Loading...
2024-09-10 Council MinutesEDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPROVED 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 Approved Minutes September 10, 2024 Page 1 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 Approved Minutes September 10, 2024 Page 2 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 Approved Minutes September 10, 2024 Page 3 • 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 Lay 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 Approved Minutes September 10, 2024 Page 4 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 Approved Minutes September 10, 2024 Page 5 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 Approved Minutes September 10, 2024 Page 6 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 Approved Minutes September 10, 2024 Page 7 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 Approved Minutes September 10, 2024 Page 8 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 Approved Minutes September 10, 2024 Page 9 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 II.Cr SR99 SB RAISED MEDKN SECTION A [.0 t0 A i.10 NOT TO SCML 4.0' Stage 3 Existing Conditions Photographs o Highway 99 @ 244t' 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 0 240"' 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 Approved Minutes September 10, 2024 Page 10 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 • Sample Plan Sheet q .w• — • 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 Approved Minutes September 10, 2024 Page 11 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) wrc.n..o uselcma�Noama j asiw r wLm F�AA()NQS HINY 99 ST(; d .. « — ... Milestones and Schedule Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 10, 2024 Page 12 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 Approved Minutes September 10, 2024 Page 13 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 Approved Minutes September 10, 2024 Page 14 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 Approved Minutes September 10, 2024 Page 15 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 Approved Minutes September 10, 2024 Page 16 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 Approved Minutes September 10, 2024 Page 17 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 Approved Minutes September 10, 2024 Page 18 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. CS: SCOTT PASS EY, CLERK Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 10, 2024 Page 19