2021-07-20 City Council - Full Minutes-2871 - ConsentEDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MEETING
APPROVED MINUTES
July 20, 2021
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Mike Nelson, Mayor
Susan Paine, Council President
Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember
Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember
Luke Distelhorst, Councilmember
Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember (arrived 7:02 p.m.)
Vivian Olson, Councilmember
Laura Johnson, Councilmember
ALSO PRESENT
Brook Roberts, Student Representative
1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE
STAFF PRESENT
Phil Williams, Public Works Director
Patrick Doherty, Econ. Dev & Comm. Serv. Dir.
Dave Turley, Finance Director
Rob English, City Engineer
Zack Richardson, Stormwater Engineer
Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
Scott Passey, City Clerk
Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator
Dave Rohde, GIS Analyst
The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Nelson in the Council
Chambers, 250 5t1i Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute.
Mayor Nelson explained this is the first hybrid meeting and recognized there may be some technical
challenges.
2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Councilmember L. Johnson read the City Council Land Acknowledge Statement: "We acknowledge the
original inhabitants of this place, the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and their successors the Tulalip
Tribes, who since time immemorial have hunted, fished, gathered, and taken care of these lands. We
respect their sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and we honor their sacred spiritual connection
with the land and water."
3. ROLL CALL
City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present with the exception of
Councilmember Buckshnis (who arrived at approximately 7:02 p.m.)
4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT
PAINE, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY. (Councilmember Buckshnis was not present for the vote.)
5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 20, 2021
Page 1
Mayor Nelson described the procedures for audience comments.
Mike McCausland, Edmonds, explained he has a legal conforming duplex on his property on 3rd
Avenue North. The east property line is on 6' Avenue North and the west property line is on 3rd Avenue
North. The City's Public Works Department is planning to install a stormwater rain garden along his
property line in the right-of-way on 6t' Avenue North. He is opposed to the rain garden and believes his
rights as a property owners are being compromised as well as taken advantage of. He was surprised to
learn the proposed rain garden, which impacts private property, does not require signage advising of the
project and to allow public comment as the City would require from any private development. He
discussed his opposition to the rain garden with Public Works Director Phil Williams, Public Works
Engineer Zack Richardson, Planning Division Manager Rob Chave and the Mayor's Executive Assistant
Carolyne LaFave; no resolution to his opposition has been reached. As he was unable to find a source to
formally address his opposition, he was bringing his concerns to the City Council. The proposed rain
garden takes away development opportunity for his property and the ability to add a driveway entrance to
his property off 6' Avenue North. As measured by himself with a tape measure, the lot size is just under
12,000 square feet but could be slightly larger. The current zoning is single family RS-6 6,000 square foot
minimum lot size. In accordance with the GMA, and optimum economic land use, his property lends
itself well to subdivision into two lots for two single family homes. There is a development under
construction on Daley and 4t' Avenue doing the exact same thing. Taking away the ability to reasonably
install a driveway eliminates the feasibility of subdividing this property. Email correspondence with Mr.
Richardson advised he would still have the option to install a driveway by building a bridge over the rain
garden or with offset mitigation, both at his expense. He questioned the City allowing him to build a
bridge in the public right-of-way as well as why any expense would be his responsibility since the City is
building something that impacts his property. He pointed out the same issue would arise if he wanted to
install a garage in his backyard or an accessory dwelling unit.
Ken Reidy, Edmonds, commented it was good to be back in Council Chambers. He explained Edmonds
adopted the power of initiative and referendum in 1985. A unanimous vote is required to pass an
emergency ordinance. Council has long acted like an emergency ordinance can be passed with a super
majority vote. Tonight Council is discussing an ordinance creating the Edmonds Rescue Plan. The
discussion involves Ordinance 4189; the City has long acted as if Ordinance 4189 was effective June 23,
2020 but that is not true because the vote on Ordinance 4189 was not unanimous. He requested disclosure
during tonight's meeting regarding how this mistake will be addressed. Tonight the Council is also
discussing a resolution adopting Council Rules of Procedure. The proposed rules include a new Code of
Conduct adopted by motion on January 26, 2021. There is a Code of Ethics that applies to all elected
officials, but is not enforced and no procedures or policies exist to govern enforcement. The City's
personnel policies contain a general Code of Conduct; all employees are expected to treat the public as
their most valued customer. He questioned who doesn't reply to emails from their most valued customer.
Via a public records request, he obtained an email from the former Finance Director to the Mayor seeking
permission to reply to an email he sent last year; he never received a reply.
Mr. Reidy continued, the Code of Conduct for City Council adopted earlier this year says that no
Councilmember shall dominate proceedings. Despite this, a Councilmember made a seven -minute
comment during last week's Council meeting that was not specific to the item on the agenda. He
questioned what happened the next time a Councilmember wanted to do the same. He requested the
Council advise their constituents how existing rules and codes will be enforced before adopting new
Council Rules of Procedure. The proposed rules state public comment time cannot be donated by one
speaker to another; he questioned why when it had been allowed in the past. The City Council needs more
time to review the proposed Council Rules of Procedure for completeness; the proposed rules discuss
items requiring four votes but are silent on items requiring a unanimous vote. Considering all the mistakes
made since 1985, he requested a section for items that require a unanimous vote be included. He
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 20, 2021
Page 2
requested the Council add a rule granting a speaker one additional minute if the City Attorney or City
Staff address the public comments after the comment is made. City Council represents citizens and
citizens should get the last word before decisions are made.
William Lighter stated he was not a resident of Edmonds and was speaking on the Perrinville Creek
restoration project and the use of federal COVID funds for improvements on Perrinville Creek. The
$3.7M is a good start to repair the damage to Perrinville Creek caused in large party by the fish -killing,
flow -splitting weir installed by the City of Edmonds to basically benefit two property owners. That fish -
killer weir has been a drain on the City's expenses and the ductal iron pipe under the BNSF tracks is
badly corroded. He documented that and spoke before the Council nine years ago. The culvert has only
gotten worse since then. A track failure and a derailment into Browns Bay would be catastrophic, not only
the potential loss of human life but also environmental damage caused by the contents of numerous
railcars carrying bulk and crude entering Puget Sound as well as chemicals on the tracks. Replacing the
culvert and removing the flow splitter on Perrinville Creek is a good start but more needs to be done,
particularly to replace the culvert on Talbot Road above the BNSF tracks which also obstructs fish
passage and salmon migration. He commended the City for spending the money to repair and replace the
culvert under the railroad tracks and hoped the City could find the money and resources to do more to
replace the culvert under Talbot Road.
Natalie Seitz, Edmonds, commented on the lack of public investment in SR-99 communities. She
disclosed that she is White and lives in the SR-99 community and that some of her comments align with
her interests but are not related to her specifically. She was very frustrated by the Council's discussion of
the Civic Center playfield Park Construction contracts. She questioned how she should respond to a call
to action to pay more than just lip service to the blatant inequity of this park that is in and of itself lip
service. Functionally, Councilmember L. Johnson said with her comments what all other
Councilmembers present said with their votes and their silence; it does not matter. The equity of this
decision does not matter because lots of decisions, time and money had already been invested, hundreds if
not thousands of decisions to redevelop Civic Center Playfield and invest more public funds in an area
that is already briming with parks. Each one was an opportunity to consider the location, size and scope
and each fell short. Looking at the 2021 Edmonds Capital Projects Map, this project is hardly isolated in
demonstrating where the City chooses to spend public funds. This is not a mistake, it is institutional;
when institutional inequities align with greater concentration of minorities and people of color, it is
known as institutional racism. She encouraged the City and Council to look at its decision -making
process to identify and address why SR-99 communities continue to receive little public investment in
light of the proportion of the population it represents. However, if it is not enough to matter for any
individual decision, nothing will change. It is not enough to matter that the Civic Center Playfield
contract does not include a parking lot for all the people in the SR-99 communities that the City fantasies
will regularly access and benefit from this park. It is not enough to matter that when the City chooses to
build nearly all the 2021 capital projects and $15M on this park, the value of nearby properties and
businesses increase and that is how public investment becomes concentrated private wealth in the Bowl.
Ms. Seitz continued, it is not enough to matter that if it not under the direct supervision of the City of
Edmonds, it does not count by code as parks when the City Council and other residents identify assets of
neighboring jurisdictions as good enough to serve the SR-99 corridor communities. The insinuation that
the dilapidated play structure north of Lake Ballinger or adding a single park bench at Mathay Ballinger
somehow nullifies the $15M investment in active recreation park facilities is insulting. The City and
Council should serious reflect on why this conversation was entertained for the SR-99 corridor. She was
dumbfounded by the July 6t1i meeting minutes; the City Council does not need SR-99 communities to
articulate that money needs to be spent on the betterment of the SR-99 neighborhoods in the PROS Plan.
This is a City contrived precondition to receiving public funds. Research indicates that complaint based
governance leads to inequitable and racist results. The City should immediately prepare and make public
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 20, 2021
Page 3
a GIS analysis and maps of population density race in association with park facilities and let that be the
backbone of the PROS Plan public engagement. The City is currently conducting a survey that asks
people to prioritize between park redevelopment, one dollar sign, and building parks, three dollar signs. It
means nothing without showing people the information that the majority of parks are located in one area
of the City or that redevelopment of Civic Center is $15M.
Jenny Anttilla, Edmonds, said Ms. Seitz's comments are very valid. It is great the City purchased Civic
Field a few years ago, but she did not see the point of exceeding the estimates so more money is owed and
she preferred to downgrade the design and keep it an open area and not spend $15.5M as that is too much
and there are other areas of the City that need help. She commented some policies happened in 2020 and
2021 that were against the residents and business owners; for example, a decision was made to close Main
Street on Saturdays and Sundays even though the shops were opposed to a 2-day closure and preferred a
1-day closure. The City did not listen to the shops which she did not think was fair. Many decisions have
been made during COVID that citizens would have liked to speak on such as the new tree policy. She
recalled 6-7 years ago Council Chambers were flooded with residents who did not agree with the tree
policy that the Council just passed. Because the public could not attend meetings, the tree policy passed
even though a lot of Edmonds residents did not support it. She concluded it was important for
Councilmembers running for office this year or in the future to remember that residents don't forget.
6. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT
PAINE, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The
agenda items approved are as follows:
1. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 13, 2021
2. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS AND WIRE PAYMENT
3. APPROVE 128-SF DEDICATION AT NORTHWEST CORNER OF 4TH AVE N &
DALEY S
4. OKTOBERFEST EVENT CONTRACT
5. MAY 2021 MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT
6. JERRIE BEVINGTON 3 MONTH EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
7. NEW BUSINESS
1. PRESENTATION OF STORMWATER MANAGEMENT CODE (ECDC 18.30) UPDATE
Mr. Richardson reviewed:
Why are we updating the code now?
o NPDES Permit with State requires codes to protect surfaces water from development which
meets or exceeds standards prescribed by Ecology.
o New permit requires that the City update to newest Ecology standard by July 2022.
o Staff aiming for effective date of January 1, 2022, for clarity in applicability timelines.
o Ecology's newest manual (2019 SWMMWW) has minimal substantive changes since
previous version (2014); most revisions are organizational changes.
o See Ecology documents Executive Summary of the 2019 Revisions and Crosswalk: 2014-
2019 SWMMWW for additional information of Ecology driven changes.
How is ECDC related to Ecology Manual
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 20, 2021
Page 4
o Ecology issues their manual (2019 SWMMWW)
o City makes minor local modifications via the Edmonds Stormwater Addendum (Addendum)
o City updates ECDC 18.30 to adopt the new manual as modified in the Addendum
o Some provisions are required by Ecology
o Some items are optional add-ons for City of Edmonds
o City provisions cannot be less stringent than Ecology standard and cannot be less stringent
than previous version (without Ecology approval)
Drainage Review 101
o Drainage mitigation is required when projects exceed certain thresholds of new plus replaced
hard surfaces and/or clearing limits.
o Hard surfaces are traditional impervious surfaces, plus other compacted surfaces including
gravel roadways and pervious pavements.
o Replaced hard surfaces are any surfaces where the subgrade material below the surface is
exposed temporarily during the construction operation.
o Category 1 — Minimum Requirements (MR) 1 — 5 apply
■ 2,000 SF new plus replace hard surfaces, OR
■ 7,000 SF of land disturbing activity (clearing)
o Category 2 — Minimum Requirements 1 — 9 apply
■ 5,000 SF new plus replace hard surfaces, OR
■ Converts 0.75 acres of vegetation to lawn/landscaped area, OR
■ Converts 2.5 acres of native vegetation to pasture
o Minimum Requirement #5 (LID)
■ Applies to all projects that require drainage review (over 2,000 SF hard surfaces).
■ Focuses on erosion flows; 2-year storm and below.
■ Requires the use of infiltration if feasible
■ Predominant way we get storm water mitigation in Edmonds
o Minimum Requirement #6 (Water quality)
■ Requires 5,000 SF of pollution generating hard surfaces (ie. drivable pavement; does not
include roofs in most cases)
■ Requires treatment of runoff specific to removing contaminants.
o Minimum Requirement #7 (Flow control)
■ Requires 10,000 SF of hard surfaces (or more than 0.1 cfs increase in discharge from site)
■ Big vaults/detention; this is the traditional way of storm water management where we try
to match historic flow rates.
■ Infiltration is required to be used for flow control if applicable
How's it working?
o Switched permit tracking systems at beginning of 2020; reviewed single family building
permit data since that date through the start of June 2021.
■ This didn't capture plats as a whole project but reflects the mitigation required for each
individual home within a plat.
■ Focused on main BMP where multiple BMPs were proposed.
0 52 projects required drainage review
0 2 applied dispersion as main BMP
0 22 applied an infiltration -based BMP
0 5 applied a perforated pipe connection
0 22 applied Edmonds -specific detention BMP
0 1 qualified for direct discharge
What's changing?
o Most changes are updates to match Ecology reorganization and/or to provide clarity where
staff have experienced commonly missed or misinterpreted information by manual users &
designers.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 20, 2021
Page 5
o See 2022 ECDC 18.30 and Stormwater Addendum Summary of Changes in agenda packet
■ Direction from Ecology (Orange) = Ecology prescribed/required
■ Direction from Staff (White) = Staff -proposed clarification, reorganization, or update
without substantial change/impact
■ Direction from Staff (Green) = Staff -proposed change with potential impacts
o Staff seek direction on staff -proposed changes with potential impacts prior to moving code
for State approval and permitting.
■ Department of Commerce and SEPA approval required prior to formal Council adoption.
Change #1: New connections of existing hard surfaces
o Old: Current code allows for connection of existing hard surfaces on case -by -case basis with
a focus on maintaining City pipe capacity.
o New: Staff propose revisions to require new connections of existing hard surfaces to be
treated like new hard surfaces requiring full drainage mitigation.
■ Note that this is specific to new connections; where residents have an existing
connection, they are permitted to replace the connection in -kind without any mitigation
requirements.
o Staff Opinion: These new connections of existing surfaces are still new or altered impacts to
the City system and any surfaces water they drain to; they should be mitigated for as new
impacts.
o Potential Impacts: This may limit homeowner options when working on homes without
development or expansion. However, the impacts of allowing every pre -drainage -code
residence or business to connect to our system would be continuation of the negative impacts
of unmitigated historic development and detrimental to staff ability to manage the capacity of
our systems in the future.
Change #2: Removing Edmonds Way as a direct discharge basin
o Old: Current code recognizes the Edmonds Way drainage basin as a partial direct discharge
basin with reduced requirements for LID (MR #5) and flow control (MR #7)
o New: Staff propose revisions to remove all exemptions for the Edmonds Way basin, resulting
in equal application of all drainage code requirements to the Edmonds Way basin.
o Staff Opinion: The Edmonds Way drainage pipe (WSDOT) is known to overflow to the
Edmonds Marsh under certain conditions; since this demonstrates a capacity issue and now
discharges to a non -manmade water body, the direct discharge exemption should no longer
apply.
o Potential Impacts: This simply means that projects within the Edmonds Way basin comply
with the exact same requirement as the rest of the City.
Change #3: Increasing protection of Perrinville Creek
o Old: Current code applies the drainage code uniformly to all areas of City, including the
Perrinville Creek Basin.
o New: Staff propose revisions to increase the retrofit requirement for LID and increase the
flow control standard within the Perrinville Creek basin (only).
■ Retrofit (applies to existing unmitigated surfaces to remain): 25% _> 50%
■ Flow control: Match 50-year peak => Match 100-year peak (ie. King County Level 3
Standard)
o Staff Opinion: The Perrinville has been beaten up by past development and needs better
protections. The change in flow control standard is typical for impacted water ways and the
retrofit requirement attempts to rectify some of the past abuses on the creek. Staff believe it's
fair to ask the residents who have directly benefitted from the impacts on the creek to chip in
a little extra towards its recovery.
o Potential Impacts: Flow control will have minimal impacts; larger projects will have larger
detention facilities with minimal impacts and cost on already large budgets. However, the
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 20, 2021
Page 6
retrofit requirement has the potential to impact homeowners who are not necessarily
developing and may become cost -limiting to smaller projects in this basin.
Change #4: Detention preferred over perforated pipes
o Old: Current code adopted the Ecology BMP list for MR #5 and then added an Edmonds -
specific detention BMP to the end of the list, making its priority less than that of a perforated
pipe connection.
o New: Staff propose revisions to elevate the Edmonds -specific detention BMP to be
considered before a perforated pipe connection.
o Staff Opinion: Perforated pipes connection are only used when infiltration is already found
undesirable for some reason; because of this fact, they are of very little mitigation benefit and
often get proposed in dangerous or undesirable locations. Staff have run flow comparisons to
demonstrate that the detention option generates far more desirable decreases in the flow rates
for sites this condition would apply to.
o Potential Impacts: At a minimum detention would be anticipated in nearly all cases where
drainage review is required. Detention systems may add some cost to developing compared to
the perforated pipe connections but will go much further in protecting the City system and
surfaces waters.
What's Next?
o Staff is requesting comments from the City Council.
■ We are requesting comments now, prior to beginning the permitting and approval
process.
o Approvals Needed
■ Department of Commerce
■ SEPA
■ No Ecology review
o Public Input
■ SEPA comment period required
■ Public hearing required before final approval/adoption
■ Additional workshops, as directed/if needed.
o Questions/concerns: Zachary.Richardson@edmondswa.gov
Council President Paine what Mr. Richardson expected to see in the next update of Ecology Stormwater
Management Manual. Mr. Richardson responded Ecology will begin that process soon. Personally, he
would like to see the existing codes updated to address climate change.
Councilmember Buckshnis thanked Mr. Richardson for responding to her emailed questions. She referred
to the proposed changes and asked about the associated costs that will be borne by the homeowner. She
asked about costs related to Change #1. Mr. Richardson answered it depends on the site and the
conditions. That change will upfront trigger the need for a geotechnical engineer to do an infiltration test,
which will cost at least $1,000-2,000, one of the larger costs. He would need to do further research to
determine the associated cost.
Councilmember Buckshnis referred to Change #2, Removing Edmonds Way as a direct discharge basin,
relaying her understanding that as development occurs along Edmonds Way it would no longer be treated
as a direct basin due to flooding along SR-104. Mr. Richardson answered it was not done to target any
center of development. When he was first hired, he was unaware of that overflow and once he discovered
it, this was identified as an important update to the code. It is entirely driven by the overflow that occurs
at the marsh and the need to protect the marsh. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if the Dayton Street
pump station, a costly addition to the stormwater system, had an impact on the Edmonds Way flooding.
Mr. Richardson answered this is the WSDOT line, the Edmonds Way basin is carried down into the
WSDOT basin which now overflows into the marsh.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 20, 2021
Page 7
Councilmember Buckshnis referred to Change #3, and asked if there have been discussions with
Lynnwood due to development occurring there that impacts Edmonds. Mr. Richardson answered there
have not been a lot of discussions yet due to interest in fixing the immediate Perrinville issue first, but is
on the list of things to do. He was not aware of what Lynnwood was doing in this round of updates.
Councilmember Buckshnis recalled there have been efforts in the past to get Lynnwood to join WRIA 8
so they understand the importance of salmon recovery, stormwater, etc. and they have not been interested
because they indicate they have no waterfront when in fact the Edmonds waterfront is their waterfront.
Councilmember Buckshnis referred to Change #3 and the cost to homeowners of requiring larger
detention facilities. Mr. Richardson answered in this case, the homeowner will have already triggered
drainage review so a lot of the costs will have been incurred by the project. For a homeowner retrofit, it
was 50% of the area, a relatively small area, approximately 40 feet of 24" pipe. The flow control would
be for bigger volumes and a similar percentage of the budget because it is a larger system and much larger
budget. It will not affect the average homeowner as it requires 10,000 square feet.
Councilmember Buckshnis recalled putting in a detention pond in a southeast Portland home that was less
than 10,000 square feet, but was related to flooding and aged infrastructure. With regard to Change #4,
she agreed perforated pipes can cause a lot of problems. She observed the minimum requirement was
perforated pipes and the proposal was to do more than that. Mr. Richardson answered the proposal is to
recommend Edmonds -specific detention BMP be considered before a perforated pipe connection.
Councilmember Buckshnis thanked Mr. Richardson for the compete packet.
Councilmember L. Johnson referred to #9 and #25, new connections over 25,000 square feet to be
handled like a new project. She asked whether a process should be considered to document cumulative
connections for all categories. She asked if that would be a worthwhile undertaking or would it have
negligible impact. Mr. Richardson answered the drainage code used to include cumulative impact
language which would address what Councilmember L. Johnson referenced, where someone could
piecemeal smaller projects in sequence. That was really hard to track because often there were no permits
for that work. That is one of the reasons the retrofit requirement was created, tackling 25% of everything
could mitigate against that without tracking it. Councilmember L. Johnson commented the impact would
be unknown if they were unpermitted. Mr. Richardson explained most end up being caught by code
enforcement; if is over 2,000 square feet, drainage review is required and if it is over 2,000 square feet it
has to be documented in the list. He noted under 2,000 square feet often does not require a permit.
A one of the Councilmembers impatiently waiting on a code rewrite, Councilmember Olson said she
appreciated the work that went into this significant code rewrite. It may be boring to the public but it was
exciting to her.
Mayor Nelson asked if staff had gotten sufficient direction from Council. Mr. Richardson responded he
did not hear much objection. If the Council was comfortable with the changes, he will move forward with
them and return to Council for formal adoption.
Councilmember Buckshnis said she wanted a better understanding of the cost implications of the changes.
She understood the importance of stormwater, but there is also stormwater mitigation in the tree code. Mr.
Richardson offered to provide costs.
8. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
1. ORDINANCE CREATING THE EDMONDS RESCUE PLAN FUND
Economic Development/Community Services Director Patrick Doherty reviewed:
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 20, 2021
Page 8
American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA)
o The ARPA was passed by Congress and signed into law by President Biden on 3/11/21
ARPA and provides funds to cities, allowing for the funds to be used to:
■ respond to the COVID-19 emergency or its negative economic impacts, including
assistance to households, small businesses, and nonprofits or aid to impacted industries
such as tourism, travel, and hospitality;
■ provide premium pay to essential workers or provide grants to employers of essential
workers during the COVID-19 emergency;
■ provide government services to the extent of the reduction in revenue of such state,
territory, or tribal government due to the COVID-19 emergency; or
■ make necessary investments in water, sewer, or broadband infrastructure
o A Treasury Department 151-page Rule has been issued that provides more detailed guidance
on the use of these funds
o ARPA will provide $11,893,099 to the City of Edmonds in two tranches:
■ $5,950,087.50 was received on 6/25/21
■ The remaining $5,943,011.50 is expected approximately one year later
■ Funds are available for expenditures incurred as of 3/3/21 and through 12/31/24.
Expenditures shall be considered "incurred" if they are obligated for projects or programs
completed through 12/31/26.
Mr. Doherty reviewed the Edmonds Rescue Plan Fund:
• The proposed Ordinance would create the Edmonds Rescue Plan Fund and set out its intended
uses.
Sections of the Ordinance:
o Comprehensive set of "whereas" clauses that refer to the state of emergency and impacts of
the COVID-19 pandemic, reference to the ARPA and its requirements and public purposes.
o Section 1 accepts the $11,893,099.
o Section 2 renames Fund 142, the Edmonds CARES Fund, to the Edmonds Rescue Plan Fund
for receipt of the funds and expenditure of the funds.
o Section 3 allows for the fund to be administered by the Administrative Services Director
o Section 4 sets out the six program funds for expenditure of the Edmonds Rescue Plan Fund
monies:
■ Account "A" is the "Edmonds Rescue Plan City Expenditures" account into which up to
$750,000 will be allocated to reimburse City expenditures associated with responding to
the COVID-19 health emergency and any resurgences in the future, including staffing,
equipment, and supplies related to maintaining a safe workplace for employees and the
visiting public, as well as necessary capital investments, such as enhancements to HVAC
filter upgrades, etc.
■ Account `B" is the "Edmonds Rescue Plan Household Support" account into which
$4,150,000 from the ARPA funds shall be allocated for programs providing assistance to
households earning no more than 40% of the Edmonds AMI:
- Household Support: Up to $3,000,000 for Grants for housing expenses, food, medical
bills, childcare, internet access, and other household expenses. Up to 400 households
may receive grants of up to $2,500 in 2021 and 2022. Up to 200 households may
receive grants of up to $2,500 in 2023 and 2024.
- Utility Bill Support. Up to $150,000 for one-time grants in amounts up to $1,000 for
up to 150 households to help defray expenses derived from outstanding City of
Edmonds utilities bills.
- Housing Repair. Up to $1,000,000 for one-time grants for housing repair, especially
focused on energy -saving measures such as roof repair, window replacement, HVAC
repair/replacement, etc. Up to 200 grants at up to $5,000 each.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 20, 2021
Page 9
REVISION TO SECTION 4(B) IN CURRENT VERSION OF ORDINANCE:
Account "B" shall be the "Edmonds Rescue Plan Household Support" account into which
$4,150,000 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 for Grants to households earning no more
than 40% of Edmonds Median Income for housing expenses, food, medical bills,
childcare, internet access, and other household expenses. Up to 400 households may
receive grants of up to $2,500 in 2021 and 2022. Up to 200 households may receive
grants of up to $2,500 in 2023 and 2024.
2. Utility Bill Support. Up to $150,000 for one-time grants to households earning, no
more than 40% of Edmonds Median Income in amounts up to $1,000 for up to 150
households to help defray expenses derived from outstanding City of Edmonds
utilities bills.
3. Housing Repair. Up to $1,000,000 for one-time grants to households earning no
more than 40% of Edmonds Median Income for housing repair, especially focused on
energy -saving measures such as roof repair, window replacement, HVAC
repair/replacement, etc. Up to 200 grants at up to $5,000 each.
Account "C" shall be the "Edmonds Rescue Plan Business Support" account into which
$1,125,000 to assist the business community, as follows:
- General Business Support. Up to $200,000 in installments of $50,000 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.
- Tourism Support. Up to $300,000 in installments of $75,000 per year in 2021, 2022,
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.
REVISION TO SECTION 4(C)(3) IN CURRENT VERSION OF ORDINANCE:
3. Small Business Support. Up to $625,000 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), totaling up to 50 at $10,000 each in 2021, with up to 25
grants of up to $5,000 each available in 2022. Eligibility criteria for these grants will
include:
Small businesses in Edmonds with zero to 30 employees.
- Businesses must demonstrate at least a 50% loss in revenue by the end of 2020
compared to the pre -pandemic 2019 revenues.
- Businesses must not have received more than $5,000 in other grants, tax credits or
other financial assistance.
- Businesses must be 4eeated outside ntewaEdmonds('QwAntewa s"
being defined as any leea4ien west of 9th Avenue bet-ween Casper-s Stfeet and Pine
meet).
- Particular consideration will be given to businesses owned by people of color,
women, veterans, and other minorities
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. A general call for requests will be issued, with
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 20, 2021
Page 10
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 shall be approvable by the Mayor. Large grants of
any amount over $20,000 for a total of up to $400,000 shall be approvable by the City
Council.
Account "E" shall be the "Edmonds Rescue Plan Job Retraining Program" account into
which $600,000 from the ARPA funds shall be allocated to provide financial aid to
working adults, demonstrating financial need, 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
contract(s) with participating colleges serving Edmonds residents.
- Both Edmonds College and Shoreline Community College have indicated interest in
participating in this program.
- Edmonds College has highlighted its aerospace training and advanced manufacturing
programs.
- Shoreline Community College has highlighted its biomanufacturing and automotive
programs, such as the Tesla program that provides specialized, hands-on training on
vehicles that are leading the way in sustainable automotive technology.
REVISION TO SECTION 4(E) IN CURRENT VERSION OF ORDINANCE:
Account "E" shall be the "Edmonds Rescue Plan Job Retraining Program" account into
which $600,000 from the ARPA funds shall be allocated to provide financial aid to
working adults, with demonstrated financial need, 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
contract(s) with participating colleges serving Edmonds residents.
Account "F" shall be the "Edmonds Rescue Plan City Green Infrastructure" account in
which up to $4,768,099 from the ARPA funds shall be allocated to reimburse City capital
expenditures through 2026 associated with green infrastructure projects, which are
prioritized in the ARPA guidelines, such as:
- Edmonds Marsh Water Quality and Flood Control. Retention and treatment of
surface stormwater runoff into the Edmonds Marsh to enhance the water quality of
the Marsh, as well as other associated projects. Preliminary projected cost -
approximately $750,000.
- Lower Perrinville Creek Realignment. Retention and treatment of surface stormwater
runoff in the Perrinville Creek drainage basin, intended to reduce stormwater surge
flows and enhance the quality of stormwater reaching Puget Sound. Preliminary
projected cost - $3,500,000.
- 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.
Preliminary projected cost - $1,000,000.
- All infrastructure projects and their associated budgets shall be presented to City
Council for review and approval.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 20, 2021
Page 11
o Section 5 sets out the timeframe for use of the ARPA funds — from 3/31/21 till 12/31/26,
with explanation of "incurred" and "obligated" expenses.
o Section 6 requires any organization assisting the City in providing emergency aid to provide a
quarterly written report, as well as requiring that the Administration provide quarterly reports
to the City Council.
o Section 7 is the "Severability" clause
o Section 8 provides the effective date of the Ordinance as FIVE days after passage and
publication.
Mr. Doherty relayed staff s recommendation: Council approval, including additional revisions discussed
tonight.
Main Motion
COUNCILMEMBER L. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO APPROVE AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
CREATING THE EDMONDS RESCUE FUND AND SETTING OUT ITS INTENDED USE.
Amendment #1
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO REVISE "WORKING ADULTS" IN THE FIRST SENTENCE OF SECTION E
TO "PEOPLE WHO HAVE SUFFERED WORKFORCE PARTICIPATION INTERRUPTIONS."
Action on Amendment #1
AMENDMENT CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Councilmember Distelhorst asked Mr. Doherty to comment on the process for future adjustments,
recalling the Council approved the initial allotment of CARES funds and later made adjustments as needs
changed. Mr. Doherty recognized this is a 4-5.5 year program and reports, whether quarterly, annually or
as requested, will provide an opportunity to review the distribution of funds and whether any adjustments
are necessary.
Councilmember K. Johnson referred to Account C, and the disparity in the eligibility criteria; for example
in 3.c, a business is not eligible if they received more than $5000 in grants, however, the explanation of
Small Business Supports offers a loan of up to $10,000 each. Mr. Doherty answered they were not
intended to be the same. The intent under #3 was grants up to $10,000; last year the Council approved a
similar provision which was expanded slightly to provide $8,000 grants. One of the criteria is that the
business has not receive more than $5,000. For example, if a business did not receive a City or State grant
or tax credit, which some did not because they did not understand the complex provisions. It was not
intended that previous grants and this potential grant would be the same amount.
Councilmember Buckshnis reiterated her statement last week that it was foolish to put 42% of the ARPA
funds the City receives into green infrastructure because citizens, non -profits and individuals need more
money. This a 4-5.5 year program and regardless that some think the City's demographics are wealthy,
some people need money. She did not agree with the eligibility requirement that prevents a business that
received $5,000 from receiving another grant. The spirit of the ARPA is to rescue citizens, people and
businesses that are in trouble. She will propose removing $750,000 from Item F.1 and $1 million in Item
.173 and redistribute it to General Business Support, Tourism Support, Small Business Support and
Nonprofit Support as well as the Retraining Program. The amounts in those accounts need to be increased
and if it's later found too much has been set aside for citizens, funds can be reallocated to green
infrastructure. She said $3.5M out of $11M is sufficient for green infrastructure, approximately 25%. She
pointed out Household Support of $3M was 26%, Utility Support 1%, Household Repair 9%, General
Business Support 1.8%, Tourism Support 2.7%, Small Business Support 5.6%, Nonprofit Support 4.5%,
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 20, 2021
Page 12
and Job Training 5.4%. She wanted a more equitable distribution so that assistance was provided to
everyone. She reiterated 42% for green infrastructure for projects that have been in the CIP/CFP for a
long time was foolish.
Amendment #2
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO
AMEND TO REMOVE ITEM FA, MARSH WATER QUALITY AND FLOOD CONTROL, FOR
$750,000, AND REDISTRIBUTE IT TO GENERAL BUSINESS SUPPORT.
Councilmember Olson explained some of the most active environmental citizens are not in favor of the
projects in Account F which was surprising to her so perhaps this redistribution is a good idea due to need
in those other accounts. She expressed support for the amendment.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas did not support the amendment. The Council has been talking about the
need to take care of the marsh at least since she has been on Council and this is a perfect opportunity to
accomplish that. She did not support taking money from the marsh to give it to other sources that may
need it. With regard to equity and fairness in grants, she said some people did not apply for grants,
particularly those in communities where English was not their first language.
Councilmember Distelhorst said the Department of the Treasury's guidance states, "Treasury encourages
recipients to consider green infrastructure investments and projects to improve resilience to the effects of
climate change. For example, more frequent and extreme precipitation events combined with construction
and development trends have led to increased instances of stormwater runoff, water pollution, and
flooding." In the previous item, staff described changes to update the stormwater code from the 50 year
peak to the 100 year peak. He referred to emails from Mr. Williams regarding the stormwater/marsh water
quality project that was identified by Students Saving Salmon and asked staff to speak to the specifics of
this item.
Public Works Director Phil Williams explained the $750,000 is for a marsh water quality project. There
are a series of catch basins on the state highway where pollutants from traffic such as oil drippings, tire
wear, brake wear, etc. as well as sediment run into the marsh every time it rains. This is an opportunity to
do something about that. The City applied for and received a grant for $313,500 this year to be matched
by $104,500 from stormwater resources to provide $418,000 to take care of those catch basins. That will
either be done through bioretention or actual direct mechanical chemical treatment. These fund offer an
opportunity to extend that concept to the other side of SR-104 as well as the stormwater system in Harbor
Square which has a lot of the same pollutants. The primary pieces of the marsh restoration such as the
daylighting of Willow Creek cannot be pursued yet because it is tied up in a property transfer issue and
awaiting final cleanup of the Unocal property. The SR-104 culverts are entirely within the City's control,
do involve the Unocal property and could protect the City -owned marsh. He concluded it is a good
environmental project. Councilmember Distelhorst summarized it was a more comprehensive water
quality treatment versus one section of it. Mr. Williams agreed.
Council President Paine said she did not support the amendment, anticipating there will be future
opportunities for business support via the federal government. She encouraged all businesses to take full
advantage of that and other opportunities. She was hopeful the City would provide information and access
to businesses. Mr. Doherty explained the City had two grant processes last year, the County had two
grants process with funds available from the State and the State provided grants as well. The City did
mailings, Facebook postings as well as provided information on the City's website regarding those
opportunities in several languages which will be done again with these funds. He has also heard there will
be grants available to businesses from other sources. Council President Paine recognized stormwater
cleanup near the ferry line and marsh has been needed for years. She expressed support for leaving the
funds in place as proposed.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 20, 2021
Page 13
Councilmember Buckshnis commented it was obvious that not all the information has been shared. She
knew the Port has done wonders for their stormwater control and wondered if the Port would accept Mr.
Williams comments about pollutants in Harbor Square. The Port has proposed a new program that they
are working on with WRIA 8. She is very familiar with the Edmonds Marsh restoration and has been
involved with WRIA 8 and the Salmon Recovery Council for ten years and helped get the marsh on the
project watch list. She observed apparently people are not as important as stormwater. The City was
recently informed that the citizen group, Save Our Marsh, will be allowed to adopt that area of SR-104.
Joe Scordino informed Mr. Williams of the program that will removing invasive plants, bittersweet
nightshade vines and thickets, and the City will be able to keep the tide gate open. Removal of nightshade
thickets will improve the water quality. WSDOT has agreed to bring in a backhoe to assist with removal.
It is preliminary to allocate these funds until there is a determination whether that project improves the
water quality. This is a holistic project and she did not believe the $750,000 project considered other
issues facing the City and nonprofits who have asked for $1M. She urged environmentalists on the
Council to support her amendment, using the $750,000 for the human aspect of the ARPA.
Councilmember L. Johnson said she also read the 151 page Treasury document which includes four
categories; Category 4 states, improve stormwater infrastructure, address pollution, control non -point
sources of pollution, improve resilience of infrastructure of severe weather events and create green
infrastructure and protect water bodies from pollution. The intent of F.3 is water quality, flood control,
retention and treatment of surface water runoff into the marsh and enhance water quality of the marsh as
well as other projects. That is in the spirit of the ARPA funds. She did not support the amendment.
Councilmember Olson commented when voters get their voters pamphlet and there is a group that they
would have expected to support a ballot measure does not, there tends to be a bigger picture at play which
is the case here. She acknowledged the administration's proposal was good, but upon vetting, it seems
there may be better ways to divide the money. The Council will the opportunity to move funds in the
future if necessary. From the emails the Council has received, the citizens do not support the
administration's allocation. She will support the amendment.
Action on Amendment #2
UPON ROLL CALL, AMENDMENT FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON,
BUCKSHNIS, AND OLSON VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST, FRALEY-
MONILLAS, AND L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING NO.
Amendment #3
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO
AMEND THE LAST SENTENCE OF ACCOUNT E, EDMONDS RESCUE PLAN JOB
RETRAINING PROGRAM, TO READ, "THE A4AVO COUNCIL SHALL BE AUTHORIZED TO
ENTER INTO THE CORRESPONDING CONTRACT(S) WITH PARTICIPATING COLLEGES
SERVING EDMONDS RESIDENTS."
Mr. Doherty explained the reason it was proposed that the Mayor be authorized is this is the most time
sensitive proposal because it was intended that this funding would be in place for the coming term which
starts in September. It may be difficult to approve the contracts in time to advertise the program if
Council approval is required. It was hoped by approving the program, the Council would approve the
Mayor's authority to enter into the contracts.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked how much money was in this account. Mr. Doherty answered
$600,000. Shoreline Community Colle and Edmonds College have expressed interest so the funds may be
split evenly between the two but it also may depend on the specific requests. Councilmember Fraley-
Monillas suggested indicating that part of the funding will go to Shoreline Community College and part
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 20, 2021
Page 14
will go to Edmonds College. Mr. Doherty said it would be difficult to specify those agencies in the
ordinance because although Shoreline and Edmonds have expressed interest and provided examples of
programs, contracts have not been negotiated. Additionally, specifying an amount to each would limit
flexibility should one college have a more robust response than the other. Councilmember Fraley-
Monillas observed if the contracts were not approved in time, the funding potentially would not be
available until winter quarter. Mr. Doherty advised that was the potential and the intent was to have it
available for fall quarter.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked Council President Paine the purpose of requiring the contracts be
approved by Council. Council President Paine explained the Mayor has a $100,000 spending limit and
Council authority is required over that amount. Mr. Doherty said by approving the Edmonds Rescue Plan
Fund ordinance, the Council would be providing authority to the Mayor to contract for more than
$100,000 in this account.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented unless the intent is to bring everything over $100,000
related to this project back to Council one by one, she did not see the purpose. She understood the
$100,000 spending limit, but approval of the ordinance would authorize the Mayor to approve the
contracts. She was not particularly interested in knowing about the division of funds, particularly if it
delayed the ability for students to register. If the Council wants everything over $100,000 to come back to
Council, that is one thing, but she did not understand this particular objection. Mr. Doherty pointed out
Account D, Edmonds Rescue Plan Nonprofit Organization Support, expressly states, "Small grants of up
to $20,000 and totaling no more than $100,000 shall be approvable by the Mayor. Large grants of any
amount over $20,000 for a total of up to $400,000 shall be approvable by the City Council." That is
because there will be more time to administer that program. The retraining account is more time sensitive
which is why giving the Mayor authorization was expressly identified.
As a parent familiar with college age students, Councilmember L. Johnson said she was familiar with
programs at both Edmonds College and Shoreline Community College. Without knowing their offerings
or the need, she did not want to specify the amount that would be provided to each school. In addition, it
may be possible that Everett Community College is interested in participating. She understood that
$600,000 was a lot of money and typically the Mayor has a $100,000 limit so initially she supported the
amendment. However, Mr. Doherty made a good case and after further consideration and as a mom with
community college age students, she knew that class registration had already started and delaying the
program will make it more difficult for students to access the funds. She respected the intent of the
amendment, but with this account, she agreed with the urgency.
Councilmember Distelhorst asked if the intent was colleges and community colleges, and not trade or
technical schools. Mr. Doherty said that was the proposal; the intent was to focus on the two that have the
greatest impact on the community.
Councilmember Olson referred to City jobs for which it is difficult to find employees and asked if there
were particular job training opportunities the City wanted to encourage related to its needs. She recalled
hearing during the last 11/2 years that there were jobs that the City has a difficult time filling. She hoped
consideration would be given to training, certification or college opportunities that would fulfill those
needs. Mr. Doherty said he spoke with representatives of the college foundations who described how they
are changing some short-term programs and certificates due to what has happened over the last 11/2 years
and the need for people to obtain greater skills to be more competitive. The colleges are responding to
that, it is not just about a degree but also certification training, upskilling and reskilling. The colleges
identified programs they would like to focus on, but some internal vetting will likely be required as
students apply. There is a lot of flexibility and the reporting will indicate how it is received and whether
changes need to be made.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 20, 2021
Page 15
Councilmember Olson asked if the way the program was set up would accommodate a program or
certificate identified by a director. Mr. Doherty said the contracts with the colleges need to provide
flexibility. For example, if they identify programs of focus and there is no interest from students, changes
may need to be made to include other programs to ensure they are responsive to the population.
Councilmember Olson referred to Washington State Ferries' inability to fill some positions that results in
reduced service. She suggested training for ferry captain programs would be a good thing to make
available.
Councilmember Buckshnis said she was interested in including trade schools. Her next amendment
related to green streets will add more to this account. She commented on a neighbor who is taking an
EMT/Firefighters program which is also costly.
Amendment 3A
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO
AMEND TO STATE, "THE MAYOR SHALL BE AUTHORIZED WITH COUNCIL PRESIDENT
OVERSIGHT TO ENTER INTO CORRESPONDING CONTRACT(S) WITH PARTICIPATING
COLLEGES SERVING EDMONDS."
Councilmember Buckshnis commented this would help move the process forward more quickly.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas expressed support for the amendment, noting trade schools are an
important piece of this program.
City Attorney Jeff Taraday asked whether the phrase "Council President oversight" meant there would be
signature block for the Council President on the contract. He asked how the Council would know that
oversight had been complied with.
Action on Amendment 3A
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS WITHDREW THE AMENDMENT WITH THE
AGREEMENT OF THE SECOND
Amendment 3B
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO
AMEND THE LAST SENTENCE TO READ, "THE MAYOR SHALL BE AUTHORIZED WITH
COUNCIL PRESIDENT APPROVAL TO ENTER INTO CORRESPONDING CONTRACTS WITH
PARTICIPATING COLLEGES OR TRADE SCHOOLS SERVING EDMONDS RESIDENTS."
Action on Amendment 3B
AMENDMENT CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Action on Amendment 3 (as amended)
AMENDMENT CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Amendment 4
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO
AMEND TO REMOVE ITEM F.3 GREEN STREETS AND RAIN GARDENS FOR $1M.
Councilmember Buckshnis explained the Edmonds Rescue Plan City Green Infrastructure includes $ 1 M
for 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
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 20, 2021
Page 16
established for these same purposes. There are important human aspects of the plan that can be
supplemented such as the Job Retraining Program. Funding can be reallocated to green streets and rain
gardens in the future if appropriate. Snohomish County Conservation District provides funds for rain
gardens. She preferred to concentrate on increasing funding for Accounts A-E.
Councilmember Distelhorst referred to the guidance from the Treasury, commenting this is related to
environmental justice and looking at where problems are being fixed. If only the end of the pipe is
considered and not the beginning, there will not be a great deal of improvement and funding will continue
to address the results instead of preventing problems upstream. Living on an arterial with increased traffic
and pollutants, he sees daily the affects that has on waterways from the top of the hill and down. He
supported retaining the proposed funding and if there isn't a need for it in the coming five years as
climate impacts increase, the funding can be adjusted and spent elsewhere.
Council President Paine did not support the amendment because having greener roads and infrastructure
helps everyone and, as Councilmember Distelhorst mentioned, it is important to address problems where
they occur. Runoff down the hills in Edmonds have had negative impacts where the City touches Puget
Sound and infiltrating that water uphill is a smarter, better way. These funds provide an opportunity to do
green streets and rain gardens, an opportunity the City does not always have. Many neighborhoods have
installed rain gardens on their own; continuing that process with the City's assistance will capture a lot of
runoff before it reaches the marsh. She did not want to pass up that opportunity.
Councilmember L. Johnson appreciated Councilmember Distelhorst raising the issue of environmental
justice. She hoped with this funding, the City would put emphasis on underserved communities. It was
stated that some neighborhoods installed their own rain gardens, something that may be harder for some.
She emphasized the importance of environmental justice in the allocation of these funds.
Councilmember Olson expressed support for retaining these funds. She hoped if there were more
businesses and individuals in crisis than anticipated, the City would keep this funding in mind specifically
for reallocation.
Amendment 4A
COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
BUCKSHNIS, TO AMEND BY REDUCING THE AMOUNT BY HALF TO $500,000 AND MOVE
THE REMAINING $500,000 INTO SMALL BUSINESS SUPPORT FOR TOTAL A TOTAL OF
$1.125M.
Councilmember K. Johnson commented this is important but it is not the highest importance and there
needs to be more support for small businesses.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said she will oppose this amendment for reasons previously stated. In
addition, the County has indicated the State will be providing more money to small businesses and
nonprofits. However, there is no money from the County or State for green streets, rain gardens or other
environmental projects. She agreed with Councilmember Olson, if it looks like money is needed, funds
could be reallocated.
Councilmember L. Johnson pointed out the discussion is related to recovering from a pandemic which has
been a crisis, but there has been an environmental crisis forever and that can keeps getting kicked down
the road. While the environmental crisis may be slower moving, the can has been kicked for so long that
it is now at the front door and should not be ignored. She made the case that green streets and rain gardens
were equally as important and the implications of not addressing it are beyond what can be imagined. The
environment is a crisis and she supported what Edmonds can do to address it.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 20, 2021
Page 17
Councilmember Olson commented one of the things in the legislation as a possible use of the funds was
mental health and addiction. COVID has taken a toll and there is nothing in the proposal related to that.
She was uncertain if that should be discussed in the context of this amendment or if funds for that need
should be a separate discussion. She asked if the administration had a reason for not including that. Mayor
Nelson encouraged Councilmembers to keep their discussion related to the amendment. Mr. Doherty said
the quick answer is the City is aggressively moving forward with a social worker and human services
funding to agencies. Funding was not included in this proposal as the intent was to allow those programs
to address mental health, substance abuse and other issues related to social services.
Councilmember Buckshnis agreed there is an environmental crisis. She has been on WRIA 8 and Puget
Sound Partnership for 11 years. She agreed with the $500,000 reduction, emphasizing a number of the
accounts/categories could use more money as opposed to putting aside $lM for green streets and rain
gardens when they can be funded via grants from Snohomish County Conservation District. She
supported reducing the amount for green streets and rain gardens, and wanted to increase funding for
other categories.
Action on Amendment 4A
UPON ROLL CALL, AMENDMENT FAILED (2-5), COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON AND
BUCKSHNIS VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST, FRALEY-MONILLAS,
OLSON, AND L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING NO.
Action on Amendment 4
UPON ROLL CALL, AMENDMENT FAILED (2-5), COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON AND
BUCKSHNIS VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST, FRALEY-MONILLAS,
OLSON, AND L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING NO.
Amendment 5
COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
BUCKSHNIS, TO AMEND SECTION C.3, WITHOUT CHANGING TOTAL AMOUNT,
AUTHORIZE 100 GRANTS AT $5,000 EACH IN 2021.
Councilmember K. Johnson explained this would provide the maximum opportunity to help businesses;
114 business were served in 2020 and she anticipated an equal amount served in 2021 and only those who
had already received $5000 would not be eligible.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked about the current proposal. Mr. Doherty it is currently 50 grants
up to $10,000 each in 2021 and 25 grants up to $5,000 each in 2022 which recognizes as businesses
recover, the need should diminish after 2021.
If the Council approved the amendment and did not provide 100 $5000 grants, Councilmember L.
Johnson asked if it could be opened up to $10,000 grants or would the funds be held to provide more
grants in 2022. Mr. Doherty said if the amendment was approved, $10,000 grants would not be possible.
Councilmember L. Johnson said before she could support the amendment, she needed more specifics. She
assumed there was some metric for the administration choosing 50 at $10,000. If $5000 grants were not
provided to 100 businesses, she questioned how those funds would be used for small business support.
Mr. Doherty said many, many businesses in Edmonds have seen support. As the Economic Development
Commission discussed, most businesses who understood the availability of support received a fair
amount. It is believed a small number, such as 50, may have not understood the availability or applied in
time. A few businesses did not qualify last year due to the criteria regarding length of time in business
which is not proposed for the ARP funds. It is also believed that $10,000 to a smaller number of
businesses would provide more support to those that did not receive support.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 20, 2021
Page 18
Councilmember Distelhorst observed last year's program approved up to $10,000, but due to the need,
grants were reduced to $8,000 so more grants could be provided. Mr. Doherty said that is the reason for
the language "up to $10,000." Due to the number of grant applications last year, the amount was reduced
slightly to $8,000 to cover more businesses. The intent with this funding is to provide grants close to
$10,000. Councilmember Distelhorst observed if the need was greater, there is some flexibility.
Council President Paine observed the ordinance states, "...totaling up to 50 participants at $10,000 each
in 2021..." She asked if the intent was up to 50 participants or up to $10,000. Mr. Doherty relayed the
ordinance should state, "...totaling up to 50 at up to $10,000 each in 2021..."
Action on Amendment 5
UPON ROLL CALL, AMENDMENT FAILED (2-5), COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON AND
BUCKSHNIS VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST, FRALEY-MONILLAS,
OLSON, AND L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING NO.
Councilmember Olson referred to the category of Tourism Support in the Edmonds Rescue Plan Business
Support and increasing tourism promotion while there are difficulties with staffing hospitality of all kinds.
She suggested using some of the General Business Support to provide bonuses to keep businesses staffed.
She suggested specifying that the tourism support be provided to arts and culture nonprofits such as the
Edmonds Center for the Arts, the Arts Festival, etc. which bring people to town to visit businesses.
Promoting nonprofits helps them and tourism will occur as a byproduct of their advertising. Mr. Doherty
agreed a lot of the events occur associated with nonprofits but not all and certainly not all the activities
such as whale watching excursions, restaurants, etc. This proposal is to promote all of Edmonds and to do
more than can be done with the relatively small amount of lodging tax funds. The City has very low
lodging tax revenue compared to other cities and the tourism support was intended to help augment
advertising to get the word out. He did not want to limit what could be done with advertising and
promotion and because so much of what occurs in the City is the result of nonprofits, they will benefit
substantially from the proposal.
Amendment 6
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER K.
JOHNSON, TO AMEND TO REDUCE GREEN STREETS AND RAIN GARDENS TO $500,000
AND ADD $250,000 TO ACCOUNT E, EDMONDS RESCUE PLAN JOB RETRAINING
PROGRAM, AND $250,000 TO ACCOUNT D, EDMONDS RESCUE PLAN NONPROFIT
ORGANIZATION SUPPORT.
Councilmember Buckshnis commented both of those accounts need more funding and it can be changed
in the future. She reiterated there are other grant resources for rain gardens.
Councilmember Olson raised a point of order, whether that was the same motion as before. Mr. Taraday
answered this motion is slightly different than the previous motion; they both take $500,000 out of the
Green Streets and Rain Gardens fund, but the reallocation is different.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said she was not interested in this reallocation.
Action on Amendment 6
UPON ROLL CALL, AMENDMENT FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON,
BUCKSHNIS AND OLSON VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST, FRALEY-
MONILLAS, AND L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING NO.
Amendment 7
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO
AMEND TO REMOVE IN ACCOUNT C, SECTION 3.C, "BUSINESSES MUST NOT HAVE
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 20, 2021
Page 19
RECEIVED MORE THAN $5,000 IN OTHER GRANTS, CREDITS OR FINANCIAL
ASSISTANCE."
Councilmember Olson said $5,000 is arbitrary; some businesses have a lot of overhead and others do not
have as much. A set dollar amount does not consider those variables. She supported removing this
section. She asked how the need would be assessed, expressing support for helping viable businesses
damaged by COVID who can survive with help. Mr. Doherty said it is important to have a number
because a lot of businesses have received a fair amount of support via tax credits, direct grants from the
City, State and County, etc. and they would potentially qualify if they experienced a 50% loss in revenue.
Removing the amount would open the funding to more businesses, sending the message that there is more
support than there really is. The intent was to focus on businesses that had not been assisted last year.
Action on Amendment 7
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS WITHDREW THE AMENDMENT WITH THE
AGREEMENT OF THE SECOND.
Councilmember Buckshnis said she wanted to ensure small businesses received funding. She recognized
many businesses received assistance, but they still need more. She knew of a person who had to turn
down a scholarship because he had to work in his parents' business. She asked how funds could be
provided to businesses that received assistance but needed more. Mr. Doherty assured there will be more
opportunity for assistance than just the City. The County, State, Economic Alliance of Snohomish
County, etc. will all offer grants again.
Councilmember Buckshnis referred to Section D that states, "Particular consideration will be given to
businesses owned by people of color, women, veterans, and other minorities." She recalled language
issues related to the availability of grants in the past.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked how many businesses there were in the City including home
businesses. City Clerk Passey answered there are approximately 3,500-4,000 on the books but far more
are operating that the City does not capture. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas observed if there were 3,000
businesses in Edmonds, a lot of them are home businesses which have the same issues as more visual
businesses. She suggested a robust contact of all businesses in Edmonds to see who needs assistance. She
knew of some home businesses that had gone out of businesses during the pandemic for a variety of
reasons. There are many more businesses than the ones people see, there are businesses in the
neighborhoods that people may not be aware of. Mr. Doherty said a postcard was sent to all businesses
last year in five languages and he anticipated that would be done again this year. Councilmember Fraley-
Monillas said due to information in the nationwide media, everyone has a better understanding of the
availability of grants. She hoped some of the businesses that were not as visible would seek assistance.
Amendment 9
A MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED AND SECONDED, TO
AMEND TO REDUCE GREEN STREETS AND RAIN GARDENS BY $300,000 AND MOVE IT
TO THE EDMONDS RESCUE PLAN JOB RETRAINING PROGRAM.
Councilmember Buckshnis said the Edmonds Rescue Plan Job Retraining Program was underfunded, it
provides a wonderful opportunity, and the additional funds would bring the total close to $1M.
Action on Amendment 8
UPON ROLL CALL, AMENDMENT FAILED (2-5), COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON AND
BUCKSHNIS VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST, FRALEY-MONILLAS,
OLSON, AND L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING NO.
Amendment 9
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 20, 2021
Page 20
COUNCILMEMBER DISTELHORST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO AMEND SECTION 4.C.3 TO READ, "...TOTALING UP TO 50 AT UP TO
$10,000 EACH IN 2021...".
Action on Amendment 9
AMENDMENT CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Action on Main Motion
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS VOTING
YES; COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON, DISTELHORST, FRALEY-MONILLAS, OLSON,
AND L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING NO.
2. 2021 ARPA BUDGET AMENDMENT ORDINANCE
Finance Director Dave Turley explained the ordinance is a budget amendment to provide authorization
for the administration to spend the money that the Council discussed in the previous agenda item. The
ordinance that Mr. Doherty presented was a plan for how to spending the ARPA money; this ordinance is
the authority to spend it. The effect on the budget would be $5,946,550 in revenue to the City and the
exact same amount in expenses. Staff s recommendation is a motion to approve the ordinance as included
in the packet.
COUNCILMEMBER DISTELHORST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO APPROVE AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON,
AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 4221 AS A RESULT OF UNANTICIPATED TRANSFERS AND
EXPENDITURES OF VARIOUS FUNDS, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL
BECOME EFFECTIVE
Councilmember Buckshnis asked if a new Fund 142 had been created. Mr. Turley explained the CARES
Fund last year was 142; it was renamed as part of the ordinance approved in the previous agenda item.
The CARES Fund was in the 2020 budget which has expired. For clarity sake, the fund name was
changed but the purpose is nearly identical so the fund number was retained.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mayor Nelson declared a brief recess.
3. RESOLUTION ADOPTING COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE
Council President Paine introduced this item, advising City Clerk Scott Passey prepared the staff report.
This has been before the Council several times.
Mr. Passey relayed there was a lot of information in packet so he will highlight the background and
context. With regard to the history, in 2013 the Council adopted a resolution stating the Council will
follow Robert's Rules of Order for the conduct of Council meetings. In December 2013, the Council
adopted another resolution adopting a Code of Conduct that applied to Council, boards, commissions and
work groups. In 2015, the Council adopted a standalone Code of Ethics that applied to elected officials
and appointed City volunteers. In January 2021, the Council adopted a new Code of Conduct that applies
exclusively to the City Council. That Code of Conduct has been incorporated into the draft Rules of
Procedure as Section 6 to consolidate all applicable rules and Code of Conduct into a single document.
Mr. Passey explained the draft Rules of Procedure have been edited and refined since first introduced in
2020 when the Council was presented a draft and asked to provide proposed changes. At that time, some
Councilmember provided changes, most of which were minor and helped clarify existing points. A few
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 20, 2021
Page 21
other changes proposed completely different policies or procedures; prior drafts of the Rules of Procedure
in Council packets last year included all the proposed changes. In the version in tonight's packet, he chose
to omit what he considered the more controversial items and allow Councilmembers to propose
amendments in the regular course of the legislative process. The draft in the Council packet represents his
recommendation to Council. He did not intend to speak again to the value of having comprehensive Rules
of Procedure and was happy to respond to any questions.
As she stated when this arose in spring 2020, Councilmember L. Johnson said she would have found this
extremely helpful as an incoming Councilmember and it would be helpful for anyone considering serving
on City Council as well as to inform citizens' expectations.
COUNCILMEMBER L. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 1295 ADOPTING ROBERT'S
RULES OF ORDER FOR THE CONDUCT OF CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS, AND
ESTABLISHING COMPREHENSIVE RULES OF PROCEDURE AND CODE OF CONDUCT
FOR THE CITY COUNCIL.
Councilmember Buckshnis found the motion very premature as the Council had not yet had a discussion.
She was uncertain what information had been removed and whether or not there was a working group that
worked on the Rules of Procedure. She expressed concern with attempting to push this through as a
procedural issue when there were so many other issues facing the Council such as the emergency
ordinance. This is a very detailed document and she was concerned with introducing a motion to approve
it at 9:45 p.m. She found it very perplexing that the Council was interested in passing it instead of having
a discussion. She did not support passing the resolution and wanted to know what Councilmembers had
proposed, what had been included and removed from the rules, how the rules were developed, etc. She
was also concerned with having only 15 minutes remaining in the meeting to discuss this when it was
scheduled for 45 minutes.
Councilmember Olson asked if the maker of the motion intended that the Council would vote on this
tonight. Councilmember L. Johnson commented this first came to Council in the spring, it was agreed to
delay it for 3 weeks and bring it back to Council. There has been quite a bit of time to review the rules
and ask questions. Many Councilmembers have spoken to the need for Rules of Procedure so it was her
intent to take it seriously and to consider moving forward.
With the response from Councilmember L. Johnson, Councilmember Olson said she agreed with
Councilmember Buckshnis' protest and asked the Council not to vote on this tonight. She was one of the
Councilmembers who submitted changes that were not included in the rules in the packet and with only
15 minutes remaining, she would not have the time and opportunity to explore them. Since nearly a year
has passed since Councilmembers provided that feedback, she suggested staff provide the changes that
Councilmembers submitted so those proposals were not lost in the interim. She wondered if there was a
better method for keeping track of past submittals.
Council President Paine said the Rules of Procedure have been on and off the Council's agenda for the
last year plus. The changes are not that significant and Councilmembers have had an opportunity to
review them, ask questions and develop amendments throughout the process. She did not have a problem
with approving the rules today, acknowledging there had not been much discussion but the Council
needed to start making decisions.
Councilmember Distelhorst recalled the last time this came to Council was April 20 when the Council
voted to delay 3 weeks until May 4. He supported delaying it at that time to provide Councilmembers
time to work on it. It has now been close to 18 months since the Council first saw the Rules of
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 20, 2021
Page 22
Procedures. He thanked Mr. Passey for his work on this and for incorporating the Council's feedback.
Due to it now being 9:46 p.m., he suggested if this were delay to next week, it be at the top of the agenda
and that Councilmembers do their review ahead of time so that more clear process and procedure could be
added to the Council's work.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas agreed with Councilmember Distelhorst. She was exhausted from the
last item and feared if the Council continued reviewing the rules, they would not make good decisions.
She agreed moving it to the top of next week's agenda would be reasonable and would give
Councilmembers a week to review it and draft amendments. The rules have been worked on since she was
Council President in the winter of 2020. Mr. Passey pointed out the two public hearings next week take
priority so it would need to be later on the agenda. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas agreed the public
hearings should be done first but the Rules of Procedure should follow immediately.
Councilmember Olson referred to a public comment tonight that there was no section for items that
require a unanimous vote. She asked if that could be incorporated by next week. Mr. Passey answered it
could if that was the will of the Council.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas raised a point of order, suggesting that would be an amendment to the
motion.
COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE, TO
AMEND TO INCORPORATE A SECTION FOR ITEMS REQUIRING A UNANIMOUS VOTE.
Councilmember Olson agreed items requiring a unanimous vote was a different process so it would be a
good addition to the Rules of Procedure.
Councilmember Buckshnis pointed out in April, the Council did not discuss the rules and even though it
has been on the agenda many times, the Council has never really reviewed the rules. She asked who
helped develop the Rules of Procedure, recalling Councilmember Fraley-Monillas' comment that
Edmonds was different than Edmonds. She recalled the Code of Conduct was developed by a committee
comprised of Councilmembers Olson, L. Johnson and Distelhorst. The Rules of Procedure have been
around since it was brought up by Councilmember K. Johnson that the Council follow Robert's Rules of
Order. It is not that the Council has been avoiding this but there are more pressing issues and generally
Councilmembers should know how to operate because they all were business people who learned
common sense, kindness and how to conduct business. She reiterated her interest in how the rules were
created and which the amendments were removed because they were controversial. Mayor Nelson
cautioned Councilmembers to keep comments related to the amendment.
Councilmember Distelhorst asked if votes that require unanimous affirmation are regulated under RCW.
City Attorney Jeff Taraday answered both RCW and case law. Councilmember Distelhorst asked the
maker of the motion whether the if intent was to research that and develop language around the RCW and
case law or to incorporate the language that was just stated. Councilmember Olson said she would leave
that to Mr. Passey, but even referencing the applicable RCW would be helpful. Mr. Passey said the rules
have many footnotes and references to existing statutes and governing laws. Something could be added to
the rules with a footnote to the RCW. Councilmember Distelhorst expressed support for that.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said she thought the Council had agreed to take this up next week. She
did not want staff making amendments based on opinions; it needs to be done via amendment. She
recalled she was charged with creating a subcommittee and did not understand the point of discussing
who was on it. Mayor Nelson requested Councilmembers focus their discussion on the amendment.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 20, 2021
Page 23
COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS CALLED THE QUESTION. VOTE ON THE CALL
FOR THE QUESTION CARRIED (6-1); COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON VOTING NO.
UPON ROLL CALL, AMENDMENT FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON,
DISTELHORST, AND OLSON VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS FRALEY-MONILLAS,
BUCKSHNIS, L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING NO.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DISTELHORST,
TO EXTEND AN EXTRA 10 MINUTES TO 10:10 P.M. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
COUNCILMEMBER L. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO POSTPONE TO THE NEXT MEETING. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
9. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS
1. COUNCIL COMMITTEE MINUTES
10. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember L. Johnson said she wanted to take this opportunity to thank the entire City staff for
everything each of them have taken on during the pandemic and shut down to keep the City running and
to get the City where it is today after 16 months to meet fairly safety in person. She recognized the City
for the quick pivot from the traditional model to one that proactively prioritized public health and used
shift scheduling to reduce exposure and ensure that enough critical staff would be available to keep
essential functions up and running. She appreciated those whose positions required they remain working
in person to keep the City running which often meant they risked exposure for themselves and their
family so the City could remain safe and functioning. She appreciated those who made room at home to
telecommunicate which often meant hushing children, pets and sometimes partners who were home with
them 24/7. In addition to their City work, many had to juggle sudden, unexpected, increased
responsibilities like homeschooling, and increased diligence and attention necessary to protect the mental
and physical wellbeing of family members. Much of what they had to do to accommodate was unseen and
unrecognized and all too often they only heard complaints, but not appreciation. She wanted staff to know
they were very, very much appreciated.
Councilmember Olson thanked Councilmember L. Johnson for saying that on behalf of all
Councilmembers. She has been watching the national scene regarding COVID, specifically Los Angeles
who is returning to a mask mandate and Springfield, Illinois, who is overwhelmed by the highly
contagious Delta variant. For those who have been waiting to ensure the vaccines are safe, there has been
time to watch and see that they are. For those thinking that we are out of the woods and there is no need to
be vaccinated, she assured we are not out of the woods. She urged the public to consider getting
vaccinated now, tomorrow, this week, before it overwhelms the community like it has some areas. It is for
the protection of the young and otherwise vulnerable who cannot get vaccinated as well as for themselves,
to avoid another mask mandate, to keep schools and businesses open, and to protect the economy. She
thanked those who have already gotten vaccinated and those who still can and will for the community's
sake.
Councilmember Olson reported the patience and persistence of the volunteer environmental stewards is
paying off. Following a community meeting with WSDOT a couple weeks ago, permission has been
granted to start work parties to remove the invasive nightshade growth from the Edmonds and
Shellabarger Marsh along SR-104, growth that is responsible for sediment buildup that obstructs flow and
contributes to flooding in the Harbor Square area. This will be a highly labor intensive effort and the
community's help is actively sought. Volunteers can contact Joe Scordino at Joe.Scordino@Yahoo.com
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 20, 2021
Page 24
for a volunteer application and work party schedule. She will personal be there and looked forward to
seeing others.
Councilmember Buckshnis said people can also email her and she will forward it to Mr. Scordino. This is
extremely exciting news and she cited numerous volunteer parties that have occurred in the past. WSDOT
has offered a backhoe to pull the fence out. She congratulated the Milwaukee Bucks for winning the
championship.
Council President Paine welcomed everyone back, commenting it was good to be back in person. She
pointed out there are different notices on the doors, one for the Council Chambers and another for the
Court. She encouraged the public to enjoy summer activities safely, from Sea Jazz at the Port to the
Uptown Market as well as the Arts Festival and many other activities. The variants are in the community
and she did not want to test the extent of protection provided by the vaccines. She echoed Councilmember
L. Johnson's thanks to City staff.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas explained she and others on the dais were wearing masks because a
Councilmember had been around unvaccinated people which she felt was a very dangerous position to be
in. The Health District is expecting a fifth wave to hit in October as a result of the Delta variant and they
and other organizations are considering who it will affect and the death rate. She encouraged everyone to
get vaccinated.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas reported Snohomish County is return to work in small, hybrid sections
and the County Council has not returned to the dais. The Health District is also returning to work in small
numbers, an important signal that people need to be vigilant in the coming months, particularly when
school starts and unvaccinated children will be in school with vaccinated children. She relayed a warning
from the Snohomish County Health District related to high levels of poisons in shellfish harvested off
Puget Sound due to water temperatures. She described symptoms that may last 2-3 days and start between
4 hours to 4 days after eating contaminated shellfish.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said she was absent from last week's Council meeting and unable to
vote on Civic Park due to caring for a family member following surgery. If she had been present, she
would have voted yes on the Civic Park contracts. Her initial response regarding Civic Park was
intentional because she wanted to begin a discussion about fairness in different areas of Edmonds, but
City was way too far down the road with Civic Park to back up. There are 46 parks in Edmonds, 1 of
which is on the east side with a few parking spaces. She appreciated Councilmember L. Johnson's
statements last week regarding the differences between parks in east Edmonds and the Bowl. She received
a number of contacts from citizens, one saying residents in east Edmonds could visit parks in Mountlake
Terrace, Lynnwood and Shoreline and did not need parks in their neighborhood. A former
Councilmember said residents could drive to visit parks. She referred to Natalie Seitz' public comment
tonight, explaining she lives in an area that requires crossing seven lanes of traffic to reach a county park.
The Council believes in representing all of Edmonds, but needs to take steps to equalize what occurs in
east Edmonds and in the Bowl.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE AND SECONDED TO EXTEND TO
10:15 P.M. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Councilmember Distelhorst thanked Councilmember L. Johnson for her comments regarding City staff.
He too appreciated all the work staff has done during the pandemic, for residents and to get Council back
in person. Case rates are on the rise, almost at the peak of initial lockdown in March 2020, taking into
account that over 60% of Snohomish County residents are vaccinated. He encouraged unvaccinated
individuals to get vaccinated; the United States is one of the few privileged countries in the world to have
vaccines readily available and there is no reason not to get vaccinated to take care of the community.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 20, 2021
Page 25
Councilmember Distelhorst thanked the Diversity Commission, Mayor Nelson and Mr. Doherty for
getting the new anti -hate, bias and discrimination portal up on the City's website. As the liaison to the
Diversity Commission, this issue was discussed multiple times by the commission and with community
members who did not feel they had a place to report instances that may not arise to a criminal nature. He
has discussed with the Diversity Commission and Mr. Doherty upgrades to ensure it is fully accessible
and that its availability is robustly communicated to the community. He remarked it was nice to see
everyone back in person.
Councilmember K. Johnson commented it was nice to be back in person and to see audience members
and staff in 3D. She encouraged the public to do their best to remain social distanced, get vaccinated and
to stay safe.
Student Representative Roberts recognized getting the Council back to in -person meetings was a big team
effort. Echoing Councilmember L. Johnson, he thanked City staff, healthcare workers and everyone who
adjusted and adapted. Although adjustments have been made, COVID is not over yet. He encouraged the
public to get vaccinated if they can if they haven't already and to make safe choices because he along
with many others want to be back in school in September.
if�u RVO) Y.Y41130V lu M OQ1 V
Mayor Nelson agreed it was wonderful to be back in person with Council, staff and audience members.
He thanked staff for making it making it possible and relatively pain free. He agreed we are not out of the
woods yet regarding COVID. The data from late May/early June indicated Edmonds zip codes are in the
top 1-2 in Snohomish County for the highest vaccination rates, mid-70% and probably higher now. The
current rate is 108/100,000; when Washington reopened it was in the 60s but has been going up for the
last several weeks and is on track for a fifth wave. There are many citizens in Edmonds, Snohomish
County, Washington, the United States and the world who need to get vaccinated. The latest data
indicates 98% of the people hospitalized and dying of COVID are unvaccinated so clearly vaccinations
save lives. He urged the public to get vaccinated.
12. ADJOURN
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:13 p.m.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 20, 2021
Page 26