2024-10-01 Council Minutes
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 1, 2024
Page 1
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MEETING
APPROVED MINUTES
October 1, 2024
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Mike Rosen, Mayor
Vivian Olson, Council President
Chris Eck, Councilmember
Will Chen, Councilmember
Neil Tibbott, Councilmember
Michelle Dotsch, Councilmember
Susan Paine, Councilmember
Jenna Nand, Councilmember
STAFF PRESENT
Rod Sniffen, Assistant Police Chief
Angie Feser, Parks, Rec., & Human Serv. Dir.
Shane Hope, Acting Planning & Dev. Dir.
Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
Sharon Cates, City Attorney
Nicholas Falk, Deputy City Clerk
Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator
1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE
The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 6:59 pm by Mayor Rosen in the Council
Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually. The meeting was opened with the flag salute.
2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Councilmember Paine read the City Council Land Acknowledge Statement: “We acknowledge the original
inhabitants of this place, the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and their successors the Tulalip Tribes, who
since time immemorial have hunted, fished, gathered, and taken care of these lands. We respect their
sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and we honor their sacred spiritual connection with the land
and water.”
3. ROLL CALL
Deputy City Clerk Nicholas Falk called the roll. All elected officials were present.
4. PRESENTATIONS
1. NATIONAL ARTS & HUMANITIES MONTH PROCLAMATION
Mayor Rosen read a proclamation proclaiming October as National Arts and Humanities Month in
Edmonds.
Arts Commission Chair Tanya Sharp accepted the proclamation. She said she was honored to accept the
proclamation on behalf of Edmonds’ arts community and sincerely appreciated recognition of National Arts
and Humanities Month and the vital role arts and culture plan in the community. She thanked the city
council for their support of the arts.
2. ARBOR DAY PROCLAMATION 2024
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 1, 2024
Page 2
Mayor Rosen read a proclamation proclaiming October 1, 2024 as Arbor Day in Edmonds.
Tree Board Chair Wendy Kliment accepted the proclamation and introduced Tree Board Member Ross
Dimmick. She thanked the mayor and city council for recognizing Arbor Day and the importance of trees.
The tree board provides advice to the mayor and council and educational information about trees to
Edmonds residents. The tree board plans to give away 100 trees on Saturday at the Farmers Market
beginning at 9 am until they are gone. Tree board members will be on hand to answer questions and provide
information about critical areas in Edmonds.
3. MAYOR'S FINANCE UPDATE
Mayor Rosen invited the council and public to watch the video of his budget presentation.
5. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON, TO
APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Jason Penaluna, Edmonds, a 20-year practicing functional neurologist in Shoreline, relayed information
to assist the council in making educated, informed and reasonable choices on behalf of its residents which
protect and benefit the community. This announcement is related to the federal court ruling in California to
stop the practice of drinking water fluoridation which came after seven years of legal debate. The court
ruled that the practice of water fluoridation poses an unnecessary risk to people’s health, especially the
brain development of children. Water fluoridation was also found to provide no benefit to oral health, yet
found to be neurotoxic when introduced systematically to the body. The most compelling aspect of the
court proceedings was the presentation of a Harvard University study from several years ago that confirmed
IQ scores were significant lower in children who consumed fluoridated water; 60% of children have chronic
health conditions these days linked to environmental toxins, toxic food, vaccine ingredients and don’t need
a continued attack on their health through their water supply. There were also medical legal aspects to the
case; according to the FDA, fluoride is considered a drug, therefore, since the 50s when fluoride was
introduced to drinking water, people have been ingesting a known drug without informed consent which
spits in the face of medical ethics, goes against the Geniva Convention and fails to warn people of potential
detrimental side effects associated with every drug. He implored the council to start an immediate plan to
rid fluoride from the City’s water supply and to join other communities at the cutting edge of community
health who have done the same. As a well-informed and concerned member of the community, he offered
his services if needed.
Bill Krepick, Woodway, recognized the budget is front and center tonight after Mayor Rosen presented a
very thorough explanation of the proposed budget, making it very clear the budget as presented will require
a lot of further discussion by council. As the council reviews the proposed budget, he asked that they pay
particular attention to the question of RFA cost versus price. He expressed concern that the RFA has not
provided any proof why the cost of their services, which will not change, will increase from $11.5 million
in 2023 to $19 million in 2026. He found it a travesty that the RFA has the gall to suggest a 65% price
increase when there is no concurrent cost increase in their services. He urged the council to seriously
consider the Edmonds’ own fire department as an alternative because he anticipated the City could finance
the fire department for $12 million and not require taxpayers pay $19 million. He asked which of the Blue
Ribbon Panel’s recommendations were included in the budget and whether the budget included any of the
recommendations from the September 14 citizen focus group. The City’s police chief is on record saying
at least two studies have shown the City would receive economies of scale equivalent to a 50% savings in
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 1, 2024
Page 3
the cost of police services at the same level of service via a contract with the Snohomish County Sheriff’s
Office. He questioned adding 33 officers when the police budget could be reduced by 50% for the same
level of service via a contract with Snohomish County. He also requested the council consider double
taxation with regard to fire and EMS.
Zach Bloomfield, unincorporated Edmonds, referred to Item 9.2, Policy for Expanding MUGA
Boundary, commenting the proposed policy language provides a valuable clarification of the City’s
approach and policy regarding consideration of MUGA redesignation A clear policy would be a critical
tool in supporting the council’s initial motion last year to open discussions with Lynnwood and Snohomish
County about the topic and generally will serve the City well in the future in light of other MUGA
designation and annexation questions. He expressed support for the language in the policy that provides an
unbiased and external analysis on costs and cost allocation. He encouraged the council to include language
regarding cost allocation between the City and other stakeholders rather than only total cost without
understanding who would be responsible for bearing the costs. He encouraged the council to include the
language in the draft comprehensive plan.
7. RECEIVED FOR FILING
1. WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS
8. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO
APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items
approved are as follows:
1. APPROVAL OF COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 17, 2024
2. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 17, 2024
3. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS AND WIRE PAYMENTS
4. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL AND BENEFIT CHECKS, DIRECT DEPOSIT AND WIRE
PAYMENTS
5. APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CHANGE OF PROCEDURE FOR OCTOBER 29 PUBLIC
HEARING ON PRELIMINARY BUDGET
9. COUNCIL BUSINESS
1. COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE TO CONTRACTING AND PURCHASING POLICIES AND
PROCEDURES
Sharon Cates, City Attorney’s Office, explained she has been working with City staff on the update to the
purchasing policies and procedures. City council reviews and approves updates to the City’s purchasing
policies and procedures on a fairly regular basis; however, the policies have not undergone a comprehensive
update for several years and not in the 14 years she has been with the city. She prepared a draft based on
other jurisdictions’ recently updated purchasing policies and procedures and worked closely with the
directors and other staff who work with the policies on regular basis. The purchasing policies and
procedures are not necessarily in final form and the council has the opportunity to discuss additions and
changes that were proposed by the Finance Committee. There was a lot of great input at the Finance
Committee; the three major proposals suggested by the committee are outlined in the agenda memo.
Councilmember Paine referred to the email she sent today with a question and motions she would like to
make. She asked the dollar threshold for projects to be on the CIP. Ms. Cates answered that is not part of
the purchasing policies unless the same contracting authority limits apply to CIP projects. Parks, Recreation
and Human Services Director Angie Feser answered to her knowledge there was no threshold or dollar
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 1, 2024
Page 4
amount to quality a project to be on the CIP. The capital program is often based on funds and restrictions
on funds and the projects they are allocated to. She was not aware of a policy related to a minimum collar
amount per project for it to be listed on the CIP, it was more the nature of the project
Councilmember Paine commented sometimes a project balloons and tips over some threshold, and she
wondered if it should have been in the CIP. Ms. Feser asked if Councilmember Paine’s question was related
to an initial project that was approved for a dollar amount and as the project proceeds, it exceeds that amount
or becomes a rolling project that has continual phases. Those are two different questions; projects and
budget allocations are approved by city council when the capital budget is authorized. The council also
authorizes project bids and contracts. As projects are proceeding, the council can ask for updates regarding
expenditures. Typically when projects are closed out, they are brought to council and if the budgeted amount
is exceeded, that is also brought to council.
Councilmember Paine agreed that was the normal and expected process. Sometimes there is scope creep
where there are project add-ons, nice to haves, are added. She was unsure if that has happened and wondered
if there were thresholds that will land a project on the CIP. Ms. Feser explained when there is a contract
related to a capital project, if that contract is amended or a change order over $50,000 or a change that will
exceed the total amount, staff has to bring the contract amendment to council. Once a contract is authorized,
if that amount is exceed, council approval is required.
Councilmember Chen thanked Ms. Cates and the directors for working on this comprehensive update. He
noted there was a really good discussion at the Finance Committee last week, but he noticed some of the
changes that were discussed were not included in the policy. One of the major topics of discussion was the
spending threshold for the mayor and directors throughout the updated purchasing policies and procedures.
The original purchasing policies had a spending limit of $100,000 and this proposed policy increased that
to $150,000 and other thresholds were adjusted by scale throughout the document.
COUNCILMEMBER CHEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON, TO
APPROVE THE PURCHASING POLICIES AS PROPOSED.
Councilmember Dotsch asked if there were any goals or learning opportunity such as being more efficient,
saving money, making the policies less redundant, instead of looking at what other cities were doing. Ms.
Cates answered there were a variety of goals, one was to increase the quality of the guidance to add some
context about why things are done the way they are, the ethics of procurement, and based on the type of
questions she gets on regular basis, she felt a more robust guidance document would help staff be more
efficient and to streamline the process. Part of the goal was context, incorporating new state law, and
clarifying some confusing language. Most of what was in the current policies still exists, but was updated
and/or made more robust. She also got input from directors about changes in internal policy and procedures
and clarifying the policy document to reflect those changes. Councilmember Dotsch asked if there was a
redline version. Ms. Cates answered she tried to do that initially, but it was too complicated to understand.
COUNCILMEMBER NAND MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER CHEN, TO AMEND
THE UPDATED CONTRACTING AND PURCHASING POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
DOCUMENT, SPECIFICALLY IN SECTION 5.3 MULTIPHASE AND MULTI-VENDOR
PROJECTS, TO ADD TO THE LAST SENTENCE, “AND COUNCIL MAY CHOSE TO ASSIGN
PROJECT CODING TO SPECIAL PROJECTS AT ITS DISCRETION.”
Councilmember Nand relayed her understanding there has been trepidation about assigning special project
numbers, but for multiphase and multiyear projects that receive a high level of public scrutiny and have a
great deal of council interest due to the use of resources, council should at its discretion have the ability to
ask that project coding be assigned, not only for capital expenditures but also associated labor costs, not
just vendors, but also internal staff. She recognized this would be a paradigm shift for the City and did not
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 1, 2024
Page 5
anticipate it would be used exhaustively or even routinely, but as the City may choose to pursue large and
complicated capital projects in the future, this could be a tool to provide transparency and insight to public
and the council.
Councilmember Paine appreciated the idea to provide the option for council to request project coding. She
recalled at the last meeting, the agenda memo said all projects have coding assigned. She recalled staff
indicating the difficulty with requesting project coding after a project began as some of expenditures and
cost would not be captured. She was unable to support the amendment.
Council President Olson commented this was an interesting proposal and thought. She asked if a staff
person could identify the pros and cons. She pointed out the wording “at council discretion” means it would
need to be a council majority request and would not occur all the time. Ms. Feser responded, speaking from
her experience in her department, every capital projects has its own specific code and expenditures related
to that project are tracked by Finance. If a project lives in operating, it may be difficult to assign a project
code and track expenditures and would be quite time intensive because every staff member involved in that
project would have to list that on their time sheet and it would have to be recorded. Staff still does time
sheets on paper, so for example if a project took six months and council wanted to know the amount of staff
time involved, staff would need to know from the beginning of the project that time would be coded and
tracked and go back through every timesheet to account for the time. It may be easier to track employees’
time if the City had a different time sheet system. Most of the employees in her department do not track
their time by project, except for the project manager.
Councilmember Chen recalled the Finance Committee had this discussion last week and input from Acting
Finance Director Dunscombe. To his recollection, what Ms. Feser described was the same as Ms.
Dunscombe’s input. Considering the City’s new ERP system has yet to be implemented, there are some
unknowns about its capability. Although he agreed with council having the discretion to request project
coding, he believed staff and council have the same desire to have a project tracking mechanism in place.
However, at this point it will add extra work for something that is already being accomplished. He did not
support the amendment.
Councilmember Nand agreed the Finance Committee had a robust discussion. The current ERP and
timesheet system make this logistically difficult, but she wanted to insert this into the policies now so future
council know it could potentially be done in the future for special projects, especially avant-garde projects
such as the carbon capture system, the wastewater treatment plant, Landmark 99, etc. When the City
receives public inquiry about how much internal staff time has been used for a project, it would provide
that level of transparency and accountability for the council and the public. She understood if the
administration and councilmembers do not feel this is the appropriate time to include this language.
AMENDMENT FAILED (1-6), COUNCILMEMBER NAND VOTING YES.
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ECK, TO AMEND
THE FIRST SENTENCE OF SECTION 1.5 ON PACKET PAGE 52 AS IT IS REDUNDANT AND
EXCESSIVE. [SENTENCE TO BE DELETED READS, “A VIOLATION OF ANY OF THE
PROVISIONS OF THE PURCHASING POLICIES MAY RESULT IN DISCIPLINE TO THE
INDIVIDUAL INVOLVED WHERE, IN THE OPINION OF THE MAYOR (IN THE CASE OF
EMPLOYEES) OR THE CITY COUNCIL (IN THE CASE OF AN ELECTED OFFICIAL OR
MAYOR), SUCH DISCIPLINE IS IN THE INTEREST OF THE PUBLIC AND GOOD
GOVERNMENT.”]
Councilmember Paine explained the next paragraph covers this, rules and RCWs to ensure all officers and
employees should be aware of the policies and compliance. The HR director stated the directors and people
who manage contracts are very familiar with the policies and do all they can to comply with them. She felt
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 1, 2024
Page 6
this language was unnecessary and a bit redundant as there are other systems in place. She commented the
last line, “such discipline is in the interest of the public and good government” is vague and if there is a
policy violation, it should be cut and dry and discipline should be defined by normal policies and procedures
and not based on the interest of the public or good government.
Council President Olson commented the council has gotten feedback from the public that there are never
any consequences when things don’t go the way they’re supposed to. She asked if this sentence was
redundant and there were still consequences for not following the policy. Ms. Cates apologized she did not
understand this was what Councilmember Paine was referring to earlier today. Because Councilmember
Paine spoken with the HR director and she hasn’t, she was hesitant to speak on behalf of the City. The
intent of that sentence was to put people on notice that these are important policies to follow and that there
are state law violations that could happen, but internal discipline can also potentially happen if the policies
are not followed. In her mind, it is somewhat separate and potentially a good reminder to new staff about
the importance of following the policies. It is up to the council to include language they are comfortable
including.
Ms. Feser responded from her perspective it may be a bit redundant. She was curious if the language in the
personnel policy aligned with the language in the purchasing policy. When there is the same type of policy
in two different documents, if one is changed, the other needs to align with it. To Ms. Cates’ point, it is nice
to have it in the policy so employees are aware there are consequences, but everything employees do at
work is part of the personnel policy.
Councilmember Nand expressed concerned with removing the language because if there was corruption or
inside dealing, that should be deterred to the maximum extent possible to avoid creating the perception that
city employees were doing anything unethical. She preferred the mayor have the discretion to discipline
such as meeting with an employee, writing someone up, etc. before something was reported as criminal and
prosecuted. She was unable to support the motion to strike this language.
Based on years of managing people and working with HR, Councilmember Eck said it doesn’t hurt to have
a policy like this, but including it does not necessarily compel the administration to hold people accountable.
It is neater and cleaner to have a simple line saying something like noncompliance with this policy could
make you subject to the City’s disciplinary process. She agreed with Councilmember Paine and it appeared
the HR director indicated if the City already has a disciplinary process, that can be referenced, but including
it doesn’t force the administration to hold people accountable.
Councilmember Dotsch said she was inclined to retain the language, believing it was separate. Coming
from a private business and HR background, it was important to have this policy. If legal counsel was
comfortable with including it, she was fine with including it.
AMENDMENT FAILED (3-4), COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON AND COUNCILMEMBER
DOTSCH AND COUNCILMEMBER NAND VOTING YES.
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NAND, TO AMEND
THE LANGUAGE IN SECTION 2.3 ON PACKET PAGE 53, FORMER EMPLOYEES AS
VENDORS/CONSULTANTS/CONTRACTORS, TO ADD, “FORMER CITY EMPLOYEES WHO
WERE IN A DIRECTOR OR MANAGER POSITION WHEN THEY LEFT THE CITY, MAY NOT
CONTRACT WITH THE CITY AS A VENDOR OR CONSULTANT AS DESCRIBED IN
SECTIONS 7.1.2 AND 7.2 FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR. THIS EXCLUSION DOES NOT APPLY
TO RETURNING PERSONNEL TO BACK FILL AN OPEN POSITION ON A TEMPORARY
BASIS.”
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 1, 2024
Page 7
Councilmember Paine said she was familiar with this in her past employment where people would pop in
and out of public service as soon as they left, director positions and positions who managed people and
contracts, with no cooling off period. When they leave the City of Seattle, they would take a vacation and
come back and begin consultant contracting, using all the contacts gained while working for the city for
their personal or business gain without a cooling off period. Having a cooling off period ensured no
backroom dealing occurred in those situations. This would offer a way for people to backfill in a position
such as Ms. Hope serving as an acting director.
Councilmember Chen expressed support for the amendment to prevent unethical purchasing practices.
Council President Olson said she wished she knew more about the pros and cons. Ms. Feser respected
Councilmember Paine’s perspective after seeing this occur in a larger organization. However, in the next
couple years, positions will be eliminated and departments will be downsizing quite a bit. This would
prevent managers who left the City from contracting or filling in for a year. There are some extenuating
circumstances in the next couple years and this would limit existing staff from provide their expertise and
experience to the City within a year.
Council President Olson asked if the wording, the exclusion does not apply to returning personnel to backfill
an open position on a temporary basis, whether that would address returning on a temporary basis. She
asked if Councilmember Paine intended for it to be applicable to both a temporary position and consulting.
Councilmember Paine asked if Ms. Feser was referring to someone returning to a position similar or equal
to the one they left as a temporary backfill or hiring them as a consultant. Ms. Feser said she was referring
to hiring them as a consultant. Councilmember Paine asked if the intent was for them to do similar work.
Ms. Feser answered yes. For example, if a manager position is not funded, but there are still projects or
work to be done, instead of paying that employee full-time, they would vacate the position and use
consulting services to complete the project or return for certain circumstances. It was not necessarily
backfilling the position, but providing their expertise to bridge gaps while the position was not filled.
Councilmember Paine said she understood that dilemma. She has seen it used for bad, but understood the
need to ensure the wheels stay on bus.
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE WITHDREW THE MOTION WITH THE AGREEMENT OF THE
SECONDER.
Councilmember Paine commented she still thinks it’s a good idea, but after the City is out of this situation.
Councilmember Nand thanked Councilmember Paine for raising that topic, relaying her understanding there
is a huge perception of corruption at the federal level due to the revolving door. She thanked Ms. Feser for
adding context.
COUNCILMEMBER CHEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NAND, TO AMEND
POLICY 4.1, PACKET PAGE 56, TO ADD AFTER THE SECOND SENTENCE, “THE MAXIMUM
DELEGATION OF CONTRACTING AUTHORITY FROM THE CITY COUNCIL TO THE
MAYOR AND DEPARTMENT DIRECTORS IS $100,000.”
Councilmember Chen commented as was discussed by the Finance Committee, he understood the
purchasing power of dollar is lower due to inflation, however, considering the City’s current financial
situation, the presentation of the biennial budget indicated the City has a $13M gap to fill in 2025 and
potentially a bigger gap in 2026. He felt it was not the right time to raise the spending limit from the current
$100,000 to $150,000. The timing would be better when revenue sources have been secured and the council
can review and amend the purchasing policy in the future.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 1, 2024
Page 8
Council President Olson commented there may be a logistical issue with this amendment as Sections 8, 9
and 10 still contain dollar thresholds that would be contrary to this amendment. The intent is enduring
policies that will always apply, not just when the City is in a fiscal emergency. She suggested leaving the
policy as proposed and in Section 17.11 Miscellaneous or adding Section 9.1.2.6 that states, “In the event
of and for the duration of a declared fiscal emergency, the contracting limits in Sections 8, 9 and 10 will be
reduced by 33%.” That would reduce the authorities to the current levels but allow an automatic rebound
to the levels adjusted for inflation once the City is out of the fiscal emergency.
Councilmember Nand offered a friendly amendment and asked if there was a way to phrase the amendment
so the maximum delegation of contracting authority to the mayor and department directors is $100,000 and
amend that throughout the document. City Attorney Jeff Taraday suggested directing the city attorney to
bring back a document at a subsequent meeting that has a maximum delegation of $100,000. That would
give the city attorney time to make that change throughout the document and bring it back on consistent
with those changes shown rather than making the changes in multiple places on the fly tonight.
COUNCILMEMBER CHEN ACCEPTED MR. TARADAY’S RECOMMENDATION TO DIRECT
THE CITY ATTORNEY TO CHANGE THE SPENDING LIMIT TO $100,000 THROUGHOUT
THE DOCUMENT AND BRING IT BACK ON CONSENT AT A FUTURE MEETING.
Councilmember Tibbott said he did not support the amendment although he could change his mind during
deliberations. One of the points raised in the packet was in addition to inflation, there is a certain amount
of time involved with bringing smaller projects to council for the authority to spend. He preferred to have
City staff spend time on higher priority projects and this is one way to do that. He respected that this
document had been prepared with best practices in mind and a high level of trust in the administration to
conduct themselves as it relates to the City’s current financial condition. This is a long-range, enduring
document and the amendment is a short range solution.
Councilmember Paine said she found it difficult to support the amendment after listening to the discussion
during the Finance Committee meeting and knowing there has been a tremendous level of inflation during
the last three years. She agreed with Councilmember Tibbott that the council would be inundated with
requests that could probably be much better handled within the spending authority. The directors have a
good understanding of their budgets and just went through the budgeting by priorities exercise and
rebuilding the City’s budget and she trusted them to not overspend. The proposed limits are within a
reasonable range and she feared having a restrictive limit would hinder the process of getting projects out.
Council President Olson did not support the amendment, but will propose an exception clause. She felt that
was a better way to handle it so the spending authority could automatically rebound. Inflation has been
significant and impactful; this is not about trust, it is about council having enough oversight and awareness
during a time when Edmonds is fragile.
Councilmember Paine raised a point of order, whether Council President Olson was speaking to the
amendment. Council President Olson said she was speaking to the amendment, indicting she planned to
vote no because she felt there was a better way to handle it.
Councilmember Nand explained she joined the council in 2022 and sat through that budget cycle and
participated in the full 2023 budget when the media called the council the tax and spend council and said
the council sent the City over a fiscal cliff. Until the City government is financially healthy, council and the
administration need to know what each other is doing, have notice, and be able to provide feedback.
Keeping the contracting limit at $100,000 will require council authorization for the mayor and directors to
spend more than that and therefore have more penetration into how City spending is building throughout
the year before finding themselves with a gigantic structural budget gap. This is not intended to impugn the
mayor or directors, but simply an attempt to build closer cooperation between the administration and the
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 1, 2024
Page 9
council. She expressed support for Councilmember Chen’s amendment and retaining the $100,000
contracting authority. She noted she did oppose the proposal in 2023 to lower the contracting authority to
$50,000. Staying at $100,000 now is where she was comfortable to ensure the council, mayor, public and
departments had a greater awareness of how spending was building throughout the year.
Councilmember Eck commented there have been many thoughtful comments on both sides. As she listened
to Councilmember Tibbott, she tended to agree less interference was good. However, Councilmember Nand
makes a good point, the City is in a situation it has not been in previously. She asked if the proposal for
Section 8.0, Procurement of Products, was to boost the authority for department director, mayor or designee
to $150,000. She did not expect that inflation would decrease or that costs would decrease and if the intent
was to be consistent throughout the document, it would be prudent to increase it to $150,000 which still
provides the check and balance that Councilmember Nand was looking for.
Ms. Cates advised the same levels of increase are proposed in Section 8.0, 9.0 and 10.0. The current levels
in the contracting and purchasing policies are $50,000 for directors and $100,000 for the mayor, for product
purchases, services purchases, and public works construction related contracting. The proposal is to raise
those amounts throughout the document from $50,000 to $75,000 and from $100,000 to $150,000. It would
make sense that those would be consistent across board; either remain at current levels or be raised to the
new proposed levels or some other level that the council is comfortable with.
Councilmember Eck agreed with Mr. Taraday’s offer to make the amounts consistent throughout the
document, but supported following the recommendation to increase department director or designee from
$50,000 to $75,000 and the mayor or designee from $100,000 to $150,000. She summarized with inflation,
it seems reasonable to increase the levels and to be consistent within the document. Mr. Taraday commented
the document is already internally consistent. If there is a desire to change the delegated limits, that would
need to be changed through the document. Otherwise if the council agrees with the limits as proposed in
the document, the document is consistent throughout. Ms. Cates agreed.
Councilmember Eck proposed rather than $100,000 as proposed by Councilmember Chen, she preferred
$150,000. Mayor Rosen advised that is what is currently in the document. If that was Councilmember Eck’s
preference, she could vote against Councilmember Chen’s amendment.
Councilmember Dotsch commenting having run a business and done purchasing, inflation is what it is.
Saving money is a possibility; to keep purchasing the same things for higher amounts is not much of a
policy. Inflation of $100,000 in today’s dollars is $122,500 not $150,000. To be consistent with something
in the middle, she offered the following amendment:
COUNCILMEMBER DOTSCH MOVED TO AMEND THE AMENDMENT TO INCREASE TO
$125,000 RATHER THAN $150,000 THROUGHOUT THE DOCUMENT. MOTION DIED FOR
LACK OF A SECOND.
Councilmember Chen assured his amendment was not about trust; he had full confidence the administration
and directors will do the best for the City. Considering the City’s current financial situation including the
mayor’s indication there is a $20M gap to fill and that replenishing the reserves will take about 20 years,
increasing the spending limit is contrary to solving the financial situation the City is facing. He favored
exercising common sense.
Councilmember Paine commented the council reviews and approves all the contracts. Section 9 is related
to contracts and professional service contracts. Ms. Feser agreed, based on the amounts. From staff’s
prospective, council authorizes budget allocations for departments; the budget sets the spending authority.
The purchasing policy happens within that. For example, if a department is allocated $200,000 for a project
and a purchase is made for something for $110,000; the council has already approved up that dollar amount
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 1, 2024
Page 10
so this is just another step in the process. This is more about efficiency. She appreciated the conversation
around trust; there have been a rough couple years related to budget. When staff has to come to council for
authorization according to the policy, it first goes to committee and then full council. Committee meetings
are held once a month which can delay the process 3-4 weeks which ironically can add money to the project
or the City gets a reputation in the community that authorization for contracts takes a very long time and
contractors don’t bid on the City’s projects. The reason directors worked with Ms. Cates on these amounts
is to enable staff to work through the process faster and more efficiency. Council has already authorized
amounts via the budget; this is just a step in acquiring a service, product, etc.
Councilmember Nand commented these are the council’s contracts; when the council sets spending limit
and ask contracts to be presented to committee and then on the consent agenda or to full council, that is the
council’s opportunity to provide feedback to the administration regarding whether proceed or to tap on the
brakes. Given the situation City government has spent itself into over the last couple years, now is the time
to be prudent and retain the $100,000 contracting limit in order for the council to have discussions, more
notice, and a more eagle eyed view of spending throughout the year.
The proposed amendment as displayed on the screen:
HAVE CITY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE BRING BACK A REVISION THAT CHANGES THE
DELEGATION THROUGH THE DOCUMENT SUCH THAT THE MAXIMUM DELEGATION OF
CONTRACTING AUTHORITY TO THE MAYOR AND DEPARTMENT DIRECTORS IS $100,000.
AMENDMENT FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS CHEN, NAND AND DOTSCH VOTING YES.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO
DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO ADD A PROVISIONS THAT DECREASES THE
CONTRACTING AUTHORITY STATED IN THIS DOCUMENT BY 33% IN THE EVENT OF AND
FOR THE DURATION OF A DECLARED FISCAL EMERGENCY.
Council President Olson said she appreciates what councilmembers have said and understood the desire to
be faster and more efficient. In normal times, the council wants to support that which is why she supports
a higher, inflation-adjusted amount in the document. However, there are special circumstances right now
and there have been circumstances in the past where projects were occurring that the public and the council
did not ask for, money that was being spent based on somebody wanting to do something, but not the
council or the public. When there is a fiscal emergency is not the time to make the proposed adjustment
and 33% increases the amount and provides for an automatic adjustment when the City is no longer in a
fiscal emergency. Her husband is in finance; with a lot of these rules, if someone is trying to pull a fast one,
they simply won’t follow them. Limits make it harder for people working in the spirit of good government
to do their jobs, but that is an unfortunate reality of regulation. She was glad the council decided to retain
the language regarding disciplinary action. She encouraged councilmembers to support her amendment to
give the added oversight and awareness to council during this time of fiscal emergency.
Councilmember Tibbott asked how the council would know the fiscal emergency is over, whether a
declaration would be made ending it. Council President Olson anticipated the council would declare it was
over, likely based on meeting the reserve levels again. Councilmember Tibbott commented if it was about
reserve levels and it takes 10 years to get there, the council would be locked into 10 years. Mayor Rosen
added the clock related to restoring reserves won’t start for two years. Councilmember Tibbott supported
the comments about oversight and also support the proposed language as it helps to make this an enduring
document so if another fiscal emergency occurred in the future, there are guardrails for providing additional
oversight. For that those reasons he will support the amendment.
Councilmember Nand appreciated the sentiment of the amendment, but was concerned having a dollar
amount in a working document that is supposed to guide the administration and that including a provision
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 1, 2024
Page 11
that states for X number of years the amount is reduced by 33% would make the actual contracting limits
confusing for staff and the public. She preferred to set a static dollar amount and lower and or raise that
amount by action of the council to make the document less confusing to City employees or members of the
public. For that reason, she was unable to support the amendment.
Councilmember Chen appreciated the intent to narrow the reduction in the spending limit during the fiscal
emergency which was what he was trying to address with his earlier amendment. His amendment was not
approved and this amendment would be confusing for staff to follow. It may be difficult to know when the
City is in or out of a fiscal emergency; that will need to be defined. It will take 10-20 years to replenish the
reserves. If the purchasing policies are reviewed every five years, it would be cleaner to have clear guidance
and maintain the $100,000 limits and review them every five years or sooner. He did not support the
amendment.
The proposed amendment as displayed on the screen:
HAVE CITY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE BRING BACK A REVISION THAT DECREASES THE
DELEGATION LEVELS BY 33% FOR THE DURATION OF THE FISCAL EMERGENCY.
AMENDMENT FAILED (2-5), COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON AND COUNCILMEMBER
TIBBOTT VOTING YES.
Councilmember Dotsch asked how $150,000 was chosen since it does not reflect inflation. Ms. Cates
responded she had conversations with directors and that number seemed to work well within budgets and
the type of services and products that were purchased. She did not have a clearer recollection of where that
number came from other than it is a round number and increases $100,000 by what seemed to be a
reasonable amount since it had not been increased since 2009. Councilmember Dotsch said she wished
there was better clarity around that number and not just picking a round number. The increased amount
does reflect inflation. She relayed her wish that this had come to council for discussion first due to the
number of changes in the policy.
COUNCILMEMBER NAND MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON, TO
AMEND SECTION 4.3, EFFECT OF CONTRACT MODIFICATION ON APPROVAL AND
SIGNATURE AUTHORITY, TO ADD TO THE END OF THE LAST SENTENCE, “AND COUNCIL
MUST BE NOTIFIED OF ANY REDUCTION OF A CONTRACT AMOUNT OF $100,000 OR
MORE.”
Councilmember Nand reiterated these are council’s contracts and if the council is delegating a certain
authority to the mayor to sign a contract at a certain budget amount, and that contracting amount isn’t used,
the council needed to be notified. She referred to the VIA contract, commenting the council and public
deserve notice if there is a reduction in the price of a contract and maybe at the discretion of the
administration, what it intends to do with the added liquidity in the affected budget.
Council President Olson suggested an amendment so the council was notified of any reduction or increase.
Ms. Cates responded there are provisions in the purchasing policy that require notification at $100,000.
Councilmember Nand explained the first part of Section 4.3 says if there is a modification that pushes the
contract over the next authority limit, there is a notice requirement from the administration. This would add
an additional notification if there is a reduction of over $100,000.
Councilmember Paine asked if there is a contract that needs to be concluded and it is significantly
underspent, whether the funds go back into the project pot of money. Ms. Feser explained for example if a
capital project was budgeted at $100,000 and it finishes at $90,000, the $10,000 goes back into the capital
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 1, 2024
Page 12
funds to be spent on something else. The same is true with an operating project; the $10,000 stays in that
year’s budget to be used elsewhere or if not spent, ends up in the ending fund balance.
AMENDMENT CARRIED (6-1) COUNCILMEMBER PAINE VOTING NO.
Mr. Taraday asked for clarification, explaining the way he wrote the amendment does not look great in the
context of Section 4.3. He suggested possibly it should be a standalone sentence. He displayed the language
in the previous amendment:
ADD CLAUSE TO THE END OF LAST SENTENCE IN 4.3, “AND COUNCIL MUST BE NOTIFIED
OF ANY REDUCTION OF A CONTRACT OF $100,000 OR MORE.”
Councilmember Nand suggested she make another amendment directing the city attorney to draft the
language and include it in Section 4.3 to reflect the spirit of the amendment. Mr. Taraday agreed with that
approach.
COUNCILMEMBER NAND MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PAINE, TO DIRECT
THE CITY ATTORNEY TO AMEND SECTION 4.3 TO INCLUDE A NOTICE REQUIREMENT
TO COUNCIL FOR REDUCTION OF A CONTRACT OF $100,000 OR MORE.
Councilmember Nand explained this amendment reflects the spirit of the vote the council took, but gives
the city attorney discretion to phrase the language more eloquently.
AMENDMENT CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mayor Rosen asked Mr. Taraday to advise the council of the main motion. Mr. Taraday advised it was to
adopt the purchasing policies as amended by the prior motions. Given the context, it was a motion to have
the purchasing policies brought back on the next consent agenda. Council President Olson asked if the
council could indicate their consensus to make have it come back on consent since that wasn’t in the original
motion. Mr. Taraday answered it was somewhat implied by passage of the last motion that directed the city
attorney to bring it back on consent.
Councilmember Dotsch did not support the motion, relaying this seemed like a rewrite of the whole
contracting and purchasing policies, not just an update and she did not feel well enough informed about
what had been changed to vote tonight.
Councilmember Nand asked if she was allowed to offer a motion reducing the contracting spending limit
to $100,000 if that motion was previously made by Councilmember Chen and defeated. Mr. Taraday
answered if the motion is substantially the same as the motion that was previously voted on and she voted
on the prevailing side of that vote, she can make a motion to reconsider the prior vote. Councilmember
Nand began to make a motion to lower the contracting limit to $100,000, but realized she was not on the
prevailing side of the vote.
UPON ROLL CALL, MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED (4-3), COUNCILMEMBERS
ECK, TIBBOTT AND PAINE AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON VOTING YES;
COUNCILMEMBERS CHEN, DOTSCH AND NAND VOTING NO.
2. POLICY FOR EXPANDING MUGA BOUNDARY
Acting Planning & Development Director Shane Hope relayed the packet includes a memo about a possible
policy for MUGAs. A policy can provide for different methods ways to handle it, can be captured in a
resolution or in this case, proposed to be included in the comprehensive plan. The comprehensive plan is a
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 1, 2024
Page 13
long-term document, intended to think about next 20 years, although it can be amended periodically. She
reviewed:
• What is MUGA?
o Municipal Growth Area Boundary = MUGA
o Designation adopted by Snohomish County (through Snohomish County Tomorrow process)
To identify specific unincorporated urban growth areas that are associated with a particular
city.
• Annexation & MUGAs
o Cities are generally able to annex unincorporated areas only within their county-designated
MUGA
o MUGA boundary changes may occur as part of a process that involves the affected jurisdictions
(for example, two cities and the county)
o Edmonds’ comprehensive plan does not currently provide direction on potential MUGA
boundaries
• MUGA Expansion possibilities
o Recent Proposal
Recently, proposal was brought by
property owners to consider expanding
Edmonds MUGA to include a new area
Recognition that consideration for
specific site needed to include financial
factors, as well as preference of other
affected city, and other factors and
options
o Future proposal
Over next 10-20 years, additional
proposals could be suggested, which
might have different circumstances
For example, they could include a
MUGA “trade” between cities or some
other kind of possibility that might be of
interest to city council.
• Comprehensive Plan Update
o Comprehensive plan update this year is an opportunity to consider having a MUGA policy
o Policies in comprehensive plan should be broad enough to incorporate long-term issues and
options – while still providing direction on intent
o Assumed purpose for MUGA policy is to help ensure city council:
Has necessary info to decide whether to explore a MUGA boundary change; and
Has basis to move forward to get additional info and/or set conditions and to approve,
modify or reject pursuing MUGA change.
• Draft comprehensive plan being published this week
o …has very broad “placeholder” text for a MUGA policy
o Draft text could apply to many situations, whether a MUGA change proposal comes from
property owners, a city, or whomever
o Current draft placeholder text:
“Consider carefully any proposed changes to the Municipal Urban Growth Area boundaries
that would affect Edmonds, taking into account financial and other factors.”
• Suggestion for more specific language in comprehensive plan:
“The City Council may consider a proposal affecting its Municipal Urban Growth Area boundary
after receiving adequate information to determine whether it is in the City’s best interest to take
action on the proposal. The information should include:
1. Whether any other jurisdiction affected by the proposed MUGA boundary change is willing to
approve or consider approving the change;
2. An engineering analysis of how the infrastructure of the proposed MUGA expansion area meets
or does not meet the City’s standards for level of service; and
3. The improvements that may be needed (including any downstream capacity-related
improvements) and their cost as estimated by a qualified engineering firm, for the area to meet
the City’s standards.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 1, 2024
Page 14
The City Council may consider the resulting information, along with any other relevant factors,
and identify whether additional information should be obtained and/or potential tools, such as an
LID process to achieve the infrastructure improvements deemed necessary, be required as part of a
City decision to pursue a MUGA boundary change.”
• Next step
o Council to discuss and provide direction to include a MUGA policy in the final draft
comprehensive plan (no final decision needed now)
Councilmember Paine relayed she was glad to see the comprehensive plan was the right place to include
this policy. She asked if it needed to live anywhere else in the code or resolutions. Ms. Hope answered it
doesn’t need to if it is included in the comprehensive plan and the council is satisfied that is adequate. If a
really general policy was included like the first one, the council could adopt a resolution with more detail.
Councilmember Eck commented Ms. Hope and staff’s expertise is reflected in the proposed policy. She felt
the proposed policy was the right level, not too detailed, and encompassed most of the issues she and others
were concerned about. She supported including the policy in the comprehensive plan update.
Councilmember Tibbott appreciated the clarity the proposed policy brings to any future discussion. He
asked how the level of engineering analysis was determined and who pays for it. Ms. Hope said the proposed
language doesn’t say who does it; for example, it could be the council wants to pursue a MUGA expansion
so it wouldn’t be appropriate to say someone else pays for it. Councilmember Tibbott relayed his
understanding the policy just said that information was needed and the scope of who pays for it would be
articulated later. Recognizing the comprehensive plan can be revised annually, he asked if a MUGA change
could be considered on an annual basis using this criteria. Ms. Hope answered that could be done, however,
a MUGA boundary change may take longer than that to go through the process.
Councilmember Tibbott summarized initiate a process could be considered once a year. Ms. Hope
responding having this policy would allow the process to be initiated without making a decision; it would
be just asking for information that would include consideration of other affected jurisdictions and their
perspective, costs, etc. To actually take action to include a MUGA boundary change requires buyoff from
the county and any other cities and then the council can choose to amend the comprehensive plan to change
the MUGA boundary. The council is not prevented from seeking information before changing the MUGA
boundary.
Councilmember Tibbott relayed his understanding the council could initiate the process, but it might take
two years to gather all the information and then the council might revise the comprehensive plan. Ms. Hope
agreed. Councilmember Tibbott asked if that language needed to be included. Ms. Hope answered no, this
is the process for looking at the information and factors for making decision, but to actually change the
MUGA boundary requires county buyoff, etc., before proceeding with an amendment to the comprehensive
plan. Councilmember Tibbott said with that clarification, he supported the longer narrative.
Councilmember Dotsch asked staff to display the shorter, general language, “Consider carefully any
proposed changes to the Municipal Urban Growth Area boundaries that would affect Edmonds, taking into
account financial and other factors.” Ms. Hope explained that language left it open to how the proposed
change is initiated, it could be from property owners, the city council or another city. Councilmember
Dotsch asked to have the more detailed language displayed. Ms. Hope explained this level of detail is not
normal for comprehensive plan policies and is more specific to the city council, but also provides for
alternatives.
Councilmember Dotsch suggested including language about the cost allocation versus just total cost,
recalling that came up with Esperance in the past, the City’s versus property owners’ burden. Ms. Hope
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 1, 2024
Page 15
said this is just the minimum information that is needed, the next step is council gets whatever information
they want and then can determine whether additional information is needed. This is the basic amount of
information, willingness or interest of any other affected jurisdiction, engineering analysis of the
infrastructure of the area and what improvements may be needed. For example if the City’s standard is now
a minimum 5’ sidewalk, but sidewalks in the area are only 4’ or there are no sidewalks, would the council
necessarily decline consideration when that same issue is present in the rest of the City. That would give
the council the discretion to consider the needed infrastructure improvements and determine whether those
needed to be done or were adequate compared to the rest of the City.
Councilmember Dotsch asked whether the longer policy boxed the council into anything. Ms. Hope
answered no, it says the council may consider the information along with any other relevant factors. For
example there may be social issues or commercial gain from a particular expansion. The council could
consider that and whether more information was needed and whether any tools, such as an LID, but not
limited to an LID, would be used and decide what infrastructure improvements would be expected.
Councilmember Nand relayed her impression that MUGA designations typically come from a higher level
government, such as county or state. Ms. Hope answered they come from the county. Councilmember Nand
asked if the MUGA designation comes from the county, whether there was there any inherent conflict
inherent with putting these conditions on a proposal from a higher level of government. Ms. Hope said if
the county made a proposal, the city council would still have a say in it; MUGA boundaries come from the
Snohomish County Tomorrow process which includes city input. Who makes the decision in the end will
depend on the particular circumstances of the Snohomish County countywide planning policies.
Council President Olson thanked staff for providing the alternatives. She appreciated what Ms. Hope saying
the more general language would be more typical for a comprehensive plan, but due to special
circumstances, council was more comfort with more detail and lowering the expectation regarding how
much the City could fund in either staff time or engineering projects to support the factfinding to make a
decision whether to support it. She expressed her preference for the longer policy language at this time.
Ms. Hope summarized the council preferred the more detailed language. Staff will incorporate this
language, or something similar when it comes back to council for discussion and approval.
3. LEGAL ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION OF
CITY ATTORNEY 2024
Councilmember Dotsch relayed the legal assessment committee, composed in 2024 of her and
Councilmember Nand as chair, came to council earlier this year with the committee’s 2024 work plan which
council approved. The committee then presented the questions the legal assessment committee developed
for the annual assessment of the city attorneys which were approved by council on consent. The committee
recently held private interviews with a variety of members of Edmonds city government. The group
interviewed was not meant to be representative of all possible input and was provided on a volunteer basis.
The committee received positive feedback about the in-person format and the feedback received from it by
both the respondents interviewed as well as Lighthouse Law Group. The legal assessment committee
recommends no specific changes at this time. The memo in the packet includes an assessment from the
interviews which has already been shared with the city attorneys.
Councilmember Dotsch continued, in summary, there was generally positive feedback on approachability,
trustworthiness and good work done for the City by Lighthouse Law Group. Specifics on quality of work,
team collaboration, communication were mostly positive with some respondents recommending
improvement. Topics of trustworthiness and integrity, along with working in the best interest of the City,
received positive feedback. The longevity of staff at Lighthouse was noted as a plus. Timeliness and
prioritization of response were noted as needing improvement, as well as the request for more advice and
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 1, 2024
Page 16
interpretation of the laws rather than simply restating applicable RCWs. An opportunity for improvement
included more proficient knowledge and explanation of case law and its impacts on the City. Several
expressed the need for more timely and consistent methods to update staff on new or amended state laws
to keep Edmonds current, and similar needs were expressed to update the Municipal Court system on new
ordinances passed by council. Lighthouse stated due to budget constraints, it has been sensitive to the City’s
desire to minimize spending on legal services and awaits specific direction before providing more
comprehensive legal context. Additional suggestions from respondents to the administration and
Lighthouse include more robust resources for HR legal advice, contracting additional public disclosure
support, and designating one specific staff member for police communication/research.
Council President Olson thanked the legal assessment committee for their hard work on this project and
also thanked Lighthouse Law Group.
Councilmember Tibbott asked for additional information about the resources that might be desirable for
police communication/research. Councilmember Dotsch answered there was interest in more directed,
proactive input rather than an update after something happens. Councilmember Tibbott relayed his
understanding there was not a desire for specific legal counsel for the police department. Councilmember
Dotsch answered there was interest in having a designated contact person at Lighthouse Law Group and
better communication between the two.
Councilmember Nand relayed these were suggestions from the respondents directed to both the
administration and Lighthouse.
Councilmember Paine summarized the recommendation was that no specific changes were needed and the
feedback has been provided to the parties. Councilmember Dotsch agreed.
Councilmember Chen thanked the legal assessment committee for their work and thanked the Lighthouse
team for the great work they do. He asked how the people who were interviewed were selected.
Councilmember Nand answered an invitation to participate in the annual performance evaluation process
was sent to project leads, directors and elected officials and participation was on a completely voluntary
basis. Councilmember Chen observed the general public was not included in the pool of candidates to be
interviewed. Councilmember Nand answered no, only members of the council, the administration and the
mayor. The list of categories of people that were proposed to be interviewed to perform the annual
performance evaluation was included in the work plan, attached to this item, and approved by council on
July 9, 2024. . That was the council’s opportunity to amend or add to the list of interviewees if they wished
before the evaluation process began. Councilmember Chen said he was aware of the process, but wanted
the public to be aware of the process.
COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PAINE, TO
THANK THE COMMITTEE FOR THEIR WORK AND ACCEPT THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS
FOR NO SPECIFIC CHANGES IN THE RELATIONSHIP WITH OUR LEGAL VENDORS AT
THIS TIME. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
4. FLOCK CAMERA PRESENTATION
Assistant Police Chief Rod Sniffen introduced Kristen MacLeod, Community Affairs Manager, Flock
Safety. Ms. MacLeod reviewed the history of Flock. Flock is a public safety technology company based in
Atlanta. Flock started in 2017 after the founder and CEO experienced an uptick in property crime in his
neighborhood in Atlanta. Through that experience, he found many communities and law enforcement
lacked the technology to make communities safer. An engineer by trade, he set out to figure out an efficient,
effective, affordable tool that could impact community safety in an ethical way. He learned about license
plate recognition (LPR), which had been around since the 1970s, and that 70% of crimes are committed in
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 1, 2024
Page 17
conjunction with the use of a vehicle. He created Flock to provide law enforcement and communities the
necessary technology to capture objective evidence and bring case closure. She reviewed:
• The policing paradox: fewer resources, higher stakes
• What we observe: The current reality • What we believe: The opportunity
o Limited police resources
o Crime continues to hurt
communities
o Trust is needed more than ever
o Technology multiplies the force
o Protect first responders and community using
technology
o Collect and distribute objective evidence to the
right user
o Engage community to support and grow
• The Flock Safety Platform
o Provides a variety of devices, today’s presentation will focus on the LPR Falcon
• With Flock Safety, you get:
o Flock Safety provides your police department
with indiscriminate evidence from fixed
locations
o We provide all the maintenance so that your
police department and city staff can focus on
keeping your city safe and prosperous
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 1, 2024
Page 18
• What this is:
o License Plate Recognition (LPR)
o Gathers objective evidence and facts about vehicles, not people
o Alerts police of wanted vehicles
o Used to solve crime
o Adheres to all state laws
• What this is not:
o Not facial recognition
o Not collection of biometric or sensitive information
o Not used for tracking speed or parking violations
o Data automatically deletes every 30 days
• How does this technology deter and eliminate crime?
o Proactive: Real-time alerts when stolen or wanted vehicles enter your city
o Investigative: As clearance rates increase, overall crime often decreases
o Flock cameras serve as a deterrent
• Protecting privacy
o Footage owned by agency/city and will never be sold to private third parties by Flock
o 30-day data retention, then automatically hard deleted
o Takes human bias out of crime-solving by detecting only objective data
o All data is stored security with end to end encryption of all data
• Accountability Mechanisms
o Search reason and user number saved in indefinitely-available audit trail
o NOT facial recognition software, NOT collecting biometric information
o NOT used for parking enforcement or tolls
o Not connected to registration data or 3rd party databases (Carfax, DMV)
o Transparency portal (free and optional)
• Transparency & Insights
o Measure ROI and promote the ethical use of public safety technology
o Transparent Portal
Customizable for each agency
Display technology policies
Publish usage metrics
o Insights Dashboard
Measure crime patterns and ROI
Audit search history
o Examples
Morgan Hill PD
Vallejo PD
• Solve crime, we’ll handle the rest
o Our dedicated team provides rapid, full-service deployment. Your police officers focus on
solving crime and protecting the community.
o Within the Flock Safety annual subscription:
Solar power
Installation + ongoing maintenance
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 1, 2024
Page 19
Hardware procurement + permitting
User training
Data storage
Software updates
• Flock Safety in Washington State
o 70+ law enforcement agencies, including
Spokane County SO
Yakima PD
Centralia PD
Tukwila PD
• Hundreds of Vehicle Recoveries in <1 year
o Yakima Police Department, Yakima WA
From April to January, Yakima’s Police Department Flock LPR cameras results in:
- 596 stolen vehicle alerts
- 276 stolen license plates
- 190 violent persons alerts
- 133 wanted people
- 78 sex offenders
- 33 missing persons
• Case Study – LPRs and Public Parks
o Spokane County Sheriff’s Office – Liberty Lake, WA
Liberty Lake officers and Spokane County deputies responded to reports of an assault that
occurred on a local hiking trail
The female victim told authorities that an unidentified male suspect attacked her before
fleeing in his vehicle
Authorities checked a nearby Flock Safety LPR and identified a suspect vehicle whose
registered owner matched the suspect’s description provided by the victim
Deputies located the vehicle the following day and arrested the suspect on foot nearby
He is charged with 2nd Degree Assault
• #Solved – Retail Theft Crew
o Fairfax County Police Department – Fairfax, VA
Officers with FCPD Tysons Urban Team received a tip from Saks Fifth Avenue that a
“retail theft crew” had left their store with stolen merchandise driving a Chevrolet Impala
Using Flock LPRs, officers learned that the Impala entered Tysons heading toward Saks
Fifth Avenue at Tysons Galleria.
Officers observed the vehicle’s occupants stealing handbags and other luxury merchandise
in the store. When approached by the store’s security guards, two suspects ran.
FCPD units were able to take one suspect into custody. The other suspect was found in a
nearby dumpster, and the driver of the vehicle was soon located and taken into custody.
Officers recovered about $15,000 worth of stolen property. The suspects were charged with
grant larceny, organized retail theft, larceny with intent to sell or distribute, and possession
of schedule I/II drug.
• Missing, Endangered Senior Found in 15 minutes
o Port Washington PD – Port Washington, WI
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 1, 2024
Page 20
• When Every Second Matters: Child Abduction
o Chamblee PD – Chamblee, GA
Stanger on Stranger Abduction: August 28, 2020
Assistant Chief Sniffen relayed he has heard about Flock cameras for years. He thanked Crime Analyst
Molly Reeves who applied for the grant to fund this technology. He explained Flock is a series of cameras
in fixed locations around the City that records cars going back and forth and that data goes into the cloud.
When a crime is committed and a law enforcement purpose can be validated, that vehicle information will
be entered into the Flock system, and it will report whether any of the cameras have seen the car or will
alert when the car’s license plate is recorded. That doesn’t mean an officer will be available immediately,
but it provides a point of reference where the suspects may be or may be headed.
In addition to the examples Ms. McLeod provided, Assistant Chief Sniffen explained two weeks ago the
City of Everett had a homicide; their Flock system was just installed last month and it was a Flock camera
that found that suspect on 19th Ave SE. There happened to be an officer close by and that was how the
suspect was caught. Staff’s recommendation is for council to authorize the mayor to accept the grant from
the Washington Auto Theft Prevention Authority in the amount of the 2-year contract. Both the contract
and the master service agreement were reviewed by legal.
Councilmember Chen commented the data and the examples indicate use of this tool will greatly improve
public safety and there is a grant to cover the cost for two years. He asked from a data management and
investigation perspective, if additional FTE would be required to do that work. Assistant Chief Sniffen
responded from talking with other agencies who use Flock, there is no need for an FTE to manage the
system. Once the system is set up and running, it is automated and the information comes in through the
cameras and goes to the cloud. There is no need to maintain or access data unless there is a law enforcement
need. When there is a law enforcement need, law enforcement logs in, enters the necessary data supported
by either a case number or law enforcement purpose and the data is retrieved. There is no other maintenance,
no one sits and watches the cameras; the data just lives in the cloud until there is a need to query the dataset.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 1, 2024
Page 21
Councilmember Chen recalled the data will be automatically deleted after 30 days. Assistant Chief Sniffen
agreed. Councilmember Chen asked whether the data would still be accessible via the cloud beyond 30
days. Ms. MacLeod answered no, it is hard deleted and unrecoverable. An elected body has the option to
extend the data retention, but that comes with an extra cost. Assistant Chief Sniffen said best practice was
a 30 day retention and that period is identified in the contract.
Councilmember Chen referred to Council President Olson’s email that there were line items missing in the
invoice in the packet and that the total did not add up. Assistant Chief Sniffen relayed tax was not included.
Councilmember Chen advised the email indicated the line items totaled $74,000, not $119,000. Council
President Olson said it appeared the subscription itself was not identified as a line item. The invoice
included hardware, the LPR products, professional services, implementation fees and infrastructure
implementation fees, but not the actual subscription so the items in the contract do not add up to the contract
total of $119,350 even with tax. Her assumption was the actual subscription for managing the data for two
years was the line item that was missing. Assistant Chief Sniffen answered he would need to research that.
Ms. MacLeod apologized and advised Assistant Chief Sniffen could ask the sales team to address that.
Councilmember Paine said she was pleased to hear that Everett has used this system. She recalled from
discussion at the committee meeting, one of benefits was the system sends out alerts to neighboring
subscribers. She asked who else in the area uses Flock. Assistant Chief Sniffen answered once the City is a
subscriber to the system, the department has the ability to ask other Flock subscribers if they are willing to
share their data much like the City could share its data in the cloud. It has the ability to cast a very wide net.
Currently Everett, Lake Stevens, Arlington and other cities around the state have Flock systems, Lynnwood
is considering a proposal. Ms. MacLeod advised Mill Creek, Mukilteo, Clyde Hill, Medina, Yarrow Point,
and Redmond have systems and Flock is in discussions with other neighboring cities.
Councilmember Paine asked whether Flock was available to private neighborhoods. Assistant Chief Sniffen
relayed his understanding it was. A different part of Flock works with private neighborhood, particularly
homeowner associations who install cameras at entrance and exits, shopping malls and other entities. He
was not aware of the prevalence in Washington State, but had heard about its use in other parts of the
country.
Councilmember Paine recalled having a recent conversation with a local neighborhood with a one way
in/out that is considering installing cameras due to bicycle thefts. She asked how that would intersect with
the Flock system and the police department. For example, someone calls the Edmonds Police Department
saying their bike was stolen and three have been stolen in the last week and they have some license plates
on their system. Assistant Chief Sniffen said Flock only records automobiles, not bikes or pedestrians.
Councilmember Paine said the resident indicated a truck had been in the neighborhood stealing bicycles.
Assistant Chief Sniffen said if the HOA contacted the police department, he would refer them to Flock to
get answers to those questions. Flock does engage in the private sector; the HOA would be responsible for
the install, maintenance, subscription, etc., but that same data set would be recorded in the cloud. If a
resident called the police department and they were able to provide a vehicle description and license plate
and describe what had happen, the police could do an active investigation for a potential theft and could
enter that information into the Flock system and obtain data from that camera.
Ms. MacLeod added, assuming the HOA had Flock cameras, they would not receive alerts regarding wanted
vehicles, that is law enforcement privileged. The great thing about having commercial and HOA entities
with Flock cameras is they can opt to provide law enforcement access to their cameras so if a wanted vehicle
passes a camera in that neighborhood, Edmonds Police Department would receive an alert. That provides
a great public-private partnership, the community purchases the cameras and gives access to law
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 1, 2024
Page 22
enforcement to help impact public safety. Councilmember Paine appreciated the fact that this has a bias
reduction impact. She also liked the 30-day destruction policy.
Councilmember Tibbott echoed the affirmation he’s heard from councilmembers. He heard affirmative
stories about the Flock system at the AWC conference. For this to be an ongoing program in Edmonds,
there will need to be a financial benefit and he asked if there was any data on that possibility. Assistant
Chief Sniffen said he did not have any data for local agencies. There is potential to ask the prosecutor to
request restitution when criminals are caught using the system. Given the information provided earlier this
evening, he agreed the City will need some financial assistance to keep the system beyond two years.
Councilmember Tibbott asked if there were any examples of cost sharing with the City if a prosecutor
obtained a settlement. Ms. MacLeod answered that was certainly possible, but she was not aware of any.
She offered to have the team research whether any other jurisdictions have had success with that.
Councilmember Tibbott said the main benefit is it is force multiplier that results in more crime prevention
in a cost effective way. Assistant Chief Sniffen pointed out it works in real time 24/7 so any time there is a
crime-involved vehicle, as long as law enforcement has information on the vehicle, the department will
receive information right away. Ms. MacLeod said departments and councils often consider stolen property
recovered for victims, impact of locating missing persons, hours saved by detectives and officers
investigating crimes using this tool and getting information into the hands of officers in a timely manner.
Councilmember Nand suggested because the City is at the start of this budget cycle and have not yet
ascertained how many FTE will be retained in the police department, what logistical support this program
would require, and what budgetary support could be allocated to this in the future in addition to the
discrepancy in invoice, that it would be prudent to table consideration of the Flock system. She recalled
Assistant Chief Sniffen saying the City would still be able to access the grant funds if the council
reconsidered this after the 2025/2026 budget is approved and the council has a better understanding of how
the program could be supported from a staffing perspective as well as the $59,000/year cost after the grant
expires. Assistant Chief Sniffen explained in reading the grant document, the City has until June 2025 to
spend the money. He reminded crime happens every day and will not stop so the sooner the better this tool
can be put into play. Councilmember Nand commented the council needs a better understanding of the
number of new programs, how much equipment the City can afford on an ongoing basis and what City
staffing levels will look like at the end of this biennium budget cycle.
COUNCILMEMBER NAND MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER CHEN, TO TABLE
THIS ITEM. MOTION FAILED (1-6), COUNCILMEMBER NAND VOTING YES.
Councilmember Dotsch said she has heard positive things from other communities such as Arlington and
Lake Stevens and she believed Marysville was considering this system. She asked if the data was open to
record requests. Assistant Chief Sniffen answered the City owned the data so if a public disclosure request
was received, the City would be inclined to release the data. All the requester would receive was the vehicle
information. It is not connected to NCIC or any other private databases; it would be just a vehicle
description and a license plate. Councilmember Dotsch asked how that would work if the data is deleted
after 30 days. Assistant Chief Sniffen advised the City would be required to follow state law related to
public disclosure requests and because the City owns the data, it would have to be released to anyone
making a request. He was uncertain what advantage the data would provide. Councilmember Dotsch noted
the data would only be available for 30 days. She recalled reading that an officer could download the data
to their computer and would be responsible for uploading it. Assistant Chief Sniffen answered the data is
kept in the cloud so if an inquiry is made and the data is pulled to a computer, that will need to be tracked
if the file is retained.
Councilmember Dotsch said Arlington’s website has the transparency piece on their website and they have
a section in the police department manual about who can access the data. She assumed some training was
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 1, 2024
Page 23
required and asked if that had been considered. Assistant Chief Sniffen said that would be the next step; it
would be prudent to have a policy when and how the data is used similar to other technology.
Councilmember Dotsch referred to the term, “other legitimate law enforcement purposes,” and asked who
defined that. Assistant Chief Sniffen said the data could be accessed if there was a legitimate law
enforcement need. That would be backed up by either an active investigation or a case number; that is the
mechanism that is used to track when the system is used. There are many different instances he could
foresee for using the data such as missing and endangered persons, abductions and crimes, but did not
foresee accessing the data absent a law enforcement need.
With regard to the terms and terminations, Councilmember Dotsch pointed out the contract states the
agreement, unless otherwise indicated, would automatically renew for successive renewal terms of greater
than one year or the length set forth. Assistant Chief Sniffen said staff will ensure there is a comprehensive
discussion approaching the end of the 2-year contract to see if there is a desire to keep the technology in
place. There will be approximately 24 months to determine whether the system is of valuable and if is it,
he encouraged the City to retain it and to seek funding such as this grant or another funding source. If a
decision is made not to retain the system, the City notifies Flock of the desire to terminate the subscription,
they remove the equipment, and the City has no further responsibility.
If council is interested in approving this contract, Councilmember Dotsch suggested adding language to
have staff provide an update to the PSPHSP Committee every six months after the program is implemented.
Assistant Chief Sniffen commented that was a great idea. He was interested in Edmonds having the
transparency portal on its website where successes are published on a monthly basis to keep the public
informed.
With regard to council approval to continue the program once the grant expires, Council President Olson
observed the contract states unless otherwise stated, the contract would automatically renew. That appeared
to indicate a clause could be inserted saying the contract would not automatically renew which would
protect the City from an unauthorized continuation of the contract and put the impetus on staff to bring the
contract to council for renewal. She asked if that could be include in the contract. Ms. MacLeod answered
if the council was interested in including that language, it could be send to the legal team for review. She
was pretty confident Flock could work with the City on that.
Council President Olson said she did not see how a public records request would support the criteria of a
legitimate law enforcement need without verifying the person making the request had a legitimate law
enforcement need for the information. She asked if research could be done to verify the data was subject to
public records requests. Assistant Chief Sniffen said he would defer the legal question to City Attorney
Taraday, but the way the system is set up, a login is required to make an inquiry into the system and there
is a requirement to state the law enforcement need. That log is available for scrutiny from whoever. If a
public disclosure request is received and the record is on file, he believed the City was subject to disclosure
if the data was available.
Mr. Taraday agreed that was true if the City has control over a particular document under the Public Records
Act and a request is made. What is tricky is the hard delete; it can legitimately take some time to process
records requests and requests for this data will not be prioritized over other records requests just because
there is a hard delete occurring. He was not sure how that would work because there had not been a chance
to evaluate it but there wouldn’t be an automatic exemption. Assistant Chief Sniffen commented records
from active investigations are exempt. Unless the investigation was complete and the case had been turned
over to the prosecutor, the police department would not to be required disclose the information.
Council President Olson said she was prepared to make the motion to approve even though she thought it
would be cleaner to have it start in 2025 and not do a budget amendment. However, the opportunity and
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 1, 2024
Page 24
value of maybe solving crimes in the next few months versus waiting was overriding any concern with a
budget amendment. She would like to conduct further research via MSRC; this technology is being used in
other cities and states and MSRC probably would have some information. For example, if someone suspects
their husband or wife was cheating, they could ask for a record of a license plate going in and out of
whatever town the boyfriend/girlfriend was in. Assistant Chief Sniffen commented the police department
would not have that data because the inquiry would have to be made first and the police department would
have to possess the data in order to release it. If someone calls asking the City or Flock for that information,
the system could not be accessed for that purpose. Council President Olson relayed her understanding the
City would not retain every license plate, only the ones the City or other agencies have requested for
criminal reasons. Assistant Chief Sniffen answered that was correct.
With regard to the example of the endangered senior who was recovered, Council President Olson asked
what made them endangered and what information needed to be provided to say they were endangered.
Assistant Chief Sniffen answered that occurred in another state so he was not sure what happened in that
instance, but in Washington, the person has to be unable to care for themselves or others or have some sort
of medical or physical condition that is in peril to their health if they are not found in a timely manner. The
police department would extend resources to locate them such as a Silver (for seniors)_ or Amber (for
children) Alert, etc. There are very specific conditions that need to be present to categorize a person as an
endangered or vulnerable adult. With a legitimate law enforcement purpose, the police could inquire the
Flock data to determine if their car had been seen. Council President Olson summarized it could not be used
just for someone who wanted to know where their family member was. Assistant Chief Sniffen agreed it
would not.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ECK, TO BRING
THIS 2 YEAR CONTRACT WITH FLOCK SAFETY AND ALL GRANT ACCEPTANCE
AGREEMENTS FOR THIS PROGRAM TO A TO FUTURE CONSENT AGENDA.
Council President Olson said she preferred to have this on the consent agenda instead of approving it tonight
so the no automatic renewal term could be added and so the line items in the contact could be verified.
Councilmember Paine asked if it would be possible to have a nominal restitution fee such as $5 added to
crimes or traffic tickets to reimburse the City for the equipment needed to put this into effect. Mr. Taraday
said he did not know off the top of his head, but would be happy to research it and provide that information
in the agenda memo when it comes back on the consent. He would not ordinarily draft the agenda memo
so he would need to coordinate with the police department. Councilmember Paine suggested emailing
council if that is a possibility and if it has been done by other jurisdictions.
Councilmember Nand asked how would the City be notified if Flock or Amazon Web Services received a
subpoena for multijurisdictional information that included Edmonds or there was a request through data
forensics to deanonymize information that has been anonymized or to recreate information previously
deleted. She asked if that had happened with the FBI, USCIS, state level government, etc. Ms. MacLeod
said the City would be notified as soon as a subpoena was received for that information. Flock would not
be able to recover any data that had been hard deleted at 30 days; there is no way to recover it. If Flock
received a subpoena and was coming up on 30 days, Flock would act in good faith and retain the
information. To her knowledge, Flock had not received any sort of request or subpoena from a federal law
enforcement agency.
Councilmember Nand said she could imagine that would not happen under the Biden administration, but it
could possibly happen under potential future administrations. She asked how the City would be notified if
there was a data breach or cameras hacking and how affected community members whose data was provided
to hackers via these cameras would be notified. She asked if that was a burden the City takes on or would
Flock do that directly. Ms. MacLeod answered if there were a breach, which Flock has not experienced to
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 1, 2024
Page 25
date, the City would be notified immediately. Flock takes data security very seriously; if Flock’s system
were hacked, there is no sensitive information contained in the system, it is just images of vehicles and
license plate numbers. There is no biometric or sensitive information related to a specific person contained
in the system.
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NAND, TO EXTEND
FOR 15 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Councilmember Nand asked if the cameras create a live feed, whether it is wired and how the information
is transmitted. Ms. MacLeod answered it is over cellular network. It is not a live feed, it is motion activated;
anytime a vehicle passes the camera, a still image is captured.
Councilmember Nand commented there had been a string of very unfortunate fatalities in Snohomish
County related to police pursuits and she could see how this technology could be useful in avoiding those.
She had concerns about the privacy of community members, especially members of the undocumented
community. She was concerned a future administration determined to utilize technology in ways that could
not be foreseen would try to access the cameras and was uncomfortable putting more cameras in
neighborhoods of some of the most vulnerable community members. She was unable to support the motion.
Mr. Taraday asked if the motion was to bring the contract back on consent with different renewal language,
so there was no automatic renewal. Council President Olson answered yes. Mr. Taraday asked if the reason
was to ensure the council sees any renewal. A renewed contract for a single year would be under the
threshold for council approval and there won’t be a mechanism to require it come back to the council.
Assistant Chief Sniffen suggested keeping it at two years. Mr. Taraday said he was unsure he could do that.
If the council’s vote is premised on an understanding that it will see the next version of this contract in two
years, he could not guarantee that that would happen.
MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBER NAND VOTING NO.
10. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Nand said despite her no vote on the contracting policies document, she relayed her
appreciation for the work done by Ms. Cates, Ms. Dunscombe and members of the administration. She
recognized that was a lot of work and that the council is demanding a lot of financial transparency and
insight into the work of the administration. She recognized the finance and legal departments and
administration in general have risen to the task and she wanted to share her admiration for the hard work
everyone has been doing.
Councilmember Paine commented the high holidays are upon us; for those who celebrate or observe, she
encouraged them to do it with their families and with peace.
Councilmember Dotsch offered her thanks to the Edmonds Marsh volunteer restoration project. She walked
by on Edmonds Way and got a tour. The amount of work they have done over a few years is impressive;
it’s like an Army Corp of engineers came in and did all the work. The volunteers had to figure it out, work
with WSDOT, remove invasives, etc. She gave kudos to the entire group, recognizing there is a core group
of volunteers who have helped for multiple years.
Council President Olson announced Mayor Rosen’s 2025-2026 budget is out as of today and will be posted
on the City’s website tomorrow. She and Councilmember Chen and possibly one other councilmember, but
not more than three because that would be a quorum, will be at the Edmonds Civic Roundtable event
regarding the budget on Thursday, October 4 at the Edmonds Waterfront Center. She also reminded of the
Waterfront Center Gala on October 5.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 1, 2024
Page 26
Councilmember Tibbott added his appreciation for the well-done budget presentation. He hoped it had been
recorded so it could be accessed. One of the best things was the presentation and the discussion of summary
materials over the whole year. He looked forward to seeing the budget book when it comes out tomorrow.
Councilmember Chen expressed his appreciation for the administration’s months of hard work putting the
biennial budget together. The presentation was awesome in terms of listing the challenges the City is facing.
He encouraged the community to provide input during the upcoming budget deliberations. This is a
challenging time, but working together, the City can get through it and hopefully come out of this budget
exercise a stronger community.
Councilmember Eck expressed her appreciation for Mayor Rosen having thorough conversations with
councilmembers up to this point so there were no surprises in tonight’s presentation. She acknowledged the
collegial and respective conversation tonight about how to achieve the balance of not micromanage staff
and having visibility that makes sense moving forward. She was heartened by the conversation and the
important questions being asked and wanted to ensure council did not stymie staff in the process and to let
the budget process and polices work.
Councilmember Eck announced the Mayor’s Climate Protection Committee invites the community to a
series of three climate change speakers on October 2, 16 and 30 regarding sea level rise and coastal
implications, climate impacts to flora and fauna, and atmospheric science and climate in Room B at the
Edmonds Waterfront Center and on Zoom. The speakers are local experts, faculty from Edmonds College,
UW and State Department of Ecology. She hoped the speaker series’ would be recorded.
11. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
Mayor Rosen expressed appreciation for the council’s kind words and gave a shout out to Acting Finance
Director Dunscome and her team and other directors and their teams for embracing a lot of change and a
lot of emotion work. He relayed today’s accomplishments, transferred the draft budget to the council for
consideration and deliberation, celebrated the arts, celebrated nature, addressed cost controls to protect
residents’ money, explored how to approach geographic growth, finalized an assessment affirming the level
of satisfaction with legal representation, and advanced the accessing of technology to keep the community
safe which he summarized was not a bad day’s work.
ADJOURNMENT
With no further business, the council meeting was adjourned at 10:08 pm.