Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2019-12-10 City Council - Full Agenda-2502
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7 8. o Agenda Edmonds City Council snl. ,nyo COUNCIL CHAMBERS 250 5TH AVE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020 DECEMBER 10, 2019, 7:00 PM "WE ACKNOWLEDGE THE ORIGINAL INHABITANTS OF THIS PLACE, THE SDOHOBSH (SNOHOMISH) PEOPLE AND THEIR SUCCESSORS THE TULALIP TRIBES, WHO SINCE TIME IMMEMORIAL HAVE HUNTED, FISHED, GATHERED, AND TAKEN CARE OF THESE LANDS. WE RESPECT THEIR SOVEREIGNTY, THEIR RIGHT TO SELF-DETERMINATION, AND WE HONOR THEIR SACRED SPIRITUAL CONNECTION WITH THE LAND AND WATER. - CITY COUNCIL LAND ACKNOWLEDGMENT CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE LAND ACKNOWLEDGMENT ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA PRESENTATIONS 1. Resolutions of Appreciation - Councilmembers Nelson, Teitzel, Mesaros, Tibbott and Mayor Earling (15 min) APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approval of Council Meeting Minutes of November 26, 2019 2. Approval of Council Special Meeting Minutes of December 3, 2019 3. Approval of Council Meeting Minutes of December 3, 2019 4. Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments. 5. 2019 Board & Commission Retirements 6. 2020 Board & Commission Reappointments 7. Surplus City Computers 8. Resolutions of Appreciation - Councilmembers Nelson, Teitzel, Mesaros, Tibbott and Mayor Earling 9. Public Defense Contract Extension AUDIENCE COMMENTS (3-MINUTE LIMIT PER PERSON) - REGARDING MATTERS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA AS CLOSED RECORD REVIEW OR AS PUBLIC HEARINGS ACTION ITEMS 1. Deliberation and Adoption of the 2020 City Budget (60 min) 2. Utility Rate Analysis and adoption of a Utility Rate Ordinance (30 min) 3. Resolution Updating Development Fees (10 min) 4. Ordinance Amending ECC 2.35.045 & 2.35.060 Shared Leave & Sick Leave (5 min) Edmonds City Council Agenda December 10, 2019 Page 1 5. Resolution to approve certain revisions to the shared Leave and Sick Leave provisions of the City of Edmonds Personnel Policies, and the addition of the Washington State Paid Family and Medical Leave provisions (5 min) 9. MAYOR'S COMMENTS 10. COUNCIL COMMENTS 11. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(1). 12. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION. POTENTIAL ACTION AS A RESULT OF MEETING IN EXECUTIVE SESSION. ADJOURN Edmonds City Council Agenda December 10, 2019 Page 2 5.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 12/10/2019 Resolutions of Appreciation - Councilmembers Nelson, Teitzel, Mesaros, Tibbott and Mayor Earling Staff Lead: Council Department: City Council Preparer: Maureen Judge Background/History It has been customary to adopt a resolution thanking Councilmembers and the Mayor for their service at the end of their term. Staff Recommendation Adopt a resolution thanking Councilmembers Nelson, Teitzel, Mesaros, Tibbott and Mayor Earling for their dedication and service. Narrative A resolution will be presented to Councilmembers Nelson, Teitzel, Mesaros, and Tibbott as well Mayor Dave Earling on the December 10, 2019 agenda. Resolution 1437 Nelson Appreciation Resolution 1438 Teitzel Appreciation Resolution 1439 Mesaros Appreciation Resolution 1440 Tibbott Appreciation Resolution 1441 Earling Appreciation Packet Pg. 3 6.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 12/10/2019 Approval of Council Meeting Minutes of November 26, 2019 Staff Lead: Scott Passey Department: City Clerk's Office Preparer: Scott Passey Background/History N/A Staff Recommendation Review and approve the draft meeting minutes on the Consent Agenda. Narrative N/A Attachments: 11-26-2019 Draft Council Meeting Minutes Packet Pg. 4 6.1.a EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL DRAFT MINUTES November 26, 2019 ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Dave Earling, Mayor Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Council President Michael Nelson, Councilmember Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember Thomas Mesaros, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember Dave Teitzel, Councilmember (by phone) Neil Tibbott, Councilmember ALSO PRESENT Zach Bauder, Student Representative 1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE STAFF PRESENT Al Compaan, Police Chief Phil Williams, Public Works Director Patrick Doherty, Econ. Dev & Comm. Serv. Dir. Shane Hope, Development Services Director Scott James, Finance Director Dave Turley, Assistant Finance Director Jessica Neill Hoyson, HR Director Shannon Burley, Deputy Parks & Recreation Dir Rob English, City Engineer Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Scott Passey, City Clerk Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator Jeannie Dines, Recorder The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Earling in the Council Chambers, 250 5t1i Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. 2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Councilmember Tibbott read the City Council Land Acknowledge Statement: "We acknowledge the original inhabitants of this place, the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and their successors the Tulalip Tribes, who since time immemorial have hunted, fished, gathered, and taken care of these lands. We respect their sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and we honor their sacred spiritual connection with the land and water." 3. ROLL CALL City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present. Councilmember Teitzel participated by phone. 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5. PRESENTATION 1. SMALL BUSINESS SATURDAY PROCLAMATION Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 26, 2019 Page 1 Packet Pg. 5 6.1.a Mayor Earling recognized the importance of the small business community in Edmonds. He read a proclamation declaring November 30, 2019 as Small Business Saturday and urged the residents of our community, and communities around the country, to support small businesses and merchants on Small Business Saturday and throughout the year. Sheila Cloney, President, Downtown Edmonds Merchants Association (DEMA), and Matt McCullough, President, Edmonds Downtown Alliance (Ed!), accepted the proclamation. Mr. McCullough commented Saturday is a big day for businesses in downtown Edmonds and small businesses add to the vitality of the community. He encouraged the public to support small businesses, Shop Small and enjoy the holidays. Ms. Cloney thanked the community for Shopping Small and supporting the Edmonds community. 3 to 0104001 X0111u lu I oleo V Darrol Haug, Edmonds, a 45 year resident of Edmonds, thanked the City Council and Mayor for what they do. He recognized Edmonds was about to undergo many changes in its government, a new mayor, four new councilmembers, some new department heads, several retirements and a new council president, noting was fortunate many of the current staff and most of the taxpayers will remain. He referenced the Council's consideration of the Lighthouse legal services contract, commenting now was not the time to change the legal staff. He provided examples to support his recommendation to stay the course and retain Lighthouse including Mr. Taraday's ability to protect his privacy after a citizen's public record request attempted to reach into his personal computer due to his serving on several City committees and commissions. Another of Lighthouse's major efforts was the successful negotiation of the new fire contract. When the City first went to a subcontracting model, the City saved approximately $2M/year and in the latest negotiations, Lighthouse worked carefully to increase vital EMS services while saving the City what appears to be $1M/year. Changing legal services at this point would be counterproductive to good government and he urged the Council to make its decision based on practical considerations and not political considerations. He spoke in favor of establishing processes and procedures that will provide the public easier access to information which would also reduce the number of public records requests and save the City money. Liz Brown, business agent for Teamsters Local 763 that represents the City's Parks & Recreation employees, bid Mayor Earling a formal farewell. She explained Mayor Earling was one of the steps in the grievance procedure; although there have been disagreements during his tenure as mayor, he was not a pushover, he was tough and mostly fair, a good combination. She referenced specific instances where Mayor Earling dealt with City employees who were struggling with personal crises with compassion and deep humanity. In today's political environment, when someone commits an act of kindness, it deserves to be called out and acknowledged and she thanked Mayor Earling. Ava Dubno, Treasurer, Edmonds Chamber of Commerce, explained the Edmonds Chamber was chartered in 1907, a volunteer organization serving over 440 business and professional leaders in several Edmonds neighborhoods including downtown Edmonds, the Waterfront, Perrinville, Five Corners, Westgate and Hwy 99. The Chamber's mission is to promote the economic vitality of Edmonds through efficacy, leadership, education and community building events which include the Edmonds Kind of 4t'', Classic Car and Motorcycle Show, Halloween Trick or Treating and the Tree Lighting Ceremony. Over the years the Chamber has been able to fund these events through the generous support of its members and sponsors and through the success of its biggest fundraiser, Taste Edmonds. However, with the work being done to Civic Field in 2020 which will impact the Chamber's biggest fundraiser, there is a real possibility that the Chamber will not be able to fund these events to the degree they have in prior years. Therefore, in the spirit of cooperation and collaboration, the Chamber is requesting financial support from the City to supplement the cost of these events. She expressed the Chamber's appreciation for the Council's consideration of the request and looked forward to partnering with City so that events cherished by the people of Edmonds can continue in 2020 and into the future. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 26, 2019 Page 2 Packet Pg. 6 6.1.a Finnis Tupper, Edmonds, said his comments have nothing to do with the performance of the Lighthouse Law Group, but were related to the execution of responsibilities given to an ad hoc committee to evaluate the firm. He was unable to find any record of the Council as a body making a motion and voting to delegate that ad hoc committee the authority to renegotiate a contract. In reading ECC Chapter 2.05, any reasonable person would conclude the contract does not adhere to the code. This Council should not approve a contract that does not include an amount for each year. Due to the lookback poison pill trigger clause, the Council has no way of knowing the billing amount in three years which he said is against the Washington State constitution and the ECC. He recommended the Council table consideration of the city attorney contract, complete the evaluation process and renegotiate contract in an open public meeting via a motion and vote of the entire Council not just two Councilmembers. 7. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: 1. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 19, 2019 2. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 19, 2019 3. APPROVAL OF CLAIM, PAYROLL AND BENEFIT CHECKS, DIRECT DEPOSIT AND WIRE PAYMENTS 4. INCREASE OF TOURISM PROMOTION AREA LODGING FEE 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT/HOUSING Development Services Director Shane Hope reviewed: • Comprehensive Plans may generally be amended no more than once per year • Besides CFP update, only proposed 2019 amendment is for Implementation Action In Housing Element • Current Implementation Action in Housing Element is: o Develop a strategy by 2019 for increasing the supply of affordable housing and meeting diverse housing needs" • In December 2018, City Council adopted Resolution No. 1420 to consider amending Housing Implementation Action at next amendment period • Resolution 1420 identified 2 options for amending Comprehensive Plan. 1. Delete entire Implementation Action 1. Develop a stfategy by 2019 for- iner-easing the supply of affordable housing and fneeting diverse housing needs 2. Change only "due date" for a housing strategy • After Resolution 1420 , Council approved new process for Citizens' Housing Commission under Resolution No. 1427 o New resolution calls for: ■ Housing Commission to develop "policy recommendations" for City Council consideration by end of 2020 • Since then, 3rd Comp Plan amendment option was proposed to better reflect new Housing Commission's mission: o To develop "policy recommendations", rather than "strategy" o To recognize new timing for Commission (end of 2020, rather than 2019) Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 26, 2019 Page 3 Packet Pg. 7 6.1.a Planning Commission, on 10/29/19, recommended 4th option: * Develop a stfa4egy by 2019 for- iner-easing the supply of affordable housing and Meeting diverse o Provide housing policy options by the end of 2020 for City Council consideration, including input from the Planning Board November 4' City Council Meeting Highlights o Discussion to not specifically mention Planning Board in Comp Plan amendment, since Planning Board would be involved anyway o Concurrence on new Option 5: ■ To use Option 3 but with 2021 date November 26t' Public Hearing o To clarify that a new "2021" date does not change the 2020 date set by Resolution 1427, a new Option 6 is proposed: ■ "Provide housing policy options by the end of 2020 for City Council consideration, with additional input in 2021" o At hearing, public may comment o At close of hearing, Council may give direction Next steps o Tonight, Council will: ■ Hold public hearing ■ Provide direction on amendment option for ordinance o Draft ordinance will be prepared for Dec. 3 City Council action ■ Ordinance to also include reference to amendment for Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Mayor Earling opened the public participation portion of the public hearing. There was no one present who wished to provide testimony and Mayor Earling closed the public hearing. Councilmember Tibbott spoke in favor of the 2021 date, commenting it was reasonable to extend the date in light of the fact that the Housing Commission started six months later than originally planned. If the Housing Commission completed their work in November, Councilmember Tibbott asked whether that provided enough time for input from the Planning Board and others. Ms. Hope answered that was possible, but not certain. For example the Planning Board could possibly provide input in 2020 but it would be wiser to extend into 2021. Councilmember Tibbott inquired about extending the due date for the housing options the Housing Commission would provide to the City Council from 2020 to 2021. He asked if that would provide time to elicit feedback from the Planning Board and others. Ms. Hope asked for clarification, the resolution calls for the Housing Commission to bring back a recommendations by the end of 2020. The thought has always been that there would be more opportunity for public input following their recommendation for as long a period as the Council wants and that would occur in 2021. She also envisioned public input during the process in 2020 from the Planning Board as well as individual citizens, other groups/organizations, etc. Councilmember Tibbott asked if it was envisioned the Housing Commission would remain in effect in 2021. Ms. Hope said that would require an amendment to the resolution as the resolution states the commission expires January 1, 2021. Another challenge with revising the resolution is the impact on commissioners who were asked to serve for a time -limited period. The commission is working hard to meet the deadline. Councilmember Tibbott preferred the commission meet the deadline but recognized it got started late. Councilmember Tibbott asked about the timeline for rewriting the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Hope answered it was 2023 but that effort would begin in 2020 including coming to the City Council for direction. The information from the Housing Commission will be available for that process. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 26, 2019 Page 4 Packet Pg. 8 6.1.a COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO ADOPT OPTION 3, AMEND THE EXISTING LANGUAGE TO REFLECT THE HOUSING COMMISSION'S WORK AS FOLLOWS: PROVIDE HOUSING POLICY OPTIONS BY THE END OF 2020 FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION. Councilmember Johnson said she has been attending Housing Commission meetings; they are working hard and she believed they would complete their work without exception. Once the commission's recommendations are provided to Council, the Council can hold additional public hearings, refer it to the Planning Board and provide additional input in 2021. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if that was Option 6. Ms. Hope said Options 3 and 6 are very similar, Option 6 makes it explicit. Councilmember Buckshnis said Option 6 allows the Council until 2021 to create a housing policy. Ms. Hope answered the resolution calls for the commission sunsetting at the end of 2020. The Comprehensive Plan only calls for developing recommendations, not adopting regulations. Councilmember Teitzel agreed with the last two comments; if the options are provided by the end of 2020, that provides an opportunity for the public, Planning Board and Council to do additional work in 2021. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. PUBLIC HEARING ON THE 2020 PROPOSED BUDGET Finance Director Scott James advised there are two budget items on tonight's agenda, the public hearing and continued deliberation by the City Council. Mayor Earling opened the public participation portion of the public hearing. Richard Bologna, Edmonds, a 40 year Edmonds resident, proposed more emphasis be given to enforcement of traffic laws in Edmonds. A longtime resident of the Firdale Village area, he pointed out a high percentage of vehicles on Firdale Avenue exceed the 25-35 mph speed limit, making crossing to Firdale Village extremely hazardous for children and the elderly. He suggested a speed monitoring device similar to the one entering downtown Edmonds to help deter speeding motorists. In general, he recommended more funds and emphasis on traffic and law enforcement issues. Kimberly Koenig, Edmonds, speaking on behalf of the Economic Development Commission (EDC), relayed the Downtown Alliance has provided a holiday trolley connecting downtown and the waterfront district since 2014. A trolley will again be a feature during the upcoming holiday season. The City's Strategic Action Plan, approved by Council in 2013 and updated in 2015, includes a specific action item, 4a.14, that proposes establishment of a downtown/waterfront shuttle. The EDC adopted this proposal as one of its tourism promotion initiatives which have been researched extensively. With the potential to purchase a trolley and establish more regular service, the EDC discussed and reached consensus that the trolley was a worthwhile idea that would enhance visitor experience in downtown as well as promote connectivity between downtown and the waterfront, perhaps even linking remote parking facilities. To test viability upon the suggestion of the EDC, the City operated the trolley for a trial period on five August Saturdays. This short test indicated ridership would be good and would connect the waterfront and downtown. While a specific business plan has not been detailed, it is expected a significant portion of the operating costs will be offset by sponsorship and potentially fixture rentals for special events. The Lodging Tax Advisory Committee (LTAC) has pledged $20,000 for the trolley purchase and/or operations and Ed! pledged $11,000 in sponsorships. Other local partnerships can also be sought such as the Port and transit agencies. The trolley will become an iconic part of the charm and provide indirect benefits to downtown Edmonds. It will also improve accessibility between downtown and waterfront, generating sales tax Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 26, 2019 Page 5 Packet Pg. 9 6.1.a revenues, jobs, offering additional parking and enhancing the Edmonds experience. For those reason, she relayed the EDC's support for DP #5 to purchase an historic trolley and establish seasonal service in 2020. David Brewster, Edmonds, Board Member, Edmonds Public Facilities District (EPFD), thanked the City for its ongoing support of the EPFD and the operation of the Edmonds Center for the Arts (ECA) and urged the Council to continue that support in the coming year. He also thanked Councilmember Mesaros for his help and guidance as liaison to the EPFD and the EPFD Board looks forward to working with his successor. By December 2019, the ECA will have hosted nearly 90,000 guests this year, attending ECA presentation as well as events and shows from partners and rental clients Perhaps Councilmembers attended a recent sold -out show by India Arie or Robert Cray; know one of 8,000 students and seniors the ECA has served in its education and outreach programming; are part of a family that attended KidStock!; attend regular events produced by partners Cascade Symphony Orchestra, Edmonds Community College, SnoKing Community Chorale, and Olympic Ballet Theater; or attend events hosted by organizations such as Rick Steves Europe, the DeMiero Jazz Fest, Edmonds Daybreaker's Jazz Connection, SnoKing Music Educators and Community Christian Fellowship or one of the many shows produced by independent producers and community gatherings in the gym, lobby and classrooms. ECA is a platform for local individuals and businesses to express support for the arts in the form of sponsorships. One of those local small businesses, Edmonds Bookshop, owned by his wife and him, sees a direct benefit from supporting ECA by strengthening connections to the community. ECA has over 180 dedicated volunteers whose hard work and friendly faces make any experience at ECA memorable and familiar. ECA is proud to be an important aspect of Washington's first certified Creative District, a result of the City's stated goal of enhancing the prospects for local arts and culture. As sibling cities such as Kirkland, Bellingham, Bremerton and Olympia do for their performing art centers, he urged Edmonds to maintain the current proposed grant to ECA in the City's 2020 budget. He thanked the Council for their attention and hard work and wished all a warm and peaceful Thanksgiving. Liz Brown, Edmonds, a ratepayer in the Olympic View Water & Sewer District, commented on DP #94, replacement of the incinerator at the WWTP with a thermal chemical, pyrolysis. This project was first billed as an energy savings project, but even the City's contractor, AMERESCO, now says the new process will be a wash in terms of energy use or will require more energy to operate than the current treatment process. In fact, the electrical systems at the WWTP will need to be reconfigured to handle higher demand and pyrolysis will also use natural gas. The incinerator operates approximately 14 hours/day; the pyrolysis project will likely run 24 hours/day to keep up with demand, resulting in higher energy usage, more treatment chemicals and more staffing. The current incinerator needs to be replaced; the cost of a rehab/refresh of the incinerator was estimated at $8-1 OM and a complete replacement with a new incinerator was estimated at $13-15M. A new incinerator also could be housed in the current low profile of the WWTP versus building a new structure over the City's height limit. This will be an extremely expensive capital project for the City. With it, Edmonds would be the only city in the United States to rely solely on pyrolysis to treat all its sewage sludge. The handful of other cities and utilities that use pyrolysis also have another method of treatment. The most glowing reviews for pyrolysis are on the websites of companies selling the technology. If pyrolysis does not work, the impact on Edmonds' rate payers could be huge. She was unsure why a city the size of Edmonds wanted to be the canary in a coal mine for a project of this scope. She urged the Council to examine the assumptions behind this project and how it became the preferred alternative. Sheila Cloney, Edmonds, President, Downtown Edmonds Merchants Association (DEMA), speaking on behalf of the Edmonds Downtown Alliance (Ed!) and DEMA in support of the request to set aside funds in the 2020 budget to be used to reengage the process for wayfinding signs and business identification in the Edmonds downtown core in conjunction with initiatives related to Edmonds' recent designation as a Creative District. They envision working with Patrick Doherty and Francis Chapin with the goal of increasing the economic vitality of downtown Edmonds. She invited the Council to contact her or Matt McCullough, Ed!. She submitted written information. On behalf of DEMA, she expressed support for the trolley. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 26, 2019 Page 6 Packet Pg. 10 6.1.a Darrol Haug, Edmonds, commented the 176 page budget is like an onion with many layers. Expenses are going up and revenues are going down, the ending fund balance is projected to go way down even with the EMS tax increase of almost $1M/year and some expenses are pushed into the future causing future taxpayers to pay more for those services in the future. At over $8M, Fire and EMS services are one of the largest expenses; however, it is impossible to find information related to Fire and EMS finances in the 2020 budget. He met with Scott James in April to develop a more complete understanding of 2019 revenue components of Fire and EMS that include EMS taxes, insurance payments and monies from the General Fund. To the taxpayer, it can be expressed in cost per 1000: EMS is $0.44/1000, the General Fund contribution is $0.38/1000 or about $0.82/1000; insurance payments add approximately $800,000. Mr. James confirmed that the cost in unincorporated Snohomish County is $1.87/1000 for Fire and EMS services, making Edmonds' $0.82 a good bargain. The budget has 17 pages devoted to Police services, 31 pages to Parks and zero for Fire. Even cemetery maintenance and the opioid response fund each have their own page in the budget. The 2018 Budget in Review had nothing about Fire, there is a little in 2019 but no information in 2020. He suggested Councilmembers ask why information regarding Fire and EMS is not contained in the budget so that the public can find the information directly without doing a public records request. Hearing no further public comment, Mayor Earling closed the public hearing. 9. ACTION ITEMS 1. AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN THE WATER QUALITY STORMWATER CAPACITY GRANT FROM THE DEPT. OF ECOLOGY Public Works Director Phil Williams commented the PPW Committee found this item interesting enough to have it presented to the City Council to accept the funds offered by Ecology. He reviewed: • Grant details o Non-competitive grant for $50K o Requires zero match from City o Offered on two-year cycle since 2007 (first NPDES permit) o Funds awarded without identifying a specific use o All projects must support compliance with Phase II municipal stormwater programs (aka NPDES permit) City of Edmond has used previous capacity grants o Developing stormwater standards and codes o Purchase of drain markers o Education and public trainings o Internal staff trainings o Development of SWPPs for City -owned yards o GIS mapping efforts o Development of LID standards & IDDE procedures o Purchase of asset management software o Crew labor costs o New equipment (video inspection truck) Potential Current Uses for Capacity Grants Funding o Cover costs associated with new stormwater planning requirements ■ Permit now requires us to integrate stormwater elements into the City's comprehensive plan and perform additional basin -scale planning efforts; staff or consultant time spent on these efforts are eligible for reimbursement o Cover costs associated with new source control — business inspection requirement Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 26, 2019 Page 7 Packet Pg. 11 6.1.a ■ Permit now requires stormwater staff to maintain a list of active business which qualify as "high potential" for pollution per Ecology's definition, and must inspect 20% annually for potential stormwater contamination sources. Staff and consultant time to on -board this program are eligible for reimbursement o Cover cost of new education requirements ■ Permit now requires the use of `social marketing' and revisions to current education efforts; staff or consultant time, trainings, and cost of producing or providing educational materials are eligible for reimbursement COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE WATER QUALITY STORMWATER GRANT FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY Councilmember Johnson commented the PPW Committee wanted to share this good news with the full Council. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. WASTEWATER TREATMENT DISPOSAL AND TRANSPORT CONTRACT Public Works Phil Williams relayed the City signed a partnership agreement in 1988 with Mountlake Terrace, Olympic View Water & Sewer District and Ronald Wastewater District as partners to build a new secondary wastewater treatment facility in Edmonds to serve as a regional treatment facility. The focus of that 30-year agreement, which was extended for two years, was on building the plant, how the partners would pay for capital projects and how the identified plant capacity was divided based on financial contributions into a percentage of capacity in the facility. Those percentages are Edmonds 50.787%, Mountlake Terrace 23.14%, Olympic View 16% and Ronald 11 %. Each partner has the right to use that much capacity in the facility. If a project were done that increased capacity, each partner would have that percentage of increased capacity. That feature is included in the new contract. Mr. Williams explained the contract also dictates how the operation and maintenance costs are divided based on actual flows, not maximum capacity. There are a series of flow meters that measure wastewater and reconcile the data to determine the gallons of wastewater that each partner contributes to the WWTP. Partners pay for the operation and maintenance throughout the year and it is reconciled at the end of the year. The proposed agreement does not change that concept. The partners meet periodically to hammer out issues and have never reach an impasse until a few years ago when Ronald Wastewater District was in the process of being assumed by the City of Shoreline. That took longer than the term of the agreement so it was extended because litigation occurred which has now largely been resolved. Olympic View prevailed in the Court of Appeals and have the right to provide wastewater services to whatever is developed at Pt. Wells. That has been appealed to the State Supreme Court. Mr. Williams recommended signing the new agreement which has nice features such as a severability clause that may be necessary depending on the result of the litigation. Overhead expenses were limited in the original contract; the partners paid 10% above their portion to compensation Edmonds for overhead expenses such as general governmental which did not capture all the overhead. The new contract increases that to 15% plus some items were added to the list of overhead so it is actually about 17% which will help ratepayers. The proposed agreement will expire at the end of 2048. He hoped to have the agreement signed by the end of 2019 because the 2-year extension is about to expire. Councilmember Buckshnis thanked Mr. Williams for answering questions from Mr. Murdock and Mr. McMurray. She noted the City did not do 20 year bonds, why would the City do a 30 year contract when it is known that Mountlake Terrace will be expanding rapidly in the next couple years. She suggested a 10- Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 26, 2019 Page 8 Packet Pg. 12 6.1.a 15 year contract would be more prudent. Mr. Williams said the feeling of the partners including Edmonds was the 30-year agreement went great and with the way it is structured, there is little that would cause difficulty. If Mountlake Terrace grows rapidly, they have a fixed capacity in the WWTP although none of the partners are currently anywhere near their capacity. Edmonds is growing slowly and appliances that generate water that goes to a WWTP have gotten more water efficient over time. The net result is the numbers are not changing very rapidly. Even if Mountlake Terrace grew twice as fast as they have been currently, they would not challenge that number anytime in the foreseeable future and if they did, a process is established in the contract whereby one partner could ask another partner to buy some of their capacity. That would be negotiated between those partners. If they could not buy excess capacity, then Mountlake Terrace would need to develop another option for that portion of their flow. Councilmember Buckshnis suggested a 10-year contract with a 10-year renewal would be more logical with a check -in and renegotiation if necessary. She envisioned one of the partners could be significant impacted if they needed additional capacity and no one was willing to provide it. Mr. Williams said the proposed contract protects Edmonds just as much or more than the current contract. Any flows that disappear from the WWTP is also money that flows away from the partnership which impacts everyone's rates. If the partners can be committed to a 30-year contract and know their flows will come to Edmonds, the City can bank on that revenue flow for 30 years. Councilmember Buckshnis asked what happened if Mountlake Terrace doubled in size and needed 28%. Mr. Williams envisioned Mountlake Terrace could double their size and not get to their purchased capacity; they are not close now. Councilmember Buckshnis asked how the numbers were determined. Mr. Williams explained when the partnership was first formed, the partners identified their needs for the foreseeable future, the plant was sized based on that and a finite price determined and each partner paid that share/bought that capacity. Edmonds owns the plant and as the managing partner, decides what capital project are done and what the O&M costs are, but the costs are passed onto the partners. Mayor Earling cautioned against stating Mountlake Terrace would double in size as that was not realistic. Councilmember Johnson recalled the first contract was based on the useful life of the plant as designed 30 years ago. Councilmember Teitzel referred to Exhibit A, Allocated Capacity and Proportionate Share, and said he presumed that was not a fixed percentage for the four partners and could change over time such as if Mountlake Terrace increased in size and their flow changed. Mr. Williams said Mountlake Terrace owns 23.14% of the treatment plant's capacity. If something happened that decreased the plant's capacity such as a permit modification in the future, the percentages would remain constant but the capacity could go down. Vice versa if the plant's capacity increased, the partners would have the right to increase their capacity based on their percentage Councilmember Teitzel said the concern expressed by citizens was if a partner like Mountlake Terrace grew rapidly, would Edmonds end up subsidizing their growth. Mr. Williams answered no, they would still pay their share of the O&M based on the increased flow from the growth they experienced and share of the capital costs purchased when the plant was built. Councilmember Johnson asked if it would be prudent to reconnect with the partners before doing something expensive like the pyrolysis project to ensure they have the General Fund or bonding capacity. She understood there was an implied responsibility for Edmonds and the other partners to pay their share. Mr. Williams said the partners are well familiar with what Edmonds is doing, they meet frequently and have had an opportunity to review the alternatives. Edmonds is in a leadership role but none of the partners are in the dark which is the reason for some of the rate adjustments by partnership agencies. Councilmember Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 26, 2019 Page 9 Packet Pg. 13 6.1.a Johnson asked if they were onboard with the costs. Mr. Williams answered he believed the partners' technical and financial representatives were aware. COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO APPROVE THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT, DISPOSAL AND TRANSPORT CONTRACT AS PRESENTED BY MR. WILLIAMS. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. PROPOSED CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN AND 2020-2025 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM City Engineer Rob English explained this was a continued discussion on the Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) and Capital Improvement Program (CIP) following the November 12' public hearing. He pointed out a change based on a public comment at the public hearing related to the Edmonds Marsh/Willow Creek Daylighting project to correct the year and amount of expenditure to show construction in 2022 and 2023 and to reflect a 75% grant allocation and 25% local match by the Stormwater Fund which could change depending on the success of grants. The project sheet that explained the use of a consultant was removed from Fund 125 in the CIP and moved into Stormwater 422 Fund and the narratives were updated to be consistent in the CFP and CIP. Deputy Parks & Recreation Director Shannon Burley said the Marina Beach narrative was updated to ensure a more complete description of the project and how it relates to the daylighting. Mr. English relayed staff s recommend for Council to approve the ordinance to adopt the 2019 amendments to the City Comprehensive Plan (including the CFP) at the December 3, 2019 City Council meeting and to approve the 2020-2025 CIP with the adoption of the 2020 Budget. Councilmember Johnson referred to Mr. Williams' email with updated costs for Lake Ballinger, Pump Station 1 and the Stormwater Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Williams explained a new technology has been identified to provide the necessary information about the Lake Ballinger sewer line project that appears to be much more cost effective which resulted in staffs proposal to reduce that project in 2020 by $500,000. The other cost reduction was to postpone the update to Stormwater Comprehensive Plan for a year. Councilmember Johnson inquired about Pump Station 1. Mr. Williams said the expenditure in 2020 is to complete the study regarding alternatives. The likely recommended solution will be to construct a gravity sewer on Sunset Avenue which would eliminate the pump station. Councilmember Johnson asked if there was a cost reduction for that line item. Mr. Williams said no, the cost to complete the study for Pump Station 1 is $121,000. Councilmember Buckshnis referred to her extensive review of the CFP and CIP, recommending the Council scrub the CFP/CIP in August in advance of the budget preparation. She referred to an email she had sent to Councilmembers with her amendments. She commented on the importance of placeholders in Park Fund 125, 126 and 322 and her efforts to rewrite it to be in line with the governor's capital budget. Her goal next year is to work the scientific level through WRIA 8 and WSDOT mitigation and determine the ownership/future of the property. In the interim, there need to be placeholders in the Parks documents. She commented on the importance of describing it as salmon recovery and bring the marsh, stormwater and Marina Beach together so people understand how they fit. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED TO AMEND TO ADD THE EDMONDS MARSH ESTUARY RESTORATION (WILLOW CREEK DAYLIGHTING) BACK INTO TO PARKS PROJECT FUND 125 WITH THE ESTIMATED COST TO BE DETERMINED. THE PROJECT DESCRIPTION IS THE EDMONDS MARSH NEAR -SHORE ESTUARY RESTORATION WILL RESTORE THE NATURAL TIDAL EXCHANGE BETWEEN THE PUGET SOUND AND THE EDMONDS MARSH. THE PROJECT WILL ENHANCE ITS MANY ECOLOGICAL FUNCTIONS AND WILDLIFE FOUND WITHIN THE INTERIOR OF THE MARSH. FUNDS WILL BE USED Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 26, 2019 Page 10 Packet Pg. 14 TO SUPPORT THE GRANT WRITING EFFORTS. PROJECT BENEFITS/RATIONALE WOULD READ: THE NATURAL TIDAL EXCHANGE WILL ALLOW JUVENILE SALMON AND OTHER MARINE LIFE TO UTILIZE THE ESTUARY. SIMILARLY, THE RESTORATION WILL ALLOW COHO AND CHUM SALMON TO AGAIN MIGRATE INTO WILLOW CREEK FOR SPAWNING; NOTE THAT THE WILLOW CREEK HATCHERY IS LOCATED ADJACENT TO THE MARCH. CONDITIONS THAT SUPPORT MIGRATORY BIRDS AND WATERFOWL WILL ALSO BE IMPROVED. LIKEWISE, INCREASED TIDAL EXCHANGE WILL REDUCE THE ACCUMULATION OF CONTAMINANTS, INCREASE OXYGENATION WITHIN THE MARSH. THE ESTUARINE FUNCTIONS INCLUDING ITS ROLE IN THE AQUATIC FOOD WEB AND THE PROJECT IS INTENDED TO ADDRESS SEA LEVEL RISE... Council President Fraley-Monillas raised a point of order, commenting the motion was very long. Councilmember Buckshnis said it was an amendment, the project page was pulled from Fund 125 and she was adding it back. She offered to provide a memo with her amendments for consideration next week, adding that she has four similar amendments. Mayor Earling said it was an administrative decision to include the project in Public Works. Public Works and Parks likely speak weekly about it, but administratively he assigned it to Public Works. Councilmember Buckshnis said the bottom line is the Edmonds Marsh is part of the PROS Plan in the Comprehensive Plan and it behooves the City to have placeholders in Parks Funds 125, 126 and 322. If there are no placeholders, next year's mayor will have to wait a year because the CFP/CIP are only updated annually. Her amendments will provide flexibility to the future Council and Mayor because the CIPs governs the budget and the CFP governs projects. She rewrote the description so it was not tied to a stormwater project and to follow the guidelines of the PROS Plan, and the $363M in the governor's budget for salmon recovery, culvert removal, water quality, water supply projects that will expand and improve salmon habitat. Ms. Burley relayed her understanding of Councilmember Buckshnis' request was to add a placeholder to the spreadsheets without associated dollars that states this project is within Fund 125, 125 and 332 and to create a project sheet in Funds 125, 126 and 332 with dollars TBD with the description she provided. Councilmember Buckshnis answered yes. Ms. Burley said that does not change that the project is assigned to the Stormwater Department who also has funds set aside to fund the project. This is more of a clerical entry to ensure there is a placeholder with no associated dollars. Councilmember Johnson said she read Councilmember Buckshnis' email detailing her request so she understands her suggestion. If others have not read the email, she suggested including it in the packet for next week and taking action without reading it all into the record. Councilmember Nelson supported Councilmember Johnson's recommendation to include Councilmember Buckshnis' amendments in next week's packet. Mayor Earling asked if that would be disruptive to the timeline. Mr. Williams said it would not. Councilmember Johnson referred to the 4th Avenue Cultural Corridor in the CIP. She recalled the initial study was done at least 10 years ago and it was a general concept at that time. In 2017 when Councilmember Tibbott and she asked the status of the 4t' Avenue Cultural corridor, they were told it wasn't a Council priority. The Council reaffirmed it was a Council priority and asked when it could be done. The Council was told resources were dedicated to the design of Civic in 2018 and it took one year for design (2019) and one year for implementation (2020). Her understanding was the $50,000 for design of the 4t1i Avenue Corridor was used for right-of-way work and the design for utilities was not as extensive as previously thought. She was unsure if there had been any design for the corridor as the CIP has $100,000 for design in 2020 and $250,000 for design in 2021 for a total of $400,000 in design. She questioned that amount as it only cost $100,000 and took one year to design Civic. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 26, 2019 Page 11 Packet Pg. 15 6.1.a Ms. Burley answered a substantial amount of the $50,000 was used to survey the entire corridor to determine areas where design could occur and areas that were being encroached upon by property owners. Following that, a neighborhood meeting was held to show property owners the survey data and explain how their properties encroach, show the conceptual design and gather feedback. The conceptual design will be advanced by the end of 2019 and all the $50,000 budgeted in 2019 will have been spent. Typically 10% of the cost of construction is budgeted for design; there was $600,000 in design in 2019 for Civic Park in addition to the Master Plan which was approximately 10% of the construction cost. The original conceptual design for the 4t1i Avenue Corridor was $6M which was higher than the Council wanted and staff was asked to scale it back to $3.5-$4M. The current CIP project focuses on the artistic development of the corridor not the stormwater or utility aspects. In an effort get Civic to construction, the 41h Avenue Corridor project has been delayed. Councilmember Johnson said she would like to see the 41h Avenue Corridor project advanced. It was on the books before the City even purchased Civic. It is a key feature as a component of the Creative District. Instead of contributing $75,000 to the Public Facilities District, she preferred to spend that on the arts corridor and complete the design in 2020 using whatever funds are necessary. She asked how the utility design fit with this schedule if implementation was intended to begin in 2021. Mr. Williams explained it originally seemed there would be a great deal of opportunity for utility work in 4' Avenue ahead of a major surface improvement and that could absorb some of the costs. Further examination found the utility work was not as extensive as originally assumed so the role of utilities in the project will be smaller. Staff has been waiting to see how project evolved on the surface to prioritize utility projects ahead of that effort. There has not been the impetus for that yet so staff has selected higher priority water and sewer lines. Councilmember Johnson offered to work with Council to discuss priorities. She acknowledged different people have different priorities related to Civic and the 4' Avenue Arts Corridor; it needs to be progressed at the expense of other projects such as beginning the Marina Beach design or other smaller projects. Since she has been on the Council, the 4th Avenue Corridor has been pie in sky, but it is time to complete that project now that Edmonds has been designated a Creative District, the presence of the ECA and there is interest in revitalizing downtown. Councilmember Tibbott recall the $50,000 was to conduct a right-of-way study and early design work the following year. He asked how that sequenced with the timing of RCO grants. Ms. Burley said she was not aware of an RCO grant that would quality for this project. One of the greatest challenge is identifying grant funding for this project. Ms. Chapin requested it be designed to a point where she could begin to shop it for grant funding. The City is applying this year for RCO grants for funding provided next year. Councilmember Tibbott asked about other sources of funding related to the Creative District. Ms. Burley said staff is working on funding opportunities for the Creative District to make good on the work plan which centers around the 4' Avenue Cultural Corridor. The sequencing of funding in the CIP allows design to the level it can be shopped for grant funding for the construction phase. There is $100,000 in 2020 for technical specification and graphic representation. Mr. Williams suggested economic development grants are another a possibility although they are difficult to quality for. Private foundations that focus on the arts are another potential funding source. He summarized it would likely be funded by a variety of sources. Councilmember Johnson suggested the funding package could include a Local Improvement District (LID) that would assess home and businesses along the corridor which has been done for other large projects such as sidewalks. She recalled the assessment was 20 years to provide funds for something beneficial to the adjoining businesses and residences. Councilmember Buckshnis observed LIDS are not very popular. She asked if the TIP will be presented to the Council. City Engineer Rob English answered the TIP is presented in June as it must be adopted by July 1. Councilmember Buckshnis referred to the sidewalk on Railroad Avenue from Dayton to SR 104 and Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 26, 2019 Page 12 Packet Pg. 16 6.1.a asked if that was part of the Edmonds Waterfront Center project. Mr. English answered the existing sidewalk is in poor condition; a project was included in the CIP and TIP in the event an opportunity for a grant arose. Councilmember Buckshnis commented it would be nice to have the sidewalk redone in that area. Councilmember Teitzel referred to the estimated project cost for Civic of $13.1M and the cost breakdown of $12.6M which is under the estimate. He noted the Boys & Girls Club is considering their options, to remain there or potentially move. If the Boys & Girls Club moves, the building can be demolished or repurposed and he asked the cost of either option. Ms. Burley answered the current Civic project does not include that space. Utilities are being run to that location to make way for what could potentially be located there. The Boys & Girls Club are considering options; their current lease expires at the end of 2020 and includes a five year option to continue their current lease; they would need to provide notice to continue by May 2020. She recommended reopening Master Plan regarding that location and inviting public input on a Phase 2 of Civic. Civic is headed to permitting the first week of December; any decision the Boys & Girls Club made in May would be considered in Phase 2. There are no cost estimates associated with either option as the future of that space would be dependent on a future process. Councilmember Johnson referred to a carryforward budget amendment of $465,940 in building maintenance revenues and cash balances in 2019 in the CIP and asked if that was the elevator project. Mr. Williams answered the elevator car will be built offsite and was delayed so that project is being carried over into 2020. Another $100,000 will be carried over and applied to the project list in 2020. Councilmember Johnson referred to Fund 112 traffic calming, pointing out she did not see any funds in 2020 and beyond. Mr. English answered that had been funded by a previous decision package two years ago via a General Fund transfer to Fund 112 which was changed to Fund 126. Councilmember Johnson referred to the Annual Street Preservation program, commenting there was only $400,000/year in 2020 and beyond. Mr. Williams said the net for street preservation in 2020 is $1.1M. REET balances have been hit hard in 2019 and 2020. There was $1.25M in 2019 for street preservation but that is reduced to $1.1M in 2020. Councilmember Johnson observed under the Public Works project, there was only $404,070 and asked if there was another line item for overlays. Mr. English answered there was $304,000 in Fund 125 and 126 in 2020 and $500,005 in the 112 Fund. Mr. Williams answered that would pretty well wipe out the 112 Fund so it would be prudent not to spent it all. Councilmember Johnson asked if all the REET funds in 2020 would be spent on parks. Mr. Williams answered no, it is a heavy year for parks, but not all. Councilmember Johnson asked the split. Mr. English estimated expenditures for parks from Fund 125 at $1.5M and $425,000 for Public Works. Councilmember Johnson said it would be helpful to have a better understanding of how REET is divided between those departments. Mr. Williams said staff could provide numbers for 2019 and 2020. Councilmember Johnson recalled a long history related to allocation of REET funds. Many years ago it all went to parks and anything over $750,000/year could be spent on roads. That was to the great detriment of streets, the City did not have overlays or repairs, but over time it became more equitable. Cities are mandated by RCW to provide fire, police, and utilities including streets; parks are optional so decisions regarding parks need to be a conscious decision. When she looks at the CIP, she sees that is out of balance. The City is spending a tremendous amount for Civic including General Fund, bonds and grants and she reminded the Council to be very conscious of that decision. Mayor Earling requested Councilmembers get any additional questions to staff by tomorrow, observing outstanding issues include the marsh and the 4t1i Avenue Corridor. He was hopeful all questions could be answered next week and the plans approved at that meeting. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 26, 2019 Page 13 Packet Pg. 17 6.1.a Councilmember Buckshnis offered to draft the agenda memo with her amendments. Mr. Williams said staff will review her email and contact her with any questions. Councilmember Buckshnis reiterated she was just adding placeholders for park funds. Mr. Williams said the governor's budget and priorities are well known to staff and will obviously be part of anything that is done related to the marsh. He reiterated the marsh is a city project with a lot of funding sources. Administratively if a line item is included in the REET funds with the cost to be determined, he asked if she wanted a concomitant change in the stormwater budget. Councilmember Buckshnis answered no, she was leaving that as is. She was including the project in parks for the next administration. Council President Fraley-Monillas commented it did not sound like Councilmember Buckshnis' amendment would change the cost or intent. She suggested incorporating Councilmember Buckshnis' changes so the CFP/CIP did not have to be presented to the Council again next week. Mr. Williams said Mr. English, Ms. Burley and he will confer and bring it back. Mayor Earling declared a brief recess. 4. RENEWAL OF CITY ATTORNEY CONTRACT Councilmember Mesaros said the information in the packet is same as last week so he had no additional presentation. In response to comments made earlier by Mr. Tupper, Councilmember Mesaros referred to the November 4' meeting minutes that reflect Mr. Taraday presented a contract and following discussion, the Council directed Councilmember Teitzel and he to meet with Mr. Taraday, review the Council comments and Mr. Taraday developed a different contract proposal. He clarified Councilmember Teitzel and he were not negotiating a contract with Mr. Taraday, just commenting on it. Mr. Taraday said the contract in the packet tonight is not the original contract; he proposed revisions based on Council feedback. Also in response to Mr. Tupper's recommendation that the Council review, comment and vote on the contract, Councilmember Mesaros said that was exactly what the Council was doing tonight. Council President Fraley-Monillas reviewed a timeline of how, what, when, where and why: • July 2 — Councilmember Mesaros distributed a memo outlining the attorney evaluation process with a goal of a September completion so the Council could make a decision in October. Council gave Councilmember Mesaros and Teitzel the green light to proceed with their staff evaluation survey questions August — Councilmembers Mesaros and Teitzel updated Council on the 2-part survey and notified Council they were getting costs for in-house and contracted attorneys September — first evaluation results shared with Council October 15 — draft questionnaire approved Council President Fraley-Monillas said he found no evidence regarding direction given to Counc 1 Imembers Teitzel and Mesaros regarding their role in the process Councilmember Teitzel explained there are two part to this issue, 1) whether the City is getting good quality legal advice via the Lighthouse arrangement which the in-house satisfaction survey summarized in the packet shows in general there is satisfaction with Lighthouse, and 2) is the City getting good value. Mr. James has provided billed hour information from Lighthouse vouchers for 2016, 2017 and 2018; the average hourly cost is $165. Having worked with a lot of attorneys over the past several years, Councilmember Teitzel said he has paid more than that so finds it a fair value. Based on Council approval in October, Councilmember Mesaros and he are surveying 10 other cities regarding their cost for city attorney services, a major effort for those cities to gather that data. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 26, 2019 Page 14 Packet Pg. 18 6.1.a Councilmember Buckshnis commented her interest was piqued by Mr. Tupper's comments. She reviewed the minutes which reflect a long deliberation about the contract and a statement by Councilmember Mesaros that Council review the data provided by the Council President and he will work with her on future agenda items to bring this matter to a close as soon as possible in a manner that will provide some certainty about the upcoming 12 months as well as be fair to the Lighthouse Group. The minutes reflect that Councilmember Mesaros suggested that Councilmember Teitzel, he and Mr. Taraday consider the comments made tonight and possibly make revisions to the contract. Councilmember Teitzel said the contract would be expiring so they would bring it back as soon as possible. Council President Fraley-Monillas said she did not have much input into the process. Another thing that hasn't been looked at are comps for in-house attorneys which would be equivalent to a flat fee. Her preliminary research found the amount paid to Lighthouse would fund at least two full-time attorneys, perhaps more, and an assistant attorney. In-house attorneys also work as many hours as needed. She was not suggesting one way or another but was uncertain that appropriate due diligence had been done to grant a three year contract. She said HR has a role and HR has not weighed in on the contracts. She could understand a one year contract, but with a three year contract, the City would be paying an hourly rate if it get bids from other companies. She commented it was appropriate to see what's out there when the City has contracted with someone for eight years. She acknowledged the evaluation was fine, but was unsure the Council had done its due diligence so she would not support a three year contract as she did not feel it was in the City's best interest. Councilmember Teitzel said the concern with an in-house attorney for Edmonds was the only way to get estimates of the costs would be an RFQ which takes time and clearly there is not enough time between now and the end of the year. The future Council has the ability to do whatever they want in that regard. Lighthouse's contract expires at the end of 2019; it is incumbent on this Council to use the information available to make a decision. Councilmember Buckshnis cautioned that making a decision regarding in-house counsel will take much longer than a year. Like a city manager, there are distinctive differences related to in-house counsel in that they report to the mayor; the City will have a new mayor and four new councilmembers. She was very concerned about providing stability and history with regard to current citizens, litigation, unions, etc. and felt it would be risky not to continue with the current city attorney for at least 1-2 years. She recalled doing an extensive review of the city attorney in 2014. Councilmember Nelson expressed appreciation for the work Councilmembers Mesaros and Teitzel have done to get the Council to this point. The Council gave them direction and they have done the best they could with the time they had. He also appreciated the work that Lighthouse and Mr. Taraday have done for the City to date. It is important for the Council to acknowledge its fiduciary duty to be good stewards of public funds; moving forward with a three-year contract without a competitive process is a breach of that duty. The Council should not take at face value that the City is "getting a good deal" because Lighthouse Law Group says so. Councilmember Nelson explained it is the Council's duty to review any contract up for to renewal and do their due diligence. The proposed contract will potentially saddle the future Council for up to three years, potentially cost hundreds of thousands of dollars and potentially set that Council up to fail. He agreed with completing the process and was satisfied with an interim short-term contract while that is completed next year. With regard to stability, he questioned how this Council could assure what the next Council wanted, whether they wanted stability or progress and reform. The Council should not presume or dictate what the next Council wants, particularly when a majority of the existing Council will not be here next year. He summarized it should be left up to the next Council to determine the long term direction of the city attorney. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 26, 2019 Page 15 Packet Pg. 19 6.1.a Councilmember Mesaros relayed in the study Councilmember Teitzel and he are conducting, preliminary data from two of the five cities with in-house attorneys, the cost is nearly $1M/year. Data from the other three cities has not been provided yet. In comparison, the numbers provided by Lighthouse are favorable. He reminded that the contract with Lighthouse is a 60 day contract, basically renewable every day. As the data is provided and reviewed, the new Council could put Lighthouse on notice in the new year, their rates will convert to billable time and the cost to the City will be minimal. He summarized the City would not be locked in for three years; the new Council can make any decision they wish. COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO APPROVE THE CONTRACT PRESENTED IN THE PACKET BY THE LIGHTHOUSE LAW GROUP. Council President Fraley-Monillas said will not support the motion for the reasons she stated. She has obtained costs for contracting city attorneys in comparator cities; the $ 1 M amount includes the prosecutor and defense in most cases. Councilmember Mesaros said the two examples he shared do not include prosecution services. Council President Fraley-Monillas asked if the cities were comparables. Councilmember Mesaros said the Council agreed to the 10 cities; 5 with in-house attorneys and 5 with contracted city attorney services. Council President Fraley-Monillas said she was anxious to learn what two cities those were. Councilmember Buckshnis thanked Mr. Taraday and Lighthouse for their services over the last 9 years, commenting this process is marginalizing their hard work. She pointed out although she won the election, 42% of the population did not vote for her. In the evaluation of Lighthouse, less than 20% of evaluations were not positive. Three citizens have complained but more than 20 have indicated the need for stability for directors, staff, councilmembers and the new mayor. She agreed the contract has a 60 day clause. Lighthouse has been involved in a great deal of litigation for the City and now some Councilmembers want to try something new due to a new Council. She compared it to moving into a new house, you don't remodel everything. For the benefit of staff, directors and council, she will support the contract. Councilmember Johnson expressed support for the motion in a large part due to her experience with Lighthouse and Mr. Taraday in particular. When she was Council President, she found him to be very accessible and provided helpful advice. She did not see any reason to make a change at this time. Councilmember Tibbott expressed support for the contract. He found it very useful to have multiple attorneys available for different topics which provides expertise at a variety of levels and flexibility when the need arises which he was sure would continue in the future. Everything he has heard in the past year recommends continuing with Lighthouse; the processes have been streamlined, systems and processes are in place, and good communications that will continue into the future. He concluded a three year contract did not seem unreasonable. 10. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (5-2) COUNCILMEMBERS JOHNSON, BUCKSHNIS, MESAROS, TEITZEL AND TIBBOTT VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBER NELSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS VOTING NO. 1. 2020 BUDGET REVIEW Mayor Earling relayed Council President Fraley-Monillas and he agreed to have Councilmembers ask questions and for the submitter of amendments to introduce them. No voting will occur tonight to allow Councilmembers time to consider the ramifications of the amendments. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 26, 2019 Page 16 Packet Pg. 20 Finance Director Scott James presented the 2020 budget amendments, advising 21 amendments have been proposed by Council to date which add $1,371,744 to the budget. There are 7 staff amendments that add $560,992 into the budget for a total of $1,932,736 added back to the 2020 budget. COUNCIL PROPOSED AMENDMENTS Page # Cash Submitter Item # Description Increase New (Decrease) Item 1 DP #2 Remove New Half-time Human Services Coordinator $63,814 Teitzel & Johnson DP #3 Change City Attorney Increase from 4% to 3% $5,745 Johnson 3 DP #10 Move Health District contribution to Opioid Response $0 Teitzel Fund 4 DP #13 Remove Contribution to Edmonds Center for the Arts $75,000 Johnson 5 DP #29 Remove Purchase of new Staff Vehicle for Police Dept. $35,000 Johnson 6 DP #30 Remove Federal Lobbyist $72,000 Johnson, Buckshnis 7 DP #33 Remove Community Survey $25,000 Johnson 8 DP #37 Remove Downtown Wayfaring Signs $25,000 Johnson 9 DP #40 Remove Professional Services for Code Updates $25,000 Tibbott 10 DP #42 Remove/Change Construction Review Consultant $60,000 Tibbott 11 DP #51 Remove Public Art at the Library $62,000 Johnson 12 DP #52 Reduce expenses so that expenses = revenue for this DP $400 Johnson 13 � ge Add $7,500 for Students Saving Salmon, total $12,500 ($7,500) Buckshnis 14 DP #80 Remove Willow Creek Da li htin Design $750,000 Teitzel 15 DP #80 Reduce DP from $750,000 to $450,000 $300,000 Buckshnis 16 DP #81 Remove Marsh Restoration Consultant $25,000 Buckshnis 17 DP #81 Move Marsh Restoration Consultant from Storm to Parks $0 Buckshnis 18 New Add Full-time Arborist, truck & equipment ($79,715) Buckshnis 19 New Add Non -represented Employee Salary Study ($40,000) Mesaros 20 New Add contribution support for Edmonds Chamber ($10,000) Mesaros 21 New Add budget for consultant to review uses of all City rental ($15,000) Johnson space Total of Councilmember Requested Changes $1,371,744 STAFF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS Item # Page # DP# New Item Description Cash Increase (Decrease) Submitter 1 DP #2 Correct Half-time Human Services Coordinator Costs $21,636 Doherty 2 DP #35 Adjust Purchase of Trolley & Operation of Service ($5,000) Doherty 3 DP #86 Remove DP for Stormwater Comprehensive Plan $152,500 Williams 4 DP #92 Reduce request from $635,000 to $135,000 $500,000 Williams 5 Page #57 Add $2,500 for Students Saving Salmon, total $5000 ($2,500) James 6 New Add PUD Green Power Program ($30,000) Hope 7 Page #57 4% increase for Public Defender for 1st half of 2020 ($75,644) Neill - Ho son Total of Staff Requested Changes $560,992 Mr. James introduced the proposed Councilmember amendments individually: Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 26, 2019 Page 17 Packet Pg. 21 6.1.a 1. DP #2: Remove New Half-time Human Services Coordinator - $63,814 Councilmember Teitzel said he thought it was premature to hire a human services coordinator. He referred to the Koenig Report on Homelessness that included a recommendation to focus more strongly on devoting resources to the issue. With regard to the local vulnerable population, Koenig also recommended collaborating with neighboring cities due to the regional nature of the issue. He recalled Council President Fraley-Monillas mentioning in August that Snohomish County Councilmember Stephanie Wright was planning a meeting of South Snohomish County cities to discuss working together and potentially contributing resources toward the problem. That meeting did not happen but is still being planned. He preferred to discuss what could be done collectively rather than addressing the issue from a silo perspective. Ultimately a person may need to be added in Edmonds, but the City should first wait to see what can be done collaboratively. The Council's Legislative Assistant Maureen Judge has developed a resource guide for seniors and income -challenged residents that is available on the City's website. The budget includes the addition of a community engagement manager whose role should include communicating to citizens available options to address their issues. He concluded with that in mind, it was premature to fund this in the 2020 budget until more is known about what can be done collaboratively. Councilmember Johnson said after several discussions with Council President Fraley-Monillas, she understands why she wants this position and feels it is a good idea in the future but does not think the City is quite there yet. For that reason she supports removing the position from the budget at this time. It could be added as a mid -year adjustment once more is known about grants that could fund position and what resources are available. She suggested expanding the resource guide and make it available to all City staff to use when they encounter someone that needs assistance. Mayor Earling cautioned the intent was to introduce the amendments, but not have a lengthy discussion. Council President Fraley-Monillas commented this has nothing to do with homelessness, this is not a homelessness coordinator, it is not a position that finds people homes. The human services coordinator will design and coordinate human services with other city officials and across jurisdictions. They will prepare, write and administer grants to help pay for programs including potentially paying for themselves. They will manage all aspects of the human services contracts from the grants. They will research best practices in other cities and provide links to Edmonds residents through various sites. This position is intended to assist seniors, disabled, single parents with children and veterans, keeping people in their homes and preventing them from becoming homeless. The Koenig report states people become homeless due to making decisions between paying for food, medicine, and electricity. Edmonds unfortunately has a large group of people who fall into that category. Her research found: • Shoreline has one dedicated full-time staff member and spends $716,000/year on services • Issaquah has one dedicated staff and awards $495,000/year to service providers such as Hopelink and Eastside Friends of Seniors • Sammamish has one dedicated staff person and awards $250,000 every two years in grants to service providers • Burien has one dedicated staff person and spends $370,000/year • Lynnwood has no staff, the Human Services Commission spends $ 1 00,000/year on human services • Bothell has no staff but awards $350,000/year to human service providers such as Hopelink and Eastside Baby Corner Council President Fraley-Monillas explained the thought behind this position is not to address homelessness; if it were that easy, certainly Seattle would have fixed it with the amount of money they devote to the issue. This is related to keeping people in their homes and providing safe, nurturing environments for residents of Edmonds. Economic Development/Community Services Director Patrick Doherty agreed a lot of cities have human services coordinators and typically couple it with a budget for grants. He pointed out a city did not have to use their own budget to provide funds, and can apply for grants Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 26, 2019 Page 18 Packet Pg. 22 6.1.a and to foundations. While there is a great deal of information available that a person can access if they know how, a human services coordinator would be a central person at the City. Council President Fraley-Monillas pointed out there is currently no one in City that does this and Edmonds is the only city of its size that does not provide that assistance. For example, a senior whose roof is caving in and cannot afford to fix it and is about to live in their car. This would give them someone to call to assist them with finding funding for emergency repairs. It is also related to veterans whose income is not increasing but the cost of their housing is increasing, making them decide between paying for medicine or food. The position could write grants for the food bank. She concluded this is a very broad subject, but it isn't about homelessness. Mayor Earling clarified the intent was to have the submitter introduce the amendment and limited retort but not widen the discussion to include staff or to debate the amendment. Councilmember Tibbott appreciated the list of cities Council President Fraley-Monillas cited, noting the only one that benefits from Verdant is Lynnwood which is a tremendous resource that needs to be considered. 2. DP #3: Change City Attorney Increase from 4% to 3% - $5,745 Councilmember Johnson said this is a moot subject since the Council just adopted the City Attorney contract. 3. DP #10: Move Health District Contribution to Opioid Response Fund - $0 Councilmember Teitzel explained approximately $50,000 remains in the Opioid Response Fund and one of Snohomish Health District's priorities is the opioid crisis. The funds have been in the Opioid Response Fund for two years without any clear purpose identified; he recommended allocating the remaining $50,000 to underwrite the $1/capita donation to Snohomish Health District in 2020. Councilmember Johnson referred to an email from Assistant Police Chief Jim Lawless that stated the drug used in opioid overdoes, naloxone, will not be funded by the Snohomish Health District and he anticipated the officers' supply of naloxone would expire in February. She said it would be prudent to provide funds to purchase naloxone for the Edmonds Police Department and coordination with the Health District. She recommended the request to move $50,000 be modified to retain some of the funds to cover that expense. Mayor Earling explained if Edmonds contributes $1/capita to the Health District, they have agreed to take over that program, supplying the Police Department with naloxone as well as overseeing the administration. 4. DP #13: Remove Contribution to Edmonds Center for the Arts - $75,000 Councilmember Johnson said until the ECA has paid the City back the $1.5M loan, she did not support contributing annual operating funds. She preferred to focus any extra funding on the 4t' Avenue Arts Corridor which would indirectly benefit the ECA. Councilmember Mesaros said the ECA not only enriches the cultural life in Edmonds but it is also an economic engine. The $75,000 investment provides much more in return. Due to refinancing of their long term debt, the EPFD plans to make significant payments to the City on a regular basis and anticipate repaying the City by 2024-2026. He concluded the City gets a high degree of return from the $75,000 contribution. 5. DP #2: Remove Purchase of new Staff Vehicle for Police Dept. - $35,000 Councilmember Johnson recalled last year's budget included the purchase of a new vehicle for the Scriber Lake SRO, a position and vehicle that were later not funded. She suggested carrying forward the funds for that vehicle to provide a new staff vehicle for the Police Department. If those funds are not available, she Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 26, 2019 Page 19 Packet Pg. 23 6.1.a suggested the best of the patrol vehicles that are being retired be retained as a staff vehicle. Mr. James said that is the intent of this decision package. The SRO was not implemented due to a decision by the School District. This decision package will carry forward the funds budgeted for the SRO vehicle to the new crime prevention officer. 6. DP #3: Remove Federal Lobbyist - $72,000 Councilmember Buckshnis did not support having a placeholder in the budget for a federal lobbyist, preferring that the new mayor make that decision and funding it via a budget amendment if necessary. She suggested the new mayor go to Washington DC several times and decide what he wants. Mr. Doherty agreed the intent was a placeholder to provide an opportunity for the mayor to seek federal lobbyist services and allow for a smooth transition for lobbyist services in Washington DC regardless of whether it is the current lobbyist or a different one. 7. DP #33: Remove Community Survey - $25,000 Councilmember Johnson observed the census would be done next year. Although the community survey was valuable, she suggested doing it every 10 years, in the 5t' year after the census so information would be available every 5 years. Mr. Doherty said the community survey done 3-4 years ago was a qualitative survey with questions asking opinions about public services, parks, public safety, utilities, engagement, discrimination, diversity, etc. in an effort to understand the community better. He acknowledged concern during the past year about more public engagement and more understanding of what the public wants. The census does not ask any of those types of questions, the census questions are very factual, quantitative such as age, income, demographics, etc. It is also important to do the community survey every 4-5 years to ensure the baseline year is still relevant with the same demographic profile. Waiting 10 years, some of the demographics will change. 8. DP #37: Remove Downtown Wayfaring Signs - $25,000 Councilmember Johnson said there are funds in LTAC recommendation for wayfaring signage, possibly $15,000. If the LTAC is funding the signs, these funds could be used for the 411' Avenue Corridor. 9. DP #40: Remove Professional Services for Code Updates - $25,000 Councilmember Tibbott said he also submitted an amendment to increase the funding to $50,000. His intent was to understand whether $25,000 was enough to get something meaningful done and what would be the priority. It may be better to eliminate the funding and wait until the City is ready to prioritize the code amendments or fund it at a greater level in the coming year. Development Services Director Shane Hope explained the original proposal was $25,000; there has been discussion about doubling that amount for a consultant or staffing at half-time person at approximately $72,000/year or a fulltime person at approximately $140,000/year. She summarized it depends on how much the Council wants to get done. She believed the $25,000 plus carryforward from 2019 could fund some consultant help but staff needs to do a lot of the work. She offered to email the Council the to-do list. 10. DP #42: Remove/Change Construction Review Consultant - $60,000 Councilmember Tibbott explained this amendment was not to remove the consultant; it was his understanding the fees are paid through permitting process so it is essentially budget neutral. As this is a professional services contract versus a consultant contract, he suggested renaming the decision package from consultant to professional services contract. 11. DP #51: Remove Public Art at the Library- $62,000 Councilmember Johnson said she was seeking opportunities to fund the 4t' Avenue Arts Corridor. There has been discussion regarding public art at library for years, but that project has been stymied. Ms. Burley said $35,000 of the $62,000 is restricted to public art at the library; the $62,000 is a carryover from a previous year. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 26, 2019 Page 20 Packet Pg. 24 6.1.a 12. DP #52 Reduce expenses so that expenses = revenue for this DP - $400 Councilmember Johnson had no comment. 13. Page #57: Add $7,500 for Students Saving Salmon, total $12,500 - ($7,500) Councilmember Buckshnis said the preliminary budget only includes $2,500 as that is the minimum funding needed. The cost to do water quality testing at Perrinville Creek, Lund's Gulch and Edmonds Marsh is a total of $12,500. This has been funded from the Council Contingency Fund in the past. Mr. James advised there is a staff amendment to add $2,500 to bring the total funding to $5,000; Councilmember Buckshnis' amendment brings the total to $12,500. Council President Fraley-Monillas asked if there was a description of how the funds would be used. Councilmember Buckshnis said the $12,500 is for quarterly water quality testing. 14. DP #80: Remove Willow Creek Daylighting Design - $750,000 Councilmember Teitzel said he submitted this amendment before the City received a $450,000 federal grant for marsh restoration. As funds are now needed to match that grant, the amendment is no longer relevant. He withdrew the amendment and deferred to Councilmember Buckshnis' amendment below. 15. DP #80: Reduce DP from $750.000 to $450.000 - $300.000 16. DP #81: Remove Marsh Restoration Consultant - $25,000 Councilmember Buckshnis said she wanted to move this back to where it has been for the past several years. The Council needs to decide what to do since the City does not control the land. 17. DP #81: Move Marsh Restoration Consultant from Storm to Parks - $0 Councilmember Buckshnis said the consultant's background is Parks and the funding has been in Parks for a number of years. 18. New: Add Full-time Arborist, Truck & Equipment - ($79,715) Councilmember Buckshnis relayed her understanding that 10% would be added to the arborist employee's current time to increase it to 20%. This is the third year she has requested funding for a full-time arborist. The City has plenty of tree problems and someone needs to begin working on code changes related to the Urban Forestry Management Plan. Council President Fraley-Monillas said her research found the arborist employee currently works 10 hours/week so 25% of her work week is dedicated to arborist duties. 19. New: Add Non -Represented Employee Salary - ($40,000) Councilmember Mesaros recalled presentations by the former Human Resources Director regarding Non - Represented (NR) employee salaries and her recommendation that NR employees receive a 3% increase in addition to other increases. There were comments made at that time regarding an external study. He has discussed this with the Human Resources Director who feels there are things that could be accomplished for less than $40,000 and he reserved the right to amend the amount, likely reducing it. 20. New: Add contribution support for Edmonds Chamber - ($10,000) Councilmember Mesaros said as he became more active in the downtown core, it became apparent that the Chamber of Commerce invests a lot in the City's future and investing this amount in the Chamber will return a lot to the City. In view of the number of events sponsored by the Chamber that attract people to downtown, they are a tremendous asset and this contribution would be an affirmation of their work to promote the City. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 26, 2019 Page 21 Packet Pg. 25 COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS, TO EXTEND THE MEETING FOR 20 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 21. New: Add budget for Consultant to Review Uses of All City Rental Space - ,$15,000j Councilmember Johnson said this is not for just City rental space but all park buildings and facilities. The Boys & Girls Club lease is up next year and there are other buildings such as Frances Anderson Center, the new Waterfront Center, the Dayton Street complex, Meadowdale Clubhouse and the fieldhouse. It would be very helpful to the new Parks Director as well as people who rent those facilities to assess their needs to ensure the right space for the right tenants and to look at holistic needs. Mr. James introduced and described the proposed Staff Amendments: 1. DP #2: Correct Half-time Human Services Coordinator Costs - $21,636 Mr. James explained the benefits for the human services coordinator were double counted in the preliminary budget. 2. DP #35: Adjust Purchase of Trolley & Operation of Service - ($5,000) Mr. James explained this amendment corrects the amount to reflect actual funding commitments. There may be other partnership opportunities. 3. DP #86: Remove DP for Stormwater Comprehensive Plan - $152,500 Mr. James relayed Mr. Williams' proposal to delay the Stormwater Comprehensive Plan until 2021. 4. DP #92: Reduce request from $635,000 to $135,000 - $500,000 Mr. Williams explained there is new technology to get information about the condition of the inside of the sewer pipe without fully dewatering, bypass, etc. If it works as advertised, it will result in this savings. 5. Page #57: Add $2,500 for Students Saving Salmon, total $5,000 - ($2,500) See Item 13 above. 6. New: Add PUD Green Power Program - ($30,000) Mr. James explained the 2019 budget includes $12,500 to help implement Resolution 1389 regarding renewable energy. Staff recently learned PUD plans to offer the program again om 2020 at a cost of $30,000 in 2020. 7. Page #57: 4% increase for Public Defender for 1st half of 2020 - ($75,644) Mr. James explained the Public Defender contract expires at the end of 2019. As contract negotiations likely will not be concluded by the time the 2020 budget is adopted, this amendment will provide flexibility to add a 4% increase for the first six months. The Council will finalize the Public Defender contract in 2020. Councilmember Buckshnis said she had submitted some additional amendments. Mr. James said they will be in the packet for next week's meeting. As information for the packet is due tomorrow, he requested Councilmembers submit any additional amendments by tomorrow morning. Mayor Earling relayed the intent is to make motions and vote on the amendments at next week's meeting. 11. REPORTS ON OUTSIDE BOARDS AND COMMITTEE MEETINGS MONTHLY COUNCIL SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS AND MINUTES Due to late hour, this item was postponed. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 26, 2019 Page 22 Packet Pg. 26 6.1.a 12. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Earling reminded of the tree lighting ceremony on Saturday. He wished everyone a Happy Thanksgiving, commenting it was a time to celebrate, reflect, and value what we have as Americans. Mayor Earling he referred to predictions for an upcoming cold spell and urged citizens to take precautions as temperatures will be in the 20s at night for the next several days. 13. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Mesaros wished everyone a Happy Thanksgiving. Councilmember Johnson expressed her thankfulness to her friends and colleagues on the Council for their support during this difficult year. She especially thanked Council President Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember Teitzel and Councilmember Buckshnis. Councilmember Nelson wished everyone a Happy Thanksgiving. Council President Fraley-Monillas wished everyone a Happy Thanksgiving. She was hopeful not too many homeless would be out in the cold. Lynnwood plans to open their cold weather shelter in early December. Councilmember Tibbott wished everyone a Happy Thanksgiving. He looked forward to having his family to his house, a wonderful time to draw together as a family. Councilmember Buckshnis wished everyone a Happy Thanksgiving. She pointed out holidays sometimes are a time of depression; she has had family members commit suicide during the holidays. She commented on the availability of an online chat at SuicidePreventionLifeline.org. 14. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(i) This item was not needed. 15. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION. POTENTIAL ACTION AS A RESULT OF MEETING IN EXECUTIVE SESSION This item was not needed. 16. ADJOURN With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:11 p.m. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 26, 2019 Page 23 Packet Pg. 27 6.2 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 12/10/2019 Approval of Council Special Meeting Minutes of December 3, 2019 Staff Lead: Scott Passey Department: City Clerk's Office Preparer: Scott Passey Background/History N/A Staff Recommendation Review and approve the draft meeting minutes on the Consent Agenda. Narrative N/A Attachments: 12-03-2019 Draft Council Special Meeting Minutes Packet Pg. 28 6.2.a EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING DRAFT MINUTES DECEMBER 3, 2019 Elected Officials Present Staff Present Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Council President Dave Teitzel, Councilmember Tom Mesaros, Councilmember Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember Neil Tibbott, Councilmember Dave Earling, Mayor Elected Officials Absent Mike Nelson, Councilmember 1. CALL TO ORDER/CONVENE IN JURY MEETING ROOM At 6:40 p.m., the City Council Special Meeting was called to order by Mayor Earling in the Council Chambers, 250 5"' Avenue North, Edmonds. 3. CANDIDATE INTERVIEWS FOR APPOINTMENT TO A CITY BOARD OR COMMISSION The Council then convened in the Jury Meeting Room and interviewed Sekou Kone and Nikki Okimoto Glaros, candidates for appointment to the Edmonds Diversity Commission. ADJOURN At 6:56 p.m., the meeting was adjourned. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 3, 2019 Page 1 Packet Pg. 29 6.3 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 12/10/2019 Approval of Council Meeting Minutes of December 3, 2019 Staff Lead: Scott Passey Department: City Clerk's Office Preparer: Scott Passey Background/History N/A Staff Recommendation Review and approve the draft meeting minutes on the Consent Agenda. Narrative N/A Attachments: 12-03-2019 Draft Council Meeting Minutes Packet Pg. 30 6.3.a EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL DRAFT MINUTES December 3, 2019 ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Dave Earling, Mayor Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Council President Michael Nelson, Councilmember Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember Thomas Mesaros, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember Dave Teitzel, Councilmember Neil Tibbott, Councilmember ALSO PRESENT Zach Bauder, Student Representative 1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE STAFF PRESENT Phil Williams, Public Works Director Patrick Doherty, Econ. Dev & Comm. Serv. Dir. Shane Hope, Development Services Director Scott James, Finance Director Dave Turley, Assistant Finance Director Jessica Neill Hoyson, HR Director Shannon Burley, Deputy Parks & Recreation Dir Rob English, City Engineer Bertrand Hauss, Transportation Engineer Mike DeLilla Senior Utilities Engineer Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Scott Passey, City Clerk Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator Jeannie Dines, Recorder The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Earling in the Council Chambers, 250 5' Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. 2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Councilmember Nelson read the City Council Land Acknowledge Statement: "We acknowledge the original inhabitants of this place, the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and their successors the Tulalip Tribes, who since time immemorial have hunted, fished, gathered, and taken care of these lands. We respect their sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and we honor their sacred spiritual connection with the land and water." 3. ROLL CALL City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present. 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5. PRESENTATIONS PROCLAMATION HONORING BILL ANDERSON Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 3, 2019 Page 1 Packet Pg. 31 6.3.a Mayor Earling read a proclamation proclaiming Tuesday December 3, 2019 as Bill Anderson Day in Edmonds and recognizing him for his photographic skills, patience and environmental leadership in bringing to life photographs of nature and expressing heartfelt appreciation for the attention and service to the community, nature and humanity that he has given to the community of Edmonds. Mr. Anderson thanked the Council, Mayor and friends in audience. He explained photograph started as hobby, one of many, and he was glad it benefited community and that many people enjoyed his photographs. As an Edmonds residents since 1991, he was glad he had been able to give something back to the community. He introduced his wife Pauline and son Daren. 2. SOUND TRANSIT PRESENTATION Development Services Director Shane Hope commented this topic is near and dear to the Council and the community particularly parking and access related to the Sound Transit station as well as available opportunities and challenges. Mayor Earling recognized Patrice Hardy, a person he has worked with for decades at Sound Transit, and expressed appreciation for the hard work she does. Mayor Earling advised a number of projects have been suggested and screened by Sound Transit, however, the potential parking site at 2nd & Dayton is off the table. Kamuron Gurol, North Corridor Development Director, Sound Transit, introduced Chris Breiland, Fehr & Peers. He commented it has been a pleasure to work with Ms. Hope, Phil Williams and their staffs. Sound Transit is also working with the City Mukilteo and look forward to a continued good relationship as they work through the potential projects to identify a good fit for Edmonds. Miranda Redinger, Project Manager, Sound Transit, presented regarding Edmonds and Mukilteo Stations Parking and Access Improvements: • Project Overview o Sound Transit is investing in parking and access projects at Edmonds and Mukilteo Sounder Stations ■ Part of the 2016 ST3 Funding Measure ■ $40 million (2014$), split between both stations ■ Projects identified, evaluated, and narrowed in this phase ■ Sound Transit Board makes final decision to proceed and fund selected projects Spring 2019 Community Input o Initial Outreach in March -April ■ More than 1,100 people participated in -person and online ■ Asked community about barriers to access: limited parking, limited sidewalk and bike facilities, poor transit connections, for example • Project Identification o Data Collection & Plan Review ■ Where Sounder riders are coming from and going to ■ How riders reach the station ■ Parking utilization ■ Traffic congestion ■ Sidewalk/bike facility conditions ■ Transit schedules ■ Review of local plans from cities, counties, other agencies o Initial Project Identification ■ More than 50 projects identified from: Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 3, 2019 Page 2 Packet Pg. 32 6.3.a - Public input - Sound Transit plans - City plans - Other agencies - Project team Evaluation Framework o Project Goals ■ Increase ridership on Sounder North ■ Consistency with Sound Transit and other agency goals ■ Implementation by 2024 with available funds ■ Avoids/minimizes environmental impacts and enhances community outcomes ■ Improves access and safety for all modes o Process ■ Identify potential access improvements - Improvement projects were drawn from city, county and transit agency plans as well as from discussions with stakeholder and outreach to the public ■ Pre-screen - 57 improvement projects were then put through a prescreening process which removed projects that were ineligible according to project guidelines ■ Evaluate - 38 improvement projects that made it through the prescreening process were then evaluated against 19 criteria based on the goals of the project ■ Recommend - 25 improvement projects are recommended or highly recommended; the Sound Transit Board will consider which projects to advance into next phase. o Evaluated Improvement Projects 1. Port of Edmonds gravel lot 2. Harbor Square parking lot 3. City of Edmonds lot on the SE corner of W Dayton St and 2" d Ave S 4. Washington State Ferries parking lot adjacent to station 5. Salish Crossing parking lot 6. Remote parking at Old Woodway Campus 7. Remote parking at SR 104 and 100t1i Ave W 8. Remote parking at 76' Ave W and Olympic View Dr 9. Remote parking at Westgate Chapel 10. Remote parking at Edmonds Grace Lutheran Church 11. Additional on -demand secure bike lockers 12. 228' St SW bike and pedestrian connection 13. Downtown pedestrian lighting improvements 14. 100' Ave W and 9tn Ave S bicycle improvements 15. Bowdoin Way bicycle improvements 16. 80' Ave W bicycle improvements 17. Pine St and SR 104 pedestrian improvements 18. Additional bus bays at Edmonds Station 19. SR 104 bus improvements 20. Wind and rain screening at Edmonds Station 21. Bus transfer timing improvements o Edmonds Station -Draft "Recommended" Projects ■ Parking adjacent to the Sounder station ■ Bus timing improvements ■ Wind and rain screening at the station Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 3, 2019 Page 3 Packet Pg. 33 6.3.a ■ On -demand bike lockers at the station ■ Additional bus bays/layover near the station ■ 228th Street pedestrian and bicycle connection ■ SR 104 bus improvements ■ Downtown pedestrian lighting/crossing improvements ■ Pine Street pedestrian improvements ■ SR 104 pedestrian improvements ■ Remote parking at Edmonds Grace Lutheran Church ■ Parking at city -owned lot at 2nd Avenue/Dayton Street - Will be removed from consideration ■ 228t' Street pedestrian and bicycle connection Edmonds Station - System Access Fund Projects 0 100th Ave W/9t' Ave S Bicycle Improvements o Bowdoin Way Bicycle Improvements 0 80t' Ave W Bicycle Improvements Fall 2019 Outreach o October -November outreach ■ More than 1,700 participants online and in -person ■ Nearly 500 completed surveys on projects ■ General concurrence with technical evaluation ■ Strongest support for transit schedule alignment ■ Strong support for parking near the station ■ Support for pedestrian lighting and crossing improvements ■ Least support for remote parking Next Steps o Similar briefing in Mukilteo o Orient new Edmonds Councilmembers to project o Advance project list to Sound Transit Board o Based on Board direction, begin Conceptual Engineering and Environmental Review Councilmember Buckshnis referred to height restrictions in the waterfront area and asked how many stories were being considered. Mr. Breiland answered the team is keenly aware of the height restrictions. Parking structures were evaluated early on but they did not meet the prescreening criteria for cost so the recommended projects do not include any structured parking. Councilmember Buckshnis commented there is a parking crunch, she was under the impression that a boutique parking structure could be constructed for less than $IOM; there is $40M available. Mr. Breiland responded parking availability was identified as a major area of interest and they were able to identify approximately 150 parking spaces that could be added in the immediate vicinity of the station without incurring the cost of a parking structure. Given that those options are available, that is the most promising lead in reducing the parking crunch and managing the overall budget to improve access for all modes. Councilmember Buckshnis said one of options identified was the Harbor Square parking lot which she assured was already full all day. Mr. Breiland said in some cases it was considering shared parking opportunities or obtaining land and reconfiguring it for parking in a structure which is where the high costs were identified. Councilmember Tibbott referred to concern expressed by the community about the number of bike lanes being built in the City and that they eliminate parking spaces, especially in congested areas. He asked about the value of bike lanes, other possible uses besides bikes in those lanes and why that would be helpful. Mr. Breiland said bike lanes and bike facilities are a fairly significant piece of what is being considered, Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 3, 2019 Page 4 Packet Pg. 34 6.3.a balancing access to all modes. Bicycles have a good distance coverage. The park & ride data collection indicates the majority of riders live within 3 miles which is approximately a 15-20 minute bike ride. He recognized not everyone can ride a bicycle due issues such as weather, terrain, time of day, etc. Improved ridership has been seen in areas where bicycle infrastructure has been improved. They are also looking toward the future where modes like e-bikes are becoming more popular and prices are coming down which opens bicycling to a wider range of people. Bicycles may be a slightly marginal mode now but they view it as a good growth mode in the future; the Edmonds community is a good opportunity for that as there are a lot of residential streets. They acknowledge there are parking impacts, in some cases a lane needs to be reconfigured and there could be traffic impacts. As project moves into Phase 2, those impacts will be considered in more detail. Councilmember Tibbott inquired about alternate forms of transportation that could use those lanes. Mr. Breiland answered although it has not taken off in this area yet, many of the bike share programs in the country are morphing into scooter share which are generically referred to as slow modes. Scooters and other wheeled vehicles that look like a cross between a unicycle and a skateboard can also use bike lanes. Portland realized bike lanes can accommodate modes like scooters so they are not using the sidewalk and allow for a more managed system. Electrically assisted mobility devices, some of which have not yet been invented, can also use bike lanes. It is a better way to manage the space and keep pedestrian safe and keep slower modes in a more appropriate place. Councilmember Teitzel observed that project 6, 7, 9 and 10 involved remote parking at various locations. He asked how potential passengers would be transported from the remote parking to the Sounder Station. Mr. Breiland answered Sound Transit has discussed options with their legal team. At the outset of the project, everything was on the table including parking with remote shuttle connections, etc. However, in reviewing the funding authorization in ST3, there are limitations with Sound Transit incurring ongoing operation costs for a transit -like service like a shuttle that is not high capacity transit which is what Sound Transit is obligated to operate. Mr. Breiland explained the idea of pairing remote parking with a shuttle was eliminated so consideration was given to how the remote parking could be served by existing Community Transit service. As a result, they focused on remote parking that have existing Community Transit routes; a few do not exist yet and those were suggested by members of public and Sound Transit wanted to give them due diligence in the event they were served in the future. The timing and frequency of transit was a challenge for remote parking both in Edmonds and in Mukilteo. They often heard at the public open houses that people on Sounder are primarily going to Seattle and typically have another bus connection from the Sounder station at King Street to somewhere else downtown which resulted in a fairly lengthy time penalty. That timing issue was the reason remote parking did not rate particularly high in the technical analysis. Sound Transit is working with Community Transit on timing improvements some of which benefit the existing park & ride lots. Mayor Earling commented coordination is not limited to the top of the hill to downtown, coordination is also needed from the top of the hill east as a large population lives above the crest of the hill. 3. HOUSING COMMISSION QUARTERLY Development Services Director Shane Hope recognized the Housing Commission members in the audience. She reviewed: • Background o Council Resolution # 1427 established Housing Commission & Commission's role to: ■ Develop diverse housing policy options for Council consideration designed to expand the range of housing (including rental and owned) available in Edmonds; options that are Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 3, 2019 Page 5 Packet Pg. 35 irrespective of age, gender, race, religious affiliation, physical disability or sexual orientation o Housing Commission applications & appointments were from city-wide o July 2019, City Council approved: ■ Budget for D.S. Dept. to hire professional services for meeting facilitation & community engagement ■ Video -recording of meetings instead of detailed minutes o Professional services RFQ process occurred August/Sept o Housing Commission had first meeting Sept. 26 ■ Get acquainted with process & members ■ Identify topics of interest ■ Decide on regular monthly meeting times: second Thursday of each month, 6:30 — 8:30 pm in Brackett Room o Housing Commission's second meeting was October 10 ■ Review of topics & schedule ■ Ground rules & decision -making principles ■ State laws related to housing & planning ■ Edmonds Comp Plan ■ Community engagement goals o Third meeting of Housing Commission was November 14 ■ Demographic & housing data ■ Discussion of background materials, including: ■ VISION 2050 Housing Background Paper ■ Edmonds Housing Needs Study ■ Affordability Factors: Presentation from Alliance for Housing Affordability ■ Draft Community Engagement Plan o Other activities: ■ Extensive background reading ■ Training on Open Public Meetings Act Community Engagement Current/Recent Future o New website for Commission's work o Surveys o Links to other City webpages o Online activities o Housing news memo from department director o Public open houses/special* meetings.... o Press releases o Participation at community events o Business cards for Commissioners to hand out o Flyers/posters o Public comment period and comment box at o Other activities each meeting Next steps 0 2019: Complete info -gathering stage to have common understanding o£ ■ Timeline, milestones & process ■ Housing terminology ■ Resources & programs ■ Housing data ■ Cost factors & priority issues to consider ■ Definition of "housing policy options" 0 2020: Moving into policy discussion and more community outreach, including: ■ Multiple public activities & events ■ Policy discussions ■ Policy topic prioritization Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 3, 2019 Page 6 Packet Pg. 36 6.3.a ■ Development of draft policy options ■ Refinement of recommendations ■ Finalization of recommendations for Council consideration & other public input Council President Fraley-Monillas asked the date of the December meeting. Ms. Hope answered it was December 12ti'. Council President Fraley-Monillas asked if the commission was still in the training stage. Ms. Hope answered the December meeting will include information on housing costs and factors and will begin policy discussions in January. That will coordinate well with having a regular City Council liaison beginning in January. Several Councilmembers have attended meetings on a rotating basis in 2019. Councilmember Tibbott said he attended the first meeting and said it was a fantastic group. With regard to public engagement, in addition to getting the word out, he wanted to ensure the commission got the word in. Ms. Hope assured it was definitely both. Councilmember Tibbott inquired about the method for receiving comments and ensuring they are from a variety of people and avenues. Ms. Hope answered the community engagement specialist will assist with that as well as the commission having input. There has been discussion about surveys; one of the challenges with online surveys is they only capture part of the community which may not be the broadest. Consideration is being given to other methods such as sample mailings, etc. The idea is get input as well as ensure people are aware of the process. Councilmember Tibbott appreciated that that was a priority. Going forward, he was interested in measurables related to the amount of input the commission was getting. Ms. Hope assured all the public input was being tracked. Councilmember Teitzel thanked commissioners for their work and diligence in this important effort. He asked if staff planned to have the Affordable Housing Alliance (AHA) of Snohomish County present to the commission regarding concepts like missing middle housing. Ms. Hope said AHA made a presentation at the November meeting and she expected there may be other presentations. The thought has been that staff will provide some information such as data specific to Edmonds, but specialists like AHA and others would be invited to make presentations and respond to questions and comments. 6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Lee Kimmelman, Edmonds, said the Sound Transit presentation answered a lot of his questions. He recalled a hullabaloo in the summer about parking issues in Edmonds which have diminished with the cold weather. He cautioned the Council against waiting until next spring when parking becomes a problem to raise the issue again. Right now, when parking is not a problem, is the time to think about it so when parking becomes a problem, the City has a plan and solution in mind. Kathleen Sears, Edmonds, expressed her gratitude to Mayor Earling and the City Council for recognizing Bill Anderson's extraordinary work, remarking he is truly an Edmonds treasure. His portfolio of photographs reminds people why they live in Edmonds and how blessed they are to call Edmonds home as well as the importance of the Edmonds Marsh and the waterfront area to life in Edmonds. His photographs illustrate that restoration of marsh is much more than stormwater management, hydrology and daylighting Willow Creek although those are also important to restore salmon. His photographs of birdlife remind of the total ecosystem that Edmonds residents are the stewards of and to protect and nature that life. Climate change is pressing in and Edmonds is fortunate to have such an amazing natural setting on the edge of downtown. She thanked the City Council for their past and future work to protect, nurture and restore the marsh. The number of people present to honor Mr. Anderson shows how many care. She urge the Council to include citizen input in their plans for the marsh including positions for the public on committees. She hoped future residents will be able to look at Mr. Anderson's photographs and say they still see that wildlife. Rich Senderoff, Edmonds, recognized Bill Anderson, commenting it has been said a picture is worth a thousand words; Bill speaks often and loudly about the role of wildlife and nature in making Edmonds a unique and special place. He always seems to photograph wildlife in action, sending the message that Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 3, 2019 Page 7 Packet Pg. 37 6.3.a Edmonds wildlife is an active and participative part of the community. He thinks of two words in relation to Bill's photographs, first, inspiration; through his photographs people are remind of how lucky we are that we do not need to travel far or climb mountains to experience the diversity of nature. He inspires everyone to explore and enjoy nature as well as teach others to do the same. The second word is advocacy; Bill's photographs speak volumes about the need to protect and live harmoniously with wildlife and natural surroundings to ensure future generations can experience the wonders of nature around us. In this way, Bill embodies the mission to explore, enjoy and protect natural spaces, the credo shared by conservationists like John Muir and the founders of the Sierra Club. Laura Johnson, Edmonds, spoke in favor of adding a human services coordinator. She recalled participating in an event a few years ago designed to give insight into the hurdles to find, research and access services related to housing, job and health instability. Housing, job and health instability are interconnected, sometimes one leading to another, yet the services available to address them are often siloed and navigating the system is not intuitive. During the event, attendees crossed the room numerous times attempting to access services; at one point she was arrested for not paying fines. At the end of the simulation, she was overwhelmed and frazzled but also very aware of her own privilege and fortune. Her participation in the event overlapped with her child's 3-year health crisis that required she navigate the healthcare system, nearly a full-time undertaking. She could not image doing it without the resources she had available including a car, stable home, supportive spouse, financial resources, internet, smartphone, time and flexibility to research, make and attend appointments, and friends and family to help with her other children. Taking away one of those resources, the successful end to a years' long struggle may have been very different. That happens with many people and their voices are often not heard because they are buried in their struggle. Ms. Johnson explained a human services coordinator position could be the first line of support for community members struggling with instability. This position would reduce the enormous amount of time and research as well as dead -ends and missed opportunities often encountered when families and individuals struggle with any form of instability. The position could mean the difference between keeping a stable job or leaving to care for a sick family member, that a fixed income resident has access to services to repair a furnace, allow a family to access coordinated services that will allow them to avoid foreclosure or eviction, or help a parent looking for resources to support a suicidal teen or someone needing resources for mental illness or to escape an abusive relationship. Access to resources and coordinated services strengthens communities by providing the quality of life for the most vulnerable citizens and positively influences critical social factors. She urged the Council to approve DP #2 to provide Edmonds with a human services coordinator, a service that most cities already provide. Mindy Woods, Edmonds, shared her journey with homelessness in Edmond. A single mom and Persian Gulf Navy Veteran, she was unable to find resources when her apartment was taken over by black mold. She recalled spending a 7'/2 hour day parked at her son's school looking for resources and ended up with 55 phone numbers but no answers to predicament. She did that for two days until finally the YMCA called her back but put her on a four month waitlist. In the meantime, having nowhere else to go, they ended up couch surfing outside the local area because she was so ashamed. She urged the Council to approve a human service position, pointing out for people on the verge of homelessness, it is cheaper to help them stay in place than to help get someone out of homelessness. For those who are already homeless, there needs to be a place to access as many services in the shortest period of time possible to get back into stability. The longer someone is homeless, the more chances they will accumulate fines and legal predicaments as well as stress to their physical and mental health. The Koenig report addressed the need for human services, 230 people are already outside their homes and even more are barely hanging on. 6. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 3, 2019 Page 8 Packet Pg. 38 6.3.a COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: 1. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 26, 2019 2. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS AND WIRE PAYMENT 3. ORDINANCE AMENDING EDMONDS CITY CODE TITLE 4 AND EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE TITLE 20 TO ALIGN WITH STATE BUSINESS LICENSE SERVICE PRACTICES 4. CONFIRMATION OF APPOINTMENT OF NIKKI OKIMOTO GLAROS TO DIVERSITY COMMISSION 5. CONFIRMATION OF APPOINTMENT OF SEKOU KONE TO DIVERSITY COMMISSION 8. PUBLIC HEARING 1. UTILITY RATE ANALYSIS, PUBLIC HEARING AND FUTURE ADOPTION OF A UTILITY RATE ORDINANCE Mr. Williams introduced City Engineer Rob English and Senior Utilities Engineer Mike DeLilla. He reviewed: • Key assumptions o Annual Cost inflation ■ General (CPI): 2.5% ■ Benefits:10.0% ■ Alderwood Water Purchase Costs: -8% in 2020; (21.8%) -8.5% in 2021; (4.4%) -8% in 2022; (5%) -5% Thereafter ■ Construction Costs: 4.0% o Annual Growth ■ Water/Sewer: z 85 ERUs per year ■ Stormwater: z 55 ESUs per year Water Revenue Requirement Forecast Existin Proposed 2019 2020 2021 2022 Annual Water Rate Increase 4.5% 4.5% 4.5% Monthly single-family bill @ 7ccf $45.66 $47.71 $49.85 $52.11 Tax 6.41 $6.05 $4.99 $5.21 Total $52.07 1 $53.76 $54.85 $57.32 o Rate increases are needed to generate funding for : ■ Actual Increases from 2017-2019 in Alderwood Wholesale Water purchase costs that were above original 2016 estimates ■ Increased future Alderwood Water purchase costs (8-8.5% vs now 5% projected) ■ Inflationary Increases for maintenance and operations of the Water Utility ■ Inflationary Increases for our 1% yearly system replacement for pipes that are: - Past their useful life and breaking with a higher frequency - In need to be upsized to increase fire flow in currently deficient areas Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 3, 2019 Page 9 Packet Pg. 39 6.3.a - Decrease water loss in older leaky pipes Water Enterprise Fund Incr* and Taxes** Year 2016 12017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Rate % Increase 9% 9% 9% 9% 4.5% 4.5% 4.5% Tax Rate** 18.9% 7.07% 15.5% 4.05% 12.68% 10% 10% True % 8.01 % 8.06% 8.19% 3.24% 2.01 % 4.50% Increase/Month I 1 1 $1.69 $1.08 $2.47 *Assumes Single Family Residence and Usage of 7ccf per month and annual rate increase of 4.5%. **Taxes are applied after rates are assessed based on usage. 0 2008 Lane vs City of Seattle determined Public Fire Protection was a General Governmental Service. ■ 2009 Edmonds Council raised tax rate to enterprise water fund from 10% to 18.9% so Fire Hydrant and Fire Protection maintenance costs could be borne by the general fund. 0 2013 State legislature updated laws and stated that Public Fire Protection was a water enterprise fund service ■ 2016 City Council approved lowering of rates back to 10% between 2017 and 2021 Stormwater Revenue Requirement Forecast Existing Propose 2019 2020 1 2021 2022 Annual Stormwater Rate Increase 9.5% 9.5% 9.5% Monthly single-family bill $17.18 $18.81 $20.60 $22.56 Tax 1.72 1.88 2.06 2.26 Total $18.09 $20.69 $22.66 $24.82 o Rate increases are needed to generate funding for: ■ Inflationary Increases for maintenance and operations of the Storm Utility ■ Inflationary Increases for 1% yearly system replacement for pipes that are: - Past their useful life, - Are heavily damaged or corroded, - Show chronic root intrusion - Need to be upsized to mitigate flooding ■ Increased costs to keep in compliance with NPDES requirements Sewer Revenue Requirement Forecast Existing Pro osed 2019 2020 2021 2022 Annual Sewer Rate Increase 5% 5% 5% Monthly single-family bill $43.65 $45.83 $48.12 $50.53 Tax $4.37 $4.58 $4.81 $5.05 Total 1 $48.02 1 $50.41 1 $52.93 $55.58 o Rate increases are needed to generate funding for: ■ $1OM +/- Bond acquisition for WWTP Pyrolysis Project (Incineration replacement) - Inflationary Increases for maintenance and operations of the Sewer Utility - Inflationary Increases for 1% yearly system replacement for pipes that are: • Past their useful life Are heavily damaged or corroded Show chronic root intrusion • Need to be upsized to mitigate sewage overflows • Show groundwater or sewage infiltration and inflow Sewer Financial Plan Scenarios Existing Proposed Annual Sewer Rate Increase 12019 2020 12021 12022 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 3, 2019 Page 10 Packet Pg. 40 6.3.a Status Quo: Full Cash funding for CIP 8% 8% 8% $1OM WWTP Bond 5% 5% 5% $10M WWTP Bond (3% increases 2020-22) 3% 3% 3% Existing Proposed Monthly Single Family Bill 2019 2020 2021 2022 Status Quo: Full Cash funding for CIP $48.02 $51.85 $56.00 $60.48 $10M WWTP Bond $48.02 $50.541 $52.93 $55.58 $10M WWTP Bond 3% increases 2020-22 $48.02 1 $49.46 $50.93 $52.47 Graph of long-term forecast: outstanding debt principle balance Graph of long-term forecast: cumulative debt service interest paid Total monthly increase (all 3 funds) Year 2020 2021 2022 Monthly Total* $4.93 $4.53 $6.15 Total % Increase* 4.14% 3.66% 4.79% Monthly Total** $5.89 $5.57 $7.27 Total % Increase** 4.95% 4.46% 5.57% Difference 1 $0.96 $1.04 1 $1.12 *Assumes 4.5% Water, 3%Sewer and 9.5% Storm Rate annual Increase **Assumes 4.5% Water, 5%Sewer and 9.5% Storm Rate annual Increase 2019 Total Bill - 3/4" single family 10 ccf* • City 2019 2020 Seattle $265.51 $273.48 Kirkland $193.22 $199.01 Shoreline"" * * $175.43 $180.69 Lake Forest Park $174.38 $179.61 Mountlake Terrace $131.61 $168.66 Woodinville $158.61 $163.37 Mukilteo 132.38 $140.33 Edmonds $132.23 $141.58 Arlin on* * $129.77 $133.66 Redmond $120.48 $124.09 Everett* * * * $118.40 $121.95 Lynnwood 1 $104.72 1 $107.86 *Rates assume 10 ccf/month usage for water/sewer as applicable *Rates assume 3% rate increases for each year after 2019 *Edmonds rates increased per recommendations ** Has not had a rate adjustment in at least the past 6 years. *** 8% Water, 42.5% Sewer and 95% Storm increase 12020 * * * * 10% total increase expected in 2020 ***** 10% increases in storm rates for 2020 and 2021 • Recommendation: o Raise sewer rates 5% in 2020, 2021, 2022 to continue to meet the capital needs of the City's Sewer Utility Fund including the WWTP Pyrolysis project. This balances the cost of this project more evenly between current and future ratepayers Chris Gonzalez FCS ...."The strategy of 5% annual sewer rate increases (coupled with the $10 million borrowing for the pyrolysis project) reflects a balanced perspective on the concept of "generational equity." A purely "pay-as-you-go" funding strategy burdens existing customers with the obligation of funding future improvements that will benefit a broader base of Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 3, 2019 Page 11 Packet Pg. 41 6.3.a customers in the future, while deferring capital investment to keep rates artificially low disproportionately shifts the burden of future capital investments to future customers." o Water Rates increased at 4.5% in 2020, 2021, 2022 due to Alderwood increases over the next three years and underlying inflation o Storm rates as presented at 9.5% to meet capital and maintenance needs for the Stormwater Fund and increased NPDES permit requirements Councilmember Buckshnis said she heard from citizens who were not planning to comment regarding their concerns with capital projects and the pyrolysis project because the packet did not include any information. She requested the presentation be posted on the City's website, noting she referred citizens to the presentation in last week's packet. She referred to Mr. Williams' explanation regarding the pyrolysis project. Mr. Williams said a project webpage for the pyrolysis project could be created and that information shared there. Councilmember Buckshnis referred to the February 19, 2019 minutes where the Council approved $2.4M in the 2019 budget. She asked if the request was for $2.1M more. Mr. Williams said the 2019 budget includes $2AM; only $2.1M was spent via the contract with AMERESCO for design. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if the project was at 60% design. Mr. Williams answered yes. Councilmember Buckshnis referred to questions Mr. Williams' answered in his memo including height issues, etc. She agreed it would be great to have webpage for that project. Councilmember Tibbott asked why the cost of water was increasing so much. Mr. Williams answered it was entirely Everett's decision what they charge wholesale customers. The same pressures the City has related to aging infrastructure affect their system as well. Their system is very large, conveying water from the Cascade Foothills in huge, old, above -ground pipelines into Everett, the capital costs of operating essentially a surface water collection system and all the treatment facilities for that water to be potable and the transmission lines that need to be replaced over time is huge and has increased expenses for both Everett customers and their wholesale water customers. He recognized the benefit of the Everett system that other cities in South Snohomish County can take advantage of. However, Edmonds, is not in a good position to effect how Everett sees their rate structure. Edmonds participates in a group through Alderwood, the initial customer of Everett who wholesales water to Edmonds, who then retails it to its customers. Alderwood passes on Everett's charge to Edmonds and does not add additional costs. The last agreement was for 50 years and a 48 year agreement was signed in recent years. Alderwood thought Everett was going to have a 21.8% increase but that amount was later reduced. Councilmember Mesaros referred to Water Enterprise Fund Increase and Taxes and asked if that included the $IOM bond issue. Mr. Williams said it did. Councilmember Mesaros observed the average citizen will pay an additional cost of $4.93. Mr. Williams answered that was for the 3% option; for the recommended 5% option, the additional cost is $5.98. Councilmember Mesaros observed the difference was $0.96/month more which includes interest costs. Mr. Williams said anything can look good over 3 years; the intent was to take a longer view. There are three known capital projects in Utilities, two of which are in Sewer, but it's likely other projects will come up in the 20 years of bonding for this project that will need to be addressed, some of them large projects. A three year view does not provide the total answer; the graphs illustrate the impact of continued borrowing over time; at some point enough rate capital needs to be provided to meet the needs. Staff and the rate consultant feel it's okay to borrow for large projects but eventually the interest has to be paid. Councilmember Mesaros recalled Fram oil filter ads that said pay me now or pay me later, encouraging people to change their oil filter regularly or pay more later when the engine failed. He acknowledged no one wants to pay more, but he would rather pay less over the long term than pay more over the long term. Paying a little more now saves money over the long term. He plans to live in Edmonds for the next 20 years Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 3, 2019 Page 12 Packet Pg. 42 6.3.a and would rather pay less rather than more over a 20-year period so he supported the 5% increase. Mr. Williams said even 5% digs a bit of hole that the City will eventually crawl out of but it is not as deep. With a 0% or even 3% increase, the hole gets deep quickly which means the rate increases necessary in the next 3-6 years would need to be much higher. Councilmember Teitzel said he understands the need for rate increases to maintain infrastructure but was also concerned about rate shock for constituents. With regard to the sewer increases, he observed a large part of the increase was driven by the pyrolysis project and bonding for that project. Bonding will reduce the impact to the customer over time versus not bonding which would require a larger rate increase. He asked about the service life of the pyrolysis system. Mr. Williams answered 30 years was a good projection as it was a mechanical/electrical system. The current incinerator has been in place for 30 years and is on its last legs. He had no reason to expect the pyrolysis system would not match that service life. Councilmember Teitzel observed a 30 year service life was expected but the bond was for 20 years. He asked about a longer term bond, such as 25 or 30 years, to reduce the monthly payment even though it means more debt service over time. Mr. Williams said they have been looking at 20 years as that was the rate consultant's recommendation. A longer term increases risks for people providing that funding with regard to rates. A longer term has not always paid off with lower interest rates. He offered to ask FCS Group to run that scenario and provide that information before the bond sale which will be after the first of the year. Councilmember Teitzel said he would like to see those numbers. He observed in the 21 st year, citizens living here would be getting a break as the system would be paid off by that point; from a rate shock standpoint, the way to reduce the rate shock on current customers would be longer term bonds. Mr. Williams agreed, pointing out two other sewer projects, Pump Station 1 and the Ballinger sewer, need to be funded in the next 10 years. If the City bonds for those, future customers will be paying for those whereas current customers are not. Councilmember Johnson commented on the issue of equity with regard to sewer rates. In her neighborhood, the house to her right has seven family members including teenagers and a single woman lives alone in the house to the left; both pay the same combined utility rate because the sewer charge is the same. She asked whether consideration had been given in the rate studies to a more equitable evaluation of sewer rates. Mr. Williams said he worked at one location for an extended period of time that had volumetric sewer rates. Currently in Washington, 78% of the 218 cities in Washington, according to AWC, have fixed sewer rates. There are pros and cons with volumetric rates; they are set based on wintertime water consumption, but the total bill will vary through the year based on water consumption. Edmonds has had fixed sewer rates for a long time; volumetric rates tend to be confusing to customers. He understood the equity issue Councilmember Johnson was referring to although it is usually not as pronounced as she described as household sizes have gotten smaller. The fixed cost including the capital and O&M cost of the treatment plan, sewer line and lateral sewer, etc. make up most of the cost in the sewer utility; the volumetric piece is fairly small. Councilmember Johnson said she has heard about those options but hasn't heard any discussion at the City about those options. With regard to pyrolysis, Councilmember Johnson asked what happened if it was not installed by 2022 and how that would affect rates. Mr. Williams said he did not think the system that would be replaced would last that long. Councilmember Johnson asked hypothetically if the pyrolysis project could be postponed until 2022, how that would affect rates. Mr. Williams said it would delay the cost but the cost would also increase by 4% per year. He was concerned with the hypothetical because the current incinerator would not last another three years. Councilmember Johnson asked who decides when the incinerator is no longer within the state standards. Mr. Williams answered it was not that it did not meet state standards, the USEPA wants to get rid of incinerators like the one in Edmonds. Although they want cities to get full economic value of what was Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 3, 2019 Page 13 Packet Pg. 43 invested in the incinerator, as soon as accumulatively the equivalent of 50% of the cost to install it has been spent, ignoring inflation, it has to be replaced. Councilmember Johnson asked when the City's incinerator would hit that trigger. Mr. Williams answered that was hard to say but it was getting close; the City just put $340,000 into a Schwing pump this year. All it would take would be a few additional failures and it would meet that trigger. Councilmember Johnson said she is trying to understand some of the comments at the last Council meeting that pyrolysis was not a proven technology and it was not used anywhere in the United States. She observed there are tertiary sewer treatment plants through the United States. She wanted to ensure the City was ready to move in an economic manner and was not putting in a new system too quickly. Mr. Williams referred to information in a response he sent to the individual who commented at the last two Council meetings intended to lessen her concerns. He explained pyrolysis is a very mature technology, it hasn't been used until recent years on wastewater treatment biosolids but has been used for pulp, waste grass, agricultural waste, manure, etc. for many years. There are five plants in world using it for biosolids, one of which is in California which staff has visited and the only one in the United States. Admittedly, pyrolysis is new enough that there is not an existing example in Washington and Edmonds would be the first have all the biosolids managed by pyrolysis. There are three under construction. Mr. Williams commented the wastewater industry is pretty conservative and slow to embrace new things because nobody wants to make a mistake. For years biosolids could be disposed of by hauling them to the dump or spreading further processed biosolids on agricultural lands. Transportation costs are becoming horribly expensive and there are issues brewing in the USEPA about the remaining contaminants in those biosolids which limits how much longer those disposal methods will be allowed. The choices were to haul waste somewhere, or install a new incinerator that met the new federal standards, a gasification plant or pyrolysis. All those options were considered including the cost, environmental benefits, space requirements, etc. and pyrolysis was determined to be the best. He offered to show the Council that analysis. Mayor Earling opened the public participation portion of the public hearing. Lee Kimmelman, Edmonds, expressed concern that this was scheduled for Council approval next week when limited information was available to the public prior to this meeting and a vote next week gave the public limited opportunity for comment. He wanted to ensure the process included opportunity for public comment before the Council votes. Lee Wilson, Edmonds, referred to the cost of water and asked whether the fact that November had almost the lowest rainfall in history had anything to do with it. Water is related to snowpack and the availability of the natural resource for reservoirs which affects costs down the line. The overall presentation tonight indicates conservation, preservation and lowering one's footprint is the only way to go as rates will go up. Hearing no further comment, Mayor Earling closed the public hearing. In response to Ms. Wilson's question, Mr. Williams said an unusual month did not affect rates in the overall scheme. The Pacific Northwest is blessed with abundant clear and clean water compared to California or Arizona who struggle to find water that may not be very high quality but they can pay a lot to treat to make it potable. Little treatment other than chlorination and disinfection and sometimes filtration is required for the water in the PNW. The City is also blessed to have Alderwood and Everett who manage this large system that Edmonds participates in. The costs increase each year, but every municipality is dealing with the issue of aging infrastructure. Most of the waterlines have been in the ground for 50+ years and it is time for them to be cycled out but that is very expensive and cannot be done all at one. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 3, 2019 Page 14 Packet Pg. 44 6.3.a Councilmember Tibbott asked about the total cost of borrowing at the 3% rate increase versus the 5% rate increase. Mr. Williams said the total cost of borrowing would be the same; to borrow $1 OM over 10 years means the $10M project ends up costing $14AM but that has to be weighed against the cost of inflation. Mr. DeLilla said the problem with comparing 3% to 5% is past 2022, the 3% needs to be a lot higher than 5% to make it up. For the first three years it looks like 3% is good deal but in 2023-25 the increases have to be 5% per year instead of 3%. Mr. Williams said the longer the City waits to start making it up, the more rapidly it has to be done because the bonds have to be paid off over the fixed term. Councilmember Tibbott assumed bonding now when interest rates are attractive is a better strategy than waiting a couple years to see what happens with interest rates. Mr. Williams agreed, explaining the City had a pay-as-you-go for nine years but interest rates are so attractive now it makes sense to bond now. If the City waits too much longer, interest rates may go up and it would not be quite as attractive. Councilmember Tibbott assumed if the projects were done soon at an attractive interest rate and the City begin paying off the bonds, theoretically they could even be paid off sooner and other projects funded in the next 10-15 years. Mr. Williams said interest rates cycles over 20 years. It may be possible to refinance the bonds in the future to realize some interest savings which has frequently been done. Councilmember Tibbott asked about energy savings with pyrolysis. Mr. Williams answered in addition to energy savings, there are overall O&M savings with pyrolysis particularly over the incinerator which is becoming very expensive to operate. Councilmember Tibbott asked if those savings could be passed onto customers. Mr. Williams answered that was one possibility but there may be other things that influence those decisions. He summarized there are real savings which can be used to keep rate increase smaller in future years. Councilmember Buckshnis commented on the need for a complete packet next week, relaying that some citizens advised her to say no due to the lack of information. She agreed with Councilmember Teitzel, commenting there has been such a synthetic rate environment for so many years, it may be beneficial to do 30 year bonds to match the agreement signed with other providers and the life of the equipment. She hoped the pyrolysis system would last more than 30 years and looked forward to seeing a 30-year bond scenario. Mr. Williams said FCS will run those options and hopefully they can be included in next week's packet. Mr. Williams explained for the Council to take action next week requires development of an ordinance. He asked if the Council had concerns with sewer rates or were there also concerns with stormwater and water rates, and was the Council satisfied with having the ordinance reflect the recommendation and staff providing an additional option on borrowing if it affects the sewer rates. Staff will work with City Attorney Jeff Taraday to draft an ordinance on water and stormwater rates and provide an additional option related to a 30-year borrowing period for sewer. He acknowledged further discussion would be required next week regarding sewer. Councilmember Teitzel requested the email that provided answers to questions raised regarding the pyrolysis project be included in next week's packet. Mr. Williams agreed. 9. ACTION ITEMS 1. 2020 LEGISLATIVE AGENDA Economic Development/Community Services Director Patrick Doherty said there are items in the legislative agenda related to pyrolysis and the marsh. He will finalize the exact wording in the legislative agenda after the Council adopts the budget. He reviewed: • Proposed 2020 Legislative Agenda o Every year we prepare a formal Legislative Agenda and present to City Council for approval prior to the upcoming Legislative Session, in January Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 3, 2019 Page 15 Packet Pg. 45 6.3.a o Compiled from: ■ Remaining items from last Session ■ Items from all City Departments ■ Items from other agencies ■ Items from individual Councilmembers ■ We met with small groups of Councilmembers and Councilmembers-elect last month o Presented this evening — final draft of 2020 Legislative Agenda for review and approval Preview of 2020 session o Short session (60 days) starting January 13, 2020 o Democrats control both Houses (57-41 House, 28-21 Senate) o Bills that did not pass in 2019 Session are "alive" for 2020 Session 0 2020 Legislative Changes: ■ New House Speaker — Laurie Jinkins ■ New 1 st District Senator Derek Stanford, new 1 st District Rep. Davina Duerr, Dpty. Mayor Bothell ■ New 10th District Senator, Ron Muzzall ■ Rep. Jeff Morris (Bellingham) resigns, off. 1/6/20 o Economic Revenue forecast ■ Revenue: net increase of $299M for current biennium, w/ $313 in reserves by end of biennium ■ Over last four years revenue has increased by $1.1B but maintenance -level spending has increased $900M. 0 2020 Anticipated Legislative Issues: ■ Supplemental budget. Capital budget constrained at $70M — no new big projects ■ Capital Gains Tax ■ Transportation Funding (Gov, Leg will balance budgets assuming I-976 upheld) ■ Housing Legislation ■ Climate Change/Environmental bills (plastic bags, clean fuel standards, etc.) Edmonds Priorities o Highway 99 Corridor Improvements ■ To continue our initial progress and move forward to final design and construction of initial improvements for SR 99, we request that the Legislature shift the $6.2 million originally appropriated for the former Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector project to the SR 99 project in the 2019-2021 biennium o Pyrolysis Project at Edmonds Wastewater Treatment Plant ■ The City is seeking $500,000 from the State capital budget in 2020 to assist the City in defraying the cost of implementing this innovative, environmentally superior technology. We would be the first municipal WWTP in the US to use this technology for full-scale biosolids treatment. We believe the State has a legitimate interest in having this option fully proven for use by other plants in Washington. We are hopeful we can also receive support at the federal level and will be pursuing that option as well. o Edmonds Marsh Estuary Restoration Project (including Daylighting of Willow Creek and Redevelopment of Marina Beach Park) ■ The City of Edmonds urges the Governor and the State Legislature seek support and assistance for the Edmonds Marsh Estuary project in the 2020 Legislative Session and to adopt a 2020-2022 Capital Budget that includes full funding of the Recreation and Conservation Funding Board (RCFB), which will allow the City to seek a funding request of $1.5 million for Marina Beach Park development in conjunction with the daylighting of Willow Creek and restoration of the Edmonds Marsh. o Creative Districts Funding and Support Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 3, 2019 Page 16 Packet Pg. 46 6.3.a ■ We support requests on the part of the Washington State Arts Commission for projects and grants funding, and administrative and programmatic funding, to help further work plans and capital projects of certified Creative Districts and the onboarding of new Creative Districts. In addition, support legislation and/or rules changes that could establish incentives to further Creative District capital projects, affordable housing or studio/maker space for creatives, location of creative -sector businesses, etc. o Support Edmonds Waterfront Center (former Senior Center) Funding ■ The City of Edmonds will support efforts by the Edmonds Waterfront Center to secure funding for the redevelopment of their important community facility on the Edmonds Waterfront, in particular to assist with efforts to construct to LEED Gold -certified standards. o Initiative 976 response ■ Passage of 1-976 has significant consequences for \Edmonds. Repeal of the Transportation Benefit District authority results in the loss of $700,000 annually that the City uses to maintain our streets and roads, as well as the loss of significant amounts of potential state funding. In fact, this fund has also yielded over $6.6 million over the past 5 years to the City of Edmonds. We encourage the Legislature to evaluate additional sources of local and state transportation funding to mitigate the impacts of the passage of Initiative 976. Support Items o Invest in Housing Stability and Affordability o Fire Alarm Testing by City Certified Electricians o Bolster Resources for Infrastructure Investment o Local Public Health Funding & Programming o Public Defense Costs o Gun Violence Reduction o Fiscal Impacts of Legislation and Rulemaking o Land Use Law Review (GMA, SEPA, etc.) o Economic Development Tools o Fiscal Sustainability for Local Governments o Environmental and Climate -Related Issues o Puget Sound Health and Salmon/Orca Recovery o Parks, Recreation and Conservation o Follow/Support Other Cities', Agencies', Partners' Agendas COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO ADOPT THE LEGISLATIVE AGENDA IN CONCEPT AND CONTINUE TO WORK ON THE DETAILS AS THE COUNCIL FINALIZES THE BUDGET. Councilmember Teitzel said he was not sure what approving the legislative agenda in concept meant; either the Council approves it or not. Councilmember Johnson answered it was semantics. She recalled Mr. Doherty asked that it be approved in concept and the details related to the budget would be worked out. Mr. Doherty clarified there are two lines that reflect things the City Council has been debating, the exact amount to appropriate next year for the marsh and reference to the pyrolysis project. The Council can approve the issues as contained in the proposed agenda and he will update any specifics related to the budget approval. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 2. PROPOSED CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN AND 2020-2025 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM City Engineer Rob English explained the only change made was following City Council direction last week, the narrative was changed to Edmonds Marsh/Willow Creek Daylighting project. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 3, 2019 Page 17 Packet Pg. 47 6.3.a Councilmember Johnson asked where the parking study was in the CIP. Public Works Director Phil Williams said it was not in the CIP; funds were appropriated in the 2019 budget that have not been spent and staff was not given direction regarding when or how to bring it back in 2020. He assumed the Council would take up that issue after the first of the year and determine what the Council wants to do. Councilmember Johnson observed there should be a placeholder to carry forward the funds allocated in 2019 and to identify what year the study will be done. She observed it seemed like an omission. Mr. Williams said there did not have to be a placeholder, but staff needs clear direction whether the Council wants to do a parking study in 2020. Councilmember Johnson said her understanding was the Council agreed they wanted a parking study but had not agreed how it should be done, the cost or how to proceed. She suggested adding the parking study to the CIP in 2020. Councilmember Johnson inquired about the where/how the sidewalk crew was reflected in the CIP and the short sidewalks they intended to work on. Mr. Williams said the cost of the sidewalk crew was built into the Street Fund 111; the base budget is higher than before the sidewalk crew was approved in 2019. He clarified the costs are reflected in Fund 111, not as a capital project. Councilmember Johnson asked if both members of the sidewalk crew had been hired. Mr. Williams answered yes and they have started work. Councilmember Johnson commented a number of sidewalk projects are listed, but she would like to see what projects the sidewalk crew will be working on such as Walnut from 6' to 7'. Mr. English answered Walnut Street from 6t' to 7' was funded by a Complete Streets grant and will be built in 2020 by the street crew. Councilmember Johnson asked what other sidewalk or non -motorized projects the sidewalk crew planned do in 2020-2022. Mr. Williams answered a lot of the work the sidewalk crew does is not something that has already been identified. For example, they just finished pouring curb returns for the rectangular rapid flashing beacon installation at Admiral Way instead of contracting it out. The sidewalk crew has also been used on City capital projects where it is cheaper and faster to use the sidewalk crew instead of contracting. There is a list of short sidewalk segments in the 2015 Transportation Plan that staff intends to begin working on in the spring. Councilmember Johnson looked forward to having those programmed, but unless they were in the CIP, she did not know what was planned. Mr. Williams said staff could see if some of the projects could be programmed and send the Council that information. The intent is to start with the highest value projects. Councilmember Johnson recalled the sidewalk crew would also be doing ADA ramps. These projects have been in the adopted Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan for decades and she looked forward to getting some of them accomplished. Councilmember Johnson referred to the request for $40,000 for concrete equipment for the sidewalk crew and asked if they were pouring that much concrete that that equipment was needed. Mr. Williams said the truck was approved in the 2019 budget; the $40,000 would be used to purchase a 2.5-3 cubic yard cement mixer that would slide into the existing dump truck. The mixer would make routine concrete work that much easier, less cleanup, and higher quality concrete because it can be stirred during transport from the batch plant to the site. He summarized it was a productivity booster for the sidewalk crew. Councilmember Johnson referred to the loss of TBD funds and asked where funding for the street maintenance crew that was previously funded by TBD funds was reflected, noting it would now need to be funded by the General Fund. Mr. Williams answered it was not included. The initial decision on the lawsuit was that the initiative was defective and an injunction was granted to the plaintiffs (King County and Seattle). The initiative is in abeyance now, it was supposed to be effective December 5, 2019 and funds would have ceased flowing to the City; due to the injunction, the City is still collecting those funds. If the plaintiffs prevail on the merits of the lawsuit, funding will continue; there is time to await the final outcome. Councilmember Johnson said it would be prudent for the budget to assume there are no TBD funds available Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 3, 2019 Page 18 Packet Pg. 48 6.3.a for street maintenance and fund it via the General Fund. If the courts move in a different direction, the City can move accordingly. Mr. Williams asked the source of the $700,000 to cover that. Councilmember Johnson answered the General Fund. Mr. Williams said he will discuss it with Finance Director Scott James. Councilmember Johnson commented there needs to be a contingency plan. Councilmember Johnson reiterated she was anxious to move planning for the 4' Avenue Corridor ahead. She would like to see funds in 2020 for design rather than spread over several years and she was interested in ways to reprioritize park projects to accomplish that. She acknowledged that depends on the decision of others but felt it was doable if other projects were scheduled in later years. Councilmember Teitzel referred to the Transportation section of the CFP and the project to modifying existing lane channelization on SR104 to add vehicle storage for ferry users which he assumed was largely restriping. Mr. Williams said the City has looked at repurposing that section of SR104 to meet additional needs including storage of ferry traffic. If that could be accomplished, there would be fewer occasions and shorter periods of time when driveways are blocked further east on SR104 which reduces impacts to residential and commercial properties on SR104. As this is a state highway, there is no presumption with having that sheet in the CFP that the City would necessarily pay for that project or provide any funding; that is a future decision. The State is interested in considering that because they need more parking for ferries to implement their future three boat program. What that project ends up looking like and how to pay for it has not yet been determined. No funding has been identified and that project is in the last three years of the CFP which are not financially constrained. Councilmember Teitzel observed a cost of $357,000 has been identify in 2023. Presuming the state takes on this project, it could be removed from the CFP. Mr. Williams said if the state took on the project, he would recommend removing it from the CFP. The $3757,000 estimate includes a lot of assumptions; it was primarily seen as restriping, new signage, and reconfiguring the space, not adding more paving. Councilmember Buckshnis thanked staff for the amendments in the CFP/CIP. She referred to the railroad track related project for $141,504 in 2019 and asked if that was the emergency access, formerly the waterfront connector. She asked if referring to it as Edmonds street constrained it to that location. Mr. Williams said that project dead. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if the title should be change to emergency access to the waterfront. Mayor Earling said there are no funds for that project so it doesn't matter. Councilmember Buckshnis said the CFP included the community garden and wetland mitigation but there is no funding in the CIP. Deputy Parks & Recreation Shannon Burley said there are funds allocated in Fund 126 and Fund 125. Councilmember Buckshnis referred to DP #81 regarding Edmonds Marsh/Willow Creek Daylighting design and construction that will be reduced to $450,000; she asked if that should be changed now or after the budget. Mr. Williams said the numbers were not changed as it was subject to the Council's discussion and decision tonight. Councilmember Buckshnis questioned why the CFP/CIP was approved before the budget and asked if the numbers in the CFP/CIP should be changed after the budget was approved. Mr. Williams said if a majority of the Council wanted to change the number or the year, that can be done. As he understood Councilmember Buckshnis' correspondence today, it was a recommendation to remove DP #80 and substitute a new decision package to change the total funds in 2020 and the source. He suggested it would be better to make the decision here and it can be reflected in the budget. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, ON PAGE 176, THE EDMONDS MARSH WILLOW CREEK DAYLIGHTING DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION, DECISION PACKAGE #81, THERE IS A NEW DECISION NUMBER THAT SCOTT WILL GIVE US, AND THE AMOUNT WILL BE $450,000 AND SHE CAN EXPLAIN DURING THE BUDGET AMENDMENT PROCESS WHERE THE FUND ARE COMING FROM. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 3, 2019 Page 19 Packet Pg. 49 6.3.a Council President Fraley-Monillas asked what reducing it meant. Mr. Williams said he was not recommending that. As staff sees it, this is a really big project that will require significant match before it will ever be completed. He did not see any problem with the recommended funding in the 2020 budget and if the new Council, Mayor and administration reach agreement on pursuing a portion of the project design or other projects that are supportive of the marsh restoration, a contract and scope would be brought back to the Council for approval and public comment and the budget would contain the funds to move ahead. If that doesn't happen, the funds would be carried over into 2021 which would provide a bigger pot of money to attract grants and provide more matching funds. He was uncertain why the funding in 2020 needed to be reduced. If the funds were reduced, Council President Fraley-Monillas asked what happened to those funds, did they return to the General Fund. Mr. Williams answered they would stay in the Stormwater Fund; the $750,000 proposed for 2020 was to come from the Stormwater Utility. Much of the project is related to stormwater and that is a source of funds that can provide match to future grants. The General Fund's ability to provide funds for a match for a project of this size is not good. Having the stormwater utility be a partner is logical and should be welcomed. None of the funds will be spent on anything the Council does not want to do. Council President Fraley-Monillas relayed her understanding the funds were currently in the Stormwater Fund. Mr. Williams agreed, the recommendation was to move a portion into a specific project, the Marsh Estuary Restoration. Council President Fraley-Monillas asked for confirmation that staff would come back to Council for authorization before moving forward with a project. Mr. Williams said he was committed to doing that; he understood any spending was a sensitive issue and something the public was very interested in. No one wants to design something that was not the right answer. The City needs to work with the current and future property owner, WSDOT, to determine a way to move forward and have funds in the budget to seize that opportunity. He was concerned it could take a couple years for permitting and design for a project of this size; having funds available to react quickly to seize an opportunity seems best. Orca recovery and Chinook salmon are reaching a critical point so it is better do something sooner than later. Council President Fraley-Monillas reiterated staff was committed to not spending any money from the fund without Council approval. Mr. Williams answered absolutely, it would have to have Council approval. Councilmember Tibbott said in theory he supported the amendment to reduce the funding to $450,000 and have the remaining funds managed in the Stormwater Fund. He asked about the change in the title from design to restoration. Mr. Williams said the word design is important because design and permitting is the next phase; the grant the City received specifically asked for assistance with design. He hated to remove the word design from the match, but even if it says design, no design would be done on the project unless a project is presented to Council and the Council and the public agree it is the right project. In the meantime the funds will be available when the time comes for design. Councilmember Johnson inquired about open space funds, recalling due to the waterfront project, those funds were removed in 2020 and 2021. Ms. Burley answered $300,000 is allocated in the CIP from Fund 126 this year and $200,000 every subsequent year. Councilmember Buckshnis commented the $450,000 is already a match; the reason why she did not want the $750,000 was WSDOT and the ownership issue and to allow the future administration to determine how they wanted to proceed which was the reason there were placeholders in Funds 322, 125 and 126. She relayed Mr. James' comment that three Councilmember wanted to remove DP #80 because it makes a clean audit trail. The new DP would be $450,000 to match the grant that talks about salmon recovery. When the Council gets to the budget, she will explain how the cash is coming in. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 3, 2019 Page 20 Packet Pg. 50 6.3.a Councilmember Nelson relayed his understanding that staff was opposed to removing DP #80. Mr. Williams said if this is a year where full -fledge design cannot occur due to not having access to the site, the one thing that can be done is set aside funding for the day when this project gets a green light. There may be a window this year to do some design. Councilmember Nelson asked if Mr. Williams supported the motion to move the funds around. Mr. Williams said he did not recommend it. Councilmember Nelson said in light of Mr. Williams not recommending it and in light of the fact that this was as close as the City has ever been to funding restoration of the marsh, he did not support the motion. Council President Fraley-Monillas asked what WSDOT had to do with removing the $750,000. Mr. Williams answered the project has gotten high centered in the last couple years by the Unocal cleanup. Unocal owns the property and the cleanup has not yet concluded and because it hasn't, the property has not yet transferred ownership to WSDOT with whom the City could negotiate for access. It is unknown how long the cleanup will take; it is in the hands of Ecology and Unocal who are continuing to monitor the soils, soil vapor and water quality. When it meets the standards set by the state, the escrow project is triggered and the property changes hands to the state. For Council President Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember Buckshnis said the reason she does not support the decision package to begin design for the Willow Creek Daylighting was she did not agree it should be a stormwater project worth $16.65M. An ownership issue remains with WSDOT getting control of the property and the current design was based on a constraint with the WSDOT property so the MOU deals with the alignment along the railroad tracks. Council President Fraley-Monillas relayed her understanding that Councilmember Buckshnis did not want to allocate the funds due to concerns over WSDOT's control of the property. Councilmember Buckshnis answered yes, the property still belong to Unocal. Mr. Williams said there is no assumption on the alignment of the daylighted channel at this point. A number of options were presented for comment; the next step would be to sort through the comments, work with the Council and the public and if another alignment is identified, an additional option could be developed in the interim. Councilmember Teitzel commented there are a lot of unknowns about the property including when the property transfer will happen or what WSDOT will do with the property once they get possession. Design has occurred even with those unknowns and taxpayer money has been spent on designs that may change. He supported the motion to limit funding for this decision package to $450,000 to provide a match, but hold off on any design until there is more clarity. The money is in the Stormwater Fund and once a future City Council gets clarity about what will happen with the property, a mid -year budget amendment could be approved to free up additional funding. He summarized it was prudent to take the approach Councilmember Buckshnis proposed and revise the decision package to match the $450,000 federal grant. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (4-3), COUNCILMEMBERS JOHNSON, BUCKSHNIS, TEITZEL AND TIBBOTT VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS NELSON AND MESAROS AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS VOTING NO. Following a brief recess, Mayor Earling advised Council President Fraley-Monillas and he agreed to postpone budget amendments to a future meeting. COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS, TO APPROVE THE CFP/CIP AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON VOTING NO. 3. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT/HOUSING Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 3, 2019 Page 21 Packet Pg. 51 6.3.a Development Services Director Shane Hope relayed there are two amendments, 1) replace language in the Housing Element about completing the housing strategy by the end of 2019 with language to provide housing policy options by the end of 2020 for Council consideration. The ordinance includes amending the Comprehensive Plan to include the CFP. COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 4166, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT/HOUSING. City Attorney Jeff Taraday clarified the ordinance in the packet references Exhibit A which is not attached to the ordinance. Exhibit A is the CFP that the Council approved in the previous agenda item. Staff will attach it as Exhibit A to the ordinance. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. BUDGET AMENDMENT TO FUND 2020 COUNCIL RETREAT TRAINING Council President Fraley-Monillas explained due there being four new Councilmembers and the need for immediate training, she set up a basic Council retreat. She spoke with the directors things it would be important for the Council to learn at the retreat as well as spoke with about half the Council about what they viewed as important to include in a retreat. The retreat is scheduled on February 7 and will include instruction on basics such as how to make motions, the difference between an ordinance and a resolution, etc.; Roberts Rules of Order; and training on public records. The cost of the retreat including meals and supplies is estimated to be $4500. COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO AMEND THE BUDGET TO FUND THE 2020 COUNCIL RETREAT TRAINING FROM THE 2020 COUNCIL CONTINGENCY. Finance Director Scott James relayed the request was for Council to approve this amendment so contracts can be signed but the bills will not be paid until 2020. Councilmember Teitzel said the timing is unusual because the current Council President is scheduling training for a future Council and traditionally the presiding Council President makes decisions regarding a retreat. Much of this training is available from AWC; he attended similar training during the first quarter of his first term and the cost was far less. He asked why it was appropriate to make this decision for a future Council President. Council President Fraley-Monillas said the new Councilmembers are going to the AWC training for new electeds this weekend, but it is much simpler. She agreed the timing was awkward, but she did not think it mattered who the Council President was next year; the new Councilmembers need to be trained. In her opinion, some of the problems encountered in the last few years have been due to inadequate training provided to Councilmembers. The reason the training is February 7t1i is she hoped the remaining Councilmember would have been appointed by then. The Mayor and staff will also be invited. She summarized the timing was not the best but it was the best that could be done considering this would be the most new Councilmembers the City had ever had. Councilmember Buckshnis asked why 2019 Council Contingency Funds were not being used. Mr. James said the intent was to get approval to sign the contracts with the providers but the services will not be provided until 2020. Councilmember Buckshnis asked Mr. James if he was part of the selection process. Mr. James said he was not. Councilmember Buckshnis asked what contractors were selected. Council President Fraley-Monillas advised Phyllis Shulman for the basic training, Ann McFarland for the parliamentary procedures, Patricia Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 3, 2019 Page 22 Packet Pg. 52 6.3.a Taraday for public records and Mr. James regarding the basics of finance. Councilmember Buckshnis preferred to use the 2019 Council Contingency. Council President Fraley-Monillas said it could be rolled from 2019 into 2020. Mr. James said the Council Contingency has budget for this type of thing in the 2020 budget and there was always the option of a budget amendment. COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS TO EXTEND THE MEETING TO 10:15 P.M. MOTION CARRIED (6-1) COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON VOTING NO. Councilmember Mesaros commented this was a really good idea. To Councilmember Teitzel, he did not see this as retreat, it was training and education. He hoped the future Council President would set aside time for a retreat to consider legislative priorities Councilmembers would like to accomplish. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5. FOURTH QUARTER 2019 BUDGET AMENDMENT Finance Director Scott James reviewed: 10. • The 4th Quarter Budget Amendment starts on page 305 in the Council Packet • 6 Decision Packages totaling $384,917 in new expenditures and $3,916,944 in new revenues • Overall Fund Balance increased by $3,532,027 • Decision Packages o DPI - $132,800 Benefits Amendment ■ Funds VEBA contributions and the state required paid family medical leave benefit payments o DP2 - $4,757 Public Defense ■ The Snohomish County Public Defenders Association has experienced higher caseloads that require Edmonds to pay for the additional services o DP3 - $10,216 — Memorial Benches ■ These funds will be used to purchase four memorial benches ■ This budget request is 100% funded by private contributions o DP4 - $8,200 — Firemen's Pension Fund ■ Firemen's Pension fund has been seeing higher premium benefit costs and pension payments than we had anticipated o DP5 - $143,000 — 76' Ave/212' Intersection Improvements ■ Will pay the final payment to the contractor for worked performed on this project o DP6 — Civic Park Bonds - $85,944 Issuance cost ■ Earlier this year, Council approved the issuance of bonds to help pay for the construction of Civic Park ■ The AAA rated bonds generated $3,485,000 in bond proceed revenue, $300,944 in bond premium revenue. Summary o Revenues are Increased by $3,916,944 o Expenditures are Increased by $384,917 o Ending Fund Balance is Increased by $3,532,027 COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO APPROVE THE FOURTH QUARTER BUDGET AMENDMENT, ORDINANCE NO. 4167. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 3, 2019 Page 23 Packet Pg. 53 6.3.a DELIBERATION AND ADOPTION OF THE 2020 CITY BUDGET Due to the late hour, this item was postponed to a future meeting. 11. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Earling reported the tree lighting was a tremendous success. He visited Vancouver BC over the weekend and experienced a five hour wait at the border returning to the United States. He announced the holiday market is starting this weekend. 12. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Teitzel said Go Hawks. 13. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(i) This item was not needed. 14. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION. POTENTIAL ACTION AS A RESULT OF MEETING IN EXECUTIVE SESSION This item was not needed. 15. ADJOURN With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:08 p.m. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes December 3, 2019 Page 24 Packet Pg. 54 6.4 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 12/10/2019 Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments. Staff Lead: Scott James Department: Administrative Services Preparer: Nori Jacobson Background/History Approval of claim checks #239776 through #239880 dated December 5, 2019 for $460,352.83 and wire payments of $921.67, $798.15 and $3,529.10. Approval of payroll direct deposit and checks #64002 through #64058 for Law Enforcement and Support Employees' Holiday buy back in the amount of $147,707.96. Approval of payroll direct deposit and checks #64059 through #64062 for $600,541.17, benefit checks #64063 through #64067 and wire payments of $638,176.22 for the pay period November 16, 2019 through November 30, 2019. Staff Recommendation Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments. 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. Attachments: claims 12-05-19 us bank wire 11-27-19 wire 12-04-19 wire 12-05-19 FrequentlyUsedProjNumbers 12-05-19 payroll summary 12-05-19 a payroll summary 12-05-19 b payroll benefits 12-05-19 holiday buy back a holiday buy back b Packet Pg. 55 6.4.a vchlist Voucher List Page: 12/05/2019 10:50:03AM City of Edmonds L 3 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account .y Amoun o a m 239776 12/5/2019 061029 ABSOLUTE GRAPHIX 1119802 P&R LEAGUE SHIRTS: ADDITIONAL P&R LEAGUE SHIRTS: ADDITIONAL U 001.000.64.571.25.31.00 11.2E 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.64.571.25.31.00 ui 1.1 1 1219110 P&R: BEACH DOCENT SHIRTS P&R: BEACH DOCENT SHIRTS U 001.000.64.571.23.24.00 402.5( - 10.4% Sales Tax c 001.000.64.571.23.24.00 41.8E m Total: 456.81 �a 239777 12/5/2019 064246 ALS LABORATORY GROUP 32-EV19110154-0 E7FG.LAB SERVICES o E7FG.Lab Services 422.000.72.531.90.41.20 425.0( a Total: 425.0( 239778 12/5/2019 074306 AMWINS GROUP BENEFITS INC 6082028 RETIREE PREMIUMS - DECEMBER U RETIREE PREMIUMS - DECEMBER c 617.000.51.517.20.23.10 1,193.1E 'ji RETIREE PREMIUMS - DECEMBER 0 0 009.000.39.517.20.23.10 L 7,235.5E a Total : 8,428.6° Q 239779 12/5/2019 001529 ANDERSON, DONALD F ANDERSON 11/19 ANDERSON EXP CLAIM - FALL 201E PER DIEM - CHELAN 11/18-11/21/19 001.000.41.521.40.43.00 70.0( 0N Total: 70.0( N E 239780 12/5/2019 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES 1991520330 WWTP: 11/27/19 UNIFORMS,TOWE Mats/Towels z 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 51.4E Uniforms aD E 423.000.76.535.80.24.00 3.5( t 10.4% Sales Tax Q Page: 1 Packet Pg. 56 vchlist 12/05/2019 10 :50 :03 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 239780 12/5/2019 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES Voucher List City of Edmonds Invoice PO # Description/Account (Continued) 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 10.4% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.24.00 1991520331 PARKS MAINT UNIFORM SERVICE PARKS MAINT UNIFORM SERVICE 001.000.64.576.80.24.00 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.24.00 1991520332 FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS 001.000.66.518.30.24.00 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.24.00 1991525916 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE 001.000.65.518.20.41.00 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE 111.000.68.542.90.41.00 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE 422.000.72.531.90.41.00 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE 423.000.75.535.80.41.00 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.65.518.20.41.00 10.4% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.90.41.00 10.4% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 10.4% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.41.00 6.4.a Page: 2 a� L 3 c �a Amoun y 0 a aD 5.3E 'D r U d 0.3E N 59.5E z U 6.1E m c a� 29.1 , �a 3.0< o L �a a 1.6" E 6.1- u 4- 0 6.1- > 0 L 6.1- a Q 6.1- rn 6.0E c N E M 0.6z Z c 0.6z E t 0.6z Q Page: 2 Packet Pg. 57 vchlist 12/05/2019 10 :50 :03 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 6.4.a Page: 3 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account a� L 3 c �a Amoun y 239780 12/5/2019 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES (Continued) 0 10.4% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.41.00 0.6, u 10.4% Sales Tax L 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 0.6" 1991525917 FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS & MAT FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS 511.000.77.548.68.24.00 9.2� u FLEET DIVISION MATS 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 19.1( c 10.4% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.24.00 0.9 1 10.4% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 1.9E o Total: L 225.41 a 239781 12/5/2019 001835 AWARDS SERVICE INC 18717 2019 SERVICE AWARDS EMPLOYEE SERVICE AWARDS 001.000.22.518.10.49.00 693.1( u 10.5% Sales Tax o 001.000.22.518.10.49.00 72.7E Total: 765.81 o a 239782 12/5/2019 076923 BALING, GIEANI 11/7-11/21 MONITOR 11/7-11/21/19 VOLLEYBALL GYM M( Q' Q 11 /7-11 /21 /19 VOLLEYBALL GYM M( 001.000.64.571.25.41.00 54.0( Total : 54.0( c 239783 12/5/2019 076096 BATTERY SYSTEMS INC 4997505 UNITS E161 EQ, E162EQ RETURNEI UNITS E161 EQ, E162EQ RETURNEI N E 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 -448.5E .m 10.4% Sales Tax 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 -46.6E c 5078658 UNIT 436 - BATTERY E 10.4% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 23.3' Q Page: 3 Packet Pg. 58 vchlist 12/05/2019 10 :50 :03 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 6.4.a Page: 4 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account a� L 3 c �a Amoun y 239783 12/5/2019 076096 BATTERY SYSTEMS INC (Continued) 0 UNIT 436 - BATTERY 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 224.2� u 5081791 UNIT 437 - BATTERY P UNIT 437 - BATTERY 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 224.2( 10.4% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 23.3: v 5202301 UNIT 438 - BATTERIES UNIT 438 - BATTERIES c 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 448.5E 10.4% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 46.6E Total: 495.2d o L 239784 12/5/2019 072775 BAVCO 931137 WATER QUALITY - TEST FITTING C a WATER QUALITY - TEST FITTING C 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 25.0( Freight 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 10.5E o 10.4% Sales Tax �a 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 3.7( o Total: 39.2' a Q 239785 12/5/2019 066891 BEACON PUBLISHING INC 31666 HOLIDAY MARKET DISPLAY AD EDP Holiday market display ad Edmonds r' 001.000.61.558.70.41.40 430.0( c 31708 HOLIDAY MARKET DISPLAY AD MIL ci Holiday market display ad Mill Creek N 001.000.61.558.70.41.40 480.0( E 31741 HOLIDAY MARKET AD MUKILTEO BI 2 Holiday market ad Mukilteo Beacon 1 U 001.000.61.558.70.41.40 430.0( Total: 1,340.0( E t 239786 12/5/2019 072455 BEAR COMMUNICATIONS INC 4935211 FLEET - UNIT W575EQ - FINAL ANT Q Page: 4 Packet Pg. 59 vchlist 12/05/2019 10 :50 :03 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 239786 12/5/2019 072455 BEAR COMMUNICATIONS INC 239787 12/5/2019 075066 BEST PLUMBING GROUP LLC 239788 12/5/2019 070803 BITCO SOFTWARE LLC 239789 12/5/2019 074307 BLUE STAR GAS 239790 12/5/2019 075342 BORUCHOW ITZ, ROBERT 239791 12/5/2019 077243 BPAS Voucher List City of Edmonds Invoice PO # Description/Account (Continued) FLEET - UNIT W575EQ - FINALANT 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 10.4% Sales Tax 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 Tota I : ENG20190167 Refund ENG20190167 REFUND - PERMIT I; ENG20190167 Refund - Permit Issue 001.000.257.620 Total 938 BITCO SOFTWARE MAINTENANCE Bitco software maintenance- 512.000.31.518.88.48.00 10.4% Sales Tax 512.000.31.518.88.48.00 Total 1140739-IN FLEET - AUTO PROPANE 664.4 GAL FLEET - AUTO PROPANE 664.4 GAL 511.000.77.548.68.34.12 Total 11302019 PUBLIC DEFENSE - SEPT TO NOV. SEPT TO NOV. SERVICES 001.000.22.518.10.41.00 Tota I : 1000756349 VEBA FEES - OCTOBER OCTOBER VEBA FEES 001.000.39.518.61.49.00 OCTOBER VEBA FEES 111.000.68.542.61.49.00 OCTOBER VEBA FEES 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 6.4.a Page: 5 Page: 5 Packet Pg. 60 vchlist 12/05/2019 10 :50 :03 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 239791 12/5/2019 077243 BPAS Voucher List City of Edmonds Invoice (Continued) 239792 12/5/2019 002987 BUILDERS HARDWARE & SUPPLY CO S3726927.001 239793 12/5/2019 003328 CASCADE SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA TPA CSO 239794 12/5/2019 077306 CHECK RIDE DRIVER TRAINING 239795 12/5/2019 019215 CITY OF LYNNWOOD 239796 12/5/2019 062975 COLLISION CLINIC INC PO # Description/Account OCTOBER VEBA FEES 422.000.72.531.90.49.00 OCTOBER VEBA FEES 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 OCTOBER VEBA FEES 423.000.76.535.80.49.00 OCTOBER VEBA FEES 511.000.77.548.68.49.00 Total PUBLIC WORKS - DOOR FOR EOC PUBLIC WORKS - DOOR FOR EOC 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 10.1 % Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 Total TPA CSO TPA CSO 123.000.64.573.20.41.00 Total ; PLOEGER PLOEGER - CLASS A CDL TRAININ( PLOEGER - CLASS A CDL TRAININ( 111.000.68.542.90.49.00 Total 15629 WWTP: 11/2019 M/O+SEWER 11/2019 M/O+SEWER 423.000.75.535.80.47.20 Total RO41914 UNIT525 - DEDUCTABLE FOR REPP UNIT525 - DEDUCTABLE FOR REPP 511.000.77.548.68.48.00 6.4.a Page: 6 Page: 6 Packet Pg. 61 vchlist 12/05/2019 10 :50 :03 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 239796 12/5/2019 062975 062975 COLLISION CLINIC INC (Continued) 239797 12/5/2019 070323 COMCAST BUSINESS 8498310301175175 239798 12/5/2019 075042 COVERALL OF WASHINGTON 7100187309 7100187743 7100188071 239799 12/5/2019 075925 CROSSROADS STRATEGIES LLC 1014725 239800 12/5/2019 074444 DATAQUEST LLC 10678 239801 12/5/2019 064531 DINES, JEANNIE 19-3978 239802 12/5/2019 072145 DISTINCTIVE WINDOWS INC 22017 - RANGER PO # Description/Account Total : CEMETERY INTERNET 820 15TH Sl CEMETERY INTERNET 820 15TH Sl 130.000.64.536.20.42.00 MEADOWDALE PRESCHOOL INTEF MEADOWDALE PRESCHOOL INTEF 001.000.64.571.29.42.00 Total WWTP: NOV 2019 JANITORIAL SEF NOV 2019 JANITORIAL SERVICE 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 WWTP: CREDIT#7100188071 ISSU No December services. Contract sery 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 WWTP: CREDIT AGAINST INV 7100 CREDIT AGAINST INV 7100187743 1 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 Total FEDERAL LOBBYIST FOR NOVEMB Federal lobbyist for November 2019 001.000.61.511.70.41.00 Total NOV. BACKGROUND CHECKS NOV. BACKGROUND CHECKS 001.000.22.518.10.41.00 Total CITY COUNCIL MTG. MINUTES/TRA city council meeting 001.000.25.514.30.41.00 Total FISHING PIER - FURNISH AND INSI 6.4.a Page: 7 aD L 3 c �a Amoun y 0 1,000.0( as U d L_ 138.6- N m 138.E - 277.2: m c d 514.0( 0 L 514.0( ca a E -514.0( u 514.0( o 7a 0 a 6,000.0( a 6,000.0( Q rn 0 190.0( 190.0( 2 U 402.5( y 402.5( E t U co Q Page: 7 Packet Pg. 62 vchlist 12/05/2019 10 :50 :03 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 239802 12/5/2019 072145 DISTINCTIVE WINDOWS INC N&H.131 239804 239805 239806 12/5/2019 076172 DK SYSTEMS 12/5/2019 074674 ECOLUBE RECOVERY LLC Voucher List City of Edmonds Invoice (Continued) 23361 1911112219 12/5/2019 071969 EDMONDS CENTER FOR THE ARTS DC GRANT ECA 102619 12/5/2019 076610 EDMONDS HERO HARDWARE 1514 it PO # Description/Account FISHING PIER - FURNISH AND INSI 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 Total CITY HALL - MAINTENANCE & REP) CITY HALL - MAINTENANCE & REPE 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 Total FLEET - REMOVAL OF OLD OIL FILL 10.4% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.48.00 FLEET - REMOVAL OF OLD OIL FILL 511.000.77.548.68.48.00 Total DIV COMM GRANT FOR ECA PROD Diversity Commission grant to Edmor 001.000.61.557.20.49.00 Total PM SUPPLIES: NUTS, BOLTS, SCRE PM SUPPLIES: NUTS, BOLTS, SCRE 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 PM SUPPLIES: BATTERY, REPAIR V PM SUPPLIES: BATTERY, REPAIR V 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 6.4.a Page: 8 a� L 3 c �a Amoun y 0 a m 1,973.6£ u L 205.2E 2,178.9' m v 14,304.9 a� 1,487.7' 15,792.61 0 �a a 8.8z E 85.0( U 93.8' c 0 0 a 500.0( Q 500.0( " rn 0 5.5£ V) E 0.5£ 'M c 28.0" E t 2.9' Q Page: 8 Packet Pg. 63 vchlist 12/05/2019 10 :50 :03 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # 239806 12/5/2019 076610 076610 EDMONDS HERO HARDWARE (Continued) 239807 12/5/2019 077307 EDMONDS TREE SERVICE 1191122412 239808 12/5/2019 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 239809 12/5/2019 008969 ENGLAND, CHARLES 3-07490 3-38565 7988 DANCE 239810 12/5/2019 075136 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE ASSOC 150569 239811 12/5/2019 009350 EVERETT DAILY HERALD EDH882158 239812 12/5/2019 009410 EVERETT STEEL INC EDH882174 Description/Account Total : PM: SEAVIEW PARK TREE TRIMMI� PM: SEAVIEW PARK TREE TRIMMII` 001.000.64.576.80.41.00 Total HAINES WHARF PARK DRINKING F HAINES WHARF PARK DRINKING F 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 SPRINKLER FOR RHODIES 18410 c SPRINKLER FOR RHODIES 18410 c 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 Total 7988 FRIDAY NIGHT DANCE INSTRI 7988 FRIDAY NIGHT EAST COAST 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 Total PROFSVCS Climate Goals & Measures Project 001.000.62.524.10.41.00 Total CITY NOTICES UTILITY RATE INCRI city notice for utility rate increase 001.000.25.514.30.41.40 CITY ORDINANCE 4163 AND 4164 city ordinance 4163 and 4164 001.000.25.514.30.41.40 Total 280014 FAC MAINT - SUPPLIES FAC MAINT - SUPPLIES 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 10.4% Sales Tax 6.4.a Page: 9 aD L 3 c �a Amoun N 0 37.0E U d L_ 350.0( 350.0( m z 104.2E m c d M 51.2, 155.5( — 0 L �a a 136.4( E 136.4( fd U 4- 0 �a 3,312.5( o 3,312.5( a Q rn 41.6' o N N 47.0E .9 88.65 c aD E 35.0( U Q Page: 9 Packet Pg. 64 vchlist 12/05/2019 10 :50 :03 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 6.4.a Page: 10 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account a� L 3 c �a Amoun y 0 239812 12/5/2019 009410 EVERETT STEEL INC (Continued) as 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 3.6z -0 Total: 38.61 m L_ 239813 12/5/2019 011900 FRONTIER 253-003-6887 LIFT STATION #6 VG SPECIAL ACCI LIFT STATION #6 VG SPECIAL ACCI 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 42.1.' 253-012-9189 WWTP: 11/25-12/24/19 AUTO DIALE 11/25-12/24/19 AUTO DIALER - 1 VC 423.000.76.535.80.42.00 41.5E (D 425-771-0158 FIRE STATION #16 ALARM AND FA) FIRE STATION #16 ALARM AND FA) 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 141.3, 425-771-5553 WWTP: 11/25-12/24/19 AUTO DIALE 11/25-12/24/19 AUTO DIALER - 1 o 423.000.76.535.80.42.00 129.0E a 425-776-6829 CITY HALL ALARM LINES 121 5TH P CITY HALL FIRE AND INTRUSION A 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 141.3; U 509-022-0049 LIFT STATION #2 VG SPECIAL ACCI 0 LIFT STATION #2 VG SPECIAL ACCI 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 26.4, 0 Total: 521.91 a a Q 239814 12/5/2019 076778 GO NATIVES! NURSERY 12219 PM: PLANTS PM: PLANTS 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 33.6( 10.2% Sales Tax c N 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 3.4< Total: V) 37.W E 2 239815 12/5/2019 076542 GRANICUS 120561 LEGISLATIVE MANAGEMENT - CIVI, legislative management - agenda anc 001.000.25.514.30.48.00 1,417.3E 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.25.514.30.48.00 147.4( Q Page: 10 Packet Pg. 65 6.4.a vchlist Voucher List Page: 11 12/05/2019 10:50:03AM City of Edmonds Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account a� L 3 c �a Amoun N 239815 12/5/2019 076542 076542 GRANICUS (Continued) Total: 0 1,564.7< 0 239816 12/5/2019 071446 GREAT FLOORS COMMERCIAL SALES A20969 PUBLIC SAFETY - FLOORING COUP PUBLIC SAFETY - FLOORING COUP 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 18,279.1E 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 1,901.0E ow A20969B PUBLIC SAFETY - FLOORING OFFI( PUBLIC SAFETY - FLOORING OFFI( 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 25,968.0' c 10.4% Sales Tax (D 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 2,700.6, A20969C PUBLIC SAFETY - FLOORING POLI( �a PUBLIC SAFETY - FLOORING POLI( — 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 0 34,752.2, 10.4% Sales Tax a 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 31614.2z Total : 87,215.31 239817 12/5/2019 012560 HACH COMPANY 11726393 WATER QUALITY - WATER TEST Sl c WATER QUALITY - WATER TEST Sl 0 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 607.5( o Freight a 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 46.6< Q 10.4% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 68.0z r' Total : 722.1 j c 239818 12/5/2019 010900 HD FOWLER CO INC C483192 WATER - RETURNED PARTS FOR C WATER - RETURNED PARTS FOR C N E 421.000.74.534.80.34.20 -406.6� 'm 9.0% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.34.20 -36.6( 15167657 WATER - PARTS/ INVETORY- E WATER - PARTS/ INVETORY- 421.000.74.534.80.34.20 U 531.4, m Q Page: 11 Packet Pg. 66 vchlist 12/05/2019 10 :50 :03 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 6.4.a Page: 12 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 239818 12/5/2019 010900 HD FOWLER CO INC (Continued) 9.0% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.34.20 47.8< Total: 136.0: 239819 12/5/2019 076188 HELENA GARCIA 7994 PAINTING 7994 OIL PAINTING CLASS INSTRU, 7994 OIL PAINTING CLASS INSTRU, 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 1,058.7E Total : 1,058.7E 239820 12/5/2019 013140 HENDERSON, BRIAN 75 REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT 009.000.39.517.20.23.00 148.2, Total: 148.2, 239821 12/5/2019 072041 IBS INCORPORATED 716524-1 FLEET - SUPPLIES FLEET - SUPPLIES 511.000.77.548.68.35.00 89.9E Freight 511.000.77.548.68.35.00 10.4( 10.4% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.35.00 10.4< Total : 110.71 239822 12/5/2019 073548 INDOFF INCORPORATED 3312854 RUBBER STAMPS FOR ENG DIVISII Pre -Inked Stamps for Engineering 001.000.67.518.21.49.00 708.0, 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.67.518.21.49.00 73.6z 3313563 COPY PAPER 11 X17 Copy Paper 11 x17 - 1 cs 001.000.31.514.23.31.00 98.1 £ 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.31.514.23.31.00 10.2- Total : 890.1( Page: 12 Packet Pg. 67 vchlist 12/05/2019 10 :50 :03 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher List City of Edmonds Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account 239823 12/5/2019 077304 JEOMOK KIM & SANG GI PARK 4-44225 #500090067-SM UTILITY REFUND #500090067-SM Utility refund - recei\ 411.000.233.000 Tota I : 239824 12/5/2019 077298 JULIE KEMP 1-39200 #762084RT UTILITY REFUND #762084RT Utility refund due to 411.000.233.000 Total 239825 12/5/2019 077309 KENYON, DENISE Nov 2019 REIMBURSEMENT FOR MICROWA\ Reimbursement for Microwave purch� 001.000.31.514.23.35.00 Tota I : 239826 12/5/2019 017050 KWICK'N KLEEN CAR WASH 11152019-01 INV 11152019-01 - EDMONDS PD OCTOBER 2019 CAR WASH CHARC 001.000.41.521.22.48.00 Tota I : 239827 12/5/2019 077308 MENDEZ, BLANCA 2002479.009 REFUND: MCH RENTAL DAMAGE D REFUND: MCH RENTAL DAMAGE D 001.000.239.200 Total 239828 12/5/2019 069053 MICRO COM SYSTEMS LTD 17421 PROF SVCS Scanning of docs and plans (Bldg) 001.000.62.524.10.41.00 Total 239829 12/5/2019 072223 MILLER, DOUG 11/5-11/26 MONITOR 11/5-11/26/19 BASKETBALL GYM M( 11 /5-11 /26/19 BASKETBALL GYM M( 001.000.64.571.25.41.00 11 /6-11 /20 MONITOR 11 /6-11 /20/19 BASKETBALL GYM M( 11 /6-11 /20/19 BASKETBALL GYM M( 001.000.64.571.25.41.00 6.4.a Page: 13 aD L 3 c �a Amoun N 0 a m 220.3, u 220.3: •`— N m 124.7( 124.7( m c a� 180.0( 180.0( — 0 L �a a 111.5, .E 111.5' 0 �a 500.0( o 500.0( a Q rn Ln 1,641.9E c 1,641.9E V) E 2 U 120.0( c aD E 90.0( U M Q Page: 13 Packet Pg. 68 vchlist 12/05/2019 10 :50 :03 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 6.4.a Page: 14 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account a� L 3 c �a Amoun y 239829 12/5/2019 072223 072223 MILLER, DOUG (Continued) Total : 0 210.0( 0 239830 12/5/2019 076264 MONO ROOFTOP SOLUTIONS 25085 WASTE WATER - 2019 ROOF CLEA WASTE WATER - 2019 ROOF CLEA 001.000.66.518.30.41.00 395.0( 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.41.00 41.0E Total: 436.01 239831 12/5/2019 067834 NATIONAL CONSTRUCTION RENTALS 5564390 PM: CIVIC STADIUM PANELS m PM: CIVIC STADIUM PANELS a0i 001.000.64.576.80.45.00 492.4E 10.4% Sales Tax �a 001.000.64.576.80.45.00 51.2, _ Total: 543.7( �a 239832 12/5/2019 075539 NATURE INSIGHT CONSULTING 15 WILLOW CREEK DAYLIGHTING PR1 a Tasks 1 - 4: Parks Project Mgmt and E 125.000.64.576.80.41.00 750.0( 2 Task 5: Engineering Dept Tasks 422.000.72.594.31.65.41 c 312.5( — Total: 1,062.5( 0 239833 12/5/2019 024001 NC MACHINERY MVCS0308619 UNIT 9 - PARTS (WILL CALL) a UNIT 9 - PARTS (WILL CALL) Q 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 328.9� cn 8.7% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 28.6, c MVCS0308620 UNIT 9 - PARTS (WILL CALL) N UNIT 9 - PARTS (WILL CALL) 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 159.2E 8.7% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 13.8E SECS0681250 UNIT 101 PARTS 0 UNIT 101 PARTS E z 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 240.7E Q Page: 14 Packet Pg. 69 vchlist 12/05/2019 10 :50 :03 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 6.4.a Page: 15 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 239833 12/5/2019 024001 NC MACHINERY (Continued) Freight 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 40.5E 10.4% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 29.2E Total: 841.2f 239834 12/5/2019 024302 NELSON PETROLEUM 0716673-IN FLEET - FILTERS FLEET - FILTERS 511.000.77.548.68.34.40 50.5( 10.4% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.34.40 5.2E Tota I : 55.7E 239835 12/5/2019 074028 NORTHWEST PLAN SERVICES INC 19-1031 FIREFIGHTERS PENSION FUND Gf GASB report for CAFR for off-valuatic 617.000.51.517.20.41.00 1,268.8E GASB report for CAFR for off-valuatic 009.000.39.517.20.41.00 6,981.1.E Total : 8,250.0( 239836 12/5/2019 025690 NOYES, KARIN 000 00 951 PROF SVCS Planning Board Minutes (10/23/19) 001.000.62.558.60.41.00 333.0( Total : 333.0( 239837 12/5/2019 076902 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH CTR OF WA 66025876 PD LEAD TESTING LEAD TESTING - HAUGHIAN 001.000.41.521.10.41.00 61.0( Total: 61.0( 239838 12/5/2019 065720 OFFICE DEPOT 398973209001 INV 398973209001- ACCT 90520437 12 X 27 CALENDAR - PROPERTY RI 001.000.41.521.80.31.00 28.0� DESK CALENDAR - PROPERTY RM 001.000.41.521.80.31.00 16.5� Page: 15 Packet Pg. 70 vchlist 12/05/2019 10 :50 :03 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 239838 12/5/2019 065720 OFFICE DEPOT Voucher List City of Edmonds Invoice (Continued) 404926774001 19�i1X1~X1~ 239839 12/5/2019 070166 OFFICE OF THE STATE TREASURER November, 2019 PO # Description/Account DESK CALENDAR- PROPERTY RM 001.000.41.521.80.31.00 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.80.31.00 INV 404926774001-ACCT 90520437- DESK CALENDAR 001.000.41.521.80.31.00 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.80.31.00 404939397001-ACCT 90520437-EDN LAMINATING POUCHES 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 Total COURT, BLDG CODE & JIS TRANSI` Emergency Medical Services & Traun 001.000.237.120 PSEA 1, 2 & 3 Account 001.000.237.130 Building Code Fee Account 001.000.237.150 State Patrol Death Investigation 001.000.237.330 Judicial Information Systems Account 001.000.237.180 School Zone Safety Account 001.000.237.200 Washington Auto Theft Prevention 001.000.237.250 Traumatic Brain Injury 001.000.237.260 Accessible Communities Acct 6.4.a Page: 16 a� L 3 c �a Amoun N 0 a m 5.9� u L 5.2, N m t 7.1 � u 0.7E c aD M c 32.6� 0 3.4( >+ 99.91 a E U 739.6E o Ta 12,657.6( o a a 397.5( Q rn 84.4- 0 3, 619.3< 299.9E . R U 1,481.7z aD 588.6( _ U �a Q Page: 16 Packet Pg. 71 vchlist 12/05/2019 10 :50 :03 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 239839 12/5/2019 070166 OFFICE OF THE STATE TREASURER (Continued) 239840 12/5/2019 072739 O'REILLYAUTO PARTS 239841 12/5/2019 071488 PARENTMAP 239842 12/5/2019 077299 PIPELINE ANALYTICS 239843 12/5/2019 028860 PLATT ELECTRIC SUPPLY 3685-441929 2019-73343 2019ci-2179 3349 X567016 PO # Description/Account 001.000.237.290 Multi -Model Transportation 001.000.237.300 Hwy Safety Acct 001.000.237.320 Crime Lab Blood Breath Analysis 001.000.237.170 WSP Hwy Acct 001.000.237.340 Distracted Driving Prevention Acct 001.000.237.380 Total UNIT 66 - PARTS/ RELAY UNIT 66 - PARTS/ RELAY 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 10.4% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 Total : TOURISM PROMOTION MARKETIN( Tourism promotion marketing ads 120.000.31.575.42.41.40 TOURISM PROMOTION MARKETIN( Tourism promotion marketing digital a 120.000.31.575.42.41.40 Total YEARLY MAINTENANCE FOR WINC YEARLY MAINTENANCE FOR WINC 422.000.72.531.90.48.00 Total WWTP: PO 113 - LUGS, ELEC NIPF PO 113 - LUGS, ELEC NIPPLES 6.4.a Page: 17 W L 3 c �a Amoun N 0 a aD 86.6( 'D r U d 86.6- 365.1 , m t 1.8- U 479.1 c 2.2< 20,890.3( 0 �a a 10.9� E 1.1E U 12.1z o 7a 0 L a 1,005.0( Q rn 750.0( c 1,755.0( c14 V) E M 4,370.0( 4,370.0( c W E t U �a Q Page: 17 Packet Pg. 72 vchlist 12/05/2019 10 :50 :03 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 239843 12/5/2019 028860 PLATT ELECTRIC SUPPLY 239844 12/5/2019 064088 PROTECTION ONE Voucher List City of Edmonds Invoice PO # Description/Account (Continued) 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 10.4% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 Tota I : 2445047 ALARM MONITORING SENIOR CEN Administrative Fees - SENIOR CENT 001.000.66.518.30.41.00 Total 239845 12/5/2019 068697 PUBLIC SAFETY TESTING INC 2019-0767 239846 12/5/2019 030400 PUGET SOUND CLEAN AIR AGENCY 20202472 239847 12/5/2019 046900 PUGET SOUND ENERGY 239848 12/5/2019 064769 ROMAINE ELECTRIC 200009595790 200019375639 200021829581 TESTING FEES - OCTOBER PUBLIC SAFETY TESTING FEES 001.000.22.521.10.41.00 Total FACILITY FEE/ REGISTRATION FEE FACILITY FEE/ REGISTRATION FEE 511.000.77.548.68.49.00 Total FIRE STATION #16 8429 196TH ST FIRE STATION #16 8429 196TH ST 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 MEADOWDALE CLUBHOUSE 6801 MEADOWDALE CLUBHOUSE 6801 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 WWTP: 10/22-11/20/19 METER 000" 10/22-11/20/19 200 2ND AVE S / ME 423.000.76.535.80.47.63 Total 5-025298 UNIT 8 - BATTERY UNIT 8 - BATTERY 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 10.4% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 6.4.a Page: 18 a� L 3 c �a Amoun y 0 a aD 55.5E 'D r U d 5.7E .L 61.3' N V m t U 38.6z 38.6i c c �a 420.0( — 420.0( �a a E 140.0( 140.0( c �a 0 L 688.2f a Q rn 177.0< 0 N 44.2E 909.5i •9 c a� 120.& E U M 12.5-, Q Page: 18 Packet Pg. 73 vchlist 12/05/2019 10 :50 :03 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 6.4.a Page: 19 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 239848 12/5/2019 064769 ROMAINE ELECTRIC (Continued) 5-025334 UNIT 75 & 437 - BATTERIES UNIT 75 & 437 - BATTERIES 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 200.7( 10.4% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 20.8 5-025338 UNIT 66 - BATTERY UNIT 66 - BATTERY 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 105.5z 10.4% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 10.9f Total: 471.4< 239849 12/5/2019 065001 SCHIRMAN, RON 72 REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT 009.000.39.517.20.29.00 9,610.0( 74 REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT 009.000.39.517.20.23.00 193.0E Total : 9,803.0E 239850 12/5/2019 066964 SEATTLE AUTOMOTIVE DIST INC S3-4975723 UNIT 437 - PARTS UNIT 437 - PARTS 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 24.4E 10.4% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 2.5z Total : 27.0: 239851 12/5/2019 067076 SEATTLE PUMP AND EQUIPMENT CO 209137-1 UNIT 47 - 8" QUICK CLAMP UNIT 47 - 8" QUICK CLAMP 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 219.0( 10.4% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 22.7E Total : 241.71 239852 12/5/2019 066918 SEDOR, NORMAN 73 REIMBURSEMENT Page: 19 Packet Pg. 74 vchlist 12/05/2019 10 :50 :03 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 239852 12/5/2019 066918 SEDOR, NORMAN 239853 239854 239855 Voucher List City of Edmonds Invoice PO # (Continued) 12/5/2019 065194 SEWER EQUIPMENT CO OF AMERICA 0000176181 12/5/2019 077295 SEWER FRIENDLY LLC 12/5/2019 071655 SHI INTERNATIONAL CORP ENG20190500 Refund B10767743 B10807055 B10904799 Description/Account REIMBURSEMENT 009.000.39.517.20.29.00 UNIT 98 - PARTS UNIT 98 - PARTS 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 Freight 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 10.4% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 Total : Total : ENG20190500 REFUND - ADDITION ENG20190500 Refund - Additional 001.000.257.620 Total SEPT-19 CLOUD SERVICE CHARGE Sept-19 Cloud Service Charges 512.000.31.518.88.41.00 10.4% Sales Tax 512.000.31.518.88.41.00 COMPUTER SUPPORT FOR TABLE, Computer support for Tableau softwai 512.000.31.518.88.41.00 10.4% Sales Tax 512.000.31.518.88.41.00 OCT-19 CLOUD SERVICE CHARGE; Oct-19 Cloud Service Charges 512.000.31.518.88.41.00 10.4% Sales Tax 512.000.31.518.88.41.00 Total 6.4.a Page: 20 aD L 3 c �a Amoun y 0 a m 3,000.0( u 3,000.0( N m 128.4( 16.5E a� 15.0E 160.0° sa 0 �a a 100.0( 100.0( •� 0 �a 290.4, o a 30.2( Q rn 8,466.0( c N 880.4E N E M 722.7( c 75.1 E E 10,464.9i �a Q Page: 20 Packet Pg. 75 6.4.a vchlist Voucher List Page: 21 12/05/2019 10:50:03AM City of Edmonds a� L 3 Bank code : usbank c �a Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun N 239856 12/5/2019 036950 SIX ROBBLEES INC 14-392642 UNIT 67 - PARTS 0 m UNIT 67 - PARTS 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 82.7, u 10.4% Sales Tax L 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 8.6( Total: 91.3, m 239857 12/5/2019 075543 SNO CO PUBLIC DEFENDER ASSOC 2920 NOVEMBER PUBLIC DEFENDER C( v NOVEMBER CONTRACT 001.000.39.512.52.41.00 24,081.5E Total : 24,081.5E 239858 12/5/2019 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 200124873 TRAFFIC LIGHT 9933 100TH AVE W TRAFFIC LIGHT 9933 100TH AVE W — 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 32.5z L, 200274959 TRAFFIC LIGHT 23602 76TH AVE W a TRAFFIC LIGHT 23602 76TH AVE W 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 17.7z 200422418 FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER 70( U FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER 70( o 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 1,321.4E Ta 200493146 MAPLEWOOD PARK IRRIGATION M > 0 MAPLEWOOD PARK IRRIGATION M a 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 17.1, Q 200748606 TRAFFIC LIGHT 9730 220TH ST SW TRAFFIC LIGHT 9730 220TH ST SW r' 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 17.11 c 200943348 TRAFFIC LIGHT 23202 EDMONDS V N TRAFFIC LIGHT 23202 EDMONDS V 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 45.3" E 201192226 TRAFFIC LIGHT 20408 76TH AVE W 2 TRAFFIC LIGHT 20408 76TH AVE W U 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 18.2( c 201431244 PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 9301 PUC E PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 9301 PUC 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 17.1 , Q Page: 21 Packet Pg. 76 vchlist 12/05/2019 10 :50 :03 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 239858 12/5/2019 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 Voucher List City of Edmonds Invoice PO # Description/Account (Continued) 201557303 CEMETERY BUILDING CEMETERY BUILDING 130.000.64.536.50.47.00 201563434 TRAFFIC LIGHT 660 EDMONDS WA TRAFFIC LIGHT 660 EDMONDS WA 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 201582152 TRAFFIC LIGHT 19600 80TH AVE W TRAFFIC LIGHT 19600 80TH AVE W 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 201610276 OVERHEAD STREET LIGHTING AT OVERHEAD STREET LIGHTING AT 130.000.64.536.50.47.00 201703758 PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 23190 10( PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 23190 10( 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 201762101 415 5TH AVE S 415 5TH AVE S 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 202077194 FIRE STATION #20 23009 88TH AVE FIRE STATION #20 23009 88TH AVE 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 202087870 LIFT STATION #6 100 PINE ST / MEl LIFT STATION #6 100 PINE ST / MEl 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 202161535 CEMETERY WELL PUMP CEMETERY WELL PUMP 130.000.64.536.50.47.00 202289096 TRAFFIC LIGHT 22400 HWY 99 / ME TRAFFIC LIGHT 22400 HWY 99 / ME 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 202620415 MATHAY BALLINGER PARK IRRIGA MATHAY BALLINGER PARK IRRIGA 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 204292213 CHARGE STATION #1 552 MAIN ST CHARGE STATION #1 552 MAIN ST 6.4.a Page: 22 aD L 3 c �a Amoun N 0 a m U m 133.9, N 25.5E 33.8, c d M 8.5E 0 L 30.6, a E 21.2, u 4- 0 �a 570.1, 0 a a Q 176.2 0 75.41 w E 59.4' u c aD 17.1; E t U co Q Page: 22 Packet Pg. 77 vchlist 12/05/2019 10 :50 :03 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher 239858 239859 N&H.1-Ti, 239861 Date Vendor 12/5/2019 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 12/5/2019 063941 SNO CO SHERIFFS OFFICE 12/5/2019 076433 SNOHOMISH COUNTY 911 Voucher List City of Edmonds Invoice PO # (Continued) 204467435 220547582 2019-5807 2037 12/5/2019 070167 SNOHOMISH COUNTY TREASURER November 2019 Description/Account 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 HAZEL MILLER PLAZA HAZEL MILLER PLAZA 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 TRAFFIC LIGHT SR104 @ 95TH AVE TRAFFIC LIGHT SR104 @ 95TH AVE 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 Total INV 2019-5807 - EDMONDS PD 229.5 BASE RT HOUSING @ $101.6 001.000.39.523.60.41.50 56 BOOKINGS @ $125.06 EA 001.000.39.523.60.41.50 63 MED SPECIALTY @ $58.44 EA 001.000.39.523.60.41.50 9 MENT HEALTH @ $141.10 EA 001.000.39.523.60.41.50 12 VIDEO CT HRS @ $169.29 EA 001.000.39.523.60.41.50 Total DEC-19 COMMUNICATION DISPATC DEC-19 COMMUNICATION DISPATC 001.000.39.528.00.41.50 DEC-19 COMMUNICATION DISPATC 421.000.74.534.80.41.50 DEC-19 COMMUNICATION DISPATC 423.000.75.535.80.41.50 Total Crime Victims Court Remittance Crime Victims Court Remittance 001.000.237.140 6.4.a Page: 23 a� L 3 c �a Amoun N 0 a aD 84.6E 'D r U d 22.5 N v m 44.5E U 2,790.65 V m c d 23,337.8E 0 7,003.3E -, �a a 3,681.7, 1,269.9( U 0 2,355.4E �a 37,648.3, o a a Q 70,111.5( 0 1,845.0z c14 V) 1,845.0z E 73,801.5E c a� E 298.5, �a Q Page: 23 Packet Pg. 78 vchlist 12/05/2019 10 :50 :03 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # 239861 12/5/2019 070167 070167 SNOHOMISH COUNTY TREASURER (Continued) 239862 12/5/2019 075009 SOUNDVIEW DESIGN STUDIO 00010994 239863 12/5/2019 068439 SPECIALTY DOOR SERVICE 53224 239864 12/5/2019 074990 STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES 1590609 239865 12/5/2019 076474 STROMME, JOANNE 239866 12/5/2019 068360 SUMMIT LAW GROUP 239867 12/5/2019 077305 TASHA DELOS SANTOS 8551 8552 YOGA 8553 YOGA 108863 8-22675 Description/Account WINTER CRAZE DESIGN WINTER CRAZE DESIGN 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 Total Total : CITY PARK BUILDING - 2 DOORS Al CITY PARK BUILDING - 2 DOORS Al 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 Total EBJA.SERVICES THRU 11/22/19 EBJA.Services thru 11/22/19 421.000.74.594.34.65.41 Total 8551 8552 YOGA INSTRUCTION 8551 YOGA INSTRUCTION 001.000.64.571.27.41.00 8552 YOGA INSTRUCTION 001.000.64.571.27.41.00 8553 YOGA INSTRUCTION 8553 YOGA INSTRUCTION 001.000.64.571.27.41.00 Total CLIENT 20119-19 MCB INVOICE 10i: LEE GRIEVANCE ARBITRATION 001.000.41.521.10.41.00 Total #611221250-EN UTILITY REFUND #611221250-EN Utility refund due to 411.000.233.000 6.4.a Page: 24 a� L 3 c �a Amoun y 0 298.5: 0 U d L_ 1,490.5( 1,490.5( m 251.0( m c 26.1( -a 277.1( 0 L �a 3,421.4( a 3,421.4( E FU U 4- 0 57.7.E > 0 41.2E a Q rn 90.7E ,n 189.7.E c N V) E 1,655.5( 1,655.5( }; c aD E t U 11.8, Q Page: 24 Packet Pg. 79 6.4.a vchlist Voucher List Page: 25 12/05/2019 10:50:03AM City of Edmonds Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account a� L 3 c �a Amoun N 239867 12/5/2019 077305 077305 TASHA DELOS SANTOS (Continued) Total : 0 11.8: as 239868 12/5/2019 038315 THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR US53022 ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE MUSEUI ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE MUSEUI 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 394.4� 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 41.0' a0i Total: 435.5: 239869 12/5/2019 044960 UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOC CTR 9110148 UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATI m UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATI 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 83.8E UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATI 422.000.72.531.90.41.00 83.8E _ UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATI 423.000.75.535.80.41.00 86.4- a Total : 254.1; E 239870 12/5/2019 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS 9842716520 C/A 571242650-0001 fd iPhone/iPad Cell Service Bld Dept 001.000.62.524.20.42.00 506.1 < 0 iPhone/iPad Cell Service City Clerk c 001.000.25.514.30.42.00 76.7E a iPhone/iPad Cell Service Econ Q- Q 001.000.61.557.20.42.00 97.8 1 iPad Cell Service Council 001.000.11.511.60.42.00 493.6E iPhone/iPad Cell Service Court G N 001.000.23.512.50.42.00 76.7� iPhone/iPad Cell Service Developmer E 001.000.62.524.10.42.00 155.7< .m iPhone/iPad Cell Service Engineering U 001.000.67.518.21.42.00 1,282.6< iPhone/iPad Cell Service Facilities E 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 250.3 U iPhone/iPad Cell Service Finance Q Page: 25 Packet Pg. 80 vchlist 12/05/2019 10 :50 :03 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 239870 12/5/2019 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS Voucher List City of Edmonds Invoice PO # Description/Account (Continued) 001.000.31.514.23.42.00 iPhone/iPad Cell Service HR 001.000.22.518.10.42.00 iPhone/iPad Cell Service IS 512.000.31.518.88.42.00 iPhone/iPad Cell Service Mayor's Offi 001.000.21.513.10.42.00 iPhone/iPad Cell Service Parks Dept 001.000.64.571.21.42.00 iPhone/iPad Cell Service Police Dept 001.000.41.521.22.42.00 Air cards Police Dept 001.000.41.521.22.42.00 iPhone/iPad Cell Service Planning DE 001.000.62.558.60.42.00 iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Admin 001.000.65.518.20.42.00 iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Admin 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Admin 422.000.72.531.90.42.00 iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Admin 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Admin 423.000.76.535.80.42.00 iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Street C 111.000.68.542.90.42.00 iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Fleet 511.000.77.548.68.42.00 iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Water/, 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Water/,r 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 iPhone/iPad Cell Service Sewer Dept 6.4.a Page: 26 a� L 3 c �a Amoun y 0 a aD 107.8 -, '0 r U d 125.7, 430.2( m z 57.8E u 57.8E c 1,828.0( �a 1,120.2E o L �a 120.0< a E 26.8E 7.6E 0 26.8E o a a 7.6E Q rn 7.61 Lh 0 232.5, E 57.8E 166.8 aD 166.8- t U co Q Page: 26 Packet Pg. 81 6.4.a vchlist Voucher List Page: 27 12/05/2019 10:50:03AM City of Edmonds Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account a� L 3 c �a Amoun y 239870 12/5/2019 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS (Continued) 0 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 as 470.1 E -0 iPhone/iPad Cell Service Water 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 m 382.5, .L iPad Cell Service Storm 422.000.72.531.90.42.00 156.8- iPad Cell Service Street/Storm 111.000.68.542.90.42.00 t 200.0E u iPad Cell Service Street/Storm 422.000.72.531.90.42.00 200.0,' c iPhone/iPad Cell Service WWTP 423.000.76.535.80.42.00 653.1( iPhone/iPad Cell Service Parks 001.000.64.576.80.42.00 155.7< o iPhone/iPad Cell Service Parks >+ 001.000.64.571.21.42.00 �a 97.8, iPad Cell Service Parks Discovery 001.000.64.571.23.42.00 40.0- 9842850055 C/A 772540262-00001 Lift Station access 0 512.000.31.518.88.42.00 123.6, Total: 9,968.5: a 239871 12/5/2019 045912 WASPC DUES 2019-00672 ANDERSON, EDMONDS PD - DUES a Q ASSOCIATE DUES 001.000.41.521.10.49.00 75.0( INV029140 INV029140 WASPC FALL CONF - Al` o FALL CONFERENCE - ANDERSON N 001.000.41.521.40.49.00 300.0( Total : 375.0( . 239872 12/5/2019 075283 WAVE 3201-1027483-01 FIBER HIGH SPEED INTERNET SEF U High Speed Internet service 12/01/19 512.000.31.518.87.42.00 816.0( E Total: 816.0( U Q Page: 27 Packet Pg. 82 6.4.a vchlist Voucher List Page: 28 12/05/2019 10:50:03AM City of Edmonds a� L 3 Bank code : usbank c �a Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun N 239873 12/5/2019 075635 WCP SOLUTIONS 11407762 CR CREDIT FOR RETURNED HAND SA 0 m CREDIT FOR RETURNED HAND SA 001.000.66.518.30.24.00 -84.1( u 10.4% Sales Tax L 001.000.66.518.30.24.00 -8.7E 11477773 FAC MAINT - SUPPLIES Y FAC MAINT - SUPPLIES 001.000.66.518.30.24.00 166.6( u 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.24.00 17.3' c 11482159 FAC MAINT - SUPPLIES FAC MAINT - SUPPLIES 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 65.7( 10.4% Sales Tax o 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 6.& >+ 11491062 FAC MAINT - SUPPLIES a FAC MAINT - SUPPLIES E 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 60.0( .i 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 6.2, 0 11497837 FAC MAINT - SUPPLIES > FAC MAINT - SUPPLIES 0 L 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 25.8( a 10.4% Sales Tax Q 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 2.6£ Total: 258.1 0 239874 12/5/2019 073552 WELCO SALES LLC 7726 UTILITY BILLING - 2000 WHITE PEF c14 UTILITY BILLING - 2000 WHITE PEF 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 49.3, .E UTILITY BILLING - 2000 WHITE PEF 2 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 49.3' }; UTILITY BILLING - 2000 WHITE PEF aD 422.000.72.531.90.31.00 49.3, z 10.4% Sales Tax U 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 5.1 < Z Q Page: 28 Packet Pg. 83 vchlist 12/05/2019 10 :50 :03 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 6.4.a Page: 29 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account a� L 3 c �a Amoun y 239874 12/5/2019 073552 WELCO SALES LLC (Continued) 0 10.4% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 5.1 < u 10.4% Sales Tax L 422.000.72.531.90.31.00 5.1; 7731 P&R AND CEMETERY SUPPLIES: E P&R SUPPLIES: ENVELOPES 001.000.64.571.22.31.00 t 443.0( u CEMETERY SUPPLIES: ENVELOPE 130.000.64.536.50.31.00 384.0( c 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.64.571.22.31.00 46.0 1 10.4% Sales Tax 130.000.64.536.50.31.00 39.9z o Total: L 1,076.4( a 239875 12/5/2019 075926 WESTERN EXTERMINATOR 2221923 PS - BIMONTHLY SERVICE PS - BIMONTHLY SERVICE 001.000.66.518.30.41.00 103.9E u 10.4% Sales Tax o 001.000.66.518.30.41.00 10.8- Total: 114.7E o a 239876 12/5/2019 069691 WESTERN SYSTEMS 0000040775 96TH - 200TH / 76TH BUTTONS FO Q' Q 96TH - 200TH / 76TH BUTTONS FO 126.000.68.595.33.65.00 914.0( 10.4% Sales Tax c 126.000.68.595.33.65.00 95.0E c� 0000040790 RRFB'S FOR ADMIRAL CROSSING N RRFB'S FOR ADMIRAL CROSSING E 126.000.68.595.33.65.00 8,125.0E 2 Freight .. 126.000.68.595.33.65.00 117.6( y 10.4% Sales Tax E 126.000.68.595.33.65.00 857.2< U 0000040818 TRAFFIC - SOLAR PANEL REPLACE f6 Q Page: 29 Packet Pg. 84 vchlist 12/05/2019 10 :50 :03 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher List City of Edmonds Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 239876 12/5/2019 069691 WESTERN SYSTEMS (Continued) 0000040869 239877 12/5/2019 076625 WINDWARD ENVIRONMENTAL LLC 16946 239878 12/5/2019 066678 WSDA PESTICIDE MGMT DIVISION PESTICIDE LICENSE PO # Description/Account TRAFFIC - SOLAR PANEL REPLACE 111.000.68.542.64.31.00 Freight 111.000.68.542.64.31.00 10.4% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.64.31.00 TRAFFIC - T CANS FOR 238 - 100 R TRAFFIC - T CANS FOR 238 - 100 R 111.000.68.542.64.31.00 10.4% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.64.31.00 Total WINDWARD FINAL INVOICE FOR O Windward's final invoice for Open Hoi 001.000.11.511.60.41.00 Total 2020 PEST LIC RENEWAL: EDHOUE EDHOUSE 46620 PESTICIDE LICE[\ 001.000.64.576.80.49.00 ROCKNE 63681 PESTICIDE LICENS 001.000.64.576.80.49.00 CURRAN 53955 PESTICIDE LICENS 001.000.64.576.80.49.00 DILL 77736 PESTICIDE LICENSE RE 001.000.64.576.80.49.00 BIRD 80090 PESTICIDE LICENSE R 001.000.64.576.80.49.00 ARBANASIN 91878 PESTICIDE LICE 001.000.64.576.80.49.00 BOND 95390 PESTICIDE LICENSE I 001.000.64.576.80.49.00 Total 6.4.a Page: 30 a� L 3 c �a Amoun y 0 a m 654.5E u 46.1 N 72.8, 0 v 2,395.0E c d 249.0E 13,526.6E 0 �a a 1,515.0( 1,515.0( 0 �a 33.0( p L a 33.0( Q 33.0( 0 33.0( c� 33.0( E U 33.0( c aD 33.0( E 231.0( U �a Q Page: 30 Packet Pg. 85 6.4.a vchlist 12/05/2019 10:50:03AM Voucher List City of Edmonds Page: 31 a� L 3 Bank code: usbank c �a Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun N 239879 12/5/2019 051050 WYATT, ARTHUR D 76 REIMBURSEMENT 0 m REIMBURSEMENT 009.000.39.517.20.23.00 78.5, u Total: 78.5: •`— 239880 12/5/2019 070432 ZACHOR & THOMAS PS INC 19-EDM00011 NOV-19 RETAINER N Monthly Retainer 001.000.36.515.33.41.00 23,870.1( 105 Vouchers for bank code : usbank 105 Vouchers in this report Total : 23,870.11 m Bank total : 460,352.& a0i Total vouchers : 460,352.& c M 0 L Q U 4- 0 0 L Q Q Q r O N N E 2 V a 0 E t V f6 Q Page: 31 Packet Pg. 86 6.4.b vchlist 11 /27/2019 12:53:48PM Bank code: usbank Voucher List City of Edmonds Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account 112720191 11/27/2019 062693 US BANK 3355 STREET CC 11/6/19 WA DOL - SKILLS TEST FOR HAY 111.000.68.542.90.49.00 WA DOL - SERVICE FEE FOR SKI 111.000.68.542.90.49.00 WESTSIDE CONCRETE - SUPPLI 111.000.68.542.61.31.00 ZEPHYR GRAF-X - HATS- 422.000.72.531.90.24.00 Freight 422.000.72.531.90.24.00 3355 VERIZON SCREEN PROTECTOR Verizon - Screen Protector returned 111.000.68.542.90.49.00 Tota 1 Vouchers for bank code : usbank Bank tota 1 Vouchers in this report Total voucher Page: 1 0 L 3 c �a r 0 a Amoun U P D E �a 250.0( Y LL U 5.2. t E� U 401.5" c m 251.1( c �a 19.3" —_ Rf 0 fc M -5.5( 1 : 921.6� . M I : 921.6 j ,- 0 s : 921.6 j > 0 L Q 21 c m E t U �a r r a Page: 1 Packet Pg. 87 6.4.c vchlist 12/05/2019 11:23:56AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 12042019 12/4/2019 062693 US BANK 1 Vouchers for bank code : usbank 1 Vouchers in this report Voucher List City of Edmonds Invoice PO # Description/Account 0091 OCTOBER - EMILY CANVA SUBSCRIPTIONS 001.000.22.518.10.49.00 CONFERENCE MEAL- WESTSIDE 1 001.000.22.518.10.43.00 OFFICE SUPPLIES 001.000.22.518.10.31.00 APA JOB POSTING 001.000.67.518.21.49.00 JOB POSTING - APA 001.000.22.518.10.41.40 OPEN ENROLLMENT PRIZE 001.000.22.518.10.49.00 0808 US BANK - JESSICA NEPELRA RECERTIFICATION 001.000.22.518.10.49.00 0824 OCTOBER - CRAIG SAFETY SUPPLIES - BOOTS 001.000.22.518.10.49.00 SAFETY SUPPLIES 001.000.22.518.10.31.00 Total Bank total Total vouchers Page: 1 m L 3 c ea Amoun 00 0 a d 0 12.9,1 m =a 13.1, Y m 36.6" u 225.0( aD 100.0( c �a 100.0( o �a a 95.0( E U 154.4� p R 60.9E p L 798.1 ° a a 798.1 ° Q M 798.1' 0 N T 3 c as E a Page: 1 Packet Pg. 88 6.4.d vchlist 12/05/2019 11:41:45AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 12052019 12/5/2019 062693 US BANK Voucher List City of Edmonds Invoice PO # Description/Account 4929 DSD VISA (VARIOUS) Squarespace: website subscription 001.000.62.524.10.49.00 Amazon - Plan Template for plan revii 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 Amazon: DSD Misc Supplies (comnpi 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 Amazon: Bookshelves (BClugston, 001.000.62.558.60.49.00 Amazon: DSD Office Supplies 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 Amazon: Add'I water pitchers for CH( 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 Uplift: Desks (2) for MSzafran & 001.000.62.558.60.49.00 Amazon: DSD Misc office supplies 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 Amazon: office chair (AGroll, Plannin 001.000.62.558.60.49.00 Amazon: DSD Office Supplies 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 Amazon: DSD office supplies 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 ICC Residential Bldg Insp online exar 001.000.62.524.20.49.00 Seattle Times: DSD newspaper 001.000.62.524.10.49.00 My Building Permit (Gas Pipe Sizing 001.000.62.524.20.49.00 My Builidng Permit(Gas Pipe Sizing 001.000.62.524.20.49.00 My Building Permit (Gas Pipe Sizing 001.000.62.524.20.49.00 ICC - Residential Bldg Insp exam Page: 1 m L 3 c ea Amoun 00 0 a m 33.1; m =a 8.1 Y m 173.9E u 330.0� a� 47.3, c �a 22.0E o 1,718.9' a 87.1E 363.7 0 R 10.6E o L a a 56.5� Q rn 209.0( T- 0 43.5( r m L 55.0( '3 55.0( E t 55.0( a Page: 1 Packet Pg. 89 vchlist 12/05/2019 11:41:45AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 12052019 12/5/2019 062693 US BANK 1 Vouchers for bank code : usbank 1 Vouchers in this report Voucher List City of Edmonds Invoice PO # Description/Account (Continued) 001.000.62.524.20.49.00 Adobe Creative Cloud subscription 001.000.62.524.10.49.00 4929 REFUND-DSD VISA Amazon: House Plan Template (item 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 Total Bank total Total vouchers 6.4.d Page: 2 m L 3 c Amoun .y 0 a 209.0( 58.5( =a N -7.8- 3,529.1 t 3,529.1 t c 3,529.1 t c �a 0 L CQ G V 4- 0 0 L Q a M r Lh O N T 3 c as E a Page: 2 Packet Pg. 90 6.4.e PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Project Engineering Accounting Project vi Funding Project Title Number Number STM 12th Ave & Sierra Stormwater System Improvements c484 ESFE E STM 174th St. & 71st Ave Storm Improvements c521 EBFB Q. STM 183rd PI SW Storm Repairs c491 E6FE 3 SWR 2016 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects c469 ESGA SWR 2017 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project i013 E6GA c tv WTR 2017 Waterline Replacement Projects i014 E6JB r U) STM 2018 Lorian Woods Study s018 EBFA m STIR 2018 Minor Sidewalk Project i032 EBDA STIR 2018 Overlay Program i030 EBCB = SWR 2018 Sewerline Overlays i035 EBCElid ui SWR 2018 Sewerline Replacement Project c492 E6GC v O STIR 2018 Traffic Calming i027 EBAA t r WTR 2018 Waterline Overlays i034 EBCD m c WTR 2018 Waterline Replacement Project c493 E6JC m STIR 2019 Downtown Parking Study s021 E9AC STIR 2019 Guardrail Install i039 E9AB tv O STIR 2019 Overlay Program i036 E9CA STIR 2019 Pedestrian Safety Program i041 E9DB Q- SWR 2019 Sewerline Replacement Project c516 EBGA STM 2019 Storm Maintenance Project c525 EBFC O WTR 2019 Swedish Waterline Replacement c523 EBJA M STIR 2019 Traffic Calming i038 E9AA O L STIR 2019 Traffic Signal Upgrades i045 E9AD Q- UTILITIES 2019 Utility Rate & GFC Update s020 EBJB Q WTR 2019 Waterline Overlay i043 E9CB WTR 2019 Waterline Replacement c498 E7JA Lh o N STIR 2020 Overlay Program i042 EOCA N STIR 220th Adaptive i028 EBAB m STM 224th & 98th Drainage Improvements c486 E6FB E O STIR 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements i005 E7AC ? O STIR 236th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Madrona School) c425 E3DD a STIR 238th St. Island & Misc. Ramps i037 EBDC d rn STIR 238th St. SW Walkway (100th Ave to 104th Ave) c423 E3DB STIR 238th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Hwy 99) c485 E6DA r m STIR 76th Ave W & 220th St. SW Intersection Improvements i029 EBCA STIR 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements c368 E1CA Li STIR 84th Ave W Overlay from 220th to 212th i031 EBCC c m STIR 89th PI W Retaining Wall i025 E7CD E STIR ADA Curb Ramps i033 EBDB STIR ADA Transition Plan s016 E6DB r r Q STIR Admiral Way Pedestrian Crossing i040 E9DA STIR Audible Pedestrian Signals i024 E7AB Revised 12/4/2019 Packet Pg. 91 6.4.e PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Proiect Engineering Accounting Proiect Funding Proiect Title Number Number STM Ballinger Regional Facility Pre -Design s022 E9FA STR Bikelink Project c474 E5DA SWR Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase I c456 E4GB SWR Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase 11 c488 E6GB STR Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements i026 E7DC STR Citywide Protected/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion i015 E6AB WTR Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave) c482 E5JB STM Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station c455 E4FE FAC Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab c443 E4MB STM Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study c380 E2FC STR Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector c478 E5DB WTR Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating c473 E51KA PM Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor c282 E8MA PRK Frances Anderson Center Bandshell Replacement c477 E6MB STR Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase 111) c405 E2AD STR Hwy 99 Gateway Revitalization s014 E6AA STM Lake Ballinger Associated Projects c436 E4FD SWR Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study s011 E5GB SWR Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study c461 E4GC STR Minor Sidewalk Program i017 E6DD STM Northstream Culvert Repair Under Puget Drive i011 E6FA STM Northstream Pipe Abandonment on Puget Drive c410 E3FE STM NPDES (Students Saving Salmon) m013 E7FG STM OVD Slope Repair & Stabilization m105 E7FA FAC PW Concrete Regrade & Drainage South c540 E9MA STM Seaview Park Infiltration Facility c479 E5FD WWTP Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring c446 E4HA UTILITIES Standard Details Updates solo E5NA STM Storm Drain Improvements @ 9510 232nd St. SW c495 E7FB STM Stormwater Comp Plan Update s017 E6FD STR Sunset Walkway Improvements c354 E1 DA STR Trackside Warning System c470 E5AA UTILITIES Utility Rate Update s013 E6JA PRK Veteran's Plaza c480 E6MA STR Walnut St. Walkway (6th-7th) i044 E9DC PRK Waterfront Development & Restoration (Construction) c544 E7MA PRK Waterfront Development & Restoration (Design) c496 E7MA PRK Waterfront Development & Restoration (Pre - Design) m103 E7MA STM Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration c435 E4FC WWTP WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications c481 E5HA Revised 12/4/2019 Packet Pg. 92 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number) 6.4.e Engineering Protect Protect Accounting Funding Number Number Protect Title STR EOCA i042 2020 Overlay Program c368 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements STIR E1DA c354 Sunset Walkway Improvements 99 Enhancements (Phase III) STM E2FC c380 Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study E3DB 238th St. SW Walkway (100th Ave to 104th Ave) STIR E3DD c425 236th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Madrona School) Northstream Pipe Abandonment on Puget Drive STM E4FC c435 Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration Make Ballinger Associated Projects STM E41FE c455 Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station E4GB Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase SWR E4GC c461 Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring FAC E4MB c443 Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab rackside Warning System STIR ESDA c474 Bikelink Project treet Waterfront Connector STM ESFD c479 Seaview Park Infiltration Facility 2016 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects SWR ESGB s011 Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study 12th Ave & Sierra Stormwater System Improvements WWTP ESHA c481 WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave) WTR ESKA c473 Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating UTILITIES s010 Standard Details Updat STIR E6AA s014 Hwy 99 Gateway Revitalization Citywide Protected missive Traffic Signal Conversion STIR E6DA c485 238th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Hwy 99) ADA Transition Plan STIR E6DD i017 Minor Sidewalk Program Northstream Culvert Repair Under Puget Drive STM E6FB c486 224th & 98th Drainage Improvements s017 Stormwater Comp Plan Update STM E61FE c491 183rd PI SW Storm Repairs 2017 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project SWR E6GB c488 Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase II SWR E6GC 2018 Sewerline Replacement Project UTILITIES E6JA s013 Utility Rate Update 2017 Waterline Replacement Projects WTR E6JC c493 2018 Waterline Replacement Project ■ a Veteran's Plaz Revised 12/4/2019 Packet Pg. 93 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number) 6.4.e Engineering Protect Protect Accounting Funding Number Number Project Title PRK E6MB c477 Frances Anderson Center Bandshell Replacement edestrian Signals STIR E7AC i005 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements E7CD 89th Prff Retaining Wa STIR E7DC i026 Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements OVD Slope pair & Stabilization STM E71`13 c495 Storm Drain Improvements @ 9510 232nd St. SW E7FG NPDES (Studerlff Saving Salmo WTR E7JA c498 2019 Waterline Replacement E7MA aterfront Development & Restoration (Construction) PRK E7MA c496 Waterfront Development & Restoration (Design) Waterfront wvelopmenIffRestoration (Pre - Design) STR E8AA i027 2018 Traffic Calming STIR E8CA i029 76th Ave W & 220th St. SW Intersection Improvements 2018 Overlay Program STIR E8CC i031 84th Ave W Overlay from 220th to 212th E8CD 2018 Waterline Overlays SWR E8CE i035 2018 Sewerline Overlays 18 Minor Sidewalk Project STIR E8D13 i033 ADA Curb Ramps 238th St. Island & Misc. Ramps STM E8FA s018 2018 Lorian Woods Study c521 4th St. & 71 st Ave Storm Improvements STM E8FC c525 2019 Storm Maintenance Prc c516 2019 Sewerline Replacement Project WTR E8JA c523 2019 Swedish Waterline Replacemer 2019 Utility Rate & GFC PM E8MA c282 Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor 2019 Traffic Calming STIR E9AB i039 2019 Guardrail Install E9AC s021 2019 Downtown Parking Study STIR E9AD i045 2019 Traffic Signal Upgrades i036 2019 Overlay Program WTR E9CB i043 2019 Waterline Overlay Admiral Way Pedestrian Crossing STIR E9DB i041 2019 Pedestrian Safety Program E9DC Walnut St. Walkway (6th-7th) STM E9FA s022 Ballinger Regional Facility Pre -Design c540 PW Concrete Regrade & Drainage South ■ ■ J Revised 12/4/2019 Packet Pg. 94 6.4.e PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number) Engineering Project Project Accountinq Funding Number Number Project Title PM E8MA c282 Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor STIR E1DA c354 Sunset Walkway Improvements STIR E1CA c368 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements STM E2FC c380 Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study STIR E2AD c405 Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase III) STM E31FE c410 Northstream Pipe Abandonment on Puget Drive STIR E3DB c423 238th St. SW Walkway (100th Ave to 104th Ave) STIR E3DD c425 236th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Madrona School) STM E4FC c435 Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration STM E4FD c436 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects FAC E4MB c443 Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab WWTP E4HA c446 Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring STM E41FE c455 Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station SWR E4GB c456 Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase I SWR E4GC c461 Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study SWR E5GA c469 2016 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects STIR E5AA c470 Trackside Warning System WTR E5KA c473 Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating STIR E5DA c474 Bikelink Project PRK E6MB c477 Frances Anderson Center Bandshell Replacement STIR E5DB c478 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector STM E5FD c479 Seaview Park Infiltration Facility PRK E6MA c480 Veteran's Plaza WWTP E5HA c481 WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications WTR E5J13 c482 Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave) STM E51FE c484 12th Ave & Sierra Stormwater System Improvements STIR E6DA c485 238th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Hwy 99) STM E6FB c486 224th & 98th Drainage Improvements SWR E6GB c488 Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase II STM E61FE c491 183rd PI SW Storm Repairs SWR E6GC c492 2018 Sewerline Replacement Project WTR E6JC c493 2018 Waterline Replacement Project STM E7FB c495 Storm Drain Improvements @ 9510 232nd St. SW PRK E7MA c496 Waterfront Development & Restoration (Design) WTR E7JA c498 2019 Waterline Replacement SWR E8GA c516 2019 Sewerline Replacement Project STM E8FB c521 174th St. & 71 st Ave Storm Improvements WTR E8JA c523 2019 Swedish Waterline Replacement STM E8FC c525 2019 Storm Maintenance Project FAC E9MA c540 PW Concrete Regrade & Drainage South PRK E7MA c544 Waterfront Development & Restoration (Construction) STIR E7AC i005 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements Revised 12/4/2019 Packet Pg. 95 6.4.e PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number) Engineering Project Project Accountinq Funding Number Number Project Title STM E61FA i011 Northstream Culvert Repair Under Puget Drive SWR E6GA i013 2017 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project WTR E6JB i014 2017 Waterline Replacement Projects STIR E6AB i015 Citywide Protected/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion STIR E6DD i017 Minor Sidewalk Program STIR E7AB i024 Audible Pedestrian Signals STIR E7CD i025 89th PI W Retaining Wall STIR E7DC i026 Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements STIR EBAA i027 2018 Traffic Calming STIR EBAB i028 220th Adaptive STIR EBCA i029 76th Ave W & 220th St. SW Intersection Improvements STIR EBCB i030 2018 Overlay Program STIR EBCC i031 84th Ave W Overlay from 220th to 212th STIR EBDA i032 2018 Minor Sidewalk Project STIR EBDB i033 ADA Curb Ramps WTR EBCD i034 2018 Waterline Overlays SWR EBCE i035 2018 Sewerline Overlays STIR E9CA i036 2019 Overlay Program STIR EBDC i037 238th St. Island & Misc. Ramps STIR E9AA i038 2019 Traffic Calming STIR E9AB i039 2019 Guardrail Install STIR E9DA i040 Admiral Way Pedestrian Crossing STIR E9DB i041 2019 Pedestrian Safety Program STIR EOCA i042 2020 Overlay Program WTR E9CB i043 2019 Waterline Overlay STIR E9DC i044 Walnut St. Walkway (6th-7th) STIR E9AD i045 2019 Traffic Signal Upgrades STM E7FG m013 NPDES (Students Saving Salmon) PRK E7MA m103 Waterfront Development & Restoration (Pre - Design) STM E71FA m105 OVD Slope Repair & Stabilization UTILITIES ESNA solo Standard Details Updates SWR ESGB s0l l Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study UTILITIES E6JA s013 Utility Rate Update STIR E6AA s014 Hwy 99 Gateway Revitalization STIR E6DB s016 ADA Transition Plan STM E6FD s017 Stormwater Comp Plan Update STM EBFA s018 2018 Lorian Woods Study UTILITIES EBJB s020 2019 Utility Rate & GFC Update STIR E9AC s021 2019 Downtown Parking Study STM E91FA s022 Ballinger Regional Facility Pre -Design Revised 12/4/2019 Packet Pg. 96 6.4.e PROJECT NUMBERS (By Funding) Project Engineering Accounting Project vi Funding Project Title Number Number N FAC Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab c443 E4MB E FAC PW Concrete Regrade & Drainage South c540 E9MA PM Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor c282 EBMA PRK Frances Anderson Center Bandshell Replacement c477 E6MB PRK Veteran's Plaza c480 E6MA PRK Waterfront Development & Restoration (Construction) c544 E7MA r o PRK Waterfront Development & Restoration (Design) c496 E7MA m PRK Waterfront Development & Restoration (Pre - Design) m103 E7MA v STM 12th Ave & Sierra Stormwater System Improvements c484 ESFE 4) is STM 174th St. & 71st Ave Storm Improvements c521 EBFB ui lid STM 183rd PI SW Storm Repairs c491 E61FE STM 2018 Lorian Woods Study s018 EBFA v STM 2019 Storm Maintenance Project c525 EBFC r m c STM 224th & 98th Drainage Improvements c486 E6FB STM Ballinger Regional Facility Pre -Design s022 E91FA STM Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station c455 E4FE STM Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study c380 E2FC O STM Lake Ballinger Associated Projects c436 E4FD Q. STM Northstream Culvert Repair Under Puget Drive i011 E61FA STM Northstream Pipe Abandonment on Puget Drive c410 E31FE v STM NPDES (Students Saving Salmon) m013 E7FG O STM OVD Slope Repair & Stabilization m105 E71FA > O L STM Seaview Park Infiltration Facility c479 ESFD Q STM Storm Drain Improvements @ 9510 232nd St. SW c495 E7FB Q STM Stormwater Comp Plan Update s017 E6FD STM Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration c435 E4FC o N STIR 2018 Minor Sidewalk Project i032 EBDA fn STIR 2018 Overlay Program i030 EBCB m STIR 2018 Traffic Calming i027 EBAA E 7 STIR 2019 Downtown Parking Study s021 E9AC Z O STIR 2019 Guardrail Install i039 E9AB a STIR 2019 Overlay Program i036 E9CA y STIR 2019 Pedestrian Safety Program i041 E9DB STIR 2019 Traffic Calming i038 E9AA r m STIR 2019 Traffic Signal Upgrades i045 E9AD m STIR 2020 Overlay Program i042 EOCA Li STIR 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements i005 E7AC c N STIR 236th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Madrona School) c425 E3DD E STIR 238th St. Island & Misc. Ramps i037 EBDC STIR 238th St. SW Walkway (100th Ave to 104th Ave) c423 E3DB r r Q STIR 238th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Hwy 99) c485 E6DA STIR 76th Ave W & 220th St. SW Intersection Improvements i029 EBCA Revised 12/4/2019 Packet Pg. 97 6.4.e PROJECT NUMBERS (By Funding) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Project Title Number Number STIR 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements c368 E1CA STIR 84th Ave W Overlay from 220th to 212th i031 E8CC STIR 89th PI W Retaining Wall i025 E7CD STIR ADA Curb Ramps i033 E8DB STIR ADA Transition Plan s016 E6DB STIR Admiral Way Pedestrian Crossing i040 E9DA STIR Audible Pedestrian Signals i024 E7AB STIR Bikelink Project c474 E5DA STIR Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements i026 E7DC STIR Citywide Protected/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion i015 E6AB STIR Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector c478 E5DB STIR Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase III) c405 E2AD STIR Hwy 99 Gateway Revitalization s014 E6AA STIR Minor Sidewalk Program i017 E6DD STIR Sunset Walkway Improvements c354 E1 DA STIR Trackside Warning System c470 E5AA STIR Walnut St. Walkway (6th-7th) i044 E9DC STIR 220th Adaptive i028 E8AB SWR 2016 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects c469 E5GA SWR 2017 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project i013 E6GA SWR 2018 Sewerline Overlays i035 E8CE SWR 2018 Sewerline Replacement Project c492 E6GC SWR 2019 Sewerline Replacement Project c516 E8GA SWR Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase I c456 E4GB SWR Citywide Cl PP Sewer Rehab Phase II c488 E6GB SWR Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study s011 E5GB SWR Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study c461 E4GC UTILITIES 2019 Utility Rate & GFC Update s020 E8,113 UTILITIES Standard Details Updates solo E5NA UTILITIES Utility Rate Update s013 E6JA WTR 2017 Waterline Replacement Projects i014 E6J13 WTR 2018 Waterline Overlays i034 E8CD WTR 2018 Waterline Replacement Project c493 E6JC WTR 2019 Swedish Waterline Replacement c523 E8JA WTR 2019 Waterline Overlay i043 E9CB WTR 2019 Waterline Replacement c498 E7JA WTR Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave) c482 E5J13 WTR Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating c473 E5KA WWTP Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring c446 E4HA WWTP WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications c481 E5HA Revised 12/4/2019 Packet Pg. 98 6.4.f Payroll Earnings Summary Report City of Edmonds Pay Period: 934 (11/16/2019 to 11/30/2019) Hour Type Hour Class Description Hours Amount -ed2 REGULAR HOURS Educational Pav Correction 0.00 -156.28 112 ABSENT NO PAY NON HIRED 40.00 0.00 121 SICK SICK LEAVE 611.50 23,642.64 122 VACATION VACATION 998.45 44,171.75 123 HOLIDAY HOLIDAY HOURS 235.00 8,354.22 124 HOLIDAY FLOATER HOLIDAY 21.00 619.04 125 COMP HOURS COMPENSATORY TIME 311.22 12,757.76 135 SICK WASHINGTON STATE SICK LEA 11.50 263.70 141 BEREAVEMENT BEREAVEMENT 9.00 398.31 150 REGULAR HOURS Kelly Dav Used 240.00 10,308.45 152 COMP HOURS COMPTIME BUY BACK 0.51 17.48 154 HOLIDAY FLOATER HOLIDAY BUY BACK 4.00 70.60 155 COMP HOURS COMPTIME AUTO PAY 156.67 7,450.63 157 SICK SICK LEAVE PAYOFF 5.60 191.90 158 VACATION VACATION PAYOFF 81.39 2,789.12 160 VACATION MANAGEMENT LEAVE 1.00 57.06 170 REGULAR HOURS COUNCIL BASE PAY 700.00 8,750.00 174 REGULAR HOURS COUNCIL PRESIDENTS PAY 0.00 200.00 175 REGULAR HOURS COUNCIL PAY FOR NO MEDICP 0.00 3,521.58 190 REGULAR HOURS REGULAR HOURS 13,893.53 575,250.15 191 REGULAR HOURS FIRE PENSION PAYMENTS 4.00 5,202.46 196 REGULAR HOURS LIGHT DUTY 40.00 1,916.09 205 OVERTIME HOURS OVERTIME .5 6.00 105.85 210 OVERTIME HOURS OVERTIME -STRAIGHT 154.75 6,590.74 215 OVERTIME HOURS WATER WATCH STANDBY 54.00 2,888.24 216 MISCELLANEOUS STANDBY TREATMENT PLANT 10.00 986.37 220 OVERTIME HOURS OVERTIME 1.5 291.50 18,953.98 225 OVERTIME HOURS OVERTIME -DOUBLE 0.50 38.17 410 MISCELLANEOUS WORKING OUT OF CLASS 0.00 292.65 411 SHIFT DIFFERENTIAL SHIFT DIFFERENTIAL 0.00 1,135.98 600 RETROACTIVE PAY RETROACTIVE PAY 0.00 4,657.66 602 COMP HOURS ACCRUED COMP 1.0 118.35 0.00 603 COMP HOURS Holidav Comp 1.0 54.00 0.00 12/05/2019 Packet Pg. 99 6.4.f Payroll Earnings Summary Report City of Edmonds Pay Period: 934 (11/16/2019 to 11/30/2019) Hour Type Hour Class Description Hours Amount 604 COMP HOURS ACCRUED COMP TIME 1.5 151.75 0.00 606 COMP HOURS ACCRUED COMP 2.0 11.50 0.00 901 SICK ACCRUED SICK LEAVE 24.44 0.00 acc MISCELLANEOUS ACCREDITATION PAY 0.00 78.66 acp MISCELLANEOUS Accreditation 1 % Part Time 0.00 9.85 acs MISCELLANEOUS ACCRED/POLICE SUPPORT 0.00 172.80 boc MISCELLANEOUS BOC II Certification 0.00 91.74 colre MISCELLANEOUS Collision Reconstruction ist 0.00 37.07 cpl MISCELLANEOUS TRAINING CORPORAL 0.00 160.86 crt MISCELLANEOUS CERTIFICATION III PAY 0.00 564.90 ctr MISCELLANEOUS CTR INCENTIVES PROGRAM 0.00 1.00 det MISCELLANEOUS DETECTIVE PAY 0.00 111.20 det4 MISCELLANEOUS Detective 4% 0.00 914.78 ed1 EDUCATION PAY EDUCATION PAY 2% 0.00 575.65 ed2 EDUCATION PAY EDUCATION PAY 4% 0.00 837.62 ed3 EDUCATION PAY EDUCATION PAY 6% 0.00 4,874.43 fmla ABSENT FAMILY MEDICAL/NON PAID 8.00 0.00 hol HOLIDAY HOLIDAY 2,511.20 107,466.51 k9 MISCELLANEOUS K-9 PAY 0.00 217.06 Ig1 LONGEVITY LONGEVITY PAY 2% 0.00 837.78 Ig10 LONGEVITY LONGEVITY 5.5% 0.00 148.17 Ig11 LONGEVITY LONGEVITY PAY 2.5% 0.00 890.86 Ig12 LONGEVITY Lonqevitv 9% 0.00 5,779.62 Ig13 LONGEVITY Lonqevitv 7% 0.00 1,421.71 Ig14 LONGEVITY Lonqevitv 5% 0.00 942.40 Ig15 LONGEVITY LONGEVITY 7.5% 0.00 381.68 Igo LONGEVITY Lonqevitv 1 % 0.00 373.60 Iq5 LONGEVITY Lonqevitv 3% 0.00 667.20 Ig6 LONGEVITY Lonqevitv .5% 0.00 285.93 Iq7 LONGEVITY Lonqevitv 1.5% 0.00 468.85 Ig9 LONGEVITY Lonqevitv 3.5% 0.00 104.93 mela ABSENT Medical Leave Absent (unpaid) 2.90 0.00 mtc MISCELLANEOUS MOTORCYCLE PAY 0.00 111.20 12/05/2019 Packet Pg. 100 6.4.f Payroll Earnings Summary Report City of Edmonds Pay Period: 934 (11/16/2019 to 11/30/2019) Hour Type Hour Class Description Hours Amount pds MISCELLANEOUS Public Disclosure Specialist 0.00 101.78 phy MISCELLANEOUS PHYSICAL FITNESS PAY 0.00 2,039.97 prof MISCELLANEOUS PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS 0.00 173.48 sdp MISCELLANEOUS SPECIAL DUTY PAY 0.00 287.66 sqt MISCELLANEOUS ADMINISTRATIVE SERGEANT 0.00 173.48 sro MISCELLANEOUS School Resource Officer 0.00 111.20 str MISCELLANEOUS STREET CRIMES 0.00 470.00 traf MISCELLANEOUS TRAFFIC 0.00 111.20 20,763.26 $873,423.13 Total Net Pay: $598,660.52 12/05/2019 Packet Pg. 101 6.4.g Payroll Earnings Summary Report City of Edmonds Pay Period: 991 (12/03/2019 to 12/03/2019) 0 Hour Type Hour Class Description Hours Amount 190 REGULAR HOURS REGULAR HOURS 64.00 2,440.84 i hol HOLIDAY HOLIDAY 16.00 610.21 =a y Y 80.00 $3,051.05 a U r Total Net Pay: $1,880.65 aD c �a 0 L Q C V 0 O L Q Q El r O N i fC E E 3 N 0 L Q 12/05/2019 Packet Pg. 102 6.4.h Benefit Checks Summary Report City of Edmonds Pay Period: 934 - 11/16/2019 to 11/30/2019 Bank: usbank - US Bank Check # Date Payee # Name Check Amt Direct Deposit 64063 12/05/2019 epoa EPOA-1 POLICE 69.00 0.00 64064 12/05/2019 jhan JOHN HANCOCK 619.70 0.00 64065 12/05/2019 flex NAVIA BENEFIT SOLUTIONS 1,697.35 0.00 64066 12/05/2019 icma VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS 304884 3,726.06 0.00 64067 12/05/2019 afscme WSCCCE, AFSCME AFL-CIO 2,435.46 0.00 8,547.57 0.00 Bank: wire - US BANK Check # Date Payee # Name Check Amt Direct Deposit 2965 12/05/2019 pens DEPT OF RETIREMENT SYSTEMS 340,964.59 0.00 2966 12/05/2019 aflac AFLAC 5,815.83 0.00 2970 12/05/2019 us US BANK 130,567.59 0.00 2971 12/05/2019 mebt WTRISC FBO #N3177B1 118,221.40 0.00 2975 12/05/2019 wadc WASHINGTON STATE TREASURER 27,183.17 0.00 2977 12/05/2019 pb NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTION 5,649.07 0.00 2978 12/05/2019 oe OFFICE OF SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT 1,227.00 0.00 0.00 629,628.65 Grand Totals: 638,176.22 0.00 12/5/2019 Packet Pg. 103 Hour Type Hour Class 153 HOLIDAY Payroll Earnings Summary Report City of Edmonds Pay Period: 988 (11 /21 /2019 to 11 /21 /2019) Description HOLIDAY BUY BACK Hours Amount 4,291.00 192,832.32 4,291.00 Total Net Pay: $192,832.32 $143,979.46 12/05/2019 Packet Pg. 104 Hour Type Hour Class 153 HOLIDAY Payroll Earnings Summary Report City of Edmonds Pay Period: 989 (12/02/2019 to 12/02/2019) Description HOLIDAY BUY BACK Hours Amount 88.00 4,954.20 88.00 $4,954.20 Total Net Pay: $3,728.50 12/05/2019 Packet Pg. 105 6.5 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 12/10/2019 2019 Board & Commission Retirements Staff Lead: {Type Name of Staff Lead} Department: Mayor's Office Preparer: Carolyn LaFave Background/History This year we have four community volunteers who will be retiring from various boards and commissions. The four volunteers are: 1. Tom Walker, Architectural Design Board, 2014 - 2019 2. Beverly Shaw-Starkovich, Arts Commission, 2012 - 2019 3. Ed Dorame, Diversity Commission, 2015 - 2019 4. Maria Montalvo, Diversity Commission, 2015 - 2019 Staff Recommendation Narrative Mayor Earling would like to thank the four retiring volunteer board & commission members for their service to the City of Edmonds and the community. Mayor Earling attended final meetings for all of these individuals to acknowledge their service. Attachments: 2019 Retirements Packet Pg. 106 6.5.a Board & Commission Retirements for 2019 ➢ Architectural Design Board — term limits: 2 consecutive 4-year terms o Tom Walker, Position #4 Landscape Architect, 2014 — 2019 ➢ Arts Commission — term limits: 2 consecutive 4-year terms o Beverly Shaw-Starkovich, Position #1 Visual, 2012 - 2019 ➢ Diversity Commission — term limits: 3-year terms with no term limits o Ed Dorame, Position #1, 2015 — 2019 o Maria Montalvo, Position #3, 2015 - 2019 12/4/2019 2:09 PM Packet Pg. 107 6.6 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 12/10/2019 2020 Board & Commission Reappointments Staff Lead: Mayor Earling Department: Mayor's Office Preparer: Carolyn LaFave Background/History The attached list of board and commission members have requested reappointment. All members and positions have been vetted for eligibility for reappointment. Staff Recommendation The Mayor and staff recommend reappointment of the board and commission members on the attached list. Narrative Community volunteers are essential to the operation of the City's various boards and commissions. They provide knowledge and experience to the Mayor, City Council, and staff on a variety of issues. They also organize community events and help influence and shape our community. Edmonds is fortunate to have such a dedicated group of volunteers and we thank them for their willingness to serve the Edmonds community. Attachments: Boa rd_Commission_Reappointments_for_2020 Packet Pg. 108 6.6.a Board & Commission Reappointments for 2020 ➢ Architectural Design Board - term limits: 2 consecutive 4-year terms o Bruce Owensby: Position #1 Architect, 4/2019 - 12/2019. New term will expire on 12/31/23 o Joseph Herr: Position #2 Builder, 2016 - 2019. New term will expire on 12/31/23 o Maurine Jeude: Position #3 Layman, 4/2019 - 12/2019. New term will expire on 12/31/23 o Lauri Strauss: Position #5 At -Large Professional, 2016 - 2019. New term will expire on 12/31/23 o Kim Bayer: Position #6 Layman, 6/2019 - 12/2019. New term will expire on 12/31/23 ➢ Arts Commission - term limits: 2 consecutive 4-year terms o Lesly Kaplan: Position #7 Literary, 2016 - 2019. New term will expire on 12/31/23 ➢ Diversity Commission - term limits: 3-year terms with no term limits o Dean Olson - Position #2, 2017 - 2019. New term will expire on 12/31/2022 ➢ Edmonds Sister City Commission - term limits: 3-year terms with no term limits o lyoko Okano - Position #7, 2017 - 2019. New term will expire 12/31/2022 o Laura Braithwaite Otto - Position #6 2017 - 2019. New term will expire 12/31/2022 ➢ Historic Preservation Commission - term limits: 3-year terms with no term limits o Christine Deiner-Karr, Position #4 Citizen, 2017 - 2019. New term will expire 12/31/2022 o Katie Kelly: Position #3 Historical Society Appointment, 4/2018 - 12/2019. New term will expire 12/31/2022 ➢ Lodging Tax Advisory Committee Members - One-year terms, renewable annually with no term limits o Frances Chapin, Position #4, Tax User, 2000 - 2019 o Robert Wade, Position #1, Tax Provider, 2020 - 2020 o Joe Mclalwain, Position #6, Tax User, 2007 - 2019 o Pat Moriarty, Position #2, Tax Provider, 2013 - 2019 12/4/2019 2:08 PM Packet Pg. 109 6.7 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 12/10/2019 Surplus City Computers Staff Lead: Brian Tuley Department: Administrative Services Preparer: Scott James Background/History Fifty-four (54) City computers were de -commissioned in 2019 and are now ready to surplus. Staff Recommendation Information Services is submitting the attached list of computers that are beyond their useful life for Council approval to surplus. Narrative The equipment listed in the attached list has outlived its useful life with the City. Information Systems requests permission to recycle equipment listed and remove from City inventory. This equipment has no residual value. Attachments: 2019 list of surplused PC's Packet Pg. 110 6.7.a Number Workstation Model Service Taq Acquisition Date 1 epdcf-31-29420 CF-31JBGFAlM 1KTYA29420 Not Assigned 2 epdcf-31-29534 CF-31JBGFAlM 1KTYA29534 Not Assigned 3 epdcf-31-65711 CF-31JBGFFlM 2ETYA65711 Sep 1, 2012 12:00 AM 4 epdcf-u1-47716 Panasonic CF-U1 4BKSA47716 Not Assigned 5 en-capproj 1 -It HP EliteBook 840 G2 5CG50429NX Jan 26, 2015 12:00 AM 6 en-constinsp-It HP EliteBook 840 G2 5CG50429P8 Jan 26, 2015 12:00 AM 7 en-capproj3-It HP EliteBook 840 G2 5CG50429PQ Jan 26, 2015 12:00 AM 8 pw-tvtruck-It HP EliteBook 850 G1 5CG5111ZGN Mar 20, 2015 12:00 AM 9 epdcf-30-13048 CF-30FTSAZAM 8BKSA13048 Not Assigned 10 epdcf-u1-19983 Panasonic CF-U1 91KYA19983 Not Assigned 11 epdcf-u1-21484 Panasonic CF-U1 9JKYA21484 Not Assigned 12 co-avcontroller NUC5i5RY G6RY537005MY Nov 5, 2015 12:00 AM 13 is-win7test D54250WY GEWY4140ODH5 Not Assigned 14 is-gis-1203 HP Compaq 8200 Elite USDT PC MXL1450QJ4 Nov 14, 2011 12:00 AM 15 ww-bldg100 HP Compaq Elite 8300 USDT MXt-3260MOP Jul 3, 2013 12:00 AM 16 fn-banking HP EliteDesk 800 G1 USDT MA-4041QCG Jan 27, 2014 12:00 AM 17 pr-greenhouse HP EliteDesk 800 G1 USDT MM-4041QCH Jan 27, 2014 12:00 AM 18 ds-reception HP EliteDesk 800 G1 USDT MXL4041QCK Jan 27, 2014 12:00 AM 19 pw-pshvac HP EliteDesk 800 G1 USDT MA-4041QCM Jan 27, 2014 12:00 AM 20 ep-detective3 HP EliteDesk 800 G1 USDT MA-4041QCN Jan 27, 2014 12:00 AM 21 pw-fleetmech HP EliteDesk 800 G1 USDT MXL4041QCP Jan 27, 2014 12:00 AM 22 is-fourtnerrm HP EliteDesk 800 G1 USDT MA-4041QCR Jan 27, 2014 12:00 AM 23 is-gisanalyst HP EliteDesk 800 G1 USDT MA-4041QCS Jan 27, 2014 12:00 AM 24 pr-director HP EliteDesk 800 G1 USDT MXL4041QCT Jan 27, 2014 12:00 AM 25 fn-utiltech1 HP EliteDesk 800 G1 USDT MXt-4041QCV Jan 27, 2014 12:00 AM 26 ep-detective5 HP EliteDesk 800 G1 USDT MA-4041QCW Jan 27, 2014 12:00 AM 27 pw-sewercrew HP EliteDesk 800 G1 USDT MXL4041QCX Jan 27, 2014 12:00 AM 28 pl-reviewroom HP EliteDesk 800 G1 USDT M/14041QD2 Jan 27, 2014 12:00 AM 29 ep-detcpl HP EliteDesk 800 G1 USDT MXL4041QD3 Jan 27, 2014 12:00 AM 30 cs-director HP EliteDesk 800 G1 USDT MXL4041QD4 Jan 27, 2014 12:00 AM 31 pw-library1 HP EliteDesk 800 G1 USDT M/14041QD5 Jan 27, 2014 12:00 AM 32 ep-keycard HP EliteDesk 800 G1 USDT MA-4041QD8 Jan 27, 2014 12:00 AM 33 pw-meterreader HP EliteDesk 800 G1 USDT MXL4041QD9 Jan 27, 2014 12:00 AM 34 pw-library2 HP EliteDesk 800 G1 USDT MM-4041QDC Jan 27, 2014 12:00 AM 35 ct-banking HP EliteDesk 800 G1 USDT MA-4041QDD Jan 27, 2014 12:00 AM 36 pw-streetlead HP EliteDesk 800 G1 USDT MM-4041QDG Jan 27, 2014 12:00 AM 37 ep-traffic2 HP EliteDesk 800 G1 USDT MXL4041QDH Jan 27, 2014 12:00 AM 38 ds-codeenf HP EliteDesk 800 G1 USDT MA-4041QDJ Jan 27, 2014 12:00 AM a� r 3 Q E 0 U U a L 3 U (L a) w a 4- 0 aw 0 N c aD E t 0 r Q Packet Pg. 111 6.7.a Number Workstation Model Service Taq Acquisition Date 39 ep-detsgt HP EliteDesk 800 G1 USDT MXL4041QDK Jan 27, 2014 12:00 AM 40 pw-pwhvac HP EliteDesk 800 G1 USDT MXL4041QDL Jan 27, 2014 12:00 AM 41 pr-preschool HP EliteDesk 800 G1 USDT MM-4041QDP Jan 27, 2014 12:00 AM 42 pw-lunchroom HP EliteDesk 800 G1 USDT MM-4041QDQ Jan 27, 2014 12:00 AM 43 ep-booking HP EliteDesk 800 G1 TWR MM-413178P Mar 31, 2014 12:00 AM 44 ct-livescan HP EliteDesk 800 G1 TWR MXL413178Q Mar 31, 2014 12:00 AM 45 ep-livescan HP EliteDesk 800 G1 TWR MXL413178R Mar 31, 2014 12:00 AM 46 co -president HP EliteDesk 800 G1 USDT MXL5040Y00 Jan 22, 2015 12:00 AM 47 pl-manager HP EliteDesk 800 G1 USDT MXL5040Y01 Jan 22, 2015 12:00 AM 48 ep-detective1 HP EliteDesk 800 G1 USDT MXL5040Y02 Jan 22, 2015 12:00 AM 49 ep-detective2 HP EliteDesk 800 G1 USDT MXL5040Y03 Jan 22, 2015 12:00 AM 50 pr-maintmgr HP EliteDesk 800 G1 USDT MXL5040Y04 Jan 22, 2015 12:00 AM 51 pr-artsasst HP EliteDesk 800 G1 USDT MXL5040Y05 Jan 22, 2015 12:00 AM 52 ds-director HP EliteDesk 800 G1 USDT MXL5040Y06 Jan 22, 2015 12:00 AM 53 ep-detective4 HP EliteDesk 800 G1 USDT MXL5040Y08 Jan 22, 2015 12:00 AM 54 ep-booking-0712 HP Compaq dc5800 Microtower MXL81917R4 Not Assigned a� r 3 a E 0 U U N rL L 3 N U (L a) W 3 Q L 4- 0 T) aw r 0 N C E L 0 R r r Q Packet Pg. 112 6.8 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 12/10/2019 Resolutions of Appreciation - Councilmembers Nelson, Teitzel, Mesaros, Tibbott and Mayor Earling Staff Lead: Council Department: City Council Preparer: Maureen Judge Background/History It has been customary to adopt a resolution thanking Councilmembers and the Mayor for their service at the end of their term. Staff Recommendation Adopt a resolution thanking Councilmembers Nelson, Teitzel, Mesaros, Tibbott and Mayor Earling for their dedication and service. Narrative A resolution will be presented to Councilmembers Nelson, Teitzel, Mesaros, and Tibbott as well Mayor Dave Earling on the December 10, 2019 agenda. Resolution 1437 Nelson Appreciation Resolution 1438 Teitzel Appreciation Resolution 1439 Mesaros Appreciation Resolution 1440 Tibbott Appreciation Resolution 1441 Earling Appreciation Attachments: Resolution 1437 Nelson Resolution 1438 Teitzel Resolution 1439 Mesaros Resolution 1440 Tibbott Resolution 1441 Earling Packet Pg. 113 6.8.a 'R.eovIutivrt -Qo: 1.437 A Resofution Of The Edmonds City Councl( Nanking Councifinember 9V1ike Nelson forifis Service To The Edmonds City Council Whereas, 3l i e Nelson was appointed to the City Council on March 2015 to serve a one-year term and was elected in 2016. During his tenure he was Council President in 2018 and presided over the business of the City Council with steadfast dedication, using his knowledge, experience, and expertise to manage the day- to-day administration of the City Council and to communicate with and embrace the concerns of Edmonds citizens, City staff, and other elected officials; and nft�./ Whereas, during his term, Councilmember Nelson approached his duties diligently, comprising himself of all the facts and ensuring that the Council as a body had all the relevant information needed to make informed decisions. As such, he helped to see the completion of the following: • Initiation of the Edmonds Youth Commission • Initiation of Climate goals for the City of Edmonds • Chair of the Planning, Public Safety and Personnel Committee • Initiated gun safety legislation Whereas, while on the Council Councilmember Nelson was involved with many committees and commissions on behalf of the City of Edmonds including: • Snohomish County Emergency Radio System (SERS) • Lodging Tax Advisory Committee • Edmonds Marsh Task Force • Lake Ballinger Work Group • Homelessness Task Force • Opioid Task Force Now, Therefore, Oe it Resofved, that Mike Nelson be applauded and thanked for serving as a Councilmember. The Council looks forward to his continued dedication and service to the citizens of Edmonds as Mayor in 2020. Passed, Approved, andAdopted this loth day of December, 2019. David O. Earling, Mayor Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Council President Tom Mesaros, Councilmember Neil Tibbott, Councilmember Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember Dave Teitzel, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember Scott Passey, City Clerk Cite of (fbmonb!5 Packet Pg. 114 6.8.b 'R.eovIutivrt r_ L W L -Qo: 1.438 A Resofution Of The Edmonds City Councl( Nanking Councifinember Dave ZaitzefforYfis Service To The Edmonds City Councir o r= Whereas, Dave Teitzefwas elected to the City Council in November 2015 and sworn in January 2016. While L in office Councilmember Teitzel approached the office with passion and an earnest desire to serve the m citizens of Edmonds; and m N Whereas, while on Council, Councilmember Teitzel approached his duties diligently with a thoroughness and �T completeness. As such, he helped to see the completion of the following: c • Initiated the installation of a drive -up mailbox at the Edmonds Library • Initiated the ban on plastic utensils and straws • Contributed to the selection and appointment of numerous candidates to the many citizen's committee vacancies Whereas, while on Council, Councilmember Teitzel was involved with many committees and commissions on behalf of the City of Edmonds including: • Chair of the Council Finance Committee • Representative on the Disability Board • Representative to the Port of Edmonds • Edmonds Homelessness Task Force ,Vow, Therefore, Be it Resofved, that Dave `reitze(be applauded and thanked for serving as a Councilmember. The Council looks forward to his continued dedication and service to the citizens of Edmonds. Passed, Approved, andAdopted this 10t6 day of December, 2019. David O. Earling, Mayor Mike Nelson, Councilmember Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember Tom Mesaros, Councilmember Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Council President Neil Tibbott, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember Scott Passey, City Clerk cf itp of (fbMOHbg Packet Pg. 115 6.8.c 'R.eovIutivrt -Qo: 1.439 A 1Resofution Of The Edmonds City Councl( Nanking Councilmem6er Tom 9Vtesaros forYfis Service To The Edmonds City Councif Whereas, tom ,Uesaros was appointed to the City Council on March 2014 to serve a one-year term and was elected in 2015. While in office Councilmember Mesaros approached the office with passion and an earnest desire to serve his constituency in an open-minded, fair manner. He presided over the business of the City Council with dedication as Council President in 2017 using his knowledge, experience, and expertise to manage the day-to-day administration of the City Council; and Whereas, while on Council, Councilmember Mesaros approached his duties with professionalism. He worked well with others on the Council and his humor was appreciated. As such, he helped to see the completion of the following: • Chair, Planning, Public Safety & Personnel Committee • Overseeing the selection and appointment of numerous candidates to the many citizen's committee vacancies • Initiated Edmonds Marsh Study • Advocated for the safety pedestrian crossing light on West 104 Whereas, while on Council, Councilmember Mesaros was involved with many committees and commissions on behalf of the City of Edmonds including: • SNOCOM Board of Directors • Edmonds Public Facilities District Board • SEA/SHORE Transportation Forum 5Vow, Therefore, oe it Resoked, that Tom Mesaros be applauded and thanked for serving as a Councilmember. The Council looks forward to his continued dedication and service to the citizens of Edmonds. Passed, Approved, andAdopted this l oth day of December, 2019. 4 V 1�4 \ " David O. Earling, Mayor Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Council President Mike Nelson, Councilmember Neil Tibbott, Councilmember Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember Dave Teitzel, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember Scott Passey, City Clerk Cite of (fbM0Ub!5 U) O L N m rn M c O 0 N N c m E z U a Q Packet Pg. 116 6.8.d 'R.eovIutivrt -Q o : 1.440 A Resolution Of The Edmonds City Councl(Thanking Councilmember Nei(Ti66ott for.lfis Service To The Edmonds City Council Whereas, Xeil Ti66ott was elected to the City Council in November 2015 and sworn in January 2016. While in office Councilmember Tibbott approached the office with passion and an earnest desire to serve the citizens of Edmonds; and Whereas, while on Council, Councilmember Tibbott approached his duties diligently, his pleasant and thoughtful demeanor along with his teamwork approach was appreciated. As such, he helped to see the completion of the following: • Initiated the complete sidewalks program • Support for Citizen's Housing Commission • Contributed to the selection and appointment of numerous candidates to the many citizen's committee vacancies Whereas, while on Council, Councilmember Tibbott was involved with many committees and commissions on behalf of the City of Edmonds including: • Chair of Planning, Public Safety & Personnel Committee • Economic Development Commission • Affordable Housing Authority Now, Therefore, Oe it Resofved, that 5ved i66ott be applauded and thanked for serving as a Councilmember. The Council looks forward to his continued dedication and service to the citizens of Edmonds. Passed, Approved, andAdopted this loth day of lnecem6er, 2019. David O. Earling, Mayor Mike Nelson, Councilmember Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember Tom Mesaros, Councilmember Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Council President Dave Teitzel, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember Scott Passey, City Clerk Cite of (fbmonb!5 Packet Pg. 117 6.8.e 'R.eovIutivrt ,Qo: 1.441. A lXesolution Of The Edmonds City Council Thanking �l�layor Dave Earling forOis Service as 9Uayor To The City of Edmonds Whereas, lave Earfing was elected Mayor November — December 2019 and has served the City tirelessly; and Whereas, Mayor Earling advocated for open and productive dialogue with the City Council. Mayor Earling has a wonderful sense of humor which at times kept the serious Council meetings moving forward during the long nights; and Whereas, Mayor Earling has the highest regard for City directors and the City staff of Edmonds; and Whereas, Mayor Earling helped to see the completion of the following: • Successfully balanced numerous budgets • Represented Edmonds on the Community Transit and Sound Transit Boards • Advocated for Edmonds Marsh restoration • Initiated the Economic Development Commission • Visionary for a new Civic Field • And many other projects too numerous to name Whereas, Mayor Earling has worked closely with the County, State and Federal elected officials for the betterment of Edmonds. -(1 ( 1 Y —1 . Vow, Therefore, Be it Resofved that Dave Earfing be commended thanked and recognized for his service to the citizens of Edmonds as 14ayor. Passed, Approved andAdopted this 10th day of December, 2019. Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Council President Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember Tom Mesaros, Councilmember Neil Tibbott, Councilmember Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember Mike Nelson, Councilmember Dave Teitzel, Councilmember Scott Passey, City Clerk r Q cf itp of (Ebmaubg Packet Pg. 118 6.9 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 12/10/2019 Public Defense Contract Extension Staff Lead: Jessica Neill Hoyson Department: Human Resources Preparer: Emily Wagener Background/History The City's contract with the Snohomish County Public Defender Association for Indigent Defense Legal Services, which was extended by Amendment No. 2 dated 9/9/2018, is set to expire on 12/31/2019. Additionally, the City's contract with Bob Boruchowitz, for consultation services related to the assessment of the City's public defense services is also set to expire on 12/31/2019. Staff Recommendation The Snohomish County Public Defender Association agrees to a six-month extension through 6/30/2020 with no increase in rates, with the understanding that the rates associated with further extension(s) or renewal of the parties' agreement beyond 6/30/2020 will be negotiated during the first six months of 2020. Staff recommends accepting this extension. Additionally, Bob Boruchowitz agrees to a one-year extension through 12/31/2020 with no increase in rates. Staff recommends accepting this extension. Narrative Amendment No. 3 to the Snohomish County Public Defender Association's Indigent Defense Legal Services Agreement, attached, details the terms of the Snohomish County Public Defender Association's contract extension for six months. Amendment No. 1 to the Bob Boruchowitz Professional Services Agreement, attached, details the terms of the contract extension for one year. Attachments: Ammendment 3 SCPD Ammendment 1 RBW Packet Pg. 119 6.9.a of EDMO "ems City of Edmonds Dave MainYoWF g 121 FIFTH AVENUE N • EoMallos. WA 98020.425-771-0251 INC. 1890 AMENDMENT NO.3 TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR INDIGENT DEFENSE SERVICES FOR THE CITY OF EDMONDS WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds, a Washington municipal corporation (the "City"), and the Snohomish County Public Defender Association (the "Consultant"), entered into an underlying agreement for the provision of public defense services for 2016 through 2018 ("Underlying Agreement"), which agreement was amended pursuant to its Amendment No. 1, dated February 29, 2016, and Amendment No. 2, dated September 9, 2018; and WHEREAS, Sections if and XXX1V of the Underlying Agreement provide for the extension of the term of the agreement with a written amendment signed and endorsed by the parties; and WHEREAS, the parties have agreed to extend the Underlying Agreement through .tune 30, 2020; and WHEREAS, the parties have agreed to maintain the 2019 rates of compensation for the work to be performed pursuant to the Underlying Ag},reernent for the duration of this contract extension; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual benefits accruing, it is agreed by and between the parties to the t;nderlying Agreement m follows: I. The Underlying Agreement, which has been amended by its Amendment No. I and Amendment No. 2, all of which are incorporated by this reference as if fully set forth herein, is further amended in, but only in. the following respects: 1.1 Extension. Section 1I ("Duration of Agreement") of the Underlying Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: This Agreement shall terminate on June 30, 2020, unless extended or terminated earlier in a manner permitted by this Agreement. 1.2 Payments. Section XXVII.A. ("Compensation Payment for Services") subsection "d" of the Underlying Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: d. 2019 - June 2020. The City shall provide to the Contractor an increase of 7.5% for 2019 and January through June 2020 for services rendered under this Agreement. This includes the sum of TWENTY-SIX THOUSAND, TWO HUNDRED AND SIXTY-FIVE DOLLARS AND 27/100 ($26,265.27), per month from January I, 2019 through June 30, 2020. Of this sum, FIFTEEN Packet Pg. 120 6.9.a THOUSAND, TWO HUNDRED AND SEVENTY DOLLARS AND SEVENTY-FOUR CENTS ($15,270.74) is paid for attorney compensation, ONE THOUSAND, FIVE HUNDRED AND NINETY-FOUR DOLLARS AND ELEVEN CENTS ($1,594.11) is paid for the provision of investigator services. and NINE THOUSAND, FOUR HUNDRED DOLLARS AND FORT Y- I WO CENTS ($9,400.42) is paid for administrative expenses. 2. In all other respects, the Underlying Agreement between the parties, as amended by Amendment No. 1 and Amendment No. 2, shall remain in full force and effect, further amended as set forth herein, but only as set forth herein. DATED this day of , 2019. CITY OF EDMONDS SNOHOMISH COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER ASSOCIATION David O. Earling, Mayor Kathleen Kyle, 7anaging Dircctor ATTESTJAUTHENTICATED: Scott Passey, City Clerk APPROVr'D AS TO DORM: Office of the City Attorney Packet Pg. 121 6.9.a STATE OF WASHINGTON) )ss COUNTY OF ) On this day of , 2019, before me, the under -signed, a Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, duly commissioned and sworn, personally appeared Kathleen Kyle, Managing Director of the Snohomish County Public Defender Association, and executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said instrument to be her free and voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that she was authorized to execute said instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal hereto affixed the day and year first above written. NOTARY PUBLIC My commission expires: Packet Pg. 122 6.9.a Packet Pg. 123 6.9.b { of ED%41 Dave Earliri o City of Edmonds May 121 FIFTH AVENUE N. • EDMONDS, WA 9B020 • 425-771-0251 'NC. 1 g90 AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds, a Washington municipal corporation (the "City'), and the Robert C. Boruchowitz (the "Consultant"), entered into an underlying agreement for the provision of consultation services related to the assessment of the City's public defense services for 2019 ("Underlying Agreement'), dated December 18, 2018; and WHEREAS, Section 12 of the Underlying Agreement provides for the amendment thereof by a written agreement signed by both parties; and WHEREAS, the parties have agreed to extend the term of the Underlying Agreement through December 31, 2020; and WHEREAS, the parties have agreed to maintain the 2019 rates of compensation for the work to be performed pursuant to the Underlying Agreement for the duration of this contract extension; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual benefits accruing, it is agreed by a and between the parties to the Underlying Agreement as follows: m 1. The Underlying Agreement, which is incorporated by this reference as if fully set r forth herein, is amended in, but only in, the following respects: 1.1 Compensation. Section 2 ("Payments"), subsection A, of the Underlying Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: A. Payment for work accomplished under the terms of this Agreement shall be on a time and expense basis as set forth on the fee schedule found in Exhibit A; provided, in no event shall the payment for work performed in 2019 and 2020 pursuant to this Agreement exceed the sum of Fifty -Five Thousand Dollars ($55,000.00). 1.2 Extension of Term. Section 4 ("Time of Performance") of the Underlying Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: This Agreement shall be in effect from January 1, 2019 through December 31, 2020. The Consultant shall perform the work authorized by this Agreement promptly in accordance with the receipt of the required governmental approvals. Packet Pg. 124 6.9.b 2. In all other respects, the Underlying Agreement between the parties shall remain in full force and effect, amended as set forth herein, but only as set forth herein. DATED this day of December 2019. CITY OF EDMONDS Dave Earling, Mayor ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Scott Passey, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Office of the City Attorney STATE OF WASHINGTON) }ss COUNTY OF KING } CKIM6Y#1:ft"30y 44xc. ar-:p Robert C. Boruchowitz On this 15 4 day of December 2019, before me, the under -signed, a Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, duly commissioned and sworn, personally appeared Robert C. Boruchowitz, and executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said instrument to be his free and voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he was authorized to execute said instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal hereto affixed the day and year first above written. KEITH BUEHNER Notary Public State of Washington NOTARY PUBLIC My Appointment Expires Oct 26, 2020 My commission expires: 1 Q� 6 /42-16 Packet Pg. 125 8.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 12/10/2019 Deliberation and Adoption of the 2020 City Budget Staff Lead: Scott James Department: Administrative Services Preparer: Scott James Background/History Mayor Earling presented his Proposed 2020 Budget to Council on October 8, 2019. The Proposed 2020 Budget can be accessed on the City's website at: file:///C:/Users/sjames/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/INetCache/IE/2R24WD6N/2020_City_of_Ed monds_Proposed_Budget.pdf Staff Recommendation Recommended steps for Council Action: Step 1: Vote on Proposed Amendments: Each Councilmember submitting an amendment should make a motion to approve their respective amendments. Step 2: Motion to approve 2020 Budget: Motion to approve Ordinance No. XXXX, adopting the 2020 Budget as amended to commence on January 1, 2020. Narrative Tonight's Council Meeting is scheduled for Council to continue their deliberation on the Proposed 2020 Budget, vote on amendments to the Proposed Budget and adopt the 2020 Budget as amended. Since the November 26th Council Meeting, four changes were made to the Council Proposed 2020 Budget Amendments. Specifically, item #11 was previously withdrawn is now added back to remove DP #80, item #12 was withdrawn and replace with item #13, and items #20 and #21 were added. Councilmembers submitting these two amendments will be asked to share their respective rationale's for these amendments. The complete list of Council and staff amendments submitted are attached. Attachments: 2020 Budget Ordinance and Use of Tax Funds Report Proposed 2020 Budget Amendments Packet Pg. 126 8.1.a ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, RELATING TO THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR COMMENCING JANUARY 1, 2020 AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. WHEREAS, on or before the first business day in the third month prior to the beginning of the fiscal year of 2020, the Finance Director submitted to the Mayor the estimates of revenues and expenditures for the next fiscal year as required by law; and, WHEREAS, the Mayor reviewed the estimates and made such revisions and/or additions as deemed advisable and prior to sixty days before January 1, 2020, filed the said revised preliminary budget with the City Clerk together with a budget message, as recommendation for the final budget, and WHEREAS, the City Clerk provided sufficient copies of such preliminary budget and budget message to meet the reasonable demands of taxpayers therefore and published and posted notice of filing and the availability of said preliminary budget together with the date of a public hearing for the purpose of fixing a final budget, all as required by the law, and WHEREAS, the City Council scheduled hearings on the preliminary budget for the purpose of providing information regarding estimates and programs, and WHEREAS, the City Council did meet on November 4th, 2019 which was on or before the first Monday of the month next preceding the beginning of the ensuing fiscal year, for the purpose of fixing a final budget at which hearing all taxpayers were heard who appeared for or against any part of said budget, and Packet Pg. 127 8.1.a WHEREAS, following the conclusion of said hearing the City Council made such adoptions and changes as it deemed necessary and proper, WHEREAS, the Finance Director submitted the Use of Tax Funds Report to Mayor and Council as required by RCW 82.46.015, NOW, THEREFORE; THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Attached hereto and identified as Exhibit A, in summary form, are the totals of estimated revenues and appropriations for each separate fund and the aggregate totals for all such funds combined, and by this reference said Exhibit A is incorporated herein as if set forth in full and the same is hereby adopted in full. The Finance Director is authorized to update year-end fund balances in the final budget document as projected prior to printing the final budget document. Section 2. A complete copy of the final budget for 2020, as adopted, together with a copy of this adopting ordinance shall be transmitted by the City Clerk to the Division of Municipal Corporations of the Office of the State Auditor and to the Association of Washington Cities. Section 3. Attached hereto and identified as Exhibit B, Use of Tax Funds Report, and by this reference said Exhibit B is incorporated herein as if set forth in full and the same is hereby adopted in full. The Finance Director is authorized to update actual expenditures in the final report as projected prior to printing the final report document. Packet Pg. 128 8.1.a Section 4. This ordinance is a legislative act delegated by statute to the City Council of the City of Edmonds, is not subject to referendum and shall take effect January 1, 2020. APPROVED: MAYOR, DAVID O. EARLING ATTEST/AUTHENTICATE CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: :' CITY ATTORNEY, JEFFREY TARADAY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. Packet Pg. 129 8.1.a SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the day of , 2019, 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, RELATING TO THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this day of , 2019. CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY Packet Pg. 130 8.1.a EXHIBIT "A" 2020 BUDGET SUMMARY BY FUND Fund No. Fund Description Revenue Expenditure Difference (Rev - Exp) * 001 General Fund $ 43,857,108 $ 48,176,108 $ (4,319,000) 009 LEOFF Medical Insurance Reserve Subfund 437,980 467,140 (29,160) 012 Contingency Reserve Subfund 56,140 - 56,140 014 Historic Preservation Gift Fund 5,230 5,900 (670) 104 Drug Enforcement Fund 165,390 45,800 119,590 111 Street Fund 1,893,668 2,132,529 (238,861) 112 Street Construction Fund 2,433,890 2,398,235 35,655 117 Municipal Arts Acquisition Fund 259,635 243,880 15,755 118 Memorial Tree Fund 750 - 750 120 Hotel/Motel Tax Fund 98,630 122,750 (24,120) 121 Employee Parking Permit Fund 27,270 26,880 390 122 Youth Scholarship Fund 1,790 3,000 (1,210) 123 Tourism Promotional Arts Fund 34,450 33,900 550 125 REET 2 1,436,090 3,067,616 (1,631,526) 126 REET 1 1,453,520 2,661,040 (1,207,520) 127 Gifts Catalog Fund 145,050 100,220 44,830 130 Cemetery Maintenance/Imp.Fund 184,610 195,700 (11,090) 136 Parks Trust Fund 6,390 - 6,390 137 Cemetery Maintenance Fund 54,210 - 54,210 138 Sister City Commission Fund 10,380 11,900 (1,520) 211 LID Control Fund 12,400 12,400 231 2012 LTGO Debt Service Fund 738,400 738,400 332 Parks Capital Construction Fund 9,638,306 11,942,630 (2,304,324) 421 Water Utility Fund 11,116,270 12,785,339 (1,669,069) 422 Storm UtiIityFund 5,670,766 8,809,350 (3,138,584) 423 Sewer/WWTP UtilityFund 24,452,726 30,984,800 (6,532,074) 424 Utility Debt Service Fund 1,988,100 1,988,130 (30) 511 Equipment Rental Fund 1,746,160 3,169,898 (1,423,738) 512 Technology Rental Fund 1,202,963 1,224,784 (21,821) 617 Firemen's Pension Fund 72,620 78,700 (6,080) Totals $ 109,200,892 $ 131,427,029 $ (22,226,137) * Amount represents a contribution of (use of) fund balance N al 7 m r U O N O N d t r O C O r Q O a C C O r R L d O IZ d rn C 7 LL X M H 4- 0 N rn C R N V C ca C L 0 d Ib 0 N O N C N E t U r Q Packet Pg. 131 8.1.a EXHIBIT B Use of Tax Funds Report Part 1: Actual Use of REET Funds collected during the prior two-year period and Actual Use of REST Funds as a Percentage of Project REET FUNDS USED FOR THE FOLLOWING STREET EXPENDITURES 2018 % of Project using REET 2019 Estimate % of Project using REET REET 2 - Fund 125 2018 Overlay Program 448,409 27% 2019 Overlay Program 24,222 25% 238th Island & Misc Ramps 10,812 51% 2019 Pavement Preservation Program 506,386 30% 238th Island and ADA Curb Ramps 150,750 41% 238th St. SW Walkwayfrom SR-104 to SR-99 Project 3,004 61% Audible Pedestrian Signals 42,500 100% Traffic Calming 4,877 25% REET 1 - Fund 126 Sunset Walkway Improvement 135 31 % Trackside Warning System 68,418 80% Dayton St. Utility Replacement 29,095 13% 238th St. Walkway SR104 to Hwy99 2,041 0.41% 2017 Overlay Program 953 100% 89th PI W Retaining Wall 224 2% 2018 Traffic Calming 15,123 50% 2018 Overlay Program 895,372 55% 84th Overlay from 220th to 212th 8,727 12% 2019 Overlay Program 48,309 51% 2019 Pavement Preservation Program 565,641 33% 2019 Pedestrian Safety Program 50,000 100% 238th St. SW Walkwayfrom SR-104 to SR-99 Project 1,912 39% 84th Ave W Overlay-220th to 212th Project 108,495 14% 89th Retaining Wall 127,990 100% Adaptive system along 220th 47,000 100% Admiral Way Crossing 40,000 100% Dayton 3rd to 9th 12,058 100% Guardrail installations 20,000 100% Protected/Permissive Left Turn 14,762 100% Trackside Warning 320,149 100% Traffic Signal Upgrades 70,000 100% Packet Pg. 132 8.1.a EXHIBIT B Use of Tax Funds Report Part 1: Actual Use of REET Funds collected during the prior two-year period and Actual Use of REET Funds as a Percentage of Project REET FUNDS USED FOR THE FOLLOWING PARKS EXPENDITURES 2018 % of Project using REET 2019 Estimate % of Project using REET REET 2 - Fund 125 Civic Center Property 79,229 100% Yost Pool Improvements 53,440 100% Waterfront Redevelopment/Ebb tide walkway 215,858 98% City Park Shed 137,620 98% Frances Anderson Playground 150,188 100% Civic Development 259,616 100% Edmonds Marsh Project 25,000 100% Gateway Sign Replacements 8,976 100% Parks Maintenance 78,716 6% Hickman Slope Management 9,323 100% 4th Ave Corridor 50,000 100% Accessible Playgrounds 89,908 100% City Park Walkway 40,000 100% Gateway Sign 20,000 100% Marsh Feasibility 25,000 100% Mathy Ballinger Park 20,000 100% Olympic Beach Restrooms 35,000 19% Parks Maintenance R & M 50,000 100% Parks Maintenance Shop 20,000 100% Parks Maintenance Supplies 21,000 100% SeaVlew Park 120,000 100% Seaview Park 41,800 100% Veteran's Plaza 7,400 100% Waterfront Redevelopment 709,900 30% Yost Pool 67,921 100% REET 1 - Fund 126 CDBG Repayment to Senior Center 216,720 100% Debt Service 162,047 100% Civic Park 500,000 93% Debt Interest 3,360 100% Debt Principal 23,480 100% Interfund Transfer Out for Debt Payment 133,030 100% Waterfront Redevelopment 526,733 22% Packet Pg. 133 8.1.a EXHIBIT B Use of Tax Funds Report Part 2: Use of REET Funds for the succeeding two-year period and Percentage of REET Funds for capital projects Compared to all other sources of capital project funding as Identified in City's Capital Facilities Plan. TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS AND FUNDING SOURCES 2020 2021 MM Total % of Funding Hwy 99 Gateway/ Revitalization (918,000) (500,000) (1,418,000) Federal or State Grants Secured $628,000 $500,000 1,128,000 80% Federal or State Grants Unsecured 0% Fund 126 Reimbursement - Hwy 99 Gateway/ Revitalization 290,000 290,000 20% Hwy 99 Gateway / Revitalization $ - $ $ - 100% 76th Ave W. @ 220th St SW 533,000 533,000 Federal or State Grants Secured 400,000 400,000 75% Fund 126 Reimbursement - 76th Ave W @220h St SW 133,000 133,000 25% 238th St SW from SR-104 to Hw 99 $ $ - $ 100% PARKS PROJECTS AND FUNDING SOURCES 2020 Total % of Funding Civic Center Development 12,590,092 12,590,092 G.O. Bonds 3,700,000 3,700,000 29% General Fund 2,000,000 2,000,000 16% Grants 3,400,000 3,400,000 27% Private Donations unsecured 400,000 400,000 3% Fund 125 Reimbursement -Civic Center Development 1,737,4721 1,737,472 14% Park Impact Fees 1,352,6201 1,352,620 11% Civic Center Acquisition/Development/Stadium demo $ $ $ - 100% Waterfront Redevelopment / Waterfront Walkway Completion 2,681,065 250,000 Fund 125 Reimbursement- Waterfront development 1,568,565 54% Grants 562,500 19% Grants unsecured - 250,000 :250,000 9% Park Impact Fees/Waterfront development 550,000 - 19% Waterfront Redevelopment / Waterfront WalkwayCompletion $ - $ - $ 100% Packet Pg. 134 8.1.b COUNCIL PROPOSED 2020 BUDGET AMENDMENTS Item # Page # DP# New Item' Description Cash Increase (Decrease) Submitter Approved? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 DP #2 DP # 10 DP # 13 DP #29 DP #30 DP #33 DP #37 DP #42 DP #51 Page #57 DP #80 DP #9 New DP #81 DP #81 New New New New DP #40 New Remove New Half-time Human Services Coordinator Move Health District contribution to Opioid Response Fund Remove Contribution to Edmonds Center for the Arts Remove Purchase of new Staff Vehicle for Police Dept. Remove Federal Lobbyist Remove Community Survey Remove Downtown Wayfaring Signs Remove/Change Construction Review Professional Services Remove Public Art at the Library Add $7,500 for Students Saving Salmon, to total $12,500 Remove Willow Creek Daylighting Design n o, uee ran from $750,000 to $450,000( fe,. oye desig,, , eet) Marsh Restoration, includes use of $250,000 Marsh reserve Remove Marsh Restoration Consultant Move Marsh Restoration Consultant from Storm to Parks Add Full-time Arborist, truck & equipment Add Non -represented Employee Salary Study Add Contribution Support for Edmonds Chamber Add budget for consultant to review uses of all City rental space Increase budget for Professional Services for Code Updates Add 0.5 FTE staff member to update the City's development code Total of Councilmember Requested Changes $63,814 Teitzel, Johnson $0 Teitzel $75,000 Johnson $35,000 Johnson $72,000 Johnson, Buckshnis $25,000 Johnson $25,000 Johnson $60,000 Tibbott $62,000 Johnson ($7,500) Buckshnis $750,000 Teitzel $300,000—Buekshais ($450,000) Buckshnis $25,000 Buckshnis $0 Buckshnis ($79,715) Buckshnis ($40,000) Mesaros ($10,000) Mesaros ($15,000) Johnson ($25,000) Tibbott ($72,120) Buckshnis $ 493,479 Withdrawn "?age #" refers to page number in the Proposed 2020 Budget book where the reference item can be found, and'DP#" refers to the 2020 Decision Package number and "New Item" refers to a new budget request being submitted for Council consideration. Page 1 of 2 Packet Pg. 135 STAFF PROPOSED 2020 BUDGET AMENDMENTS Item # Page # DP# New Item' Description Cash Increase (Decrease) Submitter Approved? I 2 3 4 5 6 7 DP #2 DP #35 DP #86 DP #92 Page #57 New Page #57 Correct Half-time Human Services Coordinator Costs Adjust Purchase of Trolley & Operation of Service Remove DP for Stormwater Comprehensive Plan Reduce request from $635,000 to $135,000 Add $2,500 for Students Saving Salmon, to total $5,000 Add PUD Green Power Program 4% increase for Public Defender for I st half of 2020 Total of Staff Requested Changes $21,636 Doherty ($5,000) Doherty $152,500 Williams $500,000 Williams ($2,500) James ($30,000) Hope ($75,644) Neill-Hoyson 560,992 I" Page #" refers to page number in the Proposed 2020 Budget book where the reference item can be found, and "DP#" refers to the 2020 Decision Package number and "New Item" refers to anew budget request being submitted for Council consideration. Page 2of 2 Packet Pg. 136 8.2 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 12/10/2019 Utility Rate Analysis and adoption of a Utility Rate Ordinance Staff Lead: Rob English Department: Engineering Preparer: Megan Luttrell Background/History On June 11, 2019, staff presented the Utility Rate Analysis to the Parks and Public Works Committee and the Finance Committee and provided recommendations for Water, Sewer, and Storm Utility Rate increases. On June 25, 2019, staff presented to the full council the Utility Rate Analysis and provided utility rate increase recommendations for Water, Sewer and Storm Utility Rates. On July 16, 2019, staff presented the Utility Rate Analysis and future adoption of a Utility Rate Ordinance to the Finance committee. On September 10, 2019, staff presented to the Parks and Public Works Committee the Utility Rate Analysis and provided utility increase recommendations and options, based on Council comments, for increases in the Sewer Utility Rates. On November 19, 2019, staff presented to the full council the Utility Rate Analysis and provided additional utility rate increase options per Council comments for the Sewer Utility and utility rate increase recommendations for Water, Sewer and Storm Utility Rates. On December 3, 2019 a public hearing was held for the Utility Rate Analysis and staff presented the Utility Rate analysis and provided utility rate increase recommendations for the Water, Sewer, and Storm Utility Rates and three options for the Sewer Utility Rate Increases. Staff Recommendation Approve the Utility Rate Ordinance. Narrative Councilmembers Teitzel and Buckshnis requested that a 30-year bond option for the pyrolysis project be added and reviewed in relation to the Sewer utility rate increases. This is to be done as an effort for staff and council to determine the effects of this new option in relation to the proposed utility rate increases for the Sewer Utility. This will aid in selection of a rate increase from options available. This new option along with an evaluation by our rate consultant, FCS Group, has been added. (Refer Exhibit 1&2) Packet Pg. 137 8.2 Councilmember Buckshnis requested that staff needs to include the Utility Rate Analysis powerpoint presentation in the council packet. (Refer Exhibit 3) Council requested that the December 3, 2019 e-mail memo written by Public Works and Utility Director Phil Williams in regard to the pyrolysis project be included in this packet. (Refer Exhibit 4) A draft ordinance has been included in the packet reflecting staff's current rate increase recommendations. The rates in the electronic file for the Sewer Utility portion of the ordinance can be revised as needed to reflect council's final decision on the options for the Sewer Utility Rate increases. (Refer Exhibit 5) Background The City of Edmonds operates a combined utility operation which incorporates potable water, sanitary sewer, and storm and surface water management functions. The City received the draft combined utility rate study from its consultant, the FCS Group. The findings show increases in potable water, sanitary sewer, and storm and surface water management utility rates. This funding will help address rising costs including but not limited to: inflation and the rising maintenance and operations costs, wholesale cost increases for potable water from Alderwood Water and Wastewater District, the replacement of aging and failing water/sewer/storm infrastructure as part of the annual replacement projects and upcoming larger capital projects. The rate analysis had a focus on the sewer fund since there are numerous future large size capital projects that need to be addressed. For the sewer, the analysis reviewed various alternatives including: cash funding, one time borrowing for one large project, borrowing for the three future large projects, and borrowing near term to keep rate increases low for the near term. The rate increases recommended and proposed by staff will make it so that the City will need to acquire bonding, within the coming year, for the upcoming Pyrolysis project at the Wastewater Treatment Plant. The cost for annual maintenance and replacement projects will be rate funded, thereby resulting in considerable, capital project cost savings to the City. Attachments: Exhibit 1 - Evaluation Exhibit 2 - Summary of Sewer Rate Scenarios 30 and 20-year Bond Options Exhibit 3 - 12/10/2019 Presentation Exhibit 4 - Pyrolysis Response Exhibit 5 - Utility Rates Ordinance Packet Pg. 138 8.2.a From: Chris Gonzalez To: DeLilla, Mike Subject: RE: Making the $10 Bond a 30 Year Bond for Sewer Utility Rate (Urgent) Date: Thursday, December 5, 2019 10:32:02 AM Attachments: imaae001.jpa Summary of Sewer Rate Scenarios v7.1.pptx Hi Mike, Following our conversation this morning and the tight turnaround (getting something out by the end of the day so that it can be included in the Council packet for next Tuesday's meeting), I've prepared updated scenarios for the sewer rate forecast: • 20-Year Bond @ 3.0% • 30-Year Bond @ 3.5% These scenarios only include a bond issue of approximately $10 million next year for the WWTP pyrolysis project, and assume pay-as-you-go funding for the other large projects (we'll re-evaluate this in subsequent updates). For both of these scenarios, I've opted to change the timing for the debt proceeds so that the City takes out the proceeds in 2020 without any embedded wrapping of the debt service payments. Note that the models show $500,000 of proceeds in 2019, which is necessary in order to use the full amount of the bond proceeds — the City's estimated share of the pyrolysis project includes expenditures planned for 2019, though I wouldn't be surprised if some of those expenditures actually get bumped to 2020. Whether we move the $500,000 and related CIP project costs to 2020 or assume that $500,000 of the proceeds taken next year will reimburse the City for expenditures made this year, there shouldn't be a material impact to the forecast by the end of 2020. There was initially a minor rate impact to frontloading the bond proceeds and related debt service costs — as we discussed, the models drew the proceeds as needed on the premise that the City would be able to structure the bond payments as needed. However, reducing the interest rate from 3.5% to 3.0% in the 20-year bond scenario enabled us to keep the annual rate increases at 5.0% per year. The 30-year bond scenario allows us to drop the rate increases below 5.0% beginning in 2025, but we can't do much before then if we're going to keep the combined operating/capital cash balance at or above 180 days of 0&M (level recommended by the bond rating agencies, which we're assuming should be met in the event of any new debt issuance). Especially with the higher applicable interest rate, extending the repayment term to 30 years provides only a modest rate benefit by 2025 — since it requires higher rate increases in subsequent years, the two scenarios generally end up in a comparable place by 2050 in terms of the cumulative rate adjustment and the accumulated cash balances. Assuming a 3.0% discount rate based loosely on general cost inflation, the difference in the present value of the annual revenue requirement through 2025 is only about $46,000. Put differently, the amount that customers contribute to pay for system costs through 2025 would only be $46,000 lower in the 30-year bond scenario, equating to a relative savings of $0.23 — $0.25 per month per ERU in current dollars. If we look at the present value of the incremental interest payments on the 30-year bond, the incremental cost is about $1.9 million over the life of the debt — this equates to Packet Pg. 139 8.2.a $9.38 per ERU per month in current dollars. To reinforce the point that you and Phil have made... though the rate impact is relatively comparable across the two scenarios, the incremental interest paid in the 30-year bond scenario effectively represents funds that the City would otherwise be able to invest in future projects. As we discussed, going with a 30-year bond does come with a couple of conceptual risks. One risk is that the assets might not last 30 years, either due to evolving regulatory standards or premature failure — the industry standard is to limit the term of debt to the estimated life of the underlying assets. Though I'm not aware of any formal consequences of failing to meet this standard (especially if the assets don't remain in service for a full life cycle), public awareness that utility rates are paying debt associated with assets that are no longer in service might create a public relations issue down the road. In addition, longer repayment terms on the bond make it more likely to overlap with future bond payments, particularly for major projects that have yet to be identified. It is important to recognize that these risks exist for both scenarios, but the 30-year bond scenario would increase the City's exposure to them. Having said this, I think that the Council's decision to move forward with 20-year bonds vs. 30-year bonds needs to consider the near -term rate benefit against the increased exposure to risk that I outlined above. Though the incremental costs and exposure to risk seem a bit high to justify a relatively small rate reduction, that is a policy decision that should reflect the City's understanding of its constituents. In case it helps, I've attached a presentation slide summarizing the key factors to consider when comparing the scenarios. I hope this helps — please let me know if you have any questions or comments! Do you still want a memo explaining this, or do the attached slide and the explanation in this e-mail provide what you need? Chris Gonzalez Senior Project Manager Direct: (425) 502-6280 Main: (425) 867-1802 ext. 238 Fax: (425) 867-1937 Redmond Town Center 7525 166th Ave. NE, Ste. D-215 Redmond, WA 98052 0 chrisgna fcsgroup.com From: DeLilla, Mike <Mike.DeLilla(@edmondswa.gov> Sent: Wednesday, December 4, 2019 8:28 AM To: Chris Gonzalez <ChrisGC@fcsgroup.com> Subject: Making the $10 Bond a 30 Year Bond for Sewer Utility Rate (Urgent) Packet Pg. 140 8.2.a Chris, Council asked us to look into this alternative (instead of the usual 20 year bond). Could you let us know how it affects the Sewer Rates? I've got a call in to Scott Bauer at NW Municipal Advisors to see what the Bond rate impacts would be by extending the Bond repayment period to 30 years. I would assume that it should not be much. Would you have a feel for this? Could you give me a call to discuss as well? I want to chat a little bit with you to make sure we are not missing anything. Thanks! Mike Michele (Mike) F. De Lilla, P.E., LEED AP Senior Utilities Engineer Engineering Division I City of Edmonds 121 5th Ave N. I Edmonds, WA 98020 425-771-0220 x 1320 1 Fax: 425-672-5750 mike.delilla(@edmondswa.gov Packet Pg. 141 t E 8.2.b 11 0 11 Considerations: 20mYear vs. 30mYear Bonds Relative rate impact 30-year bond scenario provides short-term rate relief relative to 20-year bond scenario Both scenarios projected to end with comparable (cumulative) rate increases Total interest paid City would pay $2.9 million more in interest for a 30-year bond than a 20-year bond Present value of incremental interest payments @ 3.0% is $1.9 million Cash balances/financial position Comparable cash balances projected for both scenarios through 2050 Exposure to risk Debt repayment period vs. life of related assets Potential overlapping with future bond issues for projects not yet planned - .. - Packet Pg. 142 FCS G Solutions -Oriented Consulting City of Edmonds De,r; rrib r '10, 20'19 FCS CROUP Solutions -Oriented Consulting Packet Pg. 143 e Assumptions Annual Cost Inflation ■ General (CPI): 2.5% ■ Benefits:10.0% ■ Alderwood Water Purchase Costs: — 8% in 2020; (21.8%) — 8.5% in 2021; (4.4%) — 8% in 2022; (5%) — 5% Thereafter ■ Construction Costs: 4.0% Annual Growth ■ Water/Sewer: z 85 ERUs per year ■ Stormwater: z 55 ESUs per year Pa e 2 Packet Pg. 144 8.2.c Water Revenue Reauirement Forecast Annual Water Rate Increase Monthly Single -Family Bill @ 7 ccf Tax Total 4.5% 4.5% 4.5% $45.66 $47.71 $49.86 $52.11 $6.41 $6.05 $4.99 $5.21 $52.07 $53.76 $54.85 $57.32 Rate increases are needed to generate funding for: Actual Increases from 2017-2019 in Alderwood Wholesale Water purchase costs that were above original 2016 estimates Increased future Alderwood Water purchase costs (8-8.5% vs now 5% projected) Inflationary Increases for maintenance and operations of the Water Utility Inflationary Increases for our 1 % yearly system replacement for pipes that are: Past their useful life and breaking with a higher frequency In need to be upsized to increase fire flow in currently deficient areas Decrease water loss in older leaky pipes M 4- 0 0 0 Cu Cu a O a 0 N O r N r M t x W C d E V a Pa e 3 Packet Pg. 145 Water Enterprise Fund Incr.1 r n. 8.2.c i n d Taxes* Year 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Rate % Increase 9.0% 9.0% 9.0% 9.0% 4.50% 4.50% 4.50% ax ate** 7.07% 15.50 % 14.05 % 12.68 % 10.00% 10.00% True% PM78.01% 8.06% 8.19% 3.24% 2.01% 4.50% Increase/Month $1.69 $1.08 *Assumes Single Family Residence and Usage of 7ccf per month and annual rate increase of 4.5%. **Taxes are applied after rates are assessed based on usage. 2008 Lane vs City of Seattle determined Public Fire Protection was a General Governmental Service. 2009 Edmonds Council raised tax rate to enterprise water fund from 10% to 18.9% so Fire Hydran and Fire Protection maintenance costs could be born by the general fund. 2013 State legislature updated laws and stated that Public Fire Protection was a water enterprisc fund service 2016 City Council approved lowering of rates back to 10% between 2017 and 2021 Pa e 4 Packet Pg. 146 Stormwater Revenue Requirement Forecast Annual Stormwater Rate Increase Monthly Single -Family Bill $17.18 Tax $1.72 Total $18.90 Rate increases are needed to generate funding for: 9.5% 9.5% 9.5% $18.81 $20.60 $22.56 $1.88 $2.06 $2.26 $20.69 $22.66 $24.82 Inflationary Increases for maintenance and operations of the Storm Utility Inflationary Increases for 1 % yearly system replacement for pipes that are: Past their useful life, Are heavily damaged or corroded, Show chronic root intrusion Need to be upsized to mitigate flooding Increased costs to keep in compliance with NPDES requirements Pa e 5 Packet Pg. 147 Sewer Revenue Requirement Fore 4,,,Ecast n,"" Existing Proposed 2019 20ibMIJI 20211 it Annual Sewer Rate Increase 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% Monthly Single -Family Bill (Per Unit) $43.65 $45.83 $48.12 $50.53 Tax $4.37 $4.58 $4.81 $5.05 Total 1 $48.02 1 $50.41 $52.93 $55.58 Rate increases are needed to generate funding for: $10M +1- Bond acquisition for WWTP Pyrolysis Project (Incineration replacement) Inflationary Increases for maintenance and operations of the Sewer Utility Inflationary Increases for 1 % yearly system replacement for pipes that are: Past their useful life Are heavily damaged or corroded Show chronic root intrusion Need to be upsized to mitigate sewage overflows Show groundwater or sewage infiltration and inflow 7. C 0 0 c a oc Pa e 6 Packet Pg. 148 Sewer Financial PI narios 17P 1! = ; I ME1=10 • • • i Status Quo: Full Cash Funding for CIP $48.02 $51.85 $56.00 $60.48 $10 Million WWTP Bond $48.02 $50.41 $52.93 $55.58 $10 Million WWTP Bond (3% Increases 020-22 $48.02 $49.46 $50.94 $52.47 r r.. 8.2.c ' .n . Pa e 7 Packet Pg. 149 8.2.c Long -Term Forecast: Outstanding Debt Principal Balance $55,000,000 $50,000,000 $45,000,000 $40,000,000 $35,000,000 $30,000,000 $25,000,000 $20,000,000 $15,000,000 $10,000,000 $5,000,000 City sewer utility share of existing debt obligations (no new debt) M O N M * U') Co ti O O O N M � LO O ti O O O N M LO O ti O O (M N N N N N N N N . N M M M M M M M M M M 11* 1.* 1.* 11* U") O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Status Quo: Full Cash Funding for CIP $10 Million WWTP Bond $10M Bond - 3% Increases 2020-22 Pa e 8 Packet Pg. 150 8.2.c Long -Term Forecast: Cumulative Debt Service Interest Paid $45,000,000 $40,000,000 $35,000,000 $30,000,000 $25,000,000 $20,000,000 $15,000,000 $10,000,000 $5,000,000 i � City sewer utility share of existing debt obligations (no new debt) M O N M � LO O ti O O (M N M 11* U') Co 1*- W M O N M LO O ti O O O N N N N N N N N . N M M M M M M M M M M 11* 1.* 1.* 11* U") O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Status Quo: Full Cash Funding for CIP $10 Million WWTP Bond $10M Bond - 3% Increases 2020-22 Pa e 9 Packet Pg. 151 Total Monthly Increase (All 3 funds Year Monthly Total* Total % Increase* Monthly Total** Total % Increase** Difference 2020 $4.93 4.14% $5.89 4.95% $0.96 2021 $4.53 3.66% $5.57 4.46% $1.04 *Assumes 4.5% Water, 3%Sewer and 9.5% Storm Rate annual Increase **Assumes 4.5% Water, 5%Sewer and 9.5% Storm Rate annual Increase -o 0 0 2022 N $6.15 4.79% a $7.27 5.57%jj J Pa e 10 Packet Pg. 152 t 8.2.c '•') 2019 Total Bill — 3/4 Single -Family @ lOccf* 0 C 0 300 $265.51 0 Q. 0 250 $193.22 200 $175.43 $174.38 $168.66 $158.61 150 $132.38 $132.23 $131.61 $129.77 $120.48 $118.40 $104.72 a 100 a� 50 r 0 ��J\\� ° ��\,�J °�°�°tea°°a 2 r �° �°CD N N r * Rates assume 10 ccf/month usage for water/sewer as applicable x ** Has not had a rate adjustment in at least the past 6 years. w *** 8% Water, 42.5% Sewer, and 95% Storm increase in 2020 a **** 10% total increase expected in 2020 ***** 10% increases in storm rates for 2020 and 2021 a Page 11 Packet Pg. 153 :;: 202 300 $273.48 250 200 150 100 50 0 1 Total Bill — 3/4" Sinqle-Famil $199.01 $180.69 $179.61 $168.66 $163.37 $141.58 �\ �,�0� e, 0���� �a 0� 10ccf $140.33 $135.56 $133.66 $124.09 $121.95 $107.86 oo \m��aG K 0� * Rates assume 10 ccf/month usage for water/sewer as applicable * Rates assume 3% rate increases for each year after 2019 for all other jurisdictions * Edmonds rates increased per recommendations * Actual Approved MLT 2020 rates $168.66 (Assuming 10ccf/month for w/ss) FCS URUu Solutions -Oriented Consult 00a Fn 8.2.0 :;> R :ommendation Raise sewer rates 5% in 2020, 2021, 2022 to continue to meet the capital needs of the City's Sewer Utility Fund including the WWTP Pyrolysis project. This balances the cost of this project more evenly between current and future ratepayers Chris Gonzalez FCS .... "The strategy of 5% annual sewer rate increases (coupled with the $10 million borrowing for the pyrolysis project) reflects a balanced perspective on the concept of "generational equity. "A purely "pay-as- you-go" funding strategy burdens existing customers with the obligation of funding future improvements that will benefit a broader base of customers in the future, while deferring capital investment to keep rates artificially low disproportionately shifts the burden of future capital investments to future customers." M 0 0 0 CU r_ CU R a 0 w W IL 0 N O N r M x W E a - FCS -..13 GRDU Solutions -Oriented Consulting Recommendation Water Rates increased at 4.5% in 2020, 2021, 2022 due to Alderwood increases over the next three years and underlying inflation Storm rates as presented at 9.5% to meet capital and maintenance needs for the Stormwater Fund and increased NPDES permit requirements Pa e 14 Packet Pg. 156 uestions I Discussion Pa a 15 Packet Pg. 157 8.2.d Responses to recent public comments and questions concerning the City's Carbon Recovery Project 1. Comment - Pyrolysis is an unproven and unreliable technology RESPONSE: • The technology is neither unproven nor unreliable. It is, however, relatively new in this country when using biosolids as a feedstock. Following are examples showing installed and operating Bioforcetech systems in Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Belgium, and Sweden. These are using non-biosolids feedstocks including wood chips, yard waste, pulp waste, straw, coconut fiber, etc. Please see the second page below for a list of WWTPs using this technology for biosolids. Three of these are in Europe and one is in California. That last one is the Silicon Valley Clean Water (SVCW) WWTP in Redwood City, California which is discussed in more detail in Response #5 below. P1500 + P500 PM Ky y n.�w Gn.N A U7 2 wro.o WwbM SVI•�� P500 3 F.17.r R.Mr.,.r ...d 7•" PS00 I1..nseFW..bM GER (F Mn�al.o p nb. G ER PSoO 5 F•.,r.rbrry OWN ■ C. n6 GER w.ril P500 6 c.nl«.. Gn.fMa CRr16 GER P500 •YI.I4 wrA.a h.R uM SI�Y.n.H.q 7 li+h P500 N..br�lASFrwlw GfR AWIInx M1e./...11.cryfedH B "•n P500 FI..b.+.I.00.:= 11r.1.-.OWNI mbM GER 9 C..bo. %G W & COtO GER P500 10 A14 Wr.. rllw., %.I.. G—pl P5o0 IMI, ii a<� "� • aEL~~ P500 12 jA.efMln MHm SWF P500 13 vftwmom .unMmeOMSH GER moo 14 M. &-bo 5— Gift P500 15 N...[.I.e&mb.r GER moo Frin. R.r.vulr. —d l6 ' �w P500 ■..K . �(-6H GER F.1w R.i.k0..nn ■",.*a-614 'y.r GER P50017 18 %k&"tMM SWE P150o 19 slo—.*r bm GER P500 20 As Mamono 0 GER PS00 0 Packet Pg. 158 8.2.d REFERENCES P-FIVE PYROLYSIS oP*A.f.ero-.wn S+T[ SYSTEM cores WON -a 1 2weckrerband Vnkel P5i1D l5 Abrnsserbe"Isgung Unz-Unkel GER Entsorgungwerband Saar IEVSI Ooen `g .10 P500GER Bidorcetech Corporation �A . Cal P5W Skanetro fl� enhog P500 ?':19 2. The project requires a new building that exceeds the city's height restriction. RESPONSE: 0 810FORCETECF The new Pyrolysis building will be approximately 2,700 gross square feet. The new building will house three P5 pyrolysis system components as well as an area for loading, storage, weighing and racking of "super sacks" containing biochar. This new building is wholly enclosed within the existing foot print of the treatment plant site and is expected to have a useful life of 40-years or more. The Pyrolysis building footprint sits above (2) 24" diameter influent lines that bring the untreated wastewater to the plant. This would make it extremely difficult and much more expensive to lower the overall height of the building since the process equipment itself has a vertical profile that has already been optimized to be as short as possible. The initial building design of the Pyrolysis building is higher than the height restriction (roughly 10-1/2 feet taller than the existing Headworks building, 5-1/2 feet higher than City's 25-Ft. height standard). Several options have been explored to lower the overall height of the roof and minimize any impact on surrounding neighbors. Options discussed to lower the building height - 1. Keep the initial design of the building as is at 30' 11"and request a building height variance. The City would like to exhaust all other options before seeking a variance. See Figure 1 below. 2. Reroute the two 24" influent pipes and lower the entire building footprint and remove the "Utilidor". This option has the highest cost both for design (and redesign) as well as construction and neighborhood disruption. Due to the high level of risk associated with moving the influent pipes and the obvious impacts that would have on the cost of the project — a detailed cost proposal was not developed for this option. Instead, it was determined to be infeasible. 3. Lower the building overall roof height and extend the P-5 exhaust stacks (total of 3) through the roof to accommodate even lower roof height. Three options were discussed with this lower design. The first option would include a design where just the exhaust stacks from each of the 3 units would exit the roof with a small architectural screen being added to obscure them. This would create a more aesthetically pleasing view compared to three metal exhaust stacks on a roof. This would set the roof height at 24'9" with a 24" architectural screen, for a building highpoint of 26'9" (Figure 4). The second option was similar to the first option where just the exhaust stacks would protrude from the roof. The difference a Packet Pg. 159 8.2.d being the stacks would be enclosed in a larger doghouse extending 7' above the overall roofline. The third option included a step-down design overall height remained the same 30' 11" with a portion of the roof stepping down to 25'. It was decided that option 1 would have fewer impacts on the surrounding neighbors and be more community friendly. This is likely the most feasible option for the City and community (Figure 6). We have been working with the Development Services Department to provide needed information to review and analyze these various options. 3. The proposed project is expensive. What guarantees does the City have that there won't be cost overruns? RESPONSE: This project will be implemented through the "Energy Savings Performance Contracting" program which is administered by Washington State Department of Enterprise Services. As such, Ameresco is required to provide a guaranteed maximum project price (GMAX). Any cost in excess of the GMAX would be paid by Ameresco. Ameresco is guaranteeing the system performance and is backstopped by Centrisys and Bio Force Tech (manufacturers of the dryer and pyrolysis units). Ameresco provides this type of guarantee on most ESCO projects. Infrequently, a project does not go as planned and Ameresco has a good track record of fulfilling those guarantees by compensating the owner or correcting the problems. 4. The existing incinerator could be refreshed or rehabilitated for $8M-$10M, and the incinerator could be replaced with a new incinerator for $13M-$15M. RESPONSE: We are uncertain where this information came from. The current Fluidized Bed Incinerator (FBI) is not able to be 15 rehabilitated. The regulations state clearly that a "grandfathered" Sewage Sludge Incinerator (SSI - like ours) Q must be replaced once 50% of the original cost has been spent on improvements. We are rapidly approaching that trigger. That means our incinerator must be replaced, either with a new incinerator or with another system using different technology.' Any new incinerator would be required to have more stringent air pollution control equipment and achieve even stricter standards of operation than we face today. Advantages and Disadvantages of installing a new incinerator: 0 Advantages Q- ■ Operator and facility familiarity with the fluidized bed incinerator technology. ■ It is believed the entire system could be located within existing WWTP Incinerator Room. T) y Disadvantages 0 ■ Elevated O&M costs. More labor, more energy input, more maintenance. a ■ Owning and operating an SSI exposes the City to the risk of increasingly stringent and unforeseen future r regulatory requirements. ■ The current regulatory environment has gotten increasingly more stringent in recent years with the w adoption of new regulations under 40 (CFR) Part 60 Subpart O. This includes greatly increased regulatory LU reporting and frequent and expensive stack testing. ■ This additional stack testing by itself has increased costs approximately $50,000/ year ■ The incinerator process produces waste ash which must be disposed of in accordance with local, State W and Federal regulations. Currently our ash is disposed of in a subtitle landfill. a ■ This option does not align with the City's climate and sustainability goals (Council Resolution 1389). ■ Does not produce or provide a beneficial end product. ■ Electrical cost of operating an SSI is high. If we decided to use another FBI, we would "right" size it which would then require staff to be onsite 24 hours/day. We estimate that an additional 2 FTE's would be required. Currently our FBI is not being operated efficiently since it is designed to meet the ultimate capacity of the plant as permitted 30 years ago. Since it is a single unit it has very little "turn down" capability. That means it has to adjust to a less than maximal load by being turned off instead of turned Packet Pg. 160 8.2.d down. The daily start up and shutdown has had a detrimental impact on the equipment and impacts downstream or related WWTP processes. • The following table is costing info developed for replacing with a new incinerator (this data is included in the Engineering Report (Attached) as a replacement alternative that was evaluated): Preliminary Project Budget and Estimated Construction Timeline Alternative 1 — New Incinerator Task/Milestone/Phase Description Estimated Cost Estimated Start/End to Complete Dates Perform 100% level design doc's, site surveying, $ 1,952,720 Jan. 2019 Dec. 2019 Regulatory permit applications (PSCAA, Ecology) Building Permit Application Fee (Estimated Cost), $ 102,000 Feb. 2019 - Dec. 2019 Consultant - air permitting, regulatory Bonding $ 202,448 Mar. 2020 - Apr. 2020 Equipment procurement phase 1 of 2 $ 4,640,200 Jan. 2020 - Jun. 2020 Construction mobilization; site work, materials procurement $ 2,745,700 Apr. 2020 - Dec. 2020 Biosolids Hauling and Sludge Diversion to Other Plants $ 450,000 Nov. 2020 - Apr. 2021 Equipment procurement phase 2 of 2 $ 3,875,000 Jan. 2021 - Jun. 2021 Construction; site work, materials, etc. $ 2,474,597 Jan. 2021 - Jul. 2021 Construction management, site supervision, construction administration, safety consultants, community outreach, $ 3,578,511 Jan. 2020 - Dec. 2021 etc. Substantial completion, system $ 425,000 Aug. 2021 -Dec. 2021 checkout/startup/Commissioning Total Project Cost Is 20,446,176 1 Project End Date I Dec. 2021 5. During the City's visit to the BFT installation in Redwood City (Silicon Valley Clean Water) the pyrolysis unit was nfflinP. RESPONSE: The P5 unit at the Redwood City plant was temporarily off at the time of our visit but this was not due to any mechanical, electrical, or other operating issue. BFT started -up the drying and pyrolysis operation at SVCW in June, 2017. In the spring of 2018 the site was working to finalize permit matters with the California regulatory authorities (this is the first permit ever done in the USA for a Pyrolysis system of Biosolids). Coincidentally, the system was temporarily down during our site visit of March 29-30, 2018. Staff were aware of this prior to the visit however there was interest in seeing the maintenance required, which can only be done during shutdowns. The maintenance was demonstrated during the visit. The installation at SVCW has been operational as a private/public partnership until roughly 3 months ago when SVCW approved the purchase of the system. Currently, SVCW is working with Bioforcetech to replace their existing dryer units with the most recent models to further enhance capacity and efficiency. These replaced "Bio Dryers" are not utilized in the proposed Edmonds project, which utilizes a proposes a belt -dryer instead. SVCW Plant Manager contact information: Silicon Valley Clean Water; Redwood City CA Installation date: June 2017 Full Scale: 6 BioDryers and 1 P-FIVE Pyrolysis a Packet Pg. 161 8.2.d Feedstock: Anaerobically Digested Biosolids Contact information: Teresa Herrera, P.E. , 650-832-6220, THerrera@svcw.or� 6. This project relies solely on pyrolysis while other WWTP installations have backup systems. RESPONSE: • This is an incorrect statement. The Edmonds system will have a belt dryer which can, by itself, make Class A biosolids if the pyrolysis systems are down for any reason. Class A biosolids can be either land applied or disposed of in a landfill and do not need the pyrolysis system to meet state and federal requirements. The pyrolysis system takes the Class A biosolids and further reduces the volume by 60% and changes it into a product that will generate cash flow rather than incurring additional expense to dispose of it. • 3 pyrolysis units will be installed to ensure redundancy (backup). Most WWTP that utilize belt dryers do not install back up dryers as they have minimal mechanical problems which can generally be repaired by maintenance staff. • Without the "shared thermal energy" created by pyrolysis, the gas consumed by the stand-alone belt dryer would be roughly double. Therefore, it would require an even greater rate increase to cover the expense of operating a gas belt dryer. Natural Gas Demand 180,000 160,000 140,000 120,000 100,000 80,000 H 60,000 40,000 20,000 Equipment ■ Dryer Only 170,527 Dryer +P-Five 78,311 Therms/yr In regard to back up systems — many WWTP's who haul Class A biosolids must have multiple contracts and "backup" places to haul the solids. We will have three options available with a primary option and two temporary or emergency only back-ups: 1) Primary - Pyrolysis/Biochar, 2) Back-up - Class A biosolids to landfill or land application, and 3) Back-up - Hauling liquid sludge to another WWTP for dewatering and management. Perflouroalkyl Substances (PFAS) found in trace amounts in biosolids is a new and growing concern for state and federal regulatory agencies and therefore also a concern for WWTP biosolids managers, especially for those who land apply biosolids agriculturally. It makes sense to implement a process (pyrolysis) that has proven that it destroys PFAS and will not require any modification to meet new regulations that might be developed based on this issue. 7. How did the City decide on using pyrolysis in -lieu of other technologies? RESPONSE: • The existing incinerator has reached the end of its service life and requires extensive and ongoing maintenance. The incinerator also accounts for a major portion of the WWTP annual operations and maintenance (0&M) budget (. Furthermore, due to its age, most replacement parts require custom fabrication as they are no longer supplied by the manufacturer. These factors, coupled with stringent regulation and permitting requirements, has led the City to seek an alternative process for biosolids handling at the WWTP defined as the WWTP Carbon Recovery Project. Following are the objectives for the WWTP Incinerator Replacement Project: o Reduce WWTP 0&M costs; a Packet Pg. 162 8.2.d o Improve biosolids process and handling reliability; o Reduce diesel fuel consumption. o Recover and reuse energy that is lost in from the existing incinerator. o Improve air quality (i.e. reduce harmful emissions from incineration). Pyrolysis does not produce the NOX and SOX that is common in air pollution. o Reduce carbon emissions in accordance with the City's climate and sustainability goals (Council Resolution 1389). These goals and how the City intends to achieve them are discussed in detail in the "Engineering Report" which is attached. • Incinerator Replacement Alternatives Analysis The first step in achieving the goals outlined in Section 1 (of Engineering Report) was the City authorizing the issuance by Ameresco of a Request for Qualifications (RFQ). Ameresco issued the RFQ on November 16, 2017 to solicit manufacturers specializing in the thermal oxidation/decomposition of biosolids. Proponents were required to size their systems based on the following sizing criteria: o Average solids loading of 14,000 lb./day (projected 2038 Annual Average Dewatered Sludge (DS) and screenings production, see Table 6 in Appendix F) o Maximum month solids loading of 18,000 lb./day (projected 2038 Maximum Month DS and screenings production, see Table 6 in Appendix F) o DS feed % solids of 26.5% o Final production of Class A Biosolids with a minimum of 90% solids Of the ten vendors/manufacturers to receive and review the RFQ, three respondents submitted qualifications in response to the RFQ by December 22, 2017. The three respondents to the RFQ were: o Aries Clean Energy (Aries) for replacing the incinerator with a biosolids gasification system; o Centrisys for replacing the incinerator with a new Sulze/Klein belt dryer and pyrolysis system from Bioforcetech Corporation (BFT); and o Suez Incinerators for replacing the incinerator with a new Thermylis Fluid Bed Reactor, or incinerator. D Each technology includes the thermal decomposition of organic material through the application of heat with m varying supplies of air or oxygen. The technologies cover a wide range of thermal decomposition. Incineration a includes the thermal oxidation of compounds with elevated temperatures and a full supply of air/oxygen. Gasification employs mid -range temperatures with restricted air/oxygen. Lastly, pyrolysis uses low to mid -range v, temperatures without addition of air/oxygen. The City and Ameresco reviewed the proposals and selected the >, pyrolysis technology on March 2, 2018. Ameresco and the City performed an alternatives analysis which 0- included review of the following criteria: a v Current Installations: o The number of successful installations and length of time installed/operating. x References & Reliability: w o The name and contact information for references as well as any information regarding equipment 'up - time.' E Equipment/System Technology and Operating Theory: o Equipment cut sheets(s), drawings, and dimensions. a Constructability: o The system's constructability within the confines of the current footprint of the WWTP. Disruption to Plant Operations: o The impact to WWTP operations that the installation of each system will require. Equipment Cost: o Equipment cost without installation costs but including freight costs. Estimated Operating Costs: Packet Pg. 163 8.2.d o Number of staff full-time employee (FTE's) required to operate and maintain the system. o Ongoing cost to operate and maintain the equipment while 'on-line.' (power, water, fuel, manpower, chemicals, filters, etc.). o Preventive maintenance (PM) schedule and estimated costs of PM consumables. Regulatory Compliance: o Ability to comply with all Federal, State and local regulatory and permitting requirements. o Description of emissions classification for proposed equipment and what provisions will be made to comply with these regulations. o Description of any special permitting requirements or clean-up equipment required for proposed system, including cost, and project impact. 8. The new system will "use more energy" or "at best be a wash" and "The new system will require natural gas and larger electrical requirements." RESPONSE: • Ameresco is still working on the energy balance and operations cost savings. • The electrical demand upon startup will be reduced, this should translate into lower demand charges since the SSI is the single largest load at the WWTP. • The project is being performed under the Washington State Performance Contracting program. The project must realize energy savings and increase sustainability. • The new system will recover and utilize energy that is otherwise lost. i M =101:I ► IQ I[*IH'1 I ip. np.w nip P. np.r9y Drycr r-nor a • Natural gas: the SSI uses diesel as a fuel, the belt dryer uses cleaner natural gas instead and is also supplemented by excess thermal energy from the pyrolysis units. 9. The incinerator runs 14 hours/day and the pyrolysis system will run 24/7.... this will be an increase in energy consumption and require more staffing. RESPONSE: This is incorrect. The analysis done to date indicates the new Pyrolysis system will require less labor hours to operate than the existing incinerator or a new incinerator. There is a significant benefit to operating 24 hours/ day in a WWTP. This does not equate to higher costs due to the right sizing of equipment and less impact on the process. Every process in a WWTP has a return stream to the plant. A smaller load 24/7 is always better than a greater impact for a smaller number of hours each day. An excerpt from the Engineering Report approved by the WA Dept. of Ecology for the Carbon Recovery Project: Staffing Requirements The City logs the number of maintenance hours required to operate its existing system. Operation of the existing incinerator requires a licensed incinerator operator to be present at all times when the incinerator is in operation. Typically, the incinerator is in operation 18 continuous hours per day. For those 18 hours, a dedicated operator is onsite operating the system. Based on 2,080 hours/year for one FTE, incinerator operation equates to a Packet Pg. 164 8.2.d approximately 3 FTEs assuming 365 days/year operation. The operator is also supported by one FTE whose time is split equally between management, electrical and instrumentation, and maintenance. Staffing requirements for the operation and maintenance of the new dryer and its associated systems will be 0.25 FTEs (520 hours per year). This total does not include any part replacements, but it covers daily, weekly, monthly, and annual maintenance requirements for 24/7 dryer operation. The pyrolysis systems will each require approximately 520 hours/year for maintenance and 180 hours/year for operations. With three pyrolysis systems being installed, this equites to 1,560 hours/year for maintenance and 540 hours for operating the three systems. This equates to a total of 2,100 hours per year or approximately 1 FTE. These estimates may vary and are based on 24/7 operation of the biosolids drying and pyrolysis systems. Based on this preliminary assessment of existing incinerator O&M staffing and projected staffing needs for the dryer/pyrolysis system, the WWTP Carbon Recovery Project is expected to reduce staffing requirements by 1.5 FTEs. These estimates are conservative as they do not account for resource sharing with other activities at the plant, such as sludge dewatering. Staffing requirements to operate and maintain the new conveyance system and hoppers is not included in these staffing estimates. (Staffing for yearly maintenance of the current incinerator is not included in this estimate. This is an all hands effort, requiring overtime and extended work hours for 1 week each year. The cost for yearly maintenance is approximately $60,000.) All of the above factors will be worked into new estimates for cost savings and energy reductions. These will be part of the final performance commitments in the contract between Ameresco and the State Department of Enterprise Systems. 10. The City should not be the first to try a new approach to biosolids processing. (Canary in a coal mine was the term used . RESPONSE: • As documented above, Edmonds would not be the first to utilize Pyrolysis for Sewage Sludge. However, we would be the first to process 100% of the sewage sludge through pyrolysis in the United States. • An additional excerpt from the Engineering Report prepared for WA Dept. of Ecology: a m . New and Developmental Technology N 0 As pyrolysis has not been previously approved by Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) for biosolids 2' 0 treatment at a municipal WWTP and is not identified in the Criteria for Sewage Works Design (Ecology, August 2008) a or "Orange Book". it is considered new and developmental technology, as defined by Section G1-5.4.1 of the Orange Book. As such, the technology typically is required to be thoroughly tested in a full-scale or representative pilot r installation before approval can be given for construction and installation of the technology. However, per Ecology's direction (August 8, 2018 e-mail from Stephanie Allen, Municipal Facility Manager, Water Quality Program) the w pyrolysis system will not require pilot testing as it only affects the WWTP solids stream and is not responsible for effluent treatment. Therefore, this Engineering Report satisfies the necessary requirements to evaluate potential 0 impacts to water quality and is intended to address the Orange Book requirements for submission of data. This section provides an overview of the technology, its outputs, its applications, and its installations. This section also includes a side -by -side comparison with incineration. a • Additional information: Very few new sludge incinerators are being built. Bellingham is replacing their incinerator with a very expensive digester project. Nationally there are 3 large 100% biosolids pyrolysis or gasification projects under construction or Packet Pg. 165 8.2.d just completed. Internationally there are a number of gasification type projects in Europe and Japan. Gasification for other types of materials; wood, animal waste, municipal waste, oil processing is now fairly common. We are working with Centrisys on the energy balance. There are significant energy considerations that support the current plan of implementing the Pyrolysis option over other available approaches. As stated earlier but worth repeating here, Ameresco is guaranteeing system performance and is backstopped by guarantees from Centrysis (dryer manufacturer) and Bioforcetech (pyrolysis system manufacturer). Ameresco provides performance guarantees on ESCO projects. Infrequently a project doesn't go as planned and Ameresco has a good track record of fulfilling those guarantees by compensating the owner or correcting the problems. Finally, Bioforcetech has offered to operate the system for a period of time to demonstrate performance, should the City desire that option. When the project was presented to Puget Sound Clean Air Agency they were interested in, and supportive of, the City moving in the direction of replacing the SSI with pyrolysis. Massing Diagrams that have been referenced. Figure 1 Initial design Full building height 30' 11" IXPfffi'SS al]G SECTION rl Figure 2 Lower roof design option 1 building height 24' 9"massing drawings Packet Pg. 166 8.2.d VIEW 6 FROM SOUTH-EAST VIEW C FROM EAST VIFW O FROM NORTH-WEST VIEW E FROM SOUTH VIEW F FROM SOUTH-WEST Q Packet Pg. 167 8.2.d City of Edmonds WWTP Carbon Recovery Project Engineering Report May 2019 S�L AN BHC Consultants, LLC 1601 Fifth Ave. Suite 500 Seattle, WA 98101 (206) 505-3400 www.bhcconsultants.com Packet Pg. 168 8.2.d ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This document was prepared under the direct supervision of: Gregory R. Mockos, PE BHC Consultants, LLC Packet Pg. 169 8.2.d City of Edmonds WWTP Carbon Recovery Project Enqineerinq Report TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction..........................................................................................................................................1 1.1 Purpose......................................................................................................................................5 1.2 Ownership and Management.....................................................................................................5 1.3 State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Checklist...................................................................... 6 2. Existing Conditions.............................................................................................................................. 6 3. Incinerator Replacement Alternatives Analysis..................................................................................15 3.1 Alternative 1 - Incineration.......................................................................................................16 3.2 Alternative 2 - Gasification......................................................................................................17 3.3 Alternative 3 - Pyrolysis...........................................................................................................18 3.4 Recommended Incinerator Replacement Alternative...............................................................18 4. Incinerator Replacement Design........................................................................................................19 4.1 Basis of Design........................................................................................................................19 4.2 Dewatered Sludge Hopper and Pump...................................................................................... 20 4.3 Belt Dryer.................................................................................................................................23 4.4 Dry Cake Conveyance and Hopper.......................................................................................... 23 4.5 Screenings Handling Modifications.......................................................................................... 24 4.6 Pyrolysis System(s) and Bio-Char Handling............................................................................ 24 4.7 Odor Control System Modifications.......................................................................................... 25 4.8 Contingency Planning.............................................................................................................. 26 5. New and Developmental Technology................................................................................................ 27 5.1 Pyrolysis Overview................................................................................................................... 28 5.2 Pyrolysis and Incineration - a Comparison.............................................................................. 28 6. Temporary Biosolids Disposal...........................................................................................................29 7. Permitting...........................................................................................................................................30 7.1 Code Review/Building Permit...................................................................................................30 7.2 Stormwater Permit................................................................................................................... 30 7.3 Air Permit................................................................................................................................. 30 7.4 NPDES Permit......................................................................................................................... 30 7.5 Biosolids Permit....................................................................................................................... 31 8. Testing Requirements........................................................................................................................31 9. Geotechnical Investigations............................................................................................................... 32 10. Staffing Requirements....................................................................................................................... 32 11. Project Schedule and Sequencing.....................................................................................................33 12. Preliminary Opinion of Probable Project Costs.................................................................................. 34 LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Estimated Solids Production Summary..........................................................................................19 Table 2 Pyrolysis and Incineration Comparison..........................................................................................29 Table 3 Preliminary Project Schedule.........................................................................................................33 Packet Pg. 170 8.2.d City of Edmonds WWTP Carbon Recovery Project Enqineerinq Report LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 — Project Location .............................................. Figure 2 — Original WWTP Solids Process Flow Diagram Figure 3 — 2017 WWTP Solids Process Modifications..... Figure 4 — Process Flow Diagram .................................... APPENDICES Appendix A NPDES Permit WA0024058 and Fact Sheet Appendix B WWTP Biosolids Permit Appendix C PSCAA Construction Permit Appendix D Engineering Report WAC Checklist Appendix E SEPA Checklist Appendix F Basis of Design (BOD) Technical Memorandum Appendix G Sludge Dewatering BOD Memo Appendix H RFQ Evaluation Matrix Appendix I WWTP Carbon Recovery Project Preliminary Design Drawings Appendix J Major Equipment Cutsheets Appendix K Dewatered Sludge Analysis Appendix L Bioforcetech P-5 Pyrolysis System Information Appendix M Biosolids Derived Bio-char Appendix N Temporary Biosolids Disposal Options Analysis Technical Memo Appendix 0 Code Compliance Review Technical Memo Appendix P Permit Feasibility Study Appendix Q WWTP Geotechnical Investigations Appendix R Opinion of Probable Project Costs (OPPCs) .3 .9 13 21 Packet Pg. 171 8.2.d City of Edmonds WWTP Carbon Recovery Project Enqineerinq Report ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS LIST °C Degrees Celsius OF Fahrenheit Aries Aries Clean Energy BDB Biosolids Derived Bio-char BFT Bioforcetech Corporation BHC BHC Consultants, LLC BOD Basis of Design BTU British Thermal Units CCEA Coal Creek Environmental and Associates CFR Code of Federal Regulations City City of Edmonds CY Cubic Yard DC Dry Cake DES Department of Enterprise Services DNS Determination of Non -Significance DO Dissolved Oxygen DS Dewatered Sludge Ecology Washington State Department of Ecology EPA Environmental Protection Agency ESPC Energy Savings Performance Contract FA Foul Air ft Feet ft/min Feet per Minute ft/s Feet per Second FSi FSi Consulting Engineers FTE Full -Time Employee gpm Gallons per Minute HWS Heating Water Supply HWR Heating Water Return lb./day Pounds per Day Packet Pg. 172 LHV Lower Heating Value MBTU/HR Million British Thermal Units per Hour MGD Million Gallons per Day mg/L Milligrams per Liter NOC Notice of Construction NPDES National Pollution Discharge Elimination System 0&M Operations and Maintenance OPCC Opinion of Probable Project Cost PAH Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbon PFD Process Flow Diagram pH Potential of Hydrogen Plan 2013 City of Edmonds Comprehensive Sewer Plan PSCAA Puget Sound Clean Air Agency RA Recycled Air RAW Primary Sludge RCW Revised Code of Washington RFQ Request for Qualifications SA Supply Air scfm Standard Cubic Feet per Minute SEPA State Environmental Policy Act sq ft Square Feet SSI Sewage Sludge Incinerator TESC Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control VOC Volatile Organic Compounds WAC Washington Administrative Code WAS Waste Activated Sludge WWTP Wastewater Treatment Plant 8.2.d City of Edmonds WWTP Carbon Recovery Project Enqineerinq Report iv Packet Pg. 173 8.2.d City of Edmonds WWTP Carbon Recovery Project Enqineerinq Report 1. Introduction The City of Edmonds (City) operates and maintains the Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) located at 200 2nd Avenue South, Edmonds, WA. The project location is shown in Figure 1. The WWTP is a regional facility that treats flows from the cities of Edmonds, Mountlake Terrace, and Lynnwood; King County; Olympic View Water and Sewer District; and Ronald Wastewater District. On average, the WWTP treats 5.6 million gallons per day (MGD). The WWTP liquid stream consists of a headworks with three mechanical screens, three primary clarifiers (two square and one rectangular), three aeration basins, three circular secondary clarifiers, and two chlorine contact tanks. The disinfected plant effluent is discharged through a single 36-inch diameter outfall into the Puget Sound. The WWTP is operated in accordance with the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit (Permit No. WA0024058) provided in Appendix A. The WWTP also handles biosolids as covered under the General Permit for Biosolids Management (Permit No. BA0024058) provided in Appendix B. The existing incinerator air emissions are regulated by the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency (PSCAA) in accordance with the Notice of Construction (NOC) Order of Approval No. 11115 (see Appendix C). The WWTP solids stream includes screw press dewatering and incineration of the sludge cake using a fluidized bed incinerator. The dewatered sludge (DS) from the screw presses is stored in a DS storage hopper that is continuously mixed. The screw presses were replaced in 2017 and have a performance guarantee of producing DS with a minimum of 26.5% solids content. The screw presses have been performing above this minimum threshold achieving typical % solids in the 30-32% range. Washed screenings are compacted and discharged to the DS conveyors immediately upstream of the screw presses. The screenings are mixed with the DS in the conveyors and combined with the DS in the DS storage hopper where they are further comingled via the DS hopper mixing. DS is pumped from the DS storage hopper to the incinerator fluidized bed at 6-9 gallons per minute (gpm) via a piston pump. The incinerator fluidized bed is made up of approximately 16,000 lbs. of green lightening sand. Diesel is used as an auxiliary fuel to maintain a bed temperature of 1,400 degrees Fahrenheit ff). The air supply is preheated to 1,200 °F by a heat exchanger to reduce the auxiliary fuel consumption. The pre -heated air is forced up through the bed of hot sand and causes the sand bed to be fluidized. When the sand bed is fluidized it acts like boiling water that can reduce approximately 1,000 gallons of bio-solids down to approximately two quarts of ash. The incinerator exhaust with associated ash is scrubbed in the venturi scrubber with 50 gpm of water and then further treated through a 4-stage separator and tray cooling tower that has 200 gpm of water flowing in the opposite direction of the exhaust gases. Each stage of the tray cooler has a plate with small holes in it that the air must flow through. The water runs across the top of each plate and the exhaust gases 'bubble' through the water. The exhaust gases are reheated with a natural gas -fired burner to eliminate the vapor plume for aesthetics. The ash that is combined with the spray water is captured at the bottom of the separating and tray cooling tower as ash slurry. The ash slurry is then thickened in the ash thickener and then dewatered using a drum vacuum filter prior to disposal offsite. Supernatant from the ash thickener is drained by gravity to the sump pump and ultimately recombined with wastewater in the WWTP flow splitter box upstream of the primary clarifiers. Packet Pg. 174 8.2.d City of Edmonds WWTP Carbon Recovery Project Enqineerinq Report THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK. Packet Pg. 175 n Arlington/ /' •� erettSnohomish ` S:nohomish v i Lynnwood .� �. County Edmonds(e Monroe ✓ •ject •• cation �111111 �CCIW � � FDA IN fill son R111 illlr7r � �� ' � � ���► nMIR ■nomH. l _ Wail This map is a geographic representation based on available information. No warranty is made concerning the accuracy, currency, or completeness of data OF EDO depicted on this map. �� Project Location FI( V Jr WWTP Carbon Recovery Project 0 2,000 4,000 N City of Edmonds, Washington 011 L S Feet Inc t g90 May 2019 Packet Pg. 176 COPYRIGHT © 2019 BHC CONSULTANTS I.I.C. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 8.2.d City of Edmonds WWTP Carbon Recovery Project Enqineerinq Report THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK. M Packet Pg. 177 8.2.d City of Edmonds WWTP Carbon Recovery Project Enqineerinq Report The existing incinerator has reached the end of its service life and requires extensive and ongoing maintenance. The incinerator also accounts for a major portion of the WWTP annual operations and maintenance (0&M) budget. Furthermore, due to its age, most replacement parts require custom fabrication as they are no longer supplied by the manufacturer. These factors, coupled with stringent regulation and permitting requirements, has led the City to seek an alternative process for biosolids handling at the WWTP defined as the WWTP Carbon Recovery Project. The City has set the following main objectives for the WWTP Carbon Recovery Project: ■ Reduce WWTP 0&M costs; ■ Improve biosolids process and handling reliability; ■ Reduce energy consumption; and ■ Reduce carbon emissions in accordance with the City's climate and sustainability goals (Council Resolution 1389). These goals and how the City intends to achieve them are discussed in detail in this Engineering Report. 1.1 Purpose The purpose of this Engineering Report is to discuss the development and preliminary design for the WWTP Carbon Recovery Project. This Engineering Report conforms to the requirements in Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 173-240-060. Refer to Appendix D for a WAC checklist to help locate the appropriate sections within this Report that address WAC requirements. 1.2 Ownership and Management The WWTP is owned by the City, which is responsible for WWTP management, administration, and operation. Such responsibilities include accounting and financial services, billing, and collection, as well as, WWTP maintenance, repair, improvements, engineering design, and construction. Capital and 0&M expenses are funded by the City and its three treatment partners: City of Mountlake Terrace, Olympic View Water and Sewer District, and Ronald Wastewater District. The three treatment partners share 0&M costs based on a percentage of WWTP flows which equates to approximately 50% of total 0&M costs. Capital expenses are shared based on a negotiated fixed percentage determined by the capacity that each partner owns. The three treatment partners own approximately 50% of capital expenses as well. The City and its partners secure their individual funding through wastewater rates, bonds and general facility charges. Grants and utility incentives obtained by the City are shared with the partners based on their ownership stake. The Owner contact information is provided below: Pamela Randolph City of Edmonds, Public Works and Utilities Wastewater Treatment Plant Division 200 2nd Avenue South, Edmonds, WA 98003 Phone: (425) 771-0237 5 Packet Pg. 178 8.2.d City of Edmonds WWTP Carbon Recovery Project Engineering Report The City is contracted with Ameresco to develop an Energy Savings Performance Contract (ESPC) through the Department of Enterprise Services (DES) to replace the incinerator. Funding will primarily be provided by the City and its partners and be supplemented with the following funding sources that are currently being pursued by the City through Ameresco: ■ Clean Energy Fund 3 Program (CEF3) sponsored by the Department of Commerce (DOC). ■ Utility incentives and rebates through programs sponsored by Snohomish Public Utility District (PUD). ■ State Revolving Fund (SRF) low -interest loans and grants. The project representative contact is: Lonn Inman, Ameresco, 206.708-2947, linman .ameresco.com Ameresco has retained BHC Consultants, LLC (BHC) to prepare this Engineering Report. The BHC representative is: Greg Mockos, P.E., 206-505-3400, greq.mockos a( bhcconsultants.com FSi Consulting Engineers (FSi) performed plumbing, HVAC, fire suppression, and code review preliminary engineering as a subconsultant to BHC. Coal Creek Environmental and Associates (CCEA) performed air permitting assistance and prepared the Permit Feasibility Study (see Appendix P) as part of the preliminary design. Other engineering and design disciplines were performed by BHC. 1.3 State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Checklist The installation of a new biosolids treatment system at the Edmonds WWTP is considered a new treatment process and therefore requires a full review of the SEPA checklist. The SEPA and Determination of Non - Significance (DNS) checklist is provided in Appendix E. Refer to the City's General Sewer Plan and the NPDES Permit No. WA0024058 Fact Sheet (Appendix A) for a statement regarding compliance with any applicable state or local water quality management plan or any such plan adopted pursuant to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act as amended. 2. Existing Conditions The existing WWTP solids handling includes the dewatering of a waste activated sludge (WAS) and primary sludge (RAW) sludge blend and comingling the resulting DS with washed and compacted screenings from the headworks. The DS and screenings are stored in the DS storage hopper and then fed to a fluidized bed incinerator for drying and combustion. The solid waste streams collected for dewatering and incineration include the following: ■ Grit - As the WWTP is not equipped with a grit removal system, it can be assumed that grit is present throughout the WWTP system. Typical grit production is approximately 1,300 pounds per day (lb./day). Grit is assumed to be mostly present in the RAW sludge from the primary clarifiers, but it is also likely present in other WWTP processes. 0 Packet Pg. 179 8.2.d City of Edmonds WWTP Carbon Recovery Project Enqineerinq Report RAW and WAS Sludge - RAW and WAS Sludge collected from the primary clarifiers and secondary clarifiers, respectively, is collected in the Blend Tank. The Blend Tank is continually mixed using a side -mounted mechanical mixer. Typical RAW sludge production is approximately 6,000 lb./day. Typical WAS sludge production is approximately 3,360 lb./day. Blended RAW and WAS sludge are then conditioned with polymer in the screw press mixing tanks via mechanical mixing and then dewatered to 26.5% sludge using the two screw presses. DS is discharged to two shaft -less screw conveyors where it is combined with the washed and compacted screenings. The conveyors then discharge the DS and screenings into the DS hopper where scum is added. ■ Scum - Scum from the primary clarifiers is collected and concentrated in a scum concentrator and then conveyed directly to the DS hopper where it is mixed with the screenings and DS from the screw presses. Typical scum production cannot be estimated, but it is assumed to be minimal. Screenings - Mechanical bar screens remove screenings at the headworks. Screenings are collected in a reversible belt collector, ground, and washed in a screenings hopper where potable water is added. Thereafter, the fluidized screenings are pumped to the Sludge Dewatering Room where they are compacted and combined with DS from the screw presses in the DS conveyors. The combined screenings and DS are discharged to the DS hopper. Typical screenings production varies greatly but is approximately 1,000 —1,600 lb./day. Estimates for the above process streams were developed to establish design criteria for the WWTP Carbon Recovery Project described herein. Refer to the Basis of Design (BOD) Technical Memorandum (Tech Memo) in Appendix F for a detailed description of existing and projected design loadings for each of the above process streams. The BOD Tech Memo is based on the WWTP performance as modified by the recent 2017 Sludge Dewatering Improvements project. The original WWTP solid process flow diagram (PFD) is provided in Figure 2. 7 Packet Pg. 180 8.2.d City of Edmonds WWTP Carbon Recovery Project Enqineerinq Report THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK. Packet Pg. 181 scums€C.ur Exusr asp eftrct� V�er�tfa+ M ZAw S M F!G TfR PUMP- {FR6riRA*5cv L-PUMR,NG s rA Y14?A) y� C�iuH F,C rE,e REC�1yrgR �� .2.vd rL/1C,YE.VErJ A6H Ad!!'f� ilcneare: YHIC�e,�tk SLURRY PGlMPS fSN rrt n" AMR SCC1M SCum FfUroE@ N -fmx CO�lCENTRWTG2 7HKKENE2 OYE,?iLOrli FFtrsK SCREW ASH ❑EWA7ERIN6 � + iaa De3W�sA ,Fpg c GFF 4f-W coue�ursa�so �u+rrsre�e 14"M auma ral�iesriaP✓{ros tlniaE,e�t�rr crolrr szt� faacrua o�+r�v] RAW $LUNGE - - --- 70 1J4(+0 �P.9N SI UOGE I Si4RAGE SGirnr� GRiNAFR (YYPi �FP I �+� EL'lAUST P}iW SL urL e' 9 l.JM�K� f%PQII.HPW Sl,lOGE � plr/lPi,(rG SYe rla 0 PFP sLUOGE 0EW47ERING 12A1✓ SG. Raid $t"3CX ���G�I � T1?AA19iEB PilMP.'a sEkuBBF4 CGu^ l.,f35 aiaY�,H9 e P�F.e .._ MrxEk' .ilaxE•Gd� SPR.n e' AWrFiF PIP *4TE.P F12E55 y PRIMARY I WA$ STORAGE CLdRIF1FR F103 g I '` _ q I YFr� -7 COOt 1NG t' WA5 TkAArFEk Ftoc r nexs j �rs� � Y{/,yps F//-7Eg7F I I � h I IR 0kW'v .OM/ `I ViW RIK! W 4 pF p 'SprAt, L I I K BELT I V� Q 1 fla la1.YlvfEiP lw_ao P)--r45 ti 4Pwxyzj"� SCPv�G AV12 FCJu r rAG•P) m i%ROAi A,as/o0N5 S.MrA%V). vtriNr frrP1 --- F�l.T,¢A SEE FIGURE 3 FOR WWTP I I SLUDGE DEWATERING� I IMPROVEMENTSr,N�ax� I RAW SEWAGE PlFMPVN6 STiTIGN k .— — — J •— •-••,•_ �� I 4 [}SLd4TF.e2E0 SL I ASu 5L fJR+RV AlAdFS Ar4r:CF+�Rl�rAL Asa SfRESLlS y HOPPER J n ce �tsp SLUGCE NeINFRAT1E4 � SC,RSw CG,vvlrYG?2 4 LS'krr€ 1SV stua pamp "7CR PEiwd TEf'_EP $4ilP$E .HCY.{,P OhILY� 7M REVWSARLE BELT ok5po"L C[xnrEVE�¢ GE1•IATEgEO .46 KrBLE SCR�afR1b5 CDr.6Ve^{'7lQN SLUOdE SCh'E4N,NG5 GRrh1AEQ _ I _ TO PJ2l Aku ' CLARVITiM To PR+IWARV CL1kt911ZR NANL7LlNG b1jMP sY2W �FLO�f SPLI77Eit 8blr FtpW 3PLI7T1=lE Aoa( FGR ^-- SUMP P/Ji4F .SUMP P(i#!P Sf'EENv s ;N] Original WWTP Solids Process FigureAMERESCO Flow Diagram S�TANTS WWTP Carbon Recovery ProjectGreen . Clean . Sustainable May2019 ;x Q COPYRIGHT © 2018 BHC CONSULTANTS, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED I Packet Pg. 182 8.2.d THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK. City of Edmonds WWTP Carbon Recovery Project Enqineerinq Report 10 Packet Pg. 183 8.2.d City of Edmonds WWTP Carbon Recovery Project Enqineerinq Report In 2017, the WWTP Sludge Dewatering Improvements project included several modifications to the solids process. These modifications included the following: ■ Conversion of the RAW Sludge Storage tank to the Blend Tank; ■ Conversion of the WAS Sludge Storage tank to an overflow/standby tank; ■ Replacement of two belt filter presses with two screw presses and associated equipment; ■ Replacement of RAW Sludge tank diaphragm pump with double -disc pump; ■ Replacement of IDS belt conveyor with shaft -less enclosed conveyor; and ■ Modifications to IDS hopper to increase storage capacity. The design criteria and basis of design for the 2017 solids process modifications are provided in Appendix G. The 2017 modifications reduced the solids process' energy consumption, improved sludge dewatering from 15-20% to an average of 26.5%, and reduced odor emissions due to new enclosed equipment. No modifications were made to either the scum or the screenings handling system other than their previous connections to the IDS hopper and IDS conveyors were re-established with the new equipment. No modifications were made to the incinerator and associated systems as part of the 2017 WWTP Sludge Dewatering Improvements Project. The 2017 modifications to the solids process are shown in bold in the PFD in Figure 3. Packet Pg. 184 8.2.d City of Edmonds WWTP Carbon Recovery Project Enqineerinq Report THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK. 12 Packet Pg. 185 I 8.2.d I E X RAW SLUDGE EL 20.75 EL 17.75 EL 14.75 EL 11.75 EX DECANT VALVES - DR .il m-1 5 CONSULTANTS G-607 RST-607 BLEND - I 0 TANK RST-608 FUTURE GRINDER G-609 FUTURE PUMP RST-609 - WAS STORAGE (USE AS BLEND TANK OVERFLOW STORAGE) WAT-609 LEGEND EXISTING EXISTING — - - — FUTURE J6" WAS I � d WAT-610 I I I I I I I I I I I M--�DMI--0 7 _ I II BY-PASS I SP-603 VENTTO HVAC 1 A 1 \ / DR VENT TO HVAC SP-602 n n 8„ 1 Q YDR VENT TO 4" HVAC DR I I i I j - TIC -_7\-7C - TIC - n = � 1 Y FUTURE SCREW � PRESS SP-601 FUTURE CONDITIONING I TANK CT-601 AND SCREENINGS l MIXER MXR-601 COMPACTOR i--i SEE FIGURE 4 FOR WWTP INCINERATOR REPLACEMENT PROJECT PROCESS MODIFICATIONS VENT TO HVAC 1 1 1 1 1 1 T VENT TO HVAC _ NEW M ' HOPPER 1 EXTENSIONI I I I I I I I I HOPPER I I I I I TO INCINERATOR EX PISTON PUMP WI L SCREW CONVEYOR 2017 WWTP Solids Figure AMERESCO Process Modifications Green . Clean . Sustainable ° WWTP Carbon Recovery Project 3 May 2019 COPYRIGHT © 2018 BHC CONSULTANTS, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED I Packet Pg. 186 1 8.2.d THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK. City of Edmonds WWTP Carbon Recovery Project Enqineerinq Report 14 Packet Pg. 187 8.2.d City of Edmonds WWTP Carbon Recovery Project Enqineerinq Report 3. Incinerator Replacement Alternatives Analysis The first step in achieving the goals outlined in Section 1 was Ameresco publishing a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) on behalf of the City. Ameresco issued an RFQ on November 16, 2017 to solicit manufacturers specializing in the thermal oxidation/decomposition of biosolids. Proponents were required to size their systems based on the following sizing criteria: ■ Average solids loading of 14,000 lb./day (projected 2038 Annual Average DS and screenings production, see Table 6 in Appendix F) ■ Maximum month solids loading of 18,000 lb./day (projected 2038 Maximum Month DS and screenings production, see Table 6 in Appendix F) ■ DS feed % solids of 26.5% ■ Final production of Class A Biosolids with a minimum of 90% solids Of the ten vendors/manufacturers to receive and review the RFQ, three respondents submitted qualifications in response to the RFQ by December 22, 2017. The three respondents to the RFQ were: Aries Clean Energy (Aries) for replacing the incinerator with a biosolids gasification system; Centrisys for replacing the incinerator with a new Sulze/Klein belt dryer and pyrolysis system from Bioforcetech Corporation (BFT); and Suez Incinerators for replacing the incinerator with a new Thermylis Fluid Bed Reactor, or incinerator. Each technology includes the thermal decomposition of organic material through the application of heat with varying supply of air or oxygen. The technologies cover a wide range of thermal decomposition. Incineration includes the thermal oxidation of compounds with elevated temperatures and a full supply of air/oxygen. Gasification employs mid -range temperatures with restricted air/oxygen. Lastly, pyrolysis uses low- to mid -range temperatures without addition of air/oxygen. The City and Ameresco reviewed the proposals and selected the pyrolysis technology on March 2, 2018. Ameresco and the City performed an alternatives analysis which included review of the following criteria: ■ Current Installations: o The number of successful installations and length of time installed/operating. ■ References & Reliability: o The name and contact information for references as well as any information regarding equipment `up -time.' ■ Equipment/System Technology and Operating Theory: o Equipment cut sheets(s), drawings, and dimensions. ■ Constructability: o The system's constructability within the confines of the current footprint of the WWTP. ■ Disruption to Plant Operations: o The impact to WWTP operations that the installation of each system will require. ■ Equipment Cost: o Equipment cost without installation costs but including freight costs. ■ Estimated Operating Costs: o Number of staff full-time employee (FTE's) required to operate and maintain the system. o Ongoing cost to operate and maintain the equipment while `on-line.' (power, water, fuel, manpower, chemicals, filters, etc.). 15 Packet Pg. 188 8.2.d City of Edmonds WWTP Carbon Recovery Project Engineering Report o Preventive maintenance (PM) schedule and estimated costs of PM consumables. Regulatory Compliance: o Ability to comply with all Federal, State and local regulatory and permitting requirements. o Description of emissions classification for proposed equipment and what provisions will be made to comply with these regulations. o Description of any special permitting requirements or clean-up equipment required for proposed system, including cost, and project impact. The City's evaluation matrix of the three proposals received is provided in Appendix H. The Opinion of Probable Project Cost (OPPC) and the 50-year life cycle costs (LCC) are provided in Appendix R. The three alternatives and their respective advantages and disadvantages are described in detail below. 3.1 Alternative 1- Incineration Alternative 1 includes the replacement of the existing incinerator with a new fluidized bed incineration system by Suez / Thermylis. The new system would be compliant with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) guidelines for `New Fluid Bed Incinerators.' The complete system includes heat recovery and an air pollution control system. During static conditions, the fluid bed consists of an inert sand bed supported on an air distributor refractory arch dome. As air is forced up through the dome and sand bed, the individual particles of the bed will "fluidize." At a certain air velocity, they become suspended in the fluidizing air stream. This fluidized state promotes intensive mixing of the individual sand particles with the fluidizing air, which is used as combustion air for the incineration process. The fluidized layer of particles behaves like a boiling liquid, and the heat transfer coefficient in the particle layer increases drastically as the layer becomes fluidized. The high heat and mass transfer rate due to the intensive mixing in the fluid bed results in a uniform incineration process throughout the incinerator vessel. Furthermore, the large mass of heated sand acts as a thermal reservoir, which protects the incineration process against rapid temperature fluctuations if the feed rate or the net heating value of the sludge changes. Once the incinerator is at temperature, the sludge is continuously fed to the fluid bed, where it is instantly dried and disintegrated in the intensively mixed fluidized layer of sand during the incineration process. The resulting combustion byproducts, such as ash, are entrained in the exhaust air. Larger particles accumulate in the bed material until attrition reduces their size sufficiently that they are carried out by the flow of the gas stream. To eliminate the need for auxiliary fuel during the incineration process, the fluidized bed system is provided with a primary heat exchanger or an air pre -heater. This consists of a gas -to -air heat exchanger, which preheats the fluidizing air. The fluidizing and combustion air are preheated to about 1,230 'F. The preheated air temperature is selected based on the heat balance to eliminate or minimize the auxiliary fuel required during steady state operation. Incinerator off -gas, after pre -heating fluidizing air in the heat exchanger, enters the waste heat boiler (WHB) for further heat recovery. The gas exiting the WHB flows to the secondary heat exchanger, the wet scrubber and the wet electrostatic precipitator (ESP) and a granulated activated carbon (GAC) adsorber. The secondary heat exchanger is used to reheat the saturated gas from the wet ESP and to eliminate any risk of condensation in the GAC adsorber. The GAC adsorber, installed downstream of the wet ESP, is used to remove mercury (both elemental and ionic) and dioxins/furans from the flue gas. The OPPC for Alternative 1 is estimated at $20AM with a 50-year LCC of $47.3M (Appendix R). M Packet Pg. 189 8.2.d City of Edmonds WWTP Carbon Recovery Project Enqineerinq Report Advantages ■ Operator and facility familiarity with the fluidized bed incinerator technology. ■ The City can modify its existing sewage sludge incinerator (SSI) permit to accommodate the new incinerator installation potentially avoiding challenging air permitting requirements. ■ Entire system can be located within existing WWTP Incinerator Room. Disadvantages ■ Elevated 0&M costs. ■ Elevated annual regulatory compliance monitoring and sampling costs. ■ Owning and operating an SSI exposes the City to the risk of increasingly stringent and unforeseen future regulatory requirements. ■ Regulatory burden has significantly increased with the new Sludge Incinerator Regulations under 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 60 Subpart 0. ■ The incinerator process produces an ash byproduct which is regulated as hazardous waste and must be disposed of in accordance with local, State, and Federal regulations. ■ Does not align with the City's climate and sustainability goals (Council Resolution 1389). ■ Does not produce or provide a beneficial use end product. 3.2 Alternative 2 — Gasification Alternative 2 includes replacing the existing SSI with a gasifier and dryer system by Aries. Gasification is a thermochemical process of converting biomass into a synthetic gas (syngas) and char in an oxygen starved environment and without an open flame. The process requires IDS to be dried to 85-90% solids. Aries recommended an indirect dryer which will use thermal energy from the thermal oxidizer in the form of hot oil or other high temperature fluid (rather than direct combustion). The gasifier will process these solids (high temperature, no flame) and create a syngas and char. The synthetic gas will route through a cyclone to remove additional char particles, then enter the thermal oxidizer. The oxidizer will combust the gas, decomposing hydrocarbons, odors, and other organic compounds. The resultant exhaust will route through a heat exchanger to recover heat for sludge drying, and finally an emissions control system. The char, which represents about 10% of the input mass to the gasifier will be disposed of offsite as a permitted Class A biosolid. Alternative 2 OPPC is estimated at $17.4 with a 50-year LCC of $31.1 M (Appendix R). Advantages ■ Aligns with the City's climate and sustainability goals (Council Resolution 1389). ■ Gasification produces a product (referred to as "bio-char") of beneficial use. ■ Reduced electrical and fossil fuel consumption costs. ■ Reduced regulatory compliance costs. ■ Significant reduction of maintenance and operating costs compared to the existing SSI. ■ Entire system can be located within the existing WWTP Incinerator Room. 17 Packet Pg. 190 8.2.d City of Edmonds WWTP Carbon Recovery Project Engineering Report Disadvantages ■ No operating installations designed specifically for municipal biosolids in the United States. ■ Unproven technology as applied to domestic wastewater solids. ■ System & equipment support is not local. 3.3 Alternative 3 - Pyrolysis Alternative 3 includes the replacement of the existing SSI with a Sulzle/Klein belt dryer and three "P-Five" pyrolysis units from Centrisys/BFT. IDS from the screw presses will be fed at 26.5%-30% to the new belt dryer, where the biosolids will be dried to a minimum of 74% solids and then fed by conveyor to the pyrolysis process. The belt dryer will be sized to be capable of delivering 90% and higher Class A biosolids. Pyrolysis is the thermal decomposition of organic material through the application of heat without the addition of extra air or oxygen. Through this process, which takes place at temperatures between 660 and 1,650 OF, two byproducts are produced: syngas and bio-char. The syngas is used to power the pyrolysis process. Additional information on the pyrolysis process is provided in Appendix L. Alternative 3 OPPC is estimated at $19.7M with a 50-year LCC of $33.3M (Appendix R). Advantages ■ Aligns with the City's climate and sustainability goals (Council Resolution 1389). ■ Pyrolysis produces a product (referred to as "bio-char") of beneficial use. ■ Reduced electrical and fossil fuel consumption costs. ■ Reduced regulatory compliance costs. ■ Significant reduction of maintenance and operating costs compared to the existing SSI. ■ System & equipment is locally supported by the manufacturers. ■ Proven technology with full-scale system implemented for municipal biosolids at the Silicon Valley Clean Water facility in Redwood City, CA. Disadvantages ■ New technology with few installations in the United States. ■ Major equipment is foreign -made. ■ Equipment and system are highly modular with few opportunities for customization. ■ System cannot fit within existing Incinerator Room and requires the addition of a new onsite structure to house the pyrolysis systems. 3.4 Recommended Incinerator Replacement Alternative The three alternatives were evaluated based on their ability to meet City objectives of providing maximum operational flexibility, redundancy, and value. Specifically, to evaluate the three alternatives against the backdrop of the City objectives for the project, the alternatives were compared based on the following: ■ Capital and operating costs; ■ Energy use, emissions; and waste byproducts; ■ Reliability; ■ Ease of implementation / minimal disruption; and ■ Ability to reduce hauling truck traffic. Packet Pg. 191 8.2.d City of Edmonds WWTP Carbon Recovery Project Enqineerinq Report The resulting City evaluation matrix is provided in Appendix H. Based on this evaluation, Alternative 3 - Pyrolysis was selected as it provides a solution to replacing the SSI project that aligns with City goals and initiatives. 4. Incinerator Replacement Design The WWTP Carbon Recovery Project includes the replacement of the existing fluidized -bed incinerator and its associated sub -systems (heat exchanger, venturi scrubber, fluidizing air blower, separator and tray cooling tower, stack, ash slurry pumps, thickened ash slurry pumps, ash thickener, ash vacuum filter, and miscellaneous piping and supports) with a dryer and three pyrolysis systems. This section outlines the project design criteria, provides an overview of the entire solids handling process and its main components, and discusses the PFD and preliminary equipment sizing and layout(s). See Appendix I for preliminary design drawings. See sheet G-6 in Appendix I for a preliminary major equipment list and Appendix J for major equipment cutsheets. 4.1 Basis of Design The first step in the process of developing the WWTP Carbon Recovery Project design was the establishment of a BOD. This effort is detailed in the BOD Tech Memo in Appendix F. Existing WWTP data for the solid process streams defined in Section 2 were collected, reviewed, and analyzed. A summary of this data is provided in the BOD Tech Memo. As the basis of design effort was used to establish equipment sizing criteria, calculated estimates were made for each individual solids process stream for both the average and maximum month flow conditions for the present (2018) and the projected 20-year (2038). The projected flows and loads were based on an average annual population growth of approximately 0.5% as applied to the 2017 WWTP Sludge Dewatering project. This growth differed from the 2013 City of Edmonds Comprehensive Sewer Plan (Plan) growth rate of 1.2%, which was more than double the actual growth seen by the City and other neighboring cities (Lynnwood and Mountlake Terrace) since the Plan was completed. Solids production estimates were conservatively estimated as a sum of RAW and WAS sludge with and without screenings. Sludge production estimates were based on dry pounds. Scum production, as it cannot be estimated, was assumed to be included in the conservatively -estimated RAW and WAS sludge figures. The summary of estimated solids production at the WWTP for the present and the 20-year planning horizon are presented in Table 1. Table 1 Estimated Solids Production Summary Design Criteria RAW + WAS, Dry pounds RAW + WAS + Screenings, Dry Pounds Per Day Per Hour Per Day Per Hour 2019 Annual Average 11,300 471 12,570 524 Max Month 14,430 601 16,520 688 2038 Annual Average 12,430 517 13,820 576 Max Month 15,760 656 18,050 752 19 Packet Pg. 192 8.2.d City of Edmonds WWTP Carbon Recovery Project Engineering Report In addition to the above estimates of sludge production, the City performed an extensive analysis of its dewatered sludge without screenings. The analysis performed, which was performed on samples collected from the screw presses was for nutrients, total metals, potential of hydrogen (pH), ammonia, sulfides, semi- volatiles, surrogates, polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbon (PAHs), minerals (alkalinity), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), ultimate composition, and lower heating value (LHV). The sludge analyzed includes RAW, WAS, and scum. The results of these analyses are provided in Appendix K. Of particular interest to sizing the dryer and pyrolysis equipment was the sludge's LHV which over twenty samples collected averaged 7,983 British Thermal Units (BTUs) per pound (BTU/Ib.) with a maximum of 8,680 BTU/lb. The above 2038 maximum month sludge production estimates and the sludge analyses were used for system and equipment sizing. The system PFD with associated process flows and estimated loads for each system is provided in Figure 4. The WWTP Carbon Recovery Project proposed process modifications include replacing all equipment downstream of the DS conveyors on the solids process side of the process. The project also includes removal of the screenings compactor. In the headworks the existing screenings grinder, hopper, pumps, and screenings washings system with associated equipment and piping will be removed. Screenings removed from the influent screens will be washed and compacted at the screens and collected in a new screenings conveyor for disposal in a roll -off dumpster for offsite disposal. The description of each process element is provided in the following sections. 4.2 Dewatered Sludge Hopper and Pump The DS will be stored in a new 25 cubic yard (CY) live -bottom hopper. The new DS Hopper (T-701) was sized to store 16 hours per day of the maximum month sludge production of 15,760 lbs./day (dry Ibs.), 60 Ibs./ft3 sludge bulk density, and 26.5% solids (screw press manufacturer performance guaranteed minimum). The existing hopper, which was temporarily expanded in 2017, does not have enough capacity to accommodate the projected average sludge production at the plant. The existing hopper is also at the end of its service life despite multiple modifications. The new hopper will be equipped with a live bottom to avoid DS bridging. The hopper will be equipped with a level sensor to monitor DS production from the screw presses. The hopper will be structurally self-supporting and access to and around the hopper will be designed to not conflict with the dryer support structure described in Section 4.3. Sludge will be discharge via a twin-screw feeder (CVR-701) at the bottom of the DS hopper to a 10 gpm piston pump (DS Pump or P-701) which feeds the sludge to belt dyer distribution mechanism. The DS Pump will be installed in a similar configuration as the existing piston pump. Equipment cutsheets for the DS pump and hopper are provided in Appendix J. 20 Packet Pg. 193 I 8.2.d I DS %SO LBS/F LBS/C L-- J BELT DRYER EQUIPMENT PACKAGE NSULTANTS ABBREVIATIONS DS DFWATFRED SLUDGE 'ATER WATER GAS E 2 SSED AIR 5TE /ATER SOLUTION WATER RETURN WATER SUPPLY ILATING AIR AIR T OF COMBUSTION WATER > PER MINUTE > PER HOUR PER SQUARE INCH :ZD CUBIC FEET, PER MINUTE INDS PER HOUR INDS PER DAY AR COOLING AIR TION AIR BC LBS/HR: 252 SOLIDS; 98 Process Figure AMERESIC04 Flow Diagram Green • Clean • SustainableWWTP Carbon Recovery Project 4 May 2019 COPYRIGHT © 2018 BHC CONSULTANTS, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Packet Pg. 194 1 8.2.d City of Edmonds WWTP Carbon Recovery Project Enqineerinq Report 22 Packet Pg. 195 8.2.d City of Edmonds WWTP Carbon Recovery Project Engineering Report 4.3 Belt Dryer DS is fed at a rate of 656 lbs./hr. to the belt dryer (DR-701) extruder mechanism. The extruder evenly distributes the sludge on the belt dryer to allow for uniform drying. A 2.5 million BTUs per hour (MBTU/HR) water heater (BLR-701) uses natural gas to heat the heating water supply (HWS) which, through a heat exchanger, heats the supply air (SA), which is the sludge drying mechanism. Heating water return (HWR) is returned to the water heater for a continuous heating cycle. The water heater is equipped with its independent stack. A portion of the SA is also recycled as recycled air (RA) through the system. Approximately 9,250 standard cubic feet per minute (scfm) of foul air (FA) is produced from the system. This FA is captured in the heat recover system (HRS-701 and HTS-701) and is used to pre -heat the incoming fresh SA (see Figure 4.). As the FA is passed through the heat recovery system, it is conveyed to the existing odor control system where it is scrubbed and treated prior to discharge through the stack. The belt dryer is conservatively sized to produce 90% solids, or dry cake (DC), for the projected 2038 maximum month loading in Table 1. Despite the pyrolysis systems requiring 70-75% solids in their feed, the belt dryer was sized to be able to produce 90% Class A biosolids even when the Pyrolysis systems are offline. This conservative design approach provides an added degree of redundancy for the pyrolysis process. Typical operation of the belt dryer will include the production of approximately 80% solids. Equipment cutsheets for the dryer and major dryer subsystems are provided in Appendix J. The belt dryer and associated systems will be installed in the existing Incinerator Room of the WWTP Solids Process Building. The equipment will be supported on a new steel and/or concrete frame to be installed within the existing Incinerator Room (not shown in preliminary drawings). The new support structure will be self-supporting with its only connections to the existing building being its footings supported on the existing building foundation slab (basement floor in Incinerator Room). The support structure will be equipped with access stairs and grating to provide access and ease of maintenance of the belt dryer equipment in accordance with belt dryer manufacturer requirements. The exact design and layout of the support structure will be determined during detailed design. 4.4 Dry Cake Conveyance and Hopper DC from the belt dryer will be discharged onto a shaft -less screw conveyor system (CVR-801, CVR-802, CVR-803, CVR-804, and CVR-805) that will convey the DC to the new DC Hopper (T-801). DC conveyors are conservatively sized with a 12-inch diameter trough with wear -resistant liner and a stainless steel shaft - less screw. The conveyors will be sealed with bolted down and gasketed lids and FA will be actively removed via connections along the conveyance route. The exact locations of the FA connections and their sizes will be determined during detailed design. The conveyors will be supported off of the existing building and/or new supports will be installed. Conveyance supports will be designed to meet code and seismic requirements. The DC will be stored in a new 21 CY live -bottom hopper. The DC Hopper was sized based on the projected 2038 annual maximum month sludge production of 15,760 lbs./day (dry lbs.) at 40 lbs./ft3 bulk density and 70% solids. The belt dryer will typically produce 80% solids DC with the capability to go up to 90%; however, 70% was used to be conservative. The dry cake will be ground via an in -line grinder (G- 801) prior to discharge to the DC hopper. The DC hopper will be a cylindrical vessel with four radial shaftless screw conveyors (CVR-806, CVR-807, CVR-808 and CVR-809 ) existing the bottom horizontally. The four radial discharge screw conveyors from the DC hopper will discharge the DC to the individual day 23 Packet Pg. 196 8.2.d City of Edmonds WWTP Carbon Recovery Project Engineering Report hoppers on each pyrolysis system equipment skid. The DC hopper will be designed to discharge to four conveyors, three for the three pyrolysis systems and one for truck loadout shall the pyrolysis systems be offline. The conveyors to the pyrolysis systems will each be sized for 250 lbs./hr. with sealed connections to the DC hopper and the pyrolysis system day hoppers. Equipment cutsheets for the conveyors and DC hopper are provided in Appendix J. 4.5 Screenings Handling Modifications Screenings, due to their unique handling qualities, will be processed and handled directly at the headworks. Screenings removed by the three existing influent screens will be collected, washed, and compacted into three washer compactors. The new washer/compactors will be installed adjacent to the existing screens and will discharge washed and compacted screenings (50% solids) onto an inclined shaftless screw conveyor. The shaftless screw conveyor will discharge screenings into a 10 CY roll -off dumpster. Based on projected screenings production at the plant, this will require the disposal of one 10 CY dumpster per week at the plant based on average annual screenings production. Existing screenings handling equipment including the existing belt conveyor and enclosure, screenings grinder, screenings hopper, screenings pumps, piping, and screenings washer compactor in the Dewatering Room will be removed. Provisions in the design will be made to allow the City to perform testing of the pyrolysis process with the use of screenings. It is not anticipated that this testing will occur in the near future, but the City desires to have the ability to perform small batch testing of screenings with the pyrolysis process. The equipment cutsheets for the screenings compactors (WC-101, WC-102, WC-103) and screenings conveyor (CVR-101) are provided in Appendix J. 4.6 Pyrolysis System(s) and Bio-Char Handling The DC will be discharged equally into one of three pyrolysis systems (PYR-1, PYR-2, and PYR-3). The BFT pyrolysis system equipment information is provided in Appendix L. Each pyrolysis system can process approximately 210 to 240 dry pounds per hour based on a capacity of approximately 300 wet pounds per hour of 70 to 80% solids sludge. Assuming DC was consistently processed to produce a minimum of 73% solids product, the WWTP would reach the capacity of three (3) pyrolysis units, 720 dry pounds per hour, in 2038. The belt dryer will be capable of producing up to 90% solids, with a typical of 80%, thus providing the potential to extend the combined capacity of the three pyrolysis units beyond the 20-year planning horizon based on maximum month sludge production. At the typical 80% solids content of the DC produced from the belt dryer, three pyrolysis system will provide adequate capacity to treat the maximum month solids load to 2055 assuming a constant City growth rate of 0.5% (See Appendix F). Average solids production is not projected to exceed the capacity of three pyrolysis systems during the 20-year planning period even at the conservatively low 70%. Each pyrolysis system will produce approximately 84 lbs./hour of bio-char at 98%. A detailed technical overview of the biosolids derived bio-char (BDB) produced from the pyrolysis systems is provided in Appendix M. Given the sludge analysis performed (results provided in Appendix K), the bio-char produced at the WWTP will not exceed EPA Pollutant Concentrations or EPA Ceiling Concentrations. Furthermore, given its solids content of 98%, the bio-char produced at the WWTP will classify as a Class A biosolid. The bio-char will be discharged from each pyrolysis system to a common, shared shaft -less screw conveyor (CVR-901) sized to accommodate the total bio-char production rate of three pyrolysis systems (252 lbs./hour). The shared bio-char conveyor will discharge into a second conveyor (CVR-902) for beneficial us and/or packaging of bio-char for hauling offsite. Bio-char handling will be performed entirely within the new Pyrolysis Building. 24 Packet Pg. 197 8.2.d City of Edmonds WWTP Carbon Recovery Project Enqineerinq Report Each pyrolysis system will discharge its air emissions through a shared stack designed for a total estimated air flow of 720 scfm. Each pyrolysis system is estimated to produce, at full capacity, approximately 240 scfm at an average temperature of 115°F and 12.7% moisture content. Each system will also generate approximately 0.5 gpm of condensate that will be conveyed to the WWTP drain(s) and approximately 0.5 lb./day of ash that will require disposal offsite. 4.7 Odor Control System Modifications The existing Solid Process Building, Headworks Building and Primary Clarifiers are equipped with an odor control system. The odor control system includes a 20,000 scfm capacity chemical scrubber with two in - line centrifugal odor control fans that exhaust the air from the WWTP through an exhaust plenum adjacent to the Incinerator Room. The 2017 Sludge Dewatering Improvements project resulted in a decrease in FA flow to the odor control system. This decrease was due to the new dewatering equipment and conveyors being enclosed equipment and hard -piped to the odor control system. Prior to the Sludge Dewatering Improvements project, the entire volume of the Dewatering Room was being evacuated as the belt presses were equipped with large ventilation hoods. The WWTP Carbon Recovery Project will add approximately 8,500 scfm from the new belt dryer (see Figure 4), 100 scfm from the new DC hopper, and 100 scfm from the new DC conveyors. The 8.500 scfm from the belt dryer will be treated separately with a new chemical odor control system to be installed adjacent to the existing odor control system. The new system will be designed to use similar chemicals as the existing system and will have an independent emission point within the footprint of the Dryer room. During detail design an odor control system air balance for the existing system will be generated with the goal of connecting new equipment requiring FA connections and reducing existing air flows where possible to remain within the existing system's design flow of 20,000 scfm (400 ft/min air flow velocity). However, per the odor control system's manufacturer the existing system can be fed up to 500 feet per minute (ft/min) without lowering the hydrogen sulfide removal efficiency. The existing chemical feed system has the capacity to maintain the recommended ORP and pH at the higher flow, if required. As a result, the existing system has acceptable flow capacity and can be connected to with new ducting and connections provided that these new connections do not excessively increase system head loss. The expected air quality of the additional 8,500 scfm from the belt dryer cannot be accurately predicted or sampled given the lack of an existing installation. However, based on similar installations of similar size and type, the odor control system for the belt dryer was sized based on the following conservatively assumed air quality: ■ Odor value less than 10,000 odor units per m3 ■ NH3- average of 50 ppm, with maximum of 250 ppm ■ Amines: less than 10 ppm ■ H2S: less than 5 ppm ■ Dimethyl sulfide: average of 10 ppm, with maximum of 20 ppm ■ Mercaptans: average of 10 ppm, with maximum of 20 ppm ■ Acetone: less than 20 ppm ■ Organic carbon: average less than 3 milligrams per liter (mg/L) ■ Dust Content: less than 5 mg/m3, with average of 0.5 mg/m3 25 Packet Pg. 198 8.2.d City of Edmonds WWTP Carbon Recovery Project Engineering Report The above air quality values were provided by Centrisys. The expected air quality to the existing odor control system is expected to remain unchanged. Modifications to the existing odor control system and the design of the new belt dryer odor control system will be confirmed in detailed design. The modifications to the existing odor control system and the construction of the new belt dryer odor control system will require an amendment to the existing WWTP's air permit in accordance with PSCAA requirements (Section 9.2). 4.8 Contingency Planning This section outlines the contingency planning that was considered in the process design and equipment sizing for this project. The goal of this section is to outline the major operational contingencies that will be put in place should unforeseen equipment shutdowns occur throughout the process. This section only outlines contingency plans downstream of the dewatering operations currently in place at the WWTP. The overall process as shown in Figure 4 can be divided into major process steps, each with a contingency or set of contingencies. Each process step is described below. Sludge Dewatering a. Each screw press feed pump and in -line grinder are adequately sized to pump the flow to either screw press providing full redundancy for pumping the blended WAS and RAW sludge. b. The screw press polymer feed system is equipped with three fully redundant and conservatively -sized polymer pumps that can feed both screw presses interchangeably. c. The WWTP is equipped with two fully redundant screw presses each sized to accommodate the maximum month flow of blended WAS and RAW sludge. The WWTP has room for a future third screw press as the maximum month flow exceeds the capacity of a single press. d. Should flows increase unexpectedly, the screw press operation and associated polymer feed can be adjusted accordingly to reduce % solids of the produced IDS. The WWTP operators also have the option to store excess sludge in the unused WAS storage tank. e. The WWTP maintains a shelf spare for each manufacturer -recommended spare part for each major piece of equipment in the sludge dewatering process. f. Should both screw presses become non -operational, the WWTP can pump the blended sludge to a trailer truck for offsite disposal. 2. Dewatered Sludge Hopper and Pump a. The most likely point of failure in the two existing IDS conveyors (CVR-601 and CVR-602) are the motors, which are identical for both conveyors. The WWTP maintains a single shelf spare motor as a conveyor failure contingency plan. b. The new IDS hopper will be designed with a live -bottom mixing system. If this system fails, IDS can still feed the IDS piston pump below by gravity. In this scenario, the City operators will closely monitor IDS level in the hopper and adjust screw press operation accordingly. c. The WWTP operators also have the ability to add water to the sludge to reduce bridging caused by the sludge's plasticity. However, this will affect belt dryer performance and fuel consumption. d. The new IDS pump will be conservatively sized to pump the maximum month solids load to the belt dryer. The most likely point of failure for the IDS pump is its hydraulic power unit. The WWTP will maintain a shelf spare for each manufacturer -recommended spare part for the IDS pump as its primary contingency for IDS pumping. 0 Packet Pg. 199 8.2.d City of Edmonds WWTP Carbon Recovery Project Enqineerinq Report 3. Belt Dryer a. The WWTP will have the ability to use the IDS pump to pump IDS to a trailer truck for offsite disposal and bypass the belt dryer entirely. b. The WWTP will maintain a shelf spare for each manufacturer -recommended spare part for the belt dryer and belt dryer subsystems. The most likely point of failure on the belt dryer is the belt itself, which can be changed within a four-hour window. c. The WWTP operators also have the option to store excess sludge in the unused WAS storage tank as well as increase IDS solids % to maximize DS storage capacity as a contingency for a belt dryer or belt dryer sub -system equipment repair. 4. DC Conveyance and Hopper a. The most likely point of failure in the new DC conveyors (CVR-801, CVR-802, CVR-803, CVR- 804, and CVR-805) are the motors, which are identical for each conveyor. The WWTP will maintain a single shelf spare motor as a conveyor failure contingency plan. b. The new DC Hopper will be designed with a live -bottom mixing system. If this system fails, DC can still be fed at the bottom of the DC hopper by gravity to the pyrolysis feed conveyors (CVR- 806, CVR-807, CVR-808, and CVR-809). 5. Pyrolysis System(s) and Bio-Char Handling a. Should the pyrolysis systems be offline, the belt dryer operation can be modified to produce up to 90% Class A biosolids for disposal offsite. CVR-809 will be used to transfer the DC into a roll -off container for offsite disposal. The above contingency elements are preliminary and are subject to change during detailed design. Ultimately, the 0&M Manual prepared upon project completion will include a formal Contingency Plan addressing each unit process and piece of equipment. 5. New and Developmental Technology As pyrolysis has not been previously approved by Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) for biosolids treatment at a municipal WWTP and is not identified in the Criteria for Sewage Works Design (Ecology, August 2008) or "Orange Book", it is considered new and developmental technology, as defined by Section G1-5.4.1 of the Orange Book. As such, the technology typically is required to be thoroughly tested in a full-scale or representative pilot installation before approval can be given for construction and installation of the technology. However, per Ecology's direction (August 8, 2018 email from Stephanie Allen, Municipal Facility Manager, Water Quality Program) the pyrolysis system will not require pilot testing as it only affects the WWTP solids stream and is not responsible for effluent treatment. Additionally, the pyrolysis process proposed for the WWTP has a recent full-size installation at the Silicon Valley Clean Water facility in Redwood City, CA. This facility has been in operation for two years. Therefore, this Engineering Report satisfies the necessary requirements to evaluate potential impacts to water quality and is intended to address the Orange Book requirements for submission of data. This section provides an overview of the technology, its outputs, its applications, and its installations. This section also includes a side -by -side comparison with incineration. 27 Packet Pg. 200 8.2.d City of Edmonds WWTP Carbon Recovery Project Enqineerinq Report 5.1 Pyrolysis Overview Pyrolysis is the thermochemical decomposition of organic material at elevated temperatures in the absence of oxygen. It involves the simultaneous changes of chemical composition and physical phase and is irreversible. Pyrolysis is used heavily in industrial processes for chemical, charcoal, activated carbon, and methanol production. It can also be used to produce oil from plastics and tires. It is also used as a tool for chemical analysis (i.e. mass spectrometry and carbon-14 dating.) However, pyrolysis implementation for the treatment of municipal sewage biosolids is relatively new in the United States. The only full-scale pyrolysis system installed and in operation in the United States is located at the Silicon Valley Clean Water WWTP in Redwood City, California. This installation is the BFT pyrolysis system (P-five) which has obtained all statutory licensing and permitting from the State of California and has been operating successfully since June 2017. Further details on this facility are provided in Appendix L. Pyrolysis of organic substances produces gaseous and liquid phase products and produces a carbon rich material known as bio-char. Bio-char is defined as "a form of charcoal that is produced by exposing organic waste matter (such as wood chips, crop residue, manure or biosolids) to heat in a low -oxygen environment such as pyrolysis." Refer to Appendix M for detailed information on biosolids-derived bio-char (BDB) including bio-char physical characteristics and material properties, heavy metals leaching analysis, and bio-char uses. Heavy metals do not directly participate chemically in the pyrolysis process as the temperatures involved are not elevated enough. However, the reduction in water content of the biosolids results in an increase in heavy metals concentrations. Bio-char and biosolids testing by BFT at their Silicon Valley Clean Water WWTP facility allowed BFT to develop transformation factors for a suite of heavy metals. This same transformation factor (a ratio of the heavy metal concentration in the biosolids to the bio-char) was then applied to the City's biosolids heavy metals concentrations to estimate the likely heavy metal concentrations in the City's bio-char. For the heavy metals tested, the resulting bio-char heavy metals concentrations were below both the EPA Pollutant Concentrations (Table 3 of 40 CFR 503.13) and the EPA Ceiling Concentrations (Table 2 of 40 CFR 503.13) (see Appendix M). 5.2 Pyrolysis and Incineration — a Comparison This section provides a comparison between the existing Incinerator technology and the proposed pyrolysis system. Incineration is a process in which biosolids are burnt in a specifically designed furnace under suitable temperature and operating conditions. It is a very effective method of reducing the volume and weight of biosolids through the controlled burning of biosolids at high temperatures. The elevated temperature eliminates odors and sterilizes the biosolids while also reducing its volume. The thermal oxidation reaction within the incinerator converts the fuel source (carbon and hydrogen rich biosolids) in the presence of air into heat. For complete oxidation the biosolids, approximately 1,100 lbs. of air are required per ton of biosolids. This ratio is dependent on moisture content, LHV of biosolids and type of combustion employed. Pyrolysis is also a thermal oxidation process; however, it relies on the absence of air and the reaction occurs at lower temperatures than incineration. A side -by -side comparison of incineration and pyrolysis is provided in Table 2. Packet Pg. 201 8.2.d City of Edmonds WWTP Carbon Recovery Project Enqineerinq Report Table 2 Pyrolysis and Incineration Comparison Comparison Pyrolysis Incineration Factor Operating 600-1000 OF 2,100 — 2,700 OF Temperature Incoming Biosolid 70-75% (requires biosolids drying for typical Any (moisture content in biosolids affects Moisture % municipal applications) incinerator fuel consumption and incineration temperature) Volume & Weight Volume reduction —90% Volume reduction —90% reduction Weight reduction —50% Weight reduction —75%. Yes Yes Energy Recovery (Dependent on biosolids moisture (Dependent on biosolids moisture content) content Stabilization of Generates Class A Biosolids Generates Ash Material 98% solids content 90% plus solids content Process Air No process air and process air Approximately 1,100 lbs. of air are Treatment scrubbing required. required per ton of biosolids. Requires scrubbing of incinerator exhaust air. Due to reduction in moisture content, Elevated heavy metals concentrations Residual Heavy heavy metals concentrations will in ash. Ash does not offer beneficial Metals increase, but are below 40 CFR 503.13 use. Some heavy metals can be concentrations. discharge via incinerator stack. Fuel required for startup and if incoming Fuel required for startup and if Supplemental feedstock material is not producing incoming feedstock material is not Fuel Requirement enough gas to power the plant. producing enough gas to power the lant. 6. Temporary Biosolids Disposal The WWTP Carbon Recovery Project will require the complete replacement of the WWTP incinerator and associated subsystems. Given that this is the only permanent method of biosolids removal, a method of temporary biosolids handling will be required throughout construction of the WWTP Carbon Recovery Project. As part of the preliminary design, an evaluation of temporary biosolids disposal options was performed evaluating the feasibility and cost of the following five options for temporary biosolids disposal: ■ Landfilling DS ■ Temporary Drying of DS ■ Liquid Sludge Hauling ■ Land Application ■ Composting DS 29 Packet Pg. 202 8.2.d City of Edmonds WWTP Carbon Recovery Project Enqineerinq Report The evaluation concluded that the most economically viable and technically feasible options for the WWTP were to either temporarily landfill the IDS or to perform temporary drying of IDS onsite. Both options were comparable in cost with landfilling IDS likely being preferred as it would require less onsite modifications to house a temporary drying system. The detailed analysis on temporary biosolids disposal options is provided in Appendix N. Given the complexity and size of the project, the temporary biosolids disposal method will likely be implemented over the course of several months (anticipated construction schedule is estimated at 12 months) at the WWTP site. It is envisioned that the temporary biosolids disposal method will be implemented prior to demolition and construction activities being initiated onsite. 7. Permitting This section provides a preliminary overview of the major permitting requirements for the project and the mechanisms by which they will be addressed during the project. 7.1 Code Review/Building Permit A complete code compliance review was performed for this project with the goal of identifying relevant codes applicable to the project. This review is provided as the Code Compliance Review Tech Memo in Appendix 0. This review, which includes a comprehensive review of International, National, and City codes, was based on preliminary design layouts in Appendix I. The codes and code requirements identified will be used as a basis for the final design of the project. The code review identified Building Permit requirements, WAC and Revised Code of Washington (RCW) requirements, and City Code requirements. 7.2 Stormwater Permit Based on the preliminary design, the WWTP Carbon Recovery Project is expected to qualify as a Category 1 stormwater project. Therefore, a Stormwater Site Plan will be required. The Stormwater Site Plan will include a brief drainage report, calculations, and, at a minimum, a single plan and detail sheet showing the proposed design/approach to manage onsite stormwater. Additional requirements may include an overall Stormwater Site Plan, Site Circulation Plan, Grading Plan, and a Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control (TESC) Plan. The City will be the lead agency in acquiring and coordinating stormwater permits for this project. 7.3 Air Permit Furthermore, as part of the WWTP Carbon Recovery Project preliminary design, CCEA prepared the Permit Feasibility Study. The Permit Feasibility Study is a tech memo describing air emissions permitting requirements and anticipated permitting schedule with an outline and associated schedule for the expected project permitting milestones. The Permit Feasibility Study is provided in Appendix P. It is anticipated that the City will need to attain a new NOC and associated Order of Approval through PSCAA as part of the WWTP Carbon Recovery Project along with amendments for permitting the modified odor control system. 7.4 NPDES Permit The WWTP is operated in accordance with its NPDES Permit (Permit No. WA0024058) provided in Appendix A. The new belt dryer and pyrolysis process is anticipated to reduce the amount of wastewater sent to the WWTP drain(s) (and subsequently to the WWTP flow splitter box). The new process will generate less than 5 gpm of condensate to drain between all equipment. This flow does not include typical housekeeping wash down and other periodic maintenance flows that are also sent to the WWTP drain(s). 30 Packet Pg. 203 8.2.d City of Edmonds WWTP Carbon Recovery Project Enqineerinq Report The 5 gpm flow is a reduction from the existing incinerator system which typically discharges 180 gpm to drain through its separator and tray cooling tower and 50 gpm from the ash dewatering process. Therefore, the WWTP Carbon Recovery Project will not increase flow or loading at the WWTP and the project's implementation will allow effluent water quality to be maintained as no changes, other than the decrease in flow above, are anticipated on the liquid process side of the WWTP. As a result of these flow reductions and lack of changes to the liquid stream process of the WWTP, no NPDES Permit changes are anticipated. 7.5 Biosolids Permit The WWTP manages its biosolids under the General Permit for Biosolids Management (Permit No. BA0024058) provided in Appendix B. The new system described herein will produce bio-char, an Exceptional Quality (EQ) biosolids. An EQ biosolid is defined as a biosolid that meets low -pollutant and Class A pathogen reduction (virtual absence of pathogens) limits and that has a reduced level of degradable compounds that attract vectors (EPA 832/R-93/003 1994). EQ biosolids are considered a product that is virtually unregulated for use, whether used in bulk, or sold or given away in bags or other containers. Per the EPA, for a Biosolids to qualify as an EQ biosolid it must meet the following criteria: 1. The ceiling concentrations for pollutants in Table 2 of 40 CFR 503.13 may not be exceeded. 2. The pollutant concentration limits in Table 3 of 40 CFR 503.13 may not be exceeded. 3. One of the Class A pathogen requirements in Table 2-5 (EPA 832/R-93/003 1994). 4. One of the first eight vector attraction reduction options in Table 2-6 must be achieved (EPA 832/R- 93/003 1994). The proposed pyrolysis system will produce a bio-char product that qualifies as an EQ biosolid. Bio-char is, however, a more marketable product due to its lower odor profile and ability to retain more moisture and nutrients compared to traditional EQ biosolids. Refer to Section 5.1 and Appendix M for a discussion on how the ceiling and pollutant concentrations in 40 CFR 503.13 under criteria 1 and 2 above are not exceeded. Criteria 3 and 4 above are met as the biosolids are thermally treated via the pyrolysis process in which biosolids thermal oxidation has been carried on at 1,0220F -- (+/- 50°F) for 25 minutes. Therefore, given the nature of the end product, Ecology will issue a modified biosolids permit to reflect the changes to the system. 8. Testing Requirements Testing associated with the WWTP processes will be performed in accordance with the WWTP NPDES, biosolids, and air permit requirements listed in each individual permit. The anticipated testing requirements to be performed by the City are: Biosolids Sampling and Analysis Plan (to be prepared by the City in coordination with Ecology's Solid Waste Management Program); NPDES Permit Section S2 — Monitoring Requirements (established in the current permit and to remain unchanged for this project); Air Sampling and Testing in accordance with the requirements listed in Appendix P. As part of the preliminary design, sludge testing was performed for equipment selection and sizing (see Appendix K). This testing was performed at the request of the dryer and pyrolysis system manufacturers and was used in combination with the BOD Tech Memo in Appendix F to establish the preliminary design discussed herein. 31 Packet Pg. 204 8.2.d City of Edmonds WWTP Carbon Recovery Project Engineering Report It is anticipated that during start-up and commissioning additional performance testing of equipment will be required. These testing requirements will be determined during detailed design. Furthermore, the manufacturers will provide input on regular testing requirements once the system is fully operational with the testing goal of continually improving and optimizing system operation while reducing energy consumption and waste products. Regular testing requirements, schedule, and details will be captured in the update to the existing 0&M Manual prior to substantial completion of the project. The 0&M Manual will be prepared in accordance with the requirements of WAC 173-240-080 and Chapter G1 - General Engineering Requirements of the Orange Book. 9. Geotechnical Investigations Four geotechnical investigations have been performed at the WWTP site. The geotechnical reports, memoranda, and documentation for the investigations are provided in Appendix Q and summarized below: ■ Report of Geotechnical Investigation — Secondary Waste Water Treatment Plant, June 16, 1987 ■ Geotechnical Report and Technical Memoranda Additional Site Investigation, April 15, 1998. ■ Edmonds WWTP Phase 2 Pier Installation Letter, November 30, 1990. ■ Geotechnical Engineering Services Project C-311 - Odor Control Improvements, June 23, 2009. Each investigation was prepared by Landau and Associates (LA). As discussed in detail herein, the WWTP Carbon Recovery Project includes extensive modifications to the solids process building, all of which will occur within the existing structures and buildings. Therefore, this portion of work will not require additional geotechnical investigation(s). The project also includes the construction of the Pyrolysis Building in the existing WWTP parking lot (see Appendix I for existing site plan and Pyrolysis Building plan and sections). As part of the geotechnical investigations provided in Appendix Q, five borings (B-2, B-7, B-9, B-14, and B- 15) are within the area of the new Pyrolysis Building. The geotechnical information from these borings, along with the associated subsurface profiles (B-B, H-H, D-D, and 1-1) will be used in the Pyrolysis Building design. Therefore, no additional geotechnical investigations are necessary for the WWTP Carbon Recovery Project. 10. Staffing Requirements The City logs the number of maintenance hours required to operate its existing system. Operation of the existing incinerator requires a licensed incinerator operator to be present at all times when the incinerator is in operation. Typically, the incinerator is in operation 18 continuous hours per day. For those 18 hours, a dedicated operator is onsite operating the system. Based on 2,080 hours/year for one FTE, incinerator operation equates to approximately 3 FTEs assuming 365 days/year operation. The operator is also supported by one FTE whose time is split equally between management, electrical and instrumentation, and maintenance. Staffing requirements for the operation and maintenance of the new dryer and its associated systems will be 0.25 FTEs (520 hours per year). This total does not include part replacement, but it covers daily, weekly, monthly, and annual maintenance requirements for 24/7 dryer operation. The pyrolysis systems will each require approximately 520 hours/year for maintenance and 180 hours/year for operations. With three pyrolysis systems being installed, this equites to 1,560 hours/year for maintenance and 540 hours for operating the three systems. This equates to a total of 2,100 hours per year or approximately 1 FTE. These estimated may vary and are based on 24/7 operation of the biosolids drying and pyrolysis systems. 32 Packet Pg. 205 8.2.d City of Edmonds WWTP Carbon Recovery Project Engineering Report The WWTP Carbon Recovery Project is being designed to also allow for a future fourth pyrolysis system to be installed bringing the total annual labor hours total to 2,800, which equates to 1.3 FTEs. Based on this preliminary assessment of existing incinerator 0&M staffing and projected staffing needs for the dryer/pyrolysis system, the WWTP Carbon Recovery Project is expected to reduce staffing requirements by 1.5 FTEs. These FTEs will be reassigned to support other tasks at the WWTP. These estimates are conservative as they do not account for resource sharing with other activities at the plant, such as sludge dewatering. Staffing requirements to operate and maintain the new conveyance system and hoppers is not included in these staffing estimates. 11. Project Schedule and Sequencing The preliminary project schedule based on the preliminary design information herein is provided in Table 3 below. Table 3 Preliminary Project Schedule Estimated Construction Timeline Task/Milestone/Phase Description Estimated Start/End Dates Perform 100% level design floc's, site surveying, Regulatory permit applications PSCAA, Ecology) Jan. 2019 — Dec. 2019 Building Permit Application Fee (Estimated Cost), Consultant — air permitting, regulatory Feb. 2019 — Dec. 2019 Bonding Mar. 2020 — Apr. 2020 Equipment procurement phase 1 of 2 Jan. 2020 — Jun. 2020 Construction mobilization; site work, materials procurement Apr. 2020 — Dec. 2020 Biosolids Hauling and Sludge Diversion to Other Plants Nov. 2020 — Aug. 2021 Equipment procurement phase 2 of 2 Jan. 2021 — Jun. 2021 Construction; site work, materials, etc. Jan. 2021 — Jul. 2021 Construction management, site supervision, construction administration, safety consultants, community outreach, etc. Jan. 2020 — Dec. 2021 Substantial completion, system checkout/startup/Commissioning Aug. 2021 — Dec. 2021 Validation: Bio-char/Pyrolysis Jun. 2021 — Dec. 2021 Preliminary design will conclude with approval of this Engineering Report and inclusion of Ecology and public comments received during the Engineering Report review process and the public comment period to occur in the first half of 2019. The proposed construction sequence for the project includes the following major work elements: Modification of existing facilities to accommodate offsite disposal of DS. o Includes reduction of flows by 30% via diversion to King County to reduce solids loading temporarily. o Includes temporary odor control provisions to minimize odors associated with the transfer and shipment offsite of DS. o Includes piping modifications to pump DS from DS hopper to truck trailers. 33 Packet Pg. 206 8.2.d City of Edmonds WWTP Carbon Recovery Project Engineering Report ■ Installation of new screenings washer compactors and conveyors and initiate offsite disposal of screenings. ■ Shutdown and decommissioning of incinerator and ancillary systems. ■ Demolition of incinerator and ancillary systems. o Includes demolition of incinerator vessels, piping, access platforms, and electrical and controls equipment. o Includes demolition of ash handling system including pumps, thickener, piping, and electrical and controls equipment. ■ Replacement of existing DS hopper and DS transfer piston pump with new piston pump and hopper. ■ Installation of belt dryer and ancillary systems. o Includes installation of belt dryer structural support frame. o Includes building modifications necessary for the installation of the belt dryer and associated system. o Includes installation of odor control system modifications. o Belt dryer startup and commissioning. ■ Installation of temporary conveyance to accommodate offsite disposal of DC from belt dryer and replace offsite shipment of DS with DC (Class A biosolid) to reduce truck traffic at WWTP. ■ Installation of new Pyrolysis Building and pyrolysis systems with conveyance. o Includes existing site modifications to include new building. o Includes installation of new conveyance system and DC hopper. ■ Initiate feed of DC to pyrolysis systems and ceasing offsite landfilling of the DC. ■ Complete start-up and commissioning of pyrolysis systems and initiate completed system operation. The above sequence is preliminary and subject to change. The above list is not intended to capture all engineering disciplines as they are assumed to be shared as required among the several stages of work outlined above. The above sequence was developed based on the understanding of the WWTP site layout and operations and with the goal of minimizing impacts to WWTP staff and facilities and reducing the amount of time that will be required to temporarily dispose of biosolids during construction. 12. Preliminary Opinion of Probable Project Costs A preliminary American Association of Cost Engineers (AACE) Class 4 OPCC (expected accuracy ranges from -30% to +50%) applicable to a preliminary, or 15% design, was prepared as part of this Report for each alternative as presented in Section 3 herein. The OPCC for the recommended Alternative 3 (dryer and pyrolysis) improvements is approximately $19.7 million. The OPCC is provided in Appendix R. In addition to the capital cost, a 50-year 0&M cost present worth was calculated. It is estimated that the annual 0&M costs will be approximately $365,000, which at a 3% effective interest rate over 50 years equates to a present worth annual 0&M cost estimated at $33,307,000 (see Appendix R). The 0&M cost includes annual power cost, maintenance labor, and general maintenance and permitting costs. This cost may vary based on power costs and changing interest rates. 34 Packet Pg. 207 8.2.e ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF ECC SECTION 7.30.030 WATER RATES - METER INSTALLATION CHARGES, RELATING TO UTILITY RATES OF WATER SUPPLIED THROUGH METERS, THE PROVISIONS OF ECC SECTION 7.30.040 UTILITY CHARGES - SANITARY SEWER, RELATING TO UTILITY RATES OF UNMETERED SANITARY SEWER SERVICES, AND THE PROVISIONS OF ECC 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 three enterprise utility operations which incorporate potable water distribution, sanitary sewer conveyance and wastewater treatment, and storm and surface water management functions; and WHEREAS, the Engineering Division of the Public Works & Utilities Department recently commissioned a utility rate analysis of its three enterprise utility operations, which analysis was performed by FCS Group of Redmond, Washington; and WHEREAS, the city council has received utility rate study reports of the consultants 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 needed replacement of failing utility infrastructure; and WHEREAS, In Lane v. City of Seattle, 164 Wn.2d 875 (2008), the state Supreme Court determined that public fire protection was a governmental service that could not be recovered through water rates; and WHEREAS, providing for fire hydrants is a general governmental function, for which the City is responsible; and Packet Pg. 208 8.2.e WHEREAS, the tax on the public water utility may be used to pay for fire hydrants, as well as other general government functions; and WHEREAS, in 2009, the city council found that the water utility tax rate referenced above needed to be increased to address the city's then inability under Lane to fund the provision of fire hydrants through water rates; and WHEREAS, in 2013, the legislature provided additional options for funding fire hydrants by providing new authority to use water rates for fire suppression purposes as set forth in chapter 70.315 RCW; and WHEREAS, in 2016, the city council simultaneously considered a companion ordinance that proposed to decrease the tax rate on the water utility under the assumption that funding for fire hydrants would be included within the utility rates; and WHEREAS, the city council held a public hearing on these companion ordinances on November 15, 2016; and WHEREAS, the action of a city council in setting water utility rates, where the system is financed by revenue bonds, is not subject to referendum because the grant of power to set rates when revenue bonds have been used to create the utility is to the city council (State ex rel. Haas v. Pomeroy, 50 Wn.2d 23 (1957)); 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. Subsections A and B of the Edmonds City Code 7.30.030, entitled "Water rates — Meter installation charges," are hereby amended to read as follows: A. Base Rate. The bimonthly rates of water supplied through meters shall be fixed at the following levels: Packet Pg. 209 8.2.e Effective Date Current 1/1/2020 1/1/2021 1/1/2022 Single Family Residence (per unit) $ 37.14 $ 38.81 $ 40.56 $ 42.38 Duplex Apt Houses, condos and other multi unit Residences (per unit) $ 32.71 $ 34.18 $ 35.72 $ 37.33 Effective Date Current Meter 1/1/2020 1/1/2021 1/1/2022 All other customers $ 44.91 3/4" $ 46.93 $ 49.04 $ 51.25 $ 91.43 1" $ 95.54 $ 99.84 $ 104.34 $ 169.07 1.5" $ 176.68 $ 184.63 $ 192.94 $ 257.76 2" $ 269.36 $ 281.48 $ 294.15 $ 556.06 3" $ 581.08 $ 607.23 $ 634.56 $ 787.66 4" $ 823.10 $ 860.14 $ 898.85 $ 1,597.48 6" $ 1,669.37 $ 1,744.49 $ 1,822.99 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 Date Variable Rate Current 1/1/2020 1/1/2021 1/1/2022 $ 3.87 $ 4.04 $ 4.23 $ 4.42 All water base rate and variable 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. Subsection A of the Edmonds City Code 7.30.040, entitled "Utility charges - Sanitary sewer," is hereby amended to read as follows: A. The following rates shall be charged on all billings after the effective date shown with respect to the following customers and/or service: a Packet Pg. 210 8.2.e Effective Date Current 1/1/2020 1/1/2021 1/1/2022 Single Family Residence (bimonthly per unit) connected $ 87.30 $ 91.67 $ 96.25 $ 101.06 unconnected $ 14.10 $ 14.81 $ 15.55 $ 16.32 Duplex, apartment houses, condos, and other multi unit residences (bi-monthly per unit) connected $ 70.14 $ 73.65 $ 77.33 $ 81.20 unconnected $ 14.10 $ 14.81 $ 15.55 $ 16.32 Duplex, apartment houses, condos, and other multi unit residences (monthly per unit) connected $ 35.07 $ 36.82 $ 38.66 $ 40.60 unconnected $ 7.05 $ 7.40 $ 7.77 $ 8.16 All other customers (monthly per unit) Fixed Rate 4.96 $ 5.21 $ 5.47 $ 5.74 Volume Charge (per ccf)* 1 5.621 $ 5.90 $ 6.20 1 $ 6.51 *per 100 cubic feet (1 unit) of metered water consumption. Section 3. Subsection A of the Edmonds City Code 7.50.050, entitled "Stormwater rates and charges," is hereby amended to read as follows: A. The following rates shall be charged on all billings with respect to the following customers and/or service: Category Current Single Family Residential and Multi Family Residential Bimonthly Billing Cycle $ Montly Billing Cycle $ All other customers per ESU (monthly cycle) $ Effective Date 1/1/2020 1/1/2021 1/1/2022 34.35 $ 37.61 $ 41.19 $ 45.10 17.18 $ 18.81 $ 20.60 $ 22.56 17.18 $ 18.81 $ 20.60 $ 22.56 Packet Pg. 211 8.2.e Section 4. 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 5 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 DAVE EARLING ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: IM JEFF TARADAY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. Packet Pg. 212 8.2.e SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the day of , 2019, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF ECC SECTION 7.30.030 WATER RATES - METER INSTALLATION CHARGES, RELATING TO UTILITY RATES OF WATER SUPPLIED THROUGH METERS, THE PROVISIONS OF ECC SECTION 7.30.040 UTILITY CHARGES - SANITARY SEWER, RELATING TO UTILITY RATES OF UNMETERED SANITARY SEWER SERVICES, AND THE PROVISIONS OF ECC 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 , 2019. 4840-7251-8158, v. 1 0 CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY Packet Pg. 213 8.3 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 12/10/2019 Resolution Updating Development Fees Staff Lead: Shane Hope Department: Development Services Preparer: Michelle Martin Background/History The City adopts development fees by Council Resolution. The last overall fee update was completed in 2016. At its November 12 meeting, the City Council's Finance Committee reviewed and discussed the planned update. Although the specific fee schedule was not provided at that time, the general concept of increasing most fees by ten percent (including the hourly rate) and simplifying a few fees was discussed. The Committee approved moving the detailed schedule and resolution forward to the full Council for action. Staff Recommendation Adopt the fee resolution. Narrative The City adopts its fees by resolution. Minor updates occur periodically, with more substantive reviews and updates occurring every three years. The last substantive update was done at the end of 2016, three years ago. The past two years, the State Auditors reviewed development revenues against expenditures, with the goal of assuring that permit revenues did not exceed expenditures and that expenditures were allowable under state law. The Auditors concluded that the City was meeting state requirements. After a review of our current fee schedule and the revenues received, staff has concluded that only relatively minor updates need to be done at this time. Updates include: Increasing the Technology Fee from $35 to $40. Increasing the hourly rate from $100 to $110 per hour of staff time (which has a ripple effect in producing minor increases throughout the fee schedule where fees are based on staff time). Minor adjustments to fee descriptions to improve clarity or to reflect code changes or process changes. A resolution has been prepared by the City Attorney to implement the development fee schedule update, effective January 15, 2020. See attached resolution and fee schedule. Attachments: Dev.Fees. Resolution.Jan.2020 FEE UPDATE 2020 FOR COUNCIL EX -A Packet Pg. 214 8.3.a RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING A NEW FEE SCHEDULE FOR THE CITY'S DEVELOPMENT -RELATED FEES AND CHARGES FOR SERVICES. WHEREAS, ECDC 15.00.020 provides for the establishment and amendment of certain fees charged by the city by resolution; and WHEREAS, extensive effort has been made by city staff to analyze the full costs associated with city permitting and service activities; and WHEREAS, the city council has previously established and affirms as its goal that permit fees shall be set to cover the costs of processing and issuing permits and requests for service; WHEREAS, the city council adopted Resolution 1415 in 2018, which adopted a schedule of fees to be charged in relation to development activity; and WHEREAS, this resolution is intended to replace Resolution 1415; now therefore, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The fees and charges for services set forth in the schedule attached as Exhibit A to this Resolution, which is incorporated herein by this reference, are hereby adopted, along with the referenced tables which are also included therein, and shall be effective on and after January 15, 2020. Section 2. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this resolution or any fee or charge for service adopted or amended hereby 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, or any fee or charge adopted or amended hereby. Section 3. Resolution 1415 shall have no further effect as of January 15, 2020 as the fees adopted by Resolution 1415 are being replaced by the fees adopted herein. RESOLVED this day of , 2019. CITY OF EDMONDS MAYOR, DAVE EARLING Packet Pg. 215 8.3.a ATTEST: CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: RESOLUTION NO. Packet Pg. 216 I 8.3.b I FEES ASSOCIATED WITH DEVELOPMENT 'r-11 C. 1 S C) v Building —Engineering —Planning -Fire 121 5t" Ave N, Edmonds WA 98020 425.771.0220 FINAL DRAFT 12.04.19 FOR 2020 Packet Pg. 217 1 I 8.3.b I GENERAL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PERMIT FEES Building / Planning / Engineering / Fire City Technology Fee for each permit application.................................................................................. $40.00 Credit Card Transaction Fee.......................................................................................................................... 3% Development Review Committee Meeting.................................................................................................. $0 Pre -Application Meeting................................................................................................................... $1,000.00 (50% applied toward future plan check fee for that specific project only) Recording Fee (for recording documents with Snohomish County) ......................... Recording Cost + $110.00 Violation Compliance Fee................................................................................ $250.00 or up to 5x Permit Fee Residential State Building Code Surcharge Fee..................................................................................... $6.50 .................................................................................................................. Each additional dwelling unit $2.00 Commercial State Building Code Surcharge Fee................................................................................... $25.00 .................................................................................................................. Each additional dwelling unit $2.00 (not applicable to certain minor permits such as plumbing, mechanical, re -roof) PLAN REVIEW & INSPECTION FEES: Plan review is calculated at 85% of the building permit fee and includes up to 3 reviews per division/ department. Commercial/ Multi -family/ Residential: Plan review fee includes Building, Planning, Fire & Engineering reviews General plan review fee per reviewing department/division....................................... $110.00/hr (1 hr min.) plus peer review fee if applicable Plan review for re -submittals after the 3rd review.......................................................................... $110.00/hr Development Project Peer Review (Peer Review)................................................................................ $110.00 plus cost of consultant review fee charged for outside consultant peer review services when City staff lacks the expertise to review a specific project or aspect of a project. General Inspection Fee per department/division............................................................................$110.00/ea Re -Inspection Fee.............................................................................................................................$110.00/ea Engineering Inspection Fee*............................................................................ 3.3% of Value of Improvements *Applies to Civil Site Improvements, such as Subdivisions, Commercial & Multi -Family Permits Stormwater Engineer Review Fee................................................................................................... $130.00/hr Transportation Engineer Review Fee.............................................................................................. $130.00/hr Utility Engineer Review Fee............................................................................................................ $130.00/hr REFUNDS: The City may authorize refunding of any permit fee paid which was erroneously paid or collected. The City may authorize refunding of not more than 80 percent of the permit fee paid when no work has been done under a permit issued in accordance with the applicable code(s). The City may also refund not more than 80 percent of the plan review fee paid when an application for a permit for which a plan review fee has been paid is withdrawn or canceled before any plan reviewing is done. Refunds shall not be granted of any fee on an expired permit. Any application for a refund must be made in writing and describe the circumstances to justify. Refunds for permit fees covered by 19.70.025 ECDC may be authorized by the Building Official. The Planning Manager may authorize refunds of Planning fees or service charges. The City Engineer may authorize refunds of Engineering fees or service charges. Packet Pg. 218 1 I 8.3.b I BUILDING PERMIT FEES Accessory Dwelling Unit Compliance (ADU).......................................................................................... $405.00 Adult Family Home Compliance(AFH)................................................................................................... $550.00 Alternate Methods Review........................................................................................ $110.00/hr + Peer Review Appeal of Building Official Interpretation.............................................................................................. $970.00 Cellular Communication and Facilities................................................................................................... TABLE 1 Changeof Use......................................................................................................................................... $510.00 Demolition (Residential Primary Structure)........................................................................................... $300.00 Demolition (Commercial Primary Structure).......................................................................................... $500.00 Demolition (Secondary Structure or Interior Only)................................................................................. $150.00 Dock/Marina/Floats...............................................................................................................$200.00+TABLE 1 Fence...................................................................................................................................................... $100.00 Hot Tub/Spa (Single-Family)................................................................................................................... $200.00 Manufactured Coach Installation - Commercial (Federal HUD Label) ................................................... $500.00 Manufactured Home Installation (Federal HUD Label).......................................................................... $550.00 ParkingLot.............................................................................................................................$200.00+TABLE 1 Re -roof (Commercial)......................................................Valuation based on $2.00 per square foot +TABLE 1 Re -roof (Residential - includes sheathing).............................................................................................. $100.00 Retaining Wall (Commercial).......................................................................................... $740.00 + Peer Review Retaining Wall (Residential)............................................................................................ $300.00 + Peer Review Solar/Photovoltaic (Residential)............................................................................................................. $120.00 Solar/Photovoltaic (Commercial) - Valuation does not include cost of solar panels or inverters......... TABLE 1 Swimming Pool (Pre -manufactured, above ground).............................................................................. $120.00 Swimming Pool (In-Ground)................................................................................................................... TABLE 1 Temporary Certificate of Occupancy (Commercial Only — valid for 60 days) ........................................ $330.00 SIGNS: Sign (Per sign excluding specific sign categories listed below).............................................................. $165.00 Blade Sign (Includes all blade signs in proposal)............................................................................................. $0 Pedestrian Sign (Includes all pedestrian signs in proposal)..................................................................... $80.00 PoleSign(persign)................................................................................................................................. $825.00 Murals (Includes all murals in a proposal)............................................................................................. $165.00 *Planning ADB Design Review may apply ESLHA DESIGNATED PROPERTIES: Additional fees associated with development in the North Edmonds Earth Subsidence Landslide Hazard Area (ESLHA) ESLHA Administrative Fee.................................................................................................................$2,385.00 ESLHA Consultant Review....................................................................Full cost of review is paid by applicant. Deposit at Application for Peer Completeness Review................................................................... $500.00 Deposit at Full Application............................................................................................................ $2,500.00 Deposit at Re -submittal if additional Peer Review is needed ...................................................... $1,500.00 ESLHA Minor Project Administrative Processing Fee........................................................................... $300.00 ESLHASubmittal Packet......................................................................................................................... $15.00 N m m LL c a� E a 0 am W 0 a� c r 0 a c 0 0 N N Packet Pg. 219 1 I 8.3.b I MECHANICAL PERMITS: BASE PERMIT FEE: .................................................................................................................................. $50.00 UNIT FEE SCHEDULE: For the installation or relocation of each: FURNACE - Forced -air or gravity -type, including ducts and appliance vents ........................................ $30.00 AIR HANDLER- Including ducts (Diffusers, blowers, etc.) Up to and including 10,000 cfm (4719 L/s)..................................................................................... $30.00 Over 10,000 cfm (4719 L/s) including ducts.................................................................................... $40.00 GAS HEATER - Suspended, recessed wall or floor -mounted unit.......................................................... $30.00 HYDRONIC HEATING SYSTEM............................................................................................................... $150.00 APPLIANCE VENT- (Type B, BW, L gas vent, etc.).................................................................................. $15.00 INCINERATOR.......................................................................................................................................... $50.00 VENTILATION AND EXHAUST Fan connected to single duct (Bath, laundry, kitchen exhaust, etc.) .............................................. $15.00 Each system which is not a portion of any heating or air-conditioning system ............................. $15.00 HOOD - Type 1, Type 2, Fume Hood including ducts..........................................................................$150.00 GAS PIPING: (New or relocated) Gas -Piping systems of 1 to 5 outlets..................................................................................................... $30.00 Each additional outlet over 5................................................................................................................... $5.00 BOILER OR COMPRESSOR Up to and including 50 HP (176 KW)..................................................................................................... $50.00 Over50 HP (176 kW)........................................................................................................................... $100.00 ABSORPTION SYSTEM, AIR CONDITIONING SYSTEM OR HEAT PUMP Up to and including 1,750,000 Btu/h (512.9 kW)................................................................................. $50.00 Over 1,750,000 Btu/h (512.9 kW).......................................................................................................$100.00 OTHER FEES: Commercial Plan review hourly fee................................................................................................$110.00/hr Each appliance or piece of equipment regulated by the IMC for which no other fee is listed (Fire dampers, ductless mini- split systems, etc.).......................................................... $30.00 Packet Pg. 220 1 I 8.3.b I PLUMBING PERMITS: BASE PERMIT FEE: ....................................................................................................................................... $50.00 UNIT FEE SCHEDULE: For the installation, alteration, repair, addition or relocation of each: ....................................................... $15.00 Plumbing fixture (on one trap or a set of fixtures on one trap) Drain w/in footprint of building (rainwater systems, roof deck drains, etc.) Water Heater (includes expansion tank) Re -pipe - Drain, vent or water piping (each fixture served) Water Service Line (replacement or repair) For the installation, alteration, repair, addition or relocation of each: Water treating equipment (water softener).......................................................................................... $35.00 Backflow protective device - 2" and smaller......................................................................................... $35.00 Backflow protective device - Over 2".................................................................................................... $45.00 Graywater system or reclaimed water system (in addition to fixture fee) ........................................... $65.00 Non -grease waste pre-treatment interceptor (oil/water separator, etc.) .......................................... $110.00 Medical gas piping system serving 1 to 5 inlet/outlet(s) for a specific gas.........................................$110.00 Each additional medical gas inlet/outlet............................................................................................ $15.00 Grease Trap (HGI Inside Building)......................................................................................................... $220.00 Gravity Grease Interceptor (GGI))........................................................................................................ $770.00 OTHER FEES: Commercial plan review fee hourly fee......................................................................................... $110.00/hr IMPACT FEES PARK IMPACT FEES: Single-Family........................................................................................................ $2,734.05 per Dwelling Unit Multi-Family......................................................................................................... $2,340.16 per Dwelling Unit Non -Residential Development......................................................................................$1.34 per square foot Residential Administrative Fee................................................................................................................$50.00 Commercial Administrative Fee............................................................................................................$100.00 TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES: Refer to City Code & Handouts to calculate impact fee. The following applies in addition to impact fee: Residential Administrative Fee................................................................................................................$50.00 Commercial Administrative Fee............................................................................................................$100.00 Independent Fee Calculation —Transportation Engineer Review ...................................................... $260.00 plus peer review fee as applicable. Packet Pg. 221 1 I 8.3.b I GRADING PERMIT FEES PLAN REVIEW: CUBICYARDS PLAN REVIEW FEE 50 cubic yards or less $55.00 (when located in a designated critical area) 51 to 100 cubic yards $110.00 101 to 1,000 cubic yards $220.00 1,001 to 10,000 cubic yards $440.00 10,001 to 100,000 cubic yards $440.00 for the first 10,000 cubic yards, plus $110.00 for each additional 10,000 yards or fraction thereof. 100,001 to 200,000 cubic yards $1,430.00 for the first 100,000 cubic yards, plus $110.00 for each additional 10,000 cubic yards or fraction thereof. 200,001 cubic yards or more $2,530.00 for the first 200,000 cubic yards, plus $110.00 for each additional 10,000 cubic yards or fraction thereof. PERMIT FEE: CUBIC YARDS PERMIT FEE Base Permit Fee $35.00 50 cubic yards or less $110.00 (when located in a designated critical area) 51 to 100 cubic yards $110.00 101 to 1,000 cubic yards $110.00 for the first 100 cubic yards, plus $25.00 for each additional 100 cubic yards, or fraction thereof. 1,001 to 10,000 cubic yards $335.00 for the first 1,000 cubic yards, plus $45.00 for each additional 1,000 cubic yards, or fraction thereof. 10,001 to 100,000 cubic yards $740.00 for the first 10,000 cubic yards, plus $65.00 for each additional 10,000 cubic yards or fraction thereof. 100,001 cubic yards or more $1,325.00 for the first 100,000 cubic yards, plus $100.00 for each additional 10,000 cubic yards or fraction thereof. d d ILL c m E C. O m d C c W cc C. c 0 N 0 .N d a w J_ 0 Z O U w O ILL N O N W t— a 0 d LU w ILL d t 0 cc Q Packet Pg. 222 1 I 8.3.b I FIRE PERMIT FEES FIRE SPRINKLER PERMITS: Residential IRC Structures New Residential Fire Sprinkler Systems.............................................................................................. $300.00 Residential Fire Sprinkler System Alteration........................................................................................ $200.00 Commercial & Multi -Family Fire Sprinkler Systems Newsystems........................................................................................................................ $300.00 + TABLE 1 Modifications: 1 to 5 sprinklers.................................................................................................................................... $250.00 6 to 25................................................................................................................................................... $500.00 26 or more........................................................................................................................... $300.00 + TABLE 1 Additional inspections/plan review as required..............................................................................$110.00/hr FIRE ALARM PERMITS: New fire alarm system........................................................................................................ $300.00 + TABLE 1 Emergency Responders Radio System (DAS)..................................................................... $100.00+TABLE 1 Modifications: 1 to 5 initiating devices, Communicator (AES, Cellular)..................................................................... $250.00 6 to 25, including panel replacement...................................................................................................$500.00 26 or more........................................................................................................................... $300.00 + TABLE 1 Additional inspections/plan review as required..............................................................................$110.00/hr TANK PERMITS: Residential fill, remove or install (per each)......................................................................................... $200.00 Commercial fill, remove or install (per each).......................................................................................$450.00 OTHER FIRE PERMITS: Fire Suppression Systems: Commercial Hood Suppression System (per system)....................................................................$325.00 Standpipe........................................................................................................................................ $450.00 FireConnection..................................................................................................................................... $500.00 FireOperational...................................................................................................................................$100.00 Fire fees include plan review and inspections. d d u_ c m a 0 m d C a� c cc a c 0 0 0 U) d Packet Pg. 223 1 I 8.3.b I PLANNING AND LAND USE FEES GENERAL: Type I (Staff decisions, no notice)........................................................................................................... $275.00 Type 11 A (Staff decisions with notice).................................................................................................... $970.00 Type IIIA (ADB/Hearing Examiner)........................................................... Hearing Examiner Cost + $2,000.00 Type IIIB (Hearing Examiner)...................................................................... Hearing Examiner Cost + $2,000.00 Type IV (Rezone, Development Agreement)....................................................................................... $7,000.00 Type V (Plan & Edmonds Community Development Code Amendments) .......................................... $7,000.00 LotLine Adjustment............................................................................................................................ $1,050.00 Short Subdivision Preliminary Approval.............................................................................................. $3,225.00 Short Subdivision Civil Plan Review..................................................................................................... $3,050.00 Short Subdivision Final Approval......................................................................................................... $1,590.00 Subdivision Preliminary Approval.............................................................. Hearing Examiner Cost + $6,510.00 Subdivision Civil Plan Review.............................................................................................................. $4,670.00 Subdivision Final Approval................................................................................................................. $1,590.00 ModificationRequest............................................................................................................................. $970.00 Minor Change to Approved Plat............................................................................................................. $275.00 Major Change to Approved Plat..................................................................... Same as Original Application Fee PRDPreliminary Approval................................................................................................................... $6,510.00 PRDFinal Approval.............................................................................................................................. $1,590.00 ADB Design Review —Signs .................................................................................................................... $970.00 Staff Design Review if project exceeds SEPA threshold......................................................................... $970.00 Landscape Plan Inspection Fee...................................................................................................1% of Estimate SEPAReview........................................................................................................................................... $740.00 SEPA Planned Action Compliance Review (Hwy 99).............................................................................. $275.00 EISReview..................................................................................................................................................... Cost Outdoor Dining, Amateur Radio............................................................................................................. $275.00 Critical Areas Checklist Application........................................................................................................ $110.00 Critical Areas Checklist Update................................................................................................................ $55.00 Critical Areas Variance / Reasonable Use Application ............................... Hearing Examiner Cost + $7,640.00 Critical Areas Study Admin.............................................................................................. $110.00/hr (min. 1 hr) Critical Areas Contingent Review (See ECDC 23.40.195 for more detail on fees) ................................ $970.00 Shoreline Contingent Review (See ECDC 24.80.100)............................................................................. $970.00 Planning Fee not categorized............................................................................................................ $110.00/hr Request for Reconsideration.................................................................................................................. $275.00 Note: When an application is heard by the Hearing Examiner (HE), the cost of the hearing is billed to the applicant. APPEALS: Appeal of Staff Decision (Type I, II or Hearing Examiner)...................................................................... $450.00 Appeal of Type IIIB Decision to City Council.......................................................................................... $550.00 Appeal of Notice of Civil Violation.......................................................................................................... $970.00 ADB = Architectural Design Board HE = Hearing Examiner SEPA = State Environmental Policy Act EIS = Environmental Impact Statement PRD = Planned Residential Development Packet Pg. 224 1 I 8.3.b I ENGINEERING FEES MISCELLANEOUS FEES: Backflow Prevention Compliance Fee ........................ Developers Agreements ............................................. Fire/ Aid Sign Address Fabrication Fee ....................... Street Sign Fabrication Fee ......................................... Water and Sewer Availability Letters .......................... Latecomers Agreement ............................................... LID Sewer Agreement ................................................. Variance from Underground Wiring .......................... GENERAL FACILITY CHARGES: • Water GFC's are based on meter size: .......................... $165.00 .......................... $220.00 + $110.00/hr + City Attorney Fees ..................... $100.00/ea ..................... $200.00/ea ....................... $65.00/ea .......................... $220.00 + $110.00/hr + City Attorney Fees .......................... $220.00 + $110.00/hr + City Attorney Fees .......................... $330.00 + $110.00/hr + City Attorney Fees Water and sewer GFC's shall be paid by each new customer connecting to the utility systems. Storm GFC's shall be paid by the applicant for ESU's added or created by development. Meter Size General Facility Charge 3/" $5,050.00 1" $12, 624.00 11/2 " $25,248.00 2" $40,397.00 GFC's for Single Family Residences only: Fee is based on meter size required for domestic demand (typically Y4") GFC shall not be based on meter upsizing for fire sprinkler system only. • Sewer Utility GFC........................................................... $4,417.00 per ERU A single family residential development = 1.0 ERU per dwelling unit A multifamily residential development = .67 ERU per dwelling unit Applicants for non-residential development shall pay a GFC equal to the ERU determination that is made by the Public Works Director. • Stormwater Management GFC........................................ $799.00 per ESU A single family residential development with up to 5,000 sf hard surface area = 1.0 ESU All other construction calculated according to a ratio of 1.0 ESU per 3,000 sq ft of new, replaced or new plus replaced impervious surface area. Packet Pg. 225 1 I 8.3.b I RIGHT-OF-WAY FEES: Right -of -Way Construction Permit..................................$330.00 + Inspection Fees Right -of Way Minor Construction Permit ......................$110.00 + Inspection Fees Street Restoration for Water Meter Installation .........$1,000.00 + Street Overlay Cut Penalty Fee if applicable (Excluding Private Development Projects) Street Overlay Cut Penalty Fee......................................$220.00 + ROW Permit Fees + Add'I per SQYD charge times overlay cut multiplier Encroachment Permit....................................................$330.00 + Recording Fees Street Use Permit............................................................$110.00 + Bistro Dining Fees if applicable Bistro Dining Fees..............................................................$30.00 Annual Fee + Monthly ROW Use Fee @ $0.50/ SQ FT x 12.84% (leasehold tax) Alley, Sidewalk, Parking Disruption/ Closure Fees .......... $220.00 + ROW Permit + Monthly Closure Fees Closure fees charged for any activity that occupies or closes, sidewalks, parking spaces(s), parking lanes(s) or other paved area of a street/road for more than 72 hours. Monthly portion of Fee [$ per month] = 1% of assessed value per square foot of abutting property x right of way area [SF] disrupted/closed. If disruption/closure affects any portion of the area of a parking space, the area of disruption closure is calculated based upon the area of a full parking space. SEWER FEES: General New Commercial & Multi-Family....................................$220.00 + Inspection Fees Facility New Single Family...........................................................$110.00 + Inspection Fees Charges May Apply Repair - Full Line Replacement.......................................$110.00 + Inspection Fees Repair - Partial Line Replacement...................................$110.00 (Includes 1 inspection +Add'I Inspection Fees, if applicable) Special Conditions (Grinder Pumps, Ejectors).................$110.00 + Sewer Fees + Utility Engineer Review Drainage Permit (Pool, Hot Tub, Jacuzzi)..........................$55.00 Each Occurrence STORMWATER FEES: Stormwater Permit..........................................................$330.00 + General Inspection Fees WATER METER FEES: Meter Size Meter Fee Installation of New Service & Meter* 3/4" $2,920.00 1" $2,970.00 1%" $6,220.00 2" $6,390.00 *General Facility Charges may apply GFC = General Facility Charge ESU = Equivalent Service Unit ROW = Right of Way ERU = Equivalent Residential Unit Packet Pg. 226 1 8.3.b ICC VALUATION TABLE August 2019 Adopted by City of Edmonds effective Jan 1, 2020 roup (2018 International Building Co to A-1 Assembly, theaters, with stage 246.61 238.50 232.82 223.18 209.86 203.80 216.12 191.69 184.50 Li A-1 Assembly, theaters, without stage 225.65 217.54 211.85 202.22 189.15 183.09 195.16 170.98 163.79 C d E A-2 Assembly, nightclubs 191.96 186.56 182.12 174.70 164.94 160.39 168.64 149.29 144.33 CIL A-2 Assembly, restaurants, bars, O 190.96 185.56 180.12 173.70 162.94 159.39 167.64 147.29 143.33 banquet halls N A-3 Assembly, churches 226.69 218.58 212.89 203.26 191.60 185.54 196.20 173.43 166.24 A-3 Assembly, general, community halls, O 190.63 182.52 175.84 167.20 153.09 148.07 160.14 134.97 128.78 -W libraries, museums to A-4 Assembly, arenas 224.65 216.54 209.85 201.22 187.15 182.09 194.16 168.98 162.79 Q. B Business 197.81 190.62 184.70 175.70 160.65 154.63 168.95 141.15 134.99 O E Educational 207.77 200.59 194.83 186.43 173.71 164.91 180.01 151.89 147.25 O O F-1 Factory and industrial, moderate N 117.60 112.19 105.97 101.84 91.54 87.26 97.61 75.29 70.95 hazard v F-2 Factory and industrial, low hazard 116.60 111.19 105.97 100.84 91.54 86.26 96.61 75.29 69.95 N H-1 High Hazard, explosives 109.99 104.58 99.35 94.22 85.14 79.87 89.99 68.89 0.00 O .N An H234 High Hazard 109.99 104.58 99.35 94.22 85.14 79.87 89.99 68.89 63.56 H-5 HPM 197.81 190.62 184.70 175.70 160.65 154.63 168.95 141.15 134.99 d a 1-1 Institutional, supervised environment 197.83 191.05 185.12 177.91 163.28 158.81 178.06 146.98 142.33 X W 1-2 Institutional, hospitals 330.92 323.73 317.81 308.81 292.72 0.00 302.06 273.22 0.00 J <.i 1-2 Institutional, nursing homes 229.68 222.49 216.58 207.57 193.53 0.00 200.83 174.02 0.00 Z Z) 1-3 Institutional, restrained 224.86 217.67 211.75 202.75 188.96 181.94 196.00 169.45 161.29 0 U 1-4 Institutional, day care facilities 197.83 191.05 185.12 177.91 163.28 158.81 178.06 146.98 142.33 W 0 ILL M Mercantile 142.95 137.54 132.11 125.68 1 115.38 111.83 119.62 99.73 95.77 0 R-1 Residential, hotels 199.70 192.92 186.99 179.78 164.90 160.43 179.93 148.60 143.96 N 0 N W R-2 Residential, multiple family 167.27 160.49 154.56 147.35 133.71 129.23 147.50 117.40 112.76 Q R-3 Residential, one- and two-family 154.28 150.09 146.35 142.65 137.55 133.92 140.30 128.74 121.24 d R-4 Residential, care/assisted living 197.83 191.05 185.12 177.91 163.28 158.81 178.06 146.98 142.33 W facilities W ILL S-1 Storage, moderate hazard 108.99 103.58 97.35 93.22 83.14 78.87 88.99 66.89 62.56 r-� C S-2 Storage, low hazard 107.99 102.58 97.35 92.22 83.14 77.87 87.99 66.89 61.56 1 N E U Utility, miscellaneous 84.66 79.81 74.65 71.30 64.01 59.80 68.04 50.69 48.30 v O r r Q Square Foot Construction Costs a,b,c a. Private Garages use Utility, miscellaneous f. Sunroom (unheated) = $28.00 b. For shell only buildings deduct20 percent g. Deck Ramp, Stairs, Trellis, Porch = $20.00 per sq. ft. c. N.P. = not permitted h. Dock = $35.00 per sq. ft. d. Unfinished basements (Group R-3) = $22.45 persq. ft. i. Unheated Storage = $25.00 per sq. ft. e. Carport = $25.00 per sq.ft. 11 Packet Pg. 227 I 8.3.b I VALUATION BASED BUILDING PERMIT FEES TABLE 1 Total Valuation** Residential Commercial $1 to $500 $100 Base fee + $30 $100 Base fee + $36 $100 Base fee + $30 for the first $500 + $3 for $100 Base fee + $36 for the first $500 + $3.60 for $501 to $2,000 each additional $100, or fraction thereof to and each additional $100, or fraction thereof to and including $2,000 including $2,000 $100 Base fee + $75 for the first $2,001 + $14 for $100 Base fee + $90 for the first $2,001 + $16.80 $2,001 to $25,000 each additional $1,000, or fraction thereof to and for each additional $1,000, or fraction thereof to including $25,000 and including $25,000 $25,001 to $100 Base fee + $400 for the first $25,001 + $10 $100 Base fee + $480 for the first $25,001 + $12 $50,000 for each additional $1,000, or fraction thereof to for each additional $1,000, or fraction thereof to and including $50,000 and including $50,000 $50,001 to $100 Base fee + $650 for the first $50,001 + $7 $100 Base fee + $780 for the first $50,001 + $8.40 $100,000 for each additional $1,000, or fraction thereof to for each additional $1,000, or fraction thereof to and including $100,000 and including $100,000 $100,001 to $100 Base fee + $1,000 for the first $100,001 + $100 Base fee + $1,200 for the first $100,001 + $500,000 $6 for each additional $1,000, or fraction thereof $7.20 for each additional $1,000, or fraction to and including $500,000 thereof to and including $500,000 $500,001 to $100 Base fee + $3,400 for the first $500,001 + $100 Base fee + $4,080 for the first $500,001 + $6 $1,000,000 $5 for each additional $1,000, or fraction thereof for each additional $1,000, or fraction thereof to to and including $1,000,000 and including $1,000,000 $1,000,001 and $100 Base fee + $5,900 for the first $1,000,000 + $100 Base fee + $7,080 for the first $1,000,000 + up $4 for each additional $1,000, or fraction thereof $4.80 for each additional $1,000, or fraction thereof The Building Valuation Data table shall be updated on January 1 st of each year to the latest version as published by ICC. **See Valuation Table located on previous page. TABLE 1 -VALUATION BASED APPLICABLE PERMITS: Commercial Structures: New, Additions & Remodels Garages & Carports Residential Structures: New, Additions & Remodels Swimming Pools (In -Ground) Accessory Structures (Greenhouse/Shed) Cell Communications/ Cellular Facilities Deck, Stairs, Ramps Other permits types as determined Commercial: Hot/Tub and Spas, Solar/ Photovoltaic Systems, Re -roofs & Tenant Improvements Plus: $6.50 Residential State Surcharge Fee per permit and $2 per each dwelling unit $25.00 Commercial State Surcharge Fee per permit and $2 per each dwelling unit Packet Pg. 228 1 8.4 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 12/10/2019 Ordinance Amending ECC 2.35.045 & 2.35.060 Shared Leave & Sick Leave Staff Lead: Jessica Neill Hoyson Department: Human Resources Preparer: Jessica Neill Neill Hoyson Background/History Updates to City Sick Leave Policy and Shared Leave policy are necessary due to changes in Washington State Law. These policies are also part of the Edmonds City Code and require updaing. Staff Recommendation For purposes of clarity and administrative efficiency staff recommends that the ECC be updated to refer to the City Personnel Polices. Narrative N/A Attachments: Ordinance Amending ECC re Sick Leave & Shared Leave Packet Pg. 229 8.4.a ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING CHAPTER 2.35 ECC (VACATION AND SICK LEAVE) TO REFERENCE THE SHARED LEAVE AND SICK LEAVE PROVISIONS OF THE CITY'S PERSONNEL POLICIES; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND SETTING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Human Resources Department has recommended certain updates to the Shared Leave and Sick Leave provisions of the City of Edmonds Personnel Policies, which updates also require certain revisions to Chapter 2.35 ECC ("Vacation and Sick Leave"); and WHEREAS, rather than revise Chapter 2.35 ECC to align with the updated Personnel Policies, the Human Resources Department has proposed that, for the sake of administrative efficiency, the city code be amended to reference the Personnel Policies as the administrative procedure document for the Shared Leave and Sick Leave programs; and WHEREAS, after review and discussion, the City Council has determined that it is in the best interests of the city to amend ECC 2.35.045 and 2.35.060 to reference the Personnel Policies as the administrative procedure document for the Shared Leave and Sick Leave programs; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. ECC 2.35.045 ("Shared leave") is hereby amended to read as follows (additions in underline and deletions in ugh): A. Intent. The purpose of shared leave is to permit city employees, at no additional employee cost to the city other than the administrative cost of administering the program, to come to the aid of a fellow employee who is suffering from or has an immediate family member suffering from illness, injury, impairment, physical or mental conditions which has caused, or is likely to cause, the employee to take leave without pay or to terminate his or her employment. LLImmediate family" is defined as spouse, registered demestie paftneF, sen� daughter-] ] and in laws of the same The eit)l ] Re ebliga4i8n ] 9 signifieant r-alatiefish-ps similar in nature to that of the imaqediaW family, ifthe needs efthe ek�, peFmit. in additi- Packet Pg. 230 8.4.a B. Administration. The city's shared leave policy will be administered in accordance with the provisions of the City of Edmonds Personnel Policies. A 4 . • r vaeation, sick leave, compensatory time, holiday time, and/or other paid leave. O ri1Y . IRS7!!�!�!ET.I:HlR7ST.�'1!IlRl4�lRT1�T.Rf�S�RtT�:RIrT_��I!!!!�r� . 0 0 Li M N oa V7 O LO M N U U W 0) C C N E a S a L O d J d L U) 06 d N J Y V m U U W i� C C d E Q N v C C L 0 C N E m u fC Q Packet Pg. 231 8.4.a ........... C empleyee's wage. !1!'lIL7!!R'i?;�'�!R'1I�1!1!!i!'�1�41�T.1r'.'IT�F!!�1!fl!€ .■J O O O LO M N oa LO O LO M N U U W 0) C C N E a L O d > J d L U) 06 d cC N J Y V m Q Packet Pg. 232 8.4.a <r Y iT� .l!TT T!!!! RTTI•S3}41 MINIMMIMS"M Section 2. ECC 2.35.060 ("Sick leave") is hereby amended to read as follows (additions in under] i ne and deletions in strileethm ugh): A. intent. All city employees who are eligible to accrue sick leave are entitled to sick leave as provided by law.O-----,;- emaiA«mc aeorue sick leave at the The cna.-Eknum amount of aeorued siek leave shall fiet e ---- hours for B. Administration. The city's sick leave policy will be administered in accordance with the provisions of the Cily of Edmonds Personnel Policies. Upon honorable termiaatierg, unused siek leave shall be id to „earepresent empleyees at. a Fate equal te one half of the regular- rate 4 pay * the date of ter-minatjon t.. .,?ffr}7iklii-$F 800 hours.. in t e event of the death e f aii ..I. yee the payment for unused sick leave shall be aid to the employee, -Gl fir spouse or to the esWe of !he deeedeHt if theFe is no surviving gpouse. Honorable teFffiinatieH . - it -on or lay off due to Iaek of wer-k OF fundiRg and she aFe established by the pfevisions of eolleetive bar -gaining f with !Leif-espeetis,e `elleeti%,e bargaining a nt 3. Medical deR4..1- n_ppeiRtmentsr-fop the ernployee�nepende~rt �PF d-, PFON'ided ' �f FIilir!!!1t _ O O O LO M N Oa uO v 0 Lri M N U U W 0) C C N E a� c c� C O m J d L L U) 06 d > J Y V M U U W i� C C d E Q N V C fC C L O C E t U 2 Q Packet Pg. 233 8.4.a go. - - M-70 ,WWRI a basis to the amount of siek leaYe may eam additional leave heur-s on an inverse dur-ing the used ealendar Leave Used 0 ]irl—Ia'►�e y-1 eus-s Eam-ned 24 9 4-6 4-6 9 24 8 WOMB- t!L•lii2l2L'1L'ri`1•_LL`Y+1�1`2� Player to the eity of Edmonds pur-suant to inter-leeal��} }^ �,}, p p� (mil y-� f �LVT-Ctl"i't�T'RTC.Si , 'h�rsir7r .. seet'iefi.-1H addition, a t{uflsfe TQG worker'sFequirLed to pay bael( ffier,ehy m6tefe hiS/heF Siek leave ban! . . such rights with Fespec4 to Section 3. Sev_erability. 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. Packet Pg. 234 8.4.a Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifi- cally delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take effect five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title. APPROVED: MAYOR, DAVID O. EARLING ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. Packet Pg. 235 8.4.a On the Ordinance No. _ provides as follows: SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. of the City of Edmonds, Washington day of , 20_, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING CHAPTER 2.35 ECC (VACATION AND SICK LEAVE) TO REFERENCE THE SHARED LEAVE AND SICK LEAVE PROVISIONS OF THE CITY'S PERSONNEL POLICIES; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND SETTING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this day of 20 . CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY Packet Pg. 236 8.5 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 12/10/2019 Resolution to approve certain revisions to the shared Leave and Sick Leave provisions of the City of Edmonds Personnel Policies, and the addition of the Washington State Paid Family and Medical Leave provisions Staff Lead: Jessica Neill Hoyson Department: City Clerk's Office Preparer: Scott Passey Background/History In 2017 Washington State voters passed the Washington State Paid Sick Leave law that became effective January 1, 2018. While the City has been administering sick leave according to this new law, the City Sick Leave Policy has not been updated to reflect these changes. This law impacts the City Sick Leave policy and Shared Leave policy. The proposed amendments to these policies will ensure compliance with the new Washington State Paid Sick Leave law. The Washington State Paid Family & Medical Leave Act went into effect January 1, 2019 implementing the portion of this law that directs the withholding of premiums for this program. Effective January 1, 2020 employees will be able to apply for family & medical leave payments through this program. In preparation for this the City must provide a personnel policy to employees addressing the provisions of this program as well detailing how the City will manage any employer responsibilities related to this program. Staff Recommendation Adopt updates to the City Sick Leave and Shared Leave policies to be compliant with the Washington State Paid Sick Leave Law. Adopt a new Washington State Paid Family & Medical Leave Policy. Narrative N/A Attachments: Resolution Sick Leave, Shared Leave, WPFML Policy updates Packet Pg. 237 8.5.a RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, TO APPROVE CERTAIN REVISIONS TO THE SHARED LEAVE AND SICK LEAVE PROVISIONS OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS PERSONNEL POLICIES, AND THE ADDITION OF WASHINGTON STATE PAID FAMILY AND MEDICAL LEAVE PROVISIONS. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Edmonds has adopted Personnel Policies, which include provisions related to the city's shared leave and sick leave programs; and WHEREAS, the Human Resources Department has recommended certain revisions to the shared leave and sick leave provisions of the Personnel Policies; and WHEREAS, the Washington State legislature has recently enacted laws providing for paid family and medical leave, which apply to city employees; and WHEREAS, the Human Resources Department has recommended the adoption of provisions in the Personnel Policies relating to paid family and medical leave; and WHEREAS, the City Council, after review and discussion, has determined that it is in the best interests of the city to approve the proposed revisions to the Personnel Policies' shared leave and sick leave provisions, as well as the proposed addition of the paid family and medical leave provisions; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: 1. Recitals. The recitals set forth above are hereby incorporated by reference as if set forth fully herein. 2. ARproval of Revisions and Addition. The proposed revisions to the shared leave and sick leave provisions of the City of Edmonds Personnel Policies, and the addition of the paid family and medical leave provisions, all of which are set forth in Appendix A, attached hereto, are hereby approved as presented. 3. Severability. If any one or more sections, subsections, or sentences of this Resolution are held to be unconstitutional or invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Resolution and the same shall remain in full force and effect. 4. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage. Packet Pg. 238 8.5.a RESOLVED this day of ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: RESOLUTION NO. 2018. APPROVED: MAYOR, DAVID O. EARLING Packet Pg. 239 8.5.a APPENDIX A Packet Pg. 240 8.5.a 8.3 Paid Sick Leave Sick leave provides employees with a measure of financial protection by allowing time off with pay when a personal illness, accident, disability, or an illness of an immediate family member occurs. Effective January 1, 2018, the City of Edmonds implemented the Washington State paid sick leave law, which was an addition to the Minimum Wage Act (RCW 49.46.010 et seq,). While the City's sick leave accrual is more generous than that minimally required by law, the City has chosen to apply the new provisions of the law to all paid City sick leave. Accrued sick leave is available for use immediately upon hire. The provisions of this section shall apply as written unless otherwise noted in a City Council approved collective bargaining agreement. 8.3.1 Accrual All City employees, excepting Elected Officials, are eligible to accrue and use sick leave Regular full-time employees shall accrue sick leave benefits at the rate of one (1) workday of eight (8) hours per completed calendar month of continuous employment. Regular Part-time employees will accrue sick leave based on their percentage of full-time employment. Earned sick leave shall be credited at'/z of the month's accrual in each pay period. These rates of accrual shall be in effect until the employee reaches 1,000 hours of sick leave, at which time the accrual will revert to the state minimum accrual of one (1) hour of sick leave for every forty (40) hours worked. All other employees (including but not limited to: variable -hour, seasonal/hourly employees and paid interns) will accrue the state required minimum of one (1) hours of sick leave per every 40 hours worked (including overtime hours worked) unless an alternate agreement is approved in writing by the Mayor. In no event will an employee earn less than one hour of paid sick leave for every forty hours of work as defined under the FLSA. A temporary change of less than one month in the employee's regular weekly work schedule that results in a reduction of their FTE % shall not affect the employee's accumulation of sick leave benefits. Paid sick leave is accrued with the regular, semi-monthly payroll and balances can be viewed by employees on their pay stubs or by visiting the self-service website. Employees are notified of their accrual rate and their rights and responsibilities no later than their day of hire. 8.3.2 Carryover Employees may carryover from one calendar year to the next up to one thousand (1,000) hours of earned but unused sick leave. Accumulated amounts over the carryover max will be deducted from an employee's sick leave bank effective January 1st of each calendar year. 8.3.3 Authorized Uses of Sick Leave Sick leave may be taken for any of the following reasons: A. Absences resulting from an employee's mental or physical illness, injury, or health condition; to accommodate the employee's need for medical diagnosis, care, or treatment of a mental or physical illness, injury, or health condition; or an employees' need for preventative care; and B. To allow the employee to provide care for a family member with a mental or physical illness, injury, or health condition; care for a family member who needs medical diagnosis, care, Packet Pg. 241 8.5.a or treatment of a mental or physical illness, injury, or health condition; or care for a family member who needs preventative medical care; and C When the employee's place of business has been closed by order of a public official for any health -related reason, or when an employee's child's school or place of care has been closed for such a reason; and D. For absences which qualify for leave under the domestic violence leave act. For the purposes of sick leave usage under this policy, "family member" is defined as • A child, including biological, adopted, or foster child, stepchild, or a child to whom the employee stands in loco parentis, is a legal guardian, or is a de facto parent, regardless of age or dependency status; • A biological, adoptive, de facto, or foster parent, stepparent, or legal guardian of an employee or the employee's spouse or registered domestic partner, or a person who stood in loco parentis when the employee was a minor child; A spouse; ■ A registered domestic partner; A grandparent; • A grandchild; • A sibling. In the event an employee exhausts accrued sick leave, the employee may then use any accrued vacation, floating holiday or comp time. If the employee has exhausted all accrued paid leave, they may be approved for leave without pay. Employees should refer to the Industrial Accident Insurance (Worker's Compensation) policy for information on coordination of use of sick leave with worker's compensation payments. Coordination with Other Federal & State Protected Leave Laws An employee who is eligible to use sick leave under this policy may also be eligible for and/or required to receive protections under other federal and state protected leave laws. Employees should be aware that the definitions of "authorized usage" and "family member," as well as the notification and verification requirements of those laws may be more permissive or restrictive than those under Washington's paid sick leave law. 8.3.4 Payment for Sick Leave Non-exempt employees will be paid their "normal hourly compensation" for each hour of paid sick leave used. "Normal hourly compensation" is the hourly rate that an employee would have earned for the time during which the employee used paid sick leave. Exempt employees will be paid their regular salary rate. Sick leave taken is not considered "hours worked" when computing overtime, unless otherwise indicated by an applicable collective bargaining agreement. The City will pay employees paid sick leave no later than the payday for the pay period in which the paid sick leave is taken. If a verification letter is requested (according to sec. 8.3.7) the City may delay payment for paid sick leave until the pay period in which verification was provided. If payment is delayed, the employee will be notified at the time verification is requested. Packet Pg. 242 8.5.a 8.3.5 Notification Requirements If the need for sick leave usage is foreseeable, employees are required to give ten (10) days' notice to their department by completing a Request for Leave of Absence form per their department notification procedures. If the employee cannot provide a ten (10) day notification, they must do so as early as practicable. If the need for sick leave usage is not foreseeable, the employee must provide notice to their department (per department notification procedures) as soon as possible before the required start of shift, unless it is not practicable to do so. If the employee's need for sick leave usage is due to a reason under the Domestic Violence Leave law, and emergency precludes advance notice, the employee must provide notice by the end of the first day leave starts. Employees are responsible for contacting their department themselves unless it is impracticable for the employee to do so. In which case another person may provide notification for the employee. It is the intent of the City of Edmonds that all required notification procedures will not interfere with an employee's lawful use of paid sick leave. 8.3.5 Verification If an employee is seeking to use or has used paid sick leave for a purpose authorized by this policy for more than three (3) consecutive work days, the employee may be required complete the "Employee Verification for Authorized Use of Accrued Paid Sick Leave" form which can be found on the Human Resources webpage and/or to provide verification that establishes or confirms that the use of paid sick leave is for an authorized purpose. Acceptable verification may include: ■ A provider's note or signed statement indicating that the employee is unable to work for the days of absence or is required to care for a family member. • A written or oral statement from the employee indicating that the use of paid sick leave is for an authorized reason under this policy. If the absence is for a reason covered by the Domestic Violence Leave law, the employee may choose any of the following documents, or any combination thereof, to satisfy the verification requirement: • A written statement that the employee or an employee's family member is a victim of domestic violence, sexual assault, or stalking, and that the leave is taken to address related issues. • A police report indicating that the employee or the employee's family member was a victim of domestic violence. • Evidence from a court or prosecuting attorney showing that the employee or the employee's family member appeared, or is scheduled to appear, in court in connection with an incident of domestic violence, sexual assault, or stalking. • A court order of protection. ■ Documentation from any of the following persons from whom an employee or an employee's family member sought assistance in addressing the domestic violence situation indicating that the employee or the employee's family member is a victim: o An advocate for victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, or stalking; o An attorney; o A member of the clergy; or o A medical professional. When an employee is absent due to the closure of the employee's child's school or place of care by a public official due to a health -related reason, the employee should provide the notice of closure. Packet Pg. 243 8.5.a If an employee is required to provide verification, it must be provided within ten (10) calendar days of the employee's first day of used paid sick leave to care for themselves or a family member. All information provided will be kept confidential to the extent allowable by law. Unreasonable Burden or Expense for Verification If the employee believes that obtaining verification for use of paid sick leave would result in an unreasonable burden or expense, they must contact Human Resources orally or in writing by completing the "Employee Verification for Authorized Use of Accrued Paid Sick Leave" form and submit the form to their department for processing. The employee should indicate that the absence is for an authorized purpose and explain why verification would result in an undue burden or expense. If the Employee chooses to provide this information in writing rather than orally, the employee may complete the "Employee Verification of Authorized Use of Paid Sick Leave Form" found on the Human Resources webpage or provided by the employee's supervisor, or the employee may send an email to Human Resources which provides the same information. Within ten (10) calendar days of receiving the employee's request, Human Resources will work with the employee to identify an alternative for the employee to meet the verification requirement in a way that does not result in an unreasonable burden or expense. The City has the option to withhold sick leave payment for days taken in excess of three (3) consecutive days until verification is provided. The employee has the right to contact the Mayor if the employee believes the proposed final alternative still results in an unreasonable burden or expense. If an employee is not satisfied with the City's final alternatives, they may consult with the Washington State Department of Labor and Industries. 8.3.6 No Retaliation It is the intent of the City of Edmonds to not interfere with or discourage employees' lawful use of paid sick leave. Use of paid sick leave shall not be used as a basis for an employment action against an employee. Employment actions include but are not limited to: • Reduced evaluation scoring • Denial of promotion • Demotion • Discipline • Change in work schedule If an employee feels they are being discriminated or retaliated against for the exercise of their Minimum Wage Act rights, the employee is encouraged to first contact their supervisor. If the employee feels it is inappropriate to contact their supervisor, they should contact Human Resources. If an employee is not satisfied with the City of Edmonds' response, the employee may contact the Washington State Department of Labor & Industries. • Online: www.Lni.wa.gov/WorkplaceRights • Call: 1-866-219-7321, toll -free • Visit: www.Lni.wa.gov/Offices • Email: ESgeneraIgLni.wa.aov Packet Pg. 244 8.5.a 8.3.7 Use of other leave for sick leave purposes WASHINGTON FAMILY CARE ACT Consistent with the Washington Family Care Act, employees may use their choice of any accrued paid leave that they have available for their own use in order to care for covered family members as defined below. This policy reflects requirements for all employees under state law, and therefore applies to represented and non -represented employees alike. An employee may use available paid leaves to care for his/her child where the child (including biological, adopted, foster, step child, legal ward or a child of a person standing in for a parent) for the following reasons: • To care for a child with a health condition that requires treatment or supervision. ■ To care for a child 18 years and older who is incapable of self -care due to a mental or physical disability. The disability does not need to be chronic to qualify. • To obtain necessary preventative care for the covered child. An employee may use their choice of available paid leaves when a spouse, registered domestic partner, parent, parent -in-law, or grandparent has a "serious or emergency health condition" demanding immediate action and meets at least one of the following criteria: • Requiring an overnight stay in a hospital or other medical -care facility; • Resulting in a period of incapacity or treatment or recovery following inpatient care; Involving continuing treatment under the care of a health care services provider that includes any period of incapacity to work or attend to regular daily activities. Where the need for family care leave is unexpected, the City understands that advance approval of the use of leave (as is required for certain kinds of leave) may not be possible. Employees are required, however, to notify their supervisor of the need to take time off to care for a family member as soon as the need for leave becomes known. The Washington Family Care Act is subject to the City's sick leave policy requirement for providing verification as outlined in the verification section of the sick leave policy. Employees who exhaust all accrued sick leave, other available leaves (such as vacation, comp time, etc.) and who do not qualify for or have also exhausted other protected leaves and require additional time off work due to illness or injury may, with their department head's prior approval, request a leave of absence without pay. (See Leave Without Pay Policy) 8.3.8 Annual Sick Leave Payout Plan Employees may annually convert sick leave accrued in excess of eight -hundred (800) hours to a cash payment. Conversion will be made at the rate of three hours of sick leave to one hour of compensation. Each hour will be paid at the employee's then current rate of pay, up to a maximum of $1000 per year. 8.3.9 Exempt Employees Sick Leave Conversion Plan Employees who are exempt from the Washington State Minimum Wage Act are not subject to the restrictions of the Washington paid sick leave law, which prohibits programs which disincentivize employees' use of sick leave in any one calendar year. Due to this, the following conversion plan applies only to employees classified as "Exempt". Exempt employees, who maintain a good attendance record, shall be eligible for the following Sick Leave Conversion Plan. Packet Pg. 245 8.5.a Sick Leave Hours Used during the Calendar Year Hours of Vacation Leave Earned 0 24 8 16 16 8 24+ 0 Incentive leave will be added to the employee's maximum vacation accrual, however earned leave must be used in the year following the year in which the sick leave was earned. Sick leave used due to Workers Compensation illness or injury, FMLA, or other protected leaves will not be counted. The hours earned and used will be pro -rated to the nearest full hour. Employees must be employed for a full calendar year to be eligible for this benefit. 8.3.10 Sick Leave Cash -Out At Separation Upon honorable termination, unused sick leave shall be paid to non -represented employees at their then current regular rate of pay, not to exceed a total of four hundred (400) hours. In the event of the death of an employee, any payout of sick leave which the employee would have received per policy, will be paid to the surviving spouse or to the estate of the decedent if there is no surviving spouse. Honorable termination means resignation with at least two (2) weeks' notice, or lay-off due to lack of work that is anticipated to last longer than one (1) year, and shall not include discharge from service for cause. In the event that further conflicting terms are established by the provisions of collective bargaining agreements, such provisions shall control such payments to represented employees in accordance with their respective bargaining agreements. 8.3.11 Reinstatement of Sick Leave Employees who are re -hired within twelve (12) months of their separation date will have their previous sick leave balance reinstated up to the maximum carryover limit. Any sick leave that was paid out at termination under City Ordinance and/or according to any applicable collective bargaining agreement, is not eligible for reinstatement so long as the value of the paid sick leave was paid at a rate that was at least equal to the employee's normal hourly compensation or salary as defined by WAC 296-128-690. Upon rehire, employees will be notified of their available balance of accrued, unused sick leave. Appendix E Washington State Paid Family & Medical Leave Overview Paid Family and Medical Leave is a mandatory statewide insurance program that will provide almost every Washington employee with paid time off to give or receive care. If you qualify, this program will allow you to take up to 12 weeks, as needed, if you: Welcome a child into your family (through birth, adoption or foster placement) • Experience a serious illness or injury • Need to care for a seriously ill or injured relative Need time to prepare for a family member's pre- and post -deployment activities, as well as time for childcare issues related to a family member's military deployment. For specifics on military -connected paid leave, visit www.dol.gov/whd/regs/compliance/whdfs28mc.pdf Packet Pg. 246 8.5.a If you face multiple events in a year, you might be eligible to receive up to 16 weeks, and up to 18 weeks if you experience a serious health condition during pregnancy that results in incapacity. Payment of Premiums This program is funded by premiums paid by both the employee and employer. It is administered by the state Employment Security Department. Premium amounts for both the medical and family coverage are set by the state. Premium costs may be shared between employer and employee but employers must pay a minimum of 33% of the total premium for both family and medical coverage. Premium sharing for represented employees will be as agreed to in their respective collective bargaining agreements. Premium cost sharing for non -represented employees will be recommended by the Mayor as part of the annual budget process. Any employee portion of the premiums will be deducted from the employee's paycheck on each pay cycle. Applying for benefits Starting January 1, 2020, employees who have worked 820 hours in the qualifying period (equal to 16 hours a week for a year) will be able to apply to take paid medical leave or paid family leave. The 820 hours are cumulative, regardless of the number of employers or jobs someone has during a year. All paid work over the course of the year counts toward the 820 hours, including part-time, seasonal and temporary work. While on leave, you are entitled to partial wage replacement. That means you will receive a portion of your average weekly pay. The benefit is generally up to 90 percent of your weekly wage, with a minimum of $100 per week and a maximum of $1,000 per week. You will be paid by and must apply for benefits through the Employment Security Department rather than by the City. For information on applying for benefits please go to paid leave.wa.gov. Supplementing Washington Paid Family & Medical Leave with other accrued leave The City allows the supplementing of paid leave with an employee's available accrued leave. Employees who choose to supplement their paid family or medical leave payments must first use sick leave and then may use other accrued leave once sick leave is exhausted. Employees must follow normal payroll procedures in order to use accrued leave as supplemental leave while on Paid Family & Medical Leave. Coordination with Shared Leave Employees who wish to receive shared leave must also apply for paid family & medical leave benefits through Employment Security. If approved for shared leave, the amount of leave awarded will be based on the approved payments from employment security so that the employee will not receive greater than 100% of their regular compensation. Leave Protections Employees who return from leave under this law will be restored to a same or equivalent job if they meet the following requirements: • have worked for the City for at least 12 months, and • have worked 1,250 hours in the 12 months before taking leave (about 24 hours per week, on average). You may remain on your City provided health insurance while on leave. If you contribute to the cost of your health insurance you will continue to be responsible for that portion. The City will pay the full premium for your health coverage while on you are on leave and you will be required to make Packet Pg. 247 8.5.a arrangements to repay this when you return to work. Should you fail to return to work, any amount paid for your health care premiums on your behalf by the City will be deducted from your final paycheck. No Discrimination or Retaliation The City of Edmonds is prohibited from discriminating or retaliating against you for requesting or taking paid leave under this law. Packet Pg. 248 8.5.a 8.14 Shared Leave The purpose of shared leave is to permit City employees, at no additional annual budgetary cost to the City, other than the administrative cost of administering the program, to come to the aid of a fellow employee who is suffering from or has an immediate family member suffering from illness, injury, impairment, physical or mental condition which is of an extraordinary or severe nature which has caused, or is likely to cause, the employee to take leave without pay or to terminate his or her employment. "Immediate family" is defined in the City's Sick Leave Policy. The City may, but has no obligation to, approve recognition of other, significant relationships similar in nature to that of the immediate family, if the needs of the City permit. In addition to these purposes, the shared leave program may be used by employees who have been involuntarily called to military service. B. An employee may receive shared leave under this section if: 1. The employee suffers, or has an immediate family member suffering from an illness, injury, impairment or physical or mental condition, which has caused, or is likely to cause, the employee to go on leave without pay or to terminate his or her employment with the City. 2. The employee's place of business has been closed by order of a public official for any health - related reason, or when an employee's child's school or place of care has been closed for such a reason. 3. The employee will be absent for reasons covered under the Domestic Violence Leave Act. 4. In addition, the shared leave program may be utilized by an employee who has been involuntarily called to active duty in the Washington National Guard, or in the Army, Navy, Air Force, Coast Guard or Marine Corps of the United States. An employee seeking to utilize the shared leave program due to an involuntary call to military service may not be required to establish compliance with subsections (B)(5) through (9) of this section. 5. The employee has depleted or will shortly deplete his or her total of accrued vacation, sick leave, compensatory time, holiday time, and/or other paid leave. 6. Prior to a request to use shared leave, the employee has abided by the sick leave policy, and all other policies related to leave from work. 7. The employee has diligently pursued and is found to be ineligible for state industrial insurance benefits or such benefits have been exhausted. 8. The employee has diligently pursued and been either approved for or denied benefits through Washington State's Paid Family & Medical Leave program. Or those benefits have been exhausted. 9. Use of shared leave will not significantly increase the City's costs except for those costs which would otherwise be incurred in the administration of this program and which would otherwise be incurred by the employee's department. C. The employee must submit their request for shared leave to their Department Director who shall determine the amount of shared leave, if any, the employee may receive under this policy. If approved by the Department Director, the shared leave request will be forwarded by the department to Human Resources for processing. The Mayor shall have final approval of all shared leave requests. The employee shall be required to provide appropriate medical justification and documentation both of the Packet Pg. 249 8.5.a necessity for the leave and the time which the employee can reasonably be expected to be absent due to the condition. Such requests for medical information shall be in compliance with the City Sick Leave policy and Washington State's sick leave laws. D. Shared leave shall be limited to no more than a maximum of six (6) calendar months in any five-year rolling backward period from the first day of usage. D. Shared leave shall be funded through voluntary transfers of accrued vacation and/or sick leave from other City employees to the employee approved for a shared leave. Both vacation and sick leave can be donated for a shared leave request. Co-workers who donate leave must retain a minimum of eighty (80) hours each of accrued vacation and accrued sick leave to protect them from a wage loss due to illness or injury and to enjoy a reasonable vacation period. The applicable Department Director shall determine that no significant increase in City costs will occur as a result of the transfer of leave. F. While an employee is on shared leave, he or she will continue to be classified as a City employee and shall receive the same treatment, in respect to salary and benefits, as the employee would otherwise receive if using vacation leave. 1. All salary and benefit payments made to the employee on a shared leave shall be made by the department employing the person using the shared leave. 2. The employee's salary rate shall not change as a result of being on shared leave nor, under any circumstances, shall the total of the employee's salary and other benefits, including but not limited to state industrial insurance or any other benefit received as a result of payments by the City to an insurer, health care provider, or pension system, exceed the total of salary and benefits which the employee would have received had he or she been in a regular pay status. G. Leave shall be transferred on a dollar -for -dollar basis. The value of the leave shall be determined at the current hourly wage of the transferor and the leave available to the receiving employee shall be calculated at the receiving employee's wage. H. The Human Resources Department shall be responsible for computing values of donated leave and shared leave. The Finance Department shall be responsible for adjusting the accrued leave balances to show the transferred leave. Records of all leave time transferred shall be maintained by Human Resources. I. Leave donations will be transferred from the donating employee to the receiving employee as needed when payroll is processed each pay period. Shared leave donations are transferred in the order in which they are received, excepting vacation donations which will be used prior to any sick leave donations. The Human Resources Department shall determine when shared leave is no longer needed. J. The Human Resources Department shall monitor the use of shared leave to ensure equivalent treatment for all employees of the City. Inappropriate use or treatment of the shared leave provision may result in cancellation of the donated leave or use of shared leave. Packet Pg. 250