Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-11-12 Council Special Minutes Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 12, 2024 Page 1 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING APPROVED MINUTES November 12, 2024 ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Mike Rosen, Mayor Vivian Olson, Council President Chris Eck, Councilmember Will Chen, Councilmember Michelle Dotsch, Councilmember Susan Paine, Councilmember Jenna Nand, Councilmember ELECTED OFFICIALS ABSENT Neil Tibbott, Councilmember STAFF PRESENT Phil Williams, Acting Public Works Director Todd Tatum, Comm., Culture & Econ. Dev. Dir. Rob English, City Engineer Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Sharon Cates, City Attorney’s Office Scott Passey, City Clerk Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator 1. CALL TO ORDER The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 5:30 pm by Mayor Rosen in the Council Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually. 2. COUNCIL BUSINESS 1. 2025 LODGING TAX BUDGET Community, Culture & Economic Development Director Todd Tatum reviewed: • 2025 Budget Highlights o Revenue o Fund 120 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 12, 2024 Page 2 o Fund 123 • Budget Cut Impacts o The replacement of General Fund with Lodging Tax for tourism promotion allows us to maintain our destination marketing efforts o If carried on to 2026, we’d have an ending fund balance of ~$6,000 o The LTAC must now allow for public comment o The LTAC has a 45 day window to respond to this change before Council may adopt the change  This window started on 10/09/24 and will end on 11/23/24 • 2026 o Lodging tax funds many grants per year. These run on an annual basis. We’ll come back in mid-2025 to amend the 2026 budget to reflect these grant awards and update revenues and expenditures. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 12, 2024 Page 3 Councilmember Paine asked the time of tomorrow’s LTAC meeting. Mr. Tatum advised 3 pm. Councilmember Paine thanked Mr. Tatum for providing minutes of their earlier meetings; it will be interesting to hear what commissioners say about Mayor Rosen’s budget proposal. Mr. Tatum explained the RCW states the LTAC must have a period for comments and may provide comment to council about the use of the funds; it is up to the council to make a decision. Councilmember Paine commented there is normally about a $100,000-$115,000 balance. Under this proposal, LTAC would share some of the costs the City would normally absorb and bring their ending fund balance down to $6,000 in 2026. Mr. Tatum agreed if the additional $49,000 in spending occurred, the fund balance would be down to about $6,000 by the end of 2026. Councilmember Chen asked if action was expected tonight or should the council wait until after tomorrow’s LTAC meeting. Mr. Tatum said the LTAC has until November 23 to provide comment. The council is then free to vote on the budget incorporating their comments if the council wishes. Approval of the lodging tax proposal will not be presented to council again; it will be approved as part of the budget or amended per the council’s usual amendment procedure. There is a staff recommended change that the council will vote on. Council President Olson suggested the council be provided the LTAC comments in Received for Filing. Mr. Tatum said the council must be provided the LTAC’s comment. He will provide the LTAC’s comments before the council votes on the budget. 2. EDMONDS DOWNTOWN ALLIANCE 2025-2026 WORK PLAN AND BUDGET Sheila Cloney, Vice President, Edmonds Downtown Alliance (Ed!) reviewed: • Why Ed!? o A stable and predictable self-funding mechanism to support downtown-only marketing and programs o To create something bigger and better than any one of our businesses could accomplish on our own o Bring a new level of professionalism in our look and feel for promoting downtown o Focus on our downtown core • Approved Categories in BID Ordinance o Marketing & Hospitality o Safety & Cleanliness o Appearance & Environment o Transportation o Business Recruitment & Retention o Organization • Ed’s Mission Statement: Ed! is a focused, funded organization that supports and improves business conditions in Edmonds. Our goal is to ensure our downtown stays lively, attractive, prosperous and welcoming to everyone. • 2024-2025 Member Advisory Board (open door and by-appointment businesses) o Kimberly Koenig, President, Rogue o Sheila Cloney, Vice President, Anchor Chic o Olivia Brown-Latham, Secretary, Sugarology Edmonds o Lisa Epstein, Treasurer, Salish Insurance Group o Ricky Bobadilla, Santa Fe Mexican Grill & Cantina o Cheryl Farrish, Certa Farrish Law Group o Jen Cullin, The Paper Feather o Liz Morgan, FIELD by Morgan & Moss o Jen Lawson, crow Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 12, 2024 Page 4 o Beth Sanger, Ombu Salon + Spa o Carrie Hulbert, Program Manager • Professional Expertise o Volunteer advisory board of member business representatives have a wide range of expertise, offering their fresh ideas for free o Paid experts with extensive professional experience are utilized strategically o This combination of skills results in highly professional, targeted and nimble executions with a small budget Community, Culture & Economic Development Director Todd Tatum reviewed: • Going Forward o City Council asked that we provide a work plan that contemplates re-initialization and implementation of certain best practices not later than summer of 2025. We presented that work plan to Council in June 2024. o Our next steps are:  Conduct outreach to property and business owners  Create BIA options, such as adjustments to services, boundaries, budget, and organizational structure • ED! BID Review & Update Process Carrie Hulbert, Program Manager reviewed: • Appearance & Environmental Programs o Courtesy Umbrellas o After Hours Parking Signs  3 locations: - Sound Credit Union - WA Federal - US Bank  Adds 50 spots downtown o “Discover Downtown” Directional Flags • Communication & Outreach Programs o Member Outreach  Keep members up to date via Annual Meeting, Year in Review brochure, email newsletter, web page and new member information & visits o My Edmonds News Sponsored Content  Articles run as sponsored content six times per year for additional reach o Main Street Places Conference in Walla Walla  Three people attended to learn best practices, get inspired and network with other downtown organizations. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 12, 2024 Page 5 • Marketing Programs o Destination Marketing Strategy  Promote Edmonds as a local and day trip destination  Hyper-local focus (Edmonds +10 miles)  Utilize digital content, ads, and social to drive visits and keep Edmonds top of mind  Create cohesive campaigns to give people another reason to come downtown  A local writer and photographer work with the Program Manager to produce high-quality content o EdmondsDowntown.org  Member business directory  Feature articles  Business Spotlights  Parking info page  Edmonds info o Site Directory  Provide an additional digital presence for businesses  Category & business pages viewed 99,000 times past year o Web Feature Articles  Since 2018 Ed! has used compelling stories to promote downtown  Highlight Edmonds businesses, campaigns, events and the unique qualities of downtown  Viewed 29,000 times in last year  Drives most site traffic, which is +31% o Business Spotlights o Digital Advertising  Promote Spotlights, Features, campaigns, and services  Ads have been seen nearly 1.4M times past year  Strong average link clickthrough rate of 2.14% o Social Media  Instagram: 10,087 followers - 37% follower growth  Facebook: 3,351 followers - 65% follower growth o Edmonds Holidays Campaign  Holiday Trolley + Emily the Elf  Festive Drink Bingo  First Dibs  Window clings  Edmonds Holidays website  Posters & table tents  Social Media ads & features o Lovin’ Summer Edmonds Campaign  Window clings  Water bottle stickers  “Discover Downtown” flags  Posters & table tents  Ads and website features o Palentine’s Day Campaign  A night of shopping and dining specials to celebrate friendship  Ads and website feature  Posters  Window clings  Water bottle stickers Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 12, 2024 Page 6 o Edmonds Pride Campaign  Pride Stride  Edmonds Pride stickers  Ads and website feature Ms. Cloney reviewed: • Work Plan & Budget o 2025 Proposed Budget Administration $22,200 Marketing $45,545 Communication and Outreach $4,900 Appearance & Environment $11,800 TOTAL BUDGETED EXPENDITURES $84,445 TOTAL BUDGETED REVENUES $79,209 FUND BALANCE USED $5,236 o 2026 Proposed Budget Administration $22,200 Marketing $42,200 Communication and Outreach $4,200 Appearance & Environment $11,800 TOTAL BUDGETED EXPENDITURES $80,400 TOTAL BUDGETED REVENUES $79,209 FUND BALANCE USED $1,191 • 2013-2024 Budget Summary • Advisory Board Meetings o 2nd Thursday each month o Zoom and in person at City Hall Mayor Rosen asked if staff was seeking action from the council tonight. Mr. Tatum answered yes. COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NAND, TO APPROVE THE EDMONDS DOWNTOWN ALLIANCE BUDGET AND WORKPLAN FOR 2025 AND 2026. Councilmember Nand complimented the innovativeness of the Ed! Board in finding sponsors to maintain the trolley since the City no longer has ARPA funds. She recognized their economic resiliency and practices, commenting the City is trying to do the same. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 12, 2024 Page 7 Council President Olson wished Edmonds businesses a very strong retail season and encouraged everyone to shop local this year. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. 84TH AVE W WALKWAY (234TH ST SW – 238TH ST SW) PROJECT UPDATE City Engineer Rob English reviewed • Project Limits • Existing Conditions • Cross Sections o Developed to show council and select preferred design for 30% design o Difference between 1a and 1b Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 12, 2024 Page 8  1a builds this cross section from 238th to 234th  1b retains the existing 300’ feet of sidewalk north of 238th Street and continues sidewalk up to 234th o Difference between 2, 3a and 3b  No tree wells in Alternatives 3a and 3b  7’ asphalt sidewalk in Alternative 3a  7’ concrete sidewalk in Alternative 3b • Planning-Level Cost Estimates • 84th Ave Sidewalk o Planning Level Cost Estimates Include  Overlay of 84th Ave ($290k)  Sidewalk connection on west side of 84th Ave for CT bus stop  Required stormwater improvements  Right of way acquisition o Funding  Final design, right of way acquisition and construction do not have a secured funding source. o Existing Parking on 84th Ave  On-street parking on east side of 84th Ave north of 238th St o Future Development  Vacant lot at southeast corner of 84th Ave/236th St Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 12, 2024 Page 9 o Highway 99 Stage 3 Improvements  238th St. Improvements from Highway 99 to 84th Ave • Preliminary Conceptual Design o Sidewalk at the southwest corner of 236th & 84th, ramp and short section of sidewalk at the relocated bus stop o 234th St SW/84th, NE ramp removed from cost estimating, not required from ADA standpoint • Proposed right-of-way Acquisition o 234th Pl SW/84th Intersection • Public Works Committee Questions o Where are existing school bus stops on 84th within the project limits?  East side at 236th St  West side (mid-block 238th St – 236th St)  West side (mid-block 236th St – 234th St) o Requested a cost estimate for an asphalt sidewalk  Provided as option 3a o Requested cost estimate for a sidewalk without bike lanes  Options 2, 3a and 3b do not have bike lanes on west side of 84th Ave  84th Ave is on draft bicycle LOS network in the Transportation Plan Update. The 2015 Transportation Plan designated proposed bike lanes on 84th Ave. o Snohomish County’s long-term plans for 84th Ave Walkway Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 12, 2024 Page 10  84th Ave Improvements are not in the County’s 2023-2028 6-year Transportation Improvement Program  Urban design standards – sidewalk, planter strip and 5 ft. bike lanes • Next Steps o Select option for 30% preliminary design  Staff’s recommendation is Alternative 2 o Future Public Meeting o Pursue grants to fund project COUNCILMEMBER NAND MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ECK, TO AUTHORIZE STAFF TO PROCEED WITH OPTION 2 AND COMPLETE 30% DESIGN. Councilmember Nand commented even before Mr. English indicated that was staff’s recommendation, she found that option the most attractive, especially due to the landscaping element. That stretch of 84th is quite bare and sad; it will be nice to have trees there one day. Councilmember Paine expressed concern the proposal did not include ramps on the NE and SE corners for wheelchair users. She recalled when visiting the area a couple years ago when a development was proposed on the vacant corner lot, she and others saw a person using a motorized wheelchair in the street. She preferred Alternative 1b which would be compliant with the Transportation Plan with bike lanes on both sides of the street. This will be a Community Transit route and having bike lanes on both sides makes the most sense. She likes tree wells and anticipated future development will result in reduced opportunity for trees. She was interested in hearing more about how staff came up with Alternative 2. With regard to ADA curb ramps, Mr. English clarified there would be curb ramps from 238th Street south to 234th Street. ADA compliant curb ramps would be added at the SW corner of 236th as well as a short segment of sidewalk for the bus stop. The only corner he mentioned where the ramp was removed was the NE corner which could be added back in. Due to concern with the cost of project and since it does not tie into the sidewalk, staff felt it could be built at a later time. Councilmember Paine said she understood how that could be phased in, but with a known wheelchair user in that neighborhood using the street, it seems unfair to a person just trying to make their day easier. Mr. English advised it could be added back into either option. Regarding the bike lane, Mr. English explained Alternatives 1a and b have bike lanes on both sides; a bike lane could be added to Alternative 2 as well. The reason staff recommended Alternative 2 was it was lower cost and the tree wells seemed to be a better fit in this location. There are two zones in this location, south of 236th is commercial and north of 236th is residential. Tree wells still provide street trees but not a full planter strip that has to be maintained. Councilmember Paine relayed her strong preference for a design that included ADA ramps because there is a known wheelchair user in that area. She asked if the next milestone in design would be 60%. Mr. English answered the next milestone would be 30% design. Councilmember Eck shared concerns about the ADA ramp s. This is definitely an area targeted for growth, and while there is an already an individual using a wheelchair in the area, there likely will be others in the future. She asked about the use of asphalt instead of concrete and asked how often asphalt is used instead of concrete. Mr. English answered very rarely. There was a period of time before 2008 where some sidewalk projects were built with asphalt, but it is not as durable as concrete. It’s also possible to be more accurate with ADA grades using concrete. If a developer were to build on the SE corner of 236th & 84th , they would be required to build a concrete sidewalk which is what staff recommends. Councilmember Eck expressed support for a concrete sidewalk, noting if asphalt is not used elsewhere in the City, she did not understand why it would be considered in this area when the goal was to be equitable throughout the City. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 12, 2024 Page 11 Councilmember Chen said he had the same question; in comparing option 2 and 3a, it appears the difference is concrete versus asphalt. Mr. English agreed. Councilmember Chen relayed his observation that tree roots pushing up the concrete create hazards. Mr. English responded tree wells need to be installed correctly and include proper root barriers and the appropriate tree species selected to prevent uplift from roots. He suggested concrete is more durable in preventing that uplift, but it will eventually happen with the wrong species. Asphalt doesn’t have the same strength as concrete, but either will fail if the wrong tree is selected and the roots grow out and up. Councilmember Dotsch referred to an email saying this was the fourth design in the last 15 years for this stretch and there is now a new mixed-use neighborhood street crossing included in the Reimagining Neighborhoods and Streets Creating Community Spaces Together, Edmonds Streets and Public Space Typologies document She asked if that document was still out there. Mr. English answered it is, recalling he referred Councilmember Dotsch to the planning director. Planning staff is focused on completing the comprehensive plan so there hasn’t been an opportunity to determine that direction and it is in a holding pattern right now. These options went away from that document; what is presented tonight would be consistent with what has been done in the past. He was unsure about the other design options that have been presented; the 2015 Transportation Plan may have called for a 5’ sidewalk. He has been with the City since 2008, and this level of design has not been done since then. Councilmember Dotsch commented this is four blocks; no matter if someone is in a wheelchair, on bike, or walking on the sidewalk, they end up back on the street or an unpaved side. Snohomish County is doing some work in Lynnwood in unincorporated areas, but nothing is planned on 84th for quite some t ime. She asked about the project near the church. Mr. English recalled there were some preliminary meetings regarding the vacant lot a few years ago, but there is no active permit. He recalled the proposed development, which he was unsure was still active, was on the n orth side of 236th but further east and may not have affected the NE corner of 236th & 84th. Councilmember Dotsch noted there is a person in Maplewood with a disability who walks down the middle of the street so it is not just in this area. She reiterated her concern with bikes ending back in the traffic after 4 blocks, noting she is not a fan of uber short sections. She was curious about efforts to improve a 4-block sidewalk leading into Snohomish County. She also wondered if the street trees could hinder future development so she was inclined to support the less expensive option 3b. Council President Olson asked about the center turn lane intended for that stretch of 84th and whether the configuration of the sidewalk would be altered once the center lane is installed. Mr. English advised the proposed cross sections do not have a center turn lane, there was only a lane in each direction. Council President Olson relayed her understanding it was not the intent of the Transportation Plan to include a center turn lane in that location. Mr. English agreed, explaining there are different cross sections for minor arterials; a 2-way left turn lane may have been mentioned in the project description in the 2015 Transportation Plan. However, when this process began and consideration was given to what cross section makes the most sense given the average daily trips of about 5,300, it was felt adding a 2-way left turn lane wasn’t the right choice because it widens the road, creating more impervious area. Cars tend to go faster on a wider street so a narrower street helps calm traffic. Council President Olson offered kudos to the committee and staff for working so well on this project. What was proposed previously prompted a lot of questions from committee and this ended up in a better place big picture when balancing the realities of getting a project done versus having the idealized project. She summarized option 2 is a good compromise, having the street trees and hopeful staying in a price range where the City can contribute something eventually or obtain a grant to cover the cost. One of the reasons this section was prioritized was school bus stops and kids walking to school from future multifamily in the area as well as from the neighborhood. It is worth prioritizing this project and possibly the neighborhood can petition Snohomish County to include the other stretch in their 2027-2028 budget. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 12, 2024 Page 12 MOTION CARRIED (5-1), COUNCILMEMBER DOTSCH VOTING NO. 4. DISCUSSION OF ECOREMEDY, LLC EXTENDED OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE CONTRACT Mayor Rosen advised this agenda item is for discussion; if council wishes to take action, the regular meeting agenda will need to be amended. Acting Public Works Director Phil Williams circulated among councilmembers two products that are the two ends of the spectrum that the gasifier can produce, 1) a carbon rich residue that Ecoremedy has branded as Flex-char, and 2) if the belt in the gasifier is slowed down and it spends more time in the furnace, all the carbon is removed to create an inert, sand-like material, some of which is also in the carbon rich product. Flex-char is about 40% carbon by weight and by varying the speed of the belt, can be between 0 and 40%, depending on the market for the material. There are many markets for the sand-like material. The City doesn’t have anyone under contract to take either product yet, but the City and Ecoremedy has looked around and there are some good possibilities close by. Mr. Williams provided history regarding the project, explaining the project came about with the replacement of a 35-year old incinerator that was not only unreliable but also not great environmentally and regulations were making it difficult to keep it operating. There were a number of technologies considered to replace the incinerator, it was decided that gasification was the way to go and Ecoremedy offered the best project at the lowest price and the City entered into a design-build contract with Ecoremedy. The City does not have a direct contract with either Ecoremedy or Ameresco; Ameresco has a contract with the State Department of Enterprise Systems. It is a complicated contract, but that is the way the design-build contract is structured. The design-build contract has not been completed; the wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) has been running well for the last couple weeks. Next week will be the third week and likely when the official commissioning test occurs, running 5 straight days 24/day. At the end of that test, there will be another weeklong test for a total of four weeks of continuous operation which will complete the commissioning phase. The intent is to then move into the operations and maintenance (O&M) phase which this contract would facilitate. Mr. Williams continued the basic terms in the contract have not changed since it was reviewed by committee; the contract is proposed to be six months long and begin upon the completion of commissioning, estimated to be the end of November. Under the contract, Ecoremedy would initially provide 4-5 operators to run the plant and train the City’s WWTP staff. The number of Ecoremedy operators would drop to about three halfway through the contract and at that point City staff would be doing most operational adjustments on the plant, observed by Ecoremedy. Right now, City staff is observing Ecoremedy, taking videos of what they do and creating training vignettes for future review. City staff is also receiving classroom instruction from Ecoremedy. There is one month of intensive training included in the existing design-build contract and the contract promised a year of technical consulting support once commissioning ends plus a 6-month visit to review plant operations and another visit at the end of one year. Ecoremedy will already be here at the end of six months and technical support will be provided all the way through this process and Ecoremedy will be back at the end of a year, roughly this time next year, to complete the obligations under the design- build contract and City staff will be running the plant at that point. Mr. Williams continued, the price for O&M contract is fixed at $149,000/month or a total of $894,000. He displayed and reviewed a breakdown of the cost: Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 12, 2024 Page 13 Mr. Williams explained the above original proposed cost shown above was reduced via negotiations to $149,000/month. COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PAINE, TO EXTEND TO 7:00. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Nate Gockel, Ecoremedy, and Sharon Cates, City Attorney’s Office were present to answer questions. Councilmember Chen recalled the original design-build contract included training; he asked if that training was not sufficient. Mr. Williams said signing the design-build contract basically sets the fee and the scope. When the design-build contract was executed 3-4 years ago, the amount of training necessary to feel comfortable with this technology was unknown. That contract included a month of training and it was anticipated if more training was needed, there would be time to add it and potentially there wouldn’t be a need for more training and the cost could be lower. Had additional training been included in the design- build contract, the training cost would have been marked up 16.4% by Ameresco. This contract is between the City and Ecoremedy. To get to $149,000/month, there were conversations about benefits the City and Ecoremedy gets from the contract. The City gets the additional training which provides time for staff to absorb Ecoremedy’s knowledge and make staff more comfortable with taking over operations. Ecoremedy gets to keep their staff employed and gets to bring other clients to this facility since it is the only one currently operating in the U.S. on municipal biosolids. The contract also includes a “version 1.0 discount” that it was felt Edmonds should get as the first customer. The City is happy to be the first, but there are certain inherent risks with being the first and the City felt it should be rewarded for that. Those things allowed the City to negotiate a lower cost. Councilmember Chen commented when the original contract was signed, Edmonds as the customer didn’t have expertise compared to the contractor who designed and built the system. He asked if the one month of training was recommended or determined by the City. Mr. Williams responded he was certain it was recommended by somebody, but none of the people involved had operated a plant like this for very long. Ecoremedy had a pilot plant at their Morrisville, Pennsylvania, location. It is a standalone system not even hooked up to a WWTP. They haul in biosolids with a truck, load them into a hopper with a frontend loader, process them and then shut down the system. That provides good information, but it is not quite the same as having it in a much smaller footprint and on two floors like Edmonds’s facility and figuring out how it Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 12, 2024 Page 14 will work, developing the manuals, etc. It was anticipated more than a month of training would be needed, but the City didn’t want to pay more for it up front. The thought was to get the month of training and decide how much more was needed which is the reason for this 6-month O&M contract. Councilmember Chen asked what Mr. Williams foresees after six months. Mr. Williams anticipated WWTP staff would be fully competent at operating this system just like the rest of the WWTP and would have the manuals and experience to do it. There is certainly the intellectual curiosity and motivation to get really good at operating this equipment over the next six months. There is a lot of complicated equipment at the WWTP, but this is new. City staff operated the incinerator for 35 years which wasn’t exactly easy, especially the last 10 years. He wanted to ensure WWTP staff was ready to take over operations. Councilmember Dotsch recalled touring the plant, noting the importance of training during the winter months due to water events. She was hopeful worse case scenarios could be figured out during the winter months. She thanked Mr. Williams for his clear explanations. Mr. Williams explained wastewater flows coming into the plant vary a great deal; in the wintertime there is a lot more water, there are much flashier flows, changing in just minutes with downpours. He has seen the flow go from 4M gallons/day to 52M gallons/day in the space of 30 minutes. That was a very extreme event and generally does not happen in the summer. How biosolids are be affected is known, but it isn’t known how those different quality biosolids will be processed by the gasifier. The next six months will include a winter, likely with a lot of rain events, that will sharpen staff’s understanding of how to adjust the gasifier. That wouldn’t be provided in this first month of training and is an important aspect of the training. Councilmember Nand extended her compliments to Ms. Cates and Mr. Gockel and the negotiating team for finding a way to have direct privity with Ecoremedy and to find savings. She has always thought Edmonds deserved a discount/credit for basically beta testing their system. She hoped someday there would be a commercial operation for the biochar and sand so the City could recover some of its expenses. Mr. Williams also thanked Ms. Cates and Mr. Gockel; noting Ms. Cates was the legal adviser especially on the first parts of the contract that were not the detailed scope of work or finances, but legalese, liability for events, etc. He, Ms. Cates, and Treatment Plant Manager Ross Hahn spent a lot of time negotiating with Ecoremedy staff on legal issues. Council President Olson asked about the decision to go with a lump sum versus pricing out the labor and a not to exceed for travel expenses. She relayed some residents thought there should be more detail about the expenditures. Ms. Cates understood that was negotiated but she wasn’t involved with that. Mr. Gockel explained lump sum commits to a cost and the cost cannot go above that to the extent Ecoremedy needed more operators during the six months. Time and materials based on actual cost has higher exposure risk in the long run because if Ecoremedy ends up needing 10 operators, the cost would be much greater than $150,000/month. It was felt a lump sum was appropriate for this contract and duration. Council President Olson asked the timeframe for approval, recalling there were some comments about amending the wording that council may not have had time to process. She asked if the contract could be considered and brought back on Consent with information in the narrative about what was/was not incorporated/changed in the contract. Mr. Williams answered that could be done. The facility should be through commissioning by the end of the month all things being equal. The i ntent was to go directly from the design-build contract into the O&M contract. Ecoremedy is already here and likely could absorb a few days. Council President Olson asked if having it on Consent next week would alter that schedule. Mr. Williams said he hasn’t asked Ecoremedy that question, but could do that. Council President Olson said her concern was the wording on extended training in Section A, “…rather is to provide extended training services.” She proposed alternate wording to make that more clear, “…to extend the period during which those training requirements are being delivered.” Mr. Williams suggested council make a motion to amend the contract Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 12, 2024 Page 15 and if it is approved, he will present it to Ecoremedy. Council President Olson suggested Mr. Williams consider the wording, which she emailed, between now and when the contract is to considered during the regular meeting. Mr. Williams said he had no objection to the wording but will try to find out if Ecoremedy had any objection. Councilmember Chen commented since this is the first project in nation, the City as the user of the technology, is providing a training ground for Ecoremedy and there should be some cost sharing. Mr. Williams agreed there is significant benefit for both parties. That was one of the reasons the City was able to bring the price down considerably from the cost that was originally proposed, about $100,000/month less than it started out. Councilmember Chen observed the cost is close to $900,000 for 4 technicians, approximately $250,000 for each person which he did not view as a discounted price. Mr. Williams relayed it started out over $1.6M and was negotiated down to $900,000. Councilmember Nand referred to the sentence Council President Olson proposing to amend, “This O&M contract is not intended to change the requirements under the design-build contract, but rather is to provide extended training services.” and asked what her amendment was. Council President Olson responded it was to change the sentence to read, “…but rather is to provide extended training services to extend the period during which those training requirements are being delivered.” Councilmember Nand commented as that would not substantively change the intent of this provision, she did not see the point of delaying approval to make that amendment. Mayor Rosen advised action could not be taken until the regular meeting. ADJOURNMENT With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 6:59 pm.