Loading...
2013-02-01 City Council - Public Agenda-1476Added Agenda Memo 1129113 @ 4 p.m. �� �� L•' I) ,�� O AGENDA EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL RETREAT City Hall — Brackett Meeting Room 121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds City Council Retreat - February 1 and 2, 2013 FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 1 **Please note that a separate Agenda was created for Saturday, February 2** 9:00 A.M. - CALL TO ORDER / FLAG SALUTE 1. (5 Minutes) Roll Call 2. (5 Minutes) Opening Remarks 3. (5 Minutes) Amendments to Agenda 4. (90 Minutes) City Council Processes a. AM-5408 Robert's Rules b. AM-5158 Ethics Board and Code of Ethics C. AM-5427 Meetings and Agenda Process d. AM-5410 Timeframe for Getting Items on the City Council Agenda e. AM-5411 Roles f. AM-5412 Purpose of Sub -committees - Types of Items to be Reviewed g. AM-5440 Policies for Public Works Projects i. Timelines for Approving Capital Projects 1. Approved CIP 2. Approved Budget Packet Page 1 of 360 3. Projects with Secured Funding h. AM-5428 Council Executive Sessions 5. (30 Minutes) Potential Revenue Options AM-5434 a. AM-5425 Metropolitan Park District and/or Park Levy Options b. Regional Fire Authority C. Transportation Benefit District d. Public Safety Sales Tax e. Special or General Levy f. Voted Utility Tax Increase g. AM-5414 Cost Savings Ideas 6. (60 Minutes) Economic Development Code Administration, Comprehensive Planning - Part 1 a. City Code Review/Rewrite Update b. AM-5436 Implementation of Roger Brooks' Ideas C. Waterfront and Near Waterfront Area d. AM-5429 Fiber Optics Update NOON - Lunch 1:00 P.M. - Reconvene 7. (60 Minutes) Economic Development, Code Adminstration, Comprehensive Planning - Part 2 a. Form Based Code i. Impact on the Comprehensive Plan b. Highway 99 Corridor - Comprehensive Plan and Zoning C. Incentive Zoning and Development Agreements d. Quasi -Judicial Land Use Decisions 8. (45 Minutes) Transportation a. Street Funding b. AM-5432 SR 104 Transportation Corridor Study Packet Page 2 of 360 C. Public Safety and Access 9. (45 Minutes) Medical Marijuana Dispensaries / New State Law 10. (30 Minutes) Training Regarding Requests for Public Records 11. Audience Comments at 4:00 p.m. (3 Minute Limit Per Person) 12. (10 Minutes) Miscellaneous ADJOURN **Please note that a separate agenda was created for Saturday, February 2 (the second day of the Retreat). * * Packet Page 3 of 360 AM-5408 City Council Retreat - Friday, February 1, 2013 Meeting Date: 02/01/2013 Time: Submitted For: Councilmember Johnson Department: City Council Review Committee: Type: Information Information Subject Title Robert's Rules Recommendation Previous Council Action Submitted By: Committee Action: Narrative This item has been placed on the Council Retreat Agenda for discussion. Attachments Attachment 1 - Should Council Adopt Robert's Rules of Order Attachment 2 - Which Parliamentary Authority Should Council Choose Attachment 3 - A Simple Technique for Improving Council Decision Making Attachment 4 - Decision Tree Inbox Reviewed By City Clerk Sandy Chase Mayor Dave Earling Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase Form Started By: Jana Spellman Final Approval Date: 01/28/2013 Form Review Date 01/28/2013 01:17 PM 01/28/2013 01:28 PM 01/28/2013 01:29 PM Started On: 01/23/2013 01:37 PM 4. a. Jana Spellman Packet Page 4 of 360 Jurassic ATTACHMENT 9 Should Our Council Adopt Robert's Rules of order? Ann G. Macfarlane, Professional Registered Parliamentarian "Council/Commission Advisor" published by the Municipal Research S�Services Center of Washington, April 2011 The State of Washington gives city councils wide authority to decide how they will carry on their business: "The council shall determine its own rules and order of business, and may establish rules for the conduct of council meetings and the maintenance of order." RCW 3$A.12,120 Some councils have adopted, by resolution or ordinance, a set of guidelines for this purpose, and others have not. Many of these guidelines include reference to Robert's Rules of order, using such language as "meetings shall be governed by Robert's Rules of Order and these council rules of procedure. In case of conflict, the council rules of procedure shall prevail." Recently it was suggested to Jurassic Parliament that Robert's Rules of order is too complicated for small cities and towns, and they would do better not to adopt it. We agree that the book is complicated, but we believe that Robert's Rules still provides the best and most useful set of rules of order for civic bodies in our state —provided that folks are willing to do a little work and learn how to use Robert's Rules properly. Our argument runs like this: 1. The fundamental principles in Robert are common to all our civic discourse and are not hard to learn. Everyone participating in council debate and discussion should understand that the majority will rule, that the minority have rights that must be respected, that members have a right to information to help make decisions, that courtesy and respect are required, that all members have equal rights, privileges and obligations, and that members have a right to an efficient meeting. z. The use of written motions and amendments provides an efficient and fair way to consider proposals and modify them in accord with the group's preferences. The method is a little unusual, in that amendments are taken up before the motion is voted on, but once groups get used to it, the system works well. 3. Robert's rule that no one may speak a second time until everyone who wishes to do so has spoken once is vital to equalizing power imbalances and giving everyone a fair shake in discussion. We believe that it should be observed by all groups, whether or not they have formally adopted Robert. I+ over A AV Packet Page 5 of 360 4. Robert provides "special rules for small boards" that can be useful for smaller councils, should they choose to apply them. 5. Robert also allows groups to develop and apply their own "special rules of order," so if a body wishes to change something in Robert, it is perfectly free to do so. 6. In sticky situations, "do-it-yourself" rulemaking can lead to ad hoc invention of rules, likely supplied by the chair on his own authority. A chair who makes up rules or improvises on the basis of vague memories from student government days is a sure path to problems, especially if the rule -maker has an air of authority about him (or her). 7. While councils often rely on their attorney for advice in this arena, in our experience few attorneys have had serious training in parliamentary procedure and few correct the common and widespread misunderstandings about Robert's Rules. 8. A body cannot do its work without some guidelines. Failing to adopt Robert doesn't mean that there are no guidelines —but without a specific "parliamentary authority," in times of conflict a group will be driven back to rely on "common parliamentary law.' Finding out what "common parliamentary law" requires and how it applies to a given situation is likely to be complicated and expensive, requiring time and attention from legal counsel and qualified parliamentary consultants. Far better to have set the terms of discourse in advance, so that everyone knows and agrees to the way they will consider matters. We believe that adopting a set of common-sense guidelines based on Robert's Rules, incorporating Robert by reference for the more unusual or complicated situations that may arise, and then committing to the education necessary to get everyone on the same page, will pay big dividends for every council willing to make the effort. That education can be quite affordable. Every city budget ought to be able to provide a copy of Robert's Rules of order Newly Revised in Brief to each council member. This little book is a splendid summary of the rules applicable to all but the most exceptional situations. At $7.Oo it's an amazing buy, and you can read it in an evening. Should our council adopt Robert's Rules of order? O Jurassic Parliament 2011. All rights reserved. TERMS OF USE This material is provided for your personal use Permission is hereby granted to make electronic or paper copies provided that the material Is left unchanged_The purchaser may not otherwise modify, copy, distribute, transmit, display, perform, reproduce, publish, license, create derivative works from, transfer or sell any information or services contained in this publication or obtained from our website, or use the content of our website for public or commercial purposes, including any text, images, audio or video, without the written permission of Jurassic Parliament- Jurassic Parliament reserves the right to update our website at anytime without noticetoyou. If you would liketo use or quote this material for any purpose other than expressly as authorized herein, contact the Jurassic Parliament office. DISCLAIMER This material is provided for general educational purposes. Jurassic Parliament makes no representation about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published as part ofthese servicesfor any purpose_ All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind.Jurassic Parliament herebydisdaims all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all warranties and conditions of merchantability, whether express, implied or statutory, fitnessfor a particular purpose,title and non -infringement- Nothingwritten here constitutes legal or business advice. Readerswith specific questions are advised to seek an appropriate credentialed authority to address their issue,. 603 Stewart Street, Suite 6io, Seattle, WA 98iox TEL 206.542.8422 I FAX 206.626.0392 info@jurassicparliament.com E www.jurassicparliament.com Packet Page 6 of 360 ATTACHMENT 2 Q Jurassic Which Parliamentary Authority Should We Choose? Organizations intending to choose a parliamentary authority to guide their meetings have several different choices. This article describes some common authorities. We welcome feedback from our readers who use any of these authorities about the good points or disadvantages they find in them. Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised. This is the most commonly used authority in the United States. By some estimates about ninety percent of the voluntary associations in our country use Robert. Widespread use, breadth of coverage, and the availability of many excellent resources on Robert make this book our first choice. However, be warned that over the years, the book has become extremely detailed. At first glance, it is quite intimidating - the current official version is over 800 pages long. Jurassic Parliament offers many tools to help you get the most out of Robert and apply it in a pragmatic way to your meetings. Current version: iith edition. Be sure to use the official text, and not some publisher's knock -off based on earlier, out-of-date versions. See our article "Which Robert's Rules of order Should I Buy?" for guidance on this point. It is also useful to refer to Robert's Rules of Order In Brief - a short volume which is not an authority, but which serves as an introduction to Robert. The Standard Code of Parliamentary Procedure. Alice Sturgis wrote the original version of this authority, referred to as "TSC" or "Sturgis" It is well -written and easy to follow. Many medical associations use Sturgis as their authority. However, the book does not cover as many situations as Robert, and it shifts some authority from the group itself to the person running the meeting (the presider). This seems more efficient at first glance, but the added authority may go to the presider's head, and cause him or her to behave in a dictatorial fashion. Sturgis also differs from Robert in some parliamentary actions like "to reconsider" or "to fill a blank." Current version: gth edition The Modern Rules of Order. Donald Tortorice prepared this slim volume for the American Bar Association, though the ABA does not use it during its own meetings. A mere 6o pages long, it may seem a tempting choice. However, Michael Malamut, an attorney and professional registered r► over Price S0.99 May not be photoco� Contact our office fo Packet Page 7 of 360 parliamentarian, has given it a poor review in one of the leading parliamentary journals. He states that the author derived his expertise from sitting through business corporation meetings, not meetings of nonprofit associations, and the result shows in his work. This book includes "typical minutes" and a chart of motions. Current version: 3rd edition. The Democratic Rules of Order. Fred and Peg Francis of British Columbia, Canada wrote these rules, 76 pages. It seems a good compilation of standard procedure, without a lot of detail. Includes a two - page summary and an example of a meeting governed by these rules. Current version: gth edition. Rosenberg's Rules of Order. Dave Rosenberg, a Superior Court Judge in California, has prepared these rules, available as an eight -page PDF on the World Wide Web. The rules seem unobjectionable but obviously do not provide the detail that may be needed in complex situations. We found the mathematics on voting given in the addendum to be rather peculiar. Many legislatures in the U.S. use Mason's Manual of Legislative Procedure. Professional parliamentar- ians may turn to Demeter's Manual of Parliamentary Law and Procedure and Riddich's Rules of Procedure. Bourinot's Rules of order is widely used in Canada. Hugh Cannon has written Cannon's Concise Guide to Rules of order, a lively introduction. And if all else fails, you can turn to Thomas Jefferson for A Manu al of Parliamentary Procedure. We welcome suggestions about adding to this list or modifying the descriptions. Contact us at info @jurassicparliament.com. Which Parliamentary Authority Should We Choose? © Jurassic Parliament 2011. All rights reserved. TERMS OF USE This material is sold for the personal use of the purchaser. Permission is hereby granted to make electronic or paper copies it number according tothe license which you have purchased. The purchaser may not otherwise modify, copy, distribute, transmit, display, perform, reproduce, publish, license, create derivative works from, transfer or sell any Information or services contained in this publication or obtained from our website, or use the content of our website for public or commercial purposes, including any text, images, audio or video, without the written permission of Jurassic Parliament. Jurassic Parliament reserves the right to update our website at anytime without notice to you. If you would liketo use or quote this material for any purpose other than expressly as authorized herein, contact the Jurassic Parliament office, URi-wwwJurassicparliament,com. DISCLAIMER This material is provided for general educational purposes. Jurassic Parliament makes no representation about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published as part of these services for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided `as is" without warrantyof anykind. Jurassic Parliament hereby disclaims ail warranties and conditions with regard to this information, indtiding all warranties and conditions of merchantability, whether express, implied or statutory, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non -infringement. Nothing written here constitutes legal cr business advice. Readers with specific questions are advised to seek an appropriate credentialed authorityto address their issues. urass1C 603 Stewart Street, Suite 6io, Seattle, WA 983oa TEL 206.542.8422 1 FAX 206.626.0392 info@jurassicparliament.com I www.jurassicparliament.com Packet Page 8 of 360 A Simple Technique for Improving Council Decision Making I MRSC Insight Page 1 of 3 ATTACHMENT 3 A Simple Technique for Improving Council Decision Making Posted on November 5. 2012 by Byron Katsuyame One of the things that has always fascinated me as a student and observer of local government has been the process that local legislative bodies use to discuss, debate, and formulate policy decisions. To my- mind, much of what constitutes "good government" is a direct consequence of an open, fair, and effective legislative decision - making process. The open and fair parts are regulated by state laws relating to issues such as campaign finance reporting, public records disclosure, and open public meetings. Effectiveness, on the other hand, is Ieft to the local legislative body. While there are a lot of moving parts in this process and, therefore, lots of opportunities to improve it, one critical aspect, and the focus of this blog post, has to do with the way local legislative bodies deliberate on the policy issues that come before them. When acting in their formal legislative capacity, local councils come together for a very specialized purpose — to discuss, debate, and finally decide on important issues affecting their communities. It is at this point during the give and take of their policy discussions, where arguments are put forth, opinions are swayed, and votes are taken. It's not true that councilmembers always come to such meetings with their minds already made up, as some citizens and members of the press seem to think. So, it is important not only that these discussions take place, but that they be conducted in ways that promote the best possible exchange of information and ideas. To this end, one simple but effective technique designed to improve this process was suggested by Ann Macfarlane, one of MRSC's long-time Council/Commission Advisors, in her 2009 column, "Using the Round Robin Method for Efficient Council Meetings." Ann's column contains some sage advice for local legislative bodies interested in improving both the efficiency and the quality of their meetings. In it she argues that the "round robin method" for council deliberation contained in Roberts Rules of Order is one of the best ways to promote a "fair and judicious discussion of issues in which each member has an equal opportunity to participate." Of course, local government advisory boards and commissions can also benefit from this type of discussion format. In a round robin format, each council or board member participating in key policy discussions is given the opportunity to speak once, going around the table, before anyone can speak a second time. While this may seem like a minor procedural issue, anyone who has spent any amount of time participating on a council, board, or commission knows that who speaks, when, and for how long, can often have profound impacts on the outcomes of many important policy discussions. The round robin format seeks to level the playing field a bit by ensuring that all council and board members have the opportunity and, in fact, are prompted to weigh in on particular issues. Councils or boards that have no rules of procedure or that do not pay attention to the details of how their meetings are conducted are more prone to falling into habits and routines that can reduce their effectiveness as decision - making bodies. How many times have you been at a meeting where one or two members dominate the discussion, either because they are always the ones who speak up first or because they feel compelled to answer every challenge to their point of view? Members don't have to be rude or inconsiderate to end up dominating the discussion. They may just be enthusiastic, which, unfortunately, can have the same negative impact. In either case, to the extent that other members who have valuable opinions to share become less inclined or able to add their thoughts to the mix, the quality of the discussion and ultimately the decision itself can stiffer. Then there are situations where, for whatever reasons, some members may just be reluctant to jump in and offer their opiniomi. http://insigpht.mrsc.org/20l2/l l /O5/a-simple-technique-for-improving-council-decision-ma... 1 /24/2013 Packet age 9 of 360 A Simple Technique for Improving Council Decision Making I MRSC Insight Page 2 of 3 Sometimes this is because they may feel that they are not as well-informed as they should be on an issue, or perhaps because they are concerned that their opinion will be rejected by the rest of the group, or may be unpopular with a wider audience. Ironically, when called upon, these same individuals often end up making key contributions to the overall discussion. In my experience as a member of the city of Kirkland's Planning Commission for the past eight years, including a year as the chair, I know that we make our best decisions when all our members have taken the opportunity to weigh in on whatever issue is before us. When, on the other hand, we have just one or two members who dominate the discussion, or where, for whatever reasons, some members are reluctant to offer their own point of view, then we become less effective. Particularly in our role as an advisory body to the city council, it is always more helpful to have a thorough discussion of the issues that will, in turn, provide a stronger record of our deliberations for the benefit of the city council as they go on to make their final policy decisions. To be effective, councils and boards should conduct their meetings in ways that promote the fullest discussion of the issues with the broadest possible participation by all of the council or board members. One of the simplest ways to ensure that this takes place is to make use of the round robin discussion format. I'm not suggesting that this approach is necessary for every single discussion. It is intended simply as a tool. Experienced mayors and board chairs know when their council or board will benefit most from a more structured discussion format. Share this: Twitter Facebook Email Like this: *Like Be the first to like this. About AByron Katsu ' Byron lies over 30 years of experience in local government police and administration research including such areas as forms of government, strategic planning, performance measurement, and general local government management. In his ov+n community of Kirkland, Byron is a member of the city'S planning commission. C ictti ,ill post. by 13} ron Kat�oy.nna -- This entry was posted in Best Practices. Governance. Polity, ©ookmark the permalink. 2 Responses to A Simple Technique for Improving Council Decision Making KHstiana Johnson says: Noveinber 16. 2012 at 3 45 pm Byron, Thank you for this timely post. We at the City of Edmonds are working to review our City, rules and procedures for our 2013 Council Retreat. i really appreciate your comments about the round robin approach in Roberts Rules of Order. i have been tasked with finding a modern and brief set of RRoO. Can you let me kno+, which publication you use? Kristian Johnson Reply Byron Katsuyama says: November 26, 2012 at 11.58 am Kristiana, Follow httt7111•ng�•glit. rs�cerg/2012/11/05/a-simple-technique-for-improving-council-decision-ma... 1/24/2013 `Packet Page 0 A Simple Technique for Improving Council Decision Making I MRSC Insight Page 3 of 3 I asked Ann Macfarlane, Professional Registered Parliamentarian, Jurassic Parliament, who is one of our Council/Commission Advisors, and an expert on Robert's Rules, what she recommends and she provided the following response and attachments: We recommend that everybody use Robert. The best strategy is to have the presider and clerk buy the "big book," Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised rFth edition, and also provide every member v ith a copy of the "little book," Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised In Brief, znd edition. This latter volume costs $7 and can be read in an evening. It covers most situations. However, it cannot be adopted as an authority in itself. It is a signpost to the big book. By purchasing both, a city council is sure to have at hand what is needed for any situation. Attached are three articles that you are welcome to share with Kristiana (or anybody- else) on this topic: ■ Which "Robert's Rules" Should I Buy? ■ Which Parliamentar\ Authority Should We Choose? ■ should Our Council Adopt Robert's Rules of Order? Repay MRSC Insight 'llwmrploy at S4 ordPrvss.cojn. FoH ow http://insigsht.mrse. org/20l 2/l l /O5/a-simple-technique-for-improving-council-decision-ma... 1 /24/2013 Packet Page 11 of 360 DECISION TREE Rules of Procedures for Conduct of Council Meetings Should the City Council continue using: Resolution 292 YES Action: • Add Resolution 292 to Council web page as a reference for City Council procedures. • Add Resolution 292 to the new Council Reference Manual. Adoptin Rules of Procedure, 1974 NO Should the City Council adopt procedures based on Robert's Rules of Order? Yes Action: IBC • Work Session on Procedures • MRSC — Robert's Rules revised summary. Packet Page 12 of 360 AM-5158 City Council Retreat - Friday, February 1, 2013 Meeting Date: 02/01/2013 Time: Submitted For: Councilmember Bloom Department: City Council Committee: Subiect Title Ethics Board and Code of Ethics Recommendation Submitted By: Jana Spellman Type: Information Information 4. b. Previous Council Action At the 2012 Council retreat, Council made this subject a priority for 2012 (Attachment 1: 2012 Retreat Minutes). This agenda items was discussed during the Public Safety and Personnel Committee on April 10, 2012 (Attachment 2: 4-10-12 Minutes). Narrative This item has been placed on the Council Retreat Agenda for review and discussion. In reviewing other cities' code of ethics, it was found that code of ethics are inclusive of elected officials, members of commissions and boards, and employees of the city. Edmonds currently has a one page Code of Conduct (Attachment 3) and a Conflict of Interest ordinance (Attachment 4). We will be reviewing code of ethics from the following cities found at: Marysville: http://codepublishing. com/wa/marysville/html/Marysville02/MarysvilleO280.html#2.80 Lynnwood: http://www.mrsc.org/mc/lynnwood/lynnwood02/lynnwoodO294.html Monroe: http://www. codepublishin,g. com/WA/Monroe/html/Monroe02/MonroeO252.html#2.52 and the MRSC: http://www.mrsc.or,g/subjects/Personnel/ethics.aspx In addition we will review the Bainbridge Island Ethics Board materials, which are inclusive of code of ethics, and are very comprehensive: Packet Page 13 of 360 http://www.ci.bainbridge-isl.wa.us/ethics board.aspx Attachments Attach 1 Feb -03-12 Approved City Council Retreat Minutes Attach 2 April-10-12 Public Safety, Personnel Committee Attach 3 - 10.1 General Code Of Conduct from 2013 Personnel Policies Attach 4 - Ord 3689 Conflict of Interest Inbox Reviewed By City Clerk Sandy Chase Mayor Dave Earling Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase Form Started By: Jana Spellman Final Approval Date: 01/28/2013 Form Review Date 01/28/2013 01:17 PM 01/28/2013 01:27 PM 01/28/2013 01:29 PM Started On: 10/01/2012 09:55 AM Packet Page 14 of 360 before the Council is first a committee meeting or work session. Issues that have a financial impact will be discussed at a work session rather than just by the Finance Committee. It was the consensus of the Council to change the name of the Community Services/Development Services Committee to the Public Works, Parks and Planning Committees. • Mission Statements Committees will determine whether to develop a mission statement. Councilmembers Buckshnis and Yamamoto will develop a mission statement for the Finance Committee. • Clarify the Public Safety/Human Resources Committee It was the consensus of the Council to change the name of the Public Safety/Human Resources to Committee to the Public Safety and Personnel Committee. • Community Outreach, Tree Board Council President Peterson explained there has been a proposal to restart the Community Outreach Committee. Councilmember Plunkett recalled the Community Outreach Committee was discontinued after 3 years; no new methods of communicating were identified. Mayor Earling commented on the potential for an electronic newsletter. Discussion followed regarding whether to form a code rewrite committee so that the code rewrite is Council and citizen driven, technical expertise required for the code rewrite, having staff make periodic presentations at Council work sessions regarding the rewrite, the proposal by staff to restructure the code, providing opportunity for citizen comment but having professionals assemble the changes, citizen knowledge that could benefit the process, concern with citizens participating for their own benefit or at least that perception, proposal to have user groups test the model, ability for any citizen to identify code conflicts regardless of whether there is a committee structure, and asking staff whether forming a committee in the future could be helpful. The Council agreed to seek feedback from Planning Manager Rob Chave and Building Official Leonard Yarberry regarding forming a code rewrite committee and schedule further discussion on a work session agenda. Council President Peterson suggested enhancing the Council portion of the website with more updates, etc. and working with the Mayor on an electronic newsletter and then consider whether a Community Outreach Committee is needed. It was the consensus of the Council to add a Council liaison to the Tree Board and to make it a paid committee position. 0 Ethics Council President Peterson recalled there has been discussion about developing a code of ethics for Councilmembers. Councilmembers Fraley-Monillas, Bloom and Petso offered to serve on an ad hoc committee that would review other cities' codes and present a draft to the Council. • Miscellaneous Mr. Taraday explained a special meeting notice must be issued for Tuesday committee meetings that begin at 6:00 p.m. If the Council wished to continue holding committee meetings at 6:00 p.m., he suggested revising the code to reflect that start time. Edmonds City Council Retreat Draft Minutes February 2-3, 2011 Page 17 Packet Page 15 of 360 PUBLIC SAFETY/PERSONNEL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES April 10, 2012 Committee members present: Council Member K. Michael Plunkett Council Member Joan Bloom Others present: HR Manager Mary Ann Hardie Citizen Don Hall Council Member Plunkett called the meeting to order at 7:19 pm. DISCUSSION ON CODE OF ETHICS (RELATING TO COUNCIL MEMBERS) Council Member Michael Plunkett opened the discussion by stating it was unclear as to what action/direction should be taken at this point with regard to this as Council had not given any specific direction regarding this topic although one or some council member(s) may have wanted to discuss this further. Council Member Joan Bloom stated that she had reviewed the City of Kirkland's Code of Ethics and the Mountlake Terrace Code of Ethics and there were some concerns that she had with using a code of ethics similar to theirs. Council Member Bloom further stated that she was not aware that there was a code of ethics for Council Members. HR Manager Mary Ann Hardie affirmed this. Council Member Bloom stated that she would like to build a policy regarding a code of ethics and that this process needs to move forward. Council Member Plunkett stated that he was willing to discuss this topic since it was on the agenda, but that that he may not be interested in moving this forward [for Council consideration]. Ms. Hardie stated that she had discussed this HR Committee subject with Carrie Hite (Parks, Recreation & Cultural Services Director) prior to the meeting and that they both agreed that HR would likely not be the best (nor most appropriate) committee for this forum. Additionally, while HR had provided samples of codes of ethics from other cities it would seem that the City Attorney and/or the City Clerk's Office [or Council] may be more appropriate for this process. Ms. Hardie also emphasized that HR was willing to continue to provide information as needed to the committee to assist with the process, but that this was not a [specific to] HR function since it did not pertain to employee related policies. There was some discussion that followed by the committee about what the process would be to create a code of ethics policy for Council members, creating a committee for this and whether or not the HR Committee was the appropriate committee for the discussion. Council Member Plunkett emphasized his concern about the subjectivity of some of the other policies from other cities and that [while the City may not have a specific code of ethics for Council Members] there are state laws that Council Members must follow. Council Member Bloom stated that she understood Council Member Plunkett's concerns but that due to the expressed interest/concern from the citizens about the possible need for this policy, she felt it was important for: 1) The City of Edmonds to have this policy; 2) this information to be available to citizens (as well as being part of transparency of information and citizen participation); and 3) there to be continued work toward the creation of such a policy. Council Member Plunkett stated that he would like to make this information easier for citizens to access. Council Member Bloom stated that since there does not usually appear to be a large agenda for the HR Committee, that the work on this code of ethics policy could be done at this committee and that the Cities of Kirkland, Mountlake Terrace and another city may be reviewed for further policy consideration. Council Member Plunkett agreed that this could be kept on the HR Committee Meeting agenda and that further review of the policy will occur at the next meeting. Packet Page 16 of 360 PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD Citizen Don Hall stated that he agreed with Council Member Plunkett that some of the code of ethics policies from other cities that he had come across did appear to be too subjective. Citizen Hall further stated that he became more interested in this topic of discussion after it was discovered that Council Members were not considered to be employees of the City and are not held to the same City Personnel Policy standards although [perhaps] they should be. This process will likely require a lot of "hands on" work and will be a difficult process. The meeting adjourned at 7:44 pm 2 Packet Page 17 of 360 CHAPTER X EMPLOYEE RESPONSIBILITIES AND CODE OF ETHICS 10.1 GENERAL CODE OF CONDUCT The City's primary function is to provide service to the citizens of Edmonds. To achieve that goal, all employees are expected to treat the public as their most valued customer. All employees are expected to serve the public in a professional manner, which is courteous, efficient and helpful. Employees must maintain a clean and neat appearance appropriate to their work assignment, as determined by their position and department head. Since the proper working relationship between employees and the City depends on each employee's on -going job performance, professional conduct and behavior, the City has established certain minimum standards of personal and professional conduct. Among the City's expectations are: tact and courtesy towards the public and fellow employees; adherence to City policies, procedures, safety rules and safe work practices; compliance with directions from supervisors, preserving and protecting the City's equipment, grounds, facilities and resources; and providing orderly and cost efficient services to its citizens. In addition, all persons representing the City of Edmonds are expected to conduct business in the following manner: • All persons, representing the City of Edmonds, shall conduct business in a professional manner, respecting all citizens' rights, and showing courtesy to all. • Their actions shall be conducted within compliance of the laws and regulations governing the City's actions, including but not limited to RCW Title 42. • City representatives are expected to conduct business in an open manner. • They shall not engage in any conduct which would reflect unfavorably upon City government or any of the services it provides. • They must avoid any action which might result in or create the impression of using their position for private gain, giving preferential treatment or privileged information to any person, or losing impartiality in conducting the City's business. UTSIDE EMPLOYMENT AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST Employees shall not, directly or i in an outside employment or financial interest which may conflict, in the City's opinion, with t e e City or interfere with the employee's ability to perform his/her assigned City job. Examples inc are not limited to, outside employment which: 53 Attachment 3 Packet Page 18 of 360 0006.90000 BFP: 5/21/08 ORDINANCE NO.3689 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF TITLE 3 ECC, REVENUE AND FINANCE, TO ADD A NEW CHAPTER 3.70 ECC, CONFLICT OF INTEREST, REGARDING CONTRACTS WITH FORMER EMPLOYEES; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the city has contracted for professional services with firms that have hired former city employees; and WHEREAS, Chapters 42.20 and 42.23 RCW, which regulates conflict of interest in municipal contracting, does not specifically address dealings with former employees; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds it to be in the best interest of the city to adopt regulations establishing criteria for contracting with former employees or firms that hire former employees; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. A new Chapter 3.70 ECC, Conflict of Interest., is hereby adopted in Title 3 ECC, Revenue and Finance., to read as follows: Chapter 3.70 CONFLICT OF INTEREST 3.70.000 Definitions. 3.70.010 Restrictions on future employment of city employees. 3.70.020 Disclosure of Privileged, Confidential, or Proprietary Information. {SFP696127.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 1 - Packet Page 19 of 360 3.70.030 Exemption. 3.70.040 Penalties. 3.70.000 Definitions. The definition of words used in Chapter 3.70 ECC shall be consistent with the definitions, context and usage of the terms in Chapter 42.23 RCW, and their interpretation by Washington Courts. 3.70.010 Restrictions on future employment of city employees. No former city official, officer or employee may, within a period of one year from the date of termination or city employment, accept employment or receive compensation from an employer if: (a) The former city official, officer or employee, during the two years immediately preceding termination of city employment, was engaged in the negotiation or administration of one or more contracts on behalf of the city with that employer and was in a position to make discretionary decisions affecting the outcome of such negotiation or the nature of such administration; and (b) Such a contract or contracts have a total value of more than ten thousand dollars; and (c) The duties of the employment with the employer or the activities for which the compensation would be received include fulfilling or implementing, in whole or in part, the provisions of such a contract or contracts or include the supervision or control of actions taken to fulfill or implement, in whole or in part, the provisions of such a contract or contracts. This session shall not be construed to prohibit a city elected or appointed official or a city employee from accepting employment with a city employee organization. 2. No former city official, officer or employee may, within a period of one year following the termination of city employment, have a direct or indirect beneficial interest in a contract or grant that was expressly authorized or funded by specific legislative or executive action in which the former city official, officer or employee participated. {BFP696127.DOQ1/00006.900000/} - 2 - Packet Page 20 of.360 3. No former city official, officer or employee may, within a period of one year following the termination of city employment, represent any person before any city board, body, agency, department, committee, examiner, adjustor, or commission regarding a specific project the former official or employee worked on, and was in a position to make discretionary decisions or recommendations, during his/her term of service or employment unless: (a) The former city official, officer or employee receives no compensation for representing that person; or (b) The specific project was a legislative issue; or (c) The matter involved in the representation by the former city official, officer or employee directly affects properties owned by the former city official, officer or employee. 4. Any elected or appointed official having the power to perform an official act or action shall, for a period of one year after the termination of his or her employment or term of service, refrain from lobbying the city department, agency, elected body, commission, or board on which they last served unless: (a) The former city elected or appointed official is receiving no compensation for such lobbying; or (b) The matter being lobbied directly affects properties owned by the former elected or appointed official. 3.70.020 Disclosure of Privileged, Confidential, or Proprietary Information. No former city official, officer or employee shall disclose or use any privileged, confidential, or proprietary information gained because of his or her service or employment with the city. 3.70.030 Exemption. 1. The prohibitions of ECC 3.10.010 notwithstanding, the city may contract with a former city official, officer or employee for expert or consultant services within one year of the latter's leaving city service upon determination and approval by resolution from the City Council that: {BFP696127.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 3 - Packet Page 21 of 360 (a) It is important for the city to obtain the services in the contract, and time is of the essence; (b) The former city official, officer or employee is best qualified to perform the services, and contracting with another would result in undue burden on the city; and (c) The interests of the city, including but not limited to legal, financial and operations, will not be undermined as a result thereof. 2. The prohibitions of ECC 3.10.010 shall not apply to a former official, officer or employee acting on behalf of a governmental agency, if the City Council determines that the service to the agency is not adverse to the interest of the city. 3. Nothing in this ordinance shall prohibit an official elected to serve a governmental entity other than the City of Edmonds from carrying out his or her official duties for that government entity. 3.70.040 Penalties. Any person violating any provision of ECC 3,70.010 and ECC 3.70.020 shall be guilty of a gross misdemeanor and subject to punishment in accordance with ECC 5.50.020. Section 2. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance. Section 3. Effective Date. This ordinance is subject to referendum, and shall take effect thirty (30) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title. APPRD D: Atle� - MAY G Y AAAKENSON f BFP696127.DOC; 1/00006.900000/) - 4 - Packet Page 22 of 360 ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Ad'o��- z &:�� ' TY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE APPROVEDYTA : OFFICE OF EY: BY W. SCOTT SNYDER FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: 06/13/2008 PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: 06/17/2008 PUBLISHED: 06/22/2008 EFFECTIVE DATE: 07/22/2008 ORDINANCE. NO, 3689 (BFFP696127.DDC. 1/00006.9000001) - 5 - Packet Page 23 of 360 SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO.3689 of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the 17th day of June, 2008, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No.3689. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF TITLE 3 ECC, REVENUE AND FINANCE, TO ADD A NEW CHAPTER 3.70 ECC, CONFLICT OF INTEREST, REGARDING CONTRACTS WITH FORMER EMPLOYEES; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this 18th day of June, 2008, -'ear. CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE { €3FP696127.DOC; 1100006.9000001} Packet Page 24 of 360 Humann, Debi From: Chase, Sandy Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2011 11:00 AM To: Humann, Debi Subject: RE: Ordinance Search Attachments: Ordinance 3689.pdf Hi Debi, I believe you are looking for Ordinance 3689 (attached) that was adopted in May 2008 that relates to "conflict of interest", former employees, etc. I did a quick word search for anything to do with "ethics" and nothing came up. Also, I do not recall any other ordinance that may apply. If I come across anything, I will be sure to let you know. Sandy From: Humann, Debi Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2011 9:34 AM To: Chase, Sandy Subject: Ordinance Search Hi Sandy: I know you are too busy for words but I need help when you get a chance. At last night's PS/HR Committee meeting, Wilson and Bernheim reviewed the Ethics Board issue. They requested that I supply the ordinance that apparently was prepared when Don Fiene went from being an employee to working for a private company. No idea what this is about. Don left our employment 4/08 if that helps. If you can think of any other ordinance that might deal with ethics, that would be appreciate also. Thank you. Debi Packet Page 25 of 360 AM-5427 City Council Retreat - Friday, February 1, 2013 Meeting Date: 02/01/2013 Time: Submitted For: Councilmember Fraley-Monillas Department: City Council Committee: Subiect Title Meetings and Agenda Process Recommendation N/A Previous Council Action Submitted By: Jana Spellman Type: Infnrmntinn Information Narrative This item has been placed on the agenda by Councilmember Fraley-Monillas for discussion. Attachment 1: Edmonds City Code Chapter 1.02 CITY CLASSIFICATION Attachment 2: Edmonds City Code 1.04 COUNCIL MEETINGS Attachment 3: Edmonds City Code Chapter 1.05 PUBLIC MEETINGS ATTENDANCE Attachment 4: Scott Synder Document Power, Duties & Role of City Council Attachment 5: Meeting Procedures Attachment 6: Resolution 1150 Attachment 7: Discussion on Council Procedures 1995 Attachment 8: 13 Ranking Motions prepared by Scott Snyder Attachments Attach 1 - Edmonds City Code 1.02 CITY CLASSIFICATION Attach 2 - Edmonds City Code 1.04 COUNCIL MEETINGS Attach 3 - Edmonds City Code Chapter 1.05 PUBLIC MEETINGS ATTENDANCE Attach 4 - Scott Synder Document Power, Duties & Role of City Council Attach 5 - Meeting Procedures Attach 6 - Resol 150 Attach 7 - Discussion on Council Procedures 1995 Attach 8 - 13 Ranking Motions Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date City Clerk Sandy Chase 01/28/2013 01:18 PM Mayor Dave Earling 01/28/2013 01:34 PM 4. c. Packet Page 26 of 360 Finalize for Agenda Form Started By: Jana Spellman Final Approval Date: 01/28/2013 Sandy Chase 01/28/2013 01:44 PM Started On: 01/24/2013 02:17 PM Packet Page 27 of 360 Edmonds City Code Chapter 1.02 CITY CLASSIFICATION Sections: 1.02.010 Adoption of optional municipal code. 1.02.020 Effective date. 1.02.030 City council positions. 1.02.031 Council president. 1.02.035 Filling vacant council positions. 1.02.040 Existing city laws and regulations. 1.02.060 Mid -biennial budget review and modification. 1.02.010 Adoption of optional municipal code. There is adopted for the city of Edmonds, Washington, the classification of noncharter code city retaining the mayor - council plan of government under which the city of Edmonds is presently operated, as provided in Chapter 35A.12 RCW, endowed with all the applicable rights, powers, privileges, duties and obligations of a noncharter code city as the same now exists, or may be provided hereafter, including any and all supplements, amendments or other modifications of said title hereafter at any time enacted. [Ord. 1513, 1970]. 1.02.020 Effective date. The city clerk is authorized and directed to forward to the secretary of state a certified copy of the ordinance codified herein for filing pursuant to RCW 35A.02.040, as amended, on the thirty-first day of December, 1970, and upon which filing the city of Edmonds shall thereafter be classified as a noncharter city as herein provided commencing with the first day of January, 1971. [Ord. 1513, 1970]. 1.02.030 City council positions. The city council shall continue to hold office until their successors are elected and qualified at the next biennial municipal elections to be conducted as provided in Chapter 35A.29 RCW. The four existing city council positions which terms will expire January 10, 1972, shall be elected for four-year terms in the 1971 municipal elections. The three existing city council positions which terms expire January 14, 1974, shall be elected for new four-year terms in the 1973 municipal elections. Thereafter the requisite number of city council positions shall be filled by election biennially as the terms of their predecessors expire and shall serve for terms of four years. The positions to be filled on the city council shall be designated by consecutive numbers and shall be dealt with as separate offices for all election purposes as provided by Chapter 35A.29 RCW. [Ord. 1513, 1970]. 1.02.031 Council president. At the first council meeting in July for the year 1989, the city council shall elect one of its members as council president who shall also be the mayor pro tempore. The council president's term shall be for six months and until his successor is elected. Following the initial six-month term, the council president shall be elected for one-year terms by the city council at the first council meeting of each year and shall serve for a one-year term until his or her successor is elected. A. At the same time, the city council shall elect a council president pro tempore who shall serve in the absence of the council president. In the event that both the council president and president pro tempore are unavailable, the council president shall appoint a member of the council to fulfill his/her duties while both are unavailable. B. In addition to any other duties assigned by the city council, the council president shall have the following responsibilities: Packet Page 28 of 360 1. Make assignments to all council committees, schedule committee hearings, and otherwise supervise the committee system; 2. Formulate and prepare the agenda for city council meetings; and 3. Supervise and direct the activities of the council resource person*. (*Current title Sr. Executive Assistant to Council.) C. In addition to the salary as a member of the city council, the council president shall be entitled to receive a salary of $100.00 per month and $25.00 per council meeting in order to compensate him for the time necessary to prepare the agenda and other associated responsibilities. This total additional compensation shall not exceed $200.00 per month. When the council president is absent and council president pro tempore is serving in his place, the city council president pro tempore shall receive the $25.00 per meeting payment. [Ord. 2722, 1989; Ord. 2389, 1983; Ord. 2308, 1982; Ord. 2131 § 1, 1980; Ord. 2126 § 1, 1980; Ord. 2116 § 1, 1980]. 1.02.035 Filling vacant council positions. A. In the event a vacancy or vacancies shall occur on the city council, such position(s) shall be filled until a successor to such position(s) can be elected for the remainder of the unexpired term(s) at the next municipal election. Such election process shall comply with the requirements of RCW 35A.12.050 and Chapter 42.12 RCW. In addition the city council shall establish a process commensurate with the time available which includes, at a minimum, public notification by posting and publication in the city's legal newspaper, the establishment of an application process with a clearly stated deadline for the submission of letters of interest, the development of questionnaires to assist the city council in its process, a public interview process conducted by the city council and nominations and selection by the city council during an open public meeting. All portions of this process shall be open to the public unless the city council in its discretion elects to discuss the qualifications of a candidate for public office in executive session as provided for by RCW 42.30.110(h). B. In the event that a council member shall resign or otherwise become ineligible to hold office after the date when the council position has been filled by election but prior to the date on which the newly elected council member is eligible to take office, the city council may in its sole discretion elect to dispense with the procedures established in subsection A of this section and appoint the newly elected successor to fill the vacancy for the remainder of the unexpired term. [Ord. 3382 § 1, 2001; Ord. 3005 § 1, 1995; Ord. 1841 § 2, 1976]. 1.02.040 Existing city laws and regulations. All ordinances, resolutions and orders adopted under the third class city classification, where not in conflict with state law, shall continue in force until repealed or amended by the city council under the newly adopted optional municipal code classification of noncharter code city under the mayor -council form of government. [Ord. 1513, 1970]. 1.02.060 Mid -biennial budget review and modification. A review of the mid -biennial budget shall commence no sooner than eight months after the start nor later than conclusion of the first year of the fiscal biennium. The mayor shall prepare the proposed budget modification and shall provide for publication of notice of hearings consistent with publication of notices for adoption of other city ordinances. Public hearings on the proposed budget modification shall be heard prior to the adoption of the ordinance modifying the biennial budget. At least seven days before said hearings, the mayor shall distribute the proposed budget modification to members of the city council, with copies available to the public at City Hall. [Ord. 3671 § 1, 2007]. Packet Page 29 of 360 Chapter 1.04 COUNCIL MEETINGS Sections: 1.04.010 Regular public meeting time and days. 1.04.015 Posting notice of change. 1.04.020 Recessed meetings and continuances. 1.04.030 Holidays. 1.04.040 Cancellation of regularly scheduled meetings. 1.04.010 Regular public meeting time and days. Regular meetings of the city council shall be held on each Tuesday of every month throughout the year in the Plaza Meeting Room — Library Building at 7:00 p.m. The second and fourth Tuesdays of every month are hereby designated as work meetings, and the city council shall not hold any public hearings for which notice is required to be given by state law or ordinance of the city unless special notice of the same is posted as provided in ECC 1.03.020. Council meetings shall adjourn at 10:00 p.m. on the day initiated unless such adjournment is extended by an affirmative vote of a majority of the council as a whole plus one. In the event state law requires an adoption of an ordinance or other action on other than a Tuesday, such as budget hearings, said dates are hereby declared to be additional regular meeting dates upon which date the action, ordinance, resolution or hearing may be taken and/or adopted. Committee meetings of the council shall be held in conjunction with work meetings of the council at such times and in accordance with such procedures as the council and its respective committees shall establish. The 10:00 p.m. adjournment deadline set by this section shall apply only to meetings of the council as a whole and shall not affect the ability of any council subcommittee to meet after such time when so scheduled by the chair or of the subcommittee. [Ord. 2707, 1989; Ord. 2492, 1985; Ord. 2465, 1984; Ord. 2430, 1984; Ord. 2367, 1983; Ord. 2240 § 1, 1981; Ord. 2209 § 1, 1981; Ord. 2194 § 1, 1981; Ord. 2110 § 1, 1980; Ord. 1979 § 1, 1978; Ord. 1676, 1973; Ord. 1611, 1972; Ord. 1606 § 1, 1972; Ord. 1479, 1970; Ord. 839, 1960; Ord. 503 § 1, 1937]. 1.04.015 Posting notice of change. The city clerk is hereby directed to post notice in accordance with ECC 1.03.020 of any special meeting or meeting date established by the council and of any change in a meeting date, time, place or the cancellation thereof. Posting of this notice is for informational purposes only and shall be an addition to any other notice requirement established by state law or these ordinances. Any irregularity in the posting of this gratuitous notice shall not in and of itself affect the validity of any meeting held in accordance with such original or amended posting. [Ord. 2707, 1989]. 1.04.020 Recessed meetings and continuances. In the event the city council is unable to complete its agenda on any Tuesday, it may recess the meeting to the immediately following Wednesday at the same time and place as the commencement of the meeting for which the agenda was incomplete. Nothing herein shall be construed to prevent the city council from continuing any item before it in public meeting to a future regularly scheduled Tuesday meeting of the city council. [Ord. 1606 § 2, 1972]. 1.04.030 Holidays. In the event a regularly scheduled city council meeting falls on a recognized holiday, the meeting shall take place on the immediately following day at the same time and place as it would have were it not for the holiday. [Ord. 1606 § 3, 1972]. 1.04.040 Cancellation of regularly scheduled meetings. In the event that a quorum of the council will not be available for a meeting, insufficient business exists to justify a regularly scheduled meeting, an emergency such as inclement weather or other cause makes meeting attendance inappropriate or unreasonable, or other reasonable causes determined by the council president, the council president may cancel a meeting. Upon cancellation, the city clerk shall post the notice of cancellation in accordance with ECC 1.04.015, provide notice of cancellation on the city's web site and provide individual notice of cancellation to city council members. If a public hearing was scheduled on that date, reasonable efforts shall be made by staff to contact interested parties, applicants or appellants, given the amount of time available before the established meeting time and date. [Ord. 3656 § 1, 2007]. Packet Page 30 of 360 Chapter 1.05 PUBLIC MEETINGS ATTENDANCE Page 1 of 2 Chapter 1.05 PUBLIC MEETINGS ATTENDANCE Sections: 1.05.010 Attendance required. 1.05.020 Attendance records. 1.05.030 New nominees appointment/ confirmations. 1.05.040 Exemptions. 1.05.050 Quorum requirements. 1.05.010 Attendance required. A. In addition to being subject to removal for other particularized grounds as set forth in applicable provisions of the Edmonds City Code, members of all city boards, commissions and committees (hereinafter "members") except as set forth herein, shall be removed from office, and the position deemed vacant as set forth in ECC 1.05.020 (C) if such member attends less than 70 percent of the regular meetings in any one calendar year, and/or is not in attendance at three or more consecutive regular meetings. B. The chairperson of the particular board, commission or committee may excuse any member from attendance at any particular meeting or meetings for reasons that are (1) work related, (2) due to illness or death in the family, or (3) extended vacations in excess of two weeks in length; provided, however, each such excused absence shall be so noted by the chairperson at the meeting from which the member is being excused and such fact shall be recorded in the minutes along with the reason given for the excused absence by the member. Excused absences shall not be counted for purposes of removal from office, but only if so noted in the minutes as set forth herein. In the absence of the chairperson, the member acting in the chairperson's behalf, such as vice -chairperson or pro tem, shall make the determination of whether the absence is excused, and announce the same for recording in the minutes of the meeting from which the member is excused. [Ord. 2556, 1986; Ord. 2033 § 2, 1978; Ord. 2156 § 1, 19801. 1.05.020 Attendance records. A. The city clerk shall keep a record of attendance of all board, commission and committee meetings. Upon any member failing to attend three or more consecutive regular meetings without the chairperson's excuse being noted in the minutes, the city clerk shall certify said member's name in writing to the mayor and shall notify in writing the members, the chairperson, and the appropriate city department head. B. On or before January 15th of each calendar year, commencing in 1980, the city clerk shall compile a list of members, if any, who have attended less than 70 percent of the regular meetings in the past calendar year without the chairperson's excuses being noted in the minutes, and shall certify this list to the mayor. The city clerk shall also notify in writing the members, the applicable chairperson and the appropriate city department head. http;//Y ag�tsof��r�% /dtsearch/dtisapl6.dll?cmd=getdoc&Docld=7&Index=C3a%5cdtSea... 9/28/2012 Chapter 1.05 PUBLIC MEETINGS ATTENDANCE Page 2 of 2 C. The member shall be automatically removed from office and the position deemed vacant as of the date of the city clerk's written notification as set forth in subsections (A) and (B) of this section. [Ord. 2033 § 3, 1978; Ord. 2156 § 2, 1980]. 1.05.030 New nominees appointment! confirmations. Upon receipt from the city clerk of the names of members failing to maintain attendance as provided herein, the mayor shall, within 90 days thereof, submit new nominations to the city council for confirmation. The city council shall confirm or reject the nominations within 30 days after the mayor submits the nominations to the council for consideration. A member removed for failing to maintain attendance as provided by this chapter may not be renominated or reappointed to a position on that or other city of Edmonds' board, committee or commission for at least one year after removal. [Ord. 2033 § 4, 1978]. 1.05.040 Exemptions. The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to members of the following boards, commissions and committees: A. Edmonds city council; and B. Edmonds civil service commission. [Ord. 2033 § 5, 1978]. 1.05.050 Quorum requirements. Notwithstanding any other provision of the Edmonds City Code, if the number of members of any city board, commission or committee having seven positions and subject to this chapter, should be reduced to six or less for any reason, including a member's removal for failure to maintain attendance, three members shall constitute a quorum. [Ord. 2033 § 6, 1978]. This page of the Edmonds City Code its current through Ord. 3868, passed December 20, 2011. Disclaimer: The City Clerk's Office has the official version of the Edmonds City. Users should contact the City Clerk's Office for ordinances passed subsequent to the ordinance cited above. PLEASE SEE ATTACHED RCW STATE LAW MAY TRUMP CITY CODE CHECK WITH CITY ATTORNEY City Website: Fitt;://v;rtiv .. i.ed ; onds.tJa. s (hi:tp://vyovw.ci.edmonds.wc,.Lis) City Telephone: (425) 771-0245 Code Publishing Company (http;//vvwvv,codepublisliing.com/) htt ack age oq/dtsearch/dtisapi6.dll?cmd=getdoc&Docld=7&Index=C%3a%5cdtSea... 9/28/2012 RCW 35A.12.060: Vacancy for nonattendance. Page 1 of 1 RCW 35A.12,060 Vacancy for nonattendance. In addition a council position shall become vacant if the councilmember fails to attend three consecutive regular meetings of the council without being excused by the council. [1994 c 223 § 33; 1967 ex.s. c 119 § 15A.12 060.] htt a� age 3 OhWv/�rcw/default.aspx?cite=35A.12.060 9/28/2012 POWER, DUTIES AND ROLE OF CITY COUNCIL Sources: RCW 35A11.220 RCW 35A.12.100 RCW 35A.12.120 RCW 35A.12.170 RCW 35A.12.180 RCW 35A.34.090 Chapter 35A.33 RCW 1. Personnel, Staff, and City Council. A. Defines the functions, powers and duties of officers and employees. Example, adopt job descriptions by ordinance. B. Prescribe qualifications or require confirmation by ordinance when no qualifications exist. C. Fix compensation and working conditions. 1. Subject to the collective bargaining obligations 2. Civil service must comply with the State civil service system. D. Prescribe term of appointment by ordinance. (For example, judge, hearing examiner, city attorney.) II. Regulate the affairs of the City by ordinance. A code city under Title 35A may exercise any power not in conflict with the State statute or constitution (limitation to "organic law.") A.. Crimes. Maximum penalties are one year in jail or $5,000. The City may enact civil violations but cannot make a State crime a civil violation within the City. B. Buy, sell, lease, regulate and otherwise provide for public property, structures, streets and other rights -of -way. C. Provide for the rendering of local social, cultural, recreation, governmental or corporate services. 1. Establish and provide for the operation of utilities and municipal services as are "commonly or conveniently rendered by cities/towns." Broadly defined. See Teleprompter v. Issaquah - Cable TV and US v. North Bonneville ("without restriction"). { W ss 655512.DOC;1100006.9000001) 1 Packet Page 34 of 360 2. Limitations: a. No gifts or lending of credit; b. Must charge the "true cost" of services to each fund within the City. That is, utilities cannot provide free service to other City functions. D. Exercise the power of eminent domain. E. Tax. The City cannot, however, create taxes but is limited to those tax resources provided by State statute. P. Incur indebtedness within statutory limitations. G. Exercise every governmental power jointly with other cities and counties. H. Set the compensation of elected officers: I. Cannot reduce during the term of office. 2. May increase the salary of the Mayor unless he casts a tiebreaking vote. 3. Councilmember is entitled "actual and necessary expenses" or per diem. 4. Note issue regarding insurance increases as compensation increases during the term. I. Prescribe rules for the payment of warrants. J. Authorize the division of City into wards. K. Budget. "Prior to a final hearing on the budget, the legislative body or committee thereof shall schedule hearings on the budget" ... and require "the presence of department heads to give information regarding estimates and programs." 111. Ceremonial and procedural. A. Designate a mayor pro tem. B. "The City Council shall determine its own rules and order of business and may establish rules for conduct of council meeting and maintenance of order." Any member of the Council may request a role call vote with the ayes and nays recorded. { W SS6555 l2.DOC;1100006.900000/ ) 2 Packet Page 35 of 360 POWER, DUTIES AND ROLE Or MAYOR Sources: Primarily RCW 35A.12.100 and Chapter 35A.33 1. The Mayor is the chief executive and administrative officer of the City. A. He/she has the power to appoint and remove officers and employees. 1. This power is subject to civil service and 2. Union contract. B. The power can be delegated to department heads. C. The Mayor is in charge of all departments and employees. He/she may appoint and remove a chief administrative officer if designated by ordinance. D. He/she sees that all laws and ordinances are "faithfully administered" and all contracts "faithfully kept and performed." 1. To that end he may cause "any legal proceedings" to be instituted and prosecuted 2. "Subject to approval by majority vote of the Council." 11. Presides over all meetings of the City Council (when present.) A. May vote only in the case of a tie with respect to matters other than: 1. Passage of an ordinance; 2. The grant or revocation of a franchise or license; 3. Resolution for payment of money. B. The Mayor shall report to the City Council "concerning the affairs of the City and its financial needs." This obligation includes a requirement to make "recommendations for consideration and action." C. Prepare and submit a proposed budget to the City Council. Note that the Mayor does not have to make revisions. Changes to the budget are the prerogative and obligation of the Council. D. Veto. Ill. The Mayor is the official and ceremonial head of the City. ( W SS6555 l2.DOC; 1r00006.900000/ ) 3 Packet Page 36 of 360 CITY ATTORNEY RCW 35A.12.020 A. The City may employ or contract for City Attorney services. B. The City Attorney executes the ordinances passed by the Council under the direction of the Mayor. C. The City Attorney provides legal advice and services to the City in its corporate capacity -- note importance of four votes to the Council to establish policy by ordinance or other direction (such as authorization to institute litigation). D. In event of conflict between Mayor and City Council, the City Attorney represents the Mayor, and City Council has the right to hire counsel. Todd v. Tukl viler, 17 Wn. App.401 (1977). E. City Council can provide for hiring of City Attorney or services by contract, but cannot require that the City Council exclusively direct how legal services will be provided. Mayor and staff are entitled to legal services as needed to perform their duties. AGO 1997, No. 7_ 4 Wss655512.DOC;1100006.900000/) 4 Packet Page 37 of 360 Page 2 of 5 Westlaw. Wash. AGO 1997 NO 7 Page 1 Wash_ AGO 1997 NO 7, 1997 WL 855519 (Wash.A.G.) (Cite as: 1997 Wi. 855519 (Wash.A.G.)) Office of the Attorney General State of Washington *1 AGO 1997 No. 7 October 17, 1997 CITIES AND TOWNS - LAWYERS - Manner by which optional municipal code city provides for legal services to the city government. 1. Under RCW 35A_12.020, a mayor -council city operation under the optional municipal code may, by charter provision or ordinance, opt either to appoint a city attorney or to procure legal services by contract. 2. Where a code city has determined to obtain legal services by contract, the contract for professional services may specify the term of the contract and may define who will have authority to amend or terminate the agreement, provided that the contract is consistent with any charter provisions or ordinances on the subject. 3. A city council, in entering into a contract with a law firm to provide legal services for the city, may not require that the city council exclusively direct how legal services will be provided; the mayor and other administrative city offices are entitled to obtain legal services as needed for the performances of their duties_ The Honorable Mary Margaret Haugen State Senator District 10 435 John A. Cherberg Building PO Box 40482 Olympia, Washington 98504-0482 Dear Senator Haugen: By letter previously acknowledged, you requested our opinion on three questions we paraphrase as follows: 1. Under RCW 35A.12.020, in a mayor -council code city does the city council have sole authority to select a private law firm to provide Legal services to the city by contract? 2. If the city council has the sole authority to enter a contract with a law firm, may the contract for professional services state that the city's attorney will serve at the pleasure of the city council, rather than the mayor? 3_ If the city council has the sole authority to enter a contract with a law © 2007 Thomson/West. No Claim to Orig_ U-S. Govt. Works. http:96lfl�FMZR8c8 Taw.corm/print/printstream.aspx?rs=EWI.0&destination=at1)&sv=SPLI... 3/21/2007 Page 3 of 5 Slash. AGO 1997 NO 7 Page 2 Slash. AGO 1997 NO 7, 1997 WL S55519 (Wash_A.G.) (Cite as: 1997 WL 855519 (Wash.A.G.)) firm, may the contract for professional services state that the city's attorney will provide legal services under the direction of the city council, rather than the mayor? BRIEF ANSWER The city council's authority to enter a contract for legal services depends on whether the city charter or city ordinances provide for an appointed officer position for the city's attorney or provide that a contract will be entered. It the city charter or city ordinances provide that legal services shall be obtained by the council through a contract, the charter or ordinances may also state whether the contract can be terminated by the council or the mayor. In the absence of any provision in the charter or ordinances relating to termination of the contract, the city council has broad authority to "contract and be contracted with" in a manner consistent with the state constitution and the general law. Finally, legal services provided pursuant to the contract would be performed at the direction of both the mayor and the council_ The city council lacks authority to require that legal services will be provided only at its direction. ANALYSIS *2 Question 1: Under RCW 35A_12.020, in a mayor -council code city does the city council have sole authority to select a private law firm to provide legal services to the city by contract? Under the mayor -council code city form of government, the Legislature has directed that "appointive officers shall be those provided for by charter or ordinance". RCW 35A.12.020. In the same statute, the Legislature has further directed that "[p]rovision shall be made" for the manner in which legal services are obtained. Since the words "provided" and "provision" are used in different parts of the same statute, "it is presumed that the words _.. are intended to have the same meaning". Medcalf v_ Department of Licensing, 1997 WL 603446, at *6 (Wash_ S. Ct. Oct. 2, 1997). Therefore, a city could provide by charter, ordinance or otherwise, how the city will obtain legal counsel. (FN1] RCW 35A.12.020 states: The appointive officers shall be those provided for by charter or ordinance and shall include a city clerk and a chief law enforcement officer. The office of city clerk may be merged with that of a city treasurer, it any, with an appropriate title designated therefor_ Provision shall be made for obtaining legal counsel for the city, either by appointment of a city attorney on a full-time or part-time basis, or by any reasonable contractual arrangement for such professional services. The authority, duties and qualifications of all appointive officers shall be prescribed by charter or ordinance, consistent with the provisions of this title, and any amendments thereto, and the compensation of appointive officers shall be prescribed by ordinance: PROVIDED, That the compensation of an appointed municipal judge shall be within applicable statutory limits. RCW 35A.12.020_ © 2007 'Thomson/West. No Claim to prig. U.S. Govt. Works. http:9/ WFM'E,RVfcElaw.com/print/printstream.aspx?rs=EW1.0&destination=atp&sv=SPLI... 3/21/2007 Page 4 of 5 Wash. AGO 1997 NO 7 Wash. AGO 1997 NO 7, 1997 WL 855519 (Wash.A.G.) (Cite as: 1997 WL 855519 (Wash.A.G.)) Page 3 As previously noted, the city charter or city ordinances may dictate the general terms for a contract for legal services and in the absence of such direction, the council would have authority to negotiate the terms of the contract_ However, this authority must be exercised in a manner consistent with the requirements of state lava. King County v. Taxpayers of King County, 132 Wn.2d at 384-387. state lase authorizes the obtaining of legal services "for the city". RCW 35A_12.O20. Neither the council alone nor the mayor alone constitutes "the city". Rather, RCW 35A_12.010 vests the government of a charter code city, adopting the mayor -council plan of government, in "an elected mayor and an elected council"_ In this respect and in others, chapter 35A.12 RCW contemplates that the mayor and the city council will act together on behalf of the city. For example, RCW 35A.12.100 states that: [The mayor] shall see that all laws and ordinances are faithfully enforced and that law and order is maintained in the city and shall have general supervision of the administration of city government and all city interests ... He shall see that all contracts and agreements made with the city or for its use and benefit are faithfully kept and performed, and to this end he may cause any legal proceedings to be instituted and prosecuted in the name of the city, subject to approval by majority vote of all members of the council. *3 RCW 35A.12.100. In addition, the mayor is the chief executive and administrative officer of the city_ RCW 35A.12.100_ That the mayor will require legal services from time to time in fulfilling official duties cannot seriously be questioned_ Nothing in chapter 35A.12 RCW authorizes the city council to exercise general supervision over the mayor's performance of these duties. To the contrary, as previously noted, the mayor is an independently elected officer of the city. RCW 35A.12.010. For these reasons we conclude the city council generally lacks authority to contract for the provision of legal services solely under the direction of the city council. In our view, this conclusion is also consistent with case law recognizing that only under very limited circumstances may the councils of other types of municipalities retain legal services at the expense of the municipality, for purposes of .representing the council. See State ex rel_ Steilacoom Town Council v. Volkmer, 73 Wn. App. 89, 867 P.2d 678 {1994),, Tukwila v. Todd, 17 wn_ App. 401, 563 P.2d 223 (1977). We trust this opinion will be of assistance to you_ Very truly yours, Christine O. Gregoire Attorney General Anne F. Egeler © 2007 Thomson/West. No Claim to Orig_ U.S. Govt. Works. http:NlN WaNEs4Wg&w.com/print/pt intstream.aspx?rs=EW 1.0&destination=atp&sv=SPLI... 3/21/2007 Page 5 of 5 Wash. AGO 1997 NO 7 Page 4 Wash. AGO 1997 NO 7, 1997 WL 855519 (Wash.A.G.) (Cite as: 1997 WL 855519 (Wash.A.G.)) Assistant ,Attorney General [FN1]_ Given the language of RCW 35A.12.020, it seems preferahle for a city to handle the legal services issue by charter or ordinance. We do not mean to imply that a city without any charter provision or ordinance is precluded from obtaining legal services through a contract. Wash. AGO 1997 NO 7, 1997 WL 855519 (Wash.A_G.) END OF DOCUMENT 0 2007 Thomson/West. No Claim to Orig_ U.S_ Govt. Works. httppqljrP ees�wfe3s, Taw.com/prinUprintstream.aspx?rs=EW1.0&destination=atp&sv=SPLI... 3/21/2007 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MEETING PROCEDURES Meetina Times 1. Regular public and work meetings of the City Council are held every Tuesday from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at the Public Safety Complex. 2. Regular Council Committee meetings are held on the second Tuesday at 6:00 p.m. 3. Public Hearings are regularly held during the first and third Tuesday meetings. 4. No public hearing is regularly scheduled on the second and fourth meetings, and therefore no citizen testimony will be normally invited at such meetings. Council Meetings All meetings of the Council shall be presided over by the Mayor, or, in his or her absence, by the Mayor Pro Tem. The Mayor only votes if there is a tie in the votes of the Councilmembers with respect to matters other than the passage of any ordinance, grant, or revocation of a franchise or license, or any resolution for the payment of money. Audience Participation The "Audience Comments" item on the agenda is an opportunity for citizens to address the City administration and City Council. Items brought up for action during the "Audience Comments" portion of the agenda will not be acted upon by the Council at that time but may be scheduled for a subsequent date. The Council encourages audience participation. Please limit participation to three minutes. A light on the speaker's podium will flash when 30 seconds are remaining of your three minutes and when the light stops flashing, your time has expired. In accordance with RCW 42.17.130, the opportunity for public comment shall not include comments which promote or oppose candidates for public office or ballot measures except during the course of a public hearing. Public Hearina Procedu All comments shall be made at the podium and begin with the speaker first stating his or her name and city of residence. A public hearing may be continued to another date to take additional testimony when the existing available time is not sufficient. Public Hearing Presentation Suggested presentation model for precise, well -organized proposals. 1. POINT What is the idea you wish to present? Begin with an "I statement" outlining your idea, such as, "I am here to (support/oppose)..." 2. REASON Why you are making this point. This is an important step so the listener does not make assumptions about your motives. 3. EXAMPLE Brief and relevant example to clarify and make your point concrete. 4. SUMMARY What condition will be changed or improved if your point is adopted? 5. ACTION (If appropriate, depending on the situation.) What needs to be done and who will do it. All Council meetings end promptly at 10:00 p.m. unless the Council votes to extend the meeting. Updated 12/7/05 Packet Page 42 of 360 0006.90000 WSS/gjz 5/31/07 R:7/24/07gjz RESOLUTION NO. 1150 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF RULES OF PROCEDURE ADOPTED PURSUANT TO RESOLUTION NOS. 292 AND 463. WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to adopt additional Rules of Procedure to govern its meetings, now, therefore, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Clerk is hereby authorized to amend the Rules of Procedure adopted pursuant to Resolution Nos. 292 and 463 to include the following new provisions: 1.1 The Mayor or Chair of a City Council meeting shall make an effort to recognize Council Members in either the order in which they have requested to be recognized, or some other logical fashion, offering each Council Member who wishes to speak an opportunity to speak before other Council Members respond. 1.2 Executive Sessions: Prior to adjournment of an executive session, the Council shall, by consensus, determine what, if any, information may be released regarding the executive session. A discussion to release information shall be confirmed by voice motion in open session. The City Council can take action only in open session at a public meeting. In the absence of a motion and vote, no confidential information shall be released. In the event that, at a later date, the Mayor, Council President or a Council Member wishes to refer to or place {WSS663567.DOC;1/00006.900000/1 - I - Packet Page 43 of 360 information relating to executive session in the public record, the Mayor, on behalf of the Mayor or the staff or a Council Member, shall ask the Council President to place an item on an agenda for such a motion and vote. The Council Agenda item shall notify Council Members of the procedural issue to be discussed, but shall not itself release confidential information relating to the executive session. 1.3 Nothing herein shall be deemed to limit notice of the purpose of an executive session required to be announced under the Open Public Meetings Act. RESOLVED this 7th day of August, 2007. APPROVED: MAYOR, GARY HAAKENSON ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED : CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: 08/03/2007 PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: 08/07/2007 RESOLUTION NO. 1150 {WSS663567.DOC;1/00006.900000/1 - 2 - Packet Page 44 of 360 �bmvnb5 CITT-tij (founcil plsru5swn an fflrrtT-ng Prox,eburies Packet Page 45 of 360 MEMORANDUM Date: April 21, 1995 To: City Council Via: Laura M. Hall, May07 From: Rhonda March, City C Subject: COUNCIL DISCUSSION ON COUNCIL MEETING PROCEDURES The Council has scheduled discussion on meeting procedures for April 25. The attached information are rules of procedures which have been previously adopted. Resolution 9292 adopting Rules of Procedures for Conduct of Council Meetings. Adopted February 5, 1974. Resolution #463 with Exhibit "A" (Adopting Rules of Procedures for Conduct of Public Hearings) - Adopted February 26, 1980. Ordinance 92704 which amended Section 20.90.020 on Public Hearing Procedures and Notice. Adopted March 21, 1989. (See also clarifying memorandum from former Mayor Naughten, dated June 9, 1989.) The information printed on the backside of agenda is also included for your information. Lastly, 1 have included information from other cities on conduct of meetings. attachments City of Edmonds 2 Packet Page 46 of 360 RESOLUTION NO. 292 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR CONDUCT OF C009' T-MMEE'Ii�MG WHEREAS, it has been determined by the City Council that more formal rules of procedure are necessary for the efficient and orderly conduct of public meetings, now, therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, that the rules of procedure attached hereto; identified as Exhibit A and incorporated in full by this reference are hereby adopted as the rules of procedure for all meetings of the City Council of the City of Edmonds, Washington. RESOLVED this 5tn day of _ February , 1974. APPROVED: MAYOR ATTEST t / CIT CLERK PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: February 5, 1974 FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: February 1, 1974 3 Packet Page 47 of 360 A. GENERAL RULES OF PROCEDURE. 1. 'Obtaininq floor. Before a member can make a motion or address the body Upon any question, it is necessary that he obtain the floor by being recognized by the chairman. If'two or more: members shall request the floor at the same time the chairman shall recog- nize the first member requesting recognition. 2. Second. VFhen a member obtains the floor and makes a motion, that is in order, the chair should inmediaLcly inquire if the motion is seconded; if sec- onded the, maker of the motion should then be regarded as having the refusal of the floor in preference to all otr or : ;ambers. 3. Mclification of motion. Before any subject is open to debate it is necessary, first, that a :notion be made by a Member who has the floor; second, that it be stfcc-nleil, and third, that it be stated by the chairman. This does not prevent suggestions of alterations, be- fore the quastion i7, statc:d by the chairman. The chair- man My consult the members before stating the question tO clarify =he m,ot.ica. The member who offers the motion, until it has been stated by .the chairman, can modify his raction, or withdraw it entirely; after it is stated he can cry neither, without the consent of the body (major- ity). For example, the movcr may state, "With the con - EXHIBIT A Packet Page 48 of WO 4 sent of the body I will modify my motion to state as follows, * * *" If no one objects it shall be deemed that he has the consent of the body to modify his motion. linen the mover modifies his motion, the one who seconds it can withdraw his second. 4. Stating the auestion. After a question has been stated by the chairman, it is in the possession of the body ror debate; the mover cannot withdraw or modify it cycopt by obtaining leave from the body as just descrihed, or by moving an amendment 5. Withdrawal. or substitution of motion.- When a J questic,ti Ls before the body and the mover wishes to withdraw or modify it, or substitute a different one in its place, with consent of the body, the chairman shall grant pzrmi5sion; if any objection is made, it will be necessary to obtain leave to withdraw by a motion for that purpose. This motion cannot be debuted cr amended. When a motion is withdrawn, the effect is the same as if it had never been made- 6. A!'•—,t"ntior. from voting. Any member may abstain from voting on any question, provided, at the time of declarinq his abstention he shall state the reason. 7. Standing to cruestion procedures. These rules shall govern the parliamentary procedures of the members 5 Packet Page 49 of 360 -2- and by the members only. Procedures may be questioned only by members of the body, and then only in accordance with these rules. The decision of the chair will be final and conclusive as to all, subject only to a motion by a member of the body, duly and timely made, in which case the ruling of the body shall be final and conclusive. Nothing in these rules will be construed to prevent the chairman or a member from requesting aid in the inter- "pretaticn of these rules or other matters from the City staff or officials. 8. Precedence. motions having precedence are those that may be mac3W while another motion is pending. -5. To -yield. !Motions yield when they are pending and another matter can be considered while the yielding motion still ponds. 10. AT)[)lied. 'Nhcre a motion can have no subordinate nr-)tion applied to it, the fact is stated. For example, the motio:, to continue may not be applied to the motion to 13y on the table. 11. Debate. Debate shall not take place until the chair has stated the question. Debate shall be limited to the immediately pending question, except that the main question is also open when the following motions are Pending; postpone indefinitely,.or reconsider a debatable question. o _3_ Packet Page 50 of 360 i 12. Putting theestion. When the debate appears to have closed the chair will ask, "Are you ready for the question?" If no one asks for the floor he shall put the question to vote, making it clear what the question is. 13. Majority. A majority of those present shall constitute a majority of the body assuming a quorum is present. Thy: chairman has the tie breaking vote, B. SPECIFIC RULES OF PROCEDURE. The following motions are Permissible in considering any matter on the agenda, and unless ot3,erwise specified shall rank in precedence and application as set forth numerically below. 1. UNDEBATABLE MOTIONS. a. Ouestion of order and appeal.. A question of order takes precedence of the question giving rise to it, may be put when anothor member has the floor, needs no second, and must be decided by the chairman without debate_ If a member objects he may appeal, which if seconded, will immediately be put to the body. An appeal is waived if riot made immediately. On appeal the decision of the chair is sustained on a tie vote. b. Su5Den5ion of rules. This motion may not be amended, nor another motion be applied to it, -4 - Packet Page 51 of 360 7 nor a vote on it reconsidered. Rules of the body may not be suspended except for a definite and specific purpose and by a vote of one more than a majority present. Nothing else may be done under the suspension. it may not be renewed at the same meeting iE once defeated. It shall be in order to change the order of the agenda without suspending the rules. No rule can be suspended when the negative vote is as laf ge as the minority protected by that rule. C. To'lav on the table- This motion may not he used for purposes of continuance of a matter wl-.Ich has been, specially called for pub- lic hearing, which is done by a motion to con- tinue_ 1t may n.:-)t be amended nor an affirmative vote on it be reconsidered. If carried the subject tabled may not be considered again until the body votes to take it from the table, which motion is 'also undebatabie. The object of the motion is to 'Postpone the subject in such a manner'tt.at it can be taken up at any time, either at the same or some future meeting. It may be used to supress a question for t';lat mueti,zg, but not for a matter for which a public meeting has been specially set. The --5- Packet Page 52 of 360 0 effect of the motion is to place on the table everything that adheres to the subject, so 'that if an amendment be ordered to -lie on the table, the subject which it is proposed to amend is also tabled. However, it may be limited to the par- ticular pending matter and if so adopted the remaining matters shall still be before the body. After demand for the previous question up to the time of taking final action under it, it is in order to move that the main question be laid on the table. Passage requires the vote of one more than a majority of the members present. d. The T_)revious q,_stion. This motion zs not amendable and applies to any debatable question, but is not debatable itself. It re- quires the vote of one more than a majority of the members present for its adoption- Z',hen called, ano seconded, the chair shall in,m:2diately put the question. If the motion fails to carry by a majority plus one of the M211bers present, the debate will continue as if the motion hac not been made. If adopted the chair shall i-mmed- iately bring the body to vote upon the pending question. If applied to an amendment to a pendin1-J - _6_ Packet Page 53 of 360 0 m question it brings to a vote not only the motion to amend but also the question to be amended. However, the motion for the previous question may be limited.to the pending amendment, and, if adopted, debate will be closed only to the motion to amend. It shall be proper for a member to submit a motion and move the previous question thereon and thus cut off debate on the motion. In this case the chair shall first put the Motion for previous question to vote. 2. DF B TABLE NOTION'S. a. Continue to a certain :.,a,/. This motion yields to all undebatable motions, and take precedence of all other debatable motions, except that it may b�F_, amended by altering the time, and the previous question van be applied to it with- out affecting any, other motions pending. b. To co.­,mit or refer. This motion is to cornit or refer a matter to a committee.. It can he amended by altering the comunittee, or giving the comriittee instructions. The debate on the motion opens the.Oebate on the main question it is proposed to cox-Lmit. 1i C. To ar-e;.d . This motion takes precedence -7 - Packet Page 54 of 360 10 over nothing but the question to which it is proposed to amend and yields to all questions except to postpone indefinitely. It can be applied to all but undebatable questions, an amendment of an amendment, to postpone indef- initely or to reconsider. It can be amended itself, but an amendment of an amendment cannot be amended. An amendment: mzjy be inconsistent with the one already adopted, or may be directly in conflict with the spirit of the original motion, but it trust have a direct bearing upon the -subject of that motion_ A notion to amend by inserting new words once passed may not be the subject matter of a new amendment to change the same words. The proper motion is the motion to reccnsider the vote by which the words were inserted. A motion to amend may be made to "divide the question" into two or more questions as the mover specifies, so as to get a separate vote on any particular point or points. d. To c.ostt one indefinitely. This motion takes precedence of nothing except the question to which it is applied and yields to all motions except to amend. It cannot be amended, and opens Packet Page 55 of 360 to debate the entire question which it is proposed to postpone. Its effect is to entirely remove the question from the body for that session. The previous question, if ordered when this motion is pending, applies only to it witijout affecting the main question. It cannot be applied to a matter that has been specially set for public hearing. negative vote On it connct be reconsidered. e. PrinriT,zj] cif esti.on. The main or principal question is a motion to brine before the body for its consider.atic:n any particul_,r suhiocr . NO principal moL'isn can be We whor any otl-.GI' motion is hofore the body. It takes precedence over nothing and yields to all. C. MISLELL.ANVY-TS MOTIONS . 1. To rescSrci. This motir.n Mnnnt hK ma3e For a matter Lhat has been vo`.eci Typo, for which a ratter has been .ope ially called for public hearinY _ do 'Ov`r, for ether matters to which it is aticzopr iate 11, addressee, as where it is too late to reconsider the vote, e m0ti0;: is the course to pursue tc ruscitid an ob;ectionable policy, order or motion; it is debatable. 2. Tc. rn,c}nsic!or. This m, ticn in, nct in orier after the body has vote' uPun the principal question why zK is 12 Packet Page 56 of 360 - Q - the subject matter of a specially called public hearing unless made immediately, after thereon and before any mem- ber of the public has left the public hearing. It is otherwise in order at any time, even when another member has the floor, but nct after that session has adjourned. It must be made by a member who voted with the pre- vailiny .side. It can be applied to the vote of every other question, except as Noted above, and except to SUSP O t:hO rules and an a Ef irmative vow to lay on the table or to take from the table. The motion shay not l,e amended. W-hether or not it is tl-? ends uprn whether the question to be recon- sidered is debatable or undebatable. It may be laid on the table, in which case, the roconsiderDtion, like any ether question, can be t,cken from the table. 3. Rc:l 1 c l l . !tiny member may a roll call votes any time before or after any question is lout. The demand neeis no second and the chairman ,rust ask for a roll call vote on demanc:. It is not debbtable and may to applica tn 3ny question. It is waived if after the vote it is not Yrmediately made ani prior to tho next matter hoin�: cCin5:idereel. 10. Packet Page 57 of 360 13 UNMEBATABLF. a. Question of Order Appea t b. Suspension of Rules c. La-1 on Table d. Previous Question a. Cunt inuo to CF.rt:lzn Duy b. Comnit or Refer c. Amend d. Postpone Indefinitely e. Prir.ciDle Questit,c) MISCELLnNEOUS a. Rescind b. Reccnsider C. Roll. Call a� 0 O •--! 4-1 C) (n 4j 01 r� Q >~ -.-1 }-t to O W N lf� sa G C) 73 O r� C; !!3 >, .4J Si O -� ? G1 U L O CP •ram � to . 4 S1 (Il w 'LS Q .0 �' �J r7 E V t l N 14 {i7 0) 10 r I 0 C 0 � U rJ Q V S C: o E ul 0 >, ,Q — In rr C, z 0 r+-� U ;4 ,=; �. r; C J L7 * * * * * A.V. I * * * N.V. l SUGGESTED FORMS 1. UNDEBATP,RLE MOTIONS a_ Ot:est-icn of order. Member : "I raise a -paint of Order." Chair: "State your point of order." Meml)cr: States his point of order Chair: Ruling by the chairman, who may give reasons. Member: "I appeal from the de-cision of the chair.,' Chair: (If seconled} "Shall the decision of the chair stand as the decision of the body?" % b. sus ('111 ,ion of rules (majority IDIUS ,)"P) Member: "I move to suspend the rules requiring._." c. To 1-)y on table majorit plus one) Metric^e: "I move to lay the question (sta-inq it) on the table." Member : "I move to take the question (stating it) from the table." d. Previous cTuesticn m.a crit lUs one) Member: "I call (demand or move) for the previous question." Chair: (If secondedi "Shall the main question be novr put?" Me ,fiber : "I call fcr- the previous question on the amendment." 15 Packet Page 59 of 360 Chair: (If seconded) "Shall the question be now put on the amendment?" 2. DEBATABLE MOTIOtiS a. Continue to a certain day (majority) Member: "I move to continue the question of (stating it) to the next regular (or recessed) meeting of (date) . NOTE: (1) Zoning matters must be decided and re- ported by the planning commission within 90 days of the application. (2) Plats and subdivisions must be approved, disapproved or returned to applicant for mod- ification or correction. within 60 clays from date of filing, unless applicant files written consent for longer period in which to act. b. To commit or refer (ma'iorit ) Member: "I move to refer the subject to a committee." c. To am..end (ma icrity) Member: "I move to amend the motion to 'add', or 'insert', to 'strike', to 'strike out and insert 'r to 'divide the question' (into two or more questions), etc." d. To postr=one indefinitely (r,3aJority) Member: "I move to postpone the question indefinitley." -2- 16 Packet Page 60 of 360 e. Princi a1 question (Majority, unless otherwise indices ted ) Member: "I move that . [REZONE] "...proposed Ordinance No. 1234 be passed." [REZONE DENIED] [AMENDMENT TO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN] [DENIAL OF AMENDI`ICNT TO COMPREHENSIVE P Li\ N ] [ LID --RESOLUTION OF INTENTION] [LID --ORDINANCE FOP1,1ING LID] [STREET VACATION --SET HEARING DATE] [STREET VACATIOt�:— APPROVAL] [STREET VACATION — DISAPPROVALI "...Planning Commission Resolution No. 123 he affirmed and.the requested rezone denied." "...proposed Ordinance No. 1234 be passed." "...Planning Commission Resolution No. 123 be affirmed and the-recuested amendment to the comprehensive plan be denied." "...proposed Resolution of Intention No. 123 be passed establishing the public hearing on the day of 196 NOTE: If health issue, must be passed unanimously. "...that proposed Ordinance No. 1234 be passed_" NOTE: If health issue, must be passed unanimously. "_--that the public hearing cn the proposed street vacation be fixed on the day of 196 and that proposed Resolution No_ 123 be passed." NOTE: Date must be not less than 20 nor more than 60 days from the mate of passage of Resolution. ".__proposed Ordinance No. 1234 be passed." "...the proposed street vacation be denied." 17 Packet Page 61 of 360 K' [AI4EX�aTrOti " _ _ .a public meeting be set with the RECENT OF iniating parties .to determine whether JNTEL'ITION TO the city will accept the proposed ANJ.EX BY 10i01 annexation and whether it shall require the assumption of existing city indebtedness by the area to be annexed for the day of 190 NOTE:. Must not be more than 60 days after the filing of the request." .a public hearing be set for RECENT 017 the day of , 196 PETITIO:, FOR for the hearing on the proposed ANtIEXATIOt4--75/] annexation." (ANNEXATION- "...that proposed Ordinance Co. FIttAL APPROVAL) 1234 be passed." [AN1tZE`C/�TT.CN- ". _ .that the proposed annexation FIC,AL DENIAL] be denied." 3. MISCELLANEOUS MOTIONS _ a. To rescind (majority) Member: "I move to rescind that motion, policy, etc_" b. To reconsider (majority) Member: "Having voted on the prevailing side, I move that we reconsider the vote on the motion to (stating it) and have such motion entered on the record." C. Roll call (any member) Member: "I demand a roll call vote." No second needed_ Chairman: "The secretary will please call the roll." m Packet Page 62 of 360 r` RESOLUTION NO. z)-3 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING RUSES OF PROCEDURE FOR CONDUCT OF HEARINGS. WHEREAS, the following Rules of Procedure will enable the City Council to conduct public hearings in an orderly manner and therefore be'of benefit to the public, now, therefore, The City Council of the City of Edmonds, Washington, hereby resolves that the Rules of Procedure for Conduct of `IzKc�fiear�ings, Eated February 8, 198O, attached to this Reso- lution and incorporated in full by this reference are adopted as the rules of procedure for all public hearings before the City Council. RESOLVED this 2�, day of February, 1980. APPROVED: / /.,v MAYOR, H. H. HARRISON ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, IRENE ARNEY MORAN FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: February 12, 1980 PROPOSED RESOLUTION ADOPTING RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR CONDUCT OF PUBLIC HEARINGS [Item on Consent Agendaj Councilwoman Allen questioned the reason for adopting these when a resolution was adopted in 1974, copies of which had been furnished to the Council in this week's Council material_ City Attorney John Wallace noted that the rules adopted in 1974 were for the conduct of Council meetings, and these rules were for the conduct of Public hearings. COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST, TO PASS RESOLUTION 463, ADOPTING THE RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR CONDUCT OF PUBLIC HEARINGS. MOTION CARRIED. Councilman Nordquist requested that they be prepared in booklet form eig C,.,� and be placed in the compartments at each Council members place on the rostrum. 19 Packet Page 63 of 360 -1- "" !• DATED 2/8/80 RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR THE CONDUCT OF PUBLIC HEARINGS - J The format for public hearings conducted by the City Council should be as follows: 1. A request to have the: City Attorney or staff member read or otherwise paraphrase the scope of the particular hearing (the purpose of the hearing) and advise the Council of the appli- cable criteria that they must consider in the course of their review. The purpose of this is to advise the Council before they receive all of the input and testimony as to what items they should be looking at and paying the most attention to during the course of the ensuing hearing. 2. The hearing should be commenced with a staff report to the City Council together with the staff's recommenda- tion. 3. The Council should direct any questions they have at that time to the staff. 4. The hearing should be open to permit the applicant to make a presentation to the body hearing the matter. 5. Questions from the body should be directed to the applicant. 6. The hearing should be opened to the audience as a whole preferably a sign up list should have been circulated. If a sign up list has been circulated you then have an indication of the number of persons desiring to speak which may be weighed against the amount of time available that evening for the public hearing. The City of eDI4b4DS utilizes a method of allocating a Packet Page 64 of 360 -1-- 20 stated amount of t-Lme to the hearing and giving each person who has signed up an equal amount of time to speak. Frequently, per- sons who have signed up waive their opportunity to speak which leaves time to be further allocated to those who wish additional time. If the time allocated for the hearing is exhausted the hearing can then be continued to another date if such is necessary. The sign up list also provides a backup list for the Clerk who is having to take the minutes for the name and address of the speaker. In addition, it provides an orderly process for the calling of speakers_ It also assures that each person is given an opportunity to speak before those who have already spoken are given an additional opportunity to speak. 7. Each person speaking whether it be the applicant J or a member of the audience should be required to come to the podium that is tied into the recording machine and before giving their position should, for the record, state their full name and their residence address_ At the time all of the names on the list have been called and have either waived the opportunity to speak or have spoken you may then ask if there are any other persons who desire to speak that have not yet had the opportunity to speak and who had not signed on the list. If there are any then those persons should be allocated the same amount of time if there is such time remaining. S. When all who desire to speak have had an opportunity to speak then, in the event there is hearing time remaining, and in the event there are those who have already spoken that have C 21 Packet Page 65 of 360 — — something additional in the way of input then additional time may be allocated to there. 9. If at the conclusion of the time allocated for the hearing there are still persons desiring to speak that have additional input and information then the hearing time may either be extended or may be continued to a date certain in the future. 10. As photographs, maps, slides, letters, invoices, memorandums, petitions or any other documents of any nature are presented to the Council in connection with the hearing each one should be identified at the time it is presented and an exhibit number assigned to it. The Clerk should maintain an exhibit number list and ascribe the exhibit number on the face of the particular exhibit and note the date of submission on it. 11. Councilmembers should in every instance first be recognized by the Chairman before asking questions or providing other input. The purpose of this is for the Chair to specifically recognize the Councilmember about to speak by name so that the record accurately reflects who is speaking at the time. 12. Each person who speaks a second time or who responds to a question should come to the podium on each occasion and again re -identify themselves by the giving of their name. The giving of the address the second time is not necessary. 13. Any questions that any Councilmember has of any member of the audience or of the applicant should be addressed to those person or persons prior to the closing of the hearing. Once the hearing is closed no additional testimony may be taken -3- Packet Page 66 of 360 22 and the Council will be limited to questions of clarification to the staff only. 14. Councilmembers should avoid whispered conversation between themselves during the course of the hearing. These conversations are semi --intelligible on the tape recording and may jeopardize the record since there then is obviously evidence or part of the record that cannot be ascertained as to what was said should the case be on review. When the public has completed their input the applicant or appellant or their designated repre- sentative should be given a brief opportunity for rebuttal. Upon conclusion of the rebuttal if there are no more questions for any member of the audience or the applicant the hearing should be closed. 15. It should also be noted that proponents or opponents do have a right of examination of persons who have given testimony at the hearing. However, these questions should in every instance be directed through the Chairman of the meeting and not directly to the person whose response is being elicited. For example, the person would request that the Chairman ask person X for an answer to a given question_. The Chairman would direct that person to come to the podium, identify himself and give a response. At the con- clusion of that response any additional questions from that person or other persons should be handled in the same manner. That is -one question at a time, each question always channeled through the Chairman to the person whose response is being elicited. 15. At the conclusion of the hearing the Council should Packet Page 67 of 360 - 4 - 23 commence their deliberations_ Obviously it is preferable that the deliberations be completed on the night of the hearing. This, however, is not mandatory and the Council's deliberations may be continued to a date certain in the future.' Continuance should be avoided at all costs if it can be. 17. During the course of deliberation and discussion the pros and cons of the project or appeal should be thoroughly and completely discussed particularly as they relate to the criteria to be applied in the particular matter. 18. Any motion for action should as fully and completely as possible include a statement of conclusion or factual findings that are forming the basis for the motion. For example, Mr. Chairman after a review of the file and having heard the testimony from the hearing and having visited the site or otherwise being familiar with the particular site I find that the proposed whatever satisfies the criteria or does not satisfy the criteria for the following reasons (list them 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, etc.). It would not hurt to actually draft these out in advance of making any motion. At the conclusion of this statement of findings and conclusions then the person should say "for the foregoing reason(s) I move that the application or appeal be approved, denied or modified in whatever respect it should be so modified." Assuming the motion is seconded discussion should then ensue. The Chairman may call upon each member to state their reasons --for or against the particular motion. At the conclusion of that the Chairman should then call for a vote upon the motion. -5- Packet Page 68 of 360 24 19. At the conclusion of the taking of the vote and the announcement of the decision the Chairman should at that time advise the audience on the record what the appropriate appeal pro- cess is. This can be done either by the Chairman himself or by the Chairman directing such an inquiry to the City Attorney or other staff member. 25 Packet Page 69 of 360 June 9 I98�±' . 1 E 0 i0' G;` COunCA l FR03 La 1. ry S Naug�iten tea 'or SUBJI. ECT : CIE TNG, PR�3CEDURES, . Several GounciI' mbers gave: goes=boned the' recent ckanges tn" fur ,. CouncS l meeting" rocedures ;that :;were:' approved by th'e. Gfltinc�l bn Mary 21, 19�= ns,ent Agenda. Attached is; Ordin `nce #27G4 Tile main changes are_ . ]. Applicant speaks"first.` 2. 0b1 the'app7;icant:' has °ti► e .for:"rebuttals; Appl i cant" has burden 6f ,pr,.00f I. 3. Aff r PublicHear1.'r�g" is ;closed; the Go..'ki :'' can "quest itin-staff' for, reformation, Mien ma a.�decisi'.an tSIV/bw ,,�:. ��.....�,- .... . I 1. .;....m 1 . . i 1..", . ,. .. :, I . . I.`.. .. . ,. - . ... , , . :. . ..I . .. . �. � ,�I cc Slott Sttyaer, .: m .�X,. -. '�: ... l. .. . I . . ...:..7.. . j, ...� . ,. �� ., . ,.. - ..� .. .. ..'.. . ... , , .... ... . Citytorney ... .I' . -...., ....—.1�: m . �.�. w .: ,. � �I. , ... .1, . . ...: . .. 1I ��. . . , . .. 11. .. -..�.'"-. : .��:... �:. .. .... .. ...�.1 -':� ' RECEiV?' �!U ' 12 5. .`� EdmOrtrfc €;iftJ Clr� k . _ .1. 28 . Packet Page 72 of 360 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MEETING PROCEDURES Meeting Times i. Regular public and work meetings of the City Council are held every Tuesday from 7:00 p.m. to 10:0o p.m. in the Plaza Meeting Room of the Edmonds Library. 2. Regular Council Committee meetings are held on the second Tuesday at 7:00 p.m. 3. Public Hearings are regularly held during the first and third Tuesday meetings. 4. No public hearing is regularly scheduled on the second and fourth meetings, and therefore no citizen testimony will be invited at such meetings. Audience Participation The "Audience" item on the agenda is an opportunity for citizens to address the City administration and City Council. Items brought up for action during the "Audience" portion of the agenda will not be acted upon by the Council at that time but will be scheduled for a subsequent date. The Council encourages audience participation. Please limit participation to three minutes. .Public Hearing Procedure All comments must be made at the podium after the speaker first gives his or her name and address so that comments and speaker identification become part of the taped record. The Mayor may indicate the amount of time available for each hearing. So that all persons shall have an opportunity to speak, the Mayor may limit the amount of time permitted each speaker until all persons have had an opportunity to speak. Further testimony from those who have spoken will be taken in the remaining time. The public hearing will be continued to another date to take additional testimony when the existing available time is not sufficient. Public Hearing Presentation Suggested presentation model for precise, well organized proposals. 1. POINT What is the idea you wish to present? Begin with an "I statement" outlining your idea, such as, "I am here to (support/oppose)..." 2. REASON Why you are making this point. This is an important step so the listener does not make assumptions about your motives. 3. EXAMPLE Brief and relevant example to clarify and make your point concrete, 4. SUMMARY What condition will be changed or improved if your point is adopted? 5. ACTION (If appropriate, depending on the situation) What needs to be done and who will do it. All Council meetings end promptly at 10:0 p; rn. unless the Council votes to extend the meeting. cAwordata\meetprac 29 Packet Page 73 of 360 City Council Meeting Times The Renton City Council welcomes your participation in the process of local government. Council meetings are held the first four Mondays of each month at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building. (For the first few months of 1994, City Council meetings will be held in the Municipal Court Chambers due to remodeling of the City Hall Council Chambers.) Committee of the Whole meetings (work sessions) precede the Council meeting at 6:30 p.m. CouncilAgendas Council meeting agendas are available to the public from the City Clerk's office after 3:00 p.m. on the Thursday preceding the Monday meeting. Copies are also available at the Council meeting. Any citizen may present a letter to the City Clerk for presentation to the Council, but to be listed on the printed agenda, the letter must be received by the City Clerk prior to noon on the Thursday preceding the Monday meeting, Audience Participation Audience participation is encouraged at all Council meetings and at the work sessions which precede the Council meetings. There are two opportunities during the regular Council meetings (identified as "Audience Comment" on the agenda) for citizens to address the Council on any subject matter. Com- ments are limited to five minutes per speaker, The first audience comment is limited in duration to 30 minutes. During the first audience comment period, citizens may request Council to suspend the regular order of business and advance to any item, such as a pending committee report or agenda item, which may not otherwise be presented until much later in the meeting, Suggestions for Speakers 1. When you are recognized by the Presiding Officer, please walk to the podium and state your name and address for the record, spelling your last name. 2. Please limit your remarks to no more than five minutes. 3. If someone else has made the same points, simply indicate your support or disagreement. . 4. Indicate if you want to be notified of any future meetings regarding a specific subject. Public Hearing/Meeting Procedure Public hearings and public meetings are scheduled at the beginning of the regular Council meeting. Following a brief presentation by staff, audience comment will be invited, Comments will be limited to five minutes per person. The following suggestions will assist you in presenting precise, well organized comments: PURPOSE: What is the idea you wish to present? Begin with an "I" statement outlining your idea, such as "I am here to (support/oppose) ..." REASON: Why are you making this point? This is an important step so the listener does not misunderstand your motives. EXAMPLE: A brief and relevant example will clarify and make your point. SUMMARY: What condition will be changed or improved if your point is adopted? ACTION: (If appropriate, depending on the situation.) What needs to be done and who will do it? Executive Session This is a closed portion of the meeting for discussion of confidential legal matters, personnel matters, labor negotiations, and/or property transaction sales. These are the only issues which may be discussed in executive session. Council Minutes Minutes of Council meetings are available in the City Clerk's office on Friday following the meeting. For a nominal fee to cover postage, copies of the weekly minutes and agenda will be mailed to your home or business upon request. CITY OF RENTON MISSION STATEMENT The City of Renton, in partnership with residents, business, and government, is dedicated to: ■ Providing a healthy atmosphere in which to live and raise families, ■ Encouraging responsible growth and economic vitality, r Creating a positive work environment: Resulting in a quality community where people choose to live, work, and play. Packet Page 74 of 360 ISSAQUAH CITY COUNCIL City Hall South, 135 E. Sunset Way, Issaquah, WA 98027-1307 A_G_ E N D A February 22, 1994 (Live Broadcast at 7:30 p.m_) 1 . CALL TO ORDER - 7:30 PM (in City Hail South Council Chambers) a Pledge of Allegiance b. Invocation c. Introduction of New Employee 2. COMMITTEE REPORTS 3. MAYOR'S REPORT 4. AUDIENCE COMMENTS (See reverse for procedures) Notej The Mayor may interrupt citizen comments that continue too long, relate negatively to other individuals, or are otherwise inappropriate. 5. CONSENT AGENDA Items listed below have been distributed to Councilmembers in advance for study and will be enacted by one motion. If separate discussion is desired on an item, that item may be removed from the Consent Agenda and placed on the Regular Agenda at the request of a Councilmember. a Minutes of the 2-7-94 Regular Council Meeting b. Approval of Warrants 1 ) 2-22-94 2) January 1994 Treasurer's Report c. AB #3622--New City Telecommunications System --Refer to Finance & Personnel Committee d. AB #3623--Contributions to Municipal Arts Fund --Refer to Finance & Personnel Committee e. AB #3624--Ordinance Authorizing Interfund Loans to Capital Improvement Fund --Refer to Finance & Personnel Committee f. AB #3625--Ordinance Increasing Amount and Extending Due Date on an Interfund Loan --Refer to Finance & Personnel Committee g. AB #3626--ECO Center Project Financing --Refer to Finance & Personnel Committee h- AB #3627--Utility Rate Review --Refer to Utilities Committee 6. OLD BUSINESS a AB #3510--Ordinance Regarding Proposed Fee Changes for Public Works Department Services b. AB #3609--Commute Trip Reduction Act Interlocal and Implementation Agreements c. AB #3628--Ordinance Regarding Street Vacations (Plat of 1-90 Corporate Center) 7. NEW BUSINESS a AB #3629--Authorization to Submit One Grant Application to the Puget Sound Regional Council for ISTEA/Enhancement Funding (Rainier Blvd. S. Non -Motorized Corridor Improvements) b. AB #3630--1994 Computer Acquisition c. AB #3631--Mimi Robinson Arnold Trust --Easement Relocation d. AB #3632--Appointments/Reappointments to City Boards and Commissions 8. EXECUTIVE SESSION 9. ADJOURNMENT THE COUNCIL MAYADD AND TAKEAC7701V ON OTHER ITEMS NOT LISTED ON THIS AGENDA American Disabilities Act (ADA) Accommodations Provided Upon Request 31 Packet Page 75 of 360 GUNDURNES YOR PUBLIC LICE PARTICIPATION AUDIENCE COMMENTS PURPOSE: Allow the public to address the City Council on subjects that are not scheduled for a Public Hearing at that particular meeting. • This is not a question/answer session. • Questions/concerns will receive a written response within two weeks. PROCEDURE FR P RTf IPA I N-, • When recognized, use the podium • State your: Name Address Relationship to city (resident, property owner, business owner, etc.) Please limit your comments to 3 MINUTES • Submit written comments to the City Clerk PUBLIC HEARINGS PURPOSE: Allow the public to provide input/testimony to the City Council on a particular subject scheduled for Public Hearing. • This is not a question/answer session. • The Council will consider all testimony after the public hearing is closed. PROCEDURE FOR PARTICIPATION: • Sign up on the colored sheets in the lobby • When recognized, use the podium • State your: Name Address Relationship to city (resident, property owner, business owner, etc.) • Please limit your comments to 5 MINUTES • Submit written comments to the City Clerk OTHER When an appeal or other matter involving specific parties is heard by the Council, the Chair will announce whether public participation is available and explain the procedure. ,�Z, ISSAQUAH 32 Packet Page 76 of 360 CITY OF (206) 661-4000 33530 1ST WAY SOUTH FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003-6210 AGENDA FEDERAL WAY. CrrY COUNCIL Regul a-r Meeting Council Chambers - City Hall March 1, 1994 - 7:00 P.M. CALL MEETING TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE PRESENTATION SPIRIT Award for Month of March CITIZEN COMMENT (3 minute limit per person) V. CONSENT AGENDA., a. Voucher/March 1, 1994 - b. Minutes/February 15, 1994 C. Accept/File January 1994 Financial Report d. Resolution/Salmolux Change of Use e. Minor Code Revision & Priority Ranking f. Arts Commission Appointments V1. INTRODUCTION ORDINANCE Council Bill 0711ntroduction Ordinance/Temporary Use Permit AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE FEDERAL WAY ZONING CODE, ORDINANCE 90-43, BY AMENDING THE TEMPORARY USE SECTION 22- 546, ET AL, BY AMENDING THE DEFINITION OF "TEMPORARY. USE ,. -:. . BY DELINEATING SEPARATE,DECISIONAL PROCESSES. FOR CLASS I" AND CLASS II TEMPORARY USES, AND. BY EXTENDING THE TERM OF--., . TEMPORARY USF-,S.;F,-- (AMENDS ORDINANCE 90 -43)- over ..,please ... Packet Page 77 4;3"60 VII. CITY MANAGER REPORT Regional Perspectives VIII. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS IX. EXECUTIVE SESSION Property Acquisition/Pursuant to RCW 42.30.110(b) X. ADJOURNMENT �* PLEASE COMPLETE PINK SLIP & PRESENT TO DEPUTY CITY CLERK PRIOR TO SPEAKING. Citizens may address the City Council at this time. When recognized by the Mayor, please come forward to the podium and state your name and address for the records. PLEASE LIMIT YOUR REMARKS TO THREE (3) MINUTES. Citizens may comment on individual agenda items at times during any regularly scheduled City Council meeting, prior to Council discussions. These ferns include, but are not limited to, Ordinances, Resolutions and Council Business issues. These comment times are in addition to the Citizen Comment at the beginning of each regularly scheduled meeting. �r - z � �t. 0020.110.002 JEH/crd 03/24/92 rev. 03/26/92 rev. 04/08/92 ORDINANCE NO. 1679 Speaker's Time Limit AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF REDMOND, WASHINGTON, RELATING TO THE CITY COUNCIL'S RULES OF PROCEDURE, AMENDING CERTAIN SUBSECTIONS OF SECTION 2.04.070 OF THE REDMOND MUNICIPAL CODE IN ORDER TO ESTABLISH A TIME LIMIT PER SPEAKER FOR AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION, ADDING NEW SUBSECTIONS 2.04.255(C) AND (D) TO ESTABLISH THE NUMBER OF SPEAKERS AND THE TIME LIMIT FOR SPEAKERS IN QUASI JUDICIAL MATTERS, AND AMENDING SUBSECTION 2.04.260(1) TO CHANGE THE TIME LIMITS FOR SPEAKERS REQUESTING ADDITIONAL PUBLIC HEARINGS. WHEREAS, the Council desires to formalize certain rules of procedure relating to the number of speakers and the time limit on speakers in order to insure that public input at Council meetings is received in an orderly and efficient manner, now, therefore, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDMOND, WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Audience Participation. Subsection 2.04.070(c) of the Redmond Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (c) Audience Participation. Items from the audience, limited to a maximum of four minutes per speaker, will be received during the meeting at the appropriate place on the agenda to encourage citizen input and participation in Council meetings. _1_ JEH 16822.101=0.1 t oot Packet Page 79 of 360 35 Citizens may, at the end of the meeting, continue to address the Council. Section 2. Order of Business. Subsection -2.04. 070 (d) (1) of the Redmond Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (1.) Items from Audience (a maximum of four minutes per speaker); Section 3. Subsection 2.04.070(d)(3)(A)(i) of the Redmond Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (i) Hearing (a maximum of four minutes per speaker, provided, that the Council may, in its discretion, allow additional time where the complexity of issues involved requires more time in order to give the speaker a reasonable opportunity to be heard on the matter), Section 4.Quasi-judicial Matters. New subsections 2.04.255(C) and (D) are hereby added to the Redmond Municipal Code to read as follows: C. Whenever a quasi --judicial matter pending before the City Council has been the subject of a public hearing before the Hearing Examiner or Planning Commission, the Council shall allow only each side (proponents and opponents) to speak for a maximum of ten minutes each. No new evidence may be presented by either speaker, but testimony shall be limited to argument based upon the Hearing Examiner's or Planning Commission's --2- 7EHI6822.1010020.11002 Ordinance No. 1679 Packet Page 80 of 360 bur alr 36 record. All quasi-judicial items shall be noted on the agenda as being quasi-- judicial and a statement shall appear on the agenda indicating that each side may speak for a maximum of ten minutes each. D. Whenever the Council holds a public hearing on a quasi-judicial matter, whether an initial hearing or an additional hearing pursuant to Section 2.04.260, each speaker testifying before the Council shall be allowed to speak for a maximum of four minutes, provided, that the Council may, in its discretion, allow additional time where the complexity of issues involved requires more time in order to give the speaker a reasonable opportunity to be heard on the matter. Section 5. Requests for Additional Public Hearings. Subsection 2.04.260(1) of the Redmond Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (1) A representative of proponents and a representative of opponents of a recommendation or decision of a hearing authority may speak at a regular meeting for no more than four minutes each, provided, that the Council may, in its discretion, allow additional time where the complexity of the issues involved requires more time in order to give the speaker a reasonable opportunity to be heard on the matter. Section 6. Severability. if any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance. 3- JEii 16922.1010020.11002 Ordinance No. 1679 Packet Page 81 of 360 37 Section 7. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an administrative action, is not subject to referendum and shall take effect five (5) days after this ordinance or a summary thereof consisting of the title is published. ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, DORIS SCHAIBLE APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE F THE CITY A TORNEY: By: FILED WITH THE CITY CLE J, 04-01-92 PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: 04-07_92 SIGNED BY THE MAYOR: 04-14-92 PUBLISHED: 04-12-92 EFFECTIVE DATE: 01-1 7-92 ORDINANCE NO. 1679 -4- MM I R 22.1010020.11002 OF REDMOND 46 and 04-19-92 (Revised Title) UNTA367110191 Packet Page 82 of 360 38 WMCA Leavenworth March 1994 �} +� Open Public Meetings Act 4rV f I. Purpose of the Act —It is the intent of the Open Meetings Act that actions and deliberations of public agencies, including cities and towns, be conducted openly. The act is codified in Ch. 42.30 RCW. 2. General Principles a. Meetings must be open and public and all persons must be allowed to attend except as provided in the Open Meetings Act. b. Ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations, orders and directives must be adopted at public meetings or else they are invalid. C. A vote by a secret ballot at any meeting that is required to be open to the public is also declared null and void. RCW 42.30.060(2). 3. The act applies to all multi -member governing bodies of state and local agencies and their subagencies, which of course includes city and town councils. a. Subagency means a board or commission which is created pursuant to local legislation. This would include planning commission, board of adjustment, civil service commission, and any other formally established board or commission of the city. b. Governing body —This includes a subcommittee of the city council or other governing body but only if the committee is acting on behalf of the governing body, conducting hearings, or taking testimony or public comment. 4. Definitions a. Meeting means meetings at which action is taken. b. Action means the transaction of the official business of the city or town by the. governing body including public testimony, deliberations, discussions, considerations, and final action. C. Final action means a collective position or negative decision, or an actual vote by a majority of the members of the governing body on a motion, proposal, resolution or ordinance. 5. Regular Meeting —A recurring meeting held according to a schedule fixed by ordinance or other rule. a. No special notice of a regular meeting under the Open Meetings Act but later statutory enactments require governing bodies to establish procedure for notifying the public of all meeting agendas. This may be done by posting, publication, or other process as determined by the city. Municipal Research & Services Center ■ 1 39 Packet Page 83 of 360 WMCA Leavenworth March 1994 6. Special Meetings —Any meeting other than a regular meeting. This includes work sessions, study sessions, retreats, regardless of the term used to designate the meeting_ a.. May include more than one topic so long as proper notice is given. b. May be called by the presiding officer (mayor for the council) or a majority of the members of the body. C. Notice —Must be announced by written notice to all members of the governing body and members of the news media who have filed written requests for such notice. d_ Notice must be delivered personally or by mail twenty -fours in advance of the special meeting and must specify the time and place of the meeting and the business to be transacted. 7. Emergencies —There is an exception for emergency situations from the special meetings notice requirements. 8. Place of Meetings —The meeting does not have to be held within the corporate limits of the city or town under the Open Meetings Act. a. Until 1993, all meetings of third class city councils and town councils had to be within the city. Now meetings may be held where designated by the city or town council. However, any final action on an ordinance or resolution must be taken at a meeting which is being held within the corporate limits of the city or town. 9. Attendance at meetings may not be conditioned upon registration or other similar requirements. However, unruly or disorderly persons may be expelled from a council meeting. a. Tape recorders and video cameras probably cannot be prohibited if they are not disrupting the meeting. 10. Adjournments/Continuances—Any meeting may be adjourned or continued to a specified time or place. a. The clerk may adjourn the meeting to a time or place, if no members are present, by posting a copy of the notice on or near the door where the meeting was to be held. The special meeting notice requirements must then be followed for the adjourned meeting. b. An adjourned regular meeting continues to be a regular meeting for all purposes. c. 1f a regular meeting falls on a holiday, the regular meeting is to be held on the next business day. Election day is not a formal state holiday. 2 N Municipal Research & Services Center 40 Packet Page 84 of 360 WMCA Leavenworth March 1994 11. Executive Sessions ---The public may be excluded from executive sessions_ Only the mayor and the council have an automatic right to attend executive sessions. Minutes need not be taken of executive sessions. a. Executive sessions may be held for the following reasons (this Iist contains the most common reasons a city or town would hold an executive session): (1) Consider the selection of a site or acquisition of real estate if public knowledge would cause a likelihood of increased price; (2) Consider the minimum price at which real estate will be offered for sale or lease if public knowledge would cause a likelihood of decreased price; (3) Review negotiations on the performance of publicly bid contracts if public knowledge regarding such consideration would cause a likelihood of increased cost; (4) Receive or evaluate complaints or charges brought against a public officer or employee. However, upon request of the officer or employee, a public hearing or meeting open to the public shall be conducted upon the complaint or charge (5) Evaluate the qualifications of an applicant for public employment (including city manager) or to review the performance of a public employee. However, discussion by a governing body of salaries, wages, and other conditions of employment to be generally applied within the agency shall occur in a meeting open to the public. Also, final action on hiring, setting salary of an individual employee or class of employees, or discharging or disciplining an employee must be taken at a meeting open to the public; (5) Evaluate the qualification of a candidate for appointment to elective office. However, the interview of the candidate and final action appointing a candidate must be in a meeting open to the public; (7) Discuss with legal counsel matters relating to agency enforcement actions, or to discuss with legal counsel representing the agency litigation or potential litigation to which'the agency is likely to become a party if public knowledge regarding the discussion is likely to result in an adverse legal or financial consequence to the agency. 12. Before convening in executive session, the presiding officer must publicly announce the purpose for excluding the public and the time when the executive session will be concluded. It may be extended to a later time by announcement. Municipal Research & Services Center ■ 3 41 Packet Page 85 of 360 WMCA Leavenworth March 1994 13. Actions Not Subject to Open Meetings Act a. Collective bargaining sessions with employee organizations, including contract negotiations, grievance meetings and discussions relating to the interpretation of a labor agreement; and the portion of a meeting during which the governing body is planning or adopting the strategy to be taken by the city during the course of a collective bargaining, professional negotiation, or grievance or mediation proceeding, or reviewing the proposals made in the negotiations or proceedings while in progress. b. The portion of a meeting of a quasi-judicial body which relates to a quasi- judicial matter between named parties as distinguished from a matter having general affect on the public or on a class or group. c. The proceedings concerned with the formal issuance or denial of a license, permit, or certificate to engage in a business, occupation or profession. 14. Minutes of all regular and special meetings must be kept, promptly recorded, and open to public inspection. No minutes are required to be kept for executive sessions. 15. PenaIties or Remedies a_ Ordinances; rules, resolutions, regulations, or orders which are adopted in violation of the act are invalid. b. A member of a governing body who knowingly participates in violating the act is subject a $100 civil penalty. c_ A person who prevails against the agency in an action to enforce the Open Meetings Act is to be awarded all costs including reasonable attorneys fees. However, if the action is frivolous, then the court may award to the agency reasonable expenses and attorney fees. d. A person may sue for a mandamus or injunctive action to stop or prevent violations. 4 ■ Municipal Research & Services Center 42 Packet Page 86 of 360 ORDER OF HANDLING APPEAL HEARINGS: All land use related appeal hearings are as follows: 1. Staff report 2. Applicant 3. Appellant SEPA APPEALS: 1. Staff report 2. Appellant 3. Applicant manuahappeals 43 Packet Page 87 of 360 T'LJInrrrAI nAAIWrIKT/ AAf'%1rIf%KIC ass %:mU PRMLEGM MOTIONS are such that, while having no relation to the pending question, are of such urgency, O or importance that they are entitled to immediate consideration; relate to members, and to the organiza- t " n ortion, rather than to particular items of business. ; d N m d C � c` • SUBSIDIARY MOTIONS are those that maybe applied to another motion for the purpose of modifying it, de- `y m D n co IDy o m laying action on it, or disposing of it. 2 L 0 ti m c 2 Z a o W MAIN MOTION is the basis of all parliamentary procedure —provides method of bringing business before c` c — 0 o y '0 E o o the assembly for consideration and action. Can only be introduced if no other business is pending L m `6 m p NAME OF MOTION H � o W o 'FIX THE TIME TO WHICH TO ADJOURN No Yes No Yes M Yes a "ADJOURN No Yes No No M No J `RECESS No Yes No Yes M No a RAISE A QUESTION OF PRIVILEGE Yes No No No (1) No CALL FOR THE ORDERS OF THE DAY Yes No No No (2) No LAY ON THE TABLE No Yes No No M No PREVIOUS QUESTION No Yes No No 2/3 Yes cc LIMIT OR EXTEND LIMITS OF DEBATE No Yes No Yes 2/3 Yo5(3) ° POSTPONE TO A CERTAIN TIME (DEFINITELY) No Yes Yes Yes m (a) Yes H COMMIT (REFER TO A COMMITTEE) No Yes Yes Yes M Yes(s AMEND No Yes YES (6) Yes M Yes POSTPONE INDEFINITELY No Yes Yes No M onty MAIN MOTION No Yes Yes Yes M IYes (3) Unexecuted part may be reconsidered ?ased on Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised (RONR) (1) Chair grants (4) 2/3 vote if made a special order A main motion if made when no business pending (2) No vote; Demand (5) Only if committee has not started work Check RONR for specific rules (6) If applied to a debatable motion -INCIDENTAL MOTIONS are those (1) which arise out of a pending question; (2) which arise out of a question that has just been pending; or (3) that relate to the business of the assembly. Incidental motions usually apply to the method of transacting business rather than to the business itself. They have no rank among themselves because they are in order whenever they are incidental to the busi- ness of the assembly. Listed below are some of them which are most commonly used. MOTIONS THAT BRING A QUEST OI`+XGglt,+BEFORE THE ASSEMBLY (RESTORATIVE) are, as their name im- plies, motions which bring a question agalp before theassembly for Its consideration. Listed belowareths two that are used most often. NAME OF MOTION APPEAL CONSIDERATION BY PARAGRAPH OR SERIATIM Q DIVISION OF THE ASSEM$LY DIVISION OF A QUESTION z OBJECTION TO THE CONSIDERATION OF THE QUESTION PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY POINT OF ORDER SUSPEND THE RULES o RECONSIDER Ac TAKE FROM THE TABLE (1) If applied to a debatable question (2) Malori eb c- 10, o � n o a v C -'0 0 >o cI M a n wa �o �, rom O >o = an 0 ai ao as Yes No Yes Yes Ye$ (1! No M (2) Yes No Yes M No Yes No Yes Yes Yes No (7) No No Yes No No No Yes Yes Yes No No (3) No No No No Yes No M (4)01* No No (5) No No No Yes (1 No No No (6) 2/3 M No No No No No M No ty n negative required to reverse Chalrs decision (5) Chair answers (3) No vote; Demand (6) Chair rules (4) 2/3 against consideration sustains objection M In order if another has beenassignedfloor—ifthatmemberhasnot • 19M. Henrietta Marjan. Alf rights reserved. begtm to speak. To reorder specify Parfiamentary Oetck Reference" card Wolmar Parliamentary ElttMrises Packet Page 88 of 360 104 S. Aldine AvBltae, i= *, li Wt23-Bili}4 AM-5410 City Council Retreat - Friday, February 1, 2013 Meeting Date: 02/01/2013 Time: Submitted By: Department: Review Committee: Type: Jana Spellman City Council Information Information Subject Title Timeframe for Getting Items on the City Council Agenda Recommendation Previous Council Action Narrative Committee Action: 4. d. This item has been placed on the agenda to give Councilmembers an overview of the timelines required for submitting agenda items to the City Council Administrative Assistant. Attachment 1: Memo from Council Assistant Attachment 2: Agenda Memo Template Attach 1: Spellman Memo Attach 2: Agenda Memo Template Inbox Reviewed By City Clerk Sandy Chase Mayor Dave Earling Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase Form Started By: Jana Spellman Final Approval Date: 01/28/2013 Attachments Form Review Date O1/28/2013 01:17 PM O1/28/2013 01:28 PM O1/28/2013 01:29 PM Started On: 01/23/2013 01:47 PM Packet Page 89 of 360 P1 MEMORa*1VD UM Date: January 24, 2013 To: Councilmembers From: Jana Spellman Council Admin. Assistant Subject: Agenda Memo Timeframes Councilmembers, Following is a timeline for submitting agenda memos to me so that I can meet the City Clerk's deadline which is the Thursday before the next Council Meeting. Example: Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Agenda memo due to Jana by Jana submits 9:00 a.m. for next Tuesday's Council Agenda memo to City Clerk before Meeting noon for next Tuesday's Council Meeting Council Meeting However, if an agenda memo entails a lot of research by me for appropriate attachments, I really need it by 9:00 a.m. Monday before the next Council Meeting, i.e. for the Council Meeting of February 19th; I would need the agenda memo from Council on February 11t" If an agenda memo does not entail a lot of research or attachments, I will need it by 9:00 a.m. Wednesday before the next Council Meeting, i.e., for the Council Meeting on February 19t", I would need the agenda memo on February 131" The extend agenda is posted on the City's web site on the link below: http://edmondswa.gov/government/city-council/council-extended-agenda.html I realize that if Council agenda items are put on at the last minute, it might be hard for you to get them to me on time. In that case, I work with Sandy so she knows it might be late. Please keep in mind if a number of people are late with their agenda memos, it makes it very hard for Sandy to publish it by Friday afternoon. If you have any questions, please let me know. Thanks you. City of Edmonds Council O,fflce Packet Page 90 of 360 AGENDA MEMO TEMPLATE The portion of the agenda memo in blue is prepared by Council Assistant. AM - Edmonds City Council Meeting Date: Submitted By: Submitted For: Time: Department: City Council Type: Review Committee: Committee Action: Information Subject Title The portion of the agenda memo in yellow is prepared by the person requesting the item be placed on the agenda. * Recommendation Requester's responsibility. Previous Council Action Requester's responsibility Narrative Requester's responsibility Fiscal Impact Requester's responsibility Attachments Requester's responsibility *In certain instances, the Council Assistant assists with preparation of the yellow portion of the agenda memo. Packet Page 91 of 360 AM-5411 City Council Retreat - Friday, February 1, 2013 Meeting Date: 02/01/2013 Time: Submitted For: Councilmember Peterson Department: Review Committee: Type: City Council Information Information Subject Title Roles Recommendation Previous Council Action Narrative Submitted By: Committee Action: 4. e. Jana Spellman Chapter 4 (attached) of the Council Handbook is titled "The Job of a Councilmember". Councilmember Peterson would like to have a brief discussion about the roles of Council in a strong -mayor form of government to try to reduce the number of conflicts between the council and the administration regarding the difference between creating policy and administering policy. Attachment 1: Councilmembers' Handbook - Chapters 1-4 Link to Washington State Chapter 35A.12 RCW: MAYOR -COUNCIL PLAN OF GOVERNMENT http://a-pi)s.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.asi)x?cite=35A. 12&full=true Attachments Attach 1: MRSC Councilmembers' Handbook Chapters 1 - 4 Inbox Reviewed By City Clerk Sandy Chase Mayor Dave Earling Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase Form Started By: Jana Spellman Final Approval Date: 01/28/2013 Form Review Date 01/28/2013 01:17 PM 01/28/2013 01:30 PM 01/28/2013 01:30 PM Started On: 01/23/2013 01:48 PM Packet Page 92 of 360 i ", VIR-Dw ASSOCIATION i AM OF WASHINGTON Ci i i E S Councilmember's Handbook .M ASSOCIATION OF WASHINGTON Ci i i E S Association of Washington Cities, Inc. 1076 Franklin Street SE Olympia,WA 98501 (360) 753-4137 www.awcnet.org LER-*S Municipal Research and Services Center of Washington 2601 Fourth Avenue, Suite 800 Seattle,WA 98121-1280 (206) 625-1300 www.mrsc.org MRSC Report No.48, revised December 2011 Packet Page 94 of 360 Councilmember's Handbook Copyright © 2009 by Association of Washington Cities, Inc. and Municipal Research & Services Center of Washington All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the Association of Washington Cities, Inc. or Municipal Research & Services Center of Washington. AWC's mission is to SERVE our members through advocacy, education and services. Association of Washington Cities, Inc. 1076 Franklin St. SE, Olympia,WA 98501 (360) 753-4137 1-800-562-8981 www.awcnet.org MRSC's mission is working together for excellence in local government through professional consultation, research and information services. Municipal Research & Services Center of Washington 2601 Fourth Avenue, Suite 800 Seattle, WA 98121-1280 (206) 625-1300 www.mrsc.org Update November 2011 Packet Page 95 of 360 Foreword This publication is designed primarily for councilmembers, particularly newly -elected or appointed councilmembers. It contains a brief overview of the structure of municipal government in Washington State, and the role of the councilmember in that structure.The primary focus of this publication centers on the council meeting, which is where the formal role of the councilmember is normally exercised. No one publication can answer all of your questions, but hopefully this booklet will provide some guidance in regard to legal rules that affect conduct of the council meeting, as well as other procedural considerations that might make the meeting more productive. Supplemental sources of information on specific topics are listed throughout this publication. We particularly acknowledge the assistance of Patrick Mason and Jim Doherty, Legal Consultants, and to Carol Greene (retired) and Deanna Krell,AWC, for their work in the development of other publications, from which this handbook has been derived. Thanks is also given to Paul Sullivan for his work. Please accept our congratulations for assuming the responsibility and challenge of governing, and our best wishes for a productive term of office! Mike McCarty, CEO Association of Washington Cities Tracy Burrows, Executive Director Municipal Research & Services Center of Washington Packet Page 96 of 360 Packet Page 97 of 360 Table of Contents ChapterI — Introduction.............................................................................................................................. I Chapter 2 — Know Your Form of Government........................................................................................3 Chapter3 — Getting Started........................................................................................................................7 Chapter 4 —The Job of a Councilmember............................................................................................. I I Chapter5 — Budget Basics......................................................................................................................... 17 Chapter 6 — Resolving and Preventing Mayor -Council Conflict........................................................ 23 Chapter 7 —The Council Meeting............................................................................................................ 31 Chapter 8 — Citizen Participation at Council Meetings...................................................................... 39 Chapter9 — Ethical Issues..........................................................................................................................41 Chapter10 — Resources.............................................................................................................................43 Appendix I —Open Public Meetings Act................................................................................................ 51 Appendix 2 — Sample City Council Rules of Procedure for Mayor -Council Code Cities........... 53 Appendix3 — Public Hearings...................................................................................................................61 Appendix 4 — Sample Procedures:Appearance of Fairness and Quasi -Judicial Hearing .............. 63 Appendix5 — Meeting Tips........................................................................................................................67 Appendix 6 — Parliamentary Procedure.................................................................................................. 69 Appendix 7 — Keeping Out of Trouble....................................................................................................73 Appendix 8 — Initiative, Referendum, and Recall................................................................................... 75 Appendix 9 —The Mayor Pro Tempore ...................................................................................................77 Definitions..................................................................................................................................................... 79 Local Government Acronyms...................................................................................................................83 Packet Page 98 of 360 Chapter 1 Introduction It's no wonder that councilmembers often feel overworked and underpaid! Those Remember — when you who come to the job without having substantial experience in city government have a lot to Iearn.We hope this publication serves as both a basic primer on the role of a have a particular problem, councilmember, and also a resource with answers to some frequent problems. chances are somebody else Use this publication to learn how to get information, assistance and advice.When has already dealt with the your questions are not answered by the text, it will hopefully guide you to either the relevant statutes and publications, or to those people who can best answer your same issue. questions. Being an effective leader is not something which magically happens just because you are elected to office. Leadership skills must be Iearned.You will need to listen to the residents of the city, develop goals, then work effectively with the council to achieve your objectives.There are a lot of people counting on you.They want you to succeed and so do we. Good luck! Note: Unless the context or the references specifically indicate otherwise, the use of the term "city" or "cities" in this publication is meant to include "town" or "towns." Introduction Packet Page 99 of 360 Packet Page 100 of 360 Chapter 2 Know Your Form of Government Do you know your city's "classification"? It is important to know, and to know why that is so crucial.Also important are the different forms (sometimes called "plans") of government in Washington: mayor -council, council-manager, and commission. This section explains some of the basics.The city clerk can inform you of your city's classification. Almost all cities have an elected official with the title of "mayor," but the authority of the mayor depends upon the form of the government. Mayors in mayor -council cities are sometimes referred to as "strong mayors" because they have considerably more authority than mayors in council-manager cities.The distinction is explained below in the section on "Forms of Government." City classification There are four basic classifications for municipalities in the State of Washington: first class cities, second class cities, towns, and code cities. 4 classes of cities Though some of the state laws (statutes) are the same for all classes of cities, many • First class cities of the laws are different. State laws are located in different chapters of the Revised • Second class cities Code of Washington.The Revised Code of Washington, or RCW, is the compilation • Towns of the laws passed by the state Iegislature.When "statutes" are referred to, that • Code cities means the laws contained in the RCW. In 1890, the legislature established four classes of municipal corporations: first, second, and third class cities, and fourth class municipalities, known as towns.' However, in 1994 the legislature eliminated the third class city classification and those cities automatically became second class cities. Reference to fourth class municipalities was also dropped — they are now referred to exclusively as towns. An additional classification, the optional municipal code city, was provided in 196P ' First Class Cities: RCW 35.22; Second Class Cities: RCW 35.23;Third Class Cities: formerly RCW 35.24; Fourth Class Towns: RCW 35.27. Z Optional Municipal Code Cities: RCW 35A Optional Municipal Code Know Your Form of Government 3 Packet Page 101 of 360 What difference does it make? Depending on the city classification, there are some important differences with respect to the power and authority of the city government. Some of the differences are highlighted in this chapter. The optional municipal code, RCW 35A, was devised as an alternative to the existing statutory system of municipal government in Washington.The basic objective of the code was to increase the abilities of cities to cope with complex urban problems by providing broad statutory home rule authority in matters of local concern to all municipalities, regardless of population. Cities operating under the optional municipal code are commonly referred to as code cities. Under the optional municipal code, cities may take any action on matters of local concern so long as that action is neither prohibited by the State Constitution nor in conflict with the general law of the state.The powers granted to code cities include all the powers granted to any other class of city in any existing or future legislative enactment, unless the legislature specifically makes a statute inapplicable to code cities. Charter cities The Washington state constitution provides that cities and towns with a population of 10,000 or more can frame a charter for their own government, subject to all the general laws of the state.' All of the 10 first class cities have charters at this time. Only one code city, Kelso, has adopted a charter. 3 Constitution, Article XI, Section 10, as amended by Amendment 40. 4 Packet Page 102 of 360 Forms of municipal government There are three basic forms of municipal government in Washington: mayor -council, council-manager (also known as the city manager plan), and commission form. Sometimes the "form" of government is also referred to as the "plan of government" or "organization." Mayor -council form of government° In the mayor -council form, policy and administration are separated.All legislative and policy -making powers are vested in the city council.The administrative authority, including a veto power (except in towns), is vested in the mayor. Council-manager form of government All legislative and policy -making powers are vested in the city council.The council employs a professionally -trained public administrator, the city manager, to carry out the policies it develops.The city manager is the head of the administrative branch of city government. By statute, the mayor is selected by the city council from among its members, although this may also be done by election. The mayor's responsibilities are primarily to preside at council meetings, and act as head of the city for ceremonial purposes and for purposes of military Iaw.The mayor votes as a councilmember and does not have any veto power (RCW 35.18.190; RCW 35A.13.030,33 Optional Municipal Code cities). Commission form of government Only the city of Shelton has the commission form, which gives one elective body combined authority over the executive and legislative functions of municipal government.The commissioners, sitting as a body, are authorized to determine by ordinance the powers and duties of all officers and employees of each department. Each commissioner administers a separate department.The mayor has essentially the same powers as other members of the commission.The mayor has no veto power or any power to direct general city administration other than in his or her own department (RCW 35.17). 4 First, second class cities, and towns: laws governing the mayor -council plan are found in the respective RCW chapters for each class of city: RCW 35.22, RCW 35.23, and RCW 35.27.Optional Municipal Code cities: RCW 35A.12. 3 forms of government • Mayor -Council • Council -Manager • Commission Packet Page 103 of 360 Know Your Form of Government Change in classification or form of government Additional resources: The classification of a city or town can be changed. Cities and towns have the power Directory of Washington to advance their classification when the population increases sufficiently and there City &Town Officials MRSC, 2008 Lists each Washington city with address, phone number, population, class of government, and principal city officials. Code City Handbook MRSC, 2009 Town Handbook MRSC, 1992 is an election (RCW 35.06).A city or town with at least 10,000 inhabitants may become a first class city by adopting a charter.A town with at least 1,500 inhabitants may become a second class city (RCW 35.06.010). Any incorporated city or town may become a non -charter code city by following the procedures in RCW 35A.02. Any city may also change its form of government. In general, the procedure may be initiated either by a resolution adopted by the city council or by a petition process, both followed by an election. Washington cities classification & form of government summary Class Mayor -Council Council -Manager Commission Total First 6 4 0 10 Second 10 1 0 II Town 72 0 0 72 Code 138 48 1 187 Unclassified 1 0 0 1 Total 227 53 1 281 See MRSC's Directory ofWashington City &Town Officials for specific data on each city, its population, classification, and form of government. 6 Packet Page 104 of 360 Chapter 3 Getting Started So now you're a councilmember By their action at the polls, the people of your community have given you a vote of confidence and expressed faith in your ability to act in their best interest.And you don't want to let them down. But as the election campaign fades in your memory, the magnitude of your new job begins to sink in.Whether you come to this job after years of service on a city board or commission, or were elected with no prior background in city government, there's still a lot to learn. As a new councilmember, you have a lot to learn about providing leadership and governing. But don't take yourself or the business of government so seriously that you don't enjoy it. It should be fun as well as a rewarding experience. Your first days on the job Some new councilmembers are overwhelmed at first by all they need to learn and the amount of time involved.And others are surprised to discover there are limits on their role in making decisions and setting city policy. What is clear, however, is that it is a very big job. Here are some tips for getting started. Getting oriented First on the agenda for a new councilmember should be a thorough orientation session — a broad overview of the functions of the city, including finance, public works, public safety and other departments. Sit down with your mayor or city manager, and, with his or her authorization, the clerk, attorney and other key department heads.Take this opportunity to learn all you can about your city, its history, its operation, and its financing. Your orientation should also include a tour of the physical facilities of the city.A firsthand inspection is often the best way to acquaint you with the city's operations. Review key documents Here is a list of key documents you will want to review.Ask your clerk or other staff if they exist and to provide them for you, and to suggest other useful documents. • Current operating budget and capital budget • Information on key programs and services • Comprehensive annual financial report • Organizational chart, staff roster and phone list • The organization's primary planning documents • Map showing city boundaries, buildings and facilities • Mission statement and goals (if they exist) Keeping some perspective • Pace yourself. Recognize that life — and the city — is dependent on a lot of things over which we have little control. Set some priorities, recognize the need to spend time with your family, and don't burn yourself out. Develop a thick skin. Remember that they don't hate you personally, they just don't like your ideas. Packet Page 105 of 360 Getting Started 7 Council rules/meeting procedures Meeting minutes for last twelve months • Work program and significant staff reports from last twelve months • Personnel policies and other administrative policies • Facts about your city: population, form of government, incorporation date, number of employees, total budget, total debt, etc. • List of governmental agencies providing services or impacting your organization • Calendar of important events Don't be afraid to ask questions.You are not expected to know all the answers Keeping some immediately. Find out about council salaries and benefits, proposed development perspective ... projects — anything you need to know for a better understanding of city operations • The job of councilmember is and issues currently facing your community. a unique combination of stress and joy. Legal restrictions • Nurture your personal Keep in mind that your city's adopted ordinances, typically codified as your municipal life. Cutting back on family code, must be followed until the council takes action to amend them.And that's just hours won't make you a the beginning — the number of federal and state laws and regulations that also govern better mayor. your actions can be mind -boggling! If you are unsure of your responsibilities or authority in certain areas, be sure to seek clarification from your city attorney. • Be yourself. Don't try to be something you are not. Value and respect your staff If your city is fortunate enough to have experienced staff, recognize these individuals as a valuable resource — don't take them for granted and treat them with respect. Staff who have been with the city for some time have some valuable historical perspectives, and can help "fill in the gaps" for a new councilmember. Take it slowly Resist the urge to recommend drastic changes in the organization before you know how it really works. Many of your city's policies have evolved over the years through trial and error.While some methods may appear to need an immediate overhaul, it pays to watch the operation for a while before trying new methods. Don't seek change simply to do things differently! Give yourself at least six months to learn the fundamentals of the task you have undertaken. Many a potentially fine public servant has come to an unhappy ending because of errors in judgment he or she made by being overly aggressive during those first six months. 8 Packet Page 106 of 360 Public and private sector differences A word of caution ...You may have run for office with the pledge to "run the city more like a business." While there are certainly similarities, there are some important differences between the public and private sectors that will become apparent as you get used to your new role. Here are just a few of those differences: • Much of your work will be done in the public eye. Consequently, things may move more slowly and take more time.All deliberations of council are done in public meetings and most public records are available to the public. • City revenues are limited by Iaws.You can only raise taxes so high, so you can't always pass on the costs directly to the consumer. • There are more unions in the public sector. Salaries are often compared to employees in other cities. It is common for employees to expect an annual cost of living increase. • Public employees have different constitutional rights and more legal protections. With additional laws governing your actions as an employer, you can expect more grievances, claims and litigation. • Some things that you may just consider "good business sense" could run afoul of our state constitution's prohibition against "gifts of public funds." (See Article VII I, § 7 of the State Constitution.) • Public works projects and contracting often must go through a public bidding process.This takes more time and sometimes costs more. Getting Started 9 Packet Page 107 of 360 Practical Advice Helpful pointers from other elected officials. Initial words of wisdom ... • Listen. Listen to everyone. Listen until your ears fall off. Soak it up.After six months in office, you will round out the picture of the complexities of city government and your role. • Carry a notebook around for the first six months and write everything down. • Don't be afraid to say,"I don't know." • Don't make promises you can't deliver! Most major decisions and actions require approval of the council. • Gear your mind to process a tremendous amount of seemingly conflicting information. • Don't enter office with an unmovable set agenda. Learn as much as you can before taking on a major program or effort. Don't be strangled by campaign promises that were made without sufficient information. • If you come on board as a big critic of the "way things have been done," you may be surprised to find how hard the job really is.You'II soon gain a better appreciation for those who came before you. • The job can be very complex — try to stay focused on the big issues. Learn from others... • Ask for help when you need it. Don't be afraid to use outside resources (your attorney,AWC, MRSC, a neighboring city or county). • Don't be intimidated by larger cities — they have many of the same problems. • Network with others in the same boat. Meet with elected officials from neighboring communities, for example.They can provide support, new ideas, and give you an opportunity to vent. • Find an experienced mentor on the council. Ask for advice when you need help.You'II get empathy and a clearer vision from someone who has been there. • Ask opinions, and listen. Spend time with those individuals who have different opinions than yours (maybe even your opponent in the election). Listen, don't argue the points, then rethink your positions. E Packet Page 108 of 360 Chapter 4 The Job of a Councilmember The principal job of a city or town council is to make policy.A policy is a course of action for a community. Policy -making often takes the form of passing ordinances or resolutions. After policy decisions are made by the legislative body, others perform the administrative task of implementing the policies.The distinction between formulation and implementation may not always be clear, necessitating open communication between legislators and administrators. Adopting policy The council does not make policy in a vacuum. Councils rely on ideas from many sources, including the council staff, citizens' groups, advisory committees, chambers of commerce, and others. It is the council's responsibility to consider the merits of each idea and then approve, modify, or reject it. In doing so, councilmembers analyze community needs, program alternatives, and available resources.The decision often takes the form of an ordinance or resolution, although it may take the form of a rule, regulation, motion, or order.The budget and comprehensive plan are powerful policy tools that are adopted by ordinance. So, who actually runs the city? It is important to recognize that it is not the role of the councilmember to administer city affairs.The council sets policy, but it is either the mayor — in mayor - council cities, or the city manager — in council-manager cities, that actually sees that the policies are implemented.This means that it is not the role of the councilmember to supervise city employees on the job or become involved in the day-to-day administration of city affairs.This can be a source of conflict between the executive and legislative branches of city government. Responding to citizen complaints Residents often contact a councilmember when they have a problem, whether it involves a land use matter, a barking dog, or a pothole. Don't hesitate to send them to the appropriate city staff person for resolution of their problems, keeping in mind that you lack the authority to take action in administrative matters. The Job of a Councilmember I I Packet Page 109 of 360 AM-5412 City Council Retreat - Friday, February 1, 2013 Meeting Date: 02/01/2013 Time: Submitted For: Councilmember Peterson 4.L Submitted By: Jana Spellman Department: City Council Review Committee: Committee Action: Type: Information Information Subject Title Purpose of Sub -committees - Types of Items to be Reviewed Recommendation Previous Council Action Narrative Roundtable discussion of Committees. Inbox Reviewed By City Clerk Sandy Chase Mayor Dave Earling Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase Form Started By: Jana Spellman Final Approval Date: 01/28/2013 Form Review Date O1/28/2013 01:29 PM O1/28/2013 01:35 PM O1/28/2013 01:44 PM Started On: 01/23/2013 01:50 PM Packet Page 110 of 360 AM-5440 4. g. City Council Retreat - Friday, February 1, 2013 Meeting Date: 02/01/2013 Time: Submitted For: Phil Williams, Public Works Director Submitted By: Sandy Chase Department: City Clerk's Office Review Committee: Committee Action: Type: Information Information Subject Title Policies for Public Works Projects Recommendation Staff recommendations concerning Council procedures for Preauthorized Capital Projects (see narrative below). Previous Council Action Narrative Staff seeks to discuss shortening the timeframe necessary to get preauthorized capital projects on the Council agenda. In particular we would like to review with Council how Committees are used in the process of obtaining permission to issue Requests for Qualifications (RFQs) or go to bid on capital projects that have already been approved by Council. We believe that without any loss of project approval authority or fiscal oversight and control, the City Council has the ability to assist management in accelerating and ensuring the timely completion of preauthorized capital projects that are (1) listed in the approved Capital Improvement Plan, (2) listed in the approved finalized budget for the fiscal year, and (3) are capital projects for which funding has already been secured. Since the City Council has already considered and approved the capital projects in question prior to the annual budgeting process, as well as provided the resources to complete them, a layer of administrative redundancy is added to the process by requiring additional permissions from the City Council and its Committees to take these capital projects to bid. If the budget adoption ordinance as originally passed or subsequently amended contained language that pre -authorized all capital projects requiring bidding within the applicable budget period, capital project schedules could be shortened by five to six weeks. Moreover, if after a capital project is put to bid and assuming the recommended action is to award to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder (this is a legal requirement), staff could be authorized to place the contract award directly on the full City Council Agenda for discussion and action, an additional one to four weeks could be saved in a typical capital project schedule. The potential here is a shortening of capital project schedules by six to twelve weeks with the City Packet Page 111 of 360 Council still preserving all necessary fiscal control and budget authority. This would ultimately increase our efficiency by reducing overall capital project management costs and our effectiveness by allowing more work to get done in any given construction season. Form Review Form Started By: Sandy Chase Started On: 01/29/2013 03:39 PM Final Approval Date: 01/29/2013 Packet Page 112 of 360 AM-5428 4. h. City Council Retreat - Friday, February 1, 2013 Meeting Date: 02/01/2013 Time: Submitted For: Councilmember Yamamoto Submitted By: Jana Spellman Department: City Council Review Committee: Committee Action: Type: Information Information Subiect Title Council Executive Sessions Recommendation Previous Council Action Resolution 853 related to executive sessions (attached) was passed by the City Council on 9/16/96. During the July 17, 2007 Council Meeting there was a discussion regarding Executive Sessions (minutes attached). During that meeting Resolution 1150 (attached) was approved and placed on the August 8, 2007 consent agenda and approved. This agenda item was discussed during the 2012 City Council Retreat (minutes attached). It was discussed again at the March 20, 2012 Council Meeting (minutes attached). It was then discussed during the Public Safety and Personnel Committee on June 12, 2012 (minutes attached). This item was again discussed at the August 28, 2012 Council Meeting and referred back to the Public Safety and Personnel Committee for further discussion and clarification (minutes attached). The Public Safety/Personnel Committee had another discussion on this issue at their 9/11/12 meeting (minutes attached). The Council discussed this on September 18, 2012 (minutes attached) and passed the following motion: COUNCILMEMBER BLOOM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON, TO PULL ITEM 10, DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING TAKING MINUTES/NOTES DURING EXECUTIVE SESSIONS, AND SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING AT THE FIRST POSSIBILITY. MOTION CARRIED (5-1), COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON VOTING NO. On October 12, 2012 the Council held a Public Hearing on this issue (minutes attached). Narrative Packet Page 113 of 360 Council Yamamoto has placed this item on the agenda for discussion. Attachments 7-17-2007 Approved Council Minutes 2012 Council Retreat Minutes 3-20-12 Approved Council Minutes Resolution No. 853 Resolution 1150 6-12-2012 Public Safety/Personnel Committee Minutes 8-28-2012 Draft Council Minutes Mr. Nixon's Presentation 9-11-2012 Public Safety & Personnel Committee Minutes 9-18-2012 Draft Council Minutes Public Hearing Correspondence 10-2-12 Approved Council Minutes Inbox Reviewed By City Clerk Sandy Chase Mayor Dave Earling Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase Form Started By: Jana Spellman Final Approval Date: 01/28/2013 Form Review Date 01/28/2013 01:18 PM 01/28/2013 01:33 PM 01/28/2013 01:44 PM Started On: 01/25/2013 10:16 AM Packet Page 114 of 360 proposal adhered to GMA policies, met the GMA housing goals, fit within the surrounding uses, was suitable and met the value criteria. Councilmember Orvis spoke against the motion, commenting if allowing additional units on a site was required to get buildings upgraded, the entire City would be rezoned eventually which was contradictory to the changes, suitability and surrounding area criteria. Councilmember Marin spoke in favor of the motion, noting there were many requirements a developer must meet currently. He supported having the Planning Board consider the multi family zoning but cautioned against requiring sustainability as he was hesitant to mandate sustainability in private buildings. Councilmember Wambolt spoke in support of the motion. In response to Mr. Bernheim, he noted the benefit of the rezone and subsequent new construction which would be more energy efficient than the existing homes that were constructed in 1946 and 1966. Councilmember Plunkett commented in a quasi judicial hearing the Council could not consider what should be, only whether the applicant met the criteria with their proposal. He found the applicant met the criteria under the existing code, zoning and Comprehensive Plan. MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBER ORVIS OPPOSED. 10. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Term Limits Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, requested the Council consider term limits for Boards and Commissions as well as the City Council and the Mayor. Council President Olson cautioned him to avoid campaign Meeting issues. Next, Mr. Hertrich commented he could not recall a Council meeting being cancelled when he Cancellations was on the Council and he objected to giving the Council President that power. Council Rules 11. DISCUSSION OF CITY COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE INCLUDING: (1) of Procedure CANCELLATION OF MEETINGS, (2) EXECUTIVE SESSIONS, (3) GOVERNMENT ACCESS CHANNEL 21, AND (4) COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS. Council President Olson explained these issues were discussed at the recent Council retreat. Cancellation of Meetings Council President Olson did not envision this occurring very often, noting it occurred in the past due to the loss of the Police Chief. As it was not possible to talk to each Councilmember because that was considered a rolling quorum, there needed to be a way to cancel Council meetings. Councilmember Marin was satisfied with delegating that authority to the Council President. Councilmember Plunkett agreed. Councilmember Dawson envisioned it would be a rare occurrence for the Council President to exercise his/her authority to cancel a meeting. She acknowledged two meetings were cancelled earlier this year due to Police Chief Stem's sudden illness and subsequent memorial service. She found it inappropriate to require staff and/or Council to attend a meeting under those circumstances. She remarked it was a waste of public resources to schedule a meeting if there was no business as each Councilmember was paid, some staff members were paid, etc. She concluded it was appropriate to delegate that authority to the Council President. Councilmember Moore commented the proposed method was more efficient. She noted a Council President who cancelled meetings that the Council did not want to have cancelled would answer to the Council. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 17, 2007 Page 15 Packet Page 115 of 360 COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT, TO CancOrdellation of 36s6 ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 3656. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The ordinance reads as Canc Council follows: Meetings AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF THE EDMONDS CITY CODE, CHAPTER 1.04 COUNCIL MEETINGS TO ADD A NEW SECTION 1.04.140 CANCELLATION OF MEETINGS, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. Executive Session Councilmember Plunkett advised he requested a resolution be prepared regarding Executive Sessions. He recalled during the discussions of the park in south Edmonds over the past year, there was some confusion regarding what information was and was not Executive Session, whether the Council should discuss certain issues in Executive Session and in at least one instance the confidentially of an Executive Session was broken. The intent of the resolution was to identify a way for the Council to reach a consensus regarding when to break the confidentially of an Executive Session. He advised this resolution would accomplish two purposes, 1) if a Councilmember believed an Executive Session was taking place that should not, they could propose a motion to end the Executive Session and the Council could have discussion and make a determination during the public meeting, and 2) prevent any one member from revealing information that other Councilmembers believed was protected by Executive Session. Councilmember Dawson commented the resolution did not appear to address Councilmembers questioning whether the Council should be in Executive Session; she agreed it was appropriate for Councilmembers to have the ability to question whether a topic should be discussed in Executive Session. She noted the draft resolution also addressed the dissatisfaction expressed at the retreat with the way meetings were handled, the way Councilmembers were recognized and the number of times each Councilmembers could speak. Councilmember Moore agreed the resolution did not appear to provide Councilmembers a way to question an inappropriate Executive Session. City Attorney Scott Snyder advised a Councilmember could always leave an Executive Session that they felt was inappropriate. He noted the City kept minutes of Executive Session to satisfy the public at a future date that the Council discussed the appropriate issue. He explained the Council could reach consensus in Executive Session. If the Council agreed to discuss an issue in the open meeting, they could come out of Executive Session and make a motion to have the issue placed on a future agenda and/or request information be released. In the absence of a motion, the confidence of the Executive Session would be observed. He noted the resolution did not address the appropriateness of a subject for Executive Session because that was addressed in state law. Councilmember Plunkett recalled there were Councilmembers who revealed information that the Council had agreed should not be disclosed. His intent was to develop rules so that all Councilmembers had the same understanding. Mr. Snyder agreed, noting release of confidential Executive Session information was a crime and a potential basis for forfeiture of office. The resolution was intended to establish an orderly way to decide when Executive Session privilege ended. He concluded Executive Session information remained confidential as long as the Council felt it should remain confidential. COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MARIN, TO SCHEDULE APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 1150 ON A FUTURE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT, TO EXTEND THE MEETING TEN MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Committee Assi nments Council President Olson explained in the past some Council committee meetings were paid and others were not; in assigning committees, it seemed more prudent to simply pay Councilmembers for a Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 17, 2007 Page 16 Packet Page 116 of 360 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL RETREAT APPROVED MINUTES February 2-3, 2012 The Edmonds City Council retreat was called to order at 10:04 a.m. on Thursday, February 2, 2012 in the Brackett Meeting Room, City Hall, 121 5 h Avenue North, Edmonds, Washington. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Thursday, February Dave Earling, Mayor Strom Peterson, Council President Frank Yamamoto, Councilmember Joan Bloom, Councilmember Michael Plunkett, Councilmember Lora Petso, Councilmember Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember PUBLIC PRESENT Thursday, February Bruce Witenberg Darrol Haug Ron Wambolt Harry Gatjens Al Rutledge Roger Hertrich Evan Pierce Ken Reidy Bruce Faires Jim Orvis THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 2, 2012 — CALL TO ORDER STAFF PRESENT Thursday, Februar2 Al Compaan, Police Chief Jim Lawless, Assistant Police Chief Stephen Clifton, Community Services/Economic Development Director Phil Williams, Public Works Director Shawn Hunstock, Finance Director Carrie Hite, Parks & Recreation Director/Interim Human Resources Director Rob Chave, Planning Manager Carl Nelson, CIO Jerry Shuster, Stormwater Eng. Program Mgr. Leonard Yarberry, Building Official Rob English, City Engineer Mike DeLilla, Senior Utilities Engineer Tod Moles, Street Operations Manager Mary Ann Hardie, Human Resources Manager Cindi Cruz, Executive Assistant Kody McConnell, Executive Assistant Carolyn LaFave, Executive Assistant Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Sandy Chase, City Clerk Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst. Jeannie Dines, Recorder Council President Peterson called the meeting to order at 10:04 a.m. 0 Introduction/Brief Preview of Retreat Agenda Council President Peterson explained in preparation for the retreat he asked the Council, Mayor and staff to identify issues important for 2012. Most of the issues were included on the retreat agenda; some will be on future Council agendas throughout the year. Mike Bailey, Redmond's Finance Director, is ill and unable to make the presentation regarding budgeting by priorities. Finance Director Shawn Hunstock will introduce the topic today. Mr. Bailey will be invited to provide a workshop to the Council in the next few weeks to explore the concept in detail. Edmonds City Council Retreat Approved Minutes February 2-3, 2012 Page 1 Packet Page 117 of 360 Council President Peterson explained because this is a relatively young City Council with the majority of Councilmembers in their first term, roles and responsibilities of the Council was a topic that many identified. A consultant recommended by AWC will make a presentation tomorrow to review the relationship between City Council and Mayor in a strong Mayor/Council form of government. Council President Peterson briefly reviewed other topics on the retreat agenda. Councilmembers and staff introduced themselves. Audience Comments Darrol Haug, Edmonds, thanked the Council for their efforts. This is the third retreat he has attended and he enjoys the open, candid dialogue that occurs at retreats that does not happen at City Council meetings. Today is Groundhog Day; in this case the shadow looming is the budget issue. Because 2012 is not an election year, he suggested it would be a good time for the Council to continue the spirit of the retreat and establish a policy to solve the budget gap. Budgeting by priorities was studied by the levy committee and he urged the Council to consider that concept as a way to help the City. He looked forward to a concerted effort to identify policies early in the process and was hopeful the shadow of the budget gap would not be quite as looming next year. Al Rutledge, Edmonds, acknowledged the City did its best during the snow. He reported there was no mail delivery on SR 104/205`h or on 76`h for four days due to snow which could have been a problem for someone expecting medical supplies via mail. On the fifth day of the snow, a car hit a pole causing a power outage in the Lake Ballinger area. He suggested the situation be reviewed by the Police Chief. Next, he suggested the Council discuss the sale of Robin Hood Lanes and hold a public hearing. Council President Peterson referred to an email from Ken Reidy, Edmonds, regarding executive sessions. Mr. Reidy's email cited the preamble to the Washington State Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA) which states in part, the people of this state do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies which serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. In Mr. Reidy's opinion, state law requires the eventual release of executive session meeting minutes to the citizens such as after real estate has been purchased, after publically bid contracts are finalized or after pending litigation has been settled and/or all appeal rights related to the litigation have been exhausted. He supported the keeping of detailed minutes of all executive sessions and offered to work with elected officials to clearly establish the point in time that executive session meeting minutes will be made available to the citizens. Discussion about Executive Sessions and the Consequences of Minutes/Notes Council President Peterson explained there has been some question about what other cities in Washington do/not do with regard to executive session minutes/notes, when those minutes/notes are made available to public, pros and cons regarding attorney/client privilege and the concept of executive sessions. City Attorney Jeff Taraday provided the following introductory comments: first, there is a clear distinction between notes and minutes. Minutes may begin as notes but become minutes when the City Council has an opportunity to review and vote to approve their accuracy and in some cases make revisions which may include reviewing the audio of the meeting. Currently in executive session the City Clerk takes notes but those notes are never reviewed/approved by the City Council so they do not have the status of minutes. Second, Mr. Taraday was not aware of any other city in Washington that keeps notes of executive session. Municipal Research Service Center (MRSC) recommends against that practice. Edmonds began keeping notes of executive sessions in 1996 when Resolution 853 was adopted. Mr. Taraday read Resolution 853, Establishing a Procedure for Keeping and Retaining Minutes of City Council Executive Sessions. Edmonds City Council Retreat Draft Minutes February 2-3, 2010 Page 2 Packet Page 118 of 360 Mr. Taraday pointed out that although the resolution uses the term "minutes," he does not consider the Council's practice to be generating minutes. To the extent the Council deems that there is a public interest for making a record of what takes place in executive session, that record should be as accurate as possible. If there is a desire for a record, there should be an audio recording of executive sessions. Alternatively, the Council goes into executive session for a reason; the reason is stated before the Council goes into executive session and it is an executive session because it is a discussion that should not be public and no record should be made. Mr. Taraday recommended the Council either make a full record or make no record; to do what the Council is doing now is potentially misleading in that it is not possible to take down on paper everything that takes place in executive session. The Council raised the following suggestions/questions/topics (City Attorney's response in italics): • As an alternative to recording, keep notes of executive sessions and the Council review the notes and possibly in the future call them minutes. The resolution seems to state the Council wants to ensure there is a record stating the Council was in executive session for the right reason. There is no way to know that an accurate record exists unless there is a recording to back up the notes. The Council also needs to vote to approve minutes; the Council cannot vote in executive session. The Council could review the minutes privately and then vote in open session to approve them. If there is an interest in a fully accurate record of what takes place in executive session, the only way to ensure that is to record it. • Why not record executive sessions? The City has always asserted that if the executive session is for the purpose of discussing pending/potential litigation and the City Attorney is present, the notes taken during executive session are attorney/client privilege protected and therefore are not subject to public disclosure. However, there is no case law and there is no guarantee the court would rule that way. Therefore in the absence of a more clear statute about note taking/minute taking/recording of executive sessions, there is some risk that a court could rule that whatever record was made should be made public. He would, of course, vehemently object to that effort and would argue that any record of a discussion regarding pending/potential litigation should be treated as attorney work product or attorney/client privilege and not subject to public disclosure. • What topics are permissible for Executive Session and why don't other cities take notes? The reason other cities do not take notes is out of concern that the record cannot be protected from public disclosure. Mr. Taraday reviewed the permissible bases for executive sessions contained in RCW 42.30.110] (1). • The Council could continue its current practice but revise the resolution to conform to the current practice. If the current practice is continued, Councilmembers have some protection because they do not review or approve the notes taken of executive sessions. Mr. Taraday did not recommend continuing the current practice because if the goal is an accurate, complete record, it should be a record that can be verified later. • There are some issues on the list of bases for an executive session that should not have any record kept; the philosophy behind an executive session is to have an open discussion about sensitive issues such as personnel, potential litigation, and those should never be revealed to the public. The Council could record discussions regarding real estate matters; the Council could review and approve minutes in open session and possibly release them in the future. The Council would not record or take notes of all other executive session topics. The City Council could establish a policy to record certain types of executive sessions. With regard to the approval of minutes, there is no exemption from the OPMA for approval of executive session minutes; the City Council cannot go into executive session to discuss a change to executive session minutes. MRSC recommends that minutes not be kept of executive sessions because a public records request could be made for the minutes and there is no automatic exemption from disclosure that applies. • RCW 42.30.010 cited by Mr. Reidy states that the people of the state do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies which serve them. The Council should take full and complete minutes and record executive sessions and determine what can/cannot be revealed in the future. The risk of that approach is the Edmonds City Council Retreat Draft Minutes February 2-3, 2010 Page 3 Packet Page 119 of 360 executive session list of topics does not clearly say that a record of the executive session is not disclosable under the Public Records Act. • Why does Edmonds keep notes of executive sessions? MRSC recommends notes not be kept and most cities do not. There is no legal need to takes notes to comply with state law; it is up to the Council whether to preserve a record of executive sessions. It can be helpful in the future to check on topics the Council has discussed in the past. • Executive sessions give the Council an opportunity to have an open dialogue with staff. The philosophy of executive sessions is to have a frank dialogue, a recording would minimize that. • There may be short term reasons not to disclose executive session notes but not in the long term. If Councilmembers know what they say could eventually be disclosed, they may be more thoughtful in their questions and discussion. All executive session conversations should be disclosed in the future. The public has a right to know the information unless it is confidential and private. • Need to determine why other cities are not taking notes of executive sessions. The reason other cities do not take notes is clear in the statement on MRSC's website; there is no automatic exemption from disclosure. There is the possibility even in the short term that a court could require disclosure of a record the City Council thought would not be disclosed. A potential option would be to have the City Attorney take notes. His notes would be easier to protect as they are an attorney work product. • It would be unpractical to have discussion in executive session if Councilmembers have to think about what could be released. Recording or taking minutes for only some topics would also be difficult. There is the potential for a lawsuit with regard to any executive session topic and the Council has the fiduciary responsibility to limit/reduce lawsuits. Prefer no minutes be kept of executive sessions. It was the consensus of the Council to clarify, revise, rewrite the resolution. Council President Peterson will schedule it for consideration by the full Council during the first half of the year and take public comment. He asked Councilmembers to provide him their suggestions. Budgeting by Priorities Presentation (working lunch) Community Services/Economic Development Director Clifton explained one of the topics at an Association of Washington Cities budget workshop was budgeting by priorities/budgeting for outcomes. Councilmember Buckshnis, Citizen Darrol Haug and he and a few others then met with Redmond Finance Director Mike Bailey who reinforced their interest in the concept and determining whether it would be an appropriate budgeting process for Edmonds. Mr. Bailey, who is ill today, will be invited to conduct a workshop with the Council in the future to describe what it was like for Redmond to implement budgeting by priorities, and how it was received by the directors, elected officials and citizens. Mr. Hunstock explained Redmond spent 1-2 years and $160,000 on consultants to put a budgeting by priorities process in place. He referred to a handout from the Government Finance Officers Association regarding a priority -driven budget process that is similar to budgeting by priorities. He provided an overview of budgeting for outcomes: 1. Determine the "price of government" (total resources) 2. Determine priorities a) Example: one of Redmond's priorities was a safe place to work, play and live 3. Assign a portion of the "price" to each priority 4. Determine best way to delivery results by priority a) Results Team develop strategies/RFOs b) Program staff submits "offer (attempt to address goal), may be multi -department offer c) Results teams rank/scale offers 5. Results budgeting is focused on strategies to accomplish priorities Edmonds City Council Retreat Draft Minutes February 2-3, 2010 Page 4 Packet Page 120 of 360 Association of Washington Cities and the District Municipal Court Judges Association are also working on this. Councilmember Buckshnis asked Judge Fair's opinion about the recent Supreme Court decision to uphold the use of red light cameras. Judge Fair answered he was not surprised because the legislature gave that authority to the governing bodies in their enacting legislation. The dissenting opinion was that it was a moot point because it has been resolved by the City Councils. In reality it was a good issue to resolve because it has become a concern in many cities. 8. AUDIENCE COMMENTS There were no members of the public who wished to provide comment. 9. FLOWER BASKET DONATION PROGRAM Parks & Recreation Director Carrie Hite announced a new program, Adopt a Flower Basket. She thanked Councilmember Buckshnis for her assistance with launching the program and credited Jack Bevan for the idea. Ms. Hite distributed an Adopt a Flower Basket brochure. The program allows community members to donate $100 in support of each of the City's flower baskets. Each basket will have a name tag stating who this basket was donated by or in memory of. Councilmember Buckshnis donated the first $100 in memory of her dog, Buddy. Ms. Hite also thanked Recreation Manager Renee McRae who worked closely with Councilmember Buckshnis on this program. 10. DISCUSSION REGARDING TAKING MINUTES/NOTES DURING EXECUTIVE SESSIONS. Council President Peterson explained this issue was discussed at the Council retreat. He explained there are limited reasons under RCW for the Council to meet in executive session. There is legislation under consideration regarding the recording of executive sessions and limiting what must be provided via a Public Records Request. City Attorney Jeff Taraday provided an overview of the issue. The Council adopted Resolution 853 in 1996 which is when the Council began taking notes during executive sessions. He emphasized the notes that are currently taken are notes, rather than minutes. The distinction is minutes are reviewed and approved at a subsequent meeting by the body conducting the meeting. While the notes taken of executive sessions are generally accurate, they do not have a review and approval process. That is significant because it does not provide an opportunity for a Councilmember to review them or request a change. Mr. Taraday explained he has been uncomfortable with the current practice because in his opinion if the Council records the meeting, it should be recorded completely with an audio recording so there would not be any question regarding what really happened. The Council could then discontinue the practice of note taking. He pointed out Edmonds is one of the few if not the only city in Washington who keeps notes of executive sessions. It is up to the Council to decide whether to continue or change the current practice. Council President Peterson commented his intent was to have a discussion; he did not foresee any action tonight other than scheduling it on a future meeting agenda for public comment/public hearing and potential action. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 20, 2012 Page 7 Packet Page 121 of 360 Councilmember Bloom referred to SB 6109, recently passed by the Senate 39-9, exempting video and audio recordings of executive sessions. She recognized the bill had not yet been finalized. Mr. Taraday offered to research the progress of SB 6109 and comment later in the discussion. His understanding of SB 6109 was it may give Public Records Act protection from disclosure of executive session records. One of his concerns with taking notes is that although an argument can be made that the notes are attorney -client privileged or work product protected or both, there is not a clear exemption in the Public Records Act for executive session notes. Councilmember Buckshnis suggested amending Resolution 853 because the current practice creates notes, not minutes. Mr. Taraday agreed the Council either needed to change its practices to conform with the resolution or change the resolution to conform to the practice. Councilmember Buckshnis advised she was ready to do that tonight. Councilmember Bloom advised she was ready to begin recording executive sessions now. Mayor Earling pointed out Council President Peterson's intent that this item was for discussion only. Council President Peterson commented his discomfort with note taking, minute taking or recording executive sessions was because an executive session was an opportunity for the Council and Mayor with the City Attorney and preferably not the City Clerk to have a free flow of ideas and discussion on a limited number of sensitive topics including litigation, personnel, and real estate. He understood citizens' concerns that things might happen behind closed doors or that deals are being struck; the Council, Mayor and City Attorney keep each other in check should the discussion drift off topic. He recognized there is distrust in government, pointing out Washington was one of the first states to have a Public Records Act. The topics that can be discussed in executive session are not intended for the public and that is one of the reasons Councilmembers are elected. The ability for Councilmembers, Mayor and City Attorney to keep each other in check ensures the system works. Councilmember Bloom pointed out the RCWs address everything Council President Peterson said. The RCW identifies when the Council can have an executive session rather than a public meeting. The advantage of recording executive sessions is it would provide proof in the event of challenge. A judge would then review the recording and determine whether the Open Public Meetings Act was violated. It was her opinion that recording executive sessions would instill more trust. She concluded it was very important for the Council to "show our work." Councilmember Buckshnis commented she was undecided about this issue but in light of the personnel issues that occurred last year, feels note taking is the appropriate way to proceed in the future as they provide a record. Audio recording may be problematic because some Councilmembers prefer to speak less professionally in an executive session; that candor would not be possible if executive sessions are recorded. She did not support recording executive sessions unless only notes could be taken for executive session regarding personnel matters. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas agreed recording executive sessions would reflect positively on Councilmembers for the purposes of openness and transparency. Conversely, she questioned why Edmonds is the only city currently taking notes. This may be a moot point depending on what the legislature does. Mr. Taraday explained SB 6109 has not yet passed the House. If it were signed into law it would exempt video and audio recordings of executive sessions from disclosure under the Public Records Act. If someone made a request for an audio recording of an executive session, under this exemption the City would not be required to provide it. Currently if someone requests notes of an executive session, a roundabout argument has to be made regarding why the notes should be exempt from disclosure. The bill would provide an exemption for audio recordings but not for notes. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 20, 2012 Page 8 Packet Page 122 of 360 Councilmember Yamamoto commented for each executive session he has attended, Councilmembers know the topic in advance. The Council discusses only that topic and if anyone gets off track, another Councilmember, the Mayor or the City Attorney brings them in check. He appreciated the opportunity for Councilmembers to have a frank discussion; recording executive sessions could hamper that ability. He clarified the Council only has discussions in executive session and does not make decisions. Council President Peterson suggested the Council wait to see what the legislature does. There is currently no hard and fast laws regarding what can be exempted under the Public Records Act with regard to executive sessions. Until protection was provided, he was concerned that a Public Records Request could require release of sensitive information. If SB 6109 is not passed into law, the Council can consider amendments to the resolution. 11. CONTINUED DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDING EDMONDS CITY CODE SECTION 10.75.030(A)(2), EXTENSION OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION SUNSET DATE, AND OTHER ITEMS RELATED TO THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION Community Services/Economic Development Director Stephen Clifton explained the Council packet contains a draft ordinance and attachment which, if approved by the City Council, would amend ECC Chapter 10.75 regarding the Economic Development Commission (EDC). The Council discussed potential amendments on December 20, 2011, January 23, 2012 and March 6, 2012. During the March 6 meeting, the Council discussed four amendments: • Section 10.75.030(A)(2): insert language that the EDC would focus primarily on economic development related activities • Section 10.75.030(A): extension of the sunset date of the EDC approximately 4 years to December 31, 2015 • Section 10.75.010(B)(d): elected officials shall not be allowed to serve on the EDC but may serve as non -voting ex-officio members. This would also apply to elected Port Commissioners. • 10.750.030(C): staggering commission terms. Existing Commission members would be allowed to serve through the end of the year. Commissioners have indicated their interest in continuing to serve; approximately two-thirds expressed interest in remaining on the Commission. This will ensure some continuity and institutional memory on the EDC. Staff will advertise immediately to fill the remaining positions; terms filled this year would expire in 2014. Staff would re -advertise at the end of the year and either new Commissioners or existing Commissioners could be appointed. Appointments made in 2013 would expire at the end of 2015. Mr. Clifton explained another option related to staggering is to have terms expire at the end of the Councilmember's term who appointed the Commissioner. City Attorney Jeff Taraday clarified in addition to the ordinance, the Council needs to provide direction regarding staggering of Commissioners' terms. For Councilmember Buckshnis, Mr. Clifton explained approximately 5-6 Commissioners have stated they do not plan to continue serving on the EDC. Upon confirming existing members' desire to continue serving on the Commission, staff will advertise to fill the vacant positions. As the former Council liaison on the EDC, Councilmember Buckshnis commented there are often less than a handful of Commissioner present at EDC meetings. She suggested each Councilmember have an opportunity to appoint at least one Commissioner. As Chair of the former EDC, Councilmember Yamamoto clarified there was always a quorum present at EDC meetings. Most Commissioners informed staff when they would be absent and the absences were for legitimate reasons. He agreed there were a couple Commissioners who did not attend meetings regularly or notify of their absence. He agreed with the proposal to stagger terms. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 20, 2012 Page 9 Packet Page 123 of 360 0006.110.090 WSS/gjz 08/27/96 R:08/28/96gjz RESOLUTION NO. 853 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ESTABLISHING A PROCEDURE FOR KEEPING AND RETAINING MINUTES OF CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SESSIONS. WHEREAS, no provision of state law requires the City to keep minutes of executive sessions of its City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds it to be in the public interest to maintain summary minutes of executive sessions subject to release in accordance with the provisions of state law, if and when, the reason for the executive session expires; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds it to be in the public interest to provide a summary record of proceedings in order that, at some future date, the public may be advised of the substance of an executive session and in situations where such release is not appropriate, to have a record of the nature of the executive session in the event that its decision to close a session is judicially challenged; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council hereby authorizes minutes of its executive session to be prepared. Minutes may be kept by the City Clerk or her deputy, the City Attorney or another staff member designated by the Mayor. Such minutes shall be kept in summary form 141434.1 R - 1- Packet Page 124 of 360 specifying the subjects discussed and staff direction given, if any. Since no action as defined pursuant to chapter 42.30 RCW may be taken in executive session, no action will typically be recorded but, in the event that a consensus of the City Council provides direction to the staff, such consensus may be needed. Such minutes shall not be released pursuant to RCW 42.17.250 g1 = for as long as the basis for the executive session as defined by RCW 42.30.110 exists. Section 2. Release of minutes shall be undertaken in accordance with the provisions of RCW 42.17.250 et sect and RCW 42.30.110. Upon receipt of a written request for the release of Council minutes relating to any executive session, the City Clerk shall confer with the City Attorney and provide or deny release of such minutes in accordance with the provisions of state law. Section 3. In the event of conflict with any provisions of this policy and the state Open Public Meetings and Records Act, RCW 42.17.310, et seq, the provisions of state law shall apply as the same exists or is hereafter amended. All provisions of these policies shall be interpreted in a manner consistent with the provisions of state law in order to implement its policy of full public disclosure. RESOLVED this 16 day of 141434AR September . 1996 . -2- APPROVED: MAYOR, BARBARA S. FAHEY/—� Packet Page 125 of 360 ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: dry CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: 09/03/96 PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: 09/16/96 RESOLUTION NO. 853 141434.1R -3- Packet Page 126 of 360 0006.90000 WSS/gjz 5/31 /07 R:7/24/07gjz RESOLUTION NO. 1150 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF RULES OF PROCEDURE ADOPTED PURSUANT TO RESOLUTION NOS. 292 AND 463. WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to adopt additional Rules of Procedure to govern its meetings, now, therefore, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Clerk is hereby authorized to amend the Rules of Procedure adopted pursuant to Resolution Nos. 292 and 463 to include the following new provisions: 1.1 The Mayor or Chair of a City Council meeting shall make an effort to recognize Council Members in either the order in which they have requested to be recognized, or some other logical fashion, offering each Council Member who wishes to speak an opportunity to speak before other Council Members respond. 1.2 Executive Sessions: Prior to adjournment of an executive session, the Council shall, by consensus, determine what, if any, information may be released regarding the executive session. A discussion to release information shall be confirmed by voice motion in open session. The City Council can take action only in open session at a public meeting. In the absence of a motion and vote, no confidential information shall be released. In the event that, at a later date, the Mayor, Council President or a Council Member wishes to refer to or place {WSS663567.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 1 - Packet Page 127 of 360 information relating to executive session in the public record, the Mayor, on behalf of the Mayor or the staff or a Council Member, shall ask the Council President to place an item on an agenda for such a motion and vote. The Council Agenda item shall notify Council Members of the procedural issue to be discussed, but shall not itself release confidential information relating to the executive session. 1.3 Nothing herein shall be deemed to limit notice of the purpose of an executive session required to be announced under the Open Public Meetings Act. RESOLVED this 7th day of August, 2007. APPROVE MAY , , GArAAKENSON ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: r CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: 08/03/2007 PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: 08/07/2007 RESOLUTION NO. 1150 {WSS663567.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 2 - Packet Page 128 of 360 Minutes Public Safety and Personnel Committee Meeting June 12, 2012 Elected Officials Present: Councilmember Joan Bloom Councilmember Kristiana Johnson Councilmember Adrienne Fraley-Monillas Staff Present: Assistant Police Chief Gerry Gannon Sandy Chase, City Clerk Jeannie Dines, Recorder The meeting was called to order at 6:06 p.m. by Councilmember Bloom. A. Snohomish Regional Drug & Gang Task Force, 2012 — 2013 Interlocal Agreement Assistant Police Chief Gannon described the Snohomish Regional Drug & Gang Task Force (SRDGTF) Interlocal Agreement. In addition to the SRDGTF, he pointed out that Edmonds also participates in the South Snohomish County Narcotics Task Force with the cities of Lynnwood and Mountlake Terrace. The two task forces work closely and assist each other with staffing and equipment. Mr. Gannon requested that the committee approve the placement of the Interlocal Agreement on the City Council Consent Agenda. Responding to questions from Councilmember Bloom concerning how the fees are calculated for the Interlocal Agreement, Mr. Gannon stated the fees are based on population. Edmonds fee is $9,939 for July 1, 2012 through June 30, 2013 (a decrease of $59 over last year's fee). Councilmember Johnson had specific questions regarding the agreement which Mr. Gannon responded to. In particular Councilmember Johnson asked questions pertaining to the participation of certain cities/entities and why they were listed in the agreement. Mr. Gannon clarified that the interlocal agreement originates from the Snohomish County Sheriff's Office. Edmonds' participation is just the funding. He stated that he would provide additional information following this meeting to further respond to Councilmember Johnson's questions. Action: Assistant Chief of Police Gannon to provide additional information to the Committee. The Committee approved placing the agreement on the City Council Consent Agenda. B. Discussion Regarding Taking Minutes/Notes During Executive Session Councilmember Bloom suggested in addition to discussing whether to take minutes/notes during executive session, the discussion include whether executive sessions should be recorded. She acknowledged there may be some executive sessions that should never be recorded such as those regarding personnel. Councilmember Bloom explained Resolution 853 states the Council takes minutes of executive sessions and at some point the minutes will be available to the public if the reason for the Packet Page 129 of 360 executive session has expired. The issue is staff takes summary notes which are not approved by Council so they are not technically minutes. A discussion with the residents who were present ensued. Their comments included the following: Ron Wambolt, Edmonds, asked whether Councilmembers Bloom and Johnson had reviewed the materials from the Council retreat. Councilmember Johnson said she had and Councilmember Bloom said she was present at the retreat. Mr. Wambolt pointed out Mr. Reidy has done a great deal of research regarding this issue. Ken Reidy, Edmonds, acknowledged this was a complicated issue; taking minutes/notes was important to him because he believes citizens would get better representation by their elected officials and more honest government if the City Council and Mayor knew eventually the minutes of Executive Sessions could be released to the public in certain situations. Resolution 853 requires minutes be kept; if minutes require an audio or video recording, executive sessions should be recorded. Resolution 853 also addresses the concept of minutes being subject to release when the reason for the executive session expires. He acknowledged Edmonds is unique; he was not aware of any other cities that keep executive session minutes. This is an opportunity to build trust in local governance and for Edmonds to be a leader in transparency. He hoped the Council would go in that direction rather than to discontinue keeping minutes/notes. Diane Talmadge, Edmonds, commented a resolution was non -binding, she preferred the requirement be contained in an ordinance. She felt tensions build when elected officials know what occurs in executive sessions and citizens do not. Recording or minutes of executive sessions would bring tensions into balance and elected officials would be aware that the minutes could be released at a later date. If there are no recording/notes, executive sessions seem like secret meetings. The people's right to know is of greater importance than elected officials' right to discuss it without anyone looking. Ms. Talmadge said executive session minutes would also allow Councilmembers to refresh their memory if necessary regarding what was discussed in executive session. She wanted the public and the Council protected because it ultimately saved the City money. Damon Pistulka, Edmonds, commented a Councilmember could be presented information in an executive session that is later contradicted. Without documentation, there is nothing to substantiate the information provided in executive session. It was beneficial for all parties to have notes/minutes of executive sessions, especially in litigation. Current and future Councilmembers could also review notes/minutes of an executive session. Bruce Witenberg, Edmonds, suggested the City Attorney make a presentation at a Council meeting similar to the presentation at the retreat, including addressing public comments that have been made since that presentation. With regard to release of executive session minutes/notes, he commented that although a litigation or real estate matter may have been concluded, the City may use the same tactics and strategies in future negotiations/litigation; having that information made public could be a disadvantage to the City. The reason for the executive session and the passage of time are not the only criterion for releasing information. Other issues to consider include preserving the attorney/client privilege in an executive session and inadvertent disclosure if notes/minutes/recordings are kept of executive sessions. He suggested the City Attorney's presentation also clarify who is the client in executive sessions. Packet Page 130 of 360 Mr. Reidy suggested also having a proponent of open government address the City Council in addition to the City Attorney to provide a balanced viewpoint. Even if executive session minutes are never released to the public, it is important to have executive sessions recorded and detailed minutes kept. Councilmember Bloom asked whether other cities record their executive session. City Clerk Sandy Chase said Edmonds is the only city she knows of that takes minutes/notes of executive sessions. Mr. Reidy noted Resolution 853 was passed on September 16, 1996 on the Consent Agenda; he asked whether there was any previous discussion. Ms. Chase recalled the City Council was holding a number of executive sessions at the time and there were similar concerns expressed; Resolution 853 was a response to the concerns at that time. Councilmember Bloom referred to SB 6109 which would have required a judge to review the audio recording if there was a public record request of an executive session to determine if it was truly necessary to hold an executive session. She asked why the Senate proposed that bill if other cities do not document their executive session. Ms. Chase stated her understanding that it may be due to efforts by Washington Coalition for Open Government (WCOG) and others. Mr. Pistulka commented executive session notes would be helpful regardless of whether they are released. He cited the example of business board meeting notes that provide useful information. Councilmember Johnson observed there is a balance between the public's right/need/desire to know, risk assessment and the attorney/client privilege. Resolution 853 was a compromise in an attempt to appease all parties. However, the language in the resolution does not necessarily reflect the practice. Minutes require approval, notes do not. She suggested determining whether to modify the resolution or the practice. She supported having a presentation from the City Attorney on this subject at the full Council. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas suggested having a presentation from AWC and WCOG as well. Councilmember Johnson suggested MRSC as an additional resource. Other topics discussed included increased frequency of executive sessions this year, redaction of information in executive session minutes, the City Attorney's presence at executive session, and assessing risk. Action: At next week's meeting the City Attorney make a presentation, to be followed by Council discussion with the goal of a future public hearing and further input from AWC, WCOG, etc. C. Public Comments Public comment occurred during Agenda Item B. Adjourn: 8:21 p.m. Packet Page 131 of 360 distributed to different groups around the county. The ESSP is studying a standardized permitting process. Because this is new technology, many jurisdictions do not have a permitting process to address it. The ESSP will likely make a recommendation regarding fees, but each jurisdiction will establish its own fees. Councilmember Buckshnis pointed out without a permit, the City would not know how many residences have solar systems. She supported lowering the permit fee to provide incentive for solar installations. She asked about Exhibit 1 in the packet, Community Solar Fee Comparison. Mr. Yarberry advised the numbers were provided by Mr. Bernheim and were used by staff to calculate a baseline fee for Phase 1 of the Frances Anderson Center project. Councilmember Johnson suggested evaluating the amount of time spent on plan review and inspection in determining the fee for a commercial solar installation. Council President Peterson observed if the Council took no action, staff would continue with the fee structure for residential installations as described. Mr. Yarberry agreed. Council President Peterson observed waiving fees would require Council action. Mr. Yarberry agreed. Council President Peterson disclosed he owns a slice of the solar installation on the Frances Anderson Center and has promised to donate any profits from it to Sustainable Edmonds. The Council took no action with regard to this item. 7. DISCUSSION REGARDING TAKING MINUTES/NOTES DURING EXECUTIVE SESSIONS. Council President Peterson explained the Council began discussing the taking of minutes/notes during executive sessions at the 2012 Council retreat. Upon further Council and Committee direction, he was asked to schedule a broader discussion along with presentations from outside interested parties. Jim Doherty, Legal Consultant, Municipal Research Service Center (MRSC), explained MRSC has functioned in Washington for over 75 years as an advisory group to cities, counties and special purpose districts on a wide range of issues. MRSC has 25 staff members including 6 attorneys, 2 planners, a finance consultant, policy consultants and has the most extensive local government library in the State. MRSC's website, www.MRSC.orc, is open to the public. He has been with MRSC for over 19 years and authors and updates the Public Records Act (PRA) publication as well as has addressed many questions over the years regarding Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA) issues. Mr. Doherty relayed he had reviewed Council minutes where the issue of taking minutes/notes during executive session had been discussed and City Attorney Taraday's input regarding the pattern in Washington cities. He was also provided an email from Ken Reidy that contained a blog post and responses regarding this issue. Mr. Doherty relayed MRSC is not aware of any cities in the State of Washington that take minutes of executive sessions or record executive sessions. He found a reference that was confirmed by Mr. Nixon that the Port of Seattle records their executive sessions because of scrutiny by the State Auditor's Office due to past problems. MRSC's advice to cities over the last 20 years is that cities not take minutes of executive sessions. He clarified it was not that MRSC was for or against open government, as a practical matter there is some uncertainty regarding the status of minutes of executive sessions because they usually are not taken; there is no specific exemption in the PRA for minutes of executive sessions. MRSC's position is cautious; their advice is why create a problem that cities do not need. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes August 28, 2012 Page 5 Packet Page 132 of 360 Mr. Doherty explained the purpose of minutes is an official record of action taken by the Council. Executive sessions are discussion and not final action; any action is taken during open session. Thus the purpose of minutes of an executive session is not clear because no action is taken. Councilmember Buckshnis expressed her appreciation for the work MRSC does for city officials, recalling she utilized their resources regarding financial transparency. She asked about taking notes of executive session rather than minutes. Mr. Doherty asked who would take the notes. If a Councilmember takes notes in executive session for their own use, they are similar to notes taken during an open Council meeting. There is case law that supports the view that those are public records, they are a Councilmember's own personal notes, not taken at the request of the City, and not used by the City. He cited Jacobellis v. Bellingham where the court found personal notes are not a public record. Councilmember Buckshnis asked about notes taken by the City Clerk. Mr. Doherty answered if those notes are minutes, a record of the executive session, under one statute they are not open to public inspection. He noted it is unclear as the statute was written long before the PRA was adopted. Councilmember Petso asked about the statute that distinguishes Clerk's notes from a public record. Mr. Doherty answered RCW 42.32.030 which was passed in 1953 and has never been amended. Councilmember Johnson observed one question is whether a written record should be kept of executive sessions. She asked what should be done with the records maintained of executive sessions over the past seven years if the Council decided to stop keeping a written record; should they be destroyed or were they subject to public record requests. Mr. Doherty answered their destruction would depend on how the records retention schedule applied to those records. The retention schedule for minutes of regular Council meeting minutes requires they be kept permanently. He was uncertain whether that would apply to notes of an executive session. With regard to public records requests for those notes, he referred the Council to the City Attorney. He recognized many of the notes are related to attorney -client privilege where exemptions clearly apply. Councilmember Johnson commented if the Council chose to stop taking minutes of executive sessions, the Council could audio record executive sessions. She asked whether Mr. Doherty knew of any other cities, other than the Port of Seattle, that audio record their executive sessions. Mr. Doherty answered he did not. He pointed out there is no exemption that applies to an audio recording, whether video or voice, and if no exemption applies, it must be disclosed. If the City made an audio recording of an executive session and someone requested it, the City would need to provide it. That could be problematic if the Council was discussing a real estate purchase or other sensitive issues. Councilmember Johnson commented she had not heard that before; it was a key point. Mr. Doherty commented there was legislation pending this year and in past years regarding recording of executive sessions but it included a provision that any challenge would require a judge review the recording in chambers and exemptions would apply. That legislation did not pass and there is currently no exemption in the law for a recording of an executive session. Unless that is clarified, he recommended cities not record executive sessions. Councilmember Johnson asked whether any legislation regarding recording of executive sessions was anticipated in the next legislative session. Mr. Doherty answered that was difficult to anticipate; it has been raised in the past and has not been passed. It may be introduced again as the Coalition for Open Government and other groups believe it is an important issue. Councilmember Johnson summarized Mr. Doherty's recommendation was that the City do not maintain written records or audio recordings of executive sessions and whatever records of executive sessions the City has created would be maintained in accordance with the records retention schedule. Mr. Doherty agreed with her summary. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes August 28, 2012 Page 6 Packet Page 133 of 360 Toby Nixon, President, Washington Coalition for Open Government (WCOG), explained he is a former member of the State Legislature, served as ranking member on a Committee of the House that had responsibility for the open government laws of Washington, and is currently a City of Kirkland Councilmember, elected in November 2011. Mr. Nixon commented this has been one of WCOG's highest priority issues for several years. WCOG is a statewide non-profit, non -partisan organization dedicated to defending and extending the people's right to know what their government is doing. WCOG focuses most of its energy on the PRA and OPMA but also works on open courts, open legislative process, open rule -making processes, follows the workings of the Public Disclosure Commission, disclosure of campaign finance and lobbyist information, whistle -blower laws, ethics laws, and anything related to transparency and accountability in government. This is accomplished via four programs: education, litigation, legislation and recognition. He relayed language from RCW 42.30.010, "The legislature finds and declares that all public commissions, boards, councils, committees, subcommittees, departments, divisions, offices, and all other public agencies of this state and subdivisions thereof exist to aid in the conduct of the people's business. It is the intent of this chapter that their actions be taken openly and that their deliberations be conducted openly. The people of this state do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies which serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may retain control over the instruments they have created." Mr. Nixon provided a definition of executive session: "Executive sessions are meetings allowed (but not required) to be closed to the public because the people, through their legislative representatives, have determined that it is more in the public interest than not that the specific information to be discussed be kept secret for some period of time." To the question of whether recordings should be made, Mr. Nixon said yes. Agencies can choose today to make audio or video recordings, or to keep notes or minutes, of executive sessions. There is no prohibition of such recordings. Recordings can be useful for a number of agency purposes: • To resolve disagreements over what transpired or was said • To hold attorneys and others accountable for advice given or information provided in closed meetings • To allow newly -appointed or newly -elected members of the body to catch up on previous executive session discussions • To improve the ability of the agency to defend itself if it is accused of having an inappropriate discussion in an executive session Mr. Nixon relayed reasons some many do not want executive sessions recorded: • Would interfere with frank, honest, free -flowing conversations. He emphasized that is the point, executive sessions should be limited to only the allowed topic and nothing more. Members should not need to be behind closed doors to have a frank and honest discussion. • Recording is expensive. He cited the reasonable cost of a digital audio recorder. Operation is trivial. The recorder can be plugged into a PC via USB cable and recordings transferred to a secure server, and be as well protected as any other confidential electronic city records. No need for expensive safes, locked file cabinets, or large amounts of storage space. • Risk of disclosure under the Public Records Act. Mr. Nixon relayed information from RCW 42.56.010 Definitions, of "public record" and "writing," agreeing that audio recordings are records, including voicemails. He acknowledged recordings are not automatically exempt. Recordings of several of the allowed topics for executive sessions would be exempt from disclosure, but not all. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes August 28, 2012 Page 7 Packet Page 134 of 360 Mr. Nixon explained the Port of Seattle Digitally records all executive sessions. They submit records to outside counsel for periodic review for compliance. They have not had many requests for disclosure although who knows what will happen with current controversy. Mr. Nixon described the allowable topics for executive session (RCW 42.30.110) and his response to each (in italics): (a) To consider matters affecting national security. Rarely applies to cities. Some topics covered under 42.56.420 (security plans and vulnerabilities, prevention of terrorist acts). (b) To consider the selection of a site or the acquisition of real estate by lease or purchase when public knowledge regarding such consideration would cause a likelihood of increased price. (c) To consider the minimum price at which real estate will be offered for sale or lease when public knowledge regarding such consideration would cause a likelihood of decreased price. However, final action selling or leasing public property shall be taken in a meeting open to the public. Real estate appraisals are covered by 42.56.260, but not discussion of price willing to pay or sell for, or the fact that the city is interested in the property. (d) To review negotiations on the performance of publicly bid contracts when public knowledge regarding such consideration would cause a likelihood of increased costs. Not covered by any known PRA exemption. (f) To receive and evaluate complaints or charges brought against a public officer or employee. However, upon the request of such officer or employee, a public hearing or a meeting open to the public shall be conducted upon such complaint or charge. Records of complaints against public employees are disclosable unless determined to be unsubstantiated or false. 42.56.230(3), Bellevue John Does v. Bellevue School District. Some records may be exempt under the investigatory records exemption, 42.56.240(1). Identity of persons filing complaints may be exempt under 42.56.240(2) if their life, safety, or property may be endangered by disclosure, and they request non -disclosure. (g) To evaluate the qualifications of an applicant for public employment or to review the performance of a public employee. However, subject to RCW 42.30.140(4), discussion by a governing body of salaries, wages, and other conditions of employment to be generally applied within the agency shall occur in a meeting open to the public, and when a governing body elects to take final action hiring, setting the salary of an individual employee or class of employees, or discharging or disciplining an employee, that action shall be taken in a meeting open to the public; Names, resumes, other application materials are exempt from disclosure under 42.56.250(2). No exemption for other content of discussion. (h) To evaluate the qualifications of a candidate for appointment to elective office. However, any interview of such candidate and final action appointing a candidate to elective office shall be in a meeting open to the public; Not exempt under PRA. (i) To discuss with legal counsel representing the agency matters relating to agency enforcement actions, or to discuss with legal counsel representing the agency litigation or potential litigation to which the agency, the governing body, or a member acting in an official capacity is, or is likely to become, a party, when public knowledge regarding the discussion is likely to result in an adverse legal or financial consequence to the agency. All materials are likely exempt under RCW 42.56.290 or 5.60.060(2)(a), which are broader than the allowed purposes for executive sessions for attorney -client communication, and include all "attorney work product". Topics for executive session not applicable to cities include: (e) ...export trading company...; 0) ...state library...; Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes August 28, 2012 Page 8 Packet Page 135 of 360 (k) ...state investment board...; (1) ... state purchased health care services... ; (m) ...life sciences discovery fund authority... ; (n) ...health sciences and services authority...; (o) ...innovate Washington... Mr. Nixon referred to RCW 42.30.140 that describes meetings that are not technically "executive sessions," in that they do not require the agency to first convene in an announced public meeting, declare the purpose and duration of the closed meeting, and then return to public session to adjourn. He explained "140" meetings can be entirely secret, although many agencies treat them the same as "110" executive sessions. Mr. Nixon reviewed the four types of meetings described in RCW 42.30.140 and his response to each (in italics): (1) The proceedings concerned with the formal issuance of an order granting, suspending, revoking, or denying any license, permit, or certificate to engage in any business, occupation, or profession or to any disciplinary proceedings involving a member of such business, occupation, or profession, or to receive a license for a sports activity or to operate any mechanical device or motor vehicle where a license or registration is necessary; or Business license proceedings occur in cities, but are not exempt under the PRA. (2) That portion of a meeting of a quasi-judicial body which relates to a quasi-judicial matter between named parties as distinguished from a matter having general effect on the public or on a class or group; or Cities have quasi-judicial discussions for permitting, etc. Not exempt under the PRA. (3) Matters governed by chapter 34.05 RCW, the Administrative Procedure Act; or Does not apply to cities. (4)(a) Collective bargaining sessions with employee organizations, including contract negotiations, grievance meetings, and discussions relating to the interpretation or application of a labor agreement; or (b) that portion of a meeting during which the governing body is planning or adopting the strategy or position to be taken by the governing body during the course of any collective bargaining, professional negotiations, or grievance or mediation proceedings, or reviewing the proposals made in the negotiations or proceedings while in progress. Information regarding unfair practices exempt under 42.56.250(4) and (5). Otherwise, not exempt under PRA. Mr. Nixon relayed WCOG's support for enactment of additional PRA exemptions: • Specific public records exemptions to cover each of the executive session topics, even if the material is discussed in writing rather than in an executive session. • Blanket public records exemption for all recordings, minutes, and notes of executive sessions. This would also cover materials prepared by staff for review during executive sessions. Materials provided in executive session today are not exempt from disclosure under the PRA unless communications from the City Attorney protected by attorney -client privilege. In the meantime, WCOG recommends Council's be selective; have a policy to not record executive sessions when the discussion would not be exempt from the PRA, or retain only a high-level summary of the nature of the discussion without the key details. They recommend cities consider the benefits of recordings or notes on key topics that would be exempt from disclosure. For example because there is a broad exemption for attorney -client privilege communications and since attorney -client communications are the most frequent purpose for executive sessions, the Council may decide to record those executive sessions. Mr. Nixon provided WCOG's contact information: Washington Coalition for Open Government, 6351 Seaview Avenue NW, Seattle, WA 98107; (206) 782-0393; info @washin tg oncog.org; www.washin tg oncog.org. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes August 28, 2012 Page 9 Packet Page 136 of 360 Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked why no cities in the State kept minutes or record executive sessions. Mr. Nixon answered it is due to the concern about possible disclosure if a member of the public submitted a properly worded public records request. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked whether Kirkland keeps minutes or records executive sessions. Mr. Nixon answered Kirkland does not. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked why Councils have executive sessions. Mr. Nixon answered it was because the legislature decided it was more in the public interest than not to have that discussion in secret and to keep the content secret for at least some period of time. For example if the Council were to discuss the most they were willing to pay for property and that information became public and known to the property owners, that would become the price of the property and the City's ability to negotiate a lower price would be extremely limited. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked about executive session for labor negotiations. Mr. Nixon responded when he was in the legislature, he advocated for removing labor negotiations as an allowed topic for executive session; he personally believes labor negotiations should occur in public as they do in many other states. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if one of the legislature's responsibilities was to be risk managers. Mr. Nixon answered one would hope they had that exposure in mind when they passed bills. In his experience, that did not always happen because the analysis has not been deep enough. Councilmember Buckshnis asked as risk managers, shouldn't the goal be to prevent litigation; recordings of executive session could expose Councilmembers and the City to liability. Mr. Nixon answered it was unlikely to expose Councilmembers individually. There could be scenarios for liability based on the content of the recording such as inappropriate statements or incorrect information made in executive session that could be considered libel. His focus was the purpose of the executive session; attorney -client privilege is obvious, the Council does not want to expose its courtroom strategy to the opposition in a lawsuit. Councilmember Buckshnis commented if executive sessions were recorded, Councilmembers would need to be more careful about what they said. Mr. Nixon answered that was a good thing; people in leadership positions should think carefully before they speak. As a Councilmember himself, before saying or emailing anything, he assumes it will be printed on the front page of the Seattle Times the next day. Councilmember Buckshnis commented she did not object to disclosing information discussed in executive sessions regarding real estate once the transaction had been completed. She recognized confidentiality must be maintained for some other topics. Mr. Nixon referred to the fundamental principles of the PRA and OPMA, the people are sovereign, they have a right to know what their government is doing, and it is up to them to decide what is good for them to know, not for elected officials to decide what is good for them to know. Rather than determining what topics were exempt from the PRA, Councilmember Yamamoto suggested it would be simpler not to record executive sessions. He suggested that was why no other cities recorded executive sessions. Mr. Nixon agreed without a blanket exemption for recordings of executive sessions, cities are unwilling to determine what executive session topics should and should not be recorded. If the idea of recording executive sessions for its own use is something the Edmonds City Council would like, he urged them to request that AWC support legislation that would allow it. Councilmember Yamamoto referred to Mr. Nixon's comment about handouts provided during executive sessions. Mr. Nixon explained if a document is produced by City staff and distributed in executive session, it does not become a protected document because it was viewed in executive session. It is a public record like any other City document. Unless there is an exemption covering the content of the document, it must be released if a member of the public requested it. Councilmember Yamamoto asked what documents would be protected. Mr. Nixon answered it would depend on the nature of the document; Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes August 28, 2012 Page 10 Packet Page 137 of 360 a memo from the attorney regarding a case and strategies would be exempt from disclosure. Other documents may not be exempt. For example in the case of real estate, there is an exemption in the PRA for an appraisal but there is no exemption for other types of information such as a staff analysis of the property, how a facility would fit on the property, etc., unless it was protected by the generic deliberative process exemption. Simply collecting documents distributed in executive session and shredding them is not enough; the original is still on someone's computer and required to be retained under the records retention schedule. If a member of the public requested it, the City Attorney would need to determine how to prevent its disclosure. Councilmember Yamamoto summarized his understanding was that every document and handout provided at executive session should be processed accordingly. Mr. Nixon answered similar to any document handled by the Council in its official role it is considered a public record and unless a specific exemption applies, someone could request it. Councilmember Yamamoto asked Mr. Doherty's opinion. Mr. Doherty agreed with Mr. Nixon's statement; just because something is looked at in executive session does not create an automatic exemption for it. Councilmember Yamamoto asked whether comparisons provided by staff in executive session regarding labor negotiations would be subject to a public records request. Mr. Nixon answered he was not aware of any exemption for that. Mr. Doherty referred to a case, ACLU v. Seattle, where strategy papers reviewed in executive session were not exempt under the PRA. Councilmember Yamamoto asked whether the attorney should check everything that staff provided prior to an executive session. City Attorney Jeff Taraday pointed out it was not sufficient for him to check something; it would need to be advice from him in order to be attorney -client privilege exempt. It was not enough for a director to have the City Attorney review it for it to become attorney -client privilege exempt. Mr. Nixon agreed having the City Attorney in the room does not make a conversation attorney -client privilege nor does the City Attorney reading a document make it attorney -client privilege. Mr. Nixon suggested the Council could ask the City Attorney whether a document would be exempt from disclosure. Councilmember Bloom recalled Mr. Nixon said the Council could choose to record some executive sessions. If the Council made a decision to record all executive sessions regarding attorney -client privilege, would they be exempt from disclosure under the PRA? Mr. Nixon answered yes, as long as the executive session followed the guidelines in the OPMA. Councilmember Bloom asked whether those recordings would be exempt forever from public disclosure? Mr. Nixon answered according to a Supreme Court decision, there is no timeout on attorney -client communication, particularly related to litigation. Even though one lawsuit completes, there is nothing to stop someone else from suing on a similar topic; therefore, privileged information should not be released and benefit the next person filing a lawsuit. Councilmember Bloom asked for clarification whether notes taken by the City Clerk or any record kept of executive sessions related to attorney -client privilege would be subject to public disclosure. Mr. Nixon answered the portion of the notes related to questions asked of the attorney and the attorney's responses could be redacted. Anything else would be disclosable. Councilmember Bloom asked who made the decision regarding what was exempt and what was not if a public records request was submitted. Mr. Nixon answered the Public Records Officer; if he/she had any questions, he/she would seek direction from the City Attorney. Ultimately the State Supreme Court decides what is exempt or not exempt. Even if staff makes a decision they believe is correct with regard to disclosure, someone could still sue the City. Councilmember Bloom commented Edmonds is in the unique position of having taken summary minutes of executive sessions for several years in accordance with direction provided by resolution. She commented it would be difficult to go backward when that practice was started for a legitimate reason. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes August 28, 2012 Page 11 Packet Page 138 of 360 There was also discussion at a Council meeting that certain executive session meetings could be disclosed when the issue was resolved. She questioned how the City should proceed when it was "already more advanced in some ways in terms of open government than other cities are." Mr. Nixon answered according to the law, if someone made a public records request for them, the non-exempt portions would need to be disclosed. If they meet the legal definition of minutes, they must be retained forever. If they are only notes, their retention is determined by the records retention schedule. Councilmember Johnson referred to the question she asked previously, should the City maintain a paper record; if the answer is yes, it is important to know the retention schedule. Although the ordinance refers to them as minutes, the City Attorney has advised they do not meet the legal definition of minutes because they are not voted upon and are actually notes kept by the City Clerk. Given the current laws, she asked for Mr. Nixon's recommendation whether a paper record should be kept. Mr. Nixon clarified under the PRA, all types of records are the same, whether paper, electronic or an audio recording, the content of the record is what is important. It is easier to redact paper records. With regard to a recommendation, he has not loudly demanded that Kirkland start recording executive sessions because he recognizes the value of their being exempt. He has encouraged Kirkland to urge AWC not to oppose legislation regarding executive sessions. Councilmember Johnson relayed her understanding that it made a difference who took the notes. She asked if an audio recording or notes taken by the City Attorney would be exempt. Mr. Nixon answered it would depend whether it was an attorney -client privileged discussion. The City Attorney's record of questions asked and responses he gave would be exempt as an attorney -client work product. If the City Attorney was simply being used as a clerk to take notes about something other than an attorney -client privilege discussion, the fact that he was the City Attorney would make no difference with regard to whether the notes were disclosable. Councilmember Johnson relayed her understanding that there was no exemption for audio recordings other than regarding an assessed valuation of a real estate transaction and would need to be made available upon a public records request. Mr. Nixon answered audio recordings are included in the definition of public records. Whether a recording was disclosable would depend on the content of the recording; portions of the recording for which there is an exemption could be redacted, the rest of the recording would have to be disclosed. With regard to minutes versus notes, Council President Peterson asked if there could be such a thing as executive session minutes when the Council did not vote on the minutes in executive session or in public session. And if they are just cursory notes that are not reviewed by the Council, who outside the City Clerk has the ability to verify their authenticity/accuracy if they become a public record upon a public records request. Mr. Nixon answered that is why the Port of Seattle is recording their executive sessions. He asked if the executive session minutes/notes the City currently maintains are distributed to Council following executive session. Council President Peterson answered they are not. Mr. Nixon agreed the Council was very dependent upon the accuracy of the person taking notes during executive session. If there were a dispute in the future regarding an executive session, he envisioned a judge and jury would ultimately make a decision regarding the accuracy of the record. Council President Peterson summarized the Council was in a very nebulous situation with any kind of recording device, whether pen or audio recording. Mr. Nixon clarified he is not an attorney and urged the Council not to act on anything he said without first checking with the City Attorney. Councilmember Petso asked how confident Mr. Nixon was in his statement that a Councilmember's personal notes made in executive session were not a public record. Mr. Nixon answered that was established in the case Jacobellis v. Bellingham which is summarized on the MRSC website. As long as a Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes August 28, 2012 Page 12 Packet Page 139 of 360 Councilmember does not share their notes with others, it is a personal record and not a City record. Councilmember Petso asked whether that applied to notes typed into her city -provided iPad. Mr. Nixon answered yes; he sends emails to himself and was told by Kirkland's City Attorney that emails he sends to himself as personal notes and not shared with anyone else were exempt from disclosure. If the emails are forwarded to someone else, they become a public record. Mr. Taraday stated he was unsure about that interpretation. Council President Peterson asked for Council direction regarding recording executive sessions. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas preferred to wait to see what action the legislature took. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER YAMAMOTO, TO RESCIND RESOLUTION 853 BECAUSE MINUTES ARE IN FACT NOT BEING TAKEN. Councilmember Petso pointed out this was listed on the agenda as a discussion item. She preferred to rescind the resolution at a future meeting when the item is on the agenda for action. Councilmember Bloom agreed with Councilmember Petso. She suggested holding a public hearing. Councilmember Petso suggested the Council consider keeping a record of attorney -client privileged discussions as they would be exempt under the PRA. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS WITHDREW HER MOTION WITH THE AGREEMENT OF THE SECOND. Council President Peterson asked whether this issue should go back through the committee process. Councilmember Bloom commented it would be prudent to have it discussed at committee as Councilmember Johnson was not on the Committee at that time and new information has been provided that warrants further discussion. Council President Peterson explained the purpose of committee discussion was so staff could update the committee. There is no City staff person in that role for this item. He did not want it to be a discussion between two Councilmembers and members of the public that excluded the other five Councilmembers. He preferred any further discussion occur at a regular Council meeting. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented discussions at committee should only be with the two Councilmembers on the committee; the public is not included in discussion other than by providing input during public comment. Councilmember Bloom asked whether the City Attorney can participate at the committee level. The discussion at committee could include attorney -client privilege, recording, which executive sessions could be recorded, etc. Mr. Taraday responded he is happy to attend a committee meeting if there is meaningful discussion he needs to participate in. His advice on this matter is straight -forward and remains the same. The vast majority of executive sessions are attorney -client privileged. Any recording of executive sessions regarding potential litigation is in all likelihood protected under the PRA and it is up to the City Council to decide whether to record those. With regard to other types of executive sessions, they should not be recorded because there is no clear exemption from disclosure. He summarized it is an administrative, logistical question; whether the City wants to deal with the hassle of turning on and off a recording device or having the City Clerk enter and leave the room for the portion of the executive session the Council wants a written record maintained. He was unsure he needed to attend the committee Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes August 28, 2012 Page 13 Packet Page 140 of 360 meeting to have that discussion. The presentations by Mr. Doherty and Mr. Nixon were excellent; he would broaden what Mr. Nixon said would be included under the potential litigation exemption. Councilmember Yamamoto commented this was a work session and presentations were made by two parties. He was unclear what sending it to committee would accomplish. He preferred the full Council participate in any further discussions. For Council President Peterson, Councilmember Johnson said she was present when the committee last discussed this matter. Council President Peterson asked whether Councilmember Johnson preferred to have it discussed at committee. Councilmember Johnson suggested the committee could discuss it at the September 11 meeting and it could be scheduled for full Council discussion on September 18. She was uncertain Councilmember Bloom and she were of like minds but they could narrow the issues to facilitate Council discussion. Council President Peterson concluded since both committee members asked for this issue to be scheduled, he will schedule it on the September 11 Committee agenda. He echoed Councilmember Fraley-Monillas' comments that committee meetings are not open discussions with the public. He will discuss with Mr. Taraday whether his presence at the committee meeting is necessary. Councilmember Johnson requested staff determine the records retention for notes. 8. REPORT ON OUTSIDE COMMITTEEBOARD MEETINGS Councilmember Yamamoto reported SnoCom is working to resolve issues with the New World system. The Port of Edmonds is in the process of presenting the Harbor Square Master Plan to the Planning Board. The Citizens Technology Advisory Committee (CTAC) did not meet this month. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas reported the Snohomish County Health District Program Policy Committee discussed fluoride in the water and agreed to send the matter to the full Board with a recommendation not to change the current policy regarding fluoride in water. The Committee has requested that testimony be limited to recent data and not old data from the 1950s and 1960s. Councilmember Buckshnis reported WRIA 8 is having a Cedar River Watershed event. She reported Governor Gregoire gave each Snohomish County Tomorrow (SCT) member a merit award for intergovernmental collaboration in the preparation of the Countywide Planning Policies. SCT is also discussing dispute resolution for municipal urban growth areas (MUGA). Council President Peterson reported the Council will be provided an update on the Regional Fire Authority (RFA) discussion at the September 18 meeting. Mayor Earling, Councilmember Petso and he participate on the planning committee as well as individual subcommittees. Mayor Earling requested Council President Peterson and Councilmember Petso meet with him after the meeting regarding the RFA. Councilmember Bloom reported staff provided updates to the Economic Development Commission regarding Highway 99, the Harbor Square Master Plan, Main Street project, etc. Evan Pierce and Bruce Witenberg were elected co-chairs. Councilmember Johnson reported there will be a formal dedication of the Allen House on the Edmonds Register of Historic Places on August 29 at 3:00 p.m. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes August 28, 2012 Page 14 Packet Page 141 of 360 ,aShingt°nCoalition for Open t o To Record or Not to Record.? Toby Nixon President Washington Coalition for Open Government president@washingtoncog.org Packet Page 142 of 360 ''"'tshingt°nCoalition for OpenhGoto vernment Independent, Non -partisan, Non-profit "Dedicated to promoting and defending the people's right to know in matters of public interest and in the conduct of the public's business. The Coalition's driving vision is to help foster open government processes, supervised by an informed and engaged citizenry, which is the cornerstone of democracy." Packet Page 143 of 360 1as[•I: Education Forums, speakers, CLEs, Web Site, Help Line, Op-Eds WCO Legislation Legislative Agenda, Bill Tracking, Testimony 01mrs Litigation Amicus briefs and public interest lawsuits _AW_ Recognition Madison, Andersen, Key, and Ballard -Thompson Awards "The legislature finds and declares that all public commissions, boards, councils, committees, subcommittees, departments, divisions, offices, and all other public agencies of this state and subdivisions thereof exist to aid in the conduct of the people's business. It is the intent of this chapter that their actions be taken openly and that their deliberations be conducted openly." RC W 42.30. 010 Packet Page 145 of 360 "The people of this state do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies which serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may retain control over the instruments they have created." RC W 42.30. 010 Packet Page 146 of 360 Executive Sessions Executive sessions are meetings allowed (but not required) to be closed to the public because the people, through the legislature, have determined that it is more in the public interest than not that the specific information to be discussed be kept secret for some period of time. Packet Page 147 of 360 Can Recordings Be Made? Yes. Agencies can choose today to make audio or video recordings, or to keep notes or minutes, of executive sessions. There is no prohibition of such recordings. Packet Page 148 of 360 Why Make Recordings? Recordings can be useful for a number of agency purposes: • To resolve disagreements over what transpired or was said • To hold attorneys and others accountable for advice given or information provided in closed meetings • To allow newly -appointed or newly -elected members of the body to catch up on previous executive session discussions • To improve the ability of the agency to defend itself if it is accused of having an inappropriate discussion in an executive session Packet Page 149 of 360 Why Not Record? Some argue that recordings would interfere with frank, honest, free -flowing conversations. • But that's the point — executive sessions should be limited to only the allowed topic and nothing more. • You shouldn't have to be behind closed doors to have a frank and honest discussion. Packet Page 150 of 360 Why Not Record? Some argue that making and securely storing recordings would be expensive. We're not talking about a full recording studio with racks of tapes. A digital audio recorder that can keep hundreds of hours of audio can be purchased at Radio Shack for under $50. Operation is trivial. The recorder can be plugged into a PC via USB cable and recordings transferred to a secure server, and be as well protected as any other confidential electronic city records. No need for expensive safes, locked file cabinets, or large amounts of storage space. Packet Page 151 of 360 Port of Seattle • Digitally records all executive sessions Submits records to outside counsel for periodic review for compliance Has not had many requests for disclosure —but who knows what will happen with current controversy Packet Page 152 of 360 So Why Not Record? Risk of disclosure under the Public Records Act. Packet Page 153 of 360 Audio Recordings are Public Records 42.56.010 Definitions. (3) "Public record" includes any writing containing information relating to the conduct of government or the performance of any governmental or proprietary function prepared, owned, used, or retained by any state or local agency regardless of physical form or characteristics. For the office of the secretary of the senate and the office of the chief clerk of the house of representatives, public records means legislative records as defined in RCW 40.14.100 and also means the following: All budget and financial records; personnel leave, travel, and payroll records; records of legislative sessions; reports submitted to the legislature; and any other record designated a public record by any official action of the senate or the house of representatives. (4) "Writing" means handwriting, typewriting, printing, photostating, photographing, and every other means of recording any form of communication or representation including, but not limited to, letters, words, pictures, sounds, or symbols, or combination thereof, and all papers, maps, magnetic or paper tapes, photographic films and prints, motion picture, film and video recordings, magnetic or punched cards, discs, drums, diskettes, sound recordings, and other documents including existing data compilations from which information may be obtained or translated. And that includes voicemails. Packet Page 154 of 360 Not Automatically Exempt Recordings of several of the allowed topics for executive sessions would be exempt from disclosure, but not all. Packet Page 155 of 360 National Security (a) To consider matters affecting national security; Rarely applies to cities. Some topics covered under 42.56.420 (security plans and vulnerabilities, prevention of terrorist acts). Packet Page 156 of 360 Real Estate Transactions (b) To consider the selection of a site or the acquisition of real estate by lease or purchase when public knowledge regarding such consideration would cause a likelihood of increased price; (c) To consider the minimum price at which real estate will be offered for sale or lease when public knowledge regarding such consideration would cause a likelihood of decreased price. However, final action selling or leasing public property shall be taken in a meeting open to the public; Real estate appraisals are covered by 42.56.260, but not discussion of price willing to pay or sell for, or the fact that the city is interested in the property. Packet Page 157 of 360 Contract Performance (d) To review negotiations on the performance of publicly bid contracts when public knowledge regarding such consideration would cause a likelihood of increased costs; Not covered by any known PRA exemption. Packet Page 158 of 360 Complaints or Charges (f) To receive and evaluate complaints or charges brought against a public officer or employee. However, upon the request of such officer or employee, a public hearing or a meeting open to the public shall be conducted upon such complaint or charge; Records of complaints against public employees are disclosable unless determined to be unsubstantiated or false. 42.56.230(3), Bellevue John Does v. Bellevue School District. Some records may be exempt under the investigatory records exemption, 42.56.240(1). Identity of persons filing complaints may be exempt under 42.56.240(2) if their life, safety, or property may be endangered by disclosure, and they request non -disclosure. Packet Page 159 of 360 Evaluating Employment Applicants (g) To evaluate the qualifications of an applicant for public employment or to review the performance of a public employee. However, subject to RCW 42.30.140(4), discussion by a governing body of salaries, wages, and other conditions of employment to be generally applied within the agency shall occur in a meeting open to the public, and when a governing body elects to take final action hiring, setting the salary of an individual employee or class of employees, or discharging or disciplining an employee, that action shall be taken in a meeting open to the public; Names, resumes, other application materials are exempt from disclosure under 42.56.250(2). No exemption for other content of discussion. Packet Page 160 of 360 Filing Vacancies on Council (h) To evaluate the qualifications of a candidate for appointment to elective office. However, any interview of such candidate and final action appointing a candidate to elective office shall be in a meeting open to the public; Not exempt under PRA. Packet Page 161 of 360 Attorney -Client Communication (i) To discuss with legal counsel representing the agency matters relating to agency enforcement actions, or to discuss with legal counsel representing the agency litigation or potential litigation to which the agency, the governing body, or a member acting in an official capacity is, or is likely to become, a party, when public knowledge regarding the discussion is likely to result in an adverse legal or financial consequence to the agency.... All materials are likely exempt under RCW 42.56.290 or 5.60.060(2)(a), which are broader than the allowed purposes for executive sessions for attorney -client communication, and include all "attorney work product': Packet Page 162 of 360 Not Applicable to Cities (e) ... export trading company...; (j) ... state library... ; (k) ... state investment board...; (I) ... state purchased health care services... ; (m) ... life sciences discovery fund authority...; (n) ... health sciences and services authority...; (o) ... innovate Washington.... Packet Page 163 of 360 RCW 423OA40 Meetings described in RCW 42.30.140 are technically not "executive sessions", in that they do not require the agency to first convene in an announced public meeting, declare the purpose and duration of the closed meeting, and then return to public session to adjourn. "140" meetings can be entirely secret, although many agencies treat them the same as "110" executive sessions. Packet Page 164 of 360 License Proceedings (1) The proceedings concerned with the formal issuance of an order granting, suspending, revoking, or denying any license, permit, or certificate to engage in any business, occupation, or profession or to any disciplinary proceedings involving a member of such business, occupation, or profession, or to receive a license for a sports activity or to operate any mechanical device or motor vehicle where a license or registration is necessary; or Business license proceedings occur in cities, but are not exempt under the PRA. Packet Page 165 of 360 Quasi -Judicial Proceedings (2) That portion of a meeting of aquasi-judicial body which relates to aquasi-judicial matter between named parties as distinguished from a matter having general effect on the public or on a class or group; or Cities have quasi-judicial discussions for permitting, etc. Not exempt under the PRA. Packet Page 166 of 360 APA Proceedings (3) Matters governed by chapter 34.05 RCW, the Administrative Procedure Act; or Does not apply to cities. Packet Page 167 of 360 Labor Negotiations, etc. (4)(a) Collective bargaining sessions with employee organizations, including contract negotiations, grievance meetings, and discussions relating to the interpretation or application of a labor agreement; or (b) that portion of a meeting during which the governing body is planning or adopting the strategy or position to be taken by the governing body during the course of any collective bargaining, professional negotiations, or grievance or mediation proceedings, or reviewing the proposals made in the negotiations or proceedings while in progress. Information regarding unfair practices exempt under 42.56.250(4) and (5). Otherwise, not exempt under PRA. Packet Page 168 of 360 So, What to Do? WCOG supports enactment of additional PRA exemptions: • Specific public records exemptions to cover each of the executive session topics, even if the material is discussed in writing rather than in an executive session. • Blanket public records exemption for all recordings, minutes, and notes of executive sessions. Packet Page 169 of 360 In the Meantime... Be selective. Have a policy to not record executive sessions when the discussion would not be exempt from the PRA, or retain only a high-level summary of the nature of the discussion without the key details. But do consider the benefits of recordings or notes on key topics that would be exempt from disclosure. Packet Page 170 of 360 VaShingt°nCoalition for OpenhGovernment Washington Coalition for Open Government 6351 Seaview Avenue NW Seattle, WA 98107 (206) 782-0393 info@washingtoncog.or www.washinqtoncoq.ori Packet Page 171 of 360 PUBLIC SAFETY/PERSONNEL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES September 11, 2012 Committee members present: Council Member Joan Bloom Council Member Kristianna Johnson Others present: Mayor Dave Earling Council President Strom Peterson City Attorney Jeff Taraday Community Services/Economic Development Director Stephen Clifton Reporting Director for HR Carrie Hite HR Manager Mary Ann Hardie HR Consultant Tara Adams Citizen Ken Reidy Citizen Don Hall Council Member Joan Bloom started the meeting at 6:27 pm. DISCUSSION ON MINUTES/NOTE TAKING FOR EXECUTIVE SESSIONS Council Member Bloom stated that she wanted to discuss minutes vs. notes during executive sessions [with regard to executive sessions that contained attorney/client privileged information as well as exemptions and release of executive session information under the Public Records Act (PRA) exemptions]. Council Member Bloom asked City Attorney Jeff Taraday to clarify what is protected by attorney -client privilege (exempt from release as a public record) as well as clarification on all things that should not be kept private from the public. Council Member Bloom further stated that she was interested in focusing on [looking into] recording executive sessions as described by Toby Nixon of the Washington Coalition for Open Government who made a recent information presentation to Council on this subject. City Attorney J. Taraday stated that he would generally agree that the items on Mr. Nixon's list that were considered exempt from public records disclosure would be exempt although he has not had a chance to thoroughly cross check every item on the list that was presented. City Attorney Taraday further stated that he was not prepared at this time to go through the items on the list provided by Mr. Nixon (one by one) and agree or disagree although he does not have a quarrel with the information provided. Additionally, there are certain types of executive sessions in which the PRA does not provide clear protection. Council Member Bloom requested that City Attorney J. Taraday provide additional clarification on items that were considered to be attorney -client privileged. City Attorney J. Taraday stated that any time that Council meets in an executive session regarding litigation or pending litigation, this would (in his opinion) have attorney -client privilege or work product privilege and is non-disclosable. This covers a large portion of what is discussed in executive session. Council Member Johnson questioned if the Council should have written rules about how to conduct executive sessions. For example, what subjects are allowed by state statute, what is the process if a Council member states that the subject of discussion is not allowable by state statute? What are the rules for running an executive session? In the past there were concerns about who gets to talk and for how long. Other concerns have been raised about who may be invited to executive sessions, and who extends the invitation. Council Member Johnson requested that the rules be written down and that all of the allowable subjects identified by RCW be listed. This could serve as a resource for City Council members. City Council President Peterson agreed that this was a good idea. He will work with the City Attorney Jeff Taraday to draft rules for conducting executive sessions and provide the necessary reference materials. Council Member Bloom inquired as to how the recording of executive sessions (documentation) should be handled since the "minutes" from the session are not approved, so they are not legally minutes. Additionally, how should Council continue to address the recording of meetings (in what form), etc. Revised 9-27-12 Packet Page 172 of 360 Council Member Bloom stated that she would like everything to be recorded if possible (to the extent that it is not protected) and that there was a need to look at two different categories of sessions - those protected and those not protected from disclosure (under PRA). Council Member Johnson stated that it would be important to monitor legislative changes regarding this and that Mike Doubleday could keep the Council apprised on this subject with any changes. Council Member Johnson further inquired as to whether or not there was a retention schedule regarding previous Council notes. City Attorney J. Taraday stated that there should be a good reason for continuing to keep notes on executive sessions and/or why Council would want to make a record of executive sessions since, as privileged conversations, they [the records] will be unlikely to be disclosed. City Attorney J. Taraday further explained that a questionable reason to keep record of the executive sessions would be so they [the records] could be disclosed in the near future. There is a risk in keeping a record of exempt items and an audio or video is quite thorough. Council Member Johnson asked if individual Council Members' notes were exempt from public disclosure. Mr. Taraday stated that Mr. Nixon had made the assertion and reference case law. Mr. Taraday stated that he would have to do research in order to make a legal determination. Council Member Bloom stated that she liked the transparency of having all the information disclosed to the extent that it may be disclosable but [that it seems appropriate] to just record only attorney -client privilege information until the legislature comes out with new information. Council Member Johnson stated that she respectfully disagreed due to the risk [of keeping such a recording] and based on advice of the AWC, MRSC, and City Attorney. Council Member Johnson stated that the Council should have clear rules about how executive sessions are recorded and that it would be important to continue to monitor legislative issues with Mr. Doubleday pending checking on further information on Council notes in executive sessions. Responding to a question from Mr. Taraday, Council Member Bloom read the list of reasons given by Toby Nixon for recording executive sessions: • To resolve disagreements over what transpired or was said • To hold attorneys and others accountable for advice given or information provided in closed meetings • To allow newly -appointed or newly -elected members of the body to catch up on previous executive session discussions • To improve the ability of the agency to defend itself if it is accused of having an inappropriate discussion in an executive session Recommendation The Committee reached agreement on four items: 1. The Council should have executive session rules and reference materials. 2. Legislative action to modify executive sessions should be monitored through the city's lobbyist and associations (AWC, MRSC). 3. The retention schedule for previous Council executive session notes should be researched. 4. Consider not recording real estate matters. The Committee did not reach agreement regarding records of legal discussions. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD Citizen Ken Reidy stated that it is the actions in Executive Session that can create liabilities, not the recording of the actions. Those actions are subject to review by the courts whether those actions are recorded or not. Citizen Reidy opined that everyone would be better off if there was an audio or video recording (which does not require review and approval) that can be used when needed. Citizen Reidy pointed out that Mayor Earling was City Council President in 1996 when Resolution No. 853 was passed as it was in the public interest. He stated this step by the Council was a big deal as they knew State law did not require them to take minutes of Executive Session, yet they were motivated to do so anyway. Citizen Reidy encouraged the City to not go backwards in the Open Government and Transparency area. He recommended the City actively lobby the State related to recording Executive Sessions. 2 Revised 9-27-12 Packet Page 173 of 360 JOB DESCRIPTIONS REVIEW Reporting Director for HR Carrie Hite explained that the job descriptions project has been a process in the works with WCIA and the unions. The City hired Public Sector Personnel Consultants as a consultant to this project and HR Consultant Tara Adams and HR Manager Mary Ann Hardie have worked on the job descriptions as well as every employee (including managers and directors) The job descriptions contain updated Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) language. Out of concerns for potential financial impacts of job reclassifications, HR worked closely with the unions so that there were no reclassification requests [with financial impacts] at this time from the job descriptions update. There was some discussion that followed about the job descriptions in the development services department and in the public Works department as to why some positions on the second floor of City Hall [engineering] reported to public works and why others [planning and building] reported to the [acting] development services director. Council Member Bloom inquired as to whether the City would look at restructuring the development services department to provide more efficiencies and the impact of this upon job descriptions. Mayor Dave Earling stated that this issue was currently under discussion with management and that he is aware of Council Member Bloom's concerns and is working to address them. Mayor Earling stated that he had been trying to understand what each department does and it responsible for and also what each employee does [through the job descriptions]. Additionally, he has put a working group (consisting of Phil Williams — Public Works & Utilities Director, Leonard Yarberry — Building Official, Stephen Clifton — Community Services/Economic Development Director and Rob Chave — Acting Development Services Director) to have discussions regarding how to package this with more of a collaborative style in the department and for ways for things to work better but it will take time. Mayor Earling further stated that a recommendation will be put together for council approval in the future and that he firmly believes that a more friendly city is for good quality development [but requires] a collaborative approach. There was further discussion that followed about re -organizations and what departments could be eligible for reorganization. Council Member Bloom stated that she wanted to understand the role of Council in reviewing organizational chart and job descriptions. Reporting Director for HR Hite stated that, as she understood, Council has authority over working conditions in job descriptions and personnel policies as well as benefits and the Mayor has responsibility and authority to hire, terminate and discipline employees (aside from positions appointed by Council). Additionally, the Mayor can reorganize and make recommendations on the budget but has to have financial authority from Council although he has the financial parameters from Council to "run" the City. There was further discussion that followed about the Mayor's expectation of Council regarding the job descriptions as well as how many more different job duties of employees were going to be affected with the voluntary separation incentive program (VSIP). Mayor Earling stated that he has reviewed the organizational chart and the job descriptions and that he is comfortable with the layout [of both]. Mayor Earling stated that he understood that he will make decisions [regarding a reorganization] depending on the issues that may arise from the VSIP [or the budget], but that with feedback Council Member Bloom about the second floor reorganization [development services] is being taken seriously and will be taken into consideration after a thorough review has been done. Council Member Johnson inquired as to how much more different the job duties of employees were going to be for those positions that would be affected by the VSIP changes, etc. Reporting Director for HR Hite stated that there will be changes. Council Member Johnson stated that in her review of the commissioned police officer positions it did not appear that under the "Knowledge" requirements that "Federal" knowledge was required but that it should be. Also, it was suggested that the "Maintenance Custodian" and "Custodian" position differences be reviewed. There was some discussion that followed as to why positions were not more generic and why there were specific and explanation by HR provided as to legal requirements, risk management, distribution of labor, performance management and ADA requirements that necessitated specific job descriptions. Council Member Johnson made a recommendation for the union job descriptions [SEIU, TEAMSTERS, Law Support & EPOA] be forwarded to the next Council meeting for approval but that due to concerns with the Non -Represented job descriptions that the Non -represented positions be discussed at another time. Revised 9-27-12 Packet Page 174 of 360 Community Services Director/Economic Development Director Stephen Clifton inquired as to what the preliminary concerns may be with regard to the Non -Represented job descriptions. Council Member Johnson stated that the there was variation in the years of experience in the Director level position as well as in the supervisory experience at the Director level. Additionally, there was clarity needed about how education and job experience were substituted on a ratio basis. Also, whether or not certifications should be required for the paraprofessional positions is a concern. Reporting Director for HR Hite requested that Council Member Johnson e-mail the technical questions to HR for further looking into before the next discussion. Council President Strom Peterson expressed concern as to whether or not it was clear where working conditions (such as where the Mayor gets to approve in terms of technical requirements) and changing qualifications were under Council purview. Council President Peterson stated that some latitude should be given to administration [the Mayor] to do so. Reporting HR Director Hite stated that she would e-mail City Attorney J. Taraday for further clarification on this. Council Member Bloom inquired as to whether or not there are certain directors who are considered officials [as codified in the Edmonds' Municipal Code] and that Council has to approve these appointments. Which director positions are considered officials and have to be approved by Council. Recommendation Council Member Bloom and Council Member Johnson recommended moving the represented positions [SEIU, TEAMSTERS, Law Support & EPOA] for approval at the next council meeting on 9/18/12 and that they would arrange a further meeting with HR on the Non -Represented job descriptions so that the Non -rep job descriptions would be able to move forward for Council approval on 9/25/12. ORDINANCE CHANGE FOR THE SALARY COMMISSION Council President Peterson presented the ordinance change for the Salary Commission, wanting to allow the Commission to meet anytime during the year if needed. The impetus for this request is to allow the Salary Commission to consider their recommendations during the City's budget process, so they would have full information about finances before they make a recommendation. There was some discussion that followed by the committee. Recommendation It was determined that the committee was not supportive of the recommendation with respect to the decision of the Salary Commission. Additionally, it was recommended that action toward forwarding this item to Council be delayed at this time. The Committee adjourned at 9:22 p.m. 91 Packet Page 175 of 360 Revised 9-27-12 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL DRAFT MINUTES September 18, 2012 The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by Mayor Earling in the Council Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Dave Earling, Mayor Strom Peterson, Council President Joan Bloom, Councilmember Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember Lora Petso, Councilmember Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember ELECTED OFFICIALS ABSENT Frank Yamamoto, Councilmember* (*participated by phone for Agenda Item 6) STAFF PRESENT Al Compaan, Police Chief Stephen Clifton, Community Services/Economic Development Director Phil Williams, Public Works Director Shawn Hunstock, Finance Director Carrie Hite, Parks & Recreation Director Rob Chave, Interim Development Serv. Dir. Mary Ann Hardie, Human Resources Manager Rob English, City Engineer Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Sandy Chase, City Clerk Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst. Jeannie Dines, Recorder Executive Session Regarding Labor Negotiations per RCW 42.30.140(4)(b) At 6:30 p.m., Mayor Earling announced that the City Council would meet in executive session regarding labor negotiations per RCW 42.30.140(4)(b). He stated that the executive session was scheduled to last approximately 30 minutes and would be held in the Jury Meeting Room, located in the Public Safety Complex. No action was anticipated to occur as a result of meeting in executive session. Elected officials present at the executive session were: Mayor Earling, and Councilmembers Johnson, Fraley-Monillas, Buckshnis, Peterson, Petso and Bloom. Others present were City Attorney Jeff Taraday, Parks & Recreation Director Carrie Hite, Finance Director Shawn Hunstock and City Clerk Sandy Chase. The executive session concluded at 7:04 p.m. Mayor Earling reconvened the regular City Council meeting at 7:07 p.m. and led the flag salute. 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER, MOVING ITEM 6 TO FOLLOW AGENDA ITEM 3 AND AGENDA ITEM 10 TO FOLLOW AGENDA ITEM 6. Councilmember Bloom requested an opportunity to address Agenda Item 10. MOTION CARRIED (5-1), COUNCILMEMBER BLOOM VOTING NO. 10. DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING TAKING MINUTES/NOTES DURING EXECUTIVE SESSIONS Councilmember Bloom read from the minutes of the Council retreat, "It was the consensus of the Council to clarify, revise, rewrite the resolution. Council President Peterson will schedule it for consideration by the full Council during the first half of the year and take public comment. He asked Councilmembers to provide him Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September 18, 2012 Page 1 Packet Page 176 of 360 their suggestions." She acknowledged this subject has been on the Council agenda twice before and on Council committee agendas twice but the Council has never taken public comment. The resolutions referenced in this agenda item are very important and have been in place since 1996. Mayor Earling was the Council President at that time; it was felt at that time that it was in the citizens' best interest that minutes be taken of executive sessions. She recommended no action be taken with regard to taking minutes/notes during executive session until a public hearing has been held. COUNCILMEMBER BLOOM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON, TO PULL ITEM 10, DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING TAKING MINUTES/NOTES DURING EXECUTIVE SESSIONS, AND SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING AT THE FIRST POSSIBILITY. MOTION CARRIED (5-1), COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON VOTING NO. Councilmember Bloom advised she planned to make revisions to the minutes of the Public Safety and Personnel Committee meeting. 2. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS Councilmember Petso requested Item H be removed from the Consent Agenda and Councilmember Buckshnis requested Item G be removed. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE THE REMAINDER OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: A. ROLL CALL B. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 11, 2012. C. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #134142 THROUGH #134306 DATED SEPTEMBER 13, 2012 FOR $600,875.09. D. APPROVAL OF THE LIST OF BUSINESSES APPLYING FOR RENEWAL OF THEIR LIQUOR LICENSE WITH THE WASHINGTON STATE LIQUOR CONTROL BOARD FOR THE MONTHS OF JULY, AUGUST, AND SEPTEMBER. E. JULY 2012 MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT. F. AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN A $500,000 GRANT CONTRACT WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE FOR THE MAIN ST. IMPROVEMENT PROJECT BETWEEN 5TH AND 6TH AVENUES. I. REPORT ON FINAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS FOR THE 2010 WATERMAIN REPLACEMENT PROJECT AND FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF PROJECT. J. AUTHORIZATION FOR THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE 2012 STATEWIDE STORMWATER GRANT PROGRAM AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY AND THE CITY OF EDMONDS FOR $259,745 FOR A VACTOR WASTE FACILITY RETROFIT AT THE PUBLIC WORKS YARD. ITEM H: APPROVE A BILL OF SALE TO TRANSFER OWNERSHIP OF SEWER PIPE ON 224TH THAT IS CURRENTLY IN ESPERANCE FROM BEING CITY OWNED TO OVWSD OWNED. Councilmember Petso stated she pulled this item so that she could abstain from the vote. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO APPROVE ITEM G. MOTION CARRIED (5-0-1), COUNCILMEMBER PETSO ABSTAINING. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September 18, 2012 Page 2 Packet Page 177 of 360 Chase, Sandy From: don hall <halldbl2@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, September 21, 2012 6:53 PM To: Joan.bloom@edmondswa.com; Peterson, Strom; Monillas, Adrienne; Petso, Lora; Buckshnis, Diane; Yamamoto, Frank; KRISTIANA JOHNSON Subject: recording of executive sessions Council members ,you will soon be holding a public hearing on recording executive sessions. as I will be out of town I would like council member Bloom to read this into the record. I am in favor of recording executive sessions. Past councils felt that it was important that some sort of record be kept and took the time to even spell out how and what could be released to the public. Mayor Earling could hopefully shed some light on this as he was council president at the time. By recording you will reinforce to the citizens that you are following the statues. The cities insurance carrier would like no records as it reduces the possibility of law suites but it also implies there might be improprieties taking place. I believe there is less chance of law suites if you have a record, Just because other cities don't record or have written records doesn't mean Edmonds shouldn't. You are responsible to the citizens of Edmonds and not to the insurance carrier, nor to what other cities do. If you record there will be less of the citizens wondering if the law is being followed and more confidence in the council.One example would be If a council member spoke about what went on in a executive sessions which is not allowed there would be no way to enforce this. Many of you ran on the idea of providing more open government and this is just going in the opposite direction. I do not believe there is any impropriety going on ,but as you know perception is extremely important. Remember you are responsible to the the citizens of Edmonds and why not insure them that the council does everything to adhere to open government as possible. Respectfully Don Hall Packet Page 178 of 360 provide oversight of the care of the significant art pieces in the City's collection. She described how the EAFF purchased the Chihuly glass artworks. In the mid-1990s, the EAFF was presented with the possibility of acquiring pieces of Dale Chihuly's artwork. The artist wanted a new truck. Harris Ford was not interested in the artwork but was happy to partner with an arts organization. The artwork was selected, EAFF provided a check to Harris Ford and Dale Chihuly acquired his truck. On April 29, 1995, the EAFF (then the EAF Museum) presented their new acquisitions to art patrons in Edmonds. The artwork was exhibited at Frontier Bank until 2006 when the opportunity arose to loan the pieces and the new display cases for exhibit in the Edmonds Center for the Arts. It is hoped the pieces will remain on display at the ECA long term and that the City will retain the documentation of ownership. Should an art museum be developed or changes made at ECA, the Arts Commission would be the appropriate body to recommend a change in the display location. Hearing no further comment, Mayor Earling closed the public participation portion of the public hearing. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON, TO ACCEPT THE DONATION OF THE TWO ART PIECES. Councilmember Buckshnis commented it was extremely generous of the EAFF to donate these artworks. She recognized the numerous EAFF Board Members and volunteers in the audience. There will be an Interlocal Agreement between the City and the ECA to allow the artworks to be displayed in the ECA. THE VOTE ON THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 8. PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING TAKING MINUTES/NOTES DURING CITY COUNCIL Mayor Earling opened the public participation portion of the public hearing. Harry Gatjens, Edmonds, submitted written comments. Ken Reidy, Edmonds, commented in 1996, although not required by state law, the Council passed Resolution 853 regarding taking executive session minutes because they found it to be in the public interest. The City keeps minutes of executive sessions with the intent of making certain minutes available to the public in the future. He cited statements from the former City Attorney in the June 5, 2007 minutes that once the process was concluded, all executive session minutes would be available to the public and from the July 17, 2007 minutes that the City kept minutes of executive session to satisfy the public at a future date that the Council discussed the appropriate issue. On August 7, 2007, the City Council passed Resolution 1150 related to additional rules of procedure to govern Council meetings minutes and stating prior to adjournment of an executive session the Council shall, by consensus, determine what, if any, information may be released regarding the executive session. Mr. Reidy relayed two questions related to Resolution 1150, 1) does the Council follow its rules of procedure by determining what, if any, information may be released regarding the executive session prior to adjournment of each executive session, and 2) how does the Council determine consensus in executive session. He recommended the Council rewrite its rules of procedure to require digital recordings of all executive sessions, similar to the Port of Seattle's practice. This would be helpful if the City needed to recall previous actions or prove its conduct in executive session was proper and consistent with RCW 42.30.110. Recordings may mitigate risks related to disputes over actions that took place in executive session. He also requested Councilmembers state whether they have contacted the Port of Seattle to obtain feedback related to the Port's practice of recording executive sessions. (Councilmember Yamamoto participated in this item by phone beginning at this point in the meeting.) Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 2, 2012 Page 4 Packet Page 179 of 360 Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, suggested the Council continue as they have until the legislature acts. This practice has served the City well; there is no rush to change. The Council may want to review the notes with regard to past and future decisions. Councilmember Bloom read a letter from Don Hall, Edmonds, who was in favor of recording executive sessions. He pointed out past Councils felt it important to keep a record and took the time to spell out how and what could be released to the public. Recording will reinforce to citizens that the Council is following the statutes. The City's insurance carrier prefers no records as it reduces the possibility of lawsuits. Mr. Hall felt maintaining a record would reduce lawsuits and not keeping a record may imply there are improprieties taking place during executive session. The fact that other cities do not keep a written record should not be a reason for Edmonds not to maintain a record. The Council is responsible to the citizens of Edmonds and not to the insurance carrier or other cities. Many Councilmembers ran on the idea of providing more open government and not keeping a record of executive sessions is going in the opposite direction. He did not believe any improprieties were occurring but pointed out the importance of perception. Councilmember Buckshnis relayed her response to Mr. Hall's email, stating she ran on financial transparency which is very different than open government. Because the Kirkland City Councilmember who is also President of Coalition for Open Government has not introduced the concept to Kirkland and Councilmember Bloom has yet to provide examples of any other city that records minutes, she was not in favor of exposing the City to unnecessary risk. She agreed there were no improprieties going on in executive session and suggested he not vote for elected officials that he did not trust as risk managers. Mr. Hall responded to Councilmember Buckshnis' email and indicated he found her comments interesting; he hoped she did believe in open government and agreed with her suggestion regarding voting. Hearing no further comment, Mayor Earling closed the public participation portion of the public hearing. Council President Peterson recalled when the Council last discussed this matter, a motion was made to rescind Resolution 853 but a decision was then made to hold a public hearing. Motion #1 COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO RESCIND RESOLUTION 853 THAT ESTABLISHED A PROCEDURE FOR KEEPING AND RETAINING MINUTES OF CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SESSIONS. Amendment #1 COUNCILMEMBER PETSO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO AMEND THE MOTION TO CONTINUE TO RETAIN A RECORD OF EXECUTIVE SESSIONS REGARDING LITIGATION MATTERS. Councilmember Petso explained after reviewing the materials, she found there are good reasons to keep records of executive session such as the ability to look at what was communicated at a prior meeting as well as the ability to hold attorneys accountable for the advice they provide in executive session. The reasons for not keeping records of executive session regarding litigation do not apply because they would be attorney -client privileged or because they are an attorney work product. The record indicates those minutes are highly likely to be protected from being revealed at an inappropriate time due to their privileged status. If the Council chooses not to keep a record of executive sessions, she hoped to at least retain records of litigation -related executive sessions because they would be protected. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented notes are currently kept of executive sessions regarding real estate, personnel, and labor negotiations. Councilmember Petso's amendment is to keep notes of only executive sessions regarding attorney -client privilege. She asked whether Councilmember Petso's intent was for minutes or notes to be kept. Councilmember Petso answered whichever would get the most yes Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 2, 2012 Page 5 Packet Page 180 of 360 votes on the amendment. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented minutes and notes are two very different products; currently notes are kept; minutes require review and approval. Councilmember Petso responded another option was a digital recording. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas clarified Councilmember Petso had no preference regarding the type of record that was kept. Councilmember Petso agreed she had no preference; whatever was easiest for Council and worked; she would be happy with retaining a record of executive sessions regarding litigation. Councilmember Buckshnis suggested Councilmember Petso clarify that notes would be taken versus a record. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked the City Attorney to comment on issues related to keeping notes, minutes or an audio recording of executive sessions regarding litigation. City Attorney Jeff Taraday reviewed pros and cons related to keeping notes, minutes or audio recording of executive sessions regarding litigation. An audio recording would provide the most complete record; if there is ever a question about what happened during executive session, the audio recording would be the most likely way of answering that question. If the goal is completeness of recording, audio or video recording would be the best method. He explained a possible con although not from his perspective as he welcomed audio recording, at least one lawyer he knew may not advise the Council with an audio recording on. Although having an audio recording device on would not affect what he told the Council, it may affect what Councilmembers tell him; he may not get the level of candor he needs from Councilmembers to provide the best advice. With regard to notes, there is a completeness issue because as much as he values City Clerk Sandy Chase's note taking ability, there will be instances where things will be left out or be inaccurate. With regard to minutes, he recommended against taking formal minutes of executive session because he was unaware of a process the Council could use that would be in compliance with the Open Public Meetings Act for approval and possible amendment of minutes as the Council cannot go into executive session to discuss minute amendments. He summarized the choices are notes such as have been taken or some form of recording, presuming the Council is in favor of the amendment to record attorney - client privilege executive sessions. Council President Peterson commented he would not support the amendment regardless of the form of the record. One of the reasons the City Council holds executive sessions is to allow some candor and a free flow of ideas. Citizens give Councilmembers their trust when they are elected; in a representative democracy, Councilmembers represent citizens. Citizens have the last say when they elect Councilmembers; if they feel the Council is abusing their authority, their vote will reflect that. If that trust is broken such as happened with the Port of Seattle, remedies must be taken. He summarized that trust has not been broken by the City Council and without taking notes, the Council will have better communication among themselves, the administration and the City Attorney, which will allow the Council to make better decisions for citizens. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas assumed there were reasons the Council supported Resolution 853 and the idea of keeping minutes. She has served on numerous boards and commissions that have executive boards and generally there is someone taking notes. She asked whether the City Attorney could take notes so that they would be attorney -client privileged. Mr. Taraday answered although he would like to believe the courts would recognize the attorney -client privilege, there is no guarantee that a court would in fact recognize the City's privilege and uphold the City's refusal to release whatever record was maintained. There are instances where the attorney -client privilege can be pierced by a court. His notes likely are not a public record. If there is interest in recording executive sessions, it probably should not be the City Attorney's notes as the City may want to use the notes to sue their attorney one day. For example if the City wanted to sue the City Attorney for malpractice, it would not be appropriate to rely on the attorney's notes. If there was interest in keeping notes for that purpose, there should be a third party note taker. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 2, 2012 Page 6 Packet Page 181 of 360 Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked the purpose of taking notes in executive session. Ms. Chase responded they have been used to reflect on what occurred especially by someone who was not present or to review the history of a topic that has been discussed in the past. Executive session notes have been requested via public records requests; some have been released and some have not. The State Archivist stated notes of executive sessions are a permanent record. After six years they can be transferred to the State Archivist but they are a permanent record. Councilmember Petso reiterated the minutes reflect several reasons for maintaining a record, 1) to resolve a disagreement over what was said or what emerged from an executive session, 2) to hold attorneys accountable for the advice they provide, and 3) to demonstrate that the executive session was for an appropriate reason. None of the reasons relate to candor. She commented the Council does not suffer from a lack of candor and likely will say whatever they are going to say regardless of whether a tape recorder is running. The reason for maintaining a record is the value of that record and she supported maintaining a record of executive sessions regarding potential litigation as it could be done without risk to the City. Amendment #2 COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETSO, TO AMEND THE AMENDMENT TO THE MAIN MOTION TO DESCRIBE THE METHODOLOGY OF A RECORD AS NOTES. Councilmember Bloom questioned why the Council was considering rescinding the resolution when the minutes of the Council retreat state it was the consensus of the Council to clarify, revise, and rewrite the resolution. She felt strongly the Council had a duty to clarify, revise, and rewrite the resolution based on the original concern related to notes versus minutes. She preferred to maintain an audio or digital recording, envisioning with audio recording Councilmembers may be more careful about what they say in executive session. As a compromise, she would be agreeable to only recording executive sessions that are attorney -client privilege until direction is provided by the legislature that all executive session audio recordings are exempt from public disclosure. Vote on Amendment #2 UPON ROLL CALL, THE VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT FAILED (3- 4), COUNCILMEMBERS BUCKSHNIS, PETSO AND FRALEY-MONILLAS VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS JOHNSON, YAMAMOTO, BLOOM AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON VOTING NO. Amendment #3 COUNCILMEMBER BLOOM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETSO, TO AMEND THE AMENDMENT TO THE MAIN MOTION TO AUDIO RECORD ALL EXECUTIVE SESSIONS THAT ARE ATTORNEY -CLIENT PRIVILEGED. Vote on Amendment #3 UPON ROLL CALL, THE VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT FAILED (2- 5), COUNCILMEMBERS BLOOM AND PETSO VOTING YES; AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON AND COUNCILMEMBERS BUCKSHNIS, JOHNSON, FRALEY-MONILLAS AND YAMAMOTO VOTING NO. Councilmember Petso clarified her motion was to maintain a record of executive sessions regarding potential litigation; the nature of that record was not specified. Mayor Earling expressed concern the motion did not give any direction regarding how a record would be kept; that decision needs to be made and should be made tonight. Council President Peterson observed the Council voted down keeping notes and keeping an audio recording. The only other options are to take minutes or a video recording. He asked for clarification regarding the method of the record that would be kept. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 2, 2012 Page 7 Packet Page 182 of 360 Councilmember Petso stated the method did not need to be decided tonight; the amendment was to keep a record of executive session regarding litigation. She assumed it would have to be accomplished as Councilmember Bloom suggested via revising the resolution. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas suggested another option would be to have the City Attorney take notes on executive sessions regarding litigation. Amendment #4 COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETSO, THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY TAKE NOTES SPECIFICALLY ONLY ON LITIGATION ISSUES. Council President Peterson clarified that against advice from the City Attorney, Councilmember Fraley- Monillas' motion was to have the City Attorney take notes. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas responded the only reason Mr. Taraday gave against the City Attorney taking notes was the potential for the City to sue the City Attorney. Vote on Amendment #4 UPON ROLL CALL, THE VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT FAILED (3- 4), COUNCILMEMBERS PETSO, FRALEY-MONILLAS AND BLOOM VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS YAMAMOTO, BUCKSHNIS, AND JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON VOTING NO. Vote on Amendment #1 UPON ROLL CALL, THE VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT CARRIED (4-3), COUNCILMEMBERS FRALEY-MONILLAS, PETSO, BLOOM AND BUCKSHNIS VOTING YES; AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON AND COUNCILMEMBERS YAMAMOTO AND JOHNSON VOTING NO. Mayor Earling asked how the record would be kept. There was no response from Council. Mayor Earling expressed concern the Council had spent 30 minutes making amendments only to return to the current practice with no direction given. Action on Motion #1 COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON WITHDREW HIS MOTION WITH THE AGREEMENT OF THE SECOND. Council President Peterson explained he withdrew his motion as the amendment completely changed the original motion. Motion #2 COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETSO, TO REVISE RESOLUTION 853 BY ADDING "THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT A RECORD OF NOTES SPECIFICALLY FOR LITIGATION ARE KEPT." Mayor Earling asked Mr. Taraday to comment. Mr. Taraday explained the previous votes on amendments are essentially nullified by the withdrawal of the underlying motion, so thus far the Council has taken no action. If there is interest in revising Resolution 853, he recommended the Council direct him to draft a resolution for Council consideration at a future meeting rather than revising Resolution 853 on the fly. Action on Motion #2 COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS WITHDREW HER MOTION WITH THE AGREEMENT OF THE SECOND. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 2, 2012 Page 8 Packet Page 183 of 360 Motion #3 COUNCILMEMBER PETSO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO MODIFY RESOLUTION 853 TO SPECIFY THAT WE WILL KEEP A RECORD IN THE FORM OF NOTES ON EXECUTIVE SESSIONS REGARDING LITIGATION ONLY. Vote on Motion #3 UPON ROLL CALL, THE VOTE ON THE MOTION CARRIED (4-3), COUNCILMEMBERS PETSO, BLOOM, FRALEY-MONILLAS AND BUCKSHNIS VOTING YES; AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON AND COUNCILMEMBERS JOHNSON AND YAMAMOTO VOTING NO. (Councilmember Yamamoto discontinued his participation by phone at this time.) Mayor Earling declared a brief recess. 9. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Ron Wambolt, Edmonds, referred to Agenda Item 13, explaining that eliminating the step -back requirement would increase the amount of usable space. Although that would enhance developers' profits, the City's sales and property taxes would also increase. Removal of the step -back would allow the creation of more needed apartments. The newly opened Compass Apartment complex on SR104 demonstrates the demand for apartments; all 89 units were leased in a few months. Construction downtown has been at a standstill for the past 61/2 years; 7 out of 10 Architectural Design Board meetings have been canceled due to lack of items. The Council has some responsibility for the situation due to their lack of timely action on the Planning Board's recommendations regarding development agreement and step -backs that were forwarded to the Council in August 2011. He urged the Council to endorse the Planning Board's recommendation to remove the step -back requirement in hopes it will rekindle developers' interest in Edmonds. He also requested the Council discuss development agreements. Darlene Stern, Edmonds, advocated for the Council to vote for the placement of the Main Street Underpass/Main Street Grade Separation project on the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). Including the project on the CIP will allow for discussion of the conceptual idea and is not agreeing to implement the project or approving a funding source. Including the project on the CIP would allow the Economic Development Commission to discuss the pros and cons of the project. Not including the project makes access to the waterfront vulnerable to closure. She urged the Council to approve including the Main Street Underpass project in the CIP. Ken Reidy, Edmonds, asked about the Council's procedure for reading a citizen's email during a public hearing. He expressed concern that the questions he asked regarding Resolution 1150 were ignored and not discussed during the public hearing. He reiterated his questions, 1) does the Council follow its rule of procedure by determining what, if any, information may be released regarding the executive session prior to adjourning the executive session, 2) how does the City Council determine consensus in executive session when the Council cannot vote in executive session, and 3) have any elected officials discussed the issue with the Port of Seattle who has been digitally recording executive sessions since 2007. Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, commented the standard building height is 25 feet; a maximum of 30 feet can only be achieved via a roof design. If the Council eliminated the requirement for step -backs, he recommended the first floor be extra tall such as is required in BD 1. He agreed the step -backs were severe but had a place in a building that was over the height limit as can occur in some situations. Regarding the Capital Improvement Plan, he requested chip seal be included as a project and a pool and fields at the Woodway High School site be combined. With regard to the Main Street Underpass, he pointed out there Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 2, 2012 Page 9 Packet Page 184 of 360 was not enough space for a ramp on the waterfront side. He preferred to relocate the ferry dock to Pt. Edwards where loading would occur over the railroad tracks. He questioned why several projects had been restored to the CIP including lights at Walnut, Main Street, and Casper & 91h and the Olympic Avenue Walkway. He recommended the Council ask staff for an update on the design of the Sunset Avenue project. 10. REPORT: EDMONDS CENTER FOR THE ARTS Joe McIalwain, Executive Director, Edmonds Center for the Arts (ECA), thanked Councilmember Petso for her participation as the Council liaison to the Edmonds Public Facilities District. He thanked the Council for accepting the gift of the Chihuly pieces and allowing them to remain on display at the ECA. Mr. McIalwain provided highlights of ECA operations and programming: • Employs more than 20 full and part-time personnel • Draws 60,000 people for a variety of events • 2012-2013 Season: o Season kicks off Friday, October 5 with Dianne Reeves o Highlights include Natalie McMaster, Cirque Ziva, Pilobolus, Ladysmith Black Mambazo and Blind Boys of Alabama o Increased activity and revenue from partners and rental clients • Fundraising for operations continues to improve o Annual Gala Dinner & Auction — most successful to date: $268,000 o Increasing revenue from individuals, foundations and businesses to support presentations and education programs • Operated "in the black" in 2011 and trending up in 2012 Mr. McIalwain described recent successes: • Season co-sponsors and event sponsors totaling $152,000 in operating support • ECA is presenting seven student matinees and one in -school residency program for the 2012- 2013 Season • Lobby rentals have increased — wedding, reunions, and special events (Leadership Snohomish County) • Edmonds Community College Convocation was held in the ECA Theatre on September 17th Mr. McIalwain reported on the status of long term debt: • Sales tax revenues have not met original projections, therefore additional funds are needed to help cover a portion of the PFD's bond debt • Contingent Loan Agreement provides a mechanism for the City to help the PFD meet debt service payments with loans • Current outstanding loan amount: $351,946 (includes $41,770 loaned to PFD in June 2012) • Projected loan amount in December 2012: $207,000 • Total projected loan amount in December 2012: $248,770 o There may be some limited savings in 2012 after bonds are sold • Strategies to help cover long-term debt: o Refinancing 2002 bonds — net savings of an estimated $70,000 per year o New public and/or private revenue streams o Improved operating performance — net revenue to service existing debt and/or invest in facility maintenance o Impact of economic recovery — unknown Mr. McIalwain explained he is active in the statewide PFD Association who is working with the legislature to extend the PFD legislation by 15 years. Although that will not provide an immediate impact, Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 2, 2012 Page 10 Packet Page 185 of 360 it provides leverage when the 2008 bond issue is refinanced. He is also working with the Snohomish County Council on accessing unallocated Lodging Tax Funds as well as working on a naming rights project for the theater. Mr. McIalwain reported on the Strategic and Business Plan: • Purpose: Develop a 3-5 year Strategic and Business Plan with measurable outcomes and an annual cycle of evaluation • Consulting Team: Berk Consulting and AdvisArts, Inc. • Project Team consisting of two representatives each from PFD Board, ECA Board, and ECA staff • -Timeline: o -Data gathering, stakeholder engagement: May — August, 2012 o -Strategic Situation Assessment — completed 9/7/12 o -Board/Staff Retreat — held 9/11/12 o -Draft Plan submitted to project team — 10/11/12 o -Final Plan presented to Boards — January 2013 Mr. McIalwain provided highlights from Strategic Situation Assessment: • Performing arts programs are perceived to be successful and of high quality, and have a positive impact in the community • Most important challenges for the PFD: o The long-term viability of the facilities o The sustainability of the organization financially • A more detailed discussion of the assessment and the initial draft of the Strategic and Business Plan will be provided to the City Council in January Mr. McIalwain explained the retreat explored three scenarios: • Continuation of current operations and programs in existing facilities • Continuation of current operations and programs, renovate classrooms and/or gymnasium for long-term rental and/or development of new programs • Public -private partnership to redevelop facilities Mr. McIalwain summarized: Operation is "in the black" and improving, ticket sales, rental revenues and fundraising are all trending upward. Refinancing of 2002 bonds will help reduce debt expense. PFD/ECA/City are working together to develop new revenue streams. Strategic and Business Plan is scheduled to be completed in January. A report will be given to City Council at that time. Councilmember Buckshnis requested the quarterly updates include financials. She asked if a loan of $250,000 would be required for 2012. Mr. McIalwain responded it looks like significantly less than $250,000 will be required; he and Finance Director Shawn Hunstock have discussed the City budgeting for $200,000 - $250,000. Councilmember Buckshnis commended Mr. McIalwain, the ECA staff and volunteers for all their hard work. Councilmember Bloom asked for a summary of the programs at ECA. Mr. McIalwain answered the main source of revenue/ programming is the ECA season; 24 shows that the ECA books and brings to the ECA stage. The season is highlighted in the season brochure and on the ECA's website. In addition, more than 100 dates/year in the theater are booked by other organizations, businesses and citizens. In addition there are long term leases; a school that utilizes one classroom during the school year; Community Christian Fellowship uses the facility every Sunday; and the gymnasium is used for SnoKing Youth Club as well as Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 2, 2012 Page 11 Packet Page 186 of 360 by other clients for sports activities. The gymnasium is also utilized by many groups that use the theater. The ECA brings artists into schools via an outreach and residency program. In two weeks Natalie McMaster, who will perform on the ECA main stage, will also do a free performance at the Senior Center. There are also discussions with Swedish Edmonds Hospital about bringing artists to their facility. Councilmember Bloom asked whether efforts are being made to increase the use of the theater and gymnasium. Mr. McIalwain answered yes. Councilmember Bloom asked whether there is any documentation online regarding the Strategic Plan. Mr. McIalwain advised once the consultant provides materials, information will be posted on the website and the final Plan will be posted on the website. Councilmember Bloom commented although the presentations all look wonderful, they are not very affordable for families noting ticket prices range from $30-$45. She asked if there has been any exploration regarding use of the theater for movies or less expensive presentations that might attract a younger population and be more suitable for families. Mr. McIalwain answered expanding that area is discussed often. The delay in family programming is related to artist fees which make it difficult to charge less and still cover expenses. Supplementing that will likely come from fundraising. With regard to movies, the ECA does not currently own a projector and screen. A donor of those items would make that possible at little expense to the ECA. Councilmember Bloom asked whether fiber options would allow performances to be streamed so that viewers at home could pay a lesser amount. Mr. McIalwain answered the ECA paid the City to pull fiber to the ECA. More equipment needs to be purchased and installed to make streaming possible. He continues to work with the City's CIO Carl Nelson. Rick Steves and Europe through the Backdoor utilized the fiber and their own equipment to stream their performance. Councilmember Petso recognized the PFD and ECA Board Members and staff in the audience. She has enjoyed working with ECA staff and she thanked Mr. McIalwain and staff for the way they tackle challenges. Councilmember Johnson commented she participated in the community survey and looked forward to the survey results. She referred to the City's efforts to have student representatives on its boards and commissions and asked whether the stakeholders included younger members of the community. Mr. McIalwain answered the focus groups included four students. 11. UPDATE FROM THE PLANNING BOARD Valerie Stewart, Planning Board Vice Chair, provided a bimonthly briefing of the Planning Board's activities over the past two months. Planning Board meetings are held the second and fourth Wednesdays at 7:00 p.m. in Council Chambers. Agendas, public hearing notices and related documents are posted on the City's website. She encouraged citizens and appointed/elected officials to attend meetings and participate in public hearings where appropriate. Vice Chair Stewart reported in August the Planning Board continued their discussion on the draft Westgate Plan and form based code facilitated by Jill Sterritt and Nancy Rottle, University of Washington. A lengthy public involvement process occurred via an online survey, listening meetings and design workshops. The team also participated in a series of workshop discussions with the Economic Development Commission. Throughout the public process for the Westgate plan, citizens indicated they were less concerned about height in the Westgate and more interested in increasing and improving public space for all ages. The Planning Board requested examples from throughout the Puget Sound region to illustrate the concepts identified in the draft Westgate plan. Examples of mixed use principals included Mercer Island and Redmond; this information is available to the public via the City's website. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 2, 2012 Page 12 Packet Page 187 of 360 At their September 12 meeting, the Planning Board held a public hearing on a proposed plan and formed based code guiding future commercial and mixed use development in the Westgate commercial area. Further deliberations on Westgate are scheduled for later this month. Considerable public input has been obtained thus far and has been incorporated into the draft published by the UW team. To this point the Westgate District Plan and form based code are contained in a single document. Before the Planning Board's October 24 meeting, staff will identify how the various elements of the current document will be incorporated into the City's Comprehensive Plan and development code. A form -based code focuses closely on the form factor or how buildings are arranged or constructed throughout a site. The central idea is to have different choices for building types rather than limiting development to any one building type or use. The Plan also talks about the relationship of buildings to surrounding sidewalks, streets and other buildings. The goal of the Plan is to create a mixed use, walkable and compact development that is economically viable, attractive and community friendly and improving connectivity. The Economic Development Commission has also discussed the need for suitable housing for young professionals and seniors which means smaller and more affordable units. The current draft Plan for Westgate is designed to be responsive to market conditions so development could look quite different than the concepts presented in the draft. However, all development would result in enhancement of public spaces and landscaping. The Planning Board has dedicated four of their last meetings to the Port of Edmonds proposed Master Plan for Harbor Square and have attended individual site tours. The Port has requested the Master Plan be adopted as part of the City's overall growth and development goals for the downtown waterfront area and Comprehensive Plan. Their proposal is not a rezone and is not a project -level proposal. However incorporating the Harbor Square Master Plan into the City's Comprehensive Plan via the amendment process would lay the foundation for future rezone and/or development agreement for Harbor Square property to support a mixed use, transit -oriented development. At the Planning Board's third meeting regarding the Harbor Square Master Plan, held on September 12, the Port presented changes to the Plan to reflect comments and suggestions provided by the Planning Board at previous meetings. The changes were intended to expand on the existing plan elements and have been approved by the Port Commission. The Planning Board conducted a public hearing on the proposed Harbor Square Master Plan at their September 26 meeting. All data and proceedings regarding the Harbor Square Master Plan proposal are available on the City's website and the Planning Board's meetings regarding the Master Plan were video -recorded and aired daily at 7:00 a.m. on Channel 21 (Verizon) and 39 (Frontier). The October 10 meeting will include two public hearings, one on the Odgers rezone and the other on the Capital Improvement Plan/Capital Facilities Plan. The October 10 meeting will also include further deliberations and approval of Findings and Recommendations on the Port of Edmonds Harbor Square Master Plan. The Planning Board welcomed new Board Member Ian Duncan in August and a Student Representative will begin attending meetings on October 10. She thanked staff, the UW team and Port for their hard work and patience throughout the many months of process on the Westgate Plan and the Harbor Square Master Plan. She also thanked citizens who have taken the time to study the materials and commented. 12. PRESENTATION ON THE CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN (2013-2018) AND THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (2013-2018). City Engineer Rob English provided a comparison of the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and Capital Facilities Plan (CFP): CIP CFP Mandate? None GMA Reason? Budget GMA Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 2, 2012 Page 13 Packet Page 188 of 360 Time Frame? 6 year 6 year 20 year Must include Capital? Yes Yes Must include Maintenance? Yes No Mr. English provided a diagram showing components found only in the CIP and only in the CFP and components found in both the CIP and CFP. The CIP contains 6-year maintenance projects with funding sources as well as 6-year capital projects with funding sources; the CFP contains long range (20-year) capital project needs as well as 6-year capital projects with funding sources. The 2013-2018 CFP contains 3 project sections: • General o Parks, buildings & regional projects • Transportation o Safety/capacity & pedestrian/bicycle • Stormwater He highlighted projects added to the 2013-2018 CFP and CIP: • Main Street Undercrossing o Emergency access o Grade separation between transportation modes • SR99 & 212"' intersection o Add westbound and eastbound left turn lanes o Improve intersection level of service. Mr. English explained the 2013-2018 CIP provides: • Supporting information for CFP • Two project sections — General and Parks • Organized by City's financial fund numbers • Preliminary estimates on 6-year expenditures and revenue Mr. English provided a summary of fund numbers in the CIP and the department managing each fund: Fund Description Department 112 Transportation Public Works 113 Multimodal Transportation Community Services 116 Buildings Maintenance Public Works 125 REET-2 Transportation Public Works 125 REET-2 Parks Improvement Parks & Recreation 126 Parks Acquisition Parks & Recreation 129 Special Projects Parks & Recreation 132 Parks- Construction (Grant Funding) Parks & Recreation 412-100 Water Projects Public Works 412-200 Storm Projects Public Works 412-300 Sewer Projects Public Works 414 Wastewater Treatment Plant Public Works Mr. English highlighted 112 Street Fund projects: • Main Street — 5th Avenue to 6 h Avenue (construction) • 5`h Avenue Overlay (2013 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 2, 2012 Page 14 Packet Page 189 of 360 • Five Corners Roundabout (2013) • Signal cabinet improvements (2013) • SR99 Lighting phase 3 design (2013 • 228`h Corridor Improvements, design, right-of-way acquisition (2013) • 212`h & 761h Avenue Improvements, environmental review, design (2013 He highlighted 412 Utility Fund projects: • Water Utility Fund 0 3,800 feet of replaced watermains (constructions) 0 10,000 feet of watermain replacement (2013 o Overlay 2,000 linear feet of roadway affected by waterline replacement projects (complete) • Sewer Utility Fund o Rehabilitation of nine sewer lift stations 0 5,600 feet of sewer main replacement/rehabilitation (2013 o Sewer Comprehensive Plan update (2013) 0 1,000 feet of CIPP sewer mains (2013) Stormwater Utility Fund o North Talbot Road drainage improvements (complete) o Talbot Road/Perrinville Creek drainage improvement (construction) o Edmonds Marsh Study (2013) 0 3,300 feet of new/replaced storm drain pipe for Edmonds Basin #3 SD improvements (2013) o Vactor Waste Handling Facility upgrade (2013) o Perrinville Creek High Flow Reduction study (2013) 0 95`h/93rd Avenue Storm LID Project (2013) Parks & Recreation Director Carrie Hite highlighted Park CIP projects: • Completion of Interurban Trail • Completion of Hazel Miller Plaza • Groundbreaking of SR99 International District • Progress on 4th Avenue Cultural Corridor • Beginning Dayton Street Plaza Ms. Hite highlighted CFP projects: • Added Public Market • Development of Woodway High School Athletic Complex Ms. Hite highlighted REET 125 funded projects: • Additional repairs needed at Yost Pool ($50,000). Added another $120,000 next year for boiler. • Moved City Park to 2013, combined playground replacement with spray pad to match grant: City Park Spray and Play Revitalization • Carryover: Edmonds Marsh Study • Set aside for Woodway High School fields • Replacement of Mathay Ballinger play equipment • Park Impact Fee Study, PROS Plan update o Per MRSC, Park Impact Fee Study and PROS Plan not eligible as REET expenditures o PROS Plan update included as decision package in 2013 budget Ms. Hite highlighted Park Construction Fund 132 projects, advising this fund does not have its own revenue source; it receives funds from grants and transfers from REET 125: • 4`h Avenue Cultural Corridor planning Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 2, 2012 Page 15 Packet Page 190 of 360 • Completion of Dayton Street Plaza • City Park/RCO grant • Senior Center Improvements: subject to CDBG (unsecured funding) Mr. English reviewed the CFP/CIP schedule: • September 12 — Public Works, Parks, & Planning Committee • October 2 — City Council; Introduction • October 10 — Planning Board • October 16 — City Council Public Hearing • December 2012 — Adopt CFP with Comprehensive Plan Update Councilmember Buckshnis asked why the Edmonds-Crossing/WSDOT/Multimodal facility is still included, observing Phase 1 is construction of the vehicle underpass to the existing ferry terminal and Phase 2 is moving the ferry; those projects seem contradictory. Community Services/Economic Development Director Stephen Clifton answered they are not contradictory. The language in the CIP should be multimodal terminal Project La., the multimodal terminal at Pt. Edwards, which neither the City nor Washington State Ferries has abandoned, and Project Lb., a minimum build alternative. Washington State Ferries does not include a reference to Edmonds Crossing in their 2009-2013 long range plan. He pointed out that Edmonds Crossing expenditure dollars are $237 million; the ability to secure that funding by 2030 will be very difficult. Including a minimum build alternative, Project Lb., in the CIP provides the ability to seek funding to study the feasibility. Councilmember Buckshnis suggested revising the language. Councilmember Buckshnis asked why the signal at Caspers & 9th was added back into the CIP/CFP. Mr. English explained two projects were discussed at the December 20, 2012 Council meeting, the Five Corners roundabout and the signal at Caspers & 9th. A motion was made by then-Councilmember Plunkett and seconded by Councilmember Fraley-Monillas to pull the project from the CIP/CFP; the motion failed 2-5. The project therefore remained in the CIP/CFP. Councilmember Buckshnis asked why an aquatics center at Yost Pool was included. Ms. Hite answered the aquatic center at Yost Pool is included in the CFP as a placeholder; no funds have been set aside. The project has not changed from last year•, it is still an aquatics center at Yost Pool in the preferred option the public selected. Councilmember Buckshnis asked whether that will be revised. Ms. Hite answered all the Parks CIP/CFP projects, including the aquatics center, can be revised as part of the PROS Plan update. Councilmember Buckshnis observed Willows Creek was combined with the Edmonds Marsh. She asked whether there were efforts to obtain funding from WRIA 8. Ms. Hite answered that effort has been in conjunction with People for Puget Sound who closed their doors effective September 30 and moved most of their restoration projects to Earth Corp Conservation Program. Councilmember Petso thanked Mr. English for adding priorities on transportation projects. She asked why some priority transportation projects are included and others are not. For example a traffic light and road widening at Meadowdale Beach Road and Olympic View Drive, priority 17, is included but priority 15 and 16 are not. Mr. English answered it is a combination of factors including how a project may score on grant applications. Councilmember Petso referred to project changes such as the addition of rain gardens to the Southwest Edmonds Drainage Project. She asked why rain gardens were added when all the water infiltrates into the ground and does not discharge into a stream or Puget Sound. Mr. English answered the soil conditions are very good for infiltration; the locations of the rain gardens are being designed. Rain gardens are a method of dispersing the stormwater and are a good demonstration project for the community. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 2, 2012 Page 16 Packet Page 191 of 360 Councilmember Petso asked about Storm Drain Project 15 that previously included a pipe from near the Perrinville Post Office to Browns Bay. Public Works Director Phil Williams answered after extensive discussions regarding the Perrinville Creek Basin and the appropriate sequencing of capital projects, instead of a bypass pipe, there was a consensus to first conduct a study to determine the best hydrologic solution for the basin. It could be that a series of infiltration projects may be more successful, have a lower cost and have the same hydrologic impact as Project 15. Councilmember Petso clarified Project 15 is now a study rather than a pipe. Mr. Williams answered the replacement/rehabilitation of the culvert under Talbot Road and Project 15 has been deferred until a complete hydrologic study on Perrinville Creek is completed. Councilmember Johnson asked if the Perrinville Creek Study would include Lynnwood who contributes a lot of runoff to the creek. Mr. Williams stated staff met with Lynnwood within the last month to discuss partnering on the study. Lynnwood has already prepared their 2013 stormwater budget; therefore their financial participation is unclear. Lynnwood is enthusiastic about the project and acknowledges much of the drainage basin is theirs. They have good ideas regarding where infiltration could occur and will be great partners in the project. Councilmember Johnson commented a study is a step in the right direction. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked how it was decided to put the Main Street Undercrossing in the CFP rather than other options such as the Main Street Overpass, Dayton Street Emergency access, cut and cover, etc. Mr. Williams responded studying a variety of alternatives to solve an at -grade crossing problem is not specific enough to generate much enthusiasm for grant funding. Available documents and alternatives in the work already done on Edmonds Crossing were used to identify the most feasible alternative in the short term. The intent was a minimum build alternative; the undercrossing at Main Street seemed to offer the best possibility. The intent is to obtain funds to study alternatives. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented that was a subjective determination and asked why the cut and cover option was not selected. Mr. Williams answered an undercrossing at Main for cars would be less expensive than a cut and cover. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented a cut and cover would solve the noise issue of train whistles. Mr. Williams commented there are better ways to solve that issue. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked whether an undercrossing at Main was the most likely to be funded. Mr. Williams answered a project needed to be included in the CIP/CFP in order to seek funding to do an analysis. It appeared the undercrossing could solve many of the problems at the lowest cost. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas observed further discussion by elected officials and public input is needed. Mr. Williams agreed, pointing out some funds need to be acquired to do enough work to facilitate a meaningful conversation. If a $60 million undercrossing is constructed at Main Street, Councilmember Petso questioned how the ferry would ever be relocated to Pt. Edwards. She questioned how the undercrossing could be repurposed if the ferry moved. Constructing it was conceding the ferry was not going to move, yet study documents state the ferry needs to move to accommodate increased capacity. Mr. Williams answered the undercrossing would have value for vehicular access to the waterfront even if the ferry moved. The Edmonds Crossing is not in the Washington State Ferry's 2030 plan; meanwhile railroad traffic continues to increase. The issue is whether to do something to improve the problem until enough money is assembled to do Edmonds Crossing. Councilmember Petso commented an emergency access would be much less expensive than a ferry loading access. Mr. Williams agreed. Councilmember Petso asked whether the intent was an emergency access or ferry loading access. Mr. Williams answered the proposed project would be both. As there is no immediate plan to move the ferry, this project could solve many of the same problems at a far lower cost. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 2, 2012 Page 17 Packet Page 192 of 360 Councilmember Bloom noted the problem of the railroad tracks blocking the beach and emergency access has existed for many years. She was concerned including this large project on the CFP commits the City to addressing the emergency access issue via an underpass. She suggested an alternate project that would address emergency access separate from ferry loading. Mr. Williams answered the CFP is a 20-year plan and it is not unreasonable to take a visionary approach. Including the project in the CFP does not commit the City to anything; the City is not seeking design and construction funds for an undercrossing but rather funds for a conceptual analysis of viable alternatives. If the solution also addresses ferry loading, the City is much more likely to acquire funding with WSDOT Ferries Division as a partner. Councilmember Bloom questioned how the emergency access problem will be addressed in the short term, envisioning there was a less expensive alternative to addressing emergency access. Mr. Williams answered knowing that train traffic will increase, the problem will worsen in the future. He suggested it is possible to continue to live with the problem now while trying to identify a visionary solution without doing an interim solution. Mayor Earling advised the next step is a public hearing at the Planning Board. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON, TO EXTEND THE MEETING FOR 45 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED (4-2), COUNCILMEMBERS BLOOM AND FRALEY-MONILLAS VOTING NO. 13. CONTINUED DISCUSSION REGARDING STEP -BACKS. Interim Development Services Director Rob Chave commented when discussing step -backs, the real issue is design. He pointed out there have been distinct periods in the history of downtown buildings: • Prior to 1956 adoption of zoning code • 1956 to 1981 • 1981 to 1997 • 1997 to 2005 • 2005 to Now Height limits have also changed over time: • First zoning code in 1956: 45 feet • 1964: 35 feet • 1981: 30 feet o Pitched roof / modulated design / step -backs Codes since 1981 have addressed what happens in the 5 feet above 25 feet, but the 30-foot height limit has remained unchanged 2005 - step -back required to increase building height from 25 to 30 feet Mr. Chave displayed photographs of buildings constructed prior to 1956: historic forms that still exist, some are on the Historic Register, buildings that are important factors in the feel and design of downtown. He displayed photographs of buildings constructed 1956 to 1981 that he termed as the "simple box," unadorned with little architectural character. The solution when the height limit was lowered to 30 feet in 1981 was a pitched roof but still no design guidance. He displayed photographs of building constructed 1981 to 1997, commenting the buildings tended to be a box with a "hat" on top. Beginning in 1997 there was a requirement for modulated buildings. He displayed photographs of buildings constructed 1997- 2005, explaining the result was different roof forms and some attempt to differentiate vertical forms with a lot of repetitive elements. He summarized: • Buildings prior to 1956 o Pedestrian scale & orientation o A richness of materials & architectural detail Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 2, 2012 Page 18 Packet Page 193 of 360 o Vertical detailing 1956 to 1981 o Larger scale, very simple buildings o Lacking in architectural detail • 1981 to 1997 o Some improvement in architectural detail o Pitched roofs as an add -on or afterthought • 1997 to 2005 o More architectural elements included o More attention to vertical elements o "Busy" horizontal elements Mr. Chave summarized the code today requires: • Retail core / BD1: o No step -backs o Mandatory design standards • Other BD zones o Mandatory 15-foot step -backs o Design objectives (not design standards) Mr. Chave commented it was difficult to find examples of 15-foot step -backs. He provided photographic examples of 15-foot step -backs in downtown Kirkland and Old Town Bellevue, noting they were on much taller buildings. He displayed photographs of Chanterelle's and the Edmonds Theater, commenting step -backs do not complement traditional commercial building styles. Using Chanterelle's as an example, he pointed out step -backs would not allow traditional buildings to be built. He displayed photographs of buildings that echo traditional building styles and new construction that often tries to duplicate traditional building styles such as Mill Creek Town Center. Mr. Chave relayed the Planning Board recommendation to eliminate the step -back requirement in the downtown (BD) zones. Staff supports this recommendation and believes stronger design standards are needed that will produce good building design, such as currently exist in the BD 1 zone. If a maximum building height of 30 feet is allowed, Councilmember Buckshnis asked whether an overhang could be required on the first level. Mr. Chave responded the BD1 zone design standards address an overhang. There is design guidance for the other zones. Councilmember Buckshnis referred to the zoning map and asked how the location of BD2, 3, 4 and 5 zones was determined. Mr. Chave answered BD1 is the retail core, BD3 is an auto -oriented area, BD4 already has a fair amount of multi -family therefore mixed use and multi -family are allowed, and BD5 recognized the planning done for the Xh Avenue Corridor. Everything else was zoned BD2. Most of downtown is zoned BD and BD2. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas thanked Mr. Clifton and Mr. Chave for meeting with her and providing her the history. She expressed interest in similar design criteria throughout downtown in all the BD zones, noting other tourist towns she has visited have the same design throughout. She agreed the intent was not to change the height, only remove the step -back requirement. Mr. Chave commented there has been a great deal of focus on height over the years but little focus on design. Motion #1 COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO ACCEPT THE PLANNING BOARD'S RECOMMENDATION TO REMOVE THE STEP - BACK REQUIREMENT OF 15 FEET FROM THE CODE. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 2, 2012 Page 19 Packet Page 194 of 360 For Councilmember Petso, Mr. Chave explained the Planning Board was essentially saying a 30-foot building could be constructed without a step -back. Councilmember Petso recalled the step -back provision allowed an increase in height from 25 feet to 30 feet. She observed the motion would allow a 30 foot building rather than requiring a step -back to obtain a height of 30 feet. Mr. Chave answered yes, although there is still the requirement for a 12-foot ground floor. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas agreed with removing the requirement for a step -back but wanted to have design standards as part of the package, otherwise there would be no step -back and 30 foot boxes. Mr. Chave stated there is general guidance in the Comprehensive Plan but no specific standards. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas recommended removing the step -back requirement at the same time design guidelines are adopted. Mr. Chave advised that would require referring it back to the Planning Board. Councilmember Bloom did not support the motion as she agreed design standards were needed in conjunction with removing the requirement for a step -back. Council President Peterson noted step -backs are a major component of design; in this case a horrible component. He asked if requiring BD1 design standards throughout downtown would require Planning Board review. Mr. Chave answered it would. Council President Peterson expressed support for the motion and then directing the Planning Board to implement design standards throughout the downtown. Councilmember Johnson asked when the Planning Board made this recommendation. Mr. Chave answered over a year ago. Councilmember Johnson explained a key consideration by the Planning Board at that time was that a 15-foot step -back after 25 feet on a building on a flat lot with a flat roof would not produce any usable space. Mr. Chave added there are a large number of narrow lots downtown and a 15- foot step -back would result in the loss of a lot of practical building space without achieving any benefit in design. Councilmember Johnson explained that was especially true on a lot with two street frontages. She recommended making a decision on step -backs separate from any additional work the Planning Board does with regard to design standards as that decision is long overdue. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas did not object to removing the requirement for a step -back; the question was whether to remove the step -back and risk the construction of box buildings until design standards are developed. Mr. Chave suggested as an intermediary the Council could reduce the step -back to a more reasonable amount such as 5 feet while the Planning Board considers specific design standards. He anticipated it would take the Planning Board until early 2013 to consider design standards. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if the Council could implement BD 1 design standards in addition to removing the 15-foot step -back. Mr. Chave answered that was beyond the scope of what the Planning Board considered. Councilmember Petso suggested removing the step -back requirement with a maximum building height of 25 feet rather than 30 feet. She noted the agenda memo stated the Council would provide direction to staff to prepare an ordinance. When the Council last discussed this, Councilmember Fraley-Monillas requested it be discussed after development agreements and Councilmember Johnson asked that it be discussed after incentive zoning, neither of which have been discussed by the Council. She asked whether reducing the step -back to 5 feet rather than 15 feet was within the scope of what the Planning Board considered. Mr. Chave answered yes; the Planning Board discussed reduced step -backs. Amendment #1 COUNCILMEMBER PETSO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO AMEND THE MOTION TO REDUCE THE STEP -BACKS TO 5 FEET WHILE DESIGN STANDARDS ARE REVIEWED. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 2, 2012 Page 20 Packet Page 195 of 360 Councilmember Bloom commented it has been suggested by some that the Council is losing the City money because there are developers who would like to develop properties if not for the step -back requirement. She asked if there were properties that would develop with a 5-foot step -back at 25 feet versus a 15-foot step -back. Mr. Clifton was unsure with a 5-foot step -back but there were if the 15-foot step -back were removed. He agreed there is a perception among developers that the Council is stalling. Councilmember Bloom asked what kind of buildings could be constructed if the Council reduced the step -back to 5 feet or eliminated the 15-foot step -back without design standards. Mr. Clifton agreed it would be preferable to have BD 1 design standards also apply to the BD2 — 5 zones. He also supported the Planning Board's recommendation to remove the 15-foot step -back requirement. Mr. Chave commented the design review chapter states developers must abide by the Comprehensive Plan guidance in the Downtown Waterfront Plan which includes design guidance. They are not as specific as design standards that apply to BD1. At the time, the Council did not want specific design standards to apply to BD2 — 5 zones and were comfortable with the design objectives in the Comprehensive Plan. Staff's intent would be to apply the design guidance to the BD2 — 5 zones. If the Council eliminated or reduced the step -back, Councilmember Bloom questioned how many developers would proceed with projects before design standards could be adopted. Mr. Clifton answered it was impossible to know how many developers would utilize the elimination of the 15-foot step -back in their design. There is potential for one property owner to possibly move forward with a development although no final plans have been submitted. Council President Peterson said he will not support the amendment as a 5-foot step -back did not appear to be a positive design element although it was better than a 15-foot step -back. He did not fear a 1979 design because there are design guidelines in the Comprehensive Plan. Councilmember Johnson recalled there was a 25-foot height limit in the BD zones and an additional 5 feet if the ground floor facing the street frontage had a 15-foot ceiling height. Mr. Chave answered that was required in BD1. There is a 12-foot ground floor requirement in BD2; that would still exist with or without the step -back requirement. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas would not object to eliminating the 15-foot step -back if the motion was clear that the Planning Board would immediately begin work on design standards for BD2 — 5. She was not comfortable with a 5-foot step -back and waiting until the Planning Board could get to the design standards. Mr. Chave responded if the Council indicates it is a priority, staff will inform the Planning Board and schedule it on their agenda. He anticipated the Planning Board could begin well before year end. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas preferred that direction be in the form of a motion. Councilmember Johnson commented problems still exist with a 5-foot step -back. If the amendment failed, Council President Peterson offered to make an amendment to make the development of design standards a priority. Vote on Amendment #1 UPON ROLL CALL, THE VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT FAILED (2-4), COUNCILMEMBERS BLOOM AND PETSO VOTING YES; AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON AND COUNCILMEMBERS JOHNSON, BUCKSHNIS, AND FRALEY-MONILLAS VOTING NO. Amendment #2 COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS TO AMEND THE MOTION TO INCLUDE LANGUAGE THAT DESIGN STANDARDS FOR THE BD2, 3 AND 4 BE PUT ON THE PLANNING BOARD'S SCHEDULE AS SOON AS POSSIBLE AS A PRIORITY OF THE CITY COUNCIL. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 2, 2012 Page 21 Packet Page 196 of 360 Council President Peterson explained he did not include BD5 as that is the Arts Corridor where there are primarily single family homes and it is a separate issue. Councilmember Petso asked why design standards for BD5 were not a priority. Mr. Chave agreed design standards for BD5 are on a separate track. The 4th Avenue Corridor Plan includes language regarding historic preservation. Councilmember Petso asked if a 30-foot mixed use box could be constructed in the BD5 if the step -back is eliminated. Mr. Chave commented the BD5 zone has some unique characteristics. Councilmember Bloom did not support the motion because she preferred to have design standards in place before making this change. There are many buildings that people are not happy with because 3 stories rather than 2 can be achieved on a slope and 3 stories are more likely to be achieved with a 25 plus 5 foot height limit with some modulation. She was concerned with massing and design and the possibility that someone could slip in and construct a 30-foot box without appropriate design standards. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked what would prevent someone from building a box before design standards were adopted. Mr. Chave stated there are design guidelines in the form of design objectives in the Downtown Waterfront section of the Comprehensive Plan that apply throughout downtown. They are not as specific as the BD1 design standards. Under the design objectives, he was certain there would not be buildings like those constructed 1956-1981 or 1981-1997; he could not rule out a building that was similar to buildings constructed 1997 and later. The design guidelines adopted in 2004-2005 address vertical detail; any building construction now would look much different than those constructed in the late 1990s. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, MOVED TO EXTEND THE MEETING FOR 15 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Councilmember Petso referred to Anderson v. Issaquah and the ability to enforce design guidelines. City Attorney Jeff Taraday answered he had not had an opportunity to study the City's current design guidelines and the extent to which they are enforceable under Anderson v. Issaquah. From what Mr. Chave said, the guidelines are not as enforceable as staff would like and to some extent the City may be relying on a cooperative developer to provide what the City wants. Councilmember Petso asked whether it made a difference whether the design guidelines were in the code versus the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Taraday answered yes. Councilmember Petso asked whether their being in the Comprehensive Plan made them less enforceable. Mr. Chave answered the code points to the objectives in the Comprehensive Plan as criteria for approval. Vote on Amendment #2 THE VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT CARRIED (5-1), COUNCILMEMBER BLOOM VOTING NO. Mayor Earling clarified the main motion was to direct the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance. Vote on Motion #1 as amended: THE VOTE ON THE MAIN BLOOM VOTING NO. 14. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Earling had no report. 15. COUNCIL COMMENTS MOTION CARRIED (4-2) COUNCILMEMBERS PETSO AND Councilmember Johnson thanked Planning Board Vice Chair Val Stewart for her presentation and for staying during the Council's discussion regarding step -backs. Councilmember Johnson encouraged the Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 2, 2012 Page 22 Packet Page 197 of 360 public to participate or watch the Planning Board's continued discussion regarding the Harbor Square Master Plan on the second and fourth Wednesdays. Planning Board meetings regarding the Harbor Square Master Plan are aired at 7:00 a.m. on Channels 21 and 39. Council President Peterson congratulated ECA staff and ECA and PFD Boards for a fantastic event on Saturday. The event was a great show of the community's support. He thanked Mayor Earling for attending. Councilmember Buckshnis reported the Writers on the Sound Conference is this weekend. With regard to Mr. Reidy's questions regarding Resolution 1150, she reported the Council reaches consensus by head nod but do not vote. She has not contacted the Port of Seattle because she did not believe the Port is anything like the City of Edmonds. In response to Mr. Reidy's questions, Councilmember Fraley-Monillas explained the Council reaches consensus by discussion. She has not spoken with the Port of Seattle; they are in the midst of very expensive lawsuits regarding their meetings. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas congratulated the Edmonds School District Special Olympics Coach, Megan Drobnicki, who was named Northwest Region Special Olympics Coach of the Year. Ms. Drobnicki is a high school special education teacher; this was her first year coaching Special Olympics. 16. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING POTENTIAL LITIGATION PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(i). At 10:55 p.m., Mayor Earling announced that the City Council would convene in executive session regarding potential litigation per RCW 42.30.110(1)(i). He stated the executive session was scheduled to last approximately 15 minutes and would be held in the Jury Meeting Room, located in the Public Safety Complex. He stated action may occur as a result of meeting in executive session. Elected officials present at the executive session were: Mayor Earling and Councilmembers Johnson, Fraley-Monillas, Buckshnis, Peterson, Petso and Bloom. Others present were City Attorney Jeff Taraday and Deputy City Clerk Linda Hynd. The executive session concluded at 11:16 p.m. Mayor Earling reconvened the regular City Council meeting at 11:17 p.m. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY ATTORNEY TO SETTLE ALL PENDING CLAIMS IN THE SNOHOMISH COUNTY LITIGATION WITH KIMBERLY COLE, NOT TO EXCEED $1,900. THE VOTE ON THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 17. ADJOURN With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 11:18 p.m. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 2, 2012 Page 23 Packet Page 198 of 360 AM-5434 City Council Retreat - Friday, February 1, 2013 Meeting Date: 02/01/2013 Time: 30 Minutes Submitted For: Shawn Hunstock Department: Finance Review Committee: Type: Information inform �+inn Subject Title Potential Revenue Options Recommendation N.A. Previous Council Action N.A. 5. Submitted By: Shawn Hunstock Committee Action: Narrative Finance Director Shawn Hunstock will give an overview of several revenue options available to the City for consideration. No recommendations are made at this time. Council may request additional information to come at a later date for further discussion. Matrix of Potential Revenue Options Inbox Reviewed By City Clerk Sandy Chase Mayor Dave Earling Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase Form Started By: Shawn Hunstock Final Approval Date: 01/29/2013 Affao hmnnte Form Review Date 01/28/2013 04:17 PM 01/29/2013 09:13 AM 01/29/2013 09:19 AM Started On: 01/28/2013 03:57 PM Packet Page 199 of 360 City of Edmonds Potential Revenue Options Revenue Source Metropolitan Parks District Estimated Limitations on Annual Revenue Revenue Source Required for passage use of money Notes An MPD may be created for the management, Property tax levy of control, improvement, maintenance, and up to $0.50 per acquisition of parks, pathways, boulevards, and $ 2,772,686 $1,000 of AV Voter approval recreational facilities (RCW 35.61.010) Property tax levy of up to $1.00 per Regional Fire Authority $ 5,545,372 $1,000 of AV EMS levy of $0.50 per 2,772,686 $1,000 of AV 715,980 Fire Benefit Charge" Total Revenue 9,034,038 Additional $20 per Transportation Benefit District'* $ 640,000 vehicle license fee. Public Safety Sales Tax Special or General Levy 0.2 Percent Sales $ 1,300,000 Tax 0.1 Percent Sales $ 552,500 Tax Total revenue collected must be used to provide The cost of the current contract with FD1 fire and emergency medical services (EMS) would be removed from the City's budget. Voter approval response. The City would also lose the EMS revenue as that would be levied by the RFA if we Voter approval Same as above. were to join. The result would be a budget Voter approval Same as above. savings to the City, which must be weighed against the overall impact on taxpayers. TBD revenue is used to acquire, construct, Voter approved vehicle license fee could go Councilmanic? improve, provide, and fund transportation up to a maximum of $100. improvements that are consistent with Transportation Plans. Further limited by Council Voter approval policy. One-third of the tax receipts must be spent on criminal justice or fire protection services. No restrictions on the use of the other two-thirds. 15% of the sales tax receipts are shared Voter approval (RCW 82.14.450) with the County. Can be for a stated time period or permanent. Can be for a stated amount (general purpose), or increase each year $0.10 tax levy per Must be used for the purpose stated on the ballot (specific purpose) for up to six years by a $ 550,000 $1,000 of AV Voter approval title, if the purpose is stated. stated amount or rate. Voters can approve a utility tax in excess of 1 Percent Increase in No limitation, unless a specific use is included in the statutory limit of 6% on electricity, natural Voted Utility Tax Increase $ 575,000 Utility Taxes Voter approval the ballot language. gas, and telephone services. Amount is preliminary estimate. Needs to be updated if the City of Lynnwood discontinues participation in the RFA. `" TBDs also have the option of a voter approved one-year Operations and Maintenance (excess) property tax levy. (RCW 84.52.052) Packet Page 200 of 360 AM-5425 City Council Retreat - Friday, February 1, 2013 Meeting Date: 02/01/2013 Time: Submitted By: Carrie Hite Department: Parks and Recreation Review Committee: Parks/Planning/Public Works Type: Action Information Subject Title Metropolitan Park District and/or Park Levy Options Recommendation Review material and discuss options Previous Council Action 5. a. Committee Action: Recommend Review by Full Council City Council received a presentation on the formation of a Metropolitan Park District on March 27, 2012. The Council requested the Finance committee to work with staff to formulate a plan to explore a MPD. The Finance Committee met on April 10th, and decided to appoint Council member Frank Yamamoto and Council member Diane Buckshnis in a lead role to engage the community to explore this option for Edmonds. Council received a report and recommendation from the MPD Exploratory Committee on July 17, 2012, and decided to request the Exploratory Committee to continue its work, but not to put it on a ballot in 2012. Narrative Council member Frank Yamamoto and Council member Diane Buckshnis recruited 40 people to serve on an MPD exploratory committee and formalize a recommendation for City Council prior to the August ballot deadline. The MPD Exploratory committee met in May and June to research, ask questions, talk to other people in the community in order to measure the merits of the formation of a MPD for Edmonds. In addition to the committee, Council members Yamamoto and Buckshnis, and city staff Hite and Hunstock delivered several community presentations, and sent information to the media about the MPD. Upon careful consideration, the MPD committee recommended to the City Council that they consider placing the MPD on a future ballot, for an Edmonds only service area, and governed by the City Council. The committee also recommended that they continue to explore this and other options, and come back to Council with a recommendation on the timing and level of a ballot measure. The committee thought it was too soon to put it on the November ballot. Packet Page 201 of 360 Attached are several documents that the exploratory committee reviewed in exploring the merits of an MPD for Edmonds. Council member Yamamoto, lead for the MPD Exploratory Committee, in consultation with staff, decided to put these efforts on hold until after the budget process. The Committee and Councilmember Yamamoto are now ready to begin work, but would like some direction from the full Council before proceeding. In the November election there have been many successful efforts statewide in passing Parks measures. There were 19 measures that were on the ballot, of which 17 passed. Does Council want to explore the possibility of a special parks levy in lieu of a Metropolitan Park District, or continue to explore the MPD option? The option for a specific Parks levy may give the community an opportunity to support Parks to a lesser cost, and restore maintenance, operations and programs where it was before the budget cuts. Council also could decide on varoius options to add to the levy based on community priorities. If Council is interested in exploring this option, staff can work with Councilmember Yamamoto, or others as interested, to work with the Exploratory committee and bring more information back to Council. If Council has continued interest in exploring the MPD or a Parks Levy, a suitable next step could be to research the attitudes of residents through a statistically valid random sample telephone survey. Information gathered might include: Citizen willingness to consider a ballot measure for parks in 2013; Citizen priorities for recommended park levies or MPD amounts; Citizen priorities for specific funding needs and projects in the CIP. Finance Committee Strategic Direction MPD Exploratory Committee Role News Release MPD FAQ's MPD Comparisons MPD Q and A Inbox Reviewed By City Clerk Sandy Chase Mayor Dave Earling Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase Form Started By: Carrie Hite Final Approval Date: 01/28/2013 Attachments Form Review Date O1/28/2013 01:18 PM O1/28/2013 01:33 PM O1/28/2013 01:44 PM Started On: 01/24/2013 11:49 AM Packet Page 202 of 360 Metropolitan Park District Strategic Direction April 3, 2012 Previous Council Action On March 27t", Council received a presentation and overview of a Metropolitan Park District. The Council was interested in exploring this more, and referred the topic to the Finance Committee for further review. Background: The Parks, Recreation, and Cultural service budget has been struggling since 2009. Most significantly, this can be evidenced in the Parks Capital improvement fund, or REET, and the fund balances decreasing in both REET and the Cemetery. For example, in 2006-2009, the average REET revenue was 3.5 Million. In 20010-2011, the average was $500,000. This reduction in revenue has resulted in an unprecedented drop in ongoing maintenance levels of our capital investments in our parks system. The City has responded in a number of ways to the budget difficulties within the past few years. For example, last year, instead of a 2% cut, the Department sought to balance the budget with increased revenue options, including non- resident differential pricing, adding concessions to parks, renegotiating our instructor contracts, hiring less seasonal staff, and relying on the our residents and community to help with projects in the Parks system. But, despite these efforts, residents continue to experience parks that are less attractive, and less responsive to their needs, and there is increasing concern that the hidden impacts of deferred maintenance will soon become more visible and, in the long run, more costly to resolve. While trying to balance the Parks budget, without an increased amount of service level cuts, has been difficult at best. As the City faces an additional deficit next year, there is nowhere left to cut without impacting service level. In addition to this difficult situation, there are some exciting opportunities for Edmonds. The City's previous feasibility study and concept design of an expanded aquatic complex at Yost pool location is of high interest in the community. The recent discussions with the School District in regard to adding soccer fields at Woodway HS, and the renovation of Civic Stadium are also starting to gain interest. The City is conducting a feasibility study on next steps to rehabilitate Edmonds Marsh, restoring it for wildlife and salmon. In response to these issues, staff presented the idea of a Metropolitan Park District to Council on March 27, 2012. Staff recommended that if Council was interested, it might be best to form an MPD Exploratory Committee. This Committee could be formed with stakeholders representing a broad array of community interests, 1-2 City Council members, and staff support. This Committee could be charged with gathering and interpreting information about the pros and cons of an MPD; explore goals, issues, needs and priorities of Edmonds Parks and Recreation system; direct public outreach strategies such as citizen surveys and open houses and prepare conclusions and recommendations for Council consideration. This Committee could meet over the months of May and June, and be prepared to make recommendation to Council in July. If Council were to consider placing this on the November ballot, it would need to be filed in August. If Council makes this decision, the Committee could then become the voice of the MPD in the community prior to November. Packet Page 203 of 360 City of Edmonds Metropolitan Park District Exploratory Committee April 16, 2012 The Parks, Recreation, and Cultural service budget has been struggling since 2009. Most significantly, this can be evidenced in the Parks Capital improvement fund, or REET ( Real Estate Excise Tax), and the fund balances decreasing in both REET and the Cemetery. For example, in 2006-2009, the average REET revenue was 3.5 Million. In 20010-2011, the average was $500,000. This reduction in revenue has resulted in an unprecedented drop in ongoing maintenance levels of our capital investments in our parks system. The City has responded in a number of ways to the budget difficulties within the past few years. For example, last year, instead of a 2% cut, the Department sought to balance the budget with increased revenue options, including non- resident differential pricing, adding concessions to parks, renegotiating our instructor contracts, hiring less seasonal staff, and relying on the our residents and community to help with projects in the Parks system. But, despite these efforts, residents continue to experience parks that are less attractive, and less responsive to their needs, and there is increasing concern that the hidden impacts of deferred maintenance will soon become more visible and, in the long run, more costly to resolve. While trying to balance the Parks budget, without an increased amount of service level cuts, has been difficult at best. As the City faces an additional deficit next year, there is nowhere left to cut without impacting service level. In addition to this difficult situation, there are some exciting opportunities for Edmonds. The City's previous feasibility study and concept design of an expanded aquatic complex at Yost pool location is of high interest in the community. The recent discussions with the School District in regard to adding soccer fields at old Woodway High School, and the renovation of Civic Stadium are also starting to gain interest. The City is conducting a feasibility study on next steps to rehabilitate Edmonds Marsh, restoring it for wildlife and salmon. In addition, the city's long partnership with the Senior Center could benefit with increased funding and addressing capital needs. In response to these issues, City Council has decided to form an Exploratory Committee. This Committee will be charged with gathering and interpreting information about the pros and cons of a Metropolitan Park District ( MPD ); explore goals, issues, needs and priorities of Edmonds Parks and Recreation system; direct public outreach strategies such as citizen surveys and town hall meetings and prepare conclusions and recommendations for Council consideration. This Committee will meet over the months of May and June, and be prepared to make a recommendation to City Council in July. If City Council were to consider placing this on the November ballot, it would need to be filed in August. Following is the process for the Exploratory Committee: Phase 1: What is a Metropolitan Park District? What are the needs and options for funding in the Parks Department? Phase 2: Public relations: Information gathering and dissemination. Neighborhood town hall meetings, online survey, Public hearing, other Packet Page 204 of 360 Phase 3: Analysis and Recommendations to Council June study session with City Council July: Council: decision making, ballot measure language, filing Phase 4: Pro and Con committees Meeting schedule: May 7th: 6:00-8:00 p.m. Library Plaza Room, 2"d floor, Edmonds Library May 23rd, 6:00-8:00 p.m. Library Plaza Room, 2"d floor, Edmonds Library Other meetings: TBD Packet Page 205 of 360 City of Edmonds Explores a Metropolitan Park District As the City of Edmonds prepares for a difficult task of developing a balanced budget for 2013, the Mayor and City Council will need to consider service level cuts, efficiencies, revenue tools, or all of the above. Recently, Council decided to explore the formation of a Metropolitan Park District (MPD), one possible tool that could help balance the budget, and secure dedicated funding for the much loved flower baskets, Yost pool, recreation programs, Senior Center, and parks among other areas. A Metropolitan Park District can be formed for the management, control, improvement, maintenance, and acquisition of parks, parkways, and recreational facilities. If formed as a Citywide MPD, a City Council serves as the governing body. First, an MPD must be voter approved and pass with a simple majority. MPDs allow jurisdictions to levy up to $35 per $1,000 assessed value. At the maximum levy rate, this would cost a homeowner, with an average home value of $350,000, approximately $21 per month. The Parks budget has been struggling since 2009. This can be evidenced by declining Parks Capital improvement fund and fund balances as a result of decreasing Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) and the Cemetery funds. For example, in 2006-2009, the average annual REET revenue was $3.5 Million. In 2010-2011, the average was $500,000. This reduction in revenue has resulted in an unprecedented drop in ongoing maintenance levels of our parks system. The City has responded in a number of ways to balance the budget such as increasing revenue options, including non-resident fees, concessions in parks; renegotiating instructor contracts; hiring less seasonal staff; and relying on residents to help with Parks projects. Despite these efforts, residents may experience parks that are less attractive, and there is increasing concern that the impacts of deferring maintenance will soon become more visible and in the long run, more costly to address. As the City faces a projected deficit in 2013, there is little to cut within the Parks and Recreation budget without impacting service levels. Providing a dedicated fund for Parks, similar to what's been created in Bainbridge Island, Des Moines, Tacoma, Pullman, etc., would help maintain the same service level citizen's currently enjoy, while alleviating some of the burden on the City's general fund. This would also help curb service level cuts in parks as well as other areas, such as police and public works. There are exciting opportunities that could be explored with the formation of an MPD. The City's previous feasibility study for an expanded aquatic complex at Yost pool is of high interest in the community. Discussions with the School District in regard to adding soccer fields at old Woodway High School, and the renovation of Civic Stadium are also starting to gain interest. The City is conducting a feasibility study on next steps to rehabilitate Edmonds Marsh. In addition, the city's long partnership with the Senior Center could benefit with increased funding for much needed capital needs. The City Council has decided to form an MPD Exploratory Committee which will be led by Councilmember Frank Yamamoto with support from Councilmember Diane Buckshnis. The Committee will be charged with gathering information about the pros and cons of forming a Metropolitan Park District; re-examining needs and priorities of the Edmonds Parks and Recreation system; developing public outreach strategies such as citizen surveys and town hall meetings; and preparing recommendations for Council consideration. Packet Page 206 of 360 The Committee will meet during the months of May and June, and will make a recommendation to City Council in July, 2012. If the City Council were to consider placing this on the November ballot, a ballot measure would need to be filed in August. The first two meetings for the MPD Exploratory Committee have been scheduled for May 7 and 23 from 6:00-8:00 p.m. in the 2"d floor Edmonds Library Plaza Room (650 Main Street); the public is welcome to attend. If anyone is interested in serving on the committee, there is an application on the city's website [ link to website ], or for pick up at City Hall or the Frances Anderson Center. For further information, please contact Carrie Hite, Parks, Recreation, and Cultural Services Director, at carrie.hite@ci.edmonds.wa.us, or 425-771-0230. Packet Page 207 of 360 Metropolitan Park District FAQ City of Edmonds May 2012 What is a Metropolitan Park District: It is a junior taxing district that Cities, Counties, or dedicated area of citizens can form to pay for Parks and Recreation services. What other communities in Washington have formed MPD's and how are they governed ( Council or Board of Commissioners?) 1. Bainbridge Island MPD, founded 40 years ago, over 1500 acres, 90% of which is protected open space, 5 Elected Board of Commissioners, 6 year terms without pay 2. Des Moines MPD (Mt. Rainier Pool), created 11/2009, same boundaries as City limits, 5 Elected Metro Park Commissioners 3. Eastmont MPD, created 5/2004, 44 acres of parks & 7 miles of Columbia River waterfront asphalt trails, Park Board members elected for 6 year terms. There are 5 elected board positions. Every 2 years elections are held. Positions are staggered at 2 year intervals. 4. Fall City MPD, created 2/2009, governed by 5 elected commissioners S. Greater Clark Parks District, created 2/2005, governed by Board of Clark County Commissioners; also 30+ citizen advisory committees provide input. District provides funding for maintenance, operations & construction of 30 new neighborhood parks, 5 new community parks, 7 miles of new walking trails & an additional 41 sports fields. 6. Key Peninsula MPD, created 5/2004, 25 miles long and 5 miles wide at widest point (65 sq. miles), Board of Commissioners — 5 members 7. Normandy Park MPD, 11/2009, 100 acres of park land — 6 major parks, 2 of which are low intensity nature preserves. Also, 1 rec center and several mini parks, Board of Park Commissioners, 7 members appointed for 7 year terms 8. Orcas Island P&R District (OIPRD), 5 Elected Commissioners, 4 year terms each, except positions 1 & 3 have 2 year terms. 9. Peninsula MPD (PenMetParks), 5/2004, 585 acres on the Gig Harbor Peninsula, Board of 5 elected Commissioners, Six year staggered terms 10. Port Angeles /William Shore Memorial Pool MPD. Boundaries are City of Port Angeles and Port Angeles School District. Governed by board composed of members of City Council and the County Commissioners to serve ex officio as the Board of MPD through selection of 1 or more members. 11. Pullman MPD, 9/2002, Governed by City Council Packet Page 208 of 360 12. Shelton MPD, 4/10, same as City boundaries, governed by the City Commission serving as ex- officio Board of Directors 13. Si View MPD. 2/2003, 27 square miles (17,310 acres), 5 elected commissioners with staggered 6 year terms 14. Tacoma MPD. 1909, 5 member Board of Park Commissioners with 6 year staggered terms 15. Tukwila Pool MPD, Same boundaries as City of Tukwila, governed by City Council serving as the Board of Commissioners in an ex officio capacity. 16. Village Green MPD (Kingston), 8/10, 5 member Board of Commissioners elected at large Which communities in the state have put an MPD on the ballot that failed? Unfortunately we do not know how many may have been proposed and failed to pass. Since local elections are done county by county and there is no place that information is collected on a statewide basis. What is the RCW that allows Metropolitan Park Districts? RCW 35.61 authorizes cities, counties or a combination of both to form Metropolitan Park Districts by majority vote. This RCW is quite lengthy, and can be found by this link: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=35.61&full=true#35.61.001 What is the net expenditure amount needed to provide the same level of service as today? $2,164,282. What is included in the $2,164,282? Yost pool operations, recreation programs, discovery programs, athletics, day camps, fitness, gymnastics, Meadowdale preschool, Parks maintenance (mowing, bed maintenance, leaf removal, trash, restroom maintenance, equipment repair, irrigation repairs, backflow testing and playground, turf management, etc.), parks administration. What is the total scope of what's in parks and recreation. 1. Park Maintenance includes 11 FTE's, and several seasonal employees that maintain 146 park and city areas, spanning close to 345 acres and 20 facilities, and includes 133 seasonal flower baskets, a cemetery, underwater dive park, and Yost pool. Maintenance duties include turf mowing, trimming, edging, aerating, fertilizing, filling, ballfield maintenance, trash and litter pick up, restroom maintenance and repair, flower program, leaf maintenance, playground inspection and repairs, landscaping, bed maintenance and pruning year around, sprinkler installation and repair which includes parks plumbing & drinking fountains, Yost Pool maintenance, parks equipment repair, such as various types of lawnmowers, weed eaters and chain saws and other small gasoline and diesel equipment, picnic table & bench repairs, walkways & pathways cleaning and repair, park and city building parking lot maintenance, park sign maintenance, responses to vandalism, street tree pruning & maintenance, city wide park trail & pedestrian foot bridge maintenance, staffing for community events ( Arts festival, 4ch of July, Wenatchee Youth Circus, Egg Hunt, Taste of Edmonds, Holiday decorating and lighting and other small events). Packet Page 209 of 360 Recreation includes providing close to 3000 classes per year with 50,000 people participating in these classes. It includes operating Yost Pool, Frances Anderson Center, and Meadowdale Clubhouse providing a comprehensive aquatics program, environmental education, athletics, fitness, gymnastics, preschool, day camps, general recreation programs, and special events throughout the year. The Recreation program also manages the business operations for the Parks Department, including facility rentals, concessions, instructor contracts, city wide special events, class registrations, website maintenance, marketing, etc. Administration includes oversight of all services, policy and strategic planning, capital projects, Department and City wide leadership, promotion of economic tourism and development, oversight of five citizen boards/commissions. What is on the deferred maintenance list? The deferred maintenance list for parks was created after a thorough analysis of the condition of the current park system. This list would be an ideal level of service needed to maintain the park system without adding longer term costs because of deferred maintenance issues. The cost estimate is $300,000 per year. This includes ongoing play structure repair and replacement, city wide restroom improvements, replacement and updates at park entrances, gateways to the city, city wide parking lot and asphalt pathway improvements, city wide upgrades of turf and drainage, replacement of turf and soil at several ballfields, tennis court and basketball court resurfacing, park amenity maintenance and replacement (Le garbage cans, landscape, picnic tables, benches, etc), tree maintenance. What is in the Capital Improvement Plan ( CIP )? An average of $600,000 per year for the next five years is budgeted for various parks capital improvement projects. These include City Park revitalization, Mathay Ballinger Park playground replacement, former Woodway High School field development, Yost pool boiler replacement, Yost pool slide addition, Marina Beach Park playground replacement, Dayton Street Plaza completion, Upgrades to Civic Stadium fields and campus, Edmonds Marsh feasibility study and revitalization, city wide beautification, and sports field upgrades. What is in the Capital Facilities Plan ( CFP )? The City's CFP seeks to identify longer range plans for facilities for the City of Edmonds. Currently, the Parks CFP identifies the need for a new Aquatic Center, Civic Playfield acquisition and/or development, Former Woodway High School development ( this is also in the CIP, because we are starting to set aside funds for the future development), and a Parks maintenance facility. If the MPD is successful who hires/fires Parks Director? The Parks Director will still report to the Mayor who will do the hiring/firing. All Parks and Recreation services would be provided by the City to the MPD. The MPD Board (City Council) could certainly have input on the hiring selection as well as input on regular performance evaluations, but ultimately these items are the responsibility of the Mayor until/unless the MPD hires its own employees. If the MPD is successful who does the budget? The Parks Director prepares the budget, submits it to the Mayor, and the Mayor presents it to City Council. At that point it is the Council's budget to modify as it sees fit (this is the same as the City budget). Can the MPD decrease if the economy gets better? Packet Page 210 of 360 The MPD can always, at any time, levy less than what it currently does and less than what it is enabled to levy based on the ballot language that voters approved. If we vote in .38 or .59 and it needs to be increased does it have to go back to a vote? The process is the same as for the City. The levy can increase by any amount in order to capture the 1% increase in total revenue. For instance, if assessed valuation in Edmonds drops by a significant amount (10% or more), the levy rate could increase by a significant amount in order to capture the 1% increase in total revenue. The 1% limit is on total tax collections, not on the levy rate. The only difference between the MPD levy and the City levy is that the MPD will always be limited to $0.75 per $1,000 of AV, and will also be limited to the amount included in the ballot language that voters approved. If the MPD needs to increase revenues beyond the allowable 1% increase, it can ask the voters for a levy lid lift increase. The $0.75 limitation will always be in effect, though, and the MPD could not ask the voters to exceed that. Can you say the Council is the governing board and then change it later to a Board? Yes, but this would have to go back to the voters. This would essentially be creating a new MPD and dissolving the old one. Will the MPD be charged for City services? The MPD would be charged all the same expenses ( with the exception of Cultural Arts )that are now charged to the Parks and Recreation General Fund budget. This includes salaries and benefits, supplies, professional services, operations and maintenance costs, etc. There would not be a separate, added fee just because there is an MPD. However, if the MPD were to be completely independent of the City (with a Board of Commissioners rather than City Council acting as the governing body), it would not be uncommon for there to be an administrative fee or overhead for providing services to the MPD. For instance, if the MPD was completely independent of the City but the City still provided accounting, payroll, financial reporting, risk management, legal, HR, recruiting, and other services to the MPD there could be an administrative cost in addition to the direct cost of providing that service to the MPD. The administrative cost would not be automatic, though, and would be negotiable between the City and the MPD. This, again, though would probably only occur if the MPD were completely separate from the City. Will the employees still be City employees? Yes, in the model being considered by City Council the employees now working in Parks and Recreation would continue to be City employees providing services to the MPD. The MPD could opt to hire its own employees, either initially or later, but there is a likelihood that that would increase total costs due to duplication of effort. For instance, rather than having one accounting and HR staff providing service to both the City and the MPD there would be two separate staffs at each entity. If the MPD is successful can there be an ordinance stating how the money could/should be used, including savings? Will you ask the City Attorney? It would be interesting to know their opinion. Packet Page 211 of 360 Metropolitan Park District Comparison Jurisdiction Level Council/Commission Reason Other/Tips Si View MPD .47/1000 Commission Regional entity, outside the boundaries If PR operations are to stay completely under one city, makes sense for MPD to be governed by City of one city. Council. Commissions usually used for unincorporated, multiple city areas. O&M, C PenMet Parks .59/1000 Commission Outside one city's boundaries, regional Consider service level, and don't sell yourself short. If operating in one city, would be much more entity. efficient to have City Council oversee operations. O&M, C KeyPen MPD .37/1000 Commission Covers unincorporated County area Current a/v dropping, have to plan for pro rationing. O&M, C Shelton .55/1000 City Council Use of existing form of government, Identify indirect costs and services the city will provide, build this into the levy rate. less duplication of services O&M, C Normandy Park .45/1000 City Council City desired to maintain control over Timing: If on a November ballot, can't create a new district until 90 days after the adoption of initial parks and rec programs, facilities. property tax levy. So, would have to wait for one year. O&M, C Pullman .50/1000 City Council Maintain control over park system, Set aside funds for capital, plan for need, go as high as community will tolerate. assets, quality programs. O&M,C Greater Clark .27/1000 County Council County boundaries, maintain control Didn't budget accurately, have subsequently suspended any capital development for MPD parks. Protect MPD levy, so it is not subject to pro -rationing due to dropping ay. Capital Commission Operated: Pros: Can cover larger territory, specifically set up for Parks and Recreation, flexibility, operated independently. Cons: Forming a new administrative body is time consuming, and costs money, City loses control over assets, need for duplicate staffing and supplies( i.e. accounting, software, telecommunications, etc) Need for duplicate equipment ( staying as part of the city, shared use of larger equipment, without it costing more money). Packet Page 212 of 360 Metropolitan Park District Further questions, answers June 25, 2012 1. How is REET 1 and 2 allocated? Through the CIP/Budget process. See attachment for the policy direction on REET. 2. Are we talking about the MPD being the boundaries of the City and not including the unincorporated areas? Yes, City boundaries only. 3. Who has the operational control of non city owned property, such as Woodway Fields? Whoever owns it, unless the City enters into an Interlocal agreement to gain operational control. 4. P & R advisory committee — would their functions change? This is a function of the Planning Board currently. If there was a Commission that was elected in an oversight capacity for the MPD, then this would no longer be the function of the Planning Board. If the City Council is charged with oversight of the MPD, the Planning Board could still function in an advisory capacity. 5. If we put forward .50/thousand, is the bonding over and above that? The current rate to keep same level of service is .38/thousand ay. If we decided to put .50 on the ballot, that would raise an additional $660,000 and could be used for capital, bonding, deferred maintenance issues, etc. 6. What is the plan for this group to come to some kind of consensus? We would like the exploratory group to make a recommendation to the City Council, by majority vote. 7. How is this different than the 2011 proposition that failed? The propositions that were placed on the ballot in 2011 only represented $300,000 for parks deferred maintenance. This proposition was for an additional service level ( deferred maintenance), and was placed on the ballot with not a lot of time, wasn't preceded with an exploratory committee, and was lumped in with two other proposals. This would be a stand alone, be able to maintain adequate service levels, and possibly add some capital. 8. What would be the cost of total labor and benefit costs with escalation? Labor costs are built in at 2.5%, benefits at 10%. 9. If this is successful, how long will it be before the City's finances are in trouble? This would lead the city into at least 2017 without having to cut service level. 10. Do we have enough time to sell it? How long do we need to prepare a ballot measure and educate the public? Could we hear from the ESD on this since they run successful campaigns? A majority of the committee last meeting felt there was not enough time to sell this before November. A pro/con committee would need to be formed, and best case scenario is that they would have 6-8 months to prepare. 11. Is this similar to the library becoming a library district? Yes. Packet Page 213 of 360 12. What are we going to do with the savings? Can we commit those dollars? Can we commit future Councils? The savings would help to balance the GF long term. If voted for, the MPD would be permanent. Future Councils could repeal the MPD if they so choose. You could also add ballot language to have it expire, and renewable. 13. What are special election costs? This depends on if there are other districts running levies. It would range from $20,000 ( on the general or primary), to $106,000 ( special election with only Edmonds). If there were a few jurisdictions on the special election, this cost would go down. Packet Page 214 of 360 AM-5414 City Council Retreat - Friday, February 1, 2013 Meeting Date: 02/01/2013 Time: Submitted For: Council President Petso Department: City Council Review Committee: Type: Information Information Subject Title Cost Savings Ideas Recommendation Previous Council Action Narrative Roundtable discussion regarding cost -savings ideas. Inbox Reviewed By City Clerk Sandy Chase Mayor Dave Earling Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase Form Started By: Jana Spellman Final Approval Date: 01/28/2013 Form Review Submitted By: Committee Action: Date O1/28/2013 01:17 PM O1/28/2013 01:30 PM O1/28/2013 01:44 PM Started On: 01/23/2013 02:30 PM 5. g. Jana Spellman Packet Page 215 of 360 AM-5436 City Council Retreat - Friday, February 1, 2013 Meeting Date: Time: Submitted BY: Department: Review Committee: Type: 02/01 /2013 Stephen Clifton Community Services Information Information Subject Title Implementation of Roger Brooks' Ideas Recommendation Previous Council Action Narrative Committee Action: 6. b. On Novemer 8, 2012, the City's Economic Development Department hosted a public event in the Wade James Theater during which Roger Brooks with Destination Development Inc, presented information on two topics, i.e., Seven Deadly Sins of Community Marketing and 20 Ingredients for an Outstanding Destination. The following lists both topics followed by specifics of each. Seven Deadly Sins of Community Marketing 1. Being all things to all people 2. Promoting what, who and where before why 3. Boring headlines 4. Lack of focus (layout and wording) 5. Writing one ad for 30 places 6. Spending more on collateral than on the web 7. Providing generalities rather than specifics 20 Ingredients for an Outstanding Destination 1. Nearly all began with a plan 2. They defined a strong brand and retail focus 3. They orchestrated recruitment of "critical mass" or "clustering" 4. They each have "anchor tenants" 5. Lease agreements include defined operating hours and days 6. People living and/or staying downtown: Hotels, condos, loft apartments 7. Pioneers with patient money were convinced to invest 8. They started with just one block - a "demonstration project" 9. Solving the parking dilemma 10. Public washrooms 11. Development of gathering places 12. Creation of good first impressions: Community gateways Packet Page 216 of 360 13. Design, fabrication & installation of a Wayfinding System 14. A good first impression: District gateways 15. 20/20 signage equals $$$ 16. Sidewalk cafes & outdoor dining 17. They invested heavily in retail beautification 18. Activities & entertainment 19. Downtown district(s) with a name 20. Experiential marketing A link to all slides used by Mr. Brooks can be found on the front page of the City's website. The slides are also attached to this council packet. Roger Brooks Slides Inbox City Clerk Mayor Finalize for Agenda Form Started By: Stephen Clifton Final Approval Date: 01/29/2013 Attachments Form Review Reviewed By Date Sandy Chase 01/29/2013 09:09 AM Dave Earling 01/29/2013 09:12 AM Sandy Chase 01/29/2013 09:19 AM Started On: 01/28/2013 05:00 PM Packet Page 217 of 360 Topic: 20 Ingredients of an Outstanding Downtown Edmonds, Washington November 8, 2012 Save 25% on the price of these incredible resources, available in the DDI Store at www.DDistore.com. Use the promo codes below. Community Marketing on a Minuscule Budget Learn the 7 things you can do today, for practically no money, that will generate increased local spending. Price: $75 USD (Reg. $100) Promo Code: 2012MKT8467 6840 Fort Dent Way, Suite 360 1 Seattle, WA 98188 1 206-241-4770 Packet Page 218 of 360 The Art of Branding a Community - Part 1 Learn the 10 critical things you need to know and do to successfully brand your community. An absolute must -have resource. Price: $75 USD (Reg. $100) Promo Code: 20BRANDING12 The 20 Ingredients of an Outstanding Downtown In this three-DVD set, learn about the 20 ingredients that are essential for a dynamic and successful downtown. Price: $225 USD (Reg. $300) Promo Code: INGREDS4ME The Seven Deadly Sins of Community Marketing A full 97% of all community marketing is wasted. Learn how to avoid the 7 deadly sins and achieve 100%success. Price: $75.00 USD (Reg. $100) Promo Code: DEADLY423987 Your Town a Destination Learn the 25 Immutable Rules of Successful Tourism. In its 3rd printing this is the"must read" book for everyone with a role in the tourism industry. Price: $10.00 USD (Reg. $14.95) Promo Code: 20MYTOW N 12 Destination Development International The 20 ingredients of an outstanding downtown with Roger Brooks We're drowning in marketing overload City of Edmonds 1 of the 7 CL ULAB V JII IJ of Community Marketing 0 zi �r - Billions of dollars are spent each year marketing communities RP Chambers of commerce Destination marketing organizations Economic development agencies Cities, downtowns, counties, districts Regions, states & provinces F We are drowning in marketing & advertising overload The challenge? 0}.L f_I.l P a y,a, 1 :eEarpb -' u.i .c1�IL wham IhAA WHISTLER f; Jima"Aq We are now exposed to 5,000 marketing messages a day , Am .iA _ Y reentals Jain ) This has created a situation where... This includes Your brochures Websites & Internet advertising Fliers & posters Radio & television ads Print ads Billboards & outdoor advertising Fi ,L rt T yJ 97o/(o of community -based marketing is ineffective. Deadly sin #1 Trying to be all things to all people Why is this important? Because we filter out everything not directly appealing to us. Avoid these words & phrases: • Explore • Close to everywhere • Discover • Right around the corner • Outdoor recreation • Your playground • Unlike anywhere else • So much history • So much to see and do • Purely natural • The four season destination • The place for all ages • Where the seasons come to life • ...and so much more! • Historic downtown • Home away from home • Center of it all • A slice of heaven • Best kept secret • It's all right here • We have it all • Recreation unlimited • Experience... • The perfect getaway • Visit (name of town) • The place for families • Beauty & heritage • Start your vacation here • Naturally fun • Recreational paradise • Gateway • Take a look! id just about everyone is saying the very same thing. tune it out. %r � T IP Tell your tourism organizations to avoid these words! Have you ever gone anywhere because they had "something for everyone"? The challenge: Competition has never been more fierce. r 71 - Communities and businesses } Y' have been forced to specialize... r yet most are still stuck in the mire of... AL �F ... the "membership mentality.' IS, ...the" rou hu mentalit " 9 p 9 Y Or worse... bb�A-k , � you simply cannot be all things to all people and win in this new age of community marketing. Put yourself in the shoes of the people you're hoping to attract and ask this one question: In this age of differentiation you must SURVIVOR To win you must narrow your focus What do we have that they can't get or do closer to home? The world is at our fingertips - in seconds. So what sets you apart from everyone else? Why should I invest in your community? Why should I establish a business there? Why should I move there? Why should I visit you? You MUSTjettison the generic Whatever it is that makes you different or clearly better* - you MUST hang your hat on that. * by third party endorsement "Discover the wide-open spaces, gracious people, and picturesque landscapes that characterizes Darrington, Washington. Each season holds the promise of a new adventure and an incredible memory. Come join us in Darrington and discover the scenic and recreational opportunities that await you.' settings, from Pu�A Sbu'to rd unsurpassed location, we've done ie'same Wn-se educated workforce and a supportive business environm Our coui ty is home to,num&pus national companies and thousands of thriving small businesses. From healthcare_to agriculture.hpiaacial services to manufacturing, and to Tst.roction to irgparting, W6 have pal it tAes to compete in the regional, hatioKaliind, globfrIrmartets.' I —+.. - _ Lot Thanks to our sustainable evnomic developmen1programs, our ded*on to technology .-and higher education, ancl`110�4eaqlership that balances business inter with a'high quality.of life, thexe is no betlrerr lace'ts-de business. Look at your taglines & logos. Look at your brochures & website. Read your introductory text. You MUST jettison the generic If it can fit anyone The rule Don't be all things to all people. Promote your primary advantage. Find your niche and promote it like crazy. The most overused words in the world community promotion: 1) Explore 2) Discover 3) Unique 4) Experience 5) Opportunity The narrower the focus, the stronger your success will be Stew Leonards in Connecticut: ' w � 4W ~ f4 774 r r T. '` - - - rL ��. L k l 4 '{ • Farmyard zoo ' • Displays that go "moo" ' f • Free ice cream if you spend $100 or more • "Profit is the applause of happy customers" The Brand Result Farm fresh produce & dairy, fresh baked goods Highest per square foot retail sales of any grocery store on earth Stew Leonard's now has five stores You MUST jettison the generic L UNE- I - [#1 IN Something for everyone will result in mediocrity & ultimate failure. Memberships can kill your marketing efforts. You MUST jettison the generic You MussT HE', J izoN T uENERK"J" If your brand -that one thing that sets you apart -stand for everything, then you stand for nothing. Zeeland, Michigan's marketing pitch: Close knit community • Historical homes • Small home -town feel • Short walk to downtown • Neighbors look out for one another • Merchants know you • We ride our bikes as a family • Enjoy going to local parks Playing in the backyard • Children like the Zeeland Bakery- the cookies • Great community to raise a family and spend time in Could this be Edmonds? Zeeland, Michigan's marketing pitch: We love Zeeland • A great community Smallness and closeness A great school system There's a lot happening here Visitor's feel the excitement -"Feel the Zeel" Could this be Edmonds? "1 can't give you a surefire formula for success, but 1 can give you a formula for failure: try to please everybody all the time." -Herbert Bayard Swope, first recipient of the Pulitzer Prize The rule It is far better to be a big fish in a small pond (and then increase the size of the pond) than to be a small fish in a big pond. You MUST narrow your focus if you hope to compete & win. Deadly sin #1.5 Using focus groups Dim—,—hi.q— state at exp.rien—.—I or call 1.800.544.1800 —, w.m.,—. ra n...1— 1. The 6th slogan in ten years 2. Focus groups are never the way to build a brand 3. Creative services usually don't get it 4. Cute and/or clever rarely work SAYWA- This is the noiu happy muulez make. Syr, .y } o�..a... w.. y s�ar.a<expenencewa.com o. call taoo.sm.ieaa wms.. .�, z...,....m o.�.. You NEVER do branding by public consent. Period. Keep it simple 0 WHI You cannot narrow your focus through public consent. You build your brand on feasibility, notjust local sentiment. I .� ., ii—D a. The 20 ingredients of an outstanding downtown Edmonds, Washington If this was easy, everyone would be doillo w r r ,�.. _ J ' Downtown - no finer place, for sure Downtown - everything's waiting for you. 1960's What the heck happened? Then came the suburbAp mall .0Y IF 6 The big retailers went to the malls F. OV I 970's in droves P VW and the proliferation of strip malls - Andy the death of downtowns began. r But there's a new shift to taking place across North America. Sad fact: There are more than twice as many vacancies in downtowns than in neighborhood retail areas. As we begin moving to the European standard... ; . - More pedestrian -friendly • Central gathering places Plazas w/ water, art • Sidewalk cafes Street vendors, artisans, music Open well into evening hours ,Vj I ir Destination resorts took the lead & succeeded i.iRt' r 1 1. A de ti Then came Downtown Disney VA Id 411 *4 kh r And now? Downtowns are back! i 3` L. We set out to find out Survey 1 400 successful downtowns and downtown districts in the U.S. and Canada. Found The 20 most common ingredients for success. Biggest challenge Thinking that beautification and streetscapes will revitalize a downtown. You're only half done and are doing it backwards. So, how do you turn your downtown a thriving destination? 1 Community first, visitors will follow • The heart and soul of every community, besides its people, is its downtown. • If locals won't"hang out" in your downtown, neither will visitors • The number one complimentary activity of visitors is shopping, dining and entertainment in a pedestrian -friendly, intimate setting. • This is where 80% of visitor spending takes place. 01 Tourism organizations & downtowns should be joined at the hip L:''.L _ Always start with a plan Branding (what is it you want to be known for?) Development (what you need to do to "own" the brand) & Marketing (how to tell the world) Action Plan (the to-do list) r� Nearly all began with a plan No more strategic plans! Key Elements Reviewed in an Sixty Assessment ppportumty ,gym ",..�^9 ❑ M�w.,��,U gym^ ❑ .^a.,,^.^.�.wew,n ❑.,,n^n,^o�.�� o u�.eH:ww,", Os�Pc^.ms.r-�.a.mwve, a aa�a�.nrt,mom.,�. a ��M,�.We^�n ❑ �^rmA^^�, IEZ Packet Page 241 of 360 »tm k - k��.� > Packet Page &2ym0 Mir �sr.. "L — 41 The botanic arts city Alberta Cultivate Life .bk _ `r i. OL r pt ijp t �' I• .. 4 F'+ T I .1 .� - ' 4 f'w -i 7�v �ya� ' r wof'L 43 IF JMP rj_ Ala, �. pA .7 1 ep f 0 h�! .4 Cultivatid — - -- - L_ rrm, Cultivate own master # Cultivate t] — Cultivate the musician in � m ��- athlete in you. .LO Cultivate your dreams. Packet Page 246 of 360 ,l mtlWLp.LII You aim, f - — L� D owntoW 11 IJTIFICATI�N BEA rant program Application Process grant aes: M Pro9ruawW be av°'`m anY ma e. peso 9e hmwn yat redeveb menl � dficadcn wA+bma ym°"to ParOendiculer si9ne pmnl PAnasa A°�°n°" near%t Cp°ve,knt.Nwaveh slreel Nrniryre Thgd�� slness lmaysW�^"mWSdn bW Ner�MKPMut .bike racks vetl�Mere °eP�stch m°�nl�n�am / r°T��MMr 60Y ,Q �°w�AaPDr°v �. R m aPWY i° ma'am moi sonoo P°r umn all m° As. PP t°°IIW_ryovember t5 2010a PPe � �aJ ar be atl��°d CaP°N^BM Tne �enum et�n Erg T^e°u in9Da0anm°^t 3 . °r,p me PlanhlMe bicAa s ns swA tm P'XP°" r 9°bsm re aM A��s MY Pi 61��y eM En9�tm 9 Penn tln cbdm en mbe � rt rt•:re sh � 4 ' C° reck ova beuime n .Bik° yrea wmWAb°tF �rs � ar�sl-al �.na�auAWa°a" � Pho I�Min9 aP7''1cd�dsW mrg �iep_a59 t"I25ar ��+ IbaN=r�abAbM-nA. ne Pmgrem apd'°anon is tliM BeauA�anSan yPUAn a°- e d� re( �nl°atl al,MywntA�an' ra rya, pas' av a q¢az conUAJWn, Dm9r ° Packet Page 248 of 360 IJ7 crerr�a cc�f/� � �� a Af Nti�,}r Joy' r+�'�r�M'i.►�ry++�� y� � yy�4r y rr" a ~�r Packet Page 250 of 360 Wi�aw+ T.no , £LLYMING COW" Y i City Jackson, Wyoming Population 12,000 Brand The home of Western Living Foundation 110 galleries & western living shops Results Nearly 4 million visitors a year �"44w' City Jefferson,Texas Population 2,500 PIP Brand Antique Capital of Texas Foundation 125 antique dealers I r Results Now the B&B Capital of Texas City Leavenworth, Washington Population 2,500 Brand Washington's Bavarian Village Foundation Key to authenticity, artisans Results 2.5 million visitors a year Well -branded Northwest towns & downtowns - Leavenworth -The NW Bavarian village - Poulsbo- Little Norway - Port Townsend -Victorian seaport village - Capitol Hill in Seattle - Edgy, young, home to the gay community - Bellevue - Upscale, urban shopping destination -Victoria -The world's garden city - Wesport - Washington's deep sea fishing destination - Moses Lake -The lake sports destination (Ok, they're working on it!) 40 They orchestrated recruitment of"critical mass" or "clustering." Seattle metro -area haves & have-nots THE HAVES: THE HAVE NOTS: UP & COMING: - Bellevue Burien Ballard - Kirkland Kent West Seattle -Redmond -Auburn Shoreline - Issaquah - Federal Way Everett -Woodinville -SeaTac - Edmonds -Renton STRUGGLING - Mukilteo -White Center Pioneer Square - Newcastle Lynnwood North Bend - Mill Creek Bothell Kenmore - Mercer Island Des Moines 17 01 .� ;., � f 111 L I _ I r x The Ten+Ten+Ten Rule Area I Minimum in three lineal blocks Ten places that sell food: Soda fountain, coffee shop, bistro, cafe, sit- down restaurant, wine store, deli, confectionary. Ten Ten destination retail shops: Galleries, antiques (not second hand stores), collectibles, books, clothing, home accents, outfitters, brand -specific businesses, garden specialties, kitchen stores, cigars, etc. places open after 6:00: Entertainment, theater (movies, performing arts), bars & bistros, specialty shops, dining, open air markets, etc. The"mall mentality" Open hours Consistent hours and days Evenings Open late into the evening hours Clustering Like businesses grouped together: clustering Anchors Recruit and promote the anchor tenants Place A central gathering place Think Think Antique malls - 1 Ox the business when together Auto malls - 7x the sales when together Think Corner gas stations and fast food Lifestyle retail centers Food courts Case History: Halifax's Argyle Street Population 300,000 Claim to fame Lot's of vacancies, hodge-podge mix Challenge Why leave the waterfront? The brand Up the hill, why bother? Think food courts, corner gas, lifestyle retail centers _~ I r •�'- i f _ it 4z —now* » -is ME ■ i J1 � � 01\ OF� .�� � • _ � � I . &�� , �.. ■ � �k �pieIL } ■ - l . � The Brand Result Halifax's Argyle Street dining district 22 restaurants in 2.5 blocks A major gathering spot rivaling the waterfront The place to hang out -a "third place" Restaurants all doing very, very well Convention center is on the way! L Point Sometimes you have to orchestrate the effort. Start with property owners, not tenants. It only takes a one-third buy -in. They each have "anchor tenants" �e nu i F M=ii ip{Ne i' J i �Ph ` 4F YI yW �n • r• at_ �� ,7C .oquelap Au!gl •s�ueual aogDue ao auo seal 1e aneq W1W no(,u!M of OMB p O� O� (eM ano(� 10 �n Ilea�laads �... auy ud pl OM no�C �eql nssau!snq e s! �ueual aOq 140 i saiiunOD ao sa14u }ou - saDuauadxa o; unneap aae ajd -,=2* -W . — . )ff 4_ � 4 i 4.- Packet Page 260 of 360 70% of all consumer retail spending takes place after 6:00 pm Are you open? 70% of all consumer retail spending takes place after 6:00 pm a People living and/or staying downtown: Hotels, condos, loft apartments = yo,rk Packet Page 262 of 360 0 r�Ze MARKET . #e DISTRICT r �k-mowo or_k * Markel Cistrict U * Sovereign Bank Statlium yOrl' ♦ Central Market YS YOBS } ♦ Visitor In formation k , 1 ♦ rilurgPL Wayfinding system Fi AVAILABLE IRESID6NCES it. - T I AN, ;r cocl�. t t;+arS+v k'fi AM aar a 01111 aH f W&Yn Q*h,H,. ara7i Lw -OI,� �� mmco=�� - E� �'" { mtlo- a,43lru-s Tcdmr d Ir frmrw M1lyd Y.c dr'r4 •1b. CM• Lap_; F�kL mnkk ice[ Irrasrr4 rl'r reyr rr udrra�dkade rare tarn--wkYy r[weaa dda mna[ coeryre afera +Pd*.Y+lrr aa,rvelr is m 6aIGr riarx,l„anl� WIIh li• 9D-Ut gn 0004 SWw°V C 13N In IM w.rs of d—rA—rira Cry—Lured.ram III leir� 42 off&q mmr�okilhemm x eit arym a'r! o" ro-adwar ' glv", 0.4 drl;wwwMrA'414 EF Irb=%LOgF—r% oM4=r wkrn LKirBi irri 9orbad CWhb FrraerW Aem Cerau, [rratrnc NanaiV, Plh—'V iid d FQ r-W hN. Para o4 n hr IA—r� YorJ um, aratl Tk. Rog Tna. euYdr V Ip [in`pkn� N rr,n r—p fc4h Nr+. rtxY InA. awc Coaa'f i wd nrrnln] aWbiu ES dfm i,rmEp d LnINi irrrwelda oic +PnM Irro—d—.4n NO.— Tv 1— rrw»orfCktla. pft� LWd • ' •-'+� ,M aFrayl[ rvel4arr[a ,Dm Ore ryhl, Ns ararr llr-ive VW m Mors avr rren _ ± Ydk Illuorli �Itlt fN' ahi era[ an allrry7, NCR nr mId14 andMr.i w-M V tls ..d mot. LIFESTYLE GUIDE v I� f *�1111f? Packet Page 264 of 360 4-M6 RLJ -° NJ mc . — � 3 � »�■ � �f-» a Q\N � . � � Uptown Barrie, Ontario c ,� { u �\ \ \ 7 -. CL � � § _ . \ , - ■ ' � u • ± � -W 4 `• PJ'.V7. :7 f' ! } 4 * J. �• 'i � Pioneers with patient money were convinced to invest. t Downtown El Dorado, Arkansas t r M �l I w 'I R CP .�LIN. 4 Y I WE .�6, - They started with just one block - a "demonstration project" 4F) loop I THESE ARE ALL DRIVEN BY YOUR PROPERTY OWNERS Branding, Development & Marketing Action Plan (public project) Finding a strong focus (your brand) - by district Orchestrating the critical mass of like businesses (clustering) — Finding, recruiting or developing your Anchor Tenants — Working lease agreements: common operating hours and days — Recruit lodging or downtown residential (not street -level) Find or recruit pioneers with patient money Start with a one -block demonstration project THE DECISION OF WHERETO START Just one or two blocks. • Pick the blocks where the property owners are most willing to play WITH the City/Downtown, Inc. • Concentrate the critical mass in those blocks. • Timeline: three years. • Guaranteed: the next block will start organically & will be driven by the market. 0 The 20 ingredients of an outstanding downtown dM Part II:The public sector list t;k Solving the parking dilemma I MaMR21W 4 HOUR PARKING Gam To 5pm t—� Ton 61w l" i� HOUR PAR ING Bay, tD 5PM Tow" " !vG dk Alt Point Two hour parking dramatically reduces spending & repeat visits L on nights LF ! — — - and weekends ;hlS loeado yy n, OJr[{SV i." 'Il�v_.ati;L�r'. What to do Consider sponsorship programs +++•I Wkr, 1 :*41 , i'JO 11 v • •. .. E,_ - 'PE6;4 �yNutar,- wo What to do If you insist on two-hour parking, tell me WHERE I can find 4-hour or all -day parking. 1 :€ f U. lhlgKML 1 i' 7 C, NOTE: Angle -in parking increases spending by more than 20% and increases the number of parking spaces by a third. Toilets attract more than flies: The"gotta go" rule :ra I- R Public washrooms ! U. YIU_li4k-R' 1:41L '11,1 IST0ItE r. # y r Point Washrooms attract more than flies Put them where people can spend money Relieved visitors spend more money Gig Harbor, WA --a W4 AL ►� OIL.' I A L' Qu 13 1 Development of gathering places 'f 7 - Ik Packet Page 279 of 360 LEM IND d~ L OIL .,vqh N NEW pwm6L,,O P, r r , IL z it L-, -SFl L4 . I V AMIN F Cd �y 1= ■.,,�' { �� � i� �� teal -- � ;�'/'y 'l � � � i M � � d'F xrl1� � i■ y •�' � Packet Page 281 of 360 AV L WL ir Ali FIF-- .Psi ti -NLL " ■ kh -Mali - 6�4L X-jA ml wr— 44 T �t IL t t. { 4A: n rye - - �� � � - ��� Ire �ii�.r,: •,K4.1p, ti.�_ low 441 op INK y'-- d1kh" IVA _' 3 -09 mE .Lie. I�w O*-P7 77 ' fi 61 lye ekVI t-W UL What to do Don't close off streets until you're so busy itjust makes sense. 0 ... 'd WW. � What to do Turn your downtown parks into plazas. Add water. Make it interactive. Packet Page 290 of 360 '._ -RAIL — LLY• R � Y I� I I ' � — � _ ------------ All MIM � I - - I ht. n d„ H. r 5r. BRASS RAIL Packet Page 292 of 360 PIN vFlo ka f -f * .+ P Tie 1.1 il IF JO bit i Li ,lw 4,101 -71 oe JmiL� Maim v- A"M Fir \ \ � 2 � � \ � � �� \ AP qr A -P I d � � /\ ^ \��\����\��A wQt!i 1-oo- "I love the Square and as someone who works downtown I have seen the difference it has made. I see so many more locals coming down here to just hang out and have fun, and I come back downtown on the evenings and weekends now, which I never did before. I love seeing my friends, colleagues, and everyone from my cashier at the grocery store to my hairdresser to the mayor hanging around events at the Square. It gives a sense of community that we only had at Summer Nights before. I am so glad we have it" u' What to do Narrow the streets. Create wider sidewalks. Create better crosswalks. 14411t llfAI2 .* r • _• _ . ­L3 1 - 4y ta4r� { LO 4" y— '5 r x r CARRIAG ;ma, - 'In, �M imp L r s" What to do Add street trees every 30'to 35' (10 metres) 4D Creation of good first impressions: Community gateways do!T ` Sets an increased perceived value Creates pride of ownership Gets your attention Says something about the community Sells the real estate faster At an increased value All these reasons apply to communities. LA EPORT - WELCOME. Y4U What to do Always put your gateway signs where you will make the first, best impression. Rarely is that at a city limits. Use the opportunity to direct people to your downtown. f a !;d ;.. +a �d r What to do Make your gateway signs directional signs to your "showcase" area of town. Op Design, fabrication & installation of a Wayfinding System IM I'j Y V I i "_ 7r Pittsburg, California i 0001�1 ,r;, City mall �. _ .i Library •P- Transit Crater 4 , a ? T €hildrtas $eg[q 1 C#� � t r k CaLlegc Ave i East x iilra Visitor Attractions/Amenities Community Services -o• Deception Pass �• Regatta Park --a- Library --g• Hospital •► The Boardwalk y •► City hall/police •► Visitor into •► Senior center 1 Restrooms Restrooms • Pioneer Way Pioneer Li ` l--lilru--i HoL., rrxlil\L [I IBIS Jill) f ., .rL7111:xperk'a�t �enicisi ry{hq ► {:iry Alh {.ialkr4 r (:uacltRrF)dCYVUui C - WWIImG.WJL93' What to do Make this a priority. It's an investment - not an expense. Hire professionals. This is a science as much as an art. Air Yr,*. lt.�" i NORTH ADAMS } I rikS5 iloCA L IT - I b I � J(A. ' 11.4 � Don't make this mistake. Always use a dark background and contrasting colors. Q.-_.; y a C L` '�1 - ■ C II .• -f+.' ' +tier The Pavilion .� . _ ,* a <, ,. , The Mall ' ' , '.. ' - ConventWn j — ''S 1',Anter Hotel ConferenclB Center Resbrt r Y Srx PIW, UIOW- L �` Perf�emine . A FT5 afltOr East Vl�lsge '� . Arcs Dl$erlCC ` FtnLAAL MA # 'fy•+# That's better. Note that the district has a name. v c 3 � L V N LLr : - 1 .: •tip I�Y /'.' � �� �* i� .A {F lkv (B5 o om� - -.Mlo Frerd Lick 01, ,C DI 04PUBUC PARKING NOTE Less than 5% of visitors stop at visitor information centers - IF they can find that! What to do Every community should develop and implement a wayfinding system plan & program: - • Gateways & entries • Attractions • Amenities • Billboards and marketing displays Wayfinding is an investment, not an expense • Plays a role in your branding efforts • A major component in your marketing efforts • Reinforces a positive experience • Increases spending locally • Educates visitors and locals about what you have and where it's located • Builds community pride • Is as much a science as an art Packet Page 308 of 360 * To Cp .t. Main Street Blyth Park E City Hall E UW Campus FNI BOTHELL LANDING 4 4. To HWy 405 T Main Street Blyth Park E City Hatt E UW Campus Packet Page 309 of 360 T r F 3�,,,,,, LG. MI [' t sere f I�•p BwP ' 'y tT ' fi hFa f#loy LW- 7 -APOP11- 14 A good first impression: District gateways ir a.1 - l _ _1� - LK is T FIE r, i .r J � n• *i k or T n _ Oaf Point Downtown gateways create a "sense of place" and downtown partnerships. AS RUE a 4f L "hula Vista's New View If ow a gateway sign helped a town's image. ah • � � � %�� a � ■.10 _ / —�\ �2¥�� - �`� \�® �� ■ § U6 r V) . R.. . 3■ �¥� . . F 4) 9 e!UJOJ!IeD'SE)106UV SOI Appleton, WI. THESE ARE PUBLIC -SECTOR PROJECTS Convenient, well orchestrated public parking — Public washrooms with visitor information — Gathering places • Community gateways with directions to downtown A wayfinding system — Downtown gateways, district entrance points 4 20120 signage equals $$$ The 20 ingredients of an outstanding downtown Part III: The merchant list 0 What to do Use perpendicular "blade"signs. Make them consistent height and size. f` J i,4antureiJNIdS 2LL5 AW jw �. rw— ti M I I hL+ Canmore, Alberta 4-1 ..z _ f � 4 eluJOJlleD'lawj D rMoir euelpul'OSIeJedleA T. Always promote what it is you're selling - the lure to bring customers in... before you promote the name of the business. r r an -d • _. }4 .I� w mx' . _ y Suggestions for retail signage: No lower than 7' No higher than 9' No wider than 42" 'AL S�M��F Develop a Gateway, Signage & Wayfinding Plan that will address outdoor retail, A - boards, retail signage, etc. NEW,& Sidewalk cafes & outdoor dining OR PIZ � 111 4 AI.UIk k I..'I r r f'. i" aj fir. P j tl � _ r . ,.. - _- � � � � �� �/■� � , ,Or Aj ■■�■■■■I �. oi TZ, . �. - a ���■�� � _-- - � � . � � '4Agr. . . - +� ~ 1p L, a A -• -- J'F� ldF— 7. PI iyy{p.r� L'�7l7B7F.+k {,a�E 1 J !� _�•� -.... _ .fir "� �� �. Nelson, Britishrwa ;;• }�,..: r _ di 4 +■ x* r ,- eilo:)S enoN '011!^31OM 17-7 wo oil e11ODS enoN'all!^31oM .�. !-il mak � T rm "- 17 4A li� -L. - - 41 r iffi III Jk€ . ello:)S enoN'all!AJIOM o� e!gwnIOD ysll!a8 'uoslaN Lodi, California NOW pi _} A. i jr • �� •cam v * � .i i , .o t', # 6114N'�:ij IL 4 + ap 4 i v..f • * ii� � I ���I��II40 . -N<% M ANHA l T' A�tw,- iL VA r . y,41 ,. .40 They invested heavily in retail beautification ■ i Ln I - x rq C i O L ' MU I r r. .1l P 1 W M i r � r� t The Scarecrow Festival lasts all of October. The town is packed with visitors. 0 n AV 'yypp I Adw AIL - F } Fact Curb appeal can account for up to ' 70% of first-time sales_I at restaurants, golf courses, wineries, . I _.l "' • �� �' retail shops and lodging facilities.' __'.. T in isconsir ■ 'IA Newport Beach, California It.s v rr:v I Newporf 4 .6 � r1u ► �r Remember Women account for 80% of all consumer spending. + 1' JJW . I Tl- What to do Think benches. 18 Activities & entertainment ' S OW f x c o ^ a� ra � Y r d U z /_ Greenville, South Carolina AL - Asheville, North Carolina A What to do Bring downtown to life! Start with Friday evenings, Saturday, and Sunday afternoons f -. ._ .,Mir �r 5T' rim�;k #' G 41 C) ' � 1 Asheville, North Carolina Q .w 4LEM - r -V�l - - v r � 4 t S i � N E Q F \ . / - �. / --Map � a . �. � z .�� _ . _ �-_j___ � g Berea, Kentucky Sisters, Oregon g-7.�� A-3- � k TV.; f.. LX 19 Downtown district(s) with a name IE' Give downtown a name: Vancouver: Gastown • Seattle: Pioneer Square • San Diego: Gaslamp Quarter • Portland: Pearl District h • Nelson, BC: Baker Street • Barrie, ON: Uptown Barrie • New Orleans: Bourbon Street, French Quarter * Woodlands, TX: Marketplace • San Antonio: The Riverwalk 1 * - • Hawthorne, NV: Patriot Square # • Denver, CO: Larimer Square • Boulder, CO: Pearl Street Mall _;"' ' • Reading, OH: The Bridal District What to do �i Naming a downtown district makes it a destination, not just a place. CELEBRATION t SQUARE Ew w w Y n `t C k `Uatt& Czek Qitle ('teak CELEBRATION SQUARE (Rd&& cigak c Sell a feeling - not a place Experiential marketing HOW PERCEPTIONS CREATE A BRAND: 1.Visual cues. 2.The people and attitudes. ^� 3.Word of mouth. 4.Publicity, social media, peer reviews. Case History: Asheville, North Carolina Population 170,000 Claim to fame Along the Blue Ridge Parkway Challenge The Parkway is 500 miles long The brand "Where altitude affects attitude" IEVILEiPie any way you like it 911TVORT FSTATF -}r5L 6V ER L!UGFi TEltiai ran MII Atw • E�ww�F I n-n +eh MOO "I&M Bw Iu-Vdm-W� frA Iftv�r. My I I.ipM Q:OLOr rft :nI. W p 30. Px rdT r IYF�i�J I�+K+lad. �. il..rral � ���i�i hF]FryMll� � r1wv. rat ltdnl.a �q� the ashevi l le , .. t4-LLti 31.w..nd bpiil Qrl. Or— ANwvlllti AdAIh L-Lilih. welcome Packet Page 345 of 360 � 1-1U • Chile • Curacao • Stockholm Amalfi Coast Copenhagen Mozambique _„New York City .i! 1 .7 111` ���11RI F r `�• The Brand The hippest place to be in North Carolina -"Unscripted" Result THE destination along the Blue Ridge Parkway National attention as a hip arts community Nightlife drawing people from 100 miles away Tourism $1.7 billion in just the county Frommer's Travel Guide: One of the 12 global must see destinations Y' OA ° H. 41 i _ it ' - - i w\ �• � � � .� Ilk - \ k \ 3.: - - J - , _- � � . a• � . - ■ y � do rl� Y r f L IVABIL1 W Discover America's best places to live Fir AshevIi dd In earthy Asheville, food is so elemental that the locals have coined their own word for the city: Foodtopia. A thriving farm -to -table scene, a Flourishing network of familyfarms and farmers markets and a growing roster of award -winning chefs combine to create the ideal food climate in Asheville.Year-round local food tours lead visitors to locally roasted coffee, gourmet shops and chocolatiers, artisan bakeries, specialty shops and breweries. Along with its 135 restaurants, 11 annual food festivals and 17 farmers markets, Asheville has a dozen microbreweries and five annual beerfestivals - numbers that propelled travel blog Gadling.com to name Asheville one of the best cities in the world for drinking beer. GUYnary Tmnl riWMI OX&Qgdncya Al 1t t ■ L 4 E 4"Ld-n-o.nI.bN— 0— *klOrd—�+wrr-. ey.r.Y.� P.wk.v[rnvY w• �u4N TIM baJwdww YN-0eYi IwFw N..31LY.'ilNmaiFu .a.4 ,u.. t�ww�wry r �... M�4r Y.wfxiu w.�n Lama �r a.. t. .r v •ram, . Vfsa�itiialaaaorir �. �. 5 �.-0t�'4.�. �.I.f Nw��Vrsarcrtvar`� ��MMvna � ��4rGyiP�tilww•srtic�SN.� ire. .w y+�IT+,F1�rI h/FVY�I4EKWK. Nayyee..��.Yafl� Ypa+�r�ra..bMAvbnwb�Mw c4R.ru W.H�� I Packet Page 349 of 360 RSktQ� C.Pfl't� '�1, Idw�erlce . rove Arcade JR b �W-,"4', Fl-i , ow IT Od dgkNR W Bi4l�ore kwn*e . � . Shop 8 a1�4 VIAqKUP — } MILL d Eagle; Warket Streek µ''911f y SI34� R►rl4 -1,�� f THESE ARE DRIVEN BYYOUR MERCHANTS A good retail signage program — Outdoor dining tv Retail beautification and seating areas • Activities and entertainment • Names for downtown districts (or the entire downtown) • Experiential marketing I r<:® SAINEW Eli k »I7Y }'U �• r S � ' TO f• M4* Hal? t , 628_776JOU& {9697} me Rrd f gIM r- 68A[75 idol' Ft '`.. 304ngredi The 20 Ingredients of an Outstanding Downtown DI SC I: PROPERTY OWNERS fed- f THEPUBLICSECTOR DISC 3: MERCHANTS The 20 Ingredients is available as a 3-part video series. 7ik DDIStore.com Downtowns are back! Make yours just awesome! For daily tips, tricks & ideas, subscribe to Rogers Rules at www.RogerBrooks.org/Rogers-Rules 0 AM-5429 City Council Retreat - Friday, February 1, 2013 Meeting Date: 02/01/2013 Time: Submitted For: Stephen Clifton Department: Community Services Review Committee: Type: Information Information Subject Title Fiber Optics Update Recommendation Previous Council Action Submitted By: Committee Action: 6. d. Stephen Clifton Narrative The attached information below relates to an update provided to the Economic Development Commission on January 16, 2013. Fiber Optics Update - February 1, 2013 Inbox Reviewed By City Clerk Sandy Chase Mayor Dave Earling Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase Form Started By: Stephen Clifton Final Approval Date: 01/28/2013 Attachments Form Review Date 01/28/2013 01:18 PM 01/28/2013 01:31 PM 01/28/2013 01:44 PM Started On: 01/28/2013 09:25 AM Packet Page 353 of 360 Economic Development Commission (EDC) Technology Subcommittee Citizen Technology Advisory Committee (CTAC) Update to EDC The information below relates to an update provided to the Economic Development Commission on January 16, 2013 and covers three areas: A. New Customer Progress B. Redundant Network Progress C. Future EDC/CTAC Work A. New Customer Progress Council Approved $27,000 to extend network to Harbor Square and City Park. Fiber is now under Hwy 104 and is connected to Harbor Inn Hotel and to a building housing Maverick Labels. Termination equipment is to be installed and customer testing to begin in next couple of weeks. New customer located in same building has agreed to also test service. A couple of business and property owners along 51h Avenue South have expressed interest in becoming potential customers. Estimates for cabling are being prepared and will be discussed by City staff prior to presenting to potential customers. We are studying and considering serving both sides of 5th Avenue. Chamber of Commerce is now a customer. B. Redundant Network Progress Council has approved the extension of the network to the Westgate area, i.e., City cemetery and other potential customers. The City is continuing to evaluate routing options for connecting a separate run to Hwy 99. WSDOT has facilities near Hwy 99 and may want to share cost of extending network to that area. C. Future EDC/CTAC Work Council has approved $40,000 to develop and implement a marketing plan. Council has approved $35,000 to develop a business plan. EDC Tech Team and CTAC will review and provide input into the initial Requests For Proposals (RFP) related to preparation of a Business Plan. EDC/CTAC could develop an outreach plan to canvas the business in the area of existing fiber to "get the word out" that we are open for business. EDC members and City staff have spoken to the Chamber of Commerce about reaching out to businesses. With the added customers and the added revenue, the financial picture related to fiber continues to improve. City staff and CTAC still have a requirement to make periodic reports to council on the finances related to the fiber system. Packet Page 354 of 360 AM-5432 City Council Retreat - Friday, February 1, 2013 Meeting Date: Time: Submitted For: Department: Review Committee: Type: 02/01 /2013 Councilmember Johnson City Council Information Information Subject Title SR 104 Transportation Corridor Study Recommendation Previous Council Action Submitted By: Committee Action: 8. b. Jana Spellman On October 16, 2012 (minutes attached) the Council passed the following amendment to the 2013-2018 CIP (excerpts attached) as follows: Amendment #4 COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEYMONILLAS, TO AMEND THE MOTION TO PREPARE A TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR STUDY OF SR-104 BETWEEN THE INTERURBAN TRAIL (76TH AVE. W) TO THE FERRY TERMINAL FOR A 20-YEAR PLANNING HORIZON. THE STUDY WILL DETERMINE EXISTING AND FUTURE DEFICIENCIES OF THE CORRIDOR AND INCLUDE IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES TO INTEGRATE FUTURE REDEVELOPMENT WITH A FOCUS ON PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE CONNECTIONS, HIGHWAY ACCESS MANAGEMENT, AND STREET-SCAPE DESIGN IMPLEMENTATION. THE PURPOSE OF THE STUDY IS TO DEVELOP A MASTER PLAN FOR THE CORRIDOR, BOTH WITHIN AND OUTSIDE THE STREET RIGHT OF WAY. Vote on Amendment #4 AMENDMENT CARRIED (6-1), COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON VOTING NO. Narrative This has been placed on the Retreat Agenda for discussion. Attachments 10-16-2012 Approved Council Minutes Packet Page 355 of 360 2013-2018 CIP Excerpts Inbox Reviewed By City Clerk Sandy Chase Mayor Dave Earling Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase Form Started By: Jana Spellman Final Approval Date: 01/28/2013 Form Review Date O1/28/2013 02:47 PM O1/28/2013 02:54 PM O1/28/2013 02:56 PM Started On: 01/28/2013 01:46 PM Packet Page 356 of 360 Amendment #3 COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO REMOVE THE TRAFFIC LIGHT AT 9TH & CASPERS. Vote on Amendment #3 UPON ROLL CALL, THE VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT CARRIED (4-3), COUNCILMEMBERS FRALEY-MONILLAS, PETSO, BLOOM AND BUCKSHNIS VOTING YES; AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON AND COUNCILMEMBERS YAMAMOTO AND JOHNSON VOTING NO. Councilmember Petso inquired about former Project 15 and the current plan for the Perrinville Creek drainage situation. Mr. Williams answered the CFP/CIP includes a project where the City would join with Lynnwood to conduct a study of Perrinville Creek drainage and consider alternatives. Project 15 is one concept but others will be evaluated to determine which provides the greatest benefit for the lowest cost to help resolve the current hydrology problem in the Perrinville Creek basin. Improvements to the Talbot Road culvert or rerouting the stormwater will not necessarily benefit Perrinville Creek from a habitat perspective until hydrology issues such as rapid flash flows, limited detention in the basin, etc. are addressed. Staff recommends doing the study first and let that guide development of the CIP for Perrinville Creek. Councilmember Petso asked for confirmation that if by supporting approval of the CFP/CIP, she will be voting to proceed with a study and to partner with Lynnwood, not authorize a specific pipe configuration. Mr. Williams agreed. Councilmember Johnson explained she was very concerned with the SR104 corridor. Long ago it was a 2- lane road from Hwy. 99 to 5th Avenue. Now the City has completed a study of the Westgate area that focuses on land use. She proposed a complementary transportation project and staff assisted her with drafting the description of a Transportation Corridor Study. Amendment #4 COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO AMEND THE MOTION TO PREPARE A TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR STUDY OF SR-104 BETWEEN THE INTERURBAN TRAIL (76TH AVE. W) TO THE FERRY TERMINAL FOR A 20-YEAR PLANNING HORIZON. THE STUDY WILL DETERMINE EXISTING AND FUTURE DEFICIENCIES OF THE CORRIDOR AND INCLUDE IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES TO INTEGRATE FUTURE REDEVELOPMENT WITH A FOCUS ON PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE CONNECTIONS, HIGHWAY ACCESS MANAGEMENT, AND STREET-SCAPE DESIGN IMPLEMENTATION. THE PURPOSE OF THE STUDY IS TO DEVELOP A MASTER PLAN FOR THE CORRIDOR, BOTH WITHIN AND OUTSIDE THE STREET RIGHT OF WAY. Councilmember Johnson explained the purpose of the study would be to complement the work done by the Economic Development Commission to promote growth and development in the Westgate area. The study that was conducted focused on land use and she felt additional work was needed related to transportation. There are no capacity projects for this area in the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan. There are three issues, 1) moving pedestrians and bicycles through the corridor, 2) implementing the concept for streetscape and street planting plan, and 3) improving safety, access management and circulation within the four quadrants. This study will complement the work that has been done. Councilmember Petso observed the City is required to hold a public hearing on the CFP/CIP. This study is a new idea that was not considered during the public hearing. She asked whether the public hearing should be continued to allow the public an opportunity to comment on the proposed study. Mr. Taraday answered the Council may want to continue the public hearing out of an abundance of caution. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 16, 2012 Page 16 Packet Page 357 of 360 Council President Peterson suggested adding the study to the CFP/CIP next year, recognizing there is no funding source for 2013. He agreed it was an excellent idea but the Council is running out of time to schedule items on its agendas. Vote on Amendment #4 AMENDMENT CARRIED (6-1), COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON VOTING NO. For Councilmember Johnson, Ms. Hite explained the PROS Plan is not in the CIP this year; it is in the budget as a decision package. The PROS Plan is a Comprehensive Plan planning document for the entire park system and not a specific park, therefore, it is not eligible for funding in that category. Amendment #5 COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETSO, TO AMEND THE MOTION TO REMOVE 196TH & 88TH AVENUE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked whether this project included the right -turn only option. Mr. Williams answered the intersection does not currently meet warrants for a signal; it may in the future when traffic or pedestrian volumes increase. A variety of interim solutions to improve the intersection were considered such as eliminating left turns but the Council was unable to reach a consensus on an interim solution. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked whether right -turn only, curbs, etc. would be considered if the project is removed from the CFP/CIP. Mr. Williams agreed they can be, noting no policy direction has been provided to staff with regard to the intersection. Councilmember Johnson recalled the Transportation Committee recommended restricting left turn movements to improve safety. Council President Peterson did not support the amendment; including the project in the CFP/CIP allows the City to revisit the intersection. Councilmember Bloom noted the project description for 196th Street SW and 88"' Avenue is to install a traffic signal. The recommendation in the Transportation Element was to restrict left turns for safety. She asked if Council could still discuss changes to the intersection if the project was removed from the CFP/CIP. Mr. Williams stated yes; a traffic signal is a future project. The intent of long range planning is to look ahead to future projects. Removing it would not prevent discussion of near -term solutions. Councilmember Bloom clarified her understanding of Mr. Williams' explanation was the project could be eliminated from the CFP/CIP and near -term solutions could still be considered. Mr. Williams answered it can be eliminated but he does not see a reason to as staff is not applying for grants for a traffic signal; it is a placeholder for a future project. Councilmember Bloom observed it is a placeholder for a traffic signal, not restricting left turns. She asked whether the project needed to be revised to consider other alternatives or was removing it from the CFP/CIP a better option. Mr. English explained the project the Council removed earlier, 9 h & Caspers Intersection Improvements, and this project, 196th and 88 h Intersection Improvements, may have been included in the Traffic Impact Fee calculation. Removing the 9th & Caspers project and the 196th & 88`h project from the CFP/CIP would remove them from the list of projects used to calculate the Traffic Impact Fee and likely would result in a reduction of the Traffic Impact Fee. Councilmember Yamamoto pointed out the project descriptions refer to an alternate or interim solution that could be implemented until traffic signal warrants are met. Unless the project is included in the Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 16, 2012 Page 17 Packet Page 358 of 360 v v m m CD m w Cn co 0 w rn 0 R Capital Improvements Program Fund 112 -Transportation Projects Projects for 2013-2018 PROJECT NAME CFP 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Estimate (20Total 8) Preservation / Maintenance Projects Annual Street Overlays $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $4,500,000 5th Ave S Overlay from Elm Way to Walnut St $773,500 $773,500 Citywide - Signal Improvements $7,500 $7,500 $7,500 $22,500 Citywide - Cabinet Improvements / Pedestrian Countdown Display $5,000 $295,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $595,000 Signal Upgrades - 100th Ave @ 238th St. SW $508,000 $508,000 ,Signal Upgrades for NB LT - 100th Ave @238th St. SW interim $5,000 $0 Safety / Capacity Analysis 212th St. SW / 84th Ave Five Corners Roundabout X $216,900 $3,134,200 $3,134,200 228th St. SW Corridor Safety Improvements X $260,300 $719,700 $4,073,275 $4,792,975 76th Ave W @ 212th St SW Intersection Improvements X $161,500 $450,800 $700,200 $1,628,000 $2,779,000 SR 524 196th St. SW / 88th Ave. W - Guardrail $30,000 $30,000 SR 524 196th St. SW / 88th Ave. W - Intersection Improvements X $100,000 $163,000 $616,000 $879,000 Main St. @ 3rd Signal Upgrades $153,000 $153,000 Puget Dr. @ OVD Signal Upgrades 1 $40,000 $218,000 $258,000 Main St. @ 9th Ave. S Interim solution X $10,000 $10,000 Walnut St @ 9th Ave. S Interim solution X 10,000 $0 220th St. SW @ 76th Ave. W Intersection Improvements X $173,000 $173,000 Arterial Street Signal Coordination Improvements $50,000 $50,000 Hwy 99 @ 212th St. SW Intersection Improvements X $490,0001 $926,000 $2,663,000 $4,079,000 Type 2 Raised Pavement Markers $98,0001 1 1 $98,000 Non -motorized transportation projects Main Street Pedestrian Lighting from 5th Ave. to 6th Ave. X $1,476,200 $220,000 $220,000 SR-99 Lighting Phase 3 $2,000 $98,000 $584,000 $682,000 Sunset Ave Walkway from Bell St. to Cas ers St. X $16,000 $88,000 $997,000 $1,085,000 238th St. SW from 100th Ave W to 104th Ave W X $188,000 $248,000 $436,000 15th St. SW from Edmonds Way to 8th Ave S X $123,000 $248,000 $371,000 80th Ave W from 188th St SW to Olympic View Dr. Walkway X $30,000 $100,000 $647,000 $777,000 236th St. SW from Edmonds Way / SR-104 to Madrona Elementary X $120,000 $297,000 $417,000 2nd Ave. S from James St. to Main St. Walkway X $32,000 $32,000 ADA Curb Rams Im rov. Citywide Transition Plan $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $450,000 Maplewood Dr. from Main St. to 200th St. SW Walkway X $127,000 $550,000 $677,000 Meadowdale Beach Rd. Walkway X $190,000 $190,000 Walnut St. from 3rd Ave. to 4th Ave. Walkway X $220,000 $220,000 Walnut St. from 6th Ave. to 7th Ave. Walkway X 1 $110,000 $110,000 Audible Pedestrian Signals $25,000 $25,000 SR-104 Pedestrian Midblock Crossing X $271,000 $271,000 Maple St. from 7th Ave. S to 8th Ave. S Walkway X $63,000 $63,000 Dayton St. from 7th Ave. S to 8th Ave. S Walkway X $79,000 $79,000 Shell Valley Emergency Access Road X $3,900 $0 226th St. SW Walkway X 1 $6, 1 1 1 1 0 Citywide Bicycle Connections additional bike lanes and sharrows $116,0001 $116,000 $232,000 Bicycle Route Signing $10,0001 $10,0001 $10,0001 $30,000 Olympic View Dr Sidewalk Contribution I I I 1 $0 Traffic Calming Projects Residential Neighborhood TrafficCalming Sunset Ave, other stretches X 1$4,580 $10,0001 $10,000J $10,0001 $25,0001 $25,0001 $25,000 $105,000 Traffic Planning Projects Transportation Plan Update $20,000 $180,0001 1 1 $180,000 Total Projects $2,188,180 $5,799,200 $7,096,475 $2,431,000 $3,976,500 $3,615,500 $6,568,500 $29,487,175 Transfer to Fund 132 (Interurban Trail) 1 1 $11,800 Mi. Grants 2012-2018 Estimate 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Grants/ Loans Sought / Fundinq (not Secured) Annual Street Overlays $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 Signal - Cabinet Improvements $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 Signal Upgrades - 100th Ave W @ 238th St SW $256,000 228th St SW Corridor Safety Improvements $243,519 76th @212th St SW Intersection Improvements $226,708 $1,408,000 196th St SW @ 88th Ave W - Guardrail $30,000 196th St SW @ 88th Ave W - Intersection Improvements $100,000 $163,000 $616,000 Main St @ 3rd Ave Signal Upgrades $153,000 Puget Dr. @ OVD Signal Up rades $20,000 $110,000 220th St SW @ 76th Ave W Intersection Improvements $173,000 Ferry Underpass at Main St Railroad Crossing $500,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 Hwy 99 @ 212th St SW Intersection Improvements $490,000 $926,000 $2,663,000 Sunset Ave Walkway from Bell St to Caspers St $88,000 $901,000 238th St SW from 100th Ave W to 104th Ave W $188,000 $248,000 15th St SW from Edmonds Way to 8th Ave W 1 $123,000 $248,000 80th Ave / 188th St SW / Olympic View Dr Walkway $30,000 $100,000 $647,000 236th St SW from Edmonds Way / SR-104 to Madrona Elementary $120,000 $297,000 2nd Ave From Main St to James St $32,000 ADA Curb Ramp upgrades $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 Maplewood Dr. Walkway $64,000 $275,000 Mead -dale Beach Rd. Walkway $190,000 Walnut from 3rd to 4th Ave. Walkway $220,000 Walnut St. from 6th to 7th Ave. Walkway $110,000 Audible Pedestrian Signals $25,000 SR-104 Pedestrian Mid -Block Crossing $271,000 Maple St. from 7th to 8th Ave. Walkway $63,000 Dayton St. from 7th to 8th Ave. Walkway $79,000 Citywide Bicycle Connections (additional bike lanes, sharrows, or signs) $58,000 $58,000 Bicycle Route Signing $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 Citywide Traffic Calming Program $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 Yearly Sub Total Grants/ Loans Sought / Funding (not secured) Grant / Not Secured Funding Subtotal $0 $88,000 $2,103,227 $2,201,000 $3,686,000 $1,563,371 $4,603,784 $6,888,547 $2,201,000 $4,186,000 $4,254,000 $4,254,000 $7,161,000 $7,161, 000 Total Revenues & Grants $2,596,720 $6,224,481 $7,479,268 $3,004,473 $5,183,515 $5,887,072 $9,859,989 Total Projects ($2,188,180 $5,799,200) ($7,096,475 ($2,431,000 $3,976,500 $3,615,500 $6,568,500) Total Debt $88,843) ($79,560) $76,320) ($75,958 ($75,943 $75,583) $75,458) Ending Cash Balance $319,697 $345,721 $306,473 $497,515 $1,131,072 $2,195,989 $3,216,031