Loading...
2024-07-02 Council Minutes Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes July 2, 2024 Page 1 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MEETING DRAFT MINUTES July 2, 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 Kim Dunscombe, Deputy Admin. Serv. Director Susan McLaughlin, Planning & Dev. Dir. Todd Tatum, Comm., Culture & Econ. Dev. Dir. 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 Paine read the City Council Land Acknowledge Statement: “We acknowledge the original inhabitants of this place, the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and their successors the Tulalip Tribes, who since time immemorial have hunted, fished, gathered, and taken care of these lands. We respect their sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and we honor their sacred spiritual connection with the land and water.” 3. ROLL CALL City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present. 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. Council President Olson requested the minutes for the PPW committee meeting on the Consent Agenda be amended to delete her name as she was not present. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Jim Ogonowski, Edmonds, thanked the Blue Ribbon Panel for their work and recommendations. He referenced the recommendation regarding engagement with the public, noting he did not see an emphasis Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes July 2, 2024 Page 2 on education, educating the public on the process and the challenges facing the City as well as educating elected officials. Educating public officials includes how to read and understand monthly financial statements to avoid what has occurred in the past as well as regarding the budget process. He opined the City has been through a spending process over the past several years, but not a true budgeting process. Education will help the council in their fiduciary oversight responsibilities to ensure the City is heading in the right direction., Will Morris, Marysville, President, Edmonds Police Officers Association, commented on the budgeting process and issues it is causing in the police department, including members feeling there is a lack of job security and uncertainty. The law support and commissioned officers just completed collective bargaining negotiations and now feel the hard work and relationship building during that process are being taken away or that members were promised something that will not be followed through on. With the hard work done to establish a diverse department, new, diverse officers about to complete field training do not feel they will have a job in the next 18 months. In response to council questions at the special meeting held before this meeting, he advised there are currently 10 vacancies and a department member put in retirement paperwork today bringing vacancies to 11. Additional positions were approved, but the department is currently 3 below 2019 numbers and 5 officers are in field training. The number of approved officers equates to 1.5 officers/1,000 residents; the current staffing level is 1.18 officers/1,000 residents and the national average is 2.4 officers/1,000 residents. Until February, the department was operating with less than 1 officer/1,000 residents. There has not been a fully functional police department since 2019. What that looks like, for example as a traffic officer, he hasn’t been doing his specialty enforcing DUIs and traffic laws because he is answering patrol calls due to minimum staffing levels. He expressed interest in a more concerted effort toward public safety and not turning the City’s financial crisis and issues into a public safety issue. 6. RECEIVED FOR FILING 1. WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS 7. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: 1. APPROVAL OF COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES JUNE 18, 2024 2. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES JUNE 25, 2024 3. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS AND WIRE PAYMENT 4. AUTHORIZATION TO PURCHASE (1) 2024 FREIGHTLINER 800 SERIES JET TRUCK 8. COUNCIL BUSINESS 1. BLUE RIBBON PANEL REPORT Mike Bailey, Financial Consultant, acknowledged Blue Ribbon Panel members in the audience. He is a retired financial director and has been assisting the City by leading the Blue Ribbon Panel’s work. He reviewed: • Blue-Ribbon Panel Members o Mike Bailey, CPA o Erin Monroe, CPA o Troy Rector, CPA, CGMA o Carl Zapora o Rick Canning Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes July 2, 2024 Page 3 o Scott James, CPA o Darrol Haug o 13 in-person meetings, almost perfect attendance, invested over 20 hours in meeting and more in studying on own. o Dedicated and interested in issue. Commend them for their work. • The Panel’s Work Products (provided to council following this presentation) 1. Executive Summary 2. Strategic Approach to Fiscal Resiliency 3. Fiscal First Aid 12 Step Project Plan 4. Financial Health Model 5. Memo to Mayor Rosen – February 20, 2024 6. Price of Government Description • Our Charge 1. What is the current status of the City’s finances? 2. How did this problem occur? 3. Make recommendations to correct the situation. 4. Make recommendations that return the City to long-term financial health. • Our Methods 1. Utilize the GFOAs 12 steps to Fiscal First Aid 2. Reviewing past and current budgets 3. Requested and reviewed information that enabled deeper analytics of the situation 4. Reviewed the Fire and EMS service issues the City is currently considering and their implications 5. Explored various “what-if” scenarios • Specific Responses to Our Charge o What is the current status of the City’s finances 1. 2023 ending fund balance in the General Fund is $2.492 million 2. This compares unfavorably to the budgeted EFB of $3.047 million 3. The budget imbalance in 2024 is about $12.5 million o How Did This Problem Occur? 1. Budgeted expenditures exceeded revenues in 3 of the past 4 years a. Amendments to the budgets made this worse in each year 2. Revenues were overestimated (enabling budgeted expenditures to be higher than actual revenues in 3 of the past 4 years. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes July 2, 2024 Page 4 o Illustration of Fund Balance Decline o Make recommendations to correct the situation 1. New sources of non-tax revenues: increased fees, red light cameras, and other revenue increases; 2. Expense reductions: headcount reductions, furloughs, professional service and other non- compensation reductions; 3. New taxes: The 1% annual increase for EMS, and General Fund (GF) should be done. Additional property levy for GF and / or joining SCF will require a vote and would not impact the revenues until 2026. (Note: with the lag of significant revenue increases until 2025, the Panel recommends “bridging” the 2025 budget with borrowing internally from available surplus resources in other City funds) o Make recommendations that return the City to long-term financial health (informed by the GFOA’s Fiscal First Aid framework) 1. Continue generic treatments (hiring, scrutinize expenses, begin streamlining) 2. Develop and use a financial health model (a draft is provided) 3. Develop model and monitor cash-flow (done) 4. Review and develop relevant financial policies (in process) 5. Understand future operating budget impacts from capital improvements 6. Implement Priority Based Budgeting (PBB) to right-size (in process) 7. Evaluate revenues in the context of the “Price of Government” 8. Make updating related technology a priority 9. Evaluate deferred maintenance on City assets 10. Address the risks associated with this work 11. Develop a communication plan to keep stakeholders informed 12. Determine if the General Fund is subsidizing other funds 13. Review investment rates of return to maximize value 14. Evaluate capital funding options and develop a capital spending plan 15. Forecast the capital budget impacts for a rolling five years Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes July 2, 2024 Page 5 • Illustration of Future Fund Balances (from adopted budget) • Fire and EMS Service Issues o The Panel is aware of the current issues related to providing fire and emergency medical services to the City. o While there are clear budgetary implications related to alternatives, the Panel did not specifically address what the City should do to provide these services. o The Panel felt that it wasn’t within the scope of the Mayor’s request. o Clearly, the alternatives should be evaluated from provision of service, costs and sustainability of the chosen model perspectives. o The Financial Health Model facilitates such a review and illustrates the impact on taxpayers and ratepayers in the City. • Conclusion o It was appropriate for the Council to declare a fiscal emergency. o The magnitude of financial challenges facing the City cannot be underestimated. o Community confidence in the City's leadership will be essential. o The work to remedy the situation will be difficult – and important. o The overall impact on the City’s tax and ratepayers should be of significant concern in identifying solutions. o Our work took time to do properly – we feel we were given adequate time and resources to provide helpful feedback to the Mayor. o We appreciate the support provided by the Mayor and staff. Councilmember Paine commented Mr. Bailey always provided great service to the City and council regarding budgeting. She appreciated the suggestion about considering the policy for contingency and reserve funds and replenishing those funds. She asked if the Panel had any specific suggestions. Mr. Bailey answered the Panel discussed whether the levels in the current policy were too high given everything else that’s going on and the Panel did not want the City to cut the budget so much and impose hardships to accommodate a reserve policy that might be a bit high right now and possibly the target could be lowered somewhat and continue to deliver as much service as possible and revisit it in the future. Part of the problem that has occurred is confusion over fund balance numbers; at times those numbers includes General Fund subfunds and at times those are excluded. Right now the numbers are similar so there was confusion about which number applied to which fund. Being very clear about what the pockets of money are for is important and to the extent they are money sitting in the bank versus delivering services is something for the council to consider. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes July 2, 2024 Page 6 Councilmember Paine asked whether the Panel suggests reforecasting revenue mid-year before the budget process begins. She recognized forecasting revenue was a bit of art, science and trust in the data. Mr. Bailey agreed forecasting in August for the next year is an art form. Due to the upcoming budget process, the council has scheduled a mid-year check that will look at the current year’s revenue performance as well as get a sense of the future budget which will create an opportunity to reevaluate the revenue forecast. Accountants and finance directors tend to be conservative and would rather collect more revenue than the forecast. Conservative forecasts usually mean budgets don’t have to be cut later in the year because the revenue targets weren’t met. That hasn’t been the case in Edmonds which has contributed to the problem. The council will have the opportunity to revisit that at the August mid-year check in. Councilmember Paine referred to the graph on packet page 38, Illustration of Future Fund Balances, and asked if the graph assumed doing nothing. Mr. Bailey answered yes. Councilmember Paine commented there was a lot of information in the materials provided. She was glad to see following the salary study and salary adjustments that they are not unreasonable for comparator cities. That has been voiced as part of the problem, but the data shows salaries are within the midpoint. Mr. Bailey answered the City has to have competitive salaries to have the kind of staff the City wants serving the community, but when cities overpay, it leads to budget problems. The Panel took a citywide view and when compared to other cities, found compensation was fairly consistent. Councilmember Paine commented the City has always chosen the midpoint. She asked if the Panel calculated the price of government specifically for Edmonds. Mr. Bailey answered yes and that information can be provided if it is not in the materials. Councilmember Paine said it would be interesting to see the source material to help understand the process. She expressed her appreciation for Mr. Bailey’s and the Panel’s work. Councilmember Chen thanked Mr. Bailey and the entire Panel for their hours of work attending meetings, conducting interviews, and helping the City figure out the problem and a path forward. He referred to the slide that illustrates spending outpaced revenue in 2022 and 2023, pointing out even though revenue increased somewhat, it was outpaced by expenditures. He asked whether the Panel uncovered any opportunities related to spending redundancy or spending that could have been avoided. He agreed with the Panel’s approach of not pointing fingers, but was interested in not repeating mistakes in the future. Mr. Bailey reiterated Councilmember Chen’s point about not pointing fingers, recalling the Panel and the mayor did not want the Panel’s work to turn into finding who was at fault. That was not the Panel’s focus and was not healthy for the city. The intent is to solve the problems, so dwelling on the past and who was at fault was not part of solution. Mr. Bailey continued, there are several redundancies not unique to Edmonds, but now that the City needs to identify ways to streamline and provide as much services as possible with the resources available, the Panel felt some of the redundancies were opportunities. The Panel had that conversation with the mayor and it is something he is reviewing. A big part of the recommendation, although it may not feel satisfactory at this point, is informing the upcoming budget process. In addition to priority based budgeted, looking at revenues, considering whether the General Fund is subsidizing other funds, finding efficiencies through streamlining and avoiding duplication of effort are also intended to be part of budget process. Ferreting those out will take some time. Councilmember Chen observed that information will come to council as part of the process. Mr. Bailey answered the intent is to set up the financial planning work and budgeting process in a way that helps inform those opportunities. Councilmember Chen observed another of the Panel’s recommendations was to bridge the 2025 budget by internal borrowing. That is an option, but although borrowing internally is easier, he preferred to explore other options such as increased revenue, reduced expenditures, etc. before borrowing internally. Mr. Bailey agreed borrowing would only be done as needed. The City can borrow externally, but it would be more expensive and involve more bureaucracy. The suggestion to borrow internally was because it would be more cost efficient for the City as a whole and the funds borrowed would be made whole. The funds are Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes July 2, 2024 Page 7 currently invested in the City’s investment pool and earning interest, the same interest rate that the General Fund would be charged for borrowing internally. He agreed borrowing should be a last resort, but did not see how the City could avoid it in 2025 and suggested the council should expect that and other things the council may prefer not to do as part of getting through the difficulty and getting the City back on its feet. Councilmember Chen emphasized the General Fund, Fund 001, has a positive balance as of right now due to property taxes. Mr. Bailey said the financial information provided to the finance committee and council makes that clear. When the cash position declines below and the General Fund is borrowing from a cash flow standpoint over the course of the year and is paying interest, that is reported to the finance committee. He summarized significant improvements have been made to reporting so the committee is getting much better and more timely information than it received in the past. Councilmember Tibbott referred to the tech fix that Mr. Bailey alluded to. In the past the City has paid dearly for technology that was expected to be put in place. He asked the status of investments made in technology and new options that are forthcoming in that department. Mr. Bailey answered the core financial system the City uses to pay bills, pay employees, collect revenues, do all the bookkeeping, produce monthly, quarterly and annual financial reports was discontinued in early the 2000s so the City is using a system that has not been supported for over 20 years after being acquired by another company. As a result, a lot of the City’s systems are manual and many efficiencies will be realized by automating processes that should have been automated some time ago. The core financial systems are being replaced, but likely not until next year. In the meantime, the City acquired a budgeting software, OpenGov, a couple of years ago and began paying an annually renewing contract to implement a hosted system that is limited to budget development and hosted web-based illustrations, but that has yet to be implemented. This is the third year the City has been paying for that. He recommended to the mayor that having it for three years, not implementing it and continuing to pay for it was not providing the City much service and this would be a difficult time to implement a new budget system. Councilmember Tibbott asked for Mr. Bailey’s suggestions for new options. Mr. Bailey answered the system being considered for implementation next year is the current version of the software system the City has used in the past so it is familiar to staff. He recommended working toward implementation of that financial system, doing it carefully, but not trying to do it quickly. He anticipated the City would get more benefit from a thoughtful implementation than a quick implementation because quick implementations can create more risk which the City does not need at this point. Proceeding thoughtfully will be another opportunity to find efficiencies and help staff avoid doing things manually which raises concern with the State Auditor’s Office (SOA) such as manual payroll timekeeping. Councilmember Tibbott relayed his understanding the City was already paying for that new software. Mr. Bailey answered as soon as the City agreed to terms with the revised version of the financial system software, it will trigger payment for maintenance of the new system even though implementation is probably six months out. Councilmember Tibbott asked about Snohomish County’s exploration of the possibility of a public safety tax. Mr. Bailey said Mayor Rosen may have more current information. He was aware it would benefit the City and was certainly something to be aware of. Councilmember Nand thanked Mr. Bailey and members of Blue Ribbon Panel for their hard work, stepping in during a tumultuous time in the City’s finances. As the City moves forward into the upcoming budget cycle and the Blue Ribbon Panel is winding down, she asked who would oversee the City’s overall financial strategy. Mayor Rosen answered ultimately him, with assistance from Deputy Administrative Services Director Kim Dunscombe. Mr. Bailey has also been asked to stick around for a while. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes July 2, 2024 Page 8 For the public, Councilmember Nand referred to the Illustration of Future Fund Balances on packet page 38 which illustrates the structural budget gap. She acknowledged the affordability crisis in the community affecting a lot of people who are already financially distressed, seniors, people with disabilities and she assured the council did not look forward to increasing taxes and fees. She identified resources in the community that could provide relief to those in need including a team of volunteers at the Edmonds Waterfront Center assisting people who may be eligible for property tax relief; their phone number is 425- 774-5555. There are also a lot of resources available at the city, county and state level. Public Works has been sending quarterly notices regarding how to access rebates and the state provides bridge funds for people applying for social security and disability benefits. She encouraged anyone experiencing financial distress or who knows someone experiencing financial distress to contact the City’s dedicated human services staff in the parks department to avoid a resident becoming homeless or being forced to leave the community. Councilmember Dotsch thanked Mr. Bailey and the Blue Ribbon Panel. She asked the current interest rate on debt. Mr. Bailey answered the interest on investment is about 5.4%, but the interest rate on debt varies. Councilmember Dotsch asked the interest rate on the $8 million. Mr. Bailey answered there is no General Fund debt; as of the end of May, the General Fund is in a positive cash position. The amount of interest the General Fund has paid to date for the months it was in a cash deficit is reflected in the most recent financial report. The General Fund pays interest at the rate those funds would otherwise earn, currently 5.4%. Councilmember Dotsch asked if there was an estimate regarding the amount that needed to be borrowed to bridge 2025. Mr. Bailey answered it will depend. The City will need to find opportunities to increase resources and cut expenses one way or another which will inform the deficit amount that will occur in 2025. That forecast will be included in the materials the council receives in October with the mayor’s proposed budget. Identifying that amount at this point would be completely speculative. He did not think the City would have to borrow $12.5 million; he anticipated it would be far less than that. He pointed out whatever is borrowed has to made up in 2026 in order to end the biennium in a positive position. Councilmember Dotsch recognized the importance of involving the community and to understand their priorities, but understanding the price, it may be challenging to ask the community what they want and then say that’s not feasible. She asked about a check and balance to avoid giving too many choices/options that are unrealistic. Mr. Bailey answered it is always difficult to find the right way to ask a question to get informed answers that the council can rely on to make difficult decisions. The upcoming survey will be an attempt to gauge what are the most important things the City does for residents, how well the City is providing those services, and cost versus value issues. Having done surveys in various cities, they create data to help inform council conversations and considerations; the answers need to be informed by many other things in addition. Trying to understand what the community wants and what it is willing to pay for is an art form; understanding the price of government is another data point to inform that process. Councilmember Dotsch commented on the City’s core responsibilities and adding other opportunities and priorities as the financial situation improves, noting there is not much wiggle room. Mr. Bailey responded the Panel would agree, start with the core responsibilities and ensure those are done well, add needed things to the extent possible and lastly add the nice to have things that make Edmonds special. Councilmember Dotsch referred to Mr. Bailey’s comment about departments not being surprised. She asked if there were checks and balances so departments know their targets and whether they are meeting their goals. It seems like there needs to be more metrics than previously existed. Mr. Bailey answered in his first conversation with the department heads, they were very surprised to learn that the City was in fiscal distress and the information he shared was new to them, which from his perspective, was a problem. The mayor and the current financial leader is addressing that problem by having regular conversations particularly to ensure 2024 remains within the budget authorized by council to set up the City for success going forward. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes July 2, 2024 Page 9 It is time to hold down expenses and the sooner that is done, the easier it will be. Those conversations are ongoing and department heads are involved so the level of awareness is much higher. Councilmember Dotsch referred to the recommendations to have a standing council agenda item and asked if that would start next week. Mr. Bailey said when he was in the chief financial officer role in cities that were dealing with financial distress such as in 2008, one of the ways of making this work visible was to have it a standard item on the council’s agendas because the council wanted to the community to see them having the discussions and dealing with issues on a recurring basis. How that translates into how the Edmonds City Council wants to do that is a council decision. Creating more visibility demonstrates this is a high priority item for the council. There has been some concern the Blue Ribbon Panel did not check in sooner, but they needed time to do their work. Councilmember Dotsch expressed support for starting that agenda item right away. Councilmember Eck thanked Mr. Bailey and the Blue Ribbon Panel for their work, commenting the council owes them a debt of gratitude. As it relates to visibility with directors and programs and departments, she assured information cannot be over communicated; it is important to ensure everyone is on the same page. She asked if there was any ah-ha moments around new reporting, new ways of getting the word out, discoveries that will make communication more effective, etc. Mr. Bailey answered the tactic that Ms. Dunscombe is taking with regular check-ins is a great place to start. A lot of the ah-ah moments were related to the current budget and creating visibility related to issues. Once department heads were informed and advised they would need to be part of the solution, the response was good. They prefer to be involved and engaged in discussions rather than not know what’s going on and being dictated the consequences in the future. In his experience, department heads are leaders in their profession and want to be involved. Councilmember Eck agreed, commenting it is about transparency, empowerment and collaboration. Councilmember Eck asked if there was a best practice or standard in the industry for the percentage of a city’s budget that should be dedicated to the police department or the planning department. Mr. Bailey answered not really, all communities are different. That is one of the challenges with the concept of the price of government, Edmonds includes things in the General Fund that other cities don’t and vice versa. Some will say there is a standard and the City does not meet that standard, but Edmonds needs to look at what the community expects; standards will always be used to encourage a city to do more of whatever the person is asking for, whether that is police or fire or whatever else. One thing the council hasn’t gotten as part of the budget is level of service and quality of performance. The council gets reports from departments about what they do, but not as part of the budget conversation. As the council considers moving resources around to meet community needs, that will be important information to have – how well one need is being met versus another need that may be of higher importance. Without that information, it is difficult to make decisions. Council President Olson anticipated she may have a hard time communicating this question and she was unsure who to direct the question to. She asked for confirmation that the policy regarding when a fiscal emergency was declared was tied to the reserves. Mr. Bailey agreed. Council President Olson observed that was a bit of a moving target and possibly somewhat conservative and there may be a typical standard that is a little lower, but now the City is way under even that. She asked if whatever level the council determines in the short term is the right level, whether it would be prudent to tie capital investments to not having a fiscal emergency and whether that is something that will be tracked and whether the City will be out of the fiscal emergency once the reserves are replenished. Mr. Bailey responded if he understood the question correctly, his answer would be yes. The reserve targets are what triggered the fiscal emergency, but the reserve targets are relatively high for a city Edmonds’ size. If the reserve targets were reduced, the fiscal emergency was addressed and contingent reserve and General Fund reserve combined were 12% instead of 20%, that would enable the City to address other needs before Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes July 2, 2024 Page 10 increasing the reserve levels. Those are judgment calls the council has to make, how much money is it prudent to have in the bank in case something occurs where money in the bank is needed, versus how much money should be put into service delivery. For example, if there are some resources left over at the end of 2024 and the fund balance target is exceeded, those funds could be added to the reserve to continue to build it or those funds could be put back into services or used for a one time expenditure that does not have to be sustained going forward. Moving reserves up and down and deciding what the reserve level should be to keep as much money providing services as possible while at the same time being prudent with reserves to meet unanticipated demands in the future such as a natural disaster will be important tradeoffs to consider in the upcoming budget process. Council President Olson said she was on board for having lower reserves, but if the City is doing bigger and riskier capital investments, there needs to be a bigger buffer because a natural disaster could also occur. Council President Olson said she has no authority to designate a Citizen of the Year, but if she did or her personal selection for Citizens of the Year would be the Blue Ribbon Panel. She could not offer enough gratitude to the members for the knowledge and expertise they offered to the community for free and the pittance paid to Mr. Bailey. The members of the Blue Ribbon Panel are very, very competent people who are paid well in their professional careers. The City needed their help and she was very grateful for their work. Mr. Bailey concurred, commenting it was a great group to work with. Councilmember Paine referred to packet page 57, 12 Steps to Financial Resilience, and enhancing revenues as one of the near term treatments, recalling discussion regarding grants during the last budget cycle. She asked if grants were helpful, did the Blue Ribbon Panel discuss grants, and how grants figured into the cost of government. Mr. Bailey answered grants can be helpful. He recommended as the City pursues grants, there be a way to determine which grants are the right ones to pursue so the City does not end up in a situation where the City is awarded a grant they don’t really want. A staff member may want the grant, but the City as a whole is not better off if that was not one of the City’s focuses at that time. In terms of the price of government, Redmond identified when big grants occurred due to their impact on the price of government. Redmond received a number of large grants and/or funding via partnership with Redmond’s large employer. Councilmember Paine referred to packet page 60, portfolio of strategies, and asked Mr. Bailey to expand on the statement, “The Blue-Ribbon Panel has expressed concerns about risks and potential risk mitigation strategies.” Mr. Bailey said the Blue Ribbon Panel was recommending a lot of change; staff is already very busy providing services to the community. The Panel acknowledged implementing change such as asking for performance information as part of departments’ budget presentation will be a lift which results in risk. Making a lot of changes all at once will be less elegant than the council may prefer. He encouraged the council to be gracious to the fact that staff will be doing their best. The council will get more and better information and the quality of the information will improve over time. Keeping existing employees on the City’s team will be also be important. Councilmember Paine liked the idea of having a standing agenda item related to financial status. She suggested agenda memos include a component related to fiscal impacts which she has seen done in other cities. Fiscal impacts are serious and the council needs to know what they are. COUNCILMEMBER DOTSCH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON, TO ADD A STANDING COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM WITH MR. BAILEY OR HIS REPRESENTATIVE STARTING NEXT WEEK. Mayor Rosen advised it would not be the Blue Ribbon Panel. Mr. Bailey advised the Blue Ribbon Panel’s last meeting was last week. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes July 2, 2024 Page 11 Councilmember Dotsch asked who Mr. Bailey anticipated would provide an update. Mr. Bailey answered it would be at the mayor’s discretion, the council would be asking the mayor to provide that update whether it was staff or however the mayor chose to do it. Councilmember Dotsch said this generates more questions and she hated to lose the rest of this month and then it would be August, but she will leave it to the council president and mayor to discuss. She wanted the standing agenda item to start as soon as possible; her preference would be next week and if that wasn’t possible, the last meeting of the month. Council President Olson clarified the motion was to have the standing agenda item on the first available meeting and not specify which staff member would provide the update. Councilmember Dotsch agreed that was the motion. Council President Olson agreed it was good idea. Councilmember Nand, a member of the finance committee along with Councilmember Chen, was curious how a standing agenda item differed from the monthly update at the finance committee meeting. While it is a good idea to have heightened scrutiny, having staff at evening meetings requires paying overtime. If Ms. Dunscombe is providing this information to the finance committee and again at the council meeting, she suggested eliminating that report from the finance committee meeting. Council President Olson said it would be at the mayor’s discretion and he may even choose to provide the update himself. She agreed that was something the mayor should consider. Councilmember Chen said he liked the idea in general, but would leave the agenda planning up to the council president and mayor. MOTION CARRIED (5-2), COUNCILMEMBERS CHEN AND NAND VOTING NO. Mr. Bailey said the Blue Ribbon Panel was not suggesting to rehash the report provided at the monthly finance committee, but rather to keep the council informed of highlights relevant to the fiscal distress and budget planning for the upcoming biennium. There likely will be meetings where there is no update and the Blue Ribbon Panel was not suggesting it be a big part of the council’s agenda, it was intended as a check- in. Mayor Rosen thanked the Blue Ribbon Panel, explaining he called a bunch of people and told them although he wasn’t the mayor yet, he would need their help. On January 29 they all showed up, nobody said no, and they worked very hard. He expressed his sincere gratitude to them. Mayor Rosen declared a brief recess. 2. A RESOLUTION REGARDING THE LANDMARK 99 PROPERTY Planning & Development Director Susan McLaughlin described key reasons Landmark 99 was pursued as an opportunity including addressing a public space deficiency in the Highway 99 Subarea, seeking a catalyst for positive redevelopment, addressing safety concerns on Highway 99 via environmental design as well as police presence, and increasing the City’s sales and property tax bases. After years of planning and looking to stimulate redevelopment via the comprehensive plan, PROS plan, subarea planning, draft community renewal plan (CRP), development was still short of the subarea plan’s anticipated growth, only 20-28% of the subarea plan’s target of 185 residential units/year in the subarea and 10% of the annual target for non- residential development. The impact of that level of redevelopment was felt from a revenue perspective and the lack of change in the corridor. That was where the City found itself in Augusts 2023, taking action on the recommendations in those previous planning efforts. The Landmark 99 opportunity presented itself unexpectedly to serve as a potential catalyst to engage in a public-private partnership recommended in those plans. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes July 2, 2024 Page 12 Community, Culture & Economic Development Director Todd Tatum recapped the option agreement that had a deadline of March 31, 2025 to provide $1 million in earnest money and September 30, 2025 to close on the property. Negotiations with both the property owner and developer needed to occur during that time and financing would always be complicated. Between the time the council approved the option agreement and efforts such as master planning, a request for expression of interest was issued which a number of developers attended to discuss opportunities and challenges with the property, an RFP process was conducted as well as a selection process for a developer team. Key things learned during that process was developers want a partnership, they like the idea of partnering with the City and see mutual value. A partnership with the City helps to make places vibrant, lowers costs for both, gives developers a reason to add community amenities, and makes mixed use work more effectively. These types of property opportunities often occur in fits and starts. He recalled a comment that developments like this usually take 15 years in other cities, why is Edmonds trying to get it done in 4 years? In other cities with similar developments, it takes a long time to develop consensus and once consensus is achieved, development comes together more quickly. Mr. Tatum continued, cities often find when development struggles in areas where development is desired, the city needs to have skin in the game often via property ownership which gives them control and options. Other cities used a number of tools such as development agreements, tax increment financing or community renewal areas. In keeping with previous studies and plans, this process affirmed there is still community interest in amenities and services in the subarea. However, what was a narrow path has become far more challenging; options for the City to have skin in the game are significantly reduced due to the budget. What should be the focus of this area of the City is one of many giant conversations to be had this year and next year. The lack of fiscal resources affords the City no management reserves to manage risk moving forward. For those reason, the resolution recommends ceasing work on the Landmark 99 option. Ms. McLaughlin explained as described in the resolution, it is important to continue the City’s commitment to the Landmark 99 area. Interestingly, the recommendation for a public-private partnership in the CRP includes, 1) establishing the community renewal area, 2) identifying potential sites, and 3) assessing available City resources for acquisition. While staff found great value in seeking out this opportunity, there may still be opportunity on the Landmark site in the future and establishing those foundational pieces is key. As the resolution and agenda memo states, staff recommends: 1) pursue adoption of the draft CRP which has been reviewed by the planning board and the economic development commission and an overview presented to the city council, 2) study the feasibility of tax increment financing (TIF) for part or all of the subarea, and 3) assess City resources for acquisition. Establishing an investment fund will not only strengthen the City’s negotiating power, but also strengthen confidence that the City has the resources to pursue acquisition. Ms. McLaughlin summarized good fortune is what happens when opportunity meets planning. The City’s continued commitment to addressing deficiencies is critically important not only for social equity for Highway 99 residents and business owners, but also the economic well-being of the area. COUNCILMEMBER CHEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, RELATED TO COMMUNITY INVESTMENT IN THE HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO PURCHASING THE LANDMARK PROPERTY. Councilmember Chen commented considering Landmark 99 has been a long journey for the City, staff and council. From the beginning, he was very skeptical about this project due to the location, size and the City’s financial health. The only thing that caused him to vote for additional time to explore the opportunity was the attractiveness of the CRP, TIF, and grant obtained by a private company. Unfortunately the chemistry for the City did not come together. He appreciated staff and the administration realizing there are still Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes July 2, 2024 Page 13 opportunities and challenges facing the Highway 99 subarea. At this time given the City’s financial health and after listening to Mr. Bailey presentation regarding the Blue Ribbon Panel’s findings and the challenges facing the City and what will need to be done to regain financial health, the best option is to step back and continue to establish a community fund, look into TIF and other potential programs, and build the City’s financial health. Councilmember Eck thanked Ms. McLaughlin and Mr. Tatum for the time they and their staffs invested in this potential venture. It was a lot of hard work and she recognized it must be difficult to pause at this point. Speaking as a resident, as someone with experience in human services, as an executive with a financial background, she was aware of complexity of the City’s financial issues. She will support the motion, but pointed out when the City was flush financially, not enough was done for this area. That part of Edmonds is Edmonds, Westgate is Edmonds, the Bowl is Edmonds, Five Corners is Edmonds, everywhere within the City limits should be treated equitably and the City should be investing equitably. She was not directing her comments at staff, but if the council plans to pass this resolution, the council needs to mean it because the community members who live in this part of town are tired of waiting. She understood the budget situation facing the City, but the residents and businesses in this area need to feel like the City is treating them like other areas of Edmonds. She assured she will continue to push on this issue because it is really important. COUNCILMEMBER NAND MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PAINE, TO STRIKE THE SECOND SENTENCE OF FIRST LEGALLY OPERATIVE SECTION OF THE RESOLUTION, “THE CITY COUNCIL SUPPORTS THE MAYOR’S RECOMMENDATION TO CEASE IMMEDIATE WORK RELATED TO THE LANDMARK PROPERTY.” Councilmember Nand explained the purpose of the amendment would not be to revive the $1 million investment in 2025 and proceed with exercising that option, but rather to leave the door open to continue negotiations with the land owner in the future. By approving the resolution, the council is telling the property owner that the City no longer wishes to move forward with purchasing the entire property of over 10 acres for $37 million but it would be foolhardy to shut the door entirely on potential future negotiations with the property owner. The City should stay engaged with all the property owners along Highway 99 because it is an area ripe for redevelopment in the future. In the future, the City could potentially negotiate purchasing a portion of the property which is what the administration attempted to do when the Parks, Recreation, and Human Services Director expressed interest in the two acres behind the Burlington Coat Factory as open space. Maintaining an open dialogue with the property owner, the City can have a seat at the table in future master planning with private partners. She preferred to leave open the possibility of renegotiation in the future if the City’s financial situation changes or if resources or interest from other levels of government change. It is always a good idea for the City to maintain a seat at the table. Councilmember Paine expressed support for the amendment. The City needs to maintain the ability to have a business relationship, conversation and dialogue with all members of the business community along Highway 99 particularly in this area due to the need for renewal and redevelopment and having a seat at the table to bring in resources. She expressed support for deleting this sentence, because this is a council decision. She supported maintaining relationships in the subarea and ensuring the City does not cut off its nose to spite its face. Councilmember Dotsch did not support the amendment, pointing out Section 2.A states, “Monitor the Landmark site and, if appropriate, engage in discussions with current or future landowners to identify potential opportunities” which would allow the City to move forward in the future if appropriate. Council President Olson agreed Section 2.A achieves the goal of keeping the door open and monitoring. Staff is seeking council support for the mayor’s intent to have staff cease work on this. A return to reserves is a prudent path forward before take on a risky venture. She supported the resolution as written. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes July 2, 2024 Page 14 Councilmember Tibbott did not support the amendment. It is important for the council to be clear with the land owner its intent not to follow through with the purchase agreement. As opportunities come up, he would consider working with a future developer or the property owner. The property owner has been clear in the past that he did not want to separate parcels out of the property. He agreed with Council President Olson that the mayor is giving council his best inclination and he anticipated the council will be getting a number of recommendations from the administration about cuts that need to be made; this happens to be one of them. It is not a particularly popular recommendation. He was an early supporter of this project, but it is better to make a clean break at this point and pursue other options as they arise in the future. Councilmember Chen said as much as he liked the engagement with the Landmark property owner and the businesses on Highway 99 in general, that intent is documented in the resolution. Now that this conclusion has been reached, he did not want to commit additional staff time, city attorney time or other resources. He did not support the amendment. MOTION FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS PAINE, ECK AND NAND VOTING YES. Councilmember Paine did not support the main motion. The Landmark property acquisition showed the entire City the potential along Highway 99 and in that subarea. The opportunity for renewal and engagement with the business owners and community highlighted the need for resources in that area. The City needs to continue offering planning, vision and partnerships in that area by offering more than just lip services, but also community investments. The equity problem is absolutely enormous; Edmonds needs to have skin in the game and be a player in the area. That area has been neglected for generations and has suffered from bad planning practices in the 1950s and 1960s that divided that community. The City needs to continue working on opportunities to create investment in that area which will create dialogue and opportunities for additional amenities. She did not support the resolution, but was glad to see other elements in it. COUNCILMEMBER DOTSCH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON, TO AMEND SECTION 2, TO STRIKE “IN 2024 AND 2025” AND SUBSTITUTE “IN 2025 AND BEYOND.” Councilmember Dotsch said future commitments to the Highway 99 subarea will require time, money, staff, and council bandwidth to do a great job for this area. She wanted the City to do it right and not rush it this year and next year by ensuring the resolution was not too tightly worded. Council President Olson commented the City has suffered a lot from workload and staffing shortages this year. Her preference is to focus on the comprehensive plan, budget changes as well as the fiscal stress the City is under in 2024. She will support the amendment. Councilmember Nand did not support the amendment, commenting this is isolationist. Other entities are already seeking to invest in Highway 99 such as Snohomish County’s investment in America’s Best Hotel. When the City doesn’t engage in critical discussions, the City has to take a very passive, bystander view and cannot represent the views of the constituents and community members particularly those who live in the subarea and are directly impacted by decisions made by property owners in the subarea. For example, America’s Best Hotel, the City is just sitting back with its hands folded and waiting for Snohomish County to provide updates because the county did not see Edmonds as a viable partner for that property at the outset. Councilmember Nand continued, allowing that sort of isolationism and disregarded view toward Highway 99 when other parties are potentially seeing investment opportunities would be a mistake. TIF and the CRP are resources and tools from the federal government. Other municipalities seek out those opportunities to enrich and benefit their community, increase their tax base and increase the quality of life for their community members; it’s not wrong for Edmonds to do that as well, especially for the underserved and Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes July 2, 2024 Page 15 neglected Highway 99 subarea. She encouraged the City to remain engaged with master planning in the subarea and have open dialogue and conversations on behalf of 43,000 people in Edmonds to influence what happens there instead of continuing to treat it with neglect, noting she did not think there was such a thing as benign neglect. Councilmember Eck did not support the amendment. The language in Section 2 is staff’s recommendation which means they believe they have the capacity to support that effort beginning this year. Changing the language and not commemorating the intent to have conversations this year and do this modest work was the wrong message to send to that part of the City. Councilmember Paine did not support amendment, commenting the need for continuity and engagement in the community has never been more necessary and she did not want to delay that effort. Council President Olson asked if there was any tangible messaging or loss of support from partners by postponing to 2025 instead of 2024. It is already July so postponing to 2025 would not mean a lengthy delay. Ms. McLaughlin said the comment about momentum is spot on, what staff has done and learned, the relationships that have begun, conversations with community not only lend themselves to comprehensive planning conversations that staff is actively engaged in, but there is also a draft CRP. It is not beneficial for more time to go by, it is better to pick up that that plan, dust it off and pivot to that strategy right away. With regard to the feasibility of TIF, that needs to be contemplated in relation to the budget so it is not possible to wait to 2025 to think about that strategy, there needs to be consideration of whether it can be feasible in the 2025 budget. For those reasons, it is critical not to skip a beat. This is not a significant amount of staff time; a lot of the work will be leveraging work that is already actively occurring with the comprehensive plan or work that has already done with the draft CRP. Council President Olson commented there is an assumption that the council knows a lot more about TIF and the CRP than they actually do. Both those items have come to the council once and she did not know enough about them to know how whether it was an expense to the City, how they affected the budget, etc. She felt strongly the City should not be moving forward on any investments in the short term and asked how having TIF set up sooner rather than later would be helpful. Mr. Tatum answered timing wise it would be important to start conversations about community renewal in 2024. The consulting work that would produce a tax increment area plan is not expensive compared to other consulting efforts, but staff would like to include that in the budget for 2025 and then have the detailed conversation about TIF in 2025. That would provide a platform and a set of potential financing tools for 2025. He agreed there was a huge amount of conversation to be had regarding TIF, which he recommended not be attempted in 2024, but setting the groundwork for 2025 needs to happen in 2024 during the budget process. Council President Olson said she was willing not to support this amendment due to the staff and consulting work that has already been done, but the council is in the mode of not spending more money on consultants, lawyers, or even staff time when it takes away from other priority projects like creating a good budget. She was not confident TIF needed to be included in 2025 because she did not know anything about it yet. She was willing to give that allowance for work that has already been done, but she hoped staff was not getting mixed messages from council about spending money in 2024, because that cannot happen. Ms. McLaughlin clarified this is not a budget ask, it is a resolution showing intention. The TIF conversation will include providing more information to council about what it means at the time budget is requested. That work would not begin until 2025 and as Mr. Tatum mentioned, the consultant contract would be in the realm of $40,000. While right now that number is still not savory, as a consultant body of work that can stimulate investment in desperately needed infrastructure in that area, it is a good conversation to have as part of the budget. Council President Olson said she was open to having that conversation during the budget which is all the language in the resolution would make possible. She was willing to learn more about TIF, Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes July 2, 2024 Page 16 but anticipated she would not support a consultant contract because the City has a $12 million deficit and adding $40,000 for something that is not necessary right now may not be the right idea. Councilmember Chen did not support the amendment. He thanked staff for their explanation regarding the work that has been done. The CRP and TIF does not equate to the Landmark project. Landmark is one of potential projects that could use those programs; without Landmark, the City and the Highway 99 area are still good candidates for community renewal, for TIF, for county and federal grants, and Amazon’s affordable housing grants. He has seen other communities get those grants, it just takes time. Removing the preparatory work in 2024 is not a wise choice. He referred to the saying, strike while the iron is hot; all this preparatory work has been done, money has been spent, and that knowledge needs to be retained and the area given the proper amount of attention. He did not want to give the perception that any money spent on Highway 99 was bad for the City; with the right amount of investment, there is potential to generate additional tax revenue as development occurs including on Highway 99. He pointed out ceasing work on acquisition of the Landmark property did not mean work on the entire corridor ceased. COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT CALLED THE QUESTION. COUNCILMEMBER CHEN SECONDED. CALL THE QUESTION FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS TIBBOTT AND CHEN AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON VOTING YES. Councilmember Nand asked for clarification regarding the $70,000 Snohomish County invested via an affordable housing grant and how that could be parlayed into community renewal. Mr. Tatum said two different funding sources were discussed, the Affordable and Supportive Housing Tax Credit and a $100,000 grant (began as $75,000 and Snohomish County Councilmember Peterson helped increase it to $100,000). The City never signed a grant agreement for that grant and have not received the funds. Councilmember Nand asked if the funds could be applied toward CRP or TIF. Mr. Tatum answered that would need to be discussed with Snohomish County Councilmember Strom in a follow-up conversation with him based on tonight’s discussion. Councilmember Nand expressed support for allowing staff to continue this dialogue. Councilmember Dotsch recalled during the previous presentation regarding community renewal, the city council must pass a resolution that identifies a specific area for community renewal, adopt a finding of blight that applies to the area, and designate the City as a community renewal agency. Ms. McLaughlin responded that work has been completed in draft form. The area has been identified and how it meets the RCW criteria, and there are project recommendations which include establishing a community renewal agency to spearhead the tools available through community renewal. Councilmember Dotsch recalled a public hearing was also required. Ms. McLaughlin answered a public hearing by the city council would be part of a typical process. She anticipated staff would also provide another introduction of the subject to council. AMENDMENT FAILED (1-6), COUNCILMEMBER DOTSCH VOTING YES. COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO AMEND BY STRIKING THE 6TH WHEREAS CLAUSE, “WHEREAS, THESE CIVIC INVESTMENT SHOULD BE ADDED TO THE CIP; AND” Council President Olson explained whereas clauses are intended to be retrospective, which this one is not, and for that reason it doesn’t belong and should be removed. Councilmember Tibbott supported the proposed amendment, advising he found the wording “these civic investments” too vague. When projects are added to the CIP, the council needs to know what they are; in the past the CIP has become bloated with projects the City does not intend to pursue. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes July 2, 2024 Page 17 Councilmember Paine did not support the amendment. Adding the CRP and the TIF to the CIP provides clear direction so staff can seek grants to support that work. Council President Olson commented there are several items on the extended planner regarding the CIP/CFP process and the CIP/CFP is also reviewed by the planning board. This amendment does not state it won’t be done, but it isn’t appropriate to include anything that is not context, background or retrospective or to make new commitments in a whereas clause. She had this conversation with the city attorney and he is attending the meeting virtually if there are any questions. Councilmember Tibbott expressed support for efforts related to the CRP and TIF, tools the City will eventually want to use and that he supported referencing in the resolution; however, they are not capital projects and he did not understand how they would be added to the CIP/CFP. Ms. McLaughlin said staff did not anticipate the CRP and the TIF would be items in the investment fund, it would be the establishment of a fund to leverage potential future land acquisition or identify potential infrastructure projects for capital investment in the future. The establishment of a fund would make the City more nimble as opportunities arise in the future. The intent is have funding available for infrastructure or land acquisition. Mr. Tatum commented if the whereas clause is eliminated, the intent is encapsulated in 2.D. Councilmember Nand said she was not particularly passionate about preserving the 6th whereas clause, but it can be important to leave breadcrumbs, context and hints for future councils and whoever succeeds Mr. Tatum and Ms. McLaughlin in the future to understand the context when the council decided to pass this resolution. From that perspective, the whereas serves as context regarding staff’s intent to establish a pool of funds through grant opportunities in the future. Councilmember Chen did not support the amendment. He preferred to retain this language to set a target. He drives, walks, or rides his bike by the public storage on a daily basis, a very attractive location for future consideration. Council President Olson commented future actions are not typically included a whereas clause. Councilmember Eck did not support the amendment. She understood Council President Olson’s point, but in this regard it makes sense to overstate the point. If the City is pulling out of the Landmark purchase and making a line in the sand to be committed, that cannot be overstated. AMENDMENT FAILED (3-4), COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON AND COUNCILMEMBERS TIBBOTT AND DOTSCH VOTING YES. COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO AMEND THE 6TH WHEREAS CLAUSE TO READ, “WHEREAS THE COUNCIL INTENDS TO CONSIDER NEW ADDITIONS TO THE CIP TO SERVE THIS AREA; AND” Council President Olson said as it the whereas clause is currently worded, it states the council is on board for “these” civic investments, one of the civic investments was a community center. She suggested the mayor ask staff to do a real analysis of what if any impact the change of the Ballinger Center from a Mountlake Terrace focus to a catchment area focus will have on the need. She recognized that center is on border of the Edmonds but so was the Landmark site which was being considered for a community center. If the Ballinger Center is a place the City chooses to invest in and support, the City should look at the impact that has. When a community center came up in the PROS Plan, it was before the change to the Ballinger Center and all the discussions since then have not really included any analysis or consideration of whether that changes the need for a community center which includes a capital investment, facilities maintenance and staff, and if there is a better or more efficient way to provide that for residents in that area. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes July 2, 2024 Page 18 Council President Olson clarified she was not saying she didn’t want to make investments in that area; she has been on the record in numerous public meetings saying one of the reasons she was not wholly on board with the Landmark purchase was she felt the most important capital investment in that area was a park in the Gateway neighborhood where there is nothing within a mile walk. She was satisfied with stating investments, but did not want to specify “these” civic investments which included a community center until that is fully vetted. Councilmember Paine did not support the amendment, commenting it was totally appropriate to include the language in the whereas clause as it helps tell a story. This is not related to a project in Mountlake Terrace, it is related to future capital investment in the Highway 99 subarea or whatever that area ends up looking like under community renewal. The Ballinger Center in Mountlake Terrace is a nonprofit and a totally separate proposition. Edmonds needs to have community centers as they add value. Councilmember Tibbott expressed support for the amendment, the council will want to consider capital projects and it’s obvious the council is interested in capital projects as this has been discussed for over a year. He did not want to limit civic investments. Section 2.D already addresses the commitment to establishing a fund for new projects in the community renewal area. Councilmember Nand did not support the amendment. Whereas clauses are not legally operative, they are aspirational. Under the comprehensive plan, Highway 99 is planned to take on a lot of additional density; however, there are no community centers, arts and culture venues, or any public meeting space within easy walking distance of Highway 99. The council does not need to direct staff via a whereas clause to engage in an exercise to see whether a community center is needed on Highway 99. Whereas clauses are inspirational and provide guidance for future councils and administration; the City should seek community partnerships and include civic investments in the CIP. Councilmember Dotsch expressed support for the amendment, pointing out Section 2 addresses the intent for this area. She agreed with Councilmember Tibbott’s reasoning. With this amendment, the whereas clause still says the same thing, but is not as tightly worded as the existing language. AMENDMENT FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS TIBBOTT AND DOTSCH AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON VOTING YES. MAIN MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBER PAINE VOTING NO. 9. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Nand thanked the Edmonds Chamber of Commerce very small staff for their hard work, commenting several months of work are about to meet fruition in the 4th of July parade. Mountlake Terrace will have a great fireworks show and she encouraged the public to let the professionals handle fireworks to ensure there are no more tragic fires. Sparklers are fun and not very lethal and she hoped people who wanted to celebrate the 4th of July with fireworks would confine themselves to sparkers and going to the professional shows which keep the community safe and respects veterans and others negatively impacted by illegal fireworks as well as pets and wildlife. Many wild birds are killed due to confusion and terror caused by fireworks. She suggested being be kinder to everyone and the environment by not setting off illegal fireworks. Councilmember Paine looked forward to the 4th of July parade and marching with advocates for the Edmonds Marsh and carrying the orca. She was hopeful this was not the last 4th of July considering the last week from SCOTUS. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes July 2, 2024 Page 19 Councilmember Dotsch gave a shout out to the Chamber for the reasons Councilmember Nand stated; they operate with a small crew and do an amazing job every year. She will be at the parade watching. She wished everyone a Happy Independence Day with their family and friends. Council President Olson said she loves the 4th of July, recalling a conversation in the context of Juneteenth that not everyone was free at the same time. She directed attention to the hope and promise of America and the fact that as a country, the United States falls forward to success. Mistakes have been made as a community and as a nation, but everyone tries to correct those mistakes, move forward and do better. She hoped everyone would take on the 4th of July celebration with that mindset and embrace it. The 4th of July is a joyous holiday in Edmonds and she hoped everyone enjoyed the Brackett Run and the parade. Councilmember Tibbott echoed the praise of the 4th of July and said he looked forward to it. Councilmember Chen wished everyone a happy, fun 4th of July hoping to see everyone at the parade, a must attend event. Councilmember Eck commented things are converging at her house in the next few days. In addition to celebrating the origins of the United States and exercising our rights, two days later her eldest is getting married. She is thinking a lot about joy, empathy for one another, and happiness in exercising their rights and liberties. She wished all a safe and happy 4th of July. 10. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Rosen relayed the 4th of July is about something took that place on that day 248 years ago. The 56 people who signed that document knew it could be a death warrant for them and for many of them it actually was. He relayed strong points in the document including that governments derive their just powers from the consent of those who are governed, we should be organized in a way that will most likely effect their safety and happiness. It started 248 years ago and now, because of those people, we have the privilege of living in this country and serving others as we also pursue assuring their safety and happiness. It is an honor to do that with council and the community. ADJOURNMENT With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 9:40 pm.