Loading...
Cmd011822 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes January 18, 2022 Page 1 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL VIRTUAL ONLINE MEETING APPROVED MINUTES January 18, 2022 ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Mike Nelson, Mayor Vivian Olson, Council President Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember Will Chen, Councilmember Neil Tibbott, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember Susan Paine, Councilmember Laura Johnson, Councilmember ALSO PRESENT Brook Roberts, Student Representative STAFF PRESENT Angie Feser, Parks, Rec., Cultural Arts & Human Services Director Jessica Neill Hoyson, HR Director Rob English, Acting Public Works Director Shannon Burley, Deputy Parks, Rec., Cultural Arts & Human Services Director Pamela Randolph, WWTP Manager Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Scott Passey, City Clerk Dave Rohde, GIS Analyst 1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE The Edmonds City Council virtual online meeting was called to order at 7:02 p.m. by Mayor Nelson. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. 2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Councilmember Tibbott read the City Council Land Acknowledgement 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, participating remotely. 4. PRESENTATIONS 1. CITY PARK ODOR SCRUBBER PROJECT UPDATE Councilmember K. Johnson said she and Councilmember Tibbott (PPW Committee), asked staff to provide this presentation to the council. Acting Public Works Director Rob English introduced Pamela Randolph, WWTP Manager, who explained construction will begin in the next couple weeks. The City is sending a note to local residents affected by the city park odor scrubber project. She reviewed: Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes January 18, 2022 Page 2 • Location of odor scrubber project in City Park on aerial map o Located there because City owns the property o Parks is installing electrical service for charging stations at City Park • Diagram of collection system o Described how odor scrubber will address odors via negative pressure o Existing odor carbon units will be removed and manholes on 2nd & 3rd Avenue sealed • Photograph of odor scrubber and diagram of installation • Photographs of project site in City Park o In open space, not damage any trees o Fence around it, could install building in future if Parks desires • Project Schedule Description Begin Work Mobilization/Erosion Control Week of Jan 17th Site Grading, Trenching, Piping & Vault January 25th Form and Pour Concrete Pad February 15th SnoPUD Electrical & Transformer Vault February 22nd Electrical work and connection to meter March 8th Install Bio-Air Unit & Start-up March 14th Project Complete March 25th *Schedule is subject to change due to weather • Project Budget Budget Original Change Order Cost (DP#68) $297,121 Change Order Increase (w/$10k contingency) $83,192 Additional Management Reserve $20,000 Total $400,313 Funding City of Edmonds (50.787%) Sewer Utility Fund $203,306 WWTP Partners (49.213%) $197,006 Total $400,313 Councilmember K. Johnson commented this is really good news for the community and should be a long term solution to complaints about odors around 2nd and 3rd Avenue that have occurred for the past several years. 2. EDUCATIONAL PRESENTATION ON RANKED CHOICE VOTING Council President Olson said there is some movement on ranked choice voting (RCV) in the legislature and she thought the community would be interested in learning more about it. She knew about RCV and had some passion about it even before talking to the presenters. Lisa Ayrault, Director, Fair Vote Washington, a non-profit working on electoral reforms like RCV, introduced a volunteer from Edmonds, Eric Bidstrup. She was grateful the council was considering the possibility of supporting legislation now being considered by the State Legislature. She recalled local volunteers requested the city council support the legislation via adoption of a resolution. That resolution came quickly in front of the council in November and raised the issue of whether RCV was a good idea for Edmonds or not. That conversation put the cart before the horse in her opinion and instead she wanted to inform the council and the community about the bill that will have a hearing tomorrow in the legislature. She reviewed: Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes January 18, 2022 Page 3 • Local Options for RCV: HB 1156 and SB 5584 o Options, not a mandate o Local jurisdictions can: 1. Keep the status quo 2. Combine the primary and general into a single, high-turnout election using RCV ▪ When more than five candidates, a primary is still held, and the top five vote-getters advance to the general election. Both elections use RCV 3. For offices with multiple identical positions, like city councilors, a city can choose to have candidates run in a pool instead of by arbitrary “position numbers” that artificially constrain voter choices o Provides funds for implementation Ms. Ayrault explained they did not go into whether RCV was good or bad because they did not want to put that ahead of providing an understanding that this bill gives the City more choices about how it runs elections. For anyone interested in more information about RCV, how it’s working, and why it is the fastest growing electoral reform in the county, presentations are available from Fair Vote Washington’s website twice a month and the Edmonds Civic Roundtable plans to make a presentation on Monday, January 24th. Fair Vote Washington presentations about RCV allow participants to try it via ranking something fun like their favorite pie. Mr. Bidstrup said the best way to think about this is there are a number of things that local jurisdictions can/cannot do in terms of elections; today Edmonds could not adopt RCV even if they wanted to. The legislation is about putting another tool in the city council’s tool box about something they could choose to pursue if there is value and benefit to the community. The current legislation is making that tool available; the longer conversation about whether RCV is something Edmonds wants to pursue will occur later. Ms. Ayrault relayed Clallam County had a Charter Review Commission review process underway about a year ago that recommended supporting this bill to give Clallam County the authority to ask their voters if they wanted try RCV. Part of the reason for their support was in 2007 Clallam County had an RCV initiative on the ballot that narrowly lost. The Charter Review Commissioners were surprised to learn in the intervening years, since the state adopted the current top two primary method, that Clallam County had lost their authority to ask voters whether they wanted to use RCV. She summarized RCV is about local control. Councilmember Buckshnis commented the council has received a lot of questions from citizens. One of the question that has come up is how RCV works in jurisdictions with districting such as Seattle. Ms. Ayrault commented Seattle is a great example for many reasons; Seattle is having a lot of people file for council seats resulting in very long primary ballots. She referred to the phenomenon of vote splitting; the current method of voting where voters pick one candidate means voters are careful not to throw their vote away. For example, if ten people are running for city council in their district, voters think carefully about how to spend their one vote. A voter may have one candidate they like the best, but if they do not think they are electable, they are unlikely to vote for them. With RCV, a voter can honestly vote for first choice and if their first choice does not have enough support to win, they do not want their vote to be wasted and can vote for their second choice. RCV can be used in district elections with no problem and it allows voters to rank their choices. The only place RCV is not useful is if there are only 1-2 candidates in a race; it is only helpful in a race with 3 or more candidates. Mr. Bidstrup suggested thinking of elections as how people get elected versus what position they get elected to, whether it is a single district or numbered post, it is independent from that. Ms. Ayrault explained in a place like Seattle that has a districted system, they can keep that with RCV. If the RCV Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes January 18, 2022 Page 4 local options bill passes, Seattle could consider having candidates run in pool like the City of Cambridge does. This bill does not mandate anything; it just gives more options. Council President Olson commented the council would not make the choice for the community; if the RCV bill passes, it would be a ballot measure and the community would decide for themselves. Ms. Ayrault said she was not an attorney and was not certain of Edmonds’ process, but jurisdictions that have councilmanic authority have the authority to make that decision on their own, but most jurisdictions would go to the voters before making that decision. She believed that was the case in Edmonds. Council President Olson commented that was a question that could be answered at the Edmonds Civic Roundtable opening meeting which was open to the public. Council President Olson said the reason this has been on her radar for a long time is Item 3 in the presentation, offices with multiple identical positions. It does not seem to serve the community’s best interest to have head-to-head races and it even builds animosity among groups of residents. That goes away for the most part with RCV and gives more support for people with wider appeal which helps serve the community as a whole. She liked the idea of RCV personally, but emphasized the bills were not making decisions for any jurisdictions, they only provide additional choices. She was grateful to the guests for sharing this information. She gave a shout out to Student Representative Brook Roberts for his hard work drafting the resolution. Now that everyone understands the bills are about a community being able to make that choice, the council welcomes emails from residents whether they want the council to support it. Ms. Ayrault said the local options bill is about local control of elections, all of which are non-partisan. On the national scale where RCV is gaining traction and voters like it, there is a remarkably broad ideological spectrum of communities adopting it. It is advancing quickly in deep red Utah as well as more left-leaning cities like Minneapolis, San Francisco and New York, and Alaska is about to begin using it for statewide elections and congressional races in the coming year. Nationally, there will be a lot of opportunity to benefit from other jurisdictions’ taking the lead and using this way of voting. At this point early returns indicate voters like it which is why it is advancing so quickly. She summarized the local options bill would allow Edmonds voters to consider this form of voting in the future if they wanted to. Councilmember Chen thanked the presenters for informing the council. Having just finished an election himself, he felt RCV would ease the competitiveness between the top two candidates and provide a system that benefits the entire community by allowing voters to rank their top choices. This is a very important decision that voters need to decide themselves. If there is a point at which a decision has to be made, he supported putting it on the ballot to let voters decide. Mr. Bidstrup advised the Edmonds Civic Roundtable presentation is January 24th from 4 to 5:30 p.m. at the Edmonds Waterfront Center. 5. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. Council President Olson pointed out the addition of Item 8.3, Marina Beach Park Renovation Project Grant, which was inadvertently left off the original agenda. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes January 18, 2022 Page 5 Mayor Nelson invited participants and described the procedures for audience comments. Linda Ferkingstad, Edmonds, commenting on the Edmonds Tree Ordinance, asked when the council would make the ordinance equitable and correct to comply with the U.S. and Washington State Constitution, the Growth Management Act and Edmonds Comprehensive Plan. She questioned whether citizens should have to hire an attorney to force the council to obey the law. Her family purchased 1.2 acres and planned to build 4 homes in 2016 when her parents were 81 years old. They immediately began working with the Edmonds planning department and hired the necessary professionals to make it happen. They were told dividing the property could be problematic due to a critical area on one corner; that corner was given to their neighbor and then they were told they could divide the property into only three lots due to setbacks. That process took over two years. In November 2020, their engineers were finally prepared to submit an application, only to find submittals were halted for six months due to an emergency action by the city council. During those six months, the council, with the assistance of Kernen Lien, voted in the Edmonds tree ordinance, requiring property owners to pay the City for the timber and carbon footprint worth of trees over 24” in diameter that would be removed, $3000-$12,000 each, illegal takings of nearly $200,000 for their trees. Later council put a limit of $2 per square foot of property on the takings which amounts to over $100,000 for them. Council later conceded if they saved 50% of the significant trees on their property, they would be exempt from the illegal taking. Ms. Ferkingstad continued, commercial property development has a requirement for 5% open space which has been lowered to zero. Retaining 50% of the trees on their property equals 70-80% open space, leaving no natural light, no gardens, no views of Puget Sound or Olympic Mountains, no option for solar electricity and imminent danger of branches or trees falling on their homes. The cost of building has gone up exponentially in the last five years; they paid engineers and arborists double to prepare two applications for division with the changing ordinances. Her parents, who were 81 when they bought the property, will be 87 next month and are no longer able to move to the accessible home they hoped to build for them. This council has damaged their and other families’ plans to build homes in single family zones because of the amount of trees on their property. There are few buildable properties in Edmonds without abundant trees. Edmonds has not paid into the tree fund for the many trees over 24” in diameter cut down in City Park and existing homeowners are not required to pay for their trees’ worth before they are allowed to remove them. She requested the council rescind this illegal, discriminatory tree ordinance. Natalie Seitz, Edmonds, referred to the grant agreement for Marina Beach Park and requested the City not sign the agreement and pause implementation of the project because Marina Beach Park is currently in fairly good condition with a draft PROS Plan rating of 1.2. For context, 1.0 is the best possible condition rating so a master plan renovation is not needed. Marina Beach will require $4 million of local investment and is located in an area well served by Edmonds park resources. Delay of the project to increase equitable investment is in alignment with best practices from the 2018-2022 RCO plan for Washington State and the draft PROS Plan objective 2.1. The park design is predicated on the purchase of the Unocal marsh property with the Willow Creek alignment and salmon related benefits could be achieved through regulatory means at no cost to Edmonds residents when BNSF builds its second rail line. This is a moment when it is not too lake to change course for Marina Beach and prioritize underserved areas. With regard to the 2022 budget amendments, she did not support the removal of the REDI program manager as this position is critical to the City providing equitable investments in all communities. She did not support the removal of the Public Information Officer (PIO) as the City needs to make significant strides in outreach to all communities and a PIO is a critical position to support inclusive engagement to all Edmonds communities. Ms. Seitz supported the addition of uptown office expenses, including $60,000 for a police station and/or city hall relocation in an areas more central to the majority of Edmonds residents. She also supported the addition of $150,000 for streetlights in the Lake Ballinger area, a desperately needed improvement that Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes January 18, 2022 Page 6 would make the community safer for children. Putting streetlights on existing poles is not enough to safely light the area and prevent crime. Her family went to their old neighborhood outside Edmonds to trick-or-treat last year because there are no sidewalks and not enough streetlights to make it safe for their children to celebrate Halloween in their area. She did not support the addition of $100,000 for the Creative District’s 4th Avenue Corridor project design. The draft PROS Plan is already underway and that process will weigh the priority of this investment in relation to other critical park system needs. The downtown area already has over 108 acres of total park investments that serves only [inaudible] percent of the City’s population while other areas, south Edmonds and the SR 99 corridor have significant more population than downtown and approximately 11 acres total combined identified as park resources. She urged the council to prioritize underserved areas instead of another high-dollar investment downtown and allow the PROS Plan and citywide public process to weigh this investment. She expressed her support for ranked choice voting. Ken Reidy, Edmonds, referred to tonight’s consent agenda that includes Building Use Agreements at Frances Anderson Center, and requested a councilmember ask that this to be removed from the consent agenda for separate discussion and vote. Building Use Agreements contain discussion of something referred to as leasehold property tax which is really leasehold excise tax required under RCW 82.29A. The leasehold excise tax is supposed to be calculated on a market rate which is not necessarily the amount the City charges private parties to use public space. He questioned how annual rent increases below the CPI related to market rates. The March 16, 2010 city council meeting minutes document that former City Councilmember Strom Peterson and former City Attorney Bio Park had the following exchange: Councilmember Peterson noted the vendor near the ferry holding lanes who was charged the $1.05 per square foot right-of-way use fee did not pay property taxes such as a downtown business owner would. He asked if that could be considered in the gift of public funds. Mr. Park explained a leasehold excise tax must be charged when there was rental or lease of city property that is non-exempt. He said even if the City decreased the rental lease rate to zero, the leasehold excise tax would be calculated on the market rate. Mr. Reidy pointed out the City once understood that the leasehold excise tax was calculated on the market rate. City council reduced the monthly use fee of $1.05/square foot to $0.50/square foot when council adopted Resolution 1228 on April 20, 2010. Even though this specific $0.50/month/square foot fee still exists today, it should not be confused with the market rate that leasehold excise tax is based on. Evidence exists that City staff thinks food trucks can be charged leasehold excise tax based on the percentage of gross revenue that they pay the City for use of public parks. The January 4, 2022 meeting minutes document that City Attorney Jeff Taraday said he believed a portion of the fee charged streateries in 2022 would be subject to leasehold excise tax. He said the streatery related leasehold excise tax is not necessarily based on the $110 charge for all of 2021, $4,000 or $2,000 for 4 months in 2022. It is supposed to be calculated on the market rate. He encouraged Mayor Nelson and his staff to inform the Washington State Department of Revenue of the City’s leasehold excise tax collection practices since at least March 16, 2010. Jim Ogonowski, Edmonds, said crime is increasing in Edmonds and not just along Highway 99. In December he became a victim. From behind, he was pushed down an embankment by a knife-wielding individual while walking on Olympic View Drive next to Southwest County Park. It was unprovoked and he did not see it coming. He thanked the Edmonds Police officers who responded to his 911 call; truly professional in the manner in which they handled the situation and arrested his assailant. Since the assault he has reached out to Mayor Nelson and Chief Bennett on multiple occasions to discuss what he learned from his experience and to share a few suggestions, but they refused to engage. He could only assume that public safety was not high on Mayor Nelson’s agenda and he seemed more frustrated with his street not being plowed than with increasing crime. For Police Chief Bennett to say in a recent My Edmonds News story that, “we are fortunate no innocent people have been injured,” Mr. Ogonowski said he was an Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes January 18, 2022 Page 7 innocent person. He questioned whether they were waiting for more serious injuries. He suggested a task force to consider how to curtail this problem before it gets further out of hand. The City’s police force has been put in a completely reactionary position; a proactive approach is needed. Rather than spending money putting a fence around the police parking lot, he suggested spending it protecting citizens. He hoped the city council takes a more proactive approach if the mayor will not, noting for whatever reason he got lucky. Kyle Weisbrod, Edmonds, said he spoke to the council last month in support of RCV. He thanked the council for scheduling time for a presentation regarding the local options bill currently before the state legislature. While he was disappointed the resolution to encourage Olympia to pass the local options bill was not on the agenda, whether a person liked RCV, were a skeptic or just wanted more information, passage of HB 1156 would simply give Edmonds and other communities in the state the opportunity to implement RCV. It is important not to take democracy for granted and to look for ways to improve how democracy functions and he encouraged such efforts. If someone is remodeling their house, they need all the tools available; even if they did not expect to need a screwdriver for the remodel, they would want one available just in case. Like a screwdriver, RCV is a tool to improve elections. It may be that Edmonds doesn’t need it or chooses not to use it, but the choice should be available to all municipalities in Washington; HB 1156 would provide that option. He hoped he Council reconsidered the resolution in support of HB 1156 and urged Olympia to give local Washington communities greater control and more tools to use in their elections. Nathaniel Cook, Edmonds, who spoke to the council previously in support of RCV, thanked the council for scheduling the educational presentation regarding the local option bill which lays out the particulars of what is in the local options bill being considered by the legislature and what the resolution speaks to. He encouraged the council to vote in support of the resolution in the future. Cynthia Sjoblom, Edmonds, welcomed Councilmember Neil Tibbott. She did not support RCV as she did not see the need in Edmonds since there are rarely more than 2-3 candidates. She was aware the Edmonds Waterfront Center requires proof of vaccination and wanted to know if that would be required to attend the Civic Roundtable’s presentation. She was sure she has natural immunity but wanted to know the policy and suggested a councilmember email her. (Written comments submitted to PublicComment@Edmondswa.gov are attached.) 7. APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PAINE, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. Council President Olson requested Item 7.10, Frances Anderson Center Tenant Building Use Agreements & Rate Increase, be removed from the agenda to ask Mr. Taraday and/or directors if the pointed raised by Ken Reidy should be considered before the agreements are finalized. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: 1. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 4, 2022 2. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL AND BENEFIT CHECKS, DIRECT DEPOSIT AND WIRE PAYMENTS. 3. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS AND WIRE PAYMENT. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes January 18, 2022 Page 8 4. ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF A CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM HARRIET ROSE & MARK ADAMO 5. ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF A CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM JAMES NELSEN 6. EDMONDS CITIZENS' TREE BOARD APPOINTMENT CONFIRMATION 7. CONFIRM APPOINTMENT TO BOARD/COMMISSION 8. NOVEMBER 2021 MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT 9. PFD BOARD CANDIDATE APPROVAL 11. APPROVE RESOLUTION TO AMEND THE PURCHASING POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR JOB ORDER CONTRACTING 12. AGREEMENT WITH CASCADE BICYCLE CLUB FOR THE CITYWIDE PEDESTRIAN CROSSING ENHANCEMENTS PROJECT 13. BOB BORUCHOWITZ PUBLIC DEFENSE OVERSIGHT CONTRACT 14. CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER FOR CITY PARK ODOR SCRUBBER PROJECT ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT 10. FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER TENANT BUILDING USE AGREEMENTS & RATE INCREASE City Attorney Jeff Taraday said he did not have an opinion on whether the lease rates were fair market value. He has done a fair amount of litigation over the years to determine fair market value of real estate in the context of condemnation and determining that usually requires hiring an appraiser to give an opinion of fair market value. He knew of two ways to determine fair market value, 1) getting an opinion from a licensed real estate appraiser, and 2) looking at actual arms-length market transactions that reflect the market. With regard to the transactions in this item, he did not have enough data to have an opinion whether any of those transactions are being done at fair market value. Depending on how one wants to come to an opinion of fair market value, it could require devoting a fair amount resources to reach a grounded opinion as to whether something is fair market value. He was unsure what the fair market value of those properties was and he anticipated it would potentially require a significant amount of work to determine. The question is whether determining that is a wise use of City resources, a question for the council to decide. Council President Olson pointed out Director Feser and Deputy Director Burley were also present to answer questions. Parks, Recreation, Cultural Arts & Human Services Director Feser supported Mr. Taraday’s assessment that in order to establish if the City is charging fair market value, a fair market value study would need to be done for the leased space at Frances Anderson Center as well as all the City’s lease agreements. That would be a sizeable project that would take time, City resources, money and staff time to establish the market value for those leases. Even if the fair market value is not being charged, the leasehold excise tax is charged on the fair market value. Council President Olson relayed her understanding that even if the City wanted to keep the leases where they are, the amount that is non-taxable rent would need to be lowered to provide cushion for the extra tax that had to be charged. She asked if something more basic than a fair market value study could be done or would it be legally problematic to approve this year’s agreements and then look at more closely going forward, knowing that the rates are probably below fair market value. Mr. Taraday said he did not have Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes January 18, 2022 Page 9 enough information to come to that conclusion and was not challenging Council President Olson’s conclusion. The council is entering into the agreements for the term of the lease. The next time the leases come up, council could direct staff to enter into more comprehensive analysis of the market value to ensure the leasehold excise tax is being properly calculated. COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER CHEN, FOR THE NEXT TIME THAT THE CITY ENTERS INTO LEASE AGREEMENTS, NOT THE ONES IN THE PACKET CURRENTLY, THAT WE DO A MARKET ASSESSMENT TO MAKE SURE WE’RE PROPERLY DOING THAT TAX. Councilmember Buckshnis recommended this be moved to a committee for further research. This issue was just raised and there are a number of issues related to other City rentals, a market study, etc. She anticipated a study would be tremendous amount of work, and rather than just say yes, she preferred to have a more pragmatic discussion by a committee. She did not support the motion. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED TO AMEND TO MOVE THIS TO A COMMITTEE FOR REVIEW. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. Council President Olson raised a point of clarification, the motion was to do it for future leases because these leases start in January so there wasn’t an option to wait for an in-depth study before approving these leases. She clarified the motion was to pursue getting that information but not stopping these leases and the council would need to separately approve the leases. The motion is related to looking into property values for the next time the leases are approved. Councilmember Paine commented it sounds like a request for more discussion and she was unsure that required a motion. She wanted to ensure the agreements could move forward for this year and consider whether the leases are fair market value at a more convenient date with more runway. She was concerned about doing this on the fly on a consent agenda item. She expressed support for approving the lease agreements. Councilmember L. Johnson supported moving forward with the lease agreements tonight as she did not have sufficient information to support doing a more in-depth study. There are a lot of things going on in the City now and without time to research or ponder it, she was unsure that was a high priority or what other projects would be delayed by doing a study. She supported moving forward with the lease agreements but not undertaking a study. Councilmember K. Johnson recalled the Parks and Public Works Committee discussed this with Deputy Parks, Recreation, Cultural Arts & Human Services Director Burley. She learned the Frances Anderson Center leases range from three to five years. Public Works and Administrative Services also oversee leases of other spaces in the City. The motion does not fit the needs of the City at this time. At the PPW Committee meeting, she learned the rents are not based on market rate but the cost of operations for utilities, bare bones to keep the facility running. The issue raised by Ken Reidy regarding taxes is a separate issue that Finance, Mr. Taraday and Ms. Burley can analyze and report back to council. She did not support the motion. Council President Olson raised a point of clarification, pointing out the motion did not include anything about approving the leases tonight. It was a standalone motion about looking into it further. Whether the motion passes or fails, a separate motion will be necessary to pass the agreements. Councilmember Chen expressed support for looking into it but as there are other priorities, it may not be the best use of resources. He seconded the motion for discussion. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes January 18, 2022 Page 10 MOTION FAILED UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER TENANT BUILDING USE AGREEMENTS & RATE INCREASE AS PROPOSED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 8. COUNCIL BUSINESS 1. AMENDMENT TO CITY’S INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH SOUTH COUNTY FIRE City Attorney Jeff Taraday said the packet contains a proposed amendment to the City’s interlocal agreement between South County Fire (SCF) and the City. In the last quarter of 2021, the council proposed to respond to SCF and their threshold notice with certain mitigation measures. The discussion centered around whether the city council preferred adding one 24-hour 2-person unit or two 12-hour 2- person units. The cost to the City was basically the same in either case, approximately $1.5 million in addition to the current cost for fire and EMS services. At that time it was not so much a budgetary decision, but how they wanted to see fire service delivered, whether it was with one 24-hour unit or two 12-hour units that could address peak times as 70% of calls happen between 8 a.m. and 8 pm. The council ultimately decided it preferred the two peak hour unit approach and that was the designated remedial measure. Immediately following the council meeting, the mayor sent a letter to SCF indicating the City’s choice. Unfortunately SCF is essentially refusing to provide that type of service, saying the service they will provide is one 24-hour two-person unit and not the two 12-hour units that the city council requested. The amendment to the interlocal agreement in the packet does what SCF is proposing, adding the 24-hour 2-person. Councilmember K. Johnson raised a point of clarification, asking whether it was a 24-hour one-person unit. Mr. Taraday clarified it was a 24-hour 2-person unit. Mr. Taraday continued, this is on the agenda for discussion tonight and will be on the agenda for action next week. The deadline SCF has given the City to enter into the interlocal agreement is the day after next week’s council meeting. If the council meets that deadline, the agreement will be executed and that service will be added and will be the service provided for at least a year. SCF has committed in the draft ILA to not provide the city with an additional threshold notice for at least a one-year review period so they can analyze the impact of this 24-hour unit on the transport balance factor and Neighboring Unit Utilization Factor (NUUF), metrics used to determine whether Edmonds is paying its fair share. Mr. Taraday said the problem is the City believes two peak hour units would do a better job of addressing those factors than a single unit would, but are not being given an opportunity to essentially prove that. He expected the City was likely to receive another threshold notice and will be engaged in this process again in 2023. That doesn’t mean that the council should not enter into the agreement; for at least the next year, the agreement gives the council what it would have had under its preferred remedial measure because the preferred remedial measure started with a 24-hour unit and converted to two 12-hour units at a time of the RFA’s choosing. If councilmembers were asking themselves whether or not to support the ILA, entering into the amendment to the ILA provides what would have been provided anyway under the preferred remedial measure, but does not provide the long term solution. The council will have to hope that next year the RFA will be more receptive to the City’s preferred remedial measure because that option is not being offered now. Councilmember Paine commented if the City went through mediation, that would happen prior to any service addition to the City. That persuaded her to make a decision sooner rather than later about next steps. She asked how long would it take go through mediation. Mr. Taraday answered it was hard to say Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes January 18, 2022 Page 11 how long mediation would take; he guessed from an extra month to an extra three months, but during that time, no additional fire service would be implemented. Council President Olson said the point Councilmember Paine made was a good one and was one of the things on her radar as well. This is a large amount of money and she assured the public the council was not taking it lightly; it was a subject that has been before the council for many months and has been exhaustedly considered and discussed in other meetings. To the extend the council may or may not have a lot of discussion tonight, she assured it was not something the council was entering into lightly. Councilmember Buckshnis commented the council is up against a rock and a hard place. She recalled some councilmembers questioned the thresholds and it was her understanding the thresholds would be reviewed to ensure things like having Swedish Hospital within the City did not skew the numbers and put Edmonds at a disadvantage. She asked if the threshold would be discussed to mediate the fact that there is a hospital in Edmonds and the closest unit goes to incident or is that no longer on the table for discussion. Mr. Taraday said the RFA provided a response to those issues and in order for the City to drill down deeper and/or push back on their answer, the council would probably need to hire consultant. While he understands this at reasonably high level for an attorney, he is not a former fire chief and cannot necessarily scrutinize with the kind of detail that a consultant could. Even with that support from a consultant, he was did not think SCF was of a mind to get rid of these metrics. Councilmember Chen asked whether SCF provided a reason why they are not able to provide two 12-hour 2-person units. Mr. Taraday answered yes, SCF’s November 11 letter (packet page 329) goes into some detail regarding their concerns. He read from the letter, “We cannot agree with the City’s proposed Remedial Measures, as presented, for the following reasons: 1. South County Fire simply cannot commit to implementing the so-called permanent Remedial Measure of two PAUs because it is a subject of bargaining.” Mr. Taraday said the City acknowledges that bargaining takes an uncertain amount of time which is why the timeline was left in SCF’s control. The proposal was to eventually get to two PAUs, but since the amount of time it will take to get there is unknown, the one 24-hour unit can be provided as long as necessary to convert to the two PAUs. He thought the City was being very helpful to SCF by providing that flexibility and was surprised to see that identified as a sticking point. SCF also said the imposition of a 24-month threshold for issuing a new threshold notice was unacceptable. Mr. Taraday read the first paragraph it its entirety as he thought that was the crux of the matter: “1. South County Fire simply cannot commit to implementing the so-called permanent Remedial Measure of two PAUs. In short, this is a mandatory subject of bargaining, and we cannot ensure that IAFF Local 1828 will agree to add two PAUs. We would be willing to negotiate with IAFF Local 1828 in good faith about this issue, but any concessions South County Fire would have to make to obtain this contractual right is not a cost South County Fire should fairly absorb. Thus, if South County Fire were successful in negotiating for two PAUs, the cost to the City would need to include not only the labor cost but also the cost of any concessions South County Fire would need to offer in exchange.” Councilmember Chen said if the City was paying $1.5 million for a 24-hour shift, essentially that is paying for 12 hours of non-peak time. Although he loved the firefighters, as a councilmember he needs to look out for citizens’ interests. He asked if it would be possible go back to the table and negotiate with SCF for one 12-hour shift coverage for the peak time and pay $750,000, saving the City $750,000. If that was an option, he felt that would be the best bang for the dollar. Mr. Taraday said if Councilmember Chen was asking whether he thought SCF would accept that, he did not think they would. Councilmember Chen said SCF gives the council no choice, they are the only provider. Mr. Taraday said the council has long term choices. When the City entered into this agreement in 2010, he did not think the city council at that time contemplated these types of situations, that the council would essentially be Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes January 18, 2022 Page 12 denied the level of service they were requesting. The council has time to consider whether this relationship is working long term or whether it wants to look at other possible arrangements. Right now, the council does not have a lot of leverage because the City is in a long term agreement with SCF. Either party can get out of the agreement with two years notice. If the council does not accept these terms, the option is find a way to do something different. Councilmember Tibbott assumed SCF believes the utilization factor is out of balance, so they think Edmonds needs more services. Mr. Taraday answered yes, it is beyond dispute that the NUUF is out of balance, that is a simple mathematical calculation and he has no reason to believe that the inputs into that formula are inaccurate. There is a difference of opinion how to potentially bring it into balance. Councilmember Tibbott observed SCF’s solution is a 24-hour crew which he understood from the documentation would not operate out of Station 17 like it did in the past, but somewhere else. He assumed they would operate out of Swedish Hospital. One of the questions he asked in the past was whether it would be possible do an ILA with other cities utilizing Swedish, would they entertain that as a way to fund a 2-person crew that operates out of Swedish. Mr. Taraday said he thinks fundamentally SCF is looking for the City to contribute more to the regional fire and EMS effort. This additional $1.5 million is a significant additional contribution to the regional effort. The problem he saw going forward was he anticipated the City would receive another threshold notice next year and will be asked to provide another significant contribution to the regional effort. The problem was not who the City entered into ILA’s with, but SCF does not feel Edmonds is contributing enough and they are looking to make that situation better. Councilmember Tibbott concluded there was really no way to negotiate; the solution was to either pay it or go to arbitration. Mr. Taraday answered there is no arbitration, there is mediation, but he did not think mediation would change anything in this instance. For the next year at least, this agreement is the answer. What the council decides to do long term is a different story and maybe one that the council needs to take a closer look at. Mayor Nelson clarified SCF originally wanted $2.25 million. Mr. Taraday agreed the City was able to reach an agreement with SCF on an amount lower than SCF originally requested. SCF’s original remediation proposal was one 24-hour unit plus one-peak hour unit. They moved from their original proposal, but will not accept the remedial measure the City is proposing. Councilmember K. Johnson said it had not been lost on her that each time the council receives a report from SCF there is a subtext that they would like the City to join their regional organization which she felt was a driving factor. There are about five contracted cities. Figuring out the cost if the City was in the fire authority would be an important piece of information, if not this year, in the future. Mr. Taraday agreed with Councilmember K. Johnson’s assessment and SCF has not been shy about saying so. SCF has pretty much said they would love for the City to join the RFA. If he was a SCF board member and was trying to convince Edmonds to join the RFA, he would probably do what they are doing, making it more expensive not to be in the RFA. Councilmember K. Johnson asked if they would sweeten the pot if the City joined the RFA. Mr. Taraday said he did not have an opinion on that. Councilmember K. Johnson said that was something to consider. While SCF is trying force the City by raising the rates, not providing any leeway makes the council not want to negotiate with them. Councilmember L. Johnson relayed her understanding that the NUUF has been out of balance almost since day one back in 2016 when a number of councilmembers who are on the council now were part of the decision to take away two FTE. She felt it was pretty strong language to say SCF was trying to force the City; the NUUF has been out of balance since the beginning and the council needs to acknowledge Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes January 18, 2022 Page 13 that. Whether or not the City joins the RFA in the future is a separate issue. There needs to be some recognition that the decision made in 2016 may not have been the best decision for Edmonds. Edmonds continues to grow and needs adequate coverage. She hoped the council would take the time to come to an agreement regarding how the NUUF is calculated taking into consideration the placement of the hospital, etc. At this point she did not feel forced; she was disappointed it was not going the way the council wanted, but she looked at it as returning to the previous level of service. Council President Olson commented it was reasonable to think that the location of the hospital and traffic in and out impacted the NUUF, but SCF presented a slide that showed that was not the case, at least not to the extent the council thought it was. It sounds like in SCF’s letter there are priorities for bargaining and they do not want to make the two 12-hour shifts a high priority because there are other things they want. It is possible if the City is closer to meeting the NUUF in the future, they may be willing to negotiate two 12-hour units. Councilmember Paine referred to the first page of the packet that says the council with input from the City should be able to determine what our level of need is. There is a defined need and in the near future the City needs to look at its needs and how to meet them. It is true the population is growing and it is important to adequately meet the public safety needs of the residents. Mr. Taraday said the council could make a motion tonight to put it on the consent agenda next week. COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO ACCEPT THE JANUARY 3, 2022 PROPOSAL FROM THE RFA TO HAVE ON CONSENT NEXT WEEK. Due to Councilmember K. Johnson experiencing technical difficulties, Mayor Nelson declared a brief recess. Mayor Nelson repeated the motion for Councilmember K. Johnson. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. NON-REPRESENTED EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION STUDY HR Director Jessica Neill Hoyson commented a majority of councilmembers have walked through the materials or seen the presentation at the Finance or PSPP Committee meetings so the consultants will move through the materials quickly while giving it the weight and time it needs. She introduced Shannon Drohman and Kathy Marek, Compensation Connections. Ms. Drohman recapped the draft executive summary: • Project Activities o Conduct a base pay market study for 115 positions (72 represented and 43 non-represented) o Review and suggest revisions to existing wage scales based on the new market data o Recommend placement of positions into proposed wage scales • Summary of Methodology o We began this work by meeting with the Director of Human Resources to discuss the City’s competitive market, comparator organizations, and positions to include in the study. We also explored how the City’s compensation philosophy would inform the work of the project. o Excluded from the analysis were police, police support (except police service assistants), treatment plant, casual/hourly, and contract positions. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes January 18, 2022 Page 14 o The study began with a review of the existing job descriptions for the included positions. Next, we researched base pay from relevant compensation sources representing the jobs and the City’s competitive market (see Market Data Sources below). o Best practice in compensation reviews recommends at least three market data sources to price a job title. Most of the City’s positions have three matches in this market analysis, and many have four or five matches. o Using the market data as a foundation, we reviewed the existing wage scales and recommended updates to the structures. We then suggested potential changes to position grade based on the new market data • Compensation goals o The City Council updated the compensation policy in 2021. The policy included the following goals for the compensation program: ▪ To attract and retain, dedicated, hardworking, diverse, talented employees who are well qualified to perform their duties in an ever-evolving municipal government environment ▪ To pay employees fairly and to ensure pay equity and internal equity ▪ To be externally competitive by providing compensation commensurate with the labor market ▪ To be fiscally responsible and legally defensible o The market study was grounded in the compensation policy and these goals. • Market data sources o The compensation policy defined the City’s comparable labor market as “Cities in Washington State based on population, assessed valuation, and assessed valuation per capita with a bandwidth of 50% up and 50% down.” We researched compensation market data for these comparable cities: City County Population Assessed Valuation Per Capita Issaquah King 38,690 11,966,058,762 309,280 Edmonds Snohomish 42,470 11,011,221,440 259,271 Bothell King/Snohomish 48,400 12,354,415,516 255,257 Mukilteo Snohomish 21,360 5,444,416,654 254,888 Shoreline King 56,980 11,637,183,574 204,233 Lynnwood Snohomish 40,690 7,503,860,299 184,415 Puyallup Pierce 42,700 6,928,321,607 162,256 Burien King 52,300 7,794,662,044 149,038 Olympia Thurston 54,150 7,741,414,390 142,962 Lacey Thurston 52,910 7,268,934,236 137,383 o The compensation policy also states that other local government agencies and private employers may be taken into consideration when they are determined to be a relevant factor in the City’s labor market. o We researched pay data using published survey sources. These surveys utilize compensation information provided by hundreds of employers in the public and private sectors. We filtered the data to reflect employers of similar size to the City of Edmonds in the Puget Sound market. o Utilizing published surveys let us round out the data for City of Edmonds jobs that were not in the comparable city data. The published survey data also reflects the broader labor market in which the City competes for talent. Councilmember Buckshnis relayed a citizen question why assessed value was used in selecting comparator cities. Ms. Neill Hoyson answered the update to the compensation policy included updating how comparators are selected. An RCW addresses what a public entity should do when selecting comparators for uniformed personnel (fire and police) and the reason that applies to represented or non- represented is to have a consistent methodology across the board because it makes the decisions more Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes January 18, 2022 Page 15 defensible. The RCW states having similar size employers with like type resources. Similar size is done using population as the first metric (50% up and down to be in the middle of the population group), the like piece is established by looking at what financial resources the city has to do the work and the most commonly used metric is assessed valuation because it shows the tax base. The assessed valuation per capita shows how much is available per person served in the city. This is the PERC-supported methodology; there is not a one-size-fits-all methodology, but if the methodology is ever challenged such as by a union, it is a very defensible position to use the methodology that PERC has said in the past is appropriate. Ms. Drohman continued: o The chart below shows the published survey sources and the market sector “filter” utilized in the study: Survey source Market Sector Economic Research Institute Government CompAnalyst Government Milliman Public Employees Government Compdata Government Milliman Puget Sound Government Milliman Northwest Government • Market Reference Point o When researching pay data in the published surveys, we noted the 25th, 50th (median), and 75th percentiles. For the comparator organization research, we noted the pay scales for each position and calculated the midpoint, which represents the 50th percentile (median). o When comparing the City’s pay scales to the market, we utilized the 50th percentile (median) in alignment with the compensation policy and goals. Most public and private sector organizations use the 50th percentile as their market reference point. Councilmember Buckshnis clarified this is strictly wages and not benefits. Ms. Drohman agreed this study focused on wages and considered wage data for other employers compared to wage data for the City of Edmonds. Ms. Neill Hoyson explained comparator wages are used to set compensation for a position, not benefits. That does not mean that benefits should not be taken into account when setting total value of compensation. The council could consider whether benefits align with other employers, but that is not part of the three-year cycle for the Non-Represented Employee Compensation Study. Council President Olson referred to the list of comparators (packet page 378), relaying the comparator for the Development Services Director from CompAnalyst and Compdata was Engineering Director. She questioned whether that was the best comparator, assuming from that title that Engineering Director meant they were engineers first and also in a supervisory role which may impact the wage. She asked whether that was an appropriate choice or was it used by mistake. Ms. Drohman answered when they did job matching, they looked at the purpose, primary duties and required qualifications of the position. Sometimes that means the job title is different than the Edmonds or other cities’ job title. Council President Olson said when Compdata used the title Engineering Director in the compiled analysis, it was $20,000+/year higher than the Development Services Director. She suggested relooking at whether that was appropriate. Ms. Drohman agreed that could be done. Ms. Drohman continued: • Findings and Recommendations for Non-Represented Positions o We compared the current non-represented salary scale to the market data and found it to be approximately 6% below the market median overall. This is based on the overall market data for all of the City’s jobs compared to the current salary scale. We suggest that the City increase the non-represented salary scale's dollar amounts to better align with the market. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes January 18, 2022 Page 16 o We also examined the placement of each non-represented job within the salary scale to determine if any jobs might be a better fit in a different salary range, based on the market data. We found that 29 jobs move to a higher salary range (listed below). ▪ Administrative Services Director ▪ Associate Engineer ▪ Associate Planner ▪ Building Official ▪ Capital Projects Manager ▪ City Engineer ▪ Comm Service/Econ Development Director ▪ Deputy Parks Director ▪ Development Services Director ▪ Engineering Program Manager II ▪ Executive Assistant to the Mayor ▪ Executive Assistant Confidential ▪ Human Services Program Manager ▪ IS Manager ▪ Park, Rec & Cultural Service Director ▪ Planner ▪ Planning Manager ▪ Police Chief ▪ Public Works Director ▪ Recreation Supervisor ▪ Senior Planner ▪ Senior Utilities Engineer ▪ Stormwater Engineer ▪ Street-Stormwater-Manager ▪ Facilities Manager ▪ Fleet Manager ▪ HR Director ▪ Transportation Engineer ▪ Urban Forest Planner o If the City implements the proposed salary scale and job placement changes for the non- represented employees, 39 people would be eligible for a pay increase. The total increase would be $220,409 or 2% of the City’s total salary budget. Ms. Drohman reviewed additional materials provided in the packet: • Non-Represented Market 50th and Job Matching o Summary of all market data collected at 50th percentile for each non-represented position o Details of survey source, survey job match title and survey 50th percentile (median) pay data for each NR position. Councilmember Buckshnis found it interesting with the Administrative Service Director that there was a $60,000 delta between the positions, Milliman – WA Public Employers could include Seattle, the Port, and much larger institutions. Ms. Drohman answered Milliman reflects Edmonds’ general talent market overall and includes a broader swath of organizations. About 36 organizations participated in that survey, 27 in western Washington mainly Puget Sound and a few eastern WA, with a mix of small cities, small ports, large ports, and large cities. Councilmember Paine said when looking at the detailed analysis such as CompAnalyst 2021 4th quarter data, those look like outside agencies, maybe private employers which would be competitors for people the City is hiring. Ms. Drohman answered with CompAnalyst, they were able to filter for other governmental agencies and look at a cross section of employers that include for profit and non-profit employers. Councilmember Paine appreciated the inclusion of the year the study was included. She acknowledged the City competes with the private sector for some of the positions. Ms. Drohman continued: • Non-Represented Salary Scale Adjustment o We compared the current non-represented salary scale to the market data and found it to be approximately 6% below the market median overall. The following table lists each non- represented grade, the current grade midpoint, the market data for jobs found in that grade if applicable, and the percent variance between the midpoint and market. The overall (average) variance is -6.7% Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes January 18, 2022 Page 17 • Non-Represented Position Changes o Table lists each non-represented position which data has indicated should be placed at a new range on the salary schedule and the percentage of difference (increase) when comparing the current pay range midpoint to the proposed pay range midpoint. ▪ List of increase to range mid-point for non-represented positions by department and job title Councilmember Buckshnis commented a lot of new directors have been hired recently. Citizens have asked why they were hired at the top level, in other words, market research is done to offer them a competitive wage. The example she gave in Finance Committee was the package given to the Development Services Director. Ms. Neill Hoyson clarified a market study is not done every time a position becomes vacant. That would not be a good practice because it would impact internal equity. Non- rep compensation is only adjusted at the time of the Non-Rep Compensation Study every three years. It was her understanding that the last time the director positions were market adjusted was in 2012 so it has been approximately 10 years since those positions received a market adjustment which is why they are so out of whack. She summarized the wage for Development Services Director was not reviewed at the time the position became vacant and it was essentially a 10-year old wage. Councilmember Tibbott asked about the process at the Finance and PSPP Committee, whether they looked at each position and recommended a move to the mid-point or were they recommending an across- the-board 6% increase. Ms. Neill Hoyson said both committees felt it required review and decision by full Council; there was no specific recommendation from the committees about implementation other than bringing the information to full Council. Councilmember Chen asked about the implication for represented employees if the council moved forward with a 6% increase for the non-rep employees. Ms. Neill Hoyson said she recommended council not make any decisions about the non-rep wages today because the council needs to review the results of Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes January 18, 2022 Page 18 the represented employees comp study in a closed bargaining session in order to have a complete picture for all the positions. With regard to the impact to represented employees, there are individual results for each represented group which vary somewhat from the non-rep employees because they have different salary schedules and have had different bargaining over time. There is data for what will be recommended and that will be shared with the union when council gives authority to bargain. Councilmember Buckshnis commented this is looking at director positions that haven’t been considered in ten years compared to positions that are bargained every three years. She reiterated the need to discuss the global aspect including benefits. Councilmember Chen recalled the Finance Committee was informed the studies incorporate a cost adjustment from different cities. Ms. Marek said any data point outside of the general of Edmonds or Puget Sound area would be geographically adjusted to Edmonds. For example, wages in Olympia would be adjusted to the Puget Sound-Edmonds area. Economic Research Institute is used to make those geographic adjustments. Ms. Neill Hoyson advised no action is necessary. She will schedule a bargaining strategy session and return this to council in open session for a decision regarding non-rep employees. 3. MARINA BEACH PARK RENOVATION PROJECT GRANT AGREEMENT Parks, Recreation, Cultural Arts & Human Services Director Angie Feser explained the purpose of this item is council consideration to authorize the mayor to sign an agreement for a $1M grant secured for Marina Beach Park. The agreement is the mechanism by which the City formally commits to completing this project as presented during the grant application. • Marina Beach Park o 4.9 Acre park on south part of the beachfront o Adjacent to Port of Edmonds Marina o Bordered by BNSF railroad o Park renovation is part of the greater Edmonds Marsh restoration project ▪ Edmonds Marsh is an estuary with degraded water quality due to its limited access to Puget Sound due to part of it in a pipe under the park o Park renovation provides open air channel that allow tidal flow between Puget Sound and the marsh • Willow Creek Daylighting o Aerial of current and future o Historically, Willow Creek flowed through the marsh and park but was put in a pipe in 1962 for the development of the Port of Edmonds o Existing: 1,000’ underground pipe and tide gate in the park ▪ Creates a fish barrier, changed the marsh from health saltwater/freshwater estuary to a freshwater only marsh with invasive species and degraded water quality ▪ Daylighting of the creek can occur by connecting the marsh through an existing railroad bridge o Proposed: 362’ open-air, tidal channel, a critical part of reintroducing saltwater back into the marsh ▪ Marsh restoration ▪ Salmon habitat • Historic photos of Marina Beach Park – 1941 and 1985 o Unocal operated Edmonds fuel station from on site from 1923 to 1991 o Farm tanks on top of hill were removed 2000/2002 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes January 18, 2022 Page 19 o City purchased property now known as Marina Beach Park in 2001 for $3.1M o Pier removed 2007-2009 • Marina Beach Park – Design o Aerial photo of existing park o Schematic of proposed renovated park • Renovation Design – Parking/Vehicle Circulation o Difficult parking lot, especially for ADA access and water sports o New design moves parking lot out of center by combining 2 lots into one o Same number of current paved parking (58 regular and 4 ADA), eliminates 16 gravel spaces adjacent to dog park that can flood o Adds a circular drop off • Renovation Design – Restrooms o Entry plazas formalize park entries at both ends of parking lot and address public’s request for permanent restrooms o Park’s ADA walking paths will connect to Port boardwalk and ADA sidewalk • Renovation Design – Playground o Plastic playground replaced with nature play area o Inclusive playground o Three new overlooks and one renovated overlook will be ADA accessible • Renovation Design – Willow Creek bridges o Two ADA bridges over creek connect south and north sides of park o Provides improve circulation to dog area o Dog park upgraded to add dog agility course o Educational signage o Above-creek observation • Daylighting the Creek o 2013 early and 2015 final feasibility studies ▪ 3 options considered - Preferred option, creek within Marina Beach Park, included in design - Unique opportunity to restore salmon habitat within the creek and estuary - Creek’s alignment through the park best replicates the historic path and is supported by the park plan - No other place along the immediate stretch of the built-out shoreline to route the creek especially with the railroad running along the shore - Daylighting the creek means the park will become functionally contiguous with the Edmonds Marsh, improving the ecological function of both ▪ Design incorporates - Fish habitat assessment - Hydrologic modeling - Sea-level rise studies - And conceptual design of broader restoration project ▪ High certainty of success • Renovation Design – Preferred Tidal Channel Path o Aligns with open area under railroad bridge/tunnel providing considerable cost and time savings o To accommodate climate change, all proposed park development set at additional 1.5’ back from the 12’ 100 year storm line along the waterfront and 50’ back from the creek o Native plants, shrubs and trees will be on the streambank and flat areas as well as salt-tolerant shrubs, sages and grasses near the mean tide level within the channel • Marina Beach Park Project – Timeline o Park Project Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes January 18, 2022 Page 20 ▪ 2015 Master Plan – council adoption ▪ 2016 PROS Plan appendix – council adoption ▪ In 2019 for 2020 budget council approved $30k allotted for design development/grant application ▪ Grant application council approval - March 2020 – recommended by Parks & Public Works Committee - March 2020 – Authorized by council via resolution (required by RCO) • Grant Application timeline o June 2020 – grant applications submitted ▪ July – technical review ▪ September – full presentation o Early 2021 – successful awards in both grant programs ($500,000 each) ▪ Ranked #1 ALEA (Aquatic Land Enhancement Account( ▪ Funded in Local Parks category of WWRP program o May 2021 Grant Match certification – council approval on 5-5-1 vote o November 2021 – PPW Committee supports grants agreement o December 2021 – Finance Committee did not support grant agreement and asked for presentation to full council o Next Step: RCO Grant Agreement • Marina Beach Park – RCO Grant Awards o ALEA (Aquatic Land Enhancement Account) ▪ Acquisition, improvement, or protection of aquatic lands for public purposes ▪ Provide or improve public access to the waterfront ▪ Project unique and qualified in both categories ▪ Funding group asked questions about marsh restoration and how this tied to it. o Local Parks category of WWRP program ▪ Outdoor recreation amenities • PRK2: Marina Beach Park Improvements 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Planning & Design $600,000 Construction $1,150,000 1,500,000 $2,750,000 Total expenses $1,750,00 $1,500,000 $2,750,000 REET II Fund 125 $750,000 $1,000,000 Fund 332 Balance + Park Impact Fees $1,000,000 $500,000 $1,150,000 Secured Grants $1,000,000 Total Revenues 1,750,000 $1,500,000 $2,150,000 Unsecured Funding $600,000 o Renovation to better serve community o ADA Improvements o Daylighting Creek o Support Marsh Restoration • Does the council authorize the mayor to enter into the RCO grant agreement? If not, the project will pause. Councilmember L. Johnson congratulated staff on their work and the successful grant efforts. She referred to the comment about flooding of the gravel lot near the dog park and asked if the dog park also floods. Ms. Feser answered there are some issues with standing water in dog park as well. Councilmember L. Johnson asked whether the water stands or whether it wash off and if it washes, where does the water go. Ms. Feser answered standing water sits and eventually percolates into the ground and she assumed worked its way out into Puget Sound. Councilmember L. Johnson asked about the impact of percolation Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes January 18, 2022 Page 21 from the dog park on salmon. Ms. Feser answered she did not have data on water quality related to the beach. She recalled the state has information about not recommend being in the water in that area due to water quality. Councilmember L. Johnson asked what the implication of not accepting the grants would be on the City’s relationship with the granting agencies. Ms. Feser said she talked to RCO about this, whether it was better for the City to decline the grants now or whether the City should try to get additional grant funding to make the project work, see what happens with the Unocal property, etc. RCO said if the City is going to step away from a grant, the best time would be before signing the agreement. That is less impactful than if the City accepts the agreement and spends a couple years holding up the money and not allowing it to be used for other projects. In RCO, projects are ranked and the grant funding dollars go down the list until the money runs out. If a project is removed, the money trickles down to the next project so it is better to do it sooner rather than later. Councilmember L. Johnson said what excites her most about this project is the daylighting of Willow Creek; if the project does not move forward, that is the part she will be the most disappointed about. However, in light of everything she has learned about the City’s park system and heard from constituents, it brings up the equity question. For so long the City has focused on the downtown and bowl area and it is worth considering whether this is the time to pivot and put those efforts into underserved neighborhoods instead. The City has a lot of catching up to do. She recalled counting benches, trash cans, etc. in parks which illustrated the glaring inequities. The council needs to think hard about whether this is the right thing to do right now, and if not, take advantage of the timing by not holding up the money and not damaging the City’s relationship with the granting agencies. Speaking for the Off Leash Area Edmonds, the stewards of the dog park, Councilmember Buckshnis said gravel is added to dog park to take care of puddles. There have been king tides that come up to gate and move water, but generally the water saturates into ground. The City helps volunteers move the gravel. Water quality is tested; the Edmonds dog park has had better water quality than where the dive park is. Councilmember Buckshnis thanked the councilmembers that voted in favor of taking the Edmonds Marsh out of stormwater making this one holistic project. Ms. Feser has done a great job with what she inherited related to the Marina Beach Park remodel and obtaining two grants. She noted grant are returned often in the salmon recovery area of WRIA 8. Now that the City is taking holistic approach, she anticipated the City could apply for grants from WRIA 8 salmon recovery council. She supported declining the grants, noting there are many tribes, cities and parks that need the money. She preferred to wait until the resolution of Unocal property is known. Councilmember Buckshnis continued, approving these grants commits the City to $4 million in funding, one of the reasons the Finance Committee suggested presenting the agreements to full council. Regardless of whether the $4M comes from REET or impact fees, it is money the City can use in other areas. She agreed with Councilmember L. Johnson on the equity issue; the council should pause and regroup with regard to the marsh and revise the comprehensive plan which is out of compliance. She acknowledged the work the department did on the grants, but preferred to pause until the land acquisition issue is resolved. Councilmember Paine observed the packet states staff recommends the council consider allowing the City to keep the potential of project development available for at least a couple years. She asked what that would look like, putting the project on hold and not losing what has already done related to project design, predevelopment, etc. Ms. Feser answered the packet was prepared a number of weeks ago; it was originally scheduled to come to Council the first week of January but got bumped. Since then, the preliminary results of PROS Plan have become available that indicate the priorities of the community are slightly different than investing large sums of money into project like this and more about the diversity Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes January 18, 2022 Page 22 and equity of the community and looking at land acquisition closer to Highway 99 and south and southeast Edmonds as well as conservation areas which would make the purchase of the Unocal a higher priority than this project. This project is at the 30% design level and can pause which will help move forward with marsh efforts across the railroad tracks. The design can be used in the big picture of the marsh restoration. Ms. Feser said her original ask was to accept the agreement to secure the funds, but after long conversations with RCO, staff changed their recommendation to say if the council is not going to do this project, it would be better for the City’s reputation to turn the money back now rather than hold on to it for a couple years and try to gather the additional grant funds to move it forward. Councilmember Paine said the damage to the City’s reputation was a high concern to her. She agreed there needed to be equity across the City in terms of the amenities provided for all neighborhoods. The list of current projects is long and other projects need to be added for equity across the City. She was not happy the project needed to be put on hold as it would be great to start developing a more effective, environmental appropriate waterfront area and she preferred to see that sooner rather than later as native killer whales are not thriving, but she understood the need. COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO EXTEND TO 10:20. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Council President Olson extended her thanks to the Parks Department who did a beautiful job. Looking at the pictures, she wants it all. She was glad it was designed because it was a great project for someday. She echoed what others have said, spending $4M in the next few years was not a priority nor was additional granting efforts with the exception of ecological things. She loved everything in the plans including restrooms, but agreed the timing wasn’t right to accept the grants. Councilmember Chen agreed with what has been said by councilmembers, especially Councilmember L. Johnson about the equity issue. Like Council President Olson, he loved the design and the improvements, but agreed it was probably not the best time to do them for obvious reasons; the PROS Plan has a long list of projects including many backlogged projects. However, if the project is delayed, citizens are concerned about ADA access to Marina Beach and other areas. He asked if current resources could be used to complete those easy fixes such as marking lines to provide ADA parking in front of the dog park or switching around the portable restrooms to provide ADA accessibility. He has toured Marina Beach with citizens who have access difficulties and he was hopeful those easy fixes could be addressed even if this project is delayed. Ms. Feser said there are funds set aside in the citywide capital program for small projects and ADA non- compliance is quickly becoming one of her high priorities. Those issues are identified in the PROS Plan draft and will be a high priority for the Parks Department. Councilmember Chen commented that issue has been raised in prior years as well. Councilmember Tibbott commented on Ms. Feser’s amazing grasp of the park design and the elements around. He was part of the design when it came to the council the first time and he was impressed with the facts she provided. He thanked her for that hard work and for securing the grants. He supported not accepting grants, particularly due to the importance of considering how the park relates holistically to the marsh. He asked if she had any idea about the timeline for developing the marsh and the marsh park features and how it relates to water flows between the saltwater and freshwater. Ms. Feser answered the biggest next step and a key piece is the Unocal property. It is 20+ acres which doubles the size of the marsh and is the piece between the marsh the City owns and the outlet at Marina Beach Park. Whether the City can acquire that piece will drive the overall planning effort. Ownership of the Unocal property is important; if it is not owned by the City, it may be a partner the City can work with to restore the marsh. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes January 18, 2022 Page 23 Last year the City was able to security the first right of refusal on the property so the City is first in line when the property becomes available and the City needs to be ready for that. The price is unknown, whether it will be best and highest use and it is questionable what could be built there. The state bought the land for $8M and there is conversation about making the state whole. There is other work that can be done in the meantime to get ready but that is probably the first big piece to making the project move forward. Councilmember K. Johnson said she believes Puget Sound is the City’s greatest park asset. Marina Beach Park can be used as it is without losing that opportunity. She has been involved with Marina Beach back to the master planning when there were various stakeholder groups. The dog beach was a major stakeholder and the daylighting of Willow Creek was a major feature in the design. Due to limited property, there has not been an opportunity to do a braided channel or more natural drainage through the Edmonds Marsh. She did not want to take an incremental approach right now. She had been led to believe there would be more funding available to cover the City’s $4M if there was a more comprehensive approach to the Edmonds Marsh including the two bookends and the Unocal property. With regard to time, she has heard for the past ten years that the Unocal property would be resolved within two years; it is unknown how long that will take. In the meantime, the City needs to do its homework and get ready for the day the City could possibly own it, how it would be purchased, and obtaining funding from WRIA 8 to support salmon recovery in the Edmonds Marsh. COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO CHOOSE TO THANK THE GRANTING AGENCIES BUT DECLINE THE GRANTS AT THIS TIME. Councilmember Buckshnis thanked Ms. Feser, assuring cities give back grants to WRIA 8 all the time because their design changes and Edmonds’ design is changing to be holistic. She was excited to work with staff in the future on a holistic approach. Councilmember Tibbott commented the design work done so far will not be lost and will be useful in the future. It is the right thing to do to pass on the grants now, knowing the work done in the past will be useful. He will support the motion. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION APPOINTING A COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVE TO THE SNOHOMISH HEALTH DISTRICT BOARD Council President Olson commented the resolution in the packet appoints Councilmember Tibbott to the Snohomish Health District. Councilmember Buckshnis raised a point of order, stating this was a council decision so the council should make a nomination and vote. She recalled that was how this was done in the past. City Clerk Scott Passey explained the name of the appointee is typically provided by the newly selected council president and added to the resolution for council adoption. COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, APPOINTING NEIL TIBBOTT TO THE SNOHOMISH HEALTH DISTRICT BOARD. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON, CHEN, TIBBOTT, BUCKSHNIS, AND PAINE AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBER L. JOHNSON VOTING NO. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes January 18, 2022 Page 24 5. APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION APPOINTING A COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVE AND ALTERNATE TO THE SNOHOMISH COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT AREA CORPORATION (COMMUNITY TRANSIT) COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION APPOINTING COUNCILMEMBER PAINE AS THE COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVE AND COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON AS ALTERNATE TO THE SNOHOMISH COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT AREA CORPORATION (COMMUNITY TRANSIT). MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 6. APPOINTMENT OF BOARD AND COMMITTEE REPRESENTATIVES FOR 2022 Council President Olson read the following appointments: Committee of the Council Representative Public Safety, Personnel & Planning Committee (2) Laura Johnson (Chair) & Susan Paine Parks & Public Works Committee (2) Kristiana Johnson & Neil Tibbott (Chair) Finance Committee (2) Diana Buckshnis (Chair) & Will Chen Outside Boards/Commissions/Advisory Representative(s) Affordable Housing Alliance Alternate Laura Johnson Neil Tibbott Community Transit Alternate Susan Paine Kristiana Johnson Creative District Council Rep Diane Buckshnis Disability Board (Edmonds) Mayor appoints two Laura Johnson Susan Paine Diversity Commission Will Chen Economic Development Commission Susan Paine Historic Preservation Advisory Commission (Edmonds) Kristiana Johnson Lake Ballinger Work Group Diane Buckshnis Lodging Tax Advisory Committee (Edmonds) Laura Johnson Mayor’s Climate Protection Committee (Mayor appoints) Susan Paine PFD Oversight (Edmonds) Susan Paine Port of Edmonds Neil Tibbott SNOCOM 911 Kristiana Johnson Salmon Recovery – WRIA 8 Alternate Diane Buckshnis Seashore Transportation Forum Laura Johnson Snohomish County Tomorrow Alternate Will Chen Snohomish Health District Neil Tibbott Tree Board Liaison (Edmonds) Laura Johnson Youth Commission (Edmonds) Diane Buckshnis Council President Olson commented liaisons are present as ears and mouth to bring information to/from the Council/committees and are not active members of commissions. COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY L. JOHNSON, TO EXTEND TO 10:30 P.M. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes January 18, 2022 Page 25 Councilmember Buckshnis asked if there were plans to consider Item 8.7, Budget Amendments. Council President Olson suggested setting a budget hearing for the first meeting in February. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 7. BUDGET AMENDMENTS COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE BUDGET ON FEBRUARY 1, 2022. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 9. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS 1. COUNCIL COMMITTEE MINUTES 10. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Tibbott thanked the council for their support of his appointment to the Health District. For those who wonder why he was interested, his mother retired as a nurse so growing up he saw her in the health profession for nearly 30 years. His family benefitted greatly from her commitment to nursing and health but also to holistic health. He was determined to make sure the people of Snohomish County have a strong health and wellbeing factor from the Health District as well as all the programs in the county and ultimately the city. He had strong motivation to be involved with the Health District and was thankful for the opportunity to be involved. Councilmember Tibbott reported much of the discussion at today’s Health District meeting was regarding COVID rates in Snohomish County. The number of infections has decreased and it is possible, although not certain, that there will be a very rapid decrease in the number of cases. However, the caseload is so high that hospitals are quite full which is concerning. Further information is available on the Snohomish Health Board website. Councilmember Tibbott announced his appointment of Janelle Cass to the Tree Board. She brings a great deal of experience in environmental matters and he was excited to see what she will bring to the Tree Board discussions. He expected there will be important decisions and recommendations from the Tree Board this year. Councilmember Chen said he was excited to be the council liaison to the Diversity Board. He has seen the energy and involvement on the board and a lot of great work has been done. He referred to last night’s Lift Every Voice performance at the Edmonds Center for the Arts, a powerful, wonderful message that he and his family and other councilmembers enjoyed. For the first time there will be a Chinese New Year celebration on January 29th. He thanked the Diversity Commission for their hard work on this event; it will be split into two celebrations, 10:30 a.m. on Highway 99 since a lot of diverse populations live there followed by other activities at 12 p.m. including line dancing, lucky money bag and other fun activities. He invited the public to attend this first celebration of many to come. Councilmember Chen announced his appointment of Andy Lyon to the Tree Board, commenting it was difficult decision because there were so many qualified applicants. Mr. Lyon has the professional experience and will be a great addition to the Tree Board. He has heard a lot of comments at council meetings about the tree ordinance as well as while campaigning and he looked forward to the Tree Board bringing recommendations to the council for further discussion. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes January 18, 2022 Page 26 Councilmember Paine reported the celebration of Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King’s life and his work was really powerful and offers both lessons and hope for the community. The presentation by Lift Every Voice Legacy was thoughtful and hopeful. She also looked forward to the Lunar New Year event and referred to a donation link on their webpage. She expressed appreciation to the Diversity Commission for putting that together. She also appreciated tonight’s guests who talked about ranked choice voting. Council President Olson announced she had appointed Wendy Kliment to the Tree Board and Ross Dimmick as the alternate. She agreed there were amazing candidates with expertise and interest in trees. She encouraged those not selected to apply again. Councilmember K. Johnson said she was pleased to hear the rumble of Republic Waste Services on her street; the wait is over, residents now have pickup of garbage, recycling and yard waste. She announced her appointment of Rob Grant to the Tree Board. He is a charming man, with a great deal of knowledge about trees and tree identification and will be a wonderful addition to the Tree Board. Councilmember Buckshnis thanked everyone who reaches out to ask questions, express concerns and offer solutions. She pointed out the issue of 5G is now hitting the FAA and pilots are complaining it may impact their ability to fly planes. COUNCILMEMBER L. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON, TO EXTEND 5 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Councilmember L. Johnson reported in mid-December COVID case counts were 250 cases/100,000 residents; on January 15th, the case count is 2,997/100,000 which is an extreme increase. She encouraged the public to be aware and take appropriate precautions. Hospitals are at capacity which means anyone that needs to be seen for an emergency faces shortages and delays, not just COVID patients. Healthcare workers are at their wits end. She encouraged everyone to do their part; we’re all in it together, be well and be safe. Student Representative Roberts thanked Lisa Ayrault and Eric Bidstrup from Fair Vote for the ranked choice voting presentation. The federal government is now offering free at-home COVID tests, four per household. Kits can be ordered at Covidtests.gov. He urged people to keep wearing masks in public, get booster shots, and make safe choices as he and other do not want to catch the virus or continue to overload hospitals. 11. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Nelson said if COVID was not enough, Saturday morning he received a call about a potential tsunami. He thank the Disaster Safety Coordinator, County Department of Emergency Management, Parks Department, Police Department, Public Works, and PIO. Even though the tsunami would be under 3 feet so the tsunami siren would not be activated, it could potentially move cars, knock people over as well as cause other property destruction so, based on the information available, staff was able to effectively close access to all public parks along the waterfront. He thanked the departments for acting quickly and the PIO for getting pertinent information out to residents. With regard to garbage, Mayor Nelson said four weeks is a long time to wait for waste or recycling picked up. Even though that was the result of a combination of events, it is unacceptable and is a health and safety hazard. He has asked that a complaint be filed with the Washington State Utilities and Transportation Commission because there needs to be other options, people cannot just wait week after week. He also directed the city attorney to look at how the City can contract directly for waste and recycling service. Currently it is under a franchise agreement with the State of Washington which is why Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes January 18, 2022 Page 27 any concerns have to go through the Utilities Commission and not the City which he wanted changed. He was hopeful the garbage service providers could be held more accountable than they were now. Mayor Nelson urged everyone to be safe, wear masks, get boosters and vaccinations, and avoid gatherings. He commented people are getting test results and then the PCR says something different. He suggested people with symptoms assume they have it and be safe. 12. ADJOURN With no further business, the council meeting was adjourned at 10:32 p.m. ____ ____ MICHAEL NELSON, MAYOR SCOTT PASSEY, CITY CLERK