Loading...
Cmd42622 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 26, 2022 Page 1 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPROVED MINUTES April 26, 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 Michelle Bennett, Police Chief Dave Turley, Administrative Services Director Jessica Neill Hoyson, HR Director Rob English, Interim Public Works Director Shannon Burley, Deputy Parks, Rec., Cultural Arts & Human Services Director Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Patricia Taraday, City Attorney’s Office Scott Passey, City Clerk Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator 1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:18 p.m. by Mayor Nelson in the Council Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. 2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Councilmember L. Johnson 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. PRESENTATIONS 1. JOINT MEETING WITH THE PLANNING BOARD Planning Board Chair Alicia Crank recognized Student Representative Lily Distelhorst, VC Roger Pence and Board Members Judi Gladstone, Mike Rosen, and Rich Kuehn who were present. She reviewed: • Who We Are o 7 Planning Board Members o 1 Alternate Member (pending) o 1 Student Representative • Diverse Board - Students to Retired Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 26, 2022 Page 2 o Alicia - Chief Development Officer for AtWork!/ Community Event Planner o Judi - Executive Director for the Washington Association of Sewer & Water Districts o Lily - High School Student o Matt - Aspiring Squirrel Trainer o Mike - Retired Marketing Communication Professional o Rich - Investment Company Professional o Roger - Retired Sound Transit o Todd - Mission Planning Executive o Fun Fact: Current Planning Board tenure ranges from 6 months to 13 years • Where We Are o Uptown to the Bowl o Our Planning Board represents various parts of the Edmonds community • Collaborative Yet Individual o Everyone on the Planning Board has not only unique skillsets, but goals they'd like to achieve based on their own interests and experiences for the betterment of our community • Personal Goals o Housing policy / zoning o Engagement on long range planning issues o Code updates on existing codes as well as updates on emerging issues / proactive vs reactive o Meaningful, convenient, equitable and accessible public engagement • 2021-2022 Accomplishments o Our Work over the Past Year ▪ Virtual Meetings - Meeting attendance was almost more consistent - Increase of public engagement/comments ▪ Updates 1. Tree Code 2. Residential Occupancy Standards 3. Outdoor Dining Ordinance ▪ Broadened Applicability of Unit Subdivision Process ▪ Fun with Plans - Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) - Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) - Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan ▪ Let Our Voices To: - Proposed Veterans Plaza memorial sculpture Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 26, 2022 Page 3 - City level public engagement proposal - Code amendments to multifamily design standards - PB membership and terms in line with code • Extended Agenda o April to June ▪ Waterfront Study Presentation ▪ Development Activity Report ▪ 2024 Comp Plan Update Scoping ▪ Wireless Code Update Introduction - Public Hearing ▪ Equitable Outreach Plan o Pending for Future Consideration in 2022 (in no particular order) ▪ Implementation / code updates concerning trees and the UFMP ▪ Climate Action Plan update and public outreach ▪ Housing policies and implementation (incl Multifamily Design) ▪ Comprehensive Plan update preparation and gap analysis ▪ Subdivision code updates ▪ Community Development Code Amendments / Re-Organization ▪ Neighborhood Center Plans & implementation (esp. 5 Corners) ▪ Low impact / stormwater code review and updates ▪ Sustainable development code(s) review and updates ▪ Further Highway 99 Implementation, including: a. Potential for “urban center” or transit-oriented design/development strategies b. Parking standards ▪ Parkland Acquisition ▪ ADA Transition Plan ▪ CIP/CFP Councilmember Buckshnis inquired about the waterfront study presentation and asked if that was the comprehensive plan change the council requested last year or a new study she was unaware of. Chair Crank answered her understanding it was to review the waterfront study report. Councilmember Buckshnis relayed her understanding it was the comprehensive plan change that the council included funds for in the 2021 budget to remove Edmonds Crossing because it is no longer in WSDOT’s long range plan. She offered to check with Development Services Director Susan Laughlin. Board Member Rosen said this is the study that will help inform the comprehensive plan update because WSDOT is no longer planning for that project, as well as other studies that need to take place and specific language that should be used. Councilmember Buckshnis commented the zoning on the waterfront also needs to be consistent. Councilmember K. Johnson commented she could only read the boldest fonts in the presentation because she is participating virtually. She requested the presentation be included in the council minutes. Chair Crank advised it was in the council packet. Councilmember Paine said she listens in on a lot of planning board meetings. She noted the list of items for future consideration was ambitious, especially considering that there are five pending plans including the stormwater plan, comprehensive plan, PROS plan, ADA transition plan and one other. She asked how all 18 would be managed in the next seven months. Chair Crank commented the planning board is an ambitious group and have been eager to delve deeper into the plans. Being remote has provided more the board time for that, but there is also staff time and availability to consider. She recognized some of the Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 26, 2022 Page 4 items will carry over into 2023, but the list contains items that are top of mind for the planning board, council and mayor to consider. Vice Chair Pence commented the board is cognizant of staffing issues in both departments that the board deals regularly and understands that interviews are being conducted for the planning manager position, who normally staffs the board, are underway. He anticipated things would pick up a bit when that vacancy is filled. He acknowledged it was challenging for the board and they have been reminded more than once not to make a lot of requests to staff in recognition of their bandwidth issues. Chair Crank pointed out some items have carried over from other years such as the subdivision code. Vice Chair Pence encouraged finding the upper limit of the board’s capacity. Councilmember Paine recognized the hard work done by the dedicated volunteers on the planning board who meet twice a month. The council will be approving a new member on tonight’s consent agenda. As this is a joint session Board Member Gladstone encouraged the council to identify items on the list that are urgent or a priority. It will be a tall order to get through them all and if choices need to be made, it would be good to have the council’s input regarding their priorities. Council President Olson expressed her appreciation for board members’ significant commitment and thanked the members who were participating tonight. Her priorities are stormwater and ADA. She was also eager to get the multifamily design standards through the system and back to council, noting that not having them has been a recipe for getting something the community doesn’t want. When the council was discussing roof top decks as part of the multifamily design standards, objectionable aspects related to living space were identified such as noise and privacy. She encouraged the board to think about green roofs with low plantings and vegetables in the context of the multifamily design standards. She thanked Councilmember K. Johnson for bringing up a planner who would look at subareas during the budget last year. Although not approved, she was excited about holistically looking at stormwater, transit, businesses, housing, etc. with input from people that live in the subarea. She will support that again in this year’s budget process and hoped to have support from all councilmembers or at least majority because that is the way to move forward toward good policy instead of dragging our feet and looking at things in a vacuum. Councilmember Chen expressed appreciation to the planning board members for their hard work and dedication, and for volunteering their time and expertise. His priority is the code rewrite. The council’s recent passage of development moratoriums illustrates the urgent need to update/rewrite the code so it accommodates the needs of the City. Anything the Planning Board can do regarding that is his priority. Chair Crank commented on the need to hire a code writer to accomplish that. Due to short staff and changing priorities, the individual hired to work on the code rewrite did not have an opportunity to do as much as he’d hoped and has since resigned. Councilmember Chen commented that full-time position is authorized. Councilmember L. Johnson thanked the planning board members who were in attendance tonight. She appreciated the comment/challenge about finding the upper limit of capacity. Her overwhelmingly top priority was housing policies and implementation. A lot of time went into that commission and respect has not been shown to the work they did. The outcome from that work and the implementation is desperately needed in the community. Councilmember Tibbott thanked the planning board for their dedication and expressed appreciation for their input and the time they take to deliberate. His priority was in the area of comprehensive planning. He recognized there were 4-5 elements to be updated this year and that that work would continue over the next 1½ years. He recognized the planner and the code work would also funnel into that. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 26, 2022 Page 5 Councilmember K. Johnson agreed with Councilmember Tibbott’s comments about the comprehensive plan. Another of her priorities is hiring a code writer and having them work on the most important projects such as multifamily design standards instead of accessory building permits. 2. 2021 PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE ANNUAL REPORT Jim Zachor, Zachor, Stocks & Krepps, explained this is a joint presentation by Zachor & Thomas as well as the new prosecuting firm, Zachor, Stocks & Krepps. His father retired at the end of 2021 after practicing law for 47 years, 30 of those as a prosecutor. The 2021 prosecution contract was serviced by Zachor & Thomas which has now closed its books and Zachor, Stocks & Krepps has taken over the prosecution contract for 2022 and 2023. The principals of the new firm are James M. Zachor, Yelena I. Stock and Chad W. Krepps, all three prior employees and senior associates at Zachor & Thomas and have at least ten years of prosecution experience. All current employees of Zachor, Stocks & Krepps were former employees of Zachor & Thomas. He summarized new name, same faces. He introduced the Edmonds prosecution team and the attorneys assigned to it; Yelena Stock has been the supervisor on all Edmonds cases since 2019. Her focus has been primarily on DV prosecution. Two attorneys serve the City of Edmonds full-time, Winston Choe, who joined the firm in January 2021 and Hana Lee, who has been with the firms for the last four years. He also handles City of Edmonds cases; his duties are primary out of court functions including appeals, extreme risk protection orders, civil drug and felony forfeitures, charging reviews, training police officers on legal updates and he is available 24/7/365 if an officer needs a question answered or search warrant review. Mr. Zachor provided an overview of 2021, commenting the criminal justice system was still reeling from COVID-19; 2020 transformed the criminal justice system in unforeseen ways. While not as bad as 2020, COVID-19 still had a major effect on the world in 2021. The criminal justice system was able to catch up to the rest of the world with technology and adapt; Edmonds Municipal Court was a leader in keeping the doors open for the public, for defendants, victims and others who needed the criminal justice system. His written report outlines the case filings for the past five years. In 2021 compared to 2020, there was a decrease in criminal filings; the total of 800 criminal filings in 2020 was reduced to 455 in 2021. There was a significant increase in traffic infractions of about 300 from 2020 to 2021. Mr. Zachor continued, the reason behind those numbers include significant legislation in 2020 and 2021 at the Court of Appeals and Washington State Supreme Court level as well as in Olympia. One of the major changes was the Pierce v. DOL decision out of Thurston County Superior Court which represented a drastic change in how DWLS 3s were processed. An injunction and other orders required the DOL to reinstate thousands of driver’s licenses across the state for people suspended for failing to pay traffic infractions. It was found to be a due process violation to impose fines without any recourse for indigent people to pay their fines. The DOL completed that process by the final quarter of 2021. Subsequent legislation in 2023 is expected to further change DWLS 3s. Mr. Zachor reported another piece of legislation, commonly referred to as the Blake bill, State v. Blake, a Washington State Supreme Court case regarding felony VUCSA (unlawful possession of a controlled substance) statute which was found unconstitutional and required many courts and prosecutor’s offices to withdraw guilty findings and refund a great deal of money. Subsequent legislation amending RCW 69.50.4013, the old criminal possession of drug paraphernalia statute, removed all criminal penalties for personal use items of drug paraphernalia such as pipes, baggies to hold drugs, foil, scales, etc. and left only drug paraphernalia required to grow and harvest and prepare drugs. That resulted in the elimination of PDP charges which were charged often by the Edmonds Municipal Court and Edmonds Police Department. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 26, 2022 Page 6 Mr. Zachor continued, another change to that legislation was changing possession of a controlled substance from a felony to a misdemeanor, but only after the offender had received two prior diversion attempts by police (prior to being charged the person has to be offered services such as treatment). It was his understanding that two people received diversion referrals, the next one may result in criminal charges. He was unsure how many could be anticipated, but the legislation encourages the prosecutor’s office to divert those and attempt to get treatment over conviction. (Councilmember K. Johnson left the meeting at approximately 7:50 p.m.) Mr. Zachor relayed that discussions and implementation of the DWLS 3 diversion program has slowed waiting to see the full effect of the Pierce v. DOL court decision and ESSB 5226 (which goes into effect January 2023). The prosecutor’s office has not been requested to appear at any meetings regarding the DWLS 3 diversion program since November of 2021. In 2021, the Edmonds Municipal Court had 171 cases set for trial. Of those 171 cases, only 4 cases ended up at jury trial. Two jury trials resulted in not guilty findings (DUI and Assault 4 DV), one was dismissed on a half-time motion for lack of jurisdiction, and one resulted in a guilty finding but the jury finding was overturned by Judge Rivera based on caselaw. Regarding the body worn camera pilot program, the Edmonds Police Department is conducting a pilot program. One of the major hiccups is the large amount of time and resources required to transfer the data between the police department and his office. On average downloading one set of videos for a case takes 1-3 hours of computer time and has to be downloaded every time the video is watched. Discussions are underway with Axon, the city’s body camera vendor, regarding an easier way to transmit the information to his office, the public defender and other defense attorneys. Regarding appeals, at the time of his last presentation there were five appeals pending, there is currently one appeal pending which is the result of a guilty finding on a scary domestic violence stalking bench trial. The trial lasted at least 3 days, involved 21 witnesses 8 of whom testified, 50 exhibits and over 400 pages of police reports. It involved allegations of the defendant placing trackers on his ex-wife’s vehicle and resulted in a guilty finding of stalking DV. The written transcript of that bench trial is 440 pages. The defense’s brief is 30 pages. Mr. Zachor relayed in 2021, he was able to successful secure the first two extreme risk protection orders for the City of Edmonds. He successful petitioned the Superior Court and obtained one year of probation on possessing firearms for two dangerously ill individuals who presented a threat to the safety to the citizens of Edmonds as well as surrounding areas. At least for the next year, the maximum time those orders can be issued, those individuals are prohibited from possessing firearms. There are plans and methods available to renew that order and he anticipates working with the Police Department to have them renewed. In collaboration with the public defender’s office, a significant number of old and outstanding bench warrants languishing with the court were reviewed. Through that process and as a result of the State v. Gelinas case, approximately 400+ warrants were resolved with cases either being dismissed because they were old or summons issued to restart them. There are currently a handful of outstanding warrants from Edmonds Municipal Court cases, some of which are being administratively held for issuance of a bench warrant. Mr. Zachor continued, prospects for 2022 include resuming community court in the new space. The goal of expanding community court has not yet been realized as cases are still being processed in community court much like prior to COVID-19 where only post-disposition cases are accepted. He looked forward to Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 26, 2022 Page 7 discussing ways to expand the community court especially with misdemeanor VUCSA charges likely occurring in the next 1-2 years. The prosecutor’s office also looks forward to the full implementation of body worn cameras within 2022. Zachor, Stocks & Krepps view their job as prosecutors as part of the executive branch, helping to implement the vision of the mayor and the police department in their goals related to crime enforcement and crime prevention. He hoped to meet with the mayor and city council to help implement this vision and help guide the city into a safer area. Mr. Zachor referred to his prior presentations that included Voices of a Victim by Pam and Rick Jenness whose daughter was the subject of stalking for a number of years. He spotlighted the retirement of Jill Schick, the City’s domestic violence coordinator who retired at the end of 2021. Her retirement resulted in a significant loss of an important tool in the prosecution of domestic violence. She was the voice of many victims and survivors of domestic violence. Helping those victims was more than a job to Ms. Schick, it was a passion; to his office and the police department she will always be an unsung hero in the battle against domestic violence. Her position remains vacant after four months; every day that goes by without someone like her in the position, fighting for domestic violence suffers. He stressed the importance of that position and the need to fill it. As a prosecutor, he does not have the same ability to speak with domestic violence victims because he can be seen as the bad guy. People like Ms. Schick are able to build a rapport and be their voice. Domestic violence victims often see the prosecutor as the person trying to throw their loved one in jail, making it difficult to create a rapport. Domestic violence coordinators do not have those same barriers. Mr. Zachor recognized the loss of Officer Tyler Steffins to a random act of senseless violence, a loss that highlights the failure of the system in general in terms of mental health. Mental health is a major hole for criminal prosecution; the tools he has to prosecute someone who is dangerously mentally are limited and Western State does not have enough resources, capacity or desire to truly help people and keep people medicated, properly treated or off the streets. He encouraged the council to contact the state legislature to get more funding and resources for mental health programs. Council President Olson agreed Jill Schick was an unsung hero and thanked her for many years of service. With regard to her replacement, she recognized south county is trying to do more together which can be more efficient from a resource and cost standpoint. She asked if there was any opportunity with this position, since laws in Edmonds, Mountlake Terrace and Lynnwood are fundamentally the same, in having two people doing this job for the three cities instead of one for each city. Mr. Zachor responded the domestic violence coordinator position is a guild position within the police department which is one of the issues. Lynnwood has a full-time domestic violence coordinator, Tiffany Krusey-Kelly, and Mountlake Terrace has a full-time coordinator, Danielle Singson. Mr. Zachor continued, Ms. Krusey-Kelly created business, Bridge Coordinating Services, which provides contract domestic violence coordinators. She serves several departments his office represents including Arlington, Mukilteo, Mill Creek and soon Bothell. Snohomish County Sheriff Fortney has also approached her to provide domestic violence coordinators for his four precincts. Mr. Zachor said he has also contemplated contracting with Bridge Coordinating Services to provide that service to cities who do not have an in-house domestic violence coordinator. She has a formula based on the number of domestic violence for determining the amount of time necessary to serve a city like Edmonds. He has asked her to prepare a cost estimate to fill that role temporarily until a permanent replacement can be hired because going on four months without having that position filled is a detriment to the citizens of Edmonds. Council President Olson summarized it appeared there was an opportunity to explore that concept. Council President Olson referred to the jury finding that was overturned by Judge Rivera and asked if that was a common occurrence. Mr. Zachor answered that trial was a combination hit and run charge with a Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 26, 2022 Page 8 DWLS 3 charge; the Pierce v. DOL decision effected that being overturned and it was directly related to the change in the law. Councilmember Paine was pleased to see to hear about clearing out all the old bench warrants. She asked what he expected in the future with the body worn cameras and how he expected it would impact his office’s workload now and in the future. Mr. Zachor anticipated a significant change in workload, 1) it is all evidence that needs to be reviewed for exculpatory evidence/Brady type material, 2) it will have a drastic impact on the amount of defense interviews they sit in on with the police department. They average a significant number of officer interviews with the public defender’s investigator to ask questions. Having the bodycam footage will likely significantly reduce that which will reduce officer off- the-road time or overtime for interviews. The video has to be reviewed by a prosecutor, because it could contain exculpatory evidence that needs to be pointed out to defense attorneys. It also needs to be reviewed by the prosecutor because the public defender and defense attorneys will be reviewing it. Councilmember Paine agreed Ms. Schick did a great deal of work for many community member and her outreach, compassion and intelligence on the subject is deeply missed. She expressed appreciation for his thoughts about Officer Steffins. 5. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PAINE, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. (Councilmember K. Johnson was not present for the vote.) 6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Mayor Nelson described the procedures for in-person audience comments. Ben Burkhalter, Edmonds, a resident living at the intersection 220th SW & 80th W, said he moved here in 2017 with his wife and welcomed their first child. While he moved here by chance, he could not imagine living anywhere else. Unfortunately, during the time he has lived here, he has dealt with escalating safety issues at the intersection. At first he noticed accidents seemed to happen more frequently than normal and once his son was born and he was home on leave, he noticed they happened with alarming regularity, occurring nearly every two weeks. Due to the nature of the intersection, victims have issues with insurance claims and liabilities, so people in the neighborhood began pointing their security cameras toward the intersection and sharing the video with victims and police. He has sat with countless families on the curb of his house helping them through one of the worst moments of their lives. In 2019, after learning about the traffic calming program and budget; he and his wife gathered signatures and submitted a series of proposed measures in early 2020. They were told the intersection would be investigated but then were told there was not sufficient traffic to justify calming measures. Accidents have continued and they resubmitted the application in 2020 after a particularly brutal accident where car containing two children was struck twice and launched into the yard of a resident. He still remembers trying to pull out the car seats with the children still strapped in. They were lucky with relatively minor injuries. Their resubmission was rejected as due to COVID, there was not enough traffic to accurately gauge the need for traffic calming. Mr. Burkhalter continued, in 2022, the City acknowledged there were issues at the intersection and said it would be remedied with the installation of speed limit sign. He contacted the City immediately, saying that was not what the neighborhood proposed and it would not remedy any of the issues. He was deeply concerned that something would happen and children would be hurt. Soon after, he was proven right. At 3 p.m. on April 22nd, a family crossed 220th going southbound and two children, one just 3 years old, were struck by a vehicle. Both children were rushed to the hospital, the toddler in critical condition. The police, Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 26, 2022 Page 9 fire department and emergency medical workers were quick to the scene and everyone pitched in to help. He has been in contact with the family, the father of the toddler is in the audience tonight; both children survived and will recover. They were lucky. It is strange to think how many times children have to injured in car accidents to continue to say they were lucky. It doesn’t feel lucky and someday luck will run out. He shared the footage of the accident with one of the officers on the scene and it was so brutal that both the officer and he were crying. He still has difficulty sleeping after witnessing the accident and he keeps imaging it could be his son next. He begged the city council to make this a priority and put real traffic calming measures in place with controlled signals, improved pedestrian crossing measures, or even completely block cross traffic and left turns at this intersection. He cannot bear to see another family have the worst day of their life happen in front of his home when it is easily preventable. Carolyn Strong, Edmonds, referred to the no camping in public spaces proposal, commenting as someone who has gone into several homeless encampments and seen how many of them live, it is not compassionate to allow people to live like that. She has participated in the cleanup of multiple homeless and addiction encampments on public and private land; evidence of drug use and sex trafficking is everywhere. The conditions are abhorrent. People are living in mounds of garbage, filth, used needles, tinfoil from fentanyl use and human waste. The devastation to the environment on top of the human tragedy is frightening and very concerning. Many of these areas are surrounded by residential neighborhoods and some residents do not allow their children to play outside due to the risk of being poked by a used needle. Even playfields and parks become danger zones for children and pets. She has spoken with many recovering addicts; they all say making life easier to stay addicted to drugs and not be accountable does not help them, it harms them. Allowing camping in public spaces only enables those afflicted with addiction to remain in this dehumanizing state. While not all homeless are addicted, anyone who has seen Seattle is Dying knows that those on the street freely admit that almost everyone on the streets is an addict. Ms. Strong said has spoken to multiple nonprofit organizations that help homeless addicts get the help they need and they also agree getting people off the streets and into services where they can get treatment is the best thing for them. Those that suffer mental illness should be treated by professionals; those who are truly homeless without addiction issues have services available. Addicts will need to choose if they want to get help or suffer the consequences of breaking the law. Often jail time offers a sobering moment that propels them into recovery. Marysville is know for enacting this type of policy and before the legislature took away some of the tools for the police, crime there plummeted over 25%. Now with new legislation, vagrants already get multiple chances to obey the law before action is taken. Other cities have enacted laws similar to the one the council will be voting on tonight. They do this to protect their citizens from crime, their neighborhoods from destruction and to stop their cities from becoming the next Seattle where addiction and homelessness are out of control. She asked the council to follow in the footsteps of cities like Marysville, Everett and Mill Creek who all voted unanimously to enact no camping laws to protect their cities, businesses and residents and to do the compassionate thing by not enabling self- destructive lifestyles for those afflicted with addiction. Janelle Cass, Edmonds, extended her support for the last resort tool being considered tonight under the unauthorized used of public spaces. She thanked the council for taking the initiative on this complex and controversial issue. It is understandably one that has required an immense amount of consideration and soul searching. Like many, the issue of addiction, mental health and homelessness weighs heavy on her heart and in her thoughts which is why she has volunteered several times with the Hand Up project and Encourage to Change, two organizations in Snohomish County working tirelessly to provide a better life for those struggling with homelessness and addiction. In listening to ex-addicts, many of whom have lived on the streets, the resounding takeaway was it took accountability and in some cases jail to save their lives so they could get the help they needed. Having a law like this may seem unkind to some, Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 26, 2022 Page 10 ultimately it is the compassionate thing to do. Negative consequences are an important motivator to move in a more positive direction. Ms. Cass continued, during her volunteer time, she had the opportunity to talk with the parents of a young woman in Edmonds who suffers from schizophrenia and drug addiction. She consistently has bouts of psychosis and lives in encampments on the streets and the parents live in absolute torment, waiting for the call that their daughter is dead. During their conversation, they expressed how relieved they would be if she were taken into custody. While this particular ordinance might not help this family, having a tool like this might be the necessary thing that will nudge someone’s daughter to sleep in a warm bed. She thanked the council for anticipating how this issue could grow in Edmonds and taking initiative via the ordinance. Joy Wiley, Edmonds, said she has lived in Portland, Seattle and Ballard her whole life, and grew up in Issaquah. She felt fortunate to live in Edmonds and felt, as a woman, she can walk through the parks fairly safely. She had an incident in Seattle last winter crossing a street and encountering a man about to strike her. She urged the council to consider the safety of Edmonds citizens who work hard to live here, appreciate it, pay taxes and deserve to have children playing safely in parks without needles. Once pandora’s box is open, it can never be shut. Ken Reidy, Edmonds, said WCIA is a municipal organization that provides insurance protection to its members. WCIA membership is optional and can be terminated. Tonight’s packet page 177 indicates WCIA provided an estimate of its assessment for 2022; that estimate is not included in the agenda packet. The actual assessment received from WCIA in January was $167,295 higher than the preliminary assessment which seems very large and he questioned the percentage increase. Tonight council is being asked to increase the budget for the updated WCIA assessment. There is more to consider; he urged the council to read and consider the information he is providing. The city council has an opportunity to stop and ask the following very important question; is the City’s WCIA membership in the best interest of the citizens of Edmonds? In his opinion, the answer was a strong no. History shows WCIA and the attorneys WCIA uses are willing to go well beyond the court and hearing examiner’s orders and ignore knowledge of an incomplete subdivision application and simply explain to the applicant’s attorney, as you know the neighbor’s right-of-way issue is goofing things up. Hopefully, the permits will issue before Tuesday and the settlement can be approved. Mr. Reidy provided the city clerk seven copies of materials documenting that history for distribution to the council. This is real history and is very alarming. The documented history shows great disrespect for law and justice, proves citizens can go to court, get a good decision, but then be harmed when the City and WCIA huddle up with the other party and agree to go well beyond the court and hearing examiner’s orders. An email written by a WCIA attorney says, frankly I am baffled your client is not jumping at this offer as it is extremely generous and fair and goes well beyond the court and hearing examiner’s orders. There were Edmonds citizens on the other side of this who were negatively impacted by the City and WCIA’s willingness to go well beyond the court and hearing examiner’s orders. He urged the council to ensure Edmonds citizens, the council’s constituents, are never harmed by WCIA again and begin the process of terminating the City’s WCIA membership; anything less exposes constituents to harm. Mayor Nelson described the procedures for virtual audience comments. Linda Ferkingstad, Edmonds, asked why the five year tree canopy increase of 117.6 acres has gone uncelebrated. Edmonds’ 2017 tree canopy assessment reported 1,844 acres, 33.3%. That increased to 34.6% in the 2022 assessment with 1,961.7 acres. Edmonds’ tree canopy has increased 117.6 acres to 34.6%, nearly 5% over the City’s 30% goal which is fantastic. She asked if it was not celebrated because of the illegal takings imposed on vacant property owners can no longer be justified. Should all vacant property owners be forced to pay for arborist appraisals and then pay the City $3,000-$12,000 plus $2500 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 26, 2022 Page 11 replacement fee for each tree? Must the City claim 100% of the trees on their property as protected forever, allowing no rights to their remaining trees? Even when retaining the required 30% trees on their acre, the $2.2 per square foot takings costs them over $107,000. The City’s actions violate the U.S. Constitution 5th amendment takings clause amongst many others. In today’s agenda packet, the planning board stated the following, for those fortunate to have homes on previously clearcut properties, rather than pursuing regulations, the City could focus its efforts on incentive programs for protecting and planting trees on private property. To ensure success with enhancing tree canopy, voluntary public participation must be encouraged with a program of giving away trees and/or tree vouchers for use in Edmonds. For properties that retained a certain amount of tree canopy cover, explore a property tax rebate and stormwater utility fee reduction. These same rights should be allowed for vacant property owners. Ms. Ferkingstad asked for the legal distinction separating property rights between those with homes and those building or purchasing new homes. To be equitable, current homeowners would have to plant 30 large trees 10-15 feet from their homes and give the City all future rights to the trees, light, views and safety to escape penalty. Current homeowners would have to plant 50% of the trees that historically grew on their property or pay $2/square foot. It doesn’t sound right because it is not right. Why is it imposed on vacant land owners and future homeowners? The tree ordinance raises the cost of new homes by imposing illegal takings of property rights without compensation upon owners of vacant property and then charges for the right to their trees. It is discriminatory and governmental overreach. She requested the council rescind the illegal tree ordinance. Mary Anne Dillon, Edmonds, executive director, YWCA Snohomish County, said she has worked for the YWCA in Snohomish County for 25 years. Their 13 unit emergency shelter, Pathways for Women, in Lynnwood is the only 24/7/365 shelter in south Snohomish County serving Edmonds, Lynnwood and Mountlake Terrace. She referenced the unlawful occupation of public property ordinance proposed tonight, relaying her understanding that the ordinance originated in part due to a woman experiencing homelessness in Edmonds last summer. As a volunteer for the Edmonds Homelessness Taskforce, this situation was discussed at length along with other shelter and housing solutions for the Edmonds community. The taskforce’s number #1 recommendation was to not criminalize homelessness, but to instead create other shelter options such as motel space. Ms. Dillon continued, the City’s human services department contacted their shelter to inquire if there were any available units for the individual experiencing homelessness to move into. At that time the waiting list was 60-90 days long. The need for shelter far exceeds resources in the community. This particular person was amenable to shelter if there was some for her to access. An unlawful occupation of public property ordinance that requires individuals to access shelter when there are no shelter beds available defeats the very purpose of the ordinance. She urged the council to consider other strategies, expanded shelter options and more permanent solutions before passing the ordinance, perhaps looking at the taskforece’s recommendations, the Kone recommendations and Snohomish County Heart report would be helpful. Dee [no last name given], expressed support for the no camping laws in Edmonds and the last resort tool if a homeless person refuses help, offering jail or a bus ticket to Anywhere Else USA. She urged the council to make the needed changes on 220th & 80th, finding it sad that the City, although fully informed of this dangerous situation, did absolutely nothing. She asked the City to look into constructing sidewalks in all school neighborhoods as students walking to school need to be protected and have sidewalks to walk on. She urged the council to look into this before spending money on bike trails in the streets and to keep little kids safe first. She supported leaving the current residential zoning in place to keep Edmonds manageable with existing infrastructure. A housing committee is great, but maybe the cart was put before the horse; the City should have asked the citizens via a ballot to decide whether zoning changes were desirable. She expressed appreciation for the time and effort councilmembers give to the City. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 26, 2022 Page 12 Natalie Seitz, Edmonds, shared observations about public process and equity. With regard to public process, she grew up in an active civic family, her father was an attorney who represented community service districts and gave lectures on public access television on the implementation of the Brown Act, California’s public process low. From a young age, she became versed in transparency as foundational for good governance. Since becoming an adult, she has had the opportunity to administer and participate in many public processes and influence regulations that are adopted regionally and statewide. She has also been blessed to have employers who valued and provided opportunities for her to grow in her understanding of equity. She offered high level takeaways; first, while many jurisdictions now institute equitable outreach and engagement to develop plans, the process between public release of the draft plan and adoption almost always serves to produce equitable distribution of resources. For Edmonds, this process has thus far increased distribution of resources to the grossly overserved downtown by reinserting the $6 million Marina Beach project and adding over $8 million of additional investments with no new additions in under-served and non-downtown areas. Second, subversions of public process never have the intent or outcome of prompting equitable distribution of resources Ms. Seitz continued, for Edmonds, this has been council providing their notes to select residents prior to public hearing and council running a parallel process to develop open space environmental priorities with the Save Our Marsh group instead of the broader Edmonds community but especially the underserved communities that were prioritized for open space investment. Third, if a process begins to no longer distribute resources to dominant communities, i.e. begins to distribute resources to under-served communities, new criteria are often developed to ensure the dominant community remains prioritized. This is council inserting environmental priorities of downtown instead of having an open and transparent public process. In short, what the council is doing is why equity is so hard, because there will always be projects and special interests and there appears to be no ability for the council to allow these interests to be publicly discussed and debated for the benefit of all Edmonds residents. Earlier this year the council took months to rework the budget due to transparency and public process concerns. Why are the residents from SR-99 who signed an open letter to council asking for public process treated so differently than those who live downtown? Either public process matters every time or is it just a tool that only certain communities are given access to. Her comments next week will address why acquisition of the Unocal property does not make sense as a park open space investment. Bill Herzig, Edmonds, said he moved to Ballard in 2013; while there, the City of Seattle began to make significant changes in how they managed housing, homelessness, and the like. Where they used to enjoy going to downtown Ballard, the library and the adjacent park became open air drug emporiums and the kids in the neighborhood were no longer able to go to the library or park because it was unsafe. They also had a number of friends who owned businesses where people would sleep in the doorways at night, doing what humans do in those doorways and requiring they be removed in the mornings. The whole city became fundamentally unlivable which is why in 2016 they moved to Edmonds, a charming, livable, open and accepting community. He expressed support for the last resort effort. He realized there was no perfection in resources as one of the earlier commenters pointed out and supported increasing resources for those experiencing homelessness or drug addiction. The citizens of Edmonds pay the city council and the police to keep them safe and keep the town open and accessible. He did not want people who have problems put at the top of the pyramid and the citizens who pay taxes and support the city government ignored. Everyone should have an opportunity to survive and thrive in the community, but the community needs to be kept safe for the people who live here and the people with problems addressed with the resources they need to solve their problems. Deborah Arthur, Edmonds, said she agreed with pretty much what everyone said. She knows a lot of drug addicts and feels sorry for them, recalling a lifelong friend addicted to crack, a nice guy, union carpenter and whose wife was a pharmacist, was finally able to get off drugs. Doing nothing does not help Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 26, 2022 Page 13 these people and it also makes citizens victims because they need money to buy drugs and they get it by committing crimes. She is scared when her husband leaves for the grocery store that someone may jump over the fence and crash through her backdoor. That wouldn’t happen if people didn’t need the money. She supported doing something in a kind way and would like to have places built where people can be rehabilitated or if they are mentally ill, can receive medication. She recalled an incident years ago where a man with schizophrenic shot someone in Pioneer Square. She is from the 60s and understands this because she has lived it. She wanted to help anyone she can but people cannot allowed to break into homes, assault people, and run over people in the street. She also expressed concern with the situation at 220th & 80th, recalling cars traveling 50-60 mph on 80th until 2 or 3 a.m. Jim Ogonowski, Edmonds, referred to the unlawful occupation of public property ordinance the council will be considering tonight. He referred to information he provided the council, constructive comments to improve and broaden the ordinance. He described being the victim of an attack outside Southwest County Park in December by an individual off his meds, homeless and likely living in the park for the previous few days. He was attacked with a knife, but luckily was able to avoid any serious injury. This ordinance is well overdue and needs to be enacted to keep the community safe. He has compassion for the individuals and recognizes not everyone should be treated the same, but there needs to be something on the books to give law enforcement ability to deal with these type of incidents that could result in something more serious than that he encountered. He admitted he got lucky and wouldn’t wish that experience on anyone and urged the council to do the right thing tonight. Dan Murphy, Edmonds, said there are 12 homes on the market in Edmonds, all but 2 are over $900,000; the median home price in Edmonds is $975,000 or $1.2 million for single family homes. The average time on the market in Edmonds is 6 days, up from 5 days a year ago and median home prices are up 46% year on year, evidence of worsening in the affordability in housing crisis. Instead of attacking the root cause of the problem which is clearly to enable and build more density within the City, something the citizens housing commission recommended in a very comprehensive report last year, the council and others in the City have been dithering about a proposed apartment building on Main Street for months. There is clearly not enough supply of housing and now the city is looking to criminalize homelessness. Mr. Murphy said although he felt for the victims of crimes, it seems policy makers are just shirking their responsibilities which he felt was a lazy way out. There is a responsibility to make the City affordable for young families to live here so it is not just a community for the ultra-wealthy. When more homes are not allowed, the natural byproduct is homelessness. He urged citizens to be more careful and sensitive about how they speak about their neighbors, calling them drug addicts, vagrants, and these people. These people are our neighbors and they are struggling. Criminalizing homelessness runs counter to the recommendations of the City’s own taskforce which Council President Olson was involved in. He acknowledged this was a very complex issue with a lot of different facets, but it seems the council and the City is taking the easy way out – kick the unfortunate people out of town, get them out of sight and out of mind, so we can go on with our lives which to him was not the way. Jeremy Bartram, Edmonds, said he moved to Westgate 1½ years ago from north Seattle. He grew up in Seattle and bought a home in north Seattle and raised a family of 5. He felt forced out of his home due to the deterioration he saw. Allowing public camping in public spaces caused all the green spaces in his neighborhood to become polluted. He was nearly attacked by a homeless man while running on a trail. He and his children were chased out of the parking lot of a nearby grocery store. He objected to what the previous speaker said, this is not complex, compassion must be shown, but public camping cannot be allowed because it is a public safety issue, an environmental issue and it is not compassionate. He worked for a year in a homeless shelter in Newark, New Jersey where he saw addiction. There is compassion in helping people make hard decisions. More resources are necessary but there also needs to be laws to keep citizens safe. He hoped the council would make the right decision. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 26, 2022 Page 14 7. APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER L. JOHNSON, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. (Councilmember K. Johnson was not present for the vote.) The agenda items approved are as follows: 1. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF APRIL 19, 2022 2. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL AND BENEFIT CHECKS, DIRECT DEPOSIT AND WIRE PAYMENTS. 3. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS 4. CONFIRM APPOINTMENT OF CANDIDATE TO A BOARD/COMMISSION 5. CONFIRM APPOINTMENT OF CANDIDATE TO A BOARD/COMMISSION 6. EDMONDS PUBLIC FACILITIES DISTRICT RESOLUTION AND FINANCIAL INFO 7. WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS 8. COUNCIL BUSINESS 1. EXTENSION OF INTERIM PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR APPOINTMENT HR Director Jessica Neill Hoyson requested an extension of the interim appointment of Rob English as the public works director. Recruitment for that position is still in process and interviews are scheduled the first week in May. She was hopeful the position would be filled soon but recognized it would not be filled before the interim appointment expires on May 10th. Council President Olson thanked Mr. English his willingness to serve as the interim public works director and for accepting the extension. Ms. Neill Hoyson advised he did agree to the extension. COUNCILMEMBER L. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE THE EXTENSION OF ROBERT ENGLISH AS INTERIM PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR FOR 6 MONTHS FROM MAY 10, 2022 OR UNTIL A HIRE IS MADE, WHICHEVER COMES SOONER. Councilmember Chen thanked Ms. Neill Hoyson for presenting this and Mr. English for his willingness to take on this position on an interim basis. He recognized the City was shorthanded, there were many challenges and the task had not been easy. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. (Councilmember K. Johnson was not present for the vote.) 2. AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR THE 2022 OVERLAY PROGRAM Interim Public Works Director Rob English reviewed the 2022 Overlay Program: • Construction contract o 27 city streets o 6.8 lane miles o 2 inch grind/overlay o Pavement fabric o Kevlar fibers Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 26, 2022 Page 15 • Bid Results Contractor Bid results Amount JB Asphalt $1,242,914 Granite Construction $1,678,315 Lakeside $1,734,893 Engineer’s Estimate $1,259,747 • Construction budget Item Amount Contract Award $1,242,914 Construction Mgmt, Inspection & Testing $186,440 Management Reserve $124,290 Total $1,553,644 • Construction funding Item Amount Fund 112 – (General Fund Transfer) $452,590 REET – Fund 125 $524,930 REET – Fund 126 $505,770 Stormwater Utility – Fund 422 $50,830 Sewer Utility – Fund 423 $52,640 Total $1,586,760 • Staff recommendation o Award contract to JP Asphalt for $1,242,914 o Authorize a 10% Management Reserve of $124,290 COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER CHEN, TO AWARD THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO JB ASPHALT FOR $1,242,914 AND AUTHORIZE A 10% MANAGEMENT RESERVE OF $124,290. Councilmember Chen said the bids are reasonable, the contractor is excellent, and he was happy with the proposal. He referred to the map following packet page 167, observing the streets identified for overlay are concentrated in the southeast end of the City and there was not much on the north end. Mr. English answered the program is planned to keep the streets in close proximity which saves on costs related to mobilization and moving equipment around; it is expensive to move the grinding machine and pavers. An area is identified each year and paving done within that area as much as possible. Many things are balanced when streets are selected including the pavement rating, other ongoing projects and utility improvements. Paving has been done in the north and central parts of the City in the past and will be likely be done downtown in the future. Councilmember Chen commented it makes sense to focus in one area due to all the heavy equipment and workflow planning. He recalled when doorbelling during his campaign, residents in the north end expressed concern the City was not paying enough attention to that area. He was glad it was in the plan for the future. Council President Olson thanked Mr. English for a very complete packet and commended engineering for the estimate, noting it was comforting when the estimates was so close. Mr. English agreed to pass on her thanks to Project Manager Ryan Hague. Councilmember Paine referred to the maps that indicate overlays in front of Westgate Elementary and asked if it would be completed before school starts. Mr. English answered yes, given the current schedule, the overlay should be finished by the end of August. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. (Councilmember K. Johnson was not present for the vote.) Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 26, 2022 Page 16 3. 2022 APRIL BUDGET AMENDMENT Administrative Services Director Dave Turley reviewed: • 10 requests tonight, more detailed information available beginning on council packet page 168. • If approved, this budget amendment would increase forecast revenue by $119,645 and would increase budgeted expenditures by $2,694,010 • Please note that none of tonight’s requests involve any reduction of cash or transfer of cash from one fund to another fund, all requests only affect spending authority for those funds. Fund Proposed Change in Revenue Proposed Change in Expense Proposed Change to Ending Fund 001 General Fund $2,989,337 $(2,989,337) 016 – Building Maintenance $119,645 (435,000) $554,645 011 – Street Maintenance 61,104 (61,104) 142 – ARPA Fund 100,000 (100,000) 421 – Water Utility Fund 15,094 (15,094) 422 – Storm Utility Fund (61,791) 61,791 423 – Sewer Utility Fund 17,355 (17,355) 511 – Fleet Management 7,911 (7,911) $119,645 $2,694,010 $(2,574,365) • Amendments 1. Provide an additional $1,569,015 of budget authority to account for the increase to the annual contract with South County Fire as approved by council. 2. Provide an additional $167,295 to account for the increase to the annual assessment from Washington Cities Insurance Authority, the city’s insurance provider. The amount included in the 2022 budget was the amount projected by WCIA in the summer of 2021, but the actual updated assessment received in December was higher than the previous estimate. 3. Provide $100,000 for a contracted project manager to provide ARPA grant management as well as audit management with the State Auditor’s Office. 4. Provide $60,000 for a contracted project management to manage the upcoming ERP implementation 5. Provide $62,400 for temporary contracted staffing from Robert Half to assist in managing workload due to an unplanned staffing shortfall. 6. Provide $5,000 for additional time and materials due to expansion of Sound Salmon Solutions program. 7. Provide the contracted amount of $38,800 for the Salmon Safe Certification Project. 8. Remove budget authority from the new Fund 016 and place it in the building maintenance division of the General Fund, to be used for operational building maintenance issues or small equipment replacement. This was originally included in the 016 fund but is more appropriate in the General Fund. This request adds no additional budget authority. 9. Add budget authority in the building maintenance division of the General Fund, specifically to maintain annual service agreements as well as allow for ongoing repairs and maintenance. 10. Add $119,645 of additional revenue for a Washington Department of Commerce solar plant grant, as well as $230,000 of expenditure authority related to the project, for a net budget increase of $110,355 Councilmember Buckshnis advised the April 12, 2022 finance committee meeting included a robust conversation regarding many of the amendments. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO APPROVE ORDINANCE 4255, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 26, 2022 Page 17 WASHINGTON, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 4250 AS A RESULT OF UNANTICIPATED TRANSFER AND EXPENDITURES OF VARIOUS FUNDS, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. Councilmember Chen agreed with the comments about the process at the finance committee and thanked Mr. Turley for updating the amendments to reflect the finance committee’s discussion. He asked if WCIA was the only insurance provider for the City or were there other players in the market that the City could choose from. Mr. Turley answered WCIA is an organization of approximately 170 in Washington cities who banded together. This is a unique organization in Washington and there is not really an alternative similar to WCIA. Most cities Edmonds’ size are borderline with regarding to being self-insured. Edmonds is at the bottom of the range and would need to be a little bigger to make being self-insured work. He was unsure if there were any other standard insurance companies that offered insurance for cities such as Safeco or Allstate. City Attorney Jeff Taraday said there are cities that contract for insurance on the open market; that is not the norm and the vast majority of cities the size of Edmonds are members of an insurance pool like WCIA. There are two other insurance pools but the members tend to be smaller cities. Most cities Edmonds’s size are members of WCIA. He explained WCIA is not an insurance company, it is a group of cities who pool their resources to provide coverage for unforeseen circumstances. Councilmember Chen asked how the premiums were decided. Mr. Taraday said his understanding is somewhat vague, he is not the City’s WCIA delegate, but his general understanding is the premium is based on a rolling 5-year claims history; the more claims a city has in a 5-year period, the more it will eventually effect the premium. Edmonds is pooled with other cities so sometimes the premium goes up if other city has significant losses. It is not necessarily directly related to an Edmonds loss; it could be that the pool in general needs to bolster its reserves. Mr. Turley said it was not dissimilar to car insurance; if someone has a couple accidents, their premium might go up and if they have a good driving record for a while, it might go down. If there is a catastrophic event in the area, the insurance company may increase everyone’s premiums. He summarized those are the principles we live by with insurance. Councilmember Chen asked if it was fair to say that at this stage the City did not have other choices but to go with WCIA. Mr. Taraday answered there are other choices. For example, Bremerton is roughly Edmonds’ size and does not use WCIA and instead is self-insured. At one point in time, a prior administration was looking into that and gathering facts. There are choices but it is definitely by far the norm to use WCIA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. (Councilmember K. Johnson was not present for the vote.) 4. ARPA FUNDING STATUS Deputy Parks, Recreation, Cultural Arts & Human Services Director Shannon Burley said this presentation was provided to committee by the former interim community services director. ARPA funding will likely not live with parks and recreation moving forward. She reviewed: • Suggested Ordinance Changes: Ordinance No 4237 o Based on actual experience, the language in the ordinance setting both a “per unit” dollar amount and a total number of “units” imposes an unforeseen limitation on getting funding out to customers. For example with Household Support: ▪ Current language - Household Support Example: “Household support: Up to $3,000,000 for Grants to households earning for housing expenses, food, medical bills, childcare, internet and other household expenses. Up to Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 26, 2022 Page 18 400 households may receive grants up to $2,500 in 2021 and 2022. Up to 200 households may receive grants up to $2,500 in 2023 and 2024.” ▪ Issue: Not all households have enough expenses to be eligible for the full $2,500. Accordingly, we hit the number of households limitation of 400 before we reach the fully authorized annual funding limitation. ▪ Possible new language: Household support: Up to $3,000,000 for Grants to households earning for housing expenses, food, medical bills, childcare, internet and other household expenses. Up to 400 hHouseholds may receive grants up to $2,500 to a total Household Support expenditure of $1,000,000 in both 2021 and 2022. Up to 200 hHouseholds may receive grants up to $2,500 to a total expenditure of $500,000 in both 2023 and 2024.” o Based on actual experience, it may be difficult for clients to provide adequate documentation to show earnings in order to meet the 60% Edmonds Median Income Limitation. ▪ Current language - Household Support “To be eligible for grants, households must earn no more than 60% of Edmonds Median Income, with priority given to households earning at or below 40%.” ▪ Issue: It may be difficult for some households to provide documentation (W2, 1099, or other verified means) to determine if they meet the 60% requirement. ▪ Possible new language: “To be eligible for grants, households must meet one of the two following parameters: 1) earn no more than 60% of Edmonds Median Income, with priority given to households earning at or below 40%, or 2) qualify for assistance under one of the listed programs on the US Department of Treasury Final Rule for the State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) program, as an impacted or disproportionately impacted household or community.” • Listed programs on the US Department of Treasury Final Rule for the State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) program: o In recognition of the difficulties cities were experiencing with qualifying clients to receive funding, Treasury’s Final Rule established the following: ▪ Impacted households. Treasury will recognize a household as impacted if it otherwise qualifies for any of the following programs: - Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) - Childcare Subsidies through the Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) Program - Medicaid - National Housing Trust Fund (HTF), for affordable housing programs only - Home Investment Partnerships Program (HOME), for affordable housing programs only ▪ Disproportionately impacted households. Treasury will recognize a household as disproportionately impacted if it otherwise qualifies for any of the following programs: - Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) - Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) - Free and Reduced-Price Lunch (NSLP) and/or School Breakfast (SBP) programs - Medicare Part D Low-income Subsidies - Supplemental Security Income (SSI) - Head Start and/or Early Head Start - Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) - Section 8 Vouchers - Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) - Pell Grants Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 26, 2022 Page 19 - For services to address educational disparities, Treasury will recognize Title I eligible schools36 as disproportionately impacted and responsive services that support the school generally or support the whole school as eligible • Staff Recommended Changes to ARPA allocations: o Combine $1,000,000 Housing Repair Program with Household Support Grants and allow home repair as part of Household Support Grant Program ($500,000 per year in 2023 & 2024 = $1M per year). o Increase Non-Profit Support by $200,000 o Add $500,000 in Green Infrastructure to cover the Yost Park Stormwater Mitigation (budgeted in REET, construction in 2022), this allows the funding to be available for future projects. o Reduce Green Streets by $400,000 ($600,000 remaining), consistent with council-approved budget o Reduce Perrinville Creek by $300,000 ($3,200,000 remaining) Council President Olson observed the recommendation did not include action. She asked if a motion on the language change would be helpful. She asked staff to address the urgency/lack of urgency on the two items. Ms. Burley answered it would be helpful to ask the city attorney to draft a revised ordinance based on the recommended language revisions. She envisioned that ordinance could be placed on the consent agenda at the council’s discretion. Regarding the funding allocations, staff is moving ahead as current allocated. There is not a great sense of urgency with the exception of the Civic Park allocation; it would be great to know whether that is authorized by council sooner than later although authorizing that would require determining the source of funding. That decision can be delayed a few months. COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO CHANGE THE WORDING AS REFLECTED IN THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND HAVE THE CITY ATTORNEY DRAFT AN ORDINANCE TO REFLECT THAT. Councilmember Buckshnis clarified the language is related to Ordinance 4237 and the funding allocation is a separate ordinance. COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON ACCEPTED THE CHANGE PROPOSED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS. Councilmember Paine commented there are some changes that will allow help to be provided to households sooner and she supported that. She was hesitant about approving the items in staff’s recommended changes to the ARPA allocation such the one as related to green infrastructure. Councilmember Buckshnis raised a point of order advising the allocation is a separate ordinance. This is only regarding Ordinance 4237. Councilmember Paine said she was referring to the staff recommended changes. Councilmember Buckshnis responded the staff recommended changes to the language relate to Ordinance 4237. The allocation is a separate ordinance, Ordinance 4229. The motion on the floor is related to Ordinance 4237 and the recommended change in the language. With regard to the ordinance numbers, Mr. Taraday suggested because council is not taking a final vote tonight, the city attorney’s office could draft the ordinances in a way that makes sense and is clear and easy to understand after getting substantive feedback from the council. He was unsure it would be easiest to amend Ordinance 4237, there may be a more straightforward way. He preferred to gather the substantive feedback from council and return with an ordinance that reflects that. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 26, 2022 Page 20 Councilmember Paine said she wanted more time to discuss green streets and other changes to the funding. She agreed with the changes that support housing services and families. Councilmember Tibbott referred to the $500,000 green infrastructure allocation, and asked if ARPA funding allows funding of green infrastructure improvements. Ms. Burley answered yes. Councilmember Tibbott referred to helping households with utilities and asked whether a property owner could access those funds for payment of utilities in the situation where a renter left with an unpaid utility bill that became the obligation of the property owner. Ms. Burley offered to get back to him with a precise answer. She believed landlords had access to ARPA funds but wanted to confirm that. As stated previously, development and oversight of the programs do not live within her department. Councilmember Buckshnis said it was her understanding there would be a public hearing on the allocation ordinance, Ordinance 4229. She recalled the Edmonds Marsh was removed from stormwater so the $750,000 allocation needs to be removed per council vote during the budget amendment process. She expressed support for the staff recommendations, but wanted to increase non-profit funding quite a bit. It was her understanding Council President Olson wanted to have a public hearing first which was the reason for approving the ordinance regarding the language first. Although not required, citizens may want to weigh in at a public hearing. If the intent is to delay the language changes and include both in one ordinance, it may not be advantageous to have a public hearing. Council President Olson suggested withdrawing the motion and treating it as discussion. Mr. Taraday responded the motion on the floor was directing the city attorney to draft the ordinance. If that is correct, the motion on the floor is appropriate. He suggested leaving the specifics about amending the ordinance for the attorneys to figure out. They will draft it in a way that makes sense and is easy to follow, but both ordinance may need to be amended. The ordinances regarding the language and the financial allocation can proceed on separate timetables if that is the council’s wish. He summarized the council should provide policy guidance and let the attorneys do the legal work. Council President Olson suggested proceeding with the motion regarding only the language. Councilmember Chen expressed support for the language changes to Ordinance 4237 to speed up the distribution of household ARPA funding, because households need those funds as soon as possible. With regard to the ARPA allocation, the $500,000 for green infrastructure to cover the Yost Park stormwater mitigation, that project is already budgeted and funded via the budget amendment process so that request is redundant. In addition, the $400,000 for green street funding was already removed from the budget. He agreed the council needed more time to discuss the fund reallocation and to get the public involved. Council President Olson raised a point of order, clarifying the motion was only regarding the language. Mayor Nelson ruled point taken. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. (Councilmember K. Johnson was not present for the vote.) COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO TAKE A VOTE TO INFORM THE FINANCE DIRECTOR AND DEPUTY DIRECTOR BURLEY OUR INTENT TO USE ARPA FUNDING FOR THE YOST PROJECT AND WE WILL FIGURE OUT HOW TO GO ABOUT THAT DOWN THE ROAD. Council President Olson commented it may be important for staff to know the council intends to use ARPA for that project versus using REET funds. How to proceed can be determined at the agenda planning meeting. Councilmember Buckshnis said she had no problem supporting the motion but asked if it was time sensitive. Ms. Burley responded time sensitive is relative; it is not time sensitive in the next few weeks or Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 26, 2022 Page 21 month, but much longer than that becomes a problem. Councilmember Buckshnis said funds need to be moved around; as Councilmember Chen said, the $400,000 and $750,000 were already taken out so there are funds available. She asked if the intent was to have public hearing or just a discussion, noting a public hearing requires 2 weeks’ notice. Council President Olson clarified the motion is only about that one item so staff has direction. She anticipated a subsequent motion to schedule a public hearing to get public input on the rest of the allocations. Councilmember Paine commented it was well within the purview of the council president to schedule a public hearing soon so a vote regarding intent was not necessary. Councilmember Buckshnis said the council president is representing the entire council and it’s possible not all councilmembers want to have a public hearing so a motion is relevant. During the following vote, Council President Olson restated the motion GIVING STAFF THE NOD THAT WE INTEND TO USE ARPA FUNDING FOR THE $500,000 YOST PROJECT. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (3-3), COUNCILMEMBERS TIBBOTT, AND BUCKSHNIS AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS CHEN, PAINE AND L. JOHNSON VOTING NO. Councilmember Chen said he voted no because he did not think it required a vote. Council President Olson asked if council approval was required to move money from one fund to another. Mr. Taraday advised movement of money between funds requires a council vote. The motion was just to signal council intent, not actually move the money; moving the money will require a subsequent council action. While staff may be interested in knowing the council’s intentions so they can plan accordingly, tonight’s vote would not authorize that transfer. Council President Olson asked if the outcome of the vote mattered. Mayor Nelson said it showed the intent of the council. Council President Olson said one member said he voted no because he did not think it mattered. If the vote mattered, that councilmember may wish to reconsider his vote. Mr. Taraday anticipated staff would interpret this as being inconclusive and return at later date with a formal proposal. Ms. Burley said the intent was to share the proposal tonight with the staff recommended changes and to inspire council discussion regarding how to use ARPA funds. She appreciate the update to the language as a great first start and recognized the final allocation would take time. She requested council discuss the Civic Park potential allocation sooner rather than later as it will help staff navigate that project. For Councilmember Chen, Ms. Burley advised there is budget authority for that project from two funds that can be used for other projects. The request is to utilize ARPA funding instead of REET and park impact fees, thereby saving the REET and park impact fees for use on different projects because ARPA funding expires. COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE ALLOCATION OF ARPA FUNDS ON EITHER MAY 17TH OR 24TH, TO BE DETERMINED AT THE AGENDA SETTING MEETING. Council President Olson commented the motion is optional, but it would be great to hear from residents as well as councilmembers or others about how other cities are spending their ARPA funds. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 26, 2022 Page 22 MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. (Councilmember K. Johnson was not present for the vote.) COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO AMEND THE AGENDA AND TAKE OFF THE TREE CODE UPDATE, COUNCIL BUSINESS ITEM 8.6. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. (Councilmember K. Johnson was not present for the vote.) 5. PROPOSED ORDINANCE ADDING NEW CHAPTER, CHAPTER 5.70 ENTITLED “UNLAWFUL OCCUPATION OF PUBLIC PROPERTY Patricia Taraday, city attorney’s office, explained the ordinance was drafted after much collaborative work with Deputy Parks Director Shannon Burley and Chief of Police Michelle Bennett and input from her staff. As stated in the purpose section, the purpose of the ordinance is to protect the public health and safety of Edmonds residents, those who are housing insecure and those who are unhoused while still ensuring the constitutional rights of those who are unhoused are being protected. The ordinance makes it unlawful to occupy public property when overnight public shelter is available and subsequently refused. She reviewed: • Unlawful occupation of public property ordinance o Affordable housing crisis o Regional increase in unhoused population o Occupation of public property because nowhere else to go • City of Edmonds Response o Added component of human services to Deputy Parks & Recreation Director position o Working with local non-profits to coordinate existing services o Taskforce created to analyze complex issues related to unhoused o Taskforce supports offering of services and prioritizing shelter to unhoused • What does ordinance address? o Allows police to cite individuals only when two conditions are met: 1) Available overnight shelter exists 2) Available overnight shelter has been offered and refused • Constitutional limitations o Courts have limited the authority to cite unhoused for occupying public property o Martin v. Boise case: ▪ Violation of Eighth Amendment if cite unhoused individual when there is no available shelter ▪ Court looked at what “available” meant ▪ Cannot criminalize an act of being (sleeping) ▪ Court noted that holding does not cover individuals who do have access to adequate temporary shelter but choose not to use it • What is “Available Overnight Shelter” o Defined in Ordinance Section 5.70.020 ▪ Public or private shelter ▪ No charge to individual ▪ The city facilities the transport (bus ticket, etc.) ▪ If cannot use because of sex, familial or marital status, religious beliefs, disability or a shelter’s length-of-stay restrictions, the space is not considered to be available. • Application of Ordinance o If an unhouse individual is occupying public property: 1) City must offer available shelter to the unhoused individual; and 2) If the individual refuses shelter, police can cite, notify them that property will be removed, and store if not removed. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 26, 2022 Page 23 • Operational Rules o 5.70.050 Rules ▪ The chief of police is hereby authorized to adopt rules, regulations, administrative policies, and procedures for implementing the provisions of this chapter o Removal of property ▪ Notice that city is going to remove property within certain time-period, at least 72 hours o Storage of property ▪ When and how to store ▪ Usually period of at least 60 days • Wrap-up o Effect of ordinance is limited to comply with current law: ▪ Only enforce if available shelter exists and ▪ Shelter is refused o Shelter space must be truly “available” ▪ Cannot enforce if barriers make shelter unavailable o Focus on provision of services and housing Councilmember Tibbott asked what constitutes available housing, whether it has to be available in Edmonds or could it be available elsewhere in the county or anywhere in the state. Ms. Taraday answered there were discussions about how to define it or including Snohomish County as a geographical boundary, but there are many shelter opportunity in north King County that Ms. Burley has close contacts with, so was decided not to include a geographical boundary for an available shelter. The City will rely on the reasonableness of the combined efforts of the chief of police, Ms. Burley and the humans services staff to assist with reasonable parameters. It will also depend on transportation options. She envisioned available shelters up to Everett and perhaps to north King County would be reasonable, but it is about reaching out to see if shelter is available. If shelter is not available, the ordinance cannot be enforced. Councilmember Tibbott envisioned a specialized shelter may be requested, but it may not be readily available in the immediate local area but it could be available in another part of the county or even in the state. He agreed creating geographical boundaries would be difficult if there is a highly desirable shelter for a person who needs it. He referred to a presentation by an official in Snohomish County who observed Snohomish County now has beds available for anyone who needs one and questioned the extent of the availability. He cited growth in the last few years in the amount of shelter available, anticipating the City would be successful in providing shelter for people willing to come off the streets. Councilmember Chen referred to chapter 5.7.020, observing the general theme was targeting unhoused people, but there was no verbiage about housed people who occupy public property unlawfully. He asked if the ordinance targeted only the homeless and not everyone else. Ms. Taraday answered the ordinance was drafted to answer a very narrow question about the occupation of public property by the unhoused. COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER CHEN, TO EXTEND TO 10:20. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. (Councilmember K. Johnson was not present for the vote.) Ms. Taraday continued the ordinance only addresses the unhoused. If the council wanted to make a distinction between the housed and unhoused within the ordinance, it could be revised to reflect that distinction. This was answering a specific question and need that seems to be arising in many jurisdictions. Councilmember Chen said a law should apply to everyone equally as stated in the title, unlawful occupation of public property. He did not support the ordinance as he did not support singling out the unfortunate and less privileged people. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 26, 2022 Page 24 Councilmember L. Johnson said the homelessness taskforce stated before enforcing unauthorized use of public space, the City has a constitutional obligation to provide shelter for persons experiencing homelessness. Furthermore, they do not recommend criminalizing homelessness but increasing shelter and working to stabilize those who are unsheltered. The taskforce made a number or recommendations, starting with ensure shelter availability and property storage are available and resources are in place to enforce/adhere to these policies before considering no camping laws as required by the federal law. She referred to an earlier comment, and asked how can someone say anyone is refusing services when the City of Edmonds does not have services to give. Councilmember L. Johnson continued, the taskforce made a number of recommendations and she questioned why the City was leading with an ordinance against camping, noting camping was an improper term as it was related to recreation. Ms. Taraday responded the ordinance serves to project the constitutional rights of those that are unhoused and ensures that the City is not criminalizing homelessness. Before the police are able to arrest or cite an unhoused individual for occupying any public property, shelter needs to exist and it needs to be offered and only when that shelter is refused and they continue to occupy the public property, would they be in a position to be cited or arrested. It is meant to illuminate the constitutional rights of the unhoused and ensure that is what the City is following. Councilmember L. Johnson said it seems the ordinance sets up a narrative that there is adequate shelter available to meet the need, but the reality is a totally different story. There is no shelter facility anywhere within the Edmonds city limits and as of today, the one shelter in south Snohomish County, the YWCA in Lynnwood has room for 17 women and children but there is a two month waiting list. The Monroe Gospel Mission, women only, has 9 beds based on availability and when you call, you are asked to leave a message. The Everett Gospel Mission, men only, is at capacity with no intake appointments at this time. Cocoon House for ages 12-17 and another program for adults, state call for availability, mostly at capacity. The Interfaith Family Shelter in Everett asks callers to leave a number and they will call if space is available. Leading with this ordinance tells people that adequate shelter is out there, but it is not. Councilmember L. Johnson was also concerned with saying if someone refuses services, even if they are available. She pointed out an unhoused resident trying to obtain one of the limited beds has to first leave Edmonds, wait in line without any guarantee of receiving the bed and if the shelter fills while they are waiting, they will still need to find somewhere to sleep but now are no longer in Edmonds. She questioned whether it was compassionate to remove someone from the community they reside in and dump them someplace else. She asked whether return transportation was provided and wondered whether the City was simply giving a bus ticket so they become someone else’s responsibility to deal with. She summarized this was backward, and at the very least should be tabled until these other issues are addressed. Councilmember Paine said her questions are related to where we are now and how we’ve gotten here. A lot of the public policy on addressing homelessness comes through caselaw and lawsuits; there are reams of paper on the topic and it is changing all the time. At some point the City needs to figure out how to properly manage individuals’ property such as a shopping cart. Another issue is someone who decides to live in a motor home, there are recent local rulings about that. This is a moving target. She asked what specifically the City is doing now to bring in human services, how services are being provided via funding and active programming, who are the local partners and what are the existing gaps and challenges. Councilmember Paine continued, the City’s human services have just gotten underway and it was her understanding there were five motel rooms available for up to six months and she understood there was a waiting list. Contrary to what the Kone report says, the City should also focus on keeping people in their Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 26, 2022 Page 25 homes. She expressed interest in the cost to store belongings, noting that was a huge thing to take on. A lot of the public comments were about having safe parks and walkways and while she was not sure there were issues with safety in Edmonds, she was aware of that fear and had seen needles in parking lots that need to be cleaned up by the property owners. She summarized her interest in addressing what the City is doing now, local partners, as well as the gaps and challenges and caselaw analysis. Ms. Burley commented there were many correct statement made, but some are incorrect. She agreed shelter was incredibly hard to come by. All the congregate shelters in a reasonable geographic area have been contacted and all have waiting lists or phone messages stating they will call when shelter becomes available. What is missing is the fact that motel vouchers programs can be used to house people and there are many more people in motels settings than are in congregate shelters in the City’s direct service area. While there are only 17 beds at the YWCA shelter for women, more people are being housed in motels in the Edmonds area than at the YWCA shelter so there are options. Staff is trying to bring to light that enforcing the ordinance will take a significant investment by everybody to increase available shelter. She was personally hopeful this would serve as a catalyst to unify everyone to a common goal, to ensure none of Edmonds’ residents are living on a sidewalk. That’s not humane and that is the goal behind this ordinance, to treat people with respect and provide a basic need, shelter. The City cannot do that today but can do it in the future if everyone is unified behind that common goal and that common vision. To answer the question of what is the City doing to people housed, Ms. Burley said the City is distributing ARPA funding as quickly as possible, the human services manager position was increased to 40 hours/week which will allow better coordination of care, staff is in discussion with DSHS and 211 to outstation their navigation resources in the human services office as an opportunity to expedite service coordination for anyone who needs it and that is expected to come to fruition in the next couple months, and staff is working closely with the police department and the community court to be creative and ensure property crimes are not being over-criminalized. The administration and council have combined to do some really unique and fantastic things in Edmonds. Using the analogy of the carrot and stick, the focus is on the carrot, but the ordinance provides the police department the opportunity to enforce penalty upon individuals who truly are not willing to accept services. Ms. Burley continued, it is rare to encounter someone who denies shelter, especially when most of the shelter being offered is in an individual room motel setting. With regard to transporting someone to a different city, that city wants Edmonds to transport them back. For the few people that are in a shelter receiving wraparound care such as in Everett, the agreement is Edmonds will bring them back once they complete their treatment. She stressed there was no one size fits all, everyone’s circumstances are unique. The ordinance is not a one size fits all solution; it allows the City the opportunity and to receive guidance from all parties that shelter matters and to continue to invest in providing enhanced shelter. Councilmember Paine asked about gaps and challenges. Ms. Burley said some of the most visible homeless individuals are experiencing mental health crisis which is what makes them visible. That comes with many layers because the treatment and services needed for those individuals is very intense. As she has shared during previous presentations, staff is working closely with Snohomish County to address the lack of shelter. On behalf of her colleagues and those who work in the human services and social services, she asked the council to please address the affordable housing situation and examine the recommendations made by the housing taskforce. The problem is very large and it took many years to get here and it will not be solved overnight with a single ordinance. Council President Olson thanked staff for the information and work that led up to the ordinance and the other things that Ms. Burley described. She noted another thing the City is doing is actively seeking a social worker which will be a great addition. Even though this may have been in response to a specific situation that occurred, she did not want her neighbor’s children to put a tent on the sidewalk for a week Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 26, 2022 Page 26 every summer because people want to use the sidewalk. She supported revising whereas clauses so it was neutral to the circumstances that might lead to that use. For example, someone does not need a hotel voucher but refuses when asked to move their tent; ultimately if they won’t move their tent, they really are camping. She did not want her neighbor’s kids camping on the sidewalk preventing her from riding her bike. She also suggested removing reference to residents as that may present an issue with enforcement. Council President Olson relayed comments from a woman she worked with on a marsh restoration project who moved to Edmonds from Seattle. The woman has friends who still live in Seattle who are conflicted and unhappy because their values are in conflict with their dislike for the circumstances they are living in. The reality is that without a doorstop, it only goes in one direction and the City has to address all the underlying issues. To Ms. Burley’s point that the City has been working on those things, she supported work harder by allocating money for motel stays or a motel designated for this purpose that is shared with south county partners. There are so many fronts that need attention; this is one tool in the toolbox and it is not expected to be used regularly. Council President Olson recalled a situation where a woman was living on the interurban trail for 4-5 months and was repeatedly offered a hotel stay and refused, sometimes more than once a day. At the five month point she was motivated to say yes for some reason. If she hadn’t, she could still conceivably be there today or there could be five other people choosing not to accept a hotel stay. She summarized that situation had been very problematic for residents. COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER CHEN, TO EXTEND FOR 15 MINUTES TO 10:35. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. (Councilmember K. Johnson was not present for the vote.) Council President Olson continued, in the most extreme circumstances there needs to be a doorstop, and we’ve seen what happens in a neighborhood when that was not available. Councilmember L. Johnson commented we live in a community that tends to protest each and every attempt to expand housing options, but then turn around and demand that something be done about homelessness. Everyone deserves a safe place to call home house, people who are currently housed and those without housing. Which should be addressed first; the demand and needs and feeling of safety of those that are currently housed, or by addressing the basic need of those struggling with being unhoused? Why not invest first and then circle back? The ordinance states that space is not considered to be available if the individual has attempted to secure a bed at a shelter by lining up in advance of the shelter opening for the day and has been denied due to lack of available space. This acknowledges that it is quite likely an individual will be removed from the place they have chosen to live that is the safest for them for whatever reason, transported outside the City, stand in line and very likely find out they will not get in. This ordinance does not include a guaranteed trip back. Councilmember L. Johnson continued, there are many things that people experiencing homelessness are struggling with. People may choose not to accept shelter because they know what they face having been through it before and do not wish to go through the destruction of being moved. They may have a pet; no shelters accept pets. What happens to a companion animal that means everything to a person? There are victims of domestic violence, or those with PTSD for whom the enclosed nature and lack of privacy of a shelter atmosphere makes them feel unsafe. For some, mass shelter is perceived as more threatening than sleeping outside. This is not adequate shelter; the ordinance does not even address adequate, only shelter available. Often in the most challenging situations, what there is to offer, if it is available, does not suit someone’s needs, yet the way the ordinance is written, there are so many things missing that she feared they would be taken advantage of, that people who were already struggling would have their struggles increased expediently. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 26, 2022 Page 27 COUNCILMEMBER L. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PAINE, TO TABLE THIS INDEFINITY WHILE WE DO FURTHER WORK ON OUR INVESTMENT. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (2-4), COUNCILMEMBERS PAINE AND L. JOHNSON VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS CHEN, TIBBOTT, AND BUCKSHNIS AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON VOTING NO. Councilmember Paine said she could not express what Councilmember L. Johnson said any better. She wanted to ensure that humans were prioritized because the process of being unhoused has to be fundamentally dehumanizing. There is so much to do; address housing, safety, and ensure people are treated with the dignity they deserve. There are good resources, but effort needs to be put behind them. It’s a big problem and this is one aspect; she preferred to make the first efforts and attempts rather than focusing on the last resort. She felt referring to this as the last resort was overly simplistic and she wanted to see better efforts put in as well as get questions answered with regard to lawsuits and recent caselaw. With regard to case law and courts, Ms. Taraday said this ordinance addresses what the courts have been concerned with, the unconstitutionality of criminalizing homeless. As long as there is available shelter and it is offered to someone and that person refuses, it is not considered to be cruel and unusual punishment when the crime is enforced. The ordinance is drafted to ensure the unhoused individual’s constitutional rights are protected and the language reflects current caselaw. Many other jurisdictions have incorporated this exact definition of available overnight shelter as well as the spirit of the law. Some jurisdictions provide a blanket no camping statement, but have other provisions in their ordinance stating it cannot be enforced when there is no shelter available. She believed the ordinance would be upheld and it preserves the constitutional rights of the unhoused. Councilmember Chen encouraged staff to rewrite the ordinance so it applied to all people breaking the law so it is fair and does not single out the less fortunate. He encouraged verbiage to ensure that when services are offered including available shelters, medical needs and other needs depending on the situation, that those offers are documented and can be traced and proven. He totally agreed with the spirt of protecting all people’s right to pursue happiness. For example, he has enjoyed going from being homeless as a child himself to living in a lovely community and he wanted to protect that and protect homeless people as well. The law must be applied fairly to all and help must be truly available. He requested the ordinance be rewritten to reflect those values and brought back to council for approval. Councilmember Buckshnis commented this is obviously a very sensitive issue to many people. Affordable housing is not just an Edmonds issue, it is an issue throughout the United States. Edmonds is not the only city dealing with the issue of homelessness and people losing their homes. It is sad and the City is trying to work on it. Staff and the attorney have done a good job. She believes everything Ms. Burley says because she is in the trenches and has provided good information. A lot of people like to say things without substantiated facts because this is a sensitive issue. The council should adopt an ordinance that allows normal people like herself to have the right to call the police if someone starts camping in her driveway and check out what going on. Councilmember Buckshnis continued, there have been many complaints over the last few years about people sleeping in the library, Perrinville Woods, and on Highway 99. There are a lot of people that need help and a lot of people who want help, but there are also some people who do not want help. It is important to have an ordinance to allow the administration to take care of that so all citizens are treated fairly. She agreed it was difficult to see and clean up messes. It is costly to clean up encampments and she did not understand why people would not accept motel vouchers. It is often unknown why people want to remain homeless or remain on the street. The City has done good research and she supports the administration’s efforts and the ordinance. She said it could be brought back to the council, noting Councilmember K. Johnson was having internet issues. She supported moving forward and said it was Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 26, 2022 Page 28 important to figure out how to help people who are homeless. The City has a human services department and will soon have a full-time social worker. COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED TO EXTEND FOR 10 MINUTES. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. 6. TREE CODE UPDATE This item was postponed to a future meeting via action at the conclusion of Agenda Item 8.4. 9. REPORTS ON OUTSIDE BOARD AND COMMITTEE MEETINGS 1. OUTSIDE BOARDS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS 10. MAYOR’S COMMENTS 11. COUNCIL COMMENTS 12. ADJOURN The meeting was adjourned at 10:35 p.m.