2022-11-22 City Council - SP Agenda-3318o Agenda
Edmonds City Council
tn.. ISLP SPECIAL MEETING
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
250 5TH AVE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020
NOVEMBER 22, 2022, 6:00 PM
PERSONS WISHING TO JOIN THIS MEETING VIRTUALLY IN LIEU OF IN -PERSON ATTENDANCE FOR
THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING AUDIENCE COMMENTS CAN CLICK ON OR PASTE THE FOLLOWING
ZOOM MEETING LINK INTO A WEB BROWSER USING A COMPUTER OR SMART PHONE:
HTTPS://ZOOM. US/J/95798484261
OR COMMENT BY PHONE: US: +1 253 215 8782 WEBINAR ID: 957 9848 4261
THOSE COMMENTING USING A COMPUTER OR SMART PHONE ARE INSTRUCTED TO RAISE A
VIRTUAL HAND TO BE RECOGNIZED. PERSONS WISHING TO PROVIDE AUDIENCE COMMENTS BY
DIAL -UP PHONE ARE INSTRUCTED TO PRESS *9 TO RAISE A HAND. WHEN PROMPTED, PRESS *6 TO
UNMUTE. WHEN YOUR COMMENTS ARE CONCLUDED, PLEASE LEAVE THE ZOOM MEETING AND
OBSERVE THE REMAINDER OF THE MEETING ON THE COUNCIL MEETINGS WEB PAGE.
THIS MEETING IS STREAMED LIVE ON THE COUNCIL MEETING WEBPAGE, COMCAST CHANNEL 21,
AND ZIPLY CHANNEL 39.
"WE ACKNOWLEDGE THE ORIGINAL INHABITANTS OF THIS PLACE, THE SDOHOBSH (SNOHOMISH)
PEOPLE AND THEIR SUCCESSORS THE TULALIP TRIBES, WHO SINCE TIME IMMEMORIAL HAVE
HUNTED, FISHED, GATHERED, AND TAKEN CARE OF THESE LANDS. WE RESPECT THEIR
SOVEREIGNTY, THEIR RIGHT TO SELF-DETERMINATION, AND WE HONOR THEIR SACRED SPIRITUAL
CONNECTION WITH THE LAND AND WATER. - CITY COUNCIL LAND ACKNOWLEDGMENT
1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE
2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
3. ROLL CALL
4. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
5. PRESENTATION
1. Small Business Saturday Proclamation (5 min)
6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT REGARDING ANY MATTER NOT LISTED ON THE
AGENDA AS CLOSED RECORD REVIEW OR AS A PUBLIC HEARING. SPEAKERS ARE LIMITED TO
THREE MINUTES. PLEASE STATE CLEARLY YOUR NAME AND CITY OF RESIDENCE.
Edmonds City Council Agenda
November 22, 2022
Page 1
7. RECEIVED FOR FILING
1. Claim for Damages from Al Ansari & Paul Stromme for filing (0 min)
2. Written Public Comments (0 min)
8. APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA
1. Approval of Council Special Meeting Minutes of November 15, 2022
2. Approval of Council Regular Meeting Minutes of November 15, 2022
3. Approval of payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments.
4. Approval of claim checks.
5. EPOA Commissioned MOU Wage Reopener & Commanders
6. EPOA Law Support MOU Wage Reopener
7. Edmonds Employee Association, Local 3517 (AFSCME Council 2) 2022-2024 collective bargaining
agreement
8. Confirmation of Diversity Commission Appointees Anil DeCosta & Jessie Owen
9. COUNCIL BUSINESS
1. 2023 Legislative Agenda (20 min)
2. Resolution on Findings of Fact for the Emergency Interim CG Step Back Ordinance 4278 (10 min)
3. City Attorney Contract Extension Discussion (50 min)
4. 2023 COLA for non -represented employees (20 min)
5. 2023 HR Budget Requests (20 min)
6. Council Budget Discussion (50 min)
10. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
11. COUNCIL COMMENTS
ADJOURNMENT: (10:00 PM)
Edmonds City Council Agenda
November 22, 2022
Page 2
5.1
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 11/22/2022
Small Business Saturday Proclamation
Staff Lead: Carolyn LaFave
Department: Mayor's Office
Preparer: Carolyn LaFave
Background/History
Observed on the first Saturday after Thanksgiving, Small Business Saturday encourages holiday shoppers
to patronize brick and mortar businesses that are small and local.
Staff Recommendation
Narrative
This year Small Business Saturday falls on November 26. Since its inception, Small Business Saturday has
become the biggest sales day of the year for many small companies. Every time you pick up a cup of
coffee from your neighborhood cafe, or buy a gift from a local artist, you're shopping small and making a
difference. Shopping small helps to promote a more vibrant community and now, more than ever, small
businesses need our support.
Attachments:
SBS_2022_EdmondsWashington
Packet Pg. 3
O
City of Edmonds A Office of the Mayor
!S15ALL SMALL BUSINESS SATURDAY 2022
Whereas, the government of Edmonds, Washington celebrates our local small businesses and the
contributions they make to our local economy and community; and
Whereas, according to the United States Small Business Administration, there are 32.5 million small businesses in
the United States, small businesses represent 99.7% of firms with paid employees, small businesses are
responsible for 62% of net new jobs created since 1995, and small businesses employ 46.8% of the
employees in the private sector in the United States, and
Whereas, 79% of consumers understand the importance of supporting the small businesses in their community
on Small Business Saturday®, 70% report the day makes them want to encourage others to Shop
Small°, independently -owned retailers, and 66% report that the day makes them want to Shop Small all
year long; and
Whereas, 58% of shoppers reported they shopped online with a small business and 54% reported they dined or
ordered takeout from a small restaurant, bar, or caf6 on Small Business Saturday in 2021; and
Whereas, Edmonds supports our local businesses that create jobs, boost our local economy, and preserve our
communities; and
Whereas, advocacy groups, as well as public and private organizations, across the country have endorsed the
Saturday after Thanksgiving as Small Business Saturday;
Now, Therefore, I, Mike Nelson, Mayor of Edmonds, Washington do hereby proclaim, November 26, 2022, as:
SMALL BUS/NESSSATURDAV
and urge the residents of our community, and communities across the country, to support small businesses and
merchants on Small Business Saturday and throughout the year.
Mike:,elson, Mayor — November 22, 2022
Packet Pg. 4
7.1
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 11/22/2022
Claim for Damages from Al Ansari & Paul Stromme for filing
Staff Lead: NA
Department: Administrative Services
Preparer: Marissa Cain
Background/History
N/A
Staff Recommendation
Acknowledge receipt of Claims for Damages for filing.
Narrative
Al Ansari
9304 Olympic View Dr
(TBD)
Paul Stromme
220th Street SW & Hwy 99
(TBD)
Attachments:
Claim for Damages - Al Ansari - for council
Claim for Damages - Paul Stromme - for council
Packet Pg. 5
7.1.a
CITY OF EDMONDS
CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FORM
NOV 15 202'
Date Claim Form
Received by City
Please take note that an S who currently resides atut _
mailing address
home phone # work phone # . and who resided at
at the time of the occurrence and whose date of birth is �r, is claiming damages
against 1 r� ; ���� �_ _�' �._ in the sum of $ arising out of the following circumstances listed below.
DATE OF OCCURRENCE: TIME: AvCLL-A 10 QAq
LOCATION OF OCCURRENCE:
DESCRIPTION
1. Describe the conduct and circumstance that brought about the injury or damage. Also describe the injury or damage.
Lin— L
, v - L I i -,_ .1 . (atfach an extra sheet for additional information, if needed)
2. Provide a list of witnesses, if applicable, to the occurrence including names, addresses, and phone numbers.
] 1
3. Attach copies of all documentation relating to expenses, injuries, losses, and/or estimates for repair. /
4. Have you submitted a claim for damages to your insurance company? Yes V No
If so, please provide the name of the insurance company:
and the policy #:
License Plate #
Type Auto
* * ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR AUTOMOBILE CLAIMS ONLY * *
Driver License #
(year) (make)
DRIVER:
(model)
OWNER
Address:
Address:
Phone#:
Phone#:
Passengers:
Name:
Name:
Address:
Address:
Page 1 of 2
E
U
Form Revised 04/09/2021
Packet Pg. 6
7.1.a
This Claim form must be signed by the Claimant, a person holding a written power of attorney from the Claimant, by the
attorney in fact for the Claimant, by an attorney admitted to practice in Washington State on the Claimant's behalf, or by a
court -approved guardian or guardian ad litem on behalf of the Claimant.
I declare u er penalty of perjury under the laws of the state of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct.
Signatur6 of Clalm nt Date and place (residenti'a d! as d ess, city and county)
Or
Signature of Representative
Date and place (residential address, city and county)
Print Name of Representative Bar Number (if applicable)
Please present the completed claim form to: City Clerk's Office
City of Edmonds
121 51h Avenue North
Edmonds, WA, 98020
8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
E
U
Form Revised 04/09/2021
Page 2 of 2
Packet Pg. 7
CITY OF EDMONDS
CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FORM
140V 16 2022
Date Claim•Fonn
Received by City
Please take note Pat_��_ir%r`YZ% who currently resides at
mailing address __fa',�
home phone _ work phone hd who resided at
at the time of the occurrence -and whose date of birth is ��_ s claiming damages
1.
against in the sum of $ arising out of the following circumstances listed below.
DATE OF OCCURRENCE:
LOCATION OF OCCURRE
DESCRIPTION:
Describe the conduct and circumstance that brought abolt the injury or damage. Also des ribe the injury or
a�
a�
E
0
L
0
E
U
.1 U
�.
-
�r tt an extra sheet for additional information, if needed)
r IDf,
Provide a list of -tresses, if applicable, to the occufrencT[nudfig �a�es, addresses. and phone number �'� E
- a - N_
F a 3
R
3. Attach copies of all documentation relating to expenses, injuries, losses, and/or estimates for repair. r N
m
a�
4. Have you submitted a claim for damages to your insurance company? Yes No E
4 M
If so, please provide the name of the insurance company: c
and the policy #: �� - l �- E
! - — •mow Ca
*' ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR AUTOMOBILE CLAIMS ONLY U
r
License Plate
Type Auto: _ E
L)
w
DRIVER:
Q
Address:
Phone#.
Passengers:
Name:
Address:
Form Revised 04/09/2021 Page 1 of 2
Packet Pg. 8
This Claim form must be signed by the Claimant, a person holding a written power of attorney from the Claimant, by the
attorney in fact for the Claimant, by an attorney admitted to practice in Washington State on the Claimant's behalf, or by a
court -approved guardian or guardian ad litem on behalf of the Claimant.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the state of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct.
'Claimant Date and place (residential address, city and county)
Or
Signature of Representative
Print Name of Representative
Date and place (residential address, city and county)
Bar Number@ applicable)
Please present the completed claim form to: City Clerk's Office
City of Edmonds
121 5t' Avenue North
Edmonds, WA, 98020
8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
E
.2
U
Form Revised 04/09/2021 Page 2 of 2
Packet Pg. 9
7.2
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 11/22/2022
Written Public Comments
Staff Lead: City Council
Department: City Council
Preparer: Beckie Peterson
Background/History
N/A
Staff Recommendation
Acknowledge receipt of written public comments.
Narrative
Public comments submitted to the web form for public comments
<https://www.edmondswa.gov/publiccomment>
between November 3, 2022 and November 16, 2022.
Attachments:
Edmonds City Council Public Comments 20221122
Packet Pg. 10
7.2.a
Edmonds City Council Public Comments 11/22/2022
Submitted on: 11/15/2022 6:06:42 AM
Name: Ken Reidy
City of Residence: Edmonds
Agenda Topic: Public Hearing on CG Step Back Interim Ordinance
Comments: City Council is considering yet another interim ordinance, this time related to CG Step Backs.
Edmonds City Council has violated RCW 36.70A.390 on multiple occasions in the past. For example, The
required Public Hearing for Ordinance 3992 was not held until 77 days after City Council adopted the
interim ordinance. The required Public Hearing for Ordinance 4210 was never held. What stands out in
both examples above is the lack of City Council willpower to address Council's illegal conduct PLUS hold
those responsible accountable. Now we come to the latest interim ordinance. Unlike the Emergency
Ordinances (4209 and 4210) to allow Streateries in ROW & Outdoor Dining without CU permit, which
were on the December 15, 2020 Agenda as "Unfinished Business", this one is on the November 15, 2022
agenda as "Public Hearing'. Why the different treatment? If something is truly an emergency, how
could Council have time to provide public notice for a public hearing? The draft Ordinance found
starting on Page 457 of the November 15, 2022 Council Agenda Packet declares AN EMERGENCY in its
title and contains an entire section (Section 5) that discusses Declaration of Emergency. Despite this,
the draft Ordinance contains the following nonsensical representation: If it is only approved by a
majority of the Council, it will take effect five days after passage and publication. This is not true. If less
than a majority plus one of the entire membership of the Council vote to approve this proposed
emergency ordinance, the motion fails, plain and simple. To pass a CG Step Backs ordinance as a regular
ordinance, will require the draft of an Ordinance that removes all references to "emergency" and a
separate motion to pass an Ordinance that is not an emergency. Please adopt better practices and
please hold accountable whoever has informed you that Council can adopt an Ordinance that is not an
emergency under a Motion to adopt an Emergency Ordinance.
Submitted on: 11/15/2022 6:48:52 AM
Name: Ken Reidy
City of Residence: Edmonds
Agenda Topic: Public Hearing on the 2023 Proposed Budget
Comments: PLEASE review how Edmonds city government obtains its legal advice. My opinion is:
History supports the argument that the quality of legal advice and inconsistency of legal advice is
evidence that citizens of Edmonds pay far too much for a City Attorney. I believe the poor condition of
our City Code for over 20 years provides more evidence that citizens of Edmonds pay far too much for a
City Attorney. I believe the attempt to update our Street Vacation Code provides more evidence that
citizens of Edmonds pay far too much for a City Attorney. I believe the fact that the City Attorney had
c
m
E
E
0
U
0
a
c
m
Packet Pg. 11
7.2.a
thousands of hours available to work on the Ebb Tide matter is more evidence the citizens of Edmonds
pay far too much for a city attorney. I believe the multiple violations of RCW 36.70A.390 (including
Ordinance 4210) are more evidence that citizens of Edmonds pay far too much for a City Attorney. I
believe the release of all ownership interest in stormwater facilities at 22901 Edmonds Way without
complying with RCW 35.94.040 is evidence we pay far too much for a City Attorney. I also encourage
City Council to budget funds to return the money the City wrongly charged Westgate Chapel for a Street
Vacation. I think the Edmonds City Council should also approve reimbursement to Westgate Chapel for
the cost of preparing all the easement documents Westgate Chapel had to prepare rather than the City
of Edmonds retaining an easement as State and City law allow. The definition of "reserve for the city" is
very easy to understand: In vacating a street, alley, or easement, the city council may reserve for the
city any easements or the right to exercise and grant any easements for construction, repair and
maintenance of public utilities and services. [Ord. 3910 A§ 1, 2013; Ord. 2933 A§ 1, 19931. Edmonds
City Council should have "reserved for the city" what the city of Edmonds needed so the third -party
utilities could have continued using portions of 92nd Avenue West under their franchise agreements.
Had the City Council done what law allows, the City of Edmonds could not have also charged
compensation. Our law is clearly Either:OR. Finally, please budget the proper amount needed for
delivery of a vastly improved City Code by a date in time. The entire City Code needs to be updated,
both the ECC and the ECDC.
Submitted on: 11/15/2022 7:47:41 AM
Name: Ken Reidy
City of Residence: Edmonds
Agenda Topic: Public Hearing on Proposed 2023-2028 Capital Facilities Plan & Capital Improvement
Program
Comments: The October 13, 2015 City Council Packet includes a draft of the "Planned Development
Code Organization". Within this, the 2022 City Council can see discussion that the Official Street Map
and the Comprehensive Sidewalk Plan both will need updating. Has the Comprehensive Sidewalk Plan
been updated since it was adopted in 1984/1985? Chapter 15.50 ECDC states: In addition to the use
of the comprehensive sidewalk plan as a part of the comprehensive plan of the city of Edmonds, said
plan through Chapter 18.90 ECDC, will serve as a policy statement of the city council and shall be used as
a tool in the consideration of the construction of sidewalks as a part of the public works programs of the
city. It shall also be used in order to determine the construction and placement of sidewalks as a part of
the development review process. The development review process for the purposes of this chapter and
for Chapter 18.90 ECDC is hereby defined to be the review of any subdivision request whether formal or
short plat, any application for a planned residential development and any request for a building permit.
[Ord. 2477, 1985]. The Proposed 2023-2028 Capital Facilities Plan & Capital Improvement Program
includes 14 sidewalk installation projects. Please ask City Staff to disclose if these 14 projects are
included in the City's Comprehensive Sidewalk Plan. Also, is the Waterfront Walkway a sidewalk? If
not, what is the difference between a walkway and a sidewalk? Does the City have walkway standards
like it has street and sidewalk standards? I know that a "clear zone" must be maintained on public
sidewalks or walkways. Are walkways subject to other laws that apply to sidewalks? Is a walkway a
U)
c
m
E
E
0
U
0
a
c
m
Packet Pg. 12
7.2.a
right-of-way? Prior to approving the CFP/CIP, please require City Staff to make full disclosure as to
whether the City has the rights needed to construct the Waterfront Walkway on the Ebb Tide owners'
fee title property. Please ask if the City Administration intends to pursue rights to use additional
portions of the Ebb Tide owner's private property to facilitate construction of an elevated walkway. I
think it improper to approve the CFP/CIP without making full disclosure as to whether the City has all
the rights the City needs needed to construct the Waterfront Walkway on the Ebb Tide owners' fee title
property. Also, who has the duty to maintain the walkway? Is it the duty of the adjacent property
owner similar to what is discussed in ECDC 18.90.040?
Submitted on: 11/15/2022 8:17:59 AM
Name: Ken Reidy
City of Residence: Edmonds
Agenda Topic: General Audience Comments for the November 15, 2022 City Council Meeting
Comments: For years, I have tried to make City Council aware of the provision of false, misleading,
inaccurate, or incomplete information to City Council and the harm such can cause Council's
constituents. In addition to trying to make City Council aware of these situations, I have also pushed
for a tool to help reduce the provision of false, misleading, inaccurate, or incomplete information to City
Council and for a tool the City Council can use after a legislative act has taken place. I have promoted
improved Executive Session record keeping. Contrary to my multi -year efforts, Council chose to do away
with minutes of Executive Session in one of the ugliest legislative processes I have ever witnessed. It is
hard to understand why the 2016 City Council would act in this fashion and vote for something contrary
to the public interest. Prior to the vote, I made sure Council was aware of an example of a blatant false
representation in Executive Session as well as a violation of the Open Public Meetings Act documented
in the October 18, 2005, Executive Session Meeting Minutes. Nonetheless, Council voted to repeal
Resolution 853 - an act I strongly believe fueled greater distrust in City government. I have promoted
clear, consistent procedures that can be used to request reconsideration of prior legislative acts -
especially those legislative acts that history proves were voted on after the provision of false,
misleading, inaccurate, or incomplete information to City Council. No rules and procedures have been
adopted and I fear the City is still operating under the different rules for different people concept.
Wouldn't it be wise and prudent to adopt clear, consistent procedures that govern requests for
reconsideration? Shouldn't priority be granted to reconsidering legislative acts that were voted on after
the provision of false, misleading, inaccurate, or incomplete information to City Council? In summary, it
is hard to understand the conduct of Edmonds City Council. Per MRSC: The essence of the legislative
process is the give and take of different interests, and the search for a compromise that is acceptable to
the majority. It is critical that the compromise is not based on the provision of false, misleading,
inaccurate, or incomplete information to City Council prior to its vote. Please do all you canto end this
practice and change the culture of Edmonds City government
Submitted on: 11/15/2022 6:43:46 PM
c
m
E
E
0
U
v
0
a
c
m
Packet Pg. 13
7.2.a
Name: Natalie Seitz
City of Residence: Edmonds
Agenda Topic: SEIS for the SR99 subarea plan and public hearings (because there is no other way to
provide written hearing comments)
Comments: I will be unable to attend the council meeting tonight. Would you please consider the
following comments • I support all Edmonds residents having access to equitable public processes, the
residents of SR99 are entitled to no less public process than those from downtown supporting the
revisions to BD2. • I support inclusionary housing that provides a range of options to meet the needs of
all Edmonds residents in all areas of the City. The siting of high density residential in the SR99 corridor
without proper housing structure and infrastructure is inequitable and exclusionary. • The council took
needed action on 10/18 to identify that the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the SR99 subarea
was insufficient and to require a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement to be performed.
However if a building permit were submitted today it is unclear to city staff if any supplemental
environmental review or community notification would need or performed. Please, please clarify the
intent of the Council's action to staff that the Final Environmental Impacted Statement is insufficient and
should be treated as insufficient by City staff when receiving building permits for the SR99 subarea.
Please have City staff immediately clarify to the community if they believe the SR99 subarea plan has
SEPA coverage. • Finally, I support any and all amendments that prioritze investments that address the
most pressing hazards, public health issues and resource disparities faced by Edmonds residents in this
year's budget. Thank you for your time and consideration of these comments.
c
m
E
E
0
U
v
3
d
c
m
Packet Pg. 14
8.1
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 11/22/2022
Approval of Council Special Meeting Minutes of November 15, 2022
Staff Lead: Scott Passey
Department: City Clerk's Office
Preparer: Scott Passey
Background/History
N/A
Staff Recommendation
Review and approve the draft meeting minutes on the Consent Agenda.
Narrative
N/A
Attachments:
E111522 Special
Packet Pg. 15
8.1.a
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL
SPECIAL MEETING
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Mike Nelson, Mayor
Vivian Olson, Council President
Will Chen, Councilmember
Neil Tibbott, Councilmember
Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember
Susan Paine, Councilmember
Dave Teitzel, Councilmember
Jenna Nand, Councilmember
1. CALL TO ORDER
DRAFT MINUTES
November 15, 2022
STAFF PRESENT
Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
Scott Passey, City Clerk
Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator
The special Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by Mayor Nelson in the
Council Chambers, 250 5' Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually.
2. EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION PER RCW
42.30.110(1)(I)
The council convened in executive session for approximately 30 minutes to discuss pending or potential
litigation per RCW 42.30.110(1)(i). The executive session concluded at 6:59 p.m.
3. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION
The council reconvened in open session at 7:00 p.m.
4. ADJOURNMENT
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 7:00 p.m.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 15, 2022
Page 1
Packet Pg. 16
8.2
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 11/22/2022
Approval of Council Regular Meeting Minutes of November 15, 2022
Staff Lead: Scott Passey
Department: City Clerk's Office
Preparer: Scott Passey
Background/History
N/A
Staff Recommendation
Review and approve the draft meeting minutes on the Consent Agenda.
Narrative
N/A
Attachments:
E111522
Packet Pg. 17
8.2.a
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MEETING
DRAFT MINUTES
November 15, 2022
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Mike Nelson, Mayor
Vivian Olson, Council President
Will Chen, Councilmember
Neil Tibbott, Councilmember
Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember
Susan Paine, Councilmember
Dave Teitzel, Councilmember
Jenna Nand, Councilmember
1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE
STAFF PRESENT
Oscar Antillon, Public Works Director
Angie Feser, Parks, Rec., & Human Serv. Dir.
Susan McLaughlin, Planning & Dev. Dir.
Todd Tatum, Comm. Serv. & Econ. Dev. Dir.
Rob English, City Engineer
Shannon Burley, Deputy Parks, Rec. & Human
Serv. Dir.
Mike De Lilla, Senior Utilities Engineer
Mike Clugston, Senior Planner
Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
Scott Passey, City Clerk
Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator
The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:01 p.m. by Mayor Nelson in the Council
Chambers, 250 5' Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually. The meeting was opened with the flag salute.
2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Council President Olson read the City Council Land Acknowledge Statement: "We acknowledge the a
original inhabitants of this place, the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and their successors the Tulalip
Q
Tribes, who since time immemorial have hunted, fished, gathered, and taken care of these lands. We
respect their sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and we honor their sacred spiritual connection N
with the land and water."
w
3. ROLL CALL r
c
m
City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present.
4. PRESENTATIONS Q
1. PRESENTATION/UPDATE ON LOWER PERRINVILLE CREEK RESTORATION AND
PERRINVILLE CREEK BASIN ANALYSIS
City Engineer Rob English introduced Senior Utilities Engineer Mike De Lilla and John Ambrose and
Paul Schlenger, ESA.
Senior Utilities Engineer Mike De Lilla explained his presentation is a summary of the Perrinville Creek
Basin Work 2013-Present and ESA will describe what has happened so far with the Lower Perrinville
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 15, 2022
Page 1
Packet Pg. 18
8.2.a
project. In his presentation, the text in italics is updated November 2022, the other text has been provided
in previous presentations.
Mr. De Lilla reviewed the Perrinville Creek Stormwater Flow Reduction Retrofit Study:
Current Basin Limits
WEST
BASIN
City of
Edmo'ds
etra Tech — Figure 5)
EAST
INFILTRATION
j) BASIN
J
City of
Lynnwood
i
Legentl �_
GOLF ■
COURSE ;
2015 Report Project Criteria
0 30 possible projects (14 Edmonds/16 Lynnwood) feasible sites
0 12 recommended (7 Edmonds/5 Lynnwood) (Meeting all 3 criteria below)
■ Project cost below $450,000* per cfs of 2-year peak flow reduction
■ Overall 2-year peak flow reduction greater than 0.15 cfs
■ Limited siting and construction constraints
*2015 dollars
Perrinville Flow Reduction Projects/Studies/Agreements (City)
o Completed
■ (2013) Talbot Road Drainage Impr/Perrinville Creek Mitigation
■ (2015) Perrinville Flow Reduction Study
■ (2015) Drainage Improvements (Dellwood & 191 st - Raingardens and Infiltration)
■ (2016) Discussions with SCCD* for Municipal Raingarden Program
■ (2018) Seaview Infiltration Project (Phase 1)
■ (2019) Interlocal Agreement with SCCD*
■ (2020) 83rd Ave Raingardens
■ (2020) 81 st Ave Raingardens
* Snohomish County Conservation District
0 2022/2023
■ Seaview Infiltration Project (Phase 2) Nov 14,2022 Start
■ 83rd Ave Raingardens (Phase 2) Delayed due to Staffing
■ Geomorphology Study (Completed)
■ $150, 000 DP to further review Edmonds Portion of Basin
■ $500, 000 DOE Grant Application with Lynnwood to further expand Basin Analysis and
cover entire basin.
■ Submitting for USDOT grant due Feb 6, 2023 for Lower Perrinville project.
■ Begin negotiation of 2023 Contract with SCCD* (Late Fall)
■ Continued progress on SMAP (due March 2023)
Citv/Snohomish Countv Conservation District Improvement
Private Raingardens
#
Year Installed
Watershed
7905 189th Pl. SW
1
2019
Perrinville
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 15, 2022
Page 2
Packet Pg. 19
N
N
w
c
m
E
a
8.2.a
8011 180th St. SW
1
2019
Perrinville
18605 79th Pl. W
1
2019
Perrinville
18505 83rd Ave. W
1
2017
Perrinville
7910 187th Pl. SW
1
2021
Perrinville
19011 78th Pl. W
1
2021
Perrinville
7904 191st St. SW
1
2021
Perrinville
7628 191st St. SW
1
2021
Perrinville
8204 182nd Pl. SW
1
2021
Perrinville
7912 191st St. SW
1
2021
Perrinville
Updates to City Codes Specific to Perrinville Basin
o Development Retrofit (applies to existing unmitigated impervious surfaces to remain):
■ 25% _> 50% (currently 25% citywide)
■ 0%m2015 N
N
o Flow control: Match 50-year peak => Match 100-year peak (ie. King County Level 3 N
Standard) for developments of 10,000sf or more impervious surface area
o Edmonds currently in discussions with Lynnwood to make code changes so that these
requirements are applicable there as well.
o Since June 7, 2022 Debrief E
d
■ Lynnwood staff recommending to their council for approval these same updates for their c
portion of the Perrinville Basin. Z
N
Perrinville Basin decision packages for 2023 °'
o DP#39 Lower Perrinville Creek c
■ $750, 000 (get permanent design to 60% and submit for grants)
o DP#40 Seaview Infiltration Project Phase 2 c
■ $10, 000 (project construction closeout
o DP#43 Lower Perrinville Creek Restoration Project
■ $150, 000 (Edmonds basin analysis specific work) M
o DP#44 Perrinville Creek Flow Management Project a
■ $120, 000 (Raingardens/Flow Reduction/SCCD Work)
o DP#45 Storm & Surface Water Comp Plan Update c
■ $600, 000 (portion of these funds will finish DOE required SMAP, which has to be part of 16
Comp Plan) o
Lynnwood Accomplishments a
o Completed a
■ (2016) Maximizing the volume of stormwater going into the Lynndale Park infiltration N
gallery under the dog park. Exceeding its design capacity and performing well. 'n
■ (2016/2017) Retrofit to the Blue Ridge Pond.
■ (2017) Lynnwood Elementary School is 100% infiltration. UJ
r
■ (2017) 12 rain gardens with the Snohomish County Conservation District
o 2022/2023 E
■ Stream Keepers plan on installing 6-10 rain gardens with the Perrinville Creek Salmon
and Trout Relief fund this summer. Q
■ Teaming with Edmonds for $500,000 DOE grant to study basin to find additional
mitigation areas.
John Ambrose, ESA, reviewed:
• Project Team
o Environmental Science Associates (ESA)
■ Hydrologic and Hydraulic Modeling/Design
■ Geomorphology
■ Restoration Engineering
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 15, 2022
Page 3
Packet Pg. 20
8.2.a
■ Fish Ecology
■ Permitting
o Hanson Professional Services
■ Railroad and Road Bridge Engineering
o Shannon & Wilson
■ Geotechnical Engineering
o Duane Hartman & Associates
■ Survey
Scope of Work for Interim Action and 60% Design of Long-term Solution at Railroad and Talbot
Road (red items complete)
o Preparing Necessary Information for Infrastructure and Stream Design
■ Topographic survey (utility locate), hydraulic modeling and hydrology, geotechnical
investigation, geomorphic analysis/sediment transport, and cultural resources assessment
o Design of Interim Action (stream channel and diversion structure modification)
■ Meet with landowners, develop multiple alignment approaches, stake out alignments for
property owners, modify alignment per input
0 60% Design of Long-term Solution Railroad Crossing and Talbot Road
■ Structural engineering, bridge design, stream channel design, permitting
o Public Engagement and City Council Engagement; Stakeholder Meetings
Proposed Sequencing
1. Interim action — in summer 2022 (2023), excavate new stream channel from diversion
structure to BNSF culvert
2. Long-term solution design — replace undersized culverts through BNSF embankment with
properly sized bridge or box culvert
3. Watershed management recommendations/activities
4. Fish passage at Talbot Road — replace undersized culvert at Talbot Road with properly sized
bridge or culvert
Interim Alternatives
o Dashed lines show three alternative alignments for interim action
o Blue box is City's diversion structure
o Maintenance of diversion under 2/3 alternatives
These have been presented to WDFW, tribes, and landowners
easible
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 15, 2022
Page 4
Packet Pg. 21
N
N
W
r
C
d
E
t
V
r�
r�
a
8.2.a
. urrently Proposed Alternative
Railroad
�. 11 ,. 15
Flynn Home
McLaughlin Home`m
OExisting Trees
o Attributes of Currently Proposed Alternative
1. Accommodates the potential future, final channel location through private property.
2. Maintains viewshed and privacy of landowners to the degree practical
3. Improves flood and sediment conveyance to railroad culvert
4. Restores fish access to Lower Perrinville Creek most of the year (diversion needs to be
maintained)
x
klignment
• Long-term solution in Lower Perrinville Creek
o Properly sized replacement structure through BNSF railroad embankment
o Properly sized channel and stream mouth
o Eliminate diversion
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 15, 2022
Page 5
Packet Pg. 22
N
N
u�
w
r
c
m
E
a
�. 11 ,. 15
Flynn Home
McLaughlin Home`m
OExisting Trees
o Attributes of Currently Proposed Alternative
1. Accommodates the potential future, final channel location through private property.
2. Maintains viewshed and privacy of landowners to the degree practical
3. Improves flood and sediment conveyance to railroad culvert
4. Restores fish access to Lower Perrinville Creek most of the year (diversion needs to be
maintained)
x
klignment
• Long-term solution in Lower Perrinville Creek
o Properly sized replacement structure through BNSF railroad embankment
o Properly sized channel and stream mouth
o Eliminate diversion
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 15, 2022
Page 5
Packet Pg. 22
N
N
u�
w
r
c
m
E
a
8.2.a
• Talbot Road Culvert Replacement
o Properly sized replacement structure at Talbot Road
o Sediment management upstream
Paul Schlenger, Fisheries Biologist, ESA, reviewed: ai
• Salmon and Trout Potentially in Perrinville Creek
o Coho salmon
o Steelhead a
c
o Cutthroat trout
o Rainbow trout
o Chinook salmon (estuary and lowermost reaches only)
■ Would not use Perrinville for spawning but juvenile will use lower parts of stream a
o Photo of Coho salmon in Shell Creek this year
• Will salmon be able to access Perrinville Creek? c
o Yes, the restoration alternatives all include stream slopes less than 5%
o This is below the slope limit Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Fish c
Passage Guidance identifies as the maximum slopes for salmon and trout Q
■ Coho salmon up to 7% slopes a
■ Steelhead and cutthroat trout up to 12% slopes N
04
o WDFW guidance is consistent with slopes at which coho were observed in study by Tulalip
Tribes and Skagit River System Cooperative in Skagit and Samish Rivers
o This is below the slope limit for young Chinook salmon identified I steam -mouth study by w
Tulalip Tribes and Skagit River System Cooperative c
m
E
Council President Olson thanked staff and the consultant for the color coding in the presentation. She also
expressed her appreciation for the replies she received to questions she submitted.
a
Councilmember Paine asked whether eelgrass could be expected in the nearshore when the lower end of
Perrinville Creek is built out. Mr. Schlenger answered beyond the stream mouth, patchy or continuous
eelgrass could be expected. Councilmember Paine asked if the City was engaging with BNSF on any
funding opportunities. Mr. Schlenger answered yes, relaying they are also working with BNSF on a
regional study. They meet with BNSF every two weeks and have talked to them specifically about this
project and the City's pursuit of a U.S. Department of Transportation grant. Councilmember Paine
expressed her pleasure that Edmonds was working with Lynnwood who is a key participant in this
watershed. She appreciated the updates and hoped they would occur every six months.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 15, 2022
Page 6
Packet Pg. 23
8.2.a
Councilmember Teitzel thanked the team for their very interesting presentation. With the current
diversion structure, he observed it was not possible for fish to access Perrinville Creek beyond that
structure. Mr. Schlenger agreed, advising the structure starts with a vertical drop which fish cannot cross.
Councilmember Teitzel asked if the original stream bed traversed the McLaughlin property before the
diversion structure was placed. Mr. Ambrose answered there is no data available to determine exactly
how the stream channel moved over time. Perrinville Creek carries a high sediment load which is natural
for streams like this along Puget Sound, cutting through glacial sediments and depositing that material in
the same area it is deposited now. Those channels move over time because they do not have the power to
move a large amount of sediment so it deposits in an alluvia fan and the location varies over time. There
is indication of low lying depressions to the south, beyond the Robinson property, so it is likely the creek
occupied that position for some time. Without accurate records, it is difficult to say where the original
streambed was. Available photos only date back to the 1930s when modifications had already made. Mr.
Schlenger commented the railroad has been in that location since late the 1800s, but there has not always
been the embankment. Mr. Ambrose explained the first original impact was the railroad, followed by
Talbot Road and then development of the properties.
Councilmember Teitzel said he is very interested in salmon recovery in all the streams in Edmonds.
Presuming the streambed issue and the culvert under Talbot Road can be resolved, the stream aligned
properly, and a box culvert under the railroad, he asked how far salmon could realistically be expected to
travel upstream beyond Talbot Road. Mr. Schlenger said he hasn't walked the entire stream but current
databases show about .2 miles from Talbot Road or 1,000 feet upstream. The stream extends a long way
beyond that and he did not know if it was in a natural state or if it could be modified to improve how far
salmon travel. There are natural barriers in streams and he was unsure if the endpoint defined in the data
was a natural or manmade barrier.
Councilmember Nand explained she just joined the council and her awareness of culverts and the issue L
comes from the huge controversy with salmon access for Orcas, the state and local municipalities playing
political football with who is responsible for restoring natural habitat streams before Orcas become
extinct. She asked the team to comment generally on upstream partners and the quality of water coming to
Edmonds and if the water and habitat would be healthy enough to support salmon spawning. Mr. °
Schlenger responded water quality and quantity is definitely a challenge in urban settings. He stays c
optimistic as there are still salmon in a lot of coastal streams and if they have access, they use the habitat. a
There are plenty of examples where providing good habitat can extend the reach and that aspect can be
Q
maintained despite the upstream development. Water quality is an important issue and they are learning
more about contaminants and particulates that get into the water; that can be more challenging to address N
because it may require lifestyle changes. He intentionally separated his answer in terms of habitat as there
are meaningful things that can be done to improve the structure of the steam; the water quality is a w
different challenge that requires different tools.
m
Mr. Schlenger asked if the City had data about Lynnwood water quality. Mr. De Lilla answered there is
whatever is required by Ecology and then there is a basin by basin analysis like the City is doing with
Perrinville where an issue has been identified and the City needs to go over and above what is required by Q
the state. That is where discussions need to happen because the state sets the overall ground rules, but it is
up to the entities, such as Edmonds and Lynnwood, to address problems over and above. The other issue
is how far to go, for example 6PPD which a hot topic that deserves a lot of attention. Although not an
issue for human water quality, it is an issue for fish habitat. That discussion is in its infancy; everyone
wants to do the right thing. The intent with whatever is put in is to make it as future proof as possible so
something different doesn't need to be done in 2-3 years. Although he hates to say it, sometimes waiting
for the data is the right answer.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 15, 2022
Page 7
Packet Pg. 24
8.2.a
Councilmember Buckshnis commented although she is not a scientist, she knows a lot of scientists. She
asked for a copy of morphology report. She relayed WRIA 8, Puget Sound Partnership, Salmon
Recovery, etc. are interested in what's going on. She suggested inviting Senator Cantwell's team to visit
the stream, recalling U.S. Representative Larsen's team already visited. She recalled Senator Cantwell
included $3.5 million in the transportation budget for the Meadowdale project. There is also a lot of
money available in the infrastructure bills.
Councilmember Buckshnis asked if the Tribes have given a certain date to restore the stream. Mr. De
Lilla answered those discussions are still in process, no date has been set. Councilmember Buckshnis
asked if there are plans to look at the post office area and whether a diversion pipe will be needed. Mr. De
Lilla answered the post office area will be considered, but the ground water is very high there, which
prevents infiltration and requires consideration of other alternatives. At the same time, it is federal
property so it will take time. Councilmember Buckshnis reiterated her suggestion for funding via the
infrastructure and inflation bills.
Council President Olson referred to the sequencing slide, observing the interim project would be done
first and the final after. She expressed concern with getting grant money for infrastructure before it is all
obligated to other projects. Mr. De Lilla answered the interim and permanent alignments are actually one
in the same. Once that work is done, the railroad culvert or bridge would be done and then the work on
Talbot Road and on the diversion structure. The goal is to minimize doing double work. The work being
done now is to get the design to about 60%, the level that makes the most sense for submitting for grants
and the level BNSF wants for their funding.
5. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS,
TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
0
Mayor Nelson described procedures for audience comments.
0
L
Kristy Flynn, Edmonds, representing herself, her husband Todd and their neighbors Jackie and Charles n
McLaughlin, explained they live at the lower basin of Perrinville Creek and the creek flows through their a
yards prior to passing under the railroad and into the Salish Sea. She emphasized an interim and long term N
solution for Perrinville Creek is a highly complicated project. They believe a solution can be implemented 'n
that balances a healthy creek habitat with homeowner interests. She encouraged the council to consider
their interests as both citizens and homeowners and to ask themselves what they would want if they w
owned these properties. They have been in continuous discussion with the City on a solution and they and
the City have had many concerns and questions along the way. They have not delayed the project; for E
example, the City's original proposal, which they had concerns about, was later determined by the City
and consultants to be inoperable due to sewer lines on the west side of their properties. From that point Q
forward, they have worked with the City on an option that is workable for all parties including the Tribes
and the Department of Fish and Wildlife and until recently it seemed like the effort was headed toward an
agreeable solution.
Ms. Flynn continued, however, they have now been informed of a potential change in the City's position
which is concerning as they thought this was headed toward an interim solution that would be beneficial
to all parties and was consistent with history. Perrinville Creek will never be a spawning habitat for
salmon unless the following happens: BNSF opens a wider outflow to the Salish Sea than the current 32"
pipe, the pipe west of Talbot Road is redone to allow fish passage, and the amount of stormwater in the
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 15, 2022
Page 8
Packet Pg. 25
8.2.a
creek is drastically reduced to perhaps 1984 era conditions. These stormwaters originate in Lynnwood
and starting in 2019 began to send massive amounts of water through South County Park, scouring the
creek bed and now sending tons of rock and sediment into the lowest part of the creek through their
properties and onto the beach. They appreciate Mike De Lilla's collaborative work style and are confident
a reasonable agreement for an interim solution can be reached and achieved that satisfies all involved
parties by adequately addressing all the concerns and does not misconstrue history.
Joe Scordino, Edmonds, referred to comments in the Perrinville Creek presentation such as alternative,
proposal and may be different than originally discussed, questioning whether this should be a council
decision and whether it should have been a presentation to council and how the alternatives affect citizens
as well as the natural resources. He also heard in the presentation that consideration is being given to
leaving the diversion structure. With the diversion structure, juvenile salmon in the creek are shot out into
saltwater during high flows; they can make it back but they die if that happens a couple times. He
supported a totally thought out plan that protects the natural resources, protects citizens, and finds a way
to address the issues. In March 2021, the mayor's put out a press release stating there would be a council -
approved restoration plan. The proposed approach is wrong because it does not look at the big picture. He
suggested the City consider a diversion structure upstream of the post office where the pipe starts and
divert water under 76' Avenue. There is a similar structure on Daly Street for Shell Creek. Leaving the
diversion structure at the lower end is ridiculous as it relates to natural resources. This should be a council
decision with citizen input. He was concerned about natural resources, but he was also concerned about
the citizens of Edmonds. He was troubled that every year there was a new CIP, it is supposed to be a 6-
year plan.
Jim Ogonowski, Edmonds, thanked Mayor Nelson for joining other mayors in Snohomish County to
advocate for enhanced safety measures, and although that is a good first step, it is not enough. The
council needs to consider what additional legislation it can pass to help law enforcement; the council
should seek input from the police chief and act accordingly and quickly. The no camping in public spaces
was a good first step and more needs to be done. He was disappointed the decision package regarding the
prosecuting attorney was withdrawn and suggested it was a worthwhile discussion for the council to have.
In his opinion, the City would be better served by a different prosecuting attorney.
7. RECEIVED FOR FILING >
0
L
Q
1. CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES FROM JAEBEOM KOH FOR FILE Q
8. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS N
u�
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO
APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items w
approved are as follows:
E
1. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 1, 2022
2. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 2, 2022 Q
3. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 7, 2022
4. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS
5. PERMANENT BD2 DESIGNATED STREET FRONT MAP AND BD USE TABLE
CLARIFICATIONS
9. PUBLIC HEARINGS
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 15, 2022
Page 9
Packet Pg. 26
8.2.a
1. PUBLIC HEARING - CG STEP BACK INTERIM ORDINANCE
Planning and Development Director Susan McLaughlin explained this item is before the council as a
result of discussion with the community, staff and council about the Highway 99 subarea plan and 5-year
action. Subsequent to that community members researched materials in the EIS, recognizing that step
backs were discussed in the draft EIS, but were not included in the subsequent final EIS mitigation
measures or in the development code update to Chapter 16.60.
Ms. McLaughlin explained the subarea plan was adopted in August 2017 and was the result of a
significant amount of public engagement and mobilizing around goals for the corridor which included
fostering revitalization on the corridor. One of key points at that time was recognizing that adjacent cities
were yielding good benefits from development along the corridor including not only housing but also
public improvements. Recognizing that interest and the need, the City engaged in the subarea plan. At the
end of that process, chapter 16.60 was updated and some of those development regulations included more
stringent development regulations for the CG zone such as ground level transparency, streetscape
requirements, step backs adjacent to residential, and fostering transit oriented development. In parallel
with those recommendations, a draft EIS was created which was a planned action, basically recognizing
the cumulative impacts of upzoning the area and mitigating against those impacts in the draft EIS and
subsequently in the final adopted EIS. There are discussions in the draft EIS about step backs adjacent to
and across the street. At the last council hearing, staff recognized the concern from the neighborhood and
wanted to support quick action similar to what was done in the BD2 zone. She commented the City
received a VISION 2040 award from the Puget Sound Regional Council for this plan.
Ms. McLaughlin acknowledged there was some confusion about the draft EIS as it relates to step backs
across the street from single family residences which resulted in:
• Interim Ordinance process
o Council adopted emergency interim ordinance (Ordinance 4278) on October 4, 2022 to put in
place step backs across the street
o Council public hearing within 60 days (November 15)
o Council must issue findings to retain or vacate interim ordinance.
• Interim CG Step back across from RS zone
2. For buildings across the street from RS zones, the portion of the building above 25 feet in
height shall step back no less than 8 feet from the required street setback. That portion of
building over 55 feet in height shall step back no less than 16 feet from the required street
setback.
o Diagram of step back
Xei9ht Limit 7S I— —I
F5gh,
5' ]Vftreet Sel6ack
• Critical information discovered since emergency interim ordinance
o Step backs across the street from RS zones were considered and dismissed in 2017
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 15, 2022
Page 10
Packet Pg. 27
N
N
r
LU
j.i
C
d
E
t
V
a
■ Council discussed on June 20, July 18, and July 31, 2017
- July 18 staff agenda memo offered step back options of an even lesser extent of 5';
Council did not include step backs in their recommended draft language although it
was discussed at hearing and staff made explanation of why they were not
recommended.
■ Council unanimously approved CG code without step backs across the street from RS on
August 15, 2017 (along with unanimous approval of Subarea Plan and Planned Action
SEPA FEIS)
■ Step backs adjacent to RS zones were included in the CG code in revised ECDC 16.60,
those across the street were not included
Ms. McLaughlin explained most rights -of -way are 60' wide. When adding 10-20 feet setbacks on either
side for residential or the new CG zone requirements, results in a 80' separation across the street from a
single family residence. It was concluded via consultant analysis and review and discussion with council
that 80' of separation provides sunlight, respect of privacy, etc. The council also confirmed the
importance of a robust streetscape design to beautify the street edge which was subsequently adopted in
chapter 16.60.
Staff has learned a lot since October 4th and she talked to some of the neighborhood stakeholders today.
She validated that change is difficult, especially the transition between single family and seven stories
allowed in the CG zone. She was not negating that concern, but wanted to pinpoint a solution that did not
go back on robust conversations and decisions made with developers and the neighboring communities
along with staff and consultant analysis because it is important to have developer confidence and
partnerships with developers to get public improvements in this neighborhood.
Ms. McLaughlin reviewed:
• Permanent ordinance process
o Emergency ordinance valid through April 6, 2023
o Council must issue findings to retain or vacate interim ordinance.
■ Direct staff to draft findings for discussion at December council meeting
o Based on new information, staff recommends vacating the interim ordinance °
■ Recognizing benefit of early collaboration with neighborhood, staff recommends c
neighborhood meeting requirements at the onset of projects as part of the minor code Q
amendment package anticipated to go to Council in early Q 1
Q
o If retained, staff will take project through the planning board to consider modifications, and
back to council in early 2023
N
Councilmember Buckshnis commented it was helpful to see the minutes of the council vote. That w
planning process took a long time and she did not recall the step back issue in this area. She recalled
discussing it ad nauseum for the downtown business area. She recommended continuing with this
ordinance and expressed her support for step backs. Ms. McLaughlin advised the minutes were circulated
to council today, recognizing that was a critical part of staff s recommendation tonight.
a
Councilmember Nand recalled Ms. McLaughlin mentioned at previous meetings concerns with developer
confidence about proceeding with projects if there are zoning changes or if the community and planning
board recommend changes to the subarea plan approved in 2017. She asked if any developers have
expressed qualms or a desire to pull back if the neighborhood and planning board process recommends
significant changes to the subarea plan reflective of the considerable pushback council has received from
the community. Ms. McLaughlin answered one of unfortunate things about an emergency ordinance is it
does not go through the required notification process. Staff has heard concerns from the development
community who already have projects in pipeline; however, there has not been a large scale notification
to the other affected parcels, a total of 39.3 acres of development potential. She would love to have an
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 15, 2022
Page 11
Packet Pg. 28
8.2.a
opportunity to do that depending on the council discussion tonight. She anticipated the council would
likely hear from the development community during the public hearing testimony.
Councilmember Tibbott said he was very interested in the public testimony. He asked staff to review the
decision the council is being asked to make and the timeline. Ms. McLaughlin answered tonight is a
public hearing; typically on public hearing evenings, council listens to the community and staff,
deliberates and ask questions, but does not make a decision. Staff will come back to the council in
December if council decides tonight to move forward with an emergency ordinance. Staff will also come
back to council after taking this through the planning board in early 2023. Councilmember Tibbott
relayed his understanding of the process: the council will be listening tonight, forming opinions over the
next couple weeks and sometime in December, make a decision whether to retain the interim ordinance or
abandon it. Senior Planner Mike Clugston responded the council's decision will be whether to uphold the
interim ordinance and send to the planning board for further review/recommendation or to
vacate/eliminate it.
City Attorney Jeff Taraday pointed out section 3 of the interim ordinance states no later than the next
regular meeting immediately following the hearing, the city council shall adopt findings of fact on the
subject of this interim ordinance and either justify its continued effectiveness or repeal the interim
ordinance. While the council does not have to give him that direction tonight, some action needs to be
taken at next week's council meeting with regard to either continuing with the interim ordinance or
repealing it.
Councilmember Tibbott relayed his understanding that means the council would not wait until December,
but taking action next week. Mr. Taraday said he was not clear if Ms. McLaughlin was referencing some
other action that would occur in December, but the decision whether to continue with the interim
ordinance is a decision that needs to be made next week.
Councilmember Paine agreed the minutes would be very helpful. She asked if the Supplemental EIS will
still be pursued. Ms. McLaughlin answered yes, as the council took action on the SEIS.
With regard to a permanent decision being made in December, Council President Olson asked if the 0
council wants to continue the interim ordinance because councilmembers are not ready to make a decision c
on the permanent ordinance, would that be a finding of fact to continue the interim ordinance. Mr. a
Taraday answered yes, that is the reason for an interim ordinance, to finalize the planning process. He was
Q
not clear from Ms. McLaughlin's remarks whether the reference to December was adoption of a new
permanent CG or something else. The interim ordinance can remain in place until a permanent ordinance N
is ready to be adopted. There is nothing that requires the interim ordinance remain in place during the
continued analysis. The council has a decision to make during this period of time the City is reevaluating w
development in the corridor about what is best for the community during the next few months, whether it r
is better to have the interim in place or have no interim ordinance in place and go back to the preexisting
regulations. That is fundamentally the council's choice.
Council President Olson asked for clarification, if the council maintains the interim ordinance, the council Q
still has the option at the end of the interim period or any tine between now and then to vacate it. The
council is not locked into the entire interim period. Mr. Taraday answered even if the council decided
next week to leave the interim in place, it is not obligated to leave it in place for the full six month period.
At any point in time if the council gets new information or becomes aware of a change in circumstances
that requires the interim ordinance to repealed earlier, the council is not prevented from repealing it
earlier.
Mayor Nelson opened the public hearing.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 15, 2022
Page 12
Packet Pg. 29
8.2.a
Stanley Piha, Seattle, one of owners of the vacant land at 84t' & 236t'', said he learned about the CG
emergency interim ordinance after its passage by council on October 4, 2022. For nearly one year, they
have been under a purchase and sale agreement with a builder/developer to acquire the site. During the
period of this agreement, they have been working diligently on plans to construct a multifamily transit
oriented development in accordance with the zoning code and rules put in place by the City. They have
not requested any deviations from the code and have applied the requirements as mandated by the code
and development plans. The intent was to close at the end of December; the interim ordinance has thrown
this into an abyss and they do not know what the possibilities of this process will be. He was taken aback
to learn of the implementation of the CG interim ordinance. First, the subject of step backs was fully
vetted in the public hearing process in 2017. Public hearing presentations to the city council by the
consultant, senior planner, and FEIS consultant concluded that step backs for residentially zoned
properties across the street were not warranted due to the separation generated by the required setbacks on
each property plus the width of the City right-of-way. A step back for single family residential properties
adjacent to CG zoned properties were warranted and were included in the planned action.
Mr. Piha continued, proof of this is clearly found in the public record and video of the city council
meetings occurring on June 20, July 31, and August 15, 2017. The presentation to the council by Kernen
Lien on October 4, 2022 that resulted in the passage of the CG interim ordinance was misleading and
inaccurate. Contrary to his assertions as evidenced by the public hearing noted previously, the step backs
across the street from single family zoned properties was fully presented, discussed and vetted during the
public hearing. Councilmembers Teitzel, Tibbott, Buckshnis and then-Councilmember Nelson were in
attendance and provided comment and questions. At the conclusion of the August 15, 2017 public
hearing, the city council voted unanimously to approve the planned action. It is understandable with so
much City business to attend to that the institutional memory of prior public hearings and council
meetings can get lost, but the record is clear. The subject of step backs for residential properties across the
street was not missed and was thoroughly discussed and vetted by the council before passing the
ordinance.
Brian Bergstrom, Synergy Construction, owner representative of the developer of the property at 84t' & a
2361, commented they were quite surprised to learn of the passage of the emergency ordinance on �
October 4, 2022 and immediately mobilized their architects to analyze what this meant to the feasibility °
of their project. The impact was significant, 40-50 housing units may potentially be lost if the emergency c
ordinance were to stand as currently implemented. They recognize this issue arose due to concerns from Q
the community and hope this project will become part of this community. He expressed their willingness
Q
to work with City staff to find a workable solution for the project, the City and the community. They
chose Edmonds due to its wonderful attributes and hope to continue and close their transaction with Mr. N
Piha. He hoped a timely solution could be found as every day this continues has a significant impact on
their project. Their project is currently in for design review which has now been placed on hold. w
r
Theresa Hollis, Edmonds, a resident in the neighborhood where the Terrace Place Apartments are
proposed, expressed her appreciation for the historical context Ms. McLaughlin provided today about the
robust public engagement process in developing the subarea plan for Highway 99. She asserted none of
the neighbors on 84t1i Street who participated in the 2017 public engagement process asked the City to get Q
rid of the transition between single family and general commercial or high rise multifamily. Yet, that is
what happened in the council decision making. The lots on 84' between 238' and 236t' were upzoned
from multifamily 1.5 to CG. It will be a huge change to have a 6 story structure plus underground parking
on the corner of 236t' & 84t''. She preferred the project proposed a couple years ago, a 4-story adult family
home as there needs to be more supportive housing units, but that project did not move forward. There is
no rush to make a decision; she recognized from the business perspective, this is rehashing past decision
making. A single family home on this site was razed about 20 years ago and the property has remained
vacant. There is no longer a transition zone between single family and high rise multifamily on 84t''. The
most significant mitigation to address that is the step backs. She requested the council permanently codify
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 15, 2022
Page 13
Packet Pg. 30
8.2.a
step backs for high rise buildings across the street from single family where the transition zone has been
eliminated.
Judi Gladstone, Edmonds, a resident adjacent to the Highway 99 subarea planning area, voiced her
support for making the emergency ordinance passed in October 2022 a permanent revision to the
Edmonds zoning code. She recognized there was some history to this issue but hoped the council
appreciated those who participated in that process were not representative of the impacted neighborhoods
adjacent to the subarea plan. In her opinion, one of the main reasons for the step back was to provide the
transition that was taken away by changing the area from multifamily to CG and mitigating the bulk and
mass. Siting multifamily across the street from single family residential has a significant impact on
transportation, parks and sidewalks and aesthetically. The zoning changes would not have been needed if
it had not been upzoned to General Commercial and it remained multifamily as was done on the northern
part of Highway 99 corridor. While the council may have discussed this, she assumed the neighbors did
not voice their opinions. She lived in this area at the time and knew nothing about it. The step backs are
important and provide the mitigation needed to provide for a transition. In other areas along Highway 99,
the single family residential is not adjacent. It is not about shadows and distance, it is about aesthetics,
traffic, parks, etc. This is one of the only mitigations available; she appreciated the developers offer to
have a conversation. She supports multifamily in this corridor but wants to preserve the sense of
neighborhood as described in the comprehensive plan and the subarea plan. She hoped the council would
honor that even if the wrong decision was made in the past.
With no further public testimony, Mayor Nelson closed the public hearing.
Council President Olson commented in light of the information provided, she sensed the council needed
more time to make a decision.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS,
TO ASK THE CITY ATTORNEY TO DRAFT FINDINGS OF FACT AND RESOLUTION TO
EXTEND THE INTERIM ORDINANCE.
Council President Olson commented there is also the option to ask the city attorney to draft finding of fact
to retain and to lift the interim ordinance.
Mayor Nelson asked if the motion needed to state the timeline for the extension. Mr. Taraday answered a
the six month limit under state law would be the default unless the council directs him otherwise. Section
2 of the interim ordinance states it has a 6 month duration. N
N
Council President Olson clarified her motion was to extend the emergency ordinance. w
r
Councilmember Teitzel said he was unsure what the motion would accomplish. His understanding was
the council will vote next week whether to extend the emergency ordinance for six months and during E
that six months, the council could choose to lift it, eliminate it or something else.
W
a
Council President Olson explained findings of fact need to be adopted next week to extend the ordinance
and they will not be prepared unless the council asks for them.
Councilmember Tibbott clarified the motion is for the city attorney bring back findings of fact next week.
Council President Olson agreed.
Councilmember Chen relayed his understanding that community members and certain developers are
seeking solutions for a win -win. If the council extends the emergency ordinance for six months and a
workable solution can be reached, he wanted to be certain that the council had the option to lift the
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 15, 2022
Page 14
Packet Pg. 31
8.2.a
interim ordinance sooner. Council President Olson assured the council can lift the ordinance as soon as
resolution is reached.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
2. PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED 2023-2028 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN &
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
City Engineer Rob English advised Senior Utilities Engineer Mike De Lilla, Public Works Director Oscar
Antillon, Parks, Recreation are available to answer questions. He reviewed the following, highlighting
several projects:
• Public Works & Utilities
o 2023-2028 CFP & CIP
■ Combined CFP & CIP Document
- Transportation
- Utilities
Water
Stormwater
• Sewer
- Facilities
- Wastewater Treatment Plant
- Comparison to previous year
Public Works & Utilities - Transportation c
0 2023 Pavement Preservation Projects a
■ 2023 Pavement Preservation Program DP#64
- Decision package will be reduced from $1.5 million to $1.1 million
■ 76th Ave Overlay Close-out DP#65($15k)
L
■ Main St. Overlay 6th Ave - 8th Ave DP#69($157k) M
- 2023 Design / 2024 Construction
- $750K Federal Grant
- 11 New ADA Ramps G
0 2023 Safety & Capacity Projects >
■ Hwy 99 Revitalization/Gateway DP#66 ($2.6M) °
■ Hwy 99 Stage 3 244" St-238t' St DP#67 ($1.1M) a
■ Hwy 99 Stage 4 224t' St-220th at DP#68 ($740K)
■ 76th Ave/220th St Intersection DP#63 ($761K) N
■ SR-104 Adaptive System DP#70 ($243K)
■ Traffic Signal Safety & Upgrades DP#73 ($30K) w
■ Guardrail Improvements DP#74 ($20K)
0 2023 Active Transportation Projects & Planning
■ Transportation Plan Update DP#62 ($170K) E
■ Citywide Bicycle Improvements DP#71 ($1.7M)
■ Green Streets DP#72 ($297K) Q
■ Pedestrian Safety Program DP#75*($80K)
■ Traffic Calming Program DP#76*($33K)
■ Citywide Street Lighting Study DP#77 ($60K)
■ Elm Way Walkway DP#78 ($901K)
*increase from decision package in budget
Public Works & Utilities - Utilities
o 2023 Water Utility
■ 2022 Replacement Program DP#34 ($10k)
■ 2024 Replacement Program DP#35 ($506K)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 15, 2022
Page 15
Packet Pg. 32
8.2.a
■ Waterline Overlays DP#36 ($50K)
■ Yost/Seaview Reservoir Repairs DP#37 ($805K)
■ 2023 Replacement Program DP#38 ($1.7M)
0 2023 Stormwater Utility
■ Perrinville Creek Basin Projects
- Lower Perrinville Creek Restoration DP#39 ($750K)
- Perrinville Creek Basin Analysis Update DP#43 ($150K)
- Perrinville Creek Basin Flow Mgmt DP#44 ($120K)
■ Seaview Infiltration Facility Ph 2 DP#40 ($1 Ok)
■ Stormwater Overlays DP#41 ($200K)
■ 2024 Replacement Program DP#42 ($290K)
■ Storm & Surface Water Comp Plan DP#45 ($600K)
■ Lake Ballinger Floodplain DP#46 ($750K)
■ Edmonds Marsh Water Quality Impr* ($366K)
■ Inadvertently left out of 2023 decision package
0 2023 Sewer Utility
■ 2022 Replacement Program DP#49 ($30k)
■ 2024 Replacement Program DP#50 ($349K)
■ Sewerline Overlays DP#51 ($200K)
■ 2023 Replacement Program DP#52 ($1.6M)
■ Cured in -place pipe rehabilitation DP#53 ($423K)
0 2023 WWTP
■ WWTP Clarifier 1 Rehabilitation DP#54 ($350K)
■ Vacuum Filter Replacement DP#55 ($187K)
■ Nuvoda Pre -Design DP#56 ($300K)
■ Joint Sealant DP#57 ($60K)
Public Works & Utilities - Facilities the City owns and maintains
o Boys & Girls Club
o Cemetery Building
o City Hall
o Fishing Pier
o Frances Anderson Center
o Fire Station 16
o Fire Station 17
o Fire Station 20
o Historic Log Cabin
o Historic Museum
o Library
o Meadowdale Club House
o Old Public Works
o Parks Maintenance Bldg.
o Public Safety
o Public Works O&M
o Wade James Theater
o Yost Pool House
CIP/CFP Schedule
o July
■ City staff begins development of capital budgets
o August/September
■ Submit proposed Capital budget to Finance
■ Prepare draft CFP and CIP
o October
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 15, 2022
Page 16
Packet Pg. 33
N
N
w
c
m
E
a
8.2.a
■ Planning Board (October 12th)
■ Planning Board Public Hearing (October 26th)
■ City Council Presentation (November 1st)
o November
■ City Council Public Hearing (November 15th)
■ Adopt CFP w/ Budget into the Comprehensive Plan (November 22nd)
Parks, Recreation & Human Services Director Angie Feser advised Deputy Parks, Recreation & Human
Services Director Shannon Burley was also available to answer questions Ms. Feser reviewed:
• Parks 2023-2028 CIP/CFP — based on PROS Plan
o Project -based versus Fund -based
0 2023 Projects = Decision Packages
0 37 CIP/CFP Projects (9 last year)
0 3 Programs (4 last year)
0 5 Parkland Acquisition
o Projects coded
■ A — acquisition
■ P — planning
■ D — development
■ R — renovation
2023-2028 Parks CIP/CFP
Project Distribution
p •••,,••••••
i
�
Nan.slu s�atNk Pmktn
Nelghh:"— Pa rk3P]
a3, P6. �15
N•ighherh•ed Park Sh99
•-•-
a4, 11, Ala
—Shbwhend Pa rk SF2
"d•
Pli
P30
CkV Pa.k lmpraamenh
SI z F WaPPnding
u
a13
PI-1-1d UPgr•da Program
(1922&1!• 1
P
Parks 2023-2028 CIP/ CFP Projects
o Johnson Property — R2, P5 (DP#82)
■ Demolition and Securing 1-acre Property - 2023
■ Master Plan / Public Input Process - 2025
■ Estimated Cost $282,000
o Meadowdale Playfields — R3
■ Inclusive Playground
■ Dugout roofs
■ Light Fixtures
■ Estimated Cost TBD
o Mathay Ballinger Park — D5, D6, D7 (DP#80)
■ Paved Loop Pathway
■ Shelter with Picnic Tables
■ Permanent Restroom
■ Estimated Cost: $499,300
o Yost Park & Pool — R9, R4, R6, R11 (DP#81)
■ Playground Replacement* — 2023
■ Trail/Bridge Repair — 2024
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 15, 2022
Page 17
Packet Pg. 34
N
N
u�
w
r
c
m
E
a
8.2.a
■ Tennis Court resurface — 2025
■ Pool Upgrades — 2025
■ Estimated Cost: $985,200
*Part of annual inclusive upgrade program
Parks 2024-2027 Capital Projects
o Sierra Park — R8
■ Playground Replacement* — 2024
■ Estimated Cost: $187,500
*Part of annual inclusive upgrade program
o Maplewood Hill Park — R12
■ Playground Replacement* — 2025
■ Oldest Playground in Park System, 38 Years
■ Estimated Cost: $144,900 N
*Part of annual inclusive upgrade program N
o Playground Upgrade Program— R13 N
■ Playground Replacement / Inclusive Upgrades* r
■ Locations to be determined `m
■ Estimated Cost: $608,900 E
*part of annual inclusive upgrade program c
o Pine Street Park — D10, D11, D12 z
■ Shelter with Picnic Tables — 2024
■ Paved Pathway — 2024
■ Canopy Shade Trees — 2024
■ Estimated Cost: $164,400
o Columbarium Expansion Phase II— R8
■ Design Complete
■ Fund 130 & 137 (Cemetery Trust Fund)
■ Estimated Cost: $159,000
o Olympic Beach Park — R7
■ Renovation of existing restroom
• Estimated Cost: $53,000 °
o Neighborhood Park SE 1 — P2, D3 c
■ Park Planning — 2024 Q
■ Park Construction — 2025 Q
■ Estimated Cost: $899,100 + Parkland Acquisition (2023)
o Neighborhood Park SR 99 — P6, D 15
N
■ Planning — 2025
■ Construction — 2026 w
■ Estimated Cost: $926,100 + Parkland Acquisition (2024)
o Neighborhood Park SE 2— P7, D 18
■ Planning — 2026
■ Construction — 2027
■ Estimated Cost: $953,900 + Parkland Acquisition (2025) Q
o Waterfront Walkway Completion — Ebb Tide Section — P3, D 14
■ Provides Continuous Accessibility
■ Connect Brackett's Landing North to Marina Beach Park
■ Estimated Cost: $819,500
o Marsh Estuary Restoration — A1, P4, D9 & D1
■ Estimated Cost: $14,642,500 + Restoration + Marina Beach Park Renovation
o Elm Street Park — D 16, D 17, R14
■ Habitat Restoration — 2026
■ Nature Playground — 2026
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 15, 2022
Page 18
Packet Pg. 35
8.2.a
■ Shelter with Picnic Tables — 2026
■ Estimated Cost: $225,100
o Park & Facilities Maintenance Building — P1, D2
■ 40+ Year Old Building
■ Estimated Cost: $5,762,600
■ Parks & Planning Board recommendation: Begin project sooner than 2026
o Seaview Park Restroom — R16
■ ADA Improvements
■ Replacement or Renovation of Restroom
■ Estimated Cost: $417,900
o Yost Pool Replacement — RI
■ Pool is 50 Years Old
■ Funding Source TBD
■ Estimated Cost: $23,881,000
0 4th Avenue Cultural Corridor — P8, D 19
■ No funding identified
■ Parks project?
■ Estimated Cost: $9,206,600
Parks 2023-2028 CIP/CFP Capital Programs
o Citywide Park Improvements/Capital Replacement — R17 (DP# 79)
■ Backlog of 50+ Projects
■ Small Capital Projects and Deferred Maintenance
■ Job Order Contracting
■ Estimated Cost: $2,700,000
o Signage & Wayfinding — R10
■ Trail identification, orientation markers, safety & regulatory messaging, park hours, park
rules and etiquette, interpretive information and warning signs.
■ Estimated Cost: $51,500
Parks 2023-2028 CIP/CFP Parkland Acquisition — A2, A3, A4
o Parkland Acquisition — A2, A3, A4
■ Neighborhood Parks SE I, SR99 & SE 2
■ Acquisition as Feasible
■ Estimated Cost: $5,230,500
o Interurban Trail Expansion — A5
■ Acquisition of Lands, Easements and/or Rights -of -Way
■ Estimated Cost: $985,585
• Prioritization of 2023 Projects
1. Civic Park completion (incl. 96th Ave Infiltration)
In process
2. Greenhouse completion
3. Mathay Ballinger Park improvements
4. Yost Park Playground
2022 PROS Plan Projects
5. Johnson Property demolition
6. Yost Park/Shell Creek Study* (operating DP)
Council President Olson inquired about demolition and replacement of the library drop chute. Ms. Feser
answered it is not large enough to be considered a capital project. Public works facilities committed to
doing the work sooner than parks would be able to do it. Council President Olson asked public works
about the status of the demolition/replacement of the library drop chute. Mr. English answered he will
check with the facilities manager and report back.
Councilmember Nand asked if the greenhouse was purely for City staff usage or was there any public
accessibility for community gardening or for programs. Ms. Feser answered the greenhouse supports the
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 15, 2022
Page 19
Packet Pg. 36
N
N
w
c
m
E
a
8.2.a
City's flower program and is primarily used by City staff. It is inside the City's maintenance yard and is
not accessible to the public for safety and security reasons. Plants for the corner parks and flower baskets
are grown in that greenhouse and there are occasional volunteer work parties such as the Floretum Garden
Club.
Councilmember Teitzel referred to an excerpt from the October 12, 2022 planning board minutes (packet
page 701), "He asked about the level of allocation for the Boys & Girls Club since the building is going
away. Director Feser replied that they just learned last week that the Boys & Girls Club intends to
demolish the existing building and build a new one on that site." Councilmember Teitzel asked if that had
been confirmed and whether there was any sense of the timing. Ms. Feser said the Boys & Girls Club
have communicated that to staff and there have been discussions about the 12,000 square feet dedicated to
their facility, but it is not in writing and the lease agreement with the Boys & Girls Club has not been
completed. The Boys & Girls Club have stated they would like to demolish the building and start
construction next year; she would be surprised if it happened that soon.
Councilmember Teitzel referred to CIP/CFP project PWF-01, maintenance of the Boys & Girls Club
building, which includes $300,000 for improvements to that building through 2028. He asked if that
project would be modified depending on what the Boys & Girls Club does with their building. Mr.
English said depending on the schedule, those funds potentially would be removed. That was the planning
board's second recommendation, to remove that funding if the schedule for the Boys & Girls Club
building is expedited.
Councilmember Teitzel said he was excited about the improvements planned for Mathay Ballinger Park.
He asked about the plans to install an infiltration facility in that park and the impact it could have on the
park improvements. Ms. Feser answered she met with public works staff last week to discuss their project
and the park improvements. She looks forward to moving forward with the parks improvements next
year, but did not think the timing of the public works project will align with the parks project to do them
at the same time. The park improvement designs will be shared with public works to ensure they do not
prevent their project. Mr. De Lilla explained the design for a regional facility is being reassessed because
soil conditions were not conducive to handling the area originally planned. Public works will coordinate
with parks to ensure the impacts are as minimal as possible and to ensure things do not have to be
reworked.
Councilmember Chen referred to $1.5M allocated in 2023 for land acquisition, and asked how far along
Q
the City was in terms of identifying land or was there a possibility that would be pushed back to a future
year. Ms. Feser answered the City is always looking for land, especially around Highway 99 and in N
southeast Edmonds. Until a purchase and sale agreement comes forward, those conversations are kept
confidential. Some potential properties have been identified and there have been discussions with w
property owners. Councilmember Chen summarized there is no purchase and sale agreement yet. Ms. c
Feser answered nothing that she could share at this time.
E
Councilmember Chen explained Councilmember Tibbott and he prepared a decision package that would
reallocate $200,000 out of that funding so he wanted to know how firm that commitment was. Ms. Feser Q
answered $900,000 has been accumulated for land acquisition with a $200,000 allocation each year, plus
there is money in the tree fund that is eligible for land acquisition for the preservation of trees. She
summarized money earmarked for land acquisition tends to be retained for that purpose. Councilmember
Chen observed if the City did not find land to purchase, those funds would be carried forward to future
years. Ms. Feser answered yes.
Councilmember Paine expressed her appreciation for the work staff has done. She expressed interest in
seeing details regarding overlay projects and pedestrian infrastructure projects. She was interested in
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 15, 2022
Page 20
Packet Pg. 37
8.2.a
pedestrian pathways in areas of City that do not have sidewalks like the Lake Ballinger area. She was glad
to see funds had been set aside for the transportation plan update.
Council President Olson commenting she has been listening to podcasts and reading news reports about
the terrible water quality in Jackson, Mississippi, due to not maintaining their infrastructure. People often
dwell on things there is not enough progress on or wish for more sidewalks, but she wanted to give a
shout out to former administrations and former councils that are responsible for the fact that the City's
water mains have been maintained and replaced. The clean water that comes out of residents' faucet is a
result of that and she was personally very grateful and was sure she was speaking on behalf of a lot of
people in the community. Mayor Nelson reminded this is a hearing on the 2023-2028 CIP/CFP and
council commentary should reflect that.
Mayor Nelson opened the public hearing. N
N
O
Joe Scordino, Edmonds, commended Mr. English and Mr. De Lilla for the well laid out CIP/CFP and N
good justifications. He would like to see the consequences of not doing a project added to help identify
T
which things are essential and which are nice to do. He could not say the same for the parks CIP/CFP, it `m
only justified things based on objectives "that came out of the blue." He recommending the council delete E
the following projects: page 18 Waterfront Walkway Completion — Ebb Tide Section), page 20 (Marsh c
Estuary Restoration — Willow Creek Daylighting, and page 28 (Yost Pool Replacement). With regard to Z
the Marsh Estuary Restoration, it is premature and technically flawed. Looking at Google Earth, Google m
Maps and the City's own GIS map, Willow Creek is already daylighted next to the hatchery. Before
spending $5 million on a restoration plan, he recommended developing a good, integrated restoration
plan. He has been working with NOAA scientists to develop that for the City. With regard to the Ebb a
Tide Walkway completion, many people wonder what that is, where it will be and whether it will violate
the Shoreline Management Act or other laws. He suggested deleting that project until it is defined and all
Edmonds citizens support it. With regard to Yost Pool replacement, the materials do not document why it L
is necessary to spend $25 million on a pool that everyone already enjoys. The CIP/CFP is an annual plan,
not a 6-year plan; it looks out 6 years, but it is revised annually.
Q:
Jim Ogonowski, Edmonds, said there is only one identified sidewalk project through 2026 and that is in °
the bowl area. Twice that amount is allocated to bicycle lanes in the same time period. He recommended c
rethinking green streets and redirecting that initiative along Highway 99. Highway 99 is the worst a
polluting highway in the City; work is being done in the median and he suggested working with the state
Q
to do green streets there, using state money instead of the city's money, and then expand it to other areas
if it is as good as it is claimed to be. He suggested consideration be given to the useful life of City N
buildings versus further expenditures on those buildings such as Frances Anderson Center. He suggested
assessing what is necessary to complete the current wastewater treatment plant project before allocating w
additional funds and to get a holistic view of the plant, particularly in light of new state mandates and r
capacity issues. With regard to the waterfront walkway, he said those costs continue to increase and he
questioned $1.3 million for 100 feet of walkway. He preferred to use those funds differently and better,
particularly with the inflationary pressures the City will be under for all projects in the next few years.
a
Amy June Grumble, Edmonds, a homeowner and parent on 236t' Street SW, requested the CIP address
existing traffic safety issues in and around the intersection of 236' Street SW & 84t1i Avenue West where
a large development is proposed. Although the CIP has great improvements already underway for the
Highway 99 corridor, traffic issues off Highway 99 need to be addressed. The intersection of 236t' Street
SW & 84' Avenue West is a 2-way stop with no crosswalks despite being adjacent to at least two
elementary school bus stops and two Community Transit bus stops. Both streets have peaks of heavy
traffic as 236' Street SW is an access street for Madrona Elementary to the west and the Safeway loading
dock to the east and both streets are feeders to Highway 99. Both street also experience heavy foot traffic
from students, transit commuters and elderly or disabled shoppers, yet neither have sidewalks or paved
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 15, 2022
Page 21
Packet Pg. 38
8.2.a
shoulders, forcing pedestrians to wade through mud or walk directly in the street, problems that
disproportionate impact residents who cannot drive. Twice a day she walks her son 1/4 mile to his school
bus stop, dipping in and out of the street right past where this development is proposed; her son often tells
her they are not supposed to walk in the street. Now even more families will be required to walk in those
streets. She is glad to see construction projects improving Highway 99, but that isn't fixing her street. The
improvements are needed now, not after more building are constructed. She is proud Edmonds is a
forward -thinking community and wants to use this opportunity to develop wisely and mindfully, to build
projects that fit and blend into the community rather than towering over them, and for the CIP to improve
the surrounding area with safe walking paths, crosswalks and green space rather than putting huge
buildings with hundreds of new residents into an intersection that is already unsafe and walking away.
She urged the council to help make safety in this neighborhood a priority within the current 6-year
planning period.
With no further public testimony, Mayor Nelson closed the public hearing. He declared a brief recess.
3. PUBLIC HEARING ON THE 2023 PROPOSED BUDGET
Mayor Nelson opened the public hearing.
Joe Scordino, Edmonds, referred to decision packages #16 and #21 and urged the council not to accept
verbatim what is in the decision package but include policy direction in the budget. He made the
following recommendations:
• DP#21, the council should be directly involved in the approval of the scope of work as well as the
consultant selection as it is a huge process that affects a lot of people and there needs to be some
policy oversight.
• Delete DP#23 as the City does not need more consultant reports to tell us what we already know.
There are problems in Yost Park that need to be fixed, the City already has a report from another
contractor that did a bridge assessment. Use that instead of doing another study.
• Delete DP#24, the Salmon Safe report was inadequate and there is no reason to do anything
suggested in that report.
• Increase funding for DP#25 to fund more seasonal park staff.
16
• DP#27, council should include its priorities for bench placement; for example, there are not c
enough benches on Sunset Avenue. a
• Delete DP#32, citizens do not need more utility increases and the City needs to do a better job a
with the money it has. N
• Retain DP#45, this is something the City needs and was what Salmon Safe was supposed to do.
• Increase funding in DP#75 to buy more white paint for crosswalks
• Delete DP#81, we know what the erosion problems are, projects are needed to fix them w
• DP#79, move forward with fixing erosion problems in Yost Park
E
Jim Ogonowski, Edmonds, expressed concern with the strategic forecast in the budget that shows fund
balances will be spent down from over $9 million in 2021 to near zero in 2026. He was interest in Q
understanding the assumptions that went into the forecast and how the decisions the council is about to
make in the 2023 budget will affect the forecast. This is an unsustainable path that leads to future layoffs
or property tax increases. This year's budget is extremely important with regard to reoccurring and non -
reoccurring expenses. He expressed concern that ARPA funds are proposed to fund reoccurring projects
and/or staffing. Using one-time revenues for reoccurring expenses is a dangerous path and he suspected
the forecast in out years is the result of that type of spending. He was unclear on the process for the
budget consideration, he proposed first balancing the budget within the expected revenues and then
determine how much of the fund balance needs to be spent to cover expenses above revenues. Instead he
sees a bottom up process where the council spends up to an unknown amount.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 15, 2022
Page 22
Packet Pg. 39
8.2.a
With no further public testimony, Mayor Nelson closed the public hearing.
10. COUNCIL BUSINESS
1. 2023 ARPA ALLOCATIONS
Community Services/Economic Development Director Todd Tatum explained his presentation will
highlight proposed changes in ARPA allocations including decision packages for the 2023 budget,
proposed changes to account allocations and out year funding. He recognized it is complicated to put this
together with the budget and to make those simultaneously. He originally thought the council could
discuss and vote on proposed changes tonight, but realized that may not be possible. Instead, he will
present this tonight so the council can understand how the changes affect the ARPA ordinance and bring
the language back as the council votes on amendments and adapt them as the budget process proceeds and
have the final language adopted with the adoption of budget. He was also open to other options. He
reviewed:
Review: Subdivision of Funds by Ordinance 4259
o City Expenditure Reimbursements: $750,000
E
o Edmonds Rescue Plan Household Support: $4,150,000
■ Household Support Z
■ Utility Bill Support
■ Housing Repair
o Edmonds Rescue Plan Business Support: $1,125,000 c
•General Business Support a
■ Tourism Support
■ Small Business Support
o Edmonds Rescue Plan Nonprofit Support: $500,000 L
o Edmonds Rescue Plan Job Retraining Program: $600,000
o City Green Infrastructure: $4,768,099 a
m
■ Edmonds Marsh
■ Lower Perrinville Creek Realignment G
■ Green Streets and Rain Gardens >
■ 96th right-of-way a
Use of Funds
o Recipients may use SLFRF funds to: Q
■ Replace lost public sector revenue, using this funding to provide government services up N
to the amount of revenue lost due to the pandemic. Standard allowance of $1 Om.
■ Respond to the far-reaching public health and negative economic impacts of the w
pandemic, by supporting the health of communities, and helping households, small r
businesses, impacted industries, nonprofits, and the public sector recover from economic
impacts.
■ Provide premium pay for essential workers, offering additional support to those who have
and will bear the greatest health risks because of their service in critical sectors. Q
■ Invest in water, sewer, and broadband infrastructure, making necessary investments to
improve access to clean drinking water, to support vital wastewater and stormwater
infrastructure, and to expand affordable access to broadband internet
Ten decision packages associated with this year's ARPA budget:
o DP 9: Continue ARPA Grant Manager Consultant
o DP 13: Expansion of PD Criminal Investigations Division
o DP 14: Police Department — Patrol Support
o DP 15: Police Dept — Nine New Patrol Cars
o DP 22: Fagade Improvement Program
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 15, 2022
Page 23
Packet Pg. 40
8.2.a
o DP 23: Yost Park/Shell Creek Study
o DP 24: Salmon Safe Certification Program
o DP 26: New Park Maintenance Services (Hwy 99 and Civic)
o DP 39: Lower Perrinville Creek Restoration Project
o DP72: Green Streets
• Changes to allocations by account:
Thru
2021 1011612022 2022 2023 2024-2C
inance Proposed Spent Spent Allocated Proposed Future
Amount Amount Budget Phases
Account A -
Reimbursement
750,000
906,131
79,985
349,492
41,966
174,322
302,913
Account B -
Household Support
4,150,000
2,255,443
274,205
689,835
1,000,000
600,000
481,23
Account C - Business
Support
1,125,000
1,045,500
244,369
36,423
125,000
355,000
320,000
Account D - Nonprofit
Support
500,000
500,000
420.500
-
-
79,500
-
Account E - Job
Retraining
600,000
600,000
199,999
-
400,001
-
-
Account F - Green
Infrastructure
4,768,099
4,245,000
-
15,361
503,700
1,723,860 2,002,079
Account G - Police
Support
0
1,350,000
0
0
0
1,350,000
0
Account H - Parks
Support
0
986,025
0
0
0
986,025
0
Total Funds 11,893,09911,888,099111,219,0581,091,111 2,070,667 2.832,682 3,106,230
' $3,000 under budget accounts for rounding in the draft ordinancl
o Account A: Changes to allocation
Thru
2021 10118/2022 2022 2023 2024-202
Ordinance Proposed Proposed Future
Account A Amount Amount Spent Spent Allocated Budget Phases
Account A- City p
Reimbursement 750,000 906,131 79,985 349,492 41,966 174,322 302,912 Q
� Q
■ Increase due to ongoing funding of ARPA consultant and ongoing cost for OpenGov Q
software N
o Account A: Proposed language �
Account "A" shall be the "City Expenditure Reimbursement" account into which
$750,000 $906,000 of the ARPA funds shall be allocated to rei'mh,,r;e * w
r
any rcsurnSenc �n the future, including staffing, equipment and suppliesr) relate�
roliptai;` ii:ig a safeweri�plaEefor epees and the visiting peas w@11 8s E
necessary capital investments, ,rah a enhanr•e,„ent� to LJfilter upgrades,
V
` VAr (�
etr- as part of the city's standard allowance for lost public sector revenue under Q
the Department of the Treasury's Coronavirus State Et Local Fiscal Recovery Funds
Final Rule.
o Account B: Changes to allocation
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 15, 2022
Page 24
Packet Pg. 41
8.2.a
X
Ordinance
Account B Amount Amount SK
Account B -
Household Support 4.150,000 2.255.443 27
Thru 2024-
2021 1011812022 2022 2023 2026
Proposed Future
Household Grants 3,000,000 2,250,000 268,762 689,835 1,000,000 500,000 481,238
Utility Support 160,000 5,443 5443 -
Housing Repair 1,000,000
Total Funds A 4,150,000 2,255,443 274,205 689,835 M 1,000,000 500,000 481,238
■ Reduction in total allocation from funds not spent in 2021
■ Shift in spending for inactive accounts, utility support and housing repair. Snohomish
County has a similar program
Account B: Proposed language:
Account "B" shall be the "Edmonds Rescue Plan Household Support" account into
which $4,'r-150,000 $2,255,000 from the ARPA funds shall be allocated to reimburse
those City expenditures incurred through administration of the following
programs, in compliance with the ARPA eligibility criteria:
1, Household Support. Up to $3,000,000 fn Grants to households for housing
expenses, food, medical bills, childcare, internet access, and other household
expenses. Households may receive grants of up to $2,500 in 2021 and 2022
amounting to a total Household Support expenditure of $1,000,000 in each of
2021 and 2022. Households may receive grants of up to $2,500 in 2023 and
2024 amounting to a total Household Support expenditure of $500,000 and
481 000 in each of 2023 and 2024 respectively. The authority to spend
Household Support funds in a given year, as set forth in this subsection B.1, is
hereby extended from 2023 to 2024 into the f.,ll.,,..iRg yea in the event that
the City was/is not able to disburse the entirety of those Household Support
funds during tli FY 2023 year for which they wer initially of lecate.l
2. Utility 1341 S uppert Up to $1 rn ,nnn for- one time grants to hQuirohol-cls ;
amounts p to $1, il nnn to help defray a derived frn „re+.anding City of
u
WmAndq hiller
3. HOUSiRg--R Up to $l o nnn fnnn for one tiFse g ants +e he„rehnidl ;
r
measures such as not repair, window repLacernen+ HVAC repair/ replacemen+ eta,
Account C: Changes to allocations
Thru
2024-
2021
1Oil 812022
2022 2023 2026 N
N
u7
Ordinance
Proposed
Proposed Future
Account C
Amount
Amount
Spent
Spent
Allocated Budget Phases
Account C -
W
Business Support
1,125,000
1,045,500
244,369
36,423
d
General Business
200,000.00
161.000.00
11,111
17,846
50,000.0050,000.00 50,000 t
v
Tourism Support
300,000.00
235,000.00
49,096
18,577
75,000.0055,000.00 55,000
a
Business Grants
625,000.00
184,500.00
184,160
-
Business
Beautification
-
465,000.00
-
250,000.00215,000
Total Funds 1,125,000 1,045,500 244,369 36,423 125,000 355,000 320,000
■ Transfer money not spent for Tourism and General Business Support to other
programs
■ Lowers the Tourism Support funds in 2023 and 2024
■ Changes the focus of Business Grants subaccount to focus on fagade improvements
as outlined in DP#22 and carries those forward to 2024
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 15, 2022
Page 25
Packet Pg. 42
8.2.a
o Account C: Proposed language:
Account "C" shall be the "Edmonds Rescue Plan Business Support" account
into which $1,1� - 25,00,000 1,050,000 from the ARPA funds shall be allocated to
reimburse those City expenditures incurred through administration of the
following programs, in compliance with the ARPA eligibility criteria:
1. General Business Support. Up to $200,000 161,000, including up to
$50,000 in 2023, and 2024 in nstanr errs, of tan nnn per year in 2021
2022, 2023, and 2024 for general support of Edmonds small businesses,
business districts and the overall business community. This includes such
programs as the Edmonds Business Booster website and its programs and
promotion; promotion of business districts outside Downtown through
advertising, wayfinding, signage; business -support or promotional events,
etc.
2. Tourism Support. Up to $390,099 235,000 including up to 55,000 in
�r�iih,enr� of $75 nnn nyear n 2921 2922 2023, and 2024 for support
of tourism promotion. This includes enhanced local and regional
advertising, support of events and special promotions, investment in
facilities and/or equipment, etc.
3. Small Business Support. Up to $625,GGO $650,000 including up to $250,000
in 2023 and $215,000 in 2024 for direct grants to small businesses most
affected by the COVID-19-related economic recession. Grants will take
the form of individual financial support grants (in the form of loans that
are forgivable after four months of performance);. Maximum individual
grant amounts will be $25,000 in each year. *-,*aline in in an at tin nnn
enrh ip 2021 .with up to 25 grants of , n tG $5 nnn verb a e;lnhle ;n
Eligibility criteria for these grants will include:
a. Small businesses in Edmonds with zero to 30 employees.
b. -Rusinesses Must id-e+xAeRstrate at least 8 50% less iR FeVeRHey-thER epId-
6 R',o; r..,5o.,o .,, ,5+ .,.,+ ham,.., reepivead FR a that. $10nnn 9theF g .,ram
ramx rre.ditq Qr Qther f;r;IhC;; irrar(;e
d. Particular consideration will be given to businesses owned by people
of color, women, veterans, and other minorities
o Account D: Changes to allocations:
Thru 2024-
2021 1011812022 2022 2023 2026
Ordinance Proposed Proposed Future
Account D Amount Amount Spent Spent Allocated Budget Phases
Account D - Nonprofit
Support 500,000 500,000 420,600 - 79,500
Total Funds 500.000 420.500 - - 79.500
■ No change to amount, final $79,500 in grants will be awarded in 2023
o Account D: Proposed language:
Account "D" shall be the "Edmonds Rescue Plan Nonprofit Organization Support"
account into which $500,000 from the ARPA funds shall be allocated to assist
Edmonds nonprofit organizations that have suffered substantial financial losses
due to prolonged closures, cut -backs, loss of business, etc the final $79,500 of
which shall be available in 2023. A general call for requests will be issued, with
requests reviewed competitively and awards based on relative need, likelihood to
help an organization survive, and other sources of funds available. Small grants
of up to $20,000 and totaling no more than $100,000 $79,500 shall be approvable
by the Mayor Large grants Gf a arneunt ever $20 ,nnn fe-F -a tat -al of Lip to
o Account E: Changes to allocations
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 15, 2022
Page 26
Packet Pg. 43
N
N
w
r
c
m
E
t
a
8.2.a
Thru 2024-
2021 10118/2022 2022 2023 2026
Ordinance Proposed Proposed Future
Account E Amount Amount Spent Spent Allocated Budget Phases
Account E - Job
Retraining 600,000 600,000 199,999 - 400,001
Total Funds a 600,000 - 400,001 - * -
■ No change proposed to amount
■ Once opportunities to use funds more effectively are identified, staff will present to
council for changes within existing allocation
o Account E: No change to language
Account "E" shall be the "Edmonds Rescue Plan Job Retraining Support" account into which
$600,000 shall be allocated to provide financial aid to working adults who seek skills
training, certifications, completion of degrees or other skills enhancement at local
community colleges serving Edmonds residents in the form of grants of up to $5000 per
year per student to cover tuition, fees, supplies and life expenses during the period of
study. Administration of this program will be conducted by the college or colleges selected
under the contractual oversight of the City. The Mayor shall be authorized to enter into
the corresponding contracts) with participating colleges serving Edmonds residents.
o Account F: Changes to allocations
I Thru 2024-
2021 10/18/2022 2022 2023 2026
Ordinance Proposed Proposed Future
Account F Amount Amount Spent Spent Allocated Budget Phases
Account F - Green
Infrastructure 4,768,099 4,245,000
Edmonds Marsh 681,157 - - - -
Perrinville Creek 3,178,733 1500,000 15,361 414,450 681,116 389.073
Green Streets 908,209 2,000,000 89,260.00 297,744 1,613,006
96th RoW 450,000 450,000
Yost/Shell Creek 220,000 220,000
Salmon Safe 75.000 75.000
Total Funds 4,768,099 4,245,000 15,361 503,700 1,723,860 2,002,079
"Note: Account F in Ordinance 4259 is a repeat of Account A, and Account G is 04
titled "City Green Infrastructure."
■ Removes Edmonds Marsh project from list (other funding options available) w
■ Lowers total expected amount for Perrinville Creek r
■ Provides additional funds for Green Streets
■ Adds the 96'right-of-way project �
■ Adds Yost/Shell Creek and Salmon Safe Program implementation
o Account F: Proposed language: Q
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 15, 2022
Page 27
Packet Pg. 44
8.2.a
Account "U" shall be the "Edmonds Rescue Plan City Green Infrastructure"
account in which up to $4,7�0 $4,245,000 from the ARPA funds shall be
allocated to reimburse City capital expenditures through 2026 associated with
green infrastructure projects, meeting ARPA guidelines, such as:
st > at ly $750 nnn
2. Lower Perrinville Creek Realignment. Retention and treatment of surface
storm water runoff in the Perrinville Creek drainage basin, intended to
reduce stormwater surge flows and enhance the quality of stormwater
reaching Puget Sound. Not to exceed $1,500,000.
cest
3. Green Streets and Rain Gardens. Enhance existing streets throughout
Edmonds by adding features that retain and/or treat stormwater runoff to
reduce stormwater surges and contaminants that reach Puget Sound.
Similarly, rain gardens in association with streets, parks and other public
facilities may be established for these same purposes. Not to exceed
$2,000,000. �;••; ^'eE+ccv-c^v5i c, nnn nnn
4. 96th Right of Way Improvements. This project is required as
mitigation for the Civic Park project to treat stormwater on another
site within the same watershed. Not to exceed $450,000.
5. Yost/Shell Creek. The study is the first phase in addressing the
pedestrian system, Shell Creek water quality and health, and provides
required permitting for bridge repairs and improvements. Not to
exceed $220,000.
6. Salmon Safe Program Implementation. Two conditions of certification
impact Parks Maintenance operations and require consultant services.
These include developing a water conservation plan and track
irrigation water usage and creating an IPM (Integrated Pest
Management), Nutrient, and Chemical Management Plan. The
development of both initial Plans is beyond the scope of staff
resources, requiring consultant services to complete. Not to exceed
$75,000
o Account G: Addition to allocations
Thru Q
2021 10/18/2022 2022 2023 2024.2026
Q
Ordinance Proposed Proposed Future N
Account G Amount Amount Spent Spent Allocated Budget Phases N
LO
Account G - Police
Support 1,350,000 1,350,000
W
Total Funds 600,000 - - 1,350,000 - AW
c
■ Costs associated with DP#13, 14 and 15 E
o Account G: Proposed new language:
Account "G" shall be the "Edmonds Rescue Plan Police Support" account into which M
$1,350,000 shall be allocated to reimburse City expenditures associated with public safety Q
and police support for calendar year 2023, such as:
1. Expansion of the Criminal Investigations Division. Not to exceed $293,850
2. Patrol Support. Not to exceed $420,000
3. Purchase of new patrol cars. Not to exceed $630,000.
o Account H: Changes to allocations
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 15, 2022
Page 28
Packet Pg. 45
8.2.a
Thru 2024-
2021 10/1812022 2022 2023 2026
Ordinance Proposed V Proposed Future
Account H Amount Amount Spent Spent Allocated Budget Phases
Account H - Parks
Support 986,025 986 D25
Total Funds 986,025 - - 986,025 -
■ Costs associated with DP#26
o Account H: Proposed new language:
Account "H" shall be the "Edmonds Rescue Plan Parks Support" account into which
$986,025 shaft be allocated to reimburse City expenditures necessary to support and
maintain two significant new projects stated for completion in early 2023: Civic Park and
Highway 99 roadway improvements. Funds will be available for items, including, but not
limited to: supporting personnel, equipment, vehicles, trailers, supplies, training,
uniforms, and traffic control plans.
Mr. Tatum explained staff proposes to include this language or language amended through the budget
process into the budget ordinance as an attachment in order to keep the overall budget and ARPA budget
tied together more cleanly. He anticipated there will be changes during the budget cycle and staff will
keep the language updated to reflect those changes so the council has a clear idea of how ARPA and the
budget impact each other.
Councilmember Paine commended Mr. Tatum on the format of the presentation. With regard to Account
B, Household Support, she recalled Mr. Tatum stated there had not been much use of the housing repair
subaccount and that Snohomish County has funds for that. Mr. Tatum explained Snohomish County has a
program that does some house repair such as weatherization. When this program was original considered,
the intent was to contract with Snohomish County, adding this pool of funds to theirs and have them
administer that program, but that was never done.
Councilmember Paine suggested the City consider allocating funds for housing repair. The City did not
do a lot of advertising regarding the availability of household support and there may have been more
interest if people knew the funds were available. She was unsure if housing repair would include tree
mitigation, but has heard that is a need as well as repairs for low income homeowners. She expressed
interest in reconsidering that funding or finding good viable options. She asked staff to email her a
response whether removal of a hazardous tree on someone's property would be considered housing
support. Mr. Tatum was unsure how removal of a hazardous trees would be addressed, particularly since
the City does not have a housing repair program. He offered to email her about the availability of other
programs.
Councilmember Tibbott concurred with Councilmember Paine's comments, noting some of the programs
funded by ARPA have not been well advertised and there may be people who could benefit by access to
those funds, including increasing what is available for nonprofits. It was his understanding the $10
million had been moved into the General Fund. Mr. Tatum responded the $10 million is accounted for in
the accounts set forth in the ordinance. Cities can elect to take the standard allowance which is different
than putting the money into general accounts. Councilmember Tibbott observed there is no accounting for
the ARPA in the revenue structure and asked where the ARPA funds reside in the budget. Mr. Tatum
answered they are in the Coronavirus Relief Fund.
Councilmember Tibbott asked why an ARPA consultant was needed if decision packages are used to
access that fund. Mr. Tatum answered the ARPA consultant is incredibly important and is involved in
audit programs. When grant programs are funded, she is there on front end to say how programs should
be structured to ensure they are in line with the rules in the Final Rule, and to right proof documentation
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 15, 2022
Page 29
Packet Pg. 46
N
N
w
r
c
m
E
a
8.2.a
so they can be audited; on the backside, she audits a portion of the awardees to ensure they are operating
in line with the City's guidance. He summarized it was super critical to maintain that position.
Councilmember Tibbott questioned the need when decision packages are presented in regular budget
requests. Mr. Tatum responded for example, if the City continued doing nonprofit grants, she would audit
the programs and grantees to ensure they are in line with guidance and law. With the household support
grants, she audits the grantee's awards with regard to the grantee's execution of the program and it
provides a tool/help for the grantee if someone is validating their processes and procedures.
Councilmember Tibbott said he may follow up with an email regarding this question.
Councilmember Tibbott referred to the use of ARPA funds for law enforcement decision packages. He
understood using ARPA funds for purchasing vehicle, one time funds for resources that can be used for
many years. Funding officers with ARPA funds seems unwise, because once those funds are spent, City
revenues will need to be identified to cover those costs in the outlying years. He asked Mr. Tatum's
opinion on the use of ARPA funds for ongoing expenses. Mayor Nelson clarified no police officers are
funded with ARPA funds in any decision package that he is aware of. Mr. Tatum said he would need to
consult the decision packages. Mayor Nelson said only police equipment and police cars are funded with
ARPA funds.
Councilmember Tibbott referred to DP#13 and 14. Mayor Nelson asked Mr. Tatum to display the
decision package related to police support. Mr. Tatum displayed DP#13, 14 and 15. Councilmember
Tibbott asked about the funding mechanism for those decision packages. Mayor Nelson said this question
this is beyond the Mr. Tatum's presentation and would be an excellent question for Administrative
Services Director Dave Turley. The intent was not to get into specific decision packages.
Councilmember Nand said the presentation answered some of her questions about allocation of ARPA
funds but she has general questions about government transparency and accountability for taxpayers and L
constituents. Looking at the proposed budget, the Treasury's Final Rule states cities are allowed to use up
to $10 million as "free money' for lost revenue. However, instead of losing revenue from 2020 to 2021,
the City increased revenue by $13 million and experienced a decrease from 2021 to 2022, but the City
was already receiving Coronavirus funds from the CARES Act and ARPA to bolster revenues. She asked °
if there was a way to demonstrate lost revenues as it seems like the City did quite well during the c
pandemic. Mr. Tatum said he did not think that was the intent of the Final Rule; the Final Rule gives a a
presumption of lost revenues and allows cities of a certain size to take a standard allowance in presumed
Q
impact. He was unable to speak to how the federal government determined that was an appropriate thing
to do. N
Councilmember Nand said her understanding from reading the Final Rule was if a city had to decrease its w
operational budget for any reason such as lost sales tax, they could add those funds back and spend the c
money to stimulate the local economy. She asked if he would regard that as a correct use of the free $10 m
million. Mr. Tatum answered no, the standard allowance allows a presumed impact and allows cities to
take a $10 million allowance for presumed impacts to their revenues.
a
Councilmember Nand referred to the Account B proposed changes, the amount stated in the ordinance is
$3 million and that is proposed to be reduced to $2.25 million. As only about 1/10t1i was spent, she asked
if that was the reason for the proposal to reduce it to $500,000 in the 2023 budget. Mr. Tatum said the
ordinance amount for Account B was $4.15 million, a portion of the funds allocated in 2021 were not
spent because the programs did not get up and running as quickly as anticipated and it was later in the
year.
COUNCILMEMBER NAND MOVED, SECONDED BY CHEN TO EXTEND TO 10:30.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 15, 2022
Page 30
Packet Pg. 47
8.2.a
Council President Olson asked if it was legally acceptable to extend the meeting at 10:01 p.m. City
Attorney Jeff Taraday answered it is not an ideal practice, but he did not think anyone would sue the City
over it or determine the deliberations after 10 p.m. were illegal. Council President Olson said she thought
the council should do things by the correct method and not extend.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (5-2), COUNCILMEMBERS TEITZEL, CHEN,
BUCKSHNIS, PAINE AND NAND VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT AND
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON VOTING NO.
Councilmember Nand referred to the underutilization of the household grants and utility support, and
relayed that her independent research discovered some cities chose to direct block grants to distressed
members of the community who were negatively affected by the pandemic, not require them to go out of
their way to find programs to accrue benefits from the funds congress set aside to mitigate the effects of
the pandemic, but affirmatively find distressed people and give them money, similar to what Wellspring
was doing with rental assistance in 2020. For example, if the council wanted to retain the $3 million in
household grants and affirmatively offer property tax rebates to distressed homeowners and task the City
with finding those individuals rather than tasking those individuals with finding City programs. She asked
if that was something the City could do under the ARPA regulations. Mr. Tatum said he would need to
consult the Final Rule to determine whether that could be done legally or what the procedure for doing
that would be. He acknowledged some programs could be operated differently.
Councilmember Nand said she had a corresponding question for utility support, if the council were to task
City employees with identifying who was distressed or delinquent in paying utilities to the City and
forgive their delinquencies or reimburse their late fees. She asked if that the City could pursue that to
more effectively grant funds to distressed individuals in the community rather than placing the onus to
seek out City programs on people already experiencing financial and possibly personal distress. Mr.
Tatum responded he has not researched the ability to do direct granting; he can do that after the meeting
and respond by email. With regard to utilities, in many cases the people who were struggling the most are
renting and their utilities are included in their rent and their names are not necessarily associated with the
utilities.
Councilmember Nand responded, as a public policy issue, she wanted to explore whether the onus for
distributing funds to individuals could be on sophisticated members of City staff rather than people
experiencing financial distress who may be too stressed out to seek out programs or realize that help is a
available. Mr. Tatum agreed the City should be more active and that is part of the plan in 2023. --
Councilmember Nand said she will follow up him via email and looked forward to his suggestions about N
In
how to more affirmatively push down money from the federal government to distressed members of the
community.
w
r
Councilmember Buckshnis commented there are quite a few inaccuracies between what was presented aa)
and what is in the budget. For example, DP#13 and 14 related to police services say they are General E
Fund operating expenses. Likewise, the funding source for new park maintenance services for Highway
cc
99 is General Fund. She agreed with Councilmember Tibbott that ARPA funds should not be utilized for Q
ongoing expenses such as police support services. It was her understanding ARPA funds would only be
used for police cars.
Councilmember Buckshnis referred to Account F, pointing the Edmonds Marsh was initially $750,000 in
the ordinance and Green Streets was $1 million, but $400,000 was removed because there was no design
standards, definition, etc. for green streets. She wanted to ensure the numbers are accurate because she
plans to make amendments. She expressed interest in adding allocation for nonprofits and agreed with
Councilmember Nand's suggestion to add money for people in need. She was also interested in funding
more training, including English language training. She does not support the Salmon Safe Certification or
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 15, 2022
Page 31
Packet Pg. 48
8.2.a
funding for Yost Park. She asked how the council should propose changes. Mr. Tatum anticipated the
council will be voting on amendments and decision packages which he can track. At end of the process,
there will be a relatively thorough accounting of the changes and amendments. Mayor Nelson suggested
when councilmembers submit decision packages to Mr. Turley, they can identify if they want all or a
portion of it funded with ARPA funds.
Councilmember Chen said he and Councilmember Buckshnis are on the finance committee and have
discussed ARPA funds many times. With regard to where the ARPA reside in the budget, he referred to
page 18 of the budget book, Fund 142. He appreciated Mr. Tatum's efforts to identify the ARPA fund
allocations by account which correspond to the ordinance. With regard to the $10 million that according
to congress could be used as if it is General Fund even if the City did not suffer revenue loss, the City is
allowed to use the $10 million as General Fund money to run the City. The Council can direct how the
funds will be spent; in his opinion, the best way to do that is through decision packages. The council has a
new template for decision packages with the description, reasoning, and funding source. If a
councilmember wants to fund an expense with ARPA funds, that can be identified on the template and
provides Mr. Tatum a tracking mechanism to identify expenses funded with ARPA fund.
Councilmember Chen referred to DP#13, 14 and 15, those are one-time expenses, not personnel. Since
the City is already heading toward using up to $10 million out of $11.893 million as General Fund, he did
not see the necessity of spending another $100,000 for an ARPA consultant when Mr. Tatum and Mr.
Turley are already overseeing it.
Councilmember Teitzel thanked Mr. Tatum for the email exchange they had today regarding his concerns
about a drycleaner in Edmonds. He relayed his discussions with a drycleaner in Edmonds who, not
surprisingly when COVID hit, his business was reduced in volume by over 50% and that reduction
continues because people are not going into the office and his business is hanging by a thread. He is a
small business with fewer than five employee and is minority owned so he certainly qualifies under
Account C small business support.
Councilmember Teitzel continued, English is second language for this business owner and he wondered 4-
what outreach had been done to businesses like that to make them aware that ARPA funds are available to °
help them weather the storm. This business has been in Edmonds for 20 years, the owner works six c
days/week and does not have time to dig into the requirements to apply for a grant. Mr. Tatum answered a
pretty significant outreach was done, in the original grant rounds, multilingual materials were prepared
Q
and then -Community Services/Economic Development Director Patrick Doherty went door-to-door
handing out information. Oftentimes he would leave a business and find the grant application in his email N
when he returned. It was also advertised in the newspaper, but ground level outreach was key.
w
Councilmember Teitzel commented in this case, this person's business is hanging by a thread and is at r
imminent risk of going under. He asked how businesses like this would apply for a grant, if they needed
to wait for the next round or could apply anytime. Mr. Tatum answered the grants were opened and closed
and grantees were selected. Businesses would need to wait until the next open grant round. Based on 2.
council decisions in the budget process, he will try to get grant grounds open as soon as possible in 2023. Q
Councilmember Teitzel asked if that would be first quarter 2023. Mr. Tatum said that would be his intent.
Council President Olson pointed out in the allocations in the mayor's proposed budget, there were
numerous and in some cases extraordinary changes to the council created and approved ordinance
regarding how ARPA funds would be spent. There was no conversation or ask from the mayor about a
different plan or change to the allocation. She was not saying that there was not a better allocation and in
the end, the budget process is in council's hands and modifications will be made to the ordinance. She felt
the legislative intent was ignored and she found it disrespectful to receive a budget that had the ARPA
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 15, 2022
Page 32
Packet Pg. 49
8.2.a
funds spent in such a different way than the council's intent that was previously determined via
ordinance.
11. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
Mayor Nelson thanked the City employees, particularly those hanging holiday lights on trees and fixtures.
As it begins to get colder and dark earlier, he urged drivers to please keep an eye out for kids heading
home from school. Unfortunately people, particularly kids, like to wear dark clothes which do not mix
well with nighttime driving.
12. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Nand thanked the engaged citizens who reach out to the council every week with
comments and suggestions about budget allocations and things that concern them in their neighborhoods
such as zoning changes. She also thanked the volunteers working on City boards and commissions to
make the process work. The reason Edmonds' government functions so well is due to hardworking City
staff as well as the incredible work of the volunteers and engaged citizens. She thanked them for making
serving on council a lively and enriching process.
Councilmember Tibbott echoed Councilmember Nand's appreciation for citizens' comments about the
budget and priorities. He looked forward to a robust discussion on the City's draft vision. The Porchfest
roll out was exciting and fun, but also a meaningful time to introduce an important topic.
Councilmember Paine thanked staff for the time they have devoted over the last several weeks to
collecting and presenting information to council. This is an awesome amount of work and it takes a lot of
dedication and time. She also expressed appreciation to community members who provide input during
public hearings and during public comments at meetings.
Councilmember Paine echoed Mayor Nelson's plea for drivers to exercise extra care and caution, relaying
there was an injury accident where someone was crossing Highway 99 in the dark. She has also seen
people wearing dark clothing trying to cross Highway 99. She encouraged community members to visit
the WeAllBelong.org website and volunteer at the cold weather shelter to ensure unhoused people in the
region have a place to go as well as utilize the hygiene center at the old emissions site on 196'
Council President Olson reminded of the fun things going on in Edmonds: ArtWalk on Thursday,
November 17, 5-8 p.m., the movie "Disclosure" showing for free at the Edmonds Theater on Saturday, N
November 19 as part of the diversity commission film series, the Hispanic Heritage Art Exhibition on the
second floor of the Waterfront Center through Saturday, November 19, and the Heroes Cafe for veterans w
on the last Tuesday of the month at the New Life Church in Lynnwood (6519 188t' Street SW), doors
open at 9 a.m. and lunch at 11 a.m. m
E
Councilmember Buckshnis thanked all the veterans who are currently serving or are serving. She missed
the Veterans Day ceremony on November 11 as she was volunteering at the senior center. Q
Councilmember Chen added his appreciation to staff, council, mayor and the public for their hard work
and dedication on the day-to-day functions and the budget process. He highlighted a newly formed
nonprofit, the Chinese Service Center. They just obtained 501(c)3 status and are located in the Northern
Seattle Chinese Church on Highway 99 across the street from the 85 Degree Bakery. The aim of this
organization is to serve new immigrants, people who come to the United States seeking a better life, many
of whom have different needs and like the business owner Councilmember Teitzel mentioned, may have
language challenges and do not know about available resources. They are currently offering programs like
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 15, 2022
Page 33
Packet Pg. 50
8.2.a
citizenship classes, English as a second language, and helping people identify resources. He encouraged
the public to apply to be a board member.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO
EXTEND FOR 5 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Councilmember Chen continued, the intent is to serve this pocket of the population that is often hard to
reach. Snohomish County Public Health will be giving COVID boosters at the church from 10-12
tomorrow; the public is welcome.
Councilmember Teitzel relayed this week the council received an email from a citizen regarding a request
to make a commitment not to pass ordinances that are incomplete or are missing exhibits. That is a
reasonable request and something this and future councils should commit to. To accomplish that, it needs
to be memorialize in the code of conduct or rules of procedures. He committed to drafting language to
that effect for council consideration in January.
K�.N 11111117\I
With no further business, the council meeting was adjourned at 10:31 p.m.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 15, 2022
Page 34
Packet Pg. 51
N
N
W
r
C
d
E
t
V
r�
r�
a
8.3
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 11/22/2022
Approval of payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments.
Staff Lead: Dave Turley
Department: Administrative Services
Preparer: Lori Palmer
Background/History
Approval of payroll check #65306 dated November 7, 2022 for $167.98, Holiday Buy Back checks #65307
through #65360 dated November 16th 2022 for $161,515.55 and checks #65361 through #65365 dated
November 18, 2022 for $6,685.39, payroll direct deposit for $671,402.13, benefit checks #65366
through #65372 and wire payments for $683,464.98 for the pay period of November 1, 2022 to
November 15, 2022.
Staff Recommendation
Approval of payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments.
Narrative
In accordance with the State statutes, City payments must be approved by the City Council. Ordinance
#2896 delegates this approval to the Council President who reviews and recommends either approval or
non -approval of expenditures.
Attachments:
11-01-22 to11-15-22 benefit checks summary report
11-01-22 to 11-15-22 payroll earnings summary report
11-15-22 holiday buy back earnings summary report
11-07-22 Bevington Earnings Summary Report
Packet Pg. 52
Benefit Checks Summary Report
City of Edmonds
Pay Period: 1,059 - 11/01/2022 to 11/15/2022
Bank: usbank - US Bank
Check #
Date
Payee #
Name
Check Amt
65366
11/18/2022
bpas
BPAS
9,070.35
65367
11/18/2022
chap1
CHAPTER 13 TRUSTEE
175.00
65368
11/18/2022
epoa2
EPOA-POLICE
5,719.50
65369
11/18/2022
epoa3
EPOA-POLICE SUPPORT
698.26
65370
11/18/2022
icma
MISSIONSQUARE PLAN SERVICES
6,951.48
65371
11/18/2022
flex
NAVIA BENEFIT SOLUTIONS
3,475.18
65372
11/18/2022
teams
TEAMSTERS LOCAL 763
4,622.50
30,712.27
Bank: wire - US BANK
Check #
Date
Payee #
Name
Check Amt
3441
11/18/2022
awc
AWC
340,089.68
3445
11/18/2022
us
US BANK
154,232.22
3447
11/18/2022
mebt
WTRISC FBO #N317761
125,056.60
3448
11/18/2022
pb
NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTION
5,409.79
3449
11/18/2022
wadc
WASHINGTON STATE TREASURER
27,659.92
3451
11/18/2022
oe
OFFICE OF SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT
304.50
652,752.71
Grand Totals: 683,464.98
8.3.a
vi
Y
V
d
t
v
w
m
Direct Deposit
0.00
0.00
0.00
0
0.00
0.00
f°
a
0.00
0
0.00
Fu
0
0.00
a
CL
Q
0
Direct Deposit
Q-
m
L
0.00
0.00
E
E
0.00
E
0.00
N
0.00
Y
0.00
U
U
0.00
=
am
c
0.00
�
N
N
LO
r
r
r
O
N
N
T-
O
11/16/2022 Packet Pg. 53
Payroll Earnings Summary Report
City of Edmonds
Pay Period: 1,059 (11/01/2022 to 11/15/2022)
Hour Type Hour Class Description Hours Amount
111
ABSENT
NO PAY LEAVE
107.50
0.00
113
ABSENT
Unpaid ADA hours
40.00
0.00
120
SICK
SICK LEAVE - L & 1
27.00
841.40
121
SICK
SICK LEAVE
717.55
30,559.32
122
VACATION
VACATION
756.45
33,574.24
123
HOLIDAY
HOLIDAY HOURS
87.00
3,868.59
124
HOLIDAY
FLOATER HOLIDAY
25.00
886.18
125
COMP HOURS
COMPENSATORY TIME
103.00
4,933.93
134
MILITARY
MILITARY LEAVE -UNPAID
88.00
0.00
150
REGULAR HOURS
Kelly Day Used
60.00
2,838.56
155
COMP HOURS
COMPTIME AUTO PAY
202.90
11,107.29
160
VACATION
MANAGEMENT LEAVE
8.00
446.59
190
REGULAR HOURS
REGULAR HOURS
16,994.75
735,950.72
194
SICK
Emerqency Sick Leave
62.00
2,150.59
195
REGULAR HOURS
ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE
160.00
11,154.60
210
OVERTIME HOURS
OVERTIME -STRAIGHT
171.00
8,402.56
215
OVERTIME HOURS
WATER WATCH STANDBY
48.00
2,698.77
216
MISCELLANEOUS
STANDBY TREATMENT PLANT
14.00
1,305.35
220
OVERTIME HOURS
OVERTIME 1.5
538.75
40,270.13
225
OVERTIME HOURS
OVERTIME -DOUBLE
36.50
2,759.81
410
MISCELLANEOUS
WORKING OUT OF CLASS
0.00
381.05
411
SHIFT DIFFERENTIAL
SHIFT DIFFERENTIAL
0.00
1,134.76
600
RETROACTIVE PAY
RETROACTIVE PAY
0.00
6,440.32
602
COMP HOURS
ACCRUED COMP 1.0
136.75
0.00
603
COMP HOURS
Holiday Comp 1.0
19.00
0.00
604
COMP HOURS
ACCRUED COMP TIME 1.5
163.25
0.00
acc
MISCELLANEOUS
ACCREDITATION PAY
0.00
144.03
acs
MISCELLANEOUS
ACCRED/POLICE SUPPORT
0.00
152.28
colre
MISCELLANEOUS
Collision Reconstruction ist
0.00
93.65
cpl
MISCELLANEOUS
TRAINING CORPORAL
0.00
187.30
crt
MISCELLANEOUS
CERTIFICATION III PAY
0.00
431.16
ctr
MISCELLANEOUS
CTR INCENTIVES PROGRAM
0.00
320.00
deftat
MISCELLANEOUS
DEFENSE TATICS INSTRUCTOR
0.00
130.40
det4
MISCELLANEOUS
Detective 4%
0.00
1,075.04
ed1
EDUCATION PAY
EDUCATION PAY 2%
0.00
730.42
11/16/2022 Packet Pg. 54
Payroll Earnings Summary Report
City of Edmonds
Pay Period: 1,059 (11/01/2022 to 11/15/2022)
Hour Type Hour Class Description Hours Amount
ed2
EDUCATION PAY
EDUCATION PAY 4%
0.00
554.18
ed3
EDUCATION PAY
EDUCATION PAY 6%
0.00
6,166.08
firear
MISCELLANEOUS
FIREARMS INSTRUCTOR
0.00
413.55
fmla
ABSENT
FAMILY MEDICAL/NON PAID
80.00
0.00
fmlc
COMP HOURS
Family Medical Leave -Comp Used
2.75
116.25
fmlh
HOLIDAY
Family Medical Leave-Hol Comp
8.00
338.18
hol
HOLIDAY
HOLIDAY
1,317.56
56,675.71
k9
MISCELLANEOUS
K-9 PAY
0.00
280.93
less
MISCELLANEOUS
LESS LETHAL INSTRUCTOR
0.00
89.60
Iq1
LONGEVITY
LONGEVITY PAY 2%
0.00
1,086.45
Ig11
LONGEVITY
LONGEVITY PAY 2.5%
0.00
439.28
Ig12
LONGEVITY
Lonqevitv 9%
0.00
3,886.65
Ig13
LONGEVITY
Longevity 7%
0.00
598.72
Ig14
LONGEVITY
Lonqevitv 5%
0.00
976.97
Iq2
LONGEVITY PAY
LONGEVITY PAY 4%
0.00
259.00
Iq4
LONGEVITY
Longevity 1 %
0.00
285.30
Iq5
LONGEVITY
Lonqevitv 3%
0.00
1,338.77
Iq6
LONGEVITY
Longevity .5%
0.00
368.90
Iq7
LONGEVITY
Lonqevitv 1.5%
0.00
408.05
Iq8
LONGEVITY
Longevity 8%
0.00
252.04
mtc
MISCELLANEOUS
MOTORCYCLE PAY
0.00
128.30
pds
MISCELLANEOUS
Public Disclosure Specialist
0.00
108.88
pfmp
ABSENT
Paid Family Medical Unpaid/Sup
52.65
0.00
pfms
SICK
Paid FAMILY MEDICAL/SICK
37.35
1,863.56
phv
MISCELLANEOUS
PHYSICAL FITNESS PAY
0.00
2,616.22
prof
MISCELLANEOUS
PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS SER
0.00
203.50
sdp
MISCELLANEOUS
SPECIAL DUTY PAY
0.00
692.06
sqt
MISCELLANEOUS
ADMINISTRATIVE SERGEANT
0.00
203.50
st
REGULAR HOURS
Serqeant Pay
0.00
152.63
traf
MISCELLANEOUS
TRAFFIC
0.00
361.14
vap
VACATION
Vacation Premium
18.00
771.08
11/16/2022 Packet Pg. 55
Payroll Earnings Summary Report
City of Edmonds
Pay Period: 1,059 (11/01/2022 to 11/15/2022)
Hour Type Hour Class Description Hours
22, 082.71
Total Net Pay:
Amount
$986,604.52
$678,087.52
8.3.b
11 / 16/2022
Packet Pg. 56
Hour Type Hour Class
153
HOLIDAY
Payroll Earnings Summary Report
City of Edmonds
Pay Period: 1,118 (11/15/2022 to 11/15/2022)
Description
HOLIDAY BUY BACK
Hours
4,188.00
4,188.00
Total Net Pay:
Amount
218, 348.00
$218,348.00
$161, 515.55
8.3.c
r
a
11/16/2022 Packet Pg. 57
8.3.d
Hour Type Hour Class
190 REGULAR HOURS
Payroll Earnings Summary Report
City of Edmonds
Pay Period: 1,117 (11/07/2022 to 11/07/2022)
Description
REGULAR HOURS
Hours
3.50
Amount
183.00
3.50 $183.00
Total Net Pay: $167.98
11 /16/2022
Packet Pg. 58
8.4
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 11/22/2022
Approval of claim checks.
Staff Lead: Dave Turley
Department: Administrative Services
Preparer: Nori Jacobson
Background/History
Approval of claim checks #255009 through #255098 dated November 17, 2022 for $1,762,868.36 (re-
issued check #255054 $754.62).
Staff Recommendation
Approval of claim checks.
Narrative
In accordance with the State statutes, City payments must be approved by the City Council. Ordinance
#2896 delegates this approval to the Council President who reviews and recommends either approval or
non -approval of expenditures.
Attachments:
claims 11-17-22
FrequentlyUsedProjNumbers 11-17-22
Packet Pg. 59
8.4.a
vchlist
11 /17/2022 11:16:44AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
255009 11/17/2022 076040 911 SUPPLY INC
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Page
Invoice
PO # Description/Account
Amoun
INV-2-19069
EDMONDS PD - DAWKINS
BLAUER PANTS
001.000.41.521.10.24.00
114.9�
CLIP ON TIE
001.000.41.521.10.24.00
6.9, 0
BLAUER L/S WHITE SHIRT
U
001.000.41.521.10.24.00
54.9� E
BLAUER S/S WHITE
R
001.000.41.521.10.24.00
44.9�
10.1 % Sales Tax
001.000.41.521.10.24.00
22.4( >
INV-2-19070
EDMONDS PD - GILGINAS
o
L
5 KNIT CAPS - A/C
Q'
a
001.000.41.521.70.24.00
34.9,1 Q
5 VELCRO CAPS
ci
001.000.41.521.70.24.00
87.5(
CUSTOM EMBROIDERY
r
001.000.41.521.70.24.00
80.0(
10.1 % Sales Tax
N
001.000.41.521.70.24.00
20.4z
INV-2-19262
EDMONDS PD - DAWKINS
SINGLE BREAST COAT
c
001.000.41.521.10.24.00
335.9(
8 BULLION STARS
t
001.000.41.521.10.24.00
52.0( @
DCS STRIPING
Q
001.000.41.521.10.24.00
31.0(
ALTERATIONS
001.000.41.521.10.24.00
12.0(
10.1 % Sales Tax
001.000.41.521.10.24.00
43.5,
INV-2-19263
EDMONDS PD - CLARK
V2 TACTICAL PANTS
001.000.41.521.21.24.00
64.9�
Page: 1
Packet Pg. 60
vchlist
11 /17/2022 11:16:44AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
255009 11/17/2022 076040 911 SUPPLY INC
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
8.4.a
Page: 2
Invoice
PO # Description/Account
Amoun
(Continued)
10.1 % Sales Tax
001.000.41.521.21.24.00
6.5E
INV-2-19264
EDMONDS PD - NGUYEN
TURTLE NECK
001.000.41.521.22.24.00
34.9�
10.1 % Sales Tax
U
001.000.41.521.22.24.00
3.5< E
INV-2-19291
EDMONDS PD - DAWKINS
2 CLIP ON TIES
001.000.41.521.10.24.00
17.0( o
INNER BELT
001.000.41.521.10.24.00
27.5( o
10.1 % Sales Tax
a
001.000.41.521.10.24.00
4.5( Q
INV-2-19381
EDMONDS PD - CLARK
N
5.11 STRYKE PANTS
N
001.000.41.521.21.24.00
85.0( r
PATCH INSTALL
001.000.41.521.21.24.00
8.0(
NAME TAPE
E
001.000.41.521.21.24.00
9.0( T
HEAT PRESS POLICE
001.000.41.521.21.24.00
17.0(
10.1 % Sales Tax
E
t
001.000.41.521.21.24.00
12.0< @
INV-2-19488
EDMONDS PD - SCINKOVEC
r
OC SPRAY MOLLE
Q
001.000.41.521.70.24.00
27.7E
ASP FRICTION BATON
001.000.41.521.70.24.00
116.4E
ASP TALON INFINITY BATON
001.000.41.521.70.24.00
180.8(
10.1 % Sales Tax
001.000.41.521.70.24.00
32.8,
Page: 2
Packet Pg. 61
vchlist
11 /17/2022 11:16:44AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
255009 11/17/2022 076040 911 SUPPLY INC
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
8.4.a
Page: 3
Invoice
PO # Description/Account
Amoun
(Continued)
INV-2-19707
EDMONDS PD - WEISBERG
MOLLEE CUFF CASE
001.000.41.521.22.24.00
67.5(
10.1 % Sales Tax
001.000.41.521.22.24.00
6.8,
INV-2-19870
EDMONDS PD - TRYKAR
PISTOL HOLSTER
E
001.000.41.521.22.24.00
36.0(
MAG HOLDER
001.000.41.521.22.24.00
55.0( o
TOURNIQUET POUCH
001.000.41.521.22.24.00
42.0( 0-
CUFF CASE
Q-
a
001.000.41.521.22.24.00
40.0( Q
UTILITY POUCH
N
001.000.41.521.22.24.00
42.0( N
10.1 % Sales Tax
r
001.000.41.521.22.24.00
21.7,
INV-2-19872
EDMONDSPD - PETTIT
BOSTON BELT
E
001.000.41.521.22.24.00
23.3E
10.1 % Sales Tax
001.000.41.521.22.24.00
2.3E
INV-2-19888
EDMONDS PD - HATCHETT
E
US BLAUER SHIRT
t
@
001.000.41.521.22.24.00
284.9 � Q
S/S BLAUER SHIRT
001.000.41.521.22.24.00
254.9,
6 NAME TAPES
001.000.41.521.22.24.00
54.0(
10.1 % Sales Tax
001.000.41.521.22.24.00
59.9�
INV-2-20069
EDMONDS PD - PECK - FOR PETTI-
SPORT TEK US TEE
Page: 3
Packet Pg. 62
vchlist
11 /17/2022 11:16:44AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
255009 11/17/2022 076040 911 SUPPLY INC
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
8.4.a
Page: 4
Invoice
PO # Description/Account
Amoun
(Continued)
001.000.41.521.22.24.00
49.9£
10.1 % Sales Tax
001.000.41.521.22.24.00
5.0E
INV-2-20072
EDMONDS PD - PETTIT
PATROL RAIN PANTS
001.000.41.521.22.24.00
115.0(
10.1 % Sales Tax
E
001.000.41.521.22.24.00
INV-2-20217
EDMONDS PD - HATCHETT
BLAUER CLASS B PANTS
o
001.000.41.521.22.24.00
104.9�
10.1 % Sales Tax
o
L
001.000.41.521.22.24.00
10.6( a
INV-2-20247
EDMONDS PD - PETTIT
Q
TRAFFIC VEST
N
001.000.41.521.22.24.00
54.9� N
HEATPRESS TRAFFIC VEST
r
001.000.41.521.22.24.00
22.0(
CLIP TIE
001.000.41.521.22.24.00
8.3( .
CLASS A PANTS
T
001.000.41.521.22.24.00
114.9E
CLASS A SHIRT
y
001.000.41.521.22.24.00
94.9E E
METAL NAME PLATE
@
001.000.41.521.22.24.00
15.0( Q
10.1 % Sales Tax
001.000.41.521.22.24.00
31.31'
INV-2-20344
EDMONDS PD - SCHEELE
3 NAME TAPE EMBROIDERY
001.000.41.521.11.24.00
24.0(
3 PATCH INSTALL
001.000.41.521.11.24.00
12.0(
3 L/S POLOS
Page: 4
Packet Pg. 63
vchlist
11 /17/2022 11:16:44AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
255009 11/17/2022 076040 911 SUPPLY INC
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
8.4.a
Page: 5
Invoice
PO # Description/Account
Amoun
(Continued)
001.000.41.521.11.24.00
128.9
10.1 % Sales Tax
001.000.41.521.11.24.00
16.6E
INV-2-20345
EDMONDS PD - SCINKOVEC
HEATPRESS COG JACKET
001.000.41.521.70.24.00
22.0(
PATCH INSTALL COG JACKET
E
001.000.41.521.70.24.00
10.1 % Sales Tax
001.000.41.521.70.24.00
3.4' O
INV-2-20346
EDMONDS PD - SCINKOVEC
3 PATROL SHIRTS
o
001.000.41.521.70.24.00
165.0( a
PATCH INSTALL 3 PER SHIRT
Q
001.000.41.521.70.24.00
36.0( N
3 CUSTOM NAMETAPES
N
001.000.41.521.70.24.00
24.0( r
10.1 % Sales Tax
001.000.41.521.70.24.00
22.7( N
INV-2-20347
EDMONDS PD - GERRARD
E
PATROL BAG
001.000.41.521.22.24.00
72.0(
DUTY BELT
y
001.000.41.521.22.24.00
62.0( E
INNER BELT
@
001.000.41.521.22.24.00
27.5( Q
BELT KEEPERS
001.000.41.521.22.24.00
17.2E
10.1 % Sales Tax
001.000.41.521.22.24.00
18.0E
INV-2-21342
EDMONDS PD - DEPT ISSUE
ASP FRICTION BATON 21'
001.000.41.521.22.24.00
136.8(
ASP FRICTION BATON 26'
Page: 5
Packet Pg. 64
vchlist
11/17/2022 11:16:44AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
255009 11/17/2022 076040 911 SUPPLY INC
255010 11/17/2022 070322 A&A LANGUAGE SERVICES INC
255011 11/17/2022 065052 AARD PEST CONTROL
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Invoice
(Continued)
I N V-2-21780
15-97881
64988
65001
255012 11/17/2022 074143 AFFORDABLE WA BACKFLOW TESTING 554497
255013 11/17/2022 000850 ALDERWOOD WATER DISTRICT 11055
PO # Description/Account
001.000.41.521.22.24.00
10.1 % Sales Tax
001.000.41.521.22.24.00
EDMONDS PD - INVENTORY
300 EPD SHOULDER PATCHES
001.000.41.521.22.24.00
10.1 % Sales Tax
001.000.41.521.22.24.00
Total
INTERPRETER 2A0565065
INTERPRETER 2A0565065
001.000.23.512.51.41.01
Total
MEADOWDALE CC PEST CONTROI
MEADOWDALE CC PEST CONTROI
001.000.64.576.80.41.00
10.5% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.41.00
WWTP: 11/8/22 PEST CONTROL SE
11/8/22 Pest Control Service
423.000.76.535.80.41.00
10.5% Sales Tax
423.000.76.535.80.41.00
Total
PM: BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY TEST:
PM: BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY TEST:
001.000.64.576.80.41.00
Total
MONTHLY WHOLESALE WATER Cl-
MONTHLY WHOLESALE WATER CF
421.000.74.534.80.33.00
8.4.a
Page: 6
Amoun
283.2(
42.4,
N
m
795.0(
E
80.3(
5,220.31
0
R
0
170.0( 0.
170.0( Q
N
N
T
94.0( r
N
9.8, E
M
77.0( c
m
E
8.0� u
188.9E
r
Q
80.0(
80.0(
190,611.2(
Page: 6
Packet Pg. 65
vchlist
11/17/2022 11:16:44AM
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #
255013 11/17/2022 000850 000850 ALDERWOOD WATER DISTRICT (Continued)
255014 11/17/2022 075199 ALESSANDRINI, IOLE 09272022
255015 11/17/2022 071634 ALLSTREAM
255016 11/17/2022 001528 AM TEST INC
255017 11/17/2022 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES
18972616
130184
6560087974
6560099376
6560099381
Description/Account
Total
4TH AVE LIGHTS - MAINTENANCE
4TH AVE LIGHTS - MAINTENANCE
117.100.64.573.20.41.00
Total
C/A 768328
PR1-1 & 2 City Phone Service
512.000.31.518.88.42.00
Tourism Toll free lines 877.775.6929;
001.000.61.558.70.42.00
Econ Devlpmnt Toll free lines
001.000.61.558.70.42.00
Total
WWTP: SAMPLE #22-A0015711
SAMPLE #22-A0015711
423.000.76.535.80.41.00
Total
WWTP: 10/19/22 NIFORMS,TOWEL
Mats/Towels $52.68 + $5.53 tax @ 1
423.000.76.535.80.41.00
Rentals & Prep Charges $50.55 ($4E
423.000.76.535.80.24.00
WWTP: 11/9/22 UNIFORMS,TOWEL
Mats/Towels $52.68 + $5.53 tax @ 1
423.000.76.535.80.41.00
Rentals & Prep Charges $56.13 (50.7
423.000.76.535.80.24.00
FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS
FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS
001.000.66.518.30.24.00
10.5% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.24.00
8.4.a
Page: 7
Amoun
190,611.2(
6,650.0( ui
6,650.0(
m
t
U
E
1,346.3(
0
10.8(
0
10.8( Q.
1,367.9( C
N
N
r-
125.0( r
125.0(
E
58.2 -
50.5E
U
�a
58.2 - Q
56.1
27.9"
2.9<
Page: 7
Packet Pg. 66
vchlist
11 /17/2022 11:16:44AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
255017 11/17/2022 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
8.4.a
Page: 8
Invoice
PO # Description/Account
Amoun
(Continued)
6560101089
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE:
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE
001.000.65.518.20.41.00
1.6" ..
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE
111.000.68.542.90.41.00
6.1
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE
421.000.74.534.80.41.00
6.1 - E
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE:
422.000.72.531.90.41.00
6.1'
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE:
o
423.000.75.535.80.41.00
6.1'
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE:
o
511.000.77.548.68.41.00
6.0£ a
10.5% Sales Tax
Q
001.000.65.518.20.41.00
0.3" N
10.5% Sales Tax
N
111.000.68.542.90.41.00
r•
0.6, r
10.5% Sales Tax
421.000.74.534.80.41.00
0.6,
10.5% Sales Tax
E
422.000.72.531.90.41.00
0.6,
10.5% Sales Tax
423.000.75.535.80.41.00
c
0.6,
10.5% Sales Tax
E
511.000.77.548.68.41.00
0.5£ @
6560101093
FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS & MAT
Q
FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS
511.000.77.548.68.24.00
12.3E
FLEET DIVISION MATS
511.000.77.548.68.41.00
19.1(
10.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.24.00
1.7:
10.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.41.00
1.5,
Page: 8
Packet Pg. 67
vchlist
11/17/2022 11:16:44AM
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
8.4.a
Page: 9
Bank code :
usbank
Voucher
Date Vendor
Invoice PO #
Description/Account
Amoun
255017
11/17/2022 069751 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES (Continued)
Total :
324.2(
255018
11/17/2022 001795 AUTOGRAPHICS
84128
COUNCIL MEMBER NAME CHANGE
Council member plaque - Teitzel and
001.000.31.514.31.31.00
200.0(
10.5% Sales Tax
001.000.31.514.31.31.00
21.0(
Total:
221.0(
255019
11/17/2022 071174 AXON ENTERPRISE INC
INUS051039
ACCT 116409 - EDMONDS PD
TASER 7 CERT PLAN YEAR 4 - OTY
001.000.41.521.40.35.00
41,040.0(
Sales Tax
001.000.41.521.40.35.00
4,268.1(
Total :
45,308.1(
255020
11/17/2022 073903 BENS CLEANER SALES INC
336815
WWTP: DE-ICER
DE-iCER
423.000.76.535.80.31.00
114.5E
10.5% Sales Tax
423.000.76.535.80.31.00
12.0�
Total :
126.55
255021
11/17/2022 079149 BHL COURT REPORTERS
21180
TRANSCRIPT HOLLY 1 A01 43952
TRANSCRIPT HOLLY 1A0143952
001.000.39.515.93.41.00
409.5(
Total:
409.5(
255022
11/17/2022 074307 BLUE STAR GAS
1378723
FLEET - AUTO PROPANE 553.0 GAL
FLEET - AUTO PROPANE 553.0 GAL
511.000.77.548.68.34.12
1,330.5,
Total :
1,330.5:
255023
11/17/2022 072005 BROCKMANN, KERRY
10981 YOGA
10981 YOGA INSTRUCTION
10981 YOGA INSTRUCTION
001.000.64.571.27.41.00
1,301.3(
Page: 9
Packet Pg. 68
vchlist
11/17/2022 11:16:44AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
255023 11/17/2022 072005 072005 BROCKMANN, KERRY
255024 11/17/2022 076240 CADMAN MATERIALS INC
255025 11/17/2022 018495 CALPORTLAND COMPANY
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
8.4.a
Page: 10
Invoice PO #
Description/Account
Amoun
(Continued)
Total :
1,301.3(
5869686
ROADWAY -ASPHALT, LIQUID ASP
ROADWAY -ASPHALT, LIQUID ASP
111.000.68.542.31.31.00
656.1- ui
Total:
656.11
m
95662159
STREET - 5.5 SK 3/8 AEA
t
U
STREET - 5.5 SK 3/8 AEA
E
111.000.68.542.61.31.00
488.7(
10.5% Sales Tax
o
111.000.68.542.61.31.00
51.3, R
95662160
STREET - 5.5 SK 3/8 AEA
o
STREET - 5.5 SK 3/8 AEA
Q.
111.000.68.542.61.31.00
325.8(cL
<
10.1 % Sales Tax
111.000.68.542.61.31.00
32.9( N
95662161
STORM - 1 1/2" X 3/4" GRAVEL DRA
r-
STORM - 1 1/2" X 3/4" GRAVEL DRA
422.000.72.531.40.31.00
826.9<
10.1 % Sales Tax
E
E
422.000.72.531.40.31.00
83.5< .�
95673015
STREET - 5.5 SK 3/8 AEA & DARASI
STREET - 5.5 SK 3/8 AEA & DARASI
111.000.68.542.61.31.00
332.0z E
10.1 % Sales Tax
111.000.68.542.61.31.00
33.5(
95681210
STREET - 5.5 SK 3/8 AEA & DARASI
Q
STREET - 5.5 SK 3/8 AEA & DARASI
111.000.68.542.61.31.00
124.5,
10.1 % Sales Tax
111.000.68.542.61.31.00
12.5,
Total:
2,311.8'
255026 11/17/2022 074387 CAMPBELL NELSON OF EDMONDS 68483
UNIT 17 - PARTS/ SENSOR
UNIT 17 - PARTS/ SENSOR
Page: 10
Packet Pg. 69
vchlist
11/17/2022 11:16:44AM
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
8.4.a
Page: 11
Bank code :
usbank
Voucher
Date Vendor
Invoice PO #
Description/Account
Amoun
255026
11/17/2022 074387 CAMPBELL NELSON OF EDMONDS
(Continued)
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
360.0(
10.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
37.8(
Tota I :
397.8(
255027
11/17/2022 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES
29486828
ENGINEERING COPIER 11.2022
ENGINEERING COPIER 11.2022
001.000.67.518.21.45.00
253.4,'
10.5% Sales Tax
001.000.67.518.21.45.00
26.6-
29486829
RENTAL/LEASE - COPIER
Dev Svcs copier (SN: 3AP01472)-
001.000.62.524.10.45.00
217.4,
10.5% Sales Tax
001.000.62.524.10.45.00
22.&
Total :
520.3E
255028
11/17/2022 003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY
CG119585
PM: YOST POOL CARBON DIOXIDE
PM: YOST POOL CARBON DIOXIDE
001.000.64.576.80.31.00
250.6z
10.5% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.31.00
26.3,
Tota I :
276.9E
255029
11/17/2022 077306 CHECK RIDE DRIVER TRAINING
JOHNSON & GOLSHANAR
JOHNSON & GOLSHANARA - CLAS,
JOHNSON & GOLSHANARA - CLAS,
422.000.72.531.90.49.00
10,130.0(
Tota I :
10,130.0(
255030
11/17/2022 035160 CITY OF SEATTLE
9056920000
WWTP: 9/8-11/7/22 FLOWMETER 8
9/8-11/7/22 FLOW METER #879026
423.000.76.535.80.47.62
25.2(
Total :
25.2(
255031
11/17/2022 073737 CITY OF SEATTLE
SU1008359
ANNUAL ENG UTILITIES GPS SUBS
Page: 11
Packet Pg. 70
vchlist
11/17/2022 11:16:44AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
255031 11/17/2022 073737 CITY OF SEATTLE
255032 11/17/2022 078902 COLEMAN OIL COMPANY LLC
255033 11/17/2022 076107 COMPASS HEALTH
255034 11/17/2022 065891 CONLEY, LISA M
255035 11/17/2022 072746 CONSOR NORTH AMERICA INC
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
8.4.a
Page: 12
Invoice PO #
Description/Account
Amoun
(Continued)
ANNUAL ENG UTILITIES GPS SUBS
421.000.74.534.80.49.20
633.3'
ANNUAL ENG UTILITIES GPS SUBS
422.000.72.531.90.49.20
633.3<
ANNUAL ENG UTILITIES GPS SUBS
423.000.75.535.80.49.20
633.3z
Total:
1,900.0( E
INV-064116
DIESEL 3,204 GALLONS
DIESEL 3,204 GALLONS
o
511.000.77.548.68.34.10
16,346.7£
DELIVERY FEE
p
511.000.77.548.68.34.10
L
650.0( 0-
10.5% Sales Tax
a
511.000.77.548.68.34.10
68.2E N
Total :
17,065.W N
OCTOBER 2022
HS: BEHAVIORAL HEALTH ASSISTA
T
HS: BEHAVIORAL HEALTH ASSISTA
N
001.000.63.557.20.41.00
8,859.0( E
Total:
8,859.0(
CONLEY SUB
MEADOWDALE PRESCHOOL SUBS
MEADOWDALE PRESCHOOL SUBS
001.000.64.571.29.49.00
240.0(
Total :
240.0( m
r
a
20-2967.01-1
E22JB/SERVICES THRU 7.31.22
E22JB/SERVICES THRU 7.31.22
421.000.74.594.34.41.00
1,617.0(
N202967WA.01-2
E22JB/SERVICES THRU 9.30.22
E22JB/SERVICES THRU 9.30.22
421.000.74.594.34.41.00
5,148.0(
N202967WA.01-3
E22JB/SERVICES THRU 10.31.22
E22JB/SERVICES THRU 10.31.22
Page: 12
Packet Pg. 71
vchlist
11/17/2022 11:16:44AM
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
8.4.a
Page: 13
Bank code :
Voucher
usbank
Date Vendor
Invoice
PO # Description/Account
Amoun
255035
11/17/2022 072746
CONSOR NORTH AMERICA INC
(Continued)
421.000.74.594.34.41.00
4,163.0(
Total:
10,928.0(
255036
11/17/2022 072786
CTS LANGUAGE LINK
226335
LANGUAGE LINK OCT'22
LANGUAGE LINK OCT'22
001.000.23.512.51.41.01
94.1 £
Total :
94.11
255037
11/17/2022 006200
DAILY JOURNAL OF COMMERCE
3383118
PLANNING - ADVERTISING
Publication of RFP for Tree Code
001.000.62.558.60.41.40
76.8E
Total:
76.8°
255038
11/17/2022 006626
DEPTOF ECOLOGY
DMcC-OIT3
WWTP: DMCCLAMMA OIT 3 WW Of
DMCCLAMMA OIT 3 W W OPERATO
423.000.76.535.80.49.71
67.0(
Tota I :
67.0(
255039
11/17/2022 064531
DINES, JEANNIE
22-4192
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
City Council Mtg Min 11/01/2022 & Ci
001.000.31.514.31.41.00
1,260.0(
Total :
1,260.0(
255040
11/17/2022 067703
EDMONDS COLLEGE ATHLETICS
001-22/23
GYM RENTAL: VOLLEYBALL LEAGL
GYM RENTAL: VOLLEYBALL LEAGI
001.000.64.571.25.45.00
2,065.0(
Total :
2,065.0(
255041
11/17/2022 008705
EDMONDS WATER DIVISION
5-00080
IRRIGATION AT HWY 99/CITY LINE
IRRIGATION AT HWY 99/CITY LINE
001.000.64.576.80.47.00
56.3E
5-10351
INTERURBAN TRAIL
INTERURBAN TRAIL
001.000.64.576.80.47.00
61.21
Total :
117.6:
Page: 13
Packet Pg. 72
vchlist
11/17/2022 11:16:44AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
255042 11/17/2022 075200 EDUARDO ZALDIBAR
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Invoice
8600/2022
255043 11/17/2022 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES AR232174
AR233606
AR234661
AR234804
8.4.a
Page: 14
PO # Description/Account
Amoun
INTERPRETER 1A0647160
INTERPRETER lA0647160
001.000.23.512.51.41.01
280.0(
Total :
280.0( ..
WWTP: 9/16-10/15/22 OVERAGE Cl-
N
9/16-10/15/22 OVERAGE CHARGE
423.000.76.535.80.45.00
87.8, U
E
10.5% Sales Tax
423.000.76.535.80.45.00
9.2, Z
MK5532 C165 CONTRACT CHARGE
o
b/w copier charges 10/01/22 - 10/31/
R
001.000.31.514.31.45.00
18.9E p
Color copier charges
Q.
001.000.31.514.31.45.00
1,061.5" Q
10.5% Sales Tax
..
001.000.31.514.31.45.00
N
113.4E N
RENTAL/LEASE - COPIER
r
Contract charges forf 10/'4/22-11/3/2',
001.000.62.524.10.45.00
163.4' N
10.5% Sales Tax
E
001.000.62.524.10.45.00
17.1E T
C57501
a:
bw overage 10/16 - 11/15/2022
m
001.000.21.513.10.45.00
8.9E E
clr overages 10/16 - 11/15/2022
U
001.000.22.518.10.45.00
123.4E r
clr overages 10/16 - 11/15/2022
Q
001.000.61.557.20.45.00
35.2E
clr overages 10/16 - 11/15/2022
001.000.21.513.10.45.00
17.6z
10.5% Sales Tax
001.000.21.513.10.45.00
2.8(
10.5% Sales Tax
001.000.22.518.10.45.00
12.9E
Page: 14
Packet Pg. 73
vchlist
11/17/2022 11:16:44AM
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice
255043 11/17/2022 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES (Continued)
255044 11/17/2022 047407 EMPLOYMENT SECURITY DEPT
255045 11/17/2022 009350 EVERETT DAILY HERALD
AR234805
AR234901
PO # Description/Account
10.5% Sales Tax
001.000.61.557.20.45.00
WWTP: 10/16-11/15/22 OVERAGE C
10/16-11/15/22 OVERAGE CHARGE
423.000.76.535.80.45.00
10.5% Sales Tax
423.000.76.535.80.45.00
ACCT#MK5648 CONTRACT 2600-02
Maintenance MM/DD/22 - MM/DD/22
512.000.31.518.88.48.00
10.5% Sales Tax
512.000.31.518.88.48.00
Total
312 000 093 ES REF # 94513310 7
Q3-22 Unemployment Claims
001.000.39.517.78.23.00
Q3-22 Unemployment Claims
423.000.76.535.80.23.10
Total
EDH966210 CITY ORDINANCE #4279
CITY ORDINANCES #4279
001.000.31.514.31.41.40
EDH966414 PLANNING -ADVERTISING
Publication of City Notice-
001.000.62.558.60.41.40
255046 11/17/2022 072493 FIRSTLINE COMMUNICATIONS INC 175566
Total
NOV-2022 SUPPORT SERVICES
Nov-2022 Support Services
512.000.31.518.88.48.00
10.5% Sales Tax
512.000.31.518.88.48.00
8.4.a
Page: 15
Page: 15
Packet Pg. 74
vchlist
11/17/2022 11:16:44AM
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #
255046 11/17/2022 072493 072493 FIRSTLINE COMMUNICATIONS INC (Continued)
255047 11/17/2022 065198 GAMETIME PJI-0195982
255048 11/17/2022 069571 GOBLE SAMPSON ASSOCIATES INC BINV0010012
BINV0010039
255049 11/17/2022 063137 GOODYEAR AUTO SERVICE CENTER 0000036417
255050 11/17/2022 075082 GOUDA INCORPORATED BID-1300
8.4.a
Page: 16
Description/Account Amoun
Total : 292.8:
TODDLER SWING: MATHAY BALLIN
TODDLER SWING: MATHAY BALLIN
001.000.64.576.80.31.00 470.9E ui
10.5% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.31.00
49.4.E t
Total:
520.4( U
WWTP: PO 911 WATM 01
PO 911 WATM 01
0
423.000.76.535.80.48.00
162.0( 'R
Freight
o
423.000.76.535.80.48.00
28.21 Q.
10.5% Sales Tax
Q
423.000.76.535.80.48.00
WWTP: PO 921 PENV
N
PO 921 PENV
r-
423.000.76.535.80.48.00
T
2,136.0( r
Freight
423.000.76.535.80.48.00
N
545.8( E
10.5% Sales Tax
M
423.000.76.535.80.48.00
281.5�
Total:
3,173.61 m
UNIT 976 - TIRES
t
UNIT 976 - TIRES
M
511.000.77.548.68.34.30 555.0E Q
WA STATE TIRE FEE
511.000.77.548.68.34.30 4.0(
10.6% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.34.30 58.81
Total : 617.9:
BID/ED! UMBRELLAS
BID/ED! UMBRELLAS
Page: 16
Packet Pg. 75
vchlist
11/17/2022 11:16:44AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
255050 11/17/2022 075082 GOUDA INCORPORATED
255051 11/17/2022 012199 GRAINGER
255052 11/17/2022 072647 HERRERA ENVIRONMENTAL
255053 11/17/2022 078923 HKAGLOBAL INC
255054 11/17/2022 061013 HONEY BUCKET
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Invoice
PO # Description/Account
(Continued)
140.000.61.558.70.31.00
Total
9498830695
WWTP - DOOR LOCK BATTERY
WWTP - DOOR LOCK BATTERY
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
10.5% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
Total
51888
TO 22-03/SERVICES THRU 8.26.22
TO 22-03/SERVICES THRU 8.26.22
422.000.72.531.90.41.20
52153
TO 22-03/SERVICES THRU 9.30.22
TO 22-03/SERVICES THRU 9.30.22
422.000.72.531.90.41.20
52256
EBB TIDE LITIGATION PROFESSIOI
EBB TIDE LITIGATION PROFESSIOI
001.000.64.571.21.41.00
Tota I :
0000006-1
WWTP: ADDL MONEY DUE FOR IN)
ADDL MONEY DUE FOR INV.000001
423.100.76.594.35.41.00
0000008
WWTP: 10/2022 PROF. SERVICES 1
10/2022 Professional Services for
423.100.76.594.35.41.00
Tota I :
0553072454
PINE RIDGE PARK HONEY BUCKET
PINE RIDGE PARK HONEY BUCKET
001.000.64.576.80.45.00
0553085002
LIBRARY HONEY BUCKET
LIBRARY HONEY BUCKET
001.000.64.576.80.45.00
8.4.a
Page: 17
Page: 17
Packet Pg. 76
vchlist
11/17/2022 11:16:44AM
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
8.4.a
Page: 18
Bank code :
usbank
Voucher
Date Vendor
Invoice
PO # Description/Account
Amoun
255054
11/17/2022 061013 HONEY BUCKET
(Continued)
0553098317
FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER HC
FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER HC
001.000.64.576.80.45.00
619.9
Tota I :
754.6,
255055
11/17/2022 079033 HYUN SON SHIN
03
PROF SVCS
Translation work-
001.000.62.524.10.41.00
57.5(
Total :
57.5(
255056
11/17/2022 071254 INT'L WATER TREATMENT NA
0837
F.A.C. - PARTS
F.A.C. - PARTS
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
1,004.0(
Freight
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
25.0(
10.5% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
108.0E
Total :
1,137.0E
255057
11/17/2022 074596 JUSINO, ELIZABETH
08082022
WOTS - NONFICTION CONTEST JU
WOTS - NONFICTION CONTEST JU
117.100.64.573.20.41.00
130.0(
Total :
130.0(
255058
11/17/2022 073603 LIGHTHOUSE LAW GROUP PLLC
Nov-2022
11-2022 LEGALS FEES
11-2022 Legal fees
001.000.36.515.41.41.00
53,953.0(
Total:
53,953.0(
255059
11/17/2022 077253 MAYES TESTING ENGINEERS INC
TH65243
EOMA/SERVICES THRU 10.15.22
EOMA/SERVICES THRU 10.15.22
332.000.64.594.76.41.00
1,274.3E
EOMA/SERVICES THRU 10.15.22
125.000.64.594.76.41.00
380.6E
Total:
1,655.0(
Page: 18
Packet Pg. 77
vchlist
11/17/2022 11:16:44AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
255060 11/17/2022 079084 MCLAUGHLIN, SUSAN
255061 11/17/2022 020039 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO
255062 11/17/2022 079172 MCMILLIN, DANIELJ
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Invoice
SMcLaughlin Nov22
SMcLaughlin Oct2022
86869435
11052022DM
255063 11/17/2022 020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENTALL INC 385970
255064 11/17/2022 020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENTALL INC 386022
PO # Description/Account
CLAIM FOR EXPENSES
Per Diem (meals) while attending
001.000.62.524.10.43.00
CLAIM FOR EXPENSES
Per Diem (meals) for APAWA conf in
001.000.62.524.10.43.00
Total
WWTP: PO 915 DRUM PUMP, HOSE
PO 915 DRUM PUMP, HOSE FITTIN
423.000.76.535.80.48.00
Freight
423.000.76.535.80.48.00
10.5% Sales Tax
423.000.76.535.80.48.00
Total
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
Services in association with PA Gear
001.000.62.524.10.49.00
Total
MISC - EQUIP RENTAL
Equip rental for Porchfest Event on 1'
001.000.62.524.10.49.00
10.5% Sales Tax
001.000.62.524.10.49.00
Total
PM: REWIND STARTER, HEDGE TR
PM: REWIND STARTER, HEDGE TR
001.000.64.576.80.48.00
10.5% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.48.00
Total
8.4.a
Page: 19
Page: 19
Packet Pg. 78
vchlist
11/17/2022 11:16:44AM
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
8.4.a
Page: 20
Bank code :
usbank
Voucher
Date Vendor
Invoice PO #
Description/Account
Amoun
255065
11/17/2022 024960
NORTH COAST ELECTRIC COMPANY
S012171683.001
WWTP: PO 924 STEM B01B020 BRN
PO 924 STEM BQ1 B020 BRKR
423.000.76.535.80.48.00
52.0'
10.5% Sales Tax
423.000.76.535.80.48.00
5.4E
Tota I :
57.45
255066
11/17/2022 064951
OTIS ELEVATOR CO
F10000072344
PW - IMPACT FEE
PW - IMPACT FEE
001.000.66.518.30.48.00
138.1 <
Total :
138.1;
255067
11/17/2022 075735
PACIFIC SECURITY
43863
SECURITY OCT'22
SECURITY OCT'22
001.000.23.512.51.41.02
3,969.7�
Total :
3,969.7<
255068
11/17/2022 078895
PADILLA, TRACIE
11042022
CLAIM FOR EXPENSES PADILLA
CLAIM FOR EXPENSES PADILLA PF
001.000.23.523.30.43.00
267.5(
Total:
267.5(
255069
11/17/2022 072507
PEACE OF MIND OFFICE SUPPORT
22103
PROF SVCS
Preparation of meeting minutes for
001.000.62.558.60.41.00
92.0(
Total :
92.0(
255070
11/17/2022 029117
PORT OF EDMONDS
03870
PORT RIGHT-OF-WAY LEASE FOR
PORT RIGHT-OF-WAY LEASE FOR
422.000.72.531.90.41.50
4,392.3E
Total :
4,392.3E
255071
11/17/2022 046900
PUGET SOUND ENERGY
200016558856
CIVIC CENTER 250 5TH AVE N / ME
CIVIC CENTER 250 5TH AVE N / ME
001.000.66.518.30.47.00
130.7E
Tota I :
130.7f
Page: 20
Packet Pg. 79
vchlist
11/17/2022 11:16:44AM
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
8.4.a
Page: 21
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
Invoice PO #
Description/Account
Amoun
255072 11/17/2022 071702 RAILROAD MGMT CO III LLC
462687
LIC# 305683 MEADOWDALE STORP
LIC# 305683 MEADOWDALE STORP
422.000.72.531.90.49.00
313.3z
Total:
313.3'
255073 11/17/2022 062657 REGIONAL DISPOSAL COMPANY
0000056244
STORM - STREET SWEEPINGS
N
STORM - STREET SWEEPINGS
t
422.000.72.531.10.49.00
1,087.5' U
Total :
1,087.51,
255074 11/17/2022 061540 REPUBLIC SERVICES #197
3-0197-0800478
FIRE STATION #20 23009 88TH AVE
FIRE STATION #20 23009 88TH AVE
o
'R
001.000.66.518.30.47.00
307.2z o
3-0197-0800897
PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ;
Q.
PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH :
Q
001.000.65.518.20.47.00
PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH :
N
111.000.68.542.90.47.00
174.8(
PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH :
T
r
421.000.74.534.80.47.00
174.8( N
PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ;
E
423.000.75.535.80.47.10
174.8( .2
PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ;
511.000.77.548.68.47.00
174.8(
PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ;
m
E
422.000.72.531.90.47.00
174.8" U
3-0197-0801132
FIRE STATION #16 8429 196TH ST ;°
FIRE STATION #16 8429 196TH ST ;
r
Q
001.000.66.518.30.47.00
325.7"
3-0197-0829729
CLUBHOUSE 6801 N MEADOWDAL
CLUBHOUSE 6801 N MEADOWDAL
001.000.66.518.30.47.00
74.6,
Tota I :
1,627.51
255075 11/17/2022 079173 RICHARDSON, JEREMIAH
JRichardson-11.2022
WWTP: JRICHARDSON - EXP.CLAII
JRICHARDSON - EXP.CLAIM-REIME
Page: 21
Packet Pg. 80
vchlist
11/17/2022 11:16:44AM
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
8.4.a
Page: 22
Bank code :
Voucher
usbank
Date Vendor
Invoice PO #
Description/Account
Amoun
255075
11/17/2022 079173 RICHARDSON, JEREMIAH
(Continued)
423.000.76.535.80.49.71
98.0(
Tota I :
98.0(
255076
11/17/2022 068657 ROBERT HALF
61063716
TEMPORARY HELP WEEK ENDING
Temp Position at Customer: Bookkee
001.000.31.514.23.41.00
1,952.0(
Total :
1,952.0(
255077
11/17/2022 078316 RULE STEEL TANKS INC
0040444-IN
WWTP: PO 879 DUMPSTER
PO 879 DUMPSTER
423.000.76.535.80.48.00
9,395.0(
Freight
423.000.76.535.80.48.00
1,750.0(
Total :
11,145.0(
255078
11/17/2022 072440 SCORDINO, JOE
036
E7FG/SCORDINO REIMBURSEMEN
E7FG/SCORDINO REIMBURSEMEN
001.000.39.554.90.49.00
2,227.2-
Total :
2,227.21
255079
11/17/2022 066964 SEATTLE AUTOMOTIVE DIST INC
S3-7682723
UNIT 451 - PARTS/ ROTOR
UNIT 451 - PARTS/ ROTOR
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
105.1 E
10.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
11.0E
S3-7684904
UNIT 451 PARTS/ ADDITIVE OIL
UNIT 451 PARTS/ ADDITIVE OIL
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
4.5(
10.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
0.4£
Total :
121.2E
255080
11/17/2022 075486 SHIPLEY, BRAD
BShipley Nov2022
CLAIM FOR EXPENSES
Refreshments for Porchfest Event on
001.000.62.524.10.49.00
239.8<
Page: 22
Packet Pg. 81
vchlist
11/17/2022 11:16:44AM
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
8.4.a
Page: 23
Bank code :
Voucher
usbank
Date Vendor
Invoice PO #
Description/Account
Amoun
255080
11/17/2022 075486 075486 SHIPLEY, BRAD
(Continued)
Total :
239.8:
255081
11/17/2022 036955 SKY NURSERY
T-2109559
PM: STRAW BALES
PM: STRAW BALES
001.000.64.576.80.31.00
16.9� ui
10.3% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.31.00
1.7,'
T-2118131
PM: FLOWER PROGRAM PLANTS
U
PM: FLOWER PROGRAM PLANTS
E
001.000.64.576.81.31.00
80.8E Z
10.3% Sales Tax
o
001.000.64.576.81.31.00
8.3: R
T-2118135
CEMETERY PLANTS
0
CEMETERY PLANTS
Q.
130.000.64.536.50.31.00
56.8E Q
10.3% Sales Tax
130.000.64.536.50.31.00
5.8E N
Total :
170.6! r
255082
11/17/2022 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1
200496834
LIFT STATION #10 17526 TALBOT R
LIFT STATION #10 17526 TALBOT R
E
E
423.000.75.535.80.47.10
72.1( .m
200651644
PARK MAINTENANCE SHOP
PARK MAINTENANCE SHOP
001.000.64.576.80.47.00
349.7( E
201184538
HICKMAN PARK
HICKMAN PARK
+a,
001.000.64.576.80.47.00
30.2, Q
201431236
PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 9110 OILY
PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 9110 OILY
111.000.68.542.64.47.00
20.7E
201790003
ALDERWOOD INTERIE 6130 168TH
ALDERWOOD INTERIE 6130 168TH
421.000.74.534.80.47.00
49.1 E
202540647
SIERRA PARK IRRIGATION 8100 191
SIERRA PARK IRRIGATION 8100 191
Page: 23
Packet Pg. 82
vchlist
11/17/2022 11:16:44AM
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
8.4.a
Page: 24
Bank code :
Voucher
usbank
Date Vendor
Invoice
PO # Description/Account
Amoun
255082
11/17/2022 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1
(Continued)
001.000.64.576.80.47.00
23.7z
205184385
LIFT STATION #5 432 3RD AVE S / fV
LIFT STATION #5 432 3RD AVE S / fV
423.000.75.535.80.47.10
25.0z
221732084
VETERANS PLAZA METER 1000597
VETERANS PLAZA METER 1000597
001.000.64.576.80.47.00
100.3� E
Total :
671.11
255083
11/17/2022 006630 SNOHOMISH COUNTY
82678
PARKS MAINT 5005 DUMP FEES
o
PARKS MAINT DUMP FEES
R
001.000.64.576.80.47.00
756.0( p
ILLEGAL DUMP FEES
Q.
422.000.72.531.10.49.00
40.0( Q
Total :
796.0(
N
N
255084
11/17/2022 037303 SO SNOHOMISH CO FIRE & RESCUE
Dec-22
DEC-2022 FIRE SERVICES CONTR)
Dec-2022 Fire Services Contract Pay
r
001.000.39.522.20.41.50
784987.6E
Total:
784:987.61 E
.R
255085
11/17/2022 038300 SOUND DISPOSAL CO
103583
CIVIC CENTER 250 5TH AVE N
CIVIC CENTER 250 5TH AVE N
001.000.66.518.30.47.00
721.2-
202334
LIBRARY DISPOSAL - 650 MAIN STI
t
LIBRARY DISPOSAL - 650 MAIN STf
M
M
001.000.66.518.30.47.00
928.8E Q
Tota I :
1,650.0 ,
255086
11/17/2022 076114 SOUND SALMON SOLUTIONS
10786
10786 INVEST SALISH SCIENTISTS
10786 INVEST SALISH SCIENTISTS
001.000.64.571.22.41.00
1,687.5(
Total:
1,687.5(
255087
11/17/2022 079063 SPRING COMM & CREATIVITY LLC
002
PROF SVCS
Zoom Testing and Spanish Interpretai
Page: 24
Packet Pg. 83
vchlist
11/17/2022 11:16:44AM
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
8.4.a
Page: 25
Bank code :
Voucher
usbank
Date Vendor
Invoice
PO # Description/Account
Amoun
255087
11/17/2022 079063 SPRING COMM & CREATIVITY LLC
(Continued)
001.000.62.524.10.41.00
310.5(
Total:
310.5(
255088
11/17/2022 039775 STATE AUDITOR'S OFFICE
L151007
10-2022 AUDIT FEES
10-2022 Audit Fees
001.000.39.514.20.41.50
1,858.5E
10-2022 Audit Fees
111.000.68.543.30.41.50
185.8E
10-2022 Audit Fees
421.000.74.534.80.41.50
557.5
10-2022 Audit Fees
422.000.72.531.90.41.50
557.5
10-2022 Audit Fees
423.000.75.535.80.41.50
557.5E
Total:
3,717.1,
255089
11/17/2022 079171 TEREX USA LLC
7265284
WWTP: PO 907 REPAIR WORK PLA
PO 907 REPAIR WORK PLATFORM
423.000.76.535.80.48.00
4,521.1
10.5% Sales Tax
423.000.76.535.80.48.00
474.7,
Total:
4,995.8E
255090
11/17/2022 074800 TURNSTYLE INC
BID-5752
BID/ED! WEBSITE UPDATE
BID/ED! WEBSITE UPDATE
140.000.61.558.70.41.00
1,700.0(
Total:
1,700.0(
255091
11/17/2022 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS
9919470460
C/A442201730-00001
iPad Cell Service Mayor's Office
001.000.21.513.10.42.00
35.1 ,
Dayton St Stormwater Pump Station
422.000.72.531.90.42.00
26.8(
Total :
61.9:
Page: 25
Packet Pg. 84
vchlist
11/17/2022 11:16:44AM
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
8.4.a
Page: 26
Bank code :
usbank
Voucher
Date Vendor
Invoice PO #
Description/Account
Amoun
255092
11/17/2022 067195 WASHINGTON TREE EXPERTS
122-951
PM: TREE REMOVAL: MAPLEWOOE
PM: TREE REMOVAL: MAPLEWOOE
125.000.64.576.80.41.00
2,000.0(
10.5% Sales Tax
-71
125.000.64.576.80.41.00
210.0( u)
Total:
2,210.0(
255093
11/17/2022 073552 WELCO SALES LLC
8313
HWY 99 OFFICE BUSINESS CARD
t
U
HWY 99 OFFICE BUSINESS CARDS
E
001.000.60.557.20.49.00
62.6' Z
10.5% Sales Tax
o
001.000.60.557.20.49.00
6.5£ 'R
Total:
69.21 o
L
255094
11/17/2022 069605 WEST COAST CODE CONSULTANTS
2022-EDM-OCT
PROF SVCS
°-
Q
Consultant Plan review for Anthology
001.000.62.524.20.41.00
205.0( N
Total :
205.0(
T
255095
11/17/2022 079083 WESTWATER CONSTRUCTION COMPAN E20CE.Pmt4
E20CE/SERVICES THRU 10.31.22
E20CE/SERVICES THRU 10.31.22
N
E
112.000.68.595.33.65.00
504,576.1,
Total :
504,576.11,
255096
11/17/2022 079165 WOLLA, DEBORAH
BLD2022-0866
PERMIT FEE REFUND
Permit fee refund (BLD2022-0866)-
E
001.000.257.620
335.0( @
Total :
335.0( Q
255097
11/17/2022 077286 WSP USA INC
1212084
E20CB/SERVICES THRU 9.2.22
E20CB/SERVICES THRU 9.2.22 EDP
112.000.68.542.30.41.00
526.9E
E20CB/SERVICES THRU 9.2.22 EDP
125.000.68.542.30.41.00
276.1(
E20CB/SERVICES THRU 9.2.22 EDIN
126.000.68.542.30.41.00
38.7,
Page: 26
Packet Pg. 85
vchlist
11 /17/2022 11:16:44AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
255097 11/17/2022 077286 WSP USA INC
255098 11/17/2022 011900 ZIPLY FIBER
90 Vouchers for bank code : usbank
90 Vouchers in this report
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
8.4.a
Page: 27
Invoice
PO # Description/Account
Amoun
(Continued)
E20CB/SERVICES THRU 9.2.22 LYN
112.000.68.542.30.41.00
841.7 ,
Total :
1,683.5'
206-188-0247
TELEMETRY MASTER SUMMARY A,
N
TELEMETRY MASTER SUMMARY A,
421.000.74.534.80.42.00
278.0E
U
TELEMETRY MASTER SUMMARY A
423.000.75.535.80.42.00
278.0E
Z
253-003-6887
LIFT STATION #6 VG SPECIAL ACCI
o
LIFT STATION #6 VG SPECIALACCE
'R
423.000.75.535.80.42.00
42.1
p
425-774-1031
LIFT STATION #8 VG SPECIAL ACCI
Q.
LIFT STATION #8 TWO VOICE GRAI
a
423.000.75.535.80.42.00
58.1E
..
425-776-1281
SNO-ISLE LIBRARY ELEVATOR PH(
N
SNO-ISLE LIBRARY ELEVATOR PH(
r
001.000.66.518.30.42.00
74.6-
425-776-5316
425-776-5316 PARKS MAINT FAX LII
N
425-776-5316 PARKS MAINT FAX LII
E
001.000.64.576.80.42.00
116.7<
12
Total :
847.8,
c
Bank total :
1,763,622.9E
t
Total vouchers :
1,763,622.9E
U
r
Q
Page: 27
Packet Pg. 86
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title)
Project Title
175th St. SW Slope StabilizatiopA&
2019 Sewerline Replacement Project
2019 MIN
2019 Swedish Waterline Replacement
Engineering Project
Project Accounting Funding
Khimhor Khimhar
E21FB
c560
EBGA c516 SW R
EBFC
EBJA c523 WTR
2019 Utilitv Rate & GFC Update EBJB s020 UTILITIES
P019 Waterline Overlay
2019 Waterline Replacement
E7JA
c498
WTR
19
20 Guardrail Installations
z
2020 Overlay Program
EOCA
i042
STR
E
R2020 Pedestria
EODB
SML
°
2020 Pedestrian Task Force
EODA
s024
STR
4-
°
ffic Calming
o
2020 Traffic Signal Upgrades
EOAB
i047
STR
a
Q-
a
r020 Waterline Overlay
i053
N
2021 Guardrail Installations
E21AB
i057
STR
ti
2021 Pedestrian Task Force E21 DB i062 STR
a1 Seweriverlay Program
2021 Stormwater Overlay Program E21CD i061 STM
affic Calming
2021 Waterline Overlay Program
E21CB
i059
WTR
1022 Guardrail Program
2022 Overlay Program
E22CA
i063
STR
n Safety
2022 Sewerline Overlay Program
E22CC
i065
STR
2022 Stormwater Overlay Program
E22CD
i066
STR
022 Traffic Calming Program
2022 Utility Rate and GFC Study
E22NB
s030
UTILITIES
bL022 Waterline Overlay Program
2023 Overlay Program
E23CA
i074
STR
ak.ublic ROW ADA
B
2023 Sewer Overlay Program
E23CC
i076
SWR
2023 Stormwater Overlay Program
2023 Transportation Plan
E23AA
s032
STR
2023 Waterline Overlay Program
WT
Revised 9/27/2022 Packet Pg. 87
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title)
Project Title
220th Adaptive
76th Ave Overlay (196th St. to OV
76th Ave W & 220th St. SW Intersection Improvements
�6th Ave W at 212th St S1Antersection Improvements
84th Ave W Overlay from 220th to 212th
FDA Curb Ramps
Admiral Way Pedestrian Crossing
kallinger Regional Facility Pre -Design
Citywide Bicycle Improvements Project
Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements
-6tected/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion
Civic Center Playfield (Construction)
Vvic Center Playfield (Design) I
Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave)
Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station
Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab
EdmondsVars ater
Elm St. Waterline Replacement
ay Walkway from 8th Ave to 9th Ave
Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating
rwy 99 Gateway Revitalization
Hwy 99 Revitalization Stage 3 (244th-238th)
Hwy 99 Revitalization Stage 4 (224th-220th)
Lake Ballinger Associated Projects
We Ballinger l Sewer SM
Engineering
Project
Number
EBAB
E20CB
EBCA
E 1 CA
8.4.b
Project
Accounting
Funding
Number
i028
STR
i052
STR
i029
STR
EBCC i031 STR
E9DA i040 STR
s022
EODC i050 STR
E7DC i026 STR
EOMA c551 PRK
EOMA
ESJB
c482
WTR
E41FE
c455
A
E4MB
c443
FAC
21 FE
S1A&
E21JB
c561
WTR
ESKA
c473
WTR
E22CE
i067
STR
i068
STR
E4FD
c436
STM
�B
Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study E4GC c461 SWR
rower Perrinville Creek Restorati E22FB
Minor Sidewalk Program
NPDES (Students Saving Salmon)
Official Street Map & Sidewalk Plan Update
OVD Slope Repair & Stabilization
Perrinville Creek Flow Reduction Improvements
terrinville Creek Recovery Study
Phase 10 Sewerline Replacement Project
hase 1 Vnnual Water Utility Replacement Project
Phase 12 Annual Water Utility Replacement Project
E6DD
i017
STR
E7FG
Vm013
EONA
s025
GF
E71FA
m105
STM
E20FC
c552
STM
E22GA
c566
SW R
c549
WTR
E21JA c558
►611-0.
W
Y
t,1
d
z
E
0
0
L
a
a
4
Revised 9/27/2022 Packet Pg. 88
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title)
Engineering
Project
Project Title
Project
Accounting
Funding
Number
Number
Phase 13 Waterline Replacement Project
E22JA
c565 JLWTR_A
Phase 2 Annual Storm Utility Replacement Project
EOFB
c547
STM
Ose 3 Sto ility Replac =
E21 FD
Phase 4 Storm Utility Replacement Project
E22FA
c567
STM
nual Sewer Replacement Project
NEOGA
Phase 9 Annual Sewer Replacement Project
E21 GA
c559
SWR
W Concrete Regrade & Drainage South
Sanitary Sewer and Stormwater Pipe Rating Services
E21 GB
c562
SWR
Seaview Park Infiltration Facility Phase 2
SR Revitalization Stage 2 (Medians, Gateway Signage & Hawk Signal)
E20CE
i055
STIR
MTN Adaptive System 236th-226
E22CG
Standard Details Updates
ESNA
solo
UTILITIES
tormwater Comp Plan Update
Sunset Walkway Improvements
E1 DA
c354
STIR
Utility Funds reserve Policies Study
s029
UTILITIES
Waterfront Development & Restoration (Construction)
E7MA
c544
PRK
Waterfront Development & Restoration (Design)
c496
Waterfront Development & Restoration (Pre - Design)
E7MA
m103
PRK
Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration
Yost & Seaview Reservoir Assessment
ost & Seaview Reservoir Repairs and Upgrades
Yost Park Infiltration Facility
EOJB s026 WTR
E21 FA c556 PRK
vi
Y
t,1
d
z
E
0
0
L
Q
a
a
Revised 9/27/2022 Packet Pg. 89
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering #)
Engineering
Project Title Project
Number
L020 Guardrail Installations
2020 Traffic Signal Upgrades
2020 Overlay Program
12020 Waterline Ova
2020 Pedestrian Task Force
020 Pedestrian Safety Program
Project
Accounting Funding
Number
i046
EOAB i047 STR
i048
EOCA i042 STR
EODA s024 STR
Citywide Bicycle Improvements Project
EODC
Seaview Park Infiltration Facility Phase
Phase 2 Annual Storm Utility Replacement Project
EOFB
al Sewer Replace
Phase 11 Annual Water Utility Replacement Project
NOR
EOJA
ost & Seaview Reservoir Assessment
Civic Center Playfield (Construction)
EOMA
rvic Center Playfield (Design)
EOMA
Official Street Map & Sidewalk Plan Update EONA
at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements 1C
i05O
STR
Y
d
z
c547
STM
E
.2
c549
WTR
°
R
o
a
c551
PRK
Q-
a
R
N
N
s025
GF
ti
c368 VVSTR
Sunset Walkway Improvements E1 DA c354 STR
a Ave Overlay (196
SR Revitalization Stage 2 (Medians, Gateway Signage & Hawk Signal) E20CE i055 STR
rrinville Creek Flow Reduction Improvements
2021 Traffic Calming
1021 Guardrail Installations
2021 Overlay Program
t021 Waterline Overlay Program
E21 AA
E21 CA
21CB
c552
i056 STR
i051 STR
WTR
2021 Sewer Overlay Program
E21 CC
i06O
SW R
j?021 Stormwater Overlay Progra-
Elm Way Walkway from 8th Ave to 9th Ave
E21 DA
i058
STR
F-021 Pedestrian Task Force Mop"
Yost Park Infiltration Facility
E21 FA
c556
PRK
175th St. SW Slope Stabilization wow
E21 FB
Perrinville Creek Recovery Study
E21 FC
s028
STM
t Replacemel
qW1FD
Edmonds Marsh Water Quality Project
E21 FE
c564
STM
I Sewer Replacement Project
E21GA
c559
Sanitary Sewer and Stormwater Pipe Rating Services
E21 GB
c562
SW R
12 Annual Water Utility Replacement Project
E21JA
=MWhase
WT
Revised 9/27/2022 Packet Pg. 90
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering #)
8.4.b
Project Title
Elm St. Waterline Replacement
2022 Signal Upgrades
2022 Traffic Calming Program
■2 Guardrail Program _
2022 Overlay Program
022 Waterline Overlay Program
2022 Sewerline Overlay Program
k022 Stormwater Overlay Program
Hwy 99 Revitalization Stage 3 (244th-238th)
!wy 99 Revitalization Stage 4 (224th-220th)
Engineering
Project
Numher
E21JB
E22AA
Project
Accounting Funding
Number
c561 WTR
i070 STIR
E22AB i071 STIR
E22CA i063 STIR
E22CC i065 STIR
E22CD eTR
E22CE i067 STIR
SR-104 Adaptive System 236th-226th
E22CG
i069
STIR
j?r022 Pedestrian Safety program
Phase 4 Storm Utility Replacement Project
E22FA
c567
STM
ro-wer Perrinville Creek Restoration
a157
Phase 10 Sewerline Replacement Project
E22GA
c566
SWR
hase 13 Waterline Replacement Project
Yost & Seaview Reservoir Repairs and Upgrades
E22JB
m160
WTR
e Policies Study
E22NA
s029
UTILITIES
2022 Utility Rate and GFC Study
E22NB
s030
UTILITIES
Cn'^^
s032
2023 Public ROW ADA Transition Plan
023 Overlay Program
2023 Waterline Overlay Program
IL023 Sewer Overlay Progra
2023 Stormwater Overlay Program
-Creel.,Daylighting/E=nds Marsh Restoration
Lake Ballinger Associated Projects
ayton Street Stormwater Pump Station
Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study
Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab
Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study
Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave)
Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating
`Standardketails Updates&.
Hwy 99 Gateway Revitalization
itywide Protected/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion
Minor Sidewalk Program
E23AB
s033
STIR
E23CB
i075
WTR
E23CC
E23CD
i077
STM
STM
E4FD
c436
STM
E4GC
c461
SWR
E5GB
s011
SWR
E5J13
c482
WTR
E51KA
c473
WTR
UTIL
E6AA
s014
STIR
E6DD
i017
STIR
vi
Y
t,1
d
s
E
0
0
L.
a
a
a
Revised 9/27/2022 Packet Pg. 91
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering #)
Engineering Project
Project Title Project Accounting Funding
AI—k— AI..w.6..,.-
ktormwater Comp Plan Update &
Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase III
ssing En
OVD Slope Repair & Stabilization
FIPDES (Students Saving Salmon
2019 Waterline Replacement
6raterfront Development & Restoration (Construction)
Waterfront Development & Restoration (Design)
`waterfront Development & Restoration (Pre - Design)
220th Adaptive
Me W tIntersection Improvements
84th Ave W Overlay from 220th to 212th
FDA Curb Ramps
2019 Storm Maintenance Project
1019 Sewerline Replacement Project
2019 Swedish Waterline Replacement
E6FD
s017
E6GB
c488
SWR
E7DC
i026
INKM
E7FA
m105
STM
E7FG
m01
E7JA
c498
WTR
E7MA
c496
PRK
Y
d
z
E8AB
i028
STR
E
E8CC
i031
STIR°
i033
0
a
E8FC
c525
STM
Q-
a
E8GA
wR
N
N
E8JA
c523
WTR
ti
s020 UTILITIES
2019 Traffic Calming
E9AA i038 STR
Materline
WTR
Admiral Way Pedestrian Crossing
E9DA i040 STR
Ballinger Regional Facility Pre -Design
STM
PW Concrete Regrade & Drainage South
E9MA c502 FAC
Revised 9/27/2022 Packet Pg. 92
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Accounting #)
8.4.b
Engineering
Project
Project Title
Project
Accounting
Number
Number
Lower Perrinville Creek Restoration
E22FB
a157
Sunset Walkway Improvements
E1 DA
c354
76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements
E1 CA
c368
Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration
E4FC
c435
Lake Ballinger Associated Projects
E4FD
c436
Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab
E4MB
c443
Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station
E4FE
c455
Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study
E4GC
c461
Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating
ESKA
c473
Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave)
ESJB
c482
Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase III
E6GB
c488
Waterfront Development & Restoration (Design)
E7MA
c496
2019 Waterline Replacement
E7JA
c498
PW Concrete Regrade & Drainage South
E9MA
c502
2019 Sewerline Replacement Project
EBGA
c516
2019 Swedish Waterline Replacement
EBJA
c523
2019 Storm Maintenance Project
EBFC
c525
Civic Center Playfield (Design)
EOMA
c536
Waterfront Development & Restoration (Construction)
E7MA
c544
Seaview Park Infiltration Facility Phase 2
EOFA
c546
Phase 2 Annual Storm Utility Replacement Project
EOFB
c547
Phase 8 Annual Sewer Replacement Project
EOGA
c548
Phase 11 Annual Water Utility Replacement Project
EOJA
c549
Civic Center Playfield (Construction)
EOMA
c551
Perrinville Creek Flow Reduction Improvements
E20FC
c552
Yost Park Infiltration Facility
E21 FA
c556
Phase 12 Annual Water Utility Replacement Project
E21JA
c558
Phase 9 Annual Sewer Replacement Project
E21 GA
c559
175th St. SW Slope Stabilization
E21 FB
c560
Elm St. Waterline Replacement
E21JB
c561
Sanitary Sewer and Stormwater Pipe Rating Services
E21 GB
c562
Phase 3 Storm Utility Replacement Project
E21 FD
c563
Edmonds Marsh Water Quality Project
E21 FE
c564
Phase 13 Waterline Replacement Project
E22JA
c565
Phase 10 Sewerline Replacement Project
E22GA
c566
Phase 4 Storm Utility Replacement Project
E22FA
c567
Citywide Protected/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion
E6AB
i015
Funding
STM
STR
STR
STM
STM
FAC
STM
SWR
WTR
WTR
SWR
PRK
WTR
FAC
SWR
WTR
STM
PRK
PRK
STM
STM
SWR
WTR
PRK
STM
PRK
WTR
SWR
STM
WTR
SWR
STM
STM
WTR
SWR
STM
STR
ui
U
m
U
E
U
0
0
L
Q
a
Q
Revised 9/27/2022 Packet Pg. 93
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Accounting #)
8.4.b
Engineering
Project
Project Title
Project
Accounting
Number
Number
Minor Sidewalk Program
E6DD
i017
Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements
E7DC
i026
220th Adaptive
EBAB
i028
76th Ave W & 220th St. SW Intersection Improvements
EBCA
i029
84th Ave W Overlay from 220th to 212th
EBCC
i031
ADA Curb Ramps
EBDB
i033
2019 Traffic Calming
E9AA
i038
Admiral Way Pedestrian Crossing
E9DA
i040
2020 Overlay Program
EOCA
i042
2019 Waterline Overlay
E9CB
i043
2020 Guardrail Installations
EOAA
i046
2020 Traffic Signal Upgrades
EOAB
i047
2020 Traffic Calming
EOAC
i048
2020 Pedestrian Safety Program
EODB
i049
Citywide Bicycle Improvements Project
EODC
i050
2021 Overlay Program
E21 CA
i051
76th Ave Overlay (196th St. to OVD)
E20CB
i052
2020 Waterline Overlay
EOCC
i053
SR Revitalization Stage 2 (Medians, Gateway Signage & Hawk Signal)
E20CE
i055
2021 Traffic Calming
E21 AA
i056
2021 Guardrail Installations
E21 AB
i057
Elm Way Walkway from 8th Ave to 9th Ave
E21 DA
i058
2021 Waterline Overlay Program
E21 CB
i059
2021 Sewer Overlay Program
E21 CC
i060
2021 Stormwater Overlay Program
E21 CD
i061
2021 Pedestrian Task Force
E21 DB
i061
2022 Overlay Program
E22CA
i063
2022 Waterline Overlay Program
E22CB
i064
2022 Sewerline Overlay Program
E22CC
i065
2022 Stormwater Overlay Program
E22CD
i066
Hwy 99 Revitalization Stage 3 (244th-238th)
E22CE
i067
Hwy 99 Revitalization Stage 4 (224th-220th)
E22CF
i068
SR-104 Adaptive System 236th-226th
E22CG
i069
2022 Signal Upgrades
E22AA
i070
2022 Traffic Calming Program
E22AB
i071
2022 Pedestrian Safety program
E22DA
i072
2022 Guardrail Program
E22AC
i073
Funding
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
WTR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
WTR
SWR
STM
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
ui
U
m
U
E
U
0
0
L
Q
a
Q
Revised 9/27/2022 Packet Pg. 94
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Accounting #)
8.4.b
Engineering
Project
Project Title
Project
Accounting
Funding
Number
Number
2023 Overlay Program
E23CA
i074
STIR
2023 Waterline Overlay Program
E23CB
i075
WTR
2023 Sewer Overlay Program
E23CC
i076
SWR
2023 Stormwater Overlay Program
E23CD
i077
STM
NPDES (Students Saving Salmon)
E7FG
m013
STM
Waterfront Development & Restoration (Pre - Design)
E7MA
m103
PRK
OVD Slope Repair & Stabilization
E7FA
m105
STM
Yost & Seaview Reservoir Repairs and Upgrades
E22JB
m160
WTR
Standard Details Updates
ESNA
solo
UTILITIES
Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study
ESGB
sol l
SWR
Hwy 99 Gateway Revitalization
E6AA
s014
STR
Stormwater Comp Plan Update
E6FD
s017
STM
2019 Utility Rate & GFC Update
EBJB
s02O
UTILITIES
Ballinger Regional Facility Pre -Design
E9FA
s022
STM
2020 Pedestrian Task Force
EODA
s024
STIR
Official Street Map & Sidewalk Plan Update
EONA
s025
GF
Yost & Seaview Reservoir Assessment
EOJB
s026
WTR
Perrinville Creek Recovery Study
E21 FC
s028
STM
Utility Funds reserve Policies Study
E22NA
s029
UTILITIES
2022 Utility Rate and GFC Study
E22NB
s03O
UTILITIES
2023 Transportation Plan
E23AA
s032
STIR
2023 Public ROW ADA Transition Plan
E23AB
s033
STIR
ui
U
m
U
E
U
0
0
L
Q
Q
Q
Revised 9/27/2022
Packet Pg. 95
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Funding)
8.4.b
Engineering
Project
Project Title
Project
Accounting
Number
Number
Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab
E4MB
c443
PW Concrete Regrade & Drainage South
E9MA
c502
Official Street Map & Sidewalk Plan Update
EONA
s025
Waterfront Development & Restoration (Design)
E7MA
c496
Civic Center Playfield (Design)
EOMA
c536
Waterfront Development & Restoration (Construction)
E7MA
c544
Civic Center Playfield (Construction)
EOMA
c551
Yost Park Infiltration Facility
E21 FA
c556
Waterfront Development & Restoration (Pre - Design)
E7MA
m103
Lower Perrinville Creek Restoration
E22FB
a157
Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration
E4FC
c435
Lake Ballinger Associated Projects
E4FD
c436
Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station
E4FE
c455
2019 Storm Maintenance Project
EBFC
c525
Seaview Park Infiltration Facility Phase 2
EOFA
c546
Phase 2 Annual Storm Utility Replacement Project
EOFB
c547
Perrinville Creek Flow Reduction Improvements
E20FC
c552
175th St. SW Slope Stabilization
E21 FB
c560
Phase 3 Storm Utility Replacement Project
E21 FD
c563
Edmonds Marsh Water Quality Project
E21 FE
c564
Phase 4 Storm Utility Replacement Project
E22FA
c567
2021 Stormwater Overlay Program
E21 CD
i061
2023 Stormwater Overlay Program
E23CD
i077
NPDES (Students Saving Salmon)
E7FG
m013
OVD Slope Repair & Stabilization
E7FA
m105
Stormwater Comp Plan Update
E6FD
s017
Ballinger Regional Facility Pre -Design
E9FA
s022
Perrinville Creek Recovery Study
E21 FC
s028
Sunset Walkway Improvements
E1DA
c354
76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements
E1CA
c368
Citywide Protected/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion
E6AB
i015
Minor Sidewalk Program
E6DD
i017
Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements
E7DC
i026
76th Ave W & 220th St. SW Intersection Improvements
EBCA
i029
84th Ave W Overlay from 220th to 212th
EBCC
i031
ADA Curb Ramps
EBDB
i033
2019 Traffic Calming
E9AA
i038
Funding
FAC
FAC
GF
PRK
PRK
PRK
PRK
PRK
PRK
STM
STM
STM
STM
STM
STM
STM
STM
STM
STM
STM
STM
STM
STM
STM
STM
STM
STM
STM
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
ui
U
m
U
E
U
0
0
L
Q
Q
Q
Revised 9/27/2022 Packet Pg. 96
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Funding)
8.4.b
Engineering
Project
Project Title
Project
Accounting
Number
Number
Admiral Way Pedestrian Crossing
E9DA
i040
2020 Overlay Program
EOCA
i042
2020 Guardrail Installations
EOAA
i046
2020 Traffic Signal Upgrades
EOAB
i047
2020 Traffic Calming
EOAC
i048
2020 Pedestrian Safety Program
EODB
i049
Citywide Bicycle Improvements Project
EODC
i050
2021 Overlay Program
E21 CA
i051
76th Ave Overlay (196th St. to OVD)
E20CB
i052
SR Revitalization Stage 2 (Medians, Gateway Signage & Hawk Signal)
E20CE
i055
2021 Traffic Calming
E21 AA
i056
2021 Guardrail Installations
E21 AB
i057
Elm Way Walkway from 8th Ave to 9th Ave
E21 DA
i058
2021 Pedestrian Task Force
E21 DB
i061
2022 Overlay Program
E22CA
i063
2022 Waterline Overlay Program
E22CB
i064
2022 Sewerline Overlay Program
E22CC
i065
2022 Stormwater Overlay Program
E22CD
i066
Hwy 99 Revitalization Stage 3 (244th-238th)
E22CE
i067
Hwy 99 Revitalization Stage 4 (224th-220th)
E22CF
i068
SR-104 Adaptive System 236th-226th
E22CG
i069
2022 Signal Upgrades
E22AA
i070
2022 Traffic Calming Program
E22AB
i071
2022 Pedestrian Safety program
E22DA
i072
2022 Guardrail Program
E22AC
i073
2023 Overlay Program
E23CA
i074
Hwy 99 Gateway Revitalization
E6AA
s014
2020 Pedestrian Task Force
EODA
s024
2023 Transportation Plan
E23AA
s032
2023 Public ROW ADA Transition Plan
E23AB
s033
220th Adaptive
EBAB
i028
2020 Waterline Overlay
EOCC
i053
Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study
E4GC
c461
Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase III
E6GB
c488
2019 Sewerline Replacement Project
EBGA
c516
Phase 8 Annual Sewer Replacement Project
EOGA
c548
Phase 9 Annual Sewer Replacement Project
E21 GA
c559
Funding
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
STR
SWR
SWR
SWR
SWR
SWR
ui
U
m
t
U
E
U
0
0
L
Q
a
Q
Revised 9/27/2022 Packet Pg. 97
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Funding)
8.4.b
Engineering
Project
Project Title
Project
Accounting
Funding
Number
Number
Sanitary Sewer and Stormwater Pipe Rating Services
E21 GB
c562
SWR
Phase 10 Sewerline Replacement Project
E22GA
c566
SWR
2021 Sewer Overlay Program
E21CC
i06O
SWR
2023 Sewer Overlay Program
E23CC
i076
SWR
Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study
ESGB
s0l l
SWR
Standard Details Updates
ESNA
solo
UTILITIES
2019 Utility Rate & GFC Update
EBJB
s02O
UTILITIES
Utility Funds reserve Policies Study
E22NA
s029
UTILITIES
2022 Utility Rate and GFC Study
E22NB
s03O
UTILITIES
Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating
ESKA
c473
WTR
Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave)
ESJB
c482
WTR
2019 Waterline Replacement
E7JA
c498
WTR
2019 Swedish Waterline Replacement
EBJA
c523
WTR
Phase 11 Annual Water Utility Replacement Project
EOJA
c549
WTR
Phase 12 Annual Water Utility Replacement Project
E21JA
c558
WTR
Elm St. Waterline Replacement
E21JB
c561
WTR
Phase 13 Waterline Replacement Project
E22JA
c565
WTR
2019 Waterline Overlay
E9CB
i043
WTR
2021 Waterline Overlay Program
E21CB
i059
WTR
2023 Waterline Overlay Program
E23CB
i075
WTR
Yost & Seaview Reservoir Repairs and Upgrades
E22JB
m160
WTR
Yost & Seaview Reservoir Assessment
EOJB
s026
WTR
ui
U
m
U
E
U
4-
0
0
L
Q
Q
Q
Revised 9/27/2022
Packet Pg. 98
8.5
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 11/22/2022
EPOA Commissioned MOU Wage Reopener & Commanders
Staff Lead: {Type Name of Staff Lead}
Department: Human Resources
Preparer: Jessica Neill Neill Hoyson
Background/History
The EPOA Commissioned collective bargaining agreement is currently settled through December 31,
2023. Certain current national, social, and economic conditions have created challenges for the
Edmonds Police Department to maintain appropriate staffing levels. These economic challenges, such
as the rate of inflation, as well as the implementation of changes in technology, have had an impact on
employees' working conditions. Additionally, the City has proposed the addition of Commander
positions. These positions will be non -represented but will assume some of the work that is currently
Guild work. Addition of 3 Commander positions will result in the elimination of 2 represented Sergeant
positions. Due to this, both the Guild and the City agreed to reopen the contract to address wages in
2022 and 2023.
Staff Recommendation
Approve the attached MOU providing additional wage adjustments for 2022 and 2023.
Narrative
The attached MOU has been agreed to by the EPOA Commissioned bargaining unit and has been settled
within the authority provided by Council.
Attachments:
Final EPOA MOU - Wage Adjustment and Commander Positions (Clean)
Packet Pg. 99
8.5.a
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
Amended to the
AGREEMENT
by and between
CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
and
EDMONDS POLICE OFFICERS' ASSOCIATION
REPRESENTING THE LAW ENFORCEMENT
COMMISSIONED EMPLOYEES
January 1, 2020 through December 31, 2023
THIS MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU) is supplemental to the
AGREEMENT by and between the City of Edmonds (City) and the Edmonds Police
Officers' Association (EPOA), representing the Law Enforcement Commissioned
Employees.
WHEREAS, the parties have ratified a Law Enforcement Commissioned
Employees Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) effective January 1, 2020
through December 31, 2023; and
WHEREAS, the parties agree that certain current national social and
economic conditions have created challenges for the Edmonds Police Department's
ability to maintain a full staff of law enforcement commissioned employees; and
WHEREAS, the parties have reopened the CBA on the subject of wages to
address these challenges; and
WHEREAS, the parties agree that there is a demonstrated need for additional
command staff positions to ensure appropriate chain of command oversight of
employees, and the City has requested additional Patrol Officer positions in the 2023
budget, which will benefit both the Police Department and the citizens of the City of
Edmonds; and
WHEREAS, the parties have agreed to the creation of three (3) Commander
positions and the elimination of two (2) Sergeant positions; and
Packet Pg. 100
8.5.a
WHEREAS, the parties agree that the economic challenges, including the
current rate of inflation, as well as the Edmonds Police Department's implementation
of changes in technology, have impacted employees' working conditions; and
WHEREAS, the elimination of the Sergeant positions impacts employees by
removing work previously performed by Law Enforcement Commissioned
Employees; and
WHEREAS, to address all of the above -described economic impacts and
impacts on working conditions, the City has agreed to provide each Law Enforcement
Commissioned Employee with a one-time lump sum payment and wage adjustments
in the form of percentage increases in the negotiated wages currently set forth in the
CBA; and
WHEREAS, Appendix A of the CBA addresses the compensation due to
employees, and it is the intention of the parties, through this MOU, to provide for the
lump sum payment and wage adjustments;
NOW THEREFORE, the City and the EPOA agree as follows:
1. To address the above -described economic impacts and impacts on working
conditions, the City will provide all Law Enforcement Commissioned
Employees who are employed by the City at the time this MOU is executed:
(a) a one-time lump sum payment equal to two and one-half percent (2.5%)
of their negotiated 2022 base wage paid for each hour paid for a period of
five (5) months (the calculation period being from July 1, 2022 to November
30, 2022); (b) an increase in their negotiated 2022 base wage of two and
one-half percent (2.5%) beginning on December 1, 2022; and (c) an
increase in their negotiated 2023 base wage, which will be increased by the
above wage adjustment, of two and one-half percent (2.5%) beginning on
January 1, 2023. This increase is in addition to the previously negotiated
two and one-half percent (2.5%) for 2023.
2. The City will make the lump sum payment no later than two (2) pay periods
following the effective date of this MOU in a separate payroll check that is
subject to all payroll deductions. The wage adjustments address the parties'
wage concerns and are a full and final agreement on the wage reopener.
The parties agree that the wage reopener does not set a precedent for
future CBA reopeners.
Packet Pg. 101
8.5.a
3. Three (3) Commander positions are hereby created and two (2) Sergeant
positions (Administrative Sergeant and Professional Standards Sergeant)
are hereby eliminated. No current Sergeant will lose rank due to the creation
of the Commander positions. At the time of filling the Commander positions,
interested internal Edmonds Police Department candidates who are eligible
and meet the criteria for the position will be promoted into these positions.
Only if there are an insufficient number of such candidates will any
Commander position be filled externally. Any Sergeant promoted to
Commander who fails to pass probation for that position will be allowed to
return to their previously held position in the bargaining unit. If one or more
Commander positions are eliminated, any Sergeant promoted into that
position will be allowed to return to their previously held position in the
bargaining unit. An employee who has left the bargaining unit for a
Commander position shall not accrue bargaining unit seniority or rank
seniority as a Commander. If a former employee returns to the bargaining
unit from a Commander position they shall only be entitled to the seniority
they held when they left the bargaining unit and the seniority they held when
they left the rank of sergeant. Any external candidate selected for the
Commander position shall have no right to revert to any position in the
bargaining unit. The EPD Command Staff will request a Special Operations
Sergeant position as part of the budget process in 2023.
4. This MOU is intended to clarify the intent of the parties with regard to the
above referenced payments and changes to employment positions and,
except as stated herein, does not alter any other terms of the CBA, which
will remain in full force and effect.
9Z9]0I:WIV
CITY OF EDMONDS
day of November 2022.
Mike Nelson, Mayor
EDMONDS POLICE OFFICERS ASSOC.
Representing the Law Enforcement
Commissioned Employees
Ross Sutton, EPOA President
Packet Pg. 102
8.6
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 11/22/2022
EPOA Law Support MOU Wage Reopener
Staff Lead: {Type Name of Staff Lead}
Department: Human Resources
Preparer: Jessica Neill Neill Hoyson
Background/History
The EPOA Law Support collective bargaining agreement is currently settled through December 31, 2022.
Certain current national, social, and economic conditions have created challenges for the Edmonds
Police Department to maintain appropriate staffing levels. These economic challenges, such as the rate
of inflation, as well as the implementation of changes in technology, have had an impact on employees'
working conditions. Due to this, both the Guild and the City agreed to reopen the contract to address
wages in 2022.
Staff Recommendation
Approve the attached MOU providing additional wage adjustments for 2022.
Narrative
The attached MOU has been agreed to by the EPOA Law Support bargaining unit and has been settled
within the authority provided by Council.
Attachments:
Final Law Support MOU - Wage Adjustment (Clean)
Packet Pg. 103
8.6.a
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
Amended to the
AGREEMENT
by and between
CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
and
EDMONDS POLICE OFFICERS' ASSOCIATION
REPRESENTING THE LAW ENFORCEMENT SUPPORT SERVICE EMPLOYEES
January 1, 2020 through December 31, 2022
THIS MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU) is supplemental to the
AGREEMENT by and between the City of Edmonds (City) and the Edmonds Police
Officers' Association (EPOA), representing the Law Enforcement Support Service
Employees.
WHEREAS, the parties have ratified a Law Enforcement Support Service
Employees Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) effective January 1, 2020
through December 31, 2022; and
WHEREAS, the parties agree that certain current national social and
economic conditions have created challenges for the Edmonds Police Department's
ability to maintain appropriate staffing levels; and
WHEREAS, the parties agree that the economic challenges, including the
current rate of inflation, as well as the Edmonds Police Department's implementation
of changes in technology, have had an impact on employees' working conditions; and
WHEREAS, the parties recognize that they have begun bargaining for a
successor agreement at this time; however, given the impact of the current rate of
inflation, the parties have reopened the CBA on the subject of wages to address
these challenges; and
WHEREAS, to address the above -described economic impacts and impacts
on working conditions, the City has agreed to provide to each Law Enforcement
Support Service Employee a one-time lump sum payment and a wage adjustment in
the form of a percentage increase in the negotiated wages currently set forth in the
CBA; and
Packet Pg. 104
8.6.a
WHEREAS, Appendix A of the CBA addresses the compensation due to
employees, and it is the intention of the parties, through this MOU, to provide for this
lump sum payment and wage adjustment;
NOW THEREFORE, the City and the EPOA agree as follows:
1. To address the above -described economic impacts and the impacts on working
conditions, the City will provide all Law Enforcement Support Service Employees
who are employed by the City at the time this MOU is executed: (a) a one-time
lump sum payment equal to two and one-half percent (2.5%) of their negotiated
2022 base wage paid for each hour paid for a period of five (5) months (the
calculation period being from July 1, 2022 to November 30, 2022); and (b) an
increase in their negotiated 2022 base wage of two and one-half percent (2.5%)
beginning on December 1, 2022.
2. The City will make the lump sum payment no later than two (2) pay periods
following the effective date of this MOU in a separate payroll check that is
subject to all payroll deductions. The wage adjustment addresses the
parties' wage concerns and are a full and final agreement on the wage
reopener. The parties agree that the wage reopener does not set a
precedent for future CBA reopeners.
3. This MOU is intended to clarify the intent of the parties with regard to the
above referenced payments and, except as stated herein, does not alter
any other terms of the CBA, which will remain in full force and effect.
DONE this
CITY OF EDMONDS
day of November 2022.
Mike Nelson, Mayor
EDMONDS POLICE OFFICERS ASSOC.
Representing the Law Support Services
Employees
Ross Sutton, EPOA President
Packet Pg. 105
8.7
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 11/22/2022
Edmonds Employee Association, Local 3517 (AFSCME Council 2) 2022-2024 collective bargaining
agreement
Staff Lead: Human Resources
Department: Human Resources
Preparer: Jessica Neill Neill Hoyson
Background/History
As required by law, the City has engaged in negotiations with the Edmonds Employee Association, Local
3517 (AFSCME Council 2) Union regarding the collective bargaining agreement that expired on
12/31/2021. The City and the Union have reached an agreement to settle the contract for the period of
1/1/2022 - 12/31/2024. All contract terms were settled within the authority previously provided by
Council to the City's HR Director.
Staff Recommendation
Approve the Collective Bargaining Agreement with the Edmonds Employee Association, Local 3517
(AFSCME Council 2) on consent
Narrative
A copy of the proposed collective bargaining agreement (CBA) for 1/1/2022 - 12/31/2024 between the
City of Edmonds and the Edmonds Employee Association, Local 3517 (AFSCME Council 2) is attached.
A summary of all changes in the CBA is also attached.
Attachments:
Final 2022-2024 EEA-AFSCME CBA (clean)
Summary of changes 2022-2024 AFSCME CBA
Packet Pg. 106
8.7.a
AGREEMENT BETWEEN
CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
AND
EDMONDS EMPLOYEE ASSOCIATION,
LOCAL 3517 (AFSCME COUNCIL 2)
January 1, 2022, through December 31, 2024
Packet Pg. 107
8.7.a
AGREEMENT BETWEEN
CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
AND
EDMONDS EMPLOYEE ASSOCIATION, LOCAL 3517 (AFSCME COUNCIL 2)
January 1, 2022, through December 31, 2024
ARTICLE
SUBJECT
PAGE
ARTICLE I
RECOGNITION, UNION MEMBERSHIP AND PAYROLL DEDUCTION
3
ARTICLE II
HOURS OF WORK
4
ARTICLE III
OVERTIME
5
ARTICLE IV
POSITION CLASSIFICATIONS, RATES OF PAY AND
5
NON-DISCRIMINATION
ARTICLE V
HOLIDAYS
7
ARTICLE VI
VACATION
8
ARTICLE VII
LEAVES WITH PAY
9
ARTICLE VIII
OTHER LEAVES OF ABSENCE
12
ARTICLE IX
HEALTH AND WELFARE
13
ARTICLE X
JOB SHARE
15
ARTICLE XI
EVALUATION
16
ARTICLE XII
CHANGE IN STATUS
16
ARTICLE XIII
SUSPENSION AND DISCHARGE
19
ARTICLE XIV
UNION RIGHTS
20
ARTICLE XV
RIGHTS OF MANAGEMENT
20
ARTICLE XVI
WORK STOPPAGE
21
ARTICLE XVII
MISCELLANEOUS
21
ARTICLE XVIII
GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE
22
ARTICLE XIX
ENTIRE AGREEMENT
25
ARTICLE XX
SAVINGS CLAUSE
25
ARTICLE XXI
TERM OF AGREEMENT
25
APPENDIX
"A"
26
2
Packet Pg. 108
8.7.a
AGREEMENT BETWEEN
CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
AND
EDMONDS EMPLOYEE ASSOCIATION, LOCAL 3517 (AFSCME COUNCIL 2)
January 1, 2022 through December 31, 2024
THIS AGREEMENT is between the CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON (hereinafter called
the City or the Employer) and the EDMONDS EMPLOYEE ASSOCIATION, LOCAL 3517
(AFSCME COUNCIL 2) (hereinafter called the Union) for the purpose of setting forth the
agreement between the parties re: wages, hours, and conditions of employment of those employees
for whom the City has recognized the Union as the exclusive collective bargaining representative.
Article I - Recognition, Union Membership and Payroll Deduction
1.1 Recognition. The City recognizes the Union as the exclusive bargaining agent for the
following described employees as certified by the Public Employment Relations Commission in
case number 3259-E-81-030, and the City agrees that the Union shall be said employees'
representative for the management of this Agreement:
INCLUDED: All regular full- and part-time clerical, professional and technical
employees regularly scheduled for twenty (20) or more hours per week as listed by
position in Appendix "A". Note: The list of Job Titles in Section A.3 in no way
limits the number of job titles which may be included within the bargaining unit.
EXCLUDED: All positions contained in other bargaining units, including public
works shop and field laborers, custodial and service positions and parks
maintenance laborers; Police Department; Executive Assistant; Council Executive
Assistant; Office Administrators; Human Resources Department; City Clerk;
supervisory, professional, and management; and confidential employees as
described under the Act; temporary or interim -funded positions.
1.2 Union Membership. The Union agrees to represent all employees in the bargaining unit
regardless of membership or non -membership status.
1.3 Payroll Deduction. The City agrees to deduct monthly Union dues uniformly levied
against Union members who have authorized such deductions in writing in accordance with
applicable law, and to transfer such amounts to the Union. Written authorization for payroll
deduction is valid whether executed in hard copy or electronically. The City shall provide an
electronic copy of any written authorization for payroll deduction to the Union via email within
ten (10) days of the employee executing such authorization. The City also agrees to deduct from
the paycheck of those employees that have submitted written authorization contributions to
P.E.O.P.L.E. and transmit same to the Union. No deduction shall be made which is prohibited by
applicable law. The Union will indemnify, defend and hold the City harmless against any claims
made and against any suit instituted against the City which may arise by reason of any action taken
by the Employer to comply with the provisions of this Article, including reimbursement for any
3
Packet Pg. 109
8.7.a
legal fees or expenses incurred in connection with such action. The Employer will promptly notify
the Union in writing of any claim, demand, suit or other form of liability asserted against it relating
to its implementation of this Article. If requested by the Union in writing, the Employer will
surrender any such claim, demand, suit or other form of liability to the Union for defense and
resolution. The Union agrees to refund to the City any amounts paid to it in error upon presentation
of proper evidence thereof. The Employer shall honor the terms and conditions of each employee's
authorization for payroll deduction. Whether an employee is a union member or not, the Employer
shall continue to deduct and remit Union dues and fees to the Union until such time as the Union
notifies the Employer that the dues authorization has been properly terminated in compliance with
the payroll deduction authorization executed by the employee. Every effort will be made to end
the deduction effective on the first payroll, but not later than the second payroll of the Employer's
receipt of the Employee's written notice.
1.4 Pertinent Information. The Union will be provided with pertinent information regarding
new vacancies, new appointments, or termination in positions within the bargaining unit. Pertinent
information includes position titles, descriptions, salary ranges, and dates of appointments or
terminations of employees within the bargaining unit.
1.5 New Employee Orientation. A Union official shall, at no loss of pay, be granted up to
thirty (30) minutes to provide the new employee a basic overview of the employee's rights and
responsibilities regarding Union membership, dues authorizations, and Union insurance.
Article II - Hours of Work
2.1 Standard Work Week. The standard work week shall be five (5) consecutive workdays
of eight (8) hours each or four (4) consecutive workdays of ten (10) hours each. The standard work
week shall be forty (40) hours per week and shall normally be scheduled Monday through Friday.
The working hours of each day shall be normally between 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. with the
exception of employees in the Parks and Recreation Department whose working hours may be
adjusted to include up to two (2) evenings per week for each employee. In any event, the total
hours worked shall not exceed forty (40) hours per week unless overtime is paid, or compensatory
time is earned. Other schedules may be established by mutual agreement of the employee and
City. Rates of pay for work other than during the standard workweek shall be as provided in
Article III - Overtime. It is further recognized that 9/80 schedules may not be feasible for every
department and must be approved by the department head.
2.2 Schedule Change. Normally, at least seven (7) calendar days advance notice shall be
given the employee prior to the commencement of a schedule change, except in the case where
emergency operations cannot be anticipated.
2.3 Lunch and Breaks. A lunch period of between one half (1/2) hour and one (1) hour for
each employee shall be scheduled approximately midway through the workday. Each employee
shall receive a 15-minute paid relief period approximately midway of both the morning and the
afternoon shift. Lunch shall be considered the employees' own time and may normally be taken
away from the City's premises.
4
Packet Pg. 110
8.7.a
2.4 Flexible Hours. If scheduled at least seven (7) calendar days in advance, the hours of
employees may be adjusted to include evening hours, provided the employee is given the option
to adjust their hours for any one (1) day of the work week so that the total hours worked is not in
excess of forty (40) hours, subject to Section 2.1. If the employee is not given seven (7) calendar
days' notice, all time worked after six p.m. shall be compensated at the overtime rate or by time
and one-half compensatory time.
2.5 Shift Differential. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 2.1 ("Standard Work
Week"), the standard work week for the position of Senior Office Specialist in Parks and
Recreation may be established to five (5) consecutive days, Monday through Friday, from
12:00 p.m. until 9:00 p.m. and shall be compensated five percent (5%) per hour in addition to their
regular hourly rate of pay for all hours worked after 5 p.m.
Article III - Overtime
3.1 General. Overtime cash payment or compensatory time off by mutual agreement between
the City and the employee, at one and one-half (1-1/2) times the overtime worked, at the regular
hourly rate of the employee's salary, shall be earned for time worked beyond the 40 hour work
week established by 2.1. A minimum of one -quarter (1/4) hour's overtime payment or
compensatory time off shall be earned when required to work beyond the scheduled work week.
After the first one -quarter (1/4) hour, each one -quarter (1/4) hour or major portion thereof shall be
compensated. Overtime shall be recognized only upon prior approval of the employee's supervisor
or department head.
3.2 Callback. A minimum of three (3) hours at one and one-half (1-1/2) times the employee's
regular hourly rate shall be earned for callbacks. Time worked beyond the minimum shall be
compensated at one and one-half (1-1/2) times the actual time worked in one -quarter (1/4) hour
increments for each one -quarter (1/4) hour or major portion thereof.
3.3 Compensatory Time. Employees shall have the right to convert compensatory time off
to an overtime cash payment by making a written request on the employee's timesheet.
Compensatory time may be taken with the approval of the supervisor or at the direction of the
supervisor, provided the employee is given ten (10) working days' notice.
Article IV - Position Classifications, Rates of Pay and Non -Discrimination
4.1 Position Classifications and Pay Grades. The classifications of positions covered by this
Agreement and the corresponding rates of pay shall be as set forth in Appendix "A" which is
attached hereto and made a part of this Agreement. These rates of pay shall be regarded as
contractual minimum rates.
Throughout this agreement, any increase in pay of at least a five percent (5%) will be based on
rounding the employee's increase to the nearest whole percentage (i.e., 4.99% = 5.00%).
5
Packet Pg. 111
8.7.a
4.2 Working Out of Classification. An employee assigned by a supervisor, in writing, or has
in the course of regular duties to have assumed all the duties of a higher classification for a period
of four (4) or more consecutive working days, or performs said duties in a greater than'/2 FTE (full
time equivalent) basis for more than one pay period, shall during the period of that assignment be
placed at the step on the wage scale of the higher classification that provides an increase over the
employee's regular rate of pay of at least five percent (5%). This shall include work out of
classification to cover for another employee's scheduled vacation. Seniority shall be a
consideration when assigning employees to work out of classification.
Should the Deputy City Clerk or the Lead Court Clerk be assigned to work out of classification
for their Supervisor or Manager (a non -bargaining unit position) for the City for a period of at least
four (4) consecutive working days and up to nine (9) consecutive working days, the Deputy City
Clerk or Lead Court Clerk position will be paid an additional ten percent (10%) increase over their
regular rate of pay for the period of time that the Deputy City Clerk or Lead Court Clerk position
is working out of classification as the City Clerk or Court Administrator.
4.3 No Pyramiding. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, premium or
overtime pay shall not be duplicated or pyramided. In no case shall premium or overtime pay be
based on other than the employee's regular straight time rate of pay to the extent permitted by
FLSA.
4.4 Job Descriptions. The duties, responsibilities, and qualifications of positions shall be
contained in Job Descriptions of the Classification Plan. Copies of said descriptions and revisions
thereto shall be provided to the Union and the affected employee(s). The creation and revision of
job descriptions shall be a management prerogative. However, an employee may request a review
of their job description. The Human Resources Director shall confer with the supervisor and the
affected employee(s) to review the recommendations and suggestions. The Human Resources
Director shall record the summary of reasons for revising or not revising the job description and
provide a copy to the requesting employee within sixty (60) days of the request. Provided, the
review shall not be subject to appeal through the grievance procedure.
4.5 New Job Classifications. Should it become necessary to establish anew job classification
within the bargaining unit during the term of this Agreement, the City may designate a job
classification title and salary for the classification. The salary for any new classification within
the bargaining unit shall become subject to negotiation at such time as the salaries for the
subsequent contract year are negotiated or take effect.
4.6 Non -Discrimination. The City and the Union agree those statutory requirements and
obligations concerning equal employment opportunities, affirmative action, and all other
applicable anti -discrimination state and federal laws and regulations shall be adhered to.
Complaints of discrimination under this section shall be subject to the grievance procedure but
shall not be subject to arbitration.
No employee shall be discriminated against, and their employment security will not be threatened,
for upholding the provisions of this Agreement or seeking the enforcement of their right to
nondiscrimination through an appropriate government agency.
6
Packet Pg. 112
8.7.a
Article V - Holidays
5.1 Designation of Holidays. The following shall be considered paid holidays for full-time
employees. Part-time employees regularly working twenty (20) hours per week or more shall
receive prorated compensation for the following holidays, based on their regularly scheduled
hours.
New Year's Day
Martin Luther King, Jr. Day
President's Day
Memorial Day
Juneteenth
Independence Day
Labor Day
Veteran's Day
Thanksgiving Day
Friday following Thanksgiving Day
Day before Christmas Day
Christmas Day
January 1
Third Monday of January
Third Monday of February
Last Monday in May
June 19
July 4
First Monday of September
November 11
Fourth Thursday of November
December 24
December 25
A floating holiday will be given to each full-time employee (pro -rated for part-time regular
employees) after six consecutive months of employment. The floating holiday shall not be carried
over into the next calendar year. In the event of termination before June 30, an employee who has
completed six (6) months of employment shall be paid for one-half of that year's floating holiday,
if unused. If termination is after June 30, an employee who has completed six (6) months of
employment shall be given full payment for the floating holiday, if unused.
If Christmas Day or the day before Christmas falls on a weekend day, an alternative workday
will be selected provided the employee gets four consecutive days off.
Holiday time shall be considered time worked when computing overtime. If a holiday falls on a
Saturday, the preceding Friday will be observed as the holiday. If a holiday falls on a Sunday,
Monday will be observed as the holiday.
5.2 Holiday Pay. Eligible full-time employees will receive eight (8) hours of pay at their
straight -time rate for each holiday; provided, that if an employee has been assigned to an
alternative work schedule that is required by the Employer, rather than requested by the employee,
the employee will be paid for all hours scheduled on the holiday. In the event an employee's
supervisor requires the employee to use vacation time to cover hours above eight (8) hours on a
holiday, instead of allowing the employee to make up the time within the pay period by flexing
their normal work schedule, the employee will be considered to be on an alternative work schedule
required by the Employer, and will be entitled to holiday pay for all hours scheduled on the holiday.
Packet Pg. 113
8.7.a
If an employee is allowed to flex their schedule to make up the holiday time, any hours worked
outside of the regular work schedule will not fall under the overtime provisions of this contract.
Part-time employees will receive holiday pay on a prorated basis. Employees are eligible for
holiday pay if they are in paid status on the regular business day preceding the holiday. Employees
whose employment is terminated immediately prior to a holiday are not entitled to holiday pay.
Employees who are not assigned to an alternative work schedule that is required by the Employer,
and are scheduled to work more than eight (8) hours on a day observed as a holiday may use
vacation leave, compensatory time, or leave without pay to make up the difference between the
employee's scheduled shift and the eight (8) hours of holiday pay. An employee assigned to work
on any holiday shall be compensated at the overtime rate of pay in addition to the holiday pay,
with a minimum guarantee of four (4) hours pay.
5.3 Four Day Per Week Employees. When a holiday falls on a four -day per week, or 9/80,
employee's scheduled day off, an extra day of holiday with pay will be granted in lieu thereof.
Article VI - Vacation
6.1 General. Employees covered by this Agreement shall accrue vacation leave with pay
depending on the length of continuous service with the City. Part-time employees regularly
working twenty (20) hours or more per week shall accrue vacation leave on a prorated basis.
6.2 Accrual. Full-time employees shall accrue the following amount of vacation time with
pay, depending on the length of continuous service with the City:
YEARS OF EMPLOYMENT
VACATION
MAXIMUMALLOWED
VACATIONACCR UAL
First 6 months
48 hours
--
Second six months
40 hours Additional
--
I through 4 years
88 hours
176
5 through 9 years
128 hours
256
10 through 14 years
168 hours
336
15 through 19 years
176 hours
352
20 through 24 years
192 hours
384
25 years thereafter
208 hours
416
Employees shall not use vacation leave before completing six (6) months of continuous service.
Employees who have reached maximum vacation accrual (24 months of accrual) will not accrue
additional vacation until they have reduced their accrued balance.
6.3 Computation. Only those days on which the employee would normally be required to
work shall be counted in computing the vacation period to which the employee is entitled. When
a holiday falls within an employee's vacation period, the holiday will not be counted as a day of
vacation. Vacation pay is computed on the straight time base rate in effect at the time vacation is
taken.
Packet Pg. 114
8.7.a
6.4 Scheduling Employees shall submit vacation requests prior to March 1. Upon receipt of
same, the City shall develop a schedule of vacations, which shall be posted on or before April 1.
In the event more employees than can be scheduled request the same dates and the conflict cannot
be resolved by mutual agreement among the requesting employees, the requests of the most senior
employees will prevail. All vacation requests made after March 1 shall be granted where possible.
Employees will be required to take vacation during a period that will be determined by
departmental workload and their Supervisor. Changes in the posted vacation schedule shall be
made only as necessary to meet the demands of the workload.
6.5 Accrual During Compensated Leave. Employees who are on compensated leave
(vacation, sick, shared leave or any other approved paid leave) shall continue to accrue vacation
leave at the regularly prescribed rate during such absence.
6.6 Compensation Upon Termination/Death. Upon termination of an employee, any
accumulated vacation shall be paid off. Upon the death of an employee in active service, such
payment will be made to the beneficiary of the deceased employee.
Article VII - Leaves with Pay
7.1 Sick Leave.
7.1.1 Accrual. Sick leave with pay shall accrue at the rate of eight hours for each full calendar
month of the full-time employee's service; provided that once an employee accrues 1,000 sick
leave hours, the accrual rate will be one (1) hour of sick leave accrued for every 40 hours worked
each calendar year, with a maximum amount of 1,040 hours of sick leave to be carried over each
year. If an employee's total accrual drops below one thousand (1,000) hours, the standard accrual
rate per their percentage of full-time employee status will continue until the employee again
reaches one thousand (1,000) hours. Part-time employees regularly working twenty (20) hours per
week or more shall receive prorated sick leave.
7.1.2 Definition of Sick Leave. An employee eligible for sick leave with pay shall be granted
such leave for any reason allowed by law, and for periods of fifteen (15) minutes or more:
a. The employee's own illness, injury or disability (including disability due to pregnancy
or childbirth); an absence resulting from an employee's mental or physical illness,
injury or health condition; to accommodate the employee's need for medical diagnosis,
care or treatment of a mental or physical illness, injury or health condition; or an
employee's need for preventive medical care;
b. The need to care for a family member with a mental or physical illness injury or health
condition; to care for a family member who needs medical diagnosis, care or treatment
of a mental or physical illness; or to care for a family member who needs preventive
medical care;
c. When the employee's workplace has been closed by order of a public official for any
health -related reason, or when an employee's child's school or place of care has been
9
Packet Pg. 115
8.7.a
closed for such a reason. The need to care for the employee's immediate family as
defined in article 7.2 with a serious health condition or emergency condition;
For absences that qualify for leave under the domestic violence leave act, chapter 49.76
RCW; scheduled medical or dental appointments for the employee or a dependent
child, provided that the employee receives advance approval from the Department head
or designee; and further provided that employees must make reasonable efforts to
schedule such appointments at times when they will not interfere with the scheduled
work days;
For purposes of this Section, "family member" means a child, including a biological,
adopted or foster child, step -child, or a child to whom the employee stands in loco
parentis, is a legal guardian or is a de facto parent, regardless of age or dependency
status; a biological, adoptive, de facto or foster parent, step-parent or legal guardian of
an employee or the employee's spouse or registered domestic partner or a person who
stood in loco parentis when the employee was a minor child; a spouse; a registered
domestic partner; a grandparent; a grandchild; a sibling; or an individual who either
regularly resides in the employee's home or where the relationship with the employee
creates an expectation that the employee will care for the individual, and that individual
depends on the employee for care.
At their election, employees may use other accrued paid leave in place of or in addition to sick
leave for any of the purposes described above.
The certificate of a physician and/or written report concerning the need for the sick leave may be
required by the Employer for absences exceeding three (3) days, and if required, shall be supplied
by the employee in order to qualify for sick leave with pay. The Employer's requirements for
verification may not result in an unreasonable burden or expense on the employee and may not
exceed privacy or verification requirements otherwise established by law.
7.1.3 Pay Out Upon Termination. Upon honorable termination, accrued but unused sick leave
up to a maximum of eight hundred (800) hours shall be paid according to the following percentage
of the rate of pay in effect immediately prior to termination:
a. Employee payout on separation.
1. Voluntary quit
2. Layoff
3. Service Retirement (PERS)
25%
50%
50%
b. Employee payout on retirement. In addition to the above payments, an employee
with accrued sick leave over the 800-hour maximum shall be entitled to receive up
to 100 hours of payout on the condition that the employee is eligible and applies
for retirement through the PERS system. Payment to be processed in conjunction
with application.
10
Packet Pg. 116
8.7.a
Payment shall be on a one-to-one hour basis for accrued sick leave hours in the employee's bank
between 800 and 900 hours. Union members, as a group (provided that every bargaining unit
member agrees to such decision), may vote to have this payment made to their existing City
HRANEBA account instead of in the form of a cash payment.
In the event of death of the employee, payment for all unused sick leave (100% of accrued sick
leave) shall be made to the surviving spouse or to their estate if there is no spouse, at the deceased
employee's regular straight -time hourly rate of pay.
7.1.4 Worker's Compensation Offset. If an employee is simultaneously entitled to Worker's
Compensation benefits and sick leave, the employee may decline the Worker's Compensation
offset of sick leave usage by giving written notification to their supervisor within three (3) calendar
days of the filing of the disability claim.
Employees who are using the Worker's Compensation offset must turn over to the City Human
Resources Department all compensation received from the Department of Labor and Industries,
which will be used to restore a proportionate amount of sick leave used during the absence.
Employees, who exhaust their accrued sick leave or elect not to use the Worker's Compensation
offset, may be placed on leave without pay for a maximum of six (6) months provided the
employee is able to return to work.
7.1.5 Sick Leave Conversion. Regular full-time employees with more than eight hundred (800)
hours of accrued sick leave may convert, on an annual basis, up to twenty-four (24) hours of sick
leave to vacation leave at the rate of 3 to 1. Employees electing to convert sick leave to vacation
leave must notify Human Resources by November 1 and specify the number of hours to be
converted, not to exceed 24. Human Resources will confirm the employee has at least 800 hours
in their sick leave bank and will process the conversion to be effective the second pay period in
January.
7.2 Bereavement Leave. Regular full-time employees may receive up to three (3) days
bereavement leave with pay in the event of a death in their immediate family. "Immediate family"
means spouse, son, daughter, mother, father, brother, sister, mother-in-law, father-in-law, brother-
in-law, sister-in-law, grandparents, grandchildren, and step -relations. Spouse shall mean an
individual who is married to a City employee under the laws of the State of Washington, or who
is in a domestic partnership which is registered with or recognized by the State of Washington in
accord with the provisions of Chapter 43.07 RCW. Immediate family also refers to the spouse's
relatives the same as designated for employee. Additional leave may be granted subject to
approval of the Department Director and shall be charged against accumulated sick leave.
7.3 Jury Duty Leave. While on jury duty the employee shall receive their base pay, longevity,
and other premiums required by collective bargaining agreement not including overtime, from the
City. The employee must turn over to the City all additional compensation received for jury duty
not to include mileage reimbursement.
11
Packet Pg. 117
8.7.a
7.4 Reserve Duty Leave. An employee who is a member of a State National Guard or Federal
Reserve Military Unit shall be entitled to be absent from their duties with the City in accordance
with state and federal statutes.
7.5 Wellness Day. Between January 1 and December 1 of each year, employees who provide
sufficient evidence to the Human Resources Department that they have completed the
requirements of the annual AWC Well City incentive will receive one (1) Wellness Day off. The
day off shall be added as a floating holiday for the following year and must be used in compliance
with the floating holiday provisions of Section 5.1, above. The utilization of the Wellness Day
shall not be unreasonably denied by the Employer.
Article VIII - Other Leaves of Absence
8.1 Family and Medical Leave (FML) Eligible employees are entitled to the full benefit and
protection of the State and Federal Family Medical Leave (FML) and Pregnancy Disability laws.
In addition to the legal requirements, the following provisions and benefits shall apply.
1) Employees are required to use accrued sick leave during any state or federal FML or
pregnancy disability leave, provided the use of such leave qualifies under Section
7.1.2 herein.
2) Employees may use accrued vacation during any state and or federal FML or
pregnancy disability leave, but shall not be required to do so.
3) The City is required to continue the employee's health benefits for the duration of the
federal FML at the same level and under the same conditions as if the employee had
been continuously employed and on paid status.
4) Federal FML shall be based upon a rolling 12-month year beginning on the date an
employee takes their first FML leave.
8.1.1 Paid Family Medical Leave Act (PFML). Employees are eligible for Paid Family
Medical Leave Act leave benefits as allowed under state law. The premium cost for the leave will
be collected as follows:
• The Employer will pay for 55% of the premiums due for the medical leave portion, with
the employee paying 45% of the remaining premium dues.
• The Employer will pay 100% of premiums due for the family leave portion of the premium
dues.
8.2 Discretionary Unpaid Leaves. A leave of absence without pay may be granted to any
employee by the Department Director for such reasons as family care or emergency, education and
personal business.
12
Packet Pg. 118
8.7.a
8.3 Return from Leave. Upon return from unpaid leave, all benefit accrual calculations,
seniority rights, and credit for continuous service shall resume at the same level or with the same
rights as the employee experienced prior to going on leave. For the purposes of leave accrual and
MEBT vesting, an adjusted date will be used that reflects all previous months worked prior to
taking leave. The employee's annual performance evaluation date (anniversary date) will be
adjusted to reflect their time off due to the leave of absence.
8.4 Health Coverage During Unpaid Non-FML Leave. During the period of an approved
leave of absence, monthly premiums for medical insurance may be paid to the City for payment
to the insurance company to the extent the policy allows continued coverage, so as to maintain
continued coverage.
8.5 Terms of the Leave. The City shall state in writing the terms of the leave of absence at the
time it is granted. Unless otherwise provided herein, no sick leave or vacation leave shall accrue
during any leave, nor shall the employee be entitled to any other benefits during the leave.
Article IX - Health and Welfare
9.1 Coverage. The City shall make available to eligible regular full-time and regular part-time
employees, and their eligible spouses and dependents, an insurance program that includes medical,
dental, life and vision insurance, and an Employee Assistance Program (EAP) benefit. "Spouse"
shall mean an individual who is married to a City employee under the laws of the State of
Washington, or who is in a domestic partnership which is registered with or recognized by the
State of Washington in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 26.60 RCW. This insurance
program includes the following:
9.1.1 Medical Insurance. Employees may choose between the following medical plans:
Association of Washington Cities ("AWC") HealthFirst 250 or AWC Kaiser Permanente $20 Co -
pay Plan. The Employer reserves the right to re -open negotiations related to medical insurance.
9.1.2 Dental Insurance. Dental insurance is provided through the AWC Washington Dental
Service Plan F with Option III (orthodontia).
9.1.3 Vision Insurance. Vision insurance is provided through the AWC Vision Service Plan
($10.00 deductible).
9.1.4 EAP Benefit. The Employee Assistance Program benefit is provided through AWC
9.1.5 Life Insurance. The City will pay one hundred percent (100%) of the basic life insurance
premium.
9.1.6 Light Duty. When an employee is injured at work and is released to light or modified work
duties and the Employer has light and/or modified work duty available for the employee, the
employee will return to work on light duty during their normal working hours.
13
Packet Pg. 119
8.7.a
9.1.7 Flexible Spending Account (FSA). The City shall provide and administer a Flexible
Spending Account (FSA) using pre-tax deductions from employees for qualified medical,
childcare, transportation and other permitted uses as allowed by the Internal Revenue Service
(IRS) Code Section 125 for employees and their eligible dependents. The Employer agrees to pay
all fees for the establishment and maintenance of the FSA accounts for which it is legally allowed
to pay.
9.1.8 Health Reimbursement Arrangement / Voluntary Employees' Beneficiary
Association (HRA/VEBA). The Employer will establish an HRA/VEBA for each employee
who is eligible and enrolled in or covered by one of the Employer's health insurance plans as
described in Section 9.1.1. The Employer agrees to pay all fees for the establishment and
maintenance of the HRA/VEBA accounts for which it is legally allowed to pay.
The Employer shall make a three hundred dollar ($300) annual contribution to each eligible
employee's HRA/VEBA account, provided that these contributions are contingent upon the
bargaining group (as a whole) meeting the annual participation requirement for the AWC Well
City Award.
Union members, as a group, may vote to make contributions via payroll deduction to their
HRA/VEBA account. The amount of the HRA/VEBA contribution may be adjusted by a majority
vote of Union members, no more than once per year, and with appropriate notice to the City.
Health Insurance Premiums.
9.2 Full -Time Employees. For all regular full-time employees, the Employer will pay one
hundred percent (100%) of the premium costs of the benefits specified in Sections 9.1.1, 9.1.2 and
9.1.3, above. The Employer will pay ninety percent (90%) of the premium costs of the benefits
specified in those sections for regular full time employees' eligible spouses and dependents.
To address the timing of the health insurance premium share change, the Employer will make a
one-time payment of one -thousand dollars ($1,000) to all regular full-time employees who were
participating in the Employer's health insurance plan on January 1, 2022. All other regular full-
time employees participating in the Employer's health insurance plan at the time of ratification
will receive a one-time payment that has been prorated from their health benefit start date.
9.3 Part-time Employees. For regular part-time employees normally scheduled to work a
minimum of twenty (20) hours per week and their eligible spouses and dependents, the City's
premium contribution described in Section 9.2 will be reduced on a pro -rated basis according to
the part-time employee's budgeted FTE.
Changes to Health Insurance Plans.
9.4 Changes to Plan Benefits. Benefit changes other than those plans specified in Section
9.1 will be made by mutual agreement.
14
Packet Pg. 120
8.7.a
Article X - Job Share
10.1 Definition and Implementation. A job share position is defined as a full-time budgeted
position, which is occupied by two (2) part-time employees. Job sharing shall be implemented,
and thereafter continued, only upon the approval of the Supervisor and the Department Head of
the relevant position(s) and, in the instance of an occupied position, the request of the employee.
10.2 Schedule. Employees will share a full-time position on a half-time basis using a work
schedule, which is convenient to the City and the employees. Examples of schedules that might be
used are: (1) Each employee works four (4) hours per day; (2) Each employee works forty (40)
hours in alternating weeks; (3) Each employee works twenty-four (24) hours one week and sixteen
(16) hours the alternate week; (4) Each employee works two and one-half (2-1/2) days per week.
10.3 Coordination. The employees will be expected to coordinate with each other so that the
responsibilities of the position and the level of required productivity are not adversely affected.
10.4 Compensation. Each employee will be paid one-half (1/2) of the established salary for
the position. Due to seniority, the two (2) employees may be paid at different steps in the salary
grade, however, whenever one (1) employee is on vacation, sick leave or absent the second
employee shall have right of first refusal for available hours. Whenever one (1) employee works
during vacation, sick leave or other absence of the second employee, the working employee will
receive additional compensation at the regular rate of pay for excess hours worked up to forty (40)
hours in one (1) week. Any hours worked beyond forty (40) in one (1) week will be compensated
at time and one-half.
10.5 Benefits. Each employee working a minimum of 20 hours a week will be entitled to the
following prorated benefits:
1. Vacation, Sick Leave and Holidays on a pro -rated basis;
2. Medical, Dental and Vision insurance with the City share of the premium pro -rated;
3. Basic Life Insurance paid for in full by the City;
4. Participation in the state retirement program, the Public Employees' Retirement
System (PERS) Plan 2 or Plan 3 and the Municipal Employees' Benefit Trust;
5. Participation in other employee programs, including but not limited to the
Employee Suggestion Program, Wellness Program, and Employee Assistance
Program.
15
Packet Pg. 121
8.7.a
Article XI — Evaluation
11.1 Procedure. The following procedure shall be used to assist in the performance evaluation
of the employee: Each employee shall be evaluated at least annually, and each evaluation shall
concern an employee's work performance for the entire period since the most recent previous
evaluation. The evaluation shall include reference to weaknesses and strengths with specific
suggestions for improvement where appropriate and shall be reviewed with the employee. A copy
of the evaluation will be placed in the employee's personnel file and a copy will be given to the
employee. The employees will be given an opportunity to attach comments to the evaluation for
the personnel file.
11.2 Evaluation Appeal. An employee may appeal an evaluation through the Grievance
Procedure, Article XVI, but such appeal may not be submitted to arbitration.
Article XII - Change in Status
12.1 Definition of Seniority. Seniority shall be defined as total length of service in a bargaining
unit position with the City excluding the portion of unpaid extended leaves of absence in excess
of thirty (30) calendar days. Unpaid leave means a leave granted pursuant to Article 8.2 and does
not include leave in which the City extends benefits such as FMLA leave.
12.2 Promotions and Transfers. Appointment of employees to positions shall be made by the
City upon selection of the applicants determined by the City in its sole discretion to be best
qualified for the position(s) and after providing adequate opportunity and consideration for transfer
and promotion of current employees. At the request of the employee, the City will provide the
reasons for non -selection for the open position. Upon promotion an employee shall be placed on
the wage scale at the step that provides at least a five percent (5%) per month increase in wages.
During the employee's six (6) month probationary period upon their promotion to a position within
the bargaining unit, an employee may be demoted in the City's discretion and without recourse to
the grievance procedure. Upon request by the employee, the City shall inform the employee of
the rationale for the demotion.
12.3 Reclassification. Upon reclassification of a position to a higher classification, the
incumbent employee shall be placed on the wage scale at the step that provides at least a five
percent (5%) per month increase in wages.
12.4 Reduction in Force. An employee will receive fifteen (15) working days advance notice
of layoff with a copy of such notice to the Union.
In the event of a reduction in force, the City shall determine the order of layoff based upon the
qualifications, performance evaluations of record, specializations needed for retained positions,
and seniority with the Union. When these factors are equal, employees shall be laid off in reverse
order of seniority. Employees may "bump" or displace to a position in the same or lower pay
grade if they meet the minimum qualifications and if their seniority exceeds that of the other
employees in the pay grade.
16
Packet Pg. 122
8.7.a
For the purpose of bumping into the municipal court, an employee may bump or displace, if in
addition, they meet the qualifications for the job and the needs of the court and the Judge. If the
Judge in their discretion declines to accept the application and an employee who was eligible to
bump is laid off due to the Judge's decision, that employee shall be entitled to one month of
severance pay. In addition, the City shall pay directly to the insurance provider up to three (3)
months of insurance premiums as set forth in Article IX for the employee.
Upon receipt of the Official Notice of Reduction in Force that will be mailed to the employee's
address on file with the City, the employee will have a period of ten (10) working days in which
to consider employment options. The Official Notice will include information pertaining to the
employee's right to displace other employees as outlined in this section. A copy of the Official
Notice will be sent to the Union.
Employees wishing to exercise their displacement rights must provide to the Human Resources
Department, a Statement of Intent to Displace within the ten (10) working day notice period.
Along with the Statement of Intent to Displace, the employee must identify a maximum of three
(3) positions, listed in priority order, for which they are qualified and for which they have the
required level of seniority. The employee must also include a full and complete description of
verifiable qualifications for each position identified.
The City shall review within five (5) working days, in order, the employee's displacement choices
based on their qualifications, performance evaluations of record, specializations and seniority.
From this data, the City will determine the position (as high on the priority listings as possible),
into which the employee is qualified to bump. Knowledge, skills, and abilities as contained in the
current job description of the position in question shall be the basis from which the determination
is made. In cases where qualifications, performance, and union seniority are equal, seniority will
be the determining factor. The City shall not lay off bargaining unit employees in lieu of
disciplinary action.
Employees who are displaced will be provided the same notice and rights as outlined above. If the
Department Head and employee mutually agree, the displaced employee may take paid
administrative leave for the duration of the fifteen (15) working day advance notice period.
Employees cannot gain hours through the "bumping" process. In other words, a part-time position
may not bump a full-time position. In addition, employees who currently share a position (job
share) can, together, petition to bump into a full-time position if they are qualified and meet the
required level of seniority.
The pay grade of the position bumped into will prevail; however, the employee shall be placed at
a step as comparable to their current pay as possible within the pay grade.
All displaced employees will be provided an out -processing interview to review their benefits and
various options as an inactive employee on recall status. Displaced employees will not be allowed
to "run out" accrued leave balances but will be paid out in accordance with the Union agreement.
17
Packet Pg. 123
8.7.a
Employees who move into a new position as a result of this process shall be in a trial status and
shall receive written performance evaluations once a month throughout the six-month trial period.
At the successful completion of the six-month trial period, the employee will resume the normal
evaluation process as outlined in City policy. Employees who are unable to satisfactorily perform
the duties of the new position will be subject to termination.
12.5 Rehire. All employees who are laid off in accordance with this procedure shall be placed
in a recall pool for up to twenty-four (24) months for recall by seniority in positions for which they
are qualified.
In the event of a recall, those employees laid off shall be the first to be recalled to fill vacancies in
their former positions or any position for which they have bumping rights. All employees on the
recall list shall be informed when a position opens. Those employees with the most seniority in
the bargaining unit shall be recalled first, provided they can perform the duties required in the
classification affected. The names of persons laid off shall be maintained on a recall list. The list
will be maintained by the Human Resources Department.
For a period of twenty-four (24) months from the date of layoff, regular employees who were laid
off will be placed on the City's job announcement mailing list to assist them in applying for other
job vacancies for which they may be qualified.
Employees on layoff must keep the City informed of their current address and telephone number
so that they may be contacted in a timely fashion. The City will notify employees by certified letter
and document efforts to contact employees, and will send copies of all correspondence to the
Union. If the City is unable to contact the employee within ten consecutive working days from
the date of notification, the City's obligation to recall an employee for that position shall cease.
From the date of the receipt of a recall notice, the employee who has been recalled will have five
(5) working days to notify the City of their intent to return to work. Thereafter, the employee shall
have ten (10) working days to report to work unless an extension is granted by the City. If the
employee refuses a specific job offer within the 24-month layoff period, they shall be removed
from the recall list.
The City shall have no obligation to recall Employees after they have been on continuous layoff
for a period of 24 months.
If the individual is hired back within the 24-month layoff period, for purposes of leave accrual and
MEBT vesting, an adjusted date will be used that reflects all previous months worked prior to
layoff. Employees returning to their same position will have their annual performance evaluation
date (anniversary date) adjusted to reflect their time off due to the reduction in force.
12.6 Posting of Vacancies. Position vacancies will be posted in all work locations for a period
of five (5) working days. Postings will be longer than five (5) days if possible, without delaying
the hiring process.
18
Packet Pg. 124
8.7.a
Article XIII - Suspension and Discharge
13.1 Probationary Employees. During an employee's first six (6) months' employment with
the City within the bargaining unit, the employee may be discharged at the City's discretion and
without recourse to the grievance procedure.
13.2 Discipline/Corrective Action. The City agrees that an employee shall be disciplined,
including suspension and discharge, only for just cause. The City agrees to follow the principles
of progressive discipline. Disciplinary action generally includes the following progressive steps:
1. Oral warning which shall be reduced to writing and noted as an oral warning;
2. Written reprimand;
3. Suspension or demotion; and
4. Discharge.
A corrective action plan in writing will be provided and discussed at each step of the disciplinary
process. This action plan will include clear objectives, expectations, and timelines.
An employee suspended or discharged under the provisions of this Article must submit a grievance
in writing as set forth in Article XVIII ("Grievance Procedure") within ten (10) days of the date
that notice of the action is delivered to the employee and the Union. Coaching/Counseling Sessions
and oral and written reprimands are deemed to be a means of communicating problems to an
employee and are not subject to grievance beyond Step 3 of the grievance procedure. Discipline
involving economic impact (suspension, demotion, and discharge) may move beyond Step 3 of
the grievance process.
Disciplinary action will be tailored to the nature and severity of the offense. Management
maintains the right to take disciplinary action as they deem appropriate which may include
skipping above steps to address severe discipline issues.
Records of oral warnings shall be removed from the employee's file in the Human Resources
Department after a one (1) year period if no related violations occur. Discipline involving a written
reprimand or suspension shall be maintained in the employee's official personnel file.
The Department of Human Resources shall be the central depositor for all official personnel
records and files. Employees shall be provided a copy of all adverse material placed in the official
file at the time the material is included in the file. All official personnel records shall be maintained
by the Department of Human Resources.
13.3 Written Notice. Upon request by the affected employee, the City will provide the
employee in writing the reasons for suspension or discharge. Provided, that the reasons set forth
shall not preclude the City from presenting additional evidence of the grounds for the action at any
subsequent arbitration hearing.
19
Packet Pg. 125
8.7.a
Article XIV — Union Rights
14.1 Union Access. Upon application to the supervisor, the authorized representatives of the
Union shall be granted access to the City's premises at any reasonable time for the purpose of
adjusting grievances, investigating working conditions, or ascertaining that provisions of this
Agreement are being adhered to; provided, that they do not interfere with employees in the
performance of their duties.
14.2 Bulletin Boards. The City will make available suitable space in each building for the use
of the Union for posting notices of its meetings, elections, recreational and social affairs, reports
of Union committees, and rulings and policies of the Union.
14.3 Labor Management Committee The parties shall establish a joint Labor -Management
Committee that shall meet on an as needed basis. The Committee shall be composed of an equal
number of the Directors/Division Managers and members of the Union.
It is understood that the committee shall function in a consultative capacity and shall not be
considered a collective bargaining forum, nor a decision -making body unless the parties mutually
agree to otherwise on a given topic. Either the Union or the City may initiate a discussion on an
appropriate topic.
Article XV — Rights of Management
15.1 General. It is understood that the City retains its right to manage personnel and operate
its Departments except as may be limited by an express provision of this Agreement. This
Agreement shall not limit the right of the City to contract for services of any and all types;
provided, that no bargaining unit employees lose their employment as a result of the City's decision
to contract for services.
15.2 Method of Providing Service. Delivery of municipal services in the most efficient,
effective and courteous manner is of paramount importance to the City, and the parties pledge their
agreement with the objective of achieving the optimal level of employee performance and
efficiency and reasonable working conditions consistent with safety, good health and sustained
effort. In order to achieve this goal, the parties hereby recognize the City's right to determine the
personnel, the methods, processes and means of providing municipal services, to increase,
diminish, or change municipal equipment, including the introduction of any and all new, improved
or automated methods or equipment, the assignment of employees to specific jobs within the
bargaining unit, and the temporary assignment of employees covered by this Agreement to jobs
outside the bargaining unit. Employees temporarily assigned to positions outside the bargaining
unit shall retain all benefits and protections provided by this Agreement.
15.3 Performance Standards. The Union recognizes the City's right to establish and/or revise
performance standards. Such standards may be used to determine acceptable performance levels,
prepare work schedules, and measure the performance of employees. Such performance standards
shall be reasonable.
20
Packet Pg. 126
8.7.a
15.4 Article Not Subiect to Grievance Procedure. The exercise of any rights provided in this
Article shall not be subject to the grievance procedure unless such exercise is thought to violate
the express terms of this Agreement.
Article XVI — Work Stoppage
The City and the Union agree that the public interest requires the efficient and uninterrupted
performance of all City services, and to this end pledge their best efforts to avoid or eliminate any
conduct contrary to this objective. During the term of this Agreement, the Union and/or the
employees covered by this Agreement shall not cause or engage in any work stoppage, strike,
slowdown or other interference with City functions. Employees covered by this Agreement who
engage in any of the foregoing actions shall be subject to such disciplinary actions as may be
determined by the City.
Article XVII — Miscellaneous
17.1 Mileage. All employees who have been authorized to use their own transportation on City
business shall be reimbursed at the rate authorized by the Internal Revenue Service for employee
mileage.
17.2 Use of Personal Vehicle. No employee shall normally be required to use a personal
vehicle on City business.
17.3 Training Program. The City may provide employees release time with pay or
compensatory time off to attend training programs that the City determines will be beneficial to
their job performance. The City will attempt to provide notice of such training opportunities by
posting notice or otherwise providing appropriate notice. If the City requires attendance at such
training programs, the City will pay the expenses incurred.
17.4 Conferences. Matters of common concern to the parties concerning the application or
interpretation of this Agreement will be the subject of Meet and Confer discussion upon request
of either the City or the Union Representative. Such meetings will be scheduled at the mutual
convenience of both parties.
17.5 Personnel Files. The employee and/or representative may examine the employee's
personnel file in the offices of the Human Resources Department if the employee so authorizes
and releases the City from any obligation for breach of confidentiality in writing. Material placed
into the employee's file relating to job performance or personal character shall be brought to their
attention. The employee may challenge the propriety of including it in the files. If the City refuses
to remove the challenged material, the employee shall not have the right to the grievance
procedure, but the employee shall have the right to insert documentation into the file, providing
such documentation is relevant to the challenge. Except as may be required by state or federal laws
or regulations, unauthorized persons shall not have access to employee files or other personal data
related to their employment.
21
Packet Pg. 127
8.7.a
17.6 Recreation Passes. Employees shall be provided free of charge with weight room, gym,
and swimming pool passes to be used during non -working hours.
17.7 Reclassification Requests. It is the supervisor's responsibility to maintain the employee's
primary job assignments within the existing job description, until a revised job description is
approved. Requests for revised job descriptions can be made by the Department Director to the
Human Resources Department. Revised job descriptions, along with the appropriate pay grade, are
subject to the Mayor's approval, before submittal to the Finance Committee and City Council for
their approval.
17.8 Drivers License Verification. All employees operating a City of Edmonds vehicle must
have a valid Washington State Drivers License (DL). Any employee operating a City of Edmonds
vehicle on a suspended or revoked DL is subject to disciplinary action up to and including
termination.
Article XVIII — Grievance Procedure
The grievance procedure provides the means by which disputes or problems between the parties
which arise concerning the application, meaning, or interpretation of this Agreement are to be
resolved.
An alleged violation of the Agreement must be taken up at Step 1 of the procedure within fifteen
(15) working days from the time the employee had knowledge, or in the normal course of events
should have had knowledge, of the occurrence that created the alleged violation. Disciplinary
actions, including suspension and discharge, must also be grieved within the fifteen (15 working
day period. See Article XIII ("Suspension and Discharge").
18.1 Grievance Steps. When an employee has a grievance, they shall bring it to the attention
of their immediate supervisor, and the employee and supervisor shall attempt to settle the
grievance. If the grievance cannot be settled, the employee shall state the grievance in writing and
present it to their supervisor in accordance with the procedure set forth below:
a. Step 1. An employee and/or the Union, within fifteen (15) working days from the
occurrence or knowledge of the occurrence of an alleged grievance, shall bring said grievance to
the attention of the immediate supervisor in writing, stating clearly the facts and issues relating to
the grievance, including but not limited to: (1) the date of the alleged violation; (2) a description
of the alleged violation; (3) the provision(s) of the Agreement allegedly violated; and (4) the
remedy sought. The parties shall attempt to meet and resolve the grievance within ten (10) working
days. The immediate supervisor will respond within ten (10) working days of the meeting.
b. Step 2. If a satisfactory settlement is not reached in Step 1, and the employee wishes
to pursue the matter further, said written grievance, unchanged, showing the response if any from
Step 1, shall be submitted to the Department Head within ten (10) working days after the decision
from Step 1. The parties shall attempt to meet to resolve the grievance within ten (10) working
days of the date of the written submittal. The Department Head shall rule on the merits of the
alleged grievance and respond in writing within ten (10) working days of the meeting. In the event
22
Packet Pg. 128
8.7.a
the employee's immediate supervisor is the Department Head, the Mayor or their designee shall
consider the grievance at this step.
c. Step 3. If a satisfactory settlement is not reached at Step 2, the grievant with
authorization from the Union may submit the written grievance, unchanged, showing the responses
if any from Steps 1 and 2, to the Mayor within ten (10) working days after the decision from Step
2. The parties shall attempt to meet to resolve the grievance within ten (10) working days of the
written submittal. Failure of the Mayor or their designee to satisfactorily resolve the alleged
grievance shall permit the Union the right to submit a demand for arbitration to the City in writing
within ten (10) working days of receipt of the response at Step 3 or, failing a response, within ten
(10) working days of the date the response was due.
d. Selection of Arbitrator. The City and the Union shall immediately thereafter select an
arbitrator to hear the dispute. If the City and the Union are not able to agree upon an arbitrator
within ten (10) working days after receipt by the City of the written demand for arbitration, the
parties shall jointly request a list of eleven (11) arbitrators from the Federal Mediation and
Conciliation Service (FMCS). The list shall be limited to arbitrators who are members of the
National Academy of Arbitrators from Washington and/or Oregon sub -regions. Within ten (10)
working days after receipt of same, the parties shall alternately strike the names of the arbitrators
until only one name remains, who shall hear the dispute. The party striking first will be the winner
of the flip of a coin.
e. Authority of the Arbitrator. The Arbitrator shall have no power to render a decision
that will add to, subtract from, alter, change, or modify the terms of this Agreement, and their
power shall be limited to interpretation or application of the express terms of this Agreement, and
all other matters shall be excluded from arbitration. The decision of the arbitrator shall be presented
in writing, and shall be final and binding upon the parties; provided that the decision does not
involve action by the arbitrator beyond their jurisdiction.
18.2 Union Assistance. Nothing herein shall prevent an employee from seeking assistance from
the Union or the Union from furnishing such assistance at any stage of the grievance procedure.
18.3 Expenses. Each party shall pay the compensation and expenses for its own representatives
and witnesses, including attorneys' fees. The parties will share equally the costs and expenses of
the arbitrator.
18.4 Time Requirements. If the grievant fails to take the action required within the times
provided herein, they shall forfeit the right to further protest the grievance, denial of the grievance
or interim recommended solution. Failure on the part of the City to respond at Step 1 within the
specified time limit shall automatically move the grievance to the next step.
23
Packet Pg. 129
8.7.a
18.5 Conflict Resolution Process
Purpose
To address and resolve employee conflicts and/or problems in the workplace that are not covered
under the scope of a labor agreement, Personnel Policies, or other formal means of grievance
resolution. The Conflict Resolution Process (CRP) addresses conflicts between employees and/or
supervisors arising from problems involving personal differences, inappropriate behavior, poor
communications, or similar reasons. The intent of the CRP process is to resolve poor working
relationships, which adversely impact others or services.
Process:
All employees are encouraged to discuss problems they are experiencing with their co-workers or
supervisor in an honest and frank manner. Both parties are encouraged to resolve the conflict or
problem among themselves in the most fair way, which is mutually acceptable to both parties. If
the problem cannot be resolved among the involved parties, the employee may initiate the next
step in the CRP process.
Step 1. Any employee with or without the assistance of a representative can initiate the CRP
process by providing the other party(s) in the dispute with a written notice containing short
statements outlining 1) the problem or conflict, 2) the adverse impact upon the employee, and 3)
the remedy sought. A copy of the written notice must also be provided to the other parry's
supervisor. The other party must respond in writing to the employee within one calendar week
with a copy of the response also going to their immediate supervisor.
Step 2. If the conflict is not resolved by these actions, the employee shall request in writing for
the other parry's supervisor to resolve the issue(s). At the request of either party a mutually
agreeable mediator/fact finder will be invited to assist the parties in reaching a mutually agreeable
resolution. The expense of the mediator, if any, shall be paid by the City. This action must be
taken within two calendar weeks following receipt of the employee's request for resolution of the
issue(s).
Step 3. If the two parties involved in the dispute are not successful in resolving the issue(s), the
supervisor and/or mediator shall prepare a written report outlining the facts presented by both
parties involved in the issue along with a recommendation for a fair and equitable resolution to the
problem. This report shall be provided to both parties in a confidential manner.
Step 4. If the parties have not mutually resolved the issue(s) within one week following receipt
of the mediator's report, the report shall be submitted to the Mayor. The Mayor shall review the
report and issue a final resolution to the problem, which shall be binding upon all parties involved
in the dispute. The parties shall carry out the Mayor's directive in a cooperative manner.
Retaliatory action from either party is strictly prohibited.
Step 5. A follow-up action will be conducted by the Human Resources Department, after forty-
five (45) days, to ensure compliance with the Mayor's resolution. A written follow-up report will
be provided to all parties involved, including the Mayor.
24
Packet Pg. 130
8.7.a
Article XIX - Entire Agreement
The Agreement expressed herein in writing constitutes the entire Agreement between the parties.
The parties acknowledge that each has had the unlimited right and opportunity to make demands
and proposals with respect to any matter deemed a proper subject for collective bargaining. The
results of the exercise of that right are set forth in this Agreement. Therefore, except as otherwise
provided in this Agreement, each voluntarily and unqualifiedly agrees to waive the right to oblige
the other party to bargain with respect to any subject or matter not specifically referred to or
covered in this Agreement.
Article XX -.Savings Clause
Should any part hereof or any provision herein contained be rendered or declared invalid by reason
of any existing or subsequently enacted legislation, ordinance, or by any decree of a court of
competent jurisdiction, such invalidation of such part or portion of this Agreement shall not
invalidate the remaining portions hereof, provided, however, upon such invalidation that parties
mutually agree to meet and negotiate such parts or provisions affected. The remaining parts or
provisions shall remain in full force and effect.
Article XXI - Term of Agreement
The terms and conditions of employment contained in this 2022 through 2024 Labor
Agreement shall become effective upon its adoption by the Employer, except where noted
otherwise in the agreement, and shall remain in effect through December 31, 2024 and during the
course of negotiations on a successor Labor Agreement.
EDMONDS EMPLOYEE ASSOCIATION, CITY OF EDMONDS
LOCAL 3517 (AFSCME COUNCIL 2)
Organizer/Representative
Date Date
Bargaining Team Member
Bargaining Team Member
Michael Nelson, Mayor
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
Scott Passey, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Office of the City Attorney
25
Packet Pg. 131
8.7.a
1. RATES OF PAY, EFFECTIVE:
January 1, 2022
APPENDIX "A"
2022
NE-37
7,987
8,386
8,806
9,246
9,708
10,194
NE-36
7,607
7,987
8,386
8,806
I 9,246
I 9,708
NE-35
7,245
7,607
7,987
8,386
I 8,806
I 9,246
NE-34
6,900
7,245
7,607
7,987
I 8,386
I 8,806
NE-33
6,571
6,900
7,245
7,607
I 7,987
I 8,386
NE-32
6,258
6,571
6,900
7,245
I 7,607
I 7,987
NE-31
5,960
6,258
6,571
6,900
I 7,245
I 7,607
NE-30
5,676
5,960
6,258
6,571
6,900
7,245
NE-29
5,406
5,676
5,960
6,258
6,571
6,900
NE-28
5,149
5,406
5,676
5,960
6,258
6,571
NE-27
4,903
5,149
5,406
5,676
I 5,960
I 6,258
NE-26
4,670
4,903
5,149
5,406
I 5,676
I 5,960
NE-25
4,448
4,670
4,903
5,149
I 5,406
I 5,676
NE-24
4,236
4,448
4,670
4,903
I 5,149
I 5,406
NE-23
4,034
4,236
4,448
4,670
4,903
5,149
NE-22
3,842
4,034
4,236
4,448
4,670
4,903
NE-21
3,659
3,842
4,034
4,236
4,448
4,670
A.1 Wages
Wages for 2022 for all EDMONDS EMPLOYEE ASSOCIATION, LOCAL 3517 (AFSCME
COUNCIL 2) employees employed by the City on the final date of ratification by both parties,
will be as set forth above and will be retroactive to January 1, 2022. Retroactive wage payments
will be made to each member of the bargaining unit in a separate check. The 2022 wage schedule
is a newly created schedule based on the results of a market study. The new schedule had a five
and a half percent (5.5%) increase applied using the parameters provided for 2023 and 2024
increases.
Employees who are no longer active employees with the Employer at the time of ratification shall
not be paid retroactive pay under this Agreement. Employees who remain active employees with
the Employer shall receive any agreed upon retroactive pay, even if they have taken a position
with the Employer outside the bargaining unit prior to ratification of this Agreement.
26
Packet Pg. 132
8.7.a
Effective January 1, 2023, the monthly rates of pay for each classification covered by this
Agreement shall be increased by one hundred percent (100%) of the percentage increase in the
Seattle -Tacoma -Bellevue Area Consumer Price Index semi-annual average from June to June of
the previous year, with a minimum increase one percent (1%) and a maximum increase of five and
one-half percent (5.5%). The Index used shall be the Consumer Price Index for Urban Consumers
(CPI-U), All Items Indexes, Revised Series (1982-84+100) for the Seattle -Tacoma -Bellevue area,
as published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Effective January 1, 2024, the monthly rates of pay for each classification covered by this
Agreement shall be increased by one hundred percent (100%) of the percentage increase in the
Seattle -Tacoma -Bellevue Area Consumer Price Index semi-annual average from June to June of
the previous year, with a minimum increase four and one-half percent (4.5%) and a maximum
increase of five and one-half percent (5.5%). The Index used shall be the Consumer Price Index
for Urban Consumers (CPI-U), All Items Indexes, Revised Series (1982-84+100) for the Seattle -
Tacoma -Bellevue area, as published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
A.2 Waie Step Advancement. Step advancement shall be based upon completion of the
applicable length of service and satisfactory performance. If the completion of such period of time
occurs on a date other than the beginning of a semi-monthly pay period, the advancement to the
new pay step shall become effective at the beginning of the next semi-monthly pay period.
The normal probationary period is six (6) months from the employee's date of hire, rehire or
promotion. The Mayor may authorize the department director to extend the probationary period
for up to an additional six (6) months. An extension may be granted due to circumstances such as
an extended illness or a continued need to evaluate an employee. Extensions for represented
employees also require concurrence with the Union.
After successful completion of the six (6) month probationary period, an employee shall receive a
step increase of one step not to exceed the maximum step of the negotiated pay grade table. The
completion of probation establishes the anniversary date used for future performance evaluations
and/or step increases.
The City shall have the right to place an employee in any pay STEP above the minimum set forth
herein, in which event, advancement of said employee to each of the next higher pay STEPS shall
be governed by this section A.2. The six (6) month probationary STEP increase shall apply
regardless of the STEP in which the employee is initially placed.
A.3 Provision of Tools, Clothing and Safety Equipment. Any boots to be worn by
employees shall be purchased by the employees upon their initial hiring. Thereafter, engineer
inspector, engineering technician, engineering aide, senior construction inspector, building
inspector, combination inspector, senior combination building inspector, plans examiner, senior
plans examiner, stormwater technician, and code enforcement officer will receive up to two
hundred dollars ($200.00) per year for replacement of boots if necessary. Thereafter the allowance
will be increased by the Consumer Price Index as calculated in Section A.1 and rounded to the
nearest dollar. The City will provide rubber boots for the aquatics/athletic coordinator. Any
27
Packet Pg. 133
8.7.a
raingear and/or uniform necessary shall be provided on a department basis and used by employees
as needed.
A.4 Position Classification Schedule
Job Title
Pay Grade
Accountant, Senior
NE-37
Accountant
N E-36
Financial Manager for Public Works & Utilities
NE-36
GIS Analyst, Senior
NE-36
Human Services Program Manager
NE-36
Information Systems Specialist, Senior
NE-36
Combination Building Inspector, Senior
NE-35
Community Strategist -Public Information Officer
NE-35
Construction Inspector, Senior
NE-35
GIS Analyst
NE-35
Information Systems Specialist
NE-35
Plans Examiner, Senior
NE-35
Code Enforcement Officer
NE-34
Engineering Technician III
NE-34
Environmental Education and Sustainability Coordinator
NE-34
Plans Examiner
NE-34
Probation Officer, Senior
NE-34
Building Inspector
NE-33
Combination Building Inspector
NE-33
Executive Assistant - Parks & Rec
NE-33
Executive Assistant - Public Works
NE-33
Probation Officer
NE-33
Recreation Coordinator
NE-33
Stormwater Technician, Senior
NE-33
Web Systems Analyst
NE-33
Comm Services Program Coordinator
NE-33
Engineering Technician II
NE-32
Public Records Officer
NE-32
Stormwater Technician
NE-32
Systems Support Tech
NE-32
Accounting Specialist, Senior
NE-31
Deputy City Clerk
NE-31
Permit Coordinator, Senior (Dev Services)
NE-31
Permit Coordinator, Senior (Engineering)
NE-31
Accounting Specialist - AP/AR
NE-30
Accounting Specialist - Payroll
NE-30
Accounting Specialist - Utility Billing
NE-30
Administrative Assistant, Senior
NE-30
Engineer Technician I
NE-30
28
Packet Pg. 134
8.7.a
Office Coordinator (WWTP)
NE-30
Public Records Associate
NE-30
Administrative Assistant - Admin Services
NE-29
Administrative Assistant - Dev Services
NE-29
Administrative Assistant - Engineering
NE-29
Administrative Assistant - General
NE-29
Administrative Assistant - Planning
NE-29
Administrative Assistant - Public Works
NE-29
Cultural Arts Program Specialist
NE-29
Lead Court Clerk
NE-29
Permit Coordinator
NE-29
Court Clerk
NE-28
Business License Clerk
NE-27
Program Assistant - Parks & Rec
NE-27
Social Worker
NE-27
Human Services Program Support
NE-25
Senior Office Specialist - Admin Services
NE-25
Senior Office Specialist - Parks
NE-25
Recreation Leader - Day Camp
NE-23
Recreation Leader - Gymnastics
NE-23
Recreation Leader - Interpretive Specialist
NE-23
Recreation Leader - Preschool
NE-23
Preschool Assistant — Meadowdale Preschool
NE-21
Permitting Program Manager
NE-32
*The Permitting Program Manager is currently classified on the non -represented salary schedule.
The City recognizes this position is covered by the union. The City and the Union agree to maintain
this position's non -represented wages (including approved COLAs) until appropriate placement
on the AFSCME wage schedule can be bargained.
Senior Level Positions
The following positions shall progress to "Senior" status after three (3) years of satisfactory
performance at their introductory position:
Senior Accountant
Senior Accounting Specialist
Senior Administrative Assistant
Senior GIS Analyst
Senior Information Systems Specialist
Senior Probation Officer
Senior Stormwater Technician
Senior progressions will be effective retroactive to January 1, 2022, allowing eligible employees
to move ranges immediately upon ratification. Progression to a Senior equivalent shall occur after
3 (three) years of satisfactory performance in the non -sr. role and will be a cost -neutral progression.
29
Packet Pg. 135
8.7.a
Employee will advance to the next range and shall move back a step. The City may hire an
employee directly into a Senior position upon the City's determination that the employee has
appropriate experience.
A.5 — Longevity Pay
Effective January 1, 2023, and based on total length of service at the City, employees shall receive,
in addition to their monthly rate of pay set forth in Appendix A., monthly Longevity Pay in
accordance with the following:
Seniori
Start of 61 It
month (5 years)
Start of 121 st month (10 years)
Start of 169' month (14 years)
Start of 217' month (18 years)
Start of 301st month (25 years)
Longevity Pay
1 % of employee's monthly rate of pay
1.5% of employee's monthly rate of pay
2% of employee's monthly rate of pay
2.5% of employee's monthly rate of pay
3% of employee's monthly rate of pay
Longevity pay increases shall be effective upon the beginning of the next semi-monthly pay
period following the date the employee completes the respective number of years.
Eligible employees will continue to receive the formerly established Longevity Pay through
12/31 /2022.
A.6 — Additional Language Premium Pay
Employees in a bargaining unit position who possess, and are required by the City to use, approved
additional language skills shall receive the following Additional Language Premium Pay if the
employee is required to provide interpretation services at least once per day for at least Seventy -
Five Percent (75%) of their total annual workdays:
Court employees: $200/month paid in $100 increments each pay period
All other employees: $100/month paid in $50 increments each pay period
The employee's department head will provide Human Resources with confirmation that the
employee meets these requirements at the time this Agreement is executed. To be eligible for
Additional Language Premium Pay, the employee must pass a language proficiency test
coordinated by the City to demonstrate their ability to speak, understand, and clearly communicate
in the additional language at the level needed for either general or legal interpretation services.
Target languages include Spanish, Asian and Pacific Island languages, other Indo-European
languages, and other languages as approved by the employee's department director.
Eligible employees will be allowed to receive the Additional Language Premium as stated above
retroactive to January 1, 2022.
30
Packet Pg. 136
8.7.b
Summary of Changes
Collective Bargaining Agreement
CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
AND
EDMONDS EMPLOYEE ASSOCIATION
LOCAL 3517 (AFSCME COUNCIL 2)
January 1, 2022, through December 31, 2024
• Changed all references to be gender neutral
• Added June 19th as a recognized paid holiday
• Clarified that "Holiday Pay" is to be based on the regular work hours the employee is
assigned to (i.e. 4/10 would received 10 hours of holiday)
o If an employee is on an alternative work schedule at the request of the
employee they will receive 8 hours of holiday pay no matter the alternative work
schedule.
• Updated "Family Member" definition for sick leave to comply with current Washington
state law
• Allow for conversion of sick leave hours to vacation hours at the rate of 3 to 1 should
the regular full-time employee have accrued at least 800 hours of sick leave.
• For completing the required participation level in wellness activities annually that
qualify the City for the Well -city award and results in a discount on health care
premiums to the City, each member shall receive one "Wellness day off." This must be
used in the following year per the Floating Holiday article of the CBA.
• Increased annual VEBA contribution from $250/annually to $300/annually. The
contribution will only be provided contingent upon the bargaining unit as a whole
meeting the annual participation requirement for the AWC Well City Award.
• Regular full-time employees will have their health care premiums, for themselves only,
paid at 100% by the City. Spouses and dependents will remain at 90%.
o In order to address the delay in implementation of this change due to ongoing
bargaining the City agreed to make a one-time payment to employees who were
on the City's health care plans, in the amount of $1,000. This was in lieu of
undertaking the task of individually calculating the amount owed to each
employee for this change.
• Updated Grievance Procedure language to provide for a clearer process for both Union
and management
• Compensation Changes
o Implemented Market Study as previously approved by Council. Effective January
1, 2022 with retroactive payments to employees.
Packet Pg. 137
8.7.b
o Applied a 5.5% wage adjustment (COLA) to the new wage schedule effective
January 1, 2022 with retroactive payments to employees
o Effective January 1, 2023, the monthly rates of pay for each classification covered
by the Agreement will be increased by one hundred percent (100%) of the
percentage increase in the Seattle -Tacoma -Bellevue Area Consumer Price Index
semi-annual average from June to June of the previous year, with a minimum
increase one percent (1%) and a maximum increase of five and one-half percent
(5.5%)The Index used will be the Consumer Price Index for Urban Consumers (CPI-
U), All Items Indexes, Revised Series (1982-84+100) for the Seattle -Tacoma -
Bellevue area, as published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
■ It should be noted that the CPI-U for the time period identified was 10.1%
therefor a wage adjustment of 5.5% will be applied January 1, 2023 for all
bargaining unit members.
o Effective January 1, 2024, the monthly rates of pay for each classification covered
by this Agreement will be increased by one hundred percent (100%) of the
percentage increase in the Seattle -Tacoma -Bellevue Area Consumer Price Index
semi-annual average from June to June of the previous year, with a minimum
increase four and one-half percent (4.5%) and a maximum increase of five and
one-half percent (5.5%).The Index used will be the Consumer Price Index for Urban
Consumers (CPI-U), All Items Indexes, Revised Series (1982-84+100) for the
Seattle -Tacoma -Bellevue area, as published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
o Implemented a progression to a "Senior" classification for certain positions in
the bargaining unit. This is a cost neutral progression as the employee would
move up a range and back a step. The end result being the same compensation
but with higher earning potential at the top step of the range.
■ The implementation of this is retroactive to January 1, 2022 for purposes
of calculating step progressions for the impacted employees.
o Increased Longevity pay by .5% at each established progression. New
percentages are as below. Longevity pay increases are not retroactive and will
become effective as of the first of the month following ratification of the
agreement.
Seniority Longevity Pay
Start of 615t month (5 years) 1% of employee's monthly rate of pay
Start of 121s' month (10 years) 1.5% of employee's monthly rate of pay
Start of 169t" month (14 years) 2% of employee's monthly rate of pay
Start of 2171" month (18 years) 2.5% of employee's monthly rate of pay
Start of 3015t month (25 years) 3% of employee's monthly rate of pay
Packet Pg. 138
8.7.b
o Language Premium Pay will be provided to those employees providing
interpretation services at least once per day for at least 75% of the total annual
workdays. This payment will be calculated retroactive to January 1, 2022
■ Court employees who are providing legal interpretation will be given a
$200/month premium. All other employee will be given a $100/month
premium.
Packet Pg. 139
8.8
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 11/22/2022
Confirmation of Diversity Commission Appointees Anil DeCosta & Jessie Owen
Staff Lead: Todd Tatum
Department: Community Services
Preparer: Megan Luttrell
Background/History
The nine Edmonds Diversity Commission members were originally appointed on October 27, 2015 for
staggered 1-, 2- and 3-year terms. As of 1/1/23 Positions 1, 2 and 3 become available for full terms that
run until December 31, 2025. The position openings were advertised via local media. Two applications
were received, reviewed and interviewed by the Commission at their regular meeting on November 2,
2022. Pursuant to ECC 10.65.020(B), new appointments to the Diversity Commission shall be made by
the seated Commissioners, subject to confirmation by the City Council. The application period has been
extended to seek additional applicants for the remaining seat.
Staff Recommendation
Confirm appointment of Anil DeCosta to Position 1 and Jessie Owen to Position 2 of the Edmonds
Diversity Commission for terms scheduled to expire 12/31/25.
Narrative
Of the applications received by the City for consideration to fill the open positions, two applicants were
interviewed by the Diversity Commissioners. The Commission voted to appoint Anil DeCosta and Jessie
Owen for terms scheduled to expire 12/31/25, subject to City Council confirmation. Both applications
are attached.
Attachments:
Anil DeCosta - Application
Jessie Owen - Application
Packet Pg. 140
I 8.8.a I
City of Edmonds
Citizen Board and Commission Application
(PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE) NOTE: This form is a public record and maybe subject to disclosure upon request
Diversity Commission
(Board or Commission)
Name:Anil DeCosta Date:8/22/2022
Address: Day Phone:
Edmonds Evening Phone:
WA 98020 Cell:
E-mail:
Occupational status and background: Manage end user services for the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
Born and raised in India, came to the US for a graduate degree and have lived in NY, TX, OK before
moving to Seattle.
Organizational affiliations: South Snohomish Cold Weather Shelter (provides lodging/meals during the winter in the county)
Northwest Neighbors Network (providing local seniors with social visits, errands, transportations needs, chores).
GSA-ILR (President of the International Students at ILR at Cornell). Developed the International festival to drive better understanding of cultures and better integrating US and International students.
Why are you seeking this appointment? I have used a separate sheet to answer this question given the
limited space in this form.
What skills and knowledge do you have to meet the selection criteria?
Please list any other Board, Commission, Committee, or official positions you currently hold with the City of Edmonds:
None at this time.
Additional comments:
Please return this completed form to:
Edmonds City Hall
121 5th Avenue North
Edmonds, WA 98020
carolvn.lafave(@edmondswa.eov
Anil DeCosta
Signature
Phone:425.771.0247 l Fax:425.771.0252 Revised4/30/14
a
0
c�
Q
a
a
0
U
W
7
a
E
t
U
0
r
Q
Packet Pg. 141
8.8.a
Why am I seeking an appointment to the Diversity Commission?
Diversity and inclusion was not something that came naturally to me. Even though I grew up in a country
with people from different economic, social and religious backgrounds, we were all tied into a larger
culture of the country. We celebrated differences but never took that step of using those differences to
become a better society — in hindsight we always stopped at the celebration but not the integration.
My life as an international graduate student first and later, my experiences living and working in
different parts of the US have significantly shaped my views on this topic.
Starting off as President of the International Students association at Cornell, I saw the power of being
able to harness the collective experiences of international students by giving them the skills and training
to better communicate and engage their domestic counterparts. Similarly, it gave the domestic US
students, the opportunity to understand different communication styles and how they could also better
engage with these students and develop better relationships. We developed forums and events that
were informal, fun and were always geared towards building those bridges and leveraging our
differences as a source of strength.
Fast forward to the working as a manager at Dell with domestic and international teams spread across
the globe, I learned the hard way of the consequences of making unilateral decisions without
considering factors that would be important segments of my team. These experiences taught me the
skills of actively engaging, listening and most importantly either updating, changing work processes,
policies or outcomes in ways that helped my overall team. With time, I have also seen the impact of
those decisions, the investments in our programs (hiring more women) and positive impact to our
teams.
Its these lessons that I would like to bring to this role. Edmonds as a community is also changing rapidly.
I have seen this in just over 3 years, and I feel like this is the right time to focus on integrate all these
new residents that continue to choose Edmonds as a place to live and make them feel welcome and
valued. I want to learn from what other cities have done before us and learn from their mistakes as well.
I might not be the ideal candidate with my core background. But I know the importance of diversity, I
have seen it work and I want to be able to give back to this lovely city that I know call home! I am happy
to even volunteer as a stand in until the committee might want to choose a better candidate. For me,
it's the ability to help out and do something that will impact this city.
Thank You for considering my application.
Anil DeCosta
Packet Pg. 142
8.8.b
Edmonds
Citizen Board and Commission Application
(PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE) NOTE: This form is a public record and maybe subject to disclosure upon request
DIVERSITY COMMISSION
(Board or Commission)
Name:
JESSIE OWEN
Address:
EDMONDS, WA 98020
Date:
9-1-22
Day Phone:
Evening Phone:
Cell:
E-mail:
Occupational status and IJackground: Educator and accessible travel author. Active in the
disabled community. Advocate for ADA equity and diversity inclusion within the community.
Organizational affiliations: NSEA, NORTHWEST REGIONAL SPINAL CORD INJURY ASSOCIATION,
NORTHSHORE SCHOOL DISTRICT, UW CENTER FOR NEUROTECHNOLOGY
Why are you seeking this appointment? I'm interested in continuing to diversify Edmonds and having a
platform to help make positive changes. Edmonds is clearly dedicated to continued growth in diversity
and inclusion but there is still work to be done to make our city welcoming, accessible, and a place
where all citizens feel seen and valued.
What skills and knowledge do you have to meet the selection criteria? Harvard public leadership Credential
15 years in education and educational leadership, advocate in spinal cord injury community,
experience with interracial adoption
Please list any other Board, Commission, Committee, or official positions you currently hold with the City of Edmonds:,
N/A
Additional comments: Happy to have contributed to this community as a citizen and looking forward
to continued development in Edmonds.
Please return this completed form to:
Edmonds City Hall
121 5th Avenue North
Edmonds, WA 98020
ca ro Ivn. lafave (a)edmondswa.eov
Phone:425.771.0247 1 Fax:425.771.0252
�L�
Signature
Revised 4130114
Packet Pg. 143
9.1
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 11/22/2022
2023 Legislative Agenda
Staff Lead: {Type Name of Staff Lead}
Department: Community Services
Preparer: Todd Tatum
Background/History
Every year the City Council reviews and approves the City's Legislative Agenda for the upcoming
Legislative Session in the new year. This Agenda serves as guidance to our Lobbyist in Olympia, as well as
a hand-out to share with Legislators and their staff.
Staff Recommendation
Staff will incorporate any additions and changes and format the document attractively. Staff will then
forward the 2023 Edmonds Legislative Agenda to the Consent Agenda of the 12/06/22 regular Council
meeting for approval.
Narrative
The attached Draft of the 2023 Edmonds Legislative Agenda has been compiled over the last couple of
months with direct input from Mayor Nelson, our Olympia lobbyist, Debora Munguia, Directors of every
City Department, and those Council Members who have already shared their issues or suggestions about
agenda items. The agenda was also informed by the legislative agendas of AWC, WRIAB, and WRPA.
Attachments:
DRAFT 2023 legislative agenda 20221118
Packet Pg. 144
9.1.a
,0c. 18y"
CITY OF EDMONDS
2023 STATE LEGISLATIVE AGENDA
Transportation
Request: Program $22.5 million allocated under the Move Ahead Washington Transportation
package in the 2025-27 Biennium for SR99 Revitalization Project Stage 3 and begin work to
secure funding for future phases for the 2027-29 Biennium.
The City of Edmonds places a high priority on both safety and social and environmental justice
throughout our community. The Highway 99 Corridor and its surrounding neighborhoods have
historically been under -served, with lower levels of parks and public spaces, community
gathering facilities, and safe, multimodal transportation improvements.
In tandem with this Community Renewal Plan, the City will pursue multiphase transportation
improvements along the Corridor, costing upwards of $243 million, including accompanying
utility improvements. This significant public investment will also promote private investment
along the corridor, and bring needed jobs, affordable housing and services to an underserved
community of Edmonds.
Thanks to the legislature's support in providing $39 million from the Connecting Washington
and Move Ahead Washington transportation packages, we will complete the initial
transportation and pedestrian safety improvements in spring 2023 and have started design on
the next stages of improvements.
Edmonds Marsh
The Legislature in the 2021 Session approved a proviso for the duration of the 2021-2023
biennium that provided Edmonds first right of purchase of the former UNOCAL site when it
transfers to WSDOT. These provisions are in effect until 6/30/23. The clean-up process will take
through 2025, and therefore will require an extension of the first right of purchase.
Packet Pg. 145
9.1.a
2023 Edmonds Legislative Agenda
Page 2 of 4
In 2021, the Legislature earmarked $258,000 to help fund the potential purchase of the
UNCOCAL property. Request that these funds be reallocated to the 2023-25 Biennium.
Gun Violence Prevention
Gun violence and the injuries and death that result from it constitute a public health crisis,
including the mental health impacts on many communities. We support continued efforts for
legislation addressing the prevention of gun violence.
Environmental and Climate -Related Issues
as
a�
Monitor and support potential environmental -protection measures, including those that would Q
as
enhance the Puget Sound ecosystem, including the impacts of coal and oil trains, drought '—
management, toxics control and clean-up, as well as measures associated with climate change,MA
crumb rubber athletic field infill, remediation of culverts under state highways, banning plastic a)
as
bags, etc. Support state -level actions called out in our Climate Action Plan: N
0
N
• Support legislation to require gas supply systems statewide to be carbon -neutral
by 2045
• Support changes to the state building code to achieve net -zero energy
consumption in new buildings by 2030
• Support the long-term plan for electrifying the Washington State Ferry fleet
Other Significant issues
1. Housing affordability & availability & accessibility
• Support a proactive approach to create new tools/incentives/revenues for cities
to use to support increasing housing supply and addressing affordability. Cities
need resources to encourage development of housing at all income levels and
particularly state funding to support housing for the lowest income levels.
• Support increased funding for the Housing Trust Fund.
2. Infrastructure funding
• Fully fund the Public Works Assistance Account (PWAA), including allowing the
current revenue diversions to sunset at the end of fiscal year 2023 and refraining
from further transfers or diversions of funds to other infrastructure programs or
other non -infrastructure accounts.
• Explore expanding state funding opportunities to assist with maintenance and
operations of local infrastructure.
• Support legislation which helps local municipalities with ongoing maintenance due
to the passing of SB 5974 which requires state transportation projects over
$500,000 to include Complete Street characteristics.
Packet Pg. 146
9.1.a
2023 Edmonds Legislative Agenda
Page 3 of 4
I Support Parks and Open Space
• Support robust funding for Capital Budget programs that invest in the outdoor
recreation sector.
• Support funding to help local parks agencies address severe maintenance
backlogs exacerbated by COVID-19
• Support technical change to the Derelict Vessel Removal Program statute
4. Puget Sound Health and Salmon/Orca
• Support $82 million for Salmon Recovery Funding Board in the Recreation and
Conservation Office budget (RCO).
• Support $65.4 million for Puget Sound Acquisition and Restoration in the RCO
budget.
• Support state agency budget requests for monitoring salmon populations, and
for studies and management of predation, disease, and other issues that affect
WRIA 8 salmon populations.
• Support legislation that seeks to improve regulatory protections for areas that
are important for salmon habitat, including proposals to define and implement
"net ecological gain."
• Support efforts to improve existing funding opportunities to support salmon
recovery and Puget Sound restoration priorities.
• Support legislation and funding requests that promote stormwater management
planning, coordination, and implementation at a watershed scale.
• Support legislation that prioritizes implementation of natural drainage systems,
such as low impact development and green stormwater infrastructure, at the
watershed scale.
• Support efforts to address effects of climate change on salmon and salmon
habitat.
5. Blake decision response
• Support additional investments to help cities with the costs created by the
changes resulting from the Blake decision on how possession of controlled
substances is handled by the criminal justice system including funding to help
offset the costs of process criminal conviction vacations and repaying legal
financial obligations as well as support for ongoing costs for diversion programs
and municipal court impacts.
• Support more state investment in alternative response teams, treatment facilities
for adults and juveniles, treatment in jails, as well as funding to provide social
Packet Pg. 147
9.1.a
2023 Edmonds Legislative Agenda
Page 4 of 4
workers, treatment providers and system navigators to help direct people to
treatment.
• Support clarification regarding the crime of possession of a controlled substance
so individuals, law enforcement, and treatment providers can respond
appropriately. Revise the current system of two referrals prior to criminal charges
so that it can be more effectively administered across the state.
6. Transportation Funding
• Identify sustainable, ongoing transportation funding, including Road Usage Charge
(RUC), as a revenue source for cities' unique transportation funding needs, with a Q
specific dedicated revenue directed to cities. Funding should recognize the unique
challenges both urban and rural communities experience and their unique needs
MA
including funding for maintenance of existing transportation infrastructure.
• Support funding and options for cities and counties to create innovative "last mile" J
M
solutions. N
0
N
7. Funding for arts and the creative economy
• Support efforts to create funding sources which support creative businesses and
nonprofits abilities to connect communities, particularly youth, with the arts.
8. GMA Planning & permitting
• Engage in the GMA reform conversation and look to secure dedicated planning
funding in recognition of proposed new responsibilities in areas such as climate
change and salmon recovery that cities can support.
9. Behavioral health
• Support creating greater access to behavioral health services including substance
abuse treatment and dual diagnosis treatment facilities.
• Support continued state funding to help communities establish alternative
response programs like co -responder programs, diversion programs, and others
that provide options beyond law -enforcement for responding to situations with
individuals suffering from behavioral health issues.
10. Public safety vehicular pursuits
• Support clarification of the ability to conduct vehicular pursuits using a reasonable
suspicion standard in order to address concerns about impacts to public safety
and allow for effective and safe pursuit of suspects when there is an immediate
threat to public safety. Cities will continue to support safety standards and training
for officers who engage in vehicular pursuits.
Packet Pg. 148
9.2
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 11/22/2022
Resolution on Findings of Fact for the Emergency Interim CG Step Back Ordinance 4278
Staff Lead: Mike Clugston
Department: Planning Division
Preparer: Michael Clugston
Background/History
The City of Edmonds completed a subarea planning process for the Highway 99 corridor in 2017. This
work involved extensive public engagement, data and design analysis, scenario evaluation, and
environmental review. Ultimately this process led to the adoption of the Highway 99 Subarea Plan as an
element of the Comprehensive Plan (Ord. 4077), an update to the General Commercial zoning in
Chapter 16.60 ECDC to implement the Subarea Plan (Ord. 4078), and a planned action for the Highway
99 Subarea, in accordance with the State Environmental Policy Act (Ord. 4079).
In August 2022, a required five-year review of the Highway 99 Planned Action EIS was undertaken.
While development in the Planned Action area was found by the SEPA responsible official to be well
under the established mitigation thresholds, the adequacy of the original EIS was questioned by some
members of the public. There was also some public concern about a design review application for a new
261-unit apartment building on the vacant parcel at the southeast corner of 84th Ave. and 236th St. The
concern pertained to step -backs and the interest to require them across the street from single family
zoning.
On October 4, 2022, Council adopted emergency interim Ordinance 4278 regarding step backs for
buildings on sites in the General Commercial (CG) zone that are across the street from single-family (RS)
zoned parcels. On November 15, 2022, the Council took public testimony regarding the interim
ordinance, within 60 days of adoption as required by RCW 36.70A.390
Staff Recommendation
At Council's direction on November 15, 2022, the City Attorney drafted a resolution of findings in
support of retaining emergency interim Ordinance 4278.
However, staff recommends that Council repeal emergency interim Ordinance 4278. It is clear from
information learned since this interim was adopted that Council in 2017 had reviewed and discussed
step backs for buildings on sites in the CG zone that are across the street from single-family (RS) zoned
parcels but chose to not include that step back language in the code adopted in Ord. 4078.
Further, the language in the interim ordinance is not consistent with the 'preferred alternative' language
referenced from in the associated EIS (Ord. 4079). The relevant language in the EIS indicates step backs
are to be provided from the lot line, not the street setback as indicated in Ord. 4278:
EIS (pg 1-7): "Across the street from single family zones provide eight foot stepback for the
portion of the building above 25 feet. Provide 16 foot upper story stepback from the lot line for
the portion of the building above 55 feet.
Packet Pg. 149
9.2
Ord. 4278: "For buildings across the street from RS zones, the portion of the building above 25
feet in height shall step back no less that [sp.] eight feet from the required street setback. That
portion of building over 55 feet in height shall step back no less than 16 feet from the required
street setback."
The difference between the two approaches is significant as can be seen in Exhibit 9. This discrepancy
needs to be resolved.
If Council does not support retaining Ord. 4278, a separate repeal ordinance would be needed.
If the interim ordinance is retained, a final standard must be developed. The final standards must be
adopted by April 6, 2023, since the interim standard is only valid for six months, unless a work plan is
developed. The Planning Board would work on the permanent standard and make a recommendation to
Council who must then decide on the permanent standard.
Narrative
For additional context, several documents are included with this memo. At the time of the interim
adoption, staff's understanding was that step backs for buildings on sites in the CG zone that are across
the street from single-family (RS) zoned parcels had not been discussed by Council, and therefore the
recommendation for the step back referenced in the associated Planned Action EIS was not included in
the revised CG code that was eventually adopted.
However, the CG-street-RS step back was discussed several times by Council in 2017 - the minutes from
the June 20, July 18, and July 31, 2017, meetings are attached. In fact, Council unanimously adopted the
Highway 99 Subarea Plan (Ord. 4077), the General Commercial zoning in Chapter 16.60 ECDC (Ord.
4078), and established the SEPA Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) as a planned action (Ord. 4079)
but ultimately did not include the CG-street-RS step back in the revised CG code in ECDC 16.60.
Also of note, the December 14, 2016 agenda memo to the Planning Board for their public hearing on the
draft Highway 99 Subarea Plan includes the following summary of public outreach up that point:
Public outreach on the current project included:
- Briefings/discussions with Planning Board and City Council at several public meetings
- Meetings with key property owners
- Three public open houses
- Three mailings about the project and input opportunities:
- Flyer # 1 to nearly 2200 addresses
- Flyer # 2 to nearly 2200 addresses
- Postcard to nearly 2200 addresses
- Press releases
- News media articles (Beacon, My Edmonds News, City newsletter)
- At least two sets of email announcements to people signed up for emails
- Meetings with technical advisory committee (including transportation agencies and nearby
local governments)
- Special City website information (updated on ongoing basis)
- Miscellaneous communication with interested parties
Attachments:
Exhibit 1- Resolution on Retention of Emergency Interim Ord. 4278
Exhibit 2 - Ordinance 4278 - Interim CG Stepbacks
Exhibit 3 - 2022-10-04 CC Minutes - Interim Adopted
Exhibit 4 - 2022-10-18 CC Minutes - 5yr Planned Action Update
Exhibit 5 - 2017-06-20 CC Minutes - CG Step Backs Discussed
Packet Pg. 150
9.2
Exhibit 6 - 2017-07-18 CC Minutes - CG Step Backs Discussed
Exhibit 7 - 2017-07-31 CC Minutes - Planned Action PH, Step Backs Discussed
Exhibit 8 - 2017-08-15 CC Minutes - Approval of Ords 4077-4079
Exhibit 9 - CG setbacks and street step back sketch
Packet Pg. 151
9.2.a
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, ADOPTING FINDINGS OF FACT TO SUPPORT THE
ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE 4278, WHICH ADOPTED INTERIM SITE
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE CG ZONE.
WHEREAS, on October 4, 2022, the city council adopted Ordinance 4278, which established
interim site development standards for the CG zone; and
WHEREAS, Ordinance 4278 took effect on immediately on October 4, 2022; and
WHEREAS, the city council held a public hearing on November 15, 2022 to inform its deliberations
on whether to leave Ordinance 4278 in place; and
WHEREAS, the city council is required by RCW 36.70A.390 to adopt, no later than immediately
after the hearing, findings of fact justifying the adoption of Ordinance 4278; NOW THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, HEREBY
RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. ADOPTION OF FINDINGS.
A. The city council hereby adopts the above Whereas clauses as its findings of fact to support
the adoption of Ordinance 4278.
B. The city council hereby adopts the following additional findings of fact to support the
adoption of Ordinance 4278:
1) Five years have passed since the 2017 adoption of Ordinance 4078, which updated
the CG site development standards in accordance with the Highway 99 Subarea Plan;
2) The occurrence of development in the subarea pursuant to those 2017 CG site
development standards has allowed for a greater understanding of the massing
allowed by those 2017 standards;
3) Some have questioned whether the impact of that massing might be inappropriate in
certain portions of the subarea;
4) While those impacts were discussed in 2017 at a theoretical level, it is appropriate to
revisit those questions in light of recent development in the subarea;
5) The city council needs more time to evaluate those impacts, while also keeping in
mind its previously established goal of encouraging redevelopment in the subarea;
and
6) The continued effectiveness of Ordinance 4278 will provide that time.
RESOLVED this day of )2022.
CITY OF EDMONDS
a
Packet Pg. 152
9.2.a
MAYOR, MIKE NELSON
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK:
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
RESOLUTION NO.
a
Packet Pg. 153
9.2.b
ORDINANCE NO. 4278
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON,
ESTABLISHING INTERIM DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS FOR
THE CG ZONE, DECLARING AN EMERGENCY NECESSITATING
THE IMMEDIATE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE ORDINANCE, AND
SETTING SIX MONTHS AS THE EFFECTIVE PERIOD OF THE
ORDINANCE.
WHEREAS, City of Edmonds completed a subarea planning process for the Highway 99
corridor in 2017, which included adopting the subarea plan into the Comprehensive Plan (Ord.
4077), updating the General Commercial zoning in Chapter 16.60 ECDC (Ord. 4078), and
establishing the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
as a planned action (Ord. 4079); and
WHEREAS, the Planned Action EIS included Alternative 2 (the preferred alternative)
which included the following language regarding stepbacks for development adjacent to and
across the street from single-family zoned property:
Upper story stepbacks
Adjacent to single family zones provide 10-foot upper story stepback for
the portion of the building above 25 feet. Provide 20-foot upper -story stepback from the
lot line for the portion of the building above 55 feet.
Across the street from single family zones provide eight -foot stepback for
the portion of the building above 25 feet. Provide 16-foot upper story stepback from the
lot line for the portion of the building above 55 feet; and
WHEREAS, while the description of the preferred alternative includes stepbacks for
development across the street from single family zones, this was not discussed in the Subarea
Plan, included in the mitigation measures adopted in Ord. 4079, or in the updated CG zoning
code; and
WHEREAS, only the stepbacks for development adjacent to (or abutting) single family
zones were included in the mitigation measures and the updated CG zoning code; and
WHEREAS, staff is recommending that the city council adopt this emergency interim
ordinance to establish upper floor step backs for development across the street from single family
zones until additional consideration can be given to whether such step backs should be adopted
as a permanent regulation; NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS DOES ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Interim Site Development Standards. Section 16.60.020 of the Edmonds
Community Development Code, entitled, "Site development standards — General," is hereby
Packet Pg. 154
9.2.b
amended to read as set forth in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by
this reference as if fully set forth (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in
Section 2. Duration of Interim Regulations Adopted in Section 1. The interim
regulations adopted by section 1 of this ordinance shall commence on the effective date of this
ordinance. As long as the city holds a public hearing on this ordinance and adopts findings and
conclusions in support of its continued effectiveness (as contemplated by Section 3 herein), this
ordinance shall not terminate until six (6) months after the effective date, unless it is repealed
sooner.
Section 3. Public Hearing on Interim Standards. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.390 and
RCW 35A.63.220, the city council shall hold a public hearing on this interim ordinance within
sixty (60) days of its adoption. In this case, the hearing shall be held on November 15, 2022
unless the city council, by subsequently adopted resolution, provides for a different hearing date.
No later than the next regular council meeting immediately following the hearing, the city
council shall adopt findings of fact on the subject of this interim ordinance and either justify its
continued effectiveness or repeal the interim ordinance.
Section 4. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance
should be held to be unconstitutional or unlawful 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 5. Declaration of Emergency. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power
specifically delegated to the city council, is not subject to referendum. Because it is not subject to
referendum, RCW 35A.12.130 applies. Pursuant to RCW 35A.12.130, this ordinance shall take
W
Packet Pg. 155
9.2.b
effect immediately upon passage by a majority vote plus one of the whole membership of the
city council. The city council hereby declares that an emergency exists necessitating that this
ordinance take immediate effect. Without an immediate adoption of the interim standards
described herein, development applications could become vested, leading to the development of
property that is not consistent with the city's values and vision for the Highway 99 subarea.
Therefore, these interim regulations must be imposed as an emergency measure to protect the
public health, safety, and welfare, and to prevent the vesting of building permit applications to
other regulations. This ordinance does not affect any existing vested rights.
Section 6. Publication. This ordinance shall be published by an approved summary
consisting of the title.
Section 7. Effective Date. This ordinance is not subject to referendum and shall take
effect and be in full force and effect immediately upon passage, as set forth herein, as long as it
is approved by a majority plus one of the entire membership of the Council, as required by RCW
35A.12.130. If it is only approved by a majority of the Council, it will take effect five days after
passage and publication.
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
C CLERK, SC TT SSEY
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY:
APPROVED:
l
MAYOR MIKE NELSON
3
Packet Pg. 156
9.2.b
BY
JEFF TARADAY
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: September 30, 2022
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: October 4, 2022
PUBLISHED: October 7, 2022
EFFECTIVE DATE: October 4, 2022
ORDINANCE NO. 4278
M
Packet Pg. 157
9.2.b
SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO.4278
of the City of Edmonds, Washington
On the 4th day of October, 2022, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No
4278. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON,
ESTABLISHING INTERIM DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS FOR
THE CG ZONE, DECLARING AN EMERGENCY NECESSITATING
THE IMMEDIATE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE ORDINANCE, AND
SETTING SIX MONTHS AS THE EFFECTIVE PERIOD OF THE
ORDINANCE.
The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request.
DATED this 41h day of October 4, 2022.
i
[TY CLER ,!5V
PASSEY
Packet Pg. 158
9.2.b
EXHIBIT A
1 16.60.020 Site development standards - General.
A. Table. Except as hereinafter provided, development requirements shall be as follows:
Minimum
Minimum Lot
Minimum Lot
Minimum
Side/Rear
Maximum
Maximum
Area
Width
Street Setback
Setback
Height
Floor Area
CG
None
None
5710'2
0715"
753
None
Fifteen feet from all lot lines adjacent to RM or IRS zoned property; otherwise no setback is
required by this subsection.
Z The five-foot minimum width applies only to permitted outdoor auto sales use; otherwise
the minimum is 10 feet.
3 None for structures located within an area designated as a high-rise node on the
comprehensive plan map.
B. Maximum height for purposes of this chapter need not include railings, chimneys,
mechanical equipment or other exterior building appurtenances that do not provide interior
livable space. In no case shall building appurtenances together comprise more than 20 percent
of the building surface area above the maximum height.
C. Pedestrian Area.
1. For purposes of this chapter, the pedestrian area described herein is the area adjacent
to the street that encompasses the public right-of-way from the edge of the curb (or, if no
curb, from the edge of pavement) and the street setback area, as identified in the table in
subsection (A) of this section.
2. The pedestrian area is composed of three zones: the activity zone, the pedestrian zone,
and the streetscape zone. Providing improvements to the pedestrian area, as needed to
be consistent with this subsection on at least the primary street, is required as part of
development projects, excluding development that would not add a new building or that
consists of building improvements that do not add floor area equaling more than 10
percent of the building's existing floor area or that consists of additional parking stalls
that comprise less than 10 percent of the existing parking stalls or that consists of
development otherwise exempted under this chapter.
a. Activity Zone. The activity zone shall be the open-air pedestrian area from the
building front to the edge of the pedestrian zone. The activity zone is the section of
the pedestrian area that is reserved for activities that commonly occur immediately
adjacent to the building facade. Typical amenities or activities included in the activity
zone include, but are not limited to, sidewalks, benches, potted plants, outdoor
Packet Pg. 159
9.2.b
EXHIBIT A
dining and shopping. The area shall be paved to connect with the pedestrian zone in
an ADA-accessible manner. Stairs, stoops and raised decks or porches may be
constructed in a portion of the activity zone.
b. Pedestrian Zone. The pedestrian zone is located between the activity zone and the
streetscape zone. The pedestrian zone consists of a minimum five-foot clear and
unobstructed path for safe and efficient through traffic for pedestrians. Architectural
projections and outdoor dining may be permitted to encroach into the pedestrian
zone only where a minimum five-foot clear path and seven -foot vertical clearance is
maintained within the pedestrian zone.
c. Streetscape Zone. The streetscape zone is located between the curb or pavement
edge to the edge of the pedestrian zone and shall be a minimum of five feet wide.
The streetscape zone is the section that is reserved for pedestrian use and for
amenities and facilities that commonly occur between the adjacent curb or
pavement edge and pedestrian through traffic. Typical amenities and facilities in the
streetscape zone include, but are not limited to, street trees, street lights, benches,
bus stops, and bike racks. Street trees shall be required in conformance with the
Edmonds Street Tree Plan.
lu
a c
N Y
Y y,
W QJ y 81
W C a) C
v1 tV ri N
rF4
> a
Q 0
-,r— 5'min —r 5'.Iao--.r 18--2'w,[
Note: Numerical Ranges for the pedestrian Zone and the Activity Zone are
typical but do not control over other requirements o/ this chapter.
(Illustration: Pedestrian area)
D. Building Step -Back When Adjacent or Across the Street to RS Zones.
Packet Pg. 160
9.2.b
EXHIBIT A
1. For buildings adjacent to RS zones, tThe portion of the buildings above 25 feet in height
shall step back no less than 10 feet from the required side or rear setback to an adjacent
IRS ZeRe. That portion of the building over 55 feet in height shall be step back no less than
20 feet from the required side or rear setback to n ojacent RS zeme.
2. For buildings across the street from RS zones, the portion of the building above 25 feet
in height shall step back no less that eight feet from the required street setback. That
portion of building over 55 feet in height shall step back no less than 16 feet from the
required street setback.
32-. Balconies, railings, parapets and similar features that do not enclose an interior space
may extend into the step -back area in order to encourage more human activity and
architectural features.
PS
wl� e(wtvip
I S'ul1 �w'.11.
ivl,l,a,�,awne.
(Illustration: Setback and "step -back" of building adjacent or Across the Street to RS
zones)
Packet Pg. 161
9.2.b
EXHIBIT A
[Ord. 4078 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2017; Ord. 3981 § 1 (Att. A), 2014; Ord. 3635 § 1, 2007].
Packet Pg. 162
9.2.b
Everett Daily Herald
Affidavit of Publication
State of Washington }
County of Snohomish } ss
Michael Gates being first duly sworn, upon
oath deposes and says: that he/she is the legal
representative of the Everett Daily Herald a
daily newspaper. The said newspaper is a legal
newspaper by order of the superior court in the
county in which it is published and is now and
has been for more than six months prior to the
date of the first publication of the Notice
hereinafter referred to, published in the English
language continually as a daily newspaper in
Snohomish County, Washington and is and
always has been printed in whole or part in the
Everett Daily Herald and is of general
circulation in said County, and is a legal
newspaper, in accordance with the Chapter 99
of the Laws of 1921, as amended by Chapter
213, Laws of 1941, and approved as a legal
newspaper by order of the Superior Court of
Snohomish County, State of Washington, by
order dated June 16, 1941, and that the annexed
is a true copy of EDH964449 ORD 4276, 4277,
4278 as it was published in the regular and
entire issue of said paper and not as a
supplement form thereof for a period of 1
issue(s), such publication commencing on
10/07/2022 and ending on 10/07/2022 and that
said newspaper was regularly distributed to its
subscribers during all of said period.
The amount the fee for s h public
$51.60.
Subscribed and sworn o e me on this
,ram ZL ,
day of
1
Notary Public in and for the State of
Washington.
City of Edmonds - LEGALADS 114101416
SCOMASSEY
Linda Phillips(
Notary Public i(1)
State of
1Nash(netoil
My kppoin,nen; Expires Si%y%2U25
r Cammission NunrUer e,417
Packet Pg. 163
9.2.b
.Classified Proof
ORDINANCE SUMMARY
of the Cit/ —o dmands, Washington
On the 4th day of October, 2022. the City Council of the City of
Edmonds, passed the following Ordinances, the summaries of sale
nranances consisting of title* are provided as follows.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF H I ONOS. WASHINGTON,
ESTABLSHING DESIGN STANDARDS FOR STAND-ALONE
MULTIPLE DWELLING BUILDINGS IN THE 8132 ZONE AND
REPEALING ORDINANCE 4255
ORQINANCE NO.4277
AN ORDINANCE OFiq I Y M DS. WASHINGTON.
ADOPTING NEW REGULATIONS AND A NEW CHAPTER 17.120
ECDC, ENTITLED-SICYCLE PAR?.GNG FACILITIES'.
AMENDING ECDC SUBSECTION 76.60.030.E ENTfTL--D
'PARKING. ACCESS. AND BICYLE STORAGE STANDARDS -
AND AMENDING ECDC 22.110,090 WESTGATE MIXED USE
HEIGHT BONUS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE NEIN
REGULATIONS
ORDINANCE NO. c278
AN ORDINANCE Or THE CITYOF-b'Oii. UNDS. WASHINGTON.
ESTABLISHING INTERIM DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS FOR
THE CG ZONE. DECLARING AN EMERGE4CY
NECESSITATING THE IMMEDIATE EFFECTWENESS OF THE
ORDINANCE. AND SETTING SIX MONTHS AS THE EFFECTIVE
PERIOD OF THE
ORDINANCE.
DATED this 41h Day of October, 2022
CITY CLERK. SCOTT PASSEY
Published: October 7, 2027- EDHWA449
Proofed by Phillips, Linda, 10/10/2022 08:40:41 am Page: 2
Packet Pg. 164
9.2.c
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MEETING
APPROVED MINUTES
October 4, 2022
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Mike Nelson, Mayor
Vivian Olson, Council President
Will Chen, Councilmember
Neil Tibbott, Councilmember
Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember
Susan Paine, Councilmember
Dave Teitzel, Councilmember
1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE
STAFF PRESENT
Oscar Antillon, Public Works Director
Susan McLaughlin, Dev. Serv. Director
Kernen Lien, Planning Manager
Mike De Lilla, Senior Utilities Engineer
Mike Clugston, Senior Planner
Tom Brubaker, City Attorney
Scott Passey, City Clerk
Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator
The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Nelson in the Council
Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually. The meeting was opened with the flag salute.
2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Councilmember Paine read the City Council Land Acknowledge Statement: "We acknowledge the
original inhabitants of this place, the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and their successors the Tulalip
Tribes, who since time immemorial have hunted, fished, gathered, and taken care of these lands. We
respect their sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and we honor their sacred spiritual connection
with the land and water."
3. ROLL CALL
City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present.
4. PRESENTATIONS
5. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO
APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER.
Council President Olson advised Item 9.1, Updates to Employee Reimbursement Policy, was removed
from the agenda and will be brought back on a future agenda.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON,
TO ADD A RESOLUTION EXPRESSING SUPPORT FOR THE RENEWAL OF THE STATE
BUDGET PROVISO FOR THE RIGHT OF FIRST REFUSAL PRIVILEGE RELATING TO THE
OLD UNOCAL PROPERTY THAT WSDOT WILL ACQUIRE ADJACENT TO THE EDMONDS
MARSH ESTUARY.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 4, 2022
Page 1
Packet Pg. 165
9.2.c
Councilmember Buckshnis explained this is a resolution that will be sent to the State legislature.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Mayor Nelson described procedures for in -person audience comments.
Becky Chandler, Edmonds, a resident of the Gateway District of the Highway 99 corridor, expressed
concern that the Highway 99 subarea plan is insufficient in relation to the proposed 261 unit apartment
building proposed in the neighborhood. Passing the emergency ordinance tonight will help address some
of the issues, but it will also be important to consider a supplemental EIS to address the shortcomings of
the FEIS approved in 2017. The Highway 99 subarea plan provides guidance for ensuring aesthetic
appeal; this was identified as particularly important as the Gateway District was expected to incur the
greatest change as a result of the zoning revision from multifamily to commercial general. The Terrace
Place development is larger than any other recent project in the city, its impacts will be significant, and it
is a bigger design challenge since it is not located on SR-104 or Highway 99 like most of the recent
developments in Edmonds. She was not aware of any definition of a unique identity that has approved for
the Gateway Subdistrict so it is impossible to know if the recent proposals are within the guidance of the
subarea plan. A high level of development is occurring that will address housing needs and the Terrace
Place is one of several large projects, but they want the development to align with the intent of the
Highway 99 subarea and hope the council will give their concerns serious consideration as has been done
for other developments in the area. She thanked everyone who has worked on the gateway project,
anticipating there is a great opportunity to make it into something special for the Edmonds community.
She pointed out tonight is the start of Yom Kippur so there may be people unable to attend the meeting.
Shannon Demas, Edmonds, a physician at the Everett Clinic, and a resident of the Gateway District on
the Highway 99, thanked the council for including the emergency ordinance for the CG zone on Highway
99 on tonight's agenda and urged the council to pass it. She also requested a supplemental EIS for the
Highway 99 Subarea be required for the EIS five-year review. This is important because of the 261 unit
apartment building proposed a block away from her single family home and the absence of an opportunity
to address the impacts this size building will have on a residential neighborhood. She was unaware when
the subarea plan was approved in 2017 or the upzoning the plan included; she moved to the area in 2022.
The FEIS for the plan includes assumptions that are no longer relevant or the identified mitigation has not
been undertaken or there may be more appropriate mitigations. One of those is related to parks; the lack
of parks in the Highway 99 Gateway District is noted in the subarea plan and specific actions were
identified to mitigate the deficit. The actions in the plan have not been accomplished to date and the new
Terrace Place development with its 261 units adds urgency to address the problem. She moved from the
Northgate area to Edmonds to start a family. When she moved into her house, she realized her area was a
parks desert and there have been no changes since the plan was approved in 2017 and none in sight. With
the addition of the 192 unit building on Highway 99 at 234ti', the lack of parks will be even more acute,
even before the proposed Terrace Place apartments are constructed. A supplemental EIS is needed to
reexamine the assumptions and conditions in the area and need mitigation.
Jenna Nand, Edmonds, an attorney practicing in Edmonds, encouraged the council to view proposed
changes to the Highway 99 community where she grew up and has lived in Shoreline and in Edmonds
since she was 6 years old through a civil rights lens. This area of town generates the most tax revenue for
the City which is not reflected in the way City funds and services are distributed. As a person of color
who grew up along Highway 99, she believed that had a lot to do with the demographic makeup of the
community and the racial and socioeconomic divide. If the council's posture is that urban sprawl and
overdevelopment should be sequestered to the Highway 99 area even though they generate more revenue
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 4, 2022
Page 2
Packet Pg. 166
9.2.c
than the bowl or any other part of Edmonds, she suggested the city attorney may want to consider whether
that is a possible civil rights violation .
Glenn Douglas, Edmonds, a resident of the Gateway District of the Highway 99 corridor, thanked the
council for including the emergency ordinance regarding the CG zone along Highway 99 on tonight's
agenda and urged the council to pass it. He echoed the previous comments regarding the 261 unit building
proposed at 236' & 84', noting he lives very close to that very dangerous intersection and frequently
hears accidents occur. When the Gateway District was changed to a commercial zone in 2017, the
Highway 99 subarea plan, identified mitigation measures to soften the transition between the CG zone
and adjacent residential units. In particular, the code was to included stepbacks for buildings 75 feet high
when adjacent to or across the street from single family residential buildings. The current code only has
stepbacks for the adjacent side and does not include the mitigation cited in the plan for stepbacks when
located across the street. The proposed Terrace Place apartments on 84t' & 236t' Street will be across the
street from single family residential units and adjacent to 3-story condominiums. The ordinance the
council will consider tonight will remedy the omission in the code to help provide the transition to single
family that was intended in the subarea plan and identified as mitigation measures in the EIS. He was one
of the signatories of the letter sent to council yesterday requesting a moratorium on building permits in
the area until this code is reconciled with the subarea plan. Passing the ordinance tonight will address the
concerns in that letter and avoid the moratorium that would otherwise be needed.
Jack Malek, Shoreline, a realtor with Windermere representing Karen Wiggins in the sale of Sound
View Plaza, referred to the original designated street front map and the extension in the BD2 district from
mid -block 2nd Avenue south to James Street which he did not feel was appropriate for that street. The
buildings in that short segment of the corridor were left off the original design for good reason; the
buildings should not be limiting to just office and retail and the southern end of the block is better suited
for residential. The Sound View Plaza building has been on the market for two years with no sale or lease;
restricting it to office and retail is difficult without extensive tenant improvements. He encouraged the
council to leave that segment off the map of the designated street front.
Mayor Nelson described procedures for virtual audience comments.
Will Magnuson, Edmonds, referred to the development code regarding BD zoning and asked the council
to provide their full support to the Architectural Design Board's recommendation for BD2 zoning and
require the inclusion of commercial space for any new BD2 development. The core areas of Edmonds
including the neighborhoods of downtown, Highway 99, Westgate and elsewhere have evolved to provide
more public amenities including entertainment, recreation as well as goods and services for the
community. An abundance of these treasured assets provide the synergy required to provide a truly,
walkable, vibrant, safe and sustainable community. Slow but steady progress has been made toward the
creation of this synergy and more work needs to be done. He liked the convenience of public and
commercial amenities within convenient walking distance but more businesses and amenities are needed
to provide a sustainable energy in core neighborhoods and communities. The downtown core should
remain focused on the community by requiring any new development parcels to include commercial
space along Main Street inclusive of parcels to Dayton Street and extending from the waterfront up to the
Frances Anderson Center.
Mr. Magnuson continued, any discussion regarding commercial development should focus on clarity and
reliability to the citizens and community of Edmonds and developers will be fine. During his career in
commercial real estate development, he learned to prioritize every development decision toward the user
and property management, creating a place coveted by tenants, visitors and community alike while
offering a quality project designed and built for long term maintenance and sustainability. This
development focus provides a successful project for everyone including developers, bankers, investors,
tenants, visitors and neighbors by providing a project which will be a long term asset to the community.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 4, 2022
Page 3
Packet Pg. 167
9.2.c
He urged the council to support the ADB's recommendation and implement immediate zoning for all
BD2 parcels to include commercial space.
Judi Gladstone, Edmonds, said she was unable to be present tonight due to Yom Kippur and appreciated
the opportunity to participate online. A resident of the Gateway District of the Highway 99 corridor, she
expressed her concern about the 261 unit Terrace Place apartment building proposed in her neighborhood.
She urged the council to pass the emergency ordinance on tonight's agenda which will help address some
of the issues the building creates, acknowledging the ordinance would not solve everything. The 261 unit
Terrace Place development is proposed for the corner of 84" & 2361h Street SW; there is an existing
problem with speeding on 84th, a 2-lane very busy road with no sidewalks and 236' is used as the main
road to Madrona School with a traffic light at SR-104 but no sidewalks for the students. There are twice
as many accidents at the intersection of 236th & 84t' as there are at the intersection of 238t' & 84t''. These
transportation issues will be exacerbated by the traffic created by the Terrace Place development. The
Hwy 99 subarea plan relies on the City's transportation plan to provide for infrastructure improvements
that mitigate the impacts of development; however, the subarea plan EIS focuses on impacts to Hwy 99
and the movement of traffic through intersections along the Highway 99.
Ms. Gladstone continued, it is insufficient to address the impacts to the residential neighborhoods in the
district. The assumptions and mitigation regarding transportation and pedestrian safety should be
reconsidered in the FEIS five-year review that the council pulled from the agenda in August. This issue,
along with others, warrant requiring either a supplemental EIS or a change to the mitigation in the subarea
plan. To have any impact on the development, the council must act quickly before the building permit
application is filed. Like many of her neighbors, she was unaware the area was upzoned from multifamily
to general commercial in 2017. If she had been asked then if she wanted a 6-story, 261 unit building
across the street from single family residents, it would have caught her attention. She assured if the
council undertook a review of the plan and EIS, they would surely get more engagement from the
neighborhood.
Ken Reidy, Edmonds, recalled a council comment that Item 9.1 had been removed from the agenda. He
was unsure why the council didn't vote to amend the agenda after the council meeting started, noting
there was no 9.1 on the online agenda. He suggested considering that and voting when the agenda is
amended. Chapter 20.70 ECDC establishes the procedure and criteria that the City will use to decide upon
vacations of streets, alleys and public easements. The City code expressly states the City vacates public
easements. ECDC 20.70.060.G states an appraisal is not required if a utility easement only is proposed to
be vacated. Despite this, the City has required an appraisal and can release the utility easement under
State law RCW 35.94 which says nothing about the release of a utility easement, and does not include the
word release or easement. RCW 35.94 talks about releasing or selling public utility works, plants or
systems owned by the City. Resolution 1375 states the City releases all ownership interest in the
stormwater facilities located upon or within the vacated 92" d Avenue Street right-of-way as well as the
stormwater facilities located through the Westgate Chapel property at 22901 Edmonds Way. Westgate
Chapel shall acknowledge in writing that upon vacation it shall assume ownership and maintenance
responsibilities for these facilities.
Mr. Reidy asked whether a private party can assume ownership of public assets, public stormwater
facilities located outside the street that was vacated. It had nothing to do with the street that was vacated
but the City acted as if the applicant could assume ownership of stormwater facilities before the City ever
talked about whether the stormwater facility assets were surplus to the City's needs and comingled two
very different things into one legislative action. There is no denying that Resolution 1375 exists, the 2016
city council adopted the resolution on November 15, 2016 with City Attorney Jeff Taraday in attendance.
He encouraged the council to form a citizen taskforce to review the historical conduct of city attorneys
and recommend how the City should obtain and manage legal advice. He urged the council not to co -
mingle two different legislative outcomes into one vote later tonight. If the council wants to vote on
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 4, 2022
Page 4
Packet Pg. 168
9.2.c
something as if it is an emergency, the council should vote and if the emergency vote does not pass, there
should be a second motion to pass it as a regular ordinance instead of co -mingling it.
Kevin Smith, Edmonds, Economic Development Commissioner but speaking as a citizen, local business
owner and CPA regarding the BD2 zoning and proposed agenda item, said the joint meeting between the
planning board and EDC overwhelmingly favored extending the designated street front requirements to
the entire BD2 zone and recommended addressing the long term zoning in the 2024 comprehensive plan.
He supported doing that because, first, in his professional capacity as a CPA, he speaks with business
owners daily. A consistent theme he hears in Edmonds is the lack of available retail space in the
downtown core because as soon as retail -oriented space is opened, regardless of the configuration, it is
leased. Businesses want to locate in Edmonds, new businesses and industries move in and the City is
rapidly growing as a result. Second, commercial office buildings such as services are moving at a
different pace. The City needs to be careful and not have a kneejerk reaction to point in time
circumstances. The governor's emergency declaration is still in place and shifts back to in -office work
have been slow to occur. Additional commercial office leases are often 5-10 years old so a combination of
the pandemic and lease -locked businesses has likely led to a lack of mobility in commercial office space.
It would behoove the City to look toward the 2024 comprehensive plan as an ideal time to address the
core long-term strategy as it will allow two years of post -pandemic economic activity to inform decisions.
Mr. Smith continued, third, the downtown core has been rapidly growing over the last decade; his biggest
concern was shutting out business growth through zoning changes. The inevitable consequence of such
action is reducing areas for businesses of all types to locate. Fourth, major attractions will open next year,
Civic Park and Main Street Commons. These will undoubtedly change consumer and commercial patterns
and create new visitors and new desirability for the downtown area. Understanding those impacts needs to
be considered with major changes to the zoning. He summarized major changes to the zoning structure
should not be made in a vacuum and should be address through a broad process with heavy public
involvement and the use of post -pandemic data. The 2024 comprehensive plan is the right move. He
assured this was not an anti -housing position; housing is important and needs to be a focus area. He
personally believed the most vibrant developments were those with a strong mix of commercial and
residential; while it may not be the most profitable to the developer, it [inaudible] pencil out or in the best
interest of the City.
Deborah Arthur, Edmonds, thanked Mayor Nelson for his speech and expressed appreciation for what
he is doing. She agreed with the previous comments about the downtown zone. She urged the council to
be careful about zoning on the hill; residents are proud of their neighborhoods and do not want 5-story
buildings across the street or in their backyards either. Edmonds does not need to be like other cities; for
example, Seattle is having a lot of problems like the recent shooting in Crown Hill. She urged the City to
keep Edmonds the same as much as possible. She understood progress was inevitable to a point but
attention needs to be paid to the entire City, not just the bowl but everywhere. She noted 84t' isn't the
only place with speeding problems, people drive down 80t' 60 mph day and night and she hasn't seen a
turn signal in five years. There were campers in vans on 80t' last night, but she did not call the police
because she didn't want to bother them.
7. RECEIVED FOR FILING
1. CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM JEFFREY JOHNSON AND KATHLEEN BARRETT
8. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO
APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 4, 2022
Page 5
Packet Pg. 169
9.2.c
Councilmember Tibbott observed 0.75 parking spaces per unit for bicycles sounded like a lot; in a 200
unit complex, that would be 150 spaces for bikes. He asked where staff envisioned those spaces would be,
whether it would be in a parking garage, on the roof, etc., and how much space it would require. Mr.
Clugston answered this requirement is consistent with surrounding jurisdictions. Typically most bike
parking will be internal to the building, probably associated with a parking garage or divided into storage
spaces by floor. There are different ways to meet the standards, but he envisioned it would be primarily
inside the building.
Councilmember Tibbott said he could see this applying to multifamily buildings close to transit and
where there are bike lanes where people can ride a mile to access transit, but it is difficult to bike in other
places in the City. He asked if it would make sense to stratify where to require 0.75 bike storage spaces
per unit. Mr. Clugston answered he did not think so, the benefit is it applies equally everywhere. As bike
infrastructure is extended, more people will be using e-bikes as an option. He acknowledged the Main
Street hill was difficult on a bike, but it is much easier on an e-bike and the use of e-bikes is increasing.
Councilmember Tibbott commented the requirement is forward looking and could be change if the spaces
are not utilized the way they are anticipated to be used. He envisioned it would be very useful for
multifamily close to transit and also a desirable amenity for the residents.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (5-0-1), COUNCILMEMBERS TEITZEL, CHEN,
TIBBOTT AND PAINE AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON VOTING YES;
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS ABSTAINING.
4. CG EMERGENCY INTERIM ORDINANCE
Development Services Director Susan McLaughlin acknowledged the public for bringing this forward.
Staff is in alignment with the sentiments expressed and relayed other interests in the planned action will
be discussed on October 18'. Tonight is an opportunity to talk about the CG zone stepback as discussed
in the subarea plan, EIS and the corresponding planned action ordinance.
Planning Manager Kernen Lien reviewed the CG Zone Stepback:
• Highway Subarea Planning
o Subarea Plan (Ordinance 4077)
■ Adopted by reference in the City's comprehensive plan
o Updated Chapter 16.60 ECDC (Ordinance 4078)
■ CG Zoning
o EIS and Planned Action (Ordinance 4079)
o VISION 2040 Award from the Puget Sound Regional Council
• Existing Stepback Regulations - ECDC 16.60.020.1)
o Building Step -Back When Adjacent to RS Zones.
■ 1. The portion of the buildings above 25 feet in height shall step back no less than 10
feet from the required setback to an adjacent RS zone. That portion of the building over
55 feet in height shall be step back no less than 20 feet from the required setback to an
adjacent RS zone.
• Highway 99 Subarea Plan
o Recommendation 6.8
■ Upper Floor Stepback
- Zero upper floor stepback up to 25 feet in height (30 feet is the maximum height in
RM 1.5, which is the predominant zone surrounding the commercial zones on
Highway 99)
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 4, 2022
Page 14
Packet Pg. 170
9.2.c
- Minimum 10 feet stepback above 25 feet in height on sides with lot line adjacency to
single family zones. The portion of the building above 55 feet in height shall be
stepped back at least 20 feet from a residential zone boundary.
- Stepback areas can be used for active outdoor space such as balconies.
Planned Action Mitigation Measures
o ...the Planned Action stepback standards provide for transitions in building height and bulk
between portions of the subarea zoned for the highest intensity uses and adjacent single
family zoned areas.
o ...the Planned Action stepback standards will mitigate for land use incompatibilities in areas
where the updated CG zone abuts single family zones
o The proposed Subarea Plan includes policy language in support of the proposed stepback
development regulations, which are intended to help mitigate for potential land use conflicts
around the edges of the subarea
Environmental Impact Statement - "adjacent to"
o Proposal: Adoption of amendments to development standards to implement the Subarea Plan,
including...
■ Upper story stepbacks adjacent to single family zone
o Impacts of Alternative 2: The proposed development regulations include new upper story
stepback standards in areas adjacent to single family zones to provide transitions in building
height and scale.
o Mitigation measures: Under Alternative 2, the proposed new stepback standards would
mitigate for land use incompatibilities in areas where the updated CG zone abuts single
family zones, when combined with the City's remaining existing development and design
standards.
Environmental Impact Statement - "across the street"
o Alternative 2 - Preferred Alternative: Across the street from single family zones provide
eight -foot stepback for the portion of the building above 25 feet. Provide 16-footupper story
stepback from the lot line for the portion of the building above 55 feet.
o Areawide Rezone: For uses across the street from single family zones, the standards call for
similar setbacks of 8 feet for portions of buildings 25-55 feet in height, and 16 feet for
portions of buildings above 55 feet.
o Comp Plan Consistency: ... the Preferred Alternative would encourage development to the
fullest extent possible while ensuring that design qualities and amenities enhance the overall
character and quality of the Corridor, including upper story stepbacks for buildings adjacent
to or across the street from single family zones.
o Mitigation Measures: The proposed Subarea Plan includes policy language in support of the
proposed stepback development regulations, which are intended to help mitigate for potential
land use conflicts around the edges of the subarea.
Proposed Interim Amendment ECDC 16.60
2. For buildings across the street from RS zones, the portion of the building above 25 feet in
height shall step back no less than eight feet from the required street setback. That portion of
building over 55 feet in height shall step back no less than 16 feet from the required street
setback.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 4, 2022
Page 15
Packet Pg. 171
9.2.c
VWi en.Na,k
• Recommendation
o Adopt emergency interim ordinance
o Council public hearing within 60 days
o Complete review of Planned Action at October 18 council meeting
Ms. McLaughlin said there was commentary that a mitigation measure was missed. In reviewing this
issue, although it was discussed, mitigation measures in the EIS were not explicit about the across the
street requirement and staff agrees that needs to be fine-tuned. There used to be a transitionary zone that
helped to mitigate the blunt line between CG and single family; the stark transition requires the stepback
across the street from these larger scale buildings.
Councilmember Chen thanked staff for bringing this forward. He agreed there was a disconnect between
the City code and the EIS, the fact the code did not address the stepback requirements for development
across the street from single family zoning.
COUNCILMEMBER CHEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO
ADOPT AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ESTABLISHING
INTERIM DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS FOR THE CG ZONE, DECLARING AN
EMERGENCY NECESSITATING THE IMMEDIATE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE ORDINANCE,
AND SETTING SIX MONTHS AS THE EFFECTIVE PERIOD OF THE ORDINANCE
Councilmember Teitzel asked what happens if development occurs west of Highway 99 in Esperance; for
example, would these rules apply if there was a 260 unit building built across the street from a single
family neighborhood in Esperance. Ms. McLaughlin answered the City's zoning code does not apply in
Esperance. If the multifamily building was in Edmonds and Esperance was across the street, the
ordinance would apply. Mr. Lien agreed, it states across the street from single family zones.
Councilmember Paine said she was glad to see this, recalling there were several requests last week and
this week requesting a supplemental EIS be performed. She asked if there would be time to do that,
specifically on the topic of traffic and stormwater impacts. Ms. McLaughlin answered details associated
with the EIS and the validity of requiring additional environmental analysis will be provided on October
18th.
Councilmember Buckshnis said she also has issues with updating the EIS and will wait for the
information to be provided on October 18t1i. She thanked staff for the packet which she found very
informative.
Mr. Lien pointed out the emergency ordinance includes a blank to insert the date for the public hearing. It
was agreed to schedule the public hearing on November 15t1i.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 4, 2022
Page 16
Packet Pg. 172
9.2.d
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MEETING
APPROVED MINUTES
October 18, 2022
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Mike Nelson, Mayor
Vivian Olson, Council President
Will Chen, Councilmember
Neil Tibbott, Councilmember
Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember
Susan Paine, Councilmember
Dave Teitzel, Councilmember
Jenna Nand, Councilmember
1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE
STAFF PRESENT
Whitney Rivera, Municipal Court Judge
Dave Turley, Administrative Services Director
Oscar Antillon, Public Works Director
Susan McLaughlin, Dev. Serv. Director
Kernen Lien, Planning Manager
Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
Scott Passey, City Clerk
Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator
The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7 p.m. by Mayor Nelson in the Council
Chambers, 250 5t' Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually. The meeting was opened with the flag salute.
2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Councilmember Nand read the City Council Land Acknowledge Statement: "We acknowledge the original
inhabitants of this place, the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and their successors the Tulalip Tribes, who
since time immemorial have hunted, fished, gathered, and taken care of these lands. We respect their
sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and we honor their sacred spiritual connection with the land
and water."
3. ROLL CALL
City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present.
4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO
APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Mayor Nelson described procedures for in -person audience comments.
Glenn Douglas, Edmonds, a resident of the Gateway District of the Highway 99 corridor, said traffic and
pedestrian safety issues were inadequate addressed in the final EIS for the Highway 99 subarea plan. The
area around the largest development ever proposed for Edmonds, 236t1i & 84t'', has serious traffic and
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
October 18, 2022
Page 1
Packet Pg. 173
9.2.d
pedestrian issues. In addition, 236t1i is the main road to Madrona School and he anticipated there would be
a lot of children in a 261 unit apartment complex in addition to the complex being built behind the Lutheran
Church. There are no sidewalks; he does not even walk his dog on that road because it is dangerous. The
speed limit is 25 mph but no one goes 25. There is a light at SR-104, but if his child was attending Madrona,
he would not want them crossing a five lane highway to reach the school. Adding 1,000 people in the four
new buildings that are either proposed or completed to their neighborhood of a few hundred people will
have a major impact. He did not feel the subarea plan evaluated the traffic situation, the impact of
pedestrians, lack of space, no curbs, etc. that create a dangerous situation. He recalled voicing his concerns
about 84t'', the street he lives on, to the council in the past. Speeding has been a horrible problem; Traffic
Sergeant Strum was at the end of his driveway recently citing drivers, but that only lasted about two days
because as indicated by the police blotter, another problem in the Highway 99 subarea and neighborhood
is rampant crime.
Becky Chandler, Edmonds, a resident of the Gateway District of the Highway 99 corridor, requested the
council provide thoughtful consideration of the Highway 99 subarea in the same spirit it has considered
development in other parts of the City such as the Bowl. The Highway 99 subarea plan was developed to
encourage economic growth to benefit from the revenue stream generated via upzoning the area. She
supported having Highway 99 commercial development and the need for more housing in the area;
however, the disproportionate impact is notable. The Growth Management Act has been amended to
specifically require consideration of racial disparity impacts and displacement, specifically areas that may
be at higher risk for displacement from market forces that occur with changes to the zoning and
development regulations and capital investments. Prior to the planned action, the Highway 99 corridor was
identified as a moderate risk for displacement; all other areas of Edmonds are identified as low by the Puget
Sound Regional Council.
Ms. Chandler continued, displacement risks have intensified due to the effects of the pandemic, the light
rail and planned action which significantly increased property values in the area. There is significant new
information with the changes to the GMA and specific to the Highway 99 area that result in probable
significant adverse impact that should be addressed in the supplemental EIS. The vision of the subarea plan
was for 3-4 story apartment buildings and 5-6 story mixed use buildings, yet developments proposed in the
Gateway District are not in keeping with that vision and there is no way for residents in adjacent
neighborhoods to interject in the development process because approval of the subarea plan initially
circumvents that option. Requiring a supplemental EIS at this time or a moratorium on building permits is
a way to bring the Highway 99 communities together such as the moratorium in the BD2 district the council
imposed while considering community input of specific development.
Judi Gladstone, Edmonds, a resident of the Gateway District of the Highway 99 corridor, commented on
the 5-year review of the Highway 99 subarea plan FEIS and the opportunity the council has to address
inadequacies in that document. When the council adopted the FEIS in 2017, the ordinance included a
provision that requires a 5-year review that could result in the council proposing amendments to the
ordinance or requiring a supplement or revision to the planned action EIS. Although staff s review indicates
there is no reason to recommend any council action, there is good reason to do so. The EIS was inadequate
at the outset because it did not include consideration of adequate alternatives. Comparing the no action
alternative is a requirement of SEPA which means the only real alternative was the preferred alternative. In
addition to the alternative to upzone the entire area to commercial general, there could have been alternative
to leave multifamily zoning where it is adjacent or across the street from single family residential zones.
The planned EIS contained mitigations intended to create transitions between the commercial general zone
and single family zones for those portions in the upzone, but those mitigations are insufficient to address
the disparity between building heights and densities allowed in the commercial zones and single family
homes.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
October 18, 2022
Page 2
Packet Pg. 174
9.2.d
Ms. Gladstone continued, the action to approve the emergency ordinance two weeks ago that put into place
the stepbacks indicated in the EIS but not included in code was a really good step in remedying the
inadequacies of the mitigations for the upzone, but more is needed to allow development in those areas to
follow the recommendations of the comprehensive plan for developing uses adjacent to single family areas.
She read from page 64 of the comprehensive plan regarding the Highway 99 corridor, "New development
should be allowed and encouraged to develop to the fullest extent possible while assuring that the design
quality and amenities provided contribute to the overall character and quality of the corridor. When intense
development adjoins residential areas, site design and building design should be used to minimize adverse
impacts on residential zoned properties." One of the reasons for adopting an action plan is to streamline
development; but in doing that, the communities most impacted by that development have no avenue for
providing input about how well the development is accomplishing the recommendations of the
comprehensive plan. While she supports the staff recommendation that the City should look at the
development review process for projects within the commercial zone, that will be too late for developments
already proposed that could have long term, significant negative impacts on nearby single family
neighborhoods. Council action is needed now.
Amy June Grumble, Edmonds, a homeowner on 236t' Street SW and parent of two children under the
age of six, wanted to add perspective on existing traffic and pedestrian safety issues which will only be
accelerated by the proposed Terrace Place development unless appropriate measures are taken to mitigate.
In addition to the problem of school -aged children including her own who use their street to access school
bus stops at the east end and Madrona Elementary at the west end and the fact that their road becomes
particularly busy with school buses and parent vehicle during morning drop-offs and afternoon pickups,
there are at least two additional groups impacted by these safety issues. First elderly, low income, and other
carless residents who must regularly access the Aurora Marketplace Safeway and other shopping resources
on foot. Second, commuters and particularly disabled residents who need to access public transit such as
the Swift buses on Highway 99 and the Community Transit 115 bus stops at the intersection of 236t' & 84t'
Avenue West where the development is proposed. Due to narrow or non-existent shoulders, street parking,
drainage ditches and inclines, several segments of these roads cannot be passed without crossing the white
line to literally walk in the street. This is also dangerous for parents with stroller -aged children and even
worse during rainy months when the few existing dirt paths are blocked due to standing water. The
intersection at 236th Street SW & 84t' Avenue W has several low visibility corners, no crosswalks, few
safe places to stand and drivers do not stop for pedestrians. Finally 236t' Street between Highway 99 and
Edmonds Way is regularly used by heavy 18-wheeler trucks as a shortcut to the Safeway loading dock.
These trucks are moving fast to keep on schedule and have limited visibility for close -by pedestrians and
access this road at all hours of the day and night. Pedestrian access in this area is already dangerous and the
risk falls disproportionately onto low income, elderly, and disabled residents and minors. She requested the
council take action to address these deficiencies in the FEIS Highway 99 subarea plan before an already
risky situation becomes even more serious.
Mayor Nelson described procedures for virtual audience comments.
Natalie Seitz, Edmonds, referred to the Highway 99 planned action five year review, commenting she
could talk for hours on the subject. She was frustrated reading the final EIS that reviews the EIS. No action
alternatives were considered other than the planned action, no public involvement in mitigation with only
two comment letters from Community Transit and a real estate agent. She was frustrated that in the cursory
review she could easily identify more than a half dozen ways in which the WAC criteria have been met to
do a supplemental EIS. She was equally frustrated by the certainty that additional impacts are occurring
that could be identified by a scoping process with this community. She was frustrated that park mitigation
commitments made in chapter 1 of the FEIS are negated in Ordinance 4079 and disregarded by the City as
identified in attachment 6. She was frustrated that the FEIS did not conclude that siting any amount of
growth in this area prior to park development would be a significant, unavoidable adverse impact. The level
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
October 18, 2022
Page 3
Packet Pg. 175
9.2.d
of service thresholds used in the FEIS or newly adopted ones in the PROS Plan are both exceeded. This is
incontrovertible, not a matter of opinion, this area is being significantly impacted. On May 25th, she
commented to council asking the City to "please perform outreach and engage the SR-99 community in the
SEPA responsible official review of the EIS and upzone." Outreach did not occur and the City did not
inclusively advertise or meet with the broader community and only agreed to meet with her after the
determination was made.
Ms. Seitz continued, meeting with her or any member of the public does not matter if the City is only willing
to do it after the determination is made. She was frustrated the memo provided by the City does not include
any discussion of the WAC triggers for a supplemental EIS to be performed. The memo and supporting
documents discuss vague concepts of the City's intent and consistency with the FEIS that is wholly
inadequate and does not meet the current code requirements. She was frustrated the memo avoids any
discussion of changes to the significance of impacts which trigger for the SEIS. People will not stop being
displaced; developers will not stop proposing high density, inclusionary housing even though the utilization
clearly demonstrates that the threshold will be exceeded without the commercial redevelopment. She cannot
take her children to the imaginary park of the City's intent. Simply put, the code does not care about the
intent; it cares about impact. A supplemental EIS is required and concrete commitments to community -
driven mitigation are needed now. She supports growth that supports all income levels; this is about people
being displaced and unhoused, about the environment, resources and equity. She urged the City to commit
to undertake a scoping process and a supplemental EIS.
Nate Sugg, Edmonds, a resident of the Gateway District near the Highway 99 corridor, encouraged the
council to engage in a supplemental EIS related to the Highway 99 subarea plan. Highway 99 can and will
accommodate much of the population growth coming to Edmonds in the near future and many are fine with
that, but want to ensure that future development's impact on traffic and pedestrian safety, access to safe
places for kids to play, and access to safe drinking water are adequately considered. With regard to park
space, this area is a park desert; there are no parks within walking distance. His 2'/2 year old loves slides,
but there are no public parks they can walk to. The actions identified in the original subarea plan mitigate
that park deficit have not been implemented and since those original considerations were made, the City
adopted a new level of service related to community and neighborhood parks. With regard to the proximity
to park resources, those standards are not included in the EIS because they were adopted since the EIS. The
use of outdated standards is another reason for a supplemental EIS that looks at the adoption of park level
of service. Second, their neighborhood recently learned that Olympic View Water & Sewer District plans
to install a new well on 228' Street and have a wellhead protection area that will span across Highway 99.
Redevelopment on Highway 99 in that area relies on deep underground injection control wells, a specific
type of well for stormwater management, that can impact drinking water for Edmonds residents. That
project is not within the scope of the current EIS, a change in circumstances that would support a
supplemental EIS. He asked the council to take action to allow a supplemental EIS to consider new
information that will assist in determining appropriate mitigation for new development. A supplemental
EIS will appropriately reexamine the assumptions about conditions in the area and needed mitigations for
those conditions.
Ken Reidy, Edmonds, acknowledged great audience comments that were being made. Olympic View
Water & Sewer's franchise expired in 2014; he encouraged the council to check if the franchise had ever
been updated and is in place. He encouraged the council to form a citizen taskforce to review the historical
conduct of city attorneys and recommend how the City should obtain and manage legal advice as well as
allow a citizen taskforce to play a role in the update of Chapter 2.05 ECC. The proposed updates to Chapter
2.05 ECC in tonight's packet will once again result in new inconsistencies in city code. Regarding the BID,
a collection letter written by Lighthouse Law Group claims that state statute allows cities to establish a BID
either by petition from business owners within the BID boundaries or by resolution from the legislative
authority of the City. It was his understanding the state statue allows cities to initiate a BID process either
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
October 18, 2022
Page 4
Packet Pg. 176
9.2.d
by petition from business owners within the BID boundaries or by resolution from the legislative authority
of the City. The word "initiate" is very different from establish. Furthermore, the BID of downtown
Edmonds was not established by resolution; it was established under Ordinance 3909.
Mr. Reidy continued, the City of Seattle represents the following, as provided in RCW 35.87A.010, the
City will consider establishing or modifying business improvement areas when presented with a petition
by those who represent 60% or more of the total assessment in the proposed BIA. The 60% approval
threshold represents a super majority in favor of an initiative and indicates rate payer support for an
assessment. A major legal case related to the state statute, City of Seattle v. Rogers Clothing for Men,
included the following: the ordinance was enacted pursuant to authority provided by RCW 35.87A in
accordance with that chapter, RCW 35.87A.0101, a petition has been signed by more than 60% of the
businesses within the designated business improvement area. He questioned whether the Edmonds BID was
legally established and hoped a thorough investigation will be conducted. If BIDs can be established
without a petition, he requested the City inform all in Edmonds that the council has the ability to establish
a special BID assessment without ratepayer support for the assessment.
Liz Brown, Edmonds, a business agent for Teamsters Local 763, the labor union representing the City's
parks and public works employees, explained the labor contract with the City expired December 2020 and
it was agreed to extend the contract another year during the COVID shutdown. The first bargaining session
for a new contract was held on November 18, 2021. Now, almost a year later, there is still no contract. In
fact, only in their last meeting on September 27 did the City finally provide a full proposal on wages. One
issue they continue to struggle with is the lack of internal equity between the City's white collar employees
who work from home and their members, the City's blue collar workers who report to work in person every
day as they have throughout the pandemic except for a brief period in 2020 when the City did not have
enough protective gear in supply. Remote work is an economic benefit; an article on Salary.com estimated
cost savings for employees of about $4,000/year. Another article in August from HR Reporters surveyed
remote workers who estimated their annual savings at around $5,000 or more/year.
Ms. Brown continued, the City's remote workers save money on gas and car maintenance while their
members drive to work. When one of the City's remote employees gets COVID, they work from home and
do not have to use sick leave or vacation. When one of their members tests positive for COVID, they must
stay home and use leave. If the child of a remote worker gets sick and has to stay home from school, the
remote employee is already at home with them; their members must use a day of sick leave to stay a home
with their child. They have urged the City to acknowledge and account for the fact that remote workers
enjoy economic benefits not offered to the employees who tend the City's parks, cemetery, streets, water
and sewer system, and who operate the WWTP seven days a week. They understand remote work will be
part of the workplace moving forward; at the same time, employers must make an effort to address the
inequity between those who can work from home and those who can't. Arguing that it doesn't exist will
only lead to further divisiveness among the workforce and between the City and its employees.
Lora Petso, Edmonds, said she was not speaking as a Olympic View Water & Sewer District
commissioner or a member of the Washington State Public Works Boards but as a citizen of Edmonds who
has way too much knowledge of the effects of PFAS contamination on both humans and fish. She also has
a recently heightened understanding of the need for climate resilience and environmental justice. She
requested the council require a new SEPA for the Highway 99 subarea based on significant changes since
2017 including those mentioned earlier and including, but not limited to, increased knowledge of PFAS
contamination and the effect on people and fish, designation of two wellhead protection areas in the
Highway 99 planning area since the original SEPA in 2017, and recognition that the City's CARA
regulations are not adequate to protect wellhead protection areas or fish. She requested the council overrule
the staff recommendation to do nothing and request a scoping and supplemental EIS for the Highway 99
plans.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
October 18, 2022
Page 5
Packet Pg. 177
9.2.d
for the assistant court administrator position. With regard to workload, it depends on how it is measured.
There has been a lot of work coming out of COVID with the Washington Supreme court emergency order
about to go away and the pause on infraction failures to appear. There are different ways to measure
workload such as number of cases or number of hearings. For example, she had six cases on this afternoon's
docket but it took hours. Once the assistant court administrator position is filled, the court will be properly
staffed to handle the work that comes through Edmonds Municipal Court.
Councilmember Chen recalled Ms. Maylor's response to his email that there were 5,000 new cases in 2021
and 1,000 in 2022, which is a significant drop in the number of cases, yet the department's budget has
doubled. Judge Rivera said case filings is one way of tracking workload. The court processes cases they
get; it is interesting to look at trends, there are peaks and valleys. If someone pled guilty to domestic
violence or driving under the influence today, they potentially would be on probation through 2027. A lot
of what they do in community court is providing services to people on probation who may be struggling, it
is not just pending cases. She agreed the case filings are projected to be lower in 2022 than in 2021.
Mayor Nelson declared a brief recess.
4. HIGHWAY 99 PLANNED ACTION FIVE-YEAR REVIEW
Development Services Director Susan McLaughlin explained this plan review was written into the
legislation and anticipated. Staff thoroughly reviewed the planned action mitigation measures and will
report on compliance with the planned action and status of development. She recognized the significant
amount of public comment and she appreciated the diligence about understanding the nature of
development that is occurring, questioning how it fits into the environmental review; staff will review and
offer assurances on each of those aspects from traffic to parks to ensure the initial issues outlined the in EIS
are acknowledged and still moving forward consistent with what was required by the EIS and mitigation
measures, both the private development community as well as public investments.
Ms. McLaughlin explained the intent of a planned action is to offer transparency to the public about what
is anticipated from development along a corridor that was upzoned to a zone that will accept higher levels
of density, particularly housing given the City's housing needs. It also gives developers some assurance, a
level of confidence to make those large scale investment in larger apartment buildings that are being
constructed in the corridor. It is also to leverage public investment, putting private and public investments
in the same area increases livability. Although mitigation measures cannot address existing deficiencies,
they can shape in a beneficial ways the neighborhoods along the Highway 99 corridor. It also leverages
private investment not only in the realm of housing but sidewalks and walkability via frontage
improvements to add to the walkability network, sidewalk network and improves safety at intersections.
That is all in accordance with the anticipated impacts. There has been a negligible amount of development
compared to what was anticipated under the planned action. There are nowhere near the cumulative impacts
anticipated or mitigated against.
Planning Manager Kemen Lien reviewed:
• Highway 99 Subarea Planning Process
o Subarea Plan (Ordinance 4077)
o Updated Chapter 16.60 ECDC (Ordinance 4078)
o Environmental Impact Statement & Planned Action (Ordinance 4079)
o Won VISION 2040 Award from the Puget Sound Regional Council
• What is a Planned Action SEPA?
o Designating specific types of projects shifts environmental review to an earlier phase
o The intent is to provide a more streamlined environmental review process at the project stage
by conducting a more detailed environmental analysis during planning
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
October 18, 2022
Page 17
Packet Pg. 178
9.2.d
o Early environmental review provides more certainty to applicants with respect to what will be
required and to the public with respect to how environmental impacts will be addressed
o Designation of planned action projects does not prohibit the city from placing conditions on a
project; it only addresses procedural SEPA requirements
Planned Action Thresholds and Mitigation Measures
o Development Thresholds
■ Number of Residential Dwelling Units — 3,325 Units
■ Square Footage of Non-residential Uses — 1,634,685 square feet
■ PM Peak Hour Trips — 2,755 Trips
o Mitigation measures are largely a mix of policy, code amendments and specific projects
o Mitigation measures identified in EIS and attached to the Planned Action Ordinance
■ Incorporated Plan Features
■ Regulations and Commitments
■ Other Mitigation Measures
Planned Action Monitoring and Review
o Ongoing: Monitor progress of development to ensure it is consistent with the assumptions of
the planned action, the amount of development and associated impacts and mitigation measures
o August 2022: Five-year review of assumptions and findings with respect to environmental
conditions in the Planned Action area, the impacts of development, and required mitigation
measures
Monitoring and Tracking
o Projects reviewed at application with Planned Action Checklist
o Review based on application materials and SEPA Checklist
o All projects tracked in Highway 99 spreadsheet
o Additional SEPA review required if project impacts and/or mitigation not in Planned Action
Planned Action Projects and Thresholds
Planned
Status
Remaining until
BLD
Measure
Action
threshold
Threshold
Issued
Proposed
exceeded
Land Use
New square
1,634,685
14,125
1,389
1,619,171
Non-residential, including office,
footage of
retail, service and
building area
medical/healthcare uses
Residential
Number of new
3,325
319
313
2,693
dwelling units
Transportation
Peak PM Trips
2,755
80
126
2,549
• Enviromnental Conditions Changed?
o Detailed in Subarea Plan
■ Land Use Pattern
■ Housing
■ Transportation
■ Economic and Market Trends
o Changes in existing conditions limited to plan implementation
■ Zoning change
■ Transportation projects
■ New development
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
October 18, 2022
Page 18
Packet Pg. 179
9.2.d
WRRENI2CINlNG
r.G7-cererar Commernal2
CG General Carrm 1
RN -Nelghhorhmd! Buwress
sc•L:ommr Lytiuv—
Asa - single Fanvly_ gmo- sq fi
W RM-3 - M.74.wrty, 3,000 m. It
■ RM-2A Uulafamily, 2,400 sq. F
■ RM-1.5- vultdamdy, 1.5pp sq. ft
■ MIJ • 7vleditw me
. P-PWIIC Vse
R ECO MMEN RE O 2DN1HG
BN • Nci~ood Bus—
. K - DOnxn4nay 1941 ^^
f156 sin*Fa 47,8Ao0cv f'
{� P1d-3-MaiFan•aly-3.=sq r-
■ El,S-2 4 - iluhilarnl!y, 21DOP sq.
■ RKW 5-kounilamily, 1 500 sq. F
■ id0-Medt iuse
■ P R.blic Lh.
Impacts of Development?
o Twelve projects:
■ One expired
■ Four projects completed
■ Three currently under construction
■ Four under application review
o Impacts as envisioned and mitigated
Pwjae[
Project status
Penrod
'I, Add—
Naw square footage of
building area {non-
uses)
',
Number of new ,
dwelling units
Peak PM Trip,residential
Generated
GEE Apartments
:BLD Issued
PLN20180060
'123326 Highway 99
0
192
83
CHC Addition
BLDFneled
PLN20190029',
23320 Highway 99
7,000
0
13
Edmond 5enior Living
;Expired
IPLN20190013
', 212D072nd Ave.W
Boug's Mazda -ice
;BLD Fnaled
BLD20191272
',22133 Highway 99
13,659
0
19.7
Doug's Hyundai showroom addn/remodel
!BLD Finaled
BLD2019C120
22130 High—V 99
12,542
0
1.27
Behar remodel
!BLD reeled
IIBLD20171452
122019 Highway 99
-94
0
-2
Better Bellevue Townhomes
I BLD Applied
PLN20180058
18029 238th St SW
D
3
1
Apoll o Apartments
;BLD Applied
PL1,120200043
i:23601 Highway 99
-26,290
252
76
Anthology Senior Living
;BLDlssued
IPLN2021-MO4
', 2120072nd Ave. W
14,125
127
-3
Terrace Place Apartments
;Proposed
IPLN2022-DG47
', 2362584th Ave. W
0
261
102
Housing Hope
:Proposed
523th St. SW
1,389
52
24
Highway 996ateway Project
4CPpital Project
'll
0
Cl
0
Mitigation Measures
o Specific mitigation measures in agenda packet identifying actions taken
o Mitigation measures expected to occur over time
■ Transportation Projects (Near -term 5 to10 years; Long-term 10 to 20 years)
■ Park Acquisition
■ Development Improvements
o Specific Subdistrict Identities
■ Health District, International District, and Gateway District
Other — Project Review
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
October 18, 2022
Page 19
Packet Pg. 180
9.2.d
o Design review in other areas of the city require Architectural Design Board (ADB) review is
SEPA triggered
o In CG zone, only projects that exceed 75 feet required to go to ADB
o With adoption of Planned Action, no notice required
o City's largest projects don't require notice or public design review process
Recommendations
o No amendments to the Planned Action Ordinance 4079 or supplements to the Highway 99
Planned Action EIS are needed at this time
o Implementation of the Planned Action EIS and mitigations should continue to be pursued
o Expand notice and public process for projects in CG zone
o Expand Subdistrict Identities
Ms. McLaughlin emphasized there was a thorough analysis under the planned action, environmental review
and specific measures and staff believes it is in compliance. She recognized the community's concern which
is why changes are suggested related to public notice and design review. Staff has the discretion to require
noticing, but it does not require SEPA noticing. With regard to design review, projects are reviewed by
staff under specific development standards. If there is interest, there could be a higher level of design review
for projects along the Highway 99 corridor. Changes like this do not require a supplemental EIS. She agreed
with continuing to finetune and improve the process and outcomes and address some of the issues the
community raised.
Ms. McLaughlin continued, just like with the emergency ordinance that was brought forward, it was not an
explicit mitigation measure or requirement of the planned action, it was something staff thought was not an
equitable approach and an emergency ordinance was proposed to address it. The City can work with much
more innovation and expedience in resolving some of the issues instead of going through a rigid
environmental process that has very defined methodologies that may not result in the desired outcome. For
example, the transportation methodology relies on vehicular level of service at intersections, it only count
cars. If only cars are counted and impacts are defined by cars at intersections when the community is talking
about impacts to people, walkability, bikeability and livability of their neighborhood, an environmental
document will only expand intersections and add signals. In staff s opinion a supplement EIS is not the
vehicle to make the changes everyone wants to see. An example of that is shifting to a multimodal level of
service, something she hoped was on the near term horizon.
Ms. McLaughlin explained despite the planned action and EIS, staff still goes through an individual project
based analysis which includes traffic. Reviewing those traffic analyses confirmed what she already thought;
there are negligible impacts from the projects at the intersections mentioned this evening during audience
comments such as 236' & 84t''. She reiterated a supplemental EIS may not be the vehicle to get the outcomes
that everyone seeks.
Councilmember Tibbott recalled there used to be a transition zone between a 75' building and a one story
single family. He did not know what happened to that and would like to explore how to reintroduce that..
He appreciated what staff was saying about a multimodal approach to looking at streets; he has often
thought the level of service at intersections does not help much with regard to determining the impact to a
neighborhood. For a long time he and the late Councilmember K. Johnson worked to get walkway crews,
etc. He would like some reassurance that there is something in the TIP that addresses the issue on 236'
His kids attended Madrona; most of the students do not walk because it is a choice school. Having a
walkway system that serves that neighborhood is very important and he wanted assurance the City was
moving in that direction. Ms. McLaughlin referred to her articles regarding the comprehensive plan
visioning process which addressed evaluating a transition zone for this neighborhood as part of the
comprehensive plan process. She acknowledged eliminating nine zones may have homogenized it too
much. That can be done without a supplemental EIS via the comprehensive plan process.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
October 18, 2022
Page 20
Packet Pg. 181
9.2.d
Mr. Lien explained the rezoning of the Highway 99 corridor got rid of the transition zones and was part of
the EIS analysis and there were some mitigation measures associated with that including the stepbacks
properties that are adjacent to single family. The ordinance last week addressed specific mitigation for
properties across the street. That was part of analysis in the EIS for removing those transition zones. With
regard to transportation improvements, there are east -west connector sidewalk projects identified in the
EIS, new bike lanes on 236', and pedestrian sidewalk improvements. Pedestrian projects identified in the
EIS will occur over time.
Ms. McLaughlin said while the planned action includes mitigation measures, it is not inclusive of projects
in the CIP/CFP or existing projects. Layering those over the mitigation measures in the EIS provides a more
full picture of the commitment over the years in this neighborhood. Mr. Lien highlighted projects in the
CIP that are in the mitigation measure table in the packet.
Councilmember Buckshnis thanked staff for the complete packet. She is environmentally rigid; she is not
a scientist but has spent more than a thousand hours talking to people about this. The EIS talks about
probable adverse environmental impacts. The FEIS talks about the 2014 stormwater code which has been
updated and had a significant impact to stormwater which would be a reason to trigger supplemental EIS.
The City learned from OVWSD about issues with the wellheads that are within this area. Updating the code
regarding the critical aquifer recharge area (CARA) could also trigger a supplemental EIS. In addition to
protecting water quality and the environment, climate change has significant impacts across the world.
Significant geomorphology events where very little rain falls have a tremendous impact on stormwater.
Further, there are sewer treatment plant issues where nitrogen levels have changed and the facility is at
capacity. Citizens' voices need to be part of this supplemental EIS. She was not as worried about traffic as
she was with poor air quality, recalling people wore masks in Oregon when Mount St. Helens erupted and
more recently due to wildfire smoke. The air quality on Highway 99 is another trigger for a supplemental
EIS. Things have drastically changed from 2017 to 2022, even from 2020 to 2022. She planned to make a
motion to have a supplemental EIS performed.
With regard to stormwater regulations, Mr. Lien explained the update resulted in stricter stormwater
regulations so that was not a probable significant environmental impact under SEPA. Implementing the
stormwater regulations will help protect the environment so he disagreed that was a probable significant
probably impact under SEPA. With regard to the CARA, staff is aware of that issue and added OVWSD's
wellhead protection areas to the critical area layers, consider those during reviews and notify OVWSD if
there are any projects in those areas. As part of the SEPA review and SEPA appeal on the stormwater, there
was a lot of discussion on that and the updated stormwater regulations provide protection to the wellhead
protection areas. The City does not have a specific CARA code but it will be part of the comprehensive
plan update. Implementing the stormwater code is not a probably significant adverse impact under SEPA
and was actually litigated before the hearing examiner recently. He talked to WWTP Manager Pam
Randolph about sewer capacity
Councilmember Pained thanked staff and the community for the abundance of information. She anticipated
the planned action absorbed a lot of time in 2017. She noted things should happen sooner and asked whether
transition zones could be implemented more swiftly than the 2024 comprehensive plan update. Duplexes,
triplexes and 4-plexes provide honest transition zones in a fairly narrow area. She also asked if the sidewalk
program and planning could be accelerated to prioritize these routes because sidewalks build communities.
She asked whether Snohomish County could build sidewalks in the Esperance area. She was most
concerned about displacement; this community has the highest level of diversity and is the most
economically vulnerable. She asked what the City could do to avoid displacement. Housing is critical need
and is more critical than it was 5-8 years ago when the earlier analysis was done. Displacement is a critical
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
October 18, 2022
Page 21
Packet Pg. 182
9.2.d
issue and is one of the ways the community judges success. She asked what a blight designation meant,
how it benefits Edmonds, and the components of that designation.
With regard to whether transitional zoning could be implemented sooner, Ms. McLaughlin said that type
of analysis lends itself to what will be done with the comprehensive plan update. She was not a fan of
waiting until 2024, but starting on the journey will lend itself to more sensible citywide analysis about
growth, density and housing. Whether some of those policy recommendations can be expedited, she was
not opposed to it. The ability to invest in this network is in the council's hands in terms of approving a
budget that prioritizes investments in this corridor and in this neighborhood. There is a fixed amount of
capital funding and how it is allocated is up to council. Recognizing the importance of private investment
in that equation for building out sidewalk networks is also critical. Without the private investment, the City
does not get the frontage improvements.
Ms. McLaughlin continued, through the reimagining work, street typologies are being explored to inform
the sidewalk code package. The sidewalk code will ensure the City is leveraging as much private investment
from development as possible as well as exploring an in -lieu payment program. Those tools, which are not
currently available, will help further build out the network using private investment. A critical part of that
is shifting to a multimodal level of service. Currently the City cannot prioritize sidewalk expansion using
transportation impact fees because those go toward vehicular capacity improvements. That is a big deal for
this neighborhood in particular who want to prioritize sidewalks. Once the City shifts to a multimodal level
of service, those impact fees can be used where they are needed. The transportation and park impact fees
for one development were over $1 million. She summarized private investment was certainly part of the
equation.
With regard to displacement, McLaughlin said it is thorny and challenging and something cities across the
country are looking at in relation to escalating housing prices. The Department of Commerce under the
GMA has required all cities in Washington to evaluate this as part of the comprehensive plan. A gap analysis
has been done for equity and the analysis will consider housing costs, where costs are escalating the most
and where there is the greatest risk of displacement. Staff is aware this corridor is at risk for displacement,
but it is not disproportionate impacted under the planned action; that will be considered via the
comprehensive plan update.
With regard to a blight designation, Ms. McLaughlin said a Highway 99 community renewal plan is
underway that will consider whether it meets the designation of blight as defined in the RCW. The EIS did
use the terminology of blight so it is irrelevant to this conversation. She asked what the question about
blight was in relation to. Councilmember Paine commented it was a new word that was being applied to
some aspects of the Highway 99 redevelopment; it was her vague understanding that there was a funding
source and she was seeking more information. Ms. McLaughlin responded blight can be defined in a couple
of ways under the community renewal plan as economic or structural such as the way streets are laid out or
land use as it relates to transportation. From an economic standpoint, this corridor is actually a strong
economic engine for the City so from an economic standpoint it would not be characterized as blight.
Councilmember Paine said she was glad to hear that, commenting blight was such a loaded word. Due to
the amount of information, she wanted more time to consider this. She was interested in what could be done
short of an EIS to address the concerns raised by the community. Even though staff determined the triggers
for a supplemental EIS have not been met, there is still a big need.
Councilmember Nand echoed Councilmember Buckshnis' comment that it would be appropriate to proceed
with a supplemental EIS. She did not find it appropriate to act as though adding hundreds of housing units
to the area of town where she lived and grew up without acknowledging that when people jaywalk on
Highway 99, they are crossing five lanes of traffic. People have been killed crossing Highway 99, something
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
October 18, 2022
Page 22
Packet Pg. 183
9.2.d
that doesn't happen in other areas of the City. She was one of those 12-year old jaywalkers crossing
Highway 99 because there have never been not enough sidewalks or crosswalks. People run across five
lanes of traffic traveling 40-60 mph trying to reach a bus stop, something that does not happen in other parts
of Edmonds. That is the reason for the level of frustration expressed by the Lake Ballinger community. She
was proud to be from the Lake Ballinger and Highway 99 community; it is a lovely place to live and she
was shocked to hear the word blight applied to that area.
Councilmember Nand continued, the incredibly frustrated speakers who addressed council about
supplemental EIS they feel frustrations are falling on deaf ears. Young kids who jaywalk in this area can
be killed; adding hundreds of housing units to this area without addressing that impact is irresponsible. It
is the responsibility of the City, not private development to address that concern. A multitude of concerns
have been eloquently expounded in numerous meetings prior to tonight. She requested staff revise their
position that a supplemental EIS is not necessary or that no amendments are necessary. Conditions that may
have been appropriate in 2017 are not appropriate post -pandemic. It is not appropriate after a heatwave
killed hundreds in Washington last year due to inadequate infrastructure to protect vulnerable populations
including seniors. People died on sidewalks in Washington during 2021 due to the heat when resources
were unable to reach them in time.
Councilmember Nand continued, there is a lot of frustration in her part of the community, an area that has
always been very different than the Bowl. It is not just feeling underserved by City government or feeling
their concerns and frustrations fall on deaf ears, but the fact that they generate the most tax income for the
City, yet their area is treated as a problem. For the first time in 2019 when she ran for council, someone
referred to her part of Edmonds as the ghetto of Edmonds, a term she had never heard before. It is a part of
Edmonds where a lot of people of color live including her family who are members of the Asian -American
community. Before 2019, she did know her area of Edmonds was referred to as the ghetto of Edmonds or
that it was referred to as a blight. She was always proud to be part of Edmonds and did not know that was
how other people viewed that area.
Councilmember Nand continued, she lives in high density housing a few yards from Highway 99. She sees
her neighbor's young kids playing in the common driveway for their townhouse complex because there is
absolutely no green space for them to play. People pull out of their garages and whiz past kids trying to
play ball in the common driveway due to the lack of green space or trees especially compared to other parts
of Edmonds which are very well served and well represented. Issues of cultural competency need to be
addressed when people have been speaking to council for weeks about why they feel the subarea plan is
inappropriate and why they haven't been adequately consulted. She recognized staff worked very hard to
prepare tonight's packet, but did not feel it was adequate to address the concerns of her community and a
supplemental EIS needs to be pursued. She supported looking at transportation issues, reiterating in her
area of Edmonds, someone who is unlucky while jaywalking will die, something that does not happen to
people in the Bowl where people drive 25 mph. She encouraged staff to examine cultural competencies
when dealing with proud residents and taxpayers in her area of Edmonds who address this apparatus that is
supposed to represent them and is funded by taxpayer money.
Ms. McLaughlin appreciated Councilmember Nand's passion and commitment for the corridor. The intent
of tonight's presentation is to find the most effective vehicle to address all the issues that Councilmember
Nand raised. She assured she is passionate about traffic safety and finding ways to get capital investments
into that neighborhood. That is why she wanted to emphasize how ineffective the existing environmental
framework would be to achieve that and recognizing the limitations of that environmental document, the
City could be more effective on the fringes. She is an educated professional completely committed to under -
invested and under -represented neighborhoods like this area. She assured this areas was not blighted and
hoped that word did not get proliferated in that neighborhood. It is not blighted; it is an economic engine
for Edmonds that is only now receiving the investment that it has historically deserved.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
October 18, 2022
Page 23
Packet Pg. 184
9.2.d
Ms. McLaughlin assured Councilmember Nand that her and the community's concerns have not fallen on
deaf ears. A member of the community wrote a very thorough letter that took a lot of research in addition
to the material staff provided in the packet. It took time to research and respond to her letter and meet with
her, but it did not fall on deaf ears; staff took her comments very seriously. Staff s recommendation to not
pursue a supplemental EIS is absolutely no reflection to their dedication and commitment to investing in
this area, it is because staff feels taking a different strategy would be more successful.
Mayor Nelson expressed appreciation for the work Ms. McLaughlin does and took offense to claims that
she has not been paying attention or listening. He knew she cared deeply about what was happening in that
area and was doing everything she can via the lens she looks through. Her expertise and her staff s expertise
in working through these issues and challenges are undervalued and he appreciated everything they were
doing.
COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO
EXTEND TO 10:30. MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT VOTING NO.
Councilmember Teitzel commented the frustration expressed by residents indicates a need to redouble
efforts to reach out to the community including communities of color. During his first term on council, he
attended open houses, recalling at one held at the hospital, almost everyone in the room looked like him;
there were very few people of color. The problem is not getting enough input from people affected by these
changes and they are shocked and concerned when these large developments start happening and they
realize how big the developments will be and how many people will live there. The City needs to redouble
its efforts and find ways to reach everybody to get input early before things reach the I I' hour.
Councilmember Teitzel continued, there has been a lot of discussion about the lack of open space, green
space and parks in south Edmonds. The City is trying to acquire open space and parks in conjunction with
the subarea plan. He referred to page 842 of the packet, Parks and Open Space in the 2017 subarea plan
states, "provide onsite open space as a residential amenity through new development." He asked if that
could be interpreted as developers would be expected to provide the open space or is that action that the
City would take in concert with development. Mr. Lien answered that is one of the design review standards
that were adopted in 16.60 to require amenity space and open space with development, but does not replace
the need for parks in the area. Ms. McLaughlin said there have been conversations recently with both private
development and the parks department about private investment solely providing those investments as well
as public -private partnership opportunities.
Councilmember Teitzel referred to page 840 of the packet Parks and Open Space in the 2017 subarea plan
which refers to possible acquisition of Esperance Park from Snohomish County for annexation and
redevelopment into a community park with sports fields, community gardens, picnic shelters, etc. He asked
why it would be beneficial for the City to acquire the park from Snohomish County when south Edmonds
residents already use it. Ms. McLaughlin was unsure of the status of that effort and offered to circle back
to Councilmember Teitzel on that question. She observed his point was not to take credit for space that
already exists. Councilmember Teitzel clarified since south Edmonds residents already use that park and
actually own it because they also pay taxes to the County, if the City acquires it, it will also take on the
maintenance costs. He did not see the benefit to the City as part of the subarea plan to consider acquiring
the park at this time.
Mr. Lien said since the subarea plan was done, the Snohomish County Esperance Park has been developed
and made available for public use. It includes sports fields, a dog park, playground trails and other recreation
facilities. The City has not acquired the park, but Edmonds citizens do use it.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
October 18, 2022
Page 24
Packet Pg. 185
9.2.d
Councilmember Teitzel said he was interested in considering an SEIS especially with the passion expressed
about why the City should pursue an EIS. He asked the cost in terms of time and investment to conduct an
SEIS. Ms. McLaughlin answered that body of work has not been scoped, but depending on the scope and
amount of community outreach, she estimated the cost at $200,0004250,000 based on a range in other
local jurisdictions. She pointed out staff resources for that work would also need to be considered as the
City begins the update of the comprehensive plan. That workload would be unanticipated and almost
duplicative as it will consider the same policy issues, code issues, displacement issues, and will culminate
in an EIS.
Councilmember Teitzel suggested staff provide council the response to the citizen's letter. The council
needs to understand if an EIS is not done, how the City can respond to those concerns. Ms. McLaughlin
said these are valid issues that are mentioned in various planning documents whether it is an adopted
document of and EIS or planned projects associated with the CIP or comprehensive plan policies, all well
intended and adopted by council that are not all in one place. The community renewal plan provides an
opportunity to include an action plan to combine all the current and planned actions in one location so it
does not feel so disparate or unintentional. It would be helpful to see all the investments outlined in one
place along with a time horizon.
With regard to impacts of doing an SEIS, Mr. Lien explained if an SEIS is initiated on the subarea plan, the
planned action is not in place during that interim period. If any project applications are submitted while an
SEIS is underway, they would need to go through the entire SEPA process which includes a new threshold
determination, etc.
To reinforce what other councilmembers are saying, Council President Olson suggested some type of work
plan approved by council may be workable if it included dates and deadlines. There is a sense of urgency
about some of these things, specifically related to the aquifer. She was confused by staff saying there were
no changes in the environment; it was not that the changes have happened while the planned action was in
place, but questioned whether the fact that this environmental condition was unknown at the time it was
implemented would be considered a change. Mr. Lien explained for the SEPA analysis, the threshold is a
probable significant environmental impact. The City became aware of the wellhead protection areas by
OVWSD and there is a stormwater code that address development within wellhead protection areas that
protects the aquifer recharge area. Knowing they exist now does not necessarily mean it is a probable
significant adverse impact. This was a big part of the discussion when the SEPA review was done on the
stormwater code.
Council President Olson asked if there was anything in the documents about true protections for ensuring
development does not occur in that area. Mr. Lien answered it is not that development does not occur in the
wellhead protection areas, it is how development occurs. For example, to protect the aquifer, one of the
problems is injection wells. He first became aware of this during the Madrona School project that proposed
deep injection wells for stormwater which could potentially put stormwater into the aquifer. That is one of
the things that should not be done as part of development in an wellhead protection area. When development
is proposed within a wellhead protection area, OVWSD is notified so they can review the project and the
city stormwater code also helps project those areas. He summarized it is not that no development can occur
in those areas, it is how development occurs to avoid impacting the aquifer.
Council President Olson said she did not want to take action tonight; she wanted time to talk with citizens
and staff. One of the early concerns was the transportation impacts in the original EIS focused on Highway
99 and SR-104. As soon as those buildings (84') are constructed, they will obviously have a traffic impact.
If the original EIS did not look closely at that street and address those impact, it seems like that needs to
happen now. If there is no requirement for a traffic impact study because it is part of the subarea plan, that
seems like a miss. Whether that is handled by a council action plan or something else, she felt there should
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
October 18, 2022
Page 25
Packet Pg. 186
9.2.d
be something that is documented, tracked and made a sense of urgency and a priority. Mr. Lien explained
applicants for projects within the planned area still prepare a project -level traffic impact analysis that looks
at the impacts of that specific project. Even if it qualifies as a planned action, conditions and mitigations
can be added for specific projects if warranted. He summarized additional traffic impact analysis is required
at the project level when applications are made.
Council President Olson referred to staff s comments about having public notice and involvement, and
asked if the developer would expect something had changed based on public input. Ms. McLaughlin asked
if Council President Olson's question was whether the developer would be aware the public notice had
changed. Council President Olson clarified staff mentioned adding a step for public notice for some
projects, but if nothing is required in terms of the subarea plan or the way the City typically does business,
how would the public input be used and would it change what happens. Ms. McLaughlin answered the
developer would definitely be aware of it coming into the application process and it likely would require
an ordinance change. In terms of how to be most effective with public notice, frankly a SEPA notice may
not be effective at reaching people, speak in layman's terms, and have a community conversation. The
public notice staff has been thinking about is in advance of a design review, to require a community meeting
with the developer to talk about project. That is something other jurisdictions do and it is highly effective
to have community members meet the developer and talk about the project in advance of a design review
so they understand what's valuable to the community versus just notice of a public hearing. Council
President Olson suggested she and staff talk offline about what that ordinance needs to look like.
Councilmember Chen acknowledged staff s hard work putting the packet together and all the information
provided. He also acknowledged staff listens to the community's input and thinks about what's best for the
community as evidenced by the moratorium two weeks ago. He shared the concerns of other
councilmembers' and the community about the lack of green space, lack of a transition zone, and
displacement for low income and people of color living in this community. Many of them work multiple
jobs to make ends meet and when their property values increase due to development, their property taxes
increase which diminishes their ability to pay. He was very concerned about displacement due to
development.
Councilmember Chen referred to Councilmember Teitzel's comment that people at community events look
like him, commenting it is because people of color work 2-3 jobs and are at work when those event are held
and do not have time to attend. He complimented staffs efforts to reach out, noting it is hard to reach them.
With the community's input and concerns, he supports conducting a supplemental EIS. The estimated cost
of $250,000 is a worthy investment to get the community's input and get the best development for this
community.
COUNCILMEMBER CHEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO
HAVE A SUPPLEMENTAL EIS CONDUCTED.
Councilmember Buckshnis thanked staff for all the work they are doing, but she is jaded after 12 years.
Highway 99 residents deserve this SEIS. So much change has occurred and the citizens deserve to have a
voice. She preferred conducting a SEIS rather than a work around such as updating the code, including it
in the comprehensive plan, conducting a charrette, etc. She reiterated the climate will continue to get worse.
The Lake Ballinger Forum, which consists of Mountlake Terrace, Lake Forest Park, Shoreline and
Edmonds, is intent on keeping the lake clean and pristine. The City has $240 million from the state and
should just bite the bullet and do it.
Councilmember Paine said she was not in support of the motion at this time. The council needs to learn
more about implementing fixes that can happen right away. She wanted to explore other options before
reaching the conclusion that a SEIS is needed. She was excited about the light rail, anticipating south
Edmonds residents were not saying no housing or were supportive of the delays that a SEIS would create.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
October 18, 2022
Page 26
Packet Pg. 187
9.2.d
She was hopeful things like transition zones could be implemented right away and consideration given to
things that could be done short of a SEIS. Adding more housing options throughout Edmonds would be
ideal rather than building it all in this corridor, but this corridor has the greatest opportunity with the light
rail, additional transportation services on Highway 99, and the Highway 99 renewal project which will
result in a lot of changes.
Councilmember Paine continued, she would like to adopt guidelines for all neighborhoods so there is shared
vision and opportunities for Highway 99, Lake Ballinger, the Gateway District, etc. and do it in a way that
includes public outreach. There are two mobile home parks in Edmonds; those are the areas she worries
about displacing and having more housing options is great way to avoid that. Housing is a human right and
honors people who have been here for a long time. She thanked staff for all the information and summarized
she preferred to look at options before doing a SEIS.
Councilmember Teitzel commented the council is hearing from its constituents tonight and for the past
several weeks that they want action taken on issues that concern them such as displacement, open space
acquisition, partnership with other entities on parks, traffic safety, pedestrian safety, etc. The key thing the
council should consider is how to best address those concerns. If it is a SEIS so be it; if there is a better,
more efficient, effective way to do that, that was fine too. The council needs to get to the point where it can
make a decision whether to invest the money in a SEIS or not. He observed Ms. McLaughlin has said there
may be better ways to ensure those concerns are addressed and was willing to entertain those ideas, but
needed to see the responses to the concerns raised in the letter and the concern the council heard tonight.
He would like to consider that before taking action on conducting a SEIS. For that reason he will not support
proceeding with a SEIS at this time.
Councilmember Nand said she was full throated in support of the motion to authorize a SEIS tonight. The
political process exists for a reason and the engaged citizenry has let the council know through the political
process that they have concerns about some of the proposed changes, the oversights they feel emanate from
City government and affect their community. A SEIS is the bare minimum of an appropriate response to
the level of outage coming from her community at some of the changes imbedded in the five-year plan. She
will take endless amounts of verbal smacks to continue verbalizing the wholly appropriate engagement in
the political process that is coming from her part of Edmonds.
Councilmember Tibbott agreed that moving forward with a SEIS at this time is premature. A SEIS may
need to be done, but he preferred to see a work plan from the development services department about how
it would integrate with the comprehensive plan which will include a great deal of public input. He hated to
circumvent a process that is already in motion to insert another process when resources could be expedited
via a process that is already in motion.
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO
EXTEND TO 10:45. MOTION CARRIED (6-1) COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT VOTING NO.
Councilmember Paine asked when the emergency ordinance expires. Mr. Lien explained the emergency
interim ordinance is good for six months. A public hearing schedule is scheduled for November 15 and the
ordinance should go through the planning Board and back through council before the 6 months expires.
Councilmember Paine observed the effect of the emergency ordinance was no new permits were accepted
during emergency interim ordinance period. Mr. Lien explained the interim ordinance passed two weeks
ago was related to stepbacks for properties across the street and is good for six months with the possibility
of an extension with a work plan. A public hearing before council is scheduled on the interim ordinance for
November 15; the council makes findings whether to continue the interim ordinance or modify the interim
ordinance. The next step in the interim ordinance process is planning board review and recommendation to
council and then council would adopt another ordinance (or not) to make it permanent. The interim
ordinance is only related to stepbacks.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
October 18, 2022
Page 27
Packet Pg. 188
9.2.d
Council President Olson said she would support the motion with the thought that a motion to reconsider
could be done next week. The council will learn during the coming week whether it was the right move or
have something in the packet next week to consider as an alternative.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (4-3), COUNCILMEMBERS CHEN, BUCKSHNIS, AND
NAND AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS TEITZEL,
TIBBOTT AND PAINE VOTING NO.
Ms. McLaughlin asked what the one week reconsideration mentioned by Council President Olson meant.
Council President Olson offered to follow up with Ms. McLaughlin tomorrow, explaining councilmembers
on the prevailing side have the option to reconsider. If there was a convincing reason or an agenda memo
regarding a different approach next week, there could be a motion to reconsider the motion passed tonight.
5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN VISIONING SUMMARY
Due to the late hour, this item was postponed to a future meeting.
6. APPROVAL OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE SOLID AND HAZARDOUS
WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN (Previously Consent Agenda Item 7.10)
Mr. Taraday said he had an opportunity to compare the committee packet to tonight's packet and understood
the question about the resolution. The resolution in tonight's packet meets the typical Edmonds resolution
format and appropriately adopts the Snohomish County Solid Waste Plan so he saw no legal reason not to
adopt it.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS AND SECONDED, TO APPROVE
THE SNOHOMISH COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE SOLID AND HAZARDOUS WASTE
MANAGEMENT PLAN. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
9. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
Mayor Nelson welcomed Councilmember Nand. He reported on the Great Shakeout, an annual earthquake
preparedness exercise that will include testing of the tsunami siren on Thursday, October 20 at 10:20 a.m.
for 3 minutes. The siren is only a test and is for people who are outside, not inside a building, to seek higher
shelter. The City's disaster coordinator will be at the exercise to answer questions about disaster
preparedness.
10. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Nand said she was incredibly honored and privileged to be on council. She was tweeting
with the former council student rep Brook yesterday and told him it was important that the council model
democracy and the democratic values of the U.S. Constitution at all levels of government down to the city
council. In working with City staff, she has established Councilmember Nand office hours every week on
Thursday from 4 to 5 pm. She also plans to have Councilmember Nand office hours on the weekend in the
Highway 99 community. She is wholly committed to being a public servant and she was thankful for the
opportunity.
Councilmember Paine welcomed Councilmember Nand, commenting she has been an active part of the
community and it was great to have her voice and experience. She thanked all the applicants for their interest
in council position #7. There is an amazing body of talent in Edmonds and she encouraged the applicants
to stay involved. She looked forward to the community renewal project open house on Thursday evening.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
October 18, 2022
Page 28
Packet Pg. 189
9.2.e
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES
June 20, 2017
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Dave Earling, Mayor
Thomas Mesaros, Council President
Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember*
(*participated by phone)
Michael Nelson, Councilmember
Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember
Dave Teitzel, Councilmember
Neil Tibbott, Councilmember
ELECTED OFFICIALS ABSENT
Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember
1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE
STAFF PRESENT
T. Dreyer, Police Officer
Al Compaan, Police Chief
Phil Williams, Public Works Director
Carrie Hite, Parks, Rec. & Cult. Serv. Dir.
Shane Hope, Development Services Director
Mary Ann Hardie, HR Director
Rob English, City Engineer
Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
Scott Passey, City Clerk
Andrew Pierce, Legislative/Council Assistant
Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator
Jeannie Dines, Recorder
The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:05 p.m. by Mayor Earling in the Council
Chambers, 250 5' Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute.
2. ROLL CALL
City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present or participating by phone with the
exception of Councilmember Buckshnis.
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COUNCILMEMBER NELSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO
PULL ITEM 6.8, TEMPORARY ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT IN PUBLIC WORKS
DEPARTMENT, FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND MOVE IT TO ACTION ITEM 9.3
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT
MESAROS, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
4. PRESENTATIONS
1. PARK AND RECREATION MONTH PROCLAMATION
Mayor Earling read a proclamation proclaiming July 2017 as Parks and Recreation Month in the City of
Edmonds. He presented the proclamation to Parks & Recreation Director Carrie Hite. Ms. Hite thanked the
community and Council for their support of the City's beloved parks system, commenting there are a lot of
projects coming up. She recognized the Parks Department team for their work.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
June 20, 2017
Page 1
Packet Pg. 190
9.2.e
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas referred to incentives for smaller units and lower rents for those units and
asked how the lower cost could be guaranteed. She asked whether the incentive included putting a cap on
the rent. Chair Nordling Rubenkonig relayed the development team indicated there are ways of reducing
the cost of the construction. With regard to the Westgate project, it will be subsidized and 19% of the units
will be at the affordable housing rate. Vice Chair Monroe recalled the team indicating it was market driven;
a certain amount can be charged per square foot for apartments in the area, less square footage equals a
lower price. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas concluded the rents would be market rate but lower due to
the size.
Council President Mesaros asked what the developers of the Westgate characterized as incentives. Vice
Chair Monroe said they suggested starting with a 2-story box as the base and then providing items such as
public meeting areas, artwork or other features could quality for additional stories.
Councilmember Nelson referred to the comment about long term investor and the importance of that
distinction. This is the first time the developer has done a project outside of Seattle but they are referencing
standard incentives. He wanted to be certain the developer's first project in Snohomish County had
Edmonds appeal and not Seattle's. Vice Chair Monroe asked if Councilmember Nelson was interested in
ensuing the project was not cookie cutter, commenting the City's Planning Department will work with the
development team. At the meeting the Planning Board had, he felt they were very vested in the project and
the area. Chair Nordling Rubenkonig said the development team praised City staff for working with them
to create a project they are proud of. She noted Edmonds is urban and the Westgate project is similar to
projects in Seattle.
Councilmember Teitzel said he reads the Planning Board minutes and is impressed with the work they do.
He relayed the Council hears from the public at Council meetings, emails, phone calls, etc. and asked how
the Planning Board engages with citizens. Chair Nordling Rubenkonig commented the tree ordinance
generated significant public input; there was also a good turnout for the sign code. Planning Board meetings
are televised. The Council setup is very formal; the Planning Board is more relaxed. She acknowledged the
Planning Board did not have the amount of public participation the members would like. Councilmember
Teitzel commented it would be great to see more people engaged at the Planning Board level before issues
come to the City Council.
8. PUBLIC HEARING
1. PUBLIC HEARING ON HIGHWAY 99 AREA-: CG REZONE (MAP) & DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS
Development Services Director Shane Hope introduced John Fregonese, Principal, Fregonese Associates,
explained tonight's public hearing follows public open houses, news releases, meetings by the Planning
Board and City Council and other outreach. He displayed a map of the project area, primarily the
commercial zones around Highway 99 in Edmonds. The City Council last discussed Highway 99 Area Zone
and Code Changes on June 6: Discussion included:
• Comparison with existing zone map and development ode
• Review of proposed CG site and building design standards
• Question about additional incentives for "green buildings"
• Question about vehicle parking within buildings at street level
The focus of tonight's public hearing is the Planning Board's recommendation for Zoning Map and
Development Code. No action is requested at this time.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
June 20, 2017
Page 4
Packet Pg. 191
9.2.e
He displayed the proposed Zoning Map and explained the proposal:
• Change these zones to the consolidated CG Zone
• Incorporate design standards directly into zones to ensure scale transition into neighborhoods
• More predicable outcomes for community
He displayed the Comprehensive Plan Map, advising the new zoning is consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan map. He reviewed:
• Draft Zoning and Development Recommendations
o Strengthen current design standards
o Incorporate them directly into the zoning code
o Consideration of special circumstances within the corridor will be made to ensure the standards
are feasible, such as large parcels that would have multiple buildings if redeveloped and parcels
with unique access or transportation challenges.
• Site development standards General 16.60.020
o The pedestrian area adjacent to the street is composed of three zones: the streetscape zone, the
pedestrian zone, and the streetscape zone (Section 16.60.020.C.2)
■ Changed "amenity zone" to "streetscape zone"
■ Added dimensions
o Additional building stepback when adjacent to RS zones
■ Upper stories stepback 10' for 25' of building height; and 20' for 55' of building height
• Site development standards —design standards 16.60.030.A. LE
o 15' setback with 10' landscape buffer
• A minimum five feet wide type IV landscaping is required along all street frontages where parking
lots about the street. Section 16.60.030.A.1
• Access and vehicle parking
o All off-street surface parking shall be located to the side or rear of the primary building, except
as otherwise specifically allowed by this chapter, and shall be screened from the sidewalk by a
wall or plantings between 2 to 4 feet in height.
o Outdoor parking areas shall comprise 40% or less of the public street frontage area within 100
feet of the primary street for the lot or tract and, on corner lots, may not be located at the corner.
The requirements of this subsection do not apply to permitted auto sales uses.
• Required electric vehicle charging stations (Section 16.60.030.B.5)
o One or more electric vehicle charging stations must be provided for all new development that
includes housing.
• Bicycle storage spaces (Section 16.60.030.B.6)
o Bicycle storage spaces for multifamily housing, excluding housing for assisted living or other
specialized facilities, shall be provided for residents
0 1 bicycle storage space for each residential unit under 700 square feet and 2 bicycle storage
spaces for each residential unit greater than 700 square feet
• Paths within parking lots (Section 16.60.030.B.8)
o Pedestrian walkways in parking lots shall be delineated by separate paved routes that meet
federal accessibility requirements and that use a variation in textures and/or colors and may
include landscape barriers and landscape islands
• Pedestrian and transit access (Section 16.60.030.B.11)
o Where a transit station or bus stop is located in front of or adjacent to a parcel, pedestrian
connections linking the station or stop directly to the development are required.
o Pedestrians routes shall connect buildings on the same site to each other
• Site Development Standards — Site Design and Layout 16.60.030.0
1. Pedestrian Oriented Design (Section 16.60.030.C.1)
■ At least 50% of a building's fagade facing the primary public street shall be located within
20 feet of the property line where the primary street frontage exists.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
June 20, 2017
Page 5
Packet Pg. 192
9.2.e
■ Building must include a prominent pedestrian entry on the primary frontage
■ Vehicle parking shall not be located within the first 20 feet of the primary street frontage,
other than as allowed for vehicle sales use.
2. Alternative Walkable Design Area Option
■ For sites with unique constraints.
■ At least 50% of the building's fagade facing the primary street shall be located within 60
feet of the front property line
3. Exceptions Process for Pedestrian and Walkable Design Options
■ Exemptions may be allowed by hearing examiner to provide for design flexibility that still
encourages pedestrian orientation and efficient land uses under following criteria:
- Property is located within 300 feet of highway interchange or has unique pedestrian
access constraints
- One or more buildings are located facing the primary street frontage
- The development provides business and pedestrian areas near the primary street
frontage and likely to be active through the day/evening.
- At least 25% of required amenity space is located to connect building to the street
- Where a site has multiple buildings, amenity space should be located between
buildings to allow shared use
- One or more buildings on the site must have at least two stories of usable space
o Amenity space (Section 16.60.030.C.4)
■ An area equivalent to at least 5% of the building footprint shall be provided as amenity
space.
■ If a vehicle parking area is being added to the site without the concurrent development of
a building of at least 2,000 square feet, amenity space must be provided to equal at least
5% of the additional parking area.
■ Example of amenity space in Costa Mesa, California
o Building Design and Massing (Section 16.60.030.D.2)
■ On the primary frontage, 50% of the building fagade between two and 10 feet in height
shall be comprised of windows or doors that are transparent
Mr. Fregonese reviewed examples of amenity space and building design and massing:
• New Seasons building on N Williams Street in Portland
• Safeway on Hawthorne Boulevard in Portland
• Safeway on Hwy 99Barbur Boulevard in Portland
• Fred Meyer on Interstate Avenue,
• Auto dealers
Mr. Fregonese reviewed photographs illustrating the Health District Gateway and SW 234th today and with
corresponding private investment. He reviewed the proposed changes to the sign code
• Revisions to 20.65.045:
o Limit freestanding signs (such as monument signs) to maximum height of 14 feet in this district
o Require freestanding signs to be counted as part of total maximum sign area for this district
Mr. Fregonese described next steps:
• Council's next meeting on this topic - July 18
• Council action scheduled - August 15
Councilmember Teitzel referred to the use of stepbacks to preclude a large wall facing a neighbor, providing
a friendly transition. He asked if the use of the stepback would be restricted, for example would decks, tall
trees, awnings, etc. be allowed, commenting allowing a 20-foot tree in the stepback would defeat the
purpose of the stepback. Mr. Fregonese answered stepbacks are typically used for outdoor areas that would
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
June 20, 2017
Page 6
Packet Pg. 193
9.2.e
include furniture, trees in pots, etc. The intent would be for the stepbacks to be used as outdoor space, an
amenity for the building. If desired, tree height could be limited to 10-12 feet. Councilmember Teitzel
concluded there would not be a restriction on what was allowed in the stepback. Mr. Fregonese agreed it is
typically patio furniture and trees in pots.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if the amenity space was private or public. Mr. Fregonese answered
it is privately owned intended to be open for public use as part of the pedestrian environment. Ms. Hope
commented there is also opportunity for an internal plaza or courtyard for the tenants/residents/owners in
addition to the required public space that is typically at the sidewalk level. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas
recalled at least one project where the interpretation was it was not for the public's use but for the tenants'
use. Ms. Hope anticipated it could be a mixture, some public space near the sidewalk as well as some private
space for residents; the mix will depend on the use. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas concluded the plans
for each project would specify whether the space was public or private use. Ms. Hope agreed.
Councilmember Tibbott said he liked the architectural features in the renderings but there is a minimal list
of suggested building items. He asked whether more detail, perhaps pictures or illustration to help
developers understand what the City is looking for with regard to architectural design standards. Mr.
Fregonese answered there is typically a brochure or illustrations of how to implement the design standards.
Compared to other codes implemented at the staff level, this code has both building transparency and
building facade requirements. With creativity, that will lead to the type of buildings in the illustrations.
Quality can never be guaranteed via the code but it can guarantee it won't be a white elephant. Ms. Hope
said the draft code includes some illustrations which may be supplemented. Typically, commercial projects
include professionals who are used to these design terms, but the intent is for the code to be understandable
to the average person.
Councilmember Tibbott recalled the Westgate plan included an adaptation of form based code, recalling
the intent was to lower the risk to a developer by illustrating what the City was looking for which saves
time for the developer and for the City. Ms. Hope said this is a type of form based code as well, it addresses
uses that are allowed/not allowed uses but focuses on the building shape, bulk, glazing, as well as the site
design and building articulation.
Councilmember Tibbott recalled he expressed concern during the last presentation about the possibility of
a 75-foot building across the street from single family residences. In areas of city where that would be
allowed, it may not pencil out but it could happen. If a proposal like that were submitted to the City, he
how it would be handled. Ms. Hope answered the code currently allows a 75-foot height next to single
family housing in some instances with no requirement for stepback or building setback. This code
strengthens and respects the neighborhood more than the existing zoning.
Councilmember Tibbott expressed concern that the proposed zoning eliminates the transition areas. When
driving around Shoreline and Edmonds today, he saw taller buildings on Hwy 99 with nearby residential
areas. In one location, there was the interurban trail and vegetation between single family and the 75-foot
tall building. He appreciated there would be landscaping between the curb and the building, but that does
not breakup the bulk of the building. He asked what would be done when a use adjacent to another use
may not be compatible. Mr. Fregonese answered there would be 15-foot side and rear yards setback in
addition to the stepback. In the case of across the street, there is a 10-20-foot setback in front, the 60-foot
right-of-way, and the 20-foot single family setback, providing approximately a 100-foot separation between
the structures. Although stepback could be required, a 75-foot tall building 100 feet away is beyond the
ratio where it would be beneficial. Councilmember Tibbott commented parking would provide additional
distance.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
June 20, 2017
Page 7
Packet Pg. 194
9.2.e
Councilmember Nelson thanked Mr. Fregonese for the requirement for electrical vehicle charging station
and the description of amenity space. He referred to the sample photograph of the car dealership, remarking
when he thought of amenity space, he was not thinking it would look like that. Mr. Fregonese recalled the
Council's concern with retaining car dealerships. He reviewed the car dealership examples, and the intent
to do something useful with the space in front that is not just parking. Councilmember Nelson suggested
not using that photograph as an example.
Councilmember Nelson asked if the amenity spaces for multiple properties could be combined and
collectively create a park. Ms. Hope answered that was possible. Mr. Fregonese said he lives next to a Fred
Meyer whose amenity space ended up being a corner park.
Mayor Earling opened the public participation portion of the public hearing.
Dean Phillips, Council President, Edmonds Lutheran Church, referred to the church's letter expressing
support for the Highway 99 Subarea Plan.
Ann Wermus, Edmonds recognized the work the City has accomplished in the plan for Highway 99. It
promises to be a greatly revitalized area. She expressed support for the concept in the plan and stressed the
need for continued work on providing permanent low income housing. Under the current plan, if a developer
took advantage of the tax exemption option, a limited amount of low income housing could be supplied. In
the GMA, the goal is to encourage the availability of affordable housing to all economic segments of the
population and encourages the use of innovative techniques to meet the housing needs of all economic
segments of the population and requires the city to provide opportunity for a range of housing types. The
Highway 99 subarea plan offers a unique opportunity for housing that could be affordable for workforce
housing as well as low income, potentially relieving the pressure on low income families. She urged the
Council to develop and employ innovative strategies to promote all efforts as way to increase housing
opportunity for all economic segments of the population.
Bea Wilson, Edmonds, representing herself and her son who owns property on 225th Place SW. She
thanked the City Council and Planning Board for the proposed plan. She asked the definition of affordable
housing. Mayor Earling suggested she speak with Ms. Hope. Ms. Wilson concluded the plan looks great.
Robert Sieu, Edmonds, property owner on Highway 99, said he spoke at the Planning Board May 10
public hearing regarding the exception on design standards. He also spoke with Ms. Hope and the consultant
and both agreed some language needed to be change. The Planning Board approved the plan on the
condition those changes would be made but at the June 6 Council meeting, the language had not been
changed. The changes are related to exceptions for car dealerships and property 300 feet from an
interchange.
Seth Hale, Seattle, also representing Stan Piha, Edmonds, expressed their support for the Planning
Board's recommendation to approve the ordinance as proposed. The consultant has made the appropriate
recommendations regarding setbacks, stepbacks and activity zones to ensure protection for properties
adjacent to and across from CG zoned parcels within the corridor. Speaking as an architected, he
commended the City on the flexibility in the code, providing a unique opportunity for great design in the
corridor instead of code driven design.
Alvin Rutledge, Edmonds, asked about the affect the zoning changes would have on adult entertainment.
He recalled a Snohomish County levy in 1995-1999 that did not pass.
Bruce Witenberg, Edmonds, said the plan works well on Highway 99 frontage where none of the parcels
are across street or abut single family residences but more attention needs to be paid to the transition zone.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
June 20, 2017
Page 8
Packet Pg. 195
9.2.e
Single family residences in close proximity to the Highway 99 corridor represent some of the least
expensive housing in the City. Among the purposes of the CG zone in 16.60.005, it recognizes the evolving
identity and sense of place including distinctions between different parts of the district and to be sensitive
to adjacent resident zones. He suggested using "adjacent and neighboring" instead of "adjacent" to clarify
consideration of residents next to and across the street from CG zones. The table in 16.60.020.A is not
sympathetic to adjacent and neighboring residential zones. The minimum street, side and rear setback of
10-15 feet may be more adequately sensitive to neighboring residential zones if each was increased by a
minimum of 10 feet. With regard to 16.60.020.D regarding stepbacks adjacent to RS zones, he suggested
using "adjacent to and across the street from RS zones" instead of "adjacent." He recommended surface
parking lots adjacent to or across the street from residential zones be prohibited and that residential parking
requirements in 16.60.030.1 be further reduced from a minimum of .75 cars for units 700 square feet or less
and 1.75 cars for units above 750 square feet to encourage use of public transportation. Adopting these
recommendations would more clearly demonstrate the Council's commitment to being sensitive to
neighboring RS zones while allowing for needed development.
Hearing no further comment, Mayor Earling closed the public hearing. He relayed staff is seeking Council
input for consideration on July 18.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked for clarification whether the zoning change would allow adult
entertainment. Ms. Hope answered nothing had changed with regard to adult entertainment.
Councilmember Tibbott expressed interest in staff s suggestions to address the issue he raised regarding
multi -family directly across street from single family. Admittedly those streets were quieter and there would
be parking on the street, yet the possibility existed for a 75-foot tall building across the street. He was open
to considering options such as a parking buffer, reduced heights, stepback, etc.
Councilmember Johnson commented TOD is very conducive to bicycles. She expressed interest in ways to
accommodate bicycles in the Highway 99 corridor and consider the corridor as whole as a linear park as
there are not a lot of parks in the area.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked how to ensure people are not parking in the neighborhoods.
Although the hope is fewer cars in a TOD, parking could be an issue if residents of the TOD parked in
residential neighborhoods adjacent to the corridor. Ms. Hope said that is a legitimate issue and it is a
balancing act. If too much parking is required, the result will not be TOD, yet enough parking needs to be
required. The code tries to strike that balance between what is enough so there is some required parking but
not so much that the TOD is lost or development of the site is so expensive that nothing happens. She
described a development in Redmond where initially the city had fairly hefty parking standards and after
the project was built, they found only about half the parking was being used because residents were using
transit due to the location. If the need arose, parking programs could be considered.
9. ACTION ITEMS
1. PROPOSED NOISE ORDINANCE
Public Works Director Phil Williams explained this is in response to the current need which will continue
so staff is recommending a change to the code. He reviewed:
• Current Noise Ordinance ECC 5.30
o Written 1981 — last modified 1985 (32 years ago)
o Sets standards for noise generation by limiting sound pressure levels at receiving property lines
o Establishes two standards
■ Daytime (7 am— 10 pm)
■ Night time (10 pm — 7 am)
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
June 20, 2017
Page 9
Packet Pg. 196
9.2.f
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES
July 18, 2017
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Dave Earling, Mayor
Thomas Mesaros, Council President
Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember
Michael Nelson, Councilmember
Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember
Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember
Dave Teitzel, Councilmember
Neil Tibbott, Councilmember
1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE
STAFF PRESENT
Phil Williams, Public Works Director
Patrick Doherty, Econ. Dev & Comm. Serv. Dir
Shane Hope, Development Services Director
Scott James, Finance Director
Frances Chapin, Arts & Culture Program Mgr.
Rob English, City Engineer
Mike DeLilla, Senior Utilities Engineer
Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
Scott Passey, City Clerk
Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator
Jeannie Dines, Recorder
The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Earling in the Council
Chambers, 250 5t' Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute.
2. ROLL CALL
City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present.
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
4. PRESENTATIONS
PROCLAMATION IN HONOR OF THE 95TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE FLORETUM
CLUB
Mayor Earling read a proclamation proclaiming July 16 — 22, 2017 as Edmonds Floretum Garden Club
Week in Edmonds and urging all citizens to recognize and applaud their invaluable service. He presented
the proclamation to Past President Sally Wassal & current President Tia Scarce. Ms. Scarce said she joined
the Floretum Garden Club after moving to Edmonds three years ago due to their part in the way Edmonds
looks, particularly in the summer which draws visitors. The proclamation acknowledges the Club's close
working relationship with the City as well as their 95t' anniversary. Ms. Wassal thanked Councilmember
Buckshnis and Executive Assistant Carolyne LaFave for their efforts related to the proclamation. She
commented on her enjoyment of gardening and vegetables she grows along with the flowers in her yard on
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
July 18, 2017
Page 1
Packet Pg. 197
9.2.f
14 Decision Packages Total $281,880
0 9 are new items for Council to consider expenditures
0 5 have been previously discussed by Council
o $136,070 in new revenues
New amendments:
o Annual software maintenance for the Government Access Channel programming
o Additional consultant plan review of building permits due to increases in permitting activity
and complexity of permits, partially funded by new permit revenues
o Additional $1,000 in 2017 Diversity Commission staff budget to cover delayed invoice
o Use of $6,000 in vendor fee receipts for 2017 Holiday Market professional services
o Use of $1,500 sponsorship receipts for 2017 Puget Sound Bird Fest professional services
o Transfer of funds from Non -departmental to Parks & Recreation for payout of retiring
employee
o Insurance reimbursement for traffic controller damaged in a vehicle accident
o Preliminary design of a replacement retaining wall within right-of-way on 89" Place West -
$16,400
o Stormwater educational programs for K-12 students and businesses as part of the City's
Stormwater Permit compliance efforts
Amendments previously discussed by Council:
o Fund temporary Administrative Assistant position while employee on maternity leave -
$16,500
o Corrections to Lodging Tax Fund line item for professional services - $4,500
o Additional expenditure for Frances Anderson Center Bandshell - $32,000
o Additional $71,000 spending authority for Veterans Plaza
o Budget correction related to transfers from the Utility Operating Funds to the Bond Fund
Exhibit D (change in fund balance)
Summary:
o Revenues are increased by $136,070
o Expenditures are Increased by $281,880
o Ending Fund Balance is Decreased by $145,810
Councilmember Teitzel referred to the amendment for additional consultant plan review, recalling Mr.
James stated it would be partially offset by new revenue but the amendment states it will be more than
offset by increased revenue. Mr. James agreed.
Councilmember Tibbott asked about the revenue sources for the $136,070. Mr. James answered it varies,
permit revenues, ending fund balance, vendor fee receipts, sponsorships, etc.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO
APPROVE ORDINANCE NO. 4075, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 4063 AS A RESULT OF UNANTICIPATED
TRANSFERS AND EXPENDITURES OF VARIOUS FUNDS, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE
SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mayor Earling declared a brief recess.
2. GENERAL COMMERCIAL (CG) DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AND PLANNED
ACTION FOR THE HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA
Development Services Director Shane Hope relayed the City Council last reviewed the Highway 99 Area
zone and code changes at the June 20 public hearing. At that time discussion included, comparison with
existing zone map & development code, review of proposed CG site & building design standards and
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
July 18, 2017
Page 12
Packet Pg. 198
9.2.f
specific questions & comments. The focus of tonight's meeting is review of the Draft Zone Map and Code
and questions, comments and direction. No formal action is requested at this time.
Ms. Hope reviewed:
• Proposed Zoning Map
o The proposal is to change CG2 zones and multifamily parcels in the area to the consolidated
CG zone
o Incorporate design standards that will increase vitality & ensure transition into neighborhoods
o More predictable outcomes for community
• Comprehensive Plan map
o New zoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan map
• Zoning Map and Development Regulations - Goals
o Vitality and livability'
o Sustainability
o Consistent with subarea plan
o Reasonable balance of requirements and options
• Site development standards - General 16.60.020
o Pedestrian area - required adjacent to street
■ Composed of three zones: streetscape zone, pedestrian zone and activity zone
■ Comparison of pedestrian area requirements
- Required in existing CG regulations? - no
- Required in proposed CG regulations? - yes
o Comparison of dimensional requirements
Existing CG Chapter
Proposed CG Chapter
Height
60-75'
75' ft max*
Street setback
4' max
5'110'
Side/rear setback
0115
0115
Stepback
No additional stepback
required for upper stories
Additional stepback required for upper
stories adjacent to single family
o Additional building stepback when adjacent to RS zones
■ Upper Stories stepback 10' for 25' of building height; and 20' for 55' of building height
Site development standards -design standards 16.60.030.A. LE
o Photo of across -the -street transition illustrating separation provided by the street
o A minimum 5 feet wide Type IV landscaping is required along all street frontages where
parking lots abut the street
o Access and vehicle parking
■ All off-street surface parking shall be located to the side or rear of the primary building,
except as otherwise specifically allowed by this chapter, and shall be screened from
sidewalk by a wall or plantings between 2 to 4 feet in height
■ Outdoor parking areas shall comprise 40% or less of the public street frontage area within
100 feet of the primary street for the lot or tract and, on corner lots, may not be located at
the corner. Requirements of this subsection do not apply to permitted auto sales uses
■ High parking requirements can impede development
■ Proposed regulations aimed to encourage transit -oriented development options
- 0.75 parking spaces per residential unit less than 700 sq. ft.
- 1.25 parking spaces per residential unit of 700-1100 sq. ft.
- 1.75 parking spaces per residential units greater than 1100 sq. ft.
■ Guest parking: 1 space/per 20 units
■ Possible limitations/options on parking on first floor of building
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
July 18, 2017
Page 13
Packet Pg. 199
9.2.f
- Option A: Allow no vehicle parking within first 20 feet of a building where the
building faces a primary street unless the parking is underground. (Ms. Hope preferred
this option.)
- Option B: Allow no more than 60% of the first floor of a building to include vehicle
parking where the building is less than 50 feet from the primary street
o Required Electric vehicle charging stations
■ One or more electric vehicle charging stations must be provided for all new development
that includes housing
■ 1 station/10 required residential stalls plus planned capacity to double that amount in the
future
o Required bicycle storage spaces
■ Bicycle storage spaces for multifamily housing, excluding housing for assisted living or
other specialized facilities, shall be provided for residents
■ 1 bicycle storage space for each residential unit under 700 square feet and 2 bicycle storage
spaces for each residential unit greater than 700 square feet
o Paths within parking lots
■ Pedestrian walkways in parking lots shall be delineated by separate paved routes that meet
federal accessibility requirements and that use a variation in textures and/or colors and may
include landscape barriers and landscape islands
o Pedestrian and transit access
■ Where a transit station or bus stop is located in front of or adjacent to a parcel, pedestrian
connections linking the station or stop directly to the development are required.
■ Pedestrians routes shall connect buildings on the same site to each other
Site Development Standards — Site Design and Layout 16.60.030.0
1) Pedestrian Oriented Design
■ At least 50% of a building's facade facing the primary public street shall be located within
20 feet of the property line where the primary street frontage exists.
■ Building must include a prominent pedestrian entry on the primary frontage
■ Vehicle parking shall not be located within the first 20 feet of the primary street frontage,
other than as allowed for vehicle sales use.
2) Alternative walkable design area option
■ For sites with unique constraints.
■ At least 50% of the building's facade facing the primary street shall be located within 60
feet of the front property line
3) Exceptions process for pedestrian and walkable design options
■ Exemptions may be allowed by hearing examiner to provide for design flexibility that still
encourages pedestrian orientation and efficient land uses under following criteria:
- Property is located within 300 feet of highway interchange or has unique pedestrian
access constraints
- One or more buildings are located facing the primary street frontage
- The development provides business and pedestrian areas near the primary street
frontage and likely to be active through the day/evening.
- At least 25% of required amenity space is located to connect building to the street
- Where a site has multiple buildings, amenity space should be located between
buildings to allow shared use
- One or more buildings on the site must have at least two stories of usable space
o Amenity Space
An area equivalent to at least 5% of the building footprint shall be provided as amenity
space.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
July 18, 2017
Page 14
Packet Pg. 200
9.2.f
■ If a vehicle parking area is being added to the site without the concurrent development of
a building of at least 2,000 square feet, amenity space must be provided to equal at least
5% of the additional parking area.
o Building Design and Massing
- On the primary frontage, 50% of the building fagade between 2 and 10 feet in height shall
be comprised of windows or doors that are transparent
- Photograph of concept illustration of possible redevelopment
How do proposed regulations encourage sustainable development?
o Examples:
■ Bicycle storage
■ Electric vehicle charging wider pedestrian areas
■ Not excessive vehicle parking (transit friendly)
■ Amenity space
■ Stormwater mgmt.
■ Compact development
■ Landscaping and street trees
Proposed change to sign code
o Revision to 20.65.045
- Limit freestanding signs (such as monument signs) to maximum height of 14 feet in this
district
- Require freestanding signs to be counted as part of total maximum sign area for this district
Ms. Hope reviewed the Planned Action Code:
• Preliminary Draft
o Planned Actions are allowed under GMA and SEPA
■ Based on EIS that has analyzed impact of subarea plan or development regulations
■ Ensures environmental impacts have been considered in establishing plans and regulations
■ Streamlines SEPA review process for projects that have already been covered by EIS for a
subarea
■ Proposed planned action code for Edmonds
- Is based on Hwy 99 Subarea EIS
- Sets limits on amount and type of projects to be covered by Planned Action
- Requires all other applicable codes and standards to be applied
o Planned Action Code
- Is based on EIS process underway
- Establishes mitigation measures
- Applies to development in CG district, in addition to other codes and standards
- Details to be completed next week
o Planning Board
■ Had introduction in June
■ To hold public hearing July 26 & make recommendation to Council
Ms. Hope reviewed next steps:
• Tonight: Council consideration of proposed zoning map update and code items
• Next review July 31
• Potential Action August 15
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas was excited about the future of the Hwy 99 corridor and was pleased to
hear clarification about the space between a residential development and an existing neighborhood. It was
her understanding there would be 5 feet for streetscape, 10 feet for a pedestrian zone and 25 feet for an
activity zone. Ms. Hope clarified there is a 5-foot streetscape zone, 5-10 feet for a pedestrian zone and 1.5
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
July 18, 2017
Page 15
Packet Pg. 201
9.2.f
— 2 and up to 10 feet for an activity zone. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked about development across
the street from a residential neighborhood. Ms. Hope answered there would be a 15-foot setback, 10 feet of
which has to be landscaped and if buildings are above 25 feet, each segment must have a 10-foot stepback.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas referred to a single family residential across the street from development
and asked the typical width of a street. Ms. Hope answered streets would typically be 60 feet plus the 10-
20 foot setback. The street in the photograph she displayed as an example is 30 feet; Highway 99 is 100
feet wide. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented this gives the opportunity for residents to not live
in the shadow of a building. She asked if a 75-foot high building would be 6 or 7 stories. Ms. Hope answered
it would typically six. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said she has researched 4-6 story buildings in the
area and found the setback was important for single family neighborhoods.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas referred to the options for parking, agreeing that Option A would be more
beneficial. Ms. Hope agreed, pointing out it addressed the appearance and avoids visible vehicle parking.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented regardless of the location of the parking, the primary frontage
of the building would be glass. Ms. Hope agreed.
Councilmember Tibbott asked if the windows on the primary frontage would be transparent windows. Ms.
Hope answered they must be transparent. Councilmember Tibbott commented on the value of not having
parking behind the transparent windows. He asked if it would be possible to have a storefront with parking
behind. Ms. Hope answered yes. Councilmember Tibbott observed charging stations and bicycle storage
are requirements not incentives. Ms. Hope agreed.
Councilmember Johnson pointed out the reference to primary roads and suggested using the functional
classification system such as principle arterial, collector street, etc. Ms. Hope said the terms used in the
plan were more user friends and they were defined. Councilmember Johnson suggested it would be better
to use the functional classification to be consistent with Transportation Element. Ms. Hope said the intent
was to be descriptive.
Councilmember Johnson asked how the alternative walkable parking designed works with a new dealership,
recalling two dealerships have expanded in the past year. Ms. Hope answered the consultant was very
cognizant that auto dealerships were an important source of revenue balanced with having the standards
apply equally; there is a practical reason for having something different for vehicle sales facilities. Several
areas in the code state, "other than as allowed for vehicle sales use."
Councilmember Johnson asked if there were any incentives for energy efficiency such as LEED or Build
Green buildings. Ms. Hope said there was interest in that for this area and throughout the City and staff has
been working with regional partners on options for incentives but it was not ready to be included in this
plan. Often the incentive is it saves money in the development long term or makes it a more attractive
development for tenants. To promote LEED, the City would include that information in the building notice,
etc. Providing a break in the permit fees is also something the Council could consider separately.
Councilmember Teitzel observed the draft regulations require amenity space equally at least 5% of the
building footprint but there is no requirement that that space be publicly accessible. Ms. Hope answered a
developer wants areas that are private for the tenants; there is also a requirement for the first 10-20 feet in
open pedestrian space. Councilmember Teitzel asked if a portion of the 5% of amenity space could be
publicly accessible. Ms. Hope said that may have been necessary if there was not a requirement for public
space in front of the building.
Councilmember Buckshnis commented it was important to provide incentives for energy efficient and
LEED such as a break on permit fees and/or fast -tracking the permitting process. To get buildings of future
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
July 18, 2017
Page 16
Packet Pg. 202
9.2.f
in Edmonds, the City needs to provide accolades and breaks for developers who are willing to do that. Ms.
Hope said staff will bring that to Council in the next few months.
Mayor Earling said there would be another opportunity for Council review prior to adoption.
3. RESOLUTION OF INTENT TO DESIGNATE HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA AS A
RESIDENTIAL TARGETED AREA
Economic Development/Community Services Director Patrick Doherty advised the resolution establishes
the Council's intent to designate the Highway 99 Subarea as Residential Targeted Area for implementation
of the Multifamily Property Tax Exemption (MFTE) Program and set a public hearing on August 15. The
Council has already implemented MFTE in Westgate following approval of the subarea plan. The purpose
of MFTE is principally to encourage development that is planning for in areas that have not seen or may be
lacking in development of that nature. Multifamily or mixed use development would be incentivized by
this program. The extra benefit of MFTE is it provides for affordable housing at 20% of the units. The State
allows two options, an 8-year tax exemption for the residential portion with no affordable housing and a
12-year exemption if the project provides 20% of the units affordable. The Council previously approved
the 12-year exemption with affordable housing for Westgate.
If the resolution is approved by Council, at the August 15 public hearing, Mr. Doherty said he will present
details of the program, adding this subarea and minor amendments to the code language. At that time, the
Council could officially designate Highway 99 and approve the revised code language. He offered to
provide the draft code language to committee prior to the August 15 public hearing.
Mr. Doherty relayed the Economic Development Commission has indicated its desire to co-sponsor with
City staff a redevelopment forum/event in fall that developers throughout the region would be invited to
attend, present the new plan, expectations for the corridor, etc. MFTE would be one of the items highlighted
at that event.
COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. 1390, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, NOTIFYING THE PUBLIC OF ITS INTENT TO DESIGNATE THE
HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA AS A RESIDENTIAL TARGETED AREA FOR THE PURPOSE OF
ESTABLISHING A MULTIFAMILY TAX EXEMPTION PROGRAM AND SETTING A PUBLIC
HEARING ON AUGUST 15, 2017 AT 7:00 P.M.
Council President Mesaros requested the revisions to the code language be reviewed by committee.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas inquired about the boundaries of the Highway 99 Subarea Mr. Doherty
answered it is the entire Highway 99 corridor within Edmonds and properties adjacent to Highway 99
particularly to the west. The MFTE program would apply to all properties that allow residential and/or
mixed use.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
4. HISTORIC INFORMATIONAL PANELS FOR YOST PARK AND WATERFRONT
MILLS
COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO REFER THIS TO THE PARKS, PLANNING AND PUBLIC WORKS
COMMITTEE FOR REVIEW AND TAKEN UP AT A SUBSEQUENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
July 18, 2017
Page 17
Packet Pg. 203
9.2.g
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES
July 31, 2017
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT STAFF PRESENT
Dave Earling, Mayor
Al Compaan, Police Chief
Thomas Mesaros, Council President
Carrie Hite, Parks, Rec. & Cult. Serv. Dir.
Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember
Shane Hope, Development Services Director
Michael Nelson, Councilmember
Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember
Scott Passey, City Clerk
Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember
Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator
Dave Teitzel, Councilmember
Jeannie Dines, Recorder
Neil Tibbott, Councilmember
1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE
The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Earling in the Council
Chambers, 250 5t1i Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute.
2. ROLL CALL
City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present.
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
4. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
David Huneke, Edmonds, expressed frustration with the continued delay installing street lights on Pine
Street. The lights were approved last year and scheduled to be install in the spring. The Council put the
project on hold in May and three months later, the project is still on hold. The Parks, Planning & Public
Works Committee discussed the lights and when no opposition was expressed, he anticipated the lights
would be on the Council's agenda tonight. Continually delaying the lights puts the safety of pedestrians at
risk. Beginning this week or next, Chevron will begin cleanup, 10-15 trucks will make 2-3 trips per day for
2 months. He hoped this issue would be addressed during committee reports including the reason for the
delay.
Alvin Rutledge, Edmonds, commented he has been on athletic field boards for the State, King County,
and Seattle. Seattle raised $198 million via a levy in the past for fields. He relayed past interest in movies
at Civic Fields.
Farrell Fleming, Edmonds, Executive Director, Edmonds Senior Center, expressed appreciation for City
workers' repair of the senior center's sewer issues. The senior center had to be evacuated and closed the
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
July 31, 2017
Page 1
Packet Pg. 204
9.2.g
afternoon of July 18 due to a blockage that caused a sewer backup. The center remained closed the next
day and porta-potties were delivered for planned weekend events. The center has a combination of many
old sewer lines, some cement, some cast iron and the blockage occurred where those join. The center was
able to reopen with porta-potties and two operating restrooms. A City team arrived at 6 a.m. July 25,
determined the problem by 9 a.m., were laying gravel by 2 p.m. and the system was again operational by
the next morning, hopefully for an extended period or at least another year. He commended the effective,
hardworking, good-natured City staff, particularly Facilities Manager Tom Sullivan, Facilities Maintenance
Worker Patrick Cleveland, Sewer Lead Worker Tim Harris, Senior Sewer Maintenance Workers Jim
Clemens, Don Crofton and Rick Wickers. He requested staff be recognized for their work.
5. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
The agenda items approved are as follows:
1. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 25, 2017
2. APPROVAL OF CLAIM AND PAYROLL CHECKS.
3. ACKNOWLEDGE THE RECEIPT OF A CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM RICHARD
MILLER ($169.99).
4. ORDINANCE TO CHANGE THE TIMING OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S ANNUAL
REPORT
5. HISTORIC INFORMATIONAL PANELS FOR YOST PARK AND WATERFRONT
MILLS
6. SOCIAL WORKER INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
6. PUBLIC HEARING
1. PUBLIC HEARING ON HIGHWAY 99 PLANNED ACTION ORDINANCE
Development Services Director Shane Hope introduced Anna Snyder Kelly, 3 Square Blocks, who worked
on the environmental impact statement (EIS) as well as the Planned Action Ordinance. Ms. Snyder Kelly
explained a Planned Action Ordinance regulates the projects covered by the environment analysis done in
an EIS, deemed to be "planned actions" under the Planned Action Ordinance. A Planned Action Ordinance
also regulates what must be done to mitigate the environmental impacts. The Planned Action Ordinance
does not just permit developments because they are within the EIS; it requires environmental impacts
created by a project to be mitigated. The benefit of a Planned Action Ordinance is it speeds up the SEPA
process for developers which encourages the kind of growth and economic development the City has stated
it desires, creating benefit for all parties.
Ms. Snyder Kelly explained there are three basic steps in preparing a Planned Action Ordinance, 1) prepare
an EIS that analyzes the environment impacts that various types of development might have on an area, 2)
develop and adopt a Planned Action Ordinance, and 3) review individual development projects to determine
if they are a planned action under the Planned Action Ordinance. She provided an analogy; if a development
process is a trip on a plane, a Planned Action Ordinance is the equivalent of TSA precheck. A Planned
Action Ordinance does not just let development occur because it happened to have been described in the
EIS, but it speeds up the line and requires development to mitigate for the environmental impacts it has on
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
July 31, 2017
Page 2
Packet Pg. 205
9.2.g
an area. More specifically, a Planned Action Ordinance is procedural in the sense that it does not change
the underlying codes and standards; each development considered under a Planned Action Ordinance still
must follow the underlying plans and codes. The City determines if a project is a planned action and can be
considered under the Planned Action Ordinance.
Ms. Snyder Kelly explained the proposed Planned Action Ordinance outlines five thresholds used to
determine if a project qualifies:
1. Land Use
• Meets land uses allowed by the code and described in the EIS
2. Development threshold (for entire study area)
• 3,325 dwelling units
• 1,634,685 square feet of building area
3. Transportation
• Not more than 2,755 new evening peak hour trips (for entire study area).
4. Elements of the Environment and Degree of Impacts
• A proposed project that would result in a significant change in the type or degree of impacts to
any of the elements of the environment analyzed in the Planned Action EIS would not qualify
as a planned action
Changed Conditions
• Should environmental conditions change significantly from those analyzed in the Planned
Action EIS, the City's SEPA Responsible Official may determine that the Planned Action
designation is no longer applicable until supplemental environmental review is conducted.
Council President Mesaros asked how the thresholds were determined. Ms. Snyder Kelly responded the
transportation thresholds were calculated based on level of service (LOS) in the City's code and
requirements for concurrence. The development thresholds are also related to concurrency. Council
President Mesaros relayed his understanding there was no change to those. Ms. Snyder Kelly agreed.
Councilmember Buckshnis asked whether this was the first time the City has considered a Planned Action
Ordinance. Ms. Hope answered yes, this is the first time the City has undertaken a Planned Action
Ordinance and an EIS for a subarea. Councilmember Buckshnis asked why the City wanted to speed up the
SEPA process, observing SEPA is extremely important. Ms. Hope clarified the real value is not that it
makes the SEPA process a few days faster; the value is having an EIS that has assessed the impacts of
development which helps assure the community that impacts of development have been considered and the
Planned Action Ordinance memorializes that. A SEPA Checklist is still required for each project.
Councilmember Nelson asked how much time is saved. Ms. Hope answered for a developer it may be a
few days or a couple weeks, it is not a huge amount of time unless a huge project is proposed which could
potentially save a developer several weeks. Councilmember Nelson observed the time savings was also a
cost savings. Ms. Hope agreed.
Councilmember Johnson asked whether the EIS had been published. Ms. Hope advised the draft EIS is
available online and the final EIS will be posted tomorrow; there was little change between the two. Ms.
Snyder Kelly advised the final EIS incorporates a number of public comments which were used to make a
few tweaks such as incorporating things Community Transit is doing.
Councilmember Johnson referred to G5 in the Planned Action Ordinance related to development
agreements which states the City or an applicant may request consideration and execution of a development
agreement as allowed in Chapter 20.08 ECDC for a Planned Action project. She recalled the Council had
a robust discussion regarding development agreements 3-5 years ago but the discussion was never
concluded. That discussion included types of incentives and tradeoffs for development agreements. She
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
July 31, 2017
Page 3
Packet Pg. 206
9.2.g
asked the status of the development agreement process. Ms. Hope answered development agreements are
allowed under the existing code; if a project doesn't meet certain aspect of the code but meets the intent,
the Council can consider a development agreement that binds the developer to certain conditions. A
development agreement requires a decision by the City Council. A number of cities allow for development
agreements and Ms. Hope acknowledged there are pros and cons to their use but there are occasions when
they are useful. She felt it was worthwhile to again consider the chapter related to development agreements,
but that was a different process; this ordinance simply references the existing code regarding development
agreements and does not change anything.
Councilmember Johnson relayed her understanding the Council would work with a developer on case -by -
case basis. Ms. Hope answered yes. She was not expecting requests for a development agreement and she
has not heard anything that would likely lead to a development agreement; the ordinance simply leaves that
option open.
Councilmember Johnson observed the Development Services Director or designee determines if an
application is complete and that the decision of the SEPA Responsible Official regarding qualification as a
planned action shall be final. She asked who is the SEPA Responsible Official Ms. Hope advised the
Planning Manager is the SEPA Responsible Official, currently Rob Chave. Councilmember Johnson
observed there was no way to challenge that decision. Ms. Hope answered that is typically considered an
administrative decision. Councilmember Johnson observed the Planned Action Ordinance would be
reviewed in five years. Ms. Hope agreed.
Councilmember Johnson observed the ordinances takes effect 5 days after passage and asked whether the
Planned Action Ordinance could be adopted prior to the Comprehensive Plan when it was related to the
Hwy 99 subarea plan. Ms. Hope answered subarea plans can be adopted outside the normal Comprehensive
Plan amendment process. Once the Council approves the Hwy 99 subarea plan, which is considered part of
the Comprehensive Plan, the Planned Action Ordinance could go forward.
Councilmember Tibbott relayed his understanding that development could go forward unless there were
significant impacts and asked for examples of impacts that would disallow development. Ms. Hope
answered an obvious example would be the traffic proposed at an intersection would cause the intersection's
LOS to fail; specific mitigation and additional study would be required. Councilmember Tibbott asked for
other examples. Ms. Hope answered traffic would be the mostly likely as there are no wetlands in this area.
Ms. Snyder Kelly pointed out if a project does not meet the qualifications to be considered a planned action,
it automatically reverts to the original SEPA process.
Councilmember Tibbott asked for an example of changed conditions. Ms. Hope answered the most likely
would be if traffic patterns did not occur in the way the modeling indicates. Ms. Snyder Kelly answered
another example would be an unexpected increase in population and the utilities no longer support the
development that would allowed, the environmental impact of the project would need to be considered.
Councilmember Tibbott relayed his understanding there were conditions that could require further study or
deeper analysis. He asked who decides when the impact or changed conditions required further analysis.
Ms. Hope answered that would typically be the SEPA official or it could be raised by others.
Councilmember Tibbott concluded the involvement of the SEPA Official provides additional objectivity.
Councilmember Buckshnis asked why the public hearing was being held tonight when the Council has not
seen the EIS which should have been included in the packet and it had not been reviewed by the Planning
Board. Ms. Hope clarified it did go through the Planning Board; the Planning Board held at least two
meetings including a public hearing and recommended adoption. The Planning Board minutes were sent to
Council today.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
July 31, 2017
Page 4
Packet Pg. 207
9.2.g
Councilmember Buckshnis echoed Councilmember Johnson's concern that the Council never completed
its discussion about development agreements and according to the 20.08.050, the attorney does everything
and the Council is not involved. Ms. Hope assured a development agreement requires Council approval.
Mr. Taraday pointed out 20.08.040 states a development agreement is a Type V development project permit
application which is a Council decision.
Councilmember Buckshnis relayed her support for Hwy 99 but she had not received all the documents
necessary to fully understand. Ms. Hope said the development agreement reference is not essential to this
Planned Action Ordinance; it simply references the existing chapter. If the Council chose not to include
that provision, that would be okay.
Mayor Earling opened the public participation of the public hearing.
Seth Hale, Seattle, offered suggestions to enhance the goals of the proposed code language with regard to
required parking and alternative transportation modes for transit oriented development (TOD) within '/4
mile of BRT stations. Characteristics of TODs include multiple transportation choices and reduced parking.
Studies have shown that increased transportation choices and reduced parking benefit the environment and
reduce auto congestion. Incentivizing development to provide additional transportation choices in exchange
for reduced parking only increases these benefits. Examples of incentives include charging stations.
Incentivizing charging stations within TODs would provide a higher number of charging stations or
capacity. For example, for every 4 additional charging stations or capacity, the number of standard vehicle
stalls could be reduced by 1 stall, up to a maximum of 5% of required parking. This is a good trade with
regard to cost, each charging station costs $4,000 to $6,000; structured parking stalls range from $10,000
to $30,000. Reducing one parking stall offsets the cost of an EV station. Under the proposed code, a
charging station shall be installed to serve at least 10% of the required residential parking stalls. While
Washington is a leader in the number of electrical vehicles they account for less than 1% of the registered
vehicles.
Mr. Hale relayed concern that as technology advances, charging stations will also likely advance and
today's equipment may become obsolete. He suggested an initial lower percentage of functioning charging
stations with a potential for increasing or exceeding capacity. Another example is car sharing; car sharing
users tend to be millennials and there are significantly more renters under 30 than homeowners. He has
seen car sharing used successfully in Seattle where car sharing spaces reduced the required parking by 3
stalls to a maximum of 15% of the required parking stalls. He acknowledged the cost to provide additional
transportation modes such as bicycle parking charging stations, car sharing, subsidized transit passes, etc.
adds to the overall project costs. A reduction in required parking stalls helps offset these costs and ensures
TODs can compete with typical development to provide affordable housing with alternative transportation
modes close to BRT stations.
Alvin Rutledge, Edmonds, referred to casinos in neighboring cities and adult entertainment in Shoreline
that are used by Edmonds residents. As more businesses locate on Highway 99, the traffic increases. He
questioned the existing zoning and the proposed zoning, recalling the reason development has not occurred
in Edmonds is the cost. He provided a Seattle Times article from 1987 regarding the Council considering a
topless -bar law.
Mark Tekin and Dominic Rambes, Tekin & Associates, owners of the Denny's property on Highway
99, explained a year ago they got the space back as it was no longer financial feasible for Denny's. They
have proposed a project with 4 tenants, 2 restaurants tenants and 2 retail tenants that would provide daytime
and evening services to the community. They submitted a land use application which was approved on July
14, 2017. Five days after approval, they were informed by City staff it was no longer valid due to the new
development guidelines under consideration. He relayed they spent a lot of time and energy on the
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
July 31, 2017
Page 5
Packet Pg. 208
9.2.g
redevelopment project and although they had interest from fast food, they have proposed a nice, modern
redevelopment with no drive throughs.
Eric Nielsen, Area Architecture, representing the project on 212th St SW & 72ndAve W, referred to the
proposed increase in the building setback from 4 feet to 10 feet, relaying a preference for more flexibility
in the code language to allow for site specific solutions as a blanket 10-foot setback may not provide the
desired solution on every site. He referred to images he provided the Council, first an example of a 4-foot
setback or other minimal dimension that allows the developer opportunity to setback the building higher
up, essentially transition the building to the street level. He referred to sections in the images, an example
of an elevation with a 10-foot setback and a vertical building along the sidewalk. The second elevation
provides a more pedestrian scale on the sidewalk with setback above and opportunity for landscaping above
the street. He recommended the Council consider more flexible in the code with two options, 1) the 10 foot
setback and 2) reduced setbacks as long as the building is setback above by 10 feet. With regard to the
proposal to not allow parking within 20 feet of the building wall, he pointed out this pressures building
owners to provide commercial and residential uses on the ground floor; however, not all sites are suitable
for residential or commercial uses, potentially resulting in vacant space on the ground floor.
Hearing no further comment, Mayor Earling closed the public participation portion of the public hearing.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked Ms. Hope to comment on the Denny's site. Ms. Hope said she
would need to research the particulars of the site. It was her understanding if a building permit was
approved, it would not be invalidated based on a code that was not yet adopted. City Attorney Jeff Taraday
relayed he was contacted by their attorney; the issue is they have approved design review but not an
approved building permit so the project is not yet vested. The attorney's request was for the Council to
consider a delayed effective date that would allow the applicant to submit a building permit application
before the ordinance is effective.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked how the new code would prohibit the owners of the Denny's site
from developing. Ms. Hope answered it was related to the specifics of development, not whether they could
develop. For example, the setbacks may be different; basically, the design standards would change for the
site and the building. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas suggested if they were interested in developing with
their original plan, they should apply for a permit sooner rather than later. Ms. Hope agreed, advising the
other option, if City Council wanted to permit this project, specific language could be included in the code
or the effective date could be changed. If a building permit is submitted as a complete application prior to
a new code taking effect, the project is vested. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas observed that corner has
had its challenges and it would be nice to see it redeveloped.
Councilmember Johnson asked about the effective date of new ordinance. Ms. Hope said their concern was
not related to the Planned Action Ordinance but rather the underlying development regulations. If the
development regulations were adopted on August 15, they are effective 5 days after publication. If the
Council chose to forward approval to the Consent Agenda, there would be a slight delay. Another option
would be for her to research and provide more information at the Council's next meeting and determine if
the Council wants to craft language related to that project given that a lot of work has been done it.
7. STUDY ITEMS
REVIEW OF PROPOSED HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS
Development Services Director Shane Hope recalled the Council last reviewed Highway 99 Area zone and
code changes on July 18. At that time discussion included comparison with existing zone map and
development code, review of proposed CG site & building design standards and specific questions and
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
July 31, 2017
Page 6
Packet Pg. 209
9.2.g
comments. The focus of tonight's meeting is next steps for draft plan, zone map and development code.
She sought Council direction to proceed with draft ordinances for the August 15 Council meeting. She
displayed an aerial view of the project area (Highway 99 corridor and surrounding area) and reviewed:
• Planning process and timeline
o Understanding existing conditions: March - April 2016
o Develop land use and transportation scenarios: April - June 2016
o SEPA & Planned Action Environmental Impact Assessment: April - November 2017
o Develop subarea Draft Plan: October - December 2016
o Final Subarea Plan: January - June 2017
• Community Values
o Connectivity
o Designations
o Beautification
o Safety
o Walkability
o Affordable housing
o Healthy businesses
• Distinct Subdistricts
o Major local and regional destinations on Hwy 99
■ International District
- Diverse restaurants, grocers and shops; major Korean business cluster
■ Health District
- Swedish Hospital and medical offices
■ Gateway District
- Identified by the community during workshop
- Desire for "gateway" and distinct transition point in and out of Edmonds
• Subarea Plan: implementation strategies, policy recommendations and actions
o Zoning and development recommendations
o Affordable housing recommendations
o Signage and wayfinding recommendations
o Transit recommendations
o Transportation infrastructure recommendations
■ Map: Planned Transportation Improvements
• Current Zoning Map
o The only difference between CG and CG2 is the height limit (CG = 60' and CG2 = 75')
o Many current zones are remnants from the county's antiquated zoning
o Some zones do not match with the parcel boundaries
• Proposed Zoning Map
o The proposal is to change these zones to the consolidated CG zone
o Incorporate design standards that will increase vitality and ensure transition into neighborhoods
o More predictable outcomes for community
• Zoning Map & Development Regulations - Goals
o Vitality and livability
o Sustainability
o Consistency with subarea plan
o Reasonable balance of requirements and options
• Site development standards - General 16.60.020
o Pedestrian area - required adjacent to street
■ Composed of three zones: streetscape zone, pedestrian zone and activity zone
■ Comparison of pedestrian area requirements
- Required in existing CG regulations? - no
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
July 31, 2017
Page 7
Packet Pg. 210
9.2.g
- Required in proposed CG regulations? - yes
o Comparison of dimensional requirements
Existing CG Chapter
Proposed CG Chapter
Height
60-75'
75' max*
Street setback
4' min.
5'110'
Side/rear setback
0115
0115
Stepback
No additional stepback
required for upper stories
Additional stepback required for upper
stories adjacent to single family
o Additional building stepback when adjacent to RS zones
■ Upper Stories stepback 10' for 25' of building height; and 20' for 55' of building height
Site development standards -design standards 16.60.030.A. LE
o Illustration of 15' setback with 10' landscape buffer
o Additional building stepback with adjacent to RS zones
o Illustration of upper stories stepback 10' for 25' of building height; and 20' for 55' of building
height
o Photo example of across -the -street transition illustrating streetscape zone separation provided
by street and
o Minimum 5 feet wide type IV landscaping is required along all street frontages where parking
lots abut the street
o Access and vehicle parking
■ All off-street surface parking shall be located to the side or rear of the primary building,
except as otherwise specifically allowed by this chapter, and shall be screened from
sidewalk by a wall or plantings between 2 to 4 feet in height
■ Outdoor parking areas shall comprise 40% or less of the public street frontage area within
100 feet of the primary street for the lot or tract and, on corner lots, may not be located at
the corner. Requirements of this subsection do not apply to permitted auto sales uses
■ High parking requirements can impede development
■ Proposed regulations aimed to encourage transit -oriented development options
- 0.75 parking spaces per residential unit less than 700 sq. ft.
- 1.25 parking spaces per residential unit of 700-1100 sq. ft.
- 1.75 parking spaces per residential units greater than 1100 sq. ft.
- Guest parking: 1 space/per 20 units
o Required electric vehicle charging stations
■ One or more electric vehicle charging stations must be provided for all new development
that includes housing (to serve 10% of required parking spaces)
■ Each electric vehicle charging station typically serves two vehicles
■ 1 station/10 required residential stalls plus planned capacity to double that amount in the
future
o Required bicycle storage spaces
■ Bicycle storage spaces for multifamily housing, excluding housing for assisted living or
other specialized facilities, shall be provided for residents
■ 1 bicycle storage space for each residential unit under 700 square feet and 2 bicycle storage
spaces for each residential unit greater than 700 square feet
- With 50% reduction for bikes stored in common spaces if additional racks are available
for guests
o Paths within parking lots
■ Pedestrian walkways in parking lots shall be delineated by separate paved routes that meet
federal accessibility requirements and that use a variation in textures and/or colors and may
include landscape barriers and landscape islands
o Pedestrian and transit access
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
July 31, 2017
Page 8
Packet Pg. 211
9.2.g
■ Where a transit station or bus stop is located in front of or adjacent to a parcel, pedestrian
connections linking the station or stop directly to the development are required.
■ Pedestrians routes shall connect buildings on the same site to each other
Site Development Standards — Site Design and Layout 16.60.030.0
1) Pedestrian Oriented Design
■ At least 50% of a building's facade facing the primary public street shall be located within
20 feet of the property line where the primary street frontage exists.
■ Building must include a prominent pedestrian entry on the primary frontage
■ Vehicle parking shall not be located within the first 20 feet of the primary street frontage,
other than as allowed for vehicle sales use.
2) Alternative walkable design area option
■ For sites with unique constraints.
■ At least 50% of the building's facade facing the primary street shall be located within 60
feet of the front property line
3) Exceptions process for pedestrian and walkable design options
■ Exemptions may be allowed by hearing examiner to provide for design flexibility that still
encourages pedestrian orientation and efficient land uses under following criteria:
- Property is located within 300 feet of highway interchange or has unique pedestrian
access constraints
- One or more buildings are located facing the primary street frontage
- The development provides business and pedestrian areas near the primary street
frontage and likely to be active through the day/evening.
- Not more than 50% of required parking within first 20 feet of property
- At least 25% of required amenity space is located to connect building to the street
- Where a site has multiple buildings, amenity space should be located between
buildings to allow shared use
- One or more buildings on the site must have at least two stories of usable space
o Amenity Space
■ An area equivalent to at least 5% of the building footprint shall be provided as amenity
space.
■ If a vehicle parking area is being added to the site without concurrent development of a
building of at least 2,000 square feet, amenity space must be provided to equal at least 5%
of additional parking area.
o Building Design and Massing
- On the primary frontage, 50% of the building facade between 2 and 10 feet in height shall
be comprised of windows or doors that are transparent
o New standard for vehicle parking within buildings
■ On primary frontage, no vehicle parking within first 20 feet of building facing street
How do proposed regulations encourage sustainable development?
o Examples:
■ Bicycle storage
■ Electric vehicle charging
■ Wider pedestrian areas
■ Not excessive vehicle parking (transit friendly)
■ Amenity space
■ Stormwater mgmt.
■ Compact development
■ Landscaping and street trees
o Concept illustration of possible redevelopment
Proposed change to sign code
o Revision to 20.65.045
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
July 31, 2017
Page 9
Packet Pg. 212
9.2.g
- Limit freestanding signs (such as monument signs) to maximum height of 14 feet in this
district
- Require freestanding signs to be counted as part of total maximum sign area for this district
Ms. Hope relayed tonight was an opportunity for Council review and direction to proceed with draft
ordinances and final presentation and adoption of the ordinances on August 15.
Councilmember Buckshnis recalled public comment tonight about the code, not the Planned Action
Ordinance. She asked if the public hearings had been completed. Ms. Hope explained several public
meetings and hearings have been held and there were no plans for more. There will be another presentation
on August 15 and opportunity for public comment during Audience Comments. Councilmember Buckshnis
asked whether the Planned Action Ordinance and the code had to be approved at the same time. Ms. Hope
answered no, it would be ideal to approve the subarea plan and the code amendments at the same time. The
Planned Action Ordinance can be adopted at the same time or a little later. Councilmember Buckshnis
relayed her interest in reviewing the Planning Board minutes and the EIS.
Councilmember Buckshnis recalled the Council also approved a resolution of intent to designate the Hwy
99 subarea as a Residential Targeted Area on July 18 and asked how that fit with these other regulations.
Ms. Hope answered one of the recommendations in the subarea plan was to allow the Multifamily Tax
Exemption (MFTE) in this area. The Council approved a resolution of intent to designate the Highway 99
Subarea as Residential Targeted Area for implementation of the MFTE program and will hold a public
hearing on August 15.
Councilmember Teitzel commended staff and the consultant on the Hwy 99 subarea plan, an excellent
example of involving the public. He referred to Esperance on the west side of Hwy 99 which comprises
approximately 10% of the Hwy 99 frontage and asked if Hwy 99 is rezoned to CG, will the zoning of
Esperance be inconsistent if the City annexes it in the future. He asked if it would behoove the City to work
with Snohomish County now to modify the zoning to be more consistent with the intent for that area. Ms.
Hope answered staff has involved Snohomish County in the development of the plan and they have been
very supportive. It may be some time before Esperance is annexed by the City but staff will continue
working with Snohomish County. Councilmember Teitzel asked if Snohomish County was interested in
CG-type zoning in that area. Ms. Hope said Snohomish County has had no objections but they would have
to take action. Snohomish County has many unincorporated areas and have not looked at them individually;
they expect cities to annex them and then it becomes a city issue.
Councilmember Johnson referred to the new development on 196t' in Lynnwood near the convention center,
relaying her objection to the six -story flat wall. She hoped something more architecturally interesting and
less oppressive for pedestrians would be built on Hwy 99. Ms. Hope said she would consider that and
address it at the next meeting.
Councilmember Johnson asked if there was a roadway or profile design beyond the pedestrian area. Ms.
Hope said a detailed corridor design is planned using State funds. The $1 million allocated by the State has
been delayed due to delays at the legislature in approving the capital budget. Councilmember Johnson said
in her conversations with WSDOT, bicycles are not excluded from Hwy 99 or SR-104. She expressed
interested in not necessarily a bicycle lane but an opportunity to protect bicycle riders. She recalled this was
an issue of right-of-way width on SR-104 but Hwy 99 is wider. Ms. Hope answered Hwy 99 is 100 feet
wide. Councilmember Johnson suggested future planning include how to accommodate bicycles. She
relayed her continued concern that the bicycle route on 212t' did not extend to the Interurban Trail.
Councilmember Johnson suggested another issue she wants addressed in the Hwy 99 subarea plan is
whether an urban interchange is needed for SR-104/Hwy 99 which is currently incomplete for all
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
July 31, 2017
Page 10
Packet Pg. 213
9.2.g
movements. As this will be expensive, she suggested it be included in the plan so it can get on a list. That
interchange would improve access to adjacent properties and improve movement on SR-104, a highway of
statewide significance. She appreciated that the plan did not allow vehicle parking on the first level but
pointed out the Everett Clinic has parking on the first and second levels that is visible from the street. She
suggested consideration be given to how to better screen or eliminate visibility of parking. Ms. Hope agreed
vehicle parking could occur on the second level, not just the first level, and the proposed code does not
address that.
Councilmember Johnson suggested consideration be given to expanding Park & Rides within the corridor.
There are three Swift transit stations and it is assumed people will walk'/4 mile. She uses the Swift line but
lives more than a '/4 mile away and typically parks in a Park & Ride lot. There is no parking for the Swift
line, yet if Edmonds residents utilize it, they may need parking. Ms. Hope advised that was not in the current
scope; Community Transit's policy is to not build Park & Ride lots on that valuable land. Councilmember
Johnson suggested consideration be given to increasing size of existing Park & Ride lots or other options.
To encourage people to ride the bus, the amount of parking is reduced; however, there is not a lot of on -
street parking in the surrounding area. For example, she currently parks at Safeway but that extra parking
may not exist in the future.
Councilmember Tibbott recalled Ms. Hope stating two electrical vehicles could be charged in one parking
space. Ms. Hope clarified each charging station has two outlets. Councilmember Tibbott asked about the
requirement to provide future capacity for charging stations. Ms. Hope explained the wiring would be
installed but not the stations themselves. Councilmember Tibbott asked about the percentage. Ms. Hope
answered the requirement for future capacity is doubling the currently requirement. For example, if five
stations are required, the developer would have to rough -in an additional five.
Councilmember Tibbott was intrigued by parking for vehicle sharing or drop off zones. He asked what
capacity could be added or provided in a residential development. Ms. Hope said that is identified in the
code as one of the ways to offset some of the parking requirements; the developer would be required to
demonstrate how that would be provided and the amount of parking it would offset. Councilmember Tibbott
recognized not all future transportation forms could be anticipated and he was interested in providing some
flexibility.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas observed Hwy 99 has no bike lanes, not in Seattle, Shoreline or
Lynnwood, likely because it was deemed to be unsafe. Ms. Hope said given that Hwy 99 is a highway as
well as the amount of traffic, alternative parallel routes have been provided. Councilmember Fraley-
Monillas observed there are often bikes on 76t' Avenue and on the Interurban Trail.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas referred to Councilmember Johnson's comment about Park & Ride lots,
pointing out the purpose of TOD is to increase the number of people using transit but they do not need a
Park & Ride lot. Ms. Hope agreed residents in new development on Hwy 99 could walk to transit and they
have parking on site. People who do not live in the Hwy 99 area who want to use transit may want a Park
& Ride lot; however, that is not related to the Hwy 99 plan. The Swift line is the highest performing line
Community Transit has, even without a Park & Ride lot. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented there
is only one Park & Ride lot on the corridor in Edmonds. She questioned where Swift riders park now. Ms.
Hope said she could check with Community Transit.
COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT
MESAROS, TO DIRECT STAFF TO PREPARE THE PROPOSED HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN
AND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS IN ORDINANCE FORMAT FOR COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION ON AUGUST 15. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mayor Earling declared a brief recess.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
July 31, 2017
Page 11
Packet Pg. 214
9.2.h
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES
August 15, 2017
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Dave Earling, Mayor
Thomas Mesaros, Council President
Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember
Michael Nelson, Councilmember
Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember
Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember
Dave Teitzel, Councilmember
Neil Tibbott, Councilmember
1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE
STAFF PRESENT
Al Compaan, Police Chief
Phil Williams, Public Works Director
Carrie Hite, Parks, Rec. & Cult. Serv. Dir.
Patrick Doherty, Econ. Dev & Comm. Serv. Dir
Shane Hope, Development Services Director
Scott James, Finance Director
Dave Turley, Assistant Finance Director
Rob English, City Engineer
Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
Scott Passey, City Clerk
Andrew Pierce, Legislative/Council Assistant
Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator
Jeannie Dines, Recorder
The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Earling in the Council
Chambers, 250 5t1i Avenue North, Edmonds. He announced audience comment would be limited to 2
minutes per person. The meeting was opened with the flag salute.
2. ROLL CALL
City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present.
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COUNCIL PRESIDENT MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
4. PRESENTATIONS
1. LEGISLATIVE SESSION WRAP-UP 2017
Jennifer Ziegler, the City's lobbyist/government affairs specialist, reported:
Session overview
o Continue to have close margins between republicans and democrats in both chambers
o Final biennium to fulfill state funding obligations for basic education most estimates are
between $3 and $3.5 billion
o Significant disagreement on funding for collective bargaining agreements
o Disagreement on major policy issues, including paid family leave, the Hirst decision and the
1 % property tax cap
o Concerns regarding Sound Transit motor vehicle excise tax rates
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
August 15, 2017
Page 1
Packet Pg. 215
9.2.h
members and a broad and flexible representation from elected officials and emergency professionals. As
someone who has had to be transferred after calling, he assured it was an awful experience. He
wholeheartedly supported consolidation.
Councilmember Johnson said although the presentation indicated there would elected officials on the
Board, it appears they are not elected officials but fire and police. Mr. Peterson answered there would be
representation from fire and police agencies; there is a requirement for a mix of elected and operational
personnel on the Board. Councilmember Johnson asked how elected officials would be selected. Mr.
Peterson answered there will be a caucusing process; Edmonds is in the third caucus which is shared with
Marysville and Lynnwood and is based on the percentage of population as it relates to the entire County.
Those three agencies will collectively share three seats, at least one of the three be an operational person.
The caucusing processing would occur in April every year with two-year appointments. The initial
caucusing process will occur January 15, 2018 should consolidation move forward; the initial
representatives will serve 2+ year terms until April 2020.
Councilmember Johnson observed only one operational person was required from the three cities. Mr.
Peterson agreed. Councilmember Johnson asked how the other caucuses worked. Mr. Peterson explained
there are 3 other caucuses, one dedicated to the Snohomish County Sheriff's Office and because the
unincorporated portion of Snohomish County represents 40% of the population, SCSO has 2 seats; of the 2
seats, one is operational staff or SCSO. The second caucus is Everett who has 2 seats, 1 must be operational.
The third caucus is Edmonds, Lynnwood, Marysville with 3 seats. The fourth caucus is the remaining 8
smaller cities who share 3 seats; 1 of which must be operational.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
2. ADOPTION OF SUBAREA PLAN ZONE MAP AMENDMENTS, DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS, AND PLANNED ACTION FOR HIGHWAY 99 AREA
Development Services Director Shane Hope introduced John Fregonese, Principal, Fregonese Associates.
Mr. Fregonese explained the City Council last reviewed the Highway 99 Area Plan and proposed code
updates on July 31. The focus of tonight's meeting is adoption of the Plan, Development Code/Map and
Planned Action.
Mr. Fregonese described:
• Planning process and timelines
• Extensive Public Outreach
o Numerous meetings with Planning Board & City Council
o Meetings with key property owners
0 3 public open houses
0 4-5 mailings about the project, each to nearly 2200 addresses
o Press releases
o News media articles
o Announcements via email list
o Technical advisory committee meetings
o Ongoing website info
o Facebook posts
0 5 Public hearings
o Misc. communication with interested parties
• March 2016 public workshop
• November 2016 open house
• Community Values
• Distinct Subdistricts
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
August 15, 2017
Page 14
Packet Pg. 216
9.2.h
o Major local and regional destinations on Hwy 99
o International District
o Health District
o Gateway District
• Subarea Plan: implementation strategies, policy recommendations and actions
o Planned Transportation Improvements
• Current Zoning Map
o The only difference between CG and CG2 is the height limit (CG = 60' and CG2 = 75')
o Many current zones are remnants from the county's antiquated zoning
o Some zones do not match with the parcel boundaries
• Proposed Zoning Map
o The proposal is to change these zones to the consolidated CG zone
o Incorporate design standards that will increase vitality and ensure transition into neighborhoods
o More predictable outcomes for community
• Zoning Map & Development Regulations - Goals
o Vitality and livability
o Sustainability
o Consistency with subarea plan
o Reasonable balance of requirements and options
• Site development standards - General 16.60.020
o Pedestrian area - required adjacent to street and composed of three zones: streetscape zone,
pedestrian zone and activity zone
o Comparison of pedestrian area requirements
■ Required in existing CG regulations? - no
■ Required in proposed CG regulations? - yes
o Comparison of dimensional requirements
Existing CG Chapter
Proposed CG Chapter
Height
60-75'
75' max*
Street setback
4' min.
5'110'
Side/rear setback
0115
0115
Stepback
No additional stepback
required for upper stories
Additional stepback required for upper
stories adjacent to single family
Site development standards -design standards 16.60.030.A. LE
o Illustration of 15' setback with 10' landscape buffer
o Additional building stepback with adjacent to RS zones
o Photo example of across -the -street transition illustrating streetscape zone separation provided
by street and
o Minimum 5 feet wide type IV landscaping is required along all street frontages where parking
lots abut the street
o Access and vehicle parking
■ All off-street surface parking shall be located to the side or rear of the primary building,
except as otherwise specifically allowed by this chapter, and shall be screened from
sidewalk by a wall or plantings between 2 to 4 feet in height
■ Outdoor parking areas shall comprise 40% or less of the public street frontage area within
100 feet of the primary street for the lot or tract and, on corner lots, may not be located at
the corner. Requirements of this subsection do not apply to permitted auto sales uses
■ High parking requirements can impede development
■ Proposed regulations aimed to encourage transit -oriented development options
- 0.75 parking spaces per residential unit less than 700 sq. ft.
- 1.25 parking spaces per residential unit of 700-1100 sq. ft.
- 1.75 parking spaces per residential units greater than 1100 sq. ft.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
August 15, 2017
Page 15
Packet Pg. 217
9.2.h
- Guest parking: 1 space/per 20 units
o Required electric vehicle charging stations
■ One or more electric vehicle charging stations must be provided for all new development
that includes housing (to serve 10% of required parking spaces)
■ Each electric vehicle charging station typically serves two vehicles
■ 1 station/10 required residential stalls plus planned capacity to double that amount in the
future
o Required bicycle storage spaces
■ Bicycle storage spaces for multifamily housing, excluding housing for assisted living or
other specialized facilities, shall be provided for residents
■ 1 bicycle storage space for each residential unit under 700 square feet and 2 bicycle storage
spaces for each residential unit greater than 700 square feet
- 50% reduction for bikes stored in common spaces if additional racks are available for
guests
o Paths within parking lots
o Pedestrian and transit access
Site Development Standards — Site Design and Layout 16.60.030.0
1) Pedestrian Oriented Design
■ At least 50% of a building's fagade facing the primary public street shall be located within
20 feet of the property line where the primary street frontage exists.
■ Building must include a prominent pedestrian entry on the primary frontage
■ Vehicle parking shall not be located within the first 20 feet of the primary street frontage,
other than as allowed for vehicle sales use.
2) Alternative walkable design area option
■ For sites with unique constraints.
■ At least 50% of the building's fagade facing the primary street shall be located within 60
feet of the front property line
3) Exceptions process for pedestrian and walkable design options
■ Exemptions may be allowed by hearing examiner to provide for design flexibility that still
encourages pedestrian orientation and efficient land uses under following criteria:
- Property is located within 300 feet of highway interchange or has unique pedestrian
access constraints
- One or more buildings are located facing the primary street frontage
- The development provides business and pedestrian areas near the primary street
frontage and likely to be active through the day/evening.
- Not more than 50% of required parking within first 20 feet of property
- At least 25% of required amenity space is located to connect building to the street
- Where a site has multiple buildings, amenity space should be located between
buildings to allow shared use
- One or more buildings on the site must have at least two stories of usable space
o Amenity Space
■ An area equivalent to at least 5% of the building footprint shall be provided as amenity
space.
■ If a vehicle parking area is being added to the site without concurrent development of a
building of at least 2,000 square feet, amenity space must be provided to equal at least 5%
of additional parking area.
o Building Design and Massing
■ On the primary frontage, 50% of the building fagade between 2 and 10 feet in height shall
be comprised of windows or doors that are transparent
o New standard for vehicle parking within buildings
■ On primary frontage, no vehicle parking within first 20 feet of building facing street
How do proposed regulations encourage sustainable development?
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
August 15, 2017
Page 16
Packet Pg. 218
9.2.h
o Examples:
■ Bicycle storage
■ Electric vehicle charging
■ Wider pedestrian areas
■ Not excessive vehicle parking (transit friendly)
■ Amenity space
■ Stormwater management
■ Compact development
■ Landscaping and street trees
o Concept illustration of possible redevelopment
Mr. Fregonese reviewed a proposed change to sign code
• Revision to 20.65.045
o Limit freestanding signs (such as monument signs) to maximum height of 14 feet in this district
o Require freestanding signs to be counted as part of total maximum sign area for this district
Mr. Fregonese reviewed the Planned Action Ordinance (PAO):
• EIS, analyzing environmental impacts was issued for Highway 99 area plan.
• To make future project review easier, a draft Planned Action Ordinance has been prepared. It
reflects the EIS assumptions & mitigation
• Planning Board held public hearing & recommended Council adoption of PAO
• City Council held public hearing on PAO on July 31
Mr. Fregonese recommended the Council adopt ordinances for the Subarea Plan, Zone Map and
Development Regulations, and Planned Action.
Ms. Hope explained there are two versions of the Zone Map and Development Regulations in the Council
packet; the only difference is Attachment 2 provides for the normal process of adopting development
regulations; following adoption and publication, the regulations are effective in 5 days. The regulations in
the ordinance in Attachment 3 are the same but it states any project that had design review approval within
a certain timeframe, they are grandfathered under the older regulations if building permits are submitted by
September 30. She acknowledged there were pros and cons to the ordinance in Attachment 3; if the Council
wants the vision to happen, it would be preferable to adopt the regulations with minimal delay but there is
one project with unique circumstances where the applicant is pretty far down the path of a project although
they knew several months ago this process was occurring.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if that much bike space, one space for each unit, was warranted.
Ms. Hope answered more spaces are required for 2-bedroom units, and the spaces can be reduced by 50%
if common area for bike storage and bike racks for visitors are provided. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas
commented it seemed like a lot of space for bike storage given that people will not ride on Highway 99.
Ms. Hope said the intent was to allow for the possibility to store bikes. Bike storage can be design in
multiple ways such as storage space for each unit that could accommodate a bike.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas referred to the applicant already down the path and asked if that was only
Mr. Rambes' project. Ms. Hope said others are thinking about projects but theirs is the only project with
initial design review approval and as far as staff knows, that is the only project affected. The ordinance in
Attachment 3 would allow them until September 30 to submit a building permit and the ordinance in
Attachment 2 contains the standard timeframe. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented that area is
the gateway to Edmonds and it will be important for it to look nice/appropriate.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas referred to the PAO as a blanket SEPA for the Highway 99 corridor and
asked if the SEPA was only for the Highway 99 subarea. Ms. Hope answered the EIS done under SEPA
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
August 15, 2017
Page 17
Packet Pg. 219
9.2.h
looked at the Highway 99 subarea and made assumptions about what could be developed and potential
environmental issues. There are few critical areas so the EIS looked primarily at traffic and aesthetics,
transit, pedestrian opportunities, etc. The EIS found if certain mitigations are done such as transportation
safety improvements and continued transit, many of the issues will be mitigated. In addition, new design
standards provide stronger standards than the current code. The EIS also considered police, fire and utility
services and determined that could be met in ordinary ways.
Ms. Hope explained the EIS determined it was possible to do X amount of housing, commerce, facilities,
etc. and mitigate for traffic and other issues. The ordinance states if the code is followed and development
is allowed at the scale envisioned, there will be sufficient mitigation. A significant project may have
separate requirements. Rather than a piecemeal approach to SEPA where each project does an EIS, this was
an effort to look at the area in a holistic way. She acknowledged not every city is able to do a Planned
Action and this is a big step for Edmonds. Mr. Fregonese advised the EIS considers not only residential
units but also development of medical facilities.
Council President Mesaros relayed his understanding of the September 30 effective date in the ordinance
in Attachment 3. Ms. Hope says the ordinance is effective in the standard timeline; any development project
in the Highway 99 corridor that received design review approval July to August would have until September
30 to submit a building permit. Council President Mesaros asked why September 30 was selected and if it
could be September 15. Ms. Hope said September 15 would be acceptable; the applicant advised staff they
would submit this week but September 15 or 30 would provide them additional time.
With regard to Councilmember Fraley-Monillas' comments about bicycle storage, Council President
Mesaros relayed when using light rail in Seattle, he often sees people taking their bikes on light rail as well
as on Sounder. He pointed out the ability to take the new 228' to the new light rail transit center opening
in 2019. Ms. Hope remarked the Swift route is Community Transit's highest route for travel as well as for
bicycles.
Councilmember Buckshnis said she still has concerns with the PAO, remarking it is very new to Edmonds
and the Council only had one meeting to discuss it and it did not go through committee. Further, the Council
never completed its discussion regarding development agreements. She asked if all three ordinances needed
to be approved at the same time. Ms. Hope answered the Council could adopt the Highway 99 Subarea Plan
and the development regulations and put the PAO on Consent Agenda or remove the reference to
development agreements from the PAO.
Councilmember Johnson referred to a letter the Council received today from Arca, a planning and
architectural firm, that raised a concern about building fagades and included a photograph of the new
development on 196' in Lynnwood. She previously mentioned her concerns with that massive fagade and
staff offered to investigate. Ms. Hope said that issue was addressed in the Q&A in the agenda memo; the
proposed code requires articulation and breakup of the fagade.
Councilmember Johnson said the building on 196' has minimal articulation or breakup of the fagade; the
building appears massive from the sidewalk. Ms. Hope agreed the City does not want a massive wall; the
regulations require a top and base, articulation, choice of building elements, as well as fagade articulation.
She assured Edmonds' regulations are different than Lynnwood's. Mr. Fregonese pointed out the setback
would be larger, there would be a pedestrian area in the setback and landscaping, as well as amenity space.
Councilmember Johnson said it was not difficult to drive around and see examples of architecture she liked
and did not like. She expressed concern with a new sidewalk amenity at the corner of 212t1i & Highway 99,
basically a brick semicircle with benches and a garbage can where she has never seen a pedestrian. Another
example is the basalt sculpture garden on 196t1i & Highway 99 where she has never seen anyone. She
summarized those were amenity spaces no one wanted to use and wanted to ensure Edmonds was not
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
August 15, 2017
Page 18
Packet Pg. 220
9.2.h
creating that type of requirement in the code. Ms. Hope answered it is a balance; the City Council wants
amenity space associated with development. The code requires 5% of the building footprint be amenity
space but it does not all need to be in front of the building; some of it can be located wherever it make sense
for the development. For example, a mixed -use building may want some amenity space near the entry
conductive to pedestrian activity but other amenity space may be for use by residents/tenants.
Councilmember Johnson referred to a study on the use of public spaces by William Whyte in NYC. Mr.
Fregonese recalled it included sun, water, people watching, food, etc. and has been influential in design.
The code requires green in the amenity space, seating areas; in between buildings in an appropriate location.
Councilmember Johnson pointed out in the medical district, the Swift station is called the gateway station;
however, the plan has the gateway station at Safeway. Ms. Hope offered to work with Community Transit
on that.
Councilmember Johnson referred to a suggestion that large projects include pathways between the building
and the sidewalk network. She suggested going further; as there will be bicycle storage and bicycles on
transit routes, having a parallel bike route and connections between bicycle routes/paths. Although bicycles
are not encouraged on Highway 99, people do ride bicycles on Highway 99 and there is nothing to prevent
it. Ms. Hope said she will continue working with engineering as plans are updated.
Councilmember Johnson referred to screening parking in buildings and whether second floor parking would
be visible from street. Ms. Hope said no revision was proposed to the code. Parking generally occurs on the
first level; the second stories are required to have glazing and it was unlikely there would be parking. She
concluded that change could be made but she felt it was an unnecessary step at this point. Councilmember
Johnson referred to the Everett Clinic near the Edmonds Park & Ride where the first two floors are parking
and the top floor is glazed. Ms. Hope advised the glazing requirement at the first and second level would
help avoid that.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
BUCKSHNIS, TO EXTEND THE MEETING UNTIL 10:30 P.M. MOTION CARRIED (6-1),
COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON VOTING NO.
Highway 99 Subarea Plan
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT
MESAROS, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO.4077, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, ADOPTING THE HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN AS AN ELEMENT OF THE
CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, ATTACHMENT 1. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Development Code Changes
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 4078, ATTACHMENT 3, AN ORDINANCE OF THE
CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO THE EDMONDS
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE, AMENDING CHAPTER 16.60 ENTITLED "CG —
GENERAL COMMERCIAL ZONE," AND ECDC 20.60.045 ENTITLED "FREESTANDING SIGNS
— REGULATIONS," REZONING CERTAIN PROPERTY TO CG — GENERAL COMMERCIAL
ZONE.
Councilmember Johnson asked what would be different if the proposal occurred under the new code. Ms.
Hope answered it likely could not be built in the same place, it is proposed to be built 90 feet from the street
with parking in front. The building would have to be moved forward and amenity space and pedestrian
frontage provided. Councilmember Johnson asked if it would be an expense to the property owners to meet
the new code. Ms. Hope answered yes, they would be required to redesign to submit under the new code.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
August 15, 2017
Page 19
Packet Pg. 221
9.2.h
City Attorney Jeff Taraday pointed out they would also have to obtain another design review approval; they
already have design review approval.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Planned Action
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT
MESAROS, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO.4079, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ESTABLISHING A PLANNED ACTION FOR THE
HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA, PURSUANT TO THE STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT,
REMOVING THE SECTION RELATED TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked the impact of removing the section related to development
agreements. Ms. Hope answered there is a section of the code related to development agreements, this
would remove reference in the Planned Action to development agreements. Councilmember Fraley-
Monillas asked if staff planned to return to Council with an amendment related to development agreements.
Ms. Hope answered at some point but not immediately. She concluded development agreements were a
rarely used tool.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
3. AMENDMENTS TO MULTI -FAMILY TAX EXEMPTION CODE PROVISIONS
Economic Development/Community Services Director Patrick Doherty reviewed:
• History
o 1995 - State Legislature created the Multi -Family Tax Exemption (MFTE) program
o RCW 84.14
o To help spur redevelopment in lagging urban centers
o Fulfill GMA goals to encourage in -fill development in existing urban centers, thereby reducing
sprawl and promoting "smart growth"
How it works:
o MFTE provides incentive to developers to invest in "residential targeted areas"
o Residential targeted areas - mixed -use centers designated by cities in Comp Plans or Subarea
Plans to receive greater density of multifamily and commercial development
Residential targeted areas
o Often called "urban villages" or "urban centers" -
■ Walkable
■ Amenity -rich
■ Transit -supportive
■ Mixed -use areas
o Intended to accommodate future growth in housing and employment
o Designated by cities through Comp Plans or Subarea Plans per GMA
Barriers to development
o Notwithstanding a city's plans, transformation to "urban village" can be fraught with
challenges
o Challenges include:
■ Competition from higher -rent locales (e.g., Seattle, Bellevue)
■ Complications with urban redevelopment
- Unwilling property sellers
- Need to aggregate multiple properties
- Existing long term leases
- Environmental remediation
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
August 15, 2017
Page 20
Packet Pg. 222
Height Limit: 75'
7
8' 6
U
C 5
4
V)
8 3
2
1
\\\\N:
RS
Zone
5'-10' street setback
1
N
O
W
O
N
Ul
9.3
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 11/22/2022
City Attorney Contract Extension Discussion
Staff Lead: Council City Attorney Contract Workgroup (CMs Paine, Teitzel, Chen)
Department: City Council
Preparer: Beckie Peterson
Background/History
The current contract between Lighthouse Law Group (Lighthouse) and the City of Edmonds is in the final
year of the three-year contract term which expires on December 31, 2022. Council must take action to
establish a one-year contract with Lighthouse commencing on January 1, 2023 to provide additional
time for Council to consider options for legal representation and complete its due diligence in assessing
the pricing and quality of Lighthouse's services relative to alternative providers.
In 2019, Council approved the current contract with Lighthouse for legal representation for the City of
Edmonds. At that time, Council concluded -based on direct input obtained from individual
Councilmembers and members of the Administration -there was general satisfaction with the quality of
the legal work being performed by Lighthouse. There was also general consensus by internal clients that
the city is receiving good value for its investment via the flat rate billing structure by Lighthouse. For
these reasons, a new three-year contract with Lighthouse was entered into by the city on December 31,
2019.
During the workgroup discussions, we have found it important to have additional outside legal counsel
review of this contract and related issues and would like to extend the agreement with Madrona Law
Group for this purpose for an amount not to exceed $2,500.00 and will request Council authorization to
proceed.
Recommendation
Consider the contract options for a one-year contract with Lighthouse as developed by the Council work
group and provide direction for finalizing one of the options. The chosen option will be refined based on
Council input and brought back to Council on December 6, 2022 for final discussion and a vote.
In addition, we recommend extending the agreement with Madrona Law Group to provide advice to the
work group. The extension would be for services not to exceed $2,500.00
Narrative
On August 23, 2022, City Attorney Jeff Taraday provided to City Council the annual City Attorney report.
As part of that report, Mr. Taraday provided data showing the annual effective rate per hour for city
attorney services provided to Edmonds by Lighthouse was $185 for full year 2021 and $175 for the first
six months of 2022. These values were derived by dividing the payments made to Lighthouse by
Edmonds by the city attorney hours reported as having been worked by Lighthouse on Edmonds issues.
Packet Pg. 224
9.3
On September 20, 2022, Council discussed the need to form a Council work group to complete proper
due diligence of the provision of city attorney services, and the work group (consisting of
Councilmembers Susan Paine, Will Chen and Dave Teitzel) was assigned to first, develop a one-year
contract with Lighthouse commencing on January 1, 2023 and expiring on December 31, 2023), and to
evaluate the value and quality of legal services provided by Lighthouse. On November 7, 2022,
Councilmember Teitzel reported that the work group has carefully examined the underlying
documentation supporting Mr. Taraday's calculations of the average effective hourly rate for
Lighthouse's work for Edmonds in 2021 and 2022 and that those calculations are accurate.
However, since the city has not requested bids for legal representation for the past two contract cycles
with Lighthouse, it is prudent that Council assess all its options -continuing to contract with Lighthouse,
contract with another legal group or hire in-house legal services --to ensure the city is continuing to
receive strong value. This 12-month contract will provide adequate time for Council to do its due
diligence in determining the optimal course to obtain legal representation for the city.
As an initial step, Lighthouse developed a proposed 2023 12-month contract, which was provided for
Council review on September 20, 2022 and is provided here as a reference (Attachment A).
The work group developed several additional contract options for consideration and has discussed them
with Lighthouse to determine which may be workable. The options, shown for reference in Attachment
B, have been discussed with Mr. Taraday, and two are considered to be viable. Note: the work group is
not recommending a particular option and is simply providing choices for Council consideration
• The first contract option is a modification of the "flat fee" contract proposed by Lighthouse,
which also reflects changes suggested by the Madrona Law Group. The cost difference with this option is
that instead of the proposed 9% CPI-U increase in the original Lighthouse proposal, there is a 7.5% CPI-U
increase. This version is enclosed as Attachment C.1, containing suggested changes in redline as well as
Attachment C.2, which is a clean version for ease of readability. Also, the work group has estimated the
annual budget effect for 2023 of this contract version and the calculations for this estimate are shown in
Attachment D.
• The second contract option is based on the existing Lighthouse contract with the city of Maple
Valley, which features a monthly retainer coupled with hourly fees. This version is a more traditional City
Attorney contract arrangement: the existing flat fee contract is unique to Lighthouse's arrangement with
Edmonds. The cost difference is significantly higher and the number of hours anticipated with this
option are 85% of an average of the past 3.5 years of usage. When those hours are exhausted, any hours
in addition to those included in the retainer amount will be billed by the hour. This "retainer" contract
version is attached in redline format as Attachment E.1, and also contains suggestions by the Madrona
Law Group. A clean version of this contract option is enclosed as Attachment E.2. This contract version
has a different 2023 budget impact, and the calculations of the estimated effect on the 2023 budget are
shown in Attachment F.
Attachments:
Attachment A -
2023 Proposed Lighthouse contract extension
Attachment B -
Summary of alternative 2023 contract options
Attachment C.1
- Redline version of 2023 flat fee contract option
Attachment C.2
- Clean version of 2023 flat fee contract option
Attachment D -
2023 budget effects of proposed flat fee contract options
Attachment E.1
- redline version of the 2023 retainer contract option
Packet Pg. 225
9.3
Attachment E.2 - Clean version of the 2023 retainer contract option
Attachment F - 2023 budget effects of proposed retainer contract option
Packet Pg. 226
9.3.a
Attachment A
AGREEMENT FOR CIVIL LEGAL SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT entered into between the City of Edmonds ("the City") and Lighthouse Law
Group PLLC ("LIGHTHOUSE") effective January 1, 2023, is entered into in consideration of the terms and
conditions set forth below, the parties agree as follows:
1. Services to be Provided. LIGHTHOUSE will serve as attorneys for the City on all civil legal
matters assigned or referred to LIGHTHOUSE by the City during the term of this Agreement, and
will perform all civil legal services for the City with the exception of litigation covered by the City's
insurance pool, litigation defended under an accepted tender arrangement, and legal services related
to the issuance of any municipal bond or similar security.
This is a nonexclusive agreement and the City at its sole discretion may engage other legal counsel
regarding any service that is expected to be provided by LIGHTHOUSE. Examples of such services
expected to be provided by LIGHTHOUSE include, but are not limited to:
1.1 Preparing for and attending meetings of the City Council and City Council Committees,
if applicable, as necessary or requested to do so;
1.2 Drafting ordinances, resolutions, and decisions;
1.3 Answering telephone calls from City elected officials and staff and providing general
consultation on civil legal matters;
1.4 Attending meetings with City staff (including regular office hours if requested), the
Mayor, and/or Council Members on civil legal matters;
1.5 Attending meetings of other City boards and commissions, such as the Planning Board
and Hearing Examiner, when requested to do so; and
1.6 Negotiating with third parties other than in a litigation context, e.g., negotiating
interlocal agreements.
1.7 Representing the City and its officials in litigation matters, provided, that in cases
where the City and its officials have insurance coverage through WCIA or another
insurer, LIGHTHOUSE will represent the City and its officials only until WCIA
retained attorneys are actively handling the case or to the extent necessary to deal with
non -covered claims or to provide consultation and coordination between the City and
the WCIA retained attorneys;
1.8 Labor negotiation or arbitration;
1.9 Services related to local improvement districts;
Packet Pg. 227
9.3.a
1.10 Services related to taxation;
1.11 Services requiring expertise in CERCLA, MTCA, or other state or federal
environmental cleanup laws;
1.12 Representing the City in administrative proceedings before another governmental unit
(such as Boundary Review Board hearings, proceedings before the State Shoreline
Hearings Board, or proceedings before the State Growth Management Hearings
Board);
1.13 Telecommunications services, including franchise negotiation and leasing; and
1.14 Office hours at City Hall will be provided by LIGHTHOUSE as requested.
2. Personnel Performing Services. Jeff Taraday will be the lead attorney and shall have the
primary responsibility for attending City Council meetings and delegating work to other
LIGHTHOUSE attorneys as needed. Mr. Taraday may assign work to any attorney affiliated with
LIGHTHOUSE. Provision of service by any other attorney shall require prior approval by the Mayor
with notification provided to the Council of such assignment and approval.
3. Payment for Services.
a. Except as provided in Section 3.b, below, during the year 2023, the City will pay
LIGHTHOUSE for the services specified in Section 1 the sum of Fifty-eight Thousand
Eight Hundred and Nine Dollars ($58,809) a month (the flat fee).
b. If any of the Option Triggering Events described in Section 3.c, below, occur,
LIGHTHOUSE shall have the option to convert the flat fee compensation arrangement
described in Section 3.a, above, to an hourly compensation arrangement. If exercised by
LIGHTHOUSE, this option will have the effect of applying the hourly rates described in
Section 3.d, below to all of the work performed by LIGHTHOUSE, including work that
was performed prior to the Option Triggering Event, subject to the retroactive billing cap
described in Section 3.e, below. LIGHTHOUSE shall have the ability to exercise this
option, if triggered, at any time after the Option Triggering Event occurs by sending
written notice to the City of its decision to exercise the option. If the option is exercised,
LIGHTHOUSE shall send the City invoices that reflect the additional hourly charges
owing after crediting the flat fee payments previously made by the City.
c. Any of the following shall constitute Option Triggering Events for the purposes of
triggering the option in Section 3.b, above:
i. The City terminates or provides notice of an intent to terminate the Agreement
with LIGHTHOUSE;
ii. The City selects a firm other than LIGHTHOUSE to serve as City Attorney; or
iii. The City approves an in-house City Attorney position.
Termination of the Agreement by LIGHTHOUSE shall not constitute an Option
Triggering Event.
d. The hourly rates below shall apply to the hourly invoices that will be paid by the City if
LIGHTHOUSE exercises the option described in Section 3.b, above.
• Jeff Taraday $367
• Tom Brubaker $367
• Mike Bradley $367
Packet Pg. 228
9.3.a
• Sharon Cates
$276
• Patricia Taraday
$276
• Angela Tinker
$276
• Beth Ford
$276
• any other attorney
$276
e. If LIGHTHOUSE exercises the option described in Section 3.b, above, the total number
of months that LIGHTHOUSE may convert retroactively to hourly billing is limited to
not more than eight months, PROVIDED THAT retroactive billing shall not apply to any
work performed prior to January 1, 2023.
4. Awards of Attorneys Fees. If the City prevails in a legal matter and the tribunal awards
reasonable attorneys fees to the City as the prevailing party, the hourly rates in Section 3.d, above
shall apply for the purposes of calculating such fee award. These rates shall also be used where the
City is able to charge a third -party (e.g. a real estate developer) for work performed by
LIGHTHOUSE.
Upon receipt of a fee award, the City shall keep the entire award PROVIDED THAT in cases
initiated by the City including abatement actions, utility lien foreclosures, and other matters
involving collection of a debt that is less than One Hundred Thousand Dollars, any attorneys fee
award shall be paid to LIGHTHOUSE.
5. The City will not be charged separately for normal clerical or secretarial work, the expense
of which has been calculated into LIGHTHOUSE's flat fee. Reimbursement will be made by the
City for expenditures related to fees paid to a mediator, expert witness fees, court costs and fees,
copying, postage, process service and courier costs. Other expenses shall be reimbursed when
authorized in advance by the City.
6. Billing. The City shall pay the amount of the flat fee to LIGHTHOUSE within five calendar
days of the last day of the month for which the legal services have been rendered. It shall not be
necessary for LIGHTHOUSE to send an invoice for the flat fee to be paid. For informational
purposes only, LIGHTHOUSE will send a detailed monthly description of the services rendered
during the past month along with the amount that those services would cost the City in the event
those services are billed on an hourly basis pursuant to Section 3.b, above. If LIGHTHOUSE
exercises the option in Section 3.b, above, then it shall invoice according to that section.
7. Term of Agreement. This Agreement shall commence on January 1, 2023 and shall remain in
effect through December 31, 2023. Either party may terminate the Agreement for any reason upon
sixty (60) days notice. In the event of termination, work in progress will be completed by
LIGHTHOUSE if authorized by the City under terms acceptable to both parties. If completion of
work in progress is not authorized or acceptable terms cannot be worked out, LIGHTHOUSE will
submit all unfinished documents, reports, or other material to City and LIGHTHOUSE will be
entitled to receive payment for any and all satisfactory work completed prior to the effective date of
termination. If the effective date of termination falls in the middle of a month, the flat fee shall be
prorated accordingly, as applicable.
Packet Pg. 229
9.3.a
8. Professional Liability Insurance. LIGHTHOUSE will maintain professional liability
insurance throughout the duration of this Agreement in the minimum amount of $2,000,000.
9. Discrimination. LIGHTHOUSE agrees not to discriminate against any employee or applicant
for employment or any other person in the performance of this Agreement because of race, creed,
color, national origin, marital status, sex, age, or physical, mental or sensory handicap, except where
a bona fide occupational qualification exists.
10. Independent Contractor. LIGHTHOUSE is an independent contractor with respect to the
services to be provided under this Agreement. The City shall not be liable for, nor obligated to pay
to LIGHTHOUSE, or any employee of LIGHTHOUSE, sick leave, vacation pay, overtime or any
other benefit applicable to employees of the City, nor to pay or deduct any social security, income
tax, or other tax from the payments made to LIGHTHOUSE which may arise as an incident of
LIGHTHOUSE performing services for the City. The City shall not be obligated to pay industrial
insurance for the services rendered by LIGHTHOUSE.
11. Ownership of Work Product. All opinions, data, materials, reports, memoranda, and other
documents developed by LIGHTHOUSE under this Agreement specifically for the City are the
property of the City, shall be forwarded to the City at its request, and may be used by the City as the
City sees fit.
12. Hold Harmless. LIGHTHOUSE agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend the City, its
elected and appointed officials, employees and agents from and against any and all claims,
judgments or awards of damages, arising out of or resulting from the acts, errors or omissions of
LIGHTHOUSE. The City agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend LIGHTHOUSE, its
members, employees, and approved sub -contractors (e.g. Special Counsel), from and against any
and all claims, judgments or awards of damages, arising out of or resulting from the acts, errors or
omissions of the City, its elected and appointed officials, employees and agents. To the extent
necessary to fully fulfill these promises of indemnity, the parties waive their immunity under Title
51 RCW.
13. Rules of Professional Conduct. All services provided by LIGHTHOUSE under this
Agreement will be performed in accordance with the Rules of Professional Conduct for attorneys
established by the Washington Supreme Court.
14. Work for Other Clients. LIGHTHOUSE may provide other services for clients other than the
City during the term of this Agreement, but will not do so where the same may constitute a conflict
of interest as defined by the Rules of Professional Conduct unless the City, after full disclosure of
the potential or actual conflict, consents in writing to the representation. Any potential conflicts shall
be handled in accordance with the Rules of Professional Conduct referred to above.
15. Subcontracting or Assignment. LIGHTHOUSE may not assign or subcontract any portion of
the services to be provided under this agreement without the express written consent of the City,
PROVIDED THAT such consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, and FURTHER PROVIDED
THAT by this Agreement, the City hereby consents to LIGHTHOUSE's subcontracting with the
following Special Counsel: Mike Bradley, attorneys supervised by Mike Bradley, and/or the
respective legal entities through which they perform their legal services.
Packet Pg. 230
9.3.a
16. Entire Agreement. This Agreement represents the entire integrated agreement between the
City and the LIGHTHOUSE, superseding all prior negotiations, representations or agreements,
written or oral. This Agreement may be modified, amended, or added to, only by written instrument
properly signed by both parties hereto. In the event of a conflict between this Agreement and Exhibit
A, this Agreement shall control.
Date:
CITY OF EDMONDS
Mike Nelson
Mayor
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
Scott Passey
City Clerk
Date:
LIGHTHOUSE LAW GROUP PLLC
Patricia Taraday
Managing Member
Packet Pg. 231
Attachment B
9.3.b
MEMORANDUM
Date: November 16, 2022
To: Council
From: City Attorney Contract Workgroup (Teitzel, Paine, Chen)
RE: Contract options
The City Attorney contract workgroup has developed several CA contract options. We are
presenting two options at this meeting that are agreeable to both sides. We are also presenting
a brief description of the options that were not going to accomplish the needs of both parties.
Option A— Flat fee contract highlights
• Includes 7.5% CPI-U increase from 2022 rates
• Removes the need for City Attorney attendance at Council Committee meetings as well
as other Board/Commissions, unless requested
• No changes in available hours
• Adds language allowing Lighthouse Law Group to respond to community commentary
from time to time, and within the bounds of Rules of Professional Conduct.
Option B — Retainer fee contract highlights
Assumptions — the hourly rates are 95% of another long term client of Lighthouse; the hours
allocated are 85% of the average of the past four years of Edmonds usage.
• Hourly rates are divided into two classes; each rate class has a certain number of hours
anticipated to meet the contract budget
• Removes the need for City Attorney attendance at Council Committee meetings as well
as other Board/Commissions, unless requested
• Includes language allowing Lighthouse Law Group to respond to community
commentary from time to time, and within the bounds of Rules of Professional Conduct
Some of the options that were considered and discarded include
• Flat fee contract as proposed by Lighthouse
• Flat fee contract with no "look back" provisions
• Flat fee contract with a one month payment for separation
• Flat fee contract with a two month payment for separation
• Retainer style contract 80% of hourly fee rate and 90% of hours
• Retainer style contract 90% of hourly rate and 90% hours
• Retainer style contract with flat fee components and no "look back" provision.
Packet Pg. 232
Proposed Lighthouse contract updated look back 7.5% increase
9.3.c
Attachment C.1
AGREEMENT FOR CIVIL LEGAL SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT entered into between the City of Edmonds ("the City") and Lighthouse Law
Group PLLC ("LIGHTHOUSE") effective January 1, 2023, is entered into in cons i eration of the terms and
conditions set forth below, the parties agree as follows:
1. Services to be Provided. LIGHTHOUSE will serve as attorneys for the City on all civil legal
matters assigned or referred to LIGHTHOUSE by the City during the term of this Agreement, and
will perform all civil legal services for the City with the exception of litigation covered by the City's
insurance pool, litigation defended under an accepted tender arrangement, and legal services related
to the issuance of any municipal bond or similar security
This is a nonexclusive agreement and the City at its sole discretion may engage *of
al counsel
regarding any service that is expected to be provided by LIGHTHOUSE. Examplh services
expected to be provided by LIGHTHOUSE include, but are not limited to:
1.1 Preparing for and attending meetings of the City cil and City Gets ei !`^,�.,�.:**���
if applicable, as necessary or uested to do so;
W
1.2 Drafting ordinances, resolutions, and deci ' s;
1.3 Answering telephone calls from City electe fficials and staff and providing general
consultation on civil legal matters;
1.4 ending meetings with City st ncluding regular office hours if requested), the
ayord/or Council MenibersA civil legal matters;
1.5 AttendingWngs of oft li7rity boards and commissions, such as the Planning Board
and Hearing'lWiner, when requested to do so; and
1.6 Negotiating with r
parties other than in a litigation context, e.g., negotiating
interlocal agree nts.
Representing the City and its officials in litigation matters, provided, that in cases
Representing
the City and its officials have insurance coverage through WCIA or another
insurer, LIGHTHOUSE will represent the City and its officials only until WCIA
retained attorneys are actively handling the case or to the extent necessary to deal with
non -covered claims or to provide consultation and coordination between the City and
the WCIA retained attorneys;
1.8 Labor negotiation or arbitration;
1.9 Services related to local improvement districts;
Packet Pg. 233
9.3.c
Proposed Lighthouse contract updated look back 7.5% increase
1.10 Services related to taxation;
1.11 Services requiring expertise in CERCLA, MTCA, or other state or federal
environmental cleanup laws;
1.12 Representing the City in administrative proceedings before another governmental unit
(such as Boundary Review Board hearings, proceedings before the State Shoreline
Hearings Board, or proceedings before the State Gro anagement Hearings
Board);
1.13 Telecommunications services, including franchise leasing; and
1.14 Office hours at City Hall will be provided b)&LGfVHOU
2. Authorization for RPC 1.6(a) Purposes. The lawyers at LIGHTHOUSE shall be authorized to
provide information to members of the public and/or the local media to facilitate a more informed
public discourse related to the role of the city attdmey, the operation of the city, antor issues facing
the city, particularly where the legality of city actions has been called into question, PROVIDED
THAT, this permission to provide information does not apply to information communicated to the
lawyers in confidence by duly authorized representatives of the client, AND FURTHER
PROVIDED THAT, the lawyers will need to use their professional juc11%ent in determining when it
would be appropriate to exercise this permission given the lawyers' other priorities and obligations
to the city and the extent to which the information is likely to be flpful to the public discourse.
Vo
3. Personnel Performing Services. Jeff Ta ay will be the lead attorney and shall have the
primary responsibility, for attending City Counci etings and delegating work to other
LIGHTHOUSE att s as needed. Mr. Taraday may assign work to any attorney affiliated with
LIGHTHOUSE. Prov on of service by any ether non -LIGHTHOUSE attorney shall require prior
gatMayor with notification provided to the Council of such assignment and approval.
Payment for Services.`
a. Except as provided in ction 3.b, below, during the year 2023, the City will pay
LIGHTHOUSE for e services specified in Section 1 the sum of Fifty-eight Thousand
Dollars ($58,000.00) a month (the flat fee).
QW any of the Option Triggering Events described in Section 3.c, below, occur,
LIGHTHOUSE shall have the option to convert the flat fee compensation arrangement
described in Section 3.a, above, to an hourly compensation arrangement. If exercised by
LIGI�THOUSE, this option will have the effect of applying the hourly rates described in
Section 3.d, below to all of the work performed by LIGHTHOUSE, including work that
was performed prior to the Option Triggering Event, subject to the retroactive billing cap
described in Section 3.e, below. LIGHTHOUSE shall have the ability to exercise this
option, if triggered, at any time after the Option Triggering Event occurs by sending
written notice to the City of its decision to exercise the option. If the option is exercised,
LIGHTHOUSE shall send the City invoices that reflect the additional hourly charges
owing after crediting the flat fee payments previously made by the City.
Packet Pg. 234
Proposed Lighthouse contract updated look back 7.5% increase
9.3.c
c. Any of the following shall constitute Option Triggering Events for the purposes of
triggering the option in Section 3.b, above:
i. The City terminates or provides notice of an intent to terminate the Agreement
with LIGHTHOUSE;
ii. The City selects a firm other than LIGHTHOUSE to serve as City Attorney; or
iii. The City approves an in-house City Attorney position.
Termination of the Agreement by LIGHTHOUSE shall not constitute an Option
Triggering Event.
The hourly rates below shall appl
LIGHTHOUSE exercises the opti
• Jeff Taraday
• Tom Brubaker
• Mike Bradley
• Sharon Cates
• Patricia Taraday
• Angela Tinker
• Beth Ford
• any other attorney
City if
e. If LIGHTHOUSE exercises the option described in Section 3.b, above, the total number
of months that LIGHTHOUSE may convert retroactively to hourly billing is limited to
not more than eight months, PROVIDED THAT retroactive billing shall not apply to any
work performed prior to January , 2023.
5. Awards of Attorneys Fees. If the Cit prevails in a legal matter and the tribunal awards
reasonable attorneys fees to the City as the prevailing party, the hourly rates in Section 3.d, above
shall apply for, the Suirge
rposes of calculating such fee award. These rates shall also be used where the
City is able to a third -party (e.g. IF real estate developer) for work performed by
LIGHTHOUSE.
�a.Theurly rates below will be used as a basis for the calculation and reQuestina of
attorneA fees.
• Jeff Tarada_y.0
$354
• Tom Brubaker
$354
Mike Bradley
$354
• Sharon Cates
$266
• Patricia Taraday
$266
• Angela Tinker
$266
• -Beth Ford
$266
• any other attorney
$266
Upon receipt of a fee award, the City shall keep the entire award PROVIDED THAT in cases
initiated by the City including abatement actions, utility lien foreclosures, and other matters
involving collection of a debt that is less than One Hundred Thousand Dollars, any attorneys fee
award shall be paid to LIGHTHOUSE.
Packet Pg. 235
9.3.c
Proposed Lighthouse contract updated look back 7.5% increase
6. The City will not be charged separately for normal clerical or secretarial work, the expense
of which has been calculated into LIGHTHOUSE's flat fee. Reimbursement will be made by the
City for expenditures related to fees paid to a mediator, expert witness fees, court costs and fees,
copying, postage, process service and courier costs. Other expenses shall be reimbursed when
authorized in advance by the City.
7. Billing. The City shall pay the amount of the flat fee to LIGHTHOUSE within five calendar
days of the last day of the month for which the legal services have been rendered. It shall not be
necessary for LIGHTHOUSE to send an invoice for the flat fee to be paid. For informational
purposes only, LIGHTHOUSE will send a detailed monthly description of the services rendered
during the past month along with the amount that those services would cost the City in the event
those services are billed on an hourly basis pursuant to Section 3.b, above. If LIGHTHOUSE
exercises the option in Section 3.b, above, then it shall i ice according to that section.
8. Term of Agreement. This Agreement shall commence on January 1, 2023 an all remain in
effect through December 31, 2023. Either party fKay terminate the Agreement for a reason upon
sixty (60) days notice. In the event of termination, work in progress will be completed by
LIGHTHOUSE if authorized by the City under terms acceptable to both parties. If completion of
work in progress is not authorized or acceptable terms cannot be worked out, LIGHTHOUSE will
submit all unfinished documents, reports, or other material to City and LIGHTHOUSE will be
entitled to receive payment for any and all satisfactory work completed prior to the effective date of
termination. If the effective date of termination falls in the midd4rf a month, the #fee shall be
calculated on the fraction of the daily portion of the monthly fee for those days prior to the term of
the agreementprorated aeeordiflgly, as „lieab e
9. Professional Liability Insurance. LIGHTHOUSE will maintain professional liability
insurance throughout the duration of this Agreement in the minimum amount of $2,000,000.
10. Discriminatio*GI0HOUSE agrees not to discriminate against any employee or applicant
for employment or any other person in the performance of this Agreement because of race, creed,
colo national origin, marital statusYIG
sex, age, or -physical, mental or sensory handicap, or other
cted status, except wherede occupational qualification exists.
Independent Contractor.HOUSE is an independent contractor with respect to the
services to be providedounder this Agreement. The City shall not be liable for, nor obligated to pay
to LIGHTHOUSE, or any employee of LIGHTHOUSE, sick leave, vacation pay, overtime or any
other benplicable to employees of the City, nor to pay or deduct any social security, income
tax, or othe ax fr# the payments made to LIGHTHOUSE which may arise as an incident of
LIGHTHOUSE performing services for the City. The City shall not be obligated to pay industrial
insurance for the services rendered by LIGHTHOUSE.
12. Ownership of Work Product. All opinions, data, materials, reports, memoranda, public
records, and other documents developed by LIGHTHOUSE under this Agreement specifically for
the City are the property of the City, shall be forwarded to the City at its request, and may be used
by the City as the City sees fit.
4
Packet Pg. 236
9.3.c
Proposed Lighthouse contract updated look back 7.5% increase
13. Hold Harmless. LIGHTHOUSE agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend the City, its
elected and appointed officials, employees and agents from and against any and all claims,
judgments or awards of damages, arising out of or resulting from the acts, errors or omissions of
LIGHTHOUSE. The City agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend LIGHTHOUSE, its
members, employees, and approved sub -contractors (e.g. Special Counsel), from and against any
and all claims, judgments or awards of damages, arising out of or resulting from the acts, errors or
omissions of the City, its elected and appointed officials, employees and ag pts. To the extent
necessary to fully fulfill these promises of indemnity, the parties waive their immunity under Title
51 RCW. 14
14. Rules of Professional Conduct. All services provided by LIGHTHO SE under this
Agreement will be performed in accordance with the Rules of Professiona duct for attorneys
established by the Washington Supreme Court.
15. Work for Other Clients. LIGHTHOUSE may provide other services for clients other than the
City during the term of this Agreement, but will not do so where the same may constitute a conflict
of interest as defined by the Rules of Professionalf Conduct unless the City, after fulf disclosure of
the potential or actual conflict, consents in writing to the representation. Any potential conflicts shall
be handled in accordance with the Rules of Professional Conduct referred to above.
16. Subcontracting or Assignment. LIGHTHOUSE may not assign or' subcontract any portion of
the services to be provided under this agreement without the expreskwritten consent of the City,
PROVIDED THAT such consent shall not be unreasonably Ad, , and FURTHER PROVIDED
THAT by this Agreement, the City hereby consents to LIGHT2USE's subcontracting with the
following Special Counsel: Mike Bradley, attorneys supervised by Mike Bradley, and/or the
respective legal entities through�which they perform their legal services.
17. Entire A ent. This Agreement represents the entire integrated agreement between the
City and the L SE, superseding all prior negotiations, representations or agreements,
written or oral. This eement may be modified, amended, or added to, only by written instrument
properly signed by both parties hereto.
Date:
CITY OF EDMONDS LIGHTHOUSE LAW GROUP PLLC
Patricia Taraday
Managing Member
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
Scott Passey
City Clerk
Packet Pg. 237
Proposed Lighthouse contract updated look back 7.5% increase
9.3.d
Attachment C.2
AGREEMENT FOR CIVIL LEGAL SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT entered into between the City of Edmonds ("the City") and Lighthouse Law
Group PLLC ("LIGHTHOUSE") effective January 1, 2023, is entered into in cons i eration of the terms and
conditions set forth below, the parties agree as follows:
1. Services to be Provided. LIGHTHOUSE will serve as attorneys for the City on all civil legal
matters assigned or referred to LIGHTHOUSE by the City during the term of this Agreement, and
will perform all civil legal services for the City with the exception of litigation covered by the City's
insurance pool, litigation defended under an accepted tender arrangement, and legal services related
to the issuance of any municipal bond or similar security
This is a nonexclusive agreement and the City at its sole discretion may engage of egal counsel
regarding any service that is expected to be provided by LIGHTHOUSE. Example of such services
expected to be provided by LIGHTHOUSE include, but are not limited to:
1.1 Preparing for and atten ' meetings of the City, cil if applicable, as necessary or
requested to do so;
1.2 Drafting ordinances, resolu ons, and deciV
'
1.3 Answering telephone calls from City elecals andstaff and providing general
consultation on civil legal matters;
1.4 ending meetings with City st ncluding regular office hours if requested), the
ayord/or Council MenibersA civil legal matters;
1.5 AttendingWngs of oft li7rity boards and commissions, such as the Planning Board
and Hearing'lWiner, when requested to do so; and
1.6 Negotiating with r
parties other than in a litigation context, e.g., negotiating
interlocal agree nts.
Representing the City and its officials in litigation matters, provided, that in cases
Representing
the City and its officials have insurance coverage through WCIA or another
insurer, LIGHTHOUSE will represent the City and its officials only until WCIA
retained attorneys are actively handling the case or to the extent necessary to deal with
non -covered claims or to provide consultation and coordination between the City and
the WCIA retained attorneys;
1.8 Labor negotiation or arbitration;
1.9 Services related to local improvement districts;
Packet Pg. 238
9.3.d
Proposed Lighthouse contract updated look back 7.5% increase
1.10 Services related to taxation;
1.11 Services requiring expertise in CERCLA, MTCA, or other state or federal
environmental cleanup laws;
1.12 Representing the City in administrative proceedings before another governmental unit
(such as Boundary Review Board hearings, proceedings before the State Shoreline
Hearings Board, or proceedings before the State Gro anagement Hearings
Board);
1.13 Telecommunications services, including franchise leasing; and
1.14 Office hours at City Hall will be provided b)&LGfVHOU
2. Authorization for RPC 1.6(a) Purposes. The lawyers at LIGHTHOUSE shall be authorized to
provide information to members of the public and/or the local media to facilitate a more informed
public discourse related to the role of the city attdrney, the operation of the city, antor issues facing
the city, particularly where the legality of city actions has been called into question, PROVIDED
THAT, this permission to provide information does not apply to information communicated to the
lawyers in confidence by duly authorized representatives of the client, AND FURTHER
PROVIDED THAT, the lawyers will need to use their professional juc11%ent in determining when it
would be appropriate to exercise this permission given the lawyers' other priorities and obligations
to the city and the extent to which the information is likely to be flpful to the public discourse.
Vo
3. Personnel Performing Services. Jeff Ta ay will be the lead attorney and shall have the
primary responsibility, for attending City Counci etings and delegating work to other
LIGHTHOUSE att s as needed. Mr. Tarad may assign work to any attorney affiliated with
LIGHTHOUSE. Prov on of service by any n n-LIGHTHOUSE attorney shall require prior
gatMayor with notification provided to the Council of such assignment and approval.
Payment for Services.`
a. Except as provided in ction 3.b, below, during the year 2023, the City will pay
LIGHTHOUSE for e services specified in Section 1 the sum of Fifty-eight Thousand
kL Dollars ($58,000.00) a month (the flat fee).
f any of the Option Triggering Events described in Section 3.c, below, occur,
LIGHTHOUSE shall have the option to convert the flat fee compensation arrangement
described in Section 3.a, above, to an hourly compensation arrangement. If exercised by
LIGI�THOUSE, this option will have the effect of applying the hourly rates described in
Section 3.d, below to all of the work performed by LIGHTHOUSE, including work that
was performed prior to the Option Triggering Event, subject to the retroactive billing cap
described in Section 3.e, below. LIGHTHOUSE shall have the ability to exercise this
option, if triggered, at any time after the Option Triggering Event occurs by sending
written notice to the City of its decision to exercise the option. If the option is exercised,
LIGHTHOUSE shall send the City invoices that reflect the additional hourly charges
owing after crediting the flat fee payments previously made by the City.
Packet Pg. 239
Proposed Lighthouse contract updated look back 7.5% increase
9.3.d
c. Any of the following shall constitute Option Triggering Events for the purposes of
triggering the option in Section 3.b, above:
i. The City terminates or provides notice of an intent to terminate the Agreement
with LIGHTHOUSE;
ii. The City selects a firm other than LIGHTHOUSE to serve as City Attorney; or
iii. The City approves an in-house City Attorney position.
Termination of the Agreement by LIGHTHOUSE shall not constitute an Option
Triggering Event.
The hourly rates below shall appl
LIGHTHOUSE exercises the opti
• Jeff Taraday
• Tom Brubaker
• Mike Bradley
• Sharon Cates
• Patricia Taraday
• Angela Tinker
• Beth Ford
• any other attorney
the City if
e. If LIGHTHOUSE exercises the option described in Section 3.b, above, the total number
of months that LIGHTHOUSE may convert retroactively to hourly billing is limited to
not more than eight months, PROVIDED THAT retroactive billing shall not apply to any
work performed prior to January , 2023.
5. Awards of Attorneys Fees. If the Cit prevails in a legal matter and the tribunal awards
reasonable attorneys fees to the City as the prevailing party, the hourly rates in Section 3.d, above
shall apply for, the Suirge
rposes of calculating such fee award. These rates shall also be used where the
City is able to a third -party (e.g. IF real estate developer) for work performed by
LIGHTHOUSE.
a.
• Jeff Taraday
$354
• Tom Brubaker
$354
• Mike Bradley
$354
• Sharon Cates
$266
• Patricia Taraday
$266
• Anizela Tinker
$266
• Beth Ford
$266
• any other attorney
$266
Upon receipt of a fee award, the City shall keep the entire award PROVIDED THAT in cases
initiated by the City including abatement actions, utility lien foreclosures, and other matters
involving collection of a debt that is less than One Hundred Thousand Dollars, any attorneys fee
award shall be paid to LIGHTHOUSE.
Packet Pg. 240
9.3.d
Proposed Lighthouse contract updated look back 7.5% increase
6. The City will not be charged separately for normal clerical or secretarial work, the expense
of which has been calculated into LIGHTHOUSE's flat fee. Reimbursement will be made by the
City for expenditures related to fees paid to a mediator, expert witness fees, court costs and fees,
copying, postage, process service and courier costs. Other expenses shall be reimbursed when
authorized in advance by the City.
7. Billing. The City shall pay the amount of the flat fee to LIGHTHOUSE within five calendar
days of the last day of the month for which the legal services have been rendered. It shall not be
necessary for LIGHTHOUSE to send an invoice for the flat fee to be paid. For informational
purposes only, LIGHTHOUSE will send a detailed monthly description of the services rendered
during the past month along with the amount that those services would cost the City in the event
those services are billed on an hourly basis pursuant to Section 3.b, above. If LIGHTHOUSE
exercises the option in Section 3.b, above, then it shall i ice according to that section.
8. Term of Agreement. This Agreement shall commence on January 1, 2023 an all remain in
effect through December 31, 2023. Either party fKay terminate the Agreement for a reason upon
sixty (60) days notice. In the event of termination, work in progress will be completed by
LIGHTHOUSE if authorized by the City under terms acceptable to both parties. If completion of
work in progress is not authorized or acceptable terms cannot be worked out, LIGHTHOUSE will
submit all unfinished documents, reports, or other material to City and LIGHTHOUSE will be
entitled to receive payment for any and all satisfactory work completed prior to the effective date of
termination. If the effective date of termination falls in the middl 4rf a month, the fee shall be
calculated on the fraction of the daily portion of the monthly ferfor those days prior to the term of
the agreement. r
9. will maintain pr' ofessional liability ins nce throughout the duration of this Agreement in
the minimum amount of $2,000,000. oe
10. Discriminatio HTHOUSE agrees not to discriminate against any employee or applicant
for employment or any o r person in the performance of this Agreement because of race, creed,
colo national origin, marital status, sex, age, physical, mental or sensory handicap, or other
p cted status, except where a bona fide occupational qualification exists.
Independent Contractor.4LIGHTHOUSE is an independent contractor with respect to the
services to be providedounder this Agreement. The City shall not be liable for, nor obligated to pay
to LIGHTHOUSE, or any employee of LIGHTHOUSE, sick leave, vacation pay, overtime or any
other benplicable to employees of the City, nor to pay or deduct any social security, income
tax, or othe ax fr# the payments made to LIGHTHOUSE which may arise as an incident of
LIGHTHOUSE performing services for the City. The City shall not be obligated to pay industrial
insurance for the services rendered by LIGHTHOUSE.
12. Ownership of Work Product. All opinions, data, materials, reports, memoranda, public
records, and other documents developed by LIGHTHOUSE under this Agreement specifically for
the City are the property of the City, shall be forwarded to the City at its request, and may be used
by the City as the City sees fit.
4
Packet Pg. 241
9.3.d
Proposed Lighthouse contract updated look back 7.5% increase
13. Hold Harmless. LIGHTHOUSE agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend the City, its
elected and appointed officials, employees and agents from and against any and all claims,
judgments or awards of damages, arising out of or resulting from the acts, errors or omissions of
LIGHTHOUSE. The City agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend LIGHTHOUSE, its
members, employees, and approved sub -contractors (e.g. Special Counsel), from and against any
and all claims, judgments or awards of damages, arising out of or resulting from the acts, errors or
omissions of the City, its elected and appointed officials, employees and ag pts. To the extent
necessary to fully fulfill these promises of indemnity, the parties waive their immunity under Title
51 RCW. 14
14. Rules of Professional Conduct. All services provided by LIGHTHO SE under this
Agreement will be performed in accordance with the Rules of Professiona duct for attorneys
established by the Washington Supreme Court.
15. Work for Other Clients. LIGHTHOUSE may provide other services for clients other than the
City during the term of this Agreement, but will not do so where the same may constitute a conflict
of interest as defined by the Rules of Professionalf Conduct unless the City, after fulf disclosure of
the potential or actual conflict, consents in writing to the representation. Any potential conflicts shall
be handled in accordance with the Rules of Professional Conduct referred to above.
16. Subcontracting or Assignment. LIGHTHOUSE may not assign or' subcontract any portion of
the services to be provided under this agreement without the expreskwritten consent of the City,
PROVIDED THAT such consent shall not be unreasonably Ad, , and FURTHER PROVIDED
THAT by this Agreement, the City hereby consents to LIGHT2USE's subcontracting with the
following Special Counsel: Mike Bradley, attorneys supervised by Mike Bradley, and/or the
respective legal entities through�which they perform their legal services.
17. Entire A ent. This Agreement represents the entire integrated agreement between the
City and the L SE, superseding all prior negotiations, representations or agreements,
written or oral. This eement may be modified, amended, or added to, only by written instrument
properly signed by both parties hereto.
Date:
CITY OF EDMONDS LIGHTHOUSE LAW GROUP PLLC
Mike 1
Mayor
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
Scott Passey
City Clerk
Patricia Taraday
Managing Member
Packet Pg. 242
9.3.e
Attachment D
2023 budget effects of proposed "flat fee" contract option
This contract option is a modification of the "flat fee" contract proposed by Lighthouse, which also
reflects changes suggested by the Madrona Law Group. Instead of the proposed 9% CPI-U increase in
the original Lighthouse proposal, the Council Work Group is using a 7.5% CPI-U increase. The monthly
flat fee that the city paid to Lighthouse is $53,953 in 2022, with the 7.5% CPI-U increase, the 2023
monthly flat fee will be $58,000, which resulted in an annual "flat fee" of $696,000.
Note that this "flat fee" option comes with a look back clause, which means if the city initiates the
disengagement with Lighthouse in 2023, the city is obligated to pay the difference between the "flat
fee" and the amount that would have been invoiced had the hourly rates applied. The details of the
look back clause and the triggering events are documented in Attachment C.1: redline version of 2023
"flat fee" contract option.
The look back calculation is variable depending on the point in time at which the city notifies Lighthouse
of its intent to terminate the agreement. Note that the maximum look back period would be eight
months, per item 4.e of the proposed contract. In a likely worst -case scenario, if the city were to notify
Lighthouse of its intent to terminate in December 2023, Lighthouse would credit the city for the most
recent eight months of flat fee billing, then would rebill the city based on hourly rates for the hours
worked during those months. The calculations in this likely worst -case scenario would be as follows:
- Lighthouse credit for 8 months in 2023: $58,000 x 8 = $464,000
- Starting with the average hours billed per month over the last four years for each hourly rate
class and then multiplying by the maximum eight -month look back period, the likely hours that
would be worked over that period for the Rate Class 1 (the lower hourly rate class) are 1624
hours and 727 hours for the Rate Class 2 (the higher hourly rate class). Multiplying 1624 by $266
and 727 by $354, the estimated hourly billing cost over that eight -month period would be
$689,478. After deducting the credit for the flat fee already paid, the estimated maximum
additional amount owed to Lighthouse would be $225,478 ($689,478 minus $464,000).
Important: this amount is an estimate based on historical attornev hours used and will va
based on actual 2023 attorney hours used.
Packet Pg. 243
Lighthouse Retainer contract - 85% average hours over last four years / 95% rate
9.3.f
Attachment E.1
AGREEMENT FOR CIVIL LEGAL SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT entered into between the City of Edmonds ("the City") and Lighthouse Law
Group PLLC ("LIGHTHOUSE") effective January 1, 2023, is entered into in consideration of the terms and
conditions set forth below, the parties agree as follows: 4
1. Services to be Provided. LIGHTHOUSE will serve as attorneys for the City on all civil legal
matters assigned or referred to LIGHTHOUSE by the City during the t' im of this Agreement, and
will perform all civil legal services for the City with the exception of litigation covered by the City's
insurance pool, litigation defended under an accepted tend agement, an egal services related
to the issuance of any municipal bond or similar security.
This is a nonexclusive agreement and the City at its sole discretion may engage oTWgaI counsel
regarding any service that is expected to be provided by�LIGHTHOUSE. ExamplesXF such services
expected to be provided by LIGHTHOUSE include, but are not limited to:
N
1.1 Preparing for and attending meetings of the CitX Council and City Coidneil Comm,
if applicable, as necessaV or requested to do so; 13P
1.2 Drafting ordinances, resolutions, and decisions;
1 moshh-
1.3 Answering telephone calls from City elected officials and staff and providing general
consultation on civil legal matters; •
Mik
1.4 Attending meetings with City staff �pcluding regular office hours if requested), the
Mayor, and/or Council Members on civil legal matters;
1.5 Attending meetings of other City boards and commissions, such as the Planning Board
loHearing Examiner, when requested to do so; and
1.6 Negotiating with third parties other than in a litigation context, e.g., negotiating
interlocal agreem�ts.
Representing the City and its officials in litigation matters, provided, that in cases
where the City and its officials have insurance coverage through WCIA or another
insurer, LIGHTHOUSE will represent the City and its officials only until WCIA
retained attorneys are actively handling the case or to the extent necessary to deal with
non -covered claims or to provide consultation and coordination between the City and
"the WCIA retained attorneys;
1.8 Labor negotiation or arbitration;
1.9 Services related to local improvement districts;
Packet Pg. 244
9.3.f
Lighthouse Retainer contract — 85% average hours over last four years / 95% rate
1.10 Services related to taxation;
1.11 Services requiring expertise in CERCLA, MTCA, or other state or federal
environmental cleanup laws;
1.12 Representing the City in administrative proceedings before another governmental unit
(such as Boundary Review Board hearings, proceedings before the State Shoreline
Hearings Board, or proceedings before the State Growt anagement Hearings
Board);
1.13 Telecommunications services, including franchise negotiation and leasing; and
1.14 Office hours at City Hall will be provided by LIGHTHOUSE as requested.
2. Authorization for RPC 1.6(a) Purposes. The lawyers at LIGHTHOUSE s authorized to
provide information to members of the public and/or the local media to facilitate a informed
public discourse related to the role of the city attgrney, the operation of the city, an issues facing
the city, particularly where the legality of city actions has been called into question, PROVIDED
THAT, this permission to provide information does not apply to information communicated to the
lawyers in confidence by duly authorized representatives oft ent, AND FURTHER
PROVIDED THAT, the lawyers will need to use their professilWjudgment in determining when it
would be appropriate to exercise this permission given the lawyers' other priorities and obligations
to the city and the extent to which the information is 1' to be helpful to the public discourse.
3. Personnel Performing Services. Jeff Tarada� will lead attorney and shall have the
primary responsibility for attending City Council meetings nd delegating work to other
LIGHTHOUSE attorneys, as needed. Mr. Taraday may assign work to any attorney affiliated with
LIGHTHOUSE. Provision of service by any ether non -LIGHTHOUSE attorney shall require prior
approval by thoAayor with notification provided to the Council of such assignment and approval.
4. Payment for Services. "W
the Contract Period, for each attorney Rate Class group, a particular number of
hours the "Included Hour?) is included in the retainer. Because the Contract Period
spans 12 months, the City will have the flexibility to use the Included Hours, as it sees fit,
during the Contract Period. Under this contract, exceeding a particular number of hours
in a given month, would not necessarily lead to an additional charge to the City during
that month. However, if the number of Included Hours is reached prior to the end of the
C'entract Period, then the City would incur additional charges. Lighthouse will charge
any such extra hours at the hourly rates set forth herein.
While there is flexibilitv to use Included Hours within the Contract Period. anv unused
Included Hours may not be carried forward for use in a future Contract Period. Also, any
unused Rate Class 1 hours in the Contract Period may not be applied to any extra retainer
hours billed by Rate Class 2 attorneys in that same Contract Period. But any unused Rate
Class 2 hours in a given Contract Period may be applied to extra retainer hours billed by
Rate Class 1 attorneys in that same Contract Period. If Rate Class 2 attorneys bill more
than the Included Hours during the Contract Period, those extra hours would be billed at
the applicable hourly rate for the Rate Class 2 attorneys. Similarly, if Rate Class 1
Packet Pg. 245
9.3.f
Lighthouse Retainer contract — 85% average hours over last four years / 95% rate
Q
attorneys bill more than the Included Hours during the Contract Period, those extra
retainer hours would first be applied to any unused Rate Class 2 hours and then, if there
were still extra hours, would be billed on an hourly basis after that. All time is billed in
tenth of an hour increments, rounding up to the nearest tenth. When our services require
travel to Edmonds, regardless of the actual travel time, a one -hour round trip will be
charged at the attorney.�pplicable hourly rate, which will likely be charged against the
Included Hours unless all the Included Hours have been used.
Payment and Included Hours shall be prorated according to this paragraph. The final
Monthly Payment shall be prorated by dividing the number of days of the month up to
the effective date of termination by the total number of days in the month. For example,
if termination becomes effective on the 201h day of a 30-dav month. then the final
.iu). lncluctea Hours would oe prorated as a percentage of the sdJ-ctayye
if termination becomes effective on September 20th (the 263rd day of the
Rate Class 1: 1492 Included How
Rate Class 2: 668 Included Hours
(calculated by taking 927 times Wivided by 365)
Any hours worked in excess of the prorated Included Hours would be extra retainer hours
that would be billed at the applicable hourly rate usiniz the same methods as described in
the preceding paragrWh.
• Patricia Taradav
• Sharon Cates
• Beth Ford
• Jeff Taradav
• Tom Brubaker
• Mike Bradle
• Jeff Taradav
$336
• Tom Brubaker
$336
• Mike Bradley
$336
• Sharon Cates
$253
• Patricia Taraday
$253
• Angela Tinker
$253
hourlv invoices that will
Packet Pg. 246
9.3.f
Lighthouse Retainer contract — 85% average hours over last four years / 95% rate
• Beth Ford $253
• any other attorney $253
Term of the Contract:
Contract Period: January 1, 2023 through December 31, 2023
Total attorney hours by rate class included during the retainer for this Contract Period
(the "Included Hours") :
Rate Class 1: 2071 Included Hours
Rate Class 2: 927 Included Hours
Period: $835.130.00
Monthly Payment toward retainer: $69,594
Hourly rates if the City uses more than the It
Period:
Rate Class 1: $253
Rate Class 2: $336 'Al
I
The terms of this contract may be changetl upon mutual agreeWent.
tract
5. Awards of Attorneys Fees. If the City prevails in a legal matter and the tribunal awards
reasonable attorneys fees to the City as the prevailing party, the ourly rates in Section 3.d, above
shall apply for the purposes of calculating such fee award. The all also be used where the
City is able to charge a third -party (e.g. a real estate dev er) for work performed by
LIGHTHOUSE.
The hourly rates below will be used as a basis f e calculation and requesting of
attorney s
• Jeff Taraday $
• Tom Brubaker to
$3
• Mike Bradley $3
• Sharon Cates 66
Patricia Taraday $266
• Angela Tinker $266
• Beth Ford $266
'OON• any other attorne/ $266
Upon receipt of a fee award, the City shall keep the entire award PROVIDED THAT in cases
initiated by the City including abatement actions, utility lien foreclosures, and other matters
involving collection of a debt that is less than One Hundred Thousand Dollars, any attorneys fee
award shall be paid to LIGHTHOUSE.
6. The City will not be charged separately for normal clerical or secretarial work, the expense
of which has been calculated into LIGHTHOUSE's #at fees. Reimbursement will be made by the
City for expenditures related to fees paid to a mediator, expert witness fees, court costs and fees,
copying, postage, process service and courier costs. Other expenses shall be reimbursed when
authorized in advance by the City.
7. Billing. The City shall pay the amount of the flat fee to LIGHTHOUSE within five calendar
Packet Pg. 247
9.3.f
Lighthouse Retainer contract — 85% average hours over last four years / 95% rate
days of the last day of the month for which the legal services have been rendered. It shall not be
necessary for LIGHTHOUSE to send an invoice for the flat fee to be paid. For informational
purposes only, LIGHTHOUSE will send a detailed monthly description of the services rendered
during the past month along with the amount that those services would cost the City in the event
those services are billed on an hourly basis pursuant to Section 3.b, above. If LIGHTHOUSE
exercises the option in Section 3.b, above, then it shall invoice according to that section.
8. Term of Agreement. This Agreement shall commence on January 1 023 and shall remain in
effect through December 31, 2023.
9. Termination
a. The City reserves the right to terminate the Agreeme at any tiTsspension,
ith or without cause,
upon 14 days' prior written notice. In the event of teVi ation or all finished
and unfinished documents, data, worksheets4 models, and reports, or other material
prepared by LIGHTHOUSE , pursuant to this agree nt, shall be submitted to the City.
I
b. In the event this Agreement is terminated, LIGHTHOUS hall be entitled to payment of
all services performed and reimbursable expen cuffed up to the date of termination.
c. The City may terminate thitgreement immediatel GH HOUSE's insurance
coverage is canceled for any reason or if LIGHTHOU nable to perform the
services called for in this agreement. 1kh.-
d. LIGHTHOUSE reserves the right to terminate greement with not less than 60 days'
written notic
e. This section shall of prevent the City fr seeking any legal remedies it may otherwise
hay.4or the violation of nonperforma of any provisions of this agreement.
10. Professional Liability Insurance. L THOUS will maintain professional liability
insura oughout the duration of this Agreement in the minimum amount of $2,000,000.
1 Discrimination. LIGHTHOUSE agrees not to discriminate against any employee or applicant
for employment or any other pe7nn in the performance of this Agreement because of race, creed,
color, national origin, marital status, sex, age, or physical, mental or sensory handicap, or other
protected status, except where a bona fide occupational qualification exists.
12. Independent Contractor. LIGHTHOUSE is an independent contractor with respect to the
services to be provided under this Agreement. The City shall not be liable for, nor obligated to pay
to LIGHTHOUSE, or any employee of LIGHTHOUSE, sick leave, vacation pay, overtime or any
other benefit Applicable to employees of the City, nor to pay or deduct any social security, income
tax, or other tax from the payments made to LIGHTHOUSE which may arise as an incident of
LIGHTHOUSE performing services for the City. The City shall not be obligated to pay industrial
insurance for the services rendered by LIGHTHOUSE.
13. Ownership of Work Product. All opinions, data, materials, reports, memoranda, public
records, and other documents developed by LIGHTHOUSE under this Agreement specifically for
Packet Pg. 248
9.3.f
Lighthouse Retainer contract — 85% average hours over last four years / 95% rate
the City are the property of the City, shall be forwarded to the City at its request, and may be used
by the City as the City sees fit.
14. Hold Harmless. LIGHTHOUSE agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend the City, its
elected and appointed officials, employees and agents from and against any and all claims,
judgments or awards of damages, arising out of or resulting from the acts, errors or omissions of
LIGHTHOUSE. The City agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend LIGHTHOUSE, its
members, employees, and approved sub -contractors (e.g. Special Counsel), from and against any
and all claims, judgments or awards of damages, arising out of or resulting from the acts, errors or
omissions of the City, its elected and appointed officials, employees and agents. To the extent
necessary to fully fulfill these promises of indemnity, the parties w eir immunity under Title
51 RCW.
15. Rules of Professional Conduct. All services provided by,L HTHOUSE under this
Agreement will be performed in accordance with the Rules of Professional Conduct fl meys
established by the Washington Supreme Court.
16. Work for Other Clients. LIGHTHOUSE may p vide oth�seices for clients other than the
City during the term of this Agreement, but will not do so where the same may constitute a conflict
of interest as defined by the Rules of Professional Conduct u the City, after full disclosure of
the potential or actual conflict, consents in writing to the repres on. ny potential conflicts shall
be handled in accordance with the Rules of Professional Conduct d to above.
17. Subcontracting or Assignment. LI THOUSE may isign or subcontract any portion of
the services to be provided under this agree ntAthout the express written consent of the City,
PROVIDED THAT such consent shall not b unreasonablyrwithheld, and FURTHER PROVIDED
THAT by this Agreement, the City hereby consents to LIGHTHOUSE's subcontracting with the
following Special Counsel: Mike Bradley, attorneys�upervised by Mike Bradley, and/or the
respective legi Ontities through which they perforri'i their legal services.
18. Entire Agreement. This Agreement represents the entire integrated agreement between the
City and the LIGHTHOUSE, superseding all prior negotiations, representations or agreements,
written or oral. This Agreement may be modified, amended, or added to, only by written instrument
properly signed by both parties hereto.
Date: Date:
dkL
CITY OF EDMONDS
Mike Nelson
Mayor
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
LIGHTHOUSE LAW GROUP PLLC
Patricia Taraday
Managing Member
Packet Pg. 249
Lighthouse Retainer contract — 85% average hours over last four years / 95% rate
9.3.f
Scott Passey
City Clerk
Packet Pg. 250
Lighthouse Retainer contract - 85% average hours over last four years / 95% rate
9.3.g
Attachment E.2
AGREEMENT FOR CIVIL LEGAL SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT entered into between the City of Edmonds ("the City") and Lighthouse Law
Group PLLC ("LIGHTHOUSE") effective January 1, 2023, is entered into in consi eration of the terms and
conditions set forth below, the parties agree as follows:
1. Services to be Provided. LIGHTHOUSE will serve as attorneys for the City on all civil legal
matters assigned or referred to LIGHTHOUSE by the City during the term of this Agreement, and
will perform all civil legal services for the City with the exception of litigation covered by the City's
insurance pool, litigation defended under an accepted tender arrangement, and legal services related
to the issuance of any municipal bond or similar security. ,
This is a nonexclusive agreement and the City at its sole discretion may engage other legal counsel
regarding any service that is expected to be provided by LIGHTHOUSE. Examples of such services
expected to be provided by LIGHTHOUSE include, but are not limited to:
1.1 Preparing for and atten meetings of the City Council, if applicable, as necessary or
requested to do so;
1.2 Drafting ordinances, resolu ns, and decisions; 1K
1.3 Answeringtelephone calls from City elected�als and staff and providing general
p Y p g
consultation on i il legal matters;
1.4 Attending meetings with City st ncluding regular office hours if requested), the
Mayor, and/or Council Members,A civil legal matters;
of of 1t 71rity boards and commissions, such as the Planning Board
ier, when requested to do so; and
1.6 Negotiating with rd parties other than in a litigation context, e.g., negotiating
interlocal agree nts.
Representing the City and its officials in litigation matters, provided, that in cases
where the City and its officials have insurance coverage through WCIA or another
insurer, LIGHTHOUSE will represent the City and its officials only until WCIA
retained attorneys are actively handling the case or to the extent necessary to deal with
non -covered claims or to provide consultation and coordination between the City and
the WCIA retained attorneys;
1.8 Labor negotiation or arbitration;
1.9 Services related to local improvement districts;
Packet Pg. 251
9.3.g
Lighthouse Retainer contract — 85% average hours over last four years / 95% rate
1.10 Services related to taxation;
1.11 Services requiring expertise in CERCLA, MTCA, or other state or federal
environmental cleanup laws;
1.12 Representing the City in administrative proceedings before another governmental unit
(such as Boundary Review Board hearings, proceedings before the State Shoreline
Hearings Board, or proceedings before the State Gro anagement Hearings
Board);
1.13 Telecommunications services, including franchise #goilWand leasing; and
1.14 Office hours at City Hall will be provided b)jjkLGfVHOU
2. Authorization for RPC 1.6(a) Purposes. The lawyers at LIGHTHOUSE shall be authorized to
provide information to members of the public and/or the local media to facilitate a more informed
public discourse related to the role of the city attdmey, the operation of the city, antor issues facing
the city, particularly where the legality of city actions has been called into question, PROVIDED
THAT, this permission to provide information does not apply to information communicated to the
lawyers in confidence by duly authorized representatives of the client, AND FURTHER
PROVIDED THAT, the lawyers will need to use their professional juc11%ent in determining when it
would be appropriate to exercise this permission given the lawyers' other priorities and obligations
to the city and the extent to which the information is li*tbeleaTpafu'�to the public discourse.
r3. Personnel Performing Services. Jeff Taradaywdttorney and shall have the
primary responsibility for attending City Council meetings and delegating work to other
LIGHTHOUSE attorneys, as needed. Mr. Taraday may assign work to any attorney affiliated with
LIGHTHOUSE Provision of service by any non -LIGHTHOUSE attorney shall require prior
approval by th8 Ma ith notification provid to the Council of such assignment and approval.
4. Pa ent for Se
a. During tli�Contr t Period for each attorney Rate Class group, a particular number of
hours (the "Included Hours") is included in the retainer. Because the Contract Period
spans 12 months, the City will have the flexibility to use the Included Hours, as it sees fit,
during the Contract Period. Under this contract, exceeding a particular number of hours
in a given month, would not necessarily lead to an additional charge to the City during
at month. However, if the number of Included Hours is reached prior to the end of the
Contract Period, then the City would incur additional charges. Lighthouse will charge
any such extra hours at the hourly rates set forth herein.
eile there is flexibility to use Included Hours within the Contract Period, any unused
Included Hours may not be carried forward for use in a future Contract Period. Also, any
unused Rate Class 1 hours in the Contract Period may not be applied to any extra retainer
hours billed by Rate Class 2 attorneys in that same Contract Period. But any unused Rate
Class 2 hours in a given Contract Period may be applied to extra retainer hours billed by
Rate Class 1 attorneys in that same Contract Period. If Rate Class 2 attorneys bill more
than the Included Hours during the Contract Period, those extra hours would be billed at
Packet Pg. 252
9.3.g
Lighthouse Retainer contract — 85% average hours over last four years / 95% rate
the applicable hourly rate for the Rate Class 2 attorneys. Similarly, if Rate Class 1
attorneys bill more than the Included Hours during the Contract Period, those extra
retainer hours would first be applied to any unused Rate Class 2 hours and then, if there
were still extra hours, would be billed on an hourly basis after that. All time is billed in
tenth of an hour increments, rounding up to the nearest tenth. When our services require
travel to Edmonds, regardless of the actual travel time, a one -hour round trip will be
charged at the attorney's applicable hourly rate, which will likely be charged against the
Included Hours unless all the Included Hours have been used.
If this contract is terminated prior to the end of the Contract Period, then the Monthly
Payment and Included Hours shall be prorated according to this paragraph. The final
Monthly Payment shall be prorated by dividing the number of days of the month up to
the effective date of termination by the total number of days in the rth. For example,
if termination becomes effective on the 201h day of a 30-day month'An the final
Monthly Payment would be $46,396 (calculated by taking $69,594 times 20 divided by
30). Included Hours would be prorated as a percentage of the 365-day year. For example,
if termination becomes effective on September 20th (the 263rd day of theyear), the
Included Hours for each Rate Class would be as follows:
Rate Class 1: 1492 Included Hours
(calculated by taking 2071 time 263 divided by 365)
Rate Class 2: 668 Included Hours
(calculated by taking 927 times 263 divKded by 365)
Any hours worked in excess of the prorated Included ours would be extra retainer hours
that would be billed at the applicable hourly rate using the same methods as described in
the preceding a�ragraph. Y
.p
• Beth Ford ,
• Angela Tinker
kk
included inmate Class 2 include:
• Jeff Taraday
• Tom Brubaker
r Mike Bradley
b. Thlhourly rates below shall apply to the hourly invoices that will be paid by the City
described in Section 3.a, above.
• Jeff Taraday
$336
• Tom Brubaker
$336
• Mike Bradley
$336
• Sharon Cates
$253
Packet Pg. 253
9.3.g
Lighthouse Retainer contract — 85% average hours over last four years / 95% rate
• Patricia Taraday $253
• Angela Tinker $253
• Beth Ford $253
• any other attorney $253
Term of the Contract:
Contract Period: January 1, 2023 through December 31, 2023
Total attorney hours by rate class included during the retainer forthis Contract Period
(the "Included Hours") :
Rate Class 1: 2071 Included Hours IAL
Rate Class 2: 927 Included Hours
Total retainer payment in exchange for the
Period: $835,130.00
Monthly Payment toward retainer: $69,5
Hourly rates if the City uses more tha e
Period:
Rate Class 1: $253
Rate Class 2: $336
Hours during this Contract
r--q%
Included Hours during th tract
The terms of this contract may be changed upon mutual agreement.
5. Awards of Attorneys Fees. If the City prevails in a leg after and the tribunal awards
reasonable attorneys fees to the City as the prevailing party, the urly rates in Section 3.d, above
shall apply for the purposes of calculating ch fee award. Thy rates shall also be used where the
City is able to charge a third -party (e. real estate developer) for work performed by
LIGHTHOUSE.
The rates b will be used a basis for the calculation and requesting of
• Jeff 4
om Bru
$354
radle
$354
• S ates
$266
• Patri is Taraday
$266
• Angela Tinker
$266
• Beth Ford
$266
kL any other attorney
$266
Upon receip award, the City shall keep the entire award PROVIDED THAT in cases
initiated by the ty including abatement actions, utility lien foreclosures, and other matters
involving coll ction of a debt that is less than One Hundred Thousand Dollars, any attorneys fee
award shall be paid to LIGHTHOUSE.
6. The City will not be charged separately for normal clerical or secretarial work, the expense
of which has been calculated into LIGHTHOUSE's fees. Reimbursement will be made by the City
for expenditures related to fees paid to a mediator, expert witness fees, court costs and fees, copying,
postage, process service and courier costs. Other expenses shall be reimbursed when authorized in
4
Packet Pg. 254
9.3.g
Lighthouse Retainer contract — 85% average hours over last four years / 95% rate
advance by the City.
7. Billing. The City shall pay the amount of the flat fee to LIGHTHOUSE within five calendar
days of the last day of the month for which the legal services have been rendered. It shall not be
necessary for LIGHTHOUSE to send an invoice for the flat fee to be paid. For informational
purposes only, LIGHTHOUSE will send a detailed monthly description of the services rendered
during the past month along with the amount that those services would cost the City in the event
those services are billed on an hourly basis pursuant to Section 3.b, above. If LIGHTHOUSE
exercises the option in Section 3.b, above, then it shall invoice accordi g to that section.
8. Term of Agreement. This Agreement shall commence on ua y 1, 2023 and shall remain in
effect through December 31, 2023.
9. Termination
a. The City reserves the right to terminate the Agreement at any time, with ithout cause,
upon 14 days' prior written notice. In the event of termination or suspen on, all finished
and unfinished documents, data, worksheets, models, and reports, or other material
prepared by LIGHTHOUSE, pursuant to this agreement, shall be submitted to the City.
b. In the event this Agreement-rminated, LIGHTHOUSE shall be entitled to payment of
all services performed and reimbursable expenses, incurred up to the date of termination.
1 - '4F
c. The City may terminate this agreement immediately I LIGHTHOUSE's insurance
coverage is canceled for any reason or if LIGHT)fOUSE is unable to perform the
services called for in�this agreement.
d. LIG USE res es the right to terminate this agreement with not less than 60 days'
wr'raen
e. This section of prevent City from seeking any legal remedies it may otherwise
have foie vio of nonperformance of any provisions of this agreement.
Professional Liability Insurance. LIGHTHOUSE will maintain professional liability
ce throughout the duration of this Agreement in the minimum amount of $2,000,000.
11. Discrimination IGHTHOUSE agrees not to discriminate against any employee or applicant
for employment or a ther person in the performance of this Agreement because of race, creed,
color, national on , marital status, sex, age, or physical, mental or sensory handicap, or other
protected status PXcept where a bona fide occupational qualification exists.
12. Independent Contractor. LIGHTHOUSE is an independent contractor with respect to the
services to be provided under this Agreement. The City shall not be liable for, nor obligated to pay
to LIGHTHOUSE, or any employee of LIGHTHOUSE, sick leave, vacation pay, overtime or any
other benefit applicable to employees of the City, nor to pay or deduct any social security, income
tax, or other tax from the payments made to LIGHTHOUSE which may arise as an incident of
LIGHTHOUSE performing services for the City. The City shall not be obligated to pay industrial
Packet Pg. 255
9.3.g
Lighthouse Retainer contract — 85% average hours over last four years / 95% rate
insurance for the services rendered by LIGHTHOUSE.
13. Ownership of Work Product. All opinions, data, materials, reports, memoranda, public
records, and other documents developed by LIGHTHOUSE under this Agreement specifically for
the City are the property of the City, shall be forwarded to the City at its request, and may be used
by the City as the City sees fit.
14. Hold Harmless. LIGHTHOUSE agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend the City, its
elected and appointed officials, employees and agents from and against any and all claims,
judgments or awards of damages, arising out of or resulting from t acts, errors or omissions of
LIGHTHOUSE. The City agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, a efend LIGHTHOUSE, its
members, employees, and approved sub -contractors (e.g. Speci ounsel), from and against any
and all claims, judgments or awards of damages, arising o or sulting from the acts, errors or
omissions of the City, its elected and appointed officials p o ees and agents. To the extent
necessary to fully fulfill these promises of indemnity parties waive their immunity under Title
51 RCW. )6�
15. Rules of Professional Conduct. All services provided by IGHTHOUSE under this
Agreement will be performed in accordance with the Rules of Professional Conduct for attorneys
established by the Washington Supre ft.
16. Work for Other Clients. LIGHTHOUSE may provide other ices for clients other than the
City during the term of this Agreement, but will not do so -where e same may constitute a conflict
of interest as defined by the Rules of Professional Conduct unle s the City, after full disclosure of
the potential or actual conflict, consents in writing to the representation. Any potential conflicts shall
be handled in accordance with the Rules of Professional Conduct referred to above.
17. Subconti;icting or Assignment. LIGHT E may not assign or subcontract any portion of
the services to e provided under this agreemen ithout the express written consent of the City,
PROVIDED THAT such consent shall not b nreasonably withheld, and FURTHER PROVIDED
THAT by this Agreement, the City hereby consents to LIGHTHOUSE's subcontracting with the
following Special Counsel: Mike Bradley, attorneys supervised by Mike Bradley, and/or the
r ctive legal entities through which they perform their legal services.
Entire Agreement. This Igreement represents the entire integrated agreement between the
City and the LIGHTHOUSE, superseding all prior negotiations, representations or agreements,
written o al. This Agreement may be modified, amended, or added to, only by written instrument
properly by both parties hereto.
Date: Date:
CITY OF EDMONDS LIGHTHOUSE LAW GROUP PLLC
Mike Nelson
Mayor
Patricia Taraday
Managing Member
6
Packet Pg. 256
Lighthouse Retainer contract — 85% average hours over last four years / 95% rate
9.3.g
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
Scott Passey
Pif— rlarl-
Packet Pg. 257
9.3.h
Attachment F
2023 budget effects of proposed "retainer" contract option
This contract option is based on the existing Lighthouse contract with the city of Maple Valley, which
features a monthly retainer coupled with hourly fees. This version is a more traditional City Attorney
contract arrangement. The number of hours used in this option are 85% of an average of the past 3.5
years of usage, which is 2071 of Class 1 hours and 927 of Class 2 hours. When those hours are
exhausted, any hours in addition to those included in the retainer amount will be billed by the hour. This
"retainer" contract version is attached as Attachment E; it also contains suggestions by the Madrona
Law Group. This contract version's 2023 retainer portion of the budget impact is $835,435, which is the
sum of the product of Class 1 hours and rate, and the product of Class 2 hours and rate. In addition to
the retainer portion, additional costs may occur when those "included hours" have been used up and
more hours are needed. A negotiated Edmonds hourly rate will be applied to any additional hour
beyond the "included hours". The Edmonds hourly rate is ninety-five percent of the Maple Valley hourly
rate, which is $253 for Class 1 and $336 for Class 2.
The following table demonstrates the financial impact of the "flat fee" and "retainer" options, and the
potential savings of the "flat fee" option.
Retainer Option
85% of Average
Historical Hours
Class 1
Class 2
Total
Estimated Legal Service Hours
2,071
927
95% of Maple Valley Rates
$ 253
$ 336
$ 523,963
$ 311,472
$
835,435
Flat Fee Option
Class 1
Class 2
Total
2022Monthly Flat Fee
$
53,953
CPI-U increase
7.50%
Number of Months
$
12
$
695,994
Annual Savings between Retainer
Option and Flat Fee Option $ 139,441
1
Packet Pg. 258
9.4
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 11/22/2022
2023 COLA for non -represented employees
Staff Lead: Jessica Neill Hoyson
Department: Human Resources
Preparer: Jessica Neill Neill Hoyson
Background/History
Per City policy, the Mayor will recommend the adjustment of the salary schedule for non -represented
employees to the City Council for approval as part of the budget process. For 2023, it is also being
recommended that Council consider benefit changes for the non -represented employees.
Staff Recommendation
Recommend the following be approved:
-7% COLA for 2023
-Provide 100% employer paid health care premiums for employees
-Provide part-time employees with the same health care benefits as full-time employees
-Establish an opt -out program for health care providing a payment of 50% of the premium of the lowest
cost medical plan that the City offers
-Provide a $300 VEBA contribution in 2023
-Increase Management leave to 80 hours per year
Narrative
Please see attached PowerPoint which will be presented by HR at the Council meeting.
Attachments:
Proposed 2023 Wage Adjustment Presentation
Packet Pg. 259
Proposed 2023 Wage
Adjustment and Benefit
ranges
Non -Represented Employees
Personnel Policies - Chapter 5
Compensation
Annual Salary Adjustments
Personnel Policy 5.10 NON -REPRESENTED EMPLOYEES' ANNUAL SALARY
ADJUSTMENTS
The Mayor will recommend the adjustment of salary schedule for non -represented
employees to the City Council for approval as part of the budget process.
2023 Wage Adjustments for Represented
Groups
Currently the AFSCME , Teamsters, and EPOA Law Support collective
bargaining agreements are not settled for 2023
Given current contract language though it could be anticipated that these groups
will receive a wage adjustment of 5.5% for 2023
The EPOA Commissioned contract is settled for 2023 but as this is a
represented group that has binding arbitration, taking this group's wage
adjustments into consideration for the non -represented employees would not
be appropriate.
2022 Wage Adjustments
When considering the 2023 wage adjustment for non -represented employees,
City Council should take into account the 2022 Wage Adjustments
In 2022 City Council approved the implementation of a market study for all
City positions. This was the first time that the internal equity of positions
was addressed in addition to the external compensation data. The intent is
to ensure all positions of similar requirements are aligned internally.
Going forward, the City will want to address the issue of maintaining some
consistency in the annual wage adjustment between all groups so as to
maintain the internal equity.
EPOA Law Support received a wage adjustment of 3% in 2022. The City has
since reopened that contract for wages to address the inflation rate and has
provided an additional 2.5% wage adjustment. Total adjustment for 2022 will
be 5.5%
2022 Wage Adjustments continued
The City is currently in bargaining with both the Teamsters and AFSCME for
2022 wages.
Given contract language it is most likely that both groups will receive a wage
adjustment of 5.5% for 2022.
► The non -reps received a wage adjustment of 3% in 2022.
This places the wages for non -represented positions 2.5% behind other employee
groups for 2022 and are therefor entering 2023 with a deficit.
IL
Other Data points
Using "comparator" organizations is often the standard in establishing
compensation and has been used by Edmonds for both represented and non -
represented employees
Using the Consumer Price Index for Urban wage earners in the
Seattle/Tacoma/Bellevue area is also used as data point to establish
compensation levels.
City
COLA
Bothell
No information
Shoreline
7.76%
5.00% (looking at other ways to
SeaTac
provide staff with more money)
Olympia
4.00%
Lacey
Not yet established
Issaquah
6.00% + 4% lump sum payment
Puyallup
5.00%
Burien
6.00%
Lynwood
No information
Mukilteo
Not yet established
mile
Packet Pg. 266
EL
Using CPI-U (and not CPI-W)
The CPI is calculated for two population groups: All Urban Consumers (CPI-U)
and Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W). The CPI-U represents
about 93 percent of the total U.S. population and is based on the
expenditures of all families living in urban areas. The CPI-W is a subset of the
CPI-U and is based on the expenditures of families living in urban areas who
meet additional requirements related to employment: more than one-half of
the family's income is earned from clerical or hourly -wage occupations. The
CPI-W represents about 29 percent of the total U.S. population.
Because the CPI-U population coverage is more comprehensive, it is used in
most wage adjustment calculations.
EL
How to use the CP1-1
In order to determine the cost of inflation from one year to the next the year
a period is established be setting a base month between two years. The June
to June period is the most commonly used.
The 2021 CPI-U, which is used to establish 2022 wages, was 5.5%
The 2022 CPI-U, which is used to establish 2023 wages, was 10.1
Washington State Minimum Wage
Increase for 2027.
Washington State minimum wage will increase to $15.74 per hour in 2023
This is an increase of 8.63%
State law requires an automatic annual inflation adjustment based on the
Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W)
for the August to August period.
EL
What was proposed and what has
occurred
At the time the budget was submitted, June to June numbers for the CPI-IJ
was not yet available.
The non -rep wage adjustment proposed in the budget was 5.5%
Since then, the June to June numbers have been released which places the
CPI-IJ at 10.1
EL
2023 COLA Recommendation
In order to maintain internal equity of positions it is recommended that the
non -represented wage schedule be increased by 7%
This will take into account the deficit from 2022
Represented wage schedules will most likely be increased by 11 % in total over
the two year period of 2022 and 2023
Providing a 7% adjustment to the non -rep schedule in 2023 will provide a total
of 10% over the two year period of 2022 and 2023.
EL
Benefit changes , 'commended for 202.3.
► In addition to wage adjustments for 2023 the following benefit changes are being recommended in order for
Edmonds to stay competitive in the labor market so that we may retain and attract the most qualified staff.
Health Care Premiums
Currently the City pays 90% of employee health care premiums. It is recommended that this be changed to 100% for employees.
90% for spouses and dependents would be maintained
Currently, part-time employees are required to pay a pro -rated share of their health care premiums. With a part-time salary it
is often too costly for the employee to afford the premium cost share. Part-time employee demographics are often women and
older workers.
It is recommended that Council consider providing the same health care benefits to part-time employees as is provided to full-time
employees.
This is not a common practice but will address issues of equity and place Edmonds as a highly desirable employer for part-time
positions, which are very hard to fill.
Edmonds currently has 9 part-time employees. 2 are on the City health care plan with only one of those being non -represented.
Should Council approve this, additional discussion should take place to address represented employees.
Health Care opt -out
It is recommended to establish a health care opt -out program that will provide employees who opt -out of City provided health
care with 50% of the premium cost of the City's lowest cost medical plan.
The current lowest cost plan is the Kaiser Permanente HMO with a monthly premium of $712.20 for 2022. Employees who opt out
would receive $356.10 per month.
VEBA Contributions
Provide a VEBA contribution of $300 to all non -reps. Non -represented employees received a $600 contribution in 2022 in order
to address that this employee group had not received a VEBA contribution for multiple years. Cost for this would be
approximately $15,000 in 2023.
EL
Recommended benefit changes
continued
Update to Management Leave Policy
Current Policy
To be more competitive in the market place, the City will provide non -represented
employees who are ineligible for compensatory time with 24 hours of management
leave annually. Management Leave will have no cash -out value and will not be
carried over at the end of the calendar year.
Comparator organizations provide, on average, 71 hours of management leave
to qualified positions with the most common amount being 80 hours.
Would recommend updating the policy to 80 hours of management leave for
qualified positions.
Recommendation
Current proposed COLA in the 2023 budget is for a 5.5% wage adjustment.
This will cost $364,955 in wages and $113,603 in benefits for 2023
Should Council approve the 7% wage adjustment this would cost an additional
$99,533 in wages and $30,983 in benefits for 2023
Recommend the following be approved
7% COLA for 2023
Provide 100% employer paid health care premiums for employees
Provide part-time employees with the same health care benefits as full-time
employees
Establish an opt -out program for health care providing a payment of 50% of the
premium of the lowest cost medical plan that the City offers
Increase Management leave to 80 hours per year
Packet Pg. 275
9.5
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 11/22/2022
2023 HR Budget Requests
Staff Lead: {Type Name of Staff Lead}
Department: Human Resources
Preparer: Jessica Neill Neill Hoyson
Background/History
The Human Resources department has requested 2 additional positions be added to the HR Department
for 2023. It has been requested to add a full-time HR Assistant and a full-time HR manager.
Staff Recommendation
Narrative
Please see DP #6 and DP #7. The HR Director will discuss the need for these positions at the 11/22/22
Council meeting.
Packet Pg. 276
9.6
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 11/22/2022
Council Budget Discussion
Staff Lead: Council
Department: City Council
Preparer: Beckie Peterson
Background/History
On October 3, Mayor Nelson presented the proposed 2023 City Budget. On November 1 and November
15, Council held public hearings on the 2023 budget.
Recommendation
N/A
Narrative
City Councilmembers will have a preliminary discussion on any amendments they would like to consider
for the 2023 City Budget.
Councilmembers have submitted some initial budget amendments to Director Turley, which are posted
on the city website under Administrative Services and are attached sequentially as submitted.
Staff requested amendments are also attached.
Attachments:
Council-DPs-Nov4
Council-DPs-Nov6th edited of Q and CIP UP
Council-DPsNovBth
Council-DPs-Nov9th
CouncilDp-Nov16
Council DPs Nov 17
Staff Proposed Changes_V 1.0
Packet Pg. 277
Decision Package Budget Report New Item
City of Edmonds
9.6.a
Decision Package: new item draft 1
Date Budget Year Group Version Priority Duration Approval Status
11/2/22 2023 Councilmember 0 1 One time Pending
Teitzel
Item Description
This decision package requests 2023 funding of $50,000 for the annual City of Edmonds contribution to
the Edmonds Center for the Arts (ECA) operations fund. The ECA is a true asset for the community and
has been working to recover from the negative effects of COVID, and recent attendance at ECA events is
beginning to rebound. This contribution will be helpful to the ECA's efforts to recover and thrive as a
centerpiece in our local and regional arts community.
Justification
The city has provided an annual support contribution to the ECA for a number of years, and this
contribution matches the 2021 and 2022 contribution levels. The ECA is a key in our focus on the arts
and draws patrons from Edmonds and surrounding areas to our city. These patrons utilize our city
amenities and drive increased sales tax revenue.
Describe All Fundina Sources
Non -Departmental Fund
BARS code 001.000.39.575.20.52.00
Describe Future or Onaoina Costs
N/A
Proiect Status (if annlicable
Pendng
FISCAL DETAILS
Expenditures
Packet Pg. 278
Decision Package Budget Report
City of Edmonds
Regarding DP 1
Decision Package:
Date Budget Year Group Version Priority
10/31/22 2023 Councilmember Teitzel 0 1
Item Description
Duration Approval Status
One -Time Pending
Edmonds Code Rewrite Project: $300,000 to underwrite the cost of contracted, expert help to accomplish the code
rewrite.
h lafifirnfl^n
This $300,000 of ARPA funding designated to DP15 patrol vehicles should be redirected to a new account entitled
Edmonds Code Rewrite Project, and will be utilized to underwrite the cost of contracted expert help to accelerate the very
significant amount of work required to accomplish the code rewrite. The code rewrite has been a priority for Council and
the administration for over a decade, and the 2022 Council has expressed a strong desire for significant progress in 2023
toward completion of the code rewrite process.
c
0
Describe All Funding Sources 3
rn
ARPA funding
a�
Describe Future or Onqoinq Costs
m
c
0
N/A Q
Iq
Project Status (if applicable) >
0
z
Pendng o
FISCAL DETAILS
3
0
Expenditures U
:.i
c
Operating Expenditures: 001.000.62.524.10.41.00 — Professional Services (Planning, Administrative) $300,000 E
z
Revenues: Coronavirus Relief Fund
2
Q
Packet Pg. 279
Decision Package Budget Report
City of Edmonds
9.6.a
Decision Package:
Date Budget Year Group Version Priority
10/31/22 2023 Councilmember Teitzel 0 1
Item Description
IT support for Planning Board hybrid meetings
Justification
Duration
One -Time
Full year 2023
At the 10/26/22 regular Planning Board meeting, the Board unanimously approved the following motion:
Approval Status
Pending
"The Edmonds Planning Board wishes to return to in -person meetings in a hybrid format, one that permits
remote participation by members and the public. The Board respectfully requests City Council to budget for the
resources that would support such meetings."
The Planning Board wishes to resume in person meetings and believes it can more effectively interact in that manner.
However, it recognizes the value of allowing Board members and the public to join remotely when they are unable to
attend Planning Board meetings in person. A hybrid meeting format will permit the Planning board to a do a better job
and perform at a higher level in serving the city and the public.
To provide support for hybrid Planning Board meetings, a contract IT employee will be needed to attend each Board
meeting and ensure the audio/visual system is operating properly for the duration of each meeting.
Describe All Fundina Sources
Funding will be provided by the General Fund Z
Describe Future or Ongoing Costs
c
3
Assuming the Planning Board meets twice per month (24 times per year at approximately 3 hours per meeting), the total o
estimated annual cost of providing contracted IT support for hybrid Planning Board meetings is $14,000. v
c
d
E
Project Status (if applicable) t
U
2
FISCAL DETAILS
Expenditures
Operating Expenditures - 001.000.62.558.60.41.00 (Professional Services, Cost Center: Development Services, Planning
Division) - $14,000
Q
Packet Pg. 280
Decision Package Budget Report Regarding DP15
City of Edmonds
Decision Package: 410-23004 draft 1
Date Budget Year Group Version Priority Duration Approval Status
11/2/22 2023 Councilmember 0 1 One Time Pending
Teitzel
Item Description
From DP15: "The issue of insufficient police patrol vehicle availability was discussed by Chief Bennett
with the mayor, and approval was given to seek Council authority to purchase nine new hybrid Ford
Explorers in 2023."
Justification
This request should be partially approved, with the number of new patrol vehicles reduced from the
requested nine vehicles to five vehicles. The approximate cost of a 2023 Ford Explorer hybrid is
approximately $75,000. These vehicles are proposed to be funded by ARPA federal funding. With the
reduction in this request of four vehicles, a total reduction in this funding request is $300,000.
This $300,000 of ARPA funding should be redirected to a new account entitled Edmonds Code Rewrite
Project, and details are provided in a new decision package.
Describe All Fundina Sources
ARPA funding
Describe Future or Ongoing Costs
N/A
Proiect Status (if applicable)
Pendng
FISCAL DETAILS
Expenditures
Reduce Operating/Capital Expenditures for DP15 by $300,000 / Eliminate need for $300,000 Revenue
from Coronavirus Relief Fund.
Packet Pg. 281
Decision Package Budget Report
City of Edmonds
Regarding DP 23
Decision Package: 640-23007
Date Budget Year Group Version Priority Duration
11/2/22 2023 CM Teitzel 0 4 One time
Item Description
Approval Status
Pending
This decision package requests funding to conduct an Existing Conditions Analysis for the north
half of Yost Park to better understand the environmental conditions and existing trail system to
develop an action plan around how to address ensuring healthy ecosystem and a good
trail/bridge system for pedestrian access.
This is a worthy objective. However, there is an urgent need to first assess erosion and
sedimentation issues caused by Shell Creek in the park (exacerbated by stormwater surges
entering the creek within Yost Park), which is undercutting the south bank of the park and the
stream has been forced out of its natural stream bed by the presence of the old Edmonds Water
Supply System concrete weirs in the stream. A near term plan for restoration of the stream back
to its original course should be undertaken before the city contracts for an Existing Conditions
Analysis.
Justification
and a planning meeting should be called by the Parks Department in the near term with key
stakeholders, including the tribes, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Parks
Department, local citizen scientists, Public Works, members of City Council and others to map
out a restoration plan for Shell Creek within Yost Park. It is entirely possible this forum can map
out an action plan for emergency restoration of Shell Creek to its original stream bed without
hiring a consultant. Once the action plan has been implemented and the Shell Creek has been
returned to its natural stream bed, the need for an Existing Conditions Analysis can be revisited.
Describe All Funding Sources
This amendment removes expenditure of $220,000 from the Coronavirus Relief Fund.
Describe Future or Onaoina Costs
Proiect Status (if aaalicable)
Pendng
FISCAL DETAILS
Expenditures
N/A
Packet Pg. 282
Decision Package Budget Report Regardin
City of Edmonds
Decision Package: 670-23003
Date Budget Year Group Version Priority Duration Approval Status
10/31/22 2023 Councilmember Teitzel 0 1 One -Time Pending
Item Description
This decision package requests funding for a new Capital Projects Manager as well as an additional vehicle for use by this
employee
Justification
This Decision Packaae should be amended to remove the reauest for an additional vehicle for this emDlovee. No
justification was provided about the need for this vehicle in the narrative of this request. There are city -owned pool
vehicles for individual use by directors and other city employees, and it is reasonable for one of those vehicles to be
repurposed for use by this employee if needed. Also, in the past, retired police patrol vehicles were assigned to School
Resource Officers for use in their duties. Another option is to assign a retired patrol vehicle to this employee.
Describe All Fundinq Sources
This amendment removes expenditure of $30,000 from the Equipment B fund.
Describe Future or Onaoina Costs
N/A
Proiect Status (if annlicable)
Pendng
FISCAL DETAILS
Expenditures
This amendment removes expenditure of $30,000 from 511.100.77.594.48.64.000: Equipment B Fund.
Packet Pg. 283
Decision Package Budget Report
City of Edmonds
Regarding DP #
Date Budget Year
10/31/22 2023
Item Description
Decision Package: 720-23002
Group Version Priority
CM Teitzel 0 1
Duration Approval Status
Ongoing Pending
DP 32's request is for an increase of 5% in Edmonds city utility rates; this request should not be approved.
Justification
We are entering a period of high inflation, and an increase of 5% in the already significant Edmonds utility rates will
represent another cost burden on our citizens at a time when many are facing financial hardships. This request was not
supported by a current rate study, but the narrative supposes a significant rate increase will be needed in 2024 when a
rate study is conducted. This is insufficient justification for a rate increase in 2023.
This request should be denied for 2023, and the request can be revisited in 2024.
Describe All Fundinq Sources
N/A
Describe Future or Ongoing Costs
N/A
Project Status (if applicable)
Pendng
FISCAL DETAILS
Expenditures
N/A
Q
Packet Pg. 284
Decision Package Budget Report New Item
City of Edmonds
Decision Package: new item
Date Budget Year Group Version Priority Duration Approval Status
11/2/22 2023 CM Teitzel 0 1 One time Pending
Item Description
This decision package requests an increase of 25% in Edmonds parking permit fees (residential,
employee and visitor). These fees have not been increased since 2005, while the CPI for the
Seattle/Tacoma/Bellevue MSA between August 2019 and August 2022 alone has tripled. This
proposal would increase the downtown employee parking permit fee from $50/year to
$62.50/year, and would increase the residential parking permit fee from 25/year to $31.25/year.
This increase would generate additional revenue of approximately $12,000 annually.
Justification
Downtown parking remains in high demand, and the demand will soon increase as new amenities such as
the renovated Civic Field and Main Street Commons come on line in 2023. At the same time, the demand
for available parking spaces for the disabled has increased, but the supply of such designated parking
spaces has remained unchanged. This proposal would increase the economic incentive for parking permit
holders to seek free parking beyond the designated permit zones in downtown Edmonds, thus freeing
additional parking for visitors and additional space for designated disabled parking. All revenue associated
with this proposal should be earmarked for signage and marking for additional disabled parking in the
downtown Edmonds area.
Describe All Funding Sources
N/A
Describe Future or Ongoing Costs
N/A
Project Status (if applicable)
Pendng
FISCAL DETAILS
These additional revenues should be directed to Fund 121 (parking permit fees)
Expenditures
N/A
9.6.a
Packet Pg. 285
Amendments from Diane Buckshnis due 11/7/22 and not complete
Good Morning Dave,
This formatting is weird and I don't know how to fix it. I can only say that this first DP is out of order as
Beckie outlined and formatted it for me and I decided to delete most of the formats as I did not have time
to document per this formatting style.
This is a DRAFT as we all know we haven't heard from all departments, or public and ARPA and CIPCFP
discussions are still outstanding. I have only noted a few of the carry forwards that were obvious to me,
but we need to look at those budget authority and carryforward items that are found left over in our project
list and yes, I know you are understaffed and I know this is probably on your to do list, but it does help
Council have a better understanding of the project totals.
apologize for any formatting issues, (spacing, or not bolding, etc) and I have tried to catch all my typos or
grammar issues, but just no time in my busy schedule — so sorry. I will be passing this along to those
town hall folks that showed a lot of interest in how I analyzed the budget.
Lastly and in honor of Kristiana, there was a reason why she was always one of the last CMs to bring forth
her amendments and was criticized by certain CMs during her tenure on Council — but she truly was
working smartly and she waited to hear everything from the administration and public first before making
her thoughtful amendments. I missed talking to her this year.
Happy Football Sunday, November 6, 2022
Diane
1) Item Description DP # 72 10% design cost at $282,744 with total estimate for two sidewalks for
estimated cost to be $5.4MM
The DP72 request is to fund the remaining scope of work for two "Green Street" projects at Dayton St between
SR 104 and 2nd Ave. S and 236th St. SW between 84th Ave. W and Highway 99. Total amount of funding these
two segments of streets is $5.4MM
Amendment: Remove ALL funding for Green Street project found in this decision packet, ARPA funding
and CIPCFP budgetary document. Hire a watershed, engineer, grant writer, project manager to deal with
all the Federal funding found in the Infrastructure Bill and Inflation Bill. Recommend putting existing
designs on hold indefinitely.
As I stated in March when I proposed this amendment for the 2021 Budget Amendments to remove the $400K in
2022, that as a Legislator, the Administration has provided no definitions, no code, no design standards and
nothing to allow our citizens to know the costs of these modified rain garden concepts, etc
Justification
"Green Streets" is a land use designation, and at this time, there is no reference to Green Streets in our
Comprehensive Plan, our code or any City documents other than discussion from the ARPA funding and that
Green Streets was allowable and we put it in our CIP with $400K in 2022 and $600K in 2023.
Without code, design standards, policy — this is merely writing a blank check of the taxpayer's money.
The Federal Infrastructure Bill and Inflation Bill both have components that provide a gateway to grant funding,
but the City must first define, craft code, etc. so that Grant applications can be obtained.
1) Amendment under #DP 20 -1 will be proposing a watershed engineer to assist in the myriad of grant
opportunities under these two infrastructure bills.
1
Packet Pg. 286
Amendments from Diane Buckshnis due 11/7/22 and not complete
NOTE: Greyed out text items have been submitted to Dir Turley separately as Questions / Clarifications/
Documentation Requests
2) Page 15 "Strategic Outlook — City of Edmonds — General Fund Balance"
Amendment is to require a footnote on this page - Justification
The new "Fund Balance Policy Analysis" section includes the anticipated under- reserved budget estimate.
Since last year was the first year the Administration began utilizing the General Fund Reserves and there were
many questions, the Administration added this new section. With further inspections of the calculations, it
appears that the reserves includes the anticipated under -expenditures for the budget. The Fund Balance is silent
regarding the inclusion of this budget excess. City Council's have the ability to set many different policies for use
of those funds and that should be a separate policy decision. As such, any under -reserve estimates should not
be included in these calculations as that number can fluctuate tremendously depending upon any number of
budgetary issues such as staffing, unfinished projects, layoffs, etc.
Amendment: Footnote 1: The Fund Balance Policy Analysis includes the anticipated budget under -
expenditure and this will not be included next year which will have an impact this strategic outlook new year.
3) Page 18 — 2023 Budget Summary All Funds
Amendment is to require footnote of funds from ARPA and Goeffe -Justification
This is the summary page of the two previous pages and there is a large swings in revenue for General Fund and
gift catalog which some may view as hitting the lottery and while the Goeffe is a fairly long term sustainable
source, ARPA is not. Or like the bonds will be diminishing as we find projects.
Amendment: Footnote the major revenue sources to help explain the large changes in these funds.
4) Page 28 — Employee Head Count by Department
Confusion occurred in two town halls as to current staffing and employee count by department title or is this head
count the total approved.
Amendment: Clarify this title to indicate approved.
5) Page 39 City Council — Increase Professional Services for Code Rewrite and update
Task forces utilizing the legislative branch, administrative branch, consultants and/or citizens have been very
successful. After 12 years on council and seeing yet another year of code delays in code rewriting, updating and
crafting, I am recommending a task force to hire a code writing consulting firm to work with a team to have a
concentrated effort of completing the code. The use of an external firm will be helpful to the understaffing issues
found in the Planning and Development Department. The Stormwater code will be handled separately as will the
Tree Code.
Amendment: $200K for Professional Services with funds coming from under -expenditure budget
6) Page 39 City Council —Increase Professional Services for $100K for Forensic Audit of Budgetary
Process leading up to the budget approval on 11/17/21.
This amendment is for a Forensic Auditor to review the potential OPMA issues, timing of decisions and the
potential Civil Liberties violations that might have taken place during the budgetary process leading up to the
budget approval on November 17, 2021. Issues relating to proper noticing of the adjournment meeting, the
limitation of the public during the public hearing even though new material information (minutes from previous
budgetary meetings) had just been received, the timing of the announcement made after audience comments,
etc.
Amendment: $100K for Professional Services with funds coming from under -expenditure budget,
2
Packet Pg. 287
Amendments from Diane Buckshnis due 11/7/22 and not complete
7) Page 63 Non -Departmental — Funding for ECA operating
ECA funding for operating. I don't know why this is called a contingency reserve as the Senior Center is not
identified as a contingency reserve. Funding for the ECA is the non-profit arm of the PFD and has been a stable
source of income for the past few years.
Amendment: Add $50K for ECA Operating with funds from under -expenditure budget
(3) Page 85 K-9 Unit
These numbers are all over the place between the 2022 budget, estimates and then the 2023 budget and with no
decision packets, only issue is explaining the $92K decrease in salaries between 22 and 23?
9) DP # 16 and Page 97 — 98 Community Services and Economic Development
The Neighborhood City Hall numbers do not seem to agree with the DP 16 and it appears that the DP doesn't
include salaries and why not? The DP states it is added cost for this office and why are salaries not included or
is the City not committing to a FTE or operating truly as a satellite office. How can Council and by extension the
public understand the True Cost of this office? Just like IT and inter -department charges, would their be a
metrics and cost analysis for the Uptown Court and use by other departments? If this is truly a satellite office, it
should be treated as a separate cost center.
Amendment: Establish the Neighborhood City Hall as a separate cost center. Establish policy and
procedures for operating procedures, office hours, inter -office usage, etc.
10) DP #18 and #19 and Page 109 — Community Services and Economic Development budget
For years, the City Council and Administration have known that rentals of homes have been allowed on a
temporary and long-term basis in residential neighborhoods. Last year, Portland Oregon required landlords to
report their activity of their properties for monitoring and to track the short term market sector that SHOULD be
paying lodging taxes to our City. This issue was brought up in 2016 by Dan Robles of the Planning Board and
nothing came about at that time as there were not many short-term renters as that time. It's time to have this
potential source of revenue reviewed.
Amendment: Establish policy regarding short-term rentals as a potential added source of revenue to be
delegated to the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee.
11) DP #21 and Page 115 Development Services — Total Department Professional Budget increase by
$446K and page 117 professional services
I can reconcile most of this large increase because of the DP #21 relative to the Comprehensive Plan and the
need for Council to get a breakdown of funds spent to all consultants and if contracts over $100K to any one
consultant was not reviewed by Council. While Page 117 does not have any decision packages, it has bizarre
financial trends for the Professional Services. How can this Department have actuals of $191 K in 2021 to
increase to $414K or double the amount needed?
Amendment: If reasoning cannot be given for this significant increase —reduce professional services to
$200K and move remainder to funding for the task force for code rewrite.
12) DP #21 and Page 121 Development Services Planning Division and offsetting DP 21 $350K in
question
How much money is being spent on this Comp Plan update as the description of funds says $425? The
professional services line is $50K more than the estimated $300K found in DP 21? lam confused about the
entire cost of this comp plan update and why this did not come forth to Council like most contracts over $100K. It
3
Packet Pg. 288
Amendments from Diane Buckshnis due 11/7/22 and not complete
would be beneficial to explain DP 21 more as didn't the money spent in 2021 come from grants as well? I would
think that an additional $425K in 2023 is excessive without any information. Additionally, citizens have sent emails
relating to a select group of community leaders being given cash cards for completing their survey. This could
also be viewed as a method of having the community leader sway their opinion towards the Administration and
could be construed as biased.
Amendment: Cut budget in half if contract spending is not provided as not enough information to
determine how much was spent in 2022 and that of 2023 on this Comprehensive Plan update (recent
update was 2020).
Amendment: Review Gift of Public Funds code and determine if the City by means of the Consultant
violated this ordinance and gave gift cards to the "hand -chosen" community individuals.
13) Page 124 - Human Services $200K Professional Services.
There is no decision package for this and it appears that it is a status quo budget. A significant increase of
$200K is found in Professional services. This may be the $200 carry forward from last year that was set aside to
assisting in the purchase of a facility which now Snohomish County used ARPA funds for.
Amendment: Remove $200K and put it back in to the under -expenditure budget or offset with one of the
Council amendments.
14) DP #23 Existing Conditions assessment to review Yost Park upper watershed $220K
Create a task force consisting of citizen scientist, citizen historians, administrative engineer and council member
to review and determine exactly what an external consultant is being recommended for? Is the City going to
utilize this report to gain grant funding and if so, can the task force include this consultant so that we can
streamline this process and cut costs. The Urban Forest Management Plan where the consultants gave us not
Edmonds specific data in terms of pests, native plants, etc, so local citizens scientist assisted in the completion.
This concept could be utilized where the consultants have readily available historical data for their reports.
Amendment: Change this funding to $100K and include a task force of scientist, CMs, historical
preservation person, administration and consultants.
15) DP #24 Salmon Safe Certification Implementation for $75K
This newly formed conceptual certification has never been sanctioned as acceptable by WRIA 8 or any other
grant funding. I was under the impression that the City Council stated they would like to take a pause on this
certification process since the unintended consequences would result in the City resting on this certification and
not fixing the areas that could be fixed or gaps internally without the use of consultants. The Intergrated Pest
Management plan could easily be a project of parks and recreation and citizen scientist. The Urban Forest
Management Program had it's pest update provided by Dr. Frank Caruso who at that time was a member of the
Tree Board.
Amendment: Remove this amendment and re-engage consultant firm once the Administration has created
more policy and plans for the Council to review. Place in 2024 Budget Process or after a more
structured program is provided to Council this DP can be re-established in 2023 once a plan is in place.
16) DP #26 New Park Maintenance Services roughly $1 MM with funding from Trust money
I am unclear as to what is funded by GF and what is funded by Goffette donation? Also, do we have the job
descriptions for the new FTE? What is the reasons for the onetime civic maintenance? There are just too many
questions regarding the on -going and the one-time.
Amendment: Remove this amendment until further information and designation of funds is obtained and
more understanding of the need for these new FTEs and by extension the cars, and supplies.
4
Packet Pg. 289
Amendments from Diane Buckshnis due 11/7/22 and not complete
17) DP #28 — Updates to Parks Beautification Program (Gift Catalog fund 127 and Goffette estate
donation) - $304K
Please review comments under DP 26 as it looks like the salary and wages are included in this DP — but clarity
needs to occur and we need to ensure that our attorney has reviewed the agreement laid out in the will.
Amendment: Please provide an attorney review and how funds can be managed and monitored. A policy
for how the City is treating this wonderful donation in terms of monitoring and compliances should be
written. Maybe the policy already exists? Is all the beautification program for all areas of the City?
Could we do flower baskets in all sub -areas of the City?
18) DP #31 New Position Capital Projects Manager $190K
This job description should be reanalyzed to be for a "grant funding project manager" that would also be able to
manage capital projects in all areas of the City. We need a watershed engineering specialists that is familiar with
grant writing at the federal level to take advantage of all these very large projects that could quality for the
Infrastructure or Inflationary Bills. Projects could include Perrinville Creek Watershed, Shell Creek Watershed,
Hwy 99 safety components such as overpass funding, Culvert Replacement funds, Mathay Ballinger Infilltration
Park, Creosol Pier removal at Haines Wharf Park, redesigning an alternative "pathway for the "missing link" that
would be an environmental disaster or expensive mitigation project merely for a stretch of the walkway.
Innovative walkway designs to move the already ADA sidewalks on the east side of the Ebb Tide and EWC could
easily create the "pokeman game effect" that brought thousands to the waterfront center's parking lot with
individuals walking on the already established sidewalks.
Amendment: Remove this DP and review the job description and reassess the need for this "project
manager" to have in its job description to include watershed analysis, stormwater, and engineering grant
funding skills.
19) DP # 32 Utility Rate Increases — 5 percent utility rate increases
The ordinance governing rate increases sunsets this year and the Council was unable to work with the
administration in summer to scrub the CFP and look at the projects and costs in current year and two years out as
utility rate calculations are predicated on this planning document. With the recession looming and without a
report to identity the "pay as you go" concept initiated years back, it seem prudent for Council to await the new
report as some items in Stormwater such as the Edmonds Marsh (which had no grant offsets) was part of that
utility rate analyses. Additionally, the calculations of water billing has been contested by citizens and should be
reviewed more carefully during this next review.
Amendment: Delete this amendment and review current ordinance to ensure we can extend with no
percentage increase for 2023.
20) DP #34, #35 #36 #37 #38 all are past projects and carryforwards are not identified.
Infrastructure replacement is also just as important as planning and development as without the updated
infrastructure in place, problems and constant reactive funding occurs after the emergency occurs from
overdevelopment.
Amendment: Include carryforward on complete data on locations as water rates could potential be
affected by a duplication of years on funding.
5
Packet Pg. 290
Amendments from Diane Buckshnis due 11/7/22 and not complete
21) DP #39 and #43 and #44 — Lower Perrinville Creek Restoration Project $750, Perrinville Creek
Basin Analysis for $150K and Perrinville Creek Flow Management Projects $120 — also on CIPCFP
Council needs to get a handle on this entire watershed as plenty of State and Federal funding available if viewed
in its entirety and includes various groups such as Tribes, WDFW, landowners, Lynnwood, WRIA 8. There are
other carryforwards from last year on this that needs to be answered from the administration: While this is ARPA
funding, new federal funds are available which WOULD free up ARPA money for the "human aspect of this
federal bill. Where is the data to support the cost estimate of $5.5MM
Amendment: Recommend this project be brought forth for full Council review and if necessary, create a
task force as the City could take advantage of State and Federal Funding available. Not sufficient
enough information for the $3.5MM blind ARPA funds and then use of stormwater utility rate funds. Also
Carryforwards from 2022 need to be included or reconciled #53 #550K, #60 $122K.
22) DP #40 Seaview Infiltration Facility Phase 2 $10K
Once again, this is a Perrinville Creek problem with scouring and watershed issues. The entire Perrinville
Watershed issues should be provided to Council as once again, this is a watershed issue that is affected by the
continued reduction of pocket forest with large homes being built without new stormwater codes.
Amendment: Determine if carryforward on DP#59 from 2022 budget needs to be included at $556,237 or it
that project was finished since this ask is so low.
Amendment: Complete Restoration Plan should be presented to Council and the effects of development
in that sensitive watershed.
Amendment: I know this is not infiltration but I caught this in 2022 budget — but I view these two as being
very complimentary — but please provide Council with the assessment from the $505K DP #47 which was
indicated to be both Yost and Seaview "Reservoir" assessment and I don't think Council was giving this
information.
23) All WWTP issues: DP# 54 WWTP project clarifier $350K DP #55 Vacuum replacement $187K on
going and #DP 58 Nuvoda Process for compliance to WDOE for new nutrient requirements $452K
and DP #57 Failed joints due to the install $90K and DP #58 offset on operating budget of $30K
(our share). Last year DP #67 was for Carbon Recovery Project as one time $1,753,156 was this
spent?
Council needs an entire review of the issues relevant to the new sewer project and the cost associated with the
build, clarifiers and timing to fully operate along with compliance to the new Ecology permitting standards.
Amendment: Total review of project and funding before approval and ensure that all stakeholders are on
board. Determine if the one time $1,753,156 carry over was spent.
24) DP #59 Vehicle Replacement $633K
It's confusing as to what Patrol means and is this Police Patrol cars? There is already a DP for policy.
amendment: Provide complete schedule of car replacements of 2022 and 2023 and criteria used and
funding sources either ARPA or 511-B fund.
25) DP #62 Transportation Plan Update $170K
With all the new traffic challenges brought forth with the Hwy 99 expansion along with all the growth expected in
our downtown with the increase in the BD2 zoning changes, it seem we need to include this with environmental
issues that might be affected regarding noise and air pollution and pedestrian safety, Additionally, some Council
Members do not believe that this City qualifies as a being designated as a High Transit City which could have
6
Packet Pg. 291
Amendments from Diane Buckshnis due 11/7/22 and not complete
detrimental impacts on the density in our downtown area and what about how can we provide a transportation
plan that can address pedestrian safety like overpasses and sidewalks. Plenty of State and Federal funding
available if he scope is properly defined.
Amendment: Remove Amendment and bring it back to Council though the Committee Process so that
environmental considerations and issue of the HTC designation can be considered.
26) DP #63 76th Ave and 2201h St SW Improvements ror tonal cost of $8.7mm with oruzm in gran:
funding
This seems expensive and I have yet to trace it to the other budgetary documents and it doesn't indicated how
much will be the right -away acquisition etc. Need update on this project and was there any carryforwards from
last year?
27) DP #64 — Pavement Overlays $1.5MM from GF and REET
It would be helpful to reference what part of the TIP this is focused on and does this include Sidewalks too? Can
any of this qualify for Federal funding? Any carryforward?
28) DP #65 — 7611 Overlay different section total cost only $15K for a total $2.7MM
It would be nice to have the offsetting budgetary item indexed and was there any carryforwards on this project?
Also, the request in contracted services is only of $15K so it would be nice to have a reference so we can look at
the entire project (yes, I know you are short staffed too).
29) DP #66 and #67 and #68 — Stage 2 Hwy 99 Revitalization total cost $2.6MM and Stage 3 at $1.18
and Stage 4 and this recognized FEDERAL grants obtained
Since the City has received two awards for this Master Plan, I think there are Federal funds available if we have
staffing time to make it so (see my suggestion to #20). Also, will all these funds be spent in 2023 as it says now
four months later after this DP was put in (i.e. since then labor shortages, cement supply and demand, etc). and
should we reduce it and stratify over two years. Again, I know there is a CIPCFP offset to give the entire picture
and I'm sorry. Does this revitalization section include perhaps a pedestrian overpass? Hurray for the State
Grants and Federal Grants obtained to date!
30) DP #71 Citywide Bicycle Improvement funded by Sound Transit of $1.85 and REET money with
total cost $2.2MM and DP #75 Pedestrian Safety for $19.5K and DP #76 Calming Program for $15K
We need more money dedicated to sidewalks and it seems that this grant does not allow for it? Can't we hire a
sidewalk crew or what is the status about this as I know KJ and NT have looked into this for years? Can't we
look at all three of these and determine how we can achieve more sidewalks and have more traffic calming to
deal with speeding.
Some of these items may be updated as with the PPW presentatioin there was that asterick for #75 $80K
and #76 $33K — But it that enough?
31) DP #78 Elm Walkway total costs at $1,025M
There was a carry forward of this for $349.9K or DP 93 in 2022. Now the updated looks like more expensive and
expanded (per presentation).
Amendment: Remove budget authority and funding in the amount of $349.9 K representing an unfunded
carryforward. Brief Council on why the increase is now up to a million?
7
Packet Pg. 292
Amendments from Diane Buckshnis due 11/7/22 and not complete
32) DP # 80 Mathay Ballinger Park Improvements $499.3K
City Council should be briefed on the status of this project in combination with the Infiltration design. Can we
obtain any Federal Funding or State? Good to see it is a job order contract.
33) DP #82 Johnson Property Demolition and CIP R2
This is a volunteering task force for recognition of two pioneer women in Edmonds. Kristiana Johnson and her
friend Shirley Johnson that used to live down the hill from Kristi. We have collected funds from Citizens in
Memory of Kristiana Johnson and many did not know that Kristiana was the link between Shirley and the donation
of that large parcel for open space, community gardens and whatever. The first community garden was created
by volunteers headed up by the Edmonds Floretum Garden Club. It would be optimal to have this same concept
utilized for the City to help in developing this area since the current DP just discusses demolition. Since Shirley
and Kristiana were childhood friends, it would be nice to have some sort of memorial recognizing both of them
(i.e. gazebo, benches, statues, etc). Task force should be created and a 1 % art mitigation be dedicated to this
Johnson Community Garden and master plan this property with volunteers.
Amendment: Create task force consisting of administration and a council member and council
legislative assistant to manage task force and dedicate 1 % arts impact fee to this park; tasks include
naming the park, simple volunteer design of community gardens and developing volunteering efforts to
shape this park with minimal funds to be spent on outside consultants.
34) DP not found in Budget but part of P&W presentation regarding Marsh Water Quality Issues
$384K?
The carryforward for this Marsh Water Quality Improvements #DP 55 for $190K does not appear to be used
Amendment: Remove budget authority and funding for carryover DP #55 from 2022.
BUCKSHNIS CFP AMENDMENTS — for two carry -forwards. These two projects do not comply to the
bond funding directives. [These CIP/CFP Amendment Submissions have been copied and
submitted separately for CIP/CFP discussion.]
1) Carryovers 2022 found CFP to be voted to remove budget authority and any funding designation
The following 2 items were part of the Bond Funding and when further reviewed in Finance Committee this year,
bonds were specified for aging infrastructure. These two items are still outstanding and this amendment will
remove those items from the bond funding source. 2022 DP #71 for $260 is for a NEW infrastructure project
known as a Citywide Electric Vehicle Charging Network. DP #72 for $230K is a NEW infrastructure Solar Plan
Renewal and Grant Application. Both of these NEW infrastructure projects violate the bonding purpose and
therefore should be removed and put forth as utility infrastructure CFP and budget request.
Amendment: Remove budgetary authority and fund designation for these two carry forwards. Funds
have not been taken from bonding yet or so it seems? Need clarification.
BUCKSHNIS CIP AMENDMENTS BUT CIP items to discuss and recommended amendments — not
complete as NO public hearing.
1) CIP Missing Link— P3 and D14 $1.4MM
Kudos for the City in obtaining that right away and the COST to get to this point is over. As an environmentalist, I
have been against this project for over 10 years, but the simple majority and momentum of the win always made
me a minority. The intrusion of this project will be costly and if out in the water, extremely destructive to the
8
Packet Pg. 293
Amendments from Diane Buckshnis due 11/7122 and not complete
environment and the alternative of condemning private property to create the walkway by the bulkhead will be
expensive and unnecessary since their already is already an alternative pathway on the west side.
Amendment: Remove from CIP and any funds returned to fund balance. Alternative routes would be
less costly and more artistic!
2) Marsh Estuary Restoration Al P4, D9, and D1
This project should be a TBD as the City should not rely on as the Shannon Wilson team for design 6 to be a
sanctioned design as it was under a Stormwater mitigation for the Connector Project. Therefore the process has
not gone through the normal RFP process when we finally obtain the UNOCAL property There is no watershed
restoration or holistic perspective master plan in place except for the Marina Beach portion of the system.
Additionally, there is not discussion regarding the use of consultants such as Forterra that could purchase the
UNOCAL property and assist the Administration in grant writing and watershed management. Again, there is
plenty of funds available at the State and Federal Level to support the millions of dollars in grants available. I can
easily provide the example of the Wayne's Golf Course State funding whereas that group was able to obtain over
$14AMM in grants to pay for that property.
Amendment: Remove any funds and indicated TBD and provide more description regarding alternatives
3) CIP - Add ILA between Mountlake Terrace and Edmonds for the Lake Ballinger Golf Course
The development of this Park has been reviewed twice in the Lake Ballinger Forum and MLT is at a critical
juncture for designing the "passive park" aspect which is designated by Edmonds. The Administration has
already agreed to this amendment.
Amendment: Add $200K for ILA work with MILT.
4) CIP — Add ILA between Snohomish County for regional parks of Esperance and Meadowdale
Beach Parks
Both of these parks are frequented by Edmonds individuals and Edmonds was part of the permitting process and
the Meadowdale Beach Park near -shore estuary restoration. We should help our neighboring cities with
expenses that might be incurred by our park uses and create a regional park model.
Amendment: Work with Snohomish County for ILAs for Esperance and Meadowdale Beach Parks.
5) CIP P8 D 19 —Move 4t' Avenue Corridor to Community Services and Economic Development
With the Creative District Designation and the Arts and Cultural area being moved over to Community Services
and Economic Development, it seems logical to create a new CIP number designation for Community Services
and Economic Development as this capital project is a key factor for the Creative District.
Amendment: Create new CIP for Community Services and Economic Development. NO cost allocated
Lost amendment and even though rate study is next year, this amount would be added.
amendment: Remove 2025 estimated cost to be TBD as this amount affects utility rates and no
justification.
9
Packet Pg. 294
Decision Package Budget Report
City of Edmonds
Regarding DP-59
Decision Package: 770-23001
Date Budget Year Group Version Priority Duration
11/3/22 2023 CM Teitzel 0 1 One time
Item Description
Approval Status
Pending
Decision Package 59 requests Council approval to purchase nine new vehicles totaling $633,000
in 2023, including two 2023 Ford Explorer Hybrid police vehicles to replace two 2017 Ford
Explore patrol vehicles (units 437-POL and 438-POL) due to fleet managements
recommendation for replacement due to age and mileage. However, the 2023 budget request
contains other requests (DP 15) for purchase of a substantial number of new vehicles, which
strains an already aggressive budget.
This amendment proposes to allow the two 2017 patrol units to remain in service for the duration
of 2023, with reconsideration for replacement in 2024, which will reduce the 2023 budget request
in DP-59 by $150,000 (approximately $75,000 per vehicle).
Justifinafinn
Continued use of the two 2017 patrol vehicles will address the Edmonds Police Department
expressed need for up to nine new patrol vehicles in 2023. By extending the service lives of
these two patrol vehicles through 2023, the need to purchase two patrol vehicles in 2023 is
reduced.
Describe All Funding Sources
This proposal reduces the 2023 Equipment B fund expenditure request by $150,000.
Describe Future or Ongoing Costs
N/A
Protect Status (if applicable)
Pendng
FISCAL DETAILS
Reduction of $150,000 in 2023 capital expenditure in 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 Equipment B fund
Expenditures
N/A
Packet Pg. 295
Decision Package Budget Report
City of Edmonds
Regarding DP #
Decision Package: Str-23015 draft 1
Date Budget Year Group Version Priority
10/31/22 2023 Councilmember Teitzel 0 1
Item Description
Duration Approval Status
One time Pending
Decision Package #72 request is to fund the remaining scope of work for two "green streets" projects at Dayton St
between SR 104 and 2nd Ave. S and 236th St. SW between 84th Ave. W and Highway 99.
This amendment would remove the Dayton Street component of the scope of work (($78,027 for Design according to
PWT-65 of the draft CIP/CFP) and redirect these funds to developing sidewalks in the Ballinger Bowl area east of
Highway 99 (proposed in a new Decision Package)
Justification
Green Street principles provide good direction for how the effects of development and redevelopment can be mitigated to
a degree to reduce "heat island" effects and provide greater stormwater infiltration. This scope of work is being funded
by Coronavirus Relief Funds. r-
This amendment removes the Dayton Street component of the scope of work and requests the scope be redirected to 0
focus on the "Ballinger Bowl" area east of Highway 99 in concert with the heightened focus on prioritizing new sidewalk
construction in that area.
Describe All Funding Sources
r
a�
aM
Coronavirus Relief Funds
m
Describe Future or On Costs
0
U
N/A proposed $78,027 for Dayton Green Streets project design 2023 Budget, $1,600,000 for Dayton Green Streets 00
construction (draft CIP/CFP PWT-65 in 2025) >
Project Status (if applicable)
Pendng
FISCAL DETAILS
Expenditures
N/A
Packet Pg. 296
Decision Package Budget Report
City of Edmonds
Regarding DP #72/
Decision Package: Str-23015 draft 1
Date Budget Year Group Version Priority
10/31/22 2023 Councilmember Teitzel 0 1
Item Description
Duration Approval Status
One time Pending
Apply $78,027 toward prioritizing new sidewalk construction in the "Ballinger Bowl' area east of Hwy 99.
Decision Package #72 request is to fund the remaining scope of work for two "green streets" projects at Dayton St
between SR 104 and 2nd Ave. S and 236th St. SW between 84th Ave. W and Highway 99.
A DP amendment submitted would remove the Dayton Street component of the scope of work (($78,027 for Design
according to PWT-65 of the draft CIP/CFP) and redirect these funds to developing sidewalks in the Ballinger Bowl area
east of Highway 99.
Justification
This amendment removes the Dayton Street component of the scope of work and requests the scope be redirected to r-
focus on the "Ballinger Bowl" area east of Highway 99 in concert with the heightened focus on prioritizing new sidewalk °
construction in that area.
Describe All Funding Sources
r
Coronavirus Relief Funds a�
m
Describe Future or Ongoinq Costs
0
c
0
U
N/A proposed $78,027 for Dayton Green Streets project design 2023 Budget, $1,600,000 for Dayton Green Streets
M
construction (draft CIP/CFP PWT-65 in 2025)
41
0
Project Status (if applicable)
y
a
0
Pending
c
FISCAL DETAILS
U
.r
Expenditures
N/A E
Q
Packet Pg. 297
Decision Package Budget Report
City of Edmonds
Regarding DP-78/NEW
Decision Package: Str-23008
Date Budget Year Group Version Priority Duration
11/3/22 2023 CM Teitzel 0 1 One time
Approval Status
Pending
Item Description
Fund $766, 684 to add missing sidewalks in the Ballinger Bowl area of Edmonds, which have
been underfunded for decades.
Justification
Especially as redevelopment progresses along the Highway 99 corridor, which will drive a
significant increase in foot traffic, there is a clear need for more pedestrian safety projects
between Highway 99 and Lake Ballinger.
In particular, there is no sidewalk between the intersection of 238t"/Highway 99 and 76t" Avenue
within the Ballinger Bowl. Since this is a popular walking route on the east side of Highway 99
for residents to and from Lake Ballinger, to Safeway and other amenities at that intersection and
is also a designated walking route to Madrona School, funding should be prioritized in 2023 to
address this unfunded need.
Describe All Funding Sources
This proposal has no net effect on the 2023 budget and simply transfers funding from the Elm
Street project in Decision Package 78 to support sidewalk installations in the Ballinger Bowl.
Describe Future or Ongoing Costs
N/A
Project Status (if applicable)
Pendng
FISCAL DETAILS
N/A (see above)
Expenditures
N/A
Packet Pg. 298
Decision Package Budget Report
City of Edmonds
Regarding DP-78
Decision Package: Str-23008
Date Budget Year Group Version Priority Duration
11/3/22 2023 CM Teitzel 0 1 One time
Item Description
Approval Status
Pending
This decision package requests 2023 funding of net $766,684 to install approximately 700 feet of
new sidewalk, curbs and curb ramps on Elm Way between 8th Avenue South and 9th Avenue
South to complete a missing link in the sidewalk system in the Edmonds Bowl. This item should
be deleted for 2023, and the funding transferred to projects to add missing sidewalks in the
Ballinger Bowl area of Edmonds, which have been underfunded for decades.
Justification
Especially as redevelopment progresses along the Highway 99 corridor, which will drive a
significant increase in foot traffic, there is a clear need for more pedestrian safety projects
between Highway 99 and Lake Ballinger. In particular, there is no sidewalk between the
intersection of 2381h/Highway 99 and 76th Avenue within the Ballinger Bowl. Since that is a
popular waling route on the east side of Highway 99 to and from Lake Ballinger, is a walking
route to Safeway and other amenities at that intersection and is a walking route to Madrona
School, funding should be prioritized in 2023 to address this unfunded need.
The completion of the missing link of 700 feet of Elm Way sidewalk should be moved in the
2023-2028 CIP/CFP to a future date, depending on budget availability.
Describe All Funding Sources
This proposal has no net effect on the 2023 budget and simply transfers 2023 funding from the
Elm Street project in Decision Package 78 to support sidewalk installations in the Ballinger Bowl.
Describe Future or Ongoing Costs
N/A
Protect Status (if applicable)
Pendng
FISCAL DETAILS
N/A (see above)
Expenditures
N/A
Packet Pg. 299
Decision Package Budget Report
City of Edmonds
Decision Package: Carry Over from 2022 DP#1
Date Budget Year Group Version Priority Duration Approval Status
11/4/2022 2023 CM Will Chen 0 1 Ongoing Pending
Item Description
This Decision Package proposes a REDI manager position as a FTE. Under the direction of the Mayor, the City's Race,
Equity, Diversity and Inclusion (REDI) Program Manager provides City-wide leadership to advance the City's race, equity,
diversity, and inclusion goals. The position will provide advice and consultation to City departments on equity and
inclusion principles and practices; provide strategic technical guidance and policy direction of the City's diversity, equity,
and inclusion efforts, help coordinate the implementation of the City's Equity roadmap and oversee the update of the
roadmap as needed and facilitate the City's Organizational Equity Team.
Justification
Under the direction of the Mayor, the City's REDI Program Manager provides City-wide leadership to advance the City's
race, equity, diversity, and inclusion goals. The position will provide advice and consultation to City departments on equity
and inclusion principles and practices; provide strategic technical guidance and policy direction of the City 's diversity, or -
equity, equity, and inclusion efforts, help coordinate the implementation of the City 's Equity roadmap and oversee the update of N
the roadmap as needed and facilitate the City's Organizational Equity Team.
0
r
Describe All Funding Sources a�
General Fund
m
c
0
Describe Future or Ongoing Costs V
All expenses have been included in this request y
Project Status (if applicable)
REDI Manager position was approved in 2022 budget, then amended/replaced with appropriation of $100,000.00 per
year for a 3-year contract position, which was not filled. Proposing FULL time position for 2023 and going forward.
FISCAL DETAILS
Expenditures
Operating Expenditures
001.000.21.513.10.11.00 SALARIES 111,227.00
001.000.21.513.10.23.00 BENEFITS 31,450.00
001.000.21.513.10.31.00 SUPPLIES 5,000.00
001.000.21.513.10.43.00 TRAVEL 500.00
001.000.21.513.10.49.00 MISCELLANEOUS 7,500.00
Total Operating Expenditures 155,677.00
Total Expenditures 155,677.00
Net Budget 155,677.00
Packet Pg. 300
Decision Package Budget Report
City of Edmonds
9.6.d
New DP Amendment
Decision Package: 84t" Ave W Sidewalk
Date Budget Year Group Version Priority Duration
11/4/2022 2023 CM Will Chen, Neil Tibbott 0 1 One -Time
Approval Status
Pending
Item Description
Walkway construction on 841" Ave W from 238t" St SW to 234t" St SW, exclude the section of the proposed Terrace Park
apartments development area.
Justification
Non -motorized transportation projects to improve public safety on a busy street are needed in this location. This is an
identified Public Works Project (draft CIP/CFP as PWT-32 with design in 2026 and construction in 2027). This
amendment would prioritize this project implementation for design in 2023 and construction in 2024.
Describe All Funding Sources
APRA fund
Describe Future or Ongoinq Costs
N/A
Project Status (if applicable)
Pending approval
FISCAL DETAILS
Expenditures
Reference PWT-32
Design $160,000 (2023 budget)
Construction $680,000 (construction will start in 2024)
$840,000
Q
Packet Pg. 301
Decision Package Budget Report Ne
City of Edmonds
Decision Package: ILA Mountlake Terrace
Date Budget Year Group Version Priority Duration Approval Status
11/3/2022 2023 CM Will Chen, Neil Tibbott 0 1 One -Time Pending
Item Description
To enter an Interlocal Agreement with the City of Mountlake Terrace for the purpose of sharing the usage of Lake
Ballinger Park space with residents from City of Edmonds, including improvements to Park entrance from the Edmonds
Interurban Trail and other amenities in partnership with Mountlake Terrace Lake Ballinger Park plan.
Justification
This Interlocal Agreement will improve access to green space and park amenities for the residents of Southeast Edmonds
by partnering with Mountlake Terrace to further develop the walking trail and viewing station within the Lake Ballinger
Park.
Describe All Funding Sources
Reallocate the 2023 Parkland acquisition budget for $200,000, which is funded by Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) tax
fund 125.
Describe Future or Ongoing Costs
Possible future park maintenance expenses as determined by ILA.
Project Status (if applicable)
N/A
FISCAL DETAILS
Expenditures
REET fund 125
$200,000
Packet Pg. 302
Decision Package Budget Report
City of Edmonds
9.6.d
New DP Amendment
Decision Package: McAleer Access Lake Ballinger
Date Budget Year Group Version Priority Duration
11/3/2022 2023 CM Will Chen, Neil Tibbott 0 1 One -Time
Approval Status
Pending
Item Description
Improve Lake Ballinger Park access by removing old bench, add two new benches, improve drop-off area by creating an
opening for pedestrian access. Create better shoreline access for watercraft.
Justification
Old bench is worn out and obsolete. Shoreline access for personal watercraft access area is uneven and needs
improvement. Park area grass needs to be restored.
Describe All Funding Sources
General Fund 001
Describe Future or Ongoing Costs
N/A
Project Status (if applicable)
Not started
FISCAL DETAILS
Expenditures
Operating expenditures
001 General Fund
$25,000
Q
Packet Pg. 303
Decision Package Budget Report
City of Edmonds
Regardin
Decision Package Amendment: Remove ARPA Consultant
Date Budget Year Group Version Priority Duration
11/4/2022 2023 CM Chen and Tibbott 0 1 One -Time
Item Description
To remove continuation of ARPA Grant Manager contract from 2023 budget (Decision Package 9)
h lafifirnfl^n
Approval Status
Pending
Since ARPA funds can be treated as General Fund for up to $10 million, the City departments have been budgeting
expenditures using ARPA funds as General Fund. In addition, we have two departments, Finance and Community Service
& Economic Development that are currently managing ARPA funds. Hiring an additional consultant to manage ARPA
funds is no longer justified. The tasks identified in DP#9 as the ARPA Grant Manager's responsibilities (such as updates
and presentation to Council on ARPA funding status) have not been evident.
Describe All Funding Sources
Reduce expenditures from ARPA fund
Describe Future or Ongoinq Costs
N/A
Project Status (if applicable)
N/A
FISCAL DETAILS
Expenditures
Reduce expenditures from ARPA fund for $120,000.
Packet Pg. 304
Decision Package Budget Report
City of Edmonds
9.6.d
Regardin
Decision Package: Remove DP#7
Date Budget Year Group Version Priority Duration Approval Status
11/8/2022 2023 0 1 One -Time or Duration Pending
Item Description
Remove Decision Package #7, new HR Manager position.
Justification
Human Resource's 2022 actual department headcount is 3.6. With the hiring of another HR Assistant (per Decision
Package #6) and paying $162,000 for professional service (contractor), the HR department essentially is increasing its
workforce by 55.5% (2/3.6). We should monitor the impact of this large increase in workforce for one year before hiring
yet another HR manager.
Describe All Funding Sources
General Fund
Describe Future or Ongoing Costs
N/A
Project Status (if applicable)
N/A
FISCAL DETAILS
Expenditures
Reduce proposed budget spending by $197,810 from General Fund 001
Q
Packet Pg. 305
9.6.d
Decision Package Budget Report
City of Edmonds
Decision Package:
Date Budget Year Group Version Priority Duration Approval Status
11/8/22 2023 0 1 Ongoing Pending
Item Description
This is to add incremental funding for Lighthouse city attorney contract services for 2023.
Justification
Edmonds is contracted with Lighthouse Law Group for city attorney services; the current contract between Lighthouse and
the city expires on December 31, 2022. Council is currently working with Lighthouse regarding potential terms of a one-
year contract for city attorney services, from January 1 - December 31, 2023. The current contract contains a 4% fee
escalator clause, such that the flat fee Edmonds pays Lighthouse increases of 4% year over year. As the 2023 contract o
terms are not yet defined, it can be assumed the 2023 fees will be at least 4% higher than 2022. Escalator clauses for •N
other multi -year contracts the city has negotiated are in the range of 4.5% to 5.5%. For this amendment, since it is a one 3
year contract, we will use 5.5% as the escalator clause for purposes of estimating the 2023 incremental budget impact of N
this contract. This estimate will be adjusted up or down depending on the results of negotiations between City Council o
and Lighthouse for a 2023 contract. W
m
Project Status (if applicable) U
0
c�
Pending
Budget Narrative
0
In 2022, Edmonds paid Lighthouse a total of $647,346 (monthly fee of $53,953x12). Applying the 5.5% lift factor z
descripted above to this amount, the 2023 total billed amount would b e $683,045. The incremental impact on the 2023 a
budget of this increase would be $35,699. Again, this total is a placeholder at this point and will be adjusted up or down p
depending on the results of the final contract negotiations between Lighthouse and City Council. s
FISCAL DETAILS
Expenditures
2023 incremental expenditure: $35,699.
Packet Pg. 306
9.6.e
Buckshnis amendments #2 DRAFT FOR 11/13/22
1) Community Services and Economic Development Comp Plan Updates — PRIORITY 1 -
$75K for Community Cultural Plan and $75K for the Economic Development Comp
Plan update.
Justifications:
There are supplemental plans that also need to be updated that are part of the Comprehensive
Plan and due staffing issues —they seem to have fallen through the cracks. The Climate Action
Plan update that I was working on until I retired from the Mayors' Climate Protection
Committee is working on the Climate Action Plan as the original needed to be updated as the
Marsh restoration was even a gem in the City's environmental eye back then. The Community
Cultural Plan was part of the 2016 PROS Plan update and Kristiana was part of that task force.
The Economic Development Plan caused the creation of the Citizens Economic Commission.
Funding will be to create a task force to bring these two plans forward as they are a major
component of the overall comprehensive plan.
Amendment:
• Create a task force for the update of the Community Cultural Plan which will require a
consultant along with a CM, stakeholders, Arts Commission, and administration. Set
aside $75K for this project. Money to come from under -budget funds.
Create a task force for the update of the Economic Development Plan which will require
a consultant along with CMs, stakeholders, Economic Development Commission and
Administration. Set aside $75K for this project. Money to come from under -budget
funds.
2) Non -departmental page 62 - Saving Salmon Club name change to Edmonds Stream
Team
Justifications:
The Edmonds Stream Team is actually the Salmon Club that is utilized for asking from funds and
the Saving Salmon Team is the team that writes the reports. This was brought to my attention
by a citizen this year. No financial impact.
Amendment:
Change budget identifier to reflect reality. Not cost.
3) Development Services Professional Services with no DP numbers — recommend
numbering and voting individually.
Justification:
Packet Pg. 307
9.6.e
Buckshnis amendments #2 DRAFT FOR 11/13/22
Council needs to get a handle on all the consultants being used and for how much in
accumulations as this budget item for professional services has grown significantly since 2021.
For amendments, I will identify what was in the PowerPoint presentation provided by Director
McLaughlin. To save time, I am not going to do a separate justification on these items.
Amendments:
• Remove Aquifer Recharge Code for $75K. Create tasks force to handle the Code Rewrite
(already an amendment of mine under Council) as this costs is excessive since we have already
met with Olympic Water and they have provided Snohomish County's Code 30.62C.330
prohibited uses along with the necessary maps. Page 263 PP
• Remove Building Incentive Program for $30K. Place this on pause and there is no definitions
and/or criteria for the Council to determine necessary codes, designs and criteria is in place.
Page 263PP
• Remove Comprehensive Planning for $62.51K. Council needs an update as to what has been
spent on the Comprehensive Plan and what this funding is to entail and why hasn't the grant
money been used? Page 255 PP as PP page 256 indicates that $60,805 has been spent.
• Remove Building Professional Services for $167K. Pause on this until we get an update from the
Administration on what this consultant plan is and if $106K spent to date, was this a former
budget carry forward or as a Council Member, I am not familiar with this approval. P255 PP
• Pause on $89,250 for 10% design or DP 72. Council pulled this budget amendment and voted it
down this year as there is no design standards, code, definition, criteria, etc. Should the City
Council approve these codes, there are millions of dollars available through the Infrastructure
Bill or Inflation Bill.
• CARRYFORWARDS Page 253 — Please provide the DP for the various components that are
considered carryforwards and I don't recall Council being updated on the Hwy 99 Community
renewal plan.
• Decision Packages which were not identified regarding the Solar Grant page 254. This
amendment is discussed in 11/7/22 amendments in that last year the funding source was
identified as Bond Funding. Finance Committee review this issue during the mid -amendment
process and the budgeting authority may have changed, but the projects were not identified in
the amendment — but dollar amounts matched. So, we need to drill down on that aspect and if
the authority was not moved, Council needs to move the bond funding since the directive for
the bonds does in fact indicated building infrastructure improvements.
• Move Hearing Examiner to page 45 or City Attorney $40K on page PP #261. 1 don't recall the
Hearing Examiner being part of this budget and from a conflict of interest standpoint, I would
think it would be prudent to put this position where the other attorney's are housed.
2
Packet Pg. 308
9.6.e
Buckshnis amendments #2 DRAFT FOR 11/13/22
• Page 258 - Waterfront Issues Study and Climate and Equity Gap analysis needs to be brought
forth to Council. This Waterfront Study report that has NO backup data needs to come forth to
Council and a more comprehensive review be made regarding many of the items that were
presented to Council as the removal of the Edmonds Crossing Project has been on Council's
radar for years now and was to be docketed last year to have that CM2 zoning removed.
4) DP #8 and Page 44 and 45 $136,750 change DP to $16,000
Justification: The Mayor has removed DP #8 and therefore an increase needs to be identified. The
amount is a placeholder and represents an estimated 5.0% increase.
Amendment: Change DP to $16,000 and return remaining funds into under -estimated budget.
3
Packet Pg. 309
Decision Package Budget Report
City of Edmonds
Decision Package: Fire and EMS Information Disclosure
Date Budget Year Group Version Priority Duration Approval Status
11/13/2022 2023 CM Chen and Buckshnis 1 1 On -going Pending
Item Description
Display Fire Services information as part of the City's budget, including revenue sources to fund Fire and EMS
services, such as EMS tax revenue, transport fees paid to Edmonds AND the amount paid from the General Fund
needed to make up the total payment to SCF. Although the Fire District Contract costs is shown on page 63 of the
proposed budget book, the breakdown of these costs, such as SCF contract payments and Station Maintenance wou
Improve transparency.
Justification
Since 2010, City of Edmonds contract with South County Fire for Fire and EMS services. Fire and EMS services are important I
of the City's Public Safety commitment and top priority. The costs are also a very significant part of the City's budget (about $1 C
million in 2021 and 2022) along with Police, Public Works, and other key city functions. Separate financial disclosure of Fire anc
EMS revenue and costs information will result in higher degree of transparency. o
Describe All Fundina Sources a
N/A — no additional funding required for this reporting
m
Describe Future or Ongoing Costs
0
N/A — no additional funding required for this reporting U
Project Status (if applicable)
Fire and EMS financial reporting needed.
FISCAL DETAILS
Expenditures
N/A — no additional funding required for this reporting
Packet Pg. 310
Decision Package Budget Report
City of Edmonds
Decision Package: Police Substation Study
Date Budget Year Group Version Priority Duration Approval Status
11/13/2022 2023 CM Will Chen and Jenna Nand 1 1 On -going Pending
Item Description
Create a task force to conduct the feasibility study for the establishment of a permanent Police Substation along
Highway 99, which will require a consultant along with a CM, stakeholders, and the Police Department.
Justification
A significant portion of Edmonds's police calls reporting criminal activity originates along the Highway 99 corridor. The
implementation of the Highway 99 subarea plan will create even higher population density and greater business activity in the
uptown area. Given the violent crimes that have taken the lives of Edmonds workers in the Highway 99 community in recent year
the addition of a Police Substation is desirable for the safety and security of the community that lives and works along the Highw<
99 corridor.
c
o_
Describe All Funding Sources N
N
General fund 001 for $75,000
0
a�
a�
Describe Future or Ongoing Costs m
One-time —
c
0
U
Protect Status (if applicable)
N/A >
FISCAL DETAILS
Expenditures
Genera fund for $75,000.
Packet Pg. 311
Decision Package Budget Report
City of Edmonds
9.6.e
Proposed Amendment to Decision Package: 15
Date Budget Year Group Version Priority
11/15/2022 2023 CM Jenna Nand 0 1
Item Description
Acquire three new patrol vehicles.
Justification
Duration
One -Time
Approval Status
Pending
While improving our police fleet is a priority under the City of Edmonds' policing power, adding three vehicles to address
operational deficiencies should be adequate for 2023, with the intention of adding another three vehicles in 2024 and the
final three requested vehicles in 2025.
Edmonds PD could use the three new vehicles as a retention incentive rather than as a hiring incentive for the proposed
new class of Commanders, which would address Edmonds Police Department leadership's stated concerns regarding
acquisition and retention of lateral candidates to join the police force.
Describe All Funding Sources
An allocation from the coronavirus funds presently included in the general fund.
Describe Future or Onaoina Costs
Each of the newly acquired vehicles will require commensurate maintenance and replacement expenditures as the assets
age and depreciate in value.
Project Status (if applicable)
N/A.
FISCAL DETAILS
Expenditures
Instead of the requested $714,000.00 for nine new vehicles in Decision Packet #15 in 2023, purchasing only three new
vehicles in 2023 would mean that $238,000.00 would be necessary to add three new vehicles in for the first year of the
phased in purchase plan, a savings of $476,000.00 in the 2023 budget.
4
Packet Pg. 312
9.6.e
Decision Package Budget Report
City of Edmonds
New Decision Package: Charter City Ballot Measure Exploration
Date Budget Year Group Version Priority Duration Approval Status
11/15/2022 2023 CM Jenna Nand 0 1 One -Time Pending
Item Description
Engage a consultant to collaborate with a working group of councilmembers to determine whether to place a ballot
measure before Edmonds voters on whether to become a charter city.
Justification
Presently, Edmonds is a code -based city. The definition the city council and the mayor's positions relies on vaguely -
worded descriptions derived from RCW 35A.11.020, "Powers vested in legislative bodies of noncharter and charter code
cities" and RCW 35A.12.100, "Duties and authority of the mayor —Veto —Tie -breaking vote." The language of these
provisions from the state of Washington is inadequate to specify the roles, responsibilities, and enumerated powers of
each of our branches of local government in the city of Edmonds.
c
To increase government transparency and accountability to the people of Edmonds about the functions of each of its local •N
governmental institutions, Edmonds City Council should engage a consultant to determine whether it would be desirable U)
and appropriate to place before the voters of Edmonds a ballot measure on whether Edmonds should become a charter
city on the 2024 ballot.
6
Describe All Funding Sources a)
An allocation from the Edmonds City Council Professional Services Fund.
m
c
Describe Future or Ongoing Costs 3
0
General fund 001 for $30,000.00 to Edmonds City Council's Professional Services Fund. U
Project Status (if applicable)
N/A.
FISCAL DETAILS
Expenditures
Hire a consultant to work with councilmembers and explore whether to pursue a charter city ballot measure in 2024.
Packet Pg. 313
9.6.e
Decision Package Budget Report
City of Edmonds
New Decision Package: Memorial Benches for Nagendiram Kandasamy and Thanh Vy Ly
Date Budget Year Group Version Priority Duration Approval Status
11/15/2022 2023 CM Jenna Nand 0 1 One -Time Pending
Item Description
Place memorial benches in honor of Edmonds Highway 99 murder victims, Nagendiram Kandasamy and Thanh Vy Ly.
Justification
On Feb. 21, 2020, a well-known and popular 7-Eleven clerk. Nagendiram Kandasamy, was murdered while working at his
job at the 7-Eleven, previously located at 8101 2381' Street SW, Edmonds, WA 98026. Mr. Nagi, as he was affectionately
known to his customers for many years, was beloved by the Highway 99 community and, along with his coworkers, had a
lasting impact on our city.
Not long afterwards, on September 29, 2020, the Highway 99 business community was again shaken by violence when
an innocent young woman, Thanh Vy Ly, was murdered outside of the Boo Han Market, located at 22618 Highway 99, g
Edmonds, WA 98026. Ms. Vy Ly was heroically attempting to protect her friend, an employee of the Boo -Han Market and N
a victim of domestic violence, when she lost her life. 3
In response to the terror and turmoil that these two murders inflicted on the Highway 99 business community in general, o
as well as the friends and families of the victims, the expenditures of $3000.00 per bench would be a small token from the
City of Edmonds to celebrate the lives and lasting impact of each of these individuals. This would be an appropriate .a
expenditure of public funds to ensure that workers in Edmonds know that their lives and contributions to our community m
are valued and that these losses will not be forgotten.
Describe All Funding Sources
N/A. o
U
Describe Future or Ongoing Costs
Each of the newly added benches will require commensurate maintenance and replacement expenditures. z
Project Status (if applicable)
N/A.
FISCAL DETAILS
Expenditures
$6,000.00 for the cost of two memorial benches.
Packet Pg. 314
9.6.f
Amendment to Decision Package #72, Vivian Olson
Item Description- Remove the Green Streets Project at Dayton and Hwy 104 (CIP/CFP PWT 65)
This amendment would leave "as is" the funding for the design of the green street at 236t" and 80,
CIP/CFP PWT 64 ($219,717) and accept the future obligation of constructing it in the sum of $3,500,000.
At the same time, it deletes the Green Streets project at Dayton Street in the current design amount of
$78,027 and the future obligation of $1,600,000.
Justification:
This gives the City its first Green Street for educational purposes and will be an aesthetic upgrade to
this neighborhood in the Gateway District of Hwy 99. It will add stormwater mitigation in the HWY99
Subarea. It takes advantage of the timing of private development (and the private investment in the
involved sidewalk that goes hand in hand with that), and will enhance the pedestrian experience in an
area of the City with growing density.
This request eliminates the design of the Green Street at Hwy 104 and Dayton in its entirety. The
educational value can be met with the other project that has the "why now" factors going for it that this
one lacks.
The recently removed street trees need to be replaced at the Hwy 104 and Dayton site but the road
width can be left as is with a much lower associated cost that should move forward now.
Describe all Funding Sources:
This will decrease decision package 72 ask by 78,027 for design in the 2023 budget and will do away with
the future obligation of 1.6 Million for construction of it. The recently removed trees need to be re-
planted here but the road width can be left as is with a much lower associated cost.
ARPA (Decrease $78,027 now and do away with a $1,600,000 obligation)
Packet Pg. 315
9.6.f
New DP- CP Vivian Olson
Item Description- Electric Leaf Blower Subsidy Program
This request is to build a $250,000 subsidy program in partnership with Edmonds retailer(s) such as
Edmonds Ace Hardware. It will make electric leaf blowers available for purchase at 10% of the regular
price with the turn in of a functioning gas leaf blower.
Edmonds residents (proof of residence and one per household), and landscaping and gardening
professionals (who can show evidence they do jobs in Edmonds) will be eligible for the program.
Most program work will be done by employees of ACE Hardware (and other participating Edmonds -
based retailers, if any). This includes direct selling the blowers to the consumer (90% paid by the City
and 10% paid by the customer) and receiving the functioning gas blowers for destruction.
The program and any volunteer support will be managed by the Community Services and Economic
Development Director. The retailer will collect the functioning gas blowers turned in at no charge to the
City, and Public Works will pick them up when the stockpile warrants.
The program budget is for the 90% electric blower subsidy payments and for the destruction and
disposal of the gas blowers (if the County solid waste operation is unwilling to support the program for
free).
Justification
This program will incent residents and operators of gardening and landscaping businesses to part with
their gas leaf blowers by making the high -quality electric blowers very affordable, and thereby removing
approximately 500 gas blowers from operation in Edmonds. This supports our community climate
goals by improving air quality (reduced carbon emissions) and improves our quality of life (by
reducing noise).
This decision package supports public health, and helps households and businesses, all of which are
allowable uses of ARPA funds.
Describe funding sources
$250,000 ARPA funds, accounts B and/or C, Household Support and Business Support
Packet Pg. 316
9.6.f
Item Description- Adjustment to Planning and Development Services Professional Services
Budget (Budget Presentation at Nov 7 Council Meeting, Nov 7 Agenda Packet pages 247-263)
for Critical Aquifer Recharge Area Code, CP Vivian Olson
Creating an Edmonds Aquifer Recharge Area Code is a critical priority but there is a less costly
way to accomplish that end.
Justification
The professionals on staff at Olympic Water say that the Snohomish County's Critical Aquifer
Recharge Areas Code (Chapter 30.62C of the Snohomish County Code) is very good. As one of
the Snohomish County aquifers is in Esperance (and has the same recharge area that ours does),
recommend providing the code writer the Snohomish County Code to evaluate for any
necessary modifications, a much less time -intensive endeavor than creating it from scratch.
Describe Funding Sources
Decrease Funding $67,500 ($7,500 remaining for 3 weeks of PSA work with a code writer)
Packet Pg. 317
9.6.f
New DP, CP Vivian Olson
Item Description- Financing Volunteer coordinator
Our community has a wonderful culture of volunteerism and that spirit can be better
harnessed, supported, and organized (providing even better returns for the City). With counsel
about the legality of doing so from the City Attorney, the Volunteer Coordinator is proposed as
a donation to the Edmonds Chamber of Commerce for the funding of a position there rather
than creating a City FTE.
With this position in place, those looking to volunteer know where to go to get "plugged in".
And from the other side: a department head needing a grant writer, summer day camp program
leader needing a reader for story time, the staff presenter who realizes that foreign language or
ASL translation would benefit those in attendance, the Parks Director needing help pulling
invasives or planting trees at a community park,... they can check and see if there is a volunteer
who is a good fit before initiating a service purchase or doing that job with staff hours.
Imagine staff taking four hours to review and edit a grant application written by a capable
volunteer (instead of 8 days writing it from scratch themselves).
We are so fortunate to have former leaders of industry and the nonprofit world, scientists,
professors, gardeners, writers, all living in Edmonds and loving it-- and wanting to keep our
taxes down. The only way we can have it all is to do more of it with free labor, especially in this
time of high inflation.
Justification
What the Edmonds Chamber of Commerce accomplishes with 3 staff members (and a legion
of volunteers) is the proof of concept.
Adding this designated Volunteer Coordinator Position at the Chamber would support the
Chamber of Commerce in the many community -focused endeavors already underway which
our residents have come to expect (an Edmonds Kind of Fourth, Halloween Trick or Treating and
the Tree Lighting to name a few), and provide the City a high return on investment as a result
of decreasing needs for staff, professional services, other contracted labor, and small project
management.
The Chamber has already mastered the art of volunteer coordination and the City volunteer
program will be up and running expediently. The Economic Development Director would serve
as the Chamber of Commerce liaison as it relates to this City -funded position.
Describe Funding Sources
$65,000 General funds
Packet Pg. 318
9.6.f
Community Services and Economic Development
c
O
U
A
0
m
a�
m
U
c
O
v
T
O
Z
N
d
U
C
7
O
U
O
E
t
U
2
r
Q
Packet Pg. 319
Decision Package Budget Report
City of Edmonds
Decision Package: Paine —Home Impvmt Grants
Date Budget Year Group Version Priority Duration Approval Status
11-1-2022 2023 CM Paine. 0 1 Duration
Item Description
This proposal would allow low-income homeowners to apply for a grant of up to $5,000.00 apiece for needed home
repairs. There are local nonprofit resources to provide the construction repairs for these low-income homeowners.
Justification
This year, the Human Services Program was asked to provide an updated report on Housing and Homelessness in
Edmonds — the Kone Report.
This request meets many of the 2022 identified cost burdened community needs, per the Kon6 Report update. The
update includes that 40% of Edmonds households are cost burdened; the percentage of unhoused residents over 65
years old is increasing; and that 21 % of Edmonds households are severely cost burdened.
Edmonds residents who are cost burdened and are in need of home repair services would benefit, thus aiding in keeping
people in their existing homes.
Describe All Funding Sources
Position funded by ARPA funding.
Describe Future or Ongoinq Costs
On -going costs related to this new 0.5 FTE position are salary and benefits, assuming we would fill the position as a 20
hours per week employee. This position will help to manage and facilitate hundreds of hours of habitat restoration,
invasive plant removal, plant installations, beach clean-ups, and park maintenance.
Project Status (if applicable)
NA
FISCAL DETAILS:
Expenditures
ARPA Expenditures
(need coding from Finance)
Total Operating Expenditures:
Total Expenditures:
Net Budget:
50,000.00
50,000.00
50,000.00
Packet Pg. 320
Decision Package Budget Report
City of Edmonds
Decision Package: Paine-- Pks Volunteer Coord 0.5 FTE
Date Budget Year Group Version Priority Duration Approval Status
11-1-2022 2023 CM Paine. 0 1 Ongoing
Item Description
This is a new, part-time position of Volunteer Coordinator would plan, develop, and manage the City's Parks volunteer
programs, including the development of goals, policies and procedures, and marketing. Emphasis of the volunteer
program in on the outdoor volunteer programs, including park/trails stewardship, native plant projects, and other
restoration work in our parks/open spaces.
Justification
The City of Edmonds has a robust volunteer community of services, organizations, groups, and individuals. The Parks,
Recreation, Cultural Arts, and Human Services Department provides only a few opportunities for volunteer events and
activities due to staff limitations to manage a volunteer program. By providing a dedicated City Volunteer Coordinator, the
city will be able to leverage a part-time employee into many more community volunteer opportunities, and hundreds of
hours of work in our parks and public spaces.
This request meets many of the 2022 Park, Recreation & Open Space (PROS) Plan goals. Goal 1 — Engagement
Objective 1.1; Goal 2 — Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, Obj. 2.6; Goal 3 — Parks, Trails, & Open Space, Obj. 3.7, 3.8, and 3.9;
Goal 5 - Natural Resource & Habitat Conservation, Obj 5.1; Goal 6 — Climate Change, Adaptation & Resiliency, Obj 6.4
and 6.5; and Goal 9 — Parks Operations & Administration, Obj 9.5.
Describe All Funding Sources
Position funded by the General Fund.
Describe Future or Ongoing Costs
Ongoing costs related to this new 0.5 FTE position are salary and benefits, assuming we would fill the position as a 20
hours per week employee. This position will help to manage and facilitate hundreds of hours of habitat restoration,
invasive plant removal, plant installations, beach clean-ups, and park maintenance.
Project Status (if applicable)
NA
FISCAL DETAILS:
Expenditures
Operating Expenditures
001.000.64.571.21.11.00 Salaries
001.000.64.571.21.23.00 Benefits
001.000.64.571.21.31.00 Supplies
Total Operating Expenditures:
Total Expenditures:
Net Budget:
30,555.00
10,694.00
1,000.00
42,249.00
42,249.00
42,249.00
Packet Pg. 321
Decision Package Budget Report
City of Edmonds
Decision Package: Paine - Downtown Parking lot lease
Date Budget Year Group Version Priority Duration Approval Status
11/03/2022 2023 CM Paine. 0 1 On -going
Item Description
This proposal is to allow the Administration to lease private parking lots located in the Downtown business zone. The
lease(s) would be for Saturdays and Sundays, year-round.
Justification
One of the most frequently heard concerns/complaints is that the parking in the downtown zone is too limited and/or hard
to find. By leasing the private parking lots and making these spaces available, at no charge, there would be an immediate
increase in the number of parking spaces on the weekend. By making this a year-round lease, these parking spots would
add a parking space resource for all of our year-round activities - Spring, Summer, and Winter markets as well as other
events. In addition to being a new parking resource, by having this be a year-round lease, visitors and residents would be
able to rely on the availability of those parking spaces.
Describe All Funding Sources
General Fund
Describe Future or Ongoing Costs
On -going
Project Status (if applicable)
NA
FISCAL DETAILS
Expenditures
(need coding from Finance)
Total Expenditures: 40,000.00
Net Budget: 40,000.00
Packet Pg. 322
Decision Package Budget Report
City of Edmonds
Decision Package: Paine CT — ORCA Card Rebate
Date Budget Year Group Version Priority Duration Approval Status
11/03/2022 2023 CM Paine 0 1 Ongoing
Item Description
A 50% reimbursement of ORCA/Community Transit passes of the actual, direct costs paid for by any Edmonds resident.
For example, if a resident pays $50.00 per month, themselves for their transit pass - they would come to the city office
and receive a subsidy of $25.00.
Justification
Community Transit will bring additional bus routes into Edmonds starting in 2024. This subsidy would add an incentive to
use more public transportation. This subsidy will help to support the Climate Action Plan goals of reducing Vehicle Miles
Traveled (VMT) which is one of the key measurements and indicators in reducing Edmonds carbon footprint.
Describe All Fundina Sources
Ending fund balance
Describe Future or Ongoinq Costs
Ongoing
Project Status (if applicable)
IWA
FISCAL DETAILS
Expenditures
(need coding from Finance)
Total Expenditures: 10,000.00
Net Budget: 10,000.00
Packet Pg. 323
Decision Package Budget Report
City of Edmonds
9.6.f
Decision Package: PAINE - Lynnwood Neighborhood Center
Date Budget Year Group
2023 CM Paine
Item Description
Version Priority Duration Approval Status
0 1 One -Time
The Lynnwood Neighborhood Center (LNC) is being built next door the Trinity Lutheran Church located at 641" Ave W and
196th, in Lynnwood and a short distance from SR99. The Lynnwood Neighborhood Center will be a service hub in
partnership with the Volunteers of America - Western Washington and other community nonprofits to provide an extensive
set of social, educational, behavioral, and medical services, as well as being a gathering place for the broader community.
https://www.voaww.org/Inc
Justification
The LNC will be a community center that builds on the strengths of our local nonprofits and direct service providers and
brings these elements into one community center. The planned services, which are already contracted include the Boys
and Girls Club, the Center for Human Services, Medical Teams International (dental, medical and prescription - one stop
services), the Korean Community Service Center, Latino Educational Training Institute (LETI), a commercial kitchen, a
space for tutoring and childcare, a gymnasium and playground, and a community room.
This community center will serve many of our community members needs and also these services will support our
unhoused population, our residents who are at risk for being unhoused, Edmonds students, and our individuals and
families who live below 200% of the federal poverty level.
Although this center is located in Lynnwood, many of our residents will use this center and help our resident have access
to free or low cost services.
Describe All Fundina Sources
Describe Future or Ongoinq Costs
On -time
Project Status (if applicable)
NA
FISCAL DETAILS
Expenditures
(need coding from Finance)
Total Expenditures: 150,000.00
Net Budget: 150,000.00
Packet Pg. 324
Decision Package Budget Report
City of Edmonds
Decision Package: Paine — Recycle Coordinator Position
Date Budget Year Group Version Priority Duration Approval Status
2023 CM Paine. 0 1 On -going
Item Description
Restore the Recycling Coordinator position.
Juwtifiratinn
Since the retirement of our past Recycling Coordinator, there has been a gap in the needed services that had been
fulfilled by this position.
This position was charged with
• working with regional organizations on waste reduction campaigns,
• coordinated community events like Taming Bigfoot,
• helped craft language around code revisions banning plastic and other environmental hazards,
• worked with businesses around town on waste reduction initiatives, and
• many other initiatives that were helping our community reduce pollutants and greenhouse gas emissions
The reinstatement of this position would provide support for community resiliency efforts, our Climate Action Plan, and
overall waste reduction strategies.
The Dept of Ecology grant cycle will begin mid - 2023, the full-time level of funding won't be needed until 2024.
Describe All Funding Sources
50% (or more) of the salary is funded by the Dept of Ecology Community Participation (CPG) grants, Federal
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) grants, etc.
50% of the salary is funded by General Fund
Describe Future or Ongoing Costs
On -going General Fund support, for salary and benefits.
Project Status (if applicable)
NA
FISCAL DETAILS
Expenditures
(need coding from Finance)
The position was in the NR7 pay scale with the range $68,284.00 - $91,506.00, grant funding is anticipated to pay for half,
at minimum.
Total Expenditures: 50,000.00
Net Budget: 50,000.00
Packet Pg. 325
9.6.f
City of
EDMONDS
Washington
RECYCLING COORDINATOR
Department:
Public Works
Pay Grade:
NR-7
Bargaining Unit:
Non -Represented
FLSA Status:
Exempt
Revised Date:
November 2012
Reports To:
Public Works Director
POSITION PURPOSE: Under general direction, plans, coordinates and monitors the City's Recycling Program
including: waste reduction, recycling, composting, household hazardous waste and other related programs and
activities; establishes goals for the program and ensures compliance with State and County regulations; plans
for and provides public information and educational programs; monitors, maintains and prepares grant
applications/renewals for the State matching grant and prepares required reports and documentation.
ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES:
The following duties ARE NOT intended to serve as a comprehensive list of all duties performed by all
employees in this classification, only a representative summary of the primary duties and responsibilities.
Incumbent(s) may not be required to perform all duties listed and may be required to perform additional,
position -specific duties.
• Oversees and coordinates public information on waste reduction, recycling, composting, household
hazardous waste, natural yard care, proper disposal options and opportunities and any other aspect of
solid waste handling and disposition.
• Serves as the community's resource for the latest information on the range of solid waste issues and
proper disposal opportunities.
• Responds directly to all inquiries from the public using all means of public information and outreach
methods to provide a consistent message to the community to promote and inform the public regarding
the recycling program.
• Administers programs that promote effective recycling or reduction strategies.
• Maintains collaboration with and serves as liaison to the City's solid waste haulers, private sector
recyclers, the County's solid waste management staff and other local and regional solid waste program
managers.
• Complies and maintains databases to track solid waste tonnage and participation in all sectors
including: residential, multi -family and commercial.
• Conducts site visits to all sectors of the community to establish or maintain the position as a resource for
information, presentations, assessments or assistance in proper collection options or appropriate solid
waste handling.
• Monitors and evaluates the City's in-house waste removal systems and practices; provides relevant
information, advice and direction to City employees on recycling; handles proper removal and recycling
of unwanted electronics, cell phones, batteries and other materials from City departments.
• Serves as contract Recycling Coordinator for the neighboring City of Lynnwood and administers and
provides similar recycling services/duties for their City.
• Administers the same type of State grant for Waste Prevention and Recycling outreach and performs all
of the above duties for the City of Lynnwood and as outlined in an Inter -local Agreement approved by
both City Councils.
Recycling Coordinator No Packet Pg. 326
9.6.f
JOB DESCRIPTION
Recycling Coordinator
• Assists with public education on stormwater pollution, water and energy conservation, watershed
awareness and related environmental areas such as the recent outreach to retail businesses affected
by the City's restriction on plastic bags at checkout stands.
• Coordinates the public participation program for stenciling storm drains; leads schools and scout groups
in arranged stenciling activities; handles the waiver forms with participants and maintains the supply of
stencils, spray paint, safety vests and more for these activities.
• Participates on the Mayor's Climate Protection Committee and subcommittees.
• Participates in the review process for permit seekers for commercial or multi -family development,
specifically following adherence to the Publics Works' policy on minimum standards in regard to solid
waste collection areas or enclosures.
• Conducts field checks on proposed or approved development sites before, during and after construction
to aid in the completion of the review process.
• Collects data and works with other City personnel and the public utilities to provide appropriate data for
creating a City operations greenhouse gas emission report and report on community -wide emissions.
• Attends meetings with the Everett Water Utility's Water Conservation Subcommittee and the County's
STORM group (Storm Water Education) and meets with County solid waste personnel and hauling
company managers as needed.
• Attends the quarterly Snohomish County Solid Waste Advisory Committee meetings as the
representative for the City.
• Prepares applications for the State match grant which includes determining scope of work; prepares all
required reports; gathers and verifies expenditure vouchers for reimbursement and writes final reports at
grant period conclusion.
• Maintains City membership with the Washington State Recycling Association and the Zero Waste
Washington organizations.
Required Knowledge of:
• Solid waste collection systems, recyclable and recoverable materials.
• Composting and organics recovery.
• Proper placement of garbage and recycling containers and enclosures.
• Basic grant preparation procedures and methods.
• Public health and City codes, as well as other local, State and Federal laws and rules and regulations
associated with the program.
• Local vendors and sources of supply available to the program.
• Effective oral and written communication principles and practices to include customer service, public
relations and public speaking.
• Record keeping techniques and practices.
• Modern office procedures, methods, and equipment including computers and computer applications
such as: word processing, spreadsheets and statistical databases sufficient to perform assignments.
• English usage, spelling, grammar and punctuation.
• Principles of business letter writing.
Required Skill in:
• Current techniques and methods for collection, disposal, storage and recycling of solid waste materials.
• Federal, state, county laws and local health and environmental codes, rules and regulations relating to
solid waste operations and hazardous waste issues.
• Planning, coordinating and monitoring the City's Recycling Program, including waste reduction,
recycling composting and other related programs and activities.
Recycling Coordinator No
Packet Pg. 327
9.6.f
JOB DESCRIPTION
Recycling Coordinator
• Coordinating and developing promotional materials including: brochures, posters, flyers, mailers, signs
and displays and activities for the program; conducting presentations to local schools and other
agencies.
• Interpreting, applying, and explaining Federal, State and County solid waste and recycling laws and
codes.
• Preparing grant applications and administering and writing progress reports.
• Utilizing personal computer software programs and other relevant software affecting assigned work.
• Establishing and maintaining effective working relationships with staff, management, vendors, outside
agencies, community groups and the general public.
• Preparing and maintaining a variety of records, files and reports.
• Communicating effectively verbally and in writing including: customer service, public relations and
public speaking.
MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS:
Education and Experience:
Associates Degree or two year technical certificate in environmental health, urban planning, public
administration or related field and two years of experience in planning and coordinating waste reduction,
recycling, composting or related programs that includes grant administration, records management, and heavy
public contact; OR an equivalent combination of education, training and experience.
Required Licenses or Certifications:
Valid State of Washington Driver's License.
Must be able to successfully complete and pass a background check.
WORKING CONDITIONS:
Environment:
• Office environment, occasional field work.
• Driving a vehicle to conduct site visits.
Physical Abilities:
• Operating a computer keyboard or other office equipment.
• Hearing, speaking or otherwise communicating to exchange information in person or on the phone.
• Sitting, standing or otherwise remaining in a stationary position for extended periods of time.
• Ability to wear appropriate personal protective equipment based on required City Policy.
Hazards:
• Occasional exposure to dangerous machinery and hazardous chemicals.
Incumbent Signature:
Date:
Department Head: Date:
Recycling Coordinator No
Packet Pg. 328
9.6.f
Decision Package Budget Report
City of Edmonds
New Decision Package: Trash Cans and Recycling Bins
Date Budget Year Group Version Priority Duration Approval Status
11/15/2022 2023 CM Jenna Nand 0 1 One -Time Pending
Item Description
Add city -owned and maintained trash cans and recycling bins to the 5 Corners, Firdale, Perrinville, and the Highway 99
International Business Districts.
Justification
Presently, the City of Edmonds maintains city -owned and maintained trash cans and recycling bins at regular intervals in
our historic downtown business district and the downtown Edmonds waterfront. This decision packet is designed to help
our Parks, Recreation, and Human Services staff extend the geographic footprint of city -owned and maintained trash cans
and recycling bins to provide sanitation, beautification, and encourage pedestrian activity to support business activity in
each of Edmonds' other business districts. This Decision Packet requests the addition of a minimum of four trash cans
and four recycling bins per business district, for a minimum addition of 16 trash cans and 16 recycling bins in the city. o
This is an appropriate use of American Rescue Plan Act funds since maintaining the cleanliness of our open spaces and 3
increasing the commercial attractiveness of Edmonds' business districts would directly correspond to Congress' stated v
desire that ARPA funds be used by local governments in responding to the economic and public health impacts of o
COVID-19. Edmonds businesses have experienced severe hardship during the COVID-19 pandemic, especially our brick- m
and -mortar retailers and restaurants. The addition of city -owned and maintained trash cans and recycling bins to increase
beautification and basic cleanliness of each of the business districts is a simple way to incentivize increased commercial
activity in each of Edmonds Business Districts. m
U
c
Describe All Funding Sources o
An allocation from the coronavirus funds presently included in the general fund. v
ti
T
0
Z
Describe Future or Ongoing Costs U)
d
Each additional city -owned and maintained trash can and recycling bin will require additional labor expenditures for Parks,
Recreation, and Human Services. U
3
Each of the newly added benches will require commensurate maintenance and replacement expenditures. o
U
0
Project Status (if applicable) E
N/A. U
2
r
Q
FISCAL DETAILS
Expenditures
This decision packet seeks to add $84,500.00 to Parks, Recreation, and Human Services' budget for the first year that the
city seeks to add 16 trash cans and 16 recycling bins to the other business districts of Edmonds. Trash can and recycling
receptacles cost $1500.00 each, so adding 32 additional receptacles throughout the other business districts would cost an
estimated $48,000.00 in a one-time cost of materials. Associated labor costs in the first year that these receptacles would
be added are estimated at $36,500 per year in either hours devoted by the department's existing staff or in new hires to
complete the additional labor required to service these 32 additional receptacles.
In subsequent years, an estimated additional labor cost of $36,500.00 per year in staff time diverted from other projects or
in acquiring new staff hires necessary to empty and maintain the additional receptacles.
Packet Pg. 329
Decision Package Budget Report
9.6.f
City of Edmonds
New Decision Package: Memorial Benches
Date Budget Year Group Version Priority
11/15/2022 2023 CM Jenna Nand 0 1
Duration Approval Status
Ongoing Pending
Item Description
Extend the memorial bench program's geographic footprint to publicly owned locations in the 5 Corners, Firdale,
Perrinville, and the Highway 99 International Business Districts.
Justification
Presently, the City of Edmonds maintains 156 memorial benches throughout our historic downtown business district,
Seaview Park, Hickman Park, Haines Wharf Park, Hutt Park, Interurban Trail, Library Plaza, Pine St. Park, Sam Stamm
Overlook, City Park, Civic Park and the downtown Edmonds waterfront. These benches are leased for 20 years at a cost
of $3000.00 per bench. This decision packet is designed to help our Parks, Recreation, and Human Services staff extend
the geographic footprint of the memorial bench program to provide seating, beautification, and encourage pedestrian
activity to support business activity in each of Edmonds' other business districts. This Decision Packet requests the
addition of a minimum of four memorial benches per business district, for a minimum addition of 16 benches
geographically distributed around the city.
This is an appropriate use of American Rescue Plan Act funds since beautification of our open spaces and increasing
pedestrian accessibility to Edmonds' business districts would directly correspond to Congress' stated desire that ARPA
funds be used by local governments in responding to the economic and public health impacts of COVID-19. Edmonds
businesses have experienced severe hardship during the COVID-19 pandemic, especially our brick -and -mortar retailers
and restaurants. The addition of benches to increase beautification and walkability of each of the business districts is a
simple way to incentivize increased pedestrian activity and hopefully commercial activity in each of Edmonds Business
Districts.
Describe All Funding Sources
An allocation from the coronavirus funds presently included in the general fund.
Describe Future or Ongoing Costs
Each of the newly added benches will require commensurate maintenance and replacement expenditures.
Project Status (if applicable)
N/A.
FISCAL DETAILS
Expenditures
An additional 16 memorial benches will require an initial expenditure of a minimum of $64,000.00 for the purchase of the
benches, which could potentially be defrayed by the leasing of the benches to the public.
16 benches would require an estimated additional 200 hours in labor time for the installation and maintenance of the
benches by Parks, Recreation, and Human Services staff, necessitating additional labor expenditures in that department's
budget.
c
0
U
A
0
m
a�
m
U
c
0
V
Packet Pg. 330
9.6.f
Decision Package Budget Report
City of Edmonds
New Decision Package: Corner Parks, Flower Baskets, and Poles
Date Budget Year Group Version Priority Duration Approval Status
11/15/2022 2023 CM Jenna Nand 0 1 One -Time Pending
Item Description
Add corner parks, hanging flower baskets and poles to the 5 Corners, Firdale, Perrinville, and the Highway 99
International Business Districts.
Justification
Presently, the City of Edmonds maintains corner park landscape beds and hanging flower baskets and poles at regular
intervals in our historic downtown business district.
This decision packet is designed to help our Parks, Recreation, and Human Services staff extend the geographic footprint
of corner park flowerbeds, flower baskets, and poles for the purpose of beautifying and encouraging commercial tourism
c
and pedestrian activity to support business activity in each of Edmonds' other business districts.
Under the terms of the Goffette bequest, the funds donated to the city can be "used for hanging baskets, street comer
N
flower planting and maintenance" to support flowerbeds and flower baskets in the city of Edmonds.
o
This is an appropriate use the Goffette donation since it would meet the stated purpose of the bequest. Adding a minimum
a)
of two corner park flowerbeds and four signposts bearing flower baskets to each of the business districts is a simple way
0
to incentivize increased commercial activity in each of Edmonds Business Districts.
m
American Rescue Plan Act funds can be utilized to fund the purchase and placement of poles in the other Edmonds c
Business Districts to hang flower baskets in the 5 Corners, Firdale, Perrinville, and the Highway 99 International Business o
Districts. v
This is an appropriate use of American Rescue Plan Act funds since increasing the commercial attractiveness of
Edmonds' business districts would directly correspond to Congress' stated desire that ARPA funds be used by local
governments in responding to the economic and public health impacts of COVID-19. Edmonds businesses have
experienced severe hardship during the COVID-19 pandemic, especially our brick -and -mortar retailers and restaurants.
The addition of sign -posts capable of bearing hanging flower baskets and historical and interpretive signs would increase
beautification of each of Edmonds Business Districts. This is a simple way to incentivize increased commercial activity in
each of Edmonds Business Districts and aid in their recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic.
Describe All Funding Sources
An allocation from the Goffette Donation.
An allocation from the coronavirus funds presently included in the general fund.
Describe Future or Ongoing Costs
Each additional city -owned and maintained corner parks, flower baskets, and poles will require additional labor
expenditures for Parks, Recreation, and Human Services.
Each of the newly added corner parks, flower baskets, and poles will require commensurate maintenance and
replacement expenditures on a yearly basis.
Project Status (if applicable)
N/A.
FISCAL DETAILS
Expenditures
Presently, the 2023 Proposed Budget lists the Parks, Recreation, and Human Services flower program as costing
$48,664.00 in city funds.
Packet Pg. 331
9.6.f
Decision Package Budget Report
City of Edmonds
This decision packet seeks to add $70,400.00 to Parks, Recreation, and Human Services' budget for the first year that the
city seeks to add hanging flower baskets and poles to the other business districts of Edmonds. Flower poles cost
$4000.00 each, so adding 16 additional flower poles throughout the other business districts would cost an estimated
$64,000.00 in a one-time cost of materials. Flower baskets cost $200.00 each, so adding 32 additional flower baskets
would add an initial cost of $6400.00.
In subsequent years, additional flower baskets will need to be purchased at a cost of $200.00 each, so adding 32
additional flower baskets would add an ongoing annual cost of $6400.00. Each flower basket owned by the city of
Edmonds must be hand -watered four times per week during the summer, for an estimated additional labor cost of
$6000.00 per year in staff time diverted from other projects or in acquiring new staff hires necessary to water and maintain
the additional flower baskets.
This decision packet also seeks to add $126,000.00 to Parks, Recreation, and Human Services' budget for the first year
that the city seeks to add corner park flower beds to each of other business districts of Edmonds. Each corner park flower
bed requires a minimum of $15,000.00 one-time cost initially. So the addition of eight corner park flower beds would
require $120,000.00 in one-time cost of materials.
In subsequent years, additional costs associated with the eight additional corner park flower beds would require an
additional labor cost of $6000.00 per year in staff time diverted from other projects or in acquiring new staff hires
necessary to water and maintain the additional corner park flower beds.
This Decision Packet seeks to add an additional $64,000.00 in ARPA funds to the Parks, Recreation, and Human
Services budget to begin the process in 2023 of locating sites and constructing a minimum of four flower basket poles in
each of Edmonds' four other business districts, for a total of 16 poles.
This Decision Packet also seeks to direct $132,400.00 from the Goffette Bequest in 2023 to begin the process of locating
sites and constructing a minimum of two corner parks for each of Edmonds four other business districts, for a total of eight
additional corner parks. And this Decision Packet would also seek to directly fund the addition of flower baskets to each of
the newly added signposts, for a total of an additional 32 flower baskets per year.
c
O
U
2
0
m
a�
m
U
c
O
U
T
O
z
N
d
U
C
7
O
U
O
E
U
2
r
Q
Packet Pg. 332
9.6.g
Staff Proposed Changes
DP # or New
Expense Increase
Revenue Increase
Eden DP
Item
Submitter
Fund
Description
(Decrease)
(Decrease)
Str-23010
75
Planning & Development
125
2023 Pedestrian Safety Program
60,585.00
2,085.00
410-23005
14
Police Dept.
001
Patrol Support
(755,422.00)
410-23005
14
Police Dept.
001
Patrol Support
633,852.00
410-23001
2-N
Police Dept.
001
Community Engagement Package
121,570.00
640-23004
15-N
Parks
001
Changes to Recreation Programs
60,879.00
60,879.00
Human Services
001
Reduction in Human Services Program
(335,000.00)
Cap-23004
29-N
Engineering
001
Edmonds Marsh Water Quality Improvement Project
30,000.00
422
Edmonds Marsh Water Quality Improvement Project
366,843.00
214,007.00
720-23001
28-N
Public Works
001
Design costs for New Roof for Material Bunker
25,000.00
111
Design costs for New Roof for Material Bunker
25,000.00
25,000.00
421
Design costs for New Roof for Material Bunker
12,500.00
422
Design costs for New Roof for Material Bunker
25,000.00
423
Design costs for New Roof for Material Bunker
12,500.00
Str-23001
64
Engineering
001
2023 Pavement Overlay Program
(18,400.00)
112
2023 Pavement Overlay Program
(500,000.00)
New
Police Dept.
001
K-9 Package (waiting for additional information)
670-23004
24-N
Engineering
001
Commute Trip Reduction
18,000.00
New
Finance
All Funds VEBA Amounts (waiting for amounts)
680-23001
27-N
Public Works
001
Street Vehicle Configuration Equipment
208,000.00
511
Street Vehicle Configuration Equipment
208,000.00
208,000.00
New
ED/CS -ARPA
142
Household Suport Grant Program
1,000,000.00
New
ED/CS -ARPA
142
General Business Support Program
50,000.00
New
ED/CS -ARPA
142
Tourism Support
75,000.00
New
ED/CS -ARPA
142
Non -Profit Support
500,000.00
360-23001
8
Finance
001
In -House Prosecuting Attorney
(126,750.00)
IF
O
.N
N
7
t)
N
8
d
7
m
_
7
O
<.i
O
�I
N
C
s
V
N
O
Q.
O
L
IL
M
Cn
m
E
z
M
Q
Packet Pg. 333