Cmd101822
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 18, 2022
Page 1
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MEETING
APPROVED MINUTES
October 18, 2022
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Mike Nelson, Mayor
Vivian Olson, Council President
Will Chen, Councilmember
Neil Tibbott, Councilmember
Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember
Susan Paine, Councilmember
Dave Teitzel, Councilmember
Jenna Nand, Councilmember
STAFF PRESENT
Whitney Rivera, Municipal Court Judge
Dave Turley, Administrative Services Director
Oscar Antillon, Public Works Director
Susan McLaughlin, Dev. Serv. Director
Kernen Lien, Planning Manager
Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
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 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 Nand read the City Council Land Acknowledge Statement: “We acknowledge the original
inhabitants of this place, the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and their successors the Tulalip Tribes, who
since time immemorial have hunted, fished, gathered, and taken care of these lands. We respect their
sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and we honor their sacred spiritual connection with the land
and water.”
3. ROLL CALL
City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present.
4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO
APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Mayor Nelson described procedures for in-person audience comments.
Glenn Douglas, Edmonds, a resident of the Gateway District of the Highway 99 corridor, said traffic and
pedestrian safety issues were inadequate addressed in the final EIS for the Highway 99 subarea plan. The
area around the largest development ever proposed for Edmonds, 236th & 84th, has serious traffic and
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 18, 2022
Page 2
pedestrian issues. In addition, 236th is the main road to Madrona School and he anticipated there would be
a lot of children in a 261 unit apartment complex in addition to the complex being built behind the Lutheran
Church. There are no sidewalks; he does not even walk his dog on that road because it is dangerous. The
speed limit is 25 mph but no one goes 25. There is a light at SR-104, but if his child was attending Madrona,
he would not want them crossing a five lane highway to reach the school. Adding 1,000 people in the four
new buildings that are either proposed or completed to their neighborhood of a few hundred people will
have a major impact. He did not feel the subarea plan evaluated the traffic situation, the impact of
pedestrians, lack of space, no curbs, etc. that create a dangerous situation. He recalled voicing his concerns
about 84th, the street he lives on, to the council in the past. Speeding has been a horrible problem; Traffic
Sergeant Strum was at the end of his driveway recently citing drivers, but that only lasted about two days
because as indicated by the police blotter, another problem in the Highway 99 subarea and neighborhood
is rampant crime.
Becky Chandler, Edmonds, a resident of the Gateway District of the Highway 99 corridor, requested the
council provide thoughtful consideration of the Highway 99 subarea in the same spirit it has considered
development in other parts of the City such as the Bowl. The Highway 99 subarea plan was developed to
encourage economic growth to benefit from the revenue stream generated via upzoning the area. She
supported having Highway 99 commercial development and the need for more housing in the area;
however, the disproportionate impact is notable. The Growth Management Act has been amended to
specifically require consideration of racial disparity impacts and displacement, specifically areas that may
be at higher risk for displacement from market forces that occur with changes to the zoning and
development regulations and capital investments. Prior to the planned action, the Highway 99 corridor was
identified as a moderate risk for displacement; all other areas of Edmonds are identified as low by the Puget
Sound Regional Council.
Ms. Chandler continued, displacement risks have intensified due to the effects of the pandemic, the light
rail and planned action which significantly increased property values in the area. There is significant new
information with the changes to the GMA and specific to the Highway 99 area that result in probable
significant adverse impact that should be addressed in the supplemental EIS. The vision of the subarea plan
was for 3-4 story apartment buildings and 5-6 story mixed use buildings, yet developments proposed in the
Gateway District are not in keeping with that vision and there is no way for residents in adjacent
neighborhoods to interject in the development process because approval of the subarea plan initially
circumvents that option. Requiring a supplemental EIS at this time or a moratorium on building permits is
a way to bring the Highway 99 communities together such as the moratorium in the BD2 district the council
imposed while considering community input of specific development.
Judi Gladstone, Edmonds, a resident of the Gateway District of the Highway 99 corridor, commented on
the 5-year review of the Highway 99 subarea plan FEIS and the opportunity the council has to address
inadequacies in that document. When the council adopted the FEIS in 2017, the ordinance included a
provision that requires a 5-year review that could result in the council proposing amendments to the
ordinance or requiring a supplement or revision to the planned action EIS. Although staff’s review indicates
there is no reason to recommend any council action, there is good reason to do so. The EIS was inadequate
at the outset because it did not include consideration of adequate alternatives. Comparing the no action
alternative is a requirement of SEPA which means the only real alternative was the preferred alternative. In
addition to the alternative to upzone the entire area to commercial general, there could have been alternative
to leave multifamily zoning where it is adjacent or across the street from single family residential zones.
The planned EIS contained mitigations intended to create transitions between the commercial general zone
and single family zones for those portions in the upzone, but those mitigations are insufficient to address
the disparity between building heights and densities allowed in the commercial zones and single family
homes.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 18, 2022
Page 3
Ms. Gladstone continued, the action to approve the emergency ordinance two weeks ago that put into place
the stepbacks indicated in the EIS but not included in code was a really good step in remedying the
inadequacies of the mitigations for the upzone, but more is needed to allow development in those areas to
follow the recommendations of the comprehensive plan for developing uses adjacent to single family areas.
She read from page 64 of the comprehensive plan regarding the Highway 99 corridor, “New development
should be allowed and encouraged to develop to the fullest extent possible while assuring that the design
quality and amenities provided contribute to the overall character and quality of the corridor. When intense
development adjoins residential areas, site design and building design should be used to minimize adverse
impacts on residential zoned properties.” One of the reasons for adopting an action plan is to streamline
development; but in doing that, the communities most impacted by that development have no avenue for
providing input about how well the development is accomplishing the recommendations of the
comprehensive plan. While she supports the staff recommendation that the City should look at the
development review process for projects within the commercial zone, that will be too late for developments
already proposed that could have long term, significant negative impacts on nearby single family
neighborhoods. Council action is needed now.
Amy June Grumble, Edmonds, a homeowner on 236th Street SW and parent of two children under the
age of six, wanted to add perspective on existing traffic and pedestrian safety issues which will only be
accelerated by the proposed Terrace Place development unless appropriate measures are taken to mitigate.
In addition to the problem of school-aged children including her own who use their street to access school
bus stops at the east end and Madrona Elementary at the west end and the fact that their road becomes
particularly busy with school buses and parent vehicle during morning drop-offs and afternoon pickups,
there are at least two additional groups impacted by these safety issues. First elderly, low income, and other
carless residents who must regularly access the Aurora Marketplace Safeway and other shopping resources
on foot. Second, commuters and particularly disabled residents who need to access public transit such as
the Swift buses on Highway 99 and the Community Transit 115 bus stops at the intersection of 236th & 84th
Avenue West where the development is proposed. Due to narrow or non-existent shoulders, street parking,
drainage ditches and inclines, several segments of these roads cannot be passed without crossing the white
line to literally walk in the street. This is also dangerous for parents with stroller-aged children and even
worse during rainy months when the few existing dirt paths are blocked due to standing water. The
intersection at 236th Street SW & 84th Avenue W has several low visibility corners, no crosswalks, few
safe places to stand and drivers do not stop for pedestrians. Finally 236th Street between Highway 99 and
Edmonds Way is regularly used by heavy 18-wheeler trucks as a shortcut to the Safeway loading dock.
These trucks are moving fast to keep on schedule and have limited visibility for close-by pedestrians and
access this road at all hours of the day and night. Pedestrian access in this area is already dangerous and the
risk falls disproportionately onto low income, elderly, and disabled residents and minors. She requested the
council take action to address these deficiencies in the FEIS Highway 99 subarea plan before an already
risky situation becomes even more serious.
Mayor Nelson described procedures for virtual audience comments.
Natalie Seitz, Edmonds, referred to the Highway 99 planned action five year review, commenting she
could talk for hours on the subject. She was frustrated reading the final EIS that reviews the EIS. No action
alternatives were considered other than the planned action, no public involvement in mitigation with only
two comment letters from Community Transit and a real estate agent. She was frustrated that in the cursory
review she could easily identify more than a half dozen ways in which the WAC criteria have been met to
do a supplemental EIS. She was equally frustrated by the certainty that additional impacts are occurring
that could be identified by a scoping process with this community. She was frustrated that park mitigation
commitments made in chapter 1 of the FEIS are negated in Ordinance 4079 and disregarded by the City as
identified in attachment 6. She was frustrated that the FEIS did not conclude that siting any amount of
growth in this area prior to park development would be a significant, unavoidable adverse impact. The level
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 18, 2022
Page 4
of service thresholds used in the FEIS or newly adopted ones in the PROS Plan are both exceeded. This is
incontrovertible, not a matter of opinion, this area is being significantly impacted. On May 25th, she
commented to council asking the City to “please perform outreach and engage the SR-99 community in the
SEPA responsible official review of the EIS and upzone.” Outreach did not occur and the City did not
inclusively advertise or meet with the broader community and only agreed to meet with her after the
determination was made.
Ms. Seitz continued, meeting with her or any member of the public does not matter if the City is only willing
to do it after the determination is made. She was frustrated the memo provided by the City does not include
any discussion of the WAC triggers for a supplemental EIS to be performed. The memo and supporting
documents discuss vague concepts of the City’s intent and consistency with the FEIS that is wholly
inadequate and does not meet the current code requirements. She was frustrated the memo avoids any
discussion of changes to the significance of impacts which trigger for the SEIS. People will not stop being
displaced; developers will not stop proposing high density, inclusionary housing even though the utilization
clearly demonstrates that the threshold will be exceeded without the commercial redevelopment. She cannot
take her children to the imaginary park of the City’s intent. Simply put, the code does not care about the
intent; it cares about impact. A supplemental EIS is required and concrete commitments to community-
driven mitigation are needed now. She supports growth that supports all income levels; this is about people
being displaced and unhoused, about the environment, resources and equity. She urged the City to commit
to undertake a scoping process and a supplemental EIS.
Nate Sugg, Edmonds, a resident of the Gateway District near the Highway 99 corridor, encouraged the
council to engage in a supplemental EIS related to the Highway 99 subarea plan. Highway 99 can and will
accommodate much of the population growth coming to Edmonds in the near future and many are fine with
that, but want to ensure that future development’s impact on traffic and pedestrian safety, access to safe
places for kids to play, and access to safe drinking water are adequately considered. With regard to park
space, this area is a park desert; there are no parks within walking distance. His 2½ year old loves slides,
but there are no public parks they can walk to. The actions identified in the original subarea plan mitigate
that park deficit have not been implemented and since those original considerations were made, the City
adopted a new level of service related to community and neighborhood parks. With regard to the proximity
to park resources, those standards are not included in the EIS because they were adopted since the EIS. The
use of outdated standards is another reason for a supplemental EIS that looks at the adoption of park level
of service. Second, their neighborhood recently learned that Olympic View Water & Sewer District plans
to install a new well on 228th Street and have a wellhead protection area that will span across Highway 99.
Redevelopment on Highway 99 in that area relies on deep underground injection control wells, a specific
type of well for stormwater management, that can impact drinking water for Edmonds residents. That
project is not within the scope of the current EIS, a change in circumstances that would support a
supplemental EIS. He asked the council to take action to allow a supplemental EIS to consider new
information that will assist in determining appropriate mitigation for new development. A supplemental
EIS will appropriately reexamine the assumptions about conditions in the area and needed mitigations for
those conditions.
Ken Reidy, Edmonds, acknowledged great audience comments that were being made. Olympic View
Water & Sewer’s franchise expired in 2014; he encouraged the council to check if the franchise had ever
been updated and is in place. He encouraged the council to form a citizen taskforce to review the historical
conduct of city attorneys and recommend how the City should obtain and manage legal advice as well as
allow a citizen taskforce to play a role in the update of Chapter 2.05 ECC. The proposed updates to Chapter
2.05 ECC in tonight’s packet will once again result in new inconsistencies in city code. Regarding the BID,
a collection letter written by Lighthouse Law Group claims that state statute allows cities to establish a BID
either by petition from business owners within the BID boundaries or by resolution from the legislative
authority of the City. It was his understanding the state statue allows cities to initiate a BID process either
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 18, 2022
Page 5
by petition from business owners within the BID boundaries or by resolution from the legislative authority
of the City. The word “initiate” is very different from establish. Furthermore, the BID of downtown
Edmonds was not established by resolution; it was established under Ordinance 3909.
Mr. Reidy continued, the City of Seattle represents the following, as provided in RCW 35.87A.010, the
City will consider establishing or modifying business improvement areas when presented with a petition
by those who represent 60% or more of the total assessment in the proposed BIA. The 60% approval
threshold represents a super majority in favor of an initiative and indicates rate payer support for an
assessment. A major legal case related to the state statute, City of Seattle v. Rogers Clothing for Men,
included the following: the ordinance was enacted pursuant to authority provided by RCW 35.87A in
accordance with that chapter, RCW 35.87A.0101, a petition has been signed by more than 60% of the
businesses within the designated business improvement area. He questioned whether the Edmonds BID was
legally established and hoped a thorough investigation will be conducted. If BIDs can be established
without a petition, he requested the City inform all in Edmonds that the council has the ability to establish
a special BID assessment without ratepayer support for the assessment.
Liz Brown, Edmonds, a business agent for Teamsters Local 763, the labor union representing the City’s
parks and public works employees, explained the labor contract with the City expired December 2020 and
it was agreed to extend the contract another year during the COVID shutdown. The first bargaining session
for a new contract was held on November 18, 2021. Now, almost a year later, there is still no contract. In
fact, only in their last meeting on September 27 did the City finally provide a full proposal on wages. One
issue they continue to struggle with is the lack of internal equity between the City’s white collar employees
who work from home and their members, the City’s blue collar workers who report to work in person every
day as they have throughout the pandemic except for a brief period in 2020 when the City did not have
enough protective gear in supply. Remote work is an economic benefit; an article on Salary.com estimated
cost savings for employees of about $4,000/year. Another article in August from HR Reporters surveyed
remote workers who estimated their annual savings at around $5,000 or more/year.
Ms. Brown continued, the City’s remote workers save money on gas and car maintenance while their
members drive to work. When one of the City’s remote employees gets COVID, they work from home and
do not have to use sick leave or vacation. When one of their members tests positive for COVID, they must
stay home and use leave. If the child of a remote worker gets sick and has to stay home from school, the
remote employee is already at home with them; their members must use a day of sick leave to stay a home
with their child. They have urged the City to acknowledge and account for the fact that remote workers
enjoy economic benefits not offered to the employees who tend the City’s parks, cemetery, streets, water
and sewer system, and who operate the WWTP seven days a week. They understand remote work will be
part of the workplace moving forward; at the same time, employers must make an effort to address the
inequity between those who can work from home and those who can’t. Arguing that it doesn’t exist will
only lead to further divisiveness among the workforce and between the City and its employees.
Lora Petso, Edmonds, said she was not speaking as a Olympic View Water & Sewer District
commissioner or a member of the Washington State Public Works Boards but as a citizen of Edmonds who
has way too much knowledge of the effects of PFAS contamination on both humans and fish. She also has
a recently heightened understanding of the need for climate resilience and environmental justice. She
requested the council require a new SEPA for the Highway 99 subarea based on significant changes since
2017 including those mentioned earlier and including, but not limited to, increased knowledge of PFAS
contamination and the effect on people and fish, designation of two wellhead protection areas in the
Highway 99 planning area since the original SEPA in 2017, and recognition that the City’s CARA
regulations are not adequate to protect wellhead protection areas or fish. She requested the council overrule
the staff recommendation to do nothing and request a scoping and supplemental EIS for the Highway 99
plans.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 18, 2022
Page 6
6. RECEIVED FOR FILING
1. CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM THE GREGORY OWENS ASSOCIATION AND LEA
JAMES
2. AUGUST 2022 MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT
3. COUNCIL APPOINTMENT TO A BOARD/COMMISSION
7. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO
APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.
Councilmember Chen requested Item 7.10 be removed from the Consent Agenda for a brief discussion
about the resolution.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows:
1. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 27, 2022
2. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF OCTOBER 4, 2022
3. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL AND BENEFIT CHECKS, DIRECT DEPOSIT AND WIRE
PAYMENTS
4. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL COMMITTEE MINUTES
5. APPROVAL OF 10-FT DEDICATION FOR 240TH ST SW RIGHT-OF-WAY ADJACENT
TO 7901 240TH ST SW
6. APPROVAL OF SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH HBB FOR HIGHWAY 99
GATEWAY REVITALIZATION - STAGE 2
7. APPROVAL OF SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH KPG PSOMAS FOR
CITYWIDE PEDESTRIAN CROSSING ENHANCEMENTS PROJECT
8. APPROVAL OF BEACH PLACE PARKING LOT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PORT
OF EDMONDS AND THE CITY OF EDMONDS TO ACCOUNT FOR INSTALLATION
OF TSUNAMI WARNING SIREN
9. APPROVE PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN AND UTILITY EASEMENTS ALONG PINE STREET
ADJACENT TO POINT EDWARDS DEVELOPMENT
11. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS AND WIRE PAYMENTS
12. APPROVE ACCEPTANCE OF PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT AT 23601 HIGHWAY
99
13. APPROVE PUBLIC WATER METER VAULT EASEMENT AT 23601 HIGHWAY 99
ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 18, 2022
Page 7
10. APPROVAL OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE SOLID AND HAZARDOUS
WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Councilmember Chen said it was his understanding during the committee meeting that the resolution would
be updated and he wanted to confirm it was updated to tailored it to the City of Edmonds. Mr. Taraday said
he did not attend the committee meeting, so he was unsure what occurred between that meeting and this
meeting.
Councilmember Chen recalled at the committee meeting, the resolution had not been drafted. Mr. Taraday
clarified Councilmember Chen’s question was whether the resolution in the packet was consistent with the
standard format. Councilmember Chen asked if it was tailored to the City of Edmonds rather than simply a
template. Mr. Taraday answered it looked very similar to other resolutions Lighthouse has prepared for the
City with the exception of a few minor differences such as italicized font in the section title. It references
the City of Edmonds in Section 2. He was happy to take a closer look at the resolution; the resolution was
drafted by one of his partners and he was not prepared to answer this question. Councilmember Chen asked
Mr. Taraday to review the resolution to ensure it is the correct one.
COUNCILMEMBER CHEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO
MOVE THE RESOLUTION TO THE CONSENT AGENDA NEXT WEEK.
Council President Olson recalled there was a timeline for this as it was being presented to all the cities in
Snohomish County. She suggested revisiting it later on tonight’s agenda once Mr. Taraday had an
opportunity to review it.
Councilmember Tibbott said the format is consistent with resolution the committee considered with the
with addition of Edmonds and the commitment the City is making to follow and participate in the
comprehensive plan. If council wanted the attorney to review it, that could be done, but he was comfortable
with approving the resolution in packet.
Council President Olson said she was also comfortable with the proposed resolution and ready to vote.
Councilmember Nand asked if there was any information available under Section 2 Adoption of Plan that
referenced the substantive changes and how adoption of the resolution impacts citizens. Mr. Taraday asked
whether Councilmember Nand’s question was whether there was a redline version of the plan showing the
changes to the last version of the plan. Councilmember Nand answered yes, if this is being promulgated by
the Snohomish County Council, she was curious what substantive change, if any, it would make to the
City’s plan or if it was just proforma changes. Mr. Taraday said he did not attend the committee meeting
and had not anticipated these question so he was not prepared to answer.
Public Works Director Oscar Antillon explained the City had the option to either develop its own plan or
adopt the Snohomish County plan. Attorney Sharon Cates reviewed the resolution to ensure it met the City’s
standards, but most of the language in the resolution was provided by Snohomish County. Information
regarding Snohomish County’s plan is available on their website. The City did not have a plan before this
so it is just adopting Snohomish County’ plan.
Council President Olson advised Snohomish County will make a presentation to the council in December.
Due to the timeline for all cities to adopt resolutions, this was being done via a separate step.
Councilmember Teitzel said he participated in the committee meeting where this was discussed and the
Snohomish County representative provided a very detailed presentation. It is a very well-considered, well
thought through plan and he anticipated the City would benefit greatly by adopting it as written. If the
council has concerns, it can be discussed further, but he was very comfortable with it.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 18, 2022
Page 8
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS CHEN, PAINE AND NAND
VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS TEITZEL, TIBBOTT, AND BUCKSHNIS AND COUNCIL
PRESIDENT OLSON VOTING NO.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO
APPROVE THE RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE SNOHOMISH COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE
SOLID AND HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN IN THE PACKET.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON,
TO AMEND TO MOVE THE RESOLUTION TO THE END OF THE AGENDA SO THE
ATTORNEY HAS TIME TO READ IT AND ADVISE ON THE APPROPRIATENESS OF THE
LANGUAGE.
Mayor Nelson advised it would be moved to Council Business Item 8.6.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
8. COUNCIL BUSINESS
1. ORDINANCE REVISING CHAPTER 2.05 ECC; CITY ATTORNEY CODE UPDATE
City Attorney Jeff Taraday advised this was coming back to the council for additional discussion and
possible action. It was first presented to council in August for discussion. No motions were made to amend,
but based on council discussion, he drafted new language in the attached proposed Code 2.05. As no
motions were made, some of the proposed amendments may not reflect what the council wanted and further
amendments are appropriate. If there are multiple amendments, he can return the code to the council in the
future. There is an ordinance in packet should the council want to move forward with adoption, but there is
nothing time sensitive about adoption if the council wants to take more time.
Council President Olson apologized for the note in the narrative about contacting MSRC which applied
when the code was previously discussed. MSRC has been consulted and did not have a problem with the
city attorney reviewing the code. This is separate from the review of the city attorney contract and review
by the outside attorney was not necessary. She summarized the former ordinance did not have as much
flexibility for the city attorney and city prosecutor and it separates the city prosecutor from the city attorney
which at one time may have been done by the same firm. This ordinance update is very overdue.
For the public’s sake as well as members of the council who may be unaware, Council President Olson
recalled before she was on council when the city attorney proposed updating a code, more than one
councilmember asked why he was initiating it. It was now at her request that the city attorney was updating
this code. The council discussed it previously and suggested minor modifications. The proposed code better
mirrors current practice and provides more flexibility regarding how city attorney services can be provided.
Councilmember Buckshnis recommended remanding this back to the attorney to differentiate between
special meetings, council meetings and committee meetings. For many years the attorney did not attend
committee meetings unless they were requested and having them attend adds to their work hours. If the
City ever converts to an hourly rate, the cost to have the attorney sit through committee meetings would be
tremendous. She requested Section 2.05.020 City Attorney Duties, Section C differentiate between regular,
special, committee and work meetings. She thanked Mr. Taraday for adding Item 4 about OPMA training.
Councilmember Teitzel recalled Mr. Taraday committed to following up with MSRC to ensure it was
appropriate for him to draft this language. Mr. Taraday said Council President Olson did that outreach.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 18, 2022
Page 9
Council President Olson said she did that outreach and received an email from MSRC. She was looking for
the memo to send to the citizen who inquired.
Councilmember Teitzel referred to Section 2.05.020.3 that states, attend regular and work meetings of the
planning board of the City of Edmonds as requested. He found that vague, raising the question of who
would request the city attorney’s attendance. He suggest amending it the language to state, “as requested
by council, the planning board chair or his/her assigned representative.” He raised a similar concern about
Section 2.05.020.4, provide training to City authorities and officers on the Open Public Meeting Act and
other applicable legal topics as requested which raises the question of who would make the request. He
suggested adding, “by council or City administration. Section 2.05.020.5 states the city attorney would hold
office hours at city hall and/or virtually as requested and be generally available to meet with and advise the
mayor’s staff. It was his understanding the city attorney advises not only the mayor’s staff, but also city
council and others. He suggested replacing “mayor’s staff” with “city officials.” He suggested making those
revisions and returning the chapter to council.
Councilmember Paine shared concerns about the scope and who makes requests. She suggested staff return
a draft of the chapter to council prior to scheduling it on an agenda so councilmembers have adequate time
to provide more guidance.
Councilmember Nand referred to the new Section 2.05.040 City prosecutor and suggested amending the
language, “The city prosecutor shall exercise discretion to prosecute criminal violations of the city’s code.”
This would add a level of cultural sensitivity when hate crimes are not prosecuted or when local activists
perceive there have been hateful actions toward children of color and either the Snohomish County
prosecutor or the city prosecutor decides there is not enough evidence to bring a change to court and clarify
it is within the prosecutor’s discretion whether to prosecute. This covers a wide variety of crimes including
incredibly petty things like vandalism of public art such as the public “I Can’t Breathe” art by a young
African American woman and the wide swell of outrage when no charges were brought as a result. This is
from the prospective of vulnerable communities who wonder why when their children are harassed or
bullied or targeted in some way, they are told it is not an important enough case to be prosecuted and go
through the criminal justice system, but if their child is caught with weed, they get harassed by the criminal
justice system.
2. 2023 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES BUDGET PRESENTATION
Administrative Services Director Dave Turley reviewed:
• Department of Administrative Services Overview
Finance Information
Services Clerk’s Office Reception Public
Records
o Payroll
o A/P
o Utility Billing
o Financial
Reporting
o Annual
Budget
o Audit
Management
o Business
Licenses
o Help Desk
o Systems
Programs
o Hardware &
Software
Maintenance
o Network
Security
o Records
Management
and Archiving
o Public Notices
o Council
Agendas and all
Public Meetings
o Phones
o Visitors
to City
Hall
o Parking
Permits
o Public
Records
Requests
• Finance Division (9 FTE)
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 18, 2022
Page 10
Budget and
Reporting
Management and preparation for annual city budget, including 33
individual funds
Oversee General Fund and other “Managed Funds”
Responsible for preparation of annual financial report, monthly reports, and
all accounting functions of the city
Audit Annual Financial Audit
Annual Grants Audit
Annual Accountability Audit
Other miscellaneous audits: Sales Tax Audit, Use Tax Audit, Payroll Tax
Audit, etc.
Accounts Payable 3,891 Checks issued year to date
7,724 Invoices paid year to date
4,348 Active vendors
Payroll 2021: 6,084 Paychecks processed
2022: 4,773 Paychecks processed year to date
56 New employees
33 Employee off boarding
Business Licenses 841 Active licenses
876 Business license transactions
• Other Managed Funds
o Non-Departmental
o LEOFF Medical & Firemen’s Pension Funds
o Debt Service Funds
o Contingency Reserve
o Risk Management
o ARPA Fund (Accounting portion)
o Employee parking
• Utility Billing Division (2 FTE)
Utility Customers 14,000 for water, sewer, and storm drain
2021 $26,091,459 billed
796 closing bills/escrow/ownership transfers
2022 $20,865,525 billed to date
424 closing bills/escrow/ownership transfers to date
Phone
Automation
Allows our customers to make their payments 24/7/365
With this new phone system, we can spend more time with our customers
that have billing questions, ownership changes, setting up auto pay etc.
• Information Services (6 FTE)
Help Desk 709 - Tickets Opened YTD
683 - Tickets Closed YTD
Uptown Neighborhood
City Hall
Adding workstations, Wi-Fi, media screen
Complex neighborhood court to allow for hybrid court using Zoom and
in-person mtgs.
New Security Platform (Firewall) - In Progress
Enhance security and accommodate Edmonds dynamic mobile and
remote workers
Re-Engineered Backup
Process
(onsite and offsite storage) - In Progress
Better leverage cloud storage and Office 365 collaboration tools
City Intranet In Progress
Provide a common storage repository for City forms, templates,
policies, etc.
• City Clerk’s Office (2 FTE)
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 18, 2022
Page 11
Public Meetings > 100 Meetings year to date
~ 115 public meetings in 2022
Includes regular, special and all committee meetings
Digital Archives 245 video files (200.14 GB) transferred
2,304 records being prepared for transfer
Records Dispositioned 253 Bankers boxes
~ 506,000 pages of records
Laserfiche Content
Management System
(CMS)
4,692 uploaded or modified documents
102,534 uploaded document pages
Document types: ordinances; resolutions; minutes/agendas/packets
from council and boards, committees, & commissions; interlocal
agreements; contracts; and public notices
Research Requests From Legal - 54
• Public Records Division (2 FTE)
1,261 Total number of requests received
1,198 Total number of requests fulfilled
1,030 Total number of requests fulfilled within 5 business days
7 Requests currently open for more than 6 months
• Reception Desk (1 FTE)
Phones Approximately 6,700 for January through September or around 750 per
month. Estimate about 9,000 calls per year
Parking Permits 300 Parking permits to City residents
• Decision Packages
o Decision Package #9 (Finance)
Description Funding to continue the contract with the ARPA Grant Manager approved
last April
Justification ARPA Consultant is responsible for:
Updates to council on ARPA funding status
Management of the Federal Grants Audit
Recommendation of improved grants procedures
Federal ARPA Reporting
Funding Source ARPA Funds
Amount $120,000
o Decision Package #10 (IT)
Description Covers vendor-initiated cost increases for licensed software. The
applications include the 911 database updates,
Microsoft office 365 and Adobe Acrobat that provides PDF editing and
digital signatures.
Justification The 911 Database software updates provides our telephony system with
location information when calling 911.
The vendor was purchased. The new vendor raised prices. cost increase =
$3,600
Microsoft is implementing across the board price increase. Our contract
expired end of 2022 and new prices go into effect 1/1/2023. Total
increase = $28,000
Adobe Acrobat has migrated to a subscription-based model. We have
migrated all users to the new subscription.
Cost to implement $4,500
Funding Source Costs will be charged to departments based on user counts.
Amount $36,100
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 18, 2022
Page 12
o Decision Package #11 (IT)
Description Replacement systems that includes desktops, laptops and networking
equipment.
Justification The city implemented a procedure to replace user equipment on a
specified cycle.
Desktop computers are replaced on a 5-year cycle, laptops are replaced
on a 4-year cycle.
Networking equipment is replaced as new feature sets and maintenance
patching availability dictates.
The replacement procedure ensures maximized uptime and reasonable
system response.
Funding Source This expenditure is covered by existing balance available in the hardware
accrual account designed for replacement equipment, and the costs get
charged to the benefiting departments.
Amount $65,000
Councilmember Buckshnis commented she was amazing by the number of public record requests and the
amazing amount of work staff does. She had several questions about non-departmental and a decision
package for capital projects manager for engineering. She offered to wait until future budget presentations
to ask those questions. She referred to Resolution 1433, the fund balance reserve policy related to
.375/$1000 of assessed value, anticipating that amount changed since assessed values have increased. Mr.
Turley answered the amount in the contingency fund has changed slightly, but has remained surprisingly
constant over the past 2-3 years because the fund balance and the overall budget did not change much. The
amount was purposefully left unchanged, noting it would have changed less than $50,000 out of $1.5
million. As there will be changes made to the proposed budget, he did not include a decision package to
move funds into or out of the contingency fund. Once the budget process is completed, the contingency
fund will be brought exactly in line with 4% of the operating budget, likely in the first quarter 2023.
Councilmember Buckshnis observed the budget includes a 11% increase in the fire district contract and
asked if the fire district had asked for that increase. Mr. Turley answered the City has not received
information on the increase yet, that is estimate from their finance director who indicated there would be a
decent sized increase. Councilmember Buckshnis observed SnoCom New World was a flat fee. Mr. Turley
answered there are several organizations and memberships fees in non-departmental; the entities provide
an invoice and the amount is included in the budget.
Councilmember Buckshnis observed prisoner care in intergovernmental increased $450,000 and asked who
could address that. Mr. Turley suggested that question be directed to the police department. There was a
new contract a couple years ago where costs were proposed to increase significantly, but once COVID hit,
jail population was more unpredictable. That amount was provided by the police department.
Councilmember Buckshnis asked whether staff planned to provide a spreadsheet with ARPA funds, bond
funds, and the General Fund. She observed the budget only included two ARPA expenditures, but she
thought there were others such as cars, salaries, and Opengov. She asked whether that question should be
directed to Community Services & Economic Development Director Tatum. Mr. Turley offered to provide
the schedule showing all the things in the budget funded by ARPA money. He emphasized the ARPA
money is an accounting nightmare. He offered to provide schedules such as new positions in the budget,
vehicles requested, costs funded by ARPA, etc. Councilmember Buckshnis said she wanted citizens to
know the council is looking at the numbers carefully.
Councilmember Chen thanked Mr. Turley for such a detailed report, commenting Councilmember
Buckshnis’ question about who to direct questions about ARPA money was one of his concerns as well.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 18, 2022
Page 13
He asked who was the main contact person with regard to ARPA fund management. Mr. Turley answered
questions about what has been spent, amounts by category and future planning, should be directed to Mr.
Tatum. For questions about what was spent in 2021 and 2022, Finance will provide a schedule of decision
package requests that are funded by ARPA money.
Councilmember Chen said he was excited about the implementation of an intranet. He asked how
councilmembers’ data would be managed once the intranet is implemented. Mr. Turley answered did not
think it would change much with intranet. Councilmember Chen commented users have to come onsite to
use the intranet. Mr. Turley explained in other places he has worked, there would be an icon on the desktop
to access the intranet. For example, when he boots up at home, it automatically connects to the internet
behind the City’s firewall. With an intranet, he assumed the user would need to indicate whether they
wanted to connect to the intranet or to the City network. He anticipated it would be seamless to people
working remotely. Councilmember Chen asked if there would be a VPN setting. Mr. Turley answered
probably, but he was not certain. Councilmember Chen said he currently backs up to external storage once
a week. Mr. Turley said data management would be the same, the way a user accesses information and who
has access to the information would be different. For example, sharing documents on SharePoint could be
much easier with an intranet than with the current process.
Councilmember Chen said he did not have any questions about the three administrative services decision
package. He asked when would be the appropriate time to ask questions about the 2023 budget book. Mr.
Turley said he preferred an email for questions that require research. Tonight’s presentation was intended
as an overview of the department and the three proposed decision packages.
Councilmember Nand referred to decision package 11, the request to replace systems including desktops,
laptops and networking equipment and specifically the volume of public records requests and FOIA
requests. If the City adds bodycams for police officers in 2023, it can have the unintended effect of
provoking massive amounts of FOIA and public requests to the point the administrative and technology
burden on small cities is such they have to cancel that program. In anticipation of the police department
becoming more technology hybridized, she asked whether $65,000 would be enough to start processing
multimedia FOIA and public records requests. Mr. Turley answered those questions are being addressed
separately outside this decision package. Additional IT staff is needed to review public records requests for
bodycam footage before it is released. Decision packages related to bodycams are in the police department’s
budget, not the IT budget. He acknowledged some things sit in two worlds such as IT and the police
bodycams or IT and public records.
Councilmember Nand asked if such requests would be processed by the police department and not by
administrative services staff who handle FOIA and public records requests. Mr. Turley answered the two
FTE in the administrative services department handle non-police department public records requests.
Councilmember Nand asked if they are paper requests or if there is a multimedia component. Mr. Turley
advised the City has an automated system where users submit requests online. A person could also submit
a public records request in person at city hall. Public records staff do all the research online either on the
City’s network or email archives. The police department also has a staff person who responds to public
records requests. The primary reason those functions are separate is the laws related to releasing police
information are much different related to what can/cannot be released. Councilmember Nand anticipated
redaction would be very burdensome which is why she was curious about the administrative and
technological burdens on staff. Mr. Turley said most of the additional burden related to bodycams will be
borne by the police department.
Councilmember Paine thanked the administrative department because they are the ones who bring
paychecks. She has a lot of questions, but hoped she could email them to Mr. Turley and have the questions
and answers uploaded on the budget page as was done in previous years. Mr. Turley agreed that way works
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 18, 2022
Page 14
best. He appreciated police-related questions being asked directly to the police department but asked
councilmembers and the responder to copy him so the questions/answered could be included in the
summary that is posted to the website. That worked well in past and he planned to do it again this year.
Councilmember Teitzel thanked Mr. Turley for his and staff’s work related to the budget. He has been
trying to copy Mr. Turley on his questions to staff. He asked if the questions/answers posted on the website
are available for the public to view. Mr. Turley answered yes, noting the questions from last year are still
on the 2022 budget page. He typically collects questions/answers and posts them online once a week.
Councilmember Teitzel observed some of the larger projects have carryforwards and sometimes he has
difficulty discerning the carryforward from the budget item. He asked if there was an easy way to discern
what was a carryforward. Mr. Turley answered carryforwards are a thorn in his side; there is no good way
to handle them because most are very large. For example, what is the best way to carry forward a $2 million
that is approved one year and the project is only halfway finished. During the last 4-5 years before he was
here, a project was treated as though it would be completed that year even though when the budget was
prepared, staff knew it wouldn’t be. Then in February/March of the following year when the project wasn’t
completed the prior year, it needed to be included in the budget. There have frequently been carryforward
budgets of $7-9 million. In his mind, a better way to do it is if a project won’t be finished in 2022, it is taken
out of the 2022 budget by reducing the estimate and included it as an ask in the 2023 budget. Either way it
looks the same to council because they receive the same decision package, the difference is whether it is in
March or October/November.
Mr. Turley continued, to him it seemed more transparent/clear if it is included in the 2023 budget if staff
knows it won’t be finished in 2022. The difficulty is often it is an estimate, so staff has to estimate in
July/August where a project will be by December 31. If staff knows a project won’t be finished and has an
idea of the amount, it shouldn’t be treated as if it will be completed this year. With regard to Councilmember
Teitzel’s question about how to tell, he tries to make it clear in the decision packages, but sometimes that
is difficult. Public works often uses dates such as the 2022 sewer project that will be completed in 2023. A
good way to handle it would be for the City to go to a biennial budget; then that issue only arises every
other year because projects are budgeted for two years, providing more opportunity to complete them.
Council President Olson commented the utility phone automation was very forward thinking and asked
when that was done. Mr. Turley answered August or September. Council President Olson asked if a
customer’s water is turned off for non-payment and they make a payment, how does that information get
relayed to staff so the water can be turned back on. Mr. Turley said customers should pay their bill before
the water is turned off because staff cannot be immediately dispatched to turn their water back on; it will
almost always have at least a 24-hour turnaround. That is one of the difficulties with the automated system.
Information is uploaded daily so if someone calls the 24-hour line at noon, the City does not know they
paid their bill until next morning when the information is downloaded. It is not a lot different than the old
system; it is difficult to immediately send someone out to turn the water back on after someone pays their
bill.
Council President Olson commented the security firewall is an important topic and she thanked Mr. Turley
for being aware of that considering how short-staffed his department is.
3. 2023 MUNICIPAL COURT BUDGET PRESENTATION
Municipal Court Judge Whitney Rivera advised the court’s 2021 mid-year reorganization was monumental
in helping adequately staff the work of the court. The court is not asking for any new decision packages
this year. She expressed her thanks to finance, HR, IT and the other City departments the court relies on
daily to ensure the work of the work of the court gets done.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 18, 2022
Page 15
Judge Rivera reported the Washington State Supreme Court emergency order is coming to a conclusion
October 31; those orders, put into place at the beginning of COVID, had a large impact on court operations
including issuance of bench warrants for individuals who failed to appear for court. Under that Supreme
Court order, those warrant could only issue if there was a factual finding that the person presented an
immediate threat to individual or public safety. Warrants that have been held pending that order will issue
at the end of the month so she expected the work of the court as well as law enforcement, prosecutors and
public defenders to increase as warrants held under the COVID emergency order go out. There is a lot of
discussion about what the legislature will do with the Blake fix that sunsets in July 2023. She is the co-
chair of the District Municipal Court Legislative Committee. Regardless of what happens, unless it
completely sunsets and becomes completely decriminalized, she expected the court to be heavily impacted
even if the legislature decides to make possession of a controlled substance a felony again. Previously the
prosecutors disposition standards for Superior Court didn’t warrant felony charges depending on the amount
so those charges frequently ended up in Municipal Court and District Court for filing.
Judge Rivera relayed they are really excited about the Highway 99 space where they have been holding
community court. A lot of vendors as well as mental health providers are on site to help connect people
with services including a new partnership with the Edmonds Food Bank. When people are summoned to
appear, they receive information about how to place a food bank order that will be delivered to court. The
human services division has been active at community court and try to ensure anyone coming to community
court knows what services will be available. The court is there the second and fourth Monday. It is a smaller
room and when everyone is sitting around a table (instead of being in the courtroom with her elevated
above), it feels like a more collaborative experience.
Looking toward 2023, Judge Rivera commented on the change related to infractions approved by the
legislature in the last session with regard to ability to pay hearings. The legislature addressed the Pierce v.
Department of Licensing, an equal protection challenge to suspending people’s licenses for failure to pay,
by providing in addition to checking a box to contest or mitigate, a difficulty to pay box. The court is
working on ensuring court users know there are opportunities for community service in lieu of payment of
infraction penalties. There was sort of a moratorium on failures to appear for infractions; if someone didn’t
respond or come to a hearing during COVID, they were set aside, recognizing that community members
were going through a lot. The relicensing clerk is now notifying each of those people in writing and
informing them of options such as requesting a reduction, community service, court hearing, etc.
Councilmember Paine said it was great to hear the reorganization and the community court space have
worked out well. She asked if Judge Rivera was drawing a full-time salary. Judge Rivera answered that
change was approved last year.
Councilmember Nand lauded the court’s incredible work in moving mental health and drug diversion out
of a punitive criminal justice system through the community court. When government chooses to intervene
in the life of somebody experiencing crisis, it is important to put a compassionate face on that, something
Judge Rivera is doing every day. As a member of the legal community, she was proud to practice law in
Edmonds knowing that this aspect of the legal community has decided to join the 21st century and leave the
19th century behind.
Councilmember Nand found it amazing that the court was coordinating with the Edmonds Food Bank. She
recalled a conversation with former Judge Coburn about what to do when people are unhoused or indigent
and do not have a car or transportation to make their court date and it puts them further into a punitive cycle.
She recalled Judge Coburn saying if she thought someone was sincere about trying to meet their court dates,
she would have her bailiff give them an Orca card. Councilmember Nand wondered about the funding
source for the Orca card and asked if that was something the council could fund for people with
transportation difficulties so they did not fall behind on whatever remedial plan they are pursuing to make
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 18, 2022
Page 16
their lives better. Judge Rivera said city council could fund that but did not need to because there is a state
grant for it.
Judge Rivera continued, as part of Blake fix that the legislature approved, funds were authorized for
therapeutic courts and courts of limited jurisdiction. For a long time the legislature authorized funds through
the CJTA for Superior Court and drug courts, but the lower level courts had never been involved. Once the
Blake fix was approved, money was authorized and Court Administrator Uneek Mayor and she submitted
a grant request to the Administrative Office of the Courts which they received. Those funds can be used to
train staff on best practices for therapeutic alternatives, Orca cards to get to court or to substance abuse
disorder or mental health appointment. COVID did some interesting things for courts such as hybrid
proceedings and emergency rules, many of which have become permanent. In the past, if someone had a
court date for a criminal manner, they had to appear in person even for a 10 second hearing to continue the
trial date. Now, under Rule 3.4, attorneys have the ability to waive their client’s presence. Hybrid
proceedings have also been retained although that presents limitations for individuals who do not have a
smart phone, but they can call in.
Judge Rivera continued, the court is trying to be as accessible as possible to meet people where they are to
get them the services they need to no longer be involved in the court system. The DMCJA is trying to get
the legislature to make the funding permanent so the courts can make more permanent changes to fund
programs. Councilmember Nand agreed permanency would be appropriate so that when people enter the
criminal justice system, they are not perceived as damaged or someone who will not become a fully
engaged, healthy member of society again. Stabilization and support for anyone who enters the criminal
justice system, especially young people and young people of color, is a very appropriate use of funds.
Councilmember Chen said he found it hard to believe that the court did not have any decision packages.
Judge Rivera commented she asked for a lot in 2021. Councilmember Chen observed the court’s budget
increased from 2021 to 2022 and that increase continued in 2023, from $518,000 in 2021 to $741,000 in
2022, an approximately 43% increase. He recalled Ms. Maylor’s answer was some positions were not filled
in 2021 and asked if all the positions have now been filled. Judge Rivera answered almost, part of the
reorganization was to create an assistant court administrator position which is a non-represented position
instead of the lead clerk. A lot of negotiations with the union were required and that position was posted
just recently. The other position that has been filled is the relicensing clerk. The last part of the
reorganization that is almost done is the assistant court administrator.
Councilmember Chen commented it is important to have the team in place to accomplish the work of the
court. Judge Rivera said that is an importance part of meeting best practices and standards for auditing and
finance that was not in place previously. The reorganization has resulted in an increase in the quality and
productivity of the work the court does. Councilmember Chen was happy to hear about the partnership with
the food bank to implement systems to help people when they come to the courtroom.
Councilmember Chen asked if translation services are offered in the uptown office. Judge Rivera answered
whenever a defendant needs an interpreter, an interpreter is scheduled. Services are not just provided to
defendants. She recalled after community court, a person outside the court needed services and which the
vendors provided. Defendants have the right to have an interpreter present at their proceeding. In 2023, she
and Ms. Maylor are interested in procedural fairness and plan to do an analysis of all the spaces to ensure
the court is accessible in terms of language and other ways. They want to ensure coming to court is as easy
as it can be especially for individuals who speak a different language.
Councilmember Chen commented the reorganization doubled the budget and headcount and asked if Judge
Rivera expected the workload to increase. Judge Rivera said the budget increase due to reorganization was
about 22% and the headcount only increased by one, but that could change depending on the person hired
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 18, 2022
Page 17
for the assistant court administrator position. With regard to workload, it depends on how it is measured.
There has been a lot of work coming out of COVID with the Washington Supreme court emergency order
about to go away and the pause on infraction failures to appear. There are different ways to measure
workload such as number of cases or number of hearings. For example, she had six cases on this afternoon’s
docket but it took hours. Once the assistant court administrator position is filled, the court will be properly
staffed to handle the work that comes through Edmonds Municipal Court.
Councilmember Chen recalled Ms. Maylor’s response to his email that there were 5,000 new cases in 2021
and 1,000 in 2022, which is a significant drop in the number of cases, yet the department’s budget has
doubled. Judge Rivera said case filings is one way of tracking workload. The court processes cases they
get; it is interesting to look at trends, there are peaks and valleys. If someone pled guilty to domestic
violence or driving under the influence today, they potentially would be on probation through 2027. A lot
of what they do in community court is providing services to people on probation who may be struggling, it
is not just pending cases. She agreed the case filings are projected to be lower in 2022 than in 2021.
Mayor Nelson declared a brief recess.
4. HIGHWAY 99 PLANNED ACTION FIVE-YEAR REVIEW
Development Services Director Susan McLaughlin explained this plan review was written into the
legislation and anticipated. Staff thoroughly reviewed the planned action mitigation measures and will
report on compliance with the planned action and status of development. She recognized the significant
amount of public comment and she appreciated the diligence about understanding the nature of
development that is occurring, questioning how it fits into the environmental review; staff will review and
offer assurances on each of those aspects from traffic to parks to ensure the initial issues outlined the in EIS
are acknowledged and still moving forward consistent with what was required by the EIS and mitigation
measures, both the private development community as well as public investments.
Ms. McLaughlin explained the intent of a planned action is to offer transparency to the public about what
is anticipated from development along a corridor that was upzoned to a zone that will accept higher levels
of density, particularly housing given the City’s housing needs. It also gives developers some assurance, a
level of confidence to make those large scale investment in larger apartment buildings that are being
constructed in the corridor. It is also to leverage public investment, putting private and public investments
in the same area increases livability. Although mitigation measures cannot address existing deficiencies,
they can shape in a beneficial ways the neighborhoods along the Highway 99 corridor. It also leverages
private investment not only in the realm of housing but sidewalks and walkability via frontage
improvements to add to the walkability network, sidewalk network and improves safety at intersections.
That is all in accordance with the anticipated impacts. There has been a negligible amount of development
compared to what was anticipated under the planned action. There are nowhere near the cumulative impacts
anticipated or mitigated against.
Planning Manager Kernen Lien reviewed:
• Highway 99 Subarea Planning Process
o Subarea Plan (Ordinance 4077)
o Updated Chapter 16.60 ECDC (Ordinance 4078)
o Environmental Impact Statement & Planned Action (Ordinance 4079)
o Won VISION 2040 Award from the Puget Sound Regional Council
• What is a Planned Action SEPA?
o Designating specific types of projects shifts environmental review to an earlier phase
o The intent is to provide a more streamlined environmental review process at the project stage
by conducting a more detailed environmental analysis during planning
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 18, 2022
Page 18
o Early environmental review provides more certainty to applicants with respect to what will be
required and to the public with respect to how environmental impacts will be addressed
o Designation of planned action projects does not prohibit the city from placing conditions on a
project; it only addresses procedural SEPA requirements
• Planned Action Thresholds and Mitigation Measures
o Development Thresholds
▪ Number of Residential Dwelling Units – 3,325 Units
▪ Square Footage of Non-residential Uses – 1,634,685 square feet
▪ PM Peak Hour Trips – 2,755 Trips
o Mitigation measures are largely a mix of policy, code amendments and specific projects
o Mitigation measures identified in EIS and attached to the Planned Action Ordinance
▪ Incorporated Plan Features
▪ Regulations and Commitments
▪ Other Mitigation Measures
• Planned Action Monitoring and Review
o Ongoing: Monitor progress of development to ensure it is consistent with the assumptions of
the planned action, the amount of development and associated impacts and mitigation measures
o August 2022: Five-year review of assumptions and findings with respect to environmental
conditions in the Planned Action area, the impacts of development, and required mitigation
measures
• Monitoring and Tracking
o Projects reviewed at application with Planned Action Checklist
o Review based on application materials and SEPA Checklist
o All projects tracked in Highway 99 spreadsheet
o Additional SEPA review required if project impacts and/or mitigation not in Planned Action
• Planned Action Projects and Thresholds
Measure
Planned
Action
Threshold
Status Remaining until
threshold
exceeded
BLD
Issued Proposed
Land Use
Non-residential, including office,
retail, service and
medical/healthcare uses
New square
footage of
building area
1,634,685 14,125 1,389 1,619,171
Residential Number of new
dwelling units
3,325 319 313 2,693
Transportation Peak PM Trips 2,755 80 126 2,549
• Environmental Conditions Changed?
o Detailed in Subarea Plan
▪ Land Use Pattern
▪ Housing
▪ Transportation
▪ Economic and Market Trends
o Changes in existing conditions limited to plan implementation
▪ Zoning change
▪ Transportation projects
▪ New development
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 18, 2022
Page 19
• Impacts of Development?
o Twelve projects:
▪ One expired
▪ Four projects completed
▪ Three currently under construction
▪ Four under application review
o Impacts as envisioned and mitigated
• Mitigation Measures
o Specific mitigation measures in agenda packet identifying actions taken
o Mitigation measures expected to occur over time
▪ Transportation Projects (Near-term 5 to10 years; Long-term 10 to 20 years)
▪ Park Acquisition
▪ Development Improvements
o Specific Subdistrict Identities
▪ Health District, International District, and Gateway District
• Other – Project Review
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 18, 2022
Page 20
o Design review in other areas of the city require Architectural Design Board (ADB) review is
SEPA triggered
o In CG zone, only projects that exceed 75 feet required to go to ADB
o With adoption of Planned Action, no notice required
o City’s largest projects don’t require notice or public design review process
• Recommendations
o No amendments to the Planned Action Ordinance 4079 or supplements to the Highway 99
Planned Action EIS are needed at this time
o Implementation of the Planned Action EIS and mitigations should continue to be pursued
o Expand notice and public process for projects in CG zone
o Expand Subdistrict Identities
Ms. McLaughlin emphasized there was a thorough analysis under the planned action, environmental review
and specific measures and staff believes it is in compliance. She recognized the community’s concern which
is why changes are suggested related to public notice and design review. Staff has the discretion to require
noticing, but it does not require SEPA noticing. With regard to design review, projects are reviewed by
staff under specific development standards. If there is interest, there could be a higher level of design review
for projects along the Highway 99 corridor. Changes like this do not require a supplemental EIS. She agreed
with continuing to finetune and improve the process and outcomes and address some of the issues the
community raised.
Ms. McLaughlin continued, just like with the emergency ordinance that was brought forward, it was not an
explicit mitigation measure or requirement of the planned action, it was something staff thought was not an
equitable approach and an emergency ordinance was proposed to address it. The City can work with much
more innovation and expedience in resolving some of the issues instead of going through a rigid
environmental process that has very defined methodologies that may not result in the desired outcome. For
example, the transportation methodology relies on vehicular level of service at intersections, it only count
cars. If only cars are counted and impacts are defined by cars at intersections when the community is talking
about impacts to people, walkability, bikeability and livability of their neighborhood, an environmental
document will only expand intersections and add signals. In staff’s opinion a supplement EIS is not the
vehicle to make the changes everyone wants to see. An example of that is shifting to a multimodal level of
service, something she hoped was on the near term horizon.
Ms. McLaughlin explained despite the planned action and EIS, staff still goes through an individual project
based analysis which includes traffic. Reviewing those traffic analyses confirmed what she already thought;
there are negligible impacts from the projects at the intersections mentioned this evening during audience
comments such as 236th & 84th. She reiterated a supplemental EIS may not be the vehicle to get the outcomes
that everyone seeks.
Councilmember Tibbott recalled there used to be a transition zone between a 75’ building and a one story
single family. He did not know what happened to that and would like to explore how to reintroduce that..
He appreciated what staff was saying about a multimodal approach to looking at streets; he has often
thought the level of service at intersections does not help much with regard to determining the impact to a
neighborhood. For a long time he and the late Councilmember K. Johnson worked to get walkway crews,
etc. He would like some reassurance that there is something in the TIP that addresses the issue on 236th.
His kids attended Madrona; most of the students do not walk because it is a choice school. Having a
walkway system that serves that neighborhood is very important and he wanted assurance the City was
moving in that direction. Ms. McLaughlin referred to her articles regarding the comprehensive plan
visioning process which addressed evaluating a transition zone for this neighborhood as part of the
comprehensive plan process. She acknowledged eliminating nine zones may have homogenized it too
much. That can be done without a supplemental EIS via the comprehensive plan process.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 18, 2022
Page 21
Mr. Lien explained the rezoning of the Highway 99 corridor got rid of the transition zones and was part of
the EIS analysis and there were some mitigation measures associated with that including the stepbacks
properties that are adjacent to single family. The ordinance last week addressed specific mitigation for
properties across the street. That was part of analysis in the EIS for removing those transition zones. With
regard to transportation improvements, there are east-west connector sidewalk projects identified in the
EIS, new bike lanes on 236th, and pedestrian sidewalk improvements. Pedestrian projects identified in the
EIS will occur over time.
Ms. McLaughlin said while the planned action includes mitigation measures, it is not inclusive of projects
in the CIP/CFP or existing projects. Layering those over the mitigation measures in the EIS provides a more
full picture of the commitment over the years in this neighborhood. Mr. Lien highlighted projects in the
CIP that are in the mitigation measure table in the packet.
Councilmember Buckshnis thanked staff for the complete packet. She is environmentally rigid; she is not
a scientist but has spent more than a thousand hours talking to people about this. The EIS talks about
probable adverse environmental impacts. The FEIS talks about the 2014 stormwater code which has been
updated and had a significant impact to stormwater which would be a reason to trigger supplemental EIS.
The City learned from OVWSD about issues with the wellheads that are within this area. Updating the code
regarding the critical aquifer recharge area (CARA) could also trigger a supplemental EIS. In addition to
protecting water quality and the environment, climate change has significant impacts across the world.
Significant geomorphology events where very little rain falls have a tremendous impact on stormwater.
Further, there are sewer treatment plant issues where nitrogen levels have changed and the facility is at
capacity. Citizens’ voices need to be part of this supplemental EIS. She was not as worried about traffic as
she was with poor air quality, recalling people wore masks in Oregon when Mount St. Helens erupted and
more recently due to wildfire smoke. The air quality on Highway 99 is another trigger for a supplemental
EIS. Things have drastically changed from 2017 to 2022, even from 2020 to 2022. She planned to make a
motion to have a supplemental EIS performed.
With regard to stormwater regulations, Mr. Lien explained the update resulted in stricter stormwater
regulations so that was not a probable significant environmental impact under SEPA. Implementing the
stormwater regulations will help protect the environment so he disagreed that was a probable significant
probably impact under SEPA. With regard to the CARA, staff is aware of that issue and added OVWSD’s
wellhead protection areas to the critical area layers, consider those during reviews and notify OVWSD if
there are any projects in those areas. As part of the SEPA review and SEPA appeal on the stormwater, there
was a lot of discussion on that and the updated stormwater regulations provide protection to the wellhead
protection areas. The City does not have a specific CARA code but it will be part of the comprehensive
plan update. Implementing the stormwater code is not a probably significant adverse impact under SEPA
and was actually litigated before the hearing examiner recently. He talked to WWTP Manager Pam
Randolph about sewer capacity
Councilmember Pained thanked staff and the community for the abundance of information. She anticipated
the planned action absorbed a lot of time in 2017. She noted things should happen sooner and asked whether
transition zones could be implemented more swiftly than the 2024 comprehensive plan update. Duplexes,
triplexes and 4-plexes provide honest transition zones in a fairly narrow area. She also asked if the sidewalk
program and planning could be accelerated to prioritize these routes because sidewalks build communities.
She asked whether Snohomish County could build sidewalks in the Esperance area. She was most
concerned about displacement; this community has the highest level of diversity and is the most
economically vulnerable. She asked what the City could do to avoid displacement. Housing is critical need
and is more critical than it was 5-8 years ago when the earlier analysis was done. Displacement is a critical
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 18, 2022
Page 22
issue and is one of the ways the community judges success. She asked what a blight designation meant,
how it benefits Edmonds, and the components of that designation.
With regard to whether transitional zoning could be implemented sooner, Ms. McLaughlin said that type
of analysis lends itself to what will be done with the comprehensive plan update. She was not a fan of
waiting until 2024, but starting on the journey will lend itself to more sensible citywide analysis about
growth, density and housing. Whether some of those policy recommendations can be expedited, she was
not opposed to it. The ability to invest in this network is in the council’s hands in terms of approving a
budget that prioritizes investments in this corridor and in this neighborhood. There is a fixed amount of
capital funding and how it is allocated is up to council. Recognizing the importance of private investment
in that equation for building out sidewalk networks is also critical. Without the private investment, the City
does not get the frontage improvements.
Ms. McLaughlin continued, through the reimagining work, street typologies are being explored to inform
the sidewalk code package. The sidewalk code will ensure the City is leveraging as much private investment
from development as possible as well as exploring an in-lieu payment program. Those tools, which are not
currently available, will help further build out the network using private investment. A critical part of that
is shifting to a multimodal level of service. Currently the City cannot prioritize sidewalk expansion using
transportation impact fees because those go toward vehicular capacity improvements. That is a big deal for
this neighborhood in particular who want to prioritize sidewalks. Once the City shifts to a multimodal level
of service, those impact fees can be used where they are needed. The transportation and park impact fees
for one development were over $1 million. She summarized private investment was certainly part of the
equation.
With regard to displacement, McLaughlin said it is thorny and challenging and something cities across the
country are looking at in relation to escalating housing prices. The Department of Commerce under the
GMA has required all cities in Washington to evaluate this as part of the comprehensive plan. A gap analysis
has been done for equity and the analysis will consider housing costs, where costs are escalating the most
and where there is the greatest risk of displacement. Staff is aware this corridor is at risk for displacement,
but it is not disproportionate impacted under the planned action; that will be considered via the
comprehensive plan update.
With regard to a blight designation, Ms. McLaughlin said a Highway 99 community renewal plan is
underway that will consider whether it meets the designation of blight as defined in the RCW. The EIS did
use the terminology of blight so it is irrelevant to this conversation. She asked what the question about
blight was in relation to. Councilmember Paine commented it was a new word that was being applied to
some aspects of the Highway 99 redevelopment; it was her vague understanding that there was a funding
source and she was seeking more information. Ms. McLaughlin responded blight can be defined in a couple
of ways under the community renewal plan as economic or structural such as the way streets are laid out or
land use as it relates to transportation. From an economic standpoint, this corridor is actually a strong
economic engine for the City so from an economic standpoint it would not be characterized as blight.
Councilmember Paine said she was glad to hear that, commenting blight was such a loaded word. Due to
the amount of information, she wanted more time to consider this. She was interested in what could be done
short of an EIS to address the concerns raised by the community. Even though staff determined the triggers
for a supplemental EIS have not been met, there is still a big need.
Councilmember Nand echoed Councilmember Buckshnis’ comment that it would be appropriate to proceed
with a supplemental EIS. She did not find it appropriate to act as though adding hundreds of housing units
to the area of town where she lived and grew up without acknowledging that when people jaywalk on
Highway 99, they are crossing five lanes of traffic. People have been killed crossing Highway 99, something
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 18, 2022
Page 23
that doesn’t happen in other areas of the City. She was one of those 12-year old jaywalkers crossing
Highway 99 because there have never been not enough sidewalks or crosswalks. People run across five
lanes of traffic traveling 40-60 mph trying to reach a bus stop, something that does not happen in other parts
of Edmonds. That is the reason for the level of frustration expressed by the Lake Ballinger community. She
was proud to be from the Lake Ballinger and Highway 99 community; it is a lovely place to live and she
was shocked to hear the word blight applied to that area.
Councilmember Nand continued, the incredibly frustrated speakers who addressed council about
supplemental EIS they feel frustrations are falling on deaf ears. Young kids who jaywalk in this area can
be killed; adding hundreds of housing units to this area without addressing that impact is irresponsible. It
is the responsibility of the City, not private development to address that concern. A multitude of concerns
have been eloquently expounded in numerous meetings prior to tonight. She requested staff revise their
position that a supplemental EIS is not necessary or that no amendments are necessary. Conditions that may
have been appropriate in 2017 are not appropriate post-pandemic. It is not appropriate after a heatwave
killed hundreds in Washington last year due to inadequate infrastructure to protect vulnerable populations
including seniors. People died on sidewalks in Washington during 2021 due to the heat when resources
were unable to reach them in time.
Councilmember Nand continued, there is a lot of frustration in her part of the community, an area that has
always been very different than the Bowl. It is not just feeling underserved by City government or feeling
their concerns and frustrations fall on deaf ears, but the fact that they generate the most tax income for the
City, yet their area is treated as a problem. For the first time in 2019 when she ran for council, someone
referred to her part of Edmonds as the ghetto of Edmonds, a term she had never heard before. It is a part of
Edmonds where a lot of people of color live including her family who are members of the Asian-American
community. Before 2019, she did know her area of Edmonds was referred to as the ghetto of Edmonds or
that it was referred to as a blight. She was always proud to be part of Edmonds and did not know that was
how other people viewed that area.
Councilmember Nand continued, she lives in high density housing a few yards from Highway 99. She sees
her neighbor’s young kids playing in the common driveway for their townhouse complex because there is
absolutely no green space for them to play. People pull out of their garages and whiz past kids trying to
play ball in the common driveway due to the lack of green space or trees especially compared to other parts
of Edmonds which are very well served and well represented. Issues of cultural competency need to be
addressed when people have been speaking to council for weeks about why they feel the subarea plan is
inappropriate and why they haven’t been adequately consulted. She recognized staff worked very hard to
prepare tonight’s packet, but did not feel it was adequate to address the concerns of her community and a
supplemental EIS needs to be pursued. She supported looking at transportation issues, reiterating in her
area of Edmonds, someone who is unlucky while jaywalking will die, something that does not happen to
people in the Bowl where people drive 25 mph. She encouraged staff to examine cultural competencies
when dealing with proud residents and taxpayers in her area of Edmonds who address this apparatus that is
supposed to represent them and is funded by taxpayer money.
Ms. McLaughlin appreciated Councilmember Nand’s passion and commitment for the corridor. The intent
of tonight’s presentation is to find the most effective vehicle to address all the issues that Councilmember
Nand raised. She assured she is passionate about traffic safety and finding ways to get capital investments
into that neighborhood. That is why she wanted to emphasize how ineffective the existing environmental
framework would be to achieve that and recognizing the limitations of that environmental document, the
City could be more effective on the fringes. She is an educated professional completely committed to under-
invested and under-represented neighborhoods like this area. She assured this areas was not blighted and
hoped that word did not get proliferated in that neighborhood. It is not blighted; it is an economic engine
for Edmonds that is only now receiving the investment that it has historically deserved.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 18, 2022
Page 24
Ms. McLaughlin assured Councilmember Nand that her and the community’s concerns have not fallen on
deaf ears. A member of the community wrote a very thorough letter that took a lot of research in addition
to the material staff provided in the packet. It took time to research and respond to her letter and meet with
her, but it did not fall on deaf ears; staff took her comments very seriously. Staff’s recommendation to not
pursue a supplemental EIS is absolutely no reflection to their dedication and commitment to investing in
this area, it is because staff feels taking a different strategy would be more successful.
Mayor Nelson expressed appreciation for the work Ms. McLaughlin does and took offense to claims that
she has not been paying attention or listening. He knew she cared deeply about what was happening in that
area and was doing everything she can via the lens she looks through. Her expertise and her staff’s expertise
in working through these issues and challenges are undervalued and he appreciated everything they were
doing.
COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO
EXTEND TO 10:30. MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT VOTING NO.
Councilmember Teitzel commented the frustration expressed by residents indicates a need to redouble
efforts to reach out to the community including communities of color. During his first term on council, he
attended open houses, recalling at one held at the hospital, almost everyone in the room looked like him;
there were very few people of color. The problem is not getting enough input from people affected by these
changes and they are shocked and concerned when these large developments start happening and they
realize how big the developments will be and how many people will live there. The City needs to redouble
its efforts and find ways to reach everybody to get input early before things reach the 11th hour.
Councilmember Teitzel continued, there has been a lot of discussion about the lack of open space, green
space and parks in south Edmonds. The City is trying to acquire open space and parks in conjunction with
the subarea plan. He referred to page 842 of the packet, Parks and Open Space in the 2017 subarea plan
states, “provide onsite open space as a residential amenity through new development.” He asked if that
could be interpreted as developers would be expected to provide the open space or is that action that the
City would take in concert with development. Mr. Lien answered that is one of the design review standards
that were adopted in 16.60 to require amenity space and open space with development, but does not replace
the need for parks in the area. Ms. McLaughlin said there have been conversations recently with both private
development and the parks department about private investment solely providing those investments as well
as public-private partnership opportunities.
Councilmember Teitzel referred to page 840 of the packet Parks and Open Space in the 2017 subarea plan
which refers to possible acquisition of Esperance Park from Snohomish County for annexation and
redevelopment into a community park with sports fields, community gardens, picnic shelters, etc. He asked
why it would be beneficial for the City to acquire the park from Snohomish County when south Edmonds
residents already use it. Ms. McLaughlin was unsure of the status of that effort and offered to circle back
to Councilmember Teitzel on that question. She observed his point was not to take credit for space that
already exists. Councilmember Teitzel clarified since south Edmonds residents already use that park and
actually own it because they also pay taxes to the County, if the City acquires it, it will also take on the
maintenance costs. He did not see the benefit to the City as part of the subarea plan to consider acquiring
the park at this time.
Mr. Lien said since the subarea plan was done, the Snohomish County Esperance Park has been developed
and made available for public use. It includes sports fields, a dog park, playground trails and other recreation
facilities. The City has not acquired the park, but Edmonds citizens do use it.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 18, 2022
Page 25
Councilmember Teitzel said he was interested in considering an SEIS especially with the passion expressed
about why the City should pursue an EIS. He asked the cost in terms of time and investment to conduct an
SEIS. Ms. McLaughlin answered that body of work has not been scoped, but depending on the scope and
amount of community outreach, she estimated the cost at $200,000-$250,000 based on a range in other
local jurisdictions. She pointed out staff resources for that work would also need to be considered as the
City begins the update of the comprehensive plan. That workload would be unanticipated and almost
duplicative as it will consider the same policy issues, code issues, displacement issues, and will culminate
in an EIS.
Councilmember Teitzel suggested staff provide council the response to the citizen’s letter. The council
needs to understand if an EIS is not done, how the City can respond to those concerns. Ms. McLaughlin
said these are valid issues that are mentioned in various planning documents whether it is an adopted
document of and EIS or planned projects associated with the CIP or comprehensive plan policies, all well
intended and adopted by council that are not all in one place. The community renewal plan provides an
opportunity to include an action plan to combine all the current and planned actions in one location so it
does not feel so disparate or unintentional. It would be helpful to see all the investments outlined in one
place along with a time horizon.
With regard to impacts of doing an SEIS, Mr. Lien explained if an SEIS is initiated on the subarea plan, the
planned action is not in place during that interim period. If any project applications are submitted while an
SEIS is underway, they would need to go through the entire SEPA process which includes a new threshold
determination, etc.
To reinforce what other councilmembers are saying, Council President Olson suggested some type of work
plan approved by council may be workable if it included dates and deadlines. There is a sense of urgency
about some of these things, specifically related to the aquifer. She was confused by staff saying there were
no changes in the environment; it was not that the changes have happened while the planned action was in
place, but questioned whether the fact that this environmental condition was unknown at the time it was
implemented would be considered a change. Mr. Lien explained for the SEPA analysis, the threshold is a
probable significant environmental impact. The City became aware of the wellhead protection areas by
OVWSD and there is a stormwater code that address development within wellhead protection areas that
protects the aquifer recharge area. Knowing they exist now does not necessarily mean it is a probable
significant adverse impact. This was a big part of the discussion when the SEPA review was done on the
stormwater code.
Council President Olson asked if there was anything in the documents about true protections for ensuring
development does not occur in that area. Mr. Lien answered it is not that development does not occur in the
wellhead protection areas, it is how development occurs. For example, to protect the aquifer, one of the
problems is injection wells. He first became aware of this during the Madrona School project that proposed
deep injection wells for stormwater which could potentially put stormwater into the aquifer. That is one of
the things that should not be done as part of development in an wellhead protection area. When development
is proposed within a wellhead protection area, OVWSD is notified so they can review the project and the
city stormwater code also helps project those areas. He summarized it is not that no development can occur
in those areas, it is how development occurs to avoid impacting the aquifer.
Council President Olson said she did not want to take action tonight; she wanted time to talk with citizens
and staff. One of the early concerns was the transportation impacts in the original EIS focused on Highway
99 and SR-104. As soon as those buildings (84th) are constructed, they will obviously have a traffic impact.
If the original EIS did not look closely at that street and address those impact, it seems like that needs to
happen now. If there is no requirement for a traffic impact study because it is part of the subarea plan, that
seems like a miss. Whether that is handled by a council action plan or something else, she felt there should
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 18, 2022
Page 26
be something that is documented, tracked and made a sense of urgency and a priority. Mr. Lien explained
applicants for projects within the planned area still prepare a project-level traffic impact analysis that looks
at the impacts of that specific project. Even if it qualifies as a planned action, conditions and mitigations
can be added for specific projects if warranted. He summarized additional traffic impact analysis is required
at the project level when applications are made.
Council President Olson referred to staff’s comments about having public notice and involvement, and
asked if the developer would expect something had changed based on public input. Ms. McLaughlin asked
if Council President Olson’s question was whether the developer would be aware the public notice had
changed. Council President Olson clarified staff mentioned adding a step for public notice for some
projects, but if nothing is required in terms of the subarea plan or the way the City typically does business,
how would the public input be used and would it change what happens. Ms. McLaughlin answered the
developer would definitely be aware of it coming into the application process and it likely would require
an ordinance change. In terms of how to be most effective with public notice, frankly a SEPA notice may
not be effective at reaching people, speak in layman’s terms, and have a community conversation. The
public notice staff has been thinking about is in advance of a design review, to require a community meeting
with the developer to talk about project. That is something other jurisdictions do and it is highly effective
to have community members meet the developer and talk about the project in advance of a design review
so they understand what’s valuable to the community versus just notice of a public hearing. Council
President Olson suggested she and staff talk offline about what that ordinance needs to look like.
Councilmember Chen acknowledged staff’s hard work putting the packet together and all the information
provided. He also acknowledged staff listens to the community’s input and thinks about what’s best for the
community as evidenced by the moratorium two weeks ago. He shared the concerns of other
councilmembers’ and the community about the lack of green space, lack of a transition zone, and
displacement for low income and people of color living in this community. Many of them work multiple
jobs to make ends meet and when their property values increase due to development, their property taxes
increase which diminishes their ability to pay. He was very concerned about displacement due to
development.
Councilmember Chen referred to Councilmember Teitzel’s comment that people at community events look
like him, commenting it is because people of color work 2-3 jobs and are at work when those event are held
and do not have time to attend. He complimented staff’s efforts to reach out, noting it is hard to reach them.
With the community’s input and concerns, he supports conducting a supplemental EIS. The estimated cost
of $250,000 is a worthy investment to get the community’s input and get the best development for this
community.
COUNCILMEMBER CHEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO
HAVE A SUPPLEMENTAL EIS CONDUCTED.
Councilmember Buckshnis thanked staff for all the work they are doing, but she is jaded after 12 years.
Highway 99 residents deserve this SEIS. So much change has occurred and the citizens deserve to have a
voice. She preferred conducting a SEIS rather than a work around such as updating the code, including it
in the comprehensive plan, conducting a charrette, etc. She reiterated the climate will continue to get worse.
The Lake Ballinger Forum, which consists of Mountlake Terrace, Lake Forest Park, Shoreline and
Edmonds, is intent on keeping the lake clean and pristine. The City has $240 million from the state and
should just bite the bullet and do it.
Councilmember Paine said she was not in support of the motion at this time. The council needs to learn
more about implementing fixes that can happen right away. She wanted to explore other options before
reaching the conclusion that a SEIS is needed. She was excited about the light rail, anticipating south
Edmonds residents were not saying no housing or were supportive of the delays that a SEIS would create.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 18, 2022
Page 27
She was hopeful things like transition zones could be implemented right away and consideration given to
things that could be done short of a SEIS. Adding more housing options throughout Edmonds would be
ideal rather than building it all in this corridor, but this corridor has the greatest opportunity with the light
rail, additional transportation services on Highway 99, and the Highway 99 renewal project which will
result in a lot of changes.
Councilmember Paine continued, she would like to adopt guidelines for all neighborhoods so there is shared
vision and opportunities for Highway 99, Lake Ballinger, the Gateway District, etc. and do it in a way that
includes public outreach. There are two mobile home parks in Edmonds; those are the areas she worries
about displacing and having more housing options is great way to avoid that. Housing is a human right and
honors people who have been here for a long time. She thanked staff for all the information and summarized
she preferred to look at options before doing a SEIS.
Councilmember Teitzel commented the council is hearing from its constituents tonight and for the past
several weeks that they want action taken on issues that concern them such as displacement, open space
acquisition, partnership with other entities on parks, traffic safety, pedestrian safety, etc. The key thing the
council should consider is how to best address those concerns. If it is a SEIS so be it; if there is a better,
more efficient, effective way to do that, that was fine too. The council needs to get to the point where it can
make a decision whether to invest the money in a SEIS or not. He observed Ms. McLaughlin has said there
may be better ways to ensure those concerns are addressed and was willing to entertain those ideas, but
needed to see the responses to the concerns raised in the letter and the concern the council heard tonight.
He would like to consider that before taking action on conducting a SEIS. For that reason he will not support
proceeding with a SEIS at this time.
Councilmember Nand said she was full throated in support of the motion to authorize a SEIS tonight. The
political process exists for a reason and the engaged citizenry has let the council know through the political
process that they have concerns about some of the proposed changes, the oversights they feel emanate from
City government and affect their community. A SEIS is the bare minimum of an appropriate response to
the level of outage coming from her community at some of the changes imbedded in the five-year plan. She
will take endless amounts of verbal smacks to continue verbalizing the wholly appropriate engagement in
the political process that is coming from her part of Edmonds.
Councilmember Tibbott agreed that moving forward with a SEIS at this time is premature. A SEIS may
need to be done, but he preferred to see a work plan from the development services department about how
it would integrate with the comprehensive plan which will include a great deal of public input. He hated to
circumvent a process that is already in motion to insert another process when resources could be expedited
via a process that is already in motion.
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO
EXTEND TO 10:45. MOTION CARRIED (6-1) COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT VOTING NO.
Councilmember Paine asked when the emergency ordinance expires. Mr. Lien explained the emergency
interim ordinance is good for six months. A public hearing schedule is scheduled for November 15 and the
ordinance should go through the planning Board and back through council before the 6 months expires.
Councilmember Paine observed the effect of the emergency ordinance was no new permits were accepted
during emergency interim ordinance period. Mr. Lien explained the interim ordinance passed two weeks
ago was related to stepbacks for properties across the street and is good for six months with the possibility
of an extension with a work plan. A public hearing before council is scheduled on the interim ordinance for
November 15; the council makes findings whether to continue the interim ordinance or modify the interim
ordinance. The next step in the interim ordinance process is planning board review and recommendation to
council and then council would adopt another ordinance (or not) to make it permanent. The interim
ordinance is only related to stepbacks.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 18, 2022
Page 28
Council President Olson said she would support the motion with the thought that a motion to reconsider
could be done next week. The council will learn during the coming week whether it was the right move or
have something in the packet next week to consider as an alternative.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (4-3), COUNCILMEMBERS CHEN, BUCKSHNIS, AND
NAND AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS TEITZEL,
TIBBOTT AND PAINE VOTING NO.
Ms. McLaughlin asked what the one week reconsideration mentioned by Council President Olson meant.
Council President Olson offered to follow up with Ms. McLaughlin tomorrow, explaining councilmembers
on the prevailing side have the option to reconsider. If there was a convincing reason or an agenda memo
regarding a different approach next week, there could be a motion to reconsider the motion passed tonight.
5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN VISIONING SUMMARY
Due to the late hour, this item was postponed to a future meeting.
6. APPROVAL OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE SOLID AND HAZARDOUS
WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN (Previously Consent Agenda Item 7.10)
Mr. Taraday said he had an opportunity to compare the committee packet to tonight’s packet and understood
the question about the resolution. The resolution in tonight’s packet meets the typical Edmonds resolution
format and appropriately adopts the Snohomish County Solid Waste Plan so he saw no legal reason not to
adopt it.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS AND SECONDED, TO APPROVE
THE SNOHOMISH COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE SOLID AND HAZARDOUS WASTE
MANAGEMENT PLAN. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
9. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
Mayor Nelson welcomed Councilmember Nand. He reported on the Great Shakeout, an annual earthquake
preparedness exercise that will include testing of the tsunami siren on Thursday, October 20 at 10:20 a.m.
for 3 minutes. The siren is only a test and is for people who are outside, not inside a building, to seek higher
shelter. The City’s disaster coordinator will be at the exercise to answer questions about disaster
preparedness.
10. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Nand said she was incredibly honored and privileged to be on council. She was tweeting
with the former council student rep Brook yesterday and told him it was important that the council model
democracy and the democratic values of the U.S. Constitution at all levels of government down to the city
council. In working with City staff, she has established Councilmember Nand office hours every week on
Thursday from 4 to 5 pm. She also plans to have Councilmember Nand office hours on the weekend in the
Highway 99 community. She is wholly committed to being a public servant and she was thankful for the
opportunity.
Councilmember Paine welcomed Councilmember Nand, commenting she has been an active part of the
community and it was great to have her voice and experience. She thanked all the applicants for their interest
in council position #7. There is an amazing body of talent in Edmonds and she encouraged the applicants
to stay involved. She looked forward to the community renewal project open house on Thursday evening.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 18, 2022
Page 29
Councilmember Tibbott echoed previous councilmembers’ comments including welcoming
Councilmember Nand. With regard to the waste management plan, he assured the citizens of Edmonds
there will be a review process after all the cities have reviewed the plan and the Public Works Director
Antillon will be on a committee that reviews the document. It will be well vetted by the 21 cities in
Snohomish County as well as by the committee. He found the 100 page document, which was in the
November 11 PPW Committee packet, very interesting.
Councilmember Buckshnis welcomed Councilmember Nand. She thanked everyone who has been
contacting her and the applicants for the council vacancy. There will be five council positions available
next year and she hoped the applicants would run for election. She announced her town hall on Thursday
from 5-7 at Mel and Mia’s across the street from Bisto 76. About 35 participants attended her first town
hall where they discussed the budget, the comprehensive plan and other topics.
Council President Olson reminded of the virtual open house about Highway 99 on October 20 from 6 to
7:30 p.m. on Zoom. Further information is available on the City’s website.
Councilmember Chen welcomed Councilmember Nand, commenting she was one of the inspirations for
him to run for council. He thanked the many qualified community members who applied for appointment
to position #7. It was a difficult decision to select a councilmember and he encouraged the applicants to
continue to be involved in the community.
Councilmember Teitzel said he feel incredibly proud to be part of the Edmonds community. There are many
great citizens as evidenced by the number of incredibly talented and diverse people who applied for the
vacancy on council. He applauded everyone who applied. He applauded and welcomed Councilmember
Nand and looked forward to her contributions. As the council liaison to SnoCom 911, he relayed they are
having difficulty filling 911 operator positions, a key piece of the public safety system. He suggested anyone
who knows a 911 operator thank them and encouraged anyone interested in that opportunity to apply. It is
not just SnoCom 911 that is having difficulty, organizations across the country are having difficulty with
staffing.
11. ADJOURN
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:42 p.m.