2024-10-08 Council Packet1.
2.
41 OE LUMG
do Agenda
Edmonds City Council
REGULAR MEETING
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
250 5TH AVE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020
OCTOBER 8, 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:HZOOM.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. PRESENTATION
5.
6.
7.
1. Breast Cancer Awareness 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. Written Public Comments (0 min)
Edmonds City Council Agenda
October 8, 2024
Page 1
8. APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA
1. Approval of Council Meeting Minutes September 24, 2024
2. Approval of Council Special Meeting Minutes September 24, 2024
3. Approval of claim checks and wire payments.
9. PUBLIC HEARING
1. Green Building Incentives Code Amendments Public Hearing (30 min)
10. COUNCIL BUSINESS
1. 2025-2026 Budget Presentations: Administrative Services and Parks, Rec & Human Svcs (45 min)
2. Public Hearing on Council Consideration to Collectively Support or Oppose Initiative Measure
No. 2117 concerns carbon tax credit trading. This measure would prohibit state agencies from
imposing any type of carbon tax credit rating, and repeal legislation establishing a cap and invest
program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. This measure would decrease funding for
investments in transportation, clean air, renewable energy, conservation, and emissions -reduction.
Should this measure be enacted into law? [ ]Yes [ ] No. (30 min)
11. COUNCIL COMMENTS
12. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
ADJOURNMENT
Edmonds City Council Agenda
October 8, 2024
Page 2
4.1
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 10/8/2024
Breast Cancer Awareness Proclamation
Staff Lead: Carolyn LaFave
Department: Mayor's Office
Preparer: Carolyn LaFave
Background/History
Breast Cancer Awareness Month as we know it began to take shape in the mid-1980s as a campaign to
encourage mammography. In 1993, the late Evelyn H. Lauder founded BCRF with her friend and
pioneering breast cancer oncologist and researcher Dr. Larry Norton. At the time, breast cancer
awareness, screening, treatment, and research was nascent. Mrs. Lauder recognized that real progress
against breast cancer would only happen through research, which needed robust support.
Staff Recommendation
n/a
Narrative
Recognizing that Breast Cancer Awareness Month means different things to different people -and that,
especially for the metastatic breast cancer community and people who are in treatment, it can be a
difficult time. Breast Cancer Awareness Month is a reminder that we lose more than 40,000 people to
the disease each year, and many are waiting on research to deliver advancements in detection and care.
Attachments:
Breast Cancer Awareness Month
Packet Pg. 3
4.1.a
PrIorriamatTIL11"
City of Edmonds •Office of the Mayor
BREAST CANCER AWARENESS MONTH 2O24
WHEREAS, in 2024, an estimated 313,510 people will be diagnosed with breast cancer in the United
States and 42,780 will die from the disease; approximately 7,450 Washington residents
will be diagnosed with breast cancer in 2024 and approximately 960 deaths will occur in
Washington from breast cancer; and
WHEREAS, breast cancer is one of the deadliest cancers and in 2021, female breast cancer
became the most diagnosed cancer worldwide; and
WHEREAS, in 2024, 2,790 men will be diagnosed with invasive breast cancer, and 530 men will
die from it; and
WHEREAS, the American Cancer Society and its affiliates support those patients currently battling
breast cancer, as well as those who have lost their lives to the disease and are
committed to nothing less than a cure; and
WHEREAS, the good health and well-being of the residents of Edmonds are enhanced as a direct
result of increased awareness about breast cancer and research into early detection,
causes, and effective treatments; and
WHEREAS, there are ways to lower your risk for breast cancer, which include staying at a healthy
weight, engaging in physical activity several times per week, and limiting or avoiding
alcohol; and
WHEREAS, every year too many people are touched by pain and hardship caused by breast cancer,
and the City of Edmonds supports these individuals and their families and commits to
continue working toward a future free from cancer in all its forms.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, I, Mike Rosen, Mayor of the City of Edmonds, hereby proclaim
October as Breast Cancer Awareness Month
to honor those who have lost their lives to breast cancer, recognize the courageous women and men
who are living with this disease, and celebrate breast cancer survivors.
Mike Rosen, Mayor —October 8, 2024
Packet Pg. 4
4.2
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 10/8/2024
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: 10/8/2024
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
Scott Campbell
Walnut St., Edmonds WA
(TBD)
Attachments:
Claim for Damages - Campbell - for council
Packet Pg. 6
7.1.a
CITY OF EDMONDS
CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FORM
Date Claim Form
Received by City
Please take note that �/T�/' I ��J �C , who currently resides at
mailing address
I lJpm phone # ' , work phone # and who resided at
r at the time of the occurrence and whose date of birth is , is claiming damages
against �i1 �TMoNaf��n the sum of $ arising out of the following circumstances listed below.
DATE OF OCCURRENCE:
LOCATION OF OCCURRENCE:
DESCRIPTION:
1. Describe the conduct and circumstance that brought about the injury or damage. Also describe the injury or damage.
(attach an extra sheet for additional information, if needed)
2. Provide a list of witnesses, if applicable, to the occurrence including names, addresses, and phone numbers.
3. Attach copies of all documentation relating to expenses, injuries, losses, and/or estimates for repair. t--x 3 / (-?q -- ` q,
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 #:
License Plate #
Type Auto:
(year) (make) (model)
OWNER:
Address:
Phone#:
Name:
Address:
DRIVER:
Address:
Phone#:
Passengers:
Name:
Address:
Yes No
* * ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR AUTOMOBILE CLAIMS ONLY * *
Driver License #
Form Revised 04/09/2021
Page I of 2
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
attorney in fact for the Claimant, by an attorney admitted to practice in Washington State on the Claimant's behalf, or by a
court -approved guardian or guardian ad litem on behalf of the Claimant.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the state of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct.
Signature o Claimant Date and place (residential address, city and county)
Or
Signature of Representative
Date and place (residential address, city and county)
Print Name of Representative Bar Number (if applicable)
Please present the completed claim form to: City Clerk's Office
City of Edmonds
121 511 Avenue North
Edmonds, WA, 98020
8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
Form Revised 04/09/2021
Page 2 of 2
E
U
Packet Pg. 8
7.1.a
September 25, 2024
Our claim for damages is a result of the water main replacement on Walnut Street beginning in July
2024.
As construction began on Walnut Street, we experienced brown water in our home. We advised the
workers of what was happening, and they advised it was harmless and just residue in the existing
pipes that had broken loose. They advised just to run your tap water, and it will disappear shortly.
We did that for more than an hour out of all of our faucets, tubs and toilets.
It did not disappear. The following day we called again, and Chris and Christian came to our door to
check out our situation. We showed them the video I had taken and asked if they would like a glass
of water from our sink. They politely declined.
Chris came back and advised that they would continue to run the water at our house main and the
neighbor across the street that was also experiencing similar problems.
This helped but we continued to experience intermittent brown water. I advised the city I was
concerned about possible damage to our recently installed hot water tank at that time.
We left town on the morning of September 2°d for our planned vacation. The connections to our new
meter and house service occurred when we were away. We returned on September 20th and found
that again we had discolored water. After running our tap water for a 15-minute period, our cold
water appeared clear. Unfortunately, our hot water continues to show brown water. We have run
the hot water in all of ourfaucets, and it appears to clear but the next use it again shows brown
water for a prolonged time. This has been going on since we returned home on September 20th
(6 Days and counting)
I am submitting this claim, but I need to leave open the claim as we may have additional damages
from possible damage to the hot water tank. We also don't know the actual cost of water from
running our faucets to clear the brown water in the last billing cycle.
I am attaching the last bill I received showing 29 units of water usage which is significantly higher
than the prior August billing cycle.
In addition, we purchased drinking waterfor our use while we dealt with our brown water problem
There were five 2.5-gallon containers. Invoices attached.
I believe we are currently looking at our extra costs as follows.
Extra water/ sewer charges compared to prior year: $96.00
Estimated charges for next billing cycle: $50.00
Purchased drinking water (5 X 3.99): $19.95
Unknown damage to Hot Water heater TBD
Once we are sure there is no more brown water and no damage to our Hot water tank, we will be
happy to finalize this claim.
E
CU
U
l , Z 7, `— Packet Pg. 9
7.2
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 10/8/2024
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 25, 2024 and October 2, 2024.
Attachments:
Public Comment October 8, 2024
Packet Pg. 10
7.2.a
Edmonds City Council Public Comments — October 8, 2024
Online Form 2024-09-25 02:40 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 9/25/2024 5:40:48 PM (GMT-
07:00) US/Arizona
FirstName Gary
LastName Holton
Email
CityOfResidence Edmonds
AgendaTopic Regional Fire Authority and property tax impact
Comments As a resident of Edmonds, it is mystifying to me why the city is considering
abrogating its responsibility in providing fire and EMS services. In every town or city I've lived in for
the last 70+ years these services and police were part of the local government services as a normal
responsibility. The service might be contracted out but the overall cost was part of the city budget
and included in the local taxes. It would seem more logical that the city would have better leverage
to manage the cost of these and all the other city services rather than off load the responsibility to
each individual property owner to negotiate with a service provider. Does this mean that my
neighbors and businesses could decide to go with a hodgepodge of providers or not have the
services at all. Somehow it seems we have lost the concept of what being in a community means.
Are we no longer committed to having common interests and responsibilities when we are part of
the city. What city service responsibility will the city try to divest itself of next, police, schools, trash
collection, water, sewer, and in the end does the city of Edmonds mean it's a community at all. It
seems to me the concept of being in a community means more than just the issue of what happens
to property taxes if the city walks away from one or more of normal city services. If by no longer
providing the service
m
E
E
0
U
a
a�
Packet Pg. 11
8.1
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 10/8/2024
Approval of Council Meeting Minutes September 24, 2024
Staff Lead: Council
Department: City Clerk's Office
Preparer: Nicholas Falk
Background/History
N/A
Recommendation
Approval of Council Meeting minutes as part of the Consent Agenda.
Narrative
Council meeting minutes are attached.
Attachments:
2024-09-24 Council Minutes
Packet Pg. 12
8.1.a
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MEETING
DRAFT MINUTES
September 24, 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
Shane Hope, Acting Planning & Dev. Dir.
Mike Clugston, Sr. Planner/Acting Planning Mgr
Leif Bjorback, Building Official
Navyusha Pentakota, Urban Design Planner
Tristan Sewell, Planner
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 5' Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually. The meeting was opened with the flag salute.
2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Councilmember Nand read the City Council Land Acknowledge Statement: "We acknowledge the original
inhabitants of this place, the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and their successors the Tulalip Tribes, who
since time immemorial have hunted, fished, gathered, and taken care of these lands. We respect their
sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and we honor their sacred spiritual connection with the land
and water."
3. ROLL CALL
City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present.
4. PRESENTATIONS
1. NHHM PROCLAMATION
Mayor Rosen read a proclamation proclaiming September 15 — October 15 as National Hispanic Heritage
Month and calling its observance to all residents.
Dr. Ileana Ponce Gonzalez, founder and executive director of Community Health Workers Coalition for
Migrants and Refugees, accepted the proclamation on behalf of the Hispanic community and Community
Health Workers Coalition and said she was honored to receive the proclamation that recognizes their
important contribution to Edmonds and the State. She thanked Mayor Rosen and the city council for
promoting the diversity and culture of the Hispanic population.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 24, 2024
Page 1
Packet Pg. 13
8.1.a
2. MAYOR'S FINANCE UPDATE
Mayor Rosen announced he will present the budget to the council and the community on October I at the
Edmonds Waterfront Center. The public is welcome and encouraged to attend. There will be several
opportunities following the presentation of the budget for the public to become more engaged, starting with
October 3' where the city council will partner with the Edmonds Civic Roundtable at the Edmonds
Waterfront Center.
5. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DOTSCH, TO
APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
There were no audience comments.
7. RECEIVED FOR FILING
1. CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FOR FILING
2. AUGUST 2024 MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT
3. WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS
4. OUTSIDE BOARDS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS
8. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON, TO
APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items
approved are as follows:
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 — LONDON
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
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 24, 2024
Page 2
Packet Pg. 14
8.1.a
9. PUBLIC HEARING
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)
Acting Planning Manager Mike Clugston explained during the past two sessions, the legislature passed a
number of bills related to middle housing and other items. One of the lesser known bills was an update to
permit timelines for land use permits. Since GMA was adopted about 30 years ago, the City had 120 days
to review land use permits. Commerce has tracked that more or less, but there are no penalties if the 120
days was not met. SB 5290 required several small changes to the code; the main change was the requirement
for new permit shot clocks. Land use permits have historically had a 120 day review period. With SB 5290,
land use permit will have 3 different shot clocks.
Mr. Clugston reviewed SB 529 Implementation Requirements for Jurisdictions
• New Final Decision Timelines
o Takes effect January 1, 2025:
■ For Type I project permits, staff decision with no public notice, the City must issue a final
decision within 65 days of the determination of completeness.
■ For Type II project permits, staff decision with public notice, the City must issue a final
decision within 100 days of determination of completeness
■ For Type III and IV project permits, which require public notice and a public hearing, the
City must issue a final decision within 170 days of the determination of completeness
■ Timelines can be amended
■ Temporary suspension of more than 60 consecutive days may add an additional 30 days to
time period until a final decision is required to be issued.
Refunding Fees
o 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 period are met
o The portion of the fee refunded for missing time periods shall be:
■ 10% if the final decision was made after the applicable deadline but the period did not
exceed 20% of the original time period; or
■ 20% if the period from the deadline to the time of the issuance exceeded 20% of the original
time period.
UNLESS...
Measures to Avoid Refunding of Fees
o Refunding fee provisions are not applicable to cities and counties which have implemented at
least three 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
e) 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 -applications meetings optional
h) Make housing types an outright permitted use in all zones where the housing type is
permitted;
Mr. Clugston anticipated the new timelines were achievable and the City already does some of the measures
to avoid refunding of fees. HB 1105 requires a change to how the City provides public notice to include
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 24, 2024
Page 3
Packet Pg. 15
8.1.a
specific dates and times when public notice is required. The planning board public held a hearing in August
and recommended approval. This procedural change does not require SEPA.
Mayor Rosen opened the public hearing. There was no public comments. Mayor Rosen closed the public
hearing.
Councilmember Tibbott commented he met with a neighbor this morning who said it was taking forever to
get his permit approved; the engineering drawings had been returned and resubmitted and he was waiting
for approval. Councilmember Tibbott asked how often people need to resubmit and stay within the 65 or
100 days. Mr. Clugston answered these changes apply only to land use permits; he was unsure if the permit
Councilmember Tibbott referred to was a building permit or an engineering permit. Councilmember Tibbott
assumed they were likely building permits. Mr. Clugston said those permits are not held to these timelines
as it is a separate process. The goal in processing permits is that the information provided up front is as
complete as possible, whether there is a preapplication meeting or development review committee meeting
or handouts are easy enough to follow and understand so that people can submit information and it is correct
the first time and there aren't multiple rounds of corrections.
Councilmember Tibbott asked if the preapplication meetings are helpful. Mr. Clugston answered
absolutely. Councilmember Tibbott asked if the preapplication meeting was at the applicant's discretion.
Mr. Clugston said staff recommends both development review meetings and preapplication meetings. The
issue is requiring them for permits; if they are not required, staff still recommends them as they are helpful
and streamline the process. Eliminating the requirement for preapplication meetings is a way to avoid
refunds.
Councilmember Paine asked how the City's current review compared to the shot clock requirements. Mr.
Clugston answered it will start with 2024 data; the City will have a better idea by the end of the year and
Commerce will have a better idea for jurisdictions that are required to comply. Councilmember Paine asked
for a rough estimate of the City's current compliance with the new requirements. Mr. Clugston answered
based on the new guidance, he believed those would be met nearly all the time. The shorter time shot clocks
are for easier permits so staff should be able to meet the 65 day requirement. SB 5290 will provide more
time for the more difficult permits and he anticipated staff would be able to meet it in every case.
Councilmember Paine said she opened some of the links in the PowerPoint and it looks like the City is able
to ensure it has adequate staffing by collecting all the fees the department is entitled to. She asked whether
a permit fee analysis had been done lately. Mr. Clugston answered it was last done in 2022 and the City
typically does it every 3 years so it is due this winter. Councilmember Paine asked if the current permit fees
were covering overhead, review time, etc. Mr. Clugston answered definitely, it also covered any
passthroughs if an expert or consultant was needed. Councilmember Paine suggested when staff was ready
to submit the report to Commerce to also provide it to council as it is a good feedback loop for the council
to know staff is meeting the needs of community related to land use permits.
Councilmember Chen commented he, like Councilmember Tibbott, has heard that some applications take
a long time, but they maybe not be in this category. If someone submits an application and information is
missing and they resubmit, he asked whether the shot clock starts over or does it continue with the original
timeframe. Mr. Clugston answered the first step is to determine whether the application is complete or
incomplete; staff has 28 days to make that determination. After it is determined to be complete, the 65, 100
or 170 day clock starts. From there, each time staff has additional corrections, the clock pauses, and once
the applicant resubmits material based on that information request, the clock restarts.
Council President Olson referred to the planning board minutes which reflect their desire to remove
language regarding refunds if it could be removed. She asked if the fact that the language was still in the
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 24, 2024
Page 4
Packet Pg. 16
proposed code amendment meant it could not be removed. Mr. Clugston answered it could be removed
because the threshold are already being met, but he wanted to leave it in as placeholder to remind staff as
they are processing permits that they have to meet these requirements and that language points to the RCW
where the additional tools are listed. It is more of a placeholder or reminder to keep the shot clocks in mind
and that if the timeframes are not met, it could lead to refunds.
Council President Olson relayed her understanding that the planning board suggested taking out the
language about refunds so the City would not be liable and need to refund permit fees. She did not see
anything in the narrative that addressed whether that was optional. Mr. Clugston answered the language
could be removed; he recommended retaining it as a placeholder for staff and the public to remind them the
refund option exists if the shot clocks are not met. Council President Olson asked if the narrative explained
that staff recommended something different than what the planning board's recommendation. Mr. Clugston
referred to the 5t1i bullet on packet page 377 regarding permit review timelines, "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."
Council President Olson commented it has been a long time since council has spoken about this, but when
there is a planning board recommendation and staff does not follow it, staff s recommendation should
explicitly address the fact that their recommendation differed from the planning board's recommendation
and why. She could have easily missed that if she had not carefully read the planning board minutes. It is
important to honor the planning board's time and effort and not necessarily do what they say every time,
but to give true transparency and expression to their recommendations. She recalled this came up once
before since she has been on council and there was a very long conversation about it.
Councilmember Nand relayed her disappointment that the State legislature decided to pass yet another
unfunded State mandate, potentially cutting City revenue and requiring the addition of FTEs at a time the
City is desperately trying to retain FTEs and the level of service to the community. She did not anticipate
any issues with the planning department being able to meet these permitting timelines as the City has a very
good reputation for turning permits around quickly. There are so many avenues of service from department
of licensing to human services where the State government has waitlists that are years long. She found it
very disappointing, especially in a challenging budget year for cities across the state, for the State to say
cities need to cut timelines and make it easier for developers to get a quick turnaround and that they are
somehow being injured by longer timelines and more touches and that cities will potentially need to
decrease the process for permit applications.
Councilmember Dotsch agreed the unfunded State mandates put a lot of pressure on smaller cities and are
difficult to adapt to. If the planning board recommends removing the refund language and an annual review
is required, she suggested using the annual review to analyze how the City is meeting its goals. Mr. Clugston
answered that language can be removed; the City will be required to submit its permit shot clock
information to Commerce annually.
Councilmember Paine referred to the language that the planning board recommended be removed, asking
if there is a huge delay or problematic codes such as the tree code not being the simplest for permit review,
were there ways around providing a refund if the shot clock was not met by using three of the methods. Mr.
Clugston answered the City already has at least three and could have several more. He did not think the
City would need to issue refunds for permit application fees any time soon. Councilmember Paine asked
what would happen if something went entirely sideways. Mr. Clugston answered if there was something
really off center, there would be communication between the applicant and the City to resolve it. Some
permits take more time; legislative permits are not included such as comprehensive plan and code
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 24, 2024
Page 5
Packet Pg. 17
8.1.a
amendments, etc. because they take more time. Even at the City's current staffing level, which he
acknowledged is a little low, he anticipated the new requirements could still be met.
Councilmember Dotsch recalled at the beginning of the presentation, Mr. Clugston mentioned streamlining
the paperwork and asked if that was something that was anticipated. Mr. Clugston answered this mandate
applies to all cities in the State. Some cities are much further behind; a lot of cities still do not have electronic
permitting which Edmonds has had since Covid. Staff is always looking for ways to streamline, but already
have a number of processes in place that have streamline things fairly well. Councilmember Dotsch asked
if there were things on staff s wish list. Mr. Clugston answered within the next month, the City will be
implementing new permitting software that will be more responsive to needs and less expensive than the
current permitting system.
10. COUNCIL BUSINESS
1. GREEN BUILDING INCENTIVES DRAFT CODE AMENDMENTS (AMD2023-0010)
Building Official Leif Bjorback introduced Planner Tristan Sewell and Acting Planning & Development
Director Shane Hope. He explained staff is bringing this back to continue the discussion from last month
and to discuss aspects that were not part of that presentation. The presentation includes slides from the
previous presentation, but will focus primarily on the new portions of the presentation including enhanced
graphics that will hopefully provide a better understanding of the zoning incentives for height and setbacks.
The goal is to get direction from the council tonight regarding how best to move forward with this program.
He reviewed:
• Staff Recommendation
o 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 zone's
primary intent
■ Enforcing follow-through via performance bonds, if needed
o Supported by Planning Board as of July 24, 2024
• Construction Standards (Established Certifications)
o Single -Family Residential: Built Green o Flexible, point -based, not prescriptive
4-Star
o Commercial, Multifamily, and Mixed
Use: LEED Gold or Built Green 4-Star
Multifamily
• Points Categories
o Built Green
o Updated in response to market and regulation
o Widely used and recognized
o Third -party verified
o Built Green benchmarked on 20%
improvement over State energy code
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 24, 2024
Page 6
Packet Pg. 18
8.1.a
■ 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
What Green Building Can Look Like
o Encouraging active transportation
o Responsible materials sourcing
o Functional landscaping
o Efficient fixtures and appliances
o Efficient building envelopes
■ Energy code requires additional insulation which requires additional height
o Interstitial space
■ Energy code encourages ductwork within the thermal envelope, often located in floor
framing (interstitial space)
■ Interstitial space is intermediate
mechanical systems
�i
space between floor levels usually to accommodate
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 24, 2024
Page 7
Packet Pg. 19
8.1.a
o 5' foot additional building height incentive is not only to accommodate energy code but also
can be the difference between designing an additional story for a project
• Draft Permit Review Incentives
DRAFT - EDMONDS TARGET TIMES FOR PERMIT PROCESSING (WEEKS)
Actual Review times may vary
Total Target
Review Time
Permit Type Review Type
1 st Review
2nd Review
3rd Review
Review Time
Savings
New Single Regular
6
3
2
11
Family Expedited
3
2
1
6
5weeks
Single Family Regular
3 to 5
2 to 3
1 to 2
6 to 10
Addition or
Remodel Expedited
2 to 3
1 to 2
1
4 to 6
2-4 weeks
CommerciaU MF Regular
8
5
3
16
New Expedited
4
3
2
9
7weeks
Commercial/MF Regular
4
3
2
9
Additions Expedited
2
2
1
5
4weeks
Commercial Regular
4
2
1
7
Remodel (Tenant
Improvement) Expedited
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:
• Important Notes on Land Use Incentives
o Incentives never supersede environmental regulations.
o Onsite or financial realities may limit utilization of incentives.
o Not every project may pursue every option.
o Possible limiting regulatory factors:
■ Critical areas
■ Building and Fire codes
■ Stormwater
■ Design review, including landscaping
■ Street frontage improvements and right-of-way access
■ Shoreline Master Program
• Draft Land Use Incentives
Sint - -le-FamiLy Residential Multifamily Resideri commercial. and Mixed Use
Multifamily Residential Commercial
- Business (B)Zones
(RM)Zones (C)Zones
Minimum Cenification Built Green 4-Star LEED Gold or Built Green 4-Star Multifamily
Built Green 5-Star or better get
setbacks one zone smaller N/A
(i.e., RS-10 to RS-8)
all portions above
d height limit are
at least 4-in-12
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)
+5' plus the 5' pitched roof bonus
for all portions sloped at least:
3-in-12 Be
4-in-12 BN. BP
6-in-12 BD5
+_'
(Cwonly)
N/A BD1-4
1 per dwelling unit 1 perdwellingunit
-0 1per500sq.ft. leasable commercial floor area
Business Zones — LEED Gold
o Parking: One per 500 sq. ft. leasable floor area or 1 per dwelling unit, except in BD — no
requirement for commercial.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 24, 2024
Page 8
Packet Pg. 20
8.1.a
BN/BP
Pitched Roof
Bonus
Incentivize Max.
Std. Height Max.
Images to scale
Height
BC BD5
3-1n-12 6in-12
BD1-4
5'
30'
3D Illustrations
o Some choices were necessary developing these examples.
■ Establish baselines — minimum lot dimensions, zoning, etc.
■ Show maximum development potential — unit count, lot coverage, size, etc.
■ Flat, rectangular lots
■ Simply masses in which a building must fit, not indicative of architecture
o Incentives illustrated in green
Minimum RS-8 lot
o Standard lot - 70' wide, 8,000 sq. ft.
o Most common zone
o Built Green 5-Star RS-6 setbacks in green
Highly idealized scenario, not reality
«.e..,
Illustrating max. use of regulation
o Max. 35% coverage
0 1,300 sf primary dwelling footprint
o Two 1,000 sf DADUs
■ 500 sf footprint for 2-story
■ 1,000 sf footprint for 1-story
o No other buildings (shed, garage, etc.)
o Orientations are somewhat arbitrary
o Built Green 5-Star RS-6 setbacks in green
o Footprints 30' wide (needed later)
0 3 parking spaces required for 2 ADUs. Illustrated as
outdoors
m
RS-8 Setback Incentives
Existing Code/Built Green 4-Star
I 1 111
_0_
Built Green 5-Star or Better
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 24, 2024
Page 9
Packet Pg. 21
8.1.a
• Existing Regulation
o Orientations - could rotate 90'
o Maximum distance between units pinned to setback corners
o Built Green 5-Star or better setback incentives illustrated in green
0
• Built Green 4-Star
o Adds 5' pitched rooves
o Orientations - could rotate 90'
o Maximum distance between units --+ pinned to setback corners
o Built Green 5-Star or better setback incentives illustrated in green
0
Built Green 5-Star
o Uses RS-6 setbacks
o Orientations - could rotate 90'
o Maximum distance between units --+ pinned to setback corners
o Built Green 5-Star or better setback incentives illustrated in green
RM Existing Zoning and Density Incentive Massing Example
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 24, 2024
Page 10
Packet Pg. 22
8.1.a
o Minimum RM-2.4 lot for 5 units (square)
o Maximum lot coverage
0 5' pitched rooves — 4-in-12
o Setback landscaping, driveway not shown
o Two stories most likely
o These examples may look the same, except parking
o Existing Zoning
■ 5 dwelling units (ag <2,200 sf)
■ Parking depends on unit bedroom count (6-10 spaces)
0 4-Star/LEED Gold — only density
■ 8 dwelling units (avg <1,360 sf)
• RM Height Incentive Massing Example
o Minimum RM-2.4 lot for 5 units
o Maximum lot coverage • 5' pitched rooves — 4-in-12
o Landscaping, driveway not shown
0 3 stories more likely, increasing potential unit size
Again, these examples look the same, except parking
0 4-Star/LEED Gold — Only Height
■ 5 dwellings, 5 parking spaces
0 5-Star/LEED Platinum — Height & Density
Mr. Bjorback reviewed:
• Proposed Enforcement Measures
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 24, 2024
Page 11
Packet Pg. 23
8.1.a
o Certification required prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy
o 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
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 goes to the City's general fund
Enforcement Examples (Monetary penalties for failure to achieve certification)
o Bond amounts based on scale of project
■ 3,000 sf new house $27,908
■ 10,000 sf commercial mixed use $79,750
■ 100,000 sf commercial mixed use $777,225
Next Steps
o Staff to draft enforcement code - Chapter 17.XX ECDC
o Public Hearing: October 8, 2024
o Council Action: Late October 2024
■ Potential Options
- Approve as presented
- Approve with modified incentives
- Approve with expedited plan review only
- Delay approval of the program to a later date
Councilmember Paine expressed her appreciation for the depth of the presentation and the description of
why additional height may be needed due to necessary equipment to help make a building green, something
that is important for people to recognize. She asked whether performance bonds were common for green
buildings. Mr. Bjorback answered he would not say they were common in the region; it was proposed
because it is already a tool the City has related to building permits. Performance bonds are currently issued
for items in a construction project that are not complete at the time the building needs occupancy and defers
the completion of some portions of the project while allowing the building to be occupied; it is an alternative
way to achieve occupancy.
Councilmember Paine asked for examples of other performance bonds other than green buildings. Mr.
Bjorback answered those are most often generated or imposed by the engineering or planning divisions.
Mr. Sewell said the planning division uses them for a handful of things, primarily landscaping performance
bonds; for example, if a commercial or multifamily development submits a proposed landscaping plan to
ensure the landscaping is planted, a performance bond is issued. A maintenance bond can also be issued to
ensure the landscaping survives for at least two years and if not, the plants have to be replaced before the
bond can be released. The critical area code can implement performance and maintenance bonds, primarily
in the context of code enforcement. He believed the tree code also allows issuance of performance bonds.
City Attorney Jeff Taraday commented with subdivision improvements there is often a need to finalize
work after the subdivision has been recorded so a bond is taken for that purpose. The City has had situations
over the years, due to various circumstances, where the bond is not adequate to correct the problem. Bonds
in theory are a great tool to enforce the City's code, but careful thought should be given to the effects of
inflation and other things that can make a bond not the perfect tool. He summarized bonds are a good tool,
but the City should assess things that can go wrong.
Councilmember Tibbott observed there is a lot of information in the presentation to digest, pointing out the
numbers were very difficult to read and suggested he get together with staff to get a better understanding
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 24, 2024
Page 12
Packet Pg. 24
8.1.a
of the measurements. With regard to the space between floors needing to be greater, a lot of houses use
2x10s between floors, the presentation indicated there need to be more space. He asked why so much space
was needed between floors for duct work, etc. Mr. Bjorback referred to the photograph of interstitial space
that illustrates typical duct work that may happen in an attic or the crawl space. Councilmember Tibbott
asked if the illustration was in the attic or between floors. Mr. Bjorback answered between floors; the
photograph was an example of interstitial space between floors. Councilmember Tibbott observed the
photograph showed about 3 feet. Mr. Bjorback answered it was likely about 2 feet. The average floor system
may be about 1 foot; this would be an additional 1 foot of height required to put that equipment in place.
Councilmember Tibbott asked what equipment needed to be put in place. Mr. Bjorback answered the
heating system. Councilmember Tibbott asked if the space needed to be bigger to accommodate insulation.
Mr. Bjorback answered if it is within the thermal envelope of the house, it did not need to be insulated in
quite this manner. Councilmember Tibbott commented it seemed a very expensive endeavor to put that
much duct work between floors. Mr. Bjorback answered it is common in commercial construction for many
years and is becoming more common in residential homes; he could think of several houses currently under
construction that look just like the illustration. Councilmember Tibbott commented he was very surprised.
Councilmember Tibbott asked about credits for a pitched roof. He referred to the illustration of a pitched
roof which are proposed to be up to 35 feet. Mr. Bjorback asked if his questions were based on energy code
impacts or the zoning height increase. Councilmember Tibbott asked if there was a benefit to a pitched roof
compared to flat for achieving green objectives. Mr. Sewell answered most of the pitched roof bonuses with
the exception of BN and single family residential already exist in the code and are not the result of this
program. Instances where they are offered by amendment in this program are out of a compromise for
height versus obstruction of views and other concerns that staff has heard and wanted to acknowledge. It
reduces the area above the 25-30 foot height, depending on the zone.
Councilmember Tibbott said according to the illustration, it would be above 30 feet. Mr. Sewell agreed,
explaining the incentive is 5 additional feet wedged between the existing height limit and the pitched roof
bonus. Councilmember Tibbott relayed his understanding that there is currently a pitched roof bonus. Mr.
Sewell agreed that already exists in all the zones illustrated on the Business Zones — LEED Gold slide
except for BN and RM zone. Councilmember Tibbott observed it is not a green benefit. Mr. Sewell
commented it was a design choice and had been on the books in Edmonds for about 60 years. It was not
new and not part of this program; the height benefit was just inserted below it.
Council President Olson referred to the height bonuses, commenting it would be helpful to know what it
was going on top of. She expressed concern with having this in isolation from the comprehensive plan, the
zoning, the DEIS and where density will be located, and preferred to wait on that part of the green incentives
until the land use plan is completed. She agreed the expedited permit process was a great incentive and
something that should be implemented as early as possible to the extent the department can handle the faster
processing.
Council President Olson referred to the RS-8 Setback Incentives slide, commenting that was a perfect
depiction. She has been frustrated by offering reduced setbacks as an incentive for anything due to the need
to preserve comfort, space and residential feel, reasons people chose Edmonds in the first place. These
illustrations show how buildings get closer to the property line and closer to neighbors' buildings in order
to give another parcel more space between the buildings on their property which she felt did not make sense.
The intent has been for property owners to stay away from their neighbor's property and preserve open
space. Historical the biggest trees have been on the perimeter of properties. People aren't making the
connection between losing setbacks and losing the tree canopy, but setbacks are absolutely linked to trees.
She did not like offering a setback incentive and hoped the council, by looking at these illustrations, will
be able to see what she has been trying to say in previous conversations.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 24, 2024
Page 13
Packet Pg. 25
8.1.a
Councilmember Eck thanked staff for the additional information which made the information clearer for
the council and the public. She asked how the proposed green incentives compared to what other cities
offer. Mr. Sewell answered that was the first step in the process, looking at what other cities are doing and
how to copy them. Shoreline's program is the most similar to what staff is proposing in terms of the
incentives they offer, meaning tiered along with deeper incentives for greener development. Some cities'
programs are a bit more bespoke. The intent of this program is for it to be compatible and easy to implement
with the existing code, and not be more ornate or difficult to implement on a day-to-day basis. The intent
was to create a package that was easy to understand and implementable for both applicants and City staff.
It is not exactly the same as another city's models, but Shoreline's Deep Green Incentive Program is
probably the easiest to recognize in this code.
Councilmember Dotsch thanked staff for the improved visuals. Her office was in Shoreline and she saw
development occurring there and knew Shoreline was backtracking a bit. One of the challenges she saw
with a green incentives program is developers with big backing and big money can do it and get their
bonuses, but it is more challenging for the traditional single family home builder to have that cash on hand
to do this extra work because it costs more. She was also very concerned about with letting developers who
can pay more jump to the head of line because it delays others. She relayed a staff member told her the City
was already behind due to staffing and bandwidth. When she talked to a developer of a single family home,
they said the extra spacing to make it a green building is not required, it is more for commercial and
multifamily. She provided an analogy, someone is making a chocolate cake and it turns out as pecan pie
because the cook didn't know the ingredients; how does the public know what they are commenting on, a
chocolate cake or a pecan pie, when not all the ingredients for this code are known, especially with HB
1110, zero lot lines, 4 units can be 6 if located near a major transit stop, reduced parking, etc. She was
concerned these could change and the public doesn't know what they are commenting on.
Councilmember Dotsch continued, on Bell Street, two lots from 7', the permitted building is almost 5
stories tall with an addition 5 feet for the pitched roof and all glass. With all the slopes in the City and how
slope already gives extra height, she was concerned about neighbors' loss of enjoyment, light, privacy,
views, and transferring property values to the new development. It would be beneficial to illustrate at the
public hearing how adding this on top of the additional height was allowed due to slopes. For example 3
stories can quickly become 5 stories on a steep slope.
Councilmember Nand thanked staff for the 3D renderings, finding them very useful for laypeople when
trying to visualize code. She understood the mission of the green incentive program was to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions and improve energy efficiency in new buildings which is a huge waste in
residential and commercial development. When the planning department brings forward the tree code
update, she wondered if there would be any intersection for green building incentives if property owners
choose to retain mature trees on properties when doing redevelopment. Ms. Hope answered staff hasn't
gotten to that yet; all those things will be looked at when updating the tree code.
Councilmember Chen asked for clarification on the 5-foot additional height for an ADU. Currently the City
allows ADUs to be 2 stories and 24 feet; a 5 foot addition would be a height of 29 feet. Mr. Sewell referred
to the Built Green 4-Star slide and the 2-story ADU in the back with a 5' pitched roof bonus illustrated in
green. Councilmember Chen envisioned that could create an issue in some zones with regard to views and
blocking the houses behind. He referred to the RS-8 Setback Incentives slide, commenting the building is
moved closer to the edge. He asked if the space between was 5 feet. Mr. Sewell offered to provide higher
resolution versions of the drawings tomorrow. The setbacks in RS-8 as illustrated on the left will be 7.5
feet on the sides, 5 feet shown in yellow, 2.5 feet shown in green on the left and right sides, thereby a 5-
foot side setback. This is copied and pasted from the RS-6 residential zone.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 24, 2024
Page 14
Packet Pg. 26
Councilmember Chen observed it would be 5 feet from one house and 5 feet from the neighbor's house for
a total of 10 feet. He asked about overhangs. Mr. Sewell answered eaves can be up to 30 inches before they
are considered part of the building footprint.
Councilmember Paine asked how the current tree code intersects with single family or multifamily
development, recalling there were some protections. Mr. Sewell answered there are retention requirements
and the overlap with the critical area ordinance. Councilmember Paine commented trees and preserving the
tree canopy needs to be part of the conversation because it all needs to be layered in. Mr. Sewell explained
30% of viable trees have to be retained on a single family development site, and 25% for multifamily. Sites
are subject to landscaping requirements that can require planting more trees. Trees can be captured in the
points a development can earn. He referred to the points categories, things like site and water, sustainable
sites can likely earn points by integrating tree retention or plantings or other tree related topics into their
plan. The green building program is not necessarily at the expense of the tree code; there are opportunities
to leverage what is required to earn points or go above and beyond the requirements.
Councilmember Paine asked if it would be possible to leverage points through the existing tree code, layer
it rather than being an extra step especially if there were significant trees. Mr. Sewell answered it could
potentially be possible. As he was not a LEED accredited professional, he could not speak to LEED, but all
the Built Green materials are publicly available. Councilmember Paine commented it would make some
sense to maintain significant stands based on the tree code as well as have it work for the parcel and she
would like to have that count in the points category. Mr. Sewell commented the difficulty guaranteeing that
is these are non -prescriptive programs, a developer does not need to choose those points and could choose
an alternate points category. Councilmember Paine observed a developer has to follow the tree code but the
others points categories are flexible. Mr. Sewell agreed, a developer would need to follow the tree code,
but they may not choose the point category to earn tree related points.
Councilmember Dotsch referred to packet page 449, the planning board's recommendation regarding green
building incentives, the proposed incentive for an additional 5% of structural lot coverage for ADUs. In the
example of a house with 2 ADUs, each one gets additional coverage. She asked the actual lot coverage in
that example. Mr. Sewell answered that is not currently proposed in the draft code. The current lot coverage
is 35%, so under that model, the 5% would be cumulative so it would be increased to 40%. Councilmember
Dotsch observed that was in the planning board's recommendation. Mr. Sewell agreed it was.
Councilmember Dotsch recognized there were still some issues with HB 1110 related to lot coverage.
Councilmember Dotsch referred to packet page 455, Section 16.43.050(C) "Height. Certified development
in the BD 1 — 4 zones can receive an additional 5 feet above the stated height limit in ECDC 16.43.030(A).
Properties zoned 13135 receive 5 additional feet in addition to the pitched roof bonus of ECDC
16.43.030(C)(2)." She asked why. Mr. Sewell referred to the Business Zones — LEED Gold slide which
illustrates BD5 has a pitched roof bonus. 13135 is a more residential version of the BD zone which he
assumed was why the bonus exists. That was probably written in the `60s or `70s. He offered to clarify that
in the draft code.
Councilmember Dotsch summarized the additional 5 feet was because 13135 was more residential. Mr.
Sewell explained it still gains a 5-foot bonus, but it also has a pitched roof bonus and its total maximum
height (orange line on the slide) is lower than the rest of the BD zones. Another 5 feet is inserted as a
potential incentive for LEED Gold or better, but the pitched roof bonus is retained as it currently exists.
BD1-4 does not have a pitched roof bonus but there is a 30 foot standard height limit which would allow
them to gain a total of 35 feet.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 24, 2024
Page 15
Packet Pg. 27
8.1.a
Councilmember Dotsch observed BD5 is the arts corridor and asked if the goal was to create more density
on that street by offering the additional 5 feet. Mr. Sewell explained the core premise of this program is to
enable and incentivize development that is Built Green or LEED certified that wouldn't otherwise occur.
With regard to parking, Councilmember Dotsch commented like other cities and around Green Lake,
Edmonds has a lot of dead -ends, little lanes, and a lot of areas that are not pedestrian friendly. Because
Edmonds does not have a street grid and is not flat, she was concerned with offering reducing parking as
an incentive everywhere. That is a concern she has heard from many people who moved to Edmonds from
areas like Ballard or other places where that type of incentive made parking difficult. Offering reduced
parking may make sense in a highly urbanized place, but she suggested giving careful consideration to
where it makes sense in Edmonds and not offer it as a blanket bonus.
Council President Olson said Councilmember Dotsch's comments are related to her question. It is always
desirable to have a code that is straight forward and easy to apply, but some of the incentives make sense
in some part of the City and not in others. She asked if incentives could be allowed by zone. The height is
a similar issue, it could be allowed for regular buildings, but not for DADUs for which the setbacks have
already been reduced. She questioned allowing additional height for a 24-foot DADU that is right at the
property line; she did not think that was appropriate. She recalled State law did not allow imposition of
design limitations on DADUs that were not imposed on single family and questioned whether incentives
were allowed to apply to single family that did not apply to DADUs. She wanted that question answered
before the council took action.
Mayor Rosen declared a brief recess.
2. PROCESS FOR DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (DEIS)
Acting Planning & Development Director Shane Hope reviewed:
• What is State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA)?
o Washington state law adopted in 1971 to inform governmental agencies and the public about
environmental considerations for proposal
o Provides method to identify environmental impacts and mitigation opportunities before action
is taken
o Tool for identifying and analyzing environmental aspects of proposal
■ The EIS process
- Provides opportunities for the public, local, state and federal agencies, and tribal
governments to participate in developing and analyzing information.
- Provides decision -makers with environmental information
- Identifies significant impacts
- Recommends reasonable alternatives for accomplishing proposal
- Identifies potential mitigation for impacts
Types of EIS
o There are two tvnes of environmental impact statements
SEPA Project EIS
SEPA Non -Project EIS
Purpose
Analyzes potential impacts and
Provides a basis for future project
alternatives to a proposal
decisions
Actions
Proposals that are likely to have a
Plans, policies, programs, or
Covered
significant adverse environmental
regulations that control the use of the
impact
environment
Project
New construction; facility operation
Comprehensive plans, watershed
Types
changes; environmental cleanup
management plans, shoreline master
projects; demolitions; and purchases,
programs, and development regulations
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 24, 2024
Page 16
Packet Pg. 28
8.1.a
sales, leases, transfers, or exchanges of
natural resources
Non -project EIS
o Background and objectives
■ Issue background including purpose and need for action'
■ Legislative authority or mandate
■ Primary objective statement
■ Relationship to ongoing and future regulatory and planning efforts
o Existing situation
■ Description of existing situation and current regulations
■ Existing means to achieve objective
■ Current institutional structure
o Proposal and alternatives
■ Description of proposed regulation, policy or plan
■ Proposed alternatives that could reasonably meet the primary objectives
o Environmental impacts
■ Summary of adverse environmental impacts from the proposal and alternatives.
EIS Process Steps
Notice of
August 2023
Early step in preparing the EIS; publication of the Notice of
Intent
Intent in the Federal Register
Scoping
Aug 4-Sept 10,
Determines the scope of issues to be considered within the
Period
2023
DEIS document. Interested parties may submit comments
DRAFT EIS
Sept 30, 2024
DEIS identifies the project's goals and objectives, assesses the
(DEIS)
environmental impacts of each alternative, proposed measures
to miti ate any identified adverse effects
Comment
Sept 30-Oct 29,
DEIS undergoes an extensive public and agency review. A
Period
2024 (30 days)
virtual meeting will be held 15 days after publishing the DEIS
to provide an overview and seek comments
Final EIS
Nov 2024
Includes analyzing and responding to all comments received
on the draft EIS. To be published no later than 60 days after
the close of the comment period.
• Role of Preferred Alternative
o SEPA does not require "preferred alternative" in EIS process
o Naming a preferred alternative can signal the approach to the plan or project thought to be the
most likely
o Advantage of naming a preferred alternative is that people can focus on the key features and
issues related to that alternative
• FEIS and Final Plan
o Final EIS includes all the public comments
o The Final EIS may or may not contain the preferred alternative
o The City's comprehensive plan is adopted only after the Final EIS is issued
o Includes a public hearing before the final adoption
IReview and
FEIS Issued ► refinement of ► Public ►
Draft Plan Hearing
If everything goes well, Ms. Hope believed adoption could occur before the end of the year. This is a very
tight timeframe; staff is beginning to plug in dates for council consideration which includes some optional
city council or planning board meetings. There may be additional public engagement outside city council
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 24, 2024
Page 17
Packet Pg. 29
8.1.a
and planning board meetings. If the process can stick to the schedule, adoption could occur before the end
of the year. However, if anything goes awry or there are complications, the deadline won't be made. She
relayed it was her obligation to do her best to meet the State law and it remains to be seen how close that
will come.
Council President Olson expressed appreciation for the clarity this information provided. She
acknowledged the timelines are tight and some residents may be concerned about the report on the Final
EIS. She asked if that was the first time the public will get to see the Q&A or will staff maintain a blog on
the website as comments occur in real time in case the public has follow up questions. Ms. Hope responded
she did not want to commit to posting comments on the website in real time, but that could be done
periodically such as on a weekly basis. Council President Olson responded that would be amazing,
anticipating that would help the public process especially since it is condensed at the end and council will
be taking action rather close to the deadline.
Council President Olson referenced Ms. Hope's comment that the preferred alternative is not locked in,
relaying that was not the council's impression and she appreciated hearing that. Ms. Hope clarified, it is not
required to have a preferred alternative, but it is helpful for people to know where the City is leaning which
is the reason for having a preferred alternative so people pay more attention to that alternative. With the
FEIS, the action that follows needs to think about and address what the EIS said. If the City ends up with
something different that was not considered in the EIS, that does not work under SEPA. There can be
variations between the bookends, but it cannot be totally different. Council President Olson relayed her
understanding the City is locked into what is between the bookends. Ms. Hope agreed.
Councilmember Dotsch asked what type of public comments are helpful during the public comment period.
Ms. Hope answered there will be two documents, first the DEIS on which she hoped people would focus
their comments on environmental impacts, things they have concerns about, things the DEIS didn't catch,
offering additional information, and if they have a preferred alternative. The public can also offer comments
on the draft comprehensive plan which may not be related to an environmental issue, but could be related
to a concern or idea that they want incorporated or comments about a specific element.
Recognizing the State deadline is the end of the year, Councilmember Dotsch asked with the budget
discussion, holidays, public participation, etc. could the City take an extra month. Ms. Hope answered the
State's deadline is December 31, 2024. It takes Commerce and other agencies time to determine who has
adopted their comprehensive plan by the deadline so there may be a little time in January to submit the plan
if it can't in good faith be done sooner.
Councilmember Paine commented it is not just Commerce who reviews the comprehensive plan, Puget
Sound Regional Council (PSRC) and others review it. She asked if other agencies look at the EIS as well
as the comprehensive plan. Ms. Hope answered they get the EIS, but usually do not go very far into it. For
example, PSRC as the regional body, needs to ensure the transportation component in particular is
consistent with regional planning requirements and policies. If Edmonds is not consistent, that could create
ineligibility in the future for transportation and other funding. The State Department of Commerce provides
the comprehensive plan to a number of other State agencies such as WSDOT, Department of Health, Fish
& Wildlife, etc.
Councilmember Paine commented the City has a Climate Action Plan (CAP) although that is not yet
required. She asked if there is a review of the CAP at the comprehensive plan level and who would do that,
the State or PSRC. Ms. Hope answered it would be the State; the PSRC may consider whether the Climate
Element said something contrary to regional policies, but they would not review it at a deep level.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 24, 2024
Page 18
Packet Pg. 30
8.1.a
Councilmember Chen thanked Ms. Hope for the information regarding the timeline and process. If a
preferred alternative is not required, he asked if one of the options could be to leave out that portion in
completing the preferred alternative to meet the deadline and be eligible for State funding. Ms. Hope
answered a preferred alternative is not required under SEPA, but it is useful because when thinking about
capital projects, it is helpful to have a list of the most likely projects. For example, if the City has a preferred
alternative, it provides time for staff working on capital projects to get the list right.
Councilmember Chen observed a preferred alternative is still useful. Ms. Hope agreed that while not a
SEPA requirement, it is useful to the City and the public. Councilmember Chen asked if there would be an
option after year end to complete that part. Ms. Hope responded there is no time requirement for selecting
a preferred alternative; it would be useful for the city council to choose a preferred alternative during the
period between the DEIS and FEIS or after the FEIS comes out. That way the comprehensive plan can be
scoped to ensure it does what is intended and not spend a lot of time on an approach that is not viable.
Councilmember Chen asked about the budget for the consultant. Ms. Hope answered if the process remains
within the current year, it will be within budget unless something new is added to their list of obligations.
If the process goes into next year, additional funds may be required. Councilmember Chen asked if council
would have an opportunity to meet with the consultant. Ms. Hope answered it was her understanding the
consultants came to one meeting; bringing a consultant to a meeting is expensive due to paying for travel
time, prep time, etc. She preferred to have them working on the documents and have staff attend meetings.
Councilmember Chen suggested maybe they could attend over Zoom sometime.
Councilmember Nand thanked Ms. Hope for the transparency related to the EIS timeline. Her question was
related to something that occurred before Ms. Hope rejoined City staff, a decision was made to repeal the
Highway 99 EIS and do a citywide EIS. She wondered what level of granularity there would be for a
specific subarea, and whether Highway 99 would have benefited from its own EIS versus being folded into
the citywide EIS. Ms. Hope answered at the time, the Highway 99 subarea benefited greatly from its own
EIS. It structured things and reduced surprises about the fairly significant impacts of the changes coming
to that area. Having a citywide EIS is fine and still works. She summarized the Highway 99 subarea EIS
was useful at the time, but not necessary if there is a citywide EIS.
11. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Chen referenced the condensed comprehensive plan timeline and expressed his thanks to
staff, Ms. Hope and everyone for their hard work to meet the timeline and produce a good product for the
City.
Councilmember Tibbott expressed his appreciation for the overview tonight, commenting he could tell the
planning & development department was doing a lot of work to keep the council and the community
updated. To the community, he said the City is entering the final quarter of year when all the excitement
and must -watch TV and opportunities for public input happen. The council's packets are often enormous,
this week's was 500 pages and included a Reports on Outside Boards and Commissions which describe
things happening in and around the City such as Community Transit, Snohomish County Tomorrow, etc.
and make for great reading.
Council President Olson shared the great opportunity she had for professional development in the last few
days, joining Commander Machado and the graveyard shift on a police ridealong on Sunday night. They
said it was a slow night, but she did not want more activity than that to be going on in the City. She gave a
shout out to the police department and the great service they provide every day. She plans to attend the
CERT disaster skills and community preparedness training this Friday, Saturday and Sunday. Next week
she will find out what it is like to live without a car by participating in Community Transit's Week Without
Driving.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 24, 2024
Page 19
Packet Pg. 31
8.1.a
Councilmember Dotsch echoed councilmembers' kudos to Ms. Hope for the clarity she provided which is
helpful for the council and public to know.
Councilmember Paine reported since the last council meeting, she participated with a local bus advocate,
Roger Pence, in a bus and light rail field trip, taking the bus from the Edmonds station at the waterfront to
the Lynnwood station, putting money on ORCA card in the store, and then taking the light rail to Northgate.
Through Community Transit, she was able to arrange a marvelous transit trainer who even had swag. There
was an electrical problem with the light rail station that day and they barely missed the end of service on
their return trip. She appreciated everyone's questions and hustling to where they needed to be.
Councilmember Paine agreed council packet item 7.4, Reports on Outside Boards and Committees, contains
a lot of great information. She highlighted the PSRC meeting, relaying she took light rail to and from their
meeting. The report includes data about new electric vehicle registrations which are up 20% across the
PSRC region and declining vehicle miles traveled mainly due to the addition of other modes of
transportation such as bus, light rail, pedestrian and bicycles. She highlighted the increase in deaths and
injuries for pedestrian and bicycles and she stressed the importance of lowering accident rates in Edmonds
and being safe with all modes of transportation.
Councilmember Nand reported on the SnoCom 911 meeting which included discussion regarding
construction of their future facility, adoption of Flock cameras, and various other topics related to
Snohomish County fire, EMS, and police dispatch. She was fascinated to hear from police and fire chiefs
about the work their rank and file do to keep the community safe. A new nonprofit is being formed to
support Edmonds Pride activities. She invited anyone interested in participating to contact Rowan Soiset at
EdmondsQueerYouthAlliance(agmail.com. The City has done a great job providing leadership and
planning Pride activities, but the local LGBTQ community is forming their own nonprofit and she was
excited see the work they will do going forward.
Councilmember Eck reported on the 9/11 memorial ceremony held at the downtown fire station. She and
others including Mayor Rosen as well as people from South Snohomish County and first responders from
SCF and the local police force attended. She was honored to attend and hear the words spoken and to
observe a moment of silence to remember and acknowledge we will never forget what happened.
Councilmember Eck said she usually asks people whether they have ever been to Edmonds and then gushes
about everything available in Edmonds including the International District on Highway 99. During the last
week she has talked to a handful of people who live outside Edmonds that have gushed to her about
Edmonds. She was excited the word was out about the wonderful amenities in Edmonds for tourists and
everyone who lives in and loves Edmonds and that it was bringing revenue to the City. She encouraged
everyone to share the wonderful things that Edmonds offers.
12. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
Mayor Rosen commented because his life these days is almost exclusively about numbers, he shared there
are only 89 days until the days start getting longer.
ADJOURNMENT
With no further business, the council meeting was adjourned at 9:11 pm.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 24, 2024
Page 20
Packet Pg. 32
8.2
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 10/8/2024
Approval of Council Special Meeting Minutes September 24, 2024
Staff Lead: Council
Department: City Clerk's Office
Preparer: Nicholas Falk
Background/History
N/A
Recommendation
Approval of Council Meeting minutes as part of the Consent Agenda.
Narrative
Council meeting minutes are attached.
Attachments:
2024-09-24 Council Special Minutes
Packet Pg. 33
8.2.a
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL
SPECIAL MEETING
DRAFT MINUTES
September 24, 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
Frances Chapin, Arts & Culture Program Mgr.
Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
Scott Passey, City Clerk
Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator
The Edmonds City Council special meeting was called to order at 5:45 pm by Mayor Rosen in the Council
Chambers, 250 5' Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually.
2. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION,
RCW 42.30.110(1)(D
The Council convened in executive session to discuss pending or potential litigation per RCW
42.30.110(1)(i) for a period of 30 minutes.
Executive Session Extension
At 6:15 pm, Mayor Rosen announced that the executive session would be extended to 6:30 pm.
3. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION
The meeting reconvened at 6:30 p.m.
4. INTERVIEW CANDIDATES FOR APPOINTMENT TO CITY BOARD OR COMMISSION
B&C CANDIDATE INTERVIEW — ARTS COMMISSION
Councilmembers interviewed Alexandra Leggett for appointment to the arts commission (responses in
italics):
I'm thrilled to be considered to be part of this group. I moved back to Edmonds three years ago after living
in Shoreline and Queen Anne. We live close to Hickman Park; we went to the concert there this summer
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 24, 2024
Page 1
Packet Pg. 34
8.2.a
and love the community. I went to UW for interdisciplinary fine art, returned for a photograph certificate
and am a full-time photographer specializing in weddings and family portraits. I am interested in the arts
commission opening because we have developed a love for the city since moving back and now that we
have two kids, are learning about opportunities to participate in things happening in the community. We
love to walk around the ferry dock and look at the salmon by the fishing pier. We'd noticed a lot of art
installations and have learned about how involved the arts commission is, which led me to the decision to
apply.
Councilmember Nand was excited Ms. Leggett had a business in the creative field. She asked what she felt
the arts commission could do to support other small business owners in creative arts. My business is a little
different in that I focus mostly on serving clients rather than creating public art installations. Working with
different venues and organizations through the years ofphotographing weddings, I've seen how accessible
some communities are. One of the things I wish for is more spaces within Edmonds that are perfectly
tailored to host things like weddings. The rebuilt Waterfront Center is gorgeous, I've photographed
weddings there and it is a perfect space for weddings. Reaching out to the community about opportunities
within the city that would make great venues for variety of uses would be wonderful. I love to be creative
on own time, I did the art walk a long time ago when I did photography for fun and thought it was a great
way to get to know people and businesses. I hope to be more involved in something like that, getting out on
a regular basis and meeting people, interacting and learning more about what people want to see. I want
to be a good advocate for the City.
Councilmember Chen said he was excited about the artistic and business skills she brings to the position.
Councilmember Paine asked what she hoped to expand in Edmonds. With her background with the schools,
she asked if she would like to carry that forward. I'm heavily involved in the school district already. Our
oldest is in kindergarten, but he has been enrolled with an IEP since his third birthday, so we are familiar
with available services and have gotten to know a lot of people in the district and I'm working with some
parents to start a special education PTSA. I come from a family of public educators; my mom was an art
and PE teacher and I remember her being sad about losing opportunities to continue teaching art as
funding was reduced for that program. My mom was a docent when I was in elementary school and I hope
to help with art in my kids' school. I am heavily involved in the district, understand the importance of arts
to kids. I would love to explore opportunities to increase visibility for what kids can do such as a flyer with
summer project ideas to encourage creativity. It's important to involve students in art as much as possible.
Councilmember Dotsch commented having a young family, her qualifications and diverse background will
bring a great perspective to the arts commission. Her passion obviously shines through; art while kids are
younger instills a spark. She is excited to see what she can do on the arts commission.
Mayor Rosen advised approval of her appointment will occur at the regular council meeting.
2. B&C CANDIDATE INTERVIEW — ARTS COMMISSION
Councilmembers interviewed Robby London for appointment to the arts commission (responses in italics):
I've lived in Edmonds for 24 years. I consider myself a refugee from Los Angeles show business. My passion
has been in music as a song writer and musician, but trying to monetize that passion made me not enjoy it,
so I took a left turn in my youth and became a writer and producer and then an executive in the television
business. I was fortunate to have great success and have credits on over 2500 hours of television, won a
couple Emmies, 14 Emmy nominations and 14 humiliating defeats. I moved to Edmonds as a lifestyle
choice; Iliad a great situation in LA professionally, but did not feel fulfilled living there. I specifically chose
Edmonds and it has exceeded my expectations as a marvelous place to live. One of the things that struck
me about Edmonds is the arts community and the artistic vibe. I've wanted to find a way to give back to
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 24, 2024
Page 2
Packet Pg. 35
8.2.a
Edmonds because I love it here so much, but nothing appealed to me until I read about this opening. I've
also worked in a lot of nonprofits related to media and entertainment including chair of the board for one
nonprofit and on the board for others. I think my skills and interests are well suited to this commission and
a good intersection between something I would enjoy, have something to offer, and hopefully can support
the wonderful arts in the community.
Councilmember Tibbott said he also enjoys Edmonds and was impressed that Mr. London wanted to bring
his talents here. He asked his impression about the musical art scene in Edmonds and how he could add to
its flavor. Because my career was not in music, that is not my expertise, but I know a lot about music. My
impressions are primarily from the Edmonds Center for the Arts and the free concerts and in general I've
been impressed with what exists, with the diversity and quality of the talents, and the offerings without
having to spend a lot of money. Porchfest was a wonderful event with wonderful talent.
Councilmember Chen commented on Mr. London's accomplished background. He looked forward to what
he would bring to the already rich musical and art environment.
Council President Olson passed on a compliment to both applicants and to Ms. Chapin, recalling Mayor
saying I don't know where Francis finds these people. She relayed her gratitude for their volunteerism,
talents and passion and what they bring to the City.
Mayor Rosen advised approval of his appointment will occur at the regular council meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
With no further business, the special Council meeting was adjourned at 6:44 pm.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 24, 2024
Page 3
Packet Pg. 36
8.3
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 10/8/2024
Approval of claim checks and wire payments.
Staff Lead: Kimberly Dunscombe
Department: Administrative Services
Preparer: Nori Jacobson
Background/History
Approval of re -issued claim checks #264415 $3,162.00, check #264417 $260.00 and check #264435
$91.20, claim check #264416 dated September 27, 2024 for $777,523.90, claim checks #264418 through
#264485 dated October 2, 2024 for $201,153.09 and wire payments of $2,933.35 & $1,896.76.
Staff Recommendation
Approval of claim checks and wire payments.
Narrative
The Council President shall be designated as the auditing committee for the city council. The council
president shall review the documentation supporting claims paid and review for approval by the city
council at its next regular public meeting all checks or warrants issued in payment of any claim, demand
or voucher. A list of each claim, demand or voucher approved and each check or warrant issued
indicating the check or warrant number, the amount paid and the vendor or payee shall be filed in the
city council office for review by individual councilmembers prior to each regularly scheduled public
meeting.
Attachments:
Claims 09-27-24 Agenda copy
Claim cks 10-02-24 Agenda copy
Packet Pg. 37
apPosPay
9/27/2024 5:20:38PM
Document group: jacobson
Vendor Code & Name
Positive Pay Listing
City of Edmonds
079699 ALTMANN, DUSTIN
076436 GRANITE CONSTRUCTION CO
076317 PROFESSIONAL TRAINING ASSOC
8.3.a
Page: 1
Check #
Check Date
Amount
264415
9/27/2024
3,162.00
264416
9/27/2024
777,523.90
264417
9/27/2024
260.00
GrandTotal:
780,945.90
Total count:
3
N
c
m
E
a
d
L
�3
c
U
d
t
V
E
M
V
4-
0
O
L
Q.
CL
Q
Q
O
0
M
Q
N
N
Cn
O
N
E
M
U
r
c
d
E
t
v
O
w
Q
Page: 1
Packet Pg. 38
8.3.b
apPosPay Positive Pay Listing Page: 1
10/2/2024 9:49:26AM City of Edmonds
Document group: jacobson
Vendor Code & Name Check # Check Date Amount
065052
AARD PEST CONTROL
264418
10/2/2024
227.64
001528
AM TEST INC
264419
10/2/2024
35.00
074718
AQUATIC SPECIALTY SERVICES INC
264420
10/2/2024
420.47
064341
AT&T MOBILITY
264421
10/2/2024
43.35
079693
AUMAN, ROBERT
264422
10/2/2024
187.00
076685
BAILEY, MICHAEL E
264423
10/2/2024
195.00
072455
BEAR COMMUNICATIONS INC
264424
10/2/2024
6,751.56
002258
BENS EVER READY
264425
10/2/2024
500.57
069226
BHC CONSULTANTS LLC
264426
10/2/2024
9,346.05
071421
BIO CLEAN INC
264427
10/2/2024
994.50
073029
CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES
264428
10/2/2024
691.18
069813
CDW GOVERNMENT INC
264429
10/2/2024
5,129.19
003510
CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY
264430
10/2/2024
353.77
073249
CG ENGINEERING, PLLC
264431
10/2/2024
1,420.00
070323
COMCAST BUSINESS
264432
10/2/2024
398.46
072746
CONSOR NORTH AMERICA INC
264433
10/2/2024
5,783.50
079709
CONTRERAS, RICHARD
264434
10/2/2024
200.00
079714
COOL HEAT LLC
264435
10/2/2024
91.20
006626
DEPT OF ECOLOGY
264436
10/2/2024
21,022.00
064531
DINES, JEANNIE
264437
10/2/2024
544.00
076610
EDMONDS HERO HARDWARE
264438
10/2/2024
69.64
008705
EDMONDS WATER DIVISION
264439
10/2/2024
1,013.86
008812
ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES
264440
10/2/2024
335.40
009350
EVERETT DAILY HERALD
264441
10/2/2024
20.64
065427
FCS GROUP
264442
10/2/2024
3,293.75
076340
FIRSTTWO INC
264443
10/2/2024
3,978.00
072634
GCP WW HOLDCO LLC
264444
10/2/2024
173.07
075082
GOUDA INCORPORATED
264445
10/2/2024
5,115.00
063819
HALL, LESLIE
264446
10/2/2024
133.00
072647
HERRERA ENVIRONMENTAL
264447
10/2/2024
5,848.38
078923
HKA GLOBAL INC
264448
10/2/2024
13,282.50
067862
HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES
264449
10/2/2024
2,255.45
067862
HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES
264450
10/2/2024
586.91
061013
HONEY BUCKET
264451
10/2/2024
3,929.60
075966
HULBERT, CARRIE
264452
10/2/2024
2,766.67
076488
HULBERT, MATTHEW STIEG
264453
10/2/2024
600.00
018980
LYNNWOOD HONDA
264454
10/2/2024
131.72
074263
LYNNWOOD WINSUPPLY CO
264455
10/2/2024
831.37
075746
MCMURRAY, LAURA
264456
10/2/2024
68.40
020900
MILLERS EQUIP & RENT ALL INC
264457
10/2/2024
143.54
079701
MORGAN, JEFFREY W
264458
10/2/2024
133.00
069923
MOTION INDUSTRIES INC
264459
10/2/2024
231.86
067834
NATIONAL CONSTRUCTION RENTALS
264460
10/2/2024
232.05
079454
NESS, JULIE ANN
264461
10/2/2024
27.00
062594
NEW PIG CORPORATION
264462
10/2/2024
998.18
070166
OFFICE OF THE STATE TREASURER
264463
10/2/2024
19,538.46
073714
OLBRECHTS & ASSOC PLLC
264464
10/2/2024
3,762.00
063750
ORCA PACIFIC INC
264465
10/2/2024
544.56
027450
PAWS
264466
10/2/2024
612.00
072507
PEACE OF MIND OFFICE SUPPORT
264467
10/2/2024
184.00
078800
POPA & ASSOCIATES
264468
10/2/2024
600.00
078925
PREMIER MEDIA GROUP INC
264469
10/2/2024
1,900.00
046900
PUGET SOUND ENERGY
264470
10/2/2024
6,686.23
Page: 1
Packet Pg. 39
apPosPay
10/2/2024 9:49:26AM
Positive Pay Listing
City of Edmonds
Document group:
jacobson
Vendor Code & Name
Check #
Check Date
Amount
075822
QUADIENT INC
264471
10/2/2024
558.47
030780
QUIRING MONUMENTS INC
264472
10/2/2024
450.00
079681
SEAPORT STEEL
264473
10/2/2024
165.75
079692
SHEILA LOESCH LLC
264474
10/2/2024
133.00
079710
SIEBERS, GREGORY
264475
10/2/2024
296.00
037375
SNO CO PUD NO 1
264477
10/2/2024
9,402.53
070167
SNOHOMISH COUNTY TREASURER
264478
10/2/2024
255.87
068141
TRANSPO GROUP
264479
10/2/2024
48,219.30
073310
UNISAFE INC
264480
10/2/2024
1,703.76
069751
VESTIS
264481
10/2/2024
283.28
075635
WCP SOLUTIONS
264482
10/2/2024
221.72
073552
WELCO SALES LLC
264483
10/2/2024
356.40
077188
WELCOME MAGAZINE
264484
10/2/2024
3,456.00
011900
ZIPLY FIBER
264485
10/2/2024
1,381.53
GrandTotal:
201,244.29
Total count:
67
W
c
m
E
0.
d
L
�3
c
U
d
t
v
E
v
0
0
L
Q
Q
Q
Q
0
0
Q
N
N
O
O
N
U
E
M
U
c
d
E
t
v
w
Q
Page: 2
Packet Pg. 40
9.1
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 10/8/2024
Green Building Incentives Code Amendments Public Hearing
Staff Lead: Leif Bjorback
Department: Planning & Development
Preparer: Tristan Sewell
Background
In the City's 2020 Comprehensive Plan, Edmonds identified the establishment of green building
incentives as an action necessary in pursuit of the climate change goals. Furthermore, Edmonds' 2023
Climate Action Plan includes the development of an incentive program to encourage sustainable
development as a necessary action to achieve the City's goal of climate neutrality by 2050. Planning &
Development aims to implement this program in 2024.
Staff initially introduced this topic to the Planning Board on January 10th, 2024. Additional discussions
occurred on February 28th and then April 24th, 2024. The Planning Board held a public hearing on the
proposed green building incentives program on June 12th, 2024. The topic returned before the Planning
Board on July 241h, 2024, for action. The Planning Board then voted to recommend Planning &
Development's draft Green Building Incentives to the City Council. Staff introduced the proposed
amendments to Council on August 61h, 2024, and delved deeper into the specifics of the proposal in a
discussion with Council on September 24th, 2024.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Council consider the community input received in this public hearing on
Planning & Development's proposed Green Building Incentives captured in the attached draft code
amendments.
Planning Board Recommendation
The Planning Board recommends the attached draft code amendments to Council after a vote in favor at
their July 24, 2024, meeting. See the attached memo addressing this recommendation.
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.
Most of Edmonds' local climate pollution stems from our built environment. Over a third of our local
climate pollution comes from residences. To achieve the Climate Action Plan's goal of climate neutrality
Packet Pg. 41
9.1
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: "[ijmprove energy efficiency of existing buildings and
infrastructure". In pursuit of this strategy, the plan establishes Action BE-2.2: "[c]reate and implement a
green building incentive program".
Planning & Development staff sought public input and practitioner knowledge in developing these draft
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
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.
Staff analyzed the administrative and regulatory devices that the City could leverage to incentivize more
certified sustainable development in Edmonds. The identified methods include permit review time and
fees, and beneficial zoning changes. Such changes to the zoning code include height, density, lot
coverage, parking requirements, and setbacks. Staff recognizes that different development types benefit
from these potential changes in disparate ways, so the drafted amendments reflect these patterns.
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 attached proposal 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 the Edmonds Community
Development 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). Whilst staff spent time developing this draft code, staff anticipates little
to no additional staff time and/or workload from 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. Staff proposes no financial incentives.
Stakeholders: The adherence to the adopted Climate Action Plan and particularly, the reduction of
climate impacts from buildings concern all members of our 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.
Packet Pg. 42
9.1
Attachments:
Chapter 16.20 ECDC - RS
Chapter 16.30 ECDC - RM
Chapter 16.43 ECDC - BD
Chapter 16.45 ECDC - BN
Chapter 16.50 ECDC - BC
Chapter 16.53 ECDC - BP
Chapter 16.55 ECDC - CW
Chapter 16.60 ECDC - CG
Section 19.00.050 Expedited Plan Review
Chapter 21.35 ECDC
Green Building Power Point
Packet Pg. 43
9.1.a
Chapter 16.20 ECDC, RS - Single -Family Residential
Page 1 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. 44
9.1.a
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. 45
9.1.b
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. 46
9.1.b
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. 47
9.1.c
Chapter 16.43 ECDC, BD - Downtown Business
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.
Page 1 of 2
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" (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. Eiigibiiity. 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. 48
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 October 3, 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.
Commented [TS7]: Confirm no conflict w/ 16.43.
namely whether "commercial floor area" applies to
residential
Packet Pg. 49
9.1.d
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. 50
9.1.d
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. 51
9.1.e
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. 52
9.1.e
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. 53
9.1.f
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. 54
9.1.f
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. 55
9.1.g
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. 56
9.1.g
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. 57
9.1.h
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. 58
9.1.h
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. 59
9.1.i
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. 60
9.1.j
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. 61
9.1.j
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. 62
9.1.j
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. 63
9.1.k
Green Building
Incentives Program
Public Hearing
Leif Bjorback, Building Official
Tristan Sewell, Planner
Planning & Development Dept.
City of Edmonds
City Council Public Hearing
October 8, 2024
9/24/2024
Packet Pg. 64
9.1.k
Tonight's Hearing
• Staff Recommendation
• Certification Standards
• What Green Building Can Look
Li ke
• Proposed Incentive Options
9/24/2024
• Illustrated Examples
• B, RS, and RMZones
• Proposed Enforcement
Measu res
• Next Steps
Packet Pg. 65
9.1.k
Brief,%...mmary
• Buildings emit most of Edmonds' local climate pollution. Residences
emit over a third.
• Encouraging development with reduced environmental impacts
via optional permit review and land use incentives.
• Proposed incentives expand upon underutilized existing examples
• Learn how to expand and adapt to more contexts, zones, etc.
• Planning Board recommends —memo forthcoming
8/ 6/ 2024
Packet Pg. 66
9.1.k
PbI icy Context
2020 Comprehensive Plan
Climate Change Element
• B.1: Citytakes lead reducing
Edmonds' GHG emissions
• E.2: Programs and incentives
for (re)development to reduce
GHG emissions
8/ 6/ 2024
2023 Climate Action Plan
• Climate neutrality by 2050
• Action BE 2.2: Develop and
implement a green building
incentives program
Packet Pg. 67
9.1.k
Program Objectives
VALUABLE
• Desirable to homeowners and
developers, motivating the
environmental outcomes
• Greater incentives in exchange
for`greener' certification
8/ 6/ 2024
SIMPLE
• Expand upon code precedent
in Titles 16 & 22
• Use industry standards to
avoid creating unique criteria
• Minimize impacts on City staff
Packet Pg. 68
9.1.k
Possible Incentives
• Expedited plan review —time is money
• Reduced permitting fees —direct financial incentive
• Additional building height —enables greater efficiency
• Reduced setbacks —onsite location flexibility
• Increased lot coverage —more developable lot area
• Increased Density —number of units, floor area ratio
• Reduced off-street parking —specific needs vs. one -size -fits -most
8/ 6/ 2024
Packet Pg. 69
9.1.k
Program Development
• Researched incentives programs
in the region and nationally
• American Institute of Architects
• American Planning Association
• Learned from peers and
neighbors
• Cities of Bellevue, Everett,
Kirkland, Seattle, Shoreline, and
Tacoma
• Master Builders of ding and
Snohomish Counties (MBAKS)
8/ 6/ 2024
• Mayor's Climate Protection
Committee
• Public forum seeking input
from both industry reps and
public
• Met with Planning Board on 4
occasions
Packet Pg. 70
9.1.k
Construction Standards
Established Certifications
• Single -Family Residential:
Built Green 4-Star
^^^ Iw
Opp BUILTGREEN
• 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. 71
9.1.k
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. 72
9.1.k
What Green Bu i I d i ng Can Look Like
Encouraging active transportation
64 --' # A, '-- -- '
9/24/2024
Responsible materials sourcing
Packet Pg. 73
9.1.k
What Green Building Can Look Like
Functional landscaping
9/24/2024
Efficient fixtures and appliances
:ter„
ly
r {
Packet Pg. 74
What Green Bu i I d i ng Can Look Like
Efficient building envelopes
9/24/2024
Interstitial space
12
Packet Pg. 75
9.1.k
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. 76
9.1.k
Draft Permit Review Incentives
DRAFT- EDMON DS TARGET T I MES FOR PERMIT PROCESSING (WEEKS)
Actual Revi ew t i m es m ay 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
3 to 5
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
FtAFAt4imes may vary depending on staff work volumes and complexity of project.
59
Review Time
Savings
5 weeks
2-4 weeks
7 weeks
4 weeks
3 weeks
Packet Pg. 77
9.1.k
Important Notes on Land Use Incentives
Incentives never supersede environmental regulations.
Onsite or financial realities may I i m it uti I ization of incentives.
Not every project may pursue every option.
Possible limiting regulatory factors:
• Critical areas
• Building and Fire codes
• Stormwater
• Design review, including landscaping
• Street frontage improvements and right-of-way access
• Shoreline Master Program
9/24/2024
Packet Pg. 78
9.1.k
Draft Land Use Incentives
Multifamily Residential
Business (B) Zones
Commercial
(RM)Zones
(C)Zones
Built Green 4-Star
LEED Gold or Built Green 4-Star Multifamily
Built Green 5-Star or better get
setbacks one zone smaller
N/A
(i.e., RS-10 to RS-8)
+5' plus the 5' pitched roof bonus
for all portions sloped at least:
Choose one:
+5' where all portions above
+5' in addition to the existing
3-in-12 BC
standard height limit are
pitched roof bonus of Ch. 16.30
4-in-12 BN, BP
+5,
(CW only)
sloped at least 4-in-12
0 Maximum unit density increased
one tier (i.e., RM-3 to RM-2.4)
6-in-12 BD5
N/A BD1 - 4
1 per
dwelling unit
1 perdwellingunit
1 per 500 sq. ft. leasable commercial floor area
9/24/2024
Packet Pg. 79
9.1.k
Enforcement —Case Studies
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 anywaived or reduced fees in full.
• Liens for the penalty or abatement needed to comply.
7/24/2024
Packet Pg. 80
9.1.k
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 val ued at 50% of bu i I d i ng perm it fee
• Land use incentive bond valued at 5% of the project valuation
• Bonds released upon approval of certification
• Failure to certify withi n 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
Packet Pg. 81
9.1.k
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
9/24/2024
$27, 908
$79, 750
$777,225
Packet Pg. 82
9.1.k
Next Steps
Staff to draft enforcement code - Chapter 17.XX ECDC
Council Committee Meeting: October 15
Council Action: late October
9/24/2024
Packet Pg. 83
NIL
. . . . . . . . . .
16
9.1.k
Potential Future Council Actions
A. Approve program as presented
B. Approve program with modified incentives
C.
Approve program with
expedited plan
review only
D.
Delay any approval of
the program to
a later date
9/24/2024
Packet Pg. 85
9.1.k
Built Green Resources
• Built Green Remodel Checklist, -landbook
• Built Green Single -Family and Townhomes Checklist, Handbook
• LEED is behind a paywal I
9/24/2024
Packet Pg. 86
9.1.k
Business Zones — LEED Gold
Parking: One per 500 sq. ft. or 1 per dwelling unit, except in BID— no requirement for commercial.
Pitched Roof
Bonus
Incentivize Max.
Std. Height Max. 25
Images to scale
3/24/2024
BN/ BP
4-i n-12
Height
BC
3-in-12
6-in-12
A
i
Packet Pg. 87
9.1.k
3D Illustrations
• Some choices were necessary
developing these examples.
• Establish baselines —minimum
lot dimensions, zoning, etc.
• Show maximum development
potential —unit count, lot
coverage, size, etc.
9/24/2024
• Flat, rectangular lots
• Simply masses inwhich a
building must fit, not indicative
of architecture
• Incentives illustrated in green
Packet Pg. 88
9.1.k
Minimum RS-8 lot
• Standard lot - 70' wide, 8,000 sq. ft.
• Most common zone
• Built Green 5-Star RS-6 setbacks in
Highly idealized scenario, not reality
Illustrating max. use of regulation
• Max. 35% coverage
• 1,300sf primary dwelling footprint
• Two 1,000 sf DADUs
• 500 sf footprint for 2-story
• 1,000 sf footprint for 1-story
• No other buildings (shed, garage, etc.)
• Orientations are somewhat arbitrary
• Built Green 5-Star RS-6 setbacks in green
• Footprints 30' wide (needed later)
• 3 parking spaces required for 2 ADUs.
Illustrated as outdoors.
9/24/2024
Packet Pg. 89
9.1.k
RS-8 Setback Incentives
Existing Code/ Built Green 4-Star
�-,._'�
9/24/202,
Built Green 5-Star or Better
27
Packet Pg. 90
9.1.k
Existing Regulation
• Orientations - could rotate 90'
• Maximum distance between units -
pinned to setback corners
• Built Green 5-Star or better setback
incentives illustrated in yruvi.
9/24/2024 28
Packet Pg. 91
9.1.k
Built Green 4-Star
• Adds 5' pitched rooves
• Orientations - could rotate 900
• Maximum distance between units -
pinned to setback corners
• Built Green 5-Star or better setback
incentives illustrated in greer,
9/24/2024
KE
c
m
E
m
E
Q
m
0
m
c�
0
N
a�
c
0
a
L
3
0
a
a�
c
m
c
aD
SD
,L^
V
r.+
m
E
s
0
0
a
Packet Pg. 92
9.1.k
Built Green 5-Star
• Uses RS-6 setbacks
• Orientations - could rotate 90'
• Maximum distance between units -
pinned to setback corners
• Built Green 5-Star or better setback
incentives illustrated in green
9/24/2024
Packet Pg. 93
9.1.k
RM Existing Zoning
and Density Incentive
Massing Example
• Minimum RM-2.4 lot for 5 units (square)
• Maximum lot coverage
• 5 pitched rooves-4-in-12
• Setback landscaping, driveway not shown
• Two stories most likely
These examples look the same, except parking.
Existing Zoning
• 5 dwelling units (avg. <2,200 sf)
• Parking depends on unit bedroom count
(6-10 spaces)
4-Star/ LEED Gold —Only Density
• 8 dwelling units (avg. <1,360 sf)
• 8 parking spaces
9/24/2024
Packet Pg. 94
9.1.k
RM Height Incentive
Massing Example
• Minimum RM-2.4 lot for 5 units
• Maxi m u m I of coverage
• S pitched rooves-4-in-12
• Landscaping, driveway not shown
• 3 stories more likely, increasing potential
unit size
Again, these examples lookthe same, except
parking.
4-Star/ LEED Gold —Only Height
• 5dwellings, 5 parking spaces
5-Star/LEED Platinum —Height & Density
• 8 dwellings units, 8 parking spaces
9/24/2024
Packet Pg. 95
10.1
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 10/8/2024
2025-2026 Budget Presentations: Administrative Services and Parks, Rec & Human Svcs
Staff Lead: Director Dunscombe and Director Feser
Department: Administrative Services
Preparer: Kimberly Dunscombe
Background/History
The 2025-2026 operating budget will be presented to the City Council by departmental components.
These presentations will occur over several Council meetings through the month of October. Most
departmental presentations are scheduled for 15 minutes and it is requested of Council to hold their
questions of staff for either scheduled budget deliberations or through the City Council's Budget Query
system.
The presentations will provide information within the following areas:
1. Programs and Services Overview
2. 2025 Budget Highlights
3. Impacts of Budget Cuts
The first set of presentations start during the October 8, 2024 Council meeting and includes both the
Administrative Services (30 minutes) and the Parks, Recreation & Human Services (15 minutes)
Departments. The related presentations are attached to this agenda item.
Staff Recommendation
Informational presentation. No action required.
Attachments:
Presentation - Parks, Rec & Human Services 2025-26 Operating Budget
2025 Department Budget Presentations - 100824
Packet Pg. 96
10.1.a
CITY OF EDMONDS
-WASH INGTON
The 2025 Budget
Parks, Recreation & Human Services
October 15, 2024
Angie Feser, Director
Packet Pg. 97
10.1.a
as
a�
_
m
co
N
O
N
6
N
O
N
d
7
m
C
c6
L
Q.
0
N
6
N
O
N
N
d
V
d
_
c6
E
2
06
V
d
N
L
ca
a
_
0
_
a�
d
L
a
as
E
ca
a
Packet Pg. 98
10.1.a
CITY OF EDMONDS
W A S H I N G T 0 N
THE ROLE OF PARKS, RECREATION & HUMAN SERVICES
as
a�
m
O
N
O
N
N
O
N
Packet Pg. 99
/,
Safety
Quality of Life
Investment
Livability
Economic Resilience
• 230 acres of Parks and Open Space
• 47 Parks
• 1 mile of Puget Sound Shoreline
• Citywide Beautification and Streetscapes
• Recreation Services
• Classes, camps, leagues
• Field & facility rentals
• Special Events
• Human Services
• Cemetery Services
All
Packet Pg. 100
10.1.a
Department
Priorities
• 2022 Parks, Recreation & Open Space (PROS) Plan
• Safety and sanitation for public, staff and visitors
• Preservation of natural and built assets.
• Cost recovery within department programs
• Programs which provide more diverse and
equitable participation opportunities.
Packet Pg. 101
10.1.a
Y ' CITY OF EDMONDS
-WASH INGTON
ono 1 %
2025 BUDGET HIGHLIGHTS
r
a�
a�
m
N
O
N
6
N
O
N
Packet Pg. 102
10.1.a
Big Changes
• Priority based budgeting
• Increase in revenue
• Decrease in expenditures
• Reduction in programs
• Reduction in staff
• Level of service reduction
Packet Pg. 103
D
I-C
kA
2C
I er,
a u
", - " 0,#
10.1.a
Expenditure
Decreases
• 11% in Park Maintenance (-$373,000)
• 42% in Administration ( >323,449)
• 30% in Recreation (-$679,000)
• 47% in Human Services (-$149,554)
(general fund impact)
• Parks, Recreation & Human Services use of
the general fund decreased by 23%
($1,525,j00)
m
a�
m
co
N
O
N
LO
N
O
FIA-
Packet Pg. 105
10.1.a
Y ' CITY OF EDMONDS
-WASH INGTON
ono 1 %
WHAT'S NEW
r
a�
a�
m
N
O
N
6
N
O
N
Packet Pg. 106
10.1.a
Afresh take
• Consolidate locations
• All programs outsourced
• No more internally run rec programs
• Doing more with less
• Inflation increase (utilities, IT, wages)
• Cost recovery for Rec programs (all
are positive to the general fund)
Packet Pg. 107
10.1.a
Consolidation
& Efficiency
• Reduction in administrative staff
• All programming at the Frances Anderson
Center; relocated from Waterfront Center
• Eliminate programs that utilize city staff as
instructors; use independent contractors
• Special fund expenses re -allocated out of
general fund
• Cemetery paying a portion of GF salaries for
Cemetery related work
• Opioid Funding (Fund 018) supporting
Human Services
• Capital Project Manager salary covered by
capital project expenditures
• Fewer vehicles used by the department
• Satellite Park Maintenance Shop vacated
Packet Pg. 108
10.1.a
Y ' CITY OF EDMONDS
-WASH INGTON
ono 1 %
BUDGET CUT IMPACTS
r
a�
a�
m
N
O
N
6
N
O
N
Packet Pg. 109
10.1.a
Level of Service
Reduction
• Recreation Programming
• Beach Rangers
• Environmental Education
• Park Maintenance
• 24 Dept Employees Laid Off
Packet Pg. 110
10.1.a
Loss of Programs
• Meadowdale Preschool
(2 x .8 FTE's and 19 families)
• Summer Day Camp
(.25 FTE, 4 hourly positions and 135 families)
• Gymnastics Program
(.63 FTE, .5 FTE, 4 hourly positions)
• Olympic Beach Visitor Center closed
(approx. 6,000 visitors per year)
• Environmental Education Program
(.5 FTE, 1 hourly position)
• Environmental Stewardship position reduced to .5 FTE anc
changed to PT Volunteer Coordinator
• All recreation programs now at Frances Anderson Center
• Student Conservation Association partnership
Packet Pg. 111
Decreased
Level of Service
• Beach Ranger and Docent Program
(6 hourly positions + volunteers)
• Administrative staff reduction
(1 FTE, .5 FTE & 4 hourly positions)
• Reduction of Parks Maintenance staff
(2 FTE and 3 Seasonals)
• Edging/weeding/vegetation management
• Lawn mowing frequency
• Less use of water / irrigation
.................---10;
*-AL
Fewer repair projects
Longer response time to vandalism and graffiti
Deferred maintenance continues
Packet Pg. 112
10.1.a
Y ' CITY OF EDMONDS
-WASH INGTON
ono 1 %
THANK YOU
r
a�
a�
m
N
O
N
6
N
O
N
Packet Pg. 113
10.1.b
r
as
m
N
O
N
6
N
O
N
C
O
N
d
N
O
O
O
T-
y
C
O
ca
C
d
N
d
L
a
d
a�
m
T
c
a�
E
Q.
d
0
LO
N
O
N
w
C
d
E
t
V
w
w
Q
Packet Pg. 114
10.1.b
a�
3
m
�D
N
O
N
LC>
N
O
N
C
O
y
d
u
N
co
O
O
T-
N
C
O
r
ca
r
C
d
N
d
L
a
a�
a�
3
m
C
O
E
R
Q
d
a
LO
N
O
N
w
C
O
E
t
V
r
r�
Q
Packet Pg. 115
10.1.b
a�
3
m
�D
N
O
N
LC>
N
O
N
C
O
y
d
u
N
co
O
O
T-
N
C
O
r
ca
r
C
d
N
d
L
a
a�
a�
3
m
C
O
E
R
Q
d
a
LO
N
O
N
w
C
O
E
t
V
r
r
Q
Packet Pg. 116
10.1.b
ROLE OF THE DEPARTMENT
• Governmental Affairs & Regional Issues
• Legislative & Budget Oversight
• Communications & Community Engagement
• Establish Law & Policy
• Council Administration
r
as
m
W
N
O
N
LO
N
O
N
Packet Pg. 117
10.1.b
CITY OF EDMONDS
WA S H I N G T O N
2025 BUDGET HIGHLIGHTS
r
as
m
w
N
O
N
6
N
O
N
Packet Pg. 118
10.1.b
2025 and 2026 Proposed Budget
$ Change
$ Change
$ Change
2023
2024
2024
2025
2026
25 Budget
25 Budget
26 Budget
Description
Actuals
Budget
Estimate
Budget
Budget
24 Estimate
24 Budget
25 Budget
Salaries
212,765
253,724
254,710
253,770
270,015
(940)
46
16,245
Overtime
826
-
-
-
-
N/A
N/A
N/A
Benefits
99,731
106,715
120,660
131,722
135,028
11,062
25,007
3,306
Supplies
1,631
1,462
1,000
1,000
1,000
-
(462)
-
Minor Equipment
470
-
-
-
-
N/A
N/A
N/A
Professional Services
154
49,500
49,500
5,000
5,000
(44,500)
(44,500)
-
Communications
7,489
7,500
7,050
7,S00
7,500
450
-
Travel
2,676
500
300
500
500
200
-
Rental/Lease
514
490
468
490
490
22
-
-
Interfund Rental
75,608
43,535
43,535
50,415
50,415
6,880
6,880
-
Repair/Maintenance
-
500
240
500
500
260
-
-
Miscellaneous
5,637
5,360
5,360
3,400
3,600
(1,960)
(1,960)
200
Council Contingency
797
10,000
-
10,000
10,000
10,000
-
Lease Payment
342
-
-
-
N/A
N/A
N/A
Interest Lease Paymen
7
-
-
-
-
N/A
N/A
N/A
408,647
479,286
482,823
464,297
484,048
(18,S26)
(14,989)
19,751
a�
3
m
LD
N
O
N
L0
N
O
N
Packet Pg. 119
10.1.b
2025 — 2026 Proposed Budget con't
• 3.8% assumed salary increase
• 2025 Furlough for contract employee
• $10,000 contingency spending reintroduced
r
as
m
w
N
O
N
LO
N
O
N.
Packet Pg. 120
10.1.b
r
as
m
N
O
N
6
N
O
N
C
O
N
d
N
O
O
O
T-
y
C
O
ca
C
d
N
d
L
a
d
a�
m
T
c
a�
E
Q.
d
0
LO
N
O
N
w
C
d
E
t
V
w
w
Q
Packet Pg. 121
10.1.b
BUDGET IMPACTS
• Furlough of contract employee results in approximately 88 hours of
lost assistance to the Council in meeting and agenda development,
strategic planning and scheduling.
r
as
m
w
N
O
N
LO
N
O
N.
Packet Pg. 122
10.1.b
r
as
m
N
O
N
6
N
O
N
C
O
N
d
N
O
O
O
T-
y
C
O
ca
C
d
N
d
L
a
d
a�
m
T
c
a�
E
Q.
d
0
LO
N
O
N
w
C
d
E
t
V
w
r�
Q
Packet Pg. 123
10.1.b
a�
3
m
�D
N
O
N
LC>
N
O
N
C
O
y
d
u
N
co
O
O
T-
N
C
O
r
ca
r
C
d
N
d
L
a
a�
a�
3
m
C
O
E
R
Q
d
a
LO
N
O
N
w
C
O
E
t
V
r
r
Q
Packet Pg. 124
10.1.b
a�
3
m
�D
N
O
N
LC>
N
O
N
C
O
y
d
u
N
co
O
O
T-
N
C
O
r
ca
r
C
d
N
d
L
a
a�
a�
3
m
C
O
E
R
Q
d
a
LO
N
O
N
w
C
O
E
t
V
r
r
Q
Packet Pg. 125
10.1.b
ROLE OF THE DEPARTMENT
• Governmental Affairs & Regional Issues
• Communications & Community Engagement
• Council Legislative Support
• City Policy Development
• Community Investment
• Boards /Commissions /Committees
r
as
m
w
N
O
N
LO
N
O
N
Packet Pg. 126
10.1.b
CITY OF EDMONDS
WA S H I N G T O N
2025 BUDGET HIGHLIGHTS
r
as
m
w
N
O
N
6
N
O
N
Packet Pg. 127
10.1.b
2025 and 2026 Proposed Budget
$ Change $ Change $ Change
2023 2024 2024 2025 2026 25 Budget 25 Budget 26 Budget
Description Actuals Budget Estimate Budget Budget 24 Estimate 24 Budget 25 Budget
Salaries 249,642 302,809 284,807 284,634 303,424 (173) (18,175) 18,790
Benefits 83,420 96,402 70,500 72,679 77,027 2,179 (23,723) 4,348
Supplies 1,261 1,097 1,050 1,100 1,100 50 3 -
Minor Equipment 683 - - - - N/A N/A N/A
Professional Services 8,622 51,500 75,000 75,000 75,000 23,500
Communications 1,671 1,400 1,400 1,400 1,400 - -
Travel 2,072 2,010 500 6,000 1,000 5,500 3,990 (5,000)
Rental/Lease (1,281) 2,000 2,300 - - (2,300) (2,000) N/A
Interfund Rental 16,814 30,320 30,320 37,122 37,122 6,802 6,802
Miscellaneous 4,038 3,337 2,260 5,000 5,000 2,740 1,663
Lease Payment 2,995 - - - - N/A N/A N/A
Lease Interest 73 - - N/A N/A N/A
Equipment 1,937 - - - - N/A N/A N/A
371,947 490,875 468,137 482,935 501,073 14,798 (7,940) 18,138
OF EDMo�O
�c. I R90
r
as
m
N
O
N
LO
N
O
N.
Packet Pg. 128
10.1.b
2025 — 2026 Proposed Budget con't
• 3.8% assumed salary increase
• No funding is available for temporary coverage
when the staffed Executive Assistant is on accrued
leave.
• $751000 misc professional services
r
as
m
W
N
O
N
LO
N
O
N
Packet Pg. 129
10.1.b
r
as
m
N
O
N
6
N
O
N
C
O
N
d
N
O
O
O
T-
y
C
O
ca
C
d
N
d
L
a
d
a�
m
T
c
a�
E
Q.
d
0
LO
N
O
N
w
C
d
E
t
V
w
r�
Q
Packet Pg. 130
10.1.b
BUDGET IMPACTS
• Furlough of non -represented staff results in 192 hours
r
as
m
w
N
O
N
LO
N
O
N.
Packet Pg. 131
10.1.b
r
as
m
N
O
N
6
N
O
N
C
O
N
d
N
O
O
O
T-
y
C
O
ca
C
d
N
d
L
a
d
a�
m
T
c
a�
E
Q.
d
0
LO
N
O
N
w
C
d
E
t
V
w
r�
Q
Packet Pg. 132
10.1.b
2025 and 2026 Proposed Budget
• The city contracts legal services with Lighthouse
• Contract states a 3-year rolling average which was
6.2% in 2025
$ Change
$ Change
$ Change
2023
2024
2024
2025
2026
25 Budget
25 Budget
26 Budget
Description
Actuals
Budget
Estimate
Budget
Budget
24 Estimate
24 Budget
25 Budget
ProfSery-CityAtty
676,037
837,420
837,420
889,340
956,041
51,920
51,920
66,701
Prof Serv- N%sc legal
-
5,000
5,000
5,310
5,708
310
310
398
ProfSery- Prosecutor
313,026
319,360
319,360
339,160
364,597
19,800
19,800
25,437
989,063
1,161,780
1,161,780
1,233,810
1,326,346
72,030
72,030
92,536
r
as
m
W
N
O
N
LO
N
O
N.
Packet Pg. 133
10.1.b
r
as
m
N
O
N
6
N
O
N
C
O
N
d
N
O
O
O
T-
y
C
O
ca
C
d
N
d
L
a
d
a�
m
T
c
a�
E
Q.
d
0
LO
N
O
N
w
C
d
E
t
V
w
r�
Q
Packet Pg. 134
10.1.b
a�
3
m
�D
N
O
N
LC>
N
O
N
C
O
y
d
u
N
co
O
O
T-
N
C
O
r
ca
r
C
d
N
d
L
a
a�
a�
3
m
C
O
E
R
Q
d
a
LO
N
O
N
w
C
O
E
t
V
r
r
Q
Packet Pg. 135
10.1.b
a�
3
m
�D
N
O
N
LC>
N
O
N
C
O
y
d
u
N
co
O
O
T-
N
C
O
r
ca
r
C
d
N
d
L
a
a�
a�
3
m
C
O
E
R
Q
d
a
LO
N
O
N
w
C
O
E
t
V
r
r
Q
Packet Pg. 136
10.1.b
ROLE OF THE DEPARTMENT
• Budget / CI Development
• Financial Reporting, Analysis, and Long -Range Planning
• Accounts Payable /Accounts Receivable /Billing
• Business License Administration
• Financial Statements, Month -end Close and GL
• Payroll and Benefits Administration
• City Hall Reception
r
as
m
w
N
O
N
LO
N
O
N
Packet Pg. 137
10.1.b
CITY OF EDMONDS
WA S H I N G T O N
2025 BUDGET HIGHLIGHTS
r
as
m
w
N
O
N
6
N
O
N
Packet Pg. 138
10.1.b
2025 and 2026 Proposed Budget
$ Change $Change $ Change
2023 2024 2024 2025 2026 25Budget 25Budget 26Budget
Description Actuals Budget Estimate Budget Budget 24 Estimate 24 Budget 25 Budget
Salaries
852,810
1,637,013
1,541,352
1,284,126
1,350,261
(257,226)
(352,887)
66,135
Overtime
6,134
4,500
-
8,000
8,000
8,000
3,500
-
Benefits
239,703
451,690
423,997
430,593
456,317
6,596
(21,097)
25,724
Supplies
2,967
6,615
6,615
6,300
6,300
(315)
(315)
-
Minor Equipment
1,324
2,650
-
-
-
N/A
(2,650)
N/A
Professional Services
(80,530)
9,300
69,300
2,200
2,200
(67,100)
(7,100)
-
Communications
14,535
2,000
2,000
2,400
2,400
400
400
-
Travel
1,109
4,200
-
500
500
500
(3,700)
-
Rental/Lease
14,544
3,300
2,000
14,000
14,000
12,000
10,700
-
Interfund Rental
84,701
165,713
165,713
107,425
107,425
(58,288)
(58,288)
-
Repair/Maintenance
55,955
44,810
44,810
-
-
(44,810)
(44,810)
N/A
Miscellaneous
10,766
6,750
3,625
3,500
3,500
(125)
(3,250)
-
Lease Payment
14,495
-
-
-
-
N/A
N/A
N/A
Machinery/Equipment
-
-
-
-
-
N/A
N/A
N/A
1,218,513
2,338,541
2,259,412
1,859,044
1,950,903
(400,368)
(479,497)
91,859
r
as
M
w
N
O
N
LO
N
O
N.
Packet Pg. 139
10.1.b
2025 — 2026 Proposed Budget con't
• 3.8% assumed salary increase
• ARPA related professional services spending was reduced
• Repair/Maintenance of ERP system will be included in
Interfund Rental rate going forward.
pF EQ4,
r
as
m
N
O
N
LO
N
O
N
Packet Pg. 140
10.1.b
r
as
m
N
O
N
6
N
O
N
C
O
N
d
N
O
O
O
T-
y
C
O
ca
C
d
N
d
L
a
d
a�
m
T
c
a�
E
Q.
d
0
LO
N
O
N
w
C
d
E
t
V
w
r�
Q
Packet Pg. 141
10.1.b
BUDGET IMPACTS
• Furlough of non -represented staff results in 96 hours
of lost time
• No funding for the Deputy Director of Administrative
Services
• No funding for the Senior Office Assistant
r
as
m
N
O
N
L0
N
O
N
Packet Pg. 142
10.1.b
a�
3
m
�D
N
O
N
LC>
N
O
N
C
O
y
d
u
N
co
O
O
T-
N
C
O
r
ca
r
C
d
N
d
L
a
a�
a�
3
m
C
O
E
R
Q
d
a
LO
N
O
N
w
C
O
E
t
V
r
r
Q
Packet Pg. 143
10.1.b
a�
3
m
�D
N
O
N
LC>
N
O
N
C
O
y
d
u
N
co
O
O
T-
N
C
O
r
ca
r
C
d
N
d
L
a
a�
a�
3
m
C
O
E
R
Q
d
a
LO
N
O
N
w
C
O
E
t
V
r
r�
Q
Packet Pg. 144
10.1.b
CITY OF EDMONDS
W A S H I N G T 0 N
ROLE OF THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE (2 FTES)
• Administers 6 Program Areas
• All required by either Local Ordinance or State Law.
Packet Pg. 145
10.1.b
CITY OF EDMONDS
W A S H I N G T 0 N
PROGRAM: ADMINISTRATION (.20 FTE)
• Includes day-to-day operations such as purchasing,
timesheets, budget development and oversight,
emergency preparation & response, internal &
external communications, liquor/cannabis license
support, business license, parking, and special event
permit support, claims, lawsuits.
Packet Pg. 146
10.1.b
CITY OF EDMONDS
IMF" - WA S H I N G T O N
PROGRAM: ADMINISTRATION (.20 F-
• Edmonds City Code (ECC)
• Revised Code of Washington (RC\
City Code and state law mandate the
perform an array of duties and tasks
city.
r
as
m
W
N
O
N
6
N
O
N
Packet Pg. 147
10.1.b
CITY OF EDMONDS
IMF" - WA S H I N G T O N
PROGRAM: BOARDS, COMMITTEES & COMMISSIONS
(.20 FTE)
Records management of BCC agendas, packets,
minutes, membership, and oversight guidance.
RCW
42.56
Public
Records Act, RCW 40.14
RCW
42.30
Open
Public
Meetings Act
r
as
m
w
N
O
N
6
N
O
N
Packet Pg. 148
10.1.b
CITY OF EDMONDS
W A S H I N G T 0 N
PROGRAM: COUNCIL AGENDAS & MEETINGS (.60 FTE)
• Administration, agenda production, agenda review
and long-term planning, meeting facilitation AND
RECORDING, minutes, legislative history.
• RCW
42.56
Public
Records Act, RCW 40.14
• RCW
42.30
Open
Public Meetings Act
Packet Pg. 149
10.1.b
CITY OF EDMONDS
W A S H I N G T 0 N
PROGRAM: ELECTRONIC CONTENT MANAGEMENT
(ECM) (.35 FTE)
• Maintenance of Laserfiche system, microfilming and
digitization, importing new record series, policies,
training, new initiatives.
• RCW 42.56 Public Records Act, RCW 40.14
Packet Pg. 150
10.1.b
CITY OF EDMONDS
IMF" - WA S H I N G T O N
PROGRAM: ORDINANCES/ RESOLUTIONS, AND
ECC/ECDC MAINTENANCE (.25 FTE)
• Maintenance of legislative history, including creation
and review, amending and repealing documents,
ongoing ECC/ECDC development, and significant
department -led code changes.
r
as
m
N
O
N
6
N
O
N
Packet Pg. 151
10.1.b
CITY OF EDMONDS
IMF" - WA S H I N G T O N
PROGRAM: ORDINANCES/ RESOLUTIONS, AND
ECC/ECDC MAINTENANCE (.25 FTE)
• RCW 42.56 Public Records Act, RCW 40.14
• RCW 35A.13.200 Authentication, Recording and
Publication of Ordinances
• RCW 5.44.080 City or Town Ordinances as Evidence
r
as
m
N
O
N
LC'l
N
O
N
Packet Pg. 152
10.1.b
CITY OF EDMONDS
IMF" - WA S H I N G T O N
PROGRAM: RECORDS MANAGEMENT (.45 FTE)
• Retention, storage, transfer, and destruction of
Clerk's department paper records.
• Assisting city departments with short and long-term
storage of paper records.
• RCW 42.56 Public Records Act, RCW 40.14
r
as
m
W
N
O
N
LC'l
N
O
N
0
Packet Pg. 153
10.1.b
CITY OF EDMONDS
IMF" - WA S H I N G T O N
• Salaries & Benefits (2 FTEs)
$344,807 (72 % )
• Other Expenses* $133,450 (28%)
TOTAL
$478,257
*facilitate administration of Clerk Programs. Professional services
(codification/City Code web portal), Software as a Service (SAAS) (MinuteTraq,
Laserfiche, DocuSign), recording & publication, citywide mail (postage &
equipment).
r
as
m
W
N
O
N
LC'l
N
O
N
Packet Pg. 154
10.1.b
CITY OF EDMONDS
W A S H I N G T 0 N
BUDGET CUT IMPACTS
1. Elimination of professional services for council
meeting minutes writing (-$21,000)*
*If this cut is retained, clerk's office will produce action
minutes for council meetings.
Packet Pg. 155
10.1.b
CITY OF EDMONDS
IMF" - WA S H I N G T O N
BUDGET CUT IMPACTS
1. Non -Rep Furlough, 12 days (-$8,250)
r
as
m
w
N
O
N
6
N
O
N
Packet Pg. 156
10.1.b
CITY OF EDMONDS
WA S H I N G TO N
THANK YOU
Packet Pg. 157
10.2
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 10/8/2024
Public Hearing on Council Consideration to Collectively Support or Oppose Initiative Measure No. 2117
concerns carbon tax credit trading. This measure would prohibit state agencies from imposing any type
of carbon tax credit rating, and repeal legislation establishing a cap and invest program to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions. This measure would decrease funding for investments in transportation,
clean air, renewable energy, conservation, and emissions -reduction. Should this measure be enacted
into law? [ ]Yes [ ] No.
Staff Lead: City Council
Department: City Council
Preparer: Beckie Peterson
Background/History
Initiative Measure No. 2117 is on the ballot for the November 5, 2024 General Election.
A local government legislative body may vote on a motion or resolution to express support or opposition
to a ballot proposition (RCW 42.17A.555) if the following procedural steps are first taken:
The notice for the meeting must include the title and number of the ballot proposition, and
Members of the legislative body or members of the public must be allowed an approximately
equal opportunity to express an opposing view.
Recommendation
Receive public testimony.
Discuss and consider a motion to collectively support or oppose Initiative Measure No. 2117
Narrative
The Washington State Elections and Snohomish County Local Voters' Pamphlet for the November 5
General Election has been published to the Snohomish County Election Division website
https:Hsnohomishcountywa.gov/5722/See-Whats-on-the-Ballot.
The relevant content of the Voters' Pamphlet Initiative Measure No. 2117 including the ballot title, the
Explanatory Statement, and Argument for and Argument against is attached.
A public hearing is not obligatory by statute for Council to consider collective support or opposition to a
ballot measure. According to MRSC's guidance on public hearings, the purpose of a legislative public
hearing is to obtain public input on important legislative policy matters that affect a wide range of
citizens. For legislative hearings, the notice requirements generally depend upon the applicable statute,
which may or may not set out specific requirements for the timing and manner of the notice. For public
hearings that are considered public meetings under the Open Public Meetings Act, the notice
Packet Pg. 158
10.2
requirements of that statute must also be followed. This public hearing follows the notice requirements
of the Open Public Meetings Act.
Attachments:
Voters-Pamphlet-Nov-5-2024-Pages 17-31
RCW 42.17A.555 (1)
Packet Pg. 159
10.2.a
VOTERS'PAMPHLET
Washington State Elections
& Snohomish County
•
ppp-
A.
STA
�
z
Official Publication
WASHINGTON
Secretary of State
�9
x
PV4;�
Ballots mailed out by October 18
1(800) 448-4881 1 sos.wa.gov/elections
Packet Pg. 160
10.2.a
Initiative Measure No. 2117
Initiative Measure No. 2117 concerns carbon tax credit trading.
Initiative Measure No. This measure would prohibit state agencies from imposing
any type of carbon tax credit trading, and repeal legislation
establishing a cap and invest program to reduce greenhouse gas
2117 emissions. This measure would decrease funding for investments
in transportation, clean air, renewable energy, conservation, and
emissions -reduction.
Should this measure be enacted into law?
[ ] Yes
[ ] No
Explanatory Statement . . . . . . . . 18
Fiscal Impact Statement . . . . . . . . 19
Arguments For and Against . . . . . . . 31
17
'The Secretary of State is not responsible
for the content of statements or arguments
(WAC 434-381-180).
Packet Pg. 161
10.2.a
0.
Initiative Measure No. 2117
Explanatory Statement
Written by the Office of the Attorney General
The Law as It Presently Exists
In 2021, the Washington Legislature enacted the
Climate Commitment Act, which directed the
Department of Ecology to design and implement a cap -
and -invest program to reduce statewide greenhouse
gas emissions. The program works by setting an
emissions limit, or cap, and then lowering the cap over
time to help ensure Washington meets the greenhouse
gas reduction commitments previously set elsewhere
in state law. Under the Climate Commitment Act, large
emitters of greenhouse gas pollution subject to the
program must either reduce their carbon emissions or
pay for "allowances" to cover their emissions.
The cap -and -invest program applies to certain large
emitters of greenhouse gas pollution, including large
facilities, fuel suppliers, natural gas and electric
utilities, waste -to -energy facilities (starting in 2027),
and railroads (starting in 2031). Generally, entities
with annual emissions below 25,000 metric tons of
carbon dioxide equivalent are not required to obtain
allowances to cover their emissions. Carbon dioxide
equivalent is a measure used to compare the emissions
from various greenhouse gases based on their global
warming potential. Additionally, the emissions from
certain facilities and certain types of fuel are not
subject to the law. These include emissions from fuels
used for agriculture or the transportation of agricultural
products, aviation fuels, marine fuels combusted
outside of Washington, and fuels exported out of
Washington. The law also exempts emissions from
national security facilities and certain municipal solid
waste landfills.
Large emitters of greenhouse gas pollution covered
by the program must obtain allowances equal to their
covered emissions. Allowances are available through
auctions administered by the Department of Ecology.
The price of allowances sold at auctions fluctuates
depending on market demand. Allowances can also be
bought or sold through secondary markets at any time
based on market prices. A portion of each polluter's
compliance obligation may also be met using offset
credits, which are also bought and sold on a secondary
market. An offset credit is purchased from developers
of projects that the Department of Ecology has verified
will result in permanent greenhouse gas reductions.
Three types of polluters are issued free allowances that
can be used to cover some or all of their emissions:
"emissions -intensive, trade exposed" industries, natural
gas utilities, and electric utilities.
All polluters covered by the program must report their
greenhouse gas emissions and submit their allowances
or other compliance instruments to the Department
of Ecology according to a specific schedule. Failure
to submit the required number of allowances by the
applicable deadline results in an automatic penalty
requiring the polluter to submit four allowances
for each missing one. Failure to comply with other
requirements of the cap -and -invest program is subject
to fines of up to $50,000 per violation, per day.
Proceeds from the allowance auctions are
appropriated by the Legislature and must be
invested in climate projects throughout the state,
including projects to increase climate resiliency, fund
alternative -transportation grant programs, and help
Washington transition to a low -carbon economy.
State agencies that receive auction proceeds must
conduct environmental justice assessments when
allocating those funds, consistent with requirements
set elsewhere in state law. At least 35% of auction
proceeds are required to be used for projects that
provide a direct benefit to people in communities
disproportionately impacted by environmental harms.
Additionally, at least 10% of auction proceeds must be
used for projects with Tribal support. The Department
of Ecology is required to provide an annual report to
the Legislature summarizing how the auction proceeds
have been used and whether each project produced
verifiable emissions reductions. In 2023, cap -and -
invest auctions raised $1.8 billion.
In addition to establishing the cap -and -invest program
to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the Climate
Commitment Act also establishes a program for the
Department of Ecology to reduce emissions of certain
air pollutants (particulate matter, ozone, nitrogen
dioxide, carbon monoxide, lead, and sulfur dioxide)
in communities that the Department of Ecology has
determined are overburdened and highly impacted by
air pollution. This part of the Act requires Department
of Ecology to collect data needed to determine which
sources contribute the most to air pollution in these
communities. The Climate Commitment Act then
requires the Department of Ecology to work with
local air agencies to analyze this data and use it to
develop and enforce stricter air quality standards where
appropriate.
Packet Pg. 162
10.2.a
Initiative Measure No. 2117
The Effect of the Proposed Measure if Approved
If approved, Initiative Measure No. 2117 would
repeal the Climate Commitment Act, and bar state
agencies from implementing carbon tax credit trading
programs. Repealing the Climate Commitment Act
would eliminate the climate and air quality programs
described above as well as the funding source for
investments in climate projects throughout the state.
Fiscal Impact Statement
Written by the Office of Financial Management
For more information visit www.ofm.wa.gov/ballot
Summary
If approved by voters, Initiative 2117 will reduce state
revenue from carbon allowance auctions by $3.8
billion and reduce state expenditures by $1.7 billion
between the effective date of the initiative and June
30, 2029. This would reduce or eliminate funding
for numerous programs and projects, including for:
transportation emissions reduction; transit, pedestrian
safety; ferry and other transportation electrification; air
quality improvement; renewable and clean energy; grid
modernization and building decarbonization; increasing
the climate resilience of the state's waters, forests and
other ecosystems; fire prevention and forest health;
and restoring and improving salmon habitat. Local
government fiscal impacts are indeterminate.
General assumptions
• The effective date of the initiative is December 5,
2024.
• The carbon allowance auction scheduled to take
place on December 4, 2024, will not occur, as
the auction certification and financial settlement
process would extend past the day the initiative
takes effect.
• The provisions of the initiative apply prospectively,
not retroactively.
• The estimates use the state's fiscal year (SFY) of
July 1 through June 30. State fiscal year 2025 is
July 1, 2024, through June 30, 2025.
State revenue impact
Summary
Initiative 2117 would repeal the law that requires the
Department of Ecology (ECY) to hold carbon allowance
auctions, called the Climate Commitment Act;
therefore, the state would no longer collect revenue
from those auctions. The Climate Commitment Act also
iFe
established a secondary market for private parties to
trade allowances and offset credits; therefore, the state
would no longer collect revenue from the business and
occupation (B&O) tax assessed on certain secondary
market transactions.
The Climate Commitment Act carbon allowance
auctions began in February 2023 and have generated
$2.15 billion in revenue between then and the auction
of June 5, 2024. Under the initiative, the last auction
would take place on September 4, 2024. The three
remaining auctions scheduled in state fiscal year 2025
would be canceled. For state fiscal years 2025 through
2029, the projected reduction in revenue is $3.9 billion
from the canceled auctions ($3.8 billion) and a loss
of B&O tax collection ($40 million). Auction revenue
projections are calculated using ECY's June revenue
forecast.
Projected revenue impact to Washington State
(See Table 1 on page 27.)
Revenue impact and fund balance transfers in
state fiscal year 2025
The projected revenue loss would be $758.1 million in
state fiscal year 2025. Three of the four annual carbon
allowance auctions would not take place and allowance
sales generating B&O taxes would end.
The initiative eliminates five accounts created under the
Climate Commitment Act. If the initiative is approved,
the remaining funds in those five accounts will be
transferred to two new accounts: (1) Transportation
Carbon Emissions Reduction Account and (2)
Consolidated Climate Account (ESHB 2134, Section
614, Chapter 310, Laws of 2024 and ESSB 5950,
Section 907, Chapter 376, Laws of 2024).
The Climate Commitment Act and the state operating
and transportation budgets direct the distribution of
carbon allowance auction revenues and make various
transfers between the five Climate Commitment Act
accounts and other transportation accounts. Under
the initiative, there would not be sufficient revenue to
make all the required revenue distributions and budget
transfers. These transfers are prioritized as follows: (1)
statutory distributions and (2) date of fund transfers
specified in the 2023-25 operating and transportation
budgets.
An estimated $1 million to $300 million would be
transferred into the Transportation Carbon Emissions
Reduction Account, and $700 million to $900 million
would be transferred into the Consolidated Climate
Account. These amounts would be available to spend
Packet Pg. 163
10.2.a
20
through June 30, 2025.
Initiative Measure No. 2117
The exact amount of funding that would transfer
into the two new accounts is unknown, because the
amounts will be based on: actual agency spending
through December 5, 2024; revenue collected from
the auction scheduled on September 4, 2024; and
implementation of the various fund transfers.
Other revenue impacts
Beginning in state fiscal year 2025, Business and
Occupation (B&O) and Public Utility taxes would not
be collected on the purchase, sale or trading of carbon
allowances and offset credits by general market
participants, resulting in lower state revenue.
Currently, general market participants are not required
to purchase allowances, have not voluntarily assumed
a compliance obligation by opting into the program,
and are not eligible to receive allowances from the
state at no cost. General market participants must
pay B&O tax or public utility tax on these transactions.
These participants may include investment banks,
hedge funds, trading firms, and companies that want to
invest in offset projects. B&O taxes are credited to the
state General Fund, which funds various government
agencies and activities, and to the Workforce Education
Investment Account, which funds educational and
training programs. For estimating purposes, the
decrease in public utility taxes collected has a minimal
impact. All impacts are shown under the B&O tax.
State expenditure impact
Summary
Thirty-seven state agencies have spending authority
from Climate Commitment Act funds in the current
biennium for programs, projects, and as grants
for local governments, community groups, school
districts and Tribes. Initiative 2117 would eliminate
the revenue source that pays for these programs. The
remaining funds already collected would transfer to the
Transportation Carbon Emissions Reduction Account
and to the Consolidated Climate Account. The 2024
supplemental transportation, operating and capital
budgets identify which programs and projects would
and would not be eligible for this funding if the initiative
passes. Spending authority of $1.7 billion in state fiscal
year 2025 would no longer exist because the budget
appropriations would be eliminated along with repeal of
the accounts.
Spending authority of $230.4 million would be available
in the Transportation Climate Emissions Reduction
Account and spending authority of $653.8 million
would be available in the Consolidated Climate
Account. It is assumed that funding transferred to the
new accounts would continue to be spent through the
end of the current state fiscal year or until revenues are
exhausted.
A net total of approximately $2.6 billion of spending
authority in state fiscal years 2025-2029 would no
longer be available under the initiative to operate
programs and pay for grants from the state operating,
capital and transportation budgets.
Additionally, the transportation spending plan approved
by the Legislature assumes $1 billion would be
available in state fiscal years 2026-2029 for projects
to improve transit, electrify ferries, advance ultrahigh -
speed rail and for initiatives to improve pedestrian
safety. This money would no longer be available.
Currently, Climate Commitment Act auction revenue is
spent from multiple accounts with different purposes.
Carbon Emissions Reduction Account
• The Carbon Emissions Reduction Account
receives the first deposit of revenue, in an amount
specified in law, and must be used to reduce
carbon emissions from the transportation sector,
such as projects to reduce single -occupancy
passenger vehicle miles driven; for alternative fuel
infrastructure and incentive programs; emission
reduction programs for freight transportation; and
for ferries and other maritime and port activities.
• Seven state agencies have spending authority
from the account in the current biennium, which
includes funding for the equivalent of more than
three full-time staff. Agencies would lose authority
to spend $205.2 million this biennium, and $230.4
million in spending authority would be transferred
to the Transportation Carbon Emissions Reduction
Account.
• Two accounts receive funding solely from the
Climate Emissions Reduction Account: Climate
Active Transportation Account (CATA) and Climate
Transit Programs Account (CTPA). These accounts
would not be eliminated by the initiative; however,
the initiative would eliminate the only revenue
source for these accounts.
• Funding provided through CATA and CTPA could
still be spent through the end of the biennium,
June 30, 2025. This funding pays for grant
programs such as Safe Routes to Schools, Tribal
transit, active transportation local projects and
support to transit agencies and other providers
Packet Pg. 164
10.2.a
Initiative Measure No. 2117
serving people with disabilities, seniors, children
and people living in rural areas.
Climate Investment Account
• Revenue from the auctions is deposited into the
Climate Investment Account after the required
distribution to the Carbon Emissions Reduction
Account and can be used for administering the
Climate Commitment Act, tracking spending and
reporting, and Tribal capacity grants.
• Seven state agencies have spending authority
from the account in the current biennium, which
includes funding for the equivalent of nearly 116
full-time staff.
• Agencies would lose authority to spend $12.2
million through the rest of the biennium, and $23.1
million in spending authority would be transferred
to the Consolidated Climate Account. However, a
significant portion of that funding is for activities
required by the Climate Commitment Act, and
under the initiative, these activities would stop.
• After reserving an amount for administration of
the Climate Commitment Act, funds in the Climate
Investment Account are distributed to the Climate
Commitment Account and the Natural Climate
Solutions Account.
Climate Commitment Account
• The Climate Commitment Account can be used for
development of renewable and clean energy, grid
modernization, building decarbonization, industrial
efficiency, low-income and worker assistance,
climate change mitigation for Tribes, Growth
Management Act planning, and the Working
Families Tax credit.
• Thirty state agencies have spending authority
from the account in the current biennium, which
includes funding for the equivalent of nearly 136
full-time staff. Agencies would lose authority
to spend $419.7 million through the rest of this
biennium, and $476.5 million in spending authority
would be transferred to the Consolidated Climate
Account.
Natural Climate Solutions Account
• The Natural Climate Solutions Account can
be used to pay for programs and projects that
increase the resilience of the state's waters, forests
and other ecosystems to the impacts of climate
change; conserve forestlands; and increase natural
climate carbon -pollution -reduction capacity.
• Twelve state agencies have spending authority
from the account in the current biennium, which
21
includes funding for the equivalent of more than
58 full-time staff. Agencies would lose authority
to spend $147.3 million through the rest of the
biennium, and $134.9 million in spending authority
would be transferred to the Consolidated Climate
Account.
Air Quality and Health Disparities Investment Account
• The Air Quality and Health Disparities Investment
Account can be used to pay for projects that
monitor and improve air quality and reduce health
disparities in overburdened communities.
• The account receives auction revenue after the
required distribution to the Carbon Emissions
Reduction Account. Statute does not specify
the amount; however, the Legislature has stated
its intention that not less than $20 million each
biennium should be transferred to the account.
• The ECY currently has a total of $21.8 million
in spending authority from the account, which
includes funding for the equivalent of nearly five
full-time staff.
• Under the initiative $19.3 million in spending
authority would be transferred to the Consolidated
Climate Account.
Projected spending impact to Washington State:
(See Table 2 on page 27.)
Carbon Emissions Reduction Account
Impact on the Carbon Emissions Reduction
Account in the current biennium:
(See Table 3 on page 28.)
Significant activities that would be eliminated in
SFY 2025 under the initiative:
• Construction of hybrid -electric ferries and ferry
terminal electrification - $42 million, Washington
State Department of Transportation (WSDOT)
• Public -private partnerships, including funding
added in 2024 for zero -emission vehicle and
infrastructure grant programs for commercial
vehicles, fire engines and utility service vehicles;
local projects to improve safe routes to schools;
and pedestrian and bicycle safety - $40.9 million,
WSDOT
• Rail projects, including Puyallup Tribe and
Anacortes port electrification - $35.5 million,
WSDOT
• Local capital projects, including funding to
complete the Guemes Island ferry replacement -
$32.9 million, WSDOT
Packet Pg. 165
10.2.a
22
Initiative Measure No. 2117
• Public bus and transit facility projects - $29.9
million, WSDOT
• Zero -emission vehicle supply equipment
infrastructure for state agencies - $13.5 million,
Department of Enterprise Services (DES)
• Grant funding for electric boats for federally
recognized Tribes, Tribal enterprises and Tribal
members - $5 million, Department of Commerce
(CO
• Zero -emission student transportation grants - $4
million, ECY
• Transportation planning for the 2026 World Cup -
$1 million, WSDOT
• Impact study of implementing emissions standards
for ocean-going vessels - $477,000, Joint
Transportation Committee
Future impacts from SFY 2026-SFY 2029:
WSDOT would lose anticipated future funding
and spending authority for ongoing programs of
approximately $2.8 million each biennium, including:
• Free ferry fares for youth,
• Free youth fares on Amtrak, and
• Assistance and education for state agency
alternative fuel usage.
Additionally, money would not be available for future
transportation projects. The 2024 supplemental
budget transportation spending plan, approved by
the Legislature and used to develop future budgets,
plans on spending $1 billion for various projects.
These projects include transit grants to improve safety
and mobility near schools, ferry vessel and terminal
electrification, Tribal port electrification projects,
advancing ultrahigh -speed rail, and initiatives to
improve pedestrian safety.
Climate Active Transportation Account
and Climate Transit Programs Account
Impact on the Climate Active Transportation and
Climate Transit Programs Accounts in the current
biennium:
(See Table 4 on page 28.)
Significant activities that would be eliminated in
SFY 2025 under the initiative:
None
Future impacts from SFY 2026-SFY 2029:
For the purposes of this fiscal impact statement, it is
assumed future spending from the accounts will end
when the remaining fund balances are exhausted.
It's unknown what funding may be available to spend
beyond June 30, 2025.
Examples of programs and funding from the current
biennium that would no longer have funding include:
• Grants for transit agency operating and capital
expenses - $188.9 million, WSDOT, CTPA
• Pedestrian and bicyclist route improvement
projects - $82.2 million, WSDOT, CATA
• Grants to sustain and expand transit services
to people with disabilities, seniors, children and
people living in rural areas - $60.1 million, WSDOT,
CTPA
• Move Ahead WA public transportation projects -
$46.6 million, WSDOT, CTPA
• Grants to increase safe walking and biking routes
to schools, including crossing improvements,
speed management, sidewalks, bike lanes, shared
use paths, streetlights, ADA improvements,
education and encouragement activities - $45.4
million, WSDOT, CATA
• Funding to transit agencies for cost-effective
capital projects that reduce the carbon intensity
of the Washington transportation system - $39.4
million, WSDOT, CTPA
• Grants to support transport vehicles and transit
facilities - $38 million, WSDOT, CTPA
• Projects to improve active transportation
connectivity for pedestrians along and
across current and former state highways in
overburdened communities - $25 million, WSDOT,
CATA
• Grants through the Complete Streets Program
for projects on city streets or county roads that
improve or add facilities for pedestrians, bicyclists
and transit users to improve safe access - $19.1
million, Transportation Improvement Board, CTPA
• Support for existing and expanded transit
services to people with disabilities and the elderly
population throughout rural and small urban areas
of the state - $18 million, WSDOT, CTPA
• Funding for a School -Based Bicycle Safety
Education Program for Washington state public
schools; safety and skills training; and education
materials including bicycles to school districts,
educational service districts and community -based
organizations - $16.8 million, WSDOT, CATA
Climate Investment Account
Impact on the Climate Investment Account in the
current biennium:
(See Table 5 on page 28.)
Packet Pg. 166
10.2.a
Initiative Measure No. 2117
Significant activities that would be eliminated under
the initiative:
• Grants added in 2024 for Tribal capacity to engage
and work on climate related projects - $5 million,
ECY
• Funding to pursue linking Washington's carbon
market with the California/Quebec market - $1.8
million, ECY
Activities that would cease in SFY 2025 under the
initiative:
• Implementation of the Climate Commitment Act,
including carbon allowance auctions, allocation of
no -cost allowances, oversight of the secondary
market, regulation of offset projects, tracking
emissions reductions produced by expenditures of
auction proceeds, and statewide greenhouse gas
inventory work - $9.1 million, ECY, Environmental
and Land Use Hearings Office
• Development of a data portal and other strategies
to improve public understanding of expenditures
from Climate Commitment Act accounts - $2.6
million, ECY, Office of Financial Management
(OFM)
• Grants to Tribal governments to support
developing carbon offset projects - $2 million, ECY
• Setting stricter standards for technology used to
limit emissions from stationary emission sources
that are the greatest contributors of air pollution in
overburdened communities - $1.5 million, ECY
• Expansion of air quality monitoring in
overburdened communities highly impacted by air
pollution, and estimations of the health impacts
associated with the air quality experienced in
overburdened communities - $557,476, ECY,
Department of Health (DOH)
Future impacts from SFY 2026-SFY 2029:
The ECY and other agencies would lose anticipated
future spending authority for ongoing programs of
approximately $35 million each biennium to administer
the Climate Commitment Act. ECY would lose funding
no longer required for administration of the cap -and -
invest program. ECY would lose funding to expand the
state's air quality monitoring network and improve air
quality standards in overburdened communities highly
impacted by air pollution.
The ECY would also lose $31.5 million per biennium
for grants to Tribes to increase capacity to engage
and work on climate -related projects and for carbon
offset project development and $3.8 million to make
improvements to Washington's inventory of greenhouse
gas emissions.
23
Climate Commitment Account
Impact on the Climate Commitment Account in
the current biennium:
(See Table 6 on page 29.)
Significant activities in SFY 2025 that would be
eliminated under the initiative:
• Funding to support energy efficiency and
decarbonization improvements in multifamily and
commercial properties - $100 million, COM
• Projects and technology to reduce greenhouse
gas emissions in local communities, especially in
overburdened communities - $74.1 million, COM
• Energy renewal projects across the University of
Washington's (UW) campuses and hospital system
- $38.9 million, UW
• Grants to K-12 schools for indoor air quality
assessment and air filtration systems - $30 million,
Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction
(OSPI)
• Matching funds to support participation in a
federal Department of Energy loan program for
large-scale energy development - $25 million,
COM
• Grants to grow Washington's clean energy
manufacturing economy - $21.5 million, COM
• Grants to improve the state's progress towards
greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals in hard -
to -decarbonize industries - $13 million, COM
• Expansion of Central Washington University's
(CWU) geothermal energy production - $12.5
million, CWU
• Design and construction of a dairy digester to
produce renewable energy and compost from
manure sources, post -consumer food and
compostable wastes - $10 million, Washington
State University (WSU)
• Sports and Recreation Center energy efficiency
improvements - $10 million, Eastern Washington
University
• Funding to support local governments to
implement greenhouse gas reduction plans - $10
million, COM
• Support for Lummi Indian Business Council clean
energy projects - $7.6 million, COM
• Replacement of Western Washington University's
(WWU) steam plant with a mostly electric and
water -based heating system - $7 million, WWU
• Providing equipment to residential, recreational or
educational facilities to improve air quality in King
County - $6 million, ECY
Packet Pg. 167
10.2.a
24
Initiative Measure No. 2117
• Replacement of windows at the Yakima Valley
School to increase energy efficiency - $5.1 million,
Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS)
• Grants to support non -emitting thermal energy
networks - $5 million, COM
• Grant funding to reduce food waste and support
hunger relief and food assistance needs - $4.8
million, ECY, Washington State Department of
Agriculture (WSDA)
• Improved energy efficiency of the CWU Science
Building - $4.5 million, CWU
• Grants to assist community -based organizations,
local governments, Tribes and other eligible
entities to write, administer federal grants and
track grant opportunities - $3.6 million, COM
• Funding to help consumers find and take
advantage of the home energy improvement
funding - $3.5 million, COM
• Funding to offer education, planning, technical
assistance, and community engagement to enable
clean energy access - $3 million, COM
• Conducting building energy efficiency
assessments - $3 million, DSHS
• Funding to reduce greenhouse gas emissions
associated with manure -handling systems at dairy
and livestock farms - $3 million, Washington State
Conservation Commission (SCC)
• Funding to advance campus decarbonization - $3
million, WSU
• Assistance for community -based organizations,
local governments, Tribes and other entities to
access federal clean -energy tax incentives - $2.9
million, COM
• Grants to increase the reuse of industrial waste
products - $2.1 million, COM
• Grants to improve the energy efficiency of
buildings at community and technical colleges - $2
million, State Board of Community and Technical
Colleges
Future Impacts from SFY 2026-SFY 2029:
Sixteen state agencies would lose anticipated
future spending authority for ongoing programs
of approximately $200 million in state fiscal years
2026-2027 and $130 million in state fiscal years
2028-2029 for multiple activities including clean energy
development, environmental justice work and climate
adaptation planning.
Natural Climate Solutions Account
Impact on the Natural Climate Solutions Account
in the current biennium:
(See Table 7 on page 30.)
Significant activities in SFY 2025 that would be
eliminated under the initiative:
• Forestland and coastal land preservation:
o Funding for the Quinault Indian Nation to buy
forestland - $25 million, Department of Natural
Resources (DNR)
o Funding to purchase forestlands for
conservation and protection of endangered
species - $15 million, DNR
o Purchasing properties to place into
conservation status - $10.8 million, DNR
o Grants for coastal restoration and resiliency
- $7.9 million, Recreation and Conservation
Office (RCO)
o Algae and other blue carbon sequestration
projects - $7 million, COM
o Grants to support community forests - $5.8
million, RCO
o Grants to improve carbon storage on
agricultural lands - $5 million, WSDA
• Fire prevention and forest health:
o Funding for forest health treatments to increase
resilience to fire - $3 million, DNR
o Grants to local governments and private
landowners for projects to increase forest
health and community wildfire resiliency - $2.5
million, SCC
o Community -based wildfire risk reduction and
forest -health activities, such as engagement
with landowners, removal of fire hazard
materials and brush clearing - $2 million, SCC
• Riparian area and salmon habitat protection:
o Restoration and protection of salmon habitat -
$25 million, RCO
o Fish passage barrier removal projects - $22.2
million, RCO
o Estuary and salmon habitat restoration - $11.1
million, RCO
Future impacts from SFY 2026-SFY 2029:
Nine state agencies would lose anticipated future
spending authority for ongoing programs of
approximately $50 million each biennium to continue
work on programs and projects which increase the
resilience of the state's waters, forests and other
vital ecosystems to the impacts of climate change;
conserve forestlands; and increase natural carbon -
pollution reduction capacity.
Packet Pg. 168
10.2.a
Initiative Measure No. 2117
Air Quality and Health Disparities
Investment Account
Impact on the Air Quality and Health Disparities
Investment Account in the current biennium:
(See Table 8 on page 30.)
Activities in SFY 2025 that would be eliminated
under the initiative:
• None
Future impacts from SFY 2026-SFY2029:
The account would be eliminated along with $40 million
in anticipated future funding for ongoing programs
administered by ECY to improve air quality and reduce
health disparities in overburdened communities.
Other state agency spending impacts
Compliance costs:
The University of Washington (UW) and Washington
State University (WSU) are covered entities under
the Climate Commitment Act and are required to
purchase or acquire compliance instruments (carbon -
emission allowances and offset credits) to account for
their covered greenhouse gas emissions. Under the
initiative, this requirement would be eliminated. The UW
would save an estimated $3.4 million in state fiscal year
2025 and $3.8 million each year in state fiscal years
2026-2029. WSU would save $3.3 million in state fiscal
year 2025 and $3.7 million each year in state fiscal
years 2026-2029.
Both universities receive state funding to cover a
portion of this obligation cost. The remainder must be
paid for by other funding sources. The UW currently
receives $1,733,000 in State General Fund each state
fiscal year to pay for a portion of their obligation.
WSU currently receives $1,718,000 in State General
Fund each state fiscal year to pay for a portion of their
obligation. The 2024 supplemental operating budget
provided an additional $4.3 million in state fiscal year
2024 and $2.6 million in state fiscal year 2025 from the
State General Fund for WSU to pay for their obligation.
Rulemaking:
Under the initiative, ECY would conduct rulemaking
from January 2025 through December 2027 to
repeal Climate Commitment Act rules and to amend
rules regarding greenhouse gas emission reporting.
Estimated costs are $1.2 million from the State General
Fund for staff to conduct this rulemaking and for
support from the Office of the Attorney General.
Lease costs:
WSU has leased a building in Richland, Washington to
25
house the Institute for Northwest Energy Futures and
is paying for this lease with funding from the Climate
Commitment Act. WSU is contractually obligated for
future expenses through December 1, 2026. Under the
initiative, this funding would be eliminated, and WSU
would need to find other funds to pay these expenses.
The cost is estimated at $810,000 in state fiscal year
2026 and $809,000 in state fiscal year 2027 and would
likely be paid for with the State General Fund.
Federal funding:
Several state agencies and local governments use
Climate Commitment Act funding as a required match
to receive federal funding, and this match funding is
often required before applying for federal grants. Under
the initiative, these federal grants would be at risk if
the Climate Commitment Act funds are not replaced.
It is unknown exactly how much federal funding the
state or local governments would receive that would be
matched with Climate Commitment Act funding in the
future. Therefore, the potential impact of the initiative
on the amount of federal funds the state and local
governments would receive is indeterminate. Some
examples are included.
Currently, Transit Formula and Special Needs grant
local projects use Climate Commitment Act funding for
federal match. The federal amount that would not be
funded each fiscal year is approximately $12 million.
For rural mobility projects, the amount is approximately
$8 million each fiscal year.
The Cascadia High -Speed Rail Program was accepted
under the Corridor Identification and Development
(CID) Program, which is a long-term federal grant
pipeline. Federal funding for the next steps for the
High -Speed Rail Program requires state matching
funds. The program is currently negotiating with the
federal railroad administration for a CID grant award
amount. These negotiations assume availability of
$25 million of Climate Commitment Act funding in the
current biennium for state match - and ability to extend
spending, if needed - to align with the reimbursement
cycle for the federal grant. Under the initiative, WSDOT
would be unable to accept $391.7 million of federal
funding in state fiscal years 2025-2029 through the CID
Program without alternative funding.
Performance audit:
Under the initiative, the Joint Legislative Audit and
Review Committee (JLARC) would not conduct a
mandated performance audit of Climate Commitment
Act implementation which is required by December 1,
2029. The estimated savings to JLARC is $200,000
from the State General Fund in state fiscal year 2029.
Packet Pg. 169
10.2.a
26
Local government impacts
Grant and award programs
Initiative Measure No. 2117
Passage of the initiative would reduce Climate
Commitment Act funding provided by state agencies to
local governments and K-12 public schools. Currently,
cities, counties, K-12 schools and other local entities
can receive grants, loan or contract funding from
approximately 130 programs across dozens of state
agencies. Under the initiative, all these programs would
lose funding past June 30, 2025. Between December 5,
2024, and June 30, 2025, approximately 50 programs
and $415.7 million would be eliminated. It is unknown
which local governments would apply for grants or
loans and be awarded funding, or the amounts of such
awards that would be eliminated under the initiative.
Significant programs in SFY 2025 that would be
eliminated under the initiative:
• Local capital transportation projects, including
zero -emission infrastructure; public transportation
projects; commercial, fire engine and public utility
vehicles and infrastructure; port electrification; and
clean energy infrastructure - $119 million, WSDOT
• Projects to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and
support planning - $91 million, COM
• Energy efficiency improvements for commercial
and multifamily buildings - $45 million, COM
• Salmon and estuary recovery and restoration
projects - $37.2 million, RCO, SCC
• School District Indoor Air Quality & Energy
Efficiency program - $30 million, OSPI
• Fish passage barrier removal - $23.2 million, COM,
RCO
• Forest health, fire prevention and fire wise grant
program - $13.2 million, DNR, RCO, SCC
• Coastal lands restoration and resiliency program -
$7.9 million, RCO
• King County air quality mitigation - $6 million, ECY
• Food waste reduction grants - $4.8 million, ECY,
WSDA
• Zero -emission student transportation grants - $4
million, ECY
• Community forest grant program - $3 million, DNR
• Sustainable Farms & Fields grants program - $3
million, SCC
• Forest health and fire wise grant program - $2.4
million, SCC
Impacts on publicly owned natural gas
utilities
Two cities in Washington provide natural gas to
local ratepayers. They participate in the Climate
Commitment Act's cap -and -invest program due to the
level of their carbon emissions: the City of Enumclaw
and the City of Ellensburg. The initiative repeals the
cap -and -invest program, and these two cities would
no longer be required to acquire allowances or offset
credits equal to their carbon emission levels. The
cap -and -invest program currently gives the two cities
free allowances in an amount that initially covers all
their emissions and then declines at 7% per year
through 2030 and 2% per year after 2030. If these
utilities decrease emissions (decarbonize) faster than
7% per year, they could return the monetary value
of any unused allowances to their ratepayers. Under
the initiative, through 2030, the total value of the
free allowances that these cities would not receive is
forecasted at $13.4 million.
Impacts on publicly owned electricity
utilities
Currently, 53 cities, counties and other publicly owned
entities that provide electricity to local ratepayers
participate in the cap -and -invest program that would
be eliminated under the initiative. Currently, these
utilities receive free allowances to cover the total
cost burden of compliance, including administrative
costs and the costs of acquiring allowances or offset
credits equal to the carbon emissions from the power
plants that serve their ratepayers. These utilities
can use the free allowances to meet their cap -and -
invest compliance obligations. Alternatively, they can
use some of the free allowance value to implement
programs that benefit ratepayers. Under the initiative,
through 2030, the total value of the free allowances that
these entities would not receive is forecasted at $1.3
billion.
Packet Pg. 170
10.2.a
Initiative Measure No. 2117
27
Table 1 — Projected revenue impact to Washington State
Account
SFY 2025
SFY 2026
SFY 2027
SFY 2028
SFY 2029
Carbon Emissions Reduction
($672,271,000 )
($71,823,000)
($71,823,000)
($71,823,000)
($71,823,000)
Account
Climate Transit Programs
$0
($201,106,000 )
($201,106,000)
($201,106,000)
($201,106,000)
Account
Climate Active Transportation
$0
($86,188,000 )
($86,188,000)
($86,188,000)
($86,188,000)
Account
Climate Investment Account,
portions of which are
distributed to the Climate
($79,285,000)
($472,765,000)
($422,789,000)
($402,426,000)
($301,837,000)
Commitment Account and
Natural Climate Solutions
Account
Air Quality and Health
Disparities Improvement
($2,500,000)
($10,000,000)
($10,000,000)
($10,000,000)
($10,000,000)
Account
General Fund -State
($3,400,000)
($7,100,000)
($7,400,000)
($7,800,000)
($8,100,000)
Workforce Education
($600,000)
($1,200,000)
($1,200,000)
($1,300,000)
($1,400,000)
Investment Account
Total
($758,056,000)
($8501182,000)
($800,566,000)
($780,643,000)
($680,514,000)
Table 2 — Projected spending impact to Washington State:
Account
SFY 2025
SFY 2026
SFY 2027
SFY 2028
SFY 2029
Carbon Emissions
($435,594,125)
($1,387,000)
($1,387,000)
($1,387,000)
($1,387,000)
Reduction Account
Transportation Carbon
Emissions Reduction
$230,354,125
$0
$0
$0
$0
Account
Climate Active
($0)
($9,533,500)
($9,533,500)
($9,533,500)
($9,533,500)
Transportation Account
Climate Transit Programs
($0)
($179,850,000)
($179,850,000)
($179,850,000)
($179,850,000)
Account
Climate Investment Account
($35,256,884)
($35,443,000)
($35,443,000)
($35,094,000)
($35,094,000)
Climate Commitment
($896,196,884)
($102,620,000)
($97,523,000)
($66,026,000)
($64,389,000)
Account
Natural Climate Solutions
($282,251,136)
($25,392,000)
($27,953,000)
($22,956,000)
($25,853,000)
Account
Air Quality and Health
Disparities Investment
($19,333,611)
$0
$0
$0
$0
Account
Consolidated Climate
$653,797,443
$0
$0
$0
$0
Account
General Fund -State
($6,349,000)
($6,152,000)
($6,364,000)
($7,500,000)
($7,700,000)
General Fund -Federal
($45,000,000)
($70,000,000)
($70,000,000)
($70,000,000)
($236,700,000)
Total
($835,829,954)
($430,377,000)
($428,053,500)
($392,346,500)
($590,5W,500)
Packet Pg. 171
10.2.a
Initiative Measure No. 2117
Table 3 — Impact on the Carbon Emissions Reduction Account in the current biennium:
Agency
Spending authority
eliminated
Spending authority transferred
to the Transportation Carbon
Emissions Reduction Account
Department of Commerce
($5,000,000)
$0
Department of Ecology
($4,000,000)
$0
Department of Enterprise Services
($13,500,000)
$0
Department of Natural Resources
$0
$671,724
Joint Transportation Committee
($477,000)
$2,243,091
Washington State Department of Transportation
($182,263,000)
$227,439,310
Washington State Parks & Recreation Commission
$0
$0
Total
($205,240,000)
$230,354,125
Table 4 — Impact on the Climate Active Transportation and Climate Transit Programs Accounts in the
current biennium:
Agency
Spending authority
eliminated
Spending authority retained
Transportation Improvement Board
$0
$7,067,000
Washington State Department of Transportation
$0
$322,984,552
Total
$0
$330,051,552
Table 5 — Impact on the Climate Investment Account in the current biennium:
Agency
Spending authority
eliminated
Spending authority transferred
to the Consolidated Climate
Account
Department of Ecology
($12,081,799)
$21,058,099
Department of Health
$0
$489,012
Department of Licensing
$0
$0
Environmental and Land Use Hearings Office
$0
$838,354
Office of Financial Management
($2,370)
$565,450
Recreation and Conservation Office
$0
$116,800
Washington State Conservation Commission
($105,000)
$0
Total
($12,189,169)
$23,067,715
Q
Packet Pg. 172
10.2.a
Initiative Measure No. 2117
KC
Table 6 — Impact on the Climate Commitment Account in the current biennium:
Agency
Spending authority
eliminated
Spending authority transferred
to the Consolidated Climate
Account
Central Washington University
($16,973,000)
$1,300,473
Columbia River Gorge Commission
$0
$70,250
Department of Architectural and Historic Preservation
$0
$506,755
Department of Children, Youth and Families
$0
$3,199,000
Department of Commerce
($269,919,794)
$303,908,217
Department of Corrections
($600,000)
$1,600,000
Department of Ecology
($9,792,103)
$17,917,345
Department of Enterprise Services
($1,617,575)
$0
Department of Health
$120,000
$79,236,333
Department of Labor & Industries
$0
$3,463,669
Department of Natural Resources
($862,000)
$5,423,409
Department of Revenue
$0
$281,500
Department of Social and Health Services
($9,958,915)
$0
Department of Veteran's Affairs
$0
$200,000
Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council
($68,000)
$4,561,612
Employment Security Department
$0
$329,837
Eastern Washington University
($9,998,000)
$50,000
Governor's Office of Indian Affairs
$0
$495,218
Office of Financial Management
($875,000)
$3,240,284
Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction
($30,000,000)
$7,525,000
The Evergreen State College
$0
$0
University of Washington
($39,053,000)
$9,055,869
Washington State Board of Community & Technical
Colleges
($2,475,000)
$5,781,000
Washington State Conservation Commission
($3,048,483)
$22,400,000
Washington State Department of Agriculture
($3,407,000)
$2,553,592
Washington State Department of Fish & Wildlife
$0
$1,056,113
Washington State Parks & Recreation Commission
($950,000)
$1,462,443
Washington State University
($13,000,000)
$352,823
Western Washington University
($7,000,000)
$0
Workforce Training Board
$0
$508,273
Total
($419,717,870)
$476,479,014
Packet Pg. 173
10.2.a
30
Initiative Measure No. 2117
Table 7 - Impact on the Natural Climate Solutions Account in the current biennium:
Agency
Spending authority
eliminated
Spending authority transferred
to the Consolidated Climate
Account
Department of Commerce
($7,975,000)
$2,600,546
Department of Ecology
($2,079,963)
$21,451,072
Department of Enterprise Services
$0
$0
Department of Health
$0
$22,828
Department of Natural Resources
($54,594,358)
$26,464,652
Military Department
$0
$84,022
Recreation and Conservation Office
($72,006,000)
$57,279,700
University of Washington
$0
$486,602
Washington State Conservation Commission
($5,603,713)
$24,331,293
Washington State Department of Agriculture
($5,000,000)
$114,884
Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife
$0
$1,145,241
Washington State Parks & Recreation Commission
($75,000)
$936,263
Total
($147,334,034)
$134,917,102
Table 8 — Impact on the Air Quality and Health Disparities Investment Account in the current biennium:
Agency
Spending authority
eliminated
Spending authority transferred
to the Consolidated Climate
Account
Department of Ecology
$0
$19,333,611
Total
$0
$19,333,611
Q
Packet Pg. 174
10.2.a
Initiative Measure No. 2117
Argument for
Vote "Yes" on 1-2117 to repeal Washington's expensive,
unfair, and wasteful CO2 tax
The CO2 tax increases the cost of gasoline and energy
and drives up the price of everything we buy. A hidden tax
that hurts low-income people most while providing large
handouts to special interests. That's why a bipartisan group
of climate scientists, farmers, small business owners, and
environmental justice advocates is voting "Yes" on 1-2117 to
cut energy prices and protect jobs.
The CO2 tax is built on broken promises
Politicians promised the CO2 tax would make gasoline
prices go up by only "pennies." Instead, the CO2 tax added
nearly 40 cents per gallon at the pump, making Washington's
fuel some of the most expensive in the nation. Plus, the tax
will double in just a few years.
Energy inflation hits low-income families hardest
While working families struggle with higher prices, politicians
offer token, election -year "credits" to hide the real costs
of the tax. The state even made it illegal for utilities to tell
people the CO2 tax is hiking up their bills. This tax is unfair
and kills small businesses and good jobs.
The CO2 tax goes mainly to government and special
interests —not fighting climate change
The CO2 tax gives billions to government bureaucrats, with
little left for tackling pollution and climate change. Lots of
cash for special interests, but almost nothing to stop wildfires
or improve air quality. Vote "Yes" to support environmental
action that prioritizes the planet not politics.
Rebuttal of argument against
Advocates of the CO2 tax - the largest energy tax in state
history - claim it doesn't increase energy costs. They know
this is false. We all felt the harm from soaring gasoline prices
Repealing the tax lowers prices. Tax supporters also know
the law prohibits the taxes from maintaining roads and
bridges. Ending the tax will not hurt transportation. Don't be
fooled by dishonest scare tactics. Vote "Yes" to pay less and
protect low-income Washingtonians.
Written by
Nichole Banegas, Environmental Justice Leader; Cliff
Mass, Professor of Atmospheric Sciences; Ben Tindall,
Executive Director of Save Family Farming; Sheri Call,
President & CEO, Washington Trucking Associations; Todd
Myers, environmental author, former Puget Sound Salmon
Recovery Councilmember; Matt Boehnke, State Senator, 8`
Legislative District
Contact: No information submitted
Argument against
31
1-2117 is a purposely misleading, poorly written initiative
that won't do a thing to guarantee lower costs for working
families. It will endanger our health and safety and would
devastate our transportation system.
1-2117 is a threat to our air, land and water - putting our
health at risk.
1-2117 would jeopardize vital protections for our waterways,
including rivers, lakes and streams. It would mean more
toxic pollution in the air we breathe, resulting in more adults
and kids suffering with asthma and illness. It would gut
programs that protect our communities from wildfires and
eliminate efforts to support salmon recovery and fish habitat.
1-2117 threatens the safe, reliable functioning of our
entire transportation system.
1-2117 would cut one-third of funding for our state's already
stretched transportation plan, making traffic congestion
worse and commutes even longer. These drastic cuts would
impact every corner of our state, putting major road and
bridge projects addressing congestion, safety and freight
mobility in danger of severe delays or outright cancellation.
1-2117 reduces funding to restore a ferry system already in
crisis and would drastically slash transit service.
An unprecedented coalition opposes 1-2117.
The devastating harm 1-2117 would cause has produced a
uniquely broad and diverse coalition united in opposition.
Over 350 organizations - including firefighters, small
businesses, leading companies, doctors, nurses, labor
unions and environmental leaders - and Tribal Nations
have joined together to fiercely oppose 1-2117. No to more
pollution. No to more traffic congestion. No on 1-2117. It's a
bad deal for Washington.
Rebuttal of argument for
The people behind 1-2117 make many misleading claims. If
its supporters wanted to lower gas prices, they should have
pushed an initiative to cut the gas tax. There is nothing in
1-2117 that guarantees lower gas prices - but it will mean
more pollution in our air and waterways, and more asthma
and illness. It will devastate our transportation system,
increasing traffic congestion and commute times, and costing
jobs. Don't be fooled. Vote no on 2117.
Written by
Mark Riker, Executive Secretary, Washington Building &
Construction Trade Council; Leonard Forsman, Chairman
Suquamish Tribe, Affiliated Tribes of Northwest Indians;
Maia Bellon, The Nature Conservancy in Washington, Board
Chair, Tumwater; Richard de Sam Lazaro, Transportation
Choice Coalition, Board President; Lindsey Kirsch,
Pediatric Registered Nurse; Jason Wilkins, State Council of
Firefighters, Spokane, Wildland Taskforce Leader
Contact: (206) 331-3969; info@no2l l7.com; no2117.com
Packet Pg. 175
10.2.b
RCW 42.17A.555 Use of public office or agency facilities in
campaigns —Prohibition —Exceptions. (Effective until January 1, 2026.
Recodified as RCW 29B.45.010.) No elective official nor any employee
of his or her office nor any person appointed to or employed by any
public office or agency may use or authorize the use of any of the
facilities of a public office or agency, directly or indirectly, for
the purpose of assisting a campaign for election of any person to any
office or for the promotion of or opposition to any ballot
proposition. Facilities of a public office or agency include, but are
not limited to, use of stationery, postage, machines, and equipment,
use of employees of the office or agency during working hours,
vehicles, office space, publications of the office or agency, and
clientele lists of persons served by the office or agency. However,
this does not apply to the following activities:
(1) Action taken at an open public meeting by members of an
elected legislative body or by an elected board, council, or
commission of a special purpose district including, but not limited
to, fire districts, public hospital districts, library districts, park
districts, port districts, public utility districts, school districts,
sewer districts, and water districts, to express a collective
decision, or to actually vote upon a motion, proposal, resolution,
order, or ordinance, or to support or oppose a ballot proposition so
long as (a) any required notice of the meeting includes the title and
number of the ballot proposition, and (b) members of the legislative
body, members of the board, council, or commission of the special
purpose district, or members of the public are afforded an
approximately equal opportunity for the expression of an opposing
view;
(2) A statement by an elected official in support of or in
opposition to any ballot proposition at an open press conference or in
response to a specific inquiry;
(3) Activities which are part of the normal and regular conduct
of the office or agency.
(4) This section does not apply to any person who is a state
officer or state employee as defined in RCW 42.52.010. [2010 c 204 s
701; 2006 c 215 s 2; 1979 ex.s. c 265 s 2; 1975-'76 2nd ex.s. c 112 s
6; 1973 c 1 s 13 (Initiative Measure No. 276, approved November 7,
1972). Formerly RCW 42.17.130.]
Finding—Intent2006 c 215: "(1) The legislature finds that the
public benefits from an open and inclusive discussion of proposed
ballot measures by local elected leaders, and that for twenty-five
years these discussions have included the opportunity for elected
boards, councils, and commissions of special purpose districts to vote
in open public meetings in order to express their support of, or
opposition to, ballot propositions affecting their jurisdictions.
(2) The legislature intends to affirm and clarify the state's
long-standing policy of promoting informed public discussion and
understanding of ballot propositions by allowing elected boards,
councils, and commissions of special purpose districts to adopt
resolutions supporting or opposing ballot propositions." [2006 c 215 s
1.]
Disposition of violations before January 1, 1995: "Any violations
occurring prior to January 1, 1995, of any of the following laws shall
be disposed of as if chapter 154, Laws of 1994 were not enacted and
Certified on 7/12/2024 RCW 42.17A.555
Packet Pg. 176
10.2.b
such laws continued in full force and effect: *RCW 42.17.130, chapter
42.18 RCW, chapter 42.21 RCW, and chapter 42.22 RCW." [1994 c 154 s
226.1
*Reviser's note: RCW 42.17.130 was recodified as RCW 42.17A.555
pursuant to 2010 c 204 s 1102, effective January 1, 2012.
Certified on 7/12/2024 RCW 42.17A.555
Packet Pg. 177