The URL can be used to link to this page

2023-11-06 City Council Special Packet2 3 4 5 6 of c�,y s Agenda Edmonds City Council SPECIAL MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS 250 5TH AVE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020 NOVEMBER 6, 2023, 6:00 PM PERSONS WISHING TO JOIN THIS MEETING VIRTUALLY IN LIEU OF IN -PERSON ATTENDANCE FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING AUDIENCE COMMENTS CAN CLICK ON OR PASTE THE FOLLOWING ZOOM MEETING LINK INTO A WEB BROWSER USING A COMPUTER OR SMART PHONE: HTTPS://ZOOM. US/J/95798484261 OR COMMENT BY PHONE: US: +1 253 215 8782 WEBINAR ID: 957 9848 4261 THOSE COMMENTING USING A COMPUTER OR SMART PHONE ARE INSTRUCTED TO RAISE A VIRTUAL HAND TO BE RECOGNIZED. PERSONS WISHING TO PROVIDE AUDIENCE COMMENTS BY DIAL -UP PHONE ARE INSTRUCTED TO PRESS *9 TO RAISE A HAND. WHEN PROMPTED, PRESS *6 TO UNMUTE. WHEN YOUR COMMENTS ARE CONCLUDED, PLEASE LEAVE THE ZOOM MEETING AND OBSERVE THE REMAINDER OF THE MEETING ON THE COUNCIL MEETINGS WEB PAGE. REGULAR COUNCIL MEETINGS BEGINNING AT 7:00 PM ARE STREAMED LIVE ON THE COUNCIL MEETING WEBPAGE, COMCAST CHANNEL 21, AND ZIPLY CHANNEL 39. "WE ACKNOWLEDGE THE ORIGINAL INHABITANTS OF THIS PLACE, THE SDOHOBSH (SNOHOMISH) PEOPLE AND THEIR SUCCESSORS THE TULALIP TRIBES, WHO SINCE TIME IMMEMORIAL HAVE HUNTED, FISHED, GATHERED, AND TAKEN CARE OF THESE LANDS. WE RESPECT THEIR SOVEREIGNTY, THEIR RIGHT TO SELF-DETERMINATION, AND WE HONOR THEIR SACRED SPIRITUAL CONNECTION WITH THE LAND AND WATER. - CITY COUNCIL LAND ACKNOWLEDGMENT CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA COUNCIL BUSINESS 1. Proposed 2024-2029 Capital Facilities Plan & Capital Improvement Program (45 min) AUDIENCE COMMENTS THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT REGARDING ANY MATTER NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA AS CLOSED RECORD REVIEW OR AS A PUBLIC HEARING. SPEAKERS ARE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES. PLEASE STATE CLEARLY YOUR NAME AND CITY OF RESIDENCE. Edmonds City Council Agenda November 6, 2023 Page 1 7. RECEIVED FOR FILING 1. Claim for Damages for filing (0 min) 2. Budget Queries - Council Budget Questions and Adminstration/Staff Responses (0 min) 3. Written Public Comments (0 min) 8. APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approval of Special Meeting Minutes October 17, 2023 2. Approval of Special Meeting Minutes October 19, 2023 3. Approval of Special Meeting Minutes October 24, 2023 4. Approval of Regular Meeting Minutes October 24, 2023 S. Approval of claim checks and wire payments. 6. Final 2024 Property Tax Ordinances 7. Resolution Authorizing Use of General Fund Operating Reserves for General Fund Expenses 9. PUBLIC HEARING 1. 2024 Budget Public Hearing #4 (20 min) 10. COUNCIL BUSINESS - CONTINUED 1. Resolution Concerning the Approval of Operating Reserve Fund Use and Addressing the Structural Budget Deficit (30 min) 2. Parkland Acquisition Purchase & Sale Agreement - Mee Property (20 min) 3. Utility Rate Study and adoption of a Utility Rate Ordinance (15 min) 4. 2023 Budget Amendment Related to ARPA (30 min) 5. Landmark Property Aquisition (30 min) 11. MAYOR'S COMMENTS 12. COUNCIL COMMENTS ADJOURNMENT 10:00 PM Edmonds City Council Agenda November 6, 2023 Page 2 5.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 11/6/2023 Proposed 2024-2029 Capital Facilities Plan & Capital Improvement Program Staff Lead: Rob English, Oscar Antillon, Angie Feser & Shannon Burley Department: Engineering Preparer: Emiko Rodarte Background/History On September 19, 2023, staff presented the proposed 2024-2029 Capital Facilities Plan & Capital Improvement Program in a joint meeting with the City Council and Planning Board. On October 10, 2023, a public hearing was held for this item. On October 24, 2023, this item was forwarded to a future City Council meeting for further discussion. Staff Recommendation Potential action to schedule adoption of the CIP/CFP at the November 21st City Council meeting. Narrative The Public Works and Utilities Department proposed 2024-2029 CFP/CIP is included as Attachment 1. The Parks, Recreation & Human Services Department proposed 2024-2029 CFP/CIP is included as Attachment 2. The presentations for Public Works & Utilities and Parks, Recreation and Human Services are attached. (Attachments 3 & 4). The Planning Board held a public hearing on September 27, 2023 (see Attachment 5 for the minutes). The Planning Board prepared a memo to the City Council after their review of the CFP-CIP documents (see Attachment 6). The Planning Board Chair notified City staff of a typo in the letter regarding the reference to the sidewalks on 236th St. SW in the third paragraph. The limits on 236th St. SW should have been 84th Ave W and State Route 104 (not HWY 99). The Planning Board minutes from the October 11, 2023 meeting are attached (Attachment 7). Public Works and Parks staff have responded to council member questions since the initial presentations were made in September. Responses to council member questions are attached (Parks - Attachment 8 and Public Works Attachment 9). Attachment 10 are the proposed amendments submitted by council member Teitzel. BACKGROUND: The City's Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Element is updated annually and identifies capital projects for at least the next six years, which support the City's Comprehensive Plan. CFP projects are capital improvement projects that expand existing facilities/infrastructure or provide new capital facilities in Packet Pg. 3 5.1 order to accommodate the City's projected population growth in accordance with the Growth Management Act. Thus, capital projects that preserve existing capital facilities are not CFP projects. These preservation projects are part of the six -year capital improvement program (CIP) along with capital facility plan projects that encompass the projected expenditure needs for all city capital related projects. Attachments: Attachment 1 - 2024 Public Works CIP.CFP DRAFT Attachment 2 - 2024 Parks CIP.CFP DRAFT Attachment 3 - Public Works Presentation Attachment 5 - Planning Board Minutes 09.27.23 Attachment 4 - Parks Presentation COE PW CIP Overview Attachment 6 - Planning Board Memo Attachment 7 - Planning Board Minutes 10.11.2023 Attachment 8 - Parks Capital Q and A Matrix Attachment 9 - Public Works Q and A Matrix Attachment 10 - Teitzel CIP UP amendments 10 29 23 Packet Pg. 4 . W CRY OF EDMONDS ` PUBLIC WORKS 2024-2029 PROPOSED CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN & CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM oi- pw- l f ' - -woo0-- Rl Packet Pg. 5 5.1.a TRANSPORTATION & UTILITY PROJECT MAP..............................................................ii FACILITIES & WWTP PROJECT MAP............................................................................iii TRANSPORTATION...........................................................................................................1 PRESERVATION/MAINTENANCE PROJECTS............................................................6 SAFETY/CAPACITY ANALYSIS....................................................................................15 NON -MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS.........................................39 as FERRYPROJECTS....................................................................................................63 TRAFFICCALMING................................................................................................ 65 TRAFFICPLANNING.............................................................................................. 67 GREENSTREETS......................................................................................................70 WATER........................................................................................................................... 72 STORMWATER.............................................................................................................. 77 EDMONDS MARSH ESTUARY RESTORATION RELATED PROJECTS.....................79 PERRINVILLE CREEK BASIN PROJECTS..........................................................................81 STORM DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS...............................................85 ANNUALLY FUNDED PROJECTS..........................................................................88 COMPLIANCE RELATED PROJECTS.....................................................................91 SEWER............................................................................................................................ 93 FACILITIES.....................................................................................................................100 WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT.........................................................................122 CFP-CIP COMPARISON(2024-2029)....................................................................1 34 Packet Pg. 6 2024 CFPICIP Al 5.1.a PWT-03 PWT-05 VPW,I,��T-07 PWT-65 �X-.� PWT-04 ,— PWT-51 PWT-09 PWT-12 W�6 PWT-35 `PWT-37 PWT-48 PWT-19 PWT-16 • PWT-11 PWT-25 PWT-15 PWT-20 PWT-08 PWT-21 �_ PWT-�9 • _ PWT-30 PWTI20 PWT-13 PWT-14 PWT-47 P.WT W, PWT-31 PWT-06 PWT-23 PWTi64 PWT-50 PWT-06 PWS-11 PWD-07 I� = PWD-06 J WP PWT-26 P ��' PWT-10 _ * Site specific projects only. Citywide/annual citywide projects not shown. PWT-43 LPacket Pg. 7 2024 CFP/CIP v1.11 II DRAFT S41 , �� 4el Zak �� PWF-07 #WF-01 � a 99.*►�p ♦ �s, • W �► `y PWF-16 �^T '► PWF-03 0 f�lj 'i�11 : �I o yJ=y PWF-100 �PiWr�09: A IN-oall FitFor p "ums �1. o q PWF-13�� . ,, 014 If I �1 �k IOU J92M. ELTi .L. - - PWF-09 M fF-03 IP • PW 3 PWF-10 14 RUB' IEPF-23 F PWF=13�� 0 * Site specific projects only. Citywide/a—nnual citywide 2024 CFP/CIP v1.11 ill' PWF-08 • �- - --FA--TWA �-A rolects no sown." Packet Pg. 8 DRAFT v � ' r Ay Vi 5.1.a 01 E Packet Pg. 9 TRANSPORTATION O 0 d r Preservation /Maintenance Projects PWT-01 Annual Street Preservation 81 $1,600,000 $2,400,000 $1,300,000 $2,630,000 $2,630,000 $2,630,000 $13,190,000 $39,450,000 $52,640,0( LL Program ca PWT-03 76th Ave. W Overlay from 196th 67 $20,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $20,000 $0 $20,0( St. SW to Olympic View Dr. U PWT-04 Main St. Overlay from 6th Ave. to 68 $789,553 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $789,553 $0 $789,5! 8th Ave. c N PWT-05 Puget Dr. / OVD Signal Upgrades $0 $0 $0 $90,000 $496,000 $0 $586,000 $0 $586,0( N PWT-06 Signal Upgrades - 100th Ave / $0 $0 $0 $165,000 $773,000 $0 $938,000 $0 0 $938,0( 238th St. SW PWT-07 Main St. / 3rd Signal Upgrades $0 $0 $0 $0 $110,000 $383,000 $493,000 $0 0 $493,0( 0 L- PWT-61 Olympic View Dr Overlay - 196th / $0 $200,000 $1,300,000 $0 $0 $0 $1,500,000 $0 a $1,500,0( SR-524 to Talbot Rd F- PWT-68 88th Ave Overlay and Sidewalk 77 $150,000 $1,350,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,500,000 $0 LL $1,500,0( < Repair 0 Safety / Capacity Analysis LL PWT-08 X 228th St. SW from Hwy 99 to 95th $0 $0 $0 $1,447,000 $2,500,000 $13,100,000 $17,047,000 $0 v $17,047,0( a PI. W Corridor V PWT-09 X Hwy 99 Revitalization & Gateway - 69 $114,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $114,000 $0 $114,0( Y Stage 2 c PWT-10 X Hwy 99 Revitalization - Stage 3 70 $1,290,000 $1,630,000 $1,612,000 $13,000,000 $13,752,000 $0 $31,284,000 $0 $31,284,0( PWT-11 X Hwy 99 Revitalization - Stage 4 71 $1,290,000 $1,500,000 $4,000,000 $2,369,000 $0 $16,434,000 $25,593,000 $16,000,000 $41,593,0( a Iq N PWT-12 X Hwy 99 Revitalization - Stage 5 $0 $0 $0 $500,000 $1,000,000 $2,000,000 $3,500,000 $43,673,000 $47,173,0( N PWT-13 X Hwy 99 Revitalization - Stage 6 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $21,160,000 $21,160,0( m E PWT-14 X Hwy 99 Revitalization - Stage 7 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $40,430,000 $40,430,0( PWT-15 X Hwy 99 Revitalization - Stage 8 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $35,242,000 .r $35,242,0( Q PWT-16 X Hwy 99 Revitalization - Stage 9 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $21,277,000 r c $21,277,0( PWT-17 X SR 524 (196th St. SW) / 88th Ave. W - $0 $0 $0 $263,000 $238,000 $788,000 $1,289,000 $0 t $1,289,0( Intersection Improvements Q PWT-18 X Main St. / 9th Ave. Intersection $0 $0 $0 $198,000 $1,092,000 $0 $1,290,000 $0 $1,290,00u Improvements 2024 PW CFP/CIP v1.11 2 Packet Pg. 10 PWT-19 X 76th Ave. W / 220th St. SW - 72 $650,000 $774,100 Intersection Improvements PWT-20 SR-104 Adaptive System 73 $186,575 $0 PWT-21 X SR-104 /100th Ave W. Intersection $0 $0 Improvements PWT-22 X SR-104 / 95th PI. W Intersection $0 $0 Improvements PWT-23 X SR-104 / 238th St. SW $0 $0 Intersection Improvements PWT-24 X Olympic View Dr. / 76th Ave. W $0 $0 Intersection Improvements PWT-25 X 84th Ave. W (212th St. SW to $0 $0 238th St. SW) PWT-26 X SR-104 / 76th Ave. W Intersection $0 $0 Improvements PWT-27 X Olympic View Dr. / 174th St. SW $0 $0 Intersection Improvements PWT-28 175th Slope Repair $0 $0 PWT-59 2024 Traffic Signal and Safety 74 $30,290 $0 Upgrades PWT-67 Waterfront Emergency Response 83 $50,000 $0 Study Non -Motorized Transportation Projects PWT-29 X 232nd St. SW Walkway from $0 $0 100th Ave. to SR-104 PWT-30 X 236th St. SW Walkway - Madrona $0 $0 Elementary to 97th Ave. W PWT-31 X 236th St. SW Walkway from Hwy. $0 $0 99 to 76th Ave. W PWT-32 X 84th Ave. W Walkway from 238th $0 $0 St. SW to 234th St. SW PWT-33 X 80th Ave. W Walkway from 212th $0 $0 St. SW to 206th St. SW PWT-34 X 80th Ave. W Walkway from 188th $0 $0 St. SW to Olympic View Dr. PWT-35 X 218th St. SW Walkway from 76th $0 $0 Ave. W to 84th Ave. W d $50,000 $6,670,000 $0 $0 $8,144,100 $0 r $8,144,1( LL $0 $4,400,000 $0 $0 $4,586,575 $0 $4,586,5, $0 $180,000 $720,000 $1,600,000 $2,500,000 $0 Q $2,500,0( 'j rn $0 $42,000 $228,000 $0 $270,000 $0 $270,0( N $0 $227,000 $1,292,000 $0 $1,519,000 $0 $1,519,0( N $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,347,000 13 $1,347,0( c a- $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $17,615,000 $17,615,0( 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,424,000 $3,424,0( LL Q $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $715,000 $715,0( a LL $0 $1,000,000 $0 $0 $1,000,000 $0 $1,000,0( a U $0 $0 $0 $0 $30,290 $0 $30,2f Y $0 $0 $0 $0 $50,000 $0 0 $50,0( 3: 2 a $0 $0 $284,000 $1,572,000 $1,856,000 $0 $1,856,0( N 0 N $0 $296,000 $1,692,000 $0 $1,988,000 $0 $1,988,0( r $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,937,000 .r c $1,937,0( E t $0 $160,000 $1,350,000 $0 $1,510,000 $0 $1,510,0( Q $0 $110,000 $120,000 $1,352,000 $1,582,000 $0 $1,582,0( d E $0 $482,000 $1,851,000 $0 $2,333,000 $0 $2,333,0( $0 $264,000 $1,474,000 $0 $1,738,000 $0 .r $1,738,0( Q 2024 PW CFP/CIP All 3 1 Packet Pg. 11 Walnut St. Walkway from 6th Ave. PWT-36 X S to 7th Ave S PWT-37 X 216th St. SW Walkway from Hwy. 99 to 72nd Ave W Citywide Bicycle Improvements PWT-39 X Project 78 PWT-40 X Maplewood Dr. Walkway from Main St. to 200th St. SW 95th PI. W Walkway from 224th PWT-41 X St. SW to 220th St. SW PWT-43 X SR-104 / 76th Ave. W Non - Motorized Trans Improvements PWT-44 X Downtown Lighting Improvements PWT-45 X SR-104 Walkway - HAWK Signal to Pine / Pine from SR-104 to 9th PWT-46 X 191 st St. SW from 80th Ave. W to 76th Ave. W 104th Ave. W / Robinhood Lane PWT-47 X from 238th to 106th PWT-48 X 80th Ave. W from 218th St. SW to 220th St. SW 84th Ave. W from 188th St. SW to PWT-49 X 186th St. SW PWT-50 X 238th St. SW from Hwy. 99 to 76th Ave. W Elm Way Walkway from 8th Ave. PWT-55 X S to 9th Ave. S 80 PWT-60 2024 Pedestrian Safety Program 75 PWT-66 4th Avenue Cultural Corridor Ferry Projects PWT-51 X Ferry Storage Improvements from Pine St. to Dayton St. Traffic Calming PWT-52 Traffic Calming Program 79 V FfA d $0 $0 $0 $290,000 $0 $0 $290,000 $0 r $290,0( LL $0 $0 $0 $220,000 $0 $0 $220,000 $0 $220,0( $15,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $15,000 $0 Q- $15,0( U rn $0 $0 $0 $220,000 $220,000 $2,511,000 $2,951,000 $0 $2,951,0( N $0 $0 $0 $131,000 $731,000 $0 $862,000 $0 It $862,0( N $0 $0 $0 $261,000 $1,310,000 $0 $1,571,000 $0 $1,571,0( c a- $0 $0 $0 $328,000 $1,310,000 $0 $1,638,000 $0 $1,638,0( a $0 $0 $0 $273,000 $273,000 $2,730,000 $3,276,000 $0 $3,276,0( � Q $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $719,000 $719,0( 0 a $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,124,000 LL $1,124,0( U a_ U $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $344,000 $344,0( w Y i $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $348,000 O $348,0( 3: $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,363,000 $1,363,0( a $10,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,000 $0 $10,0( c N $80,770 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $80,770 $0 $80,71 r $0 $0 $0 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $6,000,000 $8,000,000 $0 .r c $8,000,0( t $0 $0 $0 $380,000 $0 $0 $380,000 $0 .r $380,0( Q c d E $100,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $210,000 $330,000 $540,0( ;9 .r Q 2024 PW CFP/CIP v1.11 4 1 Packet Pg. 12 5.1.a d r Traffic Planning ADA Transition Plan (Right -of- PWT-53 $0 $440,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $440,000 $0 Li $440,0( Way) PWT-54 Transportation Plan Update 66 $236,085 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $236,085 $0 $236,M V Green Streets rn N Green Streets 236th St SW - 84th PWT-64 X $0 $350,000 $3,150,000 $0 $0 $0 $3,500,000 $0 0 N $3,500,0( c Ave W to Highway 99 TOTAL EXPENDITURE $6,612,273 $8,666,100 $11,434,000 $37,758,000 $37,078,000 $51,122,000 $152,670,373 $246,498,000 $398,418,3� N a� 0 FUNDINGSOURCE• SUBTOTALa- , 0 (2024-2029) a_ Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- $251,570 $105,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $356,570 $0 $356,5, H modal revenue LL Q REET Fund 125 $1,224,345 $850,000 $950,000 $1,190,000 $750,000 $750,000 $5,714,345 $11,250,000 $16,964,3, REET Fund 126 $975,905 $872,000 $1,614,300 $1,212,000 $772,000 $772,000 $6,218,205 $11,580,000 a $17,798,2( U Transportation Impact Fees $423,361 $466,229 $1,033,475 $0 $0 $0 $1,923,065 $0 a $1,923,0( U General Fund $0 $335,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $335,000 $0 N $335,0( C Water Utility Fund 421 $18,000 $18,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $36,000 $0 $36,0( u_ Stormwater Utility Fund 422 $69,000 $225,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $294,000 $0 $294,0( a N Sewer Utility Fund 423 $0 $40,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $40,000 $0 $40,0( N Federal Grants $2,070,355 $744,871 $2,716,525 $0 $0 $0 $5,531,751 $0 $5,531,7! r c m State Grants $1,572,237 $2,630,000 $1,969,700 $13,000,000 $6,688,000 $0 $25,859,937 $0 $25,859,9, t Other (Sound Transit Grant) $7,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,500 $0 $7,5( w Q ARPA $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 d Unsecured Funding $0 $2,380,000 $3,150,000 $22,356,000 $28,868,000 $49,600,000 $106,354,000 $223,668,000 $330,022,0( 0 TOTAL REVENUE $6,612,273 $8,666,100 $11,434,000 $37,758,000 $37,078,000 $51,122,000 $152,670,373 $246,498,000 $399,168,3, Q 2024 PW CFP/CIP v1.11 5 1 Packet Pg. 13 2024 PW CFP/CIP All Packet Pg. 14 Annual pavement preservation program to maintain City streets. Maintains the City's pavement infrastructure and reduces the need for larger capital investment to rebuild City steets $1,600,000 (2024) Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total 5.1.a $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $130,000 $130,000 $130,000 $1,95O,OOC $1,450,000 $2,250,000 $1,150,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $37,5OO,OOC $1,600,000 $2,400,000 $1,300,000 $2,630,000 $2,630,000 $2,630,000 $39,450,000 $800,000 $750,000 $650,000 $750,000 $750,000 $750,000 $11,25O,OOC $800,000 $750,000 $650,000 $750,000 $750,000 $750,000 $11,25O,OOC $900,000 $1,130,000 $1,130,000 $1,130,000 $16,95O,OOC $1,600,000 $2,400,000 $1,300,000 $2,630,000 $2,630,000 $2,630,000 $39,450,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP vl.l l 7 1 Packet Pg. 15 185th PI SV! "I' Pi 111 � s 00 = a = o H 00,5t 192nd St SW 184th St SW 3 sp/ v 186th St SW Q 187th St SW 'V 187th PI SV! 188th St SW Q 3 r, Q 3 �0 v i 189th PI Spy a>190th St SW f 6 j 0 4 M o m I o- 191 St St SW S,6 8014 �192nd PI SW I)r 193rd PI SW 3 a 194th St a ss 3 196TH ST SW s s 77 O SW 103rd PI SW -- r `F a � 185th St St SW SW o `Q v y� �185th > 185th PI Y41p10 SW ^ m Q �861hS SW L 1 S61h St 3 Sw 187th P1 SW LU > 188TH ST SW = � 1881h=P1._SW- _-- _Penny � - Ln 9� 3 189th- PI-Sh ev h Pl sw la9th al sW a 190th=St-SWs #190th_St=SW LLI 14 N 191 st PI SW 3 191 St St SW Oa/e > Q 192nd St v 192nd PI SW sW W = C 3 W 192nd PI SW Park Wa) rN S 193rd PI SW I ^ a -. >— Q-193r dSt SW 193rd St SW L 194r3 P1 SW ; 194th Si SW "V a ¢ N Er - A pavement overlay of 76th Ave from 196th St. SW (SR-524) to Olympic View Dr was completed in 2023. The project close- out and required federal documents for the transportation grant will be completed in 2024. The east side of the street is within the City of Lynnwood and was included in the project. Improve pavement condition and upgrade pedestrian curb ramps to meet ADA standards. In addition to the existing southbound bike lane, the project may add a new northbound bike lane as outlined in the City's Transportation Comprehensive Plan. $2,583,000 Design Right of Way Construction $20,000 Expense Total $20,000 Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- $7,500 REET Fund 125 $5,000 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Other $7,500 Funding Source Total $20,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP v1.11 8 1 Packet Pg. 16 > w co �L ST cm O a Mw r iIINsS�T 0 Z cc w kn > DAYTON ST Pavement overlay along Main St. from 6th Ave. to 8th Ave. with pedestrian curb ramps upgrades. The project will be fundE with a federal grant and City funds for a local match. Improve pavement conditions and pedestrian accessibility (with ADA curb ramps) on this segment of Main Street. Estimated Project Cost prior year expenditures $937,500 Project Cost Design $9,000 Right of Way Construction $780,553 Expense Total $789,553 Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- $672 REET Fund 125 $158,001 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants $630,880 State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $789,553 2024 PW CFP/CIP v1.11 9 1 Packet Pg. 17 5.1.a < 0 fir; S� J 2 Excelsior PI cu wood Ch a' <`G E J o rn � O PUGET DR w > a Puget WayW U >, Edmonds d Elementary 0 Puget Way — OJ -1— _ _ The project will rebuild the existing traffic signal and remove the signal heads currently on span wire and install standard traffic signal poles with mast arms. Vehicle detention will also be upgraded as part of this project. This upgrade will provide safer roadway conditions since the hanging signal heads will be replaced with fixed signal heads c mast arms. The new vehicle detection will guarantee that all vehicles will be detected. $586,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $90,000 $496,000 $90,000 $496,000 $90,000 $496,000 $90,000 $496,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP v1.11 10 1 Packet Pg. 18 W a a 23�t i �' 2 hP�SW E N �- o 1— 237th PI; O s O = V { 238th St SW 3 • c } C Faith au o Q� s > c s Community Q 0 • 238th St SW Church s� NN tea, ,— N f - h u Install new traffic signal and vehicle detection system. The existing traffic signal is near the end of its anticipated service life. $938,000 Design $165,000 Right of Way Construction $773,000 Expense Total $165,000 $773,000 Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding $165,000 $773,000 Funding Source Total $165,000 $773,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP All 11 1 Packet Pg. 19 Bracketts Jc P S� Landing sa a South a- .\�oa Railroad Station ✓arc's J<4 J? Mini Park = Post Office a N Q Q ✓a�Ps moo St Install new traffic signal and vehicle detection system. The existing traffic signal is near the end of its anticipated service life. $493,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total Edmonds Polic ' e%S,t and Municipa o` Court Veteran' Edmonds Centennial Plaz City Hall Plaza Bell h N Fountain MAIN ST $110,000 $383,000 $110,000 $383,000 $110,000 $383,000 $110,000 $383,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP All 12 1 Packet Pg. 20 Pavement overlay along Olympic View Dr, from 196th St. SW / SR-524 to Talbot Road, along with ADA curb ramp upgrades. Improve pavement condition and improve accessibility for pedestrians of all abilities. $1,500,000 Design $200,000 Right of Way Construction $1,300,000 Expense Total $200,000 $1,300,000 Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 $100,000 $300,000 REET Fund 126 $100,000 $300,000 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants $700,000 State Grants Unsecured Grants Funding Source Total $200,000 $1,300,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP All 13 1 Packet Pg. 21 �s fw. �� ; ��n�� •�� Or �ti•''' '�' ''/ ` I ' r•� �A11111P � •��' i �'r��i. A.:� .. i , a; ill; ~ i r i..,, ' L r'r r .. i Le • s.• s i r• i I r f L /. 1 1 - r .. • 1 .. IL 16 I• f 1� _ a ��r r l f r M :,� It a.. IL + ► I r I-% .' 1 / all / • .�� • a ,6% �� % r Anil af• to . . op f.r a1I, r1 '� a P. i i • �y r 1 Imo•, a� At •/ VtMrOR 4; 1 _ — w �Y• 1 185th PI SW .'.• r, i iir�;rl,r ��, ...•III''; —d Jall i GA • 14, / • • err.•-L./ <,- -�� 01 / Lei 1 .� �.-v3�• �+'1... f� iJ P• i 1�.� "i 042 16 us t Y .; •'t �••.^ rf 1 1 /•+� + y. 1 -w1d S ,..y).r•rrr w�•...r i - -- -- 79tTX1:'rSW - 3 This project will resurface 88th Ave and improve the existing asphalt sidewalk on the east side of 88th Ave from 196th St S\ to 185th PI SW in the Seaview neighborhood. All City utilities along this section of 88th Ave have been upgraded in recent years and the street is ready to pave. The existing curb is in poor condition and varies in height. The project will install 6" concrete vertical curbs and repave the existing asphalt sidewalk. Improve pavement conditions, pedestrian accessibility (with ADA curb ramps) and pedestrian safety. $1,500,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Sewer Utility Fund 423 State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 $150,000 $1,350,000 $150,000 $1,350,000 $65,000 $65,000 $20,000 $180,000 $40,000 $1,130, 000 $150,000 $1,350,000 14 Packet Pg. 22 2024 PW CFP/CIP v1.11 15 Packet Pg. 23 3-.r.� Iw+r•� rf-==-� ,, �'rlli. LSPI:KAN(-t .•i L, i Sth St SW 224th St SW ■' r� ~ _ 224th St S _ _ _�224th St;SW iR + '.. ■ rN V.' iRih1�r .� ram' �'� , •� zzmnPiswIA ■ 3aFrr-1 ■ ■ j�`. �' IY��i■ �i��■Sraw�L7 r �,i la' .� �.� I.i�L■. L3 aq .� -� �� r �� IL ac'�■.Lr 6- f,C'4 r a :nsrhPisw1� 7 11 - �Ic■ ilm & r ,�a�■ y J 7� ��i� 11-'■■ N! ,. �r�•�Q R zI A. ��: _t- -- _ Q I J �- � ■ a226th St SW,--_226th-`St SW ir) 4� 00 a' -� '` �m* I! II'j..rriJJ ��1 LQ�.s ��i♦ J;o� - I r ._..co- emiiw�r .�'rn -I .e.* w �} a1Ar1 it■11�,f n"!s� ! r SWL1I� dl$�� nnns sW . �a> Z 3 m t a 228TH ST S� n-1 4 -r m i 'a • , aI iJJ�w �� ■'r A • �_'A ffi l +d am ■ z2ansrs;. a J- F * )_ ■ i-jar. `` a ■ . 229th St- �� ` ��s �■«1 Q4. !� )2�(�■ it 7 w > vIJ ti Rao - � �■ a"R 3 > �O 1 a µ J _.♦ 1m■ �27 iF ■ r .a ! _ S• •ter-r ■ a' n �} - a-- m 230th St SW - 230th St SWI`- Ll AT +s oy?% ' �r 3 231st■StaSW a' .�a Q i ■ ■,sl■■s� r m w �r f w lilt 232nd St SW l y a J ■�■��■fit■ I ♦ I ,-1 �i . , ,:,. ",ram �• W g�1� V ILI rI A=_„P � i►* tr :�� `�■ .. Q•,za2�ri Widen 228th St. SW from Hwy. 99 to 95th PI. W to three lanes (with center two-way left turn lane), with curb and gutter, sidewalk, and bike lanes. This project would improve active transportation safety and traffic flows along this corridor. Community Transit will evalua the possibility of creating a new east -west bus route along 228th St. SW, if this project moves forward (connecting Edmond Transit Station to Mountlake Terrace Transit Station). Estimated Project Cost *Includes prior year expenditures 1� 111 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $1,447,000 $1,500,000 $1,000,000 $13,100,000 $1,447,000 $2,500,000 $13,100,000 $1,447,000 $2,500,000 $13,100,000 $1,447,000 $2,500,000 $13,100,000 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 16 1 Packet Pg. 24 V) 0 � > > w a a o = a _ M LO H p, 3 Q� LLJ > Q = a a o A. o �P 0 0 3 &OW,DoIIM 9 220TH ST SW a LO 228TH ST SW FQ' 3 3 w w o� a - > a 00 � 212TH S1 SW w -; a Z Ln Ln w > w 3 Q w a 3 � = w > a~o Q 3 �n = w Q L _ F- 236TH ST SW {- - 244TH ST lip - 244TH ST SW N . In 2023, the project constructed landscaped center medians on Highway 99 from 244th St. SW to 212th St. SW, a HAWK signal — 600' north of 234th St. SW, and gateway signs on both ends of the corridor. Plant establishment and project close- out will continue in 2024. The conversion of the center two-way left turn lane to a landscaped raised median will improve corridor safety along this Highway of Regional Significance (HRS), with an Average Daily Traffic (ADT) of — 35,000 vehicles per day. The new HAWK signal will provide a signalized pedestrian crossing between the existing traffic signals at 238th St and 228th St. $9,300,000 Design Right of Way Construction $114,000 Expense Total $114,000 REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants $114,000 Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $114,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP All 17 1 Packet Pg. 25 r� 2 iH[h 99 S[ SW 238th St SW £ A Q�� i 240th St SW Mathay Batt. 9e' 3 Park a o n v j 9tv t`wa m c £ �c .. 242nd St SW v £ v Edmonds 1.ydy tw N 205th St 2.1nth St SW N 205th St N 20501 St 243rd PI SW The Stage 3 Highway 99 project limits are from 244th St SW to 238th St. SW. The project will widen the intersection of Highway 99 and 238th St SW to provide a second northbound left turn lane. Additional improvements will include ADA compliant sidewalks, a landscaped planter strip to separate sidewalk from adjacent traffic, enhanced street lighting, bike lanes, ADA compliant pedestrian curb ramps and utility improvements (with potential undergrounding of overhead utility lines). Improve aesthetics, safety, and user experience along this segment of the Hwy 99 corridor. $32,500,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $1,075,000 $630,000 $409,000 $215,000 $1,000,000 $1,203,000 $13,000,000 $13,752,000 $1,290,000 $1,630,000 $1,612,000 $13,000,000 $13,752,000 $1,290,000 $1,630,000 $1,612,000 $13,000,000 $6,688,000 $7,064,000 $1,290,000 $1,630,000 $1,612,000 $13,000,000 $13,752,000 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 18 1 Packet Pg. 26 220th St SW 223rd St SW 224th St SW 3 D W C r 0 c 2 220th St SW 224th St SV 3 The Stage 4 Highway 99 project limits are from 224th St SW to approximately 500 feet north of 220th St. SW. The project will widen the intersection of Highway 99 and 220th St. SW to provide a second left turn lane for the northbound, southbound and westbound movements. Highway 99 corridor improvements will include wider ADA compliant sidewalks, landscaped planter to separate sidewalk from adjacent traffic, enhanced street lighting, bike lanes, ADA compliant pedestrian curb ramps and utility improvements (with potential to underground overhead utility lines). Improve aesthetics, safety, and user experience. In addition, future economic development would be improved $42,534,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees Water Utility Fund 421 Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Sewer Utility Fund 423 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $1,075,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $484,000 $215,000 $500,000 $3,000,000 $1,885,000 $1,290,000 $1,500,000 $4,000,000 $2,369,000 $642,300 $29,025 $67,500 $1,020,975 $1,092,738 $432,500 $1,979,025 $168,237 $1,000,000 $357,700 $2,369,000 $1,290,000 $1,500,000 $4,000,000 $2,369,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP All 19 $16,434,000 $16,000,000 $16,434,000 $16,000,000 $16,434,000 $16,000,000 Q $16,434,000 $16,000,000 Packet Pg. 27 __- a a _216th St Sw 3 3 v W a' Q H �D 3 G a 214th St SW V o�N� c� 216th S - t SW - - -� 21614 Along Hwy 99 from 216th St SW to 212th St. SW, the project will add a planter strip on both sides of the street, new street lighting, better stormwater management, targeted utility replacements, potential undergrounding of overhead utilities, landscaping and other softscape treatments to identify the area as being in Edmonds. Improve aesthetics, safety, and user experience. In addition, future economic development will be improved along the corridor. $47,173, 000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $500,000 $1,000,000 $1,500,000 $1,593,000 $500,000 $3,951,000 $ 38,129, 000 $500,000 $1,000,000 $2,000,000 $43,673,000 $500,000 $1,000,000 $2,000,000 $43,673,000 $500,000 $1,000,000 $2,000,000 $43,673,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP All 20 1 Packet Pg. 28 w11iiii-O&PIIIIII M adrona Ln +7 ��,A 16 ESPEKANCE _ 234th St SW 235th PI SW � 3 s w 236th St SW x Q 236th St SW a> ono 'AM- , A 238TH ST SW 3 U 00 o 238th St SW-- 234th St SW v a ro 236th St SW s � n a a L 28 th i s i r, IN Llu f Along Hwy 99 from 238th St. SW to 234th St. SW, the project will add a planter strip on both sides of the street, new street `c lighting, better stormwater management, targeted utility replacements, potential undergrounding of overhead utilities, c landscaping and other softscape treatments to identify the area as being in Edmonds. Improve aesthetics, safety, and user experience. In addition, future economic development would be improved along the corridor. $21,160,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $2,275,000 $1,519,000 $17,366,000 $21,160,000 $21,160,000 J' $21,160,000 j 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 21 1 Packet Pg. 29 tSNtKANCt +� �r,�L .. ��lal ��1L 1 �+� ~. a Q' U_ r� IMF' iF a ■ ■ ■■� t >tirrf"i� , r.. !!- 228TH-ST =SW �• ; a „ ` 229th St —SW' a_ �t ' "� w Mgt r� N7 �� t r■ _ 229ih St SW / i eiIr.-s f��! i 3r 1 r r a m h rH SW �l/ c i i !' ws � V,ti — — — a0 2$Oth St SW 230 h S zsotn s1 I r �.� �■LUL 23.1'stlStlSW� Q "> �. �; r ^y r w Q PMF � �- N �j r f = C4,�. _ Holly_ Ln 7 r ± + t t1 r. IWi AMPO f... r 1 233rd St A ir _ ■ I room .lA��■F'� ■Ilk ■ _i ,r q • a � a \ 6,a Maple Ln �■� 41+" , A 15 Y v ao ,fir �Q rtr 234th St SW 234th St SW M adrona Ln A Along Hwy 99 from 234th St. SW to 228th St. SW, the project will add a planter strip on both sides of the street, new street lighting, better stormwater management, targeted utility replacements, potential undergrounding of overhead utilities, landscaping and other softscape treatments to identify the area as being in Edmonds. Improve aesthetics, safety, and user experience. In addition, future economic development would be improved along the corridor. $40,430,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $4,254,000 $5,675,000 $30,501,000 $40,430,000 $40,430,000 $40,430,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP v1.11 22 1 Packet Pg. 30 up JPP� ti qr 3 J1 �■ .ir 'Elm ■ �� - zzstn Pi SW 3 3 i - /. ■ . ■ �! I iistn Pi SW v �f i .4 —� 1 < L 226th st sw -S �. l 0 MW -74 81sa,� + z !�L 7 Y� 3. L u 3 - 228TH ST SWIF `C� 224th St SW 224tfi St SW in- - i � L ^ - a M EDMONDS WQ M0UNTLAKELU ^ a v 226TH PL 3W - � r � Along Hwy 99 from 228th St. SW to 224th St. SW, the project will add a planter strip on both sides of the street, new street lighting, better stormwater management, targeted utility replacements, potential undergrounding of overhead utilities, landscaping and other softscape treatments to identify the area as being in Edmonds. Improve aesthetics, safety, and user experience. In addition, future economic development would be improved along the corridor. $35,242,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $3,596,000 $2,439,000 $29,207,000 $35,242,000 $35,242,000 $35,242,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP All 23 1 Packet Pg. 31 J iv Z Ea 216th st sW 99 e Q t 0 c 220th St SW c T Along Hwy 99 from approximately 500 feet north of 220th St. SW to 216th St. SW, the project will add a planter strip on bo sides of the street, new street lighting, better stormwater management, targeted utility replacements, potential undergrounding of overhead utilities, landscaping and other softscape treatments to identify the area as being in Edmonds Improve aesthetics, safety, and user experience. In addition, future economic development would be improved along the corridor. Estimated Project Cost *Includes prior year expenditures 1/1 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $1,978,000 $2,159,000 $17,140, 000 $21,277,000 $21,277,000 $21,277,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP v1.11 24 1 Packet Pg. 32 196TH ST SW N� A Install traffic signal at the intersection of 196th St. SW @ 88th Ave. W. The modeling in the 2009 Transportation Plan indicated that restricting northbound and southbound traffic to right -turn -only (prohibiting left -turn and through movements) would also address the deficiency identified at this location through 2025. This is same alternative as one concluded by consultant in 2007 study but not recommended by City Council. This could be implemented as an alternate solution, or as an interim solution until traffic signal warrants are met. The existing LOS is F (below City Standards: LOS D). This project was ranked #6 in the Roadway Project Priority in the 2015 Transportation Plan. Improve traffic flow characteristics and safety at the intersection. The improvement would modify LOS to A, but increase tf• delay along 196th St. SW. $1,289,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 $263,000 $238,000 $788,000 $263,000 $238,000 $788,000 $263,000 $238,000 $788,000 Q $263,000 $238,000 $788,000 25 1 Packet Pg. 33 Zell St W Bell St °' a Q 0 MAIN ST qF Anderson to Ir- Center W Field Q 2 Payton H„ a Yost Park 1 Bell : c N ; u i i Installation of a traffic signal or mini -roundabout. The project ranked #4 in the Roadway Project Priority of the 2015 Transportation Plan. The preliminary cost estimate for a new traffic signal is $1,290,000. A conceptual cost estimate for a mini -roundabout is $500,000. The existing intersection is stop -controlled for all approaches and the projected intersection LOS in 2035 is LOS F (below thi c City's concurrency standards: LOS D). The installation of a traffic signal would improve the intersection delay to LOS B. F u e Estimated. expenditures0 $1,290,000 u c Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $198,000 $1,092,000 $198,000 $1,092,000 $198,000 $1,092,000 $198,000 $1,092,000 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 26 1 Packet Pg. 34 219th St SW U � I N � m LO oo M Q �— a 21919 00 a t Lf 1 220TH ST SW Q 7514 ■ I ��M 4& ESPERANCE (V2st PI SW WINCO STARBUCKS 01 s Reconfigure eastbound lanes to a left turn lane and through/ right turn lane. Add eastbound and westbound dedicated left turn lanes with a protected -permitted phase. Provide right turn overlap for westbound movement during southbound left turn phase. (Additional improvements include wider sidewalk, bike lanes, and various utility improvements (including potential conversion overhead utility lines to underground). ROADWAY PROJECT PRIORITY #1 in 2015 Transportation Plan . Reduce the intersection delay and improve the LOS. The projected LOS in 2050 would be improved from LOS F to LOS D. Improve active transportation conditions for pedestrians and bicycle riders. $8,700,000 Design $148,000 $326,100 Right of Way $502,000 $448,000 Construction Expense Total $650,000 $774,100 Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees $394,336 $398,729 Stormwater Utility Fund 422 $45,000 $45,000 Water Utility Fund 421 $18,000 $18,000 Federal Grants $192,664 $312,371 State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $650,000 $774,100 $50,000 $6,670,000 $50,000 $6,670,000 $12, 500 $37,500 $6,670,000 $50,000 $6,670,000 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 27 1 Packet Pg. 35 zzbm Pi sw Algongpip 226th St SW+5�h a S m: r tGy .— > 3 d .i �; �� ° 225th P1SW • i e �, v Q rl T R d L a � a Q> v a a> 226th St SW' ~•` a,rn tiCO ��. zz n^uv� % �'��w•. jbi �'r X �+ ■ �r pZ' ".'� m _ 228th St SW ..,� = 228TH ST SW Oee% Dr J -� 6. �. i J Y yJ • �� 229th St S<,. � �- ?� w lip Oee"'Ot f f tioo, LZi 230th St _ 0 5 �2'1 aQ�31��Cr�Si*SW= 231 St St S� W 9� } • Q 232nd St SW ° ti'�a�,r ■ilnu. ui is a 5 o a !, zazna Pco i sw : Ln r. Holly r� Y Q sett Rd Maple Ln Nottingham Rd o v � > 234th St SW �atl�-St S Q o s a a Madrona Ln Z 235th PI SW4za •_Y s >ay! C SUS - _ ""F'_,"• l,l -236th St SW 236th St SW 236th ° 3 W The project will add a traffic signal adaptive system on a 1.25-mile segment of SR104 from 236th St to 226th St. The syster will monitor and synchronize the timing of five existing signalized intersections (SR104 @ 236th St, SR104 @ 232nd St, SR1( @ 95th PI, SR104 @ 100th Ave, SR104 @ 226th St) and improve traffic flows along SR104. Improve traffic flows along this regional corridor with a current Average Daily Traffic (ADT) of — 25,000 vehicles per day. Estimated Project Cost prior year expenditures $4,810,000 Design $186,575 Right of Way Construction $4,400,000 Expense Total $186,575 $4,400,000 Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- $7,313 REET Fund 125 $25,189 $440,000 REET Fund 126 $440,000 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants $154,073 State Grants Unsecured Funding $3,520,000 Funding Source Total $186,575 $4,400,000 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 28 1 Packet Pg. 36 E R L QFC PCC NATURAL p MARKET a �C, C) �y Y 76 GA; a WALGREEN'S �Q, d PARKING BANK i EDMONDS WAY 9rh Ave w co O 00 O N co N CD(n 00 O 6) W O 6M N CD q ` BANK co 00 00 co co f� h f— h rnrnrnm mrnrnmrn CO } 04� N N rnrn i IVARS � o = o N BARTELL'S O C, uI Implement Westgate Circulation Access Plan, install mid -block pedestrian crossing along 100th Ave. W, improve safety to c access the driveways within proximity to the intersection, and re -striping of 100th Ave. W with the potential addition of bik lanes. This project was identified in the SR-104 Completed Streets Corridor Analysis (completed in 2015). ` c Improve access and safety at the intersection and improve active transportation safety.Estimated Project Cost a t` *Includes prior year expenditures $2,500,000 a U. V a_ Design $180,000 $195,000 V N Right of Way $525,000 C Construction $1,600,000 Expense Total $180,000 $720,000 $1,600,000 2 Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- a REET Fund 125 v N O REET Fund 126 N Transportation Impact Fees General Fund 4) Stormwater Utility Fund 422 v Federal Grants State Grants Q Unsecured Funding $180,000 $720,000 $1,600,000 y Funding Source Total $180,000 $720,000 $1,600,000 s ca Q 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 29 1 Packet Pg. 37 227th p/ S PU D Sub Station 228th St SW 4P 27th St a > o a M Lam_ G _ 0' 228TH ST S W Westgate Chapel V)w Ov ZZ oQ �Lu w Da wLn w Upgrade all ADA Curb Ramps; and add C-Curb for access management. This project was identified in the SR-104 Complete Streets Corridor Analysis (completed in 2015). Improve intersection safety for pedestrians and vehicles. $270,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $42,000 $228,000 $42,000 $228,000 $42,000 $228,000 $42,000 $228,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP All 30 1 Packet Pg. 38 a Y Vi 238th St SW 77 �0 os �q 238TH ST SW,, Q x 5.1.a c a� Korean Presbyter u Church 1 c Project Description C c c Install traffic signal. This project was identified in the SR-104 Complete Street Corridor Analysis (completed in 2015). c c c Project Benefit c z Improve vehicular and pedestrian safety. $1, 519, 000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total MWM $227,000 $1,292,000 $227,000 $1,292,000 $227,000 $1,292,000 $227,000 $1,292,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP vl.l l 31 1 Packet Pg. 39 Seaview Park � a >I al 00' 185th PI SW 186th St SW, Post Office �• � NMoN LLi NVV64D a 3 a� o, a it 184th PI SW OLYMPIC V1EV pR Lynndale Park u Install traffic signal (the intersection currently stop controlled for all movements). (ROADWAY ROJECT PRIORITY in 2015 Transportation Plan: #11). The improvement will reduce the intersection delay. The projected Level of Service is LOS F in 2035, which is below the City = concurrency standards (LOS D). The project will improve the Level of Service to LOS B. $1,347,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $230,000 $1,117,000 $1,347,000 $1,347,000 $1,347,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP 0.11 32 1 Packet Pg. 40 w a > SpWDO�NyJQy ' III—' - 2125 NSTSW I 3 I > Q > LO T W N 'i iQ 11 LP) I 22OTH ST SW > a a = > a > a 3 LO a 3 > 228TH ST S'. i° 228TH ST3� yam > �c LO < r - 236TH N ST Q1AJ . Widen 84th Ave. W to (3) lanes with curb, gutter, bike lanes, and sidewalk on each side of the street. (part of this project w c ranked #6 in the Long Walkway list of the 2015 Transportation Plan). Improve traffic flow, access and active transportation uses by installing a center two way left turn lane, sidewalks, bike IanE and street lighting. t` Estimated Project Cost L *Includes prior year expenditures $17,615,000 c L Project Cost 2024 2025• •27 2028 2029• • c Design $2,245,000 Right of Way Construction $15,370,000 Expense Total $17,615,000 Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 C REET Fund 126 c c Transportation Impact Fees ` General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 i Federal Grants State Grants ` y Unsecured Funding $17,615,000 Funding Source Total $17,615,000 J 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 33 1 Packet Pg. 41 Seattle LV 243rd PI SW Lake Baptist � Ba � P > Ballinger 4Q r` Church Q tilp� F H Os,�MONO 11, s wA Y �Nt20.51H ST - �z N 205TH ST W N 204TH PL Z 0 0 _ 0 LU N N 2 P J a �y Q�14 . 2NQ A Q Y z � e Add a second westbound left turn lane along SR-104. This project was identified in the SR-104 Complete Street Corridor Analysis (completed in 2015). Improve access, safety and delay at the intersection. $3,424,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $510,000 $2,914,000 $3,424,000 $3,424,000 $3,424,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP All 34 1 Packet Pg. 42 ";� O DALE BEgC N'�'O 174th St SW 69 v O(0)4 2p 4W# \Z Q "sth p,swe o` I � a� a� �a 173rd PI SW 7�3rd St SW 174th St SW St. Thomas Moore School A Widen Olympic View Dr. to add a northbound left turn lane for 50' storage length. Shift the northbound lanes to the east tc provide an acceleration lane for eastbound left turns. Install traffic signal to increase the LOS and reduce intersection delay (ROADWAY PROJECT PRIORITY in 2015 Transportation Plan: #13) Improve intersection efficiency and safety of drivers accessing either street. Estimated Project Cost *Includes prior year expenditures $715,000 Project Cost DRight of Way esign Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $120,000 $595,000 $715,000 $715,000 $715,000 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 35 1 Packet Pg. 43 *aim ' c • 175th St SW < < F. Pre �r�c a N Snohomish u County Park i The project will stabilize the roadway subgrade and embankment and rebuild the damaged pavement on 175th St. SW Repair roadway and stabilize slope embankment. $1,000,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 36 1 Packet Pg. 44 This program started in 2019 and will provide new signal upgrades, such as vehicle detection at intersections, new vehicle/pedestrian head equipment and other signal -related upgrades. These improvements will improve the safety of the City's transportation system. Improve reliabilityof traffic signal operation. Project Cost *Includes prior year expenditures $30,290 P Design $500 Right of Way Construction $29,790 Expense Total $30,290 Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 $30,290 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Grants Funding Source Total $30,290 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 37 1 Packet Pg. 45 The City Council added this study to the 2023-2028 CFP-CIP during the 2023 budget deliberations. This study will re-evaluat alternatives identified in the 2016 Edmonds Waterfront Alternative Access Study and potential new alternatives for improving the reliability of emergency responses to the Waterfront. Both through and stopping trains can simultaneously block Main Street and Dayton Street impacting emergency response times to the Waterfront. The many amenities along the Edmonds Waterfront (including the new Waterfront/Senior Center dive park, marina, whale watching service, off leash dog park, restaurants, etc.) on the west side of the BNSF train tracks ar drawing an increasing number of visitors —meaning the potential for accidents and health emergencies is ever-increasing. The study will develop potential solutions to address this issue. Project Cost 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030-44 Planning 000 Expense Total $50,000 Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & REET Fund 125 $50,000 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $50,000 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 38 1 Packet Pg. 46 2024 PW CFP/CIP All 39 1 1 Packet Pg. 47 WIVIUNUJ WAY I ■ v Q r lu a Q o, 2 O O y �S e � L' a 23l st PI s64 a' rn 233rd St SW v Q L 1 a Q 234th St SW tSNtKANU t r. ■ s > 231 st St SW IL �3 232nd 3 v Q All m 2.34th PI 32nd PI _ w u Install sidewalk along 232nd St. SW from 100th Ave. W to SR-104. This project ranked #3 in the Long Walkway List of 2015 c Transportation Plan. This project would improve pedestrian safety. $1,856,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $284,000 $1,572,000 $284,000 $1,572,000 $284,000 $1,572,000 $284,000 $1,572,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP All 40 1 Packet Pg. 48 •��~••�� iviaarona Elementary School 236th St Install sidewalk with curb and gutter along 236nd St. SW from Madrona Elementary to 97th Ave. W. This project ranked #4 Long Walkway list of the 2015 Transportation Plan. This project would improve pedestrian safety. •:: 111 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $296,000 $1,692,000 $296,000 $1,692,000 $296,000 $1,692,000 $296,000 $1,692,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP vl.l l 41 1 Packet Pg. 49 hStSW W s a Q 00 r\ � MMMMJ2.3'6't h St SIN 236th i i S > a a a 00 Q r` o 00 u Install sidewalk along 236th St. SW from Hwy 99 to 76th Ave. W. This project ranked #10 in Long Walkway List of the 2015 c Transportation Plan. This project would improve pedestrian safety. $1,937,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $276,000 c $1,661,000 $1,937,000 $1,937,OOC y $1,937,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP All 42 1 Packet Pg. 50 9y = LSPERANU: W "Z y �: !� v - £ i 234th St SN' C _ 2 A i _ 0 4 � - Madrona Ln PARK EDMONDS APTS WHIRLY s BALL 0 Z 0 IQ N = W��' i W Christ "LL 11h ■rr� 235th PI Sl^ s Lutheran NORTH HAVE N a MANOR w i r CHRIST LUTHERAN Church q 1 L CHURCH TRAILER rn Q^ S _ 236ih St S1^/ - aicE Park and Ride OFFICE �Q COURT 236th St SW� 23601 23603 SAFEWAY 23605 L KJIHG @ ,� F -�c �'� 3 D _ 100 M-N SUNSET ! Q N 236119 p _ = P WILLOW BROOK C LL PARK PL p CONDOS '9 B1-10 D APTS F R AURORA 23701.32 Q LoENos ,. C E S MARKETPLACE ro CREST B G T _- 04 -; Lj Q A U FAMILY PANCAKE 06 - N 8901 m H V '7-11" - •� 238TH ST SW 238th St S,. u 23800 2380421R1 $FOUL - The walkway project proposed approximately 1,000 LF of new sidewalk on the east side of 84th Ave W with ADA compliant c pedestrian curb ramps. This project would improve pedestrian safety. $1,510,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 ARPA Funds Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $160,000 $1,350,000 $160,000 $1,350,000 $160,000 $1,350,000 $160,000 $1,350,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP All 43 1 Packet Pg. 51 206th St m a � v � > a 207ih St S v; 208th SY -. iW 208th PI S' D �c PI SW ICI a � v O Y N AG IL, _ E -- a E — - a � EDMOND LYNNWOOD208TH sT sw -- s w Q S 2 � � � C 210th St SW _ v v a a 0 s a G m v N i 212TH ST SW u f r Install sidewalk along 80th Ave. W from 206th St. SW to 212th St. SW with curb and gutter. This project ranked #1 in Long Walkway List of the 2015 Transportation Plan. The improvements will improve active transportation safety (including for school kids due to proximity of several schools) Estimated Project Cost *Includes prior year expenditures $1,582,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $110,000 $120,000 $1,352,000 $110,000 $120,000 $1,352,000 $110,000 $120,000 $1,352,000 $110,000 $120,000 $1,352,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP v1.11 44 1 Packet Pg. 52 v\�R c • sr4 �� Q \C sahst.sw, `180th St s SW �a i — 05 Q 0 181st PI SW 3 c O 3 1 •'J ri D W 78 2nd St SW 6 £ PI SW m a a -d WaY ri ss• � n W I� �d9e M 84th S s Q 184th St SW � 2° C v = ►- a� � i a' co Cr c I�sns�. 185th PI SW 41�c I p ` 186th St SW ^ - V/Q Q� Ov t C 87tn PI sw v LYNNWOOD 3 a 187th St SW Q o � t c �a " C0 _Q 188th St SW 187th PI SW -187th PI SW f c u 188th PI SW Install sidewalk along 80th Ave. W from 188th St. SW to OVD. This project ranked #13 in Long Walkway List of the 2015 Transportation Plan. This project would improve pedestrian safety. $2,333,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $482,000 $1,851,000 $482,000 $1,851,000 $482,000 $1,851,000 $482,000 $1,851,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP All 45 1 Packet Pg. 53 em a nta ry Chase Lake School Q c N 00 216th St SW3 a i a� 0 00 -Edmonds Woodway High School > Swedis ?r Edmorn W Q 2 - r11, Is � s W N d s 7 > a 9 ve W r _ `L 219th St SW F- n. 5 N 00 Edmonds 220TH ST SW F_ ONCE Church of God F_ A Install sidewalk along 218th St. SW from 76th Ave. W to 84th Ave. W with curb and gutter. This project ranked #2 in Long Walkway List of the 2015 Transportation Plan. The improvements will improve pedestrian safety. $1,738,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $264,000 $1,474,000 $264,000 $1,474,000 $264,000 $1,474,000 $264,000 $1,474,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP All 46 1 Packet Pg. 54 THE MARINER Alder St w COMMODORE ¢w ¢ w O o a N L �KEGORY *� > Holly DrID L .. J �3 O Cedar St N Ai u Install sidewalk on the south side of Walnut St. from 6th Ave. S to 7th Ave. S. This project is ranked #9 in the Short Walkway C. List (from 2015 Transportation Plan). Estimated Project Cost *Includes prior year expenditures $290,000 WT�Tm VIII$elfI Design $50,000 Right of Way Construction $240,000 Expense Total $290,000 Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding $290,000 Funding Source Total $290,000 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 47 1 Packet Pg. 55 MCDONALD'S ANT a a STEVENS COURT AEGIS VALUE O� Swedish ----- VILLA GEO Edmonds 216th St SW EDMONDS q� MEDICAL PAVILION 21605 KRUGER CLINIC EN'S TH ER 216th St SWT O .1�0 N OJT Install 150' sidewalk on north side of 216th St. SW from Hwy. 99 to 72nd Ave. W (completing a missing link on north side of 216th St. SW). This project is ranked #3 in the Short Walkway List (from 2015 Transportation Plan). To provide a safe and desirable walking route. $220,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total im $33,000 $187,000 $220,000 $220,000 $220,000 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 48 1 Packet Pg. 56 The project will add bike lanes or sharrows on the following streets: • 100th Ave/9th Ave from 244th St to Walnut St • Walnut/Bowdoin Way from 9th Ave to 84th Ave • 228th St. from 76th Ave to 80th Ave • Bike sharrows on 80th Ave from 228th St. to 220th St. Pedestrian crossing improvements including curb ramps, rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFB) and signing will be installed at 100th Ave & 224th St, 9th Ave & Pine St, Bowdoin Way& 96th Ave and Bowdoin Way & Pioneer Way. The project is currently in the construction phase and completion will be subject to available weather in Fall 2023. Project close-out is scheduled for 2024. This project will create new bike connections to various destination points throughout the City (such as schools, parks, Downtown, Sound Transit Station...). Sound Transit awarded the grant to fund improvements that will provide more convenient access so that more people can use Sound Transit services. $3,000,000 Design Right of Way Construction $15,000 Expense Total $15,000 Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 $10,095 REET Fund 126 $4,905 Funding Source Total $15,000 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 49 1 Packet Pg. 57 - J s a a _CASP-ERS ST - M 4 6 3: ..r. - -- — ----- -200th-St-SW z 3 - a' 4r Mountain Ln z Vista PI a > a 3 Q L ¢ O � 201 st PI SW CO� Q b-P Z Carol Way 202nd St SW- � a y ha St SLLJ ierra PI a v 's -o j W = n Z 2nd PI SW Q' > = > > a - a Q Glen 8[ Q Glen St U Q a s � � St SWCO � s 203rd s D aAems 20a �' �04 10 a- _ h St SW Daley St Daley St J 10, 13 a O WZZ SPr,O-si Sprague St PIN 205th PI SW a n a as St Edmonds St E6111L"jdl sr Edmonds St m �,-206th St-SWr - o Bell St Fm�,at��lls Bell St o x207th 1207thPI SW St N a a m N - -- - - - - - MAIN ST- - - - - 208th PI SW Construct sidewalk on Maplewood Dr. from Main St. to 200th St. SW (- 2,700'). A sidewalk currently exists on 200th St. SW from Main St. to 76th Ave. W, adjacent to Maplewood Elementary School (rated #18 in the Long Walkway list of the 2015 Transportation Plan). Create pedestrian connection between Maplewood Elementary School on 200th St. SW and Main St., by encouraging kids t use non -motorized transportation to walk to / from school. Estimated Project Cost *Includes prior year expenditures • 111 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $220,000 $220,000 $2,511,000 $220,000 $220,000 $2,511,000 $220,000 $220,000 $2,511,000 $220,000 $220,000 $2,511,000 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 50 1 Packet Pg. 58 - — — 220TH W ST S - LU a NV 3 3 0 '' ■ a a m ZZ ■ m m LU IF o d t St S� S V z W W 221s v. r a v of `� ♦ 221 st P a �� M1 ♦ ` �- Q s M a 1 4- A6 CO 7 it � �►��;�� '� �' ♦ �'_ ; MOB,. to 3' N 224th St SW ati — 224th St sw Install sidewalk along 95th PI. W from 224th St. SW to 220th St. SW with curb and gutter. This project ranked #8 in the Lonf Walkway List of the 2015 Transportation Plan. This project would improve pedestrian safety. $862,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $131,000 $731,000 $131,000 $731,000 $131,000 $731,000 $131,000 $731,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP All 51 1 Packet Pg. 59 a Seattle : 243rd PI SW Baptist W Lake FQMo 0 Church Q Ballinger QMo /VOS tv t• AY N 205TH' SiTiil�i . N 205TH ST z Z- N 204TH PL Q 204TH PL a Z Z W 0 Q > z Q NERD p� I a W O�i02N� , -n�ao sr m Extend bike lanes within proximity of the intersection in northbound and southbound directions. Install APS on all corners and new ADA curb ramps. Improve active transportation safety along this section of the Interurban Trail and across SR-104. $1, 571, 000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $261,000 $1,310,000 $261,000 $1,310,000 $261,000 $1,310,000 $261,000 $1,310,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP All 52 1 Packet Pg. 60 A Installation of street lights along various streets within Downtown Edmonds. This project will add new street lighting in Downtown to improve pedestrian safety at night. $1,638,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $328,000 $1,310,000 $328,000 $1,310,000 $328,000 $1,310,000 $328,000 $1,310,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP All 53 1 Packet Pg. 61 Edmonds I � Holly Dr I I Cedar St Cedar St I Marsh Howell Way I Magncila a ( i Spruce S1 Q Homeland 01 Spruce St C + Z N Spruce PI I s p v w Hemlock Way t Hemlock St W V) MCO La�-1 :,, s; a i j Erben Dr j I Q < Seamont Ln a Laurel St v H 0 G = L > Q M Ln r � PINE ST Pine sty � I ( r' f St Pine St > q a = }I� QQ N Forsyth Ln< > G - - e '- 5 Z Fir PI a ... no � N O n Fir S[ � ( On F;,. °I u �w Installation of sidewalk with ADA curb ramps along SR-104 from the HAWK signal to Pine St and along Pine St from SR-1041 c 9th Ave S 7 This project will improve pedestrian connectivity between the residential areas along 3rd Ave. S to Downtown Edmonds an i City Park. 0 Estimated Project Cost E *Includes prior year expenditures $3,276,000 to Project Cost u 2024 2025• •27 2028 2029• • to Design $273,000 $273,000 $2,730,000 ( Right of Way i Construction ? Expense Total $273,000 $273,000 $2,730,000 i Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- p REET Fund 125 `c c REET Fund 126 C Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants < w Unsecured Funding $273,000 $273,000 $2,730,000 Funding Source Total $273,000 $273,000 $2,730,000 i 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 54 1 Packet Pg. 62 Sierra Park ,a St : O o 0 �- 00 O 1st St S1N " 4 w ■ en ■ A 192nd PI No I Install sidewalk along 191th St. SW from 80th Ave. W to 76th Ave., with curb and gutter. This project ranked #8 in Long Walkway List of the 2015 Transportation Plan. This project would improve pedestrian safety. $719,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $106,000 $613,000 $719,000 $719,000 y $719,000 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 55 1 Packet Pg. 63 a J T 3 r ♦ r � I � aobin Hood DrJ% J � P n Fr),, pa E Q'Ln ?:Z MO O:E �Lu w 232nd St SW Salem Edmonds Lutheran Heights Church K-12 Scriber Lake ■ , ;r High School" LU a ost.� Hickman 236th PI SW s o :2 Park a �' N 73'1ih pj SW Edmonds Faith Memorial ? 237th P Community 238tn St sw Cemetery rk.—k N i u Install sidewalk along 104th Ave. W from 238th ST. SW to 106th Ave. W, with curb and gutter. This project ranked #10 in tr c Long Walkway List of the 2015 Transportation Plan. This project would improve pedestrian safety. Estimated Project Cost *Includes prior year expenditures $1,124,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $170,000 C $954,000 $1,124,000 $1,124,000 y $1,124,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP v1.11 56 1 Packet Pg. 64 218th St SW � o n_ s c 219th St SW c a s c 00 N 220TH ST SW - - Edmonds Church of God - ESPERANCE Project Description C c c Install sidewalk along 8Oth Ave. W from 218th ST. SW to 22Oth ST. SW, with curb and gutter. This project ranked #7 in the c Short Walkway List of the 2015 Transportation Plan. This project would improve pedestrian safety. $344,000 r LDesign Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $63,000 $281,000 $344,000 $344,000 y $344,000 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 57 1 Packet Pg. 65 ,I PI SW s 4 r Ln 00 . 186th St SW m 187th St SW e Q N Seaview 188th St SW00 u Elementary K— Install sidewalk along 84th Ave. W from 188th St. SW to 186th St. SW., with curb and gutter. This project ranked #5 in Shor c Walkway List of the 2015 Transportation Plan. This project would improve pedestrian safety. $348,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $53,000 $295,000 $348,000 $348,000 y $348,000 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 58 1 Packet Pg. 66 .. 8 U U J > � L L O C O +- C L C 00 00 C) 00 �Q o 00 _N �. M L L O 00 2401h St SW Mathay Rmilinnor Ll Install sidewalk along 238th St. SW from Hwy 99 to 76th Ave. W. This project ranked #10 in Long Walkway List of the 2015 c Transportation Plan. This project would improve pedestrian safety. $1,363,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $199,000 $1,164,000 $1,363,000 $1,363,000 y $1,363,000 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 59 1 Packet Pg. 67 N (D 7th and C A\je °' W 1'ista PI Q Elm Park 2 H O� Elm 5t 220TH ST SW CO (U a C t F CO /raj W � a OOOOOF > Elm PI CD , �. c O poA/ar Goo r aY i I A The walkway project is ranked #6 on the short walkway list from the 2015 Transportation Plan. The project will install approximately 700 feet of new sidewalk, six pedestrian curb ramps and modify the existing stormwater system on Elm Wa) between 8th Ave. S and 9th Ave. S. This project will complete an important missing sidewalk link. The project is currently in the construction phase and completion will be subject to available weather in Fall 2023. Project close-out is scheduled for 2024. The project will improve pedestrian safety and provide a missing link of sidewalk on Elm Way between 8th Ave and 9th Ave $1,100,000 Design Right of Way Construction $10,000 Expense Total $10,000 Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 $6,000 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 $4,000 Funding Source Total $10,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP v1.11 60 1 Packet Pg. 68 This program started in 2019 and will provide pedestrian safety improvements, such as RRFB's and flashing LED's around stop signs. These improvements will improve the safety of the City's transportation system. Improve safety at pedestrian crossings. Estimated Project Cost *Includes prior year expenditures :1 1 r LDesign $1,000 Right of Way Construction $79,770 Expense Total $80,770 Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 $80,770 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Grants Funding Source Total $80,770 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 61 1 Packet Pg. 69 Final design of 4th Avenue Cultural Corridor to include site design and construction documents for a safe, pedestrian friendly, and art enhanced corridor in the public right of way which provides a strong visual connection along 4th Avenue N between Main Street and Edmonds Center for the Arts. Interim work on this project since the concept was developed includes a 2015 temporary light artwork "Luminous Forest", as well as preliminary design development through 2020-21. Funding for this project has not been secured at this time. The 4th Avenue Cultural Corridor Project is managed by the Community Services/Economic Development Department. The corridor improvements in the public right of way will encourage pedestrian traffic and provide a strong visual connecti( between the ECA and downtown retail. Improvements will enhance connectivity as an attractive walking corridor and contribute to the economic vitality in downtown. The project has been supported by the community in the 2014 Communii Cultural Plan and in the goals and priorities for the State certified Creative District. This project is supported by the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan. $9,206,600 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 General Fund Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $1,000,000 $500,000 $500,000 $6,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $6,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $6,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $6,000,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP All 62 1 Packet Pg. 70 2024 PW CFP/CIP All Public Works - Transportation Ferry Storage Improvements from Pine St to Dayton St im W Dayton St Dayton St Dayton St _ - Puget Sound G Q L N > Maple a Alder St I � a In N r w " w Q -- Walnut _St Edmonds Marsh m u) Holly Dr c Howell Way N Homela.6 Dr > L C C'o 3 �o a rr c cnl dy Ol w o Hemlock Way X Erben Dr L Seamont Ln Modify existing lane channelization on SR104 to add vehicle storage for ferry users. Reduce conflicts between ferry storage and access to local driveways. $380,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $57,000 $323,000 $380,000 $380,000 $380,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP vl.l l 64 1 Packet Pg. 72 2024 PW CFP/CIP All 65 Packet Pg. 73 Install traffic calming devices along selected stretches throughout the City with speeding issues (through completion of detailed evaluation). This ongoing annual program started in 2015 and is included in the City's 6-year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Reduce vehicle speeds on City streets that qualify under the City's Traffic Calming Policy. Estimated Project Cost *Includes prior year expenditures $100,000 (2024) Design $11,000 Right of Way Construction $89,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $330,000 Expense Total $100,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $330,000 Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 C c REET Fund 126 $100,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $330,000 c Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 j Federal Grants e State Grants y Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $100,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $330,000 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 66 1 Packet Pg. 74 2024 PW CFP/CIP All 67 Packet Pg. 75 The 2017 Transition Plan completed an ADA evaluation and prioritization of the City's street right-of-way. This decision package will update the 2017 plan and expand the evaluation to include City Buildings and Parks facilities. The Plan will inventory physical barriers preventing accessibility and develop actions and preliminary cost estimates to address ADA non compliance. Inventories and prioritizes ADA issues in the City right of way, as well as City buildings and parks facilities. Estimated Project Cost *Includes prior year expenditures � � 1 111 Design $440,000 Right of Way Construction Expense Total $440,000 Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- $105,000 REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund $335,000 Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $440,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP All 68 1 Packet Pg. 76 The Transportation Plan serves as the transportation element of the City's Comprehensive Plan and is being updated in coordination with the 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update. Based upon existing and projected future land use and travel patterns, the Transportation Plan describes street, pedestrian, bicycle and transit infrastructure and services and provides assessment of existing and projected future transportation needs. The Plan will establish the transportation priorities and guides the development of the six -year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), Capital Improvement Program (CIP) an Capital Facilities Plan (CFP). The plan was last updated in 2015. The Transportation Plan serves as the transportation element of the City's Comprehensive Plan. The Transportation Plan is being updated in coordination with the 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update. Based upon existing and projected future land use and travel patterns, the Transportation Plan describes roadway pedestrian, bicycle and transit infrastructure and services and provides an assessment of existing and projected future transportation needs. The Plan will establish the transportation priorities and guides the development of the six -year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), Capital Improvement Program (CIP), Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) and introduce Multimodal Level of Service (MMLOS). $406,000 Planning $236,085 Right of Way Construction Expense Total $236,085 Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- $236,085 REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees Funding Source Total $236,085 2024 PW CFP/CIP v1.11 69 Packet Pg. 77 DRAFT 2024 PW CFP/CIP v1.11 70 Packet Pg. 78 DRAFT AMMOUL-_,�r t The City of Edmonds proposes the development of this project to demonstrate how green infrastructure can both address stormwater flows and enhance the streetscapes to benefit the Hwy 99 neighborhood and the downtown core. This project includes the following elements: • Roadway narrowing to reduce traffic speeds and to reduce impervious surface (vehicular capacity retained) • Sidewalks and planting strips added • Bioretention cells collect runoff from the road through curb cuts • Bioretention cells collect runoff directly from sidewalks • Public private partnership potential with Housing Hope and Terrace Place developments. Incorporating green streets into the urban fabric of the City of Edmonds is intended to demonstrate how trees, vegetation, engineered green stormwater solutions, physical and visual narrowing of vehicular lane widths, and shortening pedestrian crossings with curb bulbs help to slow traffic, ameliorate climate change impacts, and reinforce desired land use and transportation patterns on appropriate street rights -of -way. This project is intended to increase the livability of a diverse, growing city. $3,500,000 Design $350,000 Right of Way Construction $3,150,000 Expense Total $350,000 $3,150,000 Unsecured Funding $350,000 $3,150,000 Funding Source Total $350,000 $3,150,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP v1.11 71 Packet Pg. 79 DRAFT 5.1.a Mm O a c m 1 ' 1 •) COSTN d r PWW-01 2024 WL Overlay 27 $225,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $225,000 $0 $225,000 v O LL PWW-02 Phase 13 Annual Replacement Program (2023) 30 $10,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,000 $0 $10,000 +a .Q co PWW-03 Phase 14 Annual Replacement Program (2024) 31 $3,300,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,300,000 $0 $3,300,000 U rn N PWW-04 Phase 15 Annual Replacement Program (2025) 25 $426,000 $3,666,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,092,000 $0 O $4,092,000 N It N PWW-05 Phase 16 Annual Replacement Program (2026) $0 $547,000 $3,813,000 $0 $0 $0 $4,360,000 $0 O $4,360,000 N N rn PWW-06 Phase 17 Annual Replacement Program (2027) $0 $0 $569,000 $3,966,000 $0 $0 $4,535,000 $0 $4,535,000 Q O i PWW-07 Phase 18 Annual Replacement Program (2028) $0 $0 $0 $592,000 $4,124,000 $0 $4,716,000 $0 $4,716,000 er H LL PWW-08 Phase 19 Annual Replacement Program (2029) $0 $0 $0 $0 $616,000 $4,289,000 $4,905,000 $0 $4,905,000 0 PWW-09 Phase Annual Replacement Program (2030) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $641,000 $641,000 $102,677,000 $103,318,000 LL & Futuree Programs U a PWW-11 Yost & Seaview Reservoir Repairs & Upgrades 26 $850,000 $4,500,000 $3,850,000 $0 $0 $0 $9,200,000 $0 $9,200,000 U TOTAL EXPENDITURE $4,811,000 $8,713,000 $8,232,000 $4,558,000 $4,740,000 $4,930,000 $35,984,000 $102,677,000 $138,661,OOC V 1 • 14 1 1 1 1 1' TOTALFUN 1 14 • � ' ' a Water Fund -421 $4,811,000 $8,713,000 $8,232,000 $4,558,000 $4,740,000 $4,930,000 $35,984,000 $102,677,000 $138,661,OOC N O N C N E L V r.+ Q r C d t V R r-' r Q 2024 PW CFP/CIP v1.11 73 1 Packet Pg. 81 5.1.a E R L- aM 0 Per the approved 2017 Water Comprehensive Plan, the project will replace/maintain pipe and related appurtenances at various locations throughout the City due to old age, being undersized, need to increase flow or pressure, or more prone tc breakage due to its material properties. Road pavement overlays will cover areas of roadways that were excavated and patched in previous years as part of the Waterline Replacement Projects. Improve overall pavement condition in locations that were excavated and patched due to the Annual Waterline Replaceme Projects. $225,000 Design $20,000 Right of Way Construction $205,000 Expense Total $225,000 Water Fund 421 $225,000 Funding Source Total $225,000 2024 PW CFPOP v1.11 74 Packet Pg. 82 DRAFT Per the approved 2017 Water Comprehensive Plan, the projects will replace/maintain pipe and related appurtenances at various locations throughout the City due to old age, being undersized, need to increase flow or pressure, or more prone tc breakage due to its material properties. Maintain a high level of drinking water quality, improve overall system reliability, decrease probability of breakages and leakage, improve fire flows, and decrease overall day to day maintenance costs. $2.1 to $4.9 million/year Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Water Fund 421 Funding Source Total $461,000 $547,000 $569,000 $592,000 $616,000 $641,000 $13,348,O1C $3,525,000 $3,666,000 $3,813,000 $3,966,000 $4,124,000 $4,289,000 $89,328,99C $3,986,000 $4,213,000 $4,382,000 $4,558,000 $4,740,000 $4,930,000 $102,677,000 $3,736,000 $4,213,000 $4,382,000 $4,558,000 $4,740,000 $4,930,000 $1O2,677,OOC $3,736,000 $4,213,000 $4,382,000 $4,558,000 $4,740,000 $4,930,000 $102,677,000 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 75 Packet Pg. 83 DRAFT �► 'W% 185th PI SW < Yost Park rn W >i Q 2 �db I- 186th PI SW Seaview 00 00 �0 Water Tank a I�OO/ G' y y � , This work is being done to provide structural upgrades, repair leakages, and upgrades to our two underground potable wat storage reservoirs. Preliminary findings completed in early 2023 were used to determine order of magnitude/preliminary costs and next steps for the now planned repairs and upgrades project. The Yost Reservoir report shows that it will need a major structural and seismic retrofit, plus repairs to address leakage from the reservoir. The report for the Seaview Reservoir shows similar issues as the Yost Reservoir, with a less serious leakage issue. Maintain a high level of drinking water quality, improve overall system reliability, decrease probability of leakage, retrofit structures so that they meet current structural codes to improve their resiliency during earthquakes, and decrease overall day to day maintenance costs. $9,659,430 Design $850,000 $650,000 Right of Way Construction $3,850,000 $3,850,000 Expense Total $850,000 $4,500,000 $3,850,000 Water Fund 421 $850,000 $4,500,000 $3,850,000 Funding Source Total $850,000 $4,500,000 $3,850,000 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 76 Packet Pg. 84 DRAFT 5.1.a E m L- tm 0 L- a. 4) E 0 L- CL E m CL • is u a. U) 5.1.a STORMWATER N Edmonds Marsh Estuary Restoration Related Projects r PWD-01 X Edmonds Marsh Water Quality Improvements 34 $90,000 $644,843 $0 $0 $0 $0 $734,843 $0 $734,E LL Perrinville Creek Basin Projects +a PWD-03 Perrinville Creek Flow Management Projects 41 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $600,000 $1,400,000 $2,000,C rL U PWD-04 X Lower Perrinville Creek Restoration Phase 1 35 $275,000 $4,105,000 $3,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $7,380,000 $0 $7,380,C N PWD-23 Perrinville Creek Basin Analysis Update 38 $594,390 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $594,390 $0 0 $594,2 Storm Drainage Improvement Projects N N PWD-06 Lake Ballinger Regional Facility Design & Construction $0 $0 $200,000 $3,000,000 $0 $0 $3,200,000 $0 $3,200,C N PWD-22 7317 Lake Ballinger Way Floodplain Purchase & 43 $120,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $120,000 $0 $120,C p Structure Removal Annually Funded Projects a F- PWD-11 Phase 4 Annual Storm Replacement Project (2023) 42 $1,377,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,377,000 $0 $1,377,C Q PWD-12 Phase 5 Annual Storm Replacement Project (2024) 36 $324,000 $1,687,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,011,000 $0 $2,011,C 0 a PWD-13 Phase 6 Annual Storm Replacement Project (2025) $0 $337,000 $1,755,000 $0 $0 $0 $2,092,000 $0 $2,092,C U a_ PWD-14 Phase 7 Annual Storm Replacement Project (2026) $0 $0 $351,000 $1,825,000 $0 $0 $2,176,000 $0 $2,176,C U Y PWD-15 Phase 8 Annual Storm Replacement Project (2027) $0 $0 $0 $365,000 $1,898,000 $0 $2,263,000 $0 $2,263,C C PWD-16 Phase 9 Annual Storm Replacement Project (2029) $0 $0 $0 $0 $380,000 $1,974,000 $2,354,000 $0 $2,354,C .0 PWD-18 Phase 10 Annual Storm Replacement (2030) & $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $395,000 $395,000 $49,360,000 $49,755,C d Future Projects PWD-19 2024 SD Overlays 39 $315,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $315,000 $0 $315,C c N Compliance Related Projects ' r PWD-17 Storm and Surface Water Comprehensive Plan 37 $350,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $350,000 $0 $350,C d TOTAL EXPENDITURE $3,545,390 $6,873,843 $5,406,000 $5,290,000 $2,378,000 $2,469,000 $25,962,233 $50,760,000 $76,722,2 • c� M SOURCEFUNDING 1 1 1. 1 1 I' 1 1 • Q (2024-2029) Stormwater Utility Fund - 422 $2,871,750 $3,683,611 $3,156,000 $3,040,000 $2,378,000 $2,469,000 $17,598,361 $50,760,000 $68,358,2 c ARPA Funds $114,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $114,000 $0 d $114,C E Secured Grants $524,450 $575,632 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,100,082 $0 t $1,100,C City of Lynnwood $35,190 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $35,190 $0 .r $35,1 Q Unsecured Grants $0 $2,614,600 $2,250,000 $2,250,000 $0 $0 $7,114,600 $0 $7,114,6uu TOTAL REVENUE $3,545,390 $6,873,843 $5,406,000 $5,290,000 $2,378,000 $2,469,000 $25,962,233 $50, 1 Packet Pg. 86 2024 PW CFP/CIP v1.11 78 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 Public Works - Stormwater Edmonds Marsh Water Quality Improvements Edmonds Marsh �• Q N C 0 O y C W Wildlife Refuge City Park Howell Way T —0—M a A i iW �t I_1 The project will be improving water quality of stormwater runoff by replacing existing catch basins along the west side of S 104 funded via a DOE grant and on the east side of SR-104 via a state funded appropriation. The catch basins will be replaced with catch basins that include water filter cartridges. Staff proposes this effort in order to provide water quality mitigation for all discharges that directly enter the marsh from these locations. Improve water quality of stormwater discharging into the Edmonds Marsh from the west portions of SR-104 located near C marsh. The improvements will provide better habitat for the return of salmon to the marsh. $876,000 Design $90,000 Right of Way Construction $644,843 Expense Total $90,000 $644,843 Stormwater Utility Fund 422 $11,250 $69,211 ARPA Funds Secured Grants $78,750 $575,632 Unsecured Grants Funding Source Total $90,000 $644,843 2024 PW CFP/CIP vl.l l 80 1 Packet Pg. 88 2024 PW CFP/CIP All Reducing scouring flows to reduce sediments load in Perrinville Creek was identified in a previous basin report completed ii 2015 as a critical element of restoring this creek which has been significantly impacted by urban development. The project! funded by this program are incremental steps toward recovering this stream run as adequate fish habitat. These efforts ha) become even more critical given recent challenges around the Perrinville Creek outfall area. This program is a fund for implementing projects within the Perrinville Creek basin to reduce scour flows in the creek. It allows staff flexibility to respond to ad -hoc opportunities such as rain garden cluster projects, or ensure matching funds are available for chasing grant applications for flow reductions projects. The project will reduce peak flows in Perrinville creek, improve fish passage and decrease creek bed scour during peak flow events. $100,000/year Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Stormwater Utility Fund 422 ARPA Funds Secured Grants Unsecured Grants Funding Source Total $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $140,000 $90,000 $90,000 $90,000 $90,000 $90,000 $90,000 $1,260,OOC $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $1,400,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $1,400,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $1,400,000 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 82 1 Packet Pg. 90 The purpose of this project is to improve the environmental health of the creek necessary to support fish habitat, and to restore the storm water capacity. The project consists of the modifications to three structures that currently prevent fish passage and are undersized for the flows on the creek, (1) the culvert at the BNSF track, remove and replace with a fish - friendly culvert or bridge with adequate flow capacity, (2) return flow to the creek between the diversion structure and the BNSF culvert by blocking the structure and restoring creek capacity and (3) culvert at Talbot Road, remove and replace witl- fish-friendly culvert or bridge that provides adequate fish passage and storm water flow capacity. This project will increase the resiliency of the watershed by building the structures that mimic the natural channel performance necessary for fish habitat and stormwater flow capacity. The project also includes time and effort to research and apply for supplemental/additional funding sources for construction. Due to the project complexity and number of stakeholders, the planning and design phase is estimated to be 2-years. The project will reduce City maintenance needs in the future and improve fish passage. $7,636,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Stormwater Utility Fund 422 ARPA Funds Secured Grants Unsecured Grants Funding Source Total $275,000 $1,305,000 $2,800,000 $3,000,000 $275,000 $4,105,000 $3,000,000 $161,000 $1,490,400 $750,000 $114,000 $2,614,600 $2,250,000 $275,000 $4,105,000 $3,000,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP All 83 1 Packet Pg. 91 City of Edmonds and Lynnwood joint project to supplement/update the Perrinville Creek 2015 basin analysis that determined possible locations for projects that would help decrease the peak storm flows during high rain events. Project will be updated to reflect projects completed and also determine if there are other locations within the basin to aid in the reduction of peak flows in the basin. Improve overall basin and stream health, by using green stormwater infrastructure methods. This will make it so that rainf is not simply collected and conveyed downstream and instead behaves as close as possible to natural conditions. This includes infiltrating rainfall runoff as close as possible to where it fell. This will also decrease stream peak flows, which will decrease stream erosion and improve the overall stream habitat for aquatic life. $649,200 Design $594,390 Right of Way Construction Expense Total $594,390 Stormwater Utility Fund 422 $141,000 ARPA Funds Secured Grants $418,200 City of Lynnwood $35,190 Unsecured Grants Funding Source Total $594,390 2024 PW CFP/CIP v1.11 84 Packet Pg. 92 DRAFT 2024 PW CFP/CIP v1.11 85 Packet Pg. 93 DRAFT Public Works - Stormwater P Lake Ballinger Regional Facility Design & Construction 1W coco 24Oth St SW 79th P' Mathay Ballinger Park fe a a 0 242nd St SW 24Oth PI SW J W Q = 241 st St SW F— %O r` A Lake Ballinger suffers from urban flooding & seasonal algae blooms along with other water quality impairments. The Highway 99 corridor is an area of high development, including a future City project which will require stormwater mitigation. By creating a regional facility, the City can improve the stormwater mitigation achieved by development, addressed stormwater mitigation needs for the future Highway project, and treat runoff from one of the City bigger polluti generating areas. The City can drastically improve Lake Ballinger water quality. The project proposes to implement water quality and flow control improvements at City -owned Mathay-Bal linger Park as green stormwater infrastructure (GSI) whic would significantly benefit the Lake ecology and habitat conditions and enhance a valued neighborhood, but underutilized, park. The project proposes to implement water quality and flow control improvements at City -owned Mathay-Ballinger Park as green stormwater infrastructure (GSI) which would significantly benefit the Lake ecology and habitat conditions and enhan a valued neighborhood, but underutilized, park. $3,200,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Stormwater Utility Fund 422 ARPA Funds Secured Grants Unsecured Grants Funding Source Total $200,000 $200,000 $2,800,000 $200,000 $3,000,000 $200,000 $750,000 $2,250,000 $200,000 $3,000,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP v1.11 86 1 Packet Pg. 94 The project purchases an existing single family residential property in 2023 located within the Lake Ballinger flood plain. Th City secured a $500,000 Department of Ecology grant to aid in this process. The home is the lowest property on the lake w is badly damaged from previous flooding to the point it is generally uninhabitable. The City intends to remove the home and any pollution generating surfaces from the site in 2024 as part of the initial 2023 purchase. The grant has restrictions that prevent this parcel to be used for public use. After demolition of the structures an impervious surfaces, the planned site use would be for public utility benefit only. Because the City storm drain line for SR-1 cuts through in an easement immediately adjacent to this parcel, the City plans to pursue a future project to split appropriate flows from the City storm drain system and provide water quality treatment to the maximum extent feasible. The future project would provide water quality treatment for a very heavily trafficked highway (SR-104) and would make significant improvement in water quality to Lake Ballinger and its downstream course to Lake Washington via McAleer Cre( Improve the health and water quality of Lake Ballinger by removing hard surfaces and a home that is generally uninhabitable. Project will also provide a future location to treat stormwater runoff from portions SR-104. $750,000 �IYZI Design Right of Way $10,000 Construction $110,000 Expense Total $120,000 Stormwater Utility Fund 422 $92,500 Secured Grants $27,500 Unsecured Grants Funding Source Total $120,000 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 87 Packet Pg. 95 DRAFT 2024 PW CFP/CIP All Annual storm drain replacement/maintenance projects. Projects propose to replace or rehab storm drain infrastructure in several locations throughout the City. Locations of work identified by City crews and staff via firsthand knowledge or video inspection results. Much of Edmonds stormwater infrastructure is past its useful lifespan and requires routine replacement or repair to preserve the function of the storm drain system. Failure to conduct annual maintenance projects will increase chances of storm drain system failure. Improve system reliability and capacity, decrease breakages, and decrease overall day to day maintenance costs $1.7 to $2.4 million/year Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Funding Source Total $354,000 $337,000 $351,000 $365,000 $380,000 $395,000 $8,230,139 $1,347,000 $1,687,000 $1,755,000 $1,825,000 $1,898,000 $1,974,000 $41,129,861 $1,701,000 $2,024,000 $2,106,000 $2,190,000 $2,278,000 $2,369,000 $49,360,000 $1,701,000 $2,024,000 $2,106,000 $2,190,000 $2,278,000 $2,369,000 $49,360,000 $1,701,000 $2,024,000 $2,106,000 $2,190,000 $2,278,000 $2,369,000 $49,360,000 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 gg Packet Pg. 97 DRAFT Road pavement overlays to cover areas of roadways that were excavated and patched in previous years as part of the Annual Storm Maintenance Projects. Improve overall pavement condition in locations that were excavated and patched due to the Annual Storm Replacement Projects. Estimated Project Cost prior year expenditures $315,000 Design $25,000 Right of Way Construction $290,000 Expense Total $315,000 Stormwater Utility Fund 422 $315,000 ARPA Funds Secured Grants Unsecured Grants Funding Source Total $315,000 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 90 Packet Pg. 98 DRAFT 2024 PW CFP/CIP All WOODWAv nkt rv� '. EDMONDS 4 ssswsrsw u"Woavaut cou"w r = MOUNTLAKE rtsnfu¢e TERRACE �Y ...in.�.x OdG COIIN7Y 1MN13 W ..... The City of Edmonds (City) owns and operates an extensive system of drainage pipes, ditches, and other assets to convey stormwater runoff into streams, lakes, and Puget Sound to prevent and minimize damage to private property, streets, and other infrastructure. The City is faced with the challenge of conveying this runoff safely and cost-effectively while preventir or minimizing the adverse impacts of high flows (erosion, flooding, and sediment deposition) and of stormwater pollutants on water quality and aquatic habitat. In addition, recent state and federal stormwater regulations make it technically and financially challenging to address these issues while balancing utility ratepayer costs. To proactively address these challeng and remain in compliance with the State -mandated National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Western Washington Phase II Municipal Stormwater Permit (NPDES Phase II permit) and other increasing regulatory requirements, the City is updating its current comprehensive storm and surface water management plan. This permit has and will continue to have significant impact on the workload and operational budget of both the Engineering Division and the Storm Crews within the Public Works Department. Per the State Department of Ecology, the plan will also include the work findings from their required (stormwater Management Action Plan) SMAP process of City drainage watersheds. Project will also include recommendations for stormwater utilities rates to be adjusted at the discretion of Council. A holistic summary of the City's Stormwater system with recommended priorities for selecting future capital maintenance and improvements projects. $733,000 Design $350,000 Right of Way Construction Expense Total $350,000 Stormwater Utility Fund 422 $350,000 Funding Source Total $350,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP v1.11 92 Packet Pg. 100 DRAFT i W-W Packet Pg. 101 5.1.a SEWER PWS-01 2024 SS Overlays PWS-02 Phase 10 Annual Sewer Replacement (2023) PWS-03 Phase 11 Annual Sewer Replacement (2024) PWS-04 Phase 12 Annual Sewer Replacement (2025) PWS-05 Phase 13 Annual Sewer Replacement (2026) PWS-06 Phase 14 Annual Sewer Replacement (2027) PWS-07 Phase 15 Annual Sewer Replacement (2028) PWS-08 Phase 16 Annual Sewer Replacement (2029) PWS-09 Phase 17 Annual Sewer Replacement (2030) & Future Projects PWS-10 Annual Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehabiliation PWS-11 Lake Ballinger Sewer PWS-13 Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehabilitation Phase 4 TOTAL EXPENDITURE Sewer Fund - 423 _ 040, •`0 2 51 $60,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $60,000 $0 $60,0C 46 $10,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,000 $0 Co $10,0C LL 49 $2,005,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,005,000 $0 $2,005,0( U 47 $363,498 $2,043,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,406,498 $0 $2,406,4� N O $0 $378,000 $2,125,000 $0 $0 $0 $2,503,000 $0 $2,503,0C N It N $0 $0 $393,000 $2,210,000 $0 $0 $2,603,000 $0 $2,603,0( N $0 $0 $0 $409,000 $2,299,000 $0 $2,708,000 $0 $2,708,0C N O O_ $0 $0 $0 $0 $425,000 $2,391,000 $2,816,000 $0 $2,816,0C o a_ $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $442,000 $442,000 $58,991,000 $59,433,0( 1.— LL Q $0 $542,000 $565,000 $587,000 $611,000 $636,000 $2,941,000 $13,228,000 $16,169,0C 0 $0 $0 $1,000,000 $6,000,000 $0 $0 $7,000,000 $0 $7,000,0( om U 50 $522,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $522,000 $0 $522,0C a U $2,960,498 $2,963,000 $4,083,000 $9,206,000 $3,335,000 $3,469,000 $26,016,498 $72,219,000 $98,235,4E Y O V 7 a 20220264 2025 1 1 • 1' I AL 1 1 • N 1 1 O N $2,960,498 $2,963,000 $4,083,000 $9,206,000 $3,335,000 $3,469,000 $26,016,498 $72,219,000 $98,235,4� r .r c d E t v .r Q r c d E t v .r .r Q 2024 PW CFP/CIP v1.11 94 1 Packet Pg. 102 Road pavement overlays to cover areas of roadways that were excavated and patched in previous years as part of the Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects. Improve overall pavement condition in locations that were excavated and patched due to Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects. $60,000 roject Cost i 2024 Design $2,000 Right of Way Construction $58,000 Expense Total $60,000 Sewer Fund 423 $60,000 Funding Source Total $60,000 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 95 Packet Pg. 103 DRAFT Per the approved 2013 Sewer Comprehensive Plan, the projects will replace pipe and related appurtenances at various locations throughout the City due to old age, being undersized, need to increase capacity, or more prone to breakage due t its material properties. Improve system reliability and capacity, decrease infiltration and inflow, decrease breakages, and decrease overall day to day maintenance costs. Estimated Project Cost *Includes prior year expenditures • • Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Sewer Fund 423 Funding Source Total $378,000 $378,000 $393,000 $409,000 $425,000 $442,000 $9,203,679 $2,000,000 $2,043,000 $2,125,000 $2,210,000 $2,299,000 $2,391,000 $49,787,321 $2,378,000 $2,421,000 $2,518,000 $2,619,000 $2,724,000 $2,833,000 $58,991,000 $2,378,000 $2,421,000 $2,518,000 $2,619,000 $2,724,000 $2,833,000 $58,991,000 $2,378,000 $2,421,000 $2,518,000 $2,619,000 $2,724,000 $2,833,000 $58,991,000 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 96 Packet Pg. 104 DRAFT Per the approved 2013 Sewer Comprehensive plan and current video inspections of sewer mains, the project will line existing sewer mains that are subject root intrusion, infiltration and inflow, and damage that can be repaired by this trenchless method. Improve system reliability and capacity, decrease infiltration and inflow, decrease breakages, and decrease overall day to day maintenance costs. Estimated Project Cost *Includes prior year expenditures 1 111 • 1 111 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Sewer Fund 423 Funding Source Total $81,000 $85,000 $88,000 $92,000 $96,000 $1,996,679 $461,000 $480,000 $499,000 $519,000 $540,000 $11,231,321 $542,000 $565,000 $587,000 $611,000 $636,000 $13,228,000 $542,000 $565,000 $587,000 $611,000 $636,000 $13,228,000 $542,000 $565,000 $587,000 $611,000 $636,000 $13,228,000 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 97 Packet Pg. 105 DRAFT tbrtKANUL. ��■ e4sw Ln a- i� i.• Mi 5 �a �H011y Maple 234th`St SW— 3Q 234th St SW Q Q Madrona Ln Zw z N 236th St SW Q 236th St SW 2361h St SN' �z = 00 �t v h St SW 238TH ST SW __ 238th St sw _ a `'a i Oth St SW 240th St SW A. _Ire, 244TH ST SW 3: 3: 242nd St SWa a F c V%S WAY 0- Lake Ballinger 232nd St sw 232nd St SW �232 a, fN V) % a vO o Pf «« Ln 6' Y L 9 i9 I- a.v 235thStSW s�sw 235TH PL.SWhW 236TH ST SW �i a�i'�i w o LO y ro a o -24r 242"d LLINGER_WAY_ —244TH-ST SW Per the approved 2013 Sewer Comprehensive plan and current video inspections of sewer mains, the sewer pipe along Lak Ballinger will require additional flow capacity in the near future. These improvements are needed to account for populatio growth, reduce Infiltration and Inflow from the pipe and improve maintenance and emergency access for this major trunk system. Improve system reliability and capacity, decrease infiltration and inflow, and decrease overall day to day maintenance cost. Improved access will help ease maintenance and access for emergencies, which will further decease any chance of potenti� sewer spills into Lake Ballinger. $7,000,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Sewer Fund 423 Funding Source Total $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $5,000,000 $1,000,000 $6,000,000 $1,000,000 $6,000,000 $1,000,000 $6,000,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP v1.11 98 Packet Pg. 106 DRAFT Per the approved 2013 Sewer Comprehensive plan and current video inspections of sewer mains, the project will line existing sewer mains that are subject root intrusion, infiltration and inflow, and damage that can be repaired by this trenchless method. Improve system reliability and capacity, decrease infiltration and inflow, decrease breakages, and decrease overall day to day maintenance costs. Estimated Project Cost *Includes prior year expenditures 111 Design $70,000 Right of Way Construction $452,000 Expense Total $522,000 Sewer Fund 423 $522,000 Funding Source Total $522,000 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 99 Packet Pg. 107 DRAFT 5.1.a m L- im 0 a. 4) E 0 L- CL E m 44 LLJ 00- H I S r 0 K I C A L M IUS E U M CM OF o� 2024PWCFP/ClPvl.11 100-. 5.1.a FACILITIES . . . . .. . . . 0- 0• . . . -� PWF-02 Cemetery Building 63 $24,048 $8,414 $3,377 $818 $1,000 $0 $37,657 $0 $37,6! LL PWF-03 City Hall 63 $80,000 $279,064 $70,949 $108,628 $80,000 $0 $618,641 $0 $618,6, PWF-04 Fishing Pier/Beach Ranger Station $2,971 $2,918 $5,628 $1,043 $1,500 $0 $14,060 $0 Q $14,01 V PWF-05 Frances Anderson Center 63 $110,000 $98,892 $1,020,934 $113,029 $80,000 $0 $1,422,855 $0 rn $1,422,8! c N PWF-06 Fire Station 16 $49,280 $69,388 $30,107 $31,631 $35,000 $0 $215,406 $0 $215,41 c N PWF-07 Fire Station 17 $50,000 $221,922 $27,575 $122,245 $45,000 $0 $466,742 $0 $466,7, PWF-08 Fire Station 20 $36,274 $94,248 $69,782 $23,765 $20,000 $0 $244,069 $0 $244,01 c 0 PWF-09 Historic Log Cabin $30,000 $546 $1,361 $6,469 $1,500 $0 $39,876 $0 $39,8' a t- u- PWF-10 Historical Museum 63 $45,000 $10,000 $4,621 $10,199 $5,000 $0 $74,820 $0 $74,& < 0 PWF-11 Library 63 $100,000 $53,325 $45,038 $35,000 $0 $0 $233,363 $0 $233,31 a PWF-23 Library Plaza Deck Waterproofing $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,900,000 $0 $4,900,000 $0 u_ $4,900,01 a Project U PWF-12 Meadowdale Club House $97,091 $7,985 $4,446 $1,159 $5,000 $0 $115,681 $0 $115,61 Y PWF-13 Old Public Works $132,051 $25,000 $25,000 $24,519 $25,000 $0 $231,570 $0 0 $231,5' 3: PWF-14 Parks Maintenance Building 63 $40,320 $9,349 $5,177 $69,228 $20,000 $0 $144,074 $0 $144,0' 0 a PWF-15 Public Safety 63 $220,000 $55,169 $151,481 $515,071 $80,000 $0 $1,021,721 $0 $1,021,7; N PWF-16 Public Works O&M 63 $180,000 $80,315 $79,348 $43,821 $50,000 $0 $433,484 $0 0 $433,41 N r PWF-17 Wade James Theater $99,077 $43,880 $115,734 $21,872 $25,000 $0 $305,563 $0 r.+ $305,51 E PWF-18 Yost Pool House $26,128 $8,409 $19,127 $30,389 $30,000 $0 $114,053 $0 $114,0! PWF-19 Fire Life Safety Communications $125,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $125,000 $0 .r $125,01 Q r TOTAL EXPENDITURE $1,447,240 $1,068,824 $1,679,685 $1,158,886 $5,404,000 $0 $10,758,635 $0 $10,758,6: t .r .r Q 2024 PW CFP/CIP All 101 1 Packet Pg. 109 5.1.a FACILITIES TOTAL REVENUE (2024-2029) 0 d r Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) $585,000 $452,796 $1,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $2,037,796 $0 $2,037,7f LL Fund 016 (non -bond proceeds) $0 $591,028 $276,729 $76,592 $31,500 $0 $975,849 $0 $975,8, General Fund $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 m Water Utility Fund 421 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 rn $0 N 0 N Stormwater Utility Fund 422 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 N 0 N Sewer Utility Fund 423 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Unsecured Funding $862,240 $25,000 $402,956 $1,082,294 $5,372,500 $0 $7,744,990 $0 $7,744,94 a 0 $1,447,240 $1,068,824 $1,679,685 $1,158,886 $5,404,000 $0 $10,758,635 $0 $10,758,6: Pm. 2024 PW CFP/CIP All 102 1 Packet Pg. 110 This small structure houses the Edmonds Cemetery funerary services and the cemetery Sextant office. The building is in relatively good condition and has little deferred maintenance backlog. Minor security and communications updates will be needed as technology dictates. Projects: Minor repair and maintenance Public owned facilities and properties are maintained to assure safe and property operating conditions and to assure the protection of the physical asset throughout an expected lifespan. A well -maintained facility creates a safe work environmei that is clean and sanitary which promotes workplace efficiency and confidence. Routine and preventative maintenance reduces energy consumption and provides for building systems to operate as designed during manufacturer expected lifespan. $24,048 (2024) Construction\Professional Services $24,048 $8,414 $3,377 $818 $1,000 Expense Total $24,048 $8,414 $3,377 $818 $1,000 Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) $20,000 Fund 016 (non -bond proceeds) $8,414 Unsecured Funding $4,048 $3,377 $818 $1,000 Funding Source Total $24,048 $8,414 $3,377 $818 $1,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP v1.11 103 Packet Pg. 111 DRAFT 1 ,r,11tilU f1�; (MIY SI'L l City Hall was built in 1979 and was operated as a private business office center until the City purchased and renovated the building in the 199Os. The City has operated Edmonds City Hall from this location since the renovations were completed. Th building is in near original condition and needs substantial repair and maintenance. Projects: All Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing systems need replacement, Restroom remodels w/gender neutral consideration, Center Stairway Code updates and replacement, Lobby remodel, Entry Awning re -glazing, Interior Painting, ADA accessibility improvements. Public owned facilities and properties are maintained to assure safe and property operating conditions and to assure the protection of the physical asset throughout an expected lifespan. A well -maintained facility creates a safe work environmei that is clean and sanitary which promotes workplace efficiency and confidence. Routine and preventative maintenance reduces energy consumption and provides for building systems to operate as designed during manufacturer expected lifespan. $80,000 (2024) Construction\Professional Services Expense Total Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) Fund 016 (non -bond proceeds) Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $80,000 $279,064 $80,000 $279,064 $80,000 $129,064 $150,000 $80,000 $279,064 $70,949 $108,628 $80,000 $70,949 $108,628 $80,000 $70,949 $108,628 $80,000 $70,949 $108,628 $80,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP v1.11 104 Packet Pg. 112 DRAFT The Pier was recently renovated and is generally in good condition. The Beach Ranger Office is a 1200 square foot office an restroom facility located near the east end of the pier. There are season programs and visitor support functions that operas out of this facility. Projects: Electrical panel clean up and safety inspection, minor repairs, and maintenance, Beach Ranger Station/restroom roof replacement. Public owned facilities and properties are maintained to assure safe and property operating conditions and to assure the protection of the physical asset throughout an expected lifespan. A well maintained facility creates a safe work environmer that is clean and sanitary which promotes workplace efficiency and confidence. Routine and preventative maintenance reduces energy consumption and provides for building systems to operate as designed during manufacturer expected lifespan. $2,971 (2024) Construction\Professional Services $2,971 $2,918 $5,628 $1,043 $1,500 Expense Total $2,971 $2,918 $5,628 $1,043 $1,500 Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) $2,918 Fund 016 (non -bond proceeds) Unsecured Funding $2,971 $5,628 $1,043 $1,500 Funding Source Total $2,971 $2,918 $5,628 $1,043 $1,500 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 105 1 Packet Pg. 113 The Frances Anderson Center serves as the City's main recreation center offering arts, athletic and cultural programing yea round. Due to the age and high usage of the building there are many building systems that are in need of replacement or restoration. Projects: Replacement of Heating Boilers with Electric alternatives that will add ventilation, cooling and heating Investment grade audit approved by City Council, Replacement of all exterior doors scheduled for 2024, ADA accessible door closures, Plumbing drainage collector, Restroom remodels (w/ gender neutral consideration), Replacement of all plumbing fixtures, Addition of building security card readers, Building HVAC controls to maximize efficiency, Fire Sprinkler replacement, and clean building act compliance efforts will be addresses by IGA.) Public owned facilities and properties are maintained to assure safe and property operating conditions and to assure the protection of the physical asset throughout an expected lifespan. A well maintained facility creates a safe work environmer that is clean and sanitary which promotes workplace efficiency and confidence. Routine and preventative maintenance reduces energy consumption and provides for building systems to operate as designed during manufacturer expected lifespan. $110,000 (2024) Construction\Professional Services $110,000 $98,892 $1,020,934 $113,029 $80,000 Expense Total $110,000 $98,892 $1,020,934 $113,029 $80,000 Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) $110,000 $98,892 $1,000,000 Fund 016 (non -bond proceeds) Unsecured Funding $20,934 $113,029 $80,000 Funding Source Total $110,000 $98,892 $1,020,934 $113,029 $80,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP All 106 1 Packet Pg. 114 This facility is operated by South Snohomish County Fire and Rescue and was built in 2003 and has a building area of 10,70( square feet. The building is in fair condition and will require some infrastructure updates or replacements to remain operationally ready for the needs of the City. Projects: Roll -up Bay door controller replacements, HVAC unit assessment, Gutter replacement, interior coatings updates Public owned facilities and properties are maintained to assure safe and property operating conditions and to assure the protection of the physical asset throughout an expected lifespan. A well maintained facility creates a safe work environmer that is clean and sanitary which promotes workplace efficiency and confidence. Routine and preventative maintenance reduces energy consumption and provides for building systems to operate as designed during manufacturer expected lifespan. $49,280 (2024) Construction\Professional Services Expense Total Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) Fund 016 (non -bond proceeds) Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $49,280 $69,388 $49,280 $69,388 $69,388 $49,280 $49,280 $69,388 $30,107 $31,631 $35,000 $30,107 $31,631 $35,000 $30,107 $31,631 $35,000 $30,107 $31,631 $35,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP All 107 1 Packet Pg. 115 MIM,M MML-M: MMM MMM F��_ ML & . qm"a This building is operated by South Snohomish County Fire and Rescue, was built in 1999 and has a building area of 9,800 square feet. This building has had some updates but will need some infrastructure upgrades to remain operationally ready Projects: Bay Door assessment, Electrical infrastructure updates, roof soffit enclosure, interior painting. Public owned facilities and properties are maintained to assure safe and property operating conditions and to assure the protection of the physical asset throughout an expected lifespan. A well maintained facility creates a safe work environmer that is clean and sanitary which promotes workplace efficiency and confidence. Routine and preventative maintenance reduces energy consumption and provides for building systems to operate as designed during manufacturer expected lifespan. $50,000 (2024) Construction\Professional Services $50,000 $221,922 $27,575 $122,245 $45,000 Expense Total $50,000 $221,922 $27,575 $122,245 $45,000 Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) $221,922 Fund 016 (non -bond proceeds) Unsecured Funding $50,000 $27,575 $122,245 $45,000 Funding Source Total $50,000 $221,922 $27,575 $122,245 $45,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP All 108 1 Packet Pg. 116 PVC & J This building is the eldest of the City's three fire stations and is operated by South County Fire and Rescue. This station sery Esperance and supports the other two fire stations in Edmonds. The building is 6400 square feet and was built in 1990. Th( building has had significant updates to the exterior envelope and is in need of interior and HVAC system updates. Projects: interior painting, restroom fixture replacement Public owned facilities and properties are maintained to assure safe and property operating conditions and to assure the protection of the physical asset throughout an expected lifespan. A well maintained facility creates a safe work environmer that is clean and sanitary which promotes workplace efficiency and confidence. Routine and preventative maintenance reduces energy consumption and provides for building systems to operate as designed during manufacturer expected lifespan. $36,274 (2024) Construction\Professional Services Expense Total Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) Fund 016 (non -bond proceeds) Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $36,274 $94,248 $36,274 $94,248 $94,248 $36,274 $36,274 $94,248 $69,782 $23,765 $20,000 $69,782 $23,765 $20,000 $69,782 $23,765 $20,000 $69,782 $23,765 $20,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP All 109 1 Packet Pg. 117 PVC J This Historic log cabin is home to the Edmonds Chamber of Commerce visitor center, the structure was a purpose built cabi from the turn of the century. The structure is professionally maintained on a three year cycle by a log cabin specialist and requires only minor maintenance and upkeep annually. Projects: new thick cut shingle replacement, chinking of exterior log finish, interior lighting. Public owned facilities and properties are maintained to assure safe and property operating conditions and to assure the protection of the physical asset throughout an expected lifespan. A well maintained facility creates a safe work environmer that is clean and sanitary which promotes workplace efficiency and confidence. Routine and preventative maintenance reduces energy consumption and provides for building systems to operate as designed during manufacturer expected lifespan. $30,000 (2024) Construction\Professional Services Expense Total Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) Fund 016 (non -bond proceeds) Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total r $30,000 $546 $1,361 $6,469 $1,500 $30,000 $546 $1,361 $6,469 $1,500 $30,000 $546 $1,361 $6,469 $1,500 $30,000 $546 $1,361 $6,469 $1,500 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 110 1 Packet Pg. 118 MEML;1.a The 110-year-old original Carnegie Library building is home to the Edmonds Museum. The building is on the State of Washington Historic registry and has been well maintained over the last several years. Buildings of this age require specialized maintenance and coordination with the state historic architect to maintain the historic status. Structural stabilization and weatherproofing are the most significant priorities to maintain this facility. Projects: minor structural reinforcement, entry fagade masonry repair, lower entry restoration Public owned facilities and properties are maintained to assure safe and property operating conditions and to assure the protection of the physical asset throughout an expected lifespan. A well maintained facility creates a safe work environmer that is clean and sanitary which promotes workplace efficiency and confidence. Routine and preventative maintenance reduces energy consumption and provides for building systems to operate as designed during manufacturer expected lifespan. $45,000 (2024) Construction\Professional Services $45,000 $10,000 $4,621 $10,199 $5,000 Expense Total $45,000 $10,000 $4,621 $10,199 $5,000 Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) $45,000 Fund 016 (non -bond proceeds) $10,000 $4,621 $10,199 $5,000 Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $45,000 $10,000 $4,621 $10,199 $5,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP All 111 I Packet Pg. 119 - Facilit Public Works Library The Edmonds Library is operated by the Sno-Isle Library system with exception of the Second floor Plaza room rental space The library is a 19,000 square foot building built in 1982. The building hosts special event rentals and daily Library programming and community services. This is one of the City's most heavily used buildings by the public and has significant deferred maintenance needs, including the building fagade and plaza deck waterproofing. Projects: window replacement, ADA access device upgrades or replacement, gender inclusive public restroom creation, Pla Room restroom/changing facilities, Plaza Room A/V installation, building masonry restoration or building cladding, exterior stairway restoration, HVAC ventilation fan assessment, building breezeway remodel, flood damage restoration, and plaza level green roof now on CIP. Public owned facilities and properties are maintained to assure safe and property operating conditions and to assure the protection of the physical asset throughout an expected lifespan. A well maintained facility creates a safe work environmer that is clean and sanitary which promotes workplace efficiency and confidence. Routine and preventative maintenance reduces energy consumption and provides for building systems to operate as designed during manufacturer expected lifespan. $100,000 (2024) Construction\Professional Services $100,000 $53,325 $45,038 $35,000 Expense Total $100,000 $53,325 $45,038 $35,000 Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) $100,000 Fund 016 (non -bond proceeds) $53,325 $45,038 $35,000 Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $100,000 $53,325 $45,038 $35,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP All 112 1 Packet Pg. 120 MMM This 4000 square foot facility was built in 1965 as a community theater facility and later was transformed into the Meadowdale community club house. The building is currently owned and maintained by the City of Edmonds and houses tl City operated Meadowdale pre-school and the 1500 square foot Meadowdale club house rental facility. This facility while dated has been well maintained and only requires minor maintenance and repairs. Projects: minor maintenance and repairs, interior flooring and painting, and bath fixture replacement. Public owned facilities and properties are maintained to assure safe and property operating conditions and to assure the protection of the physical asset throughout an expected lifespan. A well maintained facility creates a safe work environmer that is clean and sanitary which promotes workplace efficiency and confidence. Routine and preventative maintenance reduces energy consumption and provides for building systems to operate as designed during manufacturer expected lifespan. $97,091 (2024) Construction\Professional Services $97,091 $7,985 $4,446 $1,159 $5,000 $5,000 Expense Total $97,091 $7,985 $4,446 $1,159 $5,000 $5,000 Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) Fund 016 (non -bond proceeds) $7,985 $4,446 $1,159 $5,000 Unsecured Funding $97,091 Funding Source Total $97,091 $7,985 $4,446 $1,159 $5,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP All 113 1 Packet Pg. 121 This facility was built in 1965 to house the City's Public Works Department, the building was converted in 1995 to tenant space and City storage, as well as Edmonds Police large evidence storage. This is a vital piece of property adjacent to the Waste Water Treatment Plant, and could be converted for utility use if regulatory requirements dictate. Building is primaril used as storage and will need some updates to maintain current operational readiness. Projects: HVAC updates, roll -up door replacement, security camera system. Public owned facilities and properties are maintained to assure safe and property operating conditions and to assure the protection of the physical asset throughout an expected lifespan. A well maintained facility creates a safe work environmer that is clean and sanitary which promotes workplace efficiency and confidence. Routine and preventative maintenance reduces energy consumption and provides for building systems to operate as designed during manufacturer expected lifespan. $132,051 (2024) Construction\Professional Services Expense Total Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) Fund 016 (non -bond proceeds) Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $132,051 $25,000 $132,051 $25,000 $132,051 $25,000 $132,051 $25,000 $25,000 $24,519 $25,000 $25,000 $24,519 $25,000 $25,000 $24,519 $25,000 $25,000 $24,519 $25,000 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 114 1 Packet Pg. 122 This facility was built in 1967 by Ed Huntley who at the time was the City Facilities supervisor. The 4800 square foot facility now houses all City Facility Operations staff(11) and all of Park and Rec Parks Maintenance Staff(12+ seasonal help) This Facility is home to the City Carpentry Shop, Key Shop, City Flower program, Parks engine repair shop and Parks and Facilitie maintenance supply storage as well as Parks and Facilities Manager offices. This Facility is near end of life and is undersized to support the departmental staffing that are assigned to this facility. Projects: maintenance and repair to maintain operational capacity, ADA restroom updates, shop floor replacement, Pine St facility exit, exterior painting. Public owned facilities and properties are maintained to assure safe and property operating conditions and to assure the protection of the physical asset throughout an expected lifespan. A well maintained facility creates a safe work environmer that is clean and sanitary which promotes workplace efficiency and confidence. Routine and preventative maintenance reduces energy consumption and provides for building systems to operate as designed during manufacturer expected lifespan. $40,320 (2024) Construction\Professional Services $40,320 $9,349 $5,177 $69,228 $20,000 Expense Total $40,320 $9,349 $5,177 $69,228 $20,000 Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) $25,000 Fund 016 (non -bond proceeds) $9,349 Unsecured Funding $15,320 $5,177 $69,228 $20,000 Funding Source Total $40,320 $9,349 $5,177 $69,228 $20,000 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 115 1 Packet Pg. 123 The Public Safety building houses Edmonds Police Department, Edmonds Municipal Court and the City Council Chambers. The building was built in 1999 encompassing 30,000 square feet of office, court and municipal government uses. The buildi houses one of the City emergency operations centers, large police training, simulator facilities and evidence processing anc storage. The building has had minimal system updates over it's life and has a significant amount of deferred maintenance and should be retrofitted with new fire sprinklers. Projects: air handler and outdoor ventilation unit replacements, new solar plant installation, parking lot reconfiguration to meet current usage, fire sprinkler installation, interior hallway renovation and painting, sleeping room remodel and gender specific/neutral accommodations, gender inclusive public restrooms, operable windows is specific locations, courts flat roo replacement. Public owned facilities and properties are maintained to assure safe and property operating conditions and to assure the protection of the physical asset throughout an expected lifespan. A well maintained facility creates a safe work environmer that is clean and sanitary which promotes workplace efficiency and confidence. Routine and preventative maintenance reduces energy consumption and provides for building systems to operate as designed during manufacturer expected lifespan. $220,000 (2024) Construction\Professional Services Expense Total Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) Fund 016 (non -bond proceeds) Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $220,000 $55,169 $151,481 $220,000 $55,169 $151,481 $140,000 $55,169 $151,481 $80,000 $220,000 $55,169 $151,481 $515,071 $80,000 $515,071 $80,000 $515,071 $80,000 $515,071 $80,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP All 116 1 Packet Pg. 124 tA I E ME This building built in 1995 houses four Public Works divisions and the auxiliary City Emergency Operations Center. This building is 28,000 square feet and is capable of operations 24/7 during weather emergencies and natural disasters. The building has significant deferred maintenance needs and infrastructure updates. Projects: vehicle yard leveling, HVAC unit replacements, roof system for material bunkers, ventilation fan replacements, firs alarm system replacement, lobby remodel, restroom remodel with gender inclusivity considerations, electric vehicle charging and maintenance infrastructure, emergency communications updates, interior hallway flooring thresholds, utility bay HVAC replacement, water main replacement (building connection). Public owned facilities and properties are maintained to assure safe and property operating conditions and to assure the protection of the physical asset throughout an expected lifespan. A well maintained facility creates a safe work environmer that is clean and sanitary which promotes workplace efficiency and confidence. Routine and preventative maintenance reduces energy consumption and provides for building systems to operate as designed during manufacturer expected lifespan. $285,000 (2024) Construction\Professional Services Expense Total Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) Fund 016 (non -bond proceeds) General Fund Water Fund 421 Stormwater Fund 422 Sewer Fund 423 $180,000 $80,315 $180,000 $80,315 $35,000 $80,315 $79,348 $43,821 $50,000 $79,348 $43,821 $50,000 Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total 2024 PW CFP/CIP v1.11 $145,000 $180,000 $80,315 117 $79,348 $43,821 $50,000 $79,348 $43,821 $50,000 Packet Pg. 125 DRAFT i 5.1.a This community theater was built by the Driftwood Players theater group in 1967 and was deeded to City ownership at a later date. The facility is 6,300 square feet in size and houses the Driftwood Players theatrical performances and City meetings. The City's maintenance responsibilities are limited to large infrastructure, parking lot, roofing, and grounds. Projects: parking lot repair and recoating, minor repair, and maintenance. Public owned facilities and properties are maintained to assure safe and property operating conditions and to assure the protection of the physical asset throughout an expected lifespan. A well maintained facility creates a safe work environmer C that is clean and sanitary which promotes workplace efficiency and confidence. Routine and preventative maintenance i reduces energy consumption and provides for building systems to operate as designed during manufacturer expected lifespan. $99,077 (2024) Construction\Professional Services $99,077 $43,880 $115,734 $21,872 $25,000 Expense Total $99,077 $43,880 $115,734 $21,872 $25,000 Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) Fund 016 (non -bond proceeds) $43,880 Unsecured Funding $99,077 $115,734 $21,872 $25,000 Funding Source Total $99,077 $43,880 $115,734 $21,872 $25,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP 0.11 118 1 Packet Pg. 126 This recreational facility houses the City's aquatic programing and some Parks and Recreation programs. Built in 1971 the pool house historically was only operated seasonally. The tenant run aquatic programing is currently expanding to year round lap and team aquatic activities and will continue to support summer open swim programing. The facility requires minimal maintenance to remain operational and is subject to tenant lease terms of use. Projects: security updates, roof replacement, gutter replacement, plumbing fixture updates, exterior door replacements, operational repair and maintenance to accommodate 365 operations. Public owned facilities and properties are maintained to assure safe and property operating conditions and to assure the protection of the physical asset throughout an expected lifespan. A well maintained facility creates a safe work environmer that is clean and sanitary which promotes workplace efficiency and confidence. Routine and preventative maintenance reduces energy consumption and provides for building systems to operate as designed during manufacturer expected lifespan. roject Cost 2024 2025 2028 Construction\Professional Services $26,128 $8,409 $19,127 $30,389 $30,000 Expense Total $26,128 $8,409 $19,127 $30,389 $30,000 Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) Fund 016 (non -bond proceeds) $8,409 Unsecured Funding $26,128 $19,127 $30,389 $30,000 Funding Source Total $26,128 $8,409 $19,127 $30,389 $30,000 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 119 1 Packet Pg. 127 All fire and life safety systems are required to be monitored 24/7 in case of emergency. Previously this monitoring has beer done by traditional phone lines (POTS). This infrastructure is aging in place and is not required to be maintained by the telecommunications providers as of 2020. In 2022 we have had 3 catastrophic communications failures that resulted sever; thousand dollars expense and lack of compliance with fire code. The City has eleven facilities with life safety monitoring, ar six locations with elevators, making a total of 17 locations with monitoring requirements that will need to be updated. Maintaining and updating aging infrastructure allows the City to continue to operate older buildings by staying compliant with fire code and L&I regulations. $125,000 Construction\Professional Services $125,000 Expense Total $125,000 Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) Fund 016 (non -bond proceeds) Unsecured Funding $125,000 Funding Source Total $125,000 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 120 1 Packet Pg. 128 The Library Plaza Deck is essentially a green roof on the second floor of the Edmonds Sno-Isle Library. The deck surface was waterproofed and remodeled in 2003, since that project continuous water intrusion has occurred through the waterproof membrane. This water intrusion has been successfully mitigated over the years and has not been deemed a project of significance previously. In 2018 Western Specialty Contractors inspected the water intrusion and offered an initial ROM price to demolish and waterproof the existing plaza deck. Rebuilding the plaza deck and replacement of landscape, planter! grass, pavement, flashing and hand railings would be a separate construction project. The Parks Director in 2018 offered ar estimate to replace landscaping and irrigations systems. In 2021 a draft structural report was performed by MLA Engineerir to discover any structural consequences from the years of water intrusion, building was deemed structurally sound and water intrusion not factoring in to building structural stability. Maintaining building in operational and safe condition, in order to maintain partnership with Sno-Isle Library system. Preservation of the City's physical assets in appropriate condition vs. the age of the facility and historic capital investment. $4,900,000 Construction\Professional Services Expense Total Fund 001 (Repair & Maint, Prof Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $4,900,000 $4,900,000 $4,900,000 $4,900,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP v1.11 121 Packet Pg. 129 DRAFT Rp - _ Packet Pg. 130 5.1.a WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT (2024-2029) Cos N d PWP-01 WWTP Annual Capital Replacement In House $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $1,000,000 $1,250,000 $1,250,000 $5,000,000 $18,750,000 $23,750,00 Projects v PWP-02 Carbon Recovery Project 56 $500,000 $500,000 O $500,00 LL PWP-04 Nutrient Removal Project 59 $350,000 $750,000 $750,000 $20,000,000 $20,000,000 $41,850,000 $41,850,00 'Q PWP-08 Gasification Bypass (Class A Solids Production) 55 $300,000 $300,000 O $300,00 rn PWP-09 WWTP Asset Criticality Ranking and Condition 57 $150,000 $150,000 N $150,00 N Assessment It PWP-10 VFD Upgrades 58 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $750,000 $750,00 N PWP-11 Primary Clarifier 2 Rehab 54 $600,000 $600,000 $600,00 N O PWP-12 Primary Clarifier 3 Rehab $950,000 $950,000 $950,00 a- O L_ PWP-13 ODS (Primary Sludge) Pump Replacement $350,000 $250,000 $600,000 a $600,00 H PWP-14 Chlorine Contact Channel Sluice Gates $375,000 $375,000 $375,00 Q Replacement TOTAL EXPENDITURE $2,650,000 $2,450,000 $1,850,000 $21,250,000 $21,625,000 $1,250,000 $519075,000 $189750,000 $69,825,00 0 IL U. t) a_ U N Y Lo SOURCEFUNDING 1 1 1 1 1 1• 1 1 1 1 • Edmonds (Sewer Fund 423) - 50.79% $1,345,935 $1,244,355 $939,615 $10,792,875 $10,983,338 $634,875 $25,940,993 $9,523,125 $35,464,11 .2 Mountlake Terrace - 23.17% $614,005 $567,665 $428,645 $4,923,625 $5,010,513 $289,625 $11,834,078 $4,344,375 $16,178,45 d Olympic View Water Sewer District - 16.55% $438,575 $405,475 $306,175 $3,516,875 $3,578,937 $206,875 $8,452,912 $3,103,125 $11,556,03 c N City of Shoreline - 9.49% $251,485 $232,505 $175,565 $2,016,625 $2,052,212 $118,625 $4,847,017 $1,779,375 $6,626,39 TOTAL REVENUE $2,650,000 $29450,000 $19850,000 $219250,000 $219625,000 $1,2509000 $519075,000 $189750,000 r $69,825900 N E t c� Iv .r Q r c d t v R .r Q 2024 PW CFP/CIP v1.11 123 1 Packet Pg. 131 The WWTP Annual Capital Replacement In -House Projects is intended to maintain infrastructure and equipment to ensure that the treatment plant is well maintained. This project ensures that critical infrastructure is maintained and equipment is replaced in order to reduce risk to the City Estimated Project Cost *Includes prior year expenditures 11 111 1 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Sewer Fund 423 Mountlake Terrace Olympic View Water Sewer District City of Shoreline Funding Source Total $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $200,000 $250,000 $250,000 $3,750,000 $400,000 $400,000 $400,000 $800,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $15,000,OOC $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $1,000,000 $1,250,000 $1,250,000 $18,750,000 $253,950 $253,950 $253,950 $507,900 $634,875 $634,875 $9,523,125 $115,850 $115,850 $115,850 $231,700 $289,625 $289,625 $4,344,375 $82,750 $82,750 $82,750 $165,500 $206,875 $206,875 $3,103,125 $47,450 $47,450 $47,450 $94,900 $118,625 $118,625 $1,779,375 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $1,000,000 $1,250,000 $1,250,000 $18,750,000 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 124 Packet Pg. 132 DRAFT To cover any carryover or close-out costs associated with the Carbon Recovery Project that occur in FY 2024. To complete and close out all items associated with the Carbon Recovery Project. $500,000 Design Right of Way Construction $500,000 Expense Total $500,000 Sewer Fund 423 $253,950 Mountlake Terrace $115,850 Olympic View Water Sewer District $82,750 City of Shoreline $47,450 Funding Source Total $500,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP v1.11 125 Packet Pg. 133 DRAFT 5.1.a The WA Dept of Ecology has imposed the Puget Sound Nutrient General Permit upon us. It is anticipated that our current process will not be able to meet these new permit requirements. This decision package will allow us to team with an engineering firm to study our current process and design a solution that will allow our plant to meet the new PSNGP requirements as well as accommodate projected service area growth over the next decade. To meet new permit requirements and increase capacity for projected 20-year service area expansion. Estimated Project Cost *Includes prior year expenditures � 1 111 Project Cos Right of Way Construction Expense Total Sewer Fund 423 Mountlake Terrace Olympic View Water Sewer District City of Shoreline Funding Source Total $350,000 $750,000 $750,000 $20,000,000 $20,000,000 $350,000 $750,000 $750,000 $20,000,000 $20,000,000 $177,765 $380,925 $380,925 $10,158,000 $10,158,000 $81,095 $173,775 $173,775 $4,634,000 $4,634,000 $57,925 $124,125 $124,125 $3,310,000 $3,310,000 $33,215 $71,175 $71,175 $1,898,000 $1,898,000 $350,000 $750,000 $750,000 $20,000,000 $20,000,000 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 126 Packet Pg. 134 DRAFT This allows the ability to continue production of class A solids if/when the gasification system is shut down for repairs or preventative maintenance. The ability to produce and haul class A solids will eliminate a temporary but substantial cost increase hauling as this product is essentially the same in volume as biochar or concentrated minerals and is accepted at th local transfer station whereas if this option is not available, sludge will need to be loaded into trailers and hauled to Oregor as was done during the Carbon Recovery Project at a cost of up to $200,000 per month. This redundant solids processing mode was an option to add to the Carbon Recovery Project and was rejected by previous administration. Along with the savings in hauling costs, there will be no additional odor issues or daily sludge truck traffic in the adjacent neighborhood. Allow solids handling system redundancy and the ability to run the dryer unit independently in the event of a gasification system failure or repair. The dryer is capable of producing Class A biosolids, which would negate the need for temporary hauling and disposal of wet cake at a rate of up to $200,000/month. $300,000 Design $50,000 Right of Way Construction $250,000 Expense Total $300,000 Sewer Fund 423 $152,370 Mountlake Terrace $69,510 Olympic View Water Sewer District $49,650 City of Shoreline $28,470 Funding Source Total $300,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP v1.11 127 Packet Pg. 135 DRAFT Work with engineering firm to develop a comprehensive asset management system which includes an asset condition assessment as well as asset criticality ranking. This will allow the WWTP to develop a 5 and 10 year asset repair and replacement and CIP schedule which will improve overall plant reliability. Develop a short and long term plan to improve plant reliability by ranking critical assets and creating a capital improvemen plan. As the majority of this facility is coming to the end of its useful life, the planned replacement/repair of failing equipment and structures will be much more cost effective than replacing upon failure and ensure that the plant maintains its ability to meet discharge permit requirements. This will also be valuable in future rate studies. $150,000 Design $150,000 Right of Way Construction Expense Total $150,000 Sewer Fund 423 $76,185 Mountlake Terrace $34,755 Olympic View Water Sewer District $24,825 City of Shoreline $14,235 Funding Source Total $150,000 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 128 Packet Pg. 136 DRAFT ■ The WWTP has several VFD's (variable frequency drives) on various critical equipment influent pumps, effluent pumps, RAS/WAS pumps, aeration blowers, etc. These VFD's have an expected useful life of 15-20 years. Several of the VFD's here at the plant range in age between 20-30 years old. There have already bees some failures and replacements made. These outdated VFD's need to be replaced to avoid a catastrophic failure event that could happen to these weakened state VFD's for any number of reasons, including abrupt starting and stopping due to power bumps/loss, switching from grid to generator power supply or just a parts failure. If multiple critical components fail simultaneously, then the plant may lose it ability to treat wastewater that meets NPDES permit requirements resulting in pollution of our receiving waters and possib fines by our governing agency. To keep critical equipment reliable and in working condition. $250,000 Design $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 Right of Way Construction $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 Expense Total $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 Sewer Fund 423 $126,975 $126,975 $126,975 Mountlake Terrace $57,925 $57,925 $57,925 Olympic View Water Sewer District $41,375 $41,375 $41,375 City of Shoreline $23,725 $23,725 $23,725 Funding Source Total $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP v1.11 129 Packet Pg. 137 DRAFT Primary Clarifier #2 cage, center column, feedwell, corner sweeps, weir, counterweight, skimming device and rake arms ne replacement due to severe corrosion. The steel has not been replaced since the original construction. The limited access wi require that pieces be assembled inside the tank. The concrete structure also needs to be inspected and repaired as neede as corrosion of the concrete in spots has led to exposed rebar and may have compromised the structural integrity of the clarifier. Improve reliability of critical infrastructure as it is in a state of imminent failure. Ensure WWTP's ability to treat wastewate up to its rated capacity and meet discharge permit requirements. $600,000 Design $100,000 Right of Way Construction $500,000 Expense Total $600,000 Sewer Fund 423 $304,740 Mountlake Terrace $139,020 Olympic View Water Sewer District $99,300 City of Shoreline $56,940 Funding Source Total $600,000 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 130 Packet Pg. 138 DRAFT r-- Primary Clarifier #3 (dual drive) cages, center columns, feedwells, corner sweeps, weirs, counterweights, skimming devices and rake arms need replacement due to severe corrosion. The steel is in a highly corrosive environment and has not been replaced since the original construction approximately 30 years ago. The limited access will require that pieces be assembl( inside the tank. The concrete structure also needs to be inspected and repaired as needed as corrosion of the concrete in spots has led to exposed rebar and may have compromised the structural integrity of the clarifier. Improve reliability of critical infrastructure as it is approaching a state of imminent failure. Ensure WWTP's ability to treat wastewater up to its rated capacity and meet discharge permit requirements. $950,000 Design $150,000 Right of Way Construction $800,000 Expense Total $950,000 Sewer Fund 423 $482,505 Mountlake Terrace $220,115 Olympic View Water Sewer District $157,225 City of Shoreline $90,155 Funding Source Total $950,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP v1.11 131 Packet Pg. 139 DRAFT The ODS pumps are over 30 years old and are at the end of their useful life. The maintenance, reliability and efficiency of t primary sludge pumping system would be greatly improved by replacing the current diaphragm pumps with progressive cavity pumps. During this pump replacement, piping modifications would also be done to allow pumps to support more th one clarifier, improving system redundancy along with reliability. Improve reliability, redundancy and efficiency of the primary sludge and scum pumps by replacing 30+ year old pumps and improving piping system. $600,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Sewer Fund 423 Mountlake Terrace Olympic View Water Sewer District City of Shoreline Funding Source Total $100, 000 $250,000 $250,000 $350,000 $250,000 $177,765 $126,975 $81,095 $57,925 $57,925 $41,375 $33,215 $23,725 $350,000 $250,000 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 132 Packet Pg. 140 DRAFT Replace two gate valves and actuators at the inlets of the two chlorine contact channels. These gates have repeatedly failed. Repair is often expensive and time consuming, as access is an issue, so it is necessary to rent scaffolding and other equipment to make repairs. When a gate fails, it effectively cuts the disinfection capacity of the plant in half. These are critical pieces of equipment and need to be replaced with a different technology to improve performance and reliability. To replace problematic, yet critical valves with more reliable technology that helps to ensure disinfection system functionality and the ability to continue to meet NPDES discharge permit requirements. $375,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Sewer Fund 423 Mountlake Terrace Olympic View Water Sewer District City of Shoreline Funding Source Total $75,000 $300,000 $375,000 $190,463 $86,888 $62,062 $35,587 $375,000 2024 PW CFPICIP v1.11 133 Packet Pg. 141 2024 PW CFP/CIP All 134 5.1.a CFP / CIP COMPARISON (2023 TO 2024) PROJECTS ADDED Transportation PROJECTType 2024 Traffic Signal and Safety Upgrades • Estimated future costs for transportation project. Transportation 2024 Pedestrian Safety Program Estimated future costs for transportation project. Transportation 88th Ave. Overlay and Sidewalk Repair Estimated future costs for transportation project. Water 2024 Waterline Overlays Estimated future costs for road repairs due to waterline replacements. Water Phase 20 Annual Replacement Program (2030) Estimated future costs for waterline replacements. Storm 2024 Stormwater Overlays Estimated future costs for road repairs due to storm replacements Storm Phase 10 Annual Storm Replacement (2030) Estimated future costs for stormline replacements Sewer Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehabilitation Phase 4 Estimated future costs for sewer project. Sewer 2024 Sanitary Sewer Overlays Estimated future costs for road repairs due to sewer line replacements. Sewer Phase 17 Annual Sewer Replacement/Rehab (2030) Estimated future costs for sewerline replacements WWTP Gasification Bypass Class A Solids Production Estimated future costs for waste water treatment plant project. WWTP WWTP Asset Criticality Ranking and Condition Assessment Estimated future costs for waste water treatment plant project. WWTP VFD Upgrades Estimated future costs for waste water treatment plant project. WWTP Primary Clarifier 2 Rehab Estimated future costs for waste water treatment plant project. WWTP Primary Clarifier 3 Rehab Estimated future costs for waste water treatment plant project. WWTP ODS (Primary Sudge) Pump Replacement Estimated future costs for waste water treatment plant project. WWTP Chlorine Contact Channel Sluice Gates Replacement Estimated future costs for waste water treatment plant project. CFP / CIP COMPARISON (2023 TO 2024) PROJECTS REMOVED Transportation PROJECTType 2023 Guardrail Program • to be completed in late 2023 Transportation 2023 Traffic Signal Upgrades to be completed in late 2023 Transportation 2023 Pedestrian Safety Program Completed Transportation Citywide Lighting Study to be completed in late 2023 Water 2023 Waterline Overlays Completed Water Phase 12 Annual Replacement Program Completed Storm 2023 Stormwater Overlays Completed Sewer 2023 Sewer Overlays Completed N d c� U- CU a cU U N O N 4 N O N a� 0 a 0 L a H Q a U- U a_ U Cn L 0 a N O N Q 2024 PW CFP/CIP v1.11 135 1 Packet Pg. 143 5.1.a Sewer PROJECTType Phase 9 Annual Sewer Replacement/Rehab • Completed Sewer Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehabilitation Phase 3 Completed Facilities Parks Restrooms Maintenance Six -year cost and funding (2024-2029) removed Facilities Public Works EV Conduit Addition Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 removed Facilities City Park Gazebo Roof Six -year cost and funding (2024-2029) removed WWTP Primary Clarifier Completed WWTP Joint Sealant lCompleted WWTP Vacuum Filter lCompleted UP / CIP COMPARISON (2023 TO 2024) PROJECTS REVISED PROJECTType Transportation Puget Dr. @ OVD Signal Upgrades Cost and funding moved from 2026-2027 to 2027-2028 Transportation Signal Upgrades - 100th Ave @ 238th St. SW Cost and funding moved from 2026-2027 to 2027-2028 Transportation Main St. @ 3rd Signal Upgrades Cost and funding moved from 2026-2027 to 2028-2029 Transportation 228th St. SW from Hwy 99 to 95th PI. W Corridor Cost and funding revised, moved from 2026-2028 to 2027-2029 Transportation Hwy 99 Revitalization & Gateway Project - Stage 3 Cost and funding revised, moved from 2022-2027 to 2023-2028 Transportation Hwy 99 Revitalization & Gateway Project - Stage 4 Cost and funding revised, moved from 2022-2028 to 2023-2029 Transportation SR 524 (196th St. SW) / 88th Ave. W - Intersection Improvements Cost and funding revised, moved form 2026-2028 to 2027-2029 Transportation Main St. @ 9th Ave. Intersection Improvements Cost and funding revised, moved from 2026-2027 to 2027-2028 Transportation 76th Ave. W @ 220th St. SW - Intersection Improvements Cost and funding revised, moved from 2023-2026 to 2024-2027 Transportation SR-104 Adaptive System - 236th to 226th Cost and funding revised, moved from 2023-2025 to 2024-2027 Transportation SR-104 @100th Ave W. Intersection Improvements Cost and funding revised, moved from 2026-2027 to 2027-2028 Transportation SR-104 @ 95th PI. W Intersection Improvements Cost and funding revised, moved from 2026-2027 to 2027-2028 Transportation SR-104 @ 238th St. SW Intersection Improvements Cost and funding revised, moved from 2026-2027 to 2027-2028 Transportation SR-104 @ 76th Ave. W Intersection Improvements Cost and funding revised, moved from 2029-2043 to 2030-2044 Transportation Olympic View Dr @ 76th Ave. W Intersection Improvements Cost and funding revised, moved from 2029-2043 to 2030-2044 Transportation 175th St SW Slope Repair Cost moved from 2026 to 2027 Transportation 232nd St. SW Walkway from 100th Ave. to SR-104 Cost and funding revised, moved from 2027-2028 to 2028-2029 Transportation 236th St. SW Walkway from Madrona Elementary to 97th Ave. W Cost and funding revised, moved from 2027-2028 to 2028-2029 Transportation 84th Ave. W Walkway from 238th St. SW to 234th St. SW Cost and funding revised, moved from 2026-2028 to 2027-2029 Transportation 80th Ave. W Walkway from 212th St. SW to 206th St. SW Cost and funding revised, moved from 2026-2027 to 2027-2028 Transportation 80th Ave. W Walkway from 188th St. SW to Olympic View Dr. Cost and funding revised, moved from 2026-2028 to 2027-2029 Transportation Walnut St. Walkway from 6th Ave. S to 7th Ave S Cost and funding revised, moved from 2026 to 2027 Transportation 216th St. SW Walkway from Hwy. 99 to 72nd Ave W Cost and funding revised, moved from 2026 to 2027 Transportation Maplewood Dr. Walkway from Main St. to 200th St. SW Cost and funding revised, moved from 2026-2028 to 2027-2029 Transportation 95th PI. W Walkway from 224th St. SW to 220th St. SW Cost and funding revised, moved from 2026-2027 to 2027-2028 Transportation SR-104 @ 76th Ave. W Non -Motorized Trans Improvements Cost and funding revised, moved from 2026-2028 to 2027-2029 N d c� LL w .Q cU U N 0 N le N O N 0 a 0 L a t` LL Q 0 a LL U a_ U Cn L 0 a N 0 N Q Packet Pg. 144 2024 PW CFP/CIP Al 136 5.1.a .- PROJECT Transportation Downtown Lighting Improvements Cost and funding revised, moved from 2026-2027 to 2027-2028 Transportation SR-104 Walkway: HAWK to Pine / Pine from SR-104 to 9th Cost and funding revised, moved from 2026-2028 to 2027-2029 Transportation Ferry Storage Improvements from Pine St. to Dayton St. Moved from 2026 to 2027 Transportation Transportation Plan Update Cost and funding revised Transportation Green Streets 236th St SW - 84th Ave W to Highway 99 Cost and funding revised, moved from 2023-2024 to 2025-2026 Water Yost & Seaview Reservoir Repairs and Upgrades Added estimated construction costs to 2025 and 2026 Storm Perrinville Creek Basin Analysis Update Added grant funding for project to 2024 Storm 7317 Lake Ballinger Way Purchase & Structure Removal Move $120,000 from 2023 to 2024 Storm Lake Ballinger Regional Facility Design and Construction Moved project funding from 2024/2025 to 2026/2027 Storm Storm and Surface Water Comprehensive Plan Cost revised from $315,000 in 2023 funds moved to 2024 Sewer Annual Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehabilitation Cost and funding 2025-2029 revised Sewer Lake Ballinger Sewer Cost and funding shifted from 2024-2025 to 2026-2027 WWTP Nutrient Removal Project Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 revised Facilities Cemetery Building Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 revised Facilities City Hall Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 revised Facilities Fishing Pier/Beach Ranger Station Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 revised Facilities Frances Anderson Center Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 revised Facilities Fire Station 16 Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 revised Facilities Fire Station 17 Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 revised Facilities Fire Station 20 Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 revised Facilities Fire Life Safety Communications Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 revised Facilities Historic Log Cabin Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 revised Facilities Historical Museum Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 revised Facilities Library Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 revised Facilities Library Plaza Deck Waterproofing Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 revised Facilities Meadowdale Club House Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 revised Facilities Old Public Works Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 revised Facilities Parks Maintenance Building Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 revised Facilities Public Safety Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 revised Facilities Public Works O&M Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 revised Facilities Wade James Theater Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 revised Facilities Yost Pool House Six- ear cost and funding 2024-2029 revised 0 d r U- Q 0 U rn N O N It N O N N N 0 a- 0 a t— U- Q 0 a LL U a_ U N Y i 0 0 a N 0 N Q 2024 PW CFP/CIP v1.11 137 1 Packet Pg. 145 rOft EDMONDS PARKS, RECREATION & HUMAN SERVICES 2024-2029 PROPOSED CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN & CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM r s -- 7� - / - ' 0 i DRAFT SEPTEMBER 2023 EDMONDS PARKS. RECREATION & HUMAN SERVICES Table of Contents Director's Letter................................................................ 2 CIP/CFP Worksheets.......................................................3-7 Project Distribution Map ................................................. 8 Project Descriptions......................................................9-31 Program Descriptions...................................................32-34 Acquisition Descriptions...............................................35-37 FundDetail..................................................................... 38 Fund 332 (Capital Const. & Impact Fee) Detail ............39-40 Fund 125 (REET 11) Detail ................................................ 41 Fund 126 (REET 1) Detail ................................................. 42 Fund 143 (Tree) Detail .................................................... 43 Fund 137 (Cemetery) Detail ........................................... 44 Annual Project Comparison ............................................ 45 r n r,kL 5.1.b EDMONDS PARKS, RECREATION & HUMAN SERVICES September 19, 2023 Members of the City Council, Parks & Planning Board, Staff and Citizens of Edmonds, The following document outlines the 6-year Parks Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and Capital Facilities Plan (CFP). The CIP/CFP serve as a planning guide identifying parks capital projects and related funding sources and reflects the priorities established in the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan based largely on citizens' priorities. The CIP/CFP is updated annually through a public process including presentations and Public Hearings hosted by both the Parks & Planning Board and the City Council. There were several significant Parks Capital project accomplishments in 2023 to include: 1. Completion of the 8-acre Civic Center Playfield two-year construction project with a June 23rd Grand Opening. 2. Completion of the 96th Avenue Infiltration project required for Civic Center Playfield which will significantly reduce the contaminated water run-off into Shell Creek in Yost Park. 3. An Interlocal Agreement with City of Mountlake Terrace supporting the Ballinger Park Phase 3 development to provide improved park access for Edmonds residents. The 2023 projects in process include: 1. Demolition of the structures on the property donated by Shirley Johnson (abatement completed). 2. Improvements to the Edmonds Lake Ballinger Access (McAleer) area. 3. Improvements to Mathay Ballinger Park — engineering completed, and permit submitted for paved path, shade structure, permanent restroom and parking improvements. 4. Tree maintenance for large oak trees at 5th and Main. 5. Many deferred maintenance projects throughout the park system. After completing two significant multi -million -dollar park projects consecutively (Edmonds Waterfront Center and Civic Center Playfield), the Parks, Recreation & Human Services Department will turn our focus on deferred maintenance throughout the city's existing parks system and recreation facilities. Further, the department will remain focused on acquisition of additional parkland to fill system gaps in park services and to address inequities in parkland distribution as identified in the 2022 PROS Plan. Your Parks, Recreation & Human Services Department is proud to serve the citizens and visitors of Edmonds and we look forward keeping the Edmonds parks safe, accessible, and enjoyable for all. Sincerely, I ,SL�w ti-- Angie Feser Edmonds Parks, Recreation & Human Services Director 425-771-0256 Angie.Feser@EdmondsWA.gov Page 2 Packet Pg. 148 2024-2029 SIX -YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 5.1.b Costs inflated at 3% per year Project CFP Project Site & Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Tot: # Lake Ballinger Park Mountlake Terrace ILA *CARRYFORWARD* D19 Funding to support City of Mountlake Terrace Ballinger Park Phase III $ 200,000 $ $ $ $ $ $ 200,0( Development. Payment due upon completion of project. D5 Mathay Ballinger Park *CARRYFORWARD* D6 Construction of improvements including permanent restroom, paved trail, picnic $ 271,300 $ $ $ $ $ $ 271,3( D7 shelter ADA access and other amenities. Shell Creek Restoration *CARRYFORWARD* R19 Stream health and erosion control of shell Creek in Yost Park, scope TBD based $ 120,000 $ 380,000 $ $ $ $ $ 500,0( on study. Study in 2024, work in 2025. R9 Yost Park & Pool R4 Park enhancements, repair and maintenance to include resurface of tennis courts $ 154,300 $ 1,296,400 $ $ $ $ $ 1,450,7( R6 and trail, bridge and boardwalk repairs/replacement in 2024, inclusive - - - - R11 playground and pool upgrades in 2025. Columbarium Expansion - Phase II D8 Expansion of the current columbarium. Funding provided through the Cemetery $ $ 159,100 $ $ $ $ $ 159,1( Trust Fund 137. Woodway Campus Athletic Complex - Phase I - Lighting X D20 In cooperation with the Edmonds School District, complete a community park $ $ 1,500,000 $ $ $ $ $ 1,500,0( and athletic complex at Former Woodway High School to include lighting and future construction of two additional fields. Neighborhood Park SE 1 X D13 Master plan and development of a new neighborhood park in South Edmonds $ $ 79,600 $ 819,500 $ $ $ $ 899,1( (funding is in Parkland Acquisition program for purchase). R8 Sierra Park $ $ - $ 415,000 $ $ $ $ 415,0( Playground replacement and upgrade to inclusive standards. R7 Olympic Beach Park $ $ 20,000 $ 33,000 $ $ $ $ 53,0( Renovation of existing restrooms. Project Type: A: Acquisition - R: Replacement/Upgrade - P: Master Planning - D: Development (new) 08 c IL d r ca u_ Q U rn N 0 N 1* N 0 N N W O O_ O L IL Page 3 Packet Pg. 149 2024-2029 SIX -YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 5.1.b Costs inflated at 3% per year Project CFP Project Site & Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Tot: # D10 Pine Street Park D11 Park enhancements to include the addition of a small shelter with picnic tables, $ $ 40,000 $ 124,400 $ $ $ $ 164,4( D12 canopy shade trees and a paved connecting pathway. Johnson Property R2 Master plan for future park use. Site development not included in estimate. $ $ $ 82,000 $ $ $ $ 82,0( P5 Demolition, debris removal and site security completed in 2023. Neighborhood Park SR99 X D15 Master plan and development of a new neighborhood park in Southeast $ $ $ 82,000 $ 844,100 $ $ $ 926,1( Edmonds (funding is in Parkland Acquisition program for purchase). x P1 Parks & Facilities Maintenance and Operations Building $ $ $ 1,125,500 $ 4,637,100 $ $ $ 5,762,6( D2 Replace and/or renovate shop facilities located in City Park. R12 Maplewood Hill Park $ $ $ - $ 347,800 $ $ $ 347,8( Playground replacement. Neighborhood Park SE 2 X D18 Master plan and development of a new neighborhood park in Southeast $ $ $ $ 84,400 $ 869,500 $ $ 953,9( Edmonds (funding is in Parkland Acquisition program for purchase). Waterfront Walkway P3 Connecting the waterfront walkway from Brackett's Landing North to $ $ $ $ $ 515,000 $ 819,500 $ 1,334,5( D14 Marina Beach Park by adding missing section in front of the Ebb Tide _ Condominiums, to provide ADA improvements. R16 Seaview Park $ $ $ $ $ 417,900 $ - $ 417,9( Replacement of permanent restroom to provide ADA upgrades. D16 Elm Street Park D17 Park enhancements to include the addition of a nature playground, $ $ $ $ $ 100,000 $ 340,370 $ 440,3, R14 small shelter with picnic tables and habitat restoration. Project Type: A: Acquisition - R: Replacement/Upgrade - P: Master Planning - D: Development (new) 08 c IL N d r u_ CL U rn N 0 N 1* N 0 N N U) O O_ O L IL Page 4 Packet Pg. 150 2024-2029 SIX -YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 5.1.b Costs inflated at 3% per year Project CFP Project Site & Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Tot: # X R15 Pool Replacement $ $ $ $ $ $ 23,881,000 $ 23,881,0( Replacement of the existing Yost pool. Design, location, and funding TBD. Meadowdale Playfields R3 Renovations as suggested by the City of Lynnwood and consistent with re TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD $ negotiated and updated Interlocal Agreement. May include addition of dugout - roofs, light replacement and playground upgrade. Edmonds Marsh Estuary Restoration (Willow Creek Daylighting) Master Plan development and implementation of the Edmonds Marsh to daylight X P4 D9 the waterway connection of Puget Sound to the Edmonds Marsh and two fresh TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD $ water creeks providing restoration of fresh water/salt water estuary and natural - D1 tidal exchange. (All expenses are TBD per Council direction in December 2022). Acquisition funding identified in Parkland Acquisition program. (A) SUBTOTAL PARKS CIP/CFP PROJECTS $ 745,600 $ 3,475,100 $ 2,681,400 $ 5,913,400 $ 1,902,400 $ 25,040,870 $ 33,070,01 Costs inflated at 3% per year Project PARKS CIP PROGRAMS 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Tot: Citywide Park Improvements / Capital Replacement Program R17 Ongoing program of funding allocation for regular and deferred maintenance, $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 2,700,0( repair and replacement of parks amenities, structures and equipment. Signage & Wayfinding R10 Replacement of aging signage to improve accuracy and provide a $ 75,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 75,0( consistent City of Edmonds Parks visual identification system. Parkland Acquisition Support $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 300,0( Funds utilized to evaluate potential acquisitions and complete due diligence. Debt Service and Interfund Transfers Debt service on Civic Park $1.6M bond (2021) and Interfund transfers to $ 123,000 $ 123,000 $ 123,000 $ 123,000 $ 123,000 $ 123,000 $ 738,0( Engineering for Capital Project Support. (B) SUBTOTAL - PARKS CIP PROGRAMS $ 698,000 $ 623,000 $ 623,000 $ 623,000 $ 623,000 $ 623,000 $ 3,813,0( Project Type: A: Acquisition - R: Replacement/Upgrade - P: Master Planning - D: Development (new) 08 Page 5 Packet Pg. 151 2024-2029 SIX -YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 5.1.b Costs inflated at 3% per year Project PARKLAND ACQUISITION 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Tot: X A2 Neighborhood Park SE 1 $ 1,500,000 $ - $ $ $ $ $ 1,500,0( Acquisition of parkland in South Edmonds. X A3 Neighborhood Park SR99 $ - $ 1,545,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,545,0( Acquisition of parkland near SR 99. X A4 Neighborhood Park SE 2 $ $ - $ 2,185,500 $ $ $ $ 2,185,5( Acquisition of parkland in South Edmonds. A5 Interurban Trail $ $ $ $ $ $ 895,585 $ 895,5i Acquisition for trail extension. Edmonds Marsh Estuary Restoration (Willow Creek Daylighting) X Al Acquisition of the Unocal property in support of greater Edmonds Marsh TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD $ - restoration. (C) SUBTOTAL - PARKLAND ACQUISITION $ 1,500,000 $ 1,545,000 $ 2,185,500 $ - $ $ 895,585 $ 6,126,Of 08 c O IL W r .v cc u_ CL U rn N O N 1* N O N N W O O_ O L IL H u_ Q a (D) TOTAL PARKS CIP/CFP EXPENDITURES (A+B+C) $ 2,943,600 $ 5,643,100 $ 5,489,900 $ 6,536,400 $ 2,525,400 $ 26,559,455 $ 43,009,1! V a PARKS CIP REVENUE 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Tot: Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) I - Fund 126 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 1,200,01 Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) II - Fund 125 $ 2,000,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 9,500,0 Park Impact Fees - Fund 332-100 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 1,800,0 Tree Fund 143 - Land Acquisition $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 1,290,0 Cemetery Trust Fund 137 - Columbarium Expansion $ 159,100 $ 159,1( ARPA Contribution - Shell Creek Study $ 120,000 $ - $ - $ $ - $ $ 120,0( Investment Interest (3%) $ 18,918 $ 24,795 $ 30,849 $ 37,085 $ 43,507 $ 50,122 $ 205,2- Donations $ - $ $ - $ $ - $ $ Bond Proceeds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Secured Grants $ $ $ - $ $ - $ $ Unsecured Grants/Funding - non -land acquisition $ - $ 1,500,000 $ 1,945,000 $ 5,481,200 $ 869,500 $ 24,756,800 $ 34,552,5( (E) TOTAL PARKS CIP REVENUE $ 2,853,918 $ 3,898,895 $ 4,190,849 $ 7,733,285 $ 3,128,007 $ 27,021,922 $ 48,E26 v N Y i a It N O N N C N E s c� O r r Q C N E t c� Project Type: A: Acquisition - R: Replacement/Upgrade - P: Master Planning - D: Development (new) w Q Page 6 Packet Pg. 152 2024-2029 SIX -YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 5.1.b Parks Fund 6-Year Overview 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 (F) Beginning Fund Balance $ 3,150,795 $ 3,061,113 $ 1,316,908 $ 17,857 $ 1,214,742 $ 1,817,349 (E) Revenue $ 2,853,918 $ 3,898,895 $ 4,190,849 $ 7,733,285 $ 3,128,007 $ 27,021,922 (D) Expenditures $ 2,943,600 $ 5,643,100 $ 5,489,900 $ 6,536,400 $ 2,525,400 $ 26,559,455 (G) Ending Fund Balance (F+E-D) $ 3,061,113 $ 1,316,908 $ 17,857 $ 1,214,742 $ 1,817,349 $ 2,279,817 Project Type: A: Acquisition - R: Replacement/Upgrade - P: Master Planning - D: Development (new) Page 7 Packet Pg. 153 5.1.b P5 Johnson Property R3 Meadowdale Playfields D6 Mathay Ballinger Park R9, R4, R6, R11 Yost Park & Pool D19 Lake Ballinger Park (MLT) D8 Columbarium Expansion - Phase II i R7 Olympic Beach Park D10, D11, D12 Pine Street Park R8 Sierra Park P3, D14 Waterfront Walkway R12 Maplewood Hill Park P4, D9, D1 Edmonds Marsh Restoration _ D16, D17, R14 Elm Street Park P1, D2 Parks Maintenance Building R16 Seaview Park R15 Pool Replacement Al Edmonds Marsh Restoration A5 Interurban Trail R19 Shell Creek Restoration � D20 Woodway Campus Athletic Complex MILE- * Non -site specific projects A2 , P2, D13 Neighborhood Park SE 1 A3, P6, D15 Neighborhood Park SR99 A4, P7, D18 Neighborhood Park SE 2 R17 Citywide Park Improvements R10 Signage & Wayfinding r40 D1 P4 D1 Al • D9 P1 ID2 MrA XV14 19 • * Site specific projects only. Citywide/annual citywide projects not shown DRAFT I Packet Pg. 154 2024-2029 Parks Capital Improvement & Capital Facilities Plan PROJECTS � ... 1 Y� � �. �.�1 ,rep �y� �y��,• f 11;�d`+. 1 . C .>A �yy�'�+J"',,y�il�i � Q y l F �4 ) �I -� N 'ij � �J�� Si Yi Y ('ryy' ✓ r i� x 7 (', (� ' F �Fi '.� �*M� l:(A /�y� � 1 Y� � i �1 '} M 1 �✓" i .rb A- , ,�"1� . EDMONDS PARKS, RECREATION & HUMAN SERVICES Page 9 Packet Pg. 155 5.1.b Parks & Recreation Lake Ballinger Park/Mountlake Terrace ILA — D19 v Interurban Trad Improved Park Entry Proposed Crossing by the U S. _rfr' Army Corps of Engineers J Senior Center Proposed Channel by the 6 ft Asphalt Path U.S. Army Corps of Engineers I 6 It Wood Chips Path`* a 6 ft Gravel Path Proposed Boardwalk by the U.S. f _ _- Army Corps of Engineers t Boardwalk & Viewing Platform Lake Ballinger � Lake Ballinger Park, City of Mountlake Terrace I Project Summary: Through an Interlocal Agreement with the City of Mountlake Terrace, the City of Edmonds will I support the construction of the planned improvements in the northwest area of Lake Ballinger Park including a park ! entry, pathways and access to Lake Ballinger. The project is underway and payment is due upon completion of the I project. I I I Project Justification: This western boundary of the park is Edmonds city limits and these improvements will provide I better access to Lake Ballinger Park for Edmonds residents. The revenue contribution supports the construction of the improvements which will benefit the City of Edmonds. This project is supported by the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan including 3 Recommendations, 1 Goal and 3 Objectives. Recommendation 1.2 Expand partnerships and agreements with other nearby jurisdictions. Recommendation 3.6 Explore options for access to Lake Ballinger with the City of Mountlake Terrace to include possible joint development and consideration of a fishing pier. Recommendation 5.2 Repair and improve or extend trails and boardwalks to allow improved public access to natural areas for nature/wildlife viewing, hiking and outdoor experience. PROS Goal 3, Objectives 3.2, 3.8 and 3.11. Estimated Cost: $200,000 Page 10 Packet Pg. 156 5.1.b Parks & Recreation Mathay Ballinger Park - D6 24100 78th Place West Project Summary: Park improvements to Mathay Ballinger Park began in 2023 and are continuing into 2024. Improvements include the addition of a permanent restroom, a shelter with picnic tables and a paved pathway to provide ADA accessibility to the playground as well as connect the paved Interurban Trail spur. Approximately $228,000 was expended in 2023 for the engineering, permitting and restroom procurement. Project Justification: Upgrades to this park are supported by 5 Recommendations, 3 Goals and 8 Objectives in the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan. Recommendation 3.3 is to prioritize improvements to Mathay Ballinger Park and upgrade, enhance or replace park amenities, specifically the play amenities. Recommendation 3.5 is to add amenities to existing parks, such as picnic shelters to Mathay Ballinger Park... and paved pathway connections in Mathay Ballinger Park. Recommendation 6.4 is to install permanent restrooms at Marina Beach Park and Mathay Ballinger Park. PROS Plan Goal 2, Objective 2.6, Goal 3 Objectives 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.8 and 3.9 Goal 9 Objective 9.1 and Recommendations 3.1 and 6.2 also align with these upgrades. Estimated Cost: $499,300 (approx. $228,000 expended in 2023) Page 11 Packet Pg. 157 5.1.b Parks & Recreation Shell Creek Restoration — R19 Shell Creek, Yost Park Project Summary: Restorative work of Shell Creek waterway in Yost Park to address erosion issues. Scope of this work will be determined based on a study conducted in 2024. The goal of the study is to determine what improvements are needed to support a healthy environment for the natural ecosystem within the park. and decrease stream bed erosion. With Shell Creek in its entirety being a salmon -bearing stream silting issues caused by erosion within Yost Park may impact spawning habitat. Erosion has caused closure of a pedestrian bridge in the upper creek corridor in the park, causing significant impact to trail users by lack of ability to cross the creek to access both sides of the park. In addition, other pedestrian bridges are deteriorating and in short order, require replacement. Restoration, including near t erm actions to address severe erosion issues caused by the creek, may include habitat and environmental protection and enhancement, mitigation opportunities and potential trail and bridge relocations. Project Justification: The 45-acre Yost Park, containing a portion of Shell Creek, has a need to prevent erosive conditions. This work is the second phase in addressing the pedestrian system (boardwalks, bridges, and trails) and Shell Creek water quality and health. 2022 Parks, Recreation & Open Space (PROS) Plan - Goal 3: Parks, Trails & Open Space, Objectives 3.7, 3.8 and 3.9; Goal 4: Waterfront Use & Access, Objectives 4.2 and 4.4; Goal 5: Natural Resource & Habitat Conservation Objectives, 5.1, 5.3 and 5.4; Goal 6: Climate Change, Adaptation & Resiliency, Objective 6.5; and Goal 9: Park Operations & Administration Objectives 9.1 and 9.2. Estimated Cost: $500,000 Construction (R19) — Creek Restoration 2024 $120,000 2025 2026 $380,000 2027Total $500,000 Total Expenses $120,000 $380,000 $500,000 ARPA Funding Transfer $120,000 $120,000 Real Estate Excise Tax II — Fund 125 $380,000 $380,000 Total Revenue Unsecured Funding $120,000 i $380,000 $500,000 Page 12 Packet Pg. 158 5.1.b Parks & Recreation Yost Park & Pool - R91 R41 R6 & R11 96th Ave W & Bowdoin Way, Yost Park Project Summary: Future Park enhancements, repair, and maintenance to include a playground replacement, resurface of tennis/pickleball courts, pool upgrades and trail, bridge, and boardwalk repairs / replacement. The playground at Yost Park installed in 1995, is 27 years old, has reached the end of its lifecycle, is not ADA accessible and is scheduled to be replaced in 2025. Project Justification: To maintain safety amenities should be repaired and/or replaced as supported in the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan Recommendation 3.1 which is to maintain, renovate or replace aging or damaged infrastructure in existing City properties to ensure public accessibility, use and safety and Recommendation 3.4 replace the playgrounds at... Yost Memorial Park. In addition, this work is supported by PROS Plan Goal 1, Objective 1.1 and 1.4; Goal 3, Objective 3.6, 3.8 and 3.9; Goal 4, Objective 4.4, Goal 5, Objective 5.4; Goal 6, Objective 6.5; Goal 9, Objective 9.1 and Recommendation 3.10 and 6.2 for a total of 4 Recommendations, 6 Goals and 9 Objectives. Estimated Cost: $1,450,700 Construction (M) — Bridge repairs $80,000 $80,000 Construction (R6) — Playground Replacement $750,000 $750,000 Construction (R9)—Tennis Court Resurface $74,300 $74,300 Construction (R11) — Pool Upgrades $546,400 $546,400 Total Expenses $154,300 $1,296,400 1,450,700 Real Estate Excise Tax II - Fund 125 $154,300 $1,296,400 1,450,700 Total Revenue Unsecured Funding $154,300 i 1 $1,296,400 1,450,700 Page 13 Packet Pg. 159 5.1.b Parks & Recreation Olympic Beach Park - R7 —.JV a. 200 Admiral Way, Entrance of the Fishing Pier Project Summary: Renovation of existing restroom and Visitor Center. Project Justification: This work is supported by 3 Recommendations, 3 Goals and 3 Objectives in the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan. Recommendation 6.3 is to replace or renovate restrooms at Olympic Beach, Seaview Park and Brackett's Landing North. PROS Plan Goal 3, Objective 3.8; Goal 4, Objective 4.1; Goal 9, Objective 9.1 and Recommendation 6.3 also align with these upgrades. Estimated Cost: $53,000 Planning (R7) — Restroom Renovation $20,000 $20,000 Construction (R7) — Restroom Renovation $33,000 $33,000 Total Expenses $20,000 $33,000 $53,000 Real Estate Excise Tax II - Fund 125 $20,000 $33,000 $53,000 Total Revenue Unsecured Funding $20,000 so $33,000 $53,000As Page 14 Packet Pg. 160 5.1.b Parks & Recreation D20: Woodway Campus Athletic Complex Phase I Lighting 23200 1001h Ave. W Project Summary: This project consists of two components: Phase I lighting addition, Phase II renovation of existing underdeveloped athletic field and would be coordinated with the property owner, Edmonds School District. Project Justification: By adding lighting to the renovated Phase I year-round field, usage of the multi -use facility would significantly increase. Phase II would renovate a currently poorly maintained and underutilized large athletic field to provide community significantly more multi -sport use of an existing facility. This Athletic Complex serves a densely populated area of more than 150,000 residents within 5-mile radius. Future maintenance costs could be offset by user fees. Phase I without lighting installation was completed in 2015 for $4.2M, Phase II estimated at $6-8M with funding and timing undetermined. This partnership improvement is supported by a Recommendation, 2 Goals and 5 Objectives in the 2022 PROS Plan including Recommendation 3.2 "expand partnerships and agreements with Edmonds School District ... to provide public access and opportunities for outdoor recreation". And PROS Plan Goal 3, Objectives 3.3, 3.9, 3.10 and 3.11; and Goal 9, Objective 9.4. Estimated Cost: Phase I Lighting: $1,500,000; Phase II: $6 — 8M Page 15 Packet Pg. 161 5.1.b Parks & Recreation Neighborhood Park SE 1— P2, D13 Project Summary: Acquire and develop an additional neighborhood park in the SE Edmonds area to address an existing gap in park services and inequities in parkland distribution. Once an acquisition has been authorized (see Land Acquisition Section for details) a Master Plan will be developed in collaboration with the surrounding community. Development of the park will be based on the Master Plan. Project Justification: The addition of a new park is supported by 2 Recommendations, 3 Goals and 11 Objectives in the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan. Recommendation 1 is to fill the park system gaps, 1.1 Acquire property for neighborhood parks in underserved areas such as the south Edmonds area and the SR 99 corridor. PROS Plan Goal 1, Objective 1.1; Goal 2, Objectives 2.1 and 2.3, Goal 3, Objectives 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, 3.9 and 3.10 and Recommendation 6.2 also align with the development of a new park. Estimated Cost: $899,100 + Parkland Acquisition Planning— Neighborhood Park SE 1 (P2) $79,600 2029 Total $79,600 Construction — Neighborhood Park SE 1 (D13) $819,500 $819,500 Total Expenses $79,600 $819,500 $899,100 Real Estate Excise Tax II - Fund 125 $79,600 $79,600 Total Revenue Unsecured Funding $79,600 $0 00 $79,600 00 *Project is both in Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Page 16 Packet Pg. 162 5.1.b Parks & Recreation Sierra Park — R8 81st Ave W & 190th St SW Project Summary: Replacement of the playground and fall surfacing at Sierra Park. The playground is 27 years old and is currently the smallest and most limited playground in the park system. The new playground is intended to be inclusive level design. Project Justification: These improvements are supported by 2 Recommendations, 3 Goals and 3 Objectives in the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan. Recommendation 3.4 is to replace the playgrounds at Maplewood Hill Park, Sierra Park and Yost Memorial Park. PROS Plan Goal 1, Objective 1.1; Goal 3, Objective 3.8, Goal 9, Objective 9.1 and Recommendation 3.1 also align with these improvements. Estimated Cost: $415,000 *Project is both in Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Page 17 Packet Pg. 163 5.1.b Parks & Recreation Pine Street Park - D10, D11 & D12 6th and Pine Street Project Summary: Park improvements to include the addition of a small shelter with picnic tables, canopy shade trees and a paved interior connecting pathway. Project Justification: These improvements are supported by 2 Recommendations, 2 Goals and 2 Objectives in the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan. Recommendation 3.5 is to add amenities to existing parks, such as picnic shelters to Mathay Ballinger Park, Elm Street Park and Pine Street Park and paved pathway connections in Mathay Ballinger Park and Pine Street Park. PROS Plan Goal 3, Objective 3.8; Goal 9, Objective 9.1 and Recommendation 6.2 also align with these improvements. Estimated Cost: $164,400 Planning (D10, 11, 12) $40,000 2028 2029 Total $40,000 Construction (D10) — Shelter w/Picnic Tables $59,600 $59,600 Construction (D11) — Paved Pathway $38,300 $38,300 Construction (D12) — Canopy Shade Trees $26,500 $26,500 Total Expenses $40,000 $124,400 $164,400 Real Estate Excise Tax II - Fund 125 $40,000 $124,400 $164,400 Total Revenue $40,000 1 $124,400 $164,400 Page 18 Packet Pg. 164 5.1.b Parks & Recreation Maplewood Hill Park — R12 19800 89th PI W Project Summary: Replacement of the existing playground installed in 1985. This playground is 38 years old and is the oldest in the park system. Project Justification: This improvement is supported by 2 Recommendations, 3 Goals and 3 Objectives in the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan. Recommendation 3.4 is to replace the playgrounds at Maplewood Hill Park, Sierra Park and Yost Memorial Park. PROS Plan Goal 1, Objective 1.1; Goal 3, Objective 3.8; Goal 9, Objective 9.1 and Recommendation 3.1 also align with this improvement. Estimated Cost: $347,800 Page 19 Packet Pg. 165 5.1.b Parks & Recreation Neighborhood Park SR 99 — P6 & D15 Project Summary: Design and development of an additional neighborhood park in the SR 99 area to address an existing gap in park services and inequities in parkland distribution. Once an acquisition has been authorized (see Land Acquisition Section for details) a Master Plan will be developed in collaboration with the surrounding community. Development of the park will be based on the Master Plan. Project Justification: The addition of a new park is supported by 2 Recommendations, 3 Goals and 11 Objectives in the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan. Recommendation 1 is to fill the park system gaps, 1.1 Acquire property for neighborhood parks in underserved areas such as the south Edmonds area and the SR 99 corridor. PROS Plan Goal 1, Objective 1.1; Goal 2, Objectives 2.1 and 2.3, Goal 3, Objectives 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, 3.9 and 3.10 and Recommendation 6.2 also align with the development of a new park. Estimated Cost: $926,100 + Parkland Acquisition Planning— Neighborhood Park SR99 (P6) $82,000 $82,000 Construction — Neighborhood Park SR 99 (D15) $844,100 $844,100 Total Expenses F7 $82,000 $844,100 $926,100 Real Estate Excise Tax II - Fund 125 $82,000 $82,000 Total Revenue Unsecured Funding $82,000 $0 00 $82,000 00 *Project is both in Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Page 20 Packet Pg. 166 5.1.b Parks & Recreation Johnson Property - P5 9309 Bowdoin Way Project Summary: This project is to design a master plan for this 1-acre property donated by Shirley Johnson in 2021. The house and outbuildings were removed in 2023. The site includes historic fruit and nut trees which have all been neglected for years. The master planning process uses a combination of park system -wide goals (PROS Plan), property opportunities and constraints and community input on future design and usage for the space and provides supporting documentation for potential grants for future improvements. Project Justification: This project is supported by 1 Recommendation, 5 Goals and 11 Objectives of the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan. Recommendation 3.1 — Maintain, renovate, or replace aging or damaged infrastructure in existing City properties to ensure public accessibility, use and safety. PROS Plan Goal 1, Objective 1.1; Goal 3, Objective 3.7, 3.8 and 3.10; Goal 5, Objective 5.1; Goal 6, Objectives 6.1, 6.4 and 6.5; Goal 9, Objectives 9.1, 9.3 and 9.5 also align with this project. Estimated Cost: $82,000 024 Planning & Design (P5) $82,000 $82,000 Total Expenses $82,000 $82,000 Real Estate Excise Tax II - Fund 125 $82,000 $82,000 Total Revenue Unsecured Funding $82,000 $0 $82,000 $0 Page 21 Packet Pg. 167 5.1.b Parks & Recreation Parks & Facilities Maintenance Building - P1 & D2 600 3rd Avenue South, City Park Project Summary: Replacement of 40+year old Parks and Facilities Maintenance building and renovation of the yard area in City Park. Currently undersized to accommodate staff, vehicles and equipment, mechanical work spaces and employee facilities and the facility is reaching the end of its useful life. Project Justification: Parks and Facilities Divisions have long outgrown this existing facility and need additional work areas and fixed equipment storage in order to more efficiently maintain City parks and Capital facilities. The city's small equipment repair garage is used as the Park Maintenance locker room, daily meeting room, computer access (two for 17 FTEs) and work preparation space. It is insufficient for work efficiency and creates a conflicting work space of small machinery repair and gathering space. This project is supported by 1 Goals, 3 Objectives in the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan. PROS Plan Goal 9, Objectives 9.1, 9.3 and 9.9 align with this project. Estimated Cost: $5,762,600 Planning & Design (P1) $1,125,500 $1,125,500 Construction (D2) $4,637,100 $4,637,100 Total Expenses $1,125,500 $4,637,100 $5,762,600 Real Estate Excise Tax II - Fund 125 Park Impact Fees — Fund 332-100 Bond Proceeds Operating Contribution — General Fund Park Donations Total Revenue Unsecured Funding 00 00 .00 *Project is both in Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Page 22 Packet Pg. 168 5.1.b Parks & Recreation Columbarium Expansion Phase II — D8 820 15th St SW, Edmonds Memorial Cemetery Project Summary: Expansion of the Edmonds Memorial Cemetery Columbarium. Funding provided through the Cemetery Trust Fund 137 which accumulates fund balance based on Cemetery usage and revenue generated. Project Justification: As the existing columbarium continues to fill up, it is appropriate to begin planning for the Phase II expansion. The design is complete and since it is continuation of phase improvements, could be relatively simple to implement. Estimated Cost: $159,100 Page 23 Packet Pg. 169 5.1.b Parks & Recreation Waterfront Walkway Completion — Ebb Tide Section - P3 & D14 Beachfront in front of Ebb Tide Condominiums (200 Beach Place) Project Summary: This improvement would provide a continuous ADA accessible waterfront walkway from Brackett's Landing North to Marina Beach Park ensuring all individuals, including those with mobility challenges and those using wheeled carriers can safely enjoy the waterfront. The final missing piece is a constructed pathway beach side of the Ebb Tide condominiums in the easement owned by the City of Edmonds. Project Justification: To provide public ADA access along the waterfront for all individuals. Completion of the walkway would meet ADA requirements, support efforts to keep dogs off of the beaches and was recognized as a high priority by residents participating in the development of the 2022 Parks, Recreation & Open Space Plan. This project is supported by 1 Recommendation, 3 Goals and 5 Objectives in the PROS Plan. Recommendation 6.2 is to implement upgrades and improvements to park facilities to conform with the American with Disabilities Act (ADA) and ensure universal accessibility to include required parking, providing ramped entrances and site furnishings. PROS Plan Goal 3, Objective 3.8; Goal 4, Objectives 4.1, 4.2 and 4.4, Goal 6, Objective 6.7 also align with this project. Estimated Cost: $1,334,500 Planning & Design $515,000 $515,000 Construction $819,500 $819,500 Total Expenses $515,000 $819,500 $1,334,500 Real Estate Excise Tax II - Fund 125 $515,000 $515,000 Total Revenue Unsecured Funding $515,000 $515,000 ii ii Page 24 Packet Pg. 170 5.1.b Parks & Recreation Neighborhood Park SE 2 — P7, D18 f 11 Project Summary: Design and development of an additional neighborhood park in the SE Edmonds area to address an existing gap in park services and inequities in parkland distribution. Once an acquisition (see Land Acquisition Section for details) has been authorized a Master Plan will be developed in collaboration with the surrounding community. Development of the park will be based on the Master Plan. Project Justification: The addition of a new park is supported by 2 Recommendations, 3 Goals and 11 Objectives in the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan. Recommendation 1 is to fill the park system gaps, 1.1 Acquire property for neighborhood parks in underserved areas such as the south Edmonds area and the SR 99 corridor. PROS Plan Goal 1, Objective 1.1; Goal 2, Objectives 2.1 and 2.3, Goal 3, Objectives 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, 3.9 and 3.10 and Recommendation 6.2 also align with the development of a new park. Estimated Cost: $953,900 + Parkland Acquisition *Project is both in Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Page 25 Packet Pg. 171 5.1.b Parks & Recreation Seaview Park Restroom — R16 80th Ave W & 186th St SW Project Summary: Improvements to include renovation or replacement of the permanent restroom to provide ADA compliant facilities. Project Justification: These improvements are supported by 3 Recommendations, 2 Goals and 2 Objectives in the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan. Recommendation 6 is to make improvements to existing parks as needed to ensure proper maintenance, usability and quality of park features and grounds to remove barriers and improve universal access. Recommendation 6.3 is to replace or renovate restrooms at Olympic Beach, Seaview Park and Brackett's Landing North. PROS Plan Goal 3, Objective 3.8; Goal 9, Objective 9.1 and Recommendations 3.1 and 6.2 also align with these improvements. Estimated Cost: $417,900 Construction (R16) — Restroom Replacement $417,900 $417,900 Total Expenses $417,900 $417,900 Real Estate Excise Tax II - Fund 125 $417,900 $417,900 Total Revenue Unsecured Funding $417,900 $0 $417,900 $0 Page 26 Packet Pg. 172 5.1.b Parks & Recreation Elm Street Park - D161 D17 & R14 ".0 J-1-.1 7th & Elm Street Project Summary: Park enhancements to include the addition of a nature playground, small shelter with picnic tables and habitat restoration. Project Justification: These improvements are supported by 2 Recommendations, 2 Goals and 2 Objectives in the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan. Recommendation 3.1 is to add amenities to existing parks, such as picnic shelters to Mathay Ballinger Park, Elm Street Park and Pine Street Park. PROS Plan Goal 6, Objective 6.5; Goal 9, Objective 9.1; and Recommendation 3.5 also align with these improvements. Estimated Cost: $440,370 Planning (R14, D16, D17) $100,000 $100,000 Construction (R14) — Habitat Restoration $56,300 $56,300 Construction (D16) — Nature Playground $199,670 $199,670 Construction (D17) — Shelter w/Picnic Tables $84,400 $84,400 Total Expenses $100,000 $340,370 $440,370 Real Estate Excise Tax II - Fund 125 $100,000 $284,070 $384,070 Total Revenue Unsecured Funding $100,000 i $284,070 i0 $384,070 0i Page 27 Packet Pg. 173 5.1.b Parks & Recreation Yost Pool Replacement — R15 96th Ave W & Bowdoin Way, Yost Park Project Summary: Yost Pool was built nearly 50 years ago and continues to provide recreational opportunities for many residents and visitors. In addition to teaching youth lifesaving water safety, the pool serves as an opportunity for community members of all ages to lead healthy and active lifestyles. Funding for this project has not been identified and would likely require voter approval. Project Justification: Replacing Yost Pool is supported by 4 Recommendations, 4 Goals and 6 Objectives in the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan. Recommendation 4 is to replace Yost Pool. PROS Plan Goal 1, Objective 1.1; Goal 3, Objective 3.7, 3.8 and 3.9; Goal 7, Objective 7.4; Goal 9, Objective 9.1 and Recommendations 3.1, 4.1, 4.2 and 6.2 also align with this replacement. Estimated Cost: $23,881,000 Planning & Construction (1115) 2028 2029 $23,881,000 Total $23,881,000 Total Expenses $23,881,000 $23,881,000 Real Estate Excise Tax II - Fund 125 Fund 332 Balance + Park Impact Fees Secured Grants Bonds Total Revenue Unsecured Funding $0 000($23,88,100011 $0 *Project is both in Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Page 28 Packet Pg. 174 5.1.b Parks & Recreation Meadowdale Playfields - R3 168th ST SW, Lynnwood Project Summary: Currently identifying potential budget allocation for shared improvements and related expenditures dependent upon pending Interlocal Agreement negotiations. Project Justification: The cities of Lynnwood and Edmonds and Edmonds School District currently have an Interlocal Agreement (ILA) for Meadowdale Park for shared cost of capital improvements, renovations, and ongoing maintenance. This work is supported by 2 Recommendations, 3 Goals and 5 Objectives of the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan. Recommendation 1.2 — Expand partnerships and agreements with the Edmonds School District, Snohomish County, and other nearby jurisdictions (cities of Lynnwood, Mountlake Terrace, Woodway, and Shoreline) to improve public access and opportunities for outdoor recreation and Recommendation 6.2 - Implement upgrades and improvements to park facilities to conform with the American with Disabilities Act (ADA) and ensure universal accessibility to include required parking, providing ramped entrances and site furnishings. PROS Plan Goal 2, Objective 2.6; Goal 3, Objective 3.8, 3.10 and 3.11 and Goal 7, Objective 7.2 also align with this work. Estimated Cost: TBD, negotiations are ongoing with the City of Lynnwood. Construction (R3) TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD Total Expenses TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD Ending Fund Balance/Impact Fees - 332 TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD Real Estate Excise Tax II - Fund 125 TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD Total Revenue TBD TBD TBD TBD i TBD i TBD TBD Page 29 Packet Pg. 175 5.1.b Parks & Recreation Edmonds Marsh -Estuary Expansion & Restoration - Al, P4, D9 & D1 Edmonds Marsh - City of Edmonds Marsh, Marina Beach Park and property owned by Unocal (Chevron) Project Summary: Reconnect the Puget Sound with the Edmonds Marsh near -shore estuary by restoring the natural tidal exchange. This project will impact the existing Marina Beach Park and its proposed renovation including daylighting of Willow Creek within the park and the Edmonds Marsh. In addition, this project encompasses the possible acquisition or use of the adjacent 21-acre parcel known as the Unocal property to support a larger estuary restoration project. Once acquired, an integrated restoration plan can be developed to restore functioning conditions of the tidal wetland for salmon recovery, wildlife conservation and improved public access for recreational use, environmental education and wildlife viewing. Project Justification: The marsh estuary restoration project will allow for and provide a natural tidal exchange, allow salmon to again migrate into Willow Creek, support migratory birds and waterfowl, provide a natural redistribution of saltwater -freshwater flora and fauna and address sea level rise impacts. This project is supported by 3 Recommendations, 5 Goals and 8 Objectives in the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan. Recommendation 2.2 — Expand the Edmonds Marsh/Estuary to include the Unocal property. Develop funding strategy for purchase of the Unocal property or negotiate with the State of Washington to have the property become part of the Edmonds Marsh/Estuary. PROS Plan Goal 1, Objective 1.1; Goal 4, Objective 4.3; Goal 5, Objectives 5.1, 5.3 and 5.4; Goal 6, Objective 6.5 and 6.7; Goal 9, Objective 9.1; Recommendation 2.1 and 3.11 also align with this project. Estimated Cost: TBD Acquisition and Planning + Restoration + Marina Beach Park renovation Continued on next page. Page 30 Packet Pg. 176 5.1.b Edmonds Marsh -Estuary Expansion & Restoration— continued. . 2027 2028 2029 Total Land Acquisition (Al) TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD Master Plan (P4) TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD Master Plan Implementation (D9) TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD Restoration (D1) -TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD Total Expenses TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD Real Estate Excise Tax II - Fund 125 Real Estate Excise Tax I — Fund 126 Fund 332 Balance + Park Impact Fees Bond Proceeds Secured Grants Tree Fund 143 — Land Acquisition Park Donations Operating Contribution — General Fund Stormwater — Fund 422 Total Revenue Unsecured Funding TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBID Project Accounting #M070 *Project is both in Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Expense estimates and funding sources changed to TBD per Council direction December 2022. Page 31 Packet Pg. 177 2024-2029 Parks Capital Improvement & Capital Facilities Plan PROGRAMS EDMONDS PARKS, RECREATION & HUMAN SERVICES Page 32 Packet Pg. 178 5.1.b Parks & Recreation Citywide Park Improvements / Capital Replacement Program - R17 �4- A rm a Project Summary: The 2022 Parks, Recreation & Open Space (PROS) plan identified a significant list of deferred park maintenance projects. With the addition of a Parks Capital Project Manager, hired in 2022 and the Job Order Contracting program, the Parks Department will continue to make progress on the numerous system -wide repairs, renovations and replacements of an aging parks infrastructure. Project Justification: Insufficiently maintained parks and related assets lead to higher deferred maintenance costs, increased City liability and decreased level of service and community satisfaction. This program is supported by 5 Recommendations, 6 Goals and 21 Objectives in the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Opens Space (PROS) Plan. Recommendation 3.1 is to Maintain, renovate, or replace aging or damaged infrastructure in existing City properties to ensure public accessibility, use and safety. PROS Plan Goal 2, Objectives 2.1 and 2.3; Goal 3, Objectives 3.6, 3.7, 3.8 and 3.9; Goal 4, Objectives 4.1, 4.2, 4.4; Goal 5, Objective 5.1, 5.3, and 5.4; Goal 6, Objective 6.1, 6.3, 6.4, 6.5 and 6.7; Goal 9, Objective 9.1, 9.2, 9.3 and 9.9 and Recommendations 3.7, 6.2, 6.3 and 6.4 also align with this program. Estimated Cost: $2,700,000 (6-year total) 024 2025 Repair & Maintenance $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $1,800,000 Professional Services $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $900,000 Total Expenses $450,000 $450,000 $450,000 $450,000 $450,000 $450,000 $2,700,000 Real Estate Excise Tax II - Fund 125 $450,000 $450,000 $450,000 $450,000 $450,000 $450,000 $2,700,000 Total Revenue $450,000 $450,000 $450,000 $450,000 $450,000 $450,000 $2,700,000 Unsecured Funding i i i Page 33 Packet Pg. 179 5.1.b Parks & Recreation Signage & Wayfinding — R10 � •VIEW POINT PLAY STRUCTURE NATURAL. AREA&DOG WALK PARKOPEN DAWN TO DUSK Project Summary: Update park and recreation facilities signage system -wide to include uniform and accurate trail identification information, orientation markers, safety and regulatory messaging, park hours, park rules and etiquette, interpretive information and warning signs. Project Justification: A comprehensive and consistent signage system is necessary to inform, orient and educate park users. This program is supported by 2 Recommendations, 4 Goals and 6 Objectives in the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Opens Space (PROS) plan. Recommendation 6.5 is to develop and provide consistent graphics and citywide signage to improve communication on access, usability and "branding" of the city's park and open space system. PROS Plan Goal 2, Objectives 2.1 and 2.3; Goal 3, Objective 3.6; Goal 5, Objectives 5.3 and 5.4; Goal 9, Objective 9.1 and Recommendation 6.2 also align with this program. Estimated Cost: $75,000 Page 34 Packet Pg. 180 91 ,6# 2024-2029 Parks Capital Improvement & Capital Facilities Plan %'. PARKLAND ACQUISITION '4 A 1y 1r. , EDMONDS PARKS, RECREATION & HUMAN SERVICES Page 35 Packet Pg. 181 5.1.b Parks & Recreation Parkland Acquisition — Neighborhood Park SE 1, SR 99 & SE 2 - A2, A3 & A4 Project Summary: Acquisition of parkland that will benefit citizens and support the priorities identified in the PROS Plan. Currently, $1,100,000 is reserved for parkland and open space acquisition. These funds were accumulated from 2019 through 2023. There is no specific request to purchase a particular parcel as opportunities are somewhat limited in a mostly built -out city, but staff continues to search for, develop and negotiate opportunities. Project Justification: Parkland Acquisitions are supported by 1 Recommendation, 2 Goals and 5 Objectives (land purchase only, see previous projects for development) in the 2022 Parks, Recreation & Open Space (PROS) Plan. Recommendation 1 is to fill the park system gaps, 1.1 Acquire property for neighborhood parks in underserved areas such as the south Edmonds area and the SR 99 corridor. PROS Plan Goal 2, Objective 2.1; Goal 3, Objective 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 and 3.9 also align with the acquisition of parkland. Estimated Cost: $5,230,500 2026 2027 2028 2029 Total Acquisition — Neighborhood Park SE 1 (A2) $1,500,000 $1,500,000 Acquisition — Neighborhood Park SR99 (A3) $1,545,000 $1,545,000 Acquisition — Neighborhood Park SE 2 (A4) $2,185,500 $2,185,500 Total Expenses $1,500,000 $1,545,000 $2,185,500 $5,230,500 Real Estate Excise Tax I - Fund 126 $1,300,000 $200,000 $200,000 $1,700,000 Tree Fund 143 - land acquisition - TBD Total Revenue $1,300,000 $200,000 $200,000 $1,700,000 *Project is both in Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Page 36 Packet Pg. 182 5.1.b Parks & Recreation Interurban Trail Expansion — A5 24100 78th Place West Project Summary: Acquisition of additional lands, easements and/or right-of-ways to continue the Interurban Trail, including more off -road segments. Project Justification: This Expansion is supported by 3 Recommendations, 2 Goals and 6 Objectives in the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Opens Space (PROS) Plan. Recommendation 5 is to improve trail connections including sidewalks and bike lanes to help link destinations across the community. Recommendation 5.1 suggests the City peruse opportunities to acquire additional lands, easements and/or right of way to continue the Interurban Trail. Goal 2, Objective 2.1; Goal 3, Objective 3.1, 3.2, 3.4, 3.5 and 3.6 and Recommendations 1.1 and 5.2 also align with this expansion. Estimated Cost: $895,585 Land Acquisition — Park Facilities (A5) $895,585 $895,585 Total Expenses $895,585 $895,585 Real Estate Excise Tax I - Fund 126 Tree Fund 143 - Land Acquisition Total Revenue Unsecured Funding ($895,585) ($895,585) Page 37 Packet Pg. 183 2024-2029 Parks Capital Improvement & Capital Facilities Plan FUND DETAIL EDMONDS PARKS, RECREATION & HUMAN SERVICES Page 38 Packet Pg. 184 Fund 332 5.1.b Costs inflated at 3% per year Fund 332 Expenditures 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Total D9 Edmonds Marsh Estuary Restoration (Master Plan Implementation) $ D1 Edmonds Marsh Estuary Restoration (Restoration) $ - R14 Elm Street Park Habitat Restoration $ 56,300 $ 56,300 D6 Mathay Ballinger Park Permanent Restrooms $ 100,000 $ R3 Meadowdale Playfields (Renovations, City of Lynnwood ILA) $ - D13 Neighborhood Park - SE1 (Park Development) $ 819,500 $ 819,500 D15 Neighborhood Park - SR99 (Park Development) $ 844,100 $ 844,100 D18 Neighborhood Park - SE2 (Park Development) $ 869,500 $ 869,500 R15 Pool Replacement $ 23,881,000 $ 23,881,000 P1 Parks Facilities M&O Building (Design) $ 1,125,500 $ 1,125,500 D2 Parks Facilities M&O Building (Construction) $ 4,637,100 $ 4,637,100 R19 Shell Creek Restoration (Yost Park) $ 120,000 $ 120,000 D14 Waterfront Walkway (Construction) $ 819,500 $ 819,500 D20 Woodway Campus Athletic Complex - Phase I - Lighting $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 Interfund Services 1 $ 68,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 150,000 Debt Service Civic Park $1.6M (2021) 1 $ 98,000 $ 98,000 $ 98,0001 $ 98,0001 $ 98,000 $ 98,000 $ 98,0001 $ 588,000 (C) TOTAL Fund 332 Expenditures 1 $ 266,000 1 $ 243,000 $ 1,623,000 1 $ 2,068,000 1 $ 5,604,200 $ 992,500 $24,879,800 1 $35,410,500 Fund 332 Revenue 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Total Park Impact Fees (Fund 332-100) $ 682,681 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 1,800,000 Investment Interest (3%) $ 6,230 $ 18,918 $ 24,795 $ 30,849 $ 37,085 $ 43,507 $ 50,122 $ 205,277 Miscellaneous Park Donations $ - Bond Proceeds $ - ARPA Transfer - Shell Creek Restoration (Study) $ 120,000 $ 120,000 Unsecured Funding - Woodway Campus Athletic Complex Phase 1 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 Unsecured Grants - Marsh Estuary Restoration $ - Unsecured Grants - Elm Street Park Habitat Restoration $ 56,300 $ 56,300 Unsecured Grants - Neighborhood Park SE 1 (Development) $ 819,500 $ 819,500 Unsecured Grants - Neighborhood Park SR99 (Development) $ 844,100 $ 844,100 Unsecured Grants - Neighborhood Park SE 2 (Development) $ 869,500 $ 869,500 Unsecured Funding (Bonds, Levy, Misc.) Pool Replacement $ 23,881,000 $ 23,881,000 Unsecured Funding Park Facilities M&O Building $ 1,125,500 $ 4,637,100 $ 5,762,600 Unsecured Grants - Waterfront Walkway (Construction) $ 819,500 $ 819,500 (D) TOTAL Fund 332 Revenue $ 688,911 $ 438,918 1 $ 1,824,795 $ 2,275,849 $ 5,818,285 $ 1,213,007 $25,106,922 $36,677,777 08 C R a N 41 r LL CL O U N O N 4 N O N N N O CL O a I- LL Q r� a LL U a v N Y i a N 0 N N C N E s 0 O r Q r-� C N E t V M Page 39 Packet Pg. 185 Fund 332 5.1.b Fund 332 Parks Fund 6-Year Overview 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 (E) Beginning Fund Balance (332 + 332-100) $ 207,683 $ 630,594 $ 826,512 $ 1,028,308 $ 1,236,157 $ 1,450,242 $ 1,670,749 (D) Revenue $ 688,911 $ 438,918 $ 1,824,795 $ 2,275,849 $ 5,818,285 $ 1,213,007 $ 25,106,922 (C) Expenditures $ 266,000 $ 243,000 $ 1,623,000 $ 2,068,000 $ 5,604,200 $ 992,500 $ 24,879,800 (G) Ending Fund Balance (E+D-C) $ 630,594 $ 826,512 $ 1,028,308 $ 1,236,157 $ 1,450,242 $ 1,670,749 $ 1,897,871 Project Type: A Acquisition P Master Planning D Development - New R Replacement/Upgrade Page 40 Packet Pg. 186 REET II Fund 125 5.1.b Costs inflated at 3% per year REET II(Fund 125)Expenditures 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Total P4 Edmonds Marsh Estuary Restoration (Master Plan) $ - D16 Elm Street Park (Nature Playground) $ 100,000 $ 199,670 $ 299,670 D17 Elm Street Park (Shelter w/Picnic Tables) $ 84,400 $ 84,400 R2 Johnson Property (Demo & Secure Site) $ P5 lJohnson Property (Master Plan) $ 82,000 $ 82,000 R12 Maplewood Hill Park (Playground Replacement) $ 347,800 $ 347,800 D5 Mathay Ballinger Park (Paved Loop Pathway) $ D7 Mathay Ballinger Park (Shelter w/Picnic Tables) $ - D6 Mathay Ballinger Park Permanent Restrooms $ 271,300 $ 271,300 D19 Mountlake Terrace ILA (Lake Ballinger Park)* $ 200,000 $ 200,000 P2 Neighborhood Park - SE1 (Master Plan) $ 79,600 $ 79,600 P6 Neighborhood Park - SR99 (Master Plan) $ 82,000 $ 82,000 P7 Neighborhood Park - SE2 (Master Plan) $ 84,400 $ 84,400 R7 Olympic Beach Park (Restroom Upgrade) $ 20,000 $ 33,000 $ 53,000 D10 Pine Street Park (Shelter w/Picnic Tables) $ 20,000 $ 59,600 $ 79,600 D11 Pine Street Park (Paved Connecting Pathway) $ 20,000 $ 38,300 $ 58,300 D12 Pine Street Park (Canopy Shade Trees) $ 26,500 $ 26,500 R16 Seaview Park (Restroom Replacement) $ 417,900 $ 417,900 R19 Shell Creek Restoration (Yost Park) $ 380,000 $ 380,000 R8 Sierra Park (Playground Replacement) $ 415,000 $ 415,000 P3 Waterfront Walkway Design Completion $ 515,000 $ 515,000 R11 Yost Pool Upgrades & Renovation $ 546,400 $ 546,400 R9 Yost Park (Tennis Court Resurface) $ 74,300 $ 74,300 R4 Yost Park (Trail, Bridge & Boardwalk Repairs) $ 80,000 $ 80,000 R6 Yost Park (Playground Replacement - Inclusive) $ 750,000 $ 750,000 R10 lSignage and Wayfinding $ 75,000 $ 75,000 R17 ICitywide Park Improvements / Capital Replacement Program $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 2,700,000 (C) TOTAL PARKS REET II (Fund 125) Expenditures $ 1,150,600 $ 2,266,000 $ 1,186,400 $ 882,200 $ 1,482,900 $ 734,070 $ 7,702,170 REET II(Fund 125)Revenue 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Total Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) II - Fund 125 $ 2,000,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 9,500,000 (D) TOTAL PARKS REET I (Fund 126) Revenue $ 2,000,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 9,500,000 REET II (Fund 125) Parks Fund 6-Year Overview 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 (E) Beginning Fund Balance $ 1,222,000 $ 2,071,400 $ 1,305,400 $ 1,619,000 $ 2,236,800 $ 2,253,900 (D) Revenue $ 2,000,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 (C) Expenditures $ 1,150,600 $ 2,266,000 $ 1,186,400 $ 882,200 $ 1,482,900 $ 734,070 (G) Ending Fund Balance (E+D-C) $ 2,071,400 $ 1,305,400 $ 1,619,000 $ 2,236,800 $ 2,253,900 $ 3,019,830 *Project added via Council amendment in 2023 Page 41 Packet Pg. 187 REET I Fund 126 5.1.b Costs inflated at 3% per year REET I (Fund 126) Expenditures 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Total Al Edmonds Marsh Estuary Restoration (Acquisition) $ - A5 Interurban Trail (Expansion/Acquisition) $ 895,585 $ 895,585 A2 Neighborhood Park - SE1 (Acquisition) $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 A3 Neighborhood Park - SR99 (Acquisition) $ 1,545,000 $ 1,545,000 A4 Neighborhood Park - SE2 (Acquisition) $ 2,185,500 $ 2,185,500 6C) Land Acquisition Services $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 300,000 TOTAL PARKS REET I (Fund 126) Expenditures $ 1,550,000 $ 1,595,000 $ 2,235,500 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 945,585 $ 6,426,085 REET I(Fund 126)Revenue 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Total Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) I - Fund 126 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 1,200,000 (D) TOTAL PARKS REET I (Fund 126) Revenue $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 1,200,000 REET I (Fund 126) Parks Fund 6-Year Overview 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 (E) Beginning Fund Balance $ 872,136 $ (477,864) $ (1,872,864) $ (3,908,364) $ (3,758,364) $ (3,608,364) (D) Revenue $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 (C) Expenditures $ 1,550,000 $ 1,595,000 $ 2,235,500 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 945,585 (G) Ending Fund Balance (E+D-C) $ (477,864) $ (1,872,864) $ (3,908,364) $ (3,758,364) $ (3,608,364) $ (4,353,949) 08 C O IL O N r u_ .Q O U rn N O N I* N O N N O O M O L a H u_ a u_ U a v N Y i a N O N N C N E t 0 O r r Q r-� C N E L V Page 42 Packet Pg. 188 CEMETERY Trust Fund 137 5.1.b Costs inflated at 3% per year CEMETERY Trust (Fund 137) Expenditures 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Total D8 lColumbariurn Expansion -Phase II $ 159,100 $ 159,100 Repair & Maintenance $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 125,000 (C) TOTAL CEMETERY Trust(Fund 137) Expenditures $ 25,000 $ 184,100 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 284,100 CEMETERY Trust (Fund 137) Revenue 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Total Cemetery Trust - Fund 137 Investment Interest (@5%) $ 62,673 $ 65,306 $ 60,117 $ 62,623 $ 65,254 $ 68,016 $ 315,972 F I Cemetery Trust - Fund 137 Sales Revenue $ 15,000 $ 15,000 $ 15,000 $ 15,000 $ 15,000 $ 15,000 $ 90,000 (D) TOTAL CEMETERY Trust (Fund 137) Revenue $ 77,673 $ 80,306 $ 75,117 $ 77,623 $ 80,254 $ 83,016 $ 405,972 CEMETERY Trust (Fund 137) 6-Year Overview 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 (E) Beginning Fund Balance $ 1,253,456 $ 1,306,129 $ 1,202,335 $ 1,252,452 $ 1,305,075 $ 1,360,328 (D)Revenue $ 77,673 $ 80,306 $ 75,117 $ 77,623 $ 80,254 $ 83,016 (C)Expenditures $ 25,000 $ 184,100 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 (G) Ending Fund Balance (E+D-C) $ 1,306,129 $ 1,202,335 $ 1,252,452 $ 1,305,075 $ 1,360,328 $ 1,418,345 Page 43 Packet Pg. 189 TREE Fund 143 5.1.b Costs inflated at 3% per year TREE (Fund 143)Expenditures 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Total Park and Open Space Acquisition Program $ Tree Maintenance - Oak Tree's 5th & Main* $ (C) TOTAL TREE (Fund 143) Expenditures $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - TREE (Fund 143)Revenue 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Total Tree - Fund 143 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 1,290,000 (D) TOTAL TREE (Fund 143) Revenue $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 1,290,000 TREE (Fund 143) 6-Year Overview 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 (E) Beginning Fund Balance $ 426,065 $ 641,065 $ 856,065 $ 1,071,065 $ 1,286,065 $ 1,501,065 (D) Revenue $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 (C) Expenditures $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - (G) Ending Fund Balance (E+D-C) $ 641,065 $ 856,065 $ 1,071,065 $ 1,286,065 $ 1,501,065 $ 1,716,065 *Added via Council Budget Amendment Dec. 2022 Page 44 Packet Pg. 190 5.1.b CFP / CIP COMPARISON (2024 TO 2029) PROJECTS ADDED Type I PROJECT NAME CFP DESCRIPTION None CFP / CIP COMPARISON (2024 TO 2029) PROJECTS REMOVED Type PROJECT NAME CFP DESCRIPTION Parks Lake Ballinger Access (McAleer) Project completion scheduled in 2023 Parks Johnson Property Demolition Demolition to be complete in 2023 Parks Playground Upgrade Program Playground upgrades identified each year, no need for additional program CFP / CIP COMPARISON (2024 TO 2029) Type PROJECT NAME CFP CHANGE Parks Columbarium Expansion - Phase II Funded through Cemetery Trust Fund 137 - scheduled in 2025 vs. 24 Parks Elm Street Park Improvements Separated into planning in 2027 and construction in 2028 vs. 2026 Parks Interurban Trail Expansion Moved to 2029 vs. 28 Parks Johnson Property Master Plan Removed demolition, master plan scheduled in 2026 vs. 25 Parks ILake Ballinger Park Mountlake Terrace ILA ILA completed in 2023; payment due upon construction completion in 2024, carryforward Parks Maplewood Hill Park Playground replacement moved to 2027 vs. 25, significant price increase Parks Mathay Ballinger Park Improvements permanent restroom installation scheduled to take place in 2024, carryforward Parks Neighborhood Park SE1, SR99, SE2 X Master plan and construction of all three parks pushed back one year (must acquire first) Parks Olympic Beach Park Improvements Separated into planning in 2025 and construction in 2026 vs. 24 Parks Parkland Acquisition/Neighborhood Parks X All three bumped back one year to 2024, 2025 and 2026 Parks Pine Street Park Improvements Separated into planning in 2025 and construction in 2026 vs. 24 Parks Seaview Park Improvements Restroom replacement moved to 2028 vs. 27 Parks Shell Creek Restoration Plan carried forward to 2024; restoration in 2025 vs. 24 Parks Signage and Wayfinding Price increase to $75K vs. $51,500 Parks Yost Park & Pool Improvements I Playground replacement moved to 2025 vs. 23, significant price increase due to topography Page 45 Packet Pg. 191 5.1.c Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) & Capital Improvement Program (CIP) City Council— October 3, 2023 06 ivogbk `A OV ED,,rJ�O`. �r Packet Pg. 192 5.1.c CIP 6-year maintenance 6-year capital projects w/fundin projects w/ sources funding sources OComponents found only in the CIP OComponents found only in the CFP O Components found in both the CIP & CFP CFP Long-range (20-year) capital project needs Packet Pg. 193 5.1.c Public Works & Utilities 2024-2029 CFP Combined CFP & CIP Document • Transportation • Utilities • Water • Stormwater • Sewer • Facilities • Wastewater Treatment Plant • Comparison to previous year 06 a U f� U- w .Q U M N O N NT N N d N 0 CL 0 L a 3 Packet Pg. 194 5.1.c Public Works & Utilities CFP & CIP Citywide Project Maps PWW-09 P' 1 PWT-68 PWT-17 P'A'T 24 -05 IT 44 PWT03 PWT 4G do[ 06 a a� U f� LL fC U 0) N O N N O N d N O O_ O L a 0 m _ d y i a L O V a M 2 C d Packet Pg. 195 Cd _ a m CFP & CIP Format U- oject List Capital 2024 Bu CL Pro Facilities Decision Pa Budget Nu Project Numb Amount � N N N PROJECT�' 1- 1 1 1 1 1 TOTALO (2024-2029) 1 1 • N Iv N Preservation / Maintenance Projects O c L PWT-01 Annual Street Preservation $1,600,000 $2,400,000 $1,300,000 $2,630,000 $2.630,000 $2,630,000 $13,190,000 $39,450,000 $52,64 a 10 Program = PWT-03 76th Ave. W Overlay from 196th $20,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $20,000 $0 ° $2 10 St. SW to Olympic View Dr. = PWT-04 Alain St. Overlay from 6th Ave. to $789,553 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $789,553 $0 y $78 ` 3 gth Ave. a PWT-05 Puget Dr. / OVD Signal Upgrades $0 $0 $0 $90,000 $496,000 $0 $586,000 $0 $58 L 0 PWT-06 Signal Upgrades - 100th Ave / $0 $0 $0 $165,000 $773,000 $0 $938,000 $0 O $93 10 2 238th St. SW PWT-07 Main St. / 3rd Signal Upgrades $0 $0 $0 $0 $110,000 $383,000 $493,000 $0 $49 a 0 PWT-61 Olympic View Dr Overlay - 196th / $0 $200,000 $1,300,000 $0 $0 $0 $1,500,000 $0 $1,50 5 10 SR-524 to Talbot Rd PWT-68 88th Ave Overlay and Sidewalk $150,000 $1,350,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,500,000 $0 $1,50 0 Repair IYa Safety / Capacity Analysis Q a� s 5 U Q Packet Pg. 196 5.1.c Public Works & Utilities CFP & CIP Project Sheets Annual pavement preservation program to maintain City streets Mamtains the City's pavement infrastructure and reduces the need for larger capital investment to rebuild City steels. 0mgn 5350,000 SI50,000 5150.000 5130,000 5330,000 5130p00 51.950,000 mgbt of way Conitruttpn S1,a5a,000 52,250,00a 51,150000 52,SOD,000 52,SOD,00a 52,50apW 53],500,00a Earenae Teml Sa,Em.00a $irk00.Uaa St,3mPaa S2,63Q111110 $2,53a111100 S2faap0o S3%MDM street Fnmd 132 -GES tat & bUti mt, Fund 125 S1100,000 51150,00(1 565b" 5>50,000 S150.— 5—00a S31.250,000 0.Fe*Fund L6 $&10,000 $)50,000 5650,000 51.000 St50,000 `v)50,000 531.250.000 mnsportatbn �mpaa Fels Ge— Fund stormuvter u01Ry Flmtl A22 Federal Grants state Grains umecved FUMing 590a,00a 51.130,000 51.13a.00a 51,330,0oa 516.950,000 f—din9 aewce Ural S1,500,000 S2,a0o,000 $1300,000 S2530,000 S2.M.000 $2,630,OW S39,a50,OW Parks & Recreation Lake Ballinger Park/Mountlake Terrace ILA —D19 v lake Ballinger Park, City of Mountlake Terrace Project Summary: Through an Interlocal Agreement with the City of Mountlake Terrace, the City of Edmonds will support the Construction of the planned improvements in the northwest area of Lake Ballinger Park including a park entry, pathways and access toLake Ballinger. The project is underway and payment is due upon completion of the projeR. Project Justification: This western boundary of the park is Edmonds dry limits and these improvements will provide better access to Lake Ballinger Park for Edmonds residents. The revenue contribution supports me construction of the improvements which will benefit the City of Edmonds. This project is supported by the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan including 3 Recommendations. 1 Goal and 3 Objectives. Recommendation 12 Expand partnerships and agreements wah other nearby jurisdictions. Recommendation 3.6 Explore optransfor access to Lake Ballinger with the Crty of Mountlake Terrace to include possible joint development and Consideration of o fishing pier. Recommendation 52 Repair and imprave or extend trails and boardwalks to allow improved public access to natural arepsfar narure/wildlrfe viewing, hiking and outdoor experience. PROS Goal 3, Objec —3.2, 3.6 and 3.11. Estimated Cost: $200,000 Construction pal —RA S200.000 5200,000 Tool Fs�vc $200,000 $200.000 Real Ertate Excise Tax ll - Fund 125 5200,000 5200,000 Total Revenue $200,000 $200= It W 06 a Packet Pg. 197 2024 Public Works Comprehensive Plan Updates Transportation & Stormwater/Surface Water FEHR') PEERS STORM AND SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT o s COMPREHENSIVE PLAN City of Edmonds of E�Mo�Q Inc. 1890 City of Edmonds Public Works Department/Engineering Division Approved by City Council on July 6, 2010 October 2010 I Is WORK IN PROGRESS 06 a U f� U- U Cn N O N IT N 0 N In 0 a 0 a Packet Pg. 198 5.1.c Public Works & Utilities —Transportation 2024 Pavement Preservation Projects • 2024 Pavement Preservation Program ($1.5M) • Construction - 6 Lane Miles • 2025 Pavement Preservation Program ($100K) • Design 2024; Construction 2025 • Main St. Overlay 6t" Ave — 8t" Ave ($790k) • 2024 Construction • $750K Federal Grant • 11 New ADA Ramps • 88tn Ave Overlay &Sidewalk Repair ($150K) • Design 2024 • 76th Ave Overlay Close-out ($20k) 06 a U f� LL fC Cn U N O N NT N O N 0 CL 0 a K Packet Pg. 199 5.1.c Public Works &Utilities—Trancnnrtatinn 2024 Safety &Capacity Projects • Hwy 99 Revitalization/Gateway ($114K) • Hwy 99 Stage 3 2441"St-238t"St ($1.2M) • Hwy 99 Stage 4 224thSt-220t"St ($1.2M) • 76th Ave/220th St Intersection ($650K) • SR-104 Adaptive System ($186K) • Traffic Signal Upgrades ($30K) 06 a M U. C. M N O N N 0 N d N 0 CL 0 a -:L E Packet Pg. 200 5.1.c a Public Works Utilities —Transportation U_ 2024 Active Transportation Projects & Planning - U ., M • Transportation Plan Update($236K) CD _ � N -' O • Citywide Bicycle Improvements($15K) • Elm Way Walkway($10K) a • Traffic Calming Program($100K) • Pedestrian Safety Program ($80K)a. y o Packet Pg. 201 5.1.c Public Works & Utilities — Utilities 2024 Water Utility • 2024 Replacement Program ($3.3M) • Construction 2024 • 41000 ft of Watermain Replacement • 2025 Replacement Program ($426K) • Design 2024; Construction 2025 • Yost & Seaview Reservoir Final Design ($850K) • $3.5M-$4M rehabilitation cost for each Reservoir • 2025-26 Construction • Waterline Overlays ($225K) o..` y 06 a U f� LL fC U M N O N NT N N d 0 CL 0 a : L1 Packet Pg. 202 5.1.c Public Works & Utilities — Utilities 2024 Stormwater Utility • Storm &Surface Water Comp Plan ($350K) • Perrinville Creek Basin Projects • Lower Perrinville Creek Restoration ($275K) • Perrinville Creek Flow Mgmt ($100K) • Perrinville Creek Basin Update ($594K) • Edmonds Marsh Water Quality Impr ($90K) • Lake Ballinger Floodplain Purchase ($120K) • 2024 Replacement Program ($1.3M) • Stormwater Overlays ($315K) • 2025 Replacement Program ($324K) 06 a U f� LL f� r .Q U rn N O N N O N O Q 0 a am Packet Pg. 203 5.1.c Public Works & Utilities — Utilities 2024 Sewer Utility • 2024 Replacement Program($2.01VI) • 800 ft of Sewerline Replacement • 2025 Replacement Program($363K) • Cured in -place pipe rehabilitation ($522K) • 41000 ft of sewer CIPP rehab • Sewerline Overlays($60K) 2024 WWTP • WWTP Annual Capital Replace ment($500K) • Carbon Recovery Project($500K) • Nutrient Removal Project($350K) • Gasification Bypass($300K) • Condition Assessment ($150K) • Variable Frequency Drives(VFD) Upgrades ($250K) • Primary Clarifier 2 Rehabilitation ($600K) 06 a U f� LL U M N 0 N N O N 0 0 CL 0 a 13 Packet Pg. 204 5.1.c Public Works & Utilities — Facilities • Boys & Girls Club • Cemetery Building • Historic Museum • Library • City Hall • Meadowdale Club House • Fishing Pier • Old Public Works • Frances Anderson Center • Parks Maintenance Bldg • Fire Station 16 • Fire Station 17 • Fire Station 20 • Historic Log Cabin • Public Safety • Public Works O&M • Wade James Theater • Yost Pool House 06 c a m .Q U rn N � O N U� O N d o L a c pi M a O a ch �o w N 14 E Q Packet Pg. 205 5.1.c -ured Funding $862,240 4% bond $585,000 3% )ortation Impact Fees $423,361 2% 112 $251,570 1.1% =unds $114,000 0.5% General Fund 0.4% City of Lynnwood Other Packet Pg. 206 5.1.c 06 a a� ,550 4% U General Fund LL Fund112 w a Other 0.3% ARPA v City of Lynnwood N i Other N IT N O N Facilities 016 bond/non-bond $2,013,645 0.7% N 0 CL 0 Transportation Impact Fees $1,923,065 1% a Packet Pg. 207 5.1.c CIP/CFP Schedule July • City staff begins development of capital budgets August • Submit proposed Capital budget to Finance • Prepare draft CFP and CIP September • Joint Presentation City Council/Planning Board (September 19tn) • Planning Board Public Hearing (September 27tn) October • City Council Public Hearing (October 3rd) • Planning Board Recommendations/Approval (October 11tn) • City Council Discussion (October 17th) • City Council Discussion/Approval (October 24tn) \• -Ia•-I • Adopt CFP w/ Budget into the Comprehensive Plan (November 21st) 06 a a� U f� LL fC w .Q U M N O N IT N O N W In 0 CL 0 L a 17 Packet Pg. 208 5.1.c Questions 06 M 2 C d E a Packet Pg. 209 5.1.d CITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING BOARD Minutes of Hybrid Meeting September 27, 2023 Chair Gladstone called the hybrid meeting of the Edmonds Planning Board to order at 7:00 p.m. at Edmonds City Hall and on Zoom. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES The Land Acknowledgement was read by Board Member Maxwell. Board Members Present Staff Present Judi Gladstone, Chair Mike Clugston, Senior Planner Lauren Golembiewski Rob English, City Engineer Richard Kuehn (online) Mike De Lilla, Senior Utilities Engineer Susanna Martini Angie Feser, Parks, Recreation, & Human Services Director Nick Maxwell Shannon Burley, Parks, Recreation, & Human Services Deputy Director Jeremy Mitchell Beth Tragus-Campbell, Vice Chair Board Members Absent Emily Nutsch (alternate) Lily Distelhorst (student) - excused READING/APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOTION MADE BY VICE CHAIR TRAGUS-CAMPBELL, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER MARTINI, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 13. MOTION MADE BY CHAIR GLADSTONE, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER GOLEMBIEWSKI, TO APPROVE THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS. • On page 3 of 9 of the minutes, in the second full paragraph, the second sentence should be corrected to: Replacement trees wem could be triggered when the property owner has the last two or three trees on the property. • Page 3 of 9, the fourth full paragraph, delete the third sentence starting with, "Chair Gladstone. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY TO APPROVE THE AMENDMENTS. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS AMENDED. ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA Planning Board Meeting Minutes September 27, 2023 Page 1 of 7 Packet Pg. 210 5.1.d THERE WAS UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS PRESENTED. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Sue Oskowski, Edmonds resident, asked why the sidewalk on 84th (from 238 h to 234th) in the Public Works planned schedule for 2027. When Public Works presented their transportation plan to the City Council in June of this year the sidewalk was scheduled to be built in 2024. Her neighbor drives an electric wheelchair in the road because there are no sidewalks on 84t'. She urged the City to put that section of the sidewalk in the plan for 2024. It is definitely needed now. Teresa Hollis, Edmonds resident, had the following comments for Public Works: 1. She stated that this plan uses priorities for walkways that were set in 2015 which is before the City Council decided to put almost all of the new housing growth in the Highway 99 subarea. This CFP mostly ignores the planning decisions that were made by the City Council about where future density would be. She requested that in future cycles staff pays attention to where the housing density is planned. 2. She referred to the EIS for the Highway 99 subarea plan which says to build flexibility into each cycle of the 6-year Transportation Improvement Program to modify the priority and the funding of capital projects serving the study area as new development occurs and creates opportunities for matching funds from private development. A building permit was issued for the Apollo apartments at 236t` and Highway 99. It's waiting for the developer to pick it up and pay the big fees. So where are the city infrastructure projects for that neighborhood? 3. She said she doesn't support the amount of spending in the Green Streets demonstration project. A Green Street is a Tesla, but they would be happy with a used Prius. She suggested the City just provide some sort of walkway so they don't have to walk in the street, especially when they walk their kids to school. Also, please add a project for a paved walkway on 236 h between 84th and Edmonds Way since that's a route to Madrona School. It would also support the neighborhood where development will eventually happen on the empty lot at 236th and 84th. 4. She expressed support for the big increase in traffic calming programs for 2024. She had the following comments for Parks: 1. She supports the emphasis on working down the maintenance and repair backlog. 2. She expressed concern that the Burlington Coat Factory site project is missing from the portfolio. She wondered why there wasn't at least a placeholder for it in this CFP cycle for some reasonable estimate of the city spending. Angela Winzen, Mayor's Climate Protection Committee member and Edmonds Climate Advisory Board member, commented on behalf of both of the groups to convey their shared desire for a climate action manager to be part of the City's new budget. Climate mitigation is not a task that should be on a list of many others. It deserves, at minimum, a dedicated individual who can take the lead on implementation of the 2023 Climate Action Plan and the writing of future plans, including adaptation plans and all business related to climate mitigation in the City of Edmonds. Edmonds needs a leader in the city office who is able to focus their efforts entirely on the goal of achieving carbon neutrality by 2050. They cannot wait another 13 years to begin when they are already years behind. A climate action manager for this city is long overdue and needs to be part of the new budget. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS Planning Board Meeting Minutes September 27, 2023 Page 2 of 7 Packet Pg. 211 5.1.d None PUBLIC HEARINGS A. 2024-2029 Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) and Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Public Hearing City Engineer Rob English introduced staff members and explained the difference between the CFP and the CIP and how they have been combined into one document. He highlighted the project lists and explained the way they are prioritized and organized. He also reviewed the layout of the project sheets. He explained that the Transportation Plan Update will be coordinated with the Comprehensive Plan Update. The Storm and Surface Water Management Comprehensive Plan is just beginning an update. Chair Gladstone asked for confirmation that the priorities established in the CIP are based on the 2015 Plan. Mr. English confirmed that is true. Mr. English reviewed Pavement Preservation Projects, Safety and Capacity Projects, Active Transportation Projects and Planning, Water Utility Projects, and Stormwater Projects. There was discussion about waterline overlays and patches. Staff explained the importance of coordinating between departments to determine the prioritization of projects. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell asked if the City is on track for water utility replacement. Mr. English replied that they are. The utility rate analysis currently underway will reassess the utility rates that are needed to maintain the city's infrastructure. Mr. English continued to review 2024 projects and programs including the Stormwater Utility, Sewer Utility Projects, Wastewater Treatment Plant, and Facilities. Comments/Questions: Board Member Golembiewski asked how coordination happens with other agencies if it is a road that has other ownership. Mr. English explained it depends on the project and gave some examples. Sometimes there are joint projects where jurisdictions share costs. Highway 99 is a state route. The state's responsibility on a state route is the pavement condition. The local agencies are responsible for any improvements. Sometimes there are state dollars available for this too. Board Member Mitchell asked if the estimated project cost is an engineer's ROM (rough order of magnitude) type estimate from a cost consultant. Mr. English replied that it is. When the Comprehensive Plan updates are done there is typically a high-level engineer's estimate attached to each project. Board Member Mitchell asked how many projects end up with leftover contingency funds and what happens with leftover funds. Mr. English said it depends on the scope of the project. Mr. English explained that complex projects tend to use more of the contingency funds, while the pavement preservation program rarely touches the contingency fund. If it is a local funding source like REET, the money gets put back into the fund and is part of the balance available for subsequent year projects. Board Member Golembiewski asked how private development influences prioritization of projects, particularly transportation and sidewalk projects. For example, there could be an area where they want to encourage development and the City takes the lead in doing some frontage work or an area that has some developable, Planning Board Meeting Minutes September 27, 2023 Page 3 of 7 Packet Pg. 212 5.1.d attractive land where they want the developer to do some of those sidewalk projects. Does that lead into the City's decision making and prioritization? Mr. English affirmed that it can. He referred to Highway 99 as an example of a high priority investment area by the current administration. On that corridor, projects will be done to beautify the corridor as well as subsequent frontage improvements that would typically be required by a developer. These improvements save costs for the developers and help to spur redevelopment. Chair Gladstone noted that the CIP is based on the 2015 Transportation Plan and asked how the prioritization of the CIP is impacted by the passage of the subarea plan. Was that evaluated and incorporated at all? Mr. English noted they will have an opportunity to do that with the current update. At the planning level, they go through the Transportation Plan each six years, and this is the big effort to look at overall planning and tie that into the Comprehensive Plan. Chair Gladstone asked if the Transportation Plan will come to the Planning Board. Mr. English replied that it would. Chair Gladstone said it didn't seem like there were really any new sidewalks before 2027. Why is that? Mr. English said there is no funding. The first three years are projects that have secured money or are reasonably expected to have secured money. There is no dedicated funding for sidewalks. Chair Gladstone asked what the replacement rate is for replacing the utility system with the dollar amounts that are in the budget for replacement. Mr. De Lilla replied it would be about 100 years. Mr. English commented that for transportation, at a rate of $2.8 million per year they could repave the streets in 25 to 30 years. The City is only currently funding about half that amount. He explained that traffic impact fees are restricted to growth related projects that address level of service. With this update they will be changing the way they do impact fees by looking at a multimodal level of service. Part of that will be looking at sidewalks and bike lanes in an effort to have a more holistic complete street approach. Board Member Mitchell referred to areas that don't have sidewalks and asked about the possibility of taking away some of the right-of-way that the City owns to incorporate some pedestrian right of way. Mr. English noted that a local impact district would be one way to fund a sidewalk on a local street if all the neighbors agreed to it. Board Member Mitchell explained that the City of Shoreline sometimes will put in temporary delineator curbs into the right of way. This is a way to provide a community that doesn't have any sidewalks with a designated area while funding for sidewalks is being generated. Mr. English said they don't have any active programs like this. They are already $1.3 million short on paving, so to pave something like that takes them further away from preservation efforts. He noted that there have been occasions where they have a wider shoulder and have striped it in a way so that pedestrians could walk there. However, they don't have an active program where they go look for wider shoulders to make a temporary path. Chair Gladstone asked if this could potentially be a temporary solution for the area on 236' brought up by a resident today that had no place for school kids to walk, not even a shoulder. Mr. English expressed concern that it could trigger stormwater requirements related to detention and water quality. They typically look for opportunities where there is existing pavement to maintain what they have so they don't have the stormwater triggers. Director Feser suggested that some of these ideas might be able to be addressed with the new Transportation Improvement Plan's multimodal transportation focus. Mr. England concurred. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell referred to packet page 154 and stated that they need to figure out how to prevent the massive block of sidewalk projects continuing to be pushed out because of lack of funding. She asked why parks restrooms maintenance funding had been removed. Director Feser stated that might just be a facilities budget issue. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell asked staff to provide clarification on that. Director Feser noted that there is a $450,000 program for projects like that. They are still doing the restroom projects; it just isn't under the facilities budget. Planning Board Meeting Minutes September 27, 2023 Page 4 of 7 Packet Pg. 213 5.1.d Director Feser presented the Parks, Recreation, and Human Services 2024-2029 CIP/CFP. She introduced Deputy Director Shannon Burley and expressed appreciation for the large role she plays in the budget process. She also thanked Public Works and Rob English for working with them. She presented the framework for the CIP/CFP; current and ongoing projects; capital projects (2024 highlighted projects, programs, and acquisitions); and a summary of changes in the program from last year's capital program. Public Testimony: None Questions/Comments: Board Member Martini referred to signage and wayfinding and encouraged the City to include accessibility Director Feser concurred and stated they intend to do that. Board Member Golembiewski asked if Parks is responsible for the maintenance of all street trees. Director Feser replied that they are, and it is a challenge. They need to do an inventory of all trees so they know what they have and how they are working with it. Chair Gladstone referred to parkland acquisition and asked what the minimum size is for a neighborhood park. Director Feser replied that there is no minimum or maximum; it is more about the location and what it provides. Board Member Martini referred to the waterfront walkway and asked if the apartments agreed with the City to finally put in an accessible walkway. Director Feser explained they had not, but the courts said yes. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell referred to the ADA restroom upgrade at Seaview Park and asked if they could use REET funding for that one since they are increasing access. Director Feser said they could use REET funding, but that doesn't have to do with increasing access. She didn't think they could use park impact fees because it isn't about increasing capacity. Board Member Martini argued that it would increase capacity for her. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell encouraged staff to move this project up earlier with the justification that they can't fully utilize the existing structure they have built and paid for because it doesn't have an ADA restroom. Director Feser asked for suggestions about what in exchange could get pushed back. Vice Chair Tragus- Campbell suggested pushing back the Maplewood Hill Park playground replacement one year because then you are swapping playground for playground and increasing access to the playground you have. Board Member Golembiewski pointed out that Sierra Park desperately needs to be replaced. As far as neighborhood concerns, Seaview has access to Seaview Park so they aren't lacking a park space. This could be another potential swap. Chair Gladstone asked if there are any concerns about recommending the CIP for approval to the Council. She stated that the Council needs to understand that the way that this CIP is set up perpetuates the inequities in the city. She appreciates the philosophy that the priority is that they need to maintain what they have before they put new things in, but if the Council wants to walk the walk about leveling the playing field here, there is some real hard thinking they need to do. She understands that there are funding issues, but how you direct your REET dollars is somewhat discretionary. She is unhappy that they are not seeing any new sidewalks until 2027 when they have kids walking down a street where there is no place to walk. There are people using wheelchairs on an arterial that is becoming busier by the day, and it is not being addressed. That overall philosophy flies in the face what Council has been talking about in terms of trying to address some of the inequities in the City. Planning Board Meeting Minutes September 27, 2023 Page 5 of 7 Packet Pg. 214 5.1.d Board Member Golembiewski asked if there is a breakdown of the amount of money being spent on maintenance of existing facilities versus money towards new facilities each year. She also commented that it appears that a large chunk of the improvement funds toward new items are being dedicated towards the Highway 99 revitalization stages 3 and 4, and that maybe some of the smaller neighborhood sidewalks and streets are getting pushed out further to prioritize this area. She acknowledged that Highway 99 is underserved so they are putting funds there, but maybe those aren't the streets that the community is actually wanting to improve. Maybe the issue with prioritization isn't necessarily between maintenance of existing and development of new. In 2024 and 2025 it appears that most of the capital facilities budget is going toward Highway 99. Maybe if some of those funds were diverted towards areas like 84" or 236th off the main arterial, you would have more support. Chair Gladstone said in her mind it isn't an "either/or" issue; it's probably an "and". Mr. English noted that the majority of the funding for Highway 99 is grant funding so they can't move it to local streets. He acknowledged that it is a complex issue. Board Member Golembiewski agreed and spoke to the importance of communicating that sort of thing well. The neighborhoods around there don't understand these issues. Chair Gladstone reiterated that it's more about the BEET dollars and impact fees and where they are used. Board Member Golembiewski recommended highlighting to Council the way impact fees for the transportation program can be used is going to change. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell said she would be comfortable recommending support of this with the caveat that the City Council needs to find additional funds to get at least one of those sidewalk projects done every year because it's important to the community. Board Member Mitchell spoke in support of the Green Streets program but suggested taking some of the funding and first putting it towards sidewalks or at least delineating walkways to give these communities a safe walking space. After those needs are met there might be more support from the community for the program. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell said she also supports the Green Streets program but is concerned about the safety of people walking or riding their bikes down the street. She is very pleased about the traffic calming program in the plan because people are going down streets way too fast, especially with the growing population. Having calming measures, sidewalks, and bike lanes to make it safer outside of the bowl areas is something she would recommend. Chair Gladstone suggested a couple board members could work on a draft memo to be reviewed by the Planning Board at the October 11 meeting. Director Feser noted that the memo would need to be ready to go into the Council packet on October 12. MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER GOLEMBIEWSKI, SECONDED BY VICE CHAIR TRAGUS-CAMPBELL, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THAT A SMALL GROUP PREPARE A DRAFT MEMO. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Chair Gladstone and Board Member Mitchell volunteered to work on the memo. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None Planning Board Meeting Minutes September 27, 2023 Page 6 of 7 Packet Pg. 215 5.1.d NEW BUSINESS None PLANNING BOARD EXTENDED AGENDA Senior Planner Clugston noted he would be on vacation from October 6 through October 15. Michelle Martin is also on leave right now, so logistically it will be difficult to get things done. He pointed out that the Tree Code was already bumped to October 11. Tonight, the Board added the discussion regarding the CIP/CFP memo to that meeting as well. Director McLaughlin was going to be at the October 11 meeting to talk about the Comprehensive Plan, Highway 99 Community Renewal Program Update, and the Highway 99 Landmark Site Discussion. Chair Gladstone noted they also need to have the discussion about the vision statement. Mr. Clugston indicated that would be part of the Comprehensive Plan discussion on October 11. Chair Gladstone proposed bumping the presentation to City Council to Monday, November 6 and doing it in person. There was discussion about having a small group work on a recommendation for trees similar to what they are doing for the CIP/CFP recommendation. Board Members Golembiewski, Maxwell, and Tragus-Campbell volunteered to have a memo ready for discussion at the October 11 meeting. There was discussion about using the Comprehensive Plan discussion time for the vision statement and pushing the Highway 99 Community Renewal Program Update out. PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS Chair Gladstone noted she would be available but would be on east coast time on October 11. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS None ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:34 p.m. Planning Board Meeting Minutes September 27, 2023 Page 7 of 7 Packet Pg. 216 5.1.e Parks, Recreation & Human Services Parks 2024-2029 CIP / CFP Angie Feser, Director September 27, 2023 Packet Pg. 217 5.1.e Parks 2024-2029 CIP / UP Overview Framework for CIP/CFP Current/Ongoing Projects Capital Projects — 2024 Highlighted Projects Programs Acquisition Changes 0 w U) IL N Y CU IL Packet Pg. 218 5.1.e 2024-2029 Parks CIP / CFP- FRAMEWORK Department Staff Resources PROS Plan Capital Recommendations 1. Acquisition to Fill Park System Gaps - Secure additional land for neighborhood parks to address gaps 2. Open Space & Conservation Acquisitions - Pursue acquisitions that adjoin city properties or conserve unique natural areas o w 3. Park Development & Enhancements — significant repairs needed for aging infrastructure 4. Yost Pool Replacement - Refine options for the replacement of Yost Pool a N 5. Trail Connections — Needed to help link destinations across the community CU 6. ADA, Accessibility & Other User Convenience Enhancements - Remove barriers and improve Z universal access of EDtiJO C1 r Packet Pg. 219 5.1.e 2024-2029 Parks CIP / CFP - FRAMEWORK PROS Plan Goals (9) 1. ENGAGEMENT- Encourage and facilitate meaningful public involvement in park and recreation planning. 2. DIVERSITY, EQUITY & INCLUSION -Decrease barriers and provide increased opportunities for participation and representative cultural, heritage and art programs, events representing the diversity of Edmonds demographics. 3. PARKS, TRAILS & OPEN SPACE -Provide an interconnected park system that offers a wide variety of year-round recreation opportunities and experiences which support and enhance Edmonds' cultural identity and the natural environment. 4. WATERFRONT USE & ACCESS -Preserve and pursue opportunities to expand public access and enjoyment of Edmonds' waterfront. 5. NATURAL RESOURCE & HABITAT CONSERVATION -Conserve and provide access to natural resource lands for habitat conservation, recreation, and environmental education. _ 0 w w 4) a CO) Y L CU a Packet Pg. 220 5.1.e 2024-2029 Parks CIP / CFP FRAMEWORK PROS Plan Goals (Cont.) 6. CLIMATE CHANGE, ADAPTATION & RESILIENCY -Adopt to climate change and increase local park system resiliency by improving environmental conditions, stewardship and sustainability in parks, trails, open spaces and recreation facilities within planning, development, maintenance, and operations. 7. RECREATION PROGRAMS & FACILITIES -Provide a varied and inclusive suite of recreation opportunities and experiences to promote health and wellness, year-round activity and social engagement. 8. CULTURAL SERVICES -Provide arts and cultural opportunities and experiences to promote an engaged and vibrant community. 9. PARK OPERATIONS & ADMINISTRATION - Maintain and operate a modern, efficient park system that provides a high level of user comfort, safety and aesthetic quality, and protects capital investments. PROS Plan G2—Obj2.6 G3 — Obi 3.8, 3.10, 3.11 G7 — Obi 7.2 Rec. — 1.2, 6.2 Packet Pg. 221 5.1.e 2024 - 2029 Parks CIP / UP Geographic Distribution Ps Johnson Property R3 Meadowdale Playllelds D6 Mathay Ballinger Park 119,114 R6, RII Yost Park & Pool D19 lake Ballinger Park(Min Da [alumharium Expan:ion - Phase ll R7 Olym plc Beach Park DSD, D11, D32 Pine street Park R. stets Park PI, D14 WMertron[ Walkway R12 Maplewood Hill Park P4, D9, DI Edmonds Marsh Restoration DS6,D17,RI4 Elm street Park PI, D2 Parks M.1—nonce Building R16 Seavlew Park R35 Pool Replacement Al Edmonds Marsh Restoraion AS Interurban Troll R19 Shell Creek Restoration D20 Woodwey Campus Athletic Complex 14,"te specHic projects A2, P2, D23 Nelghborhoad Park SEI A3, P6, Dls Neighborhood Park SR99 A4, P7, D39 Neighborhood Park sE 2 R27 Cltywlde Park Improvements RIO Signege& WWfinding P4 •D1 D9 F, A2, P2, D13 A3,P6,D15 A4, P7, D18 R16 R17 �� R10 VP * Non -site specific projects Neighborhood Park SE 1 Neighborhood Park SR99 Neighborhood Park SE 2 Citywide Park Improvements Signage & Wayfinding R4 RB R11 R19 R[S • 7 R14 �R6 D10 • D12 ;' 2024 Projects • •D17 :8 I � L,-/ I?19 2025 - 2029 Projects • D6 • \ 7l6 Site specific projects only. Citywide/annual citywide projects not drown. Q 0 U 016 M a a) 0 LL Wr Q M U N Q N N N 0 M 0 L. a C N i a N Y a Packet Pg. 222 5.1.e Parks 2024-2029 CIP / UP - FORMAT Costs inflated at 3% per year Project CFP Project Site& Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Total Lake Ballinger Park Mountlake Terrace ILA *CARRYFORWARD* D19 Funding to support City of Mountlake Terrace Ballinger Park Phase III $ 200,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 200,000 Development. Payment due upon completion of project. DS Mathay Ballinger Park *CARRYFORWARD* D6 Construction of improvements including permanent restroom, paved trail, picnic $ 271,300 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 271,300 D7 shelter ADA access and other amenities. Shell Creek Restoration *CARRYFORWARD* R19 Stream health and erosion control of shell Creek in Yost Park, scope TBD based $ 120,000 $ 380,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 500,000 on study. Study in 2024, work in 2025. R9 Yost Park & Pool R4 Park enhancements, repair and maintenance to include resurface of tennis courts $ 154,300 $ 1,296,400 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,450,700 R6 and trail, bridge and boardwalk repairs/replacement in 2024, inclusive R11 iplaVground and pool upgrades in 2025. Columbarium Expansion - Phase II D8 Expansion ofthe current colum barium. Funding provided throughthe Cemetery $ - $ 159,100 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 159,100 Trust Fund 137. Woodway Campus Athletic Complex - Phase I - Lighting X D20 In cooperation with the Edmonds School District, complete a community park $ _ $ 1,500,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,500,000 and athletic complex at Former Woodway High School to include lighting and future construction of two additional fields. Neighborhood Park SE 1 X Master plan and development of a new neighborhood park in South Edmonds $ - $ 79,600 $ 819,500 $ - $ - $ - $ 899,100 D13 (funding is in Parkland Acquisition program for purchase). Sierra Park R8 $ _ $ - $ 415,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 415,000 Playground replacement and upgradeto inclusive standards. R7 Olympic Beach Park $ - $ 20,000 $ 33,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 53,000 Renovation of existing restrooms. Ict Z C E �A of EDAf0 C1 v O t4 w v !0 a Packet Pg. 223 5.1.e Parks 2024-2029 CIP / CFP Funding Overview PARKS CIP REVENUE 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Total Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) I - Fund 126 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 1,200,000 Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) II - Fund 125 $ 2,000,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 9,500,000 Park Impact Fees - Fund 332-100 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 1,800,000 Tree Fund 143 - Land Acquisition $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 1,290,000 Cemetery Trust Fund 137-ColumbariumExpansion $ 159,100 $ 159,100 ARPA Contribution - Shell Creek Study $ 120,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 120,000 Investment Interest (3%) $ 18,918 $ 24,795 $ 30,849 $ 37,085 $ 43,507 $ 50,122 $ 205,277 Donations $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Bond Proceeds $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ Secured Grants $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ L(E)TOTAL Unsecured Grants/Funding- non -land acquisition $ $ 1,500,000 $ 1,945,000 $ 5,481,200 $ 869,500 $ 24,756,800 $ 34,552,500 PARKS CIP REVENUE $ 2,853,918 $ 3,898,895 $ 4,190,849 $ 7,733,285 $ 3,128,007 $ 27,021,922 $ 48,826,877 Parks Fund 6-Year Overview 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 (F) Beginning Fund Balance $ 3,150,795 $ 3,061,113 $ 1,316,908 $ 17,857 $ 1,214,742 $ 1,817,349 (E) Revenue $ 2,853,918 $ 3,898,895 $ 4,190,849 $ 7,733,285 $ 3,128,007 $ 27,021,922 (D) Expenditures $ 2,943,600 $ 5,643,100 $ 5,489,900 $ 6,536,400 $ 2,525,400 $ 26,559,455 (G) Ending Fund Balance (F+E-D) $ 3,061,113 $ 1,316,908 $ 17,857 $ 1,214,742 $ 1,817,349 $ 2,279,817 E Packet Pg. 224 Current/Ongoing Capital Projects )emolition m U rn N :s (2023-2024) N O N d N O 0. O L a c 0 c a� N d L a N Y L a v Packet Pg. 225 5.1.e Current/Ongoing Capital Projects , w .Q c� U 015 _ a d w Ballinger Park Mountlake Terrace ILA U- fC Parkland Acquisition Program L) N O N Deferred Maintenance/Small Capital Projects N BLN Shower replacement N Cemetery Gate repair o Mathay Ballinger Apollo Swing replacem( o Park Restroom Doors (12) — automatic Ic a; Viewer repairs OUTS I OR INSIDE IN9DE OUTSIDE In T 211/a In. ■ Ft ink i a� a —43I6In_� H2Y18 F.ti _ 0 CIO _ 4) L a Packet Pg. 226 5.1.e Parks, Recreation and Human Services Parks 2024-2029 CIP / UP PROJECTS Highlight — 2024 projects Packet Pg. 227 Q PARKS, RECREATION AND CULTURAL SERVIC. c a Ballinger Park/Mountlake Terrace ILA- D19 (DP) M U- -•m— .v. irW411111111 Boardwalk & Viewing Platform Lake Ballinger t I M w .Q M U N O N N O N d N O rL O L. a c 0 • Interlocal agreement to support development PROS Plan of phase 3 which includes improved access for G3—obj. 3.2, 3.8, 3.11 y G5 — Obj 5.2 Edmonds residents Rec.— 3.6 a • Estimated Cost $200,000 (L v .r c N E t Of EDy,o V `may _ tia ca Q 4) 0 E . t V !0 a Packet Pg. 228 Mathay Ballinger Park -D6 (CarryforwardlDP) • ADA parking and paved pathway • Shelter with Picnic Tables • Permanent Restroom • Estimated Total Cost: $499,300 M U- Iq N O N d N O M O L a PROS Plan o G2- Obi 2.6 G3 - Obi 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.8, 3.9 y G9- Obi 9.1 a Rec. - 3.1, 3.3, 3.5, 6.2, 6.4 Y a v c a� �A of EDMo� C1 M Inc. l_ E . t v !0 a Packet Pg. 229 5.1.e Shell Creek Restoration- x19 (Carryforward) Construction (R19) — Creek Restoration $120,000 $380,000 i $500,( Total Expenses $120,000 $380,000 $500,( Real Estate Excise Tax II - Fund 125 $380,000 $380,( ARPA Funding Transfer $120,000 $120,( Total Revenue $120,000 $380,000 $500,1 • Study to determine scope & obtain permits - 2024 • Restorative work - 2025 • Estimated Cost $500,000 Q M U , c a M U- w Q M U rn N O N N O N d to O M O L a c 0 PROS Plan G3 - Obj 3.7, 3.8, 3.9 G4 - Obj 4.2, 4.4 a G5 - Obj 5. 1, 5.3, 5.4 to G6 - Obj 6.5 a G9 - Obj 9.1, 9.2 c aD E �A OF EDMo� C1 O t v !0 a Packet Pg. 230 Yost Park &Pool - R9, R41 R6, R11 (DP) Construction (R4)—Trail/Bridge Repair $80,000 $8i Construction (R6)—Playground Replacement $750,000 $75i Construction (R9)—Tennis Court Resurface $74,300 $7 Construction (R11) — Pool Upgrades $546,400 $54 Total Expenses $154,300 $1,296,400 $1,45, Real Estate Excise Tax II - Fund 125 $154,300 $1,296,400 $1,45 Total Revenue Unsecured Funding $154,300 $0 $1,296,400 i $1,45, • Trail / Bridge Repair— 2024 • Tennis Court Resurface — 2024 • Playground Replacement - 2025 • Pool Upgrades — 2025 • Estimated Cost: $1,450,700 PROS Plan G1 — Obj 1.1, 1.4 G3 — Obj 3.6, 3.8, 3.9 G4 — Obj. 4.4 G5— Obj 5.4 G6 — Obj 6.5 G9 — Obj. 9.1 Rec.— 3.1,3.4,3.10 Rec. — 6.2 Q M U , c a M U_ w Q M U Cn N O N Iq N O N d N O Q O a` Packet Pg. 231 5.1.e Parks 2024-2029 CIP / UP - PROJECTS Costs inflated at 3% per year Project CFP Project Site& Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Total Lake Ballinger Park Mountlake Terrace ILA *CARRYFORWARD* D19 Funding to support City of Mountlake Terrace Ballinger Park Phase III $ 200,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 200,000 Development. Payment due upon completion of project. DS Mathay Ballinger Park *CARRYFORWARD* D6 Construction of improvements including permanent restroom, paved trail, picnic $ 271,300 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 271,300 D7 shelter ADA access and other amenities. Shell Creek Restoration *CARRYFORWARD* R19 Stream health and erosion control of shell Creek in Yost Park, scope TBD based $ 120,000 $ 380,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 500,000 on study. Study in 2024, work in 2025. R9 Yost Park & Pool R4 Park enhancements, repair and maintenance to include resurface of tennis courts $ 154,300 $ 1,296,400 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,450,700 R6 and trail, bridge and boardwalk repairs/replacement in 2024, inclusive R11 iplaVground and pool upgrades in 2025. Columbarium Expansion - Phase II D8 Expansion ofthe current colum barium. Funding provided throughthe Cemetery $ - $ 159,100 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 159,100 Trust Fund 137. Woodway Campus Athletic Complex - Phase I - Lighting X D20 In cooperation with the Edmonds School District, complete a community park $ _ $ 1,500,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,500,000 and athletic complex at Former Woodway High School to include lighting and future construction of two additional fields. Neighborhood Park SE 1 X Master plan and development of a new neighborhood park in South Edmonds $ - $ 79,600 $ 819,500 $ - $ - $ - $ 899,100 D13 (funding is in Parkland Acquisition program for purchase). Sierra Park R8 $ _ $ - $ 415,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 415,000 Playground replacement and upgradeto inclusive standards. R7 Olympic Beach Park $ - $ 20,000 $ 33,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 53,000 Renovation of existing restrooms. Ict Z C E �A of EDAf0 C1 v O fC w v !0 a Packet Pg. 232 5.1.e Parks 2024-2029 CIP / UP - PROJECTS Costs inflated at 3% per year Project CFP Project Site & Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Total D10 Pine Street Park D11 Park enhancements to include the addition of a small shelter with picnic tables, $ - $ 40,000 $ 124,400 $ - $ - $ - $ 164,400 D12 canopy shade trees and a paved connecting pathway. Johnson Property R2 Master plan forfuture park use. Site development not included in estimate. $ - $ - $ 82,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 82,000 PS Demolition, debris removal and site security completed in 2023. Neighborhood Park SR99 • Master plan and development of a new neighborhood park in Southeast $ - $ - $ 82,000 $ 844,100 $ - $ - $ 926,100 D15 Edmonds (funding is in Parkland Acquisition program for purchase). X P1 Parks & Facilities Maintenance and Operations Building $ _ $ - $ 1,125,500 $ 4,637,100 $ - $ - $ 5,762,600 D2 Replace and/or renovate shop facilities located in City Park. R12 Maplewood Hill Park $ _ $ _ $ - $ 347,800 $ - $ - $ 347,800 Playground replacement. Neighborhood Park SE 2 X D18 Master plan and development of a new neighborhood park in Southeast $ - $ - $ - $ 84,400 $ 869,500 $ - $ 953,900 Edmonds (funding is in Parkland Acquisition program for purchase). Waterfront Walkway P3 Connectingthe waterfront walkwayfrom Brackett's Landing North to $ $ $ $ 515,000 $ 819,500 $ 1,334,500 D14 Marina Beach Park by adding missing section in front of the Ebb Tide - _ _ S _ Condominiums, to provide ADA improvements. R16 Seaview Park $ - $ - $ - S - $ 417,900 $ - $ 417,900 Replacement of permanent restroom to provide ADA upgrades. D16 Elm Street Park D17 Park enhancements to include the addition of a nature playground, $ - $ - $ - S - $ 100,000 $ 340,370 $ 440,370 R14 small shelter with picnic tables and habitat restoration. Packet Pg. 233 5.1.e Parks 2024-2029 CIP / CFP - PROJECTS Costs inflated at 3% per year Project CFP Project Site & Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Total Pool Replacement X R15 $ _ $ _ $ _ $ _ $ - $23,881,000 $ 23,881,000 Replacement ofthe existing Yost pool. Design, location, and funding TBD. Meadowdale Playfields R3 Renovations as suggested by the City of Lynnwood and consistent with re- TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD $ negotiated and updated Interlocal Agreement. May include addition of dugout - roofs, light replacement and playground upgrade. Edmonds Marsh Estuary Restoration (Willow Creek Daylighting) Master Plan development and implementation of the Edmonds Marsh to daylight P4 the waterway connection of Puget Sound to the Edmonds Marsh and two fresh X D9 water creeks providing restoration of fresh water/salt water estuary and natural TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD $ - D1 tidal exchange. (All expenses are TBD per Council direction in December 2022). Acquisition funding identified in Parkland Acquisition program. (A) SUBTOTAL PARKS CIP/CFP PROJECTS 1 $ 745,600 $ 3,475,100 $ 2,6874 00 $ 5,913,400 $ 1,902,400 $ 25,0 00,870 $ 33,070,070 OF EDMo�N /ac. 1 S9qb Packet Pg. 234 5.1.e Parks, Recreation and Human Services Parks 2024-2029 CIP / UP PROGRAMS Highlight — 2024 projects Packet Pg. 235 5.1.e Signage & Wayfinding - R10 (DP) >_ O Trail identification, orientation markers, safety & regulatory messagin CU park hours, park rules and etiquette, interpretive information and N warning signs. a Estimated Cost: $75,000 PROS Plan L G2 — Obj. 2.1, 2.3 CU G3 — Obj. 3.6 a ' G5 — Obj. 5.3, 5.4 PARK HOURS-. MAW G9 — Obj. 9.1 Rec. — 6.2, 6.5 DUSKto Port Security 425 508-71 E V !0 a Packet Pg. 236 Parks 2024-2029 CIP / CFP - PROGRAMS Costs inflated at 3% per year Project (4) Programs PARKS CIP PROGRAMS 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Total R17 Citywide Park Improvements / Capital Replacement Program Ongoing program of funding allocation for regular and deferred maintenance, repair and replacement of parks amenities, structures and equipment. $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 2,700,000 signage m waynnamg R10 Replacement of aging signage to improve accuracy and provide a consistent City of Edmonds Parks visual identification system. Parkland Acquisition Support Funds utilized to evaluate potential acquisitions and complete due diligence. Debt Service and Interfund Transfers Debt service on Civic Park $1.61M bond (2021) and Interfund transfers to Engineering for Capital Project Support. I SUBTOTAL- PARKS CIP PROGRAMS $ 75,000 $ - $ - $ - $ $ $ 75,000 5 50,000 $ 50,000 5 50,000 5 .50,000 $ 50,000 5 50,000 $ 300,000 $ 123,000 j $ 123,000 j $ 123,000 1 $ 123,000 j $ 123,000 j $ 123,000 1 $ 738,000 Q M U c a W a) M ILL rr .Q M U rn N O N N O N d fn O CL 0 L. a c 0 c a� to d s_ a to Y s_ ftis a Packet Pg. 237 5.1.e Parks 2024-2029 CIP / UP - PROGRAMS Costs inflated at 3% per year Project � PARKS CIP PROGRAMS 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Total Citywide Park Improvements / Capital Replacement Program R17 Ongoing program of funding allocation for regular and deferred maintenance, $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 2,700,000 repair and replacement of parks amenities, structures and equipment. Signage & Wayfinding R10 Replacement of aging signage to improve accuracy and provide a $ 75,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 75,000 consistent City of Edmonds Parks visual identification system. Parkland Acquisition Support $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 300,000 Funds utilized to evaluate potential acquisitions and complete due diligence. Debt Service and Interfund Transfers Debt service on Civic Park $1.61M bond (2021) and Interfund transfers to $ 123,000 $ 123,000 $ 123,000 $ 123,000 $ 123,000 $ 123,000 $ 738,000 Engineering for Capital Project Support. (B)SUBTOTAL- PARKS CIP PROGRAMS $ 698,000 $ 623,000 $ 623,000 $ 623,000 $ 6237000 $ 623,000 $ 3,813,000 (4) Programs Packet Pg. 238 5.1.e Parks, Recreation and Human Services Parks 2024-2029 CIP / CFP PARKLAND ACQUISITIONS Highlight — 2024 project Packet Pg. 239 5.1.e Parkland Acquisition - a2, A3, A4 (No DP -Council Authorization) Acquisition — Neighborhood Park SE 1 (A2) .. $1,500,000 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Total Acquisition —Neighborhood Park SR99 (A3) Acquisition — Neighborhood Park SE 2 (A4) Total Expenses $1,500,000 Real Estate Excise Tax I - Fund 126 $1,300,000 Tree Fund 143 - land acquisition - TBD Total Revenue $1,300,000 • Neighborhood Parks SE1 • Acquisition as Feasible • Estimated Cost: $1,500,00 N Y i PROS Plan a G2 — Obj. 2.1 G3 — Obj. 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3A Rec. —1.1 E v o a c a� I � . �a a Packet Pg. 240 5.1.e Parks 2024-2029 CIP / CFP Costs inflated at 3% per year Project tf PARKLAND ACQUISITION 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Total X A2 Neighborhood Park SE 1 $ 1,500,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,500,000 Acquisition of parkland in South Edmonds. X A3 Neighborhood Park SR99 $ - $ 1,545,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,545,000 Acquisition of parkland near SR 99. X A4 Neighborhood Park SE 2 $ - $ - $ 2,185,500 $ - $ - $ - $ 2,185,500 Acquisition of parkland in South Edmonds. AS Interurban Trail $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 895,585 $ 895,585 Acquisition for trail extension. Edmonds Marsh Estuary Restoration (Willow Creek Daylighting) X Al Acquisition ofthe Unocal property in support of greater Edmonds Marsh TBD TED TED TED TED TED $ - restoration. (C)SUBTOTAL- PARKLAND ACQUISITION $ 1,500,000 $ 1,545,000 $ 2,185,500 $ $ $ 895,585 $ 6,126,085 Packet Pg. 241 5.1.e Changes to CIP/CFP UP / CIP COMPARISON (2024 TO 2029) PROJECTS ADDED Type PROJECT NAME CFP r DESCRIPTION None UP / CIP COMPARISON (2024 TO 2029) PROJECTS REMOVED Type PROJECT NAME CFP I DESCRIPTION Parks Lake Ballinger Access (McAleer) Project completion scheduled in 2023 Parks Johnson Property Demolition Demolition to be complete in 2023 Parks Playground Upgrade Program IPlayground upgrades identified each year, no need for additional program UP / CIP COMPARISON (2024 TO 2029) Type PROJECT NAME CFP CHANGE Parks Columbarium Expansion - Phase II Funded through Cemetery Trust Fund 137 - scheduled in 2025 vs. 24 Parks Elm Street Park Improvements Separated into planning in 2027 and construction in 2028 vs. 2026 Parks Interurban Trail Expansion Moved to 2029 vs. 28 Parks Johnson Property Master Plan Removed demolition, master plan scheduled in 2026 vs. 25 Parks Lake Ballinger Park Mountlake Terrace ILA ILA completed in 2023; payment due upon construction completion in 2024, carryforward Parks Maplewood Hill Park Playground replacement moved to 2027 vs. 25, significant price increase Parks Mathay Ballinger Park Improvements permanent restroom installation scheduled to take place in 2024, carr forward Parks Neighborhood Park SE1, SR99, SE2 X Master plan and construction of all three parks pushed back one year must acquire first Parks Olympic Beach Park Improvements Se arated into planning in 2025 and construction in 2026 vs. 24 Parks Parkland Acquisition/Neighborhood Parks X All three bumped back one year to 2024, 2025 and 2026 Parks Pine Street Park Improvements Separated into planning in 2025 and construction in 2026 vs. 24 Parks Seaview Park Improvements Restroom replacement moved to 2028 vs. 27 Parks Shell Creek Restoration IPlayground Plan carried forward to 2024, restoration in 2025 vs. 24 Parks Si na e and Wayfinding Price increase to $75K vs. $51,500 Parks Yost Park & Pool Improvements replacement moved to 2025 vs. 23, significant price increase due to topography Packet Pg. 242 5.1.e Questions? Packet Pg. 243 5.1.e Parks, Recreation & Human Services Parks 2024-2029 CIP / CFP Angie Feser, Director October 3, 2023 Packet Pg. 244 5.1.f CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM OVERVIEW Packet Pg. 245 5.1.f TABLE OF CONTENT CapitalImprovement Program Purpose............................................................................................................................3 0 L Introduction.......................................................................................................................................................................3 a r c d CapitalPlanning Policies....................................................................................................................................................3 E m AssetPreservation.........................................................................................................................................................4 0 Project Cost Estimate Review and Validation Process...................................................................................................5 0_ E Capital Improvement Program Funding.............................................................................................................................5 0. CU DebtFinancing...............................................................................................................................................................5 U ca Public Utility Funding (Enterprise Funds).......................................................................................................................6 r- Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) 6 a N d Edmonds's Recent History — New Revenue Sources and Debt Finance.........................................................................6 *= NewRevenue Sources...............................................................................................................................................6 0 M u_ DebtFinancing...........................................................................................................................................................7 +e 0_ 0 Funding Dynamics for Significant Future Capital Projects.................................................................................................7 U PublicSafety Facilities....................................................................................................................................................7 rn c N Transportation...............................................................................................................................................................7 N Projects......................................................................................................................................................................8 0 N -0 Utilities...........................................................................................................................................................................8 m 0 0 Q. 0 CurrentProjects.........................................................................................................................................................9 a 2024-2029 Proposed Capital Improvement Program Summary......................................................................................10 2024-2029 Proposed CIP by Department....................................................................................................................10 c 0 .N Background of Capital Improvement Program Policy Drivers.........................................................................................11 > City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan.........................................................................................................................11 3 Utilities Master Plans...................................................................................................................................................11 2 2 Comprehensive Transportation Plan...........................................................................................................................11 m > O Federal and State Regulatory Requirements...............................................................................................................12 a U Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Transition Plan.................................................................................................12 a ClimateAction Plan......................................................................................................................................................13 w O U Q Packet Pg. 246 5.1.f The Capital Improvement Program (CIP) is a six -year financial planning tool that identifies future capital investments and potential strategies for funding those investments. The CIP also satisfies various requirements of city planning under Washington State's Growth Management Act. The City of Edmonds owns and operates a variety of physical assets, ranging from community parks, roadways, and public facilities including, City Hall a library building, fire stations, maintenance yard and wastewater treatment plant, utilities infrastructure and more. The City must properly maintain these assets to ensure they are safe, lasting, and provide a welcoming and usable space to serve their intended purposes. The City's capital infrastructure supports City operations, direct public services and programs, and in some cases, provides direct public benefits themselves. Every year during the annual budget process, the city adopts a six -year CIP, which outlines anticipated investments over that timeframe. The 2024-2029 Proposed CIP totals $301.7 million over six years, with approximately $22.1 million of that amount designated for the 2024 budget year. CAPITAL PLANNING POLICIES The City has historically based capital planning efforts on a set of criteria that help set priorities among potential capital programs. Each department has its own policies to prioritize projects based on Council Priorities and specific department needs. Specifically for public works, Facilities, Transportation and Utility infrastructure the department utilizes a number of planning documents including the Comprehensive Transportation Plan, Comprehensive Water System Plan, Comprehensive Sewer Plan, Storm and Surface Water Comprehensive Plan and Facilities condition assessment, other planning documents include the ADA transition plan. For the Public Infrastructure Public works primary goal is to protect the city's investment by maintaining its assets and investing at the right time. Most capital assets when properly maintained can continue to provide a high level of service throughout their life, but if not maintained it can turn into the proverbial money pit, in which minimum investment reduces the level of service and require higher cost to bring back to adequate level of service. The criteria used to prioritize projects include: • Risk to Health, Safety and Environment and Regulatory or Mandated Requirement • Asset Condition, Annual Recurring Costs and Asset Longevity • Level and Quality of Service • Sustainability and Conservation • Funding Availability • Project Readiness Packet Pg. 247 5.1.f Multiple Category Benefit and Bundling Opportunities Preserve and maintain existing Capital Assets Support the goals of the City's Plans Support Economic Development Seek regional funding for Regional Projects Pursue cost -saving commitments; and, Pursue conservation and sustainability investments. ASSET PRESERVATION Legend 2022 Pavement Condition 70-65 i 60 - 70 50-60 40-50 >5-40 0 - '5 Network Average 66 tTy "NNWOOD T� ',_._ I d r MOUNTLAKE Y TERRACE 10x..W , 1 � 1 W.r Asset Preservation studies are required for all utilities, the city also completes these for facilities and pavement system. The studies include analysis to determine the condition of the asset and predict the level of deterioration of all systems. This results in the recommended level of investment on preservation efforts and in some cases the replacement schedule for an asset. 4 Packet Pg. 248 5.1.f As result of facilities condition assessment, the council approved a bond to invest in the backlog of facilities maintenance and is expected that it will take 2-3 years to complete recommended projects. The utilities teams continuously rate the infrastructure, for example the operations team perform video inspection of sewer and storm drainpipes and rates those to update the on -going annual replacement program and performs leak detection of the water system to identify what pipes are failing and plan for the repair or replacement. The team also tracks age of all systems and failures to determine what must be replaced to prevent emergency repair and higher costs. The pavement preservation program is completed every other year and provides the condition of our network and generates the recommended investment to maintain our network in a safe and reliable condition. The most current Pavement Condition Index (PCI). PROJECT COST ESTIMATE REVIEW AND VALIDATION PROCESS Estimated cost for CIP is a difficult process that requires extensive due diligence to adequately reflect the expected cost of a project. The first year is the most accurate while years 2-3 can be costs based on conceptual or early designs and years 4-6 can be only a rough order of magnitude based on conceptual design or other engineering knowledge of similar project costs in our area. In general, as projects get closer to construction the estimates improve as designs get finalized and estimates include the most recent cost factors that can affect a project. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FUNDING Like all municipalities, Edmonds relies on a variety of sources to pay for capital projects. These include locally generated revenues (taxes, fees, voter -approved levies, utility rates, and user fees), intergovernmental revenues (including state and federal grants), private funding (franchise utilities, philanthropy) and debt issuance. These traditional sources continue to provide the majority of funding for capital facility investments. The City's level of capital investment is based on the mix and amount of financial resources available to the City. DEBT FINANCING For public works projects the city traditionally has used debt finance only for projects that are not part of the normal maintenance or planned replacement program. These projects include high -cost projects or programs to meet new regulatory requirements or projects that require significant investment and new or unexpected needs, examples of this are the replacement of the incinerator at the wastewater treatment plant and the seismic upgrades to the Yost and Seaview water reservoirs, in both cases the debt payment is built into the utility rate fees. Other financed projects must be repaid from the same limited resources used to fund the operation and maintenance of the specific infrastructure, for example facilities maintenance projects use the same general fund sources to pay that debt. Packet Pg. 249 5.1.f PUBLIC UTILITY FUNDING (ENTERPRISE FUNDS) Edmonds Water, Wastewater and Storm drain projects are funded with revenues from utility rates (Enterprise Funds). Each utility is in the process of drafting, and eventually adopting, formal financial policies that determine what share of their capital investments are funded through cash, and what share from debt. Currently, the annual utility upgrades, maintenance and replacement projects are financed through cash since this annual investment needs to be made in perpetuity. This provides a measured process to ensure long term system reliability for the respective utility and at the same time helps decrease the volatility of utility rate increases due to inflationary factors and decreases in maintenance and upkeep levels. Large projects like the reservoir improvements or the replacement of the incinerator at the WWTP will be financed from debt. REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX (REET) Funding of the City's general government capital program is highly dependent on revenue from Real Estate Excise Tax, which is an excise tax imposed on the sale of real property. REET is a relatively volatile revenue source that generally tracks closely to local economic activity. REET funds are shared between Public Works and Parks, Public Works uses these primarily to fund the pavement preservation program. In addition to fuel tax and general funds, REET revenue has been a significant source to fund the pavement preservation program. Over the last few years general fund contributions have declined, causing the pavement preservation program to invest only a fraction of what is recommended. The effects of reduced preservation efforts are not immediately evident, but the City is starting to see those impacts in current pavement condition index, declining from mid-70's to mid-60's. EDMONDS'S RECENT HISTORY — NEW REVENUE SOURCES AND DEBT FINANCE In addition to reliance upon general tax sources, Edmonds has recently taken major capital projects that required debt finance. Projects include improvements to Civic Field, construction of a new system to replace the incinerator at the wastewater treatment plant, and facilities backlog of maintenance and repair needs. The following is a list recent funding sources that contribute to the CIP and projects that are expected to be financed with debt. NEW REVENUE SOURCES • Vehicle tab fees: The vehicle tab fee was increased from $20 to $40; this provides for approximately $700K increase per year that is used to fund the in-house maintenance and preservation efforts of our street infrastructure, this increase is a welcome revenue to keep up with the costs of growth of our infrastructure and systems and increased salaries, materials, and equipment costs. While it is not directly contributing to our annual pavement preservation program it provides some relief by providing ongoing maintenance and repair and preventing Packet Pg. 250 5.1.f significant degradation of our roadway infrastructure. As our preservation program continues to struggle with adequate funding it is critical that funding for our in-house crews is available, the less invested in preservation the more the city will have to invest in frequent calls for repairs. • Utility Rate Fees: Utilities rates studies are completed every three years to keep up with the cost of inflation, regulatory requirements, and infrastructure repair or replacement needs. During the last four years the average increase has been 4.37% for water, 5% for Storm drain and 8.12% for Sewer. DEBT FINANCING • Reservoir Improvements: It is expected that debt finance will be required for the repairs and improvements necessary for this project. • Nutrient Removal (WWTP): This is a long-term project that will require significant changes to the treatment process and will require debt financing. Given general resource funding challenges, the City will continue to rely on mix of general government resources, grants, and debt funding packages to complete major capital projects and to secure needed funding for basic asset preservation. The City has identified several major priority areas for which significant capital investments will be needed. The following sections describe these priority areas at a high level. PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITIES Planning for the future of Edmonds's public safety facilities is critical to maintaining the high level of service expected of Edmonds Police Department (EPD). The department has grown significantly and outgrown the existing facility, in addition there is a need to establish a facility that better serves the area around HWY 99 and options for that are being explored. This includes neighborhood precinct projects that will accommodate police staffing growth. TRANSPORTATION The City's existing transportation network faces an extensive backlog of major maintenance. Current funding is insufficient to maintain the City's roads, traffic signals, signs, etc. In addition, the city is in the process of updating the Transportation Comprehensive Plan. This will provide better CIP needs for investments in a transit network, bicycle facilities, and pedestrian -oriented infrastructure. As funding becomes available the city will need to update the ADA transition plan and find funding sources to make progress on correcting ADA deficiencies. Over the last five years with a combination of strategies including grant funding and bundling of ADA projects in our pavement preservation the city has made significant improvement, updating approximately 10% of the identified deficiencies, however at that rate it will take 50 years to correct all deficiencies. Packet Pg. 251 5.1.f PROJECTS • Highway 99 Corridor: This is the City's largest project — the Highway 99 Corridor — Gateway project is a multiyear project. Highway 99 is a key regional corridor that extends into Edmonds from 244th Street SW to 210th Street SW. It is comprised of a 2.25-mile stretch of Highway 99 (a state highway) and the land area around it. Parts of this corridor are adjacent to the jurisdictions of Shoreline, Lynnwood, Mountlake Terrace, and Snohomish County. It is also within WSDOT's limited access at the SR 104 interchange. The City of Edmonds has been working with the community, business owners, and other stakeholders on planning for the future revitalization of the Highway 99 Corridor for several years now. Several major projects have been undertaken toward revitalizing this corridor. • Pedestrian Safety: The Pedestrian Safety Program is designed to assist City staff in responding to resident concerns related to improving pedestrian safety at specific locations throughout the City. The Implementation of a pedestrian safety program allows local pedestrian concerns to be addressed, with the goal of improving pedestrian safety and increasing the number of pedestrians using our non -motorized transportation facilities. • Traffic Calming: The City of Edmonds Traffic Calming Program is designed to assist residents and City staff in responding to neighborhood traffic issues related to speeding, cut -through traffic, and safety. Implementation of a traffic calming program allows local traffic concerns to be addressed consistently, and traffic calming measures to be efficiently developed and put into operation. • Pavement Preservation: Our in-house street maintenance and operations crew perform maintenance for all transportation systems, these include pavement repairs, striping for all roads, striping on all city crosswalks and maintenance of streetlights and signs. In addition to this work the city evaluates pavement condition as part of our asset management program to determine what sections of our pavement require additional pavement preservation treatments, most will be pavement overlays. This program has been underfunded as the funding sources (Fuel tax, REET, and GF) are not enough to fund the recommended amount to maintain our road network in good condition. Investing now will save money later, as regular maintenance extends the lifetime of pavement. If pavement condition declines too much, the roadways require rebuilding — which is both costly and disruptive to traffic flow. UTILITIES The utilities enterprise funds are used for all utilities projects, both cash and financed projects. In addition to enterprise funds, the city seeks grants for some utilities projects that have significant environmental benefits and are competitive on grants. Two examples are the Perrinville Creek and Edmonds March projects. • Carbon Recovery Project: The City Wastewater Treatment Plant is nearing the completion of the Carbon Recovery Project; this project replaces the old incinerator. Packet Pg. 252 5.1.f • Nutrient Removal Project: To stop the flow of nitrogen pollution and improve the health of Puget Sound, the Department of Ecology is requiring wastewater treatment plants to monitor discharges, optimize operations, and plan for infrastructure investments. Excess nitrogen is the main pollutant causing low, unhealthy oxygen levels in Puget Sound, and a cascade of problems for fish and other marine life. The Department of Ecology is in the process of establishing new nutrient removal standards for all Puget Sound wastewater treatment plans. To meet the new standards the Edmonds plant will require significant treatment process modifications, initial studies have been completed and further research is required to select the right alternative for the plant. the Peugeot sound will have to comply with new nutrient removal standards, this will require significant investment to meet the new requirements. • Perrinville Creek restoration: This is a multiyear restoration project necessary to restore the habitat in the creek and prevent as much as possible the flooding of the neighboring properties and scouring of the creek bed. The project establishes fish passage structures in two locations, establishes a new alignment for the creek, and allows full surface flow to the sound. The project relies on a combination of funding sources including stormwater fund and grants. • Reservoir repairs: The city has completed upgrades to two above grade reservoirs. In addition, a recent inspection and condition assessment resulted in required seismic upgrades to the two below ground concrete reservoirs. The projects will be designed in 2024 with the goal to complete construction in 2025-2026. • Edmonds Marsh: The city is working with the state to potentially purchase the Unocal property and eventually restore the entire marsh as a true estuary with improved fish habitat and to mitigate flooding in the surrounding area. CURRENT PROJECTS The largest project —the Carbon Recovery project —construct a new system to replace the incinerator and is nearing completion. Annual pipe replacement projects for water and sewer systems and annual projects to update or improve the stormwater system are planned every year to keep up with the need to replace systems that are past their life expectancy that have records of failure or need additional capacity. FUNDING All utility projects are funded by the respective utility's Enterprise fund. The funds are generated from monies collected from each user of the respective utility. These projects are either cash financed (e.g., annual replacement/rehab projects) or financed via bonds for larger multi -year capital projects. Packet Pg. 253 5.1.f The 2024-2029 Proposed CIP totals $250 million for six years and includes approximately 60 projects Approximately $87 million of the six -year total, or 35 %, are utility projects funded by utility rates. The Edmonds Transportation's CIP totals $152 million (61%) over the six -year period, and Facilities total is $9.7 Million (4%). 2024-2029 PROPOSED CIP BY DEPARTMENT Department 2023 Adopted 2024 Proposed 2023- 2027Proposed CIP 2024-2029 Proposed CIP Total Storm Water $ 3,236,843 $ 3,545,390 $ 23,781,768 $ 25,962,233 Sewer $ 2,692,439 $ 2,960,498 $ 25,128,359 $ 26,016,498 Water $ 3,041,128 $ 4,811,000 $ 25,016,658 $ 35,984,000 Utilities Total $ 8,970,410 $ 11,316,888 $ 73,926,785 $ 87,962,731 Transportation $ 10,750,891 $ 6,612,273 $165,922,741 $ 152,670,373 Facilities $ 1,367,539 $ 1,183,845 $ 12,206,046 $ 9,758,635 Total $ 21,088,8401 $ 19,113,006 $252,055,572 $ 250,391,739 2024-2029 Proposed CIP Total $9,758,635 , 4% ■ Utilities Total ■ Transportation Facilities 2023 & 2024 $12,000 C $10,000 t $8,000 $6,000 $4,000 $2,000 a� e� w� J ■ 2023 Adopted ■ 2024 Proposed Note: 2021 Adopted totals are based on the 2024-2029 Adopted CIP. Not all funds above are appropriated; see the 2024 Proposed Budget for a list of capital appropriations by department. 10 Packet Pg. 254 5.1.f As described above, City investments in capital projects are guided by a set of key policies reflecting the City's values and priorities. These policies shape how the City takes care of buildings and infrastructure, invests in capital projects in areas that have accepted growth as envisioned in the City's Comprehensive Plan, preserves the City's buildings, supports sustainable building practices, and ensures that all members of the community have access to the economic opportunities capital projects create. The following section details some of these key policies. CITY OF EDMONDS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The Comprehensive Plan is a 20-year vision and roadmap for Edmonds's future. The plan guides City decisions on where to focus development for new jobs and households, how to improve our transportation system, and where to make capital investments such as utilities, sidewalks, and other public facilities. The Plan is the framework for most of Edmonds's big -picture decisions on how to grow. The latest update of the City's Comprehensive Plan was completed in 2020. The City began the process of updating its Comprehensive Plan in 2023 and the work is scheduled to be complete in 2024. The current Comprehensive Plan helped inform the development of the 2024-2029 Proposed CIP. This effort is intended to make sure areas receiving growth have the appropriate physical infrastructure to accommodate such growth, while balancing the major maintenance of existing facilities, such as adequate transportation systems, utilities, and other public facilities. UTILITIES MASTER PLANS The three utilities have plans to ensure the utility is keeping up with the growth and is being properly operated to ensure its safety and reliability, the three plans are: Comprehensive Water System Plan, Comprehensive Sewer Plan, Storm and Surface Water Comprehensive Plan COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN The Comprehensive Transportation Plan was updated in July 2015 and the previous Transportation Plan was completed in 2009. The plan includes both short-range and long-range strategies that will lead to the development of an integrated multimodal transportation system that facilitates the safe and efficient movement of people and goods, while addressing current and future transportation demand as well as land use. The plan identifies all existing conditions for the various modes of transportation, as well as proposed safety and mobility improvements. Those projects consist of projected improvements through 2035 (20-year plan), including roadway (intersection and corridor), transit, and non -motorized 11 Packet Pg. 255 5.1.f improvements. The document conforms with all requirements for comprehensive planning listed in the Washington State Growth Management Act Chapter 36.70A.RCW and is consistent with PSRC Transportation 2040. FEDERAL AND STATE REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS The City's utilities have several facility projects in their Capital Improvement Programs to meet federal and state regulatory requirements. The City of Edmonds must abide by the City's two National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits, one for storm water and one for our publicly owned treatment works (POTW permit) for the City's Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP). The City is required, for example, to invest in the WWTP/storm water system to control and meet state and federal requirements for city generated flows into receiving bodies of water, including creeks and Puget Sound. This work is necessary to meet Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of Ecology (DOE) requirements, regarding sewage releases from the city conveyance system. AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA) TRANSITION PLAN In an effort to make the City of Edmond's public right-of-way facilities accessible to all, the City is in engaged in developing an American with Disabilities Act (ADA) ADA transition plan for the Public Right -of -Way. The ADA Transition Plan for the Right -of -Way demonstrates the City of Edmond's commitment to providing equal access to all its public programs, services, facilities, and activities for citizens with disabilities. This plan is focused on pedestrian access routes within the right-of-way and includes sidewalks, curb ramps, street crossings, driveway crossings, rail crossings, hazards, and pedestrian activated signal systems. The Plan includes the following: Program accessibility guidelines, standards, and resources Physical obstacles that limit the accessibility of facilities to individuals with disabilities Methods to be used to make the facilities accessible Prioritization and scheduling process Estimated budget for barrier removal Identification of the ADA Coordinator Public outreach process for plan development • ADA grievance procedure 12 Packet Pg. 256 5.1.f CLIMATE ACTION PLAN In 2010, the City adopted its first Climate Action Plan (CAP) to substantially reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The City hired local consultants in 2018 to prepare a new GHG inventory and advise the City on updating its CAP for 2023 and beyond. This updated plan focuses on the most important steps Edmonds can take to address climate change. City Council adopted the 2023 Climate Action Plan on March 21st, 2023, via Resolution 1518. The 2023 Plan serves as Edmonds' guide to climate neutrality for municipal and community greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. This goal aligns with the maximum average global temperature increase of 1.5°C/2.7°F aspired to in the 2016 Paris Climate Accords. 13 Packet Pg. 257 5.1.g October 11, 2023 Memo To: Edmonds City Council Members From: Edmonds Planning Board Members Subject: 2024 CIP/CFP The Planning Board received a presentation from the Public Works and Parks Departments outlining the projects that make up their recommended 2024 CIP/CFP at the September 27 Planning Board meeting. While some of the Board members had attended the Council briefing on September 19, some had not. However, a copy of the CIP/CFP had been provided to Planning Board members by Planning Department staff in early September. The presentation provided to the Planning Board and Council was similar to those provided in past years Individual and groups of projects were reviewed without background on how project decisions were made. It was a list of what projects would be done, when, at what cost and from what funds. We presume a lot of thought went into developing this, yet the document does not include any analysis or ranking criteria that provides an understanding of how projects were prioritized. We believe Council and the community needs to understand those ranking criteria to assess if the CIP/CFP is accomplishing desired policies, objectives, and priorities. The one policy direction that staff indicated is prioritizing the maintenance and repair of existing infrastructure over installing new. The current CIP/CFP prioritization of existing and new projects is likely to perpetuate and exacerbate the inequities that exist in the city that the Council has indicated they want to improve upon. Project prioritization in the current CIP/CFP results in those parts of the city that already have infrastructure amenities getting better ones and those without continuing to not have any. This becomes a glaring inequity when most all of the REET dollars are spent on street preservation in the near future in lieu of expanding sidewalk networks. No new sidewalks are planned to be constructed until 2028 at the earliest. Some of the badly needed sidewalks, like 2361h St. SW between 84th Ave. W. and HWY 99 where children walk to school every day on this arterial, are not in the 2024 CIP/CFP. We recommend that Council seek from staff the ranking criteria of how the projects within the CIP/CFP were selected. In addition, if the Council is serious about addressing infrastructure inequities, then the information provided to the Council needs to be organized and analyzed differently for better informed decision - making. This can be done by organizing the revenues and expenditures for specific projects to more easily see which projects are benefiting from the most discretionary of funding sources- REET. It would also be informative to see a list of projects that are being funded by development impact fees. This will give Council a better picture of what can be moved around to accomplish Council objectives to improve equity. The Parks CIP/CFP has information organized this way; Public Works portion of the document does not. To accomplish equity goals, we also recommend that select projects in the current CIP/CFP be deferred to address community needs. One example is the Green Streets project (PWT-64). While it does not have any current secured sources of funding, the fact that it is listed in the CIP indicates where staff resources Packet Pg. 258 5.1.g will go to secure funding. For example, instead of seeking grants or other funding sources for that, they could reallocate the projected estimate dollars of that project towards seeking funding for sidewalks that are critical for pedestrian safety and wheelchair bound residents trying to navigate arterials without any form of walkway. To meet the timeline for Council's approval of the CIP/CFP the Planning Board is providing recommendations for how you can make a better -informed decision rather than making a recommendation to approve or not approve this CIP/CFP. In previous years the Planning Board has requested to get information earlier about the criteria and policy direction for identifying projects and their timing. Perhaps next year we will be better able to provide a more conclusive recommendation to you. Packet Pg. 259 5.1.h CITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING BOARD Minutes of Hybrid Meeting October 11, 2023 Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell called the hybrid meeting of the Edmonds Planning Board to order at 7:00 p.m. at Edmonds City Hall and on Zoom. She announced she would be serving as administrator of the meeting since Chair Gladstone was online in a different time zone and might need to drop off. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES The Land Acknowledgement was read by Board Member Mitchell. ROLL CALL Board Members Present Judi Gladstone, Chair (online) Lauren Golembiewski (online) Richard Kuehn (online) Susanna Martini Nick Maxwell Jeremy Mitchell Beth Tragus-Campbell, Vice Chair Lily Distelhorst (student rep) Board Members Absent Emily Nutsch (altemate)(excused) APPROVAL OF MINUTES Staff Present Susan McLaughlin, Development Services Director Deb Powers, Urban Forest Planner Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell noted that Chair Gladstone had submitted amended comments to the group prior to the meeting. MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER MITCHELL, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER MAXWELL, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 27, 2023 AS AMENDED. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA VICE CHAIR TRAGUS-CAMPBELL MOVED, CHAIR GLADSTONE SECONDED, TO ADD A BRIEF DISCUSSION REGARDING THE TREE CODE AND SOME OF THE CONCLUSIONS THE Planning Board Meeting Minutes October 11, 2023 Pagel of 8 Packet Pg. 260 5.1.h GROUP CAME TO BEFORE THE CURRENT FIRST ITEM IN UNFINISHED BUSINESS. THE MOTION PASSED. BOARD MEMBER MAXWELL MOVED, CHAIR GLADSTONE SECONDED, REMOVING THE PARKS, RECREATION & HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT - 2023 Q3 ACCOMPLISHMENTS FROM THE AGENDA IN LIEU OF BOARD MEMBERS READING THE REPORT ON THEIR OWN AND FORWARDING QUESTIONS TO STAFF. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. THERE WAS UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS AMENDED. AUDIENCE COMMENTS None ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS A. Parks, Recreation & Human Services Department - 2023 Q3 Accomplishments - REMOVED PUBLIC HEARINGS None UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Brief Tree Code Discussion Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell explained the subcommittee discussed all the various proposals and public comments on the tree code and submitted a document with suggested language for the code. Board Member Maxwell didn't think it was appropriate to discuss the code language specifically, just the summary table of the guiding principles. There was concern about discussing this at all since it was not included in the packet. Director McLaughlin commented that it was not an accident this item was not included on the agenda. The project is on pause at the staff level for legal review and director review. Chair Gladstone expressed a concern about waiting too long to discuss this and having to start over again. Vice Chair Tragus- Campbell suggested putting it on the agenda for the next meeting so they can stay updated on the staff review. She thinks it is important for this to stay on the agenda every meeting until they can get an answer and move forward. Board Member Maxwell suggested that legal review would be easier if they actually had some clear language to review. He also pointed out that there was no legal review of the step back ordinance. Board Member Martini asked what triggered this. Director McLaughlin said she was not able to answer that. Board Member Martini did not like the prospect of repeatedly pushing this down the road. Board Member Golembiewski expressed the concern about delaying this too long and ending up with a Council that proposes an emergency ordinance. She hopes they get to a point where they stop ruling by emergency ordinance. Planning Board Meeting Minutes October 11, 2023 Page 2 of 8 Packet Pg. 261 5.1.h MOTION MADE BY VICE CHAIR TRAGUS-CAMPBELL, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER MAXWELL, THEY HAVE A REVIEW OF THE PLANNING BOARD SUBCOMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION MEMO AND RECEIVE AN UPDATE FROM STAFF ABOUT STATUS OF THE REVIEWS PROCESS AT THE OCTOBER 25 MEETING. Board Member Kuehn expressed frustration about the situation. He doesn't understand why they can't even have a discussion about this to keep the ball moving forward. Board Member Maxwell noted that they could continue to share the key concepts tonight. Other board members disagreed because the public didn't have a chance to review the documentation ahead of time. Chair Gladstone expressed concern about having any process violations on this important topic. It was noted there would need to be continued discussion about how all of this would impact the extended agenda. MOTION PASSED WITH BOARD MEMBER MITCHELL ABSTAINING. B. Planning Board Action on 2024-2029 Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) & Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell referred to a memo drafted by another subcommittee regarding the Planning Board's recommendation. The memo states that the Board does not have sufficient information to make a clear recommendation. Chair Gladstone added that in the memo they tried to capture the concerns raised at the last meeting around the CIP/CFP. She explained that they had primarily tried to characterize what the concerns were around equity. They recognized there were gaps in the information that was provided in order to make a solid recommendation. Board Member Mitchell commented that there is a time crunch to present this to Council. It would take significant staff work to provide that backup information in time for the Board to make a formal decision. For that reason, they have left it open and recommended that specific questions be asked. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell thought the memo captured what was discussed at the last meeting and also during the last year. Mainly, they were raising questions about how items were prioritized. The public has consistently brought up concerns around sidewalks, and there was concern about not having any of that in the plan. She encouraged the Council to ask questions around prioritization and how they can make some progress toward addressing inequities in the infrastructure. Board Member Golembiewski asked if the intent was for these priorities to be presented to Council or for this to come back to Planning Board before making a recommendation to Council. Chair Gladstone did not think there was time for this to come back to the Planning Board which is why the memo ends up with things the Board thinks the Council should look at to make an informed decision. Board Member Martini thought that providing the Council with what they collectively agree on would be useful. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell concurred and noted that the memo outlines that. MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER MARTINI, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER MITCHELL, TO APPROVE THE RECOMMENDATION MEMO TO CITY COUNCIL REGARDING THE CIP/CFP AS WRITTEN. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Planning Board Meeting Minutes October 11, 2023 Page 3 of 8 Packet Pg. 262 5.1.h NEW BUSINESS A. Landmark 99 Project Overview Director McLaughlin made the presentation regarding the Landmark 99 project. She expressed appreciation to Board Members Mitchell and Golembiewski for sitting on the advisory committee for this project and representing the Planning Board. The site is located at the southern gateway of Edmonds at 24111 Highway 99. It is ten acres, owned by one owner, and zoned General Commercial. She reviewed details about the site and noted it is ideally situated for frequent transit by BRT and in close proximity to the upcoming light rail in Mountlake Terrace. Burlington has a lease on the property until 2029. Board Member Maxwell asked about the ownership of the cloverleaf. Director McLaughlin explained that is owned by WSDOT. She added that one of the recommendations in the Community Renewal Plan is to pursue rationalizing or removing that cloverleaf which would do a great deal to revitalize open space and perhaps provide new parcels. Director McLaughlin continued the presentation and explained that initially this site acquisition was led by Parks for the purpose of seeking parks space. Parks did the zoning and massing study which shows how much could be on that site. There has been interest from the community for years on revitalizing the southern gateway and providing housing, open space, and community amenities. She reviewed illustrations about possibilities for the site. She then discussed project organization, research/education, the community poll, tasks, timeline, and co -dependencies. Staff is pursuing a master plan process on this site. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell asked about the possibility of this remaining greenspace. Director McLaughlin explained that given the price tag, the location, and the fact that the City could not carry the costs alone she doesn't anticipate that it would be a significant amount of green space. Plus, the location affords itself to something a bit more dynamic that could absorb a lot of people on the site. However, this will be part of the community conversation. Board Member Golembiewski commented that it is likely that the project would not proceed if there were not a strong private development partnership established before the decision deadline. Director McLaughlin concurred and reviewed examples of public -private partnerships including Tukwila Village, Federal Way, and Woodinville. She discussed poll results and noted there is strong support for a community center, recreation facility, a police annex, park space, housing, retail, and dining. Chair Gladstone asked if the respondents to the poll were self-selected or random. Director McLaughlin replied they were self-selected. Chair Gladstone commented that the other category was quite large. Director McLaughlin agreed and noted 120 of the 351 other comments said not to buy the property. Chair Gladstone also asked if they knew where the respondents came from. Director McLaughlin said they did not. The first broad community conversation will be held on October 21 from 10-12 at Edmonds Woodway High School. For the October 21 public meeting, staff mailed the invitation to properties in the adjacent area and in multiple languages. They will also be posting in the local papers, posting yard signs, running Facebook ads, etc. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell asked about the notification radius. She hasn't received anything in the mail but lives very close to this. Director McLaughlin commented that since Council did not approve funding for this, they have a very limited amount to spend. Chair Gladstone said she received an invitation in the mail. Planning Board Meeting Minutes October 11, 2023 Page 4 of 8 Packet Pg. 263 5.1.h Board Member Golembiewski asked if it is safe to assume they would not see groundbreaking until 2029 since Burlington has a lease through that date. Director McLaughlin thought they would probably need that much time, and relocation prior to a lease expiration tends to be very expensive. Board Member Martini asked about Council support for this. Board Member Mitchell explained they voted to do the purchase agreement. Advisory committees and the team were formed to give them the best information possible to make that decision in December. He encouraged the Planning Board to look at the project in the context of the good it will be for the city and how it will benefit that area node. The price tag is a small thing in his mind because he works in that area and is aware of all the tools available for cities to do that. The big part of this is the partnership. He is excited for the potential, but he thinks there is a lot of work to do. Chair Gladstone wondered how the location of this property compares to the geographic location of the example properties in relation to what else is going on in their cities. Director McLaughlin explained that Tukwila is on the northern boundary of city limits. In other ways, the consultant has indicated that both the Tukwila and Federal Way examples are nearly identical to Edmonds. Chair Gladstone asked if the property would be rolled into the community renewal area to take advantage of those funding opportunities. Director McLaughlin replied that the community renewal plan affords more powers by municipalities in the realm of land development. The City has the draft plan, which is not adopted, but if they did adopt it, they would become a community renewal agency and would have a lot of flexible powers associated with that. Pursuing site acquisition is not entirely relevant right now. They may want to consider adopting it next year if they decide to exercise the purchase option. Tax increment financing (TIF) is a state tool that is available to all municipalities. You are restricted to having two TIF areas in your jurisdiction, but the size is not limited in area as much as it is in anticipated revenue. Federal Way created a very large TIF area, and their project is right in the middle of it. There are a lot of opportunities with the Edmonds project as well. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell asked that staff provide plenty of examples to the public of how they are not just planning on raising property taxes to come up with the $37 million. Director McLaughlin agreed. Chair Gladstone referred to the comparisons and noted that each had a fair amount of housing associated with it. She wondered how that related to housing goals for that area and for the rest of the city. Director McLaughlin replied that they have consistently heard that housing, especially affordable housing, is of high demand. Right now, it is more feasible to build housing than it is to build commercial. Board Member Mitchell clarified that regarding meeting housing goals, all they are required to do per the GMA is to make adjustments in zoning to provide that capacity. That parcel is already zoned for the capacity anyway, so it's already in the GMA projections. Director McLaughlin concurred. She stressed that they are focusing on building the community and finding the right balance of uses, not just the number of units. Chair Gladstone asked if the repeal of Ordinance 4079 would affect this property at all. Director McLaughlin replied that it would. SEPA is costly. It also elevates the risk for the developer because of the unknowns associated with not only the environmental analysis, but the public process associated with an environmental review. Chair Gladstone said she was surprised to learn that there was Planning Board representation on the advisory group. Director McLaughlin explained the members were recently chosen by the Mayor in collaboration with Planning Board Meeting Minutes October 11, 2023 Page 5 of 8 Packet Pg. 264 5.1.h the Council President, and they got off to a bumpy start. They just had their first meeting two weeks ago. They anticipate keeping the advisory group going until final decisions are made on the property. Vice Chair Tragus- Campbell suggested adding a section to the agenda for an advisory board report out. Board Member Maxwell said it is somewhat important to acknowledge that the success of the Civic Park indicates that they have some talent at creating public spaces which matters. Based on other public spaces in the City, it is very promising that it would work out well. Board Member Martini concurred and added that the accessibility for the new Civic Park is amazing. B. Comprehensive Plan Vision Statement Review Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell said the City Council requested that the Planning Board review the original vision statement and associated word cloud and make a recommendation to the Council by November 30. Director McLaughlin provided some background on the Comprehensive Plan branding process and the six -week targeted public outreach process. Throughout the process, 8500 comments were received and categorized. From this, a draft vision statement was created along with a graphic illustration of the process. The statement was put through a multilingual review process to make sure that words weren't misinterpreted or not understood by different languages. Draft community vision statement: Edmonds is a welcoming city offering outstanding quality of life for all. We value environmental stewardship, vibrant and diverse neighborhoods, safe and healthy streets, and a thriving arts scene. We are engaged residents who take pride in shaping our resilient future. A survey was put in the city newsletter to see if they generally got the statement right. 51 % of those who responded were supportive of the statement. 49% were not. Director McLaughlin reviewed how each of the phrases correspond to the most commonly used words. She explained that Council had specific concerns about the phrase "healthy streets". While "healthy" was not a word that was necessarily represented, staff thought it did represent the other words used such as walkability, green, biking, pedestrian, kids, etc. She summarized the Council resolution as previously discussed by Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell with the request that Planning Board provide feedback and recommendations to the City Council about which of the versions to adopt ("as is" or with suggested revisions) as soon as possible. Director McLaughlin stated she is confident in their process and believes that the draft community vision statement is representative of the comments. She thinks if they have to revisit the statement for an extended period of time, they risk delaying the plan itself. She pointed out that the State does not require a vision statement to be part of the comprehensive plan for the Growth Management Act. It was something staff wanted to use to energize people around in high level conversation. They did that and were able to categorize key themes to be used moving forward. If the Board wishes to advance another version, staff recommend striking the word "healthy" and just keeping it to "safe streets". Discussion: Board Member Mitchell pointed out that the Council wouldn't have drafted the resolution if they were happy with it. He assumed they wanted the Board to revise it. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell concurred. Board Member Mitchell said he didn't like how the resolution was drafted in the first place, pinning the original draft vision statement to the Bloom version. A more appropriate resolution would have been to send it to a steering committee of some kind to evaluate the data, come up with two versions, and bring those two versions to the Planning Board Meeting Minutes October 11, 2023 Page 6 of 8 Packet Pg. 265 5.1.h Planning Board. It seems like a step was missed in the process engagement by just picking Ms. Bloom's version. He suggested making the revisions to the original statement rather than just sending one or the other back. Board Member Maxwell thought that Director McLaughlin's approach was reasonable rather than jumping to rewriting the vision statement. Vice Chair Tragus Campbell asked the Board if they wanted to tackle any sort of revision or if they support going with the staff recommendation of just moving forward. Chair Gladstone recalled they had discussed the vision statement earlier in the year and that there was a general feeling that it wasn't really a vision statement; instead, it was more of a statement of values. She thought that the phrases in the vision statement were fair representations of the comments they received. In her mind, it would be improved by voicing it as a vision statement and not a value statement, but she didn't know if this was what Council had in mind. She thinks to go without a value statement is going to plague the process of the comprehensive plan with various residents. She recommended spending time on this at a different meeting to try to coalesce around a vision statement that contains most of the concepts here. Board Member Golembiewski said she thinks this vision statement is very close to acceptable. She thinks it accurately reflects the comments received. She thinks it could be as simple as, "Edmonds strives to be a welcoming city ..." She agrees that the word "healthy" associated with streets is a little weird although she understands the thought process behind it. Health is something they value as far as being an active, healthy community that takes pride in outdoor spaces and walkability and things like that. Board Member Kuehn agreed with Chair Gladstone that this seems more like a statement of values rather than a vision statement. He also agreed that it was very close and could use some tweaking to voice it as a vision statement. He would like to tweak it at a future meeting and send a recommendation to Council. Board Member Martini expressed concern about kicking this down the road. She recommended establishing a timeframe in which to finish this. Student Representative Distelhorst said she was surprised they were still talking about the vision statement. She doesn't understand why this has taken so long. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell recommended forming another subcommittee. Director McLaughlin commented that staff would want to be part of that to make sure that all those statements are taken into account. The translation issue is also very important. They do not have any consultant funding at all for this right now. Board Member Kuehn thought that if they just tweak some of the wording to make it a vision statement, but don't change the message, it could be good enough. It wouldn't need to be anything that changes from the word cloud. Director McLaughlin explained it was intended to be written in the present tense as if you were already in the future. Board Member Golembiewski asked if they could just call it a value statement since a vision statement isn't a required element of the comprehensive plan. Board Member Kuehn said he recommended that months ago. Planning Board Meeting Minutes October 11, 2023 Page 7 of 8 Packet Pg. 266 5.1.h MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER MARTINI TO DECLARE THIS TO BE A VALUE STATEMENT INSTEAD OF A VISION STATEMENT AND THAT THE PLANNING BOARD CONSTRUCT MINOR MODIFICATIONS TO IT AT THE NEXT PLANNING BOARD MEETING. THE MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. MOTION MADE BY CHAIR GLADSTONE, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER KUEHN, THAT THEY WORK WITH STAFF TO TWEAK THIS AND COME BACK TO THE PLANNING BOARD NO LATER THAN TWO MEETINGS FROM NOW. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. PLANNING BOARD EXTENDED AGENDA There will be a tree code update at the next meeting. There will also be a discussion or recommendation on the Critical Aquifer Recharge Zone and a comprehensive plan discussion. Highway 99 community renewal program update is being removed from the 25th. If there are any comments regarding the Parks, Recreation & Human Services Department - 2023 Q3 Accomplishments, they should be sent to Director Feser. PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS Chair Gladstone said it was nice to see Director McLaughlin at the meeting. She thanked Ms. Powers for filling in for Mike Clugston. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell thanked everyone for their participation. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:17 p.m. Planning Board Meeting Minutes October 11, 2023 Page 8 of 8 Packet Pg. 267 5.1.i Parks 2024-2029 Capital Program - Questions and Answers As of. October 25, 2023 Council- Q&A member (intial) Councilmember question or statement Staff response Budget program revision (if applicable) 1 DT P. 7 of six year fund overview: revenue is Page 7 is a continuation of the table at the shown as increasing by approx. $3m from bottom of page 6. On page 6 the revenue 2026 to 2027. What is the source of this breakdown shows the biggest difference is additional $3m? in "unsecured grants/funding". Specifically there is a large project programmed in 2027 which will require securing extra funding. The source of the funding is not yet determined, as is the case with most large projects in out years. This specific project is the construction of a new Parks/Facilities maintenance shop. In absence of funding, this project will likely continue to be bumped farther out in the schedule. As a reminder, the CIP/CFP is a planning document and not a budget document. It is important to list projects without funding to remain eligible for funding and keep on the planning horizon. Page 1 Packet Pg. 268 5.1.i 2 DT R-19: the narrative states "...erosion within (A) A study on the entire length of Shell (1319) Yost Park may impact spawning habitat." Creek within Yost Park is staff's Shell Creek Restoration Please revise to state "...within Yost Park recommended next step. This will help *rAIR ovFnR�NAIR D* that impacts spawning habitat." Also, the identify sources of erosion, more Stream health and erosion control of Shell narrative states "near term actions are effeciently prepare and submit for Creek in Yost Park, scope TBD based on needed to address severe erosion issues in necessary permits for any project in the study. Study in 2024, work in 2025. Funding the creek." We agree. However, waiting stream corridor including the weirs, bridges for 2024 TBD. until 2025 to begin remediation is a missed and trails for the entire length of the opportunity. Please consider updating this stream. It will also determine if the weir item to, at a minimum, reflect removal of removal is the highest priority and best the two concrete weirs in 2024 as a course of action for long-term stream proactive step toward minimizing health. Staff's professional opinion is the continued severe erosion and destruction most fiscally responsible approach is to of salmon spawning habitat. study the stream bed as a whole which would then enable all necessary projects (bridge replacement, trail enhancements, weir removal) to begin the over- and in - water repair work (and required permits) as prioritized by the study. (B) The Study is not currently funded due to a recent hold on all remaining 2023 unspent ARPA funded projects. 3 DT R-7: the project summary doesn't describe R7 is the renovation of the existing what work is being done. Please expand to restroom. The scope of work specifics will state the scope of work. be determined closer to permitting and bidding process. Typically, this includes improvments such as ADA compliance, replacement of fixtures, partitions, ventilation systems , etc. 06 c a m r LL .Q U M N 0 N le N 0 N d N 0 Q. 0 a x r a v c 0 U .Q 0 U U) Y a Q Page 2 Packet Pg. 269 5.1.i 4 DT D-20: I recall, when the Woodway Campus This project will have community outreach athletic fields were built in approx. 2015, and require a conditional use permit. To there was discussion of installing field meet the increased demand for athletic lighting. However, the residents living near field opportunities, it is more feasible to the field complained loudly that lighting light existing fields rather than building would be very intrusive, and the plan to new ones. This athletic field complex is add field lighting was shelved. Has significantly underutlized most of the year outreach been done to the residents living due to only being accessible a few hours near the field to resolve their concerns? after school until dark. As demontrated at Civic Field, modern lighting technology is very efficient, direct and limited to the playing field. 5 DT P2, D-13: will this project item be updated Yes, if a park is purchased in 2024, the goal if potential park/open space in SE Edmonds of the current plan would be to Master comes to fruition in 2024? The expense Plan the Park in 2025 and renovate in 2026. matrix shows expenditures in 2025 and The extend of the planning and 2026. improvements to provide access determined by the site conditions of the purchase. 6 DT P3 and D14: the estimated construction This estimate was developed as part of the costs for the Ebb Tide walkway seems feasibility process. The walkway has yet to extremely low. Please review this estimate be fully designed and there is still potential and update as appropriate. to work with the Ebb Tide. As such, it is too premature to pay for an engineers estimate for the project. The CIP/CFP is a planning document creating placeholders for projects up to six years on the horizon. This projects funding is unsecured and will likely require grant funding. 06 c a m r u_ .Q U rn N 0 N le N 0 N N N 0 Q. 0 a x r Q v c 0 U .Q 0 U U) Y a Q Page 3 Packet Pg. 270 5.1.i 7 DT R-16: the city installed an ADA-compliant When the playground at Seaview Park The Parks & Planning Board suggested playground at Seaview Park in approx. when the playground was built, pathway moving the 2028 restroom ADA compliance 2018. However, access by kids in improvements were made made. It is project to be a year or two earlier. wheelchairs is very difficult. In the project recognized, even with access from 184th justification for this item, the narrative and 185th which are more direct than the states "..make improvements to existing parking lot, there is opportunity for an parks as needed to ensure proper enhanced approached to the playground. maintenance, usability and quality of park This project is being considered in the 2024 features and grounds...." Requiring kids in city-wide improvement project list. In wheelchairs to travel across a grass field to addition, the draft CIP/CFP does list a 2028 access the playground equipment means improvement to replace the existing that playground is not as usable as is restroom (adjacent to the playground) to necessary. Please revise this item to show provide ADA complicance. improvements to access to the play equipment. As a point of clarification, the three points of access to the playground are all on paved surfaces and do not require children to travel across grass to reach the playground. 8 DT R-10: please specify in the project summary The "dog prohibited" signs are scheduled to that updated signage will include be installed this year, so excluded from the prominent signage at Brackett's Landing 2024 R-10 "Signage & Wayfinding" project. North that dogs are not allowed anywhere in that park, per the recent ordinance approved by Council. 9 VO Trash can and Service for trash pickup at This would be a new program and would SW county park by county or ILA with require Council direction through a vote - Snohomish county for us to be able to have either requesting the County to provide a can there (city code says trash can at all trash service or trash can service provided parks in edmonds) by City of Edmonds. Staff will need more direction to determine the level of service impacts to other city parks if Edmonds were to perform this service. 06 Q Page 4 Packet Pg. 271 5.1.i 10 VO Volunteer coordinator OPERATING BUDGET This is a general fund expense proposed in the 2023 budget as a part time position for $42,249 per year. Staff supports the addition of this position. 11A VO Parks and Rec kiosk for renting paddle OPERATING BUDGET boards and kayaks at Lake Ballinger Clarification needed - hand -carry rental kiosk at the City of Edmonds Lake Ballinger access at McAleer Street or on Lake Ballinger through City of Mountlake Terrace? 11B VO VO follow-up (10/26/2023) The site commonly referred to as McAleer "I was referring to the Lake Ballinger Access does not have grant funding (Edmonds side) boat launch when I made restrictions that would preclude a hand - the inquiry about having paddle boards carry rental vendor. Typically, for this available to rent (like you have at Marina service a vendor submits a formal request beach). to provide services as a vendor on an annual basis. Vendors contact the city if It doesn't take much room, only seasonal there is interest. We have not had any and no permanent fixtures. I know there proposals for this location at this time. are grant related restrictions but with the above characteristics it seems like it should be okay. Would it be worth trying? Wouldn't they just tell us to stop if the grantors had a problem with it?" 12 VO Overhead signage and art at Bracketts Dogs prohibited signs are in process this landing to include Signage for marine year, the 2024 Signage and Wayfinding sanctuary and no dogs project in the CIP will address additional park signage. Art installation is lead by the Cultural Arts Division in the Cultural and Arts Services and Economic Development Department. 06 Q Page 5 Packet Pg. 272 5.1.i 13 VO Safety lighting in areas we have been made This is a Public Works department project aware they are needed including by and it is listed in the PW CIP/CFP as a interurban trail lighting study as a first step. 14 VO Where is funding for lighting near See above. interurban trail? 15 VO improvements to Yost pool in 2025 are The pool will require a full tank replastering over 1M- should we make this investment project in 2025 (the last few were patches) without knowing outcome of decision Re and that will take a majority of the $1M. If landmark and possible aquatics center? the re -plastering is not completed, the pool (Yost replacement decision for another is no longer operational. There will be 24M is in 2029) additional information about the Landmark 99 project in 2024 that will available to inform the 2025 pool expenditures. 16 VO Do the dollars look right for Yost There are two projects that impact this considering the work needed there park, Project R19 which is the Shell Creek Restoration Project and the Yost Park & Pool Project (R9, R4, R6 and R11). Without completing a Stream Study, it is difficult to determine all expenses until projects are identified. 17 VO Moving the playfield lighting project to This project will require planning, 2027 from 2026 is disappointing. Any community engagement, design and option to move back? coordination with the Edmonds School District (which will more than likely manage the construction). Currently, funding is unsecured. RCO grant funding cycle is every two years, so application in 2026 and if successful, funds available in 2027 for construction. 06 Q Page 6 Packet Pg. 273 5.1.i 18 VO Elm street playground - residents have asked for it to be a dog park. Where did the specific improvements for this park (per the CIP/CFP) come from? Can the desires of the local community for one amenity versus the other be verified before proceeding? Yes, revision to the to the description of the Elm Street renovation in the final version of the CIP/CFP will note consideration of a potential dog park amenity (with public engagement). (D16, D17, R14) Elm Street Park Park enhancements to include the addition of a natural playground, small shelter with picnic tables, a+�d habitat restoration, and consideration of a dog park amenity with public design process. 19 VO We have a lot of professional services Professional services encompass associated with deferred park maintenance contracted work such as tree abortist projects now that we have full time parks services, on -call maintenance services, as capital project manager (150k per year)? well as engineering, design, site surveys, geotech testing, etc. These services are necessary to provide required materials for project permits. 20 VO Is this the same amount as in past years This is actually an increase (previously $50K before we had this position? for both professional services and materials and equipment). With the Parks Capital Project Manager we are able to perform work that requires professional services and contractors to complete major maintenance projects that the parks maintenance crew does not skills or time capacity to do. 06 Q Page 7 Packet Pg. 274 5.1.i 21 VO Where are the Landmark and green belt The entire Landmark 99 project is not a proposals? parks capital project. However, there are park capital projects such as parkland acquisition, design and improvements as well as Interurban Trail expansion which could be part of the Landmark 99 project. Assuming the "green belt" proposal being referred to is the Edmonds Greenway Loop, that is not a project that is found in the Parks CIP/CFP, but either in Planning & Community Development (during project development) or Public Works (Street improvements) 22 VO I am noting that the Interurban trail Correct, the acquisition of easements or expansion is being put off to 2029 from property to expand the Interurban trail is 2028 even without adding the trails from long-term planning and identified as a green belt idea potential future project. At this time, that project is unfunded and may need grant funding to complete. 06 c a m r u_ .Q U M N 0 N le N 0 N d N 0 Q. 0 a x r a v c 0 U .Q 0 U U) Y L a Q Page 8 Packet Pg. 275 5.1.j # CM Question/Response 1 DT PWT-01: When Council approved the $20 car tab increase earlier in 2023, we did so with the understanding the incremental $700k in revenue would be applied to the 2024 street preservation budget on top of the 2023 level of investment in the program. At $1.6m, the 2024 proposed investment level shown in the CIP/CFP appears to fall short of that understanding. Why? PW The tab fees is for street preservation "solely for transportation improvements that preserve, maintain and operate the existing transportation infrastructure of the city" Since established, the city has used this revenue to fund our in-house maintenance and repair efforts not the annual CIP. CIP pavement preservation funds use mostly REET funds, and to maximize these funds engineers coordinate pavement preservation projects with utilities to "repair once" a section of our transportation network. 2 DT PWT-31: the 236th walkway appears to be considered for investment beyond 2030. Can this be moved forward in the schedule? With revitalization of the subarea, there will be far more residents walking in that neighborhood. Also, is there any way the walkway can be installed at a lower cost? For instance, in the Sherwood neighborhood, the walkway is generally on one side of the street and is simply asphalt with a painted white line —similar to a bike lane. Where we are lacking walkways, can we consider installing asphalt sidewalks rather than concrete to stretch our dollars and deliver sidewalks earlier than now planned? PW Council can direct staff to change the priority, will need to identify what project will not be completed or a new revenue source to fund the project. Alternate methods to meet pedestrian needs can be considered during the design process, in addition the council can direct staff to develop new standards for new construction and adopt those standards. That said the best surface has been proven to be concrete sidewalks, all other possible options would have to be evaluated to our conditions. 3 DT PWT 64: total cost is shown as $3.5m: many times more expensive than standard sidewalks. I'd recommend moving this entire concept back into the "2030-2044" column until the city can determine how we can integrate green streets into the budget without delaying much needed sidewalks where they are most needed. PW There are no funds identified for this project, design can only start when funds become available, it will keep sliding to the right until funded. However if we show that we are not committed to do something until 2030-2044 we will not be able to compete for grants. 4 DT PWT 36: If there is already a sidewalk on one side of Walnut, I'd recommend moving this project back into the "2030-2044" column and reserve this investment for areas of the city with no sidewalks on either side of the street. PW Same answer as PWT 64. There is no sidewalk on either side. 06 c a m r u_ a U rn N O N le N O N d N O Q. O a x a v c cU CY N 0 a Q Packet Pg. 276 5.1.j # JCM Question/Response 5 CDT PWT-04: Why is the Main St overlay not being done all the way to 9th Ave, when Main St has been excavated for storm sewer upgrades between 6th and 9th? PW IThe City received a federal grant for a pavement overlay between 6th Ave to 8th Ave. The grant has a specific deadline to meet to obligate construction funds. Changing the project limits would require a PSRC amendment and supplement agreement with the consultant to modify the project which will slow progress and risk meeting the grant timeline and advertising the project in the first quarter of 2024. The section on Main St. between 8th Ave to 9th Ave will be paved in a following year as part of the City's locally funded paving program. 6 DT PWT-12: It appears the project on Highway 99 on the east side of the highway is either in MLT or Lynnwood. Are either of those cities contributing to the cost of installing the planter strip on the east side of the highway? Same question for PWT-16. PW During the planning stages (prior to Federal / State grant application submittals), discussions with the different agencies impacted will The held in order to determine the local funding contributions for the project phases. 7 DT PWT-21: Minor issue: the project description refers to Completed Streets. Should say Complete Streets. And a general question: are we still working toward the goals the city earlier defined about Complete Streets? I've seen nothing in recent planning discussion about Complete Streets, yet things like bicycle lanes, safer pedestrian crossings, etc. all fall within that concept. PW Typo has been corrected. Yes on complete streets, it is a work in progress and part of our comprehensive transportation plan update. Good to see that you are paying attention on what a complete street is. 8 1 DT PWT-25: Much of this project appears to lie within Esperance. Is the County splitting the project costs with Edmonds? Packet Pg. 277 5.1.j # CM Question/Response PW This project along 84th Ave. W is shared between Edmonds and Snohomish County. During the planning stages (prior to submitted grant applications). discussions will be held with Snohomish County to determine local contributions for this project (serving as local match). 9 DT PWT-26: This is a traffic project on SR-104 involving an additional turning lane. Is the state contributing to the cost of this project? PW WSDOT will most likely not fund this type of improvement project. Since the intersection is shared between Edmonds and Shoreline (signal owned by Shoreline), Federal / State grant applications will need to be submitted to fund this project (combined with local funding contributions / serving as local match). 10 DT PWT-67: What will be achieved with expenditure of $50k? If this item involves a review of the work done in 2016-2017 that led up to the Waterfront Connector proposal, can't a citizen/city task force be assembled to review those options? Also, I believe the scope should be expanded to include more than emergency waterfront access, should involve the Port and should examine what more can be done to ensure health/safety on the west side of the tracks (e.g., training additional personnel on use of the fire boat stationed at the marina, placing aid kits at regular intervals for use in quick response to injuries, identifying landing sites for a helicopter to evacuate an injured person if the tracks are blocked, etc.) PW Council requested this, and it can change if that is the goal. 11 DT PWT-31: Please move up the schedule for this project to 2026. Also, does this project involve a sidewalk on both sides of 236th? If so, can we consider placing a sidewalk on one side of the street (such as now exists in many parts of Edmonds) to deliver a much needed sidewalk amenity sooner and at lower cost? PW Will wait for council to provide direction in moving the project forward. The cost reflects sidewalk on one -side of the street. Too early to know what is possible, the design will determine if there is enough right of way, issues with utilities, parking etc. 12 DT PWT-32: Please move this project up to 2026 or earlier. PW Staff can move it forward at council's direction if City Council identifies a funding source. The ARPA funds identified for design have been transferred to the General Fund. 13 DT PWT-33: This is the top rated long walkway project identified in the 2015 transportation plan, yet it is not yet complete. Please move this project into the 2025 schedule. PW Funding? Identify a source of funding and these projects can be moved forward. 14 DT PWT-39: This item is shown as only $15k for 2024, yet the total project cost for these bike lanes is estimated at $3m. The narrative doesn't explain the discrepancy. Is the $15k just project close out costs? If so, that should be explained. PW lComment addressed in revised PW CIP-CFP draft. 15 Please move this item out to the 2030-2044 column, pending further discussion about a pedestrian/bicycle overpass near this �DT IPWT-43: site, which may eliminate the need for this item. 06 c M a m r M u_ a m U M N O N N O N d N O Q. O a x a v c c� CY N 0 a a Packet Pg. 278 5.1.j # CM Question/Response PW Several unsuccessful grant applications have been submitted for this project over the last 5 years (through joint Federal / State grant applications with Shoreline since shared intersection). As part of the 2024 Transportation Plan, the pedestrian / bicycle overpass project will be discussed to determine its inclusion into the plan. Staff recommends keeping the project in the six year plan until completion of the 2024 Transportation Plan update. 16 DT PWT-50: This project addresses a serious and long-standing pedestrian safety problem along 238th from 76th to Highway 99. This is one of the primary walking routes from 76th to the amenities at the Safeway complex —including the new neighborhood city hall. There have been no sidewalks along 76th for decades and this area simply must have them. Please move this project up to begin in 2025 as a priority. PW Funding? Identify a source of funding and this project can be moved forward. 17 DT PWT-55: The 2024 project cost shows $10k, but the overall project cost shows as $1.1m. I presume the $10k cost is for project close out, but the narrative doesn't indicate what the cost is for. Please clarify. PW Comment addressed in revised PW CIP-CFP draft. The $10k in 2024 is for project close-out. 18 DT PWT-60: RFIB signals are needed at the crosswalk on 7th Ave between Daley and Bell Streets. The new Civic Field is very heavily used, with many more cars now parked on both sides of 7th. When cars are parked near the sidewalk, pedestrians aren't visible until they are well out into the crosswalk. Please program RFIB signals at that location for 2024. PW As part of the 2024 Pedestrian Safety Program (if approved as part of 2024 Budget), RRFB's will be added at selected locations. A list of potential locations has already been created and this specific crosswalk will be included in the evaluation (with the highest ranked locations to be funded / based on funding available). 19 DT PWT-69: this project is for replacement of deteriorated sidewalk on the east side of Civic Field on 7th Ave. The funding is shown as being spent in 2027 and 2028. However, my understanding is this project will be undertaken in 2024 and that funding has been fully identified to cover the cost. Please revise this item to show the project commencing in 2024 and that funding is secured. PW Project has been removed from document and will start in spring 2024. 20 DT PWT-51: this project is for restriping SR-104 to accommodate additional ferry vehicle storage space. This project is 100% on a state highway and provides no benefit to Edmonds. The state should be responsible for 100% of the cost of this project. It is now shown as "unsecured funding." Please explain why Edmonds taxpayers would be responsible for this $380k cost. And if the state is responsible, please revise the project cost matrix accordingly. PW This project was identified in SR-104 Study (completed in 2015). This project is 100% within WSDOT Limited Access. WSDOT recently completed Ferry Storage Improvements within the opening of one of their STORAGE lanes and through striping improvements. However in order to further reduce queues going up SR-104 (impacting driveways along this corridor), additional improvements are needed. The project sheet shows funding unsecured. The project could be funded by WSDOT or a future grant and is shown in this document since there may be an opportunity for the City to secure a future grant to complete the work. 06 c M a m r M u_ a m U M N O N N O N d N O Q. O a x a v c c� CY N 0 a a Packet Pg. 279 5.1.j # CM Question/Response 21 DT PWT-52: Edmonds residents living in the area of 76th Ave. W. and Meadowdale Beach Road have been complaining for years about drivers travelling southbound on 76th at high rates of speed to get their vehicles airborne at the dip and rise in the road there. During the past decade, there have been 15 documented vehicular accidents there, some of them with injuries (Chief Bennett provided documentation of these accidents —this information has been forward to Director Antillon). 76th Ave. W. between Haines Wharf and Olympic Ave. is nearly two miles of straight road and is highly prone to speeding. Since the street is straight for such a long stretch, it is highly unusual that there would be that many accidents in that area. One suggestion is to make the 76th Ave. W and Meadowdale Beach Road intersection (a T intersection) a three way stop to prevent drivers from accelerating all the way from Haines Wharf to Perrinville. Please strongly consider this suggestion, which could be implemented at relatively low cost and would be much appreciated by the area residents as a means of keeping them and drivers safer. PW As part of the 2023 Traffic Calming Program, this specific stretch was evaluated. However following the speed study, the 85th percentile speeds didn't meet the threshold (less than 5 mph over the speed limit) / stretch didn't move forward in evaluation. The conversion of 76th Ave. @ Meadowdale Beach Rd to an ALL -WAY stop would be warranted if the volumes along 76th Ave. W were — 2X greater than along Meadowdale Beach Rd (since 3 approach roadway / based on MUTCD requirements). A study was completed in 2022 and the warrant wasn't met. Another traffic county will be completed in 2023. 22 DT PWT-53: The city is behind schedule on addressing ADA issues citywide. This proposal shows $440k in funding to do an evaluation and prioritization of ADA issues in 2025. Please move this up to 2024 and allocate ARPA funds for the update. Also, the DEIA commission is working to identify the highest priority ADA issues that need to be completed and will be providing that input to Council and Public Works. This input can feed directly into the ADA transition plan update. PW I Funding? Staff can move it forward at council's direction if the City Council identifies a funding source. 23 DT PWT-64: Council has not yet approved implementation of Green Streets, as the cost of these projects is very high and the city needs to first prioritize pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular safety projects where they are sorely needed and have been lacking for decades. Please treat Green Streets as a concept that should be further investigated and move the $3.5m funding shown in this item out to the 2030- 2044 column. However, elements of green streets (such as rain gardens, proper street tree planting, permeable paving, etc.) should be pursued incrementally as budget allows. PW City Council can decide to move this project to the out years. 24 DT PWD-04: funding sources as shown indicate nearly half of the cost of this project will be from local and/or ARPA funds. However, we have discussed that BNSF and federal funds will be available for a significant portion of this project, as well as contributions by Lynnwood. If this is correct, please update the cost matrix accordingly. If nearly $2m of the project cost will be actually be charged to the Stormwater Fund, it will create continued upward pressure on stormwater rates charged to Edmonds citizens. 06 c M a m r M u_ a m U M N O N N O N N N O Q O a a c cU CY O a a Packet Pg. 280 5.1.j # CMI Question/Response PW This reflects the best available information that we have for the funds needed to complete the project at this time. Any funding not covered by ARPA will need to be grant funds which historically requires at least a 25% local matching fund source. Contributions from the City of Lynnwood for this project are highly unlikely, since this system is not part of their MS4. BNSF does not use their own funds for projects. They will build/retrofit these types of projects if they get grants. Matching funds need to be available to allow us to pursue and qualify for grants. If these funds are not available, we would not be able to apply or qualify and/or improve our standing for the vast majority of grants that need to be pursued to complete this project and any other project that is pursuing grant funds. If council decides it does not desire to use stormwater funds for matching funds, council would need to determine the alternate source. 25 DT PWD-04: In addition to a watershed analysis for Perrinville Creek, we need to identify a similar analysis for Shell Creek, which has been identified as the second highest priority restoration focus (Perrinville Creek is the highest priority restoration focus). The Shell Creek analysis can be funded, in part, by the $120k carryforward Council allocated for Yost Park restoration. If additional funding is needed, please show ARPA as the funding source, and show this analysis as beginning in 2024. PW A project can be added, but council needs to identify a funding source. ARPA funds may not be available. This study can be considered for future funding/prioritization as part of the Stormwater Comprehensive Plan update. 26 DT PWD-23: Please update the cost matrix to indicate Lynnwood's contribution to the Perrinville Creek basin analysis cost. PW Comment addressed in revised PW CIP-CFP draft. 27 DT PWF-10: The Edmonds Museum restroom is not ADA-compliant. The toilet in the single restroom in the building is raised off the floor, making it extremely difficult for a wheelchair -bound person to use. Please add this needed upgrade to this item. PW Noted, please provide direction, at this point we don't have an ADA transition plan for facilities but this can be prioritized. The building is old and it might be difficult to meet ADA. 28 DT PWF-18: the costs shown in the expense matrix seem very low for the scope of work identified in the narrative for the Yost Pool pool house. For instance, the highest cost shown in any of the five years in the matrix is $30k. Yet, the narrative shows roof and gutter replacement is needed. Please verify the cost numbers as shown are correct. PW These are preliminary estimates, once a more detail investigation is completed possibly partnering with JOC contractors the estimates will be updated. 06 c M a m r M u_ a m U O N O N le N O N d N O Q. O a x a v c c� CY N 0 a a Packet Pg. 281 5.1.j # CM Question/Response 29 DT PWF-23: As discussed in the project narrative, the library roof membrane has been leaking for over 20 years since it was initially installed. The newly -refurbished library (which was severely damaged by a major water leak) will reopen in late 2023. It is simply unwise to reopen the library to the public without a near -term plan to permanently address the chronically leaking roof, as continued water leakage may lead to mold -related public health issues in the building. As stated in the narrative, the city obtained an estimate in 2018 for demolish and replace the entire roof membrane. Additionally, a structural assessment was completed in 2021. This project can and should be broken into two components: first, the current "green roof" structures should be demolished and the roof membrane replaced to make the library roof waterproof. The cost of this item is shown as $4.9m, with the project apparently initiated and completed in 2029. Please revise this item to show the project commencing with final design in 2024 with project completion in 2026. This item can be funded via ARPA funds, since the city has remaining approx. $8m in unused ARPA funds (and our contract with Snolsle shows they will contribute a portion of the cost of this project, so they should be shown as a partial funding source). The ARPA guidelines state these funds must be fully expended by the end of 2026. The second phase of this project is rebuilding of the planters and surface features on the library roof. That portion of the project should be shown as commencing during or after 2026, as determined by design. PW There are no funds assigned for the project, if council prioritizes this project funding will have to be identified for the design 30 DT PWP-04: This project cost is shown as over $40m across a five year period. However, litigation is pending about the level of nutrient removal required of the cities. If the cities are given legal relief from Dept. of Ecology's standards, will that relief reduce the cost estimates shown? PW Preliminary costs. Once design has been completed we will have a more accurate estimate. 31 DT PWP-10: the total estimated project cost is shown as $250k. Yet, the expense matrix below shows he cost as $250k for each of the years of 2024, 2025 and 2026. Is the total cost actually $750k? PW Comment addressed in revised PW CIP-CFP draft. Cost is for 2024. 32 VO 76th street by Meadowdale road and/or by 171- too long a stretch without a signal or traffic calming PW As part of the 2023 Traffic Calming Program, this specific stretch was evaluated. However following the speed study, the 85th percentile speeds didn't meet the threshold (less than 5 mph over the speed limit) / stretch didn't move forward in evaluation. The conversion of 76th Ave. @ Meadowdale Beach Rd to an ALL -WAY stop would be warranted if the volumes along 76th Ave. W were — 2X greater than along Meadowdale Beach Rd (since 3 approach roadway / based on MUTCD requirements). A study was completed in 2022 and the warrant wasn't met. Another traffic count will be completed in 2023. 33 VO 100th and SR 104- c page 29 CIP/CFP- no right of way purchase expense is detailed when infrastructure can/should be improved so bike lanes can be added without losing driving lanes (packet page 35) PW Comment addressed in revised PW CIP-CFP draft. Preliminary right of way cost added. 34 VO 76th and OVD- is this a shared cost between COL and COE? Is it in their CFP too (our CFP page 32, packet page 38). Same with OVD at Meadowdale beach rd and 174th, CFP page 35, packet page 41) Also, shared with COShoreline? 104 and 76 at 205 (CFP/CIP page 52) 06 c M a m r M u_ a m U M N O N N O N d N O Q. O a x a v c c� CY N 0 a Q Packet Pg. 282 5.1.j # CM Question/Response PW Yes, 76th @ OVD is a shared intersection. During the planning stages (prior to submitted grant applications). discussions will be held with Lynnwood to determine local contributions for this project (serving as local match). 35 VO Isn't some part of 84th sidewalk (CFP page 33) being prioritized in 2024 budget? Yes sidewalk design (from 234-238th) in 2024 1 see on CFP page 43 but work not until 2027. Is this timing acceptable? PW Staff can move it forward at council's direction if City Council identifies a funding source. The ARPA funds identified for design have been transferred to the General Fund. 36 VO DT street lighting- how about pedestrian street lighting needed near Inter urban trail? CIP Page 53 PW A Citywide Lighting Study is currently being completed. The Interurban Trail is one of the stretches being evaluated. Further lighting evaluation may be included in the Safety Action Plan (if city receives federal grant). 37 VO 4th Ave corridor- private funding/ capital campaign or move back in timeline PW I Keeping the project in the six -year list will make it eligible to pursue public/private grant funding in the future. 38 VO I am confused by the numbers on CFP page 88 (7317 Lake Ballinger away Floodplain purchase and structure removal): secured 500k ecology grant is referenced in narrative (which also says that the purchase is intended/ not yet done) ward project costs are 750k and 2024 costs are only ones there (and 120k) PW Narrative clarified to show that the current schedule is to purchase the property in 2023. So the majority of funds will be expended before 2024, which is when the site demolition and revegetation will take place. 39 VO Update references to RFA (from South Sno Co Fire) CIP/CFP pages 108, 109, 110 for fire stations PW Noted 40 VO Meadowdale clubhouse page 114, PWF-12- almost 100k in 2024 unsecured funding. Does this mean no more bonding for deferred maintenance or doesn't that qualify? PW Noted, will evaluate if these fit the bond requirements 41 VO Old Public Works- page 115 do the 2024 and 2025 expenditures make sense in the context of upcoming change in use being talked about? See page 127 with construction (probably on that same site) in 2027. Also same as above. What does it mean to have work planned in 2024 and no secured funding? Also- wade James theater (2024 work and no secured funding) Also fire life safety communications PWF 19 on page 121— don't we need to prioritize this? PW Roll up door is dangerous, and HVAC system need to be repaired since the building is still occupied, and eligible for bonds funds. Not included on list for Bonds project, these projects are typically funded with Facilities General Funds. 42 VO Library Plaza roof deck waterproofing project PWF 23, page 122 move design to 2024 and construction to 2025 ARPA PW There are no funds assigned for the project, if council prioritizes this project funding will have to be identified for the design 43 VO Will the restroom/showers at the Bracketts landing waterfront get addressed? (This was covered 1. Todays presentation- I am glad this is being prioritized in the maintenance budget). What about the signage at Bracketts landing that says marine sanctuary overhead? 06 c M a m r M u_ a m U M N O N N O N d N O Q. O a x a v c c� CY N 0 a a Packet Pg. 283 5.1.j # CM Question/Response PW Parks led projects 44 VO 175th slope repair- when was the problem first established/id'd? In 2019, it was said that the temporary fix (cones) had already been there for years). How many years is acceptable number for something like this to be unaddressed? What does 2023 construction cost moved to 2026 to 2027 mean? PW Based on documents, the issue dates back to at least 2004. Staff will continue to monitor the slope. Staff can move the project forwarc if City Council identifies a funding source. 45 VO 232nd from 100th to 105 timing move may not be okay (from2027-28 to 28-29). PW Staff can move it forward at council's direction if City Council identifies a funding source. 46 VO Same Re 84th from 238 to 234 (move from 26-28 to 27-29) PW Staff can move it forward at council's direction if City Council identifies a funding source. c a U) m L) M U_ a m U M N O N N O N N N O Q O i a x �L w+ CCU C Q i C ( � V U) 14 L O c.i a Q Packet Pg. 284 5.1.k TEITZEL CIP/CFP AMENDMENTS Item: PWT-32 (P. 43): 84" Ave walkway from 2381h SW to 2341h SW Proposed change: The estimated project cost for this project is $1.5 million. Please revise this project to show design in 2024 with construction in 2025 (rather than 2027), with $750k in secured funding being transferred from PWT-69 and the remaining $750k funded by ARPA funds. Impact on other projects: Requires $750k of new funding to be identified for design/completion of the 7th Ave walkway (PWT 69) Item: PWT-39 (P. 49)—Citywide bicycle lanes Proposed change: The estimated project cost for the citywide bike lane project is $3 million. Yet, there is no discussion about this project being grant funded by a Sound Transit grant. Rather, it shows $15k in 2024 construction cost, to be funded by REET revenue. Please either revise this item to show the $15k cost funded by the Sound Transit grant with zero impact to REET, or explain that the entire $3 million was spent in 2023 and the $15k is residual cost that must be covered by city funds. Impact on other projects: N/A Item PWT-44 (p. 53)—Downtown Lighting Improvements Proposed change: This item requests approx. $1.6m in unsecured funding to install additional street lighting in downtown Edmonds in 2027 and 2028. The narrative does not provide sufficient justification for this investment. Please delete PWT-44 and reserve this funding for more urgent lighting improvements in other parts of Edmonds (such as Matthay Ballinger Park, the Interurban Trail, the north Edmonds/Meadowdale area, etc). If additional downtown lighting is determined to be needed, this request can be resubmitted at a later time with appropriate justification. Impact on other projects: This change frees up $1.6m in city resources for more urgent lighting improvements in Edmonds Packet Pg. 285 5.1.k Item PWT-45 (p. 54)—SR 104 walkway on Pine St. to 9th Proposed change: This item requests funding of $3.3 million for a new walkway with ADA-complaint curb ramps on Pine St. from SR 104 to 9th Ave. While a worthy concept, there are areas in Edmonds with no sidewalks at all (Pine St. already has sidewalks along most of its length from 9th Ave to SR 104). Also, the narrative for this item does not indicate its priority ranking. Please move this entire funding request back to 2029 until it can be ranked in priority order with other funding needs for sidewalks in Edmonds. Impact on other projects: This change frees up $3.3 million for use earlier in the planning period for other sidewalk priorities. Item: PWT-50 (p. 59)—sidewalk from 238th SW from SR 99 to 76th Ave W Proposed change: The estimated project cost for this project is $1.4 million, and is scheduled for the 2030-2044 time frame. It is ranked #10 in the long walkway priority list in the most recent Transportation Plan. Please move the schedule for this project up to begin in 2025. The Highway 99 subarea is undergoing redevelopment, this route is one of the primary walking/biking routes for residents of SE Edmonds to transit and amenities on SR 99, is a major walking/biking route to the soon -to -be improved Mathay Ballinger Park and will be a major walking/biking route to the new Edmonds access to the Ballinger Park. It is a dangerous walking route with insufficient or non-existent sidewalks and needs to be reprioritized for sooner sidewalk construction. Impact on other projects: Will require reprioritization of funding for capital projects elsewhere in Edmonds. Item: PWT-69 (p. 63)-7th Ave sidewalk project Proposed change: This item requests $750k in funding, and has now been advanced in the 2024 city budget to occur in 2024. The full $750k in funding has now been secured by Public Works from existing sources. Please remove the secured funding for this project and transfer it to PWT-32 (84th Ave. walkway from 238th St. SW to 230 St. SW). This project may stay in the CIP/CFP as it is currently shown, with design scheduled for 2027 and construction in 2028, with funding shown as "unsecured" Impact on other projects: Transfers secured funding of $750k to PWT-32 for 2024 construction costs of that project. Packet Pg. 286 5.1.k Item: PWT-51 (p 65)—ferry storage improvements from Pine St. to Dayton St Proposed change: This item requests $380k in unsecured funding to add vehicle storage for ferry users. However, this project involves restriping of a section of SR-104: a state highway. This project should not be shown as suggesting funding is a city obligation. Rather, it is a WSDOT obligation. Please modify this item to either show the funding source as a state grant or remove this item entirely from the CIP/CFP. Impact on other projects: Removes $380k from city funding obligations for 2027 so this funding can be dedicated to other city purposes. Item: PWT-64 (p. 72)—Green Streets 236th SW Proposed change: This item requests approx.. $3.5 million in funding for a green street project on 236th St. SW, with design beginning in 2025. This is premature and dedicates scarce city resources to a project that should take lower priority in favor of other high priority sidewalk installation projects. Please move funding for this project back to the 2030 category, with funding shown as "unsecured" Impact on other projects: Frees up $3.5 million for other high priority city sidewalk projects requiring investment in 2025 and 2026. Item: PWF-10 (p. 112): Historical Museum Proposed change: This item requests approx.. $75k in funding from 2024 through 2028 for upgrades and maintenance of the Edmonds museum building. However, there is no reference to the need for upgrades to the only restroom in the building to be ADA complaint (which it currently is not). Please add $20k in 2024 (showing as "unsecured funding" pending identification by Council of funding sources) in funding for this item to upgrade the restroom to bring it into ADA compliance. Impact on other projects: Requires identification of 2024 funding source for the additional $20k cost. 3 Packet Pg. 287 5.1.k Item: R19 (p. 12): Shell Creek Restoration Proposed change: This item requests approx.. $500k in funding for 2024 and 2025 to study and remediate erosion problems in Shell Creek within Yost Park. $120k of that amount is programmed for 2024 for a professional study of this issue, with $380k programmed in 2025 for actual remediation work. However, apparently direction has been given by the Administration to remove the ARPA funding for 2024 for the professional study. Council does not agree with this, and wishes the $120k to remain in this DP as it is currently shown. Further, please revise the project summary narrative to state "...stream silting issues caused by erosion within Yost Park impact salmon spawning habitat" rather than "...stream silting issues caused by erosion within Yost Park may impact salmon spawning habitat." Impact on other projects: Council will vote in its 2024 budget deliberation on how to preserve $120k in funding for the professional study of the critical erosion issues within Yost Park. Until Concil holds that vote, funding should continue to be shown in this item for 2024. Item: R7 ( p 14)—Olympic Beach Park (fishing pier restroom) Proposed change: This item requests approx. $53k for renovation of the fishing pier restroom. However, this project has been moved from 2024 back to 2025. Funding is fully secured via REET Fund 125. This restroom is heavily used by visitors to Olympic Beach and the fishing pier, and it is in strong need of renovation. Please move this item up to begin in 2024.. Impact on other projects: n/a 2 Packet Pg. 288 7.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 11/6/2023 Claim for Damages for filing Staff Lead: NA Department: Administrative Services Preparer: Scott Passey Background/History N/A Staff Recommendation Acknowledge receipt of Claims for Damages for filing. Narrative Marvin J. Hatch 76th Ave W ($1,432.76) Bonnie Aylesworth Main St & Railroad Ave (TBD) Attachments: Claim for Damages - Marvin Hatch - for council Claim for Damages - Bonnie Aylesworth - for council Packet Pg. 289 7.1.a CITY OF EDMONDS CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FORM Please take note that y�'ZA f o i H c . t C_ who currently resides at mailing address 'Sa vy, C= home phone # (work phone # and who resided at Date Claim Form Received by City at the time of the occurrence and whose date of birth is � b claiming damages against C;1Z C + rc� VVI can A5 in the sum of $ 1412 a arising out of the following circumstances listed below. T DATE OF OCCURRENCE: 0/7 Z.2023 TIME: _I LOCATION OF OCCURRENCE: ca G DESCRIPTION: L E 1. Describe the conduct and circumstance that brought about the injury or damage. Also describe the injury or damage. fb ;.-JCk 5 CA.y- r^c'.' c't c4 M .i i vc1 S L� �- to 1i f• 5 © e �' V qj"'e%^*N!" tcaacLnim-_A .C�cir� �Ce L': r7c�� F� �c� �t� G:c� ►L ii t'�'� �G%=�oc:ett( Urt� �JaS sS�:c-:!'�ch,� `gliL'6, wbJ c.-e, ioti vC;)c�CACI&' -•c� i c± ego � d17G'.' zeCE �wg •Si r 76 is �erINC Pv5 KNA Cc-, o' c•4.4<: bC0"Ac, ►.J e\,5 :h0i' C::C.I(y Sc• l-'o &Ljc,tNattach an extra sheet for additional information, if needed) 2. Provide a list of witnesses, if applicable, to the occurrence including names, addresses, and phone numbers. 3. Attach copies of all documentation relating to expenses, injuries, losses, and/or estimates for repair. 4. Have you submitted a claim for damages to your insurance company? If so, please provide the name of the insurance company: and the policy #: Yes No Form Revised 04/09/2021 Pagel of 2 Packet Pg. 290 EEi2 50 w �/jy o r� G W i b 4► F Y of `} i r"%5 , � v✓r o�r� C � � hc,�► G a►n Gyti wr✓ _ Wc, S v w rw d) O'► L'o�i5�xs � — IN o i'i 6k o CSL m o, 11,vx W WvrcG o4�%c O WC `- C- � II r C n��w�ti61� Fora c�a-v�L-� mvLAYS' ° - tu cl °Look u� S L My cai~ aI sa cy, 60AC;\rd. AA a, �. � ®v� Y� WCl- J C% c, ,� 4 4 O t7 6 o�c.�. LO h t to lk d.r o t 5 5 w W C; rc moo, �- ucsI CA, t c cqu i,��.'� s f-�. e- cif l7�(i6S W�� . SU4J 'rw0 N m — $ i n cA G Q r v. ✓rq (i S ",Zs A d' c: o 1 �� ci►S D 5► ws � �� k C m E �-'cr. 1� 0 U d a Q Ci-r_ ►ti ll v, 17 H C ti v� S p U a Packet Pg. 291 7.1.a This Claim form must be signed by the Claimant, a person holding a written power of attorney from the Claimant, by the attorney in fact for the Claimant, by an attorney admitted to practice in Washington State on the Claimant's behalf, or by a court -approved guardian or guardian ad litem on behalf of the Claimant. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the state of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct. Signature of Claimant Date and place (residential address, city and county) Or Signature of Representative Date, and place (residential address, city and county) Print Name of Representative Bar Number (if applicable) Please present the completed claim form to: City Clerk's Office City of Edmonds 121 51h Avenue North Edmonds, WA, 98020- 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p,m, E U Form Rcviscd 04/09/2021 Page 2 of 2 Packet Pg. 292 CITY OF EDMONDS CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FORM _ ....7.1.b OCT 31 2023 Date Claim Form Received by City u Please take note that<--'-6d&-'0/Z'6t'currently resides at address home work phone # and who resided at it the time of the occurrence and whose date of birth is is claimin damages against 6 At '5in the sum of $ arising out of the foll ng circumstances listed below. DATE OF OCCURRENCE: LOCATION OF OCCURRE DESCRIPTION: 1. ,Describe the con 2 3. 4. icj�,ppd pjrcumstance that brquqht about)hp injury or,dam_ge. Alsoldescribpthe infil or damage. e l \ (attach an extra sheet for iti I information, if needed) list of wi f appllicable,so the occurreAce including_na-mes, addresses, and phone numbers. Pzz / - - - - - -- Attach copies of all documentation relating to expenses, injuries, losses, and/or estimates for repair. Have you submitted a claim for damages to your insurance company? Yes _ If so, please provide the name of thoinsvrarce company: and the policy #: * * ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR AUTOMOBILE CLAIMS ONLY License Plate # Driver License # Type Auto: (year) (make) DRIVER: Address: (model) _ OWNER: Address: Phone#: Phone#: Passengers: Name: Name: Address: Address: No E V Form Revised 04/09/2021 Page 1 of 2 Packet Pg. 293 7.1.b This Claim form must be signed by the Claimant, a person holding a written power of attorney from the Claimant, by the attorney in fact for the Claimant, by an attorney admitted to practice in Washington State on the Claimant's behalf, or by a court -approved guardian or guardian ad litem on behalf of the Claimant. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the state of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct. J Signature of Clalh7antllDate and plac (residential address, city and unty) rn Or V a� ca E M Signature of Representative Date and place (residential address, city and county) o L O E M Print Name of Representative Bar Number (if applicable) v Please present the completed claim form to: City Clerk's Office City of Edmonds 121 5'h Avenue North Edmonds, WA, 98020 a 8:00 a.m. to 4: . % E E c oacl 01 a� Form Revised 0 //09/2021 ` e Z o Packet Pg. 294 7.2 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 11/6/2023 Budget Queries - Council Budget Questions and Adminstration/Staff Responses Staff Lead: City Council Department: City Council Preparer: Beckie Peterson Background/History To help streamline and manage the many budget questions and emails from councilmembers to staff, a consolidated question/answer process has been coordinated by Council Staff. Published Queries with Responses are sent to Councilmembers by email, published under received for filing, and posted to the Budget 2024 section of the Council webpage; https://www.edmondswa.gov/government/city_council/budget_2024 Recommendation For Information Only. Narrative N/A Attachments: Council Budget Query 1.0 with Responses Council Budget Query 2.0 with responses Packet Pg. 295 7.2.a Council Budget Queries 1.0 Submitted by October 12 and Responded by October 20 Includes some additional questions emailed to Director Turley QueriesGeneral Budget Q1 Balanced Budget: a. At P. 3 of the 2024 Proposed Budget, the mayor reports he is "proud to share with you my proposed balanced budget" for 2024. Yet, city expenses for 2024 substantially exceed revenues. How is the budget being balanced? b. On P.8 (Budget Ordinance): the mayorreported we are deliveringa balanced budget. However, it appears we have an imbalance of about $4m (annual expenses exceed annual revenues for 2024). How is this imbalance addressed to support the mayor's statement? (CM Teitzel) Q1 Answerto a. and b.: A balanced budget is one where the beginning available resources (fund balance) plus budgeted revenues minus budgeted expenditures equals a positive amount of ending resources (ending fund balance). No budget is ever required to have revenues = or > expenses, although this is not an uncommon misconception. Q2 Overall Professional Services Budgets: a. Was there an intention to generally reduce professional services in 2024 for all departments, and if so, what was the proposed percentage reduction? b. Is there an opportunity to take additional professional services reductions in 2024to help stabilize the general fund? (CM Teitzel) A2 Answerto a. and b.: We look at the amount of professional services that are budgeted every year and evaluate for reasonableness in an attempt to not over -budget. We have not done anything different this year. If Council wishes to reduce the professional services budget, please work with the applicable department director in order to determine what plans and services will need to be reduced if cuts are made to their professional services budget. Q3 Business Facade Improvements Where did the $300k in ARPA funding go that was earmarked for small business facade improvements? (CM Teitzel) A3 This query has been forwarded; response will be provided in next document - Budget Query 2.0. Q4 Hwy 99 Police Substation The 2024 Council priority of establishing Highway 99 police substation is not reflected in the budget. When will that facility be incorporated? (CM Teitzel) A4 This query has been forwarded; response will be provided in next document - Budget Query 2.0. Q5 Strategic Outlook General Fund Revenues, Expenditures and Fund Balances, Page 16 of 2024 Proposed Budget a. Property taxes show a drop of about $4m in 2025. Why? b. Grants show a big increase in 2024 (likely the effect of transferring in from ARPA), then drop drastically to $200/year for each of the out years. Why are the out year grant estimates so much lower than the run rate? C. Expenditures show an $11m drop in 2025. Is that due to the assumption the Edmonds voters approve annexation into the RFA in that year? d. Debt service increases to $801,400 in 2024 from $323,590 in 2023. How much debt are we taking on in 2024 and for what purpose? (CM Teitzel) A5 A: The outlook for 2025 includes an estimate of the financial results that would occur, were the city to join the RFA. If that were to happen, we would no longer collect the EMS Property Tax Levy, which is represented by the $4 million reduction. B. Grant revenues in 2023 and 2024 are higher due to ARPA usage. All other years presented are relatively stable. The out years are lower than 2021-2022 because we don't want to over- estimate revenue, so this was a conservative approach. a� •L Q 3 a m a� V m m U) c 0 a 0) a) a: s w 3 Packet Pg. 296 7.2.a Council Budget Queries 1.0 Submitted by October 12 and Responded by October 20 Includes some additional questions emailed to Director Turley C. Yes, that is correct. D. This increase in debt service is a result of an accounting changed create by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board from GASB 87. It is merely a change in how we have to account for leases, it has no real effect on the budget. Q6 Strategic Outlook General Fund, Fund Balances, Page 17 a. General fund balance: the 2024 budget shows an increase of about $3m in the fund balance. What is the source of this money? b. EOY 2023 general fund balance in excess of required reserve shows negative $2.2m (meaning we have used $2.2m of reserves and are required to replenish that amount per policy). Where is the $2.2m coming from to replenish the reserve? C. Opioid response: Where is the additional $50k coming from in 2024 to increase the fund 019 balance to $110k? (CM Teitzel) d. LEOFF medical insurance: why the significant decrease in reserve levels from 2022 through 2024? (CM Teitzel) A6 A: Budgeted revenues of $62.5 million minus budgeted expenses of $59.4 million give you the $3 million increase. The significant difference in that from previous years comes from transferring money from ARPA and the maintenance fund, and the installation of red light cameras. B: See answer to A C: This is from the opioid settlement from about a year ago. The city stands to receive somewhere around $50K per year from this settlement. D: We transfer GF money into the LEOFF fund each year to cover those costs. The costs vary from year to year and the amount transferred varies from year to year. Over time theoretically those costs should reduce each year. Q7 2024 Revenue Summary —All Funds p. 18 a. Contingency reserve showing zero in 2024. Is this a typo? b. Fund 112 (street construction) revenue fund showing a decrease of 50% in 2024. Why? (CM Teitzel) A7 A: The proposed budget does not have a transfer in or out of the contingency reserve fund. The calculation for how much needs to be transferred is based on the Adopted budget, so we will propose a budget amendment later, once we know what the Adopted budget is. B: Page 177 shows reductions of $4.9 in Grant Revenue and $2.3 million in Interlocal Revenue. This may be related to less work being done on HWY 99 in 2024, but further questions should be directed to Director Antillon. Q8 2024 Expenditure Summary — All Funds p. 19 a. Fund 142 (Edmonds rescue plan) shows a reduction of $1.4m in 2024. How was that money spent? b. Fund 016 (building maintenance) expenditure shows $2.8m in 2024. Yet, the building maintenance fund balance on p 17 shows $3.2m, and $2.Om of that amount (shown in DP 65) is being transferred to the general fund. That would leave only $1.8m to cover 2024 expenses. How is the additional $1.Om being made up to cover the $2.8m in 2024 expenses? (CM Teitzel) A8 A: This is because we were spending more ARPA money in 2023. In 2024 we only have $300,000 budgeted for spending because we are assuming that most of the ARPA money will be transferred to the general fund. d •L Q 3 a m a� m m U) c 0 a 0) d s w 3 Packet Pg. 297 7.2.a Council Budget Queries 1.0 Submitted by October 12 and Responded by October 20 Includes some additional questions emailed to Director Turley B: This question is mixing up years and I can't answer it. The $2.8 million is a 2024 expenditure number, the $3.2 million is a 2023 fund balance number. We only have $805,000 budgeted to spend on repairs and maintenance in that fund in 2024 (page 175). Q9 Change in Ending Fund Balance — All Funds p. 22 What is causing the draw down in enterprise fund balances (are rates not covering expenses?) (CM Teitzel) A9 This query has been forwarded; response will be provided in next document - Budget Query 2.0. Q10 General Fund Expenditures by Department p. 28 a. do Council and mayor expenses include the salary increases recommended by the salary commission? b. Is ARPAtransferto GF intended to cover the $6.7m general fund "subsidy" to the fire district contract costs? (CM Teitzel) Answers A10 A: No, those were brought and approved after the proposed budget was prepared. We will include that change in the "Staff Proposed Changes" later. B: The ARPA transfer is not directly tied to the fire district contract costs. Inflation has had a huge impact on the general fund, driving up costs, and we have not yet had corresponding revenue increases. The increase in the fire contract is a large part of those increases, but it is not a 1:1 relationship. Q11 Property Tax New Construction p. 30 Why does total AV for Edmonds decline in 2024 by about $150k? As far as I know, assessed values didn't decrease here. (CM Teitzel) A11 The total AV estimate declines by about $148 million, or 1%, from 2023 to 2024. These numbers are provided to us by the County Assessor without any explanation. I would guess that one factor would be that inflation and higher interest rates in the last cou ple of years have slowed down the housing market, causing a tiny drop in housing prices. But that's just a guess. Q12 Authorized Positions by Department p. 30 Total employee count for 2024 is 5 more than 2023. Is that number accurate? (CM Teitzel) Al2 Yes, we are asking for a Grants Manager and a Climate Action Specialist in the General Fund, and 4 positions in Public Works, and have taken a small 0.9 FTE reduction in the Parks Dept. Q13 Rates of Pay p. 31 The rates of pay look odd. Note Council President maximum is lowerthan minimum. Is that a typo? (CM Teitzel) A13 Yes, we'll fix that in the Adopted Budget. Good catch! Q14 Property Tax I'm not clear about the property tax proposal in the budget. I know it's in there and assumes we take the 1% increase for 2024 as allowed by law. But I think it also includes using some of the "banked" tax capacity we have due to not increasing property taxes in past years. Can you tell me 1) how much additional revenue is driven by a 1% Edmonds property tax increase and 2) what is the percentage of "banked" capacity that is built into the budget (i.e., are we assuming we would "unbank" an additional 2% on top of the 1%)? (CM Teitzel) A14 The 1% increase for this year would bring additional revenue of about $126,000, and the banked capacity available on the Regular Levy is about $507,000. If both of these were approved it would be an increase of about 5.93%. Q15 DP 65 Transfer Funds from 016 and ARPA: 3 Packet Pg. 298 7.2.a Council Budget Queries 1.0 Submitted by October 12 and Responded by October 20 Includes some additional questions emailed to Director Turley This proposal moves $6.5 in ARPA funds and $2.Om in Building Maintenance fund 016 into the general fund to close the 2024 budget shortfall. On Oct. 7, 1 requested Director Turley to prepare an alternative budget scenario assuming these monies are not used in this fashion, and that Council would need to consider other options to close the budget gap (including options to increase revenues as well as options to reduce expenses). Please flag this DP for possible revision depending on what options Council decides to pursue to close the budget gap. (CM Teitzel) A15 Statement shared, no query. - Council Staff Q16 DP 89 — Add Ongoing 2023 Budget Amendments: a. Are we expecting another $1.5m increase in charges from So. County Fire on top of the $4m increases in charges we have incurred over the past two years? Why? b. I don'tsee anyestimated contract expense increases here for police services. Why is an estimate shown here for fire but not police? (CM Teitzel) A16 A: I expect at least a 7% increase in 2024 and another 7% increase in 2025. So yes, if that occurs our 2025 assessment would be about $1.6 million more than our 2023 assessment. B: We have one PD contract currently under negotiation. We have planned for an increase to that contract, but we don't know what will ultimately be agreed to. Once that is settled we will amend the budget to reflect the contract, if necessary. Q17 DP 93 - Annual Utility Overhead Allocation Update What is a "Utility Overhead Allocation"? The item description should be expanded slightly to explain what this item is and its purpose. (CM Teitzel) A17 Certain employees in the general fund do work that benefits the utility funds. We are able to allocate some of the salaries and benefits for those employees to the utilities. This is a standard practice that we have utilized for many years. Q18 DP 96 — Vacancy Rate Adjustment City salary and benefits: this DP shows a very significant decrease of $3.2m in 2024 in salaries and benefits. What assumptions are driving this significant decrease? Does this decrease reflect a decision to leave unfilled a certain number of open positions? How many, and if we aren't filling open positions that have been previously approved by Council, how does this square to the Administration's recommendation to add 5 new FTEs to the 2024 budget? (CM Teitzel) A18 The description given in the DP was very comprehensive. This is a common "best practice" to reduce the salary budget to reflect the fact that we always have vacant positions. Q19 Municipal Court (Cost Center 512.50, 523.30) — Discrepancies between 2023Adopted Budget, 2023 Budget/2023 Estimate and 2024 Budget p. 57 2023 Adopted Budget Book (page 63) shows $778, 099 for Salaries. 2024 Proposed Budget Book (page 57) shows 2023 Budget for Salaries as $1,032,069 and 2023 Estimate for Salaries as $1,310,099. Big change in budget numbers and then actuals — what was that cause? 2024 Budget for Salaries is $904,143 or roughly decrease of $4000 Please explain. (CM Buckshnis) A19 There is no discrepancy. The numbers in the 2024 proposed budget book are different than in the 2023 adopted budget book because of budget amendments that were approved by council during 2024. Those amendments need to be taken into account to understand the differences between 2023 and 2024. :l 3 Packet Pg. 299 7.2.a Council Budget Queries 1.0 Submitted by October 12 and Responded by October 20 Includes some additional questions emailed to Director Turley Q20 Municipal Court (Cost Center 512.50, 523.30) — Discrepancies between 2023 Adopted Budget, 2023 Budget/2023 Estimate and 2024 Budget p. 57 Similar question regarding Benefits: 2023 Adopted Budget Book (page 63) identifies Benefits as $253,204for 2023. 2024 Proposed Budget Book (pg 57) show Benefits 2023 Budget as $307, 696 and 2023 Budget Estimate as $349,604. Big change in budget over actuals, what was the cause? 2024 Budget now $285, 373 or about $65K decrease — what is the cause? (CM Buckshnis) A20 See response to Q19 Mayor/ Council / Administrative Services / Information Technology Q21 City Council — Total Department p. 41 Does the 2024 budget salary number for Council include the recommended Salary Commission increases? The number looks low. (CM Teitzel) A21 No it does not. The Salary commission recommendation was adopted on September 26, less than a week before the proposed budget was shared. We did not have time to make those updates at that late of an hour. We will bring this forward as part of "Staff Proposed Changes" Q22 Mayor —Total Department p. 43 Why are no FTEs being shown in the counts for 2022, 2023 and 2024? (CM Teitzel) A22 On page 43 of my book, it shows 1 FTE for the Mayor and 1 FTE for the Executive Assistant. However, the City Clerk, Deputy City Clerk, Business License Clerk, Senior Office Specialist and Public Disclosure employees were accounted for as if they reported up to the Mayor in previous years. In 2021 those positions were moved into the Administrative Services Department, as you can see in the chart on page 59. Q23 Mayor —Administration - Page 45 2023 Adopted Budget Book (page 49) indicates actual for professional services for 2021 as $415; 2024 Proposed Budget Book (pg 45) shows 2022 Actual ($1034); 2023 Estimate $53,000 and 2024 budget is proposed to be retained at $103,000 and has so since 2021. Why? (CM Buckshnis) A23 This query has been forwarded; response will be provided in next document - Budget Query 2.0. Q24 Mayor —City Attorney — p. 47 The 2023 and 2024 budget costs for city attorney and city prosecutor are the same for both year. The 2024 numbers should reflect the contract increase. (CM Teitzel) A24 We have not done a budget amendment to reflect changes in the contract costs, so the budgeted amount has not changed. Q25 Administrative Services — Finance — p. 61 Professional services for Admin Services -Finance decreases by 87% in 2024. Why? (CM Teitzel) A25 Due to staffing vacancies in 2023 we have had to hire people from temp agencies (e.g. Robert Half). Now that we have those positions filled we do not anticipate needing those outside services in 2024, so we reduced our professional services budget accordingly. Q26 Administrative Services — City Clerk 514.30— p. 63 Professional services forAdmin Services -City Clerk decreases by 26% in 2024. Why? (CM Teitzel) A26 Although 26% sounds like a lot, this is only a reduction of $12,460. City Council approved some extra money in 2023 for the Clerk to hire professional services to help them with archiving, recording and transcribing of historical records. We currently do not anticipate a� •L Q 3 a m a� V m m U) c 0 a 0) a) s w 3 Packet Pg. 300 7.2.a Council Budget Queries 1.0 Submitted by October 12 and Responded by October 20 Includes some additional questions emailed to Director Turley needing those outside services in 2024, so we reduced our professional services budget accordingly. Q27 Administrative Services — Non Departmental — p. 65 The "salary and benefit contra account" shows a negative $3.2m in 2024, but zero in prior years. What is this account and why the significant negative entry for 2024? (CM Teitzel) A27 See response to Q18 Q28 Administrative Services — Non Departmental — p. 65 Fire district contract costs budget values for 2023 and 2024 are identical. Why? (CM Teitzel) A28 The amount actually paid to South County Fire in 2023 included retro payments for 2021 and 2022 of almost $1 million. This required that the 2023 budget amount needed to be big enough to include those extra payments. We carried forward the amount from the 2023 budget to 2024 because we anticipate an increase in our assessment in 2024. We have not received an assessment from South County Fire for 2024 yet so we don't know exactly what to expect yet but maintaining the same 2023 amount should account for the bulk of the increase anticipated in 2024. Q29 Administrative Services — Edmonds Rescue Plan Fund — p. 72 Where did the $1.4m in Fund 142 monies go and what was it used for? (CM Teitzel) A29 The 2023 spending estimate in Fund 142 was $1.7 million, the spending budget in 2024 is $300,000. The change is just the difference in how much we are planning to spend out of Fund 142 in the two years. Police Q30 Police — Total Department p. 79 Why does the 2024 column say "baseline" as the column title? Is it because we expect incremental expenses to come in during 2024? If so, that expense will be unbudgeted. (CM Teitzel) Answer A30 The column heading should say 2024 Budget, not 2024 Baseline. This will be fixed in the adopted budget. Q31 Police — Training p. 91 What is causing the 84% increase in police training? (CM Teitzel) A31 Just to be clear, this is not an increase in police training. The PD has a cost center for "Training" that includes a Training Corporal and an Officer who provide training for all PD employees. The 84% increase you are looking at is in the Salaries line for this cost center. The 2024 budget includes Salaries for two FTEs to provide this training where the previous budget included only one FTE. Q32 DP 7 — Traffic Cameras a. In justification section: why are the six red light cameras proposed to be in operation only 8 months/year? b. Traffic camera infraction revenues are shown at $3.5m from the six new cameras. That works out to $73k/month per camera (based on the 8 month cycle). Assuming an average citation of $200, that works out to 365 citations/month or about 12/day. Is that number reasonable? What do other cities (such as Lynwood) report about average citation revenue/camera? (CM Teitzel) A32 A: We included only 8 months because it takes several months to get the cameras installed and running, we cannot begin the process until the new cameras are approved by Council. [1 d �L d 3 a m a� V 3 m m U) c 0 a 0) d Q: s w 3 Packet Pg. 301 7.2.a Council Budget Queries 1.0 Submitted by October 12 and Responded by October 20 Includes some additional questions emailed to Director Turley B: We based our calculations on the number of citations issued at similar locations in Lynnwood. Although these are estimates, we believe them to be reasonable. Although our calculations include only 6 new camera installations, the PD has identified 12 intersections with a high number of accidents where red light cameras could be installed. Council has the option of adding more than the 6 cameras included in the proposed budget. F111HUNILY Services Q33 Neighborhood City Hall — p 101 It doesn't make sense that benefits for 2024 would increase by 333% but salaries are increasing by 19%. Why the disparity? (CM Teitzel) A33 I believe the person in that department did not elect Dental, Medical, or Vision right away with the City. The person changed their Benefits election, which caused the Benefits expense to increase substantially more than the person's Salary increased. Q34 Community Services — p 102 and DP 8 New Position Grants Specialist a. Is the new grants specialist position intended to handle all grants for all departments? b. Is this position expected to bring in an incremental number of grants that is over and beyond the BAU number of grants we received in 2023, such that the new grant revenue received will "pay for" this position in incremental grant revenue? If so, please provide any analysis that will demonstrate this as well as a plan to track whether this proves to be the case in 2024. c. Can we use an intern or volunteer for this function instead of FTE? A34 Answers A: Yes, this person would work on Grants for many city departments. B: A dedicated Grants writer would have the knowledge and capacity to bring in substantially more Grant revenue to the Citythan what we are currently able to do. I don't know what kind of analysis you would like us to provide for the impact of a new position that the City has never had before. The majority of the Grants that this person would be able to bring in would almost certainly be Capital Grants, which means that we would be able to allocate the costs for this person to the Capital funds. This includes Parks Capital Funds as well as Public Works Capital Funds. C: Grantwriting could be outsourced butto be effective it is a function that needs to be done by someone who has extensive training in all aspects of Grant writing, and also has a deep understanding of the needs and capabilities of the city. It would really need to be a fulltime job for a professional person to be effective. I do not believe that an intern or volunteer would be effective. Q35 Economic Development 558.70 and Cultural Services 573.90 — pg 103-104 What is the status of 2023 Decision Package #50 (2023 Adopted Budget, page 44) which allocated $75,000 to the Community Cultural Plan and $75,000 to the Economic Development Plan? Economic Development (2023 Adopted Budget, pg 110) Professional Services was $187K with +$75K DP approved; 2024 Budget Book (pg 104) reflects this in the 2023 Budget ($255K) and 2023 Estimate ($255K), and shows a proposed decrease to $112K for 2024 Budget. Cultural Services (pg 105) similarly shows the $75,000 for Professional Services in the 2023 Budget and 2023 Estimate, with $0 proposed for 2024. Both of these projects have yet to come to Council so what is the status on these major comprehensive plan elements and why removed or what appears to be removed? 3 Packet Pg. 302 7.2.a Council Budget Queries 1.0 Submitted by October 12 and Responded by October 20 Includes some additional questions emailed to Director Turley (CM Buckshnis) A35 This query has been forwarded, response will be provided in next document - Budget Query 2.0. Q36 DP 13 Edmonds Rescue Plan Fund — Household Support Grant: Let's plan to double this $300k value to $600k and expand the relief beyond residential recipients to include qualifying small business recipients who can demonstrate they are still suffering from the financial impacts of the Covid pandemic. (CM Teitzel) A36 Council is free to make this proposal if they wish. Planning and Development Q37 Climate Action Plan Strategist P. 115 and DP 14 In lieu of an FTE, could this position be covered by an intern, a community volunteer or a contract employee? (CM Teitzel) A37 This query has been forwarded; response will be provided in next document - Budget Query 2.0. Q38 Total Department Professional Services P. 117: Why the $230K decrease in Planning/Development professional services? (CM Teitzel) A38 This query has been forwarded; response will be provided in next document - Budget Query 2.0. Q39 Administration — p. 119 Why the $45k decrease in professional services? A39 This query has been forwarded; response will be provided in next document - Budget Query 2.0. Q40 Planning Division — p. 123 Why the decrease of $183,040 in professional services? A40 This query has been forwarded; response will be provided in next document - Budget Query 2.0. Q41 Planning and Development — Discrepancies between 2023 Adopted Budget, 2023 Budget/2023 Estimate and 2024 Budget 2023 Adopted Budget amounts for Professional Services($1,371,800 for Total Department, pg 123 in 2023 Adopted Budget Book) is not the same as the 2023 Budget ($1,604,184) in the 2024 Proposed Budget p. 117). This is consistent in Administration (p 119), Building Division (p 121) and Planning Division (p 123). While each individual fund is less than $100K so movement of funds can occur internally, the combined total was $232,384 and Council should be apprised as to why the already large professional budgets for this department was increased by an additional $232K? (CM Buckshnis) A41 This query has been forwarded; response will be provided in next document - Budget Query 2.0. Parks and Recreation / Parks Capital Projects Q42 Total Parks and Recreation — p. 131 Why the $186k decrease in professional services? (CM Teize1) A42 This query has been forwarded; response will be provided in next document - Budget Query 2.0. Q43 Parks Discovery Program 571.23 Professional Services - p. 136 Professional services for 571.23 have consistently been low with 2021$0, 2022 Actual $72 and 2023 estimate $100. The $1,300 budget of 2023 was reduced to $1000 but it still seems to be a bit high? Or is speculation to a higher discovery program estimates is because impact from COVID are over? (Buckshnis) A43 This query has been forwarded, response will be provided in next document - Budget Query 2.0. Q44 I Meadowdale Preschool — p. 141 M d .I- Q 3 a r m a� V 3 m m U) c 0 a 0 d s w 3 Packet Pg. 303 7.2.a Council Budget Queries 1.0 Submitted by October 12 and Responded by October 20 Includes some additional questions emailed to Director Turley a. Need to revise narrative if we are keeping Meadowdale Preschool program (and adjust assumptions on pg. 131). b. 2024 budget shows significant drop in salaries below 2023. Why? C. 2024 budget shows significant increase in benefits even though 2024 shows salary decrease. Why? (CM Teizel) A44 This query has been forwarded; response will be provided in next document - Budget Query 2.0. Q45 DP 16 — Sound Salmon Solutions Contract Increase Can we increase this expenditure to $20k/year? It's not a significant amount, but we need the SSS (Students Saving Salmon) support to enable our community volunteers to have maximum impact on local environmental and salmon recovery initiatives. (CM Teizel) A45 Any council member can bring this forward as a DP that they sponsor, if they wish to. Q46 DP 82 — Yost Trails, Bridges and Tennis Court (Fund 125): This project sets aside $154k for Yost Park improvement —including removal of the concrete weir structures in the Shell Creek streambed as stated in the justification for this DP. This issue is a community and Council priority. Can this portion of the work be put out to bid in late 2023 or early 2024 to be completed during the "fish window" (as identified by WDFW) and completed by September 2024? (CM Teizel) A46 This query has been forwarded; response will be provided in next document - Budget Query 2.0. Q47 DP 87 Land Acquisition Support (Fund 126): Parkland acquisition: can we now discontinue this consulting service in view of the extreme budget challenges the city is facing in 2024 and beyond? (CM Teizel) A47 Any council member can bring this forward as a DP that they sponsor, if they wish to. Public Works: Facilities / Water/ Storm / Sewer/ WWTP / Equipment / Building Maint./ Street Capital Q50 Street Fund p. 163 Fund 111 (street fund) shows 89% decrease in 2024. Why? (CM Teitzel) A50 This query has been forwarded; response will be provided in next document - Budget Query 2.0. Q51 Water Fund P. 165 Water fund (421) shows a 91% increase in professional services. Why? (CM Teitzel) A51 This query has been forwarded; response will be provided in next document - Budget Query 2.0. Q52 Building Maintenance — Fund 016 P. 175: The $2m interfund transfer appears to be coming from Fund 106 (building maintenance). Why is this appropriate when we are behind in catching up with deferred maintenance and had this money set aside in the 2023 budget for this purpose? (CM Teitzel) A52 This query has been forwarded; response will be provided in next document - Budget Query 2.0. Q53 Street Construction / Improvement Fund 112P. 177: Big decreases in 2024 in fund 112 street construction repair/maintenance and construction projects. I don't recall any discussion about projects being delayed. Why the big decreases? (CM Teitzel) A53 This query has been forwarded; response will be provided in next document - Budget Query 2.0. Q54 DP 19: Public Works Records Administrator Is this administrative position absolutely essential? In view of the extreme 2024 (and beyond) budget challenges, we need to be extremely cautious about adding new FTEs. (CM Teitzel) A54 This query has been forwarded, response will be provided in next document - Budget Query 2.0. Q55 DP 24: Utility Locator Positions PW FTE d �L Q 3 a r m a� V 3 m m U) c 0 a 0 d s w 3 Packet Pg. 304 7.2.a Council Budget Queries 1.0 Submitted by October 12 and Responded by October 20 Includes some additional questions emailed to Director Turley Is this administrative position absolutely essential? In view of the extreme 2024 (and beyond) budget challenges, we need to be extremely cautious about adding new FTEs. (CM Teitzel) A55 This query has been forwarded, response will be provided in next document - Budget Query 2.0. Q56 DP 40 - Utilities Rate Increase What is this item? Is it simply the increase in electricity bills paid by the city for city -owned facilities? (CM Teizel) A56 This query has been forwarded; response will be provided in next document - Budget Query 2.0. Q57 DP 45 — Sewer Maintenance GIS Worker Is this administrative position absolutely essential? In view of the extreme 2024 (and beyond) budget challenges, we need to be extremely cautious about adding new FTEs. (CM Teitzel) A57 This query has been forwarded, response will be provided in next document - Budget Query 2.0. Q58 DP 59 — Nutrient Removal Project $3M for nutrient removal predesign at the WWTP seems extremely high. Is this number correct? (CM Teitzel) A58 This query has been forwarded; response will be provided in next document - Budget Query 2.0. Q59 DP 61 - 2024 Vehicle Replacements: We have an unusual budget crisis in 2024 and beyond. Replacement costs for 2024 for these vehicles in approx. $475K. Unless these vehicles are damaged, can we extend the life of these vehicles by one year and defer replacement until 2025? (CM Teitzel) Answer A59 Any council member can bring this forward as a DP that they sponsor, if they wish to. This question gets asked seemingly every year, please keep in mind that the departments have already funded the replacement of these vehicles so there would be very little impact to the general fund if these are not replaced. Extending the life of these vehicles by a year only means that we would have to replace twice as many vehicles in the following year, and keeping old vehicles on hand will also result in higher maintenance costs than would be incurred on their replacement vehicles. Q60 DP 64 — Capital Maintenance Projects: Are motorized gates really necessary in 2024 in view of the extreme budget challenges we are facing, especially in the current manual gates have been operating satisfactorily? (CM Teitzel) A60 This query has been forwarded; response will be provided in next document - Budget Query 2.0. Q61 DP 66 - 2024 Transportation Plan Update: Shows total cost for the Transportation Plan update at $406k, yet the 2024 expenditure shows $236k. Was the difference already spent in 2023? (CM Teitzel) A61 This query has been forwarded; response will be provided in next document - Budget Query 2.0. Q62 DP 68 Main Street Overlay from 6t' Ave. to 8t' Ave: Shows the Main St. overlay project (to repair damage caused by the 2023 stormwater project) as a grind/overlay between 6th Ave and 8th Ave. But the stormwater project damaged the paving all the wayto 9th & Main. Why doesn'tthis project extend the paving replacement all the way to 9th? (CM Teitzel) A62 This query has been forwarded, response will be provided in next document - Budget Query 2.0. Q63 DP 75 — 2024 Pedestrian Safety Program This DP funds pedestrian safety improvements throughout the city. With a major increase seen in 2023 of use of the new Civic Field (and with the popularity of the ADA-accessible playground), the 7th Ave. entrance to the park is heavily used, and cars are now parked close 10 3 Packet Pg. 305 7.2.a Council Budget Queries 1.0 Submitted by October 12 and Responded by October 20 Includes some additional questions emailed to Director Turley to the crosswalk —making it difficult to see pedestrians beginning to walk out into the crosswalk. There are now caution signs on poles on the east and west sides of that crosswalk. Can pedestrian -activated RFIB warning signals be installed on those poles to increase street crossing safety there? (CM Teitzel) A63 This query has been forwarded; response will be provided in next document - Budget Query 2.0. Q64 DP 83 Waterfront Emergency Study: In view of the extreme budget challenges the city is facing in 2024 and beyond, can this expenditure be deferred or cancelled altogether and the work sent to a Council -appointed task force (to include the Port, citizens, BNSF, at least one Councilmember, So. County Fire, etc.) to assess options to enhance public safety and emergency response (including, but not limited to, emergency access across the railroad tracks)? (CM Teitzel) A64 Any council member can bring this forward as a DP that they sponsor, if they wish to. Budget Assumptions: Email from CM Teitzel to Director Turley: Here is the just of assumption questions I had prepared for our meeting today —but I forgot to bring the copies when I ran out the door. I think you already answered items 2, 5,6, 8 and 12 on my list with the summary document you gave us today. Can you fill in the assumptions you used for the other items on my list? (CM Teitzel) • Inflation rate for 2024 and the out years • Wage and benefit rate changes • Current and budgeted headcount (and assumptions about budgeted headcount that may go unfilled in 2024) • What are assumptions about Fire/EMS revenue and expense trends? • RFA - have we assumed the transition and if so, when? • What's the assumption on allocation of ARPA funds? • What's the assumption on the "Grant" funds to justify the increase? • "Fines and Forfeitures" increase assumptions that contribute to the very significant amount of increased revenue • Assumptions on land acquisition (e.g. landmark site, etc.) • What assumptions are used re: professional services funding needs in 2024 and beyond? • Debt service trends (particularly with some of the large projects forecast) • What are assumptions about revenue trends (i.e., is a property tax increase or fee increases assumed)? • What are the assumptions about growth in Transportation Impact Fees and Park Impact Fees? • How will the EOY 2023 general fund reserve shortfall be filled? Where is the money coming from to fill the shortfall? • How are budget carryforwards reflected in the budget for 2024 and beyond? • If ARPA and Fund 106 monies are used to fill the budget shortfall in 2024, what are the assumptions about 2025 and beyond to address the shortfall? • Council learned just yesterday (Oct. 4) that the Administration intends to close the Meadowdale Preschool program as a cost -saving measure. Does the budget assume other similar program closures, and if so, what are they? Reply Email from Director Turley: 11 3 Packet Pg. 306 7.2.a Council Budget Queries 1.0 Submitted by October 12 and Responded by October 20 ncludes some additional auestlons emalled to Director I u We don't use a "single" inflation rate for all expenses. Current forecasts that I have seen online are for actual inflation to be around 2.5% fornextyear, as you can see in the handout I gave you I used 3% for most expenditure categories. For Labor I used 6.2% and benefits I used 7%. I've been told that most labor increases should be more in line with inflation for 2024 and 2025, but to be safe and budget conservatively we used a number more than double the current estimates. Headcount numbers are found on page 30 of the proposed budget. We generally have a vacancy rate of maybe 10%, although that number varies widely. For Fire/EMS we are assuming that we will have another significant increase to the fire contract in 2024. The outyears assume thatwe will eitherjoin the RFA effective in 2025 or we will have found another avenue for making up forthe massive general fund contribution that we are making every year. For ARPA we have a decision package asking to transfer $6.5 million of ARPA funds to shore up the General Fund in 2024. The ARPA transfer if approved by council has to be shown as Grant Revenue in the year the transfer is made, hence the one-year increase in Grants revenue. Fines and Forfeitures revenue has a large increase budgeted for 2024 primarily due to the installation of red light cameras, which are being asked for in a decision package. There are no assumptions related to land acquisition included in the strategic outlook. Professional services forthe most part are consistent with prior years, no special assumptions have been made. Debtservice assumptions are made based on our existing debt situation. We have not built in any assumptions based on what may or may not occur with debt. We have no plans at the moment for issuing general fund backed debt. For revenue assumptions, the budget assumes that Council will approve the 1% property tax increase as well as utilize all of the banked capacity. The only other significant revenue assumption comes from our decision package asking for red light camera installation. Everything else assumes regular growth based on current trends. We have incorporated no assumptions about impact fees. Increases to these fees have to be approved by council, and they have little to no impact on the general fund. EOY 2023 shortfall is being remedied by transferring $6.5 million from ARPA and $2 million from the building maintenance fund. Budget carryforwards are accounted for in the following year's budget. By definition a carryforward is expenditure authority from the previous year brought to the current year. Despite what others have said, you can't put a carryforward into a proposed budget. This is a misguided request made by people who don't understand what they are asking about. Debt Service Expenditure (page 16) Emailed question from CM Olson to Director Turley: In strategic outlook Our debt service goes from 300k to 800 k and I can't account for bonding/new revenue that would cause that chan 12 d •L Q 3 a m a� V 3 m m c 0 a 0 d o: s w 3 Packet Pg. 307 7.2.a Council Budget Queries 1.0 Submitted by October 12 and Responded by October 20 ncludes some additional auestlons emalled to Director I u Do we have floating rates and this is existing debt? I know the proposal is based on moving the 2M bonded for deferred maintenance from a different account into the general fund and I would assume the debt service for that would come over but would be much less... Council could use your insights on this. Please advise us when you get a chance. DirectorTurley's reply: This has nothing to do with selling bonds or any kind of new debt that the city is taking on. It is a change in the rules that GASB has created around how we account for leases. Previously most of our leases were treated as operating leases, but now we (all governments) have to treat all leases as though they are a capital item. We have to account for them as if we borrowed moneyand are making payments on the asset, even though we are still just leasing the asset. So the change in that line item has nothing to do with the city's finances, it's just a different way we are now required to account for leases. Employee Headcount Email exchange with CM Buckshnis, HR DirectorJessica Neill-Hoyson and DlrectorTurley From: Turley, Dave To: Buckshnis, Diane Cc: Neill Hoyson, Jessica; Chen, Will; Teitzel, Dave; Peterson, Beckie Subject: RE: Head count of employees Date: Friday, October 20, 2023 7:55:18 AM Good morning, We're doing the bestwe can to answeryour question, I guess if I knewthe purpose ofyourquestion it would be easier to give a good answer. 1) The employees in Streets/Storm, and Water/Sewer/Treatment Plant are paid for by the utilities. In addition, most of the costs in Engineering are charged to the Utilities. As is common practice, we also charge part of the costs of FTEs in other departments to the Utilities. For example we have two FTEs in Administrative Services who work 100% of their time for the Water department doing billing and working with customers, so although those FTEs are counted in Admin Services, their Salaries and Benefits get charged to the Utilities. 2) Yes, page 30 is approved head count. That means that in 2023, the maximum number of FTEs we are authorized to hire is 276.1. To answer your question, all of those positions are not filled. I doubt that we have ever been at a point in time where every position is filled. People leave city employment and are hired into city employment all the time. For example we currently have one FTE in Admin Servicesthat is vacant, the PD has around 9-10 that are vacant, Planning & Development hasvacancies, and there are other vacancies around the city. So no, all of the approved positions are not filled. 13 a� •L Q 3 a V m m c 0 a 0 d s w 3 Packet Pg. 308 7.2.a Council Budget Queries 1.0 Submitted by October 12 and Responded by October 20 ncludes some additional auestlons emalled to Director I u 3) Regarding the parks Trust, this is being administered in Fund 127, and the program that is funded by the Trust has two FTEs and two limited -term employees. I hope this answers your questions. Dave Turley (he/him) Administrative Services Director, City of Edmonds 121 5th Ave N Edmonds WA 98020 Office 425.275.4688 x1293 Cell 425.480.2391 -----Original Message ----- From: Buckshnis, Diane <Diane.Buckshnis@edmondswa.gov> Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2023 2:57 PM To: Turley, Dave <Dave.Turley@edmondswa.gov> Cc: Neill Hoyson, Jessica <Jessica.NeillHoyson@edmondswa.gov>; Chen, Will <will.chen@edmondswa.gov>; Teitzel, Dave <david.teitzel@edmondswa.gov>; Peterson, Beckie <Beckie.Pete rson@Edmondswa.gov> Subject: Re: Head count of employees Good Afternoon I know where the head count is - the question asked is 1) are all employees in utilities paid for by utilities? If so on page 30 - can those public works and water sewer head count all be utility? 2) page 30 is approved head count - are they all filled? 3) 1 know parks have two or three employees that are paid for by the trust So that's the clarity I'm looking for - Thanks in advance Diane Diane Buckshnis > On Oct 19, 2023, at 9:34 AM, Turley, Dave <Dave.Turley@edmondswa.gov> wrote: > We have included a comprehensive list of FTEs per department on page 30 of the budget book. > In addition we have provided a similar count for each department, for example, if you go to page 127 you will see a comprehensive list of FTEs in the Parks Department going back to 2019. > -----Original Message ----- > From: Neill Hoyson, Jessica <Jessica.NeillHoyson@edmondswa.gov> > Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2023 9:26 AM > To: Buckshnis, Diane <Diane.Buckshnis@edmondswa.gov> > Cc: Chen, Will <will.chen@edmondswa.gov>;Teitzel, Dave <david.teitzel@edmondswa.gov>; Turley, Dave <Dave.Turley@edmondswa.gov> > Subject: RE: Head count of employees 14 d •L Q 3 a m a� V m m c 0 a 0 a) o: s w 3 Packet Pg. 309 7.2.a Council Budget Queries 1.0 Submitted by October 12 and Responded by October 20 Includes some additional questions emailed to Director I urley > Good morning Diane, > On the HR side, the number of employees is somewhat fluid at any given time. So I could look at a single point in time and compare it to another to tell you the employee count. If you want to know the increase in positions from one year to the next (approved and budgeted) that would be Dave. I believe he could do a comparison between the 2022 and 2023 budgets. He would also be able to tell you the funding source. You are correct that that information is not tracked in my department. > Let me know if you would like a point in time look at employee counts. > Best, > Jessica > Jessica Neill Hoyson (she/her), SPHR, CLRP Director of Human Resources City of Edmonds >> -----Original Message ----- > From: Buckshnis, Diane <Diane.Buckshnis@edmondswa.gov> > Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2023 7:49 AM > To: Neill Hoyson, Jessica <Jessica.NeillHoyson@edmondswa.gov> > Cc: Chen, Will <will.chen@edmondswa.gov>; Teitzel, Dave <david.teitzel@edmondswa.gov> > Subject: Head count of employees > Good morning Jessica > Do you have the detail of the increased employees in 2023 and how many were for classified to be paid for by the enterprise funds? > Does your department keep track of that detail citywide? Like I know that a couple of park and rec employees are funded through the Geofitti Trust and it seems to me, that would not be part of your department's responsibility as to what employees are paid through general fund and those from other sources. > A couple of folks asked me for this information and I can determine that from the budget. > Thanks in advance > Diane 15 Packet Pg. 310 7.2.b Budget Queries 2.0 New Queries Submitted by October 21, 2023, Reponses by Staff provided by November 2 Some remaining Queries from 1.0 Includes some CM emails sent directly to staff •4 Budget Queries Q65 Strategic Outlook (Page 16): a. Property tax drop from 2024to 2025 by more than $4 million. If this drop is assuming the City of Edmonds is no longer getting property tax revenue related to Fire/EMS, this is premature assumption because the outcome depends on voter approval. b. Grants shows $1,960,929 in 2023 and $6,541,100 in 2024. If this is ARPA fund being repurposed forGeneral Fund usages, does afiscal emergency need to be declared by the administration for this to happen? What will happen to Ordinance No. 4289 with the ARPA fund designated accounts A, B, C, E, F, G, and H? c. Please provide an ARPA fund update as of October 2023 that shows how much ARPA has been spent and how much ARPA fund is available to be spent and transferred to General Fund. d. Transfers increase from $97,726 in 2023 to $2,011,701 in 2024. If this is moving fund from the Building Maintenance Fund into General Fund, this decision from the administration to further defer and delay the already deferred maintenance will result much bigger loss forthe city and the community we serve. The library flooding is an example. e. The Service expenditure drop from $24,703,508 in 2024 to $13,445,000 in 2025. If this is with the assumption that Edmonds will be joining RFA, this is premature because the outcome depends on voters' approval. Out -years budget need to be developed with the assumption that Edmonds will continue to contract with South County Fire until voters approve to join RFA. f. Debt Service expenditure increase from $323,590 in 2023 to $801,400 in 2024 and in the $800k in the out years. What is driving this Debt Service increase? g. The estimated General Fund ending balance will be $6,664,594, which is $2,2 million below the minimum reserve requirement of $8,914,686. What is the plan to replenish the General Fund Reserve? h. Capital expenditure will be eliminated starting 2024. What is that mean? (CM Chen) A65 A: This is an assumption in 2025, not 2024. It is appropriate to include plans in the forecast years. B: No, a fiscal emergency does not need to be declared. The spending in the accounts mentioned will be stopped, as the ARPA funds will no longer be available for those projects. D: OK E: OK F: A change in accounting practice driven by GASB 87. GASB.ORG has detailed information. G: The plan is to transfer money from the ARPA and Bldg Maint funds to the General Fund. H: There are currently no capital expenditures planned in the General Fund in those years. Q66 Police (Page 77) The number of FTE in department 41 remains the same as 83.5 from 2023 to 2024, however, the departmental expenditure increase from $13,154,284 in 2023 to $17,654,872 in 2024, which is an increase of $4.5 million. Why? (CM Chen) m Packet Pg. 311 7.2.b Budget Queries 2.0 New Queries Submitted by October 21, 2023, Reponses by Staff provided by November 2 Some remaining Queries from 1.0 Includes some CM emails sent directly to staff A66 A: FTEs increased in 2023. Many of those were not added early in the yearso a lot of the costs will only be partially incurred in 2023. In 2024 the budget assumes that those positions will be staffed for the entire year. Q67 Landmark 99 and Green Loop projects costs The Landmark 99 project and the Green Loop project costs continue to occur as the administration is marching on with them, yet no evidence of any budget or CIP/CFP has been documented in the proposed budget. Why? (CM Chen) A67 A: Council authorized the Option to Purchase for Landmark 99, requiring staff to explore the feasibility of this potential development partnership. If the Council authorizes the purchase and sale agreement, then we would update the CIP/CFP accordingly next year. The Edmonds Greenway Loop is supported by a strong policy framework around safe and complete streets. It is in a conceptual design stage, which could support a grant application. If awarded funding, we would update the CIP/CFP accordingly and get Council budget authorization at that time. Q68 Hwy 99 Police Substation No fund has been proposed in the 2024 budget. This will be an budget amendment from the City Council as this is one of the Council priorities in 2024. (CM Chen) A68 OK Q69 Land Acquisition Support (DP 87) a. The city is not in the business of buying and selling land. Based on prior two years' experience, this expenditure is not justified. The only success is the Mee Property, which the property owner approaches the city as a willing seller. I prefer hiring the traditional Real Estate Agent who represents the city and being paid at closing. Is there any concern for eliminating this Land Acquisition Support contractor? (CM Chen) A69 All cities own, purchase and sell land. The 2022 Parks, Recreation & Open Space, adopted by Council, has recommendations and goals and objectives to acquire three new park properties. DP #87 is spending authority to conduct due diligence work to purchase property such as appraisals, title reports, site surveys and environmental assessments, and drafting and reviewing legal documents such as Purchase and Sale Agreements, all of which are required to complete legal transactions. A traditional Real Estate Agent does not perform these services, they are only a salesman who charge a commission on the selling price (the higher the purchase price, the higher the commission). Only a portion of this spending authority could be used for a real estate consultant. This DP is NOT approving the current professional services agreement with the real estate consultant. That will require an independent Council review and authorization at another time if those professional services are to continue. Even if the real estate consultant (Land Acquistion Support contractor) services are not continued, there are still ongoing costs to vet potential land acquisitions. Also, this is capital funding and comes from REET and therefore, does not affect the General Fund balance. Q70 General Fund Balance Analysis (Page 17) a. Where are the General Fund Reserve dollars physically being deposited at? How doesthe administration, the city council and the public knowwhen the General Fund Reserve is being used to fund day-to-day operations in a timely manner? b. Where are the Contingency Fund Reserve dollars physically being deposited at? How does the administration, the city council and the public know when the Contingency Fund Reserve is being used to fund day-to-day operations in a timely manner? m Packet Pg. 312 7.2.b Budget Queries 2.0 New Queries Submitted by October 21, 2023, Reponses by Staff provided by November 2 Some remaining Queries from 1.0 Includes some CM emails sent directly to staff (CM Chen) A70 A and B: This information is detailed on the "Investment Portfolio Summary" in the monthly financial report. Q71 DP 7 — Red Light Cameras a) Please provide any data regarding the 12 intersections proposed for red light cameras (accident rates, traffic counts, red light violations issued, etc) that qualified those intersections as the most dangerous in the city. b) Please provide any comparative data from other cities used to estimate the number of potential citations the Edmonds cameras may generate (including traffic volumes at the comparator intersections relative to the 12 Edmonds intersections). c) Please confirm the six cameras will be in operation by April 2024. d) Please provide any data showing the red light cameras lead to a measurable decrease in the number of accidents at intersections. (CM Teitzel) A71 A: (10/25/23 email from Chief Bennett addresses this issue, and was forwarded to Council) Hi all - I spoke with Assistant Chief Sniffen this morning and he will be answering to the best of his ability the questions posed below. From my part, I can saythatthe intersections proposed included the six highest red light accident intersections, and then the six known Highway 99 intersections in Edmonds. 1. Information todayfrom Vera, the company doingthe analysis, is thatthe intersection of Highway99 and 244t" is shared with Shoreline, and the infrastructure is actually in Shoreline/King County, not Edmonds, although we do take accidents there. The intersection at SR 104 and Dayton, although in the city, is controlled by Washington State D.O.T (it is nearthe ferry and at a state route). Those two intersections, therefore, do not appearto be viable and will be removed from analysis. The data used for analysis from VERA is an algorithm from nearbystreets, and Bertrand will be providing them with more accurate Edmonds specific counts of traffic for a better analysis of accurate traffic counts. 2. Attached is the information I received from Lynnwood related to comparative data. Keeping in mind that the traffic counts, number of traffic lanes, businesses atthe intersection, etc., will impact driver behavior related to specific locations. 3. Depending on how the traffic algorithm plays out with VERA, we will know how many cameras will beviable. The information I had was thatwewere goingto startwith six cameras for red-light, and then expand from there if necessary and prudent (from our internal analysis, we see eight cameras at three of the main accident intersections that would be important to set m Packet Pg. 313 7.2.b Budget Queries 2.0 New Queries Submitted by October 21, 2023, Reponses by Staff provided by November 2 Some remaining Queries from 1.0 ncludes some CM emails sent directly to statt up initially- Highway99 and 220th-four cameras, Highway99 and 2361" - two cameras, and SR 104 and 100th-two cameras). The city of Kent just put up 23 red light cameras, and the total process was seven months. With six cameras, I am not sure the timeline, at least it is not 23 cameras0. Again, I do not have exact dates, but if the ordinance was signed in October, you could most likely expect cameras sometime in April/May. Remember too, that the first 30 days are traffic warnings for any camera system. Assistant Chief Sniffen is in contact with VERA mobility (the vendor that we have for school zone cameras who would also be responsible for red-light cameras and can give you additional information as it comes. Please let me know if you have any additional questions. Thanks, Michelle Michelle D. Bennett Chief of Police Edmonds Police Department B: (Same 10/25 email included attachments of Lynnwood annual report, was forwarded to Council.) C: Cameras have to be approved by Council before work can begin to install them. The sooner Council approves these cameras, the sooner they will be installed. D: The definitive studies that I have seen come to the conclusion that "Right -Angle Crashes" decrease but at the same time "Rear End Crashes" may increase. Right Angle Crashes are higher impact and cause much more expensive damage and much more serious injuries than Rear End Crashes. Even if rear -end crashes increase somewhat, the overall net effect is positive and the cameras result in a measurable decrease in the number and severity of accidents at intersections. The positive impact of reducing Right Angle Crashes is more than offset by the increase in Rear End Crashes, so there is still a clear positive overall benefit to installing the cameras. Overall, accidents are reduced, and injuries sustained in accidents are reduced, as a result of installing cameras. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/05049/ https://www.cdc.gov/transportationsafety/calculator/factsheet/redlight.htmI https://www.iihs.org/topics/red-light-running Q72 I Labor Inflation Assumptions You made a good point yesterday about being conservative with the assumptions about increases in labor expenses, since it is betterto under run the expense forecast than over run it. These assumptions have a big effect on the outlook for 2024 and beyond, and I'm now wondering if we could scale down the assumption and still be conservative. Two questions: 1. what labor inflation assumptions have other local cities used in their proposed 2024 budgets? al m Packet Pg. 314 7.2.b Budget Queries 2.0 New Queries Submitted by October 21, 2023, Reponses by Staff provided by November 2 Some remaining Queries from 1.0 Includes some CM emails sent directly to staff 2. Ifwe dialed down the assumption percentages by 1% across the board (i.e., from 7% to 6%) but left everything else in your proposed budget unchanged, what effect would that have on the net? Is that something you could run in the model without too much work? (CM Teitzel) A72 I don't have access to the labor rate inflation assumptions that other cities have used in their proposed budgets, so I can't really answer that question. Plus, keep in mind that many of our neighbors are in the middle of a biennium, so many of them are not preparing a budget this fall. This is their off year. I did a quick adjustment to the Labor and the Benefits rows for 2025, 2026, 2027 and 2028, reducing the inflation assumption by 1% as you requested, for each year. Total expenses for the four years become $50,079,000, $52,223,000, $54,197,000 and $56,250,000. The effect on ending fund balance was to increase as follows: 2025 $304,000 2026 $946,000 2027 $1, 959, 000 2028 $3,377,000 Keep in mind that this has a cumulative effect. So at the end of 2028 the projected fund balance would be $27,626,000 ratherthan $24,249,000, which is the difference of $3, 377, 000. Q73 Grant Manager— DP 8 In Thursday's budget workshop, Neil asked me to send you in writing my question about the proposed Grant Manager position (referenced in DP #8). The premise is that, if Council approvesthis new FTE, the position will bring in enough newgrant moneyto more than cover the cost of the position. Can you (or whichever Director is sponsoring this DP) provide any analysis supporting this premise as well as any proposed incremental grant revenue tracking plan for 2024 to demonstrate that the actual grant revenue the city receives in 2024 exceeds BAU grant revenue? (CM Teitzel) A73 The estimated cost forthis position is less than $200K, the person should be able to bring in more than that in incremental grant revenue. That's a pretty low bar. It is likely that the money the person brings in would be related to capital projects, which means we would be able to allocate their costs to those projects, so although this person is initially being budgeted in the generalfund, their costswould ultimately be charged to capital funds outside of the generalfund. This is true regardless of whether they were ultimately Parks projects or Public Works projects. Budget Queries 1.0 Forwarded to Budget Query 2.0 m Packet Pg. 315 7.2.b Budget Queries 2.0 New Queries Submitted by October 21, 2023, Reponses by Staff provided by November 2 Some remaining Queries from 1.0 Includes some CM emails sent directly to staff Q3 Business Facade Improvements Where did the $300k in ARPA funding go that was earmarked for small business fagade improvements? (CM Teitzel) 3 This query has been forwarded; response will be provided in next document - Budget Query 3.0. Q4 Hwy 99 Police Substation The 2024 Council priority of establishing a Highway 99 police substation is not reflected in the budget. When will that facility be incorporated? (CM Teitzel) 4 This queryhas been forwarded; response will be provided in next document - Budget Query 3.0. Q9 Change in Ending Fund Balance — All Funds p. 22 What is causing the draw down in enterprise fund balances (are rates not covering expenses?) (CM Teitzel) 9 This query has been forwarded; response will be provided in next document - Budget Query 3.0. Q23 Mayor —Administration - Page 45 023 Adopted Budget Book (page 49 indicates actual for professional services for 2021 as $415; 2024 Proposed Budget Book (pg 45) shows 2022 Actual ($1034); 2023 Estimate $53,000 and 2024 budget is proposed to be retained at $103,000 and has so since 2021. Why? (CM Buckshnis) 23 This is related to changes to the REDI manager position. Q35 Economic Development 558.70 and Cultural Services 573.90 — pg 103-104 What is the status of 2023 Decision Package #50 (2023 Adopted Budget, page 44) which allocated $75,000 to the Community Cultural Plan and $75,000 to the Economic Development Plan? Economic Development (2023 Adopted Budget, pg 110) Professional Services was $187K with +$75K DP approved; 2024 Budget Book (pg 104) reflects this in the 2023 Budget ($255K) and 2023 Estimate ($255K), and shows a proposed decrease to $112K for 2024 Budget. Cultural Services (pg 105) similarly shows the $75,000for Professional Services in the 2023 Budget and 2023 Estimate, with $0 proposed for 2024. Both of these projects have yet to come to Council so what is the status on these major comprehensive plan elements and why removed or what appears to be removed? (CM Buckshnis) 35 This query has been forwarded; response will be provided in next document - Budget Query 3.0. Q37 Climate Action Plan Strategist P. 115 and DP 14 In lieu of an FTE, could this position be covered by an intern, a community volunteer or a contract employee? (CM Teitzel) 37 This query has been forwarded; response will be provided in next document - Budget Query 3.0. Q38 rotal Department Professional Services P. 117: Why the $230K decrease in Planning/Development professional services? (CM Teitzel) 38 There were some errors made when putting together the Professional Services budget in P&D. This was just recently discovered, we are working on correcting this. More to come. Q39 Administration — p. 119 Why the $45k decrease in professional services? 11 m Packet Pg. 316 7.2.b Budget Queries 2.0 New Queries Submitted by October 21, 2023, Reponses by Staff provided by November 2 Some remaining Queries from 1.0 Includes some CM emails sent directly to staff A39 There were some errors made when putting together the Professional Services budget in P&D. This was just recently discovered, we are working on correcting this. More to come. Q40 Planning Division — p. 123 Why the decrease of $183,040 in professional services? A40 There were some errors made when putting together the Professional Services budget in P&D. This was just recently discovered, we are working on correcting this. More to come. Q41 Planning and Development — Discrepancies between 2023 Adopted Budget, 2023 Budget/2023 Estimate and 2024 Budget 2023 Adopted Budget amounts for Professional Services ($1,371,800 for Total Department, pg 123 in 2023 Adopted Budget Book) is not the same as the 2023 Budget ($1,604,184) in the 2024 Proposed Budget p. 117). This is consistent in Administration (p 119), Building Division (p 121) and Planning Division (p 123). While each individual fund is less than $100K so movement of funds can occur internally, the combined total was $232,384 and Council should be apprised as to why the already large professional budgets for this department was increased by an additional $232K? (CM Buckshnis) A41 There were some errors made when putting together the Professional Services budget in P&D. This was just recently discovered, we are working on correcting this. More to come. Parks and Recreation / Parks Capital Projects Q42 Total Parks and Recreation — p. 131 Why the $186k decrease in professional services? (CM Teizel) A42 The decrease is related to recreational programming and the Shell Creek Study. Recreational programming: when a class or program is not offered then we do not need to pay for the instructors/organizer to run it. In this case Sunset Bay Beach Camp will doing their own registration thusthere will be a decrease in both revenue and professional service expenses. In addition, the funding for a study of Shell Creek has been removed and submitted as a decision package. Q43 Parks Discovery Program 571.23 Professional Services - p. 136 Professional services for 571.23 have consistently been low with 2021$0, 2022 Actual $72 and 2023 estimate $100. The $1,300 budget of 2023 was reduced to $1000 but it still seems to be a bit high? Or is speculation to a higher discovery program estimates is because impact from COVID are over? (Buckshnis) A43 Correct, now that COVID is over, and people are returning to a level of activity in many ways greaterthan the pre-pandemictimeswe hold this expenditure authority to be able to augment / supplement environmental/outdoor educational opportunities. If it is not needed, we don't spend it but appreciate having the small flexibility to be able to capitalize on potential opportunities. Q44 Meadowdale Preschool — p. 141 a. Need to revise narrative if we are keeping Meadowdale Preschool program (and adjust assumptions on pg. 131). b. 2024 budget shows significant drop in salaries below 2023. Why? C. 2024 budget shows significant increase in benefits even though 2024 shows salary decrease. Why? (CM Teizel) m Packet Pg. 317 7.2.b Budget Queries 2.0 New Queries Submitted by October 21, 2023, Reponses by Staff provided by November 2 Some remaining Queries from 1.0 Includes some CM emails sent directly to staff 44 a. The proposed 2024 budget does not include the Meadowdale Preschool program after July 2024. To re -instate the program and related funding, a new decision package is needed to authorize the program expenditures. b. 2023 budget includes a "full year" of programming (January —June and September — December), the 2024 budget includes the program expenditures only forJanuary— June. (Programming officially stopping at end of 2023-2024 school year). c. The newly approved full benefits for part time employees significantly increased the overall amount of benefit for the program expenditures. In addition, we budget assuming employees will take advantage of the benefit options. If an employee chooses to decline those opportunities than the actual amount will be below the budgeted amount. Q46 DP 82 — Yost Trails, Bridges and Tennis Court (Fund 125): This project sets aside $154k for Yost Park improvement —including removal of the concrete weir structures in the Shell Creek streambed as stated in the justification for this DP. This issue is a community and Council priority. Can this portion of the work be put out to bid in late 2023 or early 2024 to be completed during the "fish window" (as identified by WDFW) and completed by September 2024? (CM Teizel) 46 Although the weir removal may qualify as work described in DP #82, staff's professional opinion is it may not be the highest priority project for park trail users' accessibility and environmental stream health. There are other issues upstream from the weir including excessive erosion and scouring, trails adjacent to the stream that are eroding directly into Shell Creek and bridge deterioration and failures that also need to be addressed. Public Works: Facilities / Water/ Storm / Sewer/ WWTP / Equipment / Building Maint./ Street Capital Q50 Street Fund p. 163 Fund 111 (street fund) shows 89% decrease in 2024. Why? (CM Teitzel) 50 This ending balance estimate is decreasing because they have been outspendingtheirrevenues or the last few years. They need to either increase revenues or reduce spending to get their fund balance back up. Q51 Water Fund P. 165 Water fund (421) shows a 91% increase in professional services. Why? (CM Teitzel) 51 New projects like the reservoir work will require additional professional services. Q52 Building Maintenance — Fund 016 P. 175: The $2m interfund transfer appears to becoming from Fund 106 (building maintenance). Why is this appropriate when we are behind in catching up with deferred maintenance and had this money set aside in the 2023 budget for this purpose? (CM Teitzel) 52 That is a subjective question, butwe have had difficulty in finding the bandwidth to begin these large projects. There is still roughly $21VI left in the fund that will be available when we create he bandwidth. Q53 Street Construction / Improvement Fund 112P. 177: Big decreases in 2024 in fund 112 street construction repair/maintenance and construction projects. I don't recall any discussion about projects being delayed. Why the big decreases? (CM Teitzel) Ei m Packet Pg. 318 7.2.b Budget Queries 2.0 New Queries Submitted by October 21, 2023, Reponses by Staff provided by November 2 Some remaining Queries from 1.0 Includes some CM emails sent directly to staff 53 The 2023 Budget included construction projects funded with grants such as Hwy 99 Revitalization Project, 76th Ave Overlay and Citywide Bikelane Project. Transportation projects with grant funding in 2024 are related to design and right of way acquisition. Q54 DP 19: Public Works Records Administrator Is this administrative position absolutely essential? In view of the extreme 2024 (and beyond) budget challenges, we need to be extremely cautious about adding new FTEs. (CM Teitzel) 54 In myopinion, yes, unlessyou want usto continue to waste ourtime performing research while we can be moving to the 21,, century and using better tools to improve our efficiency. At this point we have to go through thousands of paper files that are not well organized to complete research for our projects. The position is necessary to convert thousands of records to an electronic format, organize all the files and establish a process for all new documents to improve our efficiency, and free time for the project managers and engineers in actual management and design of projects. The position is funded with Enterprise funds. Q55 DP 24: Utility Locator Positions PW FTE Is this administrative position absolutely essential? In view of the extreme 2024 (and beyond) budget challenges, we need to be extremely cautious about adding new FTEs. (CM Teitzel) 55 This position is an operational improvement that will result in savings of time, and equipment used to cover all underground utilities locate requests. Right now, we use three persons to cover all requests, it takes three trips with three vehicles and locate equipment and it takes hose individuals out of performing maintenance and repair tasks, it is inefficient, hard to coordinate and reduces our ability to perform normal maintenance and operations tasks. This position is covered by enterprise funds and it will improve our overall efficiency, It will result in increased maintenance ability and improve our customer service with a responsive, organized and efficient completion of locate requests. Q56 DP 40 - Utilities Rate Increase What is this item? Is it simply the increase in electricity bills paid by the city for city -owned facilities? (CM Teizel) 56 That's correct, the costs we pay for utilities increases due to inflation. This is the amount they estimate for this particular Stormwater BARS account. Q57 DP 45 — Sewer Maintenance GIS Worker Is this administrative position absolutely essential? In view of the extreme 2024 (and beyond) budget challenges, we need to be extremely cautious about adding new FTEs. (CM Teitzel) 57 This supports both sewer and water so yes Seriously, it is critical as part of our asset management program, we have a complex utility system with very old infrastructure, and our ability to operate and maintain will be improved by he work this position will do, it improves our GIS system and improves our ability to plan both private and public projects in the ROW, it also directly impacts our resilience by having better information about our infrastructure and able to make better decisions on where to focus our limited maintenance, and replacement funds. Q58 DP 59 — Nutrient Removal Project $31VI for nutrient removal predesign at the WWTP seems extremely high. Is this number correct? (CM Teitzel) 58 This is a rough and probably conservative estimate, the actual cost could be more. Q59 DP 61 - 2024 Vehicle Replacements: m Packet Pg. 319 7.2.b Budget Queries 2.0 New Queries Submitted by October 21, 2023, Reponses by Staff provided by November 2 Some remaining Queries from 1.0 Includes some CM emails sent directly to staff We have an unusual budget crisis in 2024 and beyond. Replacement costs for 2024 for these vehicles in approx. $475K. Unless these vehicles are damaged, can we extend the life of these vehicles by one year and defer replacement until 2025? (CM Teitzel) Answer 59 Any council member can bring this forward as a DP that they sponsor, if they wish to. This question gets asked seemingly every year, please keep in mind that the departments have already funded the replacement of these vehicles so there would be very little impact to the general fund if these are not replaced. Extending the life of these vehicles by a year only means that we would have to replace twice as many vehicles in the following year, and keeping old vehicles on hand will also result in higher maintenance costs than would be incurred on their replacement vehicles. Q60 DP 64 — Capital Maintenance Projects: Are motorized gates really necessary in 2024 in view of the extreme budget challenges we are facing, especially in the current manual gates have been operating satisfactorily? (CM Teitzel) 60 Yes, this is a safety, security and operational improvement at the PW yard, right now after hours the police department and on -call personnel have to manually lock and unlock the gates, in an emergency they have to drive off without locking the gates leaving the yard open or lock he gates and lose valuable time to respond. Q61 DP 66 - 2024 Transportation Plan Update: Shows total cost for the Transportation Plan update at $406k, yet the 2024 expenditure shows $236k. Was the difference already spent in 2023? (CM Teitzel) 61 The budget numbers are estimated in early July. The estimated expenditure for 2023 was $170k. Actual expenditure thru September is —$68K. Q62 DP 68 Main Street Overlay from 6=h Ave. to 8=h Ave: Shows the Main St. overlay project (to repair damage caused by the 2023 stormwater project) as a grind/overlay between 6th Ave and 8th Ave. But the stormwater project damaged the paving all the way to 9th & Main. Why doesn't this project extend the paving replacement all he way to 9th? (CM Teitzel) 62 Previously answered in Question #5 in the CIP/CFP response sent out in early October. Q63 DP 75 — 2024 Pedestrian Safety Program This DP funds pedestrian safety improvements throughout the city. With a major increase seen in 2023 of use of the new Civic Field (and with the popularity of the ADA-accessible playground), he 7th Ave. entrance to the park is heavily used, and cars are now parked close to the crosswalk —making it difficult to see pedestrians beginning to walk out into the crosswalk. There are now caution signs on poles on the east and west sides of that crosswalk. Can pedestrian -activated RFIBwarning signals be installed on those poles to increase street crossing safety there? (CM Teitzel) 63 New poles would be required. 10 m Packet Pg. 320 7.3 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 11/6/2023 Written Public Comments Staff Lead: City Council Department: City Council Preparer: Beckie Peterson Background/History N/A Staff Recommendation Acknowledge receipt of written public comments. Narrative Public comments submitted to the web form for public comments <https://www.edmondswa.gov/publiccomment> between October 19, 2023 and November 1, 2023. Attachments: Public Comments November 6, 2023 Packet Pg. 321 Edmonds City Council Public Comments — November 6, 2023 7.3.a Submitted on: 10/20/2023 3:33:37 AM Name: Barbara Steller City of Residence: Edmonds Agenda Topic: Climate Action Plan Manager Comments: Edmonds needs a Climate Action Manager to be sure the 2023 Climate Action Plan meets its stated goals. This position is crucial to monitor the plan's progress and as a contact for citizens who wish to be part of the city's climate solutions. Thank you, Barbara Steller Submitted on: 10/24/2023 4:09:34 PM Name: jenny steinhagen City of Residence: EDMONDS Agenda Topic: Homeless Camping Ban Comments: I just saw my first homeless tent in Edmonds, right next door to the Francis Anderson Center/Edmonds Library where kids go for ballet, soccer, etc. and to read books and get homework help It is unacceptable for anyone to have to share the sidewalk with a homeless tent - especially next to a facility that attracts kids. Please do not let Edmonds be the new congregate for homeless encampments. Please remove tents swiftly if the individuals inside of them do not want to accept shelter or help. This cannot turn into the scourge like by the UW 15 freeway exits. Submitted on: 10/24/2023 5:46:22 PM Name: Lora Hein City of Residence: Edmonds Agenda Topic: Climate Action Manager imperative Comments: Council Members, I am commenting to urge you to include a dedicated Climate Manager position in the 2024 budget. To make progress with the Climate Action Plan we need a Climate Action Manager. Without a Climate Action Manager we are falling behind in meeting necessary goals. Hiring a grants manager would be a fiscally responsible way to provide for both with no harm to the city's financial situation. This expense will only become greater in the future if we do not act now. We have lost time by not following through with the 2010 Climate Action Plan. Edmonds has citizens and community volunteers ready and willing to do their part and they can be more effective with the support of a Climate Action Manager. The time to act is now. We cannot put this off. Please keep the impact on not only our future but the future of the children growing up in Edmonds now in mind when you make this decision. Thank you Submitted on: 10/26/2023 1:54:41 PM Name: Will Magnuson City of Residence: Edmonds Packet Pg. 322 7.3.a Edmonds City Council Public Comments — November 6, 2023 Agenda Topic: BD zone exemption Comments: Greetings Council, I urge the city council to move forward with the elimination of the 12,000 square -foot minimum lot size and 120 ft building width as requirements for the mandatory provision of public open space in new BD zone development projects. These are the times that developers may seize market advantage by securing lots including properties under 12,000 sf ahead of any BD development code guideline revisions and/or prior to the comprehensive code update. The result of inaction will essentially be approving more properties with reduced public benefit and open space in our BD zones. The arbitrary minimum requirements of 12,000 sf lot or building width of 120 ft provision in the BD ordinance which is listed as an exception under section 10 item E.1 should be eliminated. Please take action immediately. Thank you, Will Magnuson Edmonds Submitted on: 10/29/2023 10:05:33 PM Name: Steven Cristol City of Residence: Edmonds Agenda Topic: Climate Action Manager - City of Edmonds Comments: Hello. I volunteer on the Mayor's Climate Protection Committee (CPC), but as an Edmonds resident and business I'm commenting here on the City's consideration of hiring a Climate Action Manager dedicated to facilitating implementation of the updated and recently adopted Climate Action Plan (CAP). To honor our commitments in the CAP, there are a multitude of initiatives that can't possibly be managed effectively, or in a timely fashion, by current City staff given their other responsibilities - even with volunteer support from the CPC. A dedicated, experienced manager is essential. And if approved, it will be tempting with City budget challenges to hire a junior person, perhaps even just part-time. This would be a serious mistake if the City wants the CAP to be more than just words on paper. The action required now is multifaceted with many moving parts involving multiple City departments and stakeholders. It requires aggressive management with discipline that can only come from years of program management experience combined with very substantial climate knowledge and communication skills. I would encourage anyone who doubts the pressing need for a full-time, experienced climate action manager to carefully revisit the CAP and imagine how currently burdened City staff -- or even a junior or part-time hire -- could possibly push these initiatives forward to meet CAP goals, strategically prioritizing the many tasks at hand while optimizing coordination between City departments, the CPC, other Edmonds groups working on climate -related issues, and with the requisite attention to equity. Furthermore, beyond CAP implementation, which is primarily focused on mitigating greenhouse gas emissions, we must also accelerate development of climate adaptation strategies that the City is currently lacking. This is why other small coastal cities have insisted on hiring full-time for this position with solid academic credentials in environmental science and substantial management experience, typically a bare minimum of 5-7 years. Here is an excerpt, for example, of the Climate Action Manager job description for Santa Cruz, CA (pop. 61,000): "This position requires skills in analytics, public outreach and knowledge of environmental science and policies related to climate change and greenhouse gas emissions. Strong writing, and public speaking skills as well as management w r Q E E 0 U t2 3 a m r w Packet Pg. 323 7.3.a Edmonds City Council Public Comments — November 6, 2023 skills, including managing internal and external stakeholders, change management, project planning, budgeting, and project delivery are necessary for success in this job." They ultimately hired a Ph.D. in Environmental Science with 15+ years experience. While we may not get that level of credentials, I urge you to support hiring an experienced full-time Climate Action Manager. Thank you. c d E E 0 U 2 a c m e Packet Pg. 324 8.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 11/6/2023 Approval of Special Meeting Minutes October 17, 2023 Staff Lead: Council Department: City Clerk's Office Preparer: Scott Passey Background/History N/A Recommendation Approval of Council Meeting minutes as part of the Consent Agenda. Narrative Council meeting minutes are attached. Attachments: 20231017 Special Meeting Packet Pg. 325 8.1.a EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES DRAFT MINUTES October 17, 2023 ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Mike Nelson, Mayor Neil Tibbott, Council President Vivian Olson, Councilmember Will Chen, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember Susan Paine, Councilmember Dave Teitzel, Councilmember Jenna Nand, Councilmember 1. CALL TO ORDER STAFF PRESENT Oscar Antillon, Public Works Director Rob English, City Engineer Mike De Lilla, Senior Utilities Engineer Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Scott Passey, City Clerk Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator The special Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 6 p.m. by Mayor Nelson in the Council Chambers, 250 5' Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually. 2. ROLL CALL City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present. 3. COUNCIL BUSINESS 1. UTILITY RATE STUDY AND ADOPTION OF A UTILITY RATE ORDINANCE Public Works Director Oscar Antillon introduced Chris Gonzalez, Principal, FCS Group. Mr. Antillon advised the utility rate study has been discussed with individual and small groups of councilmembers over the last few weeks. The City's Water/Sewer Manager, Brett Gehrke has relayed all the utilities in the region are interested in ensuring utilities maintain the health of the community and are safe and resilient. The goal of the utility rate study is to ensure the utilities are self-supporting and have adequate resources to operate and invest in capital needs. [Due to technical difficulties, Mr. Gonzalez's PowerPoint was not displayed in Council Chambers. The PowerPoint was provided in the council packet.] Mr. Gonzalez reviewed: • Why Are We Doing This? o City utilities are enterprise funds that need to be self-sufficient ■ Revenues need to cover costs in the long run o City utilities have substantial infrastructure replacement needs ■ 30 — 40% of City's mains have exceeded standard useful life estimates Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 17, 2023 Page 1 Packet Pg. 326 8.1.a ■ Delaying needs increases operating costs and risk of failure - Main breaks - Inflow and infiltration (accelerates need for sewer treatment plant expansions) o Goal is to recover an equitable share of costs from existing/future customers ■ Delays can lead to "snowballing" needs that have adverse rate impacts ■ Debt can be used to spread costs of large projects over time - Rates should support ongoing capital projects (e.g. main replacement program) - Term of debt is limited to the expected useful life of the facilities being funded Overview of Financial Plan o Defines "cost -based rates" as rates based on aggregate obligations ■ Operating costs ■ Capital project expenditures ■ Debt service payments ■ Other financial needs o Establishes a multi -year financial plan beyond the current budget cycle o Key Elements of Financial Plan: ■ Defining revenues and expenses ■ Developing capital funding strategy ■ Establishing fiscal policy "framework" Fiscal Policies o City does not have formal policies ■ Recommendation: Draft policies for Council consideration/adoption next year o Financial plans assume each utility maintains a combined operating/capital balance equal to at least 180 days of operating expenses ■ Policy recommended by bond rating agencies - Falling short of this standard could lead to higher interest costs/reserve requirements ■ Helps mitigate cash -flow issues during construction season Key Drivers of Water Rate Increases o Recent inflation (higher than long-term averages) o Increased operating costs ■ Water purchases from Alderwood WWD (8% annual increases projected from Everett) o Capital needs Capital Costs by Year (2023 - 2032) Capital Funding Strategy (2023 - 2032) $100 Total: $U.5M $s 0 `A $6.0 0 $4.0 $2 0 $0.0 C�V C�V C�V C�V C~V C�V N M t7 M N N N N N N N N N N u Yost & 3emew Resenars ($9.6M) ■ Main Replacements ($44.9M) Expected to increase annual debt service by $803.000 Key Drivers of Stormwater Rate Increases o Recent inflation (higher than long-term averages) ■ Less funding available for main replacement program and other needs o Capital needs ■ Need to generate $2.5M in local matching funds for large stormwater projects - Staff proposes setting aside matching funds from existing balances and issuing bonds to fund other capital projects Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 17, 2023 Page 2 Packet Pg. 327 8.1.a Capital Costs by Year (2023 - 2032) Capital Funding Strategy (2023 - 2032) $10.0 Total: $37.3M Grants/ $8 0 ARPA c $6.0 S23 M \ Expected to Debt p increase annual $4 0-debt service by $2 0 Cash $218, 000 $00 r% - Q - - A W T O N N N N N N N N (7 m th O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N in Main Replacements ($22-9M) u Other Projects ($14.4M) Key Drivers of Sewer Rate Increases o Recent inflation (higher than long-term averages) ■ Less funding available for main replacement program and other needs o Capital needs Capital Costs by Year (2023 - 2032) Capital Funding Strategy (2023 - 2032) $40 o Total:;127.2M Expected to $35.0 $30.0 wwiP increase annual debt service by $25.0 Partne rs S28.5 M S3.6M $20 0 22% 10 $150 JL $10 0 $5 0 Cash $57.3 M $0.0 uL nwood WWrP Pro ects 282M Edmonds WWTP Proeds SsoM F Edmonds share is = 50% ■ Other City Sewer Projects ($7.2M) ■ Main Replacements ($33 9M) • Bimonthly Single -Family Bill @ 14 ccf Mountlake Terrace $153.49 $55.92 J $158.62 $368.03 Woodinville [1] $146.16 1$34.671 $166.42 $347.25 Lake Stevens $99.08 $42.83 $198.00 $339.91 Bothell $99.70 1 $37.52 1 $202.22 $339.44 Monroe $101.06 kAwAil- $184.30 $323.80 Bainbridge Island $65.28 92 D-40 $313.35 Shoreline [2] S133. 1 $295.99 Edmonds (Updated) $118.19 $50.89$286.33 Edmonds (Existing) ��i Bremerton L $67.52 Mukilteo L $74.74 Alderwood WWD [3] L_$64.06 Lynnwood L_$77.28 -]&.00 I $149.92 -_U- $49.67 $134.96 $22.0 $156.94 31.69 _ $132.35 -t Water Rate u Stormwater Rate - $261.49 $260.44 $259.37 $243.09 $241-32 t Sewer Rate [11 Woodinville Water District's sewer rate includes King County's wastewater treatment rate ($104.22 bimonthly) [2] Shoreline sewer rate assuming Edmonds wastewater treatment. [3] Stormwater bill shown for Alderwood WWD assumes Snohomish County's stormwater rate ($132.54 per year) applies. • Cost Impacts to Low -Income Households o Affordability assessment based on industry metrics Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 17, 2023 Page 3 Packet Pg. 328 8.1.a City of Edmonds 1.2% 6.3 5.0% Affordability Threshold 4.5% 8.0 10.0% o City offers low-income discount program ■ Established by City Ordinance No. 3629; currently published on City website - Human Services is aware and helps advertise program to eligible customers ■ Customers can qualify for a rate reduction based on income levels - 30% rate reduction if disposable income is 50 - 60% of County MHI - 50% rate reduction if disposable income is < 50% of County MHI ■ 95 - 100 customers participate in program on average Recommendations o Adopt proposed rate increases for 2024 - 2026 ■ Water: 9.0% per year ■ Stormwater: 8.5% per year ■ Sewer: 10.0 - 10.5% per year Water Bill $108.48 $118.19 $128.95 $140.52 $153.08 $166.94 $180.21 Stormwater Bill 46.90 50.89 55.21 59.90 65.00 66.62 68.29 Sewer Bill 106.11 117.25 129.56 142.52 156.77 172.45 189.69 Total Bill $261.49 $286.33 $313.72 $342.94 $374.85 $406.01 $438.19 Change from Prior Year +$24.84 +$27.39 +$29.22 +$31.91 +$31.16 +$32.18 Percent Change from Prior Year ` +9.5% +9.6% +9.3% +9.3% +8.3% +7.9% o Monitor financial status regularly, considering adjustments as needed ■ Revisit 2027 - 2029 rate increases sometime around 2026 Councilmember Olson expressed appreciation for the slide that compares Edmonds' existing and updated bimonthly single family bill @ 14 ccf with other communities (packet page 18). She recalled Mr. Gonzalez stating during the presentation that the Cost Impacts To Low -Income Households and Affordability Assessment Based on Industry Metrics (packet page 19) were based on the existing rate; she asked if the affordability assessment was done on the updated rate. Mr. Gonzalez answered he did not think the increase would be enough to exceed the industry metrics. Councilmember Olson asked if he could provide that information to council in the coming week. Mr. De Lila said that information was provided in the spreadsheet of questions generated from meetings with councilmembers; he recalled the affordability ratio next year increased to 5.5% and to 6.3% in the third year which is still below the affordability threshold of 10%. He offered to resend the information. Councilmember Teitzel referred to packet page 16, Key Drivers of Stormwater Rate Increase where the pie chart indicates $8.7M is from grants/ARPA. He asked how much of the $8.7M is ARPA and how much is grants. Mr. De Lilla answered $155,000 is ARPA and the remainder is grants. Councilmember Teitzel referred to packet page 19, Cost Impacts to Low -Income Households, expressing surprise that only 95-100 customers participate in the City's low-income discount program, anticipating there were more residents that qualified. He asked how the program was advertised. Mr. De Lilla answered it is on the City's website; in talking with utility billing staff, many people who apply do not qualify. The City's Human Services Program Manager Mindy Woods provides that information to everyone she comes into contact with. A mailer has not been done lately. Utility billing staff to do not recommend an insert due to the additional cost; a separate mailer would cost $6-10,000 to send it to all households in the City. Councilmember Teitzel asked if there was a way to print an announcement on the bill. Mr. De Lilla answered there is not enough space on the bill; there are only two lines of very fine print available. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 17, 2023 Page 4 Packet Pg. 329 8.1.a Councilmember Teitzel was hopeful newer and more creative ways could be identified to notify people who may qualify. Mr. De Lilla anticipated a postcard mailer would be the most cost efficient and effective. Mr. Gonzales provided the following in response to Councilmember Olson's earlier question about cost impacts to low-income households and affordability assessment based on industry metrics for the updated rates: Average Water/Sewer Bill as % of Median Household Income MHI Hours at Minimum Wage Affordability Ratio @ 20t1' Income Percentile AR2o City of Edmonds(existing) 1.2% 6.3 5.0% City of Edmonds 2026 1.4% 7.5 6.7% City of Edmonds 2029 1.7% 9.1 8.7% Affordability Threshold 4.5% 8.0 10.0% Mr. Gonzalez noted the affordability ratios are set via industry experts and will increase at some point as costs continue to increase. He noted minimum wage is not representative of what a lot of Edmonds residents earn based on typical income levels. Councilmember Nand observed the City's website states the water/sewer program is closed as of September 2, 2023. There is a QR code that links to Snohomish County's low income household water assistance program (LIHWAP) which states the program is unfunded because federal grant funds ran out. To stay in accordance with Ordinance 3629 that mandates the City provide a reduction of 30-50% for people who are low income, she asked whether that program would need to be funded via City resources. She recalled in her discussion with Mr. Antillon, he indicated that could be funded via the enterprise fund versus an allocation by council. Mr. De Lilla advised Snohomish County's LIHWAP is a different program. Councilmember Nand reiterated the City's website states the City's program is closed. Mr. De Lilla recalled the packet of information sent to council contained a link. He asked Councilmember Nand to send him a link to the webpage she was referring to, assuring that the City's low-income discount program is active. Councilmember Nand relayed the top of the website states in red, the water/sewer system program is closed as of September 2, 2023. She wanted to see how easy it would be for a ratepayer to access these programs. Mr. De Lilla advised there is a link to the low-income utility discount program via senior services on the City's website; the majority of people using the discount program are seniors. Councilmember Nand expressed interest in a paper advertisement and application for people with disabilities or who lack internet access to apply for the program. She asked if a budget allocation would be required to fund that. Mr. De Lilla answered he would need to check, he could see that as a possibility. He relayed the estimate for a mailer was $4,00046,000 or a little more depending on the type of mailer. There could be a budget amendment to include funds for that. Mr. Antillon advised staff will follow up on both those items, to ensure information is readily available and easy to find on the website, and if the program is not funded, work with council to ensure there are funds available. Mr. De Lilla assured the discount program is funded, he confirmed that with utility billing prior to the meeting. Councilmember Nand relayed when accessing human services from the City's website, then selecting utility, water, sewer assistance and then selecting water/sewer assistance is where it states the water/sewer assistance program is closed as of September 2, 2023. Mr. De Lilla offered to confer with utility billing department. Councilmember Nand asked if notification of the assistance program and how to apply could be sent to rate payers in concurrence with the rate increase. Mr. De Lilla suggested sending out a mailer with the rate increases and how to apply for water/sewer assistance. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 17, 2023 Page 5 Packet Pg. 330 8.1.a Councilmember Buckshnis asked if the 180 day reserve calculation was embedded in the rates. Mr. De Lilla answered it was. Councilmember Buckshnis observed the City does not have a policy and asked why 180 days was used versus 90 like most other industries. Mr. De Lilla answered during the construction season, $1-2 million/month can be spent on projects; if the reserve was only 90 days, that amount may be exceeded if $1-2 million/month was spent 3-4 months in a row. He assumed that was why bonding agencies recommend 180 days. Councilmember Buckshnis commented it has never been embedded in the past such as in 2019. Mr. De Lilla answered it was included in all the previous rate studies including 2019, 2016, and 2013. It is all about making sure the City gets the best rates for their bonds and make them as marketable as possible. Councilmember Buckshnis hoped the council adopted a policy next year. Councilmember Buckshnis said she could not reconcile anything with the CIP other than the Yost and Seaview reservoirs. She observed there are water main replacement of $44.9 million and the total cost is only $25.8 million. Mr. De Lilla responded the horizon for the CIP is 6 years, the rate analysis covers 10 years. The CIP also has a total for 2030 to 2044; the rate analysis should include 2030, 2031 and 2032. Councilmember Buckshnis said she included that and still did not come up with the same numbers. It would be nice to have a reconciliation on the numbers. She agreed the City has aging infrastructure, but citizens want clarity. Mr. De Lilla referred to the detailed model for all three utilities, one page shows the CIP/CFP based on the data available when the models were generated; those were the numbers that were used. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if it would balance to those numbers. Mr. De Lilla responded it should balance to the numbers in the models. The model was built before the finalized CIP, all the changes and increases were added, but the majority is based on a hybrid of last year's CIP and this year's CIP. The utility rate process began in January. Mr. Gonzalez added projections/estimates on main replacements were pulled from last year's study. This rate study went back to the base estimate in the system plan instead of adjusting for assumed inflation, actual inflation for 2016-2022 was used in making projections. He commented on being mindful of assumptions and not just carrying over data from the last study. Councilmember Buckshnis wanted to be mindful of transparency for citizens before approving the rates. She noted stormwater shows main replacement of $22.9M and she came up with $12.M and projects of 14AM which does not reconcile. Councilmember Buckshnis expressed concern with Lynnwood 11% and $28.2M imbedded in the utility rates and wanted more information on that. The 11% will be a large plant and she feared it was paying for Lynnwood's growth. Mr. De Lilla answered staff is in discussions with Lynwood about possibly adjusting that number; there is currently an ILA 11% so the City is stuck with that rate at this time. Both Edmonds and Lynnwood understand the number most likely needs to be revised. He anticipated a long discussion to determine how to reassess that number. The good news is both Lynnwood and Edmonds realize it needs to be done, but it will be a large process and considering the project is starting soon, there needs to be adequate cash to fund it. Another issue is that project is very early in the planning and design cycle and there are usually a lot of assumptions made early on when the number of unknown unknowns are high and the odds of the cost of the project creeping higher are more likely than if there was a 100% design. He did not want to undersell the cost and then have to play catch up and some parties not pay their fair share. In summary, it is a project with a long process, over 10 years, and what happens at the beginning falls within that 11% and the City should be able to recoup and lower rates as needed although it will not be reduced as low as 5 %. Mr. Antillon said he understood Councilmember Buckshnis' concern, it is something staff is working on. The existing agreement with Lynnwood for 11 % has to be honored, but it will be updated based on growth both cities have experienced and obviously Lynnwood has experienced more growth than Edmonds. The same is true with the agreements currently in place for the Edmonds WWTP; the share is currently approximately 50150, but that will also need to be updated. Councilmember Buckshnis commented Mr. Antillon answered her next question regarding the Edmonds WWTP, relaying she had heard Mountlake Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 17, 2023 Page 6 Packet Pg. 331 8.1.a Terrace is taking more capacity. She relayed if councilmembers are not comfortable with the amounts, in the past the council has not agreed to the full recommended percentage increase. Councilmember Chen relayed his understanding the increase is needed to fund capital projects, account for inflation, etc. With regard to assistance available to low income households, he noted some of the low income households are non-English speaking and asked if the postcard would be in multiple languages. Mr. Antillon advised that is required. Councilmember Paine thanked staff for collecting and sending information to councilmembers as well as spending time with councilmembers in small groups. She recalled in the small group meeting she participated it, it was pointed out no new water rights have been created over the past 20 years and that the cost of infrastructure replacement has not been keeping up with the City's 1 % replacement policy. It is important to remember the importance of keeping water coming in and sewer going out. She recalled pictures of the reservoirs that were provided two years ago showing the holes in the reservoirs which have since been repaired. She appreciated that staff will be doing comprehensive outreach to the community. 2. PRESENTATION OF AMENDMENT WITH CONSOR NORTH AMERICA, INC FOR YOST AND SEAVIEW RESERVOIR REPAIRS AND UPGRADES PROJECT [Due to technical difficulties, the PowerPoint was not displayed in Council Chambers. The PowerPoint was included in the council packet.] Senior Utilities Engineer Mike De Lilla explained this amendment with Consor North America, Inc. will to take design for the Yost and Seaview reservoir rehabilitation from 30% design to fully completed design that hopefully will be done by the end of 2024. He reviewed: • Structural Deficiencies - Yost Reservoir o Roof loads per code exceed capacity by 300% o Wall flexural capacity exceeded by 14% o No roof to wall connection o Foundation insufficient to provide fixity on wall base for seismic loading • Non -Structural Deficiencies - Yost Reservoir o Joint sealants failing, reservoir leakage in exceedance of allowable per AWWA D110 o No flexibility on pipes connected to reservoir 0 18-inch gate valve reaching the end of service life o Tuberculation on reservoir piping o Corroded silt stop o Ponding against reservoir perimeter • Structural Deficiencies — Seaview Reservoir o Roof loads per code exceed capacity by 200% o Wall flexural capacity exceeded by 48% in seismic condition o No roof to wall connection o Foundation insufficient to provide fixity on wall base for seismic loading Non -Structural Deficiencies — Seaview Reservoir o No flexibility on pipes connected to reservoir o Tuberculation on reservoir piping o No silt stop on drain outlet o Trees within 50 feet of reservoir o Hatch hardware corroding o Vault ladder not per code o Minor cracking allowing infiltration Structural Rehabilitation Improvements Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 17, 2023 Page 7 Packet Pg. 332 8.1.a o Fiberglass Reinforced Polymers (FRP) ■ Unidirectional reinforcement ■ Applied to reservoir walls and roof • Structural Rehabilitation Improvements o Roof to Wall Bracket ■ Allows for movement for thermal expansion while preventing lateral movement between roof and wall Amendment o Acknowledges merger of Consulting firms ■ MurraySmith and Consor North America o Scope of Work ■ Complete Final Design on both reservoirs o Amendment Fee ■ $422,634 (Includes $40,000 Management Reserve) ■ $675,575 total design cost for both reservoirs o Schedule ■ 2025 1 st reservoir ■ 2026 2nd reservoir COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY APPROVE AMENDMENT 1 TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT REGARDING THE YOST AND SEAVIEW RESERVOIRS UPGRADES AND REPAIRS AND ACKNOWLEDGING THE CONSULTANT NAME CHANGE DUE TO CONSOLIDATION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. ADJOURN With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 6:55 p.m. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 17, 2023 Page 8 Packet Pg. 333 8.2 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 11/6/2023 Approval of Special Meeting Minutes October 19, 2023 Staff Lead: Council Department: City Clerk's Office Preparer: Scott Passey Background/History N/A Recommendation Approval of Council Meeting minutes as part of the Consent Agenda. Narrative Council meeting minutes are attached. Attachments: 20231019 Special Meeting Packet Pg. 334 8.2.a EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING DRAFT MINUTES October 19, 2023 ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Mike Nelson, Mayor Neil Tibbott, Council President Vivian Olson, Councilmember Will Chen, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember Susan Paine, Councilmember Dave Teitzel, Councilmember Jenna Nand, Councilmember 1. CALL TO ORDER STAFF PRESENT Dave Turley, Administrative Services Director Angie Feser, Parks, Rec., & Human Serv. Dir. Shannon Burley, Deputy Parks, Rec. & Human Serv. Dir. Uneek Maylor, Court Administrator Beckie Peterson, Council Legislative Assistant Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Nicholas Falk, Deputy City Clerk The Edmonds City Council special meeting was called to order by Council President Tibbott at 2:02 in the Brackett Meeting Room, 121 5' Avenue N, City Hall — 3rd Floor, Edmonds, and virtually. Council President Tibbott reviewed the agenda, explaining during agenda item 5.3, 2024 Budget Workshop: 2024 Proposed Revenues, there are six potential sources of new revenue. He asked councilmembers to sign up to be the "discussion starter" for one of the six. The intent is to have a timed discussion on each and the goal is for councilmembers to learn from each other regarding sources of revenue. Councilmember Buckshnis asked what Council President Tibbott meant by discussion starter. Council President Tibbott answered for example one of the sources of revenue is ARPA funding. A councilmember would spend 2-3 minutes explaining why they supported or did not support that source of revenue for the 2024 budget. Councilmember Buckshnis commented the budget has only been available for two weeks and she has not had an opportunity to completely review it. Council President Tibbott suggested she choose a revenue source she was most familiar with or had the most interest in. 2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Councilmember Paine read the City Council Land Acknowledge Statement: "We acknowledge the original inhabitants of this place, the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and their successors the Tulalip Tribes, who since time immemorial have hunted, fished, gathered, and taken care of these lands. We respect their sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and we honor their sacred spiritual connection with the land and water." 3. ROLL CALL Deputy City Clerk Nicholas Falk called the roll. All elected officials were present. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 19, 2023 Page 1 Packet Pg. 335 8.2.a 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 5. COUNCIL BUSINESS 1. 2024 BUDGET WORKSHOP: QUESTIONS AND DISCUSSION Council President Tibbott advised the workshop would begin with a situation analysis of where the City is at the end of 2023 and an opportunity for councilmembers to ask questions. He explained in early October, the council received the August financial report. Concerns were raised related to the ending fund balance and the reserves which were below 50% at the end of August. He asked Administrative Services Director Dave Turley to give the council an idea of where the City stands and whether there will be a need to use the contingency reserve to finish out the year. Mr. Turley responded Council President Tibbott was correct, at the end of August the City dipped into the reserves and was probably below 50%. The strategic outlook projects the reserve will not have been completely replenished by the end of the year, but it will be better off than at the end of August primarily due to the receipt of $445 million in property taxes from Snohomish County in November. Cashflows go up and down; August and September are low points for cashflow which corresponds to fund balance. That will come back up some in November with the receipt of property taxes, but by the end of the year it is not anticipated the reserves will be fully replenished by the end of the year. The strategic outlook shows the reserves will be fully replenished by the end of 2024 and the end of 2025. Council President Tibbott observed that is the case if the proposed plan is adopted. Mr. Turley agreed. Council President Tibbott asked Mr. Turley to comment on the contingency or emergency reserve and cashflow for September -October. Mr. Turley answered there are technically two reserves, one is the General Fund reserve which is 16%, the contingency fund is a completely separate fund, a sub fund of the General Fund, and is required to have 4% of the operating budget and is fully funded. The contingency reserve has not been touched and he did not anticipating having to touch it at all this year. Funds were transferred in about March/April to bring the contingency fund to the correct level so it would be 4% and it has not been touched since. Councilmember Chen pointed out from January -May, the contingency reserve was below 4% and brought up to the 4% level in June. He asked if it was correct that the contingency reserve was not used, it was just an accounting update to bring it up to the 4% requirement. Mr. Turley responded the 4% requirement is unknown until the budget is adopted; once the budget is adopted, a calculation regarding 4% can be done and funds moved which was done in the first half of the year. Councilmember Chen observed the budget was adopted at the end of December, but the contingency fund was not brought to 4% until June. Councilmember Teitzel observed in the strategic outlook for the General Fund, the 2024 labor estimate is about 6.2% higher than the end of 2023 estimate and the 2025 labor estimate is about 7% higher than the 2024 budget estimate. He asked what those estimates were based on, whether it was national or local trends, noting they seemed high. Mr. Turley answered a lot goes into that number, not just COLAs and pay raises, it also includes vacancies, etc. When developing the 2024 budget which he noted he was tweaking until the end of September because things change, in September the national and regional projections were inflation for this area would be 2.5-3% in 2024 which was used as basis to start. He included increases of approximately 3% for most expenses to be conservative as it is preferable to over -estimate rather than under -estimate expenses. Salaries and benefits had increased at a faster rate than inflation for the last 2-3 years. In conversations with the HR director, one labor contract has not been settled, but she does not expect adjustments to bring labor to balance with market which was one reason recent salaries and wages exceeded the inflation rate. The HR director expects COLAs which will be in line with inflation. So instead of 2.5- 3% which he knew would not be well received, for the next 4 years he included increases of 6-8% for Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 19, 2023 Page 2 Packet Pg. 336 salaries and benefits; the increase for benefits are little higher because the City has less control over benefits and the cost of health insurance tends to increase faster than salaries. Councilmember Buckshnis referred to the Strategic Outlook for the General Fund which reflects a 18% decrease in revenues in 2025, a 15% decrease in expenditures, property taxes go from $15.9 million in 2024 to $11.4 million in 2025 and total expenses go from $59.4 million in 2024 to $50.4 million in 2025. She asked Mr. Turley to explain that. Mr. Turley responded he met with five of the seven councilmembers the week after the budget came out and addressed this topic. In the 2024 budget, revenues increased by approximately $10 million, $6.5 million of that is the anticipated transfer of ARPA funds which is shown in the grants row. The transfers row anticipates moving $2 million from Fund 016 into the General Fund. That $8.5 million accounts for most of the increase in 2024 compared to the 2023 estimate. Regarding expenses, there is not a lot of difference, it goes from an estimate of $57 million to a budget of $59 million, which is in line with inflation. In 2025 revenues go down because those are one-time transfers. Mr. Turley continued, revenues also goes down in 2025 due to the assumption built in regarding the RFA. The assumption could have been that the City would join the RFA or something like a property tax levy. The council has several options, but he had to pick one. The changes in revenue and expenses in the 2025 outlook are almost entirely due to the assumption that the City will join the RFA. If the City does not join the RFA, he will assume there will be a property tax levy or something like that so the numbers end up in the same place at the end of 2025, it is just the mechanism that council chooses to get there that differs. Councilmember Buckshnis observed expenditures for services go from $24 million to $13 million. If there is a property tax levy, the City will still retain fire services from SCF. She questioned why that was reduced. Mr. Turley answered if there was a levy, the 2025 outlook numbers would be different; instead of property taxes going down by $5 million, they would increase by $5-6 million. The numbers change, but hopefully the ending fund balance would get to the same place. Councilmember Buckshnis observed the $24 million would probably have to be adjusted to reflect the City still having the fire contract. Mr. Turley agreed. Councilmember Nand commented on chatter she had seen on the listsery that there may be an afternoon surprise via the mayor's email. She asked for the RCWs that require a balanced budget and [audio interrupted]. Council President Tibbott advised the second half of this agenda item will be a discussion with City Attorney Jeff Taraday regarding the reserve policy. Councilmember Nand requested Mr. Taraday send her the text of the RCW and the resolution via email. Mr. Taraday said he was not aware of an RCW that requires that. Councilmember Nand asked if it was a local policy that required the budget be balanced. Mr. Taraday asked Councilmember Nand to describe what she meant by balanced budget. Councilmember Nand said she was looking at the legal requirements that state Edmonds' budget has to be balanced, whether by policy, resolution, ordinance or RCW and the exact text and details of the 20% reserve fund. Mr. Turley answered there is a balanced budget and asked if Councilmember Nand was asserting there wasn't a balance budget or did she just want to see the RCW. Councilmember Nand said she wanted to see the relevant text of law so she can understand the council's legal obligation in regard to the balanced budget and the 20% reserve fund policy. Mr. Taraday answered he was not aware of any RCW that requires city revenues and city expenditures be perfectly matched in every fiscal year. Councilmember Nand asked if there was a local resolution describing the 20% reserve policy. Councilmember Olson observed the policy was in the packet. Councilmember Nand apologized and withdrew the question. Councilmember Paine referred to the City's bond rating which is currently AAA. She asked if there was any impact on the rate from the discussion that has been occurring regarding the reserve such as a declaration the City is in a fiscal crisis. She asked if the City was in a position of losing the AAA rating. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 19, 2023 Page 3 Packet Pg. 337 8.2.a Councilmember Teitzel raised a point of order, asking whether that related to fund balance which is the final item on the agenda. Council President Tibbott commented Councilmember Paine's question may help with that discussion. Councilmember Paine reiterated her question whether the City's bond rating was at risk. Mr. Turley explained going out for a bond ratings call is a long process that requires a lot of work by the finance department to work with the bonding agencies, attorneys, etc. who look at a lot of things. There will be no adjustment to the current bond ratings; the outstanding bonds are under contract and will not be changed. The utility funds have recently contemplated issuing significant large new bonds. A lot of time was spent working with the bonding agencies during that process who look at a lot of things including the hard numbers, ratios, trends, the environment of the City, whether it is growing, shrinking, staying the same, etc. The bonding agencies also talk a lot about background stuff outside the numbers. They place importance on whether the council and administration work well together, whether there is a sense there is discord between the two, which does not look good to an outside agency. Every bit as important as the numbers, Mr. Turley said he will be blunt, if the council adopts a resolution saying the City is in dire financial straits declaring an emergency might play very poorly with the bonding rating agency. If they look at the City's numbers, they look great and there's a plan where the City is going and the City is on solid footing, but then the council says the City is in a dire condition, a public resolution like that could have a very negative impact. Councilmember Paine asked what are the top 1-3 items most heavily weighted when evaluators come in from bonding agencies such as Standard and Poor and Moody. Mr. Turley said he honestly couldn't say; it is like when someone applies for a home mortgage and is asked for 20 documents, you don't know which ones are the most important. They are probably all equally important, the agencies look at historical numbers, numbers in the future and present. One would have to get the chart from bonding agencies regarding weighting. Councilmember Paine observed there may be a formula but it is probably proprietary. With regard to a resolution, Council President Tibbott advised that is on the agenda for Tuesday's council meeting. He preferred not to get too deep in the weeds on that and to stay focused on the current situation, opportunities with property taxes and other sources and discuss revenues later on the agenda. He reminded this is all discussion, part of the public process, and understanding how each councilmember understands these matters. In a very short order, the council will be making decisions about the 2024 budget. Councilmember Olson recalled Mr. Turley stating when evaluators from the bonding agencies look at the papers and say everything looks great; she asked if he expected that would be their assessment. Mr. Turley answered yes, the utilities are considering selling bonds in two years. The council is considering the 2024 budget and the future outlook; he did not anticipate these discussions occurring in two years. He expected the evaluators would say Edmonds was in the same situation as everyone else, inflation hit the City hard, they had things to resolve, they handled it well and came out on really sound, solid footing. If the City follows the plans and does the right things, he absolutely believed the City would be in perfectly fine shape. Councilmember Olson was confident the City would correct and be fine on the other end; her question was his assertion that the evaluators would say that today. Mr. Turley responded the City will not be doing a ratings call for at least 1.5-2 years. Next year the council will be approving a biennial budget and the following year will be an off year from the budget which is the time to do things like sell bonds. Councilmember Olson observed the evaluators would not be looking at the same numbers the council was looking at now, they would be looking at 1-2 years out. Councilmember Teitzel said he has received a number of questions from citizens about this; the City collectively and the council and mayor have commented on record levels sales tax revenue and stable property tax revenue. With that in mind, he asked how the City can have a negative run rate between Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 19, 2023 Page 4 Packet Pg. 338 revenues and expenses. Revenue forecasts for the end of 2023 are $51.6 million and expenses are $56.8 million. The conclusion citizens are drawing is the City is overspending revenue and that needs to be fixed, that has gotten out of balance and caused the use of reserves. He asked Mr. Turley if the City has not been responsible with spending in his opinion. Mr. Turley answered the City has been more than responsible with spending. People do not realize that Edmonds runs very lean; there are 9 employees in finance, neighboring cities the same size have 18 employees. The economic development department has three employees. Edmonds runs a very lean, small government. The fact that expenses have gone up is due to the effects of inflation. Inflation hit globally, and the reason it is an issue now is inflation averaged 2.5% for the last 20 years. Mr. Turley continued, recalling 4-5 years ago, there was discussion about negative interest rates and negative inflation. Edmonds had moderate sales tax growth which was able to keep up with inflation and made up for fact that property taxes have been almost flat for years. Property taxes make up 1/3 of the General Fund budget and costs have increased 10%. The reason the council is having this discussion is record inflation; inflation has been 8-10% for 2 years. The City is not immune to inflation, when costs went up, outside of adding funds for the fire contract, everything else was a direct result of inflation. It is not bad management by council or the administration. Even adding positions a couple years ago was simply catching up from running too lean for several years. Nearly all the reason that costs have increased is due to inflation and the reason revenues have not increased is there has not been any action to taken to increase revenues. Councilmember Buckshnis explained the AAA rating is for GFOA bonds which are related to the General Fund. The City's rating for revenue bonds for utilities is AA. Utility bonds are treated differently because utility rates pay for the bonds. She clarified the City would not be going out for GFOA bonds, it would be going out for utility revenue bonds which have separate sources of repayment. That is why the utility rate study is so important; evaluators look to see if the utility bonds can be funded with utility rates. She summarized GFOA bonds and utility revenue bonds are two separate animals. Reserve Policy Council President Tibbott asked Mr. Taraday to address the General Fund Reserve Policy. Mr. Taraday suggested as only 25 minutes was allocated for this discussion, going straight to council questions. Council President Tibbott said an overview of the reserve policy would be helpful for council. It would also be helpful to know whether there are ambiguities in the reserve policy and obligations for council to act and any decisions the council needs to be aware of as they begin budget planning for 2024. Mr. Taraday said the reserve policy could be thought of two funds sacked atop each other, the contingent reserve at that bottom which is 4% of the adopted General Fund operating expenditure budget and the reserve policy which is 16% of the operating reserve, together they are supposed to total 20% of the adopted General Fund expenditure budget. As stated in the reserve, policy, the point of the policy is to "define that portion of fund balance that is unavailable to support the current budget." Ideally that money is supposed to sit there and not be used. The policy lists scenarios where it might be used. At a fundamental level, the council has decided via this policy that the 20% should sit there and not be used except in exceptional circumstances. There are some procedural pieces missing from the policy, for example, it is not clear exactly when the City is supposed to take stock of this measuring point, whether that occurs only once a year when the budget is adopted, The word "annual" is used in the first paragraph Article III which addresses the adopted annual operating expenditure budget. That can be read two ways, that the reserve level is, 1) set and reviewed annually, or 2) set annually and reviewed continuously. Councilmember Buckshnis raised a point of clarification, suggesting Mr. Taraday read Article V. Mr. Taraday responded his overview was only at Article III at this point. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 19, 2023 Page 5 Packet Pg. 339 Mr. Taraday continued, under the theory the reserve level is supposed to be continuously reviewed, other than obvious reporting dates in the policy, it is not clear whether it should be done with every budget amendment. That might be a good idea, but the policy does not expressly say that. Arguably one could say to prevent funds from being used, that needs to be done at the budget amendment stage, but the policy does not expressly call that out. There has been some discussion about the phrase "fiscal emergency" used in policy. He read from Section 1 (bottom of page 6), "A separate balance sheet account shall be setup by the Finance Director for the General Fund Operating Reserve, to be used in instances of fiscal emergencies that include: economic uncertainties, unforeseen emergencies, and unanticipated operating expenses or revenue shortfalls." The word emergency can be a loaded term in some people's perception, but the way the policy uses that term is a fairly inclusive definition of emergency to include things like unanticipated operating expenses. Mr. Taraday referred to Section 1 (top of page 7) which states the mayor can declare a fiscal emergency. The mayor has the power to declare a fiscal emergency in certain situations and three are listed in the policy but do not include unanticipated operating expenses which was listed in the previous paragraph of Section 1. He was uncertain if that was an intentional omission or sloppy drafting. In comparing those two paragraphs, fiscal emergency is defined quite broadly, but used more narrowly in the mayoral declaration that only identifies three situations. He pointed out that distinction because not all fiscal emergencies are declared by the mayor. There is room in the policy for a fiscal emergency that would not be the type declared by the mayor but the council could determine there is a fiscal emergency. Mr. Taraday continued, the meat of the policy is in next two paragraph in Section 1, Limitations of Fund Use. The gist of those paragraphs is the funds are not supposed to be used except in cases of fiscal emergency. The second paragraph describes the process of what ideally happens when use of the funds if preceded by a presentation and vote. The council voted on budget amendments, but there was no express statement at that time about using the fund balance. When there has been a use of fund balance, which it is fairly clear in this case there has been, is there by definition a fiscal emergency? If the policy states these funds are only supposed to be used in a case of fiscal emergency and the funds have been used, is there any logical way around that to not describe that as a fiscal emergency? He was unsure there was, but that is ultimately for the council to decide. Mr. Taraday explained, ultimately, he was unsure it mattered whether this was described as a fiscal emergency because the General Fund Operating Reserve Replenishment paragraph outlines the duty to develop a plan to replenish the reserves which Mr. Turley already described. The policy does not speak to replenishing the reserves overnight, but over a certain period of time depending on how much the reserve is drawn down. Mr. Taraday said he would not review Article IV regarding the Contingency Reserve Fund Balance Policy because it was repetitive of the Operating Reserve and the Contingency Reserve has not been used. Mr. Taraday continued, Article V addresses reporting; there are two times in the year when the fund balance is supposed to be looked at, 1) when adopting the budget, and 2) a status report that provides a snapshot of fund balances on June 30t' and council is notified of the fund balance reserve levels. There is no other action contemplated in the policy other than a report to council. Every five years, the policy is to be reviewed and potentially updated; the policy was adopted in 2019 so in 2024.Obviously the council can update the policy whenever they wish.. Article VII addresses deviations and that no deviations from the policy will be allowed except as approved by a simple majority of the council, and definitions. He highlighted the definition of structural budget deficit (bottom of page 12), the last sentence of which states, "Another description is that the current revenue structure is insufficient to maintain services at the current level." Mr. Taraday said after reading the policy and listening to the May 2019 meeting where the reserve was discussed, it is not that the City can never have an adopted budget where expenses exceed revenue. If there Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 19, 2023 Page 6 Packet Pg. 340 8.2.a is extra fund balance, for example 24%, the adopted budget could draw down the fund balance. In fact there was some expectation to make good use of tax dollars, rather than having them sit in a bank, it is better to put those to public use. It would be a mistake to look at the definition and come away with the idea that any time a budget's expenses exceed revenue, it is somehow a violation of the policy. Where it becomes a problem is dipping into the fund balance that is not supposed to be used for the current budget. Council President Tibbott relayed his understanding that one of the reasons the City achieved a AAA bond rating was the reserve policy and success over the years in maintaining the reserve. Even looking into the end 20023, there are things that can be done to bring the reserve up to even again. Edmonds has been very responsible, but in considering the 2024 budget, obviously some actions need to be taken to adjust revenues to catch up with anticipated expenses. Councilmember Nand asked whether the COVID pandemic and related emergency orders that were issued during that time could be considered to construe a fiscal emergency because inflation is arguably an after- effect of the pandemic. Mr. Taraday said any of things described in Section 1 (bottom page 6), economic uncertainties, unforeseen emergencies, unanticipated operating expenses unanticipated revenue shortfalls, could be considered a fiscal emergency under the right circumstances. The right circumstances are where fund balance below the 20% needs to be used to address the situation. Councilmember Nand said there is an argument that the world and society have been in an emergency state for the last few years due to the pandemic and its economic impacts. Councilmember Nand asked if Mr. Turley was aware of any other local municipal finance departments or budget administrations that had dipped into reserves to address inflation as an economic uncertainty. Mr. Turley said he did not know what kind of reserve policies the other cities have. He has seen a lot in the media about cities saying they need to raise revenues to better balance their budget, but their reserve policies do not accompany those articles. Councilmember Nand wondered if Edmonds was an exception in dipping into its reserve or were other local entities were experiencing the same thing. Mr. Turley responded he was not sure. He referred to an article he sent to councilmembers about Poulsbo, Seattle, and King County having the exact same discussion. He has seen this same conversation occurring in a lot of cities, but they don't directly address their reserve policy the way the city council is today. In response to Mr. Taraday's overview of the reserve policy, Councilmember Chen pointed out Section 1 on page 6 broadly described when the reserve can be used such as unforeseen emergencies, unanticipated operating expenses or revenue shortfalls. In the same section, at the top of page 7, the policy list three situations when the mayor can declare a fiscal emergency, the third of which is a significant decline in General Fund revenue. His understanding of the reserve policy is for the City to have a 20% cushion in reserve in case of unexpected either revenue shortfall or unexpected expenses that outpace revenue. In Edmonds' case, revenues have been very strong even in the pandemic year, so obviously there is not a revenue shortfall. However, expenses have been outpacing revenue which is why the City is in this situation. Looking at the policy as a whole, the City meets the emergency definition. That section also has a paragraph on Limitations of Fund Use which states any use of the committed General Fund Operating Reserves shall be used only in cases of fiscal emergency and shall not be used to augment ongoing budgetary/operating spending increases. Council President Tibbott observed Councilmember Chen may be getting into the discussion planned for Tuesday's council meeting. He encouraged Councilmember Chen to ask his question related to the reserve policy. Councilmember Chen asked whether the City has a fiscal emergency. Mr. Taraday answered under the language of this policy, looking at the policy one way, any time operating reserves are used, there is a fiscal emergency because according to the policy operating reserves can only be used in cases of fiscal emergency. That is a valid way of interpreting the policy, but it may not be only way to interpret it. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 19, 2023 Page 7 Packet Pg. 341 8.2.a Councilmember Teitzel relayed Councilmember Buckshnis and he were on the Finance Committee in 2019 and worked with former Finance Director Scott James to develop this policy. He recalled Mr. Turley was also an employee at that time. The genesis of the plan was the convening the long range financial planning committee in 2018 to discuss how to control the City's finances more effective. The fund balance policy was carefully considered by the council which included Councilmembers Tibbott and Nelson at that time. He claimed no ownership over the reserve policy and acknowledged it wasn't perfect and could be improved, but this policy is what the council has to work with. Councilmember Teitzel continued, having said that by way of background, he read the definition of a structural deficit, "Structural Budget Deficit or "Gap" — A budget deficit (Gap) that results from a fundamental imbalance whereby current year governmental expenditures exceed current year revenues without any consideration of carryover or prior year unspent revenue balances if they exist. A structural deficit remains across the operating fiscal cycle because the general level of government spending is too high for the prevailing revenue structure (e.g., taxes fees, and other sources). A fiscal Gap, is a structural budget deficit over an extended period of time and not only includes the structural deficit at a given point in time but also the difference between promised future government commitments, such as health and retirement spending, and future planned or anticipated tax and other revenues. Another description is that the current revenue structure is insufficient to maintain services at the current level." As an author of this policy, Councilmember Teitzel asserted the City had exactly this situation, a structural budget deficit and the deficit is being fixed with short term infusions of cash primarily from ARPA and Fund 016, one-time fixes that do not fix the structural budget deficit. The deficit is driving the crisis in 2023 and that needs to be addressed. The council needs to take strong action in 2024 beyond what is proposed in the budget such as potential hiring freezes, not backfilling certain vacancies, etc. to fix the structural budget deficit. These are hard decisions the council will need to work through with the administration's cooperation over the next month, otherwise next year's council and whoever the mayor is will have to deal with this which will be very difficult. Council President Tibbott agreed to extend the discussion on the first agenda item for seven minutes. Councilmember Buckshnis relayed the late Councilmember Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember Teitzel, Scott James and Dave Turley spent over a year on long range financial planning so that the City could achieve a AAA rating. She referred to page 25 of the budget book, Expenditure Summary — All Funds, which indicates not only is inflation part of the problem, but a lot of expenses have increased significantly over the past 3-4 years; for example, professional services have gone up $14 million. She summarized revenues have been strong, but expenditures have outpaced revenues. She agreed with everything Councilmember Teitzel said. Councilmember Olson referred to Section 1 of the Fund Balance Reserve Policy where it states a separate balance sheet account shall be set up to be used in instances of fiscal emergencies where funds in the operating reserve are being used. She asked if that was underway or something that could be attached to the monthly financial reports. Mr. Turley said he would need to address that next year when the policy itself is readdressed. He did not understand that paragraph, did not know who wrote it, or the intention. There is no separate balance sheet account for this fund. Council President Tibbott commented it is during times of enormous inflationary pressures that policies like this are tested. It is an opportunity to see where the deficiencies are and address them when the policy is revised next year. Councilmember Paine recalled the council has made decisions such as salary increases to ensure salary equity which is directly related to inflationary pressures as well as to retain staff. The section on deviations Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 19, 2023 Page 8 Packet Pg. 342 8.2.a from policy states no deviations from the policy are allowed except as approved by a simple majority vote of the council; however, the council knew this was happening and that inflation was hitting the City hard. She agreed with Councilmember Teitzel that this needs to be fixed, but the pressure hasn't been felt until this year due to an abundance of ARPA funds and the revenue side has been minded as well it as it should have been. There are times when the council needs to take ownership of decisions they have been making and for not minding the revenue side too much. Those were some of the things she saw going on in the lens of this reserve policy. If there this many ambiguities in the policy, the council should probably spend time revising the policy next year. Councilmember Teitzel referred to Limitations of Fund Use in Section 1, which states a simple majority vote of the council shall be required to approve the amount and use of funds. He asked if his understanding was correct, that the council needed to specifically vote to approve the use of ARPA funds to close the gap. Mr. Taraday responded those are two separate questions; closing the gap is related to replenishment. Councilmember Teitzel restated his question, to refill the $2 million shortfall in the General Fund, will council need to approve funds to fill that shortfall to get back to an even state by the end of the year? Mr. Taraday said the sentence, a simple majority vote shall be required, contemplates a vote of the council when the reserve is drawn down. The council will obviously be involved in bringing the fund back up, but this is related to drawing down the reserve requiring a council vote. Councilmember Teitzel observed it was a question of timing; when are the funds in the reserve being used. The strategic outlook show the ending balance, but the fact is the end of the year is not here yet so when were the funds actually used and when did council need to vote on that. Mr. Taraday said that points out an ambiguity in the policy; the policy also calls for a June 30' snapshot which shows that the funds have been used. Councilmember Buckshnis commented there is no June 30 snapshot. Mr. Taraday assumed calculations would show that the reserve funds have been used by June 30, 2023. Councilmember Teitzel's question is related to what action should be taken retroactively and the policy is silent on that. The policy addresses what should happen prospectively; the only thing the policy addresses retroactively is replenishment, once the funds have been used, how they are replenished and the policy provides a schedule for replenishment. The reason the reserve exists is to allow the City to respond to things like periods of high inflation. It is not so much improper that the funds were used because that is why the reserve exists in the first place. Most businesses can respond promptly to inflationary pressures by raising their prices. Cities cannot do that because they are limited by 1%/year property tax increases, money the council has not taken over the last several years, and most of the City's revenue sources are beyond its control. That is one of the reasons the reserve funds exists, to respond to periods of high inflation when the City cannot just raise its prices. Councilmember Teitzel said he did not believe the policy allowed the mayor and the finance director to unilaterally use reserves; a specific vote of the council is required to allow that. He asked when that vote should happen. Mr. Taraday said the question is whether it had already happened. One of the things that is not clear in the policy is if the council expressly approves a budget amendment that brings the ending fund balance below the level of the reserve, is that a council -approved deviation from the policy? He did not know the answer and said it was a fair question to ask because the policy did not say exactly what kind of affirmative vote of the council was needed. Clearly the funds have been used; that is beyond dispute. Councilmember Olson questioned if the council was aware at the time that occurred. Councilmember Nand commented it sounds like in order to spend into the reserves, the mayor was supposed to have declared a fiscal emergency and that was approved by the council. She referred to Section 1 of Article II, reasons the mayor has the power to declare a fiscal emergency, and asked if the public safety challenges related to the COVID or the opioid pandemic could be construed as an immediate threat to health and public safety and thus triggering events for declaring a fiscal emergency. Mr. Taraday responded if Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 19, 2023 Page 9 Packet Pg. 343 8.2.a there was any tacit consent to using the funds, it would have been in the form of budget amendments that occurred in 2023. 2. SNOHOMISH COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR PRESENTATION Council President Tibbott introduced Linda Hjelli, Snohomish County Assessor. Councilmember Olson explained she met Ms. Hjelli at a candidate event and began talking about challenges with understanding the process of calculating property taxes and the taxes property owners pay as individuals. Residents assume if property taxes go up, the amount of tax they pay goes up proportionately based on their valuation going up the same amount. She thanked Ms. Hjelli for offering to make a presentation to the council. Ms. Hjelli reviewed: • What is the Assessor's job? o Washington State law requires that Assessors assess (value) all real and personal property in the county at 100% of true and fair market value in money, unless specifically exempted by law o Real property includes land and all buildings, structures and improvements to the land o Personal property includes machinery & equipment, fixtures, furniture, other moveable items owned or leased by a business o Add new construction information and value to roll We are also responsible for o Administration of exemption programs such as senior citizen and non-profit o Administration of special programs ■ Open space (farm, agricultural, timber, and general), forest land and historical restoration o Maintaining Assessor's GIS parcel layer and maps used by all county departments o Responding to appeals to the BOE and BTA o Parcel maintenance — segregations, combinations, BLA's, new plats short plats o Calculation and administration of levies o Customer service Councilmember Nand asked if Ms. Hjelli could address the impacts of HB 1110 and companion bills on valuations of previously single family zoned properties. Ms. Hjelli asked if she was referring to ADUs. Councilmember Nand answered ADUs and the increased density requirements. Ms. Hjelli said that was not part of her presentation, but she could come back for that further discussion, noting it is impactful to the Assessor's Office. • Tax Code Areas & Limits o Snohomish County has ■ 68 taxing districts (state, school, fire, hospital, etc.) ■ 382 tax code areas o Example 0 Tax Code Area Local school District #1 #2 #3 Hospital Fire District #7 Three taxing districts create 7 tax code areas. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 19, 2023 Page 10 Packet Pg. 344 8.2.a • Where do property taxes go? Snohomish County Distribution of 2023 Taxes C"" & To-s Ports Roads Lloraoas Regional ransit Authority T Parks 8 Recreaeon 6.53% 0,36 % 4.32% 3.54%h1 1.26% Cow 6.27 Firs Districts 11.34% Hospitals Shls Sdhod 0.72% 292M School Distracts 34 401, Levies & Rates o Taxing district establishes levy amount (original amount by vote) o Levy (budget) amount is provided to our office with documentation by end of November o We check limitation o We calculate the final levy amount and rate Levy terms o Highest lawful levy ■ Taxing districts do not have to collect the total amount they are allowed to collect. o Actual levy ■ What a taxing district actually takes o New construction ■ In addition to the allowed 1% increase in property taxes, additional funds can be collected for new construction that occurred within the taxing district because services are being provided to additional residents o State Utilities o Annexation ■ If additional area was annexed that services are provided to o Refunds ■ Properties that became exempt during the year that received a refund, the taxing district can collect that amount the following year from the other taxpayers o Banked Capacity Councilmember Nand asked if new construction was jurisdiction wide. Ms. Hjelli answered it is the value of new construction within the taxing district, calculated in the summer months. The Assessor determines that amount and the amount that can be added to the budget and collected the following year. Levy Limit (101%) & Amount authorized by Resolution/Ordinance o Banked Capacity ■ Is the difference between the highest lawful levy that could have been made and the actual levy that as imposed. ■ Taxing districts can increase their budgets by 1 % each year although not every taxing district does. When the increase is not taken and an ordinance is passed to banked that amount, the taxing district reserves the right to tax at a higher level in the future. ■ Having banked capacity for one year does not guarantee the district will have the same amount or more the following years ■ Districts can protect levy capacity by passing the appropriate resolution(s)/ordinance(s) ■ If a district wants to use banked capacity, their resolution/ordinance must authorize the increase Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 19, 2023 Page 11 Packet Pg. 345 ■ Future levy capacities for district who levied less than their highest lawful levy are protected under RCW 84.55.092 Councilmember Nand asked if the 1% increases can be stacked. Ms. Hjelli answered yes, the highest lawful levy is calculated as if the taxing district took the 1% every year and passed the ordinance every year to reserve the ability to do so. Councilmember Nand asked if there is a cap on banked capacity. Ms. Hjelli answered no, but a taxing district could be limited by their rate in particular year under certain circumstances. She clarified the 1% doesn't go away, but it might be limited one year. • Statutory Dollar Rate Limit State $3.60 equalized County General $1.80 County Road $2.25 Cities $3.375* RTA $0.25 Fire $1.50 RFA $1.00-$1.50 EMS $0.50 Library $0.50 Hospital $0.75 *Cities may levy up to $3.60 if they have annexed to a library or fire district less the actual levy rate for the library or fire district and also may levy an additional .225 if they have earmarked firemen's pension funds. • Examples of Estimated Levy Disclaimer: The following requested scenarios include estimated amounts. Final values that will be used in the levy calculations for 2024 taxes are as of a December 1, 2023 date o Three scenarios ■ No increase Edrttonds Hll ."",311.16 1% 112A63.11 11,318,3348] 103% 1.— 111318,63d2] NC 29A62.71 I— years W.— 4,600A5 ell el roll<bu Mneaation - Pehnd 29,12421 1l 1 3026 / 15,424A43,338 a low 0.13788285309 Nll AV Hll • 1% 11,113,43"1 wl 4vy lo.66,f80.53 Icu4te bere—sand% DbNeaence 633.254.33 5.926a]2MI1]930% AnwlleW l0,MS,IW33 s0% 10,685,180.5a 1%Increase 1o6,8s161 NC 29,052.71 r. UM a 1,60045 rvf at rolY<lotn M n Petund tlo 29,126.21 10,]4],969.91 / 15A2/,M3.338 a IOW 0.696831542N actwlemount leased andrate Pry —A!NWa AV 68,996,966.]] a 15A24,0a34338 / 1000 3.3250o00W00 statutory amount Statutory AmaNP AV Statutory Pate ■ 1% increase Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 19, 2023 Page 12 Packet Pg. 346 8.2.a Edn d9 NLL 11,— 371.16 1% 112,M,11 11,318,434.97 M.Increase LL316A341] NC n.CS2.71 last Mars UUNtbs 4,60DAS esl at rollcbu AnnewHion - Re 29.12621 1I,3p,216].a / 15A24,Mr 38 . 1000 0.73768 SS5 NLL AV ualkW I0,685,1805a eNdete increeu5anex PNererHe 633.iSa.33 5.92"7290917930% Actual LeW 10,88l,f0A36 r 0% 10.685.180.Sa NC 29,052", st Mara UlilAies 4,6U9A5 ast all roll cbu Arwiaution Pefwd 29,126.21 10,7a7,969.91 / IS.a21,063.338 a 1000 0.6 315a266 ettwl amwm Iv d and rate amv acNal bvy AV 58,9 .9 77 w IS.424,033.338 / LOW 382500000000 stHHory amw.m SlatuloryAnsount PV StalutoryPale ■ Banked capacity Edrltl%Id9 NLl 11,206,371.16 i% 111A63.)1 11.318A3a.87 101% bcreau H.318A3a.87 NC 29,US2.71 tale Mar's utdnio, a.600AS en H •on rase Anne.auon —.d 29,126.21 IL38L218.28 / 15.a2a,0a3.338 w I= 0.7378876SI08 NLL AV NLL • t% f1,311,e36.8] nua14W 10.685,180.5a cakdxe Ncrease$eM% PHerence 633,254.33 5.921'N7290917930% A<tuwl levy IO,NS,1M.58 5926R91% 633,281.]0 1L318."2.24 Ix Nwe+te 106,851.81 NC 29.032.71 lxdnrcs a,600A5 a+t a�rd I— Annour.on - 10-d 29.126.21 1L38L26L81 / ISA24p33,3M . I= 0.13188MM Mual amount NrIM and rate ". acwl NNW AV 58,996%&77 w 15,824p13,3M / Iddo 3.62sdoa9oddo wtutory amount StHHory Amnunt AV SlaNtory Rate • Basic levy process o The taxing district's "levy" divided by assessed value of all taxable parcels in the district equals the tax rate ("levy rate") for the district: o Example of calculating a levy rate: Levy Taxable Value Levy rate $50,000 = $,501$1,000 AV $100,000,000 o Example of tax bill calculation using the levy rate above: $.50 Levy Rate x 300 (300,000 AV) $150 Tax bill • Estimated impact: o Average Edmonds residence AV $896,700 ■ 0% increase — est. rate .69683154244 $896,700 x .69683154244 = $624.85 ■ 1% increase — est. rate .70375915589 $896,700 x 70375915589 = $631.06 ■ 5.9% increase — est. rate .73788962858 $896,700 x .73788962858 = $661.67 a Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 19, 2023 Page 13 Packet Pg. 347 8.2.a Councilmember Nand referred to senior citizens who originally purchased their single family residence for $86,000 and their property value has increased 1000%. She asked if more property taxes been collected from them even though the City has been banking the 1% increase. Ms. Hjelli answered no. Washington is a budget based state, not a rate based state. In a rate based state, a rate is voted in and whatever the assessed value is, the calculation is the rate times the assessed value determines the amount to be collected. The issue with that system is it's very unstable; assessed/market values can change dramatically. With a budget based system, taxing districts decide what they are going to collect first based on what has been voted for and the amount that can legally be increased. The amount to be collected is established first. The assessed value determines what portion of the amount to be collected each property will pay. It does not determine how much will be collected, it just spreads out who pays what part of the amount. That is why to collect the same amount each year, if assessed values go up, the rate has to go down and vice versa. During the past year the assessed value went down in several areas so the rate has to increase. Councilmember Nand observed the property owner who bought at $86,000 and their house is now valued at $896,000 isn't seeing too much fluctuation. Ms. Hjelli said they are not seeing fluctuation because the assessed value changed, but due to approval of school district bonds, levy lid lifts, etc. She summarized there are other ways for property tax increases occur, but it is not directly related to the increase in value. Councilmember Paine recalled when she was on the school board, the way it was explained was the amount of peanut butter that can be spread on difference size pieces of toast; the smaller the toast, the thicker the peanut butter, the peanut butter being the tax. This is a difficult thing to describe. Councilmember Teitzel asked if the 5.9% increase was the actual amount, recalling discussion about a 4.5% increase. Ms. Hjelli answered the 5.9% includes the 1% increase. It is the difference between the highest lawful levy and the actual levy which can change from year to year. Even though the banked capacity may have been estimated to be a certain amount, 5.9% is what it would be. Mr. Turley said in preparing for his presentation next week, he was looking at the property tax numbers and these look very similar to what he was researching. Councilmember Buckshnis asked the number of years the 1 % had been banked. Mr. Turley answered five years. • Examples of Estimated EMS Levy o No increase Edmonds EMS Ppmstleni 2004 o xu 263pp.39 1% a2.630.a6 a,335.93685 101% Inc[e 5,636.65 pt at mfi [bse MnRinpkn RNuM 11,333.65 11.616 a1 �V a 10W 0,183pAT39a1 a,330,9».lf / 636.65 239,391.36 almkte koease $ an0 % •Re.N u.9 6,366,usw9 o% a.2W.135 a3 / 15A2a.W3.336 • 3000 cenifiefi v UtlmaM U•p: 9%,MO RNe V %1415303 FstunpM ia• 250b6 ■ 1% Increase Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 19, 2023 Page 14 Packet Pg. 348 8.2.a EGtnp $ EMS Pamismnt 200a xu /,a3,dcn % /1, Oaf /,3I9,8]fD9 C NC est at mll<bse Pnne•ation 0.ehntl 1L—. 1 o Il.flf/1 350,9T9.T9 / 15./24,d3,338 PY • 3000 0.383090739/1 HLL'I% Lma lm 0.Rwen¢ /a,3IS,d)4S S 39,)/1,38 093)3W)aad930% a¢uve hveaae 5 antl x PebalLm /.2K.I95A) 1% /.33D,9%.DI 1%Im¢au /I.861.35 NC 11,f91.Dt uu)eafs UtNNbs 1,83I.f9 eu n rell Mse Pnnuation Rehntl 1,MJ1 5I /,3f / 19p1/,d3,338 • 1000 0.2t2293019d ,rtux amount kviM aM rn< hev a¢tal levyr PV ),)Il,OILf) • IS/3/.d3.33B / ]000 0.90000000000 suLW¢v amaum —.1-Pmoun1 Al SlatWory Rate / 19,/3/,d3,338 • 1000 [ertlOetl Pmaum PV bvy rare FatlmalM Tun: 25 O,iS22939d F utimaletl ia• 2S9.13 ■ No example for banked capacity as the 1% increase has been every year WA State Property Tax System o Dept of Revenue Property Tax Division o RCW's and WAC's Washington State Laws and Rules o Adhere to IAAO Standards o All property adjusted to current market value as of January 1 each year o New construction assessment date is July 31 st instead of Jan 1 st of each year Annual Revaluation o All property is valued every year 0 1/6t' of the property is physically inspected each year o Sales information used in valuation and/or in support of the values are ones that occurred in the market in the previous year/s o Per RCW 84.40.030 property is valued at 100% of market value Councilmember Nand said she has heard about segments of communities trying to opt out due to significant land change uses around them that greatly increased their property values. She asked if that was happening in Snohomish County. Ms. Hjelli answered the rules apply to everyone, there is no opting out, all property is valued at 100% of market value. There are property owners who think their property values are different than what the Assessor's Office calculations. The Board of Equalization or the Board of Tax Appeals requires evidence to show the value is something other than the Assessor's Office indicates. People with a concern about their value are asked to call to ensure the Assessor's Office has the right information about their property, like did something change, are there wetlands that the Assessor's Office was not aware of, etc. If the information is not accurate, the Assessor's Office will adjust their records and update the value according to the new information. If the information is accurate and the Assessor's Office is confident the right information was used to evaluate the property based on sales, the next step is to go to the board and present information to prove the Assessor's Office's value is incorrect. • Residential Appraisal Areas 0 4 Work Regions 0 6 Inspection Areas Per Region Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 19, 2023 Page 15 Packet Pg. 349 8.2.a Councilmember Teitzel commented it sounds like a massive job to inspect that many properties. He asked how many inspectors the Assessor's office has. Ms. Hjelli answered there are 70 employees and about 30 are appraisers. • Appraisal Tools o We use ■ For residential property - a predictive valuation model - Predicts value based upon property characteristics and sales price ■ Market calibrated stratified cost approach (MCSCA) - Based on Marshal & Swift ... cost approach, a national standards for estimating `cost,' calibrated to local market conditions • Commercial Property - Income, Market and Cost Approaches o Commercial Property is typically valued and assess using one or all of the 3 approaches to value: 1. Income approach - IRV (income divided by rate equals value) 2. Market or sales comparison approach 3. Cost approach Councilmember Teitzel asked what is someone completely gutted and redid the interior of their house which is not visible from the exterior. He asked how internal remodels are accounted for. Ms. Hjelli agreed it was difficult, but cities are required to submit permits to the Assessor's Office and during the summer, an effort is make to physically inspected each permit. They also use information available on online real estate sites to gather additional information. Oftentimes property owners want them to come inside to ensure assumptions are not made that overvalue the property. Councilmember Nand asked if the income approach for assessing commercial property excluded residential rental properties, Airbnb, etc. Ms. Hj elli said there are typically good sales comparisons for those properties. It is not always easy to get the income information for an Airbnb. The Assessor's Offices uses the best approach they can to come up with accurate value based on the available information. • Mass Appraisal vs Fee Appraisal o Creating a model & applying it to multiple parcels vs 3 comp appraisal for lending purposes o Sales verification o Identifying influences that affect value o Statistical analysis - use of measurement tools Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 19, 2023 Page 16 Packet Pg. 350 8.2.a o Mass appraisal report — online for both residential and commercial properties • Senior Citizen Disabled Persons Exemption for 2023 tax year Status Income Level Amount of Reduction A $0 to $38,591 Exempt from excess levies (ie: local school levies) and Part 2 of the state school levy imposed under RCW 84.52.065(2), plus a reduction of assessed value of 60% or $60,000, whichever is eater B $38,952 to $47,167 Exempt from excess levies and Part 2 of the state school levy imposed under RCW 84.52.065(2), plus a reduction of assessed value of 35% or $50,000, whichever is greater, not to exceed $70,000 C $47,168 to $55,743 71 Exempt from excess levies and Part 2 of the state school levy imposed under RCW 84.52.065(2) • Senior Citizen Disabled Persons Exemption for 2024 Tax Status Income Level Amount of Reduction A $0 to $54,000 Exempt from excess levies (ie: local school levies) and Part 2 of the state school levy imposed under RCW 84.52.065(2), plus a reduction of assessed value of 60% or $60,000, whichever is eater B $54,001 to $64,000 Exempt from excess levies and Part 2 of the state school levy imposed under RCW 84.52.065(2), plus a reduction of assessed value of 35% or $50,000, whichever is greater, not to exceed $70,000 C $64,001 to $75,000 Exempt from excess levies and Part 2 of the state school levy imposed under RCW 84.52.065(2 o Taxable value is frozen at the year a property owner enter the program. If property values go below the frozen assessed value, it will be refrozen at the lower value o Assistance completing forms is available at the Assessor's Office Mr. Taraday asked what sources of income are included. Ms. Hjelli answered it is gross household income not net, although there is a list of things that can be used to reduce income. With regard to the increased income level for the 2024 tax exemption, Ms. Hjelli explained with the 8% increase in social security, assessors were concerned senior citizens would no longer quality for the program. A group of assessors worked with the legislature to reconsider the levels. Next year's maximum to qualify for the exemption goes up to $75,000. She has requested additional staff in the next budget cycle, anticipating about 4,000 more applicants in 2024; there are about 12,000 properties on the program now. Councilmember Paine asked if applicants have to come to the Assessor's Office to apply for an exemption. Ms. Hjelli answered they can mail in their information. the Assessor's Office does not have an efile yet although she hopes to add that in the future. Councilmember Olson asked how the exemption affects the amount the City collects. Ms. Hjelli answered it does not reduce the amount collected, it changes who pays it; exemptions shifts the tax burden to other taxpayers in the area. Councilmember Nand asked about community partner organizations that assist seniors citizens or disabled individuals. Ms. Hjelli answered before COVID there were volunteers that assisted with completing forms. She often visits entities to distribute exemption packet. She does not have any volunteers who are providing assistance now, it is currently only her staff. Councilmember Nand asked if that was something the City's human services could potentially support. Ms. Hjelli advised the Assessor's Office can provide packets and Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 19, 2023 Page 17 Packet Pg. 351 8.2.a show people how to fill out the forms; she did a presentation for seniors at the Mill Creek YMCA recently. Councilmember Olson envisioned the senior center could also set up a program with volunteers. What is available on the Assessor's website o SCOPI interactive map — aerial photos, parcel boundaries, assessed values, sales info, property characteristics, taxes, etc. o Sales Search/Comp Search app o Mobile App o Assessor Parcel Maps o Personal Property E-File & FTP Data o Mass Appraisal Reports o Performance Statistics o Special Programs/Classification Information o Tax Relief Program Information o Forms and Publications • Property tax distribution tool o Shows who taxes were paid to for the past few years and how it has changed. Ro—ty tors TOL.I $4.746.768.146 2023 21127 Q Look at my tM.v�dwl Te. E.timdte. IOit Hope ty 1. ()Yft.W. . a..t. r+..d. uTw- aSN S[ad Q11-13e33% Comty a lT► C—. a T-- 0V» O.. N.—I. IV.. MA. S —, 20'1. Td. &Nk.kY.vri try W., prad.wx.. -nra t.Fq •Cq.nO SOY. pkYkU ONpprlr n..rrts •IVba NaMnn Other•MpvW irn�.t Aut.nr.Y MWr •Sthc.,,�lt�rer�Nr �S./N XIm-/ �1 Ms. Hjelli said she has a teaching background and one of her biggest goals is getting good information to people to make good decisions. Mr. Turley agreed the Assessor's Office does an outstanding job of doing that. Ms. Hjelli advised the Assessor's Office provides an annual levy class which was already held this year. The Department of Revenue also offers a class. She invited councilmembers to contact her with any questions or if they needed help. Council President Tibbott declared a brief recess. 3. 2024 BUDGET WORKSHOP: 2024 PROPOSED REVENUES Council President Tibbott explained this agenda item is regarding sources of revenue, the council is not voting on them or not committing to any action other than a robust discussion in a short timeframe. He asked councilmembers to spend two minutes describing what they liked or did not like about a specific revenue source which would then be followed by about five minutes of discussion. He identified topics and councilmembers: ARPA funds: Councilmember Chen, Building Fund Transfer: Councilmember Olson, Red Light Cameras: Councilmembers Teitzel and Paine, Grants: Councilmember Nand, and Levy options: Councilmember Buckshnis. ARPA fiords Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 19, 2023 Page 18 Packet Pg. 352 Councilmember Chen observed the City is dealing with a financial situation; according to the proposed budget, by the end of the year $2.2 million from reserves will be needed to cover daily operations. He proposed using ARPA funds to get through 2023 and not start 2024 with a deficit. About a year ago he learned at a AWC conference that federal regulations allow local jurisdictions/city governments to use ARPA funds up to $10 million for day-to-day operations even if there is no revenue shortfall. Originally the intent of ARPA funds was to supplement cities who experienced revenue shortfalls, but that is not the case for Edmonds. Since the use of ARPA funds is allowed by federal law and the City still has about $8 million in M ARPA funds, there just needs to be an announcement that there is a need to use the funds and that will allow the City to start 2024 clean. Councilmember Chen acknowledged that was just a band -aid, not a long term solution. As Councilmember Teitzel mentioned, the council and administration need to work together as a team to determine ways to generate additional revenue, perhaps a levy or reducing expenses. He summarized his proposal was to use ARPA funds and look at revenue sources in combination with cutting expenses. The City needs to be realistic and tighten its belt, expenditure levels cannot keep increasing without additional revenue sources. For example, the HR presentation indicated the City added 47 people in 2023. Councilmember Paine observed Councilmember Chen said 2023 and asked if he meant budget year 2024. Councilmember Chen answered he meant 2023, use the funds this year to get the reserve back up to 16%. Councilmember Paine said she had no objection to using ARPA funds for 2024 or to replenish the reserves. Because it is allowed and is absolutely germane to what the City has been going through for the last 2 years, she would actually like to use ARPA funds to bolster the budget as proposed. Councilmember Teitzel did not object to using ARPA for 2023 to get back into balance and replenish the reserves. However, using ARPA funds going forward seems like putting band -aid on a bleeding artery, it is a very temporary measure and does not fix the underlying problem. The council has to be disciplined. He feared if all the ARPA funds were used to help close the gap it would take away the immediacy to work on the core problem and fixing the core problem will not be easy. He did not object to using part of the ARPA funds, but did not want to use all of it Councilmember Buckshnis said the simplest thing would be to use all of it, the whole $2.2 million via a budget amendment. Councilmember Nand said while ARPA funds could plug holes in the budget, other jurisdictions such as a city in the Midwest used all their ARPA funds to pay off medical debt for their citizens, acting as a pass through to provide an economic stimulus to people who were economically distressed and affected by the pandemic. She wanted to apportion a percentage of the ARPA funds the City received in a pass -through manner to benefit the most vulnerable and marginalized in the community which was Congress' original intent. Councilmember Olson pointed out household support grants have been set up and funded with ARPA. She recalled discussion during last year's budget cycle about using ARPA funds to avoid increasing utility rates, but legally that was not an option. Residents will be asked in some way to make up shortfalls so using ARPA funds is consistent with wanting to make things better for residents. Building Maintenance Fund Transfer Councilmember Olson recalled the council vote well, when the council chose to spent money on bonds when interest rates were really low because councils past and present did not have the discipline to choose to do boring deferred maintenance projects instead of fun things. The council at that time chose to take advantage of low interest rates to bond for money to do deferred maintenance because deferred maintenance results in bigger expenses. For example, a crack in the foundation causes a water leak that requires drywall Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 19, 2023 Page 19 Packet Pg. 353 8.2.a to be removed and replaced, etc. The City has very big deferred maintenance issues, big enough that the council bonded for that expense. The funds have not been spent yet, but Public Works has $1.5 million in projects planned and docketed for next year. Spending that money to cover operating expenses is absolutely the wrong thing to do, the thing she was most disturbed about in the budget. She hoped council could be convinced not to use it in that manner so that the $1.5 million in projects, which may cost $2 million, can be accomplished. She really objected to not doing the deferred maintenance when the reason the council choose to pay interest was to make the money available for deferred maintenance. Councilmember Paine did not disagree that deferred maintenance was a problem for the City. She wondered if more information was needed from Public Works facilities regarding whether they have the capacity to do all the projects that were anticipated with the building study to accomplish the deferred maintenance. She feared there was not enough capacity to manage all those small projects, projects estimated at $50,000- $100,000, and there are a lot of them. It is one thing to manage a big $3 million project and another to manage a lot of smaller projects. She recommended asking about staffs capacity. Councilmember Olson added she asked Mr. Antillon if the projects could be done in 2024 and that is where the $1.5 million project list came from. Council President Tibbott observed they are also in the proposed budget. Councilmember Buckshnis raised a point of clarification. She recalled questioning the use of the bond funds in the 2021 budget, and learning the bond funds cannot be used for anything but building maintenance because that is in the purpose so the bond funds cannot be used to fill the gap. She recalled that was in the Finance Committee meeting minutes. Councilmember Olson agreed that was the purpose when the fund was established, but believed the council could change its mind. Councilmember Buckshnis disagreed, stating it was part of the bond issuance. Council President Tibbott requested Councilmember Buckshnis send that question to Mr. Turley and asked Councilmember Paine to send her question to Mr. Turley and Mr. Antillon. Councilmember Chen agreed building maintenance that has already been deferred cannot be deferred even longer which is why the council issued bonds to meet those needs. He recalled asking about plans for building maintenance during last Tuesday's meeting and Mr. Antillon said building maintenance is being done. He was amazing that work was being done but money was not being spent. Councilmember Olson commented the $2 million is the differential that hasn't been spent yet. The bonded amount was much higher. Council President Tibbott summarized the $2 million was the amount that had not been spent yet and Councilmember Chen preferred it be used for building maintenance. Councilmember Chen agreed. Red light cameras Councilmember Teitzel explained the primary focus of red light cameras was to improve safety for pedestrian and drivers. Twelve dangerous intersections have been identified; the plan is to focus on 6 of the 12 by installing red light cameras. This is a safety issue, not a revenue generating issue although he acknowledged revenue was a byproduct of the cameras. The plan is to roll out the red light cameras in 2024; DP #7 shows roll out in about April, but the police chief s presentation stated June so when the cameras will be implemented needs to be clarified as it will impact revenue projections. The revenue generated by a combination of the red light and school zone cameras is estimated at $3.5 million in 2024. Councilmember Teitzel continued, there needs to be an understanding of the assumptions, how the projections were derived. For example, the red light camera in Lynnwood at 196t1i & Hwy 99 has extremely high volume; Edmonds' intersections are not that high volume. He did not want the council to approve a decision package that has inaccurate revenue projections. Before red light cameras can be implemented, the code needs to be revised to allow light cameras. He was confident red light cameras would be installed at some point so it makes sense to amend the code now to accommodate red light cameras, allow the public Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 19, 2023 Page 20 Packet Pg. 354 8.2.a to comment and then make a decision. Council President Tibbott requested he send the question about how the revenue assumptions were derived to staff. Councilmember Paine did not disagree it was a public safety matter as well as a revenue matter. She suggested council consider that the police budget is $15 million so any additional revenue to the General Fund will help support police services. In the last 15 months, there have been 10-12 neighborhoods complaining about speeding and asking for relief. If relief can be provided via red light camera revenue, the question is whether more than six red light cameras are needed. She suggested analyzing comparable cities such as Kirkland which doesn't have a throughfare like Lynnwood. She pointed out more tickets will require more court staff. She summarized it was worthy of further investigation and helps support public safety goals. Councilmember Teitzel agreed with Councilmember Paine's point about additional expenses. He recalled Chief Bennett saying the department may also need a desk officer to monitor tickets and issue citations. That is not in the budget and may be a midyear amendment. Councilmember Paine anticipated that could probably be done with light duty staff. Council President Tibbott asked who on staff should the question about the number of red light cameras be sent to. Mr. Turley answered certain steps have to be taken to implement a red light program. The police department analyzes intersections to determine the most dangerous ones. Those are submitted to council and analyzed by the vendor to ensure the intersections are viable for cameras. That has been done with 12 intersections. Six cameras were included in the budget, but council could approve up to 12 because analysis has been done on 12. The number of cameras is up to council because administration has already done the work necessary to identify 12. Councilmember Olson asked when the code revision is coming to council. Council President Tibbott answered it is on the November 6 extended agenda. Councilmember Nand said as she expressed at the meeting where Chief Bennett presented the red light cameras, she remains skeptical. While other councilmembers have mentioned neighborhoods expressing concern with speeding such as during the town hall in Meadowdale, Meadowdale and other neighborhoods with the greatest potential for pedestrian accidents due to speeding are not targeted for red light cameras. The highest volume intersections are where red light cameras are proposed and while there may be a public safety component, there is a strong revenue component in targeting those intersections. She was hesitant to use Lynnwood as a comparator due to Alderwood Mall which is a regional draw. Lynnwood has adopted a revenue generating model in which they penalize people for using their roads via the use of what some feel are abusive red light cameras, as well as multiple stops that people feel are racially motivated. She admitted to receiving a red light camera ticket in Lynnwood when she was a college student and being pulled over due to a tow hitch on her dad's truck. Councilmember Nand continued, a lot of people avoid driving in Lynnwood, especially people of color, because they feel it is over policed due to human police interactions. The red light ticket she received due to slowing to 2 mph but not completely stopping was $135. She requested mitigation because she did not feel she threaten public safety and was there with dozens of people who had taken time off work. A judge and prosecutor were present; the judge would state the conduct was not dangerous, but it triggered the red light camera and require payment of a $65 ticket. Comparing the revenue estimate in DP #7 of $638,400 versus the FTEs required, she feared the program would have a net impact on the budget. Councilmember Buckshnis pointed out the difference between red light cameras and speeding cameras. She supported cameras for speeding especially on Olympic View Drive. She recommended installing the school zone cameras first, figure that out, and then next year's council can consider red light cameras due to Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 19, 2023 Page 21 Packet Pg. 355 unknowns about the revenue projections. She agreed with Councilmember Nand that the red light cameras were targeting the Highway 99 area. Mr. Turley pointed out speeding cameras are not allowed. A speeding citation requires a radar gun and a police officer; cameras cannot be posted along a roadway to cite people for speeding. Mr. Taraday commented cameras for speeding are only allowed in school zones. Mr. Turley summarized school zone, red light and traffic citations are three separate, unique things. Councilmember Paine commented installing red light cameras in some locations will also allow traffic officers to go to neighborhoods like Meadowdale. Grants Councilmember Nand recalled the council previously rejected a grant writer position midyear. She found the grant writer a very interesting position, an FTE the council should give some weight and gravity to adding to staff. She is not a grant specialist but was the office manager of a non-profit while in college and did some grant writing so she has a little understanding of what this person would do. This work currently seems to be done by directors and staff members when they have time. The concern she has heard Director Tatum expressed is the City is missing out on federal grants and grants through the State Department of Commerce that the City could potentially qualify for, but no one has the time or energy to put into seeking the grants. Councilmember Nand continued, anticipating the grant writer could be a self -funding position because if successful, they could bring in more revenue than they cost City. She noted the City spends $40,000/year on the lobbyist and everyone can agreed on the value that Debora Munguia adds when she informs the City what is occurring at the state and federal level. A full time grants manager could interact with other jurisdictions and entities to build partnerships and revenue streams to fund the City's initiatives, especially when considering Edmonds as a passthrough entity that is exploring human services and getting resources to the most vulnerable and marginalized community members. As someone who was on WRIA 8's grant committee for eight years, Councilmember Buckshnis said the City needs to have its ducks in row before writing grants. Instead of an FTE, she suggested utilizing a consultant to determine if there is sufficient information to submit grants, for example for Perrinville and Shell Creeks. She preferred to test the waters with a consultant rather than a full-time position with benefits and salary. Councilmember Teitzel commented he was on the fence with this, he was concerned about the structural problems with the budget and adding salary and benefits for an FTE. However, if the council can be assured this position will bring in incrementally more grants than the City currently receives and that the incremental increase would cover the person's salary plus, it makes sense to consider the position. He was open to the position, but needed to be convinced that that would happen. Council President Tibbott asked who would calculate/estimate that. Mr. Turley answered he could. Councilmember Teitzel suggested looking at other cities that have a grant manager. Mr. Turley pointed out the discussion about the budget deficit relates to the General Fund. Even though this person reports to community services/economic development, if they get grants for Perrinville Creek and/or the Marsh, the person will be billed to Utilities so their impact to the General Fund will end up being zero. If they brought in human services or parks grants, the position would stay in the General Fund. Council President Tibbott asked Councilmember Teitzel to send that question to Mr. Turley. Councilmember Paine relayed she talked to Information Services Manager Brian Tuley who said there are information security grants he would like to pursue, but doesn't have the time to write them. There are missed opportunities for grants and she suggested asking the directors to think about programs for which grants could be written to generate General Fund revenue to supplement work that is not being done now. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 19, 2023 Page 22 Packet Pg. 356 8.2.a Levy Councilmember Buckshnis expressed support for pursuing a levy. The first step is establishing a committee or task force. The most important thing is for the council to all be on same page that a levy is needed, recalling a previous levy failed because a councilmember opposed the levy. There could be a fire or police levy. Shoreline has been successful with levies. The school district's levies have been very successful because they have a good group of people who help voters understand the need for the levy , they advertise the levy and everyone is on the same page. She summarized a levy would be simpler than the RFA although she recognized a levy was a lot of work for the finance department. Councilmember Teitzel agreed unanimous council support was needed for a levy. He asked how the council reached a decision regarding pursuing a level, whether it came to council as a business item and a vote. Mr. Taraday advised it cannot go on the ballot without council approval. Councilmember Buckshnis recalled there were councilmembers, administration and citizens on the task force for the previous levy. Mr. Taraday commented it may have started with the mayor the last time, but there is nothing preventing the council from starting the process. Council President Tibbott summarized approving a levy requires a vote of people. A levy could be part of the 2025 budget. Councilmember Chen totally agreed with this approach. He recalled the council sent a resolution to South County Fire requesting information about annexation. He asked if the council decided to do a levy, did the council need to tell South County Fire that the City was no longer interested in annexation. Councilmember Buckshnis said the resolution was just asking for information. Councilmember Nand asked if Councilmember Buckshnis was proposing an EMS levy to address the increase in the RFA contract, or would it be labor citywide. Councilmember Buckshnis answered there have been parks, street and public safety levies. She recommend one levy on the ballot not three; a public safety levy could provide funds for fire and police which was very successful in Shoreline. Councilmember Nand wondered if putting off annexation into the RFA to seek a levy would cause the RFA to provide notice to the City, relaying her understanding that their intent was to annex the entire county. Council President Tibbott pointed out action regarding the RFA would not help until 2025. Today's discussion is about the 2024 budget. Councilmember Paine expressed interest in data from the RFA before making that decision. If the council does put forth a public safety levy, information from the RFA would help inform the council and administration about the budget implications. She pointed out a levy or joining the RFA would not affect the City's budget until 2025. In response to the question about the implications of requesting information from South County Fire, Councilmember Olson pointed out the proposed budget making that commitment without information is what doesn't feel right. A levy does not mean the council doesn't want to join the RFA, it just means putting another funding source in place to avoid having an ax over the council's head. Councilmember Teitzel pointed the budget as proposed assumes the City will join the RFA by 2025. To make that happen, it was his understanding it would need to go to voters by April. There are costs associated with a ballot measure and he asked if that expense was included in the 2024 budget. Mr. Turley answered a certain amount is included in the budget every year for voter registration and election costs. The RFA and levy are 2025 issues and are not part of the 2024 budget. The council will be working on the 2024 budget for the couple months; the levy and/or RFA can be considered after that. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 19, 2023 Page 23 Packet Pg. 357 Councilmember Buckshnis pointed out the school board puts their bonds on the ballot in special elections when fewer people are voting. Councilmember Olson pointed out the strategic outlook is a page in the budget book and is part of what the council approves so the assumptions in the outlook are things the council should be buying off on. Mr. Turley answered the strategic outlook is not part of the budget ordinance. When he prepares the adopted budget, he will update the strategic outlook to reflect decisions that have been made in the meantime, but the 2024 budget ordinance is only related to that year. Council President Tibbott thanked staff and councilmembers for attending today's special meeting. 6. ADJOURN With no further business, the council meeting was adjourned at 5:03 p.m. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 19, 2023 Page 24 Packet Pg. 358 8.3 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 11/6/2023 Approval of Special Meeting Minutes October 24, 2023 Staff Lead: Council Department: City Clerk's Office Preparer: Scott Passey Background/History N/A Recommendation Approval of Council Meeting minutes as part of the Consent Agenda. Narrative Council meeting minutes are attached. Attachments: 20231024 Special Meeting Packet Pg. 359 8.3.a EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES DRAFT MINUTES October 24, 2023 ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Mike Nelson, Mayor Neil Tibbott, Council President Vivian Olson, Councilmember Will Chen, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember Susan Paine, Councilmember Dave Teitzel, Councilmember Jenna Nand, Councilmember 1. CALL TO ORDER STAFF PRESENT Oscar Antillon, Public Works Director Angie Feser, Parks, Rec., & Human Serv. Dir. Rob English, City Engineer Shannon Burley, Deputy Parks, Rec., & Human Serv. Dir. Mike De Lilla, Senior Utilities Engineer Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Scott Passey, City Clerk Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator The special Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 6 p.m. by Mayor Nelson in the Council Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually. 2. ROLL CALL City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present. 3. COUNCIL BUSINESS 1. PROPOSED 2024-2029 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN & CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM City Engineer Rob English explained this agenda items is further discussion on both the Parks and Public Works CIP/CFP. No presentations are planned; presentations have been made twice to council committee and the full council. The planning board's recommendation is included in the packet. A follow-up memo from the planning board chair corrected reference to a sidewalk project in the memo, rather than 236' Street from 84t' to Highway 99, it should be 84' to SR 104. Mayor Nelson said Council President Tibbott recommended, and he concurred, beginning council questions via a round robin. Councilmember Buckshnis raised a point of order, stating that decision was not made by the council president and the council should vote whether to proceed that way. Mayor Nelson responded it a Roberts Rules of Order issue, but he did not have a strong opinion, and invited a motion to do questions via a round robin. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 1 Packet Pg. 360 8.3.a COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO CONTINUE THIS DISCUSSION AS A ROUND ROBIN DISCUSSION OF THE COUNCIL. MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS NOTING NO. Mayor Nelson advised councilmembers will ask one question each Councilmember Teitzel referred to PWT-32, 841 Ave. W walkway from 238" St. SW to 234" St. SW, commenting there has been a lot of discussion with the community about that walkway, it is highly desirable because there is no walkway along that stretch and it is heavily traveled. He has personally witnessed individuals in wheelchairs using the travel lane with vehicles whizzing by which is simply not safe. Most of the funding in the CIP/CFP has been moved back to 2027. He asked if there was a way to move funding around so that project was moved forward to no later than 2025. Mr. English responded last year the city council added that to this year's budget; it was funded with ARPA funds. An RFQ was issued, a consultant selected and a predesign consultant scope of work was ready to go, but then funding was removed from the project. Given reduced REET projections and lack of additional funding sources, it is a difficult project to move forward, especially when the estimated construction cost is over $1 million. Preservation has been the priority, for example there is supposed to be $2.8 million for the overlay program, and the City is at $1.5 million this year plus a federal grant. He summarized it is hard to prioritize a new project over trying to maintain the existing street system. Councilmember Teitzel advised the council will be looking at ARPA funds again. He asked if funds could be freed up for this project, would staff have the ability from a workload perspective to move it up in the schedule. Mr. English answered from a staff capacity in 2024, it could be moved forward. Councilmember Paine said she had that same question. She referred to preservation and maintenance projects such as PWT-5, 6 and 7 which are all scheduled in the future with significant unsecured amounts. She asked if that was based on REET projections or other contingencies. She was not worried about the schedule, but if funding for these three projects and others could be funded via the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL). Mr. English answered those three projects are signal upgrades/maintenance and typically grants programs fund new capital infrastructure, there are not a lot of grant sources for maintenance. He reminded the funding for the last three years of the CIP/CFP is unconstrained, projects that are needed but don't have secured funding sources. He did not envision those projects would be good candidates for grant funding programs in the future. Councilmember Paine said it would be helpful for the council to know if staff identified projects that would be good candidates for BIL funding because having additional revenue sources in the future will be important for the community. She expressed interest in knowing which projects would be eligible for BIL grants. Mr. English answered staff could go back through the infrastructure bill's grant programs to see if there are any opportunities, but he anticipated there would be few because for the most part these are maintenance upgrades of the traffic signal system. If a safety component can be tied to the upgrade, there may be an opportunity to security a transportation safety grant to fund a portion of the cost. Councilmember Paine acknowledged she did not understand all the limits of the BIL, but it would be great to find some opportunities. Councilmember Chen referred to DP# 19, the Lake Ballinger ILA, recalling $200,000 was a budget amendment for 2023 and the Mountlake Terrace City Council and the Edmonds City Council already approved the ILA. He asked if funding needed to be pushed back to 2024. Ms. Feser agreed the council approved the ILA, but did not believe there was a budget amendment for 2023. Staff was aware the project would not be completed in 2023 so there was no reason to do a budget amendment in 2023 to authorize the funds. She anticipated the project will be completed in 2024 so it is listed in the CIP/CFP and in other materials as a carryforward into 2024. It is in the budget and will be accounted for via the formal carryforward process in February 2024. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 2 Packet Pg. 361 8.3.a Councilmember Chen clarified during the 2023 budget discussions, that was an amendment to the budget. Deputy Parks, Recreation and Human Services Director Burley advised it is in the 2023 budget, but the check will not be written in 2023 because the ILA states the check won't be written until the project is complete. The project won't be complete until 2024 so the budget includes a request to carryforward the 2023 budget allocation into 2024 so it can be paid once construction is complete. Council President Tibbott referred to PWF-06, 07 and 08, maintenance projects in 3 fire stations over the next 4 years. He observed some stations may also have inefficiencies related to operations, and asked if there have been any discussions with South County Fire regarding needed upgrades. Public Works Director Oscar Antillon answered a lot of the information regarding maintenance comes from the review of facilities that was done in 2016 and 2018/2019. The more critical maintenance projects are prioritized in the CIP/CFP such as roll up doors. Council President Tibbott asked if that was considered maintenance. Mr. Antillon answered it was considered maintenance, but it is a capital maintenance expense. Council President Tibbott commented at some point it will make sense to look at capital facilities improvements that are required to bring fire stations up to modern standards. Mr. Antillon answered the fire stations are some of the best facilities in the City, they are taken care of pretty well. Unlike Frances Anderson Center, where huge needs are expected in the next couple years. Staff is going through the assessment now; the state is requiring a lot of work be done to bring that facility up to new standards. Councilmember Olson observed the CIP/CFP does not include a HAWK signal at Firdale Village which is a safety, access, and economic development issue for that plaza. There are a lot of residences in that immediate area with pedestrian usage of that center and a HAWK signal definitely needs to be added to the CIP/CFP. She realized 2024 was a scant budget year, but if it is in the CIP/CFP, staff could pursue grants for it. She asked if a council vote was required to add a project to the CIP/CFP. Mr. English answered that would be appropriate to add or delete something from the document. Councilmember Olson asked if council was doing decision packages for CIP/CFP. She asked if council needed more information or did they know enough about it to vote without more information. Mr. English said it is one thing to add it to the CIP/CFP for potential funding, but it is another thing to add it as a decision package in 2024 budget with an identified funding source. Councilmember Olson recalled staff recently quoting her a price of up to $600,000. Mr. Antillon said that estimate is without considering all the factors such as right-of-way acquisition or other things that may make it more complex. The first step is to justify the project via an analysis of the intersection, etc. which could be included initially. The transportation plan is being updated and what needs to be done to improve the crossing might be flushed out through that process. COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO ADD IT TO THE CIP/CFP FOR DESIGN IN 2025 AND MOVE IT UP SOONER IF A WAY CAN BE FOUND DURING THE BUDGET PROCESS BUT AT LEAST THIS WAY WE WILL NOT LOSE TRACK OF IT AS AN ITEM OF INTEREST. Councilmember Buckshnis questioned the estimate of $600,000 for a HAWK signal at Firdale, recalling the Pine Street HAWK signal was $20,000 and the City received a state grant due to the location on SR 104. Mr. English answered the cost of the HAWK signal installed by the state was close to $400,000; the City's contribution was $20,000. He noted even the rectangular rapid -flashing beacon (RRFB) at crosswalks typically cost $7500 each. Councilmember Buckshnis asked the cost of a crosswalk with flags without a HAWK signal. Mr. English answered one of the options discussed was potentially a RRFB in lieu of a HAWK signal which would cost $15,000-20,000 depending on striping and signage. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if that could be installed first in anticipation of a HAWK signal in 2025. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 3 Packet Pg. 362 8.3.a Mr. English said that would be a sunk cost if the RRFB was replaced with a with a HAWK signal; he did not recommend installing the RRFB anticipating a HAWK signal in the future. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if a HAWK signal was needed, noting that stops traffic for 30 seconds versus the RRFB where traffic just stops to allow people to cross. Mr. English answered if the intent is 3' Avenue, there is a horizontal curve that affects sight distance. There will need to be some evaluation to determine the best location for the crosswalk and at least pedestrian counts done to determine if there is enough use to warrant a HAWK signal which is a major investment. He summarized there would need to be some preliminary evaluation before anything like a HAWK signal could go forward. Councilmember Olson added it is not a very safe intersection right now, she would not want to cross that street, so she was unsure a pedestrian count would be a valid indicator of use. Councilmember Paine commented the cost information is important, but there needs to be data to back it up. There are also requests for a pedestrian crossing at Pine Street across 51. She asked if the transportation committee will be developing non -motorized opportunity. Mr. English answered yes. Councilmember Chen referred to the increase in the traffic calming program budget and asked if that funding source could be considered. He agreed time was needed to develop a more detailed analysis related to traffic counts, etc. Mr. English answered the traffic calming program is a separate source of funds to calm speeds. The HAWK signal is more of a pedestrian safety issue and traffic calming funds would not be used for that type of improvement. Given the magnitude of the cost, another funding source would need to be identified. Neither the pedestrian safety program nor the traffic calming program have enough funding for a HAWK signal. Councilmember Chen suggested traffic calming may be a way to mitigate the situation to where a HAWK signal is not needed. Mr. English commented this conversation is getting into the weeds; an evaluation of that area has not been done and he was not aware of accident history on that stretch. He agreed with Mr. Antillon's suggestion to wait for the transportation plan update to evaluate the entire City best rather than a one-off addition to the CIP/CFP. Councilmember Chen said he liked that approach better. COUNCILMEMBER OLSON WITHDREW THE MOTION WITH THE AGREEMENT OF THE SECOND. Councilmember Buckshnis asked about the timing, cost and negotiation aspect of the Lynnwood plant and why it is not in the CFP. Mr. Antillon answered not all the facts on that plant are known, Lynnwood is going through a very preliminary exercise. Lynnwood is doing value engineering on their preliminary design so it is still early in the process. Councilmember Buckshnis asked about the timeline, recalling it took Edmonds a couple years to get the Edmonds WWTP approved for design. She asked if a lower amount would be negotiated. Mr. Antillon answered the full analysis of growth of both cities will determine Edmonds' fair share. Senior Utilities Engineer Mike De Lilla said he has been in discussions with Lynnwood; they are planning to have phase 1 start construction in 2025. The reason it is not in the CIP/CFP is because it is a Lynnwood project and it is in their CIP/CFP. Edmonds' obligation is only to provide its fair share to build the project. With regard to value engineering occurring now, that is being done because the location of the site is very challenging, in the middle of a canyon. There is an expectation that the cost estimate is actually low. A specialist in wastewater treatment design is doing the value engineering. Lynnwood has a 10% design after working on it since 2019. Lynnwood approved new rates effective in 2022; 21 % increases this year, next year and the following two years and then 12% increases for a couple more years. Councilmember Buckshnis wanted to ensure Edmonds' 11 % was accurate and Edmonds was not funding Lynnwood's growth which is much greater than Edmonds' growth. Mr. De Lilla answered at the beginning a lot of the Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 4 Packet Pg. 363 8.3.a plant work is work that Edmonds depends on as well. It will probably be 2-3 cycles until there has to consideration of bonding. Most of the upfront costs fall within that but Edmonds will be actively negotiating to ensure the City only pays its fair share. Councilmember Nand asked why the Lake Ballinger flood plain purchase is under Public Works and Utilities and if there was any possibility that that lakefront purchase could benefit the public as park land or lake access. Mr. De Lilla answered no, the property was purchased using a grant from the Department of Ecology which does not allow public access. Another issue with public access is how people will enter the property which would require paving or a road and a pier and the whole point of this property is a stormwater mitigation facility. Cars would also have to queue on SR104 to reach the site which is not a good idea. Councilmember Nand asked about the stormwater usage of the property. Mr. De Lilla answered it would be for stormwater quality. In addition to restoring the site, there are future plans for installing rain gardens and other stormwater quality mitigation because east of the property is a large storm drain pipe that catches flows off SR-104. This can be thought of as another version of what is being done off SR-104 by the Edmonds Marsh, retrofitting catch basins. On this site, flows from pipes can be captured before it enters Lake Ballinger. Councilmember Nand observed the last time the property was on the market it was $400,000, but the City is paying $120,000. She asked what depressed the price. Mr. English answered $120,000 is in the 2024 budget; the Department of Ecology grant for acquisition was $500,000. The property was appraised and the appraised amount was $480,000. The City is currently in discussions with the property owner. Mayor Nelson reminded this is round robin with only one question per councilmember. Councilmember Nand responded her questions were quite topical and brief compared to other councilmembers. Councilmember Teitzel referred to PWT-69, 7t' Avenue sidewalk repair along the new Civic Playfield, relaying it was scheduled in the CIP/CFP in 2028 for a total of $750,000 and has been moved up to 2024. He walked that sidewalk recently, several sections have already been improved including a new ADA compliant sidewalk curb ramp and other sections have been repaired. The sidewalk, although not in great shape, appears serviceable. He wondered if that could be a source of funding for the 84t' Street walkway or was it too late to reschedule that. Mr. Antillon advised there is a JOC contract for the sidewalk and the work is scheduled for next year. It is a complete replacement of the entire sidewalk because with the patches that have been done, it will be difficult to continue patching it to make a uniform surface. Councilmember Teitzel relayed his understanding of Mr. Antillon's explanation that it was possible to move that project back if council wishes so he could potentially offer a budget amendment to make that change. Mr. Antillon answered the contract would need to be cancelled and he was unsure what that cost would be. Councilmember Teitzel asked if that was doable and what the penalty would be. Mr. Antillon advised it would need to be negotiated with the contractor. Councilmember Teitzel asked Mr. Antillon to let him know the cost to cancel the contract. Mayor Nelson reminded round robin is one question per councilmember. Councilmember Paine referred to PWT-53, ADA Transition Plan update, observing it was scheduled for 2025. She recognized plans take time, but without an active plan the City is not eligible for any ADA grants. She asked if there was any way to move that up, noting some funding was provided by REET but the bulk was General Funds. She asked if it was scheduled in 2025 due to funding or staff capacity or both. Mr. English answered the $440,000 represents a comprehensive ADA transition plan. An ADA transition plan for the right-of-way was done in 2017. The ADA Transition Plan scheduled for 2025 would include City Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 5 Packet Pg. 364 8.3.a facilities, parks, and updating the right-of-way. There would need to be an identified funding source for the General Fund contribution related to facilities and parks. If the council identified a funding source, it could be moved up into 2024, but that is a challenge because the General Fund is in a difficult position. Staff applied for a SS4A (Safe Streets and Roads for All) grant though PSRC and expect to hear the results next month. Once that plan is complete, the City could apply for funding for the ADA Transition Plan update for the right-of-way and have it paid for with infrastructure funds. That was one of the reasons it was moved to 2025. Councilmember Paine asked if staff had the capacity in 2025. Mr. English answered yes. Council President Tibbott referred to page 37 of PROS Plan related to acquisition to complete the Interurban Trail. He asked if there were other anticipated acquisition or improvements anticipated along the Interurban Trail other than regular maintenance such as lighting or expanding the trail to make it more useful as a recreational resources. Ms. Feser recalled Public Works mentioned at the last meeting that they are considering a lighting study for the Interurban Trail so those funds would be in Public Works not Parks. There are funds identified for Interurban Trail expansion in 2029 focused on the piece in Mathay Ballinger Park going southwest to 240' or SR-104 and improving that connection to other nonmotorized transportation routes. There is not much else left of the Interurban Trail to the north. There are opportunities for other trail corridors that may become available between now and 2029. The intent is expansion of trails, the Interurban Trail is the second intent in the second priority. Council President Tibbott advised he would email Ms. Feser the second part of his question. Councilmember Olson observed the green streets project was moved from 2023/2024 for design and 2025/2026 for construction. She was surprised to see it that soon in the CIP/CFP as she did not remember that was the result of last year's budget season. She recalled it was farther out and just a placeholder in case there was a grant opportunity. She wondered if that project should be moved out further or even taken out of the CIP/CFP. At the community engagement for the Burlington site, there was discussion of actual flooding happening in the streets in that area. If the City wanted to do a project, it seems like it should be moved closer to where the flooding is happening. This was also one of planning board's comments, to move this project further out. Mr. English answered two projects were proposed last year through green streets, one on 238' and the other on Dayton. The council took action in last year's budget discussions to remove the Dayton portion of that project, but 238' Street was retained and ARPA funding assigned to that project. Councilmember Olson recalled it was kept in the CIP/CFP but not the budget. Mr. English explained it was up to council to decide if they want to slide that project into the out years; there is no funding identified in the current CIP/CFP document. Councilmember Olson recalled the concern was seeking grants for something that would need matching funds when it was not a priority, and that neither the council nor the community wanted to spend the time going after those grants. Mr. Antillon commented in thinking about projects that can be competitive for grants, this is one of those, it has all the necessary pieces that everyone wants to do. Therefore, it is nice to have it in there, but if council wants to remove it, it can be removed. No resources are being spending on it, but if there is a grant that could be a good source of funding, it could be brought back. Councilmember Olson said she was concerned because it seemed grants almost always require matching funds from the City. Mr. Antillon agreed it was usually at least 20%. Councilmember Buckshnis said removal of creosote -treated logs from Marina Beach was in the media recently. She recalled there was a grant to remove the creosote -treated logs from Haines Wharf which she assumed had expired. She asked if removal of the creosote -treated logs was in the CIP/CFP or did it need to be added and had consideration been given to the creosote piers at Haines Wharf that collapsed into the water. Ms. Feser advised removal of the Haines Wharf creosote piers was not included in the capital program and she believed it was earmarked as a potential mitigation project which is the reason it sits as is. There is great potential for other projects along the water where mitigation needs to be provided so it is being held for that. Councilmember Buckshnis commented DNR has grant programs to remove them for free. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 6 Packet Pg. 365 8.3.a Mayor Nelson told Councilmember Nand that as everyone is interpreting this as a broad one question, he will extend that same courteous to her. Councilmember Nand thanked Mayor Nelson, relaying she had intended to make a motion in the interest of fairness that councilmembers be allowed to ask two follow-up questions or comments because some councilmembers are allowed to and others are being scolded which she did not feel was fair. Regarding the beautification programs and plans Parks & Recreation developed over a five year period, Councilmember Nand said she was aware work had already started at Five Corners with filling in and hardening of the flowerbeds and removal of irrigation and planting of succulents. She asked staff to describe plans for 2024 and whether Firdale was next. Ms. Feser answered the agreed upon beautification project for 2024 were the hanging baskets at the Five Corners roundabout which requires installation of arms and 10-12 flower baskets. The project being completed now, although it coincides and supports that, was a separate project. Councilmember Nand asked if the flower beds in Five Corners will be available for adoption by local businesses and community groups. Ms. Feser answered that has not been considered yet, but it could be part of the corner parks adoption. Councilmember Nand asked if there would be Floretum Club involvement in the Five Corner flower baskets and corner parks. Ms. Feser answered Edmonds in Bloom, not the Floretum Club, has offered to help pay for materials and equipment to make that happen so they will be assisting with the development of the new hanging flower baskets. Councilmember Teitzel referred to PWT-52 Traffic Calming, recalling at a council town hall at the Meadowdale Clubhouse last summer attended by approximately 35-40 people and a majority of councilmembers, they clearly heard concerns from citizens about speeding and accidents on the 1.5 mile stretch of 76', approximately 15 serious accidents in the past 10 years as well as a number of accidents that weren't reported to the police. The council appealed to Public Works to help with some mitigations and he learned last week the Public Works team installed a 3-way stop at Meadowdale Beach Road & 76". He relayed citizens are thrilled by that and appreciate the responsiveness and care for that community. Mr. Antillon thanked Transportation Engineer Bertrand Hauss who did the analysis and determined the intersection met the warrant requirements to install a 3-way stop. Councilmember Paine referred to PWT-27 Olympic View Drive & 174' Street Intersection Improvement and asked what an acceleration lane was and whether it was needed. Mr. English answered an acceleration lane helps vehicles merge into the general purpose lane. That is a project from 2015 and it may not be the right solution for that area. Councilmember Chen recalled discussions about the library roof and asked if there was any follow-up or study about accelerating the roof repair or possibly replacing the roof. Mr. Antillon answered no, reminding that the flooding issue and the roof issue are not related and are completely separate. Over the years, the facilities team has implemented mitigation measures to control the library roof leaks and those have not caused any damage to the library or the tenants who use it. Sno-Isle knows about that and are replacing and revamping that to catch the leak. The roof is nearing the end of its expected life and funded of a full design, scope, etc. will probably need to be funded in the next five years. Councilmember Chen recalled a study about the mold issue in the library and the result that the air quality was ok. Mr. Antillon answered there is no mold and the air quality inside the space is fine. An industrial hygienist did the analysis and it all came back with good results. Councilmember Buckshnis referred to the WWTP, advising her question is about the $40 million set aside to comply with the nutrient removal standards. It is listed as construction and she asked whether more would be constructed onto the building or was that the only category available. She also asked how the $40 million Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 7 Packet Pg. 366 8.3.a estimate was derived. Mr. Antillon answered it is a preliminary estimate from the consultant regarding possible options; there will be some modification. Mr. De Lilla said in talking with the consultant and WWTP staff, it should be on site within the treatment plant campus and the consultant is estimating the cost at $40 million. There is also space across the street; the preliminary plan is to put it on the site. Councilmember Buckshnis observed it was scheduled for 2024 or 2025. Mr. De Lilla answered there is 1- 2 years of design followed by construction. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if the same company used for the pyrolysis project would be used for that project. Mr. Antillon answered that company would probably be used, they have done a lot of plants in the area. Councilmember Buckshnis said she did not see any revenue from the biochar and asked if that would be included in the budget if there is ever any revenue from biochar. Mr. Antillon advised it would be added to the budget; it is still in the early stages of identifying a source to purchase it. The goal is to at least get someone to take it for $1; as long as it is sold, the Department of Revenue will provide a tax break for a large portion of the equipment. Councilmember Nand referred to the Lake Ballinger regional facility design and construction, commenting due to a lack of footprint in SE Edmonds, there is a lot planned for the park such as permanent restrooms, picnic shelter, etc. She asked it would make sense to also run the stormwater infiltration through there or possibly look at other sites so less is concentrated in that very small footprint at Mathay Ballinger and asked how that would impact usage of the park. Mr. De Lilla answered based on the original findings, the entire facility could not fit on that site so other sites are being considered, possibly a smaller footprint and not retaining and/or treating as much of the water as originally planned. Staff is still determining what else can be done and identifying grants to fund the project. Councilmember Nand asked what sort of above ground footprint that will have versus underground. Mr. De Lilla answered most of it should be underground facilities to decrease peak flows and treat the stormwater. With regard to surface usage, Public Works can talk to Parks, but he assumed that would be smaller role because it is a park, possibly there would be a way to have it as a feature in the park, but he assured there would not be an entire rain garden in that area. Councilmember Chen asked whether a study to look at the bike connection between King County and Snohomish County through SR 104 should be a budget amendment or could that be worked into the CIP/CFP. MR. English answered that project along with the other project that was mentioned earlier could be evaluated in the transportation plan update which is currently underway. Mr. Antillon added staff will continue discussions with Shoreline and collaborating with them. Once it is determined an analysis needs to be done, staff will come back to council. Councilmember Buckshnis asked where the red light cameras are in the CIP/CFP. She recalled the school zone cameras were not in the CIP/CFP because it was related to police. The eight new red light cameras and the costs are not in the CIP/CFP. Mr. Antillon agreed it not included in the CIP/CFP. It will come back as a project once there is an agreement like the agreement for the school zone cameras. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if any studies had been done to determine the intersections, traffic counts, traffic impact fees, etc. Mr. Antillon answered he believed the police department had that information. 4. ADJOURN With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 6:58 p.m. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 8 Packet Pg. 367 8.4 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 11/6/2023 Approval of Regular Meeting Minutes October 24, 2023 Staff Lead: Council Department: City Clerk's Office Preparer: Scott Passey Background/History N/A Recommendation Approval of Council Meeting minutes as part of the Consent Agenda. Narrative Council meeting minutes are attached. Attachments: 20231024 Regular Meeting Packet Pg. 368 8.4.a EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MEETING DRAFT MINUTES October 24, 2023 ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Mike Nelson, Mayor Neil Tibbott, Council President Vivian Olson, Councilmember Will Chen, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember Susan Paine, Councilmember Dave Teitzel, Councilmember Jenna Nand, Councilmember 1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE STAFF PRESENT Dave Turley, Administrative Services Director Todd Tatum, Comm., Culture & Econ. Dev. Dir. Frances Chapin, Arts & Culture Program Mgr. Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Scott Passey, City Clerk Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:04 p.m. by Mayor Nelson in the Council Chambers, 250 5t' Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. 2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Councilmember Buckshnis read the City Council Land Acknowledge Statement: "We acknowledge the original inhabitants of this place, the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and their successors the Tulalip Tribes, who since time immemorial have hunted, fished, gathered, and taken care of these lands. We respect their sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and we honor their sacred spiritual connection with the land and water." 3. ROLL CALL City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present. 4. PRESENTATIONS 1. NATIONAL ARTS & HUMANITIES MONTH PROCLAMATION Mayor Nelson read a proclamation proclaiming October as National Arts and Humanities Month in Edmonds, Washington. 2. CREATIVE DISTRICT REPORT Community, Culture & Economic Development Director Todd Tatum and Arts & Culture Program Manager Frances Chapin reviewed: • Washington Creative Districts o Established by the State in 2017 o Coordinated by the Washington State Arts Commission (ArtsWA) Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 1 Packet Pg. 369 8.4.a ■ Modeled after Colorado's Creative Districts program o Goals to celebrate creative diversity and foster economic vitality o ArtsWA provides technical assistance, professional support, and small grant opportunities for certified programs o Creative District program is one tool in the tool box Defining the Creative Sector ■ The Creative Economy's contribution to the state's GDP is 10.3% ■ Creative Sector entities (businesses and not for profits) - defined to include broad range of creative activities, supplies for creation, technical support for creation, and lifelong learning - What is included? • Galleries, art stores, makers, artists, design, software development, multi -media, retail featuring hand crafted, event venues, performance, event planning, arts education, learning, museums, craft food and beverage and more History in Edmonds 0 2014 Community Cultural Plan update recommended economic impact study of arts & culture in Edmonds 0 2017-8 Economic Impact Study recommended City apply for new State Creative District certification o Edmonds certified as the State's first Creative District at the end of 2018 • Washington Creative Districts -13 certified, 8 pending one Twisp Chewelah • CouNe lle Newport Put Langley Edmonds Bainbridge lslando 0 pW lssam,ah Bm 1-0 OBullen Olympia Ellensburg Moms Lake 4PTenino Yakima Kennewick• 40Wzl1a Walla/ College Place Certified Creadv, Dl,oi,l Vanm �A0ti Stage planning Edmonds Process and Five -Year Work Plan o Process ■ The process to complete the original application and work plan included extensive community outreach and participation. ■ The original Work Plan goals emerged from this participation. Once certified, an Advisory Committee was created with representatives from creative sector nonprofits and businesses who met monthly for the past five years. ■ The process for reviewing work done and creating a new 5 year Work Plan included a Creative District Advisory Committee retreat last spring. From this work the new plan was developed, building off of goals in the original plan and accomplishments in the first five years. ArtsWA Certification Criteria o Identify contiguous area - include a mix of creative sector uses within its boundaries o Walkable, distinguished by physical, artistic, and cultural resources o Concentration of arts and cultural organizations, and creative enterprises o Complementary non -arts businesses, such as restaurants Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 2 Packet Pg. 370 8.4.a o Vigorous arts and cultural activity, such as art walks, festivals, concerts, and community gathering places o Community generated 5 year Work Plan o Governance structure and budget Creative District Focus Areas in Review o Work Plan Areas & Accomplishments ■ Area A. Strengthening and expanding the creative identity of Edmonds - Established and convened Creative District Advisory Committee; developed new brand identity for use in advertising for both tourism and business attraction; expanded marketing activities; and implemented new wayfinding and related signage program for both vehicles and pedestrians ■ Area B. Leveraging and connecting creative experiences in Edmonds - Placemaking- inventoried art experiences in public realm; activation of public space; completing 4' Avenue Cultural Corridor concept design, and explored potential for internships/mentoring ■ Area C. Retaining and attracting creative businesses and nonprofits in Edmonds - Drafted directory of creative sector organizations and tourism assets Creative District - Facebook Sponsored Ads Lessons learned over the past five years o Internal lessons learned: ■ The development of effective organizational structure takes a significant time commitment. ■ The CD program resulted in closer connectivity and collaboration within the Edmonds arts community. ■ The Creative District brand has been embraced by a broad range of local businesses and organizations. Edmonds is now widely recognized as an arts community but also as a Creative District which is becoming a powerful "brand". ■ The more we communicated with the other Creative Districts, the more we saw the value of this program - there is strength in numbers. ■ Funding from the State was very important and enabled several projects to move forward. o As a member of the state's program: ■ With the growth of the Creative District program, it has become clear that the Creative Districts offer a comprehensible, accessible picture of what the state's creative economy looks like in practice. ■ As the program has grown, communication with other Creative Districts has increased our awareness of our own value and the value of the Creative Districts to the state's economy and quality of life. ■ As the first Creative District, we struggled initially to market ourselves effectively, recognizing that the strength of the program lies in its distribution across the state and its broad messaging appeal. o Recommendations for the State's program: ■ The Creative Districts collectively hone outreach efforts and encourage ArtsWA to continue to be a conduit for sharing and amplifying advocacy efforts. ■ The State CD program should work to create a marketing plan for the collective districts. ■ Continue to emphasize at both state and local levels the importance of collaboration and the ways a Creative District program is a tool that can strengthen the diverse creative sector within a District, within the broader community of that District, as well as regionally across the state. ■ Continue to advocate for funding streams specifically allocated for Creative Districts. The Next Five Years o Core values & Guiding concepts: ■ Collaborative - City departments and local businesses/nonprofits Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 3 Packet Pg. 371 8.4.a ■ Inclusive - Envisioned as a "hub and spoke" model, the CD is a central catalyst tied to other parts/neighborhoods of the city through connections with businesses and organizations ■ Intentional Visibility of Arts & Culture - The community intentionally incorporates creativity as a priority in programs and projects o Year 1 (2024) ■ Creative Sector Summit ■ Reengage the community - what is the CD and why is it important ■ Asset map of creative sector (organizations, creatives, events, venues) ■ Activation of public spaces ■ Connect CD to larger community - i.e. Internships ■ Work group for funding strategy for 4th Avenue Cultural Corridor ■ Work group for workforce development/infrastructure needs ■ Work group for marketing coordination ■ Advocate for funding and staff at both City and State levels o Year 2 (2025) ■ Incorporate CD in City Comprehensive Plan documents ■ Implement use of asset map ■ Collaborate on city-wide creative sector marketing strategies ■ Develop informational tools on internship programs ■ Develop pilot intern program for CD ■ Expand creative experiences in CD public realm ■ Advocate for next level of 4th Avenue Corridor design ■ Survey creative sector organizations about needs for space ■ Identify public and private funding opportunities to support CD programs o Years 3-5 (2026-2028) ■ Work plan builds on initiatives and programs listed for Years 1 & 2 o HB 1575 ■ Providing councilmanic authority for cultural access program ■ What is Cultural Access - A publicly funded program that expands community access to cultural programs in science, heritage and the arts - Created by state legislature in 2015, providing taxing authority to cities and counties for 7 years - Voter or council approved 0.1% increased sales or property tax. Average household would pay $15-$30/year - Increases public access to cultural activities - Expands cultural education activities for public school students at both schools and cultural facilities, including transportation - Provides sustainable funding for not -for -profit science, heritage and arts organizations - A Snohomish County -implemented cultural access program could generate approximately $20 million and an Edmonds -implemented program could generate approximately $1.3 million to support cultural access programs Next Steps for Recertification 1. Finalize draft recertification package with stakeholder input 2. Meet with ArtsWA for application feedback in November 3. Submit final recertification application Councilmember Nand said her questions are related to the equity and inclusivity aspect of the creative district activities and arts and cultural outreach. There is a strong perception that children should have access to arts and culture opportunities through school. A lot of that is being cut due budgetary pressures, for example, she recalled booster groups asking for old instruments to be donated to school music programs Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 4 Packet Pg. 372 for low income students. There is a perception for adults who cannot afford to rent a music or art space or do not have enough room in their living space to pursue art, music, performing arts or writing space, that that is a luxury not accessible to certain people. In light of that and efforts to put public emphasis on accessibility to the arts, would it make sense to host art, music or maker space in City owned buildings similar to an artist or musician in residence. Ms. Chapin responded that was an interesting question that is discussed a lot by the arts community because space is at a premium for everyone, particularly those without resources. Space is also at a premium within the City which makes it particularly challenging. That is a great question to raise with the creative district because a lot of the discussion is about space and where to make and create. There are performance venues and wonderful organizations that provide things for students such as the ECA and Driftwood Theater who both have programs that go into schools, the nonprofit Music for Life provides instruments, etc. It is much more challenging for adults. She did not have an answer but acknowledged it was a good question. Mr. Tatum said a lot of the arts organizations have programs that actively draw people into their spaces. A lot of the conversation is about the space the City is providing to arts organizations and that conversation needs to deepen over the next several years. There is a strong creative sector economy in the community; it is not unusual for a city to support that sector with some form of infrastructure. The City provides space for arts organizations, for example in the old Public Works building. There needs to be more discussion to give the creative district work group, city council and the state clear opportunities for investment to help alleviate some of those pressures, stresses and inequities. Ms. Chapin added the community makes a lot of effort to provide affordable access to people to experience arts and culture events. The Arts Commission puts on the Writers Conference every year which is the most affordable, accessible conference in the region and very high quality. That is a priority in the community, but the issue of space is always addressed in the cultural plan which will be updated starting next year, a great opportunity to have bigger conversation regarding the need for space and how the City can be a partner in that. Councilmember Nand asked about looking at a youth artist or poet on an annual basis as part of a mentorship program that would be accessible to someone from an underrepresented background. She asked if that could be included in the work plan. Ms. Chapin said that is something the arts commission has talked about. The arts commission recently started poets perspective which is a way to engage both youth and adult applicants. That is a little different and does not require as much management as a youth poet for the year would. The ECA is very active with their statewide spoken word program. Councilmember Nand observed the Port has buskers authorized to do live performances and there are often people performing by Starbucks downtown. She asked if there was a program within the creative district for busking. Ms. Chapin answered there is not an official program; it has always been something where people come and perform. Art Walk has a program where they bring in musicians to perform at specific sites; individual businesses arrange to have someone perform outside their business on Art Walk night. Council President Tibbott said he loved that the branding is coming together and he has been seeing more and more signs around the city which creates enthusiasm for the creative district. Even though the creative district has been in existence for five years, it is still a new program, still in its infancy and there are a lot of opportunities. When his daughter moved back to the area, she wanted to get involved with arts and had opportunity make costumes for Driftwood Players. In terms of a directory, there are a lot of opportunities if people have a name and phone number to contact. Councilmember Paine commented it was exciting that the creative district had reached the five year mark. She asked about spreading the largess and power of the program outside the creative district boundaries, for example encouraging people to visit dining opportunities on Highway 99 and other amenities located in other neighborhoods. Mr. Tatum responded marketing uses the idea of Edmonds as a creative hub with creative institutions, not all within the creative district boundaries. Marketing uses the creative district Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 5 Packet Pg. 373 8.4.a branding and messaging and describes ways to spend the day having creative experiences in Edmonds. Live/work spaces do not need to be in the center of the geographic boundary. As the creative district relationship is deepened with the state, it needs to respect the fact that communities are regional and citywide and can help provide funding for things like live/work space that may not be in the most expensive core of a city, but provide workforce support in the periphery that supports the core at an affordable level. Councilmember Paine asked for example if the multicultural association wanted to put on an event but they are located outside the creative district, would there be partnership opportunities with creative district. Mr. Tatum referred to the core values of inclusive and collaborative. Institutions within the geographic boundary have inclusivity outside the boundary. Councilmember Paine appreciated hearing that it includes all of Edmonds. Ms. Chapin said staff has been grappling with this since beginning, figuring out how to encourage internships and mentorships to learn more about the creative industry. The educational aspect via internships and mentorships is very important and is a way of linking throughout the community. That is a role the creative district can encourage to happen with individual businesses. Councilmember Chen applauded staff for including lessons learned in their presentation, commenting this was the first report/presentation he has encountered with that information. As a private business, he accumulates lessons learned every year so he can improve. He suggested that was a good model that other City departments, board and commissions, etc. can capture. Councilmember Olson wanted to ensure the public knew about Art Works, located in a City building that is not being used for the WWTP yet. There are at least a couple years ahead to thoroughly use and enjoy that space. It is a very economical way for people to take art classes, use equipment for art projects, etc. She asked if staff knew about the internship programs through Edmonds College. Ms. Chapin advised they did. Councilmember Olson commended staff on developing the hub and spoke discussion in the context of recertification because it meets the needs and desires as city and likely the needs and desires of the state to be more inclusive and more equitable. ArtsWA certification criteria in the council packet states there is a contiguous area, walkable and distinguished by physical artistic and cultural resources. There is a concentration of arts and cultural organizations which limits the creative district to a certain space with certain characteristics. The proposed approach is a way around that. Councilmember Buckshnis commented even though she is retiring, she will still support the creative district. She observed the $75,000 in the budget for the cultural element has dropped off and she hoped the cultural element would not be removed from the comprehensive plan. Ms. Chapin suggested addressing that in the budget presentation later on the agenda. She explained the cultural element had to be postponed this year, the intent is to begin the cultural planning process in 2024. Councilmember Buckshnis observed there should be a carryforward in budget. Mr. Tatum advised there has been a selection process and it will be a carryforward item. 5. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO ADD DISCUSSION ABOUT COUNCIL BUDGET CALENDAR AS COUNCIL BUSINESS ITEM 10.3. AMENDMENT CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 6 Packet Pg. 374 8.4.a Edward Benyas, Bothell, the new executive director of the Cascade Symphony Orchestra, reported last night was the symphony's opening night performance at the ECA, 600 people attended the start of the 62' season. The symphony is very successful, people come to the symphony, they go downtown and contribute to the economy by going out to eat before and getting drinks afterwards. He invited City leaders to attend "Europe, a Symphonic Journey" on December 10 and 11, hosted by Rick Steves,. The orchestra will play music accompanied by images from all over Europe and commemorative t-shirts will be on sale in the lobby. He and his wife moved to the area three months ago after retiring from a three decade career in Illinois as a university professor. They love Edmonds, but are living in Bothell until they find something in Edmonds. Nora Carlson, Edmonds, a resident of the Westgate neighborhood, recalled previously speaking to the council about creating safer intersections at school crossings. After a few years of persistence, a positive result occurred with improvements made or still to be made at 96' & 224'i', along with 96t1i and 220'1i near Westgate Elementary. She appreciated the council's request for support and action. Tonight her request has more urgency and the council's response is vital to the community and the health of the environment. The climate crisis is certainly real and the City needs to make a concerted effort to respond in a meaningful and effective way sooner rather than later. Edmonds needs to do its part to live up to America's commitment to stop the negative impacts of climate change. Edmonds has already fallen behind cities in the region by not implementing the 2010 climate action plan. The time to act is now; taking courageous steps now such as figuring out the best way to hire a climate action manager like other cities have done to lead efforts to address climate change. With the great honor of being selected as the first designated creative district in Washington State, she envisioned the City could have an innovative approach to stemming the progress of climate change in Edmonds. Darrol Haug, Edmonds, a member of the economic development commission and the EDC liaison to the creative district advisory board, said the EDC is responsible for helping Edmonds build jobs and revenue and his comments are offered from that perspective. The creative district can help add jobs and revenue, but it needs to be more inclusive than just the bowl. He urged the City when recertifying the creative district to consider making the boundaries all of Edmonds to take advantage of objectives related to inclusivity. This may help recruit software companies for example to locate in the hospital district and receive grants they would ineligible for if not in the creative district. The City has always affirmed its commitment to the arts and used the creative district as one of the vehicles to expand that role. He referenced the legislature's latest tool for providing greater access to culture, the director of Inspire Washington recently showed the creative district advisory board how the City could obtain $1.3 million/year to provide greater cultural access in the community, revenue that could be used to support educational elements of creative district entities. For example, a program that would rotate among creative district entities to encourage families to come to Edmonds every weekend to expand cultural awareness at one of the creative district entities. Ziggy, Edmonds, who runs the arts supply store on Main Street, said he often has conversations with people about art, their experience, and what they want for themselves and their children. He emphasized the need for the opportunities suggested by Councilmember Nand. People visit the store every day looking for opportunities for their kids, whether it is somewhere to further develop their skills or just somewhere safe and interesting to be for a couple hours after school. He supported looking at the development of a makers space in Edmonds, somewhere that is a reliable, hospitable and desirable third place for people to be without necessarily having to spend money to be there, and easily accessible by public transit so people outside the creative district can share the benefits. He summarized these are things that people come into his store and ask for every single day. Lora Hein, Edmonds, spoke in support of budgeting for a climate action manager. To make progress on the climate action plan, the City needs a climate action manager. Without a climate action manager, the City is falling behind meeting necessary goals. Hiring a grants manager would be a fiscally responsible way to provide for both with no harm to the City's financial situation. This expense as well as the costs of too Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 7 Packet Pg. 375 little action in addressing the clear and present climate crisis will only become greater in the future if the City does not act now. Edmonds has citizens and community volunteers ready and willing to do their part. Their efforts can be more effective with the support of a climate action manager. The time to act is now; this cannot be put off. The future of Edmonds, and more importantly, the future of children growing up in Edmonds depends on the council's decision. She implored the council to make the right choice. Comments provided via Zoom by Greg Ferguson, Edmonds, a member of climate advisory board, were interrupted by technical difficulties. His written comments are included below: The last time we had as much CO2 in the atmosphere as we do now was 3 million years ago. There were giant camels roaming the forests of Antarctica, large parts of the earth would have been uninhabitable by humans, and sea levels were 70' higher - about the elevation of Edmonds City Hall. There is no scientific uncertainty about climate change, it is happening now and impacts will be accelerating in the coming decades (see the figure attached below). We are not only not reducing emissions but they increased last year by 2ppm, as they have for the last 11 straight years (see the figure attached below). Climate is not something that will be affecting other people in other places. Edmonds is a front line coastal community. Our response involves two main elements, mitigation, that is reducing emissions, and adaptation, which is responding to what will be happening. Taking as one example of impacts that we will need to adapt to - sea levels are likely to be 4.3' higher in 77 years in Puget Sound and they won't stop there. For reference, think about the Christmas flood we had last year and add 4' to that. Our waterfront will not survive without taking action. Options include protection, adaptation, or a managed retreat. We need to figure out what the plan is and we need to start working on the plan now. A few notes on the CAM position: • A bunch of us retired volunteers, with little professional climate experience in this field by the way, are not going to solve these climate issues. We need a full time expert. • This manager would work on all of our environmental issues. Things like stormwater control, watershed protection, tree canopy, are all climate related issues along with the direct climate impacts. • Sharing this position with nearby cities has been suggested. However, these other cities do not share our climate threats, they, for example do not have a large waterfront area under threat and steep slope, salmon bearing streams. • Edmonds is not overwhelmed by city employees, we have a low ratio of employees to population (0.6%), compared to the rest of the state and other nearby cities. For example, this ratio for Lynwood and Mountlake Terrace is twice ours. Let's fix the budget issues and get to work protecting our future. We need to act now by hiring a climate action manager. 7. RECEIVED FOR FILING 1. CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FOR FILING 2. PARKS, RECREATION & HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT - 2023 Q3 ACCOMPLISHMENTS 3. WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS 4. OUTSIDE BOARDS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS 8. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: 1. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 10, 20232. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 8 Packet Pg. 376 8.4.a 3. APPROVAL OF REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 17, 2023 4. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL AND BENEFIT CHECKS, DIRECT DEPOSIT AND WIRE PAYMENTS. 5. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS AND WIRE PAYMENTS 6. INTERNATIONAL DISTRICT PERMANENT BANNER DESIGN PROJECT 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS PRESENTATION AND PUBLIC HEARING ON REVENUE SOURCES Administrative Services Director Dave Turley reviewed: • Why are we having this presentation tonight? o RCW 35.33.057 states that "prior to the final hearing on the budget, the legislative body or a committee thereof, shall schedule hearings on the budget or parts thereof' • What is the purpose? o When putting a budget together, we start with understanding our revenues. One purpose of this presentation is to help you understand City revenues to help us make expenditure decisions, another is to give you context later this evening when you decide whether to recapture our banked capacity, and/or increase our property tax levies by 1 %. o For both this and the property tax agenda item, tonight is an opportunity to hear comments from the public and for council to discuss whether to adjust our property tax levies for next year. • Budget priorities o What is in the proposed budget in addition to ensuring our commitment to maintaining ongoing city services? ■ Investment in Safe Places to Walk and Drive — In this budget the mayor is prioritizing pedestrian safety. Included is increased funding for traffic calming and for red light cameras which will improve safety for both drivers and pedestrians. Also included is a proposal to add a grants manager, a position that would help bring in additional funds for sidewalks and other city infrastructure. ■ Improving our Parks and Green Spaces — This budget prioritizes upgrades to Mathay Ballinger Park, improving the water quality in the Edmonds Marsh, restoring Perrinville Creek, and responding to the climate crisis by adding a climate action specialist to manage the City's climate response. ■ Highway 99 Revitalization — This budget includes funds for continued improvements to the Highway 99 corridor, reflecting our commitment to that vital area. • Citywide revenues by fund o About 51% of revenues are in the General Fund, another 34% in the water, storm and sewer related funds o Most of the funds on the right side of the pie have their own revenue sources Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 9 Packet Pg. 377 8.4.a • General Fund Revenues by Category o About 45-60% of General Fund revenues are made up of property taxes and sales tax. o Property taxes - very predictable and consistent - but little increase, even during period of inflation. o Sales taxes- unpredictable and more volatile Oahe, o General Fund - Other (- 40%) ■ These are things like charges for services, fines and penalties, grants, and other misc. - Planning & Development - Building permits and related fees - Parks & Recreation - Program fees for things like classes If reduce expenses for programs, may reduce revenue ■ Outside Revenues - Agreements with Woodway and Edmonds School District, Distributions from the State (e.g. liquor and marijuana taxes), Fines and Penalties - - 90 revenue line items in total • General Fund Tax Revenue (2017 through 2022) o Growth in sales tax tlatteninLy out General Fund Tax Revenue (2017 through 2022 Sal,, Tax -Property Tax EMS Tea Other Taxes 12,000,000 — 10,000,000_----- 8,000,00) — — — — — — — — — ��M—— —— 6,000,000 4,000,000 2,000,000 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 • Inflation o This chart goes back to 2003, showing that we experienced the highest inflation during the last 20 years in 2021 and 2022 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 10 Packet Pg. 378 8.4.a 12-month percentage change. Consumer Price Index- selected categories. not seasonally add uston All i--- Fo ad at Jr.— Foad aw ay fro m ho m e Energy Gasoline (all types) Electricity Natural gas (piped) — All items less footl and energy C.—dities less f—d and energy ApnAMI N— ve hi rlat Metllcal care—mOFlmes Sery— less energy se—ces ]Delter Metllcal Cafe Services Eaucatlon ana COmmunl Cation Pnrre nt 10.0 5.0 0.0 June lutl" June June June luny Jut le June June luale lutle 7nm 7005 7007 7009 7011 7n1i 7015 7017 7n19 7n71 7077 Hover wer c hart [o view data. N ale. Shaded ales a�yr�aerita rea�a�iu as rleleuii. real lay IIi� Nat.uinl Bua�uu ur huriurri is Reaurelr. Snnrcn- II G Rrarnau of 1 ahnr Sfati. rir. rf • General Fund Revenues — Property Taxes o Very predictable and consistent, BUT lag behind during inflationary periods o Presentation to follow later this evening • General Fund Revenues — Sales Tax (-34%) o Retail Sales Tax— 21% o Other Sales Taxes (utilities, criminal justice, leasehold) — 13% 1I Adit 00 10A00.000 9.000.00D &000,000 7.000.000 6000,000 i.000000 4.000.000 3'ccl 090 000.: I.000,000 0 ]AN FFB S14R APR hLAY JLN 11.1 .4LJG SEP OCI NW D£C —C—Yer —3.4't P—Y.. 2023 Sales and Use Tax 1zlwo.aoo l I.oao.aoo 10.000.000 9.000.000 &000000 7,000.M all Q000000 5.000.m 4.000 009 3.00QOOl1 '_000000 1.000.O9ll 0 JAN FEB h1AR APR MA1]UN JIJL AllO SEP qCr NOl' DBC �CLrem Ye: —4get Pnv Yee • Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) o A significant revenue source that can help to alleviate pressure on the General Fund (REET does not affect most household in a given year) REET Revenue 2019 Actual 2020Aclual 2021 Actual 2022 Actual 2023 Estimate 2024 Budget • General Fund Revenues and Budget Planning o What you need to know: a� L d N O T— l`e) N O N r-� C tv E t V ca w rr Q Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 11 Packet Pg. 379 8.4.a ■ Transfers — inflation has hit the City hard, and during 2023 council has authorized budget amendments that have caused the General Fund to be forced to utilize restricted fund balance. To resolve this we are proposing to transfer most of our remaining unspent AR -PA funds, as well as money from the Building Maintenance sub fund, into the General Fund. This action will immediately resolve this issue and fully restore our fund balances in the general fund. ■ Revenues — Council has not taken action for several years to increase General Fund revenues in any significant fashion. During the coming months we will need to work together to analyze various options, which may involve changing our relationship with South County Fire, may include a property tax levy, or other forms of revenue generation. ■ Expenses — The administration has taken significant action to reduce spending in 2023, including holding positions vacant and reducing spending wherever possible. Departments were given 2023 spending target reductions which they agreed to meet. During the coming months we will need to work together to explore any options that may be available to improve efficiencies and reduce spending where possible. ■ Trends — Our sales tax revenues remain strong, although growth is now just keeping up with inflation. REET revenues have suffered due to slow growth and development in the city. However, the inability to increase property tax collections, dating back 20 years, has caused a serious revenue shortfall whereby our revenue increases are falling behind current and projected inflation. ■ Budget for 2024 — our city remains on solid round. As part of this budget, the Administration has presented a plan that, if followed, will ensure that the city continues in a strong financial position into 2025 and beyond. Next steps o Open public hearing o Accept comments o Close public hearing o This is presentation only, no action is asked from council after the public hearing. Its purpose is to inform council and the public and to help council make budgetary decisions later Mayor Nelson opened the public hearing. Glenda Krull, Edmonds, asked whether the intersections that would benefit from the red light cameras had been identified, whether a study or analysis had been prepared, has there been an analysis or study of how much revenue the cameras will generated and will that information could be shared with the public. If the City feels more money needs to be spent on safety, she agreed crosswalks should be improved because they are horrible to walk across even on a bright, sunny day. As a walker in Edmonds, she relayed she has had several near misses at crosswalks. She questioned including the implementation of red light cameras in the budget if the intersections had not been identified. Darrol Haug, Edmonds, spoke regarding revenue source, advising the finance department likely has a lot of historic data, some of which has been provided tonight, that would help a part-time council with no staff and a general public that simply doesn't know to be on the same page regarding how to collectively make decisions about running the City. As shown in the presentations, there are different patterns for each revenue source. Edmonds could take a cue from Shoreline and develop a citizen -based effort to create long term revenue forecasting. This would facilitate an understanding of how sustainable some plans are for providing public service. In the post -pandemic world, all sorts of activities are undergoing adjustments and even total reset. How people work, entertain themselves and buy things are all changing. Sales tax revenues are a major funding source, sales tax on auto sales is a major part. Where the car is delivered determines where the sales tax goes. The sale of a mid -priced auto generates the same taxes as 8,000 Dick's burgers so the City needs to be concerned about the vulnerability of some of its revenue streams. He suggested assessing how changes in some of these elements could impact future revenues. New revenue sources also present Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 12 Packet Pg. 380 opportunities. He referred to his earlier comments about the cultural access program that could be developed to bring more families to Edmonds for cultural education. Edmonds does not have a board or commission that addresses increased revenue sources; the council may wish to create a citizen -driven thinktank to help determine vulnerable revenue sources and potential new revenue sources. He joked sitting in council chambers shivering, a possibility is storing cold things in the room. With no further public comment, Mayor Nelson closed the public hearing. Councilmember Nand said it's no secret she is skeptical about the red light camera program. She sees the need for the school zone cameras, but has a lot of questions about implementing a red light camera program in Edmonds, specifically related to potential revenue. The budget estimates the City would issue 280 tickets/month and generate $4 million in revenue/year. According to her calculations, generating $4 million with tickets averaging $200 would require issuing over 1,600 tickets/month. She was concerned about the administrative and logistic impacts to the court with people contesting tickets. She has seen how Lynnwood's court operates; there are dozens of people contesting tickets every day. She reached out to Judge Rivera and she directed Court Administrator Uneek Maylor to determine if additional FTEs will be required. Councilmember Nand clarified her questions were how many tickets would need to be issued to generate $4 million in revenue, the impacts on court staff and if additional FTEs or contractors would need to be hired to process the additional legal activity within the municipal court that could be anticipated from issuing the amount of tickets required to generate $4 million in revenue. Mr. Turley answered he did not have the per ticket calculation. It is assumed five school zone cameras will come on line in January which will give warnings for a month and begin issue tickets in February, so 5 school zone cameras generating infractions for 11 months of the year. The budget includes six red light cameras. The police department does a study to determine the most dangerous intersections which are then proposed for cameras. That is to ensure cameras are really to address traffic and pedestrian safety. Mr. Turley continued, staff then comes to council and asks for approval to proceed with the project. Following council approval, the vendor working on the school zone cameras will verify the study done by the police department and then the cameras can be installed. The revenue projection is based on red light cameras in place for half a year, hopefully longer if there is no foot dragging related to implementing the program. Tickets are $130/each. The revenue Lynnwood generates was used plus the traffic flows on the streets they have cameras on was compared to traffic flows on the streets in Edmonds to develop a ballpark comparison based on Lynnwood's data. The estimates are low to avoid overestimating revenues. Some information is included in the decision package; he can provide more information regarding how many tickets are estimated to be issued per camera per intersection. Mr. Turley agreed it will result in additional workload for the municipal court. The administration did not want to propose hiring someone to handle the additional workload until the addition workload happens. If additional staffing is needed, that can be done quickly. Councilmember Nand advised that will affect the net revenue added to the General Fund. She asked how that assumption was built into the 2024 proposed budget. Mr. Turley answered for the first year it is assumed the number of infractions will not increase from zero in January to 5,000 February. School zone cameras will come on slowly and the red light camera will be installed later and there will be a better idea at that time about the additional workload. He summarized there is not an additional FTE in the 2024 budget for the municipal court. Councilmember Nand asked if the company that runs the red light cameras receives fee for each ticket issued or is it a monthly flat fee. Mr. Turley answered it is a monthly flat fee; it is the same fee whether there are a lot of infractions or a few infractions, so there is no incentive for the vendor to generate more infractions, their incentive is to keep the cameras working. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 13 Packet Pg. 381 8.4.a Councilmember Nand strongly encouraged throwing out Lynnwood as a comparator because of Alderwood Mall and 196' ; Lynnwood draws tens of thousands of commuters every day, especially during the holiday season. She referred to the statistic that 80% of people who get a ticket in Lynnwood don't reside in Lynnwood, noting Lynnwood's population is only 18,000. Edmonds has a really nice waterfront, but does not have anything like the Alderwood Mall unless the cameras target ferry traffic which she feared would deter people from using the Edmonds ferry and using the Mukilteo ferry instead. Mr. Turley agreed Lynnwood has Alderwood Mall which generates a lot of traffic; Edmonds has Highway 99, where some of the cameras are proposed, which has about 35,000-40,000 cars/day. While not a mall, Highway 99 is a very high traffic area. To Councilmember Nand's concern that some of the people traveling Highway 99 are Edmonds residents, Mr. Turley pointed out lot of them are traveling through. For example he has driven Highway 99 hundreds of times and has never lived in Edmonds. Mr. Turley found it highly suspect to believe a driver who knows there are traffic cameras in Edmonds, especially because there are traffic cameras in many surrounding cities, would drive to Mukilteo and around to avoid Edmonds and be able to run red lights in Mukilteo. A driver knowing there are red light cameras in Edmonds would drive more safely and stop at red lights versus driving around to Mukilteo. Councilmember Nand said she knows many people who refuse to drive in Lynnwood because they have gotten caught by a red light camera doing a rolling stop and not a full stop and have had to take time off work to contest the ticket. In addition, a lot of people of color feel they get racially profiled because of Lynnwood's decision to use their roads as a revenue generating source which leads to over -policing. She remained very skeptical and would prefer Edmonds not follow the City of Lynnwood in this matter. Mr. Turley said the studies he has seen show red light cameras do not lead to over -policing and if anything it has the opposite effect because patrols can be diverted to other areas because the cameras take care of speeding and red light running instead of officers. Councilmember Nand said the City of Lynnwood decided that a lot of people use their roads to get to the mall and they can make a lot of money pulling people over. Councilmember Teitzel said the council has received input from citizens that state law may require city council take action to investigate the red light camera possibility and initiate studies themselves to determine the right intersections for red light cameras. The first time the council saw the proposal for red light cameras was in the budget when it was received 2'/2 weeks ago so council did not initiate this action. He asked if the council is required to take that action before considering red light cameras. City Attorney Jeff Taraday answered the council is not required to take that action before considering red light cameras; council action is required before implementing the cameras. The council can decide whether they like the idea; some code changes and other things will need to come to council before the cameras can be fully implemented. Councilmember Teitzel said he understood that, but asked if the law requires the council to initiate its own studies of which intersections deserve red light cameras. Mr. Taraday answered the study has to come to council for council approval, but he did not think it had to be initiated by the council. Councilmember Buckshnis preferred to see the school cameras installed first. She also supported having a vetting session and public hearing on the red light cameras. She has heard some of the same comments Councilmember Nand has; she has never gotten a red light camera ticket but her sister has. She agreed a rolling stop could generate a red light camera ticket. She was unsure if the revenue source should be included in the 2024 budget. Councilmember Buckshnis recalled in 2021 when interest rates were low, the City issued $2.3M in bonds for the building maintenance fund. That was discussed by the finance committee last year and it specified the funds were for building maintenance. She asked about transferring the $2 million in bond proceeds into the General Fund or was the $2 million accumulation of building maintenance money from another source. Mr. Turley answered it was from the 016 Fund. Councilmember Buckshnis observed the bond proceeds were moved into Fund 016. She recalled when those bonds were issued, other bonds were consolidated. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 14 Packet Pg. 382 8.4.a In response to comments that the red light cameras capture rolling slow stops, Mr. Turley said the red light cameras are first and foremost a public safety issue and not just cars crashing in the intersection. For example, his wife was entering an intersection and a car making a very slow, rolling stop hit her, knocked her over, injured her wrist and her wrist is still sore to this day. Even though slow rolling stops might not total a car, it is a public safety issue for pedestrians and vehicles. Councilmember Olson said the Edmonds Police Department has initiated a study and has the information regarding the intersections. She asked if the studies and data would be provided when it comes to council for consideration. Mr. Turley agreed the police department has identified dangerous intersections for cameras. He has not seen the data himself but believed it would be shared with council. Councilmember Olson said she has been on the receiving end of a lot of complaints and concerns from residents about reckless driving and high speeds so she was not as automatically opposed red light cameras as some other councilmembers. Relying on it in the budget is why the council is talking about it. She took exception and was offended by staff saying the City was on solid ground because that solid ground assumed $4 million in revenue from red light cameras, using a $6.5 million ARPA patch and $2 million that was set aside for deferred maintenance. It also assumes there won't be any budget amendments despite knowing the police contract is being renegotiated and there will be approximately a 10% increase. She wanted to be honest and she did not feel that was an honest assertion. She was interested in seeing the information related to red light cameras, and being open to the possibility it may be a program that is appropriate for Edmonds, but it is dangerous to assume that large amount for that many intersections. The council was completely on board with the school zone cameras. She suggested separating the revenue from school zone cameras versus red light cameras so the council knows the revenue they can count on versus what they are still considering. Councilmember Olson referred to the assertion that permits only cover the cost of processing. Residents are interested in DADUs and although there is time before the City has to implement them based on the state mandate, they could be implemented sooner. If the City was generating more than the cost to process those permits, that could be a way to generate more revenue this year. She asked if that was true, that the cost of processing permits is just a break even. She noted the City should be implementing DADUs because the people are asking for it. Mr. Turley said he is not an expert in how permit fees are calculated, but it is his understanding a study is done every 2-4 years to compare the costs of permitting and adjust rates accordingly; it is not allowed to be profit center, to use permit and inspection fees to do anything other than support the planning & development department. Further details can be provided by Planning & Development Director McLaughlin. If permitting activity goes up, it generates more revenue, but may require hiring more staff to handle the activity. He summarized the revenues and expenses kind of match. In response to earlier points, Mr. Turley said this has not been a fun year to put the budget together. The administration was tasked with a big job to put together a sound, solid budget that would put the City on solid ground which he believed they did. Many things in the 2024 budget are estimates; that's what a budget is, a projection. If council approves expenses in the budget and takes away a good chunk of revenue, the City won't be on solid ground and that won't be the fault of the administration. The council and the administration need to work together to ensure these revenues come into the budget. Councilmember Paine said discussing ways to generate revenue is not a fun conversation and requires being more creative. She recalled during the presentation regarding red light cameras there were six intersection scattered around including 100t1i & SR 104 and 76't' & 220'1i. She described driving to tonight's meeting, she was nearly T-boned at Olympic View Drive and Puget Drive by someone who did not stop at the red light. She agreed with Councilmember Nand that there are likely to be additional expenses associated with red light cameras. There will need to be an understanding of how much and to include estimates in the budget for those and other expenses. The budget anticipates 6 cameras but 12 dangerous intersections have been identified. She emailed staff asking for the location of those 12 intersections, noting they are in areas Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 15 Packet Pg. 383 8.4.a where there have been a lot of accidents. For example 100' & SR 104, she knows three people who have been hit by cars at that intersection. The council needs information, calculations and formulas. Councilmember Paine continued, recalling there is always an attachment to the budget regarding revisions to permit fees. She agreed permits are a cost center, are intended to be self-supporting and cannot make a profit. She recalled two years ago, there was an amendment to allow the City to charge for attorney fees for technically difficult permits such as wireless cell cabinets which she hoped had been implemented. Councilmember Chen suggested when talking about revenue, the council also needs to talk about expenses. Inflation has an impact, but it is not totally to blame. Spending habits and staff headcount also need to take some of the responsibility, recalling HR's presentation last week on their efforts to recruit 60+ people and transitioning out about 20 for a net gain of 47 staff in the first 9 months of the year. A combination of factors are responsible for the City's financial situation. He agreed the City was far from being on solid financial ground at this point. There is work to do and the council and administration need to work together to resolve it. Councilmember Chen continued, transferring $2 million from the building maintenance fund to the General Fund for day-to-day operations is very costly because the City issued bonds, meaning the City incurred costs issuing the bonds and is paying interest on borrowed money. The deferred maintenance was needed which is why the City borrowed money. The proposed transfer will further delay that maintenance and transfer money with interest incurring. The red light cameras have to be for safety and should not be targeting certain areas or considered as a revenue generator. The study results from the police department and other resources need to be reviewed to ensure the red light cameras are related to public safety and not for the purpose of generating revenue. With regard to the ARPA fund transfer, Councilmember Chen said that is needed for an immediate patch, but Congress' intent was to use those funds to help out small businesses and other one-time expenditures. He hoped the City would only use enough ARPA funds to patch the hole, and leave some for critical, one time needs. The budget also assumes there will not be any RFA or fire service expenses in 2025, with the assumption the City joins the RFA. That may be a premature conclusion and other options may need to be considered. He reiterated his comment about the need to consider cutting expenses along with generating revenue. He was hopeful during council discussions, there will be opportunities to cut expenses. Councilmember Nand agreed it was not appropriate to view the red light cameras as a revenue generating exercise and it was very inappropriate to target one area of the City with the red light cameras . She was sick and tired of the Highway 99 community being referred to as an income generating part of town; everything that everyone considers unpleasant like car dealerships and red light cameras that generate a lot of money for City government, go into that part of town so the other parts of town are much more pleasant. Conversely, public safety in the Edmonds bowl is a radar sign that voluntarily slows drivers to 25 mph, huge safety bumps, and extra wide sidewalks. The Highway 99 community is being told that public safety has to look like red light cameras which she felt was very inappropriate. 2. PRESENTATION AND PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPERTY TAXES Administrative Services Director Dave Turley relayed at the request of council, he will go off script and do show and tell of the Assessor's website. The council's budget workshop on Thursday, October 19 included a great presentation by the Snohomish County Assessor regarding property taxes. He demonstrated property tax information available on the Snohomish County Assessor's Office website by clicking on Tax Distribution, and entering a parcel number. Mr. Turley reviewed: • Why are we having this presentation tonight? Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 16 Packet Pg. 384 8.4.a o RCW 84.55.120 States that we must "hold a public hearing on revenue sources for the district's following year's current expense budget." (General Fund) What is the purpose? o In our case, Property Taxes make up about 33% of GF budget, excluding transfers. One significant purpose of this presentation is to give you context when you decide whether to increase our property tax levies by 1%. o A complete and detailed view of revenues and expenses, and fund balances, are included in the Mayor's Proposed Budget. Introduction: o Washington State property tax laws are among the most complicated in the entire country. o There are many sources out there that I can direct you to if you would like more details on the intricacies of Washington State property tax laws. One very good, concise description can be found at http://mrsc.org/Home/Explore-Topics/Finance/Revenues/The-Property-Tax-in- Washington-State.aspx o A law was passed in Washington State 20 years ago that limited property tax increases to 1 %/year. Examples of other jurisdictions facing General Fund shortfalls o King County— tweet from King County Executive Dow Constantine regarding major shortfalls in the General Fund o Poulsbo - Kitsap Daily News: Poulsbo looks at options to bring in more revenue o City of Seattle — Seattle Times: As budget shortfall looms, Seattle City Council debates need for new revenues How do we compare to other cities in Snohomish County? o 2023 Levy Rate for Cities in Snohomish County: $9.0000 MW $8,0000 $] 0000 $6.0000 $5.0000 $+ 00H $' no. $2 nW0 Si 00W i ` r c Fp o \ a \ca e e �a3 aF t¢``��e Jµ �o hoc 6 �'e� \ c 5°�c �` � Sd'a w�yc i Property Taxes make up about $15.9 million, or 25% of the General Fund budget (Budget Book page 27) Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 17 Packet Pg. 385 8.4.a o Property Taxes that go to the City of Edmonds make up only 10.2% of the Property Tax bill paid by the typical Edmonds homeowner o This declined from 10.3%, 11.2%, and 14.6% in the previous years Chart: Budget Book page 27) 2022 PROPERTY TAX RATE PER $1,000 OF AV HOSpltaMstrict $o.o5 1% c1tvd _ _ 'iii Edmdds WA $tale $drools ` $0m im $2.23 33% Snohomish County Sno-lsle libraries $0.31 5% FdmoMs6chool llhtrict $2.62 39% • What would be the estimated annual impact per household on increasing the 2024 levy? (the average AV in rcimonQS is �,2Syo,/uu) Regular Levy 1% $ 106,852 Approx. # of Households 17,845 Annual Increase per Household $ 5.99 EMS Levy 1% $ 42,861 Approx, #of Households 17,845 Annual Increase per Household $ 2.40 Regular Levy 1%+Banked Capacity $ 633,282 Approx. #of Households 17,845 Annual Increase per Household $ 35.49 Number of households in Edmonds is 17,845 per the 2020 US Census o Our banked capacity is $526,430, which results from not taking the full 1% allowable for the last five years. This is the full amount that Council could still levy if it wished. • What would be the estimated annual impact per household in increasing the 2024 Regular levy by 1% and adding the banked capacity? r Q Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 18 Packet Pg. 386 8.4.a The formula Is: AV / $1,000 X Rate Average Res.dence $503.000 AV $1 h1 AV Edmonds Residence AV S 896 M 5 500,Ceo $ 1.000,00.7 Estimated Rate Iper thousartd) $ 0.6%83154264 $ 069f-&1154244 $ 0.6%831542=4 AV per thousand S 39G70 S AJ.Co S toco.00 41 X Rate S O.CF GDIS42`1 S 0.69CS31S4244 S O.fti931S42-'4 Increase by 1% S 1> 7S $ 3.48 $ (A9 Add Banked Capacity (assurne 17,845households) S 29t/3 5 1645 $ 32.90 Average increase per 101 . $ 35.75 S 19.93 S 19.87 • Senior Citizen / Disabled Persons Exemption for 2023 tax vear Status Income Level Amount of Reduction A $0 to $38,591 Exempt from excess levies (ie: local school levies) and Part 2 of the state school levy imposed under RCW 84.52.065(2), plus a reduction of assessed value of 60% or $60,000, whichever is eater B $38,952 to $47,167 Exempt from excess levies and Part 2 of the state school levy imposed under RCW 84.52.065(2), plus a reduction of assessed value of 35% or $50,000, whichever is greater, not to exceed $70,000 C $47,168 to $55,743 Exempt from excess levies and Part 2 of the state school levy imposed under RCW 84.52.065(2 • Senior Citizen/Disabled Persons F,xemntion for 2024 Tax Status Income Level Amount of Reduction A $0 to $54,000 Exempt from excess levies (ie: local school levies) and Part 2 of the state school levy imposed under RCW 84.52.065(2), plus a reduction of assessed value of 60% or $60,000, whichever is eater B $54,001 to $64,000 Exempt from excess levies and Part 2 of the state school levy imposed under RCW 84.52.065(2), plus a reduction of assessed value of 35% or $50,000, whichever is greater, not to exceed $70,000 C $64,001 to $75,000 Exempt from excess levies and Part 2 of the state school levy imposed under RCW 84.52.065(2 • Property Tax Decision for tonight: Does Council wish to add the banked capacity, as well as increase either the Regular Property Tax Levy or the EMS Levy by 1 % over last year? (Amounts provided by the Snohomish County Assessor's Office) c m a� L a1 d N 0 M N O N r-� d E U w r a Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 19 Packet Pg. 387 8.4.a Adding036 Adding1% Adding 1%+Banked Amount levied last year $ 10,685,180.54 $ 10,695,180.54 $ 10,695,180.54 Add 1% - 106,851.81 633,281.70 Add New Construction 29,052.71 29,052.71 29,052-71 From Previous Slide: Utilities 4,600.45 4,600.45 4,600.45 Refunds and otherAssessor Adjustments 29,126.21 29,126.21 29,126.21 Adding only 1% to the regular levy adds about $5.99 per household per year. ESTIMATED Regular Levy for 2024 $ 10,747,959.91 $ 10,854,81172 $ 11,381,241.61 Adding 1% to the EMS levy adds about $2.40 per household. EMS Levy Or adding 1% plus the banked capacity Adding0% Adding1% No Banked Capacity Would add $35.49 per household per Amount levied last year $ 4,286135.47 $ 4,286,135.47 S - year. Add 1% - 42,86L35 Add New Construction 11,653.88 11,653.88 Utilities 1,832.65 1,832.65 Refunds and other Assessor Adjustments 1L616.41 11,616.41 ESTIMATED EMS Levy for 2024 $ 4,311,236.41 $ 4,354,099.76 0 Next Steps: o Open Public Hearing o Accept comments o Close Public Hearing o After the public hearing, council needs to discuss the alternatives and decide on 1% or 0% increases on both the Regular and EMS levies, as well as whether to recapture the city's banked capacity on the Regular Levy. Then we will prepare an ordinance reflecting the decision arrived at tonight and place it on the next available Consent Agenda. ■ Action Needed: - Motion to approve a 0% increase to the Current Expense (Regular) Levy, or - Motion to approve increasing the Regular Levy by 1 %, or - Motion to approve increasing the Regular Levy by 1% plus the banked capacity. - Also need a second motion to approve a 0% or 1% increase to the EMS Levy. Mayor Nelson opened public hearing. Darrol Haug, Edmonds, commented property taxes are a mystery to everyone; if your home value goes up, do your property taxes go up? If your home value goes down, do your property taxes go down? Most people say yes to both those questions; 50% of the time that answer is wrong. People need to understand how property taxes work, it is pretty complicated. He suggested a presentation on the website that helps people learn about complicated issues such as this. Due to higher assessed values in Edmonds, tax dollars are actually exported to the rest of Snohomish County, to schools, and to the library. The council packet shows raising regular property tax levy and the EMS levy by the 1% allowed by the initiative enacted by the legislature in 2001; 1% does not cover inflation. Labor costs for union and non -represented employees and growth rates all exceed 1 %. Those increasing costs need to be covered in order to sustain city services. The council should vote in favor of the 1% increase in property taxes, not just for this year but also the banked capacity. It will not solve the problem, but it will help and a do a few good things. He thanked Councilmember Buckshnis for her efforts over the years to help residents understand taxation and budget. He congratulated the council for their efforts this year to help the public understand taxes and the budget. This is a public hearing with limited scope and time does not permit him to offer ideas regarding how to tackle this inflationary problem so he will correspond with councilmembers with more ideas related to inflationary pressures on the budget. Kim Bayer-Augustavo, Edmonds, said in order to comment on the property tax public hearing, she needed to go back to the revenue presentation because they are intertwined. She found the revenue presentation included too many fear tactics; for example, sales tax revenue is relative to inflation and consumer spending and she did not see it spiraling as Mr. Turley indicated. She urged councilmembers not to fall prey to the Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 20 Packet Pg. 388 plea for more money in property taxes especially those seeking reelection. The council cannot continue to raise taxes; there is slush in the budget and she urged the council to cut the fluff and get back to the basics. Pet partisan projects need to go and there are too many with this administration. She urged the council to do what they were elected to do, represent the citizens by cutting expenses and not raising property taxes. Debra Arthur, Edmonds, said she is more concerned about taxes on utilities and keeping them at a decent amount than she is about an increase in property tax. A $35.49/year increase is nothing, it is $4/month. She supported the increase and did not think most property owners would have a problem with it. With no further public comment, Mayor Nelson closed the public hearing. As Councilmember Olson began making a motion, Councilmember Buckshnis raised a point of order, suggesting a question and answer period before a motion. City Clerk Scott Passey advised a motion was not out of order. Mayor Nelson ruled point not taken. COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PAINE, TO APPROVE INCREASING THE REGULAR LEVY BY 1% PLUS THE BANKED CAPACITY. Councilmember Olson echoed one of the commentors who said a 1% tax increase does not keep up with inflation. There have been some very bad years with regard to inflation and the council has not approved a property tax increase in a long time. As shared in the presentation, this is approximately $500,000 citywide with the amount distributed evenly. Had she better understood the way taxes were assessed sooner, and she apologize to the residents that she did not understand it better and sooner, she would not have been voting no on the 1% increase each year. She recommended future councils approve the 1% increase each year because everything the City buys, whether labor or lumber or services, is going up at a rate higher than 1%. Due to the very difficult times with the budget this year, the council needs to approve the banked capacity. She recognized the increase would be felt a little more this year than it will in subsequent years when only the allowed 1% increase is approved. Councilmember Nand said due to the severe budget issues the City is facing, unfortunately the council will need to approve the 1% and the banked capacity. During her presentation, Snohomish County Assessor Hjelli said in regard to the slide about potential relief for low income and seniors, her staff have paper packets they use to help people with disabilities and/or are elderly and who may have computer access issues complete the necessary forms. She expressed support for the City making those paper packets available and helping people who are negatively impacted such as people with disabilities or elderly on a fixed income apply for relief. She asked if that would be feasible. Mr. Turley assumed the City could help people fill out the form although the application has to be submitted to Snohomish County. Councilmember Nand assumed people who are adversely impacted by a $40 increase in their property taxes would need a lot of help. Those are individuals the City should connect with household support grants and other human services. The incredible inflation the City is facing is unfortunately the reason for taking this leap; $40 may not sound like a lot but the banked capacity is 5%, a total of a 6% increase which is significant to a lot of people and she wanted to ensure the people at the margin do not feel like they are being thrown under the bus. Mr. Turley advised it is not a 6% increase, it is only a'/z% increase in property taxes because only 10% of what someone pays comes to the City so the 6% increase coming to the City is only a %2% of the overall bill. Councilmember Teitzel commented this is always a difficult discussion but especially in an election year because some voters will say they will not vote for a councilmember who approves this property tax increase. However, the council has not approved an increase since 2018 and inflation has vastly outstripped the City's ability to generate revenue. He did not see another choice at this point so he will support the motion. As the council thinks about the impact on citizens, it is not just a property tax increase, there will Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 21 Packet Pg. 389 8.4.a also be increases in utility rates, and the EMS levy, and he wanted to ensure that everyone who qualifies for a reduction knows how to obtain it even if they do not speak English. He expressed interest in exploring that outreach further. Councilmember Chen thanked Mr. Turley for demonstrating the Snohomish County Assessor's site. When it comes to a tax increase, the City is in a situation where it is short of revenue to fund operations and needs the additional funds generated by a property tax increase. The council has been banking the property tax increase for years and now the City need the money to function. He supported the motion, but like other councilmembers mentioned, he wanted to ensure people who need help can get that help either by being aware that assistance is available, help with filling out forms, etc. He volunteered the Asian Service Center to help the Asian -speaking population, commenting outreach may be needed to other non-English speaking populations. It is not just the City proposing an increase, the school district is also considering issuing bonds to build new schools and raise money, which also impacts taxpayers. With staff s commitment to assisting vulnerable residents who need help, he will support the motion. Councilmember Buckshnis referred to the slide in the presentation with the estimated annual impact to the average household, summarizing a 1% increase would generate $106,852; the 1% + banked capacity generates an additional $526,430. She asked if the banked capacity was for five years. Mr. Turley answered yes, advising the numbers in the slide were provided by the county assessor so they are correct. Councilmember Paine pointed out the 1% was not taken in a couple of high revenue years. Taking the 1%/year increase is a best practice and it is unfortunate the council did not take it each year. She was glad the council was having this discussion and it is great for the community to have this information. It's unfortunate the City has to continue to do this, but it is a structural problem created by 1-747. She will support the motion. With regard to the City's commitment, Councilmember Olson wanted to ensure people have access to programs, but in her opinion it did not necessarily have to be from staff. The Waterfront Center has volunteers who help people prepare their taxes and perhaps something similar could be set up through the Waterfront Center and other charities where the paperwork would be available and assistance provided instead of using staff time. With regard to the 5.9% increase, she noted that was partially because the 1% increases compound. Councilmember Teitzel was committed to combing the budget to find every penny of expense savings possible. It is not just blindly asking for revenue increases, the council will be looking for additional cost savings to ensure as lean a budget as possible is delivered. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO EXTEND FOR 30 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Councilmember Buckshnis defended what has happened over the last 13 years. She recalled the City started doing pay as you go and utility rates spiked between 2010 and 2019. There were some good revenue years but there was also the Great Recession, synthetic interest rates that were low for many years, and then high inflation because printing money spikes inflation. It is important to realize this will be very impactful to residents because there will also be utility rate increases. She was committed to looking at the budget to cut as much as possible. It is unfortunate utility rates have spiked so much over the last ten years. In response to Councilmember Olson's comment, Councilmember Nand said while she did not want to unfairly burden staff, government has an important obligation to provide services to vulnerable members of the community, especially when they will be negatively impacted by this property tax increase as well as utility rate increases. The City cannot expect nonprofits to step in with their limited capacity to help the most vulnerable and easily hurt members of the community; the City has to directly help provide those Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 22 Packet Pg. 390 8.4.a resources and be seen as a source to provide that assistance. She has already started a conversation with Director Antillon regarding the utility rate increase and accessibility to utility assistance programs. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER CHEN, TO PASS A 1% INCREASE TO THE EMS LEVY. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 10. COUNCIL BUSINESS 1. YEAR IN REVIEW / DECISION PACKAGE PRESENTATION - COMMUNITY, CULTURE & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (CCED) Community, Culture & Economic Development Director Todd Tatum reviewed: • Organization Economic Development & Community Se.v' e Todd Tatum Administrative Arts &Cultural �Commonitzlions Assistant Community Services rvices ProgramScrategis/Pblic Dive rsity Commission (PT) Program Coordinator Manager Information Officer Coo(PT) r q (PT) Cultural Arts Program Specialist • Program Areas o Neighborhood City Hall ■ Front Desk ■ Rent ■ Construction ■ Space use and interdepartmental coordination o Community Services ■ Communications ■ Intergovernmental Relations ■ Special Projects ■ DEIA Commission o Economic Development ■ LTAC ■ Tourism ■ BID ■ Economic Development Commission ■ Creative District o Cultural Services ■ Arts Commission - WOTS - Concerts - Public Art - Exhibits ■ Tourism ■ Promotion ■ Creative District o Communications Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 23 Packet Pg. 391 ■ Launched Instagram account ■ 103 press releases as of 10/24/23 ■ Translated 11 board recruitment notices into three languages (Spanish, Korean, Chinese) ■ Reach 2 1 K households via print newsletter ■ Produced in person State of the City, simulcast online and TV ■ Produced promotional video for new Fix It app ■ Increased local and regional news coverage online, in print, radio, and TV o Community Services ■ Staff Diversity, Equity, Inclusion & Accessibility Commission - Continue the Diversity Film Series - DEIA Commission grant program - $2000 ■ Increased community outreach and support activities such as Lunar New Year; Pride Event; Community Fair; Juneteenth Event Economic Development o ARPA funding: ■ Account `B" shall be the "Edmonds Rescue Plan Household Support" account - Likely to grant the entirety of the $920,000 allocated to household grants this year ■ Account "C" shall be the "Edmonds Rescue Plan Business Support" account - No funds were disbursed from this account ■ Account "D" shall be the "Edmonds Rescue Plan Nonprofit Organization Support" - Disbursed final $79,000 of grants ■ Account "E" shall be the "Edmonds Rescue Plan Job Retraining Program" - Disbursed additional $108,300 to Edmonds College - Additional ARPA distributions • $210,000 to Edmonds School District for SINC positions o Edmonds Tourism Marketing ■ Consolidated a talented local team of marketing professionals ■ Focused on improving the branding and delivery of tourism messages ■ Increased organic social media ■ Continued to build web presence and work with regional publications such as 425 and The Seattle Times ■ Continued the Holiday and Winter Markets ■ Created the Edmonds Community Fair ■ Supported non-profit events through LTAC grants ■ Continued to promote the Creative District ■ Staff Economic Development Commission o Economic Development Decision Packages ■ #610-24001 Business Improvement District - This decision package was developed by the BID and approved by the BID board in August 2023 FISCAL DETAILS 2024 Operating Expenditures 140.000.61.558.70.31.00 SUPPLIES 10,650.00 140.000.61.558.70.41.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 67,500.00 140.000.61.558.70.41.40 ADVERTISING 19,975.00 140.000.61.558,70.49.00 MISCELLANEOUS 4,370.00 Total Operating Expenditures 102,495.00 Total Expenditures 102,495.00 Revenues 140-000.321.99.000.00 ED' ASSESSMENT FEE -110,626.00 Total Revenues -110,626.00 Net Budget -8,131.00 #610-24002 Lodging Tax Fund Budget - Tourism Promotion Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 24 Packet Pg. 392 - This decision package allocates Lodging Tax funds. The LTAC approved the allocation of funds on June 15, 2023 FISCAL DETAILS 2024 Operating Expenditures 120.000.31.575.42.41.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 72,400.00 120.000.31.575.42.41.40 ADVERTISING 55,000.00 120.000.31.697.73.55.17 TRANSFER TO FUND 117 4,000.00 Total Operating Expenditures 131,400.00 Total Expenditures 131,400.00 Revenues 117.100.397.73.120.00 TRANSFER FROM FUND 120 -4,000.00 120.000.313.31.000.00 HOTEUMOTEL EXCISE TAX -120,941.00 Total Revenues -124,941.00 Net Budget 6,459.00 #610-24004 Grant Specialist - This decision package requests a new position for a grant specialist. This specialist's work will focus on bringing new money in to the city, specifically from the Inflation Reduction Act and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. This position will focus initially on preparing grants for multi -modal infrastructure and on preparing a cross -department grant -writing work plan to support the city's most strategic initiatives. FISCAL DETAILS 2024 Operating Expenditures 001.000.61.557.20.11.00 SALARIESIWAGES 142.450.00 001.000.61.557.20.23.00 BENEFITS 32.550.00 001.000.61.557.20.31.00 SUPPLIES 5.000.00 512.000.31.518.88.35.00 SMALL EQUIPMENT 3.000.00 Total Operating Expenditures 183.000.00 Total Expenditures 183.000.00 Net Budget 183.000.00 #610-24008 Household Support Grants - Household Support Grants have used the Edmonds Rescue Plan Funds to supplement Edmonds resident's income during the COVID pandemic recovery. Households who meet strict criteria are eligible for a $2,500 grant that can help pay for household expenses that they are struggling to pay. FISCAL DETAILS 2024 Operating Expenditures 142.000.39.518.63.41.00 COMMUNITY RELIEF FUNDS 300.000.00 Total Operating Expenditures 300.000.00 Total Expenditures 300.000.00 Revenues 142.000.333.21.019.00 CORONAVIRUS RELIEF FUND-300.000.00 Total Revenues-300,000.00 Net Budget 0.00 Cultural Services - o WOTS: Nationally known three day Writers' Conference. In 2023 - 197 registered in person for conference, 47 attended the online preconference, Over 30 hotel night stays. Attendees from 11 states/Canadian provinces. Presenters from 13 states o Public Art: Permanent Public Art - 2023: Civic Park art by Clark Wiegman completed, Highway 99 permanent replacement Banner Project in progress, 2024 start Library art project (approved by city council in 2020), Temporary Public Art - On the Fence installations, Poet's Perspective poetry, Mika's Playground concert performance at Civic o Summer Concerts in the Parks - expanded to 7 concerts at City Park, 1 at Hickman, 14 at Hazel Miller Plaza o Tourism Promotion Award - $20,000 Lodging Tax funds allocated in 2023,$32,000 proposed 2024. Supports nonprofit arts organization to promote events that attract tourists Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 25 Packet Pg. 393 8.4.a o Decision package #610-24005 Municipal Arts Fund Budget ■ Increase $100,000 for Library project from ending cash, $39,535 from 332 Fund - The proposed public art includes two projects: one on Hwy 99 for permanent metal banners in the International District, and one in the Creative District for the Library site. Both are near term implementation as one-time expenditures FISCAL DETAILS 2024 Operating Expenditures 117.100.64.573.20.41.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 100.000.00 Total Operating Expenditures 100.000.00 Capital Expenditures 332.000.64.594,76.65.00 CONSTRUCTION -PARK FACILITIES 39.535.00 Total Capital Expenditures 39.535.00 Total Expenditures 139.535.00 Net Budget 139.535.00 o Decision Package #610-24011 Lodging Tax Fund Budget - Arts Promotion - Increase to $43,400, use ending cash ■ $31,400 LTAC approved budget on June 15, 2023. Additional $12,000 for tourism promotion grants pending approval by LTAC due to higher than forecasted ending balance and increased need to attract audience as local arts organizations continue to recover from impacts of pandemic FISCAL DETAILS 2024 Operating Expenditures 123.000.64.573.20.41.40 ADVERTISING 43.400.00 Total Operating Expenditures 43.400.00 Total Expenditures 43.400.00 Revenues 123.000.313.31.000.00 25 % HOTELIMOTEL TOURISM TAX-40.313.00 Total Revenues-40.313.00 Net Budget 3.087.00 Councilmember Buckshnis commented she has been in the grant world for a long time. Congressman Derek Kilmer is giving grants right and left; staff needs to find a congressperson to assist them. She did not think a grant specialist would be advantageous especially in the watershed because there is not a complete design to use in writing a grant. If the City needed assistance writing grants, she preferred to use a contractor, noting one of the examples was an IT grant, she was unsure of the job description for a grant specialist qualified enough to write an IT grant. Grant writers rely heavily on the City to provide information in order for the grant writer to complete the forms. City staff has been successful in obtaining grants although she acknowledged staff was spread thin due to the time spent on things like the Landmark property. If the City needs grant assistance, she preferred to use a consultant since the City is in a fiscal emergency and needs to worry about new and existing FTEs. Congressman Kilmer gave out $5 million to small coastal cities in his jurisdiction; the City needs to tap into him or Representative Rick Larsen. WRIA 8 is meeting with Puget Sound Partnership to look at the issues with Perrinville. Writing a good grant requires data to support the grant and she did not see that happening especially with any of the watershed programs. Councilmember Teitzel said he was torn about the grant specialist position. He was tempted to support it, but he would hate to hire this person and just transfer the work being done by people who are currently writing successful grants to that person and not gain anything and just spend $183,000/year in salary and benefits. If he could be convinced this person would bring in new grants to more than offset the cost, he would be more supportive. He summarized he was wavering and needed to hear more. Mr. Tatum said the point is net new money. City staff have a great track record in getting the grants they traditionally receive and he did not want to pull that work from them. There are a number of things the City does not have with regard to grants, including a comprehensive understanding of all the grant sources the City is currently using. Part of the grant writer's role would be to get a comprehensive view of the grants being written at the department level and identify gap in the grants that are not being pursued. Staffing is lean and staff Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 26 Packet Pg. 394 8.4.a needs to pursue easier targets and grants they know they can be successful at obtaining and cannot spend time writing a federal grant they only have a 15% chance of obtaining; the 15% chance may be increased by a dedicated grant writer with federal experience. He summarized the purpose of the grant writer would be getting a comprehensive picture, understanding the gaps, working cross -departmentally to fill gaps and working on harder, more complicated grants that staff do not have the ability to pursue. COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PAINE, TO EXTEND FOR 15 MINUTES TO 10:45. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Councilmember Paine asked if the funding for the police parking lot was in the budget. Mr. Tatum answered that was ARPA funded. With regard to the grant specialist, Councilmember Paine said she liked the idea of reconnecting communities, anticipating there was a lot of potential in that. Funding for human services is $300,000 and the need is anticipated to be $920,000. She hoped the grant specialist would spend time helping human services write grants for additional funding. Inflation is impacting everyone in the community and those without any wiggle room in their budget are feeling it the most. When she asked IT Manager Brian Tuley if there were grants he was not pursuing, he said absolutely. It would be helpful to ask about rounding out the skill set for this position. There are options for spreading out the work and filling in gaps related to applying for grants. She was excited to see more information, especially the possibility of bringing in new revenue to support the work the City does for the community. Councilmember Nand said her questions are primarily things she contacted Mr. Tatum about and wanted to bring to the awareness of other councilmembers, Mayor Nelson and other members of the administration. She referred to ARPA funding in Account C, Edmonds Rescue Plan Business Support, and asked if there were plans to distribute funds in 2024 though the fagade improvement program or would it be helpful for her to suggest a budget amendment to convert the funds into $5,000 grants to businesses. Mr. Tatum answered the way the 2024 budget is structured, there are only a couple different ARPA funds available for anything other than transfer to the General Fund to help fill the gap so someone would need to propose that. Councilmember Nand said she enjoyed the banner program that is part of the tourism spending. She asked about the Loving Edmonds Summer window clings and decals and the chalk art, whether that was related to the BID or the City's economic development tourism fund. It was her understanding the BID's tourism funds must be spent with the BID boundaries. Mr. Tatum answered the Loving Summer window clings are part of the BID's appearance committee. The BID does appearance and branding in the downtown core as well as market the downtown core. Their marketing budget is relatively small, approximately $42,000. Councilmember Nand recalled Mr. Tatum saying Explore Edmonds highlights businesses on Highway 99. She asked if it would possible to emphasize one area each month. Mr. Tatum answered that would be difficult. Explore Edmonds often highlights an experience or opportunity which includes highlighting different neighborhoods, parks, cuisine, etc. There have been Highway 99 specific ones. Marketing has to grab people's attention and get them excited, that often includes combining easily digestible, already branded things and throwing in things from other neighborhood. Councilmember Nand offered alternative suggestions related to the decision package for the grant specialist. She did a little grant writing when she was the office manager of a nonprofit for $16/hour; she was not comparing what she did to the prospective grant writing this person would do. She asked if it would be possible to put this position in the N29 salary range and target someone more junior in their career who could step up through years of involvement with administration to 183. Mr. Tatum answered potentially. This was funded for a person who could write federal grants at an autonomous level and also take responsibility for consolidated grant tracking and leading that citywide. Funding it at a lower level would requiring moving the dials on how ambitious grants could be and managing the City's grant program. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 27 Packet Pg. 395 Councilmember Nand recognized there would be a tradeoff regarding the training Mr. Tatum and the other director would need to do with a more junior position, but it might be a way to get the position included in the budget with the current economic forecast. Councilmember Nand recalled Mr. Tatum saying some of the grants could have a multijurisdictional benefit. She asked about reaching out to neighboring jurisdictions about participating in funding this position to benefit them multi jurisdictionally. Mr. Tatum answered that would be a challenge. As jurisdictions are successful with grants, there are overhead funds available to help pay for the position. It would be a challenge for a person to work with multiple jurisdictions because everyone will have their own priorities. Councilmember Nand recognized the goal to fund the position at an FTE and $183,000, but wanted to offer those alternatives if there needed to be a plan B to fund this position. Councilmember Chen said he was open to the idea of a grant writer, but considering the current financial situation, he preferred to delay it until a balanced budget is figured out and perhaps it can come back as budget amendment in the first quarter. 2. RESOLUTION CONCERNING STRUCTURAL BUDGET DEFICIT Councilmember Buckshnis advised two resolutions were submitted, calling for a general operating reserve and considering a declaration of a fiscal emergency. Council President Tibbott expressed appreciation to Councilmember Buckshnis for getting this started. Via conversations with other councilmembers and bringing together different ideas and interest in a more precise resolution, he asked the city attorney to draft another resolution that he considered a companion version. The resolution references budget shortfalls and provides direction to City staff regarding the use of reserves. Exhibit C was drafted by Councilmember Buckshnis and Exhibit D was drafted by City Attorney Jeff Taraday. Councilmember Buckshnis said she tried to be extremely high level, because the numbers are projections. The resolution prepared by Mr. Taraday includes numbers that do not match. Two weeks ago the council was informed there is a $2.2 million budgetary shortfall into the General Fund reserves. Everyone interprets the reserve policy differently. Had the administration come to council in March/April or whenever this structural imbalance began, Mr. Taraday's resolution would be appropriate, but she believed the City was in a fiscal emergency now and needed to bite the bullet to figure out how to correct the $2.2 million deficit in the 2023 budget as well as look at projections for 2024 and ensure those are realistic and not embed items like the RFA or potential levy. Councilmember Buckshnis continued, Mayor Nelson called her today, and she agreed to work with a taskforce on the plan required by the fund balance policy. The resolution she drafted talks about the shortfall, recognizing there is a fiscal emergency as required by Section V of the fund balance policy, and that the council is authorizing the mayor to use General Fund reserve funds which for 2023 will be ARPA funds and create a taskforce to create a plan to ensure the City is on strong footing in 2024. Not only did inflation hit the City hard, like Councilmember Chen stated in his article, there has been a significant growth in staff and other significant changes which all came to a head this year which she felt resulted in a fiscal emergency Council President Tibbott expressed support for Councilmember Buckshnis' resolution including authorizing the mayor to use General Fund reserves and a plan for replenishing it. COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, THAT THE COUNCIL PASS THIS RESOLUTION. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 28 Packet Pg. 396 8.4.a Councilmember Teitzel did not dispute that there is a structural budget deficit or gap as stated in the policy on page 12 of policy. The final line in that section defining a structural budget deficit states, "Another description is that the current revenue structure is insufficient to maintain services at the current level." He said although that sounds complicated, it is much like a family's budget. He provided the analogy, if you have to dip into your savings to make ends meet, that's fine until those savings are gone and you have to dip into your kids' college fund to make ends meet. In that case, unless the structural, fundamental problem is fixed, the kids don't go to college. The City has a structural imbalance of about $2.3 million for 2023. The resolution Mr. Taraday prepared speaks to that and states that needs to be resolved by transferring money out of the reserves into the General Fund to close that gap and then come up with a plan by November to refill that $2.3 million in the reserve account. He, Councilmember Buckshnis, then -Finance Director Scott James and then -Assistant Finance Director Turley coauthored the policy in 2019. The policy took over a year to complete, requiring a lot of review and input and he acknowledged it is not perfect. COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO EXTEND TO 11. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Councilmember Teitzel continued, it can be argued based on a strict reading of the policy whether or not there is a fiscal emergency. In fact if the actions defined in the resolution prepared by Mr. Taraday are taken, the problem will be resolved in 2023 and there will no longer be an emergency. The council will need to work on the 2024 budget. If the motion is to support the resolution drafted by Councilmember Buckshnis, he will not support it. He will support the version drafted by Mr. Taraday. Councilmember Nand acknowledged she is the new kid on the block, in reading the reserve fund policy at Thursday's special budget meeting, it states the mayor is to first declare a fiscal emergency before council votes to agree there is a fiscal emergency and therefore authorize the mayor and administration to access the contingency and emergency reserve funds. She asked if that was correct. Mr. Taraday answered the policy describes various different kinds of emergencies, but it only gives the mayor the power to declare a fiscal emergency in three of those and there are more than three types of emergencies. None of the three apply in this instance because there is not a decline in General Fund revenues; what exists is a significant increase in General Fund expenses. That is the reason the resolution he drafted does not refer to the mayor declaring a fiscal emergency. Councilmember Nand referred to the second whereas in the version of the resolution authored by Mr. Taraday which states, "Whereas the city council adopted a budget for fiscal year 2023 on December 20, 2022 with Ordinance 4289." She asked since the administration was spending into the reserve funds at that point shouldn't the resolution have come then and is the council backdating a year to authorize the expenditure of the contingency reserve funds that were authorized last year. Mr. Taraday explained the last budget adoption via Ordinance 4289 complied with the fund balance reserve policy so there was no need at that time to ask the city council to authorize use of the fund balance. Councilmember Nand observed it was due to budget amendments. Mr. Taraday agreed. Councilmember Nand asked him to describe the substantive differences between the resolution he drafted and the version Councilmember Buckshnis drafted. Mr. Taraday answered in looking at the Now Therefore section of the resolution, the version he drafted has two sections, Section 1 expressly authorizes use of the operating reserve for General Fund expenses, and Section 2 requests a replenishment plan and report. He will allow Councilmember Buckshnis speak to her resolution, but at a high level Section 2 of Councilmember Buckshnis' resolution looks similar to Section 1 of his and Section 3 looks similar to Section 2 of his resolution. It would appears Section 1 is not contained in the resolution he drafted. The reason that language is not includes is because he did not feel it was necessary. Councilmember Paine said when she looks at the two resolutions, the one the motion refers to is 10.2.0 in the packet where Section 1 declares a fiscal emergency. She did not support that version. The other Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 29 Packet Pg. 397 resolution offers a plan and a report in November and she wanted to hear how replenishment would happen. Mr. Taraday said both resolutions call for a replenishment plan. Councilmember Paine found the declaration of fiscal emergency a little extreme and feared it would dramatically affect future budgets. The council is up to its elbows in budget and revenue discussions; this is not happening in June when it could constitute an emergency. She did not support the version of the ordinance in 10.2.0 but could support the resolution in 10.2.D. Councilmember Chen observed Mr. Taraday's version calls for use of ARAP funds in 2023. Mr. Taraday answered not specifically; it calls for a replenishment plan, but does not specifically identify ARPA as the source of the replenishment, but also does not preclude that source. It asks the finance director to come back in November with a replenishment plan. Councilmember Chen observed Councilmember Buckshnis' resolution also call for a replenishment plan so from that perspective they are the same and either version accomplishes the goal of identifying revenue sources, looking for opportunities to cut expenses opportunity and getting through this difficult time. He asked if both versions of the resolution accomplish that. Mr. Taraday answered they both do that. Sections 2 and 3 of Councilmember Buckshnis' version generally align with Sections 1 and 2 of the version he drafted. At a high level, they both accomplish the same general objective. He referred to the word "amendment" in Section 3 of Councilmember Buckshnis' resolution which does not appear in the resolution he drafted. A replenishment plan could take the form of a 2023 budget amendment, but it does not have to and he was unsure why Councilmember Buckshnis included that. The resolution he drafted would not preclude a 2023 budget amendment, it still allows that as a possibility, but it does not require that happen as part of the plan. Councilmember Buckshnis said she did not believe the city attorney should review policy issues. She felt it was inappropriate for Mr. Taraday to read and try to interpret the policy because it is the council's policy. The council is faced with something that needs to be corrected by yearend and the council will work together with a taskforce to attempt to strengthen revenue streams using the projections that Mr. Turley has provided. Councilmember Buckshnis continued, Councilmembers Teitzel and Chen and she have probably spent 100 hours discussing the difference between a structural imbalance and a fiscal emergency. If the mayor will not declare that there is an issue with future revenue streams, council is stepping in which she believed was a fiscal emergency. Council is requesting the amendment occur by November 2023 and that there be a plan in place that is not predicated on joining the RFA or installing red light cameras. There are significant issues that need to be worked on which is why the mayor called her today. There is a plan to create a taskforce to work through the projections so when the budget comes to council for approval, there is a realistic status quo situation. Councilmember Buckshnis relayed Councilmember Teitzel has drafted another section that calls for the formation of a taskforce. She had tremendous issue with the numbers Mr. Taraday used in the resolution he prepared because he did not pull them from the adopted budget and there are other discrepancies and she did not think details such as what ordinances and amendments caused the imbalance were necessary. COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO EXTEND TO 11:15. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Councilmember Buckshnis opined the resolution created by Mr. Taraday includes a tremendous amount of stuff that is not needed and was already identified in her resolution. If the council wants to go with Mr. Taraday's resolution and call it a structural imbalance, she will make a lot of amendments. There is an imbalance that the council wants to take care of to correct and to work together. She suggested adding the formation of a taskforce to the resolution. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 30 Packet Pg. 398 8.4.a As co-author of the policy, Councilmember Teitzel read the paragraph regarding what is a fiscal emergency, "The Mayor has power to declare a fiscal emergency based upon one of the following: 1) A natural catastrophe; 2) An immediate threat to healthy and public safety; or 3) A significant decline in General Fund revenues." If the mayor refuses to declare a fiscal emergency, council can step in and declare one, but in his mind, it had to be related to one of those three things. There has been discussion tonight that expenses have exceeded revenues fairly dramatically, primarily driven by high inflation, but that does not qualify as a fiscal emergency as the policy is written. Discussing whether a fiscal emergency exists distracts the council from the problem; the problem is what to do to fix the structural imbalance. Both resolutions call out what needs to be done in 2023 using $2.3 million from reserves to plug the whole in the General Fund and then backfill the $2.3 million in reserves this year which will get things even by yearend. The resolutions say nothing about 2024; as Councilmember Buckshnis mentioned, the council is committing to work on that with Mr. Turley to figure out how to improve the City's financial situation. In his opinion, in a strict reading of policy, there isn't a fiscal emergency. Instead, there is a structural imbalance in the budget which is being resolved by the resolution. Council President Tibbott read from the resolution drafted by Mr. Taraday, Whereas, Article III, Section 1 states that "[a]ny use of the committed General Fund Operating Reserves shall be used only in cases of fiscal emergency", which are defined broadly to include "economic uncertainties, unforeseen emergencies and unanticipated operating expenses or revenue shortfalls" and he felt the City was definitely in a situation of revenue shortfalls. The council can declare a fiscal emergency to draw attention to an important thing that needs to be remedied, the use of reserve funds to fund the City. Whether it is called a fiscal emergency or something else doesn't really matter to him, what mattered to him was focusing on resolving the issue and resolving the problem. He agreed with Councilmember Buckshnis that her version of the resolution is simpler and not quite as specific and even though it calls for declaring a fiscal emergency in Section 1, but Sections 2 and 3 describe how to resolve the issue so he will support the resolution drafted by Councilmember Buckshnis. Councilmember Nand commented since there have apparently been late developments by Mayor Nelson and the administration deciding to implement a taskforce, she wondered if both resolution were premature until the taskforce is formed and could address whether to issue a resolution declaring a fiscal emergency before finalizing the 2024 budget. She asked Councilmember Buckshnis, Councilmember Teitzel or Mayor Nelson to address the purpose of the task force and the timing of the resolution. Mayor Nelson responded he greatly appreciated everyone's interest, recognizing everyone collectively wants to resolve the revenue shortfall. There are more things everyone wants to achieve which he felt could be done if they worked together. He referred to Councilmember Chen's recent article about wanting to work with the administration and solve the issue, he agreed everyone wants to solve the problem. Where things get more heated is calling it certain things or trying to get people excited about things in a negative way. If the goal is to solve the issue, addressing the revenue shortfall, that was his hope with a taskforce. The taskforce would consist of three councilmembers working closely with City staff and himself to put forth some other options besides the budget he proposed and ways to address the revenue shortfall. It was his understanding that Councilmember Teitzel had an amendment that will address that. A MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL AND SECONDED, TO AMEND COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS' VERSION OF THE RESOLUTION, ADD NEW SECTION 4 THAT READS "THE CITY COUNCIL RESOLVES TO WORK COLLABORATIVELY WITH THE ADMINISTRATION TO ESTABLISH A BUDGET TASKFORCE BY OCTOBER 31, 2023, CONSISTING OF THREE COUNCILMEMBER AND SELECTED MEMBERS OF THE ADMINISTRATION. THIS TEAM WILL IDENTIFY SOLUTIONS TO THE STRUCTURAL BUDGET DEFICIT (THE GAP) IN THE PROPOSED 2024 CITY OF EDMONDS BUDGET. THESE SOLUTIONS SHOULD NOT INCLUDE AS AN OPTION USE OF ALL REMAINING ARPA FUNDS TO CLOSE THE BUDGET GAP. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 31 Packet Pg. 399 8.4.a Councilmember Teitzel said he believed the amendment goes beyond either version of the resolution which only focus on 2023. His amendment would add focus on 2024 including potentially identifying additional revenue streams and what else can be done to cut expenses to ensure the budget is actually structurally in balance. This amendment accomplishes that and lets the council and administration work collaboratively. Councilmember Paine commented the council is talking about a lot of topics. She suggested having more discussion regarding Councilmember Nand's question, whether a resolution needs to be adopted right now. Councilmember Olson raised a point of order, reminding councilmembers to speak to the amendment. Mayor Nelson ruled point taken. Councilmember Paine said she had no objection to the amendment, but wondered if it was timely and needed right now, because the resolution declares a fiscal emergency which the council heard last week might harm the City's bond rating in the future. She would support the amendment, but wanted to ensure the City's future was not harmed. Councilmember Chen said Councilmember Teitzel's amendment focuses on solving the problem. There is a revenue shortfall, meaning expenses outpace revenues not only in 2023, but also 2024. The council also needs to cast its sights on 2025 and beyond. Councilmember Buckshnis expressed support for the amendment, commenting it was unknown whether the City would be financially stable in 2024 which is why she considered it a fiscal emergency. For someone who really understands municipal bonds, she assured it would have no impact on municipal bonds because the City is going for revenue bonds. She urged everyone not to worry about that rumor being passed around. Councilmember Nand expressed support for the amendment and found two aspects very positive, first the council and administration have agreed to set aside some of their finger pointing and work collaboratively to see how to ameliorate the situation the City finds itself in. Second, she is also concerned about using all remaining ARPA funds to plug the budget gap because council by ordinance directed the administration to use ARPA funds in a manner intended to aid the community and she wanted to ensure funds set aside for that purpose were preserved. AMENDMENT CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED FAILED (3-3-1), COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT AND COUNCILMEMBERS BUCKSHNIS AND OLSON VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS TEITZEL, CHEN AND PAINE VOTING NO; COUNCILMEMBER NAND ABSTAINING. COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT MOVED TO USE THE RESOLUTION PRODUCED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY. Councilmember Buckshnis suggested if the council wanted to call it a structural imbalance, the resolution could be changed. She expressed concern with including projections in the resolution. She suggested changing the resolution title and remove Section 1 to achieve the same content. COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PAINE, TO EXTEND TO 11:30. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT, TO USE THE TITLE OF THE RESOLUTION PREPARED BY MR. TARADAY, "A RESOLUTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AUTHORIZING THE USE OF GENERAL FUND OPERATING RESERVES FOR 2023 GENERAL FUND EXPENSES" ON THE RESOLUTION SHE PREPARED. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 32 Packet Pg. 400 8.4.a Councilmember Nand suggested tabling this to next week as there seemed to be significant changes occurring and potentially both resolutions could be merged. COUNCILMEMBER NAND MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PAINE, TO TABLE UNTIL NEXT WEEK. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS BUCKSHNIS, PAINE AND NAND VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS TEITZEL, CHEN, AND OLSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT VOTING NO. Councilmember Teitzel advised he would offer his amendment to the version of the resolution prepared by Mr. Taraday. Mayor Nelson clarified the motion on the table was Councilmember Buckshnis' amendment to swap the title of the resolution, putting the title of the resolution prepared by Mr. Taraday on the resolution she prepared. COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT CALLED THE QUESTION. VOTE ON THE CALL FOR THE QUESTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBER PAINE VOTING NO. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (5-2), COUNCILMEMBERS CHEN, BUCKSHNIS, OLSON AND NAND AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS TEITZEL AND PAINE VOTING NO. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT, TO DELETE THE LAST WHEREAS CLAUSE WHICH STATES WHEREAS THIS 2023 GENERAL FUND $2.2 MILLON SHORTFALL IS NOW CONSIDERED AS A FISCAL EMERGENCY BY THE CITY COUNCIL AS REQUIRED BY POLICY. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT, TO REMOVE SECTION 1 WHICH STATES ON OCTOBER XX, THE CITY COUNCIL RECOGNIZES AND APPROVES THE FISCAL REFERENCE AS REQUIRED BY SECTION VII OF THE FUND BALANCE RESERVE POLICY. Councilmember Paine said she did not see the language Councilmember Buckshnis was reading. Mayor Nelson relayed it was on page 206, Councilmember Buckshnis' resolution as amended. Councilmember Paine pointed out that did not pass. Mayor Nelson clarified Councilmember Buckshnis' resolution was the basis of the amendments that are being made. The first amendment was swapping the title followed by an amendment to remove another section and now this amendment. Councilmember Olson observed Councilmember Buckshnis' amendment removes the last reference to any kind of an emergency. She preferred to leave something in the resolution about an emergency as stated in the policy and she did not understand why the council cannot say the truth. She will vote against the amendment. COUNCILMEMBER NAND MOVED TO TABLE TO GIVE HER COLLEGE COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS A CHANCE TO PRESENT A CLEAN COPY WITH AMENDMENTS AND CHANGES AS NECESSARY TO BRING IT INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THESE LATE DEVELOPMENTS AND THEN BRING IT BEFORE THIS BODY AND THE PUBLIC FOR US TO VOTE ON. Councilmember Olson raised a point of order, whether it was appropriate to have a motion to table when the council already voted on that. Mr. Passey advised the council just had that vote so the motion could be ruled as dilatory or meant to delay. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 33 Packet Pg. 401 8.4.a COUNCILMEMBER NAND WITHDREW THE AMENDMENT. UPON ROLL CALL, AMENDMENT CARRIED (4-3), COUNCILMEMBERS CHEN, BUCKSHNIS AND NAND AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS TEITZEL, OLSON AND PAINE VOTING NO. COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT, TO ADD NEW ITEM 3 ON THE BUCKSHNIS VERSION AS AMENDED THAT READS, "THE CITY COUNCIL RESOLVES TO WORK COLLABORATIVELY WITH THE ADMINISTRATION TO ESTABLISH A BUDGET TASKFORCE BY OCTOBER 31, 2023, CONSISTING OF THREE COUNCILMEMBER AND SELECTED MEMBERS OF THE ADMINISTRATION. THIS TEAM WILL IDENTIFY SOLUTIONS TO THE STRUCTURAL BUDGET DEFICIT (THE GAP) IN THE PROPOSED 2024 CITY OF EDMONDS BUDGET. THESE SOLUTIONS SHOULD NOT INCLUDE AS AN OPTION USE OF ALL REMAINING ARPA FUNDS TO CLOSE THE BUDGET GAP. AMENDMENT CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NAND, INSTEAD OF IT BEING AN OUTRIGHT VOTE, TO SEND IT TO THE CONSENT AGENDA SO EVERYBODY CAN SEE IT. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. DISCUSSION ABOUT COUNCIL BUDGET CALENDAR COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO EXTEND 10 MORE MINUTES TO 11:40 P.M. MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBER CHEN VOTING NO. Council President Tibbott commented next week is a 5' Tuesday when normally there would not be a council meeting; however, the budget calendar proposed a workshop on Monday, October 30. The idea of a workshop was an opportunity to discuss council proposed decision packages and amendments to the administration's decision packages. He wanted council to have an opportunity to discuss whether to continue with that workshop format or delay that workshop so the taskforce meeting could move forward. He suggested the council not meet on October 30 to give time for a taskforce to be formed. Councilmember Buckshnis explained she agreed to the mayor's proposal to form a taskforce but she will not comply with having the budget approved by Thanksgiving. She acknowledged the budget will need to be approved by December, but she did not want to rush the taskforce through. She wanted to get the taskforce moving in the right direction to ensure the council had sufficient time to work through things which means the budget will probably need to be moved into the first week of December. Councilmember Teitzel raised a procedural question; the council passed a motion to bring the resolution back on the consent agenda in its final form but did not pass the resolution so the council has not formally voted to form the taskforce. He asked whether formation of the taskforce could proceed even though the resolution had not been approved. Mr. Taraday agreed the resolution had not been approved, but the taskforce could be formed by consensus of the council. He joked there was City code that prevented the council from meeting on Halloween. Councilmember Paine said she had no objection to allowing the taskforce to meet on October 30 rather than holding a council workshop. Councilmember Nand concurred with Councilmember Paine and hoped discussions between the administration and councilmembers on the taskforce are fruitful. She found the taskforce a very good solution and compliment her colleagues for forming the taskforce. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 34 Packet Pg. 402 8.4.a Councilmember Chen expressed support for the idea of taskforce; the council and administration need to work together to solve this problem. Council President Tibbott summarized it appears the council will not hold a special meeting on October 30 and instead will give that time to the work of a taskforce. 11. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Nelson reported a 12 member delegation from Edmonds' Sister City Hekinan will be visiting Edmonds. He was super excited to have them visit Edmonds and said a warm welcome is planned. 12. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Nand reported she was very excited to hear about the outcome of the Landmark 99 discussion. She apologized that she and Councilmember Chen were unable to attend due to attending the Asian Service Center's annual board retreat. She was hopeful there could be additional fruitful discussion with the City's various neighborhoods about development issues and feedback. She reported on October 26 there will be a discussion regarding the rise of white supremacy in Snohomish County with journalist David Neiwert. She invited anyone interested in attending to contact her for more information. Councilmember Buckshnis reported on the great ribbon cutting for Meadowdale Beach Park which was one of WRIA 8's first RCO grants; RCO initially did not want to fund the park because they felt it was too recreational. She thanked Council President Tibbott for supporting her fiscal emergency. She did not believe forming the taskforce meant everything would be hunky dory, roses, candy and ice cream next year or the following year. She still viewed it as a fiscal emergency, but was willing to acquiesce to Councilmember Teitzel because they have spent about 100 hours talking about it. Councilmember Olson apologized for having to rush through this important comment, relaying this is the first meeting with council comments since the heinous attack on Israel by Hamas, a terrorist act and an international war crime. The death and devastation, although aimed at the devastation or destruction of the State of Israel, affects innocent civilians of both the Israeli and Palestinian nations and it's right to be angry. She hoped the public was angry and encouraged their anger to stay targeted on the Hamas organization and not the Palestinian people. This is the beginning of what is likely to be a very protracted engagement with terrible images especially as they related to the hostages and what Hamas promises to do to the hostages when Israel engages in retribution. There are lots of ways to support the victims and hostages, financial support is very much appreciated to vetted, reputable organizations only. Send your thoughts and if you are a praying person, please pray, reach out to friends and family who are Jewish and let them know you are thinking of them. They are hurting in general and some are very directly and personally affected. What people do not have to do to support the hostages is watch; terrorists want the public to watch, but that does not help the hostages. Regarding the resolution the council passed this evening, Council President Tibbott explained a lot of work went into it although he was not privy to all the background. The reason the discussion may look disjointed was the council was trying to work on two resolutions. He expressed appreciation to all who contributed to the conversation and recognized Mayor Nelson for bringing forth the idea of a taskforce. When Mayor Nelson called him today to propose the idea, he immediately thought it was both generous and obviously a collaborative effort to bring together solutions that desperately need to be considered. This is one of the ways the council can effectively work with the administration. He anticipated bringing together some of the best thinkers related to financial policy and looked forward to really good work. Councilmember Chen expressed appreciation to the public engaged in the budget process. The City has a budget imbalance and this is a very challenging budget cycle. He thanked the people who commented on Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 35 Packet Pg. 403 8.4.a his articles on article in MEN and expressed appreciation to Teresa Wippel for posting it. He echoed Council President Tibbott's comment about Mayor Nelson taking the advice about working collaboratively with the council. The true intent is to solve the problem so hopefully the taskforce will develop revenue generating ideas as well as opportunities to cut costs while still delivering excellent city services to residents. Councilmember Paine expressed appreciation to everyone who comment tonight and over the past several weeks regarding the state of the budget and revenues. She also appreciated tonight's discussion about what needs to be done and she liked the idea of working together, anticipating the right solutions can be identified. She often says, we have all the right elements so that makes us a good team. Councilmember Teitzel reported on Sunday, he, Councilmember Olson and Teresa Wippel attended the 50t1i anniversary gala event for Edmonds South Snohomish County Historical Society, the managing entity for the museum. It was a great event, a great auction and great time to celebrate a great organization. He expressed appreciation for the museum, the summer markets they put on and the scarecrow festival they sponsor. He congratulated the Edmonds South Snohomish County Historical Society on 50 years. i [c��l110 490 With no further business, the council meeting was adjourned at 11:35 p.m. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 24, 2023 Page 36 Packet Pg. 404 8.5 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 11/6/2023 Approval of claim checks and wire payments. Staff Lead: Dave Turley Department: Administrative Services Preparer: Nori Jacobson Background/History Approval of claim checks #259816 through #259902 dated October 26, 2023 for $1,013,890.94, checks #259903 through #259982 dated November 2, 2023 for $2,146,217.21 (re -issued check #259911 $3,138.20) and wire payments of $19,125.91, $8,956.00, $4,558.60 & $7,324.77. Staff Recommendation Approval of claim checks and wire payments. Narrative The Council President shall be designated as the auditing committee for the city council. The council president shall review the documentation supporting claims paid and review for approval by the city council at its next regular public meeting all checks or warrants issued in payment of any claim, demand or voucher. A list of each claim, demand or voucher approved and each check or warrant issued indicating the check or warrant number, the amount paid and the vendor or payee shall be filed in the city council office for review by individual councilmembers prior to each regularly scheduled public meeting. Attachments: Claims Agenda copy 10-26-23 Claims agenda copy 11-02-23 Packet Pg. 405 8.5.a apPosPay Positive Pay Listing Page: 1 10/26/2023 12:19:48PM City of Edmonds Document group: jacobson Vendor Code & Name Check # Check Date Amount 079330 76 INVESTMENT LLC 259816 10/26/2023 7,000.00 076040 911 SUPPLY INC 259817 10/26/2023 1,939.97 065052 AARD PEST CONTROL 259818 10/26/2023 109.40 075132 AERZEN USA CORP 259819 10/26/2023 1,648.74 074306 AMWINS GROUP BENEFITS INC 259820 10/26/2023 7,340.02 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES 259821 10/26/2023 27.19 079351 ATCO 259822 10/26/2023 423.00 079382 ATWELL LLC 259823 10/26/2023 6,095.79 069699 AUDIO VISUAL SPECIALISTS 259824 10/26/2023 8,134.51 028050 BILL PIERRE FORD INC 259825 10/26/2023 677.46 079196 BLUE MOUNTAIN CONST GROUP LLC 259826 10/26/2023 20,848.23 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 259827 10/26/2023 1,064.85 077353 CAPITOL CONSULTING LLC 259828 10/26/2023 3,900.00 019215 CITY OF LYNNWOOD 259829 10/26/2023 42,307.00 074559 CLARK, PATRICK 259830 10/26/2023 52.92 076914 CM DESIGN GROUP LLC 259831 10/26/2023 3,087.53 076107 COMPASS HEALTH 259832 10/26/2023 9,448.89 079198 COSTAR REALTY INFORMATION INC 259833 10/26/2023 475.15 077437 DASH MEDICAL GLOVES INC 259834 10/26/2023 354.36 061570 DAY WIRELESS SYSTEMS - 03 259835 10/26/2023 1,348.10 076043 DEERE & COMPANY 259836 10/26/2023 41,135.07 072174 DEMIERO JAZZ FESTIVAL 259837 10/26/2023 4,000.00 064531 DINES, JEANNIE 259838 10/26/2023 632.00 007253 DUNN LUMBER 259839 10/26/2023 20.40 065892 EDM ARTS FESTIVAL FOUNDATION 259840 10/26/2023 5,000.00 077589 EDMONDS FOOD BANK 259841 10/26/2023 10,000.00 076610 EDMONDS HERO HARDWARE 259842 10/26/2023 75.00 008550 EDMONDS SCHOOL DISTRICT #15 259843 10/26/2023 250.00 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 259844 10/26/2023 10,689.35 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES 259845 10/26/2023 676.30 009350 EVERETT DAILY HERALD 259846 10/26/2023 232.20 072634 GCP WW HOLDCO LLC 259847 10/26/2023 846.95 063137 GOODYEAR AUTO SERVICE CENTER 259848 10/26/2023 402.88 012199 GRAINGER 259849 10/26/2023 20.16 079140 HAAS, ROSE 259850 10/26/2023 510.35 012560 HACH COMPANY 259851 10/26/2023 147.83 074804 HARLES, JANINE 259852 10/26/2023 300.00 010900 HD FOWLER CO INC 259853 10/26/2023 551.12 072647 HERRERA ENVIRONMENTAL 259854 10/26/2023 14,062.03 074966 HIATT CONSULTING LLC 259855 10/26/2023 200.00 072041 IBS INCORPORATED 259856 10/26/2023 76.77 069733 ICONIX WATERWORKS INC 259857 10/26/2023 4,918.74 065306 INSTITUTE OF TRANSP ENGINEERS 259858 10/26/2023 337.00 076917 JACOBS ENGINEERING GROUP INC 259859 10/26/2023 1,980.00 079444 JENNIFER KARR 259860 10/26/2023 309.54 078250 KAUFER DMC LLC 259861 10/26/2023 300.00 072650 KCDA PURCHASING COOPERATIVE 259862 10/26/2023 255.06 072101 KCR MEDIA GROUP INC 259863 10/26/2023 495.00 071137 KIDZ LOVE SOCCER 259864 10/26/2023 3,615.30 017050 KWICK'N KLEEN CAR WASH 259865 10/26/2023 45.63 075159 LIFE INSURANCE CO OF NO AMER 259866 10/26/2023 16,557.52 074263 LYNNWOOD WINSUPPLY CO 259867 10/26/2023 1,257.85 075716 MALLORY PAINT STORE INC 259868 10/26/2023 47.50 Page: 1 Packet Pg. 406 8.5.a apPosPay Positive Pay Listing 10/26/2023 12:19:48PM City of Edmonds Document group: jacobson Vendor Code & Name Check # Check Date Amount 067235 MARYS TOWING INC 259869 10/26/2023 280.67 076264 MONO ROOFTOP SOLUTIONS 259870 10/26/2023 856.38 018950 NAPA AUTO PARTS 259871 10/26/2023 317.19 075542 NORTHWEST LANDSCAPE SUPPLY 259872 10/26/2023 82.95 064215 NORTHWEST PUMP & EQUIP CO 259873 10/26/2023 2,415.49 076902 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH CTR OF WA 259874 10/26/2023 118.00 065720 OFFICE DEPOT 259875 10/26/2023 198.03 070166 OFFICE OF THE STATE TREASURER 259876 10/26/2023 15,939.12 069873 PAPE MACHINERY INC 259877 10/26/2023 33,448.93 027450 PAWS 259878 10/26/2023 3,619.00 028860 PLATT ELECTRIC SUPPLY 259879 10/26/2023 783.24 071559 PUBLIC SAFETY PSYCHOLOGICAL SV 259880 10/26/2023 2,700.00 068697 PUBLIC SAFETY TESTING INC 259881 10/26/2023 660.00 030695 PUMPTECH INC 259882 10/26/2023 3,420.00 030780 QUIRING MONUMENTS INC 259883 10/26/2023 1,768.00 068657 ROBERT HALF 259884 10/26/2023 4,620.00 065044 ROTARY CLUB OF EDMONDS 259885 10/26/2023 5,000.00 079174 SAVANNAH POWERS 259886 10/26/2023 465.50 077345 SHAPE GUARD 259887 10/26/2023 110.00 079418 SHARPER WORDS LLC 259888 10/26/2023 280.00 068132 SHORELINE CONSTRUCTION CO 259889 10/26/2023 571,442.42 036955 SKY NURSERY 259890 10/26/2023 663.00 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 259891 10/26/2023 29,159.92 063941 SNO CO SHERIFFS OFFICE 259892 10/26/2023 58,129.80 063941 SNO CO SHERIFFS OFFICE 259893 10/26/2023 1,000.00 070167 SNOHOMISH COUNTY TREASURER 259894 10/26/2023 185.72 038300 SOUND DISPOSAL CO 259895 10/26/2023 852.62 079439 STOWE DEVELOPMENT & STRATEGIES 259896 10/26/2023 1,425.00 074797 SUPER CHARGE MARKETING LLC 259897 10/26/2023 650.00 072649 THE WIDE FORMAT COMPANY 259898 10/26/2023 1,005.55 068141 TRANSPO GROUP 259899 10/26/2023 27,754.00 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS 259900 10/26/2023 20.95 074662 VERTIGIS NORTH AMERICA LTD 259901 10/26/2023 6,846.58 011900 ZIPLY FIBER 259902 10/26/2023 1,442.22 G randTotal : 1,013,890.94 Total count: 87 Page: 2 Packet Pg. 407 8.5.b apPosPay Positive Pay Listing Page: 1 11/2/2023 8:28:28AM City of Edmonds Document group: jacobson Vendor Code & Name Check # Check Date Amount 076040 911 SUPPLY INC 259903 11/2/2023 5,091.65 065052 AARD PEST CONTROL 259904 11/2/2023 227.64 074143 AFFORDABLE WA BACKFLOW TESTING 259905 11/2/2023 2,320.00 074718 AQUATIC SPECIALTY SERVICES INC 259906 11/2/2023 2,690.57 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES 259907 11/2/2023 602.01 025217 ARG INDUSTRIAL 259908 11/2/2023 336.56 079353 ASPECT CONSULTING LLC 259909 11/2/2023 9,950.80 064341 AT&T MOBILITY 259910 11/2/2023 43.35 001795 AUTOGRAPHICS 259911 11/2/2023 3,138.20 001801 AUTOMATIC WILBERT VAULT CO 259912 11/2/2023 961.00 071174 AXON ENTERPRISE INC 259913 11/2/2023 255.26 072455 BEAR COMMUNICATIONS INC 259914 11/2/2023 444.40 012005 BENDIKSEN & BALL POLYGRAPH 259915 11/2/2023 600.00 069226 BHC CONSULTANTS LLC 259916 11/2/2023 5,125.45 072571 BUILDERS EXCHANGE 259917 11/2/2023 135.00 078083 BUYCE JR, RICHARD J 259918 11/2/2023 42.00 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 259919 11/2/2023 1,385.62 069813 CDW GOVERNMENT INC 259920 11/2/2023 839.28 003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY 259921 11/2/2023 263.54 066134 CITY OF ARLINGTON 259922 11/2/2023 899.54 074255 COAL CREEK ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOC 259923 11/2/2023 12,684.36 070323 COMCAST BUSINESS 259924 11/2/2023 398.81 072746 CONSOR NORTH AMERICA INC 259925 11/2/2023 25,796.30 079449 CORNERSTONE THERAPEUTICS 259926 11/2/2023 308.55 073823 DAVID EVANS & ASSOC INC 259927 11/2/2023 1,168.11 076043 DEERE & COMPANY 259928 11/2/2023 2,915.65 006626 DEPT OF ECOLOGY 259929 11/2/2023 65.00 064531 DINES, JEANNIE 259930 11/2/2023 1,940.00 007253 DUNN LUMBER 259931 11/2/2023 814.01 076610 EDMONDS HERO HARDWARE 259932 11/2/2023 336.44 008688 EDMONDS VETERINARY HOSPITAL 259933 11/2/2023 2,154.62 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 259934 11/2/2023 1,041.96 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES 259935 11/2/2023 152.80 009350 EVERETT DAILY HERALD 259936 11/2/2023 292.40 076751 FALK, NICHOLAS 259937 11/2/2023 128.56 065427 FCS GROUP 259938 11/2/2023 7,231.25 002500 GALLS LLC DBA BLUMENTHAL 259939 11/2/2023 570.21 012199 GRAINGER 259940 11/2/2023 91.45 071759 GRANICH ENGINEERED PRODUCTS 259941 11/2/2023 1,030.97 076436 GRANITE CONSTRUCTION CO 259942 11/2/2023 508,728.61 076333 HASA INC 259943 11/2/2023 8,616.35 079447 HATCH, KYLIE 259944 11/2/2023 198.72 072647 HERRERA ENVIRONMENTAL 259945 11/2/2023 1,514.71 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 259946 11/2/2023 1,572.68 061013 HONEY BUCKET 259947 11/2/2023 3,745.22 075966 HULBERT, CARRIE 259948 11/2/2023 2,851.67 076488 HULBERT, MATTHEW STIEG 259949 11/2/2023 500.00 073548 INDOFF INCORPORATED 259950 11/2/2023 232.28 072627 INTRADO LIFE & SAFETY INC 259951 11/2/2023 500.00 079227 JAMTOWN LLC 259952 11/2/2023 394.76 078946 KITCHENS, KYLEE 259953 11/2/2023 495.52 067568 KPG PSOMAS INC 259954 11/2/2023 22,595.31 074158 LASER UNDERGROUND & EARTHWORKS 259955 11/2/2023 200,202.40 Page: 1 Packet Pg. 408 8.5.b apPosPay Positive Pay Listing 11/2/2023 8:28:28AM City of Edmonds Document group: jacobson Vendor Code & Name Check # Check Date Amount 078719 LESS LETHAL LLC 259956 11/2/2023 2,263.00 074263 LYNNWOOD WINSUPPLY CO 259957 11/2/2023 299.06 067235 MARYS TOWING INC 259958 11/2/2023 561.34 020039 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO 259959 11/2/2023 115.69 002079 OPEN SQUARE 259960 11/2/2023 2,660.00 063750 ORCA PACIFIC INC 259961 11/2/2023 5,623.54 078800 POPA & ASSOCIATES 259962 11/2/2023 1,200.00 046900 PUGET SOUND ENERGY 259963 11/2/2023 9,955.34 078007 PUGET SOUND ENERGY 259964 11/2/2023 110.00 075769 QUADIENT LEASING USA INC 259965 11/2/2023 2,193.70 069103 ROGERS, MAUREEN 259966 11/2/2023 75.00 079019 ROOT AND LIMB YOGA 259967 11/2/2023 904.08 072733 SCHWING BIOSET INC 259968 11/2/2023 11,713.39 063306 SHERWIN-WILLIAMS 259969 11/2/2023 236.95 036955 SKY NURSERY 259970 11/2/2023 1,231.07 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 259971 11/2/2023 7,026.29 037303 SO SNOHOMISH CO FIRE & RESCUE 259972 11/2/2023 917,042.00 075875 SOUND CLEANING RESOURCES INC 259973 11/2/2023 1,165.67 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS 259974 11/2/2023 18,536.06 072312 VERSATILE MOBILE SYSTEMS INC 259975 11/2/2023 5,725.00 068259 WA ST CRIMINAL JUSTICE 259976 11/2/2023 9,894.00 065568 WATER SERVICES NW INC 259977 11/2/2023 171.83 075635 WCP SOLUTIONS 259978 11/2/2023 9,499.93 073552 WELCO SALES LLC 259979 11/2/2023 683.89 079083 WESTWATER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY 259980 11/2/2023 290,439.35 064213 WSSUATREASURER 259981 11/2/2023 2,320.00 011900 ZIPLY FIBER 259982 11/2/2023 1,087.68 GrandTotal: 2,149,355.41 Total count: 80 Page: 2 Packet Pg. 409 8.6 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 11/6/2023 Final 2024 Property Tax Ordinances Staff Lead: Dave Turley Department: Administrative Services Preparer: Dave Turley Background/History The City Council heard a presentation and held a Public Hearing on October 24 regarding the 2024 Property Tax Levies for the Regular Levy and the EMS Levy. Council approved the 2024 Ordinances at that time. Final Ordinances as approved are placed on this evening's Consent Agenda. Staff Recommendation Approve the attached Ordinances on Consent. Narrative N/A Attachments: 2024 Final Property Tax Ordinance_ Regular 1% plus banked 2024 Final Property Tax Ordinance —EMS 1% Packet Pg. 410 8.6.a ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, PROVIDING FOR THE ANNUAL TAX LEVY BY INCREASING THE REGULAR PROPERTY TAX LEVY AT 105.9267291 % OF THE CURRENT LEVY LIMIT, INCLUDING A RECAPTURE OF PAST BANKED LEVIES OF 4.93%, PRESERVING FUTURE LEVY CAPACITY, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. WHEREAS, the City Council and the City of Edmonds has met and considered its budget for the calendar year 2024; and WHEREAS, the City's actual levy for the previous year was $10,685,181 for the regular property levy, and WHEREAS, the population of this district is greater than 10,000, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, that an increase in the regular property tax levy is hereby authorized for the levy to be collected in the 2024 tax year. The dollar amount of the increase over the actual levy amount from the previous year shall be $633,282 which is a percentage increase of 5.93% from the previous year. This increase is exclusive of additional revenue resulting from new construction, improvements to property, newly constructed wind turbines, solar, biomass, and geothermal facilities, and any increase in the value of state assessed property, any annexations that have occurred and refunds made. APPROVED: MAYOR, MICHAEL NELSON 2024 Regular Property Tax Ordinance Page] of 2 Packet Pg. 411 8.6.a ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY, JEFFREY TARADAY BY CITY ATTORNEY, JEFFREY TARADAY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. 2024 Regular Property Tax Ordinance Page 2 of 2 Packet Pg. 412 8.6.b ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, PROVIDING FOR THE ANNUAL TAX LEVY BY INCREASING THE EMS PROPERTY TAX LEVY AT 101% OF THE CURRENT LEVY LIMIT, PRESERVING FUTURE LEVY CAPACITY, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. WHEREAS, the City Council and the City of Edmonds has met and considered its budget for the calendar year 2024; and WHEREAS, the City's actual levy for the previous year was $4,286,135 for the EMS property levy, and WHEREAS, the population of this district is greater than 10,000, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, that an increase in the EMS property tax levy is hereby authorized for the levy to be collected in the 2024 tax year. The dollar amount of the increase over the actual levy amount from the previous year shall be $42,861 which is a percentage increase of 1% from the previous year. This increase is exclusive of additional revenue resulting from new construction, improvements to property, newly constructed wind turbines, solar, biomass, and geothermal facilities, and any increase in the value of state assessed property, any annexations that have occurred and refunds made. APPROVED: MAYOR, MICHAEL NELSON 2024 EMS Property Tax Ordinance Page] of 2 Packet Pg. 413 8.6.b ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY, JEFFREY TARADAY CITY ATTORNEY, JEFFREY TARADAY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. 2024 EMS Property Tax Ordinance Page 2 of 2 Packet Pg. 414 8.7 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 11/6/2023 Resolution Authorizing Use of General Fund Operating Reserves for General Fund Expenses Staff Lead: City Council Department: City Council Preparer: Beckie Peterson Background/History On October 24, 2023 the Council discussed a Resolution Concerning Structural Budget Deficit. The Council directed the resolution as amended to the consent agenda. Draft minutes to this October 24 meeting are included in this meeting's consent agenda for approval. Recommendation Approve the resolution. Narrative N/A Attachments: Resolution GF Operating Reserves Packet Pg. 415 8.7.a RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AUTHORIZING THE USE OF GENERAL FUND OPERATING RESERVES FOR 2023 GENERAL FUND EXPENSES. WHEREAS, the City adheres to the Fund Balance Reserve Policy as adopted by Resolution 1433 on July 19, 2019; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted a balanced budget in December of 2022 for fiscal year 2023; and WHEREAS, during the course of 2023, budget amendments increased expenses at a greater rate than increases in revenues; and WHEREAS, during the course of the year, high inflationary rates increased expense levels that are not sustainable for revenue; and WHEREAS, Section VII Deviation of from the Fund Balance Policy allows for the deviation from policy with a simple majority vote of Council; and WHEREAS, Section III, section I describes that General Fund Operating Reserves are to be used for fiscal emergencies in instances that include economic uncertainty and unanticipated operating expenses; and WHEREAS, the Mayor's 2024 proposed budget projects that the 2023 General Fund will be below the 20% required reserves by $2.2 million; and WHEREAS, this $2.2 million shortfall could be recognized as a fiscal shortfall as outlined in Article III, section 1 of the Fund Balance Reserve Policy requirements; NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON DOES HEREBY RESOLVE THE FOLLOWING: SECTION 1. The City Council authorizes the Mayor to use General Fund Operating Reserves for General Fund expenses in 2023. SECTION 2. As required by the Fund Balance Reserve Policy, the City Council directs the Mayor to provide a plan to replenish the 2023 General Fund Operating Reserves shortfall used for General Fund expenses by providing a report and amendment to the City Council during the month of November, 2023. SECTION 3. The City Council resolves to work collaboratively with the Administration to establish a budget task force by October 31, 2023 consisting of three Councilmembers and selected members of the Administration. This team will identify solutions to the Structural Budget Deficit (the "gap") in the proposed 2024 City of Edmonds budget. Packet Pg. 416 8.7.a These solutions should not include as an option use of all remaining ARPA funds to close the budget "gap." RESOLVED this day of , 2023. CITY OF EDMONDS MAYOR, MIKE NELSON ATTEST: CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: RESOLUTION NO. Packet Pg. 417 9.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 11/6/2023 2024 Budget Public Hearing #4 Staff Lead: Dave Turley Department: Administrative Services Preparer: Dave Turley Background/History The Proposed Budget has been available for five weeks, this is the fourth opportunity during that time for Council to hear from members of the public in the form of a Public Hearing on budget related topics. This gives members of the public another opportunity for their voices to be heard, so that Council members will have this information during budget deliberations. Staff Recommendation Public Hearing only, no staff recommendation. Narrative N/A Packet Pg. 418 10.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 11/6/2023 Resolution Concerning the Approval of Operating Reserve Fund Use and Addressing the Structural Budget Deficit Staff Lead: City Council Department: City Council Preparer: Beckie Peterson Background/History A resolution on this topic was worked on and amended from the dais at the October 24th meeting, and council voted to put it on the November 6th consent agenda so all could see the clean copy before the vote for final approval (therefore that version can be found on the consent agenda in this Nov 6th packet). Numerous issues have been identified with that version (including compliance with our fiscal reserve policy) and so it will be pulled by one or more councilmembers. For the sake of efficiency, an alternate version of the Resolution is provided here as a basis for discussion and action. This version 1) is compliant with the fiscal reserve policy and 2) deletes reference to a task force, which will not be utilized. Reiterating the background from the 10/24/2023 agenda memo: The Mayor's 2024 Proposed Budget estimates the General Fund Balance for 2023 will be $2,204,692 below the minimum required reserves. The Fund Balance Reserve Policy provides procedures and guidelines for the establishment, use, and replenishment of fund balances/reserves. The Council discussed the 2023 estimates of the General Fund Revenues, Expenditures, and Fund Balance during the Special Meeting on October 19, 2023. Recommendation Consider a motion to approve the resolution. Narrative It is suggested that the version on consent be pulled and postponed indefinitely during the consent agenda approval process, and that this agenda memo with alternate resolution be discussed and acted on instead. The discussions on the Fiscal Reserve Policy on Oct 19, 2023, and the discussions on the resolutions in the 10/24/23 packet, are reflected in the version attached. Attachments: Packet Pg. 419 10.1 Proposed replacement Resolution Nov 6 Packet Pg. 420 10.1.a A RESOLUTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AUTHORIZING THE USE OF GENERAL FUND OPERATING RESERVES FOR 2023 GENERAL FUND EXPENSES AND ADDRESSING THE STRUCTURAL BUDGET IMBALANCE WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds adheres to the Fund Balance Reserve Policy as adopted on July 2, 2019 by Resolution 1433; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted a balanced budget in December of 2022 for fiscal year 2023; and WHEREAS, the recent high inflation and tight labor markets necessitated increased wages and led to other higher costs; and WHEREAS, during the course of 2023, budget amendments increased expenses to levels not sustainable for revenues creating a structural budget deficit as defined by Article VIII in the Fund Balance Reserve Policy; and WHEREAS, the Strategic Outlook in the Mayor's Proposed 2024 Budget shows estimated spending of $2,204,692 of the minimum required amount of the General Fund Operating Reserves in 2023; and WHEREAS, the Fund Balance Reserve Policy states that the General Fund Operating Reserve shall be used in cases of fiscal emergency; and WHEREAS, Article 111, section 1 states "(a)ny use of the committed General Fund Operating Reserves shall be used only in cases of a fiscal emergency", which are broadly defined to include "economic uncertainties, unforeseen emergencies and unanticipated operating expenses and revenue shortfalls"; and WHEREAS, Article VII, Deviations from the Fund Balance Policy, allows for deviation from the fund balance reserve policy with a simple majority vote of Council; and WHEREAS, this spending of the 2023 General Fund Operating Reserves represents such a deviation; NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF EDMONDS WASHINGTON HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. On November 6th, the City Council recognizes the de facto fiscal emergency represented in the 2024 Mayor's Proposed Budget and approves the deviation per Article VII of the Fund Balance Reserve Policy. SECTION 2. The City Council acknowledges that even after the Council approves a budget in 2024, a fiscal emergency may continue to exist in 2024 due to the structural imbalance of future expenses and projected revenues. SECTION 3. The City Council approves the use of General Fund Operating Reserves to support the 2023 General Fund Operations and requests the Administration provide in accordance with Packet Pg. 421 10.1.a Article III Section 1 a General Fund Reserve Replenishment schedule for Council approval in November 2023 (and all subsequent Novembers until the reserves are replenished). SECTION 4. Notwithstanding any forthcoming authorization to replenish General Fund Operating Reserves with ARPA funds (allocated by the Federal Government for purposes of relief from the financial effects of the Covid-19 pandemic), immediate action will still be required by the Administration and Council to address issues of an expected structural budget deficit in 2024 and beyond. RESOLVED this day of , 2023. CITY OF EDMONDS MAYOR, MIKE NELSON ATTEST: CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: RESOLUTION NO. Packet Pg. 422 10.2 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 11/6/2023 Parkland Acquisition Purchase & Sale Agreement - Mee Property Staff Lead: Angie Feser Department: Parks, Recreation & Human Services Preparer: Angie Feser Narrative The City of Edmonds has the opportunity to acquire a one -acre property in Southeast Edmonds adjacent to Mathay Ballinger Park which will preserve existing open space and a well -established tree canopy, expand the only small park in the underserved southern area of Edmonds and support a trailhead for the regional Interurban trail. Two parcels, known as the Mee property (more information below and in attached presentation), will provide a significant expansion of Mathay Ballinger Park, the only city -owned park in south Edmonds. The shared 260-foot long property line provides easy access to the adjacent park and provides a seamless transition between the existing park and this property's heavily treed perimeter with an open lawn area. Mathay Ballinger Park has a playground, basketball courts and parking and currently in the permitting process for $450,000 improvements including a permanent restroom and water fountain, paved path through the park connecting to the Interurban trail, picnic shelter, benches and picnic tables. With these improvements slated for completion in 2024, the addition of the Mee property supports and expands a rarely found trailhead for the Interurban trail as well. With demolition of the existing small, older dwelling and two out -buildings having no contributory value, this site will become an important 55% expansion of an existing passive -use city park. The willing owner, who has resided for on the site 50 years, has asked a purchase price of $925,000 which is below the value provided from a city -ordered real estate appraisal. Funding The Parks capital program has more than $1,000,000 available for acquisitions and sufficient funding for the asking price and related costs. The city has received a preliminary funding award through a successful Snohomish County Conservation Futures Program grant application which will reimburse 75% of purchase price and acquisition related costs up to $880,000 pending County Council approval scheduled for December this year. Purchase & Sale Agreement Council's approval of the attached Purchase and Sale Agreement (PSA) allows for up to 75 days (January 2024) for the city to perform due diligence such as a survey and Phase 1 ESA (Environmental Site Assessment). The PSA also allows time for the city receive confirmation of the Snohomish County grant funding by the end of the year. Packet Pg. 423 10.2 This parkland acquisition is supported by numerous goals, objectives and recommendations found the recently adopted 2022 Parks, Recreation & Open Space (PROS) Plan including - Goal #3 - Parks, Trails & Open Space: Provide an interconnected park system that offers a wide variety of year-round recreation opportunities and experiences which support and enhance Edmonds' cultural identity and the natural environment. Objectives #3.1, 3.2 and 3.7. Goal #5 - Natural Resource & Habitat Conservation: Conserve and provide access to natural resource lands for habitat conservation, recreation, and environmental education. Objectives #5.1, 5.3, 5.4 and 5.5. Recommendation #1 - Acquisitions to Fill Park System Gaps Sect. 1 Acquire property for neighborhood parks in underserved areas, such as the south Edmonds and the SR (Highway) 99 corridor. Recommendation #2 - Open Space and Conservation Acquisitions The City should continue to seek options to expand its open space holdings and pursue acquisitions that adjoin city properties or conserve unique natural areas, such as wetlands, forested areas and vistas. Recommendation #5: Trail Connections Sect 1. Pursue opportunities to acquire additional lands, easements and/or rights -of -way to continue the Interurban Trail, including more off -road segments. Sect 2. Repair and improve or extend trails and boardwalks to allow improved public access to natural areas for nature/ wildlife viewing, hiking, and outdoor experience. Planning Board Recommendation On November 25, 2023, the Planning Board was presented this potential parkland acquisition and unanimously supported the motion of "Planning Board supports the acquisition of the Mee property". Staff Recommendation Staff recommends City Council authorize the Mayor to execute the attached Purchase and Sale Agreement for the Mee property. Background Basic property information includes - Parcel number: (West parcel) 00491100000805, (East parcel) 00491100000904 Address: 24024 76TH West, Edmonds, WA 98026 Owner: Gerald and Evelyn Mee Size: 0.99 Acre (0.87, 0.12) Zoning: R-8 Use Code: 111 Single Family Residence - Detached Utilities on site: Water (public), sewer Site location: Accessed off of 76th Avenue West at the western end of 240th Place SW. Conditions: Property is about 1 acre of land with an existing small, older dwelling and out- buildings having no contributory value. It has a flat, open lawn area and also located on the site are significant coniferous and deciduous trees, including a sequoia of substantial size and more than 20 significant and/or unique trees. The site is relatively flat, gently sloping down from northwest to southeast (6'). The site is not constrained by any mapped sensitive areas. Packet Pg. 424 10.2 Attachments: Purchase and Sale Agreement Mee Signed rspdf 2023.11.06 CC Presentation - Mee Property Packet Pg. 425 10.2.a REAL ESTATE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN GERALD J MEE AND EVELYN M MEE AND CITY OF EDMONDS 145960583.4 Packet Pg. 426 10.2.a REAL ESTATE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT THIS REAL ESTATE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT (the "Agreement") is made as of the day of , 2023 (the "Effective Date"), by and between Gerald J Mee and Evelyn M Mee, Husband and Wife ("Seller") and City of Edmonds, a Washington Municipal Corporation ("Purchaser'). ARTICLE I 1.1 Property Description. Seller owns that certain real property located at 24024 76t' Avenue West, Washington, and as more particularly described on Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference (the "Real Property'). 1.2 Agreement of Purchase and Sale. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein, Seller agrees to sell, convey, transfer, and assign, and Purchaser agrees to purchase, all of Seller's right, title and interest in and to the Real Property, together with all of Seller's right, title and interest in and to the following (collectively, the "Property'): (a) Real Property Rights. Any and all land lying in the bed of any street, road, highway or avenue, open or proposed, in front of, or adjoining all or any part of the Real Property, and all strips, gores or rights -of -way, lakebeds, streams, riparian rights, appurtenances, rights, licenses, and easements, in any way benefitting or otherwise in front of or adjoining all or any part of the Real Property (the "Real Property Rights'). (b) Improvements. Any and all buildings, fixtures, structures, landscaping, parking areas, improvements, and related improvements or amenities erected or located on, over, or beneath the Real Property (the "Improvements"). (c) Leases. Any and all leases of the Real Property, if any, including all leases, work letter agreements, improvement agreements, and other rental agreements with respect to occupancy or use of the Real Property by tenants, and such other leases, work letter agreements, improvement agreements, and other rental agreements as may be approved by Purchaser in accordance with the terms of this Agreement (the "Leases"). (c) Contracts. Any and all contracts, agreements, commitments, employment agreements, service contracts, utility contracts, construction contracts, maintenance agreements, leasing and brokerage agreements and all other contracts, agreements and obligations, whether or not in writing, which relate in any way to the ownership, development, operation, management, maintenance, use or occupancy of the Real Property (the "Contracts'). (d) Intangible Property. Any and all intangible property (other than the Real Property, Real Property Rights, Improvements, Leases, Contracts, and Personal Property) owned orheld by Seller and used in connection with the ownership, development, operation, management, maintenance, use, or occupancy of the Property, including, to the extent such Intangible Property exists and without warranty or representation of any kind, without limitation, the plans and specifications relating to the Property, all engineering, soil, land use, pest control and all other non -confidential studies or reports relating to the Property, the Improvements and/or the Personal - 1 - 145960583.4 Packet Pg. 427 10.2.a Property, all pre -paid fees, utility agreements, and connections for water and sewer, if any, all rights to reimbursements and credits pertaining to the Real Property, including without limitation, all those from any governmental jurisdiction, all rights to development impact fee credits pertaining to the Real Property and the development thereof, all awards or payments made or to be made for or with respect to any taking in condemnation or eminent domain (including awards or payments for damage resulting from change of grade or impairment of access) of any part of the Property, the Improvements and/or the Personal Property prior to, on or after the date hereof, all rents, issues and profits therefrom and to the extent, if any, approved by Purchaser pursuant to the terms of this Agreement, all consents, licenses, franchises, permits, entitlements, approvals, utility and/or subdivision bonds or deposits, purchase or construction warranties or guarantees (the "Intangible Property'). (e) Sellers shall retain the right to remove any personal property, including any appliances, furniture, or furnishings whether inside the premises or outside on the Property. (f) Sellers reserve the right to remove any kitchen cabinets, whether the cabinets are fixtures or not. (g) Sellers reserve the right to remove any fencing on or around the Real Property (h) Sellers reserve the right to remove the brick from any pathways on the Real Property. 1.3 Purchase Price. The purchase price for the Property is Nine Hundred and Twenty -Five Thousand Dollars and no cents ($ 925,000.00) (the "Purchase Price"). 1.4 Purchaser's Deposit; Escrow. Within three (3) business days after the Effective Date, Purchaser shall deliver to the Everett, Washington office of Chicago Title Insurance Company located at 3002 Colby Ave., Everett, Washington 98201 ("Escrow Agent" or "Title Company"), a cash deposit in the amount of Thirty Thousand Dollars and no cents ($30,000.00) (which, together with any interest earned thereon, is the "Earnest Money"). Escrow Agent shall invest the Earnest Money in an interest -bearing account as instructed by Purchaser. The Earnest Money shall be applicable to the Purchase Price at Closing, except as specifically provided elsewhere in this Agreement. If the Closing does not occur as the result of a breach or default by Seller, all of the Earnest Money, and all accrued interest thereon, shall be immediately refunded to the Purchaser, and the parties shall promptly execute and deliver cancellation instructions to the Escrow Agent. ARTICLE II TITLE REVIEW; SELLER'S CONDITIONS 2.1 Title Examination; Commitment for Title Insurance; Survey. Within two (2) business day after the Effective Date, Purchaser shall order from the Title Company a commitment for an extended coverage A.L.T.A. Policy of Title Insurance (the "Title Commitment"), and copies of all recorded instruments referenced in the Title Commitment, if any. Purchaser shall have thirty (30) days after the Effective Date to examine title to the Property (the "Title Review Period"). Purchaser may, in Purchaser's sole discretion and at Purchaser's sole cost and expense - 2 - 145960583.4 Packet Pg. 428 10.2.a during the Title Review Period, obtain an ALTA or other survey of the Property as required to obtain extended coverage (the "Survey'). 2.2 Title Objections, Cure of Title Obiections. (a) Purchaser shall have until the expiration of the Title Review Period to give written notice to Seller of such objections as Purchaser may have to any exceptions to title insurance coverage as disclosed in the Title Commitment. Any such exception to title disclosed in the Title Commitment to which Purchaser does not object by timely written notice shall be a "Permitted Exception." Purchaser shall not be required to object to any mortgage or deed of trust liens, the lien of any financing of Seller, any exceptions related to Seller's authority to convey the Property, and the same shall not be deemed Permitted Exceptions. Following delivery of the Title Commitment, Seller shall not alter the condition of title to the Property without the written consent of Purchaser. (b) In the event Purchaser gives timely written notice of objection to any exceptions to title, Seller shall have the right, but not the obligation, to elect to remove, satisfy or otherwise cure ten (10) days prior to Closing any exceptions to title or matters identified on the Survey so objected to by Purchaser. Within five (5) business days after receipt of Purchaser's notice of objection, Seller shall give written notice to Purchaser informing Purchaser of Seller's election with respect to such exceptions. If Seller fails to give written notice of its election within such five (5) business day period, Seller shall be deemed to have elected not to cure any such exceptions or matters. (c) If Seller elects or is deemed to have elected not to cure any exceptions to title or matters identified on the Survey as objected to by Purchaser or if, after electing to cure, Seller determines and provides written notice to Purchaser that it is unwilling or unable to remove, satisfy or otherwise cure any such exceptions or matters by Closing, Purchaser's sole remedy hereunder in such event shall be either (i) to accept title to the Property subject to such exceptions as if Purchaser had not objected thereto and without reduction of the Purchase Price, or (ii) to terminate this Agreement, in which case the Earnest Money shall be returned to Purchaser by the Escrow Agent, and neither party hereto shall have any further rights, obligations or liabilities hereunder except to the extent that any right, obligation or liability set forth herein expressly survives termination of this Agreement. Purchaser shall provide Seller with written notice of its election pursuant to this Section 2.2(c) prior to the end of the Inspection Period. If Purchaser fails to provide Seller with timely notice of its election to terminate this Agreement prior to the end of the Inspection Period pursuant to this Section 2.2(c), Purchaser shall be deemed to have elected to purchase the Property in accordance with and as contemplated in this Agreement. Any exceptions to title to which Purchaser has objected and that Seller has elected or is deemed to have elected not to remove, satisfy or otherwise cure which is not otherwise removed from the Title Commitment or final Title Policy shall also be a "Permitted Exception." 2.3 Supplemental Title Report. If there are any changes or additions to the Title Commitment after the expiration of the Title Review Period, Title Company shall deliver to Purchaser a supplement to the Title Commitment (the "Supplemental Report"). Purchaser shall have the right to review and approve any new items appearing in the Supplemental Report. Purchaser shall deliver notice of approval or disapproval of the items set forth in the Supplemental - 3 - 145960583.4 Packet Pg. 429 10.2.a Report to Seller within five (5) business days after the delivery of the Supplemental Report. The failure of Purchaser to deliver notice of disapproval within said three (3) business day period shall be deemed to be Purchaser's approval of the Supplemental Report. In the event Purchaser delivers notice of disapproval, Seller shall have five (5) business days after receipt of Purchaser's notice to deliver notice as to whether Seller intends to remove, satisfy or otherwise cure any or all of the items in the Supplemental Report disapproved by Purchaser by Closing. Seller shall conclusively be deemed to have elected not to cure or remove each such item ("Disanaroved Exceptions") for which Seller fails to notify Purchaser of its intention to cure or remove within such three (3) business day period. If Seller does not elect to cure or remove any Disapproved Exception within such three (3) business day period, Purchaser shall elect by notice to Seller within two (2) business days after expiration of such three (3) business day period to either (i) waive the Disapproved Exception, in which event the Disapproved Exception shall become a Permitted Exception (and failure of Purchaser to provide such notice within the two (2) business day period shall be deemed to be Purchaser's election to proceed under this clause (i)), or (ii) terminate this Agreement, in which case the Earnest Money shall be returned to Purchaser by the Escrow Agent, and neither party hereto shall have any further rights, obligations or liabilities hereunder except to the extent that any right, obligation or liability set forth herein expressly survives termination of Agreement. Closing shall be extended as necessary to provide for the notice and response periods set forth above. 2.4 Conveyance of Title. At Closing, Seller shall convey and transfer to Purchaser title to the Property by Deed (as defined in Section 4.2(a) subject only to the Permitted Exceptions and the standard preprinted exceptions in the Title Company's standard form of owner's title policy. At Closing, Seller shall cause the Title Company to issue to Purchaser an A.L.T.A. Owner's Policy of Title Insurance (or the Title Company's irrevocable commitment to issue such policy) in the same form as the Title Commitment, unless revised in accordance with this Agreement or otherwise upon Purchaser's prior written approval (the "Title Policy'), covering the Property in the full amount of the Purchase Price, subject only to the Permitted Exceptions and the standard preprinted exceptions in the Title Company's extended form of owner's title policy. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary specified herein, Purchaser shall be responsible for providing the Survey, delivering the same to the Title Company and providing any other information or documentation required by the Title Company in order for the Title Company to issue to Purchaser at Closing an extended coverage A.L.T.A. Owner's Policy of Title Insurance (the "Extended Coverage Conditions"). Seller shall deliver to Escrow Agent such additional documents as the Title Company requires from Seller in order to issue Purchaser the Title Policy, including, but not limited to, an owner's/seller's affidavit. ARTICLE III PROPERTY DOCUMENTS: PURCHASER'S CONTINGENCIES 3.1 Property Documents. Within three (3) business days after the Effective Date, Seller shall provide to Purchaser disclosure materials made available by Seller pertaining to the - 4 - 145960583.4 Packet Pg. 430 10.2.a condition and/or operation of the Property, including, without limitation, all Contracts, Leases, and written evidence of Personal Property and Intangible Property, land use permits, studies, analyses and entitlements related to the Property (collectively, the "Property Documents"). 3.2 Inspection Period. Commencing on the Effective Date and continuing until 11:59 P.M., Pacific time on the date that is seventy-five (75) days after the Effective Date (hereinafter referred to as the "Inspection Period"), Purchaser shall have the right, at Purchaser's expense, to make physical inspections of the Property pursuant to Section 3.3 below. 3.3 Property Inspection Conditions. Upon reasonable prior notice to Seller, Purchaser shall have the right, at Purchaser's expense, to make physical inspections of the Property at times and at locations reasonably convenient to Purchaser in order to make the determination of suitability as provided in this Section 3.3, provided that such inspection activities do not unreasonably interfere with Seller's use of, or obligations relating to, the Property. In addition, Purchaser and Purchaser's representatives and authorized agents shall have the right, upon reasonable prior notice to Seller, to enter on the Property from the Effective Date to the Closing Date (defined below) or the earlier termination of this Agreement, to undertake inspections and investigations and make such tests, surveys and other studies of the Property as Purchaser deems appropriate, provided that such inspections, investigations or tests do not unreasonably interfere with Seller's use of, or obligations relating to, the Property. Purchaser's physical inspection and testing activities of the Property shall be conditioned upon the following: (a) Purchaser shall cooperate with and adhere to all reasonable requirements of Seller that affect the timing of all such activities; (b) Purchaser shall not conduct any drilling or other invasive testing on the Property without the prior written consent of Seller, not to be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed; provided, however, that Purchaser may perform a Phase Il Environmental Site Assessment; and (c) Seller shall provide Purchaser and Purchaser's representatives with reasonable access to the Property at reasonable business hours for such purposes; (d) prior to any entry upon the Property, Purchaser shall provide Seller with proof of commercial general liability insurance on an occurrence basis (CG 11-93 form including ISO 2010 11-85 or equivalent, if available) with limits not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury or property damage and $2,000,000 aggregate, and naming Seller as additional insured; (e) Purchaser shall bear the entire cost of all tests and studies performed by Purchaser or at Purchaser's direction; and (f) Purchaser agrees at its sole cost to restore the Property to substantially the condition it was in immediately prior to such inspections, including, but not limited to the immediate removal of anything placed on the Property in connection with such inspections (Sections 3.3(a) - (fl shall hereinafter be referred to as the "Property Inspection Conditions"). Seller shall permit and provide access for Purchaser, at Purchaser's sole cost and expense, to contact and have discussions with any contractors or consultants who have performed any work or inspections relating to the Property, and Seller shall permit Purchaser to contact and discuss development of the Property with the permitting jurisdiction and all relevant governmental agencies. For the avoidance of doubt, Purchaser shall pay all fees, costs and expenses of any contractors or consultants contacted by Purchaser as contemplated herein. Following Seller's written request, copies of any reports, letters or other written information, if any, generated as a result of such inspections shall be provided to Seller if the sale contemplated by this Agreement does not close for any reason. 3.4 Property Indemnity Conditions. Purchaser shall defend, indemnify and hold Seller and the Property harmless from any and all costs, expenses, claims, losses, liabilities and - 5 - 145960583.4 Packet Pg. 431 10.2.a demands arising from the exercise of these rights referred to in this Section 3.4, except with respect to Property conditions that existed before Purchaser's exercise of these rights (but, with respect to any such pre-existing conditions, Purchaser's indemnification obligations shall include any liabilities and expenses arising out of the exacerbation of such conditions caused by Purchaser's activities). Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement, Purchaser's liability under this Section 3.4 shall survive the termination of this Agreement. 3.5 Right of Termination. Seller agrees that in the event Purchaser determines (such determination to be made in Purchaser's sole discretion, and which may be made for any reason or no reason at all) that the Property is not suitable for Purchaser's purposes, then Purchaser shall have the right to terminate this Agreement prior to the expiration of the Inspection Period. If Purchaser fails to give a notice of approval of its review of the Property ("Approval Notice") to Seller within the Inspection Period, Purchaser shall be deemed to have elected to terminate this Agreement and the Earnest Money shall be returned to Purchaser. If Purchaser does deliver to Seller the Approval Notice prior to the expiration of the Inspection Period, the Earnest Money shall be non-refundable and applicable towards the Purchase Price, except as otherwise expressly provided herein and this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect. 3.6 Seller Disclosure Statement. The Property constitutes "improved residential property" as defined in RCW 64,06.005. Pursuant to RCW 64.06.020, Seller shall provide to Purchaser the seller disclosure statement required pursuant thereto, the form of which is attached hereto as Exhibit B (the "Disclosure Statement"). The Parties hereto acknowledge and agree that the Disclosure Statement shall be considered part of this Agreement. 3.7 Purchaser's Council Approval Contingency. Purchaser's performance under this Agreement is contingent on approval by resolution of the purchase of the Property by the Edmonds City Council ("Council Approval Contingency"). The Council Approval Contingency will be satisfied only if the Edmonds City Council (the "Council") adopts a resolution approving the purchase of the Property pursuant to the terms of this Agreement ("Resolution") no later than seventy-five (75) days after the Effective Date ("Council Approval Period"), (a) If the Council does not adopt this Resolution within the Council Approval Period, this Agreement and all of the City's obligations hereunder shall be rendered null and void and the Earnest Money shall be returned to Purchaser. (b) If the Council does adopt this Resolution prior to the expiration of the Council Approval Period, the Earnest Money shall be non-refundable and applicable towards the Purchase Price, except as otherwise expressly provided herein and this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect. ARTICLE IV CLOSING 4.1 Time and Place. (a) The consummation of the transactions contemplated hereunder ("Closing") shall occur on a date mutually agreed upon by Seller and Purchaser, but not later than the date that is thirty (30) days after the date on which Purchaser delivers the Approval Notice pursuant to - 6 - 145960593.4 Packet Pg. 432 10.2.a Section 3.5 and the Council Approval has been issued pursuant to Section 3.7 (the "Closing Date"). 4.2 Seller's Obligations at Closing. On or before the Closing Date, Seller shall: (a) Deliver to Escrow Agent a duly executed Statutory Warranty Deed (the "Deed") in recordable form, conveying the Real Property to Purchaser, subject only to the Permitted Exceptions; (b) Deliver to Escrow Agent such evidence as the Title Company may reasonably require as to the authority of the person or persons executing documents on behalf of Seller; (c) Delivery to Escrow Agent an affidavit duly executed by Seller stating that Seller is not a "foreign person" as defined in the Federal Foreign Investment in Real Property Tax; (d) Immediately after completion of the Closing, deliver to Purchaser possession and occupancy of the Property, subject only to the Permitted Exceptions; and (e) Deliver to Purchaser and Escrow Agent such additional documents as shall be reasonably required to consummate the transaction contemplated by this Agreement, including a standard Title Company form of owner's affidavit, but Seller makes no representation that the Title Company will be able to issue extended coverage to Purchaser and the Closing is not contingent on Purchaser being able to obtain extended coverage. 4.3 Purchaser's Obligations at Closing. On or before the Closing Date, Purchaser shall: (a) Pay to Escrow Agent the full amount of the Purchase Price as increased or decreased by prorations and adjustments as herein provided, less the Earnest Money, and less interest accrued thereon, by wire transfer of immediately available federal finds; (b) Deliver to Escrow Agent and Seller such evidence as the Title Company may reasonably require as to the authority of the person or persons executing documents on behalf of Purchaser; and (c) Deliver to Escrow Agent and Seller such additional documents as shall be reasonably required to consummate the transaction contemplated by this Agreement. 4.4 Credits and Prorations. Real estate property taxes shall be apportioned with respect to the Property as of 12:01 a.m., on the Closing Date, as if Purchaser were vested with title to the Property during the entire day upon which Closing occurs. Any taxes paid at or prior to Closing shall be prorated based upon the amounts actually paid. If taxes and assessments for the current year have not been paid before Closing, Seller shall be charged at Closing an amount equal to that portion of such taxes and assessments which relates to the period before Closing and Purchaser shall pay the taxes and assessments prior to their becoming delinquent. To the extent that the actual taxes and assessments for the current year differ from the amount apportioned at - 7 - 145960583.4 Packet Pg. 433 10.2.a Closing, the parties shall make all necessary adjustments by appropriate payments between themselves within thirty (30) days following Closing when such final amounts are known. 4.5 Closine Costs. (a) Seller shall pay (i) the fees of any counsel representing Seller in connection with this transaction; (ii) one-half (%) of any escrow fee which may be charged by the Escrow Agent or Title Company; (iii) the standard coverage portions of the Title Policy to be issued to Purchaser by the Title Company at Closing; and (iv) any real estate commissions owed by Seller pursuant to Section 8.1 below. (b) Purchaser shall pay (i) the fees of any counsel representing Purchaser in connection with this transaction; (ii) the extended coverage portion of the Title Policy to be issued to Purchaser by the Title Company at Closing as well as any additional endorsements issued by the Title Company; (iii) one-half ('/z) of any escrow fees charged by the Escrow Agent or Title Company; and (iv) the cost of any recording fees for recording the Deed. (c) All other costs and. expenses incident to this action and the Closing shall be apportioned by the parties equally in accordance with local custom. ARTICLE V REPRESENTATIONS, WARRANTIES, COVENANTS AND INDEMNITIES 5.1 Representations and Warranties of Seller. Seller hereby makes the following representations and warranties to Purchaser as of the Effective Date and at Closing, except as otherwise disclosed to Purchaser in the Property Documents or discovered by Purchaser in connection with its inspections during the Inspection Period: (a) Authority and Ownership. Seller has the full right and authority to enter into this Agreement, to transfer all of the Property to Purchaser, and to consummate, or cause to be consummated, the transactions contemplated herein. The person or persons signing this Agreement on behalf of Seller are authorized to do so. (b) Pending Actions. To Seller's actual knowledge, there are no actions, suits, arbitrations, unsatisfied orders or judgments, or governmental investigations pending or threatened in writing against the Property, or the transaction contemplated by this Agreement, except as disclosed in writing to Purchaser. (c) Leases. There are no parties other than Seller in possession of any portion of the Property or improvements thereon as lessees, licensees, tenants, claimants to any right of possession or ownership or trespassers. (d) Property Documents. The documents to be delivered to Purchaser under this Agreement, including the Property Documents, are complete and correct copies of the same. Seller has no actual knowledge of any other documents, correspondence, or other materials that could have a material impact on the Property except for the Property Documents. - 8 - 145960583.4 Packet Pg. 434 10.2.a (e) Outstanding Agreements. There are no outstanding agreements of sale, options or any other rights of third parties to acquire or use the Property or to any interest therein, except for the Permitted Exceptions. There are no contracts applicable to the Property that will survive Closing. (f) Hazardous Materials. To Seller's actual knowledge, there are no, and have been no, releases of Hazardous Substances on or about the Property. To Seller's actual knowledge, there are no pending proceedings or inquiries by any governmental body with respect to the Property. For purposes of this Agreement, "Hazardous Substances" shall refer to the definition provided under the Model Toxics Control Act, Chapter 70.105D RCW and Chapter 173-340 WAC, as amended or revised after the Effective Date. (g) Mechanic's Liens. There are no contractors, subcontractors, materials suppliers, or any other third parties that are unpaid, that have provided Seller with notice of a claim of lien, or that otherwise have any other rights to impose, enforce, file, record, or foreclose a lien against the Real Property pursuant to RCW 60.04 or otherwise. 5.2 Representations and Warranties of Purchaser. Purchaser hereby represents and warrants to Seller that Purchaser has the full right, power and authority to purchase the Property as provided in this Agreement, subject to Section 3.7 above, and to carry out Purchaser's obligations hereunder, and all requisite actions necessary to authorize Purchaser to enter into this Agreement and to carry out its obligations hereunder have been, or by Closing will have been, taken, and Purchaser has the financial capability to consummate the Closing. The person signing this Agreement on behalf of Purchaser is authorized to do so, subject to Section 3.7 above. 5.3 Indemnification by Seller. Seller agrees to indemnify, defend and hold Purchaser, its successors and assigns, members, managers, shareholders, officers, directors and/or employees of each of them, harmless for, from and against any and all claims, demands, liabilities, costs, expenses, damages and losses, cause or causes of action and suit or suits of any nature whatsoever, including, without limitation, attorneys' fees, arising from any misrepresentation or breach of any warranty or covenant by Seller in this Agreement. 5.4 Survival. The provisions of this Section 5 shall survive Closing and the delivery of the Deed for twelve (12) months. ARTICLE VI CONDEMNATION 6.1 Purchaser's Elections. In the event condemnation proceedings are commenced against all of the Property or any material portion thereof (and for this purpose, "material" is defined as a proposed condemnation which would reasonably be expected to be valued at more than Fifty Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($50,000.00)) or would have a material adverse impact on Purchaser's intended development or use of the Property as communicated by Purchaser or Purchaser's Broker (as defined below) to Seller on or before the Effective Date hereof, Purchaser may elect, on notice to Seller within fifteen (15) days after receipt of notice of the commencement of such proceedings either: (i) to terminate this Agreement in which case the Earnest Money shall be returned to Purchaser by the Escrow Agent, and neither party hereto shall have any further - 9 - 145960583.4 Packet Pg. 435 10.2.a rights, obligations or liabilities hereunder except to the extent that any right, obligation or liability set forth herein expressly survives termination of Agreement; or (ii) to proceed to Closing in which case Seller shall at Closing assign to Purchaser all of Seller's right, title and interest to any claims and proceeds Seller may have with respect to any condemnation awards relating thereto, less any costs and expenses reasonably incurred by Seller from the date of the commencement of such condemnation through the date of Closing relating to such condemnation. If Purchaser does not make such an election within fifteen (15) days after the commencement of condemnation proceedings, Purchaser shall be deemed to have elected to proceed under clause (ii) above. ARTICLE VII DEFAULT 7.1 Liquidated Damages. IF THE CLOSING IS NOT CONSUMMATED DUE TO ANY DEFAULT BY PURCHASER HEREUNDER, AND PURCHASER FAILS TO CURE SUCH DEFAULT WITHIN FIVE (5) BUSINESS DAYS AFTER PURCHASER'S RECEIPT OF WRITTEN NOTICE FROM SELLER SPECIFYING SUCH BREACH (PROVIDED, HOWEVER, THAT THE FOREGOING NOTICE AND CURE RIGHTS SHALL NOT APPLY TO PURCHASER'S FAILURE TO CLOSE ON THE CLOSING DATE), THEN SELLER, AS ITS SOLE REMEDY, SHALL RETAIN THE EARNEST MONEY AND EXTENSION OPTION FEES (IF ANY) AS LIQUIDATED DAMAGES, WHICH RETENTION SHALL OPERATE TO TERMINATE THIS AGREEMENT AND RELEASE PURCHASER FROM ANY AND ALL LIABILITY HEREUNDER, EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE EXPRESSLY PROVIDED IN THIS AGREEMENT. THE PARTIES HAVE AGREED THAT SELLER'S ACTUAL DAMAGES, IN THE EVENT OF A FAILURE TO CONSUMMATE THIS SALE DUE TO PURCHASER'S DEFAULT, WOULD BE EXTREMELY DIFFICULT OR IMPRACTICABLE TO DETERMINE. AFTER NEGOTIATION, THE PARTIES HAVE AGREED THAT, CONSIDERING ALL THE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE DATE OF THIS AGREEMENT, THE AMOUNT OF THE EARNEST MONEY AND EXTENSION OPTION FEES IS A REASONABLE ESTIMATE OF THE DAMAGES THAT SELLER WOULD INCUR IN SUCH EVENT, EACH PARTY SPECIFICALLY CONFIRMS THE ACCURACY OF THE STATEMENTS MADE ABOVE AND THE FACT THAT EACH PARTY WAS REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL WHO EXPLAINED, AT THE TIME THIS AGREEMENT WAS MADE, THE CONSEQUENCES OF THIS LIQUIDATED DAMAGES PROVISION. THE FOREGOING IS NOT INTENDED TO LIMIT PURCHASER'S SURVIVING OBLIGATIONS, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ITS INDEMNIFICATION OBLIGATIONS, UNDER THIS AGREEMENT. 7.2 Seller Default. In the event of a Seller Default, Purchaser shall provide Seller with written notice of such default and Seller shall have five (5) business days after Seller's receipt from Purchaser of such written notice to cure such default, or if such default cannot be cured in such period, to commence the cure during such period and thereafter diligently complete such cure. If after such notice, the Closing fails to occur due to such Seller Default, Purchaser may elect to either (i) terminate this Agreement and receive the return of the Earnest Money and any Extension Option Fees paid to Seller; or (ii) commence an action against Seller for specific performance of its obligations under this Agreement. Any such action for specific performance must be commenced within sixty (60) days after the then scheduled Closing Date. In no event shall Seller - 10 - 145960583.4 Packet Pg. 436 10.2.a be liable to Purchaser for any lost profits or other consequential or special damages. If Purchaser elects to terminate this Agreement, (a) this Agreement shall not be terminated automatically, but only upon delivery to Escrow Agent and Seller of written notice of termination from Purchaser; and (b) Escrow Agent shall return all sums (including the Earnest Money and all interest earned thereon while held in escrow) deposited by Purchaser. As used in this Agreement, a "Seller Default" shall mean (i) the failure by the Seller to deliver the Deed; (ii) the failure by the Seller to discharge, satisfy, release or terminate the matters of record Seller is required to remove from title as set forth herein above; (iii) any material breach of representation, warranty or covenant of Seller hereunder, or (iv) the failure by the Seller to perform any of Seller's other obligations under this Agreement. ARTICLE VIII BROKERS 8.1 Brokers. Purchaser represents to Seller that Long Bay Enterprises Inc., ("Purchaser's Broker") is the only real estate broker that Purchaser has engaged or dealt with in connection with this transaction, and that Purchaser will compensate Purchaser's Broker pursuant to a separate agreement. Seller represents to Purchaser that Seller has not engaged a Seller's Broker in connection with this transaction, and that if Seller does engage a Seller's Broker Seller is obligated to pay a real estate brokerage commission to Seller's Broker pursuant to a separate agreement. Each party shall indemnify, defend and hold the other harmless with respect to claims for real estate brokerage commissions or finder's fee for which such party is allegedly obligated. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, Seller shall indemnify, defend and hold Purchaser harmless with respect to any claims by Seller's Broker for real estate brokerage commissions or finder's fees. The provisions of this Section 8.1 shall survive Closing. ARTICLE IX AS -IS PURCHASE AND SALE 9.1 At or before the end of the Inspection Period, Purchaser will have approved the physical and environmental characteristics and condition of the Property, as well as the economic characteristics of the Property. Purchaser hereby waives any and all defects in the physical, environmental and economic characteristics and condition of the Property which would be disclosed by such inspection. Purchaser further acknowledges that neither Seller nor any other person or entity acting on behalf of Seller, except as otherwise expressly provided in Section 5.1, have made any representations, warranties or agreements (express or implied) by or on behalf of Seller as to any matters concerning the Property, the economic results to be obtained or predicted, or the present use thereof or the suitability for Purchaser's intended use of the Property, including, without limitation, the following: the size or acreage of the Property; the suitability of the topography; the availability of water rights or utilities; the present and future zoning, subdivision and any and all other land use matters; the condition of the soil, subsoil, or groundwater; the purpose(s) to which the Property is suited; drainage; flooding; access to public roads; or proposed routes of roads or extensions thereof. Purchaser acknowledges and agrees that the Property is to be purchased, conveyed and accepted by Purchaser in its present condition, "AS -IS" and that no 145960583.4 Packet Pg. 437 10.2.a patent or latent defect in the physical or environmental condition of the Property whether or not known or discovered, shall affect the rights of either party hereto. Any documents furnished to Purchaser by Seller relating to the Property including, without limitation, service agreements, management contracts, maps, surveys, reports and other information shall be deemed furnished as a courtesy to Purchaser but without warranty from Seller. All work done in connection with preparing the Property for the uses intended by Purchaser including any and all fees, studies, reports, approvals, plans, surveys, permits, and any expenses whatsoever necessary or desirable in connection with Purchaser's acquiring, developing, using and/or operating the Property shall be obtained and paid for by, and shall be the sole responsibility of, Purchaser. Purchaser has investigated and has knowledge of operative or proposed governmental laws and regulations including land use laws and regulations to which the Property may be subject and shall acquire the Property upon the basis of its review and determination of the applicability and effect of such laws and regulations. Purchaser has neither received nor relied upon any representations concerning such laws and regulations from Seller. Except for claims of fraud or willful misrepresentation on the part of Seller, and except for those representations and warranties expressly set forth herein, Purchaser, on behalf of itself and its employees, agents, successors and permitted assigns, attorneys and other representatives, and each of them, hereby releases Seller from and against any and all claims, demands, causes of action, obligations, damages and liabilities of any nature whatsoever, whether alleged under any statute, common law or otherwise, directly or indirectly, arising out of or related to the condition, operation or economic performance of the Property. ARTICLE X MISCELLANEOUS 10.1 Public Disclosure. Prior to Closing, any release to any third party, except for the Escrow Agent, the Title Company, the permitting jurisdiction and all relevant governmental agencies, or Seller's or Purchaser's attorneys, accountants, engineers and confidential advisors, of information with respect to the sale contemplated herein or any matters set forth in this Agreement, will be made only in the form approved by Purchaser and Seller and their respective counsel; provided, however, that Seller acknowledges that Purchaser is a public entity, that Purchaser will have already held public hearings concerning this transaction, and that Purchaser may be required to disclose or otherwise release information about this Agreement and this transaction pursuant to applicable public disclosure or other laws in the State of Washington. 10.2 Notices. Any notice pursuant to this Agreement shall be given in writing by (i) personal delivery, (ii) nationally recognized overnight delivery service with proof of delivery, or (iii) legible facsimile transmission sent to the intended addressee at the address set forth below and receipt confirmed by telephone, or to such other address or to the attention of such other person as the addressee shall have designated by written notice sent in accordance herewith, and shall be deemed to have been given either at the time of delivery or, in the case of facsimile transmission, as of the date of the facsimile transmission (or, if such date is not a business day, then on the next business day) provided that an original of such facsimile is also sent to the intended addressee by means described in clauses (i) or (ii) above. In addition, notice may be given by email at the email address set forth hereinbelow for the party to whom notice is given, and such notice shall be deemed given and served upon transmission so long as such notice is also given by no later than the following business day via a method provided for in (i) through (iii) above. Unless changed - 12 - 145960583A Packet Pg. 438 10.2.a in accordance with the preceding sentence, the addresses for notice given pursuant to this Agreement shall be: If to Purchaser: Angie Feser Angie.feser a,edmondswa.gov 425-771-0230 With a copy to: Jeff Taraday jeffnlighthouselawgroup.com If to Seller: Gerald and Evelyn Mee 24024 76`" Ave W Edmonds, WA 98026 With a copy to: Joseph Rockne joseph@rocknelaw.com 10.3 Bindina Effect. This Agreement shall not be binding in any way upon Seller and Purchaser unless and until Seller and Purchaser shall execute and deliver this Agreement. The binding effect upon Purchaser is subject to Section 3.7 above. 10.4 Modifications. This Agreement cannot be changed orally, and no executory agreement shall be effective to waive, change, modify or discharge it in whole or in part unless such executory agreement is in writing and is signed by the parties against whom enforcement of any waiver, change, modification or discharge is sought. 10.5 Business Days. References to "business days" herein shall mean any day except Saturday, Sunday or day on which commercial banks located in Seattle, Washington, are authorized or required by law to be closed for business. If the Closing Date or the day for performance of any act required under this Agreement falls on a day which is not a business day, then the Closing Date or the day for such performance, as the case may be, shall be the next following regular business day. The final day of any such period shall be deemed to end at 5:00 p.m. Pacific time unless otherwise specifically stated. 10.6 Successors and Assi ns. The terms and provisions of this Agreement are to apply to and bind the permitted successors and assigns of the parties hereto. 10.7 Entire Agreement. This Agreement, including the exhibits and documents to be delivered at Closing, contains the entire agreement between the parties pertaining to the subject matter hereof and fully supersedes all prior written or oral agreements and understandings between the parties pertaining to such subject matter. - 13 - 145960583.4 Packet Pg. 439 10.2.a 10.8 Further Assurances. Each party agrees that it will, without further consideration, execute and deliver such other documents and take such other action, whether prior or subsequent to Closing, as may be reasonably requested by the other party to consummate more effectively the purposes or subject matter of this Agreement. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, Purchaser shall, if requested by Seller, execute acknowledgments of receipt with respect to any materials delivered by Seller to Purchaser with respect to the Property. The provisions of this Section 10.8 shall survive the Closing. 10.9 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts and all such executed counterparts shall constitute the same agreement. It shall be necessary to account for only one such counterpart in proving this Agreement. Fax copies of signatures shall be treated for all purposes as original signatures. 10.10 Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement shall nonetheless remain in full force and effect. 10.11 Applicable Law. This Agreement is performable in the state in which the Property is located and shall in all respects be governed by, and construed in accordance with the substantive federal laws of the United States and the laws of the State of Washington. Seller and Purchaser hereby irrevocably submit to the jurisdiction of any state or federal court sitting in the state in which the Property is located in any action or proceeding arising out of or relating to this Agreement and hereby irrevocably agree that all claims in respect of such action or proceeding shall be heard and determined in a state or federal court sitting in the state in which the Property is located. Purchaser and Seller agree that the provisions of this Section 10.11 shall survive Closing. 10.12 No Third Party Beneficiary. The provisions of this Agreement and of the documents to be executed and delivered at Closing are and will be for the benefit of Seller and Purchaser only and are not for the benefit of any third party, and accordingly, no third party shall have the right to enforce the provisions of this Agreement or the documents to be executed and delivered at Closing. 10.13 Survival. The terms of this Agreement shall survive the Closing, or any termination of this Agreement prior thereto, and shall not be merged into the execution and delivery of the Deed; provided, however, that the representations and warranties of Seller and Purchaser in Article 5 shall survive the Closing for a period of twelve (12) months. 10.14 Attorneys' Fees. In the event any dispute between Purchaser and Seller should result in litigation, arbitration or mediation, the substantially prevailing party shall be reimbursed for all reasonable costs incurred in connection with such action, including, without limitation, reasonable attorneys' fees. 10.15 Time is of the Essence. Time is of the essence in this Agreement and each of its provisions. [Remainder of page intentionally left blank; separate signature page attached.] - 14 - 145960583.4 Packet Pg. 440 10.2.a IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have duly executed this Agreement as of the Effective Date. PURCHASER: By: City of Edmonds Name: Its: Date: SELLER: By: Gerald Evelyn Name: d' n rr Its: Hu and and Wife Date: tv 145960583.4 Packet Pg. 441 10.2.a EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN IS SITUATED IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: For APN/Parcel ID(s): 004911-000-008-05 ALL THAT PORTION OF TRACTS 8 AND 9, LAKE MCALEER FIVE ACRE TRACT, ACCORDING TO PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 5 OF PLATS PAGE 48, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT 375 FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID TRACT 9; THENCE NORTH 15 FEET; THENCE NORTH TO WEST LINE OF TRACT 9; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID WEST LINE OF TRACT 9,140 FEET; THENCE WEST TO EAST LINE OF RIGHT-OF-WAY OF SEATTLE EVERETT INTERURBAN RAILWAY; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAD RIGHT-OF-WAY TO WEST LINE OF TRACT 8; THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID WEST LINE OF TRACT 8 TO A POINT WEST OF POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE EAST TO POINT OF BEGINNING EXCEPT COUNTY ROAD ON EAST SIDE TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF TRACT 9, MCALEER FIVE ACRE TRACTS, RECORDED IN VOLUME 5 OF PLATS, PAGE 48, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; BEGINNING AT A POINT NORTH 2*32'33" WEST 530 FEET FROM THE SOUTH EAST CORNER OF SAID TRACT 9; THENCE SOUTH 88°06'2" WEST 300.14 FEET TO A POINT WHICH IS THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 2°34'26" EAST 140 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 88°06'02" WEST 32 FEET; THENCE NORTH 2°34'26" WEST 140 FEET; THENCE NORTH 88°06'02" EAST 32 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON. For APN/Parcel ID(s): 004911-000-009-04 THAT PORTION OF TRACT 9, MCALEER FIVE ACRE TRACTS, RECORDED IN VOLUME 5 OF PLATS, PAGE 48, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; BEGINNING AT A POINT NORTH 2°32'33" WEST 530 FEET FROM THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID TRACT 9; THENCE SOUTH 88°06'2" WEST 300.14 FEET TO A POINT WHICH IS THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 2°34'26" EAST 140 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 88°06'02" WEST 32 FEET; THENCE NORTH 2°34'26" WEST 140 FEET; THENCE NORTH 88°06'02" EAST 32 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON. 145960583.4 Packet Pg. 442 10.2.a EXHIBIT A to Disclosure Statement Legal Description oi'the Real Property For APN/Parcel ID(s): 004911-000-008-05 ALL THAT PORTION OF TRACTS 8 AND 9, LAKE MCALEER FIVE ACRE TRACT, ACCORDING TO PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 5 OF PLATS PAGE 48, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT 375 FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID TRACT 9; THENCE NORTH 15 FEET; THENCE NORTH TO WEST LINE OF TRACT 9; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID WEST LINE OF TRACT 9,140 FEET; THENCE WEST TO EAST LINE OF RIGHT-OF-WAY OF SEATTLE EVERETT INTERURBAN RAILWAY; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAD RIGHT-OF-WAY TO WEST LINE OF TRACT 8; THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID WEST LINE OF TRACT 8 TO A POINT WEST OF POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE EAST TO POINT OF BEGINNING EXCEPT COUNTY ROAD ON EAST SIDE TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF TRACT 9, MCALEER FIVE ACRE TRACTS, RECORDED IN VOLUME 5 OF PLATS, PAGE 48, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; BEGINNING AT A POINT NORTH 2°32'33" WEST 530 FEET FROM THE SOUTH EAST CORNER OF SAID TRACT 9; THENCE SOUTH 88'06'2" WEST 300.14 FEET TO A POINT WHICH IS THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 2°34'26" EAST 140 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 88°06'02" WEST 32 FEET; THENCE NORTH 2°34'26" WEST 140 FEET; THENCE NORTH 88°06'02" EAST 32 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON. For APN/Parcel ID(s): 004911-000-009-04 THAT PORTION OF TRACT 9, MCALEER FIVE ACRE TRACTS, RECORDED IN VOLUME 5 OF PLATS, PAGE 48, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; BEGINNING AT A POINT NORTH 2°32'33" WEST 530 FEET FROM THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID TRACT 9; THENCE SOUTH 88°06'2" WEST 300.14 FEET TO A POINT WHICH IS THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 2'34'26" EAST 1.40 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 88°06'02" WEST 32 FEET; THENCE NORTH 2°34'26" WEST 140 FEET; THENCE NORTH 88°06'02" EAST 32 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON. 24 145960583 4 Packet Pg. 443 10.2.a Form 17 SELLER DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ©copyright 2021 Seller Disclosure Statement IMPROVED PROPERTY Northwest Multiple Listing Service Rev, 8/21 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Page 1 of 6 SELLER: �_3e_ra 0 J Seller Seller To be used in transfers of improved residential real property, including residential dwellings up to four units, new construction, 2 dwellings in a residential common interest community not subject to a public offering statement, condominiums not subject to a public 3 offering statement, certain timeshares, and manufactured and mobile homes. See RCW Chapter 64.06 for further information. 4 INSTRUCTIONS TO THE SELLER 5 Please complete the following form. Do not leave any spaces blank. If the question clearly does not apply to the property check 6 "NA." If the answer is "yes" to any asterisked (*) item(s), please explain on attached sheets. Please refer to the line number(s) of 7 the question(s) when you provide your explanation(s). For your protection you must date and initial each page of this disclosure 8 statement and each attachment. Delivery of the disclosure statement must occur not later than five (5) business days, unless 9 otherwise agreed, after mutual acceptance of a written purchase and sale agreement between Buyer and Seller. 10 NOTICE TO THE BUYER 11 THE FOLLOWING DISCLOSURES ARE MADE BY THE SELLER ABOUT THE CONDITION O�THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 12 CITY .'li �}�� 13 STATE, ZIP9C�� , COUNTY C%1�?( �?'`jr�'1(�j ("THE PROPERTY") OR AS 14 LEGALLY DESCRIBED ON THE ATTACHED EXHIBIT A. 15 SELLER MAKES THE FOLLOWING DISCLOSURES OF EXISTING MATERIAL FACTS OR MATERIAL DEFECTS TO BUYER BASED 16 ON SELLER'S ACTUAL KNOWLEDGE OF THE PROPERTY AT THE TIME SELLER COMPLETES THIS DISCLOSURE 17 STATEMENT. UNLESS YOU AND SELLER OTHERWISE AGREE IN WRITING, YOU HAVE THREE (3) BUSINESS DAYS FROM 18 THE DAY SELLER OR SELLER'S AGENT DELIVERS THIS DISCLOSURE STATEMENT TO YOU TO RESCIND THE AGREEMENT 19 BY DELIVERING A SEPARATELY SIGNED WRITTEN STATEMENT OF RESCISSION TO SELLER OR SELLER'S AGENT. IF THE 20 SELLER DOES NOT GIVE YOU A COMPLETED DISCLOSURE STATEMENT, THEN YOU MAY WAIVE THE RIGHT TO RESCIND 21 PRIOR TO OR AFTER THE TIME YOU ENTER INTO A PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT. 22 THE FOLLOWING ARE DISCLOSURES MADE BY SELLER AND ARE NOT THE REPRESENTATIONS OF ANY REAL ESTATE 23 LICENSEE OR OTHER PARTY. THIS INFORMATION IS FOR DISCLOSURE ONLY AND IS NOT INTENDED TO BE A PART OF 24 ANY WRITTEN AGREEMENT BETWEEN BUYER AND SELLER. 25 FOR A MORE COMPREHENSIVE EXAMINATION OF THE SPECIFIC CONDITION OF THIS PROPERTY YOU ARE ADVISED 26 TO OBTAIN AND PAY FOR THE SERVICES OF QUALIFIED EXPERTS TO INSPECT THE PROPERTY, WHICH MAY INCLUDE, 27 WITHOUT LIMITATION, ARCHITECTS, ENGINEERS, LAND SURVEYORS, PLUMBERS, ELECTRICIANS, ROOFERS, 28 BUILDING INSPECTORS, ON -SITE WASTEWATER TREATMENT INSPECTORS, OR STRUCTURAL PEST INSPECTORS. 29 THE PROSPECTIVE BUYER AND SELLER MAY WISH TO OBTAIN PROFESSIONAL ADVICE OR INSPECTIONS OF THE 30 PROPERTY OR TO PROVIDE APPROPRIATE PROVISIONS IN A CONTRACT BETWEEN THEM WITH RESPECT TO ANY 31 ADVICE, INSPECTION, DEFECTS OR WARRANTIES. 32 Seller ❑ is / ❑ is not occupying the Property. 33 SELLER'S DISCLOSURES: *If you answer "Yes" to a question with an asterisk (*), please explain your answer and attach documents, if available and not otherwise publicly recorded. If necessary, use an attached sheet. YES NO 1. TITLE A. Do you have legal authority to sell the property? If no, please explain...........................................•X *B. Is title to the property subject to any of the following? (1) First right of refusal..................................................................... ❑ ...................................... ....... (2) Option.......................................................................................................................................❑ (3) Lease or rental agreement.......................................................................................................❑ (4) Life estate? ............................... ................................................................................................ ❑ *C. Are there any encroachments; boundary agreements, or boundary disputes?........I.......................❑ *D. Is there a private road or easement agreement for access to the property? ....................................❑ *E. Are there any rights -of -way, easements, or access limitations that may affect the Buyer's use of theproperty?...................................................................................................................................❑ *F. Are there any written agreements for joint maintenance of an easement or right-of-way? ...... ......... ❑ *G. Is there any study, survey project, or notice that would adversely affect the property? ...................❑ *H. Are there any pending or existing assessments against the property? ... ......................................... ❑ *k7 Are there any zoning violations, nonconforming uses, or any unusual restrictions on the (/ ro erg that would affect future construction or remodeling?.........................................................❑ SELLE 'S INITIALS ate SELLER'S INITIALS Date i LJ DON'T WA KNOW ❑ A ❑ 't�k ❑ ❑ 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 Packet Pg. 444 10.2.a Form 17 SELLER DISCLOSURE STATEMENT a ©Copyright 2021 Seller Disclosure Statement IMPROVED PROPERTY Northwest Multiple Listing Service Rev. 8/21 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Page 2 of 6 (Continued) YES NO DON'T WA 54 KNOW 55 *J. Is there a boundary survey for the property? ............. ...................................................................... ❑ ❑ 1 ❑ 5 *K. Are there any covenants, conditions, or restrictions recorded against the property? ......................LI a LJ ❑ 57 NOTICE TO BUYER: Covenants or deed restrictions based on race, creed, sexual orientation, 58 or other protected class were voided by RCW 49.60.224 and are unenforceable. Washington 59 law allows for the illegal language to be struck by bringing an action in superior court or by the 60 free recording of a restrictive covenant modification document. Many county auditor websites 61 provide a short form with instructions on this process. 62 2. WATER 63 A. Household Water 64 (1) The source of water for the property is: 'W Private or publicly owned water system 65 ❑ Private well serving only the subject property '❑ Other water system 66 *If shared, are there any written agreements?.........................................................................❑ ❑ U 67 *(2) Is there an easement (recorded or unrecorded) for access to and/or maintenance of the 68 watersource? ........................... ................................................................................................ U ❑ ❑ 69 *(3) Are there any problems or repairs needed? .................... ........_LJ ............................................... ❑ ❑ 70 (4) During your ownership, has the source provided an adequate year-round supply of potable water? .11 ❑ ❑ ❑ 71 If no, please explain: ( 4 ir (-- t 72 *(5) Are there any water treatment systems for the property? .........................................................❑ ; U LI 73 If yes, are they: ❑ Leased ❑ Owned 74 *(6) Are there any water rights for the property associated with its domestic water supply, such 75 as a water right permit, certificate, or claim?............................................................................ ❑ )n' ❑ ❑ 76 (a) If yes, has the water right permit, certificate, or claim been assigned, transferred, or changed? ❑ ❑ ❑ ® 77 *(b) If yes, has all or any portion of the water right not been used for five or more successive years? ❑ ❑ ❑ 11�. 78 *(7) Are there any defects in the operation of the water system (e.g. pipes, tank, pump, etc.)? ......❑ ❑ ❑ 79 B. Irrigation Water 80 (1) Are there any irrigation water rights for the property, such as a water right permit, 81 certificate, or claim?........................................................................................... *(a) If yes, has all or any portion of the water right not been used for five or more 83 successive years? ....................................... ....❑ ❑ ❑ '0 .................................................................. 84 *(b) If so, is the certificate available? (If yes, please attach a copy.)........................................0 U U �A 85 *(c) If so, has the water right permit, certificate, or claim been assigned, transferred, or changed? ... ❑ ❑ ❑ ; 3r 86 *(2) Does the property receive irrigation water from a ditch company, irrigation district, or other entity? ..... Cl q ❑ ❑ 87 If so, please identify the entity that supplies water to the property: 88 " La 89 C. Outdoor Sprinkler System 90 (1) Is there an outdoor sprinkler system for the property? ....................... ......................❑ 19 ❑ ❑ 91 *(2) If yes, are there any defects in the system?.............................................................................❑ ❑ ❑ (4 92 *(3) If yes, is the sprinkler system connected to irrigation water?......................................................... ❑ ❑ ❑ 93 3. SEWER/ON-SITE SEWAGE SYSTEM 94 A. The property is served by: 95 Gl Public sewer system ❑ On -site sewage system (including pipes, tanks, drainfields, and all other component parts) 96 l Other disposal system 97 Please describer. ic.4 U {—uPF'Y 1, �t� 2 98 B. If public sewer system service is available to the property, is the house connected to 99 the sewer main? ...................................... .........F ................................................................. ❑ ❑ ❑ 100 no, please explain: 101 SE LER'S INITIALS D t SELLER'S N T S e I I IAL Date Packet Pg. 445 10.2.a Form 17 SELLER DISCLOSURE STATEMENT OCopyright 2021 Seller Disclosure Statement IMPROVED PROPERTY Northwest Multiple Listing Service Rev. 8/21 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Page 3 of 6 (Continued) YES NO DON'T NIA 102 *C. Is the property subject to any sewage system fees or charges in addition to those covered KNOW 103 in your regularly billed sewer or on -site sewage system maintenance service? ...............................❑ �la ❑ ❑ 104 D. If the property is connected to an on -site sewage system: *(1) Was a permit issued for its construction, and was it approved by the local health department or district following its construction?.......................................................................❑ ❑ ❑ (2) When was it last pumped? *(3) Are there any defects in the operation of the on -site sewage system? ...... ............................... ❑ ❑ ❑ (4) When was it last inspected? ❑ By whom: l J (5) For how many bedrooms was the on -site sewage system approved? bedrooms ❑ E. Are all plumbing fixtures, including laundry drain, connected to the sewer/on-site sewagesystem?............................................................................................................................ =, ❑ ❑ If no, please explain: /o *F. Have there been any changes or repairs to the on -site sewage system? ....................................... [a ❑ ❑ G. Is the on -site sewage system, including the drainfield, located entirely within the boundariesof the property?.............................................................................................................❑ ❑ ❑ If no, please explain: *H. Does the on -site sewage system require monitoring and maintenance services more frequently thanonce a year? ........... ................................................................................................................... ❑ ❑ ❑ 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 j(d 112 113 114 115 116 117 J� 118 119 120 ,® 121 NOTICE: IF THIS RESIDENTIAL REAL PROPERTY DISCLOSURE IS BEING COMPLETED FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION WHICH HAS NEVER BEEN OCCUPIED, SELLER IS NOT REQUIRED TO COMPLETE THE QUESTIONS LISTED IN ITEM 4 (STRUCTURAL) OR ITEM 5 (SYSTEMS AND FIXTURES). 4. STRUCTURAL *A. Has the roof leaked within the last 5 years? ............................. ........................................................ ❑ ,ll ❑ ❑ *B. Has the basement flooded or leaked? ...................... ......................... ............................................. .❑ '( ❑ ❑ *C. Have there been any conversions, additions or remodeling?..........................................................:,a *(1) If yes, were all building permits obtained? ........................................ .................... I ................... ❑ *(2) If yes, were all final inspections obtained?...............................................................................❑ D. Do you know the age of the house? .............. .... If yes, year of original construction: *E. Has there been any settling, slippage, or sliding of the property or its improvements? ...................❑ *F. Are there any defects with the following: (If yes, please check applicable items and explain) .........❑ ❑ Foundations ❑ Decks ❑ Exterior Walls ❑ Chimneys ❑ Interior Walls ❑ Fire Alarms ❑ Doors ❑ Windows ❑ Patio ❑ Ceilings ❑ Slab Floors ❑ Driveways ❑ Pools ❑ Hot Tub ❑ Sauna ❑ Sidewalks ❑ Outbuildings ❑ Fireplaces ❑ Garage Floors ❑ Walkways ❑ Siding ❑ Wood Stoves Cl Elevators ❑ Incline Elevators ❑ Stairway Chair Lifts ❑ Wheelchair Lifts ❑ Other *G. Was a structural pest or "whole house" inspection done?................................................................❑ If yes, when and by whom was the inspection completed? r f ,1 �-, H. During your ownership, has the property had any wood destroying organism or pest infestation? .......... ❑ I. Is the attic insulated? ........ ....................................................... ......................................................... A J. Is the basement insulated?..............................................................................................................❑ SELLER'S INITIALS Date SELLER'S INITIALS Date 1,. 122 123 124 125 126 127 ❑ ❑ ❑ 128 f 3' ❑ ❑ 129 ❑ ❑ 130 ❑ ❑ ❑ 131 132 ❑ ❑ 133 ❑ ❑ 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 ❑ ❑ 144 145 146 ,I ❑ ❑ 147 Ll ❑ ❑ 148 Ag ❑ ❑ 149 Packet Pg. 446 10.2.a Form 17 SELLER DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ©Copyright 2021 Seller Disclosure Statement IMPROVED PROPERTY Northwest Multiple Listing Service Rev. 8/21 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Page 4 of 6 (Continued) j, YES NO DON'T WA 150 5. SYSTEMS AND FIXTURES KNOW 151 Q- *A. If any of the following systems or fixtures are included with the transfer, are there any defects? 152 a If yes, please explain: 153 m Electrical system, including wiring, switches, outlets, and service ............................................❑ ❑ ❑ 154 � Plumbing system, including pipes, faucets, fixtures, and toilets ................................................❑ L�V ❑ ❑ 155 Hotwater tank ........................... ................................................................................................ ❑ 1�d. ❑ ❑ 156 = Garbagedisposal....................................0 ❑ ❑ 157 .................................................................................. Appliances ................... ❑ 14 ❑ ❑ 158 .............................................................................................................. Sumppump............................................................ ................................................................... ❑ ❑ ❑ `R. 159 Heating and cooling systems ................ .................................................................................... ❑ -,Qt ❑ ❑ 160 Q Security system: ❑ Owned ❑ Leased....................................................................................❑ ❑ ❑ �R 161 m Other .................❑ ❑ ❑ 162 *B. If any of the following fixtures or property is included with the transfer, are they leased? 163 o5 (If yes, please attach copy of lease.) 164 m Security System: ..................❑ ❑ ❑ %, 165 eNa Tanks (type): Satellite dish: ............❑ ❑ ❑ . 167 a Other: ...................❑ ❑ ❑ 14 168 C *C. Are any of the following kinds of wood burning appliances present at the property? 169 0 (1) Woodstove?..............................................................................................................................14 ❑ ❑ ❑ 170 •rn (2) Fireplace insert? .............................................. ......................................................................... ❑ i9' ❑ ❑ 171 s (3) Pellet stove?.............................................................................................................................❑ 'W. ❑ ❑ 172 173 U (4) Fireplace?................................................................................................................................ � ❑ ❑ ❑ Q If yes, are all of the (1) woodstoves or (2) fireplace inserts certified by the U.S. Environmental 174 c Protection Agency as clean burning appliances to improve air quality and public health? .....................❑ El❑ 175 D. Is the property located within a city, county, or district or within a department of natural 176 resources fire protection zone that provides fire protection services? ................ ❑ 177 a E. Is the property equipped with carbon monoxide alarms? (Note: Pursuant to RCW 19.27.530, Seller 178 must equip the residence with carbon monoxide alarms as required by the state building code.)........... ❑ ❑ ❑ 179 c F. Is the property equipped with smoke detection devices?................................................................. ❑ ❑ ❑ 180 •2 (Note: Pursuant to RCW 43.44.110, if the property is not equipped with at least one smoke 181 detection device, at least one must be provided by the seller.) 182 G. Does the property currently have internet service? ............. ................................................ ............. > ❑ U ❑ 183 Provider: IY11�:'C-1 184 CL 6. HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATIONICO MON INTERESTS 185 L A. Is there a Homeowners' Association?................................................................................. ........... ❑ U ❑ 186 _ Name of Association and contact information for an officer, director, employee, or other authorized 187 a) agent, if any, who may provide the association's financial statements, minutes, bylaws, fining policy, 188 N and other information that is not publicly available: 189 m B. Are there regular periodic assessments?........................................................................................❑ ❑ ❑ 190 $ per ❑ month ❑ year 191 d ❑ Other: 192 >_ *C. Are there any pending special assessments? ...... C�' ❑ ❑ ❑ 193 L *D. Are there any shared "common areas" or any joint maintenance agreements (facilities 194 Q such as walls, fences, landscaping, pools, tennis courts, walkways, or other areas 195 a) co -owned in undivided interest with others)?...................................................................................❑ ❑ ❑ 196 icu 7. ENVIRONMENTAL 197 *A. Have there been any flooding, standing water, or drainage problems on the property 198 that affect the property or access to the property?...........................................................................❑ 1�J ❑ ❑ 199 y *B. Does any part of the property contain fill dirt, waste, or other fill material? .......................................❑ f ❑ ❑ 200 *C. Is there any material damage to the property from fire, wind, floods, beach movements, 201 L earthquake, expansive soils, or landslides? ..... ............................................................................... ❑ ❑ ❑ 202 a D. Are there any shorelines, wetlands, floodplains, or critical areas on the property? ..........................D �4 ❑ ❑ 203 *E. Are there any substances, materials, or products in or on the property that may be environmental 204 concerns, such as asbestos, formaldehyde, radon gas, lead -based paint: Fuel or chemical 205 storage tanks, or contaminated soil or water?..................................................................................❑ 'A U ❑ 206 the property been used for commercial or industrial purposes? ................................................❑ ❑ ❑ 207 Q SELLER'S INITIALS / Date SELLER'S INITIALS Date Packet Pg. 447 10.2.a Form 17 SELLER DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ©Copyright 2021 Seller Disclosure Statement IMPROVED PROPERTY Northwest Multiple Listing Service Rev. 8/21 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Page 5 of 6 (Continued) YES NO DONT WA 208 KNOW 209 *G. Is there any soil or groundwater contamination? .................. ............................................................ ❑ 14J 1J U 210 *H. Are there transmission poles or other electrical utility equipment installed, maintained, or 211 buried on the property that do not provide utility service to the structures on the property? ............. El E ❑ ❑ 212 *I. Has the property been used as a legal or illegal dumping site? ......................................................❑ ❑ ❑ 213 *J. Has the property been used as an illegal drug manufacturing site?................................................❑I ❑ ❑ 214 *K. Are there any radio towers in the area that cause interference with cellular telephone reception? .......... U U ❑ 215 8. LEAD BASED PAINT (Applicable if the house was built before 1978).................................................... ❑ 216 A. Presence of lead -based paint and/or lead -based paint hazards (check one below): 217 LI Known lead -based paint and/or lead -based paint hazards are present in the housing 218 (explain). 219 TX- Seller has no knowledge of lead -based paint and/or lead -based paint hazards in the housing. 220 B. Records and reports available to the Seller (check one below): 21 ❑ Seller has provided the purchaser with all available records and reports pertaining to 22 lead -based paint and/or lead -based paint hazards in the housing (list documents below). 223 224 �t Seller has no reports or records pertaining to lead -based paint and/or lead -based paint hazards in the housing. 225 9. MANUFACTURED AND MOBILE HOMES 226 If the property includes a manufactured or mobile home, 227 *A. Did you make any alterations to the home?....................................................................................❑ ❑ ❑ 228 If yes, please describe the alterations: 229 *B. Did any previous owner make any alterations to the home?...........................................................❑ ❑ ❑ 230 *C. If alterations were made, were permits or variances for these alterations obtained? ......................❑ ❑ ❑ 231 10. FULL DISCLOSURE BY SELLERS 232 A. Other conditions or defects: 233 'Are there any other existing material defects affecting the property that a prospective 234 buyershould know about?................................................................................................................❑ 14 ❑ ❑ 235 B. Verification 236 The foregoing answers and attached explanations (if any) are complete and correct to the best of Seiler's knowledge and 237 Seller has received a copy hereof. Seller agrees to defend, indemnify and hold real estate licensees harmless from and 238 against any and all claims that the above information is inaccurate. Seller authorizes real estate licensees, if any, to deliver a 239 copy of this i . cloture statement to other real estate licensees and all prospective buyers of the property. 240 /� '� y� a 241 ell" DateSeller U Date If the answer is "Yes" to any asterisked (*) items, please explain below (use additional sheets if necessary). Please refer to the line 242 number(s) of the question(s). 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 Packet Pg. 448 10.2.a Form 17 SELLER DISCLOSURE STATEMENT @Copyright 2021 Seller Disclosure Statement IMPROVED PROPERTY Northwest Multiple Listing Service Rev. 8121 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Page 6 of 6 (Continued) II. NOTICES TO THE BUYER 257 1. SEX OFFENDER REGISTRATION 258 INFORMATION REGARDING REGISTERED SEX OFFENDERS MAY BE OBTAINED FROM LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT 259 AGENCIES. THIS NOTICE IS INTENDED ONLY TO INFORM YOU OF WHERE TO OBTAIN THIS INFORMATION AND IS NOT 260 AN INDICATION OF THE PRESENCE OF REGISTERED SEX OFFENDERS. 261 2. PROXIMITY TO FARMINGIWORKING FOREST 262 THIS NOTICE IS TO INFORM YOU THAT THE REAL PROPERTY YOU ARE CONSIDERING FOR PURCHASE MAY LIE IN 263 CLOSE PROXIMITY TO A FARM OR WORKING FOREST. THE OPERATION OF A FARM OR WORKING FOREST 264 INVOLVES USUAL AND CUSTOMARY AGRICULTURAL PRACTICES OR FOREST PRACTICES, WHICH ARE PROTECTED 265 UNDER RCW 7.48.305, THE WASHINGTON RIGHT TO FARM ACT. 266 3. OIL TANK INSURANCE 267 THIS NOTICE IS TO INFORM YOU THAT IF THE REAL PROPERTY YOU ARE CONSIDERING FOR PURCHASE UTILIZES 268 AN OIL TANK FOR HEATING PURPOSES, NO COST INSURANCE MAY BE AVAILABLE FROM THE POLLUTION LIABILITY 269 INSURANCE AGENCY. 270 111. BUYER'S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 1. BUYER HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGES THAT: 271 272 A. Buyer has a duty to pay diligent attention to any material defects that are known to Buyer or can be known to Buyer by 273 utilizing diligent attention and observation. 274 B. The disclosures set forth in this statement and in any amendments to this statement are made only by the Seller and 275 not by any real estate licensee or other party. 276 C. Buyer acknowledges that, pursuant to RCW 64.06.050(2), real estate licensees are not liable for inaccurate information 277 provided by Seller, except to the extent that real estate licensees know of such inaccurate information. 278 D. This information is for disclosure only and is not intended to be a part of the written agreement between the Buyer and Seiler. 279 E. Buyer (which term includes all persons signing the "Buyer's acceptance" portion of this disclosure statement below) has 280 received a copy of this Disclosure Statement (including attachments, if any) bearing Seller's signature(s). 281 F. If the house was built prior to 1978, Buyer acknowledges receipt of the pamphlet Protect Your Family From Lead in Your Home. 282 DISCLOSURES CONTAINED IN THIS DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ARE PROVIDED BY SELLER BASED ON SELLER'S 283 ACTUAL KNOWLEDGE OF THE PROPERTY AT THE TIME SELLER COMPLETES THIS DISCLOSURE. UNLESS BUYER 284 AND SELLER OTHERWISE AGREE IN WRITING, BUYER SHALL HAVE THREE (3) BUSINESS DAYS FROM THE DAY 285 SELLER OR SELLER'S AGENT DELIVERS THIS DISCLOSURE STATEMENT TO RESCIND THE AGREEMENT BY 286 DELIVERING A SEPARATELY SIGNED WRITTEN STATEMENT OF RESCISSION TO SELLER OR SELLER'S AGENT. YOU 287 MAY WAIVE THE RIGHT TO RESCIND PRIOR TO OR AFTER THE TIME YOU ENTER INTO A SALE AGREEMENT, 288 BUYER HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGES RECEIPT OF A COPY OF THIS DISCLOSURE STATEMENT AND ACKNOWLEDGES 289 THAT THE DISCLOSURES MADE HEREIN ARE THOSE OF THE SELLER ONLY, AND NOT OF ANY REAL ESTATE 290 LICENSEE OR OTHER PARTY. 291 Date 292 293 2. BUYER'S WAIVER OF RIGHT TO REVOKE OFFER 294 Buyer has read and reviewed the Seller's responses to this Seller Disclosure Statement. Buyer approves this statement and 295 waives Buyer's right to revoke Buyer's offer based on this disclosure. 296 Date Buyer Date 297 298 3. BUYER'S WAIVER OF RIGHT TO RECEIVE COMPLETED SELLER DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 299 tf Buyer has been advised of Buyer's right to receive a completed Seller Disclosure Statement. Buyer waives that right. 300 d However, if the answer to any of the questions in the section entitled "Environmental" would be "yes," Buyer may not waive 301 the receipt of the "Environmental" section of the Seller Disclosure Statement. 302 E 303 t, Buyer Date Buyer Date 304 ++ i Q SEA R'S INITIALS / Date SELLER'S INITIALS Date Packet Pg. 449 10.2. b Conservation Futures ProgramCLMee Property 0 L a U U cc 0 City Council M �*1 EDMO� o N November 6, 2023 E Q Packet Pg. 450 10.2. b Overview Property City Park System Funding Next Steps Level to gently sloping topography, view along southerly property boundary c2> U U Packet Pg. 451 10.2. b Mee Property C3 � kIp— I I,e ��Ea a=m••�o,�•a� ,. P...ts...e fD JJ Lynnwood MIL Wood—y _ M- tl,k, Terrace Unincorporated Snohomish Co. �e� 4 sho, h- 51ze:.`J`J Acre Property Zoned: R-8 location One house/two outbuildings Utilities on site: water, power, sewer $925,000 Purchase Price Motivated Seller Threat of development Appraisal Complete Purchase & Sale Agreement Negotiated d 0a d N IL c O N 0 Q c O a CL O a m a� c O M c m a U U cc 0 ri �A pF EDMo� O N 4 a� E t Q Packet Pg. 452 10.2. b Mee Property Property Highlights o • Existing park -like setting 2 • 260 LF of shared property line • Numerous and varied significant trees Q • Expands existing passive -use park by 55% • Provides additional access from east L • Expands Interurban connection a • Supports only Interurban Trail trailhead for miles a) 0- 0 L a m a� c 0 w c� c m a� L a Views from property into Mathay Ballinger Park c4> U U cc 0 ri �yop EDMO� CD N v� 6 a� E ail O. Q Packet Pg. 453 Mee Property Zoned RS-8 = 4 new houses Permit started for proposed development pop I Packet Pg. 454 1 10.2. b MathayBallinger MA• A DA path to playground and SE 1 /4, SE 1/4, SECTION 31, TOWN! continuing to Interurban trail 2023: design and permitting • Restroom • Parking lot improvements • Picnic shelter and tables • Benches • Drinking fountain (6) 2024: construction - -7 7 d c� 0a d N a L) die ism O 9_; N ""zaiN6"snw. o A O © N SP1 Packet Pg. 455 City Park System Park System gaps * School district facilities e Esperance Park (SnoCo) 9 Lake Ballinger Park (7) Legend ae 1p— -P.-I 1. -k. a meets n—I Puget Sound NP Lynnwood 90 00" Wood,ay a Mountlake Terrace Unincorporated Snohomish Co 0 025 05 Shoreline CL 0 L— a. 0 M a L) L) cc C11 0 IF A C14 Q C*4 r- E I Packet Pg. 456 1 City Park System 2022 Parks, Recreation &Open (PROS) Plan • Goal #3 - Parks, Trails & Open Space, objectives #3.1, 3.2 and 3.7 • Goal #5 - Natural Resource & Habitat Conservation, objectives #5.1, 5.3, 5.4 and 5.5 • Recommendation #1 - Acquisitions to Fill Park System Gaps • Recommendation #2 - Open Space and Conservation Acquisitions • Recommendation #5 — Trail Connections Legend Q City Limits 1/4-mile Travelshetl to City Parks 1/2-mile TravelsN to City Parks 114-mile Travelshetl W AccessiNe Open Space & Non -City Parks Puget S— d 1/2-mile Travelshetl w Aaesside Open Space & N—City Parks - Ciy Parks Open Space & Spedal Use N— M Noncky Parks �Nonc4y Parks•7 lnterlowlAgreemems / FAmonds Schaal Oistritt water — 14--aentiel Z-9 i i t I lei Woodway E Unincorporated Snohomish Co.r. A g w., Shoreline a� 06 N W U a T ..sms.w a �mxnsr Q Lynnwood Y wn.nn, L M � a CL r t Mountlake �i Terrace d U 0 M `y OF eDMo� O N till v � r ® d t r Q Packet Pg. 457 10.2.b Wider Benefits Interurban Trail and non - motorized transportation Proximity to - • Mountlake Terrace (.5 mi) • Shoreline (.25 mi) • Mountlake Terrace Transit Center via trail (1.5 mi) (9) Bike Lanes Interurban Trail Property Of ED.4f a Packet Pg. 458 Funding Capital Improvement Program (CIP) /Capital Facility Plan (CFP) 2023-2028 SIX -YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Project PARKLAND ACQUISITION 2023 X A2 Neighborhood Park SE 1 $ 1,500,000 Acquisition of parkland in South Edmonds. Costs inflated at 3% per year 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 6-Year Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,500,000 X A3 Neighborhood Park SR99 $ $ 1,545,000 $ - Acquisition of parkland in near SR 99. X A4 Neighborhood Park SE $ $ _ $ 2,185,500 Acquisition of parkland in South Edmonds. $ - ) $ - ( $ - ) $ 1,545,000 ( $ - ) $ - ( $ - ) $ 2,185,500 ( Edmonds Marsh Estuary Restoration (Willow Creek Daylighting) X I Al Acquisition ofthe Unocal property in support ofgreater Edmonds Marsh TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD $ - restoration. A5 Interurban Trail $ $ $ $ $ $ 895,585 $ 895,585 Extension and acquisition (C) SUBTOTAL- PARKLAND ACQUISITION $ 1,500,000 $ 1,545,000 $ 2,185,500 1 $ $ $ 895,595 1 $ 1,126,085 U U 0 0 r M ��F E6,tl O fJLp N r 4) E a Packet Pg. 459 10.2.b a 06 Funding a c 0 1. Parkland Acquisition Fund: $1,000,000+ a Q 2. 2023 Snohomish County Conservation Future Program (SCCFP) Grant L a • Successful application — SCCFP Board • Award of 75% of acquisition and related costs up to $880,000 0. • Appraisal • Due diligence o • Closing costs • Demolition a • Securing site 0 r r • Awaiting County Council approval in December �yof EDA,O� N J s Q Packet Pg. 460 10.2. b Next Steps Council approval of Purchase & Sale Agreement • $30,000 Escrow • Due Diligence (75 days/mid-January) • Site Survey • Phase 1 ESA (Environmental Site Assessment) Confirmation of $880,000 grant award (December) Property Closing (30 days/mid-Feb) Possession of the property/securing site (12) d 7i Q _ M Y L M a U U cc 0 M OF EDM O I G N ++ E M 0 9 R a+ Q Packet Pg. 461 10.2. b Questions? d oa d N t V L IL c 0 .N Q c 0 L IL r- a) 0_ 0 a m a� a c 0 �a c d 07 d L A Q c.� co 0 ri N 0 N C E s R Q Packet Pg. 462 10.3 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 11/6/2023 Utility Rate Study and adoption of a Utility Rate Ordinance Staff Lead: Rob English Department: Engineering Preparer: Emiko Rodarte Background/History On September 12, 2023, staff presented this item to the Parks and Public Works Committee and it was forwarded to a future City Council meeting for discussion. On October 17, 2023, staff presented this item to the City Council and it was forwarded to a future City Council meeting for discussion. Staff Recommendation Approve ordinance. Narrative The City owns and maintains drinking water, sewer, and storm utilities. In order to ensure the continued function and maintenance of each of these utilities, the City of Edmonds charges fees to all residences and business which have access and make use of them. The fees generated for each utility fund their respective enterprise funds. These enterprise funds in turn are used to support and fund the respective utility to ensure its continued maintenance and function. The City of Edmonds operates a multiple utility operation which incorporates potable water, sanitary sewer, and storm and surface water management functions. The City received the combined utility rate study from its consultant, the FCS Group. The findings show increases in potable water, sanitary sewer, and storm and surface water management utility rates. This funding will help address rising costs including but not limited to: inflation and the rising maintenance and operations costs, wholesale cost increases for potable water from Alderwood Water and Wastewater District, the replacement of aging and failing water/sewer/storm infrastructure as part of the annual replacement projects and upcoming larger capital projects. The rate increases recommended and proposed by staff will make it so that the City will only need to acquire bonds for the larger upcoming capital projects. The cost for annual maintenance and replacement projects will continue to be rate funded, thereby resulting in considerable future savings to the City. Attachment 1 is the proposed Ordinance and includes the recommended rate increases for the water, sewer and storm utilities. The updates reflect the rate assessment schedule updates based on customer class and clarify the effective dates. Attachments: Packet Pg. 463 10.3 Attachment 1 - Ordinance Attachment 2 - Presentation Packet Pg. 464 10.3.a ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF ECC SECTION 7.30.030 WATER RATES - METER INSTALLATION CHARGES, RELATING TO UTILITY RATES OF WATER SUPPLIED THROUGH METERS, THE PROVISIONS OF ECC SECTION 7.30.040 UTILITY CHARGES - SANITARY SEWER, RELATING TO UTILITY RATES OF UNMETERED SANITARY SEWER SERVICES, AND THE PROVISIONS OF ECC SECTION 7.50.050 RATES AND CHARGES, RELATING TO UTILITY RATES FOR STORM AND SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT SERVICES, IN ORDER TO INCREASE SUCH RATES, CLARIFY WHEN NEW RATES SHALL TAKE EFFECT, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds operates three enterprise utility operations which incorporate potable water distribution, sanitary sewer conveyance and wastewater treatment, and storm and surface water management functions; and WHEREAS, the city's utility rates were last adjusted with Ordinance 4286; and WHEREAS, after the adoption of Ordinance 4286, the city's consultant, FCS Group, completed an updated rate study; and WHEREAS, the updated rate study provides the basis for the rates that are now being recommended for adoption by the city council; and WHEREAS, the increased rates will help address rising costs, including but not limited to: inflation and the rising maintenance and operations costs, wholesale cost increases for potable water from Alderwood Water and Wastewater District, the replacement of aging and failing water/sewer/storm infrastructure as part of the annual replacement projects and upcoming larger capital projects; and WHEREAS, the rate increases will allow the city to limit bond financing to the larger capital projects, with the cost of annual maintenance and replacement projects being funded through these rate increases, which will save the city, and its ratepayers, money over the long term; NOW, THEREFORE, Packet Pg. 465 10.3.a THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Subsections A and B of the Edmonds City Code 7.30.030, entitled "Water rates - Meter installation charges," are hereby amended to read as follows (except for the rate tables which are replaced in their entirety, new text is shown in underline and deleted text is shown in stfil eugh): A. Base Rate. The bimonthly rates of water supplied through meters shall be fixed at the following levels: Effective Date Current 1/1/24 1/1/25 1/1/26 Single Family Residence (per unit) $ 44.08 $ 48.05 $ 52.37 $ 57.08 Duplex Apt Houses, condos and other multi unit Residences (per unit) $ 38.82 $ 42.31 $ 46.12 $ 50.27 Effective Date Current Meter 1/1/24 1/1/25 1/1/26 All other customers $ 53.30 3/4" $ 58.10 $ 63.33 $ 69.03 $ 108.51 1" $ 118.28 $ 128.92 $ 140.52 $ 200.66 1.5" $ 218.72 $ 238.40 $ 259.86 $ 305.92 2" $ 333.45 $ 363.46 $ 396.18 $ 659.94 3" $ 719.33 $ 784.07 $ 854.64 $ 934.80 4" $ 1,018.93 $ 1,110.64 $ 1,210.59 $ 1,895.91 6" $ 2,066.54 $ 2,252.53 $ 2,455.26 B. Variable Rate. In addition to the base rate set forth above, the customer shall be charged the following rate per 100 cubic feet of water consumed: Effective Date Variable Rate Current 1/1/24 1/1/25 1/1/26 $ 4.60 $ 5.01 $ 5.47 $ 5.96 For the purposes of understanding the reference to the "effective date" in the above tables, all water base rate and variable rate charges on water utility bills mailed on or after JanuaryFebruai�., 1 st of each year shall be based on the adopted rates for that effective date even if the utility service Packet Pg. 466 10.3.a period reflected on the bill includes time from before the effective date. Section 2. Subsection A of the Edmonds City Code 7.30.040, entitled "Utility charges — Sanitary sewer," is hereby amended to read as follows (except for the rate tables which are replaced in their entirety, new text is shown in underline and deleted text is shown in A. The following rates shall be charged on all billings after the effective date shown with respect to the following customers and/or service: Effective Date Current 1/1/24 1/1/25 1/1/26 Single Family connected $ 106.11 $ 117.25 $ 129.56 $ 142.52 Residence (bimonthly per unit) unconnected $ 17.14 $ 18.94 $ 20.93 $ 23.02 Duplex, apartment connected $ 85.26 $ 94.21 $ 104.10 $ 114.52 houses, condos, and other multi unit residences unconnected $ 17.14 $ 18.94 $ 20.93 $ 23.02 (bimonthly per unit) All other customers Fixed Rate $ 12.05 $ 13.32 $ 14.71 $ 16.18 (bimonthly per unit) Volume Charge $ 6.84 $ 7.56 $ 8.35 $ 9.19 (per ccf)* *per 100 cubic feet (1 unit) of metered water consumption. For the purposes of understanding the reference to the "effective date" in the above tables, all sanitary sewer rates and charges on sewer utility bills mailed on or after JanuaryF-e� 1 st of each year shall be based on the adopted rates for that effective date even if the utility service period reflected on the bill includes time from before the effective date. Section 3. Subsection A of the Edmonds City Code 7.50.050, entitled "Stormwater rates and charges," is hereby amended to read as follows (except for the rate tables which are replaced in their entirety, new text is shown in underline and deleted text is shown in A. The following rates shall be charged on all billings with respect to the following customers and/or service: Packet Pg. 467 10.3.a Effective Date Category Current 1/1/24 1/1/25 1/1/26 Single Family Residential and Multi Family Residential (Bimonthly) $ 46.90 $ 50.89 $ 55.21 $ 59.90 All other resident customers per ESU (Bimonthly) $ 46.90 $ 50.89 $ 55.21 $ 59.90 For the purposes of understanding the reference to the "effective date" in the above tables, all stormwater rates and charges on stormwater utility bills mailed on or after Januarys 1 st of each year shall be based on the adopted rates for that effective date even if the utility service period reflected on the bill includes time from before the effective date. Section 4. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance. Section 5. Effective Date. This ordinance is subject to referendum and shall take effect thirty (30) days after final passage of this ordinance. APPROVED: MAYOR MIKE NELSON ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: BY JEFF TARADAY Packet Pg. 468 10.3.a FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. Packet Pg. 469 10.3.a SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the _ day of , 2023, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF ECC SECTION 7.30.030 WATER RATES - METER INSTALLATION CHARGES, RELATING TO UTILITY RATES OF WATER SUPPLIED THROUGH METERS, THE PROVISIONS OF ECC SECTION 7.30.040 UTILITY CHARGES - SANITARY SEWER, RELATING TO UTILITY RATES OF UNMETERED SANITARY SEWER SERVICES, AND THE PROVISIONS OF ECC SECTION 7.50.050 RATES AND CHARGES, RELATING TO UTILITY RATES FOR STORM AND SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT SERVICES, IN ORDER TO INCREASE SUCH RATES, CLARIFY WHEN NEW RATES SHALL TAKE EFFECT, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this day of 92023. 4840-7251-8158, v. 1 C CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY Packet Pg. 470 10.3.b :y O�- F M�ti G C, f 2023 Utility Rate Update o •:;> FCS GROUP Solutions -Oriented Consulting Packet Pg. 471 10.3.b •:;> Agenda Background Revenue Requirement (Financial Plan) Update Summary of Key Drivers Sample Bill Comparison Questions/Discussion FCS GROUP I Packet Pg. 472 10.3.b :J Why Are We Doing This? City utilities are enterprise funds that need to be self-sufficient Revenues need to cover costs in the long run City utilities are built out and have substantial infrastructure replacement needs » 30 — 40% of City's mains have exceeded standard useful life estimates » Delaying needs increases operating costs and risk of failure Main breaks Inflow and infiltration (accelerates need for sewer treatment plant expansions) Goal is to recover an equitable share of costs from existing/future customers Delays can lead to "snowballing" needs that have adverse rate impacts Debt can be used to spread costs of large projects over time Rates should support ongoing capital projects (e.g. main replacement program) Term of debt is limited to the expected useful life of the facilities being funded FCS GROUP I Packet Pg. 473 10.3.b •:;> Key Drivers of Water Rate Increases Recent inflation (higher than long-term averages) Increased operating costs Water purchases from Alderwood WWD (8% annual increases projected from Everett) Capital needs Capital Costs by Year (2023 — 20321 $10.0 $8.0 c $6.0 $4.0 $2.0 E.0 M LO CO I` M M O N N N N N N N N M M M O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N N . Yost & Seaview Reservoirs ($9.6M) kA Main Replacements ($44.9M) Capital Funding Strategy (2023 — 2032) 0 0 CL 0 0 0 0 0 r Expected to increase annuz debt service b) $803, 000 FCS GROUP Packet Pg. 474 10.3.b ❖) Key Drivers of Stormwater Rate Increases _ Recent inflation (higher than long-term averages) o Less funding available for main replacement program and other needs o Capital needs Need to generate $2.5M in local matching funds for large stormwater projects Cn Staff proposes setting aside matching funds from existing balances and issuing bonds to fund other capital projects r Capital Costs by Year (2023 — 20321 Capital Funding Strategy (2023 — 2032) $10.0 $8.0 c $6.0 $4.0 $2.0 $0.0 M 'zi- Ln CD I` M M O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N u Main Replacements ($22.9M) Other Projects ($14.4M) 7.3M M1 M CN O O N CV Grants/ ARPA $8.7 M \ Expected to 23% _ ueOl increase annu $2.5 M debt service t $218, 000 FCS GROUP I Packet Pg. 475 10.3.b ❖F KeYDrivers of Sewer Rate Increases 0 0 C. 0 0 0 Capital Funding Strategy (2023 - 2032) Cn Expected to Recent inflation (higher than long-term averages) Less funding available for main replacement program and other needs Capital needs Capital Costs by Year (2023 - 20321 $40.0 $35.0 $30.0 $25.0 _0 $20.0 $15.0 $10.0 $5.0 $0.0 M � LO CO I` 00 M O CIA CV N N " CV M M M O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N L nnwood WWTP Projects 28.2M Edmonds WWTP Projects 58.OM F- Edmonds share is M • Other City Sewer Projects ($7.2M) o Main Replacements ($33.9M) increase annuz debt service b) $3.6M FCS GROUP I Packet Pg. 476 10.3.b •:;> Bimonthly Single -Family Bill @ 14 ccf Mountlake Terrace $153.49 $55.92 $158.62 $368.03 Woodinville [1 ] L $146.16 $34.67 $166.42 $347.25 Lake Stevens $99.08 $42.83 $198.00 $339.91 Bothell L- $99.70...AQ7.52 $202.22 $339.44 Monroe $101.06 -LX$38.44 $184.30 $323.80 Bainbridge Island $65.28 $37.67 $210.40 $313.35 Shoreline [2] _�L $133.77 ,, $54.82 djo& $107.40 $295.99 Edmonds (Updated) $118.19 $50.80p�I $286.33 Edmonds (Existing) $46.90 $106.11$261.49 Bremerton $67.52 $43.00 $149.92 $260.44 Mukilteo $74.74 $49.67 t $134.96 $259.37 Alderwood WWD [3] $64.06 $22.00 $156.94 $243.09 Lynnwood $77.28 1$31.691 $132.35 $241.32 i Water Rate i Stormwater Rate i Sewer Rate 0 0 C. 0 [1] Woodinville Water District's sewer rate includes King County's wastewater treatment rate ($104.22 bimonthly) [2] Shoreline sewer rate assuming Edmonds wastewater treatment. r [3] Stormwater bill shown for Alderwood WWD assumes Snohomish County's stormwater rate ($132.54 per year) applies. a FCS GROUP I Packet Pg. 477 10.3.b •:;> Recommendations Adopt proposed rate increases for 2024 - 2026 Water: 9.0% per year » Stormwater: 8.5% per year » Sewer: 10.0 -10.5% per year Water Bill $108.48 $118.19 $128.95 $140.52 $153.08 $166.94 Stormwater Bill 46.90 50.89 55.21 59.90 65.00 66.62 Sewer Bill 106.11 117.25 129.56 142.52 156.77 172.45 Total Bill $261.49 $286.33 $313.72 $342.94 $374.85 $406.01 Change from Prior Year +$24.84 +$27.39 +$29.22 +$31.91 +$31.16 Percent Change from Prior Year +9.5% +9.6% +9.3% +9.3% +8.3% Monitor financial status regularly, considering adjustments as needed Revisit 2027 - 2029 rate increases sometime around 2026 �- $180.21 68.29 189.69 $438.19 +$32.18 +7.9% 0 0 C. 0 r Cn 5 D _ 0 r c as a� L a N C E a a FCS GROUP I Packet Pg. 478 Thank You! Questions? Michele (Mike) De Lilla City of Edmonds Chris Gonzalez Principal (425) 502-6280 chrisg@fcsgroup.com 10.4 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 11/6/2023 2023 Budget Amendment Related to ARPA Staff Lead: Dave Turley Department: Administrative Services Preparer: Dave Turley Background/History The Council is currently reviewing the 2024 Proposed Budget. Part of the Proposed Budget includes a decision package request to transfer $6.5 million from the ARPA fund to the General Fund in 2024; however, it has been proposed that we make this transfer in 2023 instead of 2024. This budget amendment would accomplish that. Staff Recommendation Staff recommendation is to approve the 2023 budget amendment ordinance as included in tonight's council packet. Narrative N/A Attachments: 1 ARPA final rule Standard Allowance info brief 2 Budget Amendment ARPA November 2023 full council 3 2023 November Decision Package 4 2023 November Budget Amendment Ordinance 5 2024 Strategic Outlook Proposed Budget Book—ARPA moved in 2023 Packet Pg. 480 10.4.a ARPA Standard Allowance Information Brief 11/06/23 Todd Tatum, Director Community/Culture/Economic Development DETERMINING REVENUE LOSS DETERMINING REVENUE LOSS Recipients have two options for how to determine their amount of revenue loss. Recipients must choose one of the two options and cannot switch between these approaches after an election is made. 1. Recipients may elect a "standard allowance" of $10 million to spend on government services through the period of performance. Under this option, which is newly offered in the final rule Treasury presumes that up to $10 million in revenue has been lost due to the public health emergency and recipients are permitted to use that amount (not to exceed the award amount) to fund "government services." The standard allowance provides an estimate of revenue loss that is based on an extensive analysis of average revenue loss across states and localities, and offers a simple, convenient way to determine revenue loss, particularly for SLFRF's smallest recipients. All recipients may elect to use this standard allowance instead of calculating lost revenue using the formula below, including those with total allocations of $10 million or less. Electing OF EDMD�cn Q Packet Pg. 482 DETERMINING REVENUE LOSS This fixed amount, referred to as the "standard allowance," is set at up to $10 million total for the entire period of performance not to exceed the recipient's SLFRF award amount. The $10 million level is based on average revenue loss across state and local governments, taking into consideration potential variation in revenue types and losses and continued uncertainty faced by many recipients regarding revenue shortfalls. OF EDyI0 Q Packet Pg. 483 SPENDING ON GOVERNMENT SERVICES Recipients can use SLFRF funds on government services up to the revenue loss amount, whether that be the standard allowance amount or the amount calculated using the above approach. Government services generally include any service traditionally provided by a government, unless Treasury has stated otherwise. OF EDyI0 Q Packet Pg. 484 Further Discussion of Application of Funds Uses of funds that are not specifically named as eligible in this final rule may still be eligible in two ways. First, under the revenue loss eligible use category, recipients have broad latitude to use funds for government services up to their amount of revenue loss due to the pandemic. A potential use of funds that does not fit within the other three eligible use categories may be permissible as a government service, which recipients can fund up to their amount of revenue loss OF EDyI0 Q Packet Pg. 485 Restrictions on Use While recipients have considerable flexibility to use Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds to address the diverse needs of their communities, some restrictions on use of funds apply. OFFSET A REDUCTION IN NET TAX REVENUE • States and territories may not use this funding to directly or indirectly offset a reduction in net tax revenue resulting from a change in law, regulation, or administrative interpretation beginning on March 3, 2021, through the last day of the fiscal year in which the funds provided have been spent. DEPOSITS INTO PENSION FUNDS • No recipients except Tribal governments may use this funding to make a deposit to a pension fund. ADDITIONAL RESTRICTIONS AND REQUIREMENTS • No debt service or replenishing financial reserves. • No satisfaction of settlements and judgments. OF EDAt Q Packet Pg. 486 QUESTIONS? a� a� m L E 0 Z �L C C m 3 0 Q L Cu C w+ Cn L E Q A a c d w w a Packet Pg. 487 2023 November Budget Amendment Request November 6, 2023 OF EDM U `A v OHO U � N Q Packet Pg. 488 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVI\.LJ We have 1 request tonight; more detailed information including the draft ordinance can be found in your Council Packet. This will: bring the city back into compliance with the Fund Balance Policy, and allow for better, more understandable financial reporting for 2024. Part of the Proposed Budget currently before you includes this transfer request in 2024; however, it has been proposed that we make this transfer in 2023 instead of 2024. This budget amendment would accomplish that. y OF EDli f r Packet Pg. 489 fie. I89 If approved, this budget amendment would increase 2023 forecast revenues in the General Fund by $6,500,000. ?ndmE Proposed Proposed Amendment Proposed Amendment Change in Amendment Change in Ending Revenue Change in Expense Fund Balance L:iL b1I J I_I I_I �1 b 5 00,000 6,500,000 6,500,000 Packet Pg. 490 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVI\.LJ The Staff recommendation for tonight is to approve the budget amendment Ordinance as included in tonight's packet. Thank you. y OF EDli f r Packet Pg. 491 fie. I89 10.4.c Budget Amendment for: November 6, 2023 Description: This decision package is to transfer $6,500,000 from Fund 142 and reallocate those unspent ARPA funds to support government expenditures paid out of the General Fund. This is done in accordance with the "Standard Allowance" of up to $10 million allowed by the federal government. Services Division: Finance Title: A"A Funds Reallocation to General Fund Budget Amendment Type Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure? Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Dave Turlev / Todd Tatum New Item For Council To Consider 100% Ending Fund Balance One -Time Operating —71 Fund 001 GENERAL Name: Account Number Description 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Total Expenditure Increase Decrease S $ $ $ S Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 001.000.333.21.019.00 Coronavirus Relief Fund $ 6,500,000 $ $ $ S Total Revenue Increase Decrease $ 6,500,000 1 $ $ $ S Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 001.000.39.508.00.00.00 Ending Fund Balance $ 6,500,000 $ $ $ S Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease $ 6,500,000 $ S S - S C tv E C d E Q r.+ N i� 3 m L 4) M E 4) O Z 4) i� O Y t) lC a C O .N 4) L t) M E d O Z M N O N M C O E M 0 R r.+ a Packet Pg. 492 10.4.d ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 4313 AS A RESULT OF UNANTICIPATED TRANSFERS AND EXPENDITURES OF VARIOUS FUNDS, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. WHEREAS, previous actions taken by the City Council require Interfund Transfers and increases in appropriations; and WHEREAS, state law requires an ordinance be adopted whenever money is transferred from one fund to another; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the amended budget appropriations and information which was made available; and approves the appropriation of local, state, and federal funds and the increase or decrease from previously approved programs within the 2023 Budget; and THEREFORE, WHEREAS, the applications of funds have been identified; THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 1. of Ordinance No. 4313 amending the final budget for the fiscal year 2023 is hereby amended to reflect the changes shown in Exhibits A, B, C, and D adopted herein by reference. 1 Packet Pg. 493 10.4.d Section 2. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifically delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take effect five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title. MAYOR, MIKE NELSON ATTEST/AUTHENTICATE: CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: CI JEFF TARADAY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. Packet Pg. 494 10.4.d SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the th day of November, 2023, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. XXXX. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 4313 AS A RESULT OF UNANTICIPATED TRANSFERS AND EXPENDITURES OF VARIOUS FUNDS, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this day of 52023. CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY 3 Packet Pg. 495 10.4.d EXHIBIT "A": Budget Amendment Summary (November 2023) FUND NO. FUND DESCRIPTION 2023 BEGINNING FUND BALANCE REVENUE EXPENDITURES 2023 ENDING FUND BALANCE 001 GENERAL FUND 11,902,952 59,058,830 63,970,754 6,991,028 009 LEOFF-MEDICAL INS. RESERVE 216,864 225,000 367,140 74,724 011 RISK MANAGEMENT RESERVE FUND 25,000 - 25,000 - 012 CONTINGENCY RESERVE FUND 1,782,150 447,522 - 2,229,672 014 HISTORIC PRESERVATION GIFT FUND 11,701 - 5,900 5,801 016 BUILDING MAINTENANCE 4,296,604 17,480 1,275,000 3,039,084 017 MARSH RESTORATION & PRESERVATION FUND 849,766 - - 849,766 018 EDMONDS HOMELESSNESS RESPONSE FUND 200,000 200,000 019 EDMONDS OPIOID RESPONSE FUND - - - - 104 DRUG ENFORCEMENT FUND 67,570 167,650 45,800 189,420 111 STREET FUND 408,684 2,015,410 2,746,179 (322,085) 112 COMBINED STREETCONST/IMPROVE 2,439,505 12,366,800 11,273,695 3,532,610 117 MUNICIPAL ARTSACQUIS. FUND 634,888 99,220 207,380 526,728 120 HOTEL/MOTEL TAX REVENUE FUND 94,864 84,400 95,400 83,864 121 EMPLOYEE PARKING PERMITFUND 75,032 38,960 26,880 87,112 122 YOUTH SCHOLARSHIP FUND 15,208 1,660 3,000 13,868 123 TOURISM PROMOTIONAL FUND/ARTS 115,171 30,440 28,500 117,111 125 PARK ACQ/IMPROVEMENT 3,292,557 2,320,090 4,315,418 1,297,229 126 SPECIAL CAPITAL FUND 4,025,522 2,302,980 2,227,383 4,101,119 127 GIFTS CATALOG FUND 3,063,792 232,490 551,598 2,744,684 130 CEMETERY MAINTENANCE/IMPROV 268,169 150,960 291,530 127,599 136 PARKSTRUST FUND 161,439 5,460 216,062 (49,163) 137 CEMETERY MAINTENANCE TRUSTFD 1,103,300 51,500 50,000 1,104,800 138 SISTER CITY COMMISSION 19,895 10,430 11,900 18,425 140 BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FUND 39,784 88,645 88,575 39,854 141 AFFORDABLE& SUPPORTIVE HOUSING FUND 234,566 65,000 - 299,566 142 EDMONDS RESCUE PLAN FUND 64,588 1,879,000 1,879,000 64,588 143 TREE FUND 226,300 215,100 239,800 201,600 211 LID FUND CONTROL - - - - 231 2012 LTGO DEBTSERVICE FUND - 309,800 309,800 - 332 PARKS CONSTRUCTION 207,683 2,713,902 2,255,647 665,938 421 WATER 31,888,623 11,950,114 11,949,308 31,889,429 422 STORM 18,071,732 9,095,452 8,525,900 18,641,284 423 SEWER/TREATMENT PLANT 62,999,334 16,895,408 18,972,999 60,921,743 424 BOND RESERVE FUND 843,961 1,991,860 1,989,820 846,001 511 EQUIPMENT RENTAL FUND 9,395,801 4,253,740 4,966,825 8,682,716 512 TechnologyRental Fund 962,502 1,634,131 1,943,624 653,009 Totals 160,005,507 130,719,434 140,855,817 149,869,124 Packet Pg. 496 10.4.d EXHIBIT "B": Budget Amendments by Revenue (November 2023) FUND NO. FUND DESCRIPTION Adopted Budget Ord.#4289 1/1/2023 Adopted Amendment Ord.#4297 3/2/2023 Adopted Amendment Ord.#4300 4/25/2023 Adopted Amendment Ord.#4310 6/20/2023 Adopted Amendment Ord.#4313 7/25/2023 Proposed Amendment Ord.# 2023 Amended Revenue Budget 001 General Fund $ 49,991,791 $ 360,954 $ 834,000 $ $ 1,372,085 $ 6,500,000 $ 59,058,830 009 Leoff-Medica I Ins. Reserve 225,000 - - - 225,000 011 Risk Management Reserve Fund - - - 012 Contingency Reserve Fund 447,522 447,522 014 Historic Preservation Gift Fund - - 016 Building Maintenance Fund 17,480 17,480 017 Marsh Restoration & Preservation Fund - 018 Edmonds Homelessness Response Fund 019 Edmonds Opioid Response Fund - - 104 Drug Enforcement Fund 167,650 - 167,650 111 Street Fund 1,815,410 - 200,000 2,015,410 112 Combined Street Const/Improve 8,308,065 2,776,000 1,282,735 - 12,366,800 117 Municipal Arts Acquis. Fund 98,098 - - 1,122 99,220 118 Memorial Street Tree - - - 120 Hotel/Motel Tax Revenue Fund 84,400 84,400 121 Employee Parking Permit Fund 38,960 38,960 122 Youth Scholarship Fund 1,660 1,660 123 Tourism Promotional Fund/Arts 30,440 30,440 125 ParkAcq/Improvement 2,320,090 2,320,090 126 Special Capital Fund 2,302,980 - 2,302,980 127 Gifts Catalog Fund 135,340 97,150 232,490 130 Cemetery Maintenance/Improv 150,960 - 150,960 136 Parks Trust Fund 5,460 5,460 137 Cemetery Maintenance Trust I'd 51,500 51,500 138 Sister City Commission 10,430 10,430 140 Business Improvement District Fund 88,645 88,645 141 Affordable and Supportive Housing Fund 65,000 - 65,000 142 Edmonds Rescue Plan Fund 1,249,000 420,000 210,000 1,879,000 143 Tree Fund 215,100 - - 215,100 211 Lid Fund Control - - 231 2012 LTGO Debt Service fund 309,800 309,800 332 Parks Construction 927,205 1,786,697 2,713,902 421 Water 11,950,114 - - 11,950,114 422 Storm 8,903,407 117,045 75,000 9,095,452 423 Sewer/Treatment Plant 15,898,844 - 996,564 16,895,408 424 Bond Reserve Fund 1,991,860 - 1,991,860 511 Equipment Rental Fund 4,188,740 - 65,000 4,253,740 512 Technology Rental Fund 1,413,372 67,822 152,937 1,634,131 617 Firemen's Pension Fund - - - - Totals $ 112,956,801 1 $ 5,108,518 $ 2,984,257 $ $ 3,169,858 1 $ 6,500,000 $ 130,719,434 C d E 73 C d E Q w d 3 m L Q M E d O Z d C1 C l0 C L 0 rr C O E C O E Q O 3 m L d E O Z Cl) N O N le C d E L V M r.+ Q Packet Pg. 497 10.4.d EXHIBIT "C": Budget Amendment by Expenditure (November 2023) FUND NO. FUND DESCRIPTION Adopted Budget Ord. #4289 1/1/2023 Adopted Amendment Ord. #4297 3/2/2023 Adopted Amendment Ord. #4300 4/25/2023 Adopted Amendment Ord. #4310 6/20/2023 Adopted Amendment Ord. #4313 7/25/2023 Proposed Amendment Ord. # 2023 Amended Expenditure Budget 001 General Fund $ 55,716,788 $ 1,970,899 $ 4,093,110 $ $ 2,189,957 $ $ 63,970,754 009 Leoff-Medical Ins. Reserve 367,140 - - - 367,140 011 Risk Management Reserve Fund 25,000 25,000 012 Contingency Reserve Fund - - 014 Historic Preservation Gift Fund 5,900 - 5,900 016 Building Maintenance Fund 1,215,000 60,000 1,275,000 017 Marsh Restoration & Preservation Fund - - - 018 Edmonds Homelessness Response Fund 019 Edmonds Opioid Response Fund - - 104 Drug Enforcement Fund 45,800 - - 45,800 111 Street Fund 2,350,969 - 232,445 162,765 2,746,179 112 Combined Street Const/Improve 7,214,960 2,776,000 1,282,735 - 11,273,695 117 Municipal Arts Acquis. Fund 182,880 24,500 - 207,380 118 Memorial Street Tree - - - 120 Hotel/Motel Tax Revenue Fund 95,400 95,400 121 Employee Parking Permit Fund 26,880 26,880 122 Youth Scholarship Fund 3,000 3,000 123 Tourism Promotional Fund/Arts 28,500 - - 28,500 125 ParkAcq/Improvement 2,473,362 1,589,536 252,520 - 4,315,418 126 Special Capital Fund 1,631,812 137,000 31,700 426,871 2,227,383 127 Gifts Catalog Fund 497,598 - - 54,000 551,598 130 Cemetery Maintenance/Improv 249,413 - 42,117 291,530 136 Parks Trust Fund - 43,842 172,220 216,062 137 Cemetery Maintenance Trust I'd 25,000 25,000 - 50,000 138 Sister City Commission 11,900 - 11,900 140 Business Improvement District Fund 88,575 88,575 141 Affordable and Supportive Housing Fund - - - - 142 Edmonds Rescue Plan Fund 1,249,000 420,000 210,000 1,879,000 143 Tree Fund 239,800 - - 239,800 211 Lid Fund Control - - 231 2012LTGO Debt Service Fund 309,800 309,800 332 Parks Construction 468,950 1,786,697 - - 2,255,647 421 Water 11,335,050 300,000 184,061 130,197 11,949,308 422 Storm 7,603,123 483,840 205,414 233,523 8,525,900 423 Sewer/Treatment Plant 15,381,246 650,000 457,699 2,484,054 18,972,999 424 Bond Reserve Fund 1,989,820 - - - 1,989,820 511 Equipment Rental Fund 3,695,807 671,411 64,640 534,967 4,966,825 512 Technology Rental Fund 1,617,205 67,822 68,400 190,197 1,943,624 617 1 Firemen'S Pension Fund - - - Totals $116,145,678 1 $ 10,586,547 1 $ 7,292,724 1 $ $ 6,830,868 1 $ $ 140,855,817 Packet Pg. 498 EXHIBIT "D": Budget Amendment Summary (November 2023) 10.4.d Proposed Proposed Amendment Proposed Amendment Changein Amendment Change in Ending Fund Number Revenue Change in Expense Fund Balance 001 6,500,000 6,500,000 Total Change 6,500,000 6,500,000 C d E C d E Q d 7 m L E Q Z V L O C E E Q CO W L E Q Z M N O N r�+ C d E M V f� w Q Packet Pg. 499 10.4.e Beginning Fund Balance Revenue Property Taxes Retail Sales Taxes Other Sales Taxes Utility Taxes Other Taxes Licenses/Permits/Franchise Construction Permits Grants State Revenues Charges for Goods & Services Interfund Service Charges Fines & Forfeitures Miscellaneous Revenues Transfers Total Revenues Revenue % Change YOY Expenditures Labor Benefits Supplies Services Capital Debt Service Transfers Total Expenses Expense % Change YOY Change in Ending Fund Balance Anticipated Under -Expenditure Ending Fund Balance STRATEGIC OUTLOOK CITY OF EDMONDS GENERAL FUND REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND FUND BALANCES 2021 - 2028 ANALYSIS 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 Actual Actual Estimate Budget Outlook Outlook Outlook Outlook 13,843,806 15,915,319 11,9029933 13,164,594 12,105,000 15,9059000 1991219000 21,960,000 14,654,572 14,843,369 15,905,100 15,905,500 11,480,000 11,606,000 11,734,000 11,863,000 10,508,460 11,313,760 12,100,000 12,300,000 13,038,000 13,690,000 14,375,000 14950,000 977,315 1,041,146 1,150,000 1,150,000 1,242,000 1,304,000 1,369,000 1:437,000 6,463,896 6,599,936 7,314,500 7,473,652 8,072,000 8,476,000 8,900,000 9,345000 375,461 410,894 421,550 416,150 441,000 463,000 486,000 510:000 1,761,282 1,790,243 1,869,102 1,833,750 1,925,000 2,021,000 2,122,000 2,228000 691,905 769,928 390,000 160,000 168,000 176,000 185,000 194:000 368,376 259,347 8,460,929 41,100 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 1,240,271 1,107,943 1,188,610 1,163,610 1,187,000 1,211,000 1,235,000 1,260,000 2,792,824 3,020,628 3,903,302 4,093,512 3,216,000 3,312,000 3,411,000 3513000 3,120,735 - 3,427,765 4,032,314 4,194,000 4,404,000 4,624,000 4:855:000 272,303 182,884 302,350 4,402,350 4,946,000 4,995,000 5,045,000 5095,000 469,739 1,074,351 1,582,518 1,009,132 1,029,000 1,050,000 1,071,000 1:092,000 413,547 26,300 97,726 2,011,701 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 44,110,686 42,440,729 58,113,452 55,992,771 51,178,000 52,948,000 54,797,000 56,582,000 4% 4% 37% 4% -9% 3% 7% 7% 17,919,401 17,498,086 22,675,683 24,086,455 25,773,000 27,319,000 28,685,000 30,119,000 6,278,943 6,076,441 7,615,630 8,151,355 8,722,000 9,245,000 9,800,000 10,388,000 708,590 837,672 1,062,576 1,031,516 1,062,000 1,094,000 1,127,000 1,161,000 16,145,255 18,736,558 22,701,765 24,703,508 13,445,000 13,848,000 14,263,000 14,691,000 268,886 1,597,773 1,130,565 - - - - - 60,228 391,523 323,590 801,400 800,000 800,000 800,000 800,000 657,870 1,315,062 1,341,982 655,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 42,039,173 46,453,115 56,851,791 59,429,234 50,402,000 52,906,000 55,275,000 57,759,000 -5% 10% 22% 5% -15% 5% 4% 4% 2,071,513 (4,012,386) 1,261,661 (3,436,463) 776,000 42,000 (478,000) (1,177,000) - - - 2,376,869 3,024,000 3,174,000 3,317,000 3,466,000 15,915,319 11,902,933 1391649594 1291059000 15,905,000 19,121,000 21,960,000 24,249,000 R:\Budget\2024\Budget Document\20245trategic Outlook Proposed Budget Book_ARPA moved in 2023 11/2/2023 3:18 PM Packet Pg. 500 10.5 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 11/6/2023 Landmark Property Aquisition Staff Lead: Councilmember Dave Tetizel Department: City Council Preparer: Beckie Peterson Background/History The City of Edmonds has made a clear commitment to the Southeast Edmonds community that it will actively seek opportunities to enhance the area, including ongoing landscaping and street improvements along Highway 99, purchase of additional open space/parkland, refinement of zoning standards to ensure attractive and beneficial redevelopment, additional sidewalks/bike lanes, etc. This commitment is further evidenced by the recent announcement of the purchase of a significant parcel directly adjacent to Matthay Ballinger Park, which will essentially double this size of that popular park, in addition to an investment in a new entrance to the new Ballinger Park which can be accessed directly from the Interurban Trail in Edmonds. In keeping with this commitment, the city has been exploring an opportunity to purchase a block of property at the southern border of the City of Edmonds, currently occupied by the Burlington Coat Factory and other tenants. On June 27, 2023, Council approved an agreement for the City of Edmonds to enter into an Option Agreement with seller, representing an exclusive option to purchase the ten -acre parcel at 24111 SR 99 in Edmonds (Option Agreement and minutes attached). This option was granted by the seller and Edmonds paid an Option Payment of $100,000 to secure the first right to purchase, refundable if the option to purchase is terminated by December 31, 2023. Various activities are being and have been conducted by the city about this opportunity, including a market appraisal, site evaluation, community outreach, ideation, initial purchase and sale agreement development, etc. Recommendation Direct the City Attorney to draft and bring to the Council for action a resolution expressing the Council's intent not to execute the addendum contemplated in Section 4(a) of the Option Agreement for the Landmark property, recognizing that not executing such addendum will result in the automatic termination of the Option Agreement and the refund from the seller of the city's deposit of $100,000. Further, direct the City Attorney to stop work on drafting, revising and negotiating the Purchase Agreement contemplated in Section 4(a) of the Option Agreement for the Landmark Property. Narrative The sales price for this property has been set at $37 million. As described above, expenses in addition to the $100,000 deposit have been incurred to date -estimated at over $150,000, in this potential purchase. Significant City of Edmonds staff time by three city Directors has also been invested to date in this potential acquisition. Packet Pg. 501 10.5 In 2024, the $100,000 deposit becomes non-refundable should pursuit of this purchase continue beyond December 31, 2023, and additional investments will be required to fund a site master plan, community outreach, further site evaluation, preparation of a purchase and sale agreement, etc. While these expenses have not yet been fully quantified, they could easily exceed $200,000 (in addition to the foregone $100,000 deposit and other expenses already incurred). Further, prior to March 2025, an earnest money deposit of $1 million will be due. While the city has been researching potential partnerships and grant opportunities for this potential property acquisition, it will have to bear a significant proportion of the $37 million purchase price, plus untold costs to redevelop the portion of the property it will continue to own (in addition to foregoing significant financial benefits if the property were instead to be sold to another party -including Real Estate Excise Taxes, Park Impact Fees, Traffic Impact Fees, etc.) This potential purchase involves real estate speculation and risk, at a time when the city's budget is significantly stressed. Importantly, for the first time in well over a decade, the city has been required to use its General Fund reserves in 2023 to balance the budget. In plain terms, the city's expenses are increasing at a far faster rate than its revenues and urgent steps must be taken to stabilize the city's financial fundamentals. The Landmark Property is a speculative real estate proposition, which carries significant financial risk to the city. Municipal entities have a duty to minimize risk to their constituents to ensure continued delivery of high -quality city services. This potential purchase does not minimize that risk. It should also be noted the city will likely need to determine in 2024 whether to exercise its purchase option on the 20-acre Unocal site at the Edmonds Marsh. While the final purchase price has not yet been negotiated with WSDOT, it is likely to be in the tens of millions of dollars (since the seller is required by law to sell the property at fair market retail value), which represents yet another strain on the city's stressed budget. At this point, it is entirely unclear how the city could financially bear the cost of two such significant purchases within a short period of time. While it is exciting to contemplate potential uses for the Landmark property, the city's financial condition simply does not support further investment in this potential acquisition. Pursuit of this opportunity should be set aside at this point, and future opportunities -which will certainly exist --to bring community amenities to Southeast Edmonds should be explored as the city's financial situation stabilizes. Attachments: Option to Purchase Agreement for Eastern Investment Corporation and Southeast 888 Investment LLC pages from EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES June 27, 2023 Packet Pg. 502 10.5.a of I VA 0'V 1. J' ANc.IS90 CONTRACT ROUTING FORM No. (City Clerk Use Only) Z Originator: Angie Feser I Routed by: I Angie Feser O Department/Division: Parks, Rec & Human Svcs I Date: 6/28/2023 a Name of Consultant/Contractor: Eastern Investment Corporation and Southeast 888 Investment LLC wCONTRACT TITLE: OPTION AGREEMENT between Eastern Investment Corporation and Southeast 888 1 _ 1 Investment LLC and CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Type of Contract: ® (GR) Grants O (1) Intergovernmental Agreement O (L) Lease Agreement Z _, (S) Purchase of Services (W) Public Works (0) Other W ll'— Project/Bid/RFP No: Z v Effective Date: 07/01 /2023 Completion Date: 12/31 /2024 I— uHas the original contract boilerplate language been modified? Yes • No I.- If yes, specify which sections have been modified: `p 1 Description Option to Purchase property located at 24111 SR 99, Edmonds consisting of 11 tax parcels. V of Services: Total Amount of Contract: $100,000 y Budget # 126.000.64.594., Amount: $100,000 Budget # J Amount: W Budget # Budget # G J Amount: Q Budget # Budget # C� Z Are there sufficient funds in the current budget to cover this contract? • Yes No Q Z Remarks: Authorization Level: W 1. Project Manager Q ❑ 2. Risk Management/Budget Z ❑ 3. City Attorney 2 ❑ 4. Consultant/Contractor N ❑ 5. Other ie Feser ❑ 6. City Council Approval ❑ Date (if applicable) ❑ 7. Mayor ❑ 8. City Clerk MEMEMMMEN Amount: I !111 1 d Q. 0 a E J Packet Pg. 503 10.5.a OPTION AGREEMENT a 0 L a between E �a Eastern Investment Corporation and Southeast 888 Investment LLC and CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON dated as of July 1, 2023 Packet Pg. 504 10.5.a OPTION AGREEMENT CL 0 This OPTION AGREEMENT (this "Agreement") dated as of the I st day of July, 2023 a (the "Effective Date") is entered into between EASTERN INVESTMENT CORPORATION, a Washington Corporation and SOUTHEAST 888 INVESTMENT LLC, a Washington Limited Liability Company (collectively "Optionor"), and CITY OF EDMONDS, a Washington J municipal corporation ("Optionee"). -- WHEREAS, Optionor is the owner of that certain real property located at 24111 SR 99, Edmonds, in SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON, which is more particularly described in Exhibit A attached hereto (the "Property"); and WHEREAS, Optionor wishes to grant to Optionee, and Optionee wishes to obtain from Optionor, an irrevocable and exclusive option to purchase the Property, subject to the terms and conditions set forth below. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the Option Payment (defined in Section 3 below) and the other mutual covenants and agreements hereinafter set forth and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows: l . Grant of Option. Subject to Optionee's timely payment of the Option Payment (defined in Section 3 below), Optionor hereby grants to Optionee an exclusive and irrevocable option to purchase the Property on the terms and conditions set out in this Agreement (the "Option"). 2. Option Term. The term of the Option (the "Option Term") shall commence on the Effective Date and automatically expire at 11:59 pm PACIFIC TIME December 31, 2024 (the "Option Termination Date"), unless duly extended, exercised, or sooner terminated as provided for in this Agreement. Option Payment. (a) The Option is granted in consideration of Optionee's payment to Optionor, concurrently with the execution of this Agreement, in the amount of ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS $100,000 (the "Option Payment"), the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged. (b) Optionee acknowledges and agrees that the Option Payment constitutes consideration to Optionor for Optionor's agreement to: (i) enter into this Agreement with Optionee; (ii) not advertise, market the Property for sale, and/or sell the Property to another purchaser while this Agreement is in effect; and (iii) sell the Property to Optionee on the terms and conditions and for the Purchase Price (as defined in the Purchase Agreement (defined below in Section 4)), provided that Optionee has exercised the Option in the manner provided in Section 4 below. The Option Payment shall be nonrefundable to Optionee. 4. Exercise of Option. At any time during the Option Term, Optionee may exercise the Option by timely sending Optionor a written notice of Optionee's intention to exercise the 2 Packet Pg. 505 10.5.a Option (the "Exercise Notice") accompanied by three (3) executed copies of the purchase and sale agreement certain material terms of which are attached as Exhibit B (the "Purchase o Agreement"). Optionor shall promptly execute the Purchase Agreement and return two (2) fully a executed originals to Optionee. if Optionee does not timely exercise the Option in the manner described herein on or before the Option Termination Date, the Option will automatically E terminate. Thereafter, neither party shall have any further obligations hereunder except for those obligations that expressly survive termination of this Agreement. (a) Within ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY (180) days of the Effective Date, Exhibit B hereto shall be converted into an approved Purchase Agreement consistent with the material terms and subject to approval by both Optionor and Optionee in their sole discretion. Once the parties agree upon the form of the complete Purchase Agreement, that agreement shall be finalized by the parties executing an addendum to this Agreement which will have the effect of replacing Exhibit B with the complete Purchase Agreement. If the parties have not executed such an addendum, for any reason, within ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY (180) days of the Effective Date, Optionor shall return the entire Option Payment to Optionee and this Agreement shall terminate. Failure of the parties to execute the above addendum in a timely manner renders the Option Payment refundable notwithstanding any other language to the contrary in this Agreement. 5. Default by Optionor. If Optionor fails to perform any of its obligations or is otherwise in default hereunder, Optionee shall have the right to terminate this Agreement, obtain a refund of the Option Payment paid by Optionee, and/or to seek such other relief Optionee may have at law or in equity, including, without limitation, seeking injunctive relief to prevent a sale of the Property to a party other than Optionee and the filing of an action for specific performance. Default by Optionor renders the Option Payment refundable notwithstanding any other language to the contrary in this Agreement. 6. Notices. Unless specifically stated otherwise in this Agreement, all notices, waivers, and demands required or permitted hereunder shall be in writing and delivered to the addresses set forth below, by one of the following methods: (a) hand delivery, whereby delivery is deemed to have occurred at the time of delivery; (b) a nationally recognized overnight courier company, whereby delivery is deemed to have occurred the business day following deposit with the courier; (c) registered United States mail, signature required and postage -prepaid, whereby delivery is deemed to have occurred on the third business day following deposit with the United States Postal Service; or (d) electronic transmission (email) provided that the transmission is completed no later than 11:59 p.m. Pacific time on a business day and the original also is sent via United States Mail, whereby delivery is deemed to have occurred at the end of the business day on which electronic transmission is completed. To Optionor: Name: Robert Siew Address: 15310 SE 43`d Place, Bellevue, WA 98006 Telephone: 425-643-3 83 8 Email: Robsiew@comcast.net 3 Packet Pg. 506 10.5.a a� a With a copy to. Name: Andrew Goodrich ° a Ad&ess:601 Union Street, Suite 2600 E Seattle, WA 98101-4000 �a Telephone: 206.654.2428 v J J Facsimile: 206.340.2563 = a� Email: Goodrich@lasher.com E To Optionee: Name: Angie Feser City of Edmonds Parks, Recreation & Human Services Director 700 Main Street Edmonds WA 98026 Telephone: 425-771-0256 Email: angie.feser(a,edmondswa.gov with a copy to: Name: Jeff Taraday Lighthouse Law Group PLLC Address: 600 Stewart Street, Suite 400 Seattle, WA 9101 Telephone: 206-273-7440 Email: Jeff@ighthouselawgroup.com 4 Packet Pg. 507 10.5.a Any party to this Agreement may change its address for purposes of this Section 6 by giving written notice as provided in this Section 6. All notices and demands delivered by a party's attorney on a party's behalf shall be deemed to have been delivered by said party. Notices shall be valid only if served in the manner provided for in this Section 6. 7. Optionee's Right to [nepect. (a) In conducting inspections related to due diligence or feasibility or otherwise accessing the Property, Optionee shall at all times comply with all laws and regulations of all applicable governmental authorities. In connection with such inspections, neither Optionee nor any of Optionee's representatives shall. (i) unreasonably interfere with or permit unreasonable interference with any person occupying or providing service at the Property; or (ii) unreasonably interfere with the business of Optionor (or any of its tenants) conducted at the Property or unreasonably disturb the use or occupancy of any occupant of the Property. (b) Optionee shall schedule and coordinate all inspections or other access thereto with Optionor and shall give Optionor at least FIVE (5) business days' prior notice thereof. Optionor shall be entitled to have a representative present at all times during each such inspection or other access. Optionor shall allow the Optionee's representatives unlimited access to the Property and to other information pertaining thereto in the possession or within the control of Optionor for the purpose of the inspections and any due diligence undertaken by the Optionee. (c) In the event of termination of the Option, Optionee shall provide to Optionor at no cost, electronic; copies of any reports, studies or written conclusions made by Optionee during the Option Period. (d) Optionee shall not perform any invasive testing including environmental inspections beyond a Phase 1 assessment or contact the tenants without obtaining Optionor's prior written consent. Optionee shall restore the Property and all improvements to substantially the same condition they were in prior to the inspection. 8. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original and all of which when taken together shall constitute one and the same document. 9. Time of Essence. Optionor and Optionee hereby acknowledge and agree that time is strictly of the essence with respect to each and every term, condition, obligation, and provision hereof and that failure to timely perform any of the terms, conditions, obligations, or provisions hereof by either party shall constitute a material breach of and a non -curable (but waivable) default under this Agreement by the parry so failing to perform. 10. Entire Agreement; No Representations. This Agreement constitutes the sole and entire agreement of the parties to this Agreement with respect to the subject matter contained herein and supersedes all prior and contemporaneous understandings and agreements, both written and oral, with respect to such subject matter. This Agreement is entered into after full 5 Q. 0 ILL_ E c 0 J Packet Pg. 508 10.5.a investigation by each party and neither party is relying upon any statement or representation made by the other party not set forth in this Agreement. o L a 11. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. E 12. Attorney Fees. If either Optionor or Optionee institutes suit against the other concerning this Agreement, the prevailing party is entitled to reasonable attorney fees and costs. J J [SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS] _ Packet Pg. 509 10.5.a IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Optionor and Optionee hereto have executed this Agreement as of the Effective Date. OPTIONOR: EASTERN INVESTMENT CORPORATIO , a washington corporation r Qv- Name:. Title: SOUTHEAST 888 INVESTMENT LLC, a Washington Limited Liability Company f Bv: Name: R Title: "-Ckt�r— OPTIONEE: CITY OF EDMONDS, a Washington municipal corporation By: Name: Mike Nelson Title: Mayor Q a 0 L a L c �a J 7 Packet Pg. 510 10.5.a EXHIBIT "A" Legal Description For A_ PNlParc_eI ID_rs : 004911-000-003-02, 004911-000-003-03, 004911-000-003-04, 004911-000-003-05, as a a 004911-000-001-05, 004911-000-001-06, 004911-000-001-07, 004911 -000-001 -10, 004911-000-003-06, 004911-000-003-07 and 004911-000-003-08 Parcel A: 'a _ A portion of Tracts 1, 2, and 3, Lake McAleer Five Acre Tracts, according to the plat thereof, recorded in Volume 5 of Plat§, pa_ge_48. records of Snohomish County, Washington, described follows: ca v as J Beginning at the Southeast corner of above said Tract 3; _ m Thence North 0045'50" East along the East line of said Tract 3, 634.13 feet to a point 10 feet South of the Northeast immer of lot 3; w Q Thence North 88029'56" West parallel to the North line of said plat, 201.64 feet; c Thence South 0°43'57" West parallel to the West line of above said Tract 3, 176.96 feet to a point 135.00 feet North of the South line of North one-half of said Tract 3; 00 CO Thence North 88°28'07" West parallel to said South line 130.00 feet to the East line CO of above said Tract 2; Thence North 0'43'57" East along said East line 176.89 feet to a point 10.00 feet South of the Northeast corner of said Tract 2; r Thence North 88-29'56" West parallel to the North line of above said Plat 130.00 feet; 7 0 Thence South 0°43'57" West parallel to the East line of said Tract 2, 125.00 feet; rn Thence North 88029'56" West parallel to the North line of said Plat 218.43 feet to an intersection with a curve on the Easterly right of way line of Highway 99 (center point which bears South 64'17'03" East a distance of 2814.79 feet); _ Thence Southwesterly along the arc of said curve to the Left, consuming a central angle of 9°56'56" a distance of 488.72 feet; ca Thence South 74613'56" East on a radial line of said curve, a distance of 10.00 feet to an intersection with a curve on the 07 Easterly right of way line of Highway 99 (center point which bears South 74°13'56" East a distance of 2804.79 feet); C Thence Southwesterly along the arc of said curVE- to the left, consuming a central angle of 0056'39" a distance of 46.22 r feet to the South line of Tract 1 In above said plat; _ Thence South 88'26'18" East along the South ling, of Tracts 1, 2, 3 in above said Plat, a distance of 848.72 feet to the true a� E -point of beginning; v, Except those portions acquired by or conveyed to the State of Washington for SR 104. d _ L Situate in the County of Snohomish, State of Washington, w ca w Parcel B: That part of the North 135 feet of Tracts 1 and 2, ILake McAleer Five Acre Tracts, according to the plat thereof, recorded in Volume 5 of Plats. page 48, records of Snohomis) County, Washington, lying Easterly of State Road No. 1 (U.S. Highway 99); Except the East 130 feet; And except the North 10 feet thereof conveyed to Snohomish County for road by deed recorded under Auditor's File Number 693550: And except that portion conveyed to the State of Washington for Primary State Highway No. 1 by deed recorded under Auditor's File Number 1646398. Packet Pg. 511 10.5.a EXHIBIT "A" Legal Description Situate in the County of Snohomish, State of Washington. Parcel C: That portion of Tracts 1 and 2, Lake McAleer Five Acre Tracts, according to the plat thereof, recorded in Volume 5 of Plats, page 48, records of Snohomish County, Washington, described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the Southeasterly right of way line of State Highway Route 99, as said right of way line existed prior to March 12, 1970, with the South line of the North 135 feet, as measured parallel with the East line of said tract 1; Thence Westerly along said South line to a point which is 51 feet Southeasterly, when measured at right angles from the R line survey of State Highway Route 104; Thence Northeasterly parallel with said R line survey to a point opposite Highway Engineer's station R 113+81.36; Thence along a curve to the right having a radius of 40 feet to a point on the South line of 240th St. S.W. opposite Highway Engineer's Station 240th 10+64.85 and 30 feet Southerly therefrom; Thence Easterly along said South lint? to the Southeasterly right of way line of State Highway Route 99; Thence Southwesterly along said right of way line to the point of beginning. Situate in the County olf Snohomish, State of Washington. Parcel D: That portion of Tract 1, Lake MCAleel Five Acre Tracts. according to the plat thereof, recorded in Volume 5 of Plats, page 48, records of Snohomish County, Washington, described as follows: Beginning at a point opposite Highway Engineer's Station (hereinafter referred to as H.E.S.)1 188+66 on the I line survey of SR 104, 236th Street S.W. to Meridiaq Avenue, and 365 feet Northeasterly therefrom, said point also being on the Southeasterly right of way line of SR 99, as said right of way existed prior to March 12, 1970: Thence Northwesterly to a point opposite H. E.S. 109+65 on the R line survey of said highway and 42 feet Southeasterly therefrom; Thence Northeasterly in a straight line to a point opposite H.E.S. R 109+82 and 42 feet Southeasterly therefrom; Thence Northeasterly in a straight line to a point opposite H.E.S. R 110+00 and 42 feet Southeasterly therefrom; Thence Northeasterly in a straight line to a point opposite H.E.S. R 110+50 and 41 feet Southeasterly therefrom; Thence Northeasterly in a straight line to a point opposite H.E.S. R 111+00 and 41 feet Southeasterly therefrom; Thence Northeasterly in a straight line to a point opposite H.E.S. R 111+50 and 41 feet Southeasterly therefrom; Thence Northeasterly in a straight line to a point opposite H.E.S. R 112+00 and 41 feet Southeasterly therefrom; Thence Northeasterly in a straight line to a point opposite H.E.S. R 112+50 and 41 feet Southeasterly therefrom: Thence Northeasterly in a straight line to a point on the South line of the North 135 feet, as measured parallel with the East line, of said tract, which point is 41 feet Southeasterly, when measured at right angles, from the R line of said highway; Thence Easterly, along said South line, to the Southeasterly right of way line of SR 99, as said right of way line existed prior to March 12, 1970. Thence Southwesterly, along said right of way line, to the point of beginning. Situate in the County of Snohomish, Z;tate of Washington. Parcel 004911-000-003-02; Parcel 004911-000-003-03; Parcel 004911-000-003-04; Parcel 004911-000-003-05; Parcel 004911-000-OD1-05; Parcel 004911-000-001-06; Parcel 004911-000-001-07; Parcel 004911-000-001-10; Parcel 004911-000-003-06; Parcel 004911-000-003-07; Parcel 004911-000-003-08 Q a 0 L a L E c ca Packet Pg. 512 10.5.a EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION i Packet Pg. 513 10.5.a EXHIBIT B d Q. PURCHASE AGREEMENT — CERTAIN MATERIAL TERMS a The following are certain material terms of the purchase and sale agreement ("Purchase E Agreement") as described in Section 4 of this Agreement: 1. Subject Property: The Property shall be the same Property that is the subject of this J Agreement. c� 2. Purchase Price: The Purchase Price shall be THIRTY-SEVEN MILLION DOLLARS AND ZERO CENTS ($37,000,000.00) all cash at closing. The Option Payment shall not count toward the Purchase Price. 3. Earnest Money Deposit: The Earnest Money Deposit shall be: a. ONE MILLION DOLLARS AND ZERO CENTS ($1,000,000.00); b. credited toward the Purchase Price; c. deposited with the escrow agent within FOURTEEN (14) days of mutual execution of the Purchase Agreement; d. non-refundable as to FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($500,000.) upon release of title contingency (see 4.c, below); e. non-refundable as to the remaining FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($500,000.) upon release of the due diligence / feasibility contingency (see 4.b, below). 4. Contingencies: The Purchase Agreement shall be subject to the following contingencies: a. A financing contingency, which shall be released no later than ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY(120) days after mutual execution of the Purchase Agreement; b. A due diligence / feasibility contingency, which shall be released no later than ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY (120) days after mutual execution of the Purchase Agreement; An acceptable title contingency, which shall be released no later than SIXTY (60) days after mutual execution of the Purchase Agreement. 5. Closing: The closing of the transaction shall occur on or before June 30, 2025. 6. Title: Title shall be conveyed by statutory warranty deed, subject to any exceptions shown on a survey provided by Optionee. The title company shall be Chicago Title Insurance Company in Everett, WA. 7. Leases: Seller shall not renew or enter into any leases in a manner that would extend the lease expiration past the closing date, provided, however, that Optionee understands that there is a current lease which terminates on Jan. 31, 2029. 8. Brokers: Seller represents and warrants to Purchaser that it dealt with no broker in connection with, nor has any broker had any part in bringing about, this transaction and that no commissions are owed by either party. Purchaser represents and warrants to Seller that the broker it used to facilitate this transaction was engaged by the Purchaser on a ten Packet Pg. 514 10.5.a consulting basis and that no commission is owed to that broker in connection with this transaction. 9. Excise Tax: Seller shall pay all excises taxes associated with the transaction. 10. Assi ent: Purchaser may assign part or all of its interest in the Purchase Agreement without the prior written consent of the Seller, provided: (a) Purchaser gives Seller written notice of such assignment within THIRTY (30) days after such assignment; and (b) Purchaser's assignee executes an instrument in form substantially the same as that attached to the Purchase Agreement agreeing to be bound by all the terms and conditions of the Purchase Agreement and agreeing that at least seventy-five percent (75%) of the acreage of the Property will be used for public purposes. 11. AS IS. The sale shall be "as is". 12. 1031 Exchange. If Optionor intends for this transacton to be a part of a Section 1031 like -kind exchange, then Optionee agrees to cooperate in the completion of the exchange so long as they incur no additional liability or expense. 10 Q CL 0 L a L 0 M c �a Packet Pg. 515 10.5.b Councilmember Chen commented this ordinance is timely and fills the gap. When the issue arose with the Blake decision, the legislature heard the concerns and came with this fix. Now, with the adoption of this ordinance, the City can address the gap. Council President Tibbott asked for confirmation that the city attorney reviewed the ordinance, that it met the City's standards, and that the council should approve it. City Attorney Jeff Taraday advised his office drafted the ordinance, he modified the effective date clause and he had no concerns with the ordinance. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mayor Nelson declared a brief recess. 2. HIGHWAY 99 LANDMARK SITE Parks, Recreation & Human Services Director Angie Feser advised this item is council consideration of the proposed option agreement for what is known as the Highway 99 Landmark property. The agreement will enable the City to investigate the opportunity for development while the property is held off the market. No purchase decision will be made until information is gathered and brought to council at a much, much later date, as long as 18 months from now. She reviewed: • Property information o Address: 24111 Highway 99 o Size 10.06 acres o Tax lots: 11 o Zoned: GC - General Commercial o Purchase Price: $37 million (preliminarily agreed to by the land owner and City representative as a starting point) o Highlights ■ One owner, willing to sell, interest in property having some civic use ■ No significant critical areas ■ Utilities in streets north and south ■ Close proximity to public and non -motorized transportation including Bus Rapid Transit, Interurban Trail Corridor, and light rail station in MLT ■ Burlington Coat Factory lease (January 2029) ■ Community driven development o Due diligence ■ City has been in conversation with land owner for a couple years ■ Completed a zoning memo that identified the highest and best use yields of the property and mixed use development that could be constructed on the site ■ Conducted an appraisal and appraisal review ■ Preliminary conversations with potential partners for development of the site Property potential o Massing study Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 27, 2023 Page 16 Packet Pg. 516 10.5.b A� - �:rl,' o Community visioning process ■ Master planning the site and possibly surrounding area o Council goals o Planning documents ■ Subarea plan ■ Comprehensive plan ■ PROS Plan o Opportunity for public -private partnerships o Discussions occurring in the public regarding options for site ■ Community space ■ Public safety ■ Housing ■ Share Parks & Recreation facilities ■ Civic spaces ■ Community services ■ Commercial ■ Opportunity for reinvestment/revitalization and potential catalyst for Highway 99 development, creating a landmark and gateway into the community • Option Agreement o Components ■ Agreement ■ Purchase Agreement — Material Terms (Exhibit B) ■ $100.000 Option Pavment Phase Timeline Action Details Activities 1 6 months Exercise of Council decision Community visioning Option $100,000 refundable Due diligence • Purchase agreement Funding options finalized partnerships 2 12 months Agreement Council decision Master Planning/Community Addendum Enacts the Purchase Engagement Agreement (Exhibit B) Due diligence • Earnest Money Deposit Funding options $1 M Partnerships 3 6 months Closing Council decision Purchase executed • Next Steps 1. Council consideration of option agreement 2. Project integration and implementation — how do we get all of the pieces done? 0 A M Cr Q CL 0 a L E _ _ r4 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 27, 2023 Page 17 Packet Pg. 517 10.5.b Community/Culture/Economic Development Director Todd Tatum commented this option is an incredible opportunity that provides the City six months of low risk time to coordinate, collaborate and ensure everyone is moving in understanding together and he hoped the council would approve option. He referred to the timeline in the packet that identifies five tasks: • Project management o Contracting plan o Communications plan o Team establishment • Develop a purchase and sale agreement o Negotiate PSA details o Title report o Geotech investigation o Environmental review • Master plan o Contracting o Establish program elements of the site o Conceptual design o Schematic design • Developing financing options o Prepare Tax Increment Finance (TIF) strategy o Bonds o Public/private options • Implementation Planning (2024 and beyond o Ongoing project management o Public/private structure o Team funding ad budget amendments Mr. Tatum continued, there is a lot to examine, manage and integrate, particularly with regard to financing. The function of project management is to plan, execute, monitor and control projects so they meet objectives and effectively manage change. That is a big lift that will have a big impact on staff and council. Making informed, timely and mutual decision is critical to the success of this effort as is clear, thorough communication with residents. A project team and structure is being formed so staff and council have clarity about how the elements of this effort will come together and how to reach timely and informed decisions. One of the first steps is to create a steering committee which would include the council president and another councilmember as plans for community outreach, stakeholder engagement, budgeting and timeline are solidified. Staff is excited to continue the work that brought this opportunity to council and look forward to working with the council and the community. Councilmember Teitzel applauded staff for thinking big, noted this is an exciting prospect. Having said that, he wanted to be clear-eyed, this is a big deal for the City and he wanted to ensure taxpayers would not be overburdened. It appeared the way the option agreement was written, the City would be buying the entire 10 acre parcel. He asked if the property owner would be willing to break up the parcels and the City purchase only 1-2 parcels for park space, a community center, etc. Ms. Feser answered the project began with the City approaching the landowner about the three acres on the eastern half of the property which are undeveloped open space at this time. The City decided not to move forward on just that parcel and it turned into a conversation about purchasing all the parcels. In her conversations with the property owner, she believed he wanted to sell all of the parcels as a unit and has expressed a desire to sell the property by late 2025/2026. City Attorney Jeff Taraday said the core terms of the purchase and sale agreement attached to the option agreement make it so the City can assign part or all of its interest in the purchase and sale agreement Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 27, 2023 Page 18 Packet Pg. 518 10.5.b without prior written consent of seller. The only limitation is at least 75% of acreage has to be used for public purposes. The City could assign any acreage of the site to other public entities who want to use the site for public purchases and could also assign up to 25% of the property for for -profit development. He summarized the City would not have to take on the entirety of the site. Councilmember Teitzel relayed his understanding if the City purchased the property, 75% of the 10 acres would need to be assigned to public purposes which would not be revenue generating for the City, only 25% would be revenue generating. Mr. Taraday answered it may be correct, but it may depend on whether a public purpose could occur while the property was owned by a taxable entity; those two things are not always hand -in -hand although they often are. He could conceive of a hypothetical where the property remains in a taxable state and is still used for public purposes. Councilmember Teitzel relayed his understanding the $37 million was a starting point for negotiations. Ms. Feser answered that is the currently agreed upon purchase price. Councilmember Teitzel asked why that number would change. Ms. Feser answered if something was discovered during due diligence that drove down the purchase price, the City could approach the land owner to negotiate the price. At this point in time, the purchase price is $37 million from now until the closing in two years. Mr. Taraday clarified during the six months while the purchase and sale agreement is being formalizing, anything could happen. Once the purchase and sale agreement is solidified, the property owner would not be able to increase the price and would be locked in at $37 million. As Ms. Feser stated, if during the course of the City's due diligence something was discovered that made the property not worth $37 million, the deal would not have to close. Councilmember Nand thanked staff who have involved in bringing this incredible opportunity to the community. She asked if the land owner could get more than $37 million for the property if it were put on the market. Ms. Feser answered that was speculating real estate and it would be difficult to say. Councilmember Nand asked if the relationship with the land owner would be jeopardized if the council did not approve the option agreement tonight. Ms. Feser answered it did not need to be approved tonight. If the option to purchase was not executed with the land owner, it would eventually jeopardize communication and negotiations with the property owner. Councilmember Nand asked if 75% were designated toward public uses, did staff anticipate the City would be able to easily find grant partners to finance the property purchase. Mr. Tatum answered there are a number of grants available to help fund the purchase and development of this property. Public purposes can vary so without a specific public purpose in mind, he could not identify a specific grant. The goal/intent over the next several months is to explore those public purposes and levels of public/private partnership to make this a make feasible project. Councilmember Nand referenced discussions regarding the Unocal property and asked if staff anticipated looping in the state and county legislative delegations. Mr. Tatum answered one of the first steps will be contacting state and federal representatives; that conversation needs to start early and continue as there are number of things on which their help and support will be needed. Councilmember Nand asked if staff anticipated reaching out to neighboring cities about potential interlocal agreements. Mr. Tatum answered staff has discussed that and there has been outreach to other municipalities, exploring uses and programming on the site. Councilmember Nand asked if staff anticipated getting buy -in from the Edmonds School District or Sno-Isle Libraries for usage of the property. Mr. Tatum said he could not speak to that at this point. Councilmember Buckshnis referred to the indication in the presentation that an appraisal was conducted and asked why it was not included in the packet and what the appraised amount was. Ms. Feser said she would be happy to share the appraisal and amounts in executive session. Councilmember Buckshnis Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 27, 2023 Page 19 Packet Pg. 519 10.5.b asked about the estimated cash flow from the Burlington Coat Factory and other businesses, noting the appraisal must have included cash flow. Ms. Feser suggested discussing details of the appraisal in executive session. Councilmember Buckshnis hoped an executive session would be scheduled. Councilmember Buckshnis asked how the 75/25 split was determined and why not a 50150 split. Mr. Taraday answered he did not have a lot of detail on it except that it was his general understanding the property owner would not have accepted a 50150 split. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if cottage housing or affordable housing would be considered a public purpose. Mr. Taraday answered it is an interesting question whether affordable housing would be considered a public purpose. That is a detail that will be worked out when negotiating the purchase and sale agreement. Market rate housing would not be a public purpose. To the extent that any portion of the site was used for market rate housing, it would need to be limited to 25% of the acreage. Councilmember Buckshnis observed only 25% or approximately 2.5 acres could be revenue generating like a store. Mr. Taraday answered affordable housing is revenue generating. He suggested Councilmember Buckshnis clarify what she mean by revenue generating. Councilmember Buckshnis commented most of Highway 99 is revenue generating for the City such as car dealerships, restaurants, stores, international district, hospital, etc. Mr. Taraday clarified she meant sales tax generating which would need to be limited to 25%. Councilmember Buckshnis found this exciting, but wanted to drill down on the numbers. The timeline in the packet does not have enough council touchpoints and is very aggressive with regard to TIF. She hoped to have a clearer understanding as this moved through the process. Councilmember Olson relayed her understanding TIF could not be used for 75% of the purchase as TIF is based on projected future revenue. Ms. McLaughlin answered property tax revenue primarily. Mr. Tatum said it is based on the tax increment area. Ms. McLaughlin pointed out the City may purchase the property but may not be the resultant land owner at the end of the process. If the City engages in a public -private partnership, it may be more advantageous for the City not to own the land and negotiate via a development agreement to have public facilities on the site. Mr. Taraday it has not been fully evaluated whether a nonprofit that owned a portion of the site and operated affordable housing on the site would be exempt or subject to property tax. If the nonprofit -owned portion was subject to property tax, then TIF would still potentially apply to that acreage. That is still being evaluated and something the City will need to be sure about before financing anything with TIF. COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO TALK ABOUT THE HIGHWAY 99 LANDMARK SITE AS AN OPPORTUNITY TO VET ITS ACQUISITION VERSUS A PLAN TO ACQUIRE IT. Councilmember Olson agreed the council needed to go through this public process and talk about all the possible opportunities because there is risk involved in a huge capital investment and a huge investment of time and staff effort. The City will need to figure out whether all the things being planned are worth all the other things. She was concerned there was already discussion about the City planning to buy the property. She agreed the six month window was pretty low risk, basically losing the interest opportunity on the $100,000 for six months and staff and consultant time. Her biggest concern was just assuming the council will make this happen because it may not be worth the capital investment, the risk and the time when all is said and done and that will not be known until there is a plan for the site. Her pie in the sky vision is to have arena sports and partner with the Boys & Girls Club and the City where there is nighttime and weekend use by the community like at the Edmonds Waterfront Center. Arena sports is a great revenue generator, there is a need for an indoor sports arena in south Snohomish County, and it is a great location close to major arterials. There is great potential and she was excited about looking into it, but the council needs to know about opportunities on the site before they know if it is worth pursuing. She Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 27, 2023 Page 20 Packet Pg. 520 10.5.b was concerned with setting the community up for disappointment if after vetting, it is not the best use of the City's time, money and effort. Council President Tibbott asked if that language changed the option agreement, noting it seemed like semantics. Ms. Feser asked if Councilmember Olson wanted to change components of the option to purchase. Councilmember Olson said she did not see anything in the option agreement that said otherwise, it is not binding, and either party can walk away after six months. Her concern was related to what she heard at the media launch announcement as well as conversations in the media and comment threads. Councilmember Chen thanked the three directors for their efforts and the time they have devoted to this project. He lives in that area and was very excited about the possibility, but wanted to emphasize City government was not in the business of buying, selling, and flipping land. Councilmember Olson raised a point of order, requesting councilmembers speak to the motion. Mayor Nelson ruled point taken. Councilmember Nand commented the motion was putting the cart in front of the horse and it seemed like a more appropriate process to pursue through the steering committee that would be chaired by the council president. At that point it would be appropriate if Councilmember Olson or other councilmember wanted to go through a public process to determine whether to acquire the property or not. She preferred to execute the option agreement tonight or as soon as possible to protect and preserve this incredible opportunity for the community. She did not support the motion. Councilmember Chen said he did not support the motion. Councilmember Teitzel commented the motion was well intended, however, the option agreement as written allows flexibility to vet the purchase without risk. The option agreement accomplishes what the motion proposes so he will vote against the motion.. Councilmember Olson commented the motion may have been misunderstood; her thought was for the council to have a meeting of the minds and agreement that the council should be careful about how they speak about the purchase and be sensitive to the community's expectations if the purchase is discussed as a plan versus a vetting process. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (1-5), COUNCILMEMBER OLSON VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS TEITZEL, CHEN, BUCKSHNIS, OLSON AND NAND AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT VOTING NO. Councilmember Chen commented the City is not in the real estate business. This area of the City needs a lot of improvements, but the City needs to determine what the community needs before purchasing 10 acres of land. The area needs a police substation and community center. The City needs to do the necessary outreach and buy land that fits the needs, not just buy 10 acres and try to flip the land. COUNCILMEMBER CHEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO REJECT THE PURCHASE OPTION AGREEMENT WHILE WE DO FURTHER EXPLORATION. Councilmember Chen reiterated the City needs to understand the community's needs first and based on those needs, determine how much land is needed. This is not the only property on Highway 99; there are other properties for sale on Highway 99, in Five Corners, etc. He noted $37 million is significantly higher than the assessed value and he agreed council needed to look at the appraisal. It will take the taxpayers a Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 27, 2023 Page 21 Packet Pg. 521 10.5.b long time to pay off $37 million and based on the 75/25% assignment, he feared the City may end up in a big hole. Mayor Nelson commented there is a lot of rushing to judgment, noting it is an 18 month process. Councilmember Nand spoke against the motion, stating it is putting the cart in front of the horse. She did not support devoting any staff resources or engaging the community on potential uses for the property without an option agreement to protect the City's right to purchase. It would be cruel and foolhardy to get the Highway 99 community's hopes up that they could have a community center and other wonderful uses without the protection of an option agreement and have a developer outbid the City. The conversation has already started in the community and the public is excited. Their enthusiasm, ideas and engagement needs to be respected by the City dotting it's I's and crossing it's T's via having an option agreement in place before beginning to discuss potential uses of the property. Councilmember Buckshnis expressed concern with how this was rolled out, noting it was an ethics issue but the City does not have a good code of conduct. The council should have held an executive session to talk about the appraisal and look at the numbers so everyone is informed instead of just running on blind faith. A lot of people are excited, it is a great concept but it's like throwing 50 million snowballs at once. This was not in the CIP/CFP, a huge consideration that was troublesome to her. At one point in time there was discussion about 3 acres and now suddenly it was 10 acres and the cost was $37 million which was a lot of money. She has seen TIFs fail terribly and developers make a lot of money because of insufficient code. There is hope and she will support the option even though she did not like how it was rolled out. She hoped to have an executive session to talk about this freely and not be blindsided regarding what's going on. She did not support the motion. Councilmember Olson said what got her attention tonight is the 75% for public use versus commercial; she did not see how TIF would work in that scenario. Second, the property is right at the border of the City and making a $37 million investment there means the City will not have money for other public uses. She recalled comments from residents saying this site on the City's border is not the best place for a police station or even a community center unless it is shared with Shoreline. She expressed a preference to wait a week to make a decision. With the 75%/25% split, she did not see how the council could ultimately move forward with the purchase. She did not want to damage the relationship with the landowner, but that part of the deal makes it unlikely funds would be available to make investments near 220' or 228' that would serve more of the Edmonds corridor. Mr. Tatum said TIF is not the 100% solution for purchasing this property. The greatest thing about the option is it provides 6 months of worry free/risk free time, followed by 12 months and during that time, the opportunity to work on partnerships, work with legislators, explore grant funding, etc. He knew the property would require a lot of funding sources; the 18-month timeframe allows exploration of a lot of options. He agreed it was possible at the end it may be that none of the funding options will work or maybe the public component is actually revenue generating depending on how it is structured. There is a lot of study to be done to reach a workable project. There is a lot of uncertainty but the timeline provides an opportunity for exploration. Ms. McLaughlin said Councilmember Olson's point about the 75%/25% split in the revenue projection is a valid factor that needs to be considered in the initial TIF analysis to determine if the TIF tool will work. That analysis will be complete before the conclusion of the six month risk free period. The TIF tool would be better used for infrastructure and not property acquisition. A multitude of finance options need to be considered and the revenue projections need to be considered based on the 75%/25% split. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 27, 2023 Page 22 Packet Pg. 522 10.5.b UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (2-4), COUNCILMEMBERS CHEN AND OLSON VOTING YES; COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT AND COUNCILMEMBERS TEITZEL, BUCKSHNIS, AND NAND VOTING NO. A MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS AND SECONDED, TO TABLE UNTIL THE COUNCIL HOLDS AN EXECUTIVE SESSION TO FINALLY VET THIS WHICH SHOULD HAVE DONE AT VERY BEGINNING OF TIME. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (3-3), COUNCILMEMBERS CHEN, BUCKSHNIS AND OLSON VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS TEITZEL AND NAND AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT VOTING NO. Council President Tibbott advised an executive session would be held at the soonest possible date on this topic so the council could be well informed. He asked the building height for the site. Ms. McLaughlin answered it is the City's most generous building height, 75 feet. Council President Tibbott commented that would allow commercial space with approximately 6 stories above and on 2.5 acres, that could be a significant amount. Ms. McLaughlin agreed, especially if there was a publicly funded shared parking facility. Council President Tibbott commented housing on 25% of the site would be a fairly significant income generator. He asked when the $1 million in earnest money was due. Ms. Feser answered it was when the purchase and sale agreement was executed. Mr. Taraday answered it was due when the option was exercised; there was an 18-month option period, the first 6 of which was the preview and at the end of 18 months at the end of 2024, the City would exercise the option or not. Exercising the option means the City was in a binding purchase and sale agreement where the City puts down $1 million in earnest money followed by six months to close. He clarified while theoretically there was no deadline by which the council needed to act on the option agreement, the 18 months would not keep extending. The clock has already started essentially; the council can act tonight or in two or four weeks in the future, but that reduces the due diligence period, it does not get pushed out. COUNCILMEMBER NAND MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT, TO AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE OPTION AGREEMENT BETWEEN EASTERN INVESTMENT CORPORATION AND SOUTHEAST 888 INVESTMENT LLC WITH THE ANTICIPATION THAT WE WILL GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION AND THE COUNCIL PRESIDENT WILL HEAD UP A STEERING COMMITTEE WITH A COUNCILMEMBER TO BEGIN A ROBUST PUBLIC PROCESS. Councilmember Olson asked if the reason to proceed before holding an executive would be because waiting for the executive session would reduce the due diligence period. Mr. Taraday explained the option agreement states the option needs to be exercised by December 31, 2024. That date is not likely to change. Regardless of when the city council decides to act on the option agreement, the December 31, 2024 deadline will probably not change. Councilmember Olson asked if the start of the six month window could change. Mr. Taraday answered it was his understanding that could change. To set expectations regarding the executive session, he clarified the only topic that could be discussed in executive session would be the relationship between the option price and the appraised value; everything else would need to be discussed in public so it would be a very short executive session. Councilmember Olson said she will vote no on the motion since it has already been agreed to hold an executive session. Mr. Taraday pointed out since this is a regular meeting, an executive session could be held tonight. Councilmember Nand commented it is incredibly benevolent of the property owner to have such a strong desire that the property be used for the good of the community. Now that everything is public, this is an Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 27, 2023 Page 23 Packet Pg. 523 10.5.b incredible opportunity for the City and she wanted to ensure the City's bargaining position was protected while what would occasionally be thorny public discussions occurred related to acquisition of the property, how it would be financed, whether it was a good deal, etc. Under no circumstance did she want the property owner to be spooked by discussions that occur at the dais or in executive session. Transactionally the council needs to protect its bargaining position and options before processing questions related to funding, whether to split up the property, etc. The process needs to come later and she encouraged councilmembers not to put the cart in front of the horse. The council needs to guarantee this opportunity will not go away based on the whim of the property owner by executing this option agreement. She agreed with having an executive session to very narrowly discuss the difference between the appraised value and the $37 million and having a robust public process. She looked forward to the council president's plans for the steering committee. Councilmember Chen was excited about the possibilities related to this potential acquisition, but he did not want to make a mistake by committing the City to $37 million before having a full understanding. He urged councilmembers not to put the cart in front of the horse, to hold the executive session first and then make a decision. Councilmember Teitzel asked if the council approves the option agreement tonight and then learns something in the executive session that causes severe concern, can the council unwind the vote. Mr. Taraday corrected his earlier statement; the effective date is a defined term in the agreement, July 1, 2023 so regardless of when the council acts, the six months start July 1, 2023. In response to Councilmember Teitzel's question, he read key language from the option agreement, "If the parties have not executed such an addendum, for any reason, within ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY (180) days of the Effective Date, Optionor shall return the entire Option Payment to Optionee and this Agreement shall terminate." Council President Tibbott called for a 10 minute executive session. Mr. Taraday advised the executive session would be pursuant to RCW 42.30.110(1)(b), To consider the selection of a site or the acquisition of real estate by lease or purchase when public knowledge regarding such consideration would cause a likelihood of increased price. COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NAND, TO EXTEND TO 10:30. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Executive Session At 9:51 p.m., the city council convened in executive session for approximately 10 minutes pursuant to RCW 42.30.110(1)(b), to consider the selection of a site or the acquisition of real estate by lease or purchase when public knowledge regarding such consideration would cause a likelihood of increased price. The executive session concluded at 10:00 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 10:01 p.m. Councilmember Nand restated the motion: THAT COUNCIL AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN EASTERN INVESTMENT CORPORATION AND SOUTHEAST 888 INVESTMENT LLC AND THE CITY OF EDMONDS PURSUANT TO US ENGAGING IN AN EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS THE NARROW TOPIC OF THE APPRAISED PRICE AND THEN ALSO ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT THE COUNCIL PRESIDENT AND THE VARIOUS DIRECTORS WOULD ENGAGE IN A ROBUST PUBLIC PROCESS OVER THE NEXT SIX MONTHS RELATED TO USAGE OF THE PROPERTY. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (3-1-2), COUNCILMEMBERS TEITZEL AND NAND AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBER OLSON VOTING NO; AND COUNCILMEMBERS CHEN AND BUCKSHNIS ABSTAINING. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 27, 2023 Page 24 Packet Pg. 524