Activities Since July, 2012 • September 16, 2012 – The City hosted its first half-marathon drawing approximately 300+ runners. • July, August, September and October, 2012 – I continue to serve on the Snohomish County Tourism Promotion Board and attend board meetings. Sports Tourism • October 29, 2012 – The Economic Development Commission Tourism Subgroup met to discuss tourism development. Items of Interest Energy Efficiency / Sustainability Significant Activities Since July, 2012 • July, August, September and October, 2012 – The City continues to update web pages related to sustainability City’s new website. The web pages are dedicated to the subject of energy within the Edmonds community, e.g., how is energy used in Edmonds? What can we do to conserve and reduce energy use... and reduce what we pay on a daily basis? EdmondsEnergy.org is the place to find information on: the City’s energy meter program, energy planning in Edmonds, energy saving ideas, community solar project, hybrid and electric vehicles, bring your own bag campaign, and how to calculate your energy use. Burlington Northern Santa Fe – Installation of Second Rail Line As a part of the Sound Transit’s Sound Move, Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) will be installing a second rail line alongside the existing rail line between the areas north of Downtown Edmonds and south of Marina Beach Park. Regarding a timeline related to the installation of a BNSF second rail line, I have been trying to obtain a definitive date from BNSF as to when installation of the second rail line; BNSF has not provided a commencement date. Significant Activities Since July, 2012 • July, August, September and October, 2012 – No new information. Packet Page 142 of 266 13 Grants I recently wrote an article which appeared in a few on-line websites about grant programs, many of which typically have more applicants than funds available making competition between organizations high. As a result, many strong applications fail to receive funding. This being said, over the past few years, City of Edmonds staff have been quite successful in securing both state and federal grants to help fund a variety of projects throughout the City. I asked David Rohde, Geographic Information System Analyst, to prepare a map depicting locations tied to projects that recently have been or are being funded either fully, or in part, by grants; locations of the following projects can be found on the attached map: 1. Historic Preservation - Preserve America Grant in the amount of $24,000 for a matching grant to implement artist made interpretive signage to identify sites of historic interest downtown, and another $7,500 State Certified Local Government Grant for a city-wide historic sites survey. 2. 228th and HWY 99 (228th St. SW Corridor Improvements) - $536,000 Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Surface Transportation Program Grant for design and right of way acquisition to improve access and safety at the intersection. $4,233,000 FHWA Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) Grant for additional design and ROW acquisition costs, as well as complete construction. 3. Main Street - $725,000 FHWA Enhancements Grant and $500,000 State appropriation for design and reconstruction of Main Street (between 5th and 6th Streets). 4. Five Corners – $2,399,000 FHWA Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) Grant for design of a roundabout, Right of Way acquisition, and construction. 5. Highway 99 (Phase 1 and 2) - $289,000 FHWA Enhancements Grant for International District Illumination Enhancements along Hwy. 99 from 230th St. SW to 220th St. SW (This is an additional allocation to the original $373,000 grant for a total of $662,000). 6. Highway 99 (Phase 3) - $685,000 FHWA Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) Grant for lighting improvements along Hwy. 99 from 220th St. SW to 212th St. SW. 7. 5th Ave. South Overlay – $551,000 FHWA Preservation Grant for design and construction of an overlay 5th Ave. S from Elm Way to Walnut St., as well as upgrades to all non-ADA compliant curb ramps along stretch. 8. 76th Ave W/212th Street – $940,397 CMAQ grant for design and right of way acquisition to improve the intersection and reduce congestion. 9. Shell Valley – $100,000 Department of Ecology Stormwater Grant and $250,000 Washington State appropriation for Shell Valley Emergency Access Road. 10. Stormwater Improvements - $128,115 Department of Ecology Stormwater Grant for programmatic stormwater improvements and a $259,000 Ecology Stormwater Grant for a new decant facility at the Public Works shops complex. Packet Page 143 of 266 14 11. 84th Avenue - Washington Traffic Safety Commission Grant in the amount of $6,250 for installation of a radar reader board which depicts the speed of cars. 12. 226th Street Walkway - $185,000 FHWA Safety Grant for design and construction of 300 feet of new sidewalk and ADA curb ramps. 13. Interurban Trail - $577,000 Washington State Wildlife and Recreation Coalition Grant and $750,000 CMAQ Grant to construct the final segment of the Interurban Trail. 14. City Park Enhancement - $500,000 Recreation Conservation Office Grant to construct improvements to City Park 15. Efficiency Conservation - $160,000 Energy Efficiency Conservation Block Grant to purchase equipment and implement programs that conserve energy. 16. Citywide Safety Improvements - $300,000 FHWA Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) Grant for upgrades to several traffic signal cabinets and pedestrian countdown display. 17. Commute Trip Reduction program - $2,630 Community Transit grant for an incentives program to City employees using alternative modes of transportation to driving alone as their commute to work. There is much work that goes into researching and applying for grants as well as administering them once awarded. This is where City of Edmonds staff excel and the reason the City has been so successful in competing for grants. As projects and programs are identified, and as long as funding opportunities exist, staff will diligently work to secure grants to pay for projects and lessen the cost to the City of Edmonds. One reason I asked for the map is to illustrate that City administration is working to address infrastructure needs and fund projects throughout the City. Packet Page 144 of 266    AM-5220     5.              City Council Meeting Meeting Date:11/05/2012 Time:5 Minutes   Submitted For:Dave Earling Submitted By:Carolyn LaFave Department:Mayor's Office Review Committee: Committee Action:  Type: Information  Information Subject Title Proclamation in honor of Bill Brayer, founder of MS Helping Hands. Recommendation Previous Council Action Narrative Long-time Edmonds resident Bill Brayer retired in October from his position as President/CEO of MS Helping Hands and Director of the Donor Closet. Mr. Brayer founded MS Helping Hands and the Donor Closet here in Edmonds in 1998; their mission is “To Create and provide services, resources and information that will enhance the quality of life for people with Multiple Sclerosis”. The Donor Closet recycles used and new durable medical and mobility equipment for suggested minimum donations and provides financial assistance to people with Multiple Sclerosis who reside in the State of Washington. Bill has committed the last 14 years of his life to assisting those with MS. Bill himself was diagnosed with MS in 1987. He and his wife Carol were MS Support Group co-facilitators for over 23 years. Bill has been highly recognized and has received many awards for his outstanding work with MS Helping Hands and the Donor Closet over the past 14 years. Mayor Earling would like to honor Mr. Brayer for his years of commitment and dedication to the MS cause. Attachments Bill_Brayer_Proclamation Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase 10/30/2012 11:28 AM Mayor Dave Earling 10/30/2012 01:17 PM Form Started By: Carolyn LaFave Started On: 10/30/2012 09:24 AM Final Approval Date: 10/30/2012  Packet Page 145 of 266 Packet Page 146 of 266    AM-5236     6.              City Council Meeting Meeting Date:11/05/2012 Time:5 Minutes   Submitted For:Carl Nelson Submitted By:Carl Nelson Department:Other Review Committee: Finance Committee Action: Recommend Review by Full Council Type: Action  Information Subject Title Video Annotation of Agendas Recommendation City Administration request the City Council express support for continuing to move forward with researching and providing cost estimates related to providing Video Annotation to City Council Agendas, options for recording meetings, improving the quality of recordings and images being aired on the City's government channel, and options related to creating an automated broadcast station. Previous Council Action Numerous requests to provide Web access to Videos of Council and other meetings. Narrative The City has been using the Agenda Quick software by Destiny Software for over 7 years to capture, circulate for approval, and publish agendas regarding City activities.  The Mayor, Council, and City Staff have requested that IT staff look at adding video links to City Council agenda items on the City's website. Destiny software has successfully worked with two companies, Granicus and Swagit, to integrate video annotation with their system. Destiny worked with Swagit to create a demonstration using the September 18, 2012 City Council meeting.  By clicking on the following link, you can view and test an example.                                http://edmondswa.swagit.com/play/10312012-540/#26 The video is easily displayed on mobile systems such as iPhones, iPads, other smartphones, tablets and standard desktop systems. One significant benefit of this proposal is the ability to assign a link that connects a citizen directly to an agenda item. This will allow a user to view the topic he/she is looking for instead of having to watch the Government Channel on TV and waiting for an agenda item, or purchasing a DVD of a City Council meeting. City staff is also researching options and costs for the following: Packet Page 147 of 266 Replacing existing "Standard Definition cameras to "High Definition" cameras to record meetings and presentations that result in more readable text/images on the City's government channel. Updating how the City produces the static/rotating slide show on the City's government channel. By using the video captured, by either Granicus or Swagit, and replacing the current "Magic Box" software slide show (maintained by the City Clerk and Mayor's assistant) with an "Automated Broadcast Station", departments can be given public service announcement pages they can turn on or off and update from a web interface. Some examples would be Arts and Parks programs, Public Works Project Progress reports, and items of Public Interest, such as ribbon cuttings and the videos from them. Attached are diagrams for the current system and a possible future system. Attachments Current System Possible System Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Community Services/Economic Dev.Stephen Clifton 11/02/2012 09:08 AM Finance Shawn Hunstock 11/02/2012 10:36 AM Mayor Dave Earling 11/02/2012 10:57 AM City Clerk Sandy Chase 11/02/2012 10:59 AM Mayor Dave Earling 11/02/2012 11:04 AM Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase 11/02/2012 11:13 AM Form Started By: Carl Nelson Started On: 11/01/2012 07:54 PM Final Approval Date: 11/02/2012  Packet Page 148 of 266 DVD writer council admin @ meetings hard drive recorder Video Cameras DVD(s) produced next day DVD-1 reader VHS reader DVD-2 reader & others LEIGH-TRONIX SWITCHER DVDs for Public Record Magic Box Slide shows (City Clerk & Mayor’s Assistant) Current System Council Chambers Channel 21 Channel 39 Packet Page 149 of 266 Channel 21 Channel 39 Remote Control Index & Annotate Agenda QUICK council admin @ meetings encoderVideo Cameras Agendas with Video on City Web Internet PHASE 1 Automated Broadcast City Clerk, Mayor’s Assistant, Other Pages/ Depts with their own pages PHASE 2 internet fiber Possible System Other Venues (ECA, Bracket Room, Wade James) Council Chambers PHASE 3 Portable Studio in a Single Case (capture) PHASE 4 internet fiber Council Chambers Ci t y f i b e r c o n n e c t i o n Video Cameras Improved Council Chambers VideoAnnotation &Automated Broadcast see demo on: Sept 18th 2012 Agenda Packet Page 150 of 266    AM-5234     7.              City Council Meeting Meeting Date:11/05/2012 Time:10 Minutes   Submitted By:Gina Janicek Department:Planning Review Committee: Committee Action:  Type: Action  Information Subject Title Closed record review of a "Type IV-B" rezone application initiated by owners Sid Odgers and Ken Darwin to change the zoning designation for their properties located at 8609/8611/8615 244th Street SW from Single Family Residential "RS-8" to Multiple Residential "RM-2.4."  The Comprehensive Plan designation for these properties was amended last year from "Single Family Urban 1" to "Multi Family Medium Density." Recommendation Approve the requested change in zoning and direct the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance for final Council action. Previous Council Action None regarding this zoning request.  However, in 2011 the Council reviewed and approved a proposal to change the Comprehensive Plan designation for these three properties from "Single Family Urban 1" to "Multi Family - Medium Density" (AMD20110001). Narrative A rezone is a "Type IV-B" application where staff makes a recommendation to the Planning Board and the Planning Board forwards a recommendation to the City Council for a final decision.  The site is rectangular and comprised of three parcels totaling approximately 39,000 square feet.  Properties to the east are zoned "RM-1.5" and properties to the north and west are zoned "RS-8."    The adjacent property to the east contains a total of 18 multi-family dwelling units.  The current zoning designation would allow one single family home per lot.  The proposed "RM-2.4" designation would allow a density of 16 dwelling units max (keeping in mind that avariables such as parking requirements, height limits, landscaping, and building setbacks further reduce the number of dwelling units feasible for a given project).  The other compatible designation, "RM-3," would allow a density of 13 dwelling units max. Please refer especially to the following documents for additional information: EXHIBIT-1, PAGE-3 illustrates the differences between the existing zoning ("RS-8") and the two compatible RM zoning designations ("RM-2.4" and "RM-3"). EXHIBIT-1, ATTACHMENT-A indicates the proposed location and neighborhood zoning.  Note the other "RM-2.4" zones in the vicinity which form a transition between intense commercial zoning to single family residential zoning. Packet Page 151 of 266 EXHIBIT-1, ATTACHMENT-C is the Applicant's criteria statement explaining the proposal and why they are seeking a rezone. EXHIBIT-1, ATTACHMENT-D is ECDC Chapter 20.40 (Rezones). EXHIBIT-1, ATTACHMENT-E is ECDC Chapter 16.30 (RM - Multiple Residential). EXHIBIT-1, ATTACHMENT-F is the SEPA determination and Environmental Checklist.  No comments or appeals were received. EXHIBIT-2 is the Planning Board meeting minutes from the October 10th public hearing.  To date, no public comments have been received. Planning staff recommended approval of the proposed rezone to the Planning Board. The Planning Board voted unanimously to recommend approval of the proposed rezone to the City Council. Attachments EXHIBIT - 1: Staff Report & Attachments EXHIBIT - 2: Planning Board Minutes Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Planning Department Rob Chave 11/01/2012 03:27 PM City Clerk Sandy Chase 11/01/2012 03:51 PM Mayor Sandy Chase 11/01/2012 04:44 PM Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase 11/01/2012 04:46 PM Form Started By: Gina Janicek Started On: 11/01/2012 02:34 PM Final Approval Date: 11/01/2012  Packet Page 152 of 266 Page 1 of 6 CITY OF EDMONDS 121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020 Phone: 425.771.0220 • Fax: 425.771.0221 • Web: www.EdmondsWA.gov DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT • PLANNING DIVISION PLANNING DIVISION ADVISORY REPORT FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS To: City of Edmonds Planning Board From: __________________________ Gina Janicek, Associate Planner File: PLN20120029 A Type IV-B rezone application initiated by owners Sid Odgers & Ken Darwin to change the zoning designation for their properties located at 8609/8611/8615 244th Street SW from Single Family Residential “RS-8” to Multiple Residential “RM-2.4.” The Comprehensive Plan designation for these properties was amended last year from “Single Family Urban 1” to “Multi Family Medium Density.” Public Hearing: October 10, 2012 at 7:00 PM Edmonds City Council Chambers / Public Safety Complex 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020 EXHIBIT - 1 Packet Page 153 of 266 Odgers/Darwin Rezone: File PLN20120029 Page 2 of 6 CITY OF EDMONDS 121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020 Phone: 425.771.0220 • Fax: 425.771.0221 • Web: www.ci.edmonds.wa.us DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT • PLANNING DIVISION I. INTRODUCTION A. Applicant: Property owners Sid Odgers & Ken Darwin (Attachment B). B. Site Location: Three parcels located at 8609, 8611, and 8615 244th Street SW (Attachment A). C. Request: To change the zoning designation from Single Family Residential “RS- 8” to Multiple Residential “RM-2.4” to correspond with the Comprehensive Plan designation that was amended last year. D. Review Process: A rezone is a “Type IV-B” application. Staff makes a recommendation to the Planning Board. The Planning Board conducts a public hearing and forwards a recommendation to the City Council for a final decision. The application was submitted on June 25, 2012 and determined to be “complete” on July 23. A “Notice of Application” was issued (mailed/posted/published) on August 6 and a combined “Notice of Public Hearing” and “SEPA Determination” was issued (mailed/posted/published) on September 10 (Attachment G). This application has demonstrated compliance with the requirements of ECDC Chapter 20.02 (Development Project Permit Applications). E. Major Issues: Compliance with ECDC Chapter 20.40 (Rezones). II. FINDINGS OF FACT A. Site Description: This is a rectangular site containing three parcels comprised of a total of approximately 0.88 acres or 39,000 square feet (130’ x 300’). The site is developed with single family homes. Currently, the zoning designation is Single Family Residential “RS-8.” B. Neighboring Development & Zoning: The neighborhood is mainly developed with single family homes, with a more intense zoning and development pattern east of this site ranging from multi-family to commercial as you travel east along 244th towards Highway 99. The properties to the east are zoned RM-1.5 (Attachment A) while the properties to the north and west are zoned RS-8. The neighborhood is conveniently located near Highway 99, Interstate 5, with public transit available along 244th Street SW and a Park & Ride nearby at the Aurora Village shopping center. The adjacent “RM-1.5” zoned property to the east is comprised of three buildings, each with six units with a total of 18 dwelling units. They were constructed in 1977 and the whole neighborhood was annexed into the City of Edmonds in 1995. C. State Environmental Policy Act: A Determination of Nonsignificance was issued on September 10, 2012 for the proposed change in zoning. No appeals were received. Therefore, the SEPA requirements have been satisfied for the proposed change in zoning (Attachment F). D. Technical Review Committee: This application was reviewed by the City of Edmonds Public Works Department, Engineering Division, and Fire District One. No comments or conditions were noted by the above reviewing bodies. E. Public Comments: To date, no public comments have been received. EXHIBIT - 1 Packet Page 154 of 266 Odgers/Darwin Rezone: File PLN20120029 Page 3 of 6 CITY OF EDMONDS 121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020 Phone: 425.771.0220 • Fax: 425.771.0221 • Web: www.ci.edmonds.wa.us DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT • PLANNING DIVISION F. Edmonds Community Development Code Compliance: The Planning Board shall review the proposed rezone and the following factors shall be considered pursuant to ECDC Chapter 20.40 (Rezones): A. Comprehensive Plan. Whether the proposal is consistent with the comprehensive plan; The Comprehensive Plan designation was changed from “Single Family Urban 1” to “Multi Family – Medium Density” last year under file AMD20110001. The compatible zoning classifications for the Multi Family – Medium Density plan map designation are “RM-2.4” and “RM-3.0” – both of these zoning classifications would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. There are several Comprehensive Plan goals and policies for the Multi Family designation (p. 72-73 of the 2011 Comprehensive Plan), most of which are policies of how new multi-family buildings should look in relation to neighboring single family developments. A discussion on building design would be premature at this point, but the following policy is still applicable: C.2.a.i. RM uses should be located near arterial or collector streets. The proposal is located along 244th, which is considered a “minor arterial.” B. Zoning Ordinance. Whether the proposal is consistent with the purposes of the zoning ordinance, and whether the proposal is consistent with the purposes of the proposed zone district; The current zoning designation allows one single family home per lot. The proposed new zoning designation of “RM-2.4” would allow a density of 16 dwelling units, maximum 1 (39,000 square feet / 2400 lot area per dwelling unit). The “RM-3” zoning designation would allow a density of 13 dwelling units, maximum. The change from single family “RS-8” to multiple residential “RM- 2.4” would mean a potential increase in dwelling units. Below is a comparison of site development standards between the existing single family zone and the applicable compatible zoning classifications for the Multi Family Medium Density plan map designation. Zone Street Setback Side Setback Rear Setback Height Lot Coverage Parking RS-8 25’ 7.5’ 15’ 25’ 35% 2 RM-2.4 15’ 10’ 15’ 25’ 45% 2 RM-3 15’ 15’ 15’ 25’ 45% 2 C. Surrounding Area. The relationship of the proposed zoning change to the existing land uses and zoning of surrounding or nearby property; 1 The maximum density isn’t a realistic figure, because other variables such as parking requirements, height limits, landscaping, and building setbacks further reduce the number of dwelling units feasible for a given project. EXHIBIT - 1 Packet Page 155 of 266 Odgers/Darwin Rezone: File PLN20120029 Page 4 of 6 CITY OF EDMONDS 121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020 Phone: 425.771.0220 • Fax: 425.771.0221 • Web: www.ci.edmonds.wa.us DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT • PLANNING DIVISION Uses in the subject area are single family. The surrounding area contains a mix of uses, including multi-family and single-family. The approval of a medium density plan map designation meant that the applicable zoning classifications could either be “RM-2.4” or “RM-3.” When the zoning map was analyzed (Attachment A) it was discovered that there are a few areas nearby that share similar characteristics with this neighborhood that have a “RM-2.4” zoning classification sandwiched between a more intense zone and the more restrictive “RS-8” zone. See attached zoning map for these areas. The proposed “RM-2.4” zoning classification would make an appropriate transition between the other zones at this location. D. Changes. Whether there has been sufficient change in the character of the immediate or surrounding area or in city policy to justify the rezone; The Comprehensive Plan designation for these properties was changed in 2011. At that time, a potential rezone to “RM-2.4” was discussed at length. The determination was made to designate these properties medium density instead of high density, which could have allowed for a “RM-1.5” rezone application (resulting in a maximum density of 26 dwelling units) but instead only allows for a rezone application of either “RM-2.4” or “RM-3.” E. Suitability. Whether the property is economically and physically suitable for the uses allowed under the existing zoning, and under the proposed zoning. One factor could be the length of time the property has remained undeveloped compared to the surrounding area, and parcels elsewhere with the same zoning; The neighborhood comprising the subject properties has long been developed with either single family homes or apartments. The site is located on a “minor arterial” so the traffic impact to the neighborhood would be minimal. If zoned for multi-family use, a future development application would be required to submit a traffic impact analysis. Also, a SEPA review would need to be conducted for any proposal with more than 4 dwelling units. A thorough design review by the Architectural Design Board would also be required. Rest assured, there are many future reviews required for a proposed redevelopment of this site. Also, at 39,000 square feet, the applicants could apply for a subdivision under the current RS-8 zoning classification which could yield a maximum of 4 dwelling units, which indicates that the site is currently underutilized. See also II.B for a discussion on how this site is near transit opportunities and the urban hub “Aurora Village.” F. Value. The relative gain to the public health, safety and welfare compared to the potential increase or decrease in value to the property owners. There is a potential increase in value to the applicants, because if the rezone is approved, then the property could eventually be developed with multiple dwelling units, whereas now the zoning constraints require only one house per lot. Also, all of the RM-zones would allow an applicant to propose an office use (through the conditional use permit process, which requires a public hearing before the Hearing Examiner). Because the site access for the nearest properties to the west is 130’ from this site’s closest property lines, there seems to be less of an impact based on how the neighboring lots are currently developed. The greatest impact EXHIBIT - 1 Packet Page 156 of 266 Odgers/Darwin Rezone: File PLN20120029 Page 5 of 6 CITY OF EDMONDS 121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020 Phone: 425.771.0220 • Fax: 425.771.0221 • Web: www.ci.edmonds.wa.us DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT • PLANNING DIVISION of a future development would be for the single family homes to the west, however, no questions or comments about this application have been received to date. Lastly, the tax base would be increased by allowing more dwelling units (RM) or a potential office use (through an approved CUP). To clarify, the above items A through F are factors for consideration only and do not represent code requirements. Through the discussion of these items we can better understand a proposal’s impact to the City of Edmonds and whether or not it should be approved. III. CONCLUSIONS A. The proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, which was amended last year in order to increase the development potential for these lots. B. The proposal is consistent with proposed zoning district, in that single family homes are still permitted primary uses in multiple residential zones. C. The proposal is appropriate given the surrounding area, because it would act as a transition between the single family lots to the west and the high density lots to the east. D. There has been sufficient change in the City’s policy to justify the rezone (AMD20110001). E. The neighborhood appears to be both economically and physically suitable for the proposed zoning designation, as the property is flat and is located on an arterial. F. There does not appear to be a gain in public health/safety/welfare compared to the potential increase in value to the property owners. There would be an increase in the tax base if we allowed a potential for more dwelling units, which would benefit the City as well as the property owner. G. After taking into consideration the above rezone factors, the rezone should be approved. IV. RECOMMENDATION Based on the findings of facts, analysis, conclusions, and attachments to this report, staff recommends that the Planning Board make a recommendation to the City Council to APPROVE the requested rezone from Single Family Residential “RS-8” to Multiple Residential “RM-2.4.” EXHIBIT - 1 Packet Page 157 of 266 Odgers/Darwin Rezone: File PLN20120029 Page 6 of 6 CITY OF EDMONDS 121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020 Phone: 425.771.0220 • Fax: 425.771.0221 • Web: www.ci.edmonds.wa.us DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT • PLANNING DIVISION V. ATTACHMENTS A. Zoning map. B. Land use application form. C. Criteria statement. D. ECDC Chapter 20.40 (Rezones). E. ECDC Chapter 16.30 (RM – Multiple Residential). F. SEPA DNS and Environmental Checklist. G. Public Notices. VI. PARTIES OF RECORD A. Sid Odgers – 8615 244th Street SW, Edmonds WA 98026. B. Ken Darwin – 8611 244th Street SW, Edmonds WA 98026. C. City of Edmonds Planning Division. EXHIBIT - 1 Packet Page 158 of 266 E D M O N D S W A Y 244TH ST SW/LAKE BALLINGER WAY 238TH ST SW 240TH ST SW 234TH ST SW 233rd St SW MAPLE LANE HOLLY LANE MADRONA LANE 8 0 87 T H A V E W 7 9 TH P L W 235th ST SW 233RD PL SW 8 0 T H W Y 8 9 T H A V E W 8 0 T H L N 238TH ST SW H W Y 9 9 H W Y 9 9 8 1 S T P L W 8 8 T H P L W 231ST PL SW 8 4 T H A V E W 240TH ST SW 8 9 T H P L W 8 9 T H P L W 9 0 A V E W 8 7 T H P L W 78TH P L W 7 8 T H P L W 8 1 244TH ST SW/205TH ST NW 236TH ST SW 7 9 T H A V E W 232ND PL SW 242ND ST SW 8 6 T H A V E W 8 9 T H P L W 8 2 N D P L W 8 0 T H P L W 8 6 T H A V E W 7 8 T H A V E W 8 2 N D 79 T H A V E W 8 0 T H A V E W N W 7 8 T H P L W 8 5 t h A v e W ]0 300 600 900150 Feet Unincorporated Snohomish CountySite City of Edmonds Zoning Map Odgers / Darwin Rezone Application (RS‐8  to RM‐2.4) File PLN20120029 8609/8611/8615 244th Street SW RS‐8 Zone RM‐2.4 Zone RM‐1.5 Zone CG Zone RM‐3 Zone ATTACHMENT - AEXHIBIT - 1 Packet Page 159 of 266 ATTACHMENT - BEXHIBIT - 1Packet Page 160 of 266 A T T A C H M E N T - C E X H I B I T - 1 P a c k e t P a g e 1 6 1 o f 2 6 6 A T T A C H M E N T - C E X H I B I T - 1 P a c k e t P a g e 1 6 2 o f 2 6 6 Chapter 20.40 REZONES Sections: 20.40.000 Scope. 20.40.010 Review. 20.40.020 Contract rezones. 20.40.030 Notice. 20.40.000 Scope. The requirements of this chapter apply to proposed rezones, which are changes in the zone districts by amendment to the official zoning map that apply to parcels of property. 20.40.010 Review. The planning advisory board shall review the proposed rezone as provided in ECDC 20.100.020. At least the following factors shall be considered in reviewing a proposed rezone: A. Comprehensive Plan. Whether the proposal is consistent with the comprehensive plan; B. Zoning Ordinance. Whether the proposal is consistent with the purposes of the zoning ordinance, and whether the proposal is consistent with the purposes of the proposed zone district; C. Surrounding Area. The relationship of the proposed zoning change to the existing land uses and zoning of surrounding or nearby property; D. Changes. Whether there has been sufficient change in the character of the immediate or surrounding area or in city policy to justify the rezone; E. Suitability. Whether the property is economically and physically suitable for the uses allowed under the existing zoning, and under the proposed zoning. One factor could be the length of time the property has remained undeveloped compared to the surrounding area, and parcels elsewhere with the same zoning; F. Value. The relative gain to the public health, safety and welfare compared to the potential increase or decrease in value to the property owners. 20.40.020 Contract rezones. An applicant may propose conditions to be imposed by contract on a rezone. If the applicant wishes to take this approach, the proposed conditions shall be reviewed at all public hearings on the rezone. 20.40.030 Notice. Notice of rezone hearings (and text change) before the planning board shall be the same as set forth for proposed amendments to the comprehensive plan in ECDC 20.00.020 for newspaper publication, and pursuant to ECDC 20.03.003. [Ord. 3817 § 11, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 56, 2009; Ord. 3112 § 14, 1996]. This page of the Edmonds City Code is current through Ord. 3868, passed December 20, 2011. Disclaimer: The City Clerk's Office has the official version of the Edmonds City. Users should contact the City Clerk's Office for ordinances passed subsequent to the ordinance cited above. City Website: http://www.ci.edmonds.wa.us (http://www.ci.edmonds.wa.us) City Telephone: (425) 771-0245 Code Publishing Company (http://www.codepublishing.com/) Chapter 20.40 REZONES 10/4/2012http://www.mrsc.org/mc/edmonds/edmonds20/edmonds2040.html ATTACHMENT - DEXHIBIT - 1 Packet Page 163 of 266 Chapter 16.30 RM – MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL Sections: 16.30.000 Purposes. 16.30.010 Uses. 16.30.020 Subdistricts. 16.30.030 Site development standards. 16.30.040 Site development exceptions. 16.30.000 Purposes. The RM zone has the following specific purposes in addition to the general purposes for residential zones of ECDC 16.00.010 and 16.10.000: A. To reserve and regulate areas for a variety of housing types, and a range of greater densities than are available in the single-family residential zone, while still maintaining a residential environment; B. To provide for those additional uses which complement and are compatible with multiple residential uses. [Ord. 3627 § 1, 2007]. 16.30.010 Uses. A. Permitted Primary Uses. 1. Multiple dwellings; 2. Single-family dwellings; 3. Retirement homes; 4. Group homes for the disabled, foster family homes and state-licensed group homes for foster care of minors; provided, however, that halfway houses and group homes licensed for juvenile offenders are not permitted uses in a residential zone of the city; 5. Boarding houses and rooming houses; 6. Housing for low income elderly in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 20.25 ECDC; 7. Churches, subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.020; 8. Primary schools subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.050(G) through (R); 9. Local public facilities that are planned, designated, and sited in the capital improvement plan, subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.050; 10. Neighborhood parks, natural open spaces, and community parks with an adopted master plan subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.070. B. Permitted Secondary Uses. 1. All permitted secondary uses in the RS zone, if in conjunction with a single-family dwelling; 2. Home occupations, subject to the requirements of Chapter 20.20 ECDC; 3. The keeping of one domestic animal per dwelling unit in multiple-family buildings; Chapter 16.30 RM – MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL 10/4/2012http://www.mrsc.org/mc/edmonds/edmonds16/edmonds1630.html ATTACHMENT - EEXHIBIT - 1 Packet Page 164 of 266 4. The following accessory uses: a. Private parking, b. Private swimming pools and other private recreational facilities, c. Private greenhouses covering no more than five percent of the site in total; 5. Commuter parking lots containing less than 10 designated parking spaces in conjunction with a church, school, or local public facility allowed or conditionally permitted in this zone. Any additionally designated parking spaces that increase the total number of spaces in a commuter parking lot to 10 or more shall subject the entire commuter parking lot to a conditional use permit as specified in subsection (D)(2) of this section, including commuter parking lots that are located upon more than one lot as specified in ECDC 21.15.075. C. Primary Uses Requiring a Conditional Use Permit. 1. Offices, other than local public facilities; 2. Local public facilities not planned, designated, or sited in the capital improvement plan, subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.050; 3. Day-care centers; 4. Hospitals, convalescent homes, rest homes, sanitariums; 5. Museums, art galleries, zoos, and aquariums of primarily local concern that do not meet the criteria for regional public facilities as defined in ECDC 21.85.033; 6. Counseling centers and residential treatment facilities for current alcoholics and drug abusers; 7. High schools, subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.050(G) through (R); 8. Regional parks and community parks without a master plan subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.070. D. Secondary Uses Requiring a Conditional Use Permit. 1. Day-care facilities of any size to be operated in a separate, nonresidential portion of a multifamily residential dwelling structure operated primarily for the benefit of the residents thereof; 2. Commuter parking lots with 10 or more designated parking spaces in conjunction with a church, school, or local public facility allowed or conditionally permitted in this zone. [Ord. 3627 § 1, 2007]. 16.30.020 Subdistricts. There are established four subdistricts of the RM zone, in order to provide site development standards for areas which differ in topography, location, existing development and other factors. These subdistricts shall be known as the RM-1.5, RM – Edmonds Way (RM-EW), RM-2.4, and RM -3 zones. [Ord. 3627 § 1, 2007]. 16.30.030 Site development standards. A. Table. Chapter 16.30 RM – MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL 10/4/2012http://www.mrsc.org/mc/edmonds/edmonds16/edmonds1630.html ATTACHMENT - EEXHIBIT - 1 Packet Page 165 of 266 Subdistrict Minimum Lot Area Per Dwelling Unit4 (Sq. Ft.) Minimum Street Setback2 Minimum Side Setback2 Minimum Rear Setback Maximum Height Maximum Coverage Minimum3 Parking (Spaces Per Unit) RM-1.5 1,500 15′ 10′ 15′25′1,5 45% 2 RM-EW 1,500 15′10′15′25′5,6,7 45% 2 RM-2.4 2,400 15′ 10′15′25′1,5 45% 2 RM-3 3,000 15′15′15′25′1,5 45% 2 1 Roof only may extend five feet above the stated height limit if all portions of the roof above the stated height limit have a slope of four inches in 12 inches or greater. 2 RS setbacks may be used for single-family homes on lots of 10,000 square feet or less in all RM zones. 3 See Chapter 17.50 ECDC for specific parking requirements. 4 See definition of townhouse. 5 Maximum height for accessory structures of 15 feet. 6 The maximum base height of any building fronting on Edmonds Way may be increased to 30 feet if the following apply to the site and proposed development: (a) At least 50 percent of the parking for the subject building shall be enclosed inside a building or buildings; (b) The subject property is at least five feet lower at its lowest elevation than any adjacent residentially (R) zoned property measured at its lowest elevation; and (c) The proposed development integrates low impact development techniques where reasonably feasible. For the purposes of this subsection, “low impact development techniques” shall include, but shall not be limited to, the following: the use of bioswales, green roofs, and grasscrete. “Reasonably feasible” shall be determined based upon the physical characteristics of the property and its suitability for the technique; cost alone shall not make the use of the impact development unreasonable or unfeasible. 7 In addition to any height bonus under note 6, the building may extend up to an additional five feet if all portions of the roof above the height limit (after adding the height bonus under note 6) provide a minimum 15 percent slope or pitch. B. Signs and Design Review. See Chapters 20.10 and 20.60 ECDC for regulations. C. Location of Parking. No parking spaces may be located within the street setback. D. Landscaping. In addition to the landscaping requirements set forth in Chapter 20.13 ECDC, any development in the RM – Edmonds Way zone shall retain at least 35 percent of the existing Chapter 16.30 RM – MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL 10/4/2012http://www.mrsc.org/mc/edmonds/edmonds16/edmonds1630.html ATTACHMENT - EEXHIBIT - 1 Packet Page 166 of 266 healthy significant trees within the side and rear setbacks of the development site. The applicant shall retain an arborist to determine the health of all significant trees within the side and rear setbacks. For the purposes of this section, “significant tree” shall be defined as any tree with a caliper greater than six inches measured at four feet above grade. Where it is not reasonably feasible for the applicant to retain 35 percent of the existing healthy significant trees within the side and rear setbacks, the applicant may replace any significant trees below the 35 percent threshold as follows: each significant tree removed that reduces the percentage of retained significant healthy trees below 35 percent shall be replaced with three new trees, each of no less than three- inch caliper measured at four feet above grade. [Ord. 3627 § 1, 2007]. 16.30.040 Site development exceptions. A. Housing for the Elderly. Housing projects for the elderly are eligible for special parking and density provisions. See Chapter 20.25 ECDC. B. Satellite Television Antenna. Satellite television antennas shall be regulated as set forth in ECDC 16.20.050 and reviewed by the architectural design board. C. Setback Encroachments. 1. Eaves and chimneys may project into a required setback not more than 30 inches. 2. Except as authorized by subsection (C)(3) of this section, uncovered and unenclosed porches, steps, patios, and decks may project into a required setback not more than one- third of the required setback, or four feet, whichever is less; provided, that they are no more than 30 inches above the ground level at any point. 3. In the RM – Edmonds Way zone, uncovered and unenclosed porches, steps, patios, and decks may occupy up to one-half of the required street setback area along Edmonds Way; provided, that these structures or uses are located no more than 20 feet above the ground level at any point. D. Corner Lots. Corner lots shall have no rear setback; all setbacks other than street setbacks shall be side setbacks. [Ord. 3652 § 1, 2007; Ord. 3627 § 1, 2007]. This page of the Edmonds City Code is current through Ord. 3868, passed December 20, 2011. Disclaimer: The City Clerk's Office has the official version of the Edmonds City. Users should contact the City Clerk's Office for ordinances passed subsequent to the ordinance cited above. City Website: http://www.ci.edmonds.wa.us (http://www.ci.edmonds.wa.us) City Telephone: (425) 771-0245 Code Publishing Company (http://www.codepublishing.com/) Chapter 16.30 RM – MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL 10/4/2012http://www.mrsc.org/mc/edmonds/edmonds16/edmonds1630.html ATTACHMENT - EEXHIBIT - 1 Packet Page 167 of 266 A T T A C H M E N T - F E X H I B I T - 1 P a c k e t P a g e 1 6 8 o f 2 6 6 A T T A C H M E N T - F E X H I B I T - 1 P a c k e t P a g e 1 6 9 o f 2 6 6 A T T A C H M E N T - F E X H I B I T - 1 P a c k e t P a g e 1 7 0 o f 2 6 6 A T T A C H M E N T - F E X H I B I T - 1 P a c k e t P a g e 1 7 1 o f 2 6 6 A T T A C H M E N T - F E X H I B I T - 1 P a c k e t P a g e 1 7 2 o f 2 6 6 A T T A C H M E N T - F E X H I B I T - 1 P a c k e t P a g e 1 7 3 o f 2 6 6 A T T A C H M E N T - F E X H I B I T - 1 P a c k e t P a g e 1 7 4 o f 2 6 6 A T T A C H M E N T - F E X H I B I T - 1 P a c k e t P a g e 1 7 5 o f 2 6 6 A T T A C H M E N T - F E X H I B I T - 1 P a c k e t P a g e 1 7 6 o f 2 6 6 A T T A C H M E N T - F E X H I B I T - 1 P a c k e t P a g e 1 7 7 o f 2 6 6 A T T A C H M E N T - F E X H I B I T - 1 P a c k e t P a g e 1 7 8 o f 2 6 6 A T T A C H M E N T - F E X H I B I T - 1 P a c k e t P a g e 1 7 9 o f 2 6 6 A T T A C H M E N T - F E X H I B I T - 1 P a c k e t P a g e 1 8 0 o f 2 6 6 A T T A C H M E N T - F E X H I B I T - 1 P a c k e t P a g e 1 8 1 o f 2 6 6 A T T A C H M E N T - F E X H I B I T - 1 P a c k e t P a g e 1 8 2 o f 2 6 6 A T T A C H M E N T - F E X H I B I T - 1 P a c k e t P a g e 1 8 3 o f 2 6 6 A T T A C H M E N T - F E X H I B I T - 1 P a c k e t P a g e 1 8 4 o f 2 6 6 A T T A C H M E N T - F E X H I B I T - 1 P a c k e t P a g e 1 8 5 o f 2 6 6 A T T A C H M E N T - F E X H I B I T - 1 P a c k e t P a g e 1 8 6 o f 2 6 6 A T T A C H M E N T - F E X H I B I T - 1 P a c k e t P a g e 1 8 7 o f 2 6 6 A T T A C H M E N T - F E X H I B I T - 1 P a c k e t P a g e 1 8 8 o f 2 6 6 A T T A C H M E N T - F E X H I B I T - 1 P a c k e t P a g e 1 8 9 o f 2 6 6 A T T A C H M E N T - F E X H I B I T - 1 P a c k e t P a g e 1 9 0 o f 2 6 6 A T T A C H M E N T - F E X H I B I T - 1 P a c k e t P a g e 1 9 1 o f 2 6 6 A T T A C H M E N T - F E X H I B I T - 1 P a c k e t P a g e 1 9 2 o f 2 6 6 A T T A C H M E N T - F E X H I B I T - 1 P a c k e t P a g e 1 9 3 o f 2 6 6 A T T A C H M E N T - F E X H I B I T - 1 P a c k e t P a g e 1 9 4 o f 2 6 6 Notice of Pending Land Use Application Information on this development application can be viewed or obtained at the City of Edmonds Planning Division between the hours of 8:00 AM and 4:30 PM Monday through Friday or online through the City’s website. Visit www.EdmondsWA.org, navigate to “Permits Online” and then “Search for Permit.” Any person has the right to comment on this application during the public comment period, receive notice, participate in any hearings, and request a copy of the decision on the application. The City may accept public comments at any time prior to closing of the record or prior to the decision on the project permit. Only parties of record as defined in ECDC 20.07.003 have standing to initiate an administrative appeal. City of Edmonds Development Services Department Planning Division 121 5th Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020 Project Planner: Gina Janicek Gina.Janicek@EdmondsWA.org 425.771.0220 x 1778 www.EdmondsWA.org Odgers/Darwin Rezone File # PLN20120029 PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION: Planning Board and Council Hearing dates — to be determined. WARNING: The removal, mutilation, destruction, or concealment of posted notices before the removal date is a misdemeanor punishable by fine and imprisonment. This notice was mailed to owners within 300 feet of the site, posted on site, posted at the Public Safety Complex, Library, and at City Hall. It was also Published in the Everett Herald. NAME OF APPLICANT: Sidney Odgers and Ken Darwin (owners). DATE OF PUBLIC NOTICE: August 6, 2012. PROJECT LOCATION: 8615/8609/8611 — 244th Street SW, Edmonds (RS-8 zone). PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Notice of Application for a “Type IV-B” rezone proposal to change the zoning designation on three parcels from Single Family Residential “RS-8” to Multiple Residential “RM-2.4”. The Comprehensive Plan designation for these properties was amended last year from “Single Family Urban 1” to “Multi Family Medium Density.” The rezone application was submitted June 25, 2012 and determined to be complete on July 23, 2012. The application is available for review at the Planning Division counter: 121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds. Please contact the project planner if you have any questions. ATTACHMENT - GEXHIBIT - 1 Packet Page 195 of 266 A T T A C H M E N T - G E X H I B I T - 1 P a c k e t P a g e 1 9 6 o f 2 6 6 Notice of Pending Land Use Application Information on this development application can be viewed or obtained at the City of Edmonds Planning Division between the hours of 8:00 AM and 4:30 PM Monday through Friday or online through the City’s website. Visit www.EdmondsWA.org, navigate to “Permits Online” and then “Search for Permit.” Any person has the right to comment on this application during the public comment period, receive notice, participate in any hearings, and request a copy of the decision on the application. The City may accept public comments at any time prior to closing of the record or prior to the decision on the project permit. Only parties of record as defined in ECDC 20.07.003 have standing to initiate an administrative appeal. City of Edmonds Development Services Department Planning Division 121 5th Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020 Project Planner: Gina Janicek Gina.Janicek@EdmondsWA.org 425.771.0220 x 1778 www.EdmondsWA.org Odgers/Darwin Rezone :: File # PLN20120029 Notice of Public Hearing and SEPA Determination PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION: OCTOBER 10, 2012 at 7:00 PM in the City Council Chambers (250 5th Ave N). WARNING: The removal, mutilation, destruction, or concealment of posted notices before the removal date is a mis- demeanor punishable by fine and imprisonment. This notice was mailed to owners within 300 feet of the site, posted on site, posted at the Public Safety Complex, Library, and at City Hall. It was also Published in the Everett Herald. NAME OF APPLICANT: Sidney Odgers and Ken Darwin (owners). DATE OF PUBLIC NOTICE: September 10, 2012. PROJECT LOCATION: 8615/8609/8611 — 244th Street SW, Edmonds (RS-8 zone). PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Notice of Public Hearing before the Planning Board for a “Type IV-B” rezone proposal to change the zoning designation on three parcels from Single Family Residential “RS-8” to Multiple Residential “RM-2.4”. The Comprehensive Plan designation for these properties was amended last year from “Single Family Urban 1” to “Multi Family Medium Density.” The rezone application was submitted June 25, 2012 and determined to be complete on July 23, 2012. The application is available for review at the Planning Division counter: 121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds. Please contact the project planner if you have any questions. SEPA DETERMINATION: The City has issued a Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) under WAC 197-11-340(2) for the above project. This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available upon public request. You may appeal this determination by filing a written appeal citing the specific reasons for appeal with the required appeal fee no later than September 24, 2012 by 4:30 PM. ATTACHMENT - GEXHIBIT - 1 Packet Page 197 of 266 A T T A C H M E N T - G E X H I B I T - 1 P a c k e t P a g e 1 9 8 o f 2 6 6 APPROVED OCTOBER 24TH CITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING BOARD MINUTES October 10, 2012 Vice Chair Stewart 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 Valerie Stewart, Vice Chair Kevin Clarke Todd Cloutier Bill Ellis John Reed Neil Tibbott Ian Duncan BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT Philip Lovell, Chair STAFF PRESENT Rob Chave, Development Services Director Gina Janicek, Planner Kernen Lien, Planner Carrie Hite, Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Director Rob English, City Engineer Jerry Shuster, Stormwater Manager Stephen Clifton, Community Services/Economic Development Director Karin Noyes, Recorder Vice Chair Stewart introduced Shukri Farey, Edmonds Woodway High School Student, who has been selected to serve as student representative to the Planning Board. She noted she is present to observe the meeting tonight and would sit on the dais with the Board at the next meeting. READING/APPROVAL OF MINUTES BOARD MEMBER REED MOVED THAT THE MINUTES OF MARCH 28, 2012 BE APPROVED AS AMENDED. BOARD MEMBER TIBBOTT SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA The agenda was accepted as presented. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Natalie Shippen, Edmonds, recalled that at the their last meeting, the Board considered proposed language from the City Attorney that would note the distinction between the Harbor Square property and the other properties located within the Downtown Master Plan District of the Downtown/Waterfront Activity Center. The City Attorney’s recommended language recognized that what is done at Harbor Square could influence later actions on the remaining properties in the district, mainly allowing the same height. She noted that this language does not appear to have been included in any of the documents that were provided for the Board’s continued discussion tonight. If the Board recommends approval of the Harbor Square Master Plan, their recommendation should include some details as to why this property is different from the others in the district. PUBLIC HEARING ON FILE NUMBER PLN20120029 – A Type IV-B rezone proposal to change the zoning designation on three parcels from Single-Family Residential (RS-8) to Multi-Family Residential (RM-2.4). The Comprehensive Plan designation for these properties was amended last year from “Single Family Urban 1 to Multi Family Medium Density. The sites are located at 8609, 8611 and 8615 – 244th Street Southwest. (Applicants: Sid Odgers and Ken Darwin) EXHIBIT - 2 Packet Page 199 of 266 APPROVED Planning Board Minutes October 10, 2012 Page 2 Ms. Janicek displayed a zoning map to illustrate the location and current zoning of the subject properties. She reminded the Board that these are the same properties they reviewed last year as part of a Comprehensive Plan amendment proposal. The Board recommended approval of the Comprehensive Plan amendment to change the land use designation from Single Family Urban 1 to Multi Family Medium Density, and the City Council adopted the amendment as proposed. The applicants are now proposing to change the zoning from Single Family Residential (RS-8) to Multiple Residential (RM-2.4) to correspond with the Comprehensive Plan designation that was amended last year. Ms. Janicek reported that no written public comments were received regarding the application, and no concerns were raised by City departments. She received one telephone call from a neighbor indicating support of the application and suggesting that both a preschool and a grocery store would be appropriate uses for the subject properties. She informed the citizen that while day cares would be permitted in the proposed new zone, a grocery store would not. Ms. Janicek referred to Page 3 of the Staff report, which provides a comparison of the different zoning designations (RS-8, RM-2.4 and RM-3). She noted that both the RM-2.4 and RM-3 zoning designations are compatible with the Multi Family Medium Density land use designation. She reminded the Board that the applicant originally proposed a Multi-Family High Density land use designation, but this was not approved. She pointed out that the multi-family medium density zones provide a transitional buffer between the General Commercial (CG) zone along the Highway 99 Corridor and the single-family residential zones. She said staff recommends approval of the rezone as proposed. Board Member Reed recalled that there is an uphill slope as you approach the subject properties. Ms. Janicek said the subject properties are located at the top of the hill and are quite flat. Sid Odgers, Applicant, said he is one of the three property owners, and has lived on his property for 34 years. He explained that, over the years, the properties around him have all been redeveloped with two-story newer homes and condominiums. The houses on the three subject properties are all single-story and no longer fit into the character of the area. Because the properties are located adjacent to a condominium development, the property owners felt it would be nice to develop their properties as multi-family, as well. They believe the subject properties are an excellent location for multi-family development. They have good drainage, are relative flat, and very little soil would have to be removed to accommodate construction. The public portion of the hearing was closed. BOARD MEMBER CLARKE MOVED THAT THE PLANNING BOARD FORWARD FILE NUMBER PLN20120029 TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL TO BE CONSISTENT WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT THAT WAS ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL LAST YEAR. BOARD MEMBER CLOUTIER SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. PUBLIC HEARING ON FILE NUMBER AMD20120007 – Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Element update for 2013 – 2018 to City’s Comprehensive Plan and the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for 2013 – 2018. The proposal updates the City’s CFP to include improvements, additions, upgrades or extensions of City infrastructure such as transportation, parks, and stormwater along with other public facilities necessary to implement the City’s Comprehensive Plan. Mr. English presented the proposed Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) and Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for the years 2013 – 2018. He noted that Mr. Clifton, Ms. Hite and Mr. Shuster also contributed to the draft document before the Board and were present to answer questions. Mr. English reviewed that the CIP is budget driven. The information in the CIP helps staff prepare and develop projected capital needs for the upcoming year. The CFP is mandated by the Growth Management Act (GMA) and is an element of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. Both documents have a six year horizon, and the CFP goes beyond to a 20-year horizon for most elements. Both plans include capital projects, and the CIP includes maintenance projects, as well. EXHIBIT - 2 Packet Page 200 of 266    AM-5229     8.              City Council Meeting Meeting Date:11/05/2012 Time:10 Minutes   Submitted For:Stephen Clifton Submitted By:Stephen Clifton Department:Community Services Committee: Type: Cancel Information Subject Title Public hearing on Ordinance No. 3894 - An Interim Zoning Ordinance that would allow farmers markets in Business Commercial (BC) and Business Downtown (BD) Zones. Recommendation Previous Council Action Narrative On September 11, 2012, the City Council adopted Ordinance 3894 - An Interim Zoning Ordinance That Would Allow Farmers Markets in the Community Business (BC) and Downtown (BD) Zones.  This was based on the following information, and draft interim ordinance, being provided to the City Council. "The city has been approached by an organization that would like to operate a farmers market on Wednesday evenings in the BC or BD zone beginning in September of this year and extended at least into the autumn months. The existing City of Edmonds Development Code does not expressly list farmers markets as a permitted use in the BC and BD zones and allows "seasonal" farmers markets to operate only during the period between May and September. The attached interim zoning ordinance will allow farmers markets to operate in the BC and BD zones in any month. The City Council may adopt an interim zoning ordinance for a period of up to six months, as long as the City Council holds a public hearing on the proposed interim zoning ordinance within sixty days after adoption (RCW 35A.63.220, RCW 36.70A.390). During the six month period that this interim zoning ordinance is in effect, the Planning Board will hold a public hearing, consider whether this interim zoning ordinance should be adopted for a period longer than six months, and transmit its recommendation to the City Council. In addition to the above, City staff has reviewed Edmonds City Code Chapter 4.90, Community Oriented Open Air Markets and has identified that this chapter also needs updating. Amendments to this chapter and other sections of the code will be forthcoming in order to allow or create a process that will more clearly define how community oriented and/or farmers markets can operate year round."      During the November 5, 2012 City Council meeting, the public will have an opportunity to comment on the interim ordinance. Packet Page 201 of 266 Attachments Interim Zoning Ordinance 3894 To Allow Farmers markets in BC and BD Zones  Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date City Clerk Sandy Chase 11/01/2012 08:56 AM Mayor Dave Earling 11/01/2012 09:08 AM Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase 11/01/2012 01:06 PM Form Started By: Stephen Clifton Started On: 10/31/2012 03:49 PM Final Approval Date: 11/01/2012  Packet Page 202 of 266 Packet Page 203 of 266 Packet Page 204 of 266 Packet Page 205 of 266 Packet Page 206 of 266 Packet Page 207 of 266 Packet Page 208 of 266 Packet Page 209 of 266 Packet Page 210 of 266 Packet Page 211 of 266 Packet Page 212 of 266    AM-5226     10.              City Council Meeting Meeting Date:11/05/2012 Time:20 Minutes   Submitted For:Shawn Hunstock Submitted By:Shawn Hunstock Department:Finance Review Committee: Committee Action:  Type: Information  Information Subject Title Public Hearing on 2013 revenue sources including property taxes. Recommendation Information only. Previous Council Action Budget workshops on 10/23/12 and 10/30/12. Narrative The following Ordinance authorizes a 1% increase in the 2013 levy for regular property tax and the Emergency Medical Services levy. The Ordinance also continues the voter-approved Debt Service levy. The Levy Certification must be received by the Snohomish County Assessor by November 30, 2012. Fiscal Impact Fiscal Year:2013 Revenue:$13,470,259 Expenditure: Fiscal Impact: Regular property tax levy: $9,779,567 EMS levy: $2,774,589 Voted bond levy: $916,103 Total property tax revenue: $13,470,259 Attachments 2013 Property Tax Levy Ordinance Property Tax Levy Calculation Property Tax Summary General Fund Revenue Detail Packet Page 213 of 266 Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/31/2012 01:48 PM Mayor Dave Earling 10/31/2012 03:49 PM Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase 11/01/2012 01:06 PM Form Started By: Shawn Hunstock Started On: 10/31/2012 01:11 PM Final Approval Date: 11/01/2012  Packet Page 214 of 266 2013 Property Tax Ordinance Page 1 of 5 ORDINANCE NO. ____ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, 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 $9,800,000, AN EMS LEVY OF $3,300,000 AND LEVYING $916,103 FOR VOTED INDEBTEDNESS FOR THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMPLEX, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. WHEREAS, the City Council and the City of Edmonds have properly given notice of the public hearing held on November 5, 2012, to consider the City's current expense budget for 2013, pursuant to RCW 84.55.120; and WHEREAS, the City Council in the course of considering the budget for 2013 have reviewed all sources of revenue and examined all anticipated expenses and obligations; and WHEREAS, the district’s actual levy amount for the previous year was $9,623,702 for regular property levy, and $3,263,193 for EMS levy, and $895,640 for debt service payments, and WHEREAS, the City Council hereby determines following public hearing that it is in the best interest of and necessary to meet the expenses and obligations of the City to increase the regular property levy by 1%; and keep the Emergency Medical Services (EMS) levy at the prior year level, and WHEREAS, the population of this district is greater than 10,000, and WHEREAS, the Snohomish County Assessor’s Office has requested that all Snohomish County Taxing Districts submit their levy certifications to the county on the State Department of Revenue standardized form REV 64 0100; NOW, THEREFORE Packet Page 215 of 266 2013 Property Tax Ordinance Page 2 of 5 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The limit factor for the regular levy to be collected in budget year 2013 shall be limited to the 101%, or 100% plus inflation, which ever is lower of the highest amount of regular property taxes that could have been levied in the City in any year since 1985. Section 2. Regular Property Tax. The 2012 regular property tax levy for collection in 2013 is the amount levied in 2011 for collection in 2012, plus an increase of $97,000 which is a percentage increase of 1%, plus an increase equal to the amount allowed by one or more of the following; new construction, improvements to property, newly constructed wind turbines, any increase in the value of state assessed property, any annexations that have occurred and refunds made, for an estimated total levy of $9,800,000. Section 3. Emergency Medical Services (EMS) property tax levy. The 2012 EMS property tax levy for collection in 2013 is the amount levied in 2011 for collection in 2012, plus an increase of $33,000 which is a percentage increase of 1%, plus an increase equal to the amount allowed by one or more of the following; new construction, improvements to property, newly constructed wind turbines, any increase in the value of state assessed property, any annexations that have occurred and refunds made, for an estimated total levy of $3,300,000. Section 4. There shall be and is hereby levied current taxes of $916,103, the purpose of which is to make debt service payments on voter approved bonds. Section 5. The levies contained in sections 2 through 4 are subject to amendment upon receipt of 2012 assessed valuation from Snohomish County. Section 6. Pursuant to the request by the Snohomish County Assessor’s Office, the Finance Director is hereby authorized to submit to the Snohomish County Council Packet Page 216 of 266 2013 Property Tax Ordinance Page 3 of 5 certification of the hereby approved levies on the State Department of Revenue standardized form REV 64 0100 attached hereto as Exhibit A. Section 7. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance. Section 8. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifically delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take effect five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title. It is enacted on a vote of a majority plus one of the City Council. APPROVED: MAYOR, DAVE EARLING ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: BY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: _________ PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: _________ PUBLISHED: _________ EFFECTIVE DATE: _________ ORDINANCE NO. ____ Packet Page 217 of 266 2013 Property Tax Ordinance Page 4 of 5 SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. ____ of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the __ day of November, 2012, 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, 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 $9,800,000, AN EMS LEVY OF $3,300,000 AND LEVYING $916,103 FOR VOTED INDEBTEDNESS FOR THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMPLEX, 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 November, 2012. CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE Packet Page 218 of 266 2013 Property Tax Ordinance Page 5 of 5 Exhibit A – Levy Certification Levy Certification Submit this document to the county legislative authority on or before November 30 of the year preceding the year in which the levy amounts are to be collected and forward a copy to the assessor. In accordance with RCW 84.52.020, I, Shawn Hunstock, Finance Director, for the City of Edmonds, do hereby certify to the Snohomish County legislative authority that the Council of said district requests that the following levy amounts be collected in 2013 as provided in the district’s budget, which was adopted following a public hearing on November 5, 2012. Regular Levy: $9,800,000 EMS Levy: $3,300,000 Excess Levy: $916,103 ___________________________________________ Signature Date Packet Page 219 of 266 Ci t y  of  Ed m o n d s 20 1 3  Le v y  Ca l c u l a t i o n Re v i s e d  10 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 2 Re g u l a r  Pr o p e r t y  Ta x Re v e n u e Am o u n t  le v i e d  la s t  ye a r 9, 6 2 3 , 7 0 2 $             Pe r c e n t a g e  in c r e a s e 1% 9 6 , 2 3 7                            Es t i m a t e  fo r  ne w  co n s t r u c t i o n 49 , 5 8 8                            (B a s e d  on  $2 9 , 8 5 8 , 0 2 3  of  ne w  co n s t r u c t i o n ) Re f u n d e d  am o u n t  to  be  ad d e d 10 , 0 4 0                            As s e s s e d  Va l u a t i o n  * T o t a l  Le v y EM S  Le v y B o n d s C o m b i n e d  Lev y 20 1 3  Re g u l a r  pr o p e r t y  ta x  le v y 9, 7 7 9 , 5 6 7 $             5, 5 4 9 , 1 7 7 , 6 7 6 $   1. 7 6 2 3 4 5 2 $         0. 5 0 $                    0. 1 6 5 0 8 8 1 $  2. 4 2 7 4 3 3 3 $  EM S  Le v y Am o u n t  le v i e d  la s t  ye a r 3, 2 3 0 , 6 2 9 $             Pe r c e n t a g e  in c r e a s e 1% 3 2 , 3 0 6                            Es t i m a t e  fo r  ne w  co n s t r u c t i o n 14 , 9 2 9                            (B a s e d  on  $2 9 , 8 5 8 , 0 2 3  of  ne w  co n s t r u c t i o n ) Re f u n d e d  am o u n t  to  be  ad d e d 3, 5 4 2                                  As s e s s e d  Va l u a t i o n  * 20 1 3  EM S  ta x  le v y 3, 2 8 1 , 4 0 6 $             5, 5 4 9 , 1 7 7 , 6 7 6 $   0. 5 9 1 3 3 2 0 $         Ma x .  EM S  le v y ** * 2 , 7 7 4 , 5 8 9                  5, 5 4 9 , 1 7 7 , 6 7 6 $   0. 5 0                                  St a t u t o r y  li m i t  of  $0 . 5 0 In c r e a s e  to  ex c e s s  (b a n k e d )  EM S  le v y  ca p a c i t y 50 6 , 8 1 8 $                     0. 0 9 1 3 3 2 0 $         Vo t e d  Bo n d  Le v y  ‐   20 0 3  UT G O  Re f u n d i n g  Bo n d s  ** Vo t e d  pr o p e r t y  ta x  le v y 91 6 , 1 0 3 $                     5, 5 4 9 , 1 7 7 , 6 7 6 $   * 0 . 1 6 5 0 8 8 1 $         Pr i n c i p a l I n t e r e s t To t a l  D/ S O/ S  Ba l a n c e 20 1 3 80 0 , 0 0 0 $                                     11 6 , 1 0 3 $                     91 6 , 1 0 3 $                         2, 7 2 0 , 0 0 0 $           20 1 4 85 5 , 0 0 0                                          91 , 3 0 3                            94 6 , 3 0 3                            1, 8 6 5 , 0 0 0              20 1 5 90 5 , 0 0 0                                          64 , 3 7 0                            96 9 , 3 7 0                            96 0 , 0 0 0                    20 1 6 96 0 , 0 0 0                                          33 , 6 0 0                            99 3 , 6 0 0                            ‐                                       * E s t i m a t e d  As s e s s e d  Va l u a t i o n  as  of  10 / 1 / 2 0 1 2 .  Fi n a l  va l u a t i o n  wi l l  no t  be  kn o w n  un t i l  ea r l y  Ja n u a r y ** C i t y ' s  in v e s t m e n t  ad v i s o r  re v i e w e d  de b t  re p a y m e n t  te r m s  in  Oc t o b e r  20 1 1  an d  de t e r m i n e d  th e r e  wo u l d  be  n o ne t  sa v i n g s  on  re f i n a n c i n g  th e s e  bo n d s  (a n y  sa v i n g s  wo u l d  be  le s s  th a n  bo n d  is s u a n c e  co s t s ) ** * P r i o r  ye a r  EM S  le v y : 2, 8 9 7 , 3 2 2 $                             Pr e l i m i n a r y  le v y  fo r  20 1 3 2, 7 7 4 , 5 8 9                                    In c r / ( d e c r )  fr o m  pr i o r  ye a r (1 2 2 , 7 3 3 ) $                                   ‐4. 2 4 % 20 0 3  UT G O  Re f u n d i n g  Bo n d s  De b t  Sc h e d u l e Pa c k e t Pa g e 22 0 of 26 6 Ci t y  of  Ed m o n d s Pr o p e r t y  Ta x  Su m m a r y 20 0 9 ‐20 1 3 % Change %  Change 20 0 9 2 0 1 0 2 0 1 1 2 0 1 2 2 0 1 3 2 0 1 2 ‐2013 2 0 0 9 ‐2013 As s e s s e d  Va l u e 7, 7 0 9 , 2 0 9 , 4 9 0 $           6, 9 5 5 , 4 8 2 , 7 1 7 $         6, 4 3 3 , 2 5 8 , 8 5 3 $         5, 7 9 4 , 6 4 4 , 4 6 5 $         5, 5 4 9 , 1 7 7 , 6 7 6 $         ‐4.24%‐28.02% Ci t y  Re g u l a r 1. 1 9 9 9 0 2 $                               1. 3 4 9 0 0 8 $                             1. 4 7 6 6 3 2 $                             1. 6 6 0 7 9 2 $                               1. 7 6 2 3 4 5 $                             6.11% 4 6 . 8 7 % Ci t y  EM S 0. 5 0 0 0 0 0                                    0. 5 0 0 0 0 0                                0. 5 0 0 0 0 0                                0. 5 0 0 0 0 0                                  0. 5 0 0 0 0 0                                0.00%0.00% Ci t y  Bo n d s 0. 1 1 5 6 5 0                                    0. 1 3 0 7 5 0                                0. 1 4 5 7 2 1                                0. 1 6 5 1 3 0                                  0. 1 6 5 0 8 8                                ‐0.03% 4 2 . 7 5 % Su b t o t a l  (C i t y  As s e s s e d  Ta x ) 1. 8 1 5 5 5 3 $                               1. 9 7 9 7 5 8 $                             2. 1 2 2 3 5 4 $                             2. 3 2 5 9 2 3 $                               2. 4 2 7 4 3 3 $                             4.36% 3 3 . 7 0 % Ci t y  Re g u l a r 9, 2 5 0 , 2 9 9 $                           9, 3 8 3 , 0 0 0 $                         9, 4 9 9 , 5 5 8 $                         9, 6 2 3 , 7 0 2 $                           9, 7 7 9 , 5 6 7 $                         1.62%5.72% Ci t y  EM S 3, 8 5 4 , 6 0 5                                  3, 4 7 7 , 7 4 1                              3, 2 1 6 , 6 2 9                              2, 8 9 7 , 3 2 2                                2, 7 7 4 , 5 8 9                              ‐4.24%‐28.02% Ci t y  Bo n d s 83 9 , 0 8 4                                        85 3 , 0 8 4                                    87 7 , 9 8 4                                    89 5 , 6 4 0                                      91 6 , 1 0 3                                    2.28%9.18% Su b t o t a l  (C i t y  As s e s s e d  Ta x ) 13 , 9 4 3 , 9 8 8 $                       13 , 7 1 3 , 8 2 5 $                     13 , 5 9 4 , 1 7 1 $                     13 , 4 1 6 , 6 6 4 $                     13 , 4 7 0 , 2 5 9 $                     0.40%‐3.40% Re g u l a r  Pr o p e r t y  Ta x  ‐   In c r e a s e  li m i t e d  to  1%  an n u a l l y ,  pl u s  th e  va l u e  of  ne w  co n s t r u c t i o n / t e n a n t  im p r o v e m e n t s . EM S  ‐   Th e  EM S  le v y  al l o w s  fo r  an  an n u a l  1%  in c r e a s e .  Ho w e v e r ,  du e  to  th e  $0 . 5 0  pe r  $1 , 0 0 0  li m i t a t i o n ,  we  an t i c i p a t e  co l l e c t i n g  ap p r o x i m a t e l y  $2 . 8 M  in  2013 . Vo t e d  Bo n d  Le v y  ‐   Th i s  le v y  is  ne c e s s a r y  to  ad d r e s s  th e  bo n d  pa y m e n t  sc h e d u l e  fo r  th e  pu b l i c  sa f e t y  bo n d s . Pr o p e r t y  Ta x  Ra t e s (p e r  $1 , 0 0 0  as s e s s e d  va l u e ) Pr o p e r t y  Ta x e s To t a l  Re c e i p t s Pa c k e t Pa g e 22 1 of 26 6 10 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 2 Ci t y o f E d m o n d s 1 7 : 5 4 A M Page: re v f l e x . r p t 20 1 2 Y E E s t & 2 0 1 3 B a s e l i n e 2 0 1 0 A c t u a l s A cc o u n t N u m b e r A c t u a l s 20 1 2 A c t u a l s As o f R p t D a t e Baselin e 2 0 1 1 20 1 2 Bu d g et 2012 Yr. End Est 2013 31 1 G E N E R A L P R O P E R T Y T A X E S 00 0 . 3 1 1 . 1 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 R E A L P E R S O N A L / P R O P E R T Y T A 9, 3 4 9 , 6 2 4 . 2 8 9, 2 0 3 , 1 8 7 . 5 0 9 , 6 2 9 , 9 8 6 . 0 0 5 , 9 5 6 , 1 2 2 . 4 5 9,528,942.00 9,781,109.00 00 0 . 3 1 1 . 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 . 0 0 E M S P R O P E R T Y T A X 3, 4 7 3 , 2 5 6 . 3 1 3, 4 0 1 , 3 6 1 . 4 7 2 , 9 0 8 , 9 4 4 . 0 0 1 , 8 4 6 , 0 7 3 . 3 6 2,897,322.00 2,775,282.00 00 0 . 3 1 1 . 1 0 0 . 0 2 0 . 0 0 V O T E D P R O P E R T Y T A X 84 9 , 9 9 3 . 4 0 83 2 , 0 0 7 . 7 6 8 9 5 , 6 4 0 . 0 0 5 8 6 , 1 4 5 . 6 0 895,640.00 916,103.00 To t a l GE N E R A L P R O P E R T Y T A X E S 13 , 6 7 2 , 8 7 3 . 9 9 1 3 , 4 3 6 , 5 5 6 . 7 3 1 3 , 4 3 4 , 5 7 0 . 0 0 8, 3 8 8 , 3 4 1 . 4 1 1 3 , 3 2 1 , 9 0 4 . 0 0 1 3 , 4 7 2 , 4 9 4 . 0 0 31 3 R E T A I L S A L E S A N D U S E T A X 00 0 . 3 1 3 . 1 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 L O C A L R E T A I L S A L E S / U S E T A X 4, 4 6 8 , 2 3 7 . 1 0 4, 6 9 0 , 2 4 3 . 5 4 4 , 7 2 4 , 1 8 3 . 0 0 3 , 2 5 6 , 3 1 3 . 6 3 4,873,609.00 4,913,150.00 00 0 . 3 1 3 . 6 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 N A T U R A L G A S U S E T A X 12 , 9 6 2 . 9 6 11 , 6 0 5 . 1 6 1 3 , 2 4 4 . 0 0 6 , 6 6 2 . 7 1 9,673.00 8,706.00 00 0 . 3 1 3 . 7 1 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 / 1 0 S A L E S T A X L O C A L C R I M J U S 53 4 , 0 4 5 . 2 4 50 8 , 9 2 1 . 9 1 5 1 4 , 8 9 8 . 0 0 3 4 3 , 6 3 7 . 7 6 515,264.00 520,417.00 To t a l RE T A I L S A L E S A N D U S E T A X 5, 0 1 5 , 2 4 5 . 3 0 5, 2 1 0 , 7 7 0 . 6 1 5, 2 5 2 , 3 2 5 . 0 0 3, 6 0 6 , 6 1 4 . 1 0 5,398,546.00 5 , 4 4 2 , 2 7 3 . 0 0 31 6 B U S I N E S S A N D O C C U P A T I O N T A X E S 00 0 . 3 1 6 . 4 3 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 G A S U T I L I T Y T A X 75 7 , 3 3 9 . 9 9 86 7 , 7 0 2 . 5 1 8 9 2 , 3 8 1 . 0 0 5 7 4 , 5 1 6 . 6 3 803,143.00 811,174.00 00 0 . 3 1 6 . 4 6 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 T . V . C A B L E U T I L I T Y T A X 63 5 , 6 0 8 . 5 3 72 3 , 6 7 3 . 4 4 7 5 0 , 6 8 2 . 0 0 4 4 2 , 9 5 2 . 1 9 725,000.00 730,910.00 00 0 . 3 1 6 . 4 7 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 T E L E P H O N E U T I L I T Y T A X 1, 4 6 7 , 7 9 9 . 5 4 1, 3 7 8 , 0 7 4 . 0 5 1 , 3 9 0 , 2 4 2 . 0 0 1 , 1 4 9 , 4 1 9 . 9 9 1,544,025.00 1,529,498.00 00 0 . 3 1 6 . 5 1 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 E L E C T R I C U T I L I T Y T A X 1, 4 5 3 , 6 1 1 . 2 1 1, 4 6 1 , 0 2 8 . 0 6 1 , 4 7 3 , 8 8 0 . 0 0 1 , 1 2 6 , 9 8 1 . 7 6 1,464,513.00 1,475,638.00 00 0 . 3 1 6 . 5 5 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 S O L I D W A S T E U T I L I T Y T A X 27 9 , 1 1 6 . 1 3 28 4 , 8 6 1 . 6 2 2 9 4 , 6 0 1 . 0 0 2 1 6 , 4 0 3 . 6 3 280,577.00 287,710.00 00 0 . 3 1 6 . 7 2 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 W A T E R U T I L I T Y T A X 71 1 , 8 3 5 . 5 2 79 8 , 9 5 4 . 3 0 8 2 4 , 9 3 5 . 0 0 5 6 3 , 4 9 8 . 5 3 841,500.00 904,613.00 00 0 . 3 1 6 . 7 4 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 S E W E R U T I L I T Y T A X 45 9 , 7 4 6 . 1 3 46 8 , 0 6 1 . 3 5 4 7 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 3 1 6 , 5 5 0 . 1 2 470,000.00 493,500.00 00 0 . 3 1 6 . 7 8 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 S T O R M W A T E R U T I L I T Y T A X 21 9 , 1 3 1 . 0 9 25 0 , 1 3 4 . 0 6 2 5 4 , 0 6 1 . 0 0 1 7 2 , 0 5 0 . 4 3 270,000.00 274,600.00 To t a l BU S I N E S S A N D O C C U P A T I O N T A X E S 5, 9 8 4 , 1 8 8 . 1 4 6, 2 3 2 , 4 8 9 . 3 9 6, 3 5 0 , 7 8 2 . 0 0 4, 5 6 2 , 3 7 3 . 2 8 6,398,758.00 6 , 5 0 7 , 6 4 3 . 0 0 31 7 E X C I S E T A X E S 00 0 . 3 1 7 . 2 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 L E A S E H O L D E X C I S E T A X 24 9 , 3 8 4 . 3 9 21 8 , 0 3 8 . 3 3 2 2 1 , 1 6 2 . 0 0 1 6 2 , 9 8 9 . 1 9 210,247.00 212,350.00 00 0 . 3 1 7 . 5 1 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 P U L L T A B S T A X 53 , 7 2 9 . 6 0 60 , 6 6 1 . 5 0 6 0 , 2 5 7 . 0 0 5 2 , 1 4 7 . 6 0 60,777.00 61,385.00 00 0 . 3 1 7 . 5 3 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 A M U S E M E N T G A M E S 0. 0 0 1, 4 6 1 . 8 7 0 . 0 0 1 4 1 . 3 0 205.00 731.00 To t a l EX C I S E T A X E S 30 3 , 1 1 3 . 9 9 28 0 , 1 6 1 . 7 0 28 1 , 4 1 9 . 0 0 21 5 , 2 7 8 . 0 9 271,229.00 274,466.00 1 Page: Fo r m a t N a m e ( s ) : S = R e v e n u e O = S H R e p o r t Pa c k e t Pa g e 22 2 of 26 6 10 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 2 Ci t y o f E d m o n d s 2 7 : 5 4 A M Page: re v f l e x . r p t 20 1 2 Y E E s t & 2 0 1 3 B a s e l i n e 2 0 1 0 A c t u a l s A cc o u n t N u m b e r A c t u a l s 20 1 2 A c t u a l s As o f R p t D a t e Baselin e 2 0 1 1 20 1 2 Bu d g et 2012 Yr. End Est 2013 31 9 P E N A L T I E S & I N T E R E S T O N D E L I Q U E N T T A X E S To t a l PE N A L T I E S & I N T E R E S T O N D E L I Q U E N T 0. 0 0 0. 0 0 0. 0 0 0. 0 0 0.00 0.00 32 1 B U S I N E S S L I C E N S E S A N D P E R M I T S 00 0 . 3 2 1 . 3 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 F I R E P E R M I T S - S P E C I A L U S E 90 5 . 0 0 5, 7 8 3 . 0 0 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 5 , 4 3 3 . 0 0 5,500.00 5,555.00 00 0 . 3 2 1 . 6 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 P R O F A N D O C C L I C E N S E - T A X I 69 0 . 0 0 48 0 . 0 0 1 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 5 1 0 . 0 0 1,020.00 1,030.00 00 0 . 3 2 1 . 7 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 A M U S E M E N T S 13 , 0 5 0 . 0 0 2, 8 7 7 . 5 0 6 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 5 , 4 7 5 . 0 0 6,000.00 6,060.00 00 0 . 3 2 1 . 8 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 B U S . L I C E N C E P E R M I T P E N A L T Y 4, 9 1 7 . 5 0 4, 5 5 0 . 0 0 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 4 , 0 7 0 . 0 0 7,370.00 7,444.00 00 0 . 3 2 1 . 9 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 G E N E R A L B U S I N E S S L I C E N S E 10 2 , 6 6 2 . 0 0 10 5 , 4 8 8 . 0 0 1 0 5 , 2 4 5 . 0 0 1 0 3 , 2 9 8 . 5 0 105,245.00 106,297.00 00 0 . 3 2 1 . 9 1 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 F R A N C H I S E A G R E E M E N T - C O M C A 66 6 , 6 0 8 . 9 6 57 7 , 4 2 8 . 0 9 5 8 8 , 0 0 8 . 0 0 4 7 8 , 5 0 1 . 1 6 621,600.00 627,816.00 00 0 . 3 2 1 . 9 1 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 F R A N C H I S E A G R E E M E N T - V E R I Z O 94 , 0 8 6 . 2 9 10 0 , 9 5 0 . 4 4 1 0 6 , 9 3 0 . 0 0 6 8 , 5 1 5 . 4 2 88,917.00 95,806.00 00 0 . 3 2 1 . 9 1 2 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 F R A N C H I S E A G R E E M E N T - B L A C K 1, 6 9 3 . 7 1 7, 3 2 6 . 7 3 6 , 9 0 1 . 0 0 1 1 , 0 7 9 . 8 7 8,205.00 8,287.00 00 0 . 3 2 1 . 9 1 5 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 O L Y M P I C V I E W W A T E R D I S T R I C T 23 1 , 0 0 2 . 4 9 22 4 , 1 0 4 . 1 5 2 1 2 , 2 9 2 . 0 0 2 0 1 , 9 8 7 . 4 1 212,292.00 214,415.00 00 0 . 3 2 1 . 9 3 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 D E V S E R V P E R M I T S U R C H A R G E 20 , 8 0 5 . 0 0 21 , 6 4 5 . 0 0 2 1 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 6 , 7 2 5 . 0 0 18,240.00 18,422.00 00 0 . 3 2 1 . 9 4 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 N O N - R E S I D E N T B U S L I C E N S E 63 , 4 5 0 . 0 0 60 , 4 5 0 . 0 0 3 8 , 8 8 5 . 0 0 2 8 , 4 0 0 . 0 0 38,885.00 39,274.00 00 0 . 3 2 1 . 9 5 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 R I G H T O F W A Y F R A N C H I S E F E E 6, 5 3 1 . 3 3 6, 3 8 0 . 3 7 1 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 9 , 3 0 7 . 9 6 9,308.00 9,500.00 To t a l BU S I N E S S L I C E N S E S A N D P E R M I T S 1, 2 0 6 , 4 0 2 . 2 8 1, 1 1 7 , 4 6 3 . 2 8 1, 1 0 6 , 2 6 1 . 0 0 93 3 , 3 0 3 . 3 2 1,122,582.00 1 , 1 3 9 , 9 0 6 . 0 0 32 2 N O N - B U S I N E S S L I C E N S E S A N D P E R M I T S 00 0 . 3 2 2 . 1 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 B U I L D I N G S T R U C T U R E P E R M I T S 36 1 , 9 2 7 . 7 8 47 7 , 5 3 4 . 7 4 4 2 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 2 8 3 , 1 9 4 . 0 0 322,812.00 345,436.00 00 0 . 3 2 2 . 3 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 A N I M A L L I C E N S E S 15 , 1 8 5 . 0 0 11 , 6 2 2 . 0 0 1 1 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 8 , 4 3 0 . 0 0 12,000.00 13,205.00 00 0 . 3 2 2 . 4 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 S T R E E T A N D C U R B P E R M I T 53 , 1 8 5 . 0 0 51 , 5 8 5 . 0 0 4 2 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 2 2 , 2 1 8 . 8 8 88,000.00 50,000.00 00 0 . 3 2 2 . 9 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 O T R N O N - B U S L I C / P E R M I T S 5, 7 1 5 . 0 0 7, 9 8 1 . 0 0 7 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 8 , 4 3 6 . 5 0 7,000.00 7,070.00 00 0 . 3 2 2 . 9 2 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 D I V E P A R K P E R M I T F E E 0. 0 0 11 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0.00 0.00 To t a l NO N - B U S I N E S S L I C E N S E S A N D P E R M I T S 43 6 , 0 1 2 . 7 8 54 8 , 8 3 2 . 7 4 48 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 32 2 , 2 7 9 . 3 8 429,812.00 415,711.00 33 1 D I R E C T F E D E R A L G R A N T S 00 0 . 3 3 1 . 0 1 4 . 0 2 5 . 1 0 H U D E D I G r a n t 83 , 7 2 2 . 5 1 0. 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0.00 0.00 00 0 . 3 3 1 . 0 1 5 . 9 0 4 . 0 0 H I S T O R I C P R E S E R V A T I O N F U N D 0. 0 0 7, 5 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0.00 0.00 00 0 . 3 3 1 . 0 1 6 . 6 0 1 . 0 0 D O J 1 5 - 0 4 0 4 - 0 - 1 - 7 5 4 - B u l l e t P r o o f 1, 3 4 9 . 2 9 5, 2 2 8 . 1 1 3 , 9 6 9 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 3,928.00 1,191.00 2 Page: Fo r m a t N a m e ( s ) : S = R e v e n u e O = S H R e p o r t Pa c k e t Pa g e 22 3 of 26 6 10 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 2 Ci t y o f E d m o n d s 3 7 : 5 4 A M Page: re v f l e x . r p t 20 1 2 Y E E s t & 2 0 1 3 B a s e l i n e 2 0 1 0 A c t u a l s A cc o u n t N u m b e r A c t u a l s 20 1 2 A c t u a l s As o f R p t D a t e Baselin e 2 0 1 1 20 1 2 Bu d g et 2012 Yr. End Est 2013 00 0 . 3 3 1 . 0 8 1 . 1 0 0 . 0 0 E E C B G G r a n t 65 , 0 8 9 . 0 6 53 , 9 3 6 . 5 3 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0.00 0.00 00 0 . 3 3 1 . 1 6 0 . 5 8 0 . 0 0 2 0 0 9 R e c o v e r y A c t E d w a r d B y r n e 24 , 6 1 8 . 8 5 0. 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0.00 0.00 To t a l DI R E C T F E D E R A L G R A N T S 17 4 , 7 7 9 . 7 1 66 , 6 6 4 . 6 4 3, 9 6 9 . 0 0 0. 0 0 3,928.00 1,191.00 33 3 I N D I R E C T F E D E R A L G R A N T S 00 0 . 3 3 3 . 0 2 0 . 6 0 0 . 0 0 W A A S S O C O F S H E R I F F S T R A F F I 0. 0 0 1, 6 9 9 . 7 4 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0.00 0.00 00 0 . 3 3 3 . 0 2 0 . 6 0 0 . 0 1 W T S C S L O W D O W N O R P A Y U P 5, 0 0 5 . 5 0 0. 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0.00 0.00 00 0 . 3 3 3 . 0 2 0 . 6 0 1 . 0 1 W T S C X - 5 2 D U I A N D S P E E D I N G 3, 9 5 7 . 9 1 0. 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0.00 0.00 00 0 . 3 3 3 . 0 2 0 . 6 0 4 . 0 0 W T S C - N I G H T T I M E S E A T B E L T E N 1, 3 9 2 . 2 6 0. 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0.00 0.00 00 0 . 3 3 3 . 0 2 0 . 6 0 5 . 0 0 T a r g e t Z e r o T e a m s G r a n t 2, 9 5 2 . 9 2 9, 8 4 8 . 1 5 1 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 3 , 4 5 6 . 3 9 4,500.00 10,000.00 00 0 . 3 3 3 . 0 2 0 . 6 0 6 . 0 0 H I G H V I S I B I L I T Y E N F O R C E M E N T 2, 7 8 7 . 8 2 4, 8 7 2 . 8 2 6 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 8 9 5 . 3 7 1,500.00 6,000.00 00 0 . 3 3 3 . 0 9 7 . 0 3 6 . 0 1 E 0 7 9 4 3 P # 1 7 P W # 2 4 2 2 0 0 6 S t o r m 10 0 . 0 0 0. 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0.00 0.00 To t a l IN D I R E C T F E D E R A L G R A N T S 16 , 1 9 6 . 4 1 16 , 4 2 0 . 7 1 16 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 4, 3 5 1 . 7 6 6,000.00 16,000.00 33 4 S T A T E G R A N T S 00 0 . 3 3 4 . 0 3 0 . 5 0 0 . 0 0 W A S T A T E T R A F F I C C O M M G R A N 1, 9 6 8 . 8 2 5, 8 9 8 . 1 6 0 . 0 0 5 , 8 9 8 . 1 6 - 0.00 0.00 00 0 . 3 3 4 . 0 3 0 . 6 0 0 . 0 1 P u g e t D r i v e W a l k w a y H L P - P B 0 7 ( 0 0 0. 0 0 10 , 2 2 0 . 8 3 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0.00 0.00 00 0 . 3 3 4 . 0 3 0 . 6 0 0 . 0 2 W S D O T S H E L L V A L L E Y L A 7 2 2 3 15 , 4 4 8 . 7 7 0. 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0.00 0.00 00 0 . 3 3 4 . 0 6 0 . 9 0 0 . 0 2 S M A R T C O M M U T E R P R O J E C T G R 1, 0 4 0 . 0 0 48 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 9 0 0 . 0 0 0.00 0.00 To t a l ST A T E G R A N T S 18 , 4 5 7 . 5 9 16 , 5 9 8 . 9 9 0. 0 0 - 4, 9 9 8 . 1 6 0.00 0.00 33 5 S T A T E S H A R E D R E V E N U E S 00 0 . 3 3 5 . 0 0 0 . 9 1 0 . 0 0 P U D P R I V I L E D G E T A X 18 6 , 2 5 7 . 0 0 18 1 , 5 3 2 . 5 3 1 8 3 , 3 4 8 . 0 0 1 8 4 , 7 5 5 . 8 7 183,348.00 185,181.00 To t a l ST A T E S H A R E D R E V E N U E S 18 6 , 2 5 7 . 0 0 18 1 , 5 3 2 . 5 3 18 3 , 3 4 8 . 0 0 18 4 , 7 5 5 . 8 7 183,348.00 185,181.00 33 6 S T E N T L M N T S , I M P C T P Y M T S , I N - L I E U T A X E S 00 0 . 3 3 6 . 0 1 0 . 2 9 0 . 0 0 J U D I C I A L S A L A R Y C O N T R I B U T I O 15 , 8 7 5 . 0 0 12 , 1 6 1 . 0 0 1 3 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 2 , 4 4 8 . 0 0 12,448.00 12,572.00 00 0 . 3 3 6 . 0 6 0 . 2 1 0 . 0 0 M V E T / S P E C I A L D I S T R I B U T I O N 11 , 3 8 7 . 2 4 8, 7 7 9 . 6 7 9 , 1 0 0 . 0 0 6 , 7 8 3 . 4 1 8,741.00 8,828.00 00 0 . 3 3 6 . 0 6 0 . 2 6 0 . 0 0 C R I M I N A L J U S T I C E - S P E C I A L P R 43 , 1 0 9 . 0 6 33 , 1 4 2 . 0 2 3 3 , 8 2 7 . 0 0 2 5 , 4 7 2 . 1 0 32,960.00 33,290.00 00 0 . 3 3 6 . 0 6 0 . 5 1 0 . 0 0 D U I - C I T I E S 9, 4 4 3 . 2 3 8, 4 7 8 . 4 0 9 , 5 0 0 . 0 0 5 , 5 3 2 . 3 4 7,628.00 7,704.00 3 Page: Fo r m a t N a m e ( s ) : S = R e v e n u e O = S H R e p o r t Pa c k e t Pa g e 22 4 of 26 6 10 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 2 Ci t y o f E d m o n d s 4 7 : 5 4 A M Page: re v f l e x . r p t 20 1 2 Y E E s t & 2 0 1 3 B a s e l i n e 2 0 1 0 A c t u a l s A cc o u n t N u m b e r A c t u a l s 20 1 2 A c t u a l s As o f R p t D a t e Baselin e 2 0 1 1 20 1 2 Bu d g et 2012 Yr. End Est 2013 00 0 . 3 3 6 . 0 6 0 . 9 4 0 . 0 0 L I Q U O R E X C I S E T A X 20 2 , 3 1 7 . 5 5 19 3 , 4 7 2 . 6 0 2 0 0 , 6 6 6 . 0 0 9 9 , 7 2 7 . 9 4 196,774.00 20,000.00 00 0 . 3 3 6 . 0 6 0 . 9 5 0 . 0 0 L I Q U O R B O A R D P R O F I T S 32 7 , 1 6 2 . 8 2 27 6 , 7 7 7 . 4 8 3 1 0 , 8 3 5 . 0 0 3 0 6 , 9 3 4 . 1 0 433,479.00 301,761.00 To t a l ST E N T L M N T S , I M P C T P Y M T S , I N - L I E U T A 60 9 , 2 9 4 . 9 0 53 2 , 8 1 1 . 1 7 57 6 , 9 2 8 . 0 0 45 6 , 8 9 7 . 8 9 692,030.00 384,155.00 33 8 I N T E R G O V M ' T L S E R V I C E R E V E N U E S 00 0 . 3 3 8 . 1 2 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 S H A R E D C O U R T C O S T S 52 4 . 1 5 8, 7 5 0 . 0 0 6 , 3 0 0 . 0 0 1 , 5 0 0 . 0 0 3,000.00 3,030.00 00 0 . 3 3 8 . 1 9 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 M U N I C I P A L C O U R T A G R E E M E N T 18 7 . 5 0 75 0 . 0 0 1 , 0 5 0 . 0 0 7 5 0 . 0 0 1,500.00 1,500.00 00 0 . 3 3 8 . 1 9 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 F I R E D I S T R I C T # 1 S T A T I O N B I L L I N 0. 0 0 10 5 , 6 7 9 . 3 5 5 5 , 0 8 0 . 0 0 3 6 , 4 6 4 . 6 7 87,500.00 27,808.00 00 0 . 3 3 8 . 2 1 0 . 3 0 0 . 0 0 D V C O O R D I N A T O R S E R V I C E S 9, 6 8 2 . 3 2 10 , 1 4 5 . 8 8 1 0 , 7 6 0 . 0 0 8 , 9 6 7 . 0 0 10,921.00 10,921.00 00 0 . 3 3 8 . 2 1 0 . 4 0 0 . 0 0 O C D E T F O V E R T I M E 0. 0 0 3, 0 3 2 . 6 0 0 . 0 0 1 , 2 2 5 . 8 1 648.00 0.00 00 0 . 3 3 8 . 2 4 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 C A M P U S S A F E T Y - E D M . S C H . D I S 33 , 2 2 4 . 7 6 14 , 9 0 6 . 9 7 1 1 , 5 0 0 . 0 0 4 , 0 4 1 . 1 0 13,000.00 11,615.00 00 0 . 3 3 8 . 2 5 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 W O O D W A Y - L A W P R O T E C T I O N 11 , 6 2 5 . 1 4 12 , 8 6 7 . 1 7 1 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 2 , 0 2 7 . 1 7 15,197.00 36,000.00 00 0 . 3 3 8 . 2 8 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 S N O C O M / D I R E C T O R S E R V I C E S 61 , 1 5 1 . 3 0 0. 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0.00 0.00 00 0 . 3 3 8 . 2 8 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 I N T E R G O V E R N M E N T A L F I B E R S E 0. 0 0 3, 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 7 , 9 8 6 . 2 3 7,200.00 7,272.00 00 0 . 3 3 8 . 7 4 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 I N T E R G O V E R N M E N T A L R E V E N U E 0. 0 0 0. 0 0 6 9 , 3 0 0 . 0 0 5 1 , 9 7 5 . 0 0 69,300.00 69,300.00 00 0 . 3 3 8 . 8 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 S N O - I S L E 68 , 0 9 3 . 3 2 62 , 2 1 0 . 8 5 6 9 , 4 1 8 . 0 0 4 2 , 7 9 0 . 6 1 56,669.00 57,236.00 To t a l IN T E R G O V M ' T L S E R V I C E R E V E N U E S 18 4 , 4 8 8 . 4 9 22 1 , 3 4 2 . 8 2 23 3 , 4 0 8 . 0 0 16 7 , 7 2 7 . 5 9 264,935.00 224,682.00 34 1 G E N E R A L G O V E R N M E N T 00 0 . 3 4 1 . 3 1 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 R E C O R D / L E G A L I N S T R U M T S 64 6 . 0 0 1, 1 8 3 . 0 0 1 , 0 5 0 . 0 0 9 5 4 . 5 0 776.00 1,065.00 00 0 . 3 4 1 . 3 2 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 C O U R T R E C O R D S E R V I C E S 0. 0 0 0. 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0.00 0.00 00 0 . 3 4 1 . 3 2 0 . 0 2 0 . 0 0 D / M C O U R T R E C S E R 10 3 . 5 4 68 9 . 2 6 9 5 0 . 0 0 1 3 9 . 2 4 134.00 172.00 00 0 . 3 4 1 . 5 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 S A L E M A P S & B O O K S 16 6 . 3 0 95 . 8 8 0 . 0 0 9 8 . 6 2 46.00 72.00 00 0 . 3 4 1 . 6 2 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 M U N I C . - D I S T . C O U R T C U R R E X P E 21 1 . 2 3 19 8 . 3 9 1 5 0 . 0 0 2 5 1 . 6 1 185.00 188.00 00 0 . 3 4 1 . 6 9 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 P H O T O C O P I E S 4, 2 7 7 . 7 9 4, 5 2 6 . 5 1 4 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 2 , 5 7 3 . 2 2 3,778.00 4,572.00 00 0 . 3 4 1 . 6 9 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 P O L I C E D I S C L O S U R E R E Q U E S T S 5, 3 7 5 . 5 6 3, 9 3 7 . 6 5 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 3 , 5 0 4 . 6 5 4,316.00 4,500.00 00 0 . 3 4 1 . 6 9 2 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 A S S E S S M E N T S E A R C H 20 . 0 0 5. 0 0 0 . 0 0 5 . 0 0 10.00 5.00 00 0 . 3 4 1 . 9 1 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 E L E C T I O N C A N D I D A T E F I L I N G F E 0. 0 0 4, 0 4 4 . 3 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0.00 1,011.00 00 0 . 3 4 1 . 9 9 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 P A S S P O R T S A N D N A T U R A L I Z A T I O 14 , 8 2 5 . 0 0 10 , 0 7 5 . 0 0 1 0 , 5 0 0 . 0 0 9 , 8 7 5 . 0 0 11,700.00 9,571.00 To t a l GE N E R A L G O V E R N M E N T 25 , 6 2 5 . 4 2 24 , 7 5 4 . 9 9 21 , 7 5 0 . 0 0 17 , 4 0 1 . 8 4 20,945.00 21,156.00 4 Page: Fo r m a t N a m e ( s ) : S = R e v e n u e O = S H R e p o r t Pa c k e t Pa g e 22 5 of 26 6 10 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 2 Ci t y o f E d m o n d s 5 7 : 5 4 A M Page: re v f l e x . r p t 20 1 2 Y E E s t & 2 0 1 3 B a s e l i n e 2 0 1 0 A c t u a l s A cc o u n t N u m b e r A c t u a l s 20 1 2 A c t u a l s As o f R p t D a t e Baselin e 2 0 1 1 20 1 2 Bu d g et 2012 Yr. End Est 2013 34 2 P U B L I C S A F E T Y 00 0 . 3 4 2 . 1 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 P O L I C E S E R V I C E S S P E C I A L E V E 2 6 , 1 6 5 . 8 9 3 1 , 5 4 6 . 9 9 2 6 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 2 8 , 6 0 4 . 5 4 2 6 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 2 6 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 00 0 . 3 4 2 . 2 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 D U I E M E R G E N C Y F I R E S E R V I C E S 63 . 5 4 9 8 4 . 8 0 0 . 0 0 4 2 6 . 0 9 5 2 6 . 0 0 5 3 2 . 0 0 00 0 . 3 4 2 . 3 3 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 A D U L T P R O B A T I O N S E R V I C E C H A 82 , 3 9 8 . 5 5 7 5 , 8 2 0 . 6 4 6 8 , 3 0 0 . 0 0 4 7 , 8 3 6 . 5 7 5 6 , 3 8 5 . 0 0 6 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 00 0 . 3 4 2 . 3 6 0 . 0 1 0 . 0 0 E L E C T R O N I C M O N I T O R I N G 1, 4 4 7 . 6 9 10 5 . 0 0 15 0 . 0 0 0. 0 0 0.00 0.00 00 0 . 3 4 2 . 3 6 0 . 0 3 0 . 0 0 E L E C T R O N I C M O N I T O R D U I 78 5 . 2 7 51 7 . 2 9 70 0 . 0 0 81 . 5 7 163.00 165.00 00 0 . 3 4 2 . 3 7 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 B O O K I N G F E E S 6, 3 7 0 . 4 0 6, 1 4 2 . 7 7 6, 3 0 0 . 0 0 3, 8 2 4 . 8 2 4,393.00 5,711.00 00 0 . 3 4 2 . 4 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 F I R E C O N S T R U C T I O N I N S P E C T I O 6, 9 2 0 . 0 0 6 , 1 0 5 . 0 0 6 , 0 6 0 . 0 0 4 , 0 7 5 . 0 0 5 , 0 7 0 . 0 0 5 , 5 7 7 . 0 0 00 0 . 3 4 2 . 5 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 E M E R G E N C Y S E R V I C E F E E S 22 , 5 1 4 . 2 7 23 , 7 3 8 . 8 7 21 , 2 1 0 . 0 0 15 , 5 3 7 . 1 5 17,885.00 23,976.00 00 0 . 3 4 2 . 6 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 D U I E M E R G E N C Y A I D 25 0 . 0 0 21 5 . 1 7 20 0 . 0 0 33 . 1 5 66.00 67.00 00 0 . 3 4 2 . 6 0 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 E M S T R A N S P O R T U S E R F E E 78 6 , 8 5 3 . 3 2 81 3 , 1 8 6 . 2 7 84 8 , 5 0 0 . 0 0 58 5 , 5 5 6 . 7 7 811,973.00 814,318.00 00 0 . 3 4 2 . 9 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 P O L I C E - F I N G E R P R I N T I N G 15 . 0 0 27 0 . 0 0 30 0 . 0 0 28 5 . 5 0 491.00 496.00 00 0 . 3 4 2 . 9 0 0 . 0 1 0 . 0 0 C R I M C N V F E E D U I 57 1 . 0 9 65 8 . 6 0 70 0 . 0 0 53 6 . 4 1 691.00 698.00 00 0 . 3 4 2 . 9 0 0 . 0 2 0 . 0 0 C R I M C O N V F E E C T 7, 1 2 4 . 3 4 5, 9 2 9 . 5 7 5, 9 0 0 . 0 0 3, 4 9 4 . 0 8 4,317.00 4,360.00 00 0 . 3 4 2 . 9 0 0 . 0 3 0 . 0 0 C R I M C O N V F E E C N 2, 6 7 5 . 7 6 2, 1 8 3 . 5 7 2, 1 0 0 . 0 0 1, 4 2 8 . 3 5 1,608.00 1,624.00 00 0 . 3 4 2 . 9 1 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 P O L I C E T R A I N I N G C L A S S E S 1, 4 7 3 . 4 7 0. 0 0 0. 0 0 0. 0 0 0.00 0.00 To t a l PU B L I C S A F E T Y 94 5 , 6 2 8 . 5 9 96 7 , 4 0 4 . 5 4 98 6 , 4 2 0 . 0 0 69 1 , 7 2 0 . 0 0 929,568.00 943,524.00 34 3 U T I L I T I E S A N D E N V I R O N M E N T 00 0 . 3 4 3 . 2 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 E N G I N E E R I N G F E E S A N D C H A R G 92 , 7 3 6 . 6 3 1 3 1 , 8 0 8 . 8 1 1 0 2 , 0 1 0 . 0 0 7 6 , 9 9 0 . 2 5 9 7 , 4 0 0 . 0 0 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 00 0 . 3 4 3 . 8 4 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 F I B E R S E R V I C E S 0. 0 0 18 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 0. 0 0 40 , 8 3 2 . 6 6 36,078.00 36,438.00 00 0 . 3 4 3 . 9 3 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 A N I M A L C O N T R O L S H E L T E R 7, 5 2 8 . 5 0 7, 0 1 1 . 0 0 4, 0 0 0 . 0 0 5, 6 9 0 . 0 0 6,550.00 6,616.00 To t a l UT I L I T I E S A N D E N V I R O N M E N T 10 0 , 2 6 5 . 1 3 15 6 , 8 1 9 . 8 1 10 6 , 0 1 0 . 0 0 12 3 , 5 1 2 . 9 1 140,028.00 143,054.00 34 4 T R A N S P O R T A T I O N 00 0 . 3 4 4 . 5 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 F L E X F U E L P A Y M E N T S F R O M S T A 0. 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 8 1 . 9 2 2 1 1 . 0 0 2 1 3 . 0 0 00 0 . 3 4 4 . 9 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 A N N U A L V E H I C L E F E E ( T B D ) 58 3 , 1 4 0 . 5 0 32 0 . 0 0 - 0. 0 0 0. 0 0 0.00 0.00 To t a l TR A N S P O R T A T I O N 58 3 , 1 4 0 . 5 0 - 32 0 . 0 0 0. 0 0 18 1 . 9 2 211.00 213.00 34 5 E C O N O M I C E N V I R O N M E N T 5 Page: Fo r m a t N a m e ( s ) : S = R e v e n u e O = S H R e p o r t Pa c k e t Pa g e 22 6 of 26 6 10 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 2 Ci t y o f E d m o n d s 6 7 : 5 4 A M Page: re v f l e x . r p t 20 1 2 Y E E s t & 2 0 1 3 B a s e l i n e 2 0 1 0 A c t u a l s A cc o u n t N u m b e r A c t u a l s 20 1 2 A c t u a l s As o f R p t D a t e Baselin e 2 0 1 1 20 1 2 Bu d g et 2012 Yr. End Est 2013 00 0 . 3 4 5 . 8 1 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 Z O N I N G / S U B D I V I S I O N F E E 47 , 9 3 5 . 6 5 45 , 3 2 0 . 0 0 5 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 3 4 , 4 3 7 . 0 0 35,000.00 38,000.00 00 0 . 3 4 5 . 8 2 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 F I R E P L A N C H E C K F E E S 4, 0 0 5 . 0 0 2, 8 4 0 . 0 0 3 , 3 0 0 . 0 0 1 , 1 4 2 . 5 0 1,435.00 2,911.00 00 0 . 3 4 5 . 8 3 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 P L A N C H E C K I N G F E E S 20 4 , 9 9 1 . 0 0 24 3 , 6 1 3 . 7 6 2 3 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 7 8 , 3 0 0 . 5 0 209,696.00 216,457.00 00 0 . 3 4 5 . 8 4 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 P L A N N I N G 1 % I N S P E C T I O N F E E 1, 8 2 8 . 6 4 5, 1 0 5 . 2 6 4 , 5 0 0 . 0 0 3 2 5 . 7 5 600.00 1,200.00 00 0 . 3 4 5 . 8 8 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 S . E . P . A . R E V I E W 3, 3 9 5 . 0 0 6, 3 0 5 . 0 0 6 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 2 , 4 2 5 . 0 0 3,500.00 5,000.00 00 0 . 3 4 5 . 8 9 0 . 0 1 0 . 0 0 C R I T I C A L A R E A S T U D Y 23 , 0 6 0 . 0 0 16 , 2 7 5 . 0 0 1 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 3 , 0 2 0 . 0 0 14,000.00 12,000.00 To t a l EC O N O M I C E N V I R O N M E N T 28 5 , 2 1 5 . 2 9 31 9 , 4 5 9 . 0 2 31 8 , 8 0 0 . 0 0 22 9 , 6 5 0 . 7 5 264,231.00 275,568.00 34 7 C U L T U R E A N D R E C R E A T I O N 00 0 . 3 4 7 . 3 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 S W I M P O O L E N T R A N C E F E E S 67 , 6 0 8 . 1 7 50 , 6 2 4 . 2 0 5 2 , 4 7 1 . 0 0 5 9 , 3 2 6 . 4 3 58,407.00 56,000.00 00 0 . 3 4 7 . 3 1 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 L O C K E R F E E S 57 7 . 0 0 39 8 . 5 0 3 0 0 . 0 0 3 0 3 . 1 0 300.00 300.00 00 0 . 3 4 7 . 3 2 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 S W I M C L A S S F E E S 64 , 7 4 3 . 2 2 21 , 3 4 5 . 0 0 4 5 , 5 2 0 . 0 0 2 8 , 6 2 5 . 0 0 29,795.00 32,000.00 00 0 . 3 4 7 . 6 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 P R O G R A M F E E S 83 4 , 3 9 0 . 4 3 86 9 , 1 2 7 . 5 3 8 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 6 0 9 , 0 7 4 . 7 5 721,736.00 780,000.00 00 0 . 3 4 7 . 6 1 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 T A X A B L E R E C R E A T I O N A C T I V I T I E 6, 4 3 1 . 7 8 17 , 3 6 9 . 1 0 1 2 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 2 2 , 7 1 6 . 3 3 114,358.00 115,500.00 00 0 . 3 4 7 . 6 2 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 S W I M T E A M / D I V E T E A M 0. 0 0 31 , 0 1 6 . 0 0 3 1 , 1 5 0 . 0 0 3 0 , 0 1 8 . 5 0 30,019.00 31,600.00 00 0 . 3 4 7 . 9 1 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 B I R D F E S T R E G I S T R A T I O N F E E S 57 0 . 0 0 49 0 . 0 0 6 2 0 . 0 0 1 , 0 1 5 . 0 0 660.00 660.00 To t a l CU L T U R E A N D R E C R E A T I O N 97 4 , 3 2 0 . 6 0 99 0 , 3 7 0 . 3 3 1, 0 5 0 , 0 6 1 . 0 0 85 1 , 0 7 9 . 1 1 955,275.00 1 , 0 1 6 , 0 6 0 . 0 0 34 9 I N T E R F U N D / I N T E R D E P T S A L E S & S E R V I C E 00 0 . 3 4 9 . 1 8 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 I N T E R F U N D R E I M B U R S E M E N T - C 1, 2 8 3 , 8 1 2 . 2 3 1, 3 9 8 , 6 3 0 . 1 1 1 , 5 8 2 , 0 6 1 . 0 0 1 , 2 2 3 , 3 3 1 . 1 6 1,350,478.00 1,520,248.00 00 0 . 3 4 9 . 9 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 M I S C E L L A N E O U S P O L I C E S E R V I C 32 5 . 0 9 2, 7 5 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 2,750.00 2,750.00 To t a l IN T E R F U N D / I N T E R D E P T S A L E S & S E R V I 1, 2 8 4 , 1 3 7 . 3 2 1, 4 0 1 , 3 8 0 . 1 1 1, 5 8 2 , 0 6 1 . 0 0 1, 2 2 3 , 3 3 1 . 1 6 1,353,228.00 1 , 5 2 2 , 9 9 8 . 0 0 35 1 F E L O N Y / M I S D E M E A N O R P E N A L T I E S To t a l FE L O N Y / M I S D E M E A N O R P E N A L T I E S 0. 0 0 0. 0 0 0. 0 0 0. 0 0 0.00 0.00 35 2 C I V I L P E N A L T I E S 00 0 . 3 5 2 . 3 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 P R O O F O F V E H I C L E I N S P E N A L T Y 7, 8 4 9 . 6 0 12 , 0 1 5 . 9 6 1 0 , 5 0 0 . 0 0 8 , 1 6 4 . 5 3 10,116.00 10,214.00 To t a l CI V I L P E N A L T I E S 7, 8 4 9 . 6 0 12 , 0 1 5 . 9 6 10 , 5 0 0 . 0 0 8, 1 6 4 . 5 3 10,116.00 10,214.00 6 Page: Fo r m a t N a m e ( s ) : S = R e v e n u e O = S H R e p o r t Pa c k e t Pa g e 22 7 of 26 6 10 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 2 Ci t y o f E d m o n d s 7 7 : 5 4 A M Page: re v f l e x . r p t 20 1 2 Y E E s t & 2 0 1 3 B a s e l i n e 2 0 1 0 A c t u a l s A cc o u n t N u m b e r A c t u a l s 20 1 2 A c t u a l s As o f R p t D a t e Baselin e 2 0 1 1 20 1 2 Bu d g et 2012 Yr. End Est 2013 35 3 C I V I L I N F R A C T I O N P E N A L T I E S 00 0 . 3 5 3 . 1 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 T R A F F I C I N F R A C T I O N P E N A L T I E S 58 , 5 9 5 . 5 4 48 , 2 5 3 . 5 7 5 1 , 4 7 2 . 0 0 2 3 , 6 2 2 . 4 8 30,000.00 24,000.00 00 0 . 3 5 3 . 1 0 0 . 0 2 0 . 0 0 N C T R A F F I C I N F R A C T I O N 28 7 , 6 7 1 . 2 3 32 4 , 4 5 0 . 0 8 2 8 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 2 0 6 , 8 7 0 . 7 9 252,000.00 213,000.00 00 0 . 3 5 3 . 1 0 0 . 0 4 0 . 0 0 C R T C O S T F E E C O D E L E G A S S E S 0. 0 0 19 , 8 8 7 . 0 7 1 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 5 , 3 3 1 . 5 6 19,334.00 20,086.00 00 0 . 3 5 3 . 1 0 0 . 4 1 0 . 0 0 S P E E D I N G D O U B L E 0. 0 0 76 . 7 1 0 . 0 0 3 7 . 8 0 76.00 77.00 00 0 . 3 5 3 . 7 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 N O N - T R A F F I C I N F R A C T I O N P E N A 1, 4 6 3 . 8 7 2, 2 6 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 9 0 0 . 0 0 1,800.00 2,034.00 00 0 . 3 5 3 . 7 0 0 . 0 2 0 . 0 0 O T H E R I N F R A C T I O N S ' 0 4 85 0 . 5 6 99 2 . 5 3 1 , 2 5 0 . 0 0 6 1 5 . 8 4 646.00 1,002.00 To t a l CI V I L I N F R A C T I O N P E N A L T I E S 34 8 , 5 8 1 . 2 0 39 5 , 9 1 9 . 9 6 35 2 , 7 2 2 . 0 0 24 7 , 3 7 8 . 4 7 303,856.00 260,199.00 35 4 C I V I L P A R K I N G I N F R A C T I O N P E N A L T I E S 00 0 . 3 5 4 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 P A R K I N G I N F R A C T I O N P E N A L T I E 31 , 6 9 3 . 6 6 33 , 2 5 5 . 1 2 3 3 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 2 9 , 9 5 1 . 6 4 31,475.00 31,592.00 00 0 . 3 5 4 . 0 0 0 . 0 1 0 . 0 0 P R - H A N D I C A P P E D 2, 6 7 5 . 0 0 78 6 . 0 1 8 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0.00 794.00 00 0 . 3 5 4 . 0 0 0 . 0 3 0 . 0 0 P A R K I N G I N F R A C T I O N L O C 80 0 . 0 0 40 0 . 0 0 6 0 0 . 0 0 4 0 . 0 0 80.00 404.00 00 0 . 3 5 4 . 0 0 0 . 0 7 0 . 0 0 P A R K / I N D D I S Z O N E 38 8 . 9 0 1, 3 4 7 . 3 3 6 0 0 . 0 0 2 , 7 1 6 . 3 1 3,573.00 3,000.00 To t a l CI V I L P A R K I N G I N F R A C T I O N P E N A L T I E S 35 , 5 5 7 . 5 6 35 , 7 8 8 . 4 6 35 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 32 , 7 0 7 . 9 5 35,128.00 35,790.00 35 5 C R I M I N A L T R A F F I C M I S D E M E A N O R F I N E S 00 0 . 3 5 5 . 2 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 D W I P E N A L T I E S 8, 3 3 0 . 5 0 9, 3 0 6 . 2 2 9 , 5 0 0 . 0 0 6 , 4 6 6 . 2 3 5,970.00 9,200.00 00 0 . 3 5 5 . 2 0 0 . 0 1 0 . 0 0 D U I - D P A C C T 0. 0 0 41 1 . 0 1 0 . 0 0 1 , 3 1 4 . 6 0 1,261.00 415.00 00 0 . 3 5 5 . 8 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 O T H E R C R I M I N A L T R A F M I S D E M 10 0 . 5 8 8. 0 8 5 0 . 0 0 3 3 0 . 8 2 372.00 8.00 00 0 . 3 5 5 . 8 0 0 . 0 1 0 . 0 0 C R I M I N A L T R A F F I C M I S D E M E A N O 51 , 6 2 6 . 6 0 42 , 3 4 9 . 7 1 4 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 2 5 , 9 3 9 . 2 5 32,965.00 33,000.00 To t a l CR I M I N A L T R A F F I C M I S D E M E A N O R F I N E 60 , 0 5 7 . 6 8 52 , 0 7 5 . 0 2 49 , 5 5 0 . 0 0 34 , 0 5 0 . 9 0 40,568.00 42,623.00 35 6 C R I M I N A L N O N T R A F F I C F I N E S 00 0 . 3 5 6 . 9 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 O T H E R N O N - T R A F M I S D E M E A N O 88 9 . 9 3 53 3 . 3 8 6 0 0 . 0 0 2 4 0 . 5 2 481.00 539.00 00 0 . 3 5 6 . 9 0 0 . 0 4 0 . 0 0 O T H E R N O N T R A F F I C M I S D . 8 / 0 3 14 , 5 5 7 . 3 1 8, 8 6 4 . 0 8 1 1 , 5 0 0 . 0 0 1 1 , 1 8 9 . 6 7 15,930.00 14,000.00 00 0 . 3 5 6 . 9 0 0 . 0 8 0 . 0 0 C O U R T D V P E N A L T Y A S S E S S M E N 1, 0 7 8 . 3 5 1, 4 7 5 . 9 7 9 5 0 . 0 0 9 1 4 . 0 2 1,013.00 1,491.00 To t a l CR I M I N A L N O N T R A F F I C F I N E S 16 , 5 2 5 . 5 9 10 , 8 7 3 . 4 3 13 , 0 5 0 . 0 0 12 , 3 4 4 . 2 1 17,424.00 16,030.00 35 7 C R I M I N A L C O S T S 7 Page: Fo r m a t N a m e ( s ) : S = R e v e n u e O = S H R e p o r t Pa c k e t Pa g e 22 8 of 26 6 10 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 2 Ci t y o f E d m o n d s 8 7 : 5 4 A M Page: re v f l e x . r p t 20 1 2 Y E E s t & 2 0 1 3 B a s e l i n e 2 0 1 0 A c t u a l s A cc o u n t N u m b e r A c t u a l s 20 1 2 A c t u a l s As o f R p t D a t e Baselin e 2 0 1 1 20 1 2 Bu d g et 2012 Yr. End Est 2013 00 0 . 3 5 7 . 3 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 C R I M I N A L C O S T S - R E C O U P M E N T 11 1 , 6 4 0 . 7 5 14 1 , 5 8 0 . 6 3 1 2 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 9 2 , 1 2 9 . 4 4 106,421.00 113,265.00 00 0 . 3 5 7 . 3 1 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 J U R Y D E M A N D C O S T 0. 0 0 0. 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0.00 0.00 00 0 . 3 5 7 . 3 3 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 P U B L I C D E F E N S E R E C O U P M E N T 41 , 0 0 6 . 9 2 41 , 0 5 6 . 4 2 3 7 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 2 5 , 4 1 9 . 3 5 30,261.00 40,000.00 00 0 . 3 5 7 . 3 5 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 C O U R T I N T E R P R E T E R C O S T 45 0 . 1 1 28 8 . 6 7 3 0 0 . 0 0 1 4 4 . 7 2 228.00 292.00 To t a l CR I M I N A L C O S T S 15 3 , 0 9 7 . 7 8 18 2 , 9 2 5 . 7 2 15 7 , 4 0 0 . 0 0 11 7 , 6 9 3 . 5 1 136,910.00 153,557.00 35 9 N O N - C O U R T F I N E S , F O R F E I T U R E S & P E N A L T I E S 00 0 . 3 5 9 . 9 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 M I S C F I N E S A N D P E N A L T I E S 2, 7 7 8 . 0 0 48 0 . 0 0 1 , 0 5 0 . 0 0 1 , 9 3 0 . 0 0 1,440.00 485.00 To t a l NO N - C O U R T F I N E S , F O R F E I T U R E S & P E N 2, 7 7 8 . 0 0 48 0 . 0 0 1, 0 5 0 . 0 0 1, 9 3 0 . 0 0 1,440.00 485.00 36 1 I N T E R E S T A N D O T H E R E A R N I N G S 00 0 . 3 6 1 . 1 1 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 I N V E S T M E N T I N T E R E S T 11 , 0 1 6 . 8 4 7, 0 4 4 . 0 7 0 . 0 0 5 , 1 3 5 . 8 5 3,969.00 8,000.00 00 0 . 3 6 1 . 1 9 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 I N V E S T M E N T S E R V I C E F E E S 16 1 . 5 1 - 0. 0 0 9 , 8 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 1 2 - 0.00 0.00 00 0 . 3 6 1 . 4 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 I N T E R E S T O N C O U N T Y T A X E S 5, 9 8 2 . 2 6 2, 4 9 9 . 2 1 2 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 , 3 2 4 . 0 1 1,542.00 1,250.00 00 0 . 3 6 1 . 4 0 0 . 0 1 0 . 0 0 I N T E R E S T - C O U R T C O L L E C T I O N 3, 2 8 2 . 4 4 3, 6 6 0 . 8 4 3 , 1 5 0 . 0 0 4 , 3 8 9 . 5 0 5,365.00 5,491.00 To t a l IN T E R E S T A N D O T H E R E A R N I N G S 20 , 1 2 0 . 0 3 13 , 2 0 4 . 1 2 14 , 9 5 0 . 0 0 10 , 8 4 9 . 2 4 10,876.00 14,741.00 36 2 R E N T S , L E A S E S , A N D C O N C E S S I O N S 00 0 . 3 6 2 . 3 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 P A R K I N G 9, 9 2 9 . 9 2 9, 2 5 2 . 8 8 1 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 9 , 2 5 2 . 8 8 11,510.00 8,790.00 00 0 . 3 6 2 . 4 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 S P A C E / F A C I L I T I E S R E N T A L S 14 5 , 0 2 6 . 1 1 14 5 , 2 4 2 . 0 0 1 4 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 3 3 , 2 7 7 . 0 0 139,300.00 140,000.00 00 0 . 3 6 2 . 4 1 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 G Y M A N D W E I G H T R O O M F E E S 7, 7 7 1 . 5 9 8, 0 2 1 . 2 4 7 , 8 0 0 . 0 0 4 , 3 7 5 . 5 5 5,475.00 5,500.00 00 0 . 3 6 2 . 4 2 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 B R A C K E T R O O M R E N T A L 5, 2 4 0 . 0 0 76 0 . 0 0 1 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 4 , 1 0 5 . 0 0 5,090.00 3,040.00 00 0 . 3 6 2 . 5 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 L E A S E S L O N G - T E R M 16 8 , 8 6 5 . 5 7 15 6 , 0 1 9 . 5 9 1 7 3 , 4 6 5 . 0 0 1 3 2 , 7 6 1 . 4 9 153,665.00 143,000.00 00 0 . 3 6 2 . 8 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 V E N D I N G M A C H I N E / C O N C E S S I O 3, 5 6 2 . 1 0 4, 0 2 9 . 3 7 4 , 7 0 0 . 0 0 6 , 1 0 3 . 1 3 4,220.00 4,500.00 00 0 . 3 6 2 . 9 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 O T H E R R E N T S & U S E C H A R G E S 8, 4 4 5 . 0 0 10 , 0 7 7 . 5 0 1 0 , 0 7 8 . 0 0 5 , 7 4 5 . 0 0 5,845.00 6,200.00 To t a l RE N T S , L E A S E S , A N D C O N C E S S I O N S 34 8 , 8 4 0 . 2 9 33 3 , 4 0 2 . 5 8 34 7 , 0 4 3 . 0 0 29 5 , 6 2 0 . 0 5 325,105.00 311,030.00 36 7 C O N T R I B U T I O N S & D O N A T I O N S P R I V A T E S O U R C E 00 0 . 3 6 7 . 1 1 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 P A R K S D O N A T I O N S 3, 9 0 9 . 0 0 3, 7 0 9 . 0 0 8 , 4 5 6 . 0 0 1 8 , 0 6 0 . 7 1 7,956.00 4,300.00 00 0 . 3 6 7 . 1 1 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 P O L I C E C O N T R I B U T I O N S F R O M P 0. 0 0 50 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0.00 0.00 8 Page: Fo r m a t N a m e ( s ) : S = R e v e n u e O = S H R e p o r t Pa c k e t Pa g e 22 9 of 26 6 10 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 2 Ci t y o f E d m o n d s 9 7 : 5 4 A M Page: re v f l e x . r p t 20 1 2 Y E E s t & 2 0 1 3 B a s e l i n e 2 0 1 0 A c t u a l s A cc o u n t N u m b e r A c t u a l s 20 1 2 A c t u a l s As o f R p t D a t e Baselin e 2 0 1 1 20 1 2 Bu d g et 2012 Yr. End Est 2013 00 0 . 3 6 7 . 1 2 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 B I R D F E S T C O N T R I B U T I O N S 1, 2 5 0 . 0 0 1, 4 5 9 . 2 0 1 , 5 0 0 . 0 0 1 , 3 3 6 . 5 8 1,200.00 1,400.00 To t a l CO N T R I B U T I O N S & D O N A T I O N S P R I V A T E 5, 1 5 9 . 0 0 5, 2 1 8 . 2 0 9, 9 5 6 . 0 0 19 , 3 9 7 . 2 9 9,156.00 5,700.00 36 9 O T H E R R E V E N U E S 00 0 . 3 6 9 . 1 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 S A L E O F J U N K / S A L V A G E 1, 3 2 1 . 4 2 1, 2 3 8 . 6 2 2 0 0 . 0 0 1 , 0 8 0 . 1 2 2,160.00 1,486.00 00 0 . 3 6 9 . 2 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 S A L E S O F U N C L A I M P R O P E R T Y 4, 8 6 2 . 9 2 1, 2 9 6 . 6 0 4 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 , 6 2 7 . 2 6 1,740.00 1,750.00 00 0 . 3 6 9 . 3 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 C O N F I S C A T E D A N D F O R F E I T E D P 1, 0 8 1 . 5 6 0. 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0.00 0.00 00 0 . 3 6 9 . 4 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 O T H E R J U D G E M E N T / S E T T L E M E N 10 0 . 0 0 14 , 1 3 1 . 5 8 2 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0.00 0.00 00 0 . 3 6 9 . 4 0 0 . 4 1 0 . 0 0 P O L I C E J U D G M E N T S / R E S T I T U T I O 47 0 . 6 6 62 0 . 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 1 6 0 . 0 0 300.00 465.00 00 0 . 3 6 9 . 8 1 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 C A S H I E R ' S O V E R A G E S / S H O R T A G 21 . 0 2 - 43 . 3 3 2 0 0 . 0 0 - 4 . 0 0 - 26.00 44.00 00 0 . 3 6 9 . 9 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 O T H E R M I S C R E V E N U E S 5, 6 5 9 . 2 4 2, 2 7 2 . 1 6 3 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 5 , 2 9 9 . 2 1 10,204.00 3,000.00 00 0 . 3 6 9 . 9 0 0 . 0 1 0 . 0 0 S M A L L O V E R P A Y M E N T 10 5 . 4 8 65 . 3 8 0 . 0 0 8 8 . 0 0 110.00 66.00 00 0 . 3 6 9 . 9 0 0 . 0 2 0 . 0 0 N S F F E E S - P A R K S & R E C 15 0 . 0 0 18 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 8 0 . 0 0 120.00 182.00 00 0 . 3 6 9 . 9 0 0 . 0 3 0 . 0 0 N S F F E E S - M U N I C I P A L C O U R T 70 3 . 3 6 96 8 . 3 7 5 2 5 . 0 0 5 4 3 . 2 3 653.00 978.00 00 0 . 3 6 9 . 9 0 0 . 0 4 0 . 0 0 N S F F E E S - P O L I C E 0. 0 0 0. 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0.00 91.00 00 0 . 3 6 9 . 9 0 0 . 0 5 0 . 0 0 N S F F E E S - D E V E L S E R V D E P T 0. 0 0 90 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 6 0 . 0 0 0.00 0.00 00 0 . 3 6 9 . 9 0 0 . 6 2 0 . 0 0 P L A N N I N G S I G N R E V E N U E 3, 1 7 3 . 8 8 1, 5 8 5 . 0 0 2 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0.00 0.00 To t a l OT H E R R E V E N U E S 17 , 6 0 7 . 5 0 22 , 4 9 1 . 0 4 9, 8 2 5 . 0 0 9, 0 3 3 . 8 2 15,313.00 8,062.00 38 6 A G E N C Y T Y P E D E P O S I T S To t a l AG E N C Y T Y P E D E P O S I T S 0. 0 0 0. 0 0 0. 0 0 0. 0 0 0.00 0.00 38 8 O T H E R I N C R E A S E I N F U N D B A L A N C E / N E T A S S E T To t a l OT H E R I N C R E A S E I N F U N D B A L A N C E / N E 0. 0 0 0. 0 0 0. 0 0 0. 0 0 0.00 0.00 39 1 P R O C E E D S O F L T D E B T - G O V E R N M E N T A L F U N D S To t a l PR O C E E D S O F L T D E B T - G O V E R N M E N T A 0. 0 0 0. 0 0 0. 0 0 0. 0 0 0.00 0.00 39 5 D I S P O S I T I O N / F I X E D A S S E T S 00 0 . 3 9 5 . 1 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 S A L E O F F I X E D A S S E T S 96 8 , 8 7 2 . 2 6 0. 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0.00 0.00 9 Page: Fo r m a t N a m e ( s ) : S = R e v e n u e O = S H R e p o r t Pa c k e t Pa g e 23 0 of 26 6 10 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 2 Ci t y o f E d m o n d s 10 7 : 5 4 A M Page: re v f l e x . r p t 20 1 2 Y E E s t & 2 0 1 3 B a s e l i n e 2 0 1 0 A c t u a l s A cc o u n t N u m b e r A c t u a l s 20 1 2 A c t u a l s As o f R p t D a t e Baselin e 2 0 1 1 20 1 2 Bu d g et 2012 Yr. End Est 2013 00 0 . 3 9 5 . 2 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 I N S U R A N C E R E C O V E R I E S 0. 0 0 10 , 2 6 2 . 6 8 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0.00 0.00 To t a l DI S P O S I T I O N / F I X E D A S S E T S 96 8 , 8 7 2 . 2 6 10 , 2 6 2 . 6 8 0. 0 0 0. 0 0 0.00 0.00 39 7 T R A N S F E R S - I N 00 0 . 3 9 7 . 1 2 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 I N T E R F U N D T R A N S F E R 25 , 0 8 6 . 0 0 25 , 0 8 6 . 0 0 2 5 , 0 8 6 . 0 0 1 2 , 5 4 3 . 0 0 25,086.00 25,086.00 00 0 . 3 9 7 . 1 3 6 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 I N T E R F U N D T R A N S F E R 24 , 6 8 1 . 0 0 0. 0 0 6 , 9 3 0 . 0 0 6 , 9 3 0 . 0 0 6,930.00 0.00 00 0 . 3 9 7 . 5 1 1 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 I n t e r f u n d t r a n s f e r f r o m f u n d 5 1 1 52 5 , 2 3 6 . 5 6 0. 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0.00 0.00 To t a l TR A N S F E R S - I N 57 5 , 0 0 3 . 5 6 25 , 0 8 6 . 0 0 32 , 0 1 6 . 0 0 19 , 4 7 3 . 0 0 32,016.00 25,086.00 Gr a n d T o t a l 34 , 5 6 5 , 6 9 3 . 4 8 3 2 , 8 2 1 , 2 5 7 . 2 8 3 3 , 0 1 7 , 1 7 4 . 0 0 2 2 , 7 8 2 , 4 4 5 . 1 9 3 2 , 6 9 4 , 4 6 6 . 0 0 3 2 , 8 6 9 , 7 9 2 . 0 0 10 Page: Fo r m a t N a m e ( s ) : S = R e v e n u e O = S H R e p o r t Pa c k e t Pa g e 23 1 of 26 6    AM-5225     11.              City Council Meeting Meeting Date:11/05/2012 Time:20 Minutes   Submitted For:Shawn Hunstock Submitted By:Shawn Hunstock Department:Finance Review Committee: Committee Action:  Type: Information  Information Subject Title Public Hearing on 2013 budget. Recommendation N.A. For discussion only at this time. Previous Council Action Budget Work Sessions on 10/23/12 and 10/30/12. Narrative Finance Director Shawn Hunstock will present information as follow-up from the 10/23 and 10/30 budget workshops. A cumulative list to-date of Council proposed changes, as well as staff corrections/changes, will also be discussed. Council may then begin their deliberations on changes to the proposed budget. Fiscal Impact Fiscal Year:2013 Revenue:$66,426,307 Expenditure:$78,708,399 Fiscal Impact: Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/31/2012 01:48 PM Mayor Dave Earling 10/31/2012 03:37 PM Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase 11/01/2012 01:06 PM Form Started By: Shawn Hunstock Started On: 10/31/2012 01:06 PM Final Approval Date: 11/01/2012  Packet Page 232 of 266    AM-5227     12.              City Council Meeting Meeting Date:11/05/2012 Time:20 Minutes   Submitted For:Shawn Hunstock Submitted By:Shawn Hunstock Department:Finance Review Committee: Committee Action:  Type: Action  Information Subject Title 2013 Property Tax Ordinance Recommendation Recommend approval of the 2013 property tax levy ordinance. Previous Council Action Budget workshops on 10/23/12 and 10/30/12. Narrative Council is being asked to adopt the ordinance setting the property tax levy for 2013. Fiscal Impact Fiscal Year:2013 Revenue:$13,470,259 Expenditure: Fiscal Impact: Regular property tax levy: $9,779,567 EMS levy: $2,774,589 Voted bond levy: $916,103 Total property tax revenue: $13,470,259 Attachments 2013 Property Tax Ordinance Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/31/2012 01:48 PM Mayor Dave Earling 10/31/2012 03:50 PM Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase 11/01/2012 01:06 PM Packet Page 233 of 266 Form Started By: Shawn Hunstock Started On: 10/31/2012 01:21 PM Final Approval Date: 11/01/2012  Packet Page 234 of 266 2013 Property Tax Ordinance Page 1 of 5 ORDINANCE NO. ____ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, 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 $9,800,000, AN EMS LEVY OF $3,300,000 AND LEVYING $916,103 FOR VOTED INDEBTEDNESS FOR THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMPLEX, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. WHEREAS, the City Council and the City of Edmonds have properly given notice of the public hearing held on November 5, 2012, to consider the City's current expense budget for 2013, pursuant to RCW 84.55.120; and WHEREAS, the City Council in the course of considering the budget for 2013 have reviewed all sources of revenue and examined all anticipated expenses and obligations; and WHEREAS, the district’s actual levy amount for the previous year was $9,623,702 for regular property levy, and $3,263,193 for EMS levy, and $895,640 for debt service payments, and WHEREAS, the City Council hereby determines following public hearing that it is in the best interest of and necessary to meet the expenses and obligations of the City to increase the regular property levy by 1%; and keep the Emergency Medical Services (EMS) levy at the prior year level, and WHEREAS, the population of this district is greater than 10,000, and WHEREAS, the Snohomish County Assessor’s Office has requested that all Snohomish County Taxing Districts submit their levy certifications to the county on the State Department of Revenue standardized form REV 64 0100; NOW, THEREFORE Packet Page 235 of 266 2013 Property Tax Ordinance Page 2 of 5 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The limit factor for the regular levy to be collected in budget year 2013 shall be limited to the 101%, or 100% plus inflation, which ever is lower of the highest amount of regular property taxes that could have been levied in the City in any year since 1985. Section 2. Regular Property Tax. The 2012 regular property tax levy for collection in 2013 is the amount levied in 2011 for collection in 2012, plus an increase of $97,000 which is a percentage increase of 1%, plus an increase equal to the amount allowed by one or more of the following; new construction, improvements to property, newly constructed wind turbines, any increase in the value of state assessed property, any annexations that have occurred and refunds made, for an estimated total levy of $9,800,000. Section 3. Emergency Medical Services (EMS) property tax levy. The 2012 EMS property tax levy for collection in 2013 is the amount levied in 2011 for collection in 2012, plus an increase of $33,000 which is a percentage increase of 1%, plus an increase equal to the amount allowed by one or more of the following; new construction, improvements to property, newly constructed wind turbines, any increase in the value of state assessed property, any annexations that have occurred and refunds made, for an estimated total levy of $3,300,000. Section 4. There shall be and is hereby levied current taxes of $916,103, the purpose of which is to make debt service payments on voter approved bonds. Section 5. The levies contained in sections 2 through 4 are subject to amendment upon receipt of 2012 assessed valuation from Snohomish County. Section 6. Pursuant to the request by the Snohomish County Assessor’s Office, the Finance Director is hereby authorized to submit to the Snohomish County Council Packet Page 236 of 266 2013 Property Tax Ordinance Page 3 of 5 certification of the hereby approved levies on the State Department of Revenue standardized form REV 64 0100 attached hereto as Exhibit A. Section 7. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance. Section 8. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifically delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take effect five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title. It is enacted on a vote of a majority plus one of the City Council. APPROVED: MAYOR, DAVE EARLING ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: BY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: _________ PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: _________ PUBLISHED: _________ EFFECTIVE DATE: _________ ORDINANCE NO. ____ Packet Page 237 of 266 2013 Property Tax Ordinance Page 4 of 5 SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. ____ of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the __ day of November, 2012, 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, 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 $9,800,000, AN EMS LEVY OF $3,300,000 AND LEVYING $916,103 FOR VOTED INDEBTEDNESS FOR THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMPLEX, 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 November, 2012. CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE Packet Page 238 of 266 2013 Property Tax Ordinance Page 5 of 5 Exhibit A – Levy Certification Levy Certification Submit this document to the county legislative authority on or before November 30 of the year preceding the year in which the levy amounts are to be collected and forward a copy to the assessor. In accordance with RCW 84.52.020, I, Shawn Hunstock, Finance Director, for the City of Edmonds, do hereby certify to the Snohomish County legislative authority that the Council of said district requests that the following levy amounts be collected in 2013 as provided in the district’s budget, which was adopted following a public hearing on November 5, 2012. Regular Levy: $9,800,000 EMS Levy: $3,300,000 Excess Levy: $916,103 ___________________________________________ Signature Date Packet Page 239 of 266    AM-5230     14.              City Council Meeting Meeting Date:11/05/2012 Time:45 Minutes   Submitted By:Carrie Hite Department:Parks and Recreation Review Committee: Committee Action: Recommend Review by Full Council Type: Action  Information Subject Title Nonrepresented Compensation Policy Recommendation Council adopt language for the Nonrepresented Compensation Policy.  Staff will bring back final version on consent. Previous Council Action December 7, 2010: Council voted to authorize $50,000 to hire a Compensation Consultant to complete a nonrepresented compensensation survey and policy review, and a complete job description update.  March/April/May 2011: There were various discussions with the Public safety and HR Committee, who forwarded to Council the RFP/RFQ for approval. J une 21, 2011: Council voted to advertise an RFQ/RFP for a Compensation study and job description update to be completed.  August 10-Sept 2, 2011: RFP was published.  October 10th, 2011: Council President Peterson and Council member Fraley-Monillas and staff interviewed three firms and forwarded a reccomendation to Council.  October 18th, 2011: Council awarded a contract to Public Sector Personnel Consultants ( PSPC ).  October 25th, 2011: PSPC briefed Council on the process of performing a job description update and nonrepresented compensation study and policy review.  December 6, 2011: Council discussed comparator cities and reqeusted staff to bring back alternatives.  December 20, 2011: Council adopted comparator cities for the study.  July 24th, 2012 Council discussed final report and recommendations. Council requested an additional meeting to receive public comment, and narrow down options to adopt nonrepresented compensation for 2012, and a Nonrepresented Compensation Policy.  September 25th, Council adopted compensation measures for Non represented employees for 2012, and discussed Nonrep Compensation Policy. At the meeting, Lora Petso and Diane Buskshnis volunteered to email Council feedback for revisions to the policy.  Narrative Attached is the original version of the Nonrepresented Compensation Policy as recommended by the Packet Page 240 of 266 Attached is the original version of the Nonrepresented Compensation Policy as recommended by the Compensation Consultant.  In addition, attached is a redline version of the Nonrepresented Compensation Policy as proposed by the two Council members that worked on edits of the policy.  As a guide, attached is a summary table that outlines the main tenets of the compensation consultant's recommendation alongside the two Council members suggested language.  In addition, the Mayor is recommending a proposal that may be both amenable to Council, and continue to offer equity to the nonrepresented employees.  It is the Mayor's recommendation that Council consider his proposal. Attachments Redline with Council edits Compensation Consultant Recommendation Comparison Policy with Mayor's proposal Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date City Clerk Sandy Chase 11/02/2012 12:21 PM Mayor Dave Earling 11/02/2012 01:29 PM Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase 11/02/2012 01:30 PM Form Started By: Carrie Hite Started On: 11/01/2012 08:33 AM Final Approval Date: 11/02/2012  Packet Page 241 of 266 D R A F T PERSONNEL POLICY NON-REPRESENTED EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION The City’s non-represented compensation policy strives to maintain equity, by offering competitive salaries and benefits in order to attract and retain high quality staff and an effective work force. equity in pay for all employees, offers competitive salaries to attract high level applicants, offers internal equity to foster long-term retention of valuable employees, and rewards meritorious job performance. It is the policy of the City for the classification and compensation plan to provide salaries that compare favorably with other similar cities in the region for comparable jobs, and within budget limitations. It is also the policy of the City to strive to maintain ensure that salaries are salaries that are internally equitableyequitable, in proper relationship to all other jobs within the City, within reasonable budget parameters. SALARY RANGE PROGRESSION Salary ranges for non-represented positions will have a 35% spread from the bottom to the top of each salary range, and will include a seven-step scale with 5% between each of the steps. All new employees will generally be hired at the first step of their salary range; however, an entry level rate of pay above the minimum may be offered to an applicant whose education and experience exceed the minimum qualifications for the classification, or when external labor market pay practices impact recruitment. Initial step placement at higher than Step 3 of the salary range, is subject to approval by the Mayor prior to the offer of employment. When Employees are hired, they will complete a six month probationary period upon demonstrating that they have completed with satisfactory work during this period. Employees hired January through June during the year, will be advanced to their next pay step on January 1st of the next year in which they were hired. Employees hired in July through December, will be advanced to their next step on Janaury 1st on the year after the next year they were hired.of the following year. For example, an employee hired on February 1, 2012 would be placed at their next step on January 1st 2013. An employee hired on November 1, 2012 would be placed at their next step on January 1st, 2014. Employees with satisfactory job performance will advance to each next step of the salary range on January 1st of each succeedingssive year, until reaching their maximum step. .generally advanced to the next salary step increment after six months of satisfactory job performance, and each succeeding year, after a concurrent performance evaluation has been completed by their supervisor, until reaching the maximum step. An employee who fails to achieve at least a satisfactory overall rating on their annual performance evaluation shall not be eligible for a step increase until their next performance evaluation rating period. In the event of promotion of a non-represented employee to another non-represented job classification in a higher pay range, the employee will be placed on the first step of the new salary range, or the lowest step in the new range that results in an increase ofto their current Formatted: Justified Formatted: Superscript Formatted: Superscript Formatted: Superscript Packet Page 242 of 266 salary.receive a salary increase of not less than 5% or will be adjusted to the minimum salary level of the new position’s salary range, whichever is greater. To ensure internal equity, employees promoted from a represented position to a non- represented position in a higher pay range, will be placed on the first step of the new salary range, or the lowest step in the new range that results in an increase of to their current salary, receive a gross salary increase of not less than 5% or the minimum salary level of the new position’s salary range, whichever is greater, including consideration of other cash compensation being received in the former position. In the event of a lateral placement of a non-represented employee to another non-represented job classification in the same pay range, the employee will not receive a salary increase. ANNUAL SALARY ADJUSTMENTS The Mayor will recommend the adjustment of salary ranges for non-represented employees to the City Council for approval as part of the budget process, effective January 1 of each year. The Mayor’s recommendation will take into consideration Salary ranges for non-represented employees will be adjusted at a rate not less than the average adjustment negotiated and approved for represented employee groups. Each employee will maintain the same step within the newly approved salary range that they held prior to the adjustment. In addition, the City will attempt to mitigate compression issues as they arise. The Mayor will make appropriate and timely recommendations to City Council to maintain internal equity and prevent compression issues. To maintain internal equity and to prevent compression within the ranks, the City will maintain the minimum of a 10% increment between the salary ranges at midpoint of supervisor classifications and those supervised. Additionally, the City will ensure that salary ranges of non- represented positions are equal to or exceed salary ranges for comparable represented positions. The City will attempt to mitigate compression issues as they may arise. MARKET ANALYSIS The Human Resources Department will conduct compensation surveys for each non- represented benchmark position no later than September 1, every three years. The following criteria will be used for determining which cities are comparable for the purposes of analyzing and comparing compensation (“Qualified Comparable Cities”): • Comparable cities must be located in Snohomish, King, Pierce, Thurston, or Kitsap counties; and • Comparable cities will include all cities with a population that is no more than 10,000 over or no more than 10,000 under the population of the City of Edmonds according to the most recent population figures published by the Washington State Office of Financial Management or a similar successor government agency; and • The application of the above criteria will be utilized to select a minimum of eight agencies that are closest in population to the City of Edmonds. If this process yields fewer than eight comparable cities (not counting Edmonds) for analysis during a particular year, additional cities shall be selected for analysis by adding an additional city or cities, up to eight, with agencies that are outside the 10,000 over/under Formatted: Justified Packet Page 243 of 266 criteria, but that are the next closest in population to the City of Edmonds, with the goal of having 50% of the cities with a higher population and 50% with a lower population than Edmonds. Additionally, private sector data will be gathered and considered where it is a significant factor in the City’s competitiveness. Benchmark positions are those which are assigned clearly recognizable work at a well-defined level of responsibility, and for which comparable classifications are easily identified to ensure that sufficient data can be collected. Classifications that are selected as comparable for survey purposes must match the benchmark position by 80% in level of work and responsibility. Salaries for comparable positions that are not a complete match may be leveled up or down by a maximum of 20%, to adjust for differences in the level or scope of responsibility in work duties. Non-benchmark classifications (those for which there are not adequate comparable classifications) will be indexed to a corresponding City benchmark position, which is comparable in required qualifications, scope of work, and level of responsibility. Salary ranges for benchmarks will be determined by using the prevailing rates in the identified comparator cities. The City will be competitive within the defined market, but will not assume the position of a lead pay policy compared to the market; therefore the median or 50th percentile of the mid-range of salary data collected will be used to determine competitiveness. Every three years, based upon the survey data, the Mayor will recommend salary range market adjustments salary ranges for non-represented positions to City Council. The Mayor will consider the following criteria in developing the recommendation: will be realigned, to m1. Maintain the mid-point of each salary range between 5% high/low of the mid-point of the comparator city median. 2 Positions requiring adjustment will be assigned to the new salary range within the salary range table that places the position closest to the comparator city median. 3. Any employee whose actual salary falls below the newly adopted pay range minimum, shall be adjusted up to the new minimum upon adoption of the new pay ranges. 4. Any employee whose actual salary exceeds the top of the approved salary range, will have their salary frozen until such time that market rates support pay range adjustment for their job classification. EXTERNAL/INTERNAL EQUITY To be more competitive in the market place, the City will provide a deferred compensation contribution of 2% for non-represented employees. If the City is financially unable to offer the deferred compensation contribution, the City will provide non-represented employees with 40 hours of Administrative Leave annually. Administrative Leave will have no cash-out value and will not be carried over at the end of the calendar year. To address internal equity issues among all employees, Non-represented employees will be eligible for receipt of Longevity Incentive Pay, consistent with that provided by SEIU, Teamsters, and the Edmonds Police Officers’ Association represented employees. In addition, to avoid inequity between supervisory ranks, and to eliminate disincentive for promotion within the Department, Commissioned Police management personnel will be eligible Packet Page 244 of 266 for receipt of an Educational Incentive Pay, consistent with that provided to Edmonds Police Officers’ Association represented employees. Non-represented at-will employees will be provided with an employment contract that articulates all compensation and benefits, as well as severance provisions that will be imposed in the event that their employment is involuntarily terminated. Packet Page 245 of 266 D R A F T PERSONNEL POLICY NON-REPRESENTED EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION The City’s non-represented compensation policy strives to maintain equity in pay for all employees, offers competitive salaries to attract high level applicants, offers internal equity to foster long-term retention of valuable employees, and rewards meritorious job performance. It is the policy of the City for the classification and compensation plan to provide salaries that compare favorably with other similar cities in the region for comparable jobs, and within budget limitations. It is also the policy of the City to ensure that salaries are internally equitable, in proper relationship to all other jobs within the City. SALARY RANGE PROGRESSION Salary ranges for non-represented positions will have a 35% spread from the bottom to the top of each salary range, and will include a seven-step scale with 5% between each of the steps. All new employees will generally be hired at the first step of their salary range; however, an entry level rate of pay above the minimum may be offered to an applicant whose education and experience exceed the minimum qualifications for the classification, or when external labor market pay practices impact recruitment. Initial step placement at higher than Step 3 of the salary range, is subject to approval by the Mayor prior to the offer of employment. Employees are generally advanced to the next salary step increment after six months of satisfactory job performance, and each succeeding year, after a concurrent performance evaluation has been completed by their supervisor, until reaching the maximum step. An employee who fails to achieve at least a satisfactory overall rating on their annual performance evaluation shall not be eligible for a step increase until their next performance evaluation rating period. In the event of promotion of a non-represented employee to another non-represented job classification in a higher pay range, the employee will receive a salary increase of not less than 5% or will be adjusted to the minimum salary level of the new position’s sala ry range, whichever is greater. To ensure internal equity, employees promoted from a represented position to a non- represented position in a higher pay range, will receive a gross salary increase of not less than 5% or the minimum salary level of the new position’s salary range, whichever is greater, including consideration of other cash compensation being received in the former position. In the event of a lateral placement of a non-represented employee to another non-represented job classification in the same pay range, the employee will not receive a salary increase. ANNUAL SALARY ADJUSTMENTS Packet Page 246 of 266 The Mayor will recommend the adjustment of salary ranges for non-represented employees to the City Council for approval as part of the budget process, effective January 1 of each year. Salary ranges for non-represented employees will be adjusted at a rate not less than the average adjustment negotiated and approved for represented employee groups. Each employee will maintain the same step within the newly approved salary range that they held prior to the adjustment. To maintain internal equity and to prevent compression within the ranks, the City will maintain the minimum of a 10% increment between the salary ranges at midpoint of supervisor classifications and those supervised. Additionally, the City will ensure that salary ranges of non- represented positions are equal to or exceed salary ranges for comparable represented positions. The City will attempt to mitigate compression issues as they may arise. MARKET ANALYSIS The Human Resources Department will conduct compensation surveys for each non- represented benchmark position no later than September 1, every three years. The following criteria will be used for determining which cities are comparable for the purposes of analyzing and comparing compensation (“Qualified Comparable Cities”): Comparable cities must be located in Snohomish, King, Pierce, Thurston, or Kitsap counties; and Comparable cities will include all cities with a population that is no more than 10,000 over or no more than 10,000 under the population of the City of Edmonds according to the most recent population figures published by the Washington State Office of Financial Management or a similar successor government agency; and The application of the above criteria will be utilized to select a minimum of eight agencies that are closest in population to the City of Edmonds. If this process yields fewer than eight comparable cities (not counting Edmonds) for analysis during a particular year, additional cities shall be selected for analysis by adding an additional city or cities, up to eight, with agencies that are outside the 10,000 over/under criteria, but that are the next closest in population to the City of Edmonds, with the goal of having 50% of the cities with a higher population and 50% with a lower population than Edmonds. Additionally, private sector data will be gathered and considered where it is a significant factor in the City’s competitiveness. Benchmark positions are those which are assigned clearly recognizable work at a well-defined level of responsibility, and for which comparable classifications are easily identified to ensure that sufficient data can be collected. Classifications that are selected as comparable for survey purposes must match the benchmark position by 80% in level of work and responsibility. Salaries for comparable positions that are not a complete match may be leveled up or down by a maximum of 20%, to adjust for differences in the level or scope of responsibility in work duties. Non-benchmark classifications (those for which there are not adequate comparable classifications) will be indexed to a corresponding City benchmark position, which is comparable in required qualifications, scope of work, and level of responsibility. Packet Page 247 of 266 Salary ranges for benchmarks will be determined by using the prevailing rates in the identified comparator cities. The City will be competitive within the defined market, but will not assume the position of a lead pay policy compared to the market; therefore the median or 50th percentile of the mid-range of salary data collected will be used to determine competitiveness. Every three years, based upon the survey data, salary ranges for non-represented positions will be realigned, to maintain the mid-point of each salary range between 5% high/low of the mid- point of the comparator city median. Positions requiring adjustment will be assigned to the new salary range within the salary range table that places the position closest to the comparator city median. Any employee whose actual salary falls below the newly adopted pay range minimum, shall be adjusted up to the new minimum upon adoption of the new pay ranges. Any employee whose actual salary exceeds the top of the approved salary range, will have their salary frozen until such time that market rates support pay range adjustment for their job classification. EXTERNAL/INTERNAL EQUITY To be more competitive in the market place, the City will provide a deferred compensation contribution of 2% for non-represented employees. If the City is financially unable to offer the deferred compensation contribution, the City will provide non-represented employees with 40 hours of Administrative Leave annually. Administrative Leave will have no cash-out value and will not be carried over at the end of the calendar year. To address internal equity issues among all employees, Non-represented employees will be eligible for receipt of Longevity Incentive Pay, consistent with that provided by SEIU, Teamsters, and the Edmonds Police Officers’ Association represented employees. In addition, to avoid inequity between supervisory ranks, and to eliminate disincentive for promotion within the Department, Commissioned Police management personnel will be eligible for receipt of an Educational Incentive Pay, consistent with that provided to Edmonds Police Officers’ Association represented employees. Non-represented at-will employees will be provided with an employment contract that articulates all compensation and benefits, as well as severance provisions that will be imposed in the event that their employment is involuntarily terminated. Packet Page 248 of 266 Non-Represented Employee Compensation Policy Consultant and Council Comparison Section Compensation Consultant Recommendation Council/LP, DB Suggestions Mayor’s Recommendation Notes Policy statement Ensure that salaries are equitable Strive to maintain equity. Strive to maintain equity Salary Range Progression 5% Step increase after 6 months successful probation 5% Step increase after one year, with satisfactory performance, and every year after that until at maximum salary range. Automatic with above formula. Completion of 6 months of probation, then 5% step increase in the following January, and every January after that until employee reaches maximum range. This can be proposed as part of budget, but is subject to Council approval. 5% step increase after 6 months of probation, then the January following one year anniversary, and every January after that until employee reaches maximum salary range. Mayor will include this in the budget each year, and as such, will need to be approved by Council Recommend language to have steps in January of every year. Promotion Non represented job to Non-represented job Represented job to Non -represented job Receive an increase not less than 5%, or adjusted to the minimum salary level of the new position, whichever is greater. Same as above, and consideration of other cash compensation being received in former position. Placed on first step of new range, or lowest step of new range that results in an increase in current salary ( no minimum) Same as above, and consideration of other cash compensation being received in former position. The employee will get the lesser of 5% increase or the amount to get them onto a step. After that, it would follow the Salary Range Progression plan, which would be a step increase on the January 1st following the anniversary date. Same as above, and consideration of other cash compensation being received in former position. Although current policy is a minimum 5% increase, this will at least put employees on a step with an increase, and will follow the above salary range progression. Annual Salary Adjustments ( Cost of Living Adjustments, Salary Range adjustments) Salary ranges will be adjusted at a rate no less than the average adjustment negotiated and approved for represented employee groups. City will maintain a minimum of Mayor will consider the average adjustment negotiated and approved for represented groups, and will make recommendation to Council for approval in budget process. Mayor will make appropriate and Mayor will include annual salary adjustments in the budget that are no less than the average adjustment negotiated and approved for represented employee groups. Budget is subject to Council approval. Mayor will include appropriate This would strive to maintain equity. Packet Page 249 of 266 Non-Represented Employee Compensation Policy Consultant and Council Comparison a 10% increment between the salary ranges at midpoint of supervisor classifications and those being supervised. Every three years, based upon the survey data, salary ranges for Non represented positions will be realigned, based on criteria. timely recommendations to City Council to maintain internal equity and prevent compression issues. Every three years, based upon the survey data, the Mayor will recommend salary range market adjustments to Council based on criteria. adjustments in the budget that will mitigate any compression issues and strive to maintain equity. Every three years, based upon the survey data and criteria, the Mayor will adjust salary ranges for Non represented positions as part of the budget process. External/Internal Equity To be more competitive in the market place, the City will provide: Deferred Compensation 2% and/or Management Leave, 40 hours Longevity incentive pay, consistent with all represented groups. Commissioned Police management : Educational Incentive Pay Employment Contract Delete all, and add: Mayor will make appropriate and timely recommendations to City Council to consider changes to the compensation and/or benefits of non-represented employees. To be more competitive and equitable both internally and externally, the City will provide: Management leave of up to 24 hours per year, on a use it or lose it basis, to non-represented employees that are not eligible for compensatory time. Longevity incentive pay that is consistent with all represented groups. This would be in alignment with both external and internal comparators, and would strive to maintain equity. Packet Page 250 of 266    AM-5235     15.              City Council Meeting Meeting Date:11/05/2012 Time:20 Minutes   Submitted For:Phil Williams Submitted By:Kody McConnell Department:Public Works Review Committee: Committee Action:  Type: Action  Information Subject Title Adoption of Utility Rate Ordinance  Recommendation It is recommended that Council authorize the Mayor to sign an Ordinance adopting new utility rates effective January 1, 2013. Previous Council Action  None Narrative The City of Edmonds operates a combined utility operation which incorporates potable water, sanitary sewer, and storm and surface water management functions.  The City Council had previously commissioned a utility rate study of its combined utility rates by FCS Group of Redmond, Washington.  The City received the combined utility rate study report of its consultant and found it to recommend increases in potable water, sanitary sewer, and storm and surface water management utility rates to address rising operating and maintenance costs including but not limited to wholesale cost increases for potable water acquisition from Alderwood Water and Wastewater District and the replacement of failing combined utility infrastructure.  The City Council received this recommendation from the Office of the Mayor as part of his 2013 budget recommendations.  The attached Ordinance reflects code revisions required to account for the rate changes recommended by FCS Group. Attachments 2013 Utility Rate Increase Ordinance Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date City Clerk Sandy Chase 11/01/2012 04:41 PM Mayor Dave Earling 11/02/2012 11:02 AM Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase 11/02/2012 11:02 AM Form Started By: Kody McConnell Started On: 11/01/2012 04:11 PM Final Approval Date: 11/02/2012  Packet Page 251 of 266 - 1 - ORDINANCE NO. ________ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 7.30.030 WATER RATES – METER INSTALLATION CHARGES, RELATING TO UTILITY RATES OF WATER SUPPLIED THROUGH METERS, THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 7.30.040 UTILITY CHARGES – SANITARY SEWER, RELATING TO UTILITY RATES FOR SANITARY SEWER SERVICE, AND THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 7.50.050 RATES AND CHARGES, RELATING TO UTILITY RATES FOR STORM AND SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT SERVICES, IN ORDER TO INCREASE SUCH RATES AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. _____________________________________________________________________________________ WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds operates a combined utility operation which incorporates potable water, sanitary sewer, and storm and surface water management functions; and WHEREAS, the City Council commissioned a utility rate study of its combined utility rates by FCS Group of Redmond, Washington; and WHEREAS, the City Council has received the combined utility rate study report of its consultant recommending increases in potable water, sanitary sewer, and storm and surface water management utility rates to address rising operating and maintenance costs including but not limited to wholesale cost increases for potable water acquisition and the replacement of failing combined utility infrastructure; and WHEREAS, the City Council has received this recommendation from the Office of the Mayor as part of his 2013 budget recommendations; and WHEREAS, the City Council deems it to be in the public interest to increase rates finding that such increases are justified on a cost-to-service basis; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Edmonds City Code Section 7.30.030 Water rates, Sections A and B, are hereby amended to read as follows: 7.30.030 Water rates – Meter installation charges. A. The bimonthly rates of water supplied through meters shall be fixed at the following levels: Effective Dates 1/1/2012 1/1/2013 1. Single-family residence (per unit) $20.60 $22.15 2. Duplex, apartment houses, $18.14 $19.50 condominiums and other multi-unit residences (per unit) Packet Page 252 of 266 - 2 - 3. All other customers: Meter 1/1/2012 1/1/2013 ¾” $24.91 $26.78 1” $50.71 $54.51 1½” $93.78 $100.81 2” $142.98 $153.70 3” $308.43 $331.56 4” $436.89 $469.66 6” $866.07 $952.53 B. Variable Rate. In addition to the base rate set forth above, the customer shall be charged the following rate per 100 cubic feet of water consumed: Effective Dates 1/1/2012 1/1/2013 $2.14 $2.30 All water rate charges on water utility bills mailed on or after January 1st of each year shall be based on rates as reflected in this section corresponding with said time period. Section 2. The Edmonds City Code Section 7.30.040 Utility charges – Sanitary sewer, Section A, is hereby amended to read as follows: 7.30.040 Utility charges – Sanitary sewer. A. The following rates shall be charged on all billings after the effective date shown with respect to the following customers and/or service: Effective Dates Connected Unconnected 1. Single-family residences (bimonthly) 1/1/2006 $50.64 $8.16 1/1/2013 $53.17 $8.57 2. Duplexes, apartment houses, condominiums and other multi-unit residences (bimonthly) 1/1/2006 $40.69/unit $8.16/unit 1/1/2013 $42.72/unit $8.57/unit 3. Duplexes, apartment houses, condominiums, and other multi-unit residences (monthly) 1/1/2006 $20.34/unit $4.09/unit 1/1/2013 $21.36/unit $4.29/unit 4. All other customers (monthly) Packet Page 253 of 266 - 3 - Fixed Rate: 1/1/2006 $2.88 N/A 1/1/2013 $3.02 N/A Volume Charge: 1/1/2006 $3.26/ccf* N/A 1/1/2013 $3.42/ccf* N/A *Per 100 cubic feet of metered water consumption. Section 3. The Edmonds City Code Section 7.50.050 Rates and charges, Section A, is hereby amended to read as follows: 7.50.050 Rates and charges. A. The following rates shall be charged on all billings with respect to the following customers and/or service: CATEGORY EFFECTIVE DATE 1/1/2012 1/1/2013 Single-family residential and multi-family residential Bimonthly billing cycle $20.94 $22.62 Monthly billing cycle $10.47 $11.31 All other resident customers per ESU (monthly cycle) $10.47 $11.31 Section 4: Effective Date. This Ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifically delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take effect five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title. APPROVED: ________________________________ MAYOR DAVID O. EARLING ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED ________________________________ CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: BY ____________________________ JEFF TARADAY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: ____________ PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: ____________ PUBLISHED: ____________ EFFECTIVE DATE: ____________ ORDINANCE NO. _______ Packet Page 254 of 266 - 4 - SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. ______ of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the ____ day of ___________, 2012, the City Council of the City of Edmonds passes 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 SECTION 7.30.030 WATER RATES – METER INSTALLATION CHARGES, RELATING TO UTILITY RATES OF WATER SUPPLIED THROUGH METERS, THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 7.30.040 UTILITY CHARGES – SANITARY SEWER, RELATING TO UTILITY RATES FOR SANITARY SEWER SERVICE, AND THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 7.50.050 RATES AND CHARGES, RELATING TO UTILITY RATES FOR STORM AND SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT SERVICES, IN ORDER TO INCREASE SUCH RATES 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 ____________, 2012. _______________________________________ CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE Packet Page 255 of 266    AM-5228     16.              City Council Meeting Meeting Date:11/05/2012 Time:5 Minutes   Submitted For:Shawn Hunstock Submitted By:Shawn Hunstock Department:Finance Review Committee: Committee Action:  Type: Information  Information Subject Title Report on results of bond refinancing. Recommendation N.A. For information only. Previous Council Action N.A. Narrative Finance Director Shawn Hunstock will present information on results of the recent General Obligation bond refinancing. Information on savings by bond issue, as well as by fund, will be presented. Fiscal Impact Fiscal Year:2013 Revenue: Expenditure:$(50,708) Fiscal Impact: Additional debt service savings that can be programmed into the 2013 budget includes: General Fund: $7,517 Street Fund (111): $367 REET Fund (126): $15,277 LTGO Debt Service Fund (234): $25,829 Storm Fund (422): $367 Sewer/WWTP Fund (423): $1,351 Total Savings for 2013: $50,708 Attachments Bond Refunding Details Packet Page 256 of 266 Total Savings by Bond Issue Additional Savings for 2013 Budget Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/31/2012 02:13 PM Mayor Dave Earling 10/31/2012 03:49 PM Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase 11/01/2012 01:06 PM Form Started By: Shawn Hunstock Started On: 10/31/2012 01:45 PM Final Approval Date: 11/01/2012  Packet Page 257 of 266 Oct 18, 2012 10:07 am Prepared by A. Dashen & Associates (Finance 7.002 Edmonds City:2012LTRE) Page 7 SUMMARY OF REFUNDING RESULTS City of Edmonds, Washington Limited Tax General Obligation Refunding Bonds, 2012 Final Numbers (UBS Financial Services Inc.) Dated Date 10/30/2012 Delivery Date 10/30/2012 Arbitrage yield 1.505506% Escrow yield 0.112109% Bond Par Amount 9,325,000.00 True Interest Cost 1.582528% Net Interest Cost 1.620017% All‐In TIC 1.692523% Average Coupon 2.059691% Average Life 7.543 Par amount of refunded bonds 9,525,000.00 Average coupon of refunded bonds 4.806438% Average life of refunded bonds 7.097 PV of prior debt to 10/30/2012 @ 1.505506%11,784,119.26 Net PV Savings 1,912,891.62 Percentage savings of refunded bonds 20.082852% Percentage savings of refunding bonds 20.513583% Packet Page 258 of 266 Oct 18, 2012 10:07 am Prepared by A. Dashen & Associates (Finance 7.002 Edmonds City:2012LTRE) Page 8 SAVINGS City of Edmonds, Washington Limited Tax General Obligation Refunding Bonds, 2012 Final Numbers (UBS Financial Services Inc.) Present Value PriorAccrued Interest Prior Refunding to 10/30/2012 Date Debt Service Contribution Net Cash Flow Debt Service Savings @ 1.5055058% 12/01/2012 224,313.75 185,681.94 38,631.81 16,470.26 22,161.55 21,893.28 12/01/2013 1,338,627.50 1,338,627.50 1,071,267.50 267,360.00 263,992.92 12/01/2014 1,344,850.00 1,344,850.00 1,083,667.50 261,182.50 253,998.46 12/01/2015 938,345.00 938,345.00 700,467.50 237,877.50 227,882.65 12/01/2016 952,652.50 952,652.50 709,567.50 243,085.00 229,335.78 12/01/2017 969,880.00 969,880.00 728,267.50 241,612.50 224,499.93 12/01/2018 989,505.00 989,505.00 741,367.50 248,137.50 227,050.13 12/01/2019 1,000,950.00 1,000,950.00 748,967.50 251,982.50 227,055.81 12/01/2020 1,019,517.50 1,019,517.50 771,167.50 248,350.00 220,379.28 12/01/2021 1,040,227.50 1,040,227.50 792,667.50 247,560.00 216,324.50 12/01/2022 637,810.00 637,810.00 611,367.50 26,442.50 22,961.34 12/01/2023 653,822.50 653,822.50 630,367.50 23,455.00 20,048.27 12/01/2024 672,662.50 672,662.50 645,217.50 27,445.00 23,028.03 12/01/2025 693,900.00 693,900.00 664,327.50 29,572.50 24,378.29 12/01/2026 482,540.00 482,540.00 447,262.50 35,277.50 28,575.09 12/01/2027 83,662.50 ‐83,662.50 ‐66,746.96 12/01/2028 81,975.00 ‐81,975.00 ‐64,422.58 12/01/2029 80,287.50 ‐80,287.50 ‐62,152.60 12/01/2030 83,600.00 ‐83,600.00 ‐63,748.00 12/01/2031 81,800.00 ‐81,800.00 ‐61,442.00 12,959,603.75 185,681.94 12,773,921.81 10,773,745.26 2,000,176.55 1,912,891.62 Savings Summary PV of savings from cash flow 1,912,891.62 Plus: Refunding funds on hand Net PV Savings 1,912,891.62 Packet Page 259 of 266 Oct 18, 2012 10:07 am Prepared by A. Dashen & Associates (Finance 7.002 Edmonds City:2012LTRE) Page 21 COST OF ISSUANCE City of Edmonds, Washington Limited Tax General Obligation Refunding Bonds, 2012 Final Numbers (UBS Financial Services Inc.) Cost of Issuance $/1000 Amount Bond Counsel (Foster Pepper PLLC)4.04450 37,715.00 Financial Advisor (A. Dashen & Assoc.)2.25201 21,000.00 Rating Agency (Moody's)1.23324 11,500.00 Escrow Agent (US Bank)0.03753 350.00 POS/OS Printing / Publication (I‐Deal)0.20375 1,900.00 Contingency 0.00959 89.42 7.78063 72,554.42 Packet Page 260 of 266 Oct 18, 2012 10:07 am Prepared by A. Dashen & Associates (Finance 7.002 Edmonds City:2012LTRE) Page 28 SAVINGS City of Edmonds, Washington 1998 Bonds Refunding Final Numbers (UBS Financial Services Inc.) Prior Refunding Present Value DebtAccrued Interest Prior Debt to 10/30/2012 Date Service Contribution Net Cash Flow Service Savings @ 1.5055058% 12/01/2012 17,490.00 14,477.83 3,012.17 1,360.56 1,651.61 1,630.79 12/01/2013 424,980.00 424,980.00 405,800.00 19,180.00 18,941.11 12/01/2014 422,820.00 422,820.00 408,000.00 14,820.00 14,399.30 865,290.00 14,477.83 850,812.17 815,160.56 35,651.61 34,971.20 Savings Summary PV of savings from cash flow 34,971.20 Plus: Refunding funds on hand 1,584.28 Net PV Savings 36,555.48 Packet Page 261 of 266 Oct 18, 2012 10:07 am Prepared by A. Dashen & Associates (Finance 7.002 Edmonds City:2012LTRE) Page 39 SAVINGS City of Edmonds, Washington Refund 2001B LTGO Final Numbers (UBS Financial Services Inc.) Present Value PriorAccrued Interest Prior Refunding to 10/30/2012 Date Debt Service Contribution Net Cash Flow Debt Service Savings @ 1.5055058% 12/01/2012 33,768.75 27,953.02 5,815.73 2,292.92 3,522.81 3,482.18 12/01/2013 182,537.50 182,537.50 81,627.50 100,910.00 99,430.96 12/01/2014 181,672.50 181,672.50 80,527.50 101,145.00 98,161.13 12/01/2015 180,552.50 180,552.50 84,427.50 96,125.00 91,888.86 12/01/2016 184,177.50 184,177.50 83,227.50 100,950.00 95,040.79 12/01/2017 182,292.50 182,292.50 82,027.50 100,265.00 92,971.42 12/01/2018 185,152.50 185,152.50 80,827.50 104,325.00 95,272.77 12/01/2019 181,977.50 181,977.50 79,627.50 102,350.00 92,055.00 12/01/2020 183,530.00 183,530.00 83,427.50 100,102.50 88,669.64 12/01/2021 184,537.50 184,537.50 82,127.50 102,410.00 89,337.89 12/01/2022 80,177.50 ‐80,177.50 ‐68,970.36 12/01/2023 83,877.50 ‐83,877.50 ‐71,072.67 12/01/2024 82,652.50 ‐82,652.50 ‐68,988.88 12/01/2025 81,392.50 ‐81,392.50 ‐66,922.51 12/01/2026 80,062.50 ‐80,062.50 ‐64,845.50 12/01/2027 83,662.50 ‐83,662.50 ‐66,746.96 12/01/2028 81,975.00 ‐81,975.00 ‐64,422.58 12/01/2029 80,287.50 ‐80,287.50 ‐62,152.60 12/01/2030 83,600.00 ‐83,600.00 ‐63,748.00 12/01/2031 81,800.00 ‐81,800.00 ‐61,442.00 1,680,198.75 27,953.02 1,652,245.73 1,559,627.92 92,617.81 186,998.58 Savings Summary PV of savings from cash flow 186,998.58 Plus: Refunding funds on hand 1,659.50 Net PV Savings 188,658.08 Packet Page 262 of 266 Oct 18, 2012 10:07 am Prepared by A. Dashen & Associates (Finance 7.002 Edmonds City:2012LTRE) Page 49 SAVINGS City of Edmonds, Washington Refund 2001 LTGO Final Numbers (UBS Financial Services Inc.) Present Value PriorAccrued Interest Prior Refunding to 10/30/2012 Date Debt Service Contribution Net Cash Flow Debt Service Savings @ 1.5055058% 12/01/2012 40,112.50 33,204.24 6,908.26 2,949.31 3,958.95 3,910.98 12/01/2013 235,225.00 235,225.00 199,250.00 35,975.00 35,563.95 12/01/2014 233,327.50 233,327.50 195,950.00 37,377.50 36,380.69 12/01/2015 235,887.50 235,887.50 202,650.00 33,237.50 31,871.49 12/01/2016 232,982.50 232,982.50 199,150.00 33,832.50 31,941.06 12/01/2017 234,845.00 234,845.00 200,650.00 34,195.00 31,785.26 12/01/2018 235,965.00 235,965.00 202,050.00 33,915.00 31,038.37 12/01/2019 236,605.00 236,605.00 198,350.00 38,255.00 34,459.56 12/01/2020 236,560.00 236,560.00 199,650.00 36,910.00 32,734.03 12/01/2021 236,025.00 236,025.00 200,850.00 35,175.00 30,710.65 2,157,535.00 33,204.24 2,124,330.76 1,801,499.31 322,831.45 300,396.05 Savings Summary PV of savings from cash flow 300,396.05 Plus: Refunding funds on hand ‐2,689.44 Net PV Savings 297,706.61 Packet Page 263 of 266 Oct 18, 2012 10:07 am Prepared by A. Dashen & Associates (Finance 7.002 Edmonds City:2012LTRE) Page 59 SAVINGS City of Edmonds, Washington Refund 2002 LTGO Final Numbers (UBS Financial Services Inc.) Present Value PriorAccrued Interest Prior Refunding to 10/30/2012 Date Debt Service Contribution Net Cash Flow Debt Service Savings @ 1.5055058% 12/01/2012 132,942.50 110,046.85 22,895.65 9,867.47 13,028.18 12,869.32 12/01/2013 495,885.00 495,885.00 384,590.00 111,295.00 110,056.90 12/01/2014 507,030.00 507,030.00 399,190.00 107,840.00 105,057.34 12/01/2015 521,905.00 521,905.00 413,390.00 108,515.00 104,122.30 12/01/2016 535,492.50 535,492.50 427,190.00 108,302.50 102,353.94 12/01/2017 552,742.50 552,742.50 445,590.00 107,152.50 99,743.24 12/01/2018 568,387.50 568,387.50 458,490.00 109,897.50 100,738.98 12/01/2019 582,367.50 582,367.50 470,990.00 111,377.50 100,541.25 12/01/2020 599,427.50 599,427.50 488,090.00 111,337.50 98,975.61 12/01/2021 619,665.00 619,665.00 509,690.00 109,975.00 96,275.95 12/01/2022 637,810.00 637,810.00 531,190.00 106,620.00 91,931.70 12/01/2023 653,822.50 653,822.50 546,490.00 107,332.50 91,120.95 12/01/2024 672,662.50 672,662.50 562,565.00 110,097.50 92,016.92 12/01/2025 693,900.00 693,900.00 582,935.00 110,965.00 91,300.81 12/01/2026 482,540.00 482,540.00 367,200.00 115,340.00 93,420.58 8,256,580.00 110,046.85 8,146,533.15 6,597,457.47 1,549,075.68 1,390,525.79 Savings Summary PV of savings from cash flow 1,390,525.79 Plus: Refunding funds on hand ‐554.34 Net PV Savings 1,389,971.45 Packet Page 264 of 266 Ci t y  of  Ed m o n d s De b t  Se r v i c e  Sa v i n g s  by  Bo n d  Is s u e ,  by  Fu n d Bo n d   Is s u e  Sa v i n g s   Ge n e r a l  Fu n d   00 1 S t r e e t  11 1 S t o r m  41 1 P a r k s  Ac q  12 6 W W T P  41 4 E d m o n d s  PF D 19 9 8 2 8 , 0 9 7 . 2 2                      12 . 3 5 % 7 . 0 7 % 7 . 0 7 % 7 3 . 5 2 % 20 0 1 A 2 4 4 , 6 7 1 . 2 9                83 . 5 8 % 1 6 . 4 2 % 20 0 1 B 1 1 2 , 6 5 4 . 0 7                10 0 . 0 0 % 20 0 2 1 , 0 2 0 , 3 3 6 . 8 2          13 . 6 4 % 8 6 . 3 6 % 1, 4 0 5 , 7 5 9 . 4 0          3, 4 7 0 . 0 1                        1, 9 8 5 . 0 7                      1, 9 8 5 . 0 7                    20 , 6 5 7 . 0 8                ‐                                           ‐                                            20 4 , 4 9 6 . 2 6                ‐                                          ‐                                         ‐                                         40 , 1 7 5 . 0 3                ‐                                            ‐                                            ‐                                          ‐                                         11 2 , 6 5 4 . 0 7            ‐                                           ‐                                            ‐                                            ‐                                          ‐                                         13 9 , 1 7 3 . 9 4            ‐                                           88 1 , 1 6 2 . 8 8                To t a l  Sa v i n g s  by  Fu n d 2 0 7 , 9 6 6 . 2 7 $           1, 9 8 5 . 0 7 $                 1, 9 8 5 . 0 7 $                 27 2 , 4 8 5 . 0 9 $         40 , 1 7 5 . 0 3 $           88 1 , 1 6 2 . 8 8 $         1, 4 0 5 , 7 5 9 . 4 0 $   Bo n d   Is s u e  Sa v i n g s   Ge n e r a l  Fu n d   00 1 St r e e t  11 1 S t o r m  41 1 P a r k s  Ac q  12 6 W W T P  41 4 E d m o n d s  PF D 19 9 8 34 , 9 7 1 . 2 0                      12 . 3 5 % 7 . 0 7 % 7 . 0 7 % 7 3 . 5 2 % 20 0 1 A 3 0 0 , 3 9 6 . 0 5                83 . 5 8 % 16 . 4 2 % 20 0 1 B 1 8 6 , 9 9 8 . 5 8                10 0 . 0 0 % 20 0 2 1 , 3 9 0 , 5 2 5 . 7 9          13 . 6 4 % 86 . 3 6 % 1, 9 1 2 , 8 9 1 . 6 2          4, 3 1 8 . 9 4                        2, 4 7 0 . 7 2                      2, 4 7 0 . 7 2                    25 , 7 1 0 . 8 3                ‐                                           ‐                                            25 1 , 0 7 1 . 0 2                ‐                                          ‐                                         ‐                                         49 , 3 2 5 . 0 3                ‐                                            ‐                                            ‐                                          ‐                                         18 6 , 9 9 8 . 5 8            ‐                                           ‐                                            ‐                                            ‐                                          ‐                                         18 9 , 6 6 7 . 7 2            ‐                                           1, 2 0 0 , 8 5 8 . 0 7        To t a l  Sa v i n g s  by  Fu n d 2 5 5 , 3 8 9 . 9 6 $           2, 4 7 0 . 7 2 $                 2, 4 7 0 . 7 2 $                 40 2 , 3 7 7 . 1 2 $         49 , 3 2 5 . 0 3 $           1, 2 0 0 , 8 5 8 . 0 7 $   1, 9 1 2 , 8 9 1 . 6 2 $   In t e r e s t  Ra t e :  1. 5 8 % In c l  is s u a n c e  co s t s :  1. 6 9 % Or i g i n a l  Es t i m a t e Ac t u a l  Bo n d  Sa l e Pa c k e t Pa g e 26 5 of 26 6 20 0 1 LT G O  ‐   B Ye a r Fu n d  12 6 F u n d  00 1 F u n d  11 1 F u n d  41 1 T o t a l F u n d  00 1 F u n d  41 4 T o t a l F u n d  12 6 F u n d  126 P F D General  Obligation  Total 20 1 3 B u d g e t 3 0 2 , 2 0 8 5 0 , 7 5 9 2 9 , 0 1 7 2 9 , 0 1 7 4 1 1 , 0 0 0 1 7 3 , 4 0 8 3 4 , 0 6 7 2 0 7 , 4 7 5 8 9 , 0 0 0 5 6 , 5 5 0 3 5 7 , 9 5 0 4 1 4 , 5 0 0 20 1 3 A c t u a l 2 9 8 , 3 8 5 5 0 , 1 1 6 2 8 , 6 4 9 2 8 , 6 4 9 4 0 5 , 8 0 0 1 6 6 , 5 3 3 3 2 , 7 1 7 1 9 9 , 2 5 0 8 1 , 6 2 8 5 2 , 4 6 9 3 3 2 , 1 2 1 3 8 4 , 5 9 0 Sa v i n g s 3 , 8 2 4 6 4 2 36 7 3 6 7 5 , 2 0 0 6 , 8 7 4 1 , 3 5 1 8 , 2 2 5 7 , 3 7 3 4 , 0 8 1 2 5 , 8 2 9 2 9 , 9 1 0 5 0 , 7 0 8 Fu n d  00 1 7 , 5 1 7 Fu n d  11 1 3 6 7 Fu n d  12 6 1 5 , 2 7 7 Fu n d  41 1 3 6 7 Fu n d  41 4 1 , 3 5 1 Fu n d  23 4 2 5 , 8 2 9 50 , 7 0 8 19 9 8  LT G O LT G O  ‐   A LTGO 20 0 1 2002 V: \ B o n d s \ C o p y o f D e b t S c h e d u l e s 2 0 1 2 B u d g e t S a v i n g s S a v i n g s S u m m a r y 10/31/2012 1:27 PM Pa c k e t Pa g e 26 6 of 26 6