2017-01-24 City Council - Full Agenda-18301.
2.
3.
4.
5
o Agenda
Edmonds City Council
snl. ynyo COUNCIL CHAMBERS
250 5TH AVE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020
JANUARY 24, 2017, 7:00 PM
CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE
ROLL CALL
APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA
1. Approval of Council Special Meeting Minutes of January 17, 2017
2. Approval of Council Meeting Minutes of January 17, 2017
3. Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments.
4. Confirm Appointment of Tanya Sharp to the Arts Commission Position #2
AUDIENCE COMMENTS (3-MINUTE LIMIT PER PERSON) - REGARDING MATTERS NOT LISTED ON
THE AGENDA AS CLOSED RECORD REVIEW OR AS PUBLIC HEARINGS
6. ACTION ITEM
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
1. Fire District 1 Interlocal Agreement (45 min.)
STUDY ITEMS
1. Shoreline Master Program (45 min.)
2. Authorization for the Mayor to sign an Interlocal Agreement between the City of Lynnwood and
the City of Edmonds for joint funding of the Recycling Coordinator (5 min.)
3. Presentation of a Professional Services Agreement with The Blueline Group for the 2018
Waterline Replacement Project (10 minutes)
4. Salary Commission Ordinance (15 min.)
5. Professional Services Agreement for Urban Forest Management Plan (10 min.)
REPORTS ON OUTSIDE BOARD AND COMMITTEE MEETINGS
MAYOR'S COMMENTS
COUNCIL COMMENTS
CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION PER RCW
42.30.110(1)(1)
RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION. POTENTIAL ACTION AS A RESULT OF MEETING IN EXECUTIVE
SESSION.
ADJOURN
Edmonds City Council Agenda
January 24, 2017
Page 1
4.1
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 01/24/2017
Approval of Council Special Meeting Minutes of January 17, 2017
Staff Lead: Scott Passey
Department: City Clerk's Office
Preparer: Scott Passey
Background/History
N/A
Staff Recommendation
Review and approve the draft meeting minutes on the Consent Agenda.
Narrative
N/A
Attachments:
01-17-2017 Council Special Meeting Minutes
Packet Pg. 2
4.1.a
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING
DRAFT MINUTES
JANUARY 17, 2017
Elected Officials Present
Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember
Tom Mesaros, Council President
Dave Teitzel, Councilmember
Neil Tibbott, Councilmember
Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember
Mayor Earling
Elected Officials Absent
Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember
Mike Nelson, Councilmember
Staff
Carrie Hite, Parks, Recreation & Cultural
Services Director
Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
1. CALL TO ORDER/CONVENE IN JURY MEETING ROOM
At 6:15 p.m., the City Council Special Meeting was called to order by Mayor Earling in the
Council Chambers, 250 5t' Avenue North, Edmonds.
2. EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION
PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(i)
The Council then adjourned to the Jury Meeting Room to discuss pending or potential litigation
per RCW 42.30.110(1)(i). At 6:42 p.m. the executive session concluded.
3. CANDIDATE INTERVIEWS FOR APPOINTMENT TO A CITY BOARD OR
COMMISSION
The City Council then interviewed a candidate for appointment to the Sister City Commission.
This interview was held in the Jury Meeting Room and was open to the public.
ADJOURN
At 6:50 p.m. the interview concluded and the meeting was adjourned.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
January 17, 2017
Page 1
Packet Pg. 3
4.2
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 01/24/2017
Approval of Council Meeting Minutes of January 17, 2017
Staff Lead: Scott Passey
Department: City Clerk's Office
Preparer: Scott Passey
Background/History
N/A
Staff Recommendation
Review and approve the draft meeting minutes on the Consent Agenda.
Narrative
N/A
Attachments:
01-17-2017 Draft Council Meeting Minutes
Packet Pg. 4
4.2.a
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL DRAFT MINUTES
January 17, 2017
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Dave Earling, Mayor
Thomas Mesaros, Council President
Michael Nelson, Councilmember
Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember
Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember
Dave Teitzel, Councilmember
Neil Tibbott, Councilmember
ELECTED OFFICIALS ABSENT
Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember
1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE
STAFF PRESENT
Carrie Hite, Parks, Rec. & Cult. Serv. Dir.
Shane Hope, Development Services Director
Rob English, City Engineer
Renee McRae, Recreation Manager
Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
Scott Passey, City Clerk
Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator
Jeannie Dines, Recorder
The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Earling in the Council
Chambers, 250 5ch Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute.
2. ROLL CALL
City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present with the exception of
Councilmember Johnson.
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO
APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
4. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT,
TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda
items approved are as follows:
1. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 10, 2017
2. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 10, 2017
3. CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM ELANA SHIPPEN (AMOUNT UNDETERMINED)
4. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS AND WIRE PAYMENT
5. CONFIRMATION OF HAROLD WILLIAMS II APPOINTMENT TO THE SISTER CITY
COMMISSION
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
January 17, 2017
Page 1
Packet Pg. 5
4.2.a
6. BUDGET CARRYFORWARD INFORMATION MEMO
5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Dianna Maish, Edmonds, member of Save Our Marsh, thanked the Mayor and the City Council for the
informative presentation by Western Washington University students last Friday at City Hall. She was
pleased to see community discussions regarding improving the health of the Edmonds Marsh such as
reducing Harbor Square runoff, more effective stormwater management techniques in the buffer area,
strategies for enhancing biodiversity, minimizing invasive plant species in the marsh and the possibility of
enhancing wildlife habitat. The Edmonds Marsh is the only remaining salt marsh between Tacoma and
Everett and can provide more ecosystem service than it currently does. Save Our Marsh is eager to hear
the City's plans for following up on the students' well formulated recommendations. Since most of the
work will involve Port property, they are interested in how the Port will participate in implementing the
results. Save Our Marsh wants to help, perhaps with planning, grants, field work or organizing
community volunteers. She relayed their appreciation for the Council's decision which allowed Edmonds
to be the first city in the state to receive such a quality assessment.
Rich Demeroutis, Edmonds, reported tripping on a raised piece of pavement about a year and a half ago
when walking along 5th in early evening darkness. Fortunately, he was able to stop his fall with his hands
but suffered tendentious for several months following the fall. He discovered a faint line of florescent
paint on the raised piece of pavement and during subsequent walks, saw faded lines painted in several
areas on pavement along 5th Avenue. Those have been re -marked but have not been ground down in the
past six months. He reported the raised pavement to the street department and was told they are marked
and ground down by a contractor. He encouraged the City to give more attention to raised pavement
pieces. He has also reported missing caps in the street, and once it took 4-5 months for it to be replaced.
When reporting overgrown vegetation on sidewalks on Edmonds Way, the City said it was the State's
responsibility and the State said it was the City's responsibility. When he called recently about ivy
covering half the sidewalk near Madrona School, it was trimmed within a week.
6. PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. CIVIC CENTER MASTER PLAN PUBLIC HEARING
Parks & Recreation Director Carrie Hite explained this is a hybrid draft of the Civic Park Master Plan.
There has been a very robust community conversations about the park; the Master Plan reflects the
interests expressed by the community. This presentation was previously scheduled in November 2016 but
was rescheduled due to full agendas at the end of 2016. She sought Council direction on any changes to
the final draft plan; staff s intent is to return the Master Plan to Council in the next 1-2 months for final
adoption.
Chris Jones, Principal and Landscape Architect, Walker Macy, explained Walker Macy has been
working with Ms. Hite, the Project Advisory Committee (PAC) and the community to develop a Master
Plan that re -envisions the Civic Center Playfield. This is a great site for a downtown park and Walker
Macy was excited to be a part of the process. The hybrid plan is the culmination of a nine -month planning
and community engagement process that included three public open houses and three on-line open
houses.
He explained Open House #3 began with review of Open House #2 to update members of the public who
had not been part of the entire process. Open House #1 identified programs the community wanted to see
at Civic Playfield which included over 100 ideas. He reviewed results from Open House #2
• Ideas from Open House #1 were developed into two illustrative plans:
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
January 17, 2017
Page 2
Packet Pg. 6
4.2.a
Option 1 — Meadow Loop
2 smaller or 1 large soccer field
4 p6tanque courts
1.5 courts
Playgrounds
Walking jogging paths
Multi -use lawn
Existing Field House / B&G Club
Shade pavilion and restroom
• In -person discussion & report back:
o —160 attendees
0 16 discussion tables
o Preferred Plan (by majority at table):
■ Option 1: 8
■ Option 2: 4
■ Split: 2
■ Unclear: 2
o Individual Comment Cards:
■ Option 1: 5
■ Option 2: 3
■ Undecided / Unclear: 3
Option 2 — Activity Center
1 large + 1 small soccer field
8 p6tanque courts
4 courts
200m track
Skate park
Sand volleyball
Parking
Playgrounds
Walking jogging paths
Multi -use lawn
Expanded Field House for B&G Club / Cafe / restroom
Picnic pavilion
Results of the online open house (August 24th to September 7th)
0 1,057 visitors
0 379 responses
o Preferred Plan
■ Option 1: 88 (23.9%)
■ Option 2: 280 (76.1%)
o Age Range
■ Over 70: 38 (17.7%)
■ 45-69: 81 (37.7%)
■ 30-44: 80 (37.2%)
■ 18-29: 7 (3.3%)
■ Under 18: 5 (2.3%)
o Common reasons respondents preferred option 1:
■ Free -flowing structure, layout
■ Walking paths
■ Water feature and plaza
■ Open green spaces and lawn
■ Reduced number of p6tanque courts
■ No track
o Common reasons respondents preferred option 2:
■ View terraces
■ Long walking and running paths
■ Focus on fields and athletic facilities
■ Expanded boys and girls club
■ Skate park
■ Potential for large events
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
January 17, 2017
Page 3
Packet Pg. 7
4.2.a
■ More spaces for families and children
■ Track
• Combined open houses (in -person and online) results:
o Option 1: 178 (35%)
■ In -person: 90 (64%)
■ Online: 88 (24%)
o Option 2: 330 (65%)
■ In -person: 50 (36%)
■ Online: 280 (77%)
• Most consistent comments:
o Like the lawn terraces
o Skate park should remain
o Option 1 curves nice but want more active programs like Option 2
• Additional feedback:
o Common elements not shown that respondents would like to see included:
■ Additional restrooms
■ Benches and/or seating areas
■ Lighting
■ Additional covered athletic facility and market space
■ Stage
■ ADA accessibility
■ 400-meter track
Mr. Jones reviewed the Hybrid Plan:
• How we resnonded to what we heard:
Top 10 activities (from Open House #1
Votes
Included in
Hybrid Plan
1. Restrooms
77
✓
2. Petanque
76
✓
3. Jogging/walking paths
71
✓
4. Soccer
67
✓
5. Shade trees
56
✓
6. Skate park
50
✓
7. Playground
50
✓
8. Tennis
49
✓
9. Boys & Girls Club
48
✓
10. Multi -use lawn
42
✓
• From total list of 40 activities, 36 are accommodated in the hybrid plan
• Themes/priorities
o 1 st: Active
0 2nd: Passive
0 3rd: Civic
• Framework diagram
o Civic Edge (West)
o Landscape buffer (North, South and East )
o Multi -use Lawn
• Pedestrian and vehicular connections through park
o Sidewalk on 6 h
o Sprague Avenue right-of-way connection through park providing cross park connection to
downtown
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
January 17, 2017
Page 4
Packet Pg. 8
4.2.a
o Sinuous paths on north and east side
0 1/4 mile soft surface loop with 2 lanes
Mr. Jones described the hybrid plan (starting on west side and proceeding counterclockwise):
• Market promenade along 6ffi Avenue
o Pedestrian friendly, at -grade streetscape street grade
o Not included in park plan but recommended as City strategy to activate park and make park
safer
• Tennis courts
o Replace existing courts
o Moved 10 feet south and added planting buffer
o Moved 38-feet off the property line
• Multiuse court
• Mound with constructed stairs
• Topographic change on south side of mound provides opportunity for small climbing wall
• Locations along track for park course
• Skate park
o Cast in place
o Below grade
• Playground
• Terraces
• Track follows property boundary
• Pathway with seating on south side of multiuse lawn area
• 4 P6tanque courts, garden spaces and seating areas
o Front door to park
o Needs to be beautiful, high horticultural value, gateway, shade, seating areas
• Restroom, shade structure and potentially concession space
• Small water feature
• Potential location for signature art piece
• Boys & Girls Club in current condition with no expansion
• Multi -use ball court
0 Community Hubs
o Potential 12,000 square foot Boys & Girls Club expansion
o Potential 20,000 square foot Boys & Girls Club alternative
■ Do not recommend, comments indicate this footprint does not fit neighborhood
Mr. Jones reviewed:
• Photographs of what the spaces could look like:
o Great lawn
o Market Promenade
o The Meadows
Aerial looking at the northwest corner illustrating:
o Dominant space is multiuse playfield
■ Light fixtures shown could be relocated
o Skate park
o Playground
o Boys & Girls Club (existing and potential expansion)
o Water feature/art element
o Restrooms, shade structure and concessions
o P6tanque courts
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
January 17, 2017
Page 5
Packet Pg. 9
4.2.a
Hybrid Plan event overlays
o Small to medium size events within the park
■ Diagram illustrating how could accommodate small performances, wine garden, market,
small -medium performances
o Large events
■ Taste of Edmonds
■ 4th of July
■ Market & Festivals
■ Hybrid plan includes same amount of flexible space in the park as exists today
■ Will require efficiencies by the Chamber
Mr. Jones reviewed the results of Online Open House #3 (October 19`h to November 4th)
• 347 visitors
o Majority nearby residents
o Most had not attended any of the in -person open houses
o Age Range
■ Over 70:
7%
■ 45-69:
48%
■ 30-44:
41%
■ 18-29:
0%
■ Under 18:
2%
156 comments on plan
o Range of comments similar to prior feedback:
■ Like the curves, paths and passive areas
■ Like the integrated activities
■ Skate park location is an issue for residents
■ Beautiful plan, good compromise
■ Not enough sports/ playfields and too much passive area
■ Not enough passive area and too much sport activity
■ P&tanque grove is nice but would like larger tournament area
■ Appreciate the thoughtful incorporation of community feedback
■ Formal track should be included
■ Like the 6th Avenue market promenade and plaza
■ We should leave the park as is
■ Concerns about buffers, noise, dogs, lighting and other design details
Mr. Jones reviewed updates to the Hybrid Plan based on community concern since Open House #3:
• Most controversial siting was skate park due to noise and adjacently to neighborhood
o Proposed change — move skate park away from north edge of park and swap it with a picnic
space which is a more passive, quieter use. Returns skate park generally to its current location
• Add two p6tanque courts on southwest side for a total of six courts
o Integrate planting and seating
• If Boys & Girls Club expands, change basketball court to multiuse court
He reviewed a schematic of the typical planted buffer along the alleyway on the north side:
• Public expressed concern with children running into the alley on the north side to and from the
park and safety concerns that creates
o Some suggested a fence on park boundary
■ A fence does not create a welcoming sense to park
o Planting bed creates a more welcoming entry
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
January 17, 2017
Page 6
Packet Pg. 10
4.2.a
Diagram: Planted berm, 8-foot jogging/walking path, 14-foot minimum planted buffer, 17-foot
alley
Could be schematic design feature.
Another possible solution is a sidewalk on north side
Mr. Jones displayed a diagram illustrating potential phasing:
• Phase A: West side, hardscape
• Phase B: Softscape
• Phase C: Market Promenade on 6th Avenue
Mr. Jones explained another issue is the tennis court fencing on the northwest corner
• Tennis courts currently abut alley on the north side and 6th Avenue
• Propose moving two tennis courts east 38 feet with a buffer on the north side to mitigate and
provide noise attenuation between the park and residents.
• Relocation created some concern regarding fencing. Options include:
o more transparent netting
o Netting is only raised when courts are being used
o Constructed fencing can be more appealing than existing fencing
• Will continue to engage the community regarding this issue
Council President Mesaros asked about the height of a standard tennis fence. Mr. Jones answered 12-15
feet. Council President Mesaros asked how many tracks exist in city limits. Ms. Hite answered there are
tracks at Edmonds-Woodway High School, former Woodway High School, Madrona School and College
Place. She summarized middle school and high schools typically have tracks but elementary schools do
not. Council President Mesaros supported the recommendations for 6th Avenue and the opportunity that
provides. He observed 6th Avenue will not be completely closed to traffic but the design features will
indicate that it is primarily a pedestrian way. Mr. Jones explained the proposal is for the grade to be flush
from curb to curb with no east -west grade transition and a different type of pavement. There are some
challenges on the west side due to the topographic change to the fire station but they are not
insurmountable.
Councilmember Buckshnis commented the packet was very thorough. She recalled parking is an issue in
Edmonds and asked how making 6th Avenue a pedestrian promenade would affect parking. Ms. Hite said
parking was raised during the process; there was a strong sentiment in the community not to have parking
in the park. The proposed street improvements on 6th and 7th could accommodate more parking than exists
today.
Councilmember Buckshnis pointed out the potential conflict between the promenade and access for the
fire station. Mr. Jones acknowledged that was not addressed; the concept of a promenade is in its infancy
and there are many things to be worked out. The illustration of a market setup and programming are not
accurate based on that need for circulation and would need to accommodate emergency access.
Councilmember Buckshnis asked whether the alley would be open to cars. Mr. Jones answered yes.
Councilmember Buckshnis asked if Sprague Street would be open for cars. Mr. Jones answered it would
not be open for cars through the park; it was intended as a walkway only. Ms. Hite said there are two
alleyways, one to the north and one to the south that act as driveways for condos on the north and south
sides of the park. The promenade through the park is part of the park now; it was vacated because the site
was already developed as a park.
Councilmember Teitzel expressed his appreciation for the public involvement in the development of the
plan. He observed the existing Boys & Girls Club was an older structure but an assessment found it did
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
January 17, 2017
Page 7
Packet Pg. 11
4.2.a
not rise to the level of historic significance. He was aware the building needed a lot of work and asked
whether it was savable. Ms. Hite answered it would have to be completely renovated in order to meet the
needs of the Boys & Girls Club. In conversations with the Boys & Girls Club, they are interested in
demolishing the structure and build a new building. Councilmember Teitzel observed the building needs
structural work and asked the cost to bring it up to current standard. Mr. Jones said the budget may
include a line item associated with renovations to the Boys & Girls Club. He agreed a substantial
investment in the structure would be necessary to make it functional such as mechanical, electrical,
plumbing, ADA accessibility, etc. The setup of the existing space makes it difficult to accommodate that
use.
Councilmember Teitzel observed the tennis courts, the potential multiuse court and the skate park, all
hard surface noise generating activities, are clustered in the northwest corner. He asked about moving the
tennis courts where the grandstands current exist and aligning them end to end to spread out the noise
generating activities more evenly around the park. Mr. Jones answered that could be explored. Nobody
wants a skate park next to their residence and few want tennis courts next to their residence. Putting those
in the center would destroy the park and moving features would likely result in different groups
expressing concern. He agreed there were a lot of hard surfaces in the northwest. He suggested
considering whether there was a way to reduce the hard surfaces such as a cinder tennis court that would
reduce the noise as well as the view of the colored surface. However, that would be challenging because
the courts are also used for pickleball. He summarized moving the tennis courts would require relocating
a lot of features. Ms. Hite pointed out the skate park was moved from the north edge to the center and
replaced with a picnic area which is a quieter activity. The multiuse court is optional in the hybrid plan
and would likely be omitted to keep the cost of development down unless the Boys & Girls Club rebuilt
on the other multi -use court. With the picnic area, the stairs, the track, the climbing wall and the tennis
courts are the only hardscape on that edge.
Councilmember Teitzel recalled concern about noise from the skate park and asked whether the surface
on the jogging/walking path could be a cinder -type surface that could not be skateboarded on. Mr. Jones
answered the sinuous paths are envisioned as a hard, ADA accessible material but could be a soft paving
system. The Sprague access will likely designed for fire truck, pedestrian, and bicycle use which could be
skateboarded on. He acknowledged mitigating hard surfaces to reduce noise was a valid concern. They
could look at other ways to attenuate noise such as maximizing the buffers on the north side and shifting
the tennis courts south closer to the Sprague Avenue right-of-way to provide more buffer on the north
side as well as provide more significant plant material.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked whether moving features around the outside perimeter of the park
would eliminate the ability for the Chamber to have 4th of July, Taste, etc. in the park. The plans currently
include a big open space that will accommodate a scaled back version. Mr. Jones answered rotating uses
could be explored. A wild idea would be to flip the uses from the north to the south but the challenge with
that is the design team would essentially need to start over. Moving program spaces around would be
difficulty and would bring up new challenges associated with adjacencies. He acknowledged there is
never a perfect solution; it is a puzzle. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas anticipated the same concerns
would be expressed from residents on the south side of the park. Ms. Hite reminded where the hard
surfaces are located on the west edge is unrestricted land; there are limits on the amount of impervious
surface in the center portion from the east edge to the multi -use field.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if the Boys & Girls Club has expressed any intent to leave the
area. Ms. Hite answered no, during the latest conversation she and Mayor Earling had with the Boys &
Girls Club 2-3 months ago, they indicated their intent to stay at Civic and would like rebuild a new club.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented the Boys & Girls Club currently serves 150 kids in that
small space. Mayor Earling said there was a clear indication from the Boys & Girls Club that they are
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
January 17, 2017
Page 8
Packet Pg. 12
very active and want to pursue a new building on the site but do not have any immediate plans. They
understand the value of a Boys & Girls Club in the downtown area.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked for additional information regarding 6th Avenue, asking if the
intent was still a two-lane road with sidewalks on both sides. Mr. Jones answered yes. He clarified when
the City Council approves the Master Plan, it will not include 6th Avenue as part of the proposal. They see
a great opportunity to redevelop the street; in this concept it would remain two lanes with parking on both
sides. Their suggestion is for it to be an at -grade promenade with different paving material, tree lined, etc.
in the future. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas observed 6th Avenue could still be closed for events. Mr.
Jones answered yes. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas relayed her understanding that the Civic Park Plan
would not affect traffic on 6th Avenue. Mr. Jones agreed.
Councilmember Nelson echoed Councilmember Buckshnis' concern with fire station access if 6th Avenue
is converted to a market promenade, noting the trucks could use the doors on the opposite side. With
regard to the skate park, he understood the desire to move it to a quieter location but was not crazy about
the new location. He asked if there were other materials that absorb sound better than the current skate
park. Mr. Jones there are not a lot for the skating surface. There is another material used for performance
stages but he has not seen it used for a skate park and was uncertain if it would be quieter.
Councilmember Nelson inquired about natural buffers around the skate park. Mr. Jones said berms only
do so much; distance provides the most attenuation.
Councilmember Nelson asked whether the location of skate park impacts the lawn. Mr. Jones answered
no, it integrates well and could be shifted slightly. An early concept included a depressed skate park
further west with the walkway over the top. That was cool idea but very expensive. Councilmember
Nelson asked how that would affect the sound. Mr. Jones answered there will be echo from the concrete
regardless of whether it is depressed; the more depressed it is, the less noisy it is. Ms. Hite said the skate
park in the original schematic and in the current proposal is more of a bowl in the ground rather than
above ground. The existing skate park is above ground which echoes more than an in -ground bowl will.
Councilmember Tibbott appreciated the amount of public engagement in the process. He asked if the
track material was envisioned to be a rubber surface. Mr. Jones envisioned the track would be a typical
material as recycled rubber that is easy on joints, similar to other professional tracks. Councilmember
Tibbott asked if that track would primarily be used for walking/jogging. Mr. Jones said it would not be a
skating surface. Councilmember Tibbott asked about the material for the emergency vehicle access path.
Mr. Jones answered concrete or pavers although pavers are likely cost prohibitive. It could be a scored
concrete walkway or exposed aggregate, colored concrete, etc.; there are many ways do concrete in a nice
way.
Councilmember Tibbott asked whether asked whether some of the hardscape activities in Civic Park
could be reduced by placing them in other parks such as Maplewood Park which has no amenities other
than some camp sites. Ms. Hite said that was considered during this process. The tennis courts at this site
are the only tennis courts downtown. Maplewood is not located downtown, City Park cannot
accommodate any other activities, and the Frances Anderson Center field is used a lot and has no space
for tennis courts. The Park, Recreation and Open Space Plan speaks to a compliment of recreation
components in all parks. This signature downtown park has a lot of activities but is one of the only spaces
downtown besides City Park whose key feature is the spray pad and the playground and Frances
Anderson Center whose key feature is the soccer field and bandshell. Mr. Jones said if the Boys & Girls
Club redevelops on the site, that could include an indoor tennis court.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
January 17, 2017
Page 9
Packet Pg. 13
4.2.a
For Councilmember Tibbott, Ms. Hite said in addition to the two tennis courts at Civic Field, there are
also courts at Yost and Seaview. Councilmember Tibbott pointed out there are walking paths at some
elementary schools such as Edmonds Elementary.
Mayor Earling opened the public participation portion of the hearing.
Carl Zapora, Edmonds, congratulated and thanked Mayor Earling and the City Council for the open
process and for holding a public hearing to gather public input. He attended one of the three open houses
and felt it was very well done. He was frankly blown away by the hybrid proposal and how it
accommodated so many competing priorities. He loved the hybrid plan, a beautiful design, with a lot of
thought into it. He appreciated Mayor Earling and the Council's openness to the flexibility of the field
space, good for park space, recreation space and healthy activities as well as for festivals which add to the
flavor of Edmonds, making it an attractive community for all citizens. He thanked the City and the
consultant for the genuine opportunity for input and the great job on the hybrid plan.
Darleen Attik, Edmonds, speaking on behalf Pat Woodell, Edmonds, referred to discussion about
revising the design and moving the skate park to 7th Avenue or other location. She expressed support for
the City Council approving a plan that leaves the skate park where it is in the most recent design, close to
the Boys & Girls Club. This location is realistically spaced away from condominiums and single family
residences that border Civic Field. Neighbors to Civic Field have had 11 years of experience with the
skate park in its current location, making it a known quantity. In 2005 when the City Council approved
the skate park, it was specific about where it should be sited. The Council's approval came after a long
and careful process that included noise studies, research by the Skate Park Work Group, several Planning
Board and City Council meetings and at least three public hearing and pages of testimony and reports
documenting opinions for and against siting a skate park in Civic Field. References to the core documents
that summarize this public and often controversial history were included in her written comments. If the
current design that proposes to move the skate park near a residential border of Civic Field is changed,
she requested the neighbors of Civic Field be given notice of the proposal and an opportunity to
comment. She urged the City Council to honor the hard work done 11 years ago and leave the skate park
where it is in the current design.
Linda Malan, Edmonds, said living on Daley Street allows them to walk downtown and provides a front
row seat to activities in the park. That ideal setting can also become unlivable; for example, in August
they must leave home during the Taste of Edmonds. Upon learning of the plans to create a signature park
on Civic Field, residents on its border have expressed their concerns and ideas. In April 2016, before the
open house and before plans were developed, a detailed summary of comments from residents on the
north and south sides of the field were submitted to Ms. Hite. They have also attended the public
meetings and written letters. Even with all that input, the final hybrid design placed the skate park beneath
the windows of their living area. They are grateful to Ms. Hite and Walker Macy that the skate park
hopefully will no longer be placed there. That was such an unexpected radical change from the two earlier
plans, that their confidence in having input on the final in plan has been shaken. The skate park is the
busiest of all the park features, used year-round by all ages with activity beginning at daylight and
continuing after dark. Placing the skate park near any residences would make those homes less desirable.
The best, carefully determined location for the skate park is for it to remain where is now. She assumed
most downtown city parks were surrounded by full size streets; the condos on the north side are only 17
feet from the park's northern edge with only a narrow, busy alleyway separating them. If the edges of the
park are filled with as many activities as citizens wish to use occasionally and overlooks the borders that
contain full-time homes, it will seriously affect the desirability of living in this downtown area.
Bill Wood, Edmonds, highlighted the need for a fence to separate the field from the alley on the north
that connects 6th and 7th. He did not support moving the tennis courts or the skate park any closer to
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
January 17, 2017
Page 10
Packet Pg. 14
4.2.a
residences bordering the north alley than they currently are. There is currently a fence around the entire
perimeter of the field with only one opening on the north side between 6th and 7th, making it easy for
drivers to know where children may be running to/from the park. This fence was deemed necessary to
prevent children from being hit by cars. The current design calls for landscaping instead of a fence. It was
stated at the Planning Board that bushes will minimize the chance of children being hit by cars; he argued
the goal should be to prevent children from being hit by cars, not minimize the chance. To say a fence is
inconsistent from a design element standpoint is regrettable. If the design does not include a fence, the
first child hit by a car will be a preventable tragedy. The fence need not be tall, a 3-4 feet fence would be
enough. A fence on the north alley would also protect elderly, vulnerable residents from opportunistic
vandals, purse snatchers, etc. from leaping out of the bushes. He also did not want the noisy athletic uses
to get any closer to existing residents; there are no Edmonds residents more greatly affected on a daily
basis by any redevelopment of the field than the several dozen families who live adjacent to it. He
requested the Council protect the children on the field as well as the safety of nearby residents by
requiring a fence.
Jack McHenry, Edmonds, described his background in education. After retiring three years ago, he
became a member of the P6tanque Club. He was initially curious about the enthusiastic group of people
he watched playing p6tanque when walking home from downtown. He was invited to try and found the
game fun, challenging and addictive. He also learned the Edmonds P6tanque Club exists for more than the
game played on theses courts; when it was founded five years ago, the founders envisioned a civic group
that would work for the community, educate and engage young people, serve as an economic stimulus for
the City, raise money for good causes and benefit Edmonds. As fun as the game of p6tanque is, it is a
means for a project that was created to enrich the community. The club is excited and appreciative that
the new Civic Playfield includes a welcoming, attractive p6tanque grove near the entrance of the park.
The P6tanque Club currently has 77 members and continues to grow; two years ago it was the fastest
p6tanque club in the county and this month it was featured in the National P6tanque Club Magazine for its
community service. The new playfield design will allow the club to broaden the ways it serves Edmonds
by contributing to the Edmond Food Bank, involving students and young people in the sport, and hosting
tournaments that attract visitors. On behalf of the P6tanque Club, he thanked the Parks & Recreation
Department and Planning Board for the care they have given to the project and the space allocated to
p6tanque in the new park. The club looks forward to the next phase so members can continue to play
p6tanque in the park and can continue their contributions to the community.
Michelle Martin, Edmonds, said she was born in France, is now a citizen of the United States, and is the
founder of the Edmonds P6tanque Club. She thanked the Parks & Recreation Department especially Ms.
Hite for supporting and helping p6tanque flourish. P6tanque is growing across the world and is being
considered for the 2024 Olympics. As Mr. McHenry stated, the mission of the club is to reach out to the
community. Since its inception, the club has worked to benefit Edmonds by hosting large scale
tournaments that attract players from throughout the region. They also raise money for good causes; for
example, over the years the club has donated $24,500 to the Edmonds Food Bank, worked with young
people and hosted a Sister Cities Student program. The club is excited about the six courts in the p6tanque
grove and was gratified at the November 9 Planning Board meeting to see the Board's understanding of
the club's desire to create the p6tanque grove as a flexible community space that will allow additional
temporary courts to be created on the crushed granite surface. The ability to format the p6tanque grove
will allow the club's community events to continue. The club hopes to provide a pleasing space for other
community events such as the 4th of July and the Taste of Edmonds' wine garden.
Danene Warnock, Edmonds, described her background in design and marketing production as well as
urban design and landscape architecture. She was appreciative and excited about the six p6tanque courts
planned for Civic Park. For the reasons mentioned by Ms. Martin and Mr. McKay, she looked forward to
the design of the p6tanque grove, envisioning it as an attractive area at the entrance to the park, and
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
January 17, 2017
Page 11
Packet Pg. 15
4.2.a
inviting open space. It will be a pleasant place with seating and tables that will complement the other
spaces being contemplated such as the gardens, paths, lawns and other sport -specific areas. The club
believes the grove can be attractive and inviting while maximizing its available footprint and hence its
versatility and ability to support the club's outreach activities. It would be most beneficial if the p6tanque
grove has the flexibility to host larger format activities and events; such activities contribute economically
to Edmonds as well as contribute to the food bank and broader social outreach. In the same way that
Edmonds skateboarders lend their expertise to the layout and design of the skate board park, p6tanque
players look forward to the opportunity to assist with the design of the p6tanque grove, resulting in an
area of the park that will allow larger p6tanque and community events and benefit the Edmonds
community in many ways.
Greg Urban, President & CEO, Edmonds Chamber of Commerce, thanked City staff, City Council
and the consultant for the work done on the hybrid plan. The Chamber has been open to changing the
space and working the Chambers' events into the space allowed. The hybrid plan allows the Taste and 4th
of July to continue in different a configuration, removing some onsite parking. The space is an economic
driver in the community; the P6tanque Club uses it to raise funds via tournaments, the Chambers' events
at Civic Field generate approximately $24,000/year that they give back to non -profits and service clubs.
He believed swapping the skate park and the playground to be a better solution; the proposed location in
the revised hybrid plan does not allow for a natural buffer to absorb sound. The location of the proposed
playground with tall berms on both sides could absorb more sound as well as not encroach on the great
lawn and multiuse space. He referred to the east -west corridor, the Sprague Avenue vacation, pointing out
police/fire access is typically required to be 16-feet wide; the proposed path appears to be much narrower.
Expanding the width of the east -west corridor and using a non -hard surface that would not accommodate
skateboards, bikes or roller blades such as a hard pack granite would also allow the market to happen
inside the park and it could be used by the P6tanque Club for expanded courts during large tournaments.
Chris Ziobro, Edmonds, an advocate for skate park, a skater, and a dad with two kids envisioned Civic
Park as a multigenerational venue where families can gather. If properly designed, it can be a hub of
activity for everyone, not just skaters. There is a noticeable difference between a skate park and a
basketball or tennis court where non -participants are excluded. He was not a huge fan of moving the skate
park away from the playground, pointing out that spreading uses apart and possibly isolating skaters who
can be self -policed when integrated with the larger group. He preferred the skate park be located adjacent
to other family -friend activity areas. With regard to the speculation about sound, he suggested having a
noise study done to verify that a skate park is louder than two basketball courts; he suspected the skate
park would not be noticeably louder. Modern skate parks are below ground and are quieter than the
current design. The berms will also help lessen the sound unless a person lives directly above the skate
park. He emphasized this is a community park; those living adjacent have an opinion but choosing to to
live adjacent to a public space, they could reasonably assume there would be sounds from the public
space.
Brian Brookhart, Edmonds, a father of two and a resident on 6th across from Pine Street Park, said the
process has been incredible. He was impressed by each stage and aspired to represent himself as previous
speakers. He joined the planning effort to support the interest and activities of his family but found it a
great way to plug into the community. He has made friends and has been recruited by the P6tanque Club.
This design provides an incentive to go to the park. He was generally pleased with the design,
accommodating all his family's interest, particular skateboarding. His family typically travels outside
Edmonds to enjoy one of the better designed parks in the area, a park that serves varying interests and
supports every level. Skate parks can be aesthetically pleasing; the worst skate park is an unused park that
becomes a hangout spot and gives him and his family and others who love the sport a bad name. He was
okay with any location for the skate park but agreed with the recent move. As a generalist, Walker Macy
has done an excellent job but he urged the Council to contract with a professional designer and builder for
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
January 17, 2017
Page 12
Packet Pg. 16
4.2.a
the skate park. As skateboarder who is passionate about skateboarding and has traveled the globe to skate,
he wanted something great in Edmonds, something aesthetic pleasing, that pleases the community and
reduces sound volume, needs a good skate park designer and builder would address.
Rich Demeroutis, Edmonds, commented he lived near City Hall when he was a child and recalled
playing on the dirt Civic Field until dark. When he was in junior high, he participated in football, track
and baseball at Civic Field. The field has great sentimental value to him and many others, serving as the
high school football field in the early 1900s. He wanted the design to include the 220 track so he and
others did not have to drive to Edmonds Woodway High School to use the track. He noted few people
play petanque this time of year; a synthetic track could be used even in rainy months. He also suggested
including soccer fields. He suggested building a feature with the 1% or a climbing wall to buffer sound. If
the Boys & Girls Club expands, he suggested it be a joint use facility with a community center to draw
youth and seniors, a health club, a gathering place in off hours.
Jeff Peterson, Edmonds, said he liked Option B better than Option A and was glad to see a hybrid plan
developed. He had hoped there would be a bigger, permanent field for soccer. A father with two children,
he said it was important to have a good park nearby and he looked forward to bringing his children to play
at Civic Park. He supported the idea of a fence on the north side to keep kids from chasing balls outside
the park. He questioned whether the petanque courts would be sited north -south or east -west.
Iyam Winterfelt, Edmonds, said 2'/z months ago she drove 1700 miles from Minnesota to Edmonds to
retire and to play to petanque. In July 2014, she visited Edmonds and delighted in the murals on
buildings, the kindness of the people at the Visitors Center who provided her a packet of materials. She
visited the murals, the sculpture walk, historic buildings, Driftwood Players, Edmonds Center for the
Arts, and took a yoga class. After reading an article in the Beacon inviting people to play petanque,
several ladies offered to teach her to play. That weekend was the Bastille Day tournament and after three
hours of experience, she played in the tournament and had the time of her life. At the end of that week,
with all the other wonderful things in the community, it was the people in the Petanque Club that made
her decide to retire in Edmonds. She thanked the Council and staff for the work they do to preserve such a
precious oasis. She commented the Petanque Club will be playing in Barcelona Spain representing
Edmonds.
Lorna Moffett, Edmonds, thanked the group working on this great plan for considering the tennis
courts. She recalled 17 years ago she was able to move into a condo in the Edmonds Bowl where she can
walk to stores and look out on the tennis court, kids playing, open grass, etc. When she heard the City
planned to purchase the School District property, she thought it would be wonderful. Then she heard that
the tennis courts would be moved east, leaving her a view of the fence and the hard surface instead of
green grass. She said 90% of the time during the months when people play tennis, only one court is used.
She suggested eliminating the east tennis courts and making it a grass field which would also be useful
during the Taste.
Tom Schappacher, Edmonds, said he works for the UW in real estate; one of the things his boss asks
about when he presents a plan is the as -is plan. With this opportunity to consider designing the playfield,
consideration should be given to its history and what it was used for in the past, rigorous sports. He would
have liked to have seen the process consider a self-sustaining model with rigorous use and paying
customers. The Petanque Club is a passionate group who mobilized and was well represented in the
process. However, athletic teams and sports have not been well represented. Where hundreds play
petanque, thousands play and watch sports. He envisioned high school soccer or football in downtown
Edmonds a couple times a season, the number of people that would attract to downtown to visit
businesses and the field use fees it would generate. He recognized rigorous sports and lights for sporting
events would understandably concern neighbors but he was concerned that had not been considered
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
January 17, 2017
Page 13
Packet Pg. 17
especially when that use would pay for itself. He requested the City consider that and reopen discussion
of an as -is plan. Sports on the fields could bring thousands to use the fields day and night 365 days/year
versus the proposed uses that likely will only occur on sunny days.
Val Stewart, Edmonds, thanked Ms. Hite and Walker Macy for their excellent work, months of a very
robust public process. As a member of PAC, she looked at all the public input and research as well as the
expertise that Walker Macy brought to the planning process. She expressed support for the proposed
changes to the hybrid plan. A lot of thought has gone into the concerns the public expressed, locating the
skate park based on research done 11 years ago. With regard to the fence, she was confident Walker Macy
would develop a landscape buffer that would prevent children from running back and forth and putting
themselves at risk. This will be a well -designed park that will hold the interest of kids and the right
landscaping can avoid balls and other objects going into the alleyway. With regard to represented interest
groups, she assured there have been online and physical open houses and the majority of interests are
represented in this minimal space. With a background in sports and physical activity, she recognized that
physical activity fads come and go; the park spaces need to be transitional, flexible and endure into the
future. This is a park for all residents, all abilities, and all mobilities, and it was important that the young,
the old and families have a places to play, be at peace, be active and to watch. She concluded this is a
great plan and the process has been excellent.
Hearing no further comment, Mayor Earling closed the public participation portion of the hearing. He
recalled Ms. Hite's interest in direction from the Council but questioned how that would be possible with
the variations that have introduced by Walker Macy and by the public as well as the questions that have
been asked. Although many of the ideas are fabulous, he was concerned with the element of cost
associated with further manipulation. Ms. Hite said the plan Walker Macy presented is the hybrid design
with a few changes based on public comment at the Planning Board public hearing and the open house.
She would like to give Walker Macy direction to develop the final Master Plan for Council adoption.
With the comments the Council has heard tonight and their own opinions, she asked whether the Council
was supportive of the hybrid plan with the changes or if there were any major changes the Council agreed
upon. If there are no major changes, Walker Macy will polish the Master Plan and bring it back for
adoption. Major changes could include moving the skate park, moving or having more petanque courts,
moving the tennis courts, etc.
Council President Mesaros commented on the popularity and growth of petanque. He supported the
changes made to the hybrid plan based on community comments, recognizing regardless of the plan or
location, there will always be concerns from the residents living on the borders. He supported having
Walker Macy polish the hybrid plan, mitigate factors as best they can and return with a recommendation.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas liked the location of the skate board park in the middle, close to Boys &
Girls Club, envisioning that location would offend the least amount of people. Her concern with swapping
the skate park and playground was the sound of children screaming on the playground carries much more
than the skate park noise. She also preferred a natural barrier on the north and south sides instead of a
fence and did not anticipate it would create a danger for children. She envisioned thick vegetation to keep
kids from running through. She thanked staff and Walker Macy for the great job they did and for the great
public process.
Councilmember Tibbott agreed with Council President Mesaros and Councilmember Fraley-Monillas
regarding the changes to the hybrid plan. He suggested having one tennis court and one multiuse court
and giving consideration to adding courts in other parks. He did not favor a fence, observing it could be
added later if it was necessary for safety purposes. He looked forward to seeing how the buffer material
worked and the openness it provided. He also supported using crushed granite on the east -west pathway
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
January 17, 2017
Page 14
Packet Pg. 18
4.2.a
which would provide opportunity for additional courts. He asked the width of the east -west path. Mr.
Jones responded it was 12 feet wide.
Councilmember Nelson agreed with the previous Council comments regarding the changes to the hybrid
plans. He pointed out the distance of the track will be 1/3 mile. If the City was going to have a skate park,
he supported having it designed by someone who designs skate parks.
Councilmember Buckshnis supported the hybrid plan with the proposed changes. She referred to Ms.
Moffett's comments about tennis, pointing out tennis was huge in the 70's; most of the players at the
Harbor Square Tennis Court are baby boomers. Not many younger people play tennis; most prefer big
field sports. She supported the idea of having only one tennis court as that may be all that is needed. She
rarely sees either of the tennis courts being used even in the summer. With regard to the fence, she
preferred a natural barrier such as trees, noting there is not much activity in that area.
Councilmember Teitzel said he generally likes the plan and thanked staff and Walker Macy for their great
work. He agreed with exploring a reduction in the tennis courts from two to one. He lives very near and
observes the tennis courts daily; it is the exception that both are in use even in nice weather. He supported
the revised skate park location and suggested planting a thorny row of bushes along the north alley that
discouraged people from walking through it would serve the need instead of a fence. He was concerned
about children running into the alley and agreed that edge needed careful consideration.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said she visits the Boys & Girls Club at least once a week and has seen
both tennis courts in use during the summer. She asked whether the City had any data on use of the tennis
courts. Ms. Hite said drop -in use is not tracked; data is available on instruction the City provides on the
courts. The City uses both courts for tennis lessons in the summer. The courts at the former Woodway
High School are not used as much as they could and Yost Park has two courts. By department policy,
whenever tennis courts are resurfaced, pickleball lines are painted and portable nets are available for
checkout. Pickleball is more of a trend than tennis; there is a large pickleball club in Edmonds. Reducing
the two tennis courts to one would accommodate four pickleball courts rather than eight with two tennis
courts. Yost Park has eight pickleball courts available on the two tennis courts. Councilmember Fraley-
Monillas said she received comments about the pickleball courts and whether pickleball would continue
on those courts. She expressed interest in more concrete data regarding use of the tennis courts. Ms. Hite
offered to provide the Council numbers from the City's programs.
Councilmember Teitzel commented the Boys & Girls Club likely will want to expand either in their
current location or where the tennis courts are located. If that happens, there would be a multiuse court on
the north border which could be used for pickleball in addition to the single tennis court.
Ms. Hite advised work will continue on SEPA, a community naming contest, costing options, fund
development packages and design development of the Master Plan. She will return to Council for final
adoption soon.
Mayor Earling thanked Ms. Hite and Mr. Jones for the work they have done and looked forward to the
final product.
Mayor Earling declared a brief recess.
2. PUBLIC HEARING OF THE SNOHOMISH COUNTY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
City Engineer Rob English recalled Snohomish County Department of Emergency Management made a
presentation to Council last week and several questions were raised. Staff researched the questions and
emailed responses to the Council. The City submitted a grant to secure funding for the Dayton Street
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
January 17, 2017
Page 15
Packet Pg. 19
4.2.a
Pump project. If the City is successful in obtaining the grant, this plan needs to be approved before the
funds can be secured. Staff recommends forwarding approval of the plan to next week's Consent Agenda.
Councilmember Buckshnis asked if approval should include directing the Mayor to bring back the
Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan prepared in 2009 for an update. She recalled staff
indicating there was no record that it had been adopted. Mr. English said Police Chief Compaan is
working with Snohomish County Department of Emergency Management to update that plan and will
bring it to the Council in the future.
Mayor Earling opened the public participation portion of the public hearing. There was no one present to
provide comment and Mayor Earling closed the public participation portion of the hearing.
COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT
MESAROS, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. 1382, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF
EDMONDS ADOPTING THE UPDATED AND REVISED SNOHOMISH COUNTY HAZARD
MITIGATION PLAN. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
7. STUDY ITEMS
1. DISCUSSION REGARDING COUNCIL RETREAT AGENDA
Council President Mesaros expressed appreciate to Councilmembers and Directors for their input which
he is using to formulate an agenda. The goal of the retreat is setting the Council's calendar for 2017,
getting a sense of the timing and ensuring the Council is addressing topics that affect citizens and
resolving issues that have been unresolved for a number of years. The retreat will be 12 to 5:30 p.m. on
Friday and 8:30 a.m. to 12 p.m. on Saturday in the Edmonds Library Plaza Room.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas requested Councilmembers receive the agenda in advance. Council
President Mesaros anticipated the agenda would be complete by the end of business tomorrow and
available Thursday morning.
Mayor Earling said he was thrilled to attend a Martin Luther King breakfast on Monday in downtown
Seattle, attended by 500-600 people. The breakfast is a good reminder of the principles under which a
very powerful movement began and continues. Councilmember Teitzel also attended the breakfast.
Mayor Earling reported he spent today in Olympia in eight meetings starting at 8:30 a.m. and ending with
a 2 hour and 10-minute drive back to Edmonds in a rainstorm. He assured a lot of work was done; the
specific intent was to ensure key legislators in the district as well as transportation leaders in the House
and Senate were informed of the waterfront access project. There was a very positive response including
from Representative Clibborn who said when the $500,000 was allocated, she did not think there was a
chance that something would be put together. She is excited about the project.
9. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Teitzel said he enjoyed the Martin Luther King, Junior breakfast yesterday, a wonderful,
moving presentation and great music. He reported on the Sustainable Cities Partnership presentation by
Western Washington University (WWU) students who presented three concepts for consideration, 1)
removing invasive species from the marsh and replacing with native species, 2) extending the boardwalk
and adding observation platforms, and 3) a concept for stormwater management at Harbor Square. The
students did a great job, providing a good start on concepts that can be explored and expanded.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
January 17, 2017
Page 16
Packet Pg. 20
4.2.a
Councilmember Teitzel reported he and his wife recently saw "Hidden Figures" at the Edmonds Theater,
a timely movie in view of yesterday's holiday. He found it very powerful and moving, even tearing up at
times and highly recommended the movie.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas reported on the march in downtown Seattle on Martin Luther King Day
that brought together people from many places. Everyone in the march was marching for peace, getting
along and love.
Councilmember Nelson looked forward to the retreat and was excited about the Civic Field Park.
Councilmember Buckshnis reported she attended the WWU students' presentation. All their reports (4I'
Avenue Cultural Corridor, Edmonds Marsh Restoration, Zero Waste/Food Waste, Mobile App,
Wastewater Treatment Plant Education, Stella's Landing, Playful City, Edmonds Cemetery Mapping, Sea
Level Rise, Green Business Program, and Walkability Assessment) are available on the City's website
under Sustainable Cities Partnership.
10. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION
PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(i)
This item was not needed.
11. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION. POTENTIAL ACTION AS A RESULT OF MEETING IN
EXECUTIVE SESSION
This item was not needed.
12. ADJOURN
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 9:28 p.m.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
January 17, 2017
Page 17
Packet Pg. 21
4.3
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 01/24/2017
Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments.
Staff Lead: Scott James
Department: Administrative Services
Preparer: Nori Jacobson
Background/History
Approval of claim checks #223740 through #223849 dated January 19, 2017 for $3,617,415.66.
Approval of clothing allowance checks #62548 through #62559 dated January 6, 2017 for Law
Enforcement Commissioned Employees in the amount of $3,675.93 per union contract. Approval of
payroll direct deposit and checks #62560 through #62567 for $519,501.11, benefit checks #62568
through #62573 and wire payments of $557,716.90 for the pay period January 1, 2017 through January
15, 2017.
Staff Recommendation
Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments.
Fiscal Impact
Claim checks $3,617,415.66
Payroll
Payroll checks and direct deposit $523,177.04
Benefit checks and wire payments $557,716.90
Narrative
In accordance with the State statutes, City payments must be approved by the City Council. Ordinance
#2896 delegates this approval to the Council President who reviews and recommends either approval or
non -approval of expenditures.
Attachments:
claim cks 01-19-17
FrequentlyUsedProjNumbers 01-19-17
payroll summary 01-20-17a
payroll summary 01-20-17b
payroll summary uniform allowance
Packet Pg. 22
4.3.a
vchlist
Voucher List
Page: 1
01/19/2017
11:36:12AM
City of Edmonds
.y
O
Bank code :
usbank
Voucher
Date
Vendor
Invoice PO #
Description/Account
r
Amoun m
223740
1/19/2017
070322 A&A LANGUAGE SERVICES INC
15-43233
INTERPRETER FEE
INTERPRETER FEE
001.000.23.523.30.41.01
170.2z a)
15-45388
INTERPRETER FEE
U
INTERPRETER FEE
001.000.23.523.30.41.01
164.3( c
15-46562
INTERPRETER FEE
INTERPRETER FEE
001.000.23.523.30.41.01
185.3E
15-46590
INTERPRETER FEE
=0
INTERPRETER FEE
001.000.23.523.30.41.01
185.3( a
Total:
705.2E
223741
1/19/2017
065052 AARD PEST CONTROL
380621
WWTP: 1-13-17 PEST CONTROL SE
U
1-13-17 PEST CONTROL SERVICE
p
423.000.76.535.80.41.00
73.0(
9.8% Sales Tax
p
L
423.000.76.535.80.41.00
7.1: 0-
Total:
80.1! Q
223742
1/19/2017
000850 ALDERWOOD WATER DISTRICT
10051
MONTHLY WHOLESALE WATER Cl-
~
0
MONTHLY WHOLESALE WATER Cl-
00
421.000.74.534.80.33.00
106,807.8'
Total:
106,807.8'
a6
223743
1/19/2017
065568 ALLWATER INC
011017056
FINANCE DEPT WATER
r
r
Finance dept water
o
001.000.31.514.23.31.00
N
46.9'
011017057
WWTP: 1/12/17 DRINKING WATER;
E
1/12/17 DRINKING WATER SERVIC
ca
423.000.76.535.80.31.00
21.7E
122716049
WWTP: 12/23/16 DRINKING WATER
Water services (plus rental/supplies
E
423.000.76.535.80.31.00
10.9(
R
.r
r
a
Page: 1
Packet Pg. 23
vchlist
01 /19/2017 11:36:12AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice
223743 1/19/2017 065568 065568 ALLWATER INC (Continued)
223744 1/19/2017 001528 AM TEST INC 96651
223745 1/19/2017 074674 AMERICAN PETROLEUM ENVIRO SVCS 3909120216
223746 1/19/2017 001429 AMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS ASSOC DeLilla.APWA Renewal
223747 1/19/2017 073573 ANIXTER
223748 1/19/2017 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES
English.APWA Renewal
Hauss.APWA Renewal
PO # Description/Account
Tota
4.3.a
Page: 2
c
ca
.y
0
a
a�
Amoun
79.6' _L
WWTP: 503 METALS ui
503 Metals (Sample #: 16-A0030023)
423.000.76.535.80.41.00 100.0(
Total: 100.0(
FLEET - USED OIL FEES
Fleet - Used Oil Fees
511.000.77.548.68.48.00
9.8% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.48.00
Tota
DELILLA.APWA 2017 RENEWAL
DeLilla.APWA 2017 Renewal
001.000.67.518.21.49.00
ENGLISH.APWA 2017 RENEWAL
English.APWA 2017 Renewal
001.000.67.518.21.49.00
HAUSS.APWA 2017 RENEWAL
Hauss.APWA 2017 Renewal
001.000.67.518.21.49.00
Tota
23K-137514 FAC - DOOR BAR
FAC - Door Bar
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
9.8% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
Tota
1988781383 FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS
FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS
511.000.77.548.68.24.00
9.8% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.24.00
a
c
m
206.5( c
c�
20.21 o
226.7� ca
a
E
215.0( ,-
0
c�
215.0(
a
Q.
Q
215.0( ti
0
645.0( co
d6
579.9E
r
r
0
56.81
Y
I : 636.8(
-22.5 1
r
a0i
E
-2.2'
t
.r
r
a
Page: 2
Packet Pg. 24
vchlist
01 /19/2017 11:36:12AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
223748 1/19/2017 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Invoice
PO # Description/Account
(Continued)
1988787152
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE
9.8% Sales Tax
111.000.68.542.90.41.00
9.8% Sales Tax
421.000.74.534.80.41.00
9.8% Sales Tax
422.000.72.531.90.41.00
9.8% Sales Tax
423.000.75.535.80.41.00
9.8% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.41.00
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE
001.000.65.518.20.41.00
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MAT:
111.000.68.542.90.41.00
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MAT:
421.000.74.534.80.41.00
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MAT:
422.000.72.531.90.41.00
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE
423.000.75.535.80.41.00
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE
511.000.77.548.68.41.00
9.8% Sales Tax
001.000.65.518.20.41.00
1988787153
FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS & MAT
FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS
511.000.77.548.68.24.00
FLEET DIVISION MATS
511.000.77.548.68.41.00
9.8% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.24.00
9.8% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.41.00
4.3.a
Page: 3
N
-0.6(
t
U
-0.6(
a�
c
-0.6(
-0.6( c�a
0
-0.5£ L>%
c�
a
-1.6(
-6.1(
4-
0
-6.1( ti
0
0
-6.0£
ti
r
-0.1( c6
r
rr
0
-6.41
-15.2'
-0.6z
m
-1.4£ E
R
.r
r
Q
Page: 3
Packet Pg. 25
vchlist
01 /19/2017 11:36:12AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
223748 1/19/2017 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Invoice
PO # Description/Account
(Continued)
1988798633
FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS
S FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS
001.000.66.518.30.24.00
9.8% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.24.00
1988926762
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MA
4.3.a
Page: 4
T:
�
�
�
T:
T:
-0.0'
t
U
-2.4, V
�
�
1.6' -a
�
6.1' o
j,
6.1' a
�
�
w
6.0£ 0
0.1E o
a
0.
0.6( Q
ti
0.6( 00
T:
E
E
0.6( r
a6
0.6( r
r
0
0.5£
�
6.1'
�
E
57.3,
�
R
.r
r
Q
Page: 4
Packet Pg. 26
vchlist
01 /19/2017 11:36:12AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice
PO # Description/Account
223748 1/19/2017 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES (Continued)
PARKS MAINT UNIFORM SERVIC
4.3.a
Page: 5
E
c
ca
.y
0
a
a�
Amoun
m
L_
�
58.5'
EL y
t
U
5.1(
a�
c
115.9£
0.5( c�a
T:
0
11.31 L>%
a
�
4-
0.1f 0
0.6( o
a
0.
0.6( Q
ti
0.6( 00
T:
T:
�
�
0.6( r
a6
0.5� r
r
c
1.6'
�
6.1'
�
6.1'
m
6.1' t
R
.r
r
Q
Page: 5
Packet Pg. 27
vchlist
01 /19/2017 11:36:12AM
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Bank code :
Voucher
usbank
Date
Vendor
Invoice PO #
Description/Account
223748
1/19/2017
069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES
(Continued)
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MAT
223751 1/19/2017 071124 ASSOCIATED PETROLEUM
223752 1/19/2017 075217 BASLER, TONY
1024583-IN WWTP: DIESEL FUEL
4.3.a
Page: 6
�
5.6£ 4-
a�
c
18.4(
0.5( c�a
0
1.8(
1 : 259.5', a
2 E
2 U
150.0( o
150.0( 16-
0
a
Q.
Q
28,538.0(
1 : 28,538.0( c
00
DIESEL FUEL - ULSD #2 DYED - BU
T"
423.000.76.535.80.32.00
2,201.0'
9.8% Sales Tax
r
423.000.76.535.80.32.00
215.7' w
Total :
2,416.7,
E
16092 INTERPRETER FEE
INTERPRETER FEE
001.000.23.512.50.41.01 107.5 ,
Total: 107.5,
t
R
.r
r
a
Page: 6
Packet Pg. 28
vchlist
01 /19/2017 11:36:12AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
223753 1/19/2017 074307 BLUE STAR GAS
223754 1/19/2017 002840 BRIM TRACTOR CO INC
223755 1/19/2017 003360 CENTENNIAL GLASS
223756 1/19/2017 063902 CITY OF EVERETT
223757 1/19/2017 019215 CITY OF LYNNWOOD
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Invoice
7165
-M*
SM02162
24468
116002713
12790
223758 1/19/2017 035160 CITY OF SEATTLE 9056920000
PO # Description/Account
FLEET AUTO PROPANE 577.3 GAL
Fleet Auto Propane 577.3 Gal
511.000.77.548.68.34.12
FLEET AUTO PROPANE 551.2 GAL
Fleet Auto Propane 551.2 Gal
511.000.77.548.68.34.12
FLEET AUTO PROPANE 575 GAL
Fleet Auto Propane 575 Gal
511.000.77.548.68.34.12
Tota
UNIT 19 - REPAIRS
Unit 19 - Repairs
511.000.77.548.68.48.00
9.8% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.48.00
Tota
E4MB.46X63 CLEAR 1/4" LEXAN
E4MB.46x63 Clear 1/4" Lexan
016.000.66.518.30.41.00
9.8% Sales Tax
016.000.66.518.30.41.00
Tota
WATER QUALITY - WATER LAB A
Water Quality - Water Lab Analysis
421.000.74.534.80.41.00
Tota
INV#12790 CUST#200966 - EDMO
PRISONER R&B DEC 2016
001.000.39.523.60.51.00
4.3.a
Page: 7
c
ca
.y
0
a
a�
Amoun
m
L_
521.1z
m
t
U
502.3£ 4-
a�
c
m
539.8( -o
1,563.3, M
N
0
a
6,019.8z E
58).9z U
I: 6,609.7£ o
0
a
1,824.0( Q
178.7E c
I : 2,002.7E °r°
E ~
r
C6
631.8( r
1 : 631.8( w
NI
E
M
132.5( U
Total: 132.5(
m
WWTP: 11/7/16 - 1/10/17 FLOW MEl E
t
R
.r
r
Q
Page: 7
Packet Pg. 29
vchlist
01 /19/2017 11:36:12AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
223758 1/19/2017 035160 CITY OF SEATTLE
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Invoice
(Continued)
223759 1/19/2017 071389 COASTAL WEAR PRODUCTS INC 6515
223760 1/19/2017 073135 COGENT COMMUNICATIONS INC JAN-17
223761 1/19/2017 075860 CONSOLIDATED SUPPLY CO
223762 1/19/2017 075826 DAHN DESIGN LLC
S7994035.001
2
223763 1/19/2017 006200 DAILY JOURNAL OF COMMERCE 3320887
3320952
4.3.a
Page: 8
c
ca
.y
0
a
a�
PO # Description/Account
Amoun
m
L_
11/7/16 - 1/10/17 FLOW METER 220:
423.000.76.535.80.47.62
17.1 z
Total:
17.11
t
U
UNIT 138 - 20 - 5 SECTION G/B
Unit 138 - 20 - 5 Section G/B
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
2,295.0(
9.8% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
224.9'
Total:
2,519.9' o
0
C/A CITYOFED00001
Jan-17 Fiber Optics Internet Connecti
Q'
512.000.31.518.87.42.00
406.1( .
Total :
406.1( f°
WATER - WATER SAMPLE STANDS
4-
0
Water - Water Sample Stands (2)
>
421.000.74.534.80.31.00
1,521.2( a
9.8% Sales Tax
Q.
421.000.74.534.80.31.00
149.0E Q
Total :
1,670.21 c
0
E4MB.INTERPRETIVE SIGNS - FINP
E4MB.Interpretive Signs - Final Desig
ti
016.000.66.518.30.41.00
r
6,350.0( di
Total :
6,350.0( r
0
LEGAL AD FOR RFQ FOR WATERFI
w
LEGAL AD FOR RFQ FOR WATERFI
125.000.64.576.80.41.40
105.8( .
WWTP: 1/5 & 1/12/17 NOTICE TO SI
f°
1/5 & 1/12/17 NOTICE TO
423.000.76.535.80.41.00
136.0(
Total:
241.8( E
R
.r
r
Q
Page: 8
Packet Pg. 30
vchlist
01 /19/2017 11:36:12AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
223764 1/19/2017 064531 DINES, JEANNIE
223765 1/19/2017 007253 DUNN LUMBER
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
4.3.a
Page: 9
c
ca
.y
0
a
a�
Invoice PO # Description/Account
Amoun
17-3730 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 01/10/201"
L_
01/10/2017 CITY COUNCIL MEETIN(
001.000.25.514.30.41.00
336.0(
Total:
336.0(
t
U
4440692 FAC MAINT SUPPLIES
Fac Maint Supplies
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
35.1E
223766 1/19/2017 007775 EDMONDS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 2351
223767 1/19/2017 069523 EDMONDS P&RYOUTH SCHOLARSHIP 5325 CORDOVA THIARA
223768 1/19/2017 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION
223769 1/19/2017 075912 EVAN HILL
223770 1/19/2017 009350 EVERETT DAILY HERALD
5-10351
HILL REFUND
EDH737293
9.5% Sales Tax -0
001.000.66.518.30.31.00 3.3< cm
Total: 38.5' o
L
TOURISM PROMOTION AWARD FO
Tourism promotion award from 2016 1 Q"
120.000.31.575.42.41.00 2,500.0( .
Total: 2,500.0(—,°
5325 KLS CORDOVA THIARA
5325 KLS CORDOVA THIARA
122.000.64.571.20.49.00
Tota
IRRIGATION AT HWY 99/COUNTY
IRRIGATION AT HWY 99/COUNTY
001.000.64.576.80.47.00
INTERURBAN TRAIL
INTERURBAN TRAIL
001.000.64.576.80.47.00
Tota
HARBOR INVEST. PARKING PER
REFUND FOR PARKING PERMIT#
121.000.322.90.000.00
Tota
STUDIO MENG STRAZZARA PLN2
STUDIO MENG STRAZZARA PLN2
t^.
M
64.0( a
1 : 64.0( Q
LI
LI 00
44.2E
a6
44.2E r
r
1 : 88.5( c
N
Y
I' �
0 E
50.0(
1 : 50.0(
c
m
0 E
0
R
.r
r
Q
Page: 9
Packet Pg. 31
Packet Pg. 31
vchlist
01 /19/2017 11:36:12AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
223770 1/19/2017 009350 EVERETT DAILY HERALD
223771 1/19/2017 066378 FASTENAL COMPANY
223772 1/19/2017 070271 FIRST STATES INVESTORS 5200
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Invoice
(Continued)
EDH738323
E D H 738694
EDH738697
EDH738698
E D H 738731
E D H 738755
WAMOU42325
086955
223773 1/19/2017 011900 FRONTIER 253-011-1177
PO # Description/Account
001.000.62.558.60.41.40
WWTP: 1/6&1/13/17 LEGAL NOTI
1/6&1/13/17 LEGAL NOTICES -
423.000.76.535.80.41.00
PSE GAS LINE STF20160024
PSE GAS LINE STF20160024
001.000.62.558.60.41.40
PLN20160055 ANDREW REAVES,
PLN20160055 ANDREW REAVES,
001.000.62.558.60.41.40
PEGGY WAITE PLN20160057
PEGGY WAITE PLN20160057
001.000.62.558.60.41.40
LEGAL AD FOR RFQ FOR WATER
LEGAL AD FOR RFQ FOR WATER
125.000.64.576.80.41.40
PLN20160056 ARMIN METZ ON B
PLN20160056 ARMIN METZ ON B
001.000.62.558.60.41.40
BE
UNIT E112PO PARTS
Unit E112PO Parts
511.100.77.594.48.64.00
9.8% Sales Tax
511.100.77.594.48.64.00
Tota
4.3.a
Page: 10
c
ca
.y
0
a
a�
Amoun
m
L_
80.8,
CE Y
m
55.0z U
4-
a�
c
53.3,
S
S
c�
60.2( o
a
56.7E E
FI
FI
36.1: o
EF
0
L
75.6E Q-
1 : 417.9E Q
ti
0
0
5.3' ti
r
0.5,
Total : 5.& c
N
TENANT #GK101706 4TH AVE PARk Y
4th Avenue Parking Lot Rent for Jan - E
001.000.39.542.64.45.00 3,600.0( 'M
Total: 3,600.0(
r
c
PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE
PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE'
R
.r
r
Q
Page: 10
Packet Pg. 32
vchlist
01 /19/2017 11:36:12AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
223773 1/19/2017 011900 FRONTIER
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Invoice
PO # Description/Account
(Continued)
001.000.65.518.20.42.00
PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE'
111.000.68.542.90.42.00
PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE'
421.000.74.534.80.42.00
PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE'
423.000.75.535.80.42.00
PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE'
511.000.77.548.68.42.00
PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE'
422.000.72.531.90.42.00
425-712-0417
TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE
TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE
421.000.74.534.80.42.00
TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE
423.000.75.535.80.42.00
425-712-0423
WWTP: 1/7-2/6/17 AFTER HOUR BL
1/7-2/6/17 AFTER HOUR BUSINESS
423.000.76.535.80.42.00
425-712-8251
PUBLIC WORKS OMC ALARM, FAX,
PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE AND IN'
001.000.65.518.20.42.00
PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE AND IN'
111.000.68.542.90.42.00
PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE AND IN'
421.000.74.534.80.42.00
PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE AND IN'
423.000.75.535.80.42.00
PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE AND IN'
511.000.77.548.68.42.00
425-745-4313
CLUBHOUSE FIRE AND INTRUSIOI`
CLUBHOUSE FIRE AND INTRUSIOI`
001.000.66.518.30.42.00
425-771-4741
425-771-4741 CEMETERY PHONE/II
4.3.a
Page: 11
c
ca
.y
0
a
a�
Amoun
m
L
6.3(
N
24.3( y
t
U
24.2�
w
c
24.2�
24.2( c�a
0
24.Z L>%
ca
a
E
w
33.2 , 0
0
L
71.1' a
Q
16.2 00
81.3 , ti
r
di
68.3E r
r
0
68.3E Y
91.1< •E
Page: 11
Packet Pg. 33
4.3.a
vchlist Voucher List Page: 12
01/19/2017
11:36:12AM
City of Edmonds
c
ca
Bank code :
usbank
a
W
Voucher
Date Vendor
Invoice PO #
Description/Account
Amoun
223773
1/19/2017 011900 FRONTIER
(Continued)
L_
425-771-4741 CEMETERY PHONE/II
130.000.64.536.20.42.00
92.5'
425-775-1344
425-775-1344 RANGER STATION
y
425-775-1344 RANGER STATION
U
001.000.64.571.23.42.00
64.9z
425-775-7865
UTILITY BILLING RADIO LINE
c
UTILITY BILLING RADIO LINE TO FI'
421.000.74.534.80.42.00
66.3 , -a
Total:
945.91 M
223774
1/19/2017
075163 GARCIA-GARCIA, CESAR
16786
INTERPRETER FEE
INTERPRETER FEE a
001.000.23.512.50.41.01 105.2
Total : 105.21
223775
1/19/2017
069947 GET GO INC
1206626702
GOTOMYPC CORPORATE SERVICE
c
GoToMyPC Corporate Service - Qty 2
001.000.31.514.23.31.00 2,904.0( c
9.8% Sales Tax a
001.000.31.514.23.31.00 284.5� Q
Total: 3,188.5�
ti
223776
1/19/2017
072515 GOOGLE INC
BID-200427538
BID/ED! TRANSFER OF E-MAIL PRC 00
Ed!/BID Transfer of e-mail program to
140.000.61.558.70.41.40 250.0( T"
9.8% Sales Tax d6
r
140.000.61.558.70.41.40 24.5( r
Total: 274.5( w
223777
1/19/2017
071446 GREAT FLOORS COMMERCIAL SALES
736556-202
FAC - BEACH RANGER/ BALLET OF
FAC - Beach Ranger/ Ballet Office E
016.000.66.518.30.48.00 2,292.9( 6
9.8% Sales Tax
016.000.66.518.30.48.00 224.7'
Total: 2,517.6,
R
.r
r
Q
Page: 12
Packet Pg. 34
vchlist
01 /19/2017 11:36:12AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
4.3.a
Page: 13
c
ca
.y
0
a
a�
Voucher
Date Vendor
Invoice
PO # Description/Account Amoun
223778
1/19/2017 012560 HACH COMPANY
10257981
WWTP: HACH121836 1/26/17-1/25/1 L_
HACH121836 1/26/17-1/25/18 PARTI
423.000.76.535.80.41.00 3,098.0(
9.8% Sales Tax
423.000.76.535.80.41.00 303.6: U
Total: 3,401.6:
a�
223779
1/19/2017 012900 HARRIS FORD INC
167445
UNIT 449 - SUPPLIES
Unit 449 - Supplies
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 54.6(cu
9.8% Sales Tax
0
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 5.3(
167449
UNIT 24 - HOUSING SWITCH a
Unit 24 - Housing Switch
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 70.5E
9.8% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 6.9. o
ITCS432162
UNIT 10 - REPAIRS 0
Unit 10 - Repairs 0
L
511.000.77.548.68.48.00 80.0( m
9.8% Sales Tax Q
511.000.77.548.68.48.00 7.8z
Total: 225.3E 00
223780
1/19/2017 071417 HD SUPPLY WATERWORKS LTD
G577672
FLEET - CONCRETE GUARD POST .,
ti
Fleet - Concrete Guard Post r
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 103.9(
7.7% sales tax r
0
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 8.0( w
Total: 111.9( cYi
E
223781
1/19/2017 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES
1011572
FAC MAINT UNIT 5 - SUPPLIES
Fac Maint Unit 5 - Supplies
001.000.66.518.30.31.00 25.7(
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.31.00 2.4z
R
.r
r
Q
Page: 13
Packet Pg. 35
vchlist
01 /19/2017 11:36:12AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
223781 1/19/2017 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Invoice
PO # Description/Account
(Continued)
1020186
FAC - SUPPLIES
FAC - Supplies
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
2010228
CITY HALL - SUPPLIES
City Hall - Supplies
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
2011397
FAC MAINT UNIT 5 - SUPPLIES
Fac Maint Unit 5 - Supplies
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
2020444
FAC MAINT SHOP SUPPLIES
Fac Maint Shop Supplies
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
2641628
FS 16 - OUTDOOR SECURITY LIG
FS 16 - Outdoor Security Lights (3)
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
9.8% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
3020391
FAC MAINT SHOP SUPPLIES
Fac Maint Shop Supplies
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
3080578
FAC MAINT TRUCK 40 SUPPLIES
Fac Maint Truck 40 Supplies
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
9.5% Sales Tax
4.3.a
Page: 14
c
ca
.y
0
0-
W
Amoun
m
L
N
5.3E y
t
U
0.5'
a�
c
m
20.9E c
ca
1.9� o
L
a
96.9' E
9.2'
4-
0
45.7z o
a
Q.
4.3E Q
H
0
0
230.9'
ti
r
22.6:
r
0
47.8E Y
U
4.5E .
ca
Page: 14
Packet Pg. 36
4.3.a
vchlist Voucher List Page: 15
01/19/2017 11:36:12AM
City of Edmonds
c
ca
Bank code : usbank
a
a�
Voucher Date Vendor
Invoice PO #
Description/Account
Amoun
223781 1/19/2017 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES
(Continued)
L
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
0.5E
4012313
FAC MAINT SHOP SUPPLIES
Y
Fac Maint Shop Supplies
y
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
11.7E U
9.5% Sales Tax
+'
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
1.1
4012376
FAC MAINT SHOP SUPPLIES
Fac Maint Shop Supplies
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
91.4 1 M
9.5% Sales Tax
o
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
8.6� j,
4020187
FAC MAINT UNIT 42 - SUPPLIES
a
Fac Maint Unit 42 - Supplies
E
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
22.6 ,
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
2.1E o
4020995
ROADWAY - VALVES FOR PROPANI
Roadway - Valves for Propane Torch
i
111.000.68.542.31.31.00
32.8z 0-
9.5% Sales Tax
Q
111.000.68.542.31.31.00
3.1,
4072948
SEWER UNIT 35 - SUPPLIES
00
Sewer Unit 35 -Supplies
v
423.000.75.535.80.31.00
35.8, ti
9.5% Sales Tax
a6
423.000.75.535.80.31.00
3.4( r
4572039
PS - DIMMER SUPPLIES
o
PS - Dimmer Supplies
y
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
45.9z
9.5% Sales Tax
E
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
4.3(
5020073
FAC MAINT UNIT 42 - TRUCK SUPP
Fac Maint Unit 42 - Truck Supplies
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
75.5E E
R
.r
r
Q
Page: 15
Packet Pg. 37
vchlist
01 /19/2017 11:36:12AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice
PO # Description/Account
223781 1/19/2017 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES (Continued)
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
5020828
WADE JAMES - GUTTER SUPPLIES
Wade James - Gutter Supplies
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
5020849
SEWER - REPLACEMENT HOSE
Sewer - Replacement Hose
423.000.75.535.80.31.00
9.5% Sales Tax
423.000.75.535.80.31.00
5021431
FAC - LOCKER RM HEAT SUPPLIES
FAC - Locker Rm Heat supplies
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
5085223
PW - OFFICE SUPPLIES
PW - Office Supplies
001.000.65.518.20.31.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.65.518.20.31.00
5574328
TRAFFIC - BLACK SPRAY PAINT
Traffic - Black Spray Paint
111.000.68.542.64.31.00
9.5% Sales Tax
111.000.68.542.64.31.00
6015078
STORM - OVD SLIDE POSTS FOR S
Storm - OVD Slide Posts for straw
422.000.72.531.40.31.00
9.5% Sales Tax
422.000.72.531.40.31.00
6021284
FAC MAINT SHOP SUPPLIES
Fac Maint Shop Supplies
4.3.a
Page: 16
7.1E
m
t
U
19.9E o
E
64.81
4-
0
6.1E >
0
L
Q
0.
171.8, Q
Page: 16
Packet Pg. 38
vchlist
01 /19/2017 11:36:12AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice
PO # Description/Account
223781 1/19/2017 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES (Continued)
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
6061296
TRAFFIC - HOLE SAWS
Traffic - Hole Saws
111.000.68.542.64.31.00
9.5% Sales Tax
111.000.68.542.64.31.00
6073476
CITY PARK BLDG - SUPPLIES
City Park Bldg - Supplies
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
6085055
CITY HALL - SURGE PORTECTOR
City Hall - Surge Portectors
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
7010906
CITY HALL - SUPPLIES
City Hall - Supplies
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
7021094
FAC MAINT - SUPPLIES
Fac Maint - Supplies
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
8571379
STREET - SIDEWALK FORM BOA
4.3.a
Page: 17
c
ca
.y
0
a
a�
Amoun
m
L
20.5,
ui
1.9E
t
U
4-
54.9, c
m
5.2: c
M
0 j 77.9' ,
ca
a
7.4(
S
U
39.9 1 0
R[
3.8( i
a
Q.
Q
9.9(
0
0
0.9E
ti
r
d6
107.0' r
r
0
10.1 1 Y
�
E
6.9
r
0.6( a0i
E
t
R
.r
r
Q
Page: 17
Packet Pg. 39
vchlist
01 /19/2017 11:36:12AM
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice
223781 1/19/2017 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES (Continued)
9011862
9086034
223782 1/19/2017 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 8052538
223783 1/19/2017 060165 HWAGEOSCIENCES INC 27139-R
223784 1/19/2017 073548 INDOFF INCORPORATED 2899504
223785 1/19/2017 071634 INTEGRATELECOM 14396233
PO # Description/Account
Fac Maint - Supplies
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
FAC MAINT SHOP SUPPLIES
Fac Maint Shop Supplies
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
STORM - SUPPLIES
Storm - Supplies
422.000.72.531.40.31.00
9.5% Sales Tax
422.000.72.531.40.31.00
4.3.a
Page: 18
c
ca
.y
0
a
a�
Amoun
m
L_
167.7 1
m
15.9z U
4-
a�
c
99.9t
9.5( c�a
0
L
73.6 1 a
E
7.0(
Total:
1,957.31 u
0
PM: SPACE HEATERS, CORDS, HAI
PM: SPACE HEATERS, CORDS, HAI
0
0
001.000.64.576.80.31.00
L
245.7 a
Total :
245.71 Q
E7FA.TO 16-02.SERVICES THRU 12
~
0
E7FA.TO 16-02.Services thru 12/30/1
00
422.200.72.594.31.41.00
1,961.2E r-
Total :
1,961.2E -
a6
OFFICE SUPPLIES
r
r
OFFICE SUPPLIES
o
001.000.23.512.50.31.00
N
149.4z
Total:
149.41 E
C/A 768328
PR1-1 & 2 City Phone Service
512.000.31.518.88.42.00
914.4 1 0
Tourism Toll free lines 877.775.6929;
E
t
R
.r
r
Q
Page: 18
Packet Pg. 40
4.3.a
vchlist Voucher List Page: 19
01/19/2017
11:36:12AM
City of Edmonds
c
ca
Bank code :
usbank
a
a�
Voucher
Date
Vendor
Invoice PO #
Description/Account
Amoun
223785
1/19/2017
071634 INTEGRATELECOM
(Continued)
L
001.000.61.558.70.42.00
8.5,
Econ Devlpmnt Toll free lines
Y
001.000.61.558.70.42.00
8.5.
Total:
931.5' U
223786
1/19/2017
017050 KWICK'N KLEEN CAR WASH
01062017-01
INV#01062017-01 EDMONDS PD - (
a
16 CAR WASHES @ $5.04 (INC TX)
001.000.41.521.22.48.00
80.6z
12132016-03
CITY CAR WASHES
c�
City Car Washes
—
511.000.77.548.68.48.00
5.0z
Total:
85.61 a
223787
1/19/2017
066522 LAKESIDE INDUSTRIES INC
3265182MB
WATER - ASPHALT
E
Water - Asphalt
f°
U
421.000.74.534.80.31.00
1,216.8( o
9.5% Sales Tax
421.000.74.534.80.31.00
cu
115.6' c
Total:
1,332.41, a
Q.
223788
1/19/2017
074417 LAW OFFICE OF CHRISTIAN SMITH
137
PUBLIC DEFENDER FEE
Q
PUBLIC DEFENDER FEE
r-
001.000.39.512.52.41.00
0
300.0( 00
Total:
300.0( "
ti
223789
1/19/2017
075492 LEVERAGE INFORMATION SYSTEMS
1730060
2016 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
r
Network connectivity troubleshooting
r
r
001.000.31.518.87.42.00
8,771.0( G
9.8% Sales Tax
Y
001.000.31.518.87.42.00
859.5(
Total:
9,630.5E •�
223790
1/19/2017
073603 LIGHTHOUSE LAW GROUP PLLC
20271 expenses
11-16 EXPENSES
11-16 reimbursement of expenses - C
001.000.36.515.31.41.00
89.9( E
Jan-17
01-17 LEGALS FEES
R
.r
r
Q
Page: 19
Packet Pg. 41
vchlist
01 /19/2017 11:36:12AM
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice
223790 1/19/2017 073603 LIGHTHOUSE LAW GROUP PLLC (Continued)
223791 1/19/2017 075014 LOCALIST CORPORATION
223792 1/19/2017 066191 MACLEOD RECKORD
223793 1/19/2017 020039 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO
223794 1/19/2017 069053 MICRO COM SYSTEMS LTD
223795 1/19/2017 075898 MICRONICS FILTRATION LLC
1774
7555
97260823
16847
16848
96424
PO # Description/Account
01-17 Legal fees
001.000.36.515.31.41.00
Tota
TOURISM CALENDAR SOFTWAR
Tourism calendar software license f
001.000.61.558.70.31.00
Tota
Ell DA.SERVICES THRU 12/31/16
Ell DA.Services thru 12/31/16
112.000.68.595.33.41.00
Tota
WWTP: STEEL CARABINER 7/16"
STEEL CARABINER 7/16" THICK/3
423.000.76.535.80.48.00
Freight
423.000.76.535.80.48.00
Tota
SCANNING
SCANNING
001.000.62.524.10.41.00
SCANNING
SCANNING
001.000.62.524.10.41.00
Tota
WWTP: BELTS -STYLE 6093 MB2.
BELTS -STYLE 6093 MB2.2X18.77
423.000.76.535.80.48.00
Freight
423.000.76.535.80.48.00
4.3.a
Page: 20
E
c
ca
.y
0
a
a�
Amoun
m
L_
44,345.6(
I: 44,435.5E
t
U
I
or
5,500.0(
1 : 5,500.0(
c
c�
0
L
476.4: ca
I : 476.4;
E
T 2
-1 ,-
36.2( c
6.1£ a
I : 42.3E 0
0
ti
0
1,123.41
ti
r
rn
392.0' r
r
1 : 1,515.4E o
N
Y
2x U
& E
4,097.0(
r
449.41
Total : 4,546.41,
R
.r
r
Q
Page: 20
Packet Pg. 42
vchlist
01 /19/2017 11:36:12AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
223796 1/19/2017 018950 NAPAAUTO PARTS
223797 1/19/2017 075539 NATURE INSIGHT CONSULTING
223798 1/19/2017 024302 NELSON PETROLEUM
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Invoice
PO # Description/Account
745317
UNIT 32 PARTS
Unit 32 Parts
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
9.8% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
745718
UNIT 872 PARTS
Unit 872 Parts
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
9.8% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
745722
FLEET RETURNS FOR UNIT 872
Fleet Returns for Unit 872
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
9.8% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
Total :
1 WILLOW CREEK DAYLIGHTING PR,
Tasks 1 & 2: Parks Project Mgmt and
125.000.64.575.50.41.00
Tasks 3 & 4: Engineering Grant Writir
422.200.72.594.31.41.00
Total
0601484-IN FLEET FILTER RETURNS
Fleet Filter Returns
511.000.77.548.68.34.40
9.8% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.34.40
0602220-IN FLEET FILTER INVENTORY
Fleet Filter Inventory
511.000.77.548.68.34.40
9.8% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.34.40
0603341-IN FLEET FILTER INVENTORY
Fleet Filter Inventory
4.3.a
Page: 21
4.1�
m
0.4' U
29.1.
2.8: c�a
0
L
-5.8( a
E
-0.5i
30.1E
4-
0
c�
0
L
1,000.0( a
Q
687.5(
1,687.5( �
ti
r
157.3:
0
-15.4, Y
E
32.51 .2
U
Page: 21
Packet Pg. 43
vchlist
01 /19/2017 11:36:12AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
223798 1/19/2017 024302 NELSON PETROLEUM
223799
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Invoice
(Continued)
0605235-IN
0606062-IN
1/19/2017 024960 NORTH COAST ELECTRIC COMPANY S7637577.001
223800 1/19/2017 025217 NORTH SOUND HOSE & FITTINGS 77982
77983
PO #
Description/Account
511.000.77.548.68.34.40
9.8% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.34.40
FLEET FILTER INVENTORY
Fleet Filter Inventory
511.000.77.548.68.34.40
9.8% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.34.40
UNIT 66 - SUPPLIES
Unit 66 - Supplies
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
9.8% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
FLEET FILTER INVENTORY
Fleet Filter Inventory
511.000.77.548.68.34.40
9.8% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.34.40
Tota
WWTP: SEF-UA-GRY-1-IN-400FT I.
SEF-UA-GRY-1-IN-400FT L/T & SY
423.000.76.535.80.48.00
9.8% Sales Tax
423.000.76.535.80.48.00
UNIT 14 - PARTS
Unit 14 - Parts
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
9.2% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
UNIT 14 - PARTS
Unit 14 - Parts
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
Tota
4.3.a
Page: 22
c
ca
.y
0
0-
W
Amoun
m
L
26.4(
N
2.5� a0i
t
U
4-
103.7( c
m
10.1(
c�
0
209.0( j,
c�
a
20.4�
U
24.9. o
2.4z o
1 : 262.7 a
Q
L00
o
159.0(
ti
15.5� r
1 : 174.6E
0
N
Y
87.5( E
8.0E
r
c
m
E
17.3(
R
.r
r
Q
Page: 22
Packet Pg. 44
vchlist
01 /19/2017 11:36:12AM
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice
223800 1/19/2017 025217 NORTH SOUND HOSE & FITTINGS (Continued)
223801 1/19/2017 064006 NORTHWEST INSTRUMENT SERVICES 13268
223802 1/19/2017 064215 NORTHWEST PUMP & EQUIP CO
PO # Description/Account
9.2% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
4.3.a
Page: 23
c
ca
.y
0
a
a�
Amoun
m
L_
1.5E
Total: 114.41 aa)
t
U
WWTP: CALIBRATE LAB SCALESLr-
(�
CALIBRATE LAB SCALES (ANNUAL c
423.000.76.535.80.48.00 230.0(
9.8% Sales Tax
423.000.76.535.80.48.00 22.5, cm
m
228500-00
FLEET - RETURNS
Fleet - Returns
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
228501-00
FLEET RETURN
Fleet Return
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
2685378-00
FLEET GAS PUMP PART
Fleet Gas Pump Part
511.000.77.548.68.31.20
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.20
2745532-00
FLEET SHOP SUPPLIES
Fleet Shop Supplies
511.000.77.548.68.31.20
Freight
511.000.77.548.68.31.20
9.8% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.20
2763551-00
FLEET SHOP SUPPLIES
Fleet Shop Supplies
Tota
252.5' o
L
a
-58.1( .
U
-5.5: c
0
-131.2E a
Q.
Q
-12.4 ,
ti
0
0
16.4E
r
0
N
150.0( U
E
16.2( .2
U
r
16.2E r-
E
t
U
R
.r
r
Q
Page: 23
Packet Pg. 45
vchlist
01 /19/2017 11:36:12AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher
223802
223803
223804
223805
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Date
Vendor
Invoice
PO # Description/Account
1/19/2017
064215 NORTHWEST PUMP & EQUIP CO
(Continued)
511.000.77.548.68.31.20
Freight
511.000.77.548.68.31.20
9.8% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.20
Tota
1/19/2017
025690 NOYES, KARIN
000 00 707
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES 1-11
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES 1-11
001.000.62.558.60.41.00
Tota
1/19/2017
063511 OFFICE MAX INC
733355
INV#733355 ACCT#520437 250PO
TAPE DISPENSERS
001.000.41.521.10.31.00
RETRACTABLE BLUE PENS
001.000.41.521.10.31.00
RETRACTABLE BLACK PENS
001.000.41.521.10.31.00
9.8% Sales Tax
001.000.41.521.10.31.00
1/19/2017 070166 OFFICE OF THE STATE TREASURER December, 2016
Tota
COURT, BLDG CODE & JIS TRAN
Emergency Medical Services & Tra
001.000.237.120
PSEA 1, 2 & 3 Account
001.000.237.130
Building Code Fee Account
001.000.237.150
State Patrol Death Investigation
001.000.237.330
Judicial Information Systems Accou
001.000.237.180
School Zone Safety Account
4.3.a
Page: 24
S
c
ca
.y
0
a
a�
Amoun
m
L
533.7E
N
26.1: 0
t
U
54.8 ' L
1 : 607.8E cc)
m
c�
175.0( —
1 : 175.0(
c�
L Q'
E
3.8E
w
0
71.8z
0
94.5( a
Q.
Q
16.6�
1 : 186.9 i o
00
�
un r
1,076.9z rn
r
21,052.5' w
169.0( E
86.7E
n( c
5,078.9< E
t
R
.r
r
a
Page: 24
Packet Pg. 46
vchlist
01 /19/2017 11:36:12AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher
223805
223806
Date Vendor
1/19/2017 070166 OFFICE OF THE STATE TREASURER
1/19/2017 072739 O'REILLYAUTO PARTS
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Invoice
(Continued)
3685-247220
3685-247777
3685-247824
3685-247867
PO # Description/Account
001.000.237.200
Washington Auto Theft Prevention
001.000.237.250
Traumatic Brain Injury
001.000.237.260
Accessible Communities Acct
001.000.237.290
Multi -Model Transportation
001.000.237.300
Hwy Safety Acct
001.000.237.320
Crime Lab Blood Breath Analysis
001.000.237.170
WSP Hwy Acct
001.000.237.340
UNIT 451 -AT FILTER KIT
Unit 451 - AT Filter Kit
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
9.8% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
UNIT 102 - BRAKE PARTS
Unit 102 - Brake Parts
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
9.8% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
UNIT 83 - SEAL
Unit 83 - Seal
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
9.8% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
UNIT 83 - SUPPLIES
Unit 83 - Supplies
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
Tota
4.3.a
Page: 25
c
.y
0
a
a�
Amoun
m
L_
110.9:
ui
2,152.2E y
t
U
1,076.9z
a�
c
88.8E
88.8E c�a
0
137.6�
c�
a
14.5E
492.1E v
w
I: 31,626.5' 0
0
0
a
Q.
12.0E Q
1.1E 00
ti
73.0E
r
7.1E c
N
Y
6.4E .
c�
0.6<
c
m
E
26.3E
R
.r
r
Q
Page: 25
Packet Pg. 47
vchlist
01 /19/2017 11:36:12AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
223806 1/19/2017 072739 O'REILLYAUTO PARTS
223807
223808
1/19/2017 002203 OWEN EQUIPMENT COMPANY
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Invoice
(Continued)
3685-247977
3685-248094
3685-248780
00082372
1/19/2017 074422 PARTSMASTER, DIV OF NCH CORP 23061268
PO #
Description/Account
9.8% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
UNIT 83 - PARTS
Unit 83 - Parts
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
9.8% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
UNIT 83 - PARTS
Unit 83 - Parts
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
9.8% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
UNIT 66 - WIPER BLADES
Unit 66 - Wiper Blades
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
9.8% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
UNIT 66 - CURTAIN PRES SL
Unit 66 - Curtain Pres SL
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
Freight
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
9.8% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
FLEET SHOP SUPPLIES
Fleet Shop Supplies
511.000.77.548.68.31.20
Freight
511.000.77.548.68.31.20
9.8% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.20
Tota
Tota
4.3.a
Page: 26
c
ca
.y
0
a
a�
Amoun
m
L_
2.5E
m
t
U
65.1,
a�
c
6.3E
c
c�
3.8E o
L
0.3E a
E
27.9E
4-
0
2.7z >
235.95 0
a
0.
741.4(
00
21.9' ti
r
74.8'
1 : 838.1, c
N
Y
U
E
124.8z 12
r
18.7:
E
14.0 L
R
.r
r
Q
Page: 26
Packet Pg. 48
vchlist
01 /19/2017 11:36:12AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher
223808
223809
223810
223811
223812
223813
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Date Vendor Invoice
1/19/2017 074422 074422 PARTSMASTER, DIV OF NCH CORP (Continued)
1/19/2017 027450 PAWS DEC 2016
1/19/2017 074793 PETDATA INC
1/19/2017 007800 PETTY CASH
1/19/2017 028860 PLATT ELECTRIC SUPPLY INC
1/19/2017 029117 PORT OF EDMONDS
DEC 2016
5545
12-31-16
L135770
PO # Description/Account
Tota
DECEMBER 2016 ANIMAL SHELT
SHELTERING 11 ANIMALS @ $17
001.000.41.521.70.41.00
INVOICE 1/10/17 FOR DEC 2016 -
RECLAIM FEES FOR 5 DOGS
001.000.41.521.70.41.00
BOARDING FEES FOR 6 DOGS
001.000.41.521.70.41.00
Tota
INV#5545 - EDMONDS PD - DEC 2
919 - 1 YR PET LICENSES @ $3.9
001.000.41.521.70.41.00
Tota
TRAVEL REIMBURSEMENTS, SU
Pens for development services fron
001.000.62.524.10.31.00
Mileage and parking reimbursement
001.000.67.518.21.43.00
Travel reimbursement to Legislator
001.000.21.513.10.43.00
Tota
WWTP: APP X37 1 IN FM7 BODY
APP X37 1 IN FM7 BODY
423.000.76.535.80.48.00
9.8% Sales Tax
423.000.76.535.80.48.00
4.3.a
Page: 27
c
ca
.y
0
0-
W
Amoun
157.61 _L
5
t
EF Y
�
m
1,925.0( mu
C 41
Lr-
c
-100.0(
-60.0( r-
I: 1,765.0( o
0
0 >'
cU
0 Q'
3,584.1( ,
I: 3,584.1(
w
PP 0
f°
12.0E o
a f
12.7 Q
r-
0
20.0( 00
44.8'. "
ti
r
d6
r
r
57.8E c
N
5.6 i
Total: 63.5. cu
03870 PORT RIGHT-OF-WAY LEASE FOR,
PORT RIGHT-OF-WAY LEASE FOR
m
422.000.72.531.90.51.00 2,770.7E E
t
R
.r
r
Q
Page: 27
Packet Pg. 49
vchlist
01 /19/2017 11:36:12AM
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #
223813 1/19/2017 029117 029117 PORT OF EDMONDS (Continued)
223814 1/19/2017 070955 R&R STAR TOWING 119167
223815 1/19/2017 075288 RODARTE CONSTRUCTION INC
223816 1/19/2017 064769 ROMAINE ELECTRIC
E3FH.Pmt 2
5-011977
223817 1/19/2017 066964 SEATTLE AUTOMOTIVE DIST INC S3-1546024
S3-1555201
Description/Account
INV#119167 - EDMONDS PD
TOW 1999 BMW #BCW5224
001.000.41.521.22.41.00
9.8% Sales Tax
001.000.41.521.22.41.00
E3FH.PMT 2 THRU 11/16/16
E3FH.Pmt 2 thru 11/16/16
422.200.72.594.31.65.00
E3FH.Ret 2
422.200.223.400
UNITS 24 & 68 - BATTERIES
Units 24 & 68 - Batteries
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
Unit E107PO - Battery
511.100.77.594.48.64.00
9.8% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
9.8% Sales Tax
511.100.77.594.48.64.00
UNIT 449 - TRANS OIL
Unit 449 - Trans Oil
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
9.8% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
UNIT 679 - OIL ADDITIVE
Unit 679 - Oil Additive
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
9.8% Sales Tax
Tota
Tota
Tota
Tota
4.3.a
Page: 28
c
ca
.y
0
a
a�
Amoun
2,770.7$ ,L
a
N
m
238.5( u
41
Lr-
23.3 1 c
261.8�
c
c�
31,663.7( o
CU
-1,583.1t
30,080.5' .
4-
0
172.2E >
0
a
133.3E o
16.8E c
00
13.01 "
335.5E
a6
r
0
94.8(
9.2(
c
12.6E
t
R
.r
r
Q
Page: 28
Packet Pg. 50
vchlist
01 /19/2017 11:36:12AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
223817 1/19/2017 066964 SEATTLE AUTOMOTIVE DIST INC
223818
223819
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Invoice
(Continued)
S3-1581823
S3-1584954
S3-1599275
S5-1551590
S5-1581998
1/19/2017 075909 SEATTLE JUNIOR HOCKEYASSOC 5091 BEGINNER HOCKEY
1/19/2017 067076 SEATTLE PUMP AND EQUIPMENT CO 16-6442
PO #
Description/Account
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
UNIT 37 - SUPPLIES
Unit 37 - Supplies
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
9.8% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
UNIT 89 - BRAKE PARTS
Unit 89 - Brake Parts
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
9.8% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
UNIT 102 - COOLANT
Unit 102 - Coolant
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
9.8% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
UNIT 679 - BRAKE PARTS
Unit 679 - Brake Parts
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
9.8% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
UNIT 37 - FUEL FILTER
Unit 37 - Fuel Filter
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
9.8% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
Total
5091 BEGINNER HOCKEY INSTRUC
5091 BEGINNER HOCKEY INSTRUC
001.000.64.571.25.41.00
UNIT 106 - PARTS
Unit 106 - Parts
Tota
4.3.a
Page: 29
c
ca
.y
0
a
a�
Amoun
m
L
1.2,
ui
m
136.7, U
4"
13.3� c
m
79.7(
0
7.8, j,
a
E
20.9'
2.0E o
0
L
41.5E a
Q
4.01
0
0
12.1E
a6
1.1� r
437.7' o
N
Y
E
104.3( f°
U
1 : 104.3( ..
r
c
m
E
t
R
.r
r
Q
Page: 29
Packet Pg. 51
vchlist
01 /19/2017 11:36:12AM
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice
223819 1/19/2017 067076 SEATTLE PUMP AND EQUIPMENT CO (Continued)
223820 1/19/2017 070298 SESAC INC
223821 1/19/2017 070115 SHANNON & WILSON INC
223822 1/19/2017 074086 SIGNON
4388630
95780
5451
5508
223823 1/19/2017 067686 SITELINES PARK & PLAYGROUND PD 17049
223824 1/19/2017 036950 SIX ROBBLEES INC 14-343122
14-343292
PO # Description/Account
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
9.8% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
Tota
SESAC 2017 MUSIC LICENSE
SESAC 2017 MUSIC LICENSE
117.100.64.573.20.49.00
Tota
E4FC.SERVICES THRU 12/31/16
E4FC,Services thru 12/31/16
422.200.72.594.31.41.00
Tota
INTERPRETER FEE
INTERPRETER FEE
001.000.23.512.50.41.01
INTERPRETER FEE
INTERPRETER FEE
001.000.23.523.30.41.01
Tota
FAC BANDSHELL
FAC BANDSHELL
125.000.64.594.75.65.00
9.8% Sales Tax
125.000.64.594.75.65.00
Tota
FLEET SHOP SUPPLIES
Fleet Shop Supplies
511.000.77.548.68.31.20
9.2% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.20
UNIT 94 - LIGHT
4.3.a
Page: 30
c
ca
.y
0
a
a�
Amoun
m
L
629.2 0
N
61.6-
690.91 U
4-
w
c
m
793.0(
793.0( cm
0
c�
10,316.4(
10,316.4( .
U
4-
0
188.1zto
>
0
a
Q.
170.0( Q
358.1� c
00
ti
r
41,260.0( c6
r
4,043.4E c
1 : 45,303.41 Y
U
E
21.71
c
m
2.0( E
R
.r
r
Q
Page: 30
Packet Pg. 52
4.3.a
vchlist
Voucher List
Page: 31
01/19/2017
11:36:12AM
City of Edmonds
c
ca
Bank code :
usbank
a
M
Voucher
Date
Vendor
Invoice PO #
Description/Account
Amoun
223824
1/19/2017
036950 SIX ROBBLEES INC
(Continued)
L_
Unit 94 - Light
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
99.5z
9.8% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
9.7E U
Total:
133.0E
w
223825
1/19/2017
071602 SME SOLUTIONS LLC
228034
FUEL ISLAND - SVC & REPAIRS
Fuel Island - Svc & Repairs
511.000.77.548.68.48.00
227.0(
9.8% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.48.00
0
22.2E ",
Total:
249.2E a
223826
1/19/2017
037303 SNO CO FIRE DIST# 1
Q1-2017
Q1-2017 FIRE SERVICES CONTRA(
Q1-2017 Fire Services Contract Payn
f°
U
001.000.39.522.20.51.00
1,776,042.5( c
Total:
1,776,042.5( 0
223827
1/19/2017
066754 SNO CO PUBLIC WORKS
1000429498
E6CA/E6CB/E6CC.SERVICES THRL
L
E6CA.Services thru 11/30/16
Q
Q.
112.000.68.595.33.41.00
3,266.5: Q
E6CA.Services thru 11/30/16
r-
112.000.68.595.33.65.00
0
700.0( 00
E6CB.Services thru 11/30/16
421.200.74.594.34.41.00
57.0( T"
E6CB.Services thru 11/30/16
d6
421.200.74.594.34.65.00
r
3,865.11 rr
E6CC.Services thru 11/30/16
0
N
423.200.75.594.35.41.00
772.0(
E6CC.Services thru 11/30/16
E
423.200.75.594.35.65.00
2,321.0( 'm
1000430613
E6CA/E6CB/E6CC.SERVICES THRL
E6CA.Services thru 12/31/16
112.000.68.595.33.41.00
2,350.3( E
E6CA.Services thru 12/31/16
R
.r
r
a
Page: 31
Packet Pg. 53
vchlist
01 /19/2017 11:36:12AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
223827 1/19/2017 066754 SNO CO PUBLIC WORKS
223828 1/19/2017 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Invoice
PO # Description/Account
(Continued)
112.000.68.595.33.65.00
E6CB.Services thru 12/31/16
421.200.74.594.34.41.00
E6CB.Services thru 12/31/16
421.200.74.594.34.65.00
E6CC.Services thru 12/31/16
423.200.75.594.35.41.00
E6CC.Services thru 12/31/16
423.200.75.594.35.65.00
1000430614
E6DD/E6DC.SERVICES THRU 12/31
E6DD.Services thru 12/31/16
112.000.68.595.33.65.00
E6DC.Services thru 12/31/16
112.000.68.595.33.65.00
Total:
2002-0255-4
WWTP: 12/6/16-1/5/17 FLOW METE
12/6/16-1/5/17 FLOW METER 2400 F
423.000.76.535.80.47.62
2003-2646-0
HUMMINGBIRD PARK 1000 EDMON
HUMMINGBIRD PARK 1000 EDMON
001.000.64.576.80.47.00
2007-2302-1
TRAFFIC LIGHT 961 PUGET DR / MI
TRAFFIC LIGHT 961 PUGET DR / MI
111.000.68.542.64.47.00
2017-9000-3
ALDERWOOD INTERIE 6130 168TH
ALDERWOOD INTERIE 6130 168TH
421.000.74.534.80.47.00
2019-2988-2
WWTP: 12/6/16-1/5/17 FLOW METE
12/6/16-1/5/17 FLOW METER 8421
423.000.76.535.80.47.62
2022-5063-5
9TH/CASPER LANDSCAPE BED / M
9TH/CASPER LANDSCAPE BED / M
001.000.64.576.80.47.00
2051-8438-5
LIFT STATION #5 432 3RD AVE S / IV
4.3.a
Page: 32
c
ca
.y
0
a
a�
Amoun
m
L_
23,267.5'
ui
27.0( y
t
U
699.0(
w
c
372.0(
3,742.0( c�a
0
L
5,020.1, a
E
5,225.0,
51,684.7' 4-
0
0
L
17.4, a
19.1( CD
ti
32.5' r
rn
r
O
21.9 , Y
U
E
17.4, f°
Page: 32
Packet Pg. 54
vchlist
01 /19/2017 11:36:12AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Voucher
Date Vendor
Invoice
PO # Description/Account
223828
1/19/2017 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1
(Continued)
LIFT STATION #5 432 3RD AVE S / N
423.000.75.535.80.47.10
2205-4757-4
TRAFFIC LIGHT SR104 @ 236TH S1
TRAFFIC LIGHT SR104 @ 236TH S1
111.000.68.542.63.47.00
Total:
223829
1/19/2017 063941 SNO CO SHERIFFS OFFICE
2016-3543
INV#2016-3543 SNO CO JAIL - DEC
342.33 HOUSING @ $89.38
001.000.39.523.60.51.00
45.17 BOOKINGS @ $116.14
001.000.39.523.60.51.00
39 MED/SPEC @ $52.01
001.000.39.523.60.51.00
26.5 MENTAL HEALTH @ $124.72
001.000.39.523.60.51.00
9.75 VIDEO COURT @ $115.50
001.000.39.523.60.51.00
Total:
223830
1/19/2017 063941 SNO CO SHERIFFS OFFICE
1000430039
INV#1000430039 CUST#SSH00095 -
SCSO RANGE USAGE 10 HR 12/08/
001.000.41.521.40.41.00
1000430040
INV#1000430040 CUST#SSH00095 -
SCSO RANGE USAGE 10 HR 12/15/
001.000.41.521.40.41.00
Total:
223831
1/19/2017 065910 SNOCOM 911 COMMUNICATIONS
16-1230-2
Q1-17 COMMUNICATIONS
Q1-17 COMMUNICATIONS
001.000.39.528.00.51.00
Q1-17 COMMUNICATIONS
421.000.74.534.80.51.00
Q1-17 COMMUNICATIONS
423.000.75.535.80.51.00
4.3.a
Page: 33
c
ca
.y
0
a
a�
Amoun
m
L_
30.4E
m
t
U
71.1
229.1 , c
m
c
c�
30,597.4( o
5,246.0z a
2,028.3E
3,305.0E o
c�
1,126.1, o
L
42,303.0$ a
Q
ti
0
580.0( °r°
ti
r
580.0(
1,160.0( c
N
E
244,316.9( 'ca
6
6,429.3(
m
E
6,429.4(
R
.r
r
Q
Page: 33
Packet Pg. 55
vchlist
01 /19/2017 11:36:12AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Voucher
Date Vendor Invoice PO #
Description/Account
223831
1/19/2017 065910 065910 SNOCOM 911 COMMUNICATIONS (Continued)
Tota
223832
1/19/2017 006630 SNOHOMISH COUNTY 69698
PARKS MAINT 5005 DUMP FEES
PARKS MAINT DUMP FEES -WOO
001.000.64.576.80.47.00
PARKS MAINT DUMP FEES
001.000.64.576.80.47.00
Tota
223833
1/19/2017 070167 SNOHOMISH COUNTY TREASURER December 2016
CRIME VICTIMS COURT REMITTA
Crime Victims Court Remittance
001.000.237.140
Law Library Court Remittance
001.000.237.140
Justice - Superior Court
001.000.237.140
Tota
223834
1/19/2017 075675 SORENSON FORENSICS LLC 30624-30652
INV#30624-30652 - EDMONDS PD
TESTING - CASE #16-12810
001.000.41.521.21.41.00
TESTING CASE #16-17686
001.000.41.521.21.41.00
TESTING CASE #2016-011713
001.000.41.521.21.41.00
TESTING CASE #16-25384
001.000.41.521.21.41.00
TESTING CASE #16-23226
001.000.41.521.21.41.00
TESTING CASE #2016-014982
001.000.41.521.21.41.00
TESTING CASE #16-22976
001.000.41.521.21.41.00
TESTING CASE #16-27317
001.000.41.521.21.41.00
TESTING CASE #2016-00027518
4.3.a
Page: 34
c
ca
.y
0
a
a�
Amoun
257,175.7E ,L
N
D �
m
146.0(
594.0(
1 : 740.0(
N c
c�
471.91
7.9E Q"
E
8.5E
1 : 488.41 c
0
L
Q
275.0( 0
275.0( c
00
275.0( "
550.0(
r
r
275.0( w
550.0( E
275.0(
r
c
550.0( E
t
R
.r
r
Q
Page: 34
Packet Pg. 56
vchlist
01 /19/2017 11:36:12AM
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Bank code :
Voucher
usbank
Date
Vendor
Invoice
PO # Description/Account
223834
1/19/2017
075675 SORENSON FORENSICS LLC
(Continued)
001.000.41.521.21.41.00
TESTING CASE #16-21320
001.000.41.521.21.41.00
Tota
223835
1/19/2017
038300 SOUND DISPOSAL CO
104757
WWTP: 12/8-12/30/16 ROLLOFFA
12/8-12/30/16 ROLLOFF ASH DISP
423.000.76.535.80.47.65
Tota
223836
1/19/2017
038410 SOUND SAFETY PRODUCTS
28510/4
WATER QUALITY - WORK PANTS
Water Quality - Work Pants2/Overal
421.000.74.534.80.24.00
9.8% Sales Tax
421.000.74.534.80.24.00
Tota
223837
1/19/2017
065578 SYSTEMS INTERFACE INC
20258
WATER - REPLACE SOFT START
Water - Replace Soft Start at 5 Corn
421.000.74.534.80.48.00
9.8% Sales Tax
421.000.74.534.80.48.00
Tota
223838
1/19/2017
040916 TC SPAN AMERICA
76382
CITYAPPARELL
office apparel for inspectors
001.000.62.524.20.24.00
Tota
223839
1/19/2017
070744 TIGER OAK MEDIA
2016-159045
BUSINESS RECRUITMENTADVE
4.3.a
Page: 35
13.21
I : 148.X c
Al f°
e o
a
6,591.7£ o
645.9� c
I: 7,237.71, 00
Rl
r
Q
Page: 35
Packet Pg. 57
vchlist
01 /19/2017 11:36:12AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
223840 1/19/2017 063939 TYLER TECHNOLOGIES INC
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Invoice PO # Description/Account
(Continued)
001.000.25.514.30.48.00
2017 EDEN Support Maintenance
001.000.31.514.23.48.00
2017 EDEN Support Maintenance
001.000.22.518.10.48.00
2017 EDEN Support Maintenance
512.000.31.518.88.48.00
2017 EDEN Support Maintenance
001.000.41.521.11.48.00
2017 EDEN Support Maintenance
421.000.74.534.80.48.00
2017 EDEN Support Maintenance
423.000.75.535.80.48.00
2017 EDEN Support Maintenance
422.000.72.531.90.48.00
Total
223841 1/19/2017 044960 UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOC CTR 6120130 UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATI
UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATI
421.000.74.534.80.41.00
UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATI
422.000.72.531.90.41.00
UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATI
423.000.75.535.80.41.00
Total
223842 1/19/2017 065269 VALLEY FREIGHTLINER INC PC302008651:01 UNIT 20 - DOOR VIN LABEL REPLA(
Unit 20 - Door VIN Label Replacemer
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
9.8% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
Total
223843 1/19/2017 064649 VERMEER NW SALES INC E01154 WATER - HOLE HAMMER AND ACCI
Water - Hole Hammer and Accessorie
4.3.a
Page: 36
c
ca
.y
0
a
a�
Amoun
m
L
5,996.7'
ui
39,608.2'
t
U
7,056.0( 4-
a)
c
6,296.5E
816.8: c�a
0
8,403.5< L>%
ca
a
8,403.5,
8,403.5: U
84,984.9: 0
0
L
a
Q.
76.1' Q
76.1'
00
76.1' r�-
228.3: a6
r
0
N
75.0( cYi
E
7.3: f°
82.3E
r
c
m
E
t
R
.r
r
a
Page: 36
Packet Pg. 58
4.3.a
vchlist Voucher List Page: 37
01/19/2017
11:36:12AM
City of Edmonds
c
ca
Bank code :
usbank
a
a�
Voucher
Date
Vendor
Invoice PO #
Description/Account
Amoun
223843
1/19/2017
064649 VERMEER NW SALES INC
(Continued)
L
421.000.74.534.80.35.00
4,544.5(
9.8% Sales Tax
Y
421.000.74.534.80.35.00
445.3( y
Total:
4,989.8E U
223844
1/19/2017
047605 WA ST TREASURER
YEAR 2015
EDMONDS FORFEITURES - 2015
a
2015 NARC TASK FORCE SEIZURE;
m
104.000.237.100
459.4 1
YEAR 2016
EDMONDS FORFEITURES - 2016
c�
2016 NARC TASK FORCE SEIZURE;
—
104.000.237.100
1,799.1E
Total:
2,258.6, a
223845
1/19/2017
074291 WALNUT STREET COFFEE
BID-11212016
REIMBURSEMENT FOR HOLIDAYS
E
Reimbursement to Walnut Street Cofl
f°
U
140.000.61.558.70.41.40
300.0( o
Total:
300.0( —
223846
1/19/2017
075911 WATKINS, NATALIE
1/13 REFUND
1/13 REFUND - TRANSFER
1/13 REFUND - TRANSFER
CL
a
001.000.239.200
9.1E Q
Total:
9.1 E c
00
223847
1/19/2017
026510 WCIA
40040
2017 LIABILITY/PROGRAM ASSESS
2017 Liability/Program Assessment
r-
001.000.39.518.90.46.00
605,821.5. d6
2017 Liability/Program Assessment
r
r
111.000.68.542.90.46.00
110,508.1E C
2017 Liability/Program Assessment
Y
421.000.74.534.80.46.00
58, 214.1,
2017 Liability/Program Assessment
E
422.000.72.531.90.46.00
72,027.6z
2017 Liability/Program Assessment
423.000.75.535.80.46.00
24,667.0(
2017 Liability/Program Assessment
R
.r
r
Q
Page: 37
Packet Pg. 59
vchlist
01 /19/2017 11:36:12AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Voucher
Date Vendor
Invoice
PO # Description/Account
223847
1/19/2017 026510 WCIA
(Continued)
423.000.76.535.80.46.00
2017 Liability/Program Assessment
511.000.77.548.68.46.00
Tota
223848
1/19/2017 075718 WEIS COMMUNICATIONS
4901
HOME OCCUPATION BUSINESS L
Home occupations business licens
4.3.a
Page: 38
e
c
ca
.y
0
a
a�
Amoun
m
L
90,774.5(
N
24,667.0(
I: 986,680.0( U
IC a
c
�
2,000.0(
I: 2,000.0( r-
S o
1,703.9' Q"
E
.2
U
195.3, o
0
203.61 a
Q.
21.9(
0
Q
0
21.8( ..
I : 2,146.6$
a6
1 : 3,617,415.6E r
0
s : 3,617,415.6E Y
E
r
c
m
E
t
R
.r
r
Q
Page: 38
Packet Pg. 60
4.3.b
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title)
Protect
Engineering
Accounting
Project
Funding
Project Title
Number
Number
STM
12th Ave & Sierra Stormwater System Improvements
c484
E5FE
STR
15th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to 8th Ave)
c424
E3DC
STM
183rd PI SW Storm Repairs
c491
E6FE
SWR
2013 Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation
c390
E2GB
SWR
2013 Sewerline Replacement Project
c398
E3GA
STR
2014 Chip Seals
c451
E4CB
STM
2014 Drainage Improvements '
c433
E4FA
STM
2014 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects
c436
E4FD
STR
2014 Overlay Program
c438
E4CA
WTR
2014 Waterline Overlays
c452
E4CC
STM
2015 Citywide Drainage Improvements/Rehab Projects
c466
E5FA
STR
2015 Overlay Program
c463
E5CA
SWR
2015 Sewerline Overlays
i007
E5CC
SWR
2015 Sewerline Replacement Project
c441
E4GA
STR
2015 Traffic Calming
c471
E5AB
WTR
2015 Waterline Overlays
c475
E5CB
WTR
2015 Waterline Replacement Program
c440
E4J13
STR
2016 Curb Ramp Upgrades
i016
E6DC
STR
2016 Overlay Program
i008
E6CA
SWR
2016 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects
c469
E5GA
SWR
2016 Sewerline Overlays F
i010
E6CC
WTR
2016 Water Comp Plan Update
c460
E4JC
WTR
2016 Waterline Overlays
i009
E6CB
WTR
2016 Waterline Replacement Projects
c468
E5JA
SWR
2017 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project
i013
E6GA
WTR
2017 Waterline Replacement Projects
i014
E6JB
SWR
2018/19 Sewerline Replacement Project
c492
E6GC
WTR
2018/19 Waterline Replacement Project
c493
E6JC
STR
220th Street Overlay Project
c462
E4CD
STM
224th & 98th Drainage Improvements
c486
E6FB
WTR
224th Waterline Relocation (2013)
c418
E3JB
STR
228th St. SW Corridor Improvements
i005
E7AC
STR
236th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Madrona School)
c425
E3DD
STR
238th St. SW Walkway (100th Ave to 104th Ave)
c423
E3DB
STR
238th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Hwy 99)
c485
E6DA
STM
3rd Ave Rain Gardens
i012
E6FC
STR
76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements
c368
E1CA
STR
9th Avenue Improvement Project
c392
E2AB
FAC
AN Upgrades - Council Chambers
c476
E5LA
STR
ADA Curb Ramp Upgrades along 3rd Ave S
c426
E3DE
STR
ADA Transition Plan
s016
E6DB
STR
Bikelink Project
c474
E5DA
PRK
City Spray Park
c417
E41VIA
SWR
Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase I
c456
E4GB
SWR
Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase II
c488
E6GB
STR
Citywide Protected/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion
i015
E6AB
WTR
Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave)
c482
E5J13
STM
Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives
c374
E1 FM
Revised 1/18/2017 Packet Pg. 61
4.3.b
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title)
Protect
Engineering
Accounting
Project
Funding
Project Title
Number
Number
PM
Dayton Street Plaza
c276
E7MA
STM
Dayton Street Storm Improvements (6th Ave - 8th Ave)
c472
E5FC
STM
Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station
c455
E4FE
FAC
Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab
c443
E4MB
STM
Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study
c380
E2FC
General
Edmonds Waterfront Access Analysis
c478
E5DB
FAC
ESCO III Project
c419
E3LB
PRK
FAC Band Shell Replacement
c477
E6MB
WTR
Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating
c473
E51KA
STR
Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W)
c342
E1AA
PM
Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor
c282
E8MA
STR
Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase III)
c405
E2AD
SW R
Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study
sol l
E5GB
STM
LID Retrofits Perrinville Creek Basin
c434
E4FB
SWR
Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study
c461
E4GC
STR
Minor Sidewalk Program
i017
E6DD
STM
North Talbot Road Drainage Improvements
c378
E2FA
STM
Northstream Culvert Repair Under Puget Drive
i011
E6FA
STM
Northstream Pipe Abandonment on Puget Drive
c410
E3FE
STM
NPDES (Students Saving Salmon)
m013
E7FG
STM
OVD Slope Repair & Stabilization
m105
E7FA
STM
Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement
c376
E1 FN
STM
Perrinville Creek Stormwater Flow Reduction Retrofit Study
c408
E3FC
FAC
Public Safety Controls System Upgrades
c444
E4LA
STM
Seaview Park Infiltration Facility
c479
E5FD
WWTP
Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring
c446
E4HA
STR
SR104 Corridor Transportation Study
c427
E3AB
STR
SR104/City Park Mid -Block Crossing
c454
E4DB
STR
SR99 Safety Improvements (224th to 216th)
s014
E6AA
UTILITIES
Standard Details Updates
solo
E5NA
STM
Storm Drainage Improvements - 88th & 194th
c429
E3FG
STM
Stormwater Comp Plan Update
s017
E6FD
STR
Sunset Walkway Improvements
c354
E1 DA
STM
SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System
c379
E2FB
STM
SW Edmonds-105th/106th Ave W Storm Improvements
c430
E3FH
STR
Trackside Warning System
c470
E5AA
STR
Train Trench - Concept
c453
E4DA
STR
Transportation Plan Update
c391
E2AA
STM
Update Stormwater Management Code & Associated Projects
c467
E5FB
UTILITIES
Utility Rate Update
s013
E6JA
PRK
Veteran's Plaza
c480
E6MA
STM
Video Assessment of Stormwater Lines
c459
E4FF
STM
Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration
c435
E4FC
WWTP
WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications
c481
E5HA
PRK
Yost Park Spa
c494
E6MC
Revised 1/18/2017 Packet Pg. 62
4.3.b
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number)
Engineering
Protect
Protect
Accounting
Funding
Number
Number
Project Title
E1AA
c342
Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W)
STR
E1 CA
c368
76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements
c354 _
Sunset Walkway Improvements
STM
E1 FM
c374
Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives
c376
Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement
STR
E2AA
c391
Transportation Plan Update
c392
Wth Avenue Improvement Project
STR
E2AD
c405
Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase III)
STM
E2FA
c378
North Talbot Road Drainage Improvemen
STM
E2FB
c379
SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System
STM
E2FC
c3l' Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study
SWR
E2GB
c390
2013 Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation
SR104 Corridor Transportation Study
STR
E3DB
c423
238th St. SW Walkway (100th Ave to 104th Ave)
15th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to 8th Ave)
STR
E3DD
c425
236th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Madrona School)
-
E3DE
G426
ADA Curb Ramp Upgrades along 3rd Av
STM
E3FC
c408
Perrinville Creek Stormwater Flow Reduction Retrofit Study
c410
Northstream Pipe Abandonment on Puget Driv
STM
E3FG
c429
Storm Drainage Improvements - 88th & 194th
SW Edmonds-105th/106th Ave W Storm Improvements
SWR
E3GA
c398
2013 Sewerline Replacement Project
3JB
224th Waterline Relocation (2013)
FAC
E3LB
c419
ESCO III Project
9
IV
STR
E4CA
c438
2014 Overlay Program
STR
E4CB
c451
2014 Chip Seals
WTR
A§§&ILQC
c452
2014 Waterline Overla
STR
E4CD
c462
220th Street Overlay Project
Train Trench - Concept
STR
E4DB
c454
SR104/City Park Mid -Block Crossing
LAM
2014 Drainage Improvement ilmr-
STM
E4FB
c434
LID Retrofits Perrinville Creek Basin
-
INMW
c435M
Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration
STM
E4FD
c436
2014 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects
c4L§ Payton Street Stormwater Pump Station
STM
E4FF
c459
Video Assessment of Stormwater Lines
2015 Sewerline Replacement Project =
SWR
E4GB
c456
Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase I
SW
Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Stud
W WTP
E4HA
c446
Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring
WTR
E4J13
c440
2015 Waterline Replacement Program
WTR
E4JC
c460
2016 Water Comp Plan Update
c4A& Public Safety Controls System Upgrades
PRK E4MA c417 City Spray Park
Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab
STR E5AA c470 Trackside Warning System
2015 Traffic Calming
STR E5CA c463 2015 Overlay Program
Revised 1/18/2017 Packet Pg. 63
4.3.b
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number)
Engineering Protect
Protect Accounting
Funding
Number Number
Protect Title
&69L
E5CB c475
2015 Waterline Overlays
SWR
E5CC i007
2015 Sewerline Overlays
E5DA^^'^
Bikelink Project
General
E5DB c478
Edmonds Waterfront Access Analysis
2015 Citywide Drainage Improvements/Rehab Projects
STM
E5FB
c467
Update Stormwater Management Code & Associated Projects
Dayton Street Storm Improvements (6th Ave - 8th Ave)
STM
E5FD
c479
Seaview Park Infiltration Facility
E5FE
c484
12th Ave &Sierra Stormwater System Improvements
SWR
E5GA
c469
2016 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects
SWR
s011
Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study
WWTP
E5HA
c481
WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications
016 Waterline Replacement Projects
WTR
E5JB
c482
Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave)
Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating
FAC
E5LA
c476
AN Upgrades - Council Chambers
-
E5NA
solo
Standard Details Updates
STIR
E6AA
s014
SR99 Safety Improvements (224th to 216th)
Citywide Protected/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion
STIR
E6CA
i008
2016 Overlay Program
016 Waterline Overlays
SWR
E6CC
i010
2016 Sewerline Overlays
238th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Hwy 99)
STIR
E6DB
s016
ADA Transition Plan
_
E6DC
i016
2016 Curb Ramp Upgrades
STIR
E6DD
i017
Minor Sidewalk Program
E6FA
i011
Northstream Culvert Repair Under Puget Drive
STM
E6FB
c486
224th & 98th Drainage Improvements
ve Rain Gardens
STM
E6FD
s017
Stormwater Comp Plan Update
183rd PI SW Storm Repairs
SWR
E6GA
i013
2017 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project
_
6 GB
c488
Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase II
SWR
E6GC
c492
2018/19 Sewerline Replacement Project
91ILITIES
E6JA
s013
Utility Rate Updat
WTR
E6JB
i014
2017 Waterline Replacement Projects
2018/19 Waterline Replacement Project
PRK
E6MA
c480
Veteran's Plaza
FAG Band Shell Replacement
PRK
E6MC
c494
Yost Park Spa
-
E7FA
m105
OVD Slope Repair & Stabilization
STIR
E7AC
i005
228th St. SW Corridor Improvements
(Students Saving Salmon)
ELNPDES
PM
E7MA
c276
Dayton Street Plaza
19 PM
E8MA
c282
Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor
Revised 1/18/2017 Packet Pg. 64
4.3.b
PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number)
Engineering
Protect
Protect
Accounting
Funding
Number
Number
Project Title
PM
E7MA
c276
Dayton Street Plaza
PM
E8MA
c282
Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor
STR
E1AA
c342
Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W)
STR
E1 DA
c354
Sunset Walkway Improvements
STR
ElCA
c368
76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements
STM
E1 FM
c374
Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives
STM
E1 FN
c376
Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement
STM
E2FA
c378
North Talbot Road Drainage Improvements
STM
E2FB
c379
SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System
STM
E2FC
c380
Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study
SWR
E2GB
c390
2013 Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation
STR
E2AA
c391
Transportation Plan Update
STR
E2AB
c392
9th Avenue Improvement Project
SWR
E3GA
c398
2013 Sewerline Replacement Project
STR
E2AD
c405
Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase III)
STM
E3FC
c408
Perrinville Creek Stormwater Flow Reduction Retrofit Study
STM
E3FE
c410
Northstream Pipe Abandonment on Puget Drive
PRK
E41MA
c417
City Spray Park
WTR
E3JB
c418
224th Waterline Relocation (2013)
FAC
E3LB
c419
ESCO III Project
STR
E3DB
c423
238th St. SW Walkway (100th Ave to 104th Ave)
STR
E3DC
c424
15th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to 8th Ave)
STR
E3DD
c425
236th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Madrona School)
STR
E31DE
c426
ADA Curb Ramp Upgrades along 3rd Ave S
STR
E3AB
c427
SR104 Corridor Transportation Study
STM
E3FG
c429
Storm Drainage Improvements - 88th & 194th
STM
E3FH
c430
SW Edmonds-105th/106th Ave W Storm Improvements
STM
E4FA
c433
2014 Drainage Improvements
STM
E4FB
c434
LID Retrofits Perrinville Creek Basin
STM
E4FC
c435
Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration
STM
E4FD
c436
2014 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects
STR
E4CA
c438
2014 Overlay Program
WTR
E4J13
c440
2015 Waterline Replacement Program
SWR
E4GA
c441
2015 Sewerline Replacement Project
FAC
E4MB
c443
Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab
FAC
E4LA
c444
Public Safety Controls System Upgrades
WWTP
E4HA
c446
Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring
STR
E4CB
c451
2014 Chip Seals
WTR
E4CC
c452
2014 Waterline Overlays
STR
E4DA
c453
Train Trench - Concept
STR
E4DB
c454
SR104/City Park Mid -Block Crossing
STM
E4FE
c455
Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station
SWR
E4GB
c456
Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase I
STM
E4FF
c459
Video Assessment of Stormwater Lines
WTR
E4JC
c460
2016 Water Comp Plan Update
SWR
E4GC
c461
Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study
STR
E4CD
c462
220th Street Overlay Project
STR
E5CA
c463
2015 Overlay Program
Revised 1/18/2017 Packet Pg. 65
4.3.b
PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number)
Engineering
Protect
Protect
Accounting
Funding
Number
Number
Project Title
STM
E5FA
c466
2015 Citywide Drainage Improvements/Rehab Projects
STM
E5FB
c467
Update Stormwater Management Code & Associated Projects
WTR
E5JA
c468
2016 Waterline Replacement Projects
SWR
E5GA
c469
2016 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects
STR
E5AA
c470
Trackside Warning System
STR
E5AB
c471
2015 Traffic Calming
STM
E5FC
c472
Dayton Street Storm Improvements (6th Ave - 8th Ave)
WTR
E5KA
c473
Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating
STR
E5DA
c474
Bikelink Project
WTR
E5CB
c475
2015 Waterline Overlays
FAC
E5LA
c476
A/V Upgrades - Council Chambers
PRK
E6MB
c477
FAC Band Shell Replacement
General
E5DB
c478
Edmonds Waterfront Access Analysis
STM
E5FD
c479
Seaview Park Infiltration Facility
PRK
E6MA
c480
Veteran's Plaza
WWTP
E5HA
c481
WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications
WTR
E5JB
c482
Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave)
STM
E5FE
c484
12th Ave & Sierra Stormwater System Improvements
STR
E6DA
c485
238th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Hwy 99)
STM
E6FB
c486
224th & 98th Drainage Improvements
SWR
E6GB
c488
Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase II
STM
E6FE
c491
183rd PI SW Storm Repairs
SWR
E6GC
c492
2018/19 Sewerline Replacement Project
WTR
E6JC
c493
2018/19 Waterline Replacement Project
PRK
E6MC
c494
Yost Park Spa
STR
E7AC
i005
228th St. SW Corridor Improvements
SWR
E5CC
i007
2015 Sewerline Overlays
STR
E6CA
i008
2016 Overlay Program
WTR
E6CB
i009
2016 Waterline Overlays
SWR
E6CC
i010
2016 Sewerline Overlays
STM
E6FA
i011
Northstream Culvert Repair Under Puget Drive
STM
E6FC
i012
3rd Ave Rain Gardens
SWR
E6GA
i013
2017 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project
WTR
E6JB
i014
2017 Waterline Replacement Projects
STR
E6AB
i015
Citywide Protected/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion
STR
E6DC
i016
2016 Curb Ramp Upgrades
STR
E6DD
i017
Minor Sidewalk Program
STM
E7FG
m013
NPDES (Students Saving Salmon)
STM
E7FA
m105
OVD Slope Repair & Stabilization
UTILITIES
E5NA
solo
Standard Details Updates
SWR
E5GB
sol l
Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study
UTILITIES
E6JA
s013
Utility Rate Update
STR
E6AA
s014
SR99 Safety Improvements (224th to 216th)
STR
E6DB
s016
ADA Transition Plan
STM
E6FD
s017
Stormwater Comp Plan Update
Revised 1/18/2017 Packet Pg. 66
4.3.b
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title)
Protect
Engineering
Accounting
Project
Funding
Project Title
Number
Number
FAC
A/V Upgrades - Council Chambers
c476
E51-A
FAC
Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab
c443
E4MB
FAC
ESCO III Project
c419
E3LB
FAC
Public Safety Controls System Upgrades
c444
E41-A
General
Edmonds Waterfront Access Analysis
c478
E5DB
PM
Dayton Street Plaza
c276
E7MA
PM
Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor
c282
E8MA
PRK
City Spray Park
c417
E4MA
PRK
FAC Band Shell Replacement
c477
E6MB
PRK
Veteran's Plaza
c480
E6MA
PRK
Yost Park Spa
c494
E6MC
STM
12th Ave & Sierra Stormwater System Improvements
c484
E5FE
STM
183rd PI SW Storm Repairs
c491
E6FE
STM
2014 Drainage Improvements
c433
E4FA
STM
2014 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects
c436
E4FD
STM
2015 Citywide Drainage Improvements/Rehab Projects
c466
E5FA
STM
224th & 98th Drainage Improvements
c486
E6FB
STM
3rd Ave Rain Gardens
i012
E6FC
STM
Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives
c374
E1 FM
STM
Dayton Street Storm Improvements (6th Ave - 8th Ave)
c472
E5FC
STM
Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station
c455
E4FE
STM
Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study
c380
E2FC
STM
LID Retrofits Perrinville Creek Basin
c434
E4FB
STM
North Talbot Road Drainage Improvements
c378
E2FA
STM
Northstream Culvert Repair Under Puget Drive
i011
E6FA
STM
Northstream Pipe Abandonment on Puget Drive
c410
E3FE
STM
NPDES (Students Saving Salmon)
m013
E7FG
STM
OVD Slope Repair & Stabilization
m105
E7FA
STM
Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement
c376
E1 FN
STM
Perrinville Creek Stormwater Flow Reduction Retrofit Study
c408
E3FC
STM
Seaview Park Infiltration Facility
c479
E5FD
STM
Storm Drainage Improvements - 88th & 194th
c429
E3FG
STM
Stormwater Comp Plan Update
s017
E6FD
STM
SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System
c379
E2FB
STM
SW Edmonds-105th/106th Ave W Storm Improvements
c430
E3FH
STM
Update Stormwater Management Code & Associated Projects
c467
E5FB
STM
Video Assessment of Stormwater Lines
c459
E4FF
STM
Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration
c435
E4FC
STIR
15th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to 8th Ave)
c424
E3DC
STR
2014 Chip Seals
c451
E4CB
STR
2014 Overlay Program
c438
E4CA
STR
2015 Overlay Program
c463
E5CA
STR
2015 Traffic Calming
c471
E5AB
STR
2016 Curb Ramp Upgrades
016
E6DC
STR
2016 Overlay Program
i008
E6CA
STR
220th Street Overlay Project
c462
E4CD
STR
228th St. SW Corridor Improvements
i005
E7AC
Revised 1/18/2017 Packet Pg. 67
4.3.b
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title)
Protect
Engineering
Accounting
Project
Funding
Protect Title
Number
Number
STR
236th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Madrona School)
c425
E3DD
STR
238th St. SW Walkway (100th Ave to 104th Ave)
c423
E3DB
STR
238th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Hwy 99)
c485
E6DA
STR
76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements
c368
ElCA
STR
9th Avenue Improvement Project
c392
E2AB
STR
ADA Curb Ramp Upgrades along 3rd Ave S
c426
E3DE
STR
ADA Transition Plan
s016
E6DB
STR
Bikelink Project
c474
E5DA
STR
Citywide Protected/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion
015
E6AB
STR
Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W)
c342
E1AA
STR
Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase III)
c405
E2AD
STR
Minor Sidewalk Program
017
E6DD
STR
SR104 Corridor Transportation Study
c427
E3AB
STR
SR104/City Park Mid -Block Crossing
c454
E4DB
STR
SR99 Safety Improvements (224th to 216th)
s014
E6AA
STR
Sunset Walkway Improvements
c354
E1 DA
STR
Trackside Warning System
c470
E5AA
STR
Train Trench - Concept
c453
E4DA
STR
Transportation Plan Update
c391
E2AA
SWR
2013 Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation
c390
E2GB
SWR
2013 Sewerline Replacement Project
c398
E3GA
SWR
2015 Sewerline Overlays
i007
E5CC
SWR
2015 Sewerline Replacement Project
c441
E4GA
SWR
2016 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects
c469
E5GA
SWR
2016 Sewerline Overlays
i010
E6CC
SWR
2017 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project
i013
E6GA
SWR
2018/19 Sewerline Replacement Project
c492
E6GC
SWR
Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase I
c456
E4GB
SWR
Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase 11
c488
E6GB
SWR
Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study
s011
E5GB
SWR
Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study
c461
E4GC
UTILITIES
Standard Details Updates
solo
E5NA
UTILITIES
Utility Rate Update
s013
E6JA
WTR
2014 Waterline Overlays
c452
E4CC
WTR
2015 Waterline Overlays
c475
E5CB
WTR
2015 Waterline Replacement Program
c440
E4JB
WTR
2016 Water Comp Plan Update
c460
E4JC
WTR
2016 Waterline Overlays
i009
E6CB
WTR
2016 Waterline Replacement Projects
c468
E5JA
WTR
2017 Waterline Replacement Projects
i014
E6JB
WTR
2018/19 Waterline Replacement Project
c493
E6JC
WTR
224th Waterline Relocation (2013)
c418
E3JB
WTR
Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave)
c482
E5JB
WTR
Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating
c473
E51KA
WWTP
Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring
c446
E4HA
WWTP
WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications
c481
E5HA
Revised 1/18/2017 Packet Pg. 68
Payroll Earnings Summary Report
City of Edmonds
Pay Period: 816 (01/01/2017 to 01/15/2017)
Hour Type Hour Class Description Hours Amount
-ed2
REGULAR HOURS
Educational Pay Correction
0.00
-156.28
112
ABSENT
NO PAY NON HIRED
36.00
0.00
121
SICK
SICK LEAVE
878.89
33,254.45
122
VACATION
VACATION
806.61
33,287.00
123
HOLIDAY
HOLIDAY HOURS
65.00
2,431.05
124
HOLIDAY
FLOATER HOLIDAY
17.00
604.74
125
COMP HOURS
COMPENSATORY TIME
110.25
4,320.31
129
SICK
Police Sick Leave L & 1
90.00
3,832.74
130
COMP HOURS
Holiday Compensation Used
9.00
364.31
132
JURY DUTY
JURY DUTY
0.00
-20.00
141
BEREAVEMENT
BEREAVEMENT
58.00
2,385.41
150
REGULAR HOURS
Kelly Day Used
48.00
1,772.04
155
COMP HOURS
COMPTIME AUTO PAY
86.29
3,818.23
160
VACATION
MANAGEMENT LEAVE
17.00
1,007.83
190
REGULAR HOURS
REGULAR HOURS
14,143.15
564,251.10
196
REGULAR HOURS
LIGHT DUTY
12.00
513.75
205
OVERTIME HOURS
OVERTIME .5
2.50
44.84
210
OVERTIME HOURS
OVERTIME -STRAIGHT
112.63
4,734.62
215
OVERTIME HOURS
WATER WATCH STANDBY
48.00
2,339.97
216
MISCELLANEOUS
STANDBY TREATMENT PLANT
15.00
1,449.65
220
OVERTIME HOURS
OVERTIME 1.5
326.25
20,617.93
225
OVERTIME HOURS
OVERTIME -DOUBLE
34.50
2,283.06
410
MISCELLANEOUS
WORKING OUT OF CLASS
0.00
1,130.80
411
SHIFT DIFFERENTIAL
SHIFT DIFFERENTIAL
0.00
848.75
600
RETROACTIVE PAY
RETROACTIVE PAY
0.00
1,898.92
601
COMP HOURS
ACCRUED COMP .5
3.75
0.00
602
COMP HOURS
ACCRUED COMP
70.25
0.00
603
COMP HOURS
Holiday Comp 1.0
63.00
0.00
604
COMP HOURS
ACCRUED COMP TIME
119.75
0.00
606
COMP HOURS
ACCRUED COMP TIME
18.75
0.00
900
VACATION
ACCRUED VACATION
131.96
0.00
901
SICK
ACCRUED SICK LEAVE
40.25
0.00
902
MISCELLANEOUS
BOOT ALLOWANCE
0.00
10,812.00
acc
MISCELLANEOUS
ACCREDITATION PAY
0.00
24.95
01/19/2017 Packet Pg. 69
Payroll Earnings Summary Report
City of Edmonds
Pay Period: 816 (01/01/2017 to 01/15/2017)
Hour Type Hour Class Description Hours Amount
acs
MISCELLANEOUS
ACCRED/POLICE SUPPORT
0.00
145.56
boc
MISCELLANEOUS
BOC II Certification
0.00
86.22
colre
MISCELLANEOUS
Collision Reconstructionist
0.00
142.14
cpl
MISCELLANEOUS
TRAINING CORPORAL
0.00
147.28
crt
MISCELLANEOUS
CERTIFICATION III PAY
0.00
638.86
cs
SICK
Converted Sick Hours
-480.00
0.00
ctr
MISCELLANEOUS
CTR INCENTIVES PROGRAM
0.00
75.00
det
MISCELLANEOUS
DETECTIVE PAY
0.00
102.75
det4
MISCELLANEOUS
Detective 4%
0.00
852.84
ed1
EDUCATION PAY
EDUCATION PAY 2%
0.00
793.44
ed2
EDUCATION PAY
EDUCATION PAY 4%
0.00
743.78
ed3
EDUCATION PAY
EDUCATION PAY 6%
0.00
4,916.85
fmla
ABSENT
FAMILY MEDICAL/NON PAID
68.82
0.00
fmis
SICK
FAMILY MEDICAL/SICK
74.99
2,941.91
fmly
VACATION
Family Medical Leave Vacation
18.25
709.24
hol
HOLIDAY
HOLIDAY
1,189.40
47,896.50
k9
MISCELLANEOUS
K-9 PAY
0.00
102.75
Iq1
LONGEVITY
LONGEVITY PAY 2%
0.00
839.95
Ig10
LONGEVITY
LONGEVITY 5.5%
0.00
396.36
Ig11
LONGEVITY
LONGEVITY PAY 2.5%
0.00
750.84
Iq2
LONGEVITY PAY
LONGEVITY PAY 4%
0.00
832.28
Iq3
LONGEVITY PAY
LONGEVITY 6%
0.00
5,672.76
Iq4
LONGEVITY
Longevity 1 %
0.00
190.26
Iq6
LONGEVITY
Longevity .5%
0.00
280.79
Iq7
LONGEVITY
Longevity 1.5%
0.00
994.52
Iq9
LONGEVITY
Longevity 3.5%
0.00
82.46
mels
SICK
Medical Leave Sick
108.50
5,124.20
mtc
MISCELLANEOUS
MOTORCYCLE PAY
0.00
200.57
pds
MISCELLANEOUS
Public Disclosure Specialist
0.00
47.12
phy
MISCELLANEOUS
PHYSICAL FITNESS PAY
0.00
1,801.80
prof
MISCELLANEOUS
PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS SER
0.00
157.56
sd2.5%
MISCELLANEOUS
SPECIAL DUTY PAY 2.5%
0.00
156.49
sqt
MISCELLANEOUS
ADMINISTRATIVE SERGEANT
0.00
157.56
str
MISCELLANEOUS
STREET CRIMES
0.00
418.92
01/19/2017 Packet Pg. 70
Hour Type Hour Class
traf MISCELLANEOUS
vab VACATION
Payroll Earnings Summary Report
City of Edmonds
Pay Period: 816 (01/01/2017 to 01/15/2017)
Description
TRAFFIC
VACATION ADD BACK
Hours
Amount
0.00
896.75
323.67
0.00
19,240.49 $776,575.40
Total Net Pay: $516,590.12
4.3.c
U
L_
U
d
t
U
.r
m
c
m
c
c�
0
L
M
om
1=
U
O
i
O
L
Q
Q
Q
O
00
r
M
T
O
N
O
M
E
E
7
N
O
L
Q
d
E
t
V
a
Q
01/19/2017 Packet Pg. 71
Payroll Earnings Summary Report
City of Edmonds
Pay Period: 852 (01/19/2017 to 01/20/2017)
Hour Type
Hour Class
Description
Hours
Amount
157
SICK
SICK LEAVE PAYOFF
18.25
429.79
158
VACATION
VACATION PAYOFF
131.96
3,107.66
900
VACATION
ACCRUED VACATION
-131.96
0.00
901
SICK
ACCRUED SICK LEAVE
-40.25
0.00
-22.00 $3,537.45
Total Net Pay: $2,910.99
4.3.d
U
w
�a
lid
ui
U
a�
U
r
m
c
m
c
0
L
Q
E
2
U
4-
0
O
L
Q
Q
Q
O
00
r
r
O
N
O
f�
E
E
3
N
O
L
Q
C
d
E
t
V
a
Q
01 /19/2017
Packet Pg. 72
Hour Type Hour Class
903 MISCELLANEOUS
Payroll Earnings Summary Report
City of Edmonds
Pay Period: 851 (01/06/2017 to 01/06/2017)
Description
CLOTHING ALLOWANCE
Hours
Amount
0.00
0.00
4,083.32
$4,083.32
Total Net Pay: $3,675.93
4.3.e
01/19/2017 Packet Pg. 73
4.4
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 01/24/2017
Confirm Appointment of Tanya Sharp to the Arts Commission Position #2
Staff Lead: Mayor Earling
Department: Mayor's Office
Preparer: Carolyn LaFave
Background/History
Position #2 on the Arts Commission is currently open due to a retirement. The Arts Commission
advertised for candidates and received 3 applications. They interviewed all candidates and
recommended Tanya Sharp to Mayor Earling as the best candidate.
Staff Recommendation
Confirm appointment of Tanya Sharp to the Arts Commission in Position #2.
Narrative
With her arts knowledge and passion, and her desire to contribute to the Edmonds' arts community,
staff, the Arts Commission, and Mayor Earling feel Tanya will make an excellent addition to the Arts
Commission and are recommending her appointment to the Arts Commission.
Packet Pg. 74
6.1
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 01/24/2017
Fire District 1 Interlocal Agreement (45 min.)
Staff Lead: Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
Department: Administrative Services
Preparer: Scott Passey
Background/History
The City of Edmonds had its own fire department for approximately 105 years when the city council
voted on November 2, 2009 to enter into a long-term interlocal agreement (ILA) with Snohomish County
Fire District 1 (FD1) to provide fire and emergency medical services to the city. A copy of the ILA is
attached to this memo as Attachment D. FD1 began providing that service on January 1, 2010.
The Woodway Issue: For the first four years of the contract (2010-2013), FD1 also provided fire and EMS
service to Woodway under a contract. The ILA between FD1 and Edmonds allocated the cost
responsibilities for staffing fire stations 16, 17, and 20 (the Edmonds stations) as follows:
Edmonds = 77.79%
FD1 (because Esperance is within FD1's taxing district) = 13.08%
Woodway = 9.13%
Woodway, however, was not a party to the City's contract with FD1. So, the Woodway portion of the
above cost allocation might have been more of an assumption or aspiration than a reality. On January 1,
2014, Woodway stopped contracting with FD1 and began contracting with the Shoreline Fire District.
Woodway's switch to Shoreline created the prospect of a long-term financial deficit for the fire district's
operation of the Edmonds stations. That condition persists today, almost three years after Woodway
terminated its relationship with FD1. If the present staffing levels were to be continued into 2017,
Woodway's missing share of the cost of operating the Edmonds stations would be $706,266 in 2017
alone. Woodway's absence did not result in any layoffs or cost reductions. And Edmonds continued to
pay 77.79% as it had originally agreed to pay. This left the fire district responsible for 22.21% of the cost
of operating the Edmonds stations. On July 22, 2016, the fire district board adopted by motion a policy
"to seek through negotiation of the cost associated with the operations of all contract city fire stations."
The district cannot unilaterally change the 77.79% allocation of the costs to Edmonds. But we interpret
the board's motion to indicate that the current arrangement is not sustainable and that the ILA would
likely be terminated if the City refused to negotiate a different cost allocation.
The district is willing to allocate all of the tax revenue that it collects from Esperance ($1,117,150 in
2017) to the operation of the Edmonds stations. If Edmonds takes responsibility for the remainder while
also adopting the proposed service changes, Edmonds' allocation of the cost of operating the Edmonds
stations would 83.06%. If Edmonds takes responsibility for the remainder but does not make any
changes to the service, Edmonds' allocation of the cost of operating the Edmonds stations would be
85.55%.
Packet Pg. 75
6.1
The Retroactive Invoice Issue: In August of 2014, having recently executed a collective bargaining
agreement with the firefighters union, IAFF local 1828, the District sent the City of Edmonds a $1.67
million invoice for retroactive labor costs under the new CBA. The invoice was retroactive to January 1,
2013. The invoice caused some controversy. And that controversy caused the City to take a close look at
its ILA with FD1. The city council ultimate agreed to pay the invoice on January 27, 2015.
Fitch & Associates Analysis: As part of its effort to thoroughly analyze the FD1 ILA, the City engaged
Fitch & Associates to review the service provided by the District and suggest area where the City might
want to make changes. Steve Knight from Fitch & Associates made a presentation to the city council on
February 23, 2016. The presentation and discussion lasted for about 50 minutes. Fitch & Associates also
prepared an executive summary and data report which were completed in April 2016. Among various
recommendations, Fitch analyzed the status quo as well as several options that the City could consider
in determining whether to make changes to the status quo. On December 13, 2016, the City Council
selected Alternative 2 as the basis to finalize negotiations with the District.
Alternative 2
0 3 firefighters at each station;
0 1 paramedic at each station (1 of the 3 firefighters)
§ Total paramedics on duty citywide = 3
Terms of the Proposed ILA: Alternative 2 has several advantages over the other alternatives including
the status quo. Alternative 2 employs more paramedics than any of the other alternatives, including the
status quo. It also distributes them geographically throughout the city by assigning one paramedic to
each station instead of having all the paramedics operate out of station 17. This should allow at least
one paramedic to respond more quickly to 911 calls by reducing travel time to the incident. Alternative
2 also saves the city a significant amount of money compared to the status quo. The 2017 cost of
Alternative 2 is $7,427,818. The status quo would cost an additional $1,361,275.
Key Deal Points of the ILA: In addition to the staffing mix discussed above, we have highlighted below,
several deal points that we find significant about the proposed ILA. The complete ILA is set forth in
Attachment A. Note that the language of the ILA is still being refined and none of these deals points
should be considered approved by either party at this point.
Woodway (see Section 14): Because the city is essentially being asked to absorb the 9.13% that
the parties had hoped would be paid by Woodway, the district is agreeing to allow the city to
subcontract the district's services to Woodway in hopes of the city being able to recoup some of
that lost revenue at some point in the future.
Negotiation Thresholds (see Section 2.2.1): It is anticipated that call volume will eventually
increase to the point where it may become necessary to add service or make other changes. For
that reason, the parties have agreed upon three metrics that the parties will monitor on an
ongoing basis, any one of which would trigger a new round of negotiations when the metric
exceeds the threshold set forth in the agreement. The metrics have been named Unit Utilization
Factor (UUF); Neighboring Unit Utilization Factor (NUUF); and Transport Balance Factor (TBF).
Each of these is defined in Exhibit E of the ILA with a mathematical calculation.
Esperance Offset (see Sections 4.5, 4.6, and definitions): The parties were not able to identify
the source or methodology behind the 13.08% cost share that was allocated to FD1 for service
of Esperance. Instead of continuing to use what now seems like an arbitrary percentage, the ILA
Packet Pg. 76
6.1
contemplates simply that all the FD1 tax revenue from Esperance would be allocated to offset
the cost to Edmonds of operating the Edmonds stations.
City Retains Authority to Set Level of Service In Most Circumstances (see Sections 2.2.2 through
2.2.4 : Language has been added to clarify that the City retains the legislative discretion to
establish the level of service for Edmonds in most circumstances.
Turnout Time (see Section 2.4.1): The City will continue to pursue improvements in turnout
time. While the District does not commit to making improvements in turnout time, it does
commit to understanding what prevents it from making improvements.
Retroactive Invoices (see Section 4.2.2): The City will receive timely invoices even in years for
which the CBA has not yet been finalized, in which case the invoices will set forth reliable
estimates of the eventual Contract Payment. This will allow the City to set money aside and plan
for the forthcoming retroactive invoices.
Staff Recommendation
We recommend that the City Council authorize the Mayor to execute the proposed ILA.
Attachments:
Revised and Restated ILA
120116 Cross Staffed
ILA redlined against 2016-12-02
COE FD1 ILA 2009
Packet Pg. 77
6.1.a
REVISED AND RESTATED INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR
FIRE AND EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES
THIS REVISED AND RESTATED INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT ("Restated ILA") by
and between SNOHOMISH COUNTY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT NO. 1, a Washington
municipal corporation (the "District') and the CITY OF EDMONDS, a Washington city (the "City")
is for the provision of fire and emergency medical services (EMS).
WHEREAS, a consolidated Fire and EMS service, by a single vendor or through a
Regional Fire Protection Service Authority (RFA), has recently gained support of most elected
officials in Southwest Snohomish County; and
WHEREAS, the City and District agree that a long-term agreement between the City and
the District for fire and emergency medical services is beneficial to the City and District and their
stakeholders; and
WHEREAS, on November 3, 2009, the City and District entered into an Interlocal
Agreement (the "Agreement') for the District to provide fire and emergency medical services to
the City beginning January 1, 2010;
WHEREAS, such Agreement was amended pursuant to a First Amendment dated April
17, 2012 to address a fire boat; and r
r
co
T_
WHEREAS, such Agreement was amended pursuant to a Second Amendment Q
approved on January 27, 2015; and
WHEREAS, the District and the City are authorized, pursuant to Chapter 39.34 of the
Revised Code of Washington, to enter into Interlocal Agreements which allow the District and
the City to cooperate with each other to provide high quality services to the public in the most
efficient manner possible; and
WHEREAS, the parties have analyzed the performance of the Agreement during the
period of 2010 — 2016 (the "Introductory Period") and have determined that is in their mutual
interests and the interests of their respective stakeholders to revise and update the Agreement;
and
WHEREAS, the District and City now wish to revise and restate the Agreement as
provided herein;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants contained
herein, the City and District hereto agree as follows:
0. DEFINITIONS.
The following definitions shall apply throughout this Restated ILA.
Packet Pg. 78
6.1.a
a. Adjustment Year: The year in which a new collective bargaining agreement (CBA) is
effective between the District and the local chapter of the IAFF. When a new CBA has
retroactive effect, the Adjustment Year shall be the date to which the CBA is retroactively
applied. For example, if a CBA expires on December 31, 2014 and a new CBA is
executed on December 1, 2016 but made retroactive to January 1, 2015, the Adjustment
Year would be 2015.
b. Assigned: As used in the definitions of Unit Utilization Factor and Neighboring Unit
Utilization Factor, the term "Assigned" shall describe the period of time in seconds from
dispatch time to clear time, when the Unit becomes available to respond to another call
c. City: City of Edmonds.
d. City Fire Stations: Fire Station 16, Fire Station 17, and Fire Station 20.
e. Commencement Date: January 1, 2010.
f. Contract Payment: The amount that the City shall pay to the District pursuant to this
Restated ILA.
g. District: Snohomish County Fire Protection District No. 1.
h. Edmonds Unit: An Edmonds Unit is any Unit based at one of the City Fire Stations with r
the exception of the Battalion Chief. oo
r
i. Effective Date: February 1, 2017.
j. Esperance: "Esperance" refers to the entirety of the contiguous unincorporated area
that is completely surrounded by the City of Edmonds and commonly known as
Esperance.
k. Esperance Offset: The amount of tax revenue and fire benefit charges, if fire benefit
charges are imposed in the future, to be received by the District from Esperance for the
year in which the Contract Payment is calculated. The Esperance Offset shall not drop
below $1,117,150 (the amount derived by multiplying the 2017 Esperance Assessed
Value of $565,469,115 by the District's 2017 tax rate of $1.97561714741 divided by
1,000) even if the actual tax revenue received by the District drops below that amount as
a result of reductions in assessed valuation or tax rate. The Esperance Offset for any
given year shall not exceed $1,117,150, multiplied by the compounded percentage
increase in City Station Personnel Costs from 2017 to the year for which the Esperance
Offset is being calculated. For example, if City Station Personnel Cost increases 3%
from 2017 to 2018 and 4% from 2018 to 2019, the 2019 cap for the Esperance Offset
would be $1,197,516 and be calculated as follows:
2
Packet Pg. 79
6.1.a
$1,117,150 x 1.03 = $1,150,664 x 1.04 = $1,196,691
I. District Fire Chief: The Fire Chief of Snohomish County Fire Protection District No. 1.
m. Firefighters: Full-time, compensated employees, captains, firefighters, emergency
medical technicians, and/or paramedics.
n. Insurance: The term "insurance" as used in this Restated ILA means either valid
insurance offered and sold by a commercial insurance company or carrier approved to
do business in the State of Washington by the Washington State Insurance
Commissioner or valid self-insurance through a self-insurance pooling organization
approved for operation in the State of Washington by the Washington State Risk
Manager or any combination of valid commercial insurance and self-insurance pooling if
both are approved for sale and/or operation in the State of Washington.
o. Law: The term "law" refers to state and federal statutes and regulations. Unless
expressly identified herein, City ordinances, codes and resolutions shall not be
considered "law."
p. Material Breach: A Material Breach means the District's failure to provide minimum a
staffing levels as described within this Restated ILA, the City's failure to timely pay the
r
Contract Payment as described within this Restated ILA, or the City's or District's failure 00
V.-
to comply with other material terms of this Restated ILA
q. Neighboring Unit Utilization Factor: See Exhibit E.
Negotiation Threshold. A designated occurrence or condition that requires the parties
to renegotiate the Restated ILA.
s. Non -Edmonds Unit: A Non -Edmonds Unit is any Unit stationed at any station other
than the City Fire Stations.
t. Transport Balance Factor: See Exhibit E.
u. Unit: A Unit is a group of Firefighters that work together and are based at the same
station. Where a station is staffed by three firefighters at any one time, that station shall
be considered a Unit. Where a station is staffed by five or more firefighters at any one
time, without counting the Battalion Chief or Medical Services Officer, that station shall
be deemed to have two Units and the District shall clearly allocate the Firefighters at that
station in such a manner that the two Units at that station can be clearly distinguished for
the purposes of determining the Unit Utilization Factor for each Unit.
v. Unit Utilization Factor: See Exhibit E.
3
Packet Pg. 80
6.1.a
w. Wind -Up Period: Except in the context of Material Breach as defined in Section 10.2,
the two years immediately following notice of termination under 11.2.
SCOPE OF SERVICES
1.1 Services Provided. The District shall provide all services necessary for fire suppression,
emergency medical service, hazardous materials response, technical rescue, and
disaster response (not including an Emergency Operations Center, which is provided by
the City at the time of this Restated ILA) to a service area covering the corporate limits of
the City of Edmonds. In addition, the District shall provide support services including, but
not limited to, fire marshal, fire prevention and life safety, public education, public
information, and fleet maintenance, payroll and finances, human resources, and legal
and risk management pertaining to the operations and delivery of the District's services.
1.2 Training, Education, and Career Development. The District shall provide training and
education to all firefighter and emergency medical service personnel in accordance with
State, County and local requirements. Furthermore, the District shall offer professional
development and educational and training opportunities for unrepresented and civilian o
employees.
ii
1.3 City Fire Chief. The District Fire Chief shall be designated as the City Fire Chief for r
purposes of statutory provisions, regulations and the Edmonds City Code.00
1.4 District Fire Chief Designates Fire Marshal. The District Fire Chief shall designate an
individual to serve as City Fire Marshal, and shall assign necessary personnel to support
r
the functions and needs of the Fire Marshal as mutually agreed to and partially funded y
by the City (See Exhibit A), subject to the City's right to provide its own fire inspectors
pursuant to Section 2.8.2, below.
2. STANDARDS FOR SERVICES/STAFFING a
2.1 Battalion Chief. A Battalion Chief shall continue to be available for response within the
City twenty-four (24) hours per day, seven (7) days per week as during the Introductory
Period. The District agrees to provide Incident Command response for all emergency
incidents twenty-four (24) hours per day, seven (7) days per week.
2.2 Fire Station Staffing. The City Fire Stations shall each be staffed twenty-four (24) hours
per day, seven (7) days per week with a minimum of one (1) fire captain and two (2)
firefighters, at least one of whom shall be a firefighter/paramedic. Any increase in
staffing above this level shall not increase the Contract Payment unless the increase
occurs through an amendment of this Restated ILA.
2.2.1 The parties shall renegotiate this Restated ILA upon the occurrence of any of the
following Negotiation Thresholds:
4
Packet Pg. 81
6.1.a
a. When the Unit Utilization Factor ("UUF") at any one of the City Fire Stations
exceeds 0.250;
b. When the Neighboring Unit Utilization Factor ("NUUF") is out of balance as
defined in this Restated ILA, PROVIDED THAT this subsection shall not trigger a
renegotiation any earlier than January 1, 2018.
c. When the Transport Balance Factor (TBF) is out of balance as defined in this
Restated ILA, PROVIDED THAT this subsection shall not trigger a renegotiation earlier
than January 1, 2018.
d. When the Esperance Offset drops by ten percent (10%) or more over any
consecutive three (3) year period.
2.2.2 The District shall provide written notice to the City ("Threshold Notice") whenever
any of the foregoing Negotiation Thresholds occurs. Within thirty (30) days of issuance
of a Threshold Notice, the parties shall meet to renegotiate this Restated ILA. Such
negotiations shall include, at least the following topics:
(i) Methodologies intended to reduce the UUF substantially below 0.250 or
N
to balance the NUUF or TBF, as applicable (collectively "Remedial
o
Measures"). Remedial Measures may include, but shall not be limited to,
L
changes to the staffing mix and/or levels, adding another Unit, changing
U`
fire response plans in CAD, and/or implementing other service changes;
00
and
(ii) Adjusting the Contract Payment to account for the District's increased
J
cost in employing the selected Remedial Measures.
(iii) Where the Threshold Notice pertains to subsection 2.2.1(d), topics of
o
negotiation shall include increasing the amount of the Esperance Offset
and/or reducing staff and/or reducing overhead charges that are billed to
the City.
o
2.2.3 The District shall identify various Remedial Measures that are likely to
expeditiously achieve the applicable goals in Section 2.2.2(i). The City may opt to
identify and notify the District about alternative Remedial Measures. After consulting with
the District, the City shall select one or more of the Remedial Measures and shall
provide written notice of same within one hundred twenty (120) days following the
issuance of the Threshold Notice (the "Negotiation Deadline"). The City's selection shall
be subject to mediation under paragraph 18.1 if the District finds the City's selection to
be ineffective or inappropriate, but it shall not be subject to arbitration under paragraph
18.2. Any disputes regarding the cost impacts of the City's selection shall be subject to
the complete Dispute Resolution procedures, and any adjustment to the Contract
Payment arising out of the Dispute Resolution Procedures shall be retroactive to the
earlier of the Negotiation Deadline or the date that the Remedial Measures were initially
employed. If the City fails to designate one or more Remedial Measures by the
Negotiation Deadline, such failure shall be deemed a Material Breach.
5
Packet Pg. 82
6.1.a
2.2.4 The parties shall endeavor to execute an amendment prior to the Negotiation
Deadline. If the parties cannot agree upon an amendment to this Restated ILA before
the Negotiation Deadline, either party may terminate the Restated ILA pursuant to 11.2,
PROVIDED THAT during the ensuing two-year Wind -Up Period, the District shall be
authorized to increase service levels at the City Fire Stations as it deems necessary, and
FURTHER PROVIDED THAT the marginal increase in the Contract Payment resulting
from any such District -imposed service level increases during the Wind -Up Period shall
be shared equally by the parties during the Wind -Up Period.
2.3 Shift Arrangements. The City prefers that the following shift arrangements apply to
personnel assigned to stations within the City: no Firefighter shall start a 24-hour shift at
any of the City Fire Stations if that Firefighter has just completed a 48-hour shift at a City
Fire Station or any other fire station in the District without having taken a rest day
between shifts. The District commits that it will undertake in good faith, pursuant to
Chapter 41.56 RCW, to negotiate successfully for those arrangements, to be
implemented.
2.4 Review of Service Delivery Objectives. The parties acknowledge that the service
delivery objectives adopted in 2006 ("Response Objectives") have never been met in
their entirety, even when the City had its own fire department. During the Introductory
Period, the parties contracted for a particular staffing level at the City Fire Stations. It has
been recommended that the parties move toward a performance -based contract where
the City pays for a particular level of service that is measured by service delivery
00
objectives (e.g. response time) instead of a particular number of positions. The parties
would like to continue to evaluate this recommendation, but acknowledge that it would J
take significant additional work to implement such a change, not the least of which
includes adoption of achievable performance standards. The City and the District agree
r
to work toward adoption of a revised set of service delivery objectives in the first quarter
of 2018.
2.4.1 Turnout Time. The District has adopted a standard of 2 minutes and 15 seconds
on 90% of all calls. Failure to meet this standard shall not be deemed a Material Breach
If this standard is not being met during calendar year 2017 for the City Fire Stations, the
District shall provide the City, no later than December 31, 2017, with a report containing
the following information: (i) a list of possible measures that could be implemented to
improve Turnout Time, (ii) the estimated cost of each measure (if reasonably available)
and (iii) estimates concerning the amount that turnout time could be reduced with each
measure.
2.5 Reporting. The District agrees to annually report to the City in accordance with chapter
35.103 RCW. In addition to the regular quarterly report content and the content required
by law, the annual report shall contain the Neighboring Unit Utilization Factor for each of
the following jurisdictions: Lynnwood and Mountlake Terrace. The annual report shall
contain the total number of seconds that City Fire Stations responded to calls in
Woodway and the total number of automatic aid responses from Shoreline into
1.
Packet Pg. 83
6.1.a
Edmonds. The annual report shall, to the extent practicable, also state the amount of
transport fees that the District sought to recover from incidents occurring within the City
and Esperance, respectively, and the amount of those fees that were actually recovered.
If the District has data that identifies the number of seconds during which two or more
Units were Assigned to different calls at the same time, it shall include that data in the
annual report.
2.5.1 Quarterly Reporting. In addition, the District shall provide a quarterly report to the
City Clerk, no later than 30 days after the end of each quarter. The quarterly report shall
contain the Unit Utilization Factor for each of the City Fire Stations, the Transport
Balance Factor, as well as the turnout time, travel time, and overall response time.
2.6 [section relocated for clarity]
2.7 Criteria -Based 9-1-1 Dispatch. It is understood and agreed by the City and District that
the dispatch of Units during emergencies is determined by criteria -based dispatch
protocols of the dispatch centers and Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL). Nothing herein
shall require the District to respond first within the City as opposed to other areas served
by the District. The City and District recognize that responses to emergencies shall be
determined by the District based upon dispatch protocols, the location of available Units
and the District's operational judgment, without regard to where the emergencies occur.
2.8 Level of Service Changes. During the term of this Restated ILA, service level changes r
may be mandated that are beyond the control of either party. Additionally, either party o
may desire to change the service level, including but not limited to, those services
identified in Section 1 Scope of Services and Section 2 Standards for Services/Staffing.
When a service level change is mandated by law, adopted by the Edmonds City Council
as part of the City's chapter 35.103 RCW Response Objectives, or is mutually agreed to
by the parties, the City and the District shall renegotiate the Contract Payment at the
request of either party. If the parties are unable to reach agreement within one hundred
twenty (120) days after the change is mandated or mutually agreed, the matter shall be
subject to the complete Dispute Resolution procedures, and any adjustment to the
Contract Payment arising out of the Dispute Resolution Procedures shall be retroactive
to the date that the service level change was initially employed. Failure of either party to
participate in, or comply with, the Dispute Resolution Procedures in Section 18.1 and/or
18.2 shall be deemed a Material Breach.
2.8.1 The City acknowledges that the District may be required by law to notify and
bargain with the local chapter of the IAFF any level of service changes made pursuant to
this section 2.8.
2.8.2 The City reserves the right to remove the Fire Inspector services from this
Restated ILA upon one year's written notice to the District, in which case the Contract
Payment shall be equitably reduced, PROVIDED THAT in no case shall such notice be
provided less than 90 days prior to the beginning of a new fiscal year, AND FURTHER
PROVIDED THAT the City shall consult with the District regarding the impacts of a
7
Packet Pg. 84
6.1.a
proposed removal of the Fire Inspector services at least 90 days in advance of the City
providing such notice, AND FURTHER PROVIDED THAT if the City exercises this
option, it shall provide fire inspection services using one or more inspectors with current
or previous firefighting experience.
2.9 Response Time Questions. In the event that response times should consistently deviate
from the City's Response Objectives, as they may be amended from time to time by the
City, the District Fire Chief and the City Mayor, or their designees, shall meet and confer
to address the cause, potential remedies, and potential cost impacts.
3. USE OF CITY FIRE STATIONS
3.1 Use of City Fire Stations. The City shall retain ownership of three existing City Fire
Stations and shall make them available for use by the District pursuant to the terms set
forth in Exhibit B. The parties acknowledge that none of these three fire stations are
ideally located and that the City could be better served by two ideally located fire
stations. The parties also acknowledge that the internal configuration of the City's three
stations contributes to slower turnout times than could be achieved with new stations
built according to current standards. In light of the above, the parties contemplate that i
r
the City may opt to replace the three current fire stations with two new fire stations for N
use by the District during the term of this Restated ILA. In the event of a conflict
between the provisions of the Restated ILA and Exhibit B, the provisions of Exhibit B
shall control with respect to fire stations and fixtures contained therein, PROVIDED
r
THAT Exhibit B shall be amended in the event that the City moves to a two-station00
service, and FURTHER PROVIDED THAT nothing in Exhibit B shall be construed to
a
prevent the City from moving to a two -station service; and FURTHER PROVIDED, that
J
the cost of providing turn key fire stations with equivalent technology to current fire
stations shall be borne entirely by the City.
v,
3.1.1 In the event the City decides to replace or relocate any of the City Fire Stations,
the City shall provide notice to the District concerning the location, design and layout of
the new City Fire Stations, the time frame for completion, and any other information
reasonably requested by the District to plan for the transition. Not later than thirty (30)
days following such notice, the parties shall meet to discuss the impact of any such
changes on this Restated ILA and to negotiate an amendment to this Restated ILA to
address such impacts. The parties recognize that there may be initial cost impacts that
are not ongoing, and the parties agree to negotiate these as well. The parties shall
endeavor to execute an amendment no later than one hundred twenty (120) days
following such notice to address such initial cost impacts. If the parties cannot agree
upon an amendment to this Restated ILA within such time, either party may invoke the
Dispute Resolution procedures.
H.,
Packet Pg. 85
6.1.a
3.2-3.3 [Completed. Deleted for clarity]'
4. ANNUAL CONTRACT AND TRANSPORT FEES PAYMENT TERMS
4.1 Annual Contract Payment. The City shall pay the District a sum referred to as the
Contract Payment for the services provided herein. The annual total amount of the
Contract Payment shall be determined according to Exhibit C. The Contract Payment
shall be paid in equal monthly installments by the 10t' day of each month. Failure to pay
monthly installments in a timely manner shall be considered a Material Breach as
defined in the Definitions section of this Restated ILA.
4.1.1 If a service level change requiring an adjustment in the Contract Payment occurs
on a date other than January 1, the Contract Payment shall be adjusted on the effective
date of the service level change, and the monthly installment payments shall be adjusted
accordingly.
4.2 Contract Payment Adjustment. Each year, no later than September 1, the District shall
submit to the City an invoice for the ensuing year, including any revision to the Contract
Payment for the ensuing year.
4.2.1 Annual Percent Increase Based on Labor Costs. The cost of City Station
Personnel identified in Exhibit C shall be adjusted annually pursuant to the negotiated
L
labor collective bargaining agreement between the District and the local chapter of the
``
IAFF ("CBA"); provided that, notwithstanding the actual terms of the CBA, the City
00
Station Personnel cost in Exhibit C shall increase from one labor agreement to the next
no more than the greater of (i) the median increase in the total cost of compensation
J
(i.e., combined cost of wages and benefits) of comparable fire agencies, (ii) the increase
in the Consumer Price Index as measured by the CPI-W Seattle -Tacoma -Bremerton
o
metropolitan area for the twelve (12) month period ending June 30, or (iii) the
percentage increase in compensation awarded by an interest arbitrator. The phrase
"comparable fire agencies" shall refer to a list of comparables agreed upon by the
Employer and Union through the collective bargaining process or the comparables
accepted by an interest arbitrator in an interest arbitration proceeding.
4.2.1.1 The parties recognize that the cost of the District's community paramedic
program is currently covered by grants. At the time the grants expire, the City may opt to
continue the community paramedic program in which case Exhibit C shall be revised to
add an equitable share of the cost of such community paramedics, taking into account
the other jurisdictions that are served by the community paramedics. If the City opts not
to continue with the program, the community paramedic program will not be continued
within the City limits after the grant term ends.
'The Parties acknowledge that a number of actions described in the Agreement have been completed.
For clarity and conciseness, those provisions are removed and replaced with the words "Completed.
Deleted for clarity."
9
Packet Pg. 86
6.1.a
4.2.2 Adjustment Date Not Met. If a new CBA between the District and IAFF Local
1828 has not been finalized by September 1 of the final year of the then -effective CBA,
the City Station Personnel costs and the Indirect Operating Costs for the ensuing year
shall be adjusted following execution of the new CBA and shall be retroactive to January
1 of the Adjustment Year. For example, as of the date of this Restated ILA, the last CBA
expired on December 31, 2014; thus, the Adjustment Year is 2015. In such instances,
the District shall send the City (directed to the City Clerk), no later than September 1 of
each year for which a CBA has not yet been executed for the ensuring year, a range
within which the Contract Payment for the ensuing year is likely to fall, which range shall
be informed by the current status of negotiations between the District and IAFF Local
1828. To enhance the District's ability to provide the City with a predictable range for the
Contract Payment, the District shall, to the extent practicable, commence negotiations
with IAFF Local 1828 no later than July 1 st of any year in which a CBA is expiring. If a
new CBA has not been executed by November Vt of the year in which a CBA is expiring,
the District shall notify the City of the economic issues on which the parties have not
reached tentative agreement.
4.2.3 Documentation of Labor Costs. Upon executing a new CBA, the District shall
provide supporting documentation sufficient to allow the City to confirm that the labor 0
costs have not increased more than the limits set forth in Section 4.2.1, including o
as
comparable agency compensation data used by the parties or the interest arbitrator to
establish new compensation levels.
r
oo
4.3 -4.4 [sections relocated and renumbered for clarity]
4.5 Indirect Operating Cost Portion of Contract Payment. The District shall determine the
Indirect Operating Cost portion of the Contract Payment according to the following:
• Overhead shall be ten percent (10%) of the cost of the City Station Personnel cost;
• Equipment maintenance and operation, medications, and supplies shall be ten
percent (10%) of the City Station Personnel cost;
• Fire Marshal allocation of fifty percent (50%) of wage and benefit cost of the position,
and Fire Inspector at one hundred twenty-five percent (125%) of wage and benefit
cost of the position (See Exhibit A); and
• Apparatus replacement costs based upon the District Apparatus Replacement
Schedule —Rolling Stock designated as Exhibit D.
The total of the City Station Personnel cost and the Indirect Operating Costs, plus any
additional amounts due to annexations as provided in Section 4.6, less the "Esperance
Offset", shall constitute the Contract Payment for the ensuing year.
4.6 Annexation. The City's Urban Growth Area contains property within the boundaries of
the District. Should the City seek to annex portions of the District, the District will not
oppose the annexation. In the event the City annexes portions of the District other than
Esperance, the Contract Payment shall be increased by an amount calculated by
applying the then current District levy rate and emergency medical services levy rate to
10
Packet Pg. 87
6.1.a
the assessed value of the annexed area, plus revenue from a Fire Benefit Charge, if
imposed, that the District would have received from the annexed area in the year in
which the Contract Payment is calculated. The increase in the Contract Payment shall
occur on the first month on which the District is no longer entitled to collect non -
delinquent tax revenue from the annexed area pursuant to RCW 35.13.270(2).
4.6.1 Esperance Annexation. If the City annexes all of the area commonly referred to
as "Esperance", the District will support the annexation. Whenever any portion of
Esperance is annexed, the Esperance Offset attributable to the annexed area shall no
longer be used to reduce the calculation of the Contract Payment at such time as the
District is no longer entitled to collect non -delinquent tax revenue from the annexed area
pursuant to RCW 35.13.270(2).
4.7 Significant Change in Cost of Providing Services. In the event that there is a material
a
and significant increase or decrease in the costs of providing services under this
o
Restated ILA because the District was required to comply with a legislative or regulatory
decision by an entity other than the City, then at the request of either party, the City and
r
5
District shall seek to renegotiate this Restated ILA and the Contract Payment to fully
compensate the District for actual costs incurred according to the methodology in Exhibit
C. An example of a significant increase in cost would be if the state required that fire
o
engines be staffed with four firefighters per engine instead of three. If the City and
District are unable to successfully renegotiate the Contract Payment in this context
``
through good faith negotiations, then the complete Dispute Resolution provision of this
Restated ILA shall apply. Failure of either party to participate in, or comply with, the
oo
Dispute Resolution Procedures in Section 18.1 and/or 18.2 shall be deemed a Material
J
Breach. Nothing herein prevents either party from terminating the Restated ILA
pursuant to Section 11.2, whether before or after exercise of the Dispute Resolution
r
provisions of this Restated ILA.
4.8 EMS Transport Fees. The District shall charge fees for the basic life support and
advanced life support transports that it performs. As the EMS service provider for the
City, the District shall receive and pursue collection of all Transport Fees in accordance
with District policy for transports that originate within the City limits. The District shall
remit the amount so received to the City, less an administration fee not to exceed the
actual cost of collection on a quarterly basis. The District shall be responsible for, and
agrees to prepare and provide in a timely fashion, reasonable documentation and/or
reports to the City.
4.9 Creating Unfunded Mandates. The City shall not create any unfunded mandates for
increased service or reporting by the District without fully compensating the District for
actual costs incurred.
5. CITY EMPLOYEES
5.1-5.8 [Completed. Deleted for clarity].
11
Packet Pg. 88
6.1.a
5.9 Former City Employees. The City shall indemnify, defend, and hold the District harmless
from any and all demands, claims, or actions by former City personnel, which arise out of, or
relate to, the time prior to the Commencement Date, provided, however, that the indemnification
shall not apply to any claims arising as a result of the District's actions under the Agreement or
the Restated ILA.
6. ROLLING STOCK (APPARATUS AND VEHICLES)
6.1 — 6.5 [Completed. Deleted for clarity].
6.6 District Apparatus Replacement Schedule. The District has provided current information
regarding existing and proposed Apparatus Replacement Schedule attached in Exhibit
D. The District, in its sole discretion, may elect to purchase new rolling stock or
otherwise assign District rolling stock for use within the City.
6.7 Public Safety Boat. Title to the City Public Safety Boat known as Marine 16 (the
"Vessel") has been transferred to the District. The District's use of Marine 16 for training
and emergencies as a county -wide asset is described in the First Amendment to
Interlocal Agreement for Use of Rescue and Fire Boat. Exhibit H to the Agreement is
hereby deleted.
6.7.1 [Completed. Deleted for clarity]
6.7.2 The District assumes responsibility for maintenance and repairs to the Vessel.00
r
However, upon the District's request, the City agrees to provide maintenance and repair r
services for the Vessel in exchange for receipt from the District of the City's normal a
J
hourly shop rates for labor.
6.7.3 The Apparatus Replacement Schedule (Exhibit D to the Agreement and the
Restated ILA) is amended to include the Outboard Motors of the Vessel for as long as
the Vessel is in operation. The amended Apparatus Replacement Schedule is attached
hereto. The Contract Payment shall reflect the addition of the Outboard Motors to this
schedule.
6.7.4 [Completed. Deleted for clarity]
6.7.5 Use of the vessel by the City of Edmonds Police Department shall continue as
agreed to before this Restated ILA. The City is solely responsible for maintaining and
certifying its operators.
6.7.5.1 The City's use of the Vessel is at the City's risk. The City acknowledges
that the District is making no representations or warranties concerning the Vessel.
Further, if the City uses the Vessel without a District operator, the City agrees to be
solely responsible for all damage or loss to the Vessel and its apparatus while the
Vessel is within the City's control and/or possession.
6.7.5.2 The City agrees to release the District from any claims associated with
any training provided to it. The City further agrees to defend, indemnify and hold the
12
Packet Pg. 89
6.1.a
District harmless from any and all claims for bodily injury or property damage arising out
of the City's use and operation of the Vessel.
6.7.5.3 The City specifically and expressly waives any immunity that may be
granted under the Washington State Industrial Insurance Act, Chapter 51 RCW as to
any claims by its employees arising from the use of the Vessel.
7. EQUIPMENT
7.1 — 7.4 [Completed. Deleted for clarity]
8. OVERSIGHT AND REPORTING
8.1 Agreement Administrators. The District Fire Chief and the City Mayor and/or their
designees, shall act as administrators of this Restated ILA for purposes of RCW
39.34.030. During the term of this Restated ILA, the District Fire Chief shall provide the
Mayor with quarterly written reports concerning the provision of services under this
Restated ILA. The format and topics of the reports shall be as set forth in Section 2.5.
The District Fire Chief shall present an annual report covering the previous calendar
year to the Edmonds City Council prior to March 1, and at such meeting the Chief shall
request, and the City Council shall schedule, the Joint Annual meeting provided for in
section 8.2.
8.1.1 The parties agree to meet on a quarterly basis to address the performance of the00
r
Restated ILA. It is expected that these quarterly meetings will be attended by at least r
one City Council member, the Mayor, the City Attorney, the Finance Director, the District a
Fire Chief and at least one Commissioner from the District. J
8.2 Joint Annual Meeting. In addition to the meeting(s) referred to in Section 8.1 above, the
Edmonds City Council and Board of Fire District #1 Commissioners shall have a joint
annual meeting after, but within 30 days, of the annual report at a properly noticed place
and time to discuss items of mutual interest related to this Restated ILA.
8.3 Representation on Intergovernmental Boards. The District shall represent the City on
intergovernmental boards or on matters involving the provision of services under this
Restated ILA as reasonably requested by the Mayor. The City reserves the right to
represent itself in any matter in which the interests of the City and the District are not
aligned or whenever any matter relates to the appropriation of or expenditure of City
funds beyond the terms of this Restated ILA.
9. EXISTING AGREEMENTS
9.1 DEM, SNOCOM and SERS. The City currently has contractual relationships with other
entities or agencies including the Department of Emergency Management (DEM) (or
successor), Snohomish County Communications Center (SNOCOM) (or successor), and
Snohomish County Emergency Radio System Agency (SERS) (or successor). The City
shall maintain its representation and financial obligations with those entities or agencies
13
Packet Pg. 90
6.1.a
and will act to represent itself and retain authority to negotiate on its behalf. At the
discretion of the City, the District may provide representation on behalf of the City on
various committees, boards, and/or commissions as requested, as appropriate, and/or
as agreed to by mutual agreement of the parties. The parties shall meet to address any
changes to the foregoing entities that result in a change to the City's representation or
financial obligations.
9.2 Mutual and Automatic Aid. The District shall assume any of the City's remaining
contractual responsibility and obligations for the provision of mutual and automatic aid.
9.3 Full Information as Basis for Relationship. The City and District agree to coordinate their
individual relationships with other entities and agencies so that the services under this
Restated ILA will be provided in an efficient and cost effective manner. The City and
District agree to keep each other fully informed and advised as to any changes in their
respective relationships with those entities or agencies, whether or not those changes
impact the City and/or the District obligations shall be provided to the other party in
writing in a timely manner that allows a reasonable opportunity to discuss proposed
changes in relationships or obligations.
10. TERM OF AGREEMENT
10.1 20-Year Agreement. The Effective Date of this Restated ILA shall be February 1, 2017.
The Commencement Date of the Agreement was January 1, 2010. This Restated ILA r
shall continue in effect until December 31, 2030, unless terminated earlier as provided in o
section 11. After December 31, 2030, this Restated ILA shall automatically renew under
the same terms and conditions for successive, rolling five (5) year periods unless
terminated as provided in section 11. P
10.2 Material Breach and Wind -Up Period. In the event of a Material Breach of this Restated
ILA, the City and District shall, unless the City and District mutually agree otherwise,
continue to perform their respective obligations under this Restated ILA for a minimum of
twelve (12) months after notice of the Material Breach (the "Wind -Up Period") provided,
however, that the Wind -Up Period shall be (i) ninety (90) days if the Material Breach
involves the City's failure to make the Contract Payment or (ii) 180 days if the City fails
to timely select a Remedial Measure following the District's issuance of a Threshold
Notice; provided further, that during the Wind -Up Period, the City and District shall
coordinate their efforts to prepare for the transition to other methods of providing fire and
EMS service to the City. The City shall be responsible for all Contract Payment
installments required herein until the conclusion of the Wind -Up Period.
11. TERMINATION AND RETURN OF ASSETS
11.1 [Completed. Deleted for clarity]
14
Packet Pg. 91
6.1.a
11.2 Termination — Notice. In addition to terminating this Restated ILA for a Material Breach,
either party may terminate this Restated ILA at any time by providing the other party with
two (2) years written notice of its intent to terminate.
11.3 Termination Costs. Except as otherwise provided herein, the costs associated with
terminating this Restated ILA shall be borne equally between the parties, or in the event
of a Material Breach, by the breaching party, provided that in the following
circumstances, the cost of termination shall be apportioned as provided below.
11.3.1 Termination Due to Change in Law or by Mutual Agreement. In the event
that this Restated ILA is terminated due to a change in law or by mutual agreement,
each party shall bear its own costs associated with the termination.
11.3.2 Regional Fire Protection Service Authority. In the event that the District, Q
along with one or more fire protection jurisdictions, elects to create a Regional Fire M
Protection Service Authority Planning Committee ("RFA Planning Committee") as
provided in RCW 52.26.030, the District agrees to notify the City of its intent and subject
to mutual approval of the District and other participating jurisdictions, to afford the City
an opportunity to be a participant on the RFA Planning Committee. Declining the i
r
opportunity to participate in the RFA Planning Committee shall not be construed as a
Material Breach on the part of the City. In the event that a Regional Fire Protection
Service Authority (RFA) or another legally recognized means of providing fire and
emergency medical services is created, inclusive of District, the District's powers and r
duties under this Restated ILA shall be assigned to the RFA as the District's successoroo
-
in -interest as provided by RCW 52.26.100. a
11.3.2.1 If the District forms a RFA with any other agency, the parties shall
confer to determine whether any efficiencies have resulted from the creation of the RFA
that could warrant reconfiguring the service provided to the City.
11.4 [reserved]
11.5 [reserved]
11.6 Duty to Mitigate Costs. The City and District have an affirmative duty to mitigate their
respective costs of termination, irrespective of the party who elects to terminate this
Restated ILA and irrespective of the party who must bear the costs of termination.
11.7 Return of Assets to the City. Regardless of the reason for termination, the City and
District agree that like assets purchased by and transferred to the District as part of the
Agreement shall be purchased by the City as described below. This provision shall not
apply to the formation of an RFA in which both the City and the District are participants.
11.7.1 Purchase Back Rolling Stock. All rolling stock in use by the District at the City
Fire Stations at the time of termination shall be purchased back at a price that considers
the fair market value of the asset and any adjustments to fair market value that would be
15
Packet Pg. 92
6.1.a
fair and equitable, including, for example, City contributions to apparatus replacement,
costs incurred by the District for acquisition, maintenance, and repair, depreciation, etc.
11.7.2 Purchase Back Equipment. All equipment in use by the District at the City Fire
Stations at the time of termination shall be purchased back at fair market value.
11.7.3 [Completed. Deleted for clarity]
11.7.4 District Employees. The District shall indemnify, defend and hold the City
harmless from any and all demands, claims, or actions by District personnel, which
arises out of or relate to the time that such personnel were employees of the District,
PROVIDED HOWEVER, that the indemnification shall not apply to any claims arising as
a result of the City's actions during the term of the Agreement or the Restated ILA.
12. DECLINE TO MERGE
U
0
12.1 City Declines to Merge. In the event that the District enters into an agreement with any
r
other fire district or agency that is functionally equivalent to a merger, the City may opt to 5
terminate this Restated ILA without prejudice or penalty. To exercise this option the City
shall provide written notice to the District of its intent to end the Restated ILA. Such r
notice shall be provided not more than ninety (90) days after receiving written notification o
from the District in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.1 that the District L
intends to merge with another entity. ``
00
12.1.1 Not a Material Breach. The City's decision to terminate under 12.1 does not r
constitute a Material Breach of the Restated ILA and none of the penalties associated a
with a Material Breach shall apply to the City.
12.1.2 12-Month Notice. The City's notice shall provide an effective date of termination
which shall be no more than twelve (12) months after the City officially notifies the
District of its termination, unless otherwise agreed to by the parties, and the costs of
termination shall be split evenly between the parties.
12.1.3 City Exit from Agreement. If the City elects to terminate the Restated ILA
because of an impending merger between the District and one or more other jurisdiction,
the City's exit will be under the terms and conditions described in Section 11.7.
13. [deleted]
14. TOWN OF WOODWAY
14.1 Service to Woodway. The City may, in accordance with the terms herein, subcontract
with the Town of Woodway to have the District provide fire and emergency medical
services to the Town of Woodway. The City shall consult with the District in advance of
entering into any such subcontract, and the District shall have the opportunity for input
into any issues that may affect service and/or the cost of providing service. The City
shall provide advance written notice to the District of at least twelve (12) months prior to
any commencement of such service. The City's subcontracting of the District's service to
Packet Pg. 93
6.1.a
Woodway shall not be considered an unfunded mandate, and no change in the Contract
Payment shall result from such a subcontract, provided that the City is not requesting
additional staff to serve Woodway. Any and all payments from such a subcontract with
Woodway shall be paid to the City of Edmonds only. The District agrees not to compete
with the City of Edmonds in such negotiations.
14.1.1 If the City is requesting additional staff to serve Woodway, the parties shall
renegotiate the Contract Payment retroactive to the date that the District begins
providing the additional staff. If the parties have not executed an amendment prior to the
commencement of service to Woodway, either party may invoke the Dispute Resolution
procedures in Section 18.1 and 18.2; provided, however, that any adjustment to the
Contract Payment arising out of the Dispute Resolution Procedures shall be retroactive
to the date that the District begins providing the additional staff to serve Woodway. In
this context, failure of either party to participate in, or comply with, the Dispute
Resolution Procedures in Section 18.1 and/or 18.2 shall be deemed a Material Breach.
14.1.2 The City of Edmonds right to subcontract with the Town of Woodway constitutes
the consideration for the City's agreement to incur the additional 9.13% in Exhibit C
initially attributable to Woodway under the Agreement.
14.1.3 At the City's request, the District agrees to work with Shoreline Fire Department
to adjust automatic aid responses into the Town of Woodway.
r
14.1.4 In the event that the Point Wells development is to become part of the service o
area for the District, such event shall be deemed a "Negotiation Threshold", and the
negotiation provisions of 2.2.3 - 2.2.4 shall apply.
15. [Completed. Deleted for clarity]
16. CITY AND DISTRICT ARE INDEPENDENT MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENTS
16.1 Independent Governments. The City and District recognize and agree that the City and
District are independent governments. Except for the specific terms herein, nothing
herein shall be construed to limit the discretion of the governing bodies of each party.
Specifically and without limiting the foregoing, the District shall have the sole discretion
and the obligation to determine the exact method by which the services are provided
within the District and within the City unless otherwise stipulated within this Restated
I LA.
16.2 Resource Assignments. The District shall assign the resources available to it without
regarding to internal political boundaries, but rather based upon the operational
judgment of the District as exercised within the limitations and obligations of Sections 2.4
through 2.8.
16.3 Debts and Obligations. Neither the City nor District, except as expressly set forth herein
or as required by law, shall be liable for any debts or obligations of the other.
17
Packet Pg. 94
6.1.a
17. INSURANCE
17.1 Maintenance of Insurance. For the duration of this Restated ILA, each Party shall
maintain insurance as follows: Each party shall maintain its own insurance policy
insuring damage to its own fire stations, real and personal property and equipment if
any, and "policy" shall be understood to include insurance pooling arrangements or
compacts such as the Washington Cities Insurance Authority (WCIA). The City shall
maintain an insurance policy insuring against liability for accidents occurring on City
owned property. Such insurance policy shall be in an amount not less than one million
dollars ($1,000,000.00) per occurrence with a deductible of not more than five -thousand
dollars ($5,000.00). The District shall maintain an insurance policy insuring against
liability arising out of work or operations performed by the District under this Restated
ILA in an amount not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per occurrence with a
deductible of not more than five -thousand dollars ($5,000.00). The phrases "work or
operations" and "maintenance and operations" shall include the services identified in
Section 1. Scope of Services, the services of the Fire Marshal and the District Fire
Chief, acting in the capacity of City Fire Chief and any obligation covered by Exhibit B,
Section 9.
17.2 Claims of Former City Employees. The City has provided proof of coverage that it has o
maintained insurance against claims by former City Personnel for incidents and
occurrences which may have occurred prior to the Commencement Date of the ``
Agreement, including but not limited to, injuries, employment claims, labor grievances,
00
and other work -related claims. Such insurance was at all times in an amount not less
than one million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per occurrence with a deductible of not more
than five -thousand dollars ($5,000.00). The City will hold harmless the District and its
insurance provider for any such claims lawsuits or accusations that occurred prior to the
Commencement Date.
17.3 Claims of Former District Employees. The District represents and warrants that it has
maintained insurance against claims by District employees for incidents and occurrences
which may have occurred during the time period prior to the Commencement Date of the
Agreement, including but not limited to injuries, employment claims, labor grievances,
and other work -related claims. Such insurance was at all times in an amount not less
than one million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per occurrence with a deductible of not more
than five -thousand dollars ($5,000.00).
17.4 Hold Harmless. To the extent each party's insurance coverage is not voided, each party
agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the other party, its officers, officials,
employees and volunteers from any and all claims, costs, including reasonable
attorneys' and expert witness fees, losses and judgments arising out of the negligent
and intentional acts or omissions of such party's officers, officials, employees and
volunteers in connection with the performance of the Agreement or the Restated ILA.
The provisions of this section shall survive the expiration or termination of the
Agreement and the Restated ILA.
18
Packet Pg. 95
6.1.a
17.5 Release from Claims. Except as specifically provided in this Restated ILA, and except in
the event of breach of this Restated ILA, the District and the City do hereby forever
release each other from any claims, demands, damages or causes of action arising prior
to the Commencement Date and related to damage to equipment or property owned by
the City or District or assumed under the Agreement or the Restated ILA. It is the intent
of the City and District to cover this risk with the insurance noted above.
18. DISPUTE RESOLUTION
It is the intent of the City and District to resolve all disputes between them without
litigation. In the event that any dispute between the City and District cannot be resolved
by good faith negotiations between the City and District, then the dispute resolution
provision of this Restated ILA shall apply. Excluded from these dispute resolution
provisions are issues related to the legislative authority of the Edmonds City Council to
a
make budget and appropriation decisions, decisions to contract, establish levels of
o
service or staffing under Section 2 of this Restated ILA and Chapter 35.103 RCW and
other policy matters that state law vests with the City Council. The above exclusions
r
5
from the dispute resolution process shall not abridge the right of the District to pursue an
increase in the Contract Payment as a result of any decision which, itself, is not subject
to the Dispute Resolution provisions of this Restated ILA. Nothing herein shall prevent
o
either party from providing notice of termination of the Restated ILA pursuant to Section
0
11.2 prior to completion of the dispute resolution processes described below; however,
``
such notice shall not affect any obligations to proceed with the Dispute Resolution
provisions.
oo
18.1 Mediation. Upon a request by either party to mediate a dispute that is subject to the
Dispute Resolution provisions, the parties shall mutually agree upon a mediator. If the
City and District cannot agree upon a mediator within ten (10) business days after such
request, the City and District shall submit the matter to the Judicial Arbitration and
Mediation Service (JAMS) and request that a mediator be appointed. This requirement
to mediate the dispute may only be waived by mutual written agreement before a party
may proceed to litigation as provided within this Restated ILA. Except for unusual
reasons beyond the reasonable control of either party, mediation shall be completed
within ninety (90) days after the mediator is selected. Any expenses incidental to
mediation, including the mediator's fee, shall be borne equally by the City and District.
18.2 Binding Arbitration. If the City and District are unsuccessful in resolving any dispute
subject to the Dispute Resolution provisions through mediation, either party may
demand binding arbitration as provided herein, unless the nature of the dispute is not
subject to arbitration pursuant to other provisions of this Restated ILA.
18.2.1 The arbitration shall be conducted by JAMS in Seattle, Washington or other
mutually agreeable dispute resolution service. The dispute shall be governed by the
selected arbitration service's Streamlined Arbitration Rules and Procedures. The parties
shall agree on a JAMS arbitrator with twenty (20) days from the date the matter is
submitted to JAMS. In the event that the parties fail to agree on a JAMS arbitrator within
19
Packet Pg. 96
6.1.a
such time, then JAMS shall be asked to submit the names of at least three arbitrators.
Each party shall have ten (10) days after receiving the list to strike one name from that
list. JAMS shall select the arbitrator from the names on the list that have not been struck
by either party. The parties may agree on another arbitrator in JAMS or another person
at any time. In the event that JAMS is unable or unwilling to provide an arbitrator and the
parties cannot otherwise agree, then either party may request the Snohomish County
Superior Court to designate an arbitrator.
18.2.2 At any arbitration involving the Contract Payment, the arbitrator shall, as nearly as
possible, apply the analysis used in this Restated ILA and supporting Exhibits to adjust
the Contract Payment. The arbitrator may deviate from such analysis and use principles
of fairness and equity, but should do so sparingly.
18.2.3 Unless the City and District mutually consent, the results of any binding arbitration
session shall not be deemed to be precedent for any subsequent mediations or
arbitrations.
18.2.4 The decision of the arbitrator shall be final and binding upon both parties, subject
only to the right of appeal as provided in RCW 7.04; provided, however, that in arriving
at such decision, neither of the parties nor the arbitrator shall have the authority to alter
this Restated ILA in whole or in part.
18.2.5 The arbitrator cannot order either party to take action contrary to law.
18.2.6 The substantially prevailing party, if any, in any binding arbitration action shall be
entitled to an award of its reasonable attorneys' fees and costs.
18.3 Litigation. For disputes that are not subject to binding arbitration, either party may file an
action in Superior Court. Jurisdiction and venue for such actions shall lie exclusively in
Superior Court for Snohomish County, Washington. Each party expressly waives the
right to a jury trial. The party substantially prevailing in any such action or proceeding
shall be awarded its reasonable costs and attorneys' fees.
19. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
19.1 Noticing Procedures. All notices, demands, requests, consents and approvals which
may, or are required to be given by any party to any other party hereunder, shall be in
writing and shall be deemed to have been duly given if delivered personally, sent by
electronic mail (provided a read receipt is obtained by the sender), sent by nationally
recognized overnight delivery service, or if mailed or deposited in the United States mail,
sent by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested and postage prepaid to:
District Secretary: City Clerk:
Snohomish County Fire Protection District No. 1 City of Edmonds
12425 Meridian Avenue 121 5t" Avenue North
Everett, WA 98208 Edmonds, WA 98020
20
r
oo
Packet Pg. 97
6.1.a
Or, to such other address as the foregoing City and District hereto may from time -to -time
designate in writing and deliver in a like manner. All notices shall be deemed complete
upon actual receipt or refusal to accept delivery. Facsimile transmission of any signed
original document and retransmission of any signed facsimile transmission shall be the
same as delivery of an original document.
19.2 Other Cooperative Agreements. Nothing in the Restated ILA shall preclude the City and
the District form entering into contracts for service in support of this Restated ILA.
19.3 Public Duty Doctrine. This Restated ILA shall not be construed to provide any benefits
to any third parties. Specifically, and without limiting the foregoing, this Restated ILA
shall not create or be construed as creating an exception to the Public Duty Doctrine.
The City and District shall cooperate in good faith and execute such documents as
necessary to effectuate the purposes and intent of this Restated ILA.
19.4 Entire Agreement. The entire agreement between the City and District hereto is
contained in this Restated ILA and exhibits thereto. This Restated ILA supersedes all of
their previous understandings and agreements, written and oral, with respect to this
transaction. This Restated ILA supersedes the Agreement except where provisions
have expressly been omitted for clarity and conciseness. Only those exhibits referenced
in this Restated ILA shall continue to be effective.
19.5. Amendment. This Restated ILA may be amended only by written instrument approved
r
by the governing bodies of the City and District subsequent to the date hereof.
00
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the parties agree that the formulas for NUUF, UUF, and
a
TBF may be changed administratively by mutual agreement of the parties if executed by
J
the Mayor and Council President (for the City) and the District Fire Chief (for the District)
2
in the event that a significant change occurs which would affect such formulas (e.g. RFA
y
is formed, changes in dispatch technology); provided however, that any changes to the
formulas shall be consistent with the underlying intent. c
Dated this day of 2017
SNOHOMISH COUNTY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT NO. 1
By: By:
By: By:
21
Packet Pg. 98
6.1.a
Approved as to form:
M
District Attorney
CITY OF EDMONDS
IN
Approved as to form:
IN
City Attorney
22
Attest:
Attest:
r
00
r
Packet Pg. 99
6.1.a
EXHIBIT A
FIRE MARSHAL AND FIRE INSPECTOR
1. In consultation with the City, the District Fire Chief shall designate an individual to serve as
City Fire Marshal, and ensure the assignment of necessary personnel to support the needs
and functions of the Fire Marshal as specified in the International Fire Code, City ordinances,
and other fire service -related national, state, and local standards adopted and/or followed by
the City.
2. As employees of the District, the City Fire Marshal and Fire Inspector shall perform all of
the customary roles and duties associated with their positions: fire prevention; fire
investigation; code development, application, interpretation, and enforcement; permit
processes; plans review; records retention, response to public records requests and other
legal summons; fire and life safety public education; and other duties as assigned in the City
and throughout the jurisdictional areas served by the District.
3. The City agrees to pay fifty percent (50%) of the annual personnel cost (wages and benefits)
of providing one (1) Fire Marshal, and one hundred twenty-five percent (125%) of the annual
personnel cost (wages and benefits) of providing one (1) Fire Inspector.
4. The City Engine Company Inspection Program shall be maintained in its current form unless M
modified by mutual agreement of the parties. r
oo
5. The City agrees to provide office space, office furnishings, computers, fax, copier,
printer, telephone landlines, and postal support for the use of the Fire Marshal and Fire J
Inspector in Edmonds City Hall.
6. All fees collected for Fire Permits/Special use, Fire Plan Checks, and Construction
Inspections shall be retained by the City.
23
Packet Pg. 100
6.1.a
EXHBIT B
USE OF FIRE STATIONS
For as long as the Restated ILA remains in effect, the City hereby grants to the District exclusive
use and possession of premises for use as fire stations on the terms and conditions described
below.
Three Fire Stations. The City shall provide use of the three fire stations located at 8429 -
196th Street Southwest, 275 - 6th Avenue North, and 23009 - 88th Avenue West in the
City of Edmonds, Washington, PROVIDED THAT the City reserves the right to substitute
these stations with new stations as further described in the Restated ILA.
2. Compliance with Applicable Codes. The fire stations provided by the City shall be
compliant with all applicable codes, including without limitation, the applicable provisions
of the Edmonds City Code and applicable Washington State Standards and regulations
(currently WAC 296-305-06501 et seq.).
3. No Use Charge. No use charge shall be assessed to the District. The parties agree that r
the rights and contractual obligations contained within the Restated ILA constitute 00
adequate consideration for District use and possession of the premises.
4. Utilities and Services. The City shall ensure the supply of all utilities necessary for the
use of the premises, to include: water, sewer, garbage, heating, air conditioning,
electrical power, telephone and information technology/system data lines.
4.1
Cost for Utilities. The District shall be responsible for the cost of all utilities used
on the premises, except for those utilities supplied by the City. If a separate meter is
unavailable for any utility that the District is responsible to pay, then the cost shall be
equitably apportioned to the District in a manner agreeable to both parties.
5. Conditions and Repairs. The City agrees to keep the premises and the buildings in good
condition and repair as reasonably requested by the District for use as fire stations
during the term of this Restated ILA at its own expense. The City shall at all times keep
the buildings suitably equipped as fully functioning and operational fire stations.
6. Improvements. Upon District request, the City shall install such reasonable
improvements as are normal and customary in connection with District use of premises
set forth herein. The City shall pay for such improvements.
24
Packet Pg. 101
6.1.a
7. Removal of Personal Property Upon Termination of Agreement. Upon termination of this
Restated ILA, the District shall remove all non -fixed equipment and personal property
placed upon the premises by the District during the period of this Restated ILA unless
those items are subject to repurchase by the City as provided in the Restated ILA. Any
personal property not removed from the fire stations within 60 days after termination of
this Restated ILA shall become the property of the City.
8. Maintenance of Premises.
8.1 Maintenance of the buildings, the premises and all improvements thereon is the
sole responsibility of the City. Such responsibility includes without limitation, repair of
walls, floors, ceiling, interior doors, interior and exterior windows and fixtures, sidewalks,
landscaping, driveways, parking areas, walkways, building exterior and signs.
8.2 City shall maintain in good condition the structural parts of the fire stations and c
exterior buildings and structures which shall include emergency lighting, fences,
enclosures, curbs, gutters and sidewalks, foundations, bearing and exterior walls, i
subflooring and roof, roof -mounted structures, unexposed electrical, plumbing and N
sewerage systems, including those portions of the systems lying outside the premises,
exterior doors, apparatus bay doors, window frames, gutters, downspouts on the
building and the heating, ventilating and air conditioning system servicing the premises. r
oo
8.3 All janitorial services for routine cleaning of the buildings shall be the
responsibility of the District. J
8.4 All grounds maintenance of the premises, to include fencing, enclosures, gates,
landscape, stairs, rails, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, drains, and water retention structures
shall be the responsibility of the City.
9. Insurance and Financial Security.
9.1 The parties agree that the City shall not be responsible to the District for any
property loss or damage done to the District's personal property occasioned by reason
of any fire, storm or other casualty whatsoever beyond the control of the City. The
District shall insure its personal property located on the premises.
9.2 The District shall not be responsible to the City for any loss or damage to the
buildings or premises that is not caused by the sole negligence of the District. The City
shall insure the premises and buildings against such loss or damage. The District shall
repair any damage to the buildings caused by its sole negligence
9.3 In the event of a casualty loss that renders the premises reasonably unsuitable
for the use set forth herein, the City shall provide the District with another suitable
location(s) for the District until such time as the premises have been repaired. The cost
25
Packet Pg. 102
6.1.a
of repairs, and the costs of relocation between the premises and the substitute
location(s), shall be borne by the City.
10. Indemnification for Environmental Claims: Each party shall indemnify and hold the other
party harmless from any and all claims, demands, judgments,
orders, or damages resulting from the release of hazardous substances on the premises
caused in whole or in part by the activity of the indemnifying party, its agents,
employees, licensees or invitees. The term "hazardous substances" shall mean any
substance heretofore of hereafter designated as hazardous under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act, 42 U.S.C.Sec. 6901 et seg.; the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act, 33 U.S.C. Sec. 1257 et seg.; the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Sec.
2001 et seq.; the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability
Act of 1980, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 9601 et. Seg.; or the Hazardous Waste Cleanup -Model
Toxic Control Act, RCW 70.105D all as amended and subject to all regulations
promulgated thereunder.
11. Indemnification and Hold Harmless: Each party agrees to protect,
save, defend, hold harmless and indemnify the other party, its officers,
employees and agents from any and all demands, claims, judgments, or
liability for loss or damage arising as a result of accidents, injuries, or other
occurrences on the premises, occasioned by either the negligent or willful
conduct of the indemnifying party, regardless of who the injured party may be.
12. Termination of Agreement. Upon termination of this Restated ILA or any extension
00
thereof, whether by expiration of the stated term or sooner termination thereon as
provided in the Restated ILA, the District shall surrender to City the premises peaceably a
and quietly.
13. Default and Remedies.
13.1 Failure of the City to perform repairs or maintenance
to the buildings or premises as described in 8 above within a reasonable
period after notice by the District shall constitute a Material Breach under the terms of
this Restated ILA. For purposes of this Restated ILA, a reasonable period shall be
construed to mean five (5) business days, for repairs and maintenance that could
feasibly be performed in such time.
13.2 Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, if the nature of the repair constitutes an
operational, safety, and/or security emergency which materially affects District use of the
premises or building for their intended purpose, the City shall perform the repair as soon
as possible regardless of the day or hour and no later than forty-eight (48) hours after
receiving notification from the District.
13.3 If the City fails to timely perform the repair or maintenance under the conditions
described above after notification, the District may have such repair or maintenance
performed at City expense. The cost of the repair or maintenance shall be forwarded to
the City, which shall pay the cost within thirty (30) days after notice. Notwithstanding
anything to the contrary, the City shall not be in breach of any repair or maintenance
W
Packet Pg. 103
6.1.a
obligation herein if the repair cannot be completed within the time set forth herein so
long as the City is diligently pursuing completion of the repairs.
27
r
r
CO
7
Packet Pg. 104
6.1.a
EXHIBIT C
CONTRACT PAYMENT
28
r
Q
Packet Pg. 105
6.1.a
EXHIBIT D
APPARATUS REPLACEMENT
29
r
Q
Packet Pg. 106
6.1.a
EXHIBIT E
Definitions Subject to Administrative Amendments Pursuant to Article 19.5
1. NEIGHBORING UNIT UTILIZATION FACTOR. Neighboring Unit Utilization Factor or NUUF
is the method used by the parties to determine how much time Units associated with one
jurisdiction are Assigned to calls in another jurisdiction. Because the District provides service
across a number of different cities and unincorporated areas, and because those various
jurisdictions make payments to the District for those services, Neighboring Unit Utilization Factor
is relevant even where a District Unit is dispatched to a call that is still within an area served by
the District but outside of the normal area served by that Unit.
NUUF is determined by converting the following fraction to a decimal rounded to the
nearest thousandths:
NUUF =
total seconds that non -Edmonds Units are Assigned to calls in Edmonds over the
previous calendar year
r
total seconds that Edmonds Units are Assigned to calls outside of Edmonds over o
the previous calendar year
Formula Explanation: In this fraction, the numerator shall equal the total number of seconds
that non -Edmonds Units are assigned to calls in Edmonds (not including Esperance, unless
Esperance is annexed) over the previous calendar year. The denominator shall equal the total
number of seconds that Edmonds Units are assigned to calls outside of Edmonds (Esperance
shall be considered "outside of Edmonds" for the purpose of this calculation unless Esperance
is annexed) over the previous calendar year.
Calculation: Neighboring Unit Utilization Factor shall be calculated separately for the City of
Lynnwood (stations 14 and 15 combined) and any non -Edmonds unit within the District, e.g.,
Station 19, for as long as Lynnwood and the District are not part of the same Regional Fire
Authority.
Determination of Whether NUUF is in Balance: Unlike the Unit Utilization Factor, the NUUF
need only be calculated on an annual basis after the completion of each calendar year. NUUF
shall be considered balanced if the NUUF falls somewhere between 0.900 and 1.100. For
example, if Lynnwood's Units are assigned to calls in Edmonds that total 1,000,000 seconds
during a calendar year, and Edmonds Units are assigned to calls in Lynnwood that total
1,095,000 seconds during a calendar year, the NUUF for that year would equal 0.913 and would
be considered in balance. If, on the other hand, the numerator were to remain the same, but the
30
Packet Pg. 107
6.1.a
Edmonds Units are assigned to calls in Lynnwood that total 880,000 seconds, the NUUF for that
year would equal 1.136 and would be considered out of balance.
Special Calculation for 2017: Since this Restated ILA takes effect after January 1, 2017, the
2017 NUUF shall be calculated proportionally for that portion of 2017 following the Effective
Date.
2. TRANSPORT BALANCE FACTOR. Transport Balance Factor (TBF) is the method used by
the parties to determine how frequently Units associated with one jurisdiction transport patients
resulting from calls in another jurisdiction. Because the District provides service across a
number of different cities and unincorporated areas, and because Edmonds is entitled to receive
transport fee revenue for all District transports resulting from calls in Edmonds regardless of
whether the transport is performed by an Edmonds Unit or a non -Edmonds Unit, Transport
Balance Factor is relevant to whether transport fees are being distributed in an equitable
manner. TBF is determined by converting the following fraction to a decimal rounded to the
nearest thousandths:
number of transports that non -Edmonds Units provide from calls in Edmonds
over 6 months 00
TBF =
number of transports that Edmonds Units provide from calls outside of Edmonds
over 6 months
Formula Explanation: In this fraction, the numerator shall equal the total number of
transports that non -Edmonds Units provide from calls in Edmonds (not including
Esperance, unless Esperance is annexed) over the previous six-month period. When an
Edmonds Unit and a non -Edmonds Unit both respond to a call in Edmonds and the non -
Edmonds Unit transports the patient, that call may not be counted in the numerator,
even if the Edmonds Unit responded with a non -transport vehicle. The denominator shall
equal the total number of transports that Edmonds Units provide from calls outside of
Edmonds (Esperance shall be considered "outside of Edmonds" for the purpose of this
calculation unless Esperance is annexed) over the previous six-month period.
Determination of Whether TBF is in Balance: TBF shall be considered "balanced" if the
TBF falls somewhere between 0.900 and 1.100. While TBF is intended to be analyzed
by looking back over the previous six months, during 2017, a special quarterly TBF shall
be calculated that looks at TBF on a quarterly basis and adjusts the calculation method
accordingly. The quarterly analysis shall be performed beginning with the second quarter
31
Packet Pg. 108
6.1.a
of 2017. The quarterly TBF is intended to give the District the ability to analyze the effect
of minor dispatch adjustments before TBF could result in a Threshold Notice being
issued.
3. UNIT UTILIZATION FACTOR
UUF =
Unit Utilization Factor or UUF is the method used by the parties to determine how busy a
particular Unit is. Unit Utilization Factor is determined by converting the following fraction
to a decimal rounded to the nearest thousandths:
number of seconds a Unit is Assigned to all calls over the previous twelve-month
period
31,536,000
Formula Explanation: In this fraction, the numerator shall equal the total number of a
seconds a Unit is Assigned to all calls over the previous twelve-month period. The U_
denominator shall always be 31,536,000 (the number of seconds in a twelve-month r
period). Because this contract initially contemplates exactly one Unit at each station, with o
each station having multiple apparatus types, the total number of seconds a Unit is a
Assigned to all calls shall be the total for all apparatus types used by that Unit. The
activity of the Battalion Chief and Medical Services Officer shall not be counted in the
numerator for any unit. For example, if, over the previous twelve-month period, Engine y
20 was Assigned to calls totaling 72,089 seconds, and Ladder 20 was Assigned to calls
totaling 229,320 seconds, and Medic 20 was Assigned to calls totaling 4,008,640
seconds, then the calculation for UUF would be made as follows: a
4,310,049
UUF = = 0.1366 (rounded to 0.137)
31,536,000
Frequency of Calculation: Unit Utilization Factor shall be calculated as soon as possible
after the end of each quarter, looking back over the previous twelve-month period.
While UUF is intended to be analyzed by looking back over the previous twelve months,
during the each of the last three quarters of 2017, a special UUF shall be calculated that
looks at UUF on a quarterly basis and adjusts the calculation method accordingly. The
quarterly analysis during 2017 is intended to keep data from the service delivery model
prior to the Effective Date from contaminating the data applicable to the Restated ILA.
32
Packet Pg. 109
6.1.b
Station Costing Model
Station Personnel (FTEs)
FTE Battalion Chiefs
FTE Captains
FTE Firefighter/Paramedics
FTE Firefighters
Firefighter/Paramedics-12 Hour
Firefighters-12 Hour
2017
Sta 16, 17, 20 All Cross Staffed\ALS
Average Wage &
Benefits per
FTE Position
2.424 186,248
13.746
161,593
18.000
147,936
9.492
133,343
147,936
133,343
Total Positions 41.238
FTE Factor 4.582
Station Staffingl 9.000
0
ADD: Administrative Overhead 10%
Maintenance & Operations 10%
Apparatus Replacement 2017
TOTAL SUPPRESSION/EMS CONTRACT COST
2017 Esperance AV 566,896,512 Esperance Est. Property Tax Revenue
ADD:
Additional Staff Paid Separately by the Contracting Agency
Fire Chief
Assistant Chief
Deputy Chief
Department Manager
Executive Assistant
Manager
Professional/Specialist
Admin Assistant
Technicians
Fire Marshal
Deputy Fire Marshal (Inspector)
Count
254,227
213,009
199,030
-
-
-
-
-
-
0.500
203,408
1.250
169,958
TOTAL ADDITIONAL COSTS
TOTAL FIRE/EMS SERVICES COST
Cost of living increases based on CPI-W, not Comps
Total Labor Costs
per Position
451,465
2,221,260
2,662,854
1,265,692
6,601,270
660,127
660,127
310,062
8,231,587
(1,117,920)
7,113,667
101,704
212,448
314,152
7,427,818
Packet Pg. 110
6.1.c
REVISED AND RESTATED INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR
FIRE AND EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES
THIS REVISED AND RESTATED INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT ("Restated ILA") by
and between SNOHOMISH COUNTY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT NO. 1, a Washington
municipal corporation (the "District") and the CITY OF EDMONDS, a Washington city (the "City")
is for the provision of fire and emergency medical services (EMS).
WHEREAS, a consolidated Fire and EMS service, by a single vendor or through a
Regional Fire Protection Service Authority (RFA), has recently gained support of most elected
officials in Southwest Snohomish County; and
WHEREAS, the City and District agree that a long-term agreement between the City and
the District for fire and emergency medical services is beneficial to the City and District and their
stakeholders; and
WHEREAS, on November 3, 2009, the City and District entered into an Interlocal
Agreement (the "Agreement") for the District to provide fire and emergency medical services to
the City beginning January 1, 2010;
WHEREAS, such Agreement was amended pursuant to a First Amendment dated April
17, 2012 to address a fire boat ; and 00
7
WHEREAS, such Agreement was amended pursuant to a Second Amendment
,approved on January 27, 2015; and
WHEREAS, the District and the City are authorized, pursuant to Chapter 39.34 of the
Revised Code of Washington, to enter into Interlocal Agreements which allow the District and
the City to cooperate with each other to provide high quality services to the public in the most
efficient manner possible; and
WHEREAS, the parties have analyzed the performance of the Agreement during the
period of 2010 — 2016 (the "Introductory Period") and have determined that is in their mutual
interests and the interests of their respective stakeholders to revise and update the Agreement;
and
WHEREAS, the District and City now wish to revise and restate the Agreement as
provided herein
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants contained
herein, the City and District hereto agree as follows:
0. Detin'tme s
0. DEFINITIONS.
The following definitions shall apply throughout this AgreemeRtRestated ILA.
Packet Pg. 111
6.1.c
a. Adjustment Year: The year in which a new collective bafa
fc agreement
(CBA) is effective between the District and the local chapter of the IAFF._ When a new
CBA has retroactive effect, the Adjustment Year shall be the date to which the CBA is
retroactively applied. For example, if a CBA expires on December 31, 2014 and a new
CBA is executed on December 1, 2016 but made retroactive to January 1, 2015, the
Adjustment Year would be 2015.
b. Assigned: As used in the definitions of Unit Utilization Factor and Neighboring Unit
Utilization Factor, the term "Assigned" shall describe the period of time in seconds from
dispatch time to clear time, when the Unit becomes available to respond to another call
c. City: City of Edmonds.
d. City Fire Stations: Fire Station 16, Fire Station 17, and Fire Station 20.
e. Commencement Date: The date at which the nerfermonre and ebligatiens of the City
aR d District as rnnteined heroin heninJanuary 1, 2010.
Contract Payment: The annual amount that the City w+14shall pay to the diStriGtDistrict
pursuant to this AgreementRestated ILA.
g. District-: Snohomish County Fire Protection District No. 1.
h. Edmonds Unit: An Edmonds Unit is any Unit based at one of the City Fire Stations with
the exception of the Battalion Chief.
Effective Date: The date this Restated II A is evert ited by the City aR d Distrir+February
1, 2017.
j. Esperance: "Esperance" refers to the entirety of the contiguous unincorporated area
that is completely surrounded by the City of Edmonds and commonly known as
Esperance.
k. Esperance Offset: The amount of tax revenue and/sr fire benefit charges, if fire benefit
charges are imposed in the future, to be received by the District from Esperance area for
the year in which the Contract Payment is calculatedl.J[c-Roil The Esperance Offset shall
not drop below $1,117,92-0 E150 (the amount derived by multiplying the 2017 Esperance
2
T
oo
r
Packet Pg. 112
6.1.c
AVAssessed Value of $566,Q96,512 tnmes565,469,115 by the District's 2017 tax rate of
$1.9797561714741 divided by 1,000) even if the actual tax revenue received by the
District drops below that amount as a result of reductions in assessed valuation or tax
rate. -The Esperance Offset for any given year shall not exceed the PFGdUGt Of
$1,117,920150, multiplied by the compounded percentage increase in City Station
Labe Personnel Costs from 2017 to the year for which the Esperance Offset is being
calculated. For example, if City Station Labe Personnel Cost increases 3% from 2017 to
2018 and 4% from 2018 to 2019, the 2019 cap for the Esperance Offset would be
$1,197,516 and be calculated as follows:
$1,117,9-2-0150 x 1.03 = $1,151,458150,664 x 1.04 = $1, 6196,691
District Fire Chief: The Fire Chief of Snohomish County Fire Protection District No. 1
m. Firefighters: Full-time, compensated employees, captains, firefighters, emergency
medical technicians, and/or paramedics.
n. Insurance: The term "insurance" as used in this °^"ntRestated ILA means either
valid insurance offered and sold by a commercial insurance company or carrier
T
approved to do business in the State of Washington by the Washington State Insurance
N
Commissioner or valid self-insurance through a self-insurance pooling organization
N
approved for operation in the State of Washington by the Washington State Risk
Manager or any combination of valid commercial insurance and self-insurance pooling if
N
both are approved for sale and/or operation in the State of Washington. y
o. Law: The term "law" refers to state and federal statutes and regulations. Unless
expressly identified herein, City ordinances, codes and resolutions shall not be
considered "law."
p. Material Breach: A Material Breach means the District's failure to provide minimum
staffing levels as described within this AgreementRestated ILA, the City's failure to
timely pay the Contract Payment as described within this °^r;tRestated ILA, or the
City's or District's failure to comply with other material terms of this ^^rntRestated
I LA.
3
Packet Pg. 113
6.1.c
q. Neighboring Unit Utilization Factor: See Exhibit E.
r. Negotiation Threshold. A designated occurrence or condition that requires the parties
to renegotiate the Restated ILA.
Non -Edmonds Unit: A Non -Edmonds Unit is any Unit stationed at any station other
than the City Fire Stations.
r
N
O
N
CD
T
N
r
N
C
M
a)
M
C
N
L
a
J
C
N
E
z
0
M
Q
Packet Pg. 114
6.1.c
r
c
of the n rater and the rinnnminn+nr in +he TRC frnn+inn 4%
surn E
d
L
a
0
L
regardless of whether the traRsper-t is performed by an Edmonds Unit or a RE)n EdFnE)
d
•+
r
L
A
0
L_
denimal rnU Rded to the nearest theusanniths r
' � T
oo
the W-tal -u--b--.- of transports that non Units provide ROM r
N
O
N
T
T
N
r
to
C
0)
0
ia.J TRC shall he G/�o�nsidered halan((��e�dr-,1 if the TBC falls somewhere between 0
pGTTpCr-T�JTIU'T1T.]��iplTJiQGT �JFiF1TGGT�T�TT� l�fl� GTVYGtiTr�J�V
Rth
mar ?spneGial T�hal�eGaTGUted that leeks at TRC en a quarterly basis andadjusts the GalGUlatieR methed aGGerdingly. The quarterly aRalysis shall be performed
L
a
after the first quarter of 2017 and to keep data frem the 2016 seFViGe delive-ry
J
C
N
model from nGntaminating the 2017 data E
V
R
r
r
a
TRC -
t. Transport Balance Factor: See Exhibit E.
Packet Pg. 115
6.1.c
u. Unit: A Unit is a group of Firefighters that work together and are based at the same
station. Where a station is staffed by three firefighters at any one time, that station shall
be considered a Unit. Where a station is staffed by five or more firefighters at any one
time, without counting the Battalion Chief or Medical Services Officer, that station shall
be deemed to have two Units and the District shall clearly allocate the Firefighters at that
station in such a manner that the two Units at that station can be clearly distinguished for
the purposes of determining the Unit Utilization Factor for each Unit.
v. Unit Utilization Factor: See Exhibit E.
w. Wind -Up Period: The twelve (12) menths immediately following formal Retifinotien of
Except in the context of Material Breach by either party eXGept as defined in Section
10.2-, the two years immediately following notice of termination under 11.2.
0
Packet Pg. 116
6.1.c
1. SCOPE OF SERVICES
1.1 Services Provided. The District shall provide all services necessary for fire suppression,
emergency medical service, hazardous materials response, technical rescue, and
disaster response (not including an Emergency Operations Center, which is provided by
the City at the time of this AgreemeRtRestated ILA) to a service area covering the
corporate limits of the City of Edmonds. In addition, the District shall provide support
services including, but not limited to, fire marshal, fire prevention and life safety, public
education, public information, and fleet maintenance, payroll and finances, human
resources, and legal and risk management pertaining to the operations and delivery of
the District's services.
1.2 Training, Education, and Career Development. The District w+44shall provide training and
education to all firefighter and emergency medical service personnel in accordance with
State, County and local requirements. Furthermore, the District w+14shall offer
professional development and educational and training opportunities for unrepresented
and civilian employees.
1.3 City Fire Chief. The DieDistrict Fire Chief shall be designated as the City Fire Chief 00
for purposes of statutory provisions, regulations and the Edmonds City Code.
1.4 District Fire Chief Designates Fire Marshal. The District Fire Chief shall designate an
individual to serve as City Fire Marshal, and shall assign necessary personnel to support
the functions and needs of the Fire Marshal as mutually agreed to and partially funded
by the City (See Exhibit A), subject to the City's right to provide its own fire inspectors
pursuant to Section 2.8.42, below.
2. STANDARDS FOR SERVICES/STAFFING
2.1 Battalion Chief. A Battalion Chief shall continue to be available for response within the
City twenty-four (24) hours per day, seven (7) days per week as during the Introductory
Period. The District agrees to provide Incident Command response for all emergency
incidents twenty-four (24) hours per day, seven (7) days per week.
2.2 Fire Station Staffing. The City Fire Stations shall each be staffed twenty-four (24) hours
per day, seven (7) days per week with a minimum of one (1) fire captain and two (2)
firefighters, at least one of whom shall be a firefighter/paramedic. Any increase in
staffing above this level shall not increase the Contract Payment unless the increase
occurs through an amendment of this "^r;tRestated ILA.
2.2.1 The parties shall negotiate an arnendrnent4orenegotiate this
AgreernentRestated ILA upon the occurrence of any of the following Negotiation
Thresholds:
7
Packet Pg. 117
6.1.c
2 2 1 1-a_When the Unit Utilization Factor ("UUF") at any one of the City Fire
Stations exceeds 0.250;
22 1 �?b. When the Neighboring Unit Utilization Factor ("NUUF") is out of balance
as defined in this AgreeMeRtRestated ILA, PROVIDED THAT this subsection shall not
trigger a renegotiation any earlier than January 1, 2018.
2.2.1.3c. When the Transport Balance Factor (TBF) is out of balance as defined
in this ^^Y;tRestated ILA, PROVIDED THAT this subsection shall not trigger a
renegotiation earlier than delyJanuary 1, 2017. I#2018.
d. When the TRC is out of halanneEsperance Offset drops by ten percent
(10%) or more over any sox tnconsecutive three (3) year period, the Out of BaIaRGe
menths of transport data has been GGI!eGted. At the eRd of twenty four (24) menths, if
the TBF is balaRGed, the entirety of the retaiRed tFanspert fees shall be paid to the City
nth total of the Out ef BalanGe Transport Fees shall be FetaiRed by and/er paid te the
2.2.2 The District shall ee#yprovide written notice to the City ("Threshold Notice")
whenever any of the foregoing Negotiation Thresholds results ("Threshold oo
NetiEe'occurs. Within thirty (30) days of issuance of thea Threshold Notice, the parties
N
shall meet to negotiate an amenrdmen++„renegotiate this g, ,tRestated ILA. Such e
N
negotiations shall include, at least the following topics: r
(i) Methodologies intended to reduce the UUF substantially below 0.250 or
to balance the NUUF or TBF, as applicable. SUGh methodologies
(collectively "Remedial Measures"). Remedial Measures may include, fef
examplebut shall not be limited to, changes to the staffing mix and/or
levels, adding another Unit, changing fire response plans in CAD, and/or
implementing other service changes; and
(ii) Adjusting the Contract P-FisePayment to account for the District's
increased cost of anY me+hedelegies to he empleyed that would
0RGFeasein employing the DiietFiGt'S GO selected Remedial Measures.
iii The GiipWhere the Threshold Notice pertains to subsection 2.2.1(d),
topics of negotiation shall have the right in GE)R6 Ita+iop With the Dic+rip+
to tinclude increasing the amount of the snegifin me+hedeleg„
Esperance Offset and/or methodologies tee bbc employed; seIeg+ien of
methedele hall Rot he subject +e the Dispute Reselutien pronedures
but the es} GtS Of SUGJe!eGt'OR shall he s, ,hieo+ +e the Dispute
ReselUtiGR Qcedure? The parties shall endeavor to eXeG to an
amendment no later +hanreducina staff and/or reducina overhead charaes
that are billed to the
E:3
Packet Pg. 118
6.1.c
2.2.3 The District shall identifv various Remedial Measures that are likelv to
expeditiously achieve the applicable goals in Section 2.2.2(i). The City may opt to
identify and notify the District about alternative Remedial Measures. After consulting with
the District, the City shall select one or more of the Remedial Measures and shall
provide written notice of same within one hundred twenty (120) days following the
issuance of the Threshold Notice (the "Negotiation Deadline"). if the parties rannn+
agree UPOR aR almeandment to this AgreemeRt before the Negotiation Deadli.
party may invoke the Dispute Resnl„tinn prone`+„roc in Ser+inn The City's selection shall
be subject to mediation under paragraph 18.1 only; provided hE)weyer +hat if the District
finds the City's selection to be ineffective or inappropriate, but it shall not be subject to
arbitration under paragraph 18.2. Any disputes regarding the cost impacts of the City's
selection shall be subject to the complete Dispute Resolution procedures, and any
adjustment to the Contract PAc-ePayment arising out of the Dispute Resolution
Procedures shall be retroactive to the earlier of the Negotiation Deadline or the date that
additiGRal the Remedial Measures were initially employed. If either
par4ythe City fails to nar+i^ina+e in,designate one or Gemply with,more Remedial
Measures by the Dispute Resel„+inn Drnredures OR Ser+inn IQ.�,Negotiation Deadline,
such failure shall be deemed a Material Breach.
2.2.4 The parties shall endeavor to execute an amendment prior to the ethe--F tiation a
ii
Deadline. If the parties cannot agree upon an amendment to this Restated ILA before
the Negotiation Deadline, either party recer„es the right +n may terminate the
oo
ogr ;tRestated ILA pursuant to SeGtien 11.2, in `",high race the party that refused to
N
O
netwi+hstanding Ser+ien 11.3. PROVIDED THAT during the ensuing two-year Wind -Up cm
Period, the District shall be authorized to increase service levels at the City Fire Stations o
as it deems necessary, and FURTHER PROVIDED THAT the marginal increase in the
Contract Payment resulting from any such District -imposed service level increases
M
during the Wind -Up Period shall be shared equally by the parties during the Wind -Up l)
M
Period. 71
2.3 GenseGUtnye Shifts Prohibited on EdMORds. The DiStFiGt shall net allow FirefighteFs 2.3
Shift Arrangements. The City prefers that the following shift arrangements apply
to personnel assigned to stations within the City: no Firefighter shall start a 24-hour shift
at any of the City Fire Stations if that Firefighter has just completed a 48-hour shift at a
City Fire Station or any other fire station in the District without having taken a rest day
between shifts. While the City believes that Firefighters rannot perform at the high level
itS Gitizens expeGt of they are working 72 GenseGUtive heurs, this seGtOOR is net intend
te prehibit the DiStriGt frem alleWiRg Firefighters te extend their shifts when ReGessary to
GGRtinue working an engeing inGident that began before the shift was GOMpleted. This
The
District commits that it will undertake in good faith, pursuant to Chapter 41.56 RCW, to
negotiate successfully for those arrangements, to be implemented.
9
Packet Pg. 119
6.1.c
2.4 Review of Service Delivery Objectives. The parties acknowledge that the service
delivery objectives adopted in 2006 ("Response Objectives") have never been met in
their entirety, even when the City had its own fire department. During the Introductory
Period, the parties contracted for a particular staffing level at the City Fire Stations. It has
been recommended that the parties move toward a performance -based contract where
the City pays for a particular level of service that is measured by service delivery
objectives (e.g. response time) instead of a particular number of positions. The parties
would like to continue to evaluate this recommendation, but acknowledge that it would
take significant additional work to implement such a change, not the least of which
includes adoption of achievable performance standards. The City and the District agree
to work toward adoption of a revised set of service delivery objectives in the first quarter
of 2018.
2.4.1 Turnout Time. The District has adopted a standard of 2 minutes and 15
seconds on 90% of all calls. Failure to meet this standard shall not be deemed a Material
Breach. If this standard is not being met +4[ in calendar year 2017 for the City Fire
Stations, the District shall provide the City, no later than December 31, 2017, with a
report containing the following information: (i) a list of possible measures that could be
implemented to improve Turnout Time, (ii) the estimated cost of each measure;L
reasonably available) and (iii) estimates concerning the amount efthat turnout time4hat
could be reduced with each measure.
2.5 Reporting. The District agrees to annually report to the City in accordance with chapter
00
r
35.103 RCW. In additiGRaiaddition to the regular quarterly report content and the content
N
required by law, the annual report shall contain the Neighboring Unit Utilization Factor
CN
for each of the following jurisdictions: Lynnwood, MG Rtlake Terran�aRrdd S ;ereline. The
(fl
r
O
N
Sherellno N II F in light f ShereliRe'�TereRtdispatrh syste and Mountlake Terrace.
The annual report shall contain the total number of seconds that City Fire Stations
responded to calls in Woodway. and the total number of automatic aid responses from
Shoreline into Edmonds. The annual report shall, to the extent practicable, also state the
c
amount of transport fees that the District sought to recover from incidents occurring
within the City and Esperance, respectively, and the amount of those fees that were
L
a
actually recovered. If the District has data that identifies the number of seconds during
J
which two or more Units were Assigned to different calls at the same time, it shall
include that data in the annual report. E
C_
2.5.1 Quarterly Reporting. In addition, the District shall provide a quarterly report to the
Gi+GIe_rkCity Clerk, no later than 30 days after the end of each quarter. The quarterly
report shall contain the Unit Utilization Factor for each of the City Fire Stations, the
Transport Balance Factor, as well as the turnout time, travel time, and overall response
time.
2.6 [section relocated for clarity]
10
Packet Pg. 120
6.1.c
2.7 Criteria -Based 9-1-1 Dispatch. It is understood and agreed by the City and District that
the dispatch of Units during emergencies is determined by criteria -based dispatch
protocols of the dispatch centers and Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL). Nothing herein
shall require the District to respond first within the City as opposed to other areas served
by the District. The City and District recognize that responses to emergencies shall be
determined by the District based upon dispatch protocols, the location of available Units
and the District's operational judgment, without regard to where the emergencies occur.
2.8 Level of Service Changes. During the term of this "^r;tRestated ILA, service level
changes may be mandated that are beyond the control of either party. Additionally,
either party may desire to change the service level, including but not limited to, those
services identified in Section 1 Scope of Services and Section 2 Standards for
Services/Staffing. When a service level change is mandated by law, adopted by the
Edmonds City Council as part of the City's chapter 35.103 RCW Response Objectives
URG18r nhapter 35.103 Rr`\A/ or is mutually agreed to by the parties, the City and the
District wiltshall renegotiate the Contract Payment at the request of either party. The
Gity aGkRo a ledges that the QiGtrini may be Fequired by Iavdf the parties are unable to
eatifyreach agreement within one hundred twenty (120) days after the change is
mandated or mutuallv aareed. the matter shall be subject to the complete Dispute
Resolution procedures, and bargain with the OGal Gh pteTany adjustment to the i
ii
Contract Payment arising out of the 1°FF any SUGh ^haRges.Dispute Resolution
Procedures shall be retroactive to the date that the service level change was initially
oo
employed. Failure of either party to participate in, or comply with, the Dispute Resolution
Procedures in Section 18.1 and/or 18.2 shall be deemed a Material Breach. c
2.842.8.1 The City acknowledges that the District may be required by law to
notify and bargain with the local chapter of the IAFF any level of service changes made
pursuant to this section 2.8.
2.8.2 The City reserves the right to remove the Fire Inspector services from this
AgreementRestated ILA upon one year's written notice to the District, in which case the
Contract Payment shall be equitably reduced a^^ l , PROVIDED THAT in no case
shall such notice be provided less than 90 days prior to the beginning of a new fiscal
year, AND FURTHER PROVIDED THAT the City shall consult with the District regarding
the impacts of.a proposed removal of the Fire Inspector services at least 90 days in
advance of the City providing such notice.. , AND FURTHER PROVIDED THAT if the
Citv exercises this option. it shall provide fire inspection services usina one or more
inspectors with current or previous firefighting experience.
2.9 Response Time Questions. In the event that response times should consistently deviate
from the City's Response Objectives, as they may be amended from time to time by the
City, the District Fire Chief and the City Mayor, or their designees, shall meet and confer
to address the cause, potential remedies, and potential cost impacts.
3. USE OF CITY FIRE STATIONS
11
Packet Pg. 121
6.1.c
3.1 Use of City Fire Stations. The City shall retain ownership of three existing City Fire
Stations and shall make them available for use by the District pursuant to the terms set
forth in Exhibit B. The parties acknowledge that none of these three fire stations are
ideally located and that the City could be better --served by two ideally -_located fire
stations. The parties also acknowledge that the internal configuration of the City's three
stations contributes to slower turnout times than could be achieved with new stations
built according to current standards. In light of the above, the parties contemplate that
the City may opt to replace the three current fire stations with two new fire stations for
use by the District during the term of this "^F;tRestated ILA. In the event of a
conflict between the provisions of the AgreerneRtRestated ILA and Exhibit B, the
provisions of Exhibit B shall control with respect to fire stations and fixtures contained
therein, PROVIDED THAT Exhibit B shall be amended in the event that the City moves
to a two -station service, and FURTHER PROVIDED THAT nothing in Exhibit B shall be
construed to prevent the City from moving to a two -station service; and FURTHER
PROVIDED, that the cost of providing turn key fire stations with equivalent technology to
current fire stations shall be borne entirely by the City.
3.1.1 In the event the City decides to replace or relocate any of the City Fire Stations, y
the City shall provide notice to the District concerning the location, design and layout of c
the new City Fire Stations, the time frame for completion, and any other information i
U.
reasonably requested by the District to plan for the transition. Not later than thirty (30)
days following such notice, the parties shall meet to discuss the impact of any such
changes on this Restated ILA and to negotiate an amendment to this Restated ILA to
address such impacts. The parties recognize that there may be initial cost impacts that c
are not ongoing, and the parties agree to negotiate these as well. The parties shall `V
T
endeavor to execute an amendment no later than one hundred twenty (120) days o
following such notice to address such initial cost impacts. If the parties cannot agree
upon an amendment to this Restated ILA within such time, either party may invoke the
Dispute Resolution procedures.►
3.2-3.3 [Completed. Deleted for clarity]'
4. ANNUAL CONTRACT AND TRANSPORT FEES PAYMENT TERMS
4.1 Annual Contract Payment. The City shall annually pay the District a sum referred to as
the Contract Payment for the services provided herein. The annual total amount of the
Contract Payment shall be determined according to Exhibit C. The Contract Payment
shall be paid in equal monthly installments bytheby the 10t" day of each month. Failure
to pay monthly installments in a timely manner shall be considered a material
breaehMaterial Breach as defined in the Definitions section of this AgreementRestated
I LA.
'The Parties acknowledge that a number of actions described in the Agreement have been completed.
For clarity and conciseness, those provisions are removed and replaced with the words "Completed.
Deleted for clarity."
12
Packet Pg. 122
6.1.c
4.1.1 If a service level change requiring an adjustment in the Contract Payment occurs
on a date other than January 1, the Contract Payment shall be adjusted on the effective
date of the service level change, and the monthly installment payments shall be adjusted
accordingly.
4.2 Contract Payment Adjustment. Each year, no later than September 1, the District shall
submit to the City an invoice for the ensuing year, including any revision to the Contract
Payment for the ensuing year.
4.2.1 Annual Percent Increase Based on Labor Costs. The cost of City Station
Personnel identified in Exhibit C shall be adjusted annually pursuant to the negotiated
labor collective bargaining agreement between the District and the local chapter of the
IAFFLOGal ("CBA"); provided that, notwithstanding the actual terms of the CBA, the City
Station Personnel cost in Exhibit C shall increase from one labor agreement to the next
no more than the greater of (i) the median increase in the total cost of compensation
(lei.e., combined cost of wages and benefits) of comparable fire agencies, (ii) the
increase in the Consumer Price Index as measured by the CPI-W Seattle -Tacoma -
Bremerton metropolitan area for the twelve (12) month period ending June 30, or (iii) the
percentage increase in compensation awarded by an interest arbitrator. The phrase
"comparable fire agencies" shall refer to a list of comparables agreed upon by the
Employer and Union through the collective bargaining process or the comparables
accepted by an interest arbitrator in an interest arbitration proceeding.
00
r
4.2.1.1 The parties recognize that the cost of the District's community paramedic N
program is currently covered by grants. At the time the grants expire, the City ea-n N
Eheesemay opt to continue the community paramedic program in which case Exhibit C
shall be revised to add an equitable share of the cost of such community paramedics,
taking into account the other jurisdictions that have enter} to GORtinu a ,.,i+hare served by
the pregr community paramedics. If the City dg^crc�imevo tp s not to continue with the
program, the community paramedic program will not be continued within the City limits
after the grant term ends. The DiotriGt shall nreyide Retire of the expiring grant Re later
than 120 nays prier to the expiratinr, of funding.
4.2.2 Adjustment Date Not Met. If the labor agFeeMe ,ta new CBA between the
District and IAFF Local 1828 has not been finalized by September 1 of the final year of
the then -effective CBA, the n C Station Personnel costs and the DistriGt Indirect
Operating Costs for the ensuing year wiRshall be adjusted following execution of the new
CBA and wi#shall be retroactive to January 1 of the Adjustment Year. For example, as
of the date of this Restated ILA. the last CBA expired on December 31. 2014: thus. the
Adjustment Year is 2015. In such instances, the District shall send the City (directed to
the City Clerk), no later than September 1 of each year for which a CBA has not yet
been executed for the ensuring year, a range within which the Contract Payment for the
ensuing year is likely to fall, which range shall be informed by the current status of
negotiations between the District and IAFF Local 1828. To once thetenhance the
Dictrirt is aDistrict's ability to provide the City at'�- 4ea&t-with a Feliablepredictable range
13
Packet Pg. 123
6.1.c
for the Contract Payment, the District shall, to the extent practicable, commence
negotiations with IAFF Local 1828 no later than the July 1st of any year in which t4ea
CBA is expiring. If ^e�:ete.a new CBA has not been executed by November 1 st of the
year in which t4ea CBA is expiring, the District shall notify the City of the economic
issues on which the parties have not reached tentative agreement.
4.2.3 Documentation of Labor Costs. OR an ann„al hasisUpon executing a new
CBA, the District shall provide supporting documentation sufficient to allow the City to
confirm that the labor costs have not increased more than the limits set forth in Section
4.2.1Ithese years where a R W GBA is fiRalized S Gh dGG imeRtatien shall inrli de
including comparable agency compensation data used by the parties or the interest
arbitrator to establish new compensation levels.
4.3 -4.4 [sections relocated and renumbered for clarity]
4.5 Indirect Operating Cost Portion of Contract Payment. The District shall determine the
Indirect Operating Cost portion of the Contract Payment according to the following:
• Overhead shall be ten percent (10%) of the cost of the City Station Personnel cost;
• Equipment maintenance and operation, medications, and supplies, ,"� shall be
ten percent (10%) of the City Station Personnel cost;
• Fire Marshal allocation of fifty percent (50%) of wage and benefit cost of the position,
and Fire Inspector at one--hundred-twenty-five percent (125%) of wage and benefit o
r
cost of the position (See Exhibit A); and `"
fV
• Apparatus replacement costs based upon the District Apparatus Replacement
Schedule —Rolling Stock designated as Exhibit D.
The total of the City Station Personnel cost and the Indirect GeetsOperating Costs, plus
any additional amounts due to annexations as provided in Section 4.6, less the
"Esperance Offset", shall constitute the Contract Payment for the ensuing year.
4.6 Annexation. The City's Urban Growth Area contains property within the boundaries of
the District. Should the City seek to annex portions of the District, the District will not
oppose the annexation. In the event the City annexes portions of the District other than
Esperance, the Contract Payment shall be increased an�""�all hbeby an amount
calculated by applying the then current District levy rate and emergency medical
services levy rate to the assessed value of the annexed prepertyarea, plus revenue from
a Fire Benefit Charge, if aRyimposed, that the District would have received from the
annexed area prier to annexation. The increased amen,nt shall he added to in the year
in which the Contract Payment as a base f„r naln,,la+ions in future years.is calculated.
The increase in the Contract Payment shall occur on the first month on which the District
is no longer entitled to collect non -delinquent tax revenue from the annexed area
pursuant to RCW 35.13.270(2).
4.6.1 Notwithstanding the feregoinn ifEsperance Annexation. If the City
annexes all of the area commonly referred to as "Esperance", the District will support the
14
Packet Pg. 124
6.1.c
annexation. T-ieWhenever any portion of Esperance is annexed, the Esperance Offset
attributable to the annexed area shall ^tee no longer be used to reduce the calculation
of the Contract Payment at such time as the District is no longer entitled to recollect
non -delinquent tax revenue from the annexed area, ` Rd the Gnntrant Payment shall he
adjusted effer+iye on that data. pursuant to RCW 35.13.270(2).
4.7 Significant Change in Cost of Providing Services. In the event that there is a material
and significant increase or decrease in the costs of providing services under this
Agreement as a result efRestated ILA because the District was required to comply with a
legislative or regulatory decision that is exempt from the dispute resolution provisions of
centi^no 18.1 and 18.2bv an entity other than the City, then at the request of either
party, the City and District shall seek to renegotiate this "^r;tRestated ILA and the
Contract Payment to fully compensate the District for actual costs incurred according to
the methodology in Exhibit C. In the e„en+ thatAn example of a significant increase in
cost would be if the state required that fire engines be staffed with four firefighters per
engine instead of three. If the City and District are unable to successfully renegotiate the
Contract Payment in this "^r;tcontext through good faith negotiations, then e*
coati^^ 18. of the complete Dispute Resolution provision of this AgreementRestated
ILA shall apply. Failure of either party to participate in, or comply with, the Dispute
Resolution Procedures in Section 18.1 and/or 18.2 shall be deemed a Material Breach.
Nothing herein prevents either party from terminating the °^r;tRestated ILA
pursuant to Section 11.2 ,f the nnr+ies are ,,nahle +e o,,nneoofi illy renege+into Whether
before or after exercise of the Dispute Resolution provisions of this Agreement. Restated
I LA. c
4.8 EMS Transport Fees. The District
presently ^harge shall charge fees for the basic life support and advanced life support
transports for ipr--idepts OGG61FFORg Within the (omity. The D1StFiGt atse chaff? SUGh fees
i nnidents nnn, erring within the Dictri Gt , innli Jinn the Esperance area.that it performs. As
the EMS service provider for the City, the District shall receive and pursue collection of
all Transport Fees in accordance with District policy for transports that originate within
the City limits. The District shall remit the amount so received to the City, less an
administration fee not to exceed the actual cost of collection on a quarterly basis. The
District shall be responsible for, and agrees to prepare and provide in a timely fashion,
right te establish the amount ef the traRSPOFt fee that is Gharged within the City and the
its nellentien effertsreaSonable documentation and/or reports to the City.
4.9 Creating Unfunded Mandates. The City shall not create any unfunded mandates for
increased service or reporting by the District without fully compensating the District for
actual costs incurred.
5. CITY EMPLOYEES
15
Packet Pg. 125
6.1.c
5.1-5.8 [Completed. Deleted for clarity].
5.9 Former City Employees. The City shall indemnify, defend, and hold the District harmless
from any and all demands, claims, or actions by former City personnel, which arise out of, or
relate to, the time prior to the date that SUGh Gity peFSORRel beGame employees of the
DiGtFiGtCOrnmencement Date, provided, however, that the indemnification shall not apply to any
claims arising as a result of the District's actions under the Ir,+oTAgreement or the Restated
I LA.
6. ROLLING STOCK (APPARATUS AND VEHICLES)
E
6.1 — 6.5 [Completed. Deleted for clarity]. m
L
6.6 District Apparatus Replacement Schedule. The District has provided current information
regarding existing and proposed Apparatus Replacement Schedule attached in Exhibit o
D. The District, in its sole discretion, may elect to purchase new rolling stock or
otherwise assign District rolling stock for use within the City. E
U
6.7 Public Safety Boat. Title to the City Public Safety Boat known as Marine 16 (the
"Vessel") has been transferred to the District. The District's use of Marine 16 for training o
and emergencies as a county -wide asset is described in the First Amendment to ;v
Interlocal Agreement for Use of Rescue and Fire Boat. Exhibit H to the Agreement is ``
hereby deleted.
00
r
6.7.1 [Completed. Deleted for clarity] N
6.7.2 The District assumes responsibility for maintenance and repairs to the Vessel.
However, upon the District's request, the City agrees to provide maintenance and repair
services for the Vessel in exchange for receipt from the District of the City's normal
hourly shop rates for labor.
6.7.3 The Apparatus Replacement Schedule (Exhibit D to the Ir+erAgreement and
the Restated ILA) is amended to include �he Vessel —ten t-,0utboard Motors.. of
the Vessel for as long as the Vessel is in operation. The amended Apparatus
Replacement Schedule is attached hereto. The Contract Payment for 2012 and
mthereafter shall reflect the addition of the Vessel Outboard Motors to this schedule.
6.7.4 [Completed. Deleted for clarity]
6.7.5 Use of the vessel by the City of Edmonds Police Department shall continue as
agreed to before this arnendrnent.Restated ILA. The City is solely responsible for
maintaining and certifying thelFltS operators.
6.7.5.1 The City's use of the Vessel is at the City's risk. The City acknowledges
that the District is making no representations or warranties concerning the Vessel.
Further, if the City uses the Vessel without a District operator, the City agrees to be
solely responsible [JT31for all damage or loss to the Vessel and its apparatus while the
Vessel is within the City's control and/or possession.
W9
Packet Pg. 126
6.1.c
6.7.5.2 The City agrees to release the District from any claims associated with
any -training provided to it. The City further agrees to defend, indemnify and hold the
District harmless from any and all claims for bodily injury or property damage arising out
of 4sthe City's use and operation of the Vessel.
6.7.5.3 The City specifically and expressly waives any immunity that may be
granted under the Washington State Industrial Insurance Act, Chapter 51 RCW as to
any claims by its employees arising from the use of the Vessel.
7. EQUIPMENT
7.1 — 7.4 [Completed. Deleted for clarity]
8. OVERSIGHT AND REPORTING
8.1 Agreement Administrators. The District Fire Chief and the City Mayor and/or their
designees, shall act as administrators of this "^F;tRestated ILA for purposes of
RCW 39.34.030. During the term of this AgreerneRt.Restated ILA, the District Fire Chief
shall provide the Mayor with quarterly written reports concerning the provision of
services under this "^F;1Restated ILA. The format and topics of the reports shall o
be as set forth in Section 2.5. The District Fire Chief -shall present 'man annual ;v
report 9R2gyering the previous calendar year to the Edmonds City Council prior to March
1, and at such meeting the Chief shall request, and the City Council shall schedule, the
00
Joint Annual meeting provided for in section 8.2.
8.1.1 The parties agree to meet on a quarterly basis to address the performance of the
AgreernentRestated ILA. It is expected that these quarterly meetings will be attended by
at least one City Council member, the Mayor, the City Attorney, the Finance Director, the
District Fire Chief and at least one Commissioner from the District.
8.2 Joint Annual Meeting. In addition to the meeting(s) referred to in Section 8.1 above, the
Edmonds City Council and Board of Fire District #1 Commissioners shall have a joint
annual meeting after, but within 30 days, of the annual report at a properly noticed place
and time to discuss items of mutual interest related to this "^r;tRestated ILA.
8.3 Representation on Intergovernmental Boards. The District shall represent the City on
intergovernmental boards or on matters involving the provision of services under this
AgreernentRestated ILA as reasonably requested by the Mayor. The City reserves the
right to represent itself in any matter in which the interests of the City and the District are
not ealaligned or whenever any matter relates to the appropriation of or expenditure
of City funds beyond the terms of this "^F;tRestated ILA.
9. EXISTING AGREEMENTS
9.1 DEM, SNOCOM and SERS. The City currently has contractual relationships with other
entities or agencies including the Department of Emergency Management (DEM) (or
successor), Snohomish County Communications Center (SNOCOM) (or successor), and
17
Packet Pg. 127
6.1.c
Snohomish County Emergency Radio System Agency (SERS) (or successor). The City
shall maintain its representation and financial obligations with those entities or agencies
and will act to represent itself and retain authority to negotiate on its behalf. At the
discretion of the City, the District may provide representation on behalf of the City on
various committees, boards, and/or commissions as requested, as appropriate, and/or
as agreed to by mutual agreement of the parties. The parties w+4shall meet to address
any changes to the foregoing entities that result in a change to the City's representation
or financial obligations.
9.2 Mutual and Automatic Aid. The District shall assume any of the City's remaining
contractual responsibility and obligations for the provision of mutual and automatic aid
9.3 Full Information as Basis for Relationship. The City and District agree to coordinate their
individual relationships with other entities and agencies so that the services under this
°^";tRestated ILA will be provided in an efficient and cost effective manner. The
City and District agree to keep each other fully informed and advised as to any changes
in their respective relationships with those entities or agencies, whether or not those
changes impact the City and/or the District obligations shall be provided to the other
party in writing in a timely manner that allows a reasonable opportunity to discuss
proposed changes in relationships or obligations.
10. TERM OF AGREEMENT
00
r
10.1 20-Year Agreement. The etteGtye d Effective Date of this Restated ILA shall be
N
JapuarFebruary 1, 2017. The Commencement Date of the Agreement was January N
1, 2010. This Agreer en+Restated ILA shall continue in effect
r
twenty (20) years frem the GernmenGernen Date, until December 31, 2030, N
unless terminated earlier as provided in section 11. After the initial on�C�) year
to December 31, 2030, this Agree nen+Restated ILA shall automatically renew
under the same terms and conditions for successive, rolling five (5) year periods unless
terminated as provided in section 11.
10.2 Material Breach and Wind-UD Period. In the event of a Material Breach of this
AgreernentRestated ILA, the City and District shall, unless the City and District mutually
agree otherwise, continue to perform their respective obligations under this
AgreernentRestated ILA for a minimum of twelve (12) months after notice of the Material
Breach (the "Wind -Up Period") provided, however, that the Wind -Up Period shall be fD
ninety (90) days if the Material Breach involves the City's failure to make the Contract
Payment; or (ii) 180 days if the City fails to timely select a Remedial Measure following
the District's issuance of a Threshold Notice; provided further, that during the Wind -Up
Period, the City and District shall coordinate their efforts to prepare for the transition to
other methods of providing fire and EMS service to the City. The City wi4shall be
responsible for all paym Payment installments required herein until the
conclusion of the Wind -Up Period.
18
Packet Pg. 128
6.1.c
11. TERMINATION AND RETURN OF ASSETS
11.1 [Completed. Deleted for clarity]
11.2 —Termination — Notice. In addition to terminating this AgreementRestated ILA for a
Material Breach, either party may terminate this ^^Y;tRestated ILA at any time by
providing the other party with two (2) years written notice of its intent to terminate.
11.3 Termination Costs. Except as otherwise provided herein, the costs associated with
terminating this AgreeMeRtRestated ILA shall be borne equally between the parties, or in
the event of a Material Breach, by the breaching party, provided that in the following
circumstances, the cost of termination shall be apportioned as provided below.
11.3.1 Termination Due to Change in Law or by Mutual Agreement. In the event
that this AgFeeMeRtRestated ILA is terminated due to a change in law, eaGh party
hear its mein nests assnniate`t with the termination or, in the event that the Gity and
District mutually agree to terminate this Agreement by mutual agreement, each party
shall bear its own costs associated with the termination.
11.3.2 Regional Fire Protection Service Authority. In the event that the District, o
along with one or more fire protection jurisdictions, elects to create a Regional Fire 2
Protection Service Authority Planning Committee ("RFA Planning Committee") as ``
provided in RCW 52.26.030, the District agrees to notify the City of its intent and subject
00
to mutual approval of the District and other participating jurisdictions, to afford the City
an opportunity to be a participant on the RFA Planning Committee. Declining the o
opportunity to participate in the RFA Planning Committee shall not be construed as a CN
material hrean"Material Breach on the part of the City as defined in the Definitions t0
r
sentien of this Agreement. In the event that a Regional Fire Protection Service Authority N
(RFA) or another legally recognized means of providing fire and emergency medical
services is created, inclusive of District, the District's powers and duties under this
Agreement Restated ILA shall be assigned to the RFA as the District's successor -in -
interest as provided by RCW 52.26. ..100.
11.3.2.1 —If the District forms a RFA with any other agency, the parties
shall confer to determine whether any efficiencies have resulted from the creation of the
RFA that could warrant reconfiguring the service provided to the City.
11.4 [reserved]
11.5 [reserved]
11.6 Duty to Mitigate Costs. The City and District have an affirmative duty to mitigate their
respective costs of termination, irrespective of the party who elects to terminate this
nnr;tRestated ILA and irrespective of the party who must bear the costs of
termination.
19
Packet Pg. 129
6.1.c
11.7 Return of Assets to the City. Regardless of the reason for termination, the City and
District agree that like assets purchased by and transferred to the District as part of
t#isthe Agreement shall be purchased by the City as described below. This provision
shall not apply to the formation of an RFA in which both the City and the District are
participants.
11.7.1 Purchase Back Rolling Stock. All rolling stock originally selyd by the Gity „nrler
this Agreement or equivalent apparatus anrd „ehir•les in use by the District at the City
Fire Stations at the time of termination shall be purchased back usiRgqt a price that
considers the fair market value of the asset and any adjustments to fair market value
that would be fair and equitable valuation nreness taking in+e rise„nt nemmernia4y
reasenahle farhers Whinh may insl, de rdenreniatinn ,including, for example, City
contributions to apparatus replacement Gen+rih„+iens made,_costs incurred by the Gity
pursuant +e Exhibit GDistrict for acquisition, maintenance, and repairs, depreciation,
etc.
11.7.2 Purchase Back Equipment. All equipment `'eld under this Agreement or
equivalent equipment in use by the District at the City Fire Stations at the time of
termination shall be purchased back aat fair anrd equitable „al„a+ien rareness
equipment replacement rentributions merle by the Gity pursuant to Exhibit G �
main+enanne and repair nos+s e+n market value. r
oo
11.7.3 [Completed. Deleted for clarity] N
11.7.4 District Employees. The District shall indemnify, defend and hold the City
harmless from any and all demands, claims, or actions by District personnel, which
arises out of or relate to the time that such personnel were employees of the District,
PROVIDED HOWEVER, that the indemnification shall not apply to any claims arising as
a result of the City's actions during the term of the Agreement or the Restated ILA.
12. DECLINE TO MERGE
12.1 City Declines to Merge. In the event that the District enters into an agreement with any
other fire district or agency that is functionally equivalent to a merger, the City may
elec-topt to tee atterminate this AgreementRestated ILA without prejudice or penalty.
The terms anrd nenrditiens of that terminatlen innl, ,deTo exercise this option the City shall
provide written notice provided in annerrlanne with the provisions of Sen+ien I D � to the
District of theits intent to end the AgreemeRt Restated ILA. Such notice shall be provided
not more than ninety (90) days after receiving written notification previ rom the
District in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.1 from the nis+rin+ that the District
intends to merge with another entity.
12.1.1 Not a Material Breach. The GityCity's decision to terminate under 12.1 does not
constitute a Material Breach of the AgreementRestated ILA and none of the penalties
associated with a Material Breach shall apply to the City.
20
Packet Pg. 130
6.1.c
12.1.2 12-Month Notice. The Agreement will eRd ne+City's notice shall provide an
effective date of termination which shall be no more than twelve (12) months after the
City officially notifies the District of its termination-, unless otherwise agreed to by the
parties, and the costs of termination shall be split evenly between the parties.
12.1.3 City Exit from Agreement. If the City elects to terminate the
°gY;tRestated ILA because of an impending merger between the District and one
or more other jurisdiction, the SityCity's exit will be under the terms and conditions
described in Section 11.7.
13. CITY FIRE DONATION F D[deletedl
14. TOWN OF WOODWAY c
L
d
14.1 Service to Woodway. The City may, in accordance with the terms herein, subcontract
with the Town of Woodway to have the District provide fire and emergency medical
services to the Town of WoodwaThe City shall consult with the District in advance
of entering into any such subcontract, and the District shall have the opportunity for input o
into any issues that may affect service and/or the cost of providing service. The City Iv
shall provide advance written notice to the District of at least twelve (12) months prior to ``
any commencement of such service. The City's subcontracting of the District's service to
00
Woodway shall not be considered an unfunded mandate—. e, and no change in the
Contract Payment shall result from such a subcontracts, provided that the City is o
not requesting additional Ye�esstaff to serve Woodway._ Any and all payments from N
such a subcontract with Woodway shall be paid to the City of Edmonds only. The District 6
40
agrees not to compete with the City of Edmonds in such negotiations. N
14.1.1 If the Citv is reauestina additional staff to serve Woodway. the parties shall
renegotiate the Contract Payment retroactive to the date that the District begins
providing the additional staff. If the parties have not executed an amendment prior to the
commencement of service to Woodway, either party may invoke the Dispute Resolution
procedures in Section 18.1 and 18.2; provided, however, that any adjustment to the
Contract Payment arising out of the Dispute Resolution Procedures shall be retroactive
to the date that the District begins providing the additional staff to serve Woodway. In
this context, failure of either party to participate in, or comply with, the Dispute
Resolution Procedures in Section 18.1 and/or 18.2 shall be deemed a Material Breach.
14.1.2 The City of Edmonds right to subcontract with the Town of Woodwav constitutes
the consideration for the City's agreement to incur the additional 9.13% in Exhibit C
initially attributable to Woodway. At the City's request, the Dis+rig+ agrees +e werk
Shoreline Fire Department +��Jauto _aid responses i to Town of \/Vnnrlway
under the Agreement.
21
Packet Pg. 131
6.1.c
15 1 14.1.3 At the City's request, the District agrees to work with Shoreline Fire
Department to adjust automatic aid responses into the Town of Woodway.
14.1.4 In the event that the Point Wells development is to become part of the service
area for the District, such event shall be deemed a "Negotiation Threshold", and the
negotiation provisions of 2.2.3 - 2.2.4 shall apply.
15. [Completed. Deleted for clarity]
16. CITY AND DISTRICT ARE INDEPENDENT MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENTS
16.1 Independent Governments. The City and District recognize and agree that the City and
District are independent governments. Except for the specific terms herein, nothing
herein shall be construed to limit the discretion of the governing bodies of each party.
Specifically and without limiting the foregoing, the District shall have the sole discretion
and the obligation to determine the exact method by which the services are provided
within the District and within the City unless otherwise stipulated within this
AgreemeRtRestated ILA.
16.2 Resource Assignments. The District shall assign the resources available to it without o
regarding to internal political boundaries, but rather based upon the operational
judgment of the District as exercised within the limitations and obligations of Sections 2.4 ``
through 2.8.
00
r
16.3 Debts and Obligations. Neither the City nor District, except as expressly set forth herein N
or as required by law, shall be liable for any debts or obligations of the other. N
17. INSURANCE
17.1 Maintenance of Insurance. For the duration of this Agre em &-�tRestated ILA, each Party
shall maintain insurance as follows: Each party shall maintain its own insurance policy
insuring damage to its own fire stations, real and personal property and equipment if
any, and "policy" shall be understood to include insurance pooling arrangements or
compacts such as the Washington Cities Insurance Authority (WCIA). The City shall
maintain an insurance policy insuring against liability for accidents occurring on City
owned property. Such insurance policy shall be in an amount not less than one million
dollars ($1,000,000.00) per occurrence with a deductible of not more than five -thousand
dollars ($5,000.00). The District shall maintain an insurance policy insuring against
liability arising out of work or operations performed by the District under this
AgreernentRestated ILA in an amount not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000.00)
per occurrence with a deductible of not more than five -thousand dollars ($5,000.00).
The phrases "work or operations" and "maintenance and operations" shall include the
services identified in Section 1. Scope of Services, the services of the Fire Marshal and
the D0 *�eDistrict Fire Chief, acting in the capacity of City Fire Chief and any obligation
covered by Exhibit B, Section 9.
22
Packet Pg. 132
6.1.c
17.2 Claims of Former City Employees. The City has provided proof of coverage that it has
maintained insurance against claims by former City Personnel for incidents and
occurrences which may have occurred prior to the Commencement Date of the'^+�al
Agreement, including but not limited to, injuries, employment claims, labor grievances,
and other work -related claims. Such insurance was at all times in an amount not less
than one million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per occurrence with a deductible of not more
than five -thousand dollars ($5,000.00). The City will hold harmless the District and its
insurance provider for any such claims lawsuits or accusations that occurred prior to the
Commencement Date of the 'RteFIGGal gFee ,on+
17.3 Claims of Former District Employees. The District represents and warrants that it has
maintained insurance against claims by District employees for incidents and occurrences
which may have occurred during the time period prior to the Commencement Date of the
Agreement, including but not limited to injuries, employment claims, labor grievances,
and other work -related claims. Such insurance was at all times in an amount not less
than one million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per occurrence with a deductible of not more
than five -thousand dollars ($5,000.00).
17.4 Hold Harmless. To the extent each party's insurance coverage is not voided, each party o
agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the other party, its officers, officials,
employees- and volunteers from any and all claims, costs, including reasonable
attorneys' and expert witness fees, losses and judgments arising out of the negligent
00
and intentional acts or omissions of such party's officers, officials, employees and
volunteers in connection with the performance of th sthe Agreement.. or the Restated o
ILA. The provisions of this section shall survive the expiration or termination of tf sthe CN
Agreement and the Restated ILA.
17.5 Release from Claims. Except as specifically provided in this °^";tRestated ILA,
and except in the event of breach of this AgreementRestated ILA, the District and the
City do hereby forever release each other from any claims, demands, damages or
causes of action arising prior to the Commencement Date and related to damage to
equipment or property owned by the City or District or assumed under thi sthe Agreement
or the Restated ILA. It is the intent of the City and District to cover this risk with the
insurance noted above.
18. DISPUTE RESOLUTION
Dispute Resolution. It is the intent of the City and District to resolve all disputes between
them without litigation. In the event that any dispute between the City and District cannot
be resolved by good faith negotiations between the City and District, then the dispute
resolution provision of this g,�reerneAnRestated ILA shall apply. Excluded from these
dispute resolution provisions are issues related to the legislative authority of the
Edmonds City Council to make budget and appropriation decisions, decisions to
contract, establish levels of service or staffing under Section 2 of this
gr ;tRestated ILA and Chapter 35.103 RCW and other policy matters that state
law vests with the City Council. The above exclusions from the dispute resolution
23
Packet Pg. 133
6.1.c
process shall not abridge the right of the District to eet4eGtPursue an increase in the
Contract Payment etas a result of any decision which, itself, is not subject to the
Dispute Resolution provisions of this "^Y;tRestated ILA. Nothing herein shall
prevent either party from termiRatiRg the gpeemei#providing notice of termination of the
Restated ILA pursuant to Section 11.2 prior to completion of the dispute resolution
processes described below; however, such notice shall not affect any obligations to
proceed with the Dispute Resolution provisions.
18.1 Mediation. Upon a request by either party to me�'�emediate a dispute that is subject to Q'
the Dispute Resolution provisions, the parties shall mutually agree upon a mediator. If
the City and District cannot agree upon a mediator within ten (10) business days after 0
L
such request, the City and District shall submit the matter to the Judicial Arbitration and
Mediation Service (JAMS) and request that a mediator be appointed. This requirement
to mediate the dispute may only be waived by mutual written agreement before a party
•L
may proceed to litigation as provided within this "^Y;tRestated ILA. Except for N
unusual reasons beyond the reasonable control of either party, mediation shall be o
L
completed within ninety (90) days after the mediator is selected. Any expenses ii
incidental to mediation, including the mediator's fee, shall be borne equally by the City
and District. 00
r
18.2 Binding Arbitration. If the City and District are unsuccessful in resolving any dispute
subject to thesethe Dispute Resolution provisions through mediation, the
partieseither party may agree t„ submit their dispute t„ demand binding arbitration with
dAMSas provided herein, unless the nature of the dispute is not subject to arbitration
pursuant to other provisions of this Restated ILA.
18.2.1 The arbitration shall be conducted aGn�;g-teby JAMS in Seattle, Washington
or other mutuallv aareeable dispute resolution service. The dispute shall be aoverned
by the selected arbitration service's Streamlined Arbitration Rules and Procedures. The
parties shall agree on a JAMS arbitrator with twenty (20) days from the date the matter is
submitted to JAMS. In the event that the parties fail to agree on a JAMS arbitrator within
such time, then JAMS shall be asked to submit the names of at least three arbitrators.
Each party shall have ten (10) days after receiving the list to strike one name from that
list. JAMS shall select the arbitrator from the names on the list that have not been struck
by either party. The parties may agree on another arbitrator in JAMS or another person
at any time. In the event that JAMS is unable or unwilling to provide an arbitrator and the
parties cannot otherwise agree, then either party may request the Snohomish County
Superior Court to designate an arbitrator.
18.2.2 At any arbitration involving the Contract Payment, the arbitrator shall, as nearly as
possible, apply the analysis used in this AgreernentRestated ILA and supporting Exhibits
24
Packet Pg. 134
6.1.c
to adjust the Contract Payment. The arbitrator may deviate from such analysis and use
principles of fairness and equity, but should do so sparingly.
18.2.3 Unless the City and District mutually consent, the results of any binding arbitration
session shall not be deemed to be precedent for any subsequent mediations or
arbitrations.
18.2.4 The decision of the arbitrator shall be final and binding upon both parties, subject
only to the right of appeal as provided in RCW 7.04; provided, however, that in arriving
at such decision, neither of the parties nor the arbitrator shall have the authority to alter
this AgY;tRestated ILA in whole or in part.
18.2.5 The arbitrator cannot order either party to take action contrary to law.
18.2.6 The substantially prevailing party, if any, in any ... L Mtn Elato0A As art
alternative to -binding arbitration action shall be entitled to an award of its reasonable
attorneys' fees and costs.
18.3 Litiaation. For disputes that are not subject to binding arbitration, either party hereon
fiRGIS it negessapy to hr;nnmay file an action aga+ngin Superior Court. Jurisdiction and
venue for such actions shall lie exclusively in Superior Court for Snohomish County,
Washington. Each party expressly waives the etheF partyright to enferne aRY of the
terms, Govenants GF Genditiens hereof or any instrument exeGuted pursuant to this
Agreement by reason of any hreanh or default hereunder or there under, then jury trial.
The party substantially prevailing in any such action or proceeding shall be paid all Gests
by s„gh prevailing port„ all SUGhawarded its reasonable costs and attorneys' fees -of
Agreement lies exclusively in Cnehemish GOURt i Washington
19. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
19.1 Noticing Procedures. All notices, demands, requests, consents and approvals which
may, or are required to be given by any party to any other party hereunder, shall be in
writing and shall be deemed to have been duly given if delivered personally, sent by
electronic mail (provided a read receipt is obtained by the sender), sent by nationally
recognized overnight delivery service, or if mailed or deposited in the United States mail,
sent by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested and postage prepaid to:
District Secretary: City Clerk:
Snohomish County Fire Protection District No. 1 City of Edmonds
12425 Meridian Avenue 121 5t" Avenue North
Everett, WA 98208 Edmonds, WA 98020
Or, to such other address as the foregoing City and District hereto may from time -to -time
designate in writing and deliver in a like manner. All notices shall be deemed complete
upon actual receipt or refusal to accept delivery. Facsimile transmission of any signed
25
T
oo
=1
Packet Pg. 135
6.1.c
original document and retransmission of any signed facsimile transmission shall be the
same as delivery of an original document.
19.2 Other Cooperative Agreements. Nothing in the "^F;tRestated ILA shall preclude
the City and the District form entering into contracts for service in support of this
Agr --.-I Restated ILA.
19.3 Public Duty Doctrine. This °^r;tRestated ILA shall not be construed to provide
any benefits to any third parties. Specifically, and without limiting the foregoing, this
AgreemeRtRestated ILA shall not create or be construed as creating an exception to the
Public Duty Doctrine. The City and District shall cooperate in good faith and execute
such documents as necessary to effectuate the purposes and intent of this
AgreemeRtRestated ILA.
19.4 Entire Agreement.T-i5 The entire AgreemeRtagreement between the City and District hereto
is contained in this Restated ILA and exhibits thereto.- This Restated ILA supersedes all
of their previous understandings and agreements, written and oral, with respect to this
transaction.- This Restated ILA supersedes the Agreement except where provisions U
•L
have expressly been omitted for clarity and conciseness.-m Only those exhibits N
referenced in this Restated ILA shall continue to be
the Agreement, except the revised Cvh'h'h G hereto
L
effective. LL
19.5. Amendment. This Restated ILA may be amended only by written instrument approved00
r
by the governing bodies of the City and District subsequent to the date hereof.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the parties agree that the formulas for NUUF, UUF, and
TBF may be changed administratively by mutual agreement of the parties if executed by
the Mayor and Council President (for the City) and the District Fire Chief (for the District)
in the event that a significant change occurs which would affect such formulas (e.g. RFA
is formed, changes in dispatch technology); provided however, that any changes to the
formulas shall be consistent with the underlying intent.
Dated this day of 20162017
SNOHOMISH COUNTY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT NO. 1
By: By:
By: By:
IN
Packet Pg. 136
6.1.c
Approved as to form:
By:
District Attorn
CITY OF EDMONDS
By:
Approved as to form:
By:
City Attorney
27
Attest:
Attest:
00
r
Packet Pg. 137
6.1.c
EXHIBIT A
FIRE MARSHAL AND FIRE INSPECTOR
In consultation with the City, the District Fire Chief shall designate an individual to serve as
City Fire Marshal, and ensure the assignment of necessary personnel to support the needs
and functions of the Fire Marshal as specified in the International Fire Code, City ordinances,
and other fire service -related national, state, and local standards adopted and/or followed by
the City.
2. As employees of the District, the City Fire Marshal and Fire Inspector shall perform all of
the customary roles and duties associated with their positions: fire prevention; fire
investigation; code development, application, interpretation, and enforcement: permit
processes; plans review; records retention, response to public records requests and other
legal summons; fire and life safety public education; and other duties as assigned in the City
and throughout the jurisdictional areas served by the District.
3. The City agrees to pay fifty percent (50%) of the annual personnel cost (wages and benefits)
of providing one (1) Fire Marshal, and one hundred twenty-five percent (125%) of the annual
personnel cost (wages and benefits) of providing one (1) Fire Inspector.
4. The City Engine Company Inspection Program shall be maintained in its current form unless
modified by mutual agreement of the parties.
5. The City agrees to provide office space, office furnishings, computers, fax, copier,
printer, telephone landlines, and postal support for the use of the Fire Marshal and Fire
Inspector in Edmonds City Hall.
6. All fees collected for Fire Permits/Special use, Fire Plan Checks, and Construction
Inspections shall be retained by the City.
28
N
0
N
T
co
T
N
w
c
m
0
0
CD
c
0
L
a
J
C
N
E
t
t�
R
r
r
Q
Packet Pg. 138
6.1.c
EXHBIT B
USE OF FIRE STATIONS
For as long as the Restated ILA remains in effect, the City hereby grants to the District exclusive
use and possession of premises for use as fire stations on the terms and conditions described
helnw_
1. Three Fire Stations. The City shall provide use of the three fire stations located at 8429 -
196th Street Southwest, 275 - 6th Avenue North, and 23009 - 88th Avenue West in the
City of Edmonds, Washington, PROVIDED THAT the City reserves the right to substitute
these stations with new stations as further described in the Restated ILA.
2. Compliance with Applicable Codes. The fire stations provided by the City shall be
compliant with all applicable codes, including without limitation, the applicable provisions
of the Edmonds City Code and applicable Washington State Standards and regulations
(currently WAC 296-305-06501 et sea.).
3. No Use Charge. No use charge shall be assessed to the District. The parties agree that CO
the rights and contractual obligations contained within the Restated ILA constitute 77
adeauate consideration for District use and Dossession of the Dremises. ri
4. Utilities and Services. The City shall ensure the supply of all utilities necessary for the
use of the premises, to include: water, sewer, garbage, heating, air conditioning,
electrical power, telephone and information technology/system data lines.
4.1 Cost for Utilities. The District shall be responsible for the cost of all utilities used
on the premises, except for those utilities supplied by the City. If a separate meter is
unavailable for any utility that the District is responsible to pay, then the cost shall be
equitably apportioned to the District in a manner agreeable to both parties.
5. Conditions and Repairs. The City agrees to keep the premises and the buildings in good
condition and repair as reasonably requested by the District for use as fire stations
during the term of this Restated ILA at its own expense. The City shall at all times keep
the buildings suitably equipped as fully functioning and operational fire stations.
6. Improvements. Upon District request, the City shall install such reasonable
improvements as are normal and customary in connection with District use of premises
set forth herein. The City shall pay for such improvements.
29
Packet Pg. 139
6.1.c
7. Removal of Personal Property Upon Termination of Agreement. Upon termination of this
Restated ILA, the District shall remove all non -fixed equipment and personal property
placed upon the premises by the District during the period of this Restated ILA unless
those items are subject to repurchase by the City as provided in the Restated ILA. Any
personal property not removed from the fire stations within 60 days after termination of
this Restated ILA shall become the property of the City.
8. Maintenance of Premises.
8.1 Maintenance of the buildings, the premises and all improvements thereon is the
sole responsibility of the City. Such responsibility includes without limitation, repair of
walls, floors, ceiling, interior doors, interior and exterior windows and fixtures, sidewalks,
landscaping, driveways, parking areas, walkways, building exterior and signs.
8.2 City shall maintain in good condition the structural parts of the fire stations and
exterior buildings and structures which shall include emergency lighting, fences,
enclosures, curbs, gutters and sidewalks, foundations, bearing and exterior walls,
subflooring and roof, roof -mounted structures, unexposed electrical, plumbing and
sewerage systems, including those portions of the systems lying outside the premises,
exterior doors, apparatus bay doors, window frames, gutters, downspouts on the
building and the heating, ventilating and air conditioning system servicing the premises.
8.3 All janitorial services for routine cleaning of the buildings shall be the
responsibility of the District.
8.4 All grounds maintenance of the premises, to include fencing, enclosures, pates,
landscape, stairs, rails, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, drains, and water retention structures
shall be the responsibility of the City.
9. Insurance and Financial Security.
9.1 The parties agree that the City shall not be responsible to the District for any
Property loss or damage done to the District's personal property occasioned by reason
of any fire, storm or other casualty whatsoever beyond the control of the City. The
District shall insure its personal property located on the premises.
9.2 The District shall not be responsible to the City for any loss or damage to the
buildings or premises that is not caused by the sole negligence of the District. The City
shall insure the premises and buildings against such loss or damage. The District shall
repair any damage to the buildings caused by its sole negligence
9.3 In the event of a casualty loss that renders the premises reasonably unsuitable
for the use set forth herein, the City shall provide the District with another suitable
location(s) for the District until such time as the premises have been repaired. The cost
30
T
oo
N
0
N
CD
T
N
N
c
m
a)
as
c
L
a
J
c
as
E
m
a
Packet Pg. 140
6.1.c
of repairs, and the costs of relocation between the premises and the substitute
location(), shall be borne by the City.
10. Indemnification for Environmental Claims: Each party shall indemnifv and hold the other
Party harmless from any and all claims, demands, judgments,
orders, or damages resulting from the release of hazardous substances on the premises
caused in whole or in part by the activity of the indemnifying party, its agents,
employees, licensees or invitees. The term "hazardous substances" shall mean any
substance heretofore of hereafter designated as hazardous under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act, 42 U.S.C.Sec. 6901 et seq.; the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act, 33 U.S.C. Sec. 1257 et seq.; the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Sec.
E
2001 et seq.; the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability
as
Act of 1980, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 9601 et. Seq.; or the Hazardous Waste Cleanup -Model
Q
Toxic Control Act, RCW 70.105D all as amended and subject to all regulations
c
promulgated thereunder.
as
c
11. Indemnification and Hold Harmless: Each party agrees to protect,
save, defend, hold harmless and indemnify the other party, its officers,
employees and agents from any and all demands, claims, judgments, or
y
liability for loss or damage arising as a result of accidents, injuries, or other
c
occurrences on the premises, occasioned by either the negligent or willful
conduct of the indemnifying party, regardless of who the injured party may be.
12. Termination of Agreement. Upon termination of this Restated ILA or any extension
T
oo
thereof, whether by expiration of the stated term or sooner termination thereon as„
provided in the Restated ILA, the District shall surrender to City the premises peaceably
N
and quietly.CD
r
co
13. Default and Remedies.
T
N
c
13.1 Failure of the City to perform repairs or maintenance
to the buildings or premises as described in 8 above within a reasonable
period after notice by the District shall constitute a Material Breach under the terms of
this Restated ILA. For purposes of this Restated ILA, a reasonable period shall be
construed to mean five (5) business days, for repairs and maintenance that could
;v
feasibly be performed in such time.
J
13.2 Notwithstandinq anything to the contrary, if the nature of the repair constitutes an
operational, safety, and/or security emergency which materially affects District use of the
E
premises or building for their intended purpose, the City shall perform the repair as soon
as possible regardless of the day or hour and no later than forty-eight (48) hours after Q
receiving notification from the District.
13.3 If the City fails to timely perform the repair or maintenance under the conditions
described above after notification, the District may have such repair or maintenance
performed at City expense. The cost of the repair or maintenance shall be forwarded to
the City, which shall pay the cost within thirty (30) days after notice. Notwithstanding
anything to the contrary, the City shall not be in breach of any repair or maintenance
31
Packet Pg. 141
6.1.c
obligation herein if the repair cannot be completed within the time set forth herein so
long as the City is diligently pursuing completion of the repairs.
32
Co
r
Packet Pg. 142
6.1.c
EXHIBIT C
CONTRACT PAYMENT
33
U-
r
Q
Packet Pg. 143
6.1.c
EXHIBIT D
APPARATUS REPLACEMENT
34
U-
r
r
00
r
N
O
N_
t0
O
N
N
C
al
m
N
C
N
L
Q
J
C
N
E
t
V
r
r
Q
Packet Pg. 144
6.1.c
EXHIBIT E
Definitions Subiect to Administrative Amendments Pursuant to Article 19.5
1. NEIGHBORING UNIT UTILIZATION FACTOR. Neighboring Unit Utilization Factor or NUUF
is the method used by the parties to determine how much time Units associated with one
jurisdiction are Assigned to calls in another jurisdiction. Because the District provides service
across a number of different cities and unincorporated areas, and because those various
jurisdictions make payments to the District for those services, Neighboring Unit Utilization Factor
is relevant even where a District Unit is dispatched to a call that is still within an area served by
the District but outside of the normal area served by that Unit.
NUUF is determined by converting the following fraction to a decimal rounded to the
nearest thousandths:
total seconds that non -Edmonds Units are
35
Packet Pg. 145
6.1.c
0
U-
r
r
Co
r
N
O
N_
t0
O
N
N
C
m
al
m
N
C
N
L
Q
J
C
N
E
t
V
r
r
Q
Packet Pg. 146
6.1.c
NUUF =
Assigned to calls in Edmonds over the previous calendar year
total seconds that Edmonds Units are Assigned to calls outside of Edmonds over
the previous calendar year
Formula Explanation: In this fraction, the numerator shall equal the total number of seconds
that non -Edmonds Units are assigned to calls in Edmonds (not including Esperance, unless
Esperance is annexed) over the previous calendar year. The denominator shall equal the total
number of seconds that Edmonds Units are assigned to calls outside of Edmonds (Esperance
shall be considered "outside of Edmonds" for the purpose of this calculation unless Esperance
is annexed) over the previous calendar year.
Calculation: Neighboring Unit Utilization Factor shall be calculated separately for the City of
Lynnwood (stations 14 and 15 combined) and any non -Edmonds unit within the District, e.g.,
Station 19, for as long as Lynnwood and the District are not part of the same Regional Fire
Authority.
Determination of Whether NUUF is in Balance: Unlike the Unit Utilization Factor, the
NUUF need only be calculated on an annual basis after the completion of each calendar year.
NUUF shall be considered balanced if the NUUF falls somewhere between 0.900 and 1.100.
For example. if Lynnwood's Units are assigned to calls in Edmonds that total 1,000,000 seconds
during a calendar year, and Edmonds Units are assigned to calls in Lynnwood that total
1,095,000 seconds during a calendar year, the NUUF for that year would equal 0.913 and would
be considered in balance. If, on the other hand, the numerator were to remain the same, but the
Edmonds Units are assigned to calls in Lynnwood that total 880,000 seconds, the NUUF for that
year would equal 1.136 and would be considered out of balance.
Special Calculation for 2017: Since this Restated ILA takes effect after January 1, 2017, the
2017 NUUF shall be calculated proportionally for that portion of 2017 following the Effective
Date.
2. TRANSPORT BALANCE FACTOR. Transport Balance Factor (TBF) is the method used by
the parties to determine how frequently Units associated with one jurisdiction transport patients
resulting from calls in another jurisdiction. Because the District provides service across a
number of different cities and unincorporated areas, and because Edmonds is entitled to receive
transport fee revenue for all District transports resulting from calls in Edmonds regardless of
whether the transport is performed by an Edmonds Unit or a non -Edmonds Unit, Transport
Balance Factor is relevant to whether transport fees are being distributed in an equitable
manner. TBF is determined by converting the following fraction to a decimal rounded to the
nearest thousandths:
37
T
oo
N
O
N
CD
co
T
N
r
U)
c
m
0
as
c
as
L
a
J
c
as
E
m
a
Packet Pg. 147
6.1.c
number of transports that non -Edmonds Units provide from calls in Edmonds
over 6 months
TBF =
number of transports that Edmonds Units provide from calls outside of Edmonds
over 6 months
Formula Explanation: In this fraction, the numerator shall equal the total number of
transports that non -Edmonds Units provide from calls in Edmonds (not includina
Esperance, unless Esperance is annexed) over the previous six-month period. When an
Edmonds Unit and a non -Edmonds Unit both respond to a call in Edmonds and the non -
Edmonds Unit transports the patient, that call may not be counted in the numerator_
yen if the Edmonds Unit responded with a non -transport vehicle. The denominator shall
equal the total number of transports that Edmonds Units provide from calls outside of
Edmonds (Esperance shall be considered "outside of Edmonds" for the purpose of this
calculation unless Esperance is annexed) over the previous six-month period.
Determination of Whether TBF is in Balance: TBF shall be considered "balanced" if the
TBF falls somewhere between 0.900 and 1.100. While TBF is intended to be analyzed
by looking back over the previous six months, during 2017, a special quarterly TBF shall
be calculated that looks at TBF on a quarterly basis and adjusts the calculation method o
accordingly. The quarterly analysis shall be performed beginning with the second quarter r
of 2017. The quarterly TBF is intended to give the District the ability to analyze the effect r
0
of minor dispatch adjustments before TBF could result in a Threshold Notice being
issIIpd c
3. UNIT UTILIZATION FACTOR
UUF =
Unit Utilization Factor or UUF is the method used by the parties to determine how busy a
particular Unit is. Unit Utilization Factor is determined by converting the following fraction
to a decimal rounded to the nearest thousandths:
number of seconds a Unit is Assigned to all calls over the previous twelve-month
060
31,536,000
38
Packet Pg. 148
6.1.c
Formula Explanation: In this fraction, the numerator shall equal the total number of
seconds a Unit is Assigned to all calls over the previous twelve-month period. The
denominator shall always be 31,536,000 (the number of seconds in a twelve-month
period). Because this contract initially contemplates exactly one Unit at each station, with
each station having multiple apparatus types, the total number of seconds a Unit is
Assigned to all calls shall be the total for all apparatus types used by that Unit. The
activity of the Battalion Chief and Medical Services Officer shall not be counted in the
numerator for any unit. For example, if, over the previous twelve-month period, Engine
20 was Assigned to calls totaling 72,089 seconds, and Ladder 20 was Assigned to calls
totaling 229,320 seconds, and Medic 20 was Assigned to calls totaling 4,008,640
seconds, then the calculation for UUF would be made as follows:
4,310,049
UUF = = 0.1366 (rounded to 0.137)
31,536,000
Freauencv of Calculation: Unit Utilization Factor shall be calculated as soon as Dossible
after the end of each quarter, looking back over the previous twelve-month period. i
While UUF is intended to be analyzed by looking back over the previous twelve months, U.
during the each of the last three quarters of 2017, a special UUF shall be calculated thatoo
r
looks at UUF on a quarterly basis and adjusts the calculation method accordingly. The
quarterly analysis during 2017 is intended to keep data from the service delivery model c
prior to the Effective Date from contaminatina the data aDDlicable to the Restated ILA. N
39
Packet Pg. 149
1
6.1.d
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR
FIRE AND EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES
THIS INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT by and between SNOHOMISH COUNTY
FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT NO. 1, a Washington municipal corporation (the
"District") and the CITY OF EDMONDS, a Washington city (the "City") is for the
provision of fire and emergency medical services (EMS).
WHEREAS, a consolidated Fire and EMS service, by a single vendor or through
a Regional Fire Protection Service Authority (RFA), has recently gained support of most
elected officials in Southwest Snohomish County;
WHEREAS, the City and District agree that a long-term agreement between the
City and the District for fire and emergency medical services is beneficial to the City and
District and their stakeholders; and
WHEREAS, the City and District have a long-term relationship for providing
Mutual and Automatic Aid toward the delivery of fire and emergency medical service;
and
WHEREAS, the City desires to contract with the District to provide fire and
emergency medical services to the City and the District desires to so provide these
services; and
WHEREAS, the District and the City are authorized, pursuant to Chapter 39.34 of
the Revised Code of Washington, to enter into Interlocal Agreements which allow the
District and the City to cooperate with each other to provide high quality services to the
public in the most efficient manner possible.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants
contained herein, the City and District hereto agree as follows:
Interlocal Agreement for Fire and Emergency Medical Service Operations
Page 1 of 21 November 2, 2009
® SJ "7
-a2,o/a -/v de-70,
a�
a�
L
a
U
0
L
r
c
0
L
i�
oo
a�
0
0
N
Q
J
r
U-
w
0
U
c
m
E
t
v
a
r
r
Q
Packet Pg. 150
6.1.d
1. SCOPE OF SERVICES
1.1 Services Provided. The District shall provide all services necessary for fire
suppression, emergency medical service, hazardous materials response,
technical rescue, and disaster response to a service area covering the corporate
limits of the City of Edmonds as are provided by the City of Edmonds. In addition,
the District shall provide support services including, but not limited to, fire
marshal, fire prevention and life safety, public education, public information, and
fleet maintenance, payroll and finances, human resources, and legal and risk
management pertaining to the operations and delivery of fire department
services.
1.2 Training, Education, and Career Development. The District will provide training
and education to all firefighter and emergency medical service personnel in
accordance with State, County and local requirements. Furthermore, the District
will offer professional development and educational and training opportunities for
unrepresented and civilian employees.
1.3 _City Fire Chief. The District's Fire Chief shall be designated the City Fire Chief for
purposes of statutory provisions, regulations and the Edmonds City Code.
1.4 District Fire Chief Desi Hates Fire Marshal. The District Fire Chief shall designate
an individual to serve as City Fire Marshal, and shall assign necessary personnel
to support the functions and needs of the Fire Marshal as mutually agreed to and
partially funded by the City (See Exhibit A),
2. STANDARDS FOR SERVICES/STAFFING
2.1 Battalion Chief. The City Battalion Chief unit shall be staffed with a minimum of
one (1) Battalion Chief twenty-four (24) hours per day, seven (7) days per week.
The District agrees to provide Incident Command response for all emergency
incidents twenty-four (24) hours per day, seven (7) days per week.
2.2 Fire Station Staffing. Fire Station 16 shall be staffed twenty-four (24) hours per
day, seven (7) days per week with a minimum of one (1) fire captain and two (2)
firefighter/emergency medical technicians or firefighter/paramedics. Fire Station
17 shall be staffed twenty-four (24) hours per day, seven (7) days per week with
a minimum of one (1) fire captain, and two (2) firefighter/emergency medical
technicians or firefighter/paramedics. Fire Station 20 shall be staffed twenty-four
(24) hours per day, seven (7) days per week with a minimum of one (1) fire
captain and two (2) firefighter/emergency medical technicians or
firefighter/paramedics.
2.3 Paramedic unit. The City Medic unit wm b-e sta ffea witn a rniniiiiurn o
firefighter/paramedics as currently provided.
Interlocal Agreement for Fire and Emergency Medical Service Operations
Page 2 of 21 November 2, 2009
a�
E
a�
a�
a
U
0
L
r
r
�L
y..
0
iL
oo
a�
0
0
N
a
J
0
U_
w
O
U
r_
0
E
U
0
Q
Packet Pg. 151
6.1.d
2.4 Level of Service. The District shall provide the same level of service as currently
provided by the City, which is consistent with the City response objectives per the
City's Chapter 35.103 RCW Fire Department Compliance Plan (previously SHB
Compliance Plan 1756) approved by the Edmonds City Council on November 28,
2006. If these response objectives are amended to provide an increased level of
service, the District will make reasonable efforts to meet them, provided that
funding is adequate.
2.5 Annual Reporting. The District agrees to annually report to the City in accordance
with the City's RCW 35.103 Fire Department Compliance Plan.
2.6 Staffing Exceptions. Exceptions to on duty staffing levels may occur in unusual
circumstances such as where there is a significant emergency event(s) in the
District, the City, or other areas which are under a contract for service or
auto/mutual aid agreement with the District. Unusual circumstances and
significant emergencies that affect personnel, equipment, infrastructure and/or
may include, but are not limited to, natural or man-made disasters, a significant
incident, or series of escalating incidents significant to a specific location, multiple
locations, and/or with area or region -wide impact.
2.7 Criteria -Based 9-1-1 Dispatch. It is understood and agreed by the City and
District that the dispatch of units during emergencies is determined by criteria -
based dispatch protocols of the dispatch centers, and automatic and/or mutual
aid agreements. Nothing herein shall require the District to respond first within
the City as opposed to other areas served by the District. The City and District
recognize that responses to emergencies shall be determined by the District
based upon dispatch protocols, the District's operational judgment, and without
regard to where the emergencies occur.
2.8 Level of Service Changes. During the term of this Agreement, service level
changes may be mandated that are beyond the control of either party.
Additionally, either party may desire to change the service level, including but not
limited to, those services identified in Section 1 Scope of Services and Section 2
Standards for Services/Staffing. When a service level change is mandated by
law, adopted by the Edmonds City Council as the City's response objectives as
required by RCW 35.103, or is mutually agreed to by the parties, the City and the
District will renegotiate the contract payment at the request of either party.
Provided that before renegotiation, the District must notify the Union, IAFF 1997,
of the alleged change requiring a change in the level of service and thereafter
negotiate with the Union the impact/affects of such change on the terms and
conditions of employment of bargaining unit personnel.
2.9 Response Time Questions. In the event that response times should
consistently exceed the current level of City services, the District Fire
Chief and City Mayor, or their designees, shall meet and confer to address
the cause and potential remedies. In no circumstance will a meet and
Interlocal Agreement for Fire and Emergency Medical Service Operations
Page 3 of 21 November 2, 2009
a�
a
U
0
L
a�
c
r
a+
V
0
iL
00
a�
0
0
N
Q
J
0
U_
w
0
U
a�
U
0
Q
Packet Pg. 152
6.1.d
confer process be prejudicial to the rights of the parties under this
agreement, or upon the Union, IAFF 1997, to bargain any and all
impacts/effects relating to any remedy incident to the increased response
time.
3. USE OF CITY FIRE STATIONS
3.1
Use of City Fire Stations. The City shall retain ownership of existing City fire
stations. The City shall provide three City fire stations or replacement fire stations
for use by the District during the term of this Agreement and as described in
Exhibit B. In the event of a conflict between the provisions of the Agreement and,
Exhibit B, the provisions of Exhibit B shall control with respect to fire stations and
fixtures contained therein.
L
3.2
Fire Station Furnishings. The District shall make a one-time, lump sum purchase
Q
of fire station furnishings that are not built-in or fixed, and consumable and
M
disposable supplies within 30 days after the Commencement Date of this
o
Agreement. The District shall accept ownership of furnishings that are not built-in
or fixed in "as is" condition but only if the individual furnishing or ensemble are in
r
a condition acceptable to the District.
3.3
Purchase Price. The purchase price for furnishings that are not built-in or fixed
L
y
was determined by applying a 15-year depreciation schedule to the estimated
purchase prices of individual furnishings or ensembles. The purchase price for
the estimated consumable and disposable supplies that will be in the fire stations
on the Commencement Date of this Agreement is based on the acquisition price.
Go
The purchase price for furnishings that are not built-in or fixed with appropriate
depreciation applied, and the price of consumable and disposable supplies is
o
identified in Exhibit J.
0
N
4.
ANNUAL CONTRACT AND TRANSPORT FEES PAYMENT TERMS
a
J
4.1
Annual Contract Payment. The City shall annually pay the District a sum referred
r
U_
to as the Contract Payment for the services provided herein. The amount of the
o
Contract Payment shall be determined according to Exhibit C. The Contract
Payment shall be paid in equal quarterly installments by January 15, April 15,
July 15 and September 15. Failure to pay quarterly installments in a timely
E
manner shall be considered a material breach as defined in the Definitions
U
section of this Agreement.
Q
4.2
Contract Payment Adjustment. The Contract Payment shall be adjusted each
year no later than September 1.
4.3
Annual Percent Increase Based on Labor Costs. The District shall submit to the
City an annual revision to Exhibit C of this Agreement, which shall identify the
Contract Payment for the ensuing year(s). The cost of City Station Personnel
identified in Exhibit C shall be adjusted as changes occur by the percentage
Interlocal Agreement for Fire and Emergency Medical Service Operations
Page 4 of 21 November 2, 2009
Packet Pg. 153
6.1.d
increase in labor costs resulting from the negotiated labor agreement between
the District and IAFF Local 1997; provided that the personnel cost shall increase
from one labor agreement to the next no more than the greater of (i) the median
increase in compensation of comparable fire agencies, (ii) the increase in the
Consumer Price Index as measured by the CPI-W Seattle -Tacoma -Bremerton
metropolitan area for the 12-month period ending June 30, or (iii) the percentage
increase in compensation awarded by an interest arbitrator. The phrase
"comparable fire agencies" shall refer to a list of comparables agreed upon by the
Employer and Union through the collective bargaining process or the
comparables accepted by an interest arbitrator in an interest arbitration
proceeding.
4.4 Adjustment Date Not Met. If the labor agreement between the District and IAFF
Local 1997 has not been finalized by December 31 of the year prior to the
upcoming contract for service year, the District Station Personnel costs and the
District Indirect Costs will be adjusted upon execution of the labor agreement but
will be retroactive to January 1 and paid by the City within 30 days of execution
of the labor agreement.
4.5 Annual Indirect Operating Cost Adjustments. The District shall adjust the
Contract Payment costs consisting of Indirect Operating Costs determined by the
following:
• Overhead which shall be 10 percent of the cost of the City Station Personnel
cost;
• Station equipment/maintenance/operation, which shall be 10 percent of the
City Station Personnel cost;
• Fire Marshal allocation at 75 percent of wage and benefit cost of the position,
and Fire Inspector at 100 percent of wage and benefit cost of the position
(See Exhibit A); and
• Apparatus replacement costs based upon the District Apparatus Replacement
Schedule — City Rolling Stock designated as Exhibit D.
The District Indirect Costs identified in Exhibit C shall then be adjusted based
upon the specified percentage of the increased cost of City Station Personnel.
The total of the City Station Personnel cost and the Indirect Costs shall be the
Contract Payment for the ensuing year.
4.6 Annexation. The City's Urban Growth Area does contain property within the
boundaries of the District; however, this provision shall not apply to the
annexation of "islands" as referenced in RCW 35,13.182. Should the City seek to
annex portions of the District, the District will not oppose the annexation. In the
event the City annexes portions of the District, the Contract Payment shall be
increased and shall be calculated by applying the then current District levy rate
and emergency medical services levy rate to the annexed property. The
increased amount shall be added to the Contract Payment as a base for
calculations in future years.
Interlocal Agreement for Fire and Emergency Medical Service Operations
Page 5 of 21 November 2, 2009
a�
a
U
0
L
a�
c
r
0
L
oo
a�
0
0
N
Q
J
0
U-
w
0
U
r-
W
E
U
0
Q
Packet Pg. 154
6.1.d
4.7 Significant Change in Cost of Providing Services. In the event that there is
a material and significant increase or decrease in the costs of providing
services under this Agreement or an increase in such costs as a result of
a legislative or policy decision that is exempt from the dispute resolution
provisions of Sections 18.1 and 18.2, then at the request of either party,
the City and District shall renegotiate this Agreement and the Contract
Payment to fully compensate the District for actual costs incurred
according to the methodology in Exhibit C. In the event that the City and
District are unable to successfully renegotiate this Agreement through
good faith negotiations, then the Dispute Resolution provision of this
Agreement shall apply.
4.8 EMS Transport Fees. The District understands and acknowledges that the City
presently charges fees for basic life support and advanced life support transports
occurring within the City. As the EMS service provider, the District shall receive
and collect all Transport Fees in accordance with District policy for transports that
originate within the City limits. The District shall remit these amounts, less an
administration fee not to exceed the actual cost of collection, to the City
according to the quarterly schedule in Section 4.1. The District shall be
responsible for, and agrees to prepare and provide in a timely fashion, all
necessary or requested documentation and/or reports to the City.
4.9 Creating Unfunded Mandates. The City shall not create any unfunded mandates
for increased service by the District without fully compensating the District for
actual costs incurred.
5. CITY EMPLOYEES
5.1 All City Employees Become District Employees. The District shall become the
employer of all City Fire Department employees, including administrative and
unrepresented uniformed, IAFF members, SEIU members, and civilian
employees of the City Fire Department on the Commencement Date of this
Agreement between the City and the District. The City and District recognize that
during the term of the Interlocal Agreement, the uniformed City Fire Department
employees will be integrated into Local 1997 of the IAFF. Labor -represented
employees will continue in their current positions and job assignments as
recognized by the District, or as agreed through collective bargaining prior to the
implementation of this Agreement. Administrative uniformed employees may be
reassigned to job positions that meet the needs of consolidating the two
organizations. Any civilian City Fire Department employee who is reassigned to a
new position shall be entitled to wages and benefits consistent with, or greater
than, the current wages and benefits provided by the City for such employee's
former position. City personnel shall receive the District's compensation levels
and benefits as of the Commencement Date of this Agreement.
Interlocal Agreement for Fire and Emergency Medical Service Operations
Page 6 of 21 November 2, 2009
a�
E
a�
a
U
0
`m
c
.L
0
i_
oo
a�
0
0
N
Q
J
0
LL
w
0
U
a�
E
U
Q
Packet Pg. 155
6.1.d
5.2 Seniority and Rank. Any IAFF member of the City Fire Department shall assume
employment with the District with complete seniority and rank intact. No
additional probationary periods or testing shall be required of any current IAFF
member under the Employees of Merged or Contracted Organization's article of
the Local 1997 Collective Labor Agreement. For purposes of seniority, the "hire
date" of a City Fire Department employee will be the earliest such employee's
hire date(s) with Fire District 1, Medic 7, or the City of Edmonds.
5.3 Transfer of Sick and Vacation Leave. Sick and vacation leave of City employees
shall be transferred and maintained as attached in Exhibit E. The City shall pay
to the District the current value of accrued vacation leave banks as of the date of
the transfer. The City shall also pay the cash -out value of City sick leave banks in
accordance with applicable Union contract or City policy. "Cash -out value" shall
be based on termination by layoff due to lack of work by the City as of the date of
the transfer. The District and City may agree to credit this obligation against
monies owed by the District under this Agreement. These payments are intended
to close out the City's obligations with respect to transferred, accrued leave
banks and the provisions of 5.9 shall not apply to unanticipated costs or
increases associated with the transferred leave banks such as, but not limited to,
increases attributable to changes in statutory or case law relating to the payment
of such banks, their impact on overtime requirements or changes in pension law,
PROVIDED, HOWEVER, that if a transferred employee retires within two (2)
years of the date of the transfer and the Washington State Department of
Retirement Systems (DRS) treats any portion of the leave bank payouts as
excess compensation, the City shall be liable for its proportionate share of such
excess compensation cost as determined by DRS. "Proportionate share" shall be
determined based on the last wage paid by the City and the leave payout cap in
effect as of the date of the transfer and the excess compensation assessment
attributable thereto.
5.4 Layoff Language. For the provisions of layoffs or reduction in force, there shall be
three established Seniority Lists attached as Exhibit F.
• Blended Seniority List consisting of the former members of IAFF Local
1828 (Edmonds Firefighters) and the members of IAFF Local 1997
(Snohomish County Fire District 1 Firefighters).
• Non -Blended Seniority List of IAFF local 1997 (District Firefighters) prior to
the Commencement Date of the Interlocal Agreement between the District
and the City.
• Non -Blended Seniority list of IAFF Local 1828 (Edmonds Firefighters) prior
to the Interlocal Agreement between the District and the City.
5.4.1 Layoff Within First 60 Months of Contract. If a reduction in force becomes
necessary within the first 60 months of this Agreement, the reductions in force
shall be initiated utilizing the Blended Seniority List from the most senior to the
least senior giving each member the first right of refusal. In the event that the
said reduction in force is not accomplished through the Blended Seniority List,
Interlocal Agreement for Fire and Emergency Medical Service Operations
Page 7 of 21 November 2, 2009
aD
a�
a�
Q
7i
0
0
a�
c
0
i
i_
r
oo
0
0
N
Q
J
0
U_
w
0
U
r_
aD
M
r
a
Packet Pg. 156
6.1.d
the reduction in force shall be incurred upon the least senior members of the
jurisdiction causing the reduction in force. The reduction will be based on the
Seniority Lists established prior to the Interlocal Agreement between the District
and the City.
5.4.2
New Employees. Employees hired after the date of this Interlocal Agreement will
be placed on the bottom of the Blended List and will be first subject to layoff.
5.5
Promotional Language and Probationary Period. The parties agree that two of
three Company Officer promotions required to convert the three -platoon City work
schedule to the District four -platoon work schedule will be made from a
promotional list established by the Edmonds Civil Service Commission and consist
solely of eligible pre -Commencement Date City employees.
E
a�
L
5.6
Company Officer Promotion Process. The parties agree that the City Company
Q
Officer promotion process shall occur prior to the Commencement Date of the
M
Agreement.
0
L
r
5.7
Probation Process for Newly Promoted Company Officers. The parties agree
that newly -promoted City Company Officers transferring employment to the
District on the Commencement Date shall serve the probationary period of the
IAFF 1997 collective labor agreement and District policy, procedures, and
o
performance standards for Company Officers.
i_
5.8
Impact of Agreement. Each party has undertaken to collectively bargain the
impact of this Agreement upon the respective labor unions which represent each
oo
party's employees. The City and District further acknowledge that the integration
of City employees into the District's organizational structure has been in
o
conjunction with the respective labor unions which represent each party's
N
employees, and that the City and District will have reached agreement with
existing labor unions, and with each other, that the seniority rights of City
r
Personnel will remain intact and will transfer to their employment with the District,
o
w
O
5.9
Former City Employees. The City shall indemnify, defend, and hold the District
U
harmless from any and all demands, claims, or actions by former City personnel,
which arise out of, or relate to, the time prior to the date that such City personnel
E
became employees of the District; provided, however, that the indemnification
U
shall not apply to any claims arising as a result of the District's actions under the
Q
Interlocal Agreement.
6. ROLLING STOCK (APPARATUS AND VEHICLES)
6.1 Purchase Rollin_ Stock, tock. The District shall purchase the City Fire Department's
rolling stock 'apparatus and vehicles). The Dlstnct shall accept title and
ownership of such rolling stock in "as is" condition but only if each individual unit
is in a condition reasonably acceptable to the District.
Interlocal Agreement for Fire and Emergency Medical Service Operations
Page 8 of 21 November 2, 2009
Packet Pg. 157
6.1.d
6.2 Transfer of Title. The City and District shall cooperate and execute such
documents which are necessary to accomplish the transfer of title.
6.3 Rolling Stock Lump Sum Purchase. The District shall make a one-time, lump
sum purchase of City rolling stock within 30 days after the Commencement Date
of this Agreement, specifically for the ladder (1), engines (3), medic unit (1), aid
units (4), utility (1), the 1938 Ford fire engine (1), and six vehicles.
6.4 Purchase Price. The purchase price of each piece of rolling stock shall be the
retail price determined by Fire Trucks Plus, Inc.; or by the Kelly Blue Book; the
acquisition cost of the 1938 Ford Fire Engine; plus the delivered, set-up and
lettered cost of two 2009 Ford E-450s Aid Units manufactured by Braun and
identified in Exhibit G.
6.5 Rolling Stock Records. The sale of rolling stock includes all service and
maintenance, records, and shop manuals for each purchased unit.
6.6 District Apparatus Replacement Schedule. The District has provided current
information regarding existing and proposed Apparatus Replacement Schedule
attached in Exhibit D. The District, in its sole discretion, may elect to purchase
new rolling stock or otherwise assign District rolling stock for use within the City.
6.7 Public Safety Boat. The Public Safety Boat, acquired with a Department of
Homeland Security grant as a county -wide asset and known as Marine 16,
remains the property of the City. Use by the District of Marine 16 for training and
emergencies as a county -wide asset is described in Exhibit H.
7. EQUIPMENT
7.1 Purchase Equipment. The District shall purchase City Fire Department
equipment identified in Exhibit I. Equipment is divided into two categories — (1)
that on the Fire Department Attractive Asset List, and (2) that equipment on-
board rolling stock. There is no duplication between the two lists. The District
shall accept ownership of equipment in "as -is" condition but only if each
individual piece of equipment or ensemble is in reasonably acceptable condition
as determined solely by the District.
7.2 Equipment Lump Sum Purchase. The District shall make a one-time, lump sum
purchase of City equipment within 30 days after the Commencement Date of this
Agreement.
7.3 Purchase Price. (1) The purchase price for items on the Asset List was
i _ i _ ._.__ _ _ _ _ dpp1..i-_a L ,L-liie 4— 46.pbo
determinedFJyiyity sL-aiyiniUCP1VUCXL1Uii w uiV ur 1aQc nrino imin nc
and/or estimated present value for each individual item. Straight-line depreciation
is calculated by taking the value of the asset and dividing it by the expected life
Interlocal Agreement for Fire and Emergency Medical Service Operations
Page 9 of 21 November 2, 2009
a�
E
a�
a�
a
U
0
L
r
r
0
L
U_
oo
a�
0
0
N
Q
J
0
U_
w
0
U
a�
U
0
Q
Packet Pg. 158
6.1.d
span, then multiplying the expected life span by the age of the asset (value /
years = yearly depreciation x age = depreciation amount). (2) The price for
equipment on -board rolling stock was determined by applying five years of
depreciation based on a ten-year average replacement schedule to the purchase
price of individual items using fire service reference materials including Galls, Life
Assist (EMS hard and soft gear), PMI (technical rescue equipment), and Heiman
Fire Equipment. This equates to 50 percent depreciation to all equipment. The
purchase price and depreciation of each piece of equipment or ensemble is
identified in Exhibit I.
7.4 Equipment Records and Warranties. The sale of equipment includes all service
and maintenance records, and shop manuals. Wherever permitted under the
terms of a contract to purchase a vehicle or equipment transferred to the District
or a warranty relating thereto, the City hereby transfers and assigns its interest
under such warranties to the District. In the event that only the City may exercise
the warranty, the City will cooperate with and use its best efforts to enforce any
warranty regarding equipment provided to the District.
8. OVERSIGHT AND REPORTING
8.1 Agreement Administrators. The District Fire Chief and the City Mayor
and/or their designees, shall act as administrators of this Agreement for
purposes of RCW 39.34.030. During the term of this Agreement, the District Fire
Chief shall provide the Mayor with quarterly reports concerning the provision of
services under this Agreement. The format and topics of the reports shall be
agreed upon by the District Fire Chief and the Mayor. Additionally, two District
Board Commissioner members and two City Council members, along with the
District Fire Chief and the Mayor, shall meet at least once per calendar year, on
or before April 1, for the purpose of communicating about issues related to this
Agreement. The District Fire Chief and the Mayor shall present a joint annual
report to the Edmonds City Council prior to July 31.
8.2 Joint Annual Meeting. In addition to the meeting(s) referred to in Section
8.1 above, the Edmonds City Council and Board of Fire District #1
Commissioners shall meet prior to April 1 of each calendar year at a
properly noticed place and time to discuss items of mutual interest related
to this Agreement.
8.3 Representation on Intergovernmental Boards. The District shall represent the
City on intergovernmental boards or on matters involving the provision of
services under this Agreement as reasonably requested by the Mayor. The City
reserves the right to represent itself in any matter in which the interests of the
City and the District are not mutual or whenever any matter relates to the
apprvpriatlon %f or expendeture of City f"�n�J� la„nYOnrlM the term- of this L�grPement,
Interlocal Agreement for Fire and Emergency Medical Service Operations
Page 10 of 21 November 2, 2009
aD
a�
a�
Q
7i
0
0
a�
r
c
r
w
0
i_
r
oo
a)
0
0
N
Q
J
0
U_
w
0
U
r_
aD
cu
r
r
Q
Packet Pg. 159
6.1.d
9. EXISTING AGREEMENTS
9.1 ESCA, SNOCOM and SERS. The City currently has contractual relationships
with other entities or agencies including the Emergency Services Coordinating
Agency (ESCA) for all City; Snohomish County Communications Center
(SNOCOM) for Fire, Police, and Public Works; and Snohomish County
Emergency Radio System Agency (SERS) for Fire and Police. The City shall
maintain its representation and financial obligations with those entities or
agencies and will act to represent itself and retain authority to negotiate on its
behalf. At the discretion of the City, the District may provide representation on
behalf of the City on various committees, boards and/or commissions as
requested, as appropriate, and/or as agreed to by mutual agreement of the
parties.
9.2 Mutual and Automatic Aid. The City and District currently have individual
responsibilities and contractual obligations under their respective agreements
with other fire agencies. The District shall assume the City's contractual
responsibility and obligations for the provision of mutual and automatic aid. At
such time as these agreements are renegotiated and re -executed, the District will
represent the City's interests and shall be signatory to the agreements on behalf
of the City.
9.3 Full Information as Basis for Relationship. The City and District agree to
coordinate their individual relationships with other entities and agencies so that
the services under this Agreement will be provided in an efficient and cost
effective manner. The City and District agree to keep each other fully informed
and advised as to any changes in their respective relationships with those
entities or agencies, whether or not those changes impact the City and/or the
District obligations under this Agreement. Notice of any change in the
relationship or obligations shall be provided to the other party in writing in a
timely manner that allows a reasonable opportunity to discuss proposed changes
in relationships or obligations.
9.4 Dispute Resolution. In the event that any dispute between the City and District
cannot be resolved by good faith negotiations between the City and District, then
the dispute resolution provision of this Agreement shall apply.
10. TERM OF AGREEMENT
10.1 20-Year Agreement. The effective date of this Agreement shall be upon its
execution by the City and District. The Commencement Date of this Agreement
shall be January 1, 2010. This Agreement shall continue in effect for a period of
twenty (20) years from the Commencement Date, until December 31, 2030,
Ur1e5S terminate -a' earlier as provided
herein. After 'the initial, twenty, (71.1) dcouoir
term, this Agreement shall automatically renew under the same terms and
Interlocal Agreement for Fire and Emergency Medical Service Operations
Page 11 of 21 November 2, 2009
a�
E
a�
a�
L
a
U
0
L
as
c
r
�L
0
L
i�
oo
CD
0
0
N
Q
J
0
U_
w
O
U
a�
U
a
Q
Packet Pg. 160
6.1.d
conditions for successive, rolling five (5) year periods unless terminated as
provided herein.
10.2 Material Breach and Wind -Up Period. In the event of a Material Breach of this
Agreement, the City and District shall, unless the City and District mutually agree
otherwise, continue to perform their respective obligations under this Agreement
for a minimum of twelve (12) months after notice of the Material Breach (the
"Wind -Up Period"); provided, however, that the Wind -Up Period shall be 90
(ninety) days if the Material Breach involves the City's failure to make the
Contract Payment; provided further, that during the Wind -Up Period, the City and
District shall coordinate their efforts to prepare for the transition to other methods
of providing fire and EMS service to the City. The City will be responsible for all
payments required herein until the conclusion of the Wind -Up Period.
11. TERMINATION AND RETURN OF ASSETS
11.1 First Five Years. The City and District acknowledge that in entering into this
Agreement, significant financial and personnel resources have been expended.
Therefore, neither the City nor the District may terminate this Agreement within
the first five (5) years following the Commencement Date except for a Material
Breach of this Agreement which the breaching party fails to cure within a
reasonable amount of time after receiving written notice from the non -breaching
party. The City's and the District's intent by this section is to provide both service
stability to citizens and job security to employees.
11.2 Years Six Through Twenty. In addition to terminating this Agreement for a
Material Breach, either party may terminate this Agreement after the first five (5)
years from the Commencement Date by providing the other party with two (2)
years written notice of its intent to terminate during any period of extension.
Notice under this provision may only be given once five years have elapsed after
the Commencement Date.
11.3 Termination Costs. The costs associated with terminating this Agreement shall
be borne by the party who elects to terminate, or in the event of a Material
Breach, by the breaching party, provided that in the following circumstances, the
costs of termination shall be apportioned.
11.4 Termination Due to Change in Law or by Mutual Agreement. In the event that this
Agreement is terminated due to a change in law, each party shall bear its own
costs associated with the termination; or, in the event that the City and District
mutually agree to terminate this Agreement, each party shall bear its own costs
associated with the termination.
'11.5 Regional Fire Psotectign Service Authorit in the event that the District, Glon^y
with one or more fire protection jurisdictions, elects to create a Regional Fire
Protection Service Authority Planning Committee ("RFA Planning Committee") as
Interlocal Agreement for Fire and Emergency Medical Service Operations
Page 12 of 21 November 2, 2009
a�
E
a�
a�
L
a
0
L
a�
c
r
0
M
oo
a�
0
0
N
Q
J
0
U_
w
0
U
r_
0
U
0
Q
Packet Pg. 161
6.1.d
provided in RCW 52.26.030, the District agrees to notify the City of its intent and,
subject to approval of the other participating jurisdictions, to afford the City an
opportunity to be a participant on the RFA Planning Committee. Declining the
opportunity to participate in the RFA Planning Committee shall not be construed
as a material breach on the part of the City as defined in the Definitions section
of this Agreement. In the even that a Regional Fire Protection Service Authority
(RFA) or another legally recognized means of providing fire and emergency
medical services is created, inclusive of the City and District, this Interlocal
Agreement will be terminated on the effective date of such Agreement, and
neither the City nor the District shall be considered to have committed a material
breach as defined in the Definitions section of this Agreement.
11.6 Duty to Mitigate Costs. The City and District have an affirmative duty to mitigate
their respective costs of termination, irrespective of the party who elects to
terminate this Agreement and irrespective of the party who must bear the costs
of termination.
11.7 Return of Assets to the City. Regardless of the reason for termination, the City
and District agree that like assets purchased by and transferred to the District as
part of this Agreement shall be returned to the City as described below. This
provision shall not apply to the formation of a RFA in which both the City and the
District are participants.
11.7.1 Purchase Back Rolling Stock. All rolling stock sold under this agreement, or
equivalent apparatus and vehicles in use by the District at the time of termination
shall be purchased back using the same process, methods, and conditions under
which the original purchase was made unless otherwise agreed upon by the
parties.
11.7.2 Purchase Back Equipment. All equipment sold under this agreement, or
equivalent equipment in use by the District at the time of termination shall be
purchase back using the same process, methods, and conditions under which
the original purchase was made unless otherwise agreed upon by the parties.
11.7.3 Rehire Personnel. In the event of termination within the first five (5) years of this
Agreement by either party for any reason, the City shall rehire the personnel laid
off by the District, up to fifty-four (54) personnel transferred with no loss of
compensation and accumulated benefits. Accrued vacation and sick leave banks
shall be transferred to the City and the District shall pay to the City the current
cash value of the leave banks as determined under the same procedures set
forth in Section 5.3 of this Agreement.
11.7.4 Former District Employees. The District shall indemnify, defend and hold
_ J_ _i_:�,. ..i:.. 4.. .hirr.A rli-fr;n+
harmless from any and all dernanas, dahnS, or aCu0-iiS by rehilreu
personnel, which arises out of or relate to the time that such personnel were
employees of the District, PROVIDED HOWEVER, that the indemnification shall
Interlocal Agreement for Fire and Emergency Medical Service Operations
Page 13 of 21 November 2, 2009
aD
E
(D
a�
a�
Q
0
a�
c
r
0
i�
r
oo
a)
0
0
N
Q
J
0
U-
w
0
U
a
aD
a
Packet Pg. 162
6.1.d
not apply to any claims arising as a result of the City's actions during the term of
the Agreement.
12. DECLINE TO MERGE
12.1 City Declines to Merge. In the event that the District enters into an agreement
with any other fire district that is substantially equivalent to a merger, the City
may decline to be included, and elect to end the Agreement without prejudice or
penalty. The terms and conditions of that termination include written notice
provided in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.1 to the District of the
intent to end the Agreement not more than 90 days after receiving written
notification provided in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.1 from the
District that the District intends to merge with another entity.
12.1.1 Not a Material Breach. The City decision to not merge does not constitute a
Material Breach of the Agreement and none of the penalties associated with a
Material Breach shall apply to the City.
12.1.2 12-Month Notice. The Agreement will end not more than 12 months after the City
officially notifies the District that it declines to be merged, unless otherwise
agreed to by the parties, and the costs of termination shall be split evenly
between the parties.
12.1.3 City Exit from Agreement. If the City elects to terminate the Agreement because
of an impending merger between the District and one or more other jurisdiction,
the City exit will be under the terms and conditions described in Section 11.7.
13. CITY FIRE DONATION FUND
13.1 Disposition of Fire Donation Funds. Effective on the Commencement Date of this
Agreement, the amount of funds in the Fire Department Donation Fund on
December 31, 2009 shall be forwarded to the District 1 to acquire fire and life
safety tools and equipment not otherwise affordable through the regular budget
process. Tools and equipment subsequently acquired with Donation Fund
monies by the District will be assigned to Edmonds Fire Stations and apparatus
but shall be used without restriction throughout the District service area.
14. TOWN OF WOODWAY
14.1 No Impact on this Agreement. The provision of fire and emergency medical
services to the Town of Woodway by the District has no organizational or
financial impact on the Agreement between the City and the District or the terms
and conditions of said Agreement.
Interlocal Agreement for Fire and Emergency Medical Service Operations
Page 14 of 21 November 2, 2009
a�
E
a�
a�
L
a
U
0
L
d
i
r
0
L
U-
oo
a�
0
0
N
Q
J
0
U-
w
0
U
a�
U
a
Q
Packet Pg. 163
6.1.d
15. CITY CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
15.1 Civil Service Commission Notification. The City acknowledges that the City of
Edmonds Civil Service Commission has been officially advised of the terms and
conditions of this Agreement.
16. CITY AND DISTRICT ARE INDEPENDENT MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENTS
16.1 Independent Governments. The City and District recognize and agree that the
City and District are independent governments. Except for the specific terms
herein, nothing herein shall be construed to limit the discretion of the governing
bodies of each party. Specifically and without limiting the foregoing, the District
shall have the sole discretion and the obligation to determine the exact method
by which the services are provided within the District and within the City unless
otherwise stipulated within this Agreement.
16.2 Resource Assignments. The District shall assign the resources available to it
without regard to internal political boundaries, but rather based upon the
operational judgment of the District as exercised within the limitations and
obligations of Sections 2.4 through 2.8.
16.3 Debts and Obligations. Neither the City nor District, except as expressly set forth
herein or as required by law, shall be liable for any debts or obligations of the
other.
17. INSURANCE
17.1 Maintenance of Insurance. For the duration of this Agreement, each Party shall
maintain insurance as follows: Each party shall maintain its own insurance policy
insuring damage to its own fire stations, real and personal property and
equipment if any, and "policy" shall be understood to include insurance pooling
arrangements or compacts such as the Washington Cities Insurance Authority
(WCIA). The City shall maintain an insurance policy insuring against liability for
accidents occurring on City owned property. Such insurance policy shall be in an
amount not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per occurrence with a
deductible of not more than $5,000. The District shall maintain an insurance
policy insuring against liability arising out of work or operations performed by the
District under this Agreement in an amount not less than one million dollars
($1,000,000.00) per occurrence with a deductible of not more than $5,000. The
phrases "work or operations and "maintenance and operations" shall include the
services identified in Section 1. Scope of Services, the services of the Fire
Marshal and the District's Fire Chief, acting in the capacity of City Fire Chief and
any obligation covered by Exhibit B, Section 9.
17.2 Claims of Former City Employees. The City has provided proof of coverage that it
has maintained insurance against claims by former City Personnel for incidents
Interlocal Agreement for Fire and Emergency Medical Service Operations
Page 15 of 21 November 2, 2009
a�
a
0
L
a�
c
r
.L
yr
0
i-
oo
a�
0
0
N
Q
J
0
U-
w
0
U
a�
U
0
Q
Packet Pg. 164
6.1.d
and occurrences which may have occurred prior to the Commencement Date of
the Interlocal Agreement, including but not limited to, injuries, employment
claims, labor grievances, and other work -related claims. Such insurance was at
all times in an amount not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per
occurrence with a deductible of not more than $5,000. The City will hold
harmless the District and its insurance provider for any such claims, lawsuits or
accusations that occurred prior to the Commencement Date of the Interlocal
Agreement,
17.3 Claims of Former District Employees, The District represents and warrants that it
has maintained insurance against claims by District employees for incidents and
occurrences which may have occurred during the time period prior to the
Commencement Date of the Agreement, including but not limited to injuries,
employment claims, labor grievances, and other work -related claims. Such
insurance was at all times in an amount not less than one million dollars
($1,000,000.00) per occurrence with a deductible of not more than $5,000.
17.4 Hold Harmless. To the extent each party's insurance coverage is not voided,
each party agrees to defend and hold harmless the other party, its officers,
officials, employees and volunteers from any and all claims, costs, including
reasonable attorneys' and expert witness fees, losses and judgments arising out
of the negligent and intentional acts or omissions of such party's officers,
officials, employees and volunteers in connection with the performance of this
Agreement. The provisions of this section shall survive the expiration or
termination of this Agreement.
17.5 Release from Claims. Except as specifically provided in this Agreement, and
except in the event of breach of this Agreement, the District and the City do
hereby forever release each other from any claims, demands, damages or
causes of action related to damage to equipment or property owned by the City
or District or assumed under this Agreement. It is the intent of the City and
District to cover this risk with the insurance noted above.
18. DISPUTE RESOLUTION
18.1 Mediation. It is the intent of the City and District to resolve all disputes between
them without litigation. Excluded from mediation are issues related to the
legislative authority of the Edmonds City Council to make budget and
appropriation decisions, decisions to contract, or establish levels of service under
Section 2.4 of this Agreement and Chapter 35.103 RCW. Policy decisions of the
City Council shall not be subject to review by a mediator; however, this shall not
abridge the right of the District to pursue an increase in the Annual Contract
Payment as a result of such decision. The City and District shall mutually agree
upon a mediator. Any expenses incidental to mediation, including the mediator's
fee, shall be borne equally by the City and District. If the City and District cannot
agree upon a mediator, the City and District shall submit the matter to the
Interlocal Agreement for Fire and Emergency Medical Service Operations
Page 16 of 21 November 2, 2009
aD
a�
a�
Q
0
a�
r
c
0
i�
r
oo
a)
0
0
N
Q
J
0
U_
w
O
U
r_
aD
a
Packet Pg. 165
6.1.d
Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Service (JAMS) and request that a mediator be
appointed. This requirement to mediate the dispute may only be waived by
mutual written agreement before a party may proceed to litigation as provided
within this agreement.
18.2 Binding Arbitration. If the City and District are unsuccessful in renegotiating the
Contract Payment after having completed mediation, the City and District shall
submit the matter to binding arbitration with the foregoing arbitration service.
Excluded from binding arbitration are issues related to the legislative authority of
the Edmonds City Council to make budget and appropriation decisions, decisions
to contract, or establish levels of service under Section 2.4 of this Agreement and
Chapter 35.103 RCW. Policy decisions of the City Council shall not be subject to
review by an arbitrator; however, this shall not abridge the right of the District to
pursue an increase in the Annual Contract Payment as a result of such decision.
The arbitration shall be conducted according to the selected arbitration service's
Streamlined Arbitration Rules and Procedures. At this arbitration, the arbitrator
shall, as nearly as possible, apply the analysis used in this agreement and
supporting Exhibits to adjust the Contract Payment. The arbitrator may deviate
from such analysis and use principles of fairness and equity, but should do so
sparingly. Unless the City and District mutually consent, the results of any
binding arbitration session shall not be deemed to be precedent for any
subsequent mediations or arbitrations.
18.3 Prevailing Party. In the event either party herein finds it necessary to bring an
action against the other party to enforce any of the terms, covenants or
conditions hereof or any instrument executed pursuant to this Agreement by
reason of any breach or default hereunder or there under, the party prevailing in
any such action or proceeding shall be paid all costs and attorneys' fees incurred
by the other party, and in the event any judgment is secured by such prevailing
party, all such costs and attorneys' fees of collection shall be included in any
such judgment. Jurisdiction and venue for this Agreement lies exclusively in
Snohomish County, Washington.
19. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
19.1 Noticing Procedures. All notices, demands, requests, consents and approvals
which may, or are required to be given by any party to any other party hereunder,
shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been duly given if delivered
personally, sent by facsimile, sent by nationally recognized overnight delivery
service, or if mailed or deposited in the United States mail, sent by registered or
certified mail, return receipt requested and postage prepaid to:
District Secretary: City Clerk:
Snohomish County Fire Protection District No. 1 City of Edmonds
12425 Meridian Avenue 121 5th Avenue North
Interlocal Agreement for Fire and Emergency Medical Service Operations
Page 17 of 21 November 2, 2009
(D
E
aD
a�
a�
Q
0
0
a�
c
L)
0
iL
r
oo
a)
0
0
N
Q
J
0
U-
w
O
U
aD
a
Packet Pg. 166
6.1.d
Everett, WA 98208 Edmonds, WA 98020
Or, to such other address as the foregoing City and District hereto may from
time -to -time designate in writing and deliver in a like manner. All notices shall be
deemed complete upon actual receipt or refusal to accept delivery. Facsimile
transmission of any signed original document and retransmission of any signed
facsimile transmission shall be the same as delivery of an original document.
19.2 Other Cooperative Agreements. Nothing in this Agreement shall preclude the
City and the District from entering into contracts for service in support of this
Agreement.
19.3 Public Duty Doctrine. This Agreement shall not be construed to provide any
benefits to any third parties. Specifically, and without limiting the foregoing, this
Agreement shall not create or be construed as creating an exception to the
Public Duty Doctrine. The City and District shall cooperate in good faith and
execute such documents as necessary to effectuate the purposes and intent of
this Agreement.
19.4 Entire Agreement. This entire agreement between the City and District hereto is
contained in this Agreement and exhibits hereto; and this Agreement supersedes
all of their previous understandings and agreements, written and oral, with
respect to this transaction. This Agreement may be amended only by written
instrument executed by the City and District subsequent to the date hereof.
Dated this 3 day of ovc-,1k, 2009
SNOHOMISH C❑ N'
By:
Com ' sio r
By:
Commissioner
By:
Commissioner
FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT N
BY
J- '
Commissioner
l�
Commissioner
Attest:
District Secretary
... ::
��■ ply q -;
Interlocal Agreement for Fire and Emergency Medical Service Operations
Page 18 of 21 November 2, 2009
c
as
E
as
a�
a
U
0
L
as
c
0
as
L
LL
00
rn
0
0
N
Q
J
r
0
U-
W
0
v
c
a�
E
0
r
r
Q
Packet Pg. 167
6.1.d
CITY OF E MONDS
By: 4��Z�
City Mayor
Approved a t
)5�
By:
City Attar
Attest--,,G• 'd.
City Clerk
Interlocal Agreement for Fire and Emergency Medical Service Operations
Page 19 of 21 November 2, 2009
aD
E
(D
a�
L
Q
:.i
L
r
r
c.i
�L
L
r
r
oo
a)
O
O
N
Q
J
LL
W
O
U
c
E
t
v
r
r
Q
Packet Pg. 168
6.1.d
Definitions
The following definitions shall apply throughout this Agreement.
a. Cam: City of Edmonds.
b. City Fire Chief: The Fire Chief of the City of Edmonds
C. City Fire Department: The Edmonds Fire Department.
d. City Fire Stations: Currently, Fire Station 16, Fire Station 17, and Fire
Station 20.
e. Commencement Date: The date at which the performance and
obligations of the City and District as contained herein begin.
City Personnel: The employees of the City of Edmonds Fire Department
as of the Commencement Date who are transferring employment to the
District.
g. Contract Payment: The annual amount that the City will pay to the District
pursuant to this Agreement.
h. District: Snohomish County Fire Protection District No. 1.
Effective Date: The date this Agreement is executed by the City and
District.
District Fire Chief: The Fire Chief of Snohomish County Fire Protection
District No. 1.
k. Firefighter/EMS Personnel: Full-time, compensated employees,
firefighters, emergency medical technicians, or paramedics
Grid Cards: The electronic file within the Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD)
System, which is used to determine fire station response order for Fire
District 1.
M. Insurance: The term "insurance" as used in this agreement means either
valid insurance offered and sold by a commercial insurance company or
carrier approved to do business in the State of Washington by the
Washington State Insurance Commissioner or valid self-insurance through
a self-insurance pooling organization approved for operation in the State
of Washington by the Washington State Risk Manager or any combination
of valid commercial insurance and self-insurance pooling if both are
approved for sale and/or operation in the State of Washington.
Interlocal Agreement for Fire and Emergency Medical Service Operations
Page 20 of 21 November 2, 2009
a�
E
a�
a
0
L
a�
c
r
a+
V
0
L
i_
oo
CD
0
0
N
Q
J
T
U_
w
O
U
a�
E
U
0
Q
Packet Pg. 169
6.1.d
n. Material Breach: A Material Breach means: the District's failure to provide
minimum staffing levels as described within this Agreement; the City's
failure to timely pay the Contract Payment as described within this
Agreement, or the City's or District's failure to comply within this
Agreement concerning the City's fire stations, equipment and/or
apparatus.
o. Wind -Up Period: The 12 months immediately following formal notification
of a Material Breach by either party except as defined in Section 10.2.
Interlocal Agreement for Fire and Emergency Medical Service Operations
Page 21 of 21 November 2, 2009
r
Q
Packet Pg. 170
7.1
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 01/24/2017
Shoreline Master Program (45 min.)
Staff Lead: Kernen Lien
Department: Planning Division
Preparer: Kernen Lien
Background/History
The City of Edmonds spent several years (2006 - 2014) revising its SMP consistent with updated state
guidelines. The City's review of the SMP update included ten meetings before the Planning Board from
October 2011 - November 2012 and eleven meetings before the City Council from December 2012
through November 2014, culminating in the adoption of Resolution 1326 expressing intent to adopt an
update to the Shoreline Master Program.
The Department of Ecology is responsible for ensuring statewide policies are upheld and implemented
when local SMPs are adopted and must approve local SMPs before they become effective. Following
the adoption of Resolution 1326, the City's updated SMP and supporting documentation was sent to
Ecology for review in December 2014. Ecology issued a conditional approval of the City's SMP on June
27, 2016.
The Conditional Approval includes eight required changes to the City's SMP and one recommended
change. Five of the required changes relate to incorporating the recently adopted critical area ordinance
into the SMP. The three remaining required changes and the one recommended change are in regards
to the Urban Mixed Use IV Shoreline Environment around the Edmonds Marsh. The one recommended
change was to allow residential development within the Urban Mixed Use IV shoreline environment. The
Council has reviewed each of the required changes proposed by Ecology and taken preliminary votes on
each of the changes to provide direction to staff in preparing a response to Ecology.
The City of Edmonds responded to Ecology's conditional approval on October 19, 2016 accepting some
of Ecology's required changes and proposing alternatives to others (Exhibit 2). The alternatives
proposed by the City of Edmonds largely represented providing buffers and setbacks in the Urban Mixed
Use IV shoreline environment consistent with Ecology's Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates (Publication
No. 16-06-001). Department of Ecology responded to the City's proposed alternatives on January 10,
2017 (Exhibit 1).
Staff Recommendation
Consider Department of Ecology's options for the Urban Mixed Use IV buffer/setbacks.
Narrative
Exhibit 1 contains Department of Ecology's January 10, 2017 response to the City of Edmonds proposed
alternatives to Ecology's conditional approval of the City's Shoreline Master Program. Ecology formally
Packet Pg. 171
7.1
accepts the City's actions and alternatives on Ecology's required changes 1 - 6 (incorporation of the
critical area regulations and dropping the interim designation for the Urban Mixed Use IV shoreline
environment). However, Ecology has offered two options for the City of Edmonds to consider regarding
the buffer and setbacks for the UMU IV shoreline environment. Ecology staff will be presenting these
options during the council meeting. Below is a summary of the options.
Option 1: 110-foot buffer/125-foot setback with clarification
This option would keep that Council's proposed alternative of applying the 110-buffer with a 15-foot
building setback that is consistent with Ecology's Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates (Publication No.
16-06-001), but allow for an alternative buffer width through applying the Interrupted Buffer provision
in ECDC 23.40.220.C.4 through a shoreline conditional use permit process. A shoreline conditional use
permit is decided by the hearing examiner in a public hearing and the hearing examiner's decision is
forwarded to the Department of Ecology for Ecology's approval, approval with conditions, or denial.
Option 2: Minimum 50-foot buffer/65-foot setback, after confirming through site specific scientific study
that a 50-foot buffer is appropriate for the UMU IV shoreline environment
This option would establish a buffer between 110 feet and 50 feet with a 15-foot building setback. In
this option, the appropriate buffer would be established through a master planned development and a
shoreline conditional use permit process and a site specific assessment. Ecology proposes the following
criteria for establishing the buffer: "The assessment shall determine the width based on the potential lift
in ecological functions through the re-establishment of a vegetated buffer and retrofitting storm water
system(s) to meet current State treatment standards. To ensure no net loss of ecological function from
site redevelopment, this study shall use the existing conditions as the baseline for assessing the
potential benefit of restoring the buffer and improving storm water treatment."
Next Steps
The Department of Ecology has requested the City make a final decision on the buffer/setback on this
issue by March 30, 2017.
Attachments:
Exhibit 1- Department of Ecology's Response to City of Edmonds' October 19, 2016 Proposed SMP
Alternatives
Exhibit 2 - City of Edmonds October 19, 2016 Response to Ecology's Conditional Approval
Packet Pg. 172
sTArE. o
E LY
O @ ati Cf
t�jf� 1869 boy •�
L
O
STATE OF WASHINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
PO Box 47600 ® Olympia, WA 98504-7600 V 360-407-6000 �
711 for Washington Relay Service • Persons with a speech disability can call 877-833-6341
January 10, 2017
The Honorable Kristiana Johnson, President
City of Edmonds Council
121 Fifth Avenue North
Edmonds, WA 98020
RE: City of Edmonds Response to Department of Ecology's .Dine 27, 2016, Conditional
SMP Approval.
Dear Ms. Johnson:
Thank you for your October 19, 2016, letter in response to the Department of Ecology's
(Ecology) conditional approval of the City of Edmonds (City) Shoreline Master Program (SMP)
update. For required changes one through six, the City has either accepted Ecology's required
changes or offered alternatives that Ecology finds are consistent with .the SMA and Ecology
guidelines, and are consistent with the original intent of the required changes. This letter
formally accepts the City's final determination on Ecology's required changes one through six.
The amended text provided by the City in Attachment E — Revised (10/19/2016) will become
part of the approved SMP amendment through Ecology's final action.
We have only one remaining issue. The City has proposed alternatives to Ecology's required
change seven and eight concerning Edmonds Marsh buffers and setbacks. We recognize the
intense community interest and engagement surrounding the marsh. Over the past few months,
Ecology staff have attended many Council meetings and engaged in robust discussions among
citizens and Councilmembers. I have met personally with representatives of Friends of the
Marsh and the Port of Edmonds to hear their perspectives.
Ecology understands the importance of preserving and improving the Edmonds Marsh. We
believe this is a common interest among all involved parties. However, Ecology is concerned
the City's proposed alternatives must be clarified for consistency with the purpose and intent of
Ecology's original change.l The difficulty remains how to achieve this objective given the
surrounding land uses, and the near absence of a marsh buffer within the Urban Mixed IV
shoreline environment.
' WAC 173-26-120(7)(b)(ii).
®t`,a Packet Pg. 173
The Honorable Kristiana Johnson
January 10, 2017
Page 2
L
O
L
Cn
To that end, Ecology proposes two options for clarifying the SMP that would address our
concerns, as well as the interests of the community. Please review the attached "Ecology
Response to City Alternatives." The attached document responds to the City's thoughtful
Evaluation ofScientifrc and Regulatory Consideration Related to Ecology's Required Changes 7
r
and 8. 1°
Each of these options clarify how appropriate mitigation would be established during
redevelopment of the Urban Mixed Use IV environment through site specific assessments that
acknowledge existing conditions. These suggested change are consistent with RCW 90,58.100
(use of scientific information) and WAC 173-26-201(2)(c) & (e) (protection of ecological
functions and environmental impact mitigation).
We appreciate the City's continued work on the SMP. There are many positive aspects to the
SMP update that will benefit the City's Puget Sound and Lake Ballinger shorelines. The
Edmonds Marsh issue is the last remaining issue related to the Edmonds SMP update process. I
believe all parties interested in the outcome of the SMP have a common interest in protecting and
improving the quality of Edmonds Marsh for future generations, We hope the options we have
provided will help us reach a final resolution.
We would like the opportunity to present these options to Council, answer questions you may
have, and conclude the SMP update process. Please contact Joe Burcar of our Northwest
Regional Office at (425) 649-7096 or ioe.burcar2ecy.wa,go_v.
Sincerely,
Maia D. Bellon
Director
cc: Dave Earling, Mayor, City of Edmonds.
Shane Hope, Edmonds City Development Services
Friends of the Edmonds Marsh
Bob McChesney, Executive Director, Port of Edmonds
Packet Pg. 174
7.1.a
Attachment G
Options for addressing City of Edmonds Alternatives to Ecology's Required
L
Changes addressing Edmonds Marsh Buffers and Setbacks.
This document presents Ecology's response to the City of Edmonds alternatives addressing the Edmonds
Marsh Buffers and Setbacks. The City's response, dated October 19, 2016, provides an alternative to
Ecology's Required Changes (Row Numbers 7 and 8) issued during the June 27, 2016 Conditional SMP
Approval.
Under WAC 173-26-120(7), Ecology may approve the City's alternatives if they comply with the SMA and
substantive guidelines and are "consistent with the purpose and intent of the changes originally
proposed by [Ecology]." The purpose and intent of Ecology's original proposed amendments are found
in Ecology's Findings and Conclusions (Attachment A, p. 11), and Required Changes (Attachment B, p. 4),
dated June 27, 2016.
The City's alternatives would establish a fixed requirement for a 110' vegetated buffer upon
redevelopment within the Urban Mixed Use IV environment designation. Ecology finds the City's
alternatives could be consistent with applicable laws, rules and the intent of Required Changes,
provided they are clarified to acknowledge legally existing uses and site conditions on the landward side
of the levee that rings the Marsh. The 110-foot area the City's regulations would require to be
revegetated is historic fill, and includes paved areas, tennis courts, a Health Club, other existing
structures, and a brownfields clean-up site at the southern boundary of the Marsh.
This document outlines the background of this issue, reviews the city alternatives and rationale, and
provides two different options for addressing our common interest in establishing a legally defensible
framework for protecting and restoring the Marsh.
The City's rationale for their alternatives are provided in a memo prepared by Attorney Jeff Taraday of
Lighthouse Law Group titled "Evaluation of scientific and regulatory considerations related to Ecology's
Required Changes 7 and 8," dated September 23, 2016. The Memo is described by the City as
Attachment B. To reduce confusion with Ecology's Attachment B (Required Changes), this Evaluation
memo is hereafter referred to as the "Lighthouse Memo."
Background on Ecology's ConditionalApproval Required Changes to Rows land 8
Buffers and setbacks for the Urban Mixed Use IV environment designation for Edmonds Marsh have
been discussed extensively during the SMP update. The City Planning Commission had proposed a 50'
buffer based on an evaluation of applicable scientific information and existing conditions. A 50-foot
buffer is generally consistent with existing conditions on the intensely developed north side of the
Marsh. The Planning Commission acknowledged the presence of the levee limits the water quality
benefits that a larger buffer would provide. Requiring a vegetative buffer larger than 50' would require
significant removal of historic fill and removal of existing paved areas and structures.
In adopting the final SMP the City Council retained the 50' buffer but increased the building setback to
50' for a total buffer/setback of 100.' Ecology's Required Changes (Rows 7 and 8) did not reduce the 50'
buffer width, but amended the City's 50' setback to incorporate a 15' setback from the edge of the
vegetative buffer for a 65' combined buffer/setback. The 15' setback was chosen for internal
consistency with the City Critical Areas Ordinance that requires a 15-foot setback from the edge of a
buffer (ECDC 24.40.280, Building Setbacks). The changes also added a threshold for redevelopment to
Ecology Response to City Alternatives to Required Changes
Packet Pg. 175
7.1.a
Attachment G
clarify when the requirement would apply. Ecology's changes were intended to align the SMP with the
L
planning commission draft, recognize existing conditions, and maintain consistency with the City's o
Critical Areas Ordinance.
as
Description of City Alternatives to Rows land 8 r
For Rows 7 and 8 the City provides alternative setback/buffer for the UMU IV shoreline environment in
24.40.090 Shoreline Bulk and Dimensional Standards. The City's alternative would establish a definitive
125' building setback and mandate the installation of a 110' vegetative buffer when approved master
plans for the area are implemented.
The City's description for the Change to Row 7:
For every instance in Shoreline Bulk and Dimensional Standards table contained in 24.90.090
where the Urban Mixed Use IV shoreline indicates a shore setback of 100150, that will be
changed to 1251110. This means there will be a requirement for a 110 foot vegetative buffer
with an additional 15 foot structural setback for a total of a 125-foot shore setback measured
from the edge of the Marsh.
The City's description of the Change to Row 8:
The Harbor Square site on the north side of the Marsh has been developed in accordance with a
contract rezone. The existing development cannot be expanded as the limitations of the
contract rezone have been met. The Harbor Square site has a comprehensive plan designation
of Downtown Master Plan. In order for the Harbor Square site to be redeveloped, the
redevelopment will have to be approved through a master planning process. When an
approved master plan is implemented, the 110-buffer will be required to be established.
Likewise, the property on the south side of the Marsh has a comprehensive plan designation of
Master Plan Development and a zoning designation of Master Plan 2. Development on the
south side of the Marsh will also occur through a master plan process. When an approved
master plan implemented on the south side of the Marsh, the 110-foot buffer will be required to
be established.
While buffer establishment is required with an implemented master plan, the 110-foot may be
established prior to the implementation of master planned development through a voluntary
buffer restoration effort.
City Rationale: Legal Standards
The Lighthouse Memo includes a summary of Legal Standards to guide local decision -making. The
citations address the requirements to protect ecological functions based on available scientific
information. The memo cites WAC 173-26-186(8)(b) which states that SMPs "shall include policies and
regulations designed to achieve no net loss of [shoreline] ecological functions." The Lighthouse Memo
also cites WAC 173-26-186(8)(c) which states that SMPs "shall include goals and policies that provide for
restoration of... impaired ecological functions."
However, it is important to note that the SMP Guidelines clarify that restoration be addressed through
goals and policies, but is not intended to be achieved through regulations.
The guidelines include other citations that reinforces this distinction. For example, WACs 173-26-
201(2)(c) and (e) describe how to address protection of ecological functions and environmental impact
Ecology Response to City Alternatives to Required Changes
Packet Pg. 176
7.1.a
Attachment G
mitigation. The rules require application of a mitigation sequence to achieve no net loss of ecological
functions for each new development. The rules include an important restraint on SMP authority. The
L
o
mitigation sequence may "not result in required mitigation in excess of that necessary to assure that
development will result in no net loss of shoreline ecological functions..." [WAC 173-26-201(2)(e)(ii)(A)].
ti
r
In other words, protective regulations can only require new developments to provide mitigation that
compensates for the impacts of new development. A fundamental principle of the guidelines is that the
>
no net loss" standard protects existing functions, and restoration to improve conditions is met through
nonregulatory means Restoration Planning WAC 173-26-201(2)(f). This was a cornerstone of the
guidelines, which were negotiated with diverse interests to resolve a legal challenge. Ecology has
a
approved SMPs that include incentive -based approaches to encourage restoration, but these cannot be (L
M
required. U)
City Rationale: Scientific and Technical Information
The Lighthouse Memo includes a summary of Ecology's wetland guidance documents (Citations A — F).
The citations correctly identify Ecology's recommended buffer widths for Category II estuarine wetlands
would be 110 feet provided minimization measures are provided.
However, buffers areas in Ecology's guidance documents are presumed to be functionally connected
and therefore capable of performing ecological functions. The City's existing CAO recognizes this. In a
section titled "Allowed Activities," a project applicant may propose to modify a standard buffer based on
a site -specific study that determines an area is functionally isolated (23.40. 220 C.4).
The Lighthouse Memo cites examples provided in Ecology's Wetlands in Washington State, Volume Z
Guidance for Protecting and Managing Wetlands in reference to buffer requirements for "new"
development. However, any proposal in the UMU IV would be considered "redevelopment", not new
development. In addition to the wetland guidance, the Lighthouse Memo cites Ecology's SMP
Handbook chapters on Vegetation Conservation (Chpt 11) and Legally Existing Uses (Chpt 14). These
chapters recognize that tailored buffers should be based on existing conditions.
By contrast, the City's alternative establishes a fixed area that would have to be revegetated during
redevelopment that would "over -ride" the existing allowance in the City's CAO based on a site -specific
study. The regulation relies on the "default" buffer width rather than developing a tailored buffer that
acknowledges existing conditions.
City Rationale: Effects of City Marsh Restoration
The Lighthouse Memo notes "The city council appears to hold unanimously the goal of restoring the
ecological functions and values of the Edmonds Marsh. To the extent that there are differing opinions on
the city council, they appear to concern the extent to which the Edmonds Marsh can or should be
restored, and/or the best strategies for accomplishing such restoration."
Ecology fully agrees with the unanimous goal of the Council to restore the ecological functions and
values of the Marsh. It appears Port of Edmonds Commissioners also share this goal. This should be an
ideal circumstance for reaching agreement on a reasonable path forward.
Ecology Response to City Alternatives to Required Changes
Packet Pg. 177
7.1.a
Attachment G
An SMP can include restoration goals and policies to improve existing conditions. As noted above the
L
SMP guidelines acknowledge improvements are to be achieved through voluntary restoration activities o
or through regulatory incentives. Cn
as
Ecology options based on the City's analysis of alternatives
The Lighthouse Memo includes 4 options. Option 2 (75' buffer based on City's old CAO) is no longer
applicable, as the City has already amended the CAO to include a 110' buffer for Category 2 wetlands. r
Option 4 is Ecology's original Required Changes, which the Council has indicated it does not want to c
pursue. Ecology offers the following two options based on the City's analysis of alternatives. +'
The Lighthouse Memo starts its evaluation of alternatives with the following:
"It will simplify the discussion of alternative buffer widths, if the setback from the edge of the
buffer (not from the edge of the wetland) remains consistent across the various alternatives. We
agree with Ecology that the SMP should strive for consistency with the CAO in this area. Because
the city's CAO currently requires any structure to be setback from the edge of a buffer by 15
feet, the options discussed below will all assume that structures cannot be placed any closer
than 15 feet from the edge of a buffer."
Ecology's two options below are therefore premised on the use of a 15' setback measured from the
edge of the buffer (whatever it may be). Both options include application of a site -specific study that
allows the regulatory regime to acknowledge existing conditions and adapt to anticipated impacts of
proposed development.
For either of these options, the city may want to include a requirement for a Conditional Use Permit for
developments in the UM -IV designation. The intent here is to address possible concerns that a site -
specific study might not get adequate review. The requirement for a CUP adds a heightened degree of
scrutiny and projects would require Ecology formal review and approval.
Option: 110-foot buffer/125-foot setback
The City has offered this Option as its alternative to Ecology's Required Changes in Row 7 and 8. The
Lighthouse Memo cites Ecology's Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates (June 2016) as the source for the
inclusion of a 110-foot buffer with minimization measures as the appropriate buffer for a Category 2
wetland, consistent with the City's recent CAO amendments.
The Lighthouse Memo acknowledges the reality that adoption of a 110-foot buffer does not do anything
to change conditions on the ground. The Memo recognizes that existing developments could be
maintained indefinitely, and that a wide buffer could be a disincentive to redevelopment.
Ecology finds the City's alternative should be clarified to include recognition that at the project scale the
buffers are to be implemented in a manner that acknowledges legally existing uses and site conditions
and ensure the project includes necessary protections commensurate with the proposed development.
A few clarifications could remove the disincentive for redevelopment and provide an equitable
regulatory framework consistent with SMA authorities. As noted above, the Edmonds CAO already
includes a section which allows for exemptions from prescribed buffer widths for areas proven to be
functionally isolated. The provision requires a qualified consultant prepare a site assessment and
includes criteria for evaluating the assessment, as follows:
Ecology Response to City Alternatives to Required Changes 4
Packet Pg. 178
7.1.a
Attachment G
Edmonds Critical Areas Code 23.40. 220 C.4 (Development Proposals within Interrupted
Stream or Wetland Buffers)
L
o
Adjacent areas that may be physically separated from a stream or wetland due to existing,
legally established structures or paved areas may be exempted from the prescribed buffer
widths if proven scientifically to be functionally isolated from the stream or wetland. The
r
director will require the applicant to provide a site assessment and functional analysis M
documentation report by a qualified critical area consultant that demonstrates the interrupted
buffer area is functionally isolated. The director shall consider the hydrologic, geologic, and/or
biological habitat connection potential and the extent and permanence of the physical
separation.
The fixed buffer width in the City's alternative SMP provision would override the application of the CAO
which allows for adapting necessary protections at the project level.
The City's Alternative could be modified to incorporate existing CAO provisions through the following
modification to the standards table:
24.40.090 Shoreline Bulk and Dimensional Standards
Shoreline development
Urban Mixed Use IV
All Other Commercial and Light Industrial Development
Shore Setback
100/50 125/11018
Recreation
Shore Setback
15' 17
Residential Development
Shore Setback
4-09�50- 125/11018
Transportation and Parking
Uncovered Parking
Shore Setback
a 00� 125/1101"
Covered Parking
Shore Setback
4-09�50- 125/11018
All Other Development
Shore Setback
4-09�50- 125/11018
Footnote:
18. Setback for new development within the Urban Mixed -Use IV environment is 15 feet
from the edge of a vegetative buffer. A 110-foot vegetative buffer is required to be established
when an approved master planned development is implemented on the north or south side
of the Marsh. An alternative buffer width may be established with approval of a CUP and
when consistent with 23.40. 220 CA The 110-buffer may be established in the absence of a
master planned redevelopment through a standalone restoration project.
Option: Minimum 50-foot buffer/65-foot setback, after confirming through site
specific scientific study that a 50-foot buffer is appropriate for the UMU4
The Lighthouse Memo identifies some of the assumptions behind Ecology's assertion that the City
Planning Commission recommendation for a 50-foot buffer is appropriate. These assumptions (and
others, including assumptions about restraints on requirements to restore during redevelopment) were
Ecology Response to City Alternatives to Required Changes
Packet Pg. 179
7.1.a
Attachment G
d
identified during the local planning process. The City notes this approach might be acceptable if these .a)
L
assumptions were tested in scientifically and/or economically supported findings. C
z
One option to build on this approach is to incorporate such a scientific study into the SMP requirements, 14
w
using a 50' buffer as a minimum, with site -specific determination at the project level. This could be
accomplished with the following clarifications:
24.40.090 Shoreline Bulk and Dimensional Standards
Shoreline development Urban Mixed Use IV
All Other Commercial and Light Industrial Development
Shore Setback
100/50 125/110 to
65/5018
Recreation
Shore Setback
15' 17
Residential Development
Shore Setback
10M0- 125/110 to
65/5018
Transportation and Parking
Uncovered Parking
Shore Setback
125/110 to
65/5018
Covered Parking
Shore Setback
100/50 125/110 to
65/5018
All Other Development
Shore Setback
100/50 125/110 to
65/5018
Footnote:
18. Setback for new development within the Urban Mixed -Use IV environment is 15 feet from the edge
of a vegetative buffer. A vegetative buffer is required to be established when an approved master
planned development is implemented on the north or south side of the Marsh based on approval of a
CUP and a site -specific assessment. The assessment shall determine the width based on the potential lift
in ecological functions through the re-establishment of a vegetated buffer and retrofitting storm water
system(s) to meet current State treatment standards. To ensure no net loss of ecological function from
site redevelopment, this study shall use the existing conditions as the baseline for assessing the
Dotential benefit of restoring the buffer and improving storm water treatment. The buffer width shall
not be less than 50 feet. A 110-foot vegetative buffer may be established in the absence of a master
planned redevelopment through a standalone restoration project.
Ecology Response to City Alternatives to Required Changes 6
Packet Pg. 180
7.1.a
Attachment G
Additional changes to clarify the CUP requirement.
L
The City does not need to amend the Shoreline Development Table because Footnote 1 clarifies that
0
text in the SMP over -rides the table. However, if the City wants to clarify the CUP requirement for
alternative buffers, the table could be amended as follows:
r
24.40.080 Shoreline Development Table: Shoreline Development Permitted by Area Designation
Shoreline development
Urban Mixed Use IV
Commercial and Light Industrial Development
Water -oriented
SDP'
Nonwater-oriented
SDP'
Residential Development
Detached Residential (Single -Family)
X
Attached or stacked Residential (Multi -Family)
X
Transportation and Parking
Railroads
X
Ferry Terminals
SDP'
Parking —supporting associated water -dependent uses
SDP'
Parking — not supporting associated water -dependent uses
SDP'
Other
SDP'
1: In the event that there is a conflict between the development(s) identified in this Table 24.40.080 and the
policies and/or regulations with the text of this Master Program, the policies and regulations within the text shall
apply.
2: Artwork associate with a permitted use in the Aquatic I or Aquatic II designation may by permitted; otherwise it
is a prohibited use.
3: A CUP is reauired where the aaDlicant Droaoses an alternative buffer.
Ecology Response to City Alternatives to Required Changes 7
Packet Pg. 181
7.1.b
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL
EDMONDS CITY HALL • FIRST FLOOR
121 5TH AVENUE NORTH • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • PHONE: (425) 771-0248 • FAX (425) 771-0254
Inc.1890
October 19, 2016
Maia D. Bellon, Director
WA State Department of Ecology
Attention: Director's Office
PO Box 47600
Olympia, WA 98504-6700
Re: City of Edmonds Shoreline Master Program Comprehensive Update —
City Response to Department of Ecology's Conditional Approval
Dear Ms. Bellon,
The City of Edmonds appreciates the additional time granted by Ecology to fully evaluate and prepare a
response to the Department of Ecology's conditional approval of the City's Shoreline Master Program.
Since receiving Ecology's conditional approval with eight required changes and one recommended
change, the City has spent a significant amount of time evaluating Ecology's required changes including
discussing the proposed changes over the course of seven Council meetings and receiving many public
comments on Ecology's proposed changes.
The required changes from Ecology can be split into two categories, 1) Requires changes 1— 5 related to
incorporating the recently updated critical area regulations into the SMP and 2) required changes 6 - 8
related to the Urban Mixed Use IV shoreline environment.
Regarding incorporating the critical area regulations into the SMP, the City Council largely agrees with
the changes proposed by Ecology with one exception. After the City of Edmonds adopted the updated
critical area regulations in May 2016 with Ordinance No. 4026, Ecology released Wetland Guidance for
CAO Updates (Publication No. 16-06-001) in June 2016. The wetland regulations in Ordinance No. 4026
and the SMP conditionally approved by Ecology were based on Ecology's Wetland & CAO Updates:
Guidance for Small Cities (Publication No. 10-06-002). The City Council has determined to follow the
most recent guidance with regards to Best Available Science and the City's development regulations. As
a result, Ecology's Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates (Publication No. 16-06-001) is being incorporated
into the SMP. Please see Attachment A for the specific alternatives and the rationale for the proposed
changes.
The Urban Mixed Use IV changes apply to the area surrounding the Edmonds Marsh, which is an
important feature (ecologically and socially) of the Edmonds waterfront area. While the City Council
accepts the change related to dropping the interim designation for the Urban Mixed Use IV shoreline
environment, the City Council does not believe Ecology's proposed setback/buffer in the UMU IV
environment are consistent with the Shoreline Management Act, Shoreline Master Program guidelines,
or the best available science and wetland guidance in Ecology's Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates
(Publication No. 16-06-001). The City Council is proposing an alternative setback/buffer for the UMU IV
environment and establishing an alternative threshold for buffer establishment. The City's proposed
Incorporated August 11, 1890 Packet Pg. 182
Sister City - Hekinan, Japan
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL
EDMONDS CITY HALL • FIRST FLOOR
121 5TH AVENUE NORTH • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • PHONE: (425) 771-0248 • FAX (425) 771-0254
fnc.18911
alternatives are included in Attachment A with an expanded rationale for the City's proposed alternative
included to required changes 7 and 8 in Attachment B.
Finally, the City acknowledges Ecology's recommended change to allow residential development with
the Urban Mixed Use IV environment but declines to implement this change at this time.
Please accept this letter along with Attachment A and B as the City of Edmonds' response as required by
RCW 90.58.090(2)(e).
The City of Edmonds appreciates the efforts of David Pater, Paul Anderson and Joe Burcar in this update
and their attendance at Council meetings as the City has worked through the SMP update process.
Sincerely,
Kristiana Johnson
City of Edmonds Council President
Cc: Dave Earling, City of Edmonds Mayor
David Pater, Ecology, Shoreline Planner
Joe Burcar, Ecology, SEA Section Manager
Paul Anderson, Ecology, Wetlands/401 Unit Supervisor
Incorporated August 11, 1890
Sister City - Hekinan, Japan
Packet Pg. 183
Attachment A: City of Edmonds Responses/Alternative Proposals to the Department of Ecology's Required Changes from the June 27, 2016 Conditional Approval
7.1.b
ITEM
SIVIP PROVISION
Topic Ecology
Required change from June 27,2016 Conditional Approval
City of Edmonds Response/Alternative Proposal
City of Edmonds - Discussion/Rationale
Format Changes [underline -additions; strikethrough-deletions]
1.
24.40.020 Critical
Critical Areas
B. The City of Edmonds Critical Area Ordinance, as codified in
The City of Edmonds accepts this required change.
Areas
Ordinance
Chapters 23.40 through 23.90 ECDC (dated Neyember 2-3
Referencing
2004 Ord ) (May 3, 2016, Ord 4026). are herein
adopted as a part of this Program, except for the specific
subsections list below in ECDC 24.40.020.D. All references to
the City of Edmonds Critical Area Ordinance in this Program
are for this specific version. As a result of this incorporation of
the Edmonds Critical Area Ordinance, the provisions of
Chapters 23.40 through 23.90 ECDC, less the exceptions
listed in ECDC 24.40.020.D, shall apply to any use, alteration
or development within shoreline jurisdiction whether or not a
shoreline permit or written statement of exemption is required.
In addition to the critical area regulations in Chapters 23.40
through 23.90 ECDC (Appendix B) of this Master Program),
the regulations identified in this section also apply to critical
areas within shoreline jurisdiction. Where there are conflicts
between the City of Edmonds Critical Area Ordinance and this
Shoreline Master Program, provisions of the Shoreline Master
Program shall prevail.
2.
Appendix B
SMP Critical
Replace Appendix B containing the critical area regulations
The City of Edmonds accepts this required change with
As a result of incorporating the Department of
Area
dated November 23, 2014, Ordinance 3527 with critical area
the modified exceptions list in item 4 below.
Ecology's Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates
Regulations
regulations (minus exceptions noted in item 4 below) dated
(Publication No. 16-06-001) into the SMP, the CAO
May 3, 2016, Ordinance 4026.
exceptions in 24.40.020 were reviewed. The
critical area regulations in Appendix B will not
include the provisions identified in item 4 below.
3.
24.40.020 Critical
CAO
4 Wetlands: a. ECDC 23.50 n��.3. ARY shoreline
The City of Edmonds accepts this required change with
The City accepts this change in that no critical area
project
Areas
provisions
neiRg heYGRd 25 buffer red In+inn through
that
minor modifications and indicated below:
provisions will require a shoreline variance.
proposes a
triggered by
the mfo!R GGr'n'r 24.40.02O.E.3 would
deSGn1h
Ghenisms ed
a shoreline
require 'a variaRGe. Noyai ia. for
of the Gri+iGa;Area OrdinanGe
G. The
Ecology's required change did not include the
shherelino
- is . equired
SpeGifiG PrOVOSOORS
variance
wetland buffer redUGtieR GORsisterlt with ECDC 24.40.020.E.3.
listed below may only be imnlomon+o`J within chnrolino
introductory sentence noting these provisions
urisdiGtion through the shoreline „arianGe
required a shoreline variance. That sentence is
PrGGe&SL,
h ECDC 23 80 n7n n h Q_ n 2: Buffer redUGtton
'I Wetlands
shown as being deleted.
and
aI+eurcer"+� aZm
Geologically Hazardous provisions were not shown
3 Fish Ernr
Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas
EGDG 23 50 non F 3 /any shoreline nroien++h �+
in Ecology's required change. However, allowed
and a
a �rr����z
23 90 non n ` : Re di lGed buffer widths
onion beyOR J
25% buffer red ire+inn through
activities in geologically hazardous areas (ECDC
Prnnncoc
a
the rneGhallis„,s deSGribed!R ECDC-24.^�020.E.3 ^tea
bECDC 23.90.040.D.4: Additions to
23.80.040.B.1 & 2 were moved to the exceptions
lir,
for Tonic re
No variall e r
red
list in item 4 below. The double -line strike -through
szrFGtUesrex+st'R-g within
hi
asn� a�� .
s+roam iffors
wetlaR d h, ,ffer red In+iens nerisis+on+ with C('n('
24. ^�020�3:
�rnr Qn non Q -I Q �• A11Q1A,,,,1 e,.+i„i+i„r ir,
indicates the move.
ie�d
h EGDG 23 Qn n7n 'I h A. 7: Buffer red
UG
l+ oora inns
crvna
Page 1 of 13
Packet Pg. 184
7.1.b
ITEM
SMP -• •
••
• •• Required •- • 1 •Conditional' •• • .Edmonds•. Proposal
.Edmonds•
Format Changes [underline -additions; strokethreugh-deletions]
3. Fish aR d Wildlife Habitat Gonoen ation Areas
�� 90 nnn.n.2: QedUGed1 bufferwidths
b. EGDG 23 90.04n n 4: ^dditienstO S#U^+�''res�;?+gig
within stream buffers
4.
24.40.020 Critical
CAO
D. Exceptions. The specific provisions of the Critical Area
The City of Edmonds offers the exceptions list below as an
As a result of incorporating the Department of
Areas
Exceptions
Ordinance listed below shall not apply to development within
alternative:
Ecology's Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates
shoreline jurisdiction.
(Publication No. 16-06-001) into the SMP, the CAO
D. Exceptions. The specific provisions of the Critical
exceptions in 24.40.020 were reviewed.
1. General Provisions:
� Drn�iicinnc of nh�pfor �z nn Crnr relating +n�r�en�c
Area Ordinance listed below shall not apply to
development within shoreline jurisdiction.
General Provisions: Two of the items in the
general provisions exemption list were left out of
1. General Provisions:
Ecology's required change item 4 (ECDC
eGenerniG use of do not apply to with
a Provisions Of ^hapt��,� ECDC
23.40.130.D Monitoring Program and ECDC
property property
i„risdiG�n• specifically C
23.40.220.C.8).
`shherolino
23.40.210(2). N TT�`pp"
i�� n; ECDC
ECDC 23.40.130.D requires a monitoring program
property with shoreline j speGifiGally
�n non and ECDC 232..
of not less than five years. SMP contains a
c. ECDC 23.40.210: Variance
a. ECDC 23.40.130.D: Monitoring Program
monitoring provision that requires monitoring for a
period of not less than ten years. Given the SMP
e. ECDC 23.4&230 €xis
b. ECDC 23.40.210: Variance
contains a separate monitoring program, ECDC
G. ECDC; 23 , 27n� Tinnr cite In„e^+igati„
23.40.130.D will be excepted from the CAO in
�rnr ��.4o�S:
2. Geologically Hazardous Areas:
Appendix B of the SMP.
a. ECDC 23.80.040.B.1 & 2: Allowed activities in geologically
e €�ce�,
2. Wetlands:
a. ECDC 23.50.010.B: Wetland Ratings
b. ECDC 23.50.040.F.1: Standard Buffer Widths
ECDC 23.40.220.C.8 (which is ECDC
23.40.220.C.9 in the updated CAO) contains
provisions very similar to WAC 173-27-040(m).
WAC 173-27-040(m) exempts minor site
investigative work from shoreline substantial
hazardous areas
`n�
2. Wetlands:
ECDC 23.50.010.B: Wetland Ratings
a.
h ECDC 23.5 non C 9 : Standard Buffer Widths
c. ECDC 23.50.040.F.2: Required Measures to Minimize
development permit requirements. ECDC
23.40.220.C.9 allows minor site investigative work
Impacts to Wetlands
^^�rnr�� 50non n: �n�onBuffer Width
d. ECDC 23.50.040.K: Small, Hydrologically Isolated
without the requirement for a critical area report.
Given the intent of the two provisions to allow minor
site investigation in preparation for a land use or
g p p
"^y"'
,� �r,nr, ��z Fn non � Q h� ��^ci.,e [?�r�
Wetlands
G. ECDC 23 5n non n: WetlaR per Widthder
shoreline permit, and the similar language in each
gillg
�rC23�g;04n e
+
rla r�� �n nn n � Q h: o�^��TeC�eati�,�
provision, the City of Edmonds is proposing to
remove ECDC 23.40.220.C.9 from the exception
f ECDC 23 50 050 F: Mitigation Ra
����� ��,-�at+es,
e.€f'�1f' 23 50-04n.I:�Tpt�;ens
list.
ECDC 3 50 050 G: �ni���E�Eeep+
f ECDC 23 50 050 F: Mi+�+i ��
With the incorporation of the Department of
g ga
o ECDC 23 50 050 ram: Wetlands
Ecology's Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates
Mitigation "���` as
(Publication No. 16-06-001) into the SMP, certain
provisions of the wetlands section in the CAO
3. Geologically Hazardous Areas:
needed to be excepted from the SMP where there
a. ECDC 23.80.040.B.1 & 2: Allowed activities in
was conflicts with Ecology's Wetland Guidance for
CAO Updates.
geologically hazardous areas
Geologically Hazard Areas shown as a double
underline to indicate the move from item 3 above.
5.
24.40.020 Critical
Wetlands
Delete 24.40.020.F(1) — (4).
The City of Edmonds offers the wetland section attached
After the City of Edmonds adopted the updated
Areas
Deletions are not shown in strike -through here to save space.
to the end of this table as an alternative to Ecology's
critical area regulations in May 2016 with
required change number 5.
Ordinance No. 4026, Ecology released Wetland
E
ti
0
a
a
Q
0
I=
0
r
=a
c
0
U
M
0
0
0
w
0
a�
0
a
N
0
N
ai
a�
0
O
c
0
w
0
r
N
x
w
c
a�
E
a
Page 2 of 13 Packet Pg. 185
7.1.b
ITEM
SMP -• •
••
• •• Required •- • 1 •Conditional' •• •
.Edmonds•. Proposal
.Edmonds•
Format Changes [underline -additions; strokethreugh-deletions]
Guidance for CAO Updates (Publication No. 16-06-
001) in June 2016. The wetland regulations in
Ordinance No. 4026 and the SMP conditionally
approved by Ecology were based on Ecology's
Wetland & CAO Updates: Guidance for Small Cities
(Publication No. 10-06-002). The City of Edmonds
desires to follow the most recent guidance with
regards to Best Available Science and the City's
development regulations. As a result, the City is
choosing to incorporate Ecology's Wetland
Guidance for CAO Updates (Publication No. 16-06-
001) into the SMP.
Incorporating the updated wetland guidance into
the SMP primarily involves replacing the wetland
categorizations and buffer requirements in the
SMP. Apart from incorporating the wetland
categorizations and buffer requirements into the
SMP, the City of Edmonds accepts the deletions of
the remaining sections as proposed in Ecology's
required change.
Ecology's required changed was to delete
24.40.020.F.1 — F.4; however, there is no
24.40.020.F.3 — FA in the SMP. The wetland
section in the SMP is contained within
24.40.020.F.1 — F.2.
6.
Part III Shoreline
B.
Urban Mixed -Use IV: The Urban Mixed -Use IV designation is
The City of Edmonds accepts this required change.
Environments
Designation
being established on interim shoreline rdesignotien, is
as
24.30.070
Criteria
appropriate for those areas bordering T the Edmonds Marsh.
Urban Mixed Use
5. Urban
bei-ag The marsh was identified as a shoreline of the state is
Mixed Use IV
new to this SHAD of
identified
„�� o .,-ter— �� as a shoreline
update and was
the state late in the planning process.. , W-with properties
within 200-feet of the salt influenced portions of the marsh
now under shoreline jurisdiction (where they had not
previously been so designated). SneGifig review of the effents
of establishing shoreline environment on evicting d
a aR
nr� aroi R d the marsh must he
oposed uses studied.
The south side of the marsh has been identified as the future
site of the Edmonds Crossing Ferry Terminal which underwent
significant environment review with a Final Environmental
Impact Statement issued in 2004. On the north side of the
Marsh is the Harbor Square commercial development owned
by the Port of Edmonds. The Sono update nror�ess was
delayed to the Pert of E dmonlds tome to a long
allow submit
Harbor Square Master Plall fE)r review by
plaRRed GGRGUFFellt
E
0
a
a�
(D
c
L
0
U)
ti
0
a
a
Q
0
r
r_
0
U
rn
0
0
0
w
0
a�
0
a
N
W
r
O
N
r
a�
0
0
0
w
4-
0
r
i
N
x
w
c
E
r
a
Page 3 of 13 Packet Pg. 186
7.1.b
ITEM
SMP -• •
••
• •• Required •- • 1 •Conditional' •• •
Format Changes [underline -additions; strokethreugh-deletions]
Oho City of Eitmonrds The Port's proposer) Harbor Square
.Edmonds•. Proposal
.Edmonds•
rr-rc-vn�vrL�rrrvnav��
net by the Gity.
Master Plan was
ultimately adopted
The Edmonds Marsh is also being studied for potential
restoration projects including the daylighting of the Willow
Creek outlet as well as the marshes role in the flooding
problem at the Dayton Street/State Route 104 intersection and
the role the marsh and play in a solution to the flooding
problem.
Establishing the I Irban Mixed Use IV designation as an
interim designation will allow the City, in Geeperation With
e
pprep WRers €GGlegy, seientists interested
e e e
ihIie' to
me f the
ageRGies/�. fo gqRzatiORS,, and pi
illy review effents of a new shoreline
Garef
establishing
ii irisdintion for the area around the marsh on existing and
development as well as the enologinal role the
planned
Edmonds Marsh plays in the City of Edmonds The City
crmvrrcrsTVTurs��ru�.r� �arrrvr-ra�� c-vrry
intends to ending the Edmonds Marsh
the
study issues surrounding
and related I Irban Mixed _I Use IV designation for two
years
frroTmTr��e6tuye date of this QUAD At the of the sfi irhi
, the City will sheF I�ceR�iir� ran
perieD adept appropriate Tm8Rt
designation(s) for the
si irroi ending the Edmonds Marsh
area
ineli ding eyali eating whether a new designation is needed and
I.A.xhethei: the have the designation.
eRtire area should same
7.
Part IV General
Policies and
Regulations
24.40.090 Shoreline
Bulk and
Dimensional
Standards
Development
Standards
Table
Urban Mixed
Use IV
Shore
Setback
Shoreline Area Designation
The City of Edmonds offers the following as an alternative
for the setback/buffer requirement in the Urban Mixed Use
IV shoreline environment:
See Attachment B for the rationale behinds the
City's alternative setback/buffer for the UMU IV
shoreline environment.
For every instance in Shoreline Bulk and
Dimensional Standards table contained in
24.90.090 where the Urban Mixed Use IV shoreline
indicates a shore setback of 100/50, that will be
changed to 125/110. This means there will be a
requirement for a 110 foot vegetative buffer with an
additional 15 foot structural setback for a total of a
125-foot shore setback measured from the edge of
the marsh.
Urban Mixed Use IV
Shoreline Area Designation
Commercial and Light Industrial Development
Urban Mixed Use IV
Shore
Setback
100/50 65/50
Shore
Setback
100/50 125/110
8.
Part IV General
Policies and
Regulations
24.40.090 Shoreline
Bulk and
Dimensional
Standards
Development
Standards
Table
Footnotes
18. Setback for new buildings and expansion of buildings Re w
develepment within the Urban Mixed -Use IV environment is
a-S0 65 feet. Redevelopment of greater than 50% for the
Harbor Square property within shoreline jurisdiction and
The City of Edmonds offers the following as an alternative
footnote 18:
18. Setback for new development within the Urban Mixed-
Use IV environment is 4-00 125 feet. A 110-foot vegetative
buffer is required to be established when an approved
The Harbor Square site on the north side of the
marsh has been developed in accordance with a
contract rezone. The existing development cannot
be expanded as the limitations of the contract
rezone have been met. The Harbor Square site
has a comprehensive plan designation of
Downtown Master Plan. In order for the Harbor
Square site to be redeveloped, the redevelopment
will have to be approved through a master planning
process. When an approved master plan is
implemented, the 110-buffer will be required to be
established.
development of the site on the south border of the marsh
within shoreline jurisdiction require the establishment of a 50-
foot vegetation buffer adjacent to the Edmonds Marsh where
the vegetative buffer is absent, in combination with a 15 foot
structural setback .
master planned development is implemented on the north
or south side of the marsh. The 110-buffer may be
established in the absence of a master planned
redevelopment through a standalone restoration project.
New development oetiVities within the I Irhan Mixed _I Use IV
en\/Irenment require the establishment of a 50 feet
vegetation buffer adianent to the Edmonds Marsh -eihere
E
N
x
w
c
E
r
a
Page 4 of 13
Packet Pg. 187
�1.
ITEM
SIVIP PROVISION
Topic•
•• Required change from1 • Conditional Approval •
Format Changes [underline -additions; strokethreugh-deletions]
of Edmonds•. Proposal
the vegetative buffer is abseRt
of EdmondsDiscussion/Rationale
Likewise, the property on the south side of the
marsh has a comprehensive plan designation of
Master Plan Development and a zoning designation
of Master Plan 2. Development on the south side
of the marsh will also occur through a master plan
process. When an approved master plan
implemented on the south side of the marsh, the
110-foot buffer will be required to be established.
While buffer establishment is required with an
implemented master plan, the 110-foot may be
established prior to the implementation of master
planned development through a voluntary buffer
restoration effort.
E
N
L
X
W
r
C
E
t
V
R
r
a
Page 5 of 13 Packet Pg. 188
7.1.b
City of Edmonds Proposed Alternative to Required Change No. 5 for Wetland
Regulations within the SMP.
24.40.020 Critical Areas
F. Wetlands. Wetlands are those areas, designated in accordance with WAC 173-22-035 that
are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient
to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation
adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands do not include those artificial wetlands
intentionally created from nonwetland sites, including, but not limited to, irrigation and
drainage ditches, grass -lined swales, canals, detention facilities, wastewater treatment
facilities, farm ponds, and landscape amenities, or those wetlands created after July 1, 1990,
that were unintentionally created as a result of the construction of a road, street, or highway.
Wetlands may include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from nonwetland areas
to mitigate the conversion of wetlands.
Wetlands shall be rated aeeefding to the Washington State wedand rating system for-
eo tains the definitions and methods for- detefmining the er-iter-ia and parameters defining
the following wedand rating aleg , Wetlands shall be rated accordingto o the
Washington Department of Ecology wetland rating system, as set forth in the Washington
State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington: 2014 Update (Ecology Publication
#14-06-029, or as revised and approved by Ecology), which contains the definitions and
methods for determining whether the criteria below are met.:
a. Category L Category €*hand r-elatively undis€destuarine wetlands
lafger- than 1 aer-e; 2) wetlands that afe identified by seientists ef the Washingto
Natural Her-itage Pr-ogr-am�DNR as high "ality wetlands; 3) begs; 4) mattir-e and old
gf!ovvth forested wetlands larger- than 1 acre; 5) wetlands in coastal lagoons; or 6)
wetlands that per-f many ftmetions well (see,.;n 70 p r sor- re) Category I
wetlands are: (1) relatively undisturbed estuarine wetlands larger than 1 acre; (2)
wetlands of high conservation value that are identified by scientists of the
Washington Natural Heritage Program/DNR; (3) bogs, (4) mature and old- rg owth
forested wetlands larger than 1 acre; (5) wetlands in coastal lagoons; _ (6) interdunal
wetlands that score 8 or 9 habitat points and are larger than 1 acre; and (7) wetlands
that perform many functions well (scoring 23 points or more). These wetlands: (1)
represent unique or rare wetland types; (2) are more sensitive to disturbance than
most wetlands; (3) are relatively undisturbed and contain ecological attributes that are
impossible to replace within a human lifetime; or (4) provide a high level of
functions.
b. Category II.
distff-bed estuarine wetlands larger- than I aer-e; 2) inter-dunal wetlands 1
aeFes; 3) disturbed coastal lagoons or 4) wetlands with a moderately high Lve-I A
Page 6 of 13
Packet Pg. 189
7.1.b
Category II wetlands are: Clestuarine
E
wetlands smaller than 1 acre, or disturbed estuarine wetlands larger than 1 acre; (2)
a,
interdunal wetlands larger than 1 acre or those found in a mosaic of wetlands; or (3)
°
wetlands with a moderately high level of functions (scoring between 20 and 22
a
points).
0
2
c. Category III. Category M wetland wetlands with a moderate evel Of
a)
fianetions between 30 50 2) inter-dunal between 0. 1
(scoring and points); or- wetlands
L
and 1 aero i size Category III wetlands are: (1) wetlands with a moderate level of
functions (scoring between 16 and 19 points); (2) can often be adequatelyplaced
with a well -planned mitigation project; and 3) interdunal wetlands between 0.1 and 1
acre. Wetlands scoring between 16 and 19 points generally have been disturbed in
v
some ways and are often less diverse or more isolated from other natural resources in
the landscape than Category II wetlands.
o
a
0.
d_Category IV. Category W wetlands have the lev,est levels of ftiet rs (s,.
Q
fewer- than 30 points) andare often heavily disturbedCategory IV wetlands have the
c
lowest levels of functions (scoring fewer than 16 points) and are often heavily
disturbed. These are wetlands that we should be able to replace, or in some cases to
c
improve. However, experience has shown that replacement cannot be guaranteed in
U
any specific case. These wetlands may provide some important functions, and should
�%
be protected to some degree.
o
0
U
d-.e.Illegal modifications. Wetland rating categories shall not change due to illegal
c
modifications made by the applicant or with the applicant's knowledge.
N
C
2. Development in designated wetlands within shoreline jurisdiction shall be regulated in
a
accordance with the following:
a. Buffer Requirements. The following buffer widths have been established in
N
accordance with the best available science. They are based on the category of wetland
and the habitat score as determined byqualified wetland professional using the
Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington: 2014 Update
o
(Ecology Publication #14-06-029, or as revised and approved bogy). The
adjacent land use intensity is assumed to be high.
i. For wetlands that score 5 points or more for habitat function, the buffers in
E
24.40.020.F.2.b can be used if both of the following criteria are met:
w
0
• A relatively undisturbed, vegetated corridor at least 100 feet wide is protected
between the wetland and any other Priority Habitats as defined by the
v
Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife.
CM
The corridor must be protected for the entire distance between the wetland and
w
the Priority Habitat by some type of legal protection such as a conservation
easement.
0
a
Page 7 of 13
Packet Pg. 190
7.1.b
Presence or absence of a nearby habitat must be confirmed by a qualified
biologist. If no option for providing a corridor is available, 24.40.020.F.2.b
may be used with the required measures in 24.40.020.F.2.c alone.2
• The measures in 24.40.020.F.2.c are implemented, where applicable, to
minimize the impacts of the adjacent land uses.
ii. For wetlands that score 3-4 habitat points, only the measures in 24.40.020.F.2.c
are required for the use of 24.40.020.F.2.b
iii. If an applicant chooses not to apply the mitigation measures in 24.40.020.F.2.c, or
is unable to provide a protected corridor where available, then 24.40.020.F.2.d
must be used.
iv. The buffer widths in 24.40.020.F.2.b and 24.40.020.F.2.d assume that the buffer
is vegetated with a native plant community ppropriate for the ecoregion. If the
existing buffer is unvegetated, sparsely vegetated, or vegetated with invasive
species that do not perform needed functions, the buffer should either be planted
to create the appropriate plant community or the buffer should be widened to
ensure that adequate functions of the buffer are provided.
b. Wetland Buffer Requirements if the measures in 24.40.020.F.2.c are Implemented and
Corridor Provided.
Buffer width (in feet) based on habitat score
Wetland CateEory
3-4
5
6-7
8-9
Category 1:
75
105
165
225
Based on total score
Category
Bogs and wetlands of
190
225
High Conservation
Value
Category 1:
Coastal Lagoons
150
165
225
Category 1:
Interdunal
225
Category 1:
75
105
165
225
Forested
Category 1:
150
Estuarine
(buffer width not based on habitat score)
Category II:
Based on score
75
105
165
225
Page 8 of 13
E
L
tm
0
a
L
d
N
m
as
c
LO
m
A
o�
ti
O
L
a
Q.
Q
0
a
O
a
O
U
N
O
0
u
w
O
a�
N
a
O
a
m
0
N
r
as
O
u
O
w
c
O
E
m
w
0
Al
a
Packet Pg. 191
7.1.b
Category II.
Interdunal wetlands
110
165
225
Category II:
Estuarine
110
buffer width not based on habitat score)
Category III (all)
60
105
165
225
Category IV (all)
40
will "llp-Ift
will "llp-Ift
..fKsrear!se���ssss�rr��rs�fr�as��szs�ee�:�!se�r��ssss�r:r�.
_
Page 9 of 13
Packet Pg. 192
7.1.b
..
c. Required measures to minimize impacts to wetlands. Measures are required, ,=cif
applicable to a specific proposal.
Disturbance
Required measures to Minimize Impacts
Lights
• Direct lights away from wetland
Noise
• Locate activity that generates noise away from
wetland
• If warranted, enhance existing buffer with native
vegetation plantings adjacent to noise source
• For activities that generate relatively continuous,
potentially disruptive noise, such as certain heavy
industry or mining, establish an additional 10' heavily
vegetated buffer strip immediately adjacent to the out
wetland buffer
Toxic runoff
• Route all new, untreated runoff away from wetland
while ensuring wetland is not dewatered
• Establish covenants limiting use of pesticides within
150 feet of wetland
• Apply integrated pest management
Stormwater runoff
• Retrofit stormwater detention and treatment for roads
and existing adjacent development
• Prevent channelized flow from lawns that directly
enters the buffer
• Use Low Impact Development techniques (per PSAT
publication on LID techniques)
Change in water regime
• Infiltrate or treat, detain, and disperse into buffer new
runoff from impervious surfaces and new lawns
Pets and human disturbance
• Use privacy fencing OR plant dense vegetation to
delineate buffer edge and to discourage disturbance
using vegetation appropriate for the ecoregion
• Place wetland and its buffer in a separate tract or
protect with a conservation easement
Dust
• Use best management practices to control dust
Disruption of eoffidor-s e
0 Maintain to that
eonneetions ofAite areas are-
undistur-bed
rem
Page 10 of 13
Packet Pg. 193
7.1.b
d. Wetland Buffer Requirements if the measures in 24.40.020.F.2.c are NOT Implemented
or Corridor NOT Provided.
Buffer width (in feet) based on habitat score
Wetland CateEory
3-4
5
6-7
8-9
Category 1:
Based on total score
100
140
220
300
Catelgory
Bois and wetlands of
250
300
Hiizh Conservation
Value
Category 1:
Coastal Lam
200
220
300
Category 1:
Interdunal
300
Category 1:
Forested
100
140
F 20
300
Category 1:
Estuarine
200
(buffer width not based on habitat scores)
Category II.
Based on score
100
140
220
300
Category II:
Interdunal wetlands
150
220
300
Category II:
Estuarine
150
(buffer width not based on habitat scores)
Category III (all)
80
140
220
300
Category IV (all)
50
Page 11 of 13
Packet Pg. 194
7.1.b
E
eln v me,�t
e
s s d;vea4
v
L,,,#
h ; 141, vo l„ 4; iris
(.v
nl L
ev
f wetland
widt
appr-ov
lm
O
buff-er- widths
for- wetlands
whefe existing
buff-ef
eonditio
L
a
„ff v widths)
may be granted
a
m;tay.t to the
de„eln.v.me„4
d
it; n of a
wetland b,,,f - r enhancement
plan for
Category H! and
Al
N
O
illy. Approval
of a wetland
buffer- enhaneemen4
plan shall, at
ie
�
dir-eetoi,
„flow for-
buff-erwtth
to
less than 25
c
,rthe
wetland
fedtietion
no
he standard
that.:tat.
d
width; provided,
L
O
t
;des e .;deree
that „etla-
d 4;,,,etio
s and
be ;
ed e
�
�Nl
b,
implementation
to
leant the
values
level
will
by a
b,,,4
�
plan
at
provided
standard
r- Ofinal
ti
T
7
„ts
densities
for- .
e in b,uffe,-
existing native plant
and provides
O
L
:isities to
less than thfee
feet
f6f
feet
0.
no
on eenter-
shmbs
and eight
e
Q.
Q
f
m
C
O
++
2 n n .
`a
an
O
U
N
ases in wetland
b uff ,- 4;,,,at;n.,-,ing
as
,.elated to.:
O
O
t�
W
O
r
- ,;ldl;f
habitat-,
�
O
O_
a of wetland
N
fandN
O
etln„d ;,-.tv
sio and d;st,,,-b
anee
r
'
O
N
Widt
Aver-aging. The
director-
allow
mod;f;eation
saandaia
r
i er-
may
of a
L
b, , aeeofdanee
with an apprmoved
of
tie l afeas
e v4 eand the
t
LenOft
by basis
by
buffef
Only
those
O
- ease ease
a-,�efaging
widths.
V
b f
the v
eat a e
„b,;eet v
el shall be
wetland
-erm existing
with
or
0
,1;4;ed v of
nsion l wetland
n e nt;nt
demo stvnes
4tl, n4•
C
ed„ee
4;,.,etio
f
b,,,f
,-n•
W
the
and value
wetlands
of assoeia4ed
-
f
�
O
d a „tai s
, n4io s ;
d„e
tee sting
afuetef sties
sensitivity
physieal e
the
V
slope, soils,
of vegetation,
and
wetlan
N
4t f n
„de,. b,,,f fe,- ;
v.laees and
by a&e,.sely
,
; rated b,,iff-er
++
om
would not
in other
places;
k
W
eee�rsrsrss�eas�.ressasesr�:sess�sr�:esssasseassss�srsrss�:esesrs
-
Q
Page 12 of 13
Packet Pg. 195
7.1.b
i�
ii. Wi' amaze stfuet ,.emu
iii.Fishing aeeess areas down to the watef's edge that shall be no larger- than six
few
i,e. Additions to structures existing within wetlands and/or wetland buffers may be
permitted pursuant to ECDC 23.50.040.I4I. Additions to structures within wetlands
will also require state and federal approval.
Page 13 of 13
Packet Pg. 196
Date: October 14, 2016
To: Washington State Department of Ecology
Copy: Edmonds City Council
Dave Earling, Mayor
Shane Hope, Development Services Director
Kernen Lien, Senior Planner
From: Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
Re: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Analysis regarding City of
Edmonds' proposed alternatives to Ecology's Required Changes 7 and 8
and consistency of those alternatives with the Shoreline Management
Act and the Department of Ecology's adopted guidelines
I. Purpose of this memo
This memo demonstrates how the City of Edmonds' proposed alternatives to
Required Changes 7 and 8 are consistent with the Shoreline Management Act
and the Department of Ecology's adopted guidance for Shoreline Master
Programs. The City's proposed alternatives are necessary because the
Department of Ecology's Required Changes 7 and 8 would not satisfy the
SMA's no net loss standard or the City's restoration goals for the Edmonds
marsh. If the rationale set forth below is adopted by the Edmonds City
Council, this memo should be included as Attachment B to Council President
Johnson's letter to Department of Ecology, Director, Maia Bellon.
As an alternative to Required Change 7, the City of Edmonds is proposing a
110-foot buffer and a 125-foot setback for the Urban Mixed Use IV (UMU4)
environment. This will be referred to as Alternative Change 7.
As an alternative to Required Change 8, the City of Edmonds is proposing
that the 110-foot buffer be planted and established in conjunction with a
master planned development or redevelopment of the two properties within
N1100 Dexter Ave N Suite 100 Seattle WA 98109 P 206.273.7440 F 206.273.7401 www.lighthouselawgroup.com
Packet Pg. 197
7.1.b
the UMU4 environment. This will be referred to as Alternative Change 8.
Because the two properties in the UMU4 are separately owned, it is possible
that they would plant or otherwise establish their respective buffers at
different times. Until that occurs, any existing uses within the adopted buffer
would be allowed to continue as nonconforming uses.
While most of the analysis below relates to Alternative Change 7, it should be
kept in mind that Alternative Change 8 is the timing mechanism for
Alternative Change 7.
II. Findings of Fact demonstrating the consistency of
Alternative Changes 7 and 8 with the Shoreline
Management Act and the Department of Ecology's adopted
guidance
The following findings of fact support the adoption of Alternative Changes 7
and 8.
Packet Pg. 198
7.1.b
A. The Edmonds marsh is a shoreline of the state.
B. The Edmonds marsh is a Category II estuarine wetland and
salt marsh.
C. The UMU4 environment consists of two properties that
abut the Edmonds marsh. The property to the south of the marsh
is largely undeveloped. The property to the north of the marsh is
developed as a business park known as Harbor Square.
D. Harbor Square is owned by the Port of Edmonds. The Port
had expressed interest in eventually redeveloping Harbor Square
into a more intense development. The Port had sought a
comprehensive plan amendment to approve the Port's master
plan for Harbor Square, but later withdrew that request. There is
currently no known timeline for the redevelopment of Harbor
Square.
E. Neither the City or the Department of Ecology have
conducted detailed wildlife habitat assessments or wildlife
surveys that would provide additional site -specific information
about which species are present in the Edmonds marsh and what
the buffer those species would need to be protected from
redevelopment.
F. In the absence of such detailed site -specific studies, it is
appropriate to rely upon Ecology's guidance documents to
establish buffer widths at the planning stage.
G. The Department of Ecology has published various scientific
and technical guidance documents that are intended to be used by
cities in the development of critical area regulations and shoreline
master programs. The city council reviewed relevant excerpts
from these documents before voting to propose Alternative
Change 7. Various relevant excerpts from these Department of
Ecology publications are excerpted below.
Packet Pg. 199
1. Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates, Western
Washington Version, June 2016, Publication No. 16-06-001,
Department of Ecology
This document distinguishes Category II estuarine
wetlands from Category II interdunal wetlands and
other Category II wetlands, where buffer width is based
on habitat score. Unlike the other kinds, the buffer for
Category II estuarine wetlands does not depend on
habitat score. Assuming that certain impact
minimization measures are required, the buffer would
be 110 feet. The measures include things like ensuring
that light, noise, and toxic runoff are directed away from
the wetland. If these measures are not implemented,
then the buffer would be 150 feet.
2. Wetlands & CAO Updates: Guidance for Small Cities,
Western Washington Version, January 2010, (1st Revision July
2011), (2nd Revision October 2012), Publication No. 10-06-002,
Department of Ecology
This document recommended standard buffer widths of
75 feet for Category II wetlands, with the possibility of
additional buffer width being added based on a habitat
score. The buffer table in this document does not have a
line for Category II estuarine wetlands. The 75-foot
buffer figure is for all Category II wetlands, except for
interdunal wetlands. The buffers in the city's adopted
CAO were based on the guidance from this document.
After the CAO was adopted, this document was replaced
in June 2016 by the Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates,
Western Washington Version.
3. Wetlands in Washington State, Volume 1, A Synthesis of
the Science, March 2005, Publication No. 05-06-006, Department
of Ecology
This document contains the following passage
discussing the importance of estuarine wetlands:
Estuaries, the areas where freshwater and salt water
mix, are among the most highly productive and complex
Packet Pg. 200
ecosystems. Here, tremendous quantities of sediments,
nutrients, and organic matter are exchanged between
terrestrial, freshwater, and marine communities. A large
number of plants and animals benefit from estuarine
wetlands. Fish, shellfish, birds, and plants are the most
visible organisms that live in estuarine wetlands.
However, a huge variety of other life forms also live in
an estuarine wetland, including many kinds of diatoms,
algae and invertebrates.
Estuaries, of which estuarine wetlands are a part, are a
"priority habitat" as defined by the state Department of
Fish and Wildlife. Estuaries have a high fish and wildlife
density and species richness, important breeding
habitat, important fish and wildlife seasonal ranges and
movement corridors, limited availability, and high
vulnerability to alteration of their habitat ....
4. Wetlands in Washington State, Volume 2, Guidance for
Protecting and Managing Wetlands, April 2005, Publication No.
05-06-008, Department of Ecology
This document contains the following sections:
A frequent concern about buffers is their applicability to
urban and urbanizing areas. The concerns generally fall
into two categories: 1) the science on buffers comes
largely from agricultural and forestry settings and is
perceived to be irrelevant to urban areas; and 2) the
need to maximize density of development in urban
areas is in direct conflict with the protection of large
upland areas around wetlands (and streams).
The concern over the relevancy of the literature on
buffers to urban areas is largely unfounded. While most
of the studies of buffer effectiveness occur in non -urban
settings, the principles are the same. Buffers do not
function any differently in urban settings than in rural
settings. The same processes of sediment, nutrient, and
toxics removal operate similarly in urban areas as they
do in rural settings. However, a good stormwater
Packet Pg. 201
management program can reduce the need for buffers
to perform filtration functions, with the exception of
lawns and landscaped areas which drain into wetlands
rather than into stormwater collection areas.
The role of buffers in providing needed upland habitat
for wetland species and in screening adjacent noise and
light is also performed similarly. In fact, a case can be
made that buffers in urban areas are even more
important from a habitat standpoint because there is
little other upland habitat available. The factors that
may be different in urban areas are that urban wetlands
may perform some functions at a lower level because of
degradation, and the range of wildlife species utilizing
urban wetlands may be smaller. However, remaining
wetlands (and adjacent upland areas) in urban areas
may, in fact, function as habitat islands and be critical to
many species. Generally, the protection of wildlife
habitat functions of wetlands requires larger buffers
than protection of water quality functions, particularly
when state-of-the-art stormwater management is
employed.
However, the best way to address the issue of buffers in
urban areas is to conduct a landscape analysis and
develop a subarea plan that identifies, prioritizes, and
protects the most important wetland, riparian, and
upland habitats (see Chapters 5 through 7 of this
volume for additional discussion). Maintaining and
restoring connections between wetland, riparian, and
upland habitats is key to protecting wildlife. A
landscape analysis can help identify existing
connections that should be protected as well as areas
where connectivity can be restored. Combined with
standards for low impact development and state-of-the-
art stormwater management, this kind of approach
could result in smaller buffers around the other critical
areas that are not providing vital habitat. The studies
Packet Pg. 202
should always be confirmed on the ground during
project review.
The issue of balancing wetland protection with
competing mandates in the GMA is a legitimate one that
can be addressed in a number of ways. A buildable lands
survey with a good wetlands inventory can provide
important information on the actual conflicts that may
exist (rather than a perceived conflict). Provisions to
allow density trading from buffers to adjacent or nearby
developable lands can help.
Chapter 8, Section 8.3.8.8.
Where a legally established, non -conforming use of the
buffer exists (e.g., a road or structure that lies within the
width of buffer recommended for that wetland),
proposed actions in the buffer may be permitted as long
as they do not increase the degree of non -conformity.
This means no increase in the impacts to the wetland
from activities in the buffer.
For example, if a land use with high impacts (e.g.,
building an urban road) is being proposed next to a
Category II wetland with a moderate level of function
for habitat, a 150-foot buffer would be needed to
protect functions (see Table 8C-6). If, however, an
existing urban road is already present and only 50 feet
from the edge of the Category II wetland, the additional
100 feet of buffer may not be needed if the road is being
widened. A vegetated buffer on the other side of the
road would not help buffer the existing impacts to the
wetland from the road. If the existing road is resurfaced
or widened (e.g., to add a sidewalk) along the upland
edge, without any further roadside development that
would increase the degree of non -conformity, the
additional buffer is not necessary. The associated
increase in impervious surface from widening a road,
however, may necessitate mitigation for impacts from
stormwater.
Packet Pg. 203
If, however, the proposal is to build a new development
(e.g., shopping center) along the upland side of the road,
the impacts to the wetland and its functions may
increase. This would increase the degree of non-
conformity. The project proponent would need to
provide the additional 100 feet of buffer extending
beyond the road or apply buffer averaging (see Section
8C.2.6).
Appendix 8-C, Section 8C.2.4.2.
5. SMP Handbook, Chapter 11, Vegetation Conservation,
Buffers, and Setbacks, Publication Number 11-06-010,
Department of Ecology
The following excerpts from this document should also
be helpful:
Some local governments with intensely developed
shorelines have established only setbacks from the
OHWM. Vegetation conservation is required, and
planting new vegetation, replacing noxious weeds and
invasive plants with native plants, and other habitat
improvements are required for new or expanded
development. These measures meet the requirements of
the SMP Guidelines to protect ecological functions, as
buffers do.
SMP Handbook, 11-11, p. 3-4.
New scientific studies conducted after the CAO was
adopted may establish the need for different -sized
buffers than included in the CAO. The SMP Guidelines
require "the most current, accurate and complete
scientific and technical information available" to be
used for development of SMPs [WAC 173-26-
201(2)(a)].
SMP Handbook, 11-11, p. 4.
When SMPs were first adopted in the 1970s, setbacks
were established largely to protect structures from
Packet Pg. 204
erosion and effects of wind and water and to prevent
new houses from blocking views. Some consideration
was given to habitat, as in Conservancy environments
with bigger setbacks than in Urban environments. We
now know more about the value of buffers in regard to
ecological functions. Recent scientific studies show that
25-foot setbacks do not protect most ecological
functions and will not meet the no net loss standard of
the SMP Guidelines.
SMP Handbook, 11-11, p. 7.
How do you apply these buffer widths from the
scientific literature to your local shorelines? Much of
Washington's shorelines are developed, unlike the
undeveloped shorelines discussed in much of the
scientific literature.
Those land uses include industry, commercial uses,
houses, multi -family dwellings, parks, trails, marinas,
bulkheads, parking lots, and fishing piers, among others.
Some upland areas are intensely developed, and others
are more sparsely developed. Some of our waters are
heavily used for ports, industry, marinas and
recreational piers. Many Washington lakes are intensely
developed with houses on the upland and piers and
docks in the water, while others remain undeveloped.
Tailor buffers to local conditions
Determining buffers and setbacks is a challenge. The
buffers and setbacks for marine and freshwater
shorelines should be tailored to local conditions
including existing shoreline functions and existing and
planned land use and public access. Buffers and
setbacks likely will vary within a local government's
boundaries to reflect different shoreline conditions and
functions. The inventory and characterization report
should provide a complete analysis of shoreline
functions.
Packet Pg. 205
SMP Handbook, 11-11, p. 19.
With this general guidance in mind, considerations for
determining buffer and setback width include:
What shoreline ecological functions continue to exist
and need protection or restoration?
What species of wildlife live along the shoreline, and
what buffer width will protect them?
Would smaller buffers increase nitrogen and
phosphorous levels in local waters?
How would removal of riparian vegetation affect slope
stability and hydrology?
Will future growth include new or expanded water -
oriented uses?
For developed shorelines, is redevelopment likely?
Is development projected on vacant parcels?
SMP Handbook, 11-11, p. 20.
6. SMP Handbook, Chapter 14, Legally Existing Uses and
Development, Publication No. 11-06-010, Department of Ecology
The following excerpts from this chapter should be
helpful:
Existing legally established structures and uses are
typically allowed to continue with the approval of
updated SMPs. That means they can continue to exist,
be used, maintained and repaired. That's the case even
if the updated SMPs include regulations that would not
allow new uses or development to be configured or
built exactly as existing ones.
For example, under updated SMPs, new buildings may
need to be further away from the water, new
development projects may need to retain some
vegetation onsite, or new aquaculture projects may
need to be a specific distance from aquatic vegetation.
However, existing legal development and uses can
remain in place.
Packet Pg. 206
Ecology and local governments do not expect most
existing development and uses to be eliminated from
the shoreline after new SMP regulations are adopted. In
some cases, existing buildings may be expanded,
although there may be limits to the size of the addition,
the total square footage, or new impervious surfaces....
SMP Handbook, Chapter 14, pp. 1-2.
Cities with densely developed shorelines may have
fewer opportunities for achieving no net loss than cities
or counties with less developed shorelines. With a
densely developed shoreline, large buffers or setbacks
may not be appropriate or feasible for various reasons -
- small lots cannot accommodate them; large buffers
would include many structures and impervious surfaces
that interfere with buffer functions; regulations
regarding structures within buffers could be
complicated.
SMP Handbook, Chapter 14, p. 3.
Traditionally, uses and structures that are not
consistent with the new regulations have been
categorized as "nonconforming" development.
Nonconforming uses and development were lawfully
constructed or established, but do not conform to
current land use regulations or standards. The
regulation of nonconforming uses and development is
an established concept, beginning early in the 20th
century, when municipalities started enacting zoning
regulations.
SMP Handbook, Chapter 14, p. 4.
WAC 173-27-080 applies at the local level only if the
local SMP does not address nonconforming
development.
SMP Handbook, Chapter 14, p. 4.
Some local governments are using different approaches
as they update their SMPs. They would allow existing
Packet Pg. 207
structures, particularly single family residences, to
continue as conforming structures even though new
shoreline setbacks, buffers, and other regulations in
their Shoreline Master Programs would typically create
nonconforming structures.
SMP Handbook, Chapter 14, p. 5.
Packet Pg. 208
7.1.b
H. The City has taken significant steps toward restoration of
the Edmonds marsh.
I. Ecology's Required Change 7 is a change to the 100/50
setback/buffer that the City had previously adopted for the UMU4
environment. The dimensions of this earlier adopted
setback/buffer were heavily influenced by the city's desire to
restore the Edmonds marsh and daylight Willow Creek and obtain
funding for such restoration. While it is true that Appendix L alone
may not support a 100-foot setback for the UMU4 shoreline
environment, the weight placed on Appendix L by the city council
demonstrates its commitment to restoration of the Edmonds
marsh. It is relevant to determining buffers for the UMU4 that the
city has a significant goal of restoring the Edmonds marsh and has
been actively pursuing that goal through grant applications and
studies.
J. As the City evaluates the existing conditions of the
Edmonds marsh and the surrounding area within the UMU4
environment, it finds the Edmonds marsh to be a valuable
environmental asset worthy of the City's ongoing restoration
efforts. This value must be taken into account when evaluating
the local conditions to which the buffers and setbacks for the
UMU4 environment should be tailored.
K. It should be noted for the record that the city council on
August 2, 2016 adopted Resolution 1366, which authorized the
submission of another grant application to RCO related to the
daylighting of Willow Creek. The December 18, 2015 final
feasibility study for the daylighting of Willow Creek was the result
of a successful grant application from 2013.
Packet Pg. 209
III. Conclusions of Law demonstrating the consistency of
Alternative Changes 7 and 8 with the Shoreline
Management Act and the Department of Ecology's adopted
guidance
The Department of Ecology has adopted guidelines for Shoreline Master
Programs. These guidelines are found in chapter 173-26 WAC, Part III (WAC
173-26-171 through WAC 173-26-251). Alternative Change 7 and 8 are
consistent with these guidelines, particularly the following excerpts.
A. WAC 173-26-186(8)(b): Local master programs shall include
policies and regulations designed to achieve no net loss of
[shoreline] ecological functions.
The UMU4 buffer must be designed to achieve no net loss of ecological
function, not only within the buffer, but more importantly, within the
Edmonds marsh itself. While Harbor Square is already developed and the
UMU4 buffer will render that development nonconforming, redevelopment
of Harbor Square will presumably be more intense than the existing
development. In the absence of additional wildlife habitat assessments and
surveys demonstrating that no species in the Edmonds marsh requires more
than a 50-foot buffer, the presumption should be that the habitat value of the
marsh is consistent with other Category II estuarine wetlands. Because
Ecology's guidance documents recommend a 110-foot buffer for a Category II
estuarine wetland, that is the buffer that is required to achieve no net loss in
the absence of additional wildlife habitat assessments and surveys.
B. WAC 173-26-186(8)(c): For counties and cities containing any
shorelines with impaired ecological functions, master programs
shall include goals and policies that provide for restoration of such
impaired ecological functions.
The city is engaged in an ongoing effort to daylight Willow Creek, which will
have a significant restorative benefit to the Edmonds marsh.
Packet Pg. 210
C. WAC 173-26-186(9): To the extent consistent with the policy
and use preference of RCW 90.58.020, this chapter (chapter 173-26
WAC), and these principles, local governments have reasonable
discretion to balance the various policy goals of this chapter, in
light of other relevant local, state, and federal regulatory and
nonregulatory programs, and to modify master programs to reflect
changing circumstances.
The guidelines give the city reasonable discretion to balance various factors
in the development of its SMP. The city, in adopting Alternative Change 7, has
acted reasonably in basing the buffer for the UMU4 on Ecology's own
guidance. The 110-foot buffer is consistent with the most recent guidance
from Ecology related to buffers for Category II estuarine wetlands. Even if the
Department of Ecology or the Port of Edmonds might have weighted the
various policy goals differently, the guidelines give this discretion to the city.
D. WAC 173-26-201(2)(a): To satisfy the requirements for the
use of scientific and technical information in RCW 90.58.100(1),
local governments shall incorporate the following two steps into
their master program development and amendment process.
1. First, identify and assemble the most current, accurate,
and complete scientific and technical information available that
is applicable to the issues of concern....
The city has identified Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates, Western
Washington Version, June 2016, Publication No. 16-06-001, Department of
Ecology, as the most current, accurate, and complete scientific information
available. It has also identified other resources which are set forth in the
findings of fact, above.
2. Second, base master program provisions on an analysis
incorporating the most current, accurate, and complete scientific
or technical information available....
Ecology agrees that the Edmonds marsh is a Category II estuarine wetland.
The 110-foot buffer for the UMU4 comes directly from and is consistent with
Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates, Western Washington Version, June 2016,
Publication No. 16-06-001, Department of Ecology. The 50-foot buffer in
Required Change 7 is not consistent with this recent guidance.
Packet Pg. 211
E. WAC 173-26-201(2)(d):... local governments shall ... apply
the following preferences and priorities in the order listed below
1. Reserve appropriate areas for protecting and restoring
ecological functions to control pollution and prevent damage to
the natural environment and public health.... Local governments
should ensure that these areas are reserved consistent with
constitutional limits.
Note that there is no higher -ranking priority here than to reserve
appropriate areas for protecting and restoring ecological functions. The
UMU4 buffer can be seen as such a restoration. The fact that the existing
development is allowed to continue indefinitely as a nonconforming use
keeps this reservation firmly within constitutional limits.
WAC 173-26-221(2)(b)(i): When addressing critical areas,
shoreline master programs shall adhere to the standards
established in the following sections, unless it is demonstrated
through scientific and technical information as provided in RCW
90.58.100(1) and as described in WAC 173-26-201 (2)(a) that an
alternative approach provides better resource protection.
As a Category II estuarine wetland, the city must protect the Edmonds marsh
by adhering to the standards for critical areas unless it is demonstrated
through scientific information that an alternative approach provides better
resource protection. The applicable standards here include Ecology's
wetland guidance, which in turn calls for a 110-foot buffer for this class of
wetland. In other words, the default UMU4 buffer should be 110 feet unless it
is demonstrated through scientific and technical information that an
alternative approach provides better resource protection. Ecology has not
demonstrated through scientific and technical information that the 50-foot
buffer from Ecology's Required Change 7 provides better protection for the
Edmonds marsh than a 110-foot buffer. Ecology makes the point that
untreated stormwater discharge is a significant threat to the marsh and that
this threat could be corrected upon redevelopment of Harbor Square.
Ecology's logic is that a 50-foot buffer will better incentivize redevelopment
and redevelopment will fix the stormwater discharge. But this logic fails to
address whether the habitat values of the Edmonds marsh would be
adequately protected in the face of more intense redevelopment. It also fails
to address the possibility that the stormwater problem could be corrected as
a standalone stormwater improvement project that could be sponsored by
Packet Pg. 212
the city's stormwater utility and/or through a WRIA-8 or other grant
sponsored project. Significant additional work would need to be done to
determine whether a 50-foot buffer in the UMU4 could find scientific
justification given the presumably high habitat value of the Edmonds marsh.
G. WAC 173-26-221(2)(b)(iv): The planning objectives of
shoreline management provisions for critical areas shall be the
protection of existing ecological functions and ecosystem -wide
processes and restoration of degraded ecological functions and
ecosystem -wide processes.
Shorelines with critical areas get special treatment under the SMA. With
critical areas, the objectives are not merely protection (no net loss) but also
restoration of degraded ecological functions. The city's goal is to restore both
the Edmonds marsh and its degraded buffers. The 110-foot buffer for the
UMU4 could become restored either through a standalone restoration
project that would likely require city and port cooperation, through
mitigation requirements to offset the impacts of more intense
redevelopment, or potentially through a combination of the two.
H. WAC 173-26-221(2)(c)(i)(A): Local governments should
consult the department's technical guidance documents on
wetlands.
The 110-foot buffer for the UMU4 comes directly from and is consistent with
Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates, Western Washington Version, June 2016,
Publication No. 16-06-001, Department of Ecology. The 50-foot buffer in
Ecology's Required Change 7 is not consistent with this recent guidance.
WAC 173-26-221(2)(c)(i)(D): Master programs shall contain
requirements for buffer zones around wetlands. Buffer
requirements shall be adequate to ensure that wetland functions
are protected and maintained in the long term. Requirements for
buffer zone widths and management shall take into account the
ecological functions of the wetland, the characteristics and setting
of the buffer, the potential impacts associated with the adjacent
land use, and other relevant factors.
Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates, Western Washington Version, June 2016,
Publication No. 16-06-001, Department of Ecology, addresses many of these
factors. It provides different buffer widths for Category I estuarine wetlands
Packet Pg. 213
(150 feet) and Category II estuarine wetlands (110 feet), recognizing that
Category I wetlands have greater ecological function. There is no lower
category of estuarine wetland than Category II. This suggests that even when
the wetland and buffer may have some suffered some degradation, an
estuarine wetland should still be afforded protection consistent with a
Category II wetland.
Ecology suggests that, because the Harbor Square portion of the UMU4 has
already been developed, a narrow buffer of 50 feet is justified. We could not
find support for this proposition in Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates,
Western Washington Version, June 2016, Publication No. 16-06-001,
Department of Ecology. If anything, that publication appears to state the
opposite: "Ecology's buffer recommendations are also based on the
assumption that the buffer is well vegetated with native species
appropriate to the ecoregion. If the buffer does not consist of vegetation
adequate to provide the necessary protection, then either the buffer area
should be planted or the buffer width should be increased." Id., at 13.
J. WAC 173-26-221(2)(c)(iii)(A): Critical saltwater habitats
require a higher level of protection due to the important ecological
functions they provide. Ecological functions of marine shorelands
can affect the viability of critical saltwater habitats. Therefore,
effective protection and restoration of critical saltwater habitats
should integrate management of shorelands as well as submerged
areas.
Critical saltwater habitats like the Edmonds marsh require greater
protection than other critical areas. It is necessary to establish an
appropriate buffer upon the shorelands of the UMU4 in order to be able to
protect and restore these areas.
K. WAC 173-26-221(2)(c)(iii)(B): The management planning
should address the following, where applicable:... Protecting
existing and restoring degraded riparian and estuarine ecosystems,
especially salt marsh habitats; Establishing adequate buffer zones
around these areas to separate incompatible uses from the habitat
areas;
Here again, the guidance emphasizes that salt marsh habitats like the
Edmonds marsh warrant special protection, even when they are somewhat
Packet Pg. 214
degraded and that a significant component of that special protection is the
establishment of an adequate buffer to protect the special habitat provided
by such ecosystems. It should be noted here that existing development
within the UMU4 buffer does not make the habitat in the marsh unworthy of
protection. It should also be noted that even if existing development already
has some negative impact upon that habitat, redevelopment to a more
intense use could have greater impact upon that habitat if the buffer were
not increased adequately to protect the habitat from the more intense
development.
L. WAC 173-27-080 Nonconforming use and development
standards. When nonconforming use and development standards
do not exist in the applicable master program,' the following
definitions and standards shall apply:
1. 'Nonconforming use or development' means a shoreline
use or development which was lawfully constructed or
established prior to the effective date of the act or the applicable
master program, or amendments thereto, but which does not
conform to present regulations or standards of the program.
2. Structures that were legally established and are used for a
conforming use but which are nonconforming with regard to
setbacks, buffers or yards; area; bulk; height or density may be
maintained and repaired and may be enlarged or expanded
provided that said enlargement does not increase the extent of
nonconformity by further encroaching upon or extending into
areas where construction or use would not be allowed for new
development or uses....
Portions of the Harbor Square development already exist within as little as
25 feet of the Edmonds marsh. Ecology has argued that this existing
condition warrants a much smaller buffer than the 110-foot buffer called for
by the guidance. Ecology argues, essentially, that the buffers should be sized
to avoid any already developed property so that the existing development
can retain its conforming status indefinitely. If the SMA intended this result,
1 Note: the city's SNIP does contain provisions for nonconforming use. The
WAC is cited here to demonstrate what regulation Ecology would impose as a
default if the city did not have its own nonconforming use regulation.
Packet Pg. 215
Ecology would not have needed to adopt the above shoreline nonconforming
use rule. The fact that Ecology did adopt a nonconforming use rule renders
this argument suspect.
Similarly, Ecology appears to argue that the SMA's no net loss standard
provides not only the minimum amount of regulatory protection allowed, but
also the maximum amount of regulatory protection allowed. This argument
is not supported by the plain language of the guidance for shoreline master
programs. In fact, the opposite is true, "these guidelines are designed to
assure, at minimum, no net loss of ecological functions necessary to sustain
shoreline natural resources and to plan for restoration of ecological functions
where they have been impaired." WAC 173-26-201(2)(c) (emphasis added).
The guidelines contain similar phrasing where they address wetland
regulations. "Regulations shall address the following uses to achieve, at a
minimum, no net loss of wetland area and functions, including lost time
when the wetland does not perform the function..." WAC 173-26-
221(2)(c)(i)(A) (emphasis added). In short, the plain language of the SMP
guidance indicates that no net loss is the minimum standard that an SMP
must achieve. Nowhere does the guidance suggest that Ecology should deny
an SMP for going beyond this minimum standard.
IV. Consistency with the purpose and intent of Required
Change 7
WAC 173-26-120(7)(b) outlines this stage of Ecology's review procedure:
If, in the opinion of the department, the alternative is consistent with
the purpose and intent of the changes originally proposed by the
department in this subsection (7) and with the policy of RCW
90.58.020 and the applicable guidelines, it shall approve the
alternative changes and provide written notice to all parties of record.
In such cases, the effective date of the approved master program or
amendments is the date of the department's letter to local
government approving the alternative proposal.
If the department determines the alternative proposal is not
consistent with the purpose and intent of the changes proposed by the
department, the department may either deny the alternative proposal
or at the request of local government start anew with the review and
approval process beginning at WAC 173-26-120.
Packet Pg. 216
WAC 173-26-120(7)(b). We have demonstrated in Section III, above, how
Alternative Change 7 is consistent with the applicable guidelines for SMPs.
This section addresses consistency with the purposes and intent of Required
Change 7. Certainly, the proposed buffers between Alternative Change 7 (110
feet) and Required Change 7 (50 feet) are significantly different, but that
does not mean there is inconsistency between their purposes and intents. We
look to the discussion in Ecology's June 27, 2016 Findings and Conclusions to
discern the purpose and intent behind Required Change 7. We acknowledge,
however, that, because Ecology does not succinctly state the purpose and
intent behind Required Change 7, this exercise requires some paraphrasing
and extrapolation on the part of the city. We believe the following four
statements fairly summary Ecology's purpose and intent behind Required
Change 7.
1. The city's originally adopted buffer of 50 feet was
consistent with Ecology's Required Change 7 buffer of 50 feet.
The real difference was in the amount of the setback, where the
city originally adopted a 100-foot setback (or 50 feet from the
edge of the buffer) and Required Change 7 proposed a 65 foot
setback (or 15 feet from the edge of the buffer). Ecology notes
that the city did not adequately support the additional 50-foot
setback with scientific documentation and replaced it with the
extra 15-foot setback, which is consistent with the city's critical
areas ordinance. Ecology states: "A minimum 15-foot building
setback would help preserve the integrity of a restored buffer. A
larger setback may encourage intensive uses such as parking,
which is incompatible within a buffer setback."
Alternative Change 7 is consistent with the purpose and intent of Required
Change 7 because both reflect the same setback (15 feet from edge of the
buffer) that is contained in the city's critical areas ordinance. As Ecology
notes, intensive uses such as parking, would no longer be encouraged by the
larger 50-foot setback.
Packet Pg. 217
2. Ecology expressed concern about the city's reliance upon
Appendix L to support the originally adopted buffer/setback of
50/100. In the table, Ecology states: "Ecology acknowledges the
City Council amendments to the Planning Commission draft
were based on a concern that buffers would be need to be 100
feet to be eligible for Ecology water quality grants. As noted in a
letter from Ecology's Water program, a restoration project
would be eligible based on the science -based planning
commission setback of 50 feet (see letter from Ben Rau to Shane
Hope, August 19, 2015)."
The city acknowledges that Appendix L is not the most relevant guidance for
establishing a buffer width for a Category II estuarine wetland. In Alternative
Change 7, the city has corrected its reliance upon Appendix L and now bases
the buffer for the UMU4 environment on Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates,
Western Washington Version, June 2016, Publication No. 16-06-001,
Department of Ecology. The city believes this guidance to be the "most
current, accurate, and complete scientific and technical information available,"
as required by WAC 173-26-201(2) (a). By basing Alternative Change 7 on
this recent guidance instead of Appendix L, the city's alternative is consistent
with the purpose and intent of Required Change 7.
3. Ecology's table regarding Required Change 7 cites to WAC
173-26-201(2)(c). That section of the guidelines contains the
following language: "Nearly all shoreline areas, even
substantially developed or degraded areas, retain important
ecological functions. For example, an intensely developed
harbor area may also serve as a fish migration corridor and
feeding area critical to species survival. Also, ecosystems are
interconnected. For example, the life cycle of anadromous fish
depends upon the viability of freshwater, marine, and terrestrial
shoreline ecosystems, and many wildlife species associated with
the shoreline depend on the health of both terrestrial and
aquatic environments. Therefore, the policies for protecting and
restoring ecological functions generally apply to all shoreline
areas. not iust those that remain relatively unaltered." WAC
173-26-201(2)(c) (emphasis added).
Alternative Change 7 is consistent with the purpose and intent of Required
Change 7 by recognizing the important applicability of the language above to
Packet Pg. 218
establishing the buffer for the UMU4 environment. While much of the UMU4
buffer area has been developed and degraded, this language, and Alternative
Change 7, acknowledge that the Edmonds marsh retains important ecological
functions that are worthy of being protected with a buffer that is consistent
with Ecology's buffer guidance for a Category II estuarine wetland.
4. Required Change 7 may have been crafted to address the
Port's concern about excess mitigation. The table cites WAC 173-
26-201(2)(e), which contains the following language: "master
programs shall also provide direction with regard to mitigation
for the impact of the development so that: (A) Application of the
mitigation sequence achieves no net loss of ecological functions
for each new development and does not result in required
mitigation in excess of that necessary to assure that
development will result in no net loss of shoreline ecological
functions and not have a significant adverse impact on other
shoreline functions."
Mitigation is imposed at the project stage, not with the adoption of an SMP.
Alternative Change 7 should not be construed as a mitigation requirement.
Rather, it is an acknowledgement that the Edmonds marsh provides high
value habitat that warrants the 110-foot buffer called for in Ecology's
guidance documents. When the Port is ready to pursue a master planned
redevelopment of Harbor Square, a more detailed analysis of the presence of
wildlife and associated habitat will need to be performed to determine the
extent to which the Edmonds marsh needs to be protected from the impacts
of the master planned redevelopment. And that analysis will no doubt be
informed by details about the project itself that are not currently known. At
the project stage, it is possible that additional information about the species
in the marsh and the nature of the project itself will lead to the conclusion
that requiring a 110-foot buffer would be disproportionate to the actual
impact of the project, in which case, the city might opt to incur part of the
cost associated with establishing a 110-foot buffer as a city -sponsored
restoration project. But at this planning stage, and without that critical
additional information, it would be imprudent to establish a 50-foot buffer in
the UMU4 environment. Furthermore, we doubt that a 50-foot buffer would
be upheld under a no net loss challenge without this additional information.
Therefore, to the extent that the purpose and intent of Required Change 7
was to address a concern about excess mitigation, Alternative Change 7 is not
inconsistent with that concern in light of the discussion above.
Packet Pg. 219
7.2
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 01/24/2017
Authorization for the Mayor to sign an Interlocal Agreement between the City of Lynnwood and the City
of Edmonds for joint funding of the Recycling Coordinator (5 min.)
Staff Lead: Phil Williams
Department: Public Works & Utilities
Preparer: Royce Napolitino
Background/History
Since 1995, the Edmonds City Council and staff have agreed to pursue and interlocal cooperative
agreement with the City of Lynnwood to share resources in respect to their waste prevention and
recycling programs. The original interlocal agreement between the two municipalities was produced and
approved on March 28, 1995. A provision of the original agreement allows its extension upon mutual
consent of both the City of Edmonds and the City of Lynnwood and it has been renewed continually ever
since.
Staff Recommendation
It is recommended that Council authorize the Mayor to sign the Interlocal Agreement between
Lynnwood and Edmonds to jointly fund the Recycling Coordinator position and implement their
respective Waste Prevention and Recycling Programs, Starting in 2017 and continuing through June of
2019
Narrative
The waste prevention, recycling, and conservation programs of the City of Edmonds includes providing
full-time education and outreach efforts on a wide variety of environmental issues including solid waste
handling, hazardous waste disposal, recycling maximization , water conservation, and state and regional
policy implementation coordination. The goal of these programs is to ensure the preservation of the
health of our community environment and the protection of local watersheds and waterways from
environmental pollution through proactive communication and the provision of many incidental and
related public services.
The attached updated interlocal cooperative agreement has been reviewed and approved by the city
attorneys of both Edmonds and Lynnwood and covers the budgeted periods starting in 2017 and
continuing to June of 2019.
This agreement estimates that the City of Lynnwood will provide approximately 28 of the funding of the
Recycling Coordinator position in return for a corresponding portion of time committed to assist in the
implementation of Lynnwood's parallel efforts at waste prevention, recycling, and conservation.
Considering the important interconnection of neighboring municipalities in operating these types of
programs, the joint return on investment for both partners offers an enhanced public value for the
Packet Pg. 220
7.2
citizen stakeholders of both communitites.
Attachments:
Joint Recycling Coordinator Interlocal Agreement 2017-2019
Packet Pg. 221
7.2.a
I AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
2 BETWEEN THE CITY OF LYNNWOOD
3 AND THE CITY OF EDMONDS FOR
4 JOINT FUNDING OF A RECYCLING COORDINATOR
5
6 THIS AGREEMENT ("Agreement") between the City of Lynnwood ("Lynnwood") and the City
7 of Edmonds ("Edmonds"), each a municipal corporation established under the laws of the State
8 of Washington, is dated this day of 2017.
9
10 WHEREAS, Chapter 39.34 RCW (Interlocal Cooperation Act) permits local government units to
11 make the most efficient use of their powers by enabling them to cooperate with other localities
12 on the basis of mutual advantage; and
13
14 WHEREAS, Edmonds and Lynnwood each presently staff and operate a solid waste program
15 partially funded by a Department of Ecology grant; and
16
17 WHEREAS, the Department of Ecology has funds available to partially fund a continuation of
18 the program; and
19
20 WHEREAS both Edmonds and Lynnwood have partially funded their respective programs for
21 2017 and continuing through June of 2019, yet do not have full funding capability; and
22
23 WHEREAS, Edmonds and Lynnwood have concluded that it would be in their best interests for
24 Edmonds and Lynnwood to jointly fund their solid waste efforts as provided herein.
25
26 NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows:
27
28 1. Edmonds employs Steve Fisher as Recycling Coordinator, and Lynnwood has approved
29 service provision by Mr. Fisher. Should the position of Recycling Coordinator become
30 vacant during the term of this Agreement, Edmonds shall employ a Recycling Coordinator
31 with appropriate qualifications. The selection of the replacement Recycling Coordinator
32 shall be subject to the approval of Lynnwood, which shall not be unreasonably withheld.
33
34 2. The Recycling Coordinator shall provide Edmonds and Lynnwood with a recycling program
35 during 2017, 2018, and the first half of 2019 to provide for the activities and services
36 described in Exhibit A, which is incorporated herein by reference.
37
38 3. The Edmonds Recycling Coordinator will document actual activities and contacts in meeting
39 the requirements of the Lynnwood recycling program, and will provide verification of time
40 spent on Lynnwood activities, prior to or at the time of submission of any invoice by
41 Edmonds to Lynnwood for payment under Paragraph 4 below.
42
43 4. For services provided by the Recycling Coordinator, Lynnwood will reimburse Edmonds an
44 amount not to exceed $32,000.00 in the year 2017, $36,000.00 in the year 2018, and
45 $20,000.00 in the first half of the year 2019. Reimbursement shall be paid quarterly at a rate
46 of $54.60 per hour in the year 2017, $57.33 per hour in 2018 and $60.20 in 2019, plus
47 Lynnwood's fair share of direct charges of labor, benefits, and material costs, without the
48 inclusion of overhead or general administrative charges, incurred in administering the
330936.01136009910009173c_01!.DOC (11/7/12) -1-
Packet Pg. 222
7.2.a
I Lynnwood recycling program. At the conclusion of each calendar quarter, Edmonds shall
2 submit an invoice to Lynnwood stating the total hours work on Lynnwood services during
3 that quarter, and the total amount due to Edmonds. Within thirty (30) days of Lynnwood's
4 receipt of an invoice, Lynnwood shall (1) pay all undisputed amounts to Edmonds and (2) if
5 Lynnwood objects to all or any portion of the invoice, notify Edmonds of the disputed
6 amount.
7
8 5. This Agreement shall be effective as of January 1, 2017 and will expire June 30, 2019 unless
9 terminated earlier pursuant to Paragraph 6 below. This Agreement may be extended by
10 mutual written agreement of both parties and upon specific approval of the respective
11 recycling programs for future budget years.
12
13 6. This Agreement may be terminated by either party upon sixty (60) days written notice to the
14 other party. Reconciliation of costs, payment, transfer of developed materials, and a current
15 report of completed activities will be completed within the sixty (60) day period following
16 notice by either party.
17
18 7. Lynnwood agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City of Edmonds from any claims
19 arising as a result of the administration of Lynnwood's program under this Agreement.
20 Lynnwood and Edmonds shall each be responsible for any and all liability resulting from any
21 acts or omissions resulting from its own negligent and/or wrongful acts or omissions, and
22 those of its own agents, employees, contractors, or officials, as the same shall be determined
23 under the laws of the State of Washington or a mutually approved settlement agreement.
24
25 8. This Agreement incorporates the entire understanding between Edmonds and Lynnwood
26 regarding the subject matter of this Agreement. This Agreement may only be modified in a
27 writing signed by the parties hereto. It shall be filed with the Department of Ecology and the
28 Snohomish County Auditor as required by law.
29
30 9. In addition to the provisions previously stated regarding duration, organization and purpose,
31 the following provisions are included pursuant to the requirements of RCW 39.34.030.
32
33 9.1 No joint or cooperative undertaking is required by this Agreement.
34 Therefore, no provision is made for the financing of any joint or cooperative
35 undertaking.
36
37 9.2 No joint property ownership is contemplated under the terms of this
38 Agreement. To the extent title to the right of way exists, it shall remain in the
39 ownership of the party which acquires it. In the event, at the termination of this
40 Agreement, any personal property is jointly owned by the parties, either party
41 may purchase the interest of the other, with the other party's permission, at fair
42 market value, as such value is determined by the parties. In the event that neither
43 party wishes to retain jointly obtained property, it shall be surplussed and the
44 proceeds divided pro-rata based upon the party's initial contribution to the
45 purchase of such property. If both parties seek ownership of the property, value
46 shall be determined as herein provided and the right of the parties to purchase
47 the property or properties determined by the drawing of lots.
48
330936.01136009910009173c_O1!.DOC (11/7/12) -2-
Packet Pg. 223
7.2.a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
9.3 Because no joint or cooperative undertaking is contemplated by this
Agreement, no provision has been made for an administrator or joint board.
9.4 This Agreement shall be effective when listed by subject on the City of
Edmonds' web site, Lynnwood's web site or another electronically retrievable
public source, whichever shall first occur.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this agreement as of this
day of , 2017.
CITY OF LYNNWOOD
Nicola Smith, Mayor
ATTEST
Sonya Springer, Finance Director
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Rosemary Larson, City Attorney
CITY OF EDMONDS
Dave Earling, Mayor
ATTEST
Scott Passey, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Sharon Cates, Office of the City Attorney
330936.01136009910009173c_01!.DOC (11/7/12)
-3-
Packet Pg. 224
7.2.a
I EXHIBIT A
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
Waste Reduction and Recycling Programs
Cities of Edmonds and Lynnwood
CONTINUED PUBLIC EDUCATIONAL MESSAGES & OUTREACH:
City Newsletter articles.
Program information section for city Internet web sites.
Presentations and assistance to schools and businesses.
Educational outreach, plus providing recycling/compost collection at local public events.
Maintain Recycle Cart (Edmonds) and Recycle/Compost information racks (Lynnwood).
Distribution of brochures and flyers, and creation of educational displays.
Publicity, coordination and assistance with local scout troops with Christmas tree recycling.
ASSISTANCE to MULTI -FAMILY PROPERTIES with RECYCLING EFFORTS:
Continues to supply information and assistance to managers and tenants.
Expansion of available recycling to non -participating properties.
Contamination issues, illegal dumping, Christmas tree collection, multi-lingual information.
EXPANSION & MAINTENANCE of SINGLE-FAMILY RECYCLING PROGRAMS:
Cooperation with the municipal waste collection companies in identifying non -customers for use in a campaign to
increase single family participation.
Publicity, information and management for special recycling collection and clean-up events.
ASSISTANCE to the COMMERCIAL SECTOR with WASTE PREVENTION & RECYCLING EFFORTS
and SOLID WASTE ISSUES & MANAGEMENT:
Contacts, site visits, waste assessments to retail/office/manufacturers/schools/institutions.
Presentations of options and opportunities for businesses such as construction and demolition debris recycling,
material exchanges and reuse opportunities, and issues affecting water quality.
Continuation of support and maintenance of the Compost Collection Project — involving organics collection from
restaurants and other food service businesses.
Small Quantity Generator educational outreach (special & hazardous wastes).
CONTINUED CITY IN-HOUSE WASTE PREVENTION & RECYCLING PROGRAM:
Keep employees updated on recycling information and opportunities.
Expand and evaluate recycling, reuse, and solid waste generation and disposal.
Coordinate proper recycling of unwanted electronics, cell phones, batteries, and printer cartridges.
ADMINISTRATIVE DUTIES:
Grant administration: Quarterly and final reports for Department of Ecology.
Program evaluation and ordinance research and writing.
Continuation as part of development Services review, specifically for proposed new and remodeled commercial and
multi -family properties to help site enclosures and containers for garbage and recycling.
Continued liaison with the municipal solid waste collection companies.
CONTINUED LIAISON with COUNTY SOLID WASTE DEPARTMENT:
Meetings and assistance with County programs:
-Household Hazardous Waste Drop -Off Station.
-County solid waste and recycling facilities.
-"Take It Back" Network for proper electronics recycling.
Representative on Solid Waste Advisory Committee (SWAC) (Edmonds)
330936.01136009910009173c_01!.DOC (11/7/12) -4-
Packet Pg. 225
7.3
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 01/24/2017
Presentation of a Professional Services Agreement with The Blueline Group for the 2018 Waterline
Replacement Project (10 minutes)
Staff Lead: Rob English
Department: Engineering
Preparer: Megan Luttrell
Background/History
None.
Staff Recommendation
Forward this item to the consent agenda for approval at the February 7th City Council meeting.
Narrative
The City issued a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) in November 2016 to hire a consultant to provide
design engineering services for the 2018 and 2019 Waterline Replacement Projects. The City received
statements of qualifications from nine engineering firms and the selection committee selected Blueline
to provide design engineering services for the 2018 and 2019 Waterline Replacement Projects. The
design engineering for the 2018 Waterline Replacement Project is expected to be complete by
December 2017, with construction expected to begin in spring 2018. If services are required for the
2019 Waterline Replacement Project, a separate scope and fee will be drafted in 2018 and submitted to
City Council for approval.
In total, the 2018 plus the 2019 Waterline Replacement Project will upgrade/replace portions of the
City's potable water network by replacing approximately 11,000 linear feet of existing waterlines and
associated appurtenances at various locations within the City. The 2017 Waterline Replacement Project
will replace approximately 5,000 linear feet of watermain.
The selection of the sites will be determined using the data supplied in the 2010 Comprehensive Water
System Plan dated August 2010, coordinating with upcoming road, sanitary sewer, and storm drain
projects, and input from Public Works. Upgrade projects will focus on upsizing and/or looping portions
of the existing network to improve flow and pressure. Replacement projects will remove and replace
pipes that are near the end of their life cycle and are requiring additional maintenance.
The negotiated fee for the professional services provided under this agreement is $361,300. A $32,800
management reserve is included to address unforeseen design issues that may occur during the
development of the contract plans and specifications. The design and construction of the Waterline
Replacement Project is funded by the Water Utility Fund (Fund 421).
Attachments:
The Blueline Group - Professional Services Agreement
Packet Pg. 226
7.3
Site Maps
Packet Pg. 227
7.3.a
s CITY OF EDMONDS DAVE EARLING
121 5T" AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - 425-771-0220 - FAX 425-672-5750 MAYOR
Website: www.edmondswa.gov
l890 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Engineering Division
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into between the City of Edmonds, hereinafter
referred to as the "City", and The Blueline Group hereinafter referred to as the "Consultant";
WHEREAS, the City desires to engage the professional services and assistance of a
consulting firm to provide consulting services with respect to the 2018 Waterline Replacement
Project;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of mutual benefits accruing, it is agreed by and
between the parties hereto as follows:
1. Scope of work. The scope of work shall include all services and material
necessary to accomplish the above mentioned objectives in accordance with the Scope of
Services that is marked as Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
2. Payments. The Consultant shall be paid by the City for completed work for
services rendered under this Agreement as provided hereinafter. Such payment shall be full
compensation for work performed or services rendered and for all labor, materials, supplies,
equipment and incidentals necessary to complete the work.
A. Payment for work accomplished under the terms of this Agreement shall be
on a time and expense basis as set forth on the fee schedule found in Exhibit B, provided, in no
event shall the payment for work performed pursuant to this Agreement exceed the sum of
$361,300.
B. All vouchers shall be submitted by the Consultant to the City for payment
pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. The City shall pay the appropriate amount for each
voucher to the Consultant. The Consultant may submit vouchers to the City biweekly during the
progress of the work for payment of completed phases of the project. Billings shall be reviewed
in conjunction with the City's warrant process. No billing shall be considered for payment that
has not been submitted to the City Engineer three days prior to the scheduled cut-off date. Such
late vouchers will be checked by the City and payment will be made in the next regular payment
cycle.
C. The costs records and accounts pertaining to this Agreement are to be kept
available for inspection by representatives of the City for a period of three years after final
payment. Copies shall be made available upon request.
1
Packet Pg. 228
7.3.a
3. Ownership and use of documents. All research, tests, surveys, preliminary data
and any and all other work product prepared or gathered by the Consultant in preparation for the
services rendered by the Consultant under this Agreement shall be and are the property of the
Consultant, provided, however, that:
A. All final reports, presentations and testimony prepared by the Consultant
shall become the property of the City upon their presentation to and acceptance by the City and
shall at that date become the property of the City.
B. The City shall have the right, upon reasonable request, to inspect, review
and copy any work product during normal office hours. Documents prepared under this
agreement and in the possession of the Consultant may be subject to public records request and
release under Chapter 42.56 RCW.
C. In the event that the Consultant shall default on this Agreement, or in the
event that this contract shall be terminated prior to its completion as herein provided, the work
product of the Consultant, along with a summary of work done to date of default or termination,
shall become the property of the City and tender of the work product and summary shall be a
prerequisite to final payment under this contract. The summary of work done shall be prepared at
no additional cost.
4. Time of performance. The Consultant shall perform the work authorized by this
Agreement promptly in accordance with the receipt of the required governmental approvals.
5. Indemnification / Hold harmless agreement. The Consultant shall defend,
indemnify and hold the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers harmless from any
and all claims, injuries, damages, losses, demands, or suits at law or equity arising from the acts,
errors or omissions of the Consultant in the performance of this Agreement, except for injuries
and damages caused by the sole negligence of the City. Should a court of competent jurisdiction
determine that this Agreement is subject to RCW 4.24.115, then, in the event of liability for
damages arising out of bodily injury to persons or damages to property caused by or resulting
from the concurrent negligence of the Consultant and the City, its officers, officials, employees,
and volunteers, the Consultant's liability, including the duty and cost to defend, hereunder shall
be only to the extent of the Consultant's negligence.
The Consultant shall comply with all applicable sections of the applicable Ethics laws, including
RCW 42.23, which is the Code of Ethics for regulating contract interest by municipal officers.
The Consultant specifically assumes potential liability for actions brought by the Consultant's
own employees against the City and, solely for the purpose of this indemnification and defense,
the Consultant specifically waives any immunity under the state industrial insurance law, Title 51
RCW. This waiver has been mutually negotiated by the parties. The provisions of this section
shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement.
6. General and professional liability insurance. The Consultant shall obtain and
keep in force during the term of the Agreement, or as otherwise required, the following insurance
with companies or through sources approved by the State Insurance Commissioner pursuant to
Title 48 RCW.
Packet Pg. 229
7.3.a
Insurance Coverage
A. Worker's compensation and employer's liability insurance as required by the State.
B. Commercial general liability and property damage insurance in an aggregate amount not
less than two million dollars ($2,000,000) for bodily injury, including death and property
damage. The per occurrence amount shall be written with limits no less than one million
dollars ($1,000,000).
C. Vehicle liability insurance for any automobile used in an amount not less than a one
million dollar ($1,000,000) combined single limit.
D. Professional liability insurance in the amount of one million dollars ($1,000,000).
Excepting the Worker's Compensation Insurance and Professional Liability Insurance secured by
the Consultant, the City will be named on all policies as an additional insured. The Consultant
shall furnish the City with verification of insurance and endorsements required by the
Agreement. The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required
insurance policies at any time.
All insurance shall be obtained from an insurance company authorized to do business in the State
of Washington. The Consultant shall submit a verification of insurance as outlined above within
fourteen days of the execution of this Agreement to the City.
No cancellation of the foregoing policies shall be effective without thirty days prior notice to the
City.
The Consultant's professional liability to the City shall be limited to the amount payable under
this Agreement or one million dollars ($1,000,000), whichever is the greater, unless modified
elsewhere in this Agreement. In no case shall the Consultant's professional liability to third
parties be limited in any way.
7. Discrimination prohibited. Consultant shall not discriminate against any
employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, national origin, age, sex,
sexual orientation, marital status, veteran status, liability for service in the armed forces of the
United States, disability, or the presence of any sensory, mental or physical handicap, or any
other protected class status, unless based upon a bona fide occupational qualification.
8. Consultant is an independent contractor. The parties intend that an
independent contractor relationship will be created by this Agreement. No agent, employee or
representative of the Consultant shall be deemed to be an agent, employee or representative of
the City for any purpose. Consultant shall be solely responsible for all acts of its agents,
employees, representatives and subcontractors during the performance of this Agreement.
9. City approval of work and relationships. Notwithstanding the Consultant's
status as an independent contractor, results of the work performed pursuant to this Agreement
must meet the approval of the City. During pendency of this Agreement, the Consultant shall not
perform work for any party with respect to any property located within the City of Edmonds or
for any project subject to the administrative or quasijudicial review of the City without written
notification to the City and the City's prior written consent.
Packet Pg. 230
7.3.a
10. Termination. This being an Agreement for professional services, either party
may terminate this Agreement for any reason upon giving the other party written notice of such
termination no fewer than ten (10) days in advance of the effective date of said termination.
11. Integration. The Agreement between the parties shall consist of this document,
the Scope of Services attached hereto as Exhibit A, and the Fee Schedule attached hereto as
Exibit B. These writings constitute the entire Agreement of the parties and shall not be amended
except by a writing executed by both parties. In the event of any conflict between this written
Agreement and any provision of Exhibits A or B, this Agreement shall control.
12. Changes/Additional Work. The City may engage Consultant to perform
services in addition to those listed in this Agreement, and Consultant will be entitled to
additional compensation for authorized additional services or materials. The City shall not be
liable for additional compensation until and unless any and all additional work and compensation
is approved in advance in writing and signed by both parties to this Agreement. If conditions are
encountered which are not anticipated in the Scope of Services, the City understands that a
revision to the Scope of Services and fees may be required. Provided, however, that nothing in
this paragraph shall be interpreted to obligate the Consultant to render or the City to pay for
services rendered in excess of the Scope of Services in Exhibit A unless or until an amendment
to this Agreement is approved in writing by both parties.
13. Standard of Care. Consultant represents that Consultant has the necessary
knowledge, skill and experience to perform services required by this Agreement. Consultant and
any persons employed by Consultant shall use their best efforts to perform the work in a
professional manner consistent with sound engineering practices, in accordance with the
schedules herein and in accordance with the usual and customary professional care required for
services of the type described in the Scope of Services.
14. Non -waiver. Waiver by the City of any provision of this Agreement or any time
limitation provided for in this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of any other provision.
15. Non -assignable. The services to be provided by the Consultant shall not be
assigned or subcontracted without the express written consent of the City.
16. Covenant against contingent fees. The Consultant warrants that he has not
employed or retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for
the Consultant, to solicit or secure this contract, and that he has not paid or agreed to pay any
company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for the Consultant, any fee,
commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gifts, or any other consideration contingent upon or
resulting from the award of making of this contract. For breach or violation of this warranty, the
City shall have the right to annul this contract without liability or, in its discretion to deduct from
the contract price or consideration, or otherwise recover, the full amount of such fee,
commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift, or contingent fee.
17. Compliance with laws. The Consultant in the performance of this Agreement
shall comply with all applicable Federal, State or local laws and ordinances, including
regulations for licensing, certification and operation of facilities, programs and accreditation, and
Packet Pg. 231
7.3.a
licensing of individuals, and any other standards or criteria as described in the Agreement to
assure quality of services.
The Consultant specifically agrees to pay any applicable business and occupation (B & O) taxes
which may be due on account of this Agreement.
18. Notices. Notices to the City of Edmonds shall be sent to the following address
City of Edmonds
121 Fifth Avenue North
Edmonds, WA 98020
Notices to the Consultant shall be sent to the following address:
The Blueline Group
25 Central Way, Suite 400
Kirkland, WA 98033
Receipt of any notice shall be deemed effective three days after deposit of written notice in the
U.S. mails, with proper postage and properly addressed.
19. Critical areas. To the extent that the Scope of Work under this Agreement
requires the Consultant to perform work in an environmentally critical area, the Consultant shall
comply with any and all applicable provisions of ECDC 23.40 ("Environmentally Critical Areas
General Provisions"). If such work falls within the definition of "minor site investigative work"
authorized under ECDC 23.40.220(C)(9), the Consultant shall consult with the City regarding
appropriate procedures to follow, and obtain separate written permission from the City to
proceed before undertaking this work.
DATED THIS DAY OF , 20
CITY OF EDMONDS THE BLUELINE GROUP
By By
David O. Earling, Mayor
Its
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATE :
Scott Passey, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Office of the City Attorney
Packet Pg. 232
7.3.a
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
)ss
COUNTY OF )
On this day of , 20 , before me, the undersigned, a
Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, duly commissioned and sworn,
personally appeared , to me known to be the
of the corporation that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said
instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation, for the uses and
purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he/she was authorized to execute said
instrument and that the seal affixed is the corporate seal of said corporation.
WITNESS my hand and official seal hereto affixed the day and year first above
written.
NOTARY PUBLIC
My commission expires:
a
Packet Pg. 233
7.3.a
Exhibit 'A' to the Contract Agreement for Professional Services
between The City of Edmonds and The Blueline Group, LLC
for the 2018 Waterline Replacement Project
dated January 12, 2016
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Blueline Group, LLC ("Blueline") will provide engineering services for the City of Edmonds' 2018
Waterline Replacement Project ("Project") generally consisting of replacement or extension of
±5,000 lineal feet of existing water main with 8-inch and 4-inch diameter ductile iron (DI) pipe.
Design will consist of water main, fire hydrants, connections to existing mains, water services, PRV
station replacements, other appurtenances, and surface restoration on the sites to be selected
following the 30% conceptual level design. As outlined herein, Blueline will provide topographic base
mapping, geotechnical recommendations, design drawings, specifications, engineer's estimates
(PS&E), coordination with WSDOT, and bidding and construction administration services.
PROJECT SCHEDULE
Blueline shall begin work immediately upon receipt of Notice to Proceed from the City and proceed
according to the attached Project Schedule. This schedule reflects the City's desire to complete
design by the end of 2017 and to begin construction in spring of 2018. Key dates include:
Notice to Proceed & Kick-off Meeting.......
Survey & Base Mapping ............................
30% Design Submittal ...............................
Geotechnical Explorations .........................
Project Walk -Through .................................
60% Design Submittal ...............................
90% Design Submittal ...............................
Final Design Submittal ...............................
Bidding & Award .........................................
Construction Begins ...................................
Construction Ends ......................................
As-Builts & Project Close-out .....................
......................................... late February 2017
............................................ March/April 2017
......................................................... May 2017
........................................................June 2017
........................................................June 2017
..........................................................July 2017
...................................................October 2017
.............................................. December 2017
...................................January -February 2018
..................................................... March 2018
............................................. September 2018
.............................................. November 2018
SCOPE OF WORK
Blueline's scope of work for the Project is detailed on the following pages.
a
1
Packet Pg. 234
7.3.a
Exhibit 'A' to the Contract Agreement for Professional Services
between The City of Edmonds and The Blueline Group, LLC
for the 2018 Waterline Replacement Project
dated January 12, 2016
Task 001 - PROJECT MANAGEMENT...........................................................................HR-NTE: $22,100
This task is for general coordination and meetings on the project, including plan review/discussion
meetings, in-house quality assurance, coordination with subconsultants, etc. Blueline will prepare
monthly invoices for work performed during the previous month.
Task 002- SURVEY & BASE MAPPING.......................................................................... HR-NTE: $99,600
Axis Survey and Mapping will prepare base mapping for the project areas specified below. The
project areas generally include Water System and Street Surface improvements at the following sites
(see attached maps for approximate limits):
Site 01 - Mapping of a portion of 88th Ave W and 185th PI SW
Site 02 - Mapping of a portion of 188th St SW, 89th Ave W and 90th PI W
Site 03 - Mapping of a portion of 192nd St SW near the intersection with 91st Ave W
Site 04 - Mapping of a portion of Maplewood Drive and 12th Ave N
Site 05 - Mapping of a portion of 76th Ave W and 221st PI
Site 06 - Mapping of a portion of 2nd Ave S and Edmonds Way (SR 104)
Site 07 - Mapping of a portion of Maplewood Ln and 86th PI W
Site 08 - Mapping of a portion of 9th Ave N, loth Ave N, Olympic Ave, Sprague St, Daley St
and Glen St
Site 09 - Mapping of a portion of Ocean Ave and Water St
Site 10 - Mapping of a portion of Soundview PI and Wharf St
Site 11 - Mapping of a portion of 8th Ave N and Puget Ln
Site 12 - Mapping of a portion of 76th Ave W, 73rd PI W and 215th St SW
AutoCad drawings will be prepared at a scale of 1"=20'. Existing aerial and/or LIDAR mapping
sources may be utilized directly or as a basis for verification. Services will include the following:
• Control survey in NAD 83/91 Horizontal Datum, with all elevations derived from and checked
to NAVD 88 Vertical Datum.
• Delineate parcel lines within above -described area as available from recorded plats and
public records further compared to City of Edmonds and Snohomish County Parcel GIS lines.
• Deed research and location of boundary evidence for properties in Site 4 including right of
way monuments, property corners, and occupation.
• Furnish underground utility locates by a private locate company for non -City owned utilities.
• Set additional elevation benchmarks at each end of project area and every 500-700' along
the route.
• Mapping of PRV stations to include horizontal and vertical location and visible pipes entering
and exiting the structure. m
• Contract with and coordinate services of private utility locate company to ascertain
conductible underground utility locations and available asbuilt records.
c
• Depict hard and soft surfaces on individual layers per accepted APWA standards.
E
• Show and dimension located topographic features and contours at l' intervals.
c�
• Show known utilities as provided by City of Edmonds GIS, research of available utility as -built a
records and as located by City utility locators.
2 Packet Pg. 235
7.3.a
Exhibit 'A' to the Contract Agreement for Professional Services
between The City of Edmonds and The Blueline Group, LLC
for the 2018 Waterline Replacement Project
dated January 12, 2016
Deliverables: AutoCad 2016 drawing file with point database and dtm files.
Assumptions: All work will be performed in the public right-of-way and therefore, right of
entry will not need to be obtained.
Task 003 - GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS.............................................................. HR-NTE: $26,300
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. will provide Geotechnical Engineering Explorations and Report in
accordance with the attached scope of work.
Task 004 - CONCEPTUAL DESIGN (ALL SITES)............................................................ HR-NTE: $38,000
Using the base maps prepared in Task 002, Blueline will provide conceptual level plans showing the
horizontal layout of the water main replacements for all 12 sites identified at the scoping meeting
with the City. Services under this task will include:
• Kick-off Meeting with the City.
• Layout and location of ±10,000 LF of new DI water mains (plan view only at this stage).
• Review available information to determine the most efficient, cost effective alignments.
• Coordination with franchise utility companies during design.
• Prepare plan sheets for the proposed water main improvements.
o Water design will be shown in plan view per City standards.
o Sheets to be 22"x34" with roughly an 18"x28" drawing area.
o Scale for these drawings is to be 1"=20' horizontal.
o We estimate that ±20 plan sheets will be required.
• Prepare a preliminary Engineer's Estimate for each site with large contingency at this stage.
• Prepare 30% Design Stage submittal.
• Project Walk-through with City engineering and maintenance staff.
• Recommendations to the City staff to select which of the 12 sites should be incorporated
into the 2018 project and which should be included in the 2019 project.
• Review meeting with the City staff to incorporate City comments into the next submittal.
Deliverables: 30% Design Submittal: PDF of Plans and Preliminary Engineer's Estimates.
Task 005 - WSDOT COORDINATION.............................................................................. HR-NTE: $8,200
This task is for ongoing coordination with WSDOT related to the proposed trenchless water main
installation under SR 104. Services under this task will include:
• Attending meetings and/or site visits with WSDOT representatives
• Correspondence with WSDOT representatives
a)
• Completing the Utility Construction permit for crossing a state highway (assuming Category 3 E
- Little or No Impact).
Deliverables: Completed WSDOT Utility Construction permit and supporting materials. a
3 Packet Pg. 236
7.3.a
Exhibit 'A' to the Contract Agreement for Professional Services
between The City of Edmonds and The Blueline Group, LLC
for the 2018 Waterline Replacement Project
dated January 12, 2016
Task 006 - WATER SYSTEM DESIGN (2018 SITES)...................................................HR-NTE: $116,200
Using the base maps prepared in Task 002 and the Geotechnical Recommendations provided in
Task 003, Blueline will produce design plans, and specifications for the Project. The services under
this task will include:
• Layout and location of ±5,000 LF of new DI water mains and 2 PRV station replacements.
• Design of fire hydrants, replacement of water services (to the existing water meter),
connections to the existing system, and other associated appurtenances within the selected
site limits.
• Separating the PS&E into multiple schedules (A, B, C or I, II, III or other).
• Coordination with franchise utility companies during design.
• Prepare plan & profile split sheets for the proposed water main improvements.
o Water design will be shown in plan and profile per City standards.
o Sheets to be 22"x34" with roughly an 18"x28" drawing area.
o Scale for these drawings is to be 1"=20' horizontal and 1"=5' vertical.
o We estimate that ±27 plan sheets and ±4 details sheets will be required depending
on the number of sites selected.
• Show details necessary for construction of the improvements, utilizing City standard water
details and developing specialized details as necessary.
• Provide general temporary erosion and sedimentation control notes and details as
necessary.
• Prepare technical specifications, including Proposal, Contract Forms, General Conditions,
and Measurement and Payment in WSDOT format, using City -provided standard
specifications when available.
• Prepare 60%, 90%, and Final Design stage submittals.
• Review meeting with City staff at each stage of the design and incorporate City comments
into the next submittal.
• Constructability review and QA/QC.
Deliverables: 60% & 90% Design Submittals: PDF of Plans, Specifications, and Engineer's
Estimate.
Final Design Submittal: PDF of Plans, Specifications, Engineer's Estimates,
plus all documents in digital format (and ACAD files) on a CD.
Task 007 - BIDDING ASSISTANCE.................................................................................. HR-NTE: $4,600
Blueline will provide consultation services during the bidding process, including:
• Attend Pre -Bid Conference and address questions from prospective bidders, if necessary.
• Prepare and issue addenda to clarify the construction documents, if necessary.
• Generally assist the City during the bidding process as needed.
as
Assumptions: The City will upload the bid documents to Builder's Exchange, conduct the bid E
opening, prepare the bid tabulation, review apparent low bidder references, and prepare
recommendation for contract award.
a
Deliverables: Addenda if necessary.
4 Packet Pg. 237
7.3.a
Exhibit 'A' to the Contract Agreement for Professional Services
between The City of Edmonds and The Blueline Group, LLC
for the 2018 Waterline Replacement Project
dated January 12, 2016
Task 008 - CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT........................................................................ HR-NTE: $13,000
Blueline will provide construction administration services for this Project during the construction
period. Blueline will closely coordinate construction management activities with the City's staff and
field inspector. Services under this task are anticipated to include:
• Prepare for and attend the pre -construction conference.
• Review requests for information (RFIs) provided by the Contractor and coordinate responses
to said RFIs with the City.
• Provide changes to drawings or specifications as necessary to respond to field conditions or
RFIs.
• General consultation and coordination on an as -needed basis. Address construction
questions as they arise.
• Blueline will prepare recommendation of project acceptance, if needed.
• Prepare As-Builts in AutoCad.
Deliverables: RFI responses if necessary, As-Builts on a CD, transmit and provide Utility
data and PDF to City's GIS group.
Assumptions: Construction inspection and administration services are not included.
Task 009 - MANAGEMENT RESERVE....................................................... HR-NTE (Allowance): $32,800
This task provides for unanticipated services deemed to be necessary during the course of the
Project that are not specifically identified in the scope of work tasks defined above. Any funds
under this item are not to be used unless explicitly authorized by the City. Fee estimate is based on
±10% of Tasks 001 - 008.
Deliverables: None yet identified.
Task 999 - EXPENSES.................................................................................................. (Allowance): $500
This task provides for mileage reimbursement associated with meetings and site visits throughout
the course of the project.
GENERAL ASSUMPTIONS & NOTES
• The City of Edmonds will provide any available record drawings for the project areas.
• Scope and fees outlined above are based on the following information (any changes to these
documents may result in changes to the fees):
o Scoping Meeting with the City of Edmondson December 21, 2016.
o City of Edmonds' Maps provided at Scoping Meeting.
o City of Edmonds' GIS records.
• We do not anticipate that environmental services will be necessary for this Project. If it is
determined during the design phase that environmental services are needed, we will provide
an Additional Services Authorization request for that effort.
• We do not anticipate that traffic control plans, dewatering plans, or structural engineering
plans will be necessary for this project, and are therefore not included.
• Project stops/starts and significant changes to the attached Project Schedule may result in
changes to the fees provided above and a separate fee proposal will be provided. a
• Agency fees (if any) are not included as part of the fees outlined above. a
• Easements (if required) will be an additional service.
• Time and expense items are based on The Blueline Group's current hourly rates.
5 Packet Pg. 238
7.3.a
a s s o c i a t e d
earth sciences
i n c o r p o r a t e d
January 6, 2017
Revised January 12, 2017
Project No. KE170001A
The Blueline Group
25 Central Way, Suite 400
Kirkland, Washington 98033
Attention: Ms. Deanna L. Martin, P.E.
Subject: Proposal for Subsurface Exploration and
Geotechnical Engineering Study
Edmonds Water System Improvements
Edmonds, Washington
Dear Ms. Martin:
As requested, this proposal presents our scope of work and cost estimate to perform a
subsurface exploration and geotechnical engineering study for the subject project. Our
understanding of the project is based on information provided by The Blueline Group.
SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The subject project includes various improvements to the existing City of Edmonds water
system, including the replacement of four pressure reducing valve (PRV) stations (PRV Stations
13 through 16), and the extension of new water line along the alignment of 2nd Avenue South,
below Edmonds Way (Washington State Route 104). We understand that trenchless
installation techniques, such as pipejacking or directional drilling, are currently under
consideration for the 2nd Avenue South water line extension. You have requested that
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) provide foundation recommendations for the proposed
PRV stations, as well as geotechnical recommendations for trenchless installation of the 2nd
Avenue South water line extension, including dewatering (if needed) for the pipejacking pits
associated with water line installation.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SERVICES - PURPOSE AND SCOPE
We propose to complete a geotechnical report for the site based upon subsurface conditions
encountered at the site. We understand that typical practice for water line projects in
Edmonds is to backfill the excavated trenches with bank run gravel if native material is
Kirkland Office 1911 Fifth Avenue I Kirkland, WA 98033 P 1425.827.7701 F 1425.827.5424
Everett Office 1 2911 % Hewitt Avenue, Suite 2 1 Everett, WA 98201 P 1425.259.0522 F 1425.827.5424
Tacoma Office 1 1552 Commerce Street, Suite 102 1 Tacoma, WA 98402 P 1 253.722.2992 F 1 253.722.2993
www.aesgeo.com
a
Packet Pg. 239
7.3.a
unsuitable. Therefore, our scope of our proposed exploration will focus on the proposed PRV
station locations and the trenchless installation for the 2nd Avenue South water line extension.
Exploration proposed for the project would consist of eight borings. The borings would be
advanced at the approximate locations of the four proposed PRV stations, at each end of the
planned 2nd Avenue South water line extension, and from the surface elevation of State Route
104 along the 2nd Avenue South water line extension alignment. Most of the borings will each
be drilled to a nominal depth of 15 feet below the ground surface, with the two borings on
State Route 104 advanced to a nominal depth of 45 feet below the ground surface. The borings
will be drilled in the right-of-way as close to the proposed PRV station locations as possible.
Because the roadway segments along which the work will occur are largely limited to two lanes
with narrow shoulder widths, we anticipate that closure of a portion or all of one lane adjacent
to each boring location will be needed for drilling access. We anticipate that the lane closure
would be limited to a short section of road adjacent to the boring being drilled; traffic control
would be provided by AESI and the section of lane closure would be moved for each boring.
We also anticipate the duration of the field exploration to be 3 days.
The drilling will be accomplished using a hollow -stem auger drill rig. The exploration borings
will be performed under the full-time observation of an engineer or geologist who shall
maintain detailed records of the conditions encountered in the borings and obtain
representative samples for additional laboratory testing and classification.
Subsequent to completion of the explorations, we will prepare a geotechnical report
summarizing site soil conditions and estimated ground water elevations, and presenting
geotechnical recommendations for construction of the proposed improvements. Specific items
that will be covered in our report include:
• A site plan with boring exploration locations indicated;
• Interpretive boring exploration logs;
• A summary of our subsurface observations, including the distribution and characteristics
of subsurface soils and shallow ground water;
• Geologic hazard mitigation, if appropriate;
• Temporary utility trench excavation inclinations;
• General opinions regarding use of trench box shoring and dewatering;
• Criteria for site preparation, fill placement, and compaction;
• Suitability of on -site materials for use as structural fill;
• Depth to suitable foundation bearing for PRV stations;
• Allowable foundation soil bearing pressures for PRV stations;
• Types of suitable foundations for PRV stations;
• Preliminary recommendations for utility installation via
dewatering (if needed);
• General erosion control recommendations and wet
considerations.
pipejacking, including
weather construction
a
2
Packet Pg. 240
7.3.a
Prior to our exploration, AESI will notify the one -call utility service to locate buried public
underground utilities at the site. Also, we would request that AESI be allowed to mark the
proposed locations on the street and have the The Blueline Group and the City of Edmonds
confirm that these locations are clear for drilling. If underground utility conflicts or other
obstructions/right-of-way issues prevent drilling in these locations, we would notify the client
of these conflicts, options for alternative drilling locations, and changes to the estimated cost, if
any. AESI will not be responsible for damage to buried utilities that are not accurately marked
on the ground prior to our work, or shown on as -built plans that are provided to us. Budget for
utility locations requiring vacuum truck pre -excavation are not included in our proposal fees,
and will be an additional cost if required by the City of Edmonds or utility company.
Each boring will be backfilled with bentonite and, where paved, capped with concrete or
asphalt, suitable for support of vehicle use. In preparing our cost estimate, any soil cuttings
generated during drilling will be hauled offsite by the driller. No other site restoration is
included in our cost estimate.
COST ESTIMATE
We can complete the scope of work described above for the project within an estimated
budget of $23,900. A breakdown of costs is provided below.
Subsurface Exploration
Drilling subcontractor, includes 6 hollow -stem auger borings to be
drilled to a nominal depth of approximately 15 feet, and 2 borings
to a nominal depth of approximately 45 feet............................................................ $9,000
TrafficControl Plan....................................................................................................... $600
Traffic Control
Permitting (City and State), barricade rental, flaggers, barricade setup ............. $6,000
AESI Field Labor, includes subcontractor and other field coordination .......................... $4,800
Analysis, Engineering, and Report Preparation............................................................... $3,500
TOTAL............................................................................................................................. $23,900
*Note: Traffic control charges listed above are estimated and will be re-evaluated once the traffic control plan has
been approved. If it is anticipated that actual traffic control costs will exceed the amount shown, then we would
H
advise you of the revised estimate prior to commencement of field exploration. No additional traffic control costs
would be incurred without your prior approval.
E
t
c�
Q
3
Packet Pg. 241
-;uawe3eldaM euipaleM 8I,OZ : 16L0 ;uauaaaaBV saalnaag leuolssaJoad - dnoaD aullan1El ayl :1u8uay3e11V
M
ti
All of our work would be billed on a time and materials basis in accordance with our Schedule
of Charges and General Conditions "A", copies of which are attached. If requested by the client,
non -scope tasks, such as meetings or geotechnical plan review, would be billed on a time and
expense basis in accordance with the attached Schedule of Charges and General Conditions
„A„
NOTIFICATION OF AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED
We appreciate the opportunity to submit this proposal and hope that it meets your needs. If
you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. If you approve of our scope of work and
would like for us to proceed, please return a signed copy of this letter to our Kirkland office
address (9115t" Avenue, Kirkland, Washington 98033).
Sincerely,
ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
Kirkland, Washington
Bruce L. Blyton, P. .
Senior Principal Engineer
Attachments: Schedule of Charges
General Conditions "A"
BLB/Id
KE170001A3
Projects\20170001\KE\W P
The undersigned has reviewed and accepts the
attached General Conditions "A".
Client Date
Authorized Representative Signature
Client (please print name)
4
7.3.a
Effective September 7, 2016
ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
SCHEDULE OF CHARGES
Our compensation will be determined on the basis of time and expenses in accordance with the following schedule
unless a lump sum amount is so indicated in the proposal or services agreement. Current rates are as follows:
Personnel Charges - Engineers, Hydrogeologists, Geologists, Scientists, and Technicians
Sr. Principal.......................................................................................$210.00/hour
Principal............................................................................................$180.00/hour
Sr. Associate.....................................................................................$160.00/hour
Associate..........................................................................................$150.00/hour
Senior...............................................................................................$140.00/hour
Sr. Project.........................................................................................$130.00/hour
Project..............................................................................................$115.00/hour
Sr. Staff.............................................................................................$100.00/hour
Staff....................................................................................................$85.00/hour
Legal Testimony (4 hour minimum)..................................................$400.00/hour
Other Personnel and Disbursement Charges
CAD Operator and Workstation.........................................................$95.00/hour
Prints — Sizes A and B............................................................................$2.00/each
Prints — Sizes C, D, E, and F...................................................................$5.00/each
Project Assistant.................................................................................$75.00/hour
Laboratory Technician........................................................................$75.00/hour
Clerical, Word Processing, etc............................................................
$60.00/hour
Computer Services(GIS).....................................................................$85.00/hour
Mileage.................................................................................................$0.65/mile
Four Wheel Drive Vehicle.....................................................................$0.80/mile
Per Diem............................................................................................To
be established on a project basis
Subcontractors and Miscellaneous Expenses....................................cost
plus 15%
Water Level Data Logger...................................................................$50.00/month
Barometer Data Logger.....................................................................$40.00/month
Laboratory Charges
it
Amended Topsoil Bioretention Suite...............................................$770.00/each (D
Atterberg Limit.................................................................................$110.00/test
Combined Sieve and Hydrometer....................................................$193.00/test
0
Consolidation....................................................................................$385.00/test
rn
Constant Head Permeability (ASTM:D2434-68)...............................$385.00/test
Direct Shear......................................................................................$385.00/3
point test 0-
Ethylene Glycol Test (3 rock minimum)............................................$115.00
,
Fractured Face Count (AASHTO T-335)...............................................$80.00/test
Hydrometer......................................................................................
$165.00/test 0
L
Moisture Content...............................................................................$25.00/test
Organic Content.................................................................................$70.00/test
m
c
Percent Passing#200..........................................................................$60.00/test
Permeability -Fines (Falling Head).....................................................$200.00/test
pp
Permeability -Granular Soils (Falling Head).......................................$200.00/test
Proctor ASTM:D-1557 and ASTM:D-698...........................................$200.00/test
Sand Equivalent................................................................................$110.00/test
Sieve with Organic Burn...................................................................$170.00/test
a)E
Sieve with Wash #200......................................................................$110.00/test
Specific Gravity + #4...........................................................................$65.00/test
0
Specific Gravity -#4............................................................................$70.00/test
Q
Other laboratory tests and equipment rental will be provided on a per job basis.
Charge2016-Reg1- WP\Linda\SD-2016
Packet Pg. 243
7.3.a
Notes:
Notes:
THE BLUELINE GROUP
HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE
Effective January 1, 2017
Principal Engineer
$191/hr
Project Manager
$174/hr
Senior Project Engineer
$168/hr
Project Engineer
$156/hr
Construction Administration
$156/hr
Project Planner
$ 139/hr
Engineer
$139/hr
Engineering Designer II
$ 139/hr
Engineering Designer 1
$ 128/hr
Senior CAD Technician
$122/hr
Planning Coordinator II
$122/hr
Construction Inspector
$1 10/hr
Planning Coordinator 1
$1 10/hr
CAD Technician
$1 10/hr
Project Administrator
$82/hr
Standard hourly rates include expenses for telephone, fax, photocopies (letter and legal
size) and postage. Please refer to The Blueline Group's standard contract regarding the
firm's policy regarding other project expenses.
All standard hourly rates are reviewed annually and adjusted accordingly.
PLOTTING/SCANNING RATE SCHEDULE
Effective January 1, 2017
1 1 " x 17" Bond
$0.65/sheet
12" x 18" Bond
$2.40/sheet
18" x 24" Bond
$2.75/sheet
22" x 34" Bond
$3.10/sheet
24" x 36" Bond
$3.35/sheet
30" x 42" Bond
$3.95/sheet
36" x 48" Bond
$4.55/sheet
Plotting and scanning rates are reviewed annually and adjusted accordingly.
Plotting and scanning rates include 9.5% Sales Tax.
MILEAGE RATE SCHEDULE
Effective January 1, 2017
Mileage
$0.54/mile
E
c�
a
Packet Pg. 244
EXHIBIT B - 2018 Waterline Replacement TABLE 1- Fee Estimate Summary
Job Number: 16-299
Date: January 12, 2017
Prepared By: Deanna Martin, PE
Checked By: Ken Lauzen, PE
Principal Engineer
Project Manager
Engineer
CAD Technician
Task #
Base Tasks
$191/hr
$174/hr
$139/hr
$110/hr
Hours
Hours
Hours
Hours
001
Project Management
32
$ 6,112
92
$ 16,008
0
$ -
0
$ -
002
Survey & Base Mapping
003
Geotechnical Investigations
004
Conceptual Design (All Sites)
28
$ 5,348
64
$ 11,136
60
$ 8,340
120
$ 13,200
005
WSDOT Coordination
8
$ 1,528
32
$ 5,568
8
$ 1,112
0
$ -
006
Water System Design (2018 Sites)
42
$ 8,022
204
$ 35,496
254
$ 35,306
340
$ 37,400
007
Bidding Assistance
2
$ 382
16
$ 2,784
10
$ 1,390
0
$ -
008
Construction Support
4
$ 764
20
$ 3,480
22
$ 3,058
52
$ 5,720
009
Management Reserve (Allowance)
-
-
-
999
Expenses
Total
Hours
Total
Cost
Total Cost
(Rounded)
124
$ 22,120
$ 22,100
$ 99,550
$ 99,600
$ 26,290
$ 26,300
272
$ 38,024
$ 38,000
48
$ 8,208
$ 8,200
840
$ 116,224
$ 116,200
28
$ 4,556
$ 4,600
98
$ 13,022
$ 13,000
-
$ 32,800
$ 32,800
$ 500
$ 500
TOTAL 116 $ 22,156 428 $ 74,472 354 1 $ 49,206 1 512 $ 56,320 1410 $ 361,294 1 $ 361,300
d
0
X
CD
rt
C4 -4
N W
� fl1
0 Attachment: The Blueline Group - Professional Services Agreement (1797 : 2018 Waterline Replacement - Blueline Group Contract)
The Blueline Group
EXHIBIT B - 2018 Waterline Replacement TABLE 2 - Fee Estimate Breakdown
001 Project Management
Principal Engineer
Project Manager
Engineer
CAD Technician
Item #
Description
$191/hr
$174/hr
$139/hr
$110/hr
TOTAL
HRS
TOTAL
FEE
HRS
FEE
HRS
FEE
HRS
FEE
HRS
FEE
1
2
3
4
Coordination with City
Monthly Invoices/ Progress Reports
QA / QC
General Project Coordination
4.0
0.0
24.0
4.0
$ 764
$ -
$ 4,584
$ 764
40.0
12.0
16.0
24.0
$ 6,960
$ 2,088
$ 2,784
$ 4,176
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
$
$
$
$
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
$
$
$
$
44.0
12.0
40.0
28.0
$ 7,724
$ 2,088
$ 7,368
$ 4,940
Total
32.0
$ 6,112
92.0
$ 16,008
0.0
$
0.0
$
124.0
$ 22,120
001 HR-NTE: $ 22,100
002 Survey &Base Mapping
Total Cost(Per Axis)
Blueline Markup
Item #
Description
10%
TOTAL
FEE
HR-NTE
Markup
1
2
Survey & Base Mapping
Private Locates of Non -City Owned Utilities
$ 80,500
$ 10,000
$ 8,050
$ 1,000
$ 88,550
$ 11,000
Total
$ 90,500
$ 9,050
$ 99,550
002 HR-NTE: $ 99,600
003 Geotechnicallnvestigations
Total Cost
(PerAESI)
Blueline Markup
Item #
Description
10%
TOTAL
FEE
HR-NTE
Markup
1
Geotechnicallnvestigations
$ 23,900
$ 2,390
$ 26,290
Total
$ 23,900
$ 2,390
$ 26,290
003 HR-NTE: $ 26,300
Attachment: The Blueline Group - Professional Services Agreement (1797 : 2018 Waterline Replacement - Blueline Group Contract)
I he Blueline Group
EXHIBIT B - 2018 Waterline Replacement TABLE 2 - Fee Estimate Breakdown
004 Conceptual Design (All Sites)
Principal Engineer
Project Manager
Engineer
CAD Technician
Item #
Description
$191/hr
$174/hr
$139/hr
$110/hr
TOTAL
HRS
TOTAL
FEE
HRS
FEE
HRS
FEE
HRS
FEE
HRS
FEE
1
Kick-off Meeting (Incl. Prep Time)
4.0
$ 764
4.0
$ 696
4.0
$ 556
0.0
$ -
12.0
$ 2,016
2
Conceptual Layout (all sites)
8.0
$ 1,528
36.0
$ 6,264
24.0
$ 3,336
120.0
$ 13,200
188.0
$ 24,328
3
Preliminary Engineer's Estimate
2.0
$ 382
4.0
$ 696
16.0
$ 2,224
0.0
$ -
22.0
$ 3,302
4
Project Walk-through with City (Incl. Prep Time)
8.0
$ 1,528
8.0
$ 1,392
12.0
$ 1,668
0.0
$
28.0
$ 4,588
5
Design Memo with Site Selection Recommendations
2.0
$ 382
8.0
$ 1,392
0.0
$ -
0.0
$
10.0
$ 1,774
6
Review Meeting with City
4.0
$ 764
4.0
$ 696
4.0
$ 556
0.0
$
12.0
$ 2,016
Total
28.0
$ 5,348
64.0
$ 11,136
60.0
$ 8,340
120.0
$ 13,200
272.0
$ 38,024
004 HR-NTE: $ 38,000
005 WSDOT Coordination
Principal Engineer
Project Manager
Engineer
CAD Technician
Item #
Description
$191/hr
$174/hr
$139/hr
$110/hr
TOTAL
HRS
TOTAL
FEE
HRS
FEE
HRS
FEE
HRS
FEE
HRS
FEE
1
2
3
Meetings and Site Visits
General Correspondence
Completing the Utility Construction Permit
4.0
4.0
0.0
$ 764
$ 764
$ -
12.0
16.0
4.0
$ 2,088
$ 2,784
$ 696
0.0
4.0
4.0
$ -
$ 556
$ 556
0.0
0.0
0.0
$
$
$
16.0
24.0
8.0
$ 2,852
$ 4,104
$ 1,252
Total
8.0
$ 1,528
32.0
$ 5,568
8.0
$ 1,112
0.0
$
48.0
$ 8,208
005 HR-NTE: $ 8,200
Attachment: The Blueline Group - Professional Services Agreement (1797 : 2018 Waterline Replacement - Blueline Group Contract)
I he Blueline Group
EXHIBIT B - 2018 Waterline Replacement TABLE 2 - Fee Estimate Breakdown
006 Water System Design (2018 Sites)
Principal Engineer
Project Manager
Engineer
CAD Technician
Item #
Description
$191/hr
$174/hr
$139/hr
$110/hr
TOTAL
HRS
TOTAL
FEE
HRS
FEE
HRS
FEE
HRS
FEE
HRS
FEE
1
60% PS&E
8.0
$ 1,528
60.0
$ 10,440
80.0
$ 11,120
160.0
$ 17,600
308.0
$ 40,688
2
90% PS&E
8.0
$ 1,528
60.0
$ 10,440
90.0
$ 12,510
100.0
$ 11,000
258.0
$ 35,478
3
Final Design Submittal
6.0
$ 1,146
48.0
$ 8,352
60.0
$ 8,340
80.0
$ 8,800
194.0
$ 26,638
4
Review Meetings w/ City (Incl. Prep Time)
8.0
$ 1,528
16.0
$ 2,784
16.0
$ 2,224
0.0
$ -
40.0
$ 6,536
5
Constructability Review & QA/QC
8.0
$ 1,528
12.0
$ 2,088
0.0
$ -
0.0
$
20.0
$ 3,616
6
Design Memos
4.0
$ 764
8.0
$ 1,392
8.0
$ 1,112
0.0
$
20.0
$ 3,268
Total
42.0
$ 8,022
204.0
$ 35,496
254.0
$ 35,306
340.0
$ 37,400
840.0
$ 116,224
006 HR-NTE: $ 116,200
007 Bidding Assistance
Principal Engineer
Project Manager
Engineer
CAD Technician
Item #
Description
$191/hr
$174/hr
$139/hr
$110/hr
TOTAL
HRS
TOTAL
FEE
HRS
FEE
HRS
FEE
HRS
FEE
HRS
FEE
1
2
3
4
Answer Bidder Questions as necessary
Attend Pre -Bid Conference if necessary
Prepare and Issue Addenda as necessary
General Assistance to the City
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.0
$
$
$
$ 382
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
$ 696
$ 696
$ 696
$ 696
4.0
0.0
6.0
0.0
$ 556
$ -
$ 834
$ -
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
$
$
$
$
8.0
4.0
10.0
6.0
$ 1,252
$ 696
$ 1,530
$ 1,078
Total
1 2.0
$ 382
1 16.01
$ 2,784
1 10.01
$ 1,390
1 0.0
$
28.0
$ 4,556
007 HR-NTE: $ 4,600
Attachment: The Blueline Group - Professional Services Agreement (1797 : 2018 Waterline Replacement - Blueline Group Contract)
I he Blueline Group
EXHIBIT B - 2018 Waterline Replacement TABLE 2 - Fee Estimate Breakdown
008 Construction Support
Principal Engineer
Project Manager
Engineer
CAD Technician
Item #
Description
$191/hr
$174/hr
$139/hr
$110/hr
TOTAL
HRS
TOTAL
FEE
HRS
FEE
HRS
FEE
HRS
FEE
HRS
FEE
1
Attend Pre -Construction Conference (Incl. Prep Time)
0.0
$ -
6.0
$ 1,044
4.0
$ 556
0.0
$
10.0
$ 1,600
2
Review RFls and Provide Responses
2.0
$ 382
4.0
$ 696
8.0
$ 1,112
0.0
$
14.0
$ 2,190
3
Prepare Field Changes if necessary
0.0
$ -
4.0
$ 696
6.0
$ 834
12.0
$ 1,320
22.0
$ 2,850
4
General Assistance to the City
2.0
$ 382
4.0
$ 696
0.0
$ -
0.0
$ -
6.0
$ 1,078
5
Provide As-builts in ACAD based on Inspector Redlines
0.0
$ -
2.0
$ 348
4.0
$ 556
40.0
$ 4,400
46.0
$ 5,304
Total
4.0
$ 764
20.0
$ 3,480
1 22.0
$ 3,058
52.0
$ 5,720
1 98.0
$ 13,022
008 HR-NTE: $ 13,000
009 Management Reserve (Allowance)
Total Cost
(t10% of 001-008)
10%
As Needed
$ 32,800
Item #
Description
TOTAL
FEE
1
Management Reserve
$ 32,800
Total
$ 32,800
$ 32,800
009 Reserve $ 32,800
Attachment: The Blueline Group - Professional Services Agreement (1797 : 2018 Waterline Replacement - Blueline Group Contract)
I he Blueline Group
Site 10 El, ■ f
Site -, k
■ is K*�
!ia ■ � -
Site Site "Perrinville , C, 1es; w }.
r r rr
�," Site, �
Site 1 1
■7w','
r- -air .• �
Aq
ood
Site
ho.f)_C�- Jim
r
74
a.- r. M1i FCk
- ■ R ate 1 ■ ,4 -• -2(h t- v�'
jp
Et 4.+Site,
ppF.fw�+yi r } Fes, rF".I
f ountlakd Terrace
U Z:r S
7.3.b
{
CL
-
dA CID
or
Nr
CL
{
F : --.}'•.4_ �� - ,.', •'�. OPacket Pg. 251
- - r
s
� a4�kpp
-a ��_ • - } - ' L + fir. � ,
• IP
Lp
4
ir
a
73.bL
r
7
y
1 i
C
d
V
IC
Q
d
•L
00
IA
N
d
Q
ti ,_ Packet Pg. 252
JL
43!3
bk
AwkL
Site 3
WE
mum.
11 �
� 7.3.b
pi Y
,, Site-,_
�f 1
y _ W
, >0
'
CL
^Ijl' 4 .
y TI I
" -Y�� + *}
r t x
+'1 40
Sit "
OL i r
IR
AIP
t� ' ,.. r if 1• ��} .. { ti fit'' �.
Y `,f161'
r 40 dp
41
Ica �
Ab x
wPacket Pg. 255
:site 6-
- kt�
CD
! .,.� 7 ` � _ � � � #�, • �, - - � � ° fir,+
4
7.3. b
Q
:u
Q
Lip I
Oo
'- ti _ '4 - ..mow• , �. N
C
Ar
4
;r ; x' Packet Pg. 257
KIP
**
h 4
1 �
i� .•
-�.• '} L 231 _LL
N
Q
m
d
k ti
C
Q
-r
`' ' Packet Pg. 258
m
7.3.b
Is
77
Packet Pg. 25f
olp"'A
"
site lo
4D
-AC
7 "3b I
` .� ..�.f» .
.J
%
y
-4F"
-
/
»�
.� . j
CO
.I�
_ � . � - � ƒ � • .
�\. .p
. V,
� @
\
I
\ \7 - . /
} 7.3.b
d
CO
N
N
. y t
•,�qEs �7 ,a Packet Pg. 262
7.4
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 01/24/2017
Salary Commission Ordinance (15 min.)
Staff Lead: Jeff Taraday
Department: Human Resources
Preparer: MaryAnn Hardie
Background/History
In 2016, the Council had requested that a salary commission ordinance be drafted in order to establish a
Salary Commission. The City Attorney stated that this ordinance would be brought to Council following
the completion of the 2017 budget approval process.
The Salary Commission reviews the salaries paid by the city to each elected official (with the exception
of the municipal court judge under EMC 2.15.040) and makes a determination of any salary changes
(increases or decreases) as well as the effective date of such changes. Once this determination is made
(in the form of a salary schedule), the salary schedule will be reviewed by the City Attorney for final
approval to form before it is filed with the City Clerk's Office. The changes will then become effective
according to the terms of the ordinance (under section 10.80.030-Duties) and incorporated into the
city's budget.
Staff Recommendation
The ordinance is required to be approved by Council to establish the Salary Commission. Once
approved, the 2017 salary commission may be able to be formed.
Narrative
The attached ordinance complies with state code (RCW's) for the formation of such a commission.
Attachments:
2017-01-18 Salary Commission Ordinance
Packet Pg. 263
7.4.a
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, ADOPTING A NEW CHAPTER 10.80
ENTITLED "SALARY COMMISSION"; PROVIDING FOR
SEVERABILITY; AND SETTING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, as a means of preventing the use of public office for self -enrichment, the
Washington State Constitution, Article 11, Section 8, initially prohibited any changes in the pay
applicable to an office having a fixed term, either after the election of that official or during his
or her term; and
WHEREAS, by Article 30 (Amendment 54), adopted in 1967, and an amendment to
Article 11, Section 8 (Amendment 57) in 1972, the rule was modified to permit pay increases for
officials who do not fix their own compensation; and
WHEREAS, the State Legislature adopted RCW 35.21.015 to provide the ability for city
councilmembers and commissioners to receive mid-term compensation increases, provided that a
local salary commission was established and that the commission set compensation at a higher
level; and
WHEREAS, RCW 35.21.015 authorizes the creation of a salary commission of city
residents that may increase the salary of elected officials effective mid-term, and decrease the
salary of elected officials effective upon subsequent terms of office, by filing a change in salary
to the city clerk without further action of the city council; and
WHEREAS, the Edmonds City Council wishes to establish a salary commission in
accordance with RCW 35.21.015;
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. A new chapter 10.80, entitled "Salary Commission," is hereby added to the
Edmonds City Code to read as follows:
Packet Pg. 264
7.4.a
CHAPTER 10.80
SALARY COMMISSION
10.80.010
Created — Membership.
10.80.020
Qualifications.
10.80.030
Duties.
10.80.040
Open meetings.
10.80.050
Referendum.
10.80.010 Created — Membership.
A. There is created a salary commission for the city. The commission shall consist of five
members, to be appointed by the mayor with the approval of the city council.
B. The salary commission will serve without compensation.
C. Each member of the commission shall serve a term of three years, except that the
initial members shall be appointed for staggered terms of one, two or three years.
D. No member of the commission shall be appointed to more than two terms.
E. In the event of a vacancy in office of commissioner, the mayor shall appoint, subject to
approval of the city council, a person to serve the unexpired portion of the term of the expired
position.
F. A member of the commission shall only be removed from office for cause of
incapacity, incompetence, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office, or for a disqualifying change
of residence.
10.80.020 Qualifications.
A. Each member of the commission shall be a resident of the city.
B. No member of the commission shall be an officer, official, or employee of the city or
an immediate family member of an officer, official, or employee of the city. For purposes of this
section, "immediate family member" means the parents, spouse, siblings, children, or dependent
relatives of an officer, official, or employee of the city, whether or not living in the household of
the officer, official, or employee.
10.80.030 Duties.
A. The commission shall have the duty to meet annually between July 1 st and September
30th commencing the year 2017, to review the salaries paid by the city to each elected city
Packet Pg. 265
7.4.a
official, except that the salary of the municipal court judge shall be determined in accordance
with Edmonds City Code Section 2.15.040. If after such review the commission determines that
the salary paid to an elected city official should be increased or decreased, the commission shall
file a written salary schedule with the city clerk indicating the increase or decrease in salary and
the effective date. Prior to filing the salary schedule with the city clerk, the city attorney shall
review the salary schedule for ambiguity and legality and shall approve the salary schedule as to
form if the schedule is unambiguous and legal.
B. Any increase or decrease in salary established by the commission shall become
effective and incorporated into the city budget without further action of the city council or salary
commission.
C. Salary increases established by the commission shall be effective as to all city elected
officials, regardless of their terms of office. Salary increases established by the commission shall
be effective on the next payday for City employees, or under the conditions established in the
salary schedule.
D. Salary decreases established by the commission shall become effective as to
incumbent city elected officials at the commencement of their next subsequent terms of office.
E. For purposes of this chapter, "salary" means any fixed compensation paid or provided
periodically for work or services and includes, but is not limited to, wages and medical or other
benefits. This definition expressly excludes any expenses paid or reimbursed on behalf of the
mayor or council member for training and travel expenses.
10.80.040 Open meetings.
All meetings, actions, hearings, and business of the commission shall be subject to the
Open Public Meetings Act as set forth in Chapter 42.30 RCW. Prior to the filing of any salary
schedule, the commission shall hold no fewer than two public hearings thereon within the two
months immediately preceding the filing of its salary schedule.
10.80.050 Referendum.
A. Any salary increase or decrease established by the commission pursuant to this chapter
shall be subject to referendum petition by the voters of the city, in the same manner as a city
ordinance, upon filing of a referendum petition with the city clerk within 30 days after filing of a
Packet Pg. 266
7.4.a
salary schedule by the commission. In the event of the filing of a valid referendum petition, the
salary increase or decrease shall not go into effect until approved by a vote of the people.
B. Referendum measures under this section shall be submitted to the voters of the city at
the next following general or municipal election occurring 30 days or more after the petition is
filed, and shall otherwise be governed by the provisions of the state constitution and the laws
generally applicable to referendum measures.
Section 2. Severability. If any section, subsection, clause, sentence, or phrase of this
ordinance should be held invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of
the remaining portions of this ordinance.
Section 3. Effective Date. This ordinance is subject to referendum and shall take effect
thirty (30) days after final passage of this ordinance.
APPROVED:
MAYOR DAVE EARLING
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY:
:•
JEFF TARADAY
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK:
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
PUBLISHED:
EFFECTIVE DATE:
ORDINANCE NO.
Packet Pg. 267
7.4.a
SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO.
of the City of Edmonds, Washington
On the day of , 2017, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed
Ordinance No. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting
of the title, provides as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, ADOPTING A NEW CHAPTER 10.80
ENTITLED "SALARY COMMISSION"; PROVIDING
FOR SEVERABILITY; AND SETTING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request.
DATED this day of , 2017.
CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY
5
Packet Pg. 268
7.5
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 01/24/2017
Professional Services Agreement for Urban Forest Management Plan (10 min.)
Staff Lead: Shane Hope, Director
Department: Development Services
Preparer: Diane Cunningham
Background/History
Development of an Urban Forest Management Plan for Edmonds has been of interest to the community
for the last several years. It is also required by the end of 2017, based on an action step adopted in the
Comprehensive Plan. The City Council provided partial funding for this in 2016 and the remainder in
2017, totaling $130,000.
Staff Recommendation
Authorize the Mayor to execute the professional services agreement
Narrative
A Request for Qualifications (RFQ) was issued for consultants to assist with the project and three firms
responded. A competitive process resulted in the selection of Davey Resources Group in December
2016. Since then, a professional services agreement (attached) with the firm has been prepared.
The upcoming public process for developing the Urban Forest Management Plan will include at least:
two open house events; two virtual open houses; two Tree Board meetings; three Planning Board
meetings; four City Council meetings; and information posted on the City's website.
The project will include a tree canopy assessment, using technology such as LIDAR mapping.
Recommendations will focus on urban forest management policies and practices for City -owned
property and on public rights -of -way. In addition, recommendations will be made for wildlife habitat
corridors, whether on public or private property. This is consistent with direction provided by the City
Council at a June 28, 2016 City Council meeting (minutes attached).
Authorization by the City Council for the proposed professional services agreement will allow the project
to get underway quickly and be drafted before the end of 2017.
Attachments:
ATT 1: Professional Services Agreement
ATT. 2: City Council Minutes of 6/28/16
Packet Pg. 269
7.5.a
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is made and entered into between the City of
Edmonds, hereinafter referred to as the "City", and Davey Resource Group hereinafter referred to
as the "Consultant".
WHEREAS, the City desires to engage the professional services and assistance of the
Consultant to provide services with respect to the development of an urban forest management
plan and facilitation of a public process.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of mutual benefits accruing, it is agreed by and
between the parties hereto as follows:
1. Scope of work. The scope of work shall include all services and material
necessary to accomplish the above mentioned objectives in accordance with the Scope of
Services that is marked as Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
2. Payments. The Consultant shall be paid by the City for completed work for
services rendered under this Agreement as provided hereinafter. Such payment shall be full
compensation for work performed or services rendered and for all labor, materials, supplies,
equipment and incidentals necessary to complete the work.
A. Payment for work accomplished under the terms of this Agreement shall be
on a time and expense basis as set forth on the fee schedule found in Exhibit B, attached hereto
and incorporated herein by this reference; provided, in no event shall the payment for work
performed pursuant to this Agreement exceed the sum of ONE HUNDRED THIRTY
THOUSAND DOLLARS ($130,000.00).
B. All vouchers shall be submitted by the Consultant to the City for payment
pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. The City shall pay the appropriate amount for each
voucher to the Consultant. The Consultant may submit vouchers to the City biweekly during the
progress of the work for payment of completed phases of the project. Billings shall be reviewed
in conjunction with the City's warrant process. No billing shall be considered for payment that
has not been submitted to the City three days prior to the scheduled cut-off date. Such late
vouchers will be checked by the City and payment will be made in the next regular payment
cycle.
C. The costs records and accounts pertaining to this Agreement are to be kept
T
available for inspection by representatives of the City for a period of three years after final
payment. Copies shall be made available upon request. a
c
3. Ownership and use of documents. All research, tests, surveys, preliminary data E
and any and all other work product prepared or gathered by the Consultant in preparation for the U
services rendered by the Consultant under this Agreement shall be and are the property of the a
Consultant and shall not be considered public records; provided, however, that:
1
Packet Pg. 270
7.5.a
A. All final reports, presentations and testimony prepared by the Consultant shall
become the property of the City upon their presentation to and acceptance by the City and shall at
that date become public records;
B. The City shall have the right, upon reasonable request, to inspect, review and,
subject to the approval of the Consultant, copy any work product; and
C. In the event that the Consultant shall default on this Agreement, or in the
event that this Agreement shall be terminated prior to its completion as herein provided, the work
product of the Consultant, along with a summary of work done to date of default or termination,
shall become the property of the City and tender of the work product and summary shall be a
prerequisite to final payment under this Agreement. The summary of work done shall be
prepared at no additional cost.
4. Time of performance. The Consultant shall perform the work authorized by this
Agreement promptly in accordance with the receipt of the required governmental approvals.
5. Hold harmless agreement. The Consultant shall indemnify and hold the City
and its officers and employees harmless from and shall process and defend at its own expense all
claims, demands, or suits at law or equity arising in whole or in part from the Consultant's
negligence or breach of any of its obligations under this Agreement; provided that nothing herein
shall require a Consultant to indemnify the City against and hold harmless the City from claims,
demands or suits based solely upon the conduct of the City, its agents, officers and employees;
and provided further that if the claims or suits are caused by or result from the concurrent
negligence of (a) the Consultant's agents or employees, and (b) the City, its agents, officers and
employees, this indemnity provision with respect to (1) claims or suits based upon such
negligence (2) the costs to the City of defending such claims and suits shall be valid and
enforceable only to the extent of the Consultant's negligence or the negligence of the
Consultant's agents or employees.
The Consultant shall comply with all applicable sections of the applicable Ethics
law, including RCW 42.23, which is the Code of Ethics for regulating contract interest by
municipal officers. The Consultant specifically assumes potential liability for actions brought by
the Consultant's own employees against the City and, solely for the purpose of this
indemnification and defense, the Consultant specifically waives any immunity under the state
industrial insurance law, Title 51, RCW.
6. General and professional liability insurance. The Consultant shall obtain and keep in a`
force during the terms of the Agreement, or as otherwise required, the following insurance with
companies or through sources approved by the State Insurance Commissioner pursuant to Title
48 RCW. a
Insurance Coverage E
M
U
M
A. Worker's compensation and employer's liability insurance as required by the State. a
Packet Pg. 271
7.5.a
B. Commercial general liability and property damage insurance in an aggregate amount not
less than two million dollars ($2,000,000) for bodily injury, including death and property
damage. The per occurrence amount shall not exceed one million dollars ($1,000,000).
C. Vehicle liability insurance for any automobile used in an amount not less than a one
million dollar ($1,000,000) combined single limit.
D. Professional liability insurance in the amount of one million dollars ($1,000,000).
Excepting the Worker's Compensation Insurance and Professional Liability Insurance secured by
the Consultant, the City will be named on all policies as an additional insured. The Consultant
shall furnish the City with verification of insurance and endorsements required by the
Agreement. The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required
insurance policies at any time.
All insurance shall be obtained from an insurance company authorized to do business in the State
of Washington. The Consultant shall submit a verification of insurance as outlined above within
fourteen (14) days of the execution of this Agreement to the City.
No cancellation of the foregoing policies shall be effective without thirty days prior notice to the
City.
The Consultant's professional liability to the City shall be limited to the amount payable under
this Agreement or one million dollars ($1,000,000), whichever is the greater, unless modified
elsewhere in this Agreement. In no case shall the Consultant's professional liability to third
parties be limited in any way.
7. Discrimination prohibited. Consultant shall not discriminate against any
employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, national origin, age, sex,
sexual orientation, marital status, veteran status, liability for service in the armed forces of the
United States, disability, or the presence of any sensory, mental or physical handicap, or any
other protected class status, unless based upon a bona fide occupational qualification.
8. Consultant is an independent contractor. The parties intend that an
independent contractor relationship will be created by this Agreement. No agent, employee or
representative of the Consultant shall be deemed to be an agent, employee or representative of
the City for any purpose. Consultant shall be solely responsible for all acts of its agents,
employees, representatives and subcontractors during the performance of this Agreement.
9. City approval of work and relationships. Notwithstanding the Consultant's
status as an independent contractor, results of the work performed pursuant to this Agreement °
a
must meet the approval of the City. During pendency of this Agreement, the Consultant shall not
perform work for any party with respect to any property located within the City of Edmonds or
for any project subject to the administrative or quasijudicial review of the City without written a
notification to the City and the City's prior written consent.
as
E
10. Termination. This being an Agreement for professional services, either party U
may terminate this Agreement for any reason upon giving the other party written notice of such a
termination no fewer than ten (10) days in advance of the effective date of said termination.
Packet Pg. 272
7.5.a
11. Integration. The Agreement between the parties shall consist of this document,
the Consultant's proposal attached hereto as Exhibit A, and the Consultant's fee schedule,
attached hereto as Exhibit B. These writings constitute the entire Agreement of the parties and
shall not be amended except by a writing executed by both parties. In the event of any conflict
between this written Agreement and any provision of Exhibits A or B, this Agreement shall
control.
12. Changes/Additional Work. The City may engage Consultant to perform
services in addition to those listed in this Agreement, and Consultant will be entitled to
additional compensation for authorized additional services or materials. The City shall not be
liable for additional compensation until and unless any and all additional work and compensation
is approved in advance in writing and signed by both parties to this Agreement. If conditions are
encountered which are not anticipated in the Scope of Services, the City understands that a
revision to the Scope of Services and fees may be required. Provided, however, that nothing in
this paragraph shall be interpreted to obligate the Consultant to render or the City to pay for
services rendered in excess of the Scope of Services in Exhibit A unless or until an amendment
to this Agreement is approved in writing by both parties.
13. Standard of Care. Consultant represents that Consultant has the necessary
knowledge, skill and experience to perform services required by this Agreement. Consultant and
any persons employed by Consultant shall use their best efforts to perform the work in a
professional manner consistent with sound industry practices, in accordance with the schedules
herein and in accordance with the usual and customary professional care required for services of
the type described in the Scope of Services.
14. Non -waiver. Waiver by the City of any provision of this Agreement or any time
limitation provided for in this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of any other provision.
15. Non -assignable. The services to be provided by the Consultant shall not be
assigned or subcontracted without the express written consent of the City.
16. Covenant against contingent fees. The Consultant warrants that s/he has not 6
employed or retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for
the Consultant, to solicit or secure this Agreement, and that s/he has not paid or agreed to pay any M
company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for the Consultant, any fee,
commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gifts, or any other consideration contingent upon or •y
resulting from the award of making of this Agreement. For breach or violation of this warranty, Z
the City shall have the right to annul this Agreement without liability or, in its discretion to a
deduct from the contract price or consideration, or otherwise recover, the full amount of such fee,
T
commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift, or contingent fee.
a
17. Compliance with laws. The Consultant in the performance of this Agreement c
shall comply with all applicable Federal, State or local laws and ordinances, including E
regulations for licensing, certification and operation of facilities, programs and accreditation, and U
licensing of individuals, and any other standards or criteria as described in the Agreement to a
assure quality of services.
Packet Pg. 273
7.5.a
The Consultant specifically agrees to pay any applicable business and occupation (B & O) taxes
which may be due on account of this Agreement.
18. Notices. Notices to the City of Edmonds shall be sent to the following address
City of Edmonds
Attn: Shane Hope
121 Fifth Avenue North
Edmonds, WA 98020
Notices to the Consultant shall be sent to the following address:
Davey Resource Group
Attn: Anne Fenkner
6005 Capistrano Ave., Unit A
Atascadero, CA 93422
Receipt of any notice shall be deemed effective three days after deposit of written notice in the
U.S. mails, with proper postage and properly addressed.
DATED THIS DAY OF 92017.
CITY OF EDMONDS CONSULTANT
Dave O. Earling
Mayor
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
Anne Fenkner
Davey Resource Group
Scott Passey, City Clerk UL
T
a
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Office of the City Attorney
a)
E
U
2
a
Packet Pg. 274
7.5.a
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
)ss
COUNTY OF )
On this day of , 20 , before me, the undersigned, a
Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, duly commissioned and sworn,
personally appeared Anne Fenkner, to me known to be the
of the corporation that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said
instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation, for the uses and
purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he/she was authorized to execute said
instrument and that the seal affixed is the corporate seal of said corporation.
WITNESS my hand and official seal hereto affixed the day and year first above
written.
NOTARY PUBLIC
My commission expires:
a
c
a�
E
U
a
r
r
Q
Packet Pg. 275
7.5.a
EXHIBIT A
DAVEY 0
RESOURCE iRuur
nnns 4Th,Dqr FpMC, pay
City of Edmonds Urban Forest Management Plan
Scope of Work
The City of Edmonds Urban Forest Management Plan (UFMP) will be a written procedure manual
and policy document for use by all City Departments. The UFMP is a long-term management plan
and will primarily focus on public trees (within public rights of way and on city -owned land,
including city parks and public open space) but will also assess the canopy for trees on public and
private property. The plan will focus on urban forest management goals and objectives for the next
25 years. The long term goals will be identified in attainable 3-5 year milestones.
Davey Resource Group (DRG), a division of The Davey Tree Expert Company has been selected to
produce an UFMP on behalf of the City of Edmonds. The UFMP will be prepared using an adaptive
management methodology to examine what the city has, what it wants, want it needs, and how it
will achieve the goals.
Kick-off Meeting
A kickoff meeting will take place in the City of Edmonds. DRG will set the agenda with input and
approval from the City Project Manager. The meeting will introduce team members and address
communication expectations and protocols; refine the goals, objectives, and scope of the project
beyond the RFQ; review the implementation plan; and confirm milestone dates and deliverables.
Phase 1 - Data Collection and Analysis 6
Task 1: Canopy Coverage Analysis
U)
An urban tree canopy (UTC) assessment will be prepared to address: land cover mapping (including
tree canopy, impervious surface, pervious surface, low-lying vegetation, and open water), analysis of •2
stormwater runoff and retention, forest fragmentation, and potential planting sites. The UTC will ,T
0
establish a baseline for canopy coverage goals within the city limits. a.
Task 2: Canopy Assessment and Goal Identification a
c
a�
E
U
a
r
r
Q
Davey Resource Group, Urban Forest Master Plan Scope of Work Page 6
Packet Pg. 276
7.5.a
DAVEY 0
RESOURCE GROUP
A V,1,' /TAP Du TmF pert CrmjVny
Based on the results of the UTC, DRG will identify canopy potential, recommend a canopy goal for the
City of Edmonds, especially with respect to public rights -of -way and city -owned property, and provide
measures for attaining the goal.
Task 3: i-Tree Analysis
DRG will conduct an i-Tree analysis to provide additional information to the UTC analysis. This report
will provide relevant information for the following, along with a detailed methodology:
Urban Forest Resource Structure identifies and analyzes the composition and relative health
and vitality of the city -owned urban forest resource.
Frequency of Species shows a percentage breakdown of the number of tree in each species.
Relative Age Distribution is a description of the overall age distribution (based on DBH) and
analysis of the age distribution for the top ten most common species in the inventory.
Condition is a description of overall condition.
Relative Performance Index is derived from an analysis of how each species in the inventory is
performing (based on condition) against the others, and identification of possibly underused
species that are performing above average in the inventory.
Canopy Cover is an estimate of the percentage of overall canopy cover and canopy cover of
city owned trees.
COZ Stored represents the amount and value of carbon dioxide that has been sequestered to
date.
Replacement Value is a calculation of the cost to replace the tree resource with trees of a
similar size, species, and condition.
Benefit vs Investment analyses the annual monetary value of benefits and costs.
Electricity and Natural Gas represented as the amount and value of electricity and natural gas both
saved and avoided.
COZ Sequestered and Avoided identifies the amount and value of atmospheric carbon dioxide benefits
both sequestered and avoided annually.
Air Quality Improvements are described as the amount and value of air quality improvements,
including the absorption of gaseous pollutants (03 and NOZ), interception of particulate matter,
reduced emissions, increased oxygen levels, and reduced temperatures. a
c
m
E
U
a
r
r
Q
Davey Resource Group, Urban Forest Master Plan Scope of Work Page 6
Packet Pg. 277
7.5.a
DAVEY 0
RESOURCE GROUP
A UiiW— Ike•D—TmFpPrlCmjVny
Aesthetic, Property and Socioeconomic Values are the values calculated of the enefits of the urban
forest resource to increased property values and retail sales.
Task 4: - Research Existing Policies and Conflicts
DRG will research existing codes and policies and will examine current operations and policies that
exist within the city. DRG will document and compare the City of Edmonds urban forestry practices
with current industry best management practices, determine what standards need to be updated,
and incorporate recommendations into the plan.
During this task, DRG will examine the "conflict" issues that may exist within city. This includes
looking at the public right of way tree ordinances, wildlife habitat ordinances, private property rights
and responsibilities, issues with views, the pending street tree plan, and results of the recent Tree
Code project.
Task 5: - Research Other Communities
Relevant cities will be interviewed to compare and contrast pertinent urban forestry practices and
funding sources. Five to seven peer communities will be interviewed. Data collection will seek
information on the number of trees per capita, budget breakdowns, personnel numbers, and general
political support.
Phase 2 - Public Meetings
DRG will present findings from Phase One (1) and seek input from City leadership, staff and the
community.
Leadership Input DRG will seek input and direction from the City Council, relevant City
departments, and the Tree Board for the development of the UFMP. DRG will present the
UFMP process during three or four (3-4) City Council meetings, two (2) Tree Board
presentations, and three (3) Planning Board meetings. The final (4th) City Council meeting will
be reserved for final presentation and councilor comments prior to (expected) City Council
adoption.
Staff Input DRG will interview various City departments to gather data and feedback on
current City operations and maintenance practices, including but not limited to parks a
c
a�
E
U
a
r
r
Q
Davey Resource Group, Urban Forest Master Plan Scope of Work Page 6
Packet Pg. 278
7.5.a
DAVEY
RESOURCE GROUP
A Uiiixrun JTA'Ars�-T_FperlCm ay
maintenance and recreation, streets, engineering, Public Works, drainage and planning.
Multiple meetings with individual departments may be required.
Stakeholder Input DRG will be conducting a series of public open house meetings during plan
development to solicit community participation and contribution to the plan. We will do this
through two (2) "in -person" community meetings and two (2) online "virtual" community
meetings. Community response will be gathered, synthesized, and then utilized to inform the
plan.
Phase 3 - Formulating Recommendations
Phase three (3) includes formulating recommendations, reviewing them with City staff, creating a
draft plan, and garnering feedback. Recommendations will address City regulations, maintenance
practices and standards, risk management measures, views, wildlife habitat corridors,
storm/insect/disease preparedness, allocation of resources/organization, interdepartmental
cooperation, stages and timing of UFMP implementation, and any other relevant factors that the
consultant identifies. Phase 3 should be completed approximately ninety (90) days after completion
of Phase 2.
Review, Feedback and Final Deliverables
DRG will analyze the data to determine strengths, gaps, and challenges within existing City policies.
DRG will make recommendations to the City based on Phase One and Two findings. The final project
review begins with the submittal of a comprehensive Draft UFMP. The review of the Draft UFMP is a
highly collaborative process where the City and DRG will review all plans, goals, and
recommendations developed. Once the City's team provides their feedback on the comprehensive
draft and consensus is reached on the final elements to be included in the plan, DRG transitions into
the graphic design phase of the document and the presentation of the City of Edmonds UFMP.
Project Deliverables
The following components will be addressed in the City of Edmonds Urban Forest Master Plan: [JL
• Overall schedule and schedule(s) for public process and other key project components.
To be presented and confirmed during the kick off meeting a
• Report summarizing status of the urban forest within City. DRG will deliver all metadata, and
methodology and an accuracy assessment, with a raster landcover dataset and polygon
r
r
Q
Davey Resource Group, Urban Forest Master Plan Scope of Work Page 6
Packet Pg. 279
7.5.a
DAVEY
RESOURCE GROUP
A Uin,x uJ Th, Du Tm FPFY CrmjVny
feature class in ESRI file geodatabase format in a projected coordinate system that fully
integrates with the City's existing GIS.
• Comparisons of other cities' approaches to forest management
• Presentation materials for public meetings All PowerPoint presentations, handouts,
summaries, etc., will be prepared with time for approval from the City Project Manager. Upon
approval from City management, the deliverables will be available for the City to post online
for the public/stakeholders to review, follow and comment on as the project moves forward.
SEPA checklist
Compliance DRG will ensure the City of Edmonds UFMP is consistent with State laws and the
Comprehensive Plan.
• Draft Urban Forest Management Plan (in MSWord or other City -approved format)
• Responses to written comments (EIS -style)
• Final proposed Urban Forest Management Plan (in MS Word or other City -approved format)
Final detailed Urban Forest Management Plan will be submitted at the completion of the
project. The final UFMP document will be a narrative text presented in a format desired by the
City. The report will contain summarized information about the purpose, methodology, and
findings of this project. The report will include tables, maps, and statistical analyses and
findings. DRG will present the plan to the City Council for final approval and acceptance. An
item worth noting: DRG uses Adobe InDesign for optimum layout performance. DRG generally
delivers UFMPs in the native InDesign environment for simplified conversion for web upload,
or as PDF files. MSWord, can be considered and applied, but it will limit layout/design options.
Events and Milestones
The UFMP shall begin within fourteen (14) days after contract is awarded and approval by City
Council is received. It will be completed within one year of contract date approval.
Davey Resource Group, Urban Forest Master Plan Scope of Work Page 6
a
c
a�
E
U
a
r
r
Q
Packet Pg. 280
7.5.a
DAVEY f
RESOURCE GROUP
Complete an iTree and Urban Tree Canopy (UTC) Assessment
March - June
Research existing policies and conflicts
March - July
Research and comparisons with other cities' approach on selected issues
March - July
Site visits
As needed
Phase 2 - Public Meetings
Public, City Council, Tree Board, Planning Board (pending leadership availability)
April- September
Phase 3 - Formulating Recommendations
Preliminary analysis of issues with recommendations
July - September
Preparation of draft Urban Forest Management Plan
October
Review all plans, goals, and recommendations developed with staff
October - December
Preparation and presentation of final Urban Forest Management
December - January
Davey Resource Group, Urban Forest Master Plan Scope of Work Page 6
r
a
Packet Pg. 281
7.5.a
Budget Summary
Kick off meeting
I $3,751
Stakeholder Interviews/ Program Review
$29,743
Public Meetings
$20,200
i-Tree Analysis
$6,120
UTC Report and Analysis
$35,362
Master Plan Drafts, Formatting, Imagery, Printing
$34,410
Total
$129,586
c
CL
r
C
d
E
C
r
L
0
LL
C
R
M
L
�°
r
c
d
E
O
aD
L
a�
Q
a�
L
aD
c
0
N
N
O
O
L
CL
Cl)
O
CO
r
C
d
E
O
L
Q
N
V
L
FU
O
N
N
O
O
L
CL
Lr
r
a
E
r
r
a
Packet Pg. 282
7.5.b
use impact fees to allow for a deferral process, allowing payment of impact fees later in the process. Local
government can choose between three options:
1. Collect impact fees at the time of final inspection
2. Collect impact fees at the time of certificate of occupancy
3. Collect impact fees after the sale of the first house.
The impact fee deferral process is only for attached and detached single family housing, not commercial
property. The City must choose one of three options; doing nothing is not an option. Staff recommends
collecting the impact fees as early as possible in the process, definitely not after the first sale. If the
impact fees is not collect at time of building permit, staff recommends collecting at the time of final
inspection. The City also has the option, although it is not a state requirement, to collect an administrative
fee when collecting an impact fee. The City currently does not have an administrative fee; the impact fee
collected goes entirely to capital facilities and there is no fee for staff time to handle, track, calculate, etc.
If the Council is comfortable with imposing an administrative fee, staff would return with the impact fee
collection process ordinance for adoption at the next Council meeting. Staff would propose a resolution
for collecting and setting the amount of the administrative fee along with the ordinance or at a future
meeting. No policy changes are proposed; the proposal puts the existing language for transportation and
park impact fees in one chapter and adds the impact fee deferral process, the collection process and the
administrative fee.
Councilmember Mesaros asked if there were other instances where the City has an administrative fee in
addition to the fee. Ms. Hope answered generally not because permit fees are used for admin costs, not
capital; impact fees go entirely to capital. Councilmember Mesaros if she had a sense of what the fee
might be, whether it would be a percentage or a flat fee. Ms. Hope answered staff has looked at other
cities as well as determining the amount of time to administer, report, etc. and estimate at least a '/z hour
for a single family house. The current rate is $90/hour which staff plans to recommend be increased to
$100/hour in the future.
Councilmember Mesaros asked the impact fee for a 2500 square foot home. Ms. Hope answered the size
does not matter. Mr. Williams said the transportation impact fee for a single family home is $2700.
Councilmember Mesaros said the administrative fee would add another $50. Ms. Hope said some cities
use a percentage which she was uncertain was fair because the fee was based on the amount of time, not
the cost of the project. Councilmember Mesaros said some may argue that they are already paying taxes
to pay for staff support and question why they should pay again. Ms. Hope said it requires extra work; if
the fee system is user based, the people using that service should should pay for it.
For Councilmember Buckshnis, Ms. Hope said the proposal is to charge the same administrative fee for
park impact fees.
Councilmember Tibbott asked why it was not desirable to collect the fee after the sale of the first house
when that would be when the developer collects money. Ms. Hope said if the City waits until after the
0
sale closes, it requires more work for the City. When the builder sells the property, it is recorded, and the U
buyer may not be aware they have to pay the fee after the purchase. Similarly, a developer does not pay
their permit fees after they sell the house. The State allows three options; staff believes the first option is V
the best as it does not involve the buyer and it is less work for the City. She said builders are not required �4
to use the impact fee deferral process; a builder can choose to pay the impact fee with the building permit.
Q
It was the consensus of the Council to schedule staff s recommendation and the administrative fee c
resolution on the Consent Agenda. E
s
7. URBAN FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN UPDATE
Q
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 28, 2016
Page 17
Packet Pg. 283
7.5.b
Development Services Director Shane Hope recalled the Council provided funding to begin the Urban
Forest Management Plan this year with the idea an additional amount would be provided next year to
complete it. Before an RFQ is finalized, staff wanted to discuss the scope with the Council. The primary
intent of an Urban Forest Management Plan is managing right-of-way trees and trees on City property.
The intent is to stay away from addressing private properties. She recalled during consideration of the
critical area regulations, there was discussion about looking at wildlife habitat corridors and asked for
confirmation that the Council wanted to include that. It was the consensus of the Council to include
wildlife habitat corridors.
Councilmember Nelson requested an assessment of the overall canopy. Ms. Hope agreed. If there was a
cost issue, Councilmember Nelson requested that be presented to the Council. Ms. Hope said hand
counting would be much costlier; aerial photograph or sampling would be simpler and less expensive.
Councilmember Buckshnis asked how this interfaced with the critical area ordinance. She suggested
refreshing Councilmembers regarding the City's guidelines related to trees on private property such as
permit requirements. Ms. Hope said permits are required for tree cutting in critical areas and tree planting
is required in certain other circumstances, especially when development occurs.
Councilmember Mesaros commented wildlife does not distinguish between private and public property. If
there is evidence wildlife is using private property for corridors, he recommended bringing that to Council
to determine how to work with private property owners to preserve those areas. He noted deer at Pt.
Edwards do not distinguish between public and private property. Ms. Hope said the main focus is trees
but also how they interface with wildlife.
Councilmember Teitzel agreed wildlife do not distinguish between private and public property and agreed
with looking at the extent to which corridors extend from public to private property. He was also sensitive
to the private property right issue, recalling backlash from the proposed Tree Code. He strongly urged
staff and the Council as this affects private property, to do it on a voluntary basis rather than regulations.
Ms. Hope said the Urban Forest Management Plan is not a regulation; it is a strategy, set goals and
priorities and makes recommendations. Any regulations or adopted incentive program would require a
separate action by Council.
Council President Johnson said the Council has not approved $65,000 in the 2017 budget yet. Ms. Hope
said it it was a package, $65,000 in 2016 and $65,000 in 2017. Council President Johnson recalled that
was a proposal but it was not approved. Ms. Hope recalled it was approved together.
Council President Johnson referred to the statement that the Urban Forest Management Plan could discuss
issues about tree management related to scenic views, commenting that sounded like a controversial idea.
Ms. Hope said it could be but did not see that as the focus. The issue of tree and view blockage has arisen;
the balance between priorities and issues could be discussed in the Urban Forest Management Plan.
c
Council President Johnson said the Comprehensive Plan refers to view corridors but to her knowledge the
0
City has never protected private views. Ms. Hope said the language referred to public corridors. Council v
President Johnson said the City cannot protect private views; instances of tree cutting to preserve views
have contradicted the City's ordinances. v
N
COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO
EXTEND THE MEETING FOR 10 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Q
c
8. REPORTS ON OUTSIDE BOARD AND COMMITTEE MEETINGS
E
s
This item was deferred due to the late hour.
Q
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 28, 2016
Page 18
Packet Pg. 284