2024-06-25 Council Minutes
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 25, 2024
Page 1
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MEETING
APPROVED MINUTES
June 25, 2024
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Mike Rosen, Mayor
Vivian Olson, Council President
Chris Eck, Councilmember
Will Chen, Councilmember
Neil Tibbott, Councilmember
Michelle Dotsch, Councilmember
Susan Paine, Councilmember
Jenna Nand, Councilmember
STAFF PRESENT
Rod Sniffen, Assistant Police Chief
Ross Hahn, WWTP Manager
Rob English, City Engineer
Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
Scott Passey, City Clerk
Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator
1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE
The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 6:59 pm by Mayor Rosen in the Council
Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually. The meeting was opened with the flag salute.
2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Councilmember Nand read the City Council Land Acknowledge Statement: “We acknowledge the original
inhabitants of this place, the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and their successors the Tulalip Tribes, who
since time immemorial have hunted, fished, gathered, and taken care of these lands. We respect their
sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and we honor their sacred spiritual connection with the land
and water.”
3. ROLL CALL
City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present.
4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON, TO
APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Brian Goodnight, Edmonds, said in 2008 Ann Bullis was the plans examiner for the City for multifamily.
The City’s code says a 4:12 roof on multifamily needs a continuous 4:12 roofline, but a building over 24’
wide, which most are, the roofline goes up, down, up and down so there are buildings with drains in the
middle of the roof which he doubted existed on anyone’s single family roof. Ms. Bullis would compromise
and have a 4:12 roof around the edges so it looks like a 4:12 and a giant commercial grade flat roof with
the drains in the right places which is not a problem because most of the multifamily built with continuous
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 25, 2024
Page 2
roofs with drains in the middle all have problems because there’s no code-approved assembly to make that
work. It becomes a consumer problem, requiring buildings to be reroofed early. He built the building kitty-
corner from the public safety building that has a flat roof but isn’t visible from below. He recommended
the City amend the code, noting there are few multifamily properties remaining and he is done building,
but for any consumers in the future who may buy a condo and have a drain in the middle of their building
that has to drain somewhere, he recommended the code be amended.
Chris Gardner, Edmonds, a resident on 220th, referred to a letter he submitted to Transportation Engineer
Bertrand Hauss and copied Councilmember Chen regarding the City’s traffic calming program with an
April 30 submission date. Although their submission was late, he and eight other residents on 220th
submitted a traffic calming request. HB 2384, passed by the legislature in March, enables certain
municipalities to incorporate speed cameras on streets considered at risk. He and the eight other residents
submitted a request for speed cameras. He lives on the hill and Westgate Elementary is approximately a
block from their house where school zone cameras were implemented within the last year. The school zone
cameras help during school hours but speeding and the need for traffic calming occurs during non-school
hours. Their other concerns include that 220th is posted as no commercial vehicles and local deliveries only,
but semis, box trucks, dump trucks, etc. use the street throughout the day and there is no police enforcement.
Ken Reidy, Edmonds, said for years he has pointed out the city council has been provided false,
misleading, inaccurate or incomplete information. An email from Councilmember Tibbott to two fellow
councilmembers dated November 19, 2023 stated, “I can affirm that Will and I were stonewalled and given
false or misleading information when we asked for it.” He encouraged the council not to vote on anything
tonight under the influence of false, misleading, inaccurate or incomplete information related to both red
light camera business items. With regard to the city attorney’s annual report, he focused on executive
session, relaying on February 28, 2024, the planning board convened in executive session to discuss
pending or potential litigation, something he had never seen before. He requested the council ask the city
attorney how that works, whether the planning board can convene their own executive session to discuss
pending or potential litigation.
Mr. Reidy continued, on June 27, 2023, then-Council President Tibbott stated shortly before 10 pm that he
wanted to call for an executive session for 10 minutes. It was his understanding for council to go into
executive session during a council meeting, a councilmember must make a motion, the motion must be
seconded and the motion is debatable; none of that happened. Council did not vote to conduct an executive
session or amend its meeting agenda. Instead the presiding officer, former Mayor Nelson simply stated very
well then, we will adjourn. Before he could finish speaking City Attorney Jeff Taraday interrupted and
declared the executive session was 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. Mr. Taraday is not the presiding officer of the governing body and he questioned what gave him the
authority to make this public announcement. Neither the former mayor nor Mr. Taraday disclosed the time
the executive session would be concluded. He questioned the likelihood of increased price in this situation
when the purchase price of $37 million, all cash at closing, had been known for days and as such the RCW
regarding executive session did not apply to that acquisition of real estate. He requested the council ask the
city attorney whose duty it is to see that all laws and ordinances are faithfully enforced and what must
happen when that duty is not met.
6. RECEIVED FOR FILING
1. CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FOR FILING
2. WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS
3. WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS REGARDING ADU CODE AMENDMENTS
4. MAY 2024 MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 25, 2024
Page 3
5. OPTION FOR CONTRACT FOR FIRE/EMS SERVICE WITH SOUTH COUNTY FIRE
REGIONAL FIRE AUTHORITY (RFA)
6. OUTSIDE BOARDS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS
7. PLANNING BOARD QUARTERLY UPDATE
7. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO
APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items
approved are as follows:
1. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES JUNE 4, 2024
2. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JUNE 4, 2024
3. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JUNE 11, 2024
4. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS AND WIRE PAYMENTS
5. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL AND BENEFIT CHECKS, DIRECT DEPOSIT AND WIRE
PAYMENTS
6. REAPPOINT DAVID BREWSTER FOR POSITION #3 TO THE EDMONDS PUBLIC
FACILITIES DISTRICT BOARD EPFD
7. ARLINGTON AIRPORT USE AGREEMENT
8. COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE SECTION 1 & 2 AUTHORITY AND COUNCIL
ORGANIZATION
9. APPROVAL OF SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH WSP FOR CONSTRUCTION
MANAGEMENT SERVICES ON THE 76TH AVE OVERLAY PROJECT
10. APPROVAL OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR PERRINVILLE
FLOW REDUCTION STUDY UPDATE
11. APPROVAL OF PERRINVILLE FLOW REDUCTION STUDY UPDATE - INTERLOCAL
AGREEMENT (ILA) BETWEEN THE CITIES OF EDMONDS AND LYNNWOOD
12. RESOLUTION BUDGET CALENDAR
13. CREATIVE DIST. GATEWAY ART RFQ
8. COUNCIL BUSINESS
1. PRESENTATION OF 7317 LAKE BALLINGER WAY PROPERTY PURCHASE
City Engineer Rob English reviewed:
• Vicinity Map
• Site Plan
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 25, 2024
Page 4
• Property Details
o 0.55 acre parcel
o Vacant single family residential property
o Partially demolished home (original size 2,413 sf; built in 1944)
o Lies within Lake Ballinger floodplain
o Existing nonfunctional boat dock
o Wetland on site
o Change from the presentation to the Finance Committee: Stormwater pipe is located on the
adjacent property
• Reports and Appraisal
o Completed Reports
Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment
Hazardous Building Materials Survey
Wetland Delineation
Inadvertent Discovery Plan
Baseline Inventory
Appraisal (Initial $480k Value)
Appraisal Review (Revised Value $520K)
• Stewardship Plan
o Required by Department of Ecology
o Current Conditions
o Land Management Goals & Objectives
Short-term:
- Demolish structures
- Remove impervious surfaces
- Restore to green space.
Long-term:
- Stormwater Management
- Restoration & Maintenance
• Water Quality Deed of Right
o Required by Department of Ecology (DOE)
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 25, 2024
Page 5
o City Requirements
Protect and maintain property
Provides access to DOE for inspections
Comply with specific prohibitions (Section 2)
Comply with permitted uses and activities (Section 3)
• Benefits
o Improve water quality in Lake Ballinger and downstream creeks
Remove existing structure and pollution generating surfaces from site
Restore natural floodplain area
Improve condition of wetland and buffer
Opportunity for stormwater treatment facility for runoff from SR-104
• Purchase & Sale Agreement
o Purchase & Sale Agreement with purchase price of $520,000
$10,000 Escrow
Initiate
- 30-day title review
- 75-day inspection period
Seller Disclosure Statement
City Council resolution approving purchase of property (future City Council meeting)
• Funding
o Acquisition
$500k Grant secured from Department of Ecology in 2022
- Funding Agreement approved by city council (April 18, 2023)
Local match Stormwater Utility Funds
o Land Management Goals & Objectives
Stormwater Utility funds
Future grants
Community engagement
• Staff recommendation
o Authorize staff to execute Purchase & Sale Agreement with purchase price of $520,000.
COUNCILMEMBER NAND MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON, TO
AUTHORIZE STAFF TO EXECUTE THE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT ON THIS
PROPERTY.
Councilmember Nand complimented parks & recreation and public works staff for their work in acquiring
this property and funding the purchase via a grant. She was hopeful there could be some sort of community
engagement in the future. She knew the grant was targeted toward stormwater treatment, therefore the
ability to put impervious surface on the site will be limited. However, there is very limited access to the
lake for recreational purposes on the Edmonds side of the lake. Mountlake Terrace bears the brunt with
their much more developed public access point and there is no public access on the south side of the lake
for kayakers, etc. There are plenty of private docks, but she was interested in exploring possibilities to
increase public access and community engagement through this property which would be very beneficial
for southeast Edmonds.
Councilmember Eck expressed support for the motion, commenting the opportunity to salvage this property
for these purposes is rare in this area.
Mr. English explained the Water Quality Deed in the packet limits a boat launch or that type of use as a
future option. The site is to be used as green space and/or water quality type features. He cautioned the deed
locks the City into maintaining the site as green space.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 25, 2024
Page 6
Council President Olson commented the idea of accessing Lake Ballinger from the Edmonds side is a great
idea and everyone should keep their eyes open for those opportunities. With this property being in the flood
plain, this is a great opportunity to use it for stormwater. She applauded staff for pursuing this grant as a
source for stormwater and preserving the site as open space. She asked whether casual things like picnicking
could happen on the site. Mr. English said that could be pursued with the Department of Ecology, but he
could not confirm that at this time. He reiterated the Water Quality Deed limits uses to maintenance of the
site and accessing the site for that reason. Council President Olson said she was supportive of the motion
assuming nothing else could be done with the site as open space is worth preserving and obviously it is not
a great place to build a house.
Councilmember Nand clarified she was perfectly fine with potentially no future engagement on the site. It
is clear it has become a nuisance property and the City’s purchase and demolition is likely a great relief to
the neighborhood. If there is any possibly for public engagement or access in the future to the south side of
the lake, that would be very beneficial to southeast Edmonds due to the paucity of park land and access to
the lake on the Edmonds side and Mountlake Terrace does a much better job providing access. If that is not
possible on this property, there may be future opportunities.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
2. SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH HKA GLOBAL, INC FOR THE CARBON
RECOVERY PROJECT
WWTP Manager Ross Hahn requested approval of the supplemental agreement with HKA Global. Due to
the time it is taking to complete the carbon recovery project, the supplemental agreement is needed to
continue funding HKA’s services as they pertain to the carbon recovery project. This additional funding is
expected to retain HKA’s services until the end of the project. HKA’s scope of services includes project
management, contract administration, review of contractor change requests, maintaining project
documentation, etc. HKA has proven to be critical in the path forward with this project.
Mayor Rosen advised staff’s recommendation is to forward this item to the consent agenda for approval at
the next city council meeting.
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON, TO
APPROVE THE SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH HKA GLOBAL, INC. FOR THE
CARBON RECOVERY PROJECT PER THE DETAILS OUTLINED AND NOT PUT IT ON THE
CONSENT AGENDA.
Councilmember Paine commented HKA has been doing great work for the City. Their work is highly
technical and they are the right group for this project.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
3. ORDINANCE AMENDING ECC 8.10 TO INCLUDE STOPLIGHT INTERSECTION
CAMERAS
Council President Olson commented this is a familiar topic that has been on the council agenda a few times,
the last time was to obtain more information which in included in the packet.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PAINE, TO
APPROVE THE ORDINANCE IN THE PACKET.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 25, 2024
Page 7
Council President Olson commented the council has already had a lot of conversation about this, which she
will not belabor by reiterating those points tonight. This system is in use in other cities around Edmonds.
In response to comments about analyzing the costs to show that there would be a net positive, there is
enough evidence from other cities that have red light cameras in use that that is not a concern. She hoped
the City would circle back after a year of use to look at the data. This is a five year commitment to any
intersection the council chose to move forward with. The council will make a decision tonight regarding
whether to have red light cameras in the City in general and if so, at which intersections.
COUNCILMEMBER DOTSCH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NAND, TO
POSTPONE THIS ITEM AND THE FOLLOWING AGENDA ITEM.
Councilmember Dotsch relayed her intent was to postpone until after the City’s Safety Action Plan has
been completed and published. The PPW Committee learned more about the Safety Action Plan last week;
the City partnered with ten other agencies including Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) on a $2.87
million grant application. The City will work closely with PSRC to support the goal of reducing fatalities
and series injuries on roadways in the Puget Sound region. In late 2023, the City of Edmonds secured a
$300,000 federal grant through the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Safe Streets and Roads for All
(SS4A) Grant Program. This program is focused on the development of local roadway safety action plans
by developing well-defined strategies to prevent roadway fatalities and serious injuries. It will also identify
and prioritize future projects to help address roadway safety issues. The scope of work will include data
collection, speed studies, accident history and analysis of the City's transportation network, review and
update of existing policies, develop a Vision Zero Policy, identify and prioritize transportation projects to
improve safety and document findings in a Comprehensive Safety Action Plan.
Councilmember Dotsch continued, according to the scope of work in the packet, the data collection work
on the speed study and crash analysis will begin this fall and will provide a holistic package that includes
intersections, pedestrian, bicycle and accident data to inform the council and the community as to the best
and most impactful safety measures and counter measures to improve traffic safety in Edmonds. She urged
the council to consider her motion as a better process and not rush a decision tonight to target only a narrow
focus and allow the Safety Action Plan to inform a more complete street and safety plan that is much more
comprehensive and objective for all.
Councilmember Paine said she could not support the motion to wait a year. She requested information from
staff regarding traffic incidents related to vehicle versus vehicle, vehicle versus pedestrian, and vehicle
versus bicycle. There were 243 incidents citywide in the first 6 months of the year which is on a path for
500 incidents this year. On Highway 99, SR 104 and local roads; 15 people have been injured in accidents
related to driver inattention. The safety of the community is paramount. Her daughter was nearly hit in a
crosswalk on 5th Avenue South and was hit and run 4 years ago crossing 5th Avenue South. Accidents are
happening at a rate that is unacceptable to the community. She looked forward to the Safety Action Plan
which will provide more dimension. Packet page 97 includes data on statewide statistics for traffic safety
2013-2023. Accidents in years 2021, 2022, and 2023 are accelerating. There are reports in local and regional
newspapers; the Seattle Times reported today that Seattle is #2 in the nation in pedestrian deaths.
Councilmember Nand expressed appreciation to Councilmember Dotsch for bringing this forward. This
topic has generated a lot of controversy in the community because the use of cameras creates a strong
perception, especially due to the unfortunate way it was proposed in 2023 as a budget item rather than a
traffic safety item, that cameras are used by the government for revenue generation instead of public safety.
As she has stated previously, a majority of the cameras are targeted to the lower income and multi-ethnic
parts of the community along Highway 99. She would be more comfortable supporting cameras in the future
if the red light camera program were brought forward in a holistic package. She supported the school zone
cameras due to the strong push from the community regarding those specific locations. A holistic package
would inform annexed areas that are historically underserved that the City is not looking to their
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 25, 2024
Page 8
neighborhood to extract revenue to support City operations that tend to benefit the higher income and
wealthier neighborhoods and that traffic cameras are one tool in a package of traffic calming and safety
measures in an effort to ameliorate some of the disparities between Olympic View Drive and the Edmonds
Bowl and previously annexed areas. That would be a more nuanced and equitable way to approach placing
up to nine cameras in the traditionally underserved and disregarded parts of the City that were previously
annexed.
Councilmember Nand continued, due to the millions of dollars in excess revenue this program is expected
to generate and where those funds traditionally flow in the City, there is a strong perception that the cameras
are being implemented to address the City’s budget woes. If this were adopted in the context of a Safety
Action Plan, areas of the community that have been skeptical and traditionally underserved can be informed
that the cameras are part of a package with other traffic calming options such as speed bump tables and
other ways to calm traffic that are less punitive and less extractive and designed to serve these communities
and make them safer for pedestrians, bicyclists, and local commuters. She would feel far more comfortable
if the red light cameras were brought forward in that context.
Councilmember Eck said she did not support motion. She has been doing a lot of thinking about this, she
goes through 220th & Highway 99 and SR-104 & 100th very frequently living in Westgate and going to the
freeway during her commute. There are many commuters from all over Edmonds and the region that travel
SR-104 and Highway 99. This is not targeting the residents in those areas because so many people travel
both those routes to do business, shop, commute, etc. The infractions she has seen are often from a
privileged standpoint where people think rules do not apply to them. There is a reason more people do not
walk or ride bikes in Edmonds. She lives not far from 220th on a shortcut to PCC where speed is a real issue.
She did not think the City could wait with the numbers and risks that the data shows and with the City
encouraging people to leave their cars behind and get around in other ways. She will not approve any less
than two cameras tonight and will actually approve up to four.
Councilmember Dotsch said she can appreciate everyone’s experiences; she has had experiences as well. It
is important to remain objective especially when it comes to safety. The data collection relates to accidents
at intersections, but this is about red light cameras, not all accidents at intersections. The 2023 data attributed
two accidents to red light runners at 220th & Highway 99 and two in Westgate at 100th & SR-104, a total of
four accidents out of hundreds. This is a very narrowly focused program. Verra Mobility’s data is strictly
cars running red lights, it is not about bikes or pedestrian. There are project in the works to add a bike lane
and a dedicated walkway the entire length of Highway 99 which includes 220th. There is a project for bike
lanes at 100th & SR-104 that has not been totally completed. In the context of safety for the entire
community, rather than targeting the most used intersections and are the two ways in/out of Edmonds other
than 196th, the cameras are more about volume than accident data which was why she would not support
the main motion.
Councilmember Chen said he cannot support motion. He lives near Highway 99 and his business is on
Highway 99 and he drives Highway 99 on a daily basis and sees people rushing through red lights and
creating very scary scenes. With light rail coming on line August 30, he anticipated there would be more
traffic funneling through the area. He thanked Councilmember Paine for her request for the data which
provides concrete support and as well as the data provided by police department and other research that is
included in the packet. He concluded the evidence is there, the need is there, and this is a good tool to
implement at two intersections to at least give it a try to see how the tool works and reassess it in a year.
Councilmember Nand explained if the City signs this contract with Verra Mobility, it is committing to
cameras at the approved intersections for the next five years, Verra Mobility would not agree to installing
them for a year and allowing the City to collect accident data to see whether the cameras actually change
driver behavior and lead to safer roads. Lynnwood extensively uses red light cameras and some would say
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 25, 2024
Page 9
uses them as part of their strategy for funding city government. However, Shoreline which has a larger
population than Edmonds and recently went through a 50,000 unit upzone in response to light rail has zero
automated traffic safety cameras. Their city leaders have said the reason they decided not to pursue red light
cameras is they do not want to create a perception that they are spying or playing gotcha games with their
constituents. Edmonds has always been a very friendly town with a small business community that relies
on the goodwill of tourists and people who come to Edmonds to support small business. If people start
receiving $130 tickets, she was concerned that perception would change.
Councilmember Tibbott raised a point of order, stating the motion is related to postponing and he would
like to hear Councilmember Nand’s reasons for supporting postponement. Her comments seem to be
regarding the main motion which the council is not discussing at this time.
Councilmember Nand commented this is the third or fourth meeting in which she has received a point of
order from Councilmember Tibbott when making a comment supporting a position that he may not support.
Her comments were not of any greater length or less topical than her fellow councilmembers’ comments.
She asked about the length of the comment she made before she was interrupted by Councilmember Tibbott.
City Clerk Scott Passey said it is a judgment call by the chair whether a comment is germane to the
postponement or if it speaking against the ordinance.
Councilmember Nand asked what recourse she had related to code of conduct if she felt she was being
excessively interrupted with points of order to silence her. Mr. Passey answered she could appeal to the
chair, but he did not have a good answer related to a code of conduct claim.
Councilmember Nand requested this be addressed at some point with amendments to the code of conduct
which are expected to come forward this year as she felt she was being excessively interrupted by certain
councilmembers and unfairly targeted. Mayor Rosen responded her comment was noted. Councilmember
Nand said her train of thought was completely derailed and she would end her comment. Mayor Rosen
requested she speak to why she would encourage postponement.
Councilmember Paine explained her opposition to postponement was the 82 vehicle versus vehicle
collisions on Highway 99 from January 1 through yesterday and 25 on SR-104, a total of 109, half the
number of vehicle versus vehicle collisions. On Highway 99 there were five vehicle versus pedestrian
accidents and one on SR-104, a total of six out of fifteen.
Councilmember Dotsch recalled when Police Chief Bennett presented the numbers regarding accidents to
council, she asked Chief Bennett if they were specific to red light runners and she said they were not. She
emphasized this is only red light camera running and accidents caused by that action. There are a lot of
reasons for accidents at intersections or on the way to the intersection, but that is not what this is about. It
is a very small number of the total accidents in the City and the Safety Action Plan is the best way to take
a comprehensive, holistic approach.
MOTION FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS TIBBOTT, DOTSCH AND NAND VOTING YES.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER CHEN, TO
AMEND TO FILL IN THE BLANKS IN THE ORDINANCE, E.1 WITH 220TH & HIGHWAY 99,
AND E.2 AS 100TH & HIGHWAY 104.
Council President Olson commented an argument can definitely be made for adding more intersections a
lot of data suggests that might be helpful, but because this is a 5-year commitment, there is value to
implementing two intersections and revisiting it after a year of implementation to see the impact. Just as
the police provided accident data for this year, that data could be used to compare whether the cameras
made a positive impact and whether accidents rates have decreased at intersections where red light cameras
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 25, 2024
Page 10
were installed as well as data where red light cameras were not installed. That would be a prudent and
cautious way to proceed. She acknowledged it was anticipated this would be revenue positive. In her
assessment of which intersections would be most prudent, she listened to what was said and wanted to
ensure with a smaller number of cameras they were not in a single neighborhood so there would be
geographic diversity and provide an opportunity to see the positive impact. The smaller number of cameras
also supports the idea asserted by Councilmember Dotsch, in a year when the council reviews the data, the
Safety Action Plan will also be complete and could be considered in tandem when considering any future
intersections.
Councilmember Paine said she had no objection to those two intersections. If the council wanted to add
two more intersections for a total of four, she asked how that amendment should be made. City Attorney
Jeff Taraday responded the ordinance before the council could be amended before it is ultimately adopted
by adding to the two intersections in the current motion. Councilmember Paine asked if that could be done
tonight. Mr. Taraday answered yes, that was an option for the council.
Councilmember Paine continued, there are traffic safety issues in the City. The Safety Action Plan will be
completed in the future, but work needs to be done now. These intersections are key to a lot of people’s
safety and there are other intersections such as 220th & 76th where people regularly run the red light. She
was happy to start with two and later tonight consider adding two additional intersections.
Councilmember Dotsch recalled in the information provided when this originally came forward about how
to implement these programs, one of big pieces was to have a baseline intersection without a red light
camera to provide a comparison. It is easy to say once red light cameras are installed that infractions
occurred, but without a baseline intersection, there is no way to determine whether the same thing happens
at other intersections. She asked whether adding a baseline intersection was an option.
Council President Olson raised a point of clarification, requesting Councilmember Dotsch restate her
question.
Councilmember Dotsch said part of this is how the City defines success. For example, if there are four
accidents caused by red light camera runners, what is the data point for success, two accidents, zero
accidents? She asked if there was a way to reference that in areas that do not have cameras. She asked if
there was the ability to do a baseline at an intersection without a camera.
Assistant Chief Sniffen responded an intersection could be used as a baseline, but there are so many
variables at different intersections, it would be difficult to have one as a baseline to see if accident rates
increased or decreased. The intent is to watch the metrics and any reduction in accidents or injuries will be
a success. As the intersections of 220th & Highway 99 and 100th & SR-104 are high crash data intersections,
good success was expected. However, the intersections of 220th & 8th or 220th & 9th could not be used as a
baseline for how the well the camera at 220th & Highway 99 is doing.
Councilmember Dotsch asked if there could be another camera on Highway 99 that records but doesn’t
issue tickets. Assistant Chief Sniffen said that would be something brand new, installing a camera that
records without issuing citations. He would have to look into that. The only way he could see that happening
was for the council to approve a third intersection and establish business rules to not issue citations and
only record violations.
Councilmember Nand said the State Department of Transportation has cameras that are used purely for data
gathering that do not issue tickets, but she was unsure if they were through this vendor. It would be a
mistake for this council to place four or nine cameras in previously annexed areas. The more cameras the
City adds, the more revenue generation appears to be the primary goal and not actually public safety.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 25, 2024
Page 11
Council President Olson seemed to trying to consider her feedback by limiting cameras to two in the first
year and having them geographically distributed between SR-104 and Highway 99, but those are both
annexed areas. No cameras are proposed to be sited in the best resourced parts of town with the wealthier
population which she found very problematic. Now there is discussion about placing up to three cameras
on Highway 99 and only one on SR-104 which will essentially turn Highway 99 into a toll road to support
City government and therefore she could not support the amendment.
AMENDMENT CARRIED (5-2) COUNCILMEMBERS DOTSCH AND NAND VOTING NO.
COUNCILMEMBER NAND MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DOTSCH, AMEND
THAT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING LANGUAGE:
“REVENUE RESTRICTIONS. ALL OF THE EXCESS REVENUE GENERATED BY THE
ADDITION OF AUTOMATED TRAFFIC SAFETY CAMERAS IN THE CITY OF EDMONDS
SHALL BE RESTRICTED WITHIN THE GENERAL FUND AND MAY ONLY BE USED FOR THE
PURPOSES OF TRAFFIC SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS AND TO FUND PUBLIC AMENITIES
WITHIN 0.5 GEOGRAPHIC MILE OF THE LOCATION OF ANY OPERATIONAL TRAFFIC
CAMERA.
Councilmember Nand relayed the council has been considering this since 2023 when it was first proposed
as an opportunity for the administration to plug a $3.5 million hole in the proposed 2024 budget. Since then
she has had a great deal of skepticism about the idea of using red light cameras or any sort of automated
traffic safety cameras for the purpose of revenue generation. However, if the council is determined to
proceed with this proposal, she wanted to ensure the excess revenue which the school zone cameras
generated gross revenue of $1.5 million and the City has an obligation to pay $30,000/month to Verra
Mobility for each traffic camera. With each camera added, the excess revenue generated will increase
exponentially. The City is experiencing budget problems brought on council’s excessive spending during
2023 and under the previous administration in general, however, essentially creating toll roads within the
City to support government operations isn’t the right response.
Councilmember Nand continued, if the council decides to implement traffic safety cameras at what are
targeted as the most dangerous intersections in the City, she wanted to ensure the excess revenue of $3.7
million from nine cameras, eight of which would be on Highway 99, was reinvested into annexed areas that
did not benefit from urban planning and traffic safety investments prior to annexation to bring them up to
par with areas of town that are better resourced and have historically received more attention from City
planning and government. Her hope was by reinvesting millions in revenue into traffic safety improvements
and public amenities to improve public safety in general such as funding a police substation on Highway
99, the need for the cameras could eventually be ameliorated through traffic safety improvements and they
could be decommissioned at the end of the contract.
Councilmember Tibbott said he would not support the amendment for two reasons although he appreciated
the sentiment behind it. State law already provides for the use of revenue for public safety. Implementing
the proposed restriction for the intersections is premature and may prohibit using funds in areas such as the
east side of the City. There are good reasons the council would want to use all the revenues generated to
improve public safety in the most heavily traveled areas.
Councilmember Eck applauded the intent of Councilmember Nand’s amendment and agreed there were
areas of the City that have been historically underserved. She was unsure she agreed with the comment
about essentially turning Highway 99 into a toll road; in her view if a driver’s behavior was legal and
following the law, they had no reason to be concerned about receiving a ticket. If a driver is adhering to the
speed limit and obeying traffic lights, they should feel very free about traveling on Highway 99 or SR-104.
This is about following the law and although she generally did not prefer the stick approach over a carrot
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 25, 2024
Page 12
approach, this is worth testing this for a period of time and determining the best way to use the revenue the
cameras generate to do what Councilmember Nand suggested.
Councilmember Dotsch said targeting two intersections with the highest volume versus the highest accident
rate from red light runners was a confusing way to select intersections to address safety issues. If those two
intersections are most in need of assistance, dedicating funds to those areas would seem to make sense if
the ultimate intent is safety. She may not support a 0.5 mile focus, but if those were areas where more safety
was needed, it would make sense to use the revenue on projects in those areas. She supported the idea, but
not as stated. She could possibly support another version such using a percentage of the revenue.
Councilmember Nand pointed out in the state statute governing the use of red light cameras, one of the uses
described in subsection 2.13.B is the revenue be dedicated toward census tracks with low income housing.
The federal pedagogy regarding city planning says minority communities were unfairly targeted and
actually blighted when major highways were built through their communities. It seems odd these
communities are being told they were blighted when highways were built through their area of town because
they are lower income and segregated through redlining and now federal funding is being used to ameliorate
the blight that was created when the highways were built. There seems to be a strong impetus by the council
to ultimately deploy all nine of the cameras authorized to maximize revenue generation and instead of
reinvesting the revenue into the lower income areas that were blighted when highways were created, use it
to address issues in the General Fund.
Councilmember Nand continued, it is the council’s responsibility to manage the General Fund without
necessarily always going to its constituents, visitors, commuters and workers in the community and telling
them they have to provide more revenue and trust that the council will reinvest it appropriately. State law
allows the council to dedicate the revenue from traffic cameras toward the part of town with the lowest
income quartile. Because that is a defined mechanism within state law, she did not understand why there
was so much resistance to the idea of dedicating the revenue generated by Highway 99 and reinvesting it
into primarily the Highway 99 community to address some of the disparate impacts that that area has
experienced over decades. She expressed disappointment that there was so little support for this amendment
and for reinvesting in Highway 99.
Council President Olson clarified both intersections were identified as among the top three most dangerous
intersections in the information the council was provided.
Councilmember Chen said his focus is public safety which saves lives. If red light cameras can be used to
improve drivers’ behavior and in turn improve public safety, that was his focus. He supported the general
concept of improving crime and public safety on Highway 99 because the higher crime rate and traffic
issues in that area are well known. However, a ½ mile geographic restriction may hinder improvements the
City could make. For example, the ½ mile restriction might hinder the possibility of relocating the police
station to the center of town or Highway 99. For that reason, he did not support the amendment.
Councilmember Dotsch referred to comments about relocating the police station, relaying she did not
remember that as the main reason for installing red light cameras.
COUNCILMEMBER DOTSCH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NAND, TO
AMEND THE AMENDMENT TO 50% OF EXCESS REVENUE WITHIN 1 GEOGRAPHIC MILE
OF THE LOCATION OF ANY OPERATIONAL TRAFFIC CAMERA.
Councilmember Dotsch said she felt similarly about the revenue aspect versus safety. The data regarding
the number of cars that go through the intersection is used by Verra Mobility to determine the number of
citations that can be issued. She wanted to ensure red light cameras were not being used for any purpose
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 25, 2024
Page 13
other than safety and if certain areas of the City are targeted due to high traffic volumes, the revenue should
go back into those areas.
Councilmember Nand expressed support for the amendment. There have been plenty of times in recent
history when the City’s coffers were flush; revenues actually went up during the pandemic by over 10%
when the City received a lot of federal investment. When the City was experiencing a boon in its tax coffers,
there could have been a decision to reinvest in traffic safety improvements in previously annexed areas
along SR-104 and Highway 99, yet somehow Olympic View Drive just got its fourth traffic table speed
bump and radar signs. That is a well-resourced area of town which is very good at advocating for themselves
whenever disposable revenue becomes available. Without a dedicated mechanism to provide revenue to
less resourced parts of town which are not as well versed in advocating for themselves in seeking to
implement traffic safety program projects and lobby the council to invest in traffic safety and public safety
improvements in their area, she was worried parts of SR-104 and Highway 99 will not be the squeaky wheel
that gets the grease. If the City will be generating millions of dollars in excess revenue by placing red light
traffic cameras along Highway 99, she urged the council to commit to reinvesting at least part of that
revenue into public safety on the most dangerous intersections in the City.
Council President Olson commented there is a narrative that is not being shared about the actions of council
for the last six years. During that time, the council said yes to the Lake Ballinger open space, the Mee
property 100% expansion, the 84th Avenue sidewalk project, the gateway to Ballinger Park, and the change
out of benches. During that same time the council said no to doing anything with the Marina Beach
improvements even though that had reached the top of the list on the CIP/CFP and no to replacing the
broken/ cracked sidewalk on 7th next to the new park and instead prioritized the sidewalk on 84th. She did
not think it was accurate that the council she watched in 2-3 years before being elected to council or the
council she has served on has been unequal or unfair in spending. It is on everyone’s radar to look for
fairness and equity in capital investments going forward.
Council President Olson continued, through the budget process, to the extent there is any money to spend,
she anticipated the council would be very fair in how money is spent as has been done in the past six years.
She acknowledged when this is discussed, people often bring up Civic Park which was an expensive project,
but at this point that is a bill and of little value to the conversation because the council doesn’t have control
of that expenditure anymore. When that bond was paid off, she was confident this and future councils would
not build new parks in that same part of town because a lot of other areas need improvements. She was
hopeful the list she provided was helpful to show where significant and specific investments have been
made in lieu of investments in the bowl.
In response to Council President Olson’s comment, Councilmember Nand said there has been a history
with the previously annexed areas because for example when Highway 99 was annexed into Edmonds in
the 1960s, the standards for sidewalks, street widths, etc. were much lower than in areas of Edmonds that
were incorporated in 1891 and had benefited from city planners, traffic engineers, etc. for many decades.
This is why previously annexed areas have a miasma of neglect; there are no flower baskets, no benches,
no City owned recycling bins and trash cans along the sidewalks. If the proposed amendment were
approved, to fund public safety amenities within 1 mile, the City would be forced to dedicate at least 50%
of the revenue to public amenities that include public facilities, open space and landscaping elements in
traditionally underserved parts of the City where it appears nine cameras will eventually be sited. There
needs to be catchup between two disparate areas of town that were separated by redlining during the
segregation era and decades of neglect based on when areas were annexed and started to receive that level
of city planning and investment. If the vast majority of the revenue is generated by Highway 99 when nine
cameras are ultimately operational, she did not see anything wrong with dedicating at least a portion of that
revenue to address the disparate effects and daily living experience of people in that part of the community.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 25, 2024
Page 14
Councilmember Paine suggested if there was no objection from council, Mayor Rosen speak regarding
traffic safety cameras.
Mayor Rosen said throughout his campaign, meeting people in many environments and since being elected,
by far the most frequent request from the public, all age groups and family configurations and throughout
the community, is regarding public safety. Requests related to pedestrian safety falls into four categories,
1) can you make the sidewalks smoother, 2) can I get a sidewalk, 3) can you fix or give us a crosswalk, and
4) traffic safety and the way people drive and ignore traffic signals. He relayed his support for traffic safety
cameras, commenting even if the state did not tell cities how to spend the money, he would have
recommended to council that the money be restricted to pedestrian safety.
COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT CALLED THE QUESTION. COUNCILMEMBER PAINE
SECONDED. CALL FOR THE QUESTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT FAILED (2-5), COUNCILMEMBERS DOTSCH AND
NAND VOTING YES.
AMENDMENT FAILED (1-6), COUNCILMEMBER NAND VOTING YES.
COUNCILMEMBER NAND MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DOTSCH, THAT
THE TERM OF THE ENTIRE AUTOMATED TRAFFIC SAFETY CAMERA ORDINANCE BE
SUNSET AFTER FIVE YEARS, AFTER WHICH POINT THE AUTOMATED TRAFFIC SAFETY
CAMERA PROGRAM WILL BE DISCONTINUED SO WE CAN INDEPENDENTLY ANALYZE
WHETHER THE AUTOMATED TRAFFIC SAFETY CAMERAS MODIFIED DRIVER
BEHAVIOR AT THE AFFECTED INTERSECTIONS AND LED TO LESS COLLISIONS.
Councilmember Nand recalled with the encouragement of the community, the council adopted the school
zone camera program last year. Five school zone cameras were installed and the City is now beginning to
deal with the changes this is instituting in the community. Some community members have contacted the
City saying they received frivolous tickets. She was very concerned about rushing forward with this major
policy change and not having a baseline of data to see whether red light cameras alter driver behavior in
the way that is intended. Some community members have provided independent research from national
NGOs in which they claim implementation of red light cameras leads to less safe driver conduct because
drivers are more likely to slam on their brakes to avoid red light camera tickets which causes more rearend
collisions.
Councilmember Nand continued, if the council moves forward with this proposal, she preferred the City
approach it in a data driven fashion. If in five years the future council determines the automatic traffic safety
program is great and they want to continue it, they could do their own data analysis and recommend the
program again. She proposed sunsetting the program because she was concerned once $3.7 million in
revenue was added to the City’s coffers, it will become a spigot of excess revenue that future councils
would not want to turn off and that the public safety aspect would be subordinate to revenue generation.
She was attempting to address this via this amendment and she hoped councilmembers would agree to the
sunset so the council can determine whether the red light cameras actually alter driver behavior in the City
and lead to safer streets and few collisions.
Councilmember Eck commented she was very hesitant to approve a sunset after five years without knowing
what the experience will be. She did not support the amendment.
Council President Olson said she was fully supportive of monitoring and looking at data and feedback on
the traffic safety camera program and felt it would be foolish for the City not to do that and preferred not
to wait five years for that year. She did not support having an automatic sunset in five years as that would
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 25, 2024
Page 15
create more work in the future when reviewing the data will indicate whether more investigation is needed.
She did not support the amendment.
Councilmember Dotsch expressed her support for the amendment. From the chart the council received and
the graph from Lynnwood, they changed the data set to take away approaches so the numbers in the last
five years show increased accidents at intersections with red light cameras. She was not comfortable the
council knew what outcome was being measured and how success would be measured. The Safety Action
Plan for the entire community makes more sense because it will objectively look at all data points including
pedestrians and bikes which this data does not. She did not want the City to get addicted to the revenue and
have the contract extend beyond five years. She preferred to sunset the program in five years and restart it
if needed.
Councilmember Chen said the City needs to monitor red light cameras and how they impact driver behavior,
but without concrete data, it is premature to establish a sunset date. That decision is up to the future council
when the time comes to renew the contract in five years based on data collected throughout the duration of
the red light camera operations. He did not support the amendment.
AMENDMENT FAILED (2-5), COUNCILMEMBERS DOTSCH AND NAND VOTING YES.
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ECK, TO ADD THE
INTERSECTIONS OF 224TH & HIGHWAY 99 AND 220TH & 76TH AVE W TO THE ORDINANCE.
Councilmember Paine commented there has been a great deal of discussion about red light cameras and the
safety concerns expressed by residents. Dozens of neighborhoods across the City have identified traffic
safety needs. Her concern with having red light cameras at only two intersections was it wouldn’t result in
behavioral changes and adding two more intersections might result in change at these intersections.
Councilmember Tibbott said he would not support the amendment. Since the council seemed determined
to move forward with red light cameras at two intersections at least, he was inclined to support the ordinance
because it was a pilot project and an opportunity to obtain actual data in Edmonds.
Councilmember Paine raised a point of order, stating Councilmember Tibbott’s comments were not relevant
to the amendment. Councilmember Tibbott said his comments were regarding the intersections. Mayor
Rosen advised he would allow Councilmember Tibbott to continue.
Councilmember Tibbott said he would not support adding red light cameras to more intersections. It is
important to determine the overall value of the cameras for transportation safety which can only be obtained
with actual data. It is also important to evaluate the true cost of the program before adding more
intersections and it is important to evaluate implementation of state law related to this program before
adding intersections.
Councilmember Nand said she was unable to support the amendment. She feared annexed areas were being
targeted with a punitive and extractive form of traffic safety. She preferred to wait until the Safety Action
Plan was developed which would include more holistic and supportive changes such as increasing funding
for the traffic calming program, radar signs, HAWK signals, traffic table speed bumps and other non-
punitive measures to address pedestrian safety and traffic safety. The more cameras that are added to the
underserved parts of town, the more of a slap in the face this will be, especially since the council rejected
her suggestion to dedicate the revenue to that part of town.
Councilmember Chen said he cannot support the amendment. With regard to the intersection of 220th &
76th Ave W, it is very close to Edmonds-Woodway High School and College Place Middle School where
there is already a school zone camera and the intersection of 224th & Highway 99 is just one block from
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 25, 2024
Page 16
220th & Highway 99 which is too close. He preferred to wait to see the data from the original two
intersections on Highway 99 and SR-104 before adding other intersections.
Councilmember Dotsch said she did not support the amendment, in part because the cost of two
intersections versus four intersections is unknown. The council was told two full-time employees would
need to be added to the court for two cameras. The time needed to review tickets, court time, etc. is unknown
and the City is already short staffed. She was concerned two red light cameras along with the school zone
cameras generated a lot of work, court dates, review time, etc. The capacity to implement this program is
unknown even with two red light cameras, let alone four.
Councilmember Nand referred to statements that if someone is driving safely, they did not need to worry
about getting a $130 citation. Pulling people into the criminal justice system and imposing legal and
financial obligations on them disproportionately harms low income people. It creates a sense of shame and
fear, especially for people who rely on their driver’s license to go to work and support and feed their
families. She recalled a community member saying a $130 ticket might seem minimal to a CEO but it was
painful to a minimum wage worker. For those who are low income and struggle with paying traffic fines
from these tickets and have been made to feel like a bad person because their license has been suspended,
etc. and the ticket made their life more difficulty, she did not agree with rapidly expanding this program
and pulling neighbors into the criminal justice system. The City is already pulling 12,000 people into the
system on traffic tickets; if the council approves nine cameras, the City could pull in 50,000 people. She
did not agree with penalizing people and making them feel like a bad person especially if they had difficulty
paying a $130 ticket, had language barriers, or did not have time to come to court to fight a ticket because
they were trying to support and feed their families. This is the wrong approach for the City to take. Shoreline
has no red light cameras and they are managing density and a large population and funding their General
Fund just fine.
MOTION FAILED (2-5), COUNCILMEMBERS PAINE AND ECK VOTING YES.
MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED (5-2), COUNCILMEMBERS DOTSCH AND NAND
VOTING NO.
4. AUTHORIZING USE OF TRAFFIC SAFETY CAMERAS AT SPECIFIC SIGNALIZED
INTERSECTIONS AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN CONTRACT
Council President Olson commented this item had been simplified via the amendments made during the
previous agenda item. As long as the council agreed with those two intersections, this agenda item is to
authorize the mayor to sign a contract with Verra Mobility to install cameras at those two intersections.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PAINE, TO
AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO THE CONTRACT WITH VERRA MOBILITY TO
ADD RED LIGHT CAMERAS AT THOSE TWO INTERSECTIONS.
Councilmember Paine said she was pleased to see this coming to fruition. She was hopeful it would result
in behavioral changes as people’s lives depend on it.
Councilmember Dotsch observed there is talk about safety with this traffic safety camera program with
Verra Mobility, but nothing happens immediately. There is no police officer to pull a driver over; a driver
could be drunk or high, but the camera won’t catch that, the traffic safety program is very limited. From the
data provided, this type of contract will not make intersections less dangerous. There are other opportunities
such as the median on Highway 99 and the project on SR-104 & 100th. She did not support the motion.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 25, 2024
Page 17
Councilmember Nand said she did not support the motion. It is unfortunate the administration chose to rely
on Verra Mobility’s study data and which intersections to target. Obviously Verra Mobility is a private
company and has a profit motive to add as many automated traffic safety cameras as possible to Edmonds.
However, it is not the city council’s obligation to open as many intersections as possible to Verra Mobility
without doing its own independent analysis. This is the wrong strategy for addressing the community’s
request for public safety. This could potentially be one tool assembled in the fully funded Safety Action
Plan, however the council is now going all in with this one vendor targeting the intersections they
recommended without doing any independent analysis which she felt was short-sighted and not meeting
the fiduciary obligation to the council’s constituents.
Councilmember Eck expressed support for the motion. She respectfully listened to opposing views, but was
having a difficult time understanding the level of resistance to something where having one person hit and
killed was too much. She reiterated if a driver is following the law, they have nothing to worry about
regardless of their income level and there are already measures in place in the municipal court for anyone
that cannot afford the ticket. .There are so many people from throughout the county that use these roads
and she sees the infractions daily. If the red light cameras save one life or allow people who live in these
areas to walk and bike safely, the City will have gained a lot.
Council President Olson defended the administration, advising it was not the administration that accepted
the data, it was accepted by the council. The council was provided data which included Verra Mobility’s
data, but that was not the only data the council relied on. Council made the decision regarding what data
was adequate related to the intersections.
Councilmember Chen emphasized this is about public safety, not about money grabbing.
Councilmember Nand clarified her comment; the council directed the administration to produce the study
data which was provided to the administration by Verra Mobility. The council greets other proposals such
as the RFA annexation with a great deal of skepticism and decided to do their own independent analysis
funded by council to ensure they were getting a good deal and knew all the options. It would have behooved
the council to do more independent analysis and not just rely on Verra Mobility’s analysis when choosing
which intersections to target and proceeding with the program because Verra Mobility obviously has a
profit motive to place as many cameras in Edmonds as possible to pad their bottom line and she wanted to
note that conflict of interest for the public.
MOTION CARRIED (5-2), COUNCILMEMBERS DOTSCH AND NAND VOTING NO.
Mayor Rosen declared a brief recess.
5. CITY ATTORNEY ANNUAL REPORT
City Attorney Jeff Taraday explained he is appearing in person, the members of his team are participating
virtually. He attends most council meetings, does a lot of advising related to elected official legal questions
and works closely with the planning & development and engineering departments. He asked his team to
introduce themselves and describe what they do.
Sharon Cates explained her main role at the City is working with departments on contracting and purchasing
questions and with HR on employment law and labor negotiations. She also works with the police
department on issues and ordinance updates. Most recently she has been working on a proposed update to
the purchasing policy.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 25, 2024
Page 18
Patricia Taraday explained she mainly assist the City’s public records officers in the police department and
administrative services, advising them on public record requests as well as assists with code enforcement
matters.
Beth Ford relayed the focus of her work is on litigation for the City including the Ebb Tide matter and code
enforcement in the Oakes litigation and various public records matters.
Angela Tinker explained she primarily works with public works on issues involving use of the right-of-way
and other public property.
Mr. Taraday relayed another member of the Lighthouse team, Tom Brubaker, plays a small but important
role providing backup at council meetings when he is on vacation. Although not technically a member of
Lighthouse Law Group, Mike Bradley has been a team member since the inception of Lighthouse’s
relationship with the City and primarily works on cable franchise issues.
Mr. Taraday reviewed:
• 2023 Significant Projects
o Engaged in labor negotiations with three police bargaining groups, all of which have final
Collective Bargaining Agreements
Process included numerous negotiations of related agreements regarding labor disputes
(e.g., implementation of body cameras), as well as a PERC mediation
o Assisted the police with contract negotiation for and implementation of automated traffic safety
cameras
o Assisted the police with code updates resulting from updated state police reform legislation
o Assisted with Library property issues, including obtaining a Quit Claim Deed for a portion of
the property from the Edmonds School District and negotiating agreements with Sno-Isle
Libraries relating to the flood damage restoration and related insurance issues
o Served as lead on transition of Prosecuting Attorney Services, including drafting and managing
RFP and engagement in related discussions with the Snohomish County Prosecuting Attorney’s
Office
o Ebb Tide – successful defense of trial court judgment regarding easement rights:
Drafted briefs, prepared for oral argument at court of appeals.
Drafted answer to petition for review at state supreme court
o Oakes: code enforcement / abatement
Drafted motion and reply briefs. Received a Judgment Summary and Order on Final
Judgment.
Evaluating and positioning for lien foreclosure.
o Rimmer – takings case:
Research, drafting of Motion for Summary Judgment
Case is well positioned for reversal at the Court of Appeals
o Public Records Act compliance
Research / detailed analysis re attorney invoice redaction; proposed redactions in response
to voluminous public records request
Responded to PRA injunction litigation between third parties (requester and subject of
request seeking protection on privacy grounds), advised police records officer regarding
same
o Obtained ruling from Department of Revenue exempting the city from sales tax on purchases
made on the Carbon Recovery Project at the WWTP (as long as city can sell the product and
makes timely application for refund)
o Worked on cable franchise fee audits and cable franchise renewals
Ziply dispute settled;
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 25, 2024
Page 19
Comcast dispute to be resolved as part of renewal
o Other Franchise Work
Engaged in discussions with PUD attempting to resolve various ongoing ROW use
concerns, including proposed AMI installation
Engaged in regular meetings with PSE attempting to negotiate franchise terms
o Real Estate Acquisition Efforts
Landmark option agreement
Hurst property (ultimately abandoned)
Mee property
• City Attorney Team Stats (January 1, 2023 through December 31, 2023)
o First year on hourly contract
Lighthouse worked 2644 hours for Edmonds in 2023
- Compared to 3508 hours in 2022
- Compared to 3367 hours in 2021
Why the dip in hours 2023 compared to 2022?
- Two primary factors for using 864 fewer hours than 2022
Big reduction in Ebb Tide work 417 hours
City Council usage down by 141 hours
Subtotal = 558
• New billing categories
o Over 90 matters currently open in our billing software
Not all get used regularly
• 2023 Top Matters
15. Admin Serv - public records advising (55 hours)
14. PW - franchise - Ziply cable renewal (65 hours)
13. Parks - real property acquisition (65 hours)
12. Council - agenda planning and preparation for council meetings (69 hours)
11. Police - misc advice and projects (70 hours)
10. HR - labor bargaining (73 hours)
9. Litigation - Nathan Rimmer (78 hours)
8. Parks - contracting, bidding, and acquisition (non-capital) (85 hours)
7. Council - misc advice and projects (98 hours)
6. Admin Serv - public records R001793 (104 hours)
5. PW - contracting, bidding, and acquisition (non-capital) (116 hours)
4. PW – SnoPUD (133 hours)
3. Litigation - Ebb Tide (170 hours)
2. Council - attendance at council meetings (196 hours)
1. PW - franchise - other (225 hours)
• Legal Department Costs (January 1, 2023 through December 31, 2023)
o Total legal fees in 2023 amounted to $739,741
o In 2022, under the final year of the flat fee, Edmonds paid $647,436 to Lighthouse
o 14% increase
o 2023 hourly rates
Three attorneys billed at $336 / hour
Four attorneys billed at $253 / hour
Average hourly rate was $280 / hour
- Comparing $280 to the rates paid by the city’s comparable cities in 2023
Issaquah (Madrona): $270 - $320
Mukilteo ( Ogden Murphy Wallace ): $262 - $309 (with most hours $262 - $286)
Lynnwood (Kenyon Disend): $170 - $400
• Stability of Lighthouse Team
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 25, 2024
Page 20
o Jeff Taraday 2011
o Sharon Cates 2011
o Patricia Taraday 2011
o Mike Bradley 2011
o Beth Ford 2012
o Tom Brubaker 2018
o Angela Tinker 2019
• Washington Cities insurance Authority (WCIA) Coverage
o Claims arising from alleged:
Employment related action, e.g. retaliation and harassment
Police excessive force
Land use damage
Auto liability
Defective street or sidewalk
Sewer obstruction
Premises liability
Other negligence
• Big Picture
• Who is the client?
o RPC 1.13(a) A lawyer employed or retained by an organization represents the organization
acting through its duly authorized constituents.
• The Attorney – Client Relationship
• Duly Authorized Constituents?
• What about your constituents, the citizens?
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 25, 2024
Page 21
• Why no direct interaction with citizens?
o RPC 1.6(a):
A lawyer shall not reveal information relating to the representation of a client unless the client
gives informed consent, the disclosure is impliedly authorized in order to carry out the
representation or the disclosure is permitted by paragraph (b).
• So you aren’t the client…are your communications still confidential?
o RPC 1.13, comment 2: When one of the constituents of an organizational client communicates
with the organization's lawyer in that person's organizational capacity, the communication is
protected by Rule 1.6.
• Confidentiality within the city
o … This does not mean, however, that constituents of an organizational client are the clients of
the lawyer. The lawyer may not disclose to such constituents information relating to the
representation except for disclosures explicitly or impliedly authorized by the organizational
client in order to carry out the representation or as otherwise permitted by Rule 1.6.
Councilmember Paine commented it was a pleasure working with Lighthouse on their contract. She referred
to the ability to possibly recover attorney costs related to permits and asked if any of Lighthouse’s costs
had been recovered. Mr. Taraday explained if Lighthouse determines the hours should be paid by the
applicant of a project, it is billed under the third party billable matter number which is intended to be a
signal to the administration to pay those charges from the appropriate source. That is a complicated process
and he was not responsible for overseeing how that system worked. He could not speak to the actual
implementation, but was not aware of anything else that needed to be done on their end to sow the seeds
for collection of those dollars. He acknowledged it was not a huge amount of money.
Councilmember Paine commented there are aspects of permitting where there is opportunity for recovery.
She looked forward to seeing the franchise agreements soon. Mr. Taraday said some of that work may come
forward in the form of code amendments because they proved to be difficult and Lighthouse felt they were
not making progress in ways they wanted to and made a decision to pivot and exercise their authority
through the city council unilaterally in the form of code amendments which he acknowledged was a
different way to proceed. It is regulation and the council is entitled to regulate. Some of those amendments
may be bundled with franchise in the future; it is a work in progress and he hoped it would be presented to
council soon.
Councilmember Tibbott recognized the stability of the Lighthouse team, noting the institutional knowledge
they have developed over a decade benefits the City and allows them to bring that experience and expertise
to issues that arise. He asked Mr. Taraday to comment on the council’s use of executive session such as
reasons for executive sessions, how executive session are noticed to the public, and his role in ensuring the
council stays on topic. Mr. Taraday answered the Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA) identifies various
permissible topics for an executive session. The two most common in Edmonds are potential litigation and
real estate acquisition. Although probably intuitive, there are certain things where it is not in the City’s best
interest to have those conversations publicly. For example, if all of his advice to the council concerning
legal disputes were provided publicly, the City’s position in those legal disputes would be compromised.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 25, 2024
Page 22
Executive session are allowed for the benefit of the City and ultimately for the benefit of the taxpayers
because if the City is able to successfully defend litigation, ultimate the taxpayers also benefit.
Mr. Taraday continued, with regard to the mechanics of executive session, there are times when the
mechanics do not go exactly as scripted. When those instances arise, it is appropriate to insert himself into
the moment to ensure the right things are said so the executive session is OPMA compliant even though he
is not usually tasked with saying those things. It doesn’t happen often, but in comparing the lesser of two
evils, it is better for him to say something and keep the City out of trouble than not to say something.
Councilmember Nand relayed she and Councilmember Dotsch are on the legal assessment committee that
reviews Lighthouse’s invoices every month. She thanked Lighthouse for being very precise and not being
what she was told in law school was an expensive lawyer, somebody who bills a lot of time for something
that should be done quickly. Obviously Lighthouse has a lot of expertise in the City’s work and are able to
get things done quickly. If the City could ever go back to the incredible flat rate, she would not complain.
She complimented the council and the administration for being very deliberate in how they consume legal
services now that they are billed on an hourly rate. If Lighthouse ever wanted to offer a flat rate again, the
City definitely wouldn’t say no. Everyone is being very mindful and doing a good job for taxpayers.
Councilmember Chen thanked Mr. Taraday and the Lighthouse legal team for their expertise and service
to the City. With regard to the top 15 matters, 3 items, #12, #7 and #2 are council related. He asked Mr.
Taraday to comment on those items. Mr. Taraday explained under the flat fee, there was one city council
billing matter, with hourly billing, they felt the council might appreciate seeing more detail with regard to
how the time is spent. #12, agenda planning and preparation for council meetings, is anything done leading
up to a council meeting whether it is answering a question from a councilmember two days before the
meeting, preparing for the meeting by reviewing materials in the packet, preparing for a presentation he is
giving at the council meeting, anticipating questions that would be asked, figuring out with the council’s
executive assistant when things will come forward, etc. #7, misc advice and projects, would be preparing
an ordinance, understanding the RFA options, or other larger projects not tied to a specific council meeting.
#2, attendance at council meetings, also includes travel time. One of the ways the council has been reducing
costs is he often attends meetings virtually.
Council President Olson stressed the benefits of continuity, probably even more so with the lack of
continuity in city departments, noting the council relies on the city attorney for their historical knowledge.
Over the years she has seen work products from all the Lighthouse attorneys and they have always been
excellent. She gave a shout out this year to Angela Tinker for a particular project where her work product
surpassed her expectations. With regard to franchise agreements, that showcases the value Lighthouse
brings related to creativity and different ways to approach something.
9. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Nand relayed there was a tragic fire in Edmonds recently where a member of the
community lost his life and the family also lost their dog. A Go Fund Me has been organized by Lily Helm,
the niece of the man who was killed, to raise $10,000 to help the family inter their loved one and rebuild
their home. The Go Fund Me is available on My Edmonds Neighbors Facebook group or she can email it.
It is a terrible tragedy and although the cause of the fire has not been established, summer is a much hotter,
drier season due climate change. There are a lot more electrical fires and parts of the region are like a
tinderbox which is important to remember with the 4th of July coming up. Her heart goes out to Lily Helm
and her family for their terrible loss and she hoped there were no more fatal fires in Edmonds this year. She
urged the public to practice fire safety as much as possible and other than sparklers, forego fireworks which
are banned in Snohomish County.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 25, 2024
Page 23
Councilmember Paine commented there have been three fires in the very recent past which is an alarming
number compared to one fire last year. With regard to flags, she comments flags are displayed for so many
reasons, symbols of the community, positions, etc. She was gratified to see the conversation in the media
that displaying Pride flags shows support to a community that has experienced negative impacts in the past.
Edmonds can do it in a way that respects and supports people and doesn’t drag in contentious messaging.
People are talking about flags at the national level. Although flags can create division, there are ways to
handle it. She looked forward to opportunities to how support for community members who are targeted
and ways to spread joy and celebrate communities that offer a lot of diversity.
Council President Olson referred to Received for Filing Item 6.5, the contract option with South County
Fire. Failure to include that in the options available was an oversight and she wanted to give express
acknowledgement that that was an option on the table that was being explored. Further details are available
in Received for Filing Item 6.5.
Councilmember Tibbott updated the council on the Association of Washington Cities (AWC) conference
he attended last week Wednesday through Friday in Vancouver, Washington. It was the best AWC
conference he has attended with excellent workshops led by expert presenters and he will provide council
summary notes. He reported on a half-day FEMA workshops, commenting the presentation included a lot
of acronyms and some of the content was difficult to understand. He will share the presentation slides with
council. As a result of that workshop, he is more informed and can ask questions of emergency services
regarding the City’s preparation.
Councilmember Chen wished all a Happy Independence Day, relaying Mountlake Terrace will host a
firework display on July 3 at Lake Ballinger starting around 10 pm.
Councilmember Eck said she would like to see the Pride flag return to city hall next year because symbolism
and representation matter. June is National Gun Violence Awareness Month and the first Friday in June is
National Gun Violence Awareness Day. Every day over 300 people are directly impacted by gun violence
in the United States. Gun Violence Awareness Month was created to draw attention to this tragic reality
and demand lifesaving change. There are three recommendations on one of the sites, reach out and ensure
your voice is being heard, ask friends and family if there are unlocked guns in their home and coach them
on remedying that situation, and find a gun violence prevention event near you.
10. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
Mayor Rosen thanked community members who participate in council meetings and reach out to elected
officials personally and assured they are listening. He thanked council and staff for their work this week.
ADJOURNMENT
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 9:38 pm.