2009.11.17 CC Agenda Packet
AGENDA
Edmonds City Council
Council Chambers, Public Safety Complex
250 5th Ave. North, Edmonds
______________________________________________________________
NOVEMBER 17, 2009
7:00 p.m.
Call to Order and Flag Salute
1. Approval of Agenda
2. Approval of Consent Agenda Items
A. Roll Call
B. AM-2599 Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of November 2, 2009.
C. AM-2606 Approval of claim checks #115133 through #115315 dated November 5, 2009 for
$884,683.70, and #115316 through #115434 dated November 12, 2009 for $217,299.66.
Approval of payroll direct deposit and checks #48714 through #48753 for the pay period
October 16 through October 31, 2009 for $806,065.43.
D. AM-2602 Acknowledge receipt of Claims for Damages from Bob Hovde ($2,563.70), Mark J. Johnson
($5,313.69), Ricky Arntsen (amount undetermined), and Son Nguyen ($1,500.00).
E. AM-2600 Authorization for Mayor to sign Professional Services Contracts for Building Code Plan
Review with Eagle Eye Consulting Engineers, Inc., SCBC Engineering, PLLC, and CG
Engineering, PLLC.
F. AM-2596 Acknowledgment of Termination of the Esperance Agreement for Fire and EMS Services
effective January 1, 2010.
G. AM-2607 Contract for Jail Services with Snohomish County Sheriff's Office.
H. AM-2608 Contract with the S. Morris Company for Animal Disposal Services.
I. AM-2609 Renewing the Towing Contract with Paulson's Towing, R&R Star Towing, Shannon Towing,
and Wally's Towing.
J. AM-2614 Authorization to surplus one (1) sewer TV truck utilizing a sealed bid process.
K. AM-2601 Ordinance repealing Ordinance No. 3706 codified as Chapter 5.65 of the Edmonds City
Code, and entitled Emergency Medical Service Transport Fee Charges, providing for
collection of fees incurred.
L. AM-2603 Ordinance repealing the provisions of Edmonds City Code 2.10.040, Fire Chief, adding a
Packet Page 1 of 374
L. AM-2603 Ordinance repealing the provisions of Edmonds City Code 2.10.040, Fire Chief, adding a
new Chapter 2.12 relating to the duties of the Fire Chief, Fire Marshal and other references to
the Fire Department throughout the City Code, repealing Chapter 3.09 and 3.15 and
providing for disposition of the funds held.
3. AM-2598
(15 Minutes)
Approving Transfer of Control of the Franchisee (Verizon Northwest, Inc.) to Frontier
Communications Corporation. (Public comment will be received.)
4. AM-2612
(15 Minutes)
Public hearing: (1) Resolution finding the existence of substantial need and justifying
increasing the property tax levy for the City regular property tax and Emergency
Medical Service levies for 2010 at a rate of 1.0% over the previous year.
(2) Ordinance providing for the annual tax levy by increasing the regular property tax
levy by the current 101% levy limit, thereby levying an estimated regular property tax
levy of $9,383,000, EMS levy of $3,911,000 and levying $853,084 for voted indebtedness
for the Public Safety Complex.
5. AM-2605
(30 Minutes)
Public hearing on the Community Sustainability Element of the Comprehensive Plan.
The draft Community Sustainability Element is being proposed as a new addition to the Edmonds Comprehensive
Plan. Sustainability is defined as the ability to “meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of
future generations to meet their own needs.” The sustainability element will establish a framework for linking
long-range City goals to mid-range strategic planning and short-term decision-making (including City budgets and
programs) and will address broad sustainability policy issues while emphasizing the importance of addressing
climate change, community health, and environmental quality. The City Council has adopted a number of
resolutions emphasizing various aspects of sustainability and responses to potential impacts from climate change.
The Community Sustainability Element is intended to be the next step in integrating these efforts into local plans
and decision-making.
6.Audience Comments (3 minute limit per person)*
*Regarding matters not listed on the Agenda as Closed Record Review or as Public Hearings.
7. AM-2615
(30 Minutes)
Continued discussion on roof design standards.
8. AM-2591
(30 Minutes)
Initial discussion of campaign finance limits.
9. AM-2613
(15 Minutes)
Report on City Council Committee Meetings of November 10, 2009.
10. (5 Minutes)Mayor's Comments
11. (15 Minutes)Council Comments
Adjourn
Packet Page 2 of 374
AM-2599 2.B.
Approve 11-02-09 City Council Meeting Minutes
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:11/17/2009
Submitted By:Sandy Chase Time:
Department:City Clerk's Office Type:Action
Review Committee:
Committee Action:
Information
Subject Title
Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of November 2, 2009.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
It is recommended that the City Council review and approve the draft minutes.
Previous Council Action
N/A
Narrative
Attached is a copy of the draft minutes.
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: 11-02-09 Draft City Council Minutes
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 11/09/2009 02:09 PM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 11/10/2009 06:12 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 11/12/2009 08:48 AM APRV
Form Started By: Sandy
Chase
Started On: 11/09/2009 02:06
PM
Final Approval Date: 11/12/2009
Packet Page 3 of 374
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 2, 2009
Page 1
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL DRAFT MINUTES
November 2, 2009
Following a Special Meeting at 6:30 p.m. for an Executive Session regarding pending or threatened
litigation, the Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:29 p.m. by Mayor Haakenson in the
Council Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute.
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Gary Haakenson, Mayor
D. J. Wilson, Council President
Michael Plunkett, Councilmember
Peggy Pritchard Olson, Councilmember
Steve Bernheim, Councilmember
Dave Orvis, Councilmember
Ron Wambolt, Councilmember
Strom Peterson, Councilmember
STAFF PRESENT
Tom Tomberg, Fire Chief
Mark Correira, Assistant Fire Chief
Al Compaan, Police Chief
Stephen Clifton, Community Services/Economic
Development Director
Noel Miller, Public Works Director
Lorenzo Hines, Finance Director
Scott Snyder, City Attorney
Sandy Chase, City Clerk
Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst.
Jeannie Dines, Recorder
1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT WILSON,
TO APPROVE THE AGENDA, REMOVING ITEM 9 FROM THE AGENDA. MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT,
TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda
items approved are as follows:
A. ROLL CALL
B. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF OCTOBER 27, 2009.
C. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #114982 THROUGH #115132 DATED OCTOBER 29,
2009 FOR $518,862.77.
D. ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES FROM RANDALL BAIRD
(AMOUNT UNDETERMINED), K. FRED BRESKE ($500,000), DONNA L. BRESKE
($500,000), 9330 LLC ($500,000), AND SCOTT CONAHAN ($686.27).
E. AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN FUNDING AGREEMENTS WITH THE
WASHINGTON STATE GENERAL ADMINISTRATION FOR AN ENERGY
EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AT THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT
PLANT.
F. AUTHORIZATION TO SURPLUS SEIZED VEHICLE
Packet Page 4 of 374
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 2, 2009
Page 2
Council President Wilson commented on the recent attack on two uniformed Police Officers in Seattle
and requested the audience observe a moment of silence.
3. REPORT FROM COMMUNITY TRANSIT ON BUS RAPID TRANSIT.
Joyce Eleanor, Community Transit, reported Swift Bus Rapid Transit would be operational in 26 days.
She recognized Edmonds as an outstanding partner in this project. She invited the public to a community
celebration on Sunday, November 29 at 2:00 p.m. and the Council to the invitation-only sponsored lunch
preceding the celebration at 11:30 a.m. at the Everett Station. The private lunch is a thank you to the
stakeholders and partners in the project; invited guests will take an inaugural ride of a Swift bus down the
corridor to Lynnwood where they will be met by Swift buses from the south filled with area residents.
The Swift buses will meet at the Crossroads station at 196th & Highway 99 where the community
celebration will be held. The community celebration will include family-oriented activities, dedication of
the line, launching the first buses into service, music and celebration.
Swift is an important service for Edmonds, Community Transit and Snohomish County. Swift is a major
transit improvement, greatly improving frequency of bus service on Highway 99 all day and providing a
much needed, single seat ride between Everett Station and South Snohomish County. Swift began with a
Board resolution in December 2005 and service will be launched less than four years later in November
2009. She expressed her gratitude to Edmonds, Lynnwood, Snohomish County and Everett for working
with Community Transit on this project. She reported Swift was on time and under budget by
approximately $2.5 million.
Although Community Transit had a great year in 2009 with the opening of the Mountlake Terrace Transit
Center, construction of the Marysville Cedar Grove Park & Ride and the start of Swift, Community
Transit has also felt the sting of the economy. Community Transit relies heavily on sales tax revenue and
this year’s revenues are down approximately 18% compared to 2007 levels. Community Transit believes
sales tax revenues have bottomed out but anticipate a slow recovery and protections to service via the use
of reserves and shifting federal grants are not sustainable over multiple years. Community Transit is
preparing its 2010 budget and it assumes continued lower revenue levels, transit service efficiencies that
will not be restored and likely service reductions which they hope can be restored when economic
conditions improve. The Board will approve a budget in December and they will seek public input on
proposed service reductions in January.
The decline in the economy and the resulting loss of sales tax revenue also severely limited Community
Transit’s ability to fund capital needs such as bus and van replacement, a loss projected to total $180
million through 2013. Over the past two years Community Transit has borrowed from its reserves to
keep services intact. Community Transit will continue to seek ways to replenish its capital budget to
ensure quality service in the future.
To those who may question why Community Transit was implementing Swift when they were facing
challenges to their capital and operating budget, she explained Swift was underway before the budget
crisis occurred. Over half of Swift’s capital funding came from other sources including federal, state and
local and via a partnership with Everett. A series of grants, partnership funds and fare revenues will pay
approximately 90% of Swift’s operating costs through 2012.
She explained Swift is Community Transit’s future; not only a major transit improvement on Highway
99, Community Transit’s busiest corridor, this higher frequency service is what they intend to bring to
Snohomish County’s other congested corridors via a network of Swift lines in the future.
Packet Page 5 of 374
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 2, 2009
Page 3
Council President Wilson commented he found it an honor to be appointed to the Community Transit
Board and regretted that time devoted to the City’s budget and his day job had affected his ability to
participate.
4. PUBLIC HEARING ON FIRE DISTRICT 1 CONTRACT, OPTION 4. IN ADDITION TO
CONTRACTING FOR SERVICES WITH FIRE DISTRICT 1, THIS OPTION INCLUDES
SELLING APPARATUS (ENGINES, AID CARS, AND EQUIPMENT), AND KEEPING FIRE
STATIONS, LAND AND TRANSPORT FEES.
Mayor Haakenson suggested staff respond to questions submitted yesterday and today by a
Councilmember and a citizen.
Councilmember Bernheim asked why response times were identified in minutes and seconds in Edmonds’
contract with Fire District 1 for fire service to Esperance but in the proposed contract for fire service, Fire
District 1 was required only to maintain the current level of service. Fire Chief Tom Tomberg answered
the Esperance contract was between the City and Fire District 1 for the City of Edmonds Fire Department
to provide fire service to Esperance, an unincorporated area in Fire District 1. Under the proposed
contract, Fire District 1 would provide fire service to Edmonds. The standards referred to by
Councilmember Bernheim addressed how the City provided service to Esperance under four levels of
service. The proposed contract with Fire District 1 references RCW 35.103, codification of Senate House
Bill 1756, that requires Fire Departments in the State of Washington to adopt standards of response. The
Edmonds City Council adopted the 11 standards in RCW 35.103 in November 2006. Staff has provided
three reports to the Council regarding the Fire Department’s performance in meeting those standards. He
summarized RCW 35.103 was referenced in Section 2.4, 2.5 and 2.8 and the contract actually referenced
11 standards.
Mr. Snyder commented this had been a subject of some negotiation between Fire District 1 counsel and
himself. One of the main reasons this contract was different was because the State statute was adopted
after the Esperance contract was approved and prior to the date the proposed contract was drafted. His
intent was to ensure the Council would retain its ability to set the standards and not be locked in by
contract. For example, if the Council wanted to amend the standards by increasing or decreasing levels of
service, the Council would have that right independent of the contract. Fire District 1 wanted the ability
to recover the cost if additional staffing was required to meet the amended response time.
Councilmember Bernheim questioned whether requiring Fire District 1 to meet current levels of service
was too vague and whether the 11 response time standards should be stated instead. Mr. Snyder reiterated
his intent for the Council to retain the legislative discretion to amend the standards as they wished rather
than establish them as a contract term that would be subject to renegotiation. Councilmember Bernheim
pointed out the response times referred to current levels of service and he questioned what the current
levels of service were. Mr. Snyder responded they were the levels the Council had adopted as the City’s
service standards.
Councilmember Orvis commented that in addition to specifying levels of service, deployment was also
identified as three firefighters at each fire station, a battalion chief and two dedicated medics. Chief
Tomberg agreed.
Staff responded to the following questions posed via email from George Murray:
1. Litigation – If there should be some law suits in relation to fire operations, who is responsible? Is the
town of Edmonds liable and in what ways? I remember the litigation after the warehouse fire in
Seattle when several firemen lost their lives and their families sued Seattle.
Packet Page 6 of 374
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 2, 2009
Page 4
Chief Tomberg responded the employer would be responsible in the event of litigation; the
firefighters’ employer would be Fire District 1 under the proposed contract. Items 16, 17 and 18 on
page 15 and 16 of the Interlocal Agreement states the City and District are independent municipal
governments, and addresses insurance and dispute resolution. Mr. Snyder explained claims by former
City employees relating to actions taken while the individuals were City employees were the City’s
responsibility; once transferred, employees’ claims would be defended by the entity that employed
them. If the contract were terminated and the employees transferred back, the City would be
responsible for claims after they transferred back and Fire District 1 would indemnify the City from
claims made prior to that date. He summarized the entity employing and directing the employee was
responsible for liability.
2. Personnel – Why does the city need a fire marshal and a fire inspector when the Fire District is
taking on responsibility for fire service? Do towns in the Fire District have these two positions on
their town staffs? (e.g. MLT & Brier) Are they essential?
Chief Tomberg responded Fire Marshal responsibilities in the unincorporated area of Snohomish
County were the responsibility of the Snohomish County Fire Marshal’s office, not Fire District 1. If
Fire District 1 did not serve cities under contracts for service such as Brier and Mountlake Terrace, it
would not have a Fire Marshal. Fire District 1 has a Fire Marshal to serve Mountlake Terrace and
Brier because like Edmonds, they were served by a Fire Marshal before they joined the District and
cities require fire marshal services. Mountlake Terrace and Brier pay Fire District 1 for fire marshal
services. In the Fire District 1/Edmonds Interlocal Agreement, Edmonds pays via the contract for a ¾
time Fire Marshal and a full-time Fire Inspector. Currently the City pays for two full-time positions.
3. Contract – (See attached numbers) Are the numbers shown for the “Contract” projections for
“Option 4” the ones which will be billed to Edmonds? The attached numbers were taken from a page
given me entitled, “Fire District 1 Contract Proposal – City Operational Savings”, lines named Fire
Budget and Fire Contract.
Finance Director Lorenzo Hines responded the amounts listed in the spreadsheet Option 1 v Option 4
are the amounts that are projected to be the contract payment to Fire District 1 that will be billed to
Edmonds.
4. Uneven growth rates. The attached numbers grow at different growth rates (see attachment). I had
thought the expense growth rates would be the same over the years. Why are they different?
Mr. Hines responded the analysis compared 2007 actuals to the 2008 budget. With regard to expense
growth rates being the same over the years, Mr. Hines responded growth rates would be generally the
same but rarely were they the same year-to-year. For example growth in the Edmonds Fire
Department budget was projected to be 3.15% in 2011, 3.87% in 2012, and 3.93% in 2013.
Councilmember Bernheim commented lower growth rates were projected under the proposed contract
than for the Edmonds Fire Department. Mr. Hines answered the contract was based on salaries,
overtime and benefits; the City’s Fire Department budget was composed of many other variables in
addition to labor such as uniforms, protective clothing, supplies, small equipment, professional
services, communication, travel, rental and lease, rental and maintenance, etc. Councilmember
Bernheim pointed out in the proposed contract both overhead and equipment were pegged to labor
increases per Exhibit C. Mr. Hines pointed out another variable was Fire District 1’s actions to keep
the price down; Fire District 1 may be artificially reducing the price to get the City’s business.
5. Annexation – What are the criteria for establishing and changes in billing if annexations occur? I
understand Edmonds has had over 60 and there is one underway now.
Packet Page 7 of 374
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 2, 2009
Page 5
Chief Tomberg responded annexations were addressed in Section 4.6 on page 5 of the Interlocal
Agreement. Mr. Snyder explained if property was annexed by the City, the cost of the contract would
be recalculated based on the additional population.
6. Deannexation – How will reductions be treated?
Chief Tomberg was unclear how deannexation would occur.
7. Technology – Every 5 years it’s a new world in Technology. This can be a savings and/or expensive.
Today Edmonds deals with it in consultation with other fire departments How will this be handled in
future?
Chief Tomberg answered technology would continue to be addressed with other Fire Departments
and in Snohomish County as it is today. The Fire Department participates in many coordinated
technology efforts including the SnoCom CAD system, the records management system, patient care
reporting, radio purchases, etc. via SERS, SnoCom and ESCA.
Mayor Haakenson opened the public participation portion of the public hearing.
Al Rutledge, Edmonds, commented most citizens felt this should be decided via a public vote. He
expressed concern with the participation of some Councilmembers, questioning whether they were parties
of interest. He commented on an area that was interested in annexing to Mountlake Terrace.
Hearing no further comment, Mayor Haakenson closed the public hearing.
5. CITY COUNCIL DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL ACTION ON THE FIRE DISTRICT 1
CONTRACT, OPTION 4.
COUNCILMEMBER ORVIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON, FOR
APPROVAL OF OPTION 4 (CONTRACTING FOR SERVICES WITH FIRE DISTRICT 1,
SELLING APPARATUS [ENGINES, AID CARS, AND EQUIPMENT], AND KEEPING FIRE
STATIONS, LAND AND TRANSPORT FEES, AND SIGNING THE CONTRACT WITH FIRE
DISTRICT 1.
Councilmember Orvis commented the initial proposal was to sell the land and via discussion the Council
decided although contracting with Fire District 1 was a good idea, selling the land was not. He clarified
under Option 4 the City retained the land and fire stations, sold the apparatus and contracted for fire
service personnel with Fire District 1. He was satisfied the service levels were guaranteed because
deployment was identified in the contract and in addition to meeting the City’s service requirements, fire
stations must continue to be staffed in the manner they are today. The savings in 2010 will be over
$900,000. He was impressed with the improvements in service such as fewer holes in service due to fire
training, overhead that was service-related rather than administrative-related, the availability of CPR
classes and car seat checks, and the availability of a public liaison officer. With regard to increasing costs,
he felt the proposed contract had more restrictions on cost control than the City’s own Fire Department.
He summarized the cost of fire service would increase regardless of whether the City had its own Fire
Department or contracted with Fire District 1.
Mayor Haakenson clarified the contract, if approved, would be effective January 1, 2010.
Councilmember Peterson echoed Councilmember Orvis’ comments, noting Edmonds was taking an
important step in regionalization. Edmonds was part of a larger community with regard to public safety
and other services. The contract would provide better service to the community and save the City money
Packet Page 8 of 374
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 2, 2009
Page 6
as well as allow the City to work more closely with neighboring cities and jurisdictions on important
issues.
Councilmember Olson’s aid read a statement from Councilmember Olson that stated she was voting for
Option 4 because it made the most sense after listening to all the experts. This seemed like a great
opportunity for the City.
Councilmember Wambolt commented he had been involved in the Fire District 1 discussions since they
began in May including meetings with Fire District 1, City staff, the Firefighters Union as well as several
discussions and public hearings at the City Council. He also spent a considerable amount of time
analyzing the numbers on his own. The questions he has raised since May have been satisfactorily
answered. He expressed support for Option 4 for two primary reasons, first it will reduce the City’s
deficit over the next 7 year planning period by $10 million. Under Option 1 expenses will exceed
revenues by $21.1 million over 7 years; under Option 4 expenses will exceed revenues by only $10.4
million or $10.7 million less. The City’s budget will still be in deficit and a levy lid lift will be required
in 2010. Second, service levels will be maintained and he believed gradually enhanced over the coming
years because firefighters would be better trained and morale would improve. He pointed out the
compound annual growth rate of expenses over the 7 year period under Option 1 was 4.08% versus 3.86%
with Option 4.
Council President Wilson commented he would support the motion. He commented the service level
issue was not compelling enough; the primary increase was eliminating holes in service due to training.
With regard to the financial benefit, he acknowledged the numbers pointed in a positive direction, noting
the numbers had varied over the past several months and he was hopeful the recent numbers were
accurate. The primary reason he supported the contract for service was to increase the morale of the Fire
Department employees. This was also an opportunity to place fire service on stable footing; in the future
any budgets cuts would be made to parks or police or a levy would be necessary. He concluded this was
not his ideal situation; he preferred to consider either a Fire District or reverse annex into Fire District 1.
He was hopeful the City did not regret this decision in 10 years.
Councilmember Bernheim commented there had been a lot of questions asked and answered, it had been
a great process and he was satisfied everyone was reaching a well-considered decision. He was confident
the level of service for residents would remain the same, a top priority even above the morale of the Fire
Department employees. With regard to regionalization, he was not convinced about the importance of
regionalization; he felt the City had an obligation to provide fire and police services. He expressed
concern that citizens lost complete voting power over the Fire District 1, a philosophical issue that had not
been adequately addressed. The City’s fire service was being turned over to a contractor and voters in the
unincorporated areas of Snohomish County would elect Commissioners that would interpret the contract.
Councilmember Bernheim acknowledged fire service cost a great deal and annual increases have been
substantial. He pointed out much of the City’s fiscal crisis was because tax income had not kept pace
with the cost of providing fire service. He preferred to keep the fire service in-house and continue to
manage it. He pointed out the firefighters union’s primary reason for supporting the contract with Fire
District 1 was to stabilize funding. He noted the contract pegs overhead, equipment maintenance and
purchase of new equipment to labor costs which he feared would increase more than it would otherwise.
He expressed concern that Fire District 1 may be artificially holding the price down, comparing it to the
FIOS offer of $29.95 for six months which obligated consumers without a guarantee regarding future
prices. He feared the City would be in dire straits in 10 years, worrying how to pay for the fire service
because the cost of the contract had increased.
Packet Page 9 of 374
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 2, 2009
Page 7
Councilmember Bernheim concluded this issue originated due to the fiscal crisis and as an alternative to
the levy, not the need to improve the City’s fire service. In his view the City was giving up control of its
fire service, a fundamental city responsibility to a Fire District whose Commissioners were elected by
voters outside the City without any guarantee of price control and it was only a stop gap measure.
VOTE ON THE MOTION: MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBER BERNHEIM
VOTING NO.
Tim Hoover, President, Edmonds Firefighters Local 1828, applauded the Council for vetting this issue
well. He commented regionalizing fire service had been 20 years in the making, an effort that had been
halted at the political level in the past. He commended the Council for putting politics aside, considering
the issue, doing their due diligence and reaching a decision. To the Edmonds citizens, Mr. Hoover
commented they did not take the Fire Department’s 105 year history lighting. He expressed the Fire
Department’s appreciation for the citizens’ support over those 105 years. He thanked everyone who
provided public comment and looked forward to serving the community as a regional Fire Department for
the next 105 years.
6. REPORT TO WASHINGTON CONSORTIUM REGARDING THE TRANSFER OF CONTROL
OF VERIZON NORTHWEST INC. TO FRONTIER COMMUNICATION CORPORATION –
WORKSHOP.
Community Services/Economic Development Director Stephen Clifton explained tonight’s meeting was
one of two scheduled meetings regarding the transfer of control from Verizon Northwest Inc. to Frontier
Communications Corporation. Tonight’s public workshop was an opportunity for the Council to ask
questions and learn about the proposed franchise transfer. On November 2 the public will have an
opportunity to speak and the City Council will have an opportunity to take action. He introduced Verizon
representatives Raymond Deed, Doug Steading, and Milt Gomad and Frontier Communications Chairman
Ann Burr.
Mr. Clifton reviewed the history of the transfer:
In August, 2008 - City authorized and granted a Franchise Agreement to Verizon Northwest Inc.
May 13, 2009 - Verizon announced plans to divest its local wireline communications system to
Frontier Communications Corporation.
May 19, 2009 - City received a Request for Transfer of Control (Verizon to Frontier).
Set in motion certain federal requirements and deadlines:
o City (Franchise Authority) has 30 days in which to review Form 394 to determine whether all
necessary information has been provided and is complete.
o City Council has 120 days to take action on request.
o Determine if the Transferee is legally, technically, and financially capable to operate a
Franchise.
Next he reviewed transfer request actions:
June, 2009 – A Multi-Jurisdictional Consortium was formed.
o Share in legal and technical expertise to analyze transfer of the franchise.
o Edmonds City Council authorized contracting with River Oaks Communications Corporation
and Ogden Murphy Wallace. The Council packet contains an August 21, 2009 report from
Ogden Murphy Wallace and a template transfer ordinance.
Consortium requested and reviewed extensive legal, technical and financial information from
Verizon Northwest and Frontier Communications Corporation.
Due to the amount of information under review, the decision deadline was extended to November
30, 2009.
Packet Page 10 of 374
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 2, 2009
Page 8
Under the transfer:
Frontier Communications Corporation will acquire Verizon NW Inc.
Control of Cable Franchisee will transfer from Verizon Communications to Frontier
Communications Corporation.
Completion of the transaction is expected in April 2010.
The local jurisdiction’s request to transfer control of cable franchise is one piece of the
transaction.
Waiting authorization from local, state and federal regulatory authorities.
He provided facts related to financing of the transaction:
Total Cost of Transactions $8.6 billion.
o Financed through transfer of stock and debt issuance.
o Sell unsecured notes, less than 9.5% interest.
Transfer does not include increasing cable rates to the customers; subject to future changes based
on market conditions.
Regarding the Commitment to Implement Terms of Existing Franchise Agreement, Mr. Clifton explained
franchise commitments and obligations will be met by Frontier Communications Corporation.
Calculation of Gross Revenues will remain the same. With regard to build out requirements, the
installation of fiber within the City is more than 85% complete. Government and Education channels will
remain (Edmonds Government Channel 39).
Mr. Clifton reviewed Frontier’s commitment to customer service:
Will appoint multiple General Managers to Washington State.
Empowers local supervisors and general managers with authority to resolve issues to the
customer’s satisfaction.
Maintain Call and Customer Dispatch Center in Everett.
Retain most Verizon customer service personnel.
Hire additional personnel to handle customer service.
With regard to technical capabilities:
Signals will be transported from Florida to Illinois.
A transport network will be launched from Illinois to Indiana.
From Indiana the signal will be transported to Washington and Oregon.
o Lease existing transport capacity from third party providers.
o Configure network-install off the shelf equipment to transport video.
Retain most of Verizon Personnel.
Unknowns include the following:
Programming: Process of securing content agreements is still being completed.
Although Frontier is determined to make this transaction successful, there are risks:
o Transport and content agreements are not for the length of franchise agreement.
o Frontier has not secured financing.
Frontier Communications shareholders approve acquisition of Verizon Wireline operations in 14
states.
Could scale back business or cease business.
No guarantees.
Frontier does not currently operate a cable system.
Packet Page 11 of 374
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 2, 2009
Page 9
The consortium and the City Attorney’s Office recommends the following:
Consent be given to the transfer of control of Verizon Northwest Inc. to Frontier subject to a
mutually acceptable Transfer Resolution or Ordinance.
o Frontier’s and Verizon Northwest Inc.’s responsibility to make this transfer of control and
acquisition successful from a business, technical, financial and customer standpoint.
o By consenting to the transfer of control, local governments are not opining as to whether
Frontier will ultimately be successful from a financial, technical or business standpoint.
Ann Burr, Chairman, Frontier Communications, was pleased the City was considering Frontier as its
new cable TV, telephone, data and internet provider. She explained Frontier was in 24 states and had 2.5
million customers. Frontier is a mid-sized carrier that serves small and mid-sized cities, many fast
growing, sophisticated cities that are providing advanced technology solutions. Frontier places a high
emphasis on customer service; general managers live and work in those markets and are involved in the
community such as participating in the Chamber of Commerce and Rotary. Frontier prides itself on first
call resolution and customer first policies.
Ms. Burr advised Frontier was acquiring the rights to programming content and building their video
networks to complete the long haul transport. They have resolved all agreements between Verizon and
Frontier for distribution and transport of content. They have an employee-matters agreement with
employees to ensure job protection. They plan to bring employees and systems across to Frontier to
provide business continuity to customers. Frontier’s shareholders approved the merger agreement last
week.
Councilmember Wambolt expressed concern that the implementation of FIOS in Edmonds had come to a
halt or slowed due to the announcement. He was concerned that FIOS service was not available in
Edmonds-area condominiums. With regard to Frontier’s emphasis on customer service, he pointed out
currently calls made to Verizon reached a representative in India. If they were unable to resolve an
internet service problem, it was referred to a representative in Canada. If they were unable to resolve the
problem, it was referred to a representative in Everett. He asked whether Frontier planned to utilize a
similar system. Ms. Burr answered implementation of FIOS had been moving forward diligently;
Frontier was willing to assume all the obligations of the franchise including all build out requirements.
Councilmember Wambolt relayed a Verizon representative informed him that implementation of FIOS
had been delayed until the second quarter of 2010. Ms. Burr offered to research. Raymond Deed,
Franchise Manager, Verizon, commented multi-dwelling unit buildings were different than single
family homes and they must work with building managers for access, etc. In this case, they were
experiencing difficulty reaching the building manager to schedule the work. Councilmember Wambolt
disagreed, advising he was the building manager in his condominium. Mr. Deed offered to work with
Councilmember Wambolt.
With regard to customer service, Ms. Burr advised they had multiple call centers and would be
transferring the customer service representatives at the Everett Call Center who are currently servicing
FIOS and Verizon customers to Frontier. They do not have an arrangement to handle calls outside the
United States. Although a call center may not be in the same city, the same group of representatives
served each city. She assured first call resolution was their objective. Councilmember Wambolt was
pleased with her response, noting that was the way the company he retired from handled customer
service.
Councilmember Bernheim asked whether Frontier supported allowing consumers the option to purchase
only the television stations they wanted and not require them to pay for stations they did not want. Ms.
Packet Page 12 of 374
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 2, 2009
Page 10
Burr answered the more people that watched the channels resulted in a lower rate. Rather than offer al a
carte, Frontier effectively prices bundles in order to allow customers to customize their choices.
Councilmember Bernheim commented this required customers to pay for channels they did not want. Ms.
Burr responded they try to provide something for everyone.
Mayor Haakenson urged the Verizon representatives to hasten the development of anti-virus software that
worked with Windows 7. He was told that software will not be available until November 18 or 19. He
advised second and final reading would be November 17.
Mr. Snyder reported River Oakes Communications performed the analysis and review. He invited the
Council to provide staff with any questions with regard to the legal, technical and financial capability of
the transferee to fulfill the terms of the franchise.
7. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Al Rutledge, Edmonds, commented on the City’s budget and expressed concern that this Thursday’s
Hearing Examiner meeting had been cancelled. Mr. Snyder clarified the meeting had been postponed.
He invited Mr. Rutledge to speak with him after the Council meeting.
Mauri Moore, Edmonds, advised several of the audience members were here to speak about an
easement attached to an alley vacation. She explained the biggest issue was ensuring the public had an
opportunity to speak. In this case, the public was not allowed to testify regarding the easement. The
Council held a public hearing on the alley vacation and attached a construction easement to benefit a
private party over the public good. A citizen asked for a public hearing via emailing the Council but
received no response because the Council was told by the City Attorney they should not talk to the
citizen. She remarked the citizen had no legal action against they City, thus the Council was able to talk
to him. The citizen was looking for due process and an opportunity for the public to speak to the Council
about the easement. She commented although the Council may have the right not to speak to the citizen,
it was not the right thing to do. She was ashamed of the Council for not being open minded and shocked
that the Council had not allowed the public an opportunity to speak.
Cam Gillis, Edmonds, a friend of Ken Reidy, explained he was a quality individual and an asset to the
community. He expressed concern with Mr. Reidy’s experience and that he was not allowed a fair
hearing. He agreed with Ms. Moore’s comments, that the public should be provided an opportunity to
speak to the Council. He urged the Council to listen to Mr. Reidy’s and the neighborhood’s concerns.
Anne (& Mike) Meiers, Edmonds, commented Mr. Reidy’s property was very close to their children’s
school and their friends were his neighbors. She was surprised that the average citizen was getting
stepped on by the City. They were present to show their support for Mr. Reidy.
Ken Kettel, Edmonds, a friend of Ken Reidy, agreed the City had received bad advice from their City
Attorney. He expressed his support of Mr. Reidy and his interest in a due process hearing.
Jean Marty, Edmonds, voiced their support for the Reidy’s and looked forward to their having a hearing
and the Council’s response to his request.
Dave Marty, Edmonds, agreed with his wife’s comments, commenting they were perplexed why the
Council would not consider Mr. Reidy’s concerns and have a public discussion.
Ronald Quinton, Edmonds, a friend of the Reidy family, questioned why due process was not being
followed. He anticipated if the City had an issue with the Reidy’s there would have been due process. He
Packet Page 13 of 374
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 2, 2009
Page 11
was concerned the Reidy’s were not allowed to voice their concerns and that the City Attorney’s voice
was held in higher regard than an average citizen.
Robert (& Judy) Custello, Edmonds, asked why the City Attorney gave advice regarding the easement
through Mr. Reidy’s property that made Mr. Reidy feel he did not receive due process. Noting he had
heard that the Council was 6-1 against hearing Mr. Reidy’s concerns, he asked the Councilmember who
was in favor to explain why. He voiced his support for the Reidy’s.
Chris Johnson, Edmonds, voiced his support for his friend and neighbor Ken Reidy. He acknowledged
being biased, noting his bias was not necessarily for Mr. Reidy but for the process. He was concerned that
Mr. Reidy was at the whimsy of the Council. He questioned Mr. Snyder’s expertise to provide advice
regarding an easement.
Maria Mallory, Edmonds, a neighbor of Mr. Reidy, commented the most important issue was for the
Council to do the right thing. She urged the Council to consider this as if it was their family, commenting
on the expense and stress that the City and Reidy’s have experienced. She urged the Council to listen to
Mr. Reidy’s concerns and reach the right conclusion.
Vivian Olson, Edmonds, commented she had two major issues, 1) concern with a citizen sending a
request to the Council and receiving no response and the City Attorney advising the Council not to
discuss the matter, and 2) within an hour of Mr. Reidy’s request, the attorney representing the other side
had the information.. She questioned whether the problem was Councilmember Plunkett elevating the
issue to the City Attorney or the City Attorney providing the information to the opposing side while
advising Councilmembers not to respond to Mr. Reidy. She suggested the Council consider whether they
were receiving bad advice from the City Attorney on this and other issues.
Lisa Barhoum, Edmonds, spoke in support of due process and urged the Council to hear the Reidy’s
case.
Richard McKay, Edmonds, expressed his support of Mr. Reidy.
Vera Reidy, Edmonds, expressed disappointment in the City, Mayor Haakenson, Mr. Snyder and the
City Council. She appreciated Council President Wilson taking the time to speak to them this evening.
She explained her husband had sent countless emails to the Council. She expressed concern with Mr.
Snyder’s curt replies to her husband that this was a legal issue. She was concerned with the amount of
money they had spent on errors the City has made were only resolved by their attorney speaking with Mr.
Snyder. Although she preferred to settle this outside the court, she felt the City was pushing them toward
court. She asked the Council to do the right thing and to act with integrity.
Joan Bloom, Edmonds, referred to the exchange between Mayor Haakenson and Dr. Senderoff and
Mayor Haakenson’s comment that citizens elected a Mayor and Council because life gets in the way. She
recalled speaking to the Council four years ago regarding a wetland near her home that was subsequently
filled despite the Critical Areas Ordinance that governed the land, an issue similar to the Reidy’s. She
pointed out the Council had not enforced the code for the past four years which required citizens to
watchdog the property near their homes. She questioned why the property owner was allowed to vest
under the old Critical Areas Ordinance, a huge error that should never have happened. She recalled
Councilmember Plunkett suggested the construction easement during Council discussion, pointing out it
was not on the agenda and the public was provided no notice. She requested an accounting regarding the
amount this short plat application has cost the City including how much had been paid to Ogden Murphy
Wallace.
Packet Page 14 of 374
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 2, 2009
Page 12
Ken Reidy, Edmonds, commented he had approached the City with a willingness to resolve the problem
and has never sued the City and hoped that would not be necessary. He explained this situation began
with an improper delay in a Critical Areas Ordinance of 79 days which opened the door for an individual
to invest under an old law. He commented Mayor Haakenson’s job was to ensure the City’s laws and
ordinances were enforced and Mr. Snyder’s job was to advise the Council regarding the legal status of
their decisions. With regard to the temporary construction easement over his property, he explained Mr.
Snyder interceded in a Council meeting and recommended a temporary construction easement for a
private party, an action that was not on the agenda, was outside the role of the City Attorney to advise the
Council regarding the legal status of their decisions and violated due process. He enumerated the errors
that were made, 1) no public notice was provided regarding the temporary construction easement which
did not allow his neighbors or him to prepare oral or written comment, 2) no public hearing was held to
discuss the appropriateness of a temporary construction easement, and 3) Chapter 27 was not enforced.
He urged the Council to hold a public hearing at a City Council meeting to allow his neighbors and him to
discuss the legality of reserving a temporary construction easement over private property and the lack of
public benefit of that easement. He urged the Council to work with him to avoid further expense to
Edmonds taxpayers.
George Murray, Edmonds, requested his questions and charts regarding Fire District 1 be included in
the minutes.
Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, commented on the number of people speaking to the Council regarding the
injustice that had occurred. He relayed that he had reached the same conclusion after speaking with Mr.
Reidy; the Council needed to have an opportunity to hear his concerns. He urged the Council to listen to
the citizens as much as they listened to the City Attorney. Next, he referred to a DVD of the October 13
meeting that shows Mayor Haakenson assaulting him at the podium.
Councilmember Plunkett asked Mr. Custello when the 6-1 vote was taken. Mr. Custello answered he
overheard that it had occurred at a Council meeting. He remarked a true injustice had occurred and the
rules and laws had been broken. Councilmember Plunkett advised the minutes reflect that the Council’s
vote on the vacation and the construction easement was unanimous.
Council President Wilson explained he spoke with Mr. Reidy and his friends and neighbors during
tonight’s meeting and explained to them that the Council held an Executive Session to discuss this matter
and that he had agreed to remove it from the agenda. He had explained to them that if the Council had
voted to remove it from the agenda, he anticipated the vote would be 6-1 in favor of removing it.
Council President Wilson explained because this issue spanned 4 years and the paperwork was
voluminous, he asked staff for a recommendation. Staff urged caution in speaking to Mr. Reidy as there
may be a time when the Council must act in a quasi judicial capacity on this matter. Any Councilmember
who has spoken with Mr. Reidy or Mr. Thuesen would be required to withdraw from the deliberations.
Council President Wilson explained he met with Mr. Reidy last week; the information he provided was
very compelling and it seemed there may be opportunity for Council discussion. He discussed this with
Mr. Snyder, noting he had a great deal of respect for Mr. Snyder’s advice. Mr. Snyder explained he asked
an outside law firm to provide an independent perspective. The Council had an opportunity tonight
during Executive Session to review pending and threatened litigation regarding this matter. He felt there
were some things in this matter that warranted Council review. Acknowledging the voluminous amounts
of paper regarding the matter, he was not certain how that could be accomplished but was willing to
spend the time to determine how a partial political decision could be reached on an issue that has become
a 4-year legal problem. He pointed out to take that action required the agreement of at least four
Councilmembers.
Packet Page 15 of 374
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 2, 2009
Page 13
Councilmember Bernheim pointed out any concerns should have been appealed within a certain
timeframe of the Council’s action. However, he agreed the easement arose at the last minute and Mr.
Reidy had voiced his objection to the construction easement. He recalled asking Development Services
Director Duane Bowman whether adoption of a construction easement would be detrimental to any
property owner to which Mr. Bowman replied no. He was sympathetic with the Reidy’s situation, noting
incorrect information has caused a great of problems in the City and wasted a great deal of money
including Bauer v. Edmonds that cost his neighbor and him $20,000; the pool study that included
consideration of the old Woodway High School, a site that was never an option; the delay in
implementing the Critical Areas Ordinance; the 555 Main Street debacle in the BD1 zone; lack of
enforcement of the Street Tree Plan; violation of the height ordinance by Rob Michel; the Burnstead
lawsuit, and the Park Comprehensive Plan lawsuit.
Councilmember Bernheim recalled he proposed adoption of the ordinance without the construction
easement because testimony indicated the easement was unnecessary because Mr. Thuesen had access to
his property. He regretted that he went along with adoption of the temporary easement. However, he did
not feel the remedy was to request reconsideration a year later.
To those who said the Council should be ashamed for not responding to Mr. Reidy, Councilmember
Wambolt advised he prided himself on responding to all emails he received. If it was an email directed to
all Councilmembers, he would have responded. If it was sent to one Councilmember and cc’d to him, he
would not have responded. He requested Mr. Reidy provide the emails to which he did not respond.
8. CITY OF EDMONDS WEBSITE - CITY COUNCIL WEB PAGES.
Community Services/Economic Development Director Stephen Clifton explained over the last several
months, City staff had been updating the City’s website and web pages in an attempt to provide more
effective and useful information to website visitors. The City does not employ a webmaster but utilizes
the services of a contractor to assist with website maintenance. Existing staff are responsible for updating
web pages and format; website development is ever evolving and is a product of numerous contributions
by individuals throughout the City. Increasing the accessibility of information contained on the City’s
website is a primary goal of City administration.
At the request of Council President Wilson, City staff focused their efforts on City Council web pages.
Visitors can now find an updated City Council web page and information regarding the 2009
Sustainability Agenda, meeting schedule, general contact information and associated web links to
individual Councilmember web pages. He referred to City Attorney Scott Snyder’s September 3, 2009
memorandum to the City Council (attachment 2 in the Council packet) prepared in response to the
numerous emails regarding the City Council web pages and the Council’s interest in reviewing the use of
Council biographical materials. According to Mr. Snyder’s memorandum, the Council has several
options regarding their web pages including, 1) only listing names, dates, places and basic factual
biographical information with no statements of philosophy, references to pending legislative issues; 2)
permitting each Councilmember to state his/her general philosophy and addressing pending issues in the
Edmonds community; and/or 3) a limited forum approach for Council consideration - placing
photographs and voters pamphlet information on the City’s website to provide the public information
related to candidates for public office and other issues on the Edmonds ballot.
In a September 22, 2009 letter, the Washington State Public Disclosure Commission (PDC) stated RCW
42.17.130 does not prohibit elected officials from communicating with the public concerning the issues
they are working on or their goals while in office. The letter stated it was important that this information
not be used to campaign for reelection and it would be prudent for the City to establish standards for
biography pages. The City does not currently have policies related to the content of City Councilmember
Packet Page 16 of 374
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 2, 2009
Page 14
web pages. City staff contacted several cities to request their policies; the Council packet includes a
sampling of web pages from Bellevue, Kent, Federal Way, Everett, Kirkland, Lynnwood, Mukilteo,
Redmond, Renton and Shoreline.
Mr. Clifton briefly reviewed Bellevue’s content policy that states all content on the City’s website will be
sponsored or cosponsored by the City or directly linked to the City’s policy objectives or departmental
activities. Content will accurately reflect City Council and management policy decisions and political
advocacy by individuals or interest groups, including current or former elected officials is not appropriate
material. He advised Edmonds had link policies for its website but no policies regarding City
Councilmember web pages. With regard to links, Bellevue does not provide links to candidate sites, sites
advocating positions on ballot propositions or individual personal home pages.
With regard to fair campaign practices, Bellevue’s policy states to avoid the appearance of endorsement
of political content, links will not be made to sites associated with, sponsored by or serve a candidate for
elected office, any political party or organization supporting or seeking to impeach a candidate for elected
office or any ballot proposal. Bellevue does allow links to factual information prepared by the City or
other public organization such as King County’s Voters Guide, Municipal League, League of Women
Voters, etc. Shoreline’s link policies are similar to Bellevue’s.
With regard to the City Council web pages, staff compared existing City Councilmember web pages with
the ten cities. Based on staff’s review, Edmonds Councilmember web pages align most closely with
Option 1 - names, dates, committee assignments, and basic factual biographical information with limited
philosophical narrative or reference to pending legislative issues. Eight of the ten cities reviewed also
closely align with Option 1. Renton and Lynnwood include statements that could be interpreted to relate
to Options 1 and 2. Renton’s Councilmember web pages include links to newspaper articles they have
written in the Renton Reporter, information that could be considered subjective and open to interpretation.
None of the ten cities provided information related to Option 3, political campaign brochures. Edmonds
website linkage policies were discussed at the 2002 retreat.
Staff is in the process of updating the City’s website and consideration is being given to the formation of
a Website Standards Coordinating Committee to maintain and monitor information on the City’s website.
Staff plans to address this issue further when the committee is formed. Until a Website Standards
Coordinating Committee is formed to further examine policies for Council web pages, staff proposes the
following interim measures, utilizing Bellevue’s policy that content will accurately reflect City Council
policy positions, utilizing the City’s existing link policies, and utilizing Option 1 in Mr. Snyder’s
memorandum. Information could include Council name, position number and contact information, year
elected, number of terms served, current Council committees/appointments, former Council assignments,
regional representations, community service, employment, education and factual biographical
information. If the council wishes to expand on Option 1, Option 2 would include the above information
in addition to general Councilmembers goals. Mr. Clifton briefly reviewed Bellevue’s general Council
web page and a sampling of Councilmembers web pages.
Councilmember Orvis asked whether Option 3, providing a link to all candidates, was a possibility. Mr.
Snyder answered the reason cities’ standards were so strict was to avoid their websites becoming an open
public forum where the City had no control. In view of Councilmember Orvis’ interest in an equal
playing field for candidates and seated Councilmembers, one way to accomplish that would be to adopt a
source such as Municipal League or League of Women Voters pamphlet. Another reason cities limit the
content is for budget reasons. Use of a website as a tool for Councilmembers to hear from and
communicate with their constituents was appropriate; the issue was having rules that allow the City to
control maintenance costs.
Packet Page 17 of 374
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 2, 2009
Page 15
Councilmember Orvis commented the reason he maintained a private website was the ability to say
whatever he wanted on that site. Mr. Clifton commented the information contained on Bellevue, Federal
Way and Everett Councilmember web pages was in a consistent format which would avoid challenges to
the content.
Council President Wilson suggested the Council direct staff to develop policies similar to Option 2. He
wanted the web page to be a useful a tool for Councilmembers to communicate with the public about
Council business. He did not support links to personal sites that may contain campaign materials and
suggested only links related to Council business such as the Marine Research group that made a
presentation to the Council early this year and to his Edmonds Beacon columns.
Councilmember Peterson commented greater limitations were imposed on State Legislators’ web pages 6
months prior to elections. Mr. Clifton stated staff did not research the State Legislator’s web pages. The
PDC recommended the City adopt policies. Bellevue and Federal Way’s web pages adhered to the PDC
regulations.
Councilmember Peterson expressed support for Option 2 which would allow Councilmembers to use their
web pages as a communication tool. He found it appropriate for the public to have an idea what a
Councilmember planned to do in the future. He suggested a more limited content 6 month prior to an
election or after the filing deadline. He summarized the Council’s web pages were an important tool for
communicating with the public.
Councilmember Plunkett commented if materials should not be on the web page after the filing deadline,
they likely were not appropriate for the web page at all. He questioned who would act as the gatekeeper
with regard to links and pointed out editorials were not necessarily factual. Mr. Snyder referred to “not
right” versus “not legal.” The PDC’s position was the communications on the web pages were legal
under the campaign financing statute but recommended the Council adopt rules. There was nothing
wrong with Councilmembers expressing their opinions as well as facts. To the perception that a seated
Councilmember had an unfair advantage during the election season, he emphasized it was impossible to
separate the Council’s actions from campaign issues. Mr. Clifton explained he currently served as the
gatekeeper. The reason staff supported Option 1 was to avoid his reviewing every article or editorial to
ensure it was not campaign related.
Councilmember Orvis commented if the Council was not interested in Option 3, he preferred Option 1.
He did not support placing Mr. Clifton in the position of determining what was political. He suggested
Councilmembers who wanted the public to have access to their articles develop their own website.
Council President Wilson suggested the PDC exists to determine whether material on City web pages was
appropriate. The Council President could be responsible for contacting a Councilmember regarding
inappropriate material on a web page. He agreed with Councilmember Peterson’s suggestion to limit
content for Councilmembers running for office.
Councilmember Bernheim suggested the web page content be limited by law rather than the City
developing its own policies and any complaints could be resolved by the PDC. He wanted the freedom to
provide links to materials related to Council business.
Councilmember Wambolt commented that including a great deal of information on Councilmembers web
pages would require a great deal of administration. He inquired how many hits Councilmember web
pages receive. Mr. Clifton explained the reason staff was proposing restrictions on content was the flack
the City received recently regarding Councilmember web pages including a PDC complaint that one
contained campaign materials. He commented it would be difficult to monitor the content of
Packet Page 18 of 374
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 2, 2009
Page 16
Councilmember web pages. Councilmember Bernheim suggested complaints be directed to the Council
President or the PDC. Mr. Snyder suggested obtaining a quote from the City’s webmaster regarding the
cost of administering an open forum.
Council President Wilson suggested the Office of the Mayor be the gatekeeper, questions/concerns be
directed to the Council President and Senior Executive Council Assistant Jana Spellman could manage
the content of Council web pages.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON,
TO ASK STAFF TO BRING BACK POLICIES FOR AN OPTION 2+ THAT ALLOWS FOR AS
WIDE A DISTRIBUTION OF INFORMATION AS POSSIBLE WITHOUT ANY CAMPAIGN OR
PERSONAL MATERIAL OR LINKS.
Councilmember Plunkett commented an important consideration was the cost.
Councilmember Bernheim questioned why a City policy was necessary and why the existing PDC laws
were not sufficient. He preferred to rely on the responsibility of individual Councilmembers. Council
President Wilson agreed in general, noting to whom questions/concerns are directed should be
determined.
MOTION CARRIED (5-2), COUNCILMEMBERS WAMBOLT AND ORVIS OPPOSED.
9. REVIEW OF CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT RESERVED BY ORDINANCE NO. 3729. THE
EASEMENT INVOLVES THE VACATED RIGHT OF WAY OF A PLATTED BUT UNBUILT
PUBLIC ALLEY LYING BETWEEN THE 700 BLOCK OF 8TH AVE. N AND 9TH AVE. N AND
PARALLEL TO AND NORTH OF DALEY STREET. THE RESERVED CONSTRUCTION
EASEMENT IS FOR THE INSTALLATION OF A DRIVEWAY AND RETAINING WALL ON
PROPERTY LYING NORTH OF THE ALLEY AND EAST OF 8TH AVE. N.
This item was removed from the agenda via motion under Agenda Item 1.
10. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
Mayor Haakenson reported Development Services began accepting online single family plumbing and
mechanical permits, single family reroofing permits and critical area permits today. All the contractors in
the City have been notified of the availability of online permits.
Mayor Haakenson wished good luck to all the candidates in tomorrow’s election.
11. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Council President Wilson asked whether the Council wanted to schedule a meeting on November 24.
City Clerk Sandy Chase advised Wednesday, November 25 was a furlough day and the Thanksgiving
Holiday was November 26 and 27. It was the consensus of the Council to cancel the November 24
Council meeting.
Councilmember Wambolt expressed concern that no progress was being on the sidewalks on Dayton. He
was also concerned with the construction disarray on 212th. He anticipated the contractors had too many
projects underway. Mayor Haakenson offered to confer with the City Engineer.
Packet Page 19 of 374
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 2, 2009
Page 17
Councilmember Bernheim announced Rick Steves and the ACLU will have a public conversation about
potential reforms in marijuana laws on November 16 at the Edmonds Center for the Arts. He urged the
public to attend, noting enforcement of marijuana laws was very expensive for the City and State.
12. ADJOURN
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:08 p.m.
Packet Page 20 of 374
AM-2606 2.C.
Approval of Claim Checks and Payroll Direct Deposit and Checks
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:11/17/2009
Submitted By:Debbie Karber Time:Consent
Department:Finance Type:Action
Review Committee:
Committee Action:Approved for Consent Agenda
Information
Subject Title
Approval of claim checks #115133 through #115315 dated November 5, 2009 for $884,683.70,
and #115316 through #115434 dated November 12, 2009 for $217,299.66. Approval of payroll
direct deposit and checks #48714 through #48753 for the pay period October 16 through October
31, 2009 for $806,065.43.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
Approval of claim checks and direct deposit and checks.
Previous Council Action
N/A
Narrative
In accordance with the State statutes, City payments must be approved by the City Council.
Ordinance #2896 delegates this approval to the Council President who reviews and recommends
either approval or non-approval of expenditures.
Fiscal Impact
Fiscal Year:2009
Revenue:
Expenditure:$1,908,048.79
Fiscal Impact:
Claims: $1,101,983.36
Payroll: $ 806,065.43
Attachments
Link: Claim cks 11-5-09
Link: Claims cks 11-12-09
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 Finance Lorenzo Hines 11/12/2009 04:56 PM APRV
2 City Clerk Sandy Chase 11/12/2009 04:56 PM APRV
3 Mayor Gary Haakenson 11/12/2009 05:00 PM APRV
Packet Page 21 of 374
4 Final Approval Sandy Chase 11/12/2009 05:14 PM APRV
Form Started By: Debbie
Karber
Started On: 11/12/2009 11:13
AM
Final Approval Date: 11/12/2009
Packet Page 22 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
1
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115133 11/5/2009 072627 911 ETC INC 167330 MONTHLY DATABASE MAINT
Monthly database maint
001.000.310.518.880.480.00 101.50
Total :101.50
115134 11/5/2009 065052 AARD PEST CONTROL 274183 RODENT CONTROL
RODENT CONTROL
001.000.640.576.800.480.00 85.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.480.00 8.08
Total :93.08
115135 11/5/2009 071177 ADVANTAGE BUILDING SERVICES 09-556 JANITORIAL SERVICE
JANITORIAL SERVICE
411.000.656.538.800.410.23 334.00
FLOORING MAINTENANCE09-557
FLOORING MAINTENANCE
411.000.656.538.800.410.23 273.33
Total :607.33
115136 11/5/2009 069829 AMIDO, BENJAMIM AMIDO11532 UKULELE CLASSES
UKULELE CLASS #11532
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 140.00
Total :140.00
115137 11/5/2009 069751 ARAMARK 655-4569619 UNIFORM SERVICES
PARK MAINTENANCE UNIFORM SERVICES
001.000.640.576.800.240.00 34.04
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.240.00 3.23
Total :37.27
115138 11/5/2009 069751 ARAMARK 655-4569623 21580001
1Page:
Packet Page 23 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
2
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115138 11/5/2009 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK
UNIFORM SERVICE
411.000.656.538.800.240.00 92.51
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.240.00 8.79
Total :101.30
115139 11/5/2009 069751 ARAMARK 655-4549676 Fleet Uniform Svc
Fleet Uniform Svc
511.000.657.548.680.240.00 17.90
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.240.00 1.70
2Page:
Packet Page 24 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
3
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115139 11/5/2009 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK
PW Mat655-4561989
PW Mat
001.000.650.519.910.410.00 1.75
PW Mat
111.000.653.542.900.410.00 6.65
PW Mat
411.000.652.542.900.410.00 6.65
PW Mat
411.000.654.534.800.410.00 6.65
PW Mat
411.000.655.535.800.410.00 6.65
PW Mat
511.000.657.548.680.410.00 6.65
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.650.519.910.410.00 0.17
9.5% Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.900.410.00 0.63
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.652.542.900.410.00 0.63
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.410.00 0.63
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.410.00 0.63
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.410.00 0.64
Fac Maint Uniform Svc655-4569620
Fac Maint Uniform Svc
001.000.651.519.920.240.00 40.44
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.240.00 3.84
3Page:
Packet Page 25 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
4
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115139 11/5/2009 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK
PW Mats655-4574087
PW Mats
001.000.650.519.910.410.00 1.75
PW Mats
111.000.653.542.900.410.00 6.65
PW Mats
411.000.652.542.900.410.00 6.65
PW Mats
411.000.654.534.800.410.00 6.65
PW Mats
411.000.655.535.800.410.00 6.65
PW Mats
511.000.657.548.680.410.00 6.65
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.650.519.910.410.00 0.17
9.5% Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.900.410.00 0.63
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.652.542.900.410.00 0.63
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.410.00 0.63
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.410.00 0.63
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.410.00 0.64
Total :140.54
115140 11/5/2009 071124 ASSOCIATED PETROLEUM 0010916-IN 01-7500014
DIESEL FUEL
411.000.656.538.800.320.00 1,881.25
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.320.00 178.71
Total :2,059.96
115141 11/5/2009 071124 ASSOCIATED PETROLEUM 0010083-IN Fleet Fuel - Reg 7,000 Gal
4Page:
Packet Page 26 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
5
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115141 11/5/2009 (Continued)071124 ASSOCIATED PETROLEUM
Fleet Fuel - Reg 7,000 Gal
511.000.657.548.680.340.11 12,923.40
St Excise Tax Gas, WA Oil Spill
511.000.657.548.680.340.11 2,807.35
Premium 2,001 Gal
511.000.657.548.680.340.12 3,887.94
St Excise Tax Gas, WA Oil Spill
511.000.657.548.680.340.12 804.84
Diesel 1,055 Gal
511.000.657.548.680.340.10 2,061.36
St Excise Tax Diesel, WA Oil Spill
511.000.657.548.680.340.10 424.49
Biodesiel - 55 Gal
511.000.657.548.680.340.13 150.77
St Excise Tax Biodesiel, WA Oil Spill
511.000.657.548.680.340.13 23.32
WA St Svc Fee
511.000.657.548.680.340.13 40.00
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.340.13 3.80
Total :23,127.27
115142 11/5/2009 064807 ATS AUTOMATION INC 042157 alerton system-PW
alerton system-PW
001.000.651.519.920.480.00 1,541.25
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.480.00 146.42
Total :1,687.67
115143 11/5/2009 070434 AURORA PLASTICS & PACKAGING 18991 INV#18991 EDMONDS PD
5Page:
Packet Page 27 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
6
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115143 11/5/2009 (Continued)070434 AURORA PLASTICS & PACKAGING
ZIPLOCKS, 4x6
001.000.410.521.910.310.00 24.88
ZIPLOCKS, 6x9
001.000.410.521.910.310.00 46.34
ZIPLOCKS, 9x12
001.000.410.521.910.310.00 76.95
ZIPLOCKS, 2x3
001.000.410.521.910.310.00 9.48
Freight
001.000.410.521.910.310.00 26.18
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.910.310.00 17.46
Total :201.29
115144 11/5/2009 070305 AUTOMATIC FUNDS TRANSFER 52683 OUT SOURCING OF UTILITY BILLS
UB Outsourcing area #200 Printing
411.000.652.542.900.490.00 89.86
UB Outsourcing area #200 Printing
411.000.654.534.800.490.00 89.86
UB Outsourcing area #200 Printing
411.000.655.535.800.490.00 90.14
UB Outsourcing area #200 Postage
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 288.91
UB Outsourcing area #200 Postage
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 288.91
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.652.542.900.490.00 8.54
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.490.00 8.54
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.490.00 8.56
Total :873.32
115145 11/5/2009 069076 BACKGROUND INVESTIGATIONS INC COE1009 Background check services
6Page:
Packet Page 28 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
7
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115145 11/5/2009 (Continued)069076 BACKGROUND INVESTIGATIONS INC
Background check services
001.000.220.516.100.410.00 115.00
Total :115.00
115146 11/5/2009 061659 BAILEY'S TRADITIONAL TAEKWON BAILEY11364 TAEKWON DO CLASSES
TAEKWON DO #11364
001.000.640.575.540.410.00 255.50
TAEKWON DO #11360
001.000.640.575.540.410.00 858.90
TAEKWON-DO CLASSESBAILEY11710
TKO - TOT #11710
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 147.74
TOT TKO #12116
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 120.25
Total :1,382.39
115147 11/5/2009 070992 BANC OF AMERICA LEASING 011231338 COPIER RENTAL
COPIER RENTAL
001.000.230.512.501.450.00 154.40
Total :154.40
115148 11/5/2009 070992 BANC OF AMERICA LEASING 011231339 Canon 5870 Copier Lease (12/1 -
7Page:
Packet Page 29 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
8
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115148 11/5/2009 (Continued)070992 BANC OF AMERICA LEASING
Canon 5870 Copier Lease (12/1 -
001.000.610.519.700.450.00 101.35
Canon 5870 Copier Lease (12/1 -
001.000.220.516.100.450.00 101.32
Canon 5870 Copier Lease (12/1 -
001.000.210.513.100.450.00 101.33
Supply charge
001.000.610.519.700.450.00 25.01
Supply charge
001.000.220.516.100.450.00 25.00
Supply charge
001.000.210.513.100.450.00 24.99
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.610.519.700.450.00 12.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.220.516.100.450.00 12.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.210.513.100.450.00 12.00
Total :415.00
115149 11/5/2009 072987 BASSO, AMBER 0341082 REFUND SPAY/NEUTER REFUND INV#0341082
SPAY/NEUTER REFUND IMP#7971
001.000.000.343.930.000.00 50.00
Total :50.00
115150 11/5/2009 066891 BEACON PUBLISHING INC 7588 Citizen's Commission vacancy ad
Citizen's Commission vacancy ad
001.000.220.516.100.440.00 356.40
Total :356.40
115151 11/5/2009 070803 BITCO SOFTWARE LLC 308 Additions and revisions to Permit Trax.
Additions and revisions to Permit Trax.
001.000.620.558.800.410.00 145.00
Total :145.00
8Page:
Packet Page 30 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
9
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115152 11/5/2009 002500 BLUMENTHAL UNIFORM CO INC 759700 INV#759700 - EDMONDS PD - FRAUSTO
511 TACT FBI PANTS
001.000.410.521.220.240.00 39.99
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.240.00 3.80
INV#759700-80 - EDMONDS PD - FRAUSTO759700-80
511 TACT FBI PANTS
001.000.410.521.220.240.00 -39.99
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.240.00 -3.80
INV#773098 - EDMONDS PD - MCINTYRE773098
WOOL UNIFORM PANTS
001.000.410.521.220.240.00 108.50
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.240.00 10.31
Total :118.81
115153 11/5/2009 072986 BRANDJES, ERIC AND LOUANN 2-37975 RE: 22552 UTILITY REFUND
UB Refund Gallaher / Brandjes
411.000.000.233.000.000.00 90.90
Total :90.90
115154 11/5/2009 072855 BROWN DOG PRODUCTIONS 106 DATA ENTRY
Data Entry 1819 cards
411.000.655.535.800.410.00 1,895.00
Total :1,895.00
115155 11/5/2009 069295 BROWN, CANDY BROWN11283 BIRDS ARE AWESOME
BIRDS ARE AWESOME!~
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 53.90
Total :53.90
115156 11/5/2009 072988 BUNTTING INC C198 Pmt 1 Sr Ctr Entry Repair Pmt 1 thru
9Page:
Packet Page 31 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
10
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115156 11/5/2009 (Continued)072988 BUNTTING INC
Sr Ctr Entry Repair Pmt 1 thru
116.000.651.519.920.480.00 28,060.00
Sr Ctr Entry Repair Pmt 1 thru
116.000.000.223.400.000.00 -1,403.00
9.5% Sales Tax
116.000.651.519.920.480.00 2,665.70
Total :29,322.70
115157 11/5/2009 072955 BUTTERWORTH, GERALD 100909 JUROR
JUROR
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 15.50
Total :15.50
115158 11/5/2009 070892 CASCADE BANK E6DA.Retg 4 E6DA.Precision Earthworks Ret 4
E6DA.Precision Earthworks Ret 4
125.000.640.594.750.650.00 19,503.59
Total :19,503.59
115159 11/5/2009 003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY LY149630 2954000
OXYGEN
411.000.656.538.800.450.21 28.56
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.450.21 2.72
Total :31.28
115160 11/5/2009 003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY LY149670 ALS SUPPLIES
Medical oxygen
001.000.510.526.100.310.00 45.96
Freight
001.000.510.526.100.310.00 17.50
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.510.526.100.310.00 6.03
10Page:
Packet Page 32 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
11
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115160 11/5/2009 (Continued)003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY
ALS SUPPLIESLY149672
medical oxygen
001.000.510.526.100.310.00 135.44
Freight
001.000.510.526.100.310.00 17.50
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.510.526.100.310.00 14.52
ALS SUPPLIESLY149673
medical oxygen
001.000.510.526.100.310.00 22.98
Freight
001.000.510.526.100.310.00 17.50
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.510.526.100.310.00 3.84
Total :281.27
115161 11/5/2009 066382 CINTAS CORPORATION 460541724 OPS UNIFORMS
Stn. 20
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 103.71
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 9.85
OPS UNIFORMS460543869
Stn. 16
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 139.89
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 13.29
CREDIT VOLUNTEER UNIFORMS460543870
Volunteer program terminated
001.000.510.522.410.240.00 -87.60
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.510.522.410.240.00 -8.31
Total :170.83
115162 11/5/2009 019215 CITY OF LYNNWOOD 7442 ALS SUPPLIES & PROF SERV
11Page:
Packet Page 33 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
12
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115162 11/5/2009 (Continued)019215 CITY OF LYNNWOOD
ALS supplies
001.000.510.526.100.310.00 6,789.78
ALS service fee
001.000.510.526.100.410.00 271.59
ALS SUPPLIES & PROF SERVICES7443
ALS supplies
001.000.510.526.100.310.00 7,876.73
Admin service fees
001.000.510.526.100.310.00 315.06
Total :15,253.16
115163 11/5/2009 004095 COASTWIDE LABS W2121669 FAC - ECOGreen Towels
FAC - ECOGreen Towels
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 103.96
Fac Maint - Seat Covers, TT, Towels
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 279.46
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 36.42
Total :419.84
115164 11/5/2009 064369 CODE PUBLISHING CO 34140 CODE UPDATES
ECC & ECDC Supplements
001.000.250.514.300.410.00 6,232.80
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.250.514.300.410.00 592.12
Total :6,824.92
115165 11/5/2009 071308 COLELLA, TERESA COLELLA1029 VOLLEYBALL GYM ATTENDANT
VOLLEYBALL GYM ATTENDANT @ EDMONDS CC
001.000.640.575.520.410.00 210.00
Total :210.00
115166 11/5/2009 070323 COMCAST 0721433 CEMETERY INTERNET ACCESS
INTERNET ACCESS FOR CEMETERY OFFICE
130.000.640.536.200.420.00 113.30
12Page:
Packet Page 34 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
13
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :113.3011516611/5/2009 070323 070323 COMCAST
115167 11/5/2009 066368 CRYSTAL AND SIERRA SPRINGS 1009 2989771 5374044 INV#1009 2989771 5374044 EDMONDS PD
HOT/COLD COOLER RENTAL
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 10.00
5 GALLON DRINKING H20 BOTTLES
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 90.09
ENERGY SURCHARGE
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 1.91
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 0.95
Total :102.95
115168 11/5/2009 061570 DAY WIRELESS SYSTEMS - 16 145531 OPS REPAIRS
Repair radio freq., modem
001.000.510.522.200.480.00 291.25
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.510.522.200.480.00 27.67
Total :318.92
115169 11/5/2009 061570 DAY WIRELESS SYSTEMS - 16 INV#145548 INV#145548 - EDMONDS PD
CALIBRATION GHD-02435 -16
001.000.410.521.220.480.00 75.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.480.00 7.13
Total :82.13
115170 11/5/2009 029900 DEPT OF RETIREMENT SYSTEMS Oct 2009 OCTOBER 2009 DRS
October 2009 DRS taking September 2009
811.000.000.231.540.000.00 161,609.96
Total :161,609.96
115171 11/5/2009 072956 DEVINE, ANDY 10092009 JUROR
JUROR
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 15.50
Total :15.50
13Page:
Packet Page 35 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
14
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115172 11/5/2009 064531 DINES, JEANNIE 09-3043 MINUTE TAKING
10/27 Council Minutes
001.000.250.514.300.410.00 174.00
Total :174.00
115173 11/5/2009 068591 DOUBLEDAY, MICHAEL 102009 STATE LOBBYIST CHARGES OCTOBER 2009
State lobbyist charges for 10/2009
001.000.610.519.700.410.00 2,391.25
Total :2,391.25
115174 11/5/2009 072957 DRISKELL, DANA 10092009 JUROR
JUROR
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 15.50
Total :15.50
115175 11/5/2009 072958 EBERTH, LISA 10092009 JUROR
JUROR
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 15.50
Total :15.50
115176 11/5/2009 071596 EBORALL, STEVE EBORALL11567 ART CLUB
ART CLUB #11567
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 218.96
Total :218.96
115177 11/5/2009 007675 EDMONDS AUTO PARTS 15611 SCISSORS
SCISSORS
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 5.98
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 0.57
Total :6.55
115178 11/5/2009 007675 EDMONDS AUTO PARTS 15295 Sewer LS 4 - Gold Band Lube
Sewer LS 4 - Gold Band Lube
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 13.35
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 1.27
14Page:
Packet Page 36 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
15
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115178 11/5/2009 (Continued)007675 EDMONDS AUTO PARTS
FAC - Rope Cleat15308
FAC - Rope Cleat
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 7.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 0.67
Sewer - LS 4 - Gold Band Lube15346
Sewer - LS 4 - Gold Band Lube
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 8.90
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 0.85
Total :32.04
115179 11/5/2009 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 7-05276 WATER
820 15TH ST SW~
130.000.640.536.500.470.00 98.23
Total :98.23
115180 11/5/2009 031060 ELECSYS INTERNATIONAL CORP 082640 Radix Monthly Maint Agreement~
Radix Monthly Maint Agreement~
411.000.654.534.800.480.00 152.00
Total :152.00
115181 11/5/2009 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES 048996 COPIER MAINT
COPIER MAINT
001.000.230.512.501.480.00 94.38
Total :94.38
115182 11/5/2009 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES 049464 MK0653
COPIER CONTRACT
411.000.656.538.800.310.41 169.08
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.41 16.06
Total :185.14
115183 11/5/2009 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES 049466 ADMIN MAINT
15Page:
Packet Page 37 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
16
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115183 11/5/2009 (Continued)008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.510.522.100.480.00 3.83
copier maint
001.000.510.522.100.480.00 40.28
Total :44.11
115184 11/5/2009 047407 EMPLOYMENT SECURITY DEPT 945133-10 7 UBI # 312 000 093 000
Q-3 09 Unemployment Insurance
001.000.390.517.780.230.00 19,039.13
Total :19,039.13
115185 11/5/2009 071967 ENG, STEPHEN ENG11368 TAEKWON DO
BEGINNING TAEKWON DO #11368
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 77.70
Total :77.70
115186 11/5/2009 008969 ENGLAND, CHARLES ENGLAND11683 SATURDAY NIGHT DANCE CLASSES
DANCE CLASS #11683
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 448.00
DANCE CLASS #11684
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 320.00
DANCE CLASS #11686
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 512.00
Total :1,280.00
115187 11/5/2009 008975 ENTENMANN ROVIN CO 0055739-IN INV#0055739-IN, ACCT#0011847 EDMONDS PD
ARTWORK FOR SR. ANIMAL CONTROL
001.000.410.521.100.410.00 50.00
Total :50.00
115188 11/5/2009 072977 EPIC ASSET MANAGEMENT BLD20090382 Application Void. Requested plans were
Application Void. Requested plans were
001.000.000.257.620.000.00 75.00
Total :75.00
115189 11/5/2009 072984 ESTATE OF FOSTER POWELL 8-35750 RE: 09-481-JMO UTILITY REFUND
16Page:
Packet Page 38 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
17
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115189 11/5/2009 (Continued)072984 ESTATE OF FOSTER POWELL
Cimino / Powell UB Refund
411.000.000.233.000.000.00 6.27
Total :6.27
115190 11/5/2009 066378 FASTENAL COMPANY WAMOU18276 SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 19.70
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 1.87
Total :21.57
115191 11/5/2009 069380 FBINAA WASHINGTON CHAPTER 12-1-09 LAWLESS 12-1-09 HOLIDAY TRAINING/LUNCH LAWLESS
TRAINING INCL LUNCH 12/1/09
001.000.410.521.400.490.00 35.00
Total :35.00
115192 11/5/2009 009895 FELDMAN, JAMES A 103109 OCT-09 PUBLIC DEFENDER FEE
Oct-09 Public Defender Fee
001.000.390.512.520.410.00 11,200.00
Total :11,200.00
115193 11/5/2009 066590 FELIX LLC, ROBERT W FELIX11707 WEIGHT LOSS WITH HYPNOSIS
WEIGHT LOSS WITH HYPNOSIS~
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 623.00
Total :623.00
115194 11/5/2009 069940 FIRST ADVANTAGE SBS 189080 INV# 189080 ODY900JJM EDMONDS PD
CREDIT REPORT
001.000.410.521.100.410.00 10.50
Total :10.50
115195 11/5/2009 070855 FLEX PLAN SERVICES INC 143005 August 2009 - Section 125 Plan fees
August 2009 - Section 125 Plan fees
001.000.220.516.100.410.00 50.00
August 2009 - Section 132 Plan fees
001.000.220.516.100.410.00 33.30
17Page:
Packet Page 39 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
18
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115195 11/5/2009 (Continued)070855 FLEX PLAN SERVICES INC
September 2009- Section 125 plan fees144443
September 2009- Section 125 plan fees
001.000.220.516.100.410.00 50.00
September 2009 - Section 132 plan fees
001.000.220.516.100.410.00 32.20
October 2009 - Section 125 Plan fees145887
October 2009 - Section 125 Plan fees
001.000.220.516.100.410.00 50.00
October 2009 - Section 132 Plan fees
001.000.220.516.100.410.00 37.20
Total :252.70
115196 11/5/2009 072985 FRAKER, RICHARD AND TRACY 4-08850 RE: 30028942-326 JG1 UTILITY REFUND
Fleck / Fraker UB Refund
411.000.000.233.000.000.00 104.94
Total :104.94
115197 11/5/2009 072959 GEMZA, MARIANNE 10092009 JUROR
JUROR
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 15.50
Total :15.50
115198 11/5/2009 072796 GIPPERT, WINFIELD GIPPERT1009 BASKETBALL SCOREKEEPER
BASKETBALL SCOREKEEPER @ ANDERSON CENTER
001.000.640.575.520.410.00 105.00
Total :105.00
115199 11/5/2009 068617 GLEISNER, BARBARA GLEISNER11445 TAI CHI
TAI CHI #11445
001.000.640.575.540.410.00 536.25
TAI CHI #11452
001.000.640.575.540.410.00 292.50
TAI CHI #11451
001.000.640.575.540.410.00 195.00
Total :1,023.75
18Page:
Packet Page 40 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
19
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115200 11/5/2009 063137 GOODYEAR AUTO SERVICE CENTER 091867 Unit 134 - Tires
Unit 134 - Tires
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 773.88
Fleet Tire Inventory - 12
511.000.657.548.680.340.40 1,115.88
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 73.52
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.340.40 106.01
Total :2,069.29
115201 11/5/2009 068011 HALLAM, RICHARD 75 LEOFF 1 Reimbursement
LEOFF 1 Reimbursement
009.000.390.517.370.230.00 297.80
Total :297.80
115202 11/5/2009 010900 HD FOWLER CO INC I2625956 Water - Valve Box Water Lids, 12" Valve
Water - Valve Box Water Lids, 12" Valve
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 1,356.20
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 128.84
Total :1,485.04
115203 11/5/2009 069332 HEALTHFORCE OCCMED 2126-139 OPS PROF SERVICES
Karg, DO fit-for-duty
001.000.510.522.200.410.00 978.00
Total :978.00
115204 11/5/2009 072960 HEDMAN, CYNTHIA 10092009 JUROR
JUROR
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 15.50
Total :15.50
115205 11/5/2009 072961 HENDERSON, REBEKAH 10092009 JUROR
JUROR
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 15.50
19Page:
Packet Page 41 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
20
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :15.5011520511/5/2009 072961 072961 HENDERSON, REBEKAH
115206 11/5/2009 013350 HIGHLAND, SCOTT E3JC.6 E3JC.Highland Services thru 10/30/09
E3JC.Highland Services thru 10/30/09
412.100.630.594.320.650.00 1,129.08
Total :1,129.08
115207 11/5/2009 072962 HOUSE, GARY 10092009 JUROR
JUROR
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 15.50
Total :15.50
115208 11/5/2009 070896 HSBC BUSINESS SOLUTIONS 8941 PW - Supplies
PW - Supplies
111.000.653.542.900.310.00 36.76
PW - Supplies
411.000.652.542.900.310.00 36.76
PW - Supplies
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 36.76
PW - Supplies
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 36.76
PW - Supplies
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 36.75
Total :183.79
115209 11/5/2009 070105 IFFERT, PAUL 510-2261 ALS TRAVEL
B'ham conf travel
001.000.510.526.100.430.00 336.03
Total :336.03
115210 11/5/2009 070042 IKON FINANCIAL SERVICES 80667716 C/A 467070-1003748A4
Finance Copier Rental 10/22-11/21/09
001.000.310.514.230.450.00 454.07
Add'l copy charge 8/24-10/2/09
001.000.310.514.230.450.00 52.83
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.310.514.230.450.00 48.15
20Page:
Packet Page 42 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
21
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :555.0511521011/5/2009 070042 070042 IKON FINANCIAL SERVICES
115211 11/5/2009 006841 IKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS 5012659220 INV#5012659220, CONT#1990279- EDMONDS PD
ANNUAL MAIN AGMT - MICROFICHE
001.000.410.521.110.410.00 297.56
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.110.410.00 28.27
Total :325.83
115212 11/5/2009 068952 INFINITY INTERNET 2867155 PRESCHOOL INTERNET ACCESS
MEADOWDALE PRESCHOOL INTERNET ACCESS
001.000.640.575.560.420.00 15.00
Total :15.00
115213 11/5/2009 071634 INTEGRA TELECOM 768421 6046045
PR1-1 City Phone Service thru 10/25/09
001.000.310.518.880.420.00 921.12
Total :921.12
115214 11/5/2009 014900 INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF 91730 MEMBERSHIP
Annual membership Chase & Hynd
001.000.250.514.300.490.00 240.00
Total :240.00
115215 11/5/2009 015270 JCI JONES CHEMICALS INC 449583 54278825
HYPOCHLORITE SOLUTION
411.000.656.538.800.310.53 3,457.12
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.53 328.43
Total :3,785.55
115216 11/5/2009 017135 LANDAU ASSOCIATES INC 25811 Professional Services through 10/24/09.
Professional Services through 10/24/09.
001.000.000.245.900.621.00 1,146.76
Total :1,146.76
115217 11/5/2009 072059 LEE, NICOLE 663 INTERPRETER
21Page:
Packet Page 43 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
22
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115217 11/5/2009 (Continued)072059 LEE, NICOLE
INTERPRETER
001.000.230.512.501.410.01 88.25
Total :88.25
115218 11/5/2009 069594 LINK PIPE INC 5525 Sewer - Link Pipes for Sewer Repair
Sewer - Link Pipes for Sewer Repair
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 3,352.20
Freight
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 180.00
Total :3,532.20
115219 11/5/2009 066064 LISTEN AUDIOLOGY SERVICE INC 2356 INV#2356 EDMONDS PD - 10/6/09 TESTING
HEARING TEST/ANALYSIS - 27
001.000.410.521.100.410.00 567.00
FUEL/MILEAGE CHARGE
001.000.410.521.100.410.00 45.00
Total :612.00
115220 11/5/2009 072963 LONG, JULIE 10092009 JUROR
JUROR
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 15.50
Total :15.50
115221 11/5/2009 072964 LONG, STEPHEN 10092009 JURORS
JURORS
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 15.50
Total :15.50
115222 11/5/2009 018760 LUNDS OFFICE ESSENTIALS 102689 BUSINESS CARDS~ TREATMENT PLANT & PW
22Page:
Packet Page 44 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
23
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115222 11/5/2009 (Continued)018760 LUNDS OFFICE ESSENTIALS
Business Cards~250-00231
411.000.656.538.800.310.41 19.16
Curt Zuvela250-00231
411.000.656.538.800.310.41 19.16
PW Business Cards250-00231
001.000.650.519.910.310.00 19.16
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.41 3.64
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.650.519.910.310.00 1.82
Total :62.94
115223 11/5/2009 072992 LYNNWOOD ICE CENTER LYNNWOOD11395 ICE SKATING LESSONS
LEARN TO SKATE #11395
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 115.50
LEARN TO SKATE #11398
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 192.50
Total :308.00
115224 11/5/2009 069362 MARSHALL, CITA 4318 (604)INTERPRETER
INTERPRETER
001.000.230.512.500.410.01 88.25
INTERPRETER FEE613
INTERPRETER FEE
001.000.230.512.501.410.01 88.25
INTERPRETER FEES615
INTERPRETER FEES
001.000.390.512.520.410.00 88.25
INTERPRETER FEE641
INTERPRETER FEE
001.000.230.512.500.410.01 88.25
INTERPRETER FEE642
INTERPRETER FEE
001.000.390.512.520.410.00 88.25
23Page:
Packet Page 45 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
24
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115224 11/5/2009 (Continued)069362 MARSHALL, CITA
INTERPRETER FEE643
INTERPRETER FEE
001.000.390.512.520.410.00 88.25
INTERPRETER FEE652
INTERPRETER FEE
001.000.230.512.500.410.01 88.25
INTERPRETER653
INTERPRETER
001.000.230.512.501.410.01 88.25
INTERPRETER FEE654
INTERPRETER FEE
001.000.230.512.500.410.01 88.25
INTERPRETER FEE655
INTERPRETER FEE
001.000.390.512.520.410.00 88.25
INTERPRETER FEE656
INTERPRETER FEE
001.000.390.512.520.410.00 88.25
INTERPRETER FEE657
INTERPRETER FEE
001.000.390.512.520.410.00 88.25
INTERPRETER FEE658
INTERPRETER FEE
001.000.230.512.500.410.01 88.25
INTERPRETER FEE659
INTERPRETER FEE
001.000.230.512.501.410.01 128.25
INTERPRETER661
INTERPRETER
001.000.230.512.500.410.01 88.25
Total :1,363.75
115225 11/5/2009 070028 MCA 102309 PROBATION TRAINING
PROBATION TRAINING
001.000.230.512.501.490.00 10.00
24Page:
Packet Page 46 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
25
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :10.0011522511/5/2009 070028 070028 MCA
115226 11/5/2009 072965 MCLELLAN, DARLENE 10092009 JURORS
JURORS
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 15.50
Total :15.50
115227 11/5/2009 020039 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO 40429404 123106800
HOSE COUPLING
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 104.08
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 6.08
Total :110.16
115228 11/5/2009 072966 MEICHO, RONALD 10092009 JURORS
JURORS
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 15.50
Total :15.50
115229 11/5/2009 072990 MEREDITH, RICHARD MERERDITH1029 REFUND
REFUND OF DAMAGE DEPOSIT
001.000.000.239.200.000.00 200.00
Total :200.00
115230 11/5/2009 072223 MILLER, DOUG MILLER1028 GYM MONITOR
GYM MONITOR FOR 3 ON 3~
001.000.640.575.520.410.00 120.00
Total :120.00
115231 11/5/2009 020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENT ALL INC 98162 AIR FILTER, STARTER ROPE
STIHL AIR FILTER, STARTER ROPE
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 18.12
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 1.72
Total :19.84
115232 11/5/2009 072991 MOE, CHELSY MOE1103 MEADOWDALE PRESCHOOL SUB
25Page:
Packet Page 47 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
26
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115232 11/5/2009 (Continued)072991 MOE, CHELSY
MEADOWDALE PRESCHOOL SUBSTITUTE~
001.000.640.575.560.410.00 36.72
Total :36.72
115233 11/5/2009 072492 MOLINA, NILDA MOLINA11556 ZUMBA CLASSES
ZUMBA #11556
001.000.640.575.540.410.00 526.68
Total :526.68
115234 11/5/2009 069519 MONFORT, MARY MONFORT1028 REIMBURSEMENT
WOTS REIMBURSEMENT
117.100.640.573.100.310.00 278.15
Total :278.15
115235 11/5/2009 021983 MOTOR TRUCKS INC 110182708 Unit 471 - Engine Repairs
Unit 471 - Engine Repairs
511.000.657.548.680.480.00 2,203.19
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.480.00 202.69
Total :2,405.88
115236 11/5/2009 064024 NAT'L ASSOC FOR COURT MNGMNT 2010 NATIONAL COURT ASSOCIATION FOR FEREBEE
NATIONAL COURT ASSOCIATION FOR FEREBEE
001.000.230.512.500.490.00 125.00
Total :125.00
115237 11/5/2009 024302 NELSON PETROLEUM 0414626-IN Unit 55 - Filters
Unit 55 - Filters
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 123.17
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 11.71
Unit 55 - Filters0414635-IN
Unit 55 - Filters
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 3.58
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 0.34
26Page:
Packet Page 48 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
27
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115237 11/5/2009 (Continued)024302 NELSON PETROLEUM
Unit 46 - Oil, ATF0414719-IN
Unit 46 - Oil, ATF
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 298.77
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 28.38
Total :465.95
115238 11/5/2009 065315 NEWCOMB, TRACY NEWCOMB11458 FUN FACTORY
FUN FACTORY #11458
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 753.75
Total :753.75
115239 11/5/2009 068451 NORTHEND TRUCK EQUIPMENT INC 1022746 Unit 37 - Mud Flaps
Unit 37 - Mud Flaps
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 118.20
Freight
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 15.47
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 12.70
Total :146.37
115240 11/5/2009 068663 NORTHERN ENERGY PROPANE 288446 Sewer - LS 12 - Propane fees
Sewer - LS 12 - Propane fees
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 186.05
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 17.67
Total :203.72
115241 11/5/2009 066391 NORTHSTAR CHEMICAL INC 6296 260
SODIUM BISULFITE
411.000.656.538.800.310.54 1,047.36
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.54 99.50
Total :1,146.86
115242 11/5/2009 061013 NORTHWEST CASCADE INC 1-027117 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL
27Page:
Packet Page 49 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
28
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115242 11/5/2009 (Continued)061013 NORTHWEST CASCADE INC
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL:~
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 183.47
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL1-030131
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL:~
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 214.47
Total :397.94
115243 11/5/2009 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 480969 SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
001.000.230.512.501.310.00 26.38
SUPPLIES602080
SUPPLIES
001.000.230.512.501.310.00 295.62
SUPPLIES662482
SUPPLIES
001.000.230.512.501.310.00 225.76
SUPPLIES692111
SUPPLIES
001.000.230.512.501.310.00 108.13
Total :655.89
115244 11/5/2009 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 956246 Office supplies - L. Carl
Office supplies - L. Carl
001.000.210.513.100.310.00 58.72
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.210.513.100.310.00 5.58
Total :64.30
115245 11/5/2009 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 849694 OFFICE SUPPLIES
8 1/2 X 11 COPY PAPER
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 232.74
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 22.11
28Page:
Packet Page 50 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
29
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115245 11/5/2009 (Continued)063511 OFFICE MAX INC
CREDIT868308
CREDIT
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 -0.15
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 -0.01
OFFICE SUPPLIES892065
DIVIDERS, TONER, 11 X 17 PAPER, SCISSORS
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 183.17
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 17.41
Total :455.27
115246 11/5/2009 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 888887 Stapler/cleaner/wall calendar
Stapler/cleaner/wall calendar
001.000.310.514.230.310.00 66.84
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.310.514.230.310.00 6.34
Small basket for claim checks888944
Small basket for claim checks
001.000.310.514.230.310.00 4.93
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.310.514.230.310.00 0.46
Total :78.57
115247 11/5/2009 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 934328 PW - Admin - Office Supplies
PW - Admin - Office Supplies
001.000.650.519.910.310.00 42.97
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.650.519.910.310.00 4.08
Total :47.05
115248 11/5/2009 002203 OWEN EQUIPMENT COMPANY 00054391 Unit 55 - WLDT-HPR Delector
29Page:
Packet Page 51 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
30
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115248 11/5/2009 (Continued)002203 OWEN EQUIPMENT COMPANY
Unit 55 - WLDT-HPR Delector
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 809.03
Freight
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 42.80
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 80.92
Total :932.75
115249 11/5/2009 066833 PACIFIC NW PUBLIC FLEET MGRS 10115 Annual Mbr Fee - 2009 - Fleet / D
Annual Mbr Fee - 2009 - Fleet / D
511.000.657.548.680.490.00 100.00
Total :100.00
115250 11/5/2009 063588 PACIFIC POWER PRODUCTS CO 6276753-00 Unit 475 - Repairs
Unit 475 - Repairs
511.000.657.548.680.480.00 2,288.82
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.480.00 217.44
Total :2,506.26
115251 11/5/2009 027165 PARKER PAINT MFG. CO.INC.887316 Yost Park - Paint
Yost Park - Paint
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 12.55
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 1.19
Total :13.74
115252 11/5/2009 072989 PARKER, MICHELE PARKER11625 TWILIGHT TOTS
TWILIGHT TOTS #11625
001.000.640.575.540.410.00 216.72
Total :216.72
115253 11/5/2009 069944 PECK, ELIZABETH PECK11371 TINY FEET & PILATES CLASSES
30Page:
Packet Page 52 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
31
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115253 11/5/2009 (Continued)069944 PECK, ELIZABETH
TINY FEET PLAYTIME #11371
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 477.90
PILATES #11378
001.000.640.575.540.410.00 269.97
PILATES #11382
001.000.640.575.540.410.00 352.80
Total :1,100.67
115254 11/5/2009 068563 PETSO, LORA L 07-2-08017-0 Settlement
Settlement
001.000.360.515.100.410.00 847.43
Total :847.43
115255 11/5/2009 066796 PETTY CASH - COURT 10312009 SNACKS FOR JURORS
SNACKS FOR JURORS
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 67.12
MAILING HOME MONITORING BOXES
001.000.230.512.501.490.00 12.87
MAILING PASSPORT
001.000.230.512.500.420.00 5.65
Total :85.64
115256 11/5/2009 008475 PETTY CASH - PUBLIC WORKS 8/1-10/31/09 PW - Parking for Business Meeting - N
31Page:
Packet Page 53 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
32
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115256 11/5/2009 (Continued)008475 PETTY CASH - PUBLIC WORKS
PW - Parking for Business Meeting - N
001.000.650.519.910.430.00 10.76
FS 16 - Fasteners
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 1.10
FAC Fittings
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 4.34
Fac Maint - First Aid Supplies
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 13.12
Fac Maint- First Aid Supplies
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 17.49
MCH - Clip Board Supplies
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 10.93
Traffic - Lithium Battery
111.000.653.542.640.310.00 13.13
Parks - Sign Paint
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 7.64
Fac Maint - Supplies
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 3.58
PW - Office Supplies
111.000.653.542.900.310.00 2.10
PW - Office Supplies
411.000.652.542.900.310.00 2.10
PW - Office Supplies
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 2.10
PW - Office Supplies
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 2.10
PW - Office Supplies
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 2.08
Water/Sewer - First Aid Supplies
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 5.31
Water/Sewer - First Aid Supplies
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 5.30
Water Quality - BAT Cert Test and fees
411.000.654.534.800.490.00 145.99
32Page:
Packet Page 54 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
33
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115256 11/5/2009 (Continued)008475 PETTY CASH - PUBLIC WORKS
Sewer - LS9 - Valve Balls
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 19.68
Sewer LS 9 - Hex Nipples
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 5.45
Sewer - Wall Racks
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 21.88
Sewer - TV Truck - Rope Cleats
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 13.11
Total :309.29
115257 11/5/2009 071811 PONY MAIL BOX & BUSINESS CTR 179752 Water/Sewer/Street/Storm Dept of L&I
Water/Sewer/Street/Storm Dept of L&I
411.000.652.542.900.420.00 2.16
Water/Sewer/Street/Storm Dept of L&I
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 2.16
Water/Sewer/Street/Storm Dept of L&I
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 2.16
Water/Sewer/Street/Storm Dept of L&I
111.000.653.542.900.420.00 2.14
Fac Maint - Dept of L&I Safety Film179801
Fac Maint - Dept of L&I Safety Film
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 8.62
Total :17.24
115258 11/5/2009 070979 PRECISION EARTHWORKS INC E6DA.Pmt 4 E6DA.Pmt 4 thru 10/30/09
E6DA.Pmt 4 thru 10/30/09
125.000.640.594.750.650.00 371,893.52
Total :371,893.52
115259 11/5/2009 072993 PRIMACIO, GEORENE PRIMACIO11401 GUITAR CLASSES
ROOKIE GUITAR #11401
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 172.80
Total :172.80
115260 11/5/2009 064088 PROTECTION ONE 31146525 24 HOUR ALARM MONITORING -CITY HALL
33Page:
Packet Page 55 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
34
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115260 11/5/2009 (Continued)064088 PROTECTION ONE
24 hour alarm monitoring-CH
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 36.75
Total :36.75
115261 11/5/2009 071911 PROTZ, MARGARET PROTZ11563 FELDENKRAIS
FELDENKRAIS WORKSHOP~
001.000.640.575.540.410.00 152.60
Total :152.60
115262 11/5/2009 046900 PUGET SOUND ENERGY 3689976003 200 Dayton St-Vacant PW Bldg
200 Dayton St-Vacant PW Bldg
411.000.654.534.800.470.00 223.19
MEADOWDALE CLUBHOUSE5254926008
MEADOWDALE CLUBHOUSE
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 226.39
Fire Station # 165322323139
Fire Station # 16
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 320.75
SEWER LIFT STATION #95672895009
SEWER LIFT STATION #9
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 34.27
Total :804.60
115263 11/5/2009 072254 RIVER OAKS COMMUNICATIONS CORP 11032009 COMCAST CABLE FRANCHISE NEGOTIATION
Comcast Cable franchise negotiations
001.000.610.519.700.410.00 875.65
Total :875.65
115264 11/5/2009 072967 ROUSE, STEVE 10092009 JURORS
JURORS
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 15.50
Total :15.50
115265 11/5/2009 071467 S MORRIS COMPANY 10/27/09 ACCT#70014, ANIMAL CONTROL-EDMONDS PD
34Page:
Packet Page 56 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
35
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115265 11/5/2009 (Continued)071467 S MORRIS COMPANY
#713823 9 NPC 9/28/09
001.000.410.521.700.410.00 96.12
#789048 2 NPC 10/12/09
001.000.410.521.700.410.00 21.36
Total :117.48
115266 11/5/2009 072968 SALINAS, JOHN 10092009 JURORS
JURORS
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 15.50
Total :15.50
115267 11/5/2009 072521 SAVAGE, JENNIFER SAVAGE11545 BOOT CAMP
BOOT CAMP #11545
001.000.640.575.540.410.00 245.00
Total :245.00
115268 11/5/2009 061482 SEA-WESTERN INC 138301 OPS PROTECTIVE CLOTHING
fire gloves
001.000.510.522.200.250.00 187.50
Freight
001.000.510.522.200.250.00 7.99
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.510.522.200.250.00 18.57
Total :214.06
115269 11/5/2009 072969 SHELBY-MARTIN, KATHY 10092009 JURORS
JURORS
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 15.50
Total :15.50
115270 11/5/2009 036509 SIGNATURE FORMS INC 1091961 2009 tax forms & envelopes
35Page:
Packet Page 57 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
36
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115270 11/5/2009 (Continued)036509 SIGNATURE FORMS INC
2009 tax forms & envelopes
001.000.310.514.230.310.00 294.78
Freight
001.000.310.514.230.310.00 17.35
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.310.514.230.310.00 29.65
Total :341.78
115271 11/5/2009 067644 SIGNON 10223 INTERPRETER
INTERPRETER
001.000.230.512.500.410.01 185.02
Total :185.02
115272 11/5/2009 036950 SIX ROBBLEES INC 14-207750 Unit 134 - Wheel
Unit 134 - Wheel
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 235.08
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 22.33
Total :257.41
115273 11/5/2009 036955 SKY NURSERY 282842 LIBRARY PARK IMPROVEMENT
PLANTS FOR LIBRARY BED IMPROVEMENT
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 110.82
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 10.53
BED SOUTH SIDE OF MAIN /SUNSET & 2ND283184
PLANTS FOR SMALL BED ON SOUTH SIDE OF
125.000.640.576.800.310.00 197.49
9.5% Sales Tax
125.000.640.576.800.310.00 18.76
Total :337.60
115274 11/5/2009 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 2340031869 MINI PARK RESTROOMS
MINI PARK RESTROOMS
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 136.27
36Page:
Packet Page 58 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
37
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115274 11/5/2009 (Continued)037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1
BRACKETT'S LANDING BATH HOUSE3010022725
BRACKETT'S LANDING BATH HOUSE
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 78.32
UTILITY BILLING3110774142
23202 EDMONDS WAY
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 93.25
IRRIGATION SYSTEM5100017325
IRRIGATION SYSTEM
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 41.44
Total :349.28
115275 11/5/2009 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 926039404 463-001-705-3
23219 74th AVE W/ BALLINGER
411.000.656.538.800.471.62 27.47
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.471.62 1.65
Total :29.12
115276 11/5/2009 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 2180017895 BEACON LIGHT CROSS WALK
BEACON LIGHT CROSS WALK
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 36.17
SIGNAL LIGHT2340018510
SIGNAL LIGHT
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 75.00
SIGNAL LIGHT2710014826
SIGNAL LIGHT
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 54.13
SIGNAL LIGHT3180012308
SIGNAL LIGHT
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 30.90
DECORATIVE LIGHTS 115 2ND AVE S3260494996
deocrative lighting
111.000.653.542.630.470.00 35.36
37Page:
Packet Page 59 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
38
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115276 11/5/2009 (Continued)037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1
SCHOOL FLASHING LIGHT3380016430
SCHOOL FLASHING LIGHT
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 30.69
SIGNAL LIGHT3630019994
SIGNAL LIGHT
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 42.41
LIFT STATION #143980029445
LIFT STATION #14
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 29.19
FIRE STATION #204650022645
FIRE STATION #20
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 753.05
SIGNAL LIGHT5240017631
SIGNAL LIGHT
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 36.06
STREET LIGHT5370016262
STREET LIGHT
111.000.653.542.630.470.00 29.19
SIGNAL LIGHT5450010938
SIGNAL LIGHT
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 100.91
LIFT STATION #15720013258
LIFT STATION #1
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 859.35
Total :2,112.41
115277 11/5/2009 038300 SOUND DISPOSAL CO 03587/110109 DISPOSAL SERVICES
PARK MAINTENANCE DISPOSAL SERVICES
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 569.64
Total :569.64
115278 11/5/2009 038300 SOUND DISPOSAL CO 03584 RECYCLING
38Page:
Packet Page 60 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
39
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115278 11/5/2009 (Continued)038300 SOUND DISPOSAL CO
RECYCLING
411.000.656.538.800.475.66 28.25
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.475.66 1.70
Total :29.95
115279 11/5/2009 038300 SOUND DISPOSAL CO 03583 garbage & recycle for PS
garbage & recycle for PS
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 550.74
garbage & recycle for FAC03585
garbage & recycle for FAC
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 674.47
garbage & recycle for Library03586
garbage & recycle for Library
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 555.23
garbage & recycle-City Hall03588
garbage & recycle-City Hall
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 459.89
Total :2,240.33
115280 11/5/2009 064996 SPARTAN MOTORS CHASSIS INC IN00411616 Unit 476 - Bolts and Nuts
Unit 476 - Bolts and Nuts
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 4.23
Freight
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 10.70
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 0.35
Total :15.28
115281 11/5/2009 060371 STANDARD INSURANCE CO October 2009 OCTOBER 2009 STANDARD INSURANCE PREMIUMS
October 2009 Standard Insurance Premiums
811.000.000.231.550.000.00 19,513.18
Total :19,513.18
115282 11/5/2009 071585 STERICYCLE INC 3000661871 INV#3000661871 CUST#6076358 EDMONDS PD
39Page:
Packet Page 61 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
40
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115282 11/5/2009 (Continued)071585 STERICYCLE INC
DISPOSAL-MED BOX HAZ WASTE
001.000.410.521.910.410.00 51.52
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.910.410.00 1.85
Total :53.37
115283 11/5/2009 040430 STONEWAY ELECTRIC SUPPLY 2005343 Unit 31 - Elect Supplies
Unit 31 - Elect Supplies
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 51.00
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 4.85
FAC - Elect Supplies2010533
FAC - Elect Supplies
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 188.12
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 17.87
Fac Maint - Elect Supplies2023005
Fac Maint - Elect Supplies
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 59.02
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 5.61
Total :326.47
115284 11/5/2009 068619 SWENSON, LINDA 1199 CRAZE COVER PHOTO
JANUARY - APRIL 2010 COVER PHOTO
001.000.640.574.200.490.00 158.34
Total :158.34
115285 11/5/2009 072555 SYSTEMS DESIGN ED1009 ALS PROF SERVICES
Sept EMS billing services
001.000.510.526.100.410.00 4,801.72
Total :4,801.72
115286 11/5/2009 072772 T E BRIGGS CONSTRUCTION CO E6DB.Pmt 5 E6DB.Pmt 5 thru 10/31/09
40Page:
Packet Page 62 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
41
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115286 11/5/2009 (Continued)072772 T E BRIGGS CONSTRUCTION CO
E6DB.Pmt 5 thru 10/31/09
112.200.630.595.330.650.00 118,258.90
E6DB.Retainage 5
112.200.000.223.400.000.00 -5,912.95
Total :112,345.95
115287 11/5/2009 040916 TC SPAN AMERICA 49635 GYMNASTICS T-SHIRTS
T-SHIRTS FOR GYMNASTICS PROGRAM
001.000.640.575.550.310.00 178.80
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.575.550.310.00 16.99
Total :195.79
115288 11/5/2009 009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY 148134 Citizen's Commision Vacancy ad
Citizen's Commision Vacancy ad
001.000.220.516.100.440.00 205.92
Total :205.92
115289 11/5/2009 009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY 1671605 NEWSPAPER ADS
10/27 Hearing (FDI)
001.000.250.514.300.440.00 61.12
NEWSPAPER AD1671826
Ordinance 3758
001.000.250.514.300.440.00 33.24
Total :94.36
115290 11/5/2009 038315 THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR 305129 FAC
monthly elevator maint-FAC~
001.000.651.519.920.480.00 807.09
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.480.00 76.67
41Page:
Packet Page 63 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
42
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115290 11/5/2009 (Continued)038315 THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR
MONTHLY ELEVATOR MAINT-LIBRARY305130
Monthly elevator maint-Library~
001.000.651.519.920.480.00 799.94
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.480.00 76.00
MONITORING-PS305131
PS Elev Maint~
001.000.651.519.920.480.00 673.39
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.480.00 63.97
MONITORING-PS305132
monitoring-PS~
001.000.651.519.920.480.00 39.68
MONTHLY ELEVATOR MONITORING-LIBRARY305133
Monthly elevator monitoring-Library
001.000.651.519.920.480.00 60.74
SENIOR CENTER ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE313203
SENIOR CENTER ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE
001.000.651.519.920.480.00 146.76
001.000.651.519.920.480.00 13.94
SENIOR CENTER ELEVATOR MONITORING313204
SENIOR CENTER ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE
001.000.651.519.920.480.00 11.94
Total :2,770.12
115291 11/5/2009 070577 TNEMEC COMPANY INC 070038507 Sewer - LS 1 - Epoxy Filler - Beige
Sewer - LS 1 - Epoxy Filler - Beige
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 159.88
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 15.19
42Page:
Packet Page 64 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
43
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115291 11/5/2009 (Continued)070577 TNEMEC COMPANY INC
Sewer - LS 1 - Endura Shields070038514
Sewer - LS 1 - Endura Shields
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 81.75
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 7.76
Sewer - LS1 - 1 gal Beige Epoxy Filler,070038553
Sewer - LS1 - 1 gal Beige Epoxy Filler,
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 243.44
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 23.12
Total :531.14
115292 11/5/2009 072970 TROYER, GREGORY 10092009 JURORS
JURORS
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 15.50
Total :15.50
115293 11/5/2009 072146 TRUAX, BREANNE 10282009 MONITOR FOR JOINT EC DEV/PB
Monitor for joint Economic Dev Comm and
001.000.240.513.110.490.00 42.00
Total :42.00
115294 11/5/2009 072146 TRUAX, BREANNE TRUAX110109 PLAZA ROOM/ANDERSON CENTER MONITOR
PLAZA ROOM AND ANDERSON CENTER MONITOR
001.000.640.574.100.410.00 96.00
Total :96.00
115295 11/5/2009 072971 TURCOTT, ROBERT 10092009 JURORS
JURORS
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 15.50
Total :15.50
115296 11/5/2009 061192 UNITED PIPE & SUPPLY 8356175 IRRIGATION SUPPLIES
43Page:
Packet Page 65 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
44
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115296 11/5/2009 (Continued)061192 UNITED PIPE & SUPPLY
RUBBER KIT
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 9.99
Freight
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 6.25
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 0.95
Total :17.19
115297 11/5/2009 061192 UNITED PIPE & SUPPLY 8347065 Water - Supplies
Water - Supplies
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 1,990.15
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 189.06
Water - Supplies8351734
Water - Supplies
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 1,030.34
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 97.88
Total :3,307.43
115298 11/5/2009 062693 US BANK 3249 MAILING PASSPORTS
MAILING PASSPORTS
001.000.230.512.500.420.00 14.40
Total :14.40
115299 11/5/2009 065269 VALLEY FREIGHTLINER INC 2293010020 Unit PS17 - Anti-Freeze
Unit PS17 - Anti-Freeze
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 39.44
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 3.75
Total :43.19
115300 11/5/2009 011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST 425-712-0647 IRRIGATION SYSTEM
IRRIGATION SYSTEM
001.000.640.576.800.420.00 42.68
44Page:
Packet Page 66 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
45
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :42.6811530011/5/2009 011900 011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST
115301 11/5/2009 011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST 425-AB8-1176 CITY PARK T1 LINE
City Park T1 Line 10/16-11/16/09
001.000.310.518.880.420.00 409.72
DEDICATED LINE FS #17 TO SNOCOM425-DH0-0667
Dedicated Line FS #17 to Snocom
001.000.310.518.880.420.00 375.97
Frame Relay for Snocom & Internet425-NW2-0887
Frame Relay for Snocom & Internet
001.000.310.518.880.420.00 280.00
Total :1,065.69
115302 11/5/2009 011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST 425-206-1108 TELEMETRY LIFT STATIONS
TELEMETRY LIFT STATIONS
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 145.47
TELEMETRY LIFT STATIONS
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 270.16
SEAVIEW RESERVOIR425-206-1137
SEAVIEW RESERVOIR
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 26.50
TELEMETRY LIFT STATION425-206-1141
TELEMETRY LIFT STATION
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 18.53
TELEMETRY LIFT STATION
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 34.41
TELEMETRY LIFT STATION425-206-4810
TELEMETRY LIFT STATION
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 42.32
TELEMETRY LIFT STATION
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 78.58
LIFT STATION #1425-673-5978
Lift Station #1
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 49.63
45Page:
Packet Page 67 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
46
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115302 11/5/2009 (Continued)011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST
PUBLIC SAFETY BLDG ELEVATOR PHONE425-712-8347
PUBLIC SAFETY BLDG ELEVATOR PHONE
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 56.32
FS # 16425-771-0158
FS #16
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 225.28
VACANT PW BLDG 200 DAYTON ST425-778-3297
VACANT PW BLDG 200 DAYTON ST
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 18.64
VACANT PW BLDG 200 DAYTON ST
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 34.61
Total :1,000.45
115303 11/5/2009 011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST 425-778-2153 FS #20 PHONE SERVICE
FS #20 PHONE SERVICE
001.000.510.522.200.420.00 49.70
FS #16 FRAME RELAY425-FLO-0017
FS #16 FRAME RELAY
001.000.510.528.600.420.00 356.85
Total :406.55
115304 11/5/2009 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS 0809691366 INV#0809691366, ACCT#470497482-00001
CELL PHONES - NARCS
104.000.410.521.210.420.00 122.93
Total :122.93
115305 11/5/2009 069816 VWR INTERNATIONAL INC 39970357 1066294
GLASS FILTERS/PETRI DISH/FILTERS
411.000.656.538.800.310.31 619.03
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.31 38.76
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.31 62.49
Total :720.28
46Page:
Packet Page 68 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
47
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115306 11/5/2009 006284 W S DARLEY AND CO AP657488 Unit 474 - 2.5" Daim Span Gauge
Unit 474 - 2.5" Daim Span Gauge
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 122.16
Freight
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 10.73
Total :132.89
115307 11/5/2009 045912 WASPC 90169 ELECTRONIC MONITORING
ELECTRONIC MONITORING
001.000.230.523.200.510.00 517.50
Total :517.50
115308 11/5/2009 061395 WASTE MANAGEMENT NW 5859338-2677-8 201-0170717-2677-6
ASH DISPOSAL
411.000.656.538.800.474.65 2,589.73
Total :2,589.73
115309 11/5/2009 072972 WEISGERBER, SHIRLEY 10092009 JURORS
JURORS
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 15.50
Total :15.50
115310 11/5/2009 072973 WEISSMAN, MELISSA 10092009 JURORS
JURORS
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 15.50
Total :15.50
115311 11/5/2009 064008 WETLANDS & WOODLANDS 38358004 5TH & DAYTON STREET TREES
OCTOBER GLORY MAPLES FOR 5TH & DAYTON
125.000.640.576.800.310.00 1,125.00
9.5% Sales Tax
125.000.640.576.800.310.00 106.88
Total :1,231.88
115312 11/5/2009 071631 WILLIAMS, SUE WILLIAMS11876 KNITTING CLASSES
KNITTING 101 #11876
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 65.00
47Page:
Packet Page 69 of 374
11/05/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
48
11:33:30AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :65.0011531211/5/2009 071631 071631 WILLIAMS, SUE
115313 11/5/2009 072983 WISE, CATHERINE 3-03725 RE: 1-0909-122 UTILITY REFUND
Wilder / C Wise UB Refund
411.000.000.233.000.000.00 60.05
Total :60.05
115314 11/5/2009 070717 WSU URBAN & PESTICIDE SAFETY PESTICIDE0121 PESTICIDE RECERTIFICATIONS
PESTICIDE RECERTIFICATIONS FOR:~
001.000.640.576.800.490.00 300.00
Total :300.00
115315 11/5/2009 070432 ZACHOR & THOMAS PS INC 910 OCT 09 MONTHLY RETAINER
Oct-09 Monthly Retainer
001.000.360.515.230.410.00 11,330.00
Total :11,330.00
Bank total :884,683.70183 Vouchers for bank code :front
884,683.70Total vouchers :Vouchers in this report183
48Page:
Packet Page 70 of 374
11/12/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
1
11:01:10AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115316 11/12/2009 072995 2ND MARINERS INVEST FD II REO 3-13925 RE: 005320-KD UTILITY REFUND
005320-KD UB Refund Sargent
411.000.000.233.000.000.00 75.46
Total :75.46
115317 11/12/2009 065052 AARD PEST CONTROL 274141 RODENT CONTROL @ MEADOWDALE
MEADOWDALE CLUBHOUSE RODENT CONTROL
001.000.640.576.800.480.00 82.12
Total :82.12
115318 11/12/2009 061029 ABSOLUTE GRAPHIX 1109510 PICKLEBALL & VOLLEYBALL T-SHIRTS
PICKLEBALL & VOLLEYBALL SHIRTS
001.000.640.575.520.310.00 108.96
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.575.520.310.00 10.35
Total :119.31
115319 11/12/2009 068201 ACTIVE NETWORK INC 1000013043 Annual Software Support & Updates
Annual Software Support & Updates
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 5,700.00
Total :5,700.00
115320 11/12/2009 066025 ANDERSON, ANGIE ANDERSON1106 PLAZA ROOM MONITOR
PLAZA ROOM MONITOR~
001.000.640.574.100.410.00 40.00
Total :40.00
115321 11/12/2009 069751 ARAMARK 655-4581837 UNIFORM SERVICES
PARK MAINTENANCE UNIFORM SERVICES
001.000.640.576.800.240.00 34.04
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.240.00 3.23
Total :37.27
115322 11/12/2009 069751 ARAMARK 655-4581841 21580001
1Page:
Packet Page 71 of 374
11/12/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
2
11:01:10AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115322 11/12/2009 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK
UNIFORM SERVICE
411.000.656.538.800.240.00 93.23
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.240.00 8.86
Total :102.09
115323 11/12/2009 069751 ARAMARK 655-4549675 Street/Storm Uniform Svc
Street/Storm Uniform Svc
411.000.652.542.900.240.00 3.51
Street/Storm Uniform Svc
111.000.653.542.900.240.00 3.51
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.652.542.900.240.00 0.34
9.5% Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.900.240.00 0.33
Street/Storm Uniform Svc655-4561990
Street/Storm Uniform Svc
111.000.653.542.900.240.00 3.51
Street/Storm Uniform Svc
411.000.652.542.900.240.00 3.51
9.5% Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.900.240.00 0.34
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.652.542.900.240.00 0.33
Street/Storm Uniform Svc655-4574088
Street/Storm Uniform Svc
111.000.653.542.900.240.00 3.51
Street/Storm Uniform Svc
411.000.652.542.900.240.00 3.51
9.5% Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.900.240.00 0.34
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.652.542.900.240.00 0.33
2Page:
Packet Page 72 of 374
11/12/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
3
11:01:10AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115323 11/12/2009 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK
Fac Maint Uniform Svc655-481838
Fac Maint Uniform Svc
001.000.651.519.920.240.00 40.44
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.240.00 3.84
Total :67.35
115324 11/12/2009 069451 ASTRA INDUSTRIAL SERVICES 00108109 Sr Center - Hot Water Ball Valves
Sr Center - Hot Water Ball Valves
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 361.00
Freight
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 13.07
FS 17 - CV Rubber Kits
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 129.20
Sr Center - Air Gap
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 48.74
City Park Bldg - Air Gap
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 48.74
Total :600.75
115325 11/12/2009 064343 AT&T 425-776-5316 PARKS FAX MODEM
PARKS FAX MODEM
001.000.640.576.800.420.00 49.64
Total :49.64
115326 11/12/2009 064343 AT&T 425-774-0944 STATION #20 FAX
STATION #20 FAX
001.000.510.522.200.420.00 42.61
Total :42.61
115327 11/12/2009 001801 AUTOMATIC WILBERT VAULT CO 11064 BURIAL SUPPLIES
BURIAL SUPPLIES: MURIE
130.000.640.536.200.340.00 388.00
3Page:
Packet Page 73 of 374
11/12/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
4
11:01:10AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115327 11/12/2009 (Continued)001801 AUTOMATIC WILBERT VAULT CO
BURIAL SUPPLIES11144
BURIAL SUPPLIES:~
130.000.640.536.200.340.00 388.00
BURIAL SUPPLIES11350
BURIAL SUPPLIES:~
130.000.640.536.200.340.00 388.00
Total :1,164.00
115328 11/12/2009 072994 BARBARVICH, JOHN 5-01000 RE: 40041862-803 JS2 UTILITY REFUND
40041862-803 JS2 utility ref Barbarvich
411.000.000.233.000.000.00 118.17
Total :118.17
115329 11/12/2009 072581 BARK TIME BLOWER TRUCK SERVICE 6446 Storm - Dump Fees
Storm - Dump Fees
411.000.652.542.320.490.00 189.50
Storm Dump Fees6447
Storm Dump Fees
411.000.652.542.320.490.00 189.50
Storm Dump Fees6448
Storm Dump Fees
411.000.652.542.320.490.00 189.50
Storm Dump Fees6451
Storm Dump Fees
411.000.652.542.320.490.00 151.60
Storm Dump Fees6473
Storm Dump Fees
411.000.652.542.320.490.00 189.50
Storm Dump Fees6474
Storm Dump Fees
411.000.652.542.320.490.00 151.60
Storm Dump Fees6477
Storm Dump Fees
411.000.652.542.320.490.00 151.60
4Page:
Packet Page 74 of 374
11/12/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
5
11:01:10AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115329 11/12/2009 (Continued)072581 BARK TIME BLOWER TRUCK SERVICE
Storm Dump Fees6479
Storm Dump Fees
411.000.652.542.320.490.00 151.60
Storm Dump Fees6482
Storm Dump Fees
411.000.652.542.320.490.00 151.60
Storm Dump Fees6483
Storm Dump Fees
411.000.652.542.320.490.00 151.60
Storm Dump Fees6484
Storm Dump Fees
411.000.652.542.320.490.00 151.60
Storm Dump Fees6486
Storm Dump Fees
411.000.652.542.320.490.00 151.60
Storm Dump Fees6488
Storm Dump Fees
411.000.652.542.320.490.00 151.60
Storm Dump Fees6494
Storm Dump Fees
411.000.652.542.320.490.00 151.60
Total :2,274.00
115330 11/12/2009 060502 BERG, COLIN BERG11447 TAI CHI
TAI CHI #11447
001.000.640.575.540.410.00 294.00
Total :294.00
115331 11/12/2009 002500 BLUMENTHAL UNIFORM CO INC 771286 INV#771286 - EDMONDS PD - FRAUSTO
UNIFORM PANTS
001.000.410.521.220.240.00 99.90
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.240.00 9.49
5Page:
Packet Page 75 of 374
11/12/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
6
11:01:10AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115331 11/12/2009 (Continued)002500 BLUMENTHAL UNIFORM CO INC
INV#771286-80 EDMONDS PD - FRAUSTO771286-80
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.240.00 -1.90
REFUND PRICE DIFFERENCE/PANTS
001.000.410.521.220.240.00 -20.00
INV#773096 - EDMONDS PD - DREYER773096
UNIFORM S/S WOOL SHIRT
001.000.410.521.220.240.00 65.66
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.240.00 6.24
Total :159.39
115332 11/12/2009 072158 BRAVO ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 523046 City Wide Vault & Catch Basin Cleaning
City Wide Vault & Catch Basin Cleaning
411.000.652.542.400.480.00 1,061.25
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.652.542.400.480.00 100.82
Total :1,162.07
115333 11/12/2009 071434 BRUNETTE, SISSEL BRUNETTE11538 PRENATAL YOGA
PRENATAL YOGA #11538
001.000.640.575.540.410.00 277.20
Total :277.20
115334 11/12/2009 068484 CEMEX / RINKER MATERIALS 9418176305 Water - Cold Mix Asphalt
Water - Cold Mix Asphalt
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 252.45
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 23.98
Total :276.43
115335 11/12/2009 003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY RN10091023 HELIUM FOR GYMNASTICS BALLOONS
6Page:
Packet Page 76 of 374
11/12/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
7
11:01:10AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115335 11/12/2009 (Continued)003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY
HELIUM FOR BIRTHDAY PARTY
001.000.640.575.550.450.00 16.60
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.575.550.450.00 1.58
Total :18.18
115336 11/12/2009 003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY RN10091024 2954000
ARGON/NITROGEN/OXYGEN
411.000.656.538.800.450.21 33.20
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.450.21 3.15
Total :36.35
115337 11/12/2009 003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY RN10091022 ALS RENTAL
oxygen cylinder rental
001.000.510.526.100.450.00 33.20
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.510.526.100.450.00 3.15
Total :36.35
115338 11/12/2009 064840 CHAPUT, KAREN E CHAPUT11579 FRIDAY NIGHT OUT
FRIDAY NIGHT OUT #11579
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 173.60
Total :173.60
115339 11/12/2009 061773 CHAVE, ROBERT Chave, Rob Claim for Expenses - Chave 7/9 to
Claim for Expenses - Chave 7/9 to
001.000.620.558.600.430.00 287.77
Total :287.77
115340 11/12/2009 066382 CINTAS CORPORATION 460546545 UNIFORMS
7Page:
Packet Page 77 of 374
11/12/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
8
11:01:10AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115340 11/12/2009 (Continued)066382 CINTAS CORPORATION
Stn. 17 - ALS
001.000.510.526.100.240.00 113.19
Stn. 17 - OPS
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 113.19
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.510.526.100.240.00 10.76
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 10.75
OPS UNIFORMS460546564
Stn. 20
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 103.71
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 9.85
OPS UNIFORMS460548693
Stn. 16
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 139.89
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 13.29
Total :514.63
115341 11/12/2009 019215 CITY OF LYNNWOOD 7422 INV#7422, CUST#47 EDMONDS PD-R&B 09/09
PRISONER R&B FOR 09/09
001.000.410.523.600.510.00 2,402.50
INV#7462, CUST#47, EDMONDS PD-R&B 10/097462
PRISONER R&B FOR 10/09
001.000.410.523.600.510.00 3,421.67
INV#7463, CUST #1430, EDMONDS PD7463
VERIZON PHONE 10/09 - NARCS
104.000.410.521.210.420.00 51.27
INV#7465, CUST #45 EDMONDS PD7465
NEXTEL PHONES-NARCS 10/09
104.000.410.521.210.420.00 56.25
Total :5,931.69
115342 11/12/2009 019215 CITY OF LYNNWOOD 7437 MONTHLY MAINT/OPERATIONS SEWER COSTS
8Page:
Packet Page 78 of 374
11/12/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
9
11:01:10AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115342 11/12/2009 (Continued)019215 CITY OF LYNNWOOD
MONTHLY MAINT/OPERATIONS SEWER COSTS
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 13,800.83
Total :13,800.83
115343 11/12/2009 035160 CITY OF SEATTLE 2-533584-460571 WATER USEAGE FOR THE MONTH OF Oct 09
WATER USEAGE FOR THE MONTH OF Oct 09
411.000.654.534.800.330.00 420.00
Total :420.00
115344 11/12/2009 004095 COASTWIDE LABS W2125516 005302
BIGFOLD TOWELS/JUMBO ROLLSAVER
411.000.656.538.800.310.23 186.34
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.23 17.70
Total :204.04
115345 11/12/2009 004095 COASTWIDE LABS W2124930 Fac Maint - Cleaning Supplies - Crew,
Fac Maint - Cleaning Supplies - Crew,
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 342.06
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 32.50
Fac Maint - Kit Roll TowelsW2124930-1
Fac Maint - Kit Roll Towels
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 181.78
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 17.27
Total :573.61
115346 11/12/2009 065891 CONLEY, LISA CONLEY11670 SPONGE GONE WILD
SPONGE GONE WILD~
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 45.50
Total :45.50
115347 11/12/2009 068917 COUNTRY HOMES POWER 369452 City - Honda Snow Blower
9Page:
Packet Page 79 of 374
11/12/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
10
11:01:10AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115347 11/12/2009 (Continued)068917 COUNTRY HOMES POWER
City - Honda Snow Blower
001.000.651.519.920.350.00 639.20
Freight
001.000.651.519.920.350.00 100.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.350.00 70.22
Total :809.42
115348 11/12/2009 072189 DATASITE 63775 SHREDDING SERVICES/CABINETS
Doc Shred Services City Clerk
001.000.250.514.300.410.00 20.00
Doc Shred Services Finance
001.000.310.514.230.410.00 20.00
Total :40.00
115349 11/12/2009 061570 DAY WIRELESS SYSTEMS - 16 145729 INV#145729 - EDMONDS PD
CALIBRATION GHD-03836 ~ 16
001.000.410.521.220.480.00 115.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.480.00 10.93
INV#145732 - EDMONDS PD145732
CALIBRATION GHD-12646
001.000.410.521.220.480.00 75.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.480.00 7.13
INV#145734 - EDMONDS PD145734
CALIBRATION GHD-12654
001.000.410.521.220.480.00 75.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.480.00 7.13
Total :290.19
115350 11/12/2009 006626 DEPT OF ECOLOGY 2010-WA0024058 WA0024058
WASTEWATER PERMIT
411.000.656.538.800.510.00 31,331.50
10Page:
Packet Page 80 of 374
11/12/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
11
11:01:10AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :31,331.5011535011/12/2009 006626 006626 DEPT OF ECOLOGY
115351 11/12/2009 064422 DEPT OF GENERAL ADMINISTRATION 18-1-52081 Q4-09 St Purchasing Contract
Q4-09 St Purchasing Contract
511.000.657.548.680.490.00 1,000.00
Total :1,000.00
115352 11/12/2009 047450 DEPT OF INFORMATION SERVICES 2009100122 CUSTOMER ID# D200-0
Scan Services for October, 2009
001.000.310.518.880.420.00 274.01
Total :274.01
115353 11/12/2009 064531 DINES, JEANNIE 09-3045 MINUTE TAKING
11/2 Council Minutes
001.000.250.514.300.410.00 276.00
Total :276.00
115354 11/12/2009 069605 EAGLE EYE CONSULTING ENGINEERS 2009027 Prof Services -Bldg Div
Prof Services -Bldg Div
001.000.620.524.100.410.00 3,697.50
Total :3,697.50
115355 11/12/2009 007675 EDMONDS AUTO PARTS 15748 SUPPLIES
SPARK PLUGS
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 11.56
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 1.10
Total :12.66
115356 11/12/2009 070683 EDMONDS MAIL & PARCEL 17463 UPS/INDUSTRIAL SCIENTIFIC
UPS/INDUSTRIAL SCIENTIFIC
411.000.656.538.800.420.00 14.80
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.420.00 1.41
Total :16.21
115357 11/12/2009 008688 EDMONDS VETERINARY HOSPITAL 179255 INV#179255, CLIENT #3713 - EDMONDS PD
11Page:
Packet Page 81 of 374
11/12/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
12
11:01:10AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115357 11/12/2009 (Continued)008688 EDMONDS VETERINARY HOSPITAL
EUTHANASIA IMP#7954
001.000.410.521.700.410.00 20.80
Total :20.80
115358 11/12/2009 069878 EDMONDS-WESTGATE VET HOSPITAL 132890 INV#132890, CLIENT #5118 - EDMONDS PD
SPAY DOG - IMPOUND #7932
001.000.410.521.700.490.01 125.00
MEDICINE IMPOUND #7932
001.000.410.521.700.410.00 12.28
SPAY DOG IMPOUND #7984
001.000.410.521.700.490.01 109.75
SPAY DOG IMPOUND #7985
001.000.410.521.700.490.01 109.75
SPAY DOG IMPOUND #7971
001.000.410.521.700.490.01 97.50
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.700.410.00 1.17
Total :455.45
115359 11/12/2009 069469 FLINT TRADING INC 110480 Street - 12" White Line
Street - 12" White Line
111.000.653.542.640.310.00 8,991.36
9.5% Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.640.310.00 854.18
Total :9,845.54
115360 11/12/2009 068617 GLEISNER, BARBARA GLEISNER11638 QIGONG CLASSES
QIGONG #11638
001.000.640.575.540.410.00 390.00
Total :390.00
115361 11/12/2009 072515 GOOGLE INC 916949 INTERNET ANTI-VIRUS & SPAM MAINT FEE
Nov-09 Internet Anti-Virus & Spam Maint
001.000.310.518.880.480.00 554.73
Total :554.73
12Page:
Packet Page 82 of 374
11/12/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
13
11:01:10AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115362 11/12/2009 012199 GRAINGER 9113144589 SCISSORS
HEAVY DUTY SCISSORS
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 25.00
Freight
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 7.58
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 3.09
Total :35.67
115363 11/12/2009 070896 HSBC BUSINESS SOLUTIONS 53851389 OPS SUPPLIES
stations' supplies
001.000.510.522.200.310.00 391.53
Total :391.53
115364 11/12/2009 062899 HUFF, ARIELE HUFF11404 ONLINE WRITING CLASS
WRITE ABOUT YOUR LIFE: ONLINE~
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 197.40
Total :197.40
115365 11/12/2009 072041 IBS INCORPORATED 444463-1 SAW
CARBIDE TIPPED SAW
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 128.82
Freight
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 7.25
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 12.92
Total :148.99
115366 11/12/2009 070042 IKON FINANCIAL SERVICES 80667721 COPIER LEASE
PARK MAINTENANCE COPIER LEASE
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 24.81
Total :24.81
115367 11/12/2009 070042 IKON FINANCIAL SERVICES 80725285 COPIER LEASING
Cannon Image Runner 9/21-10/22
001.000.250.514.300.450.00 988.91
13Page:
Packet Page 83 of 374
11/12/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
14
11:01:10AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :988.9111536711/12/2009 070042 070042 IKON FINANCIAL SERVICES
115368 11/12/2009 070042 IKON FINANCIAL SERVICES 80689366 Lease Ricoh 171SPF 10/26 to 11/25/09
Lease Ricoh 171SPF 10/26 to 11/25/09
001.000.620.558.800.450.00 30.66
Total :30.66
115369 11/12/2009 073015 INTERCONNECTION 1522 Transportation fee for computer donation
Transportation fee for computer donation
411.000.654.537.900.490.00 35.00
Total :35.00
115370 11/12/2009 068401 KING CO OFFICE OF FINANCE WRIA8-5456 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WATERSHED PLANNING
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WATERSHED PLANNING
411.000.652.542.900.510.00 4,315.33
Total :4,315.33
115371 11/12/2009 017135 LANDAU ASSOCIATES INC 25844 Prof Serv - geotech for Bldg Div
Prof Serv - geotech for Bldg Div
001.000.000.245.900.621.00 494.26
Total :494.26
115372 11/12/2009 069634 LEXISNEXIS RISK & INF ANLY GRP 1201641-20091031 INV# 1201641-20091031 EDMONDS PD
SEARCHES/REPORTS FOR OCT 2009
001.000.410.521.210.410.00 62.96
Total :62.96
115373 11/12/2009 018760 LUNDS OFFICE ESSENTIALS 102709 Envelopes for DSD
Envelopes for DSD
001.000.620.558.800.310.00 328.50
Total :328.50
115374 11/12/2009 018980 LYNNWOOD HONDA 682760 PARTS FOR CEMETERY
PARTS
130.000.640.536.500.310.00 22.38
9.5% Sales Tax
130.000.640.536.500.310.00 2.13
14Page:
Packet Page 84 of 374
11/12/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
15
11:01:10AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :24.5111537411/12/2009 018980 018980 LYNNWOOD HONDA
115375 11/12/2009 072886 MACDONALD-MILLER FAC.SOLUTIONS 934158 YOST POOL HEATING SYSTEM
LABOR AND PARTS FOR YOST POOL HEATING
125.000.640.576.800.480.00 6,688.10
9.5% Sales Tax
125.000.640.576.800.480.00 635.37
Total :7,323.47
115376 11/12/2009 020039 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO 40185757 123106800
PULLEY/WELDED PIPE/PIPE FITTINGS/HOSE
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 827.45
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 46.13
12310680040353190
CHANNEL/CONNECTORS/PIPE FITTING
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 420.54
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 82.82
12310680040721196
FLASHLIGHT/VACUUM HOSE/STEEL ANCHORS
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 414.84
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 17.91
12310680041155373
LIGHT BULBS
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 10.79
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 6.08
Total :1,826.56
115377 11/12/2009 020495 MIDWAY PLYWOOD INC C 57569 Yost Park - Supplies
Yost Park - Supplies
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 48.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 4.56
15Page:
Packet Page 85 of 374
11/12/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
16
11:01:10AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115377 11/12/2009 (Continued)020495 MIDWAY PLYWOOD INC
Fac Maint - 2- Speed Tape 50"C 57617
Fac Maint - 2- Speed Tape 50"
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 22.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 2.09
Total :76.65
115378 11/12/2009 020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENT ALL INC 98464 Sr Center Thrift Shop - Tile/Floor
Sr Center Thrift Shop - Tile/Floor
001.000.651.519.920.450.00 68.90
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.450.00 6.55
Total :75.45
115379 11/12/2009 020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENT ALL INC 98551 OPS SUPPLIES
starter rope
001.000.510.522.200.310.00 7.90
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.510.522.200.310.00 0.75
Total :8.65
115380 11/12/2009 072991 MOE, CHELSY MOE1105 PRESCHOOL SUBSTITUTE
MEADOWDALE PRESCHOOL SUBSTITUTE~
001.000.640.575.560.410.00 73.44
Total :73.44
115381 11/12/2009 072741 NEWTON KIGHT LLP 58021 C/A 20027-0001M
Oct-09 Legal Fees Fiber Optic Project
001.000.310.518.870.410.00 4,190.00
Total :4,190.00
115382 11/12/2009 071593 NORTHERN SAFETY CO INC P255885700017 Safety gear for DSD
Safety gear for DSD
001.000.620.558.800.310.00 50.80
Freight
001.000.620.558.800.310.00 18.18
16Page:
Packet Page 86 of 374
11/12/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
17
11:01:10AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :68.9811538211/12/2009 071593 071593 NORTHERN SAFETY CO INC
115383 11/12/2009 066391 NORTHSTAR CHEMICAL INC 6690 260
SODIUM BISULFITE
411.000.656.538.800.310.54 1,185.70
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.54 112.64
Total :1,298.34
115384 11/12/2009 061013 NORTHWEST CASCADE INC 1-036229 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL:~
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 189.87
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL1-037128
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL:~
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 189.87
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL1-037129
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL:~
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 189.87
Total :569.61
115385 11/12/2009 073013 NORTHWEST PASTEL SOCIETY NWPASTEL1105 REFUND
REFUND OF DAMAGE DEPOSIT
001.000.000.239.200.000.00 200.00
Total :200.00
115386 11/12/2009 025690 NOYES, KARIN 000 00 676 PB minutetaker 10-28-09 (Joint mgt w
PB minutetaker 10-28-09 (Joint mgt w
001.000.620.558.600.410.00 384.00
PB Minutaker 11/4/09000 00 677
PB Minutaker 11/4/09
001.000.620.558.600.410.00 332.00
Total :716.00
115387 11/12/2009 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 982254 INV#982254, ACCT#520437 250POL EDMONDS
17Page:
Packet Page 87 of 374
11/12/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
18
11:01:10AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115387 11/12/2009 (Continued)063511 OFFICE MAX INC
BULLETIN BOARD (GANNON)
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 44.05
LIQUID PAPER PENS
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 34.32
STORAGE BOXES
001.000.410.521.110.310.00 86.12
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 7.44
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.110.310.00 8.18
INV#983303, ACCT#520437 250POL EDMONDS983303
SOLO CUPS
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 98.44
PHD BALLPOINT PENS
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 12.54
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 10.54
Total :301.63
115388 11/12/2009 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 021673 OFFICE SUPPLIES
CEMETERY OFFICE SUPPLIES:~
130.000.640.536.500.310.00 11.97
2010 CALENDAR
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 11.36
9.5% Sales Tax
130.000.640.536.500.310.00 1.14
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 1.08
OFFICE SUPPLIES072618
LAMINATING POUCHES
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 13.12
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 1.25
Total :39.92
18Page:
Packet Page 88 of 374
11/12/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
19
11:01:10AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115389 11/12/2009 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 010304 Hanging folders/pens/file tray
Hanging folders/pens/file tray
001.000.310.514.230.310.00 43.57
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.310.514.230.310.00 4.13
6 ct paper/Stapler & staples/Eraser963833
6 ct paper/Stapler & staples/Eraser
001.000.310.514.230.310.00 325.32
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.310.514.230.310.00 30.91
Mouse pad/write on tabs977580
Mouse pad/write on tabs
001.000.310.514.230.310.00 13.98
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.310.514.230.310.00 1.33
Total :419.24
115390 11/12/2009 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 984431 520437
COPIER PAPER/GLUE/BATTERIES/CALENDARS~
411.000.656.538.800.310.41 73.44
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.41 6.97
520437996030
CALENDAR
411.000.656.538.800.310.41 15.67
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.41 1.49
Total :97.57
115391 11/12/2009 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 019535 OFFICE SUPPLIES
Office Supplies
001.000.250.514.300.310.00 69.44
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.250.514.300.310.00 6.59
19Page:
Packet Page 89 of 374
11/12/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
20
11:01:10AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115391 11/12/2009 (Continued)063511 OFFICE MAX INC
OFFICE SUPPLIES982260
Office Supplies
001.000.250.514.300.310.00 160.52
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.250.514.300.310.00 15.24
Total :251.79
115392 11/12/2009 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 637675 Office supplies - DSD
Office supplies - DSD
001.000.620.558.800.310.00 126.21
Total :126.21
115393 11/12/2009 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 070644 ADMIN SUPPLIES
storage boxes
001.000.510.522.100.310.00 215.30
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.510.522.100.310.00 20.45
Total :235.75
115394 11/12/2009 026200 OLYMPIC VIEW WATER DISTRICT 0000130 WATER
220TH ST SW & 84TH AVE W
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 61.84
WATER0001520
820 15TH ST SW~
130.000.640.536.500.470.00 29.43
WATER0001530
820 15TH ST SW~
130.000.640.536.500.470.00 88.15
WATER0002930
5TH & STE RTE 104/SPRINKLER
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 29.78
WATER0005060
9803 EDMONDS WAY
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 35.82
Total :245.02
20Page:
Packet Page 90 of 374
11/12/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
21
11:01:10AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115395 11/12/2009 026200 OLYMPIC VIEW WATER DISTRICT 000292 0 WATER FOR L/S #13
WATER FOR L/S #13
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 27.41
FIRE STATION #20002140 0
FIRE STATION #20
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 136.04
Total :163.45
115396 11/12/2009 066833 PACIFIC NW PUBLIC FLEET MGRS 10115 Annual Mbr Fee - 2009 - Fleet / D
Annual Mbr Fee - 2009 - Fleet / D
511.000.657.548.680.490.00 100.00
Total :100.00
115397 11/12/2009 027060 PACIFIC TOPSOILS 90882 Storm Dump Fees
Storm Dump Fees
411.000.652.542.320.490.00 189.90
Total :189.90
115398 11/12/2009 070091 PARROTT, CHERYL PARROTT11571 STAINED GLASS SNOWFLAKES
STAINED GLASS: SNOWFLAKES~
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 35.00
Total :35.00
115399 11/12/2009 028860 PLATT ELECTRIC SUPPLY INC 6765669 Traffic Control - Cable
Traffic Control - Cable
111.000.653.542.640.310.00 79.99
9.5% Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.640.310.00 7.60
Total :87.59
115400 11/12/2009 029117 PORT OF EDMONDS 03870 CITY OF EDMONDS STORMWATER
Stormwater Rent & Leasehold tax
411.000.652.542.900.450.00 1,682.62
Total :1,682.62
115401 11/12/2009 073014 PORTAL, YBANA PORTAL1109 REFUND
21Page:
Packet Page 91 of 374
11/12/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
22
11:01:10AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115401 11/12/2009 (Continued)073014 PORTAL, YBANA
REFUND OF DAMAGE DEPOSIT FOR MEADOWDALE
001.000.000.239.200.000.00 200.00
Total :200.00
115402 11/12/2009 065579 QUIKSIGN 57895 Sign Install McDonnald S-09043
Sign Install McDonnald S-09043
001.000.620.558.600.410.11 185.06
Sign Install Jorgensen AP-09-357926
Sign Install Jorgensen AP-09-3
001.000.620.558.600.410.11 185.06
Sign install Hedges S-09-4557959
Sign install Hedges S-09-45
001.000.620.558.600.410.11 185.06
Sign Install City STF 2009-2458004
Sign Install City STF 2009-24
001.000.620.558.600.410.11 185.06
Total :740.24
115403 11/12/2009 062657 REGIONAL DISPOSAL COMPANY 001311 Storm Dump Fees
Storm Dump Fees
411.000.652.542.320.490.00 716.88
Total :716.88
115404 11/12/2009 033300 SAFETY & SUPPLY CO 161491-2 Fac Maint - Proflex back support
Fac Maint - Proflex back support
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 30.10
Freight
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 11.34
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 3.94
Total :45.38
115405 11/12/2009 033550 SALMON BAY SAND & GRAVEL 2243921 Street/Arts- Large Letter Stamps
22Page:
Packet Page 92 of 374
11/12/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
23
11:01:10AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115405 11/12/2009 (Continued)033550 SALMON BAY SAND & GRAVEL
Street/Arts- Large Letter Stamps
111.000.653.542.610.310.00 437.00
Street/Arts- Large Letter Stamps
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 437.00
9.5% Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.610.310.00 41.52
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 41.51
Total :957.03
115406 11/12/2009 072521 SAVAGE, JENNIFER SAVAGE11541 CARDIO KICKBOXING
CARDIO KICKBOXING #11541
001.000.640.575.540.410.00 280.00
Total :280.00
115407 11/12/2009 061482 SEA-WESTERN INC 138560 OPS SUPPLIES
screws, clips, bearings
001.000.510.522.200.310.00 111.42
Freight
001.000.510.522.200.310.00 7.99
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.510.522.200.310.00 11.34
Total :130.75
115408 11/12/2009 036955 SKY NURSERY 283445 PLANTS/BULBS
BULBS
001.000.640.576.810.310.00 52.52
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.810.310.00 4.99
Total :57.51
115409 11/12/2009 037303 SNO CO FIRE DIST # 1 510-0128 TRAINING MISC
Hepler STICO reg
001.000.510.522.400.490.00 30.00
Total :30.00
23Page:
Packet Page 93 of 374
11/12/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
24
11:01:10AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115410 11/12/2009 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 2460018753 CITY PARK RESTROOMS
CITY PARK RESTROOMS
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 45.37
PARK & MAINTENANCE SHOP2470011830
PARK & MAINTENANCE SHOP
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 451.46
PLAYFIELD BLEACHERS3280017173
PLAYFIELD BLEACHERS
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 85.63
PARK GAZEBO3660016779
PARK GAZEBO
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 30.25
PLAYFIELD LIGHTS3690017839
PLAYFIELD LIGHTS
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 612.44
CITY PARK SOUTH RESTROOMS & COVERED5030011778
CITY PARK SOUTH RESTROOMS & COVERED
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 114.30
Total :1,339.45
115411 11/12/2009 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 125015416 620-001-500-3
VARIOUS LOCATION
411.000.656.538.800.471.62 7.84
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.471.62 0.47
Total :8.31
115412 11/12/2009 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 4270358072 LS 7 (New Svc)
LS 7 (New Svc)
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 23.71
STREET LIGHTING6000013000
STREET LIGHTING
111.000.653.542.630.470.00 15,230.59
STREET LIGHTING6100013009
STREET LIGHTING
111.000.653.542.630.470.00 7,928.69
24Page:
Packet Page 94 of 374
11/12/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
25
11:01:10AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115412 11/12/2009 (Continued)037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1
STREET LIGHTING6100013306
STREET LIGHTING
111.000.653.542.630.470.00 184.24
STREET LIGHTING6200013008
STREET LIGHTING
111.000.653.542.630.470.00 596.97
Total :23,964.20
115413 11/12/2009 038100 SNO-KING STAMP 43614 INV#43614 EDMONDS PD - POFF
LOCKER MAGNET - M. POFF
001.000.410.521.220.310.00 4.50
Freight
001.000.410.521.220.310.00 2.50
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.310.00 0.67
Total :7.67
115414 11/12/2009 064351 SNOHOMISH COUNTY TREASURER 2009163 INV#2009163 EDMONDS PD
60.75 BOOKINGS FOR 10/09
001.000.410.523.600.510.00 5,635.17
645.50 HOUSING DAYS FOR 10/09
001.000.410.523.600.510.00 39,446.51
Total :45,081.68
115415 11/12/2009 040430 STONEWAY ELECTRIC SUPPLY 2025292 City Hall - Elect Supplies
City Hall - Elect Supplies
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 258.95
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 24.60
Total :283.55
115416 11/12/2009 065941 SvR DESIGN CO 0008187 4TH AVE CULTURAL CORRIDOR
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES~
132.000.640.594.760.410.00 682.25
Total :682.25
25Page:
Packet Page 95 of 374
11/12/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
26
11:01:10AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115417 11/12/2009 040917 TACOMA SCREW PRODUCTS INC 10876649 Storm Elect Supplies
Storm Elect Supplies
411.000.652.542.400.310.00 100.24
Freight
411.000.652.542.400.310.00 6.94
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.652.542.400.310.00 10.18
Traffic - Elect Supplies10877190
Traffic - Elect Supplies
111.000.653.542.640.310.00 53.73
9.5% Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.640.310.00 5.10
Traffic - Elect Supplies10877749
Traffic - Elect Supplies
111.000.653.542.640.310.00 239.77
9.5% Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.640.310.00 22.78
Roadway - Elect Supplies10878319
Roadway - Elect Supplies
111.000.653.542.310.310.00 154.98
9.5% Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.310.310.00 14.72
Storm - Elect Supplies10878320
Storm - Elect Supplies
411.000.652.542.400.310.00 669.12
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.652.542.400.310.00 63.57
FAC - Screw Eye Lag Bolts18885128
FAC - Screw Eye Lag Bolts
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 12.61
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 1.20
Total :1,354.94
115418 11/12/2009 009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY 1671900 NEWSPAPER ADS
26Page:
Packet Page 96 of 374
11/12/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
27
11:01:10AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115418 11/12/2009 (Continued)009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY
Call for Bonds
001.000.250.514.300.440.00 19.30
NEWSPAPER ADS1672294
11/2 Hearing (FD1)
001.000.250.514.300.440.00 57.84
NEWSPAPER ADSC/A 101415
Council & Plan Brd Agendas
001.000.250.514.300.440.00 1,929.39
Total :2,006.53
115419 11/12/2009 009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY 1668642 Legal Notice Reidy AP-9-2
Legal Notice Reidy AP-9-2
001.000.620.558.600.440.00 29.14
Legal Notice City R-09-191668823
Legal Notice City R-09-19
001.000.620.558.600.440.00 77.52
Legal Notice Reidy (AP-09-2)1668906
Legal Notice Reidy (AP-09-2)
001.000.620.558.600.440.00 29.14
Legal Notice Reidy (AP-09-2)1671039
Legal Notice Reidy (AP-09-2)
001.000.620.558.600.440.00 59.48
Total :195.28
115420 11/12/2009 071590 TOWEILL RICE TAYLOR LLC Oct2009-Edmonds HE Services for October 2009
HE Services for October 2009
001.000.620.558.600.410.00 3,500.00
HE postage for Oct 2009Oct2009-EdmondsEXP
HE postage for Oct 2009
001.000.620.558.600.410.00 13.20
Total :3,513.20
115421 11/12/2009 042800 TRI-CITIES SECURITY 16202 Fac Maint - Keys
27Page:
Packet Page 97 of 374
11/12/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
28
11:01:10AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115421 11/12/2009 (Continued)042800 TRI-CITIES SECURITY
Fac Maint - Keys
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 15.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 1.43
Total :16.43
115422 11/12/2009 070182 UNDERWRITERS LABORATORIES INC 710150381771 OPS REPAIRS/MAINT
ladder inspection service
001.000.510.522.200.480.00 1,075.00
Total :1,075.00
115423 11/12/2009 044300 US POSTAL SERVICE 25000233 BULK MAIL PERMIT 1036~
Bulk Mail Permit 1036~250-00233
001.000.250.514.300.420.00 185.00
Total :185.00
115424 11/12/2009 011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST 425 771-5553 AUTO DIALER
AUTO DIALER
411.000.656.538.800.420.00 75.51
BPS TELEMETRY425 NW1-0060
BPS TELEMETRY
411.000.656.538.800.420.00 41.34
TELMETRY425 NW1-0155
TELMETRY
411.000.656.538.800.420.00 217.39
Total :334.24
115425 11/12/2009 011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST 425-640-8169 PT EDWARDS SEWER PUMP STATION MONITOR
Phone line for Sewer Lift Station at Pt
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 36.03
CITY HALL FIRE ALARM SYSTEM425-776-6829
CITY HALL FIRE ALARM SYSTEM
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 113.31
Total :149.34
115426 11/12/2009 011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST 425-771-0152 FS #16-FAX LINE
28Page:
Packet Page 98 of 374
11/12/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
29
11:01:10AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115426 11/12/2009 (Continued)011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST
FS #16-FAX LINE
001.000.510.522.200.420.00 52.61
Total :52.61
115427 11/12/2009 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS 0809587496 C/A 571242650-0001
29Page:
Packet Page 99 of 374
11/12/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
30
11:01:10AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115427 11/12/2009 (Continued)067865 VERIZON WIRELESS
9/23-10/22/09 Blackberry Cell Phone
001.000.620.524.100.420.00 99.69
9/23-10/22/09 Blackberry Cell Phone
001.000.250.514.300.420.00 56.68
9/23-10/22/09 Blackberry Cell Phone
001.000.230.512.500.420.00 114.82
9/23-10/22/09 Blackberry Cell Phone
001.000.620.558.800.420.00 56.68
9/23-10/22/09 Blackberry Cell Phone
001.000.620.558.600.420.00 56.68
9/23-10/22/09 Blackberry Cell Phone
001.000.610.519.700.420.00 56.68
9/23-10/22/09 Blackberry Cell Phone
001.000.620.532.200.420.00 276.47
9/23-10/22/09 Blackberry Cell Phone
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 118.35
9/23-10/22/09 Blackberry Cell Phone
001.000.310.514.230.420.00 58.17
9/23-10/22/09 Blackberry Cell Phone
001.000.510.522.100.420.00 57.56
9/23-10/22/09 Blackberry Cell Phone
001.000.510.522.300.420.00 56.68
9/23-10/22/09 Blackberry Cell Phone
001.000.510.522.200.420.00 357.59
9/23-10/22/09 Blackberry Air Card &
001.000.510.522.200.420.00 86.02
9/23-10/22/09 Blackberry Cell Phone
001.000.220.516.100.420.00 56.68
9/23-10/22/09 Blackberry Cell Phone
001.000.310.518.880.420.00 403.82
9/23-10/22/09 Blackberry Cell Phone
001.000.210.513.100.420.00 125.01
9/23-10/22/09 Blackberry Cell Phone
001.000.640.574.100.420.00 67.10
30Page:
Packet Page 100 of 374
11/12/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
31
11:01:10AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
115427 11/12/2009 (Continued)067865 VERIZON WIRELESS
9/23-10/22/09 Blackberry Cell Phone
001.000.410.521.220.420.00 1,056.65
9/23-10/22/09 Blackberry Air Cards
001.000.410.521.220.420.00 258.06
9/23-10/22/09 Blackberry Cell Phone
001.000.650.519.910.420.00 56.68
9/23-10/22/09 Blackberry Cell Phone
411.000.652.542.900.420.00 63.44
9/23-10/22/09 Blackberry Cell Phone
511.000.657.548.680.420.00 56.68
9/23-10/22/09 Blackberry Cell Phone
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 58.43
9/23-10/22/09 Blackberry Cell Phone
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 58.43
9/23-10/22/09 Blackberry Cell Phone
411.000.656.538.800.420.00 122.05
9/23-10/22/09 Blackberry Cell Phone
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 58.14
Total :3,893.24
115428 11/12/2009 066627 WASH ST CODE REVISOR 40552 REVISED CODE OF WA
2009 RCW supplement
001.000.250.514.300.310.00 45.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.250.514.300.310.00 4.28
Total :49.28
115429 11/12/2009 065035 WASHINGTON STATE PATROL I10003187 I10003187 EDM301
BACKGROUND CHECKS 10/09
001.000.000.237.100.000.00 327.25
Total :327.25
115430 11/12/2009 067195 WASHINGTON TREE EXPERTS 06-7849 Street - Tree Removal at 5th & Dayton
Street - Tree Removal at 5th & Dayton
111.000.653.542.710.480.00 900.00
31Page:
Packet Page 101 of 374
11/12/2009
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
32
11:01:10AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :900.0011543011/12/2009 067195 067195 WASHINGTON TREE EXPERTS
115431 11/12/2009 072000 WCI 93041430 C/A 00100362301
Early Termination Fiber Optic Internet
001.000.310.518.870.420.00 15,896.77
Total :15,896.77
115432 11/12/2009 065208 WILDFIRE PACIFIC INC 40032070 OPS EXPENDABLE TOOLS
hoses w/couplings
001.000.510.522.200.359.00 1,129.77
Sales Tax
001.000.510.522.200.359.00 96.12
Total :1,225.89
115433 11/12/2009 067465 WOOD, JULIA WOOD11663 GYROKINESIS
GYROKINESIS #11663
001.000.640.575.540.410.00 146.25
Total :146.25
115434 11/12/2009 072035 ZULAUF, JOANNE Reimbursement Canon Powershot Camera and accessories
Canon Powershot Camera and accessories
001.000.620.532.200.350.00 249.97
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.620.532.200.350.00 23.75
Total :273.72
Bank total :217,299.66119 Vouchers for bank code :front
217,299.66Total vouchers :Vouchers in this report119
32Page:
Packet Page 102 of 374
AM-2602 2.D.
Claims for Damages
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:11/17/2009
Submitted By:Linda Hynd
Submitted For:Sandy Chase Time:Consent
Department:City Clerk's Office Type:Action
Review Committee:
Committee Action:
Information
Subject Title
Acknowledge receipt of Claims for Damages from Bob Hovde ($2,563.70), Mark J. Johnson
($5,313.69), Ricky Arntsen (amount undetermined), and Son Nguyen ($1,500.00).
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
It is recommended that the City Council acknowledge receipt of the Claims for Damages by
minute entry.
Previous Council Action
N/A
Narrative
Bob Hovde
20501 86th Place West
Edmonds, WA 98026
($2,563.70)
Mark J. Johnson
9220 Cascade Drive
Edmonds, WA 98020
($5,313.69)
Ricky Arntsen
Clallam Bay Corrections Center
1830 Eagle Crest Way
Clallam Bay, WA 98326
(amount undetermined)
Son Nguyen
21511 73rd Place West
Apartment 1
Edmonds, WA 98026
($1,500.00)
Packet Page 103 of 374
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: Hovde Claim for Damages
Link: Johnson Claim for Damages
Link: Arntsen Claim for Damages
Link: Nguyen Claim for Damages
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 11/12/2009 04:59 PM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 11/12/2009 05:00 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 11/12/2009 05:14 PM APRV
Form Started By: Linda
Hynd
Started On: 11/10/2009 09:23
AM
Final Approval Date: 11/12/2009
Packet Page 104 of 374
Packet Page 105 of 374
Packet Page 106 of 374
Packet Page 107 of 374
Packet Page 108 of 374
Packet Page 109 of 374
Packet Page 110 of 374
Packet Page 111 of 374
Packet Page 112 of 374
Packet Page 113 of 374
Packet Page 114 of 374
Packet Page 115 of 374
Packet Page 116 of 374
Packet Page 117 of 374
Packet Page 118 of 374
Packet Page 119 of 374
Packet Page 120 of 374
Packet Page 121 of 374
Packet Page 122 of 374
Packet Page 123 of 374
Packet Page 124 of 374
Packet Page 125 of 374
Packet Page 126 of 374
Packet Page 127 of 374
Packet Page 128 of 374
Packet Page 129 of 374
Packet Page 130 of 374
Packet Page 131 of 374
Packet Page 132 of 374
Packet Page 133 of 374
Packet Page 134 of 374
Packet Page 135 of 374
AM-2600 2.E.
Professional Services Contracts for Building Code Plan Review
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:11/17/2009
Submitted By:Ann Bullis Time:Consent
Department:Building Type:Action
Review Committee:
Committee Action:Approved for Consent Agenda
Information
Subject Title
Authorization for Mayor to sign Professional Services Contracts for Building Code Plan Review
with Eagle Eye Consulting Engineers, Inc., SCBC Engineering, PLLC, and CG Engineering,
PLLC.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
Recommend that City Council authorize the Mayor to sign the three contracts as presented.
Previous Council Action
Narrative
The Building Division utilizes consultants for structural plan review and non-structural plan
review for various types of building permit applications on an as-needed basis. The City’s roster
for Plan Review Consultants is in need of updating.
The City’s new Purchasing Policies and Procedures requires approval by the Mayor and Director
for decisions more than $50,000 but less than $100,000. Authorization by the City Council is
required prior to the Mayor to signing on-going contracts of this nature. The selection of the
consultants, preparation and review of the contracts before you has been done in accordance with
the City’s Policy, including City Attorney review and approval to form.
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: v:\My Documents\Consultant Info and Contracts\Eagle Eye Contract - Council.pdf
Link: v:\My Documents\Consultant Info and Contracts\SCBC Engineering Contract - Council.pdf
Link: v:\My Documents\Consultant Info and Contracts\CG Engineering Contract - Council.pdf
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 11/12/2009 08:48 AM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 11/12/2009 04:48 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 11/12/2009 04:57 PM APRV
Form Started By: Ann
Bullis
Started On: 11/09/2009 03:37
PM
Final Approval Date: 11/12/2009
Packet Page 136 of 374
Final Approval Date: 11/12/2009
Packet Page 137 of 374
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
1
3
8
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
1
3
9
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
1
4
0
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
1
4
1
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
1
4
2
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
1
4
3
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
1
4
4
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
1
4
5
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
1
4
6
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
1
4
7
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
1
4
8
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
1
4
9
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
1
5
0
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
1
5
1
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
1
5
2
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
1
5
3
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
1
5
4
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
1
5
5
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
1
5
6
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
1
5
7
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
1
5
8
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
1
5
9
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
1
6
0
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
1
6
1
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
1
6
2
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
1
6
3
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
1
6
4
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
1
6
5
o
f
3
7
4
AM-2596 2.F.
Termination of Esperance Agreement for Fire and EMS Services
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:11/17/2009
Submitted By:Tom Tomberg Time:Consent
Department:Fire Type:Action
Review Committee:
Committee Action:
Information
Subject Title
Acknowledgment of Termination of the Esperance Agreement for Fire and EMS Services
effective January 1, 2010.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
Approve.
Previous Council Action
On June 6, 1995, Council approved an Agreement Between Snohomish County Fire Protection
District No. 1 and the City Regarding Fire Protection and EMS Services to the Esperance Area
effective January 1, 1996.
Amendments to the Agreement were approved by Council on December 19, 1995, June 6, 1996,
February 26, 2002, and February 18, 2003.
On April 21, 2009, Council approved a new Agreement Between Snohomish County Fire
Protection District No. 1 and the City for Fire Protection and EMS Services to the Esperance Area
effective January 1, 2009.
On November 2, 2009, Council approved an Interlocal Agreement between Snohomish County
Fire Protection District No. 1 and the City for the Provision of Fire and EMS Services to the City
by the District effective January 1, 2010.
Narrative
Acknowledging and effecting termination of the current Esperance agreement with Fire District #1
is the next procedural step following approval by Council on November 2 (and the District Board
on November 3) of an Interlocal Agreement for the provision of Fire and EMS services to the City
by the District effective January 1, 2010. Effective January 1, 2010, District #1 will provide fire
and EMS services to the Esperance area. The City attorney and District #1 attorney have approved
the attached acknowledgement document as to form.
Fiscal Impact
Fiscal Year:2010
Revenue:
Expenditure:
Packet Page 166 of 374
Expenditure:
Fiscal Impact:
The loss of revenue from the Esperance contract for service in 2010 is $752,439.
The City is obligated to pay the balance of the 1995-96 purchase of Fire Station 20 at an
approximate cost of $66,000 annually through 2015.
In 2010, the City will pay Fire District #1 6.2 million dollars for the provision of Fire/EMS
services to the City at a savings of $983,550.
Attachments
Link: Esperance Termination Agreement
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 11/09/2009 01:51 PM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 11/10/2009 06:12 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 11/12/2009 08:48 AM APRV
Form Started By: Tom
Tomberg
Started On: 11/06/2009 10:05
AM
Final Approval Date: 11/12/2009
Packet Page 167 of 374
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF TERMINATION
WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds, Washington, a municipal corporation (hereinafter
“City”) and the Snohomish County Fire Protection District No. 1, a Washington municipal
corporation (hereinafter “District”) have entered into an agreement relating to the provision of
fire protection and emergency services in the Esperance area effective January 1, 2009
(“Esperance Agreement”);
WHEREAS, the Esperance Agreement provides in Section 3(a)(iv) that the parties may
mutually terminate the Agreement;
WHEREAS, the parties have approved and have entered, or will be entering, into an
interlocal agreement for the transition and transfer of fire protection and emergency medical
services from the City to the District effective January 1, 2010 (the “Consolidation Agreement”);
and
WHEREAS, the Consolidation Agreement renders the Esperance Agreement moot.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions contained herein
and in the Consolidation Agreement, the Esperance Agreement shall be terminated on January 1,
2010, concurrently with the commencement of the Consolidation Agreement.
DATED:
SNOHOMISH COUNTY FIRE CITY OF EDMONDS
PROTECTION DISTRICT NO. 1
By: By:
Chair Mayor Gary Haakenson
Attest: Attest:
By: By:
Board Secretary City Clerk
Approved as to form: Approved as to form:
By: By:
District Attorney City Attorney
{WSS748373.DOC;1\00006.900000\ }
Packet Page 168 of 374
{WSS748373.DOC;1\00006.900000\ }
Packet Page 169 of 374
AM-2607 2.G.
Contract for Jail Services with Snohomish County Sheriff's Office
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:11/17/2009
Submitted By:Gerry Gannon Time:Consent
Department:Police Department Type:Action
Review Committee:Public Safety
Committee Action:Approved for Consent Agenda
Information
Subject Title
Contract for Jail Services with Snohomish County Sheriff's Office.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
Staff recommends that the full Council approve the jail contract with Snohomish County Sheriff's
Office for the Mayor's signature.
Previous Council Action
This agenda item was heard at the Public Safety Committee meeting of Nov. 10, 2009. It was the
recomendation that the jail services be placed on the consent agenda for approval.
Narrative
The current contract with Snohomish County Corrections expires December 31, 2009. The current
contract allowed agencies to select a level of service for inmate bed space. We were at the highest
level that guaranteed there would be bed space for our prisoners. Our current booking fee is
$92.76 and the daily fee is $61.11.
The new contract does away with the different levels of service. All municipal agencies will be
paying the same amount for booking and daily fees. In the proposed 2010 contract the booking fee
is set at $90.00 and the daily fee is $62.50. Any increases to the booking and daily fees for 2011
and 2012 are based on 90% of the Seattle-Tacoma-Bremerton June CPI-U with a maximum
increase of 3%. The attached contract has been reviewed by the City Attorney and has been
approved as to form.
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: Snohomish County Jail Contract
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 11/12/2009 02:38 PM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 11/12/2009 04:48 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 11/12/2009 04:57 PM APRV
Form Started By: Gerry
Gannon
Started On: 11/12/2009 01:24
PM
Packet Page 170 of 374
Final Approval Date: 11/12/2009
Packet Page 171 of 374
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR JAIL SERVICES
THIS INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR JAIL SERVICES (the “Agreement”) is
entered into by and between SNOHOMISH COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of
Washington (hereinafter COUNTY) and the City of Edmonds, a municipal corporation of the
State of Washington (hereinafter CITY).
NOW, THEREFORE, in accordance with the Interlocal Cooperation Act (Chapter 39.34
RCW) and the City and County Jails Act (Chapter 70.48 RCW), the COUNTY and CITY hereby
agree as follows:
Section 1 Definitions
A. The term “Jail” means a COUNTY operated facility primarily designed, staffed, and
used for the housing of adults charged or convicted of a criminal offense; for the
punishment, correction, and rehabilitation of offenders convicted of a criminal
offense; or for confinement during a criminal investigation or for civil detention to
enforce a court order. Upon the date of the execution of this Agreement, Jail includes
the Snohomish County Main Jail and Community Corrections.
B. The term “Book” means the act of registering, screening and examining inmates for
confinement in the Jail; inventorying and safekeeping inmates’ personal property;
maintaining all computerized records of arrest; performing warrant checks; and all
other activities associated with processing an inmate for confinement.
C. The term “CITY Inmate” means a person Booked or housed in the Jail for whom the
CITY is a billable agency under the procedure set out in Section 6.
D. The term “COUNTY Inmate” means any person Booked or housed in the Jail who is
not a CITY Inmate.
E. The term “Bureau Chief” means the Corrections Bureau Chief, Snohomish County
Sheriff’s Office.
F. The term “CITY Municipal Code” means the Municipal Code of the CITY signing
this Agreement.
G. The term “CITY Municipal Court” means the Court of Limited Jurisdiction charged
with hearing violations of the CITY Municipal Code, including any division of the
COUNTY District Court acting for the CITY via a service contract.
H. The term “Cities” means collectively all cities that have executed Interlocal
Agreements for Jail Services with the COUNTY in substantially the same form as
this Agreement.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Interlocal Agreement for Jail Services Page 1 of 17
2010 - 2014
Packet Page 172 of 374
I. The term “Force Majeure” means war, civil unrest, and any natural event outside of
the party’s reasonable control, including fire, storm, flood, earthquake, or other act of
nature.
J. The term “Business Day” means Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m.
excluding COUNTY recognized holidays,
K. The term “maximum allowable population level” means the greatest allowable
number of inmates that can be held in the Jail in a safe, secure humane manner. The
maximum allowable population level shall be determined by the Sheriff or his
designee.
Section 2 Purpose
Under the authority of Chapter 70.48 RCW, the COUNTY maintains a Jail. The CITY
from time to time desires to confine CITY inmates in the COUNTY Jail. In return for payment
as specified in Section 9, the COUNTY agrees to furnish its facilities and personnel for
confinement of CITY prisoners subject to the terms of this agreement. Community Corrections
options will also be made available to qualifying CITY Inmates based on rules and conditions as
laid out in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
Section 3 Term
This Agreement shall be in effect from the date of signature and shall continue until
December 31, 2014, or until terminated by either party in accordance with Section 4,
PROVIDED that the COUNTY’S obligations are contingent upon local legislative appropriation
of necessary funds in accordance with applicable laws and the Snohomish County Charter.
Section 4 Termination
In the event that either party desires to terminate this agreement, one (1) year’s written
notice shall be provided to the other party.
Section 5 Population Level Limitation
In the event that the Jail’s maximum acceptable population level is reached, inmates who
are confined on Snohomish County charges or commitments will have first priority. In the event
that inmate’s are required to leave the Jail, out-of-county inmates shall be the first inmates
removed. Every effort will be made to manage the average daily population (ADP), including
booking restrictions as a method to lower the ADP. The Bureau Chief shall have final authority
on reduction measures.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Interlocal Agreement for Jail Services Page 2 of 17
2010 - 2014
Packet Page 173 of 374
Section 6 Placing CITY Inmates in Jail by Law Enforcement Personnel
Subject to the conditions stated herein, and the constraints listed in the previous sections,
the COUNTY will accept arrested persons delivered to the Jail for confinement, including
persons arrested for, or convicted of, violations of the CITY Municipal Code and will hold them
until such time as they are lawfully discharged from custody pursuant to law, or returned to the
custody of the CITY.
A. CITY law enforcement personnel will follow all Jail procedures when presenting
arrested persons for Booking.
B. The Jail will not receive a person into custody until the officer having custody of the
person provides the Jail with proper documentation of the Jail’s legal basis to hold the
person in custody. Proper documentation will consist of an arrest warrant, the order
of a court of competent jurisdiction, or a properly completed Notice of Arrest on the
form provided by the court into which the person is being cited.
C. An arrested person will not be considered a CITY Inmate for purposes of this
Agreement until transfer of custody is complete. Transfer of custody from CITY law
enforcement personnel to the Jail will not occur until the Jail receives both the legal
basis to hold the arrested person and has medically cleared the arrested person as “fit
for Jail.” The Bureau Chief shall have final authority on all “fit for Jail”
determinations.
D. A CITY police officer may request that a person be Booked for information purposes
only (I.D. Booking), in which case, the person will be Booked and immediately
thereafter returned to the custody of the CITY police officer.
E. Conditions under which an inmate is billable to a CITY:
a. Inmate Status: An inmate is billable to a CITY during the time period when:
i. The inmate is being held on violation of a misdemeanor or gross
misdemeanor or on a warrant or court order issued by the CITY’s
Municipal Court;
ii. The inmate is not being held on any active County felony charge; and
iii. The inmate is not a Federal inmate who can be removed by the Federal
agency without regard to local charges.
b. An inmate is also billable to a CITY during the time when:
i. The inmate is billable to a CITY in accordance with Section
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Interlocal Agreement for Jail Services Page 3 of 17
2010 - 2014
Packet Page 174 of 374
ii. The inmate is being held by the State for a violation of the
Offender Accountability Act and the CITY will not allow the State to
move the inmate.
F. Active vs. Inactive Charges: A charge is considered inactive and not relevant for
billing purposes when:
a. The inmate receives a personal recognizant release, posts bail or finishes
serving a sentence on that charge; or
b. The charge is dismissed, not filed or otherwise withdrawn; or
c. The charge carries a consecutive sentence the prisoner has not yet begun
to serve; or
d. The agency with jurisdiction on that charge cannot remove the inmate to
its own facility until other charges requiring the inmate’s custody in the Jail
are satisfied.
G. Booking Fees: Booking fees are assessed against the Cities or agencies billable at
time of Booking. A CITY that becomes billable only when Booking charges become
inactive or when new charges are added is not responsible for any part of the Booking
fee.
H. A City will not be billed for subsequent Bookings when the inmate:
a. Returns from a furlough or temporary removal order, unless the inmate is
arrested and charged with escape for failing to return voluntarily; or
b. Is serving a sentence on weekends; or
c. Has more charges than can be contained in single Booking record,
requiring the creation of a new Booking.
I. The CITY will be billed for a subsequent Booking following a break in custody when
the inmate:
a. Is Booked on new charges; or
b. Returns to custody on a warrant or bond surrender or to serve a sentence
on a charge on which the inmate was previously Booked; or
c. Did not return voluntarily from a court ordered temporary removal order
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Interlocal Agreement for Jail Services Page 4 of 17
2010 - 2014
Packet Page 175 of 374
Section 7 Walk-In Commitments
A. Subject to the conditions stated herein, the COUNTY will accept persons sentenced
to a term of confinement to Jail by a CITY Municipal Court, including persons
convicted of violations of the CITY Municipal Code and will hold them until such
time as they are lawfully discharged from custody pursuant to law and the terms of
the judicial Order of Commitment, or returned to the custody of the CITY.
B. A person reporting for commitment will not be Booked until a valid judicial Order of
Commitment has been received from the CITY Municipal Court.
C. A person reporting for commitment will not be considered a CITY inmate for the
purposes of this Agreement until the person is accepted for Booking. Acceptance for
Booking will occur when the Jail receives an Order of Commitment and has
medically cleared the person reporting for commitment as “fit for Jail”. In the event
that a person reporting for commitment is not accepted for Booking, the Jail will
notify the CITY Municipal Court of the person’s non-acceptance and the reason for
the non-acceptance. Notification will occur on the same day if the non-acceptance
occurs during a Business Day or on the following Business Day if the non-acceptance
occurs after the end of a Business Day.
Section 8 Rules Relating to Prisoners in Custody.
A. Persons convicted of violations of the CITY Municipal Code may earn early release
time of up to one third of the total sentence as authorized by Chapter 9.94A RCW.
B. Investigators directed by the CITY attorney and CITY police officers will have the
right to interview CITY inmates inside the confines of the Jail, subject to necessary
operational and security rules. Interview rooms will be made available as appropriate
to CITY police officers in equal priority with those of other CITY police departments.
C. CITY Inmates will be under the complete charge of the COUNTY and subject to all
applicable rules of the Jail, including any emergency security rules imposed by the
Bureau Chief. It is expressly agreed by the CITY that visitation and telephone
privileges of CITY inmates, if any, will be the same as COUNTY inmates and subject
to applicable requirements of law.
D. The Jail will be administered by the COUNTY in accordance with the rules and
regulations of the COUNTY, COUNTY ordinances and in accordance with the rules
and regulations of any agency of the State of Washington empowered to make rules
governing the administration of county jails.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Interlocal Agreement for Jail Services Page 5 of 17
2010 - 2014
Packet Page 176 of 374
E. CITY Inmates may be made inmate workers at the discretion of the COUNTY, and
such inmates may be allowed by the COUNTY to work on public property.
F. The COUNTY will provide transportation of CITY inmates to the following courts
for arraignment, trial or other hearing as required by the following Divisions of the
Snohomish County District Court: Cascade Division, Everett Division, Evergreen
Division and South Division, PROVIDED that should the COUNTY consolidate all
in-custody District Court matters into one Division of the District Court, then the
COUNTY will provide transportation only to the consolidated court location. Nothing
in this Agreement shall be construed to prevent the CITY from transporting its own
inmates to and from a court appearance. The COUNTY will provide transportation of
CITY inmates to and from medical facilities when the Jail Medical Supervisor has
determined that such treatment is necessary under Section 9(d). The CITY will
furnish all other transportation of CITY Inmates.
Section 9 Fees
A. The CITY will pay the COUNTY fees for services as follows:
a. Booking Fee: A Booking Fee shall be assessed for the Booking of CITY
Inmates by or on behalf of the CITY into the Jail. It is the only fee charged
for inmates released within four (4) hours of Booking into the Jail. The 2010
Booking Fee shall be ninety dollars ($90) per Booking.
b. Daily Maintenance Fee: A Daily Maintenance Fee shall be assessed for
each calendar day that a CITY Inmate is housed in the Jail. This fee shall not
be charged for inmates released within four (4) hours of Booking. The 2010
Daily Maintenance Fee shall be sixty-two dollars and fifty cents ($62.50) per
day for each housing day.
c. Work Release Daily Fee: A Work Release Daily Fee shall be assessed for
each calendar day that a CITY Inmate is housed in the Work Release facility.
The 2010 Work Release Daily Fee shall be forty-two dollars ($42) per day for
each housing day.
d. Electronic Home Detention (EHD) daily fee: An EHD daily fee shall be
assessed for each calendar day that a CITY Inmate participates in the EHD
program. The 2010 EHD daily fee shall be sixteen dollars ($16) per day for
each housing day. The COUNTY will prorate the CITY’s fee based on an
inmate’s ability to pay a portion of the EHD fee.
e. In-Custody Work Crew Daily Fee: An In-Custody Work Crew Daily Fee
shall be assessed for each calendar day that a CITY Inmate participates in the
In-Custody Work Crew program. The 2010 In-Custody Work Crew Fee shall
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Interlocal Agreement for Jail Services Page 6 of 17
2010 - 2014
Packet Page 177 of 374
B. The billing process calculates booking and daily inmate charges using proportional
methodology. If multiple jurisdictions have an open misdemeanor charge on an
individual, the jurisdictions will share the cost as long as an open charge persists for
that agency. A contract agency is billed for booking an individual for its misdemeanor
charge or charges. If there are open charges with more than one contract agency, each
agency will be billed in equal portions. The same process applies for determining the
daily billing. When a contracting agency’s charge is closed, that agency drops from
the proportional billing process. The proportional billing is recalculated without that
agency. If an agency has multiple open misdemeanor charges, the agency is only
billed as one element of the proportional booking process, equal to all others with
open misdemeanor charges. Additionally, there will be no partial days billed. The
billing process looks at who is billable to whom each day and bills accordingly. See
Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
C. Fees will increase each calendar year during the term of this Agreement by a rate
equal to ninety percent (90%) of the Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index
(Urban Wage Earners) for the Seattle-Tacoma-Bremerton area, measured from June
of the prior year to June of the current year. In no event shall the increase be greater
than three percent (3%).
D. In July each year, the COUNTY will provide the CITY with Fees for the following
year. Annual revision of fees will be established by notice to the CITY, as provided
in Section 14. The new fees will go into effect with the January billing.
E. Costs incurred for necessary medical services provided to CITY Inmates beyond
routine medical examinations, tests, procedures and prescriptions will be borne by the
CITY in addition to the basic rates set out in Section 9(A). If an inmate suffers an
injury while in the custody of the Jail, the COUNTY will bear all expenses not
covered by the inmate’s health insurance and/or public assistance. The Custody or
Medical Supervisor(s) on duty in the Jail is hereby granted the authority to seek
necessary medical services for CITY Inmates without consulting with CITY officials;
PROVIDED, that when it appears that a CITY Inmate, due to illness, will incur
unusual or substantial medical expenses, the COUNTY shall notify the CITY prior to
seeking treatment unless immediate treatment is required for a life threatening
emergency. If the Custody or Medical Supervisor(s) on duty orders immediate
treatment, the COUNTY will notify the CITY as soon after the event as possible.
The CITY and the COUNTY will comply with the requirements of the Health
Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) and Snohomish
County policies and procedures regarding HIPAA. The COUNTY will credit
amounts received from the inmate’s own health insurance and applicable public
assistance before billing the CITY.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Interlocal Agreement for Jail Services Page 7 of 17
2010 - 2014
Packet Page 178 of 374
Section 10 Method of Payment & Billing Dispute Resolution Procedure
A. The COUNTY shall transmit billings to the CITY monthly. Within thirty (30) days
after receipt, the CITY shall pay the full amount billed.
B. Payments from the CITY shall clearly indicate that the payment is for Jail services
and the period covered by the payment.
C. If a CITY disputes amounts billed, it shall have thirty (30) days after receipt of billing
to notify the COUNTY of alleged mistakes incorrectly calculating the amount the
CITY owes the COUNTY. The CITY will provide the COUNTY with documentation
for all alleged discrepancies. The COUNTY will address all alleged discrepancies
within fifteen (15) working days of receipt of documentation. Credits for resolved
discrepancies will be reflected on next billing cycle. The COUNTY will notify the
CITY of all unresolved discrepancies.
D. Withholding of any amount billed or alleging that any party is in violation of any
provision of this Agreement shall constitute a dispute, which shall be resolved as
follows:
a. The Bureau Chief and CITY Police Chief or their designees shall attempt to
resolve the dispute by negotiation. If such negotiation is unsuccessful, the
dispute shall be appealed to the Chief Executive Officer of the CITY and the
COUNTY Executive for settlement. If not resolved within thirty (30) days of
referral, the Chief Executive Officer of the CITY and the COUNTY Executive
1) may by mutual written consent apply to the Presiding Judge of the
Snohomish County Superior Court for appointment of an arbitrator whose
decision shall be final and binding on both parties. OR 2) may invoke the
procedures set out in RCW 39.34.180(3) for binding arbitration. Each party
shall pay one-half of any arbitration fees incurred.
b. Any amount withheld from a billing, which is determined to be owed to the
COUNTY pursuant to the dispute resolution procedure described herein, shall
be paid by the CITY within thirty (30) days of the date of the negotiated
resolution or appeal determination.
E. Any undisputed billing amount not paid by the CITY within forty-five (45) days of
receipt of the billing, and any amounts found to be owing to the COUNTY as a result
of the billing dispute resolution procedure set forth in Section 10(D) that are not paid
within thirty (30) days of dispute resolution, shall be conclusively established as a
lawful debt owed to the COUNTY by the CITY, shall be binding on the parties and
shall not be subject to legal question either directly or collaterally. This provision
shall not limit a CITY’s ability to challenge or dispute any billings that have been
paid by the CITY.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Interlocal Agreement for Jail Services Page 8 of 17
2010 - 2014
Packet Page 179 of 374
F. If the CITY fails to pay a billing within forty-five (45) days of receipt, the CITY shall
be deemed to have waived its right to house CITY Inmates in the Jail and, at the
COUNTY’s request, will remove CITY Inmates already housed in the Jail within
thirty (30) days. Thereafter, the COUNTY, at its sole discretion, may accept no
further CITY Inmates until all outstanding bills are paid.
G. The COUNTY may charge an interest rate equal to the interest rate on the monthly
COUNTY investment earnings on any undisputed billing amount not paid by the
CITY within forty-five (45) days of receipt of the billing, and any amounts found to
be owing to the COUNTY as a result of the billing dispute resolution procedure.
H. Each party may examine the other's books and records to verify charges. If an
examination reveals an improper charge, the next billing statement will be adjusted
appropriately.
Section 11 Indemnification
A. The COUNTY shall indemnify and hold harmless the CITY and its officers, agents,
and employees, or any of them, from any and all claims, actions, suits, liability, loss,
costs, expenses, and damages of any nature whatsoever, by reason of or arising out of
any negligent action or omission of the COUNTY, its officers, agents, and
employees, or any of them related to the services provided under this Agreement. In
the event that any suit based upon such a claim, action, loss, or damage is brought
against the CITY, the COUNTY shall defend the same at its sole cost and expense;
provided, that, the CITY retains the right to participate in said suit if any principle of
governmental or public law is involved; and if final judgment be rendered against the
CITY and its officers, agents, and employees, or any of them, or jointly against the
CITY and the COUNTY and their respective officers, agents, and employees, or any
of them, the COUNTY shall satisfy the same.
B. The CITY shall indemnify and hold harmless the COUNTY and its officers, agents,
and employees, or any of them, from any and all claims, actions, suits, liability, loss,
costs, expenses, and damages of any nature whatsoever, by reason of or arising out of
any negligent act or omission of the CITY, its officers, agents, and employees, or any
of them related to the arrest or confinement of a CITY inmate. In the event that any
suit based upon such a claim, action, loss, or damage is brought against the
COUNTY, the CITY shall defend the same at its sole cost and expense; provided that
the COUNTY retains the right to participate in said suit if any principle of
governmental or public laws is involved; and if final judgment be rendered against
the COUNTY, and its officers, agents, and employees, or any of them, or jointly
against the COUNTY and the CITY and their respective officers, agents, and
employees, or any of them, the CITY shall satisfy the same.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Interlocal Agreement for Jail Services Page 9 of 17
2010 - 2014
Packet Page 180 of 374
C. In the event of the concurrent negligence of the parties, the COUNTY’s and the
CITY’s obligations hereunder shall apply to the percentage of fault attributable to the
COUNTY and CITY or the COUNTY’s and CITY’s agents, employees or officials
respectively.
D. The foregoing indemnity is specifically and expressly intended to constitute a waiver
of the CITY’s indemnity under Washington’s Industrial Insurance act, Title 51 RCW,
as respects the COUNTY only, and only to the extent necessary to provide the
COUNTY with a full and complete indemnity of claims made by the CITY’s
employees. The parties acknowledge that these provisions were specifically
negotiated and agreed upon by them.
E. In executing this agreement, the COUNTY does not assume liability or responsibility
for or in any way release the CITY from any liability or responsibility, which arises in
whole or in part from the existence or effect of the CITY Municipal Code, rules or
regulations. If any cause, claim, suit, action or administrative proceeding is
commenced in which the enforceability and/or validity of any such CITY Municipal
Code, rule or regulation is at issue, the CITY shall defend the same at its sole expense
and if judgment is entered or damages are awarded against the CITY, the COUNTY,
or both, the CITY shall satisfy the same, including all chargeable costs and attorney's
fees.
F. The terms of Section 11 shall survive the termination or expiration of this Agreement.
Section 12 Non-Waiver of Rights
Except as provided in subsections 11(E) or 11(F), no waiver of any right under this
Agreement shall be effective unless made in writing by the authorized representative of the party
to be bound thereby. Failure to insist upon full performance of any one or several occasions does
not constitute consent to or waiver of any later non-performance nor does payment of a billing or
continued performance after notice of a deficiency in performance constitute an acquiescence
thereto. The parties are entitled to all remedies in law or equity.
Section 13 Modification / Amendment
All provisions of this Agreement may be modified and amended with the written consent
of the parties. This Agreement may not be modified orally. Modification must be accomplished
with the same formalities as are required for execution of this agreement.
Section 14 Notices
A. All notices required by this Agreement to be given to the COUNTY shall be made in
writing and personally delivered or sent by certified mail to the Bureau Chief.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Interlocal Agreement for Jail Services Page 10 of 17
2010 - 2014
Packet Page 181 of 374
B. All notices required by this Agreement to be given to the CITY shall be made in
writing and personally delivered or sent by certified mail to the Chief Law
Enforcement Officer of the CITY.
C. The Bureau Chief and the Chief Law Enforcement Officer of the CITY, shall be the
administrators of this Agreement pursuant to RCW 39.34.030(4)(a).
Section 15 Entire Agreement
A. This Agreement represents the entire understanding of the parties and supersedes any
oral representations that are inconsistent with or modify its terms and conditions.
B. Nothing in this Agreement shall limit the ability of the COUNTY to contract with
other entities at different rates or terms.
Section 16 Force Majeure
In the event either party’s performance of any of the provisions of this Agreement
become impossible due to Force Majeure, that party will be excused from performing such
obligations until such time as the Force Majeure event has ended and all facilities and operations
have been repaired and/or restored.
Section 17 Severability
If any provision of this Agreement is found to be invalid or contrary to law, the
remainder of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby.
Section 18 No Creation of or Expansion of Duty to Supervise;
No Partnership or Joint Venture
A. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as creating, modifying, or expanding
any duty on the part of the COUNTY. By agreeing to provide the Community
Corrections Programs described in Exhibit B to the CITY, the COUNTY is not
agreeing to any supervision of CITY inmates except as specifically provided herein.
Nothing in this Agreement shall be interpreted as a delegation by the CITY, the CITY
Municipal Court or the CITY Municipal Court’s probation department to the
COUNTY of its duty of supervision.
B. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to render the parties partners or joint
venturers.
Section 19 Offer
A. This Agreement is offered to all entities currently contracting with the COUNTY for
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Interlocal Agreement for Jail Services Page 11 of 17
2010 - 2014
Packet Page 182 of 374
B. This Agreement may be offered to entities not previously contracting with the
COUNTY for jail services.
C. This Agreement shall be offered first to currently contracting entities, and only then
to non-contracting entities. However, it is the date of acceptance of this Agreement
that shall control any section that considers order of signature rather than the date of
the offer.
Section 20 Filing
Pursuant to Chapter 39.34 RCW, a copy of this Agreement as fully executed shall be
filed by the COUNTY with the County Auditor and by the CITY with the City Clerk.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the COUNTY and the CITY have executed this Agreement
by subscribing their names as follows:
SNOHOMISH COUNTY CITY OF
_______________________________ ______________________________
Aaron Reardon Date Date
COUNTY EXECUTIVE MAYOR
ATTEST:
______________________________
Date
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
___________________________________________
DEPUTY PROSECUTING ATTORNEY Date
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Interlocal Agreement for Jail Services Page 12 of 17
2010 - 2014
Packet Page 183 of 374
EXHIBIT A
PROPORTIONAL BILLING
Each day the billing program examines the open charges for each active booking and
applies uniform rules for determining billable charges and identifying the billable agencies.
The procedure for selecting the billable charges and responsible agencies is outline below.
The program proceeds in sequence through the series of steps only as far as needed to isolate a
billable charge and determine the responsible agency.
A. Select all felony charges. If there is more than one, go to Rule #2. If there is a felony
but no State DOC hold, do not bill. If there are no felony charges, go to Rule #5.
B. Select the Arresting Agency DOC-Parole-Olympia. If there are no other arresting
agency charges, determine if charge is State DOC and bill accordingly.
C. If there is a State DOC hold and additional local charges (Snohomish County or
contracting cities; felony, misdemeanor, or gross misdemeanor) do not bill.
D. If there is a State DOC hold and non local additional charges (from other county and
municipal agencies not contracting services with Snohomish County), bill State DOC.
E. Select all open misdemeanor charges. Bill the responsible agency. If there are open
charges with more than one contract agency, go to Rule #6.
F. If there are open misdemeanor charges with multiple contract agencies, bill each
agency in equal portion (e.g., two agencies 50/50). If an agency has multiple open
misdemeanor charges, the agency is only billed as one element of the proportional
booking process, equal to all others with open misdemeanor charges.
Example: If municipal agency A has one open misdemeanor and municipal agency
B has two open misdemeanor charges at the same time, each agency is billed for
50% of the day.
G. When an agency’s charge is closed, that agency drops from the proportional billing
process. The proportional billing is recalculated without that agency.
Example: Municipal agency A has one open misdemeanor and municipal agency B
has an open misdemeanor charge. Municipal agency B’s charge is closed. Agency A
is billed for 100% from then on.
H. When there is a Snohomish County misdemeanor charge and contract agency
misdemeanor charge, the County is billed its proportional part.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Interlocal Agreement for Jail Services Page 13 of 17
2010 - 2014
Packet Page 184 of 374
EXHIBIT B
COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS OPTIONS
Section 1 Definitions
A. “Community Corrections Programs” means alternative sentencing
programs offered by the COUNTY to the CITY pursuant to this Agreement,
including Electronic Home Detention with Electronic Home Monitoring, Work
Education Release, and Work Crews. The Community Corrections Programs are
more fully defined and described in Section 2 of this Exhibit. “Community
Corrections Program” or “Program” means any one of the Community Corrections
Programs.
B. “Electronic Home Detention” or “EHD” means that Community
Corrections program described in Section 3 of Exhibit B of this Agreement.
C. “Jail Services Agreement” means that interlocal agreement dated
_________, ____, between the CITY and the COUNTY for the provision of services
at the COUNTY Jail.
D. “Work Crew In Custody” or “WC In Custody” means that Community
Corrections Program described in Section 3(a) of Exhibit B of this Agreement.
E. “Work Crew Out of Custody” or “WC Out of Custody” means that
Community Corrections Program described in Section 3(b) of Exhibit B of this
Agreement.
F. “Work Crews” means both Work Crew In Custody and Work Crew Out of
Custody.
G. “Work Education Release” or “WER” means that Community Corrections
Program described in Section 3 of Exhibit B to this Agreement.
Section 2 Purpose
A. The CITY from time to time desires to confine CITY Inmates in the
COUNTY Jail. The purpose of this Agreement is to make a wider variety of
sentencing options available to the CITY, which has contracted with the COUNTY
for Jail services.
B. In addition to Jail services provided to the CITY pursuant to separate
contract and subject to availability, the COUNTY will make available to the CITY
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Interlocal Agreement for Jail Services Page 14 of 17
2010 - 2014
Packet Page 185 of 374
a. Electronic Home Detention;
b. Work Education Release; and
c. Work Crew – In Custody.
Section 3 Eligibility and Acceptance into Community Corrections Programs
A. CITY inmates held in the custody of the COUNTY may serve their time in
a Community Corrections Program if Program services are available and if all of the
following requirements are met:
a. The CITY Inmate has been prescreened by the COUNTY for the purpose of
assisting the court in its decision related to sentencing the offender to a
Community Corrections alternative or confinement in the County Jail.
b. The COUNTY has found that the CITY Inmate meets all statutory and Program
Eligibility Requirements; and
c. The CITY Inmate has been ordered into the Program by the CITY’s Municipal
Court.
B. CITY Inmates not held in the custody of the COUNTY may also serve their time in a
Community Corrections Program if all of the above requirements are met.
C. Additionally, if a CITY Inmate who is sentenced to secure confinement meets the
requirements set forth in Section 3(a) of Exhibit B, the CITY Inmate may be
classified as a minimum security resident (MSR) and relocated as spelled out in
Snohomish County Code 5.20.020.
D. If a CITY Inmate is sentenced or otherwise ordered into a Community Corrections
Program by a court or courts on charges from multiple jurisdictions, the CITY will be
billed for its fractional share (based on the number of jurisdictions) of the Program
charges, PROVIDED, HOWEVER, that the COUNTY may refuse Program
admission for a CITY Inmate if any of those multiple jurisdictions (other than the
COUNTY) have not entered into an agreement in substantially the same form as this
Agreement. For purposes of this subsection, the COUNTY will be considered the
financially responsible jurisdiction for all State agency-filed misdemeanor and gross
misdemeanor charges.
Section 4 Transfers of CITY Inmates into the Community Corrections Program
A. A CITY Inmate meeting the eligibility requirements set forth in Section 3(A) of
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Interlocal Agreement for Jail Services Page 15 of 17
2010 - 2014
Packet Page 186 of 374
a. A CITY Inmate already in COUNTY custody will be transferred to the
Program by the COUNTY; and
b. A CITY Inmate not in COUNTY custody on the effective date of his or
her transfer to the Program shall be transferred to the Program (1) by the CITY if
the inmate is then in CITY custody or (2) by the CITY Inmate’s presenting
himself or herself to the COUNTY, in either case on the date and at the time and
place agreed to by the CITY and the COUNTY.
Section 5 Termination of CITY Inmate from Community Corrections Program
A. Once a CITY inmate is taken into a Community Corrections Program, the inmate
shall remain in the Program for the remainder of his or her term of confinement,
unless:
a. The CITY Municipal Court orders the CITY inmate terminated from the
Program or otherwise amends its earlier order;
b. The CITY inmate is no longer eligible for, and is terminated by the
COUNTY from, the Program. The termination decision shall be made by the
COUNTY, in its sole discretion, and is not subject to review. An inmate who
was previously found to be eligible may be found ineligible to continue in a
Program either (1) because of actions by the inmate while within the Program
(including but not limited to violation of rules established by the COUNTY or
a new criminal conviction) or (2) due to newly discovered information which,
if known to the COUNTY during initial screening, would have rendered the
inmate ineligible on either statutory or Program grounds.
B. A CITY Inmate who is terminated by the COUNTY from a Program shall:
a. If then in the physical presence or custody of the COUNTY by virtue of
his or her participation in a Program, be taken into custody by the COUNTY
and transported to the COUNTY Jail to serve the remainder or his or her term
of confinement; or
b. If not then in the physical presence or custody of the COUNTY by virtue
of his or her participation in a Program, become the immediate responsibility
of the CITY for all purposes including, but not limited to, duty to apprehend.
C. If the participation of a CITY Inmate in a Community Corrections Program is
terminated by the COUNTY pursuant to Section 5(A)(b) of Exhibit B, the COUNTY
shall notify the CITY and the CITY Municipal Court in writing within twenty-four
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Interlocal Agreement for Jail Services Page 16 of 17
2010 - 2014
Packet Page 187 of 374
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Interlocal Agreement for Jail Services Page 17 of 17
2010 - 2014
D. In the event that a CITY Inmate is terminated from a Community Corrections
Program and is transferred to the COUNTY Jail pursuant to Section 5(b)(i) hereof,
the CITY shall be billed for the day in which the transfer occurs pursuant to its Jail
Services Agreement and not pursuant to this Agreement.
E. In the event that the CITY inmate is terminated from a Community
Corrections Program on a day in which he or she has not received services pursuant
to this Agreement, the COUNTY shall not bill the CITY for that day.
F. In addition to fees charged to the CITY pursuant to this Agreement, the
COUNTY may also charge CITY Inmates directly for daily monitoring costs (as
noted in the vendor contract) associated with their participation in a Program, i.e., for
EHD and if applicable work release charges, at the same rate and under the same
circumstances as COUNTY inmates are charged.
Packet Page 188 of 374
AM-2608 2.H.
Contract with S. Morris Company
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:11/17/2009
Submitted By:Gerry Gannon
Submitted For:Al Compaan Time:Consent
Department:Police Department Type:Action
Review Committee:
Committee Action:Approved for Consent Agenda
Information
Subject Title
Contract with the S. Morris Company for Animal Disposal Services.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
Staff recommends that the full Council approve the contract between the City of Edmonds and the
S. Morris Company for the Mayor's signature.
Previous Council Action
This agenda item was heard at the Public Safety Committee meeting of Nov. 10, 2009. It was the
recommendation that the contract between the S. Morris Company and the City of Edmonds be
placed on the consent agenda.
Narrative
The S. Morris Company has been providing dead animal disposal for the police department for the
past three years. The contract expires at the end of this year (2009). The department does not have
the means to dispose of dead animals and have contracted with the S. Morris Company to provide
this service. The animals are cremated at the company's facility with the remains being disposed
per law.
The cost to the department is $10.68 per animal. There is no increase in costs for 2010. For the
years 2011 and 2012 any increases will be based on Seattle-Tacoma-Bremerton June CPI-U.
In 2008 the department spent $1,368 on the services from the S. Morris Company and to date in
2009 the department has spent $1,040. The attached contract has been reviewed by the City
Attorney and has been approved as to form.
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: Animal Disposal Service Contract
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 11/12/2009 02:38 PM APRV
Packet Page 189 of 374
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 11/12/2009 04:48 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 11/12/2009 04:57 PM APRV
Form Started By: Gerry
Gannon
Started On: 11/12/2009 01:38
PM
Final Approval Date: 11/12/2009
Packet Page 190 of 374
AGREEMENT FOR ANIMAL DISPOSAL SERVICES
This Agreement is made between the City of Edmonds, Washington, hereafter
referred to as “City”, and The S. Morris Company, hereafter referred to as “Morris”.
WHEREAS, the City has determined by ordinances to regulate animals within the
city limits, and
WHEREAS, the City periodically comes into possession of deceased, diseased,
injured or otherwise un-adoptable animals that must be euthanized as part of its animal
control operations, and
WHEREAS, the City has no dead animal disposal services of its own, and
WHEREAS, Morris is a corporation duly organized under the laws of the State of
Washington, and
WHEREAS, the City and Morris desire to enter into a contract defining the rights
and responsibilities of Morris and the City with respect to dead animal disposal, NOW,
THEREFORE,
In consideration of mutual covenants herein contained, Morris and the City have
mutually agreed and do hereby agree as follows:
1. Undertakings of Morris.
1.1 Morris will furnish dead animal disposal services to the City. This includes
cremation of animals at the facility operated by Morris and legal disposal of any
crematory remains.
1.2 Morris shall make a minimum of one scheduled pick-up per week of dead
animals from the City’s designated location.
1.3 Upon request by the City, Morris will furnish a chest freezer for storage of
dead animals.
2. Undertakings of the City. In consideration of the services performed, the City
shall pay to Morris the sum of $10.68 per animal for disposal services, increased in 2011
and 2012 by an amount equivalent to the Seattle-Tacoma-Bremerton June CPI-U for the
preceding year, PROVIDED, HOWEVER, that the renewal of the Agreement is subject
to an appropriation by the Edmonds City Council for future annual terms. If the City
Council fails to appropriate funds for animal disposal services, this Agreement shall
expire at the end of the last term for which an appropriation has been made.
{BFP746158.DOC;1\00006.900160\ }{BFP746158.DOC;1\00006.900160\ }{BFP746158.DOC;1\00006.900160\
}{BFP746158.DOC;1\00006.900160\ } 1
Packet Page 191 of 374
2.1 Invoices shall be submitted by the Morris to the City for payment pursuant
to the terms of this Agreement. The City shall pay the appropriate amount for each
invoice to the Morris. Morris may submit invoices to the City for services performed and
accepted by the City. Billing shall be reviewed in conjunction with the City’s warrant
process. No invoice / billing shall be considered for payment that is not sufficiently
detailed to verify validity thereof, and that has not been submitted to the City three days
prior to the scheduled cut-off date. Such late invoice will be checked by the City and
payment will be made in the next regular payment cycle.
2.2 The service and invoice records and accounts pertaining to this Agreement
are to be kept available for inspection by representatives of the City for a period of three
(3) years after final payment. Copies shall be made available upon request.
3. Indemnity. Morris agrees to indemnify, reimburse, save and hold harmless the
City for any claim, loss damage, expense or liability to the City which the City may incur
by reason of any act of Morris in performing this contract. Morris further agrees to
procure and maintain an insurance policy or policies protecting Morris and their officers
and employees against any loss, liability or expense whatsoever from personal injury,
death, property damage or otherwise arising or occurring in connection with the
performance of this contract. Said policy or policies shall be written by a responsible
insurance company or companies satisfactory to the City and shall include general
liability for personal injury and/or property damage in an amount not less than $500,000
for each person or occurrence. The insurance policy or policies shall further provide that
the same shall not be reduced or cancelled without at least twenty days prior notice to the
City, shall name the City as additionally insured and shall be primary to any other such
insurance maintained by the City. A copy of all such insurance policies shall be
submitted to the city within five days of the execution of this Agreement, and current
proof of insurance shall be submitted to the City as the policy periodically renews. To the
extent necessary to enforce this indemnification agreement, Morris waives its immunity
under Title 51 of the Revised Code of Washington.
4. Independent Contractor. Morris is and shall be considered an independent
contractor. All persons performing services under this agreement shall be employees of
Morris and are not employees of the City. Morris agrees to indemnify and hold harmless
the City of Edmonds, its officers, agents, and employees from any cost, claim, or liability
arising out of the employment of individuals by Morris. Morris shall have entire control
and direction of its business operations and kenneling services, subject only to the
conditions and obligations established by this agreement. The indemnities provided in
paragraphs 3 and 4 of this agreement shall survive its termination. Notwithstanding
Morris’ status as an independent contractor, results of the work performed pursuant to
this contract must meet the approval of the City. During pendency of this Agreement,
Morris shall not perform work for any party with enforcement action subject to the
administrative or quasi-judicial review by the City without written notification to the City
and the City’s prior written consent.
{BFP746158.DOC;1\00006.900160\ }{BFP746158.DOC;1\00006.900160\ }{BFP746158.DOC;1\00006.900160\
}{BFP746158.DOC;1\00006.900160\ } 2
Packet Page 192 of 374
5. Discrimination prohibited. Morris shall not discriminate against any employee or
applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, age, sex, national origin or
physical handicap.
6. Changes/Additional work. The City may engage Morris to perform services in
addition to those listed in this Agreement, and Morris will be entitled to additional
compensation for authorized additional services or materials. The City shall not be liable
for additional compensation until and unless any and all additional work and
compensation is approved in advance in writing and signed by both Parties to this
Agreement. If conditions are encountered which are not anticipated in the Scope of
Works, the City understands that a revision to the Scope of Work and fees may be
required. Provided, however, that nothing in this paragraph shall be interpreted to
obligate Morris to render or the City to pay for services rendered in excess of the
payments discussed in Section 2.A, unless or until an amendment to this Agreement is
approved in writing by both Parties.
7. Standard of care. Morris represents that Morris has the necessary knowledge,
skill and experience to perform services required by this Agreement. Morris and any
persons employed by Morris shall use their best efforts to perform the work in a
professional manner consistent with sound practices, in accordance with the usual and
customary professional care required for services agreed to herein.
8. Supervision of employees. Morris is responsible for the direct supervision of its
employees, and a supervisor shall be available at reasonable times to confer with the City
in regards to services. Morris commits that its services will be performed by careful and
efficient employees trained in the best practice and highest standards imposed by Morris.
Morris agrees to remove any of its employees who in the reasonable opinion of the City,
are guilty of improper conduct or incapable of performing the work assigned to them.
9. Non-waiver. Waiver by the City of any provision of this Agreement or any time
limitation provided for in this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of any other
provision.
10. Non-assignable. The services to be provided by Morris shall not be assigned or
subcontracted without the express written consent of the City.
11. Covenant against contingent fees. Morris warrants that it has not employed or
retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for
Morris, to solicit or secure this contract, and that it has not paid or agreed to pay any
company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for Morris, any fee,
commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gifts or any other consideration contingent upon
or resulting from the award of making this contract. For breach or violation of this
warranty, the City shall have the right to annul this contract without liability or, in its
discretion to deduct from the contract price or consideration, or otherwise recover, the
full amount of such fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift, or contingent fee.
{BFP746158.DOC;1\00006.900160\ }{BFP746158.DOC;1\00006.900160\ }{BFP746158.DOC;1\00006.900160\
}{BFP746158.DOC;1\00006.900160\ } 3
Packet Page 193 of 374
12. Compliance with laws. Morris in the performance of this Agreement shall
comply with all applicable Federal, State or local laws and ordinances, including but not
limited to provisions of Title 51 RCW, Title 16 RCW and other laws, tax regulations,
regulations for licensing, certification and operation of facilities, programs and
accreditation, and licensing of individuals, and any other standards or criteria as
described in the Agreement and or necessary to assure quality of services delivered.
13. B&O Taxes. Morris specifically agrees to pay any applicable business and
occupation (B & O) taxes which may be due on account of this Agreement.
14. Expiration, Notice. In the event that the period covered by this contract shall
expire without the benefit of a new agreement, the rate scheduled then in effect as of the
date of contract expiry shall continue until such time as Morris and the City agree to an
amended rate schedule, provided that either party may, upon one hundred eighty days
advance written notice, issue notice of termination, which shall not require cause, and
after expiry of notice, the contract shall be of no further force or effect. Either party may
terminate this agreement immediately for cause upon the deposit of written notification in
the U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the regular mailing address of each party.
The regular mailing address of the Parties shall be:
City of Edmonds
c/o Sandy S. Chase, City Clerk
121 Fifth Avenue North
Edmonds, WA 98020
425.775.2525
The S. Morris Company
c/o Steve Morris
P.O. Box 99768
Seattle, WA 98139
206.784.4055
15. Severability. This Agreement shall be read and interpreted as a whole, except that
the capitalized and underlined headings for each numbered paragraph are for descriptive
purposes and shall not prevail over the provision which they head. In the event that any
provision herein shall be struck down, particularly those contained in provision number 4
(Independent Contractor), this Agreement shall be at an immediate end.
16. Integration. The Agreement between the Parties shall consist of this document
and the Exhibits attached hereto. These writings constitute the entire Agreement of the
parties and shall not be amended except by a writing executed by both parties as provided
in provision 6 (Changes/Additional Work). In the event of any conflict between this
written Agreement and any provisions of Exhibits attached hereto, this Agreement shall
control.
{BFP746158.DOC;1\00006.900160\ }{BFP746158.DOC;1\00006.900160\ }{BFP746158.DOC;1\00006.900160\
}{BFP746158.DOC;1\00006.900160\ } 4
Packet Page 194 of 374
{BFP746158.DOC;1\00006.900160\ }{BFP746158.DOC;1\00006.900160\ }{BFP746158.DOC;1\00006.900160\
}{BFP746158.DOC;1\00006.900160\ } 5
17. Venue and jurisdiction. Any action to interpret or enforce this Agreement shall be
brought before the Superior Court of Snohomish County, Washington, and the Parties
agree that, as between them, all matters shall be resolved in that venue.
18. Force Majeure. Parties shall not be liable for failure to perform or delay in
performance due to fire, flood, strike or other labor difficulty, act of God, act of any
governmental authority, riot, embargo, fuel or energy shortage, car shortage, wrecks or
delays in transportation, or due to any other cause beyond parties reasonable control. In
the event of delay in performance due to any such cause, the date of delivery or time for
completion will be extended by a period of time reasonably necessary to overcome the
effect of such delay.
19. Entire Agreement; Amendment; Attorneys’ Fees. This Agreement contains all
the understandings between the Parties and is intended to operate as such. In the event of
a dispute over any part or portion of this Agreement, the party prevailing upon its claim
or claims shall also be awarded reasonable costs and reasonable attorney’s fees.
20. Term. This Agreement shall have a three year term commencing on January 1,
2010.
EXECUTED this ______ day of _________________, 20 ____.
CITY OF EDMONDS THE S. MORRIS COMPANY
By: __________________________ By:
Mayor Gary Haakenson It’s:
ATTESTED/AUTHENTICATED
By: ___________________________
Sandy S. Chase, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM
By: ___________________________
W. Scott Snyder, City Attorney
Packet Page 195 of 374
AM-2609 2.I.
Towing Contracts
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:11/17/2009
Submitted By:Gerry Gannon
Submitted For:Al Compaan Time:Consent
Department:Police Department Type:Action
Review Committee:Public Safety
Committee Action:Approved for Consent Agenda
Information
Subject Title
Renewing the Towing Contract with Paulson's Towing, R&R Star Towing, Shannon Towing, and
Wally's Towing.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
The recommendation from the staff is that the Council approve the towing addendum between the
City of Edmonds and Paulson's Towing, R&R Star Towing, Shannon Towing, and Wally's
Towing for the Mayor's signature.
Previous Council Action
This agenda item was heard at the Public Safety Committee meeting of Nov. 10, 2009. It was the
recommendation that the contract between the S. Morris Company and the City of Edmonds be
placed on the consent agenda.
Narrative
The City uses the services of four different towing companies on rotational basis. The attached
contract addendum reflects the new rates the companies may charge their customers for towing
services. In addition, the contract addendum adds an ending term of for the towing contract. The
term now ends on October 11, 2011.
The City Attorney has reviewed the addendum and has approved the addendum as to form.
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: Towing Addendums
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 11/12/2009 03:11 PM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 11/12/2009 04:48 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 11/12/2009 04:57 PM APRV
Form Started By: Gerry
Gannon
Started On: 11/12/2009 01:58
PM
Final Approval Date: 11/12/2009
Packet Page 196 of 374
Final Approval Date: 11/12/2009
Packet Page 197 of 374
Packet Page 198 of 374
Packet Page 199 of 374
Packet Page 200 of 374
Packet Page 201 of 374
Packet Page 202 of 374
Packet Page 203 of 374
Packet Page 204 of 374
Packet Page 205 of 374
Packet Page 206 of 374
Packet Page 207 of 374
Packet Page 208 of 374
Packet Page 209 of 374
AM-2614 2.J.
Authorization to Surplus One (1) Sewer TV Truck
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:11/17/2009
Submitted By:Kim Karas
Submitted For:Noel Miller Time:Consent
Department:Public Works Type:Action
Review Committee:
Committee Action:Approved for Consent Agenda
Information
Subject Title
Authorization to surplus one (1) sewer TV truck utilizing a sealed bid process.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
Recommend that City Council authorize staff to surplus Public Works Sewer TV Truck, Unit
#16, utilizing a sealed bid process.
Previous Council Action
On February 5, 2008 Council authorized staff to surplus Unit #16 to James G.
Murphy Auctioneers.
Narrative
The City has been contacted by two interested parties to purchase Unit #16. The City has been
advised by James Murphy Auctioneers that the City would receive a higher price by utilizing a
sealed bid process. The minimum bid will be set at $15,000.00.
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
No file(s) attached.
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 11/12/2009 04:46 PM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 11/12/2009 04:48 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 11/12/2009 04:57 PM APRV
Form Started By: Kim
Karas
Started On: 11/12/2009 03:58
PM
Final Approval Date: 11/12/2009
Packet Page 210 of 374
AM-2601 2.K.
Repeal of Ordinance 3706 and Code Chapter 5.65, EMS Transport Fee Charges
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:11/17/2009
Submitted By:Tom Tomberg Time:Consent
Department:Fire Type:Action
Review Committee:Public Safety
Committee Action:Approved for Consent Agenda
Information
Subject Title
Ordinance repealing Ordinance No. 3706 codified as Chapter 5.65 of the Edmonds City Code, and
entitled Emergency Medical Service Transport Fee Charges, providing for collection of fees
incurred.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
Approve.
Previous Council Action
On November 10, the Public Safety Committee voted to move this item to the Council Consent
Agenda with a recommendation to approve.
On November 2, 2009, Council approved the contract for service interlocal agreement for the
provision of Fire/EMS services between the City and Snohomish County Fire District No. 1
effective January 1, 2010.
On November 18, 2008, Council approved Ordinance No. 3706 Emergency Medical Services
Transport Charges which was codified as Chapter 5.65 in the City Code.
Narrative
Section 4.8 EMS Transport Fees of the agreement approved by the Council on November 2
transfers the provisions of EMS services from the City to the Fire District. As the EMS provider
effective January 1, 2010, the District provides all EMS services, collects EMS transport fees, and
remits all monies back to the City on a quarterly basis less the actual cost of collection.
The attached ordinance prepared by the City Attorney repeals Ordinance No. 3706 and repeals
Chapter 5.65.
Fiscal Impact
Fiscal Year:2010
Revenue:
Expenditure:
Fiscal Impact:
None.
Packet Page 211 of 374
Attachments
Link: Amending City Code 5.65
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 11/12/2009 08:48 AM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 11/12/2009 04:48 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 11/12/2009 04:57 PM APRV
Form Started By: Tom
Tomberg
Started On: 11/10/2009 09:23
AM
Final Approval Date: 11/12/2009
Packet Page 212 of 374
0006.90000
WSS/gjz
10/12/09
ORDINANCE NO. _______
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 3706
CODIFIED AS CHAPTER 5.65 OF THE EDMONDS CITY
CODE, AND ENTITLED EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICE
TRANSPORT FEE CHARGES, PROVIDING FOR
COLLECTION OF FEES INCURRED, AND FIXING A TIME
WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE.
WHEREAS, by Ordinance No. 3706, the Edmonds City Council imposed EMS
Transport Fees, and
WHEREAS, in conjunction with the transfer of Emergency Medical Service to
Fire District No. 1 by a contract approved of even date, the provisions regarding Emergency
Medical Service Transport Charges have become redundant and should be repealed, and
WHEREAS, by said repeal, the Edmonds City Council does not limit or prohibit
Fire District No. 1 from charging emergency medical service transport fees, nor allow any
contractual obligation relating thereto, NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Ordinance No. 3706 codified as Chapter 5.65 of the Edmonds City
Code is hereby repealed. This repeal shall be effective as to all transport fees for services
rendered from and after its effective date, but does not impair the obligation of any party
previously billed for service in accordance with Chapter 5.65 in effect as of the date the transport
service charge was incurred or billed. The provisions of said Chapter shall continue to govern
{WSS745367.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } - 1 -
Packet Page 213 of 374
Section 2. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifi-
cally delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take effect
five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the
title.
APPROVED:
MAYOR GARY HAAKENSON
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY:
BY
W. SCOTT SNYDER
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK:
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
PUBLISHED:
EFFECTIVE DATE:
ORDINANCE NO.
{WSS745367.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } - 2 -
Packet Page 214 of 374
{WSS745367.DOC;1\00006.900000\ }- 3 -
SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. __________
of the City of Edmonds, Washington
On the ____ day of ___________, 2009, the City Council of the City of Edmonds,
passed Ordinance No. _____________. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting
of the title, provides as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, REPEALING
ORDINANCE NO. 3706 CODIFIED AS CHAPTER 5.65 OF THE EDMONDS CITY CODE,
AND ENTITLED EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICE TRANSPORT FEE CHARGES,
PROVIDING FOR COLLECTION OF FEES INCURRED, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN
THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE.
The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request.
DATED this _____ day of ________________, 2009.
CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE
Packet Page 215 of 374
AM-2603 2.L.
Ordinance Modifying Certain Fire Provisions in the City Code
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:11/17/2009
Submitted By:Tom Tomberg Time:Consent
Department:Fire Type:Action
Review Committee:Public Safety
Committee Action:Approved for Consent Agenda
Information
Subject Title
Ordinance repealing the provisions of Edmonds City Code 2.10.040, Fire Chief, adding a new
Chapter 2.12 relating to the duties of the Fire Chief, Fire Marshal and other references to the Fire
Department throughout the City Code, repealing Chapter 3.09 and 3.15 and providing for
disposition of the funds held.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
Approve.
Previous Council Action
On November 10, the Public Safety Committee voted to move this item to the Council Consent
Agenda with a recommendation to approve.
On November 2, 2009, Council approved the Fire/EMS contract for service interlocal agreement
between the City and Snohomish County Fire District #1.
Narrative
The November 2 Council approval of the Fire/EMS contract for service between the City and Fire
District #1 requires the following City Code modifications:
1. Repeal of Chapter 2.10.040 Fire Chief;
2. Add New Chapter 2.12 Relating to the duties of the Fire Chief, Fire Marshal and other
references to the Fire Department throughout the Code;
3. Repeal of Chapters 3.09 Cumulative Reserve Fund for Apparatus, and 3.15 Fire Donation Fund
and providing dispositions for the funds held.
The City Attorney prepared the attached ordinance.
Fiscal Impact
Fiscal Year:2010
Revenue:
Expenditure:
Fiscal Impact:
None.
Packet Page 216 of 374
Attachments
Link: Ordinance Amending City Code
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 11/12/2009 08:48 AM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 11/12/2009 04:48 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 11/12/2009 04:57 PM APRV
Form Started By: Tom
Tomberg
Started On: 11/10/2009 10:12
AM
Final Approval Date: 11/12/2009
Packet Page 217 of 374
0006.90000
WSS/gjz
10/20/09
R:10/30/09gjz
R:11/2/09gjz
ORDINANCE NO. _______
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, REPEALING THE PROVISIONS OF
EDMONDS CITY CODE 2.10.040 FIRE CHIEF, ADDING A
NEW CHAPTER 2.12 RELATING TO THE DUTIES OF THE
FIRE CHIEF, FIRE MARSHAL AND OTHER REFERENCES
TO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT THROUGHOUT THE CITY
CODE, REPEALING CHAPTER 3.09 AND 3.15 AND
PROVIDING FOR DISPOSITION OF THE FUNDS HELD, AND
FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME
EFFECTIVE.
WHEREAS, by contemporaneous action, the Edmonds City Council has
approved an interlocal agreement providing for the provision of fire services to the City by
Snohomish County Fire District No. 1, and
WHEREAS, such interlocal agreement provides that the City Council may, at its
discretion, terminate the agreement, and
WHEREAS, the City Council deems it to be in the public interest to acknowledge
that fire services including the services of a fire marshal shall be provided for by contract but
wish to retain certain provisions of the current City Code including but not limited to provisions
of the fire code, civil service and other relevant code provisions in place in the event that the City
determines it necessary to terminate the agreement and to clarify that during the term of the
interlocal agreement, fire service and fire marshal services shall be provided by Snohomish
County Fire District No. 1 by contract to the same extent as if such services were provided
directly to the citizens by City employees, NOW, THEREFORE,
{WSS746261.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } - 1 -
Packet Page 218 of 374
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Edmonds City Code 2.10.040 is hereby repealed.
Section 2. Title 2 of the Edmonds City Code is hereby amended by the addition
of a new chapter 2.12 Fire Department to read as follows:
2.12 Fire Department
2.12.010 Fire Service
2.12.020 Pre-existing rights and obligations not impaired.
2.12.010 Fire service
Fire service is provided to the citizens of the City of Edmonds by
and through a contract with Snohomish County Fire District No. 1.
Whenever any reference is made in the provisions of the Edmonds
City Code or Edmonds Community Development Code to fire
chief, fire marshal, fire department or any other reference to a
firefighter or fire services, such term shall include, for the
provision of administrative or other day to day fire services, to
reference the fire chief, fire marshal and fire fighting services
performed for the City by contract by Snohomish County Fire
District No. 1.
1. The officials of the Snohomish County Fire District No. 1
when performing services by contract to the citizens of the City of
Edmonds and to the City in its corporate capacity shall exercise
any and all rights, duties, obligations and responsibilities in
accordance with the provisions of this code to the same extent and
in the same manner as if performed by an employee of the City.
2. Employees of the Snohomish County Fire District No. 1
(“District”) shall not be entitled to any wage or benefit provision of
this code, including but not limited to Chapters 2.06 and 2.35. The
Edmonds Civil Service System shall remain in effect but no
employee of the District shall have recourse to the Civil Service
Commission following the termination date of Fire Department
employees by the City.
{WSS746261.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } - 2 -
Packet Page 219 of 374
2.12.020 Pre-existing rights and obligations not impaired.
The City Council’s determination to contract or not contract for
fire services with Snohomish County Fire District No. 1 and the
provisions of this chapter shall not impair any existing vested right
or vested obligation created under the provisions of state law or
under Chapter 2.50 Fireman’s Relief and Pension System, Chapter
2.60 Reserve Firefighters’ Relief and Pension Act, Chapter 2.70
Retirement System, and Chapter 10.30 Disability Board, as well as
the MEBT plan of the City. The rights of any person under such
system vested prior to the transfer of fire service responsibility by
contract shall remain in full force and effect and is not impaired by
either such or the adoption of this chapter.
Section 3. The Edmonds City Code is hereby amended by the repeal of Chapters
3.09 Accumulative Reserve Fund for Fire Apparatus, and 3.15 Fire Donation Fund. The funds
currently held in Chapter 3.09 are hereby released and may be utilized solely for costs associated
with the provision of fire service under a contract between the City of Edmonds and Snohomish
County Fire District No. 1, and shall be first applied to any cost or charge relating to fire
apparatus. The funds held in the Fire Donation Fund, created by Chapter 3.15 shall be
transferred to Snohomish County Fire District No. 1 and released only upon the agreement and
acknowledgement of the District that it shall use the funds solely for operating, maintaining and
improving the provision of emergency services relating to suppression of fires and the provision
of emergency medical aid and assistance. The District shall also acknowledge that its use of the
funds shall also comply with the intent of any donor with respect to identified restricted funds, if
any. The City shall notify the District of any restricted funds, the amount of such restricted
funds and the purpose for which their uses are limited prior to transfer .
Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifi-
cally delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take effect on
{WSS746261.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } - 3 -
Packet Page 220 of 374
APPROVED:
MAYOR GARY HAAKENSON
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY:
BY
W. SCOTT SNYDER
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK:
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
PUBLISHED:
EFFECTIVE DATE:
ORDINANCE NO.
{WSS746261.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } - 4 -
Packet Page 221 of 374
{WSS746261.DOC;1\00006.900000\ }- 5 -
SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. __________
of the City of Edmonds, Washington
On the ____ day of ___________, 2009, the City Council of the City of Edmonds,
passed Ordinance No. _____________. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting
of the title, provides as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, REPEALING THE
PROVISIONS OF EDMONDS CITY CODE 2.10.040 FIRE CHIEF, ADDING A NEW
CHAPTER 2.12 RELATING TO THE DUTIES OF THE FIRE CHIEF, FIRE MARSHAL AND
OTHER REFERENCES TO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT THROUGHOUT THE CITY CODE,
REPEALING CHAPTER 3.09 AND 3.15 AND PROVIDING FOR DISPOSITION OF THE
FUNDS HELD, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE.
The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request.
DATED this _____ day of ________________ ,2009.
CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE
Packet Page 222 of 374
AM-2598 3.
Transfer Control of Franchisee (Verizon Northwest) to Frontier Communications
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:11/17/2009
Submitted By:Stephen Clifton Time:15 Minutes
Department:Community Services Type:Action
Review Committee:
Committee Action:
Information
Subject Title
Approving Transfer of Control of the Franchisee (Verizon Northwest, Inc.) to Frontier
Communications Corporation. (Public comment will be received.)
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
The attached report from River Oaks includes a recommendation that "consent should be given by
each Consortium member to the transfer of control of Verizon Northwest Inc. to Frontier subject to
a mutually acceptable Transfer Resolution or Ordinance". This being said, the City Council will
not be asked to take formal action until November 17, 2009.
Previous Council Action
February 26, 2008 - The Edmonds City Council directed the City Attorney to continue with a
schedule which outlined possible "Next Steps" regarding negotiations with Verizon.
March 25, 2008 - The Edmonds City Council authorized Mayor Haakenson to sign an Interlocal
Agreement Consortium For Negotiation of Cable Television Franchising, in addition to preparing
and executing a Consultant Agreement with River Oaks.
July 22, 2008 - The Edmonds City Council conducted a first reading and public hearing related to
the proposed Cable Franchise Agreement between the City of Edmonds and Verizon Northwest
Inc.
July 29, 2008 - The Edmonds City Council approved Ordinance 3693 adopting a Cable Franchise
Agreement between the City of Edmonds and Verizon Northwest Inc. The City Council also
authorized Mayor to execute the Franchise Agreement on behalf of the City.
June 16, 2009 - The Edmonds City Council authorized Mayor Haakenson to sign, on behalf of the
City, an Interlocal Agreement related to the Consortium for Negotiation of Transfer of Cable
Franchise Agreement from Verizon Northwest, Inc. to Frontier Communications Corporation. The
City Council also authorized Mayor Haakenson to sign, on behalf of the City, a Conflict of Interest
Waiver.
November 2, 2009 - The Edmonds City Council held a public workshop on subject transfer. The
workshop included a staff presentation and introduction by Frontier Communications Chairman
Ann Barr. She also responded to questions raised by the City Council.
Packet Page 223 of 374
Narrative
On May 13, 2009, Verizon announced plans to divest its local wireline communications system to
Frontier Communications. According to a May 19, 2009 letter to the City of Edmonds from both
entities, the transaction includes Verizon’s residential and small business telephone lines, internet
service, long-distance voice accounts, as well as Verizon’s fiber-to-the-premises (FTTP) assets;
Frontier will provide video services after the completion of the merger.
Due to the complexities related to processing this type of transaction application, a
multi-jurisdictional Consortium was created similar to the process used to negotiate the Verizon
and Comcast Interlocal Agreements. Participating jurisdictions contracted with River Oaks
Communications Corporation and Ogden Murphy Wallace in June, 2009 for common services as
well as a mechanism for each entity to utilize the consultant’s services, as that entity sees fit, and
for additional support in reviewing or negotiating the transfer to meet specific needs of each
participating jurisdiction.
City staff and a representative from the City Attorney’s office met with representatives of Verizon
and Frontier Communications on June 11, 2009. This allowed City representatives an opportunity
to ask questions and to prepare for a potential transfer. Staff from jurisdictions participating in the
Consortium also conducted similar meetings with Verizon and Frontier representatives.
As required by the Federal Communications Commission, Form 394 must be used when applying
for franchise authority approval to assign or transfer control of a cable television system. The
franchise authority in this case is the City of Edmonds. In addition to the information requested on
Form 394, cable operators are required to submit all information required by the cable franchise
agreement or applicable local law or that the franchising authority deems necessary or appropriate
in connection with the transfer determination. A franchise authority has only 30 days in which to
review Form 394 to determine whether all necessary information has been provided and is
complete. Under Federal law, the members of the Consortium have a duty from a due diligence
standpoint to examine this transaction from a financial, legal and technical standpoint and
ultimately approve or deny transfer of control based on these criteria.
According to Section 617(e) of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of
1992, the franchise authority shall have 120 days from the date of filing Form 394 (complete with
all exhibits and any information required by the franchise agreement or applicable state or local
law) to act upon such request. If the franchise authority fails to render a final decision on such
request within 120 days, the request shall be deemed granted unless the requesting party and the
franchise authority agree to an extension of time. In this particular case, the timeframe was
mutually extended by all parties until November 30, 2009.
An October 21, 2009 report (Attachment 1) from River Oaks Communications Corporation
includes a recommendation that "consent should be given by each Consortium member to the
transfer of control of Verizon Northwest Inc. to Frontier subject to a mutually acceptable Transfer
Resolution or Ordinance". This being said, the Edmonds City Council will not be asked to take
formal action until November 17, 2009. The attached report also contains an executive summary,
and information related to the following: background; a description of initial documents provided
by Verizon/Frontier; the Consortium’s data requests #1 and #2 and request for information;
Frontier Communication’s legal qualifications; plans and capabilities; customer rates and
Packet Page 224 of 374
financing the transaction; prior ownership of cable systems; governmental and educational access
channels and franchise fees; build-out of Verizon’s cable systems; data request #3; standstill
agreement and reimbursement to the consortium members; technical capabilities of Frontier
Communications; future customer service; programming; financial risks; and a conclusion.
A draft Template Transfer Ordinance (Attachment 2) is also attached for your review. The
ordinance, if approved by the City Council, consents to the transfer in accordance with the terms
of applicable law, subject to and contingent upon three conditions. Language in the Template
Transfer Ordinance notes that if the transfer does not close for whatever reason, then the consent
provided for within the Ordinance shall be null and void, and the City shall be deemed to have
disapproved the transfer of control under the Franchise and federal law, and all remedies under the
Franchise and applicable laws shall be available to the City. In the event the Transfer does not
close before January 2012, Verizon and Frontier will provide notice of that event to the City and
an update on the reasons for such a delay in closing or notice of the termination of the Transfer.
NOTE: On November 3, 2009, the Washington State Attorney General’s Office recommended
that the Washington State Utilities and Transportation Commission (UTC) not approve the sale of
Verizon Northwest’s local and long distance telephone services in Washington to Frontier
Communications because the transaction, as proposed, is not in the public interest.
In response to the Attorney General's Office recommendation, the following three documents have
been prepared by Consortium members or their representatives.
1. November 6, 2009 e-mail from Odgen Murphy Wallace (Attachment 3) – This e-mail to
Consortium members highlights that the WUTC regulates landline telephone service, not the cable
service regulated through the franchise with Verizon. The WUTC process is different than one the
Consortium recently completed in evaluating the transfer application. Specifically, the Consortium
has been evaluating the technical, financial and legal qualifications of Frontier to operate the cable
system in Consortium jurisdictions.
2. November 6, 2009 letter from Stole Rives, legal Counsel for Verizon (Attachment 4) – This
letter to Consortium members responds to pending action by the WUTC.
3. November 6, 2009 memorandum to Snohomish County Council (Attachment 5) – Similar to the
e-mail and letter from Ogden Murphy Wallace and Stole Rives respectively, this memorandum
highlights that many of the issues raised by the WUTC are issues the Consortium raised during the
data request process and dialogue with both Frontier and Verizon over the past few months. As
reflected in the report prepared by River Oaks, the Consortium paid particular attention to the
financing of the transaction, and are still comfortable with that analysis and conclusions. Finally,
as underscored by Snohomish County, the ordinance and action under consideration conditions the
approval of the transfer request on approval by the WUTC.
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: Attachment 1 - Report from River Oaks Communication Corporation
Link: Attachment 2 - Template Transfer Ordinance
Link: Attachment 3 - Nov 3, 2009 E-mail from OMW to Consortium members
Link: Attachment 4 - Nov 6, 2009 Letter from Stole Rives to Elana Zana
Link: Attachment 5 - Nov 6, 2009 Memo from Peter Camp to Snohmish County Council
Packet Page 225 of 374
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 11/12/2009 02:38 PM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 11/12/2009 04:48 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 11/12/2009 04:56 PM APRV
Form Started By: Stephen
Clifton
Started On: 11/09/2009 08:20
AM
Final Approval Date: 11/12/2009
Packet Page 226 of 374
1
River Oaks Communications Corporation
Colorado Springs Office:
3 South Tejon, Suite 200
Colorado Springs, Colorado 80903
Telephone: (719) 477-6850
Fax: (719) 477-0818
E-Mail: tduchen@rivoaks.com
Denver Office:
6860 South Yosemite Court, Suite 2000
Centennial, Colorado 80112
Telephone: (303) 721-0653
Fax: (303) 721-1746
E-Mail: bduchen@rivoaks.com
REPORT TO WASHINGTON CONSORTIUM REGARDING
THE TRANSER OF CONTROL OF VERIZON NORTHWEST INC.
TO FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
October 21, 2009
Executive Summary
Verizon Northwest Inc. is the cable television franchisee in ten jurisdictions that comprise the
Consortium. Approximately ten months after the franchise agreements were finished, Verizon
Communications Inc. (“Verizon”), the parent company of Verizon Northwest Inc., announced
that it had signed an agreement to transfer control of Verizon Northwest Inc. to Frontier
Communications Corporation (“Frontier”) for approximately $8.6 Billion ($5.3 Billion in stock
and $3.3 Billion in new debt). Frontier offers wireline telephone service and Internet service and
acts as an agent for Dish Network which provides satellite television service.
On June 1, 2009, FCC Form 394, its Exhibits and related materials were received by Consortium
members. Under federal law, had the application been complete, the local franchise authorities
would have had 120 days to approve or deny the transfer of control. Due to disagreements over
the completeness of the submittal, the timeframe was mutually extended with Verizon and
Frontier until November 30, 2009.
The criteria for review are whether the transferee, in this case Frontier, has the legal, financial
and technical qualifications to own and operate the cable television systems. The Consortium
prepared Data Requests #1, #2 and #3 along with Requests for Information in order to be
provided with necessary information to conduct its due diligence and evaluation. After
reviewing several hundreds of pages of information, it is clear that there are questions as to
whether this transaction will work from financial and technical standpoints. There are risks
associated with it and no guarantees, but it is the responsibility of Frontier to make it work from
ownership and operations perspectives.
Packet Page 227 of 374
2
Frontier has indicated that it intends to abide by existing franchise requirements, has no plans to
increase rates (although they do not guarantee this due to market conditions), will continue
providing Governmental and Educational Access Channels and build-out the systems in
accordance with the franchise. Frontier prides itself on its customer service and will be retaining
the bulk of Verizon’s customer service personnel. As a result of the transaction, a smaller
company is acquiring a larger one and the company’s debt to EBITDA (EBITDA is earnings
before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization) ratio is being reduced from about 3.8 to 2.6.
Frontier continues to work on Video Transport Agreements and obtaining Programming
Agreements. It is confident in its ability to address both of these issues as well as obtaining
financing. Closing of the transaction is planned for April, 2010. Much additional detail with
respect to these and other matters is provided below.
Neither the local government members of the Consortium nor River Oaks Communications
Corporation (“River Oaks”) is expressing an opinion as to whether Frontier will ultimately be
successful financially, operationally or otherwise. We have not audited Verizon or Frontier or
prepared independent financial projections. During the past five months, River Oaks and the
Consortium Members have conducted an extensive review of information, including meetings
between Verizon/Frontier and Consortium members, conference calls and a diligent and
thorough review of these documents as required by federal law.
River Oaks believes Frontier meets the criteria of being legally, financially and technically
qualified. Thus, we recommend consent should be given by each Consortium member to the
transfer of control of Verizon Northwest Inc. to Frontier subject to a mutually acceptable
Transfer Resolution or Ordinance. It is Frontier’s and Verizon Northwest Inc.’s responsibility to
make this transfer of control and acquisition successful from a business, technical, financial and
customer standpoint.
Background
In response to public information that Verizon Communications Inc. (“Verizon”) was
transferring Verizon Northwest Inc., the cable system operator in the Northwest area, to Frontier
Communications Corporation (“Frontier”), a Consortium was formed to consolidate resources
and effectively perform due diligence as required by federal law. The Consortium is comprised
of Snohomish County and the Cities of Everett, Edmonds, Marysville, Bothell, Mountlake
Terrace, Kenmore, Mukilteo, Woodinville and the Town of Woodway (the “Consortium”).
On June 1, 2009, Verizon filed the FCC Form 394, its Exhibits and related materials with the
Consortium members. Federal law, pursuant to 47 U.S.C. §537 provides in part that a
franchising authority shall have 120 days to act upon any request for approval of a sale or
transfer that contains or is accompanied by such information as is required in accordance with
FCC Regulations and by the franchising authority. 47 CFR §76.502 also provides certain
timeframes in which local governments are required to raise substantive and procedural
questions if they believe that the FCC Form 394 is not complete.
Packet Page 228 of 374
3
With this legal and regulatory backdrop, the Consortium retained Ogden Murphy Wallace and
River Oaks Communications Corporation (“River Oaks”) to represent it in this process. Peter
Camp, the Executive Director of Snohomish County, was an integral part of this team as it
worked on its process, responses, negotiations and related matters with respect to Verizon and
Frontier.
Initial Documents Provided by Verizon/Frontier
Documents provided to the Consortium members included: FCC Form 394, Request For
Consent To Transfer Control of Franchisee, Exhibit 1 with a Corporate Organizational Chart,
Exhibit 2 with respect to Conditions of Service and Operations, Exhibit 3 with respect to
Corporate Ownership, Directors and Officers, Exhibit 4 describing how Verizon Northwest Inc.
would become a wholly owned subsidiary of Frontier Communications Corporation, Exhibit 5
with respect to other Litigation, Exhibit 6 regarding no Pledge of Stock, Exhibit 7 with respect to
Frontier Financial Matters along with the 10-K of Frontier for the year ending December 31,
2008, Exhibit 8 with respect to Frontier’s Technical Qualifications and a Model Resolution
whereby Verizon sought to have each local jurisdiction consent to the transfer of control.
This transfer involves a publicly traded company acquiring a company held by a much larger
company. As indicated by Frontier in Exhibit 7 in the submittal:
“. . . the transaction . . . will reduce significantly the Company’s debt to EBITDA
ratio. Currently, Frontier’s leverage is approximately 3.8 x EBITDA; after the
transaction its leverage will be reduced to 2.6 x EBITDA. (EBITDA is earnings
before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization). The increased financial
strength is expected to improve Frontier’s access to capital and lower its cost of
capital, which will inure to the benefit of the franchisee and its customers.”
Additionally, the submittal also contained the Distribution Agreement by and between Verizon
Communications Inc. and New Communications Holdings Inc. dated as of May 13, 2009. Also
included was the Agreement and Plan of Merger dated as of May 13, 2009 by and among
Verizon Communications Inc., New Communications Holdings Inc. and Frontier
Communications Corporation. Subsequently the Consortium also received Amendment No.1 to
the Distribution Agreement and Amendment No.1 to the Agreement and Plan of Merger.
Consortium’s Data Request #1, Data Request #2 and Request for Information
Following the submittal of the FCC Form 394, Frontier and Verizon representatives met
individually with the staff and elected officers of several of the Consortium members. Within 30
days of receipt of the FCC Form 394, the Washington Consortium prepared and submitted Data
Request #1 and Data Request #2 to Verizon and Frontier. Copies of Data Request #1, Data
Request #2 and the Request for Information Letter with its accompanying questions are attached
to this Report. For purposes of brevity, we will not address the specifics and level of detail
contained in those Requests for Information. Rather we will focus on salient issues and their
current status. It is important to note that under federal law, the key issues are whether the
transferee will have the Financial, Legal and Technical capability to own and operate the cable
Packet Page 229 of 374
4
television systems. It was the position of the Consortium that the FCC Form 394 and Exhibits,
as submitted, were incomplete and deficient. Furthermore, it was the view of the Consortium
that, given that all necessary materials were not filed, the 120 day timeframe under Federal law
had not commenced. If the 120 day timeframe had commenced, each jurisdiction would have
been required to either approve or deny the transfer within 120 days, or the transfer would be
deemed approved. The Consortium, Verizon and Frontier had significant disagreements as to
whether the shot clock had been triggered.
Legal Qualifications, Frontier’s Plans and Capabilities
Following the transfer, Verizon Northwest Inc., the current franchisee, will continue to be the
franchisee after the completion of the transfer to Frontier. However, given that Frontier will
become the new controlling entity of Verizon Northwest Inc., it was essential that the
Consortium members inquire about Frontier’s Legal Qualifications, plans and capabilities
concerning:
• the character qualifications of Frontier,
• the cable holdings owned by Frontier,
• the existing Service Area and Line Extension Policies,
• Frontier’s planned Channel Capacity, System Design and Customer Service policies, and
• the proposed Signal Carriage, including the Educational and Governmental Access
Channels, Channel Allocation, and Community Access Programming.
In addition, the Request for Information inquired about the planned employment practices,
whether any franchise modifications were expected, and the financial impact of the transaction
on Frontier.
Customer Rates and Financing the Transaction
Of importance to cable subscribers were questions as to whether Frontier planned to increase
rates as a result of this transaction. Additionally, Member communities wanted to know whether
Frontier would have the financial wherewithal to successfully operate the cable television
systems. The responses from Verizon and Frontier were that Frontier does not plan to increase
cable rates as a result of this transaction. It should be noted, however, that while this process
was underway, Verizon increased its rates to subscribers. Given that this transaction involves the
exchange of approximately $5.3 Billion in stock from Frontier to Verizon shareholders and the
creation of approximately $3.3 Billion in debt, many questions arose as to whether Verizon
Northwest Inc. would be able to continue as an ongoing entity. Much discussion has taken place
to date regarding the financial issues. This includes a presentation that was made by David
Whitehouse, the Treasurer of Frontier, in which he detailed that Frontier will be selling
unsecured notes with a maximum cost of 9.5% in order to finance this transaction. His view is
that the Capital Markets will be receptive to the offering based on a previous debt sale by
Frontier of $600 Million to $700 Million in unsecured debt. More detail regarding the financial
matters will be addressed below.
Packet Page 230 of 374
5
In response to Data Request #1 and Data Request #2 along with narrative questions, Frontier
indicated that it planned to close this transaction in April, 2010. They also indicated that they
intend to honor the build-out requirements contained in each of the existing Franchises. While
Frontier works with Dish Network in other regions, its view is that it wants to grow its wireline
cable television business. It is the position of Frontier that its responses to the Request for
Information including Data Request #1 and Data Request #2 are intended to be interpreted in
conjunction with the Franchise Agreements. Also, it is important to note that consummation of
the transaction is dependent upon approvals at the Federal Regulatory level and from several
States as well.
Frontier’s Prior Ownership of Cable Systems
In the past, Frontier has previously owned some smaller cable systems ranging in size from 255
customers to 2,728 customers. Most of these systems were either sold or discontinued. It is
Frontier’s position that by retaining many of the Verizon Northwest personnel and bringing in
people with other cable television operating experience, it has the ability to successfully manage
and operate the cable television systems in the Consortium jurisdictions. Frontier has said that it
does not have post-closing plans to sell any of the cable systems in the Washington member
jurisdictions.
Governmental and Educational Access Channels and Franchise Fees
With respect to the Educational and Governmental Access Channels, Frontier has stated that the
Franchise commitments and obligations will continue to be met. This would include retention of
the existing Educational and Governmental Access Channels. With respect to payments of
Franchise Fees, Frontier has stated that it will use the same basis for calculation of Gross
Revenues called for in the Franchises and the methodology of the computations will not change.
Build-Out of Verizon’s Cable Systems
The issue of the system build-out was of concern to the local governments. Thus, a meeting
occurred in which the build-out for each community was addressed. The range of the build-out
completed varies from more than 1/3 to more than 3/4 complete. The following is a break-down
by jurisdiction of the approximate build-out completion:
• Snohomish County: More than three quarters complete
• City of Everett: Approximately two thirds complete
• City of Edmonds: More than three quarters complete
• City of Marysville: More than a third complete
• City of Bothell: Almost three quarters complete
• City of Mountlake Terrace: More than three quarters complete
• City of Kenmore: Almost half complete
• City of Mukilteo: Almost half complete
• City of Woodinville: More than half complete
• Town of Woodway: More than three quarters complete
Packet Page 231 of 374
6
Data Request #3, Standstill Agreement and Reimbursement to the Consortium Members
In August, the Consortium, dissatisfied with the original responses to its Data Requests, sent
Verizon and Frontier Data Request #3. A copy of Data Request #3 is attached to this Report. In
order to prevent the 120 days from hampering the Consortium members’ decisions, each member
of the Consortium, Verizon and Frontier entered into a Standstill Agreement whereby the date
for approval or denial was extended until November 30, 2009. Also during this time and as a
continuation of issues raised in June 2009, the Consortium continued to seek reimbursement
from Verizon and Frontier for costs and expenses incurred in connection with this transaction.
When the Franchises were negotiated between Verizon Northwest Inc. and each of the
Consortium members, Verizon stressed that it was committed to providing cable service to the
communities for the long term. It was in this spirit that the Consortium members and Verizon
worked collaboratively to create Franchises that would best ensure the highest quality service for
the citizens. At the time the proposed transfer was announced, Verizon had held many of the
Franchises for about 10 months. Verizon and Frontier through Verizon’s attorney have
committed to reimbursing the Consortium members for a significant portion of the members’
costs and expenses. A letter of intent from Verizon will be provided shortly by Verizon.
In Data Request #3, more inquiry was made into the Legal, Technical and Financial
qualifications of Frontier. Questions were again asked as to whether rates would be increased.
Frontier responded by saying that it cannot guarantee that rates will not increase. However, in
one of the meetings, the Frontier representative said there are no plans to raise rates because of
this transaction.
Technical Capabilities
In a September meeting regarding Frontier’s technical capabilities, Frontier indicated that it was
going to use another method to transport its signals from Florida to Washington State than
originally presented. The Video Transport Plan includes utilizing space at a facility in Florida,
then sending the signal to Bloomington, Illinois, operating a transport network from
Bloomington, Illinois to Ft. Wayne, Indiana and then transporting programming to Oregon and
Washington. Frontier has stated that this network does not involve deploying significant new
fiber; rather, it involves leasing existing transport capacity from third party providers and
configuring that network by installing off-the-shelf equipment so it can transport the video
signals. Presentations in September by Michael Golob, the Head Engineer for Frontier, to
Consortiums in Washington and Oregon addressed these matters.
Customer Service
Frontier espouses a customer first and peace-of-mind culture for its service offering that
empowers its representatives to offer its customers an array of promotions and packages so that
its customers are satisfied with the services requested. Frontier empowers local supervisors and
General Managers so that if a customer is unhappy with his or her current bundle of services,
they have the authority to resolve the issue to the customer’s satisfaction. The names of
Frontier’s General Managers and Regional Managers are listed on Frontier’s website and in
telephone directories should customers need immediate access and additional assistance.
Packet Page 232 of 374
7
Frontier has indicated that it plans to hire General Managers and is committed to “extending its
local engagement model to newly acquired properties in Washington”. Under this model,
Frontier will appoint General Managers with responsibility and authority for operations,
including profit and loss, installation and maintenance, responses to customer issues, charitable
contributions and coordination with local government officials. Frontier indicated that it expects
to appoint multiple General Managers in Washington, but did not state in which cities they
would be located.
With respect to Customer Service, Frontier is retaining the Call Center and Customer Dispatch
Center in Everett, along with the Verizon Customer Service personnel. Frontier prides itself on
its Customer Service in the telecommunications business. Since there will be cable television,
telephone and internet components of their business, their financials are predicated upon
customer retention and growth in these areas. To the extent there is attrition, Frontier has
indicated that it will hire additional personnel to handle Customer Service.
Programming
With respect to programming matters, Frontier is in the process of securing content agreements.
It has teams of people involved in negotiations in New York and Los Angeles with two content
aggregators – either one of which could provide up to 90% of Verizon’s existing content.
Frontier has also retained the well-known Los Angeles based law firm of Latham and Watkins to
assist it in programming acquisition and negotiations.
Financial Risks
While Frontier is confident of the financial and operational success of this transaction, there are
risks associated with it. In response to Data Request #3, Frontier provided Verizon Northwest
Inc.’s Financial Statements for the years ended 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 and the first and second
quarters of 2009.
In summary, based upon information provided by Verizon and Frontier, Verizon Northwest Inc.
will have approximately $2.18 Billion in assets, $930 Million in revenue per year and about $116
Million in net income for 2009 on an annualized basis. There is no way to know or predict
whether this transaction will work from a financial standpoint because of the current state of the
economy (the recession) and significant competition from Comcast, other telephone providers
and DBS providers (DirecTV and EchoStar) are all variables that cannot be quantified.
Additionally, there have been instances of other financial issues in Hawaii and elsewhere
involving Verizon transfers to another company or companies that raise questions as well. In the
context of an $8.6 Billion transaction, there is a possibility that Frontier and Verizon Northwest
Inc. could cease or scale back doing business at some point in the future. The local governments
cannot require them to stay in the cable television business, and it is up to Frontier’s
management to retain customers and grow the business.
Additionally, it appears that the Transport Agreements will not be for the length of the
Franchises. Further, Programming Content Agreements could lapse or not be renewed once they
Packet Page 233 of 374
8
are initially agreed upon between Frontier and the NCTC, Frontier and NRTC or Frontier and
direct providers of video programming.
The Verizon/Frontier response to Data Request #3 contained significant narrative and 11
Attachments which were several hundred pages in length. Those documents still presented
questions for the Consortium as to whether this proposed transaction will be viable from a
financial and technical standpoint.
Frontier believes that by completing this transaction, synergies will result in cost savings of
approximately $500 Million which, according to them, represents more than 20% of the cash
operating expenses of Verizon’s separate telephone operations in 2008. Projections with respect
to Revenues, Debt Service, Expenses and Capital Expenditures were requested for the next three
years. The response was that the requested projections do not exist and the financials reflect a
combination of cable, phone and internet businesses. Without those projections, it is not possible
to test the assumptions for this transaction to determine if they are reasonable or more or less
favorable than could be reasonably anticipated.
Based on information provided, the combined company of Frontier and Verizon Northwest Inc.
will have projected revenues of approximately $6.5 Billion as compared to the $2.2 Billion for
Frontier on a stand-alone basis. Frontier has stated that the EBITDA ratio of the combined
company will be less than that for Frontier presently, and combined with other actions detailed in
the S-4, Frontier has stated that it anticipates that these factors will allow it to achieve an
investment grade credit rating after the transaction. Frontier hopes to increase Broadband
Revenue per customer as it bundles voice, video and data products tailored to customers’ needs.
Its view is that the FiOS properties being acquired are an important part of this strategy because
they are state-of-the-art in terms of video product offerings. By being actively involved in the
community and empowering local managers with their interaction with subscribers, Frontier
hopes to use its local engagement model to increase customer loyalty, which would help with
both customer retention and gaining new customers.
Frontier does not plan to have to draw on its $250 Million Revolving Credit Facility to finance
this transaction. It plans to maintain at least $100 Million in cash at all times. With the “back-up
liquidity” provided by the Revolving Credit Facility, it anticipates having access to funds on
hand if there were to be unanticipated or unforeseen events. While the financing commitments
will not be in place before November 30th, Frontier will not be able to close this transaction in
the absence of ultimately obtaining them. Frontier anticipates that potential investors could
include commercial banks, institutional loan investors and institutional fixed income bond
investors. In order to close this transaction, Frontier wants to complete the $3.3 Billion financing
at a maximum cost of 9.5%. Their preference is to secure financing entirely with senior
unsecured notes. It is their belief that equity and corporate bond valuations are improving and
that cash stockpiles held by investors could be reinvested and economic data indicates to
investors that there is light at the end of the tunnel. Obviously, every person and entity will have
their own opinion and risk tolerance, and there is no certainty as to how this will all play out
from a financial standpoint.
Packet Page 234 of 374
9
Thus, in order to close this transaction, Frontier will need to have financing in place. Similarly,
it could be reasonably anticipated that Frontier will need to have Transport Agreements, Network
Lease Agreements and Programming Agreements in place acceptable to Frontier in order to have
viability in terms of acquiring Verizon Northwest Inc. and operating the cable systems.
Conclusion
Under Federal law, the members of the Consortium have a duty from a due diligence standpoint
to examine this transaction from a Financial, Legal and Technical standpoint and ultimately
approve or deny this transfer of control based on these criteria. With respect to being legally
qualified, both Verizon Northwest Inc. and Frontier appear to meet this standard. In its response
to Data Request #1 and Data Request #2, Verizon and Frontier indicated that the proposed
ownership structure complies with any and all State and Federal restrictions regarding ownership
of cable communications systems. Further, the transferee is a U.S. citizen and Verizon
Northwest Inc. is qualified to do business in Washington and will remain qualified after the
closing of the transaction. Verizon and Frontier are seeking regulatory approvals with the
Federal Communications Commission, the Department of Justice and nine states including
Washington. According to Verizon Northwest Inc., they currently hold all necessary licenses
from the FCC to operate the cable systems. With respect to the character qualifications of
Frontier, Frontier has never been convicted in any criminal proceeding involving violations of
FCC Regulations or the Communications Act of 1934, as amended.
By consenting to the transfer of control, local governments are not opining as to whether Frontier
will ultimately be successful from a Financial, Technical or business standpoint. Similarly,
River Oaks is not expressing an opinion as to whether Verizon Northwest Inc. or Frontier will be
successful from a Technical, Financial or Operations standpoint. Competition for retention and
customer growth in the broadband market among cable television, telephony and other providers
is significant. Other business risks exist including handling the debt load, reductions in
telephone revenues and the costs inherent in deploying and maintaining broadband systems.
This could be a positive acquisition for Frontier or it could result in a situation where some day
in the future, Verizon Northwest Inc. and/or Frontier scale back or cease doing business as a
cable television provider in one or more of the jurisdictions that comprise the Consortium.
However, given the totality of the information presented and reviewed, River Oaks recommends
that consent to the transfer of control be given by each member of the Consortium subject to a
mutually acceptable Transfer Resolution or Ordinance. After a process that has spanned almost
five months, extensive production of information and a diligent and thorough review of the
Financial, Legal and Technical qualifications of the transferee, River Oaks believes that Frontier
meets the criteria of being Financially, Legally and Technically qualified per the FCC Form 394,
related materials and supplemental information to own and operate the cable systems in the
Member Communities (via transfer of control of Verizon Northwest Inc. to Frontier
Communications Corporation). While there are no guarantees as to Verizon Northwest Inc.’s or
Frontier’s post-closing Operational, Financial and Technical viability, it is the responsibility of
Frontier Communications Corporation and Verizon Northwest Inc. to make this transfer of
control and acquisition work from a business, Technical, Financial and Customer standpoint.
Packet Page 235 of 374
{ERZ746656.DOC;3\13060.080001\ }1
Template
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, APPROVING TRANSFER OF CONTROL OF
THE FRANCHISEE (VERIZON NORTHWEST INC.) FROM
VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS INC. TO FRONTIER
COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION WITH CONDITIONS
AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds has granted a cable television franchise
(“Franchise”) to Verizon Northwest Inc. (“Franchisee”) which is an indirect wholly owned
subsidiary of Verizon Communications Inc. (“Verizon”); and
WHEREAS, Verizon has entered into an agreement with Frontier
Communications Corporation (“Frontier”) to effectuate a transfer of control of Franchisee from
Verizon to Frontier (“Transfer”); and
WHEREAS, upon completion of the Transfer, Franchisee will become an indirect
wholly owned subsidiary of Frontier and, as a result, control of the Franchisee will be transferred
from Verizon to Frontier; and
WHEREAS, following the Transfer, Franchisee will continue to hold and be
responsible for the performance of the Franchise; and
WHEREAS, Franchisee has requested that the City consent to the Transfer and, in
accordance with the requirements of the Franchise and federal law, Verizon has filed an FCC
Form 394 together with Exhibits and related materials (all hereinafter collectively the
“Application”) with the City; and
WHEREAS, to evaluate Franchisee’s request, the City has participated in a
Consortium of jurisdictions including Snohomish County, the cities of Bothell, Edmonds,
Packet Page 236 of 374
{ERZ746656.DOC;3\13060.080001\ }2
Everett, Kenmore, Marysville, Mountlake Terrace, Mukilteo, Woodinville and the Town of
Woodway (the “Consortium”); and
WHEREAS, the City and the Consortium examined the legal, financial and
technical qualifications of Frontier in order to consider and act upon the Transfer request and
considered the comments of interested parties; and
WHEREAS, the City has relied upon the Application and supplemental written
information provided by Frontier and Verizon; and
WHEREAS, on ____________, 2009, the City Council held a public meeting to
review the Transfer request; and
WHEREAS, the City is willing to consent to the Transfer, subject to the closing
of the Transfer between Verizon and Frontier and the appropriate approvals by the Washington
State Utilities and Transportation Commission and federal regulatory entities; and
WHEREAS, Franchisee has agreed to continue to unconditionally accept the
terms of the existing Franchise and to comply with any other agreements existing between the
Franchisee and the City;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City hereby consents to the Transfer in accordance
with the terms of applicable law, subject to and contingent upon the following conditions:
a. In all respects and without exception, Franchisee agrees to
continue to abide by all terms of the existing Franchise and acknowledges that the transfer of
control will not affect, diminish, impair or supersede the binding nature of the Franchise and any
other valid ordinances, resolutions, and agreements applicable to the operation of the cable
Packet Page 237 of 374
{ERZ746656.DOC;3\13060.080001\ }3
system in the City and Franchisee shall continue to meet its obligations under the Franchise.
Franchisee agrees that subject to the Franchise, that Franchisee shall comply with all lawful and
applicable provisions related to cable service of Edmonds Municipal Code Chapter 4.69 as
amended, and all related applicable federal and state laws, and lawful orders, contracts,
agreements, commitments, side letters, Franchise amendments and regulatory actions.
b. The City’s consent to the transfer of control shall not be construed
to constitute a waiver or release of any rights the City may have now or in the future under
federal, state or local law, the Franchise, or any separate written agreements with the Franchisee.
Franchisee shall remain responsible for any and all Franchise requirements (including but not
limited to payment of Franchise fees and other amounts due under the Franchise, and
indemnification of the City as provided in the Franchise) and non-compliance issues under the
Franchise or any obligation that may now exist or may later be discovered to have existed during
the term of the Franchise, even if prior to the closing of this Transfer.
c. The Transfer between Frontier and Verizon shall be substantially
and materially consistent with the Application and the supplemental information provided by
Frontier and Verizon through the request for information process undertaken by the City and the
Consortium.
Section 2. In the event that the Transfer which is the subject of this ordinance
does not close for any reason; or in the event approval is not granted by the Washington State
Utilities and Transportation Commission and appropriate federal regulatory entities, or in the
event that the Transfer closes on terms substantially or materially different from the terms
described in the Application and supplemental written information provided by Frontier and
Verizon that is relied upon by the City; or Franchisee does not accept each and every condition
Packet Page 238 of 374
{ERZ746656.DOC;3\13060.080001\ }4
of the transfer of control required of it as set forth in this ordinance; then the consent provided
for herein shall be null and void, and the City shall be deemed to have disapproved the transfer
of control under the Franchise and federal law, and all remedies under the Franchise and
applicable laws shall be available to the City. In the event the Transfer does not close before
January 2012, Verizon and Frontier will provide notice of that event to the City and an update on
the reasons for such a delay in closing or notice of the termination of the Transfer.
Section 3. By consenting to the transfer of control, the City does not waive or
release any rights of the City in and to the streets as provided by state law and the Edmonds
Municipal Code, nor does the City waive or release any claim or issue of non-compliance it may
have, known or unknown, now or in the future, against the Franchisee or any successor in
interest to the Franchisee.
Section 4. The City shall not amend, revoke or otherwise alter this Ordinance
without providing reasonable prior notice to the Franchisee.
Section 5. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance shall be
held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or
unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence,
clause or phrase of this ordinance.
Section 6. This ordinance shall take effect and be fully in force five (5) days
after publication of the attached approved summary thereof consisting of the title.
Packet Page 239 of 374
{ERZ746656.DOC;3\13060.080001\ }5
PASSED by the Council of the City of ________ this day of _____, 2009.
APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of _______ this ____ day of _____, 2009.
CITY OF _______________
MAYOR
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED
CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY:
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK:
PUBLISHED:
EFFECTIVE DATE:
ORDINANCE NO.
Packet Page 240 of 374
{ERZ746656.DOC;3\13060.080001\ }6
SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO.________
of the City of Edmonds, Washington
On , 2009, the City Council of the City of Edmonds,
Washington, approved Ordinance No. , the main points of which are summarized
by its title as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, APPROVING TRANSFER OF CONTROL OF
THE FRANCHISEE (VERIZON NORTHWEST INC.) FROM
VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS INC. TO FRONTIER
COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION WITH CONDITIONS
AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
The full text of this ordinance will be mailed upon request.
APPROVED by the City Council at their meeting of , 2009.
CITY CLERK
Packet Page 241 of 374
To: Betty Springer
Subject: RE: Verizon Consortium
-----Original Message-----
From: Betty Springer [mailto:bspringer@omwlaw.com]
Sent: Friday, November 06, 2009 10:30 AM
To: bduchen@rivoaks.com; tduchen@rivoaks.com; dbuell@marysvillewa.gov;
dhall@ci.everett.wa.us; jhannan@ci.mukilteo.wa.us; nousley@ci.kenmore.wa.us;
shugill@ci.mlt.wa.us; efaison@townofwoodway.com; Clifton, Stephen;
Joe.Beck@ci.bothell.wa.us; Kathie.Oeser@ci.bothell.wa.us; JustinaT@ci.woodinville.wa.us;
peter.camp@co.snohomish.wa.us
Subject: Verizon Consortium
Sent on behalf of Elana R. Zana
All,
Many of you have asked about the press release from the Washington Attorney General’s
Office regarding a recommendation that the Washington UTC reject the proposed
transfer of Verizon Northwest to Frontier Communications Corporation. I had the chance
to speak with Verizon representatives Wednesday night, and they are in the process of
providing a written response to help address this issue as we move through the transfer
approval process.
In the meantime, a few items discussed on that call are worth sharing:
The WUTC regulates landline telephone service, not the cable service regulated through
the franchises with Verizon. So, the WUTC’s job is to evaluate the impacts of this
transaction on that landline telephone service, unlike your job in evaluating the technical,
financial and legal qualifications of Frontier to operate the cable system in your
jurisdictions.
The WUTC process is different than the one we recently completed in evaluating the
transfer application. It is adversarial in nature, and involves exchange of testimony, a
settlement process, and if that settlement process is unsuccessful, a trial-type hearing.
The AG’s office serves as an advocate for individual and small business customers of the
utility in this process, and submitted its testimony in its role as an advocate.
The WUTC process is at a different stage. Many of the issues raised are issues we raised
in the data request process and dialogue with both Frontier and Verizon over the past few
months. As reflected in the report prepared by River Oaks, we paid particular attention to
the financing of the transaction, and are still comfortable with that analysis and
conclusions.
It is also worth noting that there are often recommendations from parties for denials
during the WUTC process. These recommendations are often not instructive on the
ultimate result of the WUTC proceedings. Verizon stated it remains confident it will
obtain the necessary approvals, and has already obtained those approvals in California,
Nevada and South Carolina.
Packet Page 242 of 374
Finally, the ordinance we’ve provided as a template covers this situation. Section 2
conditions the approval of the transfer request on approval by the WUTC. I want to
emphasize that we are still, pursuant to our agreements with Verizon and Frontier,
required to act on the transfer application before November 30th, otherwise, the transfer
will be deemed approved, without the conditions contained in the ordinance.
I am in touch with the WUTC and the AG’s Office, and will let you know if I receive any
updates. In addition, I will pass along the written response from Verizon and Frontier as
soon as I receive it.
I will be in Vancouver for a CLE for the rest of the day, and will have limited email
access.
Elana R. Zana | Attorney at Law
Ogden Murphy Wallace P.L.L.C.
1601 Fifth Ave., Suite 2100 Seattle, WA 98101
phone: 206.447.7000 | fax: 206.447.0215
ezana@omwlaw.com | omwlaw.com
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION ‐ This communication constitutes an electronic communication within the meaning of the Electronic
Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Section 2510, and its disclosure is strictly limited to the recipient intended by the sender. It may
contain information that is proprietary, privileged, and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying,
distribution, or use of any of the contents is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender
immediately and destroy the original transmission and all copies.
Circular 230 Disclosure: The IRS requires us to disclose to you that any federal tax advice contained herein was intentionally written without
the requisite formality and scope needed for use as protection against federal accuracy related tax reporting penalties, and therefore cannot
e used for that purpose. Furthermore, while you are not prohibited from disclosing such federal tax treatment or tax structure to a third
arty, it is our understanding that our advice will not be used by you to promote, market or recommend to another party any matters
ddressed herein. We would, of course, be happy to discuss with you the additional requirements of a written tax opinion which you may use
r accuracy related penalty protection. If you would like to discuss such an opinion please contact one of our attorneys.
b
p
a
fo
Packet Page 243 of 374
Packet Page 244 of 374
Packet Page 245 of 374
Packet Page 246 of 374
Snohomish County
County Executive's Office
M/S #407
3000 Rockefeller Avenue
M E M O R A N D U M Everett, WA
98201
(425) 388-3460
FAX (425) 388-3434
To: County Council
From: Peter Camp, Executive Director
cc: Marcia Isenberg, Chief of Staff; Brian Goodnight, Legislative Analyst
Date: November 6, 2009
Re: Motion 09-490, Approving Transfer of Control of the Franchisee (Verizon
Northwest, Inc.) to Frontier Communications Corporation with Conditions
(ECAF 2004 4220)
Council will consider motion 09-490 on Monday, November 9, 2009 at its
administrative session. Since introduction of the motion on Monday, November 2,
2009, additional developments occurred.
In addition to selling its cable television business to Frontier, Verizon Northwest
also intends to sell its wireline telephone business to Frontier. Wireline telephone
is highly regulated, as is cable television, but the regulatory structure and focus is
very different.
In Washington state, the Utilities and Transportation Commission regulates
wireline telephone service. RCW Chap. 80.36. The WUTC’s focus on whether the
transaction is in the public interest is mandated by state law. RCW Chap. 80.12.
Cable television, on the other hand, is regulated by the Federal Communications
Commission and federal law. See, e.g., 47 U.S.C. § 537 (Communications Act).
Unlike the WUTC’s review of telephone rates, local franchising agencies like the
County are essentially forbidden by federal law from regulating cable television
rates. See 47 U.S.C. § 541(4) (limiting review to financial, technical, or legal
qualifications).
Page 1 of 2
Packet Page 247 of 374
Page 2 of 2
Additionally, the WUTC process is adversarial, with players such as the Public
Counsel in addition to WUTC staff. Not surprisingly, competitors such as Comcast
are weighing in, too.
With this background in mind, Council should know that Public Counsel and
WUTC staff issued press releases this week in which they objected to the
proposed sale of Verizon’s wireline telephone business to Frontier.1 They seek
imposition of such conditions as a promise not to raise telephone rates for at least
two years, a condition the County cannot impose because of federal law.
The WUTC process is different than the one recently completed in evaluating the
transfer application. It is adversarial in nature, and involves exchange of
testimony, a settlement process, and if that settlement process is unsuccessful, a
trial-type hearing. The Attorney General’s office serves as an advocate for
individual and small business customers of the utility in this process, and
submitted its testimony in its role as an advocate.
Too, the WUTC process is at a different stage. Many of the issues raised are
issues we raised in the data request process and dialogue with both Frontier and
Verizon over the past few months. As reflected in the report prepared by River
Oaks, we paid particular attention to the financing of the transaction, and are still
comfortable with that analysis and conclusions.
Interveners in WUTC proceedings frequently seek denial during the WUTC
proceeding. These recommendations do not often predict the outcome, but are
more akin to negotiating positions. Verizon stated it remains confident it will obtain
the necessary approvals, and has already obtained those approvals in California,
Nevada and South Carolina.
Finally, the motion under consideration conditions the approval of the transfer
request on approval by the WUTC.
Irrespective of the WUTC proceeding, the County remains obligated under federal
law to approve or reject the transfer on or before November 30. If no action is
taken, federal law deems the County’s inaction to be approval of the transfer
without any conditions, such as approval by the WUTC.
Representatives of Verizon will attend the Council meeting on Monday, November
9, 2009 and will be pleased to answer any questions.
If you have any questions prior to then, or would like me to relay questions to them
to be answered on Monday, please let me know.
1 Commission staff press release can be found at
http://www.wutc.wa.gov/webimage.nsf/0/EBE13A59F7C8BC5188257664000077CE. Public Counsel’s
press release can be found at http://www.atg.wa.gov/pressrelease.aspx?&id=24694.
Packet Page 248 of 374
AM-2612 4.
Finding of Substantial Need Resolution; Property Tax Ordinance
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:11/17/2009
Submitted By:Lorenzo Hines Time:15 Minutes
Department:Finance Type:Action
Review Committee:Finance
Committee Action:Approved for Consent Agenda
Information
Subject Title
Public hearing: (1) Resolution finding the existence of substantial need and justifying
increasing the property tax levy for the City regular property tax and Emergency Medical
Service levies for 2010 at a rate of 1.0% over the previous year.
(2) Ordinance providing for the annual tax levy by increasing the regular property tax levy
by the current 101% levy limit, thereby levying an estimated regular property tax levy of
$9,383,000, EMS levy of $3,911,000 and levying $853,084 for voted indebtedness for the
Public Safety Complex.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
Adopt the Resolution and Ordinance.
Previous Council Action
None
Narrative
The 2010 Property Tax Ordinance allows for collection of various levies to support the City's
effort. Given the regional economic decline a Finding of Substantial Need Resolution is necessary
to collect the maximum levy amounts.
Fiscal Impact
Fiscal Year:2010
Revenue:$14.1M
Expenditure:
Fiscal Impact:
An ordinance of the City of Edmonds, Washington, providing for the annual tax levy by
increasing the regular property tax levy by the current 101% levy limit, thereby levying an
estimated regular property tax levy of $9,383,000, EMS levy of $3,911,000 and levying
$853,084 for voted indebtedness for the public safety complex, and fixing a time when the same
shall become effective.
Attachments
Link: Resolution for Finding of Substantial Need
Packet Page 249 of 374
Link: 2010 Levy Ordinance
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 11/12/2009 04:46 PM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 11/12/2009 04:48 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 11/12/2009 04:57 PM APRV
Form Started By: Lorenzo
Hines
Started On: 11/12/2009 03:11
PM
Final Approval Date: 11/12/2009
Packet Page 250 of 374
RESOLUTION NO. ------
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, FINDING THE EXISTENCE OF
SUBSTANTIAL NEED AND JUSTIFYING INCREASING THE
PROPERTY TAX LEVY FOR THE CITY REGULAR
PROPERTY TAX AND EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICE
LEVIES FOR 2010 AT A RATE OF 1.0% OVER THE
PREVIOUS YEAR. THIS INCREASE OF CITY REGULAR
PROPERTY TAXES OVER THE 2009 LEVY EQUATES TO A
RATE EQUAL TO 1.0% OR $92,382. THE INCREASE OF THE
CITY EMS LEVY OVER THE 2009 LEVY EQUATES TO A
RATE EQUAL TO 1.0% OR $38,546.
WHEREAS, Chapter 84.55 RCW requires cities in excess of 10,000 in
population, following public hearing and by separate resolution to find and determine the
existence of a substantial need in order to justify tax increases above the Implicit Price Deflator,
and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the City needs increased
revenue due to the City’s declining sales tax revenue which is the result of the regional economic
decline, the City Council finds that there is a substantial need to set the levy limit at one hundred
one percent for both the regular property levy and the EMS levy.
WHEREAS, the City Council enters these findings following public hearing prior
to raising tax rates, now, therefore,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON,
HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council finds that there is a substantial need to set the levy
limit at one hundred one percent for both the regular property levy and the EMS levy. The
{WSS416764.DOC;1/00006.900000/}
Packet Page 251 of 374
{WSS416764.DOC;1/00006.900000/}
increase of its regular property tax levy over 2009 equals 1.0% or $92,382 and the increase for
the Emergency Medical Services levy equals 1.0% or $38,546 based on the following substantial
needs for budget year 2010:
The City needs increased revenue due to the City's declining sales
tax revenues which are the result of the regional economic decline.
Section 2. This resolution has been enacted by a vote of the majority plus one of
the City Council. It is the City Council's intent, by enacting this resolution, to reserve to itself
the ability to levy in this, or any future budget cycle pursuant to RCW 84.55.015 and 84.55.092,
the full levy amount permitted by law.
RESOLVED this 17th day of November, 2009.
APPROVED:
MAYOR, GARY HAAKENSON
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK:
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
RESOLUTION NO.
Packet Page 252 of 374
ORDINANCE NO. ------
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, PROVIDING FOR THE ANNUAL TAX LEVY
BY INCREASING THE REGULAR PROPERTY TAX LEVY
BY THE CURRENT 101% LEVY LIMIT, THEREBY LEVYING
AN ESTIMATED REGULAR PROPERTY TAX LEVY OF
$9,383,000, EMS LEVY OF $3,911,000 AND LEVYING
$853,084 FOR VOTED INDEBTEDNESS FOR THE PUBLIC
SAFETY COMPLEX, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE
SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE.
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted the 2009-2010 biennial budget on
December 2, 2008, per Ordinance 3711; and
WHEREAS, the City Council in the course of considering the budget for 2010
have reviewed all sources of revenue and examined all anticipated expenses and obligations; and
WHEREAS, the City Council hereby determines following public hearing that it
is in the best interest of and necessary to meet the expenses and obligations of the City to
increase the regular property levy and EMS levy by 1%; and
WHEREAS, the Snohomish County Assessor’s Office has requested that all
Snohomish County Taxing Districts submit their levy certifications to the county on the State
Department of Revenue standardized form REV 64 0100; NOW, THEREFORE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The limit factor for the regular levy to be collected in budget year
2010 shall be 101% of the highest amount of regular property taxes that could have been levied
in the City in any year since 1985.
Section 2. Regular Property Tax. The 2009 regular property tax levy for
collection in 2010 is the amount levied in 2008 for collection in 2009, plus an increase of
2008 Property Tax Ordinance Page 1 of 5
Packet Page 253 of 374
$92,382 which is a percentage increase of 1%, plus an increase equal to the amount allowed by
one or more of the following; new construction, improvements to property, newly constructed
wind turbines, any increase in the value of state assessed property, any annexations that have
occurred and refunds made, for an estimated total levy of $9,383,000.
Section 3. Emergency Medical Services (EMS) property tax levy. The 2009
EMS property tax levy for collection in 2010 is the amount levied in 2008 for collection in 2009,
plus an increase of $38,546 which is a percentage increase of 1%, plus an increase equal to the
amount allowed by one or more of the following; new construction, improvements to property,
newly constructed wind turbines, any increase in the value of state assessed property, any
annexations that have occurred and refunds made, for an estimated total levy of $3,911,000.
Section 4. There shall be and is hereby levied current taxes of $853,084, the
purpose of which is to make debt service payments on voter approved bonds.
Section 5. The levies contained in sections 2 through 4 are subject to amendment
upon receipt of 2009 assessed valuation from Snohomish County.
Section 6. Pursuant to the request by the Snohomish County Assessor’s Office,
the Finance Director is hereby authorized to submit to the Snohomish County Council
certification of the hereby approved levies on the State Department of Revenue standardized
form REV 64 0100 attached hereto as Exhibit A.
Section 7. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this
ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction,
such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other
section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance.
2008 Property Tax Ordinance Page 2 of 5
Packet Page 254 of 374
Section 8. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power
specifically delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take
effect five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of
the title. It is enacted on a vote of a majority plus one of the City Council.
APPROVED:
MAYOR, GARY HAAKENSON
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY:
BY
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK:
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
PUBLISHED:
EFFECTIVE DATE:
ORDINANCE NO.
2008 Property Tax Ordinance Page 3 of 5
Packet Page 255 of 374
SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. -----
of the City of Edmonds, Washington
On the 17th day of November, 2009, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed
Ordinance No. -----. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides
as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, PROVIDING FOR THE
ANNUAL TAX LEVY BY INCREASING THE REGULAR PROPERTY TAX LEVY BY THE
CURRENT 101% LEVY LIMIT, THEREBY LEVYING AN ESTIMATED REGULAR
PROPERTY TAX LEVY OF $9,383,000, EMS LEVY OF $3,911,000 AND LEVYING
$853,084 FOR VOTED INDEBTEDNESS FOR THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMPLEX, AND
FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE.
The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request.
DATED this 17th day of November, 2009.
CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE
2008 Property Tax Ordinance Page 4 of 5
Packet Page 256 of 374
Exhibit A – Levy Certification
Levy Certification
Submit this document to the county legislative authority on or before November 30 of the year preceding
the year in which the levy amounts are to be collected and forward a copy to the assessor.
In accordance with RCW 84.52.020, I, Lorenzo Hines Jr., Finance Director, for the City of
Edmonds, do hereby certify to the Snohomish County legislative authority that the Council of
said district requests that the following levy amounts be collected in 2010 as provided in the
district’s budget, which was adopted following a public hearing on October 21, 2008.
Regular Levy: $9,383,000
Excess Levy: $853,084
EMS Levy: $3,911,000
___________________________________________
Signature Date
2008 Property Tax Ordinance Page 5 of 5
Packet Page 257 of 374
AM-2605 5.
Community Sustainability Element of the Comprehensive Plan
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:11/17/2009
Submitted By:Rob Chave Time:30 Minutes
Department:Planning Type:Action
Review Committee:
Committee Action:
Information
Subject Title
Public hearing on the Community Sustainability Element of the Comprehensive Plan. The
draft Community Sustainability Element is being proposed as a new addition to the Edmonds Comprehensive Plan.
Sustainability is defined as the ability to “meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future
generations to meet their own needs.” The sustainability element will establish a framework for linking long-range
City goals to mid-range strategic planning and short-term decision-making (including City budgets and programs)
and will address broad sustainability policy issues while emphasizing the importance of addressing climate change,
community health, and environmental quality. The City Council has adopted a number of resolutions emphasizing
various aspects of sustainability and responses to potential impacts from climate change. The Community
Sustainability Element is intended to be the next step in integrating these efforts into local plans and
decision-making.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
Approve the draft Community Sustainability Element and direct the City Attorney to prepare an
ordinance to adopt the element as part of the City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan.
Previous Council Action
The City Council and Planning Board have had an ongoing discussion of sustainability issues and
has reviewed the draft element at several points in time during 2009. Please refer to the attached
minutes (Exhibits 2 and 3).
Narrative
The draft Community Sustainability Element is being proposed as a new addition to the Edmonds
Comprehensive Plan. A first for Edmonds, the sustainability element will establish a framework
for linking long-range City goals to mid-range strategic planning and short-term decision-making
(including City budgets and programs). This new element will address broad sustainability issues
while emphasizing the importance of addressing climate change, community health, and
environmental quality – items outside the usual GMA focus on land use and infrastructure. In this
context, sustainability is defined as the ability to “meet the needs of the present without
compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” Sustainability has a
prominent position in planning in the Puget Sound Region, being a key component of the recently
adopted Vision 2040 regional vision. The City Council has adopted a number of resolutions
emphasizing various aspects of sustainability and responses to potential impacts from climate
change. The Community Sustainability Element is intended to be the next step in integrating these
efforts into local plans and decision-making.
Exhibit 3 contains the current draft of the sustainability element, with Exhibit 4 showing changes
Packet Page 258 of 374
Exhibit 3 contains the current draft of the sustainability element, with Exhibit 4 showing changes
made by the Planning Board in response to public comments.
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: Exhibit 1: Draft Community Sustainability Element
Link: Exhibit 2: Markup showing changes by PB
Link: Exhibit 3: Planning Board minutes
Link: Exhibit 4: City Council minutes
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 11/12/2009 11:59 AM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 11/12/2009 04:48 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 11/12/2009 04:57 PM APRV
Form Started By: Rob
Chave
Started On: 11/12/2009 10:12
AM
Final Approval Date: 11/12/2009
Packet Page 259 of 374
O U T L I N E D R A F T
Community Sustainability Element 1 2009.10.01
Comprehensive Plan
Community Sustainability Element
Background: Climate Change, Community Health,
and Environmental Quality
Introduction. A relatively recent term, “sustainability” has many definitions. A commonly
cited definition is one put forward by the Brundtland Commission1 in a report of the World
Commission on Environment and Development (December 11, 1987). The Commission
defined sustainable development as development that “meets the needs of the present without
compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” Not focused solely
on environmental sustainability, the Commission’s report emphasized the inter-related nature
of environmental, economic, and social factors in sustainability. One of the keys to success in
sustainability is recognizing that decision-making must be based on an integration of
economic with environmental and social factors.
The City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan contains a number of different elements, some
mandated by the Growth Management Act, and others included because they are important to
the Edmonds community. A requirement of the Growth Management Act is that the various
comprehensive plan elements be consistent with one another. This Community Sustainability
Element is intended to provide a framework tying the other plan elements together,
illustrating how the overall plan direction supports sustainability within the Edmonds
community. A key aspect of this approach is also to provide more direct linkages between
long term planning and shorter-term strategic planning and policy review which guide the use
of city resources and programs, especially budgeting. For example, a new emphasis on life
cycle efficiency may take precedence over simple least-cost analytical methods.
The City of Edmonds is gifted with unique environmental assets, such as the shoreline on
Puget Sound, urban forests, diverse streams and wetlands, Lake Ballinger and a range of
parks and open spaces. In addition, the city has the benefit of an established, walkable
downtown served by transit, a framework of neighborhood commercial centers providing
local access to business services, and the potential to see significant economic development
in the Highway 99 activity center. Recently, the City has also experienced the beginnings of
new economic initiatives, such as a new fiber-optic infrastructure and locally-based
businesses and organizations supporting local sustainability and greenhouse gas (GHG)
reduction approaches. Combined with local government initiatives, such as the Mayor’s
Citizens Committee on U.S. Mayors’ Climate Protection Agreement and a series of
resolutions adopted by the Edmonds City Council, there is a growing recognition and
harnessing of the power of citizen knowledge to encourage and support changes in City
policies and operations which are making the City a leader in environmental stewardship.
Given this combination of assets and knowledge, the City of Edmonds has a compelling
responsibility to utilize these capabilities to address the challenges of climate change,
community health and environmental quality.
Packet Page 260 of 374
O U T L I N E D R A F T
Community Sustainability Element 2 2009.10.01
Sustainability Framework
This section describes the general goals and principles underlying the City’s approach to
community sustainability. Three important guiding principles central to a successful approach
are:
Flexible – In an environment where what we understand and can predict is still
developing and will be uncertain for some time to come, providing ways to monitor,
assess, adapt, and to be flexible in our responses will be critical. Climate change is
but one example; the uncertainties acknowledged in that subject area should be
instructive in helping us understand that a flexible approach is necessary when
addressing all areas of sustainability.
Holistic – The components of sustainability – in terms of both its inputs and outputs
–are complex and synergistic. No single action will result in a sustainable result, and
sustainable initiatives taken in one area don’t necessarily lead to sustainability in
another. For example, sustainable land use practices don’t necessarily result in a
sustainable transportation or health system. A holistic approach is required that
includes all levels of governance and encompasses planning, funding, evaluation,
monitoring, and implementation.
Long-term – Focusing on short-term, expedient solutions will only make actions
necessary to support sustainability more difficult to take in the future. For example,
in the areas of environmental issues and climate change, deferred action now will
only make the cumulative effects more difficult to resolve in the future. The familiar
GMA-based 20-year planning timeframe will not be sufficient – planning for
sustainability must take an even longer view.
Sustainability Goal A. Develop land use policies, programs, and regulations designed to
support and promote sustainability. Encourage a mix and location of land uses designed
to increase accessibility of Edmonds residents to services, recreation, jobs, and housing.
A.1 Adopt a system of codes, standards and incentives to promote development
that achieves growth management goals while maintaining Edmonds’
community character and charm in a sustainable way. Holistic solutions
should be developed that employ such techniques as Low Impact
Development (LID), transit-oriented development, “complete streets” that
support multiple modes of travel, and other techniques to assure that future
development and redevelopment enhances Edmonds’ character and charm
for future generations to enjoy.
A.2 Include urban form and design as critical components of sustainable land
use planning. New tools, such as form-based zoning and context-sensitive
design standards should be used to support a flexible land use system
which seeks to provide accessible, compatible and synergistic land use
patterns which encourage economic and social interaction while retaining
privacy and a unique community character.
Packet Page 261 of 374
O U T L I N E D R A F T
Community Sustainability Element 3 2009.10.01
A.3 Integrate land use plans and implementation tools with transportation,
housing, cultural and recreational, and economic development planning so
as to form a cohesive and mutually-supporting whole.
A.4 Use both long-term and strategic planning tools to tie short term actions
and land use decisions to long-term sustainability goals. City land use
policies and decision criteria should reflect and support sustainability goals
and priorities.
Sustainability Goal B. Develop transportation policies, programs, and regulations
designed to support and promote sustainability. Take actions to reduce the use of fuel and
energy in transportation, and encourage various modes of transportation that reduce
reliance on automobiles and are supported by transportation facilities and accessibility
throughout the community.
B.1 Undertake a multi-modal approach to transportation planning that
promotes an integrated system of auto, transit, biking, walking and other
forms of transportation designed to effectively support mobility and access.
B.2 Actively work with transit providers to maximize and promote transit
opportunities within the Edmonds community while providing links to
other communities both within and outside the region.
B.3 Explore and support the use of alternative fuels and transportation
operations that reduce GHG emissions.
B.4 When undertaking transportation planning and service decisions, evaluate
and encourage land use patterns and policies that support a sustainable
transportation system.
B.5 Strategically plan and budget for transportation priorities that balances
ongoing facility and service needs with long-term improvements that
support a sustainable, multi-modal transportation system.
B.6 Strategically design transportation options – including bike routes,
pedestrian trails and other non-motorized solutions – to support and
anticipate land use and economic development priorities.
Sustainability Goal C. Promote seamless transportation linkages between the Edmonds
community and the rest of the Puget Sound region.
C.1 Take an active role in supporting and advocating regional solutions to
transportation and land use challenges.
C.2 Local transportation options should be designed to be coordinated with and
support inter-city and regional transportation programs and solutions.
C.3 Advocate for local priorities and connections and the promotion of system-
wide flexibility and ease of use in regional transportation decisions.
Packet Page 262 of 374
O U T L I N E D R A F T
Community Sustainability Element 4 2009.10.01
Sustainability Goal D. Develop utility policies, programs, and maintenance measures
designed to support and promote sustainability. Maintain existing utility systems while
seeking to expand the use of alternative energy and sustainable maintenance and building
practices in city facilities.
D.1 Balance and prioritize strategic and short-term priorities for maintenance
and ongoing infrastructure needs with long-term economic development
and sustainability goals.
D.2 Strategically program utility and infrastructure improvements to support
and anticipate land use and economic development priorities.
D.3 Explore and employ alternative systems and techniques, such as life-cycle
cost analysis, designed to maximize investments and/or reduce ongoing
maintenance and facilities costs.
D.4 Include sustainability considerations, such as environmental impact and
GHG reduction, in the design and maintenance of facilities and
infrastructure.
Sustainability Goal E. Develop economic development policies and programs designed
to support and promote sustainability. Encourage the co-location of jobs with housing in
the community, seeking to expand residents’ ability to work in close proximity to their
homes. Encourage and support infrastructure initiatives and land use policies that
encourage and support home-based work and business activities that supplement
traditional business and employment concentrations.
E.1 Economic development should support and encourage the expansion of
locally-based business and employment opportunities.
E.2 Land use policies and implementation tools should be designed to provide
for mixed use development and local access to jobs, housing, and services.
E.3 Regulatory and economic initiatives should emphasize flexibility and the
ability to anticipate and meet evolving employment, technological, and
economic patterns.
E.4 Land use and regulatory schemes should be designed to encourage and
support the ability of local residents to work, shop, and obtain services
locally.
E.5 Land use and economic development programs should provide for
appropriate scale and design integration of economic activities with
neighborhoods while promoting patterns that provide accessibility and
efficient transportation options.
Sustainability Goal F. Develop cultural and recreational programs designed to support
and promote sustainability. Networks of parks, walkways, public art and cultural facilities
Packet Page 263 of 374
O U T L I N E D R A F T
Community Sustainability Element 5 2009.10.01
and events should be woven into the community’s fabric to encourage sense of place and
the overall health and well being of the community.
F.1 Cultural and arts programs should be supported and nourished as an
essential part of the City’s social, economic, and health infrastructure.
F.2 Recreational opportunities and programming should be integrated
holistically into the City’s infrastructure and planning process.
F.3 Cultural, arts, and recreational programming should be an integral part of
City design and facilities standards, and should be integrated into all
planning, promotion, and economic development initiatives.
Sustainability Goal G. Develop housing policies, programs, and regulations designed to
support and promote sustainability. Support and encourage a mix of housing types and
styles which provide people with affordable housing choices geared to changes in life
style. Seek to form public and private partnerships to retain and promote affordable
housing options.
G.1 Land use and housing programs should be designed to provide for existing
housing needs while providing flexibility to adapt to evolving housing
needs and choices.
G.2 Housing should be viewed as a community resource, providing
opportunities for residents to choose to stay in the community as their
needs and resources evolve and change over time.
G.3 Support the development of housing tools, such as inclusionary zoning
incentives and affordable housing programs, that promote a variety of
housing types and affordability levels into all developments.
1 Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future, U.N. General
Assembly Plenary Meeting, December 11, 1987.
Packet Page 264 of 374
O U T L I N E D R A F T
Community Sustainability Element 6 2009.10.01
Climate Change
Introduction. The quality of the environment we live in is a critical part of what people often
describe as the “character” of Edmonds. Even if it is not something we overtly think about, it
is an intrinsic part of our everyday experience, whether at work, at rest or at play. Until
relatively recently, environmental quality has often been thought of in terms of obvious,
easily observable characteristics – such as the visible landscape, the quality of the air, the
presence and variety of wildlife, or the availability and character of water in its various forms.
However, recent evidence on climate change2 points to the potential fragility of our
assumptions about the environment and the need to integrate and heighten the awareness of
environmental issues as they are inter-related with all community policies and activities.
Recognizing the importance of addressing the issues surrounding the environment and
climate change, in September 2006, the City of Edmonds formally expressed support for the
Kyoto Protocol3 and adopted the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement4 by Resolution
No. 1129, and joined the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI)5
by Resolution No. 1130.
Scientific evidence and consensus continues to strengthen the idea that climate change is an
urgent threat to the environmental and economic health of our communities. Many cities, in
this country and abroad, already have strong local policies and programs in place to reduce
global warming pollution, but more action is needed at the local, state, and federal levels to
meet the challenge. On February 16, 2005 the Kyoto Protocol, the international agreement to
address climate change, became law for the 141 countries that have ratified it to date. On that
day, Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels launched an initiative to advance the goals of the Kyoto
Protocol through leadership and action by at least 141 American cities.
The State of Washington has also been taking steps to address the issues surrounding climate
change. For example, in March, 2008, the state legislature passed ESSHB 2815, which
included monitoring and reporting mandates for state agencies along with the following
emission reduction targets:
Sec. 3. (1)(a) The state shall limit emissions of greenhouse gases to achieve the
following emission reductions for Washington state:
(i) By 2020, reduce overall emissions of greenhouse gases in the state to
1990 levels;
(ii) By 2035, reduce overall emissions of greenhouse gases in the state to
twenty-five percent below 1990 levels;
(iii) By 2050, the state will do its part to reach global climate stabilization
levels by reducing overall emissions to fifty percent below 1990 levels, or
seventy percent below the state's expected emissions that year.
The City of Edmonds has formally approved the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement
which was endorsed by the 73rd Annual U.S. Conference of Mayors meeting, Chicago, 2005.
Under the Agreement, participating cities committed to take three sets of actions:
Packet Page 265 of 374
O U T L I N E D R A F T
Community Sustainability Element 7 2009.10.01
1. Urge the federal government and state governments to enact policies and programs to
meet or beat the target of reducing global warming pollution levels to 7 percent below
1990 levels by 2012, including efforts to: reduce the United States’ dependence on fossil
fuels and accelerate the development of clean, economical energy resources and fuel-
efficient technologies such as conservation, methane recovery for energy generation,
waste to energy, wind and solar energy, fuel cells, efficient motor vehicles, and biofuels.
2. Urge the U.S. Congress to pass bipartisan greenhouse gas reduction legislation that 1)
includes clear timetables and emissions limits and 2) a flexible, market-based system of
tradable allowances among emitting industries
3. Strive to meet or exceed Kyoto Protocol targets for reducing global warming pollution
by taking actions in our own operations and community.
Given this background, the City of Edmonds recognizes that global climate change brings
significant risks to our community as a shoreline city. At the same time, the City understands
that we have a responsibility to play a leadership role both within our own community as well
as the larger Puget Sound region. To that end, the City establishes the following goals and
policies addressing climate change.
Climate Change Goal A. Inventory and monitor community greenhouse gas emissions,
establishing carbon footprint baselines and monitoring programs to measure future
progress and program needs.
A.1 Establish baselines for greenhouse gas emissions and carbon footprint for
both Edmonds city government and the broader Edmonds community.
A.2 Establish a monitoring program for consistently updating estimates on City
and community greenhouse gas emissions. The monitoring program should
be designed so as to enable a comparison between measurement periods.
A.3 The monitoring program should include assessment measures which (1)
measure progress toward greenhouse gas reduction goals and (2) evaluate
the effectiveness of or need for programs to work toward these goals.
Climate Change Goal B. Establish targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and
promoting sustainability for both city government and the Edmonds community.
Regularly assess progress and program needs, identifying opportunities and obstacles for
meeting greenhouse gas emission targets and sustainability.
B.1 City government should take the lead in developing and promoting GHG
emissions reduction for the Edmonds community.
B.2 Establish and evaluate targets for reductions in greenhouse gas emissions
for both Edmonds city government and the broader Edmonds community.
Targets should be set for both short- and long-range evaluation.
Packet Page 266 of 374
O U T L I N E D R A F T
Community Sustainability Element 8 2009.10.01
B.2.a. By 2020, reduce overall emissions of greenhouse gases to 1990
levels;
B.2.b. By 2035, reduce overall emissions of greenhouse gases to twenty-
five percent below 1990 levels;
B.2.c. By 2050, Edmonds will do its part to reach global climate
stabilization levels by reducing overall emissions to fifty percent
below 1990 levels, or seventy percent below the expected
emissions that year.
B.3 Establish measures for evaluating the degree of sustainability of Edmonds
city government and the broader Edmonds community.
B.4 Annually assess the status and progress toward emissions reduction goals.
Climate Change Goal C. Assess the risks and potential impacts on both city government
operations and on the larger Edmonds community due to climate change. The assessment
of risk and potential responses – both in terms of mitigation and adaptation – should
evaluate the full range of issues, paying particular attention to those arising from the
city’s location on Puget Sound.
C.1 Develop a climate change risk assessment and impact analysis for city
government facilities and operations.
C.2 Develop a climate change risk assessment and impact analysis for the
Edmonds community which considers the potential long-term impacts to
economic, land use, and other community patterns as well as the risks
associated with periodic weather or climate events.
Climate Change Goal D. Work with public and private partners to develop strategies
and programs to prepare for and mitigate the potential impacts of climate change, both on
city government operations and on the general Edmonds community.
D.1 Develop a strategic plan that will help guide and focus City resources and
program initiatives to (1) reduce greenhouse gas production and the carbon
footprint of City government and the Edmonds community, and, (2) reduce
and minimize the potential risks of climate change. The strategic plan
should be coordinated with and leverage state and regional goals and
initiatives, but Edmonds should look for and take the lead where we see
opportunities unique to the Edmonds community.
D.2 Build on and expand the strategic action plan to include programs that can
involve both public and private partners.
D.3 Undertake a policy review of City comprehensive, strategic and specific
plans to assure that City policies are appropriately targeted to prepare for
and mitigate potential impacts of climate change. These reviews may be
done to correspond with scheduled plan updates, or accelerated where
Packet Page 267 of 374
O U T L I N E D R A F T
Community Sustainability Element 9 2009.10.01
either a higher priority is identified or the next update is not specifically
scheduled.
Climate Change Goal E. Develop mitigation strategies that can be used by both the
public and private sectors to help mitigate the potential impacts of new and ongoing
development and operations. Develop programs and strategies that will encourage the
retrofitting of existing development and infrastructure to mitigate and adapt to the effects
of climate change.
E.1 Develop policies and strategies for land use and development that result in
reduced greenhouse gas emissions for new development as well as
redevelopment activities.
E.2 Develop mitigation programs and incentives that both public and private
development entities can use to reduce or offset potential greenhouse gas
emissions associated with both new development and redevelopment.
E.3 Develop programs and incentives that encourage existing land use,
buildings, and infrastructure to reduce their carbon footprint.
Demonstration programs and other cost-efficient efforts that do not rely on
long-term government subsidies are preferred, unless dedicated funding
sources can be found to sustain these efforts over time.
2 For example, see the Fourth Assessment Report; Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report, by the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, February 2007.
3 The Kyoto Protocol was adopted at the third Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in Kyoto, Japan, on 11, December 1997, and established
potentially binding targets and timetables for cutting the greenhouse-gas emissions of industrialized
countries. The Kyoto Protocol has not been ratified by the U.S. government.
4 The U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement is as amended by the 73rd Annual U.S. Conference of
Mayors meeting in Chicago in 2005.
5 ICLEI was founded in 1990 as the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives following the
World Congress of Local Governments for a Sustainable Future, held at the United Nations in New York.
Packet Page 268 of 374
O U T L I N E D R A F T
Community Sustainability Element 10 2009.10.01
Community Health
Introduction. Community health as it is used here means the overall aspects of public
facilities and actions that can have an effect on the health and welfare of the community’s
citizens. The focus here is on the public realm, understanding that public actions and policies
can have an impact on the well-being of Edmonds citizens. The idea is that whenever
possible, government should be an enabler, supporting the expansion of opportunities for
people so that they can be as self-sustaining as possible, thereby reducing the potential need
for intervention from government, community-based or privately-derived services – services
which are becoming increasingly costly and difficult to provide.
Community health is closely linked to land use, transportation, public service delivery, and
environmental quality. Clean water and clean air are a basic necessity when seeking to keep
people healthy. In addition, there are certain land use and other actions that Edmonds can take
to help foster healthy lifestyles throughout the community. Government also has a role in
providing basic services, such as police and fire protection, while encouraging access to
affordable housing and opportunities to live, work, and shop close to home.
Community Health Goal A. Develop a reporting and monitoring system of indicators
designed to assess Edmonds’ progress toward sustainable community health.
A.1 Develop community indicators designed to measure the City’s progress
toward a sustainable community.
A.2 Use these community indicators to inform long-term, mid-term (strategic),
and budgetary decision-making.
Community Health Goal B. Develop and maintain ongoing City programs and
infrastructure designed to support sustainable community health.
B.1 Promote a healthy community by encouraging and supporting diversity in
culture and the arts.
B.2 Promote a healthy community by encouraging and supporting access to
recreation and physical activity.
B.3 Promote a healthy community by planning for and implementing a
connected system of walkways and bikeways which will provide
alternative forms of transportation while also encouraging recreation,
physical activity and exposure to the natural environment.
B.4 Promote a healthy community by seeking to protect and enhance the
natural environment through a balanced program of education, regulation,
and incentives. Environmental programs in Edmonds should be tailored to
and reflect the unique opportunities and challenges embodied in a mature,
sea-side community with a history of environmental protection and
awareness.
Packet Page 269 of 374
O U T L I N E D R A F T
Community Sustainability Element 11 2009.10.01
B.5 Develop and encourage volunteer opportunities in community projects that
promote community health. Examples of such programs include beach
clean-ups, walk-to-school groups, and helpers for the elderly or disabled.
B.6 Increase access to health-promoting foods and beverages in the
community. Form partnerships with organizations or worksites, such as
health care facilities and schools, to encourage healthy foods and
beverages.
Community Health Goal C. Promote a healthy community by encouraging and
supporting a diverse and creative education system, providing educational opportunities
for people of all ages and all stages of personal development, including those with special
needs or disabilities.
C.1 City regulatory and planning activities should be supported by education
programs which seek to explain and encourage progress toward desired
outcomes rather then relying solely on rules and penalties.
C.2 The City should partner with educational and governmental organizations
to encourage community access to information and education. Examples
include the Edmonds School District, Edmonds Community College, Sno-
Isle Library, the State of Washington (including the Departments of
Ecology and Fish and Wildlife), and the various private and public
educational programs available to the Edmonds community.
C.3 Encourage and support broad and flexible educational opportunities,
including both traditional and new or emerging initiatives, such as
technology-based solutions. Education should be flexible in both content
and delivery.
Community Health Goal D. Promote a healthy community through supporting and
encouraging the development of economic opportunities for all Edmonds’ citizens.
D.1 Sustainable economic health should be based on encouraging a broad range
of economic activity, with an emphasis on locally-based businesses and
economic initiatives which provide family-supporting wages and incomes.
D.2 Encourage the provision of a variety of types and styles of housing that
will support and accommodate different citizens’ needs and life styles. The
diversity of people living in Edmonds should be supported by a diversity of
housing so that all citizens can find suitable housing now and as they
progress through changes in their households and life stages.
D.3 Encourage the development and preservation of affordable housing.
D,4 Develop programs and activities that promote and support a diverse
population and culture, encouraging a mix of ages and backgrounds.
Packet Page 270 of 374
O U T L I N E D R A F T
Community Sustainability Element 12 2009.10.01
Community Health Goal E. Support a healthy community by providing a full range of
public services, infrastructure, and support systems.
E.1 Recognize the importance of City services to local community character
and sustainability by planning for and integrating public safety and health
services into both short- and long-term planning and budgeting. Strategic
planning should be a regular part of the decision-making process
underlying the provision of these services to the community.
E.2 Reduce energy consumption and maximize energy efficiency by promoting
programs and educational initiatives aimed at a goal to “reduce, re-use, and
recycle” at an individual and community-wide level.
E.3 Future planning and budgeting should be based on full life-cycle cost
analysis and facility maintenance needs, as well as standards of service that
best fit clearly articulated and supported community needs.
Community Health Goal F. Support a healthy community by providing for community
health care and disaster preparedness.
F.1 Plan for and prepare disaster preparedness plans which can be
implemented as necessary to respond effectively to the impacts of natural
or man-induced disasters on Edmonds residents.
F.2 Prepare and implement hazard mitigation plans to reduce and minimize, to
the extent feasible, the exposure of Edmonds citizens to future disasters or
hazards.
F.3 Promote food security and public health by encouraging locally-based food
production, distribution, and choice through the support of home and
community gardens, farmers or public markets, and other small-scale,
collaborative initiatives.
F.4 Support food assistance programs and promote economic security for low
income families and individuals.
F.5 Promote and support community health by supporting national, state and
local health programs and the local provision of health services.
Packet Page 271 of 374
O U T L I N E D R A F T
Community Sustainability Element 13 2009.10.01
Environmental Quality
Introduction. The environmental quality and beauty of the City of Edmonds is largely
reflected through its natural resources, and especially its location on the shores of Puget
Sound. The city’s watersheds – including Lake Ballinger, a well-known landmark – and
streams that flow into the Sound provide a rich and diverse water resource. The beaches,
wetlands, and streams provide habitat for diverse wildlife including many species of
migrating and resident birds which adds to the aesthetic and pleasing quality of the
environment.
As Edmonds has grown and developed, what were once abundant native forest and wetland
habitats have now become increasingly scarce. Nonetheless, our parks, open spaces, and the
landscaped areas of our neighborhoods integrate pleasing vistas and differentiation necessary
to provide relief in a highly developed landscape. Throughout the city, woodlands, streams,
wetlands and marine areas contain native vegetation that provide food and cover for a diverse
population of fish and wildlife. Preserving and restoring these natural resources through
environmental stewardship remains a high priority for the Edmonds community. Healthy
ecosystems are the source of many less tangible benefits that humans derive from a
relationship with nature such as providing a sense of well-being and sites for nature trails and
other educational and recreational opportunities. Some ecological services that native plants
and trees provide are stabilizing slopes and reducing erosion, replenishing the soil with
nutrients and water, providing barriers to wind and sound, filtering pollutants from the air and
soil, and generating oxygen and absorbing carbon dioxide. Our city beaches and the near-
shore environment also represent unique habitats for marine organisms.
So interconnected are the benefits of a functioning ecosystem, that non-sustainable
approaches to land development and management practices can have effects that ripple
throughout the system. The combination of marine, estuarine, and upland environments
should be seen as an integrated and inter-dependent ecosystem supporting a variety of
wildlife valuable to the entire Edmonds community.
Environmental Quality Goal A. Protect environmental quality within the Edmonds
community through the enforcement of community-based environmental regulations that
reinforce and are integrated with relevant regional, state and national environmental
standards.
A.1 Ensure that the city’s natural vegetation associated with its urban forests,
wetlands, and wildlife habitat areas are protected and enhanced for future
generations.
A.2 City regulations and incentives should be designed to support and require
sustainable land use and development practices, including the retention of
urban forest land, native vegetation, and wildlife habitat areas. Techniques
such as tree retention and low impact development methods should be
integrated into land use and development codes.
Packet Page 272 of 374
O U T L I N E D R A F T
Community Sustainability Element 14 2009.10.01
A.3 Provide for clean air and water quality through the support of state and
regional initiatives and regulations.
A.4 Coordinate land use and transportation plans and implementation actions to
support clean air an water.
Environmental Quality Goal B. Promote the improvement of environmental quality
within the Edmonds community by designing and implementing programs based on a
system of incentives and public education.
B.1 The City should promote and increase public awareness and pride in its
natural areas and wildlife heritage. Special emphasis should be directed
toward preserving natural areas and habitats (forests, wetlands, streams and
beaches) that support a diversity of wildlife.
B.2 Education and recreation programs should be designed and made available
for all ages.
B.3 Environmental education should be coordinated and integrated with other
cultural, arts, and tourism programs.
B.4 To encourage adherence to community values and goals, education
programs should be designed to help promote understanding and explain
the reasons behind environmental programs and regulations.
Environmental Quality Goal C. Develop, monitor, and enforce critical areas regulations
designed to enhance and protect environmentally sensitive areas within the city consistent
with the best available science.
C.1 Critical areas will be designated and protected using the best available
science pursuant to RCW 36.70A.172.
C.2 In addition to regulations, provide incentives that encourage environmental
stewardship, resource conservation, and environmental enhancement
during development activities.
Environmental Quality Goal D. Develop, implement, and monitor a shoreline master
program, consistent with state law, to enhance and protect the quality of the shoreline
environment consistent with the best available science.
D.1 Adopt a Shoreline Master Program that meets the requirements of state law
and is consistent with community goals while being based on the best
available science
Implementing Sustainability
Packet Page 273 of 374
O U T L I N E D R A F T
Community Sustainability Element 15 2009.10.01
Introduction. One of the reasons for adopting this Community Sustainability Element as part
of the City’s Comprehensive Plan is to provide a positive conceptual framework for
coordinating and assessing the community’s progress toward sustainability. For that to
happen, there must be a tie between long-range comprehensive planning, mid-range strategic
planning, and short-term implementation decisions embodied in budgeting and operations.
There are a number of important principles to keep in mind when linking these sets of plans
and actions.
Engage and educate. Connect with the community and provide ways to access and share
information and ideas.
Integrate. Be holistic in approach, recognizing linkages and seeking to expand problem-
solving and solutions beyond traditional or institutional boundaries.
Innovate. Go beyond conventional approaches; be experimental.
Be adaptive. Be flexible, discarding or modifying approaches that don’t work and
shifting resources where or when needed. Rigid rules will not always work or result in the
most effective solution.
Be strategic. Target and prioritize actions to be effective and gain community support
and momentum. Acknowledge limitations, but be creative and persistent in seeking
solutions.
Be a leader. Lead by example, and by forming partnerships that effect decision-making
while providing ways to address differing views and perspectives.
Measure and assess. Set benchmarks to monitor progress and provide feedback to policy
development and decision-making.
A key to being successful in applying these principles to sustainability will be the need to
apply an adaptive management approach to planning and resource allocation. A passive
approach can emphasize predictive modeling and feedback, with program adjustments made
as more information is learned. A more active approach will emphasize experimentation –
actively trying different ideas or strategies and evaluating which produces the best results.
Important for both approaches is (a) basing plans and programs on multi-scenario uncertainty
and feedback, and (b) integrating risk into the analysis. Either of these approaches can be
used, as appropriate in the situation or problem being addressed.
Implementation Goal A. Develop benchmarks and indicators that will provide for
measurement of progress toward established sustainability goals.
A.1 Benchmarks and indicators should be both understandable and obtainable
so that they can be easily explained and used.
Packet Page 274 of 374
O U T L I N E D R A F T
Community Sustainability Element 16 2009.10.01
A.2 Establish both short- and long-term benchmarks and indicators to tie long-
term success to interim actions and decisions.
A.3 Develop a reporting mechanism and assessment process so that
information can be gathered and made available to the relevant decision
process at the appropriate time.
Implementation Goal B. Provide mechanisms to link long-range, strategic, and short-
term planning and decision-making in making progress toward community sustainability.
A.1 Schedule planning and budgeting decision processes to form a logical and
linked progression so that each process builds on and informs related
decisions.
A.2 Long-range, strategic, and short-term planning should acknowledge the
other time frames, decisions, and resources involved. For example, short-
term budgetary and regulatory decisions should be designed to effect
strategic and long-term goals.
Packet Page 275 of 374
O U T L I N E D R A F T
Community Sustainability Element 17 2009.10.01
Figure ##: Example of process coordination
Packet Page 276 of 374
O U T L I N E D R A F T
Community Sustainability Element 1 2009.10.01
Comprehensive Plan
Community Sustainability Element
Background: Climate Change, Community Health,
and Environmental Quality
Introduction. A relatively recent term, “sustainability” has many definitions. A commonly
cited definition is one put forward by the Brundtland Commission1 in a report of the World
Commission on Environment and Development (December 11, 1987). The Commission
defined sustainable development as development that “meets the needs of the present without
compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” Not focused solely
on environmental sustainability, the Commission’s report emphasized the inter-related nature
of environmental, economic, and social factors in sustainability. One of the keys to success in
sustainability is recognizing that decision-making must be based on an integration of
economic with environmental and social factors.
The City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan contains a number of different elements, some
mandated by the Growth Management Act, and others included because they are important to
the Edmonds community. A requirement of the Growth Management Act is that the various
comprehensive plan elements be consistent with one another. This Community Sustainability
Element is intended to provide a framework tying the other plan elements together,
illustrating how the overall plan direction supports sustainability within the Edmonds
community. A key aspect of this approach is also to provide more direct linkages between
long term planning and shorter-term strategic planning and policy review which guide the use
of city resources and programs, especially budgeting. For example, a new emphasis on life
cycle efficiency may take precedence over simple least-cost analytical methods.
The City of Edmonds is gifted with unique environmental assets, such as the shoreline on
Puget Sound, urban forests, diverse streams and wetlands, Lake Ballinger and a range of
parks and open spaces. In addition, the city has the benefit of an established, walkable
downtown served by transit, a framework of neighborhood commercial centers providing
local access to business services, and the potential to see significant economic development
in the Highway 99 activity center. Recently, the City has also experienced the beginnings of
new economic initiatives, such as a new fiber-optic infrastructure and locally-based
businesses and organizations supporting local sustainability and greenhouse gas (GHG)
reduction approaches. Combined with local government initiatives, such as the Mayor’s
Citizens Committee on U.S. Mayors’ Climate Protection Agreement and a series of
resolutions adopted by the Edmonds City Council, there is a growing recognition and
harnessing of the power of citizen knowledge to encourage and support changes in City
policies and operations which are making the City a leader in environmental stewardship.
Given this combination of assets and knowledge, the City of Edmonds has a compelling
responsibility to utilize these capabilities to address the challenges of climate change,
community health and environmental quality.
Packet Page 277 of 374
O U T L I N E D R A F T
Community Sustainability Element 2 2009.10.01
Sustainability Framework
This section describes the general goals and principles underlying the City’s approach to
community sustainability. Three important guiding principles central to a successful approach
are:
Flexible – In an environment where what we understand and can predict is still
developing and will be uncertain for some time to come, providing ways to monitor,
assess, adapt, and to be flexible in our responses will be critical. Climate change is
but one example; the uncertainties acknowledged in that subject area should be
instructive in helping us understand that a flexible approach is necessary when
addressing all areas of sustainability.
Holistic – The components of sustainability – in terms of both its inputs and outputs
–are complex and synergistic. No single action will result in a sustainable result, and
sustainable initiatives taken in one area don’t necessarily lead to sustainability in
another. For example, sustainable land use practices don’t necessarily result in a
sustainable transportation or health system. A holistic approach is required that
includes all levels of governance and encompasses planning, funding, evaluation,
monitoring, and implementation.
Long-term – Focusing on short-term, expedient solutions will only make actions
necessary to support sustainability more difficult to take in the future. For example,
in the areas of environmental issues and climate change, deferred action now will
only make the cumulative effects more difficult to resolve in the future. The familiar
GMA-based 20-year planning timeframe will not be sufficient – planning for
sustainability must take an even longer view.
Sustainability Goal A. Develop land use policies, programs, and regulations designed to
support and promote sustainability. Encourage a mix and location of land uses designed
to increase accessibility of Edmonds residents to services, recreation, jobs, and housing.
A.1 Adopt a system of codes, standards and incentives to promote development
that achieves growth management goals while maintaining Edmonds’
community character and charm in a sustainable way. Holistic solutions
should be developed that employ such techniques as Low Impact
Development (LID), transit-oriented development, “complete streets” that
support multiple modes of travel, and other techniques to assure that future
development and redevelopment enhances Edmonds’ character and charm
for future generations to enjoy.
A.2 Include urban form and design as critical components of sustainable land
use planning. New tools, such as form-based zoning and context-sensitive
design standards should be used to support a flexible land use system
which seeks to provide accessible, compatible and synergistic land use
patterns which encourage economic and social interaction while retaining
privacy and a unique community character.
Packet Page 278 of 374
O U T L I N E D R A F T
Community Sustainability Element 3 2009.10.01
A.3 Integrate land use plans and implementation tools with transportation,
housing, cultural and recreational, and economic development planning so
as to form a cohesive and mutually-supporting whole.
A.4 Use both long-term and strategic planning tools to tie short term actions
and land use decisions to long-term sustainability goals. City land use
policies and decision criteria should reflect and support sustainability goals
and priorities.
Sustainability Goal B. Develop transportation policies, programs, and regulations
designed to support and promote sustainability. Take actions to reduce the use of fuel and
energy in transportation, and encourage various modes of transportation that reduce
reliance on automobiles and are supported by transportation facilities and accessibility
throughout the community.
B.1 Undertake a multi-modal approach to transportation planning that
promotes an integrated system of auto, transit, biking, walking and other
forms of transportation designed to effectively support mobility and access.
B.2 Actively work with transit providers to maximize and promote transit
opportunities within the Edmonds community while providing links to
other communities both within and outside the region.
B.3 Explore and support the use of alternative fuels and transportation
operations that reduce GHG emissions.
B.4 When undertaking transportation planning and service decisions, evaluate
and encourage land use patterns and policies that support a sustainable
transportation system.
B.5 Strategically plan and budget for transportation priorities that balances
ongoing facility and service needs with long-term improvements that
support a sustainable, multi-modal transportation system.
B.6 Strategically design transportation options – including bike routes,
pedestrian trails and other non-motorized solutions – to support and
anticipate land use and economic development priorities.
Sustainability Goal C. Promote seamless transportation linkages between the Edmonds
community and the rest of the Puget Sound region.
C.1 Take an active role in supporting and advocating regional solutions to
transportation and land use challenges.
C.2 Local transportation options should be designed to be coordinated with and
support inter-city and regional transportation programs and solutions.
C.3 Advocate for local priorities and connections and the promotion of system-
wide flexibility and ease of use in regional transportation decisions.
Packet Page 279 of 374
O U T L I N E D R A F T
Community Sustainability Element 4 2009.10.01
Sustainability Goal D. Develop utility policies, programs, and maintenance measures
designed to support and promote sustainability. Maintain existing utility systems while
seeking to expand the use of alternative energy and sustainable maintenance and building
practices in city facilities.
D.1 Balance and prioritize strategic and short-term priorities for maintenance
and ongoing infrastructure needs with long-term economic development
and sustainability goals.
D.2 Strategically program utility and infrastructure improvements to support
and anticipate land use and economic development priorities.
D.3 Explore and employ alternative systems and techniques, such as life-cycle
cost analysis, designed to maximize investments and/or reduce ongoing
maintenance and facilities costs.
D.4 Include sustainability considerations, such as environmental impact and
GHG reduction, in the design and maintenance of facilities and
infrastructure.
Sustainability Goal E. Develop economic development policies and programs designed
to support and promote sustainability. Encourage the co-location of jobs with housing in
the community, seeking to expand residents’ ability to work in close proximity to their
homes. Encourage and support infrastructure initiatives and land use policies that
encourage and support home-based work and business activities that supplement
traditional business and employment concentrations.
E.1 Economic development should support and encourage the expansion of
locally-based business and employment opportunities.
E.2 Land use policies and implementation tools should be designed to provide
for mixed use development and local access to jobs, housing, and services.
E.3 Regulatory and economic initiatives should emphasize flexibility and the
ability to anticipate and meet evolving employment, technological, and
economic patterns.
E.4 Land use and regulatory schemes should be designed to encourage and
support the ability of local residents to work, shop, and obtain services
locally.
E.5 Land use and economic development programs should provide for
appropriate scale and design integration of economic activities with
neighborhoods while promoting patterns that provide accessibility and
efficient transportation options.
Sustainability Goal F. Develop cultural and recreational programs designed to support
and promote sustainability. Networks of parks, walkways, public art and cultural facilities
Packet Page 280 of 374
O U T L I N E D R A F T
Community Sustainability Element 5 2009.10.01
and events should be woven into the community’s fabric to encourage sense of place and
the overall health and well being of the community.
F.1 Cultural and arts programs should be supported and nourished as an
essential part of the City’s social, economic, and health infrastructure.
F.2 Recreational opportunities and programming should be integrated
holistically into the City’s infrastructure and planning process.
F.3 Cultural, arts, and recreational programming should be an integral part of
City design and facilities standards, and should be integrated into all
planning, promotion, and economic development initiatives.
Sustainability Goal G. Develop housing policies, programs, and regulations designed to
support and promote sustainability. Support and encourage a mix of housing types and
styles which provide people with affordable housing choices geared to changes in life
style. Seek to form public and private partnerships to retain and promote affordable
housing options.
G.1 Land use and housing programs should be designed to provide for existing
housing needs while providing flexibility to adapt to evolving housing
needs and choices.
G.2 Housing should be viewed as a community resource, providing
opportunities for residents to choose to stay in the community as their
needs and resources evolve and change over time.
G.3 Support the development of housing tools, such as inclusionary zoning
incentives and affordable housing programs, that promote a variety of
housing types and affordability levels into all developments.
1 Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future, U.N. General
Assembly Plenary Meeting, December 11, 1987.
Packet Page 281 of 374
O U T L I N E D R A F T
Community Sustainability Element 6 2009.10.01
Climate Change
Introduction. The quality of the environment we live in is a critical part of what people often
describe as the “character” of Edmonds. Even if it is not something we overtly think about, it
is an intrinsic part of our everyday experience, whether at work, at rest or at play. Until
relatively recently, environmental quality has often been thought of in terms of obvious,
easily observable characteristics – such as the visible landscape, the quality of the air, the
presence and variety of wildlife, or the availability and character of water in its various forms.
However, recent evidence on climate change2 points to the potential fragility of our
assumptions about the environment and the need to integrate and heighten the awareness of
environmental issues as they are inter-related with all community policies and activities.
Recognizing the importance of addressing the issues surrounding the environment and
climate change, in September 2006, the City of Edmonds formally expressed support for the
Kyoto Protocol3 and adopted the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement4 by Resolution
No. 1129, and joined the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI)5
by Resolution No. 1130.
Scientific evidence and consensus continues to strengthen the idea that climate change is an
urgent threat to the environmental and economic health of our communities. Many cities, in
this country and abroad, already have strong local policies and programs in place to reduce
global warming pollution, but more action is needed at the local, state, and federal levels to
meet the challenge. On February 16, 2005 the Kyoto Protocol, the international agreement to
address climate change, became law for the 141 countries that have ratified it to date. On that
day, Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels launched an initiative to advance the goals of the Kyoto
Protocol through leadership and action by at least 141 American cities.
The State of Washington has also been taking steps to address the issues surrounding climate
change. For example, in March, 2008, the state legislature passed ESSHB 2815, which
included monitoring and reporting mandates for state agencies along with the following
emission reduction targets:
Sec. 3. (1)(a) The state shall limit emissions of greenhouse gases to achieve the
following emission reductions for Washington state:
(i) By 2020, reduce overall emissions of greenhouse gases in the state to
1990 levels;
(ii) By 2035, reduce overall emissions of greenhouse gases in the state to
twenty-five percent below 1990 levels;
(iii) By 2050, the state will do its part to reach global climate stabilization
levels by reducing overall emissions to fifty percent below 1990 levels, or
seventy percent below the state's expected emissions that year.
The City of Edmonds has formally approved the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement
which was endorsed by the 73rd Annual U.S. Conference of Mayors meeting, Chicago, 2005.
Under the Agreement, participating cities committed to take three sets of actions:
Packet Page 282 of 374
O U T L I N E D R A F T
Community Sustainability Element 7 2009.10.01
1. Urge the federal government and state governments to enact policies and programs to
meet or beat the target of reducing global warming pollution levels to 7 percent below
1990 levels by 2012, including efforts to: reduce the United States’ dependence on fossil
fuels and accelerate the development of clean, economical energy resources and fuel-
efficient technologies such as conservation, methane recovery for energy generation,
waste to energy, wind and solar energy, fuel cells, efficient motor vehicles, and biofuels
(alternative fuels?).
2. Urge the U.S. Congress to pass bipartisan greenhouse gas reduction legislation that 1)
includes clear timetables and emissions limits and 2) a flexible, market-based system of
tradable allowances among emitting industries
3. Strive to meet or exceed Kyoto Protocol targets for reducing global warming pollution
by taking actions in our own operations and community.
Given this background, the City of Edmonds recognizes that global climate change brings
significant risks to our community as a shoreline city. At the same time, the City understands
that we have a responsibility to play a leadership role both within our own community as well
as the larger Puget Sound region. To that end, the City establishes the following goals and
policies addressing climate change.
Climate Change Goal A. Inventory and monitor community greenhouse gas emissions,
establishing carbon footprint baselines and monitoring programs to measure future
progress and program needs.
A.1 Establish baselines for greenhouse gas emissions and carbon footprint for
both Edmonds city government and the broader Edmonds community.
A.2 Establish a monitoring program for consistently updating estimates on City
and community greenhouse gas emissions. The monitoring program should
be designed so as to enable a comparison between measurement periods.
A.3 The monitoring program should include assessment measures which (1)
measure progress toward greenhouse gas reduction goals and (2) evaluate
the effectiveness of or need for programs to work toward these goals.
Climate Change Goal B. Establish targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and
promoting sustainability for both city government and the Edmonds community.
Regularly assess progress and program needs, identifying opportunities and obstacles for
meeting greenhouse gas emission targets and sustainability.
B.1 City government should take the lead in developing and promoting GHG
emissions reduction for the Edmonds community.
B.2 Establish and evaluate targets for reductions in greenhouse gas emissions
for both Edmonds city government and the broader Edmonds community.
Targets should be set for both short- and long-range evaluation.
Packet Page 283 of 374
O U T L I N E D R A F T
Community Sustainability Element 8 2009.10.01
B.2.a. By 2020, reduce overall emissions of greenhouse gases to 1990
levels;
B.2.b. By 2035, reduce overall emissions of greenhouse gases to twenty-
five percent below 1990 levels;
B.2.c. By 2050, Edmonds will do its part to reach global climate
stabilization levels by reducing overall emissions to fifty percent
below 1990 levels, or seventy percent below the expected
emissions that year.
B.3 Establish measures for evaluating the degree of sustainability of Edmonds
city government and the broader Edmonds community.
B.4 Annually assess the status and progress toward emissions reduction goals.
Climate Change Goal C. Assess the risks and potential impacts on both city government
operations and on the larger Edmonds community due to climate change. The assessment
of risk and potential responses – both in terms of mitigation and adaptation – should
evaluate the full range of issues, paying particular attention to those arising from the
city’s location on Puget Sound.
C.1 Develop a climate change risk assessment and impact analysis for city
government facilities and operations.
C.2 Develop a climate change risk assessment and impact analysis for the
Edmonds community which considers the potential long-term impacts to
economic, land use, and other community patterns as well as the risks
associated with periodic weather or climate events.
Climate Change Goal D. Work with public and private partners to develop strategies
and programs to prepare for and mitigate the potential impacts of climate change, both on
city government operations and on the general Edmonds community.
D.1 Develop a strategic plan that will help guide and focus City resources and
program initiatives to (1) reduce greenhouse gas production and the carbon
footprint of City government and the Edmonds community, and, (2) reduce
and minimize the potential risks of climate change. The strategic plan
should be coordinated with and leverage state and regional goals and
initiatives, but Edmonds should look for and take the lead where we see
opportunities unique to the Edmonds community.
D.2 Build on and expand the strategic action plan to include programs that can
involve both public and private partners.
D.3 Undertake a policy review of City comprehensive, strategic and specific
plans to assure that City policies are appropriately targeted to prepare for
and mitigate potential impacts of climate change. These reviews may be
done to correspond with scheduled plan updates, or accelerated where
Packet Page 284 of 374
O U T L I N E D R A F T
Community Sustainability Element 9 2009.10.01
either a higher priority is identified or the next update is not specifically
scheduled.
Climate Change Goal E. Develop mitigation strategies that can be used by both the
public and private sectors to help mitigate the potential impacts of new and ongoing
development and operations. Develop programs and strategies that will encourage the
retrofitting of existing development and infrastructure to mitigate and adapt to the effects
of climate change. [Note: idea also incorporated in Goal E, above]
E.1 Develop policies and strategies for land use and development that result in
reduced greenhouse gas emissions for new development as well as
redevelopment activities.
E.2 Develop mitigation programs and incentives that both public and private
development entities can use to reduce or offset potential greenhouse gas
emissions associated with both new development and redevelopment.
E.3 Develop programs and incentives that encourage existing land use, and
redevelopment activitiesbuildings, and infrastructure to reduce their carbon
footprint. Demonstration programs and other cost-efficient efforts that do
not rely on long-term government subsidies are preferred, unless dedicated
funding sources can be found to sustain these efforts over time.
2 For example, see the Fourth Assessment Report; Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report, by the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, February 2007.
3 The Kyoto Protocol was adopted at the third Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in Kyoto, Japan, on 11, December 1997, and established
potentially binding targets and timetables for cutting the greenhouse-gas emissions of industrialized
countries. The Kyoto Protocol has not been ratified by the U.S. government.
4 The U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement is as amended by the 73rd Annual U.S. Conference of
Mayors meeting in Chicago in 2005.
5 ICLEI was founded in 1990 as the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives following the
World Congress of Local Governments for a Sustainable Future, held at the United Nations in New York.
Packet Page 285 of 374
O U T L I N E D R A F T
Community Sustainability Element 10 2009.10.01
Community Health
Introduction. Community health as it is used here means the overall aspects of public
facilities and actions that can have an effect on the health and welfare of the community’s
citizens. The focus here is on the public realm, understanding that public actions and policies
can have an impact on the well-being of Edmonds citizens. The idea is that whenever
possible, government should provide be an enabler, supporting the expansion of opportunities
for people so that they can be as self-sustaining as possible, thereby reducing the potential
need for intervention from government, community-based or privately-derived services –
services which are becoming increasingly costly and difficult to provide.
Community health is closely linked to land use, transportation, public service delivery, and
environmental quality. Clean water and clean air are a basic necessity when seeking to keep
people healthy. In addition, there are certain land use and other actions that Edmonds can take
to help foster healthy lifestyles throughout the community. Government also has a role in
providing basic services, such as police and fire protection, while encouraging access to
affordable housing and opportunities to live, work, and shop close to home.
Community Health Goal A. Develop a reporting and monitoring system of indicators
designed to assess Edmonds’ progress toward sustainable community health.
A.1 Develop community indicators designed to measure the City’s progress
toward a sustainable community.
A.2 Use these community indicators to inform long-term, mid-term (strategic),
and budgetary decision-making.
Community Health Goal B. Develop and maintain ongoing City programs and
infrastructure designed to support sustainable community health.
B.1 Promote a healthy community by encouraging and supporting diversity in
culture and the arts.
B.2 Promote a healthy community by encouraging and supporting access to
recreation and physical activity.
B.3 Promote a healthy community by planning for and implementing a
connected system of walkways and bikeways which will provide
alternative forms of transportation while also encouraging recreation,
physical activity and exposure to the natural environment.
B.4 Promote a healthy community by seeking to protect and enhance the
natural environment through a balanced program of education, regulation,
and incentives. Environmental programs in Edmonds should be tailored to
and reflect the unique opportunities and challenges embodied in a mature,
sea-side community with a history of environmental protection and
awareness.
Packet Page 286 of 374
O U T L I N E D R A F T
Community Sustainability Element 11 2009.10.01
B.5 Develop and encourage volunteer opportunities in community projects that
promote community health. Examples of such programs include beach
clean-ups, walk-to-school groups, and helpers for the elderly or disabled.
B.6 Increase access to health-promoting foods and beverages in the
community. Form partnerships with organizations or worksites, such as
health care facilities and schools, to encourage healthy foods and
beverages.
Community Health Goal C. Promote a healthy community by encouraging and
supporting a diverse and creative education system, providing educational opportunities
for people of all ages and all stages of personal development, including those with special
needs or disabilities.
C.1 City regulatory and planning activities should be supported by education
programs which seek to explain and encourage progress toward desired
outcomes rather then relying solely on rules and penalties.
C.2 The City should partner with educational and governmental organizations
to encourage community access to information and education. Examples
include the Edmonds School District, Edmonds Community College, Sno-
Isle Library, the State of Washington (including the Departments of
Ecology and Fish and Wildlife), and the various private and public
educational programs available to the Edmonds community.
C.3 Encourage and support broad and flexible educational opportunities,
including both traditional and new or emerging initiatives, such as
technology-based solutions. Education should be flexible in both content
and delivery.
Community Health Goal D. Promote a healthy community through supporting and
encouraging the development of economic opportunities for all Edmonds’ citizens.
D.1 Sustainable economic health should be based on encouraging a broad range
of economic activity, with an emphasis on locally-based businesses and
economic initiatives which provide family-supporting wages and incomes.
D.2 Encourage the provision of a variety of types and styles of housing that
will support and accommodate different citizens’ needs and life styles. The
diversity of people living in Edmonds should be supported by a diversity of
housing so that all citizens can find suitable housing now and as they
progress through changes in their households and life stages.
D.3 Encourage the development and preservation of affordable housing.
D,4 Develop programs and activities that promote and support a diverse
population and culture, encouraging a mix of ages and backgrounds.
Packet Page 287 of 374
O U T L I N E D R A F T
Community Sustainability Element 12 2009.10.01
Community Health Goal E. Support a healthy community by providing a full range of
public services, infrastructure, and support systems.
E.1 Recognize the importance of City services to local community character
and sustainability by planning for and integrating public safety and health
services into both short- and long-term planning and budgeting. Strategic
planning should be a regular part of the decision-making process
underlying the provision of these services to the community.
E.2 Reduce energy consumption and maximize energy efficiency by promoting
programs and educational initiatives aimed at a goal to “reduce, re-use, and
recycle” at an individual and community-wide level.
E.3 Future planning and budgeting should be based on full life-cycle cost
analysis and facility maintenance needs, as well as standards of service that
best fit clearly articulated and supported community needs.
Community Health Goal F. Support a healthy community by providing for community
health care and disaster preparedness.
F.1 Plan for and prepare disaster preparedness plans which can be
implemented as necessary to respond effectively to the impacts of natural
or man-induced disasters on Edmonds residents.
F.2 Prepare and implement hazard mitigation plans to reduce and minimize, to
the extent feasible, the exposure of Edmonds citizens to future disasters or
hazards.
F.3 Promote food security and public health by encouraging locally-based food
production, distribution, and choice through the support of home and
community gardens, farmers or public markets, and other small-scale,
collaborative initiatives.
F.4 Support food assistance programs and promote economic security for low
income families and individuals.
F.5 Promote and support community health by supporting national, state and
local health programs and the local provision of health services.
Packet Page 288 of 374
O U T L I N E D R A F T
Community Sustainability Element 13 2009.10.01
Environmental Quality
Introduction. The environmental quality and beauty of the City of Edmonds is largely
reflected through its natural resources, and especially its location on the shores of Puget
Sound. The city’s watersheds – including Lake Ballinger, a well-known landmark – and
streams that flow into the Sound provide a rich and diverse water resource. The beaches,
wetlands, and streams provide habitat for diverse wildlife including many species of
migrating and resident birds which adds to the aesthetic and pleasing quality of the
environment.
As Edmonds has grown and developed, what were once abundant native forest and wetland
habitats have now become increasingly scarce. Nonetheless, our parks, open spaces, and the
landscaped areas of our neighborhoods integrate pleasing vistas and differentiation necessary
to provide relief in a highly developed landscape. Throughout the city, woodlands, streams,
marshes wetlands and marine areas contain native vegetation that provide food and cover for
a diverse population of fish and wildlife. Preserving and restoring these natural resources
through environmental stewardship remains a high priority for the Edmonds community.
Healthy ecosystems are the source of many less tangible benefits that humans derive from a
relationship with nature such as providing a sense of well-being and sites for nature trails and
other educational and recreational opportunities. Some ecological services that native plants
and trees provide are stabilizing slopes and reducing erosion, replenishing the soil with
nutrients and water, providing barriers to wind and sound, filtering pollutants from the air and
soil, and generating oxygen and absorbing carbon dioxide. Our city beaches and the near-
shore environment also represent unique habitats for marine organisms.
So interconnected are the benefits of a functioning ecosystem, that non-sustainable
approaches to land development and management practices can have effects that ripple
throughout the system. The combination of marine, estuarine, and upland environments
should be seen as an integrated and inter-dependent ecosystem supporting a variety of
wildlife valuable to the entire Edmonds community.
Environmental Quality Goal A. Protect environmental quality within the Edmonds
community through the enforcement of community-based environmental regulations that
reinforce and are integrated with relevant regional, state and national environmental
standards.
A.1 Ensure that the city’s natural vegetation associated with its urban forests,
marsheswetlands, and wildlife habitat areas are protected and enhanced for
future generations.
A.2 City regulations and incentives should be designed to support and require
sustainable land use and development practices, including the retention of
urban forest land, native vegetation, and wildlife habitat areas. Techniques
such as tree retention and low impact development methods should be
integrated into land use and development codes.
Packet Page 289 of 374
O U T L I N E D R A F T
Community Sustainability Element 14 2009.10.01
A.3 Provide for clean air and water quality through the support of state and
regional initiatives and regulations.
A.4 Coordinate land use and transportation plans and implementation actions to
support clean air an water.
Environmental Quality Goal B. Promote the improvement of environmental quality
within the Edmonds community by designing and implementing programs based on a
system of incentives and public education.
B.1 The City should promote and increase public awareness and pride in its
natural areas and wildlife heritage. Special emphasis should be directed
toward preserving natural areas and habitats (forests, marsheswetlands,
streams and beaches) that support a diversity of wildlife.
B.2 Education and recreation programs should be designed and made available
for all ages.
B.3 Environmental education should be coordinated and integrated with other
cultural, arts, and tourism programs.
B.4 To encourage adherence to community values and goals, education
programs should be designed to help promote understanding and explain
the reasons behind environmental programs and regulations.
Environmental Quality Goal C. Develop, monitor, and enforce critical areas regulations
designed to enhance and protect environmentally sensitive areas within the city consistent
with the best available science.
C.1 Critical areas will be designated and protected using the best available
science pursuant to RCW 36.70A.172.
C.2 In addition to regulations, provide incentives that encourage environmental
stewardship, resource conservation, and environmental enhancement
during development activities.
Environmental Quality Goal D. Develop, implement, and monitor a shoreline master
program, consistent with state law, to enhance and protect the quality of the shoreline
environment consistent with the best available science.
D.1 Adopt a Shoreline Master Program that meets the requirements of state law
and is consistent with community goals while being based on the best
available science
Implementing Sustainability
Packet Page 290 of 374
O U T L I N E D R A F T
Community Sustainability Element 15 2009.10.01
Introduction. One of the reasons for adopting this Community Sustainability Element as part
of the City’s Comprehensive Plan is to provide a positive conceptual framework for
coordinating and assessing the community’s progress toward sustainability. For that to
happen, there must be a tie between long-range comprehensive planning, mid-range strategic
planning, and short-term implementation decisions embodied in budgeting and operations.
There are a number of important principles to keep in mind when linking these sets of plans
and actions.
Engage and educate. Connect with the community and provide ways to access and share
information and ideas.
Integrate. Be holistic in approach, recognizing linkages and seeking to expand problem-
solving and solutions beyond traditional or institutional boundaries.
Innovate. Go beyond conventional approaches; be experimental.
Be adaptive. Be flexible, discarding or modifying approaches that don’t work and
shifting resources where or when needed. Rigid rules will not always work or result in the
most effective solution.
Be strategic. Target and prioritize actions to be effective and gain community support
and momentum. Acknowledge limitations, but be creative and persistent in seeking
solutions.
Be a leader. Lead by example, and by forming partnerships that effect decision-making
while providing ways to address differing views and perspectives.
Measure and assess. Set benchmarks to monitor progress and provide feedback to policy
development and decision-making.
A key to being successful in applying these principles to sustainability will be the need to
apply an adaptive management approach to planning and resource allocation. A passive
approach can emphasize predictive modeling and feedback, with program adjustments made
as more information is learned. A more active approach will emphasize experimentation –
actively trying different ideas or strategies and evaluating which produces the best results.
Important for both approaches is (a) basing plans and programs on multi-scenario uncertainty
and feedback, and (b) integrating risk into the analysis. Either of these approaches can be
used, as appropriate in the situation or problem being addressed.
Implementation Goal A. Develop benchmarks and indicators that will provide for
measurement of progress toward established sustainability goals.
A.1 Benchmarks and indicators should be both understandable and obtainable
so that they can be easily explained and used.
Packet Page 291 of 374
O U T L I N E D R A F T
Community Sustainability Element 16 2009.10.01
A.2 Establish both short- and long-term benchmarks and indicators to tie long-
term success to interim actions and decisions.
A.3 Develop a reporting mechanism and assessment process so that
information can be gathered and made available to the relevant decision
process at the appropriate time.
Implementation Goal B. Provide mechanisms to link long-range, strategic, and short-
term planning and decision-making in making progress toward community sustainability.
A.1 Schedule planning and budgeting decision processes to form a logical and
linked progression so that each process builds on and informs related
decisions.
A.2 Long-range, strategic, and short-term planning should acknowledge the
other time frames, decisions, and resources involved. For example, short-
term budgetary and regulatory decisions should be designed to effect
strategic and long-term goals.
Packet Page 292 of 374
O U T L I N E D R A F T
Community Sustainability Element 17 2009.10.01
Figure ##: Example of process coordination
Packet Page 293 of 374
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
2
9
4
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
2
9
5
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
2
9
6
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
2
9
7
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
2
9
8
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
2
9
9
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
0
0
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
0
1
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
0
2
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
0
3
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
0
4
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
0
5
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
0
6
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
0
7
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
0
8
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
0
9
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
1
0
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
1
1
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
1
2
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
1
3
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
1
4
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
1
5
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
1
6
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
1
7
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
1
8
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
1
9
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
2
0
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
2
1
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
2
2
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
2
3
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
2
4
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
2
5
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
2
6
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
2
7
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
2
8
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
2
9
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
3
0
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
3
1
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
3
2
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
3
3
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
3
4
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
3
5
o
f
3
7
4
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
3
6
o
f
3
7
4
AM-2615 7.
Continued Discussion on Roof Design Standards
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:11/17/2009
Submitted By:Rob Chave
Submitted For:Councilmember Bernheim Time:30 Minutes
Department:Planning Type:Information
Review Committee:
Committee Action:
Information
Subject Title
Continued discussion on roof design standards.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
This is a discussion item; no action is required.
Previous Council Action
The most recent discussion on this subject was on August 25, 2009 (see minutes, Exhibit 2).
Narrative
This is a continued discussion on ways to improve how the Community Development Code deals
with roof design issues. Of concern is how the current roof design language relates to the building
code, desired building design and neighborhood character. Councilmember Bernheim has
prepared a memo outlining some thoughts on the subject (Exhibit 1).
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: Exhibit 1: Memo from Councilmember Bernheim
Link: Exhibit 2: City Council minutes 8/25/2009
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 11/13/2009 09:48 AM APRV
2 Mayor Sandy Chase 11/13/2009 10:41 AM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 11/13/2009 10:42 AM APRV
Form Started By: Rob
Chave
Started On: 11/13/2009 09:12
AM
Final Approval Date: 11/13/2009
Packet Page 337 of 374
City of Edmonds
City Councilman Steve Bernheim
November 12, 2009
DRAFT Memo to Edmonds City Council re: Roof Design Standards
Distribute to DJ Wilson, Rob Chave
This memo is In connection with our continued discussion of roof design standards (with some
focus on the RM zones) scheduled for November 17, 2009. There are several "roof only"
references – in the form of footnotes – found throughout the zoning code. The following
examples illustrate the differences in terminology we currently have:
ECDC 16.30.030(A) (all portions of the "roof" above 25 feet must have minimum slope of
4 in 12) (RM and BP zones)
ECDC 16.43.030(C)(3) (all portions of the "building" above 25 feet has minimum pitch of
6 in 12) (BD-5 zone)
ECDC 16.50.020(A) (all portions of the "roof" above 25 feet must be modulated in
design) (BC zone)
ECDC 16.75.020(B) ("roof" may extend to 30 feet if modulated design) (MP zone)
Regardless of the approach we ultimately choose to take, we may want to review/visit a few
other towns with similar height limits/character to Edmonds to see how they do it in their code.
Besides a recent visit to Bellingham, I also think of Friday Harbor and Snohomish. Our attempt
to invent the wheel with our "roof only ..." construction seems to have put the city into something
of a pickle. I think it could be valuable to sample some other cities’ approaches, just to see how
they grapple with design and the definitions of "storey", "height," and "maximum height.”
After discussions with staff, I think there are several approaches that the City could consider
taking to address the current problem. I’ve summarized these on the following pages.
Packet Page 338 of 374
2
First suggestion: Have a flat 27-foot height limit (or some other plain, straightforward number)
above which nothing can protrude (except pipes, chimneys, and elevator shafts); Advantage:
ease of administration. Disadvantage: while addressing height, does not by itself address other
design issues or necessarily resolve neighborhood character concerns.
Second suggestion: Replace the current
"roof only" allowances now found throughout
the code with a maximum volume allowance.
For example: "The roof and its supporting
structure may exceed 25 feet up to a
maximum of 30 feet only if the portion above
25 feet does not cover more than 50 percent
(or some other percentage) of the volume of
the area formed by the perimeter of the
structure at the 25 foot level and the maximum
allowed height limit of 30 feet." (SEE
geometrical illustration ....) Advantage: eas
understand the intent; addresses height and
volume. Disadvantage: may be challenging to
implement and does not directly addres
substantive design or appearance of bui
y to
s
lding
from the street.
Third Suggestion: We could also co
different approach to our height limit
ordinances, making some changes to the
language in each zone to provide more specific standards. One example might be to est
combined story/height limit, such as the following sample applied to the BD zones. The
advantage here is that height will be more clearly defined, with the results tied directly to th
number of stories desired. However, as before, this will not enable us to deal directly wi
nsider a
ablish a
e
th
uilding design or streetscape design – i.e. how the buildings are viewed at the street.
I.
A. may exceed the following, except as
Fifth Avenue, 3 stories.
B. Th l
C.
nd the
stories of residential above, the
D.
s
b
Building Height Provisions in the BD Zone
No portion of a structure in the BD zone
otherwise specifically set forth herein:
1. Within 50 feet of Main Street or Fifth Avenue, 2 stories;
2. More than 50 feet from Main Street or
e fo lowing heights per story are allowed:
1. Ground floor: Minimum of 12 feet/Maximum of 15 feet:
2. Commercial above ground floor: Maximum of 12 feet:
3. Residential above ground floor: Maximum of 10 feet:
To determine the allowed height of structure, use the number of stories allowed and
apply the allowed height per story. For example, if three stories are allowed a
proposed use is ground floor retail with two
maximum allowed height would be 35 feet.
Buildings which are not constructed with the maximum allowable number of stories
may increase the height of the stories actually constructed by an amount that doe
not result in a height greater than that which would have resulted from a building
constructed with the maximum allowable number of stories. For the purpose of this
height calculation, it shall be assumed that each unconstructed story would have
Packet Page 339 of 374
3
stories are constructed, an additional 10 feet may be added to
E.
ight of the parapet around the perimeter of the structure
shall not exceed 18 inches.
been used for residential purposes if constructed, and therefore allows an additional
10 feet of height that can be added to the building. For example, if three stories are
allowed, but only two
the building height.
Decorative parapets may exceed the height limit by a maximum of three feet
provided that the average he
Fourth Suggestion: We could consider adopting a relatively easy to understand and apply
form-based code zone-by-zone or neighborhood-by-neighborhood. (SEE the sample from the
City of Benicia, California). Such an approach might well be worth exploring at least initi
“problem” zones (such as the RM zones where the City presently does not enforce the
height/roof restrictions in the ordi
ally with
nance) or in special areas such as the downtown core,
aterfront area, or Highway 99.
.edmonds.wa.us/cp6.stm
p.m.
/message)
ouncil@stevebernheim.com
w
Steve Bernheim
Edmonds City Council # 6
http://www.ci
512 Bell St.
Edmonds WA 98020
Council Office Hours: after 4:30
425-744-3021 (desk
425 712 8418 (fax)
206 240 5344 (cell)
c
Packet Page 340 of 374
Chapter 4: Farm-Based Code
Town Core (TC) Standards
Town Core (TC):
The primary intent of this zone is to enhance the vi
brant, pedestrian-oriented character of First Street. The
physical form and uses are regulated to reflect the urban
character of the historic shop front buildings.
How mixed use is defined within this zone: Mixed use
within this zone primarily refers to vertical mixed use
where retail or commercial are on the ground floor and
residential or commercial are above.
How "primary street" is defined within this zone:
The primary street is always First Street. Illustrative examples ofbuildings in a Town Core area
Downtown Mixed Use Master Plan
Opticos Design, Inc.
4-5
Packet Page 341 of 374
Chapter 4: Form-Based Code
Town Core (TC) Standards
.,.1-"-,,-,,-,,
Primary Street
Key
_..Property Line ---Setback Line
--Build-to Line (BTL) Building Area
Front 0'
Side Street 0' 0
Setback (Distance from Property Line)
Side 0' e
Rear
Adjacent to NG Zone 8' Q
Adjacent to any other Zone 5' Q
Building Form
Primary Street Fa~ade built to BTL
Side Street Fa~ade built to BTL
80% min.'
30% min!
0
0
Lot Width 125' max.
Lot Depth 100' max. 4D
•Street fa~ades must be built to BTL along first 30' from every corner.
Notes
All floors must have a primary ground-floor entrance that
faces the or side street.
Loading docks, overhead doors, and other service entries are
Any building over 50' wide must be broken down to read as a
series of buildings no wider than 50' each.
Property Line Street
Service, Retail, or
Recreation, Education &
Public Assembly'
Residential or Service'
Ground Floor
o
Upper Floor(s) o
'See Table 4.1 for specific uses. Ground floors that face the wa
terfront shall be nonresidential and shall not include parking,
garages, or similar uses.
Building Max. 2.5 stories and 40'
Max. to Eave/Top of Parapet 35' o
Ancillary Building Max. 2 stories and 25'
Finish Ground Floor Level 6ft max. above sidewalk
First Floor Ceiling Height 12' min. clear
Upper Floor(s) Ceiling Height 8' min. clear.
Notes
Mansard roof forms are not allowed.
Any section along the BTL not defined by a building must be
defined bya 2'6ft to 4'6ft high fence or stucco or masonry wall.
Downtown Mixed Use Master Plan
Opticos Design, Inc.
4-6
Packet Page 342 of 374
Chapter 4: Form-Based Code
Town Core (TC) Standards
-.1-.. _" _ .. _ .. -.J . _ .. _ .. _ .. .J .. _ .. _.I
I
_. ,'_ .. _ .. _ .. _ .. ....l .. _ .. _.
I
Sidewalk
Primary Street
Key
_..-Property Line
Parking Area
Location (Distance from Property Line)
Front Setback 30' G
Side Setback 0'
Side Street Setback 5' e
Rear Setback 5' "Required Spaces
Ground Floor
Uses <3,000 sf No off-street parking required
Uses >3,000 sf 1 space/SOO sf
Upper Floors
Residential uses 1 space/unit;.5 space/studio
Other uses 1 space/1,000 sf
Notes
Parking Drive Width 15' max. o
On corner lots, parking drive shall not be located on
primary street. (!)
Parking may be provided off-site within 1,300' or as shared
parking.
Bicycle parking must be provided and in a secure environment.
Parking drives are highly discouraged along First Street and only
permitted ifthere is no other option for access to parking areas.
Downtown Mixed Use Master Plan
Opticos Design, Inc.
_..I_ .. _ .. _ .. _ .. -.J._ .. _ .. _ .. _ .. _ .. _.1
I
Primary Street
Key
_..Property Line Setback Line
Build-to Line (BTL) Encroachment Area
Location
Front 12' max.
Side Street 8'max. .,Rear 4' max.
Notes
Canopies, Awnings, and Balconies may encroach over the BTL
on the street sides, as shown in the shaded areas. Balconies
may encroach into the setback on the rear, as shown in the
shaded areas.
Upper-story galleries facing the street must not be used to
meet primary circulation requirements.
Gallery
Clearance I' min. back from curb line
Height 9' min. clear, 2 stories max.
Awning
Depth 10' max.
Forecourt
Depth IS' min., not to exceed width
Width 20' min., 50% oflotwidth max.
4-7
Packet Page 343 of 374
Chapter 4: Form-Based Code
Town Core (TC) Standards
<1500 sf MUP <300 sf and 2 or fewer employees
>1500 sf UP
Health/fitness
<1500 sf MUP
>1500 sf UP
P
MUP
MUP
School, public or private MUP
Studio: art, dance, martial arts, music, etc.
<1500 sf P
Theater, cinema, or To""""'''''' arts P
<5000 sf P
> 5000 sf UP
P Permitted Use
MUP Minor Use Permit Required -staff review only
UP Use Permit
NA Not an allowed use
End Notes
I A definition of each listed
2 Allowed only on upper floors or behind ground floor use.
3Body art and piercing requires use permit approval and is
allowed only as an ancillary use.
>300 sf and 3 or fewer <;;UlW'''V<;<;;
NA>300 sf and 3 or more
Mixed use project residential component
Dwelling: Multi-Family-Rowhouse
Dwelling: Multi-Family-Duplex
Dwelling: Multi-Family-Triplex
Dwelling: Multi-Family-Fourplex
Ancillary Building P
Residential Care, 7 or more clients
Residential Care, 6 or fewer clients
~--~~~~~~~Retail
Artisan Shop P
Bar, tavern, night club, except with any P
of the following features
and 7am UP
General retail, except with any of the P
features:
Alcoholic beverage sales UP
Floor area over 8000 sf MUP
On-site production of items sold MUP
Operating between 9 pm and 7 am MUP
Neighborhood market <10,000 sf P
Restaurant, cafe, coffee shop P
Downtown Mixed Use Master Plan
Opticos Design, Inc.
4-8
Packet Page 344 of 374
Chapter 4: Form-Based Code
ATMorbank P
Business ,allrm'C>TT serVIce P
Medical services: Doctor Office p2
Medical services: Extended Care p2
Office: Business, service P
Office: Professional, administrative P
$ervic:e$;.. ~jnerf;:" !:"--~.~:--~~~-
Financial Services
Bed &breakfast
4 guest rooms or less p2
Greater than 4 rooms p2
Day care center: Small family p2
Lodging MUP
Personal services p3
Parking facility, public or commercial UP
Wireless telecommunications facility MUP
Downtown Mixed Use Master Plan
Opticas Design, Inc.
4-9
Packet Page 345 of 374
Chapter 4: Form-Based Code
Town Core-Open (TC-O) Standards
Town Core-Open (TC·O):
The primary intent ofthis zone is to regulate the physical
form of shopfront buildings along the side streets between
First Street and Second Street in order to provide an ap
propriate transition from First Street into the residential
neighborhoods. The physical form of a shopfront building
is regulated while allowing flexibility in use.
How mixed nse is defined within this zone: Mixed use
within this zone is defined by the flexibility and compat
ibility in use, allowing retail, commercial, or residential
live/work uses in a shopfront form. Illustrative examples ofbuildings in a Town Core-Open Area
Downtown Mixed Use Master Plan
Opticos Design, Inc.
4-11
Packet Page 346 of 374
Chapter 4: Form-Based Code
Town Core-Open (TC-O) Standards
Street
~--Setback Line
Building Area
0'
Property line Street
Ground Floor Service, Retail, or
Recreation, Education &
Public Assembly"
Floor(s) Residential or Service·
·See Table 4.2 for specific uses.
2 stories and 25'
2 stories and 25'
Finish Ground Floor Level 12" max. above sidewalk
First Floor Ceiling Height 12' min. clear
Upper Floor(s) Ceiling Height 8' min. dear o
Notes
Mansard roofforms are not allowed.
Any section along the BTL not defined by a building must be
defined by a 2'6" to 4'6" high fence or stucco or masonry wall.
Key
_..-Property Line
--Build-to Line (BTL)
Front 0
Setback (Distance from Property Line)
Side 3' 0
Rear
Adjacent to NG Zone 8' 8
Adjacent to any other Zone 5' 8
Building Form
Street Fa~ade built to BTL 80% min." G
Lot Width 75' max. 0
Lot Depth 150'max. 0
Notes
All floors must have a primary ground-floor entrance which
faces the street.
Loading docks, overhead doors, and other service entries are
prohibited on street fa~ades.
Any building over 50' wide must be broken down to read as a
series of buildings no wider than 50' each.
Downtown Mixed Use Master Plan
Opticos Design, Inc.
4-12
Packet Page 347 of 374
Chapter 4: Form-Based Code
Town Core-Open (TC-O) Standards
~.. _ .. _ .. ...J .. _ .. _ .. -l-.. _ .. -.t .. _ .. _L
Street
Key
_..-Property Line
Parking Area
Front Setback
Side Setback
Rear Setback
0'
5'
Required Spaces
Ground Floor
Uses <3,000 sf
Uses> 3,000 sf
No off-street parking required
1 sf
Upper Floor(s)
Residential uses 1 space/unit; .5 space/studio
Other uses 1 space/I,OOO sf
Notes
Parking Drive Width 15' max.
Parking may be provided off-site within 1,300' or as shared
Bicycle parking must be provided and in a secure environment.
50% ofthe on-street parking spaces adjacent to lot can count
toward parking requirements.
Downtown Mixed Use Master Plan
Opticos Design, Inc.
.. _L
Street
Key
_..Property Line Setback Line
Build-to Line (BTL) Encroachment Area
Location
Front 12' max.
Rear 4' max. o
Notes
Canopies, Awnings, and Balconies may encroach over the BTL
on the street sides, as shown in the shaded areas. Balconies
may encroach into the setback on the rear, as shown in the
shaded areas.
Upper story galleries faci ng the street must not be used to meet
primary circulation requirements.
Gallery
Clearance l' min. back from curb line
9' min. clear, 2 stories max.
Awning
Depth 10' max.
Forecourt
Depth IS' min., not to exceed width
Width 20' min., 50% oflotwidth max.
4-13
Packet Page 348 of 374
Chapter 4: Form-Based Code
Town Core-Open (TC-O) Standards
MUP
P
Bar, tavern, night club, except with
any ofthe following
UP
Operating between 9 pm and 7 am NA
General retail, except with any of the P
following features:
Alcoholic beverage sales UP
Floor area over 8000 sf NA
On-site ofitems sold MUP
Operating between 9 pm and 7 am NA
Nelgtlbo,rh()od market <10,000 sf P
Restaurant, cafe, coffee shop MUP
ServicEts:. ........--~n<ll
ATMorBank MUP
Business support service P
Medical services: Clinic, urgent care MUP
Medical services: Doctor office P
Medical services: Extended Care MUP
Office: Business, service P
Office: Professional, administrative P
Financial Services P
Bed & Breakfast
4 guest rooms or less P
Greater than 4 guest rooms P
Lodging MUP
Personal services P
<1500 sf
museum
Meeting facility, public or private MUP
Studio: art, dance, martial arts, music, etc.
<1500 sf P
Home occupation
<300 sf and 2 or fewer prnnln,vp,'< P
>300 sf and 3 or fewer P
Live/work unit P
Mixed use project residential component P
Dwelling: Multi-Family-Rowhouse P
Dwelling: Multi-Family-Duplex P
Dwelling: Multi-Family-Triplex P
Dwelling: Multi-Family-Fourplex P
Ancillary Building P
Residential Care, 7 or more clients UP
Residential Care, 6 or fewer clients MUP
P Permitted Use
MUP Minor Use Permit Required -staff review only
UP Use Permit Required
NA Use Not Allowed
End Notes
1 A definition of each listed use type is in the Glossary.
Transportatic:i~CO",rnunic:ationsl InfrostructurEJ
Wireless telecommunications facility MUP
Downtown Mixed Use Master Plan
Opticos Design, Inc.
4-14
Packet Page 349 of 374
Chapter 4: Form-Based Code
ATMorBank P
Business support service P
Medical services: Clinic, urgent care MUP
Medical services: Doctor office P
Medical services: Extended Care MUP
Office: Business, service P
Office: Professional, administrative P
----~~~------
Financial Services P
Bed & Breakfast
ServiCe$:
4 P
rooms MUP
MUP
UP
P
Personal services P
Wireless telecommunications facility MUP
Downtown Mixed Use Master Plan
Opticos Design, Inc.
4-15
Packet Page 350 of 374
Chapter 4: Farm-Based Code
Neighborhood General (NG) Standards
How mixed use is defined withiu this zone: Appropriate
ly-scaled ancillary buildings are allowed that can accommo
date residential, home-office, or workshop uses.
How "primary street" is defined within this zone:
The primary street is always the East/West running street.
Illustrative examples o/buildings
in a1Veighborhood General area
Downtown Mixed Use Master Plan
Opticos Design, Inc.
4-17
Packet Page 351 of 374
Chapter 4: Form-Based Code
Neighborhood General (NG) Standards
-I. -"-J,,11,' _------'_ Sidewalk
Primary Street
Key
_..-Property Line Setback Line
Build-to Line (BTL) Building Area
Build-to Line (Distance from Property Line)
Front 20"
Side Street 10' o
Rear, ~lJl"lJHU 5'
'May be reduced to meet furthest back adjacent BTL if adja
cent BTL is less than 20' from property line,
Setback (Distance from Property Line)
Side 4' one side, 8' other a
Rear, Main Building 40"
• Setback shall be 120' measured from front property line ifno
alley adjoins the property,
Building Form
Primary Street Fa"ade built to BTL 50% min, o
Side Street Fa"ade built to BTL 30% min,
Lot Width 50' max.
Lot Depth 150' max. o
Distance between buildings 10' min. o
Depth of ancillary building 28' max.
Footprint of ancillary building 700sfmax.
Property line
Ground Floor Residential, or Services o
Upper Floor(s) Residential, or Services
·See Table 4.4 for specific uses.
Building Max. 2.5 stories and 30' max.
1.5 stories and IS' max.
Finish Ground Floor Level 18" min. above sidewalk'
First Floor Ceiling Height 10' min. clear o
Upper Floor Ceiling Height 8' min. clear
·6" on downslope lots.
Notes
Mansard roof forms are not allowed.
The windows along any portion of a building that project
beyond the rear fa"ade of adjacent homes must be privacy win
dows if the fa"ade is 10' or less from the side property line.
Any decks on the rear of homes greater than 2' above grade
must have a privacy screen toward neighboring lots.
Downtown Mixed Use Master Plan
Opticos Design, Inc.
4-18
Packet Page 352 of 374
I
I
Chapter 4: Farm-Based Cade
Neighborhood General (NG) Standards
'-"-.,..-" -, '-"-"-'
:.
-" -/rj" -'si~~~ik" r-,--'_'_._'-_'_._'_---1_-'
Primary Street
Key
_..-Property Line
Parking Area
Location (Distance from Property Line)
Front Setback 20'
Side Setback 0'
Side Street Setback 5' o
Rear Setback 5'
Required Spaces
Residential Uses
Studio unit
1-2 bedroom unit 1 space
3+ bedroom unit 1 space plus additional 112 space
for over two
Other uses
Uses <3,000 sf No off-street
On lots ,vithout alley access, a one-unit ancillary structure up
to 400 sf may be built without requiring additional parking.
Notes
Drive Width 11' max.
No more than a single space of parking is allowed in front of
the
50% of the on-street parking spaces adjacent to lot can count
toward parking requirements,
Pri mary Street
Key
_..-Property Line
Build-to Line (BTL)
---Setback Line
Encroachment Arca
Notes
.,Side Street 8'max.
Forecourt
Depth 20' min., not to exceed width
Width 20' min., 50% oflot width max,
Porch
Depth 8' min.
2 stories max.
Common Lawn
Porch Depth 8' min.
Porches, Balconies, and Bay Windows may encroach into the
setback on the street sides, as shown in the shaded areas.
Stoop
4' min., 6' max.
Downtown Mixed Use Master Plan
Opticos Design, Inc.
Front 10'max.
4-19
Packet Page 353 of 374
Chapter 4: Form-Based Code
Neighborhood General (NG) Standards
Park, playground MUP General retail, except with any of the P
following features:
~----Alcoholic beverage sales NA
Dwelling: Single family P Floor area over 8000 sf NA
MUP
Home On-site production of items sold
<300 sf, 2 or fewer employees P NA
>300 sf, 3 or fewer employees P
Dwelling: Multi-family-Duplex P Office: Professional, administrative p2
Ancillary Building P services:
Bed & Breakfast
4 P
rooms MUP
care center: Child or adult MUP
Day care center: Large family UP
Day care center: Small family P
\Vireless telecommunications facility MUP
P Permitted Use
MUP Minor Use Permit Required -staff review only
UP Use Permit Required
NA Not an allowed use
End Notes
1 A definition of each listed use type is in the Glossary,
2 Allowed only in ancillary buildings
4-20 Downtown Mixed Use Master Plan
Opticos Design, Inc.
Packet Page 354 of 374
Chapter 4: Form-Based Code
Neighborhood General-Open (NG-O) Standards
r
I
The primary intent ofthis
is to ensure a residential
form to relate to adjacent
tial buildings along the side
between First Street and Second Street in
order to provide an appropriate transition
from First Street into the residentialllclt.\llU\H
hoods. The physical form of a residential building'
is regulated while allowing flexibility in use. This "'", )
zone is applied to buildings with an existing residential "\,: "
form that has been compromised by on-site or adjacent "
development making pure residential use inappropriate.
How mixed use is defined within this zone: Commercial or
residential uses are allowed in this area in a residential form
both in the main buildings as well as in ancillary buildings.
How "primary street" is defined within this zone: The Illustrative examples ofbuildings in a
primary street is always the East/West running street. Neighborhood General-Open area
Downtown Mixed Use Master Plan
Opticos Design, Inc.
4-21
Packet Page 355 of 374
Chapter 4: Form-Based Code
Neighborhood General-Open (NG-O) Standards
___'_'~J' .11_'_'_S_id_e_w_al_k_~
Primary Street
Key
_..Property Line ---Setback Line
Build-to Line (BTL) , Building Area
Build-to Line (Distance from Property Line)
Front 20' ,
Side S~reet 10' o
Rear, Ancillary Building 5' e
'May be reduced to meet furthest back adjacent BTL if adja
cent BTL is less than 20' from property line.
Setback (Distance from Property Line)
Side 4' one side, 8' other Q
Rear, Main Building 35' • ()
, Setback shall be 120' measured from front property line ifno
alley adjoins the property.
Building Form
Primary Street Fa<;ade built to BTL 50% min. 0
Side Street Fa<;ade built to BTL 30% min. 0
Lot Width 50' max. 4D
Lot Depth 150' max. 0
Distance between buildings 10' min. 0
Depth of ancillary building 28' max. 4)
Footprint of ancillary building 1000 sf max.
Sidewalk
Property Line
Ground Floor Residential, Retail, or
Service o
Upper Floor(s) Residential
'See Table 4.5 for specific uses.
Building Max. 2.5 stories and 30' max.
Ancillary Building Max. 1.5 stories and 15' max.
Finish Ground Floor Level 18" min. above sidewalk·
First Floor Ceiling Height 10' min. clear o
Upper Floor Ceiling Height 8' min. clear
·6" on downslope lots.
Notes
Mansard roof forms are not allowed.
The windows along any portion of a building that project
beyond the rear fa<;ade of adjacent homes must be privacywin
dows ifthe fa<;ade is 10' or less from the side property line.
Any decks on the rear of homes greater than 2' above grade
must have a privacy screen toward neighboring lots.
Monument and illuminated signs are prohibited.
Downtown Mixed Use Master Plan
Opticos Design, Inc.
4-22
Packet Page 356 of 374
1
Chapter 4: Form-Based Code
Neighborhood General-Open (NG-O) Standards
Primary Street
Key
_..-Property Line
Parking Area
Front Setback
Side Setback
20'
0'
Side Street Setback 5' o
Rear Setback 5'
Required Spaces
Residential Uses
Studio unit 1f2 space
1-2 bedroom unit 1 space
3+ bedroom unit 1 space plus additional 1f2 space
for every bedroom over two
Other uses 1 space/l,OOO sf
On lots without alley access, a one-unit ancillary structure up
to 400 sf may be built without requiring additional parking.
Notes
Parking Drive Width 11' max.
No more than a single space of parking is allowed in front of
the front fa~ade plane.
50% of the on-street parking spaces adjacent to lot can count
toward parking requirements.
, '1-" - , , T" - " ---r-' , -" - , ,
o--l\~:;J
j;;:,: i
i~;;;1
7""""" ,~~stii(r'" 1
' , r "_,,_,,_,,.....J
Sidewalk
Primary Street
Key
-..Property Line ---Setback Line
Build-to Line (BTL) Encroachment Area
Location
Front 10' max.
Side Street 8' max. o
Notes
Porches, Balconies, and Bay Windows may encroach into the
setback on the street sides, as shown in the shaded areas.
Stoop
Depth 4' min., 6' max.
Forecourt
Depth 20' min., not to exceed width
Width 20' min., 50% oflotwidth max.
Porch
Depth 8' min.
Height 2 stories max.
Common Lawn
Porch Depth 8' min.
Downtown Mixed Use Master Plan
Opticos Design, Inc.
4-23
Packet Page 357 of 374
Chapter 4: Form-Based Code
Neighborhood General-Open (NG-O) Standards
Meeting facility, public or private MUP Artisan Shop P
Park, playground P General retail, except with any of the P
School, public or private MUP following features:
Studio: art, dance, martial arts, music, etc. Alcoholic beverage sales NA
<1500 sf MUP Floor area over 8000 sf NA
>1500 sf NA On-site production ofitems sold MUP
Theater, cinema, or performing arts MUP Operating between 9 pm and 7 am NA
Resid~tial Restaurant, cafe, coffee shop MUP
Dwelling: Single family P Services: Business, Financial, Professional
Home occupation Business support service P
<300 sf and 2 or fewer employees P Medical services: Doctor office P
>300 sf and 3 or fewer employees P Office: Business, service P
>300 sf and 3 or more employees P Office: Professional, administrative P
Live/work unit P Services: General
Mixed use project residential component P Financial Services P
Dwelling: Multi-Family-Duplex P Bed & Breakfast
Ancillary Building P 4 guest rooms or less P
Residential Care, 7 or more clients UP Greater than 4 guest rooms MUP
Residential Care, 6 or fewer clients MUP Day care center: Child or adult MUP
Day care center: Large family UP
Day care center: Small family P
Lodging MUP
Personal services P
Transportation, Communications, Infrastructure
P Permitted Use Wireless telecommunications facility MUP
MUP Minor Use Permit Required -staffreview only
UP Use Permit Required
NA Not an allowed use
End Notes
1 A definition of each listed use type is in the Glossary.
Downtown Mixed Use Master Plan
Opticos Design, Inc.
4-24
Packet Page 358 of 374
Chapter 4: Form-Based Code
Additional Standards for all FBe Zones
Zone Max %
Off-Street Space 9'x18' min. Town Core 75
Compact Space 8'x16' min.· 60
Standard Vehicle Space Requirements 60
See Table 4.6 Neighborhood General-Open 60
Notes Neighborhood General 50
Wider parking drives may be required to accommodate emer
gencyaccess.
Off-street do not have to be covered. apply to the Form-Based Code Zones.
Tandem parking is allowed for off-street parking as long as
both are behind the front fa\!ade
Shared drives are encou raged between adjacent lots to Story poles shall be placed in a manner that accurately depicts
minimize curb cuts along the street. proposed structure location, mass, bulk, and height prior to
All parking areas shall be screened by a 3'6" min. height action on any project application.
hedge, wall orfence. Green Building Incentives
----------~~-----------------------------
Malibu Drives with central Projects shall receive priority for processing and review that
Ifrequired minimum space total is not a whole number, it must include green building techniques in compliance with the U.S.
be rounded up to the nearest whole number. Green Building Council LEED rating system or similar
Drives are not allowed off of streets on lots along alleys. certification standards.
No additional private or public open space requirements shall
" !Ii· "
Table 4.6: Standard Vehicle Space Requirements
Width Aisle Width
Parallel 9' 9' 20' 12' 24'
30' * 9' 18' 20' 12' N/A
45" • 9' 20'6" 20' 14' N/A
60" • 9' 22' 20' 18' N/A
Perpendicular 9' 18' 18' 24' 24'
*Measured perpendicular to aisle
Table 4.7: Compact Vehicle Space Requirements
Angle Space Width Space Depth" Space Length One-way Aisle Width 1\vo-way Aisle Width
Parallel 8' 8' 18' 12' 24'
30' * 8' 15'6" 16' 12' N/A
45' " 8' 17' 16' 14' N/A
60' • 8' 18' 16' 18' N/A
8' 16' 16' 24' 24'
*Measured perpendicular to aisle
Downtown Mixed Use Master Plan
Opticos Design, Inc.
4-25
Packet Page 359 of 374
Chapter 4: Form·Based Code
Frontage Types
<i9mmon Lawm The main fa'1ade ofthe building has a large setback from the frontage line. The
r~sulting front yard can be defined or undefined at the frontage line. This edge is typically defined
by a fence or hedge within a traditional neighborhood or left undefined within more rural areas or
subdivisions. Large common lawns are t:ypical for larger homes within historic neighborhoods. A
front porch is optional, but if it is used, it can be one or two story.
P9fCh: The main fa~ade ofthe building has a small setback from the frontage line. The resulting
ff~llt yard is typically very small and can be defined by a fence or hedge. The porch can encroach
into the setback to the point that the porch extends to the frontage line. The porch can be one or
two stories. A minimum depth of 6' clear is required within the development standards to ensure
usability.
On downslope lots the setback is typically minimized to improve the development feasibility of
the lot. On upslope lots it is maximized to reduce visual impact of the building on the streetscape.
Forecourt: The main f8.'1ade ofthe building is at or near the frontage line and a small percentage
of it is setback, creating a small court space. The space could be used as an entry court or shared
garden space for apartment buildings, or as an additional shopping or restaurant seating area
within commercial zones. The proportions and orientation ofthese spaces should be carefully
considered for sola.r orientation and user comfort. This frontage type should be used sparingly
and should not be repeated within a block. A short wall, hedge, or fence should be placed along the
und.efined edge.
Stoop: The main fat;:ade ofthe building is near the frontage line and the elevated stoop engages
the sidewalk. The stoop should be elevated a minimum of 24 inc-hes above the sidewalk to ensure
ptivacywithin the building. The stairs from the stoop may lead directly to the sidewalk or may be
side loaded. The minimum width and depth ofthe stoop should be 5 feet. This type is appropriate
for residential uses with small setbacks.
Awning: The main fa,.ade ofthe building is at or near the frontage line and the canopy or awning
element may overlap the sidewalk. The canopy is a structural, cantilevered, shed roof and the
awning is canvas or similar material and is often retractable. The coverings should extend far
enough from the building to provide adequate protection for pedestrians. This type is appropriate
for retail and commercial uses only because of the lack of a raised ground story.
Gallery: The main fa,.ade ofthe building is at the frontage line and the gallery elemeut overlaps
the sidewalk. The entry should be at the same grade as the side~a1k. This type can be one or two
stories and is intended for retail uses. The gallery should extend ~IQse enough to the curb so that a
pedestrian cannot bypass it. Due to the overlap ofthe right-of-way. an easement is usually re
quired. A minimum depth is required within the development standards to ensure usability. This
type is appropriate for ground floor commercial uses.
Downtown Mixed Use Master Plan
Opticos Design, Inc.
4-26
Packet Page 360 of 374
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 25, 2009
Page 10
site-by-site review, preferring the Planning Board conduct their review before adopting a moratorium.
She pointed out the top priority of the group that prevailed in the appeal, Citizens Alliance for Property
Rights, was saving taxpayers money and not the environment.
Al Rutledge, Edmonds, described the fire on the island in Lake Ballinger and the fire department’s
response. He commented on ash from the fire on several homes, noting most homes on the lake have
pumps that draw water from the lake.
George Murray, Edmonds, complimented the presentation on Yost Pool, noting it was good to see
people unite regarding an issue that was so important to the community. He expressed support for an
indoor pool with a zero entry. He noted there may be funds available from health organizations that
underwrite pool programs. Next, he referred to a presentation he attended regarding the $1.3 million
library levy on the November ballot. The library plans to reduce senior administrative staff salaries by
3% in 2010, freeze staff salaries in 2010, delay replacement of the library’s computer system, reduce
replacement of manuals and materials, not fill open positions, and all non-library programs are being
eliminated. He noted the presentation was well received because the library system was sharing the
burden.
Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, referred to the evaluation of the former Woodway High School in the
Aquatic Feasibility Study. He suggested the City and School District administration reach an agreement
to allow a pool on that site. He also supported an outdoor pool at Yost Park, recalling the study cited the
popularity of the natural setting of the outdoor Yost Pool.
Councilmember Plunkett referred to Mr. Van Hollebeke’s comment regarding including maintenance and
operating costs in a pool bond and requested the consultants add a note to their report regarding the
possibility of financing M&O. Parks & Recreation Director Brian McIntosh responded there would need
to be two separate bond measures, contingent on the passage of each other, one asking for construction
funds and a second for M&O.
6. INITIAL DISCUSSION ON ISSUES RELATING TO ROOF DESIGN STANDARDS.
Planning Manager Rob Chave explained recent construction in a multi family zone raised a number of
questions about how roof standards have been applied in the RM zones. As a result Building Official
Ann Bullis and he reviewed 20+ years of history of multi family projects in RM zones in an effort to
determine how roof standards have been applied and how the rules have been interpreted. He displayed
an aerial photograph of a multi family building approved in 1989 that illustrates a roof that dips into the
center portion of the building. In the center portion there are drainage features, flat roof sections, etc. that
is below the highest portion of the roof but not necessarily below 25 feet.
He displayed photographs of buildings constructed in the last 1990s that illustrate a pitch at the edge of
the building and then the roof dips down, often into a series of peaks and valleys. This presents a
challenge for getting rid of the water that collects in the valleys, necessitating the use of “cricket”
features. Crickets are placed on top of the roof where there is a valley to collect and direct water toward a
drain. The crickets are not typically 4-in-12, but as low a pitch as possible to still collect and move the
water, often ¼-in-12. He noted the crickets were not technically part of the roof structure. He displayed
several photographs of buildings with roofs that have peaks and valleys, many with cricket systems to
collect and redirect water toward drains. When reviewing plans, crickets were sometimes shown on the
plans and sometimes they were not.
History reveals it is impractical to expect a roof on a large RM building to span its entire roof area with a
uniformly pitched roof, complicated roof systems have been developed including internal wells and
Packet Page 361 of 374
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 25, 2009
Page 11
valleys; crickets have been used to solve drainage problems arising from complicated roof designs. The
Zoning Code states the following:
ECDC 16.30.030(A): Roof only may extend five feet above the stated height limit if all portions
of the roof above the stated height limit have a slope of 4 inches in 12 inches or greater.
ECDC 21.85.070 Roof: Roof means the top covering of a building or structure
The Zoning Code does not define a cricket and it appears they have been allowed for the past 20+ years.
Another factor to consider is roofs must achieve a certain structural integrity and achieve their purpose -
protect the structure and provide adequate drainage. He cautioned the City should not mandate designs
through zoning that are impractical to build, create structural or maintenance issues or add unnecessarily
to the cost. Questions that arise from the current code include:
Dictionary definition of roof includes dormers, gables as part of the roof
Where does a roof start?
Pitch is specified in the code but roof form is not
Roofs have many forms and features - peak of the roof where planes meet
Non-structural drainage features such as crickets
He suggested the City needed to get away from code provisions that did not achieve what the Council
wanted to accomplish. He commented design features include appearance from the street; light, air, mass;
materials; and interest and scale. With regard to what is good design and how it can be legislated, he
suggested different standards be developed for different RM zones such as on Highway 99 and corridors,
downtown and neighborhood centers as well as giving consideration to visual preferences. As an
example he displayed an aerial photograph of two RM buildings with similar peak and valley roof
systems and the same buildings as viewed from the street, one with few architectural details, the other
with a great deal of architectural detail.. He concluded roof systems and design do not equate in the
current code.
Mr. Chave recalled the Comprehensive Plan was developed in the 1990s, citizens were asked to rate a
series of building photographs. He displayed photographs of a 3 story multi family building and a 1½
story multi family building that residents rated positively and the same. He displayed photographs of a
single family home, multi family building and a mixed use residential/commercial building that residents
rated the same as the two multi family buildings. He summarized in many cases, use and scale were not
the most important factor; people react primarily to design.
Going forward he suggested the City focus on what they wanted the code to do and the rules should
consider and be consistent between zoning requirements (height, bulk and scale), design (appearance),
and building code (structure, maintenance). Currently these factors are not in synch. Another issue is
single family in RM zones; in the BC zone single family structures are allowed but only to a height of 25
feet. In the RM zones, single family structures may be the same height as multi family structures and
only single family setbacks are required which are typically smaller.
Council President Wilson commented the purpose of this item tonight was to bring the Council up to
speed with conversations staff has been having with Councilmember Bernheim regarding the building at
523 Alder. The September 22 agenda will include further discussion on the issues Mr. Chave identified.
Councilmember Plunkett asked whether any changes would need to be reviewed by the Planning Board.
Mr. Chave agreed they would. Councilmember Plunkett commented staff has accepted the cricket
systems because they do not impact the streetscape. Mr. Chave agreed. He commented when Ms. Bullis
and he reviewed the building plans, sometimes crickets were shown, sometimes they were not and often
Packet Page 362 of 374
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 25, 2009
Page 12
they were very difficult to discern in the plans. Typically the focus of staff and the ADB is on appearance
and overall elevation and often the crickets were overlooked.
Councilmember Bernheim asked whether literal enforcement of the slope requirement was impractical in
every case. Mr. Chave answered the interaction of the building code, slope requirement and zoning led to
impractical solutions and maintenance issues waiting to happen.
Councilmember Bernheim referred to the photographs Mr. Chave displayed of buildings constructed as
early as 1988, pointing out the current code was adopted by Ordinance 3627 in 2007. He asked whether
the site development standard of 4-in-12 were in existence when the buildings Mr. Chave displayed were
constructed. Mr. Chave answered that provision in the RM zone has not changed since 1981.
Councilmember Bernheim suggested if the literal wording of the law is disregarded, and the roof design
of the building does not comply with the 4-in-12, then the developer is being allowed to construct a larger
building than otherwise would be allowed. He commented the mass was as importance as the design.
Mr. Chave responded mass and roof design are entirely different.
Councilmember Bernheim asked if any buildings were built during this period that complied with the
spirit of the 25+5 height limit. Mr. Chave answered some buildings clearly had simpler 4-in-12 roof
designs.
Councilmember Bernheim pointed out “structure” was not referenced in the code, only that all portions of
the roof above the stated height limit have a slope of 4-in-12 or greater. With regard to different
standards in different neighborhoods, he noted the RM and BD zones required all portions of the roof
above 25 feet to be a certain manner and the BD5 zone required all parts of the building above 25 to be a
certain manner. Mr. Chave clarified his intent was RM zones in different areas of the City.
Councilmember Bernheim noted there were at least four variations of the roof requirement above 25 feet.
City Attorney Bio Park reported the City Attorney’s office was asked to work with staff to develop a
correct interpretation of the code. Therefore they looked at the plain language and asked staff what roof
structure could be built applying the plain language of the code. Their response was it was impractical
but it would not result in an absurd situation. They may be strange looking and not very efficient, but the
plain meaning of the code could be interpreted to build a functioning roof. The City’s experience in
interpreting the code, given that the definition of roofs does not include crickets and given that the
definition of heights includes several exceptions to what can exceed the building height such as chimneys,
vents and elevator penthouses, the fact that crickets were specifically excluded was an indication that the
Council intended to exclude crickets.
Councilmember Plunkett recalled when Mr. Chave referred to the plain meaning of the code, he
mentioned impractical; Mr. Park said it the result would be strange. He asked for examples of building
design that applied the plain meaning of the code. Mr. Chave answered they would be similar to existing
buildings; the difference would be crickets may disappear. One solution would be to construct a roof
such that the interior structure sloped. This would result in additional expense as each truss would need
to be individually designed versus a set of uniform trusses.
Councilmember Plunkett commented a significant increase in cost would be absorbed by the purchasers
rather than the builder and could result in an increase in the cost of housing in the community. Mr. Chave
answered it could, which was the importance of a design discussion and not considering one aspect in
isolation. Once the Council determined what they wanted to achieve, the rules to achieve that could be
developed. The problem now is the disconnect between the zoning code and the building code.
Packet Page 363 of 374
AM-2591 8.
Initial Discussion of Campaign Finance Limits
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:11/17/2009
Submitted By:Jana Spellman
Submitted For:Councilmember Bernheim Time:30 Minutes
Department:City Council Type:Information
Review Committee:
Committee Action:
Information
Subject Title
Initial discussion of campaign finance limits.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
Previous Council Action
Narrative
Councilmember Bernheim asked that this item be placed on the agenda for Council initial
discussion.
Exhibit 1: Memo from Councilmember Bernheim to Council re Campaign Contribution Limits
Exhibit 2: Proposed Ordinance Related to Campaign Contribution Limits
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: Exh 1 Bernheim Memo Campaign Contributions
Link: Exh 2 Proposed Ord re Campaign Contribution Limits
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 11/12/2009 08:48 AM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 11/12/2009 04:48 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 11/12/2009 04:56 PM APRV
Form Started By: Jana
Spellman
Started On: 11/05/2009 01:33
PM
Final Approval Date: 11/12/2009
Packet Page 364 of 374
Packet Page 365 of 374
Packet Page 366 of 374
Packet Page 367 of 374
AM-2613 9.
Report on Council Committee Meetings
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:11/17/2009
Submitted By:Sandy Chase Time:15 Minutes
Department:City Clerk's Office Type:Information
Review Committee:
Committee Action:
Information
Subject Title
Report on City Council Committee Meetings of November 10, 2009.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
N/A
Previous Council Action
N/A
Narrative
Attached are copies of the following committee meeting minutes:
•11-10-09 Community Services/Development Services Committee
•11-10-09 Finance Committee
•11-10-09 Public Safety Committee
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: 11-20-09 CSDS Committee
Link: 11-10-09 Finance Committee Minutes
Link: 11-10-09 Public Safety Committee Minutes
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 11/12/2009 04:46 PM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 11/12/2009 04:48 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 11/12/2009 04:57 PM APRV
Form Started By: Sandy
Chase
Started On: 11/12/2009 03:17
PM
Final Approval Date: 11/12/2009
Packet Page 368 of 374
M I N U T E S
Community Services/Development Services Committee Meeting
November 10, 2009
Elected Officials Present: Staff Present:
Dave Orvis, Chair Rob English, City Engineer
Rob Chave, Planning Manager
The committee convened at 6:00 p.m.
A. Olympic View Drive sewer connection fee ordinance.
Staff presented an update on the construction of sewer improvements for 13 properties as part of
the Olympic View Drive (OVD) improvement project. The City of Lynnwood is nearing completion on
their OVD Phase 2 improvements between 76th Ave W to 178th Pl SW. The Phase 1 OVD
improvements from 178th Pl SW to 168th St. SW were completed in 2009. City Engineer, Rob
English, explained that there were two groups of property owners, Category A has six property
owners and Category B has seven property owners.
The Phase 2 OVD improvements installed new sewer laterals for Category A properties from the
City of Lynnwood sewer main to the edge of the OVD right of way Category A property owners can
now connect to the public sewer system by installing a side sewer on their property from their home
to the new sewer lateral constructed by the City. In accordance with ECDC 18.10.010, the proposed
Ordinance requires that the connection be made within 60 days of the completion of the OVD phase
2 project. The phase 2 project is expected to be completed in the first quarter of 2010.
The Category B properties have a different situation than Category A properties. These properties
are all located abutting Olympic View Drive north of 180th Street SW. There is no sewer line (either
Edmonds or Lynnwood) along Olympic View Drive abutting these properties. For these properties, a
manhole and stub pipe was constructed to facilitate a future sewer collector that would serve these
properties.
Therefore, the Category B properties north of 180th Street SW will not be required to connect to the
sewer system within 60 days per ECDC 18.10.010. The special connection fee will be deferred until
the future sewer collector (or a portion thereof) is built to allow connection to the sewer system.
Connection could occur at the time their septic system fails, they develop their property or they
choose to connect for some other reason. The special connection fee paid by the property owners
will be increased for inflation at the time of connection.
Mr. English reviewed the previous Council direction in 2004 on this project and also discussed what
the estimated special connection fee would be for Category A and B properties. The next steps for
moving the ordinance forward is to finalize the special connection fees for all 13 properties, notify
them of the fees and hold a public hearing when the full Council reviews the Ordinance to implement
the special connection fees.
ACTION: Hold a public hearing and present the proposed Ordinance to the full Council for
discussion and consideration.
Packet Page 369 of 374
CS/DS Committee Minutes
November 10, 2009
Page 2
2
B. Regulations concerning bikini barista stands.
Councilmember Orvis noted the ordinance the City of Everett had recently passed addressing this
issue, and wondered whether Edmonds’ codes cover this same subject, or whether any updates
should be considered. Rob Chave said the ordinance had been forwarded to the City Attorney’s
office and they should be able to provide a review and any recommendations for consideration at
next month’s Committee meeting.
ACTION: Continue discussion at the December Committee meeting in order to obtain input from the
City Attorney.
The Committee meeting adjourned at 6:15 p.m.
Packet Page 370 of 374
FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES
November 10, 2009
6:00 PM
C:\DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\CHASE\LOCAL SETTINGS\TEMPORARY INTERNET FILES\OLK313\11-10-09 MINUTES.DOC
Present: Councilmember Wambolt
Councilmember Plunkett
Staff: Lorenzo Hines Jr., Finance Director
Noel Miller, Director, Public Works Department
Public: Roger Hertrich
Councilmember Wambolt called the meeting to order at 6:04 PM.
Item A: Report on Water Supply Contract with Alderwood
Noel Miller, Director, Public Works Department briefed the committee on the contract.
Committee members requested an additional briefing during the January 2010 Finance
Committee meeting. No Council action requested at this time.
Item B: Final 2009 Budget Amendment
Lorenzo Hines provided an overview of the proposed budget amendment, and answered
questions on same. Committee members forwarded this item to the full Council for
approval on the Consent Agenda for the 11/17/2009 Agenda.
Item C: General Fund Report for the months of October 31, 2009
Lorenzo Hines reviewed the revenue and expenditure trends of the General Fund for
month of October 2009, as well as responded to questions on same. For information
only, no further action required.
Item D: Mid-Biennial Budget Amendment for 2010
Lorenzo Hines provided an overview of the proposed budget amendment, and answered
questions on same. Committee members forwarded this item to the full Council for
approval on the Consent Agenda for the 11/17/2009 Agenda.
Item E: Resolution Finding of Substantial Need; Property Tax Ordinance
Lorenzo Hines provided an overview of the resolution and the property tax ordinance,
and answered questions on same. Committee members forwarded this item to the full
Council for approval on the Consent Agenda for the 11/17/2009 Agenda.
Adjournment - The meeting was adjourned at 6:40 PM.
Packet Page 371 of 374
Public Safety Committee Meeting
November 10, 2009
Page 1 of 3
Minutes
Public Safety Committee Meeting
November 10, 2009
Committee Members Present: Council Member Steve Bernheim, Acting Chair
Other Council Members Present: Council Member David Orvis
Staff Present: Fire Chief Thomas J. Tomberg
Assistant Police Chief Gerry Gannon
The meeting was called to order by Council Member Bernheim at 6:01 p.m.
A. Contract for Jail Services with Snohomish County Sheriff’s Office
ACOP Gannon explained that the current contract for jail services with Snohomish
County will expire on December 31, 2009. He reviewed the major changes in the terms
of the contract, which include the following:
1. The County has eliminated different level of services so that all agencies
contracting with the County will have the same contract and level of service.
2. The term of the contract is for three years ending on December 31, 2012.
3. The 2010 rates are very close to the rates for 2009. The 2009 booking fee is
$92.76; for 2010 the fee will decrease to $90.00. The 2009 daily fee is $61.11,
and will increase to $62.50 in 2010. For 2011 and 2012 any rate increases will
be 90% of the June CPI-U for Seattle-Tacoma-Bremerton, with a maximum
increase of 3%.
ACOP Gannon asked that this agenda item be placed on the consent agenda.
B. Contract with S. Morris Company for Animal Disposal Services.
ACOP Gannon explained that the contract with the S. Morris Company for disposal of
deceased animals expires on December 31, 2009. The new contract has a three year
term. There is no cost increase for 2010 in the new contract. Any increases for 2011
and 2012 will be based on the June CPI-U for Seattle-Tacoma-Bremerton.
ACOP Gannon asked that this agenda item be placed on the consent agenda.
Action:Forward to City Council Consent Agenda with a recommendation to approve.
Action:Forward to City Council Consent Agenda with a recommendation to approve.
Packet Page 372 of 374
Public Safety Committee Meeting
November 10, 2009
Page 2 of 3
C. Renewing the Towing Contract with Paulson’s Towing, R&R Towing,
Shannon Towing and Wally’s Towing.
ACOP Gannon presented the addendum to the contracts for towing services provided by
Shannon Towing, R&R Star Towing, Paulson’s Towing, and Wally’s Towing. The major
change in the contract between the City of Edmonds and all towing companies is that
the new addendum establishes new rates for towing services, based on the rates
established by Washington State Patrol. The addendum has an ending date of October
11, 2011.
Mr. Bernheim asked if the police department made arrangements for the towing
companies to respond to incidents when needed. ACOP Gannon explained that all calls
for towing services go through our dispatch center, SNOCOM. He further explained that
the tow companies are on a rotation list that SNOCOM uses to ensure that one company
does not have preference over other companies.
ACOP Gannon asked that this agenda item be placed on the consent agenda.
D. Repeal Ordinance 3706 and Code Chapter 5.65, EMS Transport Charges.
Fire staff reviewed the information contained in Public Safety Committee Agenda Memo
AM-2583. On November 2, 2009, the Council approved the interlocal agreement for the
provision of Fire and EMS services between the City and Snohomish County Fire District
No. 1, effective January 1, 2010.
Section 4.8 of the agreement, EMS Transport Fees, transfers the provision of EMS
services from the City to the Fire District. As the EMS provider effective January 1, 2010,
the District provides all EMS services, collects EMS transport fees, and remits all monies
back to the City on a quarterly basis less the actual cost of collection.
The November 2, 2009 approval by the Council of the interlocal agreement rendered
Ordinance No. 3706 and Code Chapter 5.65 superfluous. Thus the proposed ordinance
prepared by the City Attorney repeals both.
In response to a question, staff explained that Ordinance No. 3706 described how EMS
services in the City were provided, but that with November 2 approval of the interlocal
between the City and Fire District #1, the contract, specifically Section 4.8, now
describes how EMS services will be delivered in the City, effective January 1, 2010.
Action: Forward to City Council Consent Agenda with a recommendation to approve.
E. Ordinance Modifying Certain Fire Provisions in the City Code
Fire staff reviewed the information contained in Public Safety Committee Agenda Memo
AM-2585. On November 2, 2009, the Council approved the interlocal agreement for the
Action:Forward to City Council Consent Agenda with a recommendation to approve.
Packet Page 373 of 374
Public Safety Committee Meeting
November 10, 2009
Page 3 of 3
provision of Fire and EMS services between the City and Snohomish County Fire District
No. 1, effective January 1, 2010.
The November 2, 2009 Council approval of the Fire and EMS interlocal agreement
between the City and Fire District No. 1 requires the following City Code modifications:
1. Repeal Chapter 2.10.040 - Fire Chief;
2. Add New Chapter 2.12 - Relating to the duties of the Fire Chief, Fire Marshal and
other references to the Fire Department throughout the Code;
3. Repeal Chapters 3.09 - Cumulative Reserve Fund for Apparatus and 3.15 - Fire
Donations Fund, and providing dispositions for the funds held.
The modifying ordinance was prepared by the City Attorney.
Action: Forward to City Council Consent Agenda with a recommendation to approve.
The meeting adjourned at 6:25 p.m.
Packet Page 374 of 374