2024-09-24 Council Packet2.
of c�,y
s
Agenda
Edmonds City Council
REGULAR MEETING
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
250 5TH AVE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020
SEPTEMBER 24, 2024, 7:00 PM
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETINGS BEGINNING AT 7:00 PM ARE STREAMED LIVE ON THE COUNCIL
MEETING WEBPAGE, COMCAST CHANNEL 21, AND ZIPLY CHANNEL 39.
TO ATTEND VIRTUALLY, CLICK ON OR PASTE THE FOLLOWING ZOOM MEETING LINK INTO A WEB
BROWSER USING A COMPUTER OR SMART PHONE:
HTTPS://ZOOM.US/J/95798484261 BY PHONE: +1 253 215 8782 WEBINAR ID: 957 9848 4261
CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE
LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
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
4. PRESENTATIONS
S.
6
7
1. NHHM Proclamation (5 min)
2. Mayor's Finance Update (10 min)
APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
AUDIENCE COMMENTS
THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT REGARDING ANY MATTER NOT LISTED ON THE
AGENDA AS CLOSED RECORD REVIEW OR AS A PUBLIC HEARING. SPEAKERS ARE LIMITED TO
THREE MINUTES. PLEASE STATE CLEARLY YOUR NAME AND CITY OF RESIDENCE. IF USING A
COMPUTER OR SMART PHONE, RAISE A VIRTUAL HAND TO BE RECOGNIZED. IF USING A DIAL -
UP PHONE, PRESS *9 TO RAISE A HAND. WHEN PROMPTED, PRESS *6 TO UNMUTE.
RECEIVED FOR FILING
1. Claim for Damages for filing (0 min)
2. August 2024 Monthly Financial Report (0 min)
Edmonds City Council Agenda
September 24, 2024
Page 1
3. Written Public Comments (0 min)
4. Outside Boards and Committee Reports (0 min)
8. APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA
1. Approval of Council Special Retreat Minutes August 16, 2024
2. Approval of Council Special Meeting Minutes September 10, 2024
3. Approval of Council Meeting Minutes September 10, 2024
4. Approval of claim checks and wire payments.
5. Resolution to Approve Placement of Lien on Civic Park Property
6. Council Rules of Procedure Sections 10, 11, 12 and 14
7. Arts Commission Confirmation of Appointment — Leggett
8. Arts Commission Confirmation of Appointment — Leggett
9. Update to Promotion Policy - Compensation
10. Update to ECC 2.10.010 - Acting Appointments
11. Social Worker Supervision Contract
12. ILA with Edmonds School District
13. Correction to Ordinance 4362 Attachment A
14. Resolution Expressing City Council's Intention for 2026 Property Tax Levy
15. An ordinance of the City of Edmonds granting to New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC, a Delaware
limited liability company, successor in interest to AT&T Wireless Services of Washington, LLC, an
Oregon limited liability company, d/b/a AT&T Wireless, its successors and assigns, a nonexclusive
master permit agreement to install, operate, and maintain macro wireless telecommunications
facilities within a certain designated area of right-of-way, establishing an effective date.
9. PUBLIC HEARING
1. Public Hearing on Permit Processing Timeline and Public Notice Code Amendments to Achieve
Compliance with Mandates in SB 5290 and HB 1105 (file AMD2024-0002) (30 min)
10. COUNCIL BUSINESS
1. Green Building Incentives Draft Code Amendments (AMD2023-0010) (45 min)
2. Process for Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) (15 min)
11. COUNCIL COMMENTS
12. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
ADJOURNMENT
Edmonds City Council Agenda
September 24, 2024
Page 2
4.1
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 09/24/2024
NHHM Proclamation
Staff Lead: Todd Tatum
Department: Mayor's Office
Preparer: Carolyn LaFave
Background/History
In 1968 the U.S. Congress adopted a resolution asking the president of the United States annually to
issue a proclamation designating a week in September including September 15 and 16 as "National
Hispanic Heritage Week." In 1988 Congress expanded the celebration to a 31-day period beginning
September 15 creating "National Hispanic Heritage Month."
Staff Recommendation
Narrative
Mayor Rosen will read a proclamation in honor of "National Hispanic Heritage Month". Ileana Ponce -
Gonzalez, Founder and Executive Director of Community Health Worker Coalition for Migrants and
Refugees, along with members of her staff, will be on -hand to accept the proclamation.
Attachments:
National Hispanic Heritage Month 2024
Packet Pg. 3
4.1.a
PrVIrtamatTV111
City of Edmonds •Office of the Mayor
National Hispanic Heritage Month
WHEREAS, National Hispanic Heritage Month is celebrated nationwide from September 15th through October
15th each year; and
WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds looks forward to celebrating National Hispanic Heritage Month with the
greater community to highlight the rich heritage, arts, histories, food, music and traditions of all 21+
Latin-American nations, and pay tribute to all for their contributions to our city and our society;
and
WHEREAS, Latinos are individuals that are descendants from Latin American countries and speak a variety of
different languages. Hispanics are individuals that speak Spanish and are descendants from Spanish
speaking countries. Latinx is a gender neutral or non -binary term for people of Latin American
descent, and we recognize the Latinx identity also encompasses people in Black/African,
Asian, Indigenous, and Queer communities; and
WHEREAS, recognizing that Hispanics make up 7% of the Edmonds population, and that 9% of children in our
community speak Spanish predominantly at home. Understanding that Hispanics are extremely
entrepreneurial and play a vital role in our economy; and
WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds recognizes the significant contributions of the Edmonds Diversity, Equity,
Inclusion and Accessibility Commission, the Community Health Worker Coalition for Migrants and
Refuges, and numerous grassroots leaders and outreach groups that help increase cultural
awareness, education, enrichment, and community engagement with our residents. It is through
their support and community involvement that our city has continued to become more
culturally diverse and welcoming of everyone; and
WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds is committed to recognizing Hispanic/Latino and Latinx culture and heritage as
an important part of the city and its strong, inclusive community;
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Mike Rosen, Mayor of the City of Edmonds, do hereby proclaim September 15th — October
15th, as National Hispanic Heritage Month and call its observance to all residents.
Mike Rosen, Mayor --- September 24, 2024
0
0
E
0
U
0
a
x
x
z
Packet Pg. 4
4.2
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 09/24/2024
Mayor's Finance Update
Staff Lead: Carolyn LaFave
Department: Mayor's Office
Preparer: Carolyn LaFave
Background/History
On July 2, 2024 the council voted to have a Mayor Update as an ongoing item all regular meeting
agendas. This was in response to a recommendation from the Mayor's Blue Ribbon Panel.
Staff Recommendation
No action, informational
Narrative
The Mayor, or another member of the administration, will answer questions about City finances that
have been requested by council in advance and will also share actions related to the fiscal emergency
that have transpired since the last update.
When there is nothing new to report, this agenda item will be the opportunity to share that there is
nothing new to report.
Packet Pg. 5
7.1
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 09/24/2024
Claim for Damages for filing
Staff Lead: NA
Department: Administrative Services
Preparer: Marissa Cain
Background/History
N/A
Staff Recommendation
Acknowledge receipt of Claims for Damages for filing.
Narrative
Michael Hovanes
7th Ave S, Edmonds WA
($1,414.40)
John Richardson
Walnut Street, Edmonds WA
($550.29)
Attachments:
Claim for Damages - Michael Hovanes - for council
Claim for Damages - John Richardson - for council
Packet Pg. 6
7.1.a
RECE
SEP 6 2024
U
R
Please take note that ` who currently resides at
mailing address
home phone # vork phone and who resided at A
at the time of the occurrence and whose date of birth is claiming damages
against C; oT in the sum of $ / 41 4-, 40 arising out of the following circumstances listed below.
DATE OF OCCURRENCE: 12,5-I 2-4 TIME:
LOCATION OF OCCURRENCE: T� /�✓� �"� �� �,
CITY OF EDMONDS
CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FORM
DESCRIPTION.
1. Describe the conduct and circumstance that broug
injurryy or daTag Al§p describe the injury or damage
(attach an extra sheet for additional information, if needed)
2. Provide a list of itnesses, if applicable, to the occurrence including names, addresses, and phone numbers.
/ T •fT �_� H...,.-»�.s f,- �l YY/G HC , c � - V y -- l �1 �G U�~/� G `,
3. Attach copies of all documentation relating to expenses, injuries, losses, and/or estimates for repair.
4. Have you submitted a claim for damages to your insurance company?
If so, please provide the name of the insurance company:
and the policy #:
FAE
Yes _ No
`*ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR AUTOMOBILE CLAIMS ONLY
License Plate # Driver License #
Type Auto:
(year) (make) (model)
DRIVER: OWNER:
Address: Address:
Phone#: Phone#:
Passengers:
Name: Name:
Address: Address:
Form Revised 04/09/2021 Page I of 2
E
M
U
Packet Pg. 7
7.1.a
This Claim form must be*signed by the Claimant, a person holding a written power of attorney from the Claimant, by the
atforney in fact for the Claimant, by an attorney admitted to practice in Washington State on the Claimant's behalf, or by a
court -approved guardian or guardian ad litem on behalf of the Claimant.
penalty d` perjury under the laws of the state of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct.
of Claimant Date and place (residential address, city and county)
.M
Signature of Representative
Print Name of Representative
Date and place (residential address, city and county)
Bar Number (if applicable)
Please present the completed claim form to
City Clerk's Office
City of Edmonds
121 51h Avenue North
Edmonds, WA, 98020
8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
E
M
U
Form Revised 04/09/2021
Page 2 oC2
Packet Pg. 8
7.1.a
Michael Hovanes
(1) Description:
On July 7/25/24 a plumber service was contacted (Mike's Plumbing) to resolve a water
flow problem associated with recent meter replacement which accrued on 7/24/24. The
invoice for the service is attached for your reference_ They attempted to restore flow.
And followed a series of trouble shooting steps which are outlined in the attached
invoice. The description of work in the invoice provides an excellent summary of
procedures they followed during their attempt to restore flow.
As you will note in the invoice they recached the conclusion that the sink faucet had
been clogged by derbis which was released during the system shut down and restart.
This debris was permanently blocking the flow within the sink faucet. A new faucet was
ordered and subsequently installed on 8/14/24_ A description of the part and brand of
the faucet is included in the description section of the attached invoice.
You will note the full invoice amount of $1414.40 has been paid.
Please be aware prior to contacting Mike's Plumbing and pursing their service. I made
contact with Greg Malowicki (the Edmonds City project Manager). He was walking the
neighborhood inspecting and managing the restoration of water pressure to the supply
lines. Greg was invited into our home and he witnessed the failed faucet_ We followed
his suggestions of further "bleeding" the water lines to insure no air was trapped etc.
During his visit to our home he provided his name and contact information. We followed
all of his suggestions, in our attempt to restore normal operation of the contaminated
(clogged) faucet as we attempted to avoid a plumbing service call. Regrettably, his
trouble shooting suggested didn't resolve the issue.
Please, note the faucet has been replaced_..._ The replacement faucet is functioning
correctly.
Total expense of the repair was $1,414.40 See attached paid invoice_
You may contact me directly at
should you have any questions.
y
a�
CU
E
M
0
4
E
M
U
Packet Pg. 9
7.1.b
CITY OF EDMONDS
CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FORM
Date Claim Form
Received by City
Please take note that , D riN ¢.lG Pr2fl� Q K who currently resides at w
(2D MO tJ D,5 TO -Z0 mailing address S AMA
home phone # `51-Z45-F6 (k. work phone # P-JA and who resided at ASvVA-9
at the time of the occurrence and whose date of birth is LG 2l l9SS is claiming damages
against Glzy DF e0M0,%1DSs in the sum off S56 .Zg arising out of the following circumstances listed below
DATE OF OCCURRENCE: aI s! 2 `f TIME 41 d lT Z PM
LOCATION OF OCCURRENCE: Z!S W At./l dr 5T EfJM o NDS
DESCRIPTION:
1. Describe the conduct and circumstance that brought about the injury or damage. Also describe the injury or damage
f 7 0 Z i 7/ - W 5 S(v
r 1 SS O c
Wt)ty_SG i ins arDlirrj) -n/ A1J 0t4aSAa/►-' 41 VFL -rA.+T lnUi-D iV6-r Mn,"-mjKt Di?P iune--Lr--✓FLS iz
`'n?OP/ t-A4 FL )iAJ • TO 15 C4*w 0 rn?- R�1M.RLtZ5£!-ffi (attach an extra sheet for additional information, if needed)
vvgr4AJ , HZ5 Btu.
2. Provide a list of witnesses, if applicable, to the occurrence including names, addresses, and phone numbers. ejjN�
DKl5 KI± UN 4Av5GJ Q-N e&f6/^/Er-fZ KRIs.
RA &I PON SYJPt-, � PW rA9x-►2.Si��_`� JLjiA.ap,►,ie-. -4 1-315'q
Attach copies of all documentation relating to expenses, injuries, losses, and/or estimates for repair.
Have you submitted a claim for damages to your insurance company?
If so, please provide the name of the insurance company:
and the policy #:
Yes A No
" * ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR AUTOMOBILE CLAIMS ONLY
License Plate # Driver License #
Type Auto:
(year) (make) (model)
DRIVER. OWNER:
Address Address:
Phone#: Phone#:
Passengers:
Name: Name:
Address: Address
Form Revised 04/09/2021 Page t of 2
Packet Pg. 10
7.1.b
This Claim form must be signed by the Claimant, a person holding a written power of attorney from the Claimant, by the
attorney in fact for the Claimant, by an attorney admitted to practice in Washington State on the Claimant's behalf, or by a
court -approved guardian or guardian ad litem on behalf of the Claimant.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the state of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct.
4 l/ZlL 7 / !�_ W AL^lUr S'?
J
gnature of Claimant Date and place (residential address, city and county) 6AI0kJ0AJ 194
Or
Signature of Representative
Print Name of Representative
Date and place (residential address, city and county)
Bar Number (if applicable)
Please present the completed claim form to
City Clerk's Office
City of Edmonds
121 5th Avenue North
Edmonds, WA, 98020
8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
E
U
Form Revised 04/09/2021
Page 2 of 2
Packet Pg. 11
7.2
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 09/24/2024
August 2024 Monthly Financial Report
Staff Lead: Kim Dunscombe
Department: Administrative Services
Preparer: Sarah Mager
Background/History
N/A
Staff Recommendation
Receive for Filing
Narrative
August 2024 Monthly Financial Report
Attachments:
Complete August 2024 Monthly Financial Report
Packet Pg. 12
I 7.2.a I
OV
I)7C. 1 g0v
CITY OF EDMONDS
MONTHLY BUDGETARY FINANCIAL REPORT
AUGUST 2024
Packet Pg. 13 1
I 7.2.a I
MONTHLY HIGHLIGHTS
GENERAL FUND HIGHLIGHTS
• Real Personal/Property Tax and EMS Levy is up $297,025 from this point last year. Despite this current good news, our forecast for
property tax will likely finish under budget by $(130,000).
• Sales tax is up $102,652 from this point last year but is $(252,816) under the cumulative budget forecast.
• Utility taxes are categorized under "Other Taxes' in the chart below, exhibit divergent trends, with some surpassing the cumulative
budget while others lag behind. Notably, gas tax from Puget Sound Energy is down by $(105,909) falling short of their perspective
cumulative budget.
• Development services revenues overall are up a total of $385,607 from this point last year. The increase is notably due to the city
receiving permit revenue for development of the Edmonds Green Apartments.
• Interest charged to the General Fund for negative cash balance in 2024 equals $43,234 to date.
• There is a noticeable uptick in salaries and benefits for May. This increase is attributed to retroactive payments and salary
adjustments resulting from a new collective bargaining agreement for the same bargaining unit.
General Fund Tax Revenue (2024 YTD)
14'000, 000
12,000,000
v 10,000,00041 -
8,000,000
X 6,000, 000
a 4,000, 000 ■
2,000,000
Sales Tax Property Tax EMS Tax Other Taxes
Actual 7,700,256 6,162,946 2,356,737 5,869,813
■ Budget 12,300,000 11,327,000 4,578,000 9,229,949
M10:11111111111111LI11:110:1:[el::&1
• Interest charged to the Street Fund for negative cash balance in 2024 equals $12,303 to date.
REET FUND HIGHLIGHTS
• REET revenues are 24.8% or $459,907 higher than last year. Projections indicate REET revenues are on track to meet the budget targe
of $3.0 million.
CAPITAL FUND 332 HIGHLIGHTS
• The negative fund balance in Fund 332 — Capital Construction is a result of the Mee property purchase and the timing of grant receipt
A reimbursement of $713,953 was submitted in early July, and payment was received in early September. Interest charged to the
Parks Capital Construction Fund for negative cash balance in 2024 equals $8,756.
to] III Irt'dto] ►111.y:110001110001161
• The revenue increases shown on pages 17-19 is due to the 2024 Revenue Bond Issue which was new money for Water and
Stormwater, as well as refunding money for the 2013 bond issue to all three utilities. The expense increase was due to payment sent
to escrow to pay off the 2013 bond issuance.
1
Packet Pg. 14
7.2.a
City of Edmonds
All Funds Financial Summary
As of August 31, 2024
Beginning Fund
Revenues /
Expenditures /
Revenues less
Ending Fund
Fund
Balance
Sources
Uses
Expenditures
Balance
Cash Balance
Governmental
001 General Fund
2,492,460
31,627,693
32,769,880
(1,142,187)
1,350,273
(1,742,301)
009 LEOFF Medical Insurance Reserve
139,774
125,000
225,559
(100,559)
39,215
48,194
012 Contingency Reserve
2,228,672
-
-
-
2,228,672
2,228,672
014 Historic Sub -Fund
8,944
-
4,385
(4,385)
4,559
4,559
016 Building Maintenance
3,756,168
80,828
1,086,637
(1,005,810)
2,750,358
2,804,429
017 Marsh Restoration
853,595
300
-
300
853,895
853,895
o
018 Homeless Response
200,000
-
-
200,000
200,000
CL
019 Opioid Response
74,119
369,490
369,490
443,610
443,610
_
ca
Total General Funds
9,753,732
32,203,311
34,086,462
(1,883,151)
7,870,581
4,841,057
'Ei
Special Revenue Funds
104 Drug Enforcement
40,843
5,243
-
5,243
46,085
45,907
=
LL
111 Street
4,701
1,714,953
1,610,028
104,925
109,626
(13,113)
>,
112 Street Construction
2,734,808
3,311,476
2,152,165
1,159,311
3,894,119
2,847,369
I.E.
117 Municipal Arts
657,265
48,268
42,548
5,720
662,985
654,500
O
120 Hotel / Motel
151,247
83,578
62,718
20,860
172,106
154,243
2
121 Employee Parking
83,814
17,576
-
17,576
101,390
100,313
c
122 Youth Scholarship
17,868
2,294
300
1,994
19,863
19,633
N
123 Tourism Promotion
138,157
32,575
14,881
17,694
155,851
148,884
r
3
125 R E ET 2
1,992,459
1,273,836
508,397
765,439
2,757,897
2,791,884
sa
3
126 REET 1
3,957,800
1,374,218
412,665
961,553
4,919,353
4,866,292
Q
127 Gifts Catalog
3,140,448
344,480
334,937
9,543
3,149,991
3,109,415
130 Cemetery Maintenance
196,245
131,331
170,877
(39,546)
156,698
154,320
Q
137 Cemetery Trust
1,212,121
75,356
73,000
2,356
1,214,477
1,198,897
N
138 Sister City
18,681
3,389
2,475
914
19,595
19,351
140 Business Improvement
37,682
67,798
44,163
23,635
61,318
61,318
141 Affordable Housing
309,127
36,929
-
36,929
346,056
337,659
=
142 Edmonds Rescue
36,932
6,866,999
6,867,475
(476)
36,456
36,456
jL
143 Tree Fund
222,354
42,306
200,269
(157,963)
64,391
61,212
2%
Capital Projects
139,615
1,089,330
708,465
380,866
520,481
(441,903)
Debt Service
-
35,901
35,551
350
350
-
0
Enterprise Funds
411 Combined Utility Operation
-
96,585
-
96,585
96,585
138,065
c
421 Water UtiIity
9,601,886
21,735,241
10,980,151
10,755,089
20,356,976
20,263,804
r
422 Storm Water Utility
6,983,494
8,846,897
4,079,910
4,766,986
11,750,480
11,052,128
423 Sewer/ Wastewater Treatment Plar
14,903,525
19,253,610
17,731,647
1,521,962
16,425,487
17,077,141
424 Bond Reserve Fund
843,961
576,274
1,399,406
(823,132)
20,828
20,828
Q
Internal Service Funds
y
511 Equipment Rental
5,298,245
1,912,193
1,805,910
106,282
5,404,527
5,297,798
i -
512 Technology Rental
421,587
1,452,536
1,196,771
255,765
677,352
682,638
p
All Funds
62,898,595
102,634,482
84,521,172
18,113,311
81,011,906
75,526,096
V
C
E
t
t�
ca
w
Q
2
Packet Pg. 15
I 7.2.a I
GENERAL FUND SUMMARY
City of Edmonds, WA
Monthly Revenue Summary -General Fund
2024
General Fund
Cumulative Monthly Monthly YTD Variance
Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals Actuals %
January $ 2,711,054 $ 2,711,054 $ 2,532,339 $ 2,532,339 -6.59%
February 5,412,574 2,701,521 3,801,618 6,333,957 17.02%
March 8,234,389 2,821,815 4,006,316 10,340,274 25.57%
April 12,871,492 4,637,102 8,886,692 19,226,965 49.38%
May 21,881,117 9,009,625 3,958,085 23,185,051 5.96%
June 24,570,750 2,689,633 3,062,106 26,247,157 6.82%
July 27,555,506 2,984,755 2,559,427 28,806,583 4.54%
August 30,903,813 3,348,307 2,821,110 31,627,693 2.34%
September 33,691,847 2,788,034
October 39,258,675 5,566,828
November 48,115,504 8,856,828
December 51,302,492 3,186,988
City of Edmonds, WA
Monthly Expenditure Summary -General Fund
2024
General Fund
Cumulative Monthly
Budget Forecast Budget Forecast
Monthly
Actuals
YTD
Actuals
Variance
%
January
$ 4,823,378 $
4,823,378 $
4,652,570
$ 4,652,570
-3.54%
February
8,954,405
4,131,027
3,706,872
8,359,442
-6.64%
March
12,985,832
4,031,427
3,718,847
12,078,289
-6.99%
April
16,651,930
3,666,099
3,782,082
15,860,371
-4.75%
May
20,738,604
4,086,673
4,319,151
20,179,522
-2.70%
June
25,334,520
4,595,916
4,781,657
24,961,180
-1.47%
July
29,347,611
4,013,091
3,708,067
28,669,246
-2.31%
August
33,504,298
4,156,687
4,100,634
32,769,880
-2.19%
September
37,673,197
4,168,900
October
41,800,681
4,127,484
November
46,965,717
5,165,036
December
52,037,793
5,072,076
*The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average.
3
Packet Pg. 16
MAJOR GENERAL FUND REVENUE SUMMARY
I 7.2.a I
City of Edmonds, WA
Monthly Revenue Summary -Real Personal & EMS Property Tax
2024
Real Personal & EMS Property Tax
Cumulative Monthly Monthly YTD Variance
Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals Actuals %
January $
39,472 $
39,472 $
21,015
$ 21,015
-46.76%
February
220,153
180,681
366,893
387,909
76.20%
March
1,232,162
1,012,009
755,431
1,143,339
-7.21%
April
7,302,618
6,070,456
6,153,028
7,296,367
-0.09%
May
8,584,040
1,281,422
1,063,611
8,359,978
-2.61%
June
8,660,449
76,409
74,286
8,434,264
-2.61%
July
8,695,629
35,180
30,722
8,464,987
-2.65%
August
8,772,089
76,460
54,697
8,519,684
-2.88%
September
9,020,162
248,073
October
14,815,200
5,795,038
November
15,849,934
1,034,734
December
15,905,000
55,066
Sales and Use Tax
Real Personal & EMS Property Tax
16,000,000
14,000,000
12,000,000
10,000,000
8,000,000
6,000,000
4,000,000
2,000,000
0
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
-Current Year -Budget -Prior Year
City of Edmonds, WA
Monthly Revenue Summary -Sales Tax
2024
Cumulative Monthly Monthly YTD Variance
Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals Actuals %
January $
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
956,967 $
2,084,047
2,987,849
3,814,928
4,821,039
5,796,759
6,836,449
7,953,072
8,995,564
10,116,626
11,238,239
12,300,000
956,967 $
1,127,080
903,802
827,079
1,006,111
975,721
1,039,690
1,116,623
1,042,491
1,121,062
1,121,613
1,061,761
975,066 $ 975,066
1,059,532 2,034,598
870,730 2,905,328
870,807 3,776,135
983,892 4,760,027
921,356 5,681,383
996,390 6,677,774
1,022,482 7,700,256
1.89%
-2.37%
-2.76 %
-1.02 %
-1.27%
-1.99%
-2.32 %
-3.18%
Sales and Use Tax
111,000,000
9,000,000
8,000,000
7,000,000
61000,000
5,000,000
4,000,000
3,000,000
2,000,000
1,000,000
0
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
� Current Year -Budget � Prior Year
*The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average.
O
Q
N
R
C
is
LL
t
rr
C
O
2
Iq
N
O
N
N
7
7
4
Packet Pg. 17
MAJOR GENERAL FUND REVENUE SUMMARY
I 7.2.a I
City of Edmonds, WA
Monthly Revenue Summary -Water Utility Tax
2024
Water Utility Tax
Cumulative Monthly Monthly YTD Variance
Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals Actuals %
January $
90,844 $
90,844 $
92,691
92,691 2.03%
February
154,355
63,511
62,177
154,868 0.33%
March
244,152
89,797
90,963
245,831 0.69%
April
304,356
60,204
62,146
307,977 1.19%
May
393,634
89,278
90,718
398,695 1.29%
June
463,947
70,313
69,703
468,398 0.96%
July
573,149
109,202
107,776
576,174 0.53%
August
666,476
93,327
94,292
670,466 0.60%
September
791,033
124,557
October
881,630
90,597
November
983,292
101,662
December
1,047,289
63,997
Water Utility Tax
1,100,000
1,000,000
900,000
800,000
700,000
600,000
500,000
400,000
300,000
200,000
100,0001.
0
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
� Current Year -Budget - Prior Year
City of Edmonds, WA
Monthly Revenue Summary -Sewer Utility Tax
2024
Sewer Utility Tax
Cumulative Monthly Monthly YTD Variance
Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals Actuals %
January $
101,297 $
101,297 $
101,472
$ 101,472
0.17%
February
185,730
84,433
84,516
185,988
0.14%
March
286,530
100,799
101,250
287,238
0.25%
April
371,027
84,497
85,581
372,818
0.48%
May
472,427
101,400
101,036
473,855
0.30%
June
557,139
84,712
86,104
559,959
0.51%
July
659,773
102,634
103,022
662,981
0.49%
August
744,838
85,065
85,336
748,317
0.47%
September
850,226
105,388
October
936,127
85,902
November
1,039,506
103,379
December
1,123,814
84,308
Sewer Utility Tax
1,200,000
1,100,000
1,000,000
900,000
800,000
700,000
600,000
500,000
400,000
300,000
200,000
100,000
0
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Current Year -Budget Prior Year
*The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average.
5
Packet Pg. 18
I 7.2.a I
MAJOR GENERAL FUND REVENUE SUMMARY
City of Edmonds, WA
Monthly Revenue Summary -General Fund Charges for Services
2024
General Fund - Charges for Services
Cumulative Monthly Monthly YTD Variance
Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals Actuals %
January $
410,810 $
410,810 $
297,980
$ 297,980
-27.47%
February
950,331
539,521
702,035
1,000,015
5.23%
March
1,344,389
394,057
1,404,775
2,404,790
78.88%
April
2,155,227
810,839
573,921
2,978,711
38.21%
May
3,145,803
990,576
477,751
3,456,462
9.88%
June
3,752,017
606,215
929,543
4,386,004
16.90%
July
4,337,554
585,536
494,283
4,880,288
12.51%
August
5,407,415
1,069,861
609,397
5,489,685
1.52%
September
6,079,591
672,176
October
6,710,843
631,252
November
7,388,870
678,027
December
8,286,526
897,656
*The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average.
6
Packet Pg. 19
GENERAL FUND DEPARTMENT EXPENSE SUMMARY
I 7.2.a I
CITY OF EDMO NDS
EXPENDITURES - GENERAL FUND - BY DEPARTMENT IN SUMMARY
Title
CITY COUNCIL
OFFICE OF MAYOR
HUMAN RESOURCES
MUNICIPAL COURT
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
CITY ATTORNEY
NON -DEPARTMENTAL
POLICE SERVICES
SATELLITE OFFICE
COMMUNITY SERVICESIECONOMIC DEV.
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
f:lilu/•�►�.�i1 7�l
PARKS& RECREATION
PUBLIC WORKS
FACILITIES MAINTENANCE
2024 Adopted 8/31/2023 8/31/2024 Amount
Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent
$ 479,286 $
283,971 $
329,415 $
149,871
69%
490,875
259,788
284,676
206,199
58%
1,222,438
605,627
789,461
432,977
65%
1,811,176
980,820
1,156,559
654,617
64%
2,825,453
1,715,648
1,853,490
971,963
66%
1,161,780
559,282
713,650
448,130
61%
6,857,495
12,600,704
4,138,924
2,718,571
60%
17,478,540
9,201,003
11,604,017
5,874,523
66%
172,105
69,152
96,098
76,007
56%
1,162,045
872,904
736,229
425,816
63%
4,396,605
2,566,672
2,471,100
1,925,505
56%
320,940
168,503
155,765
165,175
49%
6,520,597
3,766,096
3,928,951
2,591,646
60%
4,500,279
2,613,096
2,722,421
1,777,858
60%
2,638,179
2,409,557
1,789,126
849,053
68%
$ 52,037,793 $
38,672,822 $
32,769,880 $
19,267,913
63%
O
M
N
R
C
O
C
LL
2,
t
r
C
O
2
IV
N
O
N
w
N
Q
7
Packet Pg. 20
GENERAL FUND DEPARTMENT EXPENSE SUMMARY
I 7.2.a I
City of Edmonds, WA
Monthly Expenditure Summary -City Council
2024
City Council
Cumulative Monthly Monthly YTD Variance
Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals Actuals %
January $
34,240 $
34,240 $
February
71,153
36,913
March
112,189
41,036
April
150,403
38,214
May
193,081
42,678
June
234,428
41,347
July
275,019
40,591
August
316,493
41,474
September
357,868
41,375
October
394,551
36,684
November
435,285
40,734
December
479,286
44,001
40,574 $ 40,574 18.50%
54,006 94,579 32.92%
35,007 129,587 15.51%
35,974 165,561 10.08%
57,697 223,258 15.63%
34,601 257,859 9.99%
36,103 293,962 6.89%
35,453 329,415 4.08%
City of Edmonds, WA
Monthly Expenditure Summary -Office of Mayor
2024
Office of Mayor
Cumulative Monthly Monthly YTD Variance
Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals Actuals %
January $
40,561 $
40,561 $
33,901
$ 33,901
-16.42%
February
82,159
41,598
35,511
69,412
-15.52%
March
124,596
42,436
36,798
106,210
-14.76%
April
165,441
40,846
36,154
142,364
-13.95%
May
205,791
40,350
34,804
177,167
-13.91%
June
245,843
40,052
32,377
209,545
-14.76%
July
287,251
41,408
39,558
249,103
-13.28%
August
327,468
40,217
35,573
284,676
-13.07%
September
367,326
39,858
October
406,988
39,662
November
449,726
42,738
December
490,875
41,149
Office of Mayor
500,000
450,000
400,000
350,000
300,000
250,000
200,000
150,000
]00,000
50,000
0
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
�Cu cnt Year Budget Prior Year
*The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average.
N
Packet Pg. 21 1
GENERAL FUND DEPARTMENT EXPENSE SUMMARY
I 7.2.a I
City of Edmonds, WA
Monthly Expenditure Summary -Human Resources
2024
Human Resources
Cumulative Monthly Monthly YTD Variance
Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals Actuals %
January $
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
110,919 $
206,083
293,020
385,026
477,507
609,764
691,435
781,445
882,461
976,331
1,084,356
1,222,438
110,919 $
95,165
86,937
92,006
92,481
132,257
81,671
90,009
101,016
93,870
108,025
138,082
129,960 $ 129,960
103,533 233,493
100,807 334,300
98,181 432,481
94,231 526,711
93,012 619,724
86,308 706,032
83,429 789,461
17.17 %
13.30%
14.09%
12.33%
10.30 %
1.63%
2.11%
1.03%
Human Resources
I,Juu, V
11200,000
1,100,000
1,000,000
900,000
800,000
700,000
600,000
500,000
400,000
300,000
200,000
100,000
0
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Current Year -Budget Prior Year
City of Edmonds, WA
Monthly Expenditure Summary -Municipal Court
2024
Municipal Court
Cumulative Monthly Monthly YTD Variance
Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals Actuals %
January $
133,120 $
133,120 $
136,698
$ 136,698
2.69%
February
268,761
135,641
143,646
280,344
4.31%
March
408,462
139,701
138,149
418,493
2.46%
April
549,323
140,861
140,705
559,198
1.80%
May
702,755
153,432
144,216
703,414
0.09%
June
841,629
138,874
146,775
850,190
1.02%
July
987,720
146,091
149,286
999,475
1.19%
August
1,144,145
156,425
157,084
1,156,559
1.08%
September
1,291,990
147,845
October
1,441,979
149,989
November
1,629,476
187,497
December
1,811,176
181,700
Municipal Court
2,000,000
1,800,000
1,600,000
1,400,000
1,200,000
1,000,000
800,000
600,000
400,000
200,000
0
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
� Current Year � Budget � Prior Year
*The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average.
9
Packet Pg. 22
GENERAL FUND DEPARTMENT EXPENSE SUMMARY
I 7.2.a I
City of Edmonds, WA
Monthly Expenditure Summary -Community Services/Economic Development
2024
Community Services/Economic Development
Cumulative Monthly Monthly YTD Variance
Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals Actuals %
January $
70,938 $
70,938 $
84,711
$ 84,711
19.42%
February
150,629
79,691
85,764
170,475
13.18%
March
228,686
78,058
85,735
256,210
12.04%
April
308,932
80,246
91,280
347,490
12.48%
May
391,061
82,128
83,820
431,310
10.29%
June
480,392
89,331
95,126
526,436
9.58%
July
570,789
90,397
101,892
628,327
10.08%
August
679,369
108,580
107,902
736,229
8.37%
September
777,142
97,773
October
877,976
100,834
November
1,007,121
129,145
December
1,162,045
154,924
Administrative Services
Community Services/Economic Development
11400,000
1,300,000
11200,000
1,100,000
1,000,000
900,000
800,000
700,000
600,000
500,000
400,000
300,000
200,000
100,000
0
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
_ Current Year -Budget � Prior Year
City of Edmonds, WA
Monthly Expenditure Summary -Administrative Services
2024
Cumulative Monthly Monthly YTD Variance
Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals Actuals %
January $
288,918 $
288,918 $
274,596
$ 274,596
-4.96%
February
523,687
234,769
208,739
483,335
-7.71%
March
733,695
210,008
217,967
701,302
-4.42%
April
944,992
211,297
212,849
914,151
-3.26%
May
1,157,177
212,186
372,263
1,286,415
11.17%
June
1,442,022
284,845
184,491
1,470,906
2.00%
July
1,684,828
242,805
183,557
1,654,463
-1.80%
August
1,896,259
211,431
199,026
1,853,490
-2.26%
September
2,116,379
220,121
October
2,344,386
228,007
November
2,598,917
254,531
December
2,825,453
226,536
Administrative Services
80Q000
60Q000
400,000
200,000
0
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
�Cutreat Year Budget Prior Year
*The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average.
10
Packet Pg. 23
GENERAL FUND DEPARTMENT EXPENSE SUMMARY
I 7.2.a I
City of Edmonds, WA
Monthly Expenditure Summary -City Attorney
2024
City Attorney
Cumulative Monthly Monthly YTD Variance
Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals Actuals %
January $
96,815 $
96,815 $
-
$ -
0.00%
February
193,630
96,815
127,250
127,250
-34.28%
March
290,445
96,815
93,007
220,257
-24.17%
April
387,260
96,815
108,383
328,640
-15.14%
May
484,075
96,815
98,726
427,366
-11.71%
June
580,890
96,815
80,589
507,955
-12.56%
July
677,705
96,815
86,552
594,507
-12.28%
August
774,520
96,815
119,143
713,650
-7.86%
September
871,335
96,815
October
968,150
96,815
November
1,064,965
96,815
December
1,161,780
96,815
Police
City Attorney
11200,000
1,100,000
1,000,000
900,000
800,000
700,000
600,000
500,000
400,000
300,000
200,000
100,000
0
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Current Year -Budget -Prior Year
City of Edmonds, WA
Monthly Expenditure Summary -Police
2024
Cumulative Monthly Monthly YTD Variance
Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals Actuals %
January $ 1,325,644 $ 1,325,644 $ 1,320,779 $ 1,320,779 -0.37%
February 2,644,333 1,318,689 1,322,826 2,643,606 -0.03%
March 4,027,557 1,383,224 1,252,027 3,895,633 -3.28%
April 5,378,981 1,351,424 1,459,657 5,355,290 -0.44%
May 6,782,808 1,403,826 1,864,000 7,219,290 6.44%
June 8,239,937 1,457,130 1,522,517 8,741,807 6.09%
July 9,689,531 1,449,593 1,447,113 10,188,920 5.15%
August 11,039,396 1,349,866 1,415,097 11,604,017 5.11%
September 12,478,176 1,438,780
October 13,942,747 1,464,571
November 15,677,275 1,734,528
December 17,478,540 1,801,265
Police
8,000,000
6,000,000
4,000,000
2,000,000
0
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
� Current Year Budget Prior Year
*The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average.
11
Packet Pg. 24
I 7.2.a I
GENERAL FUND DEPARTMENT EXPENSE SUMMARY
City of Edmonds, WA
Monthly Expenditure Summary -Planning & Development
2024
Planning & Development
Cumulative Monthly Monthly YTD Variance
Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals Actuals %
January $
340,178 $
340,178 $
269,177
$ 269,177
-20.87%
February
694,434
354,255
267,692
536,869
-22.69%
March
1,033,937
339,503
393,779
930,649
-9.99%
April
1,394,846
360,909
303,822
1,234,470
-11.50%
May
1,750,281
355,436
318,775
1,553,246
-11.26%
June
2,093,976
343,695
341,020
1,894,266
-9.54%
July
2,468,929
374,953
302,925
2,197,191
-11.01%
August
2,820,106
351,176
273,909
2,471,100
-12.38%
September
3,176,611
356,505
October
3,535,290
358,679
November
3,929,353
394,063
December
4,396,605
467,252
City of Edmonds, WA
Monthly Expenditure Summary -Parks & Recreation
2024
Parks & Recreation
Cumulative Monthly Monthly YTD Variance
Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals Actuals %
January $
498,850 $
498,850 $
453,277
$ 453,277
-9.14%
February
986,757
487,907
470,870
924,147
-6.35%
March
1,483,576
496,818
491,227
1,415,374
-4.60%
April
1,955,557
471,981
483,624
1,898,998
-2.89%
May
2,461,256
505,698
497,889
2,396,886
-2.62%
June
2,984,923
523,667
484,065
2,880,951
-3.48%
July
3,580,661
595,738
512,166
3,393,117
-5.24%
August
4,186,784
606,123
535,834
3,928,951
-6.16%
September
4,840,484
653,700
October
5,394,700
554,215
November
5,962,605
567,905
December
6,520,597
557,992
Parks & Recreation
500,000
0
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
� Current Year Budget � Prior Year
*The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average.
12
Packet Pg. 25
GENERAL FUND DEPARTMENT EXPENSE SUMMARY
I 7.2.a I
City of Edmonds, WA
Monthly Expenditure Summary -Facilities Maintenance
2024
Facilities Maintenance
Cumulative Monthly Monthly YTD Variance
Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals Actuals %
January $
156,775 $
156,775 $
280,811
$ 280,811
79.12%
February
389,674
232,899
265,070
545,881
40.09%
March
593,572
203,898
223,593
769,473
29.63%
April
769,278
175,706
218,971
988,445
28.49%
May
948,275
178,997
203,576
1,192,021
25.70%
June
1,082,249
133,974
575,626
1,767,646
63.33%
July
1,241,211
158,962
213,793
1,981,439
59.64%
August
1,449,110
207,898
(192,314)
1,789,126
23.46%
September
1,701,700
252,590
October
1,994,272
292,572
November
2,251,849
257,577
December
2,638,179
386,330
Facilities Maintenance
500,000
0i
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Current Year -Budget -Prior Year
City of Edmonds, WA
Monthly Expenditure Summary -Engineering
2024
Engineering
Cumulative Monthly Monthly YTD Variance
Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals Actuals %
January $
301,531 $
301,531 $
283,081
$ 283,081
-6.12%
February
604,565
303,034
286,618
569,699
-5.77%
March
913,824
309,259
255,452
825,151
-9.70%
April
1,223,821
309,997
270,205
1,095,355
-10.50%
May
1,553,842
330,021
260,871
1,356,226
-12.72%
June
1,868,266
314,424
260,767
1,616,993
-13.45%
July
2,185,239
316,973
264,710
1,881,703
-13.89%
August
2,491,236
305,997
278,563
2,160,267
-13.29%
September
2,797,476
306,240
October
3,102,475
304,999
November
3,439,952
337,477
December
3,777,853
337,901
Engine a ring
4,000,000
3,500,000
3,000,000
2,500,000
2,000,000
1,500,000
1,000,000
500,000
0
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
_Current YearBudget Prior Year
*The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average.
13
Packet Pg. 26
GENERAL FUND DEPARTMENT EXPENSE SUMMARY
I 7.2.a I
City of Edmonds, WA
Monthly Expenditure Summary -Non -Departmental
2024
Non -Departmental
Cumulative Monthly Monthly YTD Variance
Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals Actuals %
January $
926,027 $
926,027 $
1,244,387
$ 1,244,387
34.38%
February
1,489,596
563,569
221,547
1,465,934
-1.59%
March
2,012,000
522,404
285,014
1,750,948
-12.97%
April
2,395,260
383,260
211,983
1,962,932
-18.05%
May
2,923,480
528,220
178,984
2,141,916
-26.73%
June
3,677,256
753,776
824,054
2,965,970
-19.34%
July
4,126,291
449,035
197,423
3,163,393
-23.34%
August
4,662,507
536,216
975,531
4,138,924
-11.23%
September
5,123,698
461,191
October
5,544,111
420,414
November
6,294,725
750,614
December
6,857,495
562,770
Non -Departmental
20,000,000
18,000,000
16,000,000
14,000,000
12,000,000
10,000,000
8,000,000
6,000,000
4,000,000
2,000,000
0
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Current Year - Budget Prior Year
*The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average.
14
Packet Pg. 27
FUND SUMMARIES
I 7.2.a I
City of Edmonds, WA
Monthly Expenditure Summary -Fund 016 - Building Maintenance Fund
2024
Fund 016 -
Building Maintenance Fund
Cumulative
Monthly
Monthly
YTD
Variance
Budget Forecast
Budget Forecast
Actuals
Actuals
%
January
$ 127,788
$ 127,788 $
138,032
$ 138,032
8.02%
February
255,575
127,788
481,478
619,510
142.40%
March
383,363
127,788
9,472
628,982
64.07%
April
511,151
127,788
2,113
631,095
23.47%
May
638,938
127,788
28,074
659,169
3.17%
June
766,726
127,788
868
660,037
-13.91%
July
894,514
127,788
6,854
666,892
-25.45%
August
1,022,302
127,788
419,746
1,086,637
6.29%
September
1,150,089
127,788
October
1,277,877
127,788
November
1,405,665
127,788
December
1,533,453
127,788
Fund 016 -Building Maintenance Fund
1,600,000
1,400,000
1,200,000
1,000,000
800,000
600,000
400,000
200,000
0
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
� Current Year -Budget � Prior Year
*The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average.
15
Packet Pg. 28
O
CL
N
IQ
C
R
C
LL
,
s
r
C
O
2
Iq
N
O
N
N
7
7
FUND SUMMARIES
■ 7.2.a
City of Edmonds, WA
Monthly Revenue Summary -Real Estate Excise Tax 1 & 2
2024
Real Estate Excise Tax 1 & 2
Cumulative Monthly Monthly YTD Variance
Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals Actuals %
January $
225,388 $
225,388 $
158,734
$ 158,734
-29.57%
February
376,297
150,909
141,173
299,908
-20.30%
March
569,768
193,471
237,275
537,183
-5.72%
April
775,427
205,659
354,193
891,375
14.95%
May
1,036,020
260,593
338,546
1,229,921
18.72%
June
1,293,139
257,119
321,623
1,551,544
19.98%
July
1,573,012
279,874
347,663
1,899,207
20.74%
August
1,849,679
276,667
415,298
2,314,505
25.13%
September
2,151,102
301,423
October
2,420,735
269,633
November
2,687,175
266,440
December
3,000,000
312,825
Real Estate Excise Tax 1 & 2
2,700,000
100,000
P
900,000
600,000
300,000
Pil-
o
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Current Year -Budget �Prior Year
City of Edmonds, WA
Monthly Expenditure Summary -Fund 512 - Technology Rental Fund
2024
Fund 512 - Technology Rental Fand Expenses
Cumulative Monthly Monthly YTD Variance
Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals Actuals %
January $
278,067 $
278,067 $
450,425
$ 450,425
61.98%
February
459,653
181,586
88,246
538,670
17.19%
March
687,018
227,364
99,476
638,146
-7.11%
April
781,894
94,876
88,852
726,999
-7.02%
May
882,974
101,080
118,249
845,248
-4.27%
June
1,005,318
122,345
90,723
935,972
-6.90%
July
1,131,059
125,740
137,346
1,073,318
-5.11%
August
1,299,834
168,775
123,453
1,196,771
-7.93%
September
1,465,789
165,955
October
1,643,179
177,391
November
1,772,621
129,442
December
2,011,076
238,455
Fund 512 - Technology Rental Fund Expenses
2,200,000
2,000,000
1,800,000
1,600,000
1,400,000
1,200,000
1,000,000
800,000
600,000
400,000
200,000
0
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
�Cutrent Year -Budget �Prior Year
*The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average.
16
Packet Pg. 29
I 7.2.a I
FUND 421 - WATER UTILITY FUND SUMMARY
City of Edmonds, WA
Monthly Revenue Summary -Fund 421- Water Utility Fund
2024
Fund 421 - Water Utility Fund Revenues
Cumulative Monthly Monthly YTD Variance
Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals Actuals %
January $
980,443 $
980,443
$ 1,090,370
$ 1,090,370
11.21%
February
1,712,436
731,993
711,773
1,802,143
5.24%
March
2,701,940
989,503
1,075,486
2,877,629
6.50%
April
3,356,766
654,827
785,359
3,662,988
9.12%
May
4,316,356
959,590
1,061,688
4,724,677
9.46%
June
5,115,288
798,932
847,725
5,572,402
8.94%
July
6,310,311
1,195,023
1,254,684
6,827,086
8.19%
August
7,304,483
994,172
14,908,155
21,735,241
197.56%
September
8,635,357
1,330,874
October
9,613,693
978,336
November
11,500,392
1,886,699
December
12,314,744
814,352
City of Edmonds, WA
Monthly Expenditure Summary -Fund 421- Water Utility Fund
2024
Fund 421 - Water Utility Fund Expenses
Cumulative Monthly Monthly YTD Variance
Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals Actuals %
January $
641,026 $
641,026 $
503,314
$ 503,314
-21.48%
February
1,300,480
659,453
589,193
1,092,506
-15.99%
March
2,051,423
750,943
586,629
1,679,136
-18.15%
April
2,887,784
836,362
705,351
2,384,486
-17.43%
May
3,786,010
898,226
592,313
2,976,799
-21.37%
June
5,237,771
1,451,761
900,416
3,877,215
-25.98%
July
6,385,874
1,148,103
955,142
4,832,357
-24.33%
August
7,778,196
1,392,322
6,147,795
10,980,151
41.17%
September
8,859,399
1,081,203
October
9,774,932
915,533
November
11,599,342
1,824,410
December
13,837,584
2,238,242
*The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average.
17
Packet Pg. 30
FUND 422 - STORM UTILITY FUND SUMMARY
I 7.2.a I
City of Edmonds, WA
Monthly Revenue Summary -Fund 422 - Storm Utility Fund
2024
Fund 422 - Storm Utility Fund Revenues
Cumulative Monthly Monthly YTD Variance
Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals Actuals %
January $
672,191 $
672,191 $
542,348
$ 542,348
-19.32%
February
2,111,161
1,438,970
1,169,775
1,712,123
-18.90%
March
2,762,897
651,736
544,143
2,256,265
-18.34%
April
3,296,452
533,555
499,506
2,755,771
-16.40%
May
3,895,946
599,495
551,418
3,307,189
-15.11%
June
4,413,556
517,610
492,629
3,799,818
-13.91%
July
4,999,182
585,625
568,123
4,367,941
-12.63%
August
6,298,086
1,298,904
4,478,955
8,846,897
40.47%
September
6,894,458
596,373
October
7,448,274
553,816
November
8,506,043
1,057,769
December
9,086,716
580,673
Fund 422 - Storm Utility Fund Revenues
9,000,000
8,000,000
7,000,000
6,000,000
5,000,000
4,000,000
3,000,000
2,000,000
1,000,000
0
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
+Current Year -Budget -Prior Year
City of Edmonds, WA
Monthly Expenditure Summary -Fund 422 - Storm Utility Fund
2024
Fund 422 - Storm Utility Fund Expenses
Cumulative Monthly Monthly YTD Variance
Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals Actuals %
January $
728,094 $
728,094 $
397,818
$ 397,818
-45.36%
February
2,286,738
1,558,644
457,806
855,625
-62.58%
March
2,992,676
705,938
332,627
1,188,252
-60.29%
April
3,570,604
577,928
372,195
1,560,446
-56.30%
May
4,219,957
649,352
354,257
1,914,703
-54.63%
June
4,780,614
560,658
443,803
2,358,506
-50.67%
July
5,414,944
634,330
427,407
2,785,914
-48.55%
August
6,821,872
1,406,928
1,293,997
4,079,910
-40.19%
September
7,467,843
645,970
October
8,067,717
599,874
November
9,213,457
1,145,740
December
9,842,422
628,965
Fund 422 - Storm Utility Fund Expenses
10,000,000
9,000,000
8,000,000
7,000,000
6,000,000
5,000,000
4,000,000
3,000,000
2,000,000
1,000,000
0
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
� Current Year -Budget - Prior Year
*The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average.
18
Packet Pg. 31
FUND 423 - SEWER UTILITY FUND SUMMARY
I 7.2.a I
City of Edmonds, WA
Monthly Revenue Summary -Fund 423 - Sewer Utility Fund
2024
Fund 423 - Sewer Utility Fund Revenues
Cumulative Monthly Monthly YTD Variance
Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals Actuals %
January $ 1,687,922 $ 1,687,922 $ 1,476,339 $ 1,476,339-12.54%
February 3,157,126 1,469,204 1,418,266 2,894,605 -8.32%
March 4,456,021 1,298,895 1,449,133 4,343,737 -2.52%
April 5,760,746 1,304,725 2,353,378 6,697,115 16.25%
May 7,543,920 1,783,174 1,462,475 8,159,590 8.16%
June 8,534,081 990,162 1,340,953 9,500,543 11.32%
July 10,048,029 1,513,948 1,507,137 11,007,681 9.55%
August 11,755,236 1,707,207 8,245,929 19,253,610 63.79%
September 13,439,062 1,683,826
October 14,631,473 1,192,411
November 18,018,844 3,387,371
December 20,019,768 2,000,924
Fund 423 -Sewer Utility Fund Revenues
22,000,000
20,000,000
18,000,000
16,000,000
14,000,000
12,000,000
10,000,000
8,000,000
6,000,000
4,000,000
2,000,000
0
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Current Year -Budget Prior Year
City of Edmonds, WA
Monthly Expenditure Summary -Fund 423 - Sewer Utility Fund
2024
Fund 423 - Sewer Utility Fund Expenses
Cumulative Monthly Monthly YTD Variance
Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals Actuals %
January $ 1,035,408 $ 1,035,408 $ 1,373,009 $ 1,373,009 32.61%
February 2,009,872 974,464 1,032,356 2,405,366 19.68%
March 3,218,482 1,208,610 1,115,359 3,520,725 9.39%
April 4,925,786 1,707,303 1,702,160 5,222,885 6.03%
May 6,562,115 1,636,329 910,860 6,133,745 -6.53%
June 8,402,137 1,840,022 1,362,165 7,495,911-10.79%
July 10,222,675 1,820,538 1,246,323 8,742,234-14.48%
August 11,835,035 1,612,360 8,989,413 17,731,647 49.82%
September 14,187,219 2,352,184
October 15,857,930 1,670,711
November 17,953,941 2,096,010
December 23,397,507 5,443,566
Fund 423 -Sewer Utility Fund Expenses
24,000,000
22,000,000
20,000,000
18,000,000
16,000,000
14,000,000
12,000,000
10,000,000
8,000,000
6,000,000
4,000,000
2,000,000
0
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Current Year -Budget -Prior Year
*The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average.
19
Packet Pg. 32
I 7.2.a I
UTILITY EXPENSE SUMMARY
CITY OFIDMONDS
EXPENDITURES - UTILITY- BY FUND IN SUMMARY
2024 Adopted 8/31/2023 8/31/2024 Amount
Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent
WATER UTILITYFUND $ 13,837,584 $
6,202,286 $
10,980,151 $
2,857,433
STORM UTILITY FUND 9,842,422
3,489,601
4,079,910
5,762,512
SEWER/WWTP UTILITY FUND 23,397,507
9,890,999
17,731,647
5,665,860
BOND RESERVE FUND 1,988,830
574,892
1,399,406
589,424
$ 49,066,343 $ 20,157,779 $ 34,191,116 $ 14,875,227
79% 0
CL
41%
76% 0
70% R
70%
LL
t
r
C
O
N
O
N
r�
N
7
7
20
Packet Pg. 33
INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO SUMMARY
I 7.2.a I
Agency/
Investment
Issuer
Type
FFCB
Bonds
FHLB
Bonds
Spokane County WA
Bonds
First Financial - Waterfront Center
CD
FHLMC
Bonds
Farmer Mac
Bonds
FHLB
Bonds
US Treasury Note
Note
FFCB
Bonds
Farmer Mac
Bonds
FHLMC
Bonds
Farmer Mac
Bonds
First Financial - ECA
CD
TOTAL SECURrrIES
Washington State Local Gov't Investment Pool
TOTAL PORTFOLIO
City of Edmonds Investment Portfolio Detail
As of August 31, 2024
Years
Purchase to Par
Price
1,960,906
950,774
207,260
245,000
974,798
1,995,088
969,524
964,597
1,982,692
1,994,172
993,661
2,057,309
2,803,516
0.04
0.22
0.25
0.32
0.53
0.63
0.91
0.96
1.27
1.42
1.89
2.21
3.21
Value
2,000,000
1,000,000
200,000
245,000
1,000,000
2,000,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
2,000,000
2,000,000
1,115,000
2,305,000
2,803,516
Market
Value
1,998,417
990,488
198,448
245,000
996,005
1,993,936
990,780
988,148
1,997,540
1,994,061
1,049,639
2,168, 044
2,803,516
Maturity
Date
09/13/24
11/18/24
12/01 /24
12/27/24
03/13/25
04/17/25
07/28/25
08/15/25
12/08/25
02/02/26
07/22/26
11/17/26
11/15/27
Coupon
Rate
3.50%
0.90%
2.10%
2.47%
3.75%
4.25%
3.60%
3.13%
4.13%
3.95%
0.83%
1.15%
2.96%
18, 099, 298 1.07 18, 668, 516 18, 414, 022
54,024,989 54,024,989 Demand 5.40%
Issuer Diversification
First Spokane
Financial County
Farmer CD, 16% WA, 1%
Mac, 34%
FFCB, 21%
FHLMC, FHLB,
11% 11% /
$ 72,693,505 $ 72,439,010
Cash and Investment Balances
(in $ Millions)
Note, it Checki ng,
$1.00, 1%^ Bonds, $5.28, 7%
\ $14.62 ,
19%
CD's, $3.05 /
,4% J
State LGIP,
$54.02 ,
69%
Q
21
Packet Pg. 34 1
7.2.a
INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO SUMMARY
$ 2,500, 000
$ 2,000, 000
$1,500, 000
$1 236 875
$1,000,000
$500,000
$
Iff-
2019
Annual Interest Income
6
$950,684 $1,091,709
2020 2022 2023 YTD 2014
22
Packet Pg. 35
7.2.a
City of Edmonds
2024 General Fund (001) Cash Flow Report (with ACTUALS)
Difference O
Revenues
Jan Actual
Feb Actual
Mar Actual
Apr Actual
May Actual
Jun Actual
Jul Actual
Aug Actual
Sep Forecast
Oct Forecast
Nov Forecast
Dec Forecast
Total Forecast
Budget
Lac/ dec Q
Property Tax
21,016
366,893
755,437
6,153,028
1,063,611
74,286
30,722
54,697
248,081
5,861,219
1,034,766
55,068
15,718,825
15,905,500
(186,67.
Sales Tax
1,061,193
1,158,271
948,328
949,258
1,069,826
1,003,253
1,083,664
1,114,740
1,141,366
1,180,429
1,221,687
1,106,203
13,038,219
13,459,600
(421,38
Amusements & Utility Tax
513,836
865,277
655,472
567,877
630,223
544,066
491,392
662,208
654,521
388,708
727,016
588,611
7,289,208
7,743,849
(454,64 _
Excise &Other Taxes
-
81,406
-
2,448
84,129
-
-
83,193
113
-
84,940
73
336,402
326,000
10,40 M
License & Permits
298,154
162,918
68,969
322,066
84,523
61,744
224,952
135,052
59,292
225,430
205,556
64,318
1,912,974
1,993,750
(80,77 .0
Other Governments & Grants
187,239
-
112,069
138,735
312,945
257,513
155,683
12,050
81,342
41,462
458,016
21659E
1,973,650
1,204,710
768,94
Service Fees
159,253
194,102
1,091,628
239,048
169,274
614,426
202,824
294,123
591,033
268,578
192,692
634,120
4,651,101
4,238,512
412,58 M
Interfund Service Fees'
138,726
507,933
313,147
334,873
308,477
315,117
291,459
315,275
328,919
335,046
300,350
558,692
4,048,014
4,048,014
Fines & Penalties
19,021
29,017
-
91,609
153,244
68,090
100
61,362
83,341
65,725
-
157,954
729,463
902,350
(172,88 jZ
Miscellaneous
133,900
50,526
61,266
87,751
81,833
113,611
78,630
88,410
69,815
154,656
161,953
91,383
1,173,734
1,009,132
164,60
Disposal of Capital Assets
-
-
-
-
-
10,000
-
-
-
-
-
-
10,000
-
10,00
Transfers
-
385,274
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
385,274
471,075
85,80 �+
2,532,339
3,801,618
1 4,006,31E
1 8,886,692
1 3,958,085
1 3,062,10E
1 2,559,427
1 2,821,110
1 3,257,923
8,521,253
4,386,97E
1 3,473,618
1 51,266,863
1 51,302,492
1 (35,62
O
Ex enditures
Jan Actual
Feb Actual
Mar Actual
Apr Actual
May Actual
Jun Actual
Jul Actual
AugActual
Sep Forecast
Oct Forecast
Nov Forecast
Dec Forecast
Total Forecast
Budget
Balance 2
Salaries
1,868,992
1,860,417
1,848,525
1,975,160
2,402,922
2,040,193
1,993,960
1,926,131
1,0681066
1,966,234
1,963,068
1,958,929
23,872,598
23,095,383
777,21.
Overtime
116,694
93,279
54,727
76,584
122,240
95,886
48,099
54,529
76,519
50,140
69,037
64,655
922,381
643,080
279,30
Holiday Buyback
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
4,068
6,804
-
380,011
5,374
396157
294,001
102,25
Benefits
740,340
702,129
684,991
745,469
767,668
718,780
705,947
706,727
733,340
745,702
744,740
747,427
8,743,260
7,868,408
874,85
Uniforms
13,909
8,879
12,072
4,764
3,589
6,165
1,070
7,999
10,638
7,394
3,581
3,197
83,256
126,931
(43,67.
Pension
2,932
-
5,864
2,932
2,932
2,932
5,859
3,517
9,024
9,024
5,919
5,929
56,873
141,668
(84,79.
Supplies
13,474
28,205
36,924
25,194
112,010
33,603
32,205
31,760
59,151
93,274
51,780
50,694
568,273
677,285
(10901.
Small Equipment
1,388
5,978
935
5,873
7,240
7,973
11,694
16,873
Z512
2ZS64
3,285
17,947
104,162
239,791
(135:52
Professional Services
414,539
504,373
572,676
405,136
441,983
459,554
427,520
1,254,195
1,439,333
1,310,638
1,567,710
1,484,527
10,282,184
11,063,360
(781,17
Communications
11,170
8,838
20,583
25,147
7,697
15,162
18,762
18,264
40,080
12,136
13,813
29,348
221,011
236,105
(15,09
Travel
695
2,208
4,646
1,304
8,236
7,337
411
2,503
1,400
4,101
3,451
1,562
37,854
51,187
(13,33.
Excise Taxes
2,725
2,136
3,250
2,554
2,304
2,423
3,211
2,136
4,526
3,029
1,991
1,737
3ZO23
30,000
2,02
Interfund Rent
315,916
322,079
323,652
319,860
315,908
320,122
309,344
321,945
329,506
321,806
328,193
316679
3,854,909
3,913,541
(58,63
Insurance
910,495
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
910,495
883,686
26,80
Utilities
56,826
45,879
62,960
62,997
63,245
28,032
76,626
51,697
77,938
47,846
57,730
70,110
701,884
663,800
38,08
Repair &Mainz
81,539
22,811
34,904
29,285
10,924
2,320
20,497
22,208
10,687
42,573
19,27E
27,207
324,231
388,300
(64,086
Miscellaneous
66,908
74,660
42,575
34,243
26,483
22,362
27,319
41,135
43,389
41,685
12,851
17,464
452,074
424,867
27,20
Contingency
-
25,000
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
25,000
25,000
-
Transfer
-
-
-
-
-
525,000
-
-
-
-
62,695
49,478
637,173
650,000
(12,82
Building (Capital)
34,040
-
-
-
-
408,179
-
(408,179)
-
-
-
-
34,040
-
34,04
Machinery & Equipment (Capital)
-
-
-
-
20
-
-
12,233
-
-
-
-
12,253
-
12,25
Construction (Capital)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Lease
-
-
-
44,224
23,750
23,750
23,750
23,750
23,750
23,750
13,750
23,750
234,224
300,000
(65,77
Debt -Principal
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
197,120
197,120
197,120
-
Debt - Interest
-
-
9,562
21,356
-
61,886
1,792
7,242
-
-
-
61,890
163,728
123,780
39,94.
Debt - Other
500
50
4,652,570
3,706,872
3,718,847
3,782,682
4,319,151
4,781,657
3,708,567
4,100,634
4,936,663
4,702,897
5,312,899
5,145,625
52,867,364
52,037,793
829,57
1
1
1
1
1
c
Net Revenue/(Expenditures)
(2,120,231)1
94,74E
287,469
5,104,610
(361,065)
(1,719,552)
(1,148,640)
(1,279,524) (1,678,740)1 3,818,35E (925,923) (1,672,007)
(1,600,501) (735,301)1
le
N
Changes in AR
30743
30,894
(8,337)
16,329
63,269
(19,719)
5,278
(16,524)
O
ha Cn es in AP
(256:704)
(227,711)
31,069
175,337
(125,023)
(132,356)
5,313
(7,087)
(V
Cash Balance
1 (2,511,077)
(2,613,147)
(2,302,946)1
2,993,329 1
2,570,509 1
698,883 1
(439,166)
(1,742,301)
fr
(n
Q
d
w+
d
Q
E
0
U
w
c
m
E
s
Q
Packet Pg. 36
7.3
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 09/24/2024
Written Public Comments
Staff Lead: City Council
Department: City Council
Preparer: Beckie Peterson
Background/History
N/A
Staff Recommendation
Acknowledge receipt of written public comments.
Narrative
Public comments submitted to the web form for public comments
<https://www.edmondswa.gov/publiccomment>
between September 4, 2024 and September 17, 2024.
Attachments:
Public Comment September 24, 2024
Packet Pg. 37
7.3.a
Edmonds City Council Public Comments — September 24, 2024
Online Form 2024-09-09 05:25 PM(MST) (1) was submitted by Guest on 9/9/2024 8:25:25 PM (GMT-
07:00) US/Arizona
FirstName Darth
LastName No last name
Email
CityOfResidence Edmonds
AgendaTopic Public records request form
Comments You public records request form is now requiring name. You can't do that. You have
to allow for anonymity of requesters and RCW 42.56 You require a statement of not using lists of
names for commercial purposes and you have to sign your name even if you are not requesting a
list of names. That is wack. You need to have this vetted by your attorney.
_
a�
E
0
U
2
s
3
a
m
r
r
�L
N
O
N
N
L
E
d
Q
0
rt+
_
E
E
0
U
v
3
a
as
E
s
0
�a
Q
Packet Pg. 38
7.4
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 09/24/2024
Outside Boards and Committee Reports
Staff Lead: Council
Department: City Council
Preparer: Beckie Peterson
Background/History
Outside Boards and Committee Reports will be submitted to the Received for Filing portion of the
agenda for last meeting of the month.
Staff Recommendation
N/A
Narrative
The Council is asked to review the attached committee reports/minutes from the following
organizations:
Affordable Housing Alliance
Port of Edmonds
Edmonds Public Facilities District Board
Snohomish County Tomorrow
SnoCom 911
WRIA8
Community Transit
Seashore Transportation
Attachments:
8-7-24_AHA Housing Market Report exec summary and Edmonds data
Commission Meeting Minutes 8-12-24 - Port Of Edmonds
Commission Meeting Minutes 8-26-24 - Port Of Edmonds
pfd-board-meeting-minutes-06-27-2024
pfd-board-meeting-minutes-07-25-2024
SCT_06262024-2244
SCT _07242024-2256
SN0911-Boa rd-Agenda-20240815
SN0911-Boa rd-Agenda-20240919
WRIA8 July agenda May minutes
Community Transit Board 9-5-2024
09.05.24 Community Transit CEO Report
2024 Joint Transportation Board Meeting Minutes
Packet Pg. 39
7.4
2024-09-13 HSP Highway System Plan - PSRC
091324 KGCO Subarea Boards—PSRC
Metro Connects Overview - Transportation Boards Meeting 2024_09013
WSF longrangeplanning highlights PSRC 091324
Packet Pg. 40
7.4.a
141�7I�,
Alliance for
Hous'ng
Affordability
Executive Summary
Arlington .1 Edmonds -- Everett A- Granite Falls -- HASCO -1
Lake Stevens ♦ Lynnwood ♦ Monroe ♦ Marysville ♦ Mill Creek ♦ Mountlake Terrace
Mukilteo -Snohomish -kSnohomish County -k-Stanwood-, Woodway-,
Alliance for Housing Affordability
Quarterly Update
Prepared by:
Chris Collier, AHA Program Manager
August 7, 2024
Snohomish County's ownership is rising in price again, and as interest rates for home loads remain at
approximately CY2023 levels, required income has risen slightly as well. Snohomish County average rents
have overall fallen in Snohomish County by a few percentage points since late 2022, but are still slightly
higher than in early FY2023 (now after adjusting for inflation.
The remainder of CY2023 data on actual home sales in Snohomish County showed that overall home
sales continued to fall, ending the year approximately 1,500 sales lower than 2022. When viewing sales
by unit types, some cities show an increase compared 2022 in townhomes and condominiums, that,
while mixed, is still lower than the historical average. Look to the next update to give a better picture of
CY2024's sales behavior in the County and cities.
AHA has prepared a new report analyzing home sales by city by $100,000 sale price bands (Appendix B).
Top line results are the rapid decline of home sales in most cities of <$500k-$600k from approximately
2016 onward. In Snohomish County overall, home sales for over $1,000,000 now represent 20% of all of
2022 and 2023 sales of any home type, with all sales (single family, townhome, condo, manufactured)
included in the total sales count.
Page 1 1
Packet Pg. 41
7.4.a
Arlington .1 Edmonds -4 Everett � Granite Falls --HASCO
� H Alliance for Lake Stevens A, Lynnwood A, Monroe -k- Marysville w Mill Creek w Mountlake Terrace.'
Housing
Affordability Mukilteo-4 Snohomish-kSnohomish County -k- StanwoodA,Woodway A,
Home Sales Data
Home Sale Price (June 24, 2024)
Snohomish County home sales have begun to rise in 2024, following an overall decline in 2023.
The price growth has not been equal across unit types, with townhomes not yet increasing beyond
(inflation adjusted) 2022 levels, single family homes and condominiums have both increased to the
highest recorded median price in 24 years of data collection. Meanwhile, actual sales of these units
declined to one of their lowest points in 2023. (2024 is excluded as the data is not yet complete for the
year.)
With the annualized 30-year fixed rate mortgage rate at 0.682 as of June this year, an increase of
.001 over 2023's annualized rate, interest rates have not played a significant role in the steadily
increasing required income to be a homeowner in Snohomish County. Potential rate cuts in the fall of
this year add uncertainty to what the second half of 2024 and early 2025 will look like.
Data reported by the Northwest Multiple Listing Service shows the "months of inventory" in
Snohomish County between 0.8 and 1.5 months, January to July, still below the "price neutral" level of 3-
4 months of supply.' There is nothing to indicate that demand for homes has diminished except for
interest rates slowing the financial means to buy. It can be expected, therefore, that a future rate cut will
result in a more rapid pace of Snohomish County home sales that may lead to increasing sale prices,
even while required incomes may hold steady if interest rates are cut enough. If a small rate cut triggers
a flurry of buying that raises prices significantly, required income may jump again. All this to say,
Snohomish County remains in a feedback loop of rising required incomes and housing scarcity.
$900,000
$800,000
$700,000
$600,000
$500,000
$400,000
$300,000
$200,000
$100,000
Snohomish County Home Sales (All Types)
2021, $662,358
2021, 15,675
730 854 25,000
20,000
15,000
2023, 8,028
10,000
5,000
2021, $113,916 112024, $174,709
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O O O O O O O O O O N N NJ W N N N N N N N N NJ NJ
O F+ NJ A W Ql V 00 WO F-` N A W Ul Ql V 00 00 l0 O I--' N W A
Avg. Sale Price (Adjusted) Median Sale Price (Adjusted)
Income Req. For Loan - Median Units Counted/Sold
'ht-tps://public.tableau.com/app/profile/nwmIs.communications/viz/NWMLSREStatistics 16962793819630/5YearA
nnualPending
Page 1 2
Packet Pg. 42
7.4.a
Arlington ♦ Edmonds -4 Everett A- Granite Falls A HASCO�
A H Alliance for Lake Stevens Lynnwood A, Monroe ♦ Marysville � Mill Creek � Mountlake Terrace A,
Housing
Affordability Mukilteo-4 Snohomish kSnohomish County -LStanwood-,Woodway-,
Single Family Breakout
Snohomish County single family homes are the main driver of all home sales data, representing
75% of all sales in 2023 (5,982 of 8,028). Not surprisingly, as the majority of County sales, SFR sales,
prices, and required incomes largely match the previous section. Required income for a single family
home (assuming a 10% down payment and 33% debt to income ratio) has risen by $6,000/year from
2023's median price, to a current estimate of $189,220 in 2024.
The median age of single family homes sold in 2024 reflects the construction boom of the 1990s,
with 2024's median year built for sold structures at 1992, down from 1996 in 2023.
Townhome Breakout
Townhome sale prices in Snohomish County have increased significantly in 2024 compared to
the 2023 average, but not in excess of 2022. With a current price of $699,387, up from $624,220 in
2023, this represents an increase of 12% from the previous year. Between 2019 and 2021 townhome
prices hovered were in the $550,000 to $600,000 range. From 2022 to 2024 the average price has been
$682,687, and appears to be increasing. While townhome prices were high and rising in the previous
decade, they have so far taken on a new trajectory in the 2020s.
With regard to sales of townhomes, 2023 saw 477 sold to 2022's 299. 2024 so far has seen 197
townhome sales, so it appears a return to the previous trend of approximately 400 to 500 sales per year
may occur by the end of this year.
Required incomes for townhomes fell in 2023, but has now been exceeded and is again at
historical highs in the first half of 2024 at $166,207, up from $148,817's median in 2023. For comparison,
the median required income for a single family home in 2022 was $165,581. While median age of
structures is significantly different (in 2024, the median year built is 2023 for townhomes, and single
family homes' median year built is again in the 1990s), townhome buyers are now, using median price as
a leveling device, now approximately in the single family homebuyers market of 2-3 years ago.
Condominium Breakout
Condominium sales closed slightly higher in 2023 than 2022, at $516,600 and $504,400
respectively. So far in 2024, the median sale price is at $520,175.
With condominiums, the real story is the shrinking number of sales. 2023's 1,569 total sales
represents the second lowest year of condominium sales in the 24 years of data available. June 2024
shows a mid -year sales figure of 625. The historical low for condominiums was in the depths of the
recession in 2010, with 1,399 total sales. It is not surprising that condominium sales are declining along
with other housing types in Snohomish County, however it shows the increasing decline in what is
practically the first time homebuyer opportunity (combined with townhomes) in the county.
Manufactured & Mobile Home Breakout
Manufactured homes z and manufactured homes in mobile home parks3 (mobile homes) have
not seen dramatic changes 2023's averages. The 2023 median price for a manufactured home was
Z Property use code 118 — Homes on a parcel that the homeowner also owns.
3 Property use code 119 — Homes on a parcel that the homeowner rents (AKA pad rent in mobile home parks).
Page 1 3
Packet Pg. 43
AA HWArlington ♦ Edmonds -I-Everett A- Granite Falls A HASCO�
H Alliance for Lake Stevens A, Lynnwood A, Monroe ♦ Marysville � Mill Creek � Mountlake Terrace A'
Hous'ng
Affordability Mukilteo-4 Snohomish -`Snohomish County -k-Stanwood-,Woodway-,
$482,161 in 2023, and has fallen by approximately $1,000 in the first half of 2024 to $481,145. Note that
a major contributing factor to manufactured home prices is land, with a median lot squarefootage in
these sales of 20,000 to 40,000 or more, depending on the year. Manufactured homes follow the trends
of other home types with sales declining dramatically after 2021's peak.
Mobile homes, meanwhile, have continued to increase in price. To a current figure of $124,347 in 2024,
up from $115,465 in 2023, which was approximately the same value in 2022. Sales of mobile homes
have remained relatively steady, or on a very gentle decline from the year 2000, when 525 sales were
recorded, to 2023's 410.
Sub-$400k Sale Price Housing Breakout
The number of homes selling for less than $400,000 has declined dramatically since the Great
Recession, and that trend continues into the present day. Only 531 single family homes, townhomes, or
condominiums sold for less than $400,000 in 2023. (Eagle eyed readers will note the last report found
574 sales in this category — the explanation is accounting for inflation pushed some number of homes
over the price ceiling set for this report). In 2021 that figure (adjusted for inflation) was 1,211, while in
2022 it was 719. As a percentage of all home sales in 2023, below-$400,000 home sales represent only
6.6% of all home sales in Snohomish County.
Apartment Rents
Since the last report, Snohomish County overall rent has fallen by 2%, to a 2024 average of
$2,136. Studio rents have fallen most out of all unit types, by 5.3% since September 2023, to $1,636.
16R and 2613 rents have changed less than a percentage point, and remain at $1,933 and $2,358
respectively. This tracks with regional data and studies that have estimated the Seattle metro's vacancy
rate at approximately 6%, the rate at which rents can be expected to not increase, or begin to decline.
This is expected as construction of apartment units continues to increase, however the increased
borrowing rate may slow down the number of new projects that entered the pipeline in 2022, 2023 and
2024.
Homes Sold by Sale Price Band
AHA recently completed a new analysis of Snohomish County home sales by price band. These
bands have been set at $100,00 groups, starting at $0 and ending at $1M+. Future work will expand this
to examine sale price bands by home use type (single family, townhome, condo, manufactured home).
Each city's top line summary is provided in Appendix B. Please contact AHA for more information and
different visualization approaches to this data. All historical sales have had their sales prices adjusted for
inflation to 2024-dollar values.
Please note that in contrast to previous reports, Appendix A's rental data now is inflation
adjusted to 2024 dollar values, as enough time has passed since this survey method began that inflation
has begun to have noticeable impacts on prices recorded in 2022.
7.4.a
Page 14
Packet Pg. 44
AHA Alliance for
Housing
Affordability
Edmonds
Sale Prices
Single Family Home Detail
2000
2023
Med SP
$465,359
$1,004,924
PITI
$3,933
$7,047
Req Inc
$143,013
$256,255
# Sold
543
262
Yrs. Old
34
59
#Change
%Change
Med Sp
539,566
115.95%
PITI
3,114
79.18%
Req Inc
113,242
79.18%
# Sold
(281)
-51.75%
Yrs. Old
25
Rental Data
7.4.a
ArlingtonA Edmonds -- Everett A Granite Falls -- HASCO A
Lake Stevens ♦ Lynnwood -k- Monroe -k- Marysville ♦ Mill Creek ♦ Mountlake Terrace.,
Mukilteo � Snohomish � Snohomish County A, Stanwood ♦ Woodway A,
Townhome Detail
2000
2023
$273,631
$634,422
$2,171
$4,436
$78,933
$161,316
1
1
20
45
#Change
%Change
360,791
131.85
2,266
104.37%
82,383
104.37%
-
0.00%
25
Edmonds, 8/21/22 - 6/28/24
$4,000
$3,500
$3,000 ~
$2,500
$2,000
$1, 500
$1, 000
$500
$-
rV � � �bti4b
EDM Studio -EDM 1BR -EDM 2BR EDM 3BR
Condominium Detail
2000
2023
$302,018
$573,517
$2,438
$4,016
$88,640
$146,034
238
165
12
25
#Change
%Change
271,500
89.90%
1,578
64.75%
57,394
64.75%
(73)
-30.67%
13
Since Aug.
2022
Since Jan
2023
Studio
-11%
-4°
1613
-2%
-6i
21311
-5%
-7i
3613
#N/A
#N/i
Page 1 10
Packet Pg. 45
7.4.b
PORT COMMISSION OF THE PORT OF EDMONDS MINUTES OF
REGULAR MEETING
August 12, 2024
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT
Jay Grant, President
Janelle Cass, Secretary
0
Steve Johnston
Q.
Selena Killin
a�
E
E
STAFF PRESENT
0
t�
Angela Harris, Executive Director
Brandon Baker, Deputy Executive Director
W
0
Tsz Yan Brady, Director of Finance and Administration
m
Brittany Williams, Manager of Properties and Economic Development
0
N
O
OTHERS PRESENT
Jordan Stephens, Port Attorney
John Brock, Town of Woodway Council
Will Chen, City of Edmonds Council
I. CALL TO ORDER
President Grant called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
II. FLAG SALUTE
All those in attendance participated in the Pledge of Allegiance to the
American Flag.
III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COMMISSIONER JOHNSTON MOVED TO APPROVE THE
AGENDAAS SUBMITTED. COMMISSIONER CASS SECONDED
THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
IV. PUBLIC COMMENTS (Each comment shall generally be limited
to 3 minutes or less and shall be limited to Port business)
• Joe Scordino submitted a public comment about the Fishing Pier
through email.
V. CONSENT AGENDA
Packet Pg. 46
7.4.b
COMMISSIONER CASS MOVED THAT THE CONSENT AGENDA
BE APPROVED TO INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING ITEMS.
COMMISSIONER JOHNSTON SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
A. Approval of July 29, 2024 Meeting Minutes
B. Approval of Payments in the amount of $1,013,702.40
VI. POSSIBLE ACTION
A. Executive Director Harris reviewed the Contract 2024-496 HSP
Asphalt Repair details, indicating it was signed off by the Director of
Facilities and Maintenance.
COMMISSIONER JOHNSTON MOVED THAT THE COMMISISON
AUTHORIZE THE CONTRACT WITH SUPERIOD ASPHALT
MAINTENANCE #2024-496 FOR HARBOR SQUARE ASPHALT
REPAIRS AS COMPLETE. COMMISSIONER KILLIN SECONDED
THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
VII. INFORMATION
A. North Portwalk and Seawall Reconstruction Report
A report was provided on the permitting, design, communications,
funding options, and legislative efforts for the North Portwalk and
Seawall Reconstruction project.
VIII. DISCUSSION
A. City Comprehensive Plan — Waterfront Vision
Commissioner Cass provided a walkthrough of her concerns
regarding the City of Edmonds Comprehensive Vision draft for the
Waterfront. The Commission discussed the concerns and determined
a letter would be drafted from the Commission to the Mayor and City
Council expressing these concerns.
IX. CITY OF EDMONDS AND WOODWAY REPORTS
w
r
• Councilmember Chen provided an update on a few key city topics: a
enterprise resource planning systems, landmark project has been
ended, Highway 99 planning, and South County Fire update. He
mentioned the City had a new mid -year financial analysis that was
very helpful, and that work with the budget will continue at their
a.-.. ,.. .. A I C ')n'i A
Packet Pg. 47
7.4.b
I CLI CdL U1 I /'iULj. UJL -LU, LVG4.
• Councilmember Brock updated the Commission on the Town of
Woodway's property tax levy lid lift and shared that the Town of
Woodway Town Fair is Saturday, August 17th from 9:30-Noon.
X. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Executive Director Harris provided the following updates:
• Spill buckets require repairs at an estimated cost of $12,000.
• Marina breakwater cleaning will occur on August 14, 2024.
• Harbor Square Atrium Project work started on building 4, with
building 3 anticipated to be complete in the next two weeks.
• Strategic plan #CP1 update on quarterly meetings with the City of
Edmonds.
Executive Director Harris then led a discussion to finalize
Commission feedback on the Strategic Plan, which will go to print on
August 13, 2024.
XI. COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS
• Commissioner Killin —Attended PNWA meeting and learned more
about the mitigation calculator and potential lawsuits. Attended WPPA
ongoing education meeting.
• Commissioner Johnston — Recalled attending the Blue Heron
Slough grand opening in years past. Also commented that the atrium
window project repairs are looking nice and stated he was available
for Port tours, as needed.
• Commissioner Cass —Attended PNWA meeting and learned more
on the mitigation calculator and potential lawsuits. Attended City
emergency disaster preparedness meeting and was disappointed the
City draft plan was only sent to City staff and not the Port. Stated that
the City Comp Plan states that if you add a hotel, you must include an
emergency homeless shelter. She stated this should be researched
further for details.
• Commissioner Grant —Attended the City of Edmonds discussion on
the house bill. Attending WPPA Legislative Committee at Port of
Skagit on August 13, 2024.
XII. EXECUTIVE SESSION
Executive Session was not held.
Packet Pg. 48
7.4.b
XIII. ADJOURNMENT
The Commission meeting was adjourned at 9:18pm.
Janelle Cass,
Port Commission Secretary
TAGS: 2024 Port of Edmonds Commission Meeting Minutes,
City Comprehensive Plan — Waterfront Vision, Contract
2024-496 HSP Asphalt Repair details as complete, Harbor
Square Atrium Project, Marina breakwater cleaning will
occur on August 14 2024., North Portwalk and Seawall
Reconstruction Report, Spill buckets require repairs at an
estimated cost of $12k., Strategic Plan
Packet Pg. 49
7.4.c
PORT COMMISSION OF THE PORT OF EDMONDS MINUTES OF
REGULAR MEETING
August 26, 2024
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT
Jay Grant, President
Janelle Cass, Secretary
o
Steve Johnston
Q.
Selena Killin
a�
E
E
STAFF PRESENT
0
t�
Angela Harris, Executive Director
Tsz Yan Brady, Director of Finance and Administration
W
0
Brittany Williams, Manager of Properties and Economic Development
m
0
72
.N
OTHERS PRESENT
p
Jordan Stephens, Port Attorney
y
c
John Brock, Town of Woodway Council 0
I. CALL TO ORDER
President Grant called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
II. FLAG SALUTE
All those in attendance participated in the Pledge of Allegiance to the
American Flag.
COMMISSIONER JOHNSTON MOVED TO EXCUSE
COMMISSIONER PRESTON FROM THE MEETING.
COMMISSIONER CASS SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COMMISSIONER JOHNSTON MOVED TO APPROVE THE
AGENDAAS SUBMITTED. COMMISSIONER CASS SECONDED
THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
IV. PUBLIC COMMENTS (Each comment shall generally be limited to
3 minutes or less and shall be limited to Port business)
Packet Pg. 50
7.4.c
V. CONSENT AGENDA
COMMISSIONER JOHNSTON MOVED THAT THE CONSENT
AGENDA BE APPROVED TO INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING ITEMS.
COMMISSIONER KILLIN SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
A. Approval of August 12, 2024 Meeting Minutes
B. Approval of Payments in the amount of $429,102.28
C. Motion for Wildlands of Washington LLC Agreement
VI. POSSIBLE ACTION
A. There were no additional actions discussed.
VII. CITY OF EDMONDS AND WOODWAY REPORTS
• Councilmember Brock provided a brief update on the Town of
Woodway Town Fair held on August 17, 2024
VIII. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Executive Director Harris provided the following updates:
• General Updates
o Spill Buckets
o Port Management Agreement (PMA)
o Staffing Update
o Community Update
• Maintenance & Landscaping Department Update
o Staffing Concerns
o Aging Infrastructure and Equipment Planning
o Maintenance Plan
o 2024 Maintenance Project Updates
• 2025 Budget Update
IX. COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS
• Commissioner Cass — Commissioner Cass attended the Port BBQ
and appreciated all the work that staff put into the event. Reviewed
her recent meeting with the City of Edmonds Mayor regarding
emergency management planning.
• Commissioner Johnston — Commissioner Johnston noted that he
appreciated the City's response so far to the Commission letter of
concern regarding the City Comprehensive planning process as it
I ..+,.,. +.. +1— n...-+ —c r.J...........J.. -+. , I I.. .. I.,.. ..++......J...J +l-...
Packet Pg. 51
I CICIICJ LU II IC rUl l UI CUI I IUI IUJ Upt:-[ ly. nC IUCU U IU
7.4.c
[JI CIIJU CIUCI
Economic Alliance of Snohomish County Board of Trustees as proxy
for Commissioner Preston.
• Commissioner Killin — Commissioner Killin attended the Edmonds
Economic Development Commission where tax increment financing
was reviewed.
• Commissioner Grant — Commissioner Grant also attended the Port
BBQ and thanked staff for a nice event. He also mentioned he is
0
CL
hearing about break-ins in cars at Harbor Square Athletic Club
through pickleball social groups. He also appreciated the response
r
E
from the Mayor to the Commission letter of concern regarding the
v
City Comprehensive planning process as it relates to the Port of
co
Edmonds property. He also gave an update on the City budget
-a
c�
process.
m°
X. WORKSHOP
A. 2025 Association Membership & Commissioner Conference Plan —
Commission discussion and direction on budget planning for 2025.
B. Waterfront Planning — Discussion on next planning steps for the
Waterfront real estate assets, to include the involvement of the
Waterfront Committee.
XI. EXECUTIVE SESSION
Executive Session was not held.
XII. ADJOURNMENT
The Commission meeting was adjourned at 8:55pm.
Janelle Cass,
Port Commission Secretary
TAGS: 2024 Port of Edmonds Commission Meeting Minutes,
2025 Association Membership & Commissioner Conference
Plan, Waterfront Planning
Packet Pg. 52
7.4.d
Edmonds Public Facilities District
Board of Directors Meeting
June 27, 2024
The Edmonds Public Facilities District Board hybrid meeting convened at 7:30 a.m. in the
Edmonds Center for the Arts Green Room, 410 4th Avenue North, Edmonds, and via Zoom.
EPFD Board Members Present ECA Staff Present
Ray Liaw, President Kathy Liu, Executive Director
Bill Willcock, Vice President Lori Meagher, Associate Executive Director
Suzy Maloney
David Brewster ECA Board Members Present
Wayne Grotheer David Schaefer, Immed. Past President
1. Call to Order
Board President Liaw called the meeting to order.
• Attendance of those attending in -person for minutes.
2. Land Acknowledaement & Eauity Statement
Board Member Grotheer read the Land Acknowledgement & Equity Statement.
3. Agenda Review and Approval
BOARD MEMBER BREWSTER MOVED TO APPROVE THE AGENDA. BOARD MEMBER
GROTHEER SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
4. Board President's Comments
Board President Liaw wished all a Happy Pride Month. She acknowledged it has been a busy
year, congratulating staff on their efforts.
5. Public Comment
There were no public comments.
6. Consent Agenda
• EPFD Disbursement Report: May 2024
• Meeting Minutes
o April 25, 2024
o May 21, 2024 (Special Meeting)
o May 23, 2024
BOARD MEMBER GROTHEER MOVED TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. BOARD
MEMBER BREWSTER SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Edmonds Public Facilities District Board Draft Minutes
June 27, 2024
Page 1
Packet Pg. 53
7.4.d
7. Old Business
• Prior Action Items Review
Ms. Meagher reviewed progress on action items from the previous meeting and identified
outstanding items (see Action Items below).
• June Staff Report — Questions/Comments?
Board President Liaw expressed appreciation for the list of production team new hires. Board
Member Grotheer recognized the level of participation in the Educator Preview.
8. PFD Board Business
• Officer Elections
Board President Liaw explained the past practice has been for the president and vice president
to serve two years and after two years, the vice president becomes the president. Board VP
Willcock explained for a number reasons external to the ECA, he plans to step away from the
board at end of his term in June 2025. For continuity, health and overall integrity of the board, it
would be prudent for him to step down as vice president, continue as a board member and for the
board to elect another vice president. Board Members thanked Board VP Willcock for his excellent
service. Board President Liaw relayed she has agreed to serve one more year as president and
Board Member Grotheer has agreed to step into the role as vice president.
BOARD VP WILLCOCK MOVED TO APPROVE RAY LIAW AS BOARD PRESIDENT AND
WAYNE GROTHEER AS VICE PRESIDENT FOR THE NEXT YEAR. BOARD MEMBER
BREWSTER SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Board President Liaw recommended the board consider which committees should be formally
recognized and populated with at least one EPFD board member.
• Amendment to Employee Handbook — Paid Leave
Board President Liaw recalled last month the Board gave Ms. Liu and Ms. Meagher direction to
finalize this policy. Ms. Meagher reviewed revisions to the policy related to paid leave policy as
reflected in the version of the policy that was distributed to the board yesterday.
BOARD MEMBER MALONEY MOVED TO APPROVE THE DISCRETIONARY CLOSURE
POLICY. BOARD MEMBER BREWSTER SECONDED THE MOTION.
BOARD MEMER GROTHEER MOVED TO AMEND THE WORDING IN PARAGRAPH 3 UNDER
COMPENSATION TO READ, "...UP TO A NUMBER OF HOURS OR DAYS WORKED AS PAID
LEAVE AT AN ALTERNATE TIME IN ADDITION TO BEING PAID FOR THE TIME WORKED
DURING THE TEMPORARY CLOSURE." BOARD MEMBER BREWSTER SECONDED THE
MOTION. AMENDMENT CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
9. PFD Board Member Reports
Board Member Grotheer reported the IDEA committee meeting included brainstorming how to
move forward in becoming an anti -racist, multicultural organization. Regarding Facilities &
Edmonds Public Facilities District Board Draft Minutes
June 27, 2024
Page 2
Packet Pg. 54
7.4.d
Operations, the $50,000 boiler/heat exchanger is moving forward; replacement would be much
more expensive and unknown if it could be completed prior to colder weather. The cost will be
incorporated into the budget reforecast. The CO2 monitor project has been handed off to
operations. The committee is updating the Historic Building Fund Policy which will be reviewed
by Admin & Finance before approval by the EPFD Board. With regard to the Universal Access
Task Force, the lobby doors are complete; installation was funded by a grant and the electrical
work funded by the ECA. He offered kudos to Sandra Nestorovic, John Dougall, Nicole Giordano
and Lori Meagher for their assistance with that project. The task force is proposing a sound system
and assisted listening device at a cost of $17,000 which will be part of the mid -year budget review.
The task force reviewed and approved a draft charter which will be reviewed and approved by the
Facilities & Operations and IDEA Committees.
Board Member Brewster reported the Education and Community Outreach Committee did not
meet, but Diana Ortega provided a summary of the Educator Preview which set a new record for
preregistrations (approximately 6,500). The Dungeons and Dragons camp starts next month
which Ms. Ortega recognized Nick Williamson for organizing. Information regarding programming
will be presented during Edmonds School District's backpack fair. Planning for Kidstock! is
underway. The Creative District Advisory Committee did not meet and there has not been any
engagement from the Association of WA State PFDs.
Discussion followed regarding planning for the September 23-25 Association of WA State PFDs
conference. The board requested the Save the Date for the conference be sent to EPFD Board
Members.
Board President Liaw reported rental rates are typically increased in September; she requested
the EPFD Board approve the recommended rental increases at the August meeting. Discussion
followed regarding notifying current clients of the rate change and the percentage increase.
10. Associate Executive Director Update
• Finance Update
o May Financials
0 2024 Budget Reforecasting
Ms. Meagher reported the draft 2024 Budget Reforecast includes May Financials. Ms. Liu
explained she and Ms. Meagher did preliminary work on the draft financials as well as sought
input from department heads on some lines. The budget reforecast is very rough draft; following
review and input from the EPFD Board, she and Ms. Meagher will review it again with department
heads.
Ms. Meagher reviewed the 2024 projected reforecast including YTD May, original budget June -
Dec, adjusted budget Jun -Dec, updated projected total full year, approved annual budget, and
variance between updated projected vs. approved budget.
Questions and discussion followed regarding whether presented events revenue included special
engagements, confirming department heads' projections, whether increased revenue from
Historic Building Preservation Fee and Box Office Service Charge could be expected with
additional presented events, major gifts and grants, contribution revenue trending positively but
not as fast as the budget assumed, need for the reformatted Gala to succeed, error in a formula
that resulted in a lower budgeted loss, staff's confidence in the model and systems, benefits that
more robust financial software would provide, consistently underspent marketing budgets, looking
at activities from a net revenue generating perspective versus gross in the 2025 budget,
Edmonds Public Facilities District Board Draft Minutes
June 27, 2024
Page 3
Packet Pg. 55
7.4.d
July/August agenda item to check on the progress of new approaches being considered with
regard to big picture strategies, impact a new mission will have on the organization, separation
between board and staff and ensuring sufficient flexibility to run the organization, the strategic
planning process guiding major changes, gauging success beyond financials, how the reforecast
impacts next year's budget, and staff's intent to share more details in next month's reforecast
presentation.
• Human Resources Update
Ms. Meagher reported the annual performance process, catalytic coaching, is about to begin with
the hope of completing it by the end of August so any anticipated professional development can
be included in the 2025 budget. Discussion followed regarding staff's acceptance of this type of
performance evaluation and the collaborative nature of this coaching process.
• Facilities Update
o Surplus
Ms. Meagher advised the packet includes a draft surplus policy resolution; it is still being reviewed
by Facilities & Operations and Admin & Finance. Although originally related to removal of
materials in the Music building, there was a need for an organizational surplus policy that gives
the executive director the ability, at a certain threshold, to dispose of materials or handle them in
accordance with the RCW. She anticipated presenting the policy to the board at next month's
meeting for approval. Discussion followed regarding the threshold for disposal.
o Next Steps from Mithun Report
Ms. Meagher relayed Facilities and Operations was charged with reviewing the report, priorities
for 2024/2025, potential dollar amounts for budgeting, and identifying lower hanging fruit for the
strategic plan and overall campus plan. Questions and discussion followed regarding discussing
with Mithun whether anything needed to be added to the facilities master plan, timeline for the
partnership conversation, timeline to use or request an extension for the state funding,
collaborative thinking about the mission, partnering on a gymnasium, determining what to
prioritize in a partnership, keeping potential partners informed, and exploring the flexibility of the
state funding.
11. Executive Director Update
• Development Update - Gala
Ms. Liu reported:
❖ A Save the Date was sent to the entire email list
❖ Development team is working on pre -asks to people who made a significant commitment
to the Gala in the past
❖ Development team is renewing corporate event sponsors
Gala invitations will be mailed the second week of July
❖ A robust marketing plan will occur this summer to draw in general audiences
A modest online auction is planned
Importance of word of mouth strategy (talking points available for board members and
table leads)
❖ Event tickets include a donation amount
Sale of event tickets begin in July
❖ Sale of concert -only tickets begin in August
Edmonds Public Facilities District Board Draft Minutes
June 27, 2024
Page 4
Packet Pg. 56
7.4.d
Questions and discussion followed regarding whether there will be a raffle, positive feedback from
the Philanthropy Committee and community regarding the new format, and top level ticket that
includes a meet and greet with the artist.
• Programming/Revenue Update / 2023-24 Season
Ms. Liu reviewed the Ticket Sales Report, relaying the fiscal year is on track to exceed ticket
revenue goals. Questions and discussion followed regarding whether the ECA has ever published
how well a season performed and preparing an annual report that includes that information.
• Strategic Planning Update - Mission
Ms. Liu reported she has been working with Lindsay Geyer and Matt Cox on the ECA Board's
discussion which includes suggested questions for the board's input. The same questions will be
circulated to the EPFD Board for their written feedback.
12. New Business
Ms. Meagher reported the audit officially starts July 22. A kickoff meeting was held with the State
Auditor's Office. This year's audit includes a financial audit as well as an accountability audit.
13. Adjourn
The meeting was adjourned at 9:01 a.m.
Next EPFD Board Meeting: Thursday, July 25, 2024 - 7:30 AM
ACTION ITEMS:
1. Distribute list of board member committee assignments
2. Senior Staff Update by Diana Ortega -Chance regarding Education & Community
Engagement
3. Send Save the Date for Association of WA State PFDs 9/23-25 conference to EPFD
members
4. July EPFD Board Meeting
a. EPFD Board determine which committees should be formally recognized and
populated with at least one EPFD Board Member
b. Approval of budget reforecast, including how changes impact next year's budget
c. Consider Surplusing Policy
5. August/September EPFD Board meeting
a. Staff clarify scope of coverage under Enduris insurance policy
b. Approval of Amended Employee Handbook
c. Approve recommended rental increases
d. Agenda item to check on progress of new approaches related to big picture strategies
e. EPFD Board input on proposed mission (September meeting)
Edmonds Public Facilities District Board Draft Minutes
June 27, 2024
Page 5
Packet Pg. 57
7.4.e
Edmonds Public Facilities District
Board of Directors Meeting
July 25, 2024
The Edmonds Public Facilities District Board hybrid meeting convened at 7:31 a.m. in the
Edmonds Center for the Arts Green Room, 410 4th Avenue North, Edmonds, and via Zoom.
EPFD Board Members Present
Ray Liaw, President
Wayne Grotheer, Vice President
Suzy Maloney (arrived 7:33 a.m.)
David Brewster
EPFD Board Members Absent
Bill Willcock
ECA Board Members Present
David Schaefer, Immed. Past President
Call to Order
ECA Staff Present
Kathy Liu, Executive Director
Lori Meagher, Associate Executive Director
Diana Ortega, Dir. of Education & Comm.
Engagement
Guests
Chris Eck, City Council Liaison
Board President Liaw called the meeting to order.
• Attendance of those attending in -person for minutes.
2. Land Acknowledqement & Equity Statement
Board Member Brewster read the Land Acknowledgement & Equity Statement.
3. Agenda Review and Approval
BOARD MEMBER GROTHEER MOVED TO REMOVE AGENDA ITEM, "AMENDMENT TO
EMPLOYEE HANDBOOK - PAID LEAVE." BOARD MEMBER BREWSTER SECONDED THE
MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
BOARD MEMBER BREWSTER MOVED TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS AMENDED. BOARD
VP GROTHEER SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
4. Board President's Comments
Board President Liaw wished all a Happy July, acknowledged staff's week off at the beginning of
the month and hoped all were refreshed and rejuvenated.
5. Public Comment
There was no public comment.
6. Consent Agenda
Edmonds Public Facilities District Board Draft Minutes
July 25, 2024
Page 1
Packet Pg. 58
7.4.e
EPFD Disbursement Report: June 2024
Meeting Minutes — June 27, 2024
BOARD MEMBER MALONEY MOVED TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. BOARD
MEMBER BREWSTER SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
7. Old Business
• Prior Action Items Review
Ms. Meagher reviewed progress on action items from the previous meeting and identified
outstanding items (see Action Items below).
• July Staff Report — Questions/Comments?
Board Member Brewster commented on strong advanced ticket sales for the upcoming season,
the volunteer dinner and demographics of the volunteers. Board VP Grotheer expressed
appreciation for the board's support of the volunteer recognition.
8. PFD Board Business
• Surplus Policy
Ms. Meagher relayed the Facilities & Operations Committee reviewed and edited the policy and
Board President Liaw provided edits to simplify and align thresholds with the purchasing policy.
She will distribute a finalized draft for approval at August meeting.
• Historic Building Preservation Fund Policy
Ms. Meagher relayed the policy has been edited with input from several sources. Discussion
followed regarding including the policy or the purpose section on the ECA website. Board approval
of the policy will be on the August agenda.
• Committee Recognition
Board President Liaw said the intent of this agenda item was to discuss board participation on
committees, recognize committees that provide recommendations to the EPFD board in the
bylaws, and assign EPFD board members to those committees.
Discussion followed regarding current committee assignments, formally recognizing committees
that make recommendations to EPFD in the bylaws and assigning EPFD board members to serve
on those committees, staff efforts on committees, use of committees to advance aspects of the
organization, volunteers on committees, ECA board members' input into decisions via
committees, and posting committee responsibilities and membership on the website.
Board members expressed interest in committee assignments as follows:
Committee
Existing EPFD Board
Revised EPFD Board
Member
Member
Admin & Fin
Liaw & Willcock
Liaw & Grotheer
Edmonds Public Facilities District Board Draft Minutes
July 25, 2024
Page 2
Packet Pg. 59
7.4.e
Education & Community
Outreach
Brewster
Brewster & Willcock*
Board Governance
Facilities and Operations
Grotheer
Grotheer
Hosting
Liaw
Willcock* & Malone
IDEA
Grotheer
Brewster
Marketing &
Communications TF
Philanthropy
Maloney, Willcock
I Maloney & Willcock*
*Board Member Willcock assignments subject to his confirmation
9. PFD Board Member Reports
Ms. Liu reported the focus of the Philanthropy Committee meeting was finalizing online auction
items and assigning members to make those requests.
Board Member Brewster reported Ms. Liu and he attended the Creative District Advisory
Committee meeting where the City's Community/Culture/Economic Development Director Todd
Tatum provided updates on Sketcher Fest, a gathering of creative districts, and potentially
working with ArtsFund on their legislative priorities and he and Ms. Liu and other committee
members shared information. There will be a public call for artists for art on City -owned property
adjacent to the ferry holding lanes.
Board Member Brewster also reported on logistics related to the Association of WA State PFDs
conference including the evening social at ECA, business meeting in Lynnwood the next day, and
unknowns such as dinner/tour of Angel of the Winds.
Board VP Grotheer reported Director of Patron Experience Nicole Giordano and he will be
attending the Accessibility and the Arts national conference in Seattle next week. A community
member on the task force, Dean Olson, also plans to attend (at his own expense). With regard to
Facilities & Operations, he reported one of the heat exchangers needs to be repaired; the original
estimate of $50,000 has increased to $60,000-$75,000. Another critical safety item, engineering
study of electrical system safety (arc flash prevention), is also proceeding,.
Board President Liaw reported the Hosting Committee plans to finalize and present their
recommendation on rental pricing to the EPFD Board next month. Ms. Meagher Budget reported
the Admin & Finance Committee meeting focused on the draft budget reforecast, an update
regarding the audit, and the leadership retreat.
10. Associate Executive Director Update
• Finance Update
o 2024 Budget Reforecasting
Ms. Meagher reviewed the draft reforecast including projected operating loss, revenue, budget
ticket sales compared to current trends, average ticket price, four additional shows reflected in
the reforecast that were not in the original budget, operating revenue for presented events, rental
and operating leases, education and outreach, contribution and operating grants, operating
expenses, non -operating revenue and expenses, and total net surplus (loss). The goal is to
finalize the reforecast in the next few weeks and distribute it in advance of the Admin & Finance
and EPFD Board meetings; approval is anticipated at the August EPFD Board meeting.
Edmonds Public Facilities District Board Draft Minutes
July 25, 2024
Page 3
Packet Pg. 60
7.4.e
Questions and discussion followed regarding pressure on fall fundraising events, special project
expense (contribution to the City for the 4th Avenue Cultural Corridor that did not proceed), status
of accounts payable, Snohomish County's sales tax projections, capital projects that are
proceeding this year and projects that will be deferred, the Facilities & Operations Committee
prioritizing projects, and $200,000 budget to begin work identified in the building assessment.
o June Financials
June financials were reviewed during the above agenda item.
o Audit Update
Ms. Meagher reported the audit is underway which includes 2023 financials and accountability
audit for fiscal years 2021, 2022 and 2023. The intent is to have the audit complete by the end of
August.
• Season 24/25 Rental Rates
Ms. Meagher reported the Hosting Committee is assisting with gathering other organizations'
rental rates to compare with ECA's rates. Rental price packaging is also being considered to
establish more consistent pricing based on space.
• Human Resources Update
o Senior Leadership Retreat/Team Building
Ms. Meagher reported senior leadership, department heads, she and Ms. Liu met offsite for a two
half -day retreat/team building with a facilitator. Attendees took a DiSC Assessment in advance
and the retreat included discussion about communication and work styles. The retreat also
included discussion about ECA's culture, challenges and areas of opportunity, work/life balance,
boundary setting and sharing solutions. Ms. Liu agreed it was a fantastic retreat and gave
everyone a chance to talk about goals and communication. She expected the work to be ongoing
especially related to culture.
Questions and discussion followed regarding espoused culture versus experienced culture, and
a suggestion to have board members do a similar assessment.
• Facilities Update
An updated was provided by Board VP Grotheer during PFD Board Member reports.
11. Executive Director Update
• Development Update — Gala
Ms. Liu reported Development is working hard on the Gala & Benefit Concert. Invites were mailed
last week/early this week and responses are being received. Staff is doing logistics follow up and
supporting board and community members promoting the Gala by word of mouth.
(Board VP Grotheer left the meeting at 8:37 a.m.)
• Programming/Revenue Update
Edmonds Public Facilities District Board Draft Minutes
July 25, 2024
Page 4
Packet Pg. 61
7.4.e
Ms. Liu reported shows have been very well received and summer shows are performing as
expected. The 2024/25 season launch has been phenomenal; as of July 15th, revenues are ahead
of last year include new subscriptions and three new full season subscriptions.
• Strategic Planning Update
Ms. Liu reported an email and survey were sent to boards and staff regarding the mission
statement discussion. The ECA and staff plan to have discussions at their August meetings. She
encouraged board members to submit their thoughts regarding the survey questions: who are we,
what do we do, why do we do it, and for whom do we do it?
• Partnership
Ms. Liu invited input on prioritizing an institutional partner. Discussion followed regarding different
types of partnership opportunities; identifying a partner whose programming is complimentary to
ECA's programming; ensuring a partner is a good cultural fit with the ECA; guideposts around the
cultural question; a partner aligning with the ECA with regard to culture, mission, values, and
administration; considerations such as a partner that would eventually be physically on site, their
financial stability, what they offer, what they want in a partnership, opportunity for growth via a
partnership, what's in it for ECA, compatibility, and evolution of the ECA campus.
(Board VP Grotheer returned to the meeting at 8:46 a.m.).
Ms. Liu advised the RFP for a strategic planning consultant will be posted in August, a decision
made in early fall, and strategic planning will begin in early 2025.
12. Education & Community Engagement
Director of Education and Community Engagement Diana Ortega reported the season wrapped
up in June with the Educator Preview of the upcoming year. Over 85% of the reservations for the
2024/2025 were secured. Summer camps began on Monday and continue next week. Staff will
be at the Edmonds School District's Backpack Fair next month to provide information on
educational resources ECA offers. Also in August, Windows to the Arts concerts will be presented
at two nursing homes in Kitsap County and one in Snohomish County. The Education Department
has finalized the upcoming season and posted information on the website regarding student
matinees, in -school workshops, WE SPEAK, a free community concert on September 25,
workshop/talk prior to TAIKOPROJECT on September 27, Dementia Inclusive Classes on the first
Wednesday of October, November and December, and Kidstock! on January 18.
Ms. Meagher recalled the EPFD Board's preapproval of OSPI hours requires a report on the
educator hours. Ms. Ortega reported on the OPSI clock hour workshop at the Educator Preview
and professional development workshops in October by Quinteto Latino to prepare educators for
the WE SPEAK Festival, and a workshop in November by 23 Skidoo to show teachers how to
create rap and spoken word with kids before the matinee.
Questions and discussion followed regarding differences in professional development
programming this year versus last, and community partnerships/events through
Education/Outreach Department and IDEA.
13. New Business
Edmonds Public Facilities District Board Draft Minutes
July 25, 2024
Page 5
Packet Pg. 62
7.4.e
14. Adjourn
The meeting was adjourned at 9 a.m.
Next EPFD Board Meeting: Thursday, August 22, 2024 - 7:30 AM
ACTION ITEMS:
1. August EPFD Board Meeting
a. Approve budget reforecast, including how changes impact next year's budget
(distribute to Admin & Fin and EPFD Board in advance of August meeting)
b. Approve Surplus Policy
c. Staff clarify scope of coverage under Enduris insurance policy
a. Approve Amended Employee Handbook
b. Approve recommended rental pricing for 2025
c. Approve Historic Building Preservation Fund Policy
d. Agenda item to check on progress of new approaches related to big picture strategies
2. September meeting
a. EPFD Board input on proposed mission
3. Consider posting Historic Building Preservation Fund Policy or purpose and use of funds
on ECA website.
4. Consider posting committees, their responsibilities and membership on the ECA website
5. Future Tasks
a. Recognize committees in bylaws
Edmonds Public Facilities District Board Draft Minutes
July 25, 2024
Page 6
Packet Pg. 63
I 7.4.f I
Stanwood Darrington
Snohomish County Tomorrow
A GRO WTH MANAGEMENT AD VISOR COUNCIL
STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING
Wednesday, June 26, 2024
Via Zoom
4:00 p.m.
MEETING MINUTES
Tulalip Arlington
Tri;Everett
Marysville Granite Falls
Lake Stevens
Mill Creek
Lynd.nwood Snohomish
nw Mountlake Monroe
Terrace Sultan Gold Inex d
WoLodway Brier Bothell Bar
Participating Jurisdictions/Members
City of Edmonds
Councilmember Vivian Olsen
City of Everett
Councilmember Ben Zarlin o
City of Gold Bar
Councilmember Charlies Lie
City of Granite Falls
Mayor Matt Hartman
City of Lake Stevens
Mayor Brett Gaile
City of Lynnwood
Mayor Christine Frizzell, Councilmember David
Parshall
City of Marysville
Councilmember Peter Condyles
City of Monroe
Councilmember Kyle Fisher, Jacob Walker
City of Mountlake Terrace
Mayor Pro Tern Bryan Wahl
City of Mukilteo
Councilmember Jason Moon
City of Woodway
Councilmember John Brock
Snohomish County Council
Councilmembers Nate Nehrin
Snohomish County Executive
Josh Dugan
Community Representative
Allen Giffen
Community Representative
Easton Craft
Community Representative
Mike Appleby
CAB Representative
Phil Lovell
Other Attendees/Presenters:
PSRC
Ben Bakkenta
ICC
Max Phan
Sno-Ilse Libraries
Lois Thompson
Snohomish County
Stephen Toy
Snohomish County
Frank Slusser
Snohomish County
Jason Biermann
SCT CAB
Taj Sukhija, Phil Lovell
Sno-Ilse Libraries
David Durante, Susan Hempstead
Snohomish County
Mike McCrary, Matt Ojala
Snohomish County
Molly Beeman
City of Bothell
Carston Curd
City of Lake Stevens
Russ Wright
City of Mill Creek
Justin Horn
City of Monroe
Kate Tourtellot
Packet Pg. 64
7.4.f
SCT Manager
Ann Larson
Snohomish County
Taylor Twiford
Community Members
Melody Tucker, Reid Shockey
Call to Order:
The meeting was called to order at 4:01 pm by Brett Gailey
2. Introductions/Roll Call
Roll call was taken (as listed above).
3. Citizen Comments
No comments.
4. Approval of Meeting Minutes (5-22-24)
Bryn Wahl moved to approve the minutes. Ben Zarlingo seconded, and the motion
passed unanimously.
5. Update Items
a. PSRC Board Actions and Activities, Ben Bakkenta
Ben Bakkenta, Director of Regional Planning, updated the committee on PSRC Board
actions and Activities. At the next Executive Board meeting, the board will be briefed on
the Regional Transportation Safety Action Plan and will receive the official launch of the
region's new equity tracker. The Executive Board will also be briefed on PSRC's plan
and procedures that they'll be using to review and certify local comprehensive plans.
The Growth Management Policy Board meeting has been rescheduled to Thursday,
July 18th and that meeting will have an environmental planning and resources focus with
presentations about tree protection and housing production oftentimes conflicting goals
and regulations that look at tree protection while wanting to produce more housing.
They'll also get a presentation from the Tree Equity Collaborative and then a
presentation about regional open space trends.
The Transportation Policy Board will be taking up to two transportation funding actions
on the annual FTA funding adjustments and to recommend approval of this year's
grants in the 2024 project selection competition.
Bakkenta also reminded the group that there are no PSRC Board and Committee
meetings in August.
6. Action Items
a. Agenda Bill. ICC Recommended List STBG/CMAQ Projects, Max Phan
Max Phan, ICC Co-chair, gave a presentation on the recommended list of projects
for the competition. Federal funds are distributed through PSRC every two years for
transportation related projects. There are 2 competitions, the regional competition
and the county wide competition, and all the applications are scored through ICC.
The ICC has sent a prioritized list to the committee for approval.
Councilmember Bryan Wahl moved to approve the ICC recommended project list for
2024 STBG/CMAQ Projects and was seconded by Councilmember Peter Condyles.
Packet Pg. 65
7.4.f
The motion passed unanimously.
b. Agenda Bill. Citizen Representative to the Community Advisory Board,
Taj Sukhija was introduced to the group as an applicant to the SCT Community
Advisory Board. She is a realtor and was introduced to Councilmember Nate
Nehring.
Councilmember Vivian Olson moved to accept Taj Sukita as the CAB representative
and was seconded by Councilmember Bryan Wahl. The motion passed unanimously.
7. Briefings, Discussion Items
a. Sno-Isle Libraries, Lois Langer Thompson
Lois Langer Thompson, Executive Director for Small Libraries, gave a presentation
on the Sno-Isle Libraries. Sno-Isle Libraries operate 17 public libraries across
Snohomish County with another six in Island County. Thompson gave an overview of
how the libraries connect communities through access to Wi-Fi and resources,
warming, cooling, and clean air centers, building inspired spaces, and opportunities
for kids. They are working with the Auditor's Office to do voter education for better
outreach. Thompson also announced the groundbreaking for a new library in Lake
Stevens and that the City of Arlington had voted to approve the rezoning of their
current library space.
Snohomish County 2024 UGA Map Adjustments and Reconciliation, Steve Toy and
Frank Slusser
Frank Slusser, Senior Planner, gave a presentation on the County's 2024 UGA Map
Adjustments and the remaining steps for the 2024 update. He explained the process
and reasoning in preparing the executive recommendations and what is achieved in
them. Slusser gave a high level overview of the proposed changes. He also went
over other potential adjustments that were proposed that are not recommended by
the executive but were studied under the DEIS and could still be considered by the
council.
Steve Toy, Principal Demographer, gave a presentation on the Growth Target
Reconciliation. He gave some background on what the growth target is, how it has
been handled in the past, and what the schedule is for this round of comp plan
updates. Any differences between adopted growth targets in the cities and the
county's plan are reviewed by Snohomish County Tomorrow and then SCT
recommends a set of resolved or reconciled targets onto the County Council and
County Councils syncs them and adopts final targets.
c. Opioid Settlement Update, Jason Biermann
Jason Biermann gave an update on what the County has been doing with its opioid
abatement funds. Bierman gave an overview of the multiple settlements and the
amount and how they are spread out. The funds are also spread out over different
timelines and there are constraints on how the funds can be used. Biermann also
gave an update on the status of the plan and the different phases. He also gave an
overview of the mobile opioid treatment program.
Packet Pg. 66
7.4.f
d. SCT Manager's Report, Ann Larson
a. Meeting Time Survey Results
Earlier in the year the committee did a survey and opted to move the meeting
time to 4 pm. At the beginning of the month, a similar survey was sent out
looking for feedback on how the meeting move. Twenty five responses were
received with fifteen votes stating the 4 pm start time was the preference with
six votes for changing back to 6 pm. Four no preference votes were received.
b. SCT Committee Report
8. Go -Round
9. Next Meeting Date
July 24, 2024
10. Adjournment
Councilmember Vivian Olsen moved to adjourn the meeting and was seconded by
Councilmember Bryan Wahl.
The meeting was adjourned at 5:35 pm by Brett Gailey.
All presentations given, discussions held, and actions taken at this meeting are kept on file (via recording) in PDS until six years
from December 315t of this year.
Packet Pg. 67
Stanwood Darrington
7.4.g
Snohomish County Tomorrow
A GRO WTH MANAGEMENT AD VISOR COUNCIL
1
2.
STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING
Wednesday, July 24, 2024
Via Zoom
4:00 p.m.
MEETING MINUTES
Tulalip Arlington
Tribes
Marysville
Granite Falls
Everett Lake Stevens
ukilteo Mill Creek
Lynnwood Snohomish
Edmonds Mountlake Monroe
Terrace Sultan Gold Index
Woodway Brier Bothell Bar
Participating Jurisdictions/Members
City of Arlington
Mayor Don Vanne
City of Darrin ton
Mayor Dan Rankin
City of Edmonds
Councilmember Vivian Olsen
City of Gold Bar
Councilmember Charlies Lie
City of Lynnwood
Mayor Christine Frizzell, Councilmember David
Parshall
City of Marysville
Councilmember Peter Condyles
City of Mill Creek
Mayor Pro Tern Stephanie Vignal
City of Mountlake Terrace
Mayor Pro Tern Bryan Wahl
City of Mukilteo
Councilmember Jason Moon
Snohomish County Council
Councilmembers Nate Nehrin
Snohomish County Executive
Josh Dugan
Community Representative
Allen Giffen
Community Representative
Mike Appleby
CAB Representative
Kate Nesse
Other Attendees/Presenters:
Snohomish Conservation District
Linda Lyshall
Snohomish County Executive
Jason Biermann
Snohomish County, PAC CO -Chair
Mike McCrary
Snohomish County
Molly Beeman
City of Everett
Frank Hong
City of Lake Stevens, PAC Co -Chair
Russ Wright
City of Monroe
Lance Bailey
SCT Manager
Ann Larson
Snohomish County
Taylor Twiford
Community Members
Melody Tucker, Daniel Lucier
Call to Order:
The meeting was called to order at 4:02 pm by Bryan Wahl.
Introductions/Roll Call
Roll call was taken (as listed above).
Packet Pg. 68
7.4.g
3. Citizen Comments
No comments.
4. Approval of Meeting Minutes (6-26-24)
Nate Nehring moved to approve the minutes. Josh Dugan seconded, and the motion
passed unanimously.
5. Update Items
a. PSRC Board Actions and Activities, Ben Bakkenta
Ben Bakkenta, Director of Regional Planning, was unable to attend and give an update.
The Board summary was sent out to the group with the reminder there are no meetings
in August.
6. Action Items
7. Briefings, Discussion Items
a. Snohomish Conservation District
Linda Lyshall, Executive Director, gave an overview of the Snohomish Conservation
District. Lyshall provided background on how the District began and what it does.
She provided information on the different project and programs the District maintain
including the Forest Stewardship Program, Youth education, Habitat Restoration,
and Agricultural Program. Lyshall also spoke about their newest project in creating a
Natural Resource Center in Lake Stevens.
b. Final SCT Budget Update
Julie Mass, Division Manager, was unable to attend but Ann Larson gave an update.
Please review the memo that was attached to the agenda. The only change is in
p
Exhibit 2 which is the final dues distribution amongst the members. Distribution was
updated based on the April 2024 numbers. Exhibit 3 shows where the population
N
shifted.
N
C. Criminal Justice Tax
N
O
Jason Biermann, Senior Policy Advisor, gave an overview of the Public Safety Sales
c
Tax (PSST). He provided information on what a PSST is and why it is being sought
i
now. One-third of all money received must be used solely for criminal justice
U
purposes, fire protection purposes, or both. The remaining two-thirds may be used
for any lawful governmental purpose but must be spent in accordance with the
purpose(s) specified in the ballot measure (MRSC, 2023). Since 2011, Washington
E
counties placed a public safety sales tax on the ballot 26 times, and 20 of those
CU
measures passed. Biermann also spoke on the Executive Proposal and the
a
proposed actions. The Executive's proposal addresses only the County's portion.
d. SCT Manager's Report, Ann Larson
a. SCT Committee Report
8. Go -Round
9. Next Meeting Date
August 28, 2024
Packet Pg. 69
7.4.g
10. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 4:57 pm by Bryan Wahl.
W
LO
N
N
le
N
O
N
N
ti
O
I
H
U
c
0
E
t
t>
ca
r
w
Q
All presentations given, discussions held, and actions taken at this meeting are kept on file (via recording) in PDS until six years
from December 3111 of this year.
Packet Pg. 70
7.4.h
SNOHOMISH
COUNTY
SNOHOMISH COUNTY 911 BOARD OF DIRECTORS
BOARD MEETING AGENDA
s = August 15, 2024 at 8:30 a.m.
Hybrid Meeting - In Person and Zoom
Physical location: South County Fire HQ - Commissioners Board Room
12425 Meridian Ave South, Everett.
https://us02web.zoom.us/i/86274396181
Meeting ID: 860 00
46 6014, Passcode: 195881
or dial +1 253 215 8782
1. Call to Order
A. Roll Call
B. Announcements
C. Public Comment Policy: Public Comments limited to 3 minutes on
discussion items related to agency business.
2. Approval of Agenda
3. Consent Agenda
A. Minutes from the July 18, 2024 Regular Board Meeting
B. July 2024 Blanket Voucher & Payroll Approval Form:
i. Checks 1053-1059, 19060-19206, for a total of $7,064,725.92
ii. Payroll Direct Deposit, in the amount of $1,376,306.05
4. Old Business
A. APF — Fleet Expansion Inventory Order
5. New Business
A. APF — Public Safety System Initiative
B. APF — Non -Emergency Line Al Solution
C. APF — Declaration of Emergency — Radio Tower A/C replacements
6. Reports
A. Agency Report
B. New Facility Project Update
C. Radio Replacement Project (RRP)
D. Police TAC (no meeting; next one scheduled for 9/10)
E. Fire TAC
7. Committee Reports
A. Finance Committee
B. Personnel Committee (no meeting)
Packet Pg. 71
7.4.h
C. Future Facility Committee (no meeting)
D. EMS Joint Task Force
E. County EESCS Committee (formerly County E911 Office)
F. County ECSF Program Advisory Board
8. Good of the Order
9. Adjourn - The next meeting is scheduled for September 19, 2024
Packet Pg. 72
7.4.i
SNOHOMISH
COUNTY
SNOHOMISH COUNTY 911 BOARD OF DIRECTORS
911 BOARD MEETING AGENDA
s = September 19, 2024 at 8:30 a.m.
Web Conference — Join Zoom Meeting
https://uso2web.zoom.us/i/86274396181
Meeting ID: 860 00
46 6014, Passcode: 195881
or dial +1 253 215 8782
Physical location: 1121 SE Everett Mall Way, Everett Police Department, South Precinct.
Please note that most Board members and staff attend the meeting remotely. However,
pursuant to RCW 42.30, a physical location is also provided.
1. Call to Order
A. Roll Call
B. Announcements
C. Public Comment Policy: Public Comments limited to 3 minutes on
discussion items related to agency business.
2. Public Comments
3. Approval of Agenda
4. Consent Agenda
A. Minutes from the August 15, 2024 Regular Board Meeting
B. August 2024 Blanket Voucher & Payroll Approval Form:
i. Checks 1060-1061, and 19207-19321, for a total of $4,658,592.06
ii. Payroll Direct Deposit, in the amount of $1,447,789.89
5. New Business
A.
APF
- Appointive Employees Policy Revisions
B.
APF
— Personnel Administrative Policy Revisions
C.
APF
— 2024 RRP Fleet Expansion Radio Requests
D.
APF
— Surplus of IT Items
E.
APF
— Pre -Hire Authority
F.
Real -Time
Intelligence Center (RTIC) Discussion
6. Reports
A. Agency Report
B. New Facility Project Update
C. Radio Replacement Project (RRP)
D. Police TAC
Packet Pg. 73
7.4.i
E. Fire TAC
7. Committee Reports
A. Finance Committee
B. Personnel Committee
C. Future Facility Committee (No Meeting - See 6B of Agenda)
D. EMS Joint Task Force
E. Public Safety Tech Committee (PSTC)
F. County EESCS Committee (formerly County E911 Office)
G. County ECSF Program Advisory Board
8. WCIA Annual Report
9. Good of the Order
10. Adjourn - The next meeting is scheduled for October 17, 2024
Packet Pg. 74
7.4.j
�AsHiN AGENDA
Ut
Lake Washington/Cedar/Sammamish Watershed
WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council
Thursday, July 18, 2024, 2:00-3:40PM with follow-on site visit to
nearby Bear Creek restoration project
In -Person Meeting — NOTE MEETING LOCATION
Redmond City Hall
15670 NE 85th St., Redmond
(In -person attendance encouraged, but hybrid meeting option available)
Meeting
Packet Pa e
Welcome and Roll Call of Attendees John Stokes, Chair �2:00-2:10
Councilmember, City of Bellevue
Vanessa Kritzer, Vice -Chair
Public Comment
Consent Agenda:
Councilmember, City of Redmond
John Stokes
John Stokes
2:10-2:15
2:15-2:20
2.
3.
• Approval of Meeting Notes for May 16, 2024
Updates and Good of the Order
3
Jason Mulvihill -Kuntz,
4.
2:20-2:30
Announcements
WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Manager
WRIA 8 staff updates and announcements from WRIA 8
10
partners.
Consider approval of letter supporting Lake
WRIA 8 Council partners
Mary Ramirez,
2:30-2:45
5.
Washington basin invasive predatory fish
WRIA 8 Technical Coordinator
control program (Decision)
Review and consider approval to send draft letter to
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife supporting
14
development of a predatory fish control program in Lake
Washington basin, recognizing the impact of predation on
juvenile salmon and building on WRIA 8 grant investment in
predation monitoring and testing removal techniques, and
current predator control supported by recent state legislative
budget provisos.
Draft 2025 WRIA 8 Budget and Work Plan
Jason Mulvihill -Kuntz
2:45-3:05
6.
(Information/Discussion)
Review and discuss draft 2025 budget and work plan to inform
16
Management Committee development of a recommendation for
Council approval in September.
7.
Draft WRIA 8 Interlocal Agreement (2026-
Jason Mulvihill -Kuntz
3:05-3:25
2035) (Information/Discussion)
Review draft Interlocal Agreement (ILA) to renew and continue
31
regional partnership for WRIA 8 watershed -based salmon
recovery. The WRIA 8 Council will consider approval of a final
ILA at the November meeting for partner ratification in 2025.
0
a
a�
E
E
0
U
c
0
N
L
0
m
a�
0
as
E
M
2
0
_
co
a
c
a�
E
U
2
r
a
Packet Pg. 75
7.4.j
City of Redmond habitat protection and
restoration highlights (Information)
City of Redmond staff will share highlights of the City's habitat
protection and restoration efforts, including projects and
partnerships, which will provide context for the Bear Creek
Tretheway project site visit following the meeting.
Peter Holte & Tom Hardy, 3:25.3:40
City of Redmond
Adjourn Meeting — Site visit to Tretheway Amani Moyer -Ali, 3:40-5:00
restoration project on Bear Creek Mid Sound Fisheries Enhancement
• 3:40-4:10 —Travel to project site (11626 Avondale PI 48 Group
NE, Redmond, WA 98052)
• 4:10-5:00 — Site visit with Mid Sound Fisheries
Enhancement Group and property owners
Next Meeting: September 19, 2024, 2:00-4:15PM
For those who cannot attend the meeting in -person, join virtually using Zoom:
https://us02web.zoom.us/i/84967493299?pwd=MEhHTEFDeVNvYmREWOViV3hobDB6ZzO9
Meeting ID: 849 6749 3299
Passcode:078461
TIPS FOR CONNECTING TO ZOOM
• Please arrive to the meeting on time, if not a couple of minutes ahead of the start time.
• Familiarize yourself with your computer's audio capability. If your computer has a microphone, use it to connect
with the Zoom audio. Otherwise, you will have an option to call in using your phone after you enter the meeting.
Even if your computer has a microphone, have a phone handy and be prepared to use the call -by -phone
prompts in case the computer audio doesn't work. USE ONLY ONE AUDIO CONNECTION AT A TIME — otherwise,
feedback may result.
• To enter the meeting, click on the meeting links you received in the meeting invite (and on the agenda). Your
browser should prompt you to "Open Zoom." Chrome and Firefox are preferred browsers for Zoom.
• Please remember to mute yourself when you are not talking (but remember to unmute yourself when you do
want to talk!)
• We encourage you to use your webcam and enable video so that we can see you and connect with you as much
as possible using this format.
• The chat function may be used to take questions during the meeting. Feel free to type questions into the chat
box.
Packet Pg. 76
WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council (SRC) Meeting Notes
Zoom Video Conference I May 16, 2024, 2:00 pm — 4:15 pm
Members Present
#
Name
Affiliation
1)
Councilmember (CM) John Stokes, Chair
City of Bellevue
2)
CM Vanessa Kritzer, Vice Chair
City of Redmond
3)
CM Carston Curd
City of Bothell
4)
CM Michelle Dotsch
City of Edmonds
5)
Dana Zlateff
City of Everett
6)
CM Victoria Hunt
City of Issaquah
7)
Deputy Mayor Melanie O'Cain
City of Kenmore
8)
CM Tracy Furutani
City of Lake Forest Park
9)
CM Lisa Anderl
City of Mercer Island
10)
CM Sun Burford
City of Newcastle
11)
CM Valerie O'Halloran
City of Renton
12)
CM Roisin O'Farrell
City of Sammamish
13)
CM Maritza Rivera
City of Seattle
14)
CM Annette Ademasu
City of Shoreline
15)
CM Ted Frantz
Town of Hunts Point
16)
CM John Brock
Town of Woodway
17)
John Sherman
The Boeing Company
18)
Corinne Helmer
Cedar River Council
19)
Larry Reymann
Environmental Science Center
20)
Larry Franks
Friends of Issaquah Salmon Hatchery (FISH)
21)
Kirstin Haugen
King Conservation District
22)
Tor Bell
Mountains to Sound Greenway Trust
23)
David Kyle
Trout Unlimited
24)
Stewart Reinbold
Washington State Department of Fish & Wildlife
25)
Thomas Mortimer
Washington Association of Sewer and Water Districts
Alternates Present
26)
Mike Mactutis
City of Kent
27)
Martha Neuman
City of Seattle
28)
Garrett Holbrook
King County
29)
Tracy Banaszynski
Mid Sound Fisheries Enhancement Group
30)
Josh Thompson
Snohomish County
31)
David Bain
Sno-King Watershed Council
Other Attendees
32)
Christa Heller
City of Bellevue
33)
Janet Geer
City of Bothell
34)
Allen Quynn
City of Issaquah
35)
Richard Sawyer
City of Kenmore
36)
Rachel Konrady
City of Kirkland
37)
Meiring Borcherds
City of Mukilteo
38)
Tom Hardy
City of Redmond
39)
Peter Holte
City of Redmond
40)
Kristina Lowthian
City of Renton
41)
Toby Coenen
City of Sammamish
42)
Alison Agness
King County
43)
Judy Blanco
King County
44)
Craig Garric
King County
45)
Joan Lee
King County
Packet Pg. 77
7.4.j
WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council (SRC) Meeting Notes
Zoom Video Conference I May 16, 2024, 2:00 pm — 4:15 pm
46)
David St. John
King County
47)
Megan Webb
King County
48)
Gunnar Bonk
Gibson Ek High School
49)
Oliver Jones
Gibson Ek High School
50)
Rosa Mendez -Perez
King Conservation District
51)
Gary Smith
Trout Unlimited
52)
Roger Tabor
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
53)
Aaron Bosworth
Washington State Department of Fish & Wildlife
54)
Whitney Neugebauer
Whale Scout
55)
Carrie Byron
WRIA 8 Projects and Funding Coordinator
56)
Renee Leichliter
WRIA 8 Administrative Coordinator
57)
Jason Mulvihill -Kuntz
WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Manager
58)
Mary Ramirez
WRIA 8 Technical Coordinator
I. Welcome and Introductions - Councilmember (CM) Stokes, Chair, called the May 16, 2024,
Salmon Recovery Council (SRC) meeting to order. Chair Stokes welcomed everyone and
established quorum by conducting roll call.
II. Public Comment: No public comment.
III. Consent Agenda: SRC meeting minutes from the March 21, 2024 meeting were discussed. No
edits were received prior to this meeting.
Action: The SRC voted unanimously to approve the March 21, 2024 meeting minutes.
IV. Updates & Announcements — Jason Mulvihill -Kuntz, WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Manager
• Jason MK shared WRIA 8 SRC comment letter submitted to the Department of Ecology
on May 7, regarding criteria recommendations for 6PPD-Q.
• Jason reminded the SRC that WRIA 8 is continuing to work on temperature in the Ship
Canal in collaboration with Long Live the Kings. A report was recently completed to start
an initial suite of modeling runs and engineering analysis to identify what the next steps
would be for cold water supplementation to reduce water temperatures.
• Jason shared WRIA 8 staff is working with King County to develop a multi species
assessment report to analyze how actions that benefit Chinook recovery are benefiting
other species in the watershed. This is in draft form and a presentation is planned for
the July SRC meeting.
• Jason reminded the SRC the Interlocal Agreement (ILA) is up for renewal in 2026 and
provided an updated timeline that will prepare the draft for SRC review in the third
quarter of 2024 to have a final document to bring to partners in 2025 for signature.
• Carrie shared her experience attending the screening of Fish War produced by
Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission in celebration of the 50th anniversary of the
Boldt Decision.
• Alison Agness shared the Kokanee Work Group also submitted a letter to the
Department of Ecology regarding proposed 6PPD-q criteria that was complimentary to
WRIA 8's letter. Additionally, Kokanee Education Day was held recently, with 100
students in the Lake Sammamish Basin participating in learning about different aspects
of kokanee rehabilitation.
• David Kyle shared Trout Unlimited is gearing up for field season and will be using
Cooperative Watershed Management (CWM) grant funds awarded by WRIA 8 during
Packet Pg. 78
7.4.j
WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council (SRC) Meeting Notes
Zoom Video Conference I May 16, 2024, 2:00 pm — 4:15 pm
the last grant round to do experimental treatments of aquatic invasive vegetation in
Lake Sammamish.
• Gunnar Bonk, a high school student at Gibson Ek High School, shared his experience
working on a capstone project investigating No Name Creek, which is a tributary of
Issaquah Creek, and gathering information on the four fish passage blockages in the
creek. Link to his full research paper here,
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1wk5KK wuovdV3wQNHOk-
Gx4QtDuafWVZ/view?usp=sharing
• Rosa Mendez -Perez shared the King Conservation District's (KCD) current rate structure
expires at the end of 2024. KCD is seeking a three-year rate renewal with King County
and will be putting an emphasis on climate and equity facets of their work. KCD is
holding upcoming listening sessions and has an open public comment form which can be
found on the website, https://kingcd.org/rate-renewal/. KCD is asking partners for
letters of support.
• Larry Reymann shared information from a recent meeting of the Cedar River Sockeye
Hatchery Program Adaptive Management Work Group that noted Seattle Public Utilities
counted seven steelhead through the fish ladder at the Landsburg Dam.
V. 2024 WRIA 8 Grant Round Funding Recommendations (Decision) — Carrie Byron, WRIA 8
Projects and Funding Coordinator
Carrie presented the WRIA 8 Grant Review Committee's 2024 funding recommendations for
both state and county funding sources. A full list of project information can be found on the
WRIA 8 webpage,
https://www.govlink.org/watersheds/8/committees/2405/2024CWM SRFB FundingRecommen
dations.pdf.
One of the two funding sources this grant round comes from is Salmon Recovery Funding Board
(SRFB) and Puget Sound Acquisition and Restoration (PSAR) funding programs which are
administered by the Washington State Recreation and Conservation Office (RCO). Eligible
activities for these funding sources include habitat restoration, protection/acquisition, and a
new riparian funding program. The 2024 allocations for these sources are:
• SRFB - $526,624
• SRFB Riparian - $561,748
• PSAR - $1,457,509
• TOTAL - $2,545,881
• Total funding requested from these sources this year - $3,409,073
The other funding source supporting the grant round is the Cooperative Watershed
Management (CWM) grant program which is provided by King County Flood Control District.
Eligible activities for this grant source are habitat and riparian restoration,
protection/acquisition, monitoring/assessment, and outreach and education. Carrie shared the
CWM funding guidance that was adopted by the SRC in November of 2023. Monitoring projects
receive up to 20% of funds ($838,759), outreach up to 5% ($209,689), habitat projects receive
the remaining 75% ($3,145,351) with up to 15% of that going to riparian projects and the
remainder to restoration and acquisition projects. Typically return funds get rolled back into the
habitat projects pool. There were fewer Monitoring and Assessment dollars requested than
Packet Pg. 79
7.4.j
WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council (SRC) Meeting Notes
Zoom Video Conference I May 16, 2024, 2:00 pm — 4:15 pm
allocated and the review committee felt strongly about some outreach projects this round so
they are recommending to deviate from the SRC -approved funding guidance allocation.
The 2024 CWM funding amounts are:
• CWM - $4,193,799
• Returning - $323,886
• TOTAL - $4,517,716
• Total funding requested from this source this year - $5,306,381
Carrie touched on some points of note for the 2024 grant round. The one-time SRFB riparian
funding meant that we were able to recommend more riparian projects than in past years.
Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) criteria were included in the grant round and were
evaluated in house by the review committee. A couple new sponsors applied for projects this
round including, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), The Tulalip Tribes, and City of Everett.
Carrie thanked all partners who participated in this grant round especially with the new one-
time riparian funding through SRFB that took a learning curve for all.
SRFB/PSAR habitat restoration and acquisition and riparian projects received eight proposals
with a total requested amount of $3,409,073. The project review committee is recommending
all eight of those proposals, one at less than the requested amount, for a total recommended
funding amount of $2,545,881. CWM habitat restoration and acquisition and riparian projects
received 10 proposals with a total requested amount of $4,144,582. The project review
committee is recommending nine of those proposals for a total recommended funding amount
of $3,481,689.
CWM outreach and education projects received 10 proposals with a total requested amount of
$437,715. The project review committee is recommending eight of those proposals for a total
recommended funding amount of $327,715, which is roughly $100k more than the funding
allocation guidance ($209,689). The project review committee felt strongly about some of these
projects and funding them for two years of work. These projects all align with the goals of
outreach and education projects of establishing and maintaining shared messaging, sustaining
decision -maker support, raising awareness, and motivating action to support recovery of salmon
in the watershed.
CWM monitoring and assessment received six proposals with a total requested amount of
$694,084. The project review committee is recommending all six of these proposals for a total
recommended funding amount of $708,312, which is less than the funding guideline allocation
amount ($838,759). All projects are aligned with WRIA 8 monitoring and assessment priorities of
Chinook status, habitat use, and survival, predation, artificial light at night, high water
temperatures, project effectiveness, and emerging concerns.
The total recommended funding amount for the 2024 WRIA 8 grant round is $7,063,597.
Disrussinn-
• CM Ademasu asked how many projects this funding is for in total? Carrie clarified
there are 30 proposals recommended for funding.
Packet Pg. 80
7.4.j
WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council (SRC) Meeting Notes
Zoom Video Conference I May 16, 2024, 2:00 pm — 4:15 pm
• Larry Reymann asked if Carrie's presentation is available anywhere? Jason noted it is
available on the WRIA 8 SRC meeting webpage.
• Vice Chair Kritzer asked for more clarification on the SRFB Riparian project category
process? Carrie clarified when the RFP was issued the amount for this fund source
was unsure and all original RFPs were just for CWM. When it was confirmed this
money was being allocated and that it was better to spend all in that year they
funneled projects that were good fit, more expensive, and hit areas of importance,
as well as sponsors that have worked with SRFB before.
• CM Frantz asked if these large funding amounts are unusual coming from the state
budget or do we think this will be repeated in the future? Are these funds for sure
or contingent on the Climate Commitment Act? Carrie clarified CWM is King County
Flood Control District funding and we expect the funding to continue to be made
available. The state funding went up more than expected. Carrie clarified these
funds were appropriated by the 2023 legislature, so they are already secured.
Action: The SRC voted unanimously to approve the WRIA 8 2024 grant round funding recommendations.
VI. Predation Monitoring and Control (Information) —Aaron Bosworth, Washington Department of
Fish and Wildlife
Jason provided context on the issue of predation in WRIA 8 and introduced Aaron. Predation by
invasive warm water predatory fish was identified as an issue in the 2017 WRIA 8 Plan update.
In 2018, the SRC approved funding to support WDFW work on predator assessment and diet
analysis to identify fish that prey on juvenile salmon and WDFW received additional WRIA 8
grants in 2020-2022 to continue this work. In the 2023 and 2024 legislative sessions the
Muckleshoot Indian Tribe helped push budget provisos focused on predator control work in
Lake Washington and Lake Sammamish. Those provisos were supported by the SRC and the
work completed through those provisos is what Aaron will present on today.
Aaron shared one of the three main elements of the legislative budget provisos was removal of
nonnative species and northern pike minnow using traps, nets, or other means. The nonnative
species identified include rock bass, yellow perch, black crappie, small and large mouth bass,
walleye, northern pike, brown bullhead, and American shad as well as the northern pike
minnow which is a native species but are abundant and prey heavily on juvenile salmon in the
lake. In 2024 a contract was entered into with a commercial fishing specialist to use gillnets and
trap nets for five weeks starting in late winter through early April. All five weeks of this effort
were focused south of 1-90 and utilized approximately 2.5 miles of gillnets. Key takeaways from
this project show that catch rates were declining on these predatory fish in the five weeks this
project went on, pointing to the thought that this work is lowering the abundance of these fish.
Aaron also shared an update on WDFW's nearshore predation monitoring in Lake Washington
that has been funded through WRIA 8 CWM funds over the last several years. About % mile of
the lake is fished per day utilizing nets and fish work all done by hand. Every single fish is
recorded and measured and after being processed fish are taken to have their diet content
analyzed. The netting strategy starts at the mouth of the Cedar River in February and March
when sockeye and Chinook fry are coming out of the river. As springtime progresses and fry
Packet Pg. 81
7.4.j
WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council (SRC) Meeting Notes
Zoom Video Conference I May 16, 2024, 2:00 pm — 4:15 pm
salmon transition to smolt phase, netting is moved up to shoreline areas and eventually
wrapped up in June by netting the entrance to the Ship Canal. Through these efforts, rock bass,
yellow perch, and black crappie have all been found to be significant predators of juvenile
salmon in Lake Washington. This is an ongoing monitoring effort but has advanced the state of
the knowledge on predator species and predation 'hot spots' that could be used to draft an
efficient predator suppression program in the future.
Discussion:
• CM Frantz asked if monitoring along the shorelines misses fish in deeper parts of the
lake? Aaron clarified larger bodied predators are found in the deeper areas of the
lake but the smaller predators like yellow perch and black crappie seem to frequent
the shallow nearshore areas since that is where juvenile smolts are found.
• Larry Franks asked if any of these activities are still going on in Lake Sammamish? Is
there a lot of bycatch? What happens to all the fish you cut and measure? Aaron
said the predation monitoring work is not currently happening in Lake Sammamish,
but the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe have ongoing studies in the lake. The current
policy is to release live cutthroat trout that are part of bycatch, dead fish and fish
that are cut and measured get put back into the lake with their swim bladders
severed so they sink to the bottom.
• CM O'Halloran asked if there would be a critical mass of dead fish in the lake after
being tossed back in? Aaron clarified Lake Washington is very big, but WDFW is
open to ideas for how to dispose of the dead fish. David Kyle added donating fish to
be rendered for fertilizer could be a good option.
VI I. Draft Letter Supporting Lake Washington Basin Invasive Predator Fish Control Program
(Information) — Mary Ramirez and Jason Mulvihill -Kuntz, WRIA 8 staff
Mary presented points for consideration in a potential letter to request Washington State
Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) initiate a long-term commitment to efficient predatory
fish suppression and management in Lake Washington and Lake Sammamish. Lake survival and
predation of juvenile Chinook by predatory fish is a top priority and it is known that Lake
Washington is a predation bottleneck for Cedar River Chinook and other salmonids. Although it
is not possible to eradicate predators from this freshwater system, the goal for a project like this
would be to suppress predator numbers at key times and locations when salmon are present
using a variety of potential management strategies.
Staff inquired with the SRC whether WRIA 8 should draft a letter to WDFW requesting
development and implementation of an adequately resourced predatory fish control program in
the Lake Washington basin? If so, what is an appropriate scale and scope for this program and
what are appropriate program objectives and how should they be measured? If the SRC
supports drafting a letter, the next steps would be for WRIA 8 staff to work with the ITC and
subject matter experts to discuss the issue further and inform more the content of a draft letter.
Discussion:
Packet Pg. 82
7.4.j
WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council (SRC) Meeting Notes
Zoom Video Conference I May 16, 2024, 2:00 pm — 4:15 pm
• CM O'Halloran said she supports WRIA 8 drafting a letter and wondered if it was
possible to support this letter with some of the information shared in Aaron's
presentation.
• Larry Franks shared support for a letter, the advantage to Chinook, kokanee, Lake
Sammamish and Cedar River could be enormous.
• CM Frantz shared support for a letter and including a scope that would eliminate as
many nonnative fish as possible.
• Martha Neuman shared Seattle would support a letter like this. The scope and
program objectives will need to be further fleshed out with technical experts, but at
this stage the letter shouldn't be too prescriptive.
• CM Brock said it would be important to understand the apporpiate scope and scale
needed to be effective and where would the money come from to support this
ongoing program?
• Alison Agness shared support for the letter and would like to hear from Aaron
Bosworth on an appropriate scope or goals for a potential program.
• David Kyle encouraged a holistic view of what these predators are dependent on.
VIII. Success Story: Rainbow Bend Mitigation Project (Information) — Craig Garric and Megan Webb,
King County
Megan described the Maintenance Reserves Program (MRP), which funded the Rainbow Bend
Mitigation Project. The MRP program operates a state and federally authorized program that
allows developers with unavoidable impacts to pay a fee to King County and those funds go to
implement projects that restore wetlands, typically along streams and rivers. The Rainbow Bend
Mitigation project offset large infrastructure projects (Sound Transit, Washington State
Department of Transportation, etc.) and other developments.
Craig presented the project, noting it was designed by an inhouse team from King County Water
and Land Resources Division. This was a chronically flooded area, and a large floodplain
restoration project was sited here in 2013, which this project was designed to complement. The
overall project costs were around $5 million and the goals of this project were to establish
wetlands and river habitat and features that are compatible with a more dynamic river setting.
Over 36 cubic yards of materials was excavated but topsoil and woody debris were salvaged and
kept on site to be incorporated into the project as different parts of groundwater stable wetland
communities. This resulted in 6.5 acres of creditable wetlands and 4.7 acres of creditable
uplands for the Maintenance Reserves Program.
nitriittinn�
• Chair Stokes asked how long this project took? Megan clarified it got a slow start in late
2019 but was ultimately all completed in one season.
Next Meeting: Chair Stokes noted the next SRC meeting is July 18, 2024, from 2:00 p.m. — 4:15 p.m., and
could be scheduled as an in -person meeting.
Packet Pg. 83
7.4.j
NN AH , A G
my ZW WRIA 8 Updates and Committee Reports
° July 18, 2024
a
P
t4fA M I S H �
Puget Sound Regional Update — The Puget Sound Salmon Recovery Council (PS SRC) last
met on May 23, 2024. The meeting focused on:
o Update on the 2025-27 Puget Sound Acquisition and Restoration large capital
project grant round planning
o Update on federal policies for Puget Sound recovery and a recap of the Puget
Sound Day on the Hill event in Washington, D.C.
o Update on the work of the Accelerating Progress Committee
o Review and discussion of the revised draft Puget Sound Salmon Recovery Plan
Addendum
The PS SRC is scheduled to meet next on July 25. Melanie O'Cain, Kenmore Deputy Mayor,
and Ted Frantz, Hunts Point Councilmember, represent the WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery
Council on the PS SRC. Jason Mulvihill -Kuntz attends as a WRIA 8 staff alternate.
The South Central Action Area Caucus (Local Integrating Organization (LIO)) last met on
March 19. The meeting focused on a presentation on the "Our Green Duwamish —
Stormwater Retrofit Program," Puget Sound strategic funding updates and tools, and a
presentation from Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife on a pond diversity/equity
study. Jason Mulvihill -Kuntz attends the LIO to represent WRIA 8.
WRIA 8 project Four Year Work Plan additions and revisions — See memo and table in the
meeting packet reflecting this year's Four Year Work Plan (4YWP) updates. We are adding
five new projects this year that are consistent with our recovery strategies and applied for
funding in the grant round. There has also been significant cleanup of the 4YWP to remove
completed and dormant projects. Please continue to reach out to Carrie Byron if you have
new projects to add or updates on those already on the plan.
Congresswoman DelBene awards $850,000 grant to support Little Bear Creek Culvert
Replacement project — The City of Woodinville recently received $850,000 to support the
Little Bear Creek Culvert Replacement project at 1341h St. This Community Project Funding
award will help support the innovative approach to fish passage barrier correction,
replacing barrier culverts with a repurposed railroad trestle. WRIA 8 CWM funds have also
been used to support project design in the 2023 and 2024 grant rounds.
WRIA 8 grants update —The King County Flood Control District approved the SRC's funding
recommendations for Cooperative Watershed Management (CWM) grants on July 91h. This
represents the conclusion of this year's CWM grant round selection process and sponsors
can begin incurring expenses for those awards. We anticipate approval of Salmon Recovery
Funding Board and Puget Sound Acquisition and Restoration funding recommendations in
September.
Packet Pg. 84
7.4.j
Lake Washington Ship Canal water temperatures technical workshop — WRIA 8 and Long
Live the Kings hosted a technical workshop on June 24t" to update key technical subject
matter experts on progress with the project to address temperature and dissolved oxygen
conditions in the LWSC, review key uncertainties around the implementation of cold water
treatments, and identify priority next steps.
• WRIA 8 E-News —The June edition of the WRIA 8 E-news included the following topics and
updates: information and updates from partner projects and programs, media stories
related to salmon, upcoming events in the watershed and opportunities for volunteers, as
well as announcements of recent funding opportunities. The next edition is scheduled for
August. Please submit proposed topics to Renee Leichliter (rleichliter@kingcounty.gov) by
August 9t"
WRIA 8 Committee Reports
Implementation Technical Committee —The July ITC meeting featured a presentation from King
County on 6PPD-q monitoring and management, as well as an overview of the recently finalized
Multi -Species Salmon Recovery Synthesis Report (pdf). WRIA 8 staff requested feedback from the
ITC on the draft letter to WDFW regarding development of a predatory fish control program and
staff updated the ITC on the draft 2025 WRIA 8 budget and work plan and the draft 2026-2035
WRIA 8 Interlocal Agreement. The next meeting of this group will be on September 11tn
Packet Pg. 85
I 7.4.k I
�� BOARD OF DIRECTORS' Thursday
COmmull �Iy
September 5,
transit MEETING AGENDA 2024
Snohomish County Public Transportation Benefit Area Corporation 3:00 p.m.
Community Transit Board Room - 2312 W Casino Road, Everett, WA 98204
P
Board Meeting Virtual Participation
Zoom Webinar: https://us02web.zoom.us/I/87858511746?pwd=UVZwc3doeW41 LOpRSFBZbVBVVWIhQT09
Webinar ID: 878 5851 1746 Passcode: 433505 Phone: 1-253-215-8782
Watch Live
Livestream: https://bit.IV/CTPublicMtgsYouTube
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL
3. PUBLIC COMMENT*
Verbal Comment: Sign up to speak by completing this Sign Up Form. Requested by 3 p.m. Sept 4.
Written Comment: Email executiveoffice(a)commtrans.org. Requested by 3 p.m. Sept 4.
4. PRESENTATIONS
a. September 2024 Service Change Readiness — Roland Behee, Chelsea Ongaro, Jim Williams
b. Security Update — Scott Eastman
5. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S REPORT
6. COMMITTEE REPORTS
a. Executive Committee — Chair Merrill
b. Finance, Performance, & Oversight Committee — Mayor Roberts
C. Strategic Alignment & Capital Development Committee — Mayor Frizzell
7. CONSENT ITEMS**
a. Approve minutes of the August 1, 2024 Board Meeting.
b• Approve vouchers dated
July 5, 2024 in the amount of
$2,697,206.07
C. Approve vouchers dated
July 12, 2024 in the amount of
$1,192,054.50
d. Approve vouchers dated
July 19, 2024 in the amount of
$4,140,820.48
e. Approve vouchers dated
July 26, 2024 in the amount of
$3,026,587.76
f Approve July 2024 Payroll:
i. Direct Deposits Issued, #461982-463882 in the amount of $4,897,098.92
ii. Paychecks Issued, #112312-112371 in the amount of $59,582.11
iii. Employer Payroll Tax Deposits in the amount of $543,743.72
iv. Employer Deferred Compensation for IAM in the amount of $12,389.16
8. ACTION ITEMS
9. CHAIR'S REPORT
10. BOARD COMMUNICATION
Page 1 of 2
*Advance sign up for verbal public comments is not required but requested to support meeting administration.
**Indicates attachment
2312 W Casino Road Everett, WA 98204 (425) 348-7100 www.communitytransit.o Packet Pg. 86
7.4.k
11. EXECUTIVE SESSION
12. OTHER BUSINESS
13. ADJOURN
Board materials are available at www.communitytransit.org/board-of-directors. In compliance with the
Americans with Disabilities Act, those requiring accommodation for meetings should notify the executive
office at least 24 hours prior to the meeting at 425-348-7100 (TTY Relay 711) or
executiveoffice(a�-commtrans.org.
Page 2 of 2
* Advance sign up for verbal public comments is not required but requested to support meeting administration.
**Indicates attachment
2312 W Casino Road Everett, WA 98204 (425) 348-7100 www.communitytransit.org
Packet Pg. 87
7.4.k
Consent
Agenda
N
O
O_
d
d
d
E
E
O
U
c
N
L
MO
W
N
w
O
N
CD
L
MO
W
.N
L
�
E
E
O
U
c
d
E
t
0
Q
Packet Pg. 88
7.4.k
co mmco unnytransit Minutes
Board of Directors' Meeting
Thursday, August 1, 2024
Hybrid Meeting - 3 p.m.
Board Members Present
Council Member Kim Daughtry
City of Lake Stevens
Mayor Christine Frizzell
City of Lynnwood
Mayor Joe Marine
City of Mukilteo
Council Member Tom Merrill
City of Snohomish
Mayor Jon Nehring
City of Marysville
Lance Norton
Labor Representative, non -voting
Mayor Sid Roberts
City of Stanwood
Council Member Jan Schuette
City of Arlington
Board Members Absent
Council Member Jared Mead
Snohomish County
Council Member Strom Peterson
Snohomish County
Others Present"
Erik Ashlie-Vinke
Sound Transit
Roland Behee
CT -Chief Operating Officer
Art Braeul
CT -Customer Care Manager
Melissa Cauley
CT -Chief Planning & Development Officer
Scott Eastman
CT -Sr. Safety Security Manager
Veralee Estes
CT -Human Resources Manager
Kelli Eddy
CT -Transportation Supervisor
Heather Fulcher**
City of Monroe, Board Alternate
Kevin Futhey
CT -Project Manager III Innovation
Eunjoo Greenhouse
CT -Chief People & Financial Officer
Denise Gregory Wyatt
CT -Labor Relations Manager
Jennifer Hass
CT -Sr. Manager of Innovation
Randy Harlow
Sound Transit
Al Hendricks
CT -Legal Counsel
Edna Hurst
CT -Employee Communications Manager
Ric Ilgenfritz
CT -CEO
Eric Kwant
CT -Transportation Supervisor
Rich Link
CT -Transportation Supervisor
Nick Ludington
CT -Assistant Manager Customer Care
Samantha Lushtak
CT -Sr. Director Safety, Security & Sustain.
Sophie Luthin
CT -Strategic Planning Manager
Kern McGee
Perteet
Laurel McJannet
CT -Strategist External Communications
Molly Marsicek
CT -Chief Innovation & Customer Exp Officer
Kyoko Matsumoto Wright**
City of Mountlake Terrace, Board Alternate
Martin Munguia
CT -Communications Manager
Michelle O'Donnell
CT -Procurement & SBE/DBE Specialist
Deb Osborne
CT -Chief of Staff & Public Affairs Officer
Susan Paine**
City of Edmonds, Board Alternate
**Attended meeting remotely
***Names of those who were confirmed as attendees are included, others who attended remotely without submitting their names
Packet Pg. 89
7.4.k
Board of Directors' Meeting
August 1, 2024
Page 2
Geoff Patrick
Christian Richard
Christopher Silveira
Geoff Smith
Melody Smith
Goran Sparrman
Chas Stearns
Mike Swehla
Jim Williams
Brenda Works
Olivia Woods
Rachel Woods
Uriel Ybarra
Call to Order
CT -Chief Communications Officer
CT -Sr. Scientist Research & Analytics
CT -Director Development & Delivery
CT -Transportation Supervisor
CT -Executive Support Specialist
Sound Transit, Interim CEO
CT -Chief Information Officer
CT -Director of Maintenance
CT -Sr. Director of Transportation
CT -Project Manager
CT -Manager Research & Analytics
CT -Executive Programs Manager
CT -Government Relations Manager
Chair Merrill called the August 1, 2024, Board of Directors' meeting to order at 3 p.m. The meeting was
held at 2312 W. Casino Road, Everett, WA 98204 and by Zoom. The meeting was recorded and
livestreamed.
Roll Call of Members
The Executive Board Administrator called roll. Attendance was as noted above. A quorum was present.
Public Comment
There were no public comments.
Presentations
Employee Service Awards
CEO Ilgenfritz recognized Eric Kwant, Transportation Supervisor, for his thirty years of service and Art
Braeul, Customer Care Manager, for his twenty years of service at the agency.
Sound Transit Update & Lynnwood Link Launch
Goran Sparrman, Interim CEO of Sound Transit, and Randy Harlow, Executive Project Director of Sound
Transit, presented. The Sound Transit light rail project, ST2, was a voter approved, integrated rail system
Starting August 30, the 1 Line would serve stations in Shoreline South, Shoreline North, Mountlake
Terrace, and Lynnwood. As a result of a project delay for the 2 Line (downtown Seattle to Mercer Island,
Bellevue, and Redmond) the 1 Line would be opening with a reduced frequency. This new network would
provide improved frequency and transit connections. Public events were scheduled for August 30 to
celebrate the launch. The Board asked questions and commented.
September 14, 2024 Service Change
This presentation was given by Melissa Cauley, Chief Planning & Development Officer; Roland Behee,
Chief Operating Officer; Geoff Patrick, Chief Communications Officer; and Molly Marsicek, Chief
Innovation & Customer Experience Officer.
On September 14, 2024, a major network service change would take place. The span of service hours and
frequency would significantly increase, and many trips would connect directly to light rail. Local routes
would see improvements and the new express network would serve the Lynnwood City Center and
E
Packet Pg. 90
7.4.k
Board of Directors' Meeting
August 1, 2024
Page 3
Mountlake Terrace light rail stations. Additional service hours would be added in 2025 and 2026 and the
network would be monitored and adapted to provide equity access and respond to customer needs.
Link Shuttles would provide a substitute bus connection when the Link line experienced an operational
disruption. The paratransit service area was expanding with new local routes and expanded hours.
Community Transit would provide Sound Transit's paratransit service in the Link corridor. The Zip
Alderwood shuttle was preparing to serve more customers.
Customers were being supported through outreach events and by street teams at transit centers and on
buses. The "More Transit" marketing campaign was focused on sharing the upcoming service changes.
Comprehensive online resources were available online including a preview of schedules. The Ride Store
would support customers with a new facility and expanded service hours. The Board asked questions and
commented.
Chief Executive Officer's Report
CEO Ilgenfritz provided a summary of recent activities. An update was provided to the Everett City Council
about the Swift Gold Line project, the same information provided earlier to Arlington and Marysville. An
update was provided on federal funding. Senator Murray called to let us know she included at $2.5 million
earmark in next year's appropriates bill for Swift Gold Line design.
Mayor Nehring departed at 4:37 p.m.
Committee Reports
Executive Committee 0
Ict
Chair Merrill reported on the July 18, 2024, meeting. The CEO report was provided. The next meeting was N
scheduled for August 15, 2024, at 11:30 a.m. N
Finance, Performance, and Oversight Committee
L
Mayor Roberts reported on the July 18, 2024, meeting. The Committee reviewed and forwarded two items o
to the consent agenda, Sound Transit Complementary Paratransit Interagency Agreement and June 2024 m
r
monthly expenditures and payroll. The Committee reviewed and forwarded one item to the action agenda,
RFP 2024-059, Longitudinal Multi -Transit -Mode Customer Survey Program. The Committee received L
informational presentations: Q2 2024 Safety & Security Update, Security Program Update, 2023 Annual
Financial Report, and the June 2024 sales tax and diesel fuel reports. The next meeting was scheduled for
August 15, 2024, at 2 p.m.
E
Strategic, Alignment & Capital Development Committee °
U
Mayor Frizzell reported on the July 17, 2024, meeting. The Committee reviewed and forwarded three action
items to the Board: as
1. Award: ITB #2024-61, Purchase of 15 Replacement Paratransit Buses
2. Award: ITB #2024-088, Purchase of 5 Tesla Modal Y Sport Utility Vehicles for Vanpool Pilot o
3. Resolution No. 04-24, Adopting the 2024-2029 Transit Development a
The Committee received one informational update regarding the 2024 & Beyond, September Service
Change. The next meeting was scheduled for August 21, 2024, at 2 p.m.
Consent Calendar
Mayor Marine moved to approve items A through G on the consent calendar.
3
Packet Pg. 91
7.4.k
Board of Directors' Meeting
August 1, 2024
Page 4
a. Approve Sound Transit Complementary Paratransit Interagency Agreement.
b. Approve minutes of the July 10, 2024 Board Meeting.
C. Approve vouchers dated June 07, 2024 in the amount of $3,403,257.48
d. Approve vouchers dated June 14, 2024 in the amount of $1,579,558.01
e. Approve vouchers dated June 21, 2024 in the amount of $3,042,561.81
f. Approve vouchers dated June 28, 2024 in the amount of $3,795,484.34
g. Approve June 2024 Payroll:
i. Direct Deposits Issued, #460103-461981 in the amount of $5,006,608.12
ii. Paychecks Issued, #112242-112311 in the amount of $96,598.11
iii. Employer Payroll Tax Deposits in the amount of $562,905.71
iv. Employer Deferred Compensation for IAM in the amount of $12,489.27
The motion was seconded by Council Member Daughtry passed unanimously.
Action Items
Approve resolution No. 04-24, Adopting the 2024-2029 Transit Development Plan
Sophie Luthin, Strategic Planning Manager, provided an overview of the six -year Transit Development
Plan. The annual plan included activities, accomplishments, and performance reports from the previous
year, and a six -year forecast of agency financials, service levels, and capital projects.
Mayor Roberts moved that the Board of Directors approve Resolution No. 04-24, adopting the final
2024-2029 Transit Development Plan. The motion was seconded by Council Member Daughtry and
passed unanimously.
Award ITB #2024-061, Purchase of 15 Replacement Paratransit Buses
Mike Swehla, Director of Maintenance, shared that this was part of the planned 2024 vehicle replacement
schedule. No viable -zero emission fleet options existed at this time.
Mayor Marine moved that the Board of Directors authorize the Chief Executive Officer to negotiate
and award the purchase of fifteen paratransit buses using WA State Department of Enterprise
Services Vehicle Contract #06719 (ITB #2024-061) that was awarded to Model 1 Commercial
Vehicles, for a not to exceed total amount of $2,595,560.45, tax-exempt. The motion was seconded
by Mayor Roberts and passed unanimously.
Award ITB #2024-088, Purchase of Five Tesla Model Y Vehicles for Vanpool Pilot
Brendan Works, Product Manager for Customer Experience, reviewed the purchase of five electric
vehicles for a Vanpool Program Pilot. The Tesla Model Y met the driving range and passenger service
needs and were less expensive than minivans on the market. The five vehicles would be a pilot program
to assess permanent integration into the Vanpool fleet.
Mayor Marine moved that the Board of Directors authorize the Chief Executive Officer to negotiate an,
purchase five 2024 Tesla Model Y sport utility vehicles or equal vehicles using Washington State VeK
Contract #05916 (ITB #2024-004) from Tesla or another contractor on the Washington State Vehicle
contract based on availability, for a not to exceed total amount of $256,965. The motion was seconder
Council Member Schuette and passed unanimously.
M
N
O
N
Ln
C6
0
m
r
.N
c
E
0
U
c
as
E
0
a
Packet Pg. 92
7.4.k
Board of Directors' Meeting
August 1, 2024
Page 5
Award RFP #2024-059, Longitudinal Multi -Transit -Mode Customer Survey Program
Christian Richard, Sr. Scientist, Research & Analytics, presented the RFP for a 5-year contract for
customer surveys. An improved survey project would provide essential customer feedback to guide
agency decision making.
Mayor Roberts moved that the Board of Directors authorize the Chief Executive Officer to negotiate
and award Contract RFP #2024-059 Longitudinal Multi -Transit -Mode Customer Survey Program to
Resource Systems Group, Inc. for a not -to -exceed amount of $1,324,909.45 (including tax) for a
five-year period. The motion was seconded by Mayor Marine and passed unanimously.
Chair Report
The next regular Board meeting was scheduled for Thursday, September 5, 2024, at 3 p.m.
Board Communication
Mayor Frizzell was looking forward to the 1 Link opening on August 30.
Council Member Schuette provided a handout to the Board regarding PSRC grant funding.
Council Member Daughtry thanked Community Transit for supporting the Lake Stevens' Aquafest festival
Adjourn
The meeting adjourned at 5:07 p.m.
Rachel Woods
Executive Programs Manager
A
Packet Pg. 93
7.4.k
N
O
O_
d
d
d
E
E
O
U
c
N
L
MO
W
nM'Iscellaeousy
w
0
Q
Packet Pg. 94
7.4.k
C"-�O O ,
EIIL communitytr -
Board of Directors' Calendar of Events
September — November 2024
Thursday, September 5 Board Meeting — 3 p.m.
Wednesday, September 18 Strategic Alignment & Capital Development Committee — 2 p.m.
Thursday, September 19 Executive Committee — 11:30 a.m.
Thursday, September 19 Finance, Performance & Oversight Committee — 2 p.m.
Thursday, October 3 Board Meeting — 3 p.m.
Wednesday, October 16 Strategic Alignment & Capital Development Committee — 2 p.m.
Thursday, October 17 Executive Committee — 11:30 a.m.
Thursday, October 17 Finance, Performance & Oversight Committee — 2 p.m.
Thursday, October 24 Quarterly Board Workshop — 3 p.m.
Thursday, November 7 Board Meeting — 3 p.m.
Wednesday, November 20 Strategic Alignment & Capital Development Committee — 2 p.m.
Thursday, November 21 Executive Committee — 11:30 a.m.
Thursday, November 21 Finance, Performance & Oversight Committee — 2 p.m.
Online Meetinas Calendar
Optional Events
Sept. 29-Oct. 2 APTA Transform Conference (Anaheim, CA)
Packet Pg. 95
7.4.k
communnytransi
Transit Police Report
Second Quarter, 2024
Unit News
On May 11', a CT deputy received a phone call from TSO's, stating a male had
threatened their lives with a knife while they were checking a Swift Blue stop located
at 8400 blk of Evergreen Way. CT Deputy arrived in the area and saw the male
suspect. As soon as the deputy pulled up to the male suspect, he ran. After a short
foot chase the male suspect gave up and was arrested for Assault 3.
On May 16'h, a CT deputy responded to a fight on a coach that occurred the city of
c
Snohomish. It was reported that three males were actively fighting at the back of the
L)
coach. The CT deputy was in Everett at the time of the call, so he asked 911 dispatch
to advise Snohomish PD of the incident. While the CT deputy was enroute he heard
U)
over the radio that Snohomish PD had one male in custody. Report stated all three
o
males were on the coach when one of the males started staring at the other two. This
m
started a verbal altercation, which in turn lead to the physical altercation. The primary
aggressor was arrested for Assault 4 and Unlawful Transit Conduct.
0
On May 20'", a CT deputy arrested a male at the Lynnwood Transit Center for
N
assaulting a coach operator. It was reported that the male had boarded the coach
N
and started to use drugs and smoke a cigarette. The coach operator told the male
that smoking was not allowed on the coach and that he had to leave, the male stood
rn
-a
up and punch the coach operator twice, once in the stomach and once in the face.
o
Two passengers assisted the coach operator in getting the male off the coach. The
m
male was apprehended by Lynnwood PD, then ultimately taken to jail by the CT
deputy. The male was charged with Assault 3 and bail jumping due to his 6 warrants
out of Pierce, King, and Thurston Co.
r
On 6/17/2024 TPU and Mountlake Terrace Police responded to an assault on a
E
E
coach operator at the Mountlake Terrace TC. Mountlake Terrace arrived first,
C
U
investigated and arrested a suspect on Assault 3 charges. A TPU deputy met MLTPD
at the jail and issued an exclusion reference the incident.
E
The week of June 24'h, the fugitive that assaulted a coach operator in fourth quarter
r
of 2023 was apprehended in southern California. He currently awaits extradition to
w
a
the Snohomish County jail for trial.
Data for this and other reports are now being predominantly captured through
Microsoft's Power BI. That data is now available to select CT staff on the Sheriff's
Office Power BI dashboard. Data is drawn directly from Snohomish 9-1-1 and is
updated daily.
In June of 2024, four new Biometric Handheld Fingerprint readers were purchased
and issued to TPU deputies, supplementing the already aged and soon -to -be
unsupported fingerprint readers. These readers assist in identifying persons whose
identities are in question or cannot provide identification themselves.
Packet Pg. 96
7.4.k
Quarterly Data
Calls for Service
W
560
3Q
790
688
1Q
580
631
Self -Initiated Calls
3994
3391
4240
3942
4313
Motor Vehicle Thefts
9
20
19
12
20
Vehicle Recovery
21
24
40
38
22
Disturbance
72
92
76
82
84
Unlawful Transit Conduct
3
5
4
6
8
Exclusions
110
106
65
30
46
Criminal Trespass
116
114
108
66
74
Arrests
133
133
123
123
138
Substance Abuse
174
112
102
67
42
Definitions
Criminal Trespass: Anyone who violates a notification of exclusion and knowingly enters or
remains unlawfully in or upon Community Transit premises. This results in a charge of criminal
trespass in the second degree and is a misdemeanor crime.
Substance Abuse: The use of illegal drugs or the use of prescription or over-the-counter drugs or
alcohol for purposes other than those for which they are meant to be used, or in excessive amounts.
Disturbance: Disturbing the peace, public disorders, any wrongful interference with a person or
persons going about their legitimate business, any insulting, offensive or provocative conduct: any loud
quarrelling. Challenging to fight, any vulgar or obscene conduct committed by any person(s) in a public
place. Often linked to UTC.
Vehicle Recovery: Recovery of a previously stolen vehicle on Community Transit property.
Motor Vehicle Theft: The theft of any motor vehicle, to include automobiles, trucks, buses,
motorcycles and motor scooters from our transit centers and park & ride lots.
Calls for Service (CFS): A call received by the Transit Police Unit and initiated by someone in
the Community Transit service area that resulted in a deputy responding to the call and
rendering assistance. Usually through 911.
Self -Initiated Call: Through the process of patrolling and/or observation, a Transit Police
deputy witnessed something that caused them to take action.
Arrests: The custodial arrest of an individual for a crime instigated in the Community Transit
service area. This could include someone that is arrested for an outstanding warrant.
Unlawful Transit Conduct (UTC): Any violation of RCW 9.91.025 Unlawful Transit Conduct is
a misdemeanor crime. Examples of Unlawful Transit Conduct include smoking, littering, loud
obnoxious behavior, spitting, open alcohol containers, obstructing transit vehicles, skating or
skateboarding, etc.
Exclusion: A civil process where Transit Police prohibit someone from being on Community
Transit property or using its services. Anyone violating a notification of exclusion commits the
crime of criminal trespass.
Packet Pg. 97
7.4.k
Community Transit Sales Tax Report for July 2024
Sales Tax Receipts: Dollars in Millions
July Cumulative Year to Date
17.0 17.3 16.7
114.1 116.2 113.4
2023 2024 2024 2023 2024 2024
Actual Budget Actual Actual Budget Actual
July 2024 Results Cumulative Results
July 2023 Actuals $ 17,014,653 2023 Actuals $ 114,129,769
July 2024 Budget $ 17,292,337 2024 Original Budget $ 116,198,222
July 2024 Actuals $ 16,737,200 2024 Year to Date $ 113,386,326
Comments:
* Sales tax receipts reported for the month of July 2024 reflect purchases made in May 2024.
* The growth rate for July 2024 as compared to July 2023 is-1.63%.
* The growth rate for year to date vs. prior year to date is-0.65%.
Sales Tax: Actual, Budget, and Future Year Projections
____ _ $232.5 $241.8
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Blue = Prior Year Actuals Orange = Current Year Budget
2026 2027 2028
Purple = Future Year Projections
Packet Pg. 98
7.4.1
NNIL �o mm unitytransit ' Memorandum
To: Board of Directors
From: Ric ligenfritz, Chief Executive Officer
Date: September 5, 2024
Subject: CEO Report
Activities & Events
Last month, several staff and I attended the Washington State Transit Association State Conference.
Community Transit successfully competed in the annual Roadeo Competition. Driving a 40-foot bus,
Coach Operator Matt Chomjack defended his title and won first place in his category. We also had two
maintenance teams participate in the maintenance competition, with one team taking third place. This is
a pride point for our agency on the state level and now we look forward to cheering on Matt at the
national competition. I also participated in a panel on Zero Emissions, and the WSTA Board discussed
the strategy for the 2025 state legislative agenda.
The arrival of Link light rail in Snohomish County on August 30 was a major milestone that Community
Transit has supported for many years, including contributions from many of our staff and departments.
We will hear about that in more detail during the Board meeting today, and I look forward to sharing
some reflections.
In addition to the light rail events, on August 29 1 joined FTA Acting Administrator Veronica Vanterpool
and local partners at an event to pledge support for the Equity in Infrastructure Project. Our pledge
reflects the agency's commitment to increasing the number, size, and proportion of contracts going to
Historically Underutilized Businesses.
Operations and Performance
Finance & Budget
The state auditors are wrapping up the final portion the accountability audit. We expect to be
scheduling an audit exit conference before the end of September. The Board will be invited to join this
online public meeting, about which you can expect details soon.
We are finalizing the 2025 proposed budget to present to the Finance, Performance & Oversight
Committee, followed by the full Board in October. The agency is in a strong financial position for 2025,
with sufficient revenues and reserves to execute on our agency initiatives, sustain service growth, and
strengthen our commitment to a safe and secure system. Expenses continue to grow, and while we are
still below revenues, our practice is to take a very measured and careful approach to budgeting. We
have undertaken several rounds of review and conversation about new projects and growth in FTEs, for
example, with an eye on long term sustainability. The 2025 proposed budget reflects reduced state
revenue should Initiative 2117, Repeal of the Washington's Climate Commitment Act, be approved by
voters.
Packet Pg. 99
7.4.1
Programs & Projects
2024 Network Imolementation
Following recent briefings, today the Board will receive a further update on our state of readiness for
implementing our 2024 service network changes. This is the largest service change in Community
Transit's history and spans the entire agency. I am proud to report that all systems are go. Following
the September 14 service change we will regularly report back to the Board about our experience and
what we are learning from customers and employees. This will inform future service adjustments in the
years ahead.
Zero Emissions Pilot
Final preparations are underway for the zero emissions coaches to go into service for the side -by -side
pilot. We expect service to begin in December. The battery electric bus is ready for service, and we are
working on obtaining a dedicated delivery of hydrogen fuel for the hydrogen bus. We did receive a
partial delivery of hydrogen from Twin Transit in Lewis County which has allowed us to initiate testing.
Additional work to identify infrastructure needs, design requirements, and approximate costs is nearing
completion. We will keep the Board updated as we move forward toward key decision points.
Swift Gold Line
The first phase of community engagement for the Swift Gold Line project was completed on August 7.
We held an online open house and attended local events throughout the summer at locations such as
farmers markets and libraries. The survey responses and themes will be shared in detail at the October
Board meeting.
The next phase of community engagement runs through January and provides an opportunity for
people to provide input on a refined route option and bus travel lane options and potential station
locations.
Innovative Services Pilots
Details regarding the launch of our three additional microtransit pilots are being finalized, and we are on
schedule to begin operating service by the end of the year.
Page 2
Packet Pg. 100
7.4.m
2024 Joint Transportation Board Meeting Minutes — September 13, 2024
The meeting was called to order at the PSRC office building in downtown Seattle (with an online option)
at 9:35 am by ETP Chair Barb di Michele who introduced the other Chairs of transportation boards. The
theme of the meeting was "Planning for the Future."
There was no public comment.
Metro General Manager Michelle Allison spoke about the importance of partnerships between Metro
and the jurisdictions of King County. Many new services are coming online. RapidRide G is launching
tomorrow with center platforms, five doors, and six -minute service. Snoqualmie Valley is getting
weekend service. ORCA agencies have partnered for a discounted day pass promotion for six months.
Safety remains a key concern for Metro. Metro is piloting behavioral health workers doing ride-alongs
on the C, D, and the E lines. They have a large presence at the Burien Transit Center. They provide
assistance and connect people to agencies for help. Security is being increased on Third Avenue. Drug -
related incidents were down year to year in July by 42% and ridership was up 11%. Metro is reinvesting
3,700 new bust trips as the workforce recovers, this will be 5% increase in weekday service and 8%
increase in weekend service. Metro is also creating a new Metro Flex area in the Northshore area. Metro
is implementing a huge service change with Lynnwood Link and are actively street teaming out in areas
with new service changes.
To queue up Metro's presentation later in the agenda, Michelle shared that Metro Connects is Metro's
vision for the future, but it is not fully funded. The potential repeal of the Climate Commitment Act
would have significant impacts on Metro's services. Michelle closed by thanking jurisdictions for their
partnership and welcoming questions.
Mayor Kave asked about promotional information for cities to share on the reduced fare ORCA day -pass.
Chair di Michele asked for more information about the promotion to be sent out. Metro confirmed they
would follow-up in email.
Deputy Mayor Howe asked about why drug -related incidents are going down on buses. A —Michelle
answered that while the answer involves a lot of factors, we think it's because our care and presence
security efforts are working. There's more focus on security and more people riding.
Craig Helmann kicked off the PSRC presentation by sharing regional trends. Our region is planning for
growth to 5.8M people and 3.3M jobs. We are growing slightly slower, but still about 50,000 people a
year which was PSRC's forecast. The region now has 3% more jobs than it did pre -pandemic but is
behind projections. Not all job sectors have recovered.
EVs are now about 5% of all vehicles in this area. Internal combustion vehicles are now less than 60% of
cars being used. Charging infrastructure is growing rapidly. Vehicle miles traveled are still below pre -
pandemic levels. Working from home is changing. Fully at home is about 12%, hybrid work is growing to
about 25%, fully in person is 63%. Transit ridership is growing to approximately 98M, about 73% of pre -
pandemic. Our ridership ranks 11th nationally for ridership. Traffic deaths are at historic -high levels.
Bikes and pedestrians are especially at risk.
Kelly McGourty of PSRC spoke on the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) which was launched in
February 2024. The financial assumptions and strategy need to be revisited. Key priorities include safety,
Packet Pg. 101
7.4.m
climate, equity, ferries, congestion, transit and more. Big concerns include better linkage to land use,
changes in travel behavior, disparities in income, electrification, and micro -transit. PSRC is also focused
on a Regional Safety Action Plan and a Comprehensive Climate Action Plan. They are also doing a
regional analysis on access to transit, reevaluating financial assumptions, and examining post -pandemic
travel behavior.
Ben Bakkenta of PSRC spoke about the Regional Safety Action Plan. The region got $8M for safety
planning and many cities got grants through this program. There will be two more rounds of funding for
this program. The report will be published next week and will feature interactive maps showing where
safety problems are happening. Meetings are happening on the safety plan throughout the region. PSRC
is also certifying comprehensive plans for cities. They have received 49 drafts from 86 jurisdictions.
Mayor Kave asked about whether we are planning to tax electricity from chargers to replace the gas tax.
A —We could do that at public chargers, but it is difficult at home. EVs have a flat fee now which is
equivalent to the gas tax.
Vice Chair Kritzer asked about how maintenance is divided between charging providers and jurisdictions.
A —We are looking into whether it is important to standardize charging facilities. Theft is a huge issue at
charging stations.
Councilmember Goldman asked what mode share is growing faster driving alone or transit. A —Transit,
walking, and biking are all growing faster.
Councilmember Kwon remarked that data is often tough to get for jurisdictions, but the PSRC
performance dashboard is invaluable.
Nytasha Walters of Shoreline mentioned they have a program to look at electrification there and that
equity is a major concern about where charging is located. Cities need to decide whether they want to
own or lease charging.
Mayor Kave asked about the East Valley Highway and their desire to make it safer. Can they get help?
A —Kelly promised to follow up.
The boards then turned to the lightning round presentations on future plans of transportation and
transit agencies.
Erik Rundell of Metro presented on Metro Connects, Metro's long-range plan. It is an unconstrained
plan that is not fully funded. It includes a service network that increases all -day frequent service, and the
fleet, facilities, and workforce needed to accomplish this vision. It has an interim network tied to what
the network looks like right before the extension in 2039 to Ballard, and a long-range network to 2050.
Metro uses Metro Connects to plan for the future. It is updated every seven years.
Alex Krieg of Sound Transit (ST) presented on their future at ST. He mentioned the huge transit
restructures at Community Transit and Metro associated with Lynnwood Link. Service to Lynnwood will
double in 2025 when the 2 Line is fully open. Redmond will likely come online in spring 2025 and the
rest of the line at the end of the year. Federal Way Link will open in 2026. Stride BRT will open between
2027-29. The final EIS for West Seattle Link will be published soon. Tacoma Dome will open in 2035.
Ballard is targeting in 2039. Planning for Kirkland to Issaquah will begin soon. ST3 does include money
for future planning for a possible ST4.
Packet Pg. 102
7.4.m
Carmen Bendixen of Washington State Ferries (WSF) presented on their long-range plan for 2040 which
focuses on reliable service, customer experience, sustainability, and resilience. Bidding is happening
soon for two new hybrid electric ferries for 2028. WSF is very focused on maritime jobs and building that
pipeline with youth. A new terminal project is the Fauntleroy terminal project which will start
construction in 2027. Colman Dock recently opened to the public and has been well received. It will get
new food and retail vendors next year.
Jeremy Jukes of the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) spoke on the Highway
System Plan. There has not been a new plan since 2007. WSDOT is planning for an ambitious but
reasonable future plan. Programs include repair and operations, safety and efficiency, and highway
expansion. It focuses on prioritizing fixing it first and then safety and efficiency, but economizes on
expansion funding.
Mayor Kave noted that South King County doesn't have the number of rapid bus routes as many other
areas. He doesn't feel we are incorporating planning for South King County adequately. He also noted
service to the airport is critical. A—ST and Metro are partnering on South Link Connections which will
change bus service in tandem with Federal Way Link. Metro has reached out to Pacific and will connect
about the best staff member to include.
Councilmember Armen Papyan of Tukwila asked about whether Stride could have a stop at Southcenter
Mall. A —There are some constraints, and the board has baselined the project. The F Line does provide a
frequent connection to Stride at Renton.
Councilmember Kwon asked if we are measuring platform miles and passenger miles and cost per
passenger. A—ST collects all of that data. We intend to update our service standards as the system
expands.
Councilmember Paine mentioned that Snohomish County has many rural areas and smaller cities that
need service and that they are very excited about.
The meeting was adjourned at 11:04 am.
Attendees (35 in -person*, 43 online)
*Alex Krieg, Sound Transit
*Alyssa Beaver, Des Moines
Amanda Pleasant -Brown (she/they), King County Metro
*Armen Papyan, Tukwila Councilmember
*Barb di Michele, Issaquah Deputy Council President
*Ben Bakkenta, PSRC
*Camerson Sieb, Sound Transit
*Carmen Bendixen, WSDOT
Carol Benson, Black Diamond Mayor
*Chris Arkills, Metro
Community Court
*Craig Helmman, PSRC
Packet Pg. 103
7.4.m
Dave Kaplan, Port of Seattle
David Paine, Kent
*DeAnna Martin, Metro
Deanna Keller, Port of Tacoma Commissioner
Debby Hartsock, Covington Councilmember
Delanie Stegman, Covington
Didem Pierson, Maple Valley Councilmember
*Eben Pobee, Shoreline Councilmember
*Elsa Brown, Seattle
Eric Perry, Renton
*Erik Rundell, Metro
Florendo Cabudol, SeaTac
GAH
Garrett Holbrook, Office of King County Councilmember Dembowski
Greg Stamatiou, Sammamish
*Genevieve Jones, Metro
Jacob Sweeting, Auburn
Jamyang Dorjee, Community Transit
*James Randolph, Woodinville Deputy Mayor
Jen Malley -Crawford, Seattle
Jeremy Jewkes, WSDOT
*Jessica Forsythe, Redmond
*Jessica Rossman, Mayor of Medina
Jim Seitz, Renton
Jim Hammond, Shoreline
*Karen Howe, Sammamish Councilmember
Kathryn Johnson, PSRC
*Katie Drewel, Sound Transit
*Kelly McGourty, PSRC
Kent Treen, Sammamish Councilmember
*Kyoko Matsumoto -Wright, Mountlake Terrace Mayor
*Lacey Jane Wolfe, Bellevue
*Larry Goldman, Lake Forest Councilmember
Matt Mahoney, Des Moines Councilmember
*Matthew Kenna, WSDOT
Max Baker, Tukwila
*Michelle Allison, Metro
Mike Dee, Lake Forest Park Citizen's Commission
Merrill Thomas-Schadt, Mercer Island
*Nathan Loutsis, Kenmore Councilmember
*Nytasha Walters, Shoreline
*Peter Heffernan, Metro
*Peter Kwon, SeaTac Councilmember
Phillip Hill, Lake Forest Park
Packet Pg. 104
7.4.m
Nancy Backus, Auburn Mayor
Neal Black, Kirkland Councilmember
Pierce Canser, Metro
Penny Sweet, Kirkland Councilmember
Robby Paige, Office of King County Councilmember Robby Paige
*Rod Dembowski, King County Councilmember
*Sarah Arndt, Woodinville Councilmember
Sarah Olson, Kirkland
Sarah Perry, King County Councilmember
Shanna Styron Sherrel, Milton Mayor
*Sid Gupta, Sammamish Councilmember
*Stephanie Pure, Metro
Steve Morikawa, Bothell
Sun Burford, Newcastle Councilmember
*Susan Paine, Edmonds Councilmember
Tom French, Lake Forest Park Mayor
Troy Linnell, Algona Mayor
Valerie Porter, Issaquah
*Vanessa Kritzer, Remond Council President
*Vic Kave, Pacific Mayor
Packet Pg. 105
Highway
System F
PSRC
September 13, 2024
E
U
a
Packet Pg. 106
7.4.n
Planning for Ambitious -but -Reasonable
Funding
Current law funding
New funding #1:
Future increases mirror
past increases
New funding #2:
Ambitious -but -
reasonable
$48.9 billion
$69.3 billion
$11.1 billion
$11.1 billion
$37.8 billion
$58.2 billion
$20.4 billion
$91.0 billion $11.1 billion $79.9 billion $42.1 billion
Differences of +/- $0.18 may appear due to rounding.
Packet Pg. 107
CROSSWALK
M
as
0
61
am
• Safety
• Transportation
Operations
• Walking, Bicycling &
Rolling
• Environment
• Transportation Demand
Management
7.4.n
N
L
Cu
MQ
W
6:
Packet Pg. 108
2022=2041 Highway System RecommendedP
Funding
1. Fix it First $35B
Invest what is needed to keep the system $30B
working in both operations Maintenance
and capital Preservation $25B
2. Safety and Efficiency
S20B $5.4B
�
$5.413 for Safety, Environmental Retrofit, $4.3B
Operations, Active Transportation, Public 515E $12B
Transportation S1013
3. Economize on Expansion SSB
$1.413 for strategic capacity Expansion
0
Repair Safety &
Note: the cost to repair the system has changed since 2021. Efficiency
P Y 9 Highway Programs
N
L
CU
0
.N
$1.4B
(tll SR
Existing Funding
Baseline
Move Ahead Washing
Recommended Funding
Highway Repair
Safety and Efficiency
Expansion
Differences of +/- $0.1B r
appear due to rounding.
Dollars in year of expendit
Dollars are for long-range
Expansion planning, and not appropr
for budgeting.
Packet Pg. 109
7.4.n
Thank You
For additional information, please contact:
Jeremy Jewkes, Statewide Planning Manager
jeremy.jewkes wsdot.wa.gov
hsp wsdot.wa.gov FE
N
L
CU
MQ
W
Packet Pg. 110
r.a.e
PSRC'ion 2024 a�
Joint King County Subarea Board Meeting
L
m
O
p
ar
d
-
',•
WI
d
L
� ..
L� + I •
, o
L
I
QA
eta i
�
O
tU
C9 _
Y
04
N
M
/ • • • mind
Remnal , I
O
O
C
t
V
We are leaders in
the region to realize equity for all.
Diversity, racial
w
r•+
a
equity and inclusion are integrated into how we carry out all our work.
psrc.org/equity
I Packet Pg. 111
Topics for Discussion
Regional Trends
PSRC Work Ahead - Key Activities
7.4.0
Packet Pg. 112
Regional
Trends
VISION 2050 plans for 5,,8m people and 3.3m jobs
Forecast of People & Jobs, 2015-2050
6 r,,i
5M
4M
3M
2M
1M
0
Illl�i�����lllll
5.8m
0
O
Ir 3.3 m
�O �p 3� le",
e� �O
1O l l 4O
Jobs People
Source: PSRC Macroeconomic Forecast
7.4.0
w
w
E
0
U
0
Co
m
O
U
a
0
Co
U)
O
U
(7
Y
N
M
O
C
d
E
t
V
fC
w
rr
Q
Packet Pg. 114
Population growth has matched forecasts to date
Total Population in Central Puget Sound
5M
�7 ,
HK
3.5 M
3M
0
2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024
Observed Forecast
2026 2028 2030
Gray bar indicates the COVID-19 Pandemic.
Source: Office of Financial Management, April 1 Official Population, 2024 and PSRC Macroeconomic Forecast
7.4.0
w
w
E
0
U
c
L
MO
W
O
U
N
a
L
MO
W
L
U)
O
U
(7
Y
N
M
O
c
d
E
w
r
a
Packet Pg. 115
Population Growth has slowed since the pandemic
Population Change by County, 2018-2024
2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24
King County — Kitsap County
Pierce County 0 Snohomish County
The region grew by
47,,000 people
between 2023 and
2024 and 65% of the
growth occurred in
King County.
7.4.0
w
w
E
0
U
c
0
co
U
Cl)
a
0
co
U
(7
Y
N
M
O
C
d
E
t
V
w
r
Q
Source: Office of Financial Management, April 1 Official Population, 2024 1 Packet Pg. 116
Job growth is about 3%lower than forecasts to date
Wage & Salary Employment in Central Puget Sound
09
1.5M
1M
I
—•
2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026
Observed 0 Forecast
Gray bar indicates the COVID-19 Pandemic.
Source: Washington State Employment Security Department and PSRC Macroeconomic Forecast
2028 2030
7.4.0
w
w
E
0
U
c
O
m
d
.N
7
0
U
N
a
L
MO
W
L
U)
0
U
(7
Y
N
M
O
c
a�
E
w
r
a
Packet Pg. 117
Job growth has slowed
Job Change by Year, 2015-2024*
140K
The region added
12,,400 jobs between
2023 and 2024, about
1/4 of the Pre -
pandemic annual job
growth.
2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2020-21 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24
* 2020 data was left off chart. Almost 240k jobs were lost in 2020
Source: Washington State Employment Securities Department
7.4.0
w
w
E
0
U
c
0
CO
U
Cl)
a
0
CO
U
(7
Y
N
M
O
C
d
E
t
V
fC
w
r
Q
Packet Pg. 118
Not all job sectors have recovered
% Change in Jobs by Sector, 2024 / 2019
Education & Health Services
Financial Activities
Government
Information
Leisure & Hospitality
Manufacturing
Other Services
Professional & Business Services
Resource & Construction
Trade, Transportation, Utilities
Total Jobs
-9.6%
-4.6%
-1.3%
3.2%
2.6 %
13.1
7.4.0
w
E
0
Information Health
U
c
o
Services and
m
Professional &
O
Business services have'
a
led job growth.
0
CIO
V)
O
U
(9
1
le
N
M
0
c
d
w
r
Q
Source: Washington State Employment Securities Department
Packet Pg. 119
EVs made up almost 5% of the vehicle fleet in 2024
Electric Vehicle Share of All Vehicles, 2017-2024
2%
1%
9
CO
Q5
N
NO
N
N
NN N
fV
O
N
N
N
0CV N
C C
C
C
C
C
7.4.0
Source: Washington State Department of licensing
Packet Pg. 120
in EVs made up over 20% of new vehicles 2024
w
w
EV Share of New Vehicle Re istrations 0
g °
U
c
100`/.
L
M0
W
80%
N
7
0
60% v
a
i
40%
0
CO
as
L
20%
U
0 c7
Y
�`\ �`A �� N
01)
c
a�
# Battery Electric Vehicle Hybrid Electric Vehicle Internal Combustion Engine
w
r
a
Source: Washington State Department of Licensing Packet Pg. 121
Charging infrastructure is growing rapidly
Public EV Charging Stations, 2017-2024
1 2024
40 Level 1 4 Level 2 Fast Charge
Source: US Department of Energy, Alternative Fuels Data Center
7.4.0
•
c
Ap
E V
,n
•
m
d
•
• O
U
Cl)
• ;
i
n
0
CO
CU
•4 0
�� • U)
• p
• ip • U
• U
v L it ry IA M
0
c
d
E
w
r
Q
Public
Private Packet Pg. 122
Leaflet 19 OpenStreet:Map contr ntcirs : RT _[
Vehicles Miles are still below pre -pandemic levels
Daily Vehicle Miles Traveled, 2010-2023
People in the region
drove about 82.5
million miles a day in
2023 - about the
7.4.0
same as people drove
in 2U14.
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
King Kitsap Pierce 40 Snohomish
w
w
E
0
U
c
0
CO
U
N
a
0
CO
U
(7
Y
N
M
O
C
d
E
w
r
Q
Source: WSDOT Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) Packet Pg. 123
Working from Home is still influx
Work from Home Status
101110,
ME
60%
HI
20%
n
2017
2019
Fully At Home 0 Hybrid
Source: PSRC Regional Household Travel Survey 2017, 2019, 2021 & 2023
29% A
2021
Fully in Person
12%
2023
7.4.0
w
w
E
0
U
c
L
M0
W
O
U
a
i
L
M0
W
L
0
U
c�
Y
N
M
O
E
w
a
-- Ot-0
Packet Pg. 124
Transit Ridership continues to recover
Jan -July Total Boardings, 2002-2024
rlerlel*e'Vlor�p e e e e If
7.4.0
There were
approximately 98
million hoardings from
January to July 2024
on the Region"s transit
system (73% of 2019
ridership)
w
w
E
0
U
c
0
CO
U
N
a
0
CO
U
(7
Y
N
M
O
C
d
E
t
V
fC
w
rr
Q
Source: USDOT Federal Transit Administration National Transit Database I Packet Pg. 125
Recovery differs by Mode
Jan -July Boardings by Mode
100M C;`Ij
�Z�11�:��iYZi��iY�>�IiY.Y.>��iY�c��il►.>�
Ferry
Mr
7 GAA
Commuter Rail
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
Light Rail & Streetcar
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
1.2M Demand Response
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
3A.1 Vanpools
2 R.1
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
7.4.0
w
w
E
0
U
c
N
L
M0
W
.N
O
U
Cl)
a
i
L
M0
W
L
0
O
U
(7
Y
N
M
O
C
d
E
t
V
fC
w
Q
Source: USDOT Federal Transit Administration National Transit Database
Packet Pg. 126
Recovery is like other Metro Areas
Ratio of Jan -July Boardings: 2024 / 2019
Miami
San Diego
Tampa
Austin
Houston
Orlando
Dallas
Los Angeles
Washington DC
New York City
Seattle
Newark
San Antonio
Portland
Boston
Philadelphia
Chicago
Bay Area
Charlotte
Denver
Sacramento
Minneapolis
Baltimore
Detroit
Atlanta
Phoenix
St Louis
60
80
Source: USDOT Federal Transit Administration National Transit Database
7.4.0
E
0
V
Transit ridership in the m ,
Region is 73% of 2019
0
ridership -whichC.)
ranks #11 out of the 27 a'
largest Metro Areas in
the nation
0
0
m
CU
rn
O
U
(7
Y
N
IL Jorow---
0
0
c
d
s
c.�
c�
w
w
Q
Packet Pg. 127
Traffic Related Deaths are at historic levels
Traffic Deaths & Serious Injuries 2010-2023
1,500
MI
500
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
7.4.0
w
w
E
0
U
c
347 died on the0
people CO
re ion's roadways in
N
g y
2023 and 1776
40
people
were seriouslyinjured.ous) CO
0
L
U)
0
U
(9
1
le
N
M
O
C
d
E
t
V
fC
w
r
Q
Source: Washington State Department of Transportation Packet Pg. 128
Deaths are increasing for All users
Bike & Ped Deaths & Serious Injuries 2010-2023
5C;
400
300
r O$]
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
486 people biking or
walking were killed or
seriously injured in
2023. Pedestrians
accounted for 77% of
this total.
7.4.0
w
w
E
0
U
c
0
CO
U
N
a
L
M0
W
L
O
U
(7
Y
N
M
O
C
d
E
t
V
fC
w
Q
Source: Washington State Department of Transportation Packet Pg. 129
PSRC Work
Ahead -
Key
Activities
f'
0
Regional Transportation Plan (RTP)
• Development of the next RTP (2026-
2050) launched in February 2024
• Transportation Policy Board has
engaged since on:
• Priority focus areas
• Financial strategy
• Analysis needs
HIBIONAI Puget Sound RrF°"'
THANSPORTATIONPIAN
zozz-zU5o
Packet Pg. 131
Development of the Next RTP (2026-2050)
Board identified regional priorities and
emphasis areas for the next RTP:
change the status quo
new ev charging capabilit safety for equity pops
new sidewalk investments tree preservation
back to basics repairs pedestrian safety system user education
addressing gaps human -centered person -centered
community safety C l I 1 1 1 � �� public safety and transit
transit revenue planning
restore ferry service safety
�'
improving ridership traffic � biking safety equity
c
reducing greenhouse gases foot ferries
ferries non -motorized a)
economic vitality ev charging infra C'
change the status quot climate change o
bkes
cross -sector pianning congestion mitigation
freight cargo mobility
bridge -road modernization
traffic -oriented injury
bridge -road maintenance
green transportation
22
E
• Safety
U
• Climate 0
0
CO
• Equity N
O
• Ferries Cn
0-
i
• Congestion 0
m
0
CO
• Being human -centered
rn
• Transit 0
1
19t
• Preservation and M
0
Maintenance
d
• Clean transportation
Packet Pg. 132
Development of the Next RTP (2026-2050)
Board identified analysis and research needs:
• Better linkage to land use
• Micro -transit
• Financial strategy
• Changes in travel behavior
• Understanding the reasons for
disparities
• Electrification
• Monitoring and more detailed
data
• Real -world examples
0
U
c
L
MQ
W
.N
0
U
Cl)
a
i
0
CO
0
U
(7
Y
N
M
O
C
d
E
t
V
fC
w
rr
Q
23 Packet Pg. 133
New Work Programs
• Regional Safety Action Plan
• Comprehensive Climate Action Plan
• In partnership with PSCAA, regional stakeholders
• Part of EPA's Climate Pollution Reduction Grant Program
• Access to transit
• Reevaluation of the financial strategy
• Deeper dive into post -pandemic travel behavior
Packet Pg. 134
Development of the Next RTP (2026-2050)
2024
L
Board approves
Scope of RTP
2025
Ongoing Public Outreach Informs the Plan
glwl
25
Packet Pg. 135
Regional Safety Action Plan
w
w
E
E
O
• Use data analysis research and community outreach to
v v N
better understand safety issues/challenges across the region 000
.N
0
U
• Identify key typologies and distinctions to frame the a
development of a menu of strategies and countermeasures m
Cu
L
U)
0
• Jurisdictions will use plan to choose the best approach based Y
C4
on the specific context and safety issue they are addressing o
E
w
a
Packet Pg. 136
Regional Safety Action Plan
PUGET SOUND REGIONAL COUNCIL
REGIONAL
SAFETY ACTION
PLAN
EXPLORE THE
ENGAGEMENT HUB &
PROVIDE FEEDBACK
September 2024 Launch
COMMENT ON THE
DRAFT PLAN
January2025
2
3
ATTEND A REGIONAL
PUBLIC MEETING
September 18-October 1
Wednesday,
September 18
5:00-7:30pm
Kitsap Filipino -
American
Association
Regional Public Meetings
Tuesday,
September 24
5:00-7:30pm
Tacoma Art
Museum
Thursday,
September 26
5:00-7:30pm
El Centro de la
Raza
7.4.0
.l
Tuesday, (n�
October 1 0
ca
5:00-7:30pm
Everett Statioi o
U
Y
N
M
O
C
d
E
w
Q
Packet Pg. 137
Regional Safety Action Plan
7.4.0
PSRC Regional Safety Action Plan - Online Engagement Hub(https://psrc-rsap.infocommunit)(.orcli
E
English v
Puget Sound Regional Council
0
COJ�)A*AtJL4
0
N
0
PSRC Regional Safety Action Plan Engagement Hub
Cn
a
i
Traffic Safety Traffic Safety
Welcome in the Region Strategies Questionnaire Get Involved 0
as
L
Welcome Cn
0
U
(7
Welcome to the Regional Safety Action Plan (RSAP) Engagement Hub. We're glad
How to use this • • • N
you're here!Hub
M
0
................................................................................................................................................................................................ .
c
PSRC is taking action to improve roadway safety.
■ Advance through the hub by E
selecting the tab you would like
Let's do it together! to navigate to at the top of the a
Together, we can establish a regional culture of safety and advance solutions to
achieve a thriving, equitable, and sustainable central Puget Sound.
page or by selecting the button
labeled "Next Page" at the bottom
of each page.
Packet Pg. 138
7.4.0
Comprehensive Plan Review Status
E
E
O
m
Drafts Received Plans Under Review Comment Letters Selo:
a
N
L
M
O
49 m
R
L
lC
41
CO
0
86
,V
V
Y
N
M
O
O
rr
Q
Packet Pg. 139
7.4.o
0
0
2,
Thank You'.
N,
Craig Heimann Ben Bakkenta CO
Director of Data Director of Regional Planning
Cn
cheimann@psrc.org bbakkenta@psrc.org 0
M
Kelly McGourty Cq
CD
Director of Transportation Planning
E
kmcgourty@psrc.org
Packet Pg. 140
7.4.p
Metro Connects:
An overview of Metro's long-range plan
September 13, 2024
Joint Regional Transportation Boards Meeting
What is Metro Connects?
• Metro's 30-year Long -Range Plan
• Identifies a vision for more service, more
choices, and one easy -to -use system
• Is financially unconstrained and unfunded;
would require additional funding to deliver
• Adopted by the Regional Transit Committee,
King County Transportation, Environment,
and Energy Committee and full King County
Council in 2021
King County
METRO
Atta6mentC
O
V
I
N
O
N
C
King County Metro Long -Range Plan
Metro Connects
3
November 17, 2021 O
LQ King County d
METRO o
Moving forward together I U
0
Q
Packet Pg. 142
7.4.p
What Metro Connects Envisions
• Frequent, reliable, and fast service all -day, everyday throughout King County
• Connecting a growing population to fast, high -capacity transit services
• Advancing social equity by creating more opportunities for all
• Saving customers money
• Addressing climate change and protecting the environment
• Adopting new technologies that help people get around
*ji
E -
84% "%
of BIPOC of low-income
residents residents Savings a year Metric tons of
by commuting greenhouse gas
on transit emissions reduced
within 'h mile of frequent transit annually
King County
METRO
Reduction in per capita
vehicle miles traveled
Packet Pg. 143
7.4.p
What is included in Metro Connects?
• Service Network envisions choices in
one easy -to -use system with more
frequent, all -day service.
• Service Quality Investments provide
fast, frequent, and reliable service and
improve the customer experience.
• Fleet, Facilities, and Workforce
improvements to expand the physical and
people infrastructure to support growth.
• Attaining the Vision describes how
Metro will implement the vision and its
costs
King County
METRO
Locations Accessible by Transit within 60 Minutes
2019 �2050
(60
s
Q
Packet Pg. 144
7.4.p
Interim Network
• Tied to expansion of Link to Ballard (2037-
2039)
• Assumes Link expansion to Eastside,
Lynnwood, and Federal Way
• Assumes 30% increase in service from 2019
• Requires new funding
2050 Network
• Assumes full-scale buildout of our transit
network (all ST3 projects are complete)
• Assumes 70% increase in service from
2019
• Requires new funding
King County
METRO
N
Like
- - - - - - -
rMlSt xlfYlq/f
o.
i
-.N
Cl)
O
O
0
N
O
N
t�
0
m
t O
0
CL
N
_
M
— RapidRidC —link >
RapidRide Sound O
Candidate ST E.t v
Frequent & Stni d
Express
Street O
Loral Water U
Water Taxi (E.IStl p
(proposed) d
w
E
U
fC
2050 Netwa a
Data sources: King County Fwr,
Sound Transit. Seattle
n
Packet Pg. 145
7.4.p
How do we use Metro Connects?
• Informs future network changes
• Identify routes' frequency targets for growth 1,800
1,600
• Prioritize investments at the route -level 1,400
a
based on definition of priority populations L 1,200
1,000
• Identify future RapidRide expansion 0 800
L
GJ
candidates 600
Z 400
• Establish long-term planned service levels to 200
0
help determine future service quality, fleet,
infrastructure, and workforce needs
King County
METRO
Buses in Service, 2019 and 2050
1,370
Sam Noon
Existing (September 2019)
1,580
490
960
5pm 8pm
0 0
■ Metro Connects (2050)
C)
O
O
O
I
N
O
N
O)
C
W
O
m
M0
r_
O
CL
_
M
L
3
m
m
0
W
U
a�
c
c
O
U
O
r
d
w
c
m
E
U
fC
Q
Packet Pg. 146
7.4.p
Metro Connects Updates
• Updated every seven years as
required by King County ordinance
• Occurs in coordination with Strategic
Plan and Service Guidelines updates
• Last updated 2021
• Network changes accounted for
network restructures since 2017
• Improved frequency on select
routes in high -equity areas like
Skyway
• Next update must be adopted by no
later than December 2028
ka King County
METRO
Packet Pg. 147
7.4.p
n
U
L,9 King County
METRO
M
O
O!
O
I
N
O
N
C
d
N
N
L
m
M0
W
_
gym+
L
0
Q
y
_
L
3
a
Moving forward together
Packet Pg. 148
o
AM
MAP WSDOIr
Washington State Ferries:
Planning for the Future
Joint Transportation Boards meeting
Carmen Bendixen
Washington State Ferries
September 13, 2024
L
ca
M0
W
0
0
Packet Pg. 149
Reliable service
• Replace aging vessels and invest in new vessels to maintain reliable service.
• Preserve and improve terminals to enhance safety and operations.
• Invest in attracting, retaining and strengthening the workforce.
Customer experience
• Provide better trip planning information.
• Reduce customer wait times.
• Enhance multimodal connections and accessibility.
1
Manage growth
• Increase walk-on ridership.
• Spread out demand and maximize WSF's existing assets.
Sustainability and resilience
• Green the fleet and reduce our environmental footprint.
• Plan for emergencies and climate change to sustain reliable service through 2040.
7i WSDOT
. 2
Hybrid -Electric
160=AUTO FERRIES
• length: 405 feet
• Width: 83.2 feet
• Cars
•: 164
• Passengers:
1,500
7 .amo
Rudder
Propeller
(5 blades)
• Standard cars
• Travel modes: Electric (16 knots), Diesel (14.5 knots), Hybrid (17 knots)
MOTOR
Diesel
BATTERY ROOMS
°�ymr
MOTOR
ROOM 2
1 AND 2
ROOM 1
ENGINE
.Battery life:
ENGINE
Propeller
ROOM 2
10 years ROOM 1 (5 blades)
• Battery capacity: 15.2 megawatt hours
•Maximum charge: 15 megawatts
Image courtesy of The Seattle Times, June 2024
7.4.q
Packet Pg. 151
rkfor^ avelopment
• Workforce outreach: WSF Career Day, apprenticeships at Eagle Harbor, Engine room
internships, partnerships with Seattle Maritime Academy, Calhoun Engineering School, ca
Maritime High School, Maritime Blue, MITAGS (Maritime Institute of Technology and m
Graduate Studies), Maritime Institute in Everett N
• New Mate scholarship
le
• AB to Mates program
• Engine Room Wiper Program
• Reimbursement of lodging and TWIC card costs CO
• Eagle Harbor apprenticeships
Packet Pg. 152
Ah
dkV
Ah
dF
2040
• Planning & Environmental Linkages (PEL) Study
Long
Range
Develop Level 1 & 2 Level 3
PEL study
Plan
purpose screening screening
report
& need,
recommends
screening
alternative
criteria & 7
for further
alternatives Refine
environmental
alternatives
review
Identify
level of
environmental
review
NEPA/SEPA
Environmental
Review
Design/
Construction
A Community and advisory group meetings ►
7i 5
WSDOT
7.4.q
Colman Dock
• Finished in 2023; $489 million in state
and federal sources
• Ridership: 10 million passengers
annually
• More seating: 362 seats vs. 120 seats
in old building
• ADA features: tactile pavers, turnstiles,
drop off area (coming soon)
• Coming soon: 6 food and retail spaces
(Request for proposals issued late
August; proposals due October 22)
L
ca
0
m
0
0
Packet Pg. 154
7.4.q
Qucstions?
Carmen Bendixen
Senior Transportation Planner
Washington State Ferries
Carmen. bend ixen(cD-wsdot.wa.gc
0
0
le
N
CI)
O
O
N
a
N
8!
s
t
c
a
d
c
L
0
LL
U)
3.1
Wr
E
t
c.i
Q
Packet Pg. 155
8.1
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 09/24/2024
Approval of Council Special Retreat Minutes August 16, 2024
Staff Lead: Council
Department: City Clerk's Office
Preparer: Scott Passey
Background/History
N/A
Recommendation
Approval of Council Meeting minutes as part of the Consent Agenda.
Narrative
Council meeting minutes are attached.
Attachments:
2024-08-16 Council Special Retreat Minutes
Packet Pg. 156
8.1.a
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL
SPECIAL MEETING — COUNCIL RETREAT
DRAFT MINUTES
August 16, 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
1. CALL TO ORDER
STAFF PRESENT
Rod Sniffen, Assistant Police Chief
Uneek Mayor, Municipal Court Administrator
Phil Williams, Acting Public Works Director
Kim Dunscombe, Acting Finance Director
Angie Feser, Parks, Rec., & Human Serv. Dir.
Todd Tatum, Comm., Culture & Econ. Dev. Dir
Beckie Peterson, Council Executive Assistant
Scott Passey, City Clerk
Jeannie Dines, Recorder
GUESTS PRESENT
Mike Bailey, Financial Consultant
The Edmonds City Council special meeting was called to order at 8:04 p.m. by Mayor Rosen in the Brackett
Room, 121 5' Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually.
2. COUNCIL BUSINESS
BUDGET RETREAT
Mayor Rosen described practices and procedures for the retreat. He declared a brief recess for coffee
Review Events and Information to Date
Mike Bailey, Financial Consultant, explained retreats typically focus on establishing policy guidance for
developing the budget as well as financial challenges that many cities including Edmonds are facing. The
intent is an informal discussion and he encouraged councilmembers to ask questions. He reviewed the
agenda, which he assured is flexible. The goal is clarity around the big issues the City is dealing with.
Agenda
8:00
Introductions — coffee — greetings
8:30
Review Events and Information to Date
8:45
Budget Roles and Responsibilities
8:00
Introductions — Coffee - Greetings
8:30
Review Events and Information to Date
8:45
Budget Roles and Responsibilities
9:30
Break
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 1
Packet Pg. 157
8.1.a
9:45
Potential Approaches to Fiscal Resiliency
11:30
Lunch
12:00
Prioritizing Policy Goals for the Budget
2:30
Priority Based Budgeting — What to Expect
2:45
Debrief — Council's "take-aways" for the Budget
3:45
Wrap -Up / Next Steps
• Review of prior events
o Decision to Utilize a Biennial Budget
Some time ago the council decided to change from an annual to a biennial budget. It's ironic it happened at
a time there was so much fiscal distress occurring. He may have suggested a biennial budget in the past and
that recommendation holds true even in the present circumstances. A biennial budget informs a longer term
view of the issues the City is dealing with which is very relevant in this work. There is a lot on the council
and staff s plates and almost none of it is accomplished in one year so it's unrealistic to think of a budget
in one year. A biennial path will serve the City well, but will be a big change for those developing the
budget materials as well as for council.
As the City embraces this change, it can be done in stages. For example, when he joined the City of
Redmond, they had had a biennial budget for many years and no one thought of the budget as an annual
budget anymore, they consistently thought of it 24 months at a time. When he was in Lynnwood and they
transitioned to a biennial budget, it was very much two one-year budgets. Two one-year budgets is the more
likely perspective in Edmonds due to the transition and the need to evolve to a better financial situation; as
the City moves from an annual budget to a two-year budget, it will essentially look like two one-year
budgets.
Councilmember Nand recalled there has been some controversy in Lynnwood about internal controls,
tension between the administration and councilmembers, and asked if there were any gaps policy -wise
where Edmonds could do better. Mr. Bailey answered he was not familiar with tension between the
administration and council in Lynnwood. A biennial budget does not necessarily lend itself to that because
all the reporting regiments stay the same and all the policies the council has adopted or is planning to adopt
are very strong in that respect. Edmonds' robust monthly report creates an opportunity each month to
provide feedback, course correction, etc. A two-year budget has no impact on that. It is fundamentally more
about the interaction, the pace, and the rhythm of interaction around the issues.
o Declaration of Fiscal Emergency (October 2023)
The council declared a fiscal emergency last October due to the decline in fund balance. It would have been
better if the council had gotten more timely and clearer information during 2023. When it was recognized
that fund balances had dropped to the level they had, council reacted.
o Blue Ribbon Panel Recommendations (July 2024)
The Blue Ribbon Panel made a number of recommendations which were presented to council in early July.
He appreciated the council's interaction with the report and it was clear the council had carefully reviewed
their report and recommendations.
o Financial Policies Review
The financial policies presented to council were a combination of two things, 1) in response to work the
council had already started with regard to the financial policies, and 2) additional policy work, much of it
developed by Ms. Dunscombe to help lay the groundwork for the upcoming budget such as fund balances,
budget policies, revenue policies, expenditure policies, etc., which are important to have clarity around
when developing the budget. Policies tend to be aspirational and ideally the City wants to be in compliant
with its policies. That is not always possible; for example, the City is currently not in compliance with the
fund balance policy. Policies clarify the boundaries/guardrails as well as create the opportunity for
discussion when the City is struggling with those guardrails. The policies that have been proposed are
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 2
Packet Pg. 158
8.1.a
focused on paving the way for the upcoming budget work; there are additional areas of policy that the
council may want to explore.
o Mid -Year Financial Review
The mid -year financial review staff presented was very robust and he suspected was the most information
the council has received during the budget year about past conditions. Ideally the audit would have been
completed by the time the mid -year financial review is presented. Staff is required to provide the
information to the state auditor's office (SAO) by the end of May which was accomplished. The SAO has
been in the City for about a month; it is not unusual to have an audit like last year's where the auditor was
in the City in August/September and completed the audit later. Ideally the audit would be completed by the
middle of the year so council could review the SAO's recommendations and look at how this year's budget
is performing, whether revenues and expenditures are on tract, what issues have come up, what to expect
in the upcoming budget, and whether there this is a year with opportunity for growth, to hold -the -line or to
scale back.
The mid -year financial review is intended to be a conversation. As the council get more familiar with the
structure that will be created, ideally, it is not just a report out, it is an opportunity to ask questions and have
dialogue in order to stay on track and set the stage for the upcoming budget. The budget should not be a
surprise when the council gets it in October. Today's discussion is intended to help inform the mayor as he
prepares his recommended budget. The mayor will hear from council today and the council will hear from
the mayor about challenges inherent in this work given the City's financial difficulties. He recalled when
doing budget workshops for the Association of Washington Cities (AWC), they were held in August and
attendees were advised they should have had a budget retreat to provide policy guidance for budget
development.
Another thing of significance is the City decided to use priority based budgeting (PBB) for the upcoming
cycle. That does several things including recasting the work of the City from the perspective of the
consumer which is the community. Budgets tend to be fairly bureaucratic; as a peer reviewer of budgets,
he can always tell who prepared the budget; if it was the accountants, budget staff, if planning staff has a
great deal of influence on the budget, etc.
With regard to implementing PBB, Councilmember Nand recalled last year when directors submitted
decision packages, they would cite priorities the council identified at the retreat in their narrative. If the
intent with PBB is to deriving information from the survey, would directors cite the council's priorities that
are adopted by resolution. Mr. Bailey answered he recommends adopting a resolution with the council's
priorities. Second, PBB will be different because the work is characterized in the context of programs, either
community facing or government facing (internal) programs. One form of evaluation will be how that
program addresses the council priorities as well as typical budget attributes such as percentage of population
served by a given program, how much of the program is mandated, does the program recover its costs, how
does the program address issues of equity, etc. There will be an evaluation by an internal staff team as well
as the mayor's citizen panel with regard to how well each program responds to each of those and a score as
a result of the evaluation that will help inform where it falls on the hierarchy of importance to the
community or importance to good governance.
Councilmember Paine observed the City received the results of the community survey and another survey
was sent out today to the broader community and targeting some specific communities. She asked about
ensuring internal facing programs such as finance, HR, IT, etc. have all their needs covered due to the
importance of those services to delivering external facing programs. Mr. Bailey answered there is a separate
scale used to evaluate internal facing programs. Just like community facing programs, some are deemed
more important than others depending on the evaluator and the context and that is also true of internal facing
programs. The ability to hire the best, most qualified people and motivate them to stay with the City and do
good work is one aspect of HR, an internal employee wellness program is another; but are they equal,
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 3
Packet Pg. 159
probably not. He summarized there is a scale with regard to internal facing programs that is unique to the
scale for community facing programs.
Budget Series @ WFOA
o Based on GFOA's Distinguished Budget Award Program
1. The budget as a policy tool
➢ Strategic policy direction (goals); financial policies
2. Budgeting for Operations
➢ Organizational structure, employees, departments/programs, performance
3. Budgets as a Financial Management Tool
➢ High-level financial plan; long-term; fund balances; revenue structure
4. Communicating your budget and financial plans
➢ Stakeholder engagement; clear / simple language; focused on audiences
Rethinking Budgeting
o Breaking free of traditional line -item, incremental budgeting
■ Power, Politics and Budgeting
■ Breaking the Law of Triviality
■ Re -Thinking Public Engagement
■ Re -Thinking Reserves
■ Budgeting for Equity
■ Budget Officer as Decision Architect
GFOA Financial Foundations Framework
1. Establish a Long -Term Vision
➢ Promote collaboration; Balance long-term goals with short-term needs
2. Build Trust and Open Communication
➢ Create open lines of communication; Cultivate trustworthy reputations
3. Use Collective Decision -Making
➢ Engage stakeholders; collective choice arrangements; networked enterprises
4. Create Clear Rules
➢ Boundaries; Monitoring; Maintain oversight; Sanctions and rewards
5. Treat Everyone Fairly
➢ Proportional equivalence; Conflict resolution; Recognition of Rights
Councilmember Nand recognized the council cannot legally commit future councils, but when establishing
long-term plans, such as taking 20 years to rebuild the reserves, she asked how is that communicated with
turnover in council, staff and the administration. Mr. Bailey answered knowledge transfer is an issue for
every organization. He has always struggled with the concept that council cannot commit future councils;
when the council sells bonds, that is a future commitment. For example, if the council determines a 10-year
payback for the reserves is appropriate, he was unsure that was making a decision for future councils
because a future council could decide to accelerate or slow it down. He provided an example of Metro Parks
in Tacoma, where NW Trek Wildlife Park was donated to the Park District with the notion it would remain
a wildlife park and be self-sustaining. After 3 years, the park had a $1 M deficit and the Park District had to
develop a 10 year payback plan which bound future board members. As the council looks at its financial
strategy, they are informing future decisions to be consistent with the plan; that doesn't mean a future
council cannot modify that plan.
• Budget Roles and Responsibilities
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 4
Packet Pg. 160
8.1.a
Reporting "Pyramid"
Policy level
Senior staff level
Middle staff level
Line staff level
Transactions
o Policy makers - make policy
■ Provide oversight as necessary
o Administration
■ Informs policy choices and progress
- Revenue forecasts / options
- Programmatic approaches to achieve policy
- Interim financial reporting
- Performance management information
■ Carries out the policy
- Organizational structure / resource deployment
- Oversees activities
Councilmember Nand commented some cities like Olympia use an equity framework to inform the justice
aspect of each financial decision or program proposed. She asked if Edmonds should incorporate that into
the performance management matrix. Mr. Bailey answered yes, when the City is ready for it; he
characterized that as graduate level work. Councilmember Nand pointed out Olympia has a REDI manager
which Edmonds does not. Mr. Bailey said getting this started can pose a challenge, the quality of the work
will vary, and it will be a work in progress. To do this and maintain trust and open communication will
require a fair amount of grace. Staff should be encouraged to provide as much data as possible and council
needs to appreciate the work going into it because this is a big change and will require a lot of work. With
regard to an equity lens, GFOA is embracing that and has done a fair amount of work to do that better, but
that is aspirational. He suggested for now bringing one's own perspective as they think about the issues;
having the information and getting started is a significant step.
Councilmember Paine expected there to be a lot of information when considering all the programs and
services the City provides. To fairly evaluate the status quo and to rethink what the status quo includes will
require an equity lens because there are unequal levels of service and infrastructure in the community. The
council could ask to have an equity lens applied. Mr. Bailey responded equity will be one of the program
attributes in the grid that staff will use to internally evaluate their programs and will share that result with
council as one point of reference. Additionally, as the council looks toward the future and what future
budgets should look like, the council will be faced with whether to step up to these needs and find ways to
fund them, or protect those areas and find ways to reduce spending because there is an imbalance between
what the City collects and what it spends. That equity lens will be handy when thinking about those
decisions.
Councilmember Nand pointed out for example the City is funding tasers, officer taser training and body
cameras which is a cost. Less lethal interaction and use of force between the police department and members
of the public, in the aggregate over the long term, is a significant cost savings for the City. Mr. Bailey
answered that risk/reward evaluation will come into play numerous times as the council thinks through
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 5
Packet Pg. 161
8.1.a
budget items. For example, the ability to maintain properties the City owns has risks and rewards; if the
City is unable to maintain it, it creates risk of harm or other consequences.
Councilmember Dotsch commented on the disconnect between goals and community desires, and how to
measure those, how to develop KPIs and reports to show how to reach the goal. Mr. Bailey answered that
is the ideal dynamic. Councilmember Dotsch asked where those metrics and the ability to filter through the
levels comes from. Mr. Bailey answered it will come from a cultural change. The inner connectiveness that
is the strongest approach to this work is to say not only do we provide guidance, but that guidance informs
strategies and those strategies inform actions and those actions have results, and we want to see how those
results create a difference that helps inform the next iteration of the discussion about the policy framework.
He cited the Northshore School District as an example, noting their focus was good outcomes which takes
a variety of forms; the City has a much broader scope of responsibility which makes it more difficult. In
his peer review work, if someone can show him results on the street that are connected to the guidance and
then those results inform the next iteration of guidance, that's as good as it gets.
Budget Roles and Responsibilities - Policy
o Making policy
■ What does this look like?
— Broad goals / strategic plans
— Comprehensive Plan
— Other plans
■ Financial policies
— The "guardrails"
— Budget policies & Calendar
o Provides oversight as necessary
■ Reviews reports (at policy level)
— Interim financial reports, audits, etc.
■ Investigates issues (as necessary)
■ Updates policy direction (as necessary)
Budget Roles and Responsibilities — Administration
o Administration
■ Provides recommend budget
- Consistent with policy direction
■ Informs policy choices and progress
- Regular reviews of status
➢ Financial status
➢ Programmatic status
■ Carries out the policy
— Day to day activity
Councilmember Chen referred to the council's oversight role, commenting finding a balance between that
role and working cooperatively with the administration and mayor is an art. A lot of requests/proposals
come from the director level which the mayor reviews. The council's role on a scale of zero to 5, where 5
is approve everything, and zero is reject everything, is a sweet spot or an art. Mr. Bailey agreed it is an
artform that is informed by the environment which includes fiscal stress as well as personalities. Often
mayors come from councils and when they take on the role of mayor, they think nothing's changed. If he
has an opportunity, he gets to help the mayor think about that differently because there is a lot of change
from the personality perspective. It is an interesting dynamic to watch, something he has had the opportunity
to see in many places, and it is often a very difficult transition.
Mr. Bailey reiterated the need for grace, sometimes people say the wrong thing and there needs to be a way
back to a healthy relationship in order to do this work well. This is a very fluid dynamic and scale; the
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 6
Packet Pg. 162
8.1.a
degree to which that scale can remain positive will serve the community best, but at the same time, there is
a responsibility for accountability. That tension exists and it's healthy to be aware of it and appreciate it
while doing this work in the best way possible by working well together on behalf of the constituents. Each
mayor is different in terms of how they manage that responsibility; in a strong mayor form of government,
the mayor is accountable to the council and to the community and staff is accountable to the mayor, a
dynamic that can also create trip wires. To the extent that can be navigated in a collegial and healthy way,
it will best serve the community. He has worked with some cities where people on the council made that
impossible which is unfortunate because it does not serve the community well. He assured he was not
referring to present company.
The council took a brief recess.
Potential Approaches to Fiscal Resiliency
Mayor Rosen explained his presentation would loosely follow this outline:
• Potential approaches to financial resiliency
1. Some lessons from seven months (229 days) on the job
2. What I believe about the future of our city
3. Building the right budget (not just cutting this year's budget)
4. Options to build the right budget
5. My commitment to our partnership
• Budget by Priority Community Advisory Panel (background information on the individuals was
distributed to council)
o Erin Monroe, CPA (Blue Ribbon Panel)
o Courtney Wooten
o Corbitt Loch
o Marla Miller
o Rebecca Perrault
o Patrick Carter
o Gladys Gillis
o Erika Barnett
o Nina Odell
o Nicole Gaba
o Tom Sanger, CPA
Lessons Learned (a bit about the first 6 months)
o To get to the $2.2M fund balance, we needed to save at least $3.2M.
o We built a $4M plan.
■ Hiring Chill
$2,600,000
■ Park program closures
$100,000
■ Cancel Lease for space
$40,000
■ Prof Serv. Reductions
$165,000
■ Community Services
$50,000
■ Police non -labor reductions
$100,000
■ Use remaining ARPA for Fire Svc.
$550,000
■ Employee Parking Fund PEO
$80,000
o Then things changed... and changed... and changed
■ Beginning Fund Balance $550,000 lower
■ Revenue estimate high by $200,000
■ Separation pay outs $267,292
■ EPOA and leadership $1,100,000
■ Recurring Revenue is down
o We can't control everything that impacts us
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 7
Packet Pg. 163
8.1.a
■ Between 2021 and 2024 Consumer Price Index increased 21.7%
■ State 1% property tax restriction (per year)
■ State mandates
■ Our fair share of property tax isn't all that big — $0.14 per $1.00
■ Our fair share of sales tax isn't all that big — of 10.5 cents sales tax, City receives less than
one cent
o We can control some things that impact us
■ Fund balances below policy targets because:
- Increased authorized expenditures in 2022 and 2023.
- Additional expenditures approved in budget amendments. o Lack of identified funding
sources to cover each.
Result: Expenditures exceeded revenues by $20 million over two years.
■ Revenue estimates were overstated in 2020, 2022, and 2023.
Result: $7.6 million fewer dollars.
■ Staff underspent by $16 million.
Result: Prevented deficit reaching $27.6 million.
Examples of foundational changes being considered and/or implemented
o Budget By Priorities
o Community input (Survey etc.)
o More conservative revenue projections
o Increased transparency and collaboration on assumptions
o Changing union contract end dates
o Budgeting expenses that have not previously been budgeted (Separation Payouts)
o Finance Policies revised
o Purchasing policies revised
o New software
o Utilizing technology
o Review of Boards and Commissions
o Financial reports and timing modified
o Review our fee schedules
o More accurate allocation of staff time (GF or Utility Funds)
o Identify new revenue sources
o Incorporate future operating budget impacts into
o Incorporate risk assessment into decision making
o Modification of investments to increase returns without increased risk
o Staff levels and structure to reflect priorities
Mayor Rosen explained as part of the budget process, all programs will be scored; staff from each
department (not directors) will score programs and the advisory group will also complete a scoring exercise.
The seven attributes of the scoring include the level of mandate, reliance on the City as the service provider,
degree of cost recovery, percent of City served, level of internal collaboration, equity impact, and change
in demand.
• Top Priorities for Edmonds — Open Ended
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 8
Packet Pg. 164
8.1.a
Housing affordability is a top -of --mind concern to residents, as is public safety. Overdevelopment concerns are also cited.
If you could only pick one issue, what do you think should be the top priority for the City
of Edmonds government to address over the next two years?
(Open-ended question; Verbatim responses coded into categories below)
Housing affordability
14%
Crime/Public safety
7 10*6
Overdevelopment/Growth
9%
Budget/Fiscal responsibility
7%
Road/Transportation infrastructure
6%
Parking
6%
Traffic safety/enforcement
6°6
Homelessness
5%
Bike/Pedestrian lanes
5%
Cost of living/Taxes
5%
Schools/Education
4%
Climate change/Environment
3%
Parks/Recreation
3°%
Maintaining city aesthetic
3%
Other
11%
Gap Analysis: Satisfaction vs. Importance
While most satisfaction ratings fall relatively close to the perceived importance of each service, residents believe the city is
underperforming on reducing petty crime and drug usage, fixing potholes and sidewalks, and planning for growth/coding.
Mean Score /1— 7) Satisfaction Gap
1.00
2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.001-2.00 -1.00 0.00 1.00 2.00
Improving and expanding bike paths
I Satisfaction
Supporting the arts and cultural events — — _important; ---------
Attracting —'______—�— ______
Attracting businesses
new and jobs
Incentivizing the development of diverse housing types
I
Preparing for the impacts of climate change
I
Improving traffic safety and enforcement
I
Investing in and expanding parks, trails and open spaces
-
Pregarinefor natural disasters such as earthquakes. floodine. and major storms
I Satisfaction is
Providing additional parking opportunities
comparable to
I
Stewarding the environment
importance
I _
Maintaining parks, trails, and open spaces
_
Ensuring fast fire and emergency medial response times
I
— — — —Providing serylces to help the homeless and people in need
Strictly building development
enforcing and codes
Improving and expanding sidewalks
I —
—
Planning for population growth
MeI Satisfaction
Cracking down on illegal drug use and sales
I u derperforms
Maintaining streets and fixing potholes
importance
importance
I —
■ Importance Reducing petty crime and burglary
I —
• Areas of Emphasis
o Safety
■ Police
- We have one more officer than we did in 2009.
- We would need 33 additional commissioned officers to be at the national average of
officers per 1,000 residents
- Snohomish County has seen an almost 200% increase in drug related deaths
- We are the 9th worst state for Domestic Violence
- Population is being planned to increase 13K
- PRR is a growing burden. Social worker is funded for 6 months
- No marine or dive capabilities. No dedicated emergency management staff. No
adequate Emergency Operations Center
Councilmember Tibbott referred to the indication that the City has only one more officer than in 2009,
pointing out additional personnel have been added to the police department who are not officers such as the
social worker, public information officer, detectives to review the camera footage, etc. Assistant Police
Chief Rod Sniffen responded the four non-commissioned positions that were added included the two public
disclosure specialists who review body camera footage, the domestic violence coordinator/advocate was
increased from half time to full-time, a crime analysis, and the social worker (originally a contractor and
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 9
Packet Pg. 165
now grant funded for six months). Mayor Rosen anticipated public records request will increase
significantly and the court will require additional clerks.
Council President Olson recalled hearing on the radio today about increasing public record request fees to
recoup staff time. If someone is in the video or affected by what happened, the video could be provided for
free, but everyone else would have to pay a fee. Mayor Rosen answered that is being reviewed; there are
some restrictions. Assistant Chief Sniffen agreed if a person was involved or was legal counsel, most of the
video is provided unredacted at no cost. For a person who is not involved, the RCW allows the City to
charge for staff time. The per hour cost for redaction has been calculated and those fees are being charged.
That deters a lot of citizenry who just want the video for some reason.
Mayor Rosen explained these are just examples of unmet needs that the community has indicated are
important to them.
■ Sidewalks & ADA Ramps
- Sidewalks -
- 1 side of 1 block about $600,000
- ADA ramp about $6K each (We have about 1,700 to do)
■ Emergency Operations
- Planning and management of an Emergency Management Program to mobilize
resources that will increase preparedness, response, recovery, and mitigation of human
and natural -caused emergencies.
o Underfunded Needs
■ Streets
- In 2018 the recommended annual investment was $2.5M.
- Actual annual investment (average over five years) is $1.5M.
- Our roads are in worse condition today than in 2018.
■ Facility Maintenance
- ...From the McKinstry Report
➢ 2023 30 Year deferred capital backlog $44,162,802.
➢ Frances Anderson Center - Significant end -of -life equipment necessitating
upgrade.
➢ Fire Stations & Public Safety Bldg. have 238 critical systems needing replacement
w/i next 10 yrs. $3.4M in 2023 dollars.
➢ Capital funding levels merit annual funding of $1.8-2M.
➢ Increase annual maintenance repair budget for facilities to $300-400k/yr.
➢ Increase Maintenance staffing level to meet International Facility Management
Association recommendations 9 FTE (vs 4 FTE)
o Reserves
■ Replenish the reserve funds - Plan is 10 year payback
• Financial implications
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 10
Packet Pg. 166
8.1.a
Safety Levy
$18,000,000 Police Budget Rounded
$2,000,000 Sidewalks
$20,500,000 Sub Total
$4,000,000 Underfunded needs (facilities, streets, etc.)
$600,000 Reserve Replenishment 10yr payback
$1,830,000 Sustainability investment to keep pace with inflation
$6,430,000 Sub Total
$26,930,000 Total for these six Items
$15,800,000 Total current property tax
($6,300,000) Lost revenue to RFA
($4,400,000) EMS levy lost to RFA
$5,100,000 Remaining Property Tax
1,830,000) Gap to fund these six items
Summary
o Do fewer things — but do them well
o Get out of the hole
o Provide services the public wants
o Be real about real costs
o Create a sustainable funding model
o Levy every five to six years
Decisions
zozs BuoGET
Increase Accuracy /Cut Costs/Increase R—e
1
111116JoInthe RFA ��— eorrow/nra n.uy —� contractwnntne RFA
�
1
Ke" none, Sortie, eR 0t
the taws being
TWO-PART LEVY
(Golice /Sidewalks /
wUected for Fire &EMS
Emergency operarlonaJ
AND Gadin®
®
20268UDGET PAY BACK THE 2026 LOAN
SIGNIFICANTSERVICE
REDUCTIONS
1
2027 BUDGET _� CONTINUECRRICALSERVICES
BEGIN RECOVERY
Council President Olson referred to the sum of the impacts from RFA, schools, city, etc., relaying there was
some calculation, possibly in the RCW, about the maximum tax which she was sure was established based
on the reasonable price of government. She asked if the levies as proposed fall within that max tax when
added to the cost of the RFA. Mr. Bailey answered yes, but it depends on what the levies turn out to be. As
presented, it would fit within the limits set by state law. There are limits in the constitution and below that
in state law; there are two levels of limits, cities are in the primary level so it is possibility the secondary
level of limits like park districts or library districts would see an impact on how much they could levy.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 11
Packet Pg. 167
8.1.a
Cities are in the primary level and the amount can go up to the maximum level permitted for cities, given
some caveats about whether the city is part of a library or port district. The City could put together a plan
like this that would be within the limits provided by state law for cities.
Councilmember Nand relayed she has been asking since the RFA discussions began in 2023, whether it
would be possible to amortize the increase over time. For example, if the RFA plans to levy $17M, the City
could decide to temporarily reduce property owners' tax burden from the City by $8.5M this year and
slowly ramp it up to the full impact within 5-10 years. Mayor Rosen responded other cities have asked the
RFA if they could do that to ease the pain; he recalled one city had a 2-year step. Councilmember Nand
said her question was not related to the RFA reducing the tax burden, but the City temporarily decreasing
the amount of the levy and increasing it to the full amount within 5 years. Mr. Bailey relayed his
understanding that lowering the levy was a discretionary decision of the council (he cautioned that should
be verified). Councilmember Nand commented that might be a way to sell annexation to the RFA to
taxpayers, acknowledging no RFA annexation votes have failed in Snohomish County. Mr. Bailey agreed
they tend to be successful.
Councilmember Nand said amortizing the increase over a few years would recognize the impact to
taxpayers and allow them to incorporate it into their household expenses over time. Mr. Bailey recalled
when Mountlake Terrace proposed annexing into the RFA, the proposition by the council was to lower the
city levy to help make up the difference. If that is incorporated into the ballot measure, the City would be
obligated to live with that and the council would have the discretion to manage the levy up to the permitted
limit. Councilmember Nand commented if the current council or future councils did not follow through,
voters could always hold them accountable at the ballot box. Mr. Bailey pointed out once a levy is set,
future limits are informed by past levies.
Councilmember Chen pointed out in the current situation, the City is $20M short. If one assumed the
citizens vote to join the RFA, the RFA will charge residents directly which will free up approximately $6M
in General Fund dollars. If the City refunds the levy amount, that will require going out to residents for a
levy in the amount that was refunded so the net impact to residents is the same. Marketing is another
consideration, which way would be more favorable to residents' decision making. Either way, the City will
have to go out to the residents, either keep their $6M and ask for $6M less or refund $6M and ask for a levy
for $6M to maintain the same level of service.
Councilmember Paine commented it would be a two-part levy but the gap funding would be based on
whatever decision the council makes about keeping none, some or all. She recalled levies need to be specific
about the projects that would be funded via the levy such as capital facilities, sidewalks, etc. Mr. Bailey
answered there are a couple different kinds of levies. The ones that require specificity are capital levies
where the request is an increase in property tax to fund development of certain projects.
Councilmember Paine asked if that could include capital facilities, sidewalks, and an emergency operations
center. Mr. Bailey answered operations is a different kind of levy, a levy lid lift; taking the generic property
tax and saying due to the arbitrary 1% limit, it pushes the levy rate down and limits how much the City can
levy based on levy rate. Because the City's levy rate has been continually pushed down because the assessed
value has increased faster than the amount the City can collect, the solution to that is the levy rate. Having
the levy rate pushed down creates more headroom to raise it via a vote of the people, a general property tax
lid lift which can be for any governmental purpose and the ballot description can be fairly generic. He
recommended getting the advice of the city attorney regarding ballot measure language, etc. A general
property tax lid lift can be for any governmental purpose including capital and operations.
Ms. Peterson cautioned about being consistent with language, for example when talking about the potential
change to the future levy, using the word refund implies a refund of money back to taxpayers which is not
accurate, it is actually a reduction in the future levy amount. She observed lowering a levy is a discretionary
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 12
Packet Pg. 168
8.1.a
decision by council, but raising the level is not. Mr. Bailey agreed. To Councilmember Nand's suggestion
to pace the amount over five years, the amount could be reduced without any input from the public, but if
the intent is to return to the previous level, that would imply a vote of the people. Mr. Bailey agreed.
Councilmember Tibbott asked if Ms. Peterson was referring to banked capacity. Ms. Peterson said she was
not. Councilmember Tibbott commented if the levy amount were reduced by half, that would bank 50%.
Ms. Peterson explained banked capacity is related to the 1 % incremental option that the council can approve
annually. Mr. Bailey said banked capacity is traditionally a function of not increasing property tax by the
allowed 1%, but he was uncertain whether banked capacity was created by voluntarily lowering the levy to
reduce the impact on taxpayers. Councilmember Tibbott relayed his understanding that that was banked
capacity. Mr. Bailey said it would be important to be clear about that before proceeding.
Councilmember Tibbott said this question is related to how the City got to where it is and the reality of how
cities have to budget. The City experienced the impacts of inflation in 2022-2023 which severely affected
the deficits in 2024 and beyond. The City is reacting to things that happened earlier and because of the way
the City budgets once a year, budget decisions are based on the present, not the future. He suggested when
explaining this to the constituency, also explaining the City is making up for circumstances in previous
years that the City has no or limited control over. He asked how that reality factors into what is being
presented. Mr. Bailey answered that is why so many jurisdictions are dealing with same problem. To remain
competitive in a very competitive labor market, the City had to respond to inflationary pressures with
compensation. That is a big part of the dynamic that everybody has struggled with. At the same time
counties, cities and other governments got federal money to deal with pandemic impacts which clouded the
inflationary challenge. For example, Madison, Wisconsin, is having the exact same conversation that
Edmonds is having, a 22% increase in costs due to inflation. People think of inflation as prices going up 2-
3%; over the past 2%2 years, prices have gone up 22% and that happened in an environment where cities
have to compete for talent to serve citizens. That is why the arbitrary 1 % property tax increase is so out of
step; it is not unique to Washington, but it is not the case across country. Many budgets he reviews across
the country are proud they have not increased the levy rate. He envisioned what property taxes would be if
the levy rate was not the same as it was five years ago; the City would not be having financial problems.
That is the environment in a lot of other cities across the country. Cities and counties in Washington are
struggling with a 1% limit in the context of a 22% inflationary increase.
Mr. Bailey continued, at the same time, decisions were made along the way that made it worse and made
in an environment without good information. In terms of looking forward, there was some discussion about
a long term financial strategy that the council would be responsible for, that is part of the recommended
financial policies; how to make decisions today that do not push off facility upkeep and other needs into
future so in 5-10 years the council can be responsible for their needs and not have to deal with past unmet
needs. That is a common scenario in cities; difficult and often expensive challenges get pushed forward
which also contributes to the situation the City finds itself in. The long term financial strategy is intended
to say not only are we thinking about the financial future, but we're thinking about how to set up a long
term, structurally balanced financial plan that addresses the needs of the community and recognizes the
need for a periodic levy lid lift. If the City is limited to 1 % property tax growth every year in the context of
recent inflationary amounts, the levy lid needs to be periodically reset. Determining what serves the
community best is the hard part.
Mayor Rosen explained this process is asking what does the future look like, what does that cost and being
realistic. Part of how the City got here in terms of unmet needs is not being honest with consumers about
the reality of what things cost. For example, competition for staff requires being externally competitive and
internally equitable. He hoped today's efforts will lead to focusing on where we're going, having metrics
that make sense, focusing on the right things and a vision for future. The cost of government is so behind
that the City cannot just say let's increase it to what it should have been. With regard to banked capacity,
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 13
Packet Pg. 169
8.1.a
he recalled when the council used 3-4 years of banked capacity, the net was $700,000. Councilmember
Paine commented that would not solve the City's problems.
Councilmember Tibbott commented as Mayor Rosen and Mr. Bailey were talking, he pictured a rubber
band. It was stretched and stretched and moving into 2023 and 2024, instead of finding ways to bring things
back to equal, the rubber band was stretched even more. The City is at point where it needs additional
revenue to begin backing down to some equilibrium. What it costs to maintain capital assets, fund essential
services, etc. is part of having an honest discussion and easing things back to equilibrium. How the City
does that over time is what this discussion is about. He was unsure how stretched the rubber band was, but
he envisioned it was pretty tight; he did not want to let go of the end of the rubber band because that's ugly.
Part of the council's discussion is how to ease things back to an equilibrium.
Councilmember Dotsch asked about the pros and cons of other funding sources such as an transportation
benefit district (TBD) for sidewalks. Mr. Bailey responded early on in the discussion this year, Mayor
Rosen inquired about other revenue options; unfortunately cities are relatively limited with regard to what
they can do from a revenue standpoint in the state law structure. MRSC has a very good revenue guide for
cities, but the options are limited. A TBD is one option; it was his understanding the City has a TBD and
recently increased the amount. The flexibility for revenue options are focused on the business community
such as a business licensing structure and there are many opportunities to evolve that structure. For example,
Redmond has per employee amount because it did not like a B&O tax which Everett has. Places the City
has more flexibility are focused on business rather than property owners. There are a few minor focused
sales tax options for cities. Fees and charges are a policy decision, recouping a certain amount. In PBB, the
council will see resources that programs collect to support the program and the net subsidy for any given
program. Fees and charges are an option, but development fees can only recoup costs.
Councilmember Nand asked if there is "dirt" around the City that the City does not have the capacity to
serve them from a utilities standpoint, can the City petition the county, state or federal government to create
a multijurisdictional district that incorporates that "dirt" but not through the City apparatus. Mr. Bailey
answered there are different kinds of districts; it has to be something that state law allows. For example,
Edmonds created a Public Facilities District. Another example is Parks and Recreation Districts. There are
options the City could pursue; the boundary could be the same as the City's boundaries or beyond the City's
boundaries.
Mayor Rosen recommended the council continue the conversation about some, none or all as that will
impact development of the budget. He will be seeking input from the council regarding how they are
leaning, if there is consensus or if the council wants to discuss it further.
Councilmember Chen said whatever decision the council makes, the impact is the same. His personal
preference would be to keep the $6M no matter the outcome of the RFA decision and go from there.
Councilmember Paine said she was glad the council was having this conversations as it has been on her
mind for the last 6 months, how to stagger this and how it will be communicated to the broader community.
It is super important that everyone understand it is not just one ask of the community, there will have to be
two big asks and big decisions have to be made. Joining the RFA or not is a big decision and there are other
decisions to be made such as a separate levy. Whatever is not funded or if the council or voters decide not
join the RFA, all those funds get put into the second levy. There are great tools to inform community and
she gave a shout out to Darrol Haug for the information he shared with her. She concluded there will be a
major reset internally as well as in the community.
Councilmember Tibbott commented as Councilmember Paine mentioned, this will be a reset. His
illustration of rubber band, it has been artificially stretch very tight, and retaining the $6M will allow the
City to ease back some of that artificial pressure that has been experienced. Part of the key of retaining that
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 14
Packet Pg. 170
8.1.a
is being more fiscally responsible with the City's spending which is why PBB is so important. He concluded
the reset and PBB need to function together. He supported retaining the full levy amount.
Councilmember Eck expressed support for retaining the full levy amount which she noted seemed
proactive. She agreed with Councilmember Tibbott about responsible spending and keeping things upfront
rather than being reactive. She acknowledged the importance of communication and full transparency about
why the council is making this decision. She summarized retaining the full levy amount seemed like less
moving around.
Councilmember Dotsch acknowledged the City spent beyond its means for a period of time due to various
factors, but was not the only city that dd that. She supported transparency in the budget and priorities and
bringing that to the public so they see and feel the value because if the public doesn't, that is a disconnect.
The way this is set up as a cohesive package is important because the citizens are the council's partners and
the council needs to communicate with them. The City tightening its belt is also important. She expressed
appreciation for this holistic package and messaging.
Council President Olson commented she has also been thinking about this for a long time and sometimes
in the same day, she comes down on different sides of this question. She liked the clarity and simplicity of
handling everything completely separate, the decision on fire/EMS services and the City's finances. As
another councilmember mentioned about being proactive, the City is far out over its skis. The council
declared a fiscal emergency so the community is aware of the bad position the City is in and to the extend
the RFA question might not come at the same time as the levy question, that might be enough buffer to
keep Councilmember Tibbott's analogy of a rubber band from snapping, to provide a little relief while
awaiting the other decision. In the end, after a lot of back and forth, she was also supportive of retaining
the levy level along with that decision.
Councilmember Chen commented in terms of transparency, like Councilmember Dotsch pointed out, the
citizens fund City government. They provide the money and the council is the decision makers. It is
important to use the money efficiently and if mistakes were made in the past, as the ones who fund the City,
the citizens deserve to know. With regard to transparency, his personal preference is to lay it out and avoid
making the same mistakes again. There is no shame, no finger pointing, but the council needs to be
transparent.
Mr. Bailey suggested thinking about what things the City could stop doing which will be part of this
afternoon's discussion. What are ways the City can fundamentally change something it is doing or scale it
back so significantly that it will impact the budget. From what he has heard Mayor Rosen say, that is hard
to come up with. The community has benefited from things the City has included in the budget,
notwithstanding that the City now finds itself in fiscal difficulty. One of the key takeaways from the Blue
Ribbon Panel's work was not to conflict the issues, don't mash together fire/EMS with fiscal sustainability.
The council can choose to keep some, none or all, but one is a decision about how to best provide fire/EMS
and the other is how to provide for the community's needs via a solid financial plan. He also recommended
thinking about the timing of the questions to the public; what the council needs to know before taking next
steps and how that informs those next steps. As the council thinks through the upcoming biennial budget
and financial plan, timing and what informs what will be an important aspect.
Council President Olson said the council has heard from Darrol Haug as well as Mr. Bailey not to conflate
the issues, but there is no way not to conflate the actions if they are all on the one RFA ballot. The narrative
regarding the pros could make it clear what's going on and the intent. She asked Mr. Bailey if he would
choose not to put both on the same ballot. Mr. Bailey clarified he was not saying that, he was speaking to
clarity around the issues, not the structure and being very clear there are two issues, 1) how best to provide
fire/EMS to the community, and 2) how to build a financial plan for the future to best serve the community.
He acknowledged there is inner connectiveness, but from his perspective it is important to be clear there
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 15
Packet Pg. 171
8.1.a
are two separate issues. The issues are connected and resources will be freed up which the council could
chose to leverage. Another point that Mr. Haug makes is joining the RFA puts additional tax burden on the
community. That needs to be acknowledged and factored into the decision making framework.
Councilmember Dotsch commented if the council keeps the money, the issues are conflated. Mr. Bailey
agreed that is the hard part, how to keep the issues separate which the Blue Ribbon Panel also struggled
with. While there is an intention to keep them separate, there is inner connectiveness that ends up occurring
and forces a decision about that aspect. The issue is giving it back with one hand and asking for it with the
other hand and whether that is really the best alternative.
Ms. Peterson said she has begun organizing future discussions such as a study session and a public hearing
on this topic. The challenge is this is somewhat of a hypothetical decision based on the possibility of two
future decisions that still need to be made; will council choose to put this subject on the ballot and will the
voters approve it. If council never puts this on the ballot, which is a decision the council will make in the
future, then it is no longer relevant. If the voters choose not to join the RFA, this decision is no longer
relevant, but the relevance of this hypothetical decision is in the biennial budget and planning for 2026.
Councilmember Paine agreed there is a tautology, the council is always talking about the community's tax
dollars in one way or another. As Mr. Bailey said, there are very few other options to generate revenue. She
recalled a suggestion to require film permits, but that would generate a limited amount. Joining the RFA
and a levy are connected at a high level, but the council needs to make distinct decisions. This requires full
transparency to the community so there are no surprises. People get angry when there are surprises; there
will be surprises every step of the way, but they will be manageable.
Councilmember Nand recalled when discussions regarding RFA annexation first began under the previous
administration, once the council formally requested annexation, that unlocked the fire commission's ability
to devote resources to planning town halls in Edmonds that the council could participate in to explain to
voters how they would be impacted. She asked if the administration is discussing plans for town halls with
the RFA. Mayor Rosen answered there are conversations occurring regarding what that might look like and
at the same time, as directed by council, exploring contracting and annexation. The RFA will be very active
and assessable to the community to answer questions and help them understand. Councilmember Nand
looked forward to scheduling actual town halls and asked about the roles for council and the administration,
whether they would participate in those town halls or would it only be fire commission and fire personnel.
Mayor Rosen anticipated everyone will want to be available to the public, holding town halls, visiting
community organizations, etc.
Councilmember Eck commented communicating to the public about retaining the full amount seems like a
better and clearer message versus what could potentially be a mixed message if it is not retained and then
the council asks for it. There is an opportunity to package it in a realistic way. The council has a duty to be
responsible and make more responsible decision in the future; being responsible also means being straight
and talking about repercussions about the impacts of doing one thing or another, treating the public like the
adults they are, and being realistic.
Mayor Rosen continued his presentation:
• Form Follows Function
o Organizational Chart in Three Dimensions
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 16
Packet Pg. 172
8.1.a
Skill
Project Value
, 0 oR ,
o Priority Based Organizational Structure
Police
Streets and
Sidewalks
Water
J
Emergency
Operations
Economic
Development
Intergovernment
Affairs
Planning
Economic
Dvelopment
Public
Engagement
Public Records
Communication
s
City Clerk
Mayor
City Council
Municipal Court
Boards and
Commissions
Mayor Rosen used the analogy of a guy walking into a rock quarry who sees four people doing the same
job. The first person says making little rocks out of big rocks, the second person says he is cutting stone,
the third person says a day's work for a day's pay, and the fourth person says he's building a cathedral.
That is how he would like to think about what the City does; not the skill or function, but the value added
in categories like the above, ensuring the public is safe and assets are protected.
Councilmember Tibbott asked about the finance department in the above model. Mayor Rosen answered it
would be under Protect Our Assets. He explained the chart was conceptual and intended to provide
examples.
Councilmember Eck observed the Priority Based Organizational Structure was not holistic, just a first stab.
Mayor Rosen explained this was his first effort at making his thinking visual. He has already made some
changes such as it made no sense for the finance director to supervise the city clerk and IT. Regardless of
how the structure ends up, he hoped to change the thinking to priorities and value based.
Councilmember Paine commented some of the structure she had observed over 30 years is the budget also
creates silos, siloing effects that are hard to break through. Budgeting is very siloing and if that is not
respected and the intention honored and included strategically in the budget, the same siloing will result.
Mayor Rosen said that same conversation has been happening internally; for everything the City does, who
touches it and allocating appropriately. Councilmember Paine said it was like Mr. Bailey said, being able
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 17
Packet Pg. 173
8.1.a
to see strategically where it show up. A third dimension is how to bring in organization with a much more
holistic look.
Council President Olson thanked Mayor Rosen for the thought behind the chart, commenting she was
excited about it. Organizational structure like this, which is related to how the City budgets, addresses the
siloing that tends to happen a little better more than the former org chart. She summarized it was a good
place to start.
Councilmember Dotsch commented when she saw the results of the original survey and in conversations
with the public regarding the comprehensive plan, what stuck out is people value what Edmonds is. Part of
the process is the City's identity, what Edmonds is and incorporating that as well as enhancing and
improving it. A lot of cities want what Edmonds has; it's important to identify what makes people want to
be here.
Mr. Bailey said he has worked with cities who do not have the prospects that Edmonds has; Edmonds is a
vital, attractive community with a core strength once the tension in the rubber band is addressed. Having
an optimistic perspective is a fundamental mind shift for a lot of people who look at budgets to see what
can be cut instead of what is being funded and to think about what the City is building so it continues to be
an optimistic view rather than a negative view which so often permeates budget conversations. He
encouraged everyone to think about what is being built rather than what is being cut.
Councilmember Eck added the council has a duty to walk and chew gum, to keep the City running in the
best way possible and be responsible about it, to plan for and dream about the future and the next generation.
Mr. Bailey pointed out the comprehensive plan also helps think about that.
Mayor Rosen commented the council and mayor must work in partnership for the City. Neither can resolve
our challenges — or realize our City's potential — without the other. He relayed his commitment to that
partnership, "I commit to working proactively with you, our community and our staff to realize Edmonds'
potential."
The retreat recessed for lunch at 11:15 am and reconvened at 11:50 am.
Mr. Bailey asked the council's thoughts about the conversation so far.
Councilmember Chen expressed appreciation for the conversation this morning, in particular the mayor
allowing the council to look into his brain. This morning's conversation was focused on revenue generation.
He was hoping there would be time to think about costs and streamlining, noting he did not want to use the
word reduction.
Prioritizing Policy Goals for the Budget
Mr. Bailey reviewed:
• Council Budget Policy Goals
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 18
Packet Pg. 174
8.1.a
Mr. Bailey advised this section is related to strategic priorities; what things do you hold in high esteem in
terms of the City's role in the community, things that are essential for the City to provide and do as a priority
focus. One of challenges that he has heard expressed is these things are so high level that they tend to lack
substance. The challenge is stay at the strategic high level priority conversation, but understand what that
means when it's translated into actions that the City will take to remain consistent with that high level policy
guidance. There is tension between the frustration that these are so high level that they do not have as much
substance as there could be versus getting beyond strategic policy priorities and into actions, tasks, projects,
or a to-do list. The intent is not a to-do list, but to inform the to-do list.
Ms. Peterson distributed Resolution 1526, the council's 2024 budget priorities, adopted in July 2023. Mr.
Bailey explained the resolution reflects the balance and tension between being too specific and too vague.
He will ask the council to provide their three things at a policy level and then drill into those a bit.
Mr. Bailey provided details regarding Everett which was provided as an example in the above. When he
worked for the City of Everett in the late 1990s, downtown Everett was not a great place to raise a family
for a variety of reasons, yet there was a prominent developer and local business leader who wanted to
develop living space in the downtown corridor, but couldn't do it in good conscience and could not convince
financial partners to fund it for various reasons. Everett agreed it was not serving the community well and
the sense of safety in downtown Everett needed to be significantly better. A sense of safety is one thing;
people feel safe when they believe they can be safe. That strategic policy direction mobilized across the
city in a variety of ways; for example the transit center is no longer in downtown Everett; that was part of
the impetus, move the transit center. Coincidentally it is now part of the Sound Transit system.
Improvements to parks and recreation, roads, the library, etc. were all informed by this strategic direction
to improve the sense of safety in the core. Since then a great deal of development has occurred in downtown
Everett. It took a while, the policy direction was strategic in nature, but it activated a great deal of activity
on the part of the city. There are other examples where similar things happened such as in Wenatchee. There
is a connection between the work being done on the comprehensive plan; one should inform the other. He
has been asked why not just use the goals in the comprehensive plan, and his answer is there are too many.
Mr. Bailey explained in the upcoming exercise, councilmembers will be asked to identify three strategic
areas of City responsibilities that they want to see incorporated into the upcoming budget work. He
emphasized this is intended to be aspirational. There will also be an exercise to identify what things the
City should do less of. One of the clear messages from the Blue Ribbon Panel was the City needs more
resources, but also needs to exercise fiscal restraint so the community feels the City has done what it can to
provide services as efficiently as possible and to scale back where possible.
Councilmember Nand commented when it comes to pulling back on areas of service, could the City explore
not cutting services or FTEs, but ways to lower the cost of the service such as voluntary retirement for
senior staff and hiring more junior staff at a lower salary. Mr. Bailey agreed there are opportunities for that.
It is incumbent on cities to be as efficient as they can be; frankly, cities struggle with that. Some of the
thinking related to limiting the property tax structure was the way to force government to be efficient was
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 19
Packet Pg. 175
8.1.a
to "step on the air hose," starve them for money and they will have to become more efficient. It is a struggle
for government to continually find efficiencies, it is not inherent in the nature of the work, there is not a
bottom line like in a private business so it is incumbent on cities to push themselves to become more
efficient and if not, they become bloated and lose public trust. There are also ways of seeking efficiency
that would not be in the City's best interest such as, to paraphrase Councilmember Nand's suggestion, bring
in a less capable workforce and pay them less.
Mr. Bailey continued, another example is cutting training which dumbs down the workforce. The City
wants as few people it takes to do the job and have them trained as well as possible and as efficiently as
possible to do the job well so you need fewer employees. It is important to be as efficient as possible to
maintain the community's trust and provide as much service as possible with the resources available.
Finding ways to do that is part of everyone's responsibility. One of the challenges to efficiency is people
not working together as collaboratively as they should which results in duplication of efforts, inefficient
systems, etc. The mayor's thinking around organizational structure is part of that and it is incumbent on the
City to do that as best as possible especially if the intent to have the community provide more resources to
allow the City to continue what it's doing. How the City goes about that is a challenge. With regard to early
retirement, the City's retirement system is run by the state and there are limited ways to incentivize
retirement and offering early retirement is typically fairly expensive at the front end.
Council President Olson commented a lot of the conversations and thinking in recent years and months has
been about how to do whatever the City is doing within same framework cheaper or more efficiently. She
referred to the Edmonds School District (ESD) example of one stadium that serves four schools; that is the
mental shift the City needs to make. In terms of the community conversation, there have been conversations
occurring in South Snohomish County, but it takes some runway to put those in place, but that is the future.
For example the diversity commission has been discussing Edmonds, Lynnwood and Mountlake Terrace
having combined south county ethnic celebrations so each city only pays a fraction of the cost or working
with private partners or nonprofits to put on the celebrations. That is the shift the City needs to make
mentally so in the long run taxpayers have a more reasonable tax bill, but it will take time to get those things
in place. Mr. Bailey agreed it takes time and sometimes requires hard decisions. He recalled when Booth
Gardner was the first county executive for Pierce County, he made some really hard decisions that informed
subsequent decisions. For example if a service area can be accommodated another way but the city makes
it easy by providing it, maybe another provider comes forward. Things don't necessarily present themselves
as an opportunity, sometimes they have to be derived as a result of something else.
Mr. Bailey continued it is important to deliver as much value as possible for the resources the City is
entrusted with. The council has to be able to look at each other and their constituents and be able to say
they are doing the best they can and be prepared to cite examples. The council wants to be proud of the
work product at the end of the day. In his peer review work, he reads 10-15 budget messages/week and they
set the tone. Either the budget message is proud of the work product or apologizing for it. He would rather
be part of a team that is proud of their work product and describes it, tells the story, rather than budget
messages that go into the minutia. The survey is an excellent way to start the budget conversation. Many
cities who do biennial budgets, do a survey every two years so the feedback informs the budget process. In
Redmond, the budget process starts with a survey, budget calendar and then this kind of conversation.
Councilmembers were given three sticky notes and Mr. Bailey asked them to provide three
headlines/strategic priority areas. Mr. Bailey read the priority areas identified by councilmembers and
councilmembers commented:
➢ Balanced equitable investment / economic development equitable across the city
➢ People can get around town safely
❖ Councilmember Tibbott said he also had connection to transit in mind.
➢ Equity in services
➢ Direct human services and homelessness response
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 20
Packet Pg. 176
8.1.a
➢ Human and public services provided Edmonds specific support for our own residents and the need
through programs, grants and collaboration
❖ Councilmember Paine explained her intent was direct public services to the community
➢ Safety (fire, police, perception of safety, graffiti, petty crime) + public safety, community policing,
keeping people housed
➢ Housing
➢ Climate action/environment, provide evidence specific responses to support resiliency and
adaptation to climate crisis
➢ Safe and welcoming
➢ Safe, welcoming and inclusive
❖ Councilmember Eck said welcoming means everyone is valued regardless of where they live
or who they are.
➢ Infrastructure that works for all
➢ Edmonds is known for great places to gather, parks, pubs and celebrations
➢ Park acquisition and open space/mature trees retention
➢ Community policy efforts
❖ Mr. Bailey asked if this could be listed under safety. Councilmember Nand said it was a
component of safety, but was more related to things like Coffee with a Cop, etc. Mr. Bailey
suggested community policing as a subcategory of safety.
➢ Livability and collaboration with and protecting our natural resources, business growth and
opportunities
❖ Councilmember Dotsch said Edmonds businesses support the livability and the blend makes
Edmonds desirable.
❖ Councilmember Tibbott said livability also captures his thoughts about gathering places.
❖ Councilmember Dotsch also wanted to include businesses. One of the resources Edmonds has
is current and future businesses. That is something Edmonds has that not all cities have.
Businesses also generate revenue.
➢ Climate — build and preserve green spaces throughout the city, tree planting, tree protection, marsh
estuary restoration, etc. and plan for climate change
➢ Neighborhood focus — provide support guided by the neighborhood for transportation strategies,
economic development expansion and multimodal transportation
➢ Vibrance — infrastructure, activity, third places for each neighborhood, people thriving in
affordability, also dealing with drugs and homelessness
➢ Natural beauty and environmental health
❖ Councilmember Dotsch said the livability of Edmonds includes its location within the natural
environment.
❖ Council President Olson agreed green spaces in the neighborhoods is one of the attraction of
Edmonds.
❖ Councilmember Nand said she was reminded of the 2021 heat dome that killed hundreds of
people in Washington State. Shade equity is a huge thing; people are dying on unshaded
pavement.
➢ Public safety so you feel safe where you live, shop and work
➢ Collaborative accountability and metric based budgets and policies, measure and track what we do
publicly
Council President Olson recommended including collaboration with accountability to recognize Edmonds'
culture of very involved residents.
Councilmember Eck said one of her priorities was human services and homelessness; she felt strongly that
human services includes keeping people housed who may be on a path toward homelessness including
senior citizens living in single family homes. Keeping them in their homes also keeps them safe.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 21
Packet Pg. 177
8.1.a
The above priorities identified by councilmembers were consolidated into the following:
➢ Welcoming
➢ Investment (equitable)
➢ Safe transportation (connectivity)
➢ Equity (inclusive)
➢ Human Services/homelessness
➢ Public Services (keeping people housed)
➢ Safety (public safety)/Community policing
➢ Climate action/environment
➢ Natural Assets/Resources
➢ Livability (business/neighborhoods)
Mr. Bailey described options for proceeding, 1) discuss the priorities and add clarity, or 2) vote on the
priorities as listed. As some discussion about the priorities had already occurred, he was leaning toward
having councilmembers vote. He asked if councilmembers wanted to discuss the topics further.
Councilmember Nand suggested there could be more consolidation such as combining natural assets with
climate action/environment. Mr. Bailey cautioned against mashing things together and losing what they
mean. At the same time, to the extent there is overlap, consolidation would be appropriate. Councilmember
Nand suggested combining natural assets which was specifically park land, open space and mature trees
with climate action and environment.
Councilmember Tibbott commented when he said connectivity, he meant great gathering spaces which falls
under welcoming but parks are an important place to connect. He recalled when his children were small his
family connected with a lot of other people at parks. Councilmember Nand suggested changing natural
assets to parks.
Council President Olson said livability is also part of what Councilmember Tibbott was saying, each
neighborhood having third places and parks.
Councilmember Eck commented it also relates to equitable investment because it relates to having parks in
all neighborhoods.
Councilmember Paine said climate action is more about sustainability for the 3-7 year plan. Although they
are all important together, climate action is finding ways to build resilience which is related to public safety
and emergency response, planning for extreme weather events and sea level rise. Climate action includes
the natural environment but it is bigger than that and includes buildings and a lot of other things. Mr. Bailey
suggested separating climate action from natural assets, but wondered where would environment fall.
Councilmember Nand saw environment as an umbrella that climate action and parks and natural assets go
under. Councilmember Paine said climate action would also go under public safety and public services due
to extreme weather events that have occurred in the last 5 years. It will take time to build out those
investments, investments that need to be equitably distributed across the city.
Councilmember Tibbott said climate action is also related to equitable investment. Mr. Bailey suggested
environment as a heading with things like climate action and preservation of natural resources as sub -topics.
Councilmember Dotsch said natural assets are broader than parks, there are also watersheds, streams, the
shoreline, etc. Mr. Bailey said that also falls under the heading of collaboration; in his experience
watersheds, parks, and other natural assets are under various parts of government; the City wants to look at
them holistically. Councilmember Dotsch said it also falls under infrastructure. Ms. Feser suggested natural
resources.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 22
Packet Pg. 178
8.1.a
Councilmember Paine referred to the priority related to human services, public services, and homelessness,
commenting this morning's exercise will shift some of the burden to the community through gaps in
providing services or putting the financial burden onto the community. Human services and other public
services such as police, fire and efforts to keep people in their homes to prevent homelessness, providing
those direct services to the community, including courts, requires a lot of dialogue and work in these
seemingly disparate things that all work together. In her mind public services, human services, preventing
homelessness and focusing on humans could be addressed at a programmatic level.
Councilmember Tibbott pointed out public services also includes police, fire, courts, etc. Councilmember
Paine said public service falls under public safety. Mr. Bailey agreed there was a connection; the goal was
to provide as clear a signal as possible to the administration in terms of what the council hopes to see
emphasized in their recommend budget.
Councilmember Nand said equity and inclusion also fall under the umbrella of human services,
homelessness and public services. During the 2021 heat dome, she and her friends were distributing water,
fans, etc., and because there was no apparatus on the government side to address that need, she helped a
man having heat stroke at a gas station. In addition, because there was no cooling tent or safe place for
people without AC or a roof over their head to go, Safeway and TJ Maxx were functioning as cooling
centers. It is not equitable for retailers, business and churches to take on that extra expense and burden to
provide vital human services that are not provided by government. In other areas, there is less burden on
the nonprofit or business community to ensure people aren't dying.
Councilmember Eck sensed a general discomfort with putting human services under public safety. As
someone who has worked in the field, it really is about safety for everyone in the community regardless of
neighborhood. She felt strongly it was about keeping people safe. Mr. Bailey said certain categories better
reflect Councilmember Eck's sentiment that human services is one area, public service and keeping people
housed is part of that and public safety is a third area of emphasis. Councilmember Eck viewed safety as
the umbrella and human services, homelessness, and keeping people housed within that. Mr. Bailey said
one of the difficulties with combining everything together is it does not result in guidance to the
administration. Councilmember Eck responded that was subjective; that is one definition and another is that
it is all about safety.
Council President Olson said safety is one of the big umbrellas. Another is livability which includes the
natural environment as a component, maybe not in the same way as climate action as a possibility but the
livability of having green space, trees, open spaces, third spaces, a business community to support the
population that lives there.
Mr. Bailey summarized two of the strategic priorities, inclusive of sub -context, were safety and livability.
Councilmember Dotsch suggested adding economic resiliency.
Councilmember Paine said it's fair to add that, it is not identified in the community survey but is certainly
an essential piece. The city has been doing well with diverse economic development, but should always be
looking forward.
Council President Olson asked if that fit under accountability. Mr. Bailey suggested broadening
accountability.
Council President Olson said possibly climate falls under accountability/resiliency. Mr. Bailey agreed there
is a great deal of inter-connectiveness. It's hard to tease apart some of the items, but providing clear
direction requires clarity.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 23
Packet Pg. 179
8.1.a
Councilmember Nand observed the resolution with 2024 priorities had 6 bullet points. She asked how many
priorities were intended for 2025. Council President Olson pointed out the city has less money this year.
Mr. Bailey answered six were as many as he would ever recommend and that was a lot. He recalled working
with a community that had over 30 priorities which is completely unhelpful. The right number is another
art form, but in his experience, six was a lot.
Councilmember Dotsch commented sidewalks is part of safety and safe passage which was identified in
the survey. Mr. Bailey said transportation and connectivity are an essential role of government.
Council President Olson said that also segways into livability, a livable community or neighborhood means
you can easily get everywhere you want to go.
Councilmember Eck suggested combining human services and safety. Mr. Bailey said he heard different
opinions about that. He could see the connection as well as interest in creating a distinction. In the past
there has been concern that public safety and human services were not part of the same expression of
government.
Councilmember Nand suggested community policing bridges human services and safety because if
community policing prevents bad outcomes that harm the public, that increases public safety and human
services is a partner in that. Mr. Bailey asked if there were any concerns about human services as a subset
of public safety. He suggested putting human services as a subset of safety and striking human services.
Councilmember Paine preferred to have public services, homelessness, keeping people housed, and
community policing under the safety. Under that are police response, court and fire/EMS. Human services
and prevention are part of public safety. The umbrella is safety with human services, public services and
the classic services such as fire/EMS and police. She suggested also adding disaster management.
Councilmember Chen said although human services was interrelated, it should be a standalone category.
For example, the $200,000 homeless fund, if that was combined and put under public safety, those funds
could easily go into the General Fund to fund police or fire services. If it is a standalone alone category, it
would be budgeted differently. Councilmember Nand agreed.
Councilmember Eck did not agree, commenting that was a very micro example. Funding public safety in
Edmonds is all under the same umbrella. It is not just people living on the street who benefit from human
services, it is keeping people housed, keeping their lights on, keeping them connected with medical care.
Councilmember Paine commented it is also domestic violence response and responding when people lose
their homes to fire.
Council President Olson said if there wasn't consensus maybe they should be separated, but she agreed
with Councilmember Eck that safety is holistic and there are many elements to it. In the budget process the
council will have to determine how much to spend on each, especially with limited resources, but they all
feed into each other and are all important. Mr. Bailey agreed that was the challenge. He pointed out this
conversation also informs the organizational discussion that Mayor Rosen was having earlier; thinking
about what the City does, who the City serves and how the City is organized to provide services in the best
way possible.
Mr. Passey said he has often heard the purpose of government distilled into three rubrics: health, safety and
welfare. All the priorities the council identified fall into those broad categories.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 24
Packet Pg. 180
8.1.a
Councilmember Eck said if human services is not included under safety and the council does not identify
human services as a priority, they are basically telling the vulnerable people in community that they are not
a priority.
Councilmember Nand commented the part-time social worker was previously under the police department
and was reorganized into another department and is now under economic development. Merging those
concepts can create conflict in the type of population that is served. If it is a standalone budget item that is
treated separately, it is effective and approachable. She agreed with Councilmember Chen that those should
be distinct categories.
Councilmember Eck said that is not the new philosophy, the new philosophy is more embedded and police
are seen as community partners.
Councilmember Chen observed Councilmember Eck was trying to emphasize serving the unhoused or the
population in need, but if it is under a bigger umbrella, it might have the opposite effect. Councilmember
Eck said she would have to agree to disagree.
Councilmember Tibbott wondered if equity (inclusive) could be eliminated. Councilmember Nand said she
would link equity (inclusive) with homeless and human services
Councilmember Paine said that is absolutely important for infrastructure investment, safe transportation.
Equity is also one of the umbrella items. Livability is important for all neighborhoods although they each
have their own different flavor. Keeping equity in mind during the budget process is one of the ways to
achieve equity. Equity is related to infrastructure, investments, climate response, economic resilience, etc.,
all of that has to be done with equity in mind. The City cannot afford to ignore equity, it is demanded by
the community. Mr. Bailey pointed out equity is one of the programmatic attributes that will be part of the
rubric that the PBB effort will utilize. It is difficult to identify equity as a unique priority because it is an
element of many priorities and is being addressed by the approach being taken. There will be an equity
analysis of the various programs to the degree to which they serve under represented communities and
things of that nature from a programmatic attribute standpoint.
Councilmember Paine asked if climate action and natural resources was one grouping. Mr. Bailey the list
has been characterized as climate action includes the aspect of protecting/preserving natural resources,
parks, green spaces, etc. answered yes.
Councilmember Tibbott asked whether equity would be retained as a super umbrella. Councilmember Paine
commented the administration's budget will be created with equity in mind. Mayor Rosen agreed. Ms.
Peterson suggested equity be a whereas clause in the resolution, that it applies to everything. Mayor Rosen
commented that should be the culture through which all decisions pass and is a cultural thing. Mr. Bailey
suggested it remain on the list, but councilmembers did not need to vote for it because it will be part of the
budget.
Councilmember Chen said equity is important and easier said than done. For example the City made a
$25,000 investment in Lake Ballinger Park public access which made a tremendous difference. He thanked
Ms. Feser for her efforts related to that. Yet, the Civic Field Park cost $14.7M. Equity means equitable
investment throughout the City, but the scale and what actually happens is easier said than done.
Councilmember Tibbott commented economic resiliency seems like a super umbrella. Mr. Bailey said
economic resiliency was incorporated into accountability as a city and collaboration with the community
around economic issues.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 25
Packet Pg. 181
8.1.a
Mr. Bailey asked if safety and public services were combined or separate. Council President Olson
responded it depends on who you ask. Mr. Bailey suggested leaving them separate to the extent there is any
disagreement at this point in the discussion so councilmembers can express their opinion one way or another
during the dot exercise.
Councilmember Nand commented if safety is separate from homelessness and public services, from a
budget perspective that means there will be the least cuts possible to the police department.
Councilmember Paine suggested grouping human services and public services. She asked if investment,
safe transportation (connectivity) could be combined. There was no objection to combining them.
Mr. Bailey asked if councilmembers wanted any subtext with the priority "welcoming." Councilmember
Nand suggested it could be addressed in a whereas clause, a guiding principle.
Councilmember Eck said her intent was welcoming is accepting everyone, everyone is treated with the
same level of respect and care. Mr. Bailey suggested adding acceptance to welcoming. Mayor Rosen
recalled he has been involved in conversations where welcoming became belonging. Belonging was added
as subtext to welcoming.
Councilmember Dotsch asked if there was any vision that went along with the budget. It seems like this
exercise is somewhat visioning in terms of an overarching theme.
Councilmember Paine pointed out there is a vision statement in the comprehensive plan. Mr. Bailey asked
how the comprehensive plan characterized welcoming. Councilmember Paine responded it is inclusivity,
welcoming, acceptance, ensuring people have a sense of belonging. Mr. Bailey asked what the City would
do differently to emphasize welcoming.
Councilmember Eck said in her view, it was an overarching umbrella, equitable investment and economic
resiliency across all neighborhoods, those kinds of things make people feel welcome, accepted and that
they belong.
Councilmember Nand said something she has been pushing for since 2022 is more interpretive signs, flower
baskets, benches, trash/recycling receptacles in neighborhood business districts so they mirror the look and
feel of the historic business district downtown. For example, people know when they are in a particular
district because there's a pretty sign. Mr. Bailey relayed his understanding that there are ways to respond
to this as a priority.
Councilmember Dotsch referred to equitable investment, commenting Edmonds is an old city and she
wanted to ensure investment was more than just transportation but also buildings, etc.
Mr. Bailey commented a lot of what the council talked about earlier is informed by the Capital Facilities
Plan. Another topic for the council to consider is rethinking how the City addresses capital facilities needs
in developing a capital improvement strategy which is much longer term than the six year CIP. That is
connected to the comprehensive plan because the City has to provide facilities consistent with land use
plans as well as address community needs via improvements. Livability is a huge part of that.
Council President Olson pointed out one of her priorities was related to vibrance which incorporated a lot
of things such as having enough infrastructure investment so things are in good condition, safety
components of homelessness. That ended up getting included in livability, but it was also about investment
and safety. She concluded some of the priorities were broad enough to incorporate those concepts.
Councilmembers participated in an exercise where they placed dots on their top three priorities:
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 26
Packet Pg. 182
8.1.a
Priority
Votes
Welcoming (acceptance) (belonging)
0
Investment (equitable)
Safe transportation (connectivity)
3
Equity (inclusive)
0
Human Services/homelessness
Public Services (keeping eo le housed)
3
Safety (public safety)
Community policing
5
Climate action/environment
Natural Assets/Resources
4
Livability (business/neighborhoods)
3
Accountability (as a city) (collaboration)
Economic Resilient
3
Mr. Bailey summarized the list of priorities and votes each received:
➢ Safety — 5
➢ Environment — 4
➢ Investment — 3
➢ Public/Human Services — 3
➢ Livability — 3
➢ Economic Resiliency — 3
Mr. Bailey explained based on the conversation, these are fairly broad categories. This priority list will
serve a couple different purposes, 1), inform the development of the budget that will be presented to the
council in October; the two teams (internal staff team and the citizen team) evaluating budget proposals
using PBB approach will evaluate how well programs line up with these priorities, and 2) the mayor and
staff will use these priorities when balancing the interests expressed by staff in their budget requests. He
asked for council reactions to the prioritization.
Councilmember Nand asked when equitable invest is distilled down to investment, is that capital
investments or facilities and how will that translate to the budget. Mr. Bailey answered it's the council's
budget, ideally the answer would come from within. Traditionally the answer would be yes, it would be
represented by the places the City chose to invest, and typically investing mean capital investments. Equity
permeates everything so it would be done in a way that is respectful of the various needs that exist within
the City.
Councilmember Chen asked if was fair to say that this list is the council's priorities and the public survey
is the public's priorities. Mr. Bailey said one could say it that way, typically what happens in a budget
process that incorporates a survey, the survey informs this conversation and the survey -informed
conversation results in the council's priorities. He envisioned as councilmembers were expressing their
priorities, they were taking the survey responses into account. When the citizen committee asked that same
question, what should they do with the survey information, the answer was the survey informs the council's
distillation of high priorities. At the end of the day, the budget is the council's budget and will be an
expression of the council's priorities. The survey informed this discussion, and this discussion informs the
mayor's development of a proposed budget and that proposed budget informs the council's discussion about
a final budget. Councilmember Chen observed the top priority from the citizen survey was affordable
housing and he wondered how that should be incorporated into the council's priorities.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 27
Packet Pg. 183
8.1.a
Councilmember Nand answered it could possibly be addressed by livability. Councilmember Chen
responded affordable housing is a very targeted, narrow topic; livability is a very broad statement.
Mr. Tatum said in preparing his budget, he is thinking about the survey, this list and investment. The survey
indicated affordable housing was one of the public's priorities; he will consider how to address that with
respect to investment, what does affordable housing mean in terms of livability and how is he creating
projects and requesting funding to support that. Mr. Bailey said in his experience with PBB, it's hard to
determine how something aligns, so the council's discussion is helpful. Housing affordability is a subset of
livability, that would be the dialogue in expressing a program that relates to that and helping inform a
response to those who are scoring it in the context of PBB. PBB is an art form and doesn't determine a
decision, it helps inform the conversation.
Councilmember Dotsch said housing affordability is a broad term that applies to a lot of things and
economic resiliency is a piece of that and continually putting the burden on property owners, there are a lot
of different things that go into that. Mr. Bailey commented it is unfortunate the City has such a limited
toolbox in terms of addressing community needs because at the end of the day, one of the two tools is not
very sensitive to affordability.
Council President Olson commented taxes are a part of housing affordability. More affordable zoning in
the comprehensive plan is a different tool to address affordability which is top of mind for a lot of residents.
Mr. Bailey said he was recently asked what role cities play in housing affordability. Actually providing
housing is not within the City's scope of services in Washington, but there are many things the City does
indirectly that affect housing affordability.
Councilmember Nand said if the City is relying on the market to build housing, the result is very, very
expensive housing and the tax burden is shifted onto single family homeowners. If more multi -family were
developed, then the tax burden per capita could be more bearable. Mr. Bailey commented when he was in
Everett, the city was involved in a number of partnerships with affordable housing projects that revitalized
old properties using federal funds.
Mr. Bailey suggested the list of priorities with the subtext be distilled into a resolution for the council to
consider and massage until councilmembers feel it reflects their collective thinking regarding the budget
priorities. The clearer and more specific the council can be, while still being strategic, will provide better
direction to those preparing the budget.
Councilmember Tibbott commented the word tangible comes to mind. He asked if would be helpful to have
tangible projects or concepts attached to the priorities so their meaning is clearer. Mr. Bailey suggested
rather than projects, the subtext that the council has spent some time on would be helpful. Councilmember
Tibbott asked if it would be helpful to include tangible outcomes. Mr. Bailey said if the council had more
time, ideally they would identify outcomes for these priorities categories which could be used to measure
success in the future.
Ms. Dunscombe suggested as the council is defining the priorities, to think about what the scorers will think
with regard to the priorities. She selected a program as an example, Traffic Control and Street Lighting
whose description is signals, signs, lane striping, crosswalks, arrows, curb and painting, city facility parking
for striping interlocal with Lynnwood and signal assistance, maintenance and power consumption of
streetlighting and signals. The scorers will need to consider how that relates to the council's priorities. Any
details that help the scorer link this program to the council's priorities would be helpful. Mr. Bailey
estimated there were at least 100 programs in the City. The review will be a bit messy out of the starting
gate, but it will get better. For example, Renton begin this in 2003 and are still using this approach with the
fourth mayor which is a sign of resiliency of an approach. He suggested councilmembers look at Renton's
budget.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 28
Packet Pg. 184
8.1.a
Councilmember Dotsch asked about measurables. Mr. Bailey said that would be a next step, what results
were intended to be achieved and how much progress was made on those.
What Could We Do Less of?
Mr. Bailey provided councilmembers two sticky notes and asked them to suggest what the City could do
less of. This could be a service that is already provided by another entity in the community/duplication, not
a core service, a better way to provide the service, a nice to have, requires a large subsidy, could be
outsourced, etc. He acknowledged this was a challenging exercise.
Ms. Peterson asked if this would be incorporated into a council action. Mr. Bailey answered he did not view
it that way, it was a point of information for the administration regarding this difficult question.
Mr. Bailey commented on the role of department heads; he has yet to meet a department head that wants to
scale down their department. He relayed a story from Everett, when the economy was doing poorly, the
mayor let 60 employees go. After a few years when the economy improved, the mayor told department
heads they could spend more money. After the department heads presented their budgets, he met with the
HR director, budget director and finance director and asked how to discipline department heads who were
irresponsible in asking for so much. He was told that was what department heads do and he had given them
a green light.
Mr. Bailey reviewed council's input regarding what the City could do less of.
➢ Consolidate boards and commissions to a handful
➢ Too much top management in police department
➢ Less parks in areas where there are already too many
➢ Human interactions
❖ Councilmember Nand explained at SnoCom 911 board meeting, they proposed consolidating
routine administrative tasks such as non -emergency calls to an Al assistant rather than a human.
She wondered if the unions would view that as a threat to their labor load, but the unions were
very enthusiastic about it. Things that do not necessarily require human interaction can be taken
care of by Al and human employees can focus on more complex tasks. Mr. Bailey said some
cities are moving toward that, Al answers the call and that does not resolve it, it can be referred
to a human.
➢ Less reliance on consultants
➢ Arts in Edmonds is well supported financially by the community except for physical facilities so
funding programs should be added to the community
➢ City owned fleet vehicles for non -vital services
➢ Too many City building and too many boards and commissions
❖ Mr. Bailey said the Blue Ribbon Panel suggested offloading any surplus real estate especially
to bridge 2025 to 2026.
➢ Stop using outdated technology which translates to a waste of time
➢ Outsource parks and rec programing similar to the pool
➢ Streamline the management team
➢ Leave arts support to nonprofit and private entities
➢ Stop having agenda item asks without budget implications and future cost of maintenance and
whether it advances the priorities
➢ Reduce use of and purchase of mobile devices
➢ Hanging flower baskets in the downtown and maintaining them
➢ Reduce freebies to art community or reduce to 1 staff member
With regard to the suggestion about mobile devices, Councilmember Nand said when her phone was being
replaced, she was told AT&T pays the City to take an old iPhone. She asked if this suggestion was related
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 29
Packet Pg. 185
8.1.a
to more expensive mobile devices like police radios that are more expensive. Mayor Rosen said he was
unsure which councilmember provided that suggestion. To accommodate work from home during Covid,
the City purchased numerous laptops. There is an effort to reduce that number due to the cost of licensing
software for multiple devices. For example, instead of having a laptop and a desktop computer, staff is
utilizing docking stations in an effort to significantly reduce the number of devices.
Mr. Bailey suggested council remember the law of triviality when having budget discussions. For example,
most cities have flower baskets and have the conversation about funding them. Ms. Feser explained the
City's flower baskets and corner parks is supported by dedicated funds separate from the General Fund. A
very generous donation from the Goffette family was earmarked for downtown beautification and cannot
be spent anywhere else in the City. Even if the council removed all the flower baskets and corner park
plantings, it would not affect the General Fund.
Councilmember Nand asked if the Goffette donation included a geographic specificity that the baskets have
to be downtown. Ms. Feser answered flower baskets can be anywhere in the city, however, the conditions
of the donation were the flower program in downtown.
Council President Olson did not recall there was a geographic specificity, but did remember that it was
designated for the flower basket program. Ms. Feser assured it was very specific. Mr. Bailey relayed that is
an example of something that is often suggested, but will not balance the budget.
Councilmember Tibbott commented one of the programs added during Covid was Zoom broadcast of
meetings. He wondered if public programs that were added during the last few years due to the pandemic
could be scaled back now that there are other means of communicating.
Council President Olson commented the Zoom broadcast was added in addition to the cable broadcast. The
Zoom broadcast allows participation which is a plus for transparency. She was unsure whether the cable
broadcast had a cost and suggested looking at that.
Councilmember Dotsch commented without seeing the cost, staffing, time and value, it is difficult to
determine what the City could less of. Mr. Bailey said that is a segway to Ms. Dunscombe's presentation
regarding PBB.
Councilmember Nand commented the Goffette donation is an interesting example of how something that
has been traditionally within the cty's purview can be funded via public support, grants or requests. When
looking at some of the most popular public services such as parks, she suggested seeking grants, requests
and gifts from the nonprofit who would like to have their name on something which Boeing and Microsoft
do a lot of. For example, in the Seattle library, Microsoft has its own floor due to significant funding they
provided. That would be an opportunity to reduce the budget, but not cut the footprint of a popular public
service. Mr. Bailey agreed, pointing out the importance of appreciating the full cost of services that are
provided. He has been part of the conversation in other cities about finding donations, volunteers, etc. That
can be successful, but also requires thinking about if a sponsor is not found for a particular program, whether
it will be eliminated.
Councilmember Paine liked the idea of sponsorships, recalling when she was on the school board in
2008/2009, two schools were shut down as well as major reconfigurations. The school district had two
boosters for sports and music and the community was asked to take those over in an effort not to impact
classroom sizes. It had to be equitable across the district to preserve those programs so when financial
balance returned, those programs remained. She said that was how the music and sports programs survived;
nurses did not, it took them a dozen years to return to full strength. She did not have the answers, but
anticipated finding sponsors for programs would help preserve some of the things that help make Edmonds
what it is. Mr. Bailey commenting during budget conversations, it will be tempting to say let's continue
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 30
Packet Pg. 186
8.1.a
that program, but find someone else to pay for it. He cautioned to not let that be a distraction from the hard
work that will be required to balance the budget for the coming biennium.
Priority Based Budutin$ — What to Expect
Mr. Bailey explained the budget will look different this year. He has influenced that to some degree,
anticipating some of the struggles in the past were due to the approach that has traditionally been taken in
Edmonds and he was hopeful the council could have more constructive conversations on big picture issues
as a result.
Ms. Dunscombe distributed examples of information that will be contained in the 2025-2026 budget book,
explaining she did not want the new look or different information to be a hinderance to the process. Much
of the other information in the budget book, the Mayor's Message, charts and graphs related to revenues
and expenses will be the same, but there will be a big difference in the department sections. She provided
city council as an example of the information that will be provided for each department. Each department
will list program titles and descriptions, budget by program, FTEs dedicated to each program, dollar values
for the next biennium, and the tier based on scoring (1-4 with 1 being most representative of basic program
attributes and council priorities and 4 being the least relatable programs). The last page of the information
she distributed was the usual line item budget by department 2022 actual, 2023 budget, 2024 budget, $
change 24-23 estimate, $ change 24-23 budget, and % change 24-23 budget.
Ms. Dunscombe explained the scorers will have a 2-page document that thoroughly describes the program.
She considered including that in the appendix to avoid expanding the department sections by including that
information. She welcomed council feedback on what would be best. The previous way the budget was
presented with decision package for the General Fund and Street Fund is not how the conversation will be
structured for the next biennium. It will be around programs and how much they cost and how they relate
to basic program attributes and council priorities.
Councilmember Eck asked who sets the tiers and makes those decision. Ms. Dunscombe answered the
scorers will do that; all the scoring will be consolidated and programs placed into a tier. The thorough
description of each program and how it relates to the basic program attributes will also show the scoring in
the upper righthand corner. She concluded it sounds like that would be good information to include in the
budget book in some way.
Councilmember Eck asked who the scorers will be. Mayor Rosen answered an internal team from each
department (not the director) and the Budget By Priority Community Advisory Panel. Their scoring will
help inform his decisions and recommendations to council. Those groups will not set the budget, scoring,
like research, are data points.
Councilmember Nand recalled after the 2024 budget was approved in 2023, there may have been some
reformation of contracts, especially professional services contracts, to make them less expensive. If that
happens, she asked that those be reflected in the budget book. It relates to the issue of internal controls; for
example, the council approved a $650,000 VIA contract and it ended up being much less because the
contract was reformed, and for transparency sake, that needs to be communicated to the council and public.
Ms. Dunscombe said she will have that conversation at the administrative level; the budget book may not
be the right place for that as it is published once after it is completed. As part of zero based budgeting, there
will be a schedule in the budget book outlining all the professional services budgets in the next two years
to add clarity to the professional services budget.
Councilmember Dotsch recalled one of recommendations at the AWC conference she attended was to
provide a link to a digital table of contents instead of a budget book. Ms. Dunscombe said she liked that
idea. Councilmember Dotsch asked if the evaluation processes would be part of what's done before the
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 31
Packet Pg. 187
8.1.a
budget gets to council. Mr. Bailey clarified Councilmember Dotsch's question, how will the
administration's evaluation of various processes be reflected in the budget materials. Mayor Rosen
answered it will be messy for a couple of years. Budget decisions will obviously reflect what staff resources
are needed. In terms of structural changes, there are some minor changes, but that will be a much longer
process. He envisioned coming to council throughout the year to do reallocations. When the council sees
the budget, they need to see dollars, people, and external resources.
Councilmember Dotsch acknowledged people are the biggest expense. Mayor Rosen said if council wants
to get rid of staff, that translate to things. Councilmember Dotsch clarified it was not about getting rid of
staff, but processes and working smarter, not harder. She pointed out it comes down to time. Mayor Rosen
explained when thinking of staff time, most give more than the City pays for; the City basically buys 2080
hours minus vacation and holidays which is fewer than 2000 of each individual's time. Staff time translates
into what do we want, and what is the best use of their time.
Councilmember Nand recalled hearings it takes a week to prepare materials for the Tree City USA
designation. Instead of cutting staff time, she suggested looking at the scope of work for each FTE, whether
it is a vital service or a nice to have. Mayor Rosen commented that was the intent of the exercise.
Council President Olson said the Tree City USA designation is a good example. She suggested as
councilmembers think of things that possibly could be cut, to send those ideas to Ms. Peterson over the next
six weeks.
Mayor Rosen commented every time a councilmember sends a question to a staff member, they feel
responsible for answering which means they have to pick something else not to do so they can answer the
councilmembers question.
Councilmember Nand suggested consolidating questions through the council president who could exercise
discretion about what gets passed onto staff. Council President Olson commented the mayor sets a good
example, during the weekly meeting he has a list of things that have come up and she tries to do the same.
She suggested councilmembers try to consolidate their questions. Mayor Rosen explained the way he
phrases it to directors is if you hear glass breaking, call or come running; if it is something you need know
in the near future, send a text; if it is something non -critical but needs to be on someone's radar, send an
email; and otherwise there are one-on-one meeting once a week.
Ms. Peterson complimented councilmembers on the exceptional job they are doing transiting to the digital
world; the City has saved a lot of money by not printing weekly packets. She anticipated bridging between
paper and digital with regard to the budget book. When she looks at the font size in the Budget by Program
table, it might be better to have the budget available digitally. She acknowledged it has been the past practice
to provide council a paper budget book and suggested councilmembers think about that.
Ms. Peterson pointed out the program description titles in the materials Ms. Dunscombe distributed do not
match program titles. Ms. Dunscombe assured the materials were intended to illustrate what it could look
like and how the budget will look different such as there won't be numbered decision packages with an
amount and description. The conversation will be formatted around programs, how they relate to basic
program attributes and community priorities. The council will know how many FTEs are dedicated to each
program, the cost, and where it falls in the tiers. That is just to start the conversation; just because a program
is in tier 3 or 4 doesn't mean it goes away, it is simply to start the conversation of what to do with the
program. A lot of mandated programs tend to fall in tiers 3 and 4.
Ms. Peterson clarified the decision package the council is accustomed to seeing will be embedded in the
programs in the proposed budget. Ms. Dunscombe agreed. Ms. Peterson observed that will simplify and
complicate things.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 32
Packet Pg. 188
8.1.a
Councilmember Dotsch asked, looking at this from a citizen's perspective, how will the public provide
input and be included in the process. Mr. Bailey explained the framing is around programs which is
intended to enable a more informed conversation with the citizenry who will see a program they recognize.
He was unsure what typical citizen input in Edmonds looks like, but typically citizens want more of
something and he did not see that changing. He was hopeful this format will clarify what the City is doing
in the context of programs. Citizens will also have the benefit of feedback such as how does a program
compare to others in terns of addressing the attributes and strategic priorities. The idea of a digital budget
book is becoming more pervasive and would be more accessible to the public; however, he suggested to
Mayor Rosen that creating a digital budget book would be very difficult to do in the amount of time
available.
Councilmember Nand commented on the vacancy rate, the hiring freeze and nice to haves. The vacancy
rate includes positions that have not been filled, not because they are not vital positions, but because the
City can get by without it. She suggested staff that are below 1.0 FTE could be increased to 1.0 and take on
additional tasks by renegotiating their job description. That might be a way to look at streamlining via staff
retention instead of staff reduction.
Councilmember Paine asked about right sizing by program. The information provided this morning
mentioned one police officer has been added since 2009; the email from Police Chief Bennett indicated the
Edmonds Police Department is half of the national average. She was interested in knowing how many
people are supporting the City's programs. Mr. Bailey answered how many people are supporting programs
will be provided. Councilmember Paine asked about best practices. Mr. Bailey answered how many people
should be supporting a program will be a harder number to determine. Councilmember Paine advised there
are metrics available. Mr. Bailey said as a retired finance director, he looked at those with professional
skepticism.
Mr. Bailey continued, the council will receive different information and it will not include decision
packages. Instead there will be a program description with a lump sum cost of that program and much more
financial detail. The council will have more information to work with, but it will be more work for staff.
The council's conversations will be around scale which is an inoffensive way to say we cannot afford to do
as much of this as proposed and proposals can be made to scale a program down or up. As the council
works through the budget, they will be talking about programs as a whole versus incremental budgeting
which bring forward last year and assumes that was right and the council only talks about decision package.
Mr. Bailey continued, this will be a fresh look; it is often more difficult to have a discussion about the whole
rather than the pieces. For example in the finance department, programs like the budget and CIP
development will have the number of FTEs devoted to that program and the program cost. One of the
challenges with this transition is the council won't have the benefit of history so it is zero based and council
will be faced with determining whether it feels right, too big or too small. A good question to ask is what
are the consequences of scaling a program down and departments need to be prepared to answer that
question.
Councilmember Nand asked what format councilmembers will use to make amendments in this program
based budget. Mr. Bailey answered he has seen it done efficiently/effectively where someone keeps track
of potential amendments and council makes a decision on the proposed amendments in real time or at one
meeting. An efficient way to manage potential changes is for councilmembers to propose a change and
identify the programmatic and financial impact.
Councilmember Nand suggested the administration explore the idea of using project numbers as a lens for
internal control for the council related to the amount of staff time and resources devoted to particular
projects, especially multi -departmental project.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 33
Packet Pg. 189
8.1.a
Councilmember Chen observed some programs will last one year, others could span two years. When the
budget is presented, historically it was one year per line. The biennial budget will include both 2025 and
2026; he asked how programs in one year will be differentiated from programs that span both years. Ms.
Dunscombe responded programs are core to the work staff does every year all year and are not project
based like a CIP project and there won't be programs that start and end in a year. These are ongoing
activities that departments provide to the community. Mr. Bailey pointed out it is possible a program could
start and stop in one year, but that would be the rare exception, not the rule. Mayor Rosen answered there
will be a separation between 2025 and 2026, but 2026 will be heavily reliant on two voter initiatives and
2026 could change significantly based on those outcomes.
If the budget has one column combining both 2025 and 2026, Councilmember Chen asked how the amounts
per years are separated. Ms. Dunscombe advised there definitely will be two 1-year budgets, 2025 and 2026
will have their own columns. The reason the administration is asking the council to preface decisions such
as the RFA is so some assumptions can be made about 2026 to provide a balanced budget. She assured the
budget documents will show 2025 and 2026 separately.
Councilmember Chen relayed his understanding this is a transition to a biennial budget where it is not really
two years combined into one budget period, it will look and feel like an annual budget. Ms. Dunscombe
agreed, explaining one of the issues is software limitations; the City's current system does not do two
budgets at once so there have to be two 1-year budgets. Mr. Bailey answered that is not unusual in the
biennial budget world; some cities combine two years into one such as Redmond and others always have
two independent years. In this transition year, seeing the two years independent of each other is probably
helpful.
With regard to project coding, Ms. Dunscombe explained programs will not live in the chart of accounts.
There will be activities for which a project number can be tagged and reported on like the CIP, but for
programs the detail goes back to the department line item budgets and there isn't a way to roll up the
program costs in actuals. She summarized it lives in the budget world and not in the chart of accounts.
Councilmember Nand observed Mayor Rosen comes from a PR background and she comes from a legal
where project coding is used for all expenses, staff time, etc. and is included in the invoice delivered to a
client. With the council and the public as the clients, if there were large, thematic project numbers for big
projects especially multi -year projects like CFP/CIP projects, that could provide transparency and
accountability regarding how much time, effort and administrative overhead something is taking in addition
to more concrete expenses like a capital acquisition. That internal control is more common in the private
sector, and it would be interesting to see for some big projects on the municipal side. Ms. Dunscombe
answered one she could think of was the comprehensive plan; she wished that had started with a project
number because it could have been easily identified and a project number tagged to it across all departments
to show how much was spent. With program based, it would require tagging everything with a project
number which is why the information doesn't live in the chart of accounts. Tyler Industries purchased
ResourceX, the maker of PBB, so she was hopeful that could be worked into the chart of accounts.
Councilmember Paine wanted to know what the council will get to make decisions on, whether it will be
programs as she has heard that there will and will not be decision packages. Ms. Dunscombe responded the
council will receive detailed information about programs, the cost, and the FTE to produce that program
for a year, there will not be any decision packages. That term will still be used at the staff level because
that's what it is called in Eden to get the information into the ERP system, but they won't be presented in
that format. Councilmember Paine asked if each program would receive an up or down vote. Mr. Bailey
explained once the conversation has evolved to a consensus regarding how much the council wants to spend
on a given program, the program will be incorporated into the budget.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 34
Packet Pg. 190
8.1.a
Councilmember Paine said she was glad the software would not allow two years at a time and there will be
two separate years. She asked if recalibration would be possible at mid -year points throughout the biennial
budget process or how will information that is received across time be managed. Ms. Dunscombe answered
a mid -biennium review is required. Councilmember Paine asked if a halfway mid -biennium could be done
in six months. She asked if the information about the RFA that will be available next year will be
incorporated into the mid -biennium review. Ms. Dunscome answered the budget amendment process will
continue as usual throughout the next two years. Mr. Bailey commenting making this transition involves
many moving parts. The mid -year review happens each year in a biennial budget just like happened this
year in the annual budget and as provided for in the financial policies. The mid -biennium review is required
by statute during budget season, September — November, and that can be whatever the City wants it to be.
In Redmond the mid -year review is a non-event because their culture is if the budget isn't not broken, it
doesn't need to be fixed. Edmonds may want to have a mini budget process due to the number of issues.
Councilmember Paine asked if the mid -biennium review was guided by statutory timelines. Mr. Bailey said
it occurs in the fall. In the fall of 2025, there will be a mid -biennium process of some sort; it can be small
or big. It is similar to the budget, it starts in October and needs to be done by the end of the year. It may
result in action on council's part, it may not. If the budget is performing well and no changes are needed,
no council action is required. If the council wants to change the budget, that can be done at any point in the
biennium, but certainly as part of the mid -biennium review.
With proposed amendments council may wish to offer, Ms. Peterson asked if a more effective approach
would be scaling a reduction of the value of those programs or how would amendments be made. Mr. Bailey
answered it takes a variety of forma, but needs to be meaningful to the administration. Often a program
translates to FTE so that would be an example where specifics may be required regarding the authorized
headcount. At the end of the day, the council's budget takes the form of an ordinance indicating how much
money is authorized at the fund level. The decisions council makes via motions during budget deliberations
are administrative, they just inform the ordinance. If the starting point is the proposed budget and the end
point is the budget ordinance, a formal motion approach provides clarity with regard to amendments.
Ms. Peterson asked if an amendment to a program would automatically apply to both 2025 and 202 or
should that be clarified. Mr. Bailey recommended it be clarified as part of the motion. Ms. Peterson asked
if the budget ordinance would be adopted with both a 2025 and a 2026 budget. Mr. Bailey recommended
combining them in the ordinance; the 2025 will not be balanced, but ideally the biennial budget will be
balanced. A balanced budget is a statutory obligation, not that it is always followed. To the extent possible,
the City wants to balance the biennial budget.
Ms. Peterson asked why it's obvious that the 2025 budget will not be balanced. Mr. Bailey answered the
City will be borrowing money to bridge 2025 so the revenues and fund balance combined won't be enough
to offset the authorized expenditures unless council decided to reduce expenditures from about $60M to
about $51M. Ms. Peterson observed it's conceivable that the budget could be balanced, but it probably
won't be. Mr. Bailey did not believe that was the intent in terms of the preliminary thinking with regard to
the budget. Ms. Peterson asked if the budget is a combined 2025 and 2026 biennium budget, how will
budget amendments in 2025 be reflected in a way that is understandable in what is presented to council.
She concluded there would be a lot of dividing by two. Mr. Bailey agreed it is a mindset shift, everything
doubles. As the budget is amended, the biennium budget is amended.
Councilmember Dotsch asked about the payback plan. Mr. Bailey answered if the City borrows for more
than 3 years or so, the auditor will look at that skeptically and say it's not borrowing, but rather diversion
of funds. That's why the 3-4 year window for internal borrowing is said to be permissible from the auditor's
standpoint. The City does not have to borrow internally, it can borrow externally. With regard to bridging
2025, he recommended talking to the City's Financial Advisor Scott Bauer because he is the expert on all
things related to borrowing. He is the City's municipal advisor under the FCC which means he is the
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 35
Packet Pg. 191
fiduciary, has the City's best interests at heart, and will give the City his best advice. He can tell the City
how much it will cost to borrow internally and externally.
Mr. Bailey continued, the reason he has recommend internal borrowing to the mayor and others, is because
it's cheaper and more efficient. That doesn't preclude borrowing externally; many governments borrow
internally and externally for cash flow purposes. Cities in California borrow huge amounts for cash flow
purposes just as a normal course of business. He only recommended internal borrowing because it is more
efficient, but if anyone is squeamish about that or fears comments about misusing utility funds, the City
can borrow externally. He referred to the decision matrix Mayor Rosen displayed earlier in the meeting, if
the City has sufficient resources in 2026 to repay the borrowing source, the loan will be fully repaid at the
end of 2026. At the end of 2025, under the current course, the City will be in the red, but can be back in the
black by the end of 2026 is all the answers are yes. If there are any no answers, expenses will need to be
revisited.
Mr. Bailey explained although he has consistently recommended borrowing internally, he was aware there
was anxiety about internal borrowing, whether the utility funds have enough money, what happens if the
utilities need the money and the City has borrowed it. The City can borrow from wherever it wishes, but it
is most cost effective to the community to borrow internally. He reiterated any borrowing longer than three
years is perceived by the auditor as a diversion of funds, not borrowing.
Councilmember Nand commented if budget amendments are done via a percentage to a program, that seems
to preclude the ability to target things in granular fashion. Mr. Bailey said amendments can be made
however the council wishes. Using the example of a department that wants to add three vehicles to their
fleet and the council thinks they should only add one, Councilmember Nand asked if council would have
the ability to do that via the budget amendment process. Mr. Bailey answered yes, keeping in mind the
council wants to be at a strategic policy level and if the council wants to create capacity but can't afford to
create all the capacity upfront, then a strategy like creating a little capacity over time and getting there over
three years instead of one year is a feasible approach. An amendment can take whatever form a
councilmember wants; an amendment wouldn't be out of order unless it gets into the how. For example, an
amendment to have two police officers per patrol vehicle gets into how the work is carried out and would
not be consistent with the council's role as policy makers.
Councilmember Chen commented although it is a biennial budget, 2025 and 2026 will be presented
separately, amendments to a program would mostly likely affect only one year. Mr. Bailey responded
amendments can take a variety of forms; the council can make amendments that affect both years.
With regard to internal versus external borrowing, Council President Olson referenced concern expressed
by residents with borrowing from the utility and what if the utility needs that money. She relayed her
understanding that the council always has the option of borrowing externally so if the utility needed the
money, the council could borrow from an external source and pay the utility back. Mr. Bailey agreed that
could be done.
Councilmember Dotsch asked about performance indicators. Mr. Bailey said that should be part of the
information the council has to make decisions. He asked what analytics the programs sheets will contain.
Ms. Dunscombe was uncertain performance indicators would be completed by the time the budget book is
printed. That is a pretty big lift and she would like to make that an improvement for next time. She assumed
departments track performance indicators, but she didn't think they could indicate how they relate to
programs yet. Mr. Bailey said departments are not precluded from providing that information, but it won't
be imbedded in the budget. It also doesn't preclude council asking questions about performance.
Mr. Tatum said that is one of the challenges with programs is determining long term priorities and having
a strategic plan or portfolio of projects and programs to get there. As a department head, he viewed this as
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 36
Packet Pg. 192
8.1.a
a foundation -building year and agreed it was appropriate to ask about performance metrics. The priorities
are being determined and through the course of the year, efforts made related to how to measure
performance. With regard to a previous question about project reporting, he explained departments are
working on portfolio reporting and how they are delivering projects and programs toward policy goals. The
priorities the council identified will assist in developing portfolios and programs and reporting at a portfolio
level rather than project reporting.
Councilmember Nand commented some of the frustration from councilmembers who come from the private
sector is they are used to going past fund level down to actual expenses such as everyone needs to provide
receipts for travel. She suggested it would be helpful for some projects to go beyond fund level to actual
expenses, time devoted, etc., especially for things that are more avant-garde or experimental. From an
internal controls perspective, that would give council more comfort in giving the green light on projects
like that.
Ms. Dunscombe assured receipts are required to be submitted for all travel. Directors are going to have to
get good at saying what services won't be provided if council wants to decrease a program which is not
necessarily something directors have had in their skill set or delivery, explaining what a program actually
does for the community. In this situation, everyone will need to think hard about how to describe the reduced
service level if a program is reduced. That will have to be part of the conversation; just cutting X dollars,
staff needs to eloquently tell the council how the level of service will be decreased. Mr. Bailey responded
that will be healthy for a variety of reasons; most department heads are wired to want more resources to
deliver more product as well as to be accommodating.
Councilmember Chen recommended also thinking about how to evaluate contractors' performance. For
example, with OpenGov, had there been a performance measurement along the way, it would have
prevented what happened. The City is embarking on the ERP which could have a similar outcome although
he was much more comfortable with the ERP implementation than he was with OpenGov. He suggested
having checkpoints regarding the contractors hours, their progress, reports, KPI check -in, etc. to prevent
things going south.
Mayor Rosen said he came from world where billing was done to the quarter hour by the project, task,
subtask, etc. for every staff person and he liked that. With regard to managing expectations and roles, the
council needs to know things are on track, milestones that provide confidence about a project, task, etc.;
that is his job, the council's role is policy level. Mr. Bailey referred to the reporting pyramid and
recommended unless there is a problem, councilmembers stay at the top of pyramid so they see the whole.
If there is a problem, that can be drilled into; OpenGov is a good example of a problem. If the council gets
too much data, they will get lost and won't be able to do their jobs.
Councilmember Eck agreed the council needs to stay in their lane. If there were KPIs, the council would
be able to see the performance. Providing updates to council regarding whether a project is on track, etc. is
appropriate, but performance management is the administration's role. If staff is too finely documenting
their time, that may cut into their ability to get work done. The council has to trust that the reporting
provided will be sufficient.
Councilmember Nand commented this is becoming a bit of a boogey man when it doesn't need to be. If
there is a major project that includes consultants and funds from multiple departments that occurs over a
year, she did not like the idea of black box administration where the council depends on being spoon fed
information here and there. She did not think there was anything wrong with asking for a project number
to be assigned to a project of that scope and asking to have a report in the monthly or mid -year financial
reports. That would provide a check -in point so the council and public as a matter of internal control can
ask for justification or a course change. Getting too deep into certain projects is a way to keep future
administrations from going over a cliff financially.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 37
Packet Pg. 193
8.1.a
Councilmember Dotsch expressed support for having the quarterly report presented to the full council rather
than committee or in Received for Filing as well as staff providing advance notice of amendments when
possible. The financial policies the council is putting in place will provide guardrails to prevent challenges
that occurred in the past. She preferred to have a quarterly check -in for the council and the public rather
than waiting until mid -year. Mr. Bailey agreed the council may want to consider a quarterly presentation to
full council of the most recent monthly financial report in order to have a conversation in front of
constituents. That was done in Redmond during the Great Recession; at that time Redmond cut their budget
by about 10% including layoffs and the council wanted their constituents to see them dealing with these big
issues. Even though Redmond had a finance committee that everyone had great confidence in, the council
wanted to have that quarterly discussion in front of the community. Contrary to what he said at last week's
meeting that the finance committee's review and placing the reports on Received for Filing was enough, he
now agreed it was worth considering a quarterly conversation at a council meeting.
With regard to having internal controls, Councilmember Paine said it is more important to stick to big goals,
how to achieve those goals and how to measure success. To Ms. Dunscombe's comment about it would
have been good to have tracked the comprehensive plan from the start, counting hours and expenses can't
be done midway through a project. If the council wants specifics tracked for major projects, the
administration needs to be informed of that desire. Projects numbers are assigned to projects in Public
Works and Parks and hours are billed to those specific projects. It is more important to stay true to the goals
and take aim in right direction, otherwise things get bogged down. She was not interested in hourly reports
for almost anything because it detracts from the bigger vision.
Mr. Williams commented this is a key issue for Public Works and Parks on CIP projects. He recalled when
he first was hired in 2010, his first challenge was the Haines Wharf Park project that was "bleeding," and
council knew nothing about it. There were a number of very large change orders, one of which had been
reported to council. His first conversation with the council was to inform them of the situation. As a result,
guidelines were adopted related to the size of change orders, communication with council, etc. Council
welcomed that modification to the procedures and for the most part, problems like that haven't occurred
without the council being notified at the time they happen. If something emergent happens, staff reports to
the council at the next meeting.
Ms. Feser added, a new purchasing policy that further defines that process has been drafted and reviewed
by staff and will be coming to council. The purchasing policy is very detailed by dollar amount and by
project when it goes to the mayor and to the council. There are guardrails in place for this type of situation
in the capital budget. Mr. Bailey said when that policy is presented to council would be an excellent time
to have a discussion regarding what accountability looks like.
Councilmember Nand asked where internal controls and guidelines were usually housed and asked for
examples of other cities' internal controls. Mr. Bailey responded there are a lot of great examples on the
MRSC website. In partnership with the SAO, the policy guidance on the MRSC website, which has a robust
purchasing section, was revamped. That effort included looking at good examples so cities could look to
MRSC for good examples of what others are doing. For the most part, they are adopted by resolution, a
statement of policy intent by the council, instead of by ordinance. Edmonds started with financial policies
to get the conversation started and provide a good core and purchasing/procurement policy are being added.
He also suggested adding an investment treasury services policy. As a result of the Blue Ribbon Panel's
review, staff made some changes to improve the rate of return on the investment portfolio, but there is
should be guidance from council regarding working through options and making decisions about
investments.
Mr. Bailey also encouraged the council to identify outcomes that would be indicative of progress on the
issues that have been identified and how is the City doing, and signs of progress or lack of progress. He
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 38
Packet Pg. 194
8.1.a
recalled Redmond developed a KPI for intersection safety and learned from the data that safety was moving
in the wrong direction which informed the need for a change. KPIs around priority issues and determining
the cadence, when check -ins will happen, and what form the check -in takes would serve the council well
in its policy and oversight role.
Ms. Peterson asked if Mr. Bailey was suggesting it would be a council project to establish KPIs for these
priorities. Mr. Bailey answered in a typical strategic plan effort, there would be more discussion about what
these issues mean and how they evidence themselves. It was his understanding the City did a strategic plan
some time ago which was a very robust effort. That could be done in an off -budget year. There just isn't
time this year to develop performance measures. Further definition of the priorities and development of
performance measures will be a great place to start the next budget conversation.
With regard to collaboration, Council President Olson commented on having those conversations with the
community and identifying ways to get things done without them all being tax -supported expenses such as
volunteers for activities, etc. Mr. Bailey agreed that would be great if the City would find a way to deliver
a service via a partnership. He recommended working hard to stay honest with each other with regard to
whether something would get done if the City was not the instigator.
Councilmember Tibbott recalled asking at the last council meeting about the percentage of reserves that are
allocated to the continency fund. He recalled the idea of the contingency fund or emergency contingency
fund was raised at the time of the Haines Wharf issue. During periods of higher risk, it would seem the
contingency reserve should be higher and perhaps the operational reserve could be lower. The operation
reserves are tapped into throughout the year, but dipping into contingency reserve means the brake lights
need to come on. He recalled Ms. Dunscombe saying the council will have further discussions about the
reserve policy. He asked how reserve levels would be useful for the internal control discussion and helping
councilmembers stay focused on the big picture. Mr. Bailey recalled the size of the contingency reserve
was limited by state law and the City's contingency reserve is set at that limit. Councilmember Chen advised
it was a percentage of operating expenses.
Councilmember Tibbott commented the City's contingency reserve is $2M which did not seem like enough.
Mr. Bailey recalled back in the day there was a train of thought that that was all the reserve a city could
have; that is no longer the prevailing thought. It is common for cities to have a fund balance in the General
Fund and that amount varies. The fund balance reserve is the "shock absorber" to deal with peaks and
valleys to sustain services. Councilmember Tibbott asked if that was the operational reserve. Mr. Bailey
answered yes, in the General Fund. It also provides for cash flow so when it is fully funded, there aren't
cash flow issues and the City doesn't need to borrow. That is why the City needs to borrow now because
the General Fund's fund balance is depleted and as a result, the General Fund is in a cash flow deficit during
times of the year the City is awaiting property tax revenue.
Mr. Bailey continued, as the council continues to think about reserve levels, they can be established and
changed in a subsequent year as there is discretion within the state law. The City can also deviate from the
policy; the financial policies in some respect are aspirational; the policies say the fund balance should be
16%, but the City does not have 16% and aspires to get back to 16%. Therefore the 2024 budget is
inconsistent with the financial policies. He assumed when the council gets the mayor's recommended 2025-
2026 budget, the budget message would include how it responded to the financial policies. The fact that the
financial policies exist and that the budget deviates from the policy doesn't mean anyone's going to jail
because the fund balance is below 16%, but it is a deviation from a standard and that deviation should be
very clear.
Councilmember Tibbott said he wanted the council to stay high level. When the operational reserves were
being used last year and it was realized that the reserve would no longer be intact by the end of the year,
that's when the council declared a fiscal emergency. If the contingency reserve was higher, the council
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 39
Packet Pg. 195
8.1.a
could have known earlier in the year that the City was facing fiscal difficulties. Mr. Bailey answered that's
one way to look at it, another more informative, helpful way to look at it is if the council had received
timely financial information that made it clear the reserve was out of balance with the policy, that would
have informed the council as well. Having the contingency reserve higher or lower wasn't what alerted the
council to the issue, the way it was communicated to the council was the underlying issue.
Councilmember Tibbott asked when use of the operational reserve becomes an issue. Mr. Bailey relayed a
point of confusion he has observed is when reserves are being used. Reserves are used when they have been
appropriated to be used. When the council adopts a budget and the estimated ending fund balance based on
revenue estimates and expenditure authority is at or above 16%, the budget is consistent with the financial
policies. If the revenue estimates and expenditure authorization in the budget results in a fund balance below
16%, fund balance would be used to balance the budget beyond the policy target which in his mind would
be a use of fund balance. If the council authorizes use of the contingency reserve, something the council
will have to discuss this fall, that's dipping into the contingency reserve; the council has not authorized any
expenditures out of the contingency reserve yet. The 2024 budget did authorize the use of fund balance in
the General Fund below 16% which was inconsistent with the policies.
Councilmember Tibbott asked if that was the shock absorber. Mr. Bailey agreed it was. Councilmember
Tibbott pointed out the council was never asked to use operational reserves as a shock observer, they were
just told that's how it is. He asked what the contingency reserve is if it is not a shock absorber. Mr. Bailey
responded beyond that, the City is borrowing to make payroll which is the expectation in 2025. It was his
understanding the 2025 budget was anticipated to use well beyond what's in fund balance at the end of
2024 and more than what is in the contingency reserve fund as well. The decision for the council will be
whether to appropriate the contingency reserve fund to reduce the amount of borrowing to balance the
General Fund budget or retain it in case something bad happens.
Mr. Williams commented the reserves in utilities are current set at 12% which is a good number for
operational reserve for utilities because revenues are pretty regular and predicable. Best practice is to have
an operational reserve and contingency reserve in utilities and often a capital reserve and an emergency
reserve. The City typically maintains balances in the utilities substantially higher than that. He was unaware
of how much the City will be need to borrow from the utilities and how that will impact the utility reserves.
Mr. Bailey recalled the amount of cash in the investment portfolio was at least $20M. He agreed it was
important to have utility reserves in the event of an emergency.
Ms. Peterson asked how the biennial budget ordinance overlaps with the fund balance policy. Mr. Bailey
answered that is a common question, whether the City needs twice the reserve for a two year budget. The
answer is no, if the City is at 16%, it is 16% of annual expenditures. Ms. Peterson commented on budget
amendments and determining what the fund balances should be and where they are. Mr. Bailey responded
something that contributed to the difficulty was a lack of candor on the part of the people proposing those
things in terms of the impact they were having on fund balances. It was way late in the game before council
realized the fund balance had been depleted as much as it was and then the numbers also changed which
compounded the problem. There was never an explanation of why one month's beginning fund balance was
less than the previous month's ending fund balance. That is a red flag that needs to pointed out and questions
asked. Now that the council is receiving reports before the end of the following month, those questions can
be asked and answered.
Councilmember Dotsch asked if there was something she could do to prepare, recognizing there will be a
time crunch. Mr. Bailey answered probably not. This conversation will inform the scoring and the scoring
will inform the mayor's decisions and the mayor will present a great deal of information in early October
which will take the council time to absorb. The council will have conversations and workshops to better
understand the budget and ideally there will be discussions between council leadership and administrative
leadership to determine how best to do that. Those conversations inform potential changes the council will
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 40
Packet Pg. 196
8.1.a
propose and at the end of the day, the council makes decisions regarding what the final budget will look
like.
Mr. Bailey continued, the council has a lot of challenging conversations and decisions ahead. Whatever
decisions are made, they will require support from the community to be successful. For example, whatever
the council decides to do with regard to fire/EMS service, whether to annex into the RFA or raise more
resources to pay for a contract. These are complicated issues, but it is important to clearly communicate to
the public so they can make informed decisions. If the City government is not collectively supportive of
what is recommended to the community, that will undermine the chances of success. From his perspective
and experience, the mostly likely chance of success and support from the community comes from a clear,
consistent message from the City as a whole. At the end of the day, the council will have to make choices
and to the extent the council can support those choices, the potential for success is significantly greater.
Councilmember Chen referred to the exercise of what the City could do less of and asked if that will be a
decision the council has to make if residents vote no on annexing to the RFA and a levy and whether 2026
would be the right timing. Mr. Bailey relayed his understanding the preferred path forward was optimistic
which may have to be deviated from at some point if things do not go the way that is hoped. Mayor Rosen
explained he has to provide a balanced budget so some assumptions have to be made which this
conversation helps inform. In the scenarios presented in the decision chart, there needs to be a plan for what
happens if voters vote yes on RFA annexation and no to the levy, no to annexation and yes to the levy, or
no to both.
Councilmember Chen observed it will also require communication or input from the public. Mayor Rosen
commented the public will make the final choice via a vote. They are weighing in via the survey, the
community advisory group, council input, focus groups, workshops, public hearing, RFA process, etc.
Councilmember Nand asked if there was anything in the CIP/CFP that could be kicked down the road to
save money in the short term. Mr. Willliams answered that can always be done. That is already being done
in the budget development process, trying to be realistic. The utilities are mostly unaffected due to
scheduled projects such as watermain replacements, sewer lining and replacements and stormwater
projects. There will need to be some scrutiny of General Fund funded CIP projects what could be postponed.
Mayor Rosen commented on how far behind the City is now on many things.
Councilmember Nand asked if the City had a grants manager who could seek funding and grants at the
federal level, whether those projects could be funded with less strain on the City's budget. Mr. Williams
answered certainly not in utilities, there are few utilities grants as jurisdictions are expected to generate
their own revenue and debt service. Parks has been very successful in obtaining grants to support their
projects. The City has done well in the area of natural resources and drainage projects. Staff knows most of
the funding sources and works well with those agencies especially at the state level; federal funds are
somewhat more difficult. He assured staff was always looking for other people's money. Councilmember
Paine commented grants extend local dollars.
Councilmember Dotsch observed the mid -year report indicated the City's burn rate is faster than expected
so the council will have to make some decisions this year. Mr. Bailey said what the mid -year review reveals
which Mayor Rosen reiterated this morning is there are challenges to get to the numbers in the 2024 budget
and if nothing else changes, the estimated fund balance at the end of 2024 will be down to $900,000 instead
of $2.2M. Because the City will not hit that fund balance target, part of the problem is if the City is unable
to restrain expenditures to the currently approved amount, a budget amendment will be required. His advice
to the council and mayor is to avoid amending the budget as has traditionally been done in the past. Not
that that was wrong, it was a fine approach to say this underlying action occurred such as a labor agreement
which drove costs up and more spending capacity needed to be created to afford paying the higher salaries.
That is the right thing to do unless creating more budget authority drives down the already too low fund
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 41
Packet Pg. 197
8.1.a
balance and in order to hit that fund balance target in the original budget, the City cannot spend more than
was already authorized. That is why he consistently says don't amend the budget and instead wait and see
if savings can be found elsewhere to offset the increased costs. It's difficult to save that much money and
likely that a budget amendment will be required to create authority to continue to pay people through the
end of the year. A year-end budget amendment, a clean-up type ordinance, is a very common thing. About
the time the council is considering the 2025-2026 biennial budget, there will likely be a recommendation
for a budget amendment that would allow the City sufficient budget authority for expected expenditures
even though that will impact the beginning fund balance.
Mr. Bailey said he has given Ms. Dunscombe the nickname of "truth teller," because finance officers have
to tell the truth, a difficult thing to do sometimes. That is why that news sometimes isn't shared, it's difficult
news to share and if you work in an environment where sharing such information is not encouraged, that is
also a struggle. He recalled working for a mayor, not in Edmonds, who told him not to answer council
questions because the answers reflected poorly on the administration. Edmonds is in a much better place in
that it is a collaborative environment which will help avoid making things worse moving forward and there
is a truth teller. He concluded the council's conversation will enable them to find their way out of this
situation and set the stage for a more successful future.
ADJOURNMENT
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 4:17 pm.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
August 16, 2024
Page 42
Packet Pg. 198
8.2
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 09/24/2024
Approval of Council Special Meeting Minutes September 10, 2024
Staff Lead: Council
Department: City Clerk's Office
Preparer: Scott Passey
Background/History
N/A
Recommendation
Approval of Council Meeting minutes as part of the Consent Agenda.
Narrative
Council meeting minutes are attached.
Attachments:
2024-09-10 Council Special Minutes
Packet Pg. 199
8.2.a
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL
SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES
DRAFT MINUTES
September 10, 2024
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Mike Rosen, Mayor
Vivian Olson, Council President
Neil Tibbott, Councilmember
Will Chen, Councilmember
Susan Paine, Councilmember
Michelle Dotsch, Councilmember
Chris Eck, Councilmember
Jenna Nand, Councilmember
1. CALL TO ORDER
STAFF PRESENT
Phil Williams, Acting Public Works Dir.
Shane Hope, Acting Planning & Development Dir.
Rob English, City Engineer
Navyusha Pentakota, Urban Design Planner
Bertrand Hauss, Transportation Engineer
Beckie Peterson, Council Executive Assistant
Scott Passey, City Clerk
The special Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 5 pm by Mayor Rosen in the Brackett
Room, 121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually.
2. COUNCIL BUSINESS
TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
Transportation Engineer Bertrand Hauss introduced the project team: Patrick Lynch and Paul Sharman,
Transpo Group, City Engineer Rob English, and Urban Design Planner Navyusha Pentakota. He recalled a
presentation made to council in June regarding MMLOS for the Transportation Plan. This presentation is
an update of what has been done since then. He reviewed:
Project Schedule Overview
2M 2M We are hem soss
UPCOMING DATES/TOPICS
9170.. _....City Council - Project List and Pnontization Late Oct Advisory Committee - Draft Transportation Plan Review
91,1_. ........Planning Board - Project List and Pnontization 8 End 30-day review period of Comprehensive Plan DEIS
9118.. _.... _.Transportation Plan Open House Early Nov Planning Board and City Council - Draft Transportation Plan
Late Sept......Submdtal of Comprehensive Plan DEIS
Early Oct...... Advisory Committee - Project Cost Estimates and Final Pnormes
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 10, 2024
Page 1
Packet Pg. 200
8.2.a
Public Transportation Survey Responses
o Completed in May 2024
o Total of 290 responses
o Priorities identified (in no priority order)
o Pedestrian connects;
o Bicycle safety;
o Improve active transportation access to mass transit; and
o Balance of safety, infrastructure, and public transportation improvements to create a more
equitable and functional transportation system in Edmonds (_> Complete Streets
Approach)
o Traffic Calming/speeding
Paul Sharman, Transpo Group, reviewed:
• What are the goals of a network?
o Goals of the Planned Pedestrian and Bicycle Networks:
■ Maximize / improve accessibility to:
- Parks, schools, community destinations, transit
- Regional destinations outside the City
■ Supports the land use vision (areas of growth have adequate facilities)
■ Balance connectivity vs. feasibility of network construction (ROW, topographic
challenges)
■ Foster active transportation options and reduce reliance on automobiles
■ Address disparities in access to safe and convenient walking and biking facilities
• Existing Pedestrian Network
o Sidewalk and off-street network
I
05
0 os �
• Previous Comp Plan Projects
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 10, 2024
Page 2
Packet Pg. 201
8.2.a
o Proposed sidewalk projects from the 2015
Transportation Plan
■ 1,700 ft of new sidewalk built since 2015
- Dayton St
— 2nd Ave S J
~_ a
- Walnut St
- Elm St
- Maple St
• Pedestrian Network Map
o Primary/Secondary Routes LEGEND
hUMMF1 N— TY
o Local Streets -^m^
o Not meant to show every street that would _
have sidewalks, but what a connected network
EOmrm Uy lnp
would look like
L
• Pedestrian LOS Map
LEGEND
NaFY lwM M7Mnk.
�I1YFy. CFgFF
�AY�y.F
t•FY�ry.N
_ NmYF,
rrF.w
4 Er.+i
LOS
Rating Standard
Example Facilities,
- Roadway provides
. Sidewalks on both sides of
pedestrianfacilities
Ci y
If1B roadway.
Good accordance with City
with
path
•Multi -use path on one side
standards and planned
of the roadway
networks
Roadway facilities, but
Acceptable pedestrian
• Sidewalk along sid rg one e of
ate roadway, a,
does not fully nvW City
• On -street shoulder facility
standards
for peclestrians
Poor
No facilities exist
• No facilities exist
m
A
4)^
Ne%
O
/
r
r
C6
c .N
O
t-9
N
CD
f 7
N
C
v
E
t
EI
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 10, 2024
Page 3
Packet Pg. 202
8.2.a
• Existing Bicycle Network
o Differentiates facility types
o On -street and off-street networks
• Previous Comp Plan Bike Network
0 2015 proposed bicycle network
0 11.5 miles of bike lanes built since 2015:
■ 76th Ave W
■ 212t1i Ave SW
■ 9' Ave S
■ Bowdoin Way
LEGEND A
E.MYp W lw..
_-c
E.N1Mq W TMNA.tn. \ � ..•aviR
Ynb Cq
• Bicycle Network Map
o Defines ultimate vision for each corridor
■ Some of these reflect more long-term - W�
project vision (i.e Bowdoin has bike lanes
but ultimately a MUP is planned)
• Bicycle LOS Map
A
I M
d
r
_
a�
a
0)
0
v
_o
w
0
le
N
O
N
C
4)
E
t
C�
R
Q
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 10, 2024
Page 4
Packet Pg. 203
8.2.a
Roadway provides cycle . Bike lanes On both fides of
f� facilities in accordance with roadway, or;
City standards and planned • Mufti -use path an one fidf
neMrorks of the roadway
Roadway provides bicycle • Large shoulder or bike IanE
Acceptable facilities , but does not linty Aet to standard or
meet City standards •On -street shoulder facility
for bicyclists
Poor No facilities exist . No facilitres exist
• Vehicle LOS — Travel Speed Based Metric
o
15 corridors for travel speed
Example Street
LEGEND
—Eastbound —Westbound
e�'�'•r'^""
30
..La
MwMaew Q NINW
O
25
Mrr
LOS A
20
ELOS
8
15
—
LOS L
10
LOS D
LOSE
5
0
SR8R8R8R8R8R8R8R8R8R8R8R8R8R8R8R8R8
Time Of Day
• Vehicle LOS
Existing 2024 LOS
f
rr a hwvc.
—S x
WIm
N, SON
p-01r
MI ADM
.MM
9
LEDEMo
crr raM Forecast 2044 LOS
Ox: w
OMB
■ .
oft. + r
v...-..
t_ ..
of4
4. qur
k W
O
A
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 10, 2024
Page 5
Packet Pg. 204
8.2.a
• MMLOS Project Map
o Projects resulting from existing or forecast LOS de
LEGEND
ole
MMLOS PROJECTS BY TYPE (47)-.:Lryd°.,
TZrail Bike Lanes
14 /o
nr
— Ro.dwsy
Roadway Ed.vtl. Uy L.M.
8%
Sidewalk Multi Use
57% Path
19%
r�
• Non-MMLOS Project Map
Projects NOT resulting from existing or forecast
LOS deficient
NON-MMLOS PROJECTS (53)
LEGEND
Roadway
P-00TV"
9a,.
= sw Lb. v.m
Intersection
sa.m ^ - Loin S-
23%
— Roadway
• Inl.ne — Nr -
Ed— Gty Limb
Multi Use Path
19%
A
N
cost estimates under development
A
N
kt� '■-
0 m _
®
Sidewalk t
49%
Patrick Lynch, Transpo Group, reviewed:
• Project Prioritization
o Prioritization Components
■ Proximity to (overall weight):
- Areas of Safety Concern (High)
v
to
d
R
a�
a
to
C
0
v
_o
w
0
le
N
O
N
C
E
t
to
Q
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 10, 2024
Page 6
Packet Pg. 205
8.2.a
- Parks (Medium)
- Schools (Medium)
- Transit Stops (Medium)
- Growth Hubs (Low)
- Public Buildings (Low)
- Hospitals (Low)
- Commercial areas (Low)
PSRC Opportunity Index - measure of equity (High)
- Education
- Economic Health
- Housing and Neighborhood Quality
- Mobility and Transportation
- Health and Environment
Draft Scoring
o Project scoring will help city prioritize capital
projects
o Ranks will be done per project type (intersection
projects not scored against bike lane projects)
o Prioritization won't necessarily reflect buildout
timeline of capital projects due to cost, grant
opportunities, development patterns, etc.
Mr. Hauss reviewed:
f�
Next Steps
o Upcoming planning board meeting on September 11 and public open house September 18
o Project cost estimates
o Draft Transportation Document with draft comprehensive plan
o Update Impact Fees (to be completed in early 2025)
o Aiming to be back to City Council with draft plan in November
Councilmember Tibbott referred to the Prioritization Components slide and asked if measures of equity
were equally rated. Due to the urgency of mobility and transportation due to the opening the light rail
stations, he suggested weighting that higher than the others. Mr. Lynch responded they are weighted
equally, however, access to transit is also scored related to proximity, and specifically related to transit
stops in Edmonds.
Councilmember Nand asked what criteria is used to determine an LOS failure such as was described
northbound on Highway 99. Mr. Sharman referred to the Vehicle LOS slide, explaining the way LOS is
graded is based on percentage of the existing speed limit (chart on the bottom left of the slide). During the
PM Peak hour as speeds go down, LOS goes down. The City's travel demand model and a microsimulation
model to forecast growth in trips on these corridors was used to determine the impact on intersection
performance and travel time along the corridor. For example, if a corridor is at red/F, it is stop and go. For
Highway 99 the red/F LOS is indicative of speeds 10 mph and below during the afternoon commute.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 10, 2024
Page 7
Packet Pg. 206
8.2.a
With regard to a multiuse path (MUP), Councilmember Dotsch recalled that was 10+ feet and asked what
priority that was given. Mr. Sharman referred to the Bicycle Network Map, explaining the greenway loop
concept was included in this map as well as the pedestrian map in that the ultimate vision for a lot of
corridors is a shared use path (pink/purple on the map), a 10-12' paved, grade separated surface for
pedestrian and bicycle use outside the roadway. There are a number of locations with existing pedestrian
and bicycle facilities along the roadway where that project would be a non-MMLOS project and other
places where there is a lack of pedestrian and bicycle facilities where that would be a MMLOS project or a
higher priority. He referred to the Bicycle LOS Map, pointing out on both Highway 99 and SR-104, the
State adopted a Complete Streets Ordinance that requires build out of pedestrian and bicycle facilities along
their corridors. Highway 99 will be a little different because the initial design of some of the Highway 99
improvements includes grade separated bike paths and sidewalks, not a shared use path. The vision for at
least SR-104 at this time is to have a grade separated shared use path on one side of the roadway.
Councilmember Dotsch commented there is a bike path and sidewalk on Bowdoin. One of proposed
sidewalks from 84t1i for 2-4 blocks costs $3.741M. If the goal is to maximize safety, she questioned why
sidewalks would be redone to create a MUP when some existing broken sidewalks should be a higher
priority than something that could cost millions of dollars to complete due to the topography that is not
noted on the flat map. Mr. Sharman answered it probably won't, they are identified in the project list.
Councilmember Dotsch asked who decided a MUP was part of the projects, relaying she did not recall that
coming to council. Mr. Hauss referred to the Bicycle Network Map, advising the purple lines on the Bicycle
Network Map are from the greenway loop that was passed last year. The red route on that map needs further
study.
Councilmember Dotsch responded there was no council action to approve the greenway loop. She recalled
the concept was connecting parks and schools, but the council and public were not certain that was the
connection they wanted to make. She wondered if the intent was the Cadillac version and eliminating
opportunities for a broader scope that can provide more opportunities for better connections. She was trying
to understand how Edmonds can afford anything in that type of vision. Mr. Hauss explained the intent was
to improve the entire active transportation system. These projects were identified so they can be eligible for
grants in the future. For projects to be eligible for future federal or state, they have to be identified in the
transportation plan. Mr. Lynch commented there are a number of projects where that future opportunity is
protected. This is a 20-year plan, but many of these projects will take longer than that to implement. By
including them in the plan is an opportunity to protect the right-of-way or the opportunity to implement
these projects in the future, especially some of the lower priority projects.
Councilmember Paine commented it was good to know the genesis of the idea. There are three state routes
in Edmonds, 196t'', SR-104 and Highway 99 that could potentially require the multimodal transportation
required by the state. In conversations with Community Transit, Puget Drive is a very difficult road to add
multimodal facilities because it is very steep and narrow. There are 49 sidewalk projects, 6 bike lanes and
about 20 MUP and protecting those for future grant opportunities will be helpful for the community
especially with the vehicle LOS. Bigger roads cannot be built along Highway 99 to improve LOS, vehicle
traffic will need to be managed as well as provide for other modes of transportation particularly as Puget
Sound becomes more congested. She suggested prioritizing the things that work well in Edmonds as well
as building non -vehicle capacity.
Councilmember Paine referred to the change in LOS from intersection travel speed to corridor travel speed
and asked if that was a state mandate. Mr. Lynch answered it was not a state mandate, it was something the
City chose to do. Councilmember Paine observed subject matter experts agree that is a better method, but
it is a different methodology than what the community is used to. Mr. Lynch responded a lot of communities
are moving away from intersection based LOS. One of the reasons is the projects needed to mitigate
intersection often are signalization, intersection widening and adding turn lanes which is often at odds with
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 10, 2024
Page 8
Packet Pg. 207
8.2.a
other goals for pedestrian and bicycle safety where shorter crossing distances and tighter intersections are
preferred. The corridor based travel time metric is inclusive of a variety of projects that mitigate that
particular standard. It can include intersection projects as well as other roadway projects and technology
such as improved efficiencies of signals. There are a variety of projects inclusive of the corridor travel time.
Mr. Lynch continued, in addition it is more connected to transit speed and reliability and a measure of the
quality of transit service in the community. Corridor projects that improve travel time in corridors are also
improving the speed and reliability of the transit service in those corridors. The way that the system is laid
out encompasses all the transit routes, not only now but routes in Community Transit's long range plan.
Mr. Sharman added migrating to a corridor travel speed system is a more indicative of everyone's everyday
experience. Everyone is familiar with Google maps which indicates how long it will take to get from A to
B, versus the time it takes to get through an intersection. He referred to the Vehicle LOS map, commenting
travel speeds with green, yellow and red are more intuitive for people nowadays to understand.
Council President Olson said felt exactly the same way and came to it independently and had sent an email
to staff about the MUP. Councilmembers are not just stewards of taxes that are generated locally, but also
federal taxes. If something is good enough, she did not think the City should get a federal grants to make it
ideal. She supported having a MUP where nothing currently exists. Ultimately having the council vote on
how to proceed would be beneficial so what the council expects and wants to see happen is incorporate into
the plan. She recalled a resident brought up the idea of a crosswalk across 100t' to Firdale Village, but that
didn't end up being included in the study. That business center will only get bigger, more thriving and dense
over time and there is really no connection to the neighborhood because there is no safe crossing. Having
a crosswalk would almost be an economic development driver to help the neighborhood feel safer about
reaching that business center. She had hoped to see that in the plan but it was not.
Council President Olson referred to the prioritization of the list and asked if that would be the result of this
process or something staff does after the transportation plan is completed. Mr. Lynch answered it will be
part of the transportation plan; the team is working through the cost estimates and project prioritization.
Councilmember Chen commented the transportation plan is a component of the comprehensive plan so it
would be wise to align the transportation plan based on prioritization criteria and at the same time looking
at centers and hubs to ensure the opportunity to make centers and hubs more connected is not missed. He
referred to Council President Olson's example of the Firdale Village crossing and cited others such as in
the upper bowl, 76t1i, SR-104, etc. He recommended aligning those to avoid missing opportunities.
Councilmember Eck commented due to finite resources, the City needs to continue moving toward a better
budget situation and to a smart way to assess the highest priorities today and into the future. She referred
to the Prioritization Components slide, commenting that is an objective way to look at how best to invest
resources now and in the future. She empathized with less populated areas where sidewalks may be
crumbling and may not meet this criteria. Making projects eligible for grants means existing City resources
can be used for things like repair. She supported identifying projects to make them eligible for funding
while looking at these important criteria to set the City up for success in the future.
Councilmember Nand asked if a neighborhood that is passionate about sidewalks finds itself on the lower
end of the prioritization, especially if they have homeowners association, could self -advocate for voluntary
assessments or seek their own grant funding. Mr. Hauss answered not that he was familiar with. Mr. English
pointed out via a local improvement district (LID), a neighborhood could establish a district of assessment
for properties that would benefit from the sidewalks. That is something allowed by state law as a tool to
fund sidewalks.
Councilmember Paine referred to comments about grants and preferred to look at this as 20-year project
list. She did not believe the City would be in same situation in 5 or 10 years as economic cycles are a reality.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 10, 2024
Page 9
Packet Pg. 208
8.2.a
Grants extend local dollars for projects and Public Works staff are masters at finding grants for
infrastructure. She feared not looking at all the financial opportunity that helps support transportation was
borrowing trouble, pointing out the area will just get more crowded and traffic will get heavier as people
drive to the Mountlake Terrace light rail station. She suggested moving up to 10,000-foot level and look at
what will be possible in 10 years. Grants help the City get there by extending local dollars to work better
and smarter.
Councilmember Tibbott said his comment is related to Councilmembers Eck and Paine's comments about
priorities. He was surprised the MUP on SR-104 ranks higher than Highway 99 as it would be extremely
expensive to create a MUP on that corridor. The MUP on Bowdoin makes an important east -west
connection to the new transportation systems. In looking at the Draft Scoring slide, the Bowdoin MUP isn't
even ranked. Mr. Hauss answered it is not included there because it is a non-MMLOS project. He referred
to the non-MMLOS project map which includes the Bowdoin MUP.
Councilmember Tibbott was surprised the Bowdoin MUP was not ranked higher than SR-104 due to its
connectivity to transit. It seemed like the State has put a heavy foot on the prioritization systems and really
wants a MUP on SR-104 which sounds like an unfunded mandate. Unless the state is willing to provide
100% of the funding, he did not see that as a priority. He concluded the MUP on SR-104 is something the
State wants the City to do when there are other projects that are more important. He agreed with
Councilmember Paine about having projects on the list so they are eligible for grants.
Councilmember Dotsch pointed out when staff is seeking grants, most requires a local match as well as
staff time. She recalled when doorbelling, people on 220' expressed concerned about commercial traffic.
She asked about commercial truck routes, noting trucks seem to be using local streets to get around traffic,
and suggested the maps identify where commercial truck traffic is allowed. A lot of trucks use 220t' to
reach 9t1i even though they are not supposed to. The maps also do not identify emergency escape routes.
Edmonds is a highly challenging area, kind of a dead end like Lahaina, Hawaii; she wanted to ensure roads
that are supposed to be exit routes are free and clear to facilitate getting people out. Road diets are creating
issues for emergency vehicles because there is not enough space for other vehicles to move out of the way.
There are only a few ways in and out of the Bowl and she wanted to ensure escape routes were not crowded
with an idealized opportunity that creates a safety issue.
Councilmember Dotsch pointed out the relationship between land use and transportation. From her
understanding as a result of following a lot of planning, once those are more multi -use, there is more ability
to upzone land around it or increase density because there are other opportunities to get there. Edmonds has
bus routes, but most of the buses she sees are empty. Edmonds doesn't do bike counts; bike counts weren't
done for Main Street and the bike counts on 76t'', 84', Bowdoin and 9t' were very minimal. The City doesn't
go back to see if bike lanes are being used. She thought bike lanes were more for commuters than for
Sunday bicyclists. She wanted the limited roads that exist to get in and out of Edmonds to be realistically
usable for the people who live here and not become an idealized flat map planning idea that doesn't match
Edmonds' topography, road widths, etc.
Council President Olson clarified with regard to grants, she was 120% in favor of getting grants, but did
not want the City to obtain grants for projects that are nice to have versus something the City needs because
they fund something the City doesn't need or takes away funds that another city needs. For example, when
there is something on Bowdoin that works well and accommodates all modes, that is not something she
wanted the City to get a grant for it. In areas that do not have anything, she would love to get a grant for a
MUP.
With regard to obtain grants, Councilmember Chen referred to the potential for a bicycle overpass linking
King and Snohomish Counties. It depends on who you ask, maybe that's a nice to have or it's necessary.
Mr. Hauss said that project is included on the project spreadsheet.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 10, 2024
Page 10
Packet Pg. 209
8.2.a
Councilmember Eck added to Councilmember Tibbott's comments about a MUP on SR-104, commenting
it seems like strategic work. She has heard community members' interest in direct access to the new light
rail station in Mountlake Terrace. She also assumed bicyclists would also prefer a direct route and safe way
to get to the Mountlake Terrace transit center. It seems the State is looking for the best ways to move
multimodal transportation to encourage and facilitate the flow to that station. Mr. Hauss agreed a MUP on
SR-104 would provide an improved connection. Currently 220t1i is the direct route to light rail; a MUP there
would create a connection from both directions including to the Edmonds station.
3. INTERVIEW CANDIDATES FOR APPOINTMENT TO CITY BOARD OR COMMISSION
1. INTERVIEW CANDIDATE FOR APPOINTMENT TO THE PLANNING BOARD
Councilmembers interviewed George Bennett for appointment as the planning board alternate (responses
in italics):
I've lived in Edmonds 12-13 years, spent a week in every state, moved 27 times, Edmonds is the place I've
lived the longest. I used to live on 212'h in the subdivision that was new 10 years ago and now live in
Seaview. I own a small consulting firm that works with middle market and lower middle market private
equity acquired firms or family owned firms as they move to larger companies. I love Edmonds and what it
stands for and that's why I'm here.
Councilmember Tibbott asked about his interest in planning and in particular transportation projects,
zoning, and parks. For me, you weigh everything with the cost. I heard about direct access to the parking
garages, my wife uses the Sounder when she goes downtown to work on the Sound Transit project. She has
no idea how to get into the Lynnwood parking garage because it's not clearly marked, but Mountlake
Terrace is very easy. Sound Transit is broke; do we want to follow their model of being broke or follow the
model ofproviding direct access wisely? Planning is about doingfiscally responsible things for the majority
of the population and doing it in a way that's transparent and open. Frankly, I wish I could take my
community and put a golf course behind it, but you can't have all those amenities, we're not Mill Creek.
For me zoning needs to be equitable. In a way zoning is tax legislation. You get rid of some to create an
environment and you create some to create an environment. Recently we've been getting rid of legislation
to create the ability to upzone and build higher and more density. I don't think Edmonds has the capacity
for that density, but if it's done wisely such as in the hubs, perhaps it can be done. Planning is economic
development. I was on the Economic Development Commission and we talked about parking; that's not
economic development, that just fits more people into the area. For me planning is how to put businesses
in a responsible way, not another car lot where we get most of our revenue, but how are we going to include
mixed use in a responsible way and how to attract more revenue so the City can complete more projects.
Councilmember Chen expressed appreciation for his equity lens when mentioning land use and upzoning.
He asked about his view of the equity in the 2017 Highway 99 Subarea Plan. It's hard to describe what's
equitable in the plan. The planters on Highway 99, there's a cost to maintaining those. Shoreline's planters
are weed beds. It looks like someone pulled some weeds in the City's planters recently. Is that equitable to
create weed beds in the middle of that community? No, it's not equitable. It was a great idea but in practice
can we afford to maintain it, no. The money could have been better spent on sidewalks in the Lake Ballinger
area or better traffic control. That is equitable access. Planters are beautiful but there's nothing equitable
about them particularly if you can't afford to maintain them. The project at the Burlington Coat Factory,
public/private partnerships are awesome, but I don't think the public part should be the majority of the
money and the one left on the hook if it goes south. If developers wanted to develop that property, they
would have developed it a long time ago.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 10, 2024
Page 11
Packet Pg. 210
Councilmember Nand asked what he has done to familiarize himself with the planning board's work. I've
paid close attention to what's happening in the City, particularly from a fiscal perspective. I want to
preserve Edmonds in a smart way, I want to preserve what Edmonds offers, I like the single family aspect
of Edmonds. I also like the convenience of the grocery stores, I like the Bowl and coming to a cute little
seaside community. I pay attention to what council does and I'm relatively active in local politics, maybe
from behind the scenes. I read what the council and the planners do and sometimes I say something about
it, but most times I don't.
Councilmember Eck commented he will bring a great perspective to the planning board. As he thinks about
those who are not in the majority and what the City is obligated to do for them, she asked his thoughts about
prioritizing investments. Things should be data driven, what's been successful in the past usually leads to
success in the future. Back to the planters example, it wouldn't have taken long for the City's planners to
look at the planters in Shoreline to say maybe we should come up with some other novel concept other than
a weed bed. There are underserved communities in Edmonds. When I lived in Five Corners, we were the
crazies who lived close to Highway 99, we were actually called that in My Edmonds News during the
roundabout fiasco. I thought it was a beautiful idea to create a gateway to the Bowl that brought some of
the artsy stuff out of the Bowl and into other neighborhoods. If you drive towards Highway 99, the street
right before Highway 99, why aren't we spending money there or in Lake Ballinger on sidewalks? I haven't
heard anything about the pocket parks that were part of the Highway 99 plan. I haven't heard about any
changes in zoning for the car lots or any enforcement for them picking up their trash. We can spend money
to make things more beautiful but I think if we enforced the policies, Highway 99 might be a much better
place. I look at it from fiscally responsible standpoint and you spend money where you need to spend money.
Councilmember Paine commented the planning board is a mixture of looking at land use and zoning as well
as reviewing code before it comes to council. She asked his experience in land use and code review. Code
review, limited at best. I am a self-taught code reviewer. I worked for HDR Engineering for 12 years, I was
a regional controller for them and the interim CFO for HDR Canada for a year. I started in Jacksonville,
part of my job was to work with project teams to review not only the earned value of the projects but where
they were in the planning phase, budget and cost control, project control, deliverables and also openminded
discussions about alternatives to be presented to a jurisdiction. In doing that l was introduced to the concept
of planning. Being a homeowner in Edmonds, if you're not pay attention to zoning, you never know what
they'll build next door so you have to pay attention.
Council President Olson commented this will be a very busy year on the planning board. She highlighted
skills listed on his resume including public projects, design processes, planning requirement, costs, and
transportation, concluding he sounded like a really good fit. She thanked him for bringing his background
and experience to City service.
Mayor Rosen advised in the next part of the process, the council will have an opportunity to endorse his
appointment.
2. INTERVIEW CANDIDATE FOR APPOINTMENT TO THE PLANNING BOARD
Councilmembers interviewed Jon Milkey for appointment to the planning board (responses in italics)
I had a 22 year Coast Guard career as a civil engineer. Most pertinent to what's here, I ran the planning
branch for the west coast pacific area. Planning is a little different obviously for federal installations. When
we get a new ship homeported, we know our requirements for ships. Obviously master planning in a city is
a little more extensive. Although diversity of customers, ship drivers, marine safety and pilots are a pretty
diverse group and like oil and water. I'm sure you see more diversity in a city, but it is a pretty diverse
group in the Coast Guard. Most of my career was support in an advisory capacity. I was coaching and
doing random construction work and I missed my role in service. I signed on with Falkin Associates who
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 10, 2024
Page 12
Packet Pg. 211
8.2.a
works with affordable housing. This morninglwas at a LIHIsite in Olympia andFm working on theproject
behind Safeway with Housing Hope and I also worked on projects for Mercy Housing. Since 2016 until
now, I've done extensive workfor affordable housing, more from the construction side, not the development
side. I wanted to continue my role in service; I work part-time in construction. My whole career has been
in service. I try to keep up with the issues and follow the planning board and council so I think I can get up
to speedpretty quick. As an engineer with construction and affordable housing experience, I think I can be
an asset to the planning board and respectfully request your confirmation.
Council President Olson said she has had the opportunity to engage with him via email and meeting face-
to-face once and his input and insights were always super helpful to her as a councilmember. He brought a
lot of expertise to this role and she was glad he wanted to serve, noting it would be a very busy role.
Councilmember Paine expressed appreciation for his thoughtful emails. The planning board looks at zoning
and land use and reviews codes before they come to council. She asked about his experience looking at
zoning and land use and doing code review. I'm definitely a little weak in code review. I purchased a house
in Edmonds and submitted all the permitting for renovation, including critical area checklist and zoning.
Since following the city council and planning board, I have reviewed the code pretty extensively, looking
at lot coverage, building heights, setback, and things like that so I'm more familiar now than I was. As a
project manager at St Luke for a $3 million renovation, I worked extensive with the City of Shoreline.
Councilmember Chen referenced diversity in Edmonds, and asked his understanding of the 2017 Highway
99 subarea plan and how it fits into the hub and center proposal in the comprehensive plan. I do not have
detailed familiarization with the 2017 plan. I looked at the zoning recently to see what was within the realm
of possibility, especially after taking the light rail to Mountlake Terrace and recognizing Edmonds is a city
of the future now. I lived in San Francisco for 10 years and used light rail and mass transit. Highway 99 is
the gateway to the Puget Sound via a transportation hub. Why can't we have the best Highway 99 corridor
in King and Snohomish County? Shoreline looks really nice, but it's not incorporated as part of a city; I
lived in Shoreline, it's a bedroom community. Edmonds has an International District and a Medical
District. Why can't it be incorporated into a larger concept? We have a blank slate with the comprehensive
plan, it just takes some effort. Councilmember Chen responded the current plan is to leave Highway 99
alone and he welcomed Mr. Milkey's input.
Councilmember Nand asked what he had done to familiarize himself with the work of the planning board.
I've attended two planning board meetings virtually, reviewed the planning board notes, and watched
planning board videos. I printed the most recent copy of the aggressive agenda for the remainder of the
year. I don't know how the council will address the comprehensive plan, the EIS, and all the other issues.
I realize it's a very aggressive agenda. I reviewed the transportation issue, I've been following the
comprehensive plan, I've read the land use and housing elements and the previous comprehensive plan and
I've been emailing with Chair Mitchell on a number of issues. I'm doing everything I can to get up to speed.
On my own I have a number of ideas and have done a lot of research, but collaborating with seven other
members provides a tenfold education.
Councilmember Dotsch asked if there was anything else from his current work or education that would help
him be engaged right away with everything coming up with the planning board. My master's degree is in
environmental engineering. When I was in the Coast Guard, we inherited a few Navy bases. The past
practice from the WWII vintage bases was if you can dump it on the back 40, that's what you did. So I
managed one of the biggest Coast Guard cleanups with the EPA Region 10. I have a pretty detailed
environmental engineering background. With that, the bigger picture is how environmentally conscious
Edmonds is. Between the aquifers, the creeks, steep slopes, Puget Sound, and the Unocal cleanup, tying in
that experience and building on that to add to the comprehensive plan.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 10, 2024
Page 13
Packet Pg. 212
8.2.a
Councilmember Eck said as someone experienced in nonprofits, she was particularly pleased about the
work he was doing with affordable and working class housing and liked his remarks about whole Edmonds.
She asked how his affordable housing project experience will show up in the planning board's work. As
you know, Edmonds is a tough city for affordable housing. The Edmonds Lutheran project is nearly
complete, getting a start in Edmonds, the land costs are a big issue. They built on Magnuson Park; property
values were lower due to transition from the Navy departing. I've read through the comprehensive plan,
I'm not sure how many more incentives you can offer to spur affordable housing in Edmonds. Between
reducing impact fees, permit review timelines, incentivizing building sizes and heights, incentives like that
will attract developers if they can make affordable housing pencil out. I'm doing building and capital needs
assessments for affordable housing under the WCRA program and the Department of Commerce. A
majority of these are in Marysville, Stanwood, Monroe, Bellingham, Burlington, Mt. Vernon, Kingston,
there is very little housing south due to the cost of land. Incentivizing and partnering such as partnering
with Housing Hope. Mercy Housing has built some beautiful housing; I'm working with them on an
apartment building at Angle Lake. I worked with LIHI in north Seattle. It's money and partnerships and I
don't know what more incentives we can offer to spur affordable housing development.
Mayor Rosen advised in the next part of the process, the council will have an opportunity to endorse his
appointment.
ADJOURNMENT
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 6:31 pm.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 10, 2024
Page 14
Packet Pg. 213
8.3
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 09/24/2024
Approval of Council Meeting Minutes September 10, 2024
Staff Lead: Council
Department: City Clerk's Office
Preparer: Scott Passey
Background/History
N/A
Recommendation
Approval of Council Meeting minutes as part of the Consent Agenda.
Narrative
Council meeting minutes are attached.
Attachments:
2024-09-10 Council Minutes
Packet Pg. 214
8.3.a
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MEETING
DRAFT MINUTES
September 10, 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
1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE
STAFF PRESENT
Phil Williams, Acting Public Works Director
Rob English, City Engineer
Bertrand Hauss, Transportation Engineer
Beckie Peterson, Council Executive Assistant
Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
Scott Passey, City Clerk
Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator
The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 6:59 pm by Mayor Rosen in the Council
Chambers, 250 5t' Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually. The meeting was opened with the flag salute.
2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Councilmember Dotsch read the City Council Land Acknowledge Statement: "We acknowledge the
original inhabitants of this place, the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and their successors the Tulalip Tribes,
who since time immemorial have hunted, fished, gathered, and taken care of these lands. We respect their
sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and we honor their sacred spiritual connection with the land
and water."
3. ROLL CALL
City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present.
4. PRESENTATIONS
1. PUGET SOUND STARTS HERE PROCLAMATION
Mayor Rosen read a proclamation proclaiming the month of September 2024 as Puget Sound Starts Here
Month in the City of Edmonds. He presented the proclamation to Acting Public Works Director Phil
Williams.
Mr. Williams thanked the City for the proclamation on behalf of Public Works and several other
departments. There are several ways the department executes on this promise including street crews who
sweep the streets to keep material from washing into storm drains and into Puget Sound and stormwater
crews who do their best to collect and appropriately route stormwater through facilities for treatment and
discharge to Puget Sound under controlled conditions and keep erosion to a minimum. There have been
some spectacular rain storms in the past and more can be expected in the future. Other areas of the City in
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 10, 2024
Page 1
Packet Pg. 215
8.3.a
addition to Public Works are also involved in protecting Puget Sound including the wastewater division
which operates the treatment plant.
2. MAYOR'S FINANCE UPDATE
Mayor Rosen reported August financials will be presented to the finance committee next week. The goal is
to provide a formal budget presentation to the council on October 1 st. Efforts to inform the budget include
the statistically valid community survey and open community survey, departments creating budgets for
their programs, scoring process by the internal team and the Budgeting By Priorities Community Advisory
Panel, and six focus groups are planned to help inform information from the survey including young
families, BIPOC population, housing affordability, equitability, safety, and members of the engaged
community. The budget team is meeting with directors independently to start the process of aligning their
budgets. Council is holding a hearing today to help inform the budget and is looking at other outreach
opportunities to engage the community.
In advance of the August financials, Mayor Rosen relayed the three sources of General Fund revenue,
property tax, sales tax, and development -related revenues, are higher than the same time last year. YTD
2024 sales tax revenues are $102,652 higher than the same time last year, but $252,816 under the budget
forecast. YTD property tax revenue is $297,028 higher than the same time in 2023, but $252,405 lower
than the budget forecast. YTD development -related revenues are $385,607 higher than same time in 2023.
Development -related revenues include permit fees, fire inspection fees, engineering fees, etc. The City has
received 88% of the $1,840,000 budgeted for 2024 and August is only 66% of the way through the year
which is good news. However, unlike property and sales taxes, development fees are difficult to predict and
can change significantly month -to -month.
Mayor Rosen continued, in total property tax, sales tax and development fees are approximately $400,000
higher than this point last year, but approximately $505,000 lower than the budget forecast. The intent is to
be far more conservative in forecasting revenues in the 2025 budget. Historically, the City budgets for the
revenue that is forecast, so if revenues are overestimated, it is a set up for what Edmonds is experiencing.
Acting Finance Director Kim Dunscombe is tracking economic fluctuations and evaluating long term
investment opportunities to ensure the City's money is doing as well as it can.
5. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON, TO
APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER CHEN, TO
PULL ITEM 20 FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA, RESOLUTION FOR FINANCIAL POLICIES,
AND MAKE IT COUNCIL BUSINESS ITEM 10.4, AND ADD RECONSIDERATION OF THE
MEADOWDALE ANNEXATION VOTE FROM THE AUGUST 13, 2024 REGULAR MEETING AS
COUNCIL BUSINESS 10.5.
UPON ROLL CALL, AMENDMENT CARRIED (4-3), COUNCILMEMBERS CHEN, DOTSCH
AND NAND AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS ECK,
TIBBOTT AND PAINE VOTING NO.
MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
There were no audience comments.
7. RECEIVED FOR FILING
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 10, 2024
Page 2
Packet Pg. 216
8.3.a
1. WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS
2. JULY FINANCIAL REPORT
3. JULY 2024 MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT
4. CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FOR FILING
8. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO
APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED (6-1). The agenda items
approved are as follows:
1. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL SPECIAL JOINT MEETING MINUTES JULY 22, 2024
2. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES AUGUST 6, 2024
3. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES AUGUST 6, 2024
4. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES AUGUST 13, 2024
5. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES AUGUST 13, 2024
6. APPROVAL OF COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES AUGUST 20, 2024
7. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES AUGUST 20, 2024
8. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES AUGUST 30, 2024
9. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL AND BENEFIT CHECKS, DIRECT DEPOSIT AND WIRE
PAYMENTS
10. PD SPEED AWARENESS TRAILER DONATION
11. COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE SECTION 9 - MOTIONS
12. RESOLUTION REGARDING COUNCIL PRIORITIES FOR THE 2025-2026 BIENNIAL
BUDGET
13. APPROVAL OF STREET DEDICATION AT INTERSECTION OF 162ND ST SW AND
74TH PL W
14. APPROVE RESOLUTION FOR 7317 LAKE BALLINGER WAY PROPERTY PURCHASE
15. ORDINANCE TO REZONE 9514 - 228TH ST SW (PLN2024-0032)
16. CONFIRM APPOINTMENT OF PLANNING BOARD CANDIDATE BENNETT
17. CONFIRM APPOINTMENT OF PLANNING BOARD CANDIDATE MILKEY
18. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL AND BENEFIT CHECKS, DIRECT DEPOSIT AND WIRE
PAYMENTS
19. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS AND WIRE PAYMENTS
21. RESOLUTION CLARIFYING COUNCIL INTENT FOR COMMAND PAY STRUCTURE
9. PUBLIC HEARING
1. FUTURE PROPERTY TAX LEVY IMPLICATIONS OF AN RFA ANNEXATION
Mayor Rosen described the process for the public hearing which will include a presentation by
Councilmember Tibbott, public comment, and council deliberation.
Councilmember Tibbott commented this is an opportunity for the council to hear from the public and for
the council to have a brief discussion. A special meeting is scheduled next week where the council will
deliberate further and potentially take action. He reviewed:
Fire/EMS service options considered
o Join the Regional Fire Authority via Annexation
o Contract Fire/EMS Service with another city
o Contract Fire/EMS Service with the RFA
o Form Edmonds Fire Department
Specific question for discussion
o If the City of Edmonds joins the RFA via annexation in 2026, should the Edmonds City Council
change the amount levied for the General Property Tax for 2026?
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 10, 2024
Page 3
Packet Pg. 217
8.3.a
• Statement by Mayor Mike Rosen — June 4, 2024
"I would suggest that is a decision you need to make before you go to the voters. It is a decision
that the Council will make to keep some, none or all. It is a council decision that would be part of
the ask to the voters."
• Why is this decision important now?
o Variable that can be locked down for future Council and voter decisions
o Biennial Budget (2025+2026)
• Fire/EMS service decision timeline
o December 2023: South County Fire provides notice of intent to terminate Fire/EMS contract
with City of Edmonds (Fire/EMS services) effective December 2025
o June 2024: Council passes Resolution #1547 identifying joining the RFA by annexation as
preferred alternative for Fire/EMS services
o June 2024: Council passes Resolution # 1549 initiating the process/requesting annexation to the
RFA
o August/September 2024: RFA Plan and pre -annexation Plan under discussion
o October 2024 (anticipated): South County Fire Commissioners will consider resolution
amending RFA Plan and grant the request of the City to annex
o December/January (anticipated):
■ Council will consider approving RFA Plan and pre -annexation agreement
■ Public Hearing
■ Council will consider resolution placing annexation on ballot
o April 22, 2025: Special Election regarding RFA Annexation
■ Simple majority of Edmonds registered voters required for approval
■ Annexation would take effect no later than August 1, 2025
o January 1, 2026: Edmonds property owners would begin paying RFA levy/benefit charges
General property tax levy decision timeline
o Annual process wherein the city council determines the taxes that will be levied the following
year, up to the voter -approved level + 1%
o November 2024: Public hearing/ordinance for the 2025 General Property Tax Levy
o November 2025: Public hearing/ordinance for the 2026 General Property Tax Levy
Fire/EMS Contract
o Under the current contract:
■ Edmonds pays the RFA to provide fire/EMS
■ Property owners indirectly fund contract costs out of the taxes they pay to the city,
including a voter approved EMS levy and city general property tax levy
Fire/EMS Contract 2024 - 2026
2024 Fire Service Contract Expen
City EMS Levy 1 d
$4.35 M $1.2 M $6M
i ; l F.., .
2025 Fire Service Contract Expense $12. 1 M (assuming 5%)
City EMS Lewy I I General Fund
$4.4 M $1.2 M $6.5M
(ds nu g.l%) Ti ,p ,t F
2026 Fire Service Contract Expense $19.5 M (SCF letter 6/18/2024)
City EMS Levy I I General Fund
$4.44M $1.2M $13.9M
• Fire/EMS Contract 2024 2026 Funding
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 10, 2024
Page 4
Packet Pg. 218
8.3.a
2024 Fire Service Contract Expense $11.5M
City EMS Levy I I General Fund Funded with ARPA
S-1.35 M $1.2 M $6M
T,—p°rt F-,
2025 Fire Service Contract Expense $12. 1 M (assuming 5%)
City EMS Levy I I General Fund
$4.4 M $1.2 M S6.5M
(assuming +P') Transport Fees
2026 Fire Service Contract Expense $19.5 M (SCF letter 6/18/2024)
City EMS General Fund AMWi4???
$4.44M $1.2M $13.9M
If RFA Annexation — 2026
o If Edmonds annexed into the RFA:
■ Edmonds would no longer fund Fire/EMS out of its city budget and would no longer collect
an EMS levy.
■ City property owners would pay the RFA directly through Fire/EMS levies and a benefit
charge.
$0 No fire service contract expense to City of Edmonds
$6M - $6+.5M (General Fund previously applied
$0 $0 to Fire Service Contract)
No City EMS Levy
No Transport Fees
Edmonds property owners pay RFA directly
$19.5* M in RFA general levy, RFA EMS levy, RFA benefit charge (*2024 figures from SCF letter21612024)
If RFA Annexation 2026 — Taxpayer Impact (2024 valuations)
o Annexation taxpayer cost impact on an average home (SCF Fire letter dated February 6, 2024)
■ Scenario 1 "All": The City of Edmonds retains the dollars in its general fund that paid for
the fire contract, a total of $5,965,492.
■ Scenario 2 "None": The City of Edmonds reduces its general fund levy by $5,965,492, the
amount currently funding the fire contract.
■ Scenario 3 "Some": The City of Edmonds reduces its general property tax levy by a
different specific absolute dollar amount.
o Calculations based on 2,000 sq. ft. home with $836,183 AV (2024 Valuations)
General/Fire Benefit Total Annual
Levy EMS Levy Charge Increase Monthly
Scenario 1: City does not reduce general levy $ 1,303.36 $ 290.72 $ 71.64 $ 809.24 $67.44
Scenario 2: $5,965,637 general levy reduction $ 978.46 $ 290.72 $ 71.64 $ 484.33 $40.36
(SCF Fire Letter dated February 6, 2024)
Pros and Cons
o Per the several meetings and reports, the City's budget gap is in excess of $20M, way in excess
of the amount that can be met by cuts of services and spending alone making some revenue
change a given.
o On the other hand, there are benefits to keeping the issues of fire service completely separate
from the fiscal emergency.
The specific question for this public hearing:
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 10, 2024
Page 5
Packet Pg. 219
8.3.a
o If the City of Edmonds joins the RFA via annexation in 2026, should the Edmonds City Council
change the amount levied for the General Property Tax for 2026?
Councilmember Tibbott advised the council wants to hear the public's views on the property tax levy for
2026, in particular what portion of the levy should be retained, all, some or none.
Mayor Rosen opened the public participation portion of the public hearing.
Jim Ogonowski, Edmonds, said he could say a lot about this subject, but will focus on the question at
hand. The operative word is `if," if the City joins the RFA. To him the question is simple, who's money is
it? It's not the council's money, it's the taxpayers' money that they have allocated to the City to spend on
fire and EMS services. If the taxpayers are not going to get that service from the City, if that money will
not be used for the intended purpose, the money rightly should come back to the citizens. Saying it another
way as his mother would say, if it doesn't, it's stealing. He questioned how the council would phrase it.
Hearing no further comment, Mayor Rosen closed the public hearing.
10. COUNCIL BUSINESS
1. DISCUSSION OF FUTURE PROPERTY TAX LEVY IMPLICATIONS OF AN RFA
ANNEXATION
Councilmember Tibbott said although the public hearing is closed, council will continue to accept comment
from the public for consideration during its deliberations at next week's special meeting. Next week will
provide an opportunity for the council to deliberate and there will also be an opportunity for public comment
at that meeting. He recognized the importance of this decision, commenting there are a lot of factors that
go into whether to retain the funds for general fund purposes.
Councilmember Nand thanked Councilmember Tibbott, Council President Olson and Council Executive
Assistant Beckie Peterson for their hard work on the presentation. She commented it is very helpful for
councilmembers and the public to see the modeling on the direct impact to taxpayers. She found the
information provided for the 2,000 square foot $800,000 AV house very helpful, that reducing the general
levy would be a difference of $18.06/month. She relayed her personal hope that taxpayers, property owners
and constituents will see the value of the City retaining 100% of the levy to address the structural budget
gap and retain the level of staffing and service that is currently provided.
Council President Olson referenced the public comment that the money is collected for fire service,
commenting while it is a core responsibility of government to provide that service, the $4M in the chart is
specially collected for fire/EMS, but the $6M from the General Fund is not specifically designated for fire.
She thanked the residents who have submitted online comments and emails and the resident who spoke at
tonight's at public hearing. She recognized the debates for the governor and presidential races were tonight
which may have impacted the number of people commenting at the public hearing. As Councilmember
Tibbott mentioned, the public can submit comments during the coming week for the purposes of informing
the council's decision.
Councilmember Paine urged the public to watch and listen to tonight's very well done presentation and to
submit comments to the council. This is the beginning of some very transformational decisions that the
community will be asked to make. She looked forward to the public's comments.
Councilmember Dotsch expressed appreciation for the presentation which put the information together in
a very understandable way. She was curious why the $1.2M in transport fees stays static. Councilmember
Tibbott answered transport fees have remained steady over the years. At times transport fees are collected
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 10, 2024
Page 6
Packet Pg. 220
8.3.a
and sometimes they are not so the $1.2M has remained consistent. Those fees have been tracked and that
approximate amount can be depended on although it does vary. If Edmonds joins the RFA, the RFA would
collect the transport fees. Councilmember Dotsch commented it is almost like creating another ARPA, one-
time help in 2026 if the funds are retained, a one-time ability to keep the money coming in. She asked if
there were restriction on how the funds were used. Councilmember Tibbott asked for clarification regarding
the amount she was referring to. Councilmember Dotsch clarified she was referring to the $4M EMS levy.
Councilmember Tibbott explained if Edmonds joins the RFA, the City would no longer collect the EMS
Levy, the RFA would collect that amount.
Councilmember Chen expressed appreciation for this information which was laid out in an easily
understandable way. As the council accepts more comments from the public, he wanted to clarify how the
numbers lay out, to repeat the information but in a different way. If Edmonds joins the RFA, the City no
longer collects the EMS levy or transport fees, those would be collected by the RFA. At the same time, the
RFA will also come up with a levy allowed by state law, and RFA will collect the entire amount from
property tax owners. If Edmonds were to continue levying the $6M in property tax, in a way it is a double
taxation. However, if the City does not collect it, then the City will need to go out to the taxpayers for a
city -initiated levy for that amount. So either way, the net result is the cost to the property owners will
increase.
Councilmember Eck assured the council truly wants feedback from the public. These are complex
decisions, no one's mind is made up yet, the council is still mulling over feedback and information in order
to make a decision. It will ultimately be the voters' decision. This not something the council takes lightly
and it is being done with a lot of due diligence.
Council President Olson referred to the question about the $6M being recurring or one time, once the levy
is established at that level, it remains at that level unless it is lowered and would be the amount the City
collects every year which translates into the $27/month for the average median house. Ms. Peterson
displayed the slide with Scenarios 1 and 2, explaining this is related to the $6M in general property tax for
2026. The City has the option of reducing the levy for 2026 by $6M or a lesser amount or retaining that
amount. Council could reconsider that decision in 2027. There is a maximum legal amount that the City
can levy plus 1% each year. When discussing this decision for 2026, it is assumed the City will levy the
maximum legal amount in 2025 so the decision for 2026 is whether to reduce the levy by $6M to offset the
change in what the RFA would be collecting directly from taxpayers and that the City would no longer be
paying for fire service. In response to Councilmember Dotsch's question, it is not one-time money, it is a
continuation of the existing levy.
City Attorney Jeff Taraday agreed with Ms. Peterson's explanation and added that the council will have an
opportunity every year to decide whether to reduce the levy. As the City climbs out of its fiscal crisis, each
year when the council when makes the decision on taxes to levy the following year, it will have an
opportunity to make that "some, none or all" decision. If the council decides in 2026 to keep all the money,
that doesn't necessarily mean it will be that way forever; each year the council will have the opportunity to
decide whether to keep all the money or reduce the levy if things have been rectified to the point it doesn't
need to levy all of it.
Council President Olson echoed Councilmember Nand's thanks to Councilmember Tibbott for the
stupendous job he did on this presentation.
Councilmember Dotsch clarified if the funds go into the General Fund, they can be used for any purpose,
there are no restrictions. Ms. Peterson agreed the general property tax levy is levied for any municipal
services the City provides The EMS levy is specific to emergency services. Mayor Rosen clarified if the
City joined the RFA, the EMS levy would go away. Councilmember Dotsch said the City would continue
to levy taxpayers for the amount that was used to pay for fire/EMS service. Ms. Peterson answered the
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 10, 2024
Page 7
Packet Pg. 221
8.3.a
amount the City receives from the general property tax in 2024 is approximately $11,500,000 and that is
not specific for any purpose, it goes into the General Fund for all municipal services.
2. PRESENTATION TO AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR THE MAIN STREET
OVERLAY PROJECT
City Engineer Rob English explained this is regarding the Main Street Overlay project, the federal funded
portion between 6' Ave and 8th Ave. The portion between 8' Ave and 91 Ave is locally funded as part of
the annual overlay program. The work between 8' and 9t' is expected to begin next week, weather
permitting. He reviewed:
• Area Map
• Scope of work
o Full width grind and pavement overlay
0 8 new ADA compliant pedestrian ramps
o Bulb -outs at intersections of 7' Ave and 8t' Ave
o Stormwater improvements
o Eastbound bike lane
o Pavement striping
Bid Results
Contractor
Bid Amount
*Taylor's Excavators
$1,347,455
CA Carey Corporation
$1,416,113
*Road Construction NW
$1,433,332
*Titan Earthwork
$1,439,840
Granite Construction
$1,463,710
Engineer's Estimate
$1,192,550
*Non -Responsive bid
Mr. English explained this is the second bid process for this project. The first bids were opened in July and
the two bids were rejected due to non -responsive bid proposals. Five bids were received this time. Taylor's
Excavators provided the low bid this time as well as for the previous bid process. However, Taylor's
Excavators again did not complete their Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) forms correctly so their
bid was rejected. The next lowest bid proposal, from CA Carey Corporation, was evaluated by staff and
found acceptable. WSDOT also reviewed the bid and agreed with the possibility of awarding to CA Carey.
The bid proposals from Titan Earthwork and Road Construction NW were also determined to be
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 10, 2024
Page 8
Packet Pg. 222
8.3.a
nonresponsive. He suspected Titan Earthwork may not have provided supplemental documentation within
48 hours of the bid time knowing they were number four in the bid results. Road Construction NW failed
to provide one of the forms as well. Anticipating the City may bid another federal job in two years, he
planned to have a mandatory pre -bid meeting to educate contractors. The DBE forms are required any time
there is a federal funds and a DBE goal so it is not something unique to Edmonds' bid proposals.
Mr. English continued his review using CA Carey Corporation's bid amount:
• Construction Budget
Item
Roadway Schedule
Stormwater
Total
Contract Amount
$889,018
$527,095
$1,416,113
Construction Mgmt.,
Inspection & Testing 15%
$133,350
$79,060
$212,410
Management Reserve (10%)
$88,900
$52,170
$141,610
Total
$1,111,268
$658,865
$1,770,133
• Funding
Funding Source
Roadway Schedule
Storm Schedule
Total
Federal Funds
$675,565
$675,565
REET 125
$118,295
$118,295
TIB Grant
$317,408
$132,489
$449,897
Stormwater Fund 422
$186,906
$186,906
Stormwater Fund 422 Transfer
$339,470
$339,470
Total
$1,111,268
$658,865
$1,770,133
Mr. English explained bids for the 2024 utility project, opened in May, came in lower than expected so
approximately $260,000 is in the budget and not assigned to any project. That utility project is progressing
very smoothly; the contractor is using multiple crews and proceeding at a quicker pace so savings of
$180,000 are projected based on construction management and contingency fund savings. He recommended
those additional funds, shown as the Stormwater Fund 422 transfer in the above chart, be moved to this
project to make up the shortfall and fund the project as proposed.
Staff recommendation
o Award construction contract to CA Carey Corporation for $1,416,113
o Authorize a 10% management reserve of $141,610
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PAINE, TO
AWARD THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO CA CAREY CORPORATION FOR $1,416,113
AND AUTHORIZE A 10% MANAGEMENT RESERVE OF $141,610.
Council President Olson said she was happy to hear the 2024 utility project was proceeding well and asked
staff to pass on the council's thanks to the contractor. She thanked staff for their hard work on this project,
recognizing the effort it takes to do multiple bid processes. She looked forward to having a smooth Main
Street.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
3. PRESENTATION OF HIGHWAY 99 STAGES 3 AND 4 OVERHEAD UTILITY LINE
CONW.RRION
Transportation Engineer Bertrand Hauss reviewed:
• Introduction
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 10, 2024
Page 9
Packet Pg. 223
8.3.a
Main reasons for conversion
o Safety improvements to transportation system
■ Vehicular clear zone requirements
■ Active transportation safety
- ADA Sidewalk compliance
- Bike lane safety
o Benefits redevelopment
11 Cr
SR99 SB RAISED MEDKN SECTION
A [.0 10 A i.10
NOT TO SCML
4.0'
Stage 3 Existing Conditions Photographs
o Highway 99 @ 244' St SW - overhead utility lines cannot be undergrounded due to high
voltage lines
0 244t1i St SW to 240"i St SW - no overhead utility lines
o North of SR-104 Interchange - no overhead utility lines
o North of SR-104 Interchange/Burlington Coat Factory - no overhead utility lines
o Highway 99 @ 240t' St SW - overhead lines across Highway 99 could be undergrounded
0 240t' St SW to 238t'' St SW - overhead lines on west side (start north of 240t'') - lines crossing
Highway 99 could be undergrounded
o Highway 99 @ 238t' St SW intersection - overhead lines could be undergrounded
Stage 3 Scope of Work
o Length of utility underground conversion along Hwy 99
■ - 850' on west side of Hwy 99
■ - 350' on east side of Hwy 99
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 10, 2024
Page 10
Packet Pg. 224
8.3.a
o Eliminate four existing aerial utility wire crossings on Hwy 99 (high voltage aerial utility
crossing on north side of 244th St. can't be underground)
o No overhead utility lines from 244th St. SW to 150' north of 240th St. SW (on both sides of
corridor)
o Improves safety by removing existing utility poles from clear zone on Hwy 99
• Stage 4 Existing Conditions Photographs
o Highway 99 @ 224' St SW — overhead utility lines on west side could be undergrounded
0 224' St SW and 220t' St SW — overhead utility lines on both sides could be undergrounded
o Highway 99 @ 220t' St SW — high voltage lines crossing Highway 99 cannot be undergrounded
o North of 220t' St SW — overhead lines could be undergrounded
• Stage 4 Scope of Work
o Length of utility underground conversion along Hwy 99
■ 2,400' on west side of Hwy 99
■ 1,450' on east side of Hwy 99
o Eliminate five existing aerial utility wire crossings on Hwy 99 (high voltage aerial crossing at
220th St. can't be underground)
o Improves safety by removing existing utility poles from clear zone on Hwy 99
• Photograph of Joint Utility Trench 76"/212' Project
• Photograph of Vault Construction 76"/212' Project
• SamDle Plan Sheet
.,t
\ UnDS uc ro uc SMVM MWEC"M
• Utility Agency Overhead Cost Contributions
o PUD
■ No existing franchise Utility Agreement
■ Currently being negotiated in effort to increase PUD contribution for such conversion
■ Aerial to aerial credits
o Ziply
■ Aerial to aerial credits
o Comcast
■ Design and construction costs
o Wave
■ Design and construction costs
• Utility Underground Conversion Preliminary Cost Estimates
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 10, 2024
Page 11
Packet Pg. 225
8.3.a
TOTAL COST
$7,306,000
• Comcast
$708,000
• • Wave
$298,000
• City
$6,300,000
,_, includes credit from PUD cost for aerial relocation cost
TOTAL COST
$11,443,000
• Comcast
$1,100,000
• Wave
$843,000
• City
$9,500,000
includes credit from PUD cost for aerial relocation cost
Stage 3 Funding
o Preliminary Cost Estimate $28,300,000
■ All Items (except underground) $22,000,000
■ Underground Utilities (City Cost) $6,300,000
o Funding Sources
■ Connecting Washington $5.35 Million
■ Move Ahead* $22.5 Million
■ REET $45,000
*Confirmed with State that Move Ahead funds can be used for undergrounding
Stage 4 Funding
o Preliminary Cost Estimate
■ All Items (except underground)
■ Underground Utilities (City Cost)
o Funding Sources
■ Secured Federal Grant
■ Connecting Washington
■ City funds (Traffic Impact Fees)
$36,280,000
$26,780,000
$9,500,000
$4,177,500
$1,632,000 (local match)
$3,012,500 (local match)
umm
" uselcm= a,.�� j �.�.. �.■ . F�AA()N�S HINY 99 ST(; d
.. « — ...
Milestones and Schedule
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 10, 2024
Page 12
Packet Pg. 226
8.3.a
i
Preliminary Design
Environmental
WE ARE HERE
® Preliminary Design
Environmental
7
Final Design
Right of Way
Construction
Public Involvement
Final Design
Right of Way
Construction
Public Involvement
Councilmember Paine recalled this has been discussed for a number of years, and originally thought it
couldn't be done. Undergrounding power and telecom is a big bonus for the community because it offers
more system reliability because cars won't be crashing into poles and knocking down lines.
Undergrounding also facilitates the addition of big trees which would help with the heat island effect in that
corridor where there aren't an abundance of trees. She was glad new development will be putting in utility
vaults for undergrounding. With regard to the franchise agreements that need to be worked out with
SnoPUD, she anticipated SnoPUD could be a good partner and interested in helping to financially support
undergrounding costs because this will promote their system reliability. City Attorney Jeff Taraday
answered it is certainly a possibility. The City has not fully exercised its legal muscles with respect to these
franchises so there is room to improve the City's position with respect to the cost of undergrounding and
who pays that cost.
Councilmember Paine commented she would love to see some effort toward that as it helps define the lines
about permitting. Franchise agreements are long lasting things, in her prior work, they were usually three
10 year cycles. It would be great to have franchise agreement negotiations underway with SnoPUD and the
other large telecoms. She was pleased that WSDOT agreed to provide funding for the undergrounding as
part of the grants. It is also great to be able to use state grants as the federal grant match. She asked if the
City would be able to get a federal RAISE grant to provide funding for Stage 4. Mr. Hauss agreed the
amounts are huge so a RAISE grant would definitely be a good candidate for future stages such as
construction of Stage 4. As more progress is made on design, staff will definitely look into grants
opportunities such as RAISE.
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER CHEN, TO ACCEPT
THE PROJECT AND HAVE IT MOVE FORWARD TO THE NEXT LEVEL OF DESIGN.
Councilmember Tibbott commented he learned things from this presentation such as he did not realize there
were certain safety enhancements for the right-of-way, the ability to increase multimodal transportation and
the benefit to future developers which is good for economic development. He expressed support for the
motion. He referred to the map on the introduction slide, and asked about sequencing of the stages. City
Engineer Rob English described the history, explaining the City initially secured funds for Stage 3 through
Connecting Washington and moved the $16.5M programmed for the Waterfront Connector to Highway 99
for Stage 2 for the medians and other work that was completed last year. The City also secured $22.5M
through Move Ahead Washington for Stage 3. On a parallel track, staff was trying to secure federal grants;
the justification and project narrative for 220t' allowed staff to prepare a grant that was very competitive at
the countywide level, whereas some of the other intersections between Stages 3 and 4 wouldn't have scored
well. Therefore the focus was put on Stage 4 and staff was able to secure design and right-of-way grants. If
the City is able to secure more state legislature funding in the future, it can be used to fill that gap along
with any federal grant funds.
Councilmember Tibbott said he understood that for improving Highway 99, but for undergrounding
utilities, it seems inappropriate to start at one end and then hopscotching to the middle. Mr. English said
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 10, 2024
Page 13
Packet Pg. 227
8.3.a
undergrounding is typically done when the project is built. There isn't enough money to do the entire
corridor so it has to be done piecemeal as improvements are done. Councihmember Tibbott asked if the
utility companies are used to that process. Mr. English answered yes, and they will work with the City.
Councilmember Chen said he was excited that this was coming to fruition; moving undergrounding from a
possibility to a reality is a big, pleasant surprise. He asked about maintenance of underground utilities. Mr.
English answered neither he nor Mr. Hauss are electrical engineers, but are aware there are pros and cons
to undergrounding utilities. At meetings he has attended, PUD will make an argument that underground
utilities are more challenging to maintain and locating a problem underground can be more challenging.
However, when lines are aerial, they can be blown down in storms, a vehicle can hit a pole, etc. In some
ways the above ground poles are more exposed to damage and subsequent repair. Councilmember Chen
asked if it was safe to say when maintenance is needed, the technology is there and it is not the City's
responsibility. Mr. English agreed.
Councilmember Nand thanked staff for their hard work and for explaining the City does not have a franchise
agreement with SnoPUD. She was surprised when reading the technical memo that the City would bear
100% of the cost and SnoPUD was bearing none and was hopeful that ratio could be changed. She was
personally very excited as she lives very close to Stage 3 and every year she see the sky turn blue when a
transformer blows and residents lose power for days. She recognized it is also unsafe for PUD workers to
restore power. She hoped with technology advances in the future, high voltage lines could be also be
undergrounded.
Councilmember Eck recognized the potential for attracting additional economic growth in the area. She
loved how this will allow the planting of additional trees, improve walkability and fulfill ADA
improvements which are direly needed. She expressed appreciation for the thorough presentation.
Council President Olson said she was very excited about the prospect of putting utility lines underground.
This is a vital commercial area and experiencing power loss on a regular basis is difficult. She referred to
the staff recommendation, approve the overhead utility line conversion and asked if motion as stated was
what staff intended to have happen tonight. Mr. English answered yes, to convert the overhead utility lines
to underground.
Council President Olson observed these are big dollar amounts and asked if the REET funds identified for
Stage 3 had been accounted for. Mr. English answered the timeline for construction is 2028 which is 4+
years out. The numbers will change as the build date gets closer. REET funds were identified to fund the
difference; depending on when construction of Stage 3 begins, additional REET funds may be necessary or
the City may pursue another grant to secure the shortfall. Stage 4 does not have any construction funding
at this point and lends itself to pursuing another appropriation through the state's transportation program to
make up that shortfall or a RAISE or TIB grant. Stage 4 funding is a work in progress. He was hopeful the
City would be successful in securing grants to narrow the funding gap. Council President Olson commented
the congressman representing Edmonds is on the transportation committee which may be helpful.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
4. RESOLUTION RELATED TO FINANCIAL POLICIES FOR THE CITY OF EDMONDS
Council President Olson advised she pulled this to make a minor amendment.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, ON
PAGE 8 UNDER LONG TERM INTERFUND LOANS, IN THE FIRST SENTENCE STRIKE
"CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS" AND REPLACE IT WITH "ANY MUNICIPAL PURPOSE."
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 10, 2024
Page 14
Packet Pg. 228
8.3.a
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT,
PAGE 8, SECOND PARAGRAPH UNDER LONG TERM INTERFUND LOANS, STRIKE
"CAPITAL" AND REPLACE WITH "MUNICIPAL."
Councilmember Nand asked if Council President Olson had talked with Acting Finance Director
Dunscombe about why the specificity about capital needs had been included in the policies and whether it
was because the funds were restricted and could not be used for any purpose. Council President Olson
responded a lot of these policies were sourced from other cities; possibly the city where it came from had
that in mind, but Edmonds council may choose internal financing for purposes other than capital. She
inquired with Ms. Dunscombe and she provided this guidance. Councilmember Nand thanked Council
President Olson for the clarification and expressed her support for the change.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO
APPROVE THE RESOLUTION IN THE PACKET AND THE FINANCIAL POLICIES
ATTACHED TO IT AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
City Clerk Scott Passey advised the resolution number is 1556.
5. RECONSIDERATION OF THE MEADOWDALE ANNEXATION VOTE
Council President Olson reviewed:
Reconsideration background and narrative
o Those on the prevailing side have a right to ask for reconsideration if they want to change their
vote in the same or following meeting
o The council voted 5-1-1 against the Meadowdale annexation on August 13, 2024, the council's
last regular meeting
■ Annexation was not the intended subject
■ City is in receipt of information that needs to be further vetted
o MRSC — Changing Course: Using Robert's Rules to Alter a Prior Action
■ Per this article offered by MSRC, new information is a good reason to ask for
reconsideration (this may be the case, research ongoing).
Recommendation
o Because we may not yet have the complete facts upon which to vote, and further, because the
August 13t' vote was against annexation instead of against the MUGA boundary change
originally requested by council in Resolution 1530, the cleanest approach upon reopening via
reconsideration is to "postpone indefinitely."
o This would leave the original action of Resolution 1530 to be reviewed by council at a future
time with verified, correct information in the packet. Council could then consider a motion for
MUGA Boundary Change.
Steps
During agenda setting
Motion to amend the agenda to add Reconsideration of the Meadowdale Annexation Vote from
August 13, 2024. Requires a second to the motion and a majority vote to be put on the agenda.
During Council Business
1) Motion to Reconsider (made by someone on the prevailing side of the August 13' annexation
vote). Requires a second to the motion, is debatable, and then requires majority vote to pass.
2) If that passes, then the council body takes up the original motion ("TO NOT MOVE
FORWARD WITH THE PROCESS TO MAKE THE PARCELS PART OF EDMONDS'
MUGA AND SHOULD NOT ANNEX THESE PARCELS") as it was before the vote was
taken.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 10, 2024
Page 15
Packet Pg. 229
8.3.a
Council President Olson explained it will be her intention at that point to make a Motion to Postpone
Indefinitely. If this passes, it would allow this item to return to a future agenda with an agenda packet and
presentation that includes verified correct information and provide an opportunity for a council vote
specifically on the MUGA Bounday Change, not annexation.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER CHEN, TO
RECONSIDER. MOTION CARRIED (5-2), COUNCILMEMBERS TIBBOTT AND NAND VOTING
NO.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER CHEN, TO NOT
MOVE FORWARD WITH THE PROCESS TO MAKE THE PARCELS PART OF THE EDMONDS'
MUGA AND SHOULD NOT ANNEX THESE PARCELS.
Councilmember Chen raised a point of order, advising that wasn't the motion as stated. Council President
Olson said that was how it was restated by the mayor and what the council voted on. She agreed there was
a disparity between the two, but City Clerk Scott Passey advised the one that was in the record and was
voted on was the one that has been reconsidered.
As Councilmember Nand made the original motion, Councilmember Chen requested she have an
opportunity to comment.
Councilmember Nand acknowledged she made the controversial motion and apologized if she misstated it.
She did not support using staff time to explore the possibility of moving these parcels into Edmonds MUGA.
Mr. Passey advised a motion was not required as the motion to reconsider brings the original motion, to not
move forward with the process, back to the table.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DOTSCH, TO
POSTPONE THIS INDEFINITELY.
Councilmember Dotsch commented the intention in the resolution was not described in the packet and the
next steps somehow got derailed. This brings it back to the intent of the council resolution and how this
was supposed to move forward.
Councilmember Nand did not support the motion. Given the amount of work Public Works, Planning, etc.
have to do this year, she did not want to devote future staff time to this question. The council has considered
the options and made the most fiscally responsible decision for the City and it would be better to send a
clear message to this community regarding the council's decision so administrative resources are not used
to continue consideration of this possibility.
Councilmember Chen expressed support for the motion. He recalled throwing out the idea during the budget
planning meeting. this approach is the appropriate way to handle a situation where the initial motion was
not the intended discussion. He supported deferring this indefinitely which would allow consideration in
the future when enough information is available.
Councilmember Paine did not support the motion, finding it inappropriate at this time. A great deal of
information would be needed from staff and the community. This area has not been part of the overall
planning and the City has 3-4 other things that need to be done this year. It may be possible in the future
when there is a break in the action, but not this year or next year.
Councilmember Eck commented the actions the council is taking tonight will dispel any confusion
regarding the previous council action. As Councilmember Paine indicated, staff have full plates and the
budget will include figuring out the correct staffing numbers.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 10, 2024
Page 16
Packet Pg. 230
8.3.a
COUNCILMEMBER ECK MOVED TO AMEND TO NOT LOOK AT THIS ANY SOONER THAN
2005.
Councilmember Chen raised a point of order, advising a time limit cannot be added to a motion to postpone
indefinitely. Mr. Passey agreed.
COUNCILMEMBER ECK MOVED TO AMEND TO POSTPONE AT A MINIMUM THROUGH
THE END OF 2025.
Council President Olson raised a point of order, advising that is the same issue. Mr. Passey advised that is
not an amendment; the first motion was essentially to kill this item and this amendment would be the
opposite.
Council President Olson commented changing the MUGA boundary has to happen during the
comprehensive plan process which occurs once every 10 years. There is no obligation on a city to annex
anything in their MUGA. The question is whether to move them into Edmonds' MUGA; the council's
concern at the last meeting was the liability which is not certain based on what she has learned since the
August 13' meeting. The intent is to kill the action that was taken on August 13' and she will bring new
information for council consideration in the future.
Councilmember Tibbott commented it was not accurate that the only time to do this is during the
comprehensive plan process; the comprehensive plan can be amended once a year. The council could kill
this and not bring it back for 2-5 years. He had a hard time understanding why there was a risk for this
community to stay in the Lynnwood MUGA and did not see any urgency to move it into Edmonds' MUGA.
In addition, he wondered about the benefit to Edmonds, an issue that has not been clarified. He concluded
he did not see any urgency to bring this back to the council.
Councilmember Nand said given the potential financial benefit to industry stakeholders and the property
owners within the Meadowdale neighborhood who is asking to be annexed, additional information would
need to be vetted through staff and the city attorney, a significant use of resources which was the reason
she was not supportive. The council needs to make a firm statement that City resources will not continue
to be used to explore this possibility at this time.
Council President Olson said she was told by City staff as well as Snohomish County that the MUGA map
process is different than the comprehensive plan process and that the MUGA map can only be changed
every 10 years. The guidance she received was either the MUGA map needed to be changed now or
considered again in 10 years. Acting Public Works Director Phil Williams said he did not know the answer
to that question. Council President Olson asked Mr. Taraday if he knew and he answered he has not studied
it.
Council President Olson explained she may not bring this back if she learns the liability is of substance
which is why she voted no previously. If she finds the liability is not what was thought, council should have
that information for reconsideration.
COUNCILMEMBER ECK WITHDREW THE AMENDMENT.
Councilmember Dotsch relayed Edmonds staff reached out to Lynnwood staff and this was discussed by
the Lynnwood City Council.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (4-3), COUNCILMEMBERS ECK, CHEN AND
DOTSCH AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS TIBBOTT,
PAINE AND NAND VOTING NO.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 10, 2024
Page 17
Packet Pg. 231
8.3.a
11. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Nand congratulated George Bennett and Jon Milkey on their appointments to the planning
board and thanked them for stepping forward to serve the community in that capacity. Serving on the
planning board is a very rigorous volunteer opportunity, especially in a year with the comprehensive plan
update.
Councilmember Paine relayed since the last council meeting, light rail to Lynnwood opened. As the City's
liaison to Community Transit (CT), she relayed on the first day, the Orange Swift line had a 70% increase
in boardings, over 3,000 boardings the first day, a 50% increase in Orange Swift line boardings in the first
three days. The Orange Swift line goes from Edmonds College to Mill Creek with 10-minute headways.
She appreciated that CT is always looking to make improvements. For example, five days after the link
opened, there were problems with the flow to the garage for pedestrians and bikes, something CT plans to
work on. This Saturday there will be schedule changes for CT routes, a major change that has been planned
for six years. Schedules are available online. This is the biggest transportation infrastructure change four
decades in Snohomish County. When Line 2 reaches Lynnwood, it will transform South Snohomish
County. She had one ORCA card left for anyone interested. It was a great day for public transportation and
a really big day in many ways for South Snohomish County.
Councilmember Dotsch echoed Councilmember Nand's congratulations to the new planning board
members. The special council meeting prior to this meeting included information on the transportation plan
and a public open house regarding the transportation plan is scheduled on Wednesday, September 18, 6 -
7:30 pm in the Plaza conference room above the Edmonds Library. She encouraged the public to provide
input on the transportation plan as well as on the fire/EMS issue.
Council President Olson gave a shout out to local small business owner Kim Karrick and her team at Scratch
Distillery who won two platinum medals at the Northwest Spirts Awards. It is very rare to get a platinum
at all and winning two is a big deal. She congratulated them, noting they are a great business in Edmonds.
They also have whiskey in addition to gin and vodka.
Council President Olson thanked Councilmember Tibbott for the heavy lift on tonight's presentation. She
reported having a good time at Porchfest and expressed her thanks to all the volunteers. She wished Teresa
Wippel, My Edmonds News, a Happy Birthday.
Councilmember Tibbott wished Teresa a Happy Birthday.
Councilmember Chen invited the public to the upcoming Rotary Club Oktober Fest on Friday, September
13 from 3 to 10 pm and Saturday, September 14 from 12 to 10 pm.
Councilmember Eck reported as an avid music lover and someone who loves cool opportunities, Porchfest
has been growing every year. She highly encouraged everyone to attend. She offered enthusiastic thanks to
the organizers, porch hosts, volunteers, and artists. It is an opportunity for hundreds of people to come
together, community members and visitors, who are drawn to the music and share in the spirit of
community. It is also an excellent opportunity to highlight shops, businesses, restaurants and cafes and to
see glee on people's faces. She supported any opportunity like that to bring people together.
12. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
Mayor Rosen commented this past weekend was an Edmonds kind of weekend including Porchfest, the
summer market, a pickleball tournament, numerous sketchers in town, major retail sales, and the car show.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 10, 2024
Page 18
Packet Pg. 232
8.3.a
Tomorrow is 9/11, the 23' year remembering 9/11. There will be a remembrance ceremony tomorrow at
9:11 at Station 17 in downtown Edmonds.
ADJOURNMENT
With no further business, the council meeting was adjourned at 9:06 pm.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 10, 2024
Page 19
Packet Pg. 233
8.4
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 09/24/2024
Approval of claim checks and wire payments.
Staff Lead: Kimberly Dunscombe
Department: Administrative Services
Preparer: Lori Palmer
Approval of claim checks #264137 through #264238 dated September 11, 2024 for $577,499.62, claim
checks #264240 through #264294 dated September 18, 2024 for $324,514.66 and wire payments for
$29,155.70 and $8,335.29.
Staff Recommendation
Approval of claim checks and wire payments.
Narrative
The Council President shall be designated as the auditing committee for the city council. The council
president shall review the documentation supporting claims paid and review for approval by the city
council at its next regular public meeting all checks or warrants issued in payment of any claim, demand
or voucher. A list of each claim, demand or voucher approved and each check or warrant issued
indicating the check or warrant number, the amount paid and the vendor or payee shall be filed in the
city council office for review by individual councilmembers prior to each regularly scheduled public
meeting.
Attachments:
Claim Checks 09-11-2024 Agenda Copy
Claim Checks 09-18-2024 Agenda Copy
Packet Pg. 234
8.4.a
appospay Positive Pay Listing
9/11/2024 11:43:19AM City of Edmonds
Document group: Ipalmer Bank: usbank -
Page: 1
Vendor Code & Name Check # Check Date Amount
076040
911 SUPPLY INC
264137
9/11/2024
3,517.69
065052
AARD PEST CONTROL
264138
9/11/2024
85.09
000135
ABSCO ALARMS INC
264139
9/11/2024
2,817.75
075132
AERZEN USA CORP
264140
9/11/2024
33,024.98
001528
AM TEST INC
264141
9/11/2024
385.00
079537
AMERICAN TRAFFIC SOLUTIONS INC
264142
9/11/2024
23,750.00
025217
ARG INDUSTRIAL
264143
9/11/2024
152.62
078237
ARIAS, ADRIAN
264144
9/11/2024
260.00
064341
AT&T MOBILITY
264145
9/11/2024
1,749.08
079382
ATWELL LLC
264146
9/11/2024
22,372.50
070305
AUTOMATIC FUNDS TRANSFER
264147
9/11/2024
4,241.65
001835
AWARDS SERVICE INC
264148
9/11/2024
729.96
069226
BHC CONSULTANTS LLC
264149
9/11/2024
16,880.86
028050
BILL PIERRE FORD INC
264150
9/11/2024
909.68
074307
BLUE STAR GAS
264151
9/11/2024
1,179.02
077181
BOYER ELECTRIC CO INC
264152
9/11/2024
353.60
073029
CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES
264153
9/11/2024
388.86
003510
CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY
264154
9/11/2024
86.21
003510
CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY
264155
9/11/2024
961.95
073249
CG ENGINEERING, PLLC
264156
9/11/2024
1,602.50
078902
COLEMAN OIL COMPANY LLC
264157
9/11/2024
37,059.98
070323
COMCAST BUSINESS
264158
9/11/2024
301.21
075648
COVICH-WILLIAMS CO INC
264159
9/11/2024
267.69
070415
CRESSY DOOR CO INC
264160
9/11/2024
7,558.34
072786
CTS LANGUAGE LINK
264161
9/11/2024
122.95
077437
DASH MEDICAL GLOVES INC
264162
9/11/2024
248.04
006626
DEPT OF ECOLOGY
264163
9/11/2024
885.00
065739
DTG RECYCLE
264164
9/11/2024
680.31
079281
DVAADVERTISING & PUBLIC REL
264165
9/11/2024
1,923.08
068292
EDGE ANALYTICAL
264166
9/11/2024
1,478.00
076610
EDMONDS HERO HARDWARE
264168
9/11/2024
152.38
076610
EDMONDS HERO HARDWARE
264167
9/11/2024
73.71
075200
EDUARDO ZALDIBAR
264169
9/11/2024
260.00
008812
ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES
264170
9/11/2024
460.03
009350
EVERETT DAILY HERALD
264171
9/11/2024
235.64
071026
FASTSIGNS OF LYNNWOOD
264172
9/11/2024
937.86
009815
FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC
264173
9/11/2024
5,935.67
079484
FRANK, GABRIELA DENISE
264174
9/11/2024
1,000.00
072634
GCP WW HOLDCO LLC
264175
9/11/2024
34.76
068617
GLEISNER, BARBARA
264176
9/11/2024
2,232.54
012199
GRAINGER
264177
9/11/2024
600.88
010900
HD FOWLER CO INC
264178
9/11/2024
7,306.13
062383
HEPBURN SUPERIOR
264179
9/11/2024
648.32
079287
HERITAGE PROF PRODUCTS GROUP
264180
9/11/2024
2,582.28
067862
HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES
264181
9/11/2024
574.99
061013
HONEY BUCKET
264182
9/11/2024
384.55
075966
HULBERT, CARRIE
264183
9/11/2024
6,408.30
076488
HULBERT, MATTHEW STIEG
264184
9/11/2024
600.00
077909
JAMIESON, REIDALLAN
264185
9/11/2024
600.00
072422
JE HORTON INTERPRETING SVCS
264186
9/11/2024
130.00
079573
JUVVAL TECH LLC
264187
9/11/2024
200.00
079478
KASHFIA, SASSAN
264188
9/11/2024
110.00
078470
LEVESON, NANCYANN
264189
9/11/2024
130.00
Page 1
Packet Pg. 235
8.4.a
appospay Positive Pay Listing
9/11/2024 11:43:19AM City of Edmonds
Document group: Ipalmer Bank: usbank -
Vendor Code & Name Check # Check Date Amount
075716
MALLORY PAINT STORE INC
264190
9/11/2024
85928
067235
MARYS TOWING INC
264191
9/11/2024
280.67
079686
MCGUIRE BEARING COMPANY
264192
9/11/2024
55.86
063773
MICROFLEX
264193
9/11/2024
1,607.78
020900
MILLERS EQUIP & RENT ALL INC
264194
9/11/2024
17.66
074866
NORTHWEST PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT
264195
9/11/2024
56,689.82
077389
OLYMPIC ELEVATOR COMPANY
264196
9/11/2024
1,617.72
026200
OLYMPIC VIEW WATER DISTRICT
264197
9/11/2024
287.56
075735
PACIFIC SECURITY
264198
9/11/2024
4,905.30
027060
PACIFIC TOPSOILS
264199
9/11/2024
164.01
065787
PATRIOT DIAMOND INC
264200
9/11/2024
340.00
072507
PEACE OF MIND OFFICE SUPPORT
264201
9/11/2024
344.00
079209
PLANIT GEO INC
264202
9/11/2024
63125
075182
PLITMAN, VLADISLAV
264203
9/11/2024
130.00
078800
POPA & ASSOCIATES
264204
9/11/2024
1,200.00
079020
PRECISION LANGUAGE SERVICES
264205
9/11/2024
390.00
076317
PROFESSIONAL TRAINING ASSOC
264206
9/11/2024
260.00
046900
PUGET SOUND ENERGY
264207
9/11/2024
5,33628
070955
R&R STAR TOWING
264208
9/11/2024
280.92
061540
REPUBLIC SERVICES #197
264209
9/11/2024
1,857.04
064769
ROMAINE ELECTRIC
264210
9/11/2024
385.91
079607
ROMERO, STACEY F
264211
9/11/2024
260.00
074997
SEITEL SYSTEMS, LLC
264212
9/11/2024
1,259.70
063306
SHERWIN-WILLIAMS
264213
9/11/2024
224.76
071655
SHI INTERNATIONAL CORP
264214
9/11/2024
11.91
036950
SIX ROBBLEES INC
264215
9/11/2024
1,580.77
037375
SNO CO PUD NO 1
264217
9/11/2024
47.83
037375
SNO CO PUD NO 1
264216
9/11/2024
21,030.33
075875
SOUND CLEANING RESOURCES INC
264218
9/11/2024
1,209.00
038300
SOUND DISPOSAL CO
264220
9/11/2024
263.79
038300
SOUND DISPOSAL CO
264219
9/11/2024
1,956.83
079185
SYSTEMS FOR PUBLIC SAFETY INC
264221
9/11/2024
132.95
040917
TACOMA SCREW PRODUCTS INC
264222
9/11/2024
715.08
073621
TANIMURA, NAOAKI
264223
9/11/2024
1,058.40
027269
THE PART WORKS INC
264224
9/11/2024
249.44
066056
THE SEATTLE TIMES
264226
9/11/2024
1,000.00
066056
THE SEATTLE TIMES
264225
9/11/2024
2,922.42
073255
TOTAL FILTRATION SERVICES, INC
264227
9/11/2024
268.62
079619
UNCOMMON BRIDGES
264228
9/11/2024
4,602.09
067865
VERIZON WIRELESS
264229
9/11/2024
199.68
074662
VERTIGIS NORTH AMERICA LTD
264230
9/11/2024
7,394.66
069751
VESTIS
264232
9/11/2024
92.11
069751
VESTIS
264231
9/11/2024
133.02
078314
WASTE MGMT DISPOSAL SVC OF OR
264233
9/11/2024
250,913.96
065568
WATER SERVICES NW INC
264234
9/11/2024
104.92
075635
WCP SOLUTIONS
264235
9/11/2024
2,002.18
071467
WEST COAST PET MEMORIAL
264236
9/11/2024
44.00
079694
WZL ENTERPRISES LLC
264237
9/11/2024
2,100.00
011900
ZIPLY FIBER
264239
9/11/2024
179.51
011900
ZIPLY FIBER
264238
9/11/2024
328.96
GrandTotal: 577,499.62
Total count: 103
Page 2
Packet Pg. 236
8.4.b
appospay Positive Pay Listing
9/18/2024 10:09:27AM City of Edmonds
Document group: Ipalmer Bank: usbank -
Page: 1
Vendor Code & Name Check # Check Date Amount
070322
A&A LANGUAGE SERVICES INC
264240
9/18/2024
937.50
078469
AGUIRRE, RAUL
264241
9/18/2024
130.00
000850
ALDERWOOD WATER DISTRICT
264242
9/18/2024
245,554.61
079699
ALTMANN, DUANE
264243
9/18/2024
3,162.00
074718
AQUATIC SPECIALTY SERVICES INC
264244
9/18/2024
323.28
064341
AT&T MOBILITY
264245
9/18/2024
43.35
075217
BASLER, ANTHONY C
264246
9/18/2024
130.00
072005
BROCKMANN, KERRY
264247
9/18/2024
110.50
073029
CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES
264248
9/18/2024
613.50
003510
CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY
264249
9/18/2024
277.43
065403
CHAPIN, FRANCES
264250
9/18/2024
43.96
019215
CITY OF LYNNWOOD
264251
9/18/2024
5,937.63
035160
CITY OF SEATTLE
264252
9/18/2024
30.80
079696
COLLEGE PLACE ELEMENTARY PTA
264253
9/18/2024
500.00
078723
COOL HEAT 365 LLC
264254
9/18/2024
9120
072786
CTS LANGUAGE LINK
264255
9/18/2024
200.88
079683
DOUGLAS, MARGARET E
264256
9/18/2024
147.00
007675
EDMONDS AUTO PARTS
264257
9/18/2024
39.44
038500
EDMONDS SENIOR CENTER
264258
9/18/2024
1,575.00
008705
EDMONDS WATER DIVISION
264259
9/18/2024
5,549.10
008812
ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES
264260
9/18/2024
388.35
009350
EVERETT DAILY HERALD
264261
9/18/2024
58.48
079485
FAT DOG ARTS
264262
9/18/2024
1,000.00
079287
HERITAGE PROF PRODUCTS GROUP
264263
9/18/2024
239.66
070673
HID GLOBAL CORPORATION
264264
9/18/2024
1,872.56
067862
HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES
264265
9/18/2024
95.70
061013
HONEY BUCKET
264266
9/18/2024
290.95
075966
HULBERT, CARRIE
264267
9/18/2024
708.58
076488
HULBERT, MATTHEW STIEG
264268
9/18/2024
1,000.00
072422
JE HORTON INTERPRETING SVCS
264269
9/18/2024
341.25
070120
L E A D S.ONLINE INC
264270
9/18/2024
7,483.00
079698
LAURA LOUISE, C/O CHICAGO TITLE
264271
9/18/2024
24.11
074417
LAW OFFICE OF CHRISTIAN SMITH
264272
9/18/2024
900.00
076001
LUCIE R BERNHEIM, ATTY AT LAW
264273
9/18/2024
1,365.00
079493
MANGUNE, ULYSSES L
264274
9/18/2024
130.00
075746
MCMURRAY, LAURA
264275
9/18/2024
174.60
075520
NOBLE, LINDA
264276
9/18/2024
130.00
065720
OFFICE DEPOT
264277
9/18/2024
223.08
027060
PACIFIC TOPSOILS
264278
9/18/2024
1,443.00
074793
PETDATA INC
264279
9/18/2024
65.50
029117
PORT OF EDMONDS
264280
9/18/2024
4,567.65
079020
PRECISION LANGUAGE SERVICES
264281
9/18/2024
390.00
075770
QUADIENT FINANCE USA INC
264282
9/18/2024
558.47
070955
R&R STAR TOWING
264283
9/18/2024
280.92
067996
S NAKAMURA STUDIO LLC
264284
9/18/2024
2,000.00
079174
SAVANNAH POWERS
264285
9/18/2024
318.50
070495
SEPULVEDA, PABLO
264286
9/18/2024
146.25
037375
SNO CO PUD NO 1
264287
9/18/2024
7,402.81
037303
SO SNOHOMISH CO FIRE & RESCUE
264288
9/18/2024
20,184.30
072649
THE WIDE FORMAT COMPANY
264289
9/18/2024
855.27
067865
VERIZON WIRELESS
264290
9/18/2024
27.52
069751
VESTIS
264291
9/18/2024
63.05
067195
WASHINGTON TREE EXPERTS
264292
9/18/2024
2,983.51
Page:1
Packet Pg. 237
apPosPay
9/18/2024 10:09:27AM
Positive Pay Listing
City of Edmonds
E8b
'.-ge.4.
:
Document group: Ipalmer
Vendor Code & Name
Bank: usbank
069605 WEST COAST CODE CONSULTANTS
011900 ZIPLY FIBER
Check # Check Date
264293 9/18/2024
264294 9/18/2024
GrandTotal:
Total count:
Amount
645.00
760.41
324,514.66
Page: 2
Packet Pg. 238
8.5
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 09/24/2024
Resolution to Approve Placement of Lien on Civic Park Property
Staff Lead: Angie Feser
Department: Parks, Recreation & Human Services
Preparer: Angie Feser
Background/History
The Boys & Girls Club of Snohomish County (BGCSC) currently operates their Edmonds program in a city -
owned building located in Civic Center Playfield Park (Civic Park) through a lease agreement. In February
2023 the agreement was renewed and modified into a ground lease to allow the construction of a new
facility (Attachment #1: Ground Lease). Later that year, the City Council also reviewed and approved the
new Boys & Girls Club schematic design through a Public Hearing process as was required in the lease
(Attachment #2: Meeting minutes).
One of the requirements of the ground lease is that BGCSC must receive approval by the city for any
liens placed on the city property in the process of building the new facility. The BGCSC has received a
$1,000,000 grant from Snohomish County which requires a lien placement on the property where the
new club is slated to be constructed. This property is owned by the city and therefore, requires approval
of the city council for the BGCSC to receive the County's $1M funding.
The mechanism to complete this is the attached Resolution including the Snohomish County's
Leasehood Deed of Trust (Attachment #3).
Staff Recommendation
Council to approve and authorize the Mayor to sign the attached Resolution that allows placement of a
lien on city property located within Civic Center Playfield as required by Snohomish County for award of
$1,000,000 in funding for the construction of the new Boys & Girls Club.
Attachments:
2023 Boys and Girls Club Ground Lease_fully executed
2023-06-20 and 2023-07-05 City Council Minutes - BGC Schematic Design
Resolution to Approve Placement of Lien on Civic Park Property
Packet Pg. 239
DocuSign Envelope ID: 2A607031-DFF8-48B5-AAC7-B8FCF4327E89
8.5.a
GROUND LEASE
CITY OF EDMONDS
AND
BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY
Packet Pg. 240
DocuSign Envelope ID: 2A607031-DFF8-48B5-AAC7-B8FCF4327E89
8.5.a
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LISTOF EXHIBITS..................................................................................................................... ii
GROUNDLEASE......................................................................................................................... 1
SECTION 1. AGREEMENT TO LEASE PROPERTY.......................................................... 1
SECTION2. TERM..................................................................................................................... 2
SECTION3. RENT..................................................................................................................... 2
SECTION 4. BGCSC'S OTHER OBLIGATIONS.................................................................. 3
SECTION 5. CITY AUTHORITY AND OBLIGATIONS...................................................... 5
SECTION 6. INDEMNITY, INSURANCE................................................................................ 5
SECTION7. DEFAULT............................................................................................................. 8
SECTION 8. REPRESENTATIONS....................................................................................... 10
SECTION 9. GENERAL PROVISIONS................................................................................. 10
Packet Pg. 241
DocuSign Envelope ID: 2A607031-DFF8-48B5-AAC7-B8FCF4327E89
8.5.a
LIST OF EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT A: Property Description/Boys & Girls Club Footprint
EXHIBIT B: Schematic of adopted Civic Park Master Plan
EXHIBIT C: Civic Park Design Guidelines
Packet Pg. 242
DocuSign Envelope ID: 2A607031-DFF8-48B5-AAC7-B8FCF4327E89
8.5.a
GROUND LEASE
CITY OF EDMONDS / BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY
THIS GROUND LEASE (this "Lease"), effective the 2nd day of February , 2023
("Effective Date") is between the CITY OF EDMONDS, a municipal corporation of the State of
Washington (the "City"), and the BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY, a
nonprofit corporation under the laws of the State of Washington (the "BGCSC").
WHEREAS, the City and the BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY
entered into a Lease dated October 29, 2015, the Term of which was scheduled to expire in 2021
unless extended by one or both of the two five-year extensions in that Lease (the "2015 Lease").
WHEREAS, the 2015 Lease encompasses the same real property as this Lease and the
parties intend that this Lease supersede the 2015 Lease.
The parties, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are
hereby acknowledged, and intending to be legally bound by the terms and conditions of this Lease,
agree as follows:
SECTION 1. AGREEMENT TO LEASE PROPERTY
1.1 Agreement to Lease and Description of Property. The City hereby leases to the
BGCSC and the BGCSC leases from the City that certain real property described and shown on
Exhibit A attached hereto located thereon or to be located thereon (the "Property"). The footprint
for the ground lease consists of a 12,000-sf area on the Civic Park site, as shown in Exhibit B,
Civic Park Master Plan. The BGCSC will own and have the option to propose a plan to
accommodate a 20,000-sf new construction building onsite, with the addition of required
infrastructure improvements, utilities, landscaping and any other enhancements located on the
Property or to be located on the Property during the term of this Lease. This will need to be
consistent with the adopted Civic Park Master Plan (see Exhibit B) and the Civic Park Design
Guidelines (see Exhibit Q. As used in this Lease, the term "Improvements" shall mean all
buildings, driveways, infrastructure improvements, utilities, landscaping and any other
enhancements located on the Property or to be located on the Property during the term of this Lease
and made to the Property by the BGCSC.
1.2 Use of the Property.
1.2.1 Allowed Uses of the Property by the BGCSC. Except as otherwise provided
herein, the BGCSC shall use the Property for the purpose of operating a non-profit community
resource center serving the needs of the local youth members of the community.
1.2.1.1 Notwithstanding the foregoing, the BGCSC may from time to time
utilize portions of the Property for revenue -generating activities including, but not limited to,
rentals and events; provided, that all revenues generated therefrom are utilized by the BGCSC
exclusively for the purposes set forth in Section 1.2.1, above.
CES\21798\0001 \01198017.v 1
Packet Pg. 243
DocuSign Envelope ID: 2A607031-DFF8-48B5-AAC7-B8FCF4327E89
8.5.a
1.2.2 Allowed Uses of the Property by the City. The City of Edmonds may be
given access to the building so it may offer recreational and other programs to the public. A
separate operating agreement will be created to determine City use and City funding. The City will
be allowed use as mutually agreed upon with the Lessee. The City and the BGCSC agree to meet
on a regular on -going basis to review the schedule and plan for uses for both parties other than
what is outlined in this section. The City also will remain the responsible and controlling party for
the grounds surrounding the building. The BGCSC acknowledges that the grounds surrounding
the building are a public park and shall remain open to the public subject to the City's reasonable
regulations related to uses, hours, etc.
SECTION 2. TERM
2.1 Initial Term. The term of this Lease ("Lease Term") shall extend for a period of
Forty (40) years commencing on January 1, 2023, and terminating on December 31, 2062, subject
to the right of the BGCSC to extend the Lease Term as provided herein.
2.2 Extension Term. The Lease Term may be extended by the BGCSC for one
additional period of fifteen (15) years.
2.2.1 Conditions of Extension. In order for the BGCSC to extend the Lease Term,
it shall: (i) not be in material default at the time of providing notice of its Lease Extension and
thereafter; (ii) it shall provide written notice of its Lease Extension at least one hundred eighty
(180) days prior to the expiration of the Lease Term.
2.2.2 Process for Extension. No sooner than three hundred sixty-five (365) days
and no later than one hundred eighty (180) days prior to the expiration of the Lease Term, the
BGCSC shall provide written notice of its intention to exercise the Extension Term. The City and
the BGCSC shall meet no later than one hundred twenty (120) days prior to the expiration of the
Lease Term to confirm the Extension Term, discuss any matters pertaining thereto and sign a Lease
Addendum incorporating the Extension Term and any mutually acceptable matters pertaining to
the Extension Term.
SECTION 3. RENT
3.1 Rent. In consideration for the use of the Property as specified in this Lease, the
BGCSC shall pay to the City a total payment of Ten Dollars ($10.00) per year, and such sum shall
be paid within ten (10) days from the date of execution of this Lease and within ten (10) days
following January 1 St of each calendar year of each year during the Term of this Lease. The parties
mutually agree and acknowledge that the BGCSC's operation of the BGCSC upon the Property
effectuates a fundamental government purpose and public benefit such as to obviate the necessity
of additional rental payment compensation. Furthermore, because the BGCSC's mission is to
enrich the social, physical, and intellectual wellbeing of youth, the City is able to lease the Property
to the BGCSC for less than fair market value under the poor and infirm exception to the
constitutional (Article 8, Section 7) prohibition on gifting or loaning of public funds.
2
CES\21798\0001\01198017.v1
Packet Pg. 244
DocuSign Envelope ID: 2A607031-DFF8-48B5-AAC7-B8FCF4327E89
8.5.a
SECTION 4. BGCSC'S OTHER OBLIGATIONS
4.1 Construction of Improvements.
4.1.1 City Approval and Ownership. The BGCSC shall undertake no demolition,
construction, alteration, or changes ("Work") on or to the Property without the prior written
consent of the City, which shall be within the discretion of the City to withhold or deny. Consent
shall not be unreasonably denied. In applying its discretion, the City shall consider, among other
factors deemed relevant by the City Council, the intended uses of the Property as described in
Section 1.2 as well as the Property's functionality as a park. The City will allow the BGCSC to
consider three (3) options: (1) improve existing facility; (2) add to existing facility; or (3) demolish
existing facility and build new facility; however, the proposal must be consistent with the Civic
Park Master Plan and Civic Park Design Guidelines and will be subject to City Council approval.
The consent contemplated in this subsection 4.1.1 is separate and apart from the City's regulatory
authority and the discretion to withhold or deny approval under this subsection 4.1.1 is not limited
in the same way that the City's regulatory discretion is limited. Any deviation from approved plans
must also be approved, in writing, by the City. Improvements constructed by the BGCSC during
the term of this Lease shall be considered the 13GCSC's property until the date this Lease is
terminated. Upon termination of the Lease Term, together with Extension, if applicable, all
improvements located on the Property shall become the property of the City, excepting trade
fixtures, which may be removed by the BGCSC at its option. The BGCSC will bring forth the
schematic design of the facility, including its footprint on the Property, to the City Council for
approval. The City Council will consider in a reasonable time frame not to exceed 60 days, and
may opt to hold one or more public hearings on the schematic design prior to taking action. The
BGCSC agrees not to proceed with the design development phase of the design process until the
schematic design of the facility, including its footprint on the Property, is approved by the City
Council. The BGCSC will also bring forth the design development phase drawings of the facility
to the City Council for approval. The BGCSC agrees not to proceed with the construction
document phase of the design process until the drawings from the design development phase have
been approved by the City Council. Any proposed substantive design changes that are inconsistent
with a previous design approval (schematic or design development), including proposed changes
to the facility's footprint on the Property, shall also be subject to City Council approval and shall
be returned to the City Council as soon as practicable and not be deferred until the approval of the
next phase. In the event there are any disputes that arise concerning decisions made by the City
under this Section 4.1.1, those disputes shall be subject to the dispute resolution provisions in
Section 9.18.
4.1.2 Permits. Once approvals have been given by the City under 4.1.1, above,
no Work may commence until the BGCSC obtains and delivers to the City copies of all necessary
governmental permits. The BGCSC must also supply the City with a copy of any occupancy
permit required and any certification required by the fire marshal, prior to the BGCSC's occupancy
of the Property.
4.1.3 Construction Schedule. The consent to perform work in section 4.1.1 must
be given within three (3) years of the signing of this Lease. Construction Work must be completed
within three (3) years of the receipt of consent to perform the Work obtained under Section 4.1.1.
If construction is begun within one (1) year of the receipt of consent and diligently performed
CES\21798\0001 \01198017.v 1
Packet Pg. 245
DocuSign Envelope ID: 2A607031-DFF8-48B5-AAC7-B8FCF4327E89
8.5.a
thereafter, the City will grant the BGCSC a one (1) year extension to complete construction, if
needed, so long as the BGCSC notifies the City of its need for additional time at least thirty (30)
days in advance of the completion deadline. Failure to complete construction within the specified
time shall be an event of default under Section 7.1 unless any delay in construction occurred as a
result of failure by the City to allow the BGCSC's construction to commence in a timely manner
in which case, the BGCSC shall be given a commensurate amount of time for completion of
construction. All Work done on the Property at any time during the term of this Lease must be
done in a good workman -like manner and in accordance with all applicable laws and all building,
land use, and other permit requirements. All Work shall be done with reasonable dispatch. If
requested by the City, within thirty (30) days after the completion of any Work, the BGCSC shall
deliver to the City complete and fully detailed as -built drawings of the completed Work, in both
electronic and paper forms, prepared by an architect licensed by the State of Washington. All
landscaping shall be designed by a landscape architect licensed in the State of Washington.
4.1.4 The BGCSC shall be responsible for all repairs for any and all impacts or
damages attributable to the actions of the BGCSC and its invitees to City improvements of Civic
Center Playfield and city street right-of-way and agrees to return improvements to their original
condition at the start of the BGCSC project, including demolition and construction as deemed
acceptable by the City. The BGCCSC shall submit for City review and approval a site access plan
detailing how equipment and materials will be moved in and out of the construction site and how
excavation, grading and construction adjacent to park and street improvements will minimize
impact and prevent damages.
4.2 Maintenance. At all times during the Lease Term and Extension Term, if any, the
BGCSC shall reasonably keep and maintain the BGCSC Improvements located on the Property in
good repair and operating condition and shall make all necessary and appropriate preventive
maintenance, repairs, and replacements. On each fifth anniversary of this Lease (meaning every
five years), the City and the BGCSC shall conduct a thorough inspection of the BGCSC
Improvements on the Property and City shall inform the BGCSC of any needed repairs,
maintenance or clean-up to be done in order to maintain the quality of any of the BGCSC
Improvements to the Property, reasonable wear and tear excepted. Such repairs, maintenance and
clean-up shall be done with reasonable dispatch. Prior to entering into the Extension Term of this
Lease such an inspection will also be required and all reasonable repairs and maintenance needed
to be done must be done to the Improvements before the Extension Term of the Lease commences
4.3 No Liens. The BGCSC agrees to pay, when due, all sums for labor, services,
materials, supplies, utilities, furnishings, machinery, or equipment which have been provided to
the Property. If any lien is filed against the Work which the BGCSC wishes to protest, then the
BGCSC shall immediately deposit cash with the City, or procure a bond acceptable to the City, in
an amount sufficient to cover the cost of removing the lien from the Work. Failure to remove the
lien or furnish the cash or bond acceptable to the City within thirty (30) days shall constitute an
event of default under this Lease and the City shall automatically have the right, but not the
obligation, to pay the lien in full with no notice to the BGCSC and the BGCSC shall immediately
reimburse the City for any sums so paid to remove any such lien. The BGCSC shall not encumber
the Property or any Improvements thereon without prior written approval of the City. The BGCSC
shall obtain a performance bond in the full amount of the contract it has signed with its contractor
to complete the facility and provide such performance bond to the City prior to demolition of the
0
CES\21798\0001 \01198017.v 1
Packet Pg. 246
DocuSign Envelope ID: 2A607031-DFF8-48B5-AAC7-B8FCF4327E89
8.5.a
existing facility. The performance bond shall ensure that the construction of the facility is
completed and that all workers, contractors, subcontractors, and suppliers will be paid.
4.4 Utilities and Services. The BGCSC must make arrangements for all utilities and
shall promptly pay all utility charges before they become delinquent. The BGCSC is solely
responsible for verifying the existence, location, capacity and availability of all utilities it may
need for the BGCSC's planned use of the Property. The BGCSC shall be solely responsible for
the cost of extending any existing utility lines into the Property. The Property, as made available
to the BGCSC by the City, shall include utility access for water, sewer, electrical power and
telephone to the edge (back of curb) of the Property. The BGCSC shall be solely responsible for
securing all permits and for meeting all requirements necessary to achieve all of the above.
4.5 Ste. Any signs erected by the BGCSC must comply with all local sign
ordinances. The BGCSC shall remove all signs and sign hardware upon termination of this Lease
and restore the sign location(s) to its (their) former state(s) unless the City elects to retain all or
any portion(s) of the signage. Signage requirements may reasonably change during the term and,
to maintain uniformity and continuity, the BGCSC will comply with any new sign code
requirements within a reasonable time after the adoption of such new requirements.
SECTION 5. CITY AUTHORITY AND OBLIGATIONS
5.1 Delivery of Property. The BGCSC shall have the right to possession of the Property
as of the Commencement Date. In the event the City shall permit the BGCSC to occupy the
Property prior to the Commencement Date, such occupancy shall be subject to all provisions of
this Lease. Early or delayed possession shall not advance or defer the Expiration Date of this
Lease.
5.2 Quiet Enjoyment. Subject to the BGCSC performing all of the BGCSC's
obligations under this Lease and subject to the City's rights under this Lease and its rights of
condemnation under Washington law, the BGCSC's possession of the Property will otherwise
not be disturbed by the City. Any sublease shall be subject to prior approval by the City and, if
approval is granted, this quiet enjoyment provision shall apply to the BGCSC's sub -lessees.
5.3 Condition of Property. The City makes no warranties or representations regarding
the condition of the Property, including, without limitation, the suitability of the Property for the
BGCSC's intended uses or the availability of accessible utilities or roadways needed for the
BGCSC's intended purposes. The BGCSC has inspected the Property, conducted its own
feasibility and due diligence analysis, and accepts the Property in "AS IS" condition, upon taking
possession.
SECTION 6. INDEMNITY, INSURANCE
6.1 General Indemnity. Upon the Commencement Date of this Lease, the BGCSC
agrees to defend (using legal counsel reasonably acceptable to the City), indemnify, and hold the
City harmless from and against any and all actual or alleged claims, suits, actions, or liabilities for
injury or death of any person, or for loss or damage to property, damages, expenses, costs, fees
(including, but not limited to, attorney, accountant, paralegal, expert, and escrow fees), fines,
CES\21798\0001 \01198017.v 1
Packet Pg. 247
DocuSign Envelope ID: 2A607031-DFF8-48B5-AAC7-B8FCF4327E89
8.5.a
and/or penalties (collectively "Costs"), which may be imposed upon or claimed against the City,
and which, in whole or in part, directly or indirectly, arise from or are in any way connected with
the BGCSC's use of the Property, or from the conduct of the BGCSC's business, or from any
activity, work or thing done, permitted, or suffered by the BGCSC in or about the Property; this
includes any act, omission or negligence of the BGCSC, its sub -lessees, or its event space renters;
any use, occupation, management or control of the Property by the BGCSC; any condition created
in, on or about the Property by the BGCSC, an agent, sub -lessee, or event space renter, including
any accident, injury or damage occurring in, on or about the Property after the Effective Date; any
breach, violation, or nonperformance of any of the BGCSC's obligations under this Lease by the
BGCSC, its sub -lessees, or event space renters; any damage caused by the BGCSC, its sub -lessees,
or event space renters on or to the Property. The BGCSC's obligations and liabilities hereunder
shall commence on the Effective Date of this Lease, if earlier than the Commencement Date and
if caused by the activities of the BGCSC or its agents or invitees on the Property. As used herein,
the indemnification provided by the BGCSC is intended to include indemnification for the actions
of the BGCSC and its employees and other agents and all of the BGCSC's sub -lessees, event space
renters and all of their respective employees and other agents. The BGCSC's obligations to
indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City hereunder include indemnification of the employees,
agents and elected officials of the City.
The City covenants to protect, save and indemnify the BGCSC, its elected and appointed
officials, volunteers, members and employees while acting within the scope of their duties as such,
and hold the same harmless from and against all claims, demands and causes of action of any kind
or character, including the cost of defense thereof, brought by the City's employees or third parties
on account of personal injuries, death or damage to property arising out of the City's obligations
under this Lease or in any way resulting from the willful or negligent acts or omissions of the City
and/or its agents, employees or respresentatives.
6.2 Insurance Requirements. The BGCSC shall procure and maintain for the duration
of the Lease insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damage to property which may
arise from or in connection with the BGCSC's operation and use of the leased Property. The
BGCSC's maintenance of insurance as required by the Lease shall not be construed to limit the
liability of the BGCSC to the coverage provided by such insurance, or otherwise limit the City's
recourse to any remedy available at law or in equity. The amounts listed indicate only the
minimum amounts of insurance coverage the City is willing to accept to help insure full
performance of all terms and conditions of this Lease. All insurance required by the BGCSC under
this Lease shall meet the following minimum requirements:
6.2.1 Certificates: Notice of Cancellation. On or before the Commencement
Date, the BGCSC shall furnish the City with original certificates and a copy of any amendatory
endorsements, including but not necessarily limited to the additional insured endorsement,
evidencing the existence of all insurance required under Section 6.3. Thereafter, the City must
receive notice of the expiration or renewal of any policy at least thirty (30) days prior to the
expiration or cancellation of any insurance policy; provided, that the BGCSC shall provide the
City with written notice of any policy expiration or cancellation, within two business days of its
receipt of such notice. No insurance policy may be canceled, revised, terminated or allowed to
lapse without at least thirty (30) days prior written notice being given to the City. Insurance must
be maintained without any lapse in coverage during the entire Lease Term and Extension Term, if
0
CES\21798\0001\01198017.v 1
Packet Pg. 248
DocuSign Envelope ID: 2A607031-DFF8-48B5-AAC7-B8FCF4327E89
8.5.a
any. Insurance shall not be canceled without the City's consent. The City shall also be given
copies of the BGCSC's policies of insurance, upon request.
6.2.2 Additional Insured. The City shall be named as an additional insured in
each required policy using ISO Additional Insured -Managers or Lessors of Premises Form CG 20
11 or a substitute endorsement providing equivalent coverage and, for purposes of damage to the
Property, as a loss payee to the extent of its interest therein. Such insurance shall not be invalidated
by any act, neglect or breach of contract by the BGCSC and shall not in any way be construed by
the carrier to make the City liable for payment of any of the BGCSC's insurance premiums.
6.2.3 Primary Coverage. The required policies are to contain, or be endorsed to
contain, that they shall be primary insurance as respect the City. Any insurance, self-insurance,
or insurance pool coverage maintained by the City shall be excess of the BGCSC's insurance and
shall not contribute with it.
6.2.4 Company Rating. All policies of insurance must be written by companies
having an A.M. Best rating of not less than A: VII. The City may, upon thirty (30) days' written
notice to the BGCSC, require the BGCSC to change any carrier whose rating drops below such
rating.
6.3 Required Insurance. At all times during this Lease, the BGCSC shall provide and
maintain the following types of coverage:
6.3.1 Commercial General Liability Insurance. The BGCSC shall maintain an
occurrence form commercial general liability policy (including coverage for broad form
contractual liability; and personal injury liability) for the protection of the BGCSC and the City,
insuring the BGCSC and the City against liability for damages because of personal injury, bodily
injury, death, or damage to property, including loss of use thereof, and occurring on or in any way
related to the Property or occasioned by reason of the operations of the BGCSC. Such coverage
shall name the City as an additional insured using ISO Additional Insured -Managers or Lessors of
Premises Form CG 20 11 or a substitute endorsement providing equivalent coverage. Commercial
General Liability insurance shall be written with limits no less than $1,000,000 each occurrence,
$2,000,000 general aggregate. Commercial General Liability insurance shall be written on
Insurance Services Office (ISO) occurrence form CG 00 01 and shall cover premises and
contractual liability.
6.3.2 Property Insurance. The BGCSC shall maintain, in full force and effect
during the Lease Term, "All Risk" property insurance covering all buildings, fixtures, equipment,
and all other Improvements located on the Property. Coverage shall be in an amount equal to One
Hundred Percent (100%) of the new replacement value thereof with no coinsurance provisions.
6.3.3 Builder's Risk. The BGCSC shall maintain, in full force and effect during
construction of the BGCSC's facility described in this Lease, Builders Risk insurance covering
interests of the BGCSC, the City, the Contractor, Subcontractors, and Sub -subcontractors in the
Work. Builders Risk insurance shall be on an all-risk policy form and shall insure against the
perils of fire and extended coverage and physical loss or damage including flood, earthquake, theft,
7
CES\21798\0001 \01198017.v 1
Packet Pg. 249
DocuSign Envelope ID: 2A607031-DFF8-48B5-AAC7-B8FCF4327E89
8.5.a
vandalism, malicious mischief, collapse, temporary buildings and debris removal. Coverage shall
include: 1) formwork in place; 2) all materials and equipment on the Property; 3) all structures
including temporary structures; and 4) all supplies related to the Work being performed. The
insurance required hereunder shall have a deductible of not more than Five Thousand Dollars
($5,000), which will be the responsibility of the Contractor. Higher deductibles for flood and
earthquake perils may be accepted by the City upon written request by the Contractor and written
acceptance by the City. Any increased deductibles accepted by the City will remain the
responsibility of the Contractor. The Builders Risk insurance shall be maintained until final
acceptance of the Work.
6.4 Waiver of Subrogation. The BGCSC and the City hereby release and discharge
each other from all claims, losses and liabilities arising from or caused by any hazard covered by
property insurance on or in connection with the Property or said facility. This release shall apply
only to the extent that such claim, loss or liability is covered by insurance.
6.5 Periodic Review. The City shall have the right to periodically review the limits and
terms of insurance coverage. In the event the City determines that such limits and/or terms should
be changed, the City will give the BGCSC a minimum of thirty (30) days' notice of such
determination and the BGCSC shall modify its coverage to comply with the new insurance
requirements of the City. The City agrees that it shall be reasonable in any coverage change
required, and that such change will be in accordance with standard market requirements for the
BGCSC's facilities or similar activity centers. The BGCSC shall also provide the City with proof
of such compliance by giving the City an updated certificate of insurance within thirty (30) days.
6.6 Failure to Maintain Insurance. Failure on the part of the BGCSC to maintain the
insurance as required shall constitute a material breach of lease, upon which the City may, after
giving five (5) business days' notice to the BGCSC to correct the breach, terminate the Lease or,
at its discretion, procure or renew such insurance and pay any and all premiums in connection
therewith, with any sums so expended to be repaid to the City on demand.
SECTION 7. DEFAULT
7.1 BGCSC Default.
7.1.1 The occurrence of any one or more of the following shall constitute a
material default and breach of this Lease by the BGCSC:
7.1.1.1 Vacating the Property. The vacation or abandonment of the Property
by the BGCSC for more than thirty (30) days.
7.1.1.2 Failure to Pay Rent. The failure bythe BGCSC to make anypayment
of rent or any other payment required to be made by the BGCSC under this Lease, as and when
due, where such failure shall continue for a period of thirty (30) days after written notice thereof
by the City to the BGCSC.
7.1.1.3 Unpermitted Use of the Property. The use of the Property for any
purpose not authorized by Section 1.2.1 of this Lease where such unpermitted use of the Property
CES\21798\0001\01198017.v1
Packet Pg. 250
DocuSign Envelope ID: 2A607031-DFF8-48B5-AAC7-B8FCF4327E89
8.5.a
shall continue for a period of thirty (30) days after written notice thereof shall be grounds for
default.
7.1.1.4 Failure to Perform. Failure by the BGCSC to observe or perform
any of the covenants or provisions of this Lease to be observed or performed by the BGCSC,
specifically including, without limitation, the BGCSC's utilization of the Property for purposes
materially inconsistent with those set forth in this Lease where such failure shall continue for a
period of thirty (30) days after written notice thereof from the City to the BGCSC; provided, that
if the nature of the BGCSC's default is such that more than thirty (30) days are reasonably required
for its cure, then the BGCSC shall not be deemed to be in default if the BGCSC shall commence
such cure within the thirty (30) day period and thereafter diligent prosecute such cure to
completion. Notice shall specify the portion of the lease the BGCSC has failed to perform.
7.1.2 Remedies in Default. In the event of any default or breach by the BGCSC
under this Lease, in addition to any other remedies at law or in equity, the City may:
7.1.2.1 Terminate the Lease. Terminate the BGCSC's right to possession
of the Property by providing written notice of at least ninety (90) days;
7.1.2.2 Continue the Lease. Maintain the BGCSC's right to possession, in
which case the Lease shall continue in effect whether or not the BGCSC shall have abandoned the
leased Property. In such event, the City shall be entitled to enforce all landlord's rights and
remedies under this Lease; and/or
7.1.2.3 Other remedies. Pursue any other remedy now or hereafter available
to a landlord under the laws of the State of Washington. The City expressly reserves the right to
recover from the BGCSC any and all actual expenses, costs and damages caused in any manner
by reason of the BGCSC's default or breach.
7.1.3 Legal Action. If either party commences legal action relating to this lease,
its terms, conditions or enforcements thereof, the prevailing party shall be entitled to all reasonable
costs and attorney's fees incurred in bringing such action. Venue for any such legal action shall
lie exclusively in Snohomish County Superior court.
7.2 Default by the City. The City shall not be in default unless the City fails to
perform obligations required of the City under this Lease within a reasonable time, but in no event
later than thirty (30) days after written notice by the BGCSC to the City; provided, that if the
nature of the City's obligation is such that more than thirty (30) days are required for performance,
then the City shall not be in default if the City commences performance within such thirty (30) day
period and thereafter diligently prosecutes the same to completion. The notice shall specify the
portion of the Lease that the City has failed to perform and the action that the BGCSC seeks to be
taken by the City to prevent the default. The BGCSC further agrees not to invoke any remedies
until such thirty (30) days have elapsed.
CES\21798\0001 \01198017.v 1
Packet Pg. 251
DocuSign Envelope ID: 2A607031-DFF8-48B5-AAC7-B8FCF4327E89
8.5.a
SECTION 8. REPRESENTATIONS
8.1 Representations of the BGCSC.
8.1.1 The BGCSC is a duly organized and legally existing corporation
under the laws of the State of Washington.
8.1.2 The BGCSC's execution, delivery and performance of all of the
terms and conditions of this Lease have been duly authorized by all requisite corporate action on
the part of the BGCSC. This Lease constitutes the BGCSC's legal, valid and binding obligations,
enforceable against the BGCSC in accordance with its terms subject to the effects of bankruptcy,
insolvency, fraudulent conveyance or similar laws affecting creditor's rights and to equitable
principles. Execution of the Lease does not conflict with any provision of the BGCSC's Articles
of Incorporation, Bylaws or other corporate documents.
8.1.3 There is no claim, action, proceeding or investigation pending or, to
the actual knowledge of the BGCSC, threatened in writing, nor is there any legal determination or
injunction that calls into question the BGCSC's authority or right to enter into this Lease or
perform the obligations specified in the Lease.
8.1.4 The BGCSC has not employed any broker, finder, consultant or
other intermediary in connection with the Lease who might be entitled to a fee or commission in
connection with the BGCSC and the City entering into the Lease.
8.2 Representations of the City.
8.2.1 The City is a municipal corporation duly organized, validly existing and in
good standing under the laws of the State of Washington, with full power and authority to own
and lease the Property. The City has the power to enter into and perform its obligations pursuant
to this Lease.
8.2.2 The City's execution, delivery and performance of this Lease have been
duly authorized consistent with its requirements under Washington law.
8.2.3 There is no claim, action, proceeding or investigation pending or, to the
actual knowledge of the City, threatened in writing, nor is there any outstanding judicial
determination or injunction that calls into question the City's authority or right to enter into this
Lease.
SECTION 9. GENERAL PROVISIONS
9.1 No Partnership. It is understood and agreed that this Lease does not create a
partnership or joint venture relationship between the City and the BGCSC. The City assumes no
liability hereunder or otherwise for the operation of the business of the BGCSC. The provisions
of this Lease with reference to rents are for the sole purpose of fixing and determining the total
rents to be paid by the BGCSC to the City.
10
CES\21798\0001 \01198017.v 1
Packet Pg. 252
DocuSign Envelope ID: 2A607031-DFF8-48B5-AAC7-B8FCF4327E89
8.5.a
9.2 Governing Law. This Lease shall be governed and construed according to the laws
of the State of Washington, without regard to its choice of law provisions. Venue shall be in
Snohomish County.
9.3 No Benefit to Third Parties. The City and the BGCSC are the only parties to this
Lease and as such are the only parties entitled to enforce its terms. Nothing in this Lease gives or
shall be construed to give or provide any benefit, direct, indirect, or otherwise to third parties.
Nothing in this Lease shall be construed as intending to create a special relationship with any third
party; neither the City not the BGCSC intend to create benefits in favor of any third parties as a
result of this Lease.
9.4 Notices. All notices required or desired to be given under this Lease shall be in
writing and may be delivered by hand delivery, in certain cases sent by facsimile, or by placement
in the U.S. mail, postage prepaid, as certified mail, return receipt requested, addressed to the City
at:
And to the BGCSC at:
City of Edmonds
121 5th Avenue North
Edmonds, Washington 98020
Attn: City Clerk
Boys & Girls Clubs of Snohomish County
8223 Broadway — Ste 100
Everett, Washington 98203
Attn: Executive Director
Any notice delivered by hand delivery shall be conclusively deemed received by the addressee
upon actual delivery; any notice delivered by certified mail as set forth herein shall be conclusively
deemed received by the addressee on the third Business Day after deposit. The addresses to which
notices are to be delivered may be changed by giving notice of such change in accordance with
this notice provision.
9.5 Time of the Essence. Time is of the essence in the performance of and adherence
to each and every covenant and condition of this Lease.
9.6 Non -waiver. Waiver by the City or the BGCSC of strict performance of any
provision of this Lease shall not be deemed a waiver of or prejudice the City's or the BGCSC's
right to require strict performance of the same provision in the future or of any other provision.
9.7 Survival. Any covenant or condition (including, but not limited to, indemnification
agreements), set forth in this Lease, the full performance of which is not specifically required prior
to the expiration or earlier termination of this Lease, and any covenant or condition which by their
11
CES\21798\0001 \01198017. v 1
Packet Pg. 253
DocuSign Envelope ID: 2A607031-DFF8-48B5-AAC7-B8FCF4327E89
8.5.a
terms are to survive, shall survive the expiration or earlier termination of this Lease and shall
remain fully enforceable thereafter.
9.8 Partial Invalidity. If any provision of this Lease is held to be invalid or
unenforceable, the remainder of this Lease, or the application of such provision to persons or
circumstances other than those to which it is held invalid or unenforceable, shall not be affected
thereby, and each provision of this Lease shall be valid and enforceable to the fullest extent
permitted by law.
9.9 Calculation of Time. All periods of time referred to in this Lease shall include
Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays. However, if the last day of any period falls on a Saturday,
Sunday, or legal holiday, then the period shall be extended to include the next day which is not a
Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday. "Legal Holiday" shall mean any holiday observed by the
Federal Government. As used in this Lease, "Business Days" shall exclude Saturdays, Sundays,
legal holidays and the week between December 25 and January 1.
9.10 Headings. The article and section headings contained herein are for convenience
in reference and are not intended to define or limit the scope of any provisions of this Lease.
9.11 Exhibits Incorporated by Reference. All Exhibits attached to this Lease are
incorporated by reference herein for all purposes.
9.12 Modification. This Lease may not be modified except by a writing signed by the
parties hereto.
9.13 Engagement of Brokers. The BGCSC and the City each represent to one another
that if a broker's commission is claimed, the party who engaged the broker shall pay any
commission owed and shall defend, indemnify and hold the other party harmless from any such
claim.
9.14 Right of Parties and Successors in Interest. The rights, liabilities and remedies
provided for herein shall extend to the heirs, legal representatives, successors and, so far as the
terms of this Lease permit, successors and assigns of the parties hereto. The words "City" and
"BGCSC" and their accompanying verbs or pronouns, wherever used in this Lease, shall apply
equally to all persons, firms, or corporations which may be or become such parties hereto.
9.15 Execution of Multiple Counterparts. This Lease may be executed in two or more
counterparts, each of which shall be an original, but all of which shall constitute one instrument.
9.16 Defined Terms. Capitalized terms shall have the meanings given them in the text
of this Lease.
9.17 No Limit on City's Powers. Nothing in this Lease shall limit, in any way, the power
and right of the City to exercise its governmental rights and powers, including its powers of
eminent domain.
12
CES\21798\0001 \01198017.v 1
Packet Pg. 254
DocuSign Envelope ID: 2A607031-DFF8-48B5-AAC7-B8FCF4327E89
8.5.a
9.18 Non -Binding Mediation. Should any dispute arise between the parties to this
Lease, other than a dispute regarding the failure to pay Rent or other payments (including taxes)
as required by this Lease, it is agreed that any such dispute will be submitted to a mediator prior
to litigation. The parties agree to exercise good faith efforts to agree on a mediator and to resolve
disputes covered by this section through the mediation process. The parties agree that the
mediation will be conducted through Judicial Dispute Resolution (JDR) in Seattle. If the parties
cannot agree on a mediator, one shall be appointed by JDR. The mediation fee shall be shared
equally by the City and the BGCSC. Either party may commence the mediation process by
contacting JDR and notifying the other party by mail. The mediation shall become binding upon
the parties only upon the execution of a settlement agreement based on the mediator's
recommendation. If a party refuses to participate in the mediation process, either by not paying
the mediation fees or not appearing for mediation, the Superior Court may issue an appropriate
enforcement order or sanction relating to this mediation provision in its discretion.
9.19 This Lease Supersedes. This Lease shall replace and supersede the 2015 Lease.
The parties hereby terminate the 2015 Lease in its entirety as of the effective date of this Lease.
9.20 Rccording. A Memorandum of this Lease may be recorded after execution by the
parties.
9.21 Entire Agreement. This Lease represents the entire agreement between the City
and the BGCSC relating to the BGCSC's leasing of the Property. It is understood and agreed by
both parties that neither party nor an official or employee of a party has made any representations
or promises with respect to this Lease or the making or entry into this Lease, except as expressly
set forth in this Lease. No claim for liability or cause for termination shall be asserted by either
party against the other for, and neither party shall be liable by reason of, any claimed breach of
any representations or promises not expressly set forth in this Lease; all oral agreements with the
parties are expressly waived by both parties. This Lease has been extensively negotiated between
the parties. Therefore, no alleged ambiguity or other drafting issues of the terms of this Lease shall
be construed, by nature of the drafting, against either party.
IN WITNESS HEREOF, the parties have subscribed their names hereto effective as of the
day, month and year first written above.
LESSEE: LESSOR:
BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS CITY OF EDMONDS
OF SNO COUNTY DocuSigned by:
r
Bill Tsoukalas, Executive Director Mike Nelson, Mayor
13
CES\21798\0001 \01198017. v 1
APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL ON:
February 21, 2023
Packet Pg. 255
DocuSign Envelope ID: 2A607031-DFF8-48B5-AAC7-B8FCF4327E89
8.5.a
ATTEST: DocuSigned by:
D"
Scott Passey, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
D/IocuSigned by:
U,A.Vbv S
Of b 'e6C1ty Attorney
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
) ss.
COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH )
I certify that I have evidence that Mike Nelson is the person who appeared before me, and
said person acknowledged that he signed this instrument, on oath stated that he was authorized to
execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the Mayor of the City of Edmonds, to be the free
and voluntary act of such party for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument.
DATED:
PRINTED NAME:
NOTARY PUBLIC
In and for the State of Washington.
My commission expires:
14
CES\21798\0001 \01198017. v 1
Packet Pg. 256
DocuSign Envelope ID: 2A607031-DFF8-48B5-AAC7-B8FCF4327E89
8.5.a
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
) ss.
COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH )
I certify that I have evidence that Bill Tsoukalas is the person who appeared before me,
and said person acknowledged that he signed this instrument, on oath stated that s/he was
authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the Executive Director of the Boys
& Girls Clubs of Snohomish County, to be the free and voluntary act of such party for the uses
and purposes mentioned in the instrument.
DATED:
SHE d
PRINTED NAME: _ (+
o F NOTARY PUBLIC
o NOTARY �' License No. 9683 In and for the State of Washington.
N \ PL)BLIC 2 My commission expires: 2-27'0�0���
\ 12-27 2024 O
15
CES\21798\0001 \01198017. v l
Packet Pg. 257
DocuSign Envelope ID: 2A607031-DFF8-48B5-AAC7-B8FCF4327E89
8.5.a
EDMONDS CIVIC CENTER PLAYFIELD
BOYS & GIRLS CLUB SITE FOOTPRINT
v 20 40 NORTH
WALKER MACY - FEBRUARY 2023 SCALE: 1 " = 20'-0"
Packet Pg. 258
DocuSign Envelope ID: 2A607031-DFF8-48B5-AAC7-B8FCF4327E89
L1--
8.5.a
0
L
a
.� .19
m
a
Awl
c
t X `A I J rAb.1 1 I ! Y
Ow
C • '�• l ` I V • .. '7 .�fz-
- ' -mot �� � ,•' �''-.;
�ecm
w+
r A Q
5 .
�j
Packet Pg. 259
DocuSign Envelope ID: 2A607031-DFF8-48B5-AAC7-B8FCF4327E89
EXHIBIT "C"
8.5.a
WALKERI MACY LANDSCAPE ;. CH TE.^.TUBE UR9A': DESIGN; L,;NNIJ '`
To: Carrie Hite, City of Edmonds Topic: Boys & Girls Club Design Date: 09/11/2018
Guidelines
From: Walker Macy Project: Edmonds Civic Center Playfield Project #: P3282.04
SD -CA
CIVIC CENTER PLAYFIELD DESIGN GUIDELINES
Site Design — Sidewalk Zones and Streetscape Features
Intent. To produce a streetscape that is safe, convenient, comfortable and appealing for
people on foot.
1. Sidewalk materials and design shall meet and match the surrounding park and
the design established in the Civic Center Playfield Master Plan.
2. Amenity Area: Signs, street furniture, lighting, landscaping, etc., shall be located
in the amenity area. Requirements for this area are associated with the Civic
Field Master Plan
3. Clear Walkway Area: Sidewalk area shall maintain a clear 5 foot dimension for
pedestrian travel. Signs, street furniture, planters and other amenities shall not
encroach upon the clear walkway area.
4. Storefront Area: Sidewalk area outside the pedestrian travel area may be used
for outdoor dining and/or display.
Site Design - Service and Storage
Intent. To reduce the visual impacts of storage, trash, and service areas.
1. Storage of trash and recycling and other goods shall be included within the
building envelope. This standard does not apply to temporary uses such as
material storage during construction or street vendors.
2. Any mechanical equipment located on the ground, roof, or wall -mounted and
visible from the street, common areas, the park, or a public vantage point shall
be screened.
3. All on -site service areas, loading zones, outdoor storage areas and similar
activities shall be located in an area not visible from public streets and consider
adjacent public spaces. Consideration shall be given to developing common
service courts at the interior of blocks. Service areas should accommodate
loading, trash bins, recycling facilities, storage areas, utility cabinets, utility
meters, transformers, etc. Service areas shall be located and designed for easy
12133RD AVE. 5L!Tc �_ I S-ATT_E'A'A J61-3_ I - 1.111, 11 1 'jE3 A'A:_KTR%1ACv p',4
Packet Pg. 260
DocuSign Envelope ID: 2A607031-DFF8-48B5-AAC7-B8FCF4327E89
8.5.a
Edmonds Civic Center Playfield Design Guidelines
9/11 /2018
Page 2 of 6
access by service vehicles and for convenient access by each tenant. Any
emissions of noise, vapor, heat or fumes shall be mitigated.
Site Design — Public Spaces
Intent. To provide an enhanced pedestrian experience by linking public plazas, courtyards
and other gathering spaces.
1. Outdoor gathering spaces should be oriented toward the south (for solar
exposure) when possible to create a more comfortable space.
2. Buffer plantings should be a minimum of 12' and align with the Civic Center
Playfield plan.
3. Setbacks from the ROW shall meet City Code.
Building Design — Prominent Entrances
Intent: To ensure that entrances are easily identifiable and accessible from streets and
sidewalks.
1. Locate primary entrances so that they are visible from the public right of way.
The entry shall be marked by architectural elements such as canopies,
ornamental lighting fixtures and/or fixed seating that offer visual prominence.
2. The finished floor of the ground floor shall have the same grade as the street
sidewalk and/or adjacent public space and match with the Civic Center Playfield
plan.
3. Ground level detail shall reinforce the character and attractiveness of the
streetscape, provide pedestrian friendly amenities. Facades shall be designed to
be pedestrian friendly through the inclusion of at least four of the following
elements:
a. Kick plates for storefront windows
b. Projecting window sills
c. Pedestrian -scale signage
d. Exterior lighting sconces
e. Containers for seasonal plantings
f. Window box planters
g. Benches and seat walls along 30% of the length of the facade
h. Cafe tables and chairs on the south side of the building.
i. Match Civic Center Playfield paving system.
j. Brick, tile or stone work on the ground floor facade
k. A feature not on the list that meets the intent and is approved by
Director.
Building Design — Transparency Zone
Intent: To provide a visual connection between activities inside and outside of buildings.
Packet Pg. 261
DocuSign Envelope ID: 2A607031-DFF8-48B5-AAC7-B8FCF4327E89
8.5.a
Edmonds Civic Center Playfield Design Guidelines
9/11/2018
Page 3 of 6
On all streets: buildings shall include windows with clear vision glass on at least
60% of the area between two and twelve feet above grade for all ground floor
building facades that are visible from an adjacent street or public space. If windows
are not appropriate, decorative art (such as noncommercial murals or relief
sculpture), significant architectural detailing, or wall -covering landscaping may be
used, as approved by the COE.
Building Design — Treatment of Blank Walls
Intent. To soften the visual impact of any wall that does not have windows
Any blank wall shall incorporate at least five of the following features:
1. An architectural plinth (a stone or masonry base at least 36" high)
2. Belt course(s) of masonry
3. A Green Wall. For the purposes of this subsection, a "Green Wall" is defined as
a vertical trellis or cable/wire net systems installed as part of the building
envelope system where climbing plants or cascading groundcovers are trained
to cover these specially designed supporting structures (also commonly referred
to as biowalls, vertical gardens, modular living walls). A Green Wall should be
located in association with a raised planter at least 2 feet high and 3 feet wide
integrated into the building design. A Green Wall shall be planted with climbing
vines or plant materials sufficient to obscure or screen at least 60% of the wall
surface within 3 years
4. Recesses at least 4 feet wide and 2 feet deep
5. Overhanging roof
6. Decorative tile work
7. Accent lighting
8. Artwork that does not contain a commercial message
9. Landscape planting bed at least 5 feet wide, or raised planter bed at least 2 feet
high and three feet wide, in front of the wall. Such planting areas shall include
plant materials sufficient to obscure or screen at least 60% of the wall surface
within 3 years. The applicant shall utilize plant materials that complement the
natural character of the Pacific Northwest; are adaptable to the climatic,
topographic, and hydrologic characteristics of the site; and should include native
species.
10. Seating (benches or ledges)
11. A feature not on the list that meets the intent, as approved by the City of
Edmonds.
Building Design — Massing and Articulation
Intent. To reduce the apparent bulk of buildings and maintain a pedestrian scale, achieved
through consistent building details and proportions on all sides to ensure a `Your -sided"
quality to a building and upper -story features that improve the relationship between the
upper stories and the street.
1. Buildings 30 feet in height and taller shall distinguish a "base" at ground level
using articulation and materials such as stone, masonry, or decorative concrete.
Packet Pg. 262
DocuSign Envelope ID: 2A607031-DFF8-48B5-AAC7-B8FCF4327E89
8.5.a
Edmonds Civic Center Playfield Design Guidelines
9/11/2018
Page 4 of 6
2. The "top" of the building shall emphasize a distinct profile or outline with
elements such as a projecting parapet, cornice, upper level step back or pitched
roofline.
3. The "middle" of the building should be distinguished by a change in materials or
color, windows, balconies, step backs and signage.
4. The design of the building shall provide consistent architectural details; colors
and materials shall be consistent on all building walls.
5. Upper stories of buildings should maintain an expression line along the fagade--
such as a change of material, projections, or setbacks —to reduce the perceived
building mass. Upper floor windows should be divided into individual units and
not consist of a "ribbon" of glass.
6. Buildings shall include articulation along all facades Facade details and
elements should be integral to the overall building design and should not appear
added on. The purpose is not to create a regular rigid solution but rather to
break up the mass in creative ways to add visual interest and to reduce a
building's apparent scale. To provide interest and variation appropriately scaled
to the building and all facades shall incorporate all of the following methods:
a. Distinctive roof forms.
b. Integrally textured, colored or patterned materials, such as stone or other
masonry.
c. Windows articulated with mullions, recessed windows, punched
windows, etc., as well as application of complementary articulation
around doorways and balconies.
d. Landscaping:
1. Preferred: A Green Wall. For the purposes of this subsection, a
"Green Wall" is defined as a vertical trellis or cable /wire net
system installed as part of the building envelope system where
climbing plants or cascading groundcovers are trained to cover
these specially designed supporting structures (also commonly
referred to as biowalls, vertical gardens, modular living walls). A
Green Wall should be located in association with a raised planter
at least 2 feet high and 3 feet wide integrated into the building
design. A Green Wall shall be planted with climbing vines or plant
materials sufficient to obscure or screen at least 60% of the wall
surface within 3 years.
2. Alternative if the applicant can demonstrate to the satisfaction of
the City of Edmonds that a Green Wall is not appropriate,
alternative landscaping, architectural, or site design feature(s) of
equal or better means of satisfying the intent may be allowed.
3. Architectural methods of breaking down the fagade, such as
changes of plane or vertical fins.
4. A facade design that provides an alternative method for creating
visual interest at the pedestrian level, reducing the perceived
building mass, and meets the intent, may be approved by the City
of Edmonds.
Packet Pg. 263
DocuSign Envelope ID: 2A607031-DFF8-48B5-AAC7-B8FCF4327E89
8.5.a
Edmonds Civic Center Playfield Design Guidelines
9/11/2018
Page 5 of 6
Building Design — Roofline and Roof Mounted Equipment
Intent: To ensure that roof forms provide distinctive profiles and interest and to screen
rooftop
mechanical and communications equipment from the ground level of nearby streets and
residential areas. To insure that a buildings mechanical equipment and/or other utility
hardware is well screened from public view to enhance the buildings appearance.
1. Mechanical equipment shall be screened by an extended parapet wall or other
roof form that is integrated with the architecture of the building.
2. No roofline ridge should run unbroken for more than 80 feet.
3. Mechanical equipment and/or other utility hardware for a building located on the
roof, ground or wall mounted on the building, shall be screen from public view
with architectural and/or landscape materials, or they shall be located so as not
to be visible from any street, common areas, or public vantage point.
4. Screening shall be compatible with the building architecture (materials, color,
and scale) and the surrounding landscaping.
5. When using landscaping to screen equipment, plants shall be arranged with a
minimum of 50% coverage at time of installation and be able to grow to fully
screen or shield the equipment within 3 years.
6. Screening with landscaping shall utilize plant materials that complement the
natural character of the Pacific Northwest; are adaptable to the climatic,
topographic, and hydrologic characteristics of the site; and that include native
plant species whenever possible.
Building Design — General
Intent: To require additional features to be incorporated into higher density residential
development when located adjacent to properties zoned for lower density single-family use
in order to enhance the compatibility between uses. Mechanical equipment shall be
screened by an extended parapet wall or other roof form that is integrated with the
architecture of the building.
1. Incorporate at least four of the following architectural features:
a. Recessed Entry
b. Dormers
c. Higher Quality Materials
d. Distinctive Roof Forms
e. Upper Level Balconies
f. Gables
g. Window Patterns
h. A feature not on the list that meets the intent and is approved by the City
of Edmonds.
i. Flat blank walls shall not be visible from the street or common areas, or
public vantage point.
2. Exterior cladding shall utilize masonry, concrete, and metal materials and
color palette as approved by City of Edmonds for the use within the park.
3. Utilize sunscreens and metal canopies at entries and all glazed openings
on south and west facades to match the character and materials of the
restroom structures within the park.
Packet Pg. 264
DocuSign Envelope ID: 2A607031-DFF8-48B5-AAC7-B8FCF4327E89
8.5.a
Edmonds Civic Center Playfield Design Guidelines
9/11 /2018
Page 6 of 6
4. Integrate wood feature elements to match materials used at park shade
structure.
*Design Standards for the BD Zones remain applicable.
Packet Pg. 265
DocuSign Envelope ID: 2A607031-DFF8-48B5-AAC7-B8FCF4327E89
8.5.a
of t L'Af0
><� CONTRACT ROUTING FORM
M
Z Originator: Angie Feser Routed by:
O Department/Division: Parks & Recreation Date:
I -
a
Name of Consultant/Contractor: Boys and Girls Clubs of Snohomish County
CONTRACT TITLE:
W Ground Lease
c
Type of Contract: (GR) Grants
Z Z (S) Purchase of Services
W
l'— Bid/RFP Number:
Z
(City Clerk Use Only)
Carrie Haslam, P&R
02/23/2023
(1) Intergovernmental Agreement Z (L) Lease Agreement
(W) Public Works n (0) Other
0 Effective Date: 01 /01 /2023
ciHas the original City contract boilerplate language been modified?
I.- If yes, specify which sections have been modified:
0 Description
v of Services: Lease of property
Total Amount of Contract: $ 400.00
Completion Date: 12/31/2062
OYes O No
Budget # Budget #
Amount: Amount:
N ,
J
Q Amount: Amount: �
w Budget # Budget #
G
QBudget # Amount: Budget # Amount:
a
Q Z Are there sufficient funds in the current budget to cover this contract? 0 Yes O No
Z Remarks:
Authorization Level: I Mayor
W
❑ 1. Project Manager
Q ❑ 2. Risk Management/Budget
Z E 3. City Attorney
❑ 4. Consultant/Contractor
y ❑ 5. Other
❑ 6. City Council Approval
Date (if applicable)
Q 7. Mayor
E 8. City Clerk
Packet Pg. 266
8.5.b
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MEETING
APPROVED MINUTES
June 20, 2023
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Neil Tibbott, Council President
Vivian Olson, Councilmember
Will Chen, Councilmember
Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember
Susan Paine, Councilmember
Dave Teitzel, Councilmember
Jenna Nand, Councilmember
ELECTED OFFICIALS ABSENT
Mike Nelson, Mayor
1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE
STAFF PRESENT
Rod Sniffen, Assistant Police Chief
Dave Turley, Administrative Services Director
Angie Feser, Parks, Rec., & Human Serv. Dir.
Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
Sharon Cates, City Attorney's Office
Scott Passey, City Clerk
Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator
The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7 p.m. by Council President Tibbott in the
Council Chambers, 250 5' Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually. The meeting was opened with the flag
salute.
2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Councilmember Olson read the City Council Land Acknowledge Statement: "We acknowledge the original
inhabitants of this place, the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and their successors the Tulalip Tribes, who
since time immemorial have hunted, fished, gathered, and taken care of these lands. We respect their
sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and we honor their sacred spiritual connection with the land
and water."
3. ROLL CALL
City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present with the exception of Mayor
Nelson.
4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Council President Pro Tern Olson requested the following changes to the agenda:
• Move Agenda Item 9.2, Delegation Bond Ordinance, to 9.1
• Move Agenda Item 9.2, Interagency Agreement for TAC Officer at WA State Criminal Justice
Training Academy, to Item 9.1
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
June 20, 2023
Page 1
Packet Pg. 267
8.5.b
20. JOB ORDER CONTRACTION - FIRE STATION #17 APPARATUS BAY CEILING
REPLACEMENT
22. COURT GRANT EXPENDITURES
23. COUNCIL LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR COMMUNITY COURTS
25. APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE TO ALLOW DAYCARE BUSINESSES AS A PRIMARY
PERMITTED USE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD BU
26. ORDINANCE AMENDING ECC 10.01/ ECC 1.05.030
8. PUBLIC HEARINGS
BOYS & GIRLS CLUB NEW FACILITY DESIGN
Parks, Recreation and Human Services Director Angie Feser provided an introduction for the public hearing
on review of the new Boys & Girls Club (BGC) facility as it relates to Civic Center Park. The City and
BGC have a ground lease agreement that was reviewed and approved by the council in February 2023 that
allocated 12,000 square feet within the Civic Center Playfield for the BGC to either renovate their existing
facility or build a new one. The BGC is proceeding with building a new facility. The public hearing is
related to the council's review and eventual approval of the building's design, primarily on the building's
esthetics and how it fits within the park and the community. There will be a separate building permit
approval process. Council review and approval of the schematic design is one of the requirements and
conditions of the lease agreement.
Bill Toukalas, Executive Director, Boys & Girls Club of Snohomish County, referred to the ESD's
comments, noting the BGC works with those same kids before and after school. The BGC has been a partner
with the City since 1968 in the current building at Civic Field. He reviewed:
• Map of Boys & Girls Club 25 locations
o 15 in Snohomish County and 10 outside Snohomish County, primarily in partnership with tribal
communities
• Edmonds is third oldest club.
o Building originally part of Edmonds High School when the high school was in the Edmonds
Center for the Arts building.
o Building is approximately 100 years old
• 12,000 square feet designated in new park for the BGC facility
• Considered retaining existing building, but age, condition, code requirements and instability led to
a decision to demolish and rebuild
• Proposal is a 16,000 square foot building, approximately 3 times larger than the current building
o Looked at other possible locations to serve Edmonds youth including discussions with ECA
o Existing club serves approximately 1800 kids, 200 of which are teens. Daily average attendance
as high as 500.
o Plan to eventually partner with ECA to provide space for teens. In interim will be served in the
BGC facility
• $6 million project, have raised approximately $3.7 million from the state capital budget, Snohomish
County and local private donors. He was confident the remaining funds can be raised
Mr. Toukalas congratulated the City on the park improvements and the ribbon cutting planned for Friday.
He summarized the intent is for the BGC to be part of the park, to be open and inviting for kids and available
for public use when kids are not using the building.
Adam Clark, 2812 Architecture, reviewed:
• Overall site plan — entire park
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
June 20, 2023
Page 5
Packet Pg. 268
8.5.b
F � J
W
• Enlarged site plan
o New Boys & Girls Club facility
■ 11,760 SF footprint with 4,733 SF upper floor (16,493 SF total)
o Existing building planned for demolition due to:
■ Structural Integrity
■ Accessibility
■ Life safety
■ Limited flexibility
• West elevation drawing facing 6' Street — gym, canopy, garage doors, club space
o Contemporary design (Ground Face CMU, glass, wood structure)
o LEED Silver standards
■ Minimal carbon footprint
■ Efficient HVAC
■ Opportunity for solar
• South elevation facing park, restrooms and play structure
o South facing entry for park connection
o Abundance of natural light for interior
o Biophilic design to increase occupancy connectivity to the natural environment
• East elevation
o Utility spaces on southeast for economy
0 30' high gym (23' required to underside of structure)
o Existing building average height 33'
• North elevation facing tennis courts
o Varied materials and surface planes
o Canopy for weather protection at street
o Possible art on this side
0 20' building setback from property line. Proposing to put building at back of sidewalk — interior
area needed
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
June 20, 2023
Page 6
Packet Pg. 269
8.5.b
Mayor Pro Tem Tibbott opened the public hearing.
Jerry Tays, Edmonds, a former Edmonds historic preservation commission (HPC) member, relayed he
was a national park ranger for 30 years and managed many historic resources. After retiring, he was hired
by Washington State Parks to develop a historic preservation program for the state. Buildings in general
and particularly historic buildings, have character defining features, features of the building that make it
what it is. For example the golden arches, everyone knows what they represent; the broad, sweeping curves
of the old Safeway markets, those are character defining features. It appears no one on the BGC team has
any connection with historic preservation. There is nothing in the design that carries forward the very old,
historic building, none of the character defining features are represented in the new design. It may be a very
functional, good looking building, but there is nothing historic about it. As important as that building has
been to the City's history for 100 years, it would seem appropriate to incorporate something in the new
building representing the old building. As a last resort, he suggested a display on the grounds depicting the
history of the old building, but he felt that was a cop-out. He suggested the team hire the services of a
historic preservation architect to discuss incorporating something from the old building into the new
building.
Roger Pence, Edmonds, relayed his full support for the concept of a replacement building for the BGC of
approximately this scale in this location; however, he had reservations about the design. He recommended
referring the building to the Architectural Design Board (ADB) for preliminary consideration which the
council is authorized to do by City ordinance. He assumed the ADB has a role in approval once building
permits have been applied for, but rather than the council giving a conditional approval of this design, he
recommended first referring it to the ADB.
With no further public comment, Council President Tibbott closed the public hearing.
Mayor Pro Tem Tibbott advised this will come back to council for a decision. Tonight is to take input from
the public and for the council to ask clarifying questions and offer suggestions.
Councilmember Nand asked why there were no ground level windows on the north side of the building.
Mr. Clark answered that is the gym; the windows are located up high so there is natural light.
Councilmember Nand commented in Edmonds' downtown historic business district, she has seen new
buildings replacing old buildings; the style people in Edmonds enjoy is the charming red brick facade like
the Carnegie Library. If the design is not completely tied to the brown brick, she suggested red brick may
be a way to incorporate design elements of the previous building in the new building. Edmonds does a good
job with historic, interpretive signs on buildings that have replaced historic building explaining to the public
what was there before. That could be done to provide a historical acknowledgement and design elements.
People are used to seeing a large red brick building here; using red brick on the new building could make
it look less brutalist and more vintage looking. Mr. Clark said they hope to utilize some of existing gym
floor in the new club on the first or second floor which will provide a nod to the history.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
June 20, 2023
Page 7
Packet Pg. 270
8.5.b
Council President Pro Tern Olson passed on a comment emailed by a resident regarding whether retaining
the fagade would be an option and building beyond it. She recalled the fagade will not be in same plane it
was currently. Mr. Clark answered that was correct. Council President Pro Tern Olson recognized that
suggestion may be impractical, but there are people with comments about the historical reference. She noted
in the west facing rendering does not reflect the garage doors shown in the elevation drawings. She asked
if that was because the garage doors were the result of a recent suggestion. Mr. Clark agreed it was a matter
of timing.
Councilmember Olson recalled when that suggestion was made at a committee meeting, she loved the
indoor/outdoor feel and opportunity to have the doors open. Now she wondered if the garage doors created
a security issue with kids being able to run out onto the sidewalk. She asked if the doors were a good idea
since the doors do not face the park and the area is not fenced. Mr. Toukalas answered in the existing
building, kids are inside and outside but always supervised. If the doors were up, he assured there would
be adequate staffing to ensure kids were not wandering off and/or individuals did not wander in from the
street. With regard to efficiency for heating and cooling, Council President Pro Tern Olson recognized when
the doors are closed, they are not as efficient as a wall.
Councilmember Paine referred to the building exceeding the height limit and asked if the gym could be
countersunk into the ground so height was not an issue. She recognized the height of the current building
exceeds the height limit. Mr. Clark advised the building is currently 33 feet. He said countersinking the
building was a possibility, but there are serious ground water issues in the park which was why it was
proposed at the sidewalk level.
Councilmember Paine asked if the building was on the Edmonds historic registry or has it just existed for
100 years. Mr. Toukalas said he was not aware of any historic preservation designation. It is an iconic
building, but it is not on the registry. Councilmember Paine commented solar panels are essential, not so
much design but as an implementation feature; they are good for the environment and the community and
would set a good example.
Councilmember Paine asked when the facility would be completed. Mr. Toukalas answered construction
will take 10 -12 months. Construction will start after the permit process is completed. Mr. Clark anticipated
a year for the permit process as the facility has to go through design review prior to permits. Councilmember
Paine asked if the plan is to have the building at the edge of property line and how wide the sidewalk would
be. Mr. Clark answered the sidewalk will be the same width. The club portion of the building will be up to
the property line, the gym is set back about two feet and there is another cutout at one end.
Councilmember Teitzel advised he served on the HPC with Mr. Tays several years ago. The HPC looked
at designating the BGC building as historic, but it did not qualify because it has been extensively remodeled.
It is not historic from that standpoint although it is treasured in the community. With regard to a question
Council President Pro Tern Olson asked via email, he asked if having the western wall of the building at
the edge of the sidewalk would comply with the lot coverage restrictions. He recalled a certain amount of
impervious surface was allowed and asked if allowing the west wall to be at the edge of the sidewalk within
the existing setback would still meet the lot coverage requirements. Ms. Feser answered it will still qualify.
The northwest corner is exempt from grant requirements related to imperious surface which is why the
tennis, petanque and basketball courts and the BGC are in that corner.
Councilmember Buckshnis said the public could also watch the June 13 PPW Committee meeting where
this was presented. As a member of the Waterfront Center's capital campaign, she noted fundraising for
solar is a great idea. In the Waterfront Center's campaign, a $1000 donation allowed solar champions to
purchase a panel. Many people purchased solar panels in the Waterfront Center's campaign, $1,000 is an
affordable amount. She liked the idea of utilizing the old facade, recalling discussions about putting
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
June 20, 2023
Page 8
Packet Pg. 271
8.5.b
something on the north wall facing the park such as a living wall. Mr. Toukalas agreed that is a perfect
place to dress up the building; the five panels could include scenes, images of the original building, etc. He
suggested they leaving it to the artist to figure out the highest and best use of the panels, but they were open
to doing something. Councilmember Buckshnis recalled the height of the Edmonds Waterfront Center was
increased by three feet for sea level rise and suggested that could be used as an example.
Councilmember Chen commented this idea has been a long time coming and it was exciting to see
something happening. He agreed with Councilmembers Paine and Buckshnis that solar panels were a good
idea. He said friends who visited the Waterfront Center were disappointed they missed out on the
opportunity to be a solar champion. He suggested donations of $2000 to be a solar hero. He asked if the
building will have community meeting space for use by other nonprofits. Mr. Toukalas answered the space
will be available for use outside the BGC's hours; the ground floor is an open floor plan which could provide
opportunity for groups to hold meetings and there are restrooms and a kitchen on that floor. Councilmember
Chen commented there are other newly formed nonprofits that do not have the capability to raise funds that
could use the space.
Councilmember Chen observed the building appears to be a brick structure and asked if the design would
be earthquake resistant. Mr. Clark answered the building will be required to meet all seismic regulations.
The CMU block is a fagade on the outside of the structure; the main structure will be wood framing with
steel cross -bracing.
Mayor Pro Tern Tibbott asked about next steps for approving the design. Ms. Feser advised it is on the June
27 agenda for council approval or it could be moved to July if the council wants more time.
2. PUBLIC HEARING ON 2024 CITY BUDGET PRIORITIES
Mayor Pro Tern Tibbott explained the council held a budget workshop on June 12 and plans to hold another
on June 22. This public hearing is an opportunity for the public to comment in council chambers on the
2024 budget. A feedback form is available for the public to provide input to the council on priorities. The
council will meet before the June 27 council meeting to deliberate on budget priorities which will be
forwarded to the mayor in the form of a resolution. He reviewed the six priorities the council identified at
their budget retreat:
• Public safety
• Developing community spaces, parks, facilities, etc.
• Improve the way City government relates to citizens and improve transparency and functions for
citizen input
• Environment — restoring watersheds and using green technology
• Improve neighborhoods which includes walkability, beautification and business development
• Human services
Mayor Pro Tem Tibbott opened the public hearing.
Marjie Fields, Edmonds, thanked the council for providing opportunities for citizen input on the budget.
She expressed support for the following additions to the CFP: 1) construct a diversion structure on upper
Perrinville Creek to redirect excess stormwater that is destroying Perrinville Creek, 2) fix two bridges in
Yost Park to enhance outdoor recreation and public access. There are state recreation grants and park
maintenance grants that could fund this, and 3) modify the historic upper weir in Yost Park to preserve the
historic center structure and realign the creek channel away from the eroding bluff. She was sure the council
supported these environmental projects and hoped funding could be identified.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
June 20, 2023
Page 9
Packet Pg. 272
8.5.b
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL
MEETING APPROVED MINUTES
July 5, 2023
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Mike Nelson, Mayor
Vivian Olson, Council President Pro Tem
Will Chen, Councilmember
Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember
Susan Paine, Councilmember
Dave Teitzel, Councilmember
Jenna Nand, Councilmember
ELECTED OFFICIALS ABSENT
Neil Tibbott, Council President
1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE
STAFF PRESENT
Angie Feser, Parks, Rec., & Human Serv.
Susan McLaughlin, Planning & Dev. Dir.
Todd Tatum, Comm./Culture/Econ. Dev.
David Levitan, Planning Manager
Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
Nicholas Falk, Deputy City Clerk
Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator
Dir
Dir
The special Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7 p.m. by Mayor Nelson in the Council
Chambers, 250 5' Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually. The meeting was opened with the flag salute.
2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Councilmember Teitzel read the City Council Land Acknowledge Statement: "We acknowledge the
original inhabitants of this place, the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and their successors the Tulalip Tribes,
who since time immemorial have hunted, fished, gathered, and taken care of these lands. We respect their
sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and we honor their sacred spiritual connection with the land
and water."
3. ROLL CALL
Deputy City Clerk Nicholas Falk called the roll. All elected officials were present with the exception of
Council President Tibbott.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO
EXCUSE COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
4. PRESENTATIONS
2023 LEGISLATIVE WRAP-UP REPORT
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
July 5, 2023
Page 1
Packet Pg. 273
8.5.b
City spends approximately $1 million/year on streets, but studies indicate the need is about $3 million/year.
The City has no funding identified for the arts corridor, people want sidewalks, and there are a lot of old
buildings that need maintenance including the Frances Anderson Center and City Hall. He referred to page
124 of the capital program and the Library Plaza water system, noting there has been water intrusion as a
result of the library building rain garden since it was installed in 2003. An evaluation in 2018 determined
it needed to be replace, yet it is not scheduled until 2028. There are reports of mold in the ceiling, something
that should be addressed before the library is opened again and ARPA funds could go a long way to address
that. The Waterfront Study identifies additional ideas; there are no plans to study how to provide emergency
access to the waterfront which will be important with double tracking and more ferries. He applauded the
council for seeking input from the community and encouraged the council to continue that effort including
gaining input from citizens in all areas of the City to best utilize ARPA funds.
7. RECEIVED FOR FILING
1. WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS
2. 2024 BUDGET PRIORITY OUTREACH EFFORTS HANDOUT
8. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PAINE, TO
APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items
approved are as follows:
1. APPROVAL OF SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES OF JUNE 22, 2023
2. APPROVAL OF REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF JUNE 27, 2023
3. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS AND WIRE PAYMENT
9. COUNCIL BUSINESS
BOYS & GIRLS CLUB NEW FACILITY DESIGN
Parks, Recreation & Human Services Director Angie Feser advised review of the schematic drawings for
the new Boys & Girls Club (BGC) facility is part of the ground lease between the City and the BGC. The
design was presented to the PPW committee on June 13 and full council on June 20 with a public hearing.
Tonight is a summary presentation and to answer council questions. Staff is asking for council approval of
the design as presented to allow the BGC to move onto the next step. Council will review the project two
more times for aesthetic qualities and details as it progresses.
Bill Toukalas, Executive Director, Boys & Girls Club of Snohomish County, applicant for the project,
explained the BGC has been a community facility in partnership with the City since 1968 in the former
Edmonds High School fieldhouse. The design of Civic Park allotted a 12,000 square foot footprint for the
BGC. After determining it was not feasible or practical to repair or expand the existing building, the club
plans to demolish the existing building and build a new 16,000 square foot facility. The building will include
an 8,000 square foot gymnasium and approximately 8,000 square feet of activity area (4,000 square feet on
the ground level and 4,000 square feet on the second story). The design compliments the improvements
made at Civic Field Park and there is an expectation the building will have a certain amount of public use
when the kids are not occupying it. The BGC listened to the council's comments about solar panels,
retaining some of the building's history, potentially dressing up the north wall with artwork, and
incorporating some of the original gymnasium's wood floor into the design.
Adam Clark, 2812 Architecture, reviewed:
• Enlarged site plan
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
July 5, 2023
Page 7
Packet Pg. 274
8.5.b
Y•f -t,�1
4
I t�i)=W SAYS 8
61RL5 CLUB
L HALN I_I_ T60 S. F
-, UPPER: 4, i33 5.F_
TOTAL 16.4g3 5.F
4I
i .
i
?J.L''1\6 =]T:: FLAN
m -0•
o New Boys & Girls Club facility
■ 11,760 SF footprint with 4,733 SF upper floor (16,493 SF total)
o Existing building planned for demolition due to:
■ Structural Integrity
■ Accessibility
■ Life safety
■ Limited flexibility
• West elevation
o Contemporary design (Ground Face CMU, glass, wood structure)
o LEED Silver standards
■ Minimal carbon footprint
■ Efficient HVAC
■ Opportunity for solar
• South elevation
o South facing entry for park connection
o Abundance of natural light for interior
o Biophilic design to increase occupancy connectivity to the natural environment
• East elevation
o Utility spaces on southeast for economy
0 30' high gym (23' required to underside of structure)
o Existing building average height 33'
• North elevation
o Varied materials and surface planes
o Canopy for weather protection at street
o Possible art on wall
0 20' building setback from property line. Proposing to put building at back of sidewalk — interior
area needed
• Rendering (looking from southwest)
o Planning to add garage doors below canopy on gym wall (not shown on rendering)
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
July 5, 2023
Page 8
Packet Pg. 275
8.5.b
Rendering (looking from northwest)
Mr. Toukalas relayed since the last meeting with council, he spoke with ECA Executive Director Joe
McIalwain who mentioned the arts commission had discussed graphics on the south wall of the ECA
building facing the north wall of the BGC and possible synergy between them. The building height and
setback will be considered during the permit process and he was hopeful those could be overcome to allow
16,000 square feet. The construction zone will be a tight footprint; the BGC is committed to restoring
anything disturbed during construction to its current condition.
Council President Pro Tem Olson observed the garage doors on the west side were added at the request of
a councilmember. She did not think it looks as nice with the garage doors and a resident mentioned the
garage doors make the building look like a fire station which may not be the look the BGC was going for.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TEM OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
TEITZEL, TO APPROVE THE DESIGN AS IT RELATES TO THE PARK WITH CAVEATS,
POINTING OUT DISCREPANCIES WITH THE EDMONDS CIVIC PARK PLAYFIELD DESIGN
GUIDELINES ON PAGE 3, SECTION 1, MASSING AND ARTICULATION, AND SECTION 5,
ROOFLINE AND ROOF MOUNTED EQUIPMENT.
Council President Pro Tem Olson said she identified at least two caveats and possibly other councilmembers
could add to the lists of caveats; there are items in the Civic Field Park Playfield Design Guidelines that
this design does not meet. She was unsure the original author of the design guidelines, and if the ADB, staff
or planning board via the public hearing process decided to deviate from the design guidelines, she would
not personally take offense, but she did not support council approving a design that does not meet elements
of the design guidelines. Her motion to approve the design as it relates to the park with those two specific
caveats where it does not meet design guidelines allows the BGC to continue to move forward and gives a
heads up to the entities that receive this approval that those are two specific areas the council highlighted.
For Councilmember Paine, Council President Pro Tem Olson provided clarification regarding the sections
in the design guidelines that she referenced. Councilmember Paine commented her children attended the
BGC and she agreed it was difficult to reach the upper floor. The building has been well loved by the
community and has served its purpose. She appreciated that the building would be LEED which guarantees
some sustainability of materials, etc. which was very appropriate. She liked the idea of collaborating with
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
July 5, 2023
Page 9
Packet Pg. 276
8.5.b
the ECA to have artwork on both buildings that pulls them together visually. In her mind, solar panels were
a giant plus. She agreed compliance with the current code was paramount. Building height is an area of
focus and she agreed the guidelines do need to be followed. She summarized it was an exciting project that
will be refined by other processes.
Councilmember Buckshnis commented the Civic Field Park Playfield Design Guidelines were developed
in 2018 when there was not a clear idea of the BGC's plans so she understood why Walker Macy was very
conservative in the design guidelines document. With regard to height, she referred to the variance process
such as was granted for the Waterfront Center. She agreed the guidelines were important, but the gym could
not be 2' feet short. She referred to a citizen's recommendation that this go to the Architectural Design
Board (ADB) now and Ms. Feser's response that it will go to the ADB as part of permitting process.
Councilmember Nand thanked the BGC for incorporating the feedback from the public hearing and from
the city council. Noting there is a significant footprint on top of the gymnasium which may be reduced by
the placement of solar panels, she asked if there was an opportunity for rooftop access such as a meditation
space, community garden, etc. With activities geared toward children, there is an understanding that
behavioral issues can be address by children having access to a calming environment and places to de -
stimulate themselves. She asked if that could be incorporated into this design or would it be too challenging.
Mr. Clark said they looked at the option for a green roof, but felt solar was more important. Allowing people
on the rooftop presents additional challenges because two exits would be required as well as elevator access
to the roof which would extend the height 8-10 feet.
Councilmember Chen referred to water issues with the library roof and did not like the idea of a new
building having a roof leak and preferred locating solar panels on the roof. As he looked at the beautiful
design, he recalled the graffiti in the $22M Civic Park and asked how that could be prevented on this
building coupled with keeping kids safe. He suggested the addition of a fence or other ways to protect the
building and also keep kids safe. He thanked the BGC for listening to the public comments about solar
panels and agreed that would be a good feature. Mr. Toukalas answered some other BGC projects include
an indoor graffiti wall where kids can express themselves without damaging the building. Councilmember
Chen was hopeful those who were doing the graffiti would come inside and use the graffiti wall. Mr. Clark
suggested adding a graffiti coating on the building to make it easier to clean off.
Council President Pro Tem. Olson commented an indoor graffiti wall was a good, creative solution as was
a meditation space. She suggested the petanque courts, when not in use, would be a good place for
meditation. With regard to having this level of design reviewed by the ADB, she wondered if the ADB
would be willing to have an informal conversation to provide early input to the BGC which could help
expedite later stages. She summarized that might be of value if staff could make it happen.
Councilmember Paine referred to the Civic Park Design Guidelines that were referenced and asked if they
were guidelines or requirements. Ms. Feser answered they are guidelines, strong suggestions, ideas,
concepts or practices that were envisioned to help the building fit aesthetically into the park. The guidelines
were developed by Walker Macy during the park master planning process to create guardrails for the BGC
if their building was renovated or rebuilt to help the structure fit within the park. Mr. Toukalas commented
the guidelines and the design were not developed in parallel timeframes. When Walker Macy was going
through the design phase, the BGC was still contemplating whether they would stay at Civic Park. If the
guidelines and the BGC design had been developed on simultaneous timelines, the guidelines may have
been different.
Councilmember Teitzel commented looking from the west, it appears the roof is entirely flat. Mr. Clark
answered it is sloped behind the parapet to drain water to the north and south. Councilmember Teitzel
relayed his understanding the BGC will be asking for a 5-foot variance to accommodate the height of the
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
July 5, 2023
Page 10
Packet Pg. 277
8.5.b
gym. He asked about additional height if solar panels are added to the roof. Mr. Clark answered likely an
additional 12-18 inches, but they would be pretty well screened by the parapet.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
2. ARPA USE ORDINANCE
This item was removed from the agenda via action taken under Agenda Item 5.
3. CONSOLIDATED APPROACH FOR 2024 COMP PLAN UPDATE AND HIGHWAY 99
SUBAREA PLAN
Planning & Development Director Susan McLaughlin explained this is regarding the contract for the
comprehensive plan and the environmental analysis on Highway 99. She reviewed:
• Recap of 2022 visioning efforts
o Intent
■ Reach populations we don't often hear from in the public process
- Inclusive branding that led to naming of the comprehensive plan, Everyone's Edmonds
- Survey and marketing in multiple languages
- Meet people where they are
- Have a neighborhood presence
- Test new outreach strategies
- Willingness to make mistakes and learn -not let imperfection e the enemy of good intent
o Goal
■ Solicit 3,500 comments from the community
■ One comment equals
■ Each response to a survey question
■ Each comment recorded at outreach event
■ Over 8,500 comments were collected
o Foundations of Visioning Outreach
■ Week 1: Identity
■ Week 2: Quality of Life
■ Week 3: Economic Growth
■ Week 4: Environment
■ Week 5: Culture
■ Week 6: Livability and Land Use
o Summer 2022 Visioning Activities
■ Collective Visioning
- Coffee Chats - themed neighborhood conversations
- Weekly Articles - help put weekly themes into context
- Table at local events - meeting people where they are
- Yard signs - raise awareness
- Panel Discussion - in-depth conversations on key topics from subject matter experts
- Walk & Talks - explore key topics in real world scenarios
- Online Surveys - allow individual expression
- Multi-lingual Branding - process of building trust
o Who did we hear from?
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q
July 5, 2023
Page 11
Packet Pg. 278
8.5.c
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, TO AUTHORIZE THE PLACEMENT OF A LIEN ON THE
PROPERTY THAT IS THE SUBJECT OF THE GROUND LEASE WITH
BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY FOR THE FINANCING
OF BUILDING CONSTRUCTION.
WHEREAS, in 2023, the City of Edmonds and the Boys & Girls Clubs of Snohomish County
("BGCSC") entered into a Ground Lease relating to certain Civic Park property described therein
(the "Property") to be used for the construction of a new Boys & Girls Club; and
WHEREAS, the Ground Lease provides for the procedures to be used in relation to such
construction, including the requirement at Section 4.3 ("No Liens") that BGCSC obtain the City's
prior written approval before encumbering the Property with any lien; and
WHEREAS, the BGCSC has informed the City that it has obtained approval for construction
financing through Snohomish County (the "County") that is available on the condition that the
Property be used as collateral; and
WHEREAS, copies of the requested lein, in the form of a Leasehold Deed of Trust, is attached
hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the placement of the requested lien on the
Property for construction financing pursuant to the Ground Lease is appropriate; NOW,
THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, HEREBY
RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
In accordance with Section 4.3 of the Ground Lease between the City and the Boys & Girls Clubs
of Snohomish County, the use of the Property that is the subject thereof as collateral for financing
the construction of the new Boys & Girls Club building, as set forth in the lien attached hereto, is
hereby approved.
RESOLVED this day of 2024.
CITY OF EDMONDS
MAYOR, MIKE ROSEN
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY
Packet Pg. 279
8.5.c
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK:
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
RESOLUTION NO.
Packet Pg. 280
8.5.c
EXHIBIT H
FORM OF LEASEHOOD DEED OF TRUST
WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO:
Snohomish County
3000 Rockefeller Ave.,
Everett, WA 98201
Attention: Human Services - OHCD
LEASEHOOD DEED OF TRUST
BOYS' AND GIRLS' CLUBS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY
EDMONDS CLUB CHILD CARE
(CLFR — Child Care Facility)
GRANTOR: BOYS' AND GIRLS' CLUBS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY, a
non-profit corporation of the State of Washington
BENEFICIARY: SNOHOMISH COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State
of Washington
IIIII :INS MIII a 1 41:I[N_[eZ0jIIIIa1►6Yo1:Z101 us] role] LIWel01VA
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: BLK 100, CITY OF EDMONDS, TGW PTN VAC STS &
ALLEY
(Additional Legal Description on Attachment 1)
TAX PARCEL NUMBERS: 004342-100-000-00
Packet Pg. 281
8.5.c
LEASEHOLD DEED OF TRUST
BOYS' AND GIRLS' CLUBS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY
EDMONDS CLUB CHILD CARE PROJECT
THIS LEASEHOLD DEED OF TRUST ("LEASEHOLD DEED OF TRUST"), made this day
of , 2024, by and among BOYS' AND GIRLS' CLUBS OF SNOHOMISH
COUNTY, a Washington non-profit corporation, whose mailing address is PO Box 839, Everett,
WA 98206, as grantor ("GRANTOR"); Chicago Title Insurance Company, a Washington
corporation whose mailing address is 3002 Colby Ave., Suite 200, Everett, WA 98201 as
trustee ("TRUSTEE"); and Snohomish County, a political subdivision of the State of Washington,
("GRANTEE" or "BENEFICIARY"), whose address is 3000 Rockefeller Avenue, MS 305, Everett,
WA 98201.
WITNESSETH: Grantor hereby bargains, sells and conveys to Trustee in trust, with power of
sale, the building and improvements, now or hereafter erected in Snohomish County, Washington
described in Attachment 1 attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference ("the
Leasehold Improvements"), and located upon real property which is not used principally for
agricultural or farming purposes, together with all the tenements, hereditaments, and
appurtenances now or hereafter thereunto belonging or in any wise appertaining, and the rents,
issues and profits thereof.
This Leasehold Deed of Trust is for the purpose of securing performance of each agreement of
Grantor contained herein and in the Construction and Reimbursement Period of the CLFR Child
Care Facility Agreement between the Grantor and the Beneficiary (hereinafter the "Agreement")
dated the day of , 2024, and payment of the sum of
One Million Dollars ($1,000,000), in accordance with the terms of a Promissory Note of even
date herewith (the "Note"), payable to Beneficiary or order, made by Boys' and Girls' Clubs of
Snohomish County, a Washington non-profit corporation.
To protect the security of this Leasehold Deed of Trust, Grantor covenants and agrees:
1. To keep the Leasehold Improvements in good condition and repair; not to remove or demolish
any building thereon; to complete or restore promptly and in good and workmanlike manner
any building that may be constructed, damaged, or destroyed, and to pay when due all claims
for labor performed and materials furnished therefor; to comply with all laws affecting the
Leasehold Improvements or requiring any alterations or improvements to be made; not to
commit or permit waste thereof; not to commit, suffer, or permit any act upon the Leasehold
Improvements in violation of law; and to do all other acts which from the character or use of
the Leasehold Improvements may be reasonably necessary to preserve and conserve their
value.
2. To pay before delinquent all taxes, assessments and any other charges affecting the
Leasehold Improvements when due; and to keep the Property free and clear of all other
encumbrances, charges, and liens impairing the security of this Leasehold Deed of Trust,
subject to the Grantor's right to contest such taxes, assessments and other charges in good
faith.
Exhibit H
Boys' and Girls' Clubs of Snohomish County
HCS-24-AR-2106-147
Page 1 of 6
Packet Pg. 282
8.5.c
3. To keep the Leasehold Improvements described herein continuously insured against loss by
fire or other hazards in an amount not less than the total debt secured by this Leasehold Deed
of Trust. The Beneficiary shall be an additional insured under all such insurance policies,
which shall be issued by such companies as the Beneficiary may approve and have loss
payable first to the Beneficiary, as its interest may appear, and then to the Grantor. Except
as otherwise set forth in the Agreement or the Note, the amount collected under any insurance
policy may be applied to any indebtedness hereby secured in such order as the Beneficiary
shall determine. Such application by the Beneficiary shall not cause discontinuance of any
proceedings to foreclose this Leasehold Deed of Trust. In the event of foreclosure, all rights
of the Grantor in insurance policies then in force shall pass to the purchaser at the foreclosure
sale.
4. To defend any action or proceeding purporting to affect the security hereof or the rights or
powers of Beneficiary or Trustee, and to pay all costs and expenses, including cost of title
search and attorneys' fees in a reasonable amount, in any such action or proceeding, and in
any suit brought by Beneficiary to foreclose this Leasehold Deed of Trust.
5. To pay all costs, fees and expenses in connection with this Leasehold Deed of Trust, including
the expenses of the Trustee incurred in enforcing the obligations secured hereby and
Trustee's and reasonable attorneys' fees actually incurred, as provided by statute.
6. Should Grantor fail to pay when due any taxes, assessments, insurance premiums, liens,
encumbrances or other charges against the Leasehold Improvements hereinabove described,
Beneficiary may pay the same, and the amount so paid, with interest at the rate set forth in
the Note secured hereby, shall be added to and become a part of the debt secured in this
Leasehold Deed of Trust.
IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED THAT:
1. Except as otherwise set forth in the Construction and Reimbursement Period of the Agreement
or the Note, in the event any portion of the Leasehold Improvements is taken or damaged in
an eminent domain proceeding, the entire amount of the award or such portion as may be
necessary to fully satisfy the obligation secured hereby, shall be paid to Beneficiary to be
applied to said obligation.
2. By accepting payment of any sum secured hereby after its due date, Beneficiary does not
waive its right to require prompt payment when due of all other sums so secured or to declare
default for failure to so pay.
3. The Trustee shall reconvey all or any part of the Leasehold Improvements covered by this
Leasehold Deed of Trust to the person entitled thereto on written request of the Grantor and
the Beneficiary, or upon satisfaction of the obligation secured and written request for
reconveyance made by the Beneficiary or the person entitled thereto.
4. Upon the occurrence of default by Grantor in the performance of any requirement of the
Construction and Reimbursement Period of the Agreement (after the expiration of any
applicable cure period), all sums secured hereby shall immediately become due and payable
in accordance with the Agreement, the Note, and this Leasehold Deed of Trust (at the option
of the Beneficiary). In such event and upon written request of Beneficiary, Trustee shall sell
the trust Leasehold Improvements, in accordance with the Deed of Trust Act of the State of
Exhibit H
Boys' and Girls' Clubs of Snohomish County
HCS-24-AR-2106-147
Page 2 of 6
Packet Pg. 283
8.5.c
Washington, at public auction to the highest bidder. Any person except Trustee may bid at
Trustee's sale. Trustee shall apply the proceeds of the sale as follows: (1) to the expense of
the sale, including a reasonable Trustee's fee and attorneys' fee; (2) to the obligation secured
by this Leasehold Deed of Trust; and (3) the surplus, if any, shall be distributed to the persons
entitled thereto.
a. Curing of Construction and Reimbursement Period Default. In the event of default of
requirements of the Construction and Reimbursement Period of the Agreement, before
exercising any remedies, Grantee shall give Grantor written notice of such default and
provide for a cure period of ten (10) calendar days after such notice is given, or such
longer period of time as may be specified in the written notice, within which to cure the
default before exercise of remedies by Grantee under this Leasehold Deed of Trust or the
Agreement.
5. Trustee shall deliver to the purchaser at the sale its deed, without warranty, which shall convey
to the purchaser the interest in the Leasehold Improvements which Grantor had or had the
power to convey at the time of its execution of this Leasehold Deed of Trust, and such as it
may have acquired thereafter. Trustee's deed shall recite the facts showing that the sale was
conducted in compliance with all the requirements of law and of this Leasehold Deed of Trust,
which recital shall be prima facie evidence of such compliance and conclusive evidence
thereof in favor of bona fide purchasers and encumbrancers for value.
6. The power of sale conferred by this Leasehold Deed of Trust and by the Deed of Trust Act of
the State of Washington is not an exclusive remedy; Beneficiary may cause this Leasehold
Deed of Trust to be foreclosed as a mortgage.
7. In the event of the death, incapacity, disability or resignation of Trustee, Beneficiary may
appoint in writing a successor trustee, and upon the recording of such appointment in the
mortgage records of the county in which this Leasehold Deed of Trust is recorded, the
successor trustee shall be vested with all powers of the original trustee. The Trustee is not
obligated to notify any party hereto of pending sale under any other Leasehold Deed of Trust
or of any action or proceeding in which Grantor, Trustee or Beneficiary shall be a party unless
such action or proceeding is brought by the Trustee.
8. This Leasehold Deed of Trust applies to and inures to the benefit of, and is binding not only
on the parties hereto, but on their heirs, devisees, legatees, administrators, executors and
assigns. The term Beneficiary shall mean the holder and owner of the Note secured hereby,
whether or not named as Beneficiary herein.
GRANTOR FURTHER AGREES:
1. Grantor will perform each and every obligation contained in the Construction and
Reimbursement Period of the Agreement and any amendments thereof.
2. If Grantor shall fail to perform any obligation hereunder and the Beneficiary elects to perform
the same and expends any monies therefor, such expenditure shall be deemed in addition to
the amount secured by this Leasehold Deed of Trust and be immediately due and payable in
accordance with the Agreement.
Exhibit H
Boys' and Girls' Clubs of Snohomish County
HCS-24-AR-2106-147
Page 3 of 6
Packet Pg. 284
8.5.c
3. If an event of Construction and Reimbursement Period default occurs under the foregoing
Agreement or Note (after the expiration of any applicable notice and cure period), the whole
indebtedness secured thereby shall be due and payable in accordance with the Agreement
and this Leasehold Deed of Trust and the Beneficiary may proceed to foreclose this Leasehold
Deed of Trust. If the Beneficiary shall incur any costs and expenses, including reasonable
attorneys' fees and costs of any title reports, in connection with the performance of any of its
rights hereunder including foreclosure, such costs and expenditures shall remain secured by
this Leasehold Deed of Trust and shall be immediately due and payable by Grantor.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed and delivered by their duly authorized
representatives this Leasehold Deed of Trust as of the day and year written above.
GRANTOR: Boys' and Girls' Clubs of Snohomish
County, a Washington non-profit corporation
M
Bill Tsoukalas / Executive Director
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
)SS.
COUNTY OF )
On this day of , 2024, the undersigned, a Notary Public in
and for the State of Washington, duly commissioned and sworn, to me personally known (or
proved on the basis of satisfactory evidence), appeared before me, Bill Tsoukalas, and said
person acknowledged that s/he executed the foregoing instrument on oath and stated that s/he
was authorized to execute the instrument as the Executive Director of the BOYS' AND GIRLS'
CLUBS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY, a Washington non-profit corporation, and acknowledged
said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation on behalf of said
company, on behalf of said company, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned.
By:
(Print Name)
My appointment expires:
Exhibit H
Boys' and Girls' Clubs of Snohomish County
HCS-24-AR-2106-147
Page 4 of 6
Packet Pg. 285
8.5.c
REQUEST FOR FULL RECONVEYANCE
[CLFR — Child Care Facility]
Do not record. To be used only when note has been paid.
TO: TRUSTEE.
The undersigned is the legal owner and holder of the note and all other indebtedness secured
by the within Leasehold Deed of Trust ("Leasehold Deed of Trust"). Said note, together with
all other indebtedness secured by said Leasehold Deed of Trust, has been fully paid and
satisfied; and you are hereby requested and directed, on payment to you of any sums owing
to you under the terms of said Leasehold Deed of Trust, to cancel said note above mentioned,
and all other evidences of indebtedness secured by said Leasehold Deed of Trust delivered
to you herewith, together with the said Leasehold Deed of Trust, and to reconvey, without
warranty, to the parties designated by the terms of said Leasehold Deed of Trust, all the estate
now held by you thereunder.
Dated
Exhibit H
Boys' and Girls' Clubs of Snohomish County
HCS-24-AR-2106-147
Page 5 of 6
Packet Pg. 286
8.5.c
ATTACHMENT 1
Property Legal Description
Those buildings, improvements and facilities now existing or hereafter erected, located on the
following described real property:
Real property in the City of Edmonds, County of Snohomish, State of Washington,
described as follows:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
LOTS 1 THROUGH 40, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 100, CITY OF EDMONDS, ACCORDING TO THE
PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 2 OF PLATS, PAGES 39 AND 39A, RECORDS OF
SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON;
TOGETHER WITH PORTION OF EDMONDS STREET, PORTION OF SPRAGUE STREET AND
UNNAMED ALLEY WITHIN BLOCK 100 OF SAID PLAT, ALL AS VACATED BY CITY OF
EDMONDS ORDINANCE NO. 4028 RECORDED, UNDER RECORDING NO. 201606230342,
RECORDS OF SNOSHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON.
TAX PARCEL NO(S): 004342-100-000-00
Situs Address: 310 6th Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020
Exhibit H
Boys' and Girls' Clubs of Snohomish County
HCS-24-AR-2106-147
Page 6 of 6
Packet Pg. 287
8.6
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 09/24/2024
Council Rules of Procedure Sections 10, 11, 12 and 14
Staff Lead: Council President Olson
Department: City Council
Preparer: Beckie Peterson
Background/History
In 2013, the City Council passed Resolution No. 1295, which adopted Robert's Rules of Order as its
parliamentary authority for the conduct of City Council meetings. In December 2013, the Council passed
Resolution No. 1306 adopting a Code of Conduct and in June 2015, the Council approved a Code of
Ethics by motion. On January 25, 2021, the Council adopted a new Code of Conduct by motion.
Because Resolution No. 1295 is limited to parliamentary procedure in the context of Council meetings,
such rules do not address many other processes and procedures in the conduct of City business. It is
thought that a more comprehensive set of rules would provide greater understanding and transparency
about the roles, rights, and responsibilities of councilmembers and facilitate the orderly conduct of
business within the context of council meetings.
The draft rules of procedure address Council organization, duties of officers, agenda preparation,
meeting management, consent agenda, public testimony, decorum, motions, and other important areas.
The draft also includes Council's recent adoption of a Code of Conduct as Section 6; this was done to
consolidate all applicable rules into one document.
It is important to note that many provisions of these rules of procedure are already governed by other
codes, statutes, and rulings. Any provision that is footnoted with a citation to the Revised Code of
Washington (RCW), the Edmonds City Code (ECC), or other statute or ruling is included for ease of
reference only and is not intended to be adopted as a rule because it already constitutes governing law.
Provisions that are not footnoted with a citation to the RCW or ECC are adopted by City Council
resolution as the Council's procedural rules and may be amended at any time by subsequent resolution.
On April 6, 2021, the Council passed Resolution 1470, which established that the Council adopted its
own Code of Conduct separate from that which applies to the Mayor and members of City boards,
commissions, committees, and work groups. The proposed Rules of Procedure and the Code of Conduct
were presented and discussed on February 4, 2020, January 26, 2021, and April 6, 2021. For comparison
purposes, prior drafts of the rules of procedure are included in the online Council meeting packets of
February 4, 2020 and March 3, 2020.
On April 6, 2021, a motion was passed to table consideration of the draft Rules of Procedure for a period
of three weeks. The draft rules were scheduled on the June 1, 2021 council agenda, but consideration
was postponed due to lack of time.
On August 3, 2021, the Council considered the draft rules, made amendments, and instructed the city
attorney to bring back additional language for potential amendments to various sections of the rules.
A new Section 7 entitled "Code of Ethics" has been added to incorporate the Code of Ethics adopted by
the City Council on June 2, 2015.
On September 17, 2024 the PPW committee reviewed sections 10, 11, 12 and 14. The committee
Packet Pg. 288
8.6
recommended a change to the wording of 12.2.
Recommendation
Approve Rules of Procedure Sections 10, 11, 12 and 14 as provided in the agenda packet.
Narrative
It is thought that approving the draft Rules of Procedure by Section, or in segments, would be the most
practical approach to accomplishing this 2024 goal. The draft includes 14 sections, as follows:
SECTION 1. AUTHORITY - approved 6/25/2024
SECTION 2. COUNCIL ORGANIZATION - approved 6/25/2024
SECTION 3. AGENDA PREPARATION - amended and approved 3/26/2024
SECTION 4. CONSENT AGENDA - approved 7/23/2024
SECTION 5. COUNCIL MEETINGS - approved 7/23/2024
SECTION 6. COUNCIL CONDUCT - adopted 1/26/2021
SECTION 7. CODE OF ETHICS - adopted 6/2/2015
SECTION 8. PUBLIC TESTIMONY - amended and approved 4/16/2024
SECTION 9. MOTIONS - approved 9/10/2024
SECTION 10. ITEMS REQUIRING FOUR VOTES - PPW committee 9/17/2024
SECTION 11. ITEMS REQUIRING A UNANIMOUS VOTE - PPW committee 9/17/24
SECTION 12. COUNCIL REPRESENTATION - PPW committee 9/17/2024 amended 12.2
SECTION 13. REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES - approved 4/16/2024
SECTION 14. SUSPENSION AND AMENDMENT OF RULES - PPW committee 9/17/24
Proposed Workplan for Adopting Council Rules of Procedure
Address the draft rules of procedure by section or segments, starting with the most
timely/highest priority section(s).
Focus on one segment each month:
a. City Clerk and Council staff review and indicate any recommended revisions.
b. Council President review.
C. Place on agenda for review of Council Committee
If committee recommends segment for council approval on consent - place on a future
consent agenda for approval and implement that segment as adopted policy.
If committee recommends revisions or full council discussion - add to future council
business when agenda time allows.
Once all segments are approved, adopt a resolution with the comprehensive set of rules of procedures
as an attachment.
Attachments:
Section 10 1112 and 14 with edit from PPW committee
Packet Pg. 289
8.6.a
Section 10. Items Requiring Four Votes. The passage of any ordinance, grant or
revocation of franchise or license, any resolution for the payment of money or approval
of warrants shall require the affirmative vote of at least a majority of the whole
membership of the Council (4 votes).'
Section 11. Items Requiring a Unanimous Vote. An ordinance must be adopted
unanimously where both of the following conditions exist: 1) the ordinance is subject to
referendum under RCW 35A.11.090, as limited by Leonard v. City of Bothell, 87 Wn.2d o
847, 852-53, 557 P.2d 1306, 1310 (1976) ("If the grant of power is to the city as a N
corporate entity, direct legislation is permissible insofar as the statute is concerned. On o
the other hand, if the grant of power is to the legislative authority of the city, the initiative
and referendum are prohibited."), and similar case law, and; 2) the ordinance is N
proposed to take immediate effect under RCW 35A.11.090(2).
Section 12. Council Representation.
12.1 Once the City Council has taken a position on an issue, all official City
correspondence regarding the issue will reflect the Council's adopted position
12.2 Citv letterhead. email and other citv resources shall not be used for
correspondence of Councilmembers representing a dissenting point of view from
an official Council position.
12.3 As a matter of courtesy, letters to the editor, or other communication of a
controversial nature, which do not express the majority opinion of the Council,
shall be presented to the full Council prior to publication.
Section 13. Reimbursement of Expenses. (previously reviewed and approved 4/16/2024)
Section 14. Suspension and Amendment of Rules.
14.1 Any provision of these rules not governed by state law, City code, fundamental
parliamentary principle, or other statute or rule may be temporarily suspended by
a majority vote of the Council.
14.2 It is the intent of the City Council that the rules of procedure be periodically
reviewed as needed or during odd -numbered years. These rules may be
amended, or new rules adopted, by a majority vote of the Council, provided that
the proposed amendments or new rules shall have been distributed to Council at
least two weeks prior to such action.
'RCW 35A.12.120
Packet Pg. 290
8.7
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 09/24/2024
Arts Commission Confirmation of Appointment — Leggett
Staff Lead: Frances Chapin
Department: Mayor's Office
Preparer: Carolyn LaFave
Background/History
In May of this year a position on the Arts Commission became vacant due to a resignation. A
recruitment advertisement was sent out in June with a deadline date of July 12. During this process,
there was another resignation, leaving another vacancy. A total of five applications were received, and
four candidates were interviewed by the Commission, the fifth candidate withdrew their application. Of
the four candidates, two were put forward for the Mayor to interview for the two open vacancies.
Staff Recommendation
Confirm appointment of Robby London to Arts Commission Position #4, Performing.
Narrative
Mayor Rosen recommends confirmation of the appointment of Robby London to Arts Commission
Position #41 Performing.
Packet Pg. 291
8.8
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 09/24/2024
Arts Commission Confirmation of Appointment — Leggett
Staff Lead: Frances Chapin
Department: Mayor's Office
Preparer: Carolyn LaFave
Background/History
In May of this year a position on the Arts Commission became vacant due to a resignation. A
recruitment advertisement was sent out in June with a deadline date of July 12. During this process,
there was another resignation, leaving another vacancy. A total of five applications were received, and
four candidates were interviewed by the Commission, the fifth candidate withdrew their application. Of
the four candidates, two were put forward for the Mayor to interview for the two open vacancies.
Staff Recommendation
Confirm appointment of Alexandra Leggett to Arts Commission Position #6, General.
Narrative
Mayor Rosen recommends confirmation of the appointment of Alexandra Leggett to Arts Commission
Position #61 General.
Packet Pg. 292
8.9
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 09/24/2024
Update to Promotion Policy - Compensation
Staff Lead: Jessica Neill Hoyson
Department: Human Resources
Preparer: Jessica Neill Neill Hoyson
Background/History
The current city policy that addresses pay rate upon promotion provides for only a 5% increase in pay.
The current policy does not take in to account those promotions that result in significant increases in
responsibility nor does it address when internal applicants compete with external applicants. The
current policy has impacted internal promotional interest from employees due to the restrictions on
increases in compensation.
This item was reviewed by committee on 9/17/24 and committee recommended forwarding to Council
on consent.
Please note, in the track changes document of the policy, the language marked out in red is the current
policy language that is being removed. The new language is in black and the language in green is current
policy language that is being retained.
Staff Recommendation
Approve policy updates.
Narrative
The proposed policy updates will allow the Mayor to consider compensation increases beyond 5% for
those promotions which results in a significant increase in duties/responsibilities/authority.
Salary schedules are set up to have a 5% increase between ranges and a 5% increase between each step
in each range. Based on this, a two step increase would be a 10% increase and a three step increase
would be a 15% increase.
Departments will need to submit a request to HR, providing rationale for the request, which will be
reviewed and approved/denied by the mayor. The policy update will also allow internal candidates who
compete with external candidates to negotiate their salary offer in the same manner as an external
candidate.
Attachments:
Promotional Policy Compensation Update
Packet Pg. 293
8.9.a
5.12 PROMOTION
The City supports the process of internal promotion and recognizes that at times employees may promote
into positions of significantly higher responsibility. To provide a compensation program that appropriately
addresses increases in responsibility through promotion the City has set the below parameters. Placement
within the below parameters is solely within the City's discretion.
Promotion to a vacant position in a higher salary classification
When an employee is promoted to a vacant position that is one (1) to two (2) ranges higher than their
current position classification, they shall be paid at the amount of the higher salary range which is one (1)
pay step above the rate they had been paid in the lower range.
If an employee is promoted to a vacant position that is classified three (3) ranges higher than their current
position classification, they may be paid up to an amount on the higher salary range which is no more than
two (2) steps above the rate they had been paid in the lower range.
If an employee is promoted to a vacant position that is classified four (4) ranges or higher than their current
position classification, they may be paid up to an amount on the higher salary range which is no more than
three (3) steps above the rate they had been paid in the lower range.
In any promotional situation, if the salary ranges do not overlap to a degree that allows any of the above
placements, the employee shall be paid at the first step of the higher salary range.
If the promotional opportunity was posted externally, and the employee competed with external applicants
for the position, the employee may negotiate the salary offer in the new position as if they were a new
employee.
All promotional salary range placement requests must be submitted to the Human Resources Department
for review and approval by the mayor prior to offer to the employee. Requests must be submitted in writing
and provide sufficient information to support the requested promotional salary.
Promotion through Reclassification
In any case where a position is reclassified upwards which moves the employee's position into a higher
range, the step placement of the employee occupying the position shall be that step in the new range which
meets or next exceeds their previous rate of pay.
Upon promotion or reclassification to a position with a higher salary range, the employee's next step
increase date and subsequent merit pay reviews will normally be reset using the effective date of promotion
or reclassification.
An employee transferring from one position to another which are in the same pay range will not be _ Formatted: Font: 10 pt
considered a promotion.
E
O
U
R
.r
Q
Packet Pg. 294
8.10
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 09/24/2024
Update to ECC 2.10.010 - Acting Appointments
Staff Lead: Jessica Neill Hoyson
Department: Human Resources
Preparer: Jessica Neill Neill Hoyson
Background/History
Current ECC 2.10.010 allows for the Mayor to make an acting Director appointment only when the
Director position is "vacant." As vacant is not clearly defined in the code, and there have been instances
where the person holding the position is no longer performing the duties of Director, but the position is
not officially "vacant" this has caused a delay in appointing an acting Director. Delays in appointing an
acting Director lead to potential management issues of the department impacted. The proposed code
update will allow the Mayor to appoint an acting Director in those circumstances where the current
Director is no longer working but the position is not officially "vacant." There are no changes to the
other controls that Council has regarding acting appointments.
This item was reviewed by committee on 9/17/24 and committee recommended forwarding to council
on consent.
Please note, the proposed additional language is underlined in the track changes document. The
deleted language in red was never part of the code but was edited out during drafting of the proposed
additional language.
Staff Recommendation
Approve the proposed additional code language for acting appointive assignments.
Narrative
Please see attached ordinance.
Attachments:
REVISED Ordinance Amending ECC 2.10.010 8.20.2024 (JNH SEC comments)
Packet Pg. 295
8.10.a
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON,
AMENDING CHAPTER 2.10 ECC (CONFIRMATION AND
DUTIES OF APPOINTIVE OFFICERS) TO AMEND THE
AUTHORITY OF THE MAYOR IN APPOINTING ACTING
DIRECTORS FOR APPOINTIVE OFFICES; PROVIDING FOR
SEVERABILITY; AND SETTING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, Chapter 2.10 ECC provides, in part, for the filling of vacancies in
appointive offices; and
WHEREAS, ECC 2.10.010 authorizes the Mayor to appoint Acting Directors to
temporarily perform the functions and duties of vacant appointive offices; and
WHEREAS, the term "vacant" is undefined and has been interpreted to mean an
appointive office in which the previous Director has been separated from employment; and
WHEREAS, it has been determined that the appointment of an Acting Director may be
needed prior to the previous Director's official separation from employment when such Director will no
longer be performing any of the functions or duties of the appointive office;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. ECC 2.10.010 is amended to read as follows (new text is shown in
underline):
2.10.010 Review of vacancies, appointment authority and confirmation process.
A. Periodically, when the city conducts a salary survey regarding its nonrepresented
employees, and whenever a vacancy occurs in one of the positions listed in this chapter,
the city council may review the specifications for the appointive officer position(s) and
revise them as needed before acting to confirm a permanent appointment. Nothing in this
subsection shall be construed to prevent the city council from reviewing such specifications
at other times. The council's revising of a specification will not have any effect on a
previously confirmed permanent appointment. Recruitment to fill a vacant appointive
office may be postponed until after the city council acts to revise the specifications or
determines them not to be in need of revision.
B. The mayor or his/her designee will review all applications and determine the persons
with the highest qualifications. Any city council member, upon request to the mayor may
Packet Pg. 296
8.10.a
review the applications received for a vacant position. Additionally and/or alternatively,
the city council may evaluate the qualifications of an applicant for public employment in
executive session pursuant to RCW 42.3 0.11 0(l)(g).
C. If, on occasion of a vacant appointive office, the mayor elects to propose a
reorganization of the appointive offices which would alter the specifications of the vacant
appointive office, he/she shall have 60 days from the date of the vacancy to introduce a
reorganization proposal to the city council along with any necessary accompanying budget
amendment. If reorganization is proposed, recruitment to fill the vacant appointive office
may be postponed until after the city council acts upon the reorganization proposal.
D. The mayor shall appoint, subject to council confirmation, the appointive officers. The N
city council shall interview the top three candidates for each position prior to the mayor's 0
appointment; provided, that the city council may waive the three -interview requirement by w
0
motion adopted by a majority plus one of the full council and may opt to interview as few
as two candidates for any vacant appointive office; and further provided, that when an
appointive office becomes vacant, or is about to become vacant, again within nine months CL
of the city council's confirmation of the last mayoral appointment to that office, the city �-
council may waive an additional round of interviews, by motion adopted by a majority plus r
one of the full council, and proceed immediately to confirming the appointment of a
candidate interviewed by the city council during the most recent recruitment for that E
appointive office. The mayor's appointments to all other employee positions shall not be 0
subject to city council confirmation. v
w
CO
E. The mayor shall have the authority to appoint, without city council confirmation, an =
acting director to perform the functions and duties of a vacant appointive office, subject to
the term limitations described in ECC 2.10.040(B); provided, that there is budgetary
authority to fill the position. The city council shall be given written notice about any such N
acting appointments including the effective date of the appointment. Acting directors shall o
be compensated pursuant to applicable ordinances and personnel policies regarding acting 00
pay. An appointive office will be deemed vacant: (i) as of the date the appointive officer CO
has been separated from employment; or GO prior to the date of separation if the mayor
0
made a final decision to separate the employment of the appointive officer and such
N
appointive officer has been infot:med of sueh deeision, has been placed on paid v
.,a, mist....., leave, and will no longer be performing any of the functions or duties of v
w
such appointive office. a)
F. The mayor shall begin recruitment of candidates to fill vacant appointive offices no later
than 30 days after the latter of the two city council actions described in subsections (A) and
(C) of this section; provided, that such recruitment shall not be necessary where the city
council opts to make an immediate confirmation pursuant to a prior round of interviews as
set forth in subsection (D) of this section.
Section 2. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this
ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such
invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section,
sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance.
Packet Pg. 297
8.10.a
Section 3. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifi-
cally delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take effect five (5)
days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title.
/_ ' ' : 6]9"I
MAYOR MIKE ROSEN
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
r
d
E
CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY E
0
U
W
APPROVED AS TO FORM: z
I*
N
O
N
O
N
JEFF TARADAY, CITY ATTORNEY c
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK:
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
PUBLISHED:
EFFECTIVE DATE:
ORDINANCE NO.
Packet Pg. 298
8.10.a
On the
Ordinance No.
provides as follows:
SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO.
of the City of Edmonds, Washington
day of 2024, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed
A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title,
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON,
AMENDING CHAPTER 2.10 ECC (CONFIRMATION AND DUTIES
OF APPOINTIVE OFFICERS) TO AMEND THE AUTHORITY OF
THE MAYOR IN APPOINTING ACTING DIRECTORS FOR
APPOINTIVE OFFICES; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND
SETTING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request.
DATED this day of
2024.
CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY
r
d
E
E
0
U
W
Packet Pg. 299
8.11
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 09/24/2024
Social Worker Supervision Contract
Staff Lead: Chief Michelle Bennett
Department: Police Services
Preparer: Alexandra Ehlert
Background/History
This contract is for the monthly clinical supervision of the social worker. The grant will cover the cost of
the supervision time. This was originally discussed and verbally approved in a previous council meeting
when the social worker was approved.
This contract was approved to form by Legal on 8/29/24
Staff Recommendation
Staff is requesting council approve this contract to go to the consent agenda for the Mayor's signature.
Narrative
<Type or insert text here>
Attachments:
Contract - Wendy Warman
Packet Pg. 300
8.11.a
c�Y ruL>
CITY OF EDMONDS MIKE ROSEN
n' 1° r• MAYOR
1215 AVENUE NORTH • EDMONDS, WA 50023 425-111-0220 FAX 425-672.5750
wdbat ;$A%W.edm0ndewa.gov
A yU +qi10
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is made and entered into between the City of
Edmonds, hereinafter referred to as the "City," and Wendy Warman Consultation and Counseling
Services LLC, hereinafter referred to as the "Consultant."
WHEREAS, the City desires to engage the professional services and assistance of a
consulting firm to provide clinical supervision services for the City of Edmonds; and
WHEREAS, the Consultant has the necessary skills and experience, and desires to provide
such services to the City;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual benefits accruing, it is agreed by
and between the parties hereto as follows:
I . Scope of work. The scope of work shall include all services and material necessary
to accomplish the above mentioned objectives in accordance with the Scope of Work that is
marked as Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein. by this reference.
2. Payments. The Consultant shall be paid by the City for completed work for
services rendered under this Agreement as provided hereinafter. Such payment shall be full
compensation for work performed or services rendered and for all labor, materials, supplies,
equipment and incidentals necessary to complete the work.
A. Payment for work accomplished under the terms of this Agreement shall be on
an hourly basis as set forth in the Fee Schedule in Exhibit A; provided, in no event shall the
payment for work performed pursuant to this Agreement exceed the sum of TWO THOUSAND
FIVE. HUNDRED DOLLARS ($2,500.00).
6. All vouchers shall be submitted by the Consultant to the City for payment
pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. The City shall pay the appropriate amount for each
voucher to the Consultant. The Consultant may submit vouchers to the City monthly during the
progress of the work for payment of completed phases of the project. Billings shall be reviewed
in conjunction with the City's warrant process. No billing shall be considered for payment that has
not been submitted to the City three (3) days prior to the scheduled cut- off date. Such late vouchers
will be checked by the City and payment will be made in the next regular payment cycle.
C. The costs records and accounts pertaining to this Agreement are to be kept
available for inspection by representatives of the City for a period of three (3) years after final
payment. Copies shall be made available upon request.
Packet Pg. 301
8.11.a
3. Ownership and use of documents. All research, tests, surveys, preliminary data,
reports, and any and all other work product prepared or gathered by the Consultant in preparation
for the services rendered by the Consultant under this Agreement shall be and arc the property of
the Consultant, provided, however, that:
A. All final reports, presentations, documentation and testimony prepared by
the Consultant shall become the property of the City upon their presentation to and acceptance by
the City and shall at that date become the property of the City.
B. The City shall have the right, upon reasonable request, to inspect, review
and copy any work product during normal office hours. Documents prepared under this Agreement
and in the possession of the Consultant may be subject to public records request and release under
Chapter 42.56 RCW.
C. In the event that the Consultant shall default on this Agreement, or in the
event that this Agreement shall be terminated prior to its completion as herein provided, the .vork
product of the Consultant, along with a summary of work done to date of default or termination,
shall become the property of the City and tender of the work product and summary shall be a
prerequisite to final .payment under this Agreement. The summary of work done shall be prepared
at no additional cost.
4. Time of performance. This Agreement will commence on July 16, 2024 and
continue through December 15, 2024. The Consultant shall perform the work authorized by this
Agreement promptly in accordance with the receipt of the required governmental approvals.
5. Indemnification / Hold harmless agreement. The Consultant shall defend,
indemnify and 'void the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers harmless from any
and all claims, injuries, damages, losses, demands, or suits at law or equity arising from the acts,
errors or omissions of the Consultant in the performance of this Agreement, except for injuries and
damages caused by the sole negligence of the City. Should a court of competent jurisdiction
determine that this Agreement is subject to RCW 4.24.115, then, in the event of liability for
da.*rages arising out of bodily injury to persons or damages to property caused by or resulting from
the concurrent negligence of the Consultant and the City, its officers, officials, employees, and
volunteers, the Consultant's liability, including the duty and cost to defend, hereunder shall be
only to the extent of the Consultant's negligence.
The Consultant shall comply with all applicable sections of the applicable Ethics laws, including
RC` :' 42.23, which is tkc CcdAc of Ethics for regulating contract intcrest by rnualcipal offrccrs. T� c
Consultant specifically assumes potential liability for actions brought by the Consultant's own
employees against the City and, solely for the purpose of this indemnification and defense, the
Consultant specifically waives any immunity under the state industrial insurance law, Title 51
RCW. This waiver has been atually tregotiated by -the parties. The provisions of -this section shall
survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement.
6. General and professional liability insurance. The Consultant shall obtain and
keep in force during the term of this Agreement, or as otherwise required, the following insurance
with companies or through sources approved by the State Insurance Commissioner pursuant to
Title 48 RCW.
lilsiti'driCC %_GVeraR
Packet Pg. 302
8.11.a
A. Worker's compensation and employer's liability insurance as required by the State.
B. Commercial general liability and property damage insurance in an aggregate amount not
less than two million dollars ($2,000,000) for bodily injury, including death and property
damage. The per occurrence amount shall be written with limits no less than one million
dollars 100,nnn,nnn).
C. Vehicle liability insurance for any automobile used in an amount not less than a one million
dollar ($1,000,000) combined single limit.
D. 'Professional hibility insurance in the amount of one million dollars ($1,000,000).
Excepting the Worker's Compensation Insurance and Professional Liability Insurance secured by
the Consultant, the City will be named on ail policies as an additional insured. The Consultant
shall furnish the City with verification of insurance and endorsements required by the Agreement.
The City resenes the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies
at any time.
All insurance shalt be obtained from an insurance company authorized to do business in the State
of Washington. The Consultant shall submit a verification of insurance as outlined above within
fourteen days of the execution of this Agreement to the City.
No cancellation of the foregoing policies shall be effective without thirty (30) days prior notice to
the City.
The Consultant's professional liability to the City shall be limited to the amourtyay able under this
Agreement or one million dollars ($1,000,000), whichever is the greater, unless modified
elsewhere in this Agreement. In no case shall the Consultant's professional liability to third parties
be limited in any way.
7. Discrimination prohibited. The Consultant shall not discriminate against any
employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, national Origin, age, sex,
sexual orientation, marital status, veteran status, liability for service in the armed forces of the
United States, disability, or the presence of any sensory, mental or physical handicap, or any other
protected class status, unless based upon a bona fide occupational qualification.
8. Consultant is an independent contractor. The parties intend that an independent
contractor relationship will be created by this Agreement. No agent, employee or representative of
the Consultant shall be deemed to be an agent, employee or representative of the City for any
purpose. The Consultant shall be solely responsible for all acts of its agents, employees,
representatives and subcontractors during the performance-ofthis Agreement.
y. City approval of work and relationships. Notwithstanding the Consultant's
status as an independent contractor, results of the work performed pursuant to this Agreement must
meet the approval of the City. During pendency of this Agreement, the Consultant shall not
perform work for any party with respect to any property located within the City of Edmonds or for
any project subject to the administrative or quasijudicial review of the City without written
notification to the City and the City's prior written consent.
10. Termination. This being an Agreement for professional services, either party may
terminate this Agreement for any reason upon giving the other party written notice of such
termination no fewer than ten (10) bays in advance of the effective date 4f said termination.
Packet Pg. 303
8.11.a
11. Integration. The Agreement between the parties shall consist of this document
and die Scope of Work and Fee Schedule attached hereto as Exhibit A. These writings constitute
the entire Agreement of the parties and shall not be amended except by a writing executed by both
parties. In the event of any conflict between this written Agreement and any provision of Exhibit
A, this Agreement shall control.
12. Chanp-es/Additional Work. The City may engage the Consultant to perform
services in addition. to, those listed in this Agreement, and. the Consultant will be entitled. to
additional compensation for authorized additional services or materials. The City shall not be liable
for additional compensation until and unless any and all additional work and compensation is
approved in advance in writing and signed by both parties to this Agreement. If conditions are
encountered which are not anticipated in the Scope of Work, the City understands that a revision
to the Scope of Work and fees maybe required. Provided, however, that nothing in this paragraph
shall be interpreted to obligate the Consultant to render services, or the City to pay for services
rendered, in excess of the Scope of Work in Exhibit A unless or until an amendment to this
Agreement is approved in writing by both parties.
13. Standard of Care. The Consultant represents that the Consultant has the
necessary Inowledge,, skill and experience to perform services required by this Agreement. The
Consultant and any persons employed by the Consultant shall use their best efforts to perform the
work in a professional manner consistent with sound practices, in accordance with the schedules
herein and in accordance with the usual and customary professional care required for services of
the type described in the Scope of Work.
14. Non -waiver. Waiver by the City of any provision of this Agreement or any time
limitation provided for in this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of any other provision.
i 5. Non -assignable. The services to be provided by the Consultant shah not be
assigned or subcontracted without the express written consent of the City.
16. Covenant against contingent fees. The Consultant warrants that he/she/they
has/have not employed or retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee
working solely for the Consultant, to solicit or secure this Ag:eeme. t, a d at he -.h /they
has/have not paid or agreed to pay arty company or person, other than a bona fide employee
working solely for the Consultant, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gins, or any
other consideration contingent upon or resulting from the award of making of this Agreement. For
breach or violation of this warranty, the City shall have the right to annul this Agreement without
liability or, in its discretion to deduct from the contract price or consideration, or otherwise recover,
the full amount of such fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift, or contingent fee.
17. Compliance with laws. The Consultant in the .performance of this Agreement
shall comply with all applicable Federal, State or local laws and ordinances, including regulations
for licensing, certification and operation of facilities, programs and accreditation, and licensing of
individuais, and any other standards or criteria as described in the Agreement to assure quality of
services.
The Consultant specifically agrees to .pay any applicable business and occupation ($ & O) taxes
which may be due on account of this Agreement.
Packet Pg. 304
8.11.a
18. Notices. Notices to the City of Edmonds shall be sent to the following address:
City of Edmonds
Police Department
250 Fifth Avenue N
Edmonds, WA 98020
Notices to the Consultant shall be sent to the following address:
Wendy Warman Consultation and Counseling Services LLC
Attn: Wendy Warman
22923 5711 Avenue
Woodinville, WA 98072
Receipt of any notice shall be deemed effective three (3) days after deposit of written notice in the
U.S. ma:lS' q.ith Yreper r.^.—ge :.^.'{ p mrerly ad'� c—d.
DATED THIS day of
CITY OF EDMONDS
Michelle Bennett, Chief of Police
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Office of the City Attorney
2024.
WENDY WARMAN CONSULTATION AND
COUNSELING SERVICES LLC
v ,
Wendy War n, Owner
Packet Pg. 305
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
)ss
COUNTY OF KING )
On this ;n004_ day of _ /ju U1r 2024, before me, the undersigned, a Notary
Public in and for the State of Wngton, duly commissioned and sworn, personally appeared
Wendy Warman, Owner of Wendy Warman Consultation and Counseling Services LLC, to
me known to be the person who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said
instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said person, for the uses and purposes
therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he/she was authorized to execute said instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal hereto affixed the day and year first above
written.
NOTARY PUBLIC
My commission expires: `lu% �S 2��f
DARREL VO
Notary Public
State of Washington
Commission # 189460
My Comm. Expires Aug 15, 2025
Packet Pg. 306
8.11.a
EXHIBIT A
Scope otWork
Wendy Warman will provide clinical supervision to the one (1) social worker employed by the
Edmonds Police Department.
That supervision will he done in accordance with RC'W 19.225.090. It may include: clinical
supervision of social workers that have already obtained state licensure, but also supervision of
those that are working towards licensure at the Advanced Social Worker (LASW) or Independent
Clinical Social Worker (LICSW) level.
Wendy Warman attests that she is an approved supervisor, who has been licensed for at least two
.years and has had at least two years of clinical experience.post Iicensure.
Wendy Warman will abide by WAC 246-809-334, which states that to supervise a license
candidate, the supervisor must hold a license without restrictions that has been in good standing
for at least two years. The supervisor shall not be a blood or legal relative or cohabitant of the
license candidate, license candidate's peer or someone who has acted as the license candidate's
therapist within the last two years.
Prior to the commencement of any supervision Wendy Warman must provide the license
candidate with a declaration, on a form approved by Washington State Department of Health,
stating that the supervisor has met the requirements of WAC 246-809-334 and thereby qualifies
as an approved supervisor.
The declaration form will state:
"As ari UPPrOved bUI)MV iWL, i sitrai l 1114VV W111pleteu ilM iuilOwirig.
A minimum of fifteen clock hours of training in clinical supervision obtained
through:
• A supervision course;
• Continuing education credits on supervision; or
• Supervision of supervision.
And twenty-five hours of experience in supervision of clinical practice. And have
two years of clinical experience post license.
I attest I will gain thorough knowledge of the supervisec's practice activities
including:
• PiauticG bcitiuy,
• Recordkeeping.
• Financial management;
� £t�icsofcllt�icai p�actice; �trd
• A backup plan for coverage."
The declaration must be completed by Wendy Warman and provided to license candidate prior to
the commencement of supervision in accordance with WAC 246-809-334.
Wendy Warman will complete at least two hours of individual clinical supervision for the Edmonds
Police Social Worker every month for a total of 24 meetings per year.
Packet Pg. 307
8.11.a
Fee Schedule
Wendy Warman will charge $90 per hour for individual supervision sessions. The price
breakdown is as follows:
• Meet with the social worker individually twice a month for an hour ($90 an hour x two
sessions each month = $180).
$180 per month x 12 months = $2,160.
These -ore minimum o.. d there n`.3y be t::::�5' Nhere ;ddif-nsl '.7�—et2.^.a- are n�:`uSA
The Edmonds Police Department will not be billed more than $2,500 annually.
Packet Pg. 308
8.12
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 09/24/2024
ILA with Edmonds School District
Staff Lead: Chief Michelle Bennett
Department: Police Services
Preparer: Alexandra Ehlert
Background/History
The Edmonds School District has had a standing contract with Edmonds Police Department allowing
officers to work school district events on overtime and the school district will fully reimburse the police
department for the cost. Instead of having a contract for each individual event due to the lengthy
approval process with both entities a general contract was established and entered into. This contract
was up for renewal this year. Attached is the new contract signed by the Superintendent Dr. Rebecca
Miner.
This contract has been reviewed and approved by Legal. The new to form signature line has been added
which will prompt Legal to sign the contract after Council fully approves and prior to the Mayor's
signature.
Staff Recommendation
Staff is asking that Council approve the contract on consent agenda for the Mayor to sign.
Narrative
<Type or insert text here>
Attachments:
Signed ILA Edmonds SD and City of Edmonds
Packet Pg. 309
8.12.a
INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT
BETWEEN EDMONDS SCHOOL DISTRICT and
CITY OF EDMONDS
for POLICE COVERAGE AT SCHOOL DISTRICT EVENTS
THIS INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is made by and between
Edmonds School District No. 15, hereafter referred to as the "District," and the City of Edmonds,
a Washington State municipal corporation, hereafter referred to as "Edmonds," and collectively,
the "Parties."
RECITALS
A. WHEREAS, Chapter 39.34 RCW, Interlocal Cooperation Act, permits agencies to
enter into agreements to engage in cooperative activities; and
B. WHEREAS, the District and Edmonds desire to cooperate pursuant to the Act to
make the most efficient use of their respective governmental powers within their
jurisdictions; and
C. WHEREAS, Edmonds and the District desire to have police coverage at District
events to provide security, promote safety, and serve as a positive resource to the
District; and
D. WHEREAS, Edmonds is desirous to assign one or more uniformed Police Officers
(the' Officers)") to provide police coverage at athletic and other District events, in
return for a rate of compensation that is agreed upon by the Parties;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual representation and covenants contained
herein, the Parties agree as follows:
TERMS
1. Purpose. This Agreement is intended to provide police coverage at predetermined athletic
events, dances, graduations and similar District events held at Edmonds-Woodway High School or other
locations in the District ("District Events") through the assignment by Edmonds of one or more
experienced commissioned Edmonds Officers to provide such services at the specified rate of
compensation herein.
2. Term. This Agreement shall commence on September 1, 2024 and shall expire on August 31,
2029, unless otherwise terminated under the provisions of this Agreement. Upon expiration or
termination of this Agreement, including any renewal term(s), all equipment furnished by Edmonds
shall remain the sole property of Edmonds, and any equipment or facilities furnished by the District
shall remain the sole property of the District.
3. Tennination. Either Party may terminate this Agreement for any reason upon sixty (60) days'
written notice to the other party. This Agreement is subject to funding, and either party may terminate
with proper written notice due to lack of funding. If this Agreement is terminated by either party, to
the extent that compensation has been paid by the District for services not yet provided by Edmonds
OR services have been provided by Edmonds for which compensation has not yet been paid by the
Packet Pg. 310
8.12.a
District, the party due compensation or reimbursement shall be paid by the other party on a prorated
basis through the date of termination.
4. Duties of Officer(s). Edmonds shall assign the Officer(s) to provide police coverage at District
Events. The duties and responsibilities of the Officer(s) include, but are not limited to, the following:
Support District Events with crowd control and enforcement of the laws and
regulations of the State of Washington and the City of Edmonds.
Support the efforts of the District staff in providing a safe environment for
students, parents, event participants and other attendees.
Enforce rules pertaining to tobacco, alcohol, and drugs on public school property
5. Independent Contractor. Edmonds and the District understand and agree that Edmonds is
acting as an independent contractor under the terms of this Agreement.
6. Supervision of Officer's). The Officer(s) shall remain employee(s) of Edmonds and are not
employee(s) of the District. The Officer(s) shall remain responsive to the supervision of the chain of
command of the Edmonds Police Department. Edmonds shall be solely responsible for Officer(s)'
training, discipline, or dismissal.
7. Compensation. The Officer(s)' rate of pay shall be compensation at the rate of one and one-half
(1.5) times the Officer's regular straight time hourly rate of pay, plus applicable employer contributions
for state retirement, FICA equivalent, and state industrial insurance.
8. Payment. The District shall pay Edmonds within thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of a
proper invoice. Payments to Edmonds later than thirty (30) days following the receipt of a proper invoice
shall accrue interest at the rate of twelve percent (12%) per annum on the balance due. All payments shall
first be applied to accrued interest.
9. Insurance and Indemnification. The Parties shall separately maintain their own appropriate
liability and casualty insurance policies as they, in their sole discretion, deem appropriate. The Parties
further agree that no indemnification shall be provided for, except as specifically set forth below, and that
the respective liability of the Parties to each other and to third parties shall be determined in accordance
with the laws of the State of Washington. Each of the Parties shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless
the other party, their officers, officials, employees and agents, from any and all costs, claims, judgments,
and/or awards of damages, arising out of, or in any way resulting from that other parry's negligent acts or
omissions (including willful and/or wanton acts) in performing under this Agreement. No party will be
required to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the other party, if the claim, suit or action for injuries,
death, and/or damages is caused by the sole negligence of that party. Where such claims, suits, or actions
result from the concurrent negligence of the parties, the indemnity provisions provided herein shall be
valid and enforceable only to the extent of each party's own negligence. Each party agrees that its
obligations under this provision include, but are not limited to, any claim, demand, and/or cause of action
brought by, or on behalf of, any of its employees or agents. For this reason, each of the parties, by mutual
negotiation, hereby waives, with respect to the other party only, any immunity that would otherwise be
available against such claims under the Industrial Insurance provisions of Title 51 RCW. Nothing
contained in this section shall be deemed to waive any other immunities established pursuant to state
statutes or to create third party rights or immunities.
Packet Pg. 311
8.12.a
10. District Responsibility for Safety and Security. The Parties understand and agree that the
District retains its legal responsibility for the safety and security of the District, its employees, students
and property, and this Agreement does not alter that responsibility except as provided by paragraph 9
above.
11. Applicable Law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Washington.
12. Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire agreement between Parties and
supersedes and merges with any prior agreements of the Parties, written or oral. This Agreement shall
be amended only in writing with the written consent of the Parties.
13. Notice. Edmonds Assistant Chief of Administrative Services shall serve as the administrator
of this Agreement for Edmonds and the District Superintendent shall serve as the administrator of this
Agreement for the District.
Notices to Edmonds shall be sent to the following address:
City of Edmonds Police Department
ATIN: Assistant Police Chief of Administrative Services
250 5"' Avenue N.
Edmonds, WA 98020
Notices to the District shall be sent to the following address:
Edmonds School District #15
ATTN: Superintendent Office
20420 68"' Ave W.
Lynnwood, WA 98036
14. Duty to File Agreement with County Auditor. The District shall, within ten (10) days after this
Agreement is executed by both parties, file this Agreement with the Snohomish County Auditor or,
alternatively, list it by subject on a public agency's website or other electronically retrievable public
source as allowed in RCW 39.34.040.
EDMONDS SCHOOL DISTRICT CITY OF EDMONDS
a
Dr. Rebecca
Mike Rosen, Mayor
Dated: (J [ 23 / 20 L `7 Dated:
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED :
Scott Passey, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Office of the City Attorney
Packet Pg. 312
8.13
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 09/24/2024
Correction to Ordinance 4362 Attachment A
Staff Lead: City Council
Department: City Council
Preparer: Beckie Peterson
Background/History
In June, the city adopted Ordinance 4359 to solidify and transparently acknowledge the number of Full -
Time Equivalents (FTE) the City is authorized to employ.
At the July 16, 2024 Public Safety, Planning, Human Resources and Personnel Committee meeting, two
items regarding job positions were forwarded to the full council agenda for approval on consent.
(minutes attached)
On the July 23, 2024 consent agenda, in addition to these two job position changes, an ordinance
updating the list of approved FTEs and repealing 4359 was approved by Council, and designated as
Ordinance 4362. Before the ordinance was signed or published, an administrative error was identified in
Attachment A. Attachment A has been corrected for council's review. (minutes attached)
The City Attorney's recommendation was that this error went beyond what might be considered a
scriveners error and should be addressed as a correction and approved by full council.
Recommendation
Staff recommends Council approve the corrected Attachment A to Ordinance 4362.
Narrative
Ordinance 4362, as passed with the error, is attached.
The corrected attachment A shows the intended job title update from Permit Supervisor to Permitting
Program Manager (page 5, Planning and Development). It restores the inadvertent change of the Permit
Coordinator (page 7, Public Works). (highlight emphasis added)
Attachments:
2024-07-16 City Council - Full Minutes-3709
pages Minutes July 23, 2024 consent agenda
Ordinance 4362 as approved
2024-09-16 Corrected Attachment A for Ordinance 4362
Packet Pg. 313
8.13.a
PUBLIC SAFETY, PLANNING, HUMAN SERVICES & PERSONNEL
COMMITTEE MEETING
July 16, 2024
Elected Officials Present Staff Present
Councilmember Chris Eck Michelle Bennett, Police Chief
Council President Vivian Olson(ex-officio) Susan McLaughlin, Planning & Dev. Dir.
Jessica Neill Hoyson, HR Director
Elected Officials Absent Leif Bjorback, Building Official
Councilmember Neil Tibbott (Chair) Emily Wagener, Senior HR Analyst
Scott Passey, City Clerk
1. CALL TO ORDER
The Edmonds City Council PSPHSP Committee meeting was called to order virtually and in the City
Council Conference Room, 121 — 511 Avenue North, Edmonds, at 3:29 pm by Councilmember Eck.
COMMITTEE BUSINESS
1. Committee Updates
b. Comprehensive Plan — Planning/Director McLaughlin
Ms. McLaughlin explained the intent of this update is to keep council apprised of progress. She
reviewed:
• Staff and the consultant team are reviewing draft edited versions of the goal and policies
o Draft Housing and Land Use elements are being discussed with the planning board via two
subcommittees who will report to the full planning board at their July 24 meeting
o Staff has not completed their review of the Housing and Land Use elements
o Final revisions will be made to the Housing and Land Use elements prior to inclusion in the
consolidated plan
• Staff and the consultant team are conducting a second round of internal review of the
Community Design, Sustainability and Capital Facilities elements
• Staff and consultant team met with the mayor last week to discuss his preference and priorities
for the CFP. Staff will be coordinating with directors and departments to ensure goals and
policies are up-to-date and in alignment with the mayor's direction
• Staff is working with the Alliance for Housing Affordability (AHA) to review the City's existing
MFTE program to ensure alignment with best practices and looking for gaps or opportunities to
update the policy
• DEIS will be available shortly. Herrera, a subconsultant of VIA, will submit preliminary impacts
and mitigation measures for internal review
o Tentatively scheduled for planning board review next week
• Staff hosted an HB 1110 middle housing webinar
o Available online on Everyone Edmonds webpage
• Online open house on the draft Waterfront Vision and goals and policies in early/mid-August
• Online open house regarding the DEIS and the draft plan elements will be launched at the end
of August. A 20-day comment period is required; it will likely be open for a minimum 30 days
• Once the DEIS is published, staff plans to host a webinar to review each section and explain the
findings
• Staff discussed the comprehensive plan with the Historic Preservation Commission
• Staff presented the Community Design Element to the Architectural Design Board (ADB) who
was not happy with it. Due to staffing changes, the element was not ready to be presented.
Packet Pg. 314
8.13.a
07/16/24 PSPHSP Committee Minutes, Page 2
A joint planning board/city council study session is proposed on August 6 to discuss the
preliminary DEIS impacts and the planning board's recommendation on the Housing and Land
Use elements. Materials will be provided in advance.
Questions and discussion followed regarding the required 20-day comment period for the DEIS that the
City plans to have open for a minimum of 30 days, appreciation for scheduling a joint planning board/city
council study session, information provided to the ADB prematurely, creation of neighborhood area
framework in the Community Design element, and support for a subarea approach.
a. CEMP Update — Police/Chief Bennett
Chief Bennett explained the draft CEMP was sent out to all department directors; once their review and
edits are complete, it will be returned to her and then sent to the consultant who will include proposed
edits. Once the consultant completes the edits, the plan goes to the state for review and approval and
will be scheduled for council review and approval in August/September. With regard to the Hazard
Mitigation Plan, without a current, approved plan the City is only eligible for reimbursement of initial
costs instead of full cost recovery from a disaster. Snohomish County's Department of Emergency
Management asked the City to sign onto their Hazard Mitigation Plan and the City provided a letter of
intent.
Chief Bennett continued, a meeting will be held with staff at the end of July to provide an update on the
Hazard Mitigation Plan and CEMP. The City is also able to utilize Snohomish County's RAVE
(communications) system. Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) training will be available
this fall and spring through South County Fire. Commander Machado will attend an upcoming meeting
of amateur radio operators.
Questions and discussion followed regarding having the municipal court provide feedback on the
CEMP, appreciation for collaboration with Snohomish County, and appreciation for Chief Bennett's time
and effort to update of the CEMP. Council President Olson volunteered to assist as needed.
2. Reorg of Admin Services - Finance Director Job Description
Ms. Neill Hoyson observed Mayor Rosen has communicated to council his intent to reorganize the
Administrative Services Department with the departure of the director. His proposal is to change the
department back to the Finance Department and have a finance director that focuses on finance, and
have IT, the clerk's office and records functions report to the mayor. The previous finance director job
description, before it was changed to administrative services director, was amended to incorporate
current language and reviewed by the mayor, deputy director and Mike Bailey. There is no change to
the compensation, it is the same range as other directors.
Questions and discussion followed regarding support for looking at the reporting structure when a
vacancy occurs, this change making it easier hire someone who is an expert in finances, how the
finance director job description was created, difference between a finance director and an administrative
services director, updating the authorized position ordinance to remove administrative services director
and add finance director, and the proposed pay range for a finance director.
Committee recommendation: Consent Agenda
3. Resolution to Authorize Mayor to Approve Shared Leave Beyond Personnel
Policies
Ms. Neill Hoyson explained the City currently has a shared leave policy which allows employees to
donate leave to other employees when their or a family member's illness/injury would cause them to go
into unpaid status. When that occurs, employees are notified and employees can choose to donate their
Packet Pg. 315
8.13.a
07/16/24 PSPHSP Committee Minutes, Page 3
leave to the affected employee. Situations have arisen recently where limited term employees without
a lot of leave or employees in a partner relationship had a family emergency or death in the family that
did not fit the parameters of the shared leave policy. This is a request to give the mayor latitude to
approve one-off situations related to donation of leave. There is no cost to the City.
Questions and discussion followed regarding whether domestic partnerships are addressed in City's
bereavement policy, plans to propose changes to the shared leave program as part of next year's
update to personnel policies manual, and Washington State no longer recognizing domestic
partnerships unless one of the partners is over 60 years of age.
Committee recommendation: Consent Agenda
4. New Job Description for Permitting Program Manager
Mr. Bjorback explained in 2021 the building division recognized the need for a new job description,
permitting supervisor, to oversee the permit coordinator team. After the job description was approved
and implemented and filled with an existing staff person, it was realized the new supervisor position
needed to perform union work. After consulting with the union, it was agreed to revert the position to a
union represented lead position. A new job description, permitting program manager, was created and
the position is already recognized in the current union contract. Functionally it will not be a lot different
for the team other than removing true supervisor functionality such as hiring/firing, job evaluations, etc.
from the position.
Ms. Wagener relayed the City and union agreed the position would continue to be paid at the existing
non -rep supervisory pay grade and appropriate placement on the AFSCME schedule negotiated in the
upcoming negotiations.
Questions and discussion followed regarding recognition of everyone involved in making this change
and updating the authorized position ordinance.
Committee recommendation: Consent Agenda
5. Council Rules of Procedure Sections 4 & 5 Consent Agenda and Council Meetings
Council President Olson explained the intent of reviewing existing Council Rules of Procedure is to
document how the council does business. Councilmember Eck read revised language proposed by
Council President Olson for Section 4.1, The Mayo- Council President, in consultation with the Ceundl
President.Mayor, shall place matters on the Consent Agenda which...".
Committee recommendation: Consent Agenda with revised language
3. ADJOURN
The meeting was adjourned at 4:20 pm.
SCOTT PASSEY,-tM CLERK
Packet Pg. 316
8.13.b
➢ Community resources - dealing with the consequences of backyard breeding constrains city
resources. Animal control, shelters, and rescue organizations spend significant time and money
addressing issues that arise from irresponsible breeding.
By enacting a ban on backyard breeding, Edmonds can demonstrate its commitment to animal welfare and
public health. It would ensure that all breeding operations adhere to strict standards promoting the humane
treatment of animal and reducing the burden on local resources. He urged the council to consider the long
term benefits of such a ban; the community will be healthier, safer, and more compassionate as a result.
Daniel Pejovic, Edmonds, relayed his family has lived on 203' Place SW off 84' Ave W for nearly 30
years, a street that has never been paved, is bumpy, unkept, and full of expensive to fix potholes. During
the cold season, it remains icy and snowy long after nearly all other roads in Edmonds are defrosted and
void of snow and ice. He begged the City for a plan to pave 203' Place SW; it is the right thing to do as
everyone on the street are hardworking Edmonds taxpayers who have lived there for decades because they
love Edmonds.
7. RECEIVED FOR FILING
1. CLAIM FOR DAMAGES
2. WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS
3. JUNE 2024 QUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORT
4. DRAFT FINANCIAL POLICIES
5. OUTSIDE BOARDS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS
8. 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 SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 2, 2024
2. APPROVAL OF SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 9, 2024
3. APPROVAL OF REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 9, 2024
4. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS AND WIRE PAYMENTS
5. MATHAY BALLINGER PARK IMPROVEMENTS CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
6. CAR SHOW & OKTOBERFEST EVENT AGREEMENTS
7. AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN PARTICIPATION FORM RE KROGER OPIOID
SETTLEMENT
8. SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WITH NEW CINGULAR WIRELESS PCS, LLC
9. LEGAL ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE — ASSESSMENT QUESTIONS FOR CITY
ATTORNEY/PROSECUTOR
10. APPROVAL OF HAUL ROUTE AGREEMENT FOR MEADOWDALE BEACH PARK
ESTUARY RESTORATION PROJECT
11. APPROVAL OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR THE EDMONDS
MARSH ESTUARY PLANNING STUDY
12. ORDINANCE AMENDING AUTHORIZED EMPLOYEE POSITIONS
13. APPROVAL OF FINANCE DIRECTOR JOB DESCRIPTION AND REORGANIZATION
OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
14. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING MAYOR TO APPROVE SHARED LEAVE BEYOND
PERSONNEL POLICIES
15. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE SECTIONS 4 & 5 CONSENT
AGENDA AND COUNCIL MEETINGS
16. APPROVAL OF DISPOSAL OF SURPLUS EQUIPMENT/CITY ASSETS
17. APPROVAL OF JOB DESCRIPTION FOR PERMITTING PROGRAM MANAGER
9. COUNCIL BUSINESS
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 23, 2024
Page 13
Packet Pg. 317
8.13.c
ORDINANCE NO. 4362
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON,
AMENDING THE CITY'S AUTHORIZED EMPLOYEE
POSITIONS AND PAY RANGES AND REPEALING
ORDINANCE 4359
WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 35A. 11.020, "[t]he legislative body of each code city shall
have power ... to define the functions, powers, and duties of its officers and employees; ... , to fix
the compensation and working conditions of such officers and employees... "; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 35A.12.090, "[t]he mayor shall have the power of appointment
and removal of all appointive officers and employees;" and
WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 35A.33.050, "[t]he salary or salary range for each office,
position or job classification shall be set forth separately together with the title or position
designation thereof: PROVIDED, That salaries may be set out in total amounts under each
department if a detailed schedule of such salaries and positions be attached to and made a part of
the budget document;" and
WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 35A.33.105, "[n]otwithstanding the appropriations for any
salary, or salary range of any employee or employees adopted in a final budget, the legislative
body of any code city may, by ordinance, change the wages, hours, and conditions of employment
of any or all of its appointive employees if sufficient funds are available for appropriation to such
purposes;" and
WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds has historically adopted its budget at the fund level; and
WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds budget book is typically finalized administratively after
adoption of the budget ordinance; and
WHEREAS, city council intends that the City of Edmonds budget book be conformed to
this ordinance, as it may be amended from time -to -time; and
WHEREAS, with respect to the employee positions that the mayor is authorized to hire,
this ordinance, as it may be amended from time -to -time, is intended to be the controlling document;
and
1
Packet Pg. 318
8.13.c
WHEREAS, previous versions of this ordinance were adopted with Ordinances 4336, 4344,
and 4359; and
WHEREAS, should it become necessary to defend or deauthorize the filling of a particular
position, it is intended that the FTE levels in this ordinance be adjusted in concert with an
associated budget amendment; and
WHEREAS, the city council intends to use this ordinance to establish the number and types
of employee positions, wage and salary rates and ranges for all the city's employees;
WHEREAS, with this amendment, the city council intends to remove the position of
Administrative Services Director (NR-44) and add the position of Finance Director (NR-44);
WHEREAS, with this amendment, the city council intends to revise the job title of Permit
Supervisor to Permitting Program Manager;
NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The number and titles of authorized Full -Time Equivalent employees (FTEs),
including full-time and part-time regular employees, shall be established at 284.9 FTEs, as
detailed in Attachment A, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as if
set forth in full. The mayor is authorized to hire only those authorized positions shown on Attachment
A and only pursuant to the salary ranges shown therein.
Section 2. The number and titles of authorized Full -Time Equivalent employees (FTEs),
including full-time and part-time irregular employees, shall be established at 12.8 FTEs, as detailed
in Attachment B, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth
in full. It is the intention that irregular positions are not benefit eligible and/or union positions. At no
time should the schedule of irregular positions into which employees are hired be such that it would
cause the position to become benefit eligible or covered by a union, unless otherwise called out in a
collective bargaining agreement. The mayor is authorized to hire only those authorized positions
shown on Attachment B and only pursuant to the salary ranges shown therein.
Section 3. This ordinance shall apply and continue in effect until amended by subsequent
ordinance of the city council. Ordinance 4359 is hereby repealed.
14
Packet Pg. 319
Section 4. This ordinance, as it may be amended from time -to -time, shall be included as an
exhibit to every proposed and final budget book, PROVIDED THAT the city council need not take
annual action to re -adopt this ordinance unless it deems it necessary to change the number and/or titles
of authorized FTEs
Section 5. This ordinance shall control in the event of any conflict between this ordinance and the
final budget book or any other action of the city council purporting to authorize the hiring of employees.
Nothing in this ordinance shall be construed to abrogate an existing obligation of the City of Edmonds
with regard to its various collective bargaining agreements.
Section 6. Severability. If any section, subsection, clause, sentence, or phrase of this
ordinance should be held invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of
the remaining portions of this ordinance.
Section 7. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifically
delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum and shall take effect five (5)
days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title.
MAYOR MIKE ROSEN
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY:
JEFF TARADAY
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: July 18, 2024
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: July 23, 2024
PUBLISHED: July 26, 2024
EFFECTIVE DATE: July 31, 2024
ORDINANCE NO. 4362
3
Packet Pg. 320
8.13.c
SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO.4362
of the City of Edmonds, Washington
On the 23rd day of July, 2024, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No.
4362. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON,
AMENDING THE CITY'S AUTHORIZED EMPLOYEE POSITIONS AND PAY
RANGES AND REPEALING ORDINANCE 4359.
The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request.
DATED this 23rd day of July, 2024.
C5;�
CITY CLERK, SCOTT EY
10
Packet Pg. 321
8.13.c
ATTACHMENT A
Funded
Position
FTE
Grade
Department
66.6%-100%
General Fund
001) funded
Legislative/Executive Assistant
1.0
NR-33
Council
Mayor
1.0
156,123
Mayor
Executive Assistant to the Mayor
1.0
NR-34
Mayor
Human Resources Director
1.0
NR-44
Human Resources
Senior Human Resources Analyst
1.0
NR-34
Human Resources
Human Resources Analyst
0.6
NR-32
Human Resources
Safety & Disaster Coordinator
1.0
NR-34
Human Resources
Human Resources Assistant
1.0
NR-29
Human Resources
Human Resources Manager
1.0
NR-40
Human Resources
Court Administrator
1.0
NR-43
Court
Assistant Court Administrator
1.0
NR-37
Court
Lead Court Clerk
1.0
NE-29
Court
Court Clerk
4.0
NE-28
Court
Probation Officer
2.0
NE-33 -
N E-34
Court
City Clerk
1.0
NR-37
Administrative
Services
Deputy City Clerk
1.0
NE-31
Administrative
Services
Accounting Specialist
2.0
NE-30 -
NE-31
Administrative
Services
Administrative Assistant
1.0
NE-29 -
NE-30
Administrative
Services
Senior Office Specialist
1.0
NE-25
Administrative
Services
Public Records Officer
1.0
NE-32
Administrative
Services
Public Records Assistant
1.0
NE-30
Administrative
Services
Police Chief
1.0
PD-03
Police
Police Assistant Chief
2.0
PD-02
Police
Executive Assistant Confidential II
1.0
NR-35
Police
Executive Assistant Confidential 1
1.0
NR-33
Police
Police Commanders
3.0
PD-01
Police
Sergeant
7.0
NE-13
Police
Corporal
6.0
NE-12
Police
Police Officer
47.0
NE-9 -
N E-11
Police
Police Crime Analyst
1.0
NE-11
Police
Animal Control/Ordinance
Enforcement Officer
2.0
NE-10 -
NE-11
Police
a
N
(D
M
m
U
_
=a
L
0
r
a>
E
t
�a
r
r
Q
Packet Pg. 322
8.13.c
Parking Enforcement Officer
1.0
NE-6
Police
Police Services Assistant
6.0
NE-7 -
Police
NE-8
Property Officer/Evidence Technician
1.0
NE-9
Police
Domestic Violence Coordinator
1.0
NE-10
Police
Administrative Assistant
0.8
NE-6
Police
Police Public Disclosure Specialist
2.0
NE-10
Police
Community Engagement/Crime
1.0
NE-11
Police
Prevention Coordinator
Community Services & Economic
1.0
NR-44
Community Services
Development Director
& Economic
Development
Administrative Assistant
0.5
NE-29 -
Community Services
NE-30
& Economic
Development
Community Services Program
1.0
NE-33
Community Services
Coordinator
& Economic
Development
Arts & Cultural Services Program
1.0
NR-35
Community Services
Manager
& Economic
Development
Cultural Arts Program Specialist
1.0
NE-29
Community Services
& Economic
Development
Communications Strategist/Public
1.0
NE-35
Community Services
Information Officer
& Economic
Development
Diversity Commission Coordinator
0.3
x02
Community Services
& Economic
Development
Planning & Development Director
1.0
NR-44
Planning &
Development
Code Enforcement Officer
1.0
NE-34
Planning &
Development
Administrative Assistant
2.0
NE-29 -
Planning &
NE-30
Development
Building Official
1.0
NR-39
Planning &
Development
Plans Examiner
2.0
NE-34 -
Planning &
NE-35
Development
Permit Supervisor
1.0
NR-32
Planning &
Development
Combination Building Inspector
1.0
NE-33 -
Planning &
NE-35
Development
Permit Coordinator
2.0
NE-29 -
Planning &
NE-31
Development
Building Inspector
1.0
NE-33
Planning &
Development
Planning Manager
1.0
NR-40
Planning &
Development
Senior Planner
2.0
NR-35
Planning &
Development
Associate Planner
1.0
NR-33
Planning &
Development
a
c
d
E
t
r
Q
N
M
m
c
�a
=a
L
O
0
r
_
0
d
L
0
L)
M
m
0
L
a
a
R
Packet Pg. 323
8.13.c
Planner
2.0
NR-32
Planning &
Development
Urban Forest Planner
1.0
NR-35
Planning &
Development
Associate Transportation Planner
1.0
NR-33
Planning &
Development
Parks, Recreation, and Human
Services Director
1.0
NR-44
Parks & Recreation
Executive Assistant
1.0
NE-33
Parks & Recreation
Parks Maintenance Manager
1.0
NR-35
Parks & Recreation
Parks Maintenance Lead Worker
1.0
N
Parks & Recreation
Parks Maintenance Worker
13.0
1 - J
Parks & Recreation
Seasonal Parks Maintenance Laborer
5.0
B
Parks & Recreation
Field Arborist
1.0
J
Parks & Recreation
Parks Maintenance Mechanic
1.0
K
Parks & Recreation
Deputy Parks & Recreation Services
Director
1.0
NR-41
Parks & Recreation
Recreation Supervisor
1.0
NR-35
Parks & Recreation
Recreation Coordinator
2.6
NE-33
Parks & Recreation
Environmental Education &
Sustainability Coordinator
1.0
NE-34
Parks & Recreation
Senior Office Specialist
1.0
NE-25
Parks & Recreation
Preschool Assistant
0.5
NE-21
Parks & Recreation
Program Assistant
1.0
NE-27
Parks & Recreation
Recreation Leader
1.2
NE-23
Parks & Recreation
Interpretive Specialist
0.5
NE-23
Parks & Recreation
Youth Commission Coordinator
0.5
H13
Parks & Recreation
Human Services Program Manager
1.0
NE-36
Parks & Recreation
Park Planner and Capital Projects
Manager
1.0
NR-36
Parks & Recreation
Administrative Assistant
1.0
NE-29 -
N E-30
Public Works
Facilities Manager
1.0
NR-38
Public Works
Lead Custodian
1.0
H
Public Works
Custodian
5.0
D - E
Public Works
City Electrician
1.0
N
Public Works
Lead Building Maintenance Operator
1.0
M
Public Works
Building Maintenance Operator
3.0
J
Public Works
Total FTE count for positions that
are 66.6%-100% General Fund (001)
funded
184.4
33.3%-66.6%
General Fund
001 funded
Accountant
3.0
NE-36 -
NE-37
Administrative
Services
Administrative Services Dmrecto
4-.0
AID
Odminostrato.o}rotive
Cervices
a
c
d
E
t
r
Q
N
cc
M
m
c
�a
=a
L
O
0
_
0
d
L
L
0
L)
M
m
0
L
a
a
R
Packet Pg. 324
8.13.c
Finance Director
1.0
NR-44
Administrative
Services
Deputy Administrative Services
1.0
NR-41
Administrative
Director
Services
Public Works Director
1.0
NR-45
Public Works
Executive Assistant
1.0
NE-33
Public Works
Total FTE count for positions that
7.0
are 33.3%-66.6% General Fund (001)
funded
0%-33.3%
General Fund
001 funded
Accountant
1.0
NE-36 -
Administrative
NE-37
Services
Accounting Specialist
2.0
NE-30 -
Administrative
NE-31
Services
Information Services Manager
1.0
NR-41
Administrative
Services
Information Systems Specialist
1.0
NE-35 -
Administrative
NE-36
Services
GIS Analyst
1.0
NE-35 -
Administrative
NE-36
Services
Systems Support Technician
2.0
NE-32
Administrative
Services
Web Systems Analyst
1.0
NE-33
Administrative
Services
Cemetery Sexton
1.0
L
Parks & Recreation
Parks Maintenance Worker
2.0
1 - J
Parks & Recreation
City Engineer
1.0
NR-43
Public Works
Administrative Assistant
1.0
NE-29 -
Public Works
N E-30
Capital Projects Manager
5.0
NR-36
Public Works
Transportation Engineer
1.0
NR-39
Public Works
Senior Construction Inspector
1.0
NE-35
Public Works
Senior Utilities Engineer
1.0
NR-41
Public Works
Stormwater Engineer
1.0
NR-38
Public Works
Stormwater Technician
1.0
NE-32 -
Public Works
N E-33
Associate Engineer
1.0
NR-33
Public Works
Engineering Program Manager II
1.0
NR-38
Public Works
Engineering Technician
4.0
NE-30 -
Public Works
N E-34
Permitting
0.5
NE-29 -
Public Works
Program Mana er
NE-31
Public Works Record Administrator
1.0
New, No
Public Works
Grade
available
Asset/Project Management Specialist
1.0
NR-36
Public Works
Utility Locator
1.0
New, No
Public Works
Grade
available
i
Q
Packet Pg. 325
8.13.c
Sewer Maintenance/GIS Worker
1.0
New, No
Grade
available
Public Works
Environmental Program Specialist
1.0
NR-33
Public Works
Street/Storm Manager
1.0
NR-40
Public Works
Stormwater Maintenance Lead Worker
1.0
N
Public Works
Senior Storm GIS
Technician/Maintenance Worker
1.0
K
Public Works
Storm Maintenance Worker
6.0
I - J
Public Works
Street Maintenance Lead Worker
1.0
N
Public Works
Traffic Control Technician
1.0
L
Public Works
Senior Street Maintenance Worker-
Cement Finisher
2.0
K
Public Works
Street/Storm Maintenance Worker
5.0
1 - J
Public Works
Water/Sewer Manager
1.0
NR-40
Public Works
Water Maintenance Lead Worker
1.0
N
Public Works
Water Maintenance Worker
5.0
1 - J
Public Works
Water Meter Reader
2.0
E - F
Public Works
Water Quality Control Technician
1.0
L
Public Works
Sewer Maintenance Lead Worker
1.0
N
Public Works
Sewer Maintenance Worker
6.0
1 - K
Public Works
WWTP Manager
1.0
NR-41
Public Works
Office Coordinator
1.0
NE-30
Public Works
WWTP Pre -Treatment Technician
1.0
K
Public Works
WWTP Water Quality Analyst
1.0
N
Public Works
WWTP Instrument Technician/Plant
Electrician
1.0
L - N
Public Works
WWTP Plant Supervisor
1.0
NR-37
Public Works
WWTP Operator
11.0
J-N
Public Works
WWTP Maintenance Mechanic
2.0
J -N
Public Works
Fleet Manager
1.0
NR-37
Public Works
Fleet Mechanic
3.0
K - M
Public Works
Total FTE count for positions that
are 0%-33.3% General Fund (001)
funded
93.5
Total All City FTE Count
284.9
i
Q
Packet Pg. 326
8.13.c
ATTACHMENT B
Department
Title
Pay Grade
# of FTEs
approved
Police
Social Worker
H-16
1.0
Parks
Facility Attendant
H-06
0.5
Gymnastics Assistant
H-07
0.6
Da camp Assistant
H-07
1.0
Front Desk Receptionist
H-08
2.0
Ranger Naturalist
H-09
1.2
G mnastics Instructor
H-10
0.5
Information Services
Audio Visual Assistant
H-13
1.0
Engineering
Engineering Intern
H-09
1.0
Human Resources
HR Intern Temporary
H-09
0.5
Public Works
Seasonal Street Department Laborer
H-08
3.0
Municipal Court
Pro Tem Jude
H-21
.5
General/Non-specified
Temporary Office Worker
H-07
0
1 ntern
H-09
0
Temporary Project Specialist
H-16
0
12.8
'a
Packet Pg. 327
8.13.d
ATTACHMENT A
Funded
Position
FTE
Grade
Department
66.6%-100%
General Fund
001 funded
Legislative/Executive Assistant
1.0
NR-33
Council
Mayor
1.0
156,123
Mayor
Executive Assistant to the Mayor
1.0
NR-34
Mayor
Human Resources Director
1.0
NR-44
Human Resources
Senior Human Resources Analyst
1.0
NR-34
Human Resources
Human Resources Analyst
0.6
NR-32
Human Resources
Safety & Disaster Coordinator
1.0
NR-34
Human Resources
Human Resources Assistant
1.0
NR-29
Human Resources
Human Resources Manager
1.0
NR-40
Human Resources
Court Administrator
1.0
NR-43
Court
Assistant Court Administrator
1.0
NR-37
Court
Lead Court Clerk
1.0
NE-29
Court
Court Clerk
4.0
NE-28
Court
Probation Officer
2.0
NE-33 -
N E-34
Court
City Clerk
1.0
NR-37
Administrative
Services
Deputy City Clerk
1.0
NE-31
Administrative
Services
Accounting Specialist
2.0
NE-30 -
NE-31
Administrative
Services
Administrative Assistant
1.0
NE-29 -
NE-30
Administrative
Services
Senior Office Specialist
1.0
NE-25
Administrative
Services
Public Records Officer
1.0
NE-32
Administrative
Services
Public Records Assistant
1.0
NE-30
Administrative
Services
Police Chief
1.0
PD-03
Police
Police Assistant Chief
2.0
PD-02
Police
Executive Assistant Confidential II
1.0
NR-35
Police
Executive Assistant Confidential 1
1.0
NR-33
Police
Police Commanders
3.0
PD-01
Police
Sergeant
7.0
NE-13
Police
Corporal
6.0
NE-12
Police
Police Officer
47.0
NE-9 -
NE-11
Police
Police Crime Analyst
1.0
NE-11
Police
Animal Control/Ordinance
Enforcement Officer
2.0
NE-10 -
NE-11
Police
Q
c
a)
E
t
�a
r
a
N
M
d
_
�a
_
=a
L
O
0
r
r
d
L
L
0
0
N
w
M
le
m
R
_
�a
L
O
L
Q
a)
E
t
0
�a
r
a
d
a�
L
0
t�
co
rn
0
v
N
O
N
�.i
d
t
0
M
r
r
Q
Packet Pg. 328
8.13.d
Parking Enforcement Officer
1.0
NE-6
Police
Police Services Assistant
6.0
NE-7 -
Police
NE-8
Property Officer/Evidence Technician
1.0
NE-9
Police
Domestic Violence Coordinator
1.0
NE-10
Police
Administrative Assistant
0.8
NE-6
Police
Police Public Disclosure Specialist
2.0
NE-10
Police
Community Engagement/Crime
1.0
NE-11
Police
Prevention Coordinator
Community Services & Economic
1.0
NR-44
Community Services
Development Director
& Economic
Development
Administrative Assistant
0.5
NE-29 -
Community Services
NE-30
& Economic
Development
Community Services Program
1.0
NE-33
Community Services
Coordinator
& Economic
Development
Arts & Cultural Services Program
1.0
NR-35
Community Services
Manager
& Economic
Development
Cultural Arts Program Specialist
1.0
NE-29
Community Services
& Economic
Development
Communications Strategist/Public
1.0
NE-35
Community Services
Information Officer
& Economic
Development
Diversity Commission Coordinator
0.3
x02
Community Services
& Economic
Development
Planning & Development Director
1.0
NR-44
Planning &
Development
Code Enforcement Officer
1.0
NE-34
Planning &
Development
Administrative Assistant
2.0
NE-29 -
Planning &
NE-30
Development
Building Official
1.0
NR-39
Planning &
Development
Plans Examiner
2.0
NE-34 -
Planning &
NE-35
Development
Permitting Program Manager
1.0
NR-32
Planning &
Development
Combination Building Inspector
1.0
NE-33 -
Planning &
NE-35
Development
Permit Coordinator
2.0
NE-29 -
Planning &
NE-31
Development
Building Inspector
1.0
NE-33
Planning &
Development
Planning Manager
1.0
NR-40
Planning &
Development
Senior Planner
2.0
NR-35
Planning &
Development
Associate Planner
1.0
NR-33
Planning &
Develo ment
Q
m
E
t
c�
Q
N
co
M
d
c�
=a
O
0
_
0
m
L
0
U
N
c�
M
m
c�
L
O
0
Q
m
E
t
M
w
Q
m
m
L
0
U
to
r
C>
0
v
N
0
N
c
d
E
s
0
M
Q
Packet Pg. 329
8.13.d
Planner
2.0
NR-32
Planning &
Development
Urban Forest Planner
1.0
NR-35
Planning &
Development
Associate Transportation Planner
1.0
NR-33
Planning &
Development
Parks, Recreation, and Human
Services Director
1.0
NR-44
Parks & Recreation
Executive Assistant
1.0
NE-33
Parks & Recreation
Parks Maintenance Manager
1.0
NR-35
Parks & Recreation
Parks Maintenance Lead Worker
1.0
N
Parks & Recreation
Parks Maintenance Worker
13.0
1 - J
Parks & Recreation
Seasonal Parks Maintenance Laborer
5.0
B
Parks & Recreation
Field Arborist
1.0
J
Parks & Recreation
Parks Maintenance Mechanic
1.0
K
Parks & Recreation
Deputy Parks & Recreation Services
Director
1.0
NR-41
Parks & Recreation
Recreation Supervisor
1.0
NR-35
Parks & Recreation
Recreation Coordinator
2.6
NE-33
Parks & Recreation
Environmental Education &
Sustainability Coordinator
1.0
NE-34
Parks & Recreation
Senior Office Specialist
1.0
NE-25
Parks & Recreation
Preschool Assistant
0.5
NE-21
Parks & Recreation
Program Assistant
1.0
NE-27
Parks & Recreation
Recreation Leader
1.2
NE-23
Parks & Recreation
Interpretive Specialist
0.5
NE-23
Parks & Recreation
Youth Commission Coordinator
0.5
H13
Parks & Recreation
Human Services Program Manager
1.0
NE-36
Parks & Recreation
Park Planner and Capital Projects
Manager
1.0
NR-36
Parks & Recreation
Administrative Assistant
1.0
NE-29 -
N E-30
Public Works
Facilities Manager
1.0
NR-38
Public Works
Lead Custodian
1.0
H
Public Works
Custodian
5.0
D - E
Public Works
City Electrician
1.0
N
Public Works
Lead Building Maintenance Operator
1.0
M
Public Works
Building Maintenance Operator
3.0
J
Public Works
Total FTE count for positions that
are 66.6%-100% General Fund (001)
funded
184.4
33.3%-66.6%
General Fund
001 funded
Accountant
3.0
NE-36 -
NE-37
Administrative
Services
Q
a)
E
t
M
r
a
N
co
M
d
_
�a
_
=a
L
O
0
r
0
r
d
L-
0
0
N
to
M
le
m
R
_
�a
L
O
L
Q
r
a)
E
t
�a
a
d
a�
L
0
co
0
v
N
0
N
a)
E
t
U
M
Q
Packet Pg. 330
8.13.d
Finance Director
10
NR-44
Administrative
Services
Deputy Administrative Services
1.0
NR-41
Administrative
Director
Services
Public Works Director
1.0
NR-45
Public Works
Executive Assistant
1.0
NE-33
Public Works
Total FTE count for positions that
7.0
are 33.3%-66.6% General Fund (001)
funded
0%-33.3%
General Fund
001 funded
Accountant
1.0
NE-36 -
Administrative
NE-37
Services
Accounting Specialist
2.0
NE-30 -
Administrative
NE-31
Services
Information Services Manager
1.0
NR-41
Administrative
Services
Information Systems Specialist
1.0
NE-35 -
Administrative
N E-36
Services
GIS Analyst
1.0
NE-35 -
Administrative
NE-36
Services
Systems Support Technician
2.0
NE-32
Administrative
Services
Web Systems Analyst
1.0
NE-33
Administrative
Services
Cemetery Sexton
1.0
L
Parks & Recreation
Parks Maintenance Worker
2.0
1 - J
Parks & Recreation
City Engineer
1.0
NR-43
Public Works
Administrative Assistant
1.0
NE-29 -
Public Works
N E-30
Capital Projects Manager
5.0
NR-36
Public Works
Transportation Engineer
1.0
NR-39
Public Works
Senior Construction Inspector
1.0
NE-35
Public Works
Senior Utilities Engineer
1.0
NR-41
Public Works
Stormwater Engineer
1.0
NR-38
Public Works
Stormwater Technician
1.0
NE-32 -
Public Works
N E-33
Associate Engineer
1.0
NR-33
Public Works
Engineering Program Manager II
1.0
NR-38
Public Works
Engineering Technician
4.0
NE-30 -
Public Works
N E-34
Permit Coordinator
0.5
NE-29 -
Public Works
N E-31
Public Works Record Administrator
1.0
New, No
Public Works
Grade
available
Asset/Project Management Specialist
1.0
NR-36
Public Works
Utility Locator
1.0
New, No
Public Works
Grade
available
a
Packet Pg. 331
8.13.d
Sewer Maintenance/GIS Worker
1.0
New, No
Grade
available
Public Works
Environmental Program Specialist
1.0
NR-33
Public Works
Street/Storm Manager
1.0
NR-40
Public Works
Stormwater Maintenance Lead Worker
1.0
N
Public Works
Senior Storm GIS
Technician/Maintenance Worker
1.0
K
Public Works
Storm Maintenance Worker
6.0
I - J
Public Works
Street Maintenance Lead Worker
1.0
N
Public Works
Traffic Control Technician
1.0
L
Public Works
Senior Street Maintenance Worker-
Cement Finisher
2.0
K
Public Works
Street/Storm Maintenance Worker
5.0
I - J
Public Works
Water/Sewer Manager
1.0
NR-40
Public Works
Water Maintenance Lead Worker
1.0
N
Public Works
Water Maintenance Worker
5.0
1 - J
Public Works
Water Meter Reader
2.0
E - F
Public Works
Water Quality Control Technician
1.0
L
Public Works
Sewer Maintenance Lead Worker
1.0
N
Public Works
Sewer Maintenance Worker
6.0
1 - K
Public Works
WWTP Manager
1.0
NR-41
Public Works
Office Coordinator
1.0
NE-30
Public Works
WWTP Pre -Treatment Technician
1.0
K
Public Works
WWTP Water Quality Analyst
1.0
N
Public Works
WWTP Instrument Technician/Plant
Electrician
1.0
L - N
Public Works
WWTP Plant Supervisor
1.0
NR-37
Public Works
WWTP Operator
11.0
J-N
Public Works
WWTP Maintenance Mechanic
2.0
J -N
Public Works
Fleet Manager
1.0
NR-37
Public Works
Fleet Mechanic
3.0
K - M
Public Works
Total FTE count for positions that
are 0%-33.3% General Fund (001)
funded
93.5
Total All City FTE Count
284.9
a
r
a�
E
t
�a
a
N
M
d
_
�a
_
=a
L
O
0
r
0
r
L
L
0
0
N
to
M
le
m
R
_
�a
L
0
L
a
r
a�
E
t
�a
r
a
d
L
0
t�
co
0
v
N
O
N
�.i
_
N
E
L
0
M
r.+
r.+
a
Packet Pg. 332
8.13.d
ATTACHMENT B
Department
Title
Pay Grade
# of FTEs
approved
Police
Social Worker
H-16
1.0
Parks
Facility Attendant
H-06
0.5
Gymnastics Assistant
H-07
0.6
Daycamp Assistant
H-07
1.0
Front Desk Receptionist
H-08
2.0
Ranger Naturalist
H-09
1.2
Gymnastics Instructor
H-10
0.5
Information Services
Audio Visual Assistant
H-13
1.0
Engineering
Engineering Intern
H-09
1.0
Human Resources
HR Intern Temporary
H-09
0.5
Public Works
Seasonal Street Department Laborer
H-08
3.0
Municipal Court
Pro Tem Jude
H-21
.5
General/Non-specified
Temporary Office Worker
H-07
0
Intern
H-09
0
Temporary Project Specialist
H-16
0
12.8
a
Packet Pg. 333
8.14
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 09/24/2024
Resolution Expressing City Council's Intention for 2026 Property Tax Levy
Staff Lead: City Council
Department: City Council
Preparer: Beckie Peterson
Background/History
June 11, 2024 - Council passed Resolution 1549, expressing the intent to pursue the benefits of receiving
fire and emergency medical services from the South Snohomish County Regional Fire Authority via
annexation.
August 16, 2024 - Council discussion during the Budget Retreat regarding the General Property Tax Levy
for 2026 if Edmonds joins the RFA via Annexation.
September 10, 2024 - Edmonds City Council Public Hearing on Future Property Tax Levy Implications of
an RFA Annexation. Council discussion followed. Minutes pending, video is available on city website.
September 17, 2024 - Council approved 6-1 to direct the city attorney to draft a resolution stating that
the city council intended to levy the maximum allowable levy amount for collection in 2026. Minutes
pending, video is available on city website.
Recommendation
Adopt the resolution expressing Edmonds City Council's intention to collect the maximum allowable
property tax levy in 2026.
Narrative
This Council decision is relevant to the future consideration of RFA Annexation, both for future Council
decisions and Edmonds voter decisions. It is also relevant to the development of the city's biennial
budget, which includes 2025 and 2026.
Attachments:
2024-09-18 resolution re 2026 levy
Packet Pg. 334
8.14.a
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, EXPRESSING THE CITY COUNCIL'S INTENTION TO
COLLECT THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE PROPERTY TAX LEVY IN 2026.
WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds is experiencing a budget crisis; and
WHEREAS, it will likely take several years for the city to restore its fund balances to the reserve
levels that the city has established by policy; and
WHEREAS, the city council is considering placing a ballot measure before the city's voters in 2025
that would, if passed, annex the City of Edmonds into the South County Fire RFA; and
WHEREAS, the administration is in the process of finalizing its proposed budget for the 2025-2026
biennium; and
WHEREAS, the administration's budget preparation work would benefit from understanding the
city council's intentions with regard to the levy of property taxes for collection in 2026; and
WHEREAS, the Council addressed this topic during the budget retreat held on August, 16, 2024;
and
WHEREAS, a public hearing on Future Property Tax Levy Implications of an RFA Annexation
was held on September 10, 2024 with council deliberation; and
WHEREAS, on September 17, 2024 by a vote of 6-1, Council directed the city attorney to draft a
resolution stating that the city council intended to levy the maximum allowable levy amount for
collection in 2026; and
WHEREAS, the city council seeks to be as transparent as possible with the city's voters about the
city's likely future financial needs, particularly with the possibility of those voters being asked to
approve an annexation into the RFA; and
WHEREAS, even if one assumes annexation into the RFA, the city would not be able to sustainably
support its traditional levels of service by reducing its property tax levy; now therefore,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, HEREBY
RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The Edmonds City Council intends to levy the maximum allowable property tax levy for
collection in 2026, even if it decides to place RFA annexation on the ballot, and even if the voters
approve such annexation in 2025.
RESOLVED this day of September, 2024.
CITY OF EDMONDS
Packet Pg. 335
8.14.a
MAYOR, MIKE ROSEN
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK:
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
RESOLUTION NO.
Packet Pg. 336
8.15
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 09/24/2024
An ordinance of the City of Edmonds granting to New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC, a Delaware limited
liability company, successor in interest to AT&T Wireless Services of Washington, LLC, an Oregon limited
liability company, d/b/a AT&T Wireless, its successors and assigns, a nonexclusive master permit
agreement to install, operate, and maintain macro wireless telecommunications facilities within a
certain designated area of right-of-way, establishing an effective date.
Staff Lead: Jeff Taraday
Department: Engineering
Preparer: Rob English
Background/History
On September 17, 2024, this item was presented to the Parks and Public Works Committee and it was
forwarded to the consent agenda for approval.
Staff Recommendation
Approve Ordinance.
Narrative
The proposed franchise ordinance would consolidate two existing macro franchises held by New
Cingular Wireless into one. Existing ordinance 3441 granted to AT&T Wireless, predecessor to New
Cingular Wireless, a twenty-year wireless telecommunications franchise to place macro facilities at two
locations: 9227 Olympic View Drive and at 9114 207th Place. Existing ordinance 3534 granted to New
Cingular Wireless a twenty-year wireless telecommunications franchise to place macro facilities at 402
Main Street. The prior had been extended. The latter is set to expire next year.
The proposed single franchise would combine and replace 3441 and 3534 and continue to limit the
locations where New Cingular can place its facilities to those three locations above, identified in the
Exhibit A. Further locations would require a franchise amendment.
Under the proposed single franchise, the city will charge a franchise fee for the structures in the ROW at
9227 Olympic View Drive and at 9114 207th Place in the amount of $4,179.00 annually for each location.
Annual increases track CPI. The city will not charge for the location at 402 Main street because it does
not fall within the limited circumstances for which the state will allow cities to charge a franchise fee.
The facilities existing under 3441 qualify; however, New Cingular raised with the city that state law had
been amended and the height of the pole does not fall within the limited circumstances authorizing a
franchise fee. While the city will continue to charge for ground equipment, the city will no longer charge
for the pole, resulting in a fee that has been halved. However, at any time during the term the city can
obtain an appraisal and increase the franchise fee consistent with the appraisal; provided that if AT&T
does not agree to the increase, the parties will follow the arbitration procedures per state law.
Packet Pg. 337
8.15
In addition to franchise fee compensation, AT&T will reimburse the city for its costs incurred in
negotiating and processing this franchise, including paying a franchise application fee and costs of notice
and publication according to an itemized bill.
The City can require relocation at the cost of New Cingular consistent with the terms of the franchise
and state law. New Cingular will indemnify the city and obtain insurance consistent with WCIA
recommendations. New Cingular must remove its facilities upon expiration or termination within 90
days of receiving notice from the Public Works Director. If the facility operations are discontinued during
the term, then those shall be removed within 90 days consistent with city code.
Alternative
Continue to engage in franchise negotiations.
Attachments:
Attachment 1 - Ordinance
Attachment 2 - Exhibit A
Packet Pg. 338
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, GRANTING TO NEW
CINGULAR WIRELESS PCS, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY,
SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST TO AT&T WIRELESS SERVICES OF WASHINGTON, LLC, AN
OREGON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, D/B/AAT&T WIRELESS, A NON-EXCLUSIVE
MASTER PERMIT AGREEMENT TO INSTALL, OPERATE, AND MAINTAIN MACRO
WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES WITHIN A CERTAIN DESIGNATED
AREA OF PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON,
PRESCRIBING CERTAIN RIGHTS, DUTIES, TERMS, AND CONDITIONS WITH RESPECT
THERETO, ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC, successor in interest to AT&T Wireless
Services of Washington, LLC, an Oregon limited liability company, d/b/a AT&T Wireless with its
principal offices at 1025 Lenox Park Boulevard NE, Atlanta, GA 30319 ("Permittee") has an
existing franchise with the City of Edmonds that is Ordinance 3441, called therein a Master Use
Agreement, authorizing the installation of certain macro facilities in the city's right of way at 9227
Olympic View Drive and 9114 207th Place, as extended under ordinances 4322 and 4348;
WHEREAS, Permittee also has an existing franchise with the City of Edmonds that is
Ordinance 3534, called therein a Master Use Agreement, authorizing the installation of certain
macro facilities in the city's right of way at 402 Main Street, expiring in 2025;
WHEREAS, Permittee has requested a renewal of its franchises and that they be combined
into one franchise;
WHEREAS, the City is aware of no breach of any of Permittee's obligations under any of
the above described franchises, and Permittee here represents that it has complied with all terms
of each of the above described franchises to date and with applicable law;
WHEREAS, the City Council has the authority under RCW 35A.47.040, RCW 35.99.020
and Chapter 20.50 of the Edmonds Community Development Code to grant, issue, or deny Master
Permit Agreements for the use of city right-of-way; and
WHEREAS, the City is willing to grant the rights requested subject to certain terms and
conditions.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Definitions. For the purposes of this franchise, the following terms, phrases, words,
and abbreviations shall have the meanings ascribed to them below. When not inconsistent with
Packet Pg. 339
8.15.a
the context, words used in the present tense include the future tense, words in the plural number
include the singular number, and words in the singular number include the plural number.
a. "Affiliate" means an entity which owns or controls, is owned or controlled
by, or is under common ownership with the Permittee.
b. "City" means the City of Edmonds, Washington.
C. "ECDC" means Edmonds Community and Development Code.
d. "Facility" or "Facilities" shall mean only the Permittee's owned, operated,
or controlled Macro Facilities as defined in the Edmonds Community and Development
Code (ECDC) 20.50, incorporated herewith, and attendant structures and shall include all
cables, wires, conduit„ ducts, pedestals, and any associated converter, equipment, or other
facilities within the city's Right of Way, designed and constructed for the purpose of
providing Telecommunications Service.
e. "FCC" means the Federal Communications Commission, or any successor
governmental entity thereto.
f. "Master Permit Agreement" or "Master Permit" or "Agreement" shall mean
this franchise agreement, granted by the City pursuant to ECDC 20.50.020(C) and Chapter
35.99 RCW, through this Ordinance, or a subsequently adopted ordinance.
g. "Permittee" means New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC, a Delaware limited
liability company, or the lawful predecessor, successor, transferee, or assignee thereof.
h. "Person" is to be interpreted in its broadest sense and includes individuals,
corporations, companies, associations, joint stock companies or associations, firms,
partnerships, limited liability companies, and any other entity or organization.
i. "Public Ways" or "Rights -of -Way" or "Right -of -Way" means land
acquired or dedicated for public roads and streets in the Service Area, but does not include:
(a) Land dedicated for roads, streets, and highways not opened and not
improved for motor vehicle use by the public;
(b) Structures, including poles and conduits, located within the right-of-
way;
(c) Federally granted trust lands or forest board trust lands;
(d) Lands owned or managed by the state parks and recreation
commission; or
(e) Federally granted railroad rights -of -way acquired under 43 U.S.C. Sec.
912 and related provisions of federal law that are not open for motor
vehicle use; and
(f) buildings or other City -owned physical facilities.
2
Packet Pg. 340
8.15.a
Public utility easements and utility strips are expressly excluded to the extent they are not
part of the Right -of -Way. If Permittee desires to locate within any easement owned by
the city that is not part of the Right -of -Way, then Permittee must obtain separate
authorization to do so which may be granted or denied by the city in its sole discretion.
j. "Reasonable" or "reasonably" means an action or decision for which a reason or
basis can be stated, such reason or basis arising from the facts and circumstances of the
particular situation presented. Reasonable or reasonably is contrasted with arbitrary, i.e.,
unreasoning action, without consideration and in disregard of facts and circumstances.
Where there is room for two opinions, a decision is reasonable even though one may
believe an erroneous conclusion has been reached.
k. . "Right -of -Way Construction Permit" or "Permit" shall mean that permit
required of Permittee by the City in order to perform work at a particular location in the
Right -of -Way, pursuant to ECDC Chapter 18.60.
1. "Service Area" means the present municipal boundaries of the City, and
shall include any additions thereto by annexation or other legal means.
in. "Telecommunications Service" means the transmission of information by
wire, radio, optical cable, electromagnetic, or other similar means for hire, sale, or resale
to the general public. "Information" means knowledge or intelligence represented by any
form of writing, signs, signals, pictures, sounds, or any other symbols.
Telecommunications Service shall not include the over -the -air transmission of broadcast
television or broadcast radio signals, nor the provision of cable service as defined in RCW
35.99.010 nor the provision of cable television, open video, or similar services, as defined
in the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, for which a separate permit and franchise
would be required.
Section 2. Terms, Conditions, and Provisions of ECDC Chapters 20.50 and 18.60 Incorporated by
Reference. The terms, conditions, and provisions of Chapter 20.50 ECDC, and Title 18 ECDC
existing at the time of execution of this Master Permit, or as may thereafter be amended, are
incorporated herein by reference. All rights granted hereunder are subject to the terms, conditions,
and requirements of Chapter 20.50 ECDC and Title 18 ECDC.
Section 3. Authority Granted. The City hereby grants to the Permittee, its heirs, successors, legal
representatives, and assigns, subject to the requirements of Chapters 20.50 ECDC and Title 18
ECDC and the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth, the right, privilege, and authority to
construct, operate, maintain, and replace Permittee's Facilities in the Rights -of -Way for the
purpose of providing Telecommunications Service. However, the Permittee is only authorized to
place its Facilities in the Right -of -Way described in Exhibit A hereto.
Section 4. Grant Limited to Occupation of Public Ways. The authority granted herein is a
limited authorization to occupy and use the Public Ways of the City. No authority is granted to
Packet Pg. 341
8.15.a
occupy or use any City owned or leased properties. Nothing contained herein shall be construed
to grant or convey any right, title, or interest in the Public Ways of the City to the Permittee, nor
shall anything contained herein constitute a warranty of title. The authority granted herein
extends only to those portions of the Public Ways to which the City has the right to grant access
and shall be deemed to grant no more than those rights which the city may have the undisputed
right and power to give.
Section 5. Wireless Communication Facility Permits and Right -of -Way_ Construction Permits
Required.
Prior to site -specific location and installation of any portion of its Facilities within a Public Way,
the Permittee shall apply for and obtain both a wireless communication facility permit pursuant to
ECDC 20.50 and a Right -of -Way Construction Permit pursuant to ECDC 20.50.020(D) and ECDC
Chapter 18.60. The Public Works Director or designee shall review wireless communication
facility permit applications according to the procedure set forth in ECDC 20.50. In addition to any
criteria set forth in ECDC Chapter 18.60, the Public Works Director or designee shall apply the
following criteria in the issuance or denial of a Right -of -Way Construction Permit application:
Whether the Permittee has received all requisite licenses, certificates, and
authorizations from applicable federal, state, and local agencies with
jurisdiction over the activities proposed by the Permittee;
2. Whether there is sufficient capacity in the Public Ways to accommodate the
Permittee's proposed Facilities;
3. The capacity of the Public Ways to accommodate additional utility, cable,
and facilities if the construction permit is granted;
4. The damage or disruption, if any, of public or private facilities, utilities,
improvements, service, travel or landscaping if the construction permit is
granted;
5. The public interest in minimizing the cost and disruption of construction
within the Public Ways; and
6. If any criteria lead the Public Works Director to deny Permittee a
construction permit, then City will consider any alternate routes and/or
locations that may be proposed by Permittee.
Except as otherwise provided in this Master Permit Agreement, no work shall commence within
any Public Way without said Right -of -Way Construction Permit. The City may adopt procedures
combining the applications and resulting permits for wireless communication facility and Right -
of -Way Construction Permits.
Section 6. Term of Master Permit; Standards for Renewal.
Packet Pg. 342
8.15.a
A. Term. The term of this Master Permit shall be for a period of five (5) years from
the date of acceptance as set forth in Section 41 (Acceptance and Grant Fee), unless sooner
terminated as provided herein.
B. Renewal of Master Permit --Procedure. If Permittee desires to renew its Master
Permit for an additional term it shall, not less than 180 days before expiration of the current
Master Permit, file an application with the City for renewal which shall include the following:
1. The information required pursuant to ECDC 20.50.020(C)
2. Any proposed changes to the current Master Permit submitted electronically in
Word format, proposed changes in track changes. Either party may propose
changes;
3. Any information required pursuant to the current Master Permit;
4. Such other information as the Public Works Director, in his/her discretion, shall
deem appropriate; and
5. An application fee for recovery of City staff costs which may be set by the City
Council by resolution, and an additional amount for recovery of costs for
attorneys, consultants, and City Attorney's Office review.
C. Renewal of Master Permit -Standards. The city council shall decide whether to renew,
renew with conditions, require a new master permit, or deny the application, all in accordance
with the terms and procedures of ECDC 20.50.020(C).
D. Renewal of Master Permit --Obligation to Cure. No Master Permit shall be renewed
until any ongoing violations or defaults in the Permittee's performance under the Master Permit,
the requirements of Chapter 20.50 ECDC, the Edmonds Code, as applicable, and any other
lawful applicable regulations with respect to use and management of the Public Ways, other
ways, and City property, have been cured, or a plan detailing the corrective action to be taken by
the Permittee has been approved by the City.
Section 7. Non -Exclusive Grant. This Master Permit shall not in any manner prevent the City
from entering into other similar agreements or granting other or further Master Permit Agreements,
franchises, Right -of -Way permits in, under, on, across, over, through, along or below any of said
Public Ways of the City, nor from exercising such other powers and authorities granted to the City
by law. Permittee shall construct, install, maintain, and continuously operate its Facilities to
prevent interference with the other facilities in the Public Ways and the operation thereof. Further,
this Master Permit shall in no way prevent or prohibit the City from using any of its Public Ways
as authorized by law or not prohibited by law or affect its jurisdiction over them or any part of
them, and the City shall retain power to make all necessary changes, relocations, repairs,
maintenance, establishment, improvement, dedication of the same as the City may deem fit,
5
Packet Pg. 343
8.15.a
including the dedication, establishment, maintenance, and improvement of all new Public Ways,
all in compliance with this Master Permit and applicable law.
Section 8. Relocation of Facilities.
A. Where relocation of Facilities is required by the City, City and Permittee shall comply
with RCW § 35.99.060(2). If RCW 35.99.060(2) is amended after the date of this Master Permit,
then the parties' obligations are likewise amended.
B. Permittee acknowledges that its Facilities may need to be relocated during the term of
this Master Permit Agreement. Permittee agrees and covenants, at its sole cost and expense, to
protect, support, temporarily disconnect, relocate, or remove from any Public Way any portion of
its Facilities when so required by the Public Works Director by reason of traffic conditions, public
safety, dedications of new Public Ways and the establishment and improvement thereof, widening
and improvement of existing Public Ways, street vacations, highway construction, change or
establishment of street grade, or the construction of any public improvement or structure by any
governmental agency acting in a governmental capacity; provided that the Permittee shall in all
cases have the privilege to temporarily relocate, in the authorized portion of the same or similar
Public Way upon approval by the Public Works Director, any Facility required to be temporarily
disconnected or removed.
C. Upon the reasonable request of, and with at least thirty (30) days' written notice from
the Public Works Director, and in order to facilitate the design of City street and right-of-way
improvements, the Permittee agrees to, at its sole cost and expense, locate, and if reasonably
determined necessary by the City, to excavate and expose portions of its Facilities for inspection
so that the location of same may be taken into account in the improvement design. The decision to
require relocation of said Facilities in order to accommodate the City's improvements shall be
made by the Public Works Director upon review of the location and construction of the Permittee's
Facilities.
D. If the Public Works Director determines that the project necessitates the relocation of
the Permittee's then existing Facilities, the following procedures shall apply:
1. Within a reasonable time, which shall be no less than thirty (30) days prior to the
commencement of such improvement project, the City shall provide the Permittee
with written notice requiring such relocation. Provided, however, that in the event
of an emergency posing a threat to public safety, health or welfare, or in the event
of an emergency beyond the control of the City and which will result in severe
financial consequences to the City, the City shall give the Permittee written notice
as soon as practicable; and
2. The City shall provide the Permittee with copies of information for such
improvement project and a proposed location for the Permittee's Facilities so that
the Permittee may relocate its Facilities in other Public Ways in order to
accommodate such improvement project. City will strive to afford a location from
0
Packet Pg. 344
8.15.a
which Permittee can provide substantially similar service to that provided from the
original location whenever practicable.
3. The Permittee shall complete relocation of its Facilities at no charge or expense to
the City so as to accommodate the improvement project at least 10 days prior to
commencement of the project. In the event of an emergency as described herein,
the Permittee shall relocate is Facilities within the time period specified by the
Public Works Director.
E. The Permittee may, after receipt of written notice requesting a relocation of its Facilities,
submit to the City written alternatives to such relocation. The City shall evaluate such alternatives
and advise the Permittee in writing if one or more of the alternatives are suitable to accommodate
the work, which would otherwise necessitate relocation of the Facilities. If so requested by the
City, the Permittee shall submit additional information to assist the City in making such
evaluation. The City shall give each alternative proposed by the Permittee full and fair
consideration, within a reasonable time, so as to allow for the relocation work to be performed in
a timely manner. In the event the City ultimately determines that there is no other reasonable
alternative, the Permittee shall relocate its Facilities as otherwise provided in this Section.
F. The provisions of this Section shall in no manner preclude or restrict the Permittee from
making any arrangements it may deem appropriate when responding to a request for relocation of
its Facilities by any person or entity other than the City, where the facilities to be constructed by
said person or entity are not or will not become City -owned, operated or maintained facilities;
provided, that such arrangements do not unduly delay a construction project.
G. Permittee acknowledges and agrees that the placement of its Facilities on third party -
owned poles does not convey an ownership interest in such poles. Permittee acknowledges and
agrees that to the extent Permittee's Facilities are on poles owned by third parties, the City shall
not be responsible for any costs associated with requests arising out of a relocation. A relocation
includes movement of Facilities arising out of pole removal, replacement or upgrade. Permittee is
not permitted to purchase any utility owned pole in order to avoid relocation or costs associated
with relocation unless specifically authorized by the City.
H. The Permittee will indemnify, hold harmless, and pay the costs of defending the City,
against any and all claims, suits, actions, damages, or liabilities for delays on City construction
projects caused by or arising out of the failure of the Permittee to relocate its Facilities in a timely
manner; provided, that the Permittee shall not be responsible for damages due to delays caused by
the City or circumstances beyond the reasonable control of the Permittee.
I. The cost and expenses associated with relocation of the Permittee's Facilities shall be the
responsibility of the Permittee unless the Permittee had paid for the relocation cost of the same
Facilities at the request of the City within the past five years. Notwithstanding any other provision
of this Master Permit, in the event of a conflict between this Master Permit and the provisions of
applicable state law, the provisions of the applicable state law shall control. In the event of an
unforeseen emergency that creates a threat to the public safety, health, or welfare, the City may
7
Packet Pg. 345
8.15.a
require the Permittee to relocate its Facilities at Permittee's own expense, any other portion of this
Section notwithstanding.
J. If Permittee fails, neglects, or refuses to remove or relocate its Facilities as directed by
the City as described in this Section 8, then the City may, but shall have no obligation, perform
such work or cause it to be done, and the City's costs shall be paid by Permittee pursuant to Section
14.
Section 9. Undergrounding of Facilities. The parties agree that this Master Permit does not limit
the City's authority under federal law, state law, or local ordinance to require the undergrounding
of utilities, including Permittee's Facilities.
Permittee's Facilities shall be undergrounded; Provided that undergrounding requirements shall
not apply to those elements of Permittee's Facilities that are required to remain above ground in
order to be functional. The City shall not pay any of the cost of undergrounding. Upon an
undergrounding project, Facilities may be required to relocate to an alternative approved support
structure or pole consistent with Chapter 20.50 ECDC and pursuant to the relocation requirements
of this Master Permit (for example, if all utility poles in the area are removed as part of the
undergrounding project.)
Section 10. Work in Public Ways.
A. During any period of relocation, construction, or maintenance, all surface
structures, if any, shall be erected, used, and maintained in such places and positions within said
Public Ways and other public properties so as to interfere as little as possible with the free passage
of vehicular and pedestrian traffic and the free use of adjoining property. The Permittee shall at
all times comply with all applicable safety and traffic control regulations during such period of
construction as required by the specifications and codes, and all other applicable local municipal,
state, and federal codes, rules and regulations.
B. During the progress of the work, the Permittee shall not unnecessarily obstruct the
passage or proper use of the Public Ways, and all work by the Permittee in any area covered by
this Master Permit and as described in this Section shall be performed in accordance with City of
Edmonds Public Works Construction Standards and warranted for a period of two (2) years.
C. The Permittee shall cooperate with the City and all other persons with authority
from the City to occupy and use the Public Ways of the City in coordination of construction
activities and joint trenching projects. By February 1st of each calendar year, the Permittee shall
provide the City with a schedule of its proposed construction activities for that calendar year in,
around, or that may affect the Public Ways of the City. The Permittee shall also meet with the
City and other Permittees, franchisees, permittees, and users of the Public Ways of the City
annually, or as determined by the City, to schedule and coordinate construction activities.
D. Consistent with RCW Chapter 35.99, the Permittee may, on an annual basis, file
notice with the City Clerk and the City Engineer of its desire to receive notices related to public
Packet Pg. 346
8.15.a
improvement projects within the Public Ways of the City. In the event that the Permittee is mailed
such a notice and fails to coordinate installation or construction of its Facilities with the public
improvement project, the City Engineer may deny the Permittee's construction permit application
for those portions of any of the Permittee's construction projects which seek to disrupt the surface
of any said street for a period of up to five years, as reasonably determined by the City Engineer
for the purpose of protecting the City's investment in said public improvement projects. In the
alternative, the City Engineer may require the Permittee to fully restore the surface and sub -surface
areas of such street to the condition that it was in immediately after completion of the public
improvement project.
Section 11. Restoration after Construction. The Permittee shall, after installation, construction,
relocation, maintenance, removal, or repair of its Facilities within the Public Ways, restore the
surface of said Public Ways and any other City -owned property, including support structures, that
may be disturbed by the work, to at least the same condition the Public Way or property was in
immediately prior to any such installation, construction, relocation, maintenance, removal, or
repair. The Public Works Department shall have final approval of the condition of such Public
Ways and City -owned property after restoration, all in accordance with the Edmonds Municipal
Code and Public Works Construction standards. All survey monuments which are to be disturbed
or displaced by such work shall be referenced and restored, as per WAC 332-120, as the same now
exists or may hereafter be amended, and all pertinent federal, state and local standards and
specifications. The Permittee agrees to promptly complete all restoration work and to promptly
repair any damage caused by such work to the Public Ways or other affected area at its sole cost
and expense according to the time and terms specified in the Right -of -Way Construction Permit
issued by the City all in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Edmonds Municipal
Code, as the same now exists or as it may hereafter be amended or superseded. All work and
restoration by the Permittee pursuant to this Section shall be performed in accord with City of
Edmonds Public Works Construction standards and warranted for a period of two (2) years.
Section 12. Emergency Work — Permit Waiver. In the event of any emergency in which any of
the Permittee's Facilities located in, above, or under any Public Way break, are damaged, or if the
Permittee's construction area is otherwise in such a condition as to immediately endanger the
property, life, health, or safety of any individual, the Permittee shall immediately take the proper
emergency measures to repair its Facilities, to cure or remedy the dangerous conditions for the
protection of property, life, health, or safety of individuals without first applying for and obtaining
a Right -of -Way Construction Permit as required by this Master Permit. However, this shall not
relieve the Permittee from the requirement of notifying the City of the emergency work and
obtaining any permits necessary for this purpose as promptly as reasonably possible after the
emergency work. The Permittee shall notify the City Engineering Division by email immediately
upon learning of the emergency and shall apply for all required permits not later than the second
succeeding day during which the Edmonds City Hall is open for business.
Section 13. Dangerous Conditions, Authority for City to Abate. In the event of any emergency in
which any of Permittee's Facilities breaks, falls, becomes damaged, or if Permittee's Facilities is
otherwise in such a condition as to immediately endanger the property, life, health or safety of any
person, entity or the City, or whenever construction, installation, or excavation of the Facilities
E
Packet Pg. 347
8.15.a
authorized by this Master Permit has caused or contributed to a condition that appears to
substantially impair the lateral support of the adjoining Public Way, street, or public place, or
endangers the public, street utilities, or City -owned property, the City Engineer may require the
Permittee, at the Permittee's own expense, to take action to protect the public, adjacent public
places, City -owned property, streets, utilities, and Public Ways. Such action may include
compliance within a reasonably prescribed time. What will be considered reasonable time will be
determined by the City based on the nature of the dangerous condition.
In the event that the Permittee fails or refuses to promptly take the actions directed by the City, or
fails to fully comply with such directions, or if emergency conditions exist which require
immediate action, the City may enter upon the property and take such actions as are necessary to
protect the public, the adjacent streets, utilities, Public Ways, to maintain the lateral support
thereof, or actions regarded as necessary safety precautions; and the Permittee shall be liable to
the City for the reasonable costs thereof after receipt of an itemized bill.
Section 14. Recovery of Costs. Permittee shall be subject to all permit fees and any and all cost
recovery ordinances associated with activities undertaken through the authority granted in this
Master Permit or under the laws of the City. Permit fees shall be paid before issuance. Where the
City incurs costs and expenses for which a fee is not established, Permittee shall reimburse the
City the actual, administrative expenses incurred by the City that are directly related to receiving
and approving a permit, license, and this Master Permit, to inspecting plans and construction, to
supervision of activities undertaken through the authority granted in this Master Permit or any
ordinances relating to the subject for which a permit fee is not established, or to the preparation of
a detailed statement pursuant to chapter 43.21C RCW. Permittee shall further reimburse the City
for Permittee's proportionate share of all actual, identified expenses incurred by the City in
planning, constructing, installing, repairing or altering any City facility as a result of the
construction or the presence in the Right of Way of the Permittee's Facilities. Fees for which
Permittee is responsible under this Section may include reimbursement for time associated with
attorneys, consultants, City Staff, and City Attorney's Office review.
In addition to the above, the Permittee shall promptly reimburse the City for any and all actual
costs the City incurs in response to any emergency involving the Permittee's Facilities.
The time of City employees shall be charged at their respective rate of salary, including overtime
if applicable plus benefits and reasonable overhead. Any other costs will be billed proportionately
on an actual cost basis. All billings will be itemized as to specifically identify the costs and
expenses for each project for which the City claims reimbursement. A charge for the actual costs
incurred in preparing the billing may also be included in said billing. Unless otherwise provided
for in this Master Permit or ordinance of the city, payment shall be made within thirty (30) calendar
days of the date of receiving an itemized bill.
Any payment received after the due date shall bear interest until paid at the rate of twelve percent
(12%) per annum.
Section 15. Fees for Use of Public Wad
10
Packet Pg. 348
8.15.a
A. Prohibition of Franchise Fee. Pursuant to RCW 35.21.860, the City is precluded from
imposing a fee on a "telephone business" or a "service provider" for use of the right-of-way, except
for administrative expenses or any applicable tax authorized by law, and except a site specific charge
pursuant to agreement between the City and a service provider of personal wireless services as
described in RCW 35.21.860 and further addressed below. If RCW 35.21.860 is amended during the
term of this Master Permit, then the City reserves its right to charge a fee to the full extent permitted
by any such amendment, and if the parties are not able to agree upon the amount of such a fee within
ninety (90) days of the effective date of any such amendment, then this Master Permit shall terminate.
The City also reserves its right to require that the Permittee obtain a separate agreement for any change
in use, which agreement may include provisions intended to regulate the Permittee's operations, as
allowed under applicable law.
B. Permittee Obligated to Pay Taxes. Nothing in this Master Permit is intended to
alter, amend, or modify the taxes and fees that may lawfully be assessed on Permittee's business
activities under this Master Permit pursuant to applicable law. This Master Permit does not limit
the City's power of taxation. Permittee agrees that all of its activities in the City of Edmonds
authorized by this Master Permit are specifically taxable as a telephone business under Edmonds
Municipal Code Chapter 3, including EMC 3.20.050, and are taxable at the rate specified therein
now in effect or as amended. Permittee is subject to payment of any applicable local utility tax and
any other tax of whatever kind applicable to Permittee's operations.
C. Site Specific Charges. The City may impose a charge for use of the Right -of -Way
in the circumstances outlined in RCW 35.21.860(1)(e). The Parties agree on the following site
specific charges as authorized under RCW 35.21.860(1)(e):
a. For its Facilities at 9227 Olympic View Drive, the parties agree to the following
initial annual charge: ($4,179.) FOUR THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED SEVENTY-
NINE DOLLARS.
b. For its Facilities at 9114 207t' Place, the parties agree to the following initial annual
charge: ($4,179.) FOUR THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED SEVENTY-NINE
DOLLARS.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the parties acknowledge that: (i) the City entered
into this Master Permit without having obtained an appraisal; (ii) the City may obtain
an appraisal(s) at any time prior to expiration of the Master Permit; and (iii) that the
City may increase the annual charge for each location based upon the appraisal(s),
PROVIDED THAT (a) any increase in the annual charge shall not be retroactive and
shall take effect upon the first day of the first month after any increased charge is
billed, with any mid -calendar year increase to be prorated; and (b) if Permittee does
not agree with the increased annual charge as determined by the appraisal, and if the
parties cannot reach agreement on the amount of the increased annual charge within
60 days after it would otherwise take effect, then Permittee may submit the amount
of the annual charge as determined by the appraisal to binding arbitration according
11
Packet Pg. 349
8.15.a
to the method and process of RCW 35.21.860. Costs shall be borne by the parties as
stated in RCW 35.21.860.
The compensation provided for in this Subsection C shall be adjusted annually, each year of the
term, by an increase of 100% of CPI. If the Master Permit is under consideration for renewal as
contemplated per Section 6 above, then either will occur at the City's election: (a) the parties will
meet to revisit the provisions of this Section 15 to establish levels of compensation and annual
adjustments thereto, and if the parties cannot agree then compensation will be determined
according to RCW 35.21.860, or (b) the compensation will be adjusted by an increase of five
percent (5%) over what was due the previous year, and it shall be adjusted annually, each year of
the renewed term, by an increase of five percent (5%).
D. Annual Compensation Due Date. The compensation provided for in Subsection C
is per calendar year. The initial calendar year of compensation due under this Master Permit is a
partial year (i.e., from August 31, 2024 through December 31, 2024), and the compensation due
for said described partial calendar year shall be payable and due within thirty (30) days of the
date this ordinance is passed by council and signed by the City's mayor. Thereafter, Permittee
shall pay annual compensation for each calendar year in full at the beginning of the calendar
year, to be to be received by the City's Finance Director on or prior to the 15th of January. Any
payment received after the due date shall include a late payment charge equal to three percent
(3%) of the annual sum due and shall further bear interest until paid at the rate of twelve percent
(12%) per annum.
E. If Permittee's Facilities are out of service due to a relocation under the provisions
of Section 8 for the convenience of the City, then a credit equal to the prorated value of the time
the Facilities are out of service shall be provided on the subsequent year's compensation.
F. The fees and charges provided for in this Section 15 have been agreed upon
during negotiation between the parties, and Permittee acknowledges and covenants not to bring
suit with respect to the amount of said fees or charges, including late charges, and hereby waives
any and all objections thereto and any and all claims against the City and its elected or appointed
officials and releases the City and its elected or appointed officials from any and all claims
related to the payment of fees and/or charges as provided for in this Section 15 and this Master
Permit generally.
Section 16. Grant Fee.
Permittee shall pay a Grant Fee which is a fee for the actual administrative expenses incurred by
the City that are related to the receiving and approving this Master Permit pursuant to RCW
35.21.860, including the costs associated with the City's legal costs incurred in drafting and
processing this Master Permit. Permittee shall pay all costs of publication of this Master Permit
and any and all notices prior to any public meeting or hearing in connection with this Master
Permit. Permittee shall further pay the franchise application fee if not already paid. Permittee shall
pay the reimbursements pursuant to this Section within thirty (30) days after receipt of an invoice
from the City. No right of way construction permits shall be issued to Permittee until such time as
the City has received payment of this Grant Fee.
12
Packet Pg. 350
8.15.a
Section 17. Manner of Payment; Audit. Permittee shall make all required payments under this
Master Permit, including taxes, in the form, intervals, and manner requested by the City Finance
Director unless provided otherwise elsewhere in this Master Permit, and furnish him/her any
information related to his/her revenue collection functions reasonably requested. Site Specific
Charge payments under Section 15 shall be made by the due date therein stated, and shall be by
mail to the attention of the City Finance Director at the notice address in Section 35 unless
otherwise directed or agreed by the Finance Director. The City Finance Director may call for an
audit pertaining to payments under this Master Permit once per calendar year and not more
frequently unless the Finance Director has a reasonable basis therefore. In case of audit, the City
Finance Director may require Permittee to furnish a verified statement of compliance with
Permittee's obligations or in response to any questions. Said certificate may be required from an
independent, certified public accountant, at Permittee's expense. Permittee agrees, upon request of
the Finance Director, to provide copies of all documents filed with any federal, state, or local
regulatory agency affecting any of Permittee's Facilities or related business operations pursuant to
this Master Permit.
Permittee agrees that it will manage all of its operations in accordance with a policy of keeping
books and records open and accessible to the City. Without limiting its obligations under this
Master Permit, Permittee agrees that it will collect and make available books and records for
inspection and copying by the City in order to ensure the performance of any financial obligations
under this Master Permit and also to ensure the operations of Permittee are that of a telephone
business or service provider pursuant to RCW 35.21.860. Permittee shall be responsible for
collecting the information and producing it. Books and records shall be produced to the City at the
election of the City either electronically or at one of Permittee's physical offices in the State of
Washington in the greater Seattle area or such other location as the parties may agree. Permittee
shall take all steps required, if any, to ensure that it is able to provide the City all information which
must be provided or may be requested under this Master Permit. Nothing in this Master Permit
shall be read to require Permittee to violate 47 USC Section 551. Permittee shall be responsible
for redacting any date that federal law prevents it from providing to the City. Permittee shall have
the right to have its employee and agents physically present at all times that the City, its employees
or agents are conducting any such audit at a physical location. Records shall be kept for at least
six years. Permittee shall maintain records sufficient to show its compliance with the requirements
of this Master Permit and shall produce those records within thirty (30) days of a City request.
Such written notice from the City must identify with specificity the period for which the City
wishes to conduct its audit.
Section 18. Indemnification and Waiver. As consideration for the issuance of this Master Permit,
Permittee shall indemnify the City as follows:
A. Permittee hereby releases, covenants not to bring suit and agrees to indemnify,
defend and hold harmless the City, its elected and appointed officers, officials, employees, agents,
consultants, volunteers, and representatives from any and all claims, costs, judgments, awards or
liability to any Person arising from injury, sickness, or death of any Person or damage to property:
13
Packet Pg. 351
8.15.a
1. For which the negligent acts or omissions of Permittee, its agents, servants,
officers or employees in performing the activities authorized by this Master
Permit are the proximate cause;
2. By virtue of Permittee's exercise of the rights granted herein;
3. By virtue of the City permitting Permittee's use of the City's Public Ways
or other public property;
4. Based on the City's inspection or lack of inspection of work performed by
Permittee, its agents and servants, officers or employees in connection with
work authorized on a Facility, the Public Ways, or property over which the
City has control pursuant to this Master Permit or pursuant to any other
permit or approval issued in connection with this Master Permit;
5. Arising as a result of the negligent acts or omissions of Permittee, its agents,
servants, officers or employees in barricading, instituting trench safety
systems or providing other adequate warnings of any excavation,
construction, or work upon the Public Ways, in any Public Way, or other
public place, or work upon a Facility, in performance of work or services
under this Master Permit; and
6. Based upon radio frequency emissions or radiation emitted from
Permittee's equipment or Facilities, regardless of whether Permittee's
equipment or Facilities complies with applicable federal statutes and/or
FCC regulations related thereto.
B. The provisions of Subsection A of this Section shall apply to claims against the
City by Permittee's own employees and the employees of the Permittee's agents, representatives,
contractors, and subcontractors to which Permittee might otherwise be immune under Title 51
RCW. It is expressly agreed and understood that this assumption of potential liability for actions
brought against the City by the aforementioned employees is with respect to claims against the
City arising by virtue of Permittee's exercise of its rights. To the extent required to provide this
indemnification, Permittee waives its immunity under Title 51 RCW as provided in RCW 4.24.115.
This waiver of immunity under Title 51 RCW has been mutually negotiated by the parties hereto,
and Permittee acknowledges that the City would not enter into this Master Permit without
Permittee's waiver thereof.
C. Inspection or acceptance by the City of any work performed by the Permittee at the
time of completion of construction shall not be grounds for avoidance of any of these covenants
of indemnification. Provided that Permittee has been given prompt written notice by the City of
any such claim, said indemnification obligations shall also extend to claims which are not reduced
to a suit and any claims which may be compromised prior to the culmination of any litigation or
the institution of any litigation. Permittee shall control the defense of any claim under which it is
14
Packet Pg. 352
8.15.a
providing indemnification, and the City has the right to participate in the defense of any such claim,
and has the right to approve any settlement or other compromise of any such claim.
D. If Permittee refuses the tender of defense in any suit or any claim, said tender having
been made pursuant to this Section, and said refusal is subsequently determined by a court having
jurisdiction (or such other tribunal that the parties shall agree to the matter), to have been a
wrongful refusal on the part of the Permittee, then Permittee shall pay all of the City's costs for
defense of the action, including all reasonable expert witness fees, reasonable attorney's fees, the
reasonable costs of the City, and reasonable fees of recovering under this Subsection.
E. The obligations of Permittee under the indemnification provisions of this Section
shall apply regardless of whether liability for damages arising out of bodily injury to Persons or
damages to property were caused or contributed to by the City, its officers, agents, employees or
contractors except to the extent that such claims, actions, damages, costs, expenses, and attorney's
fees were caused by the sole negligence , or any malicious, or criminal act on the part of the City,
its officers, agents, employees or contractors. In the event that a court of competent jurisdiction
determines that a Master Permit is subject to the provisions RCW 4.24.115, the parties agree that
the indemnity provisions hereunder shall be deemed amended to conform to said statute and
liability shall be allocated as provided therein.
F. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Section, Permittee assumes the risk
of damage to its Facilities located in the Public Ways and upon City -owned property occurring as
a result of or in connection with any public works, public improvements, construction, excavation,
grading, filling, or work of any kind on such City property or within the Public Ways by or on
behalf of the City, regardless of whether such activities are conducted by the City, its officers,
agents, employees and contractors, except to the extent any such damage or destruction is caused
by or arises from the sole negligence or any malicious, or criminal act on the part of the City, its
officers, agents, employees or contractors. Permittee releases and waives any and all such claims
against the City, its officers, agents, employees or contractors. In no event shall the City be liable
for any indirect, incidental, special, consequential, exemplary, or punitive damages, including by
way of example and not limitation lost profits, lost revenue, loss of goodwill, or loss of business
opportunity in connection with its performance or failure to perform. Permittee further agrees to
indemnify, hold harmless and defend the City against any claims for damages, including, but not
limited to, business interruption damages and lost profits, brought by or under users of Permittee's
Facilities as the result of any interruption of service due to damage or destruction of Permittee's
Facilities caused by or arising out of activities conducted by the City, its officers, agents,
employees or contractors.
G. These indemnification requirements shall survive the expiration, revocation, or
termination of this Master Permit or any other permits or approvals related thereto.
Section 19. Insurance.
A. Insurance Term
15
Packet Pg. 353
8.15.a
The Permittee shall carry and maintain for the duration of the Master Permit Agreement
and as long as Permittee has Facilities in the Rights -of -Way, insurance against claims for
injuries to persons or damage to property which may arise from or in connection with the
Master Permit Agreement and use of the Rights -of -Way.
B. No Limitation
The Permittee's maintenance of insurance as required by the Master Permit Agreement
shall not be construed to limit the liability of the Permittee to the coverage provided by
such insurance, or otherwise limit the City's recourse to any remedy available at law or in
equity.
C. Scope of Insurance
The Permittee shall maintain insurance of the types and coverage described below:
Commercial General Liabilitv insurance shall be at least as broad as ISO occurrence
form CG 00 01 and shall cover liability arising from premises, operations, stop gap
liability, independent contractors, products -completed operations, personal injury and
advertising injury, and liability assumed under an insured contract. There shall be no
exclusion for liability arising from explosion, collapse or underground property
damage. The City shall be included as an additional insured under the Permittee's
Commercial General Liability insurance policy with respect this Master Permit
Agreement using ISO endorsement CG 20 12 or substitute endorsement providing at
least as broad coverage.
2. Automobile Liabilitv insurance covering all owned, non -owned, hired and leased
vehicles. Coverage shall be at least as broad as Insurance Services Office (ISO) form
CA 00 01.
3. Contractors Pollution Liability insurance shall be in effect throughout the entire
Master Permit Agreement covering losses caused by pollution conditions that arise
from the operations of the Permittee. Contractors Pollution Liability shall cover
bodily injury, property damage, cleanup costs and defense, including costs and
expenses incurred in the investigation, defense, or settlement of claims. Permittee
may self -insure this coverage per Subsection L. below.
4. Workers' Compensation coverage as required by the Industrial Insurance laws of the
State of Washington.
5. Excess or Umbrella Liability insurance shall be excess over and at least as broad in
coverage as the Permittee's Commercial General Liability and Automobile Liability
insurance. The City shall be included as an additional insured on the Permittee's
Excess or Umbrella Liability insurance policy by endorsement as respects this
16
Packet Pg. 354
8.15.a
agreement. Permittee may use any combination of primary and excess insurance to
meet the total limits required.
D. Amounts of Insurance
The Permittee shall maintain the following insurance limits:
1. Commercial General Liability insurance shall be written with limits of $5,000,000
each occurrence, $5,000,000 general aggregate.
2. Automobile Liability insurance with a combined single limit for bodily injury and
property damage of $5,000,000 per accident.
3. Contractors Pollution Liability insurance shall be written in an amount of at least
$2,000,000 per loss, with an annual aggregate of at least $2,000,000.
4. Excess or Umbrella Liability insurance shall be written with limits of $5,000,000 per
occurrence and annual aggregate. The Excess or Umbrella Liability requirement and
limits may be satisfied instead through Permittee's Commercial General Liability and
Automobile Liability insurance, or any combination thereof that achieves the overall
required limits.
E. Other Insurance Provisions
Permittee's Commercial General Liability, Automobile Liability, Excess or Umbrella
Liability, Contractors Pollution Liability insurance policy or policies are to contain, or be
endorsed to contain, that they shall be primary insurance as respect the City. Any
insurance, self-insurance, or self -insured pool coverage maintained by the City shall be
excess of the Permittee's insurance and shall not contribute with it.
F. Acceptability of Insurers
Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best rating of not less than A:
VII.
G. Verification of Coverage
The Permittee shall furnish the City with original certificates and a copy of the
amendatory endorsements annually, including but not necessarily limited to the additional
insured endorsement, evidencing the insurance requirements of the Master Permit
Agreement. Upon request by the City, the Permittee shall furnish certified copies of
endorsements required in this Master Permit Agreement and evidence of all
subcontractors' coverage.
17
Packet Pg. 355
H. Subcontractors
The Permittee shall cause each and every Subcontractor to provide insurance coverage
that complies with all applicable requirements of the Permittee-provided insurance as set
forth herein, except the Permittee shall have sole responsibility for determining the limits
of coverage required to be obtained by Subcontractors. The Permittee shall ensure that
the City is an additional insured on each and every Subcontractor's Commercial General
liability insurance policy using an endorsement as least as broad as ISO CG 20 26.
I. Notice of Cancellation
Permittee shall provide the City with 30 days advanced written notice of any cancellation
and any non -renewal of any required coverage that is not replaced.
J. Failure to Maintain Insurance
Failure on the part of the Permittee to maintain the insurance as required shall constitute a
material breach, upon which the City may, after giving five business days' notice to the
Permittee to correct the breach, terminate the Master Permit Agreement or, at its
discretion, procure or renew such insurance and pay any and all premiums in connection
therewith, with any sums so expended to be repaid to the City on demand.
K. City Full Availability of Permittee Limits
If the Permittee maintains higher insurance limits than the minimums shown above, the
City shall be insured for the full available limits of Commercial General and Excess or
Umbrella liability maintained by the Permittee, irrespective of whether such limits
maintained by the Permittee are greater than those required by this Master Permit
Agreement or whether any certificate of insurance furnished to the City evidences limits
of liability lower than those maintained by the Permittee.
L. Permittee Self Insurance
If the Permittee is self -insured or becomes self -insured during the term of the Master Permit
Agreement, Permittee or its affiliated parent entity shall comply with the following: (i)
provide the City, upon request, a copy of Permittee's or its parent company's most recent
audited financial statements, if such financial statements are not otherwise publicly
available; (ii) Permittee or its parent company is responsible for all payments within the
self -insured retention; and (iii) Permittee assumes all defense and indemnity obligations as
outlined in the indemnification section of this Master Permit Agreement.
Section 20. Maps and Records. After construction is complete, Permittee shall provide the City
with accurate copies of all as -built plans and maps showing the location of all components meeting
the definition of Facilities placed in the Right -of -Way, in a form and content prescribed by the
Public Works Director. These plans shall be provided at no cost to the City, and shall include hard
copies and digital copies in a format specified by the Public Works Director.
18
Packet Pg. 356
8.15.a
Permittee shall further provide at no cost to the City accurate copies of all as -built plans and maps
and records for all existing Facilities placed in the Right -of -Way under authority of ordinance 3441
or 3534, in a format specified by the City Engineer, within 60 days of the date this Master Permit
is signed by the City's mayor.
Section 21. Abandonment and Removal of the Permittee's Facilities. In addition to the
abandonment and removal requirements of ECDC 20.50.140, incorporated herein by this
reference, Permittee agrees to the following:
Upon the expiration, termination, or revocation of the rights granted under this Agreement, the
Permittee shall remove all of its Facilities from the Public Ways of the City within ninety (90)
days of receiving notice from the Public Works Director. Provided, however, that the City may
permit the Permittee's improvements to be abandoned and replaced in such a manner as the parties
shall agree, subsequent always to the City's standard construction requirements for Right -of -Way
use. Upon permanent abandonment, and Permittee's agreement to transfer ownership of any
Facilities to the City, the Permittee shall submit to the City a proposal and instruments for
transferring ownership to the City. Any such Facilities abandoned in place without City's consent
and not removed within ninety (90) days of receipt of notice thereof shall automatically become
the property of the City, unless Permittee is prevented from removing its Facilities by causes
beyond its reasonable control including, but not limited to, acts of God, war, or governmental
restrictions. In such case, Permittee's time for performance of its obligations under this section
will be extended by a reasonable period of time, not to exceed an additional thirty (30) days in any
event, without City's consent thereto. Provided, however, that nothing contained within this
Section shall prevent the City from compelling the Permittee to remove any such Facilities through
judicial action when the City has not consented to the Permittee's abandonment of said Facilities
in place. If City takes said judicial action and the court determines the city is entitled to the relief
it seeks, then Permittee shall reimburse the city its legal costs incurred.
Section 22. Restoration of Existing Facilities. If a lawfully authorized Facility is destroyed or
damaged to the extent that it must be rebuilt or replaced as follows:
(i) Permittee must apply for a new Right -of -Way Construction Permit and wireless
facilities permit prior to rebuilding or replacing the facility; and
(ii) The rebuilt or replacement facility must comply with the standards of Chapter 20.50
ECDC in effect at the time of rebuilding or replacement. Such compliance may
include, but is not limited to, a relocation to meet then current zoning standards.
Section 23. Safety Requirements.
A. Permittee shall, at all times and at its sole responsibility and expense, comply with
all applicable laws, standards and regulations relating to the installation, operation, maintenance,
repair and/or removal of its Facilities. In accordance with applicable federal, state, and local safety
requirements, Permittee shall at all times employ reasonable and ordinary care and shall install and
maintain and use commonly accepted methods and devices for preventing failures and accidents
19
Packet Pg. 357
8.15.a
which are likely to cause damage, injury, or nuisance to the public and/or workers. The Facilities
shall at all times be kept and maintained in a safe, suitable condition, and in good order and repair.
B. As an exercise of its police powers in the interest of the public health, safety, and
welfare, and to the extent not preempted by federal law, the City may require verification of
Permittee's compliance with any health and safety laws and regulations applicable to its Facilities
at Permittee's cost and expense. The City may, but shall have no obligation to, conduct inspections,
and Permittee shall cooperate with any such inspections and provide all information requested by
the City as it may reasonably determine is necessary as part of its inspection. Permittee shall
reimburse the City for its reasonable costs related to all health and safety inspections according to
the procedures of Section 14; PROVIDED THAT with respect to any RF emissions inspections,
Permittee shall only be charged if Permittee is found to be out of compliance with FCC standards.
C. If a violation of the National Electrical Safety Code or other applicable regulation
is found to exist by the City, the City will, after discussions with Permittee, establish a reasonable
time for Permittee to make necessary repairs. If the repairs are not made within the established
time frame, the City may make the repairs itself or have them made and collect all reasonable costs
thereof from Permittee.
D. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if either party discovers that the emissions from a
Facility exceed the FCC standards, and if discovered by the City then also after testing and
certification of test results from a qualified RF engineer, then Permittee shall immediately turn off
the Facility or portion thereof committing the violation, until the emissions exposure is remedied.
Upon any City discovery of violation, notification shall be made verbally by calling 1-800-832-
6662 and by email notice to REleaseAdmin@att.com. Permittee is required to promptly turn off
that portion of the Facility that is in violation, no later than forty-eight (48) hours after date and
time of email notice or of its own discovery of noncompliance.
E. Pursuant to ECDC 20.50.070, upon each application for a wireless communications
facility permit, Permittee shall provide the certificate of an RF engineer with knowledge of the
proposed development that the small wireless facility network will comply with RF standards
adopted by the FCC. Permittee shall further provide proof of FCC and other regulatory approvals
required to provide the service and to utilize the technology sought to be installed. Permittee shall
thereafter perform any testing and provide certification of the Facilities as may be requested by
FCC or any other government agency with the authority to regulate exposure to RF emissions, and
Permittee will provide a copy of any such compliance reports to the City.
Section 24. Bonds. As a condition of performing work in the Public Ways, and before
undertaking any of the work, the Permittee, at the City's request, shall furnish a Right -of -Way
Construction Bond (Construction Bond) and following completion a Maintenance Bond as
specified below.
20
Packet Pg. 358
8.15.a
A. Construction Bond. The construction bond shall be written by a corporate surety
acceptable to the City equal to at least 125% of the estimated cost of restoring the Public Ways of
the City to the pre -construction condition required by Section 11 of this Master Permit. Said bond
shall be required to remain in full force until satisfactory completion of the restoration as
determined by the City. In the event a bond issued to meet the requirements of this Section is
canceled by the surety, Permittee shall, prior to expiration of said bond, be responsible for
obtaining a replacement bond which complies with the terms of this Section.
B. Maintenance Bond. At such time as the city determines the satisfactory completion of
the authorized work, including restoration of the Public Ways, the City may require a Maintenance
Bond which shall guarantee all restoration work for a period of two (2) years. It shall be written
by a corporate surety acceptable to the City in the amount of fifteen percent (15%) of the original
Construction Bond amount. The Maintenance Bond must be in place before City may release the
Construction Bond. In the event that a bond issued to meet the requirements of this Section is
canceled by the surety, after proper notice and pursuant to the terms of said bond, Permittee shall,
prior to expiration of said bond, be responsible for obtaining a replacement bond which complies
with the terms of this Section.
Section 25. Modification. The City and the Permittee hereby reserve the right to alter, amend or
modify the terms and conditions of this Master Permit upon the written agreement of both parties
to such alteration, amendment or modification. Said modifications shall be approved by the City
by ordinance and accepted by the Permittee consistent with Section 41 (Acceptance and Grant Fee)
hereof.
Section 26. Forfeiture and Revocation.
A. This Master Permit may be terminated for failure by Permittee to comply with the
material provisions hereof and other provisions of the Edmonds Municipal Code. In addition to
termination, the City may pursue other rights or remedies as may be available to it herein, or in
law or in equity.
B. If the City has reason to believe that grounds exist for revocation of a master permit
or lesser sanctions, then:
1. The City shall provide Permittee with written notice of the violation, by
certified mail, containing a short and concise statement of the nature and general facts of the
violation, the steps necessary to cure such violation, and a reasonable time period within which
the violation must be cured. Within thirty (30) thereafter, Permittee shall respond demonstrating
that no violation occurred, that any problem has been corrected, or with a proposal to correct the
problem within a specified period of time.
2. Permittee may request an extension of time to cure an alleged violation if
construction is suspended or delayed by the City, or where unusual weather, natural consequences
(e.g., earthquakes, floods, etc.), extraordinary acts of third parties, or other circumstances which
are reasonably beyond the control of Permittee delay progress, provided that Permittee has not,
21
Packet Pg. 359
8.15.a
through its own actions or inactions, contributed to the delay. The amount of additional time
allowed will be determined by the City. The extension of time in any case shall not be greater than
the extent of the actual non-contributory delay experienced by Permittee.
3. If said response is not satisfactory to City, the City may declare Permittee
to be in default, with written notice to Permittee in accordance with the Notice requirements of
this Master Permit. Within ten business days after notice to Permittee, Permittee may deliver to
the City a request for a hearing before the City Council. If no such request is received, the City
may declare the Master Permit terminated for cause and/or pursue other rights or remedies as may
be available to it herein, or in law or in equity, including but not limited to obtaining a court order
compelling specific performance and recovery of damages and costs incurred by the City, or in
lieu of the foregoing damages, collecting liquidated damages per paragraph C below..
4. If Permittee files a timely written request for a hearing, such hearing shall
be held within thirty (30) days after the City's receipt of the request therefor. Such hearing shall
be open to the public and Permittee and other interested parties may offer written and/or oral
evidence explaining or mitigating such alleged non-compliance. Within ten days after the hearing,
the City Council, on the basis of the record, will make the determination as to whether there is
cause for termination, whether the Master Permit will be terminated, and/or to pursue other rights
or remedies. The City Council may in its sole discretion fix an additional time period to cure
violations. If the deficiency has not been cured at the expiration of any additional time period or
if the City Council does not grant any additional period, the City Council may, by resolution
declare the Master Permit to be terminated and forfeited and/or pursue other rights or remedies.
5. If Permittee appeals revocation and termination, such revocation may be
held in abeyance pending judicial review by a court of competent jurisdiction, provided the
Permittee is otherwise in compliance with this Master Permit. While revocation is held in
abeyance, City may suspend the issuance of additional permits. In any such appeal, Permittee
shall be responsible for the costs of preparing and filing the City's administrative record with the
Court and such costs shall be paid prior to the City's filing thereof.
C. In the event that the City elects to collect liquidated damages, said damages shall
be five hundred dollars ($500.00) per day, per violation, for each day beyond thirty (30) days that
Permittee has been in violation. If liquidated damages are used, then those damages shall be the
exclusive monetary remedy for the breach.
D. If this agreement is terminated for cause, the ninety (90) day clock referenced in
Section 20 (Abandonment and Removal of the Permittee's Facilities) begins to run the date the
City or City Council declares the Master Permit terminated for cause in accordance with the
procedures of this Section 26; Provided that if Permittee appeals revocation and termination
pursuant to paragraph B(5) of this Section 26, then paragraph B(5) shall govern.
E. Permittee shall not be deemed to be in default, failure, violation, or non-compliance
with any provision of this Master Permit where performance was rendered impossible due to
materially, substantially, and reasonably to an act of God, fire, flood, storm, or other element or
22
Packet Pg. 360
8.15.a
casualty, theft, war, disaster, strike, lock -out, boycott, prevailing war or war preparation, or bona
fide legal proceedings, beyond the control of Permittee.
F. City code may provide for civil penalties or abatement for code violations, and
nothing in this Section 26 prevents the City from pursuing those independent of or in conjunction
with the remedies and procedures outlined in this Section 26.
Section 27. Security
A. At the same time as providing acceptance of this Master Permit, Permittee shall establish
a permanent security fund in the amount of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000) by providing a letter
of credit or a performance bond reasonably acceptable to the City to guarantee the full and
complete performance of the requirements of this Master Permit and to guarantee payment of any
costs, expenses, damages, or loss the City pays or incurs, including monetary and civil penalties,
because of any failure attributable to Permittee to comply with the codes, ordinances, rules,
regulations, or permits of the City. The amount of the Security Fund shall not be construed to limit
Permittee's liability or to limit the City's recourse to any remedy to which the City is otherwise
entitled at law or in equity.
B. Permittee shall replenish the security fund within fourteen (14) days after written notice
from the City that there is a deficiency in the amount of the fund.
C. Upon termination or expiration of the Master Permit, all funds remaining in the Security
Fund shall be returned to Permittee within thirty (30) days after removal of Permittee's Facilities
in the Public Ways.
Section 28. Hazardous Substances. Permittee shall not introduce or use any hazardous substances
(chemical or waste), in violation of any applicable law or regulation, nor shall Permittee allow any
of its agents, contractors or any person under its control to do the same. Permittee will be solely
responsible for and will defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officers, officials, employees and
agents harmless from and against any and all claims, costs and liabilities including reasonable
attorneys' fees and costs, arising out of or in connection with the cleanup or restoration of any
property associated with Permittee's use, storage, or disposal of hazardous substances, or the use,
storage or disposal of such substances by Permittee's agents, contractors, or other persons acting
under Permittee's control.
Section 29. City Ordinances and Regulations. Permittee agrees to comply with all present and
future federal, state, and local laws, ordinances, rules, and regulations. This Master Permit is
subject to ordinances of general applicability enacted pursuant to the City's police powers. Nothing
herein shall be deemed to direct or restrict the City's ability to adopt and enforce all necessary and
appropriate ordinances regulating the performance of the conditions of this Master Permit,
including any ordinance made in the exercise of its police powers in the interest of public safety
and for the welfare of the public. The City shall have the authority at all times to control by
appropriate regulations the locations, elevation, manner or construction and maintenance of any
23
Packet Pg. 361
8.15.a
facilities by the Permittee, and the Permittee shall promptly conform with all such regulations,
unless compliance would cause the Permittee to violate other requirements of the law.
Section 30. Survival. All of the provisions, conditions, and requirements of this Master Permit
shall be in addition to any and all other obligations and liabilities the Permittee may have to the
City at common law, by statute, or by contract. The provisions, conditions, and requirements of
Sections 8, Relocation of Facilities; 9, Undergrounding of Facilities; 10, Work in Public
Wks- 11, Restoration after Construction; 13, Dangerous Conditions, Authority for City to
Abate; 14, Recovery of Costs; 15, Fees for Use of Public Ways; 17, Indemnification and
Waiver; 18, Insurance; 20, Abandonment and Removal of the Permittee's Facilities, 26 Security
Fund, and 27 Hazardous Substances, shall survive the expiration or termination of this Master
Permit, and any renewals or extensions thereof. All of the provisions, conditions, regulations and
requirements contained in this Master Permit shall further be binding upon the heirs, successors,
executors, administrators, legal representatives and assigns of the Permittee and all privileges, as
well as all obligations and liabilities of the Permittee shall inure to its heirs, successors, and assigns
equally as if they were specifically mentioned wherever the Permittee is named herein.
Section 31. Severability. In any section, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Master Permit should
be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or
unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence,
clause, or phrase of this Master Permit.
Section 32. Assignment. This Master Permit may not be assigned or transferred without prior
written notice to the City, except that the Permittee may freely assign this Master Permit without
prior notice in whole or part to a parent, subsidiary, or Affiliate or as part of any corporate
financing, reorganization or refinancing. In such case Permittee shall provide prompt, written
notice thereafter. In the case of transfer or assignment as security by mortgage or other security
instrument in whole or in part to secure indebtedness, such notice shall not be required unless and
until the secured party elects to realize upon the collateral. Permittee shall provide prompt written
notice to City of any such assignment.
Permittee may, without the prior written notice to the City: (i) Lease the Facilities, or any portion
thereof, to another; (ii) Grant an Indefeasible Right of User Interest in the Facilities, or any portion
thereof, to another; or (iii) Offer or provide capacity or bandwidth in its Facilities to another,
PROVIDED THAT: Permittee at all times retains exclusive control over such Facilities and
remains solely responsible and liable for the performance of all obligations under this Master
Permit, including but not limited to responsible for locating, servicing, repairing, relocating or
removing its Facilities pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Master Permit. Permittee cannot
grant any rights to a Lessee that are greater than any rights Permittee has under this Master Permit.
Any Lessee shall not be construed to be a third party beneficiary under this Master Permit.
Section 33. Vacation. The City may at any time by ordinance vacate all or any portion of the area
affected by this Master Permit, and the City shall not be liable for any damages or loss to the
Permittee by reason of such vacation. The City shall strive to notify the Permittee in writing at
least sixty (60) days prior to vacating all or any portion of any such area in which Permittee is
24
Packet Pg. 362
8.15.a
located. This Master Permit shall terminate with respect to such vacated area after sixty (60) days'
written notice to Permittee.
Section 34. Notice of Tariff Changes. If applicable to Permittee, Permittee shall, when making
application for any changes in tariffs affecting the provisions of this Master Permit, notify the City
in writing of the application and provide the Public Works Director with a copy of the submitted
application within three days of filing with the Washington Utilities and Transportation
Commission or other regulatory body. If applicable to Permittee, Permittee shall further provide
the Public Works Director with a copy of any actual approved tariff change affecting the provisions
of this Master Permit.
Section 35. Notice. All notices, requests, demands, and communications hereunder will be given
by first class certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, or by a nationally recognized
overnight courier, postage prepaid, to be effective when properly sent and received, refused or
returned undelivered. Notices will be addressed to the parties as follows:
CITY:
City of Edmonds
Public Works Director
7110 210th Street SW,
Edmonds, WA 98026
771-0235
and to
City of Edmonds
City Engineer
121 5th Avenue North
Edmonds, WA 98020
Telephone: (425) 771-0220
With a copy to the City Attorney, c/o City Clerk, at the 121 5th Avenue address.
PF.R MTTTF,F -
New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC
Attn: Network Real Estate Administration
Site No. City of Edmonds Wireless Franchise Agreement (WA)
1025 Lenox Park Blvd NE, 3rd Floor
Atlanta, GA 30319
With a copy to:
New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC
25
Packet Pg. 363
8.15.a
Attn: AT&T Legal Dept — Network Operations
Site No. City of Edmonds Wireless Franchise Agreement (WA)
208 S. Akard Street
Dallas, TX 75202-4206
Section 36. Entire Master Permit. This Master Permit constitutes the entire understanding and
agreement between the parties as to the subject matter herein and no other agreements or
understandings, written or otherwise, shall be binding upon the parties upon approval and
acceptance of this Master Permit. Provided further, that the City and Permittee reserve all rights
they may have under law to the maximum extent possible and neither the City nor Permittee shall
be deemed to have waived any rights they may now have or may acquire in the future by entering
into this Master Permit.
The franchises adopted between the City and Permittee or City and Permittee's predecessor under
ordinance numbers 3441 and 3534 (the "Original Franchises") are superseded and replaced by this
Master Permit as of the Effective Date of this Ordinance, and this Master Permit and all exhibits
attached hereto shall constitute the entire Master Permit between the parties. The grant of this
Master Permit shall have no effect on the requirements of the Original Franchises related to
indemnification or insurance to the City against acts and omissions occurring during the period
that the Original Franchises were in effect, including Survival, and during any period in which
Permittee's Facilities were in the Right of Way of the City.
Section 37. Attorney's Fees. Except as otherwise provided in this Master Permit, if any suit or
other action is instituted in connection with any controversy arising under this Master Permit, each
party shall be responsible for its own attorneys' fees and costs. This section shall have no effect
on the indemnity and defense obligations of this Master Permit.
Section 38. Non -waiver. Failure of the City to declare any such breach or default immediately
upon the occurrence thereof, or delay in taking any action in connection therewith, shall not waive
such breach or default, but the City shall have the right to declare any such breach or default at
any time. Failure of the City to declare one breach or default does not act as a waiver of the City's
right to declare another breach or default.
Section 39. Governing LawNenue. This Master Permit shall be governed by and construed in
accordance with the laws of the state of Washington. The venue and jurisdiction over any dispute
related to this Master Permit shall be with the Snohomish County Superior Court, or, with respect
to any federal question, with the United States District Court for the Western District of
Washington, at Seattle.
Section 40. Titles. The section titles are for reference only and should not be used for the purpose
of interpreting this Master Permit.
Section 41. Acceptance and Grant Fee. Within sixty (60) days after the passage and approval of
this ordinance, this Master Permit shall be accepted by Permittee by its filing with the City Clerk
an unconditional written acceptance thereof. Failure of the Permittee to so accept this Master
26
Packet Pg. 364
8.15.a
Permit within said period of time shall be deemed a rejection thereof, and the rights and privileges
herein granted shall, after the expiration of the sixty (60) day period, absolutely cease and
determine, unless the time period is extended by ordinance duly passed for that purpose. In
accordance with Section 16 above, Permittee shall pay to City the Grant Fee.
Section 42. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifically delegated
to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take effect five (5) days after
the passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title.
27
Packet Pg. 365
8.15.a
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY:
JEFF TARADAY
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK:
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
PUBLISHED:
EFFECTIVE DATE:
ORDINANCE NO.:
28
CITY OF EDMONDS
MAYOR MIKE ROSEN
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
CITY CLERK SCOTT PASSEY
Packet Pg. 366
8.15.a
SUMMARY ORDINANCE NO.
of the City of Edmonds, Washington
On the day of , 2024, the City Council of the City
of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. A summary of the content of said ordinance,
consisting of the title, provides as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, GRANTING TO NEW CINGULAR WIRELESS
PCS, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY,
SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST TO AT&T WIRELESS SERVICES
OF WASHINGTON, LLC, AN OREGON LIMITED LIABILITY
COMPANY, D/B/A AT&T WIRELESS, A NON-EXCLUSIVE
MASTER PERMIT AGREEMENT TO INSTALL, OPERATE,
AND MAINTAIN MACRO WIRELESS
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES WITHIN A CERTAIN
DESIGNATED AREA OF PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY OF THE
CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, PRESCRIBING
CERTAIN RIGHTS, DUTIES, TERMS, AND CONDITIONS
WITH RESPECT THERETO, ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE
The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request.
DATED this day of , 2024.
City Clerk, Scott Passey
29
Packet Pg. 367
8.15.b
9227 Olympic View Drive
AT&T Reference Numbers: SN77 Edmonds Beach, FA#10092730; and
City of Edmonds Right of Way permit number ENG2002-0184 (02-184) incorporated by
reference as if fully set forth herein.
pNamlala
1711- lii�
6 �-
o
SUNSET wAY ��
Site Plan
Packet Pg. 368
8.15.b
Enlarged Site Plan
�a
m
C
Q
L
3
3
a�
z
C
0
.A
am
Q
r
s
x
w
N
C
0
E
t
0
r
r
Q
C
d
E
t
0
�4
w
Q
Packet Pg. 369
8.15.b
(E) TWIN DIPLEXER (2 PER SECTOR, TYP OF 4)
REPLACEMENT TMA (2 PER SECTOR, TYP OF 4) 1 I
A3
TOP OF (E) UTILITY POLE (E) PANEL ANTENNA TIP HEIGHT
rEL t52.7' AGL EL t53.0' AGL ar
rE(E) 50 0' AG TENNA RAD CENTER
c (E) PANEL ANTENNA (2 PER SECTOR, TYP OF 4)
`� uuggll
(E) TRANSMISSION LINE 1
---OHP--_C"P_ OHP—OHP—OHP—OH OHP�OHP—OHP—OHP—OHP—OHP�OH EL 140.7 AGL
(E) 4.0 CONDUIT (TYP OF 4),
BEYOND W/ (12) 7/8"0 COAX
OHP—OHP—OHP—OHP—OHP—
(E) t52.T HIGH SNOPUD UTILITY POLE
(E) OVERHEAD
TRANSMISSION LINE (TYP)
(E) TRANSMISSION LINE
OHP�OHP O
� OHP—HPSOH
HP-OHP-OHP OHP-OHP-OHP�OHP EL s20.7 AGL
CHP�O
(E) UTILITY H-FRAME W/ (E) LANDSCAPE (TYP)
DISCONNECT & GEN PLUG
r (E) WOOD FENCE
(E) POST H-FRAME /
W/ UTILITY BOXES —\
Elevation
Packet Pg. 370
8.15.b
9114 20711 Place
AT&T Reference Numbers: SN63 Edmonds Ridge, FA#10092672; and
City of Edmonds Right of Way permit number 02-0200 incorporated by reference as if
fully set forth herein.
m.oauer...aw.«
aI.1.A 1.011 wJOD t1I V uo inure va[
\ 20M STREET 866V
P
p2 J 1
11�
ru i.r p/ 1 m•awE �3
E .�A ,LA 0056 7a00000eoo
1
�. � alaAalml
- MAIN STREET (208TH STREET) —
a1Wa.aMNY1�LMlm1
qulun wrtraA
Site Plan
Packet Pg. 371
8.15.b
grer�
/
rtiwc.ur..�cw.0 gacmrov
\. pmvnw
q�o�agq \�\� mwru
gMTxr�YnMMa� \'\ iarwaw�o�nm�.Eairvn
MAIN STREET jM8TH STREET)
Enlarged Site Plan
3
C
Q
o:
N
N
t
V
C
P
L_
L
3
U
3
a�
z
C
0
.A
am
Q
r
s
x
w
N
C
0
E
t
0
r
r
Q
C
d
E
t
0
�4
w
Q
Packet Pg. 372
8.15.b
(E) PANEL ANTENNA (TYP OF 2)
(E) TWIN TMA (TYP OF 4)
ANTENNA TIP HEIGHT
EL t52.9' AGL
STOP 0. (E) UTILITY POLE
UP-OF
AGL - -(E P) ANELANTENNA RAD CENTER,1
EL t49.5' AGL
REPLACEMENT PANEL ANTENNA RAD CENTER
EL t43.0' AGL A.
REPLACEMENT PANEL I
ANTENNA (TYP OF 2) 5 ?'
A-3 �
p-
(E) i50.0' WOOD SNOPUD UTILITY POLE - P P_ P P P-P-
(E)AT&T CONDUIT W/ (12) 7/8'0 COAX
(E) OVERHEAD UTILITY LINE (TYP)
(E) GPS ANTENNA -m- P P P P�
�P-P P P P-p_P-P-PAP-P_P-
P P_P-P_P-p
(E) WOOD FENCE _� (E) SNOPUD EQUIPMENT
(E) MAN GATE W/ AT&T
UTILITY H-FRAME, BEYOND
(E) ROCK RETAINING WALL--,
GRADE (REF 0.01
EL t386.0' AMSL
(E) UNDERGROUND CONDUIT BETWEEN F -�
UTILITY POLE & AT&T EQUIPMENT VAULT JJJ I I
PROPOSED (4) 7l8"O COAX ROUTED TO MATCH (E) I I
I I
�j\,
(E) UPPER LEVEL EQUIPMENT VAULT A-12 L-------J
(E) LOWER LEVEL EQUIPMENT VAULT /11
A-1.2
Elevation
Packet Pg. 373
8.15.b
402 Main Street
AT&T Reference Numbers: SN19 Edmonds, FA#10092438
City of Edmonds Building permit BLD2011-0399 issued for work at this location
incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein.
2J� � STRFFI'
49
/ 1-SFa�I RI � 00 uwl, O
/ W _C4 /
Site Plan
Packet Pg. 374
8.15.b
/
#0*1%4
Enlarged Site Plan
3
m
C
Q
N
N
t
V
C
P
L
i
ca
3
8�
C
U
3
a�
z
C
0
.A
am
Q
r
s
x
w
N
C
N
E
t
0
r
r
Q
C
d
E
t
0
�4
w
Q
Packet Pg. 375
9.1
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 09/24/2024
Public Hearing on Permit Processing Timeline and Public Notice Code Amendments to Achieve
Compliance with Mandates in SB 5290 and HB 1105 (file AMD2024-0002)
Staff Lead: Mike Clugston
Department: Planning Division
Preparer: Michael Clugston
Background/History
This is a new item for Council review.
During the 2023 legislative session, the Washington State Legislature passed, and the Governor signed,
Senate Bill 5290, updating portions of the Local Project Review Act, Chapter 36.70B RCW. The intent of
the updates was to consolidate, streamline, and improve project review and permitting, with an
emphasis on housing development, and to reduce the amount of time it takes for projects complying
with local development regulations to receive approval. To accomplish this goal, SB 5290 contained
thirteen separate sections including a variety of mandatory and voluntary measures for local
government agencies to consider when implementing permit streamlining. A summary of the legislation
is included as Attachment 1.
House Bill 1105, passed during the 2024 legislative session, requires public agencies to provide notice
for public comment that includes the last date and time by which such public comments must be
submitted. The legislation is included as Attachment 2.
While these code changes are solely procedural as required by RCW 36.70B, review and
recommendation by the Planning Board was required consistent with ECDC 20.80 (Text and Map
Changes). The Planning Board held a public hearing on August 28 (meeting minutes as Attachment 3)
and recommended approval of the redline/strikeout language in Attachment 4. It should be noted that
a decision memo was not created by the Planning Board since the proposed code changes are
procedural rather and policy -related.
Because these updates are solely procedural, they are exempt from requiring a SEPA threshold
determination consistent with WAC 197-11-800(19).
Staff Recommendation
After a brief staff presentation, the Council should take public testimony on the draft code amendments
proposed. Staff and the Planning Board recommend approval of the changes proposed in Attachment 4
If Council approves of the proposed changes, it should direct staff to prepare an ordinance for inclusion
on a future consent agenda.
Narrative
Proposed changes to comply with Senate Bill 5290
Packet Pg. 376
9.1
The following changes are proposed to relevant sections of the Edmonds Community Development Code
(ECDC) to comply with the land use permit review timeline mandates in SB 5290.
Consolidated Permits - The SB 5290 review timelines do not apply when land use permits are
consolidated for review (ECDC 20.01.002).
Permit Decision Table - The table in ECDC 20.01.003.13 is updated to include the new permit
review times:
65 days for permits that do not require public notice (Type I staff review, no notice)
100 days for permits that require public notice, but not a public hearing (Type 11 staff
review with notice)
170 days for permits that require public notice and a public hearing (quasi-judicial Type
III & IV permits)
Complete and Incomplete Applications, Requesting Additional Information - Update language in
ECDC 20.02.003 about determining application completeness and incompleteness and clarify
how staff requests additional information about a permit application.
Notice of Final Decision - Update ECDC 20.02.007 to make issuance of final permit decisions
consistent with the timelines in the Permit Decision Table in ECDC 20.01.003.B.
Permit Review Timelines - New section in ECDC 20.02.008 containing general language about the
permit timelines in ECDC 20.01.003.13, calculation of days, possible permit fee refunds, and the
annual performance report to the Department of Commerce required by SB 5290. Regarding
refunds, the City currently meets three of the criteria identified by Commerce to be exempt
from having to issue refunds (imposing reasonable fees, maintain budget for on -call permitting
assistance, and making housing types an outright permitted use). Additional criteria could also
be met with some more work (making pre -application meetings optional, only requiring public
hearings for applications that are required to have a public hearing by statute, or meeting with
the applicant within 14 days of a second request for corrections during permit review). While
the refund language could be removed from the draft code because it is not currently applicable
to Edmonds, the language is proposed to be retained as a placeholder and reminder should the
City fail to meet the review shot clocks in the future.
District -based Design Review -Update ECDC 20.12.005 to refer to the required 170-day review
clock for Type III -A permits.
Subdivisions - Update ECDC 20.75 to remove outdated 120-day permit review reference and add
reference to the permit decision table in ECDC 20.01.003.B.
Definitions - Update definition of "Project permit or project permit application" in ECDC
21.80.095 for consistency with the updated definition in SB 5290 and RCW 36.7013 (Local Project
Review).
Proposed changes to comply House Bill 1105
Amend "Public Notice Requirements" sections ECDC 20.03.002 (Notice of Application), ECDC 20.03.002
(Notice of Public Hearing), and ECDC 20.03.005 (Shoreline Master Program Notice) to include language
about when the public can comment.
Attachments:
Attachment 1 - Department of Commerce SB 5290 Summary
Attachment 2 - House Bill 1105 Session Law
Attachment 3 - Planning Board minutes August 28, 2024 excerpt
Attachment 4 - DRAFT SB 5290 HB 1105 Code Amendment redline strikeout
Packet Pg. 377
Local Project Review -
Implementing Senate Bill 5290
Jo Anne Wright, AICP
Commerce Senior Planner, Growth Management Services
Rachel Granrath, AICP
Associate Principal, SO Alliance Consulting
Ryan Walters, AICP, JD
Planner & Attorney, Legal Consultant to SO on 5290
Snohomish County PAC Meeting, September 12, 2024
Ail
AA
Ili
i
R r
HOUSING AND INFRASTRUCTURE AND SMALL BUSINESS ,
HOMELESSNESS BROADBAND ASSISTANCE 1 ENERGY
jr—
.�
awl
y r.. 1 ■ ■ f
PLANNING AND TECH COMMUNITY CRIME VICTIMS AND ! ECONOMIC
ASSISTANCE SERVICES AND FACILITIES F J13LIC SAFETY DEVELOPMENT
WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
9.1.a
Senate Bill 5290 —Overview
What SB 5290 is about
What Commerce is responsible for implementing
What jurisdictions are responsible for implementing
Packet Pg. 380
9.1.a
Senate Bill 5290 — Local Permit Review
Effective in spring of 2023.
Purpose is to consolidate, streamline and improve local permit
review processes for residential permits - amends RCW 36.706
— Local Project Review.
13 sections that lay out the local implementation requirements
for permitting processes:
What changes jurisdictions are responsible for
implementing on their own.
IV What changes Commerce is responsible for implementing.
Packet Pg. 381
9.1.a
�B
520C
IEQUIE
:OMME
1
Washington State
Department of
Commerce
Packet Pg. 382
9.1.a
Plan to Provide Local Governments with Substitute
PermittingStaff U
a
The plan was presented to the legislature last winter.
Included a survey sent to state planning directors focused on jurisdictions' needs
for extra staff and success and/or barriers to hiring extra staff.
An RFI was sent out in late August to establish a list of consulting firms that
jurisdictions can hire to provide substitute staff for residential permitting.
Communities will be responsible for paying for the extra help.
Web Page link: https://www.commerce.wa.gov/program-index-2/local-project-review-
ro ra m
Link to plan: https://deptofcommerce.app.box.com/s/Inz8uv60c6i93ii4pgrz9s8m7rrxn9ep
Packet Pg. 383
9.1.a
Assistance for Local Jurisdictions -
Establish two grant programs:
Grant Programs
Grant #1- consolidated permit review grant, awarded to any
local government that commits to issuing final decisions on
residential permits within 45 business days or 90 calendar
days.
Grant #2 - For local governments to update their permit review
process from paper or hybrid filing systems to software
systems.
Both underway —total of $3 million
Packet Pg. 384
9.1.a
Guidance for Fee Structures
Commerce developed guidance for jurisdictions in setting fee structures sufficient
to recover true costs.
Web Page:
https://www.commerce.wa.gov/program-index-2/local-project-review-program/
Link to Navigating Permit Fees: Guidance on Cost Recovery:
https://deptofcommerce.box.com/s/gpcm36i772vOmaznhaflgprwg7hpb9sI
Packet Pg. 385
9.1.a
Performance Report Guidance and Template
Jurisdictions (over 20,000 and subject to the requirements of
36.70A.215, Buildable Lands Reports) must submit annual
performance reports to Commerce each year.
Commerce developing guidance document and report template
for the performance reports. In final review. Will be posted on
website soon.
FORM,
Packet Pg. 386
Whatcom
' Okanogan
Skagit Ferry Stevens Pend
- Oreille
Clal lam Snohomish
Chelan
Jefferson -
� : Douglas
King Lincoln SP okan
qq
Grays Mas �Harbor - Kttitas Grant
-r
Pierce Adams ;1 Whitman
Thurston
Lewis Franklin
Yakima
Cowlitz Skamania Asotin
Benton Walla Walla
Kl ickitat
Clark '
WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
9.1.a
Digital Permitting Work Group
Convened a work group to examine potential license and
permitting software for local governments to encourage
streamlined and efficient permit review.
30+ members.
In addition to permitting work, the group acts as a sounding
board on all mandated Commerce implementation measures.
Commerce must submit a final report of findings to the governor
and the legislature, now in Commerce review.
Packet Pg. 388
9.1.a
Digital Permitting Work Group, continued a
U
a
Report findings must: i>—%
Ca
Evaluate the existing need for digital permitting systems, including impacts on existing
digital permitting systems;
Review barriers preventing local jurisdictions from accessing or adopting digital permitting
syste m s;
Evaluate the benefits and costs associated with a statewide permitting software system;
Provide budgetary, administrative policy, and legislative recommendations to increase the
adoption of or establish a statewide system of digital permit review.
Packet Pg. 389
9.1.a
Permit Review Guide
Developing a comprehensive guide for local jurisdictions that outlines, provides clarity,
and includes the path and assistance for compliance with Local Project Review.
Will reference the requirements of RCW 36.70B, Local Project Review, and WAC 365-196,
Growth Management Act Procedural Criteria for Adopting Comprehensive Plans and
Development Regulations.
Will include amended sections, new sections and reenacted WHAT
sections of SB 5290.
YOU
NEED
TO
KNOW
Packet Pg. 390
9.1.a
Ilk
5115290 IMPLEMENTATION
1EQUIREMENTSFOR Washington Stat
fiJRISDICTIONS Department of
Coimnmerc
Packet Pg. 391
9.1.a
Additional Requirements for Jurisdictions Interior Alterations
A local government must exclude project permits for interior alterations from site plan
review, provided that the alterations do not result in:
(a) Additional sleeping quarters or bedrooms;
(b) Nonconformity with federal emergency management agency substantial
improvement thresholds; or
(c) Increase the total square footage or valuation of the structure thereby requiring
upgraded fire access or fire suppression systems.
Packet Pg. 392
9.1.a
Additional Requirements for Jurisdictions -
Completeness Determination
If procedural
submission requirements for an
application
have been provided, the need
for additional
information
or studies
may not
preclude
a
completeness
determination.
An application shall be deemed procedurally complete on the 29th day after receiving a
project permit application if the local government does not provide a written
determination to the applicant that the application is procedurally incomplete.
i
Packet Pg. 393
9.1.a
New Final Decision Timelines
Takes effect January 1, 2025:
For project permits which do not require public notice, a local government must issue a
final decision within j5 days of the determination of completeness.
For project permits which require public notice, final decision must be issued within 100
days of determination of completeness.
For project permits which require public notice and a public hearing, a final decision must
be issued within L70 day:, of the determination of completeness.
Timelines can be amended.
Temporary suspensions of more than 60 consecutive days may add an additional 30 days
to time periods until a final decision is required to be issued.
Packet Pg. 394
9.1.a
Performance Reports
Annual performance reports due to Commerce by March 1 of
each year.
Each jurisdiction must publish report on its website.
By July 1st each year, Commerce will publish a report that
includes the annual performance report data for each county
and city.
The initial annual reports are to be submitted to Commerce by
March 1, 1025 for the year 2024 permitting information.
Commerce currently finalizing guidance document and report
template — will be posted on website when complete.
AEPo qZ
Packet Pg. 395
9.1.a
Refunding Fees
When permit time periods are not met, a portion of the permit fee must be refunded to
the applicant. A local government may provide for the collection of only 80 percent of a
permit fee initially, and for the collection of the remaining balance if the permitting time
periods are met.
The portion of the fee refunded for missing time periods shall be:
10 percent if the final decision
was made
after the applicable
deadline
but the
period
did
not exceed
20 percent
of
the
original
time
period;
or
20 percent if the period from the deadline to the time of the issuance
exceeded 20 percent of the original time period.
U N LESS ...............
- Pr
Packet Pg. 396
9.1.a
Measures to Avoid Re -Funding of Fees
Refunding fee provisions are not applicable to cities and counties which have
implemented at least threc of these options at the time an application is deemed
procedurally complete
(a, Expedited review for project permit applications;
(b) Impose reasonable fees on applicants to cover the cost of processing permits;
(c! Enter into an interlocal agreement with another jurisdiction to share staff and
resources;
(d) Maintain and budget for on -call permitting assistance;
Packet Pg. 397
9.1.a
Measures to Avoid Re -Funding of Fees
_ Budget new positions that are contingent on increased permit revenue;
(f) Only require public hearings for permit applications that are required to have a
public hearing by statute;
(g, Make pre -application meetings optional;
(h) Make housing types an outright permitted use in all zones where the housing
type is permitted;
Packet Pg. 398
9.1.a
Measures to Avoid Re -Funding of Fees
(i) Adopt a program to allow for outside professionals with appropriate professional
license to certify components of applications consistent with their license; or
(j) Meet with the applicant to attempt to resolve outstanding issues during the
review process. The meeting must be scheduled within days of a second request
for corrections during permit review.
Packet Pg. 399
9.1.a
Additional Requirements for Jurisdictions -
Not Meeting Required Permitting Deadlines
After January 1, 2026, a county or city must adopt additional provisions at the time of its
next comprehensive plan update if:
The county or city has adopted at least three of these provision more than five years prior
and is not meeting the permitting deadlines established in RCW 36.70B.080 (65, 100, 170
days) at least half of the time since its most recent comprehensive plan update.
A city or county that is required to adopt new measures but fails to do so becomes
subject to the requirements of fee refunding.
Packet Pg. 400
9.1.a
Links and Resources
Commerce Website —Local Project Review
https://www.com merce.wa.�ov
rogram-index-2/local-project-
review-program/
Overview and project details, local responsibilities, resource library,
legislative report(s), grants information, contact information.
✓Fact Sheet —The facts about SB 5290
https://deptofcommerce.app.box.com/s/n
2j7aci6314k
if3z0Rs99a839946io2
Packet Pg. 401
9.1.a
Links and Resources
Plan to provide local governments with substitute permitting
staff:
https://deptofcom merce.a
8m7rrxn9ep
.box.com/s/Inz8uv6Oc6i93ii4Darz9s
,v Navigating Permit Fees: Guidance on Cost Recovery
https://deptofcurnrnerce.box.wm/s
wg7hpb9sl
Jcrn36i i 72vOmaznhafIgpr
0 1 Packet Pg. 402
9.1.a
Links and Resources
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) The list keeps growing!
https://deptofcommerce.box.com/s/w1zc09v6y6g47ebnypnyka0
sermihhul
Save the Date: SB 5290 FAQs Webinar
Wednesday, October 9, 2024
10:00 am — 11:00 am
Resource List —where to go for more information on SB 5290.
Packet Pg. 403
Thank you!
Questions...?
Washington State
Department of
Commerce
www.commerce.wa.gov 91
9.1.b
CERTIFICATION OF ENROLLMENT
SUBSTITUTE HOUSE BILL 1105
Chapter 171, Laws of 2024
68th Legislature
2024 Regular Session
NOTICE OF PUBLIC COMMENT PERIODS
EFFECTIVE DATE: June 6, 2024
Passed by the House March 4, 2024
Yeas 97 Nays 0
LAURIE JINKINS
Speaker of the House of
Representatives
Passed by the Senate February 28,
2024
Yeas 49 Nays 0
DENNY HECK
President of the Senate
Approved March 18, 2024 3:39 PM
JAY INSLEE
Governor of the State of Washington
CERTIFICATE
I, Bernard Dean, Chief Clerk of the
House of Representatives of the
State of Washington, do hereby
certify that the attached is
SUBSTITUTE HOUSE BILL 1105 as
passed by the House of
Representatives and the Senate on
the dates hereon set forth.
BERNARD DEAN
Chief Clerk
FILED
March 19, 2024
Secretary of State
State of Washington
Packet Pg. 405
9.1.b
SUBSTITUTE HOUSE BILL 1105
AS AMENDED BY THE SENATE
Passed Legislature - 2024 Regular Session
State of Washington 68th Legislature 2023 Regular Session
By House State Government & Tribal Relations (originally sponsored by
Representatives Kloba, Abbarno, and Thai)
READ FIRST TIME 02/02/23.
1 AN ACT Relating to requiring public agencies to provide notice
2 for public comment that includes the first and last date and time by
3 which such public comment must be submitted; and adding a new section
4 to chapter 42.30 RCW.
5 BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
NEW SECTION. Sec. 1. A new section is added to chapter 42.30
RCW to read as follows:
(1) A public agency that is required by state law to solicit
public comment for a statutorily specified period of time, and is
required by state law to provide notice that it is soliciting public
comment, must specify the first and last date and time by which
written public comment may be submitted.
(2) An agency that provides a notice that violates this section
is subject to the same fines under the same procedures as other
violations of this chapter are subject to under RCW 42.30.120.
Passed by the House March 4, 2024.
Passed by the Senate February 28, 2024.
Approved by the Governor March 18, 2024.
Filed in Office of Secretary of State March 19, 2024.
--- END ---
P. 1 SH packet Pg. 406
9.1.c
P.M.) AS PRESENTED. MOTION PASSED (5-0) WITH VICE CHAIR GOLEMBIEWSKI
ABSTAINING.
ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA
Vice Chair Golembiewski requested the addition of a discussion about a Green Building Incentives memo under
Unfinished Business.
MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER HANKINS, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER LI, TO
APPROVE THE AGENDA AS AMENDED. MOTION PASSED (5-0) WITH BOARD MEMBER
GLADSTONE ABSTAINING.
AUDIENCE COMMENTS
None
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS
None
PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Public hearing on code amendments to update land use permit processes per SB 5290 and HB 1105
(AMD2024-0002)
Associate Planner Amber Brokenshire made the staff presentation giving an overview of Senate Bill 5290,
streamlining measures, and implementation of Substitute House Bill 1105. The group debated the proposed
amendments including permit review timeline requirements, the annual performance report, and the refund
process language.
Public Testimony: None
The public hearing was closed at 7:47 p.m.
MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER MAXWELL, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER
GLADSTONE, TO RECOMMEND THE DRAFT CODE FOR APPROVAL WITH THE CAVEAT
THAT IF STAFF FINDS THEY CAN REMOVE THE LANGUAGE REGARDING REFUNDS,
THAT IT BE REMOVED. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
A. Green Building Incentives Memo
Vice Chair Golembiewski read the memo into the record. Board members brought up details they would like
to add or clarify to the memo. Board Member Maxwell and Board Member Gladstone will work on some
amendments to the memo and bring it back to the next meeting.
Planning Board Meeting Minutes
August 28, 2024 Page 2 of 3
Packet Pg. 407
9.1.d
DRAFT CODE Update — SB 5290 & HB 1105 v.2
Chapter 20.01
TYPES OF DEVELOPMENT PROJECT PERMITS
Sections:
20.01.000 Purpose and general provisions.
20.01.001 Types of actions.
20.01.002 Determination of proper procedure type.
20.01.003 Permit type and decision framework.
20.01.006 Legislative enactments not restricted.
20.01.007 Exempt projects.
20.01.000 Purpose and general provisions.
A. The purpose of this chapter is to establish standard procedures, decision criteria, public
notification, and timing for development project permit application decisions made by the city
of Edmonds. These procedures are intended to:
1. Promote timely and informed public participation;
2. Eliminate redundancy in the application, permit review, and appeals processes;
3. Process permits equitably and expediently;
4. Balance the needs of permit applicants with neighbors;
5. Ensure that decisions are made consistently and predictably; and
6. Result in development that furthers city goals as set forth in the comprehensive plan.
These procedures provide for an integrated and consolidated land use permit process. The
procedures integrate the environmental review process with land use procedures, decisions,
and consolidated appeal processes.
B. The provisions of this title supersede all other procedural requirements that may exist in
other sections of the city code. When interpreting and applying the standards of this title, its
provisions shall be the minimum requirements. Where conflicts occur within provisions of this
Packet Pg. 408
9.1.d
DRAFT CODE Update —5B 5290 & HB 1105 v.2
title and/or between this title and other city code provisions and regulations, the more
restrictive provisions shall apply. Where conflict between the text of this title and the zoning
map ensue, the text of this title shall prevail.
C. Unless otherwise specified, all references to days shall be calendar days. Whenever the last
day of a deadline falls on a Saturday, Sunday, legal holiday designated by RCW 1.16.050 or by a
city ordinance, or any day when City Hall or the citys planning and development department is
closed to the public by formal executive or legislative action, the deadline shall run until the
next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or holiday or closed day. [Ord. 4299 § 37 (Exh. A), 2023; Ord
4154 § 1 (Att. A), 2019; Ord. 3817 § 1, 2010].
20.01.001 Types of actions.
There are five main types of actions (or permits) that are reviewed under the provisions of this
chapter. The types of actions are based on who makes the decision, the amount of discretion
exercised by the decision -making body, the level of impact associated with the decision, the
amount and type of public input sought, and the type of appeal opportunity.
A. Administrative Decisions. Type I and II decisions are administrative decisions made by the
planning and development director or his/her designee (hereinafter the "director"). Type I
permits are ministerial decisions and are based on compliance with specific, nondiscretionary
and/or technical standards that are clearly enumerated. Type II permits are administrative
decisions where the director makes a decision based on standards and clearly identified
criteria, but where public notice is required. Unless otherwise provided, appeals of Type II
decisions shall be initiated as set forth in ECDC 20.06.030.
B. Quasi-judicial Decisions. Type III, Type IV and appeal of Type II decisions are quasi-judicial
decisions that involve the use of discretionary judgment in the review of each specific
application. Quasi-judicial decisions are made by the hearing examiner, the architectural design
board, and/or the city council.
C. Legislative Decisions. Type V actions are legislative decisions made by the city council under
its authority to establish policies and regulations regarding future private and public
developments, and management of public lands.
1. Planning Board. The planning board shall hold a public hearing and make
recommendations to the city council on Type V actions, except that the city council may
Packet Pg. 409
9.1.d
DRAFT CODE Update —5B 5290 & HB 1105 v.2
hold a public hearing itself on area -wide rezones to implement city policies, or
amendments to zoning code text, development regulations or the zoning map. The public
hearing shall be held in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 20.06 ECDC, RCW
36.70A.035 and all other applicable law.
2. City Council. The city council may consider the planning board's recommendation in a
public hearing held in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 20.06 ECDC and RCW
36.70A.035 and all other applicable law. If the city council desires to hold a public hearing
on area -wide rezones to implement city policies, or amendments to zoning code text,
development regulations or the zoning map, it may do so without forwarding the proposed
decision to the planning board for a hearing.
3. Public Notice. Notice of the public hearing or public meeting shall be provided to the
public as set forth in Chapter 20.03 ECDC.
4. Implementation. City council Type V decision shall be by ordinance or resolution and
shall become effective on the effective date of the ordinance or resolution. [Ord. 4299 § 38
(Exh. A), 2023; Ord. 4154 § 1 (Att. A), 2019; Ord. 3817 § 1, 2010],
20.01.002 Determination of proper procedure type.
A. Determination by Director. The director shall determine the proper procedure for all project
applications. Questions concerning the appropriate procedure shall be resolved in favor of the
higher numbered procedure.
B. Optional Consolidated Permit Processing. An application that involves two or more procedures
may be processed collectively under the highest numbered procedure required for any part of
the application or may be processed individually under each of the application procedures
identified in ECDC 20.01.003. The applicant may determine whether the application will be
processed collectively or individually. If the applications are processed individually, the highest
numbered type procedure shall be undertaken first, followed by the other procedures in
sequence from the highest numbered to the lowest. When Type III -A and Type III-B permits are
consolidated under this subsection, the project shall proceed under the Type III -A permit
process. When two or more permits are consolidated under this subsection, the permit
timelines for decisions on individual permits in ECDC 20.01.003(B) do not apply.
C. Decisionmaker(s). Applications processed in accordance with subsection (B) of this section
which have the same procedure number, but are assigned to different hearing bodies, shall be
Commented [MCI]: Updated for consistency wit
5290 as codified in RCW 36.7013 (Local Project Revie
O
d
Y
U)
O
c
d
L
N
E
c
d
E
Q
d
O
CU
LO
0
r
m
2
Packet Pg. 410
9.1.d
DRAFT CODE Update —SB 5290 & HB 1105 v.2
heard collectively by the highest decisionmaker; the city council being the highest body,
followed by the hearing examiner, architectural design board or planning board, as applicable,
and then the director. joint public hearings with other agencies shall be processed according to
ECDC 20.06.010. Concurrent public hearings held with the architectural design board and any
other decisionmaker shall proceed with both decisionmakers present. [Ord. 4154 § 1 (Att. A), 2019;
Ord. 3817 § 1, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009].
20.01.003 Permit type and decision framework.
A. Permit Types.
TYPE I
TYPE II -A
TYPE II-B
TYPE III -A
TYPE III-B
TYPE IV
TYPE V
Zoning
Contingent
Essential
Site specific
compliance
critical area
public
rezone
letter
review
facilities
Lot line
Formal
Shoreline
Technological
Development
Zoning text
adjustment
interpretation
substantial
impracticality
agreements
amendment;
of the text of
development
waiver for
area -wide
the ECDC by the
permit,
amateur
zoning map
director
where public
radio
amendments
hearing not
antennas
required per
ECDC
24.80.100
Critical area
SEPA
Critical area
Comprehensive
determinations
determinations
variance
plan
amendments
Shoreline
Preliminary
Contingent
Conditional
Annexations
exemptions
short plat
critical area
use permits
review if
(where
public
public
hearing by
hearing
Packet Pg. 411
9.1.d
DRAFT CODE Update —SB 5290 & HB 1105 v.2
TYPE I
TYPE II -A
TYPE II-B
TYPE III -A
TYPE III-B
TYPE IV
TYPE V
hearing
examiner is
requested
required)
Minor
Land
Shoreline
Variances
Development
amendments
clearing/grading
substantial
regulations
to planned
development
residential
permit, where
development
public
hearing is
required per
ECDC
24.80.100
Minor
Revisions to
Shoreline
preliminary
shoreline
conditional
plat
management
use
amendment
permits
Staff design
Administrative
Shoreline
review,
variances
variance
including signs
Final short plat
Land use
Design review
permit
(where public
extension
hearing by
requests
architectural
design board
is required)
Sales
Preliminary
office/model
formal plat
(ECDC
17.70.005)
Final formal
Innocent
Preliminary
plats
purchaser
planned
determination
a)
N
_
R
J
O
4r
w
_
N
E
_
d
E
Q
N
O
V
C1
_
�L
lC
d
2
2
3
a
7
O
d
Y
r.+
to
O
_
d
L
_
N
E
_
d
E
Q
N
O
tU
LO
O
r
m
2
O
CD
N
LO
m
U)
H
6L
Q
G
C
O
E
t
V
lC
r.+
r.+
a
a
Packet Pg. 412
9.1.d
DRAFT CODE Update —SB 5290 & HB 1105 v.2
TYPE I
TYPE II -A
TYPE II-B
TYPE III -A
TYPE III-B
TYPE IV
TYPE V
residential
development
Final planned
Staff design
residential
review pursuant
development
to ECDC
20.12.010(B)(2)
B. Decision Table.
PROCEDURE FOR DEVELOPMENT PROJECT PERMIT APPLICATIONS (TYPE
LEGISLATIVE
I - IV)
TYPE III -
TYPE I
TYPE II -A
TYPE II-B
TYPE III -A
TYPE IV
TYPE V
B
Recommendation
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Planning board
Planning board
by:
Final decision by:
Director
Director
Director
Hearing
Hearing
City council
City council
examiner/ADB
examiner
Notice of
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
application:
Open record
No
Only if
(1) If
Yes, before
Yes,
Yes, before
Yes, before planning
public hearing or
appealed,
director
hearing
before
planning board
board which makes
open record
open
decision
examiner or
hearing
which makes
recommendation to
appeal of a final
record
is
board to
examiner
recommendation
council or council
decision:
hearing
appealed,
render final
or board
to council
could hold its own
before
open
decision
to render
hearing
hearing
record
final
examiner
hearing
decision
before
a)
N
_
R
J
O
4r
w
_
N
E
_
d
E
Q
N
O
V
C1
_
�L
lC
d
2
C,1
3
a
O
d
Y
r.+
to
O
_
d
L
_
N
E
_
d
E
Q
N
O
tU
LO
O
r
r
m
2
O
CD
N
LO
m
W
H
LL
Q
G
C
O
E
t
V
lC
r.+
r.+
a
a
Packet Pg. 413
9.1.d
DRAFT CODE Update —5B 5290 & HB 1105 v.2
PROCEDURE FOR DEVELOPMENT PROJECT PERMIT APPLICATIONS (TYPE
LEGISLATIVE
I - IV)
TYPE III -
TYPE I
TYPE II -A
TYPE II-B
TYPE III -A
TYPE IV
TYPE V
B
hearing
examiner
(2) If
converted
to Type
III -A
process
Closed record
No
No
No
No
Yes,
Yes, before the
review:
before
council
the
council
Permit review
65�
100 days
100 days
170 days
170 days
170 days
Not applicable
timelines (per
ECDC 20.02):1
Judicial appeal:
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
C. Any reference to "Type II" in the Edmonds Community Development Code without expressly
being modified as "Type II-B" shall be construed to mean Type II -A for the purposes of this
section unless the context clearly suggests otherwise. [Ord. 4360 § 7 (Exh. A), 2024; Ord. 4302 § 2 (Att.
A), 2023; Ord. 4299 § 39 (Exh. A), 2023; Ord. 4154 § 1 (Att. A), 2019; Ord. 4072 § 7 (Att. G), 2017; Ord. 4026 § 4,
2016; Ord. 3982 § 4, 2014; Ord. 3817 § 1, 2010; Ord. 3806 § 2, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009].
20.01.006 Legislative enactments not restricted.
Nothing in this chapter or the permit processing procedures shall limit the authority of the city
council to make changes to the city's comprehensive plan or the city's development regulations
Commented [MC2]: SB 5290
Packet Pg. 414
9.1.d
DRAFT CODE Update —5B 5290 & HB 1105 v.2
as part of the annual revision process. [Ord. 4154 § 1 (Att. A), 2019; Ord. 3817 § 1, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4
(Exh. A), 2009].
20.01.007 Exempt projects.
A. The following projects are specifically excluded from the procedures set forth in this
chapter: historic register designations, building permits, street vacations, street use permits,
encroachment permits, and other public works permits issued under ECDC Title 18.
B. Pursuant to RCW 36.70B.140(2), lot line or boundary adjustments, building and/or other
construction permits, or similar administrative approvals categorically exempt from
environmental review under SEPA (Chapter 43.21 C RCW and the city's SEPA/environmental
policy ordinance, Chapter 20.15A ECDC), or permits/approvals for which environmental review
has been completed in connection with other project permits, are excluded from the
requirements of RCW 36.70B.060 and 36.70B.110 through 36.70B.130, which includes the
following procedures:
Notice of application (ECDC 20.03.002) unless an open record hearing is allowed on the
permit decision;
2. Except as provided in RCW 36.70B.140, optional consolidated permit review processing
(ECDC 20.01.002(B));
3. Joint public hearings (ECDC 20.06.010);
4. Single report stating all of the decisions and recommendations made as of the date of
the report that do not require an open public record hearing (ECDC 20.06.050(C)); and
5. Notice of decision (ECDC 20.02.007). [Ord. 4154 § 1 (Att. A), 2019; Ord. 3817 § 1, 2010; Ord. 3736
§ 4 (Exh. A), 20091.
8
Packet Pg. 415
9.1.d
DRAFT CODE Update -5B 5290 & HB 1105 v.2
Chapter 20.02
DEVELOPMENT PROJECT PERMIT APPLICATIONS
Sections:
20.02.001 Optional preapplication conference.
20.02.002 Permit application requirements.
20.02.003 and acceptance ofan9ficationComplete and incomplete
applications, requesting additional information.
20.02.004 Effect of irreconcilable applications on the same property.
20.02.005 Referral and review of development project permit applications.
20.02.006 Resubmission of application after denial.
20.02.007 Notice of final decision.
120.02.008 Permit review timelines.
20.02.001 Optional preapplication conference.
A. Prior to filing applications for Type II actions requiring a preliminary plat and Type III and IV
actions, applicants are encouraged to participate in a preapplication conference. Preapplication
meetings with staff provide an opportunity to discuss the proposal in general terms, identify
the applicable city requirements and the project review process including the permits required
by the action, timing of the permits and the approval process. Plans presented at the
preapplication meeting are nonbinding and do not "vest' an application.
B. The conference shall be held within 28 days of the request, upon payment of applicable
fee(s) as set forth in the city s adopted fee resolution.
C. The planning and development director or his/her designee (hereinafter the "director") shall
provide the applicant with the following during the conference:
Commented [MC3]: SB 5290
C
d
E
Packet Pg. 416
9.1.d
DRAFT CODE Update —5B 5290 & HB 1105 v.2
1. A form which lists the requirements for a completed application;
2. A general summary of the procedures to be used to process the application;
3. The references to the relevant code provisions or development standards which may
apply to approval of the application; and
4. The citys design guidelines.
D. Neither the discussions at the conference nor the information on the form provided by the
director to the applicant under subsection u of this section shall bind the city in any manner or
prevent the city's future application or enforcement of all applicable codes, ordinances and
regulations.
E. Requests for preapplication conferences for all other types of applications will be
considered on a time -available basis by the director. [Ord. 4299 § 40 (Exh. A), 2023; Ord. 3817 § 2,
2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009].
20.02.002 Permit application requirements.
An application shall consist of all materials required by the applicable development regulations
and shall include the following general information:
A. A completed land use application form;
B. A verified statement by the applicant that the property affected by the application is in the
exclusive ownership of the applicant, or that the applicant has submitted the application with
the consent of all owners of the affected property;
C. A property and/or legal description of the site for all applications, as required by the
applicable development regulations;
D. The applicable fee; and
E. Cover letter describing how the proposal satisfies the applicable standards, requirements
and criteria in the development regulations. [Ord. 3817 § 2, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009].
10
Packet Pg. 417
9.1.d
DRAFT CODE Update — SB 5290 & HB 1105 v.2
20.02.003 _a^d acceptance of application Complete and
incomplete applications, requesting additional information.
A. Determination of Completeness.
Within 28 days after receiving an application, the director must shall mail ^r PerseRally deliver
to the applicant _ determination which gtafog that eithor• provide a written determination to
the applicant stating that:. The o.frItteR determinofi.,n m -,; state e4hor•
1. The application is complete; or
2. The application is incomplete and -because that -the procedural submission
requirements have not been met. The determination sh 4-G ufi ^emust specifically describe
what information is needed %A/hat is noco«ary to make the application complete.
When an application is determined to be complete, the director will note the date of acceptance
for continued processing.
B. Identification of Other Agencies with Jurisdiction. To the extent known by the city, other
agencies with jurisdiction over the project shall be identified in the determination of
completeness.
C. Failure to Provide Determination of Completeness. An application is deemed procedurally
complete on the 29th day after receiving a project permit application under this section if the
director does not provide a written determination to the applicant that the application is
incomplete as provided in subsection (A)(2) of this section.
D. Incomplete Applications.
11
Commented [MC4]: Updated for consistency wit
5290 and RCW 36.70B.080. Some existing language
reorganized for clarity in Sub (D) and (E)
Packet Pg. 418
9.1.d
DRAFT CODE Update —5B 5290 & HB 1105 v.2
1. Whenever the applicant receives a determination from the city pursuant to subsection
(AM of this section that the application is incomplete, the applicant shall have 90 days to
submit the rlecessary-requested information. If circumstances warrant, the applicant may
apply in writing to the director requesting a one-time 90-day extension. The extension
reauest must be received by the citv prior to the end of the initial 90-dav period W'th'n 1 n
2. Within 14 days after an applicant has submitted the requested additional information,
the director must make a determination of completeness and notify the applicant in the
manner provided in subsection (A) of this section Whenever the applicant receives a nptice
that the coptepts of the application, ..which had been previously dpterm'npd nder
Qr nthenewise of the inform atinn being sow fight the applicant shall have QQ
days to submit the necessary information. If riro--rA4@ncLQs; viarrant, the applicant ma
apply in writing to the director requesting a one_t'me 90-day extension The e.rtens'n
request must he received by the city prierd. to the enof the initial 90 day compliance
A.
3. If the applicant does not submit the additional information requested within the 90-day
period (or within the 90-day extension period, as applicable), the director shall make
findings and issue a decision, according to the Type I procedure, that the application has
lapsed for lack of information necessary to complete the review. The decision shall state
that no further action will be taken on the application.
4. When the director determines that an application has lapsed because the applicant has
failed to submit required information within the necessary time period, the applicant may
request a refund of the application fee remaining after the city s determination of
completeness.
E. Requesting Additional Information.
The determination of completeness does not preclude the director's ability to request
additional information or ask for corrections to submitted materials whenever additional or
updated information is required, or when substantial changes are made to the proposed
rp oject.
12
Packet Pg. 419
9.1.d
DRAFT CODE Update —5B 5290 & HB 1105 v.2
1. Whenever the applicant receives a notice that the contents of the application, which
had been previously determined to be complete under subsection (A)(1) of this section, is
insufficient, ambiguous, undecipherable, or otherwise unresponsive of the information
being sought, the applicant has 90 days to submit the requested information. If
circumstances warrant, the applicant may apply in writing to the director requesting a one-
time 90-day extension. The extension request must be received by the city prior to the end
of the initial 90-day period.
2. If the applicant does not submit the additional information requested within the 90-day
period (or within the 90-day extension period, as applicable), the director must make
findings and issue a decision, according to the Type I procedure, that the application has
lapsed for lack of information necessary to complete the review. The decision must state
that no further action will be taken on the application.
3. When the director determines that an application has lapsed because the applicant has
failed to submit required information within the necessary time period, the applicant may
request a refund of the application fee remaining after the citys determination of
completeness.
r .61
GF. City Duty to Review. After the application is determined to be complete or additional
materials are accepted following a request for additional information, �, the city must
chill begin or resume processing the application. Under ne core, wn4ance< shall the city place
any application on "hold" to be processed at serne later date, even if the reque4 for the "hold'
d s made by the applicant, and regardless of the requ@sted length of the "holding" period. This
— . - - d G-P-S Ret apply te appilratffiGRS placed OR "hold" upon deternn.*Ratie.n. by the city that
13
Packet Pg. 420
9.1.d
DRAFT CODE Update —5B 5290 & HB 1105 v.2
;;.i.Jiri nnoI infer PR onnn is req 61 0 red in order to „-,al(e a dec0s Den [Ord. 4299 § 41 (Exh. A), 2023; Ord.
3817 § 2, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009].
G. Applicant may Suspend Review. If at any time an applicant informs the city, in writing, that the
applicant would like to temporarily suspend the review of the project for more than 60 days, or
if an applicant is not responsive for more than 60 consecutive days after the city has notified
the applicant, in writing, that additional information is required to further process the
application, an additional 30 days will be added to the time periods for city action to issue a
final decision for the permit. In addition, the city may set conditions for the temporary
suspension of a permit application.
20.02.004 Effect of irreconcilable applications on the same property.
A. If an applicant submits an application that cannot be reconciled with a previously submitted
application on the same property, the previously submitted application shall be deemed
withdrawn by the applicant and it shall be rendered null and void. The director shall notify the
applicant that the previously submitted application has been deemed withdrawn and will not
be processed any further. Withdrawal shall be deemed to occur even when the city has finished
processing the previously submitted application.
B. Many inconsistencies between applications can be reconciled through corrections that are
made during the development review process. This section is not intended to treat all
inconsistencies as effecting a withdrawal of the earlier application.
C. Without limiting the generality of subsection (A) of this section, the following examples are
intended to illustrate whether a subsequent application shall be deemed irreconcilable with an
earlier application:
1. Examples of Irreconcilable Applications That Result in Withdrawal.
a. Applicant submits an application for a four -lot short plat on a particular property.
Subsequently, another application is submitted for a three -lot short plat on the same
property. Assuming there is not enough land area for seven lots, the two applications
are irreconcilable because one could not construct both short plats. Hence, the four -lot
short plat is deemed withdrawn.
14
Packet Pg. 421
9.1.d
DRAFT CODE Update —5B 5290 & HB 1105 v.2
b. Applicant submits a design review application for a 20-unit multifamily housing
development. Subsequently, another design review application is submitted for a 30-
unit multifamily housing development whose footprint would substantially overlap
with the footprint of the structure shown for the 20-unit application. Because both
structures would occupy substantially the same space they are irreconcilable and the
20-unit application would be deemed withdrawn.
2. Examples of Applications That May Be Inconsistent but Are Not Irreconcilable Resulting in
Withdrawal.
a. Applicant submits an application for a four -lot short plat on a particular property.
Subsequently, a building permit application is submitted for a single-family home the
footprint of which would encroach into the setbacks as measured from the proposed
short plat lot lines. Because the building permit application could be corrected to
properly locate the footprint, the applications are reconcilable and do not effect a
withdrawal of the short plat application.
b. Applicant submits a landscaping plan that is inconsistent in an insignificant way
with civil site -improvement plans that are submitted for the same property. If the two
sets of plans can be reconciled by submitting a corrected version of at least one of the
two plans, then city staff would seek corrections and withdrawal would not be deemed
to occur. [Ord. 4006 § 1, 2015].
20.02.005 Referral and review of development project permit
applications.
Within 10 days of accepting an application, the director shall transmit a copy of the application,
or appropriate parts of the application, to each affected government agency and city
department for review and comment, including those responsible for determining compliance
with state and federal requirements. [Ord. 3817 § 2, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009].
20.02.006 Resubmission of application after denial.
Any permit application or other request for approval submitted pursuant to this title that is
denied shall not be resubmitted or accepted by the director for review for a period of 12
15
Packet Pg. 422
9.1.d
DRAFT CODE Update —SB 5290 & HB 1105 v.2
months from the date of the last action by the city on the application or request unless, in the
opinion of the director, there has been a significant change in the application or a significant
change in conditions related to the impacts of the proposed project. [Ord. 4006 § 2, 2015; Ord. 3817
§ 6, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009. Formerly 20.07.0071.
20.02.007 Notice of final decision.
A. The director shall must issue a notice of final decision with'n consistent with 120 days of the
final plot 30 days and a final sh,,,-* .,ice* 3n ,1-y-the timelines found in the Decision Table in
ECDC 20.01.003(B). The notice shall include the SEPA threshold determination for the proposal
and a description of any available administrative appeals. For Type 11, III and IV permits, the
notice shall contain the requirements set forth in ECDC 20.06.060(C) and explain that affected
property owners may request a change in property tax valuation notwithstanding any program
of revaluation.
B. 4—The notice of final decision shall be mailed or otherwise delivered to the applicant, and to
any person who submitted comments on the application or requested a copy of the decision,
and to the Snohomish County assessor.
16
Commented [MCS]: Updated per SB 5290
Packet Pg. 423
9.1.d
DRAFT CODE Update —5B 5290 & HB 1105 v.2
20.02.008 Permit review timelines.
A. Required Timelines. Permit review timelines are shown in the Decision Table in ECDC
20.01.003(B). The citys review timelines restart if an applicant proposes a change in use that
adds or removes commercial or residential elements from the original application that result in
a failure to meet the determination of procedural comoleteness for the new use.
B. Calculation of Days.
The number of days an application is in review with the city is calculated from the day
completeness is determined to the date a final decision is issued on the permit application,
17
Packet Pg. 424
9.1.d
DRAFT CODE Update —5B 5290 & HB 1105 v.2
consistent with ECDC 20.02.007. The number of days is calculated by counting every calendar
day and excluding the following time period:
1. Any period between the day that the city has notified the applicant, in writing. that
additional information is required to further process the application and the day when
responsive information is resubmitted by the applicant;
2. Any period after an applicant informs the city, in writing, that they would like to
temporarily suspend review of the permit application until the time that the applicant
notifies the city, in writing, that they would like to resume the application; and
3. Any period after an administrative appeal is filed until the administrative appeal is
resolved and any additional time period provided by the administrative appeal has expired.
C. Permit Application Fee Refunds. qlhL `
1. When the permit review time periods provided in ECDC 20.01.003.E are not met, a
portion of the permit application fee must be refunded to the applicant, unless the city
has implemented at least three of the permit review streamlining options in RCW
36.70B.160(l) (a) through (i) at the time an application is deemed procedurally complete.
The portion of the fee refunded for missing time periods is:
issuance of the final decision did not exceed 20 percent of the original time period;
or
b. 20 percent: if the period from the passage of the deadline to the time of the
issuance of the final decision exceeded 20 percent of the original time period.
D. Annual Performance Report. Consistent with RCW 36.70B.080, the City must prepare an
annual project permit performance report.
18
Packet Pg. 425
9.1.d
DRAFT CODE Update — SB 5290 & HB 1105 v.2
Chapter 20.03
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS
Sections:
20.03.002 Notice of application.
20.03.003 Notice of public hearing.
20.03.004 State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) notice.
20.03.005 Shoreline master program (SMP) notice.
20.03.006 Optional public notice.
20.03.002 Notice of application.
Commented [MC6]: Update for consistency with n 0�
public comment dates/times 0
Y
A. Generally. A notice of application shall be provided by the director to the public, all city
departments and agencies with jurisdiction of all Type II, III and IV development project permit
rn
applications in accordance with this chapter. The notice of application for these permits shall
c
also be provided to the public by posting, publishing and mailing.
L
B. Issuance of Notice of Application.
c
E
1. A notice of application shall be issued within 14 days after the city has made a
d
determination of completeness pursuant to ECDC 20.02.003.
Q
2. If any open record predecision hearing is required for the requested development
d
p
project permit(s), the notice of application shall be provided at least 15 days prior to the
U
LO
open record hearing.
0
r
r
m
C. Contents. The notice of application shall include the following information in a format 2
determined by the director: rn
1. The date of submission of the initial application, the date of the notice of completion
and acceptance of the application, and the date of the notice of application;
2. A description of the proposed project and a list of the development project permits
requested in the application and, if applicable, a list of any studies requested under
Chapter 36.7013 RCW;
19
Packet Pg. 426
9.1.d
DRAFT CODE Update — SB 5290 & HB 1105 v.2
3. A description of other required permits not included in the application, to the extent
known by the city at that time;
4. A description of existing environmental documents that evaluate the proposed project,
and, if not otherwise stated on the document providing notice of application, the location
where the application and any studies can be reviewed;
5. A statement setting forth: (a) the time for the public comment period, which shall be not
less than 14 days following the date of notice of application; (b) the right of any person to
comment on the application, receive notice of and participate in any hearings, and request
a copy of the decision on the application; and (c) any appeal rights;
6. The date, time, place and type of hearing, if a hearing has been scheduled when the
date of notice of application is issued. For Type II-B processes, the notice shall provide
information regarding the process for requesting a public hearing in accordance with the
applicable Type II-B permit application;
7. Any other information determined appropriate by the director such as the director's
threshold determination, if complete at the time of issuance of the notice of application.
D. Mailed Notice. Notice of application shall be mailed to:
1. The owners of the property involved if different from applicant; and
2. The owners of real property within 300 feet of the boundaries of the property(ies)
involved in the application (the distance is extended to 500 feet for Type II -A design review
applications in the general commercial zone). Addresses for a mailed notice required by
this code shall be obtained from the applicable county's real property tax records. The
adjacent property owners list must be current to within six months of the date of initial
application.
3. Type 111 Preliminary Plat Actions. In addition to the above, requirements for mailed notice
of filing for preliminary plats and proposed subdivisions shall also include the following:
a. Notice of the filing of a preliminary plat adjacent to or within one mile of the
municipal boundaries of any city or town, or which contemplates the use of any city or
town utilities, shall be given to the appropriate city or town authorities;
20
Packet Pg. 427
9.1.d
DRAFT CODE Update —5B 5290 & HB 1105 v.2
b. Notice of the filing of a preliminary plat of a proposed subdivision adjoining the
boundaries of Snohomish County shall be given to the appropriate county officials;
c. Notice of the filing of a preliminary plat of a proposed subdivision located adjacent
to the right-of-way of a state highway shall be given to the Secretary of Transportation;
4. For a plat alteration or a plat vacation, notice shall be as provided in RCW 58.17.080 and
58.17.090.
All mailed public notices shall be deemed to have been received on the next business day
following the day that the notice is deposited in the mail.
E. Published Notice. Notice of application shall be published in the city's official newspaper (The
Everett Herald, as identified in Chapter 1.03 ECC). The format shall be determined by the
director and the notice must contain the information listed in subsection u of this section.
F. Posting. Posting of the property for site specific proposals shall consist of one or more notice
boards as follows:
1. A single notice board shall be placed:
a. At the midpoint of the street fronting the site or as otherwise directed by the
director for maximum visibility;
b. Five feet inside the street property line, except when the board is structurally
attached to an existing building; provided, that no notice board shall be placed more
than five feet from the street without approval of the director;
c. So that the bottom of the notice board is between two and four feet above grade;
and
d. Where it is completely visible to pedestrians.
e. The size of the notice board shall be determined by the director.
2. Additional notice boards may be required when:
a. The site does not abut a public road;
b. A large site abuts more than one public road; or
21
Packet Pg. 428
9.1.d
DRAFT CODE Update — SB 5290 & HB 1105 v.2
c. The director determines that additional notice boards are necessary to provide
adequate public notice.
3. Notice boards shall be:
a. Maintained in good condition during the notice period;
b. In place at least 14 days prior to the date of any hearing, and at least 14 days prior
to the end of any required comment period;
c. Removed within 30 days of the date of the project decision, unless the decision is
appealed. If the project decision is appealed, the sign must be removed 30 days after
the appeal decision is issued.
4. Removal of the notice board prior to the end of the notice period shall be cause for
p
discontinuance of the department review until the notice board is replaced and remains in
Y
•L
place for the specified time period.
w
c
G. Public Comment on the Notice of Application. All public comments in response to the notice of
application must be received by the city's planning and development department between the
L
day the notice is issued and 11:59 p.m, by ^.Ton the last day of the comment period.
d
Comments in response to the notice of application received after the comment period has
E
expired will not be accepted no matter when they were mailed or postmarked. Comments shall
y
be mailed, emailed or personally delivered. Comments should be as specific as possible. [Ord.
Q
4302 § 3 (Att. A), 2023; Ord. 4299 § 42 (Exh. A), 2023; Ord. 4026 § 5, 2016; Ord. 4021 § 1, 2016; Ord. 3817 § 3,
4)
2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009].
U
20.03.003 Notice of public hearing.
LO
Commented [MC7]: Update for consistency with G 0)S
public comment dates/times r
A. A notice of public hearing shall be provided by the city for Type III or Type IV actions, as well
=
as appeals of Type II actions, by mailing, posting and publishing. o
B. Content of Notice of Public Hearing forAll Applications. The notice of a public hearing required
by this chapter shall contain:
1. The name and address of the applicant and the applicant's representative;
2. A description of the subject property reasonably sufficient to inform the public of its
location, including but not limited to a vicinity location or written description, a map or
22
Packet Pg. 429
9.1.d
DRAFT CODE Update —5B 5290 & HB 1105 v.2
postal address, and a subdivision lot and block designation (complete legal description not
required);
3. The date, time and place of the hearing;
4. The nature of the proposed use or development;
5. A statement that all interested persons may appear and provide testimony;
6. The sections of the code that are pertinent to the hearing procedure;
7. A statement explaining when information may be examined, and when and how written
comments addressing findings required for a decision by the hearing body may be
admitted;
8. The name of a city representative to contact and the telephone number where
additional information may be obtained;
9. A statement that a copy of the application, all documents and evidence relied upon by
the applicant, and applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost and that copies
will be provided at the requestor's cost; and
10. A statement explaining that a copy of the staff report will be available for inspection at
no cost at least seven days prior to the hearing and that copies will be provided at the
requestor's cost.
C. Mailed Notice. Mailed notice of the public hearing shall be provided as follows:
1. The notice of the public hearing shall be mailed to:
a. The applicant;
b. The owner of the subject property, if different from applicant;
c. All owners of real property, as shown by the records of the county assessor, within
300 feet of the boundaries of the property(ies) involved in the application; and
d. Any person who submits public comments on an application;
23
Packet Pg. 430
9.1.d
DRAFT CODE Update —5B 5290 & HB 1105 v.2
2. Type 111 Preliminary Plat Actions. In addition to the above, requirements for mailed notice
of public hearing for preliminary plats and proposed subdivisions shall also include the
following:
a. If the owner of the real property which is proposed to be subdivided owns another
parcel or parcels of real property which lie adjacent to the real property proposed to
be subdivided, notice under RCW 58.17.0900)(b) shall be given to owners of real
property located with 300 feet from any portion of the boundaries of the adjacent
parcels owned by the owner of the real property to be subdivided.
3. For a plat alteration or a plat vacation, notice shall be as provided in RCW 58.17.080 and
58.17.090.
4. Procedure for Mailed Notice of Public Hearing.
a. The records of the Snohomish County assessor's office shall be used for
determining the property owner of record. Addresses for a mailed notice required by
this code shall be obtained from the applicable countys real property tax records.
b. All mailed public notices shall be deemed to have been received on the next
business day following the day that the notice is deposited in the mail.
D. Procedure for Posted or Published Notice of Public Hearing.
1. Posted notice of the public hearing shall comply with requirements set forth in ECDC
20.03.O02(F).
2. Notice of public hearing shall be published in the citys official newspaper (The Everett
Herald, as identified in Chapter 1.03 ECC). The format shall be determined by the director
and the notice must contain the information listed in subsection (B) of this section.
E. Time of Notice of Public Hearing. Notice shall be mailed, posted and first published not less
than 14 or more than 30 days prior to the hearing date. [Ord. 3817 § 3, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A),
2009. Formerly 20.03.004].
F. Public Comment on the Notice of Public Hearing. All public comments in response to the notice
of public hearing must be received by the citys planning and development department
between the day the notice is issued and the close of the public hearing.
24
Packet Pg. 431
9.1.d
DRAFT CODE Update - SB 5290 & HB 1105 v.2
20.03.004 State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) notice.
A. Whenever possible, the city shall integrate the public notice required under this subsection
with existing notice procedures for the city's nonexempt permit(s) or approval(s) required for
the proposal.
B. Whenever the city issues a determination of nonsignificance (DNS) under WAC 197-11-
340(2) or a determination of significance (DS) under WAC 197-11-360(3) the city shall give public
notice as follows:
1. If public notice is required for a nonexempt license, the notice shall state whether a DS
or DNS has been issued and when comments are due.
2. If an environmental document is issued concurrently with the notice of application, the
public notice requirements for the notice of application in RCW 36.70B.110(4) will suffice to
meet the SEPA public notice requirements in WAC 197-11-5100 ).
3. If no public notice is otherwise required for the permit or approval, the city shall give
notice of the DNS or DS by:
a. Posting the property, for site specific proposals;
b. Mailed to real property owners as shown by the records of the county assessor
within 300 feet of the boundary of the property, for site specific proposals; and
c. Publishing notice in the city's official newspaper (or if one has not been designated,
in a newspaper of general circulation within the city).
4. Whenever the city issues a DS under WAC 197-11-360(3), the city shall state the scoping
procedure for the proposal in the DS as required in WAC 197-11-408 and in the public
notice.
C. If a DNS is issued using the optional DNS process, the public notice requirements for a
notice of application in RCW 36.70B.110(4) as supplemented by the requirements in WAC 197-
11-355 will suffice to meet the SEPA public notice requirements in WAC 197-11-51000).
D. Whenever the city issues a draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) under WAC 197-11-
455(5) or a supplemental environmental impact statement (SEIS) under WAC 197-11-620, notice
of the availability of those documents shall be given by:
25
Commented [MCB]: Update for consistency with
public comment dates/times
v
3
a
Packet Pg. 432
9.1.d
DRAFT CODE Update —5B 5290 & HB 1105 v.2
1. Indicating the availability of the DEIS in any public notice required for a nonexempt
license;
2. Posting the property, for site specific proposals;
3. Mailed to real property owners as shown by the records of the county assessor within
300 feet of the boundary of the property, for site specific proposals; and
4. Publishing notice in the city's official newspaper (or if one has not been designated, in a
newspaper of general circulation within the city).
E. Public notice for projects that qualify as planned actions shall be tied to underlying permit;
the notice shall state that the project has qualified as a planned action. If notice is not otherwise
required for the underlying permit, no special notice is required.
F. Public Comment. All public comments in response to the notice of a comment period must
be received by the city's planning and development department between the day the notice is
issued and 11:59 p.m. on the last day of the comment period. The-����
to complete the public notice requirements for the applicant's proposal at his or her expense.
[Ord. 3818 § 2, 2010; Ord. 3817 § 3, 2010].
20.03.005 Shoreline master program (SMP) notice.
A. Methods of Providing SMP Notice. Notice of the application of a permit under the purview of
the city s shoreline master program shall be given by one or more of the following methods:
1. Mailing of the notice to real property owners as shown by the records of the county
assessor within 300 feet of the boundary of the property upon which the proposed project
is to be built;
2. Posting of the notice in a conspicuous manner, as determined by the director, on the
property upon which the project is to be constructed; or
3. Any other manner deemed appropriate by the director to accomplish the objectives of
reasonable notice to adjacent landowners and the public.
B. Content of SMP Notice. SMP notices shall include:
1. A statement that any person desiring to submit written comments concerning an
application, or desiring to receive notification of the final decision concerning an
26
O
m
Y
r.+
rn
O
c
Commented [MC9]: Update for consistency with
public comment dates/times
Packet Pg. 433
9.1.d
DRAFT CODE Update — SB 5290 & HB 1105 v.2
application, may submit comments, or requests for the decision, to the director within 30
days of the last date that notice is published pursuant to this subsection;
2. A statement that any person may submit oral or written comments at the hearing;
3. An explanation of the manner in which the public may obtain a copy of the city's
decision on the application no later than two days after its issuance.
C. Public Comment on an SMP Notice-PU6. c Go.m.mew.per4e6k The public comment period sha14
be is 30 days from the date of issuance of the notice until 11:59 p.m. on the final day of the
notice period or until the close of any required public hearing.
D. The director shall mail or otherwise deliver a copy of the decision to each person who
submits comments or a written request for the decision. [Ord. 3817 § 3, 2010].
20.03.006 Optional public notice.
The director, in his or her sole discretion, may:
A. Notify the public or private groups with known interest in a proposal or type of proposal;
B. Notify the news media;
C. Place notices in appropriate regional or neighborhood newspapers or trade journals;
D. Publish notice in agency newsletters or send notice to agency mailing lists, either general
lists or lists for specific proposals or subject areas; and
E. Mail notice to additional neighboring property owners. [Ord. 3817 § 3, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A),
2009. Formerly 20.03.003].
Chapter 20.12
DISTRICT -BASED DESIGN REVIEW
20.12.005 Outline of process and statement of intent.
The architectural design board (ADB) process has been developed in order to provide for public
and design professional input prior to the expense incurred by a developer in preparation of
27
Packet Pg. 434
9.1.d
DRAFT CODE Update —5B 5290 & HB 1105 v.2
detailed design. In combination, Chapter 20.10 ECDC and this chapter are intended to permit
public and ADB input at an early point in the process while providing greater assurance to a
developer that his general project design has been approved before the final significant
expense of detailed project design is incurred. In general, the process is as follows:
A. Public Hearing (Phase 1). The applicant shall submit a preliminary conceptual design to the
city. Staff shall schedule the first phase of the ADB hearing within 30 days of staffs
determination that the application is complete. Upon receipt, staff shall provide full notice of a
public hearing, noting that the public hearing shall be conducted in two phases. The entire
single public hearing on the conceptual design shall be on the record. At the initial phase, the
applicant shall present facts which describe in detail the tract of land to be developed noting all
significant characteristics. The ADB shall make factual findings regarding the particular
characteristics of the property and shall prioritize the design guideline checklist based upon
these facts, the provisions of the city s design guideline elements of the comprehensive plan
and the Edmonds Community Development Code. Following establishment of the design
guideline checklist, the public hearing shall be continued to a date certain requested by the
applicant, not to exceed 120 days from the meeting date. The 1' 1701day city review
period required by RCW 36.7013.080 commences with the application for Phase 1 of the public
hearing. The 12 170-day time period is suspended, however, while the applicant further
develops their application for Phase 2 of the public hearing. This suspension is based upon the
finding of the city council, pursuant to RCW 36.70B.080, that additional time is required to
process this project type. The city has no control over the length of time needed or taken by an
applicant to complete its application.
B. Continued Public Hearing (Public Hearing, Phase 2). The purpose of the continuance is to
permit the applicant to design or redesign his initial conceptual design to address the input of
the public and the ADB by complying with the prioritized design guideline checklist criteria.
When the applicant has completed his design or redesign, he shall submit that design for final
review. The matter shall be set for the next available regular ADB meeting date. If the applicant
fails to submit his or her design within 180 days, the staff shall report the matter to the ADB
who shall note that the applicant has failed to comply with the requirements of the code and
find that the original design checklist criteria approval is void. The applicant may reapply at any
time. Such reapplication shall establish a new 12day170-day review period and establish a
new vesting date.
28
Packet Pg. 435
9.1.d
DRAFT CODE Update -5B 5290 & HB 1105 v.2
C. After completing the hearing process, the final detailed design shall be presented to the city
in conjunction with the applicable building permit application. The city staffs decision on the
building permit shall be a ministerial act applying the specific conditions or requirements set
forth in the ADB's approval, but only those requirements. A staff decision on the building permit
shall be final and appealable only as provided in the Land Use Petition Act. No other internal
appeal of the staffs ministerial decisions on the building permit is allowed. [Ord. 4302 § 4 (Att. A),
2023; Ord. 3636 § 3, 2007].
Chapter 20.75
SUBDIVISIONS
20.75.065 Preliminary review.
0
Y
A. Responsibility for Review. The planning and development director, or a designated planning
N
staff member, is in charge of administering the preliminary review of all subdivisions. The
O
c
public works director and the fire department, and other departments if needed, shall
-a
participate in preliminary review by appropriate recommendations on subjects within their
d
L
respective areas of expertise.
a=i
E
B. Repealed by Ord. 4314. Repealed.
C. Tim e L im its fie r ReWe-t�'. !Staff r@viLQo.f Shall be completed within 120 days from thLQ date Qf
Commented [MC10]: Repeal. Duplicative of the t Q
f;
permit decision table in ECDC 20.01.003.E N
O
0
DC. Formal Subdivision Review. The hearing examiner shall review a formal subdivision as a
c
Type III -A decision in accordance with provisions of Chapter 20.06 ECDC.
m
€D. Short Subdivisions -Staff Review. The director of planning and development shall review a
=
short subdivision as a Type II decision (Staff decision - Notice required).
0
Q?
29
Packet Pg. 436
9.1.d
DRAFT CODE Update —5B 5290 & HB 1105 v.2
€E. Appeal of Staff Decision. Any person may appeal to the hearing examiner a Type II decision
of the planning and development director on a short subdivision under the procedure set forth
in Chapter 20.06 ECDC. [Ord. 4314 § 85 (Exh. A), 2023; Ord. 4299 § 57 (Exh. A), 2023; Ord. 4154 § 4 (Att. C),
2019; Ord. 4070 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2017; Ord. 3817 § 12, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 65, 2009; Ord. 3211 §§ 4, 5, 1998; Ord. 3112
§§ 17, 18, 19, 1996; Ord. 2379 § 2, 1983].
20.75.070 Formal subdivision - Time limit.
The city shall make its final decision on a proposed formal subdivision within 90 days of the
date f the timelines found in the Decision Table in ECDC 20.01.003(B), unless the
applicant agrees to extend the time. Where applicable, additiGRal tirne Reeled to prepare any,
cirn d#P ;in Pm statprnent shall net he ided within said 90 days. [Ord.
4154 § 4 (Att. C), 2019; Ord. 4070 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2017].
Title 21
DEFINITIONS
21.80.095 Project permit or project permit application.
Project permit or project permit application for purposes of the ECDC means any land use or
environmental permit or license required by the ECDC for a project action, including but not
limited to b6 i"diRg permits, subdivisions, binding site plans, planned unit developments,
conditional uses, shoreline substantial development permits, site plan review, permits or
approvals required by critical areas ordinances, site -specific rezones authorized by a
cempreheRS'Ve plaR or sub =re_ ^' ,which do not require a comprehensive plan
amendment, but excluding the adoption or amendment of a comprehensive plan, subarea
plan, or development regulations except as otherwise specifically included in this subsection.
[Ord. 3112 § 36, 1996].
30
Commented [MCI 1]: Repeal. Duplicative of the t
Commented
decision table in ECDC 20.01.003.E
Commented [MCI 2]: Updated for consistency w
5290
Packet Pg. 437
10.1
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 09/24/2024
Green Building Incentives Draft Code Amendments (AMD2023-0010)
Staff Lead: Leif Bjorback
Department: Planning & Development
Preparer: Tristan Sewell
Background/History
Staff introduced this topic to Council on August 6, 2024 (Attachment 1).
Previously, staff introduced the green building incentives project to the Planning Board on January 10,
2024. Additional discussions occurred on February 28 and April 24, where draft code amendments were
reviewed. The Planning Board held a public hearing on the proposed code amendments on June 12 and
approved the draft language on July 24. On September 11, 2024, the Planning Board completed their
recommendation to Council recommending approval the draft code amendments (Attachment 2).
Staff Recommendation
No action is required at this time. The presentation on September 24 will provide additional details
about the proposed Green Building Incentives code amendments prior to a public hearing at Council
scheduled for October 8. After the hearing, Council could choose to: (a)schedule a follow up work
session on the topic;; or (b) provide direction on proposed language for an ordinance that may be
adopted.
Narrative
The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change issued its Sixth Assessment Report in
March 2023. The Synthesis Report Summary for Policymakers states "[h]uman activities, principally
through emissions of greenhouse gases, have unequivocally caused global warming" and that "[t]here is
a rapidly closing window of opportunity to secure a livable and sustainable future for all"
That same month, the City Council adopted the 2023 Climate Action Plan to secure this future for
Edmonds. Edmonds aims to do its part to restrict the global average temperature increase to no more
than +1.5°C by achieving climate neutrality by 2050.
The largest portion of Edmonds' local climate pollution stems from the built environment. Over a third of
local climate pollution comes from residences. To achieve the Climate Action Plan's goal of climate
neutrality by 2050, immediate, rapid, and deep greenhouse gas emissions reductions are necessary
within this decade. Market conditions perpetuate construction and renovation of inefficient buildings in
Edmonds. The lifecycle climate impact of Edmonds' development could be mitigated by incentivizing
better construction.
Among the strategies identified in the plan is BE-2: "[i]mprove energy efficiency of existing buildings and
infrastructure". In pursuit of this strategy, the plan establishes Action BE-2.2: "[c]reate and implement a
Packet Pg. 438
10.1
green building incentive program".
Staff sought public input and practitioner knowledge in developing these draft code amendments. The
City engaged with the Master Builders Association of King and Snohomish Counties, local developers,
and the Mayor's Climate Protection Committee, to identify what Edmonds needs to see for more
sustainable development. Staff held a Green Building Incentive Forum to educate the broader public on
this opportunity and to receive feedback. Staff also attended a green building conference and learned
from other local governments' green building programs.
Discussion
Staff researched best practices, outcomes, and plans for revisions of the leading green building programs
both locally and nationwide prior to developing the proposed incentives. Edmonds' current development
code includes some green building land use incentives, such as increased building height, in limited
instances. The proposed language in Attachment 3 and incentive summary table in Attachment 5, works
to integrate these lessons into existing code in a manner that would be easily understood by applicants
and staff alike.
The proposal relies on industry standards and existing precedent in Edmonds' code to offer attractive
incentives capable of motivating the desired environmental outcomes. It is important to diversify the
incentives offered as every project is different - in terms of site constraints, financing options, and/or
timelines. We asked for feedback on what could Edmonds offer to convince an applicant to shift from
conventional construction to green building practices. The draft program represents desirable incentives
from our stakeholder discussions and peer feedback from other cities.
Financial Impact: Staff developed this incentive program in-house without the use of outside resources
(professional services contracts). While staff spent considerable time developing this draft code, little
additional staff time should be needed for implementation of these incentives apart from potential
enforcement. The enforcement efforts would be offset with significant revenue (enforcement fines) for
projects that fail to certify.
Stakeholders: Adherence to the adopted Climate Action Plan, and particularly, the reduction of climate
impacts from buildings, concerns all members of the community. The incentives offered primarily
concern landowners and developers as prospective applicants, and development review staff, being
responsible for implementing permitting expediting and administering the offered land use incentives.
The program represents the result of stakeholder engagement discussions, including interdepartmental
staff discussions on the impacts of expedited permitting on Engineering, Fire, Planning and Building.
Attachments:
Attachment 1 - August 6, 2024 excerpt Council minutes
Attachment 2 - Planning Board Recommendation to Council on Green Building Incentive Code
Amendments
Attachment 3 - Draft Green Building Incentives Code Amendments
Attachment 4 - Green Building Incentives - Council 9.24.24 presentation
Attachment 5 - Draft Incentives Summary Table
Packet Pg. 439
10.1.a
from the policy, for example in a budget, if the budget did not meet the City's policy standards. In budgets
he prepared, he recommended calling that out to make it clear to the council and public. The budget policies
are a bit aspirational but intended to become the new standard.
Mr. Bailey referred to the policy regarding the Long Range Financial Strategy, acknowledging confusion
by the finance committee about how this is characterized and suggested could be stated more as a policy
statement than a task.
Councilmember Paine asked how seeking grants would fit into a Long Range Financial Strategy as some
large capital projects can be ongoing for several years. Mr. Bailey answered that would be a consistent
approach, especially for grants that sustain multi -year projects.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER CHEN, TO
BRING THE FINANCIAL POLICIES AS AMENDED TO A FUTURE CONSENT AGENDA FOR
APPROVAL.
Council President Olson commented it would be nice to see the changes that the council approved
implemented into the policy before final approval. Mr. Bailey commented based on the amount of work
that has gone into the policy, the council's intent will be clear to staff and will be used to inform the budget
process. Council President Olson expressed appreciation for all the work that went into the policies.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mayor Rosen declared a brief recess.
3. GREEN BUILDING INCENTIVES DRAFT CODE AMENDMENT INTRODUCTION
Building Official Leif Bjorback introduced Planner Tristan Sewell and Planning & Development Director
Susan McLaughlin. Planner Tristan Sewell reviewed:
• Brief Summary
o Buildings emit most of Edmonds' local climate pollution. Residences emit over a third.
o Encouraging development with reduced environmental impacts via optional permit review and
land use incentives.
o Proposed incentives expand upon underutilized existing examples
o Learn how to expand and adapt to more contexts, zones, etc.
o Planning Board recommends — memo forthcoming
• Policy Context
0 2020 Comprehensive Plan Climate Change Element
■ B.1: City takes lead reducing Edmonds' GHG emissions
■ E.2: Programs and incentives for (re)development to reduce GHG emissions
0 2023 Climate Action Plan
■ Climate neutrality by 2050
■ Action BE-2.2: Develop and implement a green building incentives program
• Program Objectives
o VALUABLE
■ Desirable to homeowners and developers, motivating the environmental outcomes
■ Greater incentives in exchange for `greener' certification
o SIMPLE
■ Expand upon code precedent, specifically Titles 16 & 22
■ Use industry standards to avoid creating unique criteria
■ Minimize impacts on City staff
Existing Regulations
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 6, 2024
Page 16
Packet Pg. 440
10.1.a
o WMU requires Built Green 1-3 Star or
equivalent LEED
o Extra height for LEED Gold in:
■ RM - Edmonds Way
■ BC - Edmonds Way
■ Westgate
■ Firdale Village District 2 (Multifamily
Residential)
■ Minimal uptake - only Westgate Village
D15TW-78OLtQMF3FOR `•w.r.cw —"•—"
ABOMF OW1DF BURDNG(% ® E FFVAL.'. E
Market Influence
o Edmonds
■ 25 Built Green Projects
o Neighbors and Peers
■ Hundreds of Built Green Projects in:
- Shoreline
- Everett
- Kirkland
r 12
S1 Edward
tale Pk
3T
4,
!G�
e
RndIP Trails
Kirkland
Possible Incentives
o Expedited plan review - time is money
o Additional building height - enables greater efficiency
o Reduced setbacks - onsite location flexibility
o Increased lot coverage - more developable lot area
o Increased Density - number of units, floor area ratio
o Reduced off-street parking - specific needs vs. one -size -fits -most
Important Notes
o Incentives never supersede other regulations.
o Onsite realities may limit utilization of incentives.
o Possible limiting factors:
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 6, 2024
Page 17
Packet Pg. 441
10.1.a
■ Critical areas
■ Applicant finances
■ Existing development
■ Topography
■ Building and Fire codes
■ Stormwater
■ Design review, including landscaping
■ Street frontage improvements and right-of-way access
■ Shoreline Master Program
Mr. Bjorback reviewed:
• Program Development
o Researched incentives programs in the region and nationally
■ American Institute of Architects
■ American Planning Association
o Learned from peers and neighbors
■ Cities of Bellevue, Everett, Kirkland, Seattle, Shoreline, and Tacoma
o Master Builders of King and Snohomish Counties (MBAKS)
o Mayor's Climate Protection Committee
o Public forum seeking input from both industry reps and public
o Met with Planning Board on 4 occasions
• Construction Standards (Established Certifications)
o Single -Family Residential: Built Green® 4-Star
o Commercial, Multifamily, and Mixed Use: LEEDTM Gold
o Flexible, point -based systems — not prescriptive
o Periodically updated in response to the market and regulation
o Widely used and recognized in our region
o Third -party verified
• Point Categories
o Built Green
■ Site and Water
■ Energy Efficiency
■ Health and Indoor Air Quality
■ Materials Efficiency
■ Equity and Social Justice
■ Operation, Maintenance, and Homeowner Education
■ Built Green Brand Promotion
o LEED
■ Integrative Process
■ Location and Transportation
■ Sustainable Sites
■ Water Efficiency
■ Energy and Atmosphere
■ Materials and Resources
■ Indoor Environmental Quality
■ Innovation
■ Regional Priority
Draft Permit Review Incentives
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 6, 2024
Page 18
Packet Pg. 442
10.1.a
DRAFT - EDMONDS TARGETTIMES FOR PERMIT PROCESSING (WEEKS)
Actual Review times may vary
Permit Type
Review Type
New Single
Regular
Family
Expedited
Single Family
Regular
Addition or
Remodel
Expedited
Commercial/ MF
Regular
New
Expedited
Commercial/MF
Regular
Additions
Expedited
Commercial
Regular
Remodel (Tenant
Improvement)
Expedited
Total Target IReview Time
1 st Review
2nd Review
3rd Review
Review Time
Savings
6
3
2
11
3
2
1
6
5weeks
3to5
2to3
1to2
6to10
2 to 3
1 to 2
1
4 to 6
2-4 weeks
8
5
3
16
4
3
2
9
7weeks
4
3
2
9
2
2
1
5
4 weeks
4
2
1
7
2
1
1
4
3weeks
Expedited review for single family not available in RM or B zones
Review times may vary depending on staff work volumes and complexity of project.
Mr. Sewell reviewed:
• Draft Land Use Incentives
Development Multifamily Residential Commercial
Business (M Zones
(RMiZones IC --ones
Minimum Certification Built Green 4-Star LEED Gold
Built Green 5-Star or better
projects may use setbacks
NIA
one zone smaller
(i e., RS-10 to RS-8)
Choose one of the -5 plus the 5pitched roof bonus for all portions sloped
following: at least.
. -5' in addition to the 3-in-I2 BC
,5'where all portions existing pitched roof
above 25' are sloped at bonus of Ch. 16.30 4-in-12 BN. BF +5
least 4-in-12 . Maximum unit 6-in-12 BD5 CCW only:
density increased
one tier (i.e., RM-3 to NIA BD1 -4
RM-2 4)
Parking 1 per dwelling unit 1 per dwelling unit N/A
1 per 500 sq. ft. leasable commercial Floor area
Mr. Bjorback reviewed:
• Enforcement - Case Studies
o Examples from other jurisdictions:
■ Certification required within 6-30 months of issuance of Certificate of Occupancy
■ Financial penalty models:
- Flat rate
- Percentage of work valuation
- Per square foot
■ Remit any waived or reduced fees in full
■ Liens may be issued for the penalty or abatement needed to comply
• Proposed Enforcement Measures
o Proof of certification required prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy, otherwise two 2-
year performance bond required:
■ Requires registration of the project with the certifying organization
■ Expedited permit review bond valued at 50% of building permit fee
■ Land use incentive bond valued at 5% of the project valuation
■ Bonds released upon approval of certification
o Failure to certify within 2 years surrenders the bonds as a penalty
■ Expedited permit review bond processed as permit fee revenue
■ Land use incentive bond funds the Green Building Incentives Program
• Next Steps
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 6, 2024
Page 19
Packet Pg. 443
10.1.a
o Discussion: September 10, 2024
o Public Hearing: September 24, 2024
o Council Action: October 1, 2024
Councilmember Nand relayed her understanding the fees charged by the LEED program can be cost
prohibitive to certain developers. She asked if the proposed financial incentives would pencil out when
considered against the cost of LEED certification. Mr. Sewell answered based on what staff has heard from
stakeholders, they think the program offers enough carrots to cross that threshold. It should go without
saying that not every project will pencil in that way; some will look at it and say it will not work for them,
it may be matter of scale for some. He clarified LEED Gold is not one thing, there are a lot of different
versions and has a broader application than the Built Green residential model. Based on what staff is seeing
from its peers and attempt to make equivalencies, they think the program will cross that threshold.
Council President Olson said in theory she is100% excited about the green incentives and when it was
approved in the Climate Action Plan (CAP), everyone has been looking forward to the development of the
program. However, she had concerns with regard to implementation. For example she was looking for
something she was told would be in the program that she was not seeing so perhaps it was already taken
out, 40% lot coverage versus 35%. Mr. Sewell said there has not been a lot coverage proposal. It was
considered internally, but was not presented to the planning board.
Council President Olson continued, she had similar concerns regarding reduced setback and going down a
level because it actually sacrificed something that was green, sustainable and good for the environment to
get this other. Setbacks were reduced in the DADU code and now someone could choose the zone smaller
than the one they are in, but the setbacks in some of those zones were already reduced so this will be a very
significant change. The other thought is the combination of how all things come together; she wanted to
see it all at the same time because one affects the each other. With regard to the DADU code that was just
approved, if a green incentive was applied to a new ADU, it can get 5 extra feet as an incentive which
would conceivably make the DADU taller than the main residence. She has heard repeatedly the community
does not want the weirdness of tall spires of DADUs that dwarf houses and make neighborhoods look weird.
She needed to see the zone it would be applied to and the impact of the allowed height, the extra five feet
or the reduced setback. She was especially concerned about setbacks as they had already been reduced. She
recalled a councilmember's email about making a motion related to timing. The intent was council action
later this year, but preferred to finalize the comprehensive plan so the council knew what this program was
being applied to in order to know the impacts.
Councilmember Eck asked staff their thoughts about Council President Olson's concerns. Mr. Sewell
provided and reviewed illustrations of setbacks:
Single Family Residential — Built Green 4-Start
o Includes remodels, duplexes, and ADUs
o Excludes new SFRs in Business, Commercial and mixed use zones — remodels, ADUs OK
Built Green 4-Star or better
Parking Height
One per dwelling unit _ _ _ _ Pacnad Fool
5'
IncentKv
std. Hetot
Max-
BuiltGreen 5-Star or better
Setbacks
As one zone smaller
(N/A in RS-6, RSW-12,
and RS-MP)
Images to scale
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Il
11
uy.r.,ynr.rw
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 6, 2024
Page 20
Packet Pg. 444
10.1.a
Minimum RS-8 lot
• Standard lot
• 70' width, 8,000 sq. ft.
• Most common zone
• Maximized 35%coverage
• RS-6 setbacks in green
Flighty idealized scenario, not reatiry
Presented as greenfield development
Using squares for footprints
Illustrating most permissive scenario
Not illustrating detached accessory structures
New ADU code
and incentives
• 1,450 sq, It. primary dwelling footprint
• Two 900 sq. ft. DADUs
• One single -story with reduced 5'setback
• One two-storywith standard 10'setback
Height
• All receive +5' pitched 4-in-12 incentive
if all dwellings are Built Green° 4-Star
Setbacks
• All can receive green building setback
reduction if all are Built Green° 5-Star
• ADU rear setbacks always supersede
Parking
No change
New ADU code
and incentives
Lot
• Minimum -sized standard RS-8lot
• Maximized lot 35%coverage
• Two 900 sq. ft. DADUs
• One single -story with reduced 5'setback
• One two-story with standard 10'setback
Height
• All receive +5' pitched 4-in-12 incentive
if all dwellings are Built Greene 4-Star
Setbacks
• All can receive green building setback
reduction if all are Built Green° 5-Star
• ADU rear setbacks always supersede
Parking
• No change
S 'HW"
1143,
rs•leb.ck
75'setb.ck
11s.Y
SI' _t
2 9000 a it >:
bt.N _
II II
II II
II II
II zeoow.R II
HI ktaebt II
r.l' I cwerege I I
II II
II II
II II
II II
ll� �JJ
SinplrFen�ti Rs-3d-n1a110.S 6>
I i�40
x
oil
ff?ii �
r �
I Primary Dvreirg I I
I 1 1AS0 sq. it. Footprirl41
II
II II
II 11
II ®namwa. 2AW'%fL-15% II
II 0 O 11
II
S.0hm41 PM,demw 05,S)
1240
m
oa
5
r ---- i
PrimaryD"IkV II
II 1A50rq. R. FoolpiPkI
71 II
II II
II Ij
I I BpaO sQ,k iA00 p�R.-35'! I I
II O O II
Fl 11
1
• s'.=w�r
Prd, 11 d—I (ISE)
INp
Councilmember Eck relayed her understanding if an ADU was built to LEED or Built Green standards, it
could receive additional height. Mr. Sewell explained other incentives could be offered for an ADU such
as increased square footage or lot coverage which may make more sense than height for ADUs.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 6, 2024
Page 21
Packet Pg. 445
10.1.a
Councilmember Eck relayed council could limit height or decrease setbacks for ADUs. Ms. McLaughlin
explained this is staff s proposal based on staff s research, stakeholder discussions, peer review, the City's
existing code and opportunities. From a policy discussion, it is completely up to council. With regard to
height, the planning board recognized green building warrants interstitial space between stories which is
more common in multifamily or commercial buildings given larger ventilation systems, whether 5 feet is
inappropriate in lower density residential or appropriate in mixed use and commercial zones. These are
policy discussions staff welcomes council to have.
Councilmember Eck asked if moving forward, would council select either LEED or Built Green or both.
Ms. McLaughlin answered both, LEED is for commercial, multifamily and mixed use and Built Green is
for low density residential.
Councilmember Paine referred to the slide regarding possible incentives and asked if the City could choose
which ones it wants. She was aware of concern regarding the percentage of lot coverage and was glad to be
moving away from 40% but other things that she was interested in keeping were more permeability in
residential zones to improve stormwater infiltration, retain and design around trees, etc. She looked forward
to the public hearing and other presentations to get more information about land use and other elements in
the comprehensive plan. Ms. McLauglin emphasized that while these are possible incentives, they are not
the ones the planning board landed on. The previous table is the proposed incentive package.
Councilmember Dotsch said she will be curious to see the planning board memo. She referred to the list of
questions including can staff successful implement accelerated review. She has been told the City is three
months or more behind in reviews. She has heard from developers that that is a great incentive, but it doesn't
sound like that is an option. She worried that others waiting for review get delayed even further. She
summarized it seemed like a great opportunity, but one the City was not quite ready for. Ms. McLauglin
responded expedited review will always be relative to the existing target date so a green building applicant
would still get an expedited review regardless of the delayed target.
Councilmember Dotsch said she was thinking of bandwidth right now. Ms. McLauglin said the queue list
remains the same. Councilmember Dotsch said it is a great goal but may be premature to put it out to the
community. She referred to the draft permit review incentives for single family residential and multifamily
residential and asked whether middle housing was defined as single family. She recalled on one slide
duplexes and ADUs were defined as single family, but if quadplexes are allowed in single family if one
unit is affordable, would that also be considered single family. Mr. Sewell explained the City hasn't fully
accounted for compliance with HB I I10 at this phase. Councilmember Dotsch recalled the 40+% lot
coverage may have been mentioned in the webinar on HB 1110. She expressed concern these regulations
will be additive to other changes being made in the comprehensive plan and feared it was cart before the
horse.
Councilmember Dotsch continued, the comprehensive plan also addressed changing the zoning of single
family and asked if current zoning would even apply. Ms. McLaughlin responded these regulations are
written under the existing development code and comprehensive plan. It is anticipated single family will
become low density residential in the 2025 code amendments and the comprehensive plan land use
designations which would enable middle housing. In 2025 there will be a comprehensive code amendment
to correct any zoning references to single family. The discussion is whether what is relevant for single
family now will still relevant for a low density residential zone. The way the regulations are written, staff
believes it is still compatible. The modest setback reductions for ADUs would still be consistent with the
policy language and applying these incentives. Staff does not see conflicts, but there will absolutely need
to be some rationalization when the code amendments are done. With regard to getting the cart before the
horse, in the wake of potential new development, she would rather have a Green Building Incentive Program
at the ready so any new development is green. Once some higher density standards are enabled in centers
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 6, 2024
Page 22
Packet Pg. 446
and hubs to meet growth strategies, there should be an adopted green building incentive program so new
buildings are modern and sustainable.
Councilmember Dotsch commented Edmonds has a lot of slopes and a height increase on a slope is quite
dramatic for the surrounding neighbors. If the setbacks are reduced so buildings are closer to neighbors,
that also impacts light and views. She looked forward to a better understanding of what these regulations
entailed in addition to the comprehensive plan changes. She commented on the importance of visuals at
public hearings to illustrate proposed changes.
Councilmember Nand commented on the striking difference in the percentage of Built Green in Edmonds
versus surrounding cities such as Shoreline. She was excited to have this in place before a new cycle of
development begins under the state housing bills. She asked if it would be possible to do modeling to
illustrate how much greenhouse gas is generated by a typical 2-story build under current construction
practices versus Green Built 4 or 5 and LEED. Ms. McLaughlin answered calculations in the existing CAP
indicated over 30% of emissions are from residential development. Staff could research whether the Built
Green program has a way to calculate that.
Councilmember Nand said she was excited to better understand the environmental impact a green building
incentive program would have in real time. Ms. McLaughlin explained while this came from the CAP, the
City's ability to achieve it will also depend on the ability to achieve the CAP target of carbon neutral by
2050. It is important to follow through with reducing residential emissions. Mr. Sewell said Built Green is
calibrated off the Washington State Energy Code and is intended to be 20% improvement at the 3 star level.
Councilmember Chen said the direction this is heading is the right one and there may be a lot of excitement
building based on something new, but it will take time to adapt to it and get to know it. He suggested it
might be helpful to provide visualizations of developers taking advantage of the incentives on a DADU for
example, such as maximizing 1200 square foot footprint and 24' height limit plus the 5' height green
building incentive to assist the council and the public in understanding the maximum height and size. Ms.
McLaughlin said Mr. Sewell attempted to do that in a bird's eye view, but it could be done in SketchUp.
She cautioned the design would look like a box, but it would provide some perspective.
COUNCILMEMBER DOTSCH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON, TO
POSTPONE THE NEXT STEPS IN THE PROCESS OF IMPLEMENTING THE GREEN
BUILDING INCENTIVES PROGRAM UNTIL AFTER THE 2024 UPDATE TO THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS APPROVED BY COUNCIL ALONG WITH THE LAND USE MAP.
Councilmember Dotsch commented the discussion provided good input especially in reference to
considering baseline height changes along with potential increased lot coverage, setback changes in the
updated comprehensive plan and the land use map for different areas of the City that will not be understood
until approved in December. While the goal and adoption of a green building incentive program is part of
the CAP and council desires to pursue this goal, there is no specific date especially when everyone does not
know what land use changes will result from the comprehensive plan update. The process would be more
holistic and transparent for all involved, developers and citizens, by having a chance to understand exactly
how the impacts could be additive within a green incentive program in relation to the new land use map
approved in December.
Council President Olson agreed that delay would provide more transparency to what the public is
commenting on. Until they know what the baseline is, they don't know what green incentives will do and
whether or not they support it. The council will not get valid input from the public if the public hearing is
held before they have all that information. She reached out to the city attorney to ask whether DADUs could
be excluded from the green incentives and he has not yet been able to provide guidance. There are so many
unknowns and answers are needed before making a decision such as excluding DADUs. She recalled some
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 6, 2024
Page 23
Packet Pg. 447
of the house bills did not allow ADU/DADUs to be treated differently than single family. She was
uncomfortable with proceeding until the comprehensive plan was finalized.
Councilmember Paine did not support the motion to delay. Staff has been working on a green building
ordinance for a while via discussion with the community, planning board and climate protection committee.
There will need to be some adjustments in the code, but the value of green buildings on greenhouse gases
is something the City can do now. She did not see any value in delaying.
Councilmember Nand appreciated Councilmember Dotsch bringing this concern forward. Her initial
thought was if there was stacking of incentives to the point the public found it objectionable and
communicated that to council, the regulations could be amended. As the City is doing the comprehensive
plan update and trying to present a vision to the development community, stakeholders and property owners
of how Edmonds should be built/rebuilt in the future, she preferred to do it comprehensively. She did not
support the motion.
Councilmember Eck appreciated Councilmember Dotsch's intent and saw the point of her motion. She
asked for staff s opinion on the motion. Ms. McLaughlin responded a public hearing was scheduled; it was
important to hear from the public and to factor that into this discussion and the policy decision. Staff put a
proposal forward that they think is compatible with peer cities and with existing zoning and with what they
foresee as the outcome of the comprehensive plan land use framework. Ultimately while she thinks the land
use incentives are critical for getting developers excited and offsetting the cost of going green, if council is
ready for an expedited review, perhaps that is where to start. Green building incentives will influence
development and the CAP envisioned developing this program in 2024 so she preferred to make a good
attempt at it rather than putting the whole program aside. Councilmember Eck relayed her understanding
this is a living document, the public and council will be providing input that staff will be factoring in. Mr.
Sewell agreed with Ms. McLaughlin's comments.
Council President Olson agreed there had been a great attempt by staff and this was a very interesting and
comprehensive document and she could see all the work behind it. She preferred to wait on providing
setbacks as an incentive until the cumulative effects were known. She could support a proposal for green
building incentives that include expedited permits, but felt it was a bad idea to proceed with any of the other
incentives. She supported postponing as the council will not get valid information from the public without
them knowing what it applies to. Ms. McLaughlin referred to the table with land use incentives, pointing
out setbacks currently only apply to single family. How the council ultimately decides to incentivize this
program, excluding low density setbacks would also be an option. Mr. Sewell advised only Built Green 5
Star or better single family residential can reduce setbacks.
Councilmember Chen commented there was a compelling reason for this proposal. He wanted to understand
the practical aspects from a human resources standpoint. With staff working on the comprehensive plan
and the budget, he asked whether staff had the bandwidth to take on this project at the same time. Ms.
McLaughlin answered the good news is the heavy lifting, the draft code amendments, has been done and
the planning board supported staff s recommendation. If the council adopts the proposed code amendments,
not much more work would be required to implement and administer the program. This was developed
internally with no consultant contracts so there is little to no fiscal staff impacts. Councilmember Chen
summarized given the urgency of the CAP and the global direction the community is heading, he would
like to hear what the public has to say. He did not support the motion.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PAINE, TO
EXTEND UNTIL 10:45. MOTION CARRIED (5-1), COUNCILMEMBER CHEN VOTING NO.
MOTION FAILED (2-4), COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON AND COUNCILMEMBER DOTSCH
VOTING YES.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 6, 2024
Page 24
Packet Pg. 448
10.1.b
MEMO
September 11, 2024
To: Edmonds City Council Members
From: Edmonds Planning Board Members
Subject: PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATION REGARDING GREEN BUILDING INCENTIVES
Background
The 2023 Edmonds Climate Action Plan included a provision that Edmonds could "create and
implement a green building incentive program" (action BE-2.2). This was intended to address the
fact that Edmonds' buildings produce a third of greenhouse gas emissions within Edmonds.
(Edmonds 2017 GHG Inventory, p. 12). Green buildings reduce those greenhouse gas emissions as
well as reduce electricity consumption. The program discussed in this memo implements action
BE-2.2 of the Climate Action Plan.
The Proposed Green Building Program
The proposed Green Building Program provides developers incentives if they construct buildings
that meet the requirements for a Built Green 4-star certification, and obtain that certification.
Incentives
The proposed incentives for the program include:
• Expedited permit review
• Additional 5 feet in height
• Smaller setbacks, matching the setbacks of the next smallest zone (for example, an RS-12
site would have to meet RS-10 setbacks)
• Reduced parking requirement to 1 space per unit
• Additional 5% of structural lot coverage for ADUs
Penalties
If a developer participated in the program by constructing a building and received the incentives,
but failed to obtain a certification, the builder would be penalized in the form of forfeiting to the City
of Edmonds bonds equaling:
• 50% of the building permit fee, and
• 5% of the project valuation
Planning Board Review and Public Comment
The Planning Board met with staff from the Planning and Development Department on four
separate occasions between January and July 2024 to discuss a staff proposal for a new Green
Packet Pg. 449
10.1.b
Building Incentives program. These Planning Board meetings included a public hearing held on June =
12.
Staff shared the objectives, proposed methods and desired outcomes of the program in
m
=
presentations to the Board members. The Planning Board members discussed the program
following the staff presentations. While Planning Board members thought staff performed sufficient
research and outreach and involved the appropriate stakeholders, there was much discussion
c
about the incentives and penalties proposed for the program. Staff provided refinements to the
E
proposed penalties as a result of Planning Board input to have penalties that are appropriately
c
scaled.
c
Planning Board Recommendation
At the July 24 Planning Board meeting, the Planning Board voted to recommend that City Council
approve the proposed Green Building program.
Packet Pg. 450
10.1.c
Chapter 16.20 ECDC, RS - Single -Family Residential
Pagel of 2
Chapter 16.20
RS - SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
Sections:
16.20.000
Purposes.
16.20.010
Uses.
16.20.020
Subdistricts.
16.20.030
Table of site development standards.
16.20.040
Site development exceptions.
16.20.045
Site development standards - Single-family master plan.
16.20.050
Site development standards - Accessory buildings.
16.20.060
Green building incentives.
16.20.060 Green building incentives.
A. General. New principal residences, additions and remodels to existing permitted dwellings,
and accessory dwelling units may earn reduced site development standards by receiving
Master Builders Association of King and Snohomish Counties Built Green® 4-Star certification
or better. Each building receives incentives independently for their individual certification.
B. Eligibility. Only residential development may receive the land use incentives listed below.
Other uses permitted in this zone, whether primary or secondary uses, outright or conditionally
permitted, or legal nonconforming, are ineligible for these incentives. See Chapter 17.100 for
incentives for community facilities.
C. Height. Certified development may extend five feet above the stated height limit of ECDC
16.20.030 if all portions of the roof above the stated height limit have a slope of four inches in
twelve inches or greater.
D. Setbacks. Residences certified Built Green 5-Star or better may use the setbacks of one RS
zone district smaller (i.e. RS-12 site may use RS-10 setbacks - see ECDC 16.20.030). Properties
zoned RS-6, RSW-12, or RS-MP are ineligible for this incentive.
The Edmonds Community Development Code is current through Ordinance 4314, passed August 2, 2023.
Packet Pg. 451
10.1.c
Chapter 16.20 ECDC, RS - Single -Family Residential
Page 2 of 2
E. Parking. New residential development certified Built Green 4-Star or better requires only one
parking space per dwelling unit rather than the standard requirement of ECDC
17.50.020(A)(1)(a). Electric vehicle parking standards of Chapter 17.115 remain calculated
according to standard parking requirements.
F. Enforcement. Development granted these incentives but then unable to achieve the
requirements are subject to the enforcement measures of ECDC 17.XX.
G. Permit Review. Permit applications for Green buildings are eligible to receive expedited plan
review, as established by ECDC 19.00.050.
Draft Amendment - last updated September 13, 2024
The Edmonds Community Development Code is current through Ordinance 4314, passed
August 2, 2023.
Disclaimer: The city clerk's office has the official version of the Edmonds Community
Development Code. Users should contact the city clerk's office for ordinances passed
subsequent to the ordinance cited above.
City Website: www.edmondswa.gov
Hosted by Code Publishing Company, A General Code Company.
The Edmonds Community Development Code is current through Ordinance 4314, passed August 2, 2023.
Packet Pg. 452
10.1.c
Chapter 16.30 ECDC, RM - Multiple Residential
Page 1 of 2
Chapter 16.30
RM - MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL
Sections:
16.30.000
Purposes.
16.30.010
Uses.
16.30.020
Subdistricts.
16.30.030
Site development standards.
16.30.040
Site development exceptions.
16.30.050
Green building incentives.
16.30.050 Green building incentives.
A. General. New multifamily residential buildings, as well as additions and remodels to existing
multifamily residences, may earn reduced site development standards by receiving U.S. Green
Building Council® Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design TM (LEED) Gold, Master
Builders Association of King and Snohomish Counties Built Green® 4-Star certification, or
better. The appropriate LEED rating system depends on the project. Each building receives
incentives independently for their individual certification.
B. Eligibility. These incentives are available to multifamily residential development only.
Remodels of and additions to existing single-family residences can earn the incentives for the
RS zone instead (see ECDC 16.20.060). Development of new single-family residences is ineligible
for these incentives. Other uses permitted in this zone, whether primary or secondary uses,
outright or conditionally permitted, or legal nonconforming, are ineligible for these incentives.
See Chapter 17.100 for incentives for community facilities.
C. Incentive Options. Multifamily residential development certified LEED Gold, Built Green® 4-
Star, or better may choose to use one of the following incentives. Multifamily residential
development certified LEED Platinum, Built Green® 5-Star, or better may use both of the
following incentives.
The Edmonds Community Development Code is current through Ordinance 4314, passed August 2, 2023.
Packet Pg. 453
10.1.c
Chapter 16.30 ECDC, RM - Multiple Residential
Page 2 of 2
1. Height. Multifamily residences are allowed an additional five feet above the stated
height limit of ECDC 16.30.030(A). This is in addition to pitched roof height bonus of
ECDC 16.30.030(A)(1).
2. Density. The dwelling unit density may increase one zoning district as listed in ECDC
16.30.030(A) (i.e., a property zoned RM-2.4 may apply the lot area per unit requirement
of the RM-1.5 zone - see). Properties zoned RM-1.5 or RM-EW are ineligible for this
additional density incentive.
D. Parking. Multifamily residential development certified LEED Gold, Built Green® 4-Star, or
better must provide at least one off-street parking space per dwelling unit rather than the
requirements of ECDC 17.50.020(A)(1)(b). Electric vehicle parking standards of Chapter 17.115
remain calculated off standard parking requirements.
E. Enforcement. Development granted green building incentives but then unable to achieve the
requirements are subject to the enforcement measures of ECDC 17.XX.
F. Permit Review. Green buildings are eligible to receive expedited plan review, as established by
ECDC 19.00.050.
Draft Amendment - last updated September 13, 2024
The Edmonds Community Development Code is current through Ordinance 4314, passed
August 2, 2023.
Disclaimer: The city clerk's office has the official version of the Edmonds Community
Development Code. Users should contact the city clerk's office for ordinances passed
subsequent to the ordinance cited above.
City Website: www.edmondswa.gov
Hosted by Code Publishing Company, A General Code Company.
The Edmonds Community Development Code is current through Ordinance 4314, passed August 2, 2023.
Packet Pg. 454
10.1.c
Chapter 16.43 ECDC, BD - Downtown Business
Page 1 of 2
Chapter 16.43
BD - DOWNTOWN BUSINESS
Sections:
16.43.000
Purposes.
16.43.010
Subdistricts.
16.43.020
Uses.
16.43.030
Site development standards.
16.43.035
Design standards - BD zones.
16.43.040
Operating restrictions.
16.43.050
Green building incentives.
16.43.050 Green building incentives.
A. General. New buildings, as well as additions or remodels to existing permitted buildings,
may earn reduced site development standards by receiving U.S. Green Building Council®
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design TM (LEED) Gold certification, Master Builders
Association of King and Snohomish Counties Built Green® 4-Star, or better. The appropriate
LEED rating system depends on the project.
B. Eligibility. Development of new single-family residences is ineligible for these green building
incentives. Remodels and additions for existing single-family residences can earn the incentives
for the RS zone instead (see ECDC 16.20.030). See Chapter 17.100 for incentives for community
facilities.
C. Height. Certified development in the BD1 - 4 zones can receive an additional five feet above
the stated height limit in ECDC 16.43.030(A). Properties zoned BD5 receive five additional feet in
addition to the pitched roof bonus of ECDC 16.43.030(C)(2).
D. Parking. For projects certified LEED Gold, Built Green® 4-Star, or better, residential parking
requirements become one per dwelling unit rather than the standards of ECDC
The Edmonds Community Development Code is current through Ordinance 4314, passed August 2, 2023.
Packet Pg. 455
10.1.c
Chapter 16.43 ECDC, BD - Downtown Business
Page 2 of 2
17.50.020(A)(1)(b). Electric vehicle parking standards of Chapter 17.115 remain calculated off
standard parking requirements. Refer to ECDC 17.50.010(C) for parking requirements.
E. Enforcement. Development granted these incentives but then fails to achieve the
requirements are subject to the enforcement measures of ECDC 17.XX.
F. Permit Review. Green buildings are eligible to receive the expedited plan review, as
established by ECDC 19.00.050.
Draft Amendment - last updated September 13, 2024
The Edmonds Community Development Code is current through Ordinance 4314, passed
August 2, 2023.
Disclaimer: The city clerk's office has the official version of the Edmonds Community
Development Code. Users should contact the city clerk's office for ordinances passed
subsequent to the ordinance cited above.
City Website: www.edmondswa.gov
Hosted by Code Publishing Company, A General Code Company.
The Edmonds Community Development Code is current through Ordinance 4314, passed August 2, 2023.
Packet Pg. 456
10.1.c
Chapter 16.45 ECDC, BN - Neighborhood Business
Page 1 of 2
Chapter 16.45
BN - NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS
Sections:
16.45.000
Purposes.
16.45.010
Uses.
16.45.020
Site development standards.
16.45.030
Operating restrictions.
16.45.040
Green building incentives.
16.45.040 Site development exceptions - green building incentives.
A. General. New buildings, as well as additions and remodels to existing permitted buildings,
may earn reduced site development standards by receiving U.S. Green Building Council®
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design TM (LEED) Gold certification, Master Builders
Association of King and Snohomish Counties Built Green® 4-Star, or better. The appropriate
LEED rating system depends on the project. Each building receives incentives independently for
their individual certification.
B. Eligibility. Development of new single-family residences is ineligible for these incentives.
Remodels of and additions to existing single-family residences can earn the incentives for the
RS zone instead (see ECDC 16.20.060). See Chapter 17.100 for incentives for community
facilities.
C. Height. Development certified LEED Gold, Built Green® 4-Star, or better may receive an
additional five feet above the stated height limit of ECDC 16.45.020(A) where all portions of the
roof above 25 feet are sloped four inches in twelve inches or greater.
D. Parking. Development certified LEED Gold, Built Green® 4-Star, or better must provide at
least one parking space per 500 square feet of commercial floor area and/or one parking space
per dwelling unit. Electric vehicle parking standards of Chapter 17.115 remain calculated off
standard parking requirements.
The Edmonds Community Development Code is current through Ordinance 4314, passed August 2, 2023.
Packet Pg. 457
10.1.c
Chapter 16.45 ECDC, BN - Neighborhood Business
Page 2 of 2
E. Enforcement. Development granted these incentives but then fail to achieve the requirements
are subject to the enforcement measures of ECDC 17.XX.
F. Permit Review. Green buildings are eligible to receive expedited plan review, as established by
ECDC 19.00.050.
Draft Amendment - last updated September 13, 2024
The Edmonds Community Development Code is current through Ordinance 4314, passed
August 2, 2023.
Disclaimer: The city clerk's office has the official version of the Edmonds Community
Development Code. Users should contact the city clerk's office for ordinances passed
subsequent to the ordinance cited above.
City Website: www.edmondswa.gov
Hosted by Code Publishing Company, A General Code Company.
The Edmonds Community Development Code is current through Ordinance 4314, passed August 2, 2023.
Packet Pg. 458
10.1.c
Chapter 16.50 ECDC, BC - Community Business
Page 1 of 2
Chapter 16.50
BC - COMMUNITY BUSINESS
Sections:
16.50.000
BC and BC - Edmonds Way.
16.50.005
Purposes.
16.50.010
Uses.
16.50.020
Site development standards.
16.50.030
Operating restrictions.
16.50.040
Green building incentives.
16.50.040 Green building incentives.
A. General. New buildings, as well as additions and remodels to existing permitted buildings,
may earn reduced site development standards by receiving U.S. Green Building Council®
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design TM (LEED) Gold, Master Builders Association of
King and Snohomish Counties Built Green® 4-Star certification, or better. The appropriate LEED
rating system depends on the project. Each building receives incentives independently for their
individual certification.
B. Eligibility. Development of new single-family residences are ineligible for these incentives.
Remodeled existing single-family residences can earn the incentives for the RS zone instead
(see ECDC 16.20.060). See Chapter 17.100 for incentives for community facilities.
C. Height. Certified development is allowed an additional five feet above the stated height limit
of ECDC 16.50.020(A) in addition to the standard pitched roof height bonus of ECDC
16.50.020(A)(2).
D. Parking. Development certified LEED Gold, Built Green® 4-Star, or better must provide at
least one parking space per 500 square feet of commercial floor area and/or one parking space
per dwelling unit instead of the parking required by Chapter 17.50. Electric vehicle parking
standards of Chapter 17.115 remain calculated off standard parking requirements.
The Edmonds Community Development Code is current through Ordinance 4314, passed August 2, 2023.
Packet Pg. 459
10.1.c
Chapter 16.50 ECDC, BC - Community Business
Page 2 of 2
E. Enforcement. Development granted these incentives but then unable to achieve the
requirements are subject to the enforcement measures of ECDC 17.XX.
F. Permit Review. Green buildings are eligible to receive expedited plan review, as established by
ECDC 19.00.050.
Draft Amendment - last updated September 13, 2024
The Edmonds Community Development Code is current through Ordinance 4314, passed
August 2, 2023.
Disclaimer: The city clerk's office has the official version of the Edmonds Community
Development Code. Users should contact the city clerk's office for ordinances passed
subsequent to the ordinance cited above.
City Website: www.edmondswa.gov
Hosted by Code Publishing Company, A General Code Company.
The Edmonds Community Development Code is current through Ordinance 4314, passed August 2, 2023.
Packet Pg. 460
10.1.c
Chapter 16.53 ECDC, BP - Planned Business
Page 1 of 2
Chapter 16.53
BP - PLANNED BUSINESS
Sections:
16.53.000 Purpose.
16.53.010 Uses.
16.53.020 Site development standards.
16.53.030 Green building incentives.
16.53.030 Site development exceptions - green building incentives.
A. General. New commercial buildings, as well as additions and remodels to existing buildings,
may earned reduced site development standards by receiving U.S. Green Building Council®
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design"' Gold certification or better. The appropriate
LEED rating system depends on the project. Each building receives incentives independently for
their individual certification.
B. Eligibility. Development of new single-family residences cannot receive these green building
incentives. Remodeled existing single-family residences can earn the incentives for the RS zone
instead (see ECDC 16.20.060). See Chapter 17.100 for incentives for community facilities.
C. Height. Certified development receives an additional five feet to the height maximum, in
addition to the standard pitched roof height bonus of ECDC 16.53.020(A)(2).
D. Parking. Development certified LEED Gold or better must provide at least one parking space
per 500 square feet of commercial floor area instead of parking required by Chapter 17.50.
Electric vehicle parking standards of Chapter 17.115 remain calculated off standard parking
requirements.
E. Enforcement. Development granted these incentives but then fails to achieve the
requirements are subject to the enforcement measures of ECDC 17.XX.
The Edmonds Community Development Code is current through Ordinance 4314, passed August 2, 2023.
Packet Pg. 461
10.1.c
Chapter 16.53 ECDC, BP - Planned Business
Page 2 of 2
F. Permit Review. Green buildings are eligible to receive expedited plan review, as established by
ECDC 19.00.050.
Draft Amendment - last updated September 13, 2024
The Edmonds Community Development Code is current through Ordinance 4314, passed
August 2, 2023.
Disclaimer: The city clerk's office has the official version of the Edmonds Community
Development Code. Users should contact the city clerk's office for ordinances passed
subsequent to the ordinance cited above.
City Website: www.edmondswa.gov
Hosted by Code Publishing Company, A General Code Company.
The Edmonds Community Development Code is current through Ordinance 4314, passed August 2, 2023.
Packet Pg. 462
10.1.c
Chapter 16.55 ECDC, CW - Commercial Waterfront
Page 1 of 2
Chapter 16.55
CW - COMMERCIAL WATERFRONT
Sections:
16.55.000
Purposes.
16.55.010
Uses.
16.55.020
Site development standards.
16.55.030
Operating restrictions.
16.55.040
Green building incentives.
16.55.040 Green building incentives.
A. General. New buildings, as well as additions or remodels to existing permitted buildings,
may earn reduced site development standards by receiving U.S. Green Building Council®
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design TM (LEED) Gold certification or better. The
appropriate LEED rating system depends on the project. Each building receives incentives
independently for their individual certification.
B. Eligibility. See Chapter 17.100 for incentives for community facilities.
C. Height. Certified development can receive an additional five feet above the stated height limit
in ECDC 16.55.020. Building heights remain subject to the Shoreline Management Act - RCW
90.58.
D. Parking. Refer to ECDC 17.50.010(C) for parking requirements. Electric vehicle parking
standards of Chapter 17.115 remain calculated off standard parking requirements.
E. Enforcement. Development granted these incentives but then fails to achieve the
requirements are subject to the enforcement measures of ECDC 17.XX.
F. Permit Review. Green buildings are eligible to receive the expedited plan review, as
established by ECDC 19.00.050.
The Edmonds Community Development Code is current through Ordinance 4360, passed June 11, 2024.
Packet Pg. 463
10.1.c
Chapter 16.55 ECDC, CW - Commercial Waterfront
Page 2 of 2
Draft Amendment - last updated September 13, 2024
The Edmonds Community Development Code is current through Ordinance 4360, passed
June 11, 2024.
Disclaimer: The city clerk's office has the official version of the Edmonds Community
Development Code. Users should contact the city clerk's office for ordinances passed
subsequent to the ordinance cited above.
City Website: www.edmondswa.gov
Hosted by General Code.
The Edmonds Community Development Code is current through Ordinance 4360, passed June 11, 2024.
Packet Pg. 464
10.1.c
Chapter 16.60 ECDC, CG - General Commercial
Page 1 of 2
Chapter 16.60
CG - GENERAL COMMERCIAL ZONE
Sections:
16.60.000
CG zone.
16.60.005
Purposes.
16.60.010
Uses.
16.60.015
Location standards for sexually oriented businesses.
16.60.020
Site development standards - General.
16.60.030
Site development standards - Design.
16.60.040
Operating restrictions.
16.60.050
Green building incentives.
16.60.050 Green building incentives.
A. General. New buildings, as well as additions or remodels to existing permitted buildings,
may earn reduced site development standards by receiving U.S. Green Building Council®
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design TM
(LEED) Gold certification, Master Builders
Association of King and Snohomish Counties Built Green® 4-Star certification, or better. The
appropriate LEED rating system depends on the project. Each building receives incentives
independently for their individual certification.
B. Eligibility. These incentives are available to commercial, multifamily residential, and mixed -
use development only. Remodels of and additions to existing single-family residences can earn
the incentives for the RS zone instead (see ECDC 16.20.060). Development of new single-family
residences is ineligible for these incentives. See Chapter 17.100 for incentives for community
facilities.
C. Parking. Multifamily residential development certified LEED Gold, Built Green® 4-Star, or
better must provide at least one off-street parking space per dwelling unit rather than the
standards of ECDC 16.60.030(B)(1). Electric vehicle parking standards of Chapter 17.115 remain
calculated off standard parking requirements.
The Edmonds Community Development Code is current through Ordinance 4360, passed June 11, 2024.
Packet Pg. 465
10.1.c
Chapter 16.60 ECDC, CG - General Commercial
Page 2 of 2
D. Enforcement. Development granted these incentives but then fails to achieve the
requirements are subject to the enforcement measures of ECDC 17.XX.
E. Permit Review. Green buildings are eligible to receive the expedited plan review, as
established by ECDC 19.00.050.
Draft Amendment - last updated September 17, 2024
The Edmonds Community Development Code is current through Ordinance 4360, passed
June 11, 2024.
Disclaimer: The city clerk's office has the official version of the Edmonds Community
Development Code. Users should contact the city clerk's office for ordinances passed
subsequent to the ordinance cited above.
City Website: www.edmondswa.gov
Hosted by General Code.
The Edmonds Community Development Code is current through Ordinance 4360, passed June 11, 2024.
Packet Pg. 466
10.1.c
Chapter 21.35 ECDC, "G" Terms
Pagel of 3
Chapter 21.35
"G" TERMS
Sections:
21.35.010
Garage.
21.35.013
Gross floor area.
21.35.017
Ground floor.
21.35.020
Repealed.
21.35.030
Repealed.
21.35.040
Repealed.
21.35.010 Garage.
(See also, Commercial Garage.)
21.35.012 Green Building.
A development certified by the Master Builders of King and Snohomish Counties Built Green®
or U.S. Green Building Council U.S. Green Building Council® Leadership in Energy and
Environmental Design TM (LEED).
21.35.013 Gross floor area.
An interior habitable area of an accessory dwelling unit, including basements and attics but not
including unconditioned space, such as a garage or nonhabitable accessory structures. [Ord.
4360 § 9 (Exh. A), 2024].
The Edmonds Community Development Code is current through Ordinance 4360, passed June 11, 2024.
Packet Pg. 467
10.1.c
Chapter 21.35 ECDC, "G" Terms
Page 2 of 3
21.35.017 Ground floor.
The ground floor of a structure is that floor which is closest in elevation to the finished grade
along the width of the side of the structure that is principally oriented to the street which
provides primary access to the subject property. A structure consisting of a building with
multiple entrances divided into individual offices and related uses shall have only one ground
floor. In the event that the use of the building shifts traffic from one entrance to another or
there is uncertainty in determining which entrance provides "primary access," the primary
entrance as established by the historic use of the structure shall control unless the transfer of
the "primary access" from one street orientation to another is brought about in conjunction
with the building or its use being brought into full compliance with all current code
requirements. [Ord. 2958 § 4, 1993].
21.35.020 Group sign.
Repealed by Ord. 3313.
21.35.030 Guest house.
Repealed by Ord. 4360.
21.35.040 Guyed tower.
Repealed by Ord. 3845. The Edmonds Community Development Code is current through
Ordinance 4360, passed June 11, 2024.
Disclaimer: The city clerk's office has the official version of the Edmonds Community
Development Code. Users should contact the city clerk's office for ordinances passed
subsequent to the ordinance cited above.
The Edmonds Community Development Code is current through Ordinance 4360, passed June 11, 2024.
Packet Pg. 468
10.1.c
Chapter 21.35 ECDC, "G" Terms
Page 3 of 3
City Website: www.edmondswa.gov
Hosted by General Code.
The Edmonds Community Development Code is current through Ordinance 4360, passed June 11, 2024.
Packet Pg. 469
10.1.c
Green Building Incentives — Expedited Plan Review
Chapter 19.00 BUILDING CODE
Sections:
19.00.000 Purpose.
19.00.005 Referenced codes.
19.00.010 Conflict between codes.
19.00.015 Administrative provisions.
19.00.020 International Building Code adopted.
19.00.025 International Building Code section amendments.
• 19.00.030 Architectural design review - Optional vesting.
• 19.00.040 Excluding nonconforming religious building from certain
requirements.
• 19.00.045 Reconstruction of damaged buildings.
• 19.00.050 Green Building Incentives.
The following is a stand-alone code section proposed to be included at the end of ECDC
Chapter 19.00 Building Code.
19.00.050 Green Building Incentives.
Projects qualifying for Green Building Incentives as allowed in Chapter 16 ECDC shall be
eligible for expedited plan review as administered by the Planning and Development
Department.
Packet Pg. 470
10.1.d
TSO
Today's Discussion
• Staff Recommendation
• Construction Standards
• Points Categories
• What Green Building Can Look
Li ke
• Draft Permit Review Incentive
• Important Notes on Land Use
Incentives
9/24/2024
• Draft Land Use Incentives
• Illustrated Examples
• B, RS, and RM Zones
• Proposed Enforcement
Measures
• Next Steps
Packet Pg. 472
10.1.d
Slide 2
TSO Revise later a'
c
Sewell, Tristan, 2024-09-11T15:52:16.117
O
m
C
a�
d
'L^
V
A
m
Q
Packet Pg. 473
10.1.d
Staff Recommendation
Incentivize green building in pursuit of climate neutrality by 2050 by:
• Leveraging well -established certification programs
• Reducing permit review timeline 50% for certified projects
• Granting height bonuses, reduced setbacks, reduced off-street parking, and
increased dwelling unit density to certified projects
• Providing deeper incentives for higher levels of certification
• Limiting scope of eligible projects to certain zones and land uses,
prioritizing each zones primary intent
• Enforcing follow-through via performance bonds, if needed
Supported by Planning Board as of July 24, 2024
9/24/2024
Packet Pg. 474
10.1.d
Construction Standards
Established Certifications
• Single -Family Residential:
Built Green 4-Star
• Commercial, Multifamily,
and Mixed Use: LEED Gold or
Built Green 4-Star Multifamily
9/24/2024
• Flexible, point -based, not
prescriptive
• Updated in response to market
and regulation
• Widely used and recognized
• Third -party verified
• Built Green benchmarked on
20% improvement over State
energy code
Packet Pg. 475
10.1.d
Points Categories
Built Green
• Site and Water
• Energy Efficiency
• Health and Indoor Air Quality
• Materials Efficiency
• Equity and Social Justice
• Operation, Maintenance, and
Homeowner Education
• Built Green Brand Promotion
9/24/2024
LEED
• Integrative Process
• Location and Transportation
• Sustainable Sites
• Water Efficiency
• Energy and Atmosphere
• Materials and Resources
• Indoor Environmental Quality
• Innovation
• Regional Priority
Packet Pg. 476
What Green Building Can Look Like
Onsite renewable energy
9/24/2024
Efficient building envelopes
Packet Pg. 477
10.1.d
What Green Building Can Look Like
Encouraging active transportation
9/24/2024
Responsible materials sourcing
Packet Pg. 478
t
What Green Building Can Look Like
Functional landscaping
9/24/2024
4
Efficient fixtures and appliances
i
■►.
Packet Pg. 479
10.1.d
Draft Permit Review Incentives
DRAFT- EDMONDSTARGET TIMES FOR PERMIT PROCESSING (WEEKS)
Actual Review times may vary
Permit Type
Review Type
New Single
Regular
Family
Expedited
Single Family
Regular
Addition or
Remodel
Expedited
Commercial/ MF
Regular
New
Expedited
Commercial/MF
Regular
Additions
Expedited
Commercial
Regular
Remodel (Tenant
Improvement)
Expedited
1 st Review
6
3
3to5
2nd Review
3
2
2to3
3rd Review
2
1
1 to 2
Total Target
Review Time
11
6
6 to 10
2to3
1 to
1
4to6
8
5
3
16
4
3
2
9
4
3
2
9
2
2
1
5
4
2
1
7
2
1
1
Expedited review for single family not available in RM or B zones
Review times may vary depending on staff work volumes and complexity of project.
9/24 2024
21
Review Time
Savings
5 weeks
2-4 weeks
7 weeks
4 weeks
1
3 weeks
Packet Pg. 480
10.1.d
Important Notes on Land Use Incentives .0
Incentives never supersede other regulations.
Onsite or financial realities may limit utilization of incentives.
Not every project may pursue every option.
Possible limiting regulatory factors:
• Critical areas
• Building and Fire codes
• Sto rmwate r
• Design review, including landscaping
• Street frontage improvements and right-of-way access
• Shoreline Master Program
9/24/2024
Packet Pg. 481
10.1.d
Draft Land Use Incentives
Built Green 4-Star
Built Green 5-Star or betterget
setbacks one zone smaller
(i.e., RS-10 to RS-8)
+5' where all portions above
standard height limit are
sloped at least 4-in-12
Multifamily Residential
(RM) Zones
Business (B) Zones
LEED Gold or Built Green 4-Star Multifamily
Choose one:
• +5' in addition to the existing
pitched roof bonus of Ch. 16.30
• Maximum unit density increased
one tier (i.e., RM-3 to RM-2.4)
1 per dwelling unit
9/24/2024
+5' plus the 5' pitched roof bonus
for all portions sloped at least:
3-in-12 BC
BD1 -4
1 per dwelling unit
1 per 500 sq. ft. leasable commercial floor area
Packet Pg. 482
10.1.d
Business Zones — LEED Gold
Parking: One per 500 sq. ft. leasable floor area or 1 per dwelling
unit, except in BD - no requirement for commercial.
Pitched Roof
Bonus
Incentivized Max.
Std. Height Max.
Images to scale
9/24/2024
61
5
=a 'o a walm
BC
3-in-12
6-in-12
G�
30
12
Packet Pg. 483
10.1.d
Minimum RS-8 lot
• Standard lot - 70' wide, 8,000 sq. ft.
• Most common zone
• Built Green 5-Star RS-6 setbacks in green
Highly idealized scenario, not reality
Illustrating maximal use of regulation
• Maximized 35% coverage
• 1,300 sf primary dwelling footprint
• Two 1,000 sf DADUs
• 500 sf footprint for 2-story
• 1,000 sf footprint for 1-story
• No other accessory structures
• Orientations are somewhat arbitrary
• Built Green 5-Star RS-6 setbacks in green
• Footprints 30' wide (needed later)
• 3 required parking spaces outdoors
9/24/2024
7.5'
�5,
S'
10.
5'
1-Story DADU Setback
DADU Setback
r—Standard Setback
25'
20'
Packet Pg. 484
10.1.d
Slide 13
TSO *2-Story DADU setback
Sewell, Tristan, 2024-09-12T23:10:28.580
O
m
c
a�
d
'L^
V
A
m
Q
Packet Pg. 485
10.1.d
Existing Regulation/Built Green
4-Star Footprints
Illustrating maximal use of incentives
• Maximized 35% coverage
• 1,300 sf primary dwelling footprint
• Two 1,000 sf DADUs
• 500 sf footprint for 2-story
• 1,000 sf footprint for 1-story
• Built Green 5-Star RS-6 setbacks in green
• Footprints 30' wide for 5' pitched roof
• 3 required off-street parking spaces
49
9/24/2024
Packet Pg. 486
10.1.d
Built Green 5-Star Footprints
Illustrating maximal use of incentives
• Maximized 35% coverage
• 1,300 sf primary dwelling footprint
• Two 1,000 sf DADUs
• 500 sf footprint for 2-story
• 1,000 sf footprint for 1-story
• Built Green 5-Star RS-6 setbacks in green
• Footprints 30' wide for 5' pitched roof
• 3 required off-street parking spaces
9/24/2024
4
Packet Pg. 487
10.1.d
RS-8 Setback Incentives
Existing Code/Built Green 4-Star
9/24/2024
Built Green 5-Star or Better
146
Packet Pg. 488
10.1.d
Existing Regulation
assing Study
9/24/2024
- 2-Story DADU
za
• Orientations - could rotate 900
• Maximum distance between units 4
pinned to setback corners
• Built Green 5-Star or better setback
incentives illustrated in green
17
Packet Pg. 489
Built Green 4-Star
assing Study
9/24/2024
ADDS 5' pitched rooves
Orientations - could rotate 901
Maximum distance between units 4
pinned to setback corners
Built Green 5-Star or better setback
incentives illustrated in giuun
18
Packet Pg. 490
il
Built Green 5-Star
Massina,Studv--
9/24/2024
16.5'
2-Story DADU
MI
,D•
33.3' 15
j
• ADDS RS-6 setbacks
Orientations - could rotate 901 `
• Maximum distance between units
pinned to setback corners
• Built Green 5-Star or better setback
a
incentives illustrated in giuun
19
Packet Pg. 491
10.1.d
RM Existing Zoning
and Density Incentive
Massing Study
• Minimum RM-2.4 lot for 5 units
• >4 units requires SEPA
• 5' pitched rooves - 4-in-12
• Setback landscaping, driveway not shown
Existing Zoning
• 5 dwelling units
• Parking depends on unit bedroom count
(6-10 spaces)
4-Star/LEED Gold Density Incentive
• 8 dwelling units and parking spaces
9/24/2024
Packet Pg. 492
10.1.d
RM Height Incentive
Massing Study
• Minimum RM-2.4 lot for 5 units
• >4 units requires SEPA
• 5' pitched rooves — 4-in-12
• Setback landscaping, driveway not
shown
4-Star/LEED Gold
• 5 dwellings and parking spaces
5-Star/LEED Platinum
• 8 dwellings and parking spaces
9/24/2024
c
2
m
a)
d
'L^
V
Packet Pg. 493
10.1.d
Proposed Enforcement Measures
• Certification required prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy
• Failure to achieve certification will require posting a 2-year
performance bond. Bond amount is based on:
• Expedited permit review bond valued at 50% of building permit fee
• Land use incentive bond valued at 5% of the project valuation
• Bonds released upon approval of certification
• Failure to certify within 2 years surrenders the bonds as a penalty.
• Expedited permit review bond processed as permit fee revenue
• Land use incentive bond goes to the City's general fund
9/24/2024 22
Packet Pg. 494
10.1.d
Enforcement Examples
Monetary penalties for failure to achieve certification
Bond amounts based on scale of project:
3000sf new house
10,000sf Commercial Mixed Use
100,000sf Commercial Mixed Use
$27,908
$79,750
$777,225
9/24/2024 23
Packet Pg. 495
10.1.d
Next Steps
Staff to draft enforcement code - Chapter 17. XX ECDC
Public Hearing: October 8, 2024
Council Action: October 2024
9/24/2024
Packet Pg. 496
10.1.d
Built Green Resources
• Built Green Remodel Checklist, Handbook
• Built Green Single -Family ana iownhomes Checklist, Handbook
• LEED is behind a paywall
9/24/2024 26
Packet Pg. 498
10.1.e
Edmonds Green Building
Land Use Incentives
Development
Multifamily Residential, Commercial, and Mixed Use
Multifamily Residential
Business (B) Zones
Commercial
1
Type
Single -Family Residential'
(RM) Zones
(C) Zones
Minimum
Built Green 4-Star
LEED Gold' or Built Green 4-Star Multifamily
Certification
Built Green 5-Star or better may use
Setbacks
setbacks one zone smaller
N/A
(i.e., RS-10 to RS-8)4
+5' plus the 5' pitched roof bonus for
Choose ones of the following:
all portions sloped at least:
+5 where all portions above 25 are
+5' in addition to the existing pitched
+5'
3-in-12
BC
Height
sloped at least 4-in-12
roof bonus of Ch. 16.30
(CW only) 7
4-in-12
s
BN , BP
• Maximum unit density increased one
6-in-12
BD5
tier (i.e., RM-3 to RM-2.4)6
N/A
BD 1 - 4
Parking'
1 per dwelling unit
1 per dwelling unit and/or
1 per 500 sq. ft. leasable commercial floor area o
1 Community facilities covered by Ch. 17.100 are excluded from the program at this time.
2 Subject to revision to comply with HB 1110. New SFR and ADUs only eligible in RS zones. Remodels and additions are eligible where permitted.
'Appropriate LEED rating system depends on project Q
4 RS-6, RS-MP, and RSW-12 are ineligible for this incentive. Setback incentive only applies to the subject dwelling; future development requires independent application.;
s Projects rated LEED Platinum, Built Green 5-Star, or better may use both
6 RM-1.5 and RM-EW are ineligible for this incentive. E
May require view analysis during review, per RCW 90.58.320
8 Previously lacked the 5' pitched roof bonus r
' EV parking required by Ch. 17.115 remains calculated off standard parking requirement. Q
io Matches standard requirement in downtown business area (ECDC 17.50.010(C))
Last revised September 13, 2024
Packet Pg. 499
10.2
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 09/24/2024
Process for Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS)
Staff Lead: Shane Hope
Department: Planning & Development
Preparer: Shane Hope
Background/History
A Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) will soon be issued for the Draft Comprehensive Plan
update. The process for issuing and handling a DEIS is subject to requirements of the State
Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). (Similarly, SEPA governs the process for a Final Environmental Impact
Statement (FEiS).) At the City Council's meeting, information about the DEIS process will be presented.
Staff Recommendation
Consider Information; no action needed
Narrative
The information tonight is specifically about the process for Draft Environmental Impact Statement
(DEIS) when it is a "non -project action" --for example, a policy plan being considered, as opposed to a
site -specific development project.
First, an environmental impact statement (EIS) process is only used when a qualifying action has been
determined to potentially have a significant adverse effect. (A process exists for such determinations
but that is a different subject, not part of the current one.)
Second, the typical EIS process includes:
1. Issuance and circulation of a DEIS (draft environmental impact statement), noting the due date for
any comments
2. Opportunity for public comment during a 30-day time period
3. A public hearing that occurs at least 15 days after the DEIS issuance
4. Consideration of public comments and a response to each comment from the lead agency
representative --the compilation of which will be a City record
5. Issuance of a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS), generally in 60 days or less after the end of
the DEIS comment period. (The intent is to have the FEIS follow the end of the public comment period
as closely as possible.)
More details about the process will be presented at the Council meeting. NOTE: Information gained
from the DEIS process being carried out for the Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update will be shared
once the DEIS comment period is finished.
Packet Pg. 500