HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-01-14 Council PacketAgenda
Edmonds City Council
REGULAR MEETING
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
250 5TH AVE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020
JANUARY 14, 2025, 7:00 PM
Edmonds City Council Agenda
January 14, 2025
Page 1
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETINGS BEGINNING AT 7:00 PM ARE STREAMED LIVE ON THE COUNCIL
MEETING WEBPAGE, COMCAST CHANNEL 21, AND ZIPLY CHANNEL 39.
TO ATTEND VIRTUALLY, CLICK ON OR PASTE THE FOLLOWING ZOOM MEETING LINK INTO A WEB
BROWSER USING A COMPUTER OR SMART PHONE:
HTTPS://ZOOM.US/J/95798484261 BY PHONE: +1 253 215 8782 WEBINAR ID: 957 9848 4261
1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE
2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
WE ACKNOWLEDGE THE ORIGINAL INHABITANTS OF THIS PLACE, THE SDOHOBSH
(SNOHOMISH) PEOPLE AND THEIR SUCCESSORS THE TULALIP TRIBES, WHO SINCE TIME
IMMEMORIAL HAVE HUNTED, FISHED, GATHERED, AND TAKEN CARE OF THESE LANDS. WE
RESPECT THEIR SOVEREIGNTY, THEIR RIGHT TO SELF-DETERMINATION, AND WE HONOR THEIR
SACRED SPIRITUAL CONNECTION WITH THE LAND AND WATER.
3. ROLL CALL
4. PRESENTATIONS
1. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day Proclamation (5 min)
2. Resolution of Appreciation for Service as Council President - VIvian Olson (5 min)
3. Mayor's Finance Update (10 min)
5. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT REGARDING ANY MATTER NOT LISTED ON THE
AGENDA AS CLOSED RECORD REVIEW OR AS A PUBLIC HEARING. SPEAKERS ARE LIMITED TO
THREE MINUTES. PLEASE STATE CLEARLY YOUR NAME AND CITY OF RESIDENCE. IF USING A
COMPUTER OR SMART PHONE, RAISE A VIRTUAL HAND TO BE RECOGNIZED. IF USING A DIAL-
UP PHONE, PRESS *9 TO RAISE A HAND. WHEN PROMPTED, PRESS *6 TO UNMUTE.
7. RECEIVED FOR FILING
1. Written Public Comments (0 min)
Edmonds City Council Agenda
January 14, 2025
Page 2
2. Council Affirmation of Code of Conduct and Code of Ethics (0 min)
8. APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA
1. Approval of Council Special Meeting Minutes November 21, 2024
2. Approval of Council Special Meeting Minutes November 25, 2024
3. Approval of Council Special Meeting Minutes November 26, 2024
4. Approval of Council Meeting Minutes November 26, 2024
5. Approval of payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments.
6. Approval of claim checks and wire payment.
7. Resolution of Appreciation for Service as Council President - VIvian Olson
8. Adoption of Interim Ordinance for Neighborhood Centers and Hubs
9. Adoption of Interim Ordinance for STEP Housing
9. COUNCIL BUSINESS
1. Planning Board Update (20 min)
2. Ordinance to amend ECDC 18.00.050 and 18.00.060 (20 min)
3. Interfund Loan (15 min)
4. Ordinance Authorizing Full Time Equivalents (FTEs) (15 min)
5. Extension of Interim Finance Director Appointment (10 min)
6. Discussion of Proposed Changes to ECC 1.04 Council Meetings (45 min)
10. COUNCIL COMMENTS
11. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
12. EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(I) (30
MIN.)
13. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION
ADJOURNMENT 10:00 PM
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 01/14/2025
Martin Luther King, Jr. Day Proclamation
Staff Lead: Carolyn LaFave
Department: Mayor's Office
Preparer: Carolyn LaFave
Background/History
Staff Recommendation
Narrative
Mayor Rosen will read a proclamation in honor of Martin Luther King, Jr., Day.
Attachments:
Martin Luther King, Jr. Day 2025
4.1
Packet Pg. 3
4.1.a
Packet Pg. 4
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
M
a
r
t
i
n
L
u
t
h
e
r
K
i
n
g
,
J
r
.
D
a
y
2
0
2
5
(
M
a
r
t
i
n
L
u
t
h
e
r
K
i
n
g
,
J
r
.
D
a
y
P
r
o
c
l
a
m
a
t
i
o
n
)
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 01/14/2025
Resolution of Appreciation for Service as Council President - VIvian Olson
Staff Lead: Council
Department: City Council
Preparer: Beckie Peterson
Background/History
It has been customary to adopt a resolution thanking the outgoing Council President for their service at
the end of their term.
Staff Recommendation
Adopt a resolution thanking Councilmember Olson for her dedication and service.
Narrative
Councilmember Vivian Olson served as Council President from January to December 2024.
Attachments:
Resolution Thanking Council President Vivian Olson January 2025
4.2
Packet Pg. 5
RESOLUTION NO. _____
A RESOLUTION OF THE EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL
THANKING COUNCIL PRESIDENT VIVIAN OLSON FOR HER
SERVICE TO THE EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL
WHEREAS, Vivian Olson served as Council President from January to December 2024, while
also serving as the liaison to Snohomish County Tomorrow, and member of the City of Edmonds
Boards and Commission Task Force, the City of Edmonds Future of Fire, and the Anway Park
public art selection committee; and
WHEREAS, Council President Olson exhibited leadership with prompt response and respectful
consideration to differing views of Council peers, city staff, and members of the Edmonds
community; and
WHEREAS, Council President Olson shepherded the development and adoption of the city’s
first Council Rules of Procedure, providing documented guidance for Council processes; and
WHEREAS, she served with tenacious dedication to accuracy, precision, and detail of the
process considering the city’s future of Fire and Emergency Medical Services; and
WHEREAS, Ms. Olson managed a challenging Council workload year, including the adoption of
the 2025-2026 biennial budget with inaugural community prioritization methods, the update to
our city’s Comprehensive Plan, and financial policies and revenue initiatives related to the city’s
fiscal challenges;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Vivian Olson be commended and thanked
for serving as Council President.
RESOLVED this 14th day of January 2024.
CITY OF EDMONDS
______________________________
MAYOR, MIKE ROSEN
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY
4.2.a
Packet Pg. 6
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
T
h
a
n
k
i
n
g
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
P
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
V
i
v
i
a
n
O
l
s
o
n
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
2
5
(
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
o
f
A
p
p
r
e
c
i
a
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
a
s
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
P
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
)
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK:
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
RESOLUTION NO.
4.2.a
Packet Pg. 7
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
T
h
a
n
k
i
n
g
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
P
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
V
i
v
i
a
n
O
l
s
o
n
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
2
5
(
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
o
f
A
p
p
r
e
c
i
a
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
a
s
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
P
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
)
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 01/14/2025
Mayor's Finance Update
Staff Lead: Carolyn LaFave
Department: Mayor's Office
Preparer: Carolyn LaFave
Background/History
On July 2, 2024 the council voted to have a Mayor Update as an ongoing item on all regular meeting
agendas. This was in response to a recommendation from the Mayor's Blue Ribbon Panel.
Staff Recommendation
No action, informational
Narrative
The Mayor, or another member of the administration, will answer questions about City finances that
have been requested by council in advance and will also share actions related to the fiscal emergency
that have transpired since the last update.
When there is nothing new to report, this agenda item will be the opportunity to share that there is
nothing new to report.
4.3
Packet Pg. 8
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 01/14/2025
Written Public Comments
Staff Lead: City Council
Department: City Council
Preparer: Beckie Peterson
Background/History
N/A
Staff Recommendation
Acknowledge receipt of written public comments.
Narrative
Public comments submitted to the web form for public comments
<https://www.edmondswa.gov/publiccomment>
between January 1, 2025 and January 8, 2025.
Attachments:
Public Comment January 14, 2025
7.1
Packet Pg. 9
Edmonds City Council Public Comments – January 14, 2025
Online Form 2025-01-03 11:52 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 1/3/2025 1:52:13 PM (GMT-
07:00) US/Arizona
FirstName Ian
LastName Higgins
Email
CityOfResidence Edmonds
AgendaTopic Law Enforcement
Comments Dear City Council, While I do not fully understand where this "budget crisis" is
coming from, or how much of a "crisis" it is, I understand it can be hard to generate revenue under
or regressive tax structure. I fully support efforts to disband the Edmonds Police Force and contract
out services. While this is a complex topic; I encourage looking into alternatives to policing such as
crisis response units, that would reduce the need for uniformed officers to respond to situations;
thus saving additional money. I think reducing the amount of traditional "policing" is a better way
forward then increasing the amount of traffic cameras, license plant scanners, and other "public
safety" surveillance systems; which the Edmonds Police Department as proposed to generate
additional revenue. Thank you for all your hard work, Ian
Online Form 2025-01-05 10:10 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 1/6/2025 12:10:16 AM (GMT-
07:00) US/Arizona
FirstName Barrett
LastName Speller
Email
CityOfResidence Edmonds, WA
AgendaTopic Idea to Close Edmonds Police Department, Contract with King County Sherriff
Instead - Due to Poor Budgeting
Comments Speaking up to say this is the WORST city of Edmonds idea I've heard of, and can't
believe it is even being considered. I've lived in Edmonds for 13 years, and grew up in nearby Lake
Forest Park, where I visited Edmonds to see family or recreate with friends with some frequency.
The Edmonds Police have been a real strength to this community for a long time, and are the
backbone to everything else good we have. King County is terrible at policing, and are already
overwhelmed. King County would not be able to police our community adequately, and you can
expect an increase in crime if this change is made. Do you want that on your watch? We want a
Bellevue style police regime. Not a Seattle one, or generic King County one. Sufficient policing is a
PRIMARY purpose of citizen property tax dollars. Not secondary. Prioritize accordingly. Raise taxes if
you must. But more importantly, please be wise about what you spend money on, how much, and
how important that really is or is not in hard reality. Not based on perception, at a moment in time.
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 10
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
u
b
l
i
c
C
o
m
m
e
n
t
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
1
4
,
2
0
2
5
(
W
r
i
t
t
e
n
P
u
b
l
i
c
C
o
m
m
e
n
t
s
)
Edmonds City Council Public Comments – January 14, 2025
Is a more aesthetic highway 99 barrier more important than proper police? NO! If we had too many
officers for our needs, we can look at reducing that number. But that does not justify eliminating the
local city force entirely, and contracting with King County for policing instead. We strongly prefer a
local force, with a high level of local accountability, and service focus. A very clear job. So it can be
well done. We don't really matter to King County. Especially if push comes to shove. This budget
shortfall is essentially your fault. Not ours. Don't make us pay for it with lower levels of safety and
security. That's your number 1 job. Please note, the Biden Administration has shifted from Defund
the Police, to Fund the Police. Let's keep those lessons learned, and honor the personnel who have
done such a standout job here in Edmonds. Not disband them. Mike Rosen was elected on the
basis of keeping that Mayberry feel he expressed so much appreciation for. This is his time to shine,
and make sure that promise is kept.
Online Form 2025-01-08 04:41 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 1/8/2025 6:41:06 PM (GMT-
07:00) US/Arizona
FirstName Marjie
LastName Fields
Email
CityOfResidence Edmonds
AgendaTopic Regulations Protecting our Critical Ares
Comments Watching the progress of development in our city near to our streams and wetlands,
I and many others have become increasingly concerned about city zoning codes for Critical Areas.
With review of those codes coming up in 2025, I trust that city council and staff will quickly begin
the urgently needed review of current related policies and practices. These include careful
identification and mapping of critical areas, overview of SEPA reviews, and buffer requirements.
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 11
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
u
b
l
i
c
C
o
m
m
e
n
t
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
1
4
,
2
0
2
5
(
W
r
i
t
t
e
n
P
u
b
l
i
c
C
o
m
m
e
n
t
s
)
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 01/14/2025
Council Affirmation of Code of Conduct and Code of Ethics
Staff Lead: City Council
Department: City Council
Preparer: Beckie Peterson
Background/History
Council approved Resolution 1562, adopting the Council Rules of Procedure on November 7, 2024.
These Rules include the Code of Conduct and Code of Ethics which were adopted previously.
Recommendation
N/A
Narrative
Section 6.4 B. of the Council Rules of Procedure states: The Code of Conduct shall be reviewed and
reaffirmed annually by the City Council.
Attachments:
Council Code of Conduct Affirmations January 2025
Resolution 1562
7.2
Packet Pg. 12
7.2.a
Packet Pg. 13
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
C
o
d
e
o
f
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
A
f
f
i
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
s
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
2
5
(
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
A
f
f
i
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
C
o
d
e
o
f
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
a
n
d
C
o
d
e
o
f
E
t
h
i
c
s
)
7.2.a
Packet Pg. 14
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
C
o
d
e
o
f
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
A
f
f
i
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
s
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
2
5
(
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
A
f
f
i
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
C
o
d
e
o
f
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
a
n
d
C
o
d
e
o
f
E
t
h
i
c
s
)
7.2.a
Packet Pg. 15
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
C
o
d
e
o
f
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
A
f
f
i
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
s
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
2
5
(
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
A
f
f
i
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
C
o
d
e
o
f
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
a
n
d
C
o
d
e
o
f
E
t
h
i
c
s
)
7.2.a
Packet Pg. 16
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
C
o
d
e
o
f
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
A
f
f
i
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
s
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
2
5
(
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
A
f
f
i
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
C
o
d
e
o
f
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
a
n
d
C
o
d
e
o
f
E
t
h
i
c
s
)
7.2.a
Packet Pg. 17
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
C
o
d
e
o
f
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
A
f
f
i
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
s
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
2
5
(
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
A
f
f
i
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
C
o
d
e
o
f
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
a
n
d
C
o
d
e
o
f
E
t
h
i
c
s
)
7.2.a
Packet Pg. 18
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
C
o
d
e
o
f
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
A
f
f
i
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
s
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
2
5
(
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
A
f
f
i
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
C
o
d
e
o
f
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
a
n
d
C
o
d
e
o
f
E
t
h
i
c
s
)
7.2.a
Packet Pg. 19
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
C
o
d
e
o
f
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
A
f
f
i
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
s
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
2
5
(
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
A
f
f
i
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
C
o
d
e
o
f
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
a
n
d
C
o
d
e
o
f
E
t
h
i
c
s
)
1
RESOLUTION NO. 1562
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ESTABLISHING RULES OF
PROCEDURE FOR THE CITY COUNCIL
WHEREAS, Chapter 35A.12.120 RCW gives the City Council of each code city the power
to set rules for conducting its business within the provisions of Title 35A RCW; and
WHEREAS, in 2013, the City Council passed Resolution No. 1295, which adopted
Robert's Rules of Order as its parliamentary authority for the conduct of City Council meetings;
and
WHEREAS, in December 2013, the Council passed Resolution No. 1306 adopting a Code
of Conduct and in June 2015, the Council approved a Code of Ethics by motion; and
WHEREAS, on January 25, 2021, the Council adopted a new Code of Conduct by motion;
and
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 1295 is limited to parliamentary procedure in the context of
Council meetings, and such rules do not address many other processes and procedures in the
conduct of City business; and
WHEREAS, a more comprehensive set of rules, including a code of conduct, would
provide greater understanding and transparency about the roles, rights, and responsibilities of
councilmembers and facilitate the orderly conduct of City business; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and approved all sections of its draft Rules of
Procedures during its committee and regular meetings in 2024; and
WHEREAS, it is the intent of the City Council that these rules of procedure be periodically
reviewed as needed during odd-numbered years, as referenced in Section 14.2 of the Council Rules
of Procedure.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Establishment of Rules of Procedure. The City Council hereby adopts the "Rules
of Procedure" attached hereto as "Exhibit A."
Section 2. Repealer. Resolution No. 1295 adopting Robert’s Rules of Procedure is hereby
repealed.
7.2.b
Packet Pg. 20
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
1
5
6
2
(
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
A
f
f
i
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
C
o
d
e
o
f
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
a
n
d
C
o
d
e
o
f
E
t
h
i
c
s
)
RESOLVED this 12th day of November, 2024.
APPROVED:/
~~----
MAYOR, MIKE ROSEN
ATTEST/ AUTHENTICATED:
C£~ASSE Y
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK:
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
RESOLUTION NO.
November 7, 2024
November 12, 2024
1562
2
7.2.b
Packet Pg. 21
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
1
5
6
2
(
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
A
f
f
i
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
C
o
d
e
o
f
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
a
n
d
C
o
d
e
o
f
E
t
h
i
c
s
)
Exhibit A – COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE
i
COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION 1. AUTHORITY
1.1 Intent of Policies ............................................................................................ 1
1.2 Effect/Waiver of Rules .................................................................................... 1
1.3 Footnotes and References ............................................................................. 1
SECTION 2. COUNCIL ORGANIZATION
2.1 Oath of Office ................................................................................................. 1
2.2 Election of Council President and Council President Pro Tem ....................... 1
2.3 Duties of Officers ............................................................................................ 2
2.4 Appointments to Boards and Commissions .................................................... 2
2.5 Filling a Council Vacancy ............................................................................... 2
SECTION 3. AGENDA PREPARATION
3.1 Role of City Clerk ............................................................................................3
3.2 Placement of Items on the Agenda .................................................................3
3.3 Format for Agenda Memos ..............................................................................4
3.4 Agenda Item Priority .......................................................................................4
3.5 Readings for Ordinances .................................................................................4
SECTION 4. CONSENT AGENDA
4.1 Establishment of Consent Agenda ................................................................. 4
4.2 Adoption of Consent Agenda ......................................................................... 4
4.3 Removal of Item from Consent Agenda ......................................................... 4
SECTION 5. COUNCIL MEETINGS
5.1 Open Public Meetings ................................................................................. 5
5.2 Meeting Cancellation ....................................................................................5
5.3 Regular Meetings .........................................................................................5
5.4 Forms of Address .........................................................................................6
5.5 Seating Arrangement ...................................................................................6
5.6 Quasi-Judicial Items .....................................................................................6
5.7 Council Committees .....................................................................................7
5.8 Executive Sessions ..................................................................................... 8
5.9 Special Meetings ......................................................................................... 8
5.10 Emergency Meetings ................................................................................. 8
5.11 Meeting Place............................................................................................ 8
7.2.b
Packet Pg. 22
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
1
5
6
2
(
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
A
f
f
i
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
C
o
d
e
o
f
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
a
n
d
C
o
d
e
o
f
E
t
h
i
c
s
)
Exhibit A – COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE
ii
5.12 Notice of Meetings, Public Hearings .......................................................... 8
5.13 Quorum ...................................................................................................... 8
5.14 Attendance, Excused Absences ..................................................................8
5.15 Remote Attendance .....................................................................................9
5.16 Role of Clerk................................................................................................9
SECTION 6. COUNCIL CONDUCT
6.1 General Conduct ............................................................................................ 9
6.2 Conduct with City Staff, and the Council Legislative Assistant ..................... 10
6.3 Conduct with Boards, Committees, Commissions, and Outside Agencies .... 10
6.4 Implementation, Compliance, and Enforcement ............................................ 11
SECTION 7. CODE OF ETHICS
7.1 Code of Ethics .............................................................................................. 11
SECTION 8. PUBLIC TESTIMONY
8.1 Public Hearings ............................................................................................ 12
8.2 Audience Comments .................................................................................... 12
8.3 Group representation .................................................................................... 12
8.4 Quasi-Judicial Items ...................................................................................... 12
8.5 Recognition by Chair ..................................................................................... 13
8.6 Decorum ........................................................................................................ 13
8.7 Identification of Speakers .............................................................................. 13
8.8 Instructions for Speakers ............................................................................... 13
8.9 Donation of Speaking Time .......................................................................... 13
8.10 Campaigns and Elections… ........................................................................ 13
SECTION 9 . MOTIONS
9.1 Voice Votes ................................................................................................... 13
9.2 Motions that do not Receive or Require Seconds ......................................... 13
9.3 Tie Votes ...................................................................................................... 13
9.4 Nature of Motion ............................................................................................ 13
9.5 Request for Written Motions .......................................................................... 13
9.6 Discussion Following a Motion ..................................................................... 13
9.7 Council Consensus ...................................................................................... 14
9.8 Withdrawal of Motions .................................................................................. 14
9.9 Motion to Table.............................................................................................. 14
9.10 Motion to Postpone to a Time Certain ........................................................ 14
9.11 Motion to Postpone Indefinitely ................................................................... 14
9.12 Motion to Call for the Question .................................................................. 14
9.13 Motion to Amend ........................................................................................ 14
9.14 Repetition of the Motion Prior to Voting ..................................................... 14
9.15 Voting ......................................................................................................... 14
9.16 Recusal ...................................................................................................... 14
9.17 Silence and Abstention ............................................................................... 15
7.2.b
Packet Pg. 23
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
1
5
6
2
(
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
A
f
f
i
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
C
o
d
e
o
f
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
a
n
d
C
o
d
e
o
f
E
t
h
i
c
s
)
Exhibit A – COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE
iii
9.18 Prohibition of Voting by Proxy .................................................................... 15
9.19 Close of Discussion .................................................................................... 15
9.20 Motion to Reconsider ................................................................................. 15
9.21 Questions of Interpretation ......................................................................... 15
SECTION 10. ITEMS REQUIRING FOUR VOTES ............................................. 15
SECTION 11. ITEMS REQUIRING A UNANIMOUS VOTE ................................ 15
SECTION 12. COUNCIL REPRESENTATION
12.1 Correspondence .......................................................................................... 15
12.2 Use of City Resources ................................................................................. 16
12.3 Controversial Communications................................................................... 16
SECTION 13. REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES
13.1 Authorized Expenses .................................................................................. 16
SECTION 14. SUSPENSION AND AMENDMENT OF RULES
14.1 Suspension of Rules ................................................................................... 16
14.2 Amendment of Rules ................................................................................... 16
7.2.b
Packet Pg. 24
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
1
5
6
2
(
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
A
f
f
i
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
C
o
d
e
o
f
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
a
n
d
C
o
d
e
o
f
E
t
h
i
c
s
)
Exhibit A – COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE
1
Section 1. Authority.
1.1 These rules constitute the official rules of procedure for the Edmonds City
Council. In all decisions arising from points of order, the Council shall be
governed by the current edition of Robert's Rules of Order," a copy of which is
maintained in the City Council Office.
1.2 These rules of procedure are adopted for the sole benefit of the members of the
City Council to assist in the orderly conduct of Council business. These rules of
procedure do not grant rights or privileges to members of the public or third
parties. Failure of the City Council to adhere to these rules shall not result in any
liability to the City, its officers, agents, and employees, nor shall failure to adhere
to these rules result in invalidation of any Council act.
1.3 Any provision of these rules of procedure that is footnoted with a citation to the
Revised Code of Washington, the Edmonds City Code, or other statute or ruling
is included here for ease of reference only and is not intended to be adopted as a
rule herein because it already constitutes governing law. Likewise, any conflict
between such a provision and the law cited in the footnote shall be resolved in
favor of the law cited in the footnote. Provisions herein that are not footnoted with
a citation to the Revised Code of Washington or the Edmonds City Code have
been adopted by City Council resolution as the Council’s procedural rules and
may be amended at any time by subsequent resolution.
Section 2. Council Organization.
2.1 New Councilmembers shall be sworn in by one of the following persons: court
commissioner, judicial officer, judge, clerk of the court, county auditor or deputy
auditor, county commissioner or county councilmember, mayor of a code city, a
town, or a second-class city, mayor pro tem of a second-class city, clerk of a
code city, town clerk or deputy clerk.
2.2. The Council shall elect a Council President and Council President Pro Tem for a
one-year term. The election of the Council President shall be conducted by the
City Clerk. No one Councilmember may nominate more than one person for a
given office until every member wishing to nominate a candidate has an
opportunity to do so. Nominations do not require a second. The Clerk will repeat
each nomination until all nominations have been made. When it appears that no
one else wishes to make any further nominations, the Clerk will ask again for
further nominations and if there are none, the Clerk will declare the nominations
closed. A motion to close the nominations is not necessary. After nominations
have been closed, voting for Council President takes place in the order
nominations were made. Councilmembers will be asked to vote by a raise of
hands. As soon as a nominee receives a majority vote (four votes), the Clerk will
declare him/her elected. No votes will be taken on the remaining nominees. If
7.2.b
Packet Pg. 25
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
1
5
6
2
(
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
A
f
f
i
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
C
o
d
e
o
f
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
a
n
d
C
o
d
e
o
f
E
t
h
i
c
s
)
Exhibit A – COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE
2
none of the nominees receives a majority vote, the Clerk will call for nominations
again and repeat the process until a single candidate receives a majority vote.
The same process is conducted for the election of the Council President Pro
Tem.
2.3 Duties of Officers
A. The Mayor shall be the Presiding Officer at all Council Meetings except
Council Committee Meetings. In the absence of the Mayor, the Council
President shall become Mayor Pro Tem and act as the Presiding Officer,
performing the duties and responsibilities regarding conduct of meetings
and emergency business. In the absence of both the Mayor and the
Council President, the Council President Pro Tem shall act as a temporary
Presiding Officer.
B. It shall be the duty of the Presiding Officer to:
1. Call the meeting to order.
2. Keep the meeting to its order of business.
3. Control discussion in an orderly manner.
a. Give every Councilmember who wishes an opportunity to
speak when recognized by the chair.
b. Permit audience participation at the appropriate times.
c. Require all speakers to speak to the question and to observe
Robert’s Rules of Order.
4. State each motion before it is discussed and before it is voted
upon.
5. Put motions to a vote and announce the outcome.
C. The Presiding Officer shall decide all questions of order, subject to the right
of appeal to the Council by any member.
2.4 Appointments to Boards and Committees1
The Council President shall appoint Councilmembers to Council committees and
outside boards and committees that are not otherwise specified or governed by
other rules. Prior to appointment, the Council President shall solicit interest from
Councilmembers for their preferred appointments. The Council President shall
then circulate the final appointment list to the Council at least seven (7) days
prior to appointment. The Council President shall make his or her appointments
as soon as practicable, following election of the Council President.
2.5 Filling a Council Vacancy
1 ECC 1.02.031(B)
7.2.b
Packet Pg. 26
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
1
5
6
2
(
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
A
f
f
i
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
C
o
d
e
o
f
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
a
n
d
C
o
d
e
o
f
E
t
h
i
c
s
)
Exhibit A – COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE
3
A. If a vacancy occurs in the office of Councilmember, the Council will follow
the procedures outlined in the Revised Code of Washington2. To fill the
vacancy with the most qualified person available until an election is held,
the Council will widely distribute and publish a notice of the vacancy at
least two weeks in advance, the procedure by which the vacancy will be
filled, and an application form.
B. The Council staff will draw up and Council will approve an application form
to aid the Council's selection of the new Councilmember.
C. Those candidates selected by the Council will be interviewed by the
Council during a regular or special Council meeting open to the public.
The order of the interviews will be determined by drawing the names.
Applicants will be asked to answer questions posed by each
Councilmember during the interview process. The interview process will
be designed to be fair and consistent. Since this is not a campaign,
comments about other applicants will not be allowed.
D. The Council may recess into executive session to discuss the
qualifications of all candidates. Nominations, voting and appointment of a
person to fill the vacancy will be conducted during an open public meeting.
E. The term of an appointed Council position expires upon certification of the
next election.
Section 3. Agenda Preparation.
3.1 In an administrative capacity, the City Clerk receives agenda topics and preferred
dates from the administration for council or council committee agendas. The
same process applies to the extended council meeting agendas.
The City Clerk provides these inputs to the Council President for agenda setting
in advance of publishing the agenda for the next public meeting. The Council
President is responsible for determining which items will be moved forward for
council business or moved to a future date. In the same way, the president
determines what section of the meeting an item will appear and in what order.
The resulting agendas for Council committees and Council regular meetings will
set forth a brief general description of each item to be considered by the Council
and specify the time and place of the meeting. The agenda for the next council
meeting and the extended agenda are published online by the City Clerk.
3.2 An item for a Council meeting may be placed on the agenda by one of the
following methods:
2 RCW 42.12.070
7.2.b
Packet Pg. 27
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
1
5
6
2
(
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
A
f
f
i
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
C
o
d
e
o
f
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
a
n
d
C
o
d
e
o
f
E
t
h
i
c
s
)
Exhibit A – COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE
4
A Majority vote or consensus of the Council.
B. By the Council President or Council President Pro Tem when acting in the
absence of the Council President.
The Council President will make every effort to place an item Council
approved by consensus or majority vote on an agenda. If time is not
available for the requested date, it shall be placed on the next available
agenda.
3.3 Agenda memos shall be in a standard format. The Mayor shall determine the
format.
3.4 Agenda items will generally be prioritized in the following order of importance: 1)
joint meetings or presentations involving outside agencies; 2) items scheduled for
statutory compliance; 3) advertised public hearings; 4) continued items from a
prior meeting; and 5) items scheduled for convenience, such as those involving
outside consultants.
3.5 Except when the Council President has authorized an exception for items of an
emergency or unexpected nature requiring immediate action, ordinances
scheduled for Council action will receive a minimum of two readings. Action by
the Council (by the consent agenda, or council motion and vote) will always be
one of the readings. Other reading(s) will be in the number the topic warrants,
and could include any or all of the following:
1. publication on the extended agenda
2. presentation of the topic by staff
3. discussion at council committee and/or meetings of the full council
4. public hearings (sometimes mandated by law)
Section 4. Consent Agenda.
4.1 Upon approval of the Council President, the administration shall place matters on
the Consent Agenda which: (a) have been previously discussed by the Council or
council committee, or (b) based on the information delivered to members of the
Council, by the administration, can be reviewed by a Councilmember without
further explanation, or (c) are so minor or routine in nature that passage is likely.
4.2 The motion to adopt the Consent Agenda shall be non-debatable and have the
effect of moving to adopt all items on the Consent Agenda.
4.3 Since adoption of any item on the Consent Agenda implies unanimous consent,
any member of the Council shall have the right to remove any item from the
Consent Agenda. Councilmembers are given an opportunity to remove items
7.2.b
Packet Pg. 28
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
1
5
6
2
(
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
A
f
f
i
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
C
o
d
e
o
f
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
a
n
d
C
o
d
e
o
f
E
t
h
i
c
s
)
Exhibit A – COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE
5
from the Consent Agenda after the motion is made and seconded to Approve the
Agenda. If any matter is withdrawn, the Presiding Officer shall place the item at
an appropriate place on the agenda at the current or future Council meeting,
subject to Council agreement.
Section 5. Council Meetings.
5.1 All Council meetings shall comply with the requirements of the Open Public
Meetings Act3. All Regular Meetings, Committee Meetings, and Special Meetings
of the Council shall be open to the public. A Council meeting is defined as a
properly noticed meeting in which a quorum of the Council transacts official City
business as defined by the OPMA. Meetings under the OPMA require an
agenda, public notice, and an official record in the form of meeting minutes.
Meetings attended by Council members which do not involve the transaction of
City business are not considered meetings under the Act. If a quorum of Council
members attends such meetings, they are encouraged to sit separately, refrain
from discussing City business, and only participate as passive observers.
5.2 Any Council meeting may be canceled by a majority vote or consensus of the
Council. The Council President may cancel a Council meeting for lack of official
business.
5.3 Regular Meetings4 of the City Council shall be held in accordance with the
meeting schedule adopted in Edmonds City Code 1.04.010. Council meetings
shall adjourn no later than 10:00 p.m. on the day initiated unless such
adjournment is extended by an affirmative vote of a majority of the Council as a
whole plus one.
Order of Business for Regular Meetings. The order of business shall
generally be as follows:
Regular Meeting (7:00 p.m.)
1. Call to Order, Flag Salute
2. Land Acknowledgment
3. Roll Call
4. Approval of the Agenda
5. Presentations
6. Public Comment
7. Approval of the Consent Agenda
8. Received for Filing5
3 RCW 42.30
4 ECC 1.04.010(A)
5 Received for Filing is a method of providing information on an agenda that doesn’t require council action. It
includes but is not limited to: financial reports, program/project status updates, committee reports, claims for
damages, public comments, and appointments to boards/commissions.
7.2.b
Packet Pg. 29
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
1
5
6
2
(
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
A
f
f
i
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
C
o
d
e
o
f
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
a
n
d
C
o
d
e
o
f
E
t
h
i
c
s
)
Exhibit A – COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE
6
9. Public Hearing(s)
10. Council Business: The following procedures shall be used:
• Introduction of item by Presiding Officer
• Presentation by staff
• Council motion to adopt legislation
• Council deliberation and potential action
11. Council Comments
12. Mayor’s Comments
13. Adjournment (10:00 PM)
5.4. Meetings of the council shall be presided over by the mayor, if present, or
otherwise by the mayor pro tempore (Council President or Council President Pro
Tempore) or by a member of the council selected by a majority of the
councilmembers at such meeting. Appointment of a councilmember to preside
over the meeting shall not in any way abridge his or her right to vote on matters
coming before the council at such meeting.
5.5. At all meetings, the Mayor shall be addressed as "Mayor (surname)." The
Council President shall be addressed as "Council President (surname)."
Members of the Council shall be addressed as "Councilmember (surname)." At
all meetings, the Mayor shall sit in the Presiding Officer’s seat, and the Council
President shall sit at the right hand of the Mayor. Other Councilmembers are to
be seated in a manner acceptable to Council. If there is a dispute, seating shall
be in position order.
5.6 Prior to commencement of discussion of a quasi-judicial item, the Mayor will ask
if any Councilmember has a conflict of interest or Appearance of Fairness
Doctrine concern which could prohibit the Councilmember from participating in
the decision-making process. If it is deemed by the Councilmember, in
consultation with the City Attorney, that it is warranted, the Councilmember
should step down and not participate in the Council discussion or vote on the
matter. The Councilmember shall leave the Council Chambers while the matter is
under consideration.
5.7 Council Committees 6. The City Council shall have the following Standing
Committees: Finance (“FIN”); Parks and Public Works (“PPW”); Public Safety,
Personnel, Human Services, and Planning (“PSPHSP”). Regular meetings of the
City Council standing committees shall be held in accordance with the meeting
schedule adopted in Edmonds City Code 1.04.010. The audio and/or video of
Council Committee meetings shall be recorded and posted online.
A. Business items considered by a City Council committee should only be
forwarded to the City Council Consent Agenda with the unanimous consent of
6 ECC 1.04.010(B)
7.2.b
Packet Pg. 30
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
1
5
6
2
(
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
A
f
f
i
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
C
o
d
e
o
f
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
a
n
d
C
o
d
e
o
f
E
t
h
i
c
s
)
Exhibit A – COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE
7
the committee members.7
B. Committee business items that have not received unanimous support of the
committee to be forwarded to the Consent Agenda may be discussed at a
forthcoming committee meeting if additional committee work is likely to
produce unanimity. Alternatively, the Council President may place the item on
a future Council agenda for further deliberation and/or action by the City
Council.8
C. The Council President shall be a nonvoting ex-officio member of all Council
committees, except when a regular committee member is absent, in which
case the Council President may vote. When a committee chair is absent, the
other regular committee member shall serve as the committee chair.9
D. The Mayor and Council members from other committees may attend
committee meetings of which they are not members and may join the
discussion and ask questions about a committee business item if they have
been present during the entire discussion of that business item; provided, that
only committee members, or the Council President when substituting for an
absent committee member, may vote on committee business. Presence of a
quorum of the City Council at a committee meeting shall not change the
character of the meeting from a committee meeting to a City Council
meeting.10
5.8 The Council may hold Executive Sessions or Closed Sessions from which the
public may be excluded, for those purposes set forth in the Revised Code of
Washington11. Before convening an Executive Session, the Presiding Officer
shall announce the purpose of the Session and the anticipated time when the
Session will be concluded. Should the Session require more time, a public
announcement shall be made that the Session is being extended.
Councilmembers should keep confidential all written materials and verbal
information provided to them during Executive Sessions, to ensure that the City's
interests are not compromised. Councilmembers should refrain from taking notes
in Executive Session because such records may be subject to public disclosure,
thereby compromising the confidential nature of the matters discussed.
Confidentiality also includes information provided to Councilmembers outside of
Executive Sessions when the information is exempt from disclosure under the
Revised Code of Washington. If a Councilmember unintentionally discloses
Executive Session discussion with another party, that Councilmember shall make
full disclosure to the Mayor and/or the City Council in a timely manner as soon as
the error is discovered.
7 ECC 1.04.050(A)
8 ECC 1.04.050(B)
9 ECC 1.04.050(C)
10 ECC 1.04.050(D)
11 RCW 42.30.110 and RCW 42.30.140
7.2.b
Packet Pg. 31
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
1
5
6
2
(
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
A
f
f
i
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
C
o
d
e
o
f
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
a
n
d
C
o
d
e
o
f
E
t
h
i
c
s
)
Exhibit A – COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE
8
5.9 Special Meetings 12 may be held by the Council subject to notice requirements
prescribed by State law. Special Meetings may be called by the Council
President, Mayor, or any four members of the City Council by written notice
delivered to each member of the Council at least twenty-four hours before the
time specified for the proposed meeting. The notice of such Special Meetings
shall state the subjects to be considered, and no subject other than those
specified in the notice shall be considered.
5.10 An Emergency Meeting 13 is a special Council meeting called without the 24-
hour notice. It deals with an emergency involving injury or damage to persons or
property or the likelihood of such injury or damage, when time requirements of a
24-hour notice would make notice impractical and increase the likelihood of such
injury or damage. Emergency meetings may be called by the Mayor or the
Council President with the consent of a majority of Councilmembers. The
minutes will indicate the reason for the emergency.
5.11 Special Meetings and Emergency Meetings will be at a time and place as
Council directs.
5.12 The City shall comply with the public notice provisions of the Revised Code of
Washington14. Unless specified otherwise, the public shall receive notice of
upcoming public hearings through publication of such notice in the City's official
newspaper at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing.
5.13 At all Council Meetings, a majority of the Council (four members) shall constitute
a quorum for the transaction of business. In the absence of a quorum, the
members present may adjourn that meeting to a later date.
5.14 Members of the Council may be excused from attending a City Council meeting
by contacting the Council President prior to the meeting and stating the reason
for his or her inability to attend. If the member is unable to contact the Council
President, the member shall contact the Mayor, who shall convey the message to
the Council President. Following roll call, the Presiding Officer shall inform the
Council of the member's absence, state the reason for such absence, and inquire
if there is a motion to excuse the member. This motion shall be nondebatable.
Upon passage of such motion by a majority of members present, the absent
member shall be considered excused and the Clerk will make an appropriate
notation in the minutes. Councilmembers who do not follow the above process
will be considered unexcused and it shall be so noted in the minutes. A motion to
excuse a Councilmember may be made retroactively at the next meeting.
Removal of a sitting Councilmember for three (3) consecutive unexcused
absences is authorized by RCW 35A.12.060.
12 RCW 42.30
13 RCW 42.30
14 RCW 35A.12.160
7.2.b
Packet Pg. 32
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
1
5
6
2
(
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
A
f
f
i
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
C
o
d
e
o
f
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
a
n
d
C
o
d
e
o
f
E
t
h
i
c
s
)
Exhibit A – COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE
9
5.15 Remote Attendance: Notification of the need to attend a meeting remotely shall
be made to the City Clerk by noon of the meeting day. When attending a council
meeting remotely, Councilmembers must have video and audio capabilities and
enable them during the meeting whenever possible. Any attendee (Council, staff,
or presenter) must enable their video and audio when speaking, unless technical
difficulties do not allow. Attendees must attempt to contact the technology
department to resolve any problems prior to the meeting. If the problem cannot
be resolved, the attendee must inform the Council President and/or the Mayor
prior to the meeting.
5.16 The City Clerk or an authorized Deputy City Clerk shall attend all Council
meetings. If the Clerk and the Deputy Clerk are absent from any Council
meeting, the Mayor shall appoint a Clerk Pro Tempore. The minutes of the
proceedings of the Council shall be kept by the City Clerk and shall constitute the
official record of the Council.
Section 6. Council Conduct.
The City Council finds that Councilmembers should seek to continually improve the
quality of public service and ensure public confidence in the integrity of local
government and its effective, transparent, and equitable operation. Councilmembers
have a public stage and privileged platform to show how individuals with contrasting
points of view can find common ground, demonstrate problem-solving approaches, and
achieve solutions that benefit the community as a whole. Central to these principles is
that civility and decorum shall apply to all Councilmember conduct in relation to city
business. To this end, the following Code of Conduct for members of the Edmonds City
Council is established.
6.1 General Conduct
A. Councilmembers shall focus discussions and debates on vision, policies,
and their implementation.
B. No Councilmember shall dominate proceedings during Council or other
public meetings.
C. Personal, insulting, or intimidating language, body language and actions,
are not allowed. Councilmembers may raise a point of order for ruling by
the Chair or by the Body to address inappropriate remarks.
D. Ensuring that all meeting participants feel welcome is a vital part of the
democratic process. No signs of partiality, prejudice, or disrespect should
be evident on the part of Councilmembers toward any individual
participating in a public meeting. Every effort should be made to be
respectful in listening to Council, staff and public testimony and
7.2.b
Packet Pg. 33
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
1
5
6
2
(
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
A
f
f
i
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
C
o
d
e
o
f
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
a
n
d
C
o
d
e
o
f
E
t
h
i
c
s
)
Exhibit A – COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE
10
discussions.
E. Technology allows words written or said to be distributed far and wide.
Councilmember written notes, voicemail messages, texts, email, or other
electronic communications, are public records and shall follow this code.
6.2 Conduct with City Staff, and the Council Legislative Assistant
The community is best served when the abilities, experience, and knowledge of
staff and contract employees work alongside councilmembers, and
councilmembers will value these resources and relationships by:
A. Using respectful language and avoiding aggressive tones.
B. Whenever possible, provide questions ahead of public meetings and
otherwise avoid surprises.
C. Recognize that calls and emails may not be returned outside of business
hours.
D. Expressing concerns about performance only to the Mayor, in the case of
staff, and the Council President, in the case of Council legislative aide.
E. Understanding that Council, as a legislative body, directs City business via
policy change initiated by majority Council vote only; councilmembers
acting individually shall refrain from directing staff or otherwise intruding
on the City’s administrative functions.
6.3 Conduct with Boards, Committees, Commissions, and Outside Agencies
A. The City maintains several boards and commissions as a means of
encouraging and gathering community input. Residents who serve on
boards and commissions are a valuable resource to the City’s leadership
and shall be treated with appreciation and respect.
B. Councilmembers are appointed as non-voting members to serve as the
primary two-way communication liaison between the Council and boards,
commissions, and committees. Councilmembers are not to direct the
activities or work of the board, commission, or committee.
C. Councilmembers may attend any board or commission meeting to which
they are not appointed but shall do so as a member of the public. Personal
comments or positions, if given, will be identified as such and shall not be
represented as the position of the City or Council.
D. Councilmembers shall not contact a board or commission member to
7.2.b
Packet Pg. 34
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
1
5
6
2
(
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
A
f
f
i
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
C
o
d
e
o
f
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
a
n
d
C
o
d
e
o
f
E
t
h
i
c
s
)
Exhibit A – COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE
11
lobby on behalf of an individual, business, or organization, with the
exception of the hearing examiner or architectural design board. It is
acceptable for Councilmembers to contact boards or commissions and
their members, so long as all interactions are in line with the Edmonds
Code of Ethics.
E. When attending a non-city sponsored event, meeting, conference, or other
activity, Councilmembers shall do so in an individual Councilmember
capacity only. Likewise, a Councilmember may be authorized to represent
the City only in compliance with RCW 35A.12.100.
6.4 Implementation, Compliance, and Enforcement
As an expression of the standards of conduct that best serve the City, the Code
of Conduct is intended to be self-enforcing and is most effective when members
are thoroughly familiar with it and embrace its provisions.
A. This Council Code of Conduct shall be included in the regular orientations
for newly seated Councilmembers. Members entering office shall sign a
statement affirming they read and understood the City of Edmonds
Council Code of Conduct.
B. The Code of Conduct shall be reviewed and reaffirmed annually by the
City Council.
C. When a breach of this code occurs, Councilmembers are encouraged to
remind one another of the Code of Conduct terms. These communications
may be documented with the subject line, “Code of Conduct Reminder.”
D. Repeated breaches, or egregious instances, may be dealt with according
to the terms set out in the Council’s adopted Robert’s Rules of Order or
other applicable laws and regulations.
Section 7. Code of Ethics.
7.1 Code of Ethics. The purpose of a Code of Ethics is to strengthen the quality of
government through ethical principles which shall govern the conduct of the City
Council. To this end, the Council shall:
1. Be dedicated to the concepts of effective and democratic government.
2. Affirm the dignity and worth of the services rendered by government and
maintain a sense of social responsibility.
3. Be dedicated to the highest ideals of honor and integrity in all public and
personal relationships.
4. Recognize that the chief function of local government at all times is to
7.2.b
Packet Pg. 35
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
1
5
6
2
(
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
A
f
f
i
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
C
o
d
e
o
f
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
a
n
d
C
o
d
e
o
f
E
t
h
i
c
s
)
Exhibit A – COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE
12
serve the best interest of all the people.
5. Keep the community informed on municipal affairs and encourage
communications between the citizens and all municipal officers.
Emphasize friendly and courteous service to the public and each other;
seek to improve the quality of public service, and confidence of citizens.
6. Seek no favor; do not personally benefit or profit by confidential
information or by misuse of public resources.
7. Conduct business of the city in a manner which is not only fair in fact, but
also in appearance.
Section 8. Public Testimony.
8.1 Public Hearings:
a. Individuals will be allowed three minutes to speak.
b. The Presiding Officer may allow additional time for receipt of written
testimony when needed.
c. The Clerk shall be the timekeeper.
d. Prior to closing the public hearing, the Presiding Officer shall inquire if
there are any additional speakers other than those that have signed up
and previously spoken, and if there are, they shall be allowed to testify.
8.2 Other Audience Comment at Regular Meetings
Audience comments are offered at the beginning of regular meetings. This is an
opportunity for members of the public to speak to any topic not listed as a public
hearing or closed record review.
A speaker sign-up form will be at the entry table.
The procedures for the Public Hearing testimony in 8.1 A and C above are
generally followed for audience comment; 8.1 D is followed for audience
comment as time allows.
8.3 When large numbers of people are signed up to speak on the same topic, the
Presiding Officer may request that the group(s) select a limited number of
speakers to cover their view and then ask all those who agree with that position
to stand at the conclusion of each presentation.
8.4 Public testimony authorized in Section 8.2 and 8.3 may not include comments or
information on any quasi-judicial matter pending before the City Council, or on
any topic for which Council has closed the public record.
7.2.b
Packet Pg. 36
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
1
5
6
2
(
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
A
f
f
i
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
C
o
d
e
o
f
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
a
n
d
C
o
d
e
o
f
E
t
h
i
c
s
)
Exhibit A – COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE
13
8.5 No person shall be allowed to address the Council while it is in session without
the recognition of the Presiding Officer.
8.6 It shall be unlawful for any person in the audience at a Council meeting to do any
of the following: Engage in disorderly, disruptive, disturbing, delaying or
boisterous conduct, such as, but not limited to, handclapping, stomping of feet,
whistling, making noise, use of profane language or obscene gestures, yelling or
similar demonstrations, which conduct substantially interrupts, delays, or disturbs
the peace and good order of the proceedings of the Council.15
8.7 Persons testifying shall identify themselves for the record as to name, City of
residence and any organization represented.
8.8 An instruction notice for speakers will be available at the meeting. Speakers will
be advised by the Presiding Officer that their testimony is being recorded.
8.9 Time cannot be donated by one speaker to another.
8.10 No person may use audience comment to promote or oppose any candidate for
public office. In election years, a campaign officially begins when a candidate
files their candidacy with the elections office and continues through the election.
Section 9. Motions.
9.1 Unless otherwise provided for by statute, ordinance, or resolution, all votes shall
be taken by voice and hand raise, except that at the request of any
Councilmember, a roll call vote shall be taken by the City Clerk.
9.2 A motion must precede deliberation of an action item. A Councilmember should
make a motion, which is seconded by another Councilmember, on the topic
under discussion. If the motion is not seconded, it dies. Some motions do not
require a second: nominations, withdrawal of a motion, request for a roll call vote,
and point of order.
9.3 In case of a tie vote on a motion, the motion shall be considered lost. If the
motion is an item for which the Mayor may break the tie vote, the Mayor may
vote on the motion.
9.4 Motions shall be clear and concise and not include arguments for the motion.
9.5 Motions shall be reduced to writing when required by the Presiding Officer or any
member of the Council. All resolutions and ordinances shall be in writing.
9.6 After a motion has been made and seconded, Councilmembers may discuss
15 Acosta v. City of Costa Mesa, 718 F.3d 800 (9th Cir. 2013), Id., at 816
7.2.b
Packet Pg. 37
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
1
5
6
2
(
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
A
f
f
i
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
C
o
d
e
o
f
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
a
n
d
C
o
d
e
o
f
E
t
h
i
c
s
)
Exhibit A – COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE
14
their opinions on the issue prior to the vote. If they wish to do so, they may state
why they will vote for or against the motion.
9.7 When the Council concurs or agrees with an item that does not require a motion,
the Mayor will summarize the Council's consensus at the conclusion of the
discussion.
9.8 A motion may be withdrawn by the maker of the motion upon consent of the
Council.
9.9 A motion to table is nondebatable. It requires a majority to pass. If the motion to
table prevails, the matter may only be "taken from the table" at the same meeting
or the next regular meeting.
9.10 A motion to postpone to a specific time is debatable, amendable, and may be
reconsidered at the same meeting. It requires a majority to pass. The motion
being postponed must be considered later in the same meeting or a specific
future meeting.
9.11 A motion to postpone indefinitely is debatable, is not amendable, and may be
reconsidered at the same meeting. It requires a majority to pass. The merits of
the main motion may be debated.
9.12 A motion to call for the question shall close debate on the main motion and is
nondebatable. This motion must receive a second and fails without a two-thirds
(2/3) vote. Debate is reopened if the motion fails.
9.13 A motion to amend is defined as amending a motion that is on the floor and has
been seconded, by inserting or adding, striking out, striking out and inserting, or
substituting.
9.14 When the discussion is concluded, the motion maker, Mayor, or City Clerk, shall
repeat the motion prior to voting.
9.15 The City Council votes on the motion as restated. If the vote is unanimous, the
Mayor shall state that the motion has been passed unanimously according to the
number of Councilmembers present, such as "7-0" or "6-0." If the vote is not
unanimous, the Mayor shall state the number of Councilmembers voting in the
affirmative and the number voting in the negative and whether the motion passes
or fails.
9.16 Personal involvement in an issue coming before Council shall be a trigger to
consult with the City Attorney regarding possible conflict of interest/need for
recusal from that council business item. If such conflict of interest or an
appearance of fairness question under state law 16 is established, the
16 RCW 42.36 and RCW 42.23.020
7.2.b
Packet Pg. 38
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
1
5
6
2
(
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
A
f
f
i
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
C
o
d
e
o
f
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
a
n
d
C
o
d
e
o
f
E
t
h
i
c
s
)
Exhibit A – COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE
15
Councilmember shall recuse themselves from the issue and shall leave the
Council chambers during discussion and voting on the issue. That
Councilmember shall be considered absent when voting occurs.
9.17 If a member of the Council is silent on a vote, it shall be recorded as an
affirmative vote. If a member of the Council abstains, it shall be recorded as an
abstention and not included in the vote tally.
9.18 No vote may be cast by proxy.
9.19 Once the vote has been taken, the discussion is closed. It is not necessary for
Councilmembers to justify or explain their vote. If they wish to make their
positions known, this should happen during the discussion preceding the vote.
9.20 After the question has been decided, any Councilmember who voted in the
majority may move for a reconsideration of the motion. The motion for
reconsideration must be made at the same or next regular meeting.
9.21 The City Attorney, in consultation with the City Clerk, shall decide all questions of
interpretations of these policies and procedures and other questions of a
parliamentary nature which may arise at a Council meeting. All cases not
provided for in these policies and procedures shall be governed by the current
edition of Robert's Rules of Order. In the event of a conflict, these Council rules
of procedures shall prevail.
Section 10. Items Requiring Four Votes. The passage of any ordinance, grant or
revocation of franchise or license, any resolution for the payment of money or approval
of warrants shall require the affirmative vote of at least a majority of the whole
membership of the Council (4 votes).17
Section 11. Items Requiring a Unanimous Vote. An ordinance must be adopted
unanimously where both of the following conditions exist: 1) the ordinance is subject to
referendum under RCW 35A.11.090, as limited by Leonard v. City of Bothell, 87 Wn.2d
847, 852–53, 557 P.2d 1306, 1310 (1976) (“If the grant of power is to the city as a
corporate entity, direct legislation is permissible insofar as the statute is concerned. On
the other hand, if the grant of power is to the legislative authority of the city, the initiative
and referendum are prohibited.”), and similar case law, and; 2) the ordinance is
proposed to take immediate effect under RCW 35A.11.090(2).
Section 12. Council Representation.
12.1 Once the City Council has taken a position on an issue, all official City
correspondence regarding the issue will reflect the Council's adopted position.
17 RCW 35A.12.120
7.2.b
Packet Pg. 39
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
1
5
6
2
(
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
A
f
f
i
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
C
o
d
e
o
f
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
a
n
d
C
o
d
e
o
f
E
t
h
i
c
s
)
Exhibit A – COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE
16
12.2 City letterhead, email and other city resources shall not be used for
correspondence of Councilmembers representing a dissenting point of view from
an official Council position.
12.3 As a matter of courtesy, letters to the editor, or other communication of a
controversial nature, which do not express the majority opinion of the Council,
shall be presented to the full Council prior to publication.
Section 13. Reimbursement of Expenses.
13.1 Council adopted the City of Edmonds Employee Expenses, Volunteer
Recognition and Reimbursements Policy18 for application to Council as
enumerated therein.
In addition to the option of prior approval of training course-by-course as outlined
in Section VI of the Policy, a Council President may also pre-authorize trainings
relevant to the councilmember role up to a pre-authorized budget amount per
councilmember annually.
Section 14. Suspension and Amendment of Rules.
14.1 Any provision of these rules not governed by state law, City code, fundamental
parliamentary principle, or other statute or rule may be temporarily suspended by
a majority vote of the Council.
14.2 It is the intent of the City Council that the rules of procedure be periodically
reviewed as needed or during odd-numbered years. These rules may be
amended, or new rules adopted, by a majority vote of the Council, provided that
the proposed amendments or new rules shall have been distributed to Council at
least two weeks prior to such action.
ADOPTED BY:
RESOLUTION NO. 1562
AMENDED BY:
RESOLUTION NO. XXXX
18 Resolution 1516, November 1, 2022
7.2.b
Packet Pg. 40
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
1
5
6
2
(
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
A
f
f
i
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
C
o
d
e
o
f
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
a
n
d
C
o
d
e
o
f
E
t
h
i
c
s
)
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 01/14/2025
Approval of Council Special Meeting Minutes November 21, 2024
Staff Lead: Council
Department: City Clerk's Office
Preparer: Scott Passey
Background/History
N/A
Recommendation
Approval of Council Meeting minutes as part of the Consent Agenda.
Narrative
Council meeting minutes are attached.
Attachments:
2024-11-21 Council Special Minutes
8.1
Packet Pg. 41
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 21, 2024
Page 1
x
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL
SPECIAL MEETING
DRAFT MINUTES
November 21, 2024
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Mike Rosen, Mayor
Vivian Olson, Council President
Chris Eck, Councilmember
Michelle Dotsch, Councilmember
Neil Tibbott, Councilmember (joined 6:04 p.m.)
Susan Paine, Councilmember
Jenna Nand, Councilmember
ELECTED OFFICIALS ABSENT
Will Chen, Councilmember
STAFF PRESENT
Michelle Bennett, Police Chief
Loi Dawkins, Assistant Police Chief
Kim Dunscombe, Acting Finance Director
Shane Hope, Acting Planning & Dev. Dir.
Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
Scott Passey, City Clerk
Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator
1. CALL TO ORDER
The Edmonds City Council special meeting was called to order at 6 pm by Mayor Rosen in the Council
Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually.
2. ROLL CALL
City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present with the exception of
Councilmembers Chen and Councilmember Tibbott. (Councilmember Tibbott joined the meeting at 6:04
pm).
3. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
There were no audience comments.
8. COUNCIL BUSINESS
1. FLEX FUND CONTRACT AMENDMENT
Assistant Police Chief Loi Dawkins explained for the last several years the police department has had a
contract with Snohomish County that allows the department to apply for reimbursement of funds used to
assist individuals with emergency needs. The funds have not used to the extent initially thought due to the
availability of other funds and the period of time the department did not have a social worker, so Snohomish
County is reducing the funding. For the past several years the amount was $5,000 which is being reduced
to $1,000 via this amendment.
8.1.a
Packet Pg. 42
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
1
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
1
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 21, 2024
Page 2
The agreement has been reviewed by legal. Additional funds will be available if the need arises. The police
department also has access to funds from the Edmonds Police Foundation and the social worker also utilizes
assistance provided by St. Vincent de Paul and churches for housing needs or people who are already housed
who need rent assistance. Staff recommends approval of the contract amendment.
Councilmember Nand asked if the mayor or the police chief was the signatory to the contract amendment.
Assistant Chief Loi answered the mayor was the signatory.
COUNCILMEMBER NAND MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PAINE, TO
AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN THIS CONTRACT AMENDMENT. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
2. UPDATED AXON CONTRACT
Assistant Police Chief Loi Dawkins reported she has been in negotiations with Axon since July to change
some of the services and in the interest of the police department staying under budget, renegotiating the
contract. Staff requests council approval of 10-year contract that retains most of the services; a couple Axon
programs were eliminated including the drone program, Redaction Assistant, a program that that provides
a transcription which was not being utilized, and Axon Standards and Performance where Axon runs audits
and evidence reports. Axon services were reduced to what the department really needs and uses and the
contract was extended to 10 years. The negotiation also allowed the department to forfeit its 2024 payment
of over $160,000 and extend that amount over the 10 year contract. Staff’s recommendation is to approve
the new contract with Axon.
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NAND, TO
APPROVE THE EXTENSION OF THE AXON CONTRACT FOR 10 YEARS AS PROPOSED IN
THIS AGENDA ITEM. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
3. COUNCIL 2025-26 BUDGET DELIBERATIONS, INCLUDING POSSIBLE VOTING ON
BUDGET AMENDMENTS PROPOSED BY COUNCILMEMBERS DURING MEETING
Mayor Rosen asked council for their indulgence to allow him to make a few comments, recalling at the last
meeting the meeting ended before staff was able to provide comment. There has not been an opportunity
during the budget process to acknowledge the world the council lives in. The council entered this year in a
horrible financial reality that they did not wish upon themselves, they had to work with a new mayor, had
changes in numerous directors, had to embrace a new budget process, and were given a mountain of
information. Councilmembers have asked a lot of good questions throughout the process, submitted a lot
very thoughtful amendments, and exhibited great empathy for what staff has gone through and the impact
on the lives of the individuals who are also impacted. He thanked the council for those things, commenting
being a councilmember was not intended to be a full-time job.
Mayor Rosen also acknowledged the work of staff; they too inherited a very bad situation, a new mayor, a
new system and change in directors and when asked to make deep cuts, they rose to the occasion. The goal
was to find several million dollars to help get through 2024 which also mean fewer staff. Staff was then
asked to find over $7M when creating the 2025/2026 budget which required digging deeper which was hard
and it hurt.
Mayor Rosen continued, remarking that bring us to now. Some of the intent he has sensed from the council
was that there needs to be more cuts. As the City faces potentially going to public to ask for approval to
annex into the RFA and potentially a levy lid lift, further cuts will also mean borrowing less and decreasing
the amount of a levy lid lift. There were three very similar, large reductions proposed by three different
councilmembers, a 10% staff reduction, a 35-hour work week, and a 32-hour work week which would have
8.1.a
Packet Pg. 43
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
1
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
1
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 21, 2024
Page 3
an approximately $2.3M impact. He reached out to the directors, explaining that based on the council’s
conversations, there was some momentum behind those concepts and asking their preference if the council
were to advance one of them. Without exception including his own preference, every director gravitated
toward the 10% reduction and had very strong reactions to the two other approaches. Most directors
preferred instead of a percentage, the council provide a target number they were trying to save, recognizing
most of the amendments offered were related to savings.
Mayor Rosen continued, if that is the direction the council would like to go, he suggested adopting a target
number, for example $2.3M, and using that as a target and informed by the budgeting by priories (BBP)
process, the administration would make deeper cuts, aiming for $2.3M. As identifying those cuts and
implementing them will take time he suggested targeting March 31, 2025 as a delivery date for a plan that
would be implemented immediately so the number would need to be prorated for 2025 and the full amount
in 2026. He suggest the amendments the council has invested time in would become guidance that the
administration could consider in reaching that amount.
Mayor Rosen continued, if the council decides to ask the voters to annex into the RFA, the result of that
election in April would absolutely potentially create the need for a course correction. Any new information
or changes in conditions would cause a course correction. This would also provide council the opportunity
to create the ordinance that gives spending authority; the council would approve a budget with spending
authority and the administration would be charged with identifying those cuts. The budget book would then
reflect that modified budget.
Councilmember Nand thanked Mayor Rosen for providing his perspective and the directors’ feedback. As
one of seven councilmembers, she fully supports the $7.5M interfund loan to forestall layoffs. The City is
already very understaffed serving a population of nearly 43,000. She was interested in the 32 or 35-hour
work week or further furloughs to forestall layoffs. She did not want departments to have one hand tied
behind their backs, attempting to provide essential services. She thought it was wildly optimistic to think
the council could identifying further cuts and have a neatly tied up bow of a budget on November 26. Her
goal is to try to preserve City functions and levels of services especially for essential departments such as
public works and police and all the administrative services that support staff who are providing essential
services to ensure the City is meeting its obligations to the community, constituents and taxpayers. She was
not interested in further cuts to avoid an internal interfund loan.
Councilmember Eck said she understood Councilmember Nand’s concerns. She expressed appreciation for
the simplicity of 10% in cuts for council, acknowledging it certainly would not be simple for directors to
carry out. She recalled hearing from smaller departments who indicated there was not 10% in cuts to be
made. For example, cutting one FTE in Mr. Tatum’s department would be more than 10%. Mayor Rosen
clarified the intent would be a target number, how the administration got there would first be programmatic
using BBP; it would not be a 10% across the board reduction. Anecdotally the sense is the City would lose
more people by a reduced hours approach and there is concern with recruiting for jobs that aren’t full-time.
Councilmember Eck recognized a 10% reduction could be accomplished in a few different ways.
Councilmember Paine expressed appreciation for Mayor Rosen asking staff their preference; they are the
ones who deliver the services and it helps the council understand what services and programs are making a
difference. She was concerned that 10% of the General Fund was probably too high. She would be happier
with 5% and maybe as low as 4% if the council decides to go this direction. There are challenges with both
a wholesale percentage cut from General Fund which will mean layoffs and she worried that layoffs would
include programs that provide direct services to people, not just mowing lawns, cleaning restrooms, etc.
The budget is reaching a point where the council needs to pay attention to programs that serve people, one
of her greatest concern. The cuts directors made were very program informed and the file transfer protocol
(FTP) site the council was given was amazing to review as well as difficult to see what has been impacted.
8.1.a
Packet Pg. 44
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
1
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
1
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 21, 2024
Page 4
She was glad the council did not need to make a decision tonight; there are options including a little this
and a little that. If people get laid off, there will also have to be program cuts so not all the work shifts from
one desk to another. She summarized she was not comfortable with a 10% cut, envisioning that was too
high and was concerned with cutting programs that serve people in Edmonds.
Council President Olson said she has also asked staff their preference and received the same feedback.
None of these approaches are desirable, but they interestingly came close to same numbers. This seems
preferable to the across the board reduction because she agreed a lot of people would end up choosing to
leave. Choosing to look at a BBP approach this year at great staff time expense, the 32 and 35 work week
does not honor those BBP priorities. It is a falsity to say that cuts won’t affect level of service; the City
cannot delivery on all things well with fewer hours. The 10% reduction is more true to a BBP approach.
Council President Olson continued, with regard to the course correction that Mayor Rosen mentioned, there
would not be a course correction if voters approve annexing into the RTA or from the 10% cut. The 10%
cut would just barely make it possible to provide services, begin repaying the loan, repaying the reserves
and getting to street projects that have been put off for a very long time. She was in favor of the 10%
reduction approach and appreciated the administration volunteering to go back and make further cuts based
on the BBP exercise that the community participated in. If the administration revisiting programs that
ranked lower and finding additional cuts, that supports the system the council chose to embrace. The City
has more priorities than it has money which is one of the things the community will have to adjust to or
decide that they are willing to fund more priorities in the future.
Councilmember Dotsch explained her thought with a 10% reduction was to provide the administration as
much flexibility as possible. The concept was 10% of salaries and benefits, it doesn’t have to be programs,
it could be changes in the benefit structure that will allow the City to retain staff or other cuts. One piece
that hasn’t been discussed is the impact on citizens; between a levy lid lift and annexation into the RFA, it
could be a 200% tax increase. That could also affect small businesses in Edmonds who may choose to close
or move somewhere else because Edmonds is too expensive. She recognized there were impacts on staff,
but the 10% structural imbalance still exists. To Council President Olson’s comments, she agree 10% would
just get the City there. One of the other reasons for the 10% cut was staff already went through and scored
all the programs; the administration knows more about the community’s priorities. She summarized the
budget process is challenging for all involved, but it’s important to consider the impacts that new funding
sources will have on citizens and taxpayers.
Councilmember Tibbott commented there would seem to be greater flexibility if the council aims for a
target dollar amount such as $2M to be cut over 6-18 months instead of a percentage. He invited input from
the mayor or staff regarding which would provide more flexibility. Mayor Rosen said a dollar amount
would be preferable versus a percentage. Ms. Dunscombe relayed the proposed council amendment related
to a 10% reduction estimated a $2.5M reduction, but was reduced to $2.3M excluding overtime and holiday
buyback. The amendment description describes how the amount was determined.
Councilmember Tibbott commented a dollar amount rather than a percentage provides the greatest level of
creativity and flexibility in terms of identifying whether it’s a program cut, a revenue increase, or a
reorganization that allow for savings. With regard to timing, due to the possibility of annexation into the
RFA, which won’t be known until May, he suggested moving the presentation and implementation of the
cuts to June or July. For example, if the proposal is a $2M budget reduction, it would be $1M for the second
half of the year. He asked the administration to weigh in on the timing. Mayor Rosen responded this is open
to variables including the amount and the timing. Some of the things that impact it is the amount required
for the loan; the earlier the cuts are made, the greater the savings which would also impact the levy lid lift
request and messaging to the community, demonstrating to the community what has occurred before asking
for a levy lid lift. Depending on the amount of reduction the council requests, it will take time to develop a
8.1.a
Packet Pg. 45
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
1
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
1
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 21, 2024
Page 5
plan and implement those reductions. There are many ways for reductions to happen including benefits,
furloughs, reorganization, etc. In some cases a 45-day notice is required. Timing is as much of a variable
as the number and the method.
Councilmember Tibbott asked if council chose to request the budget be reduced by $2.3M by March, how
is that reflected in the budget book for 2025. Mayor Rosen answered if the council chose a $2.3M reduction
by March 31, 2025, it would be prorated for the 9 remaining months and the ordinance would give spending
authority for that number. Ms. Dunscombe answered there would need to be a process to bring forward
staff recommendations and motions made to adjust the proposed budget so it is clear what programs were
recommended for reduction or elimination. Each one would be detailed with FTE and non-labor expenses.
It will be very clear how the targeted amount was achieved. Councilmember Tibbott asked if March would
be enough time to make those calculations and for reorganization in some departments. Mayor Rosen said
the suggestion was March 31, 2025.
Councilmember Nand commented the City self-funds its unemployment insurance. She asked if it had been
ascertained that laying off individuals would result in savings in 2025 since each layoff incurs an obligation
for unemployment. Ms. Dunscome answered she increased the unemployment budget in 2025. Dept 39 also
budgets for payouts which was also increased in the 2025 budget in anticipation of the potential layoffs that
were included in the budget.
With regard to a 32-hour workweek, 35-hour workweek and 10% reduction in salaries and benefits,
Councilmember Nand referred to a previous councilmember’s comment that it was a falsity to consider the
32 or 35 work week in the spirit of BBP. She did not see how a 10% reduction in salary or benefits honored
BBP more than a 32 or 35 hour work week. In response to a previous councilmember’s comment that taxes
might be burdensome to Edmonds small businesses and cause them to close, she is a small business owner
in Edmonds who started her business in South Lake Union and left Seattle to move her business to
Edmonds. When she talks to small businesses who moved to Edmonds from Seattle and other large cities,
they cite public cleanliness and public safety as reasons. For example, during an Edmonds Chamber of
Commerce meeting, Sugarology said their workers felt unsafe going to/from their previous location in
Ballard and decided to move to Edmonds. That is a reflection of the level of staffing of the Edmonds Police
Department.
Councilmember Nand continued, the more positions that are unfunded, the dirtier and more dangerous the
city becomes for small businesses, their workers and their clients as well as for residents, the more the City
harms their business model. Edmonds has charm and is a well maintained City which is a reflection of
proper planning by the council and administration. If cuts have to be made, she preferred to wait until after
the question about annexation into the RFA is answered. She relayed her support for Councilmember
Paine’s proposed budget amendment for a work force planning study so the City can be more data driven
and strategic and not doing this hasty slash and burn within a couple weeks and telling people their service
to the City after decades is no longer needed.
Regarding a 10% reduction, Council President Olson clarified the intent was not 10% across the board; it
might not be each department equally or each person taking a 10% cut in salary and benefits, but using the
BBP approach, the administration would find another 10% in salaries and benefits or broadening that
definition to a dollar amount such as $2.3M. With regard to the budget impact of annexing into the RFA,
she reminded that was the only real revenue assumption that was included in the budget and it is a big
assumption. If the council waits to see how that vote turns out, it could mean that more cuts are necessary,
it will never mean less cuts because passage was already assumed in the budget.
Council President Olson continued, in thinking about programs that could be eliminated or reduced, Mayor
Rosen assembled a task force to consider boards and commissions because although they generate a lot of
8.1.a
Packet Pg. 46
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
1
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
1
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 21, 2024
Page 6
benefit, they cost the City about $500,000 annually. Consideration is being given to whether they are
operated as efficiently as possible, if the City has the right boards and commissions, if some could be
consolidated, or if there is a completely different approach for utilizing volunteers and residents who are
interested in being involved. She suggested a two year pause in boards and commissions during this critical
2025/2026budget cycle. It may not be possible to save the $500,000 spent on boards and commissions, but
a large percentage of that could be saved. Only 3 of the City’s 20 boards are mandatory, the planning board,
LEOFF Disability Board, and the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee. She summarized that could address a
large portion of the $2.3M.
Councilmember Paine agreed the workforce planning study needed to be done. It would allow the City to
determine the staff required for each program. No one on the council has the expertise to determine exactly
what is needed for each program. She objected to the comments that the reduced work week is not a
programmatic decision, explaining a reduced work week is a layer for all programs and there is plenty of
airspace within that discussion. It happens after program driven decisions have been made and would not
supplant them. She appreciated the proposal for a percentage reduction and Councilmember Tibbott’s
proposal for a specific dollar amount and not starting before the result of the annexation vote is known. As
department directors reminded council on Tuesday, it will be helpful not to make rash or rushed decisions.
The council needs to be very strategic with regard to how the workforce is treated, some of whom are in a
very precarious position. Because the proposed changes affect the City’s workforce, they need to be done
with a lot of communication and emotional intelligence and not throw big numbers around without
understanding the numbers and the process.
Councilmember Eck asked if there was a 10% or an equivalent dollar amount reduction, if the same intra-
fund transfer in the same amount would still be necessary. Ms. Dunscombe answered the same $7.5M will
not be necessary; this reduction would be an offset to reduce the loan amount as well as the interest charge.
Councilmember Eck observed the exact dollar amount of the 10% would come off the loan amount. Ms.
Dunscombe answered that would probably be the administration’s recommendation; council has the option
to say no. She anticipated the administration’s intent would be to bring forward a reduced staffing level to
directly offset the amount of the interfund loan.
Mayor Rosen thanked council for entertaining this discussion.
Reinstate Funding for the Police Public Records Position – Amendment #C17
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NAND, TO
REINSTATE FUNDING FOR THE POLICE PUBLIC RECORDS POSITION.
Councilmember Paine explained this position requires a lot of technical and legal expertise and decision-
making along with an understanding of timelines and deadlines associated with records requests. There are
specific legal requirements for processing records requests and she was worried about the legal risk and
liability.
Councilmember Nand asked about the volume of public records requests handled by this staff person and
the liability risks if the department does not respond within the required time period if this position is cut
and productivity is affected. Police Chief Bennett recalled this was addressed during their presentation on
staff reductions. She explained it depends on the call volume. If there is a major critical incident, there
could be 5-6 vehicles and 5-6 body cameras which could result in hours of public disclosure redaction of
the bodycam and dashcam video; one case could be 70 hours. Even a traffic stop could require a couple
hours of redaction. There are timelines in the RCW that have to be met; not meeting timelines and deadlines
has resulted in liability for other agencies.
Councilmember Nand referred to funding required to fund this position in 2025, $145,000, and the present
political environment with first amendment auditors and other government skeptical individuals making
8.1.a
Packet Pg. 47
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
1
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
1
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 21, 2024
Page 7
large volume requests. She asked if eliminating this position in 2025 would result in the City paying more
than $145,000 in potential liability if the department does not turn around requests quickly enough. Chief
Bennett answered that is certainly a possibility. There are two public disclosure request personnel; when a
request is received, they send out notification of receipt and dates when information can expect to be
received. If dates were missed and there was a lawsuit and if the reporting party prevailed, it could obviously
cost more.
Councilmember Nand asked if litigation cost could be expected to exceed $145,000. Chief Bennett
answered that would be a better question for City Attorney Jeff Taraday to answer. Mr. Taraday answered
if the primary motivation to restore this funding was to avoid hypothetical legal liability, he preferred to get
back to the council by their next meeting. Although he is not the public records expert at Lighthouse, his
hunch would be this was not a concern the council should use to justify restoring this funding, but he would
like to doublecheck that and get back to council with an answer.
Council President Olson commented when the initial presentation was made, this was one of a couple
positions she wondered if in the long run it would come out ahead financially. She had been satisfied that
it would, although she was open to new/different information that this was something the department felt
they could get by without. The City is in a getting-by mode so she was prepared to support staff’s proposal
with regard to what they thought was most in compliance with the BBP process and that level of funding.
Councilmember Tibbott said he was inclined to support staff’s recommendation to eliminate this position.
He emphasized it was not about the person, but the position and the role. He asked if there was an enormous
backlog that was required to be covered, could the City contract or outsource that workload to handle an
unusual or excessive amount of requests. Chief Bennett answered it takes a great deal of specialized training
to do public disclosure request redactions. Outsourcing might be a better question for Mr. Taraday. There
are a lot of certifications and ongoing specialized training for staff in those position. Councilmember
Tibbott appreciated that it was very specialized, however, many cities are doing this kind of work and
outsourcing to another city that did not have the same workload might be a way to handle an unusual
circumstance.
Councilmember Eck commented from an operations standpoint, she felt the most vulnerability was having
one person doing such an important function with a high volume workload. She asked who provided backup
if this was reduced to one position. Chief Bennett answered that could be problematic. She would need to
research outsourcing unless Mr. Taraday had other information as that was not something that had been
done before. Councilmember Eck asked what would happen if the person was sick for an long period of
time or they leave and a new person has to be hired or the person takes a vacation. With regard to
outsourcing, Mr. Taraday said it may be worth looking into entering into an interlocal agreement with
another city such as Lynnwood to provide backup capability, almost like mutual aid for public records.
With mutual aid, when one police department is overwhelmed by a massive incident, other jurisdictions
come in to help. He did not know if Chief Bennett had ever considered such a concept with regard to public
records, and if not, it may be worth looking into. Chief Bennett pointed out the potential for unfair labor
practice with outsourcing work, something she has encountered when outsourcing in the past.
Councilmember Eck commented in the scenario where someone leaves suddenly or they are out for an
extended period of time, it may be necessary to pull people from other positions to do that work. Chief
Bennett answered those people would have to be trained to do that work; another consideration would be
taking them away from their assigned duties. Some research would definitely needed to be done regarding
whether outsourcing or someone taking over for the position in the event of an extended absence was even
a possibility.
8.1.a
Packet Pg. 48
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
1
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
1
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 21, 2024
Page 8
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NAND, TO
POSTPONE THIS DECISION TO NOVEMBER 26, 2024. MOTION CARRIED (5-1),
COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT VOTING NO.
Permitting Fees Study – Amendment #C18
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DOTSCH, TO ADD
UP TO $10,000 FOR A CONSULTANT STUDY TO EVALUATE CURRENT PERMITTING FEE
SCHEDULE AND UPDATE THE PERMITTING FEE METHODOLOGY.
Councilmember Dotsch explained this amendment replaces an one she withdrew previously and
Councilmember Paine was very helpful in crafting this amendment. It would be an opportunity to update
fees and have the amount factored into the fees. The City hasn’t done a comprehensive fee study in some
time and she anticipated a study would bring fees to a more accurate level and reimburse costs at 2025
rates.
Councilmember Paine explained a permit fee study would provide an external review and comparison of
Edmonds’ permitting fees versus other cities, determine if there are gaps in our current permit fee schedule,
reduce General Fund impacts based on an inadequate fee schedule, review permitting in other areas,
particularly those which have experienced a recent burst of development, index the regional inflation rate
used for construction during the years when there isn’t a permitting fee rate study, and the cost of the study
could be included in the calculation of the permitting fee.
Councilmember Nand thanked Councilmembers Dotsch and Paine and Ms. Hope for developing this
amendment. She was generally skeptical of adding more obligations to General Fund unless there was an
offset, however, given the strong potential for revenue generation in the future, this $10,000 would be well
spent. She expressed her strong support for the amendment.
Councilmember Eck relayed her support for the amendment, commenting she put it in the category of a
good grant writer who more than makes up for their salary. In this case, there would be an expenditure to
generate significant revenue.
Council President Olson asked if Ms. Hope or another staff person with expertise in the area of permit fees
could estimate the return on investment, the number of years it would take to recover the $10,000 cost
which she understood would covered by fees eventually. Acting Planning & Development Director Shane
Hope responded the challenge is one doesn’t know the amount of fees the City will collect, but chances are
good it would be recovered within 1-2 years and maybe even more than the cost of the study. Council
President Olson commented a study every five years wouldn’t be too soon. Ms. Hope answered every five
years would be good, often the cost can be recouped in less than 1-2 years, that is a conservative estimate.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Correction to Street Fund IF Services Charge - Staff Recommendations #10
Ms. Dunscombe explained this amendment is to reduce the interfund services line for the Street Fund.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER PAINE AND SECONDED TO REDUCE THE
STRET FUND INTERFUND SERVICES LINE ITEM BY $170,000 TO $3,247,230 IN EACH YEAR
OF THE BIENNIUM.
Councilmember Dotsch asked whether the Street Fund was one of the funds where there were challenges.
Ms. Dunscombe answered the Street Fund definitely struggles. The General Fund contributes $450,000 to
the Street Fund every year and it continues to struggle. The TBD charge was increased from $20 to $40;
8.1.a
Packet Pg. 49
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
1
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
1
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 21, 2024
Page 9
2025 will be the first year the new $40 fee will be collected the entire year but the Street Fund will still
struggle.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
As budget amendments was the only topic for the Saturday meeting, Council President Olson inquired
about councilmembers’ interest in cancelling Saturday’s meeting. Council consensus to cancel the Saturday
meeting. The next meeting is a special meeting on Monday, November 25 at 6 pm.
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DOTSCH, TO
EXCUSE COUNCILMEMBER CHEN. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Taraday commented for future reference, there is no need to excuse councilmembers from a special
meetings. The law that applies to councilmember absences applies only to regular meetings.
ADJOURNMENT
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 7:06 pm.
8.1.a
Packet Pg. 50
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
1
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
1
,
2
0
2
4
)
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 01/14/2025
Approval of Council Special Meeting Minutes November 25, 2024
Staff Lead: Council
Department: City Clerk's Office
Preparer: Scott Passey
Background/History
N/A
Recommendation
Approval of Council Meeting minutes as part of the Consent Agenda.
Narrative
Council meeting minutes are attached.
Attachments:
2024-11-25 Council Special Minutes
8.2
Packet Pg. 51
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 25, 2024
Page 1
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL
SPECIAL MEETING
DRAFT MINUTES
November 25, 2024
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Mike Rosen, Mayor
Vivian Olson, Council President
Chris Eck, Councilmember
Will Chen, Councilmember
Neil Tibbott, Councilmember
Michelle Dotsch, Councilmember
Susan Paine, Councilmember
Jenna Nand, Councilmember
STAFF PRESENT
Angie Feser, Parks, Rec., & Human Serv. Dir.
Shane Hope, Acting Planning & Dev. Dir.
Todd Tatum, Comm., Culture & Econ. Dev. Dir.
Brad Shipley, Senior Planner
Frances Chapin, Arts & Culture Program Mgr.
Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
Scott Passey, City Clerk
Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator
1. CALL TO ORDER
The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 6 pm by Mayor Rosen in the Council Chambers,
250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually.
2. ROLL CALL
City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present.
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO
APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
4. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Jim Ogonowski, Edmonds, assumed most councilmembers had purchased a house in the past and assumed
they did not purchase more than they could afford. He asked when buying a house, was it the hope or the
plan to win the lottery to pay the mortgage. If they missed a payment, foreclosure was the result. The same
is true for the city. By his analysis the city can only afford about $2 million in loan payments for 2025 and
zero in 2026 to keep the city afloat. Otherwise the city will reach a tipping point in mid -2025 where fiscal
recovery will be nearly impossible based on a plan of hope. Hoping the citizens will approve the RFA as
well as a levy lift is just that – hope – it is not a plan. He encouraged the council to ask the city attorney
what insolvency looks like for the city, what actually happens when it reached that point and at what point
did the city have to begin selling assets such as buildings and land to pay off the $7.5 million loan in 2025
and $5 million in 2026. He feared the city was headed toward insolvency and reiterated hope is not a plan.
He encouraged the council to provide a plan to retain the city that residents love and not just hope voters
will approve something. The council has a long way to go; budget amendments have saved $7,000 so far.
8.2.a
Packet Pg. 52
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
5
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
5
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 25, 2024
Page 2
5. COUNCIL BUSINESS
1. INTERVIEW CANDIDATE FOR APPOINTMENT TO BOARD/COMMISSION
Councilmembers interviewed Megan Joplin for appointment to the arts commission (responses in italics):
I’ve worked as a photographer in commercial and fine art capacity for the past 30 years. I started doing
theater photography for local theater companies in Seattle and did various other things including solo art
shows. I’m also an attorney and work in an environmental practice and see the two complimenting each
other; being an attorney as well as practicing fine art both require creativity.
Councilmember Eck asked what mark she hoped to leave as part of the arts commission. I’m interested in
art that is joyful, fun and playful and in moving into that area. There are great things in Edmonds already;
I love that Edmonds has a Creative District, there is tons of stuff already happening. I’m interested in doing
activities with kids. There’s a program called Art Sunday in other cities where they bring in a professional
artist to collaborate with children on a piece that is temporarily displayed in a storefront window. I’d love
to have something like San Francisco’s Peephole Cinema that has 24 hour silent movies. There is a vending
machine called Art-o-mat where you pay $5 and get a piece of artwork. I’m interested in getting the
community more involved and having art for everyone.
Councilmember Nand asked how she could use a position on the arts commission to support the small
business community. I love the idea of having artist displays in storefront windows. I haven’t thought about
other ideas that would incorporate the business community. Beautiful artwork attracts people, the Art-o-
Mat or something interesting and exciting for the community will increase foot traffic and support for
businesses.
Council President Olson said she enjoyed meeting her through her resume and today’s interview. Her
background is really diverse and interesting and she has lived a lot of places; she too has lived in Tempe
and Brooklyn, New York. She was hopeful this was the tip of the iceberg with regard to her involvement
with the city and that she finds lots of ways to contribute due to her rich perspective.
2. BOYS & GIRLS CLUB BUILDING DESIGN - SECOND REVIEW
Parks, Recreation and Human Services Director Angie Feser explained the council was reviewing the
design of the Boys & Girls Club (BGC) in Civic Park for the second time per the ground use agreement.
The council reviewed the BGC design in July 2023, the packet includes responses to council questions,
comments and suggestions along with additional building elevations from all perspectives. One change is
a proposal for a set of concrete stairs inside the park property that would tie the front of the building to the
park, a change staff is very supportive of. Details regarding the stairs will be worked out in the agreement
prior to construction. She advised Bill Tsoukalas, Executive Director, Boys & Girls Club of Snohomish
County, was present to answer questions.
Adam Clark, Architect, representing Boys & Girls Club, explaining this is essentially the same design as
was presented in July 2023. He displayed and reviewed views of the northwest and southwest corner in day
and evening, identifying the gym on the north side of the lot and the 2-story club on the south side, high
windows on three sides of the gym, and 2-story portion that provides views into the gym. In the club portion
of the building, the main floor consists of the gym, a kitchen, a dining foyer, restrooms, control office for
the BGC, a public area and flex space. The upper floor is dedicated to club use and two ECAP classrooms,
areas for club use, restrooms, and views into the gym. The nighttime views were prepared at the request of
the Architectural Design Board.
8.2.a
Packet Pg. 53
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
5
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
5
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 25, 2024
Page 3
Mr. Clark reviewed the following schematic which shows aspects of the park such as the skatepark and the
track. He identified the BGC's main entry, an angled sidewalk with stairs, power for the park and the
building that comes in at the south edge. There are plans for a paved area that can be used as a plaza.
Building materials include concrete masonry and wood or cement board panels to break up the facades.
There is a lot of glass on the south and west sides. The east side toward the park is primarily the gym,
kitchen, restrooms, electrical room and power transformer.
Mr. Clark displayed the west and south elevations (below), explaining the west elevation shows two garage
doors off the sidewalk; he was uncertain those would be included. They were added as a result of a council
suggestion, but there are some safety concerns; they will work with the ADB on the doors or another
solution. The main entry doors are on the south elevation.
8.2.a
Packet Pg. 54
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
5
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
5
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 25, 2024
Page 4
Mr. Clark displayed and reviewed the east and north elevations, explaining the east side is the backside
facing the park and contains high windows for the gym and mechanical spaces. The north elevation contains
recessed areas where there is opportunity for artwork. The artwork cannot protrude out very far due to the
fire lane. They will work with an artist on potential artwork.
Mr. Clark displayed a view of the ramp and the proposed stairs.
Mr. Clark displayed and reviewed the site plan, explaining there is a conditional use permit and a design
review process to go through. A gym 23’ clear is required to make it regulation for volleyball. The allowed
height in this zone is 25’, but it needs to be increased to 30’ to provide room for structure and roof slopes.
The existing club is about 35’ tall so the proposed building reduces the overall height and mass. There is
also a 20’ building setback required, they are working to eliminate that so the full extent of the 12,000
square foot pad can be utilized. If those issues are not approved, they will return to council. The next step,
once approved by the city council is ADB review and approval and scheduling the CUP hearing.
8.2.a
Packet Pg. 55
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
5
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
5
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 25, 2024
Page 5
Councilmember Eck commented this is a marvelous design and the stairs make perfect sense leading to the
park. Both her girls went to the BGC so she is looking forward to the new building. She summarized there
are tremendous opportunities with all amenities that were mentioned.
Councilmember Paine referred to the ADA ramp and the stairs that abut the ramp, and asked if there had
been any conversation with the DEIA commission about having stairs abutting the ramp. She did not object
to the stairs but wanted to ensure they were compatible. Mr. Clark was unsure the stairs had been discussed
with the DEIA commission, but he is very well versed in ADA requirements and assured access will not be
impacted by the stairs. The ramp slope does not require handrails; the stairs will require a handrail, but they
will be setback enough that they do not intrude onto the ramp.
Councilmember Tibbott said he did not recall the previous presentation to council but could see that
significant strides had been made in the architectural design. He was especially concerned with the north
side of the building, but that has been broken up in this iteration of the design and the idea of art in that area
is an exciting opportunity that could evolve over time. With regard to the west side, it was his understanding
the sidewalk was reduced to move the building further west. Mr. Clark answered the building is at that the
edge of the existing sidewalk. Councilmember Tibbott asked if a setback was required from the sidewalk.
Mr. Clark answered no, there is a setback from the property line.
Councilmember Tibbott recalled the council’s suggestion for the rollup doors was to provide engagement
with the walkway versus just a blank wall. He envisioned it would be an interesting feature for the
community as well as the building users and would add ventilation. He was hopeful the design practicalities
could be worked out. Mr. Clark answered that may be possible. He pointed out this wi ll be LEED Silver
building so it will include a lot of green building features; HVAC is a heavily weighted item in that process.
Councilmember Tibbott commented the council recently considered green building incentives; he was
unsure this building would qualify, but those incentives allows up to a 30’ height with green building
incentives. He suggested adding solar panels so the building could qualify. Mr. Clark said solar panels are
included in the plans.
Councilmember Chen recalled talking about the solar panels and the height increase to maximize uses in
the building. He was excited to see this building come together and was hopeful funds could be raised to
install solar panels. He was pleased there would be ADA access so the building will be fully accessible for
all abilities.
Councilmember Nand thanked the BGC team for their hard work, fundraising, and adding this incredible
amenity that updates the downtown Edmonds skyline in such an attractive manner.
Council President Olson thanked the BGC team for incorporating the council’s feedback and for the detailed
Q&A they provided which expedited the presentation and discussion. With regard to the art, she pointed
out nearby residents will see that art every day from their homes. She was unsure whether that art, similar
to the building design, would go through a public process to ensure the nearby residents are considered.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY ECK, THAT THE COUNCIL
APPROVE THE SECOND REVIEW OF THE BOYS & GIRLS CLUB BUILDING AS PROPOSED.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
3. 2025 LEGISLATIVE AGENDA
Community, Culture and Economic Development Director Todd Tatum introduced State Lobbyist Debora
Munguia. Ms. Mungua explained she has worked with the City since 2019. This year’s legislative session
will start January 13th and will be a long session, 105 days. The legislature needs to adopt biennial budgets
including a 4-year balanced operating budget, a 2-year transportation budget and 2-year capital budget. The
8.2.a
Packet Pg. 56
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
5
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
5
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 25, 2024
Page 6
democrats increased their majorities in both the House and Senate by one seat in each chamber. There will
be a recount in the senate seat in Clark county; Senator-elect Cortes is ahead by only about 350 votes so a
mandatory recount will occur. She has heard from the senate about big changes due to people who have left
the legislature or left their old position for a new position. Jamie Pedersen will be the new Senate Majority
Leader since Andy Billig is leaving. Senator-elect Marcus Riccelli will be the Floor Leader. Senator
Solomon will be the Chair of Local Governments. Senator-elect Bateman, who ran the middle housing bills
when she was in the House, will be the chair of the Housing Committee. The Senate Ways and Means
Committee, the budget committee, has some big changes; two of the moderate democrats who would often
vote with republicans to stop certain proposals are gone from the legislature. Ways and Means has been
restructured, giving democrats more seats and added the Chair, Senator Stanford as Vice Chair of
Operating, Senator Trudeau as Vice Chair for Capital, and created a new Vice Chair of Finance.
Ms. Munguia explained she was still waiting for information on House committee assignments as well as
information from the Senate republican caucus. The legislature will be in Olympia the week of December
9 for assembly days. The governor’s budget will also come out in December. This will be Governor Inslee’s
last budget proposal. By law he has to propose a balanced budget which is Book 1. Book 2 can assume
different revenues. It is expected Book 2 will go to Governor-elect Ferguson who will decide how to move
forward with it.
Ms. Munguia continued, the governor asked state agencies to submit budget reduction proposals. It is
estimated the operating budget will have a $10-12B hole for the 4 years the legislature has to come up with
a balanced operating budget. That does not include collective bargaining for state employees which is
estimated to be $1B+. The hole is due to anticipated caseload increases for social workers, juvenile justice,
child care, etc. and decreases in general revenues. The transportation budget also has a big hole due to
decreasing revenues and increasing costs. The budget leaders for operating and transportation are talking
with leadership about how to fill those holes. They are working collaboratively and developing various
scenarios; the hope is they will identify one big thing that will backfill that or it make easier. For example,
if they can do something in operating, the operating budget has many more levers than transportation, such
as diverting sales tax to the transportation budget. The priorities for transportation are to finish what was
started in Connecting Washington and Move Ahead packages that have been adopted, address the backlog
of maintenance and preservation, and make key investments to keep the economy moving and traffic safety
due to an historic loss of life due to traffic safety issues.
Ms. Munguia continued prefiling of bills starts in December. In addition to the budget, there will be a lot
of policy bills. There is a coalition of organizations including schools, labor, firefighters, etc. working
together, led by AWC, to lift the 1% property tax cap. AWC is also looking at things to help cities with
revenue such as more flexibility regarding REET such as increasing REET for higher value properties and
lowering it on other properties, storage facility tax parity, a retail delivery service fee, increasing state
shared revenues, creating more flexibility that would allow cities some revenue options, indigent defense
standards, public safety, behavioral health services, housing, affordable housing and homelessness, juvenile
justice, environmental priorities, the RAP Act, childcare, and many other important public policy issues.
Mr. Tatum referred to the City’s legislative agenda, explaining past legislative agendas have been 4-5 pages
and included a great deal of cut and paste from other agencies’ legislative agendas. The goal this year was
to make the City’s legislative agenda more concise. He reviewed the legislative agenda:
• Hwy 99 Revitalization project
o Maintain $22.5 million funding in the Move Ahead Washington package across 2025 -27
($4.3M) and 2027-29 ($18.2M) biennia for Stage 3 of the SR 99 Revitalization Project.
• Key 2025-27 Legislative Priorities
1. City Revenue options: Support mechanisms to expand general revenue (e.g., lifting the 1%
property tax cap, increasing REET share, and exploring state revenue-sharing)
8.2.a
Packet Pg. 57
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
5
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
5
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 25, 2024
Page 7
2. Behavioral Health and public safety: Support co-responder programs, increase resources to
deal with domestic violence, and enhance behavioral health infrastructure (practitioners and
beds)
3. Indigent Defense standards: Engage in discussions on defense standards, emphasizing state
funding for any cost increases.
4. Increase Housing Supply: Back measures that support housing construction and explore new
funding options for needs along the housing continuum, including home ownership and senior
housing
5. Tax Increment Financing (TIF): Support TIF’s viability
6. Address the impacts of state environmental and housing legislation on cities: Promote the
creation of funding and programs which help cities to plan for, adapt to, and fund
7. Work with our delegates to identify solutions to:
The impacts of the lowest bidder requirements.
Increasing the ability of retired law enforcement officers to return to service.
Reduce the impacts of vexatious requests and litigation as a result of the Public Records
Act.
Mr. Tatum referred to the additional legislative issues on the legislative agenda which includes items from
other agencies’ as well as councilmember requests related to other issues. The intent is to bring the
legislative agenda to council on a future consent agenda reflecting any changes requested by council.
Councilmember Paine asked if the legislature would be looking at a roadway usage tax due to diminishing
gas tax. She pointed out it would be a swap, not a double taxation to replace a gas tax with a roadway usage
tax based on miles traveled. Ms. Munguia answered Representative Fey, Chair of House Transportation, is
planning to put a RUC bill forward this session. He has been holding stakeholder meetings across the state.
She was unsure it would pass; Senator Liias recently talked about it in a transportation meeting and his
view on implementing a RUC charge in the state was it was a long term thing, taking up to 8 years to fully
implement. There is discussion about potentially introducing it in different categories such as starting with
electric and hybrid vehicles. It is such as a big change for Washingtonians, he would rather do it in a way
that is not so abrupt and potentially create opportunities to not be successful. Councilmember Paine said
she will not suggest that as a priority for this session, but wanted to recognize that gas tax revenues have
been decreasing.
Councilmember Paine asked the status of the legislative intent for the purchase or transfer of the Edmonds
Marsh to the City. There were provisos in past years, but she did not see that in the legislative agenda. Mr.
Tatum answered there has been a legislative proviso giving the City first right of purchase for the Unocal
property when it transfers to WSDOT. The thought with not including it in this legislative agenda was, 1)
the memorandum of understanding in which they committed to giving the City first right of purchase and
setting forth a process, and 2) the property won’t change hands until two years of successful monitoring
once Ecology deems the property to be in compliance which hasn’t occurred yet. He did not envision
Ecology deeming the property in compliance before June 30, so the City wouldn’t be in a position to
purchase the property in this biennia.
Councilmember Paine requested human services housing support be added to the legislative agenda. The
City’s human services department spends a lot of time ensuring people have access to housing and are able
to remain in housing. There are a lot of efforts to make housing more affordable, but this would be to ensure
human services to keep people housed and access to housing options at the lowest income level and to help
people on the verge of becoming unhoused. Mr. Tatum offered to look at the wording in partner
organization’s legislative agenda items and see what makes the most sense to include. He will share that
with her between now and when it is placed on the consent agenda.
8.2.a
Packet Pg. 58
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
5
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
5
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 25, 2024
Page 8
Councilmember Nand expressed appreciation for this year’s bullet point format. With regard to the bullet
points under public safety, she recalled in previous years the City supported proposals brought forward by
the Edmonds Police Department related to police pursuits. There have been a rash of fatalities in Snohomish
County during police pursuits and she asked if there was any movement in the legislature regarding reforms
to decrease negative outcomes and if so, would it be appropriate for the City to support that. Ms. Munguia
relayed Chair Goodman will be looking at that and will be introducing some legislation but she was unsure
whether it would address vehicular pursuits. She envisioned that was an issue that will come before the
legislature again; she was not hearing any plans to adjust that statue again, but will inform Mr. Tatum if she
hears anything.
Councilmember Tibbott expressed support for the new, more concise format. He referred to the indigenous
defense standard, assuming that legislation would require a response by cities, and asked if that would be
considered an unfunded mandate. Mr. Tatum answered it could be, if indigent defense standards are
adopted, it would lower caseloads from 150 felonies/attorney/year to 47 by 2027, a significant reduction.
Ms. Munguia said the court would change the caseload standards; even if the legislature adopts a change,
the attorneys would follow the court’s decision. The Association of Counties is working with AWC to
introduce legislation that would assist Washington with its current standards; it would be a multitiered
approach where the state would pay for half the existing costs and there is a formula where the counties
doing a good job wouldn’t be penalized and if the new standards are adopted by the court, the state would
cover 100% of that. The state has a $10-12B deficit so she was unsure how that would play out. There is
recognition that Washington State is woefully behind in helping local governments with costs.
Councilmember Tibbott relayed his concern that the state continues to pass requirements that require cities
to divert funding from things like sidewalks, streets, and parks. He wondered if there could be legislation
that requires the state to estimate the cost to cities before they pass a mandate, something he was unsure
had every been done before. Ms. Munguia relayed if the legislature passes something, it will be
implemented by the Supreme Court, not necessarily the legislature. There have been hearings on this so the
court knows it would be a huge financial issue. Even if the caseload standards were dropped, there isn’t the
workforce in place for public defenders or prosecutors or facilities so something like that couldn’t be
implemented right away. The court is thinking about how they could eventually roll something like that
out; the expectation is they will do something. With regard to Councilmember Tibbott’s concern about
unfunded mandates, she recalled related to transit oriented development there was concern by cities related
to costs so a proviso was included in the transportation budget last session that will look at Snohomish,
King, Clark and Spokane Counties and a report will come to the legislature in June 2025. She summarized
there have been examples of where the impacts have been studied.
Mr. Tatum asked if the fiscal notes for bills include financial impacts to cities. Ms. Munguia answered the
Department of Commerce is responsible for submitting local government fiscal notes on bills. The agencies
submit their own and then Commerce submits theirs using information from AWC. Mr. Tatum said City
representatives meet with delegates during the session; this legislative agenda and clear talking points about
actual expenses and opportunities will be important. The legislation has asked a lot of cities; but the
bottleneck is the lack of financial ability. He will prepare something related to the impacts and opportunities
related to funding for use when City representatives meet with delegates. Councilmember Tibbott
commented one of the unfunded mandates is related to public records requests. The City is considering
laying off an employee that does that work; it would save money but also impact the ability to process
public records. The legislature needs to know some of the actions the City is taking that will be detrimental
to the effectiveness they envision.
Councilmember Eck said she was happy to see senior housing mentioned in the legislative agenda.
Edmonds has a lot of low income seniors and she was concerned with the increasing percentage of seniors
who are part of the homeless population in Snohomish County. Due to the City’s financial situation, she
was also happy to see items related to funding, financing and revenue. She asked what proposals would
8.2.a
Packet Pg. 59
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
5
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
5
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 25, 2024
Page 9
look like to address exploring state revenue sharing. Ms. Munguia said one thing cities and counties are
looking at is marijuana shared revenue; when the law was first put in place, the amount anticipated to go to
local governments never materialized. There is interest in changing the statute so a set amount or percentage
that is significantly more than the current amount would go to cities. Again, the state has a $10-12B deficit
so a lot will depend on what the legislature does related to additional revenue or cuts that state agenci es
take.
Councilmember Dotsch relayed she also likes the format of the legislative agenda. She seconded
Councilmember Tibbott’s comments, recalling the city council previously requested the legislature allow
cities to retain local control over zoning and housing density. That also came with unfunded mandates to
cities in terms of staffing, bandwidth, and gaps in infrastructure. Her goal would be to create no new laws
that have unfunded mandates that increase the cost of city government without reasonable compensation.
A one size fits all idea placed on cities like Edmonds is a mismatch. For example bills related to TOD could
greatly impact downtown Edmonds. Ms. Munguia relayed she, Mr. Tatum and Ms. Hope recently met with
Representative Reed regarding a TOD bill. During that meeting Ms. Hope described the unique things that
would impact Edmonds and Representative Reed was open to considering things like sea level rise and
ferry traffic and welcomed comments related to changes to the bill to avoid negative impacts on Edmonds.
Good relationships have been established; the City has a wonderful delegation that understands the issues.
Councilmember Dotsch referred to placemaking grants and asked for an example of a desired outcome of
a placemaking grant for Edmonds. Mr. Tatum responded there is currently no clear grant category for
something that is less than a park, an amount of public space that isn’t multiple acres. There needs to be
more flexible sources to connect smaller transit or trail networks, to improve sidewalk networks, to acquire
smaller public spaces, etc., basically finding places in these categories to fill in the blanks in hubs and
centers where private developers and retails don’t provide things the City wants to make the space more
attractive and appealing for residents and retailers. Councilmember Dotsch asked if the goal was to increase
revenue and economic development. Mr. Tatum answered yes; having a funding source that does these
things helps encourages retail to locate and flourish in mixed use developments. He has heard from the
community and the council that they do not want just big boxes of housing; these spaces also enhance
quality of life.
Councilmember Chen was glad to hear AWC is championing efforts related to revenue, in particularly
property tax. Edmonds is in a unique situation where a large percentage of the City’s revenues is property
tax and its sales tax is very limited compared to Lynnwood which has a large sales tax base due to the mall
and other businesses. He asked if any bills had been introduced to repeal the 1% property tax cap. Ms.
Munguia answered there have been conversations with Senator Pedersen who was the prime sponsor of the
bill during the last session. He is now the majority leader in the Senate so there have been conversations
about whether he would be willing to sponsor it again, and if not, if there is someone in his caucus who
would champion it. There is no bill sponsor yet, but she anticipated there would be one soon.
Councilmember Chen added the City’s voice in support of that legislation, noting that is one of the things
that put Edmonds into a budget imbalance and resulted in major challenges related to revenues. Mr. Tatum
referred to a list of cities in support of changing this legislation that included Edmonds. Even prior to the
session, Edmonds has been advocating for that issue and will continue to advocate for it during the session.
Council President Olson referred to the key 2025-27 Legislative Priorities, in particular Increase Housing
Supply, relaying she supports that effort, but it could mean a lot of different things. She did not support any
additional density requirements from the state, noting there had been a lot of that in the past housing bills.
She resented that being imposed on the City and did not want to invite more of that. The idea of funding
options for needs along the housing continuum seemed like it addressed human services which a
councilmember requested in her earlier comments. Ms. Munguia relayed some of the language is from
AWC’s legislative agenda related to permanent supportive housing, first time homeownership,
homeownership for people below 80% AMI, workforce and senior housing, etc.
8.2.a
Packet Pg. 60
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
5
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
5
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 25, 2024
Page 10
Council President Olson asked for clarification regarding a councilmember’s earlier request to add human
services housing support. Councilmember Paine responded she was interested in funding support for people
who are living close to the edge, 0-50% AMI, and having financial resources to house people in motels,
repair roofs, rent support via Commerce grants, etc. Families who are struggling will need that support. She
acknowledged behavioral health funds associated with law enforcement; this is different, it is human
services to ensure people do not lose their homes through economic eviction. She wanted to encourage the
state to maintain some level of funding that cities can access via the Department of Commerce. Mr. Tatum
answered the explanation addresses the housing as well as the tools to support people.
Councilmember Nand relayed her support for this component of the legislative priorities. She was
particularly excited by the clause “including home ownership and senior housing.” There has been
discussion for years about the difficulty of condominiumization due to insurance challenges with
developers. Some realtors in Seattle’s hyper-hot real estate market have been pursuing novel joint tenancies
with new and existing construction to try to get as many equity owners into a property as possible . She
would be supportive of whatever the legislature could do to increase those opportunities. Mr. Tatum
commented there is a lot of agreement on that statement. Condominiumization and the laws surrounding
that have been of particular interest among many cities and legislators and there may be an effort to convene
developers to determine solutions. Councilmember Nand commented for most people in the working and
middle class, their house is their intergenerational piggy bank so there needs to be opportunities for families
to build intergenerational wealth for themselves and their future offspring.
Mr. Tatum advised a legislative dinner between the council and the delegation is planned for January 7 at
5:30 pm in the Brackett Room prior to the council meeting.
Mayor Rosen declared a brief recess.
4. UPDATE ON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PROCESS AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP
Acting Planning & Development Director Shane Hope provided an introduction.
• Process to date (2022-2024)
o Initial research and preparation
o Adoption of growth targets in Snohomish County Countywide Planning Policies
o Development of growth alternatives
o Preparation and consideration of Draft EIS
o Preparation and consideration of initial Draft Plan
o Selection of preferred growth alternative
o Consideration of comments and other information
o Preparation and publication of revised draft plan
o Community engagement included:
▪ Visioning (Sept 2022)
▪ Community events and activities (summer 2023)
▪ EIS coping (August 2024)
▪ Neighborhood meetings (Dec 2023)
▪ Online open house and forum (March 2024(
▪ Stakeholder interviews (April 2024)
▪ Citywide meetings on goals & policies (May 2023)
▪ Draft EIS public hearing (Oct 2024)
▪ Draft Plan open house & webinar (Oct 2024)
▪ Draft EIS comment period (Sept 29-Oct 29, 2024)
▪ Draft Plan comment period (Oct 3-Nov 11, 2024)
▪ Numerous city council meetings
8.2.a
Packet Pg. 61
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
5
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
5
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 25, 2024
Page 11
▪ Numerous planning board meetings
• Process to Date – key reminder
o On November 4, 2024, after considering a No Action Alternative and two Action Alternatives,
along with public comments and planning board recommendation, council selected a Preferred
Alternative for comprehensive plan’s approach to growth and community quality of life
o The preferred option
▪ Combines components for Action Alternatives A and B;
▪ Includes NO new components that were outside of Action Alternatives;
▪ Results in housing unit numbers that are between Alts A & B for housing unit capacity
Senior Planner Brad Shipley reviewed:
• Development of Future Land Use Map based on Preferred Alternative for Growth
o Reflects what we heard from planning
board and city council as it relates to
neighborhood centers and hubs.
Ms. Hope reviewed
• Next Steps
o Consideration of issues in revision Plan
1) What’s been done to reflect council’s selection of preferred alternative?
▪ Actions Include
- Housing capacity for hubs and centers recalculated
- Discussion with Department of Commerce about proposed numbers
- Growth choices for each hub and center included in revised draft Plan (consistent
with council’s preferred alternative)
- Land Use element updated
- Future land use map adjusted
- Appendix added to draft Plan to explain original growth alternatives
8.2.a
Packet Pg. 62
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
5
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
5
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 25, 2024
Page 12
- Transportation projects recalculated (2+ week process) and included in new draft
Transportation Element
2) Can new growth areas (e.g., new hubs and centers) be added to proposed comprehensive
plan?
▪ No, because additional growth areas were not considered in the Draft EIS
▪ Also, not advisable because has the potential for being significant and would not have
had time for public input during the regular process
3) Can overlay of critical areas be added to comprehensive plan?
▪ Comprehensive plan already has a Critical area Map in the Land Use Element
▪ Critical areas are specifically governed through critical area and development
regulations
▪ Could be considered later as part of a “zoning code overlay” but might be confusing
since the map does not override the critical area regulations – but rather, the other way
around.
4) What is the relationship of comprehensive plan to development regulations and other city
actions?
▪ Comprehensive plan covers many topics at a high level; it needs to be somewhat
general for long-term, while providing useful policy direction
▪ Under GMA, detailed implementation of Plan must occur through:
- Development regulations (including but not limited to zoning)
- City’s budget
- Other city plans and activities
o Review of revised draft Plan (ongoing)
o Council review of update process & future land use map (Nov 25, tonight)
o Planning board discussion of revised draft Plan (Nov 25)
o City council discussion of revised draft Plan (Dec 3)
o Identification of corrections & clarifications to revised draft Plan (continuing)
o Consideration of Final EIS (Dec 4)
o Discussion of Final EIS (council special meeting Dec 10)
o Public hearing on revised draft Plan (Dec 10)
o City council adoption of Plan, with any changes (Dec 17)
o Staff submittal of final Plan to state agencies
Councilmember Eck commented the council has received a lot of comments about added protection for
vulnerable environmental areas. The presentation spoke to an overlay and the reasons that would not be
helpful. She asked staff to comment on added protections for those areas and why an overlay wasn’t
necessary. Ms. Hope relayed her understanding from comments she has heard is that most people want
environmental sensitive, critical areas to be protected. That is an important part of the comprehensive plan
and implementing regulations. The comprehensive plan includes a map of known critical areas and also
addresses policies that are included in the critical area regulations. In addition, in 2025 Edmonds, like many
other cities, is due to review and revise its critical area regulations as needed. The City will be entering into
a really important effort in 2025 to update the critical area regulations which could include updating areas
that have been mapped. Simply placing an overlay on a map does not protect critical areas any differently.
Her understand of why some people wanted that was they thought it would be helpful when someone is
considering a development project. Having it in the comprehensive plan wouldn’t be very helpful because
people usually look at the critical areas map and the development code. It is important to ensure the code
protects critical area and that as much information is available as possible. The comprehensive plan is a
policy direction document, but it is not a substitute for code.
Councilmember Eck commented if a development is proposed in an area that includes a critical area, that
is a different step entirely. Ms. Hope provided an example, a property includes 2-3 critical areas, a circle is
drawn around the them and it is identified as a sensitive area, but the code only applies to the critical areas,
8.2.a
Packet Pg. 63
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
5
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
5
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 25, 2024
Page 13
not the other areas inside the circle. Someone who wants to develop will look at the code, the critical area
map and any field work that has been done; in areas with wetlands, often a wetland survey will be done in
conjunction with development. Councilmember Eck summarized this is important information to share with
the community with regard to protecting critical areas.
Councilmember Nand commented because the council is involved in the budget, she was most interested
in the public revenues portion of economic development on pages 101-105, specifically Goal ED-2,
Revitalize and enhance the City’s activity centers, neighborhood centers and hubs through integrated mixed
use placemaking and destination development approaches and recognition of the needs of housing,
commerce and economic development. She was happy to see the policy statements include a desire to retain
existing businesses as much as possible and avoid displacement. She wondered if it would be appropriate
when discussing community renewal to disavow an interest in using the condemnation tools. There is a lot
of sensitivity, particularly in majority and minority neighborhoods, about the use of condemnation in
neighboring locations such as Seattle where activity in the CID led to pushback on attempts to use land for
transportation. She asked whether that would be appropriate to include at the policy level. Ms. Hope
answered the community renewal that has been talked about in the Highway 99 area is not to grab land for
city or state use. The concern has been what can be done to improve and help businesses and housing
opportunities be successful as well as address problem sites where undesirable activities are occurring. She
offered to confer with Mr. Tatum about including a note that describes community renewal planning.
Councilmember Dotsch commented she was surprised to see what is before council, much of it she hasn’t
seen before. A lot of terms are used that no one knows what they mean, and there isn’t an opportunity for
the public to interact at this special meeting during Thanksgiving week. She attended most of the
neighborhood meetings and none of these maps or terms were included. She expressed concern with the
giant change that is coming to council this late in the game. She referred to questions about the EIS and the
comprehensive plan, commenting it would be nice to see all the questions and answers and asked when that
would be available. Ms. Hope commented as far as she knew, big changes haven’t been made to the plan.
The only change from the original draft was adding the hubs and centers which were part of the preferred
alternative. There were no other sweeping changes.
Ms. Hope continued, with regard to the comprehensive plan draft comments, that closed November 11. The
comments were provided to council and a posted online in a summary form for each element. The raw data
could be provided to council; staff grouped the comments together based on which element they related to.
With regard to the draft EIS, all the comments were provided to council and posted online. The responses
are only partial and staff is working to complete that. A more complete version will be provided in the final
EIS. The final EIS includes all the comments and responses. With regard to comprehensive plan comments,
there wasn’t an intent to respond to each of the 179 comments separately. All the comments were provided
along with responses to major themes in the comments. Staff is working to complete that and provide it to
council and post it online in a couple days. Councilmember Dotsch recalled attending the online meeting
where there were a lot of questions as well as questions in the chat feature. Attendees were told to put
comments in the chat because there wasn’t time to address them all.
Councilmember Dotsch commented it feels like there is a lot of information including goals from Vision
2050 that aren’t requirements, but there aren’t community goals of Edmonds residents. That is something
that seems to have been lost in this document and seems to take a backseat to some urbanization and
development goals. With regard to the map, no one at the meeting can see it because it’s so small. There
are definitions of a residential walkable urban designation, residential low scale, moderate density
residential, mixed use general, mixed use urban center, mixed use urban core; some include the BD which
is no longer on map. With regard to the new term, residential walkable urban designation which is defined
as primary residential uses, some small scale neighborhood retail and services are conditionally permitted.
Typical buildings are a mixture of detached and attached housing and middle housing types. This is
generally located within ½ mile walkshed of designed neighborhood centers and hubs. There is no definition
8.2.a
Packet Pg. 64
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
5
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
5
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 25, 2024
Page 14
of walkshed and having a different zoning within ½ mile walk of neighborhood centers and hubs was never
discussed with the community;, transition zones were supposed to be within centers and hubs not outside
them which expands density further.
Councilmember Dotsch continued, there are no definitions for low scale or medium scale or what it means
to someone who owns a house in a neighborhood. She recalled at the community open house at the high
school a lot of terms were used that community members were unfamiliar with. She was unsure what the
community or she can comment on and there is precious little time remaining. She was trying to figure out
what the goal is for rezoning all the single family neighborhoods in a manner that was not brought forward
to the community. Ms. Hope responded perhaps the draft land use map needs to be revised. It is true and it
has been discussed in the past that single family residential areas that cover the largest area of land in the
City will no longer have for example 7200 square foot lots that are consistent with the zoning designation
because they now can be divided and more units built on them and the 7200 square foot or 6 units/acre no
longer applies. The intent was to find terms such as residential 1 and residential 2 to replace RS which will
no longer apply in the same way once the state legislation is implemented. With regard to some of the other
terms, she will take a harder look at those.
With regard to HB 1110, Councilmember Dotsch said the council has not had that conversation yet; there
was a presentation by the previous director using the high end of all the Department of Commerce options
as potential, not the minimum. The community has a choice whether to do the minimum, there is no
requirement that ½ mile from a center or hub has to have a different designation that the rest of the
neighborhood. She recognized the requirement to allow two ADUs per lot and other things, but not every
single lot will necessarily have to accommodate every type of housing. There doesn’t seem to be very good
definitions and planning terms are used to define neighborhoods in new ways without public input. The
City has until next June to deal with HB 1110; other cities are not going this route. She feared there was a
lot of missing information and community engagement and clarity. For example, including the transition
zones within the centers and hubs make sense, but the planning department seems to be taking those further
beyond the intent to create scalable centers and hubs. Ms. Hope offered to look at the map, assuring that
was not the intent; the FLUM was not intended to change the zoning. Councilmember Dotsch commented
someone included terms that have not been presented in the past. It may be a good idea but it has not been
presented previously. She summarized the City has options, it can do the minimum, the centers and hubs
exceed the required growth.
Mr. Shipley explained the intent was to add clarity by being more specific with the titles. The lines have
not changed and the density that has been discussed has not changed. The intent was to categorize it in a
way that makes sense to the public. Everything the council has agreed to is in the document and nothing
has changed with regard to where they’re located. The only thing that has changed is more specificity about
the designation for centers or mixed use. The intent is more providing more flexibility with the zoning code
that would apply to each one; each one will have to have a zoning designation that applies to it. If the City
pigeonholes itself by including zoning code in the comprehensive plan, the result will be a very rigid
development code which is not where the City wants to go. It was his understanding the council wanted
flexibility to have transition zones between the centers and hubs and the nearby residential areas. The height
requirements are the same as have been discussed, it is just a way to categorize it to make more sense. Ms.
Hope reiterated staff will look at it again.
Councilmember Chen was glad to see that transition zones were being considered. He asked for more detail
about Highway 99 development, recalling the original plan was not to touch that area, but there are
transition zone issues. For example, a couple years ago a moratorium was passed related to a development,
an example of the need for transitional zones between Highway 99 and single family. He inquired about
transition zones between single family and hubs and centers that are incorporated into the comprehensive
plan. Ms. Hope responded the Highway 99 area will be addressed in the zoning code, not the comprehensive
plan. Mr. Shipley responded the development code may include a different zone on the edge of Westgate
8.2.a
Packet Pg. 65
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
5
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
5
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 25, 2024
Page 15
for example where a transition area is desired; that would be a different zoning designation. There needs to
be some flexibility to allow transition zones.
Councilmember Chen observed the comprehensive plan is at a higher level and specific land use will be in
a separate document. Mr. Shipley answered zoning is more refined than the comprehensive plan. For
example, there could be a different zone that limits height to 2.5 stories in a transition zone. That will be
discussed with the development code. The comprehensive plan designations offer more flexibility going
forward to create the Edmonds that everyone wants instead of pigeonholing the City into a specific uniform
type that applies to everything. Councilmember Chen asked when the development code will be updated.
Mr. Shipley answered it has to be adopted by July 1, 2025. In a perfect world the comprehensive plan and
development code would have been developed together and he understands why this conversation
continues; there is a desire for specificity but the process is not there yet.
Council President Olson highlighted the July 1, 2025 deadline for the development code, recalling a resident
asserted it needed to be done by December 31, 2025. Ms. Hope responded some parts of the code need to
be updated by 2024, but those have already been accomplished related permitting timelines and ADUs. The
other code updates such as including the state legislation regarding housing needs to be done by July 1,
2025.
Council President Olson referred to the term, zoning crosswalk in Table 2.2, a term she and another
councilmember had not heard before. She asked staff to provide that definition for the council and public.
Mr. Shipley commented some of this is related to notes passed to the consultant and the consultant included
more than was intended. His first step was to look at what has been discussed so far and have it make sense
with regard to implementation. He offered to remove that, agreeing it was too specific at this level. With
regard to residential 1 and 2, there is no distinction between those. It is a way to start to differentiate between
what residential 1 and 2 might be, residential low scale and residential walkable urban. Those are just terms
to start to think about how to implement a development code around a larger vision for the City. He assured
the lines have not changed. The distinction between walkable urban and low scale would be the frontage
improvements, maybe one would include sidewalks and not the other depending on the distance from an
urban center or hub. The different colored yellows are a legacy of the old zoning code and may not be how
it is how applied in the future. Ms. Hope agreed some notes were translated in too much detail. As Mr.
Shipley mentioned, the lines on the map have not changed. There were some potential designation titles
used that would be used in the upcoming zoning code update and recognizing existing zoning designations.
Council President Olson relayed in the past, parcel sizes were the basis for the different zones. From what
she was reading in the comprehensive plan, that will go away entirely. Ms. Hope agreed. Council President
Olson commented that is a tectonic shift that she did not see coming. Ms. Hope said the zone can be called
RS-6, but realistically it won’t be 6 units/acre based on the zoning code changes that need to be made in
the coming months because some people may want to develop their lots with at least 2 units and in some
areas where there is a major transit stop, it could be four units or an ADU and an additional unit. The terms
won’t apply in the same way as they do now where there is a minimum 7200 square foot lot in a particular
zone; if someone chooses to develop their property with additional units, there won’t be that minimum lot
size in the future.
Council President Olson said she understood there would be an impact on density from the housing bills,
she was trying to extrapolate what that meant in terms of subdivision, etc. Ms. Hope said that will be part
of the development code update in the next six months such as allowing subdivisions to occur on what has
been a traditional single family lot. Council President Olson asked if the community conversation would
happen at that point. Ms. Hope answered yes.
With regard to the proposed sensitive zone overlay, Council President Olson relayed her understanding of
the motivation behind that idea was if the estimate of needed units is far in excess of what the City needs,
8.2.a
Packet Pg. 66
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
5
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
5
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 25, 2024
Page 16
it would roll out slowly and construction wouldn’t reach environmental sensitive areas until later on when
it was determined the City needed to provide all the units. M s. Hope answered that is a different concept
than an overlay; that would be prioritizing where development goes and trying to push growth into certain
areas. Council President Olson clarified it would be to have growth in less environmentally sensitive areas.
Ms. Hope answered an overlay where property is prioritized not to grow hasn’t been part of the conversation
with regard to hubs or centers or property near hubs or centers. The potential capacity was calculated based
on removing critical areas.
Council President Olson referred to comments about excluding open space and the natural environment
from the land use guiding principle and asked if that was intentional or something that could be looked at.
Ms. Hope reminded she was not here for some of the original discussion; she asked if there was an open
space guiding principle that wasn’t included. Council President Olson said the land use guiding principle
did not include the concept of open space and natural space. Ms. Hope asked if the land use principle was
the one reviewed by the community and the council. Council President Olson answered she did not
remember that specifically. Ms. Hope relayed her understanding that was the guiding principle that went
forward with council approval, but she could determine if that was the case. Council President Olson did
not recall that being an overt approval by council.
Councilmember Paine referred to the FLUM and the upcoming zoning map and asked if they would be
identical. Ms. Hope answered probably not, because typically a comprehensive plan map is more
generalized and the zoning map is more detailed. For example there may be a business district in the
comprehensive plan, and the zoning includes more specific details. Councilmember Paine responded that
was good and what she was expecting to hear. With regard to the environmental overlay, she asked if that
would add more regulation. She recalled hearing that one area having more regulation than another area
was discouraged by the laws passed by the legislature. Ms. Hope responded there is a lot of confusion and
people speaking about different concepts that do not necessarily track. For example, critical areas are
regulated in the City code; drawing lines on a map will not make a difference. Councilmember Paine said
she experienced that when having a fence installed in critical area, but where the fence was installed, it
wasn’t a critical area. Ms. Hope explained the code is the driver, not the map. The map is intended to be a
red flag to say there is probably an issue that requires more review of the specific site and determinations
based on field work, studies, etc. whether there is actually a critical area.
Councilmember Nand noted for the public when Acting Director Hope rejoined the City, it was initially
predicted that the City would not have a finalized comprehensive plan in time to meeting the state’s
December 31, 2024 deadline. She was excited to see this very well done, 288 page draft document in
November. She recognized development and building is a sensitive topic in Edmonds that rouses passions,
pointing out Edmonds staff is apolitical and are following mandates from the state, county, city and mayor.
She offered hats off to the planning department and Ms. Hope for salvaging the document and the process,
dealing with a lot of inquiries and questions, and handling it all with incredible grace.
With regard to residential low scale and residential walkable urban, Councilmember Dotsch pointed out
those incorporated RS6-RS20 and RSW-12. The fact that a property is located withing ½ miles of a center
or hub puts in it in one of the two designations; it is not required by the housing bills. Ms. Hope offered to
revisit that. Councilmember Dotsch pointed out people living within ½ mile of centers and hubs were never
told they would have retail and service. The area within ½ mile of a center or hub was overlayed differently
than areas beyond that. Ms. Hope offered to review it.
Councilmember Dotsch commented this is the community’s comprehensive plan, she did not see
community input in the introduction, it was all the top level planning, urbanization terms, state mandates,
etc. She acknowledged there would be some change in the neighborhoods, but there aren’t mandates for
every lot to have every type of housing. The City has choices and other cities are utilizing those choices.
When this process began, there was a 15-minute city idea which was removed. The idea of property within
8.2.a
Packet Pg. 67
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
5
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
5
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 25, 2024
Page 17
½ mile of a center or hub seems to be pushing back into the walkable 15-minute city idea, but Edmonds’
topography is not flat. She asked what percentage of Edmonds is ½ mile from a center or hub. Mr. Shipley
said he would have to map that. Councilmember Dotsch recalled the 15-minute city encompasses nearly all
of Edmonds. She wasn’t sure what to tell her constituents about the plan or how to read the map. Ms. Hope
reiterated staff will look at that.
Councilmember Dotsch commented this process has been really flawed. The City is coming up to the
deadline with something the public doesn’t understand how it will affect their neighborhood. Ms. Hope
advised staff would return with changes or clarifications. Mr. Shipley agreed the amount of specificity could
be reduced in the comprehensive plan and that conversation continued in the development code. Ms. Hope
agreed the comprehensive plan is intended to be more general.
5. COUNCIL 2025-26 BUDGET DELIBERATIONS, INCLUDING POSSIBLE VOTING ON
BUDGET AMENDMENTS PROPOSED BY COUNCILMEMBERS DURING MEETING
Mayor Rosen advised no specific budget amendments were identified for this meeting. The ones submitted
previously were postponed to tomorrow’s agenda. He asked if councilmembers had any additional
amendments.
Councilmember Nand offered Councilmember Chen an opportunity discuss his amendments, explaining
they were tabled to give him an opportunity to present them himself.
No new amendments were proposed.
ADJOURNMENT
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 8:25 pm.
8.2.a
Packet Pg. 68
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
5
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
5
,
2
0
2
4
)
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 01/14/2025
Approval of Council Special Meeting Minutes November 26, 2024
Staff Lead: Council
Department: City Clerk's Office
Preparer: Scott Passey
Background/History
N/A
Recommendation
Approval of Council Meeting minutes as part of the Consent Agenda.
Narrative
Council meeting minutes are attached.
Attachments:
2024-11-26 Council Special Minutes
8.3
Packet Pg. 69
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 26, 2024
Page 1
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL
SPECIAL MEETING
DRAFT MINUTES
November 26, 2024
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Mike Rosen, Mayor
Vivian Olson, Council President
Chris Eck, Councilmember
Will Chen, Councilmember
Neil Tibbott, Councilmember
Michelle Dotsch, Councilmember
Susan Paine, Councilmember
Jenna Nand, Councilmember
STAFF PRESENT
Kim Dunscombe, Acting Finance Director
Angie Feser, Parks, Rec., & Human Serv. Dir.
Jessica Neill Hoyson, HR Director
Shane Hope, Acting Planning & Dev. Dir.
Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
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. ROLL CALL
City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present.
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO
APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
4. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Denise Nelson, Everett, City of Edmonds employee for nearly 10 years, expressed concerned with the idea
of cutting staff hours. In the last 16 months she has been dealing with cancer which required many surgeries
and over 50 doctor appointments, but due to how dedicated she is to her job, she has lost less than 3 weeks
of work during those 16 weeks. If council reduced staff’s hours to 32 or 35 hours/week, she would be unable
to afford her cancer care. She wanted the council to see the person behind their proposed cuts and the effects
those cuts have. She is the only breadwinner in her family, reducing her hours to 32 or 35 hours/week or a
10% cut will not allow her to supplement her income and she was unsure how she would pay for her cancer
treatment. She hoped the council looked at Mayor Rosen’s proposal as it seemed like the best proposal, one
that would save valuable employees.
Jennifer Lambert, Lake Forest Park, City of Edmonds employee, asked the council to allow the
administration to determine how budget cuts should occur as it would be difficult for the council to
8.3.a
Packet Pg. 70
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
6
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
6
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 26, 2024
Page 2
understand exactly how each position impacts City operations. Losing staff members with years of
experience and knowledge could be more of a detriment than relief to the budget. The city formed a
taskforce to address budget concerns and solutions, she urged the council not to let that hard work be in
vain. City employees already work under extreme workloads with limited staff in high stress situations.
During the 17 years she has worked for Edmonds, her coworkers have become like extended family and
support system, especially after recently losing her husband and becoming a single parent. Staying in
Edmonds will not be as important if this family starts breaking up. This area is expensive to live in, cutting
pay or hours does not mean staff can reduce their own expenses. For example, daycare is typically paid
monthly, not by the day or hour so staff’s daycare expenses will remain the same. Some proposed cuts will
force staff to find employment elsewhere to maintain their cost of living and if the benefits begin
disappearing, many staff will look for jobs with more manageable expectations. People in the industry talk
to each other and know which cities treat their staff well; some of Edmonds’ dedicated staff have already
been approached by colleagues in other agencies with current and upcoming positions. There would be a
great loss of knowledge and history if neighboring jurisdictions make competitive offers to the city’s most
experienced employees.
Ms. Lambert continued, many staff members have worked for Edmonds for years if not decades and are
cross-trained and very good at what they do. It would be difficulty, expensive and time consuming to fill
the vacated positions and train new employees to the caliber of staff the city current has. She reminded the
council their words have power; the council has proposed amendments without considering the people
attached to those positions which has been hurtful and disrespectful. She felt council should apologize to
Shannon Burley for making such an open and personal speculation of her position in a previous meeting.
She recognized the council’s task was not easy but reminded the employees did not create the deficit; this
situation was created by and masked by elected officials. The growing financial emergency was facilitated
by council in not holding officials and their hires accountable. The staff that council is choosing to suffer
the weight of those actions are only guilty of doing their job to provide serv ices to citizens. She urged the
council to work with current city leaders to create a successful path forward while showing staff the respect
they have earned. Trust the mayor, directors, and managers to develop a plan that is responsive to the current
circumstances while creating the least amount of collateral damage to the organization and the people who
work for it.
Marissa Rutler, Lynnwood, City of Edmonds Plans Examiner, stated her opposition to the proposed
Amendment C8 presented by Councilmember Chen, C15(A) presented by Councilmember Paine and C19
presented by Councilmember Dotsch. These irrational suggestions are disheartening seeing as many city
employees witnessed their managers and directors pour an immense amount of energy into compiling a list
of solid, rational budget cut decisions provided to council in the month of October. The city relies on those
individuals to make the best decisions they can for their respective departments and in return they have
been as transparent as possible during this endeavor. Staff is painfully aware they will all experience a pinch
during the next couple years and are ready to take charge. However, the proposed amendments will severely
dwindle the remaining capacity that each manager and director was depending on to make it possible to
stay afloat. She is the sole provider of her household, much like many of her colleagues; these proposals
are outright disgusting. Earlier this year, she left private practice as an architectural associate and designer
of K-12 educational facilities, knowing she wanted to invest her time, energy and passion into the local
community in which she lives.
Ms. Rutler continued, any of the amendments suggested by council would reduce and encumber the ability
of the planning and development employees to do their jobs. The planning and development department is
revenue based and revenue will be directly impacted by the proposed reduced hours, fewer permits will be
reviewed and customers at the counter will also feel the impact. People’s livelihoods are at stake with the
potential reduction of 1/5th of their pay. She honestly didn’t know how she would make ends meet to keep
a roof over her family’s head and food on the table. The reduce work week proposals do not provide current
8.3.a
Packet Pg. 71
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
6
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
6
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 26, 2024
Page 3
city employees enough bandwidth to pursue a second job to fill the gap in their income and the city will
lose good, talented, professional, and passionate employees. She supported the mayor’s plan and strongly
recommended the council reconsider these preposterous amendments. It will be tough, but at least the intent
is to save jobs and support the community they are committed to serving. As council gathers with their
family and friends during this holiday season, she urged them to take the time to reflect on the decision they
have to make. As they look into their loved ones’ eyes, she suggested they think about all the families
looking into their families eyes with worry and wondering how they will make ends meet in 2025 and 2026.
The lack of compassion for the human factor is evident with the city council.
Rose Haas, Seattle, City of Edmonds Planner, expressed her opposition to the proposed budget
amendments that would result in additional cuts to staff, including decreasing the work week to 32 or 35
hours. She is the primary income earner in her home. The decision to cut hours will push many city
employees to look for more lucrative positions within their fields, within the private sector or with other
municipalities that offer the ability to work a full work week as is the norm. A 32-hour work week would
reduce employees’ take-home pay by 20%, for her, the equivalent of 14 months of preschool tuition for her
toddler or 7 mortgage payments. A 32-hour work week would reduce her take-home pay by 12.5%, the
equivalent of 9 months of preschool tuition or 4 mortgage payments , pay cuts her family cannot absorb.
Cutting work hours will result in many talented employees leaving the city to work elsewhere. As anyone
who has owned a business can attest, retaining staff is more cost effective than training new staff. As a
member of the planning division for the last 2½ years, their team has been chronically understaff, leaving
all team members with untenable workloads at times. The division is currently hiring two positions, a
reduced work week with pay 12.5-20% less than comparable municipalities is not attractive to qualified,
professional candidates. She summarized cutting staff hours is a myopic solution that will harm staff
retention and hinder talent acquisition, something hardworking and understaffed employees simply cannot
afford. She urged the council to accept the mayor’s budget proposal without additional staff reductions.
Mindy Woods, Edmonds, Edmonds’ Human Services Program Manager, spoke in opposition to any
additional cuts, whether hours or jobs. The parks, recreation and human services division is already
overworked and understaffed; she could not imagine how parks could earn any revenue if any additional
cuts were made because they are already down to a skeleton crew. She is the only person in human services
and already her job is being hindered by the closure of the neighborhood office where she runs all her
programs. Without that office where the bulk of people come to receive services and respite because they
have no where else to go as well as be able to develop relationships to build rapport and understand where
people are coming from, their circumstances and how to best serve them, people will be lost in the wind.
Without those connections, she will receive more calls from the public about people who need help; there
is only one of her and she cannot respond to all those requests. She is also facing health challenges and her
health insurance is very important to her. Morale is very low among city employees right now; she
recognized the city was facing hard times and difficult decisions must be made, but she urged the council
not to make those decisions on the backs of people who work hard to serve the city and do the best they can
for the residents. As a resident of Edmonds, she feared what else would be coming if other services are cut.
She implored the council to pass the mayor’s budget proposal.
Alec Rowlands, Edmonds, spoke on behalf of the city employees and the tremendous resource that
personnel are to any organization, probably greater than the organization’s fixed assets. He urged the
council not to cut salaries or hours. His concern was this would force some of the city’s most important
employees to seek employment elsewhere because everyone, including the city, is feeling the crunch of the
current recession. He wanted to ensure the city retains its most valuable asset.
5. COUNCIL BUSINESS
1. COUNCIL 2025-26 BUDGET DELIBERATIONS, INCLUDING POSSIBLE VOTING ON
BUDGET AMENDMENTS PROPOSED BY COUNCILMEMBERS DURING MEETING
8.3.a
Packet Pg. 72
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
6
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
6
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 26, 2024
Page 4
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO
HEAR STAFF RECOMMENDED CHANGES FIRST. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Hearing Examiner Work - Staff Recommendation #11
Acting Finance Director Kim Dunscombe explained during the transition to new leadership and the
development of two different budgets, several professional services requests that align with ongoing
biennial budget processes were inadvertently excluded from the proposed budget. These requests reflect
routine, recurring work that is essential to maintaining operations, and do not represent an expansion of the
work plan. The first is the hearing examiner; she requested council approve the addition of $15,000 in
professional services to the planning & development department to comply with City code.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, ADD
$15,000 TO PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT FOR HEARING EXAMINER FUNCTION. MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Minute Taker - Staff Recommendation #12
Ms. Dunscombe reiterated several professional services were inadvertently excluded from the proposed
budget. This is a request to add $10,000 of professionals services to planning & development, the typical
annual cost for contacted services to take minutes for evening meetings of the planning board and the
architectural design board (ADB).
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ECK, TO
APPROVE FUNDING FOR MINUTE TAKER SERVICES IN 2025 AND 202 6.
Council President Olson commented there has been some conversation about the possibly of putting a pause
on any of the non-mandatory boards. She asked if this could be brought back as a budget amendment and
removed from the budget if council ended up approving such a pause. She was aware the planning board
was mandatory but was unsure if the ADB was. Ms. Dunscombe answered that would be a great way to
keep in line with budgeting by priorities (BBP) concept and to keep professional services in check
throughout the year.
Councilmember Tibbott observed this list of amendments were all from the General Fund; he asked if Ms.
Dunscombe was offering cost reductions to offset these amendments. Ms. Dunscombe answered the way
they are presented she did not have an offset. They total $49,000 and it would come from ending fund
balance in 2025. Councilmember Tibbott observed to stay within the proposed budget, council would need
to look for additional cuts. Ms. Dunscombe answered that was correct, but envisioned $49,000 was an easy
amount to achieve in savings throughout the year. Councilmember Tibbott summarized these are essential
services and that normally would be included in the budget. Ms. Dunscombe agreed.
Councilmember Paine observed if the funds weren’t used, they would remain in the General Fund. Ms.
Dunscombe agreed.
Councilmember Eck relayed her understanding that the planning board meets frequently during most
months. She asked how often the ADB meets. Acting Planning & Development Director Shane Hope
advised the planning board is the bulk of $10,000; the ADB is approximately ¼ due to the number of ADB
meetings. Councilmember Eck said she will support this since most of it is related to the planning board.
She wondered if the ADB could use AI to take notes since they meet less frequently and suggested
considering that method for boards other than the planning board.
Councilmember Chen wondered if the 2023 audit resulted in any General Fund balance restatement. Ms.
Dunscombe answered not at this time, the 2023 ending balance is still $2.49M. Councilmember Chen
8.3.a
Packet Pg. 73
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
6
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
6
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 26, 2024
Page 5
observed there were funds available in the ending fund balance if it was necessary to access those funds.
Ms. Dunscombe responded that was the council’s decision in 2025. Councilmember Chen recalled in the
past the balance was dramatically changed. Ms. Dunscombe advised in the proposed budget the estimated
yearend 2024 ending fund balance was around $700,000, her mid-year estimate of $900,000 is closer to
where it will be and that is the fund balance she would suggest be used for these expenditures.
Councilmember Chen observed it will not result in a negative fund balance if more of the General Fund
balance is used. Ms. Dunscombe answered these staff recommendations will not venture into that area.
Obviously, depending on other decisions made tonight, there may need to be further discussion at the time
amendments are made.
Councilmember Nand asked if the spending authority request to raise 2024 by $550,000 had been accounted
for in the General Fund for 2025 or will that still be a consideration after all the amendments are made. Ms.
Dunscombe answered that has already been considered and is part of the proposed budget. Councilmember
Nand commented the lifting of the spending authority hasn’t been authorized by council yet. Ms.
Dunscombe answered the $550,000 to raise the spending authority for 2024 has already been approved and
expenditures are already included in the proposed budget.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Alliance for Housing Affordability Membership– Staff Recommendation #13
Ms. Dunscombe explained this is an increase in spending authority of the General Fund by $6,250 for the
Alliance for Housing Affordable (AHA) membership fee.
COUNCILMEMBER ECK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PAINE, TO APPROVE
THE ALLIANCE FOR HOUSING AFFORDABILITY MEMBERSHIP FOR 2025/2026.
Council President Olson asked what the City gets and whether there is value in pausing this membership
based on the fiscal emergency. Ms. Hope answered AHA, which began with the Snohomish County
Tomorrow process, is a regional effort to provide data and planning assistance related to housing. The
$6250 is much less than each jurisdiction having a staff person and represents pooling resources to share
the cost. Edmonds has participated in AHA for some years and found it useful.
Councilmember Nand advised she was the AHA liaison in 2023 and recalled AHA Program Manager Chris
Collier saying he felt his expertise was being underutilized by cities in Snohomish County; he has a lot of
data and input that could benefit cities’ housing discussions and plan development in the context of what is
happening in the rest of Snohomish County. If the City will be dedicating these funds to AHA, she
recommended the City fully utilize Mr. Collier’s services.
Councilmember Paine relayed her understanding that Mr. Collier is the data scientist that does a lot of the
number crunching that helps support housing priorities and disaggregating data for Snohomish County in
alignment with HASCO policies and understanding the economic demographics. Ms. Hope agreed, Mr.
Collier is the only staff person for AHA, housed at the Housing Authority of Snoh omish County and his
salary and benefits are paid by participating cities. He has provided useful data to the City in the past and
she anticipated he would be involved in providing data next year as the City considers updates to the code
as well as tracking progress as compared to neighboring cities.
Councilmember Eck commented she did not see this as a nice to have, she viewed it as a need to have. It is
important the City has to make headway with regard to housing. This is a small investment compared to
hiring a consultant or devoting City staff to this effort.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
8.3.a
Packet Pg. 74
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
6
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
6
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 26, 2024
Page 6
Arborist Services – Staff Recommendation #14
Ms. Dunscombe relayed cutting and pruning trees is regulated by the City code. The development team
does not have any trained arborists on staff. The request is for $15,000 to fund arborist services as needed.
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NAND, TO
APPROVE FUNDING FOR ARBORIST SERVICES FOR 2025 AND 2026 UP TO $15,000.
Council President Olson said she thought there was an arborist on staff. Ms. Hope answered there was at
one time but there was not now. Council President Olson observed that was not Debra Dill’s role, but she
is an arborist. Ms. Hope said she was unsure if she was working for another department, but she does not
provide services for planning & development.
Parks, Recreation, & Human Services Director Angie Feser explained parks & recreation has a field arborist
and on-call contracts for arborist services as well. It was her understanding planning & development’s
request was for an urban forester to review plans. The parks & recreation arborist does in-field work.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Digitization Service - Staff Recommendation #15
Ms. Dunscombe explained planning & development has been digitizing paper records that must be
preserved. This amount would allow the planning division’s paper archives to be digitized and findable
when needed. The request is $10,000 in 2025 to accommodate this work.
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO
APPROVE DIGITIZATION SERVICES IN 2025 IN THE AMOUNT OF $10,000.
Councilmember Tibbott commented this is an ongoing program that adds efficiency to departments and
future cost savings and is a valuable investment.
Council President Olson suggested costs that can be put off should be. The paper records are less efficient,
but she supported not doing the digitization this year.
Councilmember Dotsch observed the recommendation says 2025 and 2026. Ms. Dunscombe clarified it is
for 2025 only.
Councilmember Chen suggested the new ERP system could help with this effort instead of spending more
money on digitization. Ms. Dunscombe answered it may or may not, depending on what records this relates
to, she was unsure the new ERP system would accommodate them. The ERP system will help with purchase
orders and contracts, but the ERP is not the appropriate system for permits and plans. Ms. Hope advised
this is for permits, plans, site review and large format which are different than contracts and purchase orders.
Councilmember Chen asked if this was hiring more hours to do the work or would an existing employee
do the work. Ms. Hope answered it is a combination; this has been ongoing for several years, digitizing a
chunk of the paperwork each year and this is wrapping up the major part of that last effort. Staff will provide
some assistance, but it is much faster using professional services. The $10,000 is only for the professional
services portion. Councilmember Chen said he understands this process because he does it on a daily basis
himself. He suggested existing staff step up this effort to help ease the financial crisis and delay this given
the budget situation.
Councilmember Nand said she was a Starbucks file clerk when she was 21 years old and strongly supports
digitization. She understood how many hours it takes to pull documents from a paper archive, distribute
them, and then refile them. Getting these documents online and having OCR recognition so they are
8.3.a
Packet Pg. 75
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
6
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
6
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 26, 2024
Page 7
searchable will save FTE hours so the return on investment for $10,000, even though the City is in a fiscal
crisis, is warranted. She will support the amendment.
Councilmember Paine said she worked in permitting and knew about large format. Some developers will
submit plans electronically so they do not have to be scanned. The scanned information is important for the
historical record. This respects staff’s time every day so they are not chasing paper. She recalled permitting
work with plans in rolled up tubes; having that digitized makes it so much easier. She was supportive of the
amendment.
Councilmember Eck said she was not interested in spending just to spend, but was interested in efficiencies.
She asked if there was an estimate of how many FTEs this would save in the short and long term. Ms. Hope
said she did not have that information, but envisioned it would save many hours of time on an ongoing
basis. The City is required to retain these records and be able to access them. Councilmember Eck
envisioned it was a large volume of paperwork and tracking down paper in the future risks inaccuracies.
Ms. Hope agreed, explaining the professional services have the expertise to make the records searchable.
Digitizing the records saves time for people inquiring about a project, but also staff time to track the records.
Councilmember Eck summarized it is a fine line between investing money and saving money. She
recognized not all expenditures pay off quickly, but envisioned this would have a good return on investment.
She expressed support for the amendment.
Councilmember Chen said he 100% supports efficiency and digitalization. In his experience if an individual
has to go through each department and learn what paperwork needs to be scanned, it would require more
time training and clarifying the job duty than having the employee working on it scan it and put it in folder.
Speaking from his own experience, it would be more efficient to do it that way than hiring professional
services. Ms. Hope responded the volume of paperwork with sets of plans and sometimes large format
paper requires a great deal of work. When staff is at the counter servicing customers, it is hard to do all
those things efficiently at the same time. The City has relied on permit coordinator staff for assistance so
there is not much training of the professional services staff; it is a pretty seamless handoff to get the
documents in a retrievable format.
Councilmember Dotsch recalled going from paper dental charts to digital, time is time and the ability to
scan records so anyone can it access it is valuable. This is a worthwhile expenditure to save time and grief.
MOTION CARRIED (6-1) COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON VOTING NO.
Interpretation Services – Staff Recommendation #16
Ms. Dunscombe described the request for $2,500 in General Fund money to provide interpretation services
in 2025 and 2026 for the planning & development department.
COUNCILMEMBER ECK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO
APPROVE FUNDING FOR INTERPRETATION SERVICES IN 2025 AND 2026.
Councilmember Eck commented if Edmonds’ goal is to treat everybody equitably, this is a small investment
to ensure conversations are efficient, and the City is caring for everyone who is seeking assistance.
Councilmember Paine commented on the importance, particularly with permitting, of ensuring what is
being discussed is absolutely clear with regard to property and projects. $2500 is not a lot, but when it is
needed, it absolutely is needed.
Councilmember Nand asked what interpretation services are typically used for in planning & development.
Ms. Hope answered it is primarily for people seeking permits. There are residents for whom English is not
their first language. It can be complicated to explain permit requirements, land use regulations, construction
8.3.a
Packet Pg. 76
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
6
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
6
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 26, 2024
Page 8
requirements, etc. and at times people bring their children or another person to help explain. Interpretation
services help provide residents a more dependable option. Councilmember Nand asked if this is the same
phone-based vendor that the courts use. Ms. Hope answered she was unsure if it was the same one, but was
aware there were a pool of interpreters that can be contacted. Councilmember Nand expressed her support
for the amendment.
Council President Olson commented this is a very small amount and she could understand it was needed at
times. She reminded the City pays an additional benefit to employees who speak another language. She
encouraged departments to utilize existing employees to provide interpretation services to realize the return
on investment from the City paying that additional benefit. She suggested creating a list of languages staff
members speak.
Councilmember Chen expressed appreciation for this budget amendment, but was unsure how it would
work with this small amount. It is a necessary service for the City to have for non-English speakers, but he
wondered if other departments needed interpretation services and anticipated $2500 would not be adequate.
There are so many services the City wants to provide, but there is a budget crisis. Each individual budget
amendment sounds so necessary which makes it hard for council to say no. The council is trying to do its
job and all the fingers and fists are pointed at the council. He urged staff to be thoughtful in their requests,
summarizing we’re all in this together. Ms. Hope appreciated those sentiments, relaying she felt badly
bringing these amendments to council; they should have been in the budget packet, but due to the transition
that happened at the time the budget was put together, there wasn’t staff that knew to include all these things
in the budget process. Staff worked very hard on the budget, but a things got left out.
Councilmember Paine asked if the City pays a bonus for employees speak additional languages. HR
Director Jessica Neill Hoyson answered there is bilingual pay for employees who provide interpreter
services as part of their position with the City. It would be up to the director to notify HR that they have an
employee providing those interpreter services as part of their job and then they would receive the additional
compensation. Councilmember Paine relayed she thought that was only the police department. Ms. Neill
Hoyson advised HR added that to all the contracts.
Councilmember Chen commented English is his 3rd or 4th language so he is aware of the importance of this
service. He recalled when taking his mom to the hospital, that was one of the essential services his mom
required and needed. He appreciated this amendment, but wanted to be thoughtful that the City is heading
into a budget crisis and if expenditures keep increasing without revenue, the budget is heading in the wrong
direction.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Historical Property Inventory - Staff Recommendation #17
Ms. Dunscombe relayed this amendment adds $15,000 of spending authority for professional services in
planning & development and is offset by a $15,000 grant for an historical property inventory.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DOTSCH, TO
APPROVE THIS BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR $15,000, REIMBURSED BY A GRANT, FOR THE
COMPREHENSIVE INVENTORY OF MID CENTURY HOUSES IN THE SHERWOOD VILLAGE
NEIGHBORHOOD. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Councilmember Tibbott relayed he provided a motion to the council earlier for consideration tonight.
COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON, TO
DIRECT THE ADMINISTRATION TO TARGET A REDUCTION IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET
BY AN ADDITIONAL $2 MILLION BEGINNING ON APRIL 1, 2025. THE $2 MILLION IN
8.3.a
Packet Pg. 77
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
6
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
6
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 26, 2024
Page 9
PROPOSED BUDGET CUTS SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL
PRIOR TO APRIL 1ST AND THEN PRORATED FOR THAT DATE. AND FURTHER, THE
SAVINGS IDENTIFIED WOULD BE APPLIED TO THE LOAN AMOUNT IN THE PROPOSED
BUDGET BY THE PRORATED AMOUNT.
Councilmember Tibbott commented there have been extensive discussions regarding whether to reduce
wages, hours or a percentage of wages and benefits. It was recommended there would be greater flexibility
by choosing a dollar amount. In this motion he proposed a target of $2M to be identified between now and
April 1, 2025. Approval of any of those budget cuts would need to be brought to council prior to April 1;
he would leave it up to the administration when to bring those to council. If the motion is approved, the
$2M would be prorated for the budget year following the first quarter and any savings would be applied
toward the $7.5M loan in the proposed budget,.
Councilmember Nand asked if Ms. Dunscombe could provide a rough estimate of the savings to the City
by repaying an internal fund loan of $5.5M instead of $7.5M over a 3-year period. Ms. Dunscombe
answered she did not have that off the top of her head. Councilmember Nand estimated the cost of an FTE
was about $99,000 - $100,000. The motion would be a request to cut an additional 20 positions in 2025.
Ms. Dunscombe relayed her estimate for an average FTE was $120,000. Councilmember Nand responded
the motion would result in an additional 13-15 people being laid off.
Mayor Rosen explained one of the reasons this was proposed as alternative was that it was not specific to
salaries or benefits and gives the administration the opportunity to look at other things. For example, it
could be looking at the benefit package, other ways of staffing such as job sharing. The goal was the ultimate
amount of flexibility rather than a 10% cut which was very specific where it would come from or the 32 or
35-hour work week. It was administration’s opinion that this method gave them ultimate flexibility in
making decisions and also honored the BBP process and looking at the community and council’s priorities,
looking at the ratings and the attributes. This method provided more ability to honor that system and be
flexible. Given the amount of salaries in the budget, there likely would be staff reductions.
Councilmember Nand stated her opposition to Councilmember Tibbott’s amendment. She has confidence
in Ms. Dunscombe’s calculation that the enterprise funds can support an interfund transfer of $7.5M to help
forestall additional layoffs in 2025 and 2026. A lot is being asked of the City’s workforce already and
asking them to squeeze out an additional 10-15 FTE or give up some of their benefits through bargaining
would be unnecessary and not something she could personally support. She summarized she has great
respect for the City’s workforce and everything they do.
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ECK, TO AMEND
TO REDUCE THE AMOUNT FROM $2 MILLION TO $1,660,000 TO REDUCE THE IMPACT ON
STAFF AND EASE THE PAIN THROUGH THIS TRANSITION.
Councilmember Paine relayed the council was presented with a balanced budget but it included a big loan,
a loan that will be really challenging. The council has been asked to find more cuts to reduce the repayment
of the $7.5M loan from the utilities fund which resulted in proposals for a 32-hour and 35-hours work
weeks, and a 10% reduction. That loan has to be repaid within three years so the council was trying to find
ways to offset the challenge of repaying the loan due to other big issues that will need to be sorted out next
year. Her proposal is to reduce the $2M by 1/3 which would offer a cushion to see where thing are following
the first vote next year, annexation into the RFA. The council is making honest and transparent steps to
manage the challenges responsibly. Councilmember Tibbott’s motion would not start this process before
April 1 to see if there were other opportunity and ease off the immediacy of the cuts.
Councilmember Eck expressed support for the amendment. Hearing directly from staff was impactful and
vital and she respected staff for sharing their voices. Council takes full responsibility, this is their job. It
8.3.a
Packet Pg. 78
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
6
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
6
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 26, 2024
Page 10
was not lost on council that the decisions they make have important consequences on staff and their families.
There were a lot of cuts in the proposed budget and it seems prudent to take a little extra time to see what
else could be considered before making even more drastic cuts to staff in departments that will already be
struggling with maintaining services levels.
Council President Olson commented this is not matter of deciding what to spend because the council is
spending all money it has to spend; this is about how much to borrow. The amount of borrowing that was
in the originally proposed budget was $7.5M. The intent of council which began a week or so ago and was
represented by the reduced work week was about $2.3M. Then the discussion was to reduce that to $2M
and now the proposal is $1.66 M. The City can’t borrow that much because it can’t pay it back; the only
way to pay that back is via a significant levy which the council can and will ask for because she personally
misses the people and the services the council was looking at cutting, she missed the feeling in Edmonds
that would be lost by not doing what has been enjoyed in the past, but can no longer afford. She has a lot
of passion and enthusiasm about finding new revenue sources and was personally willing to support a levy,
but the council cannot count on a levy because there won’t be time to recover if the levy is not approved.
As hard a reality as this is, she was in favor of a $2.3M cut which still may not be enough. She cannot
support this amendment and she hoped the council would support the $2M that was originally proposed as
that is the very minimum the council can do.
Councilmember Tibbott did not support amendment as he agreed $2M was the least the council should be
doing in terms of cuts. The reason he proposed that amount was it offered the most flexibility, not just for
wages and benefits, but also programs, purchases, etc. Savings in a variety of areas could allow the City to
reach $2M, not just cuts to staff. He expressed support for the original amount.
Councilmember Chen did not support the amendment. Based on the proposal, the original amount is $2M,
but language is to prorated it throughout the year. If it is implemented April 1, the actual budget cuts for
2025 is $1.5M which is even less than $1.66M. As other councilmembers have stated, the council has a
difficult job; councilmembers are real people with jobs and families. The reason the council is going through
this difficult process was to try to save City employees’ jobs. In 2023, $6.5M in ARPA funds was used
keep the City afloat. In 2024, the General Fund balance and other funds were used to keep the City afloat.
In 2025, there is no longer any ARPA money. The City is already in the red and to cover the red, one of the
brilliant ideas was to borrow internally, but borrowing creates another risk. The utility enterprise funds are
not revenue generating funds, they are self-sustaining operations. Borrowing potentially creates a tricky
situation for the wastewater treatment plant and utilities which are essential, crucial services.
Councilmember Chen continued, the council is doing what it can to identify budget cuts such as a 32 or 35
hour work week, a 10% cut, those are ideas for discussion. The fact that the council hears from the City’s
dedicated staff, that’s what this process is about. He appreciated the administration developing another
proposal, to let the administration determine where the opportunities are and which programs can be
reduced and not necessarily employees or hours, but to explore programs, purchases, and other
opportunities and he supported that approach. He wanted the public to know the council’s efforts are based
on good intentions in an attempt to save jobs; the council does want to cut employees or cut their pay.
Everett voters rejected a levy that represented a 44% increase, Mukilteo’s 40% increase was also rejected.
Edmonds would be asking for a 100-160% increase if further cuts are not made; City employees who live
in Edmonds will pay that as well. He reminded we’re all in this together and increased revenues and reduced
expenditures is the only way to get through this difficult time together. He expressed support for the main
motion to allow the administration to identify appropriate places to make cuts.
COUNCILMEMBER NAND MOVED, SECONDED BY OLSON TO EXTEND TO 6:55. MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
8.3.a
Packet Pg. 79
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
6
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
6
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 26, 2024
Page 11
Councilmember Nand defended the proposed $7.5M internal fund loan. She has been accused in My
Edmonds News for treating the $7.5M loan as credit card debt; someone asked whether Councilmember
Nand knew how to control her own credit card debt. She thought that was a great analogy and wanted to
explain to the public, to the budget hawks who nitpick at her and teach her a lot, this is not like credit card
debt, not like the City bonding for $7.5M. This is an internal transfer of money in a different pot to a pot
that is struggling to fund basic levels of operation. The finance department worked very hard to calculate
the $7.5M amount to ensure the enterprise funds would remain viable and be able to fund all the necessary
maintenance and still maintain adequate reserves if the various budget scenarios related to RFA annexation,
levy lid lift, etc. were approved.
Councilmember Nand continued, in the analogy, if she doesn’t have enough money in her main checking
account, she will take money out of her savings account. That doesn’t mean she doesn’t know how to
control her credit card debt, it is internal, not her going to American Express and asking for $5,000 to buy
a new bag. She did not understand the level of discomfort with an internal, interfund transfer that is
supported by the finance department in their original budget proposal. It is not like credit card debt, it is not
an external debtor that the City will have to repay $7.5M to; the City will be repaying its own enterprise
fund. It is just shifting money from one pot to another to help the City get through lean years, retain staff
that make the City function, and then try to fix what’s wrong with the structural budget gap. She did not
care if the budget hawks want to make fun of her and accuse her of having credit card debt and being fiscally
irresponsible because she values the City’s workforce.
Councilmember Chen explained the $7.5M loan is not borrowing from a savings account; the City doesn’t
have any savings. The savings account was the General Fund balance reserve and now the City is down to
the contingency reserve. The $7.5M belongs to a separate enterprise fund, the utilities, which are self-
sustaining and it is not the City’s savings account.
Councilmember Eck commented whether it’s $2.3M, $2M, $1.66M, or $1.5M, a large percentage of that
has to be salaries and benefits because salaries and benefits are the largest part of the budget regardless of
sector. The budget proposed by the administration already includes quite a few staff cuts. A reduction of
$1.5M or $1.6M in the April/March would allow time to determine if that level of cuts still need to be made.
The truth is a $2M cut will be a lot of staff. She recognized the administration would have the discretion to
figure out where those cuts would come from, but for all practicality, a large percentage would come from
staff and benefits. This conversation is incredibly useful and necessary to ensure the council is covering all
bases before those cuts are made.
Council President Olson said the credit given to Ms. Dunscombe is appropriate with regard to saying $7.5M
is an amount that can be borrowed from the utility funds in the short term. The ability to pay it back is the
other side of that coin; $7.5M is a significant part of the City’s total budget revenues each year and it has
to be paid back in 3 years, something the state auditor’s office (SAO) looks at during audits. Earlier people
were referring to what happens with the RFA vote; the 2025/2026 budget assumed approval of the RFA
annexation but did not assume passage of a levy. There is no reason to talk about whether the RFA
annexation vote passes or not or whether it will inform future budget cuts because the situation will only
be worse if that eventuality doesn’t happen. She cautioned against thinking there was more time; there isn’t
more time although she wished there was.
Councilmember Dotsch recalled the $7.5M loan from the utilities was not calculated based on what was
needed, the $7.5M was the maximum amount that could be borrowed and not put those funds at risk. The
money in the utility fund is provided by residents’ utilities and it earns 5% so repayment of the loan includes
that interest. Ms. Dunscombe explained $7.5M was the amount needed to balance the budget; the 2025
ending fund balance is about $600,000. That amount was necessary to get the ending fund balance above
zero. A replenishment plan hasn’t been included in the proposed budget and is important to consider. The
8.3.a
Packet Pg. 80
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
6
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
6
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 26, 2024
Page 12
$7.5M was chosen to bring the General Fund above zero and obviously she made sure the utility funds
could afford that amount. She acknowledged repayment will be difficult and the SAO will look to having
that loan repaid within three years. The SAO website in the BARS manual states not repaying the loan
would be a permanent diversion of funds which would lead to an audit finding. The City receives audit
findings all the time and she was not saying that was the end of the world, but the bond market also would
not look kindly on stretching out that loan although she did not anticipate the City going out for bonds for
major capital projects on the general government side any time soon. Those were two downfalls of not
being able to pay back the loan in the three years that SAO would like to see.
Councilmember Dotsch pointed out the proposed budget also calls for a $5M loan in 2026. Ms. Dunscombe
agreed it does, advising the process kind of ran out of time and there needs to be a lot of thought and
consideration into the amount of a levy lid lift, what it’s for, whether it’s permanent, one time, etc. before
including it in the budget and strategic forecast. Councilmember Dotsch concluded to balance the budget,
the City is borrowing $12.5M plus interest for these two years. Ms. Dunscombe answered that is correct;
borrowing $5M from the utilities in 2026 runs the utilities a little tight and during the mid-biennium budget
review, that $5M loan needs to turn into some other revenue source.
AMENDMENT FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS ECK, PAINE AND NAND VOTING YES.
City Attorney Jeff Taraday requested clarification of the motion; the way the motion is phrased it appears
it is to not reducing the General Fund appropriation by a fixed dollar amount, it is going forward with the
General Fund appropriation as proposed and asking the administration to come back next year and seek
reduction in the budget. Mayor Rosen said to approve the motion, the council has to give spending authority
which would have to reflect a real number. Mr. Taraday responded there will be a real number appropriated
in the General Fund and it is currently whatever the mayor’s budget proposed plus whatever amendments
have been adopted. There is a difference between in 2024 saying we will reduce the General Fund
appropriation by some fixed dollar amount versus saying we will go forward with the currently proposed
General Fund appropriation and then seek to reduce that amount in 2025. One big difference between those
two is if the intent is to reduce the budget next year, there will need to be five votes, not four, to do it so he
encouraged the council to be mindful with regard to what they wanted to do via this motion.
Mayor Rosen relayed his assumption the intent was to reduce the appropriation by $2M with these
directions and qualifiers. Councilmember Tibbott relayed his understanding if it is prorated, the
appropriation would be $1.5M. Mr. Taraday offered to rephrase the motion at the regular meeting. Mayor
Rosen asked how to advance this to the next meeting in accordance with Robert’s Rules. Mr. Taraday
answered it really doesn’t matter because this same item is on the regular meeting agenda. He suggested
tabling the motion and taking it from the table at the next meeting.
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DOTSCH, TO
TABLE TO THE NEXT MEETING. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
ADJOURNMENT
With no further business, the council meeting was adjourned at 6:55 pm.
8.3.a
Packet Pg. 81
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
6
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
S
p
e
c
i
a
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
6
,
2
0
2
4
)
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 01/14/2025
Approval of Council Meeting Minutes November 26, 2024
Staff Lead: Council
Department: City Clerk's Office
Preparer: Scott Passey
Background/History
N/A
Recommendation
Approval of Council Meeting minutes as part of the Consent Agenda.
Narrative
Council meeting minutes are attached.
Attachments:
2024-11-26 Council Minutes
8.4
Packet Pg. 82
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 26, 2024
Page 1
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MEETING
DRAFT MINUTES
November 26, 2024
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Mike Rosen, Mayor
Vivian Olson, Council President
Chris Eck, Councilmember
Will Chen, Councilmember
Neil Tibbott, Councilmember
Michelle Dotsch, Councilmember
Susan Paine, Councilmember
Jenna Nand, Councilmember
STAFF PRESENT
Michelle Bennett, Police Chief
Uneek Maylor, Court Administrator
Phil Williams, Acting Public Works Director
Kim Dunscombe, Acting Finance Director
Angie Feser, Parks, Rec., & Human Serv. Dir.
Jessica Neill Hoyson, HR Director
Rob English, City Engineer
Shannon Burley, Deputy Parks, Rec., & Human
Serv. Dir.
Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
Scott Passey, City Clerk
Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator
1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE
The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:02 pm by Mayor Rosen in the Council
Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually. The meeting was opened with the flag salute.
2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Councilmember Nand read the City Council Land Acknowledgement Statement: “We acknowledge the
original inhabitants of this place, the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and their successors the Tulalip Tribes,
who since time immemorial have hunted, fished, gathered, and taken care of these lands. We respect their
sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and we honor their sacred spiritual connection with the land
and water.”
3. ROLL CALL
City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present.
4. PRESENTATIONS
1. PROCLAMATION FOR SMALL BUSINESS SATURDAY
Mayor Rosen read a proclamation proclaiming November 30, 2024, as Small Business Saturday and urged
the residents of our community, and communities across the country, to support small businesses and
merchants on Small Business Saturday – celebrating its 15th year in 2024 – and Shop Small throughout the
8.4.a
Packet Pg. 83
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
6
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
6
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 26, 2024
Page 2
year. He presented the proclamation to Sheila Cloney, BID Vice President. Ms. Cloney thanked Mayor
Rosen and the council for supporting Small Business Saturday. Like many other businesses in Edmonds,
she loves being part of what makes Edmonds unique and special. The businesses especially appreciate the
support the City gives to the shop local culture; Edmonds is a wonderful place to do business.
2. SISTER CITY COMMISSION 2024 REPORT TO COUNCIL
Sister City Commissioner and this year’s Youth Exchange Chaperone Karen Heinekin provided an update
on the work of the Sister City Commission (SCC) in 2024 and plans for the upcoming year:
• Mission: It is the mission of the Edmonds Sister City Commission to promote international
communication and understanding through exchanges of people, ideas, and culture.
• 2024 Highlights
o 2024 student exchange ~ summer 2024:
▪ Recruitment of students via media release, posting w/Edmonds school district, posting on
city website and Sister City Facebook page
▪ Conducted student interviews and five orientation meetings
▪ Planned and executed a ten-day itinerary for the Hekinan visit
o Recruitment of two new commissioners in 2024
▪ Kiwa Tashiro in March
▪ Karen Reid in April
▪ There are currently 10 commissioners
o Community Outreach @ the Museum Market
▪ 7/13/2024 focused on Commissioner recruitment; there was a high-level of interest, and
several commission applications were passed out
▪ 9/21/2024 focused on Commission familiarization; another day of high-level interest,
many brochures passed out, two previous student delegates stopped by and shared what a
positive impact the program had on their lives
o Created a policy for recruitment and selection for the adult exchange program, which is
included in your agenda packet along with your directive
▪ An opportunity was provided through Sister Cities International for students between the
age of 19-27 to work at the USA Pavilion at the 2025 Osaka World Expo. We learned of
this opportunity through our relationship with the Consulate-General of Japan in Seattle
and passed it along to our list of past student exchange delegates. We are aware of one past
student delegate who has applied
• 2025 Goals
o Due to current budget constraints, the decision was made to cancel the 2025 student exchange
and concentrate on fundraising in 2025
o In place of an in-person exchange we will plan a virtual meet-up, like the ones we did during
COVID
o Further explore the Commission becoming a non-profit organization
o To bring attention to the Commission and our work locally and regionally, we plan to arrange
speaking engagements, and participate in local markets, fairs, and cultural events
Commissioner Heinekin reported on the 10-day 2024 Student Exchange with Hekinan, Japan
• Traveled with 16 high school students, ages 15-18
• Quickly formed a cohesive group quickly and represented the City well
• Tried variety of things, greeted everyone with smiles, practiced their Japanese, and rarely
complained
• Formed strong bonds of friendship with the Japanese delegation which carried over to their trip to
Edmonds
• Hosted by wonderful families who provided great home experiences
8.4.a
Packet Pg. 84
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
6
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
6
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 26, 2024
Page 3
o During the first week, host families took students to many of their favorite places to experience
Japan
▪ Met Hekinan Mayor Koike
▪ Five-story firehouse
▪ Hekinan high school
▪ Hekinan aquarium
▪ Thermal plant
▪ Traditional tea ceremony
▪ Fishing at the Yahagi River
▪ Made washi paper
▪ Toyota museum
▪ Temple visits in Kyoto
▪ Shrine in downtown Nagoya and Nagoya Castle
▪ Art museums and restaurants
Commissioner Heinekin reported on the 10-day 2024 Hekinan, Japan Student Delegation that visited
Edmonds
• Seven students plus a chaperone
• Visited many places in Edmonds and throughout the area to give them an experience of life in
Washington.
o Favorite activities included
▪ Meeting Mayor Rosen
▪ Edmonds fire station
▪ Ferry to Kingston
▪ Pike Place Market and MOHAI Museum
▪ Scavenger hunt in Edmonds
▪ Boehm’s Chocolate Factory tour
▪ Snoqualmie Falls
▪ Woodland Park Zoo
Ms. Heinekin reported following the student exchange, two students have joined City boards. She thanked
the Edmonds and Hekinan SCCs for their hard work and planning to make this year’s exchange, the first
exchange in five years, a success. The cities have worked hard to promote international communication and
understanding with 36 years of successful exchanges as sister cities. She has been part of the SCC for 11
years and has seen the value it provides to the cities, students and adults. The SCC hopes to continue their
work to build the City’s relationship with Hekinan, Japan. She displayed a video of the Edmonds’ student
trip to Hekinan and Hekinan students’ trip to Edmonds.
Councilmember Paine commented she wants to go; it was lovely to see all the pictures.
Councilmember Eck thanked Commissioner Heinekin for the time she has invested in the SCC. She
remarked on the priceless experience of the student exchange for the youth, that will pay dividends. She
thanked all the volunteers on the SCC.
Council President Olson echoed other councilmembers’ comments. She gave a shout out to Carolyn LaFave
who has done a phenomenal job shepherding this program for the past 12 years. She thanked Ms. LaFave
on behalf of the City and international relations for all she has done for this program and thanked all the
volunteers for their support.
3. MAYOR'S FINANCE UPDATE
Mayor Rosen had no update.
8.4.a
Packet Pg. 85
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
6
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
6
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 26, 2024
Page 4
5. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO
APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER.
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NAND, TO AMEND
THE AGENDA BY ADDING A BUDGET AMENDMENT FROM THE COURT TO FOLLOW
CONSIDERATION OF COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT’S MOTION THAT WAS TABLED AT
THE PRIOR MEETING. MOTION CARRIED (6-1-1) COUNCILMEMBER DOTSCH
ABSTAINING.
Councilmember Nand relayed she would like to bring some contingent budget amendments forward if
certain savings can be ascertained within the proposed budget. She asked if she should make a motion to
amend now, or should she do it subsequently. City Clerk Scott Passey suggested making the amendments
during deliberations on the budget.
MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
There were no audience comments.
7. RECEIVED FOR FILING
1. CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FOR FILING
2. WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS
8. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO
APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items
approved are as follows:
1. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 2, 2024
2. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 4, 2024
3. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 4, 2024
4. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS AND WIRE PAYMENTS.
5. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL AND BENEFIT CHECKS, DIRECT DEPOSIT AND WIRE
PAYMENTS
6. SOCIAL WORKER POSITION
7. CONFIRMATION OF DIVERSITY, EQUITY, INCLUSION & ACCESSIBILITY (DEIA)
COMMISSION APPOINTEES ELAINE DUCHARME & JOSEPH TAI ADEMOFE
8. APPROVAL OF AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH SNOHOMISH COUNTY AND
MOUNTLAKE TERRACE, TO RENEW AN ON-GOING WATER QUALITY
MONITORING PROGRAM FOR LAKE BALLINGER
9. APPROVE SUBAWARD SAFETY ACTION PLAN AGREEMENT BETWEEN PUGET
SOUND REGIONAL COUNCIL AND CITY OF EDMONDS
10. APPROVAL OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT AMENDMENT FOR
PHASE 12 (2025) & 13 (2026) SEWER REPLACEMENT
11. PERMITTING PROGRAM MANAGER JOB DESCRIPTION
12. CODE AMENDMENT ECC 2.10.010
13. CONFIRM APPOINTMENT OF BOARD/COMMISSION CANDIDATE
9. COUNCIL BUSINESS
8.4.a
Packet Pg. 86
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
6
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
6
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 26, 2024
Page 5
1. INT'L DISTRICT BANNER UPDATE
Arts & Culture Program Manager Frances Chapin relayed this is an update regarding the Highway 99
International District Banner project; no decision is required, just an opportunity to review the progress to
date and the selected designs. She explained the banner project is focused on the 14 red light poles on
Highway 99 in the International District and are part of a project that started in 2008 as an economic
development and arts project. The lanterns on seven poles and one in the island, Eight Paths of Light,
designed by artist Patty Beyette. That project included fiber banners that were installed above the lanterns
and on the other light poles that were visible when entering the International District from either direction.
That area is quite a wind tunnel and the fiber banners didn’t last very long. When they were removed, there
was a plan to put up permanent cut metal banners in the future.
Ms. Chapin continued, the arts commission was interested in permanent artist-design banners for the poles
to provide public art on Highway 99. There was some funding left in the original project and the arts
commission suggest using some public art money on the banner. That budget and the request for artists was
approved by council. A request for qualifications went out, 21 artists applied and were invited to provide
submissions last summer and a selection panel chose artists to design banners for the site. The selection
panel, consisting of Councilmembers Nand and Paine, Arts Commissioners Chung and Leute, and Robert
Ha, a member of the International District business community, selected five artists to create final designs
for the 14 poles, 2 of each design and 2 individual designs. The designs are developed for fabrication but
have not yet been fabricated. The banners will be made out of cut metal, viewable from both sides, and
include a range of artistic themes that reflect the cultural and environmental context of the Edmonds
International District.
Ms. Chapin displayed the designs the committee selected which were designed by artists Romson Regarde
Bustillo, Rebecca Elaynow, Stuart Nakamura, June Sekiguchi, and Gabrielle Wildheart. The multiple ethnic
and cultural traditions of the International District are reflected in the various designs, from textile to print
patterns, from Hispanic to Japanese and Filipino and references to nearby habitats of the lake and forest.
She displayed renderings of the banner graphics and their locations on Highway 99:
The panels are on poles located south of Miller rental to the Plum Plaza at 224th. The next steps are
fabrication and installation which are anticipated to occur in spring 2025.
Councilmember Tibbott thanked Ms. Chapin for her enthusiasm for this exciting project. He asked about
maintenance over the next 5-10 years. Ms. Chapin answered very little maintenance will be required, the
8.4.a
Packet Pg. 87
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
6
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
6
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 26, 2024
Page 6
banner will be made of painted cut aluminum and should be fine for at least 10 years. This project also
includes fabrication of the banner arms. Councilmember Tibbott summarized they will look great for 10
years. Ms. Chapin hoped they would look great for 20 years.
Councilmember Nand commented as Ms. Chapin is retiring, she wanted to highlight what an incredible
resource and asset she has been for the City. She found it very exciting to participate in the selection process
for this project. When looking at the business district on Highway 99, there has always been an abrupt
change between Shoreline and Edmonds. Shoreline has very similar poles with public art. Culturally and
visually matching Edmonds and Shoreline will enhance prospects for small businesses along Highway 99.
She viewed this as a valuable investment, and expressed her appreciation to Ms. Chapin for what she does
to make the City beautiful, visually interesting and memorable for people who come here to live, work,
shop and the City’s increased tax base. She summarized Ms. Chapin has been a very valuable asset for the
City.
Councilmember Paine agreed participating on the selection panel was a fun project; the volunteers were
very engaging and the artists did a lot of spectacular work. She asked when Ms. Chapin will be retiring.
Ms. Chapin answered she was retiring in February.
Councilmember Eck echoed the comments about Ms. Chapin, thanking her for her commitment and the
time spent. She appreciated the intentionality of placing these banners on Highway 99 to honor the culture
and history, but also placemaking and community building and ensuring no matter where residents live in
the City, they have the same amenities. This is a very important layer among other layers that will be
occurring.
Councilmember Chen expressed appreciation for Ms. Chapin’s efforts. When he goes to the International
District in Seattle, he is proud to tells them Edmonds has an International District . These projects require
volunteers, leadership, artists and many hours of work. He hoped Ms. Chapin will stay engaged after her
hard-earned retirement as he anticipated there will be other opportunities for art and gathering places on
Highway 99.
Councilmember Dotsch echoed other councilmembers’ comments. She saw the designs at the council
committee and was very excited for this project, bringing art to Highway 99 and beginning to revitalize that
area.
2. COUNCIL 2025-26 BUDGET DELIBERATIONS, INCLUDING POSSIBLE VOTING ON
BUDGET AMENDMENTS PROPOSED BY COUNCILMEMBERS DURING MEETING
COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PAINE, TO
TAKE THE ITEM FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING FROM THE TABLE.
Mr. Passey said for anything that was postponed, the correct motion would be to take it from the table; that
motion requires a second and is non-debatable or amendable and requires a majority vote.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Taraday relayed the following was his attempt to rephrase Councilmember Tibbott’s motion with the
clarification that resulted from the Q&A during the special meeting: To strike the main motion and replace
with the following: reduce the general fund appropriation by $1.5M and have the administration report back
to the council by no later than April 1, 2025 with a report as to how the reduced appropriation will be
achieved along with any proposed amendments to the authorized positions ordinance that would be
necessary to achieve the reduce appropriation.
8.4.a
Packet Pg. 88
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
6
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
6
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 26, 2024
Page 7
COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER CHEN, TO THE
STRIKE MAIN MOTION AND REPLACE WITH THE FOLLOWING: REDUCE THE GENERAL
FUND APPROPRIATION BY $1.5M $3.5M AND HAVE THE ADMINISTRATION REPORT
BACK TO THE COUNCIL NO LATER THAN APRIL 1, 2025 WITH A REPORT AS TO HOW THE
REDUCED APPROPRIATION WILL BE ACHIEVED ALONG WITH ANY PROPOSED
AMENDMENTS TO THE AUTHORIZED POSITIONS ORDINANCE THAT WOULD BE
NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE THE REDUCED APPROPRIATION.
Councilmember Tibbott asked where the intent was for the savings to go toward reducing the loan. Mr.
Taraday assumed that would be understood, but it could be discussed. Mayor Rosen relayed the original
intent was $2M in the second year. Councilmember Tibbott agreed the original intent was to find $2M in
savings by April with an appropriation of $1.5M in 2025. Mr. Taraday clarified it is a $3.5M reduction over
the biennium. Councilmember Tibbott agreed that was correct. The above motion was changed from $1.5M
to $3.5M.
Mr. Taraday said his understanding was any reduction in the General Fund appropriation would necessarily
correspond with a reduction in the loan from the utilities. In the interest of simplicity, it may be worthwhile
stating that as a general operating principle and the final ordinance would reflect hat. If the General Fund
appropriation is reduced, it will also reduce the loan; if the General Fund appropriation is increased, it will
increase the loan. In the interest of simplicity, that does not need to be stated with each motion where the
savings would come from.
Councilmember Nand commented Councilmember Tibbott is senior to her and has been through more
budget cycles. She was confused by the April 1, 2025 report back by the administration. The council is
deliberating on the 2025 and 2026 budget; if this were a motion to add $3.5M worth of additional cuts over
what the administrative has proposed for 2025 and 2026 with full transparency to the council and public,
that would make sense to her. She did not understand why the council would ask the administration in
almost a secretive manner to institute another $3.5M in cuts and bring that forward to council by April 1.
She was not comfortable authorizing the administration to do that without full transparency before the
council and public, therefore, unless Councilmember Tibbott could justify the April 1, 2025 date and why
the administration would do that without full debate on the dais, she will not support the motion.
Councilmember Chen agreed it was assumed this would reduce the utility loan, but he preferred to have
that documented and offered to make an amendment if required. Mr. Taraday said the final budget ordinance
will reflect a total General Fund appropriation as well as any loan from the utility fund to the General Fund.
The mayor’s proposed budget includes a $7.5M loan; as the General Fund appropriation goes down, it was
his understanding what comes back for final adoption is a corresponding reduction in the amount of the
loan. A councilmember could make that as a general principle motion, but he did not think it was necessary
because that’s everyone’s intention and the council will see it before adopting the final budget.
Councilmember Chen commented when the council sees this opportunity to reduce General Fund
expenditures by $3.5M over 2 years, it is very tempting to add back additional expenses. Mr. Taraday
reminded if the council does that, the loan amount will go up. Every amendment the council makes between
now and finalizing the budget, will either increase or reduce the amount of the loan depending on whether
the amendment is increasing or reducing the General Fund appropriation. There is no other proposed source
of revenue other than the loan. If an amendment increased the General Fund appropriation, it increased the
amount of the loan; if an amendment decreased the General Fund appropriation, it decreased the amount of
the loan.
Councilmember Chen responded that was not entirely correct because there is still about $560,000 General
Fund by the end of 2025 and $2.3M contingency fund balance that can be used. Mr. Taraday clarified the
running assumption, unless council directs otherwise, is staff will provide a final budget ordinance that is
consistent with what he just said; unless council directed staff to use the contingency or some other source,
8.4.a
Packet Pg. 89
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
6
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
6
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 26, 2024
Page 8
the assumption is the final budget ordinance will reflect a loan amount that corresponds to any council
amendments. Mayor Rosen commented with that clarification, it was council prerogative to make this
motion if they chose.
COUNCILMEMBER CHEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, THAT
ANY EXPENDITURE REDUCTION THROUGH THIS EFFORT WILL BE USED SOLELY TO
REDUCE THE INTERNAL LOAN FROM THE UTILITY FUND IN 2025 AND 2026.
Councilmember Eck said she absolutely hears staff when they talk about other amendments on the table
with regard to cutting hours and she no longer supported either of those amendment proposals. She sees the
merits of this amendment. Her concern is as a separate branch, the city council should not normally
relinquish control over where these cuts will be made. The council represents its constituents and should be
keeping their interests in mind when making these decisions. There is merit in asking the administration to
make a proposal, but for the council to agree on the cuts before seeing the proposal made her uncomfortable.
Mayor Rosen clarified the amendment on the table is for expenditure reductions to be used to reduce the
loan from the utility funds.
Councilmember Nand said she did not support this amendment or the main motion. If councilmembers wish
to accomplish $3.5M in reductions, the public, the council and staff deserve to see a line item breakdown
of how those cuts will be accomplished. She did not like this abdication of council authority to oversee the
budget process and be open and transparent with constituents about where cuts will be accomplished so the
public can provide feedback. That is why the administration spent months preparing a proposed budget
with line item reductions and proposals that the council has spent months deliberating on. Politically, she
found it very uncomfortable to try to kick the can down the road this close to the filing deadline if someone
is motivated to run against a councilmember because they disagree with their vote on the budget. The filing
deadline is in May and April 1 is too close to that deadline to see where cuts were accomplished.
Mayor Rosen restated the motion:
ANY EXPENDITURE REDUCTIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS MOTION WILL BE USED TO
REDUCE THE LOAN FROM THE UTILITY FUNDS.
MOTION CARRIED (4-3), COUNCILMEMBERS ECK, PAINE, AND NAND VOTING NO.
Mayor Rosen reread the motion as amended:
TO STRIKE THE MAIN MOTION AND REPLACE WITH THE FOLLOWING: REDUCE THE
GENERAL FUND APPROPRIATION BY $3.5M AND HAVE THE ADMINISTRATION REPORT
BACK TO THE COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL NO LATER THAN APRIL 1, 2025 WITH A REPORT
AS TO HOW THE REDUCED APPROPRIATION WILL BE ACHIEVED ALONG WITH ANY
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE AUTHORIZED POSITIONS ORDINANCE THAT WOULD
BE NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE THE REDUCED APPROPRIATION AND ANY EXPENDITURE
REDUCTION ASSOCIATED WITH THIS MOTION WILL BE U SED TO REDUCE THE LOAN
FROM THE UTILITY FUNDS.
Councilmember Tibbott offered rebuttal to the comments about transparency and kicking the can down the
road. His preference when this was first discussed was to go out to June to give the administration plenty
of time to deliberate with organizations representing City staff, look at areas of savings including purchases,
operations, programs, etc. because there is not enough time to do that deliberation now. This motion is
intended to offer as much flexibility for staff to bring back $2M in cuts in the budget that would be applied
in 2025 and 2026 for a total of $3.5M. This is an opportunity for the administration to do their work using
their expertise and bring back their very best recommendation to council for approval or rejection. There
will be complete transparency between January 1 and April 1 about what the budget cuts will be, there will
8.4.a
Packet Pg. 90
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
6
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
6
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 26, 2024
Page 9
be discussion back and forth and council will do their due diligence with regard to approving any budget
amendments that result from this effort. He supported the motion as written and liked the fact that reductions
would be applied to the loan balance.
Councilmember Paine commented this will delay impacts from the mayor’s proposed budget until April 1.
Ms. Dunscombe said this would be in addition to what is already in the proposed budget. Councilmember
Paine relayed her understanding that the proposed cuts would be solidified and any additional cuts would
be delayed until April 1. The council will have to see what the administration would propose; it is a lot of
finagling and working with numbers that the administration knows best. The additional cuts would have to
be approved by council because these are big policy discussions. The council will be working on the budget
all next year and having other discussions depending on how the votes go. This approach probably results
in less harm than the 35 or 32 hour workweek proposal which council has heard tonight is damaging morale
and has been difficult for staff to accept. She supported the motion, commenting cuts have to be made and
they have to start now. The things that can be given up now will only help later next year and the years
beyond.
Council President Olson commented it is important to commit to lowering the loan amount and it shows
the council’s resolve by having the benefit of the administration’s support in finding the best places to
exercise BBP and there is some history and trust that council and community priorities will be acted on and
upheld. The survey was not done willy nilly and for no reason, it was intended to find out the community’s
core priorities and whether they thought the City was over or under performing on those. She appreciated
the administration and Mayor Rosen’s willingness to work on this further and to bring back a proposal.
When this proposal comes back to council, if council doesn’t like what’s in it, due to the target number,
any changes will require swapping other expenditures due to the commitment to reduce the loan. If this
passes, which she supports, that’s great; if it doesn’t pass, she looked forward to two other councilmembers
joining her between now and Tuesday figuring out where additional cuts can be found because that’s the
alternative. The council either identifies specific cuts, or have the people who know which staff impact the
priorities do it.
Councilmember Chen commented by taking this approach, allowing the administration the flexibility to
come up with cuts, the negative impact to staff will be far less than the 32 or 35 hour workweek. Using this
approach, the administration has the opportunity to look at program cuts, purchasing cuts, or cuts to other
areas to achieve a reduction in internal borrowing. He preferred this option over the reduction in work
hours. His hesitation in reading the motion, even though English is his second language, he sees opportunity
for the administration to push the $3.5M entirely into 2026 and carry on business as usual for 2025. If that
is done, there is almost no chance of recovery because by then the City will not only be in the hole for
$20M plus the $7.5M loan, but it also creates a hole of almost $30M plus interest. The City would then
have to go to the public for a levy lid lift for that amount, an 160% increase in taxes on top of the RFA
annexation and other tax increases by other taxing authorities. He did not see that being successful.
COUNCILMEMBER CHEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON, TO
AMEND TO CLARFY THE REDUCTION OF $3.5M WILL BE ALLOCATED IN THE AMOUNT
OF $1.5M IN 2025 AND THE REMAINDER OF $2M WILL BE IN 2026.
Councilmember Dotsch asked what if there is opportunity for more than a $1.5M reduction in 2025. Mayor
Rosen relayed his assumption that if more cuts were found in 2025, it would reduce the amount of
reductions in 2026.
Councilmember Chen restated the amendment:
TO CLARIFY THE REDUCTIONS WILL BE AT LEAST $1.5M IN 2025 AND $2M IN 2026.
8.4.a
Packet Pg. 91
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
6
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
6
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 26, 2024
Page 10
Councilmember Nand said she was unable to support the amendment. If Councilmember Tibbott or other
councilmembers wish to accomplish $1.5M in reductions in 2025 and $2M in 2026, the council has the
budget book with programs, they should pick programs and positions to defund and have an open discussion
on the dais. She did not understand this mechanism to bypass open discussion before the public about which
programs the council intends to defund. It is an attempt to bypass politically unpopular decisions and delay
the impact of those politically unpopular decisions, it is illegitimate and disrespectful to the public.
Councilmember Paine said she wished it hadn’t been changed. The council is pushing a lot and it will come
out of the hard work staff does. Having the administration identify programs for council, that will be
extremely helpful. As it is now, she will not support the amendment.
Ms. Dunscombe clarified while this is a biennium budget, it is presented as two 1-year budgets. While she
was fine with the motion, the $1.5M would have been shown in 2025 and $2M in 2026. It would have been
very clear and transparent that the $3.5M was split into two years.
MOTION CARRIED (4-3), COUNCILMEMBERS ECK, PAINE AND NAND VOTING NO.
Councilmember Dotsch referred to language in the motion, report back to council for approval no later than
April 1. Approval is an assumption; she suggested it would be preferable to say the administration will
report back to council with this by a certain date such as March 11. Mr. Taraday suggested changing
“approval” to “action.” The date the report is due could also be earlier.
COUNCILMEMBER DOTSCH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON, TO
AMEND TO CHANGE APRIL 1, 2025 TO NO LATER THAN MARCH 11, 2025.
Councilmember Paine did not support the amendment because she would prefer changing “for approval by
April 1” to “action by April 1.”
Councilmember Nand did not support the amendment because if the council wants to make changes to the
proposed biennial budget, they should be done by December 31 to be completely open, honest and
transparent with constituents about the cuts that will be made. If constituents aren’t happy with council,
they can start preparing to run against them. She did not like this finagling with the timelines and this
attempt to hide the ball.
Mr. Taraday shared how this proposal would be implemented. Some of the labor unions have 45-day layoff
notice requirements so if the council is contemplating there may be additional layoffs on April 1, that
decision would need to be made by February 11, not March 11. Unless that is done, for the unions that have
a 45-day layoff notice, layoffs could not take effect early enough to be on target for the $1.5M reduction in
2025. Not all the unions have a 45-day layoff notice, and non-represented employees do not have that
requirement, but it is something to keep in mind. Mayor Rosen said another option would be for the
administration to accommodate that in meeting the targets.
Councilmember Dotsch restated the amendment:
TO CHANGE APRIL 1 TO MARCH 11 AND STRIKE “FOR APPROVAL.”
Councilmember Dotsch commented her intent was to have the report to council by April 11 and it would
be up to council to approve it by whatever date they wished. Mayor Rosen commented if council approval
is delayed beyond the April 1 target, the amount would need to be increased.
Councilmember Nand said she didn’t know why the City spent so much money on Mike Bailey’s services
and devoted so much time this year toward implementing a biennial budget, BBP and attempting to pass a
8.4.a
Packet Pg. 92
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
6
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
6
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 26, 2024
Page 11
balanced budget by December 31st if the council is now going to play these calendar games which is a huge
waste of taxpayer resources.
AMENDMENT CARRIED (4-3), COUNCILMEMBERS ECK, PAINE AND NAND VOTING NO.
Councilmember Eck said she respected the process used for BBP and recognized the importance of multiple
public forums for input. She was not willing to abandon that, because it is valid, there was a lot of good
public input. For the record, she pointed out she was keeping the voices of the most vulnerable people who
cannot attend these meetings in her mind during these conversations. She will respect the BBP process, but
will continue to raise her voice to help amplify the voices of people who were unable to attend those
meetings.
Councilmember Tibbott said he brought this forward due to other amendments that were being offered with
regard to reducing hours, positions and benefits during this deliberation. The administration is in the best
place to identify areas where savings might be realized that keep the most employees and the most relevant
programs and services in place. Doing this now allows the council to make a commitment to making
reductions in the future and by requesting the administration report to council by March 11 is a good way
for the council to move forward.
Councilmember Paine commented these proposals will absolutely have to be transparent with the same
reporting the council gets related to finances. There aren’t other programs that can be cut that won’t be
devastating to the community. The first cuts resulted in zero wiggle room so some of the changes will have
to be structural. She anticipated it would be devastating for employees.
Councilmember Dotsch expressed support for the motion. The 10% reduction suggested last week was
$2.3M and this motion is now $1.5M; there still have to be more cuts. The tipping point is coming fast next
year and revenues are not an option. She recalled that sales tax was down $500,000 last month. Ms.
Dunscombe responded sales tax is down, increasing 1% in 2024 over 2023 and she has a 3% increase in
2025 over 2024. She acknowledged the trend in sales tax revenue was definitely slowing. Councilmember
Dotsch commented the impacts on staff are not lost on councilmembers, but the fiscal cliff will require cuts
the City cannot plan for if there are not enough cuts now. In that respect she agreed with Councilmember
Nand’s thought process about identifying cuts this year. There is still time this year to do more and she
hoped councilmembers would consider that.
Councilmember Nand stated for the public the council could easily authorize a $7.5M interfund loan, the
council could decide to place the RFA annexation before the voters, the council does not have to drive the
City over a fiscal cliff. The council could be responsible to its constituents, the City’s workforce and visitors
and make fiscally responsible decisions. The council could choose to be open and transparent about
programs they choose to defund now using the gigantic budget book full of programs to achieve $3.5M in
savings. She continued to protest this attempt to kick the can down the road; the budget is the purview of
council and it is supposed to be open and transparent to the public so they understand the decisions the
council is making based on policy and if they disagree, they can hold the council accountable via the
political process. She did not support the motion.
Mayor Rosen read the motion with amendments:
TO REDUCE THE GENERAL FUND APPROPRIATION BY $3.5M (AT LEAST $1.5M IN 2025
AND $2M IN 2026) AND HAVE THE ADMINISTRATION REPORT BACK TO THE COUNCIL
FOR APPROVAL BY NO LATER THAN MARCH 11 APRIL 1, 2025 WITH A REPORT AS TO
HOW THE REDUCED APPROPRIATION WILL BE ACHIEVED ALONG WITH ANY
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE AUTHORIZED POSITIONS ORDINANCE THAT WOULD
BE NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE THE REDUCED APPROPRIATION AND ANY EXPENDITURE
REDUCTIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS MOTION WILL BE USED TO REDUCE THE LOAN
FROM THE UTILITY FUND.
8.4.a
Packet Pg. 93
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
6
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
6
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 26, 2024
Page 12
MOTION CARRIED (4-3), COUNCILMEMBERS PAINE, NAND AND ECK VOTING NO.
Court Related Amendments
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NAND, TO ACCEPT
THE COURT’S PROPOSED BUDGET AS PRESENTED BY THE COURT AT THE 10/22/24
COUNCIL MEETING:
REDLIGHT PROGRAM – CLERK FTES - $2.66, $279,210
REDLIGHT PROGRAM – PRO TEM BUDGET - $25,000
REDLIGHT PROGRAM – INTERPRETER BUDGET - $15,000
REDLIGHT PROGRAM – EQUIPMENT COST FOR FTES - $15,000 (ONE TIME FOR
DESKS/COMPUTERS/SUPPLIES.
Councilmember Paine explained this is to correctly document the net budget impacts necessary for
implementing the red light camera program.
Court Administrator Uneek Maylor recalled the budget she and Judge Weiss presented to council on
October 22 that included a slide with all these amounts, the court’s analysis of the cost of the red light
cameras. The court provided a 13-page workbook on June 24, 2024 that explained how the court’s needs
were determined.
Councilmember Paine commented if there isn’t staffing available to perform all the tasks associated with
red light cameras, the court prioritizes their work as described in a PowerPoint that was attached to an email
sent to council today, the same PowerPoint provided to council at the October 22 meeting. The estimates
in the court’s budget assumed revenue from the red light cameras. This is the staffing workload that was
not included in the budget; this is the court’s opportunity to ensure they have access to the level of funding
and FTEs they need to accomplish the financial goals from the red light camera revenue. Ms. Dunscombe
said it appears by the court’s request that revenue would be reduced by $500,000 and expenses increased
by $190,210 which is a hit to the General Fund bottom line of $690,210. She asked for clarification, if this
passes, where those funds would come from. There is not that much in fund balance so it would probably
require an increase in the interfund loan.
Ms. Maylor explained the court brought these figures to the administration in June. The administration was
informed of the staff needed, she sent an email to Mayor Rosen in June and sent a workbook that the judge
worked on to council in June that explained based on citation count, the court would need almost 4 people
to do the job. She didn’t receive any indication that that would be included in the budget. She reached out
to other court administrators, surveyed other courts that have red light camera programs and looked at many
decision packages that the council has voted on in the past to ensure her information was as clear as possible
so the council could make a decision on funding for the program. They then had a meeting with HR, law
enforcement, Mayor Rosen, and Ms. Dunscombe and that meeting didn’t go well. The mayor and
administration asked why the court couldn’t just assume the work. This work is almost four times the
existing caseload in any given month. It would be asking a staff of four to take on four times what they
normally do in a 40 hour week without any help. She explained in the best way possible that that couldn’t
be done, adding 400 hours/month of staff time cannot be assumed by people already working full-time.
Ms. Maylor continued, at that point she went back to the judge; the judge created an excel spreadsheet
based on citation count to provide a clear look at what they were trying to explain. That excel spreadsheet
was based on her work productivity. She worked as a clerk, and timed herself doing all the tasks. She did
not know of any other director that has come to council, the mayor or finance director and said they timed
themselves mowing grass or fixing a pothole to ensure the staffing they were requesting was the appropriate
amount. She did that and created an excel spreadsheet where the citation amount could be changed to figure
out the amount of staff needed. It was presented multiple times to the administration and the information
was provided to council. This is the staff that is needed to produce the amount of revenue that is included
8.4.a
Packet Pg. 94
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
6
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
6
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 26, 2024
Page 13
in the budget book. The budget includes $2.5M; that wasn’t a number developed by the court. To put money
into the City accounts, there need to be people to receipting that money. Without enough staff, the court
cannot put the money into the criminal data base that issues a check to the City. The logic of not staffing
appropriately to receipt money that is already spent in the budget doesn’t make sense.
Ms. Maylor continued, she attempted to have this conversation with the administration multiple times. She
was told orally in a director’s meeting that the court would be given three people in the budget, but learned
on the night the budget was presented that the court was given two people and the next day the printed
budget book says 1.5 people. Per GR29, the judge has sole discretion to present their budget to the city
council and be voted on. Typically the judge and the mayor get together prior to the budget reveal and agree
upon the court’s budget that will be included in the budget book. This has been an issue that has come up
in multiple administrations; she is on the third mayor, third finance director and third police chief. For
example in 2018 or 2019, Judge Coburn asked for full-time security; the court had part-time security at the
time. There was a court rule that came out that required full -time security for the court house so Judge
Coburn put in a decision package and the finance director at that time, Scott James, decided not to include
it in the budget that was presented to council. The judge then informed council the finance director does
not get to determine what she requests and made her presentation to council during her budget presentation
and it was voted on separately and added to the budget.
Ms. Maylor continued, ultimately the council approves the court’s budget; they have been very clear, very
transparent, and she has done everything she can to report how many minutes it will take to process these
documents. She has gone above and beyond to try and work with the administration to make sure it is clear
what will happen if these positions are not approved. The legislative bill states revenue from the cameras
can be used to process citations. The fact that none of that revenue was included in the court’s budget to
pay for these positions is not on her. She was sorry that occurred, was sorry the budget book included
revenue that was used elsewhere that should be used to fund these positions, but she was unable to speak
to why that was done.
Mayor Rosen recalled his hesitation was those people will not be needed day one. There is a 30-day warning
period, it is unknown exactly how many citations will be issued so gearing up and staffing as needed based
on science and the reality of experience seemed preferable to him. The City also has ultimate control so if
staff capacity is being reached, the cameras can be turned off and/or slowed down which would have an
immediate reduction in demand. Those things gave him comfort in recommending gearing up as appropriate
and as required and that was addressed in the conversation with the court.
Ms. Dunscombe agreed the revenue is high in the proposed budget which was concerning to her. She felt it
was appropriate to see Edmonds’ experience before increasing staff. The City is in a position now where
everything that is approved requires saying no to something else; there is no budgetary slack for the
potential of staff need. Although she was concerned the revenue was high, $144,000 was allocated to the
court in increased salary and benefits to ramp up when the ticket volume was experienced. The current
contract will implement the red light camera program in January with one-month grace period. How that is
staffed and the City’s experience in 2025 with regard to ticket volume, staff can come back to council to
ask for amendments when ticket volume is known. She did not feel it was a good idea to add staff to the
budget that might not be needed based on another city’s experience or information received from the vendor
in their presentation because that would require saying no to something else and identifying the funding in
some other department or expenditure. She concluded that was the logic that went into those decisions.
Councilmember Paine expressed appreciation for Ms. Dunscomb’s explanation, relaying her understanding
how that came to be, but the court is not another department, it is an entirely different branch of government.
Looking at the study done by Ms. Maylor brought back memories from her years in courts; the studies Ms.
Maylor provided regarding how much time it took to docket the tickets and going through the entire life
cycle of a citation demonstrates what courts do, everything is calculated by citations. Her concern is the
8.4.a
Packet Pg. 95
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
6
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
6
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 26, 2024
Page 14
court not being able to fund the necessary people and build in the necessary capacity. Ms. Maylor is a very
good court administrator and a qualified probation officer; no other court has a court administrator that is
also a probation officer. Court employees wear many hats which is what all courts do. The study did not
use numbers from another city, it reflects actual hours by the court administrator to ensure the council
understands how much time it takes to put a ticket into the system. She worried tickets would have to be
sent back and money refunded if citations/infractions are unable to be adjudicated. She summarized the
decision on when to hire would be up to the court; the court has not made rash decisions across time. The
council supported red light cameras at two of the City’s most dangerous intersections; public safety was
one of the top priorities in BBP.
Councilmember Nand commented since the discussion regarding red light cameras first came forward under
the previous administration, she had had a lot of questions about appropriate staffing, issues with getting
the administration to ascertain appropriate staff support for this program, and the effect staff will have on
revenue. HB 2384 requires disaggregation; she has asked how the finance department will disaggregate and
properly allocate automated traffic safety camera revenue. She hoped councilmembers understand this was
never just free money; it was never a really easy way to plug a budget hole. When a new program is
implemented in any branch of City government, it has to be appropriately staffed. With drastic budget cuts
slashing millions from programs, the council cannot expect people will grow extra sets of arms to do yet
more work. She thanked Ms. Maylor for sharing her frustrations and the court concerns about proper
implementation of this program, remarking it is information the public needs to hear.
Councilmember Eck commented this was an investment to create greater revenue. She asked the amount
of revenue that was counted on for 2025. Ms. Dunscome responded the budget includes $2.5M for red light
cameras. She assured it was not her intent to balance the General Fund with this revenue, it is just part of
the math and part of what was included in budget based on a contract signed in 2024. There was no intention
of hiding it or making it balance, her only request was to wait and see the volume of Edmonds’ experience
with red light cameras before hiring staff. There is $144,000 in the budget, if the volume justified more
FTE, it is a simple budget amendment mid-year to show those details. Councilmember Eck relayed her
understanding and respect for the work Ms. Dunscombe has been doing.
Councilmember Eck observed if the court is not staffed correctly, the City will not realize that revenue. It’s
a decision point, the administration was counting on this revenue and if the cameras are paused, that
jeopardizes that level of revenue. She understood the wait and see approach, but being too reactive puts a
lot on the court, waiting for them to cry uncle before they are staffed appropriately. Ms. Maylor said $2.5M
in revenue equals clerk time, but it doesn’t equal 1.5 clerks. To have a budget that is balanced off $2.5M in
red light camera revenue without the staff to put those payments into the criminal justice system is not
reality; a payment equals time, it is not an automated system. A citation is not a like a PUD bill where the
account number and the amount is input and it magically goes somewhere; this is money a clerk looks at
and types into a dot matrix system that was created in 1983. For a finance director or anyone in the
administration to say this revenue can be created by this staffing doesn’t make sense because they do not
work in the court.
Ms. Mayor continued, the City of Lynnwood’s budget was approved yesterday and it included three more
clerks in addition to the clerk they asked for earlier this year plus a full-time commissioner to manage their
caseload of red light cameras. Lynnwood’s court already has 10 clerks for 1 full-time judge. Edmonds court
has 4 clerks; if a court that has 10 clerks can’t keep up with the red light camera revenue , regardless of
whether they have more citations than Edmonds, Lynnwood already has almost 6 more clerks than
Edmonds. She assured $2.5M in revenue will not be realized with 1.5 personnel if the City receives that
volume of citations. It takes time for a staff member to type that into a computer. When she c alculated the
time it takes, she went as fast as she could and she has 20 years of experience. She likely will not get
someone with 20 years of experience to do that type of work and it takes at least 6 months to train a clerk
to process all the required documents. The computer systems and processes the court uses require working
8.4.a
Packet Pg. 96
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
6
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
6
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 26, 2024
Page 15
with live data and working multiple case types that require multiple screens. Training new clerks takes time
which is why she indicated the court would not start hiring until March.
Ms. Mayor continued even if the volume is not as high as expected, the court has to be ready to deliver
access to justice. It is not just about processing payments, it is answering the public concerns and processing
documents regarding their rights, as well as hearing management. The budget does not include funds for a
pro tem judge; the court has a full-time judge working a full-time caseload. The red light cameras also have
the potential to add thousands of citations to a hearing process, meaning if there are only 40 hours in a week
and someone asks for a hearing, does the judge come in on Saturdays to process those or are those citations
dismissed because there is no pro tem budget to allow someone to review the hearings by mail? Whether
the City receives 1000 citations or 2300 citations, the 2300 citations were based on the lowest amount that
would be received. She recalled the expected volume was 17 tickets per camera per day. She recalled
pointing out to the mayor when she went to Whole Foods, she saw 3-4 cars getting a red light camera ticket.
The numbers are very conservative. The City was told they could receive 500-800 citations per month
without the City being billed extra; the court used the 500 number.
Councilmember Eck pointed out Ms. Maylor’s comments highlight the City cannot wait, the court has to
have staff in place ahead of the volumes coming in.
Council President Olson referred to information the council received, account in BARS shows a decrease
of $2M in revenue; she assumed that was incorrect, that it was an adjustment from $2.5M to $2M. Ms.
Maylor said she put $2M based on clerks and average hearings and payments. An Excel spreadsheet was
provided based on hearings and processes and the revenue based on that ticket count, not necessarily based
on staff time. Based on 500 citations/month/camera, this is an estimated average and does not include all
the independent decisions that a judge makes on the bench. The calculation was 500 multiplied by 5
multiplied by the average hearing amount and considering cases paid outright based on historical data.
Council President Olson asked if it was expected to have $500,000 in revenue. Ms. Maylor apologized if
she filled out the form incorrectly. She was saying $2M was more reasonable based on the ticket count, not
$2.5M. Council President Olson observed the impact to the budget is $834,210 as presented. Ms.
Dunscombe said the way the budget amendment is written, the impact to the General Fund would be
$690,210. Council President Olson observed computers, desks and chairs were part of the budget ask. She
wondered if any of those items were available to avoid purchasing new desks and chairs. She obse rved
someone said no.
Councilmember Dotsch thanked Ms. Mayor for the clarification. With regard to the FTE number, the budget
books says one thing and Ms. Mayor said something else and now she sees 2.76 FTE. She asked what was
allocated in the budget and what additional FTE did the court need. Ms. Maylor answered the court total is
2.66 which is a very, very conservative number. The original number she presented to Mayor Rosen was 4
based on 800 ticket count; the ticket count was reduced to 500 with the hope the spigot would be turned off
at 500 tickets/month. If that happens, based on her average, 2.66 FTE was the bare minimum. That FTE
does not include many other things such as answering phones, fax machines, front counter help, vacations,
sick leave, etc. The reason the 1.5 was included in the budget book was because the court was not included
in that conversation. She found out about that number when the court got a printed copy of the budget book
the day after the mayor’s presentation. Ms. Dunscombe responded there was a meeting scheduled that Ms.
Mayor did not attend.
Councilmember Dotsch referred to page 73 which shows an addition of 2 court clerks. Ms. Maylor said
whatever is in the budget book is not what the court presented. The court is presenting 2.66 total FTEs in
addition to the 2. She noted the top of that program page was not completed by the court; it was completed
by finance. Councilmember Dotsch pointed out the budget book says 2. Ms. Maylor responded the number
does not equate to 2 full-time employees. Councilmember Dotsch commented the 1.5 is baked in and the
8.4.a
Packet Pg. 97
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
6
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
6
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 26, 2024
Page 16
court needs more. Ms. Maylor responded 2.66 minus 1.5 equals the total amount. She had about an hour to
complete the form while having a conversation with the city attorney and others. All these numbers and
information were provided to council during the court’s presentation. The only reason she is presenting this
information now is to ensure there are no legal issues between the three branches of government and what
is approved/not approved, and what the court has requested and what the council votes on is transparent to
the public
Councilmember Dotsch relayed one of her concerns when the red light camera program was proposed was
not enough consideration was being given to how to run the program. If the goal of the red light cameras is
safety, there is a cost to run the program and that comes out of revenues. She recalled the numbers were
conservative understanding there was a grace period, but also time to get staff trained. She concluded there
will need to be cuts elsewhere in the City’s budget to cover this.
Council President Olson commented equipment costs are a one-time cost so the total impact is $653,420
versus $690,000. Ms. Dunscombe responded the amount she calculated was for 2025; the $690,000 did not
reflect an amendment to 2026. Council President Olson observed $334,210 is what the things at the top
added up to. Ms. Dunscombe relayed her assumption with how this was written was $334,210 in
expenditures; there is already $144,000 for additional staff in the current budget. She noted that was an
assumption because she saw this proposed amendment just minutes before the meeting. There is $2.5M in
the proposed budget; if the court’s proposal is accepted, the revenue would need to be reduced to $2M
which is $500,000 in reduced revenue and $190,210 in increased expense which equates to $690,210 in
2025. If the council wanted to do the same for 2026, she would need to consider the FTE that was added I
2026, recalling the FTE was phased in 2025 but included the full amount in 2026. She did not have that
information available tonight.
Council President Olson said she stands by her original support for the red light cameras at troubled
intersections. This is obviously disconcerting because there are budget impacts that the council didn’t
already considered which is stressful, but it is obviously net positive for the entirety of the program. More
importantly, while driving on 212th today and passing the cross country team running, she drove very slowly
and carefully in that school zone which is the effect the traffic safety cameras have. She suggested tabling
this amendment as it is the first time the council has seen it and there is a lot to discuss and think about.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO
TABLE THIS TO A FUTURE MEETING ON THE BUDGET.
Mr. Taraday said if the motion is actually to table, it is not debatable. If the motion is to postpone to a future
date, it is debatable. The council often makes a motion to table when they don’t really mean it. He assumed
the motion was really to postpone.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON WITHDREW THE MOTION.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER CHEN, TO
POSTPONE TO DECEMBER 3, 2025.
Councilmember Nand asked when the court made its presentation to council with the description of
appropriate staffing for Edmonds’ automated traffic safety camera program. Ms. Maylor answered the
council was provided a 13-page document with a workload estimate on June 14 based on 500-800 citations
and her timing of every aspect of the document process. At the court’s October 22 budget presentation to
council, the judge explained the last slide in that presentation; there had been multiple discussions with
administration but an agreement had not been reached which is why the red light camera presentation was
provided to council in that form. Councilmember Nand recalled Judge Weiss emailing a worksheet
describing the calculation for the required FTE hours. She did not think the council needed more time to
8.4.a
Packet Pg. 98
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
6
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
6
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 26, 2024
Page 17
consider the court’s request and she did not support a motion to postpone. The council should vote on it
tonight and start making responsible budget decisions in a timely fashion.
Councilmember Paine did not support the motion to postpone for the reasons Councilmember Nand stated.
The council and administration has had this information and it’s unfortunate that some lines of
communication weren’t as successful as hoped.
Councilmember Chen said he has supported the red light cameras program from the beginning for public
safety and did not want to delay it any longer. In a new biennial budget process, things fall through. He did
not support postponing council action.
Councilmember Dotsch commented it seemed there were multiple decisions to be made, whether the
amount in the budget book of $2.5M or the $2M from the court was accurate which equates to a $500,000.
The other decision is the staffing necessary to process citations from the program. She needed clarity and
wanted to ensure whatever is approved, everyone is on the same page. The only reason she may support
postponing is to get clarity about the impacts.
Councilmember Eck said she was comfortable supporting the request for additional FTEs tonight. It remains
to be seen how it will be accounted for on other side which is a conversation the council needs to have in
the next budget conversation.
MOTION FAILED (2-5), COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON AND COUNCILMEMBER DOTSCH
VOTING YES.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER PAINE AND SECONDED TO CALL THE
QUESTION.
Mr. Taraday advised a super majority is required to approve a call for the question.
CALL THE QUESTION CARRIED (5-2) COUNCILMEMBERS TIBBOTT AND DOTSCH
VOTING NO.
The motion as clarified during council discussion was displayed as follows:
TO ACCEPT THE COURT’S PROPOSED BUDGET OF:
RED LIGHT PROGRAM – CLERK FTES - $2.66, $279,210 (MINUS $144K OF THE NEW
SALARIES AND BENEFITS FOR THE 1.5 FTE IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET)
RED LIGHT PROGRAM – PRO TEM BUDGET - $25,000
RED LIGHT PROGRAM – INTERPRETER BUDGET - $15,000
RED LIGHT PROGRAM – EQUIPMENT COST FOR FTES - $15,000 (ONE TIME FOR
DESKS/COMPUTERS/SUPPLIES.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (5-1-1), COUNCILMEMBERS ECK, CHEN, TIBBOTT,
PAINE AND NAND VOTING YES, COUNCILMEMBER DOTSCH VOTING NO, AND COUNCIL
PRESIDENT OLSON ABSTAINING.
Mr. Taraday pointed out what is shown on the screen and what the council voted on does not include the
revised revenue assumption. If the council wants to make a motion to use the court’s revenue assumption
rather than the revenue in the proposed budget, that would be an appropriate amendment.
COUNCILMEMBER DOTSCH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON, TO
CHANGE THE ESTIMATED REVENUE FOR THE RED LIGHT CAMERAS FOR 2025 TO $2
MILLION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
8.4.a
Packet Pg. 99
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
6
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
6
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 26, 2024
Page 18
Ms. Maylor advised the court will present regarding citation counts, staffing, program outcomes, and other
real data during their spring state of the court address to council.
Mayor Rosen declared a brief recess.
Mayor Rosen recalled a number of amendments were postponed to this meeting.
Police Leadership Structure – Amendment #C6
Councilmember Chen advised this was addressed by the administration reducing the General Fund by
$3.5M.
Reduce City Hall Operations to 32 hours a Week Except for Police, Court and Wastewater Treatment -
Amendment #C8
Mayor Rosen relayed his assumption that C8 would also be removed.
Reduce Work Week to 35 hours/Week with Exceptions - Amendment #C15(A)
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ECK, TO REMOVE
AMENDMENT C15(A), 35 HOUR WORK WEEK. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mayor Rosen asked if motions were necessary for C8 and C6 as well. Mr. Passey relayed he was uncertain
the council needed to take affirmative action on any amendments. If the council wanted to bring back an
amendment, it could be taken from the table.
Workforce Planning Study - Amendment C15(B)
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NAND, TO DISCUSS
THE WORKFORCE PLANNING PROPOSAL.
Councilmember Paine explained this is $20,000 to add to a workforce planning study to establish the proper
staffing based on programs. This study was planned for 2025 and was brought up at the council retreat
earlier this year as information that would be helpful for council’s mandated role in budgeting and
understanding staffing levels and what would be appropriate for the size of Edmonds. This amendment was
postponed as HR Director Neill Hoyson was not available to describe the study. She supported having this
workforce planning study done to provide data and outside analysis regarding the City’s workforce needs.
In light of council’s decision to authorize the administration to seek another $3.5M in cuts in 2025 and
2026, Councilmember Nand asked staff to speak to how this study could help accomplish that in a data
driven and intelligent manner. Ms. Neill Hoyson responded when the council is looking at cuts, being able
to fully identify the people resources needed to support projects and initiatives is very important. Without
that, it’s very difficult to make clear decisions. The administration absolutely depends on directors to know
what they need to accomplish projects, but having outside validation is important. Ever since she joined the
City, she has known the staffing levels are not the correct size for the workloads which is why the City has
added positions over the last couple years. Unfortunately, the City can no longer afford those positions. A
full workforce planning analysis will provide information that will assist with making informed decisions
about the people attached to projects and programs based on the funding available.
Council President Olson referred to the police audit that was conducted and how the consultant identified
the ideal organization which was implemented and now the City cannot afford it. She questioned the value
of a study to identify the idealized workforce when the City is in this financial situation. It seems like it’s a
consulting report that is not of value and she would rather use the $20,000 toward head count. Ms. Neill
Hoyson commented it would not be looking at an idealized situation; workforce planning would look at the
projects, initiatives, and the work that the city council wants to accomplish and provide to residents and
what bodies does it take to achieve that. It is not idealized, it is where we are right now and looking at where
8.4.a
Packet Pg. 100
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
6
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
6
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 26, 2024
Page 19
do we need to be, providing a clearer view of where the City needs to be to do every single thing the City
wants to do and what needs to be done to reduce that. Council President Olson clarified if the study said it
will take this much staff and that is beyond the budget amount, more programs would need to be cut. Ms.
Neill Hoyson answered there would need to be a look at programs and the number of bodies attached to
that program, and if the City cannot afford that, consider cutting that program.
Councilmember Dotsch commented thinking in terms of a dental practice, each practice is a bit different,
just the same each city is different. There are so many moving parts right now, although such a study could
be helpful, she did not think it was helpful right now because it can’t really be realized until the City gets
through this initial phase. She did not think undertaking this at this point in time would provide actionable
information. She did not support the motion.
Councilmember Nand commented based on council decisions over the last few years and particularly
tonight, the City will have less than 250 FTE. In shrinking the workforce, she supported doing it in the most
intelligent, 21st century way. She was tired of the City being caught in a situation where there are a lot of
great ideas and suffering from severe mission creep in multiple departments. She would like there to be
better alignment between the number of FTE hours the City can fund and the number of objectives the City
is attempting to meet. She wouldn’t want to work for a place where she was expected to do four times as
much work as she was being paid for, a frustration the courts just voiced. The courts’ frustration is a perfect
objective lesson for funding a study like this to ensure there is intelligent alignment between the number of
FTEs and what they are expected to do.
Councilmember Eck referred to work studies, job observation, shadowing, etc. done in her career, realistic
information about what the City is doing that is used for those studies. This would also be helpful with BBP
conversation because as programs are trimmed, the City can say we are understaffed for things the
community wants. She had no doubt staff would continue to do their best, but she wondered if they were
working more than 40 hours/week to make that happen. This study feels much more scientific and should
the City get into a better budget position in 2-3 years, there will be data to figure out the right staffing for
the programs the City wants to provide for the community.
Councilmember Chen said he sees the value of this study, but viewed it as a long term strategy, looking at
appropriate staffing and service levels. In this moment, the City’s precious dollars should go to paying the
already overworked staff and then maybe when the City gets out of this budget crisis, the City would have
the luxury to fund the police department and other departments as they should be. He fully supports the
idea, but the timing is not ideal.
Ms. Dunscombe asked if this passes, was it council’s intent to use information to somehow inform the
recommended motion to reduce $1.5M in 2025 and $2M in 2026. If so, the timing for that reduction in
2025 might be tight. Councilmember Paine responded in conversations with Ms. Neill Hoyson, she
indicated the study could be done pretty swiftly and she was left with the understanding that the study would
also be useful in looking at scaling down. Ms. Neill Hoyson answered it would depend on the availability
of consultants; she anticipated once a consultant was retained, the study would take no more than 60 days.
Councilmember Tibbott said he was originally in favor of this study. He still thinks it is probably valuable,
but given the time constraints between now and when the council is asking the administration to make
budget reductions, the money is better spent in other areas and an amendment could be proposed in the
future if it make sense to do the study . He did not support this expenditure at this time.
MOTION FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS ECK, PAINE AND NAND VOTING YES.
Creation of a New Fund to Support the 35-Hour Workweek – Amendment #C-15(C)
Councilmember Paine withdrew the project completion fund attached to the 35 hour/week proposal.
8.4.a
Packet Pg. 101
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
6
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
6
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 26, 2024
Page 20
Reinstate Funding for the Police Community Engagement/Crime Prevention Position - Amendment #C16
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NAND, TO
REINSTATE FUNDING FOR POLICE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT/CRIME PREVENTION
POSITION.
Councilmember Paine relayed this position provides a great service to our community by providing
outreach to the public, making and keeping community connections regarding crime prevention programs.
Councilmember Nand recognized councilmembers are very budget conscious, but she regarded the work
the community engagement officer does to be preventative in terms of costs to the City and the savings in
terms of human cost that the position has accomplished in her long career with the Edmonds Police
Department. Current funding is quite lean with one full-time community engagement officer; the council is
potentially offsetting many more contacts that would be costly and negative for community members and
the city government. This would be an appropriately preventative measure to save time and heartache as
well as from an equity perspective, the human cost that can happen when the City does not have the model
police department that Edmonds has due to the very thoughtful workforce planning and investment from
people like Ms. Shoemake.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (4-3), COUNCILMEMBERS ECK, CHEN, PAINE AND
NAND VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS TIBBOTT AND DOTSCH AND COUNCIL
PRESIDENT OLSON VOTING NO.
Reinstate Funding for the Police Public Records Position - Amendment #C17
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NAND, TO
REINSTATE FUNDING FOR POLICE PUBLIC RECORDS POSITION.
Councilmember Paine relayed this position requires technical and legal training and decision-making, along
with an understanding of timelines and deadlines associated with records requests.
Council President Olson said she doesn’t have a lot of hope there will be approval when staff comes back
with their proposal regarding how to make $2M more in cuts. She agreed this position was valuable, just
like she agreed the community engagement position and all the positions in the City are valuable. This is
an example of duplication, where more than one person was doing the job or a program, such as community
engagement, that could done by other officers. The City just doesn’t have money, that is the bottom line.
She was really concerned about the proposals to add things back to the budget.
Councilmember Nand referred to an email that Chief Bennett forwarded from Commander Hawley
regarding the potential impact related to litigation exposure if this position is eliminated. Chief Bennett
provided a recent example, an 82-year old woman who assaulted sign holders in Edmonds that made the
international news; there were 20 public disclosures related to that incident. As Commander Hawley stated
in his email, it takes one big incident to wipe out hours of what the City is responsible for civil liability
wise. Another issue is who does the work if one person is out sick, on vacation, etc. There are frequent
lawsuits against law enforcement and government agencies for not following public disclosure laws.
Chief Bennett continued, a search of 2024 found 6,400 public disclosure lawsuits filed in Washington State.
Local examples included a University of Washington settlement with the Seattle Times for $100,000 over
a PDR lawsuit, the UW lost a PDR lawsuit with PETA in King County Superior Court that was $540,000.
Settlements for PDR lawsuits are not covered by WCIA. There has been discussion about outside attorneys
doing some of the PDR work if someone is out sick as long as that wasn’t a union issue, but that would
require paying a high hourly rate. One of the PDR staff averages over 48 new PDR/month; some of them
involve hours of video and audio redaction. One incident can be 40 hours of PDR redaction and another
8.4.a
Packet Pg. 102
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
6
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
6
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 26, 2024
Page 21
could take 4 hours; it is hard to gauge the time required. She concluded those were the salient points
addressed in Commander Hawley’s email.
Councilmember Paine asked Mr. Taraday to describe the email he sent which included information
regarding the process. Mr. Taraday explained the question he was looking into was to what extent have the
courts articulated a standard for staffing public records staff at a city. There obviously won’t be a particular
FTE because that will vary by city, according to established case law, as long as a city is making reasonably
diligent efforts to fulfill a request, the city will not be not penalized for a delay in processing a request
simply due to being under-resourced. Some requests take a lot of time due to nature of the request. Requests
usually require some level of video or attorney client privilege redaction which is very time consuming.
Sometimes reasonable diligence in fulfilling a request takes the form of production over a period of time
such as releasing the response to a massive request in increments over a period of time. Obviously a city
needs to resource sufficiently to meet the reasonably diligent standard, but he could not say what exactly
that was. If he was trying to figure that out, he would be curious to know how long the department has been
taking to fulfill requests. Lighthouse advises the police department but does not have access to the number
of outstanding requests.
Mr. Taraday continued, to Chief Bennett’s point, there is some unpredictability because the department
never knows when a massive request will come in. The City has 4 FTEs doing public records production,
2 in the police department plus the chief’s administrative assistant, and 2 in administrative services. He
could not say that was the FTE needed to avoid getting sued. Most of the lawsuits that happen have little to
do with resources and are related to refusing to communicate with a requester, not performing a proper
search etc. In reading case law, there wasn’t one that alleged a city didn’t hire enough people and therefore
was being penalized. The conclusion he has reached is he would disagree with the suggestion that simply
by dropping from 2 to 1 public records positions in the police department would necessarily translate into
a lawsuit. Of course, it increases the risk in some marginal way, but he did not think there was a major risk
from what he hears from Patricia Taraday in his office who works with police department staff. It would be
a loss to lose one of the public records staff, but they are both very good which gave him confidence the
City might be fine with either one staying on.
Councilmember Chen asked if a public records request came up, similar to the example Chief Bennett gave,
could existing, experienced police officers or others in the office provide assistance or could the public
records position work overtime to address the spike. Chief Bennett responded police department public
records positions do body worn camera public disclosure which is a specialty within public disclosure. The
other people in the City do not do that work and her administrative assistant doesn’t do that type of work
and if she did, it could be an unfair labor practice. Some of the public disclosure requests her administrative
assistant does will take up to 9 years to fulfill. There has to be timely notice to extend, but when there is
not a lot of staff, and there are continual extensions, the worry is something is unintentionally missed. If
there is only one person doing PDRs and there are a lot of requests, the requester has to be provided notice
of how long it will take, and staff has to work on them to get them fulfilled and in the meantime, more
PDRs are received. She summarized it is a piling on of workload versus just overtime to finishing one
request. Councilmember Chen observed there may be some delay, but the level of workload varies. Chief
Bennett answered it has increased since the positions were added in 2022 which makes sense because more
body cameras and in-car cameras have been added.
Councilmember Eck asked whether Chief Bennett would have still offered this position as one to cut had
this information come to light when it was proposed in the mayor’s budget. Chief Bennett answered as
mentioned earlier, all positions are vital. It was hard to find any positions to propose as a cut. As Council
President Olson said, each department had to come up with something so one of the factors that was
considered was redundancy. Command staff made decisions based on mandates and potential redundancy,
but that did not negate all the issues that came with those cuts.
8.4.a
Packet Pg. 103
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
6
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
6
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 26, 2024
Page 22
MOTION FAILED (1-6), COUNCILMEMBER NAND VOTING YES.
General Fund Labor/Benefits Expenditure Reduction - Amendment #C19
Councilmember Dotsch withdrew the amendment.
Councilmember Nand advised given the addition cuts that have passed, she will not bring forward any of
her contingent amendments.
Include Fund Balance Reserve Replenishment in Strategic Outlook - Amendment #C2
COUNCILMEMBER DOTSCH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON, TO
RENEW AMENDMENT #C2, INCLUDE FUND BALANCE RESERVE REPLENISHMENT IN
THE STRATEGIC OUTLOOK.
Councilmember Dotsch explained this was to incorporate the fund balance reserve replenishment plan into
strategic outlook once the budget process is completed to demonstrate the intent to replenish the reserves
to policy mandated levels. Ms. Dunscombe responded given all the new amendments and new information,
she will be happy to include that as a separate line item in the strategic forecast.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Rebalance Intergovernmental Loan Principal and Interest Amounts Based on Final Loan Details
A MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER DOTSCH AND SECONDED TO REBALANCE
THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL LOAN PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST AMOUNTS BASED ON
FINAL LOAN DETAILS.
Councilmember Dotsch explained this was regarding how all the changes impact the loan amount. Ms.
Dunscombe responded given the amendments passed tonight, the intergovernmental loan will need to be
rebalanced. Given that most of the amendments tonight went the opposite way, she will need time go back
to the drawing board. Councilmember Dotsch relayed her interest in accurately reflecting the loan amount
for transparency.
Councilmember Paine asked if the loan was intergovernmental or intragovernmental. Ms. Dunscombe
answered it is an intergovernmental loan because it is between an enterprise fund and government.
MOTION CARRIED (5-2), COUNCILMEMBERS CHEN AND TIBBOTT VOTING NO.
COUNCILMEMBER ECK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON, TO
EXTEND TO 10:15. MOTION CARRIED (6-1) COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT VOTING NO.
3. 2025-2030 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN (CFP) AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM (CIP)
Parks, Recreation and Human Services Director Angie Feser introduced City Engineer Rob English, Acting
Public Works Director Phil Williams and Deputy Parks , Recreation and Human Services Director Shannon
Burley. She explained this is the final draft of the 2025-2030 CFP/CIP. Staff has been in front of council a
handful of times including a presentation to the planning board on September 11 and public hearing on
September 25, presentation to council on October 8 and public hearing on October 22. The document has
been available to the public and council and questions have been answered via the budget query process.
The plan as proposed and attached in the packet includes one amendment approved by council on November
12, a $100,000 reduction related to the Johnson property master plan in 2026 that is reflected in the parks
capital program. Staff’s request is approval of the document as presented; it will be formally adopted with
the comprehensive plan as an element which will occur later this year.
8.4.a
Packet Pg. 104
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
6
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
6
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 26, 2024
Page 23
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO
PRELIMINARILY APPROVE THE PARKS CFP/CIP.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER CHEN, TO
AMEND TO REDUCE THE REET AMOUNT ON THE MEE PROPERTY FROM $80,000 TO $10,00
WHICH WOULD ALLOW PERMITS TO STILL BE PULED AND TO DO A MORE
GRASSROOTS, INHOUSE EVALUATION OF THAT MASTER PLAN.
Council President Olson said she was really excited by this addition to the park. She asked staff via email
whether the park could be utilized without doing the master plan process first and was told yes. It is a great
space with a lot of great trees, a wonderful place to picnic or throw a ball or frisbee and that will not change
if master planning is delayed. With the City in a financial crisis and so many other projects delayed, most
notably street projects where the pavement on many of the City’s streets is alligatored. In the short term
when the City doesn’t have enough resources, this is a project that can and should be put off.
Councilmember Nand recalled a conversation with Ms. Feser earlier today that with $20,000, master
planning for the Mee property could be done internally. Ms. Feser responded one option is to leave the
allocation of $80,000 in the capital plan, but use park impact fees to fund it. There are two parts to this, one
is transferring $70,000 in REET funds out of the parks capital program and into streets. The other part is
whether the council wants to reduce the project when there are other funds that can be used to do the master
plan. One option is the possibility of bringing the master plan inhouse and doing a community engagement
process to help determine amenities in the park. The Mee property adjacent to Mathay Ballinger is about
50% the size of Mathay Ballinger so it considerably expands the park. It would be good to design how it
ties into Mathay Ballinger and allow people in the surrounding neighborhoods and the entire City to be
involved in the design. The funding provided by Snohomish County Conservation Futures grant limits uses
to passive recreation as well as limits impervious surface so it will not be a very elaborate design. She
anticipated it could be brought inhouse; she is a licensed landscape architect and could lead and manage
the design process due to the small, simple scope. It would be nice to have some funds allocated to offset
staff time, materials for the process, etc.
COUNCILMEMBER NAND MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PAINE, TO AMEND
TO PROVIDE $20,000 FROM REET FOR COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND MASTER
PLANNING FOR THE MEE PROPERTY.
Mayor Rosen clarified the amendment would be reducing $80,000 to $20,000 instead of reducing $80,000
to $10,000.
Councilmember Chen asked for clarification that the $80,000 was not covered by the Snohomish County
Conservation Futures grant. Ms. Feser answered the grant does not cover master planning or improvements
to the property, it was solely for acquisition and securing the site such as demolition of the house which has
been done and costs related to purchasing the property. Councilmember Chen asked if the design could still
be done in-house if the amount is reduced from $80,000 to $20,000. Ms. Feser answered yes.
Councilmember Chen observed the reduction will not impact the timeline to use the Mee property. Ms.
Feser answered in-house master planning will be contingent on other upcoming budget cuts if more staff
are eliminated in parks. Councilmember Chen commented that was unrelated to this project. Ms. Feser
responded it is related because if other staff are cut in the department, her responsibilities may shift to fill
those voids. Councilmember Chen commented this project lifted up the entire community during this budget
crisis and he hated to see any funding cut from it. The budget constraint is in the General Fund, not in the
capital project funds. He did not support the motion.
Council President Olson pointed out the City doesn’t have enough money in streets and it has been really
underfunded for a long time. She found it a bit of a misstatement to say there is plenty of money if it can
be done in a more budget-oriented way. Whether the master planning is done or not, it is not a matter of
8.4.a
Packet Pg. 105
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
6
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
6
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 26, 2024
Page 24
using the property, it is just how extensive the planning is. The property will be used regardless of whether
any money is allocated.
Councilmember Nand said she found it odd given the investments in improving park properties in other
parts of the City that the one addition to a park in southeast Edmonds is getting short shrift. She supports
doing master planning and community engagement and if that can be done for $20,000, she did not see why
that was such a difficult lift for the council considering $13M was spent on Civic Park.
Councilmember Paine relayed Ms. Feser could inform council if this could not be done due to further cuts
in the first quarter of next year and then the council could consider reallocating funds. Ms. Feser agreed
that could be done once the budget all shakes out. Councilmember Paine relayed the hope the City will not
lose any more staff.
AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT CARRIED (5-2), COUNCILMEMBER CHEN AND
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON VOTING NO.
AMENDMENT CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBER CHEN VOTING NO.
MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON, TO
PRELIMINARILY ADOPT THE PUBLIC WORKS CFP/CIP FOR THE YEARS 2025-2030.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PAINE, TO
EXTEND TO 10:20. MOTION CARRIED (5-2) COUNCILMEMBERS TIBBOTT AND DOTSCH
VOTING NO.
Council President Olson referred to an email exchange she had with Mr. Williams regarding minor
amendments and suggested they be offered as amendments for council to vote on. She referred to PWT-30,
the narrative sounded like it was only the sidewalk install on 236th which did not match the red line of the
project on the map.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DOTSCH, TO
AMEND TO AUTHORIZE STAFF TO UPDATE THE NARRATIVE TO INCLUDE 96TH AND 94TH
AS SHOWN ON THE PROJECT MAP. AMENDMENT CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
10. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Nand acknowledged this evening’s approval of the consent agenda included confirmation
of Elaine Ducharme & Joseph Tai Ademofe as the newest members of DEIA Commission. She thanked
them for volunteering.
Councilmember Paine thanked everyone for coming and talking about the importance of their jobs; she
recognizes the importance of their jobs to getting work done in the City.
Councilmember Dotsch thanked everyone for their participation tonight. She relayed concern the council
was going in wrong direction with regard to the budget; insolvency will be brutal, the council has to make
cuts, and may even have to sell buildings. There are a lot of things on the horizon that could be quite
catastrophic if assumptions are not realized, many of which are out of the council’s hands. The council has
added a lot back into the budget without the funds to sustain it and have anything left over next year. She
was hopeful the council could come back next week with some opportunities for additional cuts to keep the
City solvent next year.
8.4.a
Packet Pg. 106
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
6
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
6
,
2
0
2
4
)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
November 26, 2024
Page 25
Council President Olson wanted to be on the record saying she supports the wonderful Tabitha Shoemake,
every bit as much as other councilmembers who voted in favor of keeping that program and position in
place, a $181,000 cut in the proposed budget that now adds to the amount to be cut. The addition of clerks
in the court are offset by revenues. She would have loved for Ms. Shoemake to pursue a job in the courts
so the City does not lose her. The community engagement/crime prevention position was one the City can
do without in the short term. The $181,000 includes funds that go along with that position. She feared the
council went in the wrong direction today. What she was hoping to avoid as councilmembers make these
hard choices and have difficult conversations regarding the budget happened today to her disappointment.
Casting dispersions about taking REET funds out of the CFP/CIP for the Mee property for example,
commenting she was happy to share an email with the councilmember who pointed that out. One of the
ways those funds could be used was the sidewalk on 84th which is in that same neighborhood. This is about
making hard choices and getting the core things done in this year when there’s not enough money to do
everything the community cares about and prioritizes which is everything the City has funded before.
Councilmember Tibbott said he found this deliberation process very difficult; last year was hard for
different reasons. Having to cut positions and programs has been really difficult. As Council President
Olson stated, the council has now added to the proposed budget so councilmembers will need to roll up
their sleeves in the next week and find additional cuts before the end of year in order to pass a balanced
budget. There are a lot of things he was excited about in Edmonds in the new year such as the arts programs,
the school district’s offerings, and families’ involvement. He thanked everyone involved in helping the
council through this budget process and the directors for their time to provide explanations to council.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER CHEN, TO
EXTEND FOR 4 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Councilmember Chen thanked the public for expressing their concerns to council. Making budget cuts is a
very difficult decision-making process and the City’s financial situation requires the council make hard
decisions. With regard to the community engagement position, it is one the City can potentially live without,
but considering the history of the City from an equity perspective, that position provides services to the
underserved population which is why he made the exception to retain that position. With regard to the
police and court, especially the court, red light camera revenue put the budget in an unfavorable position.
The entire City needs to work together to find opportunities. The council is focused on expenditure cuts,
but energies also need to be focused on revenue generation as well as expenditure reductions. He
summarized the council still has work to do.
Councilmember Eck welcomed the new DEIA commissioners. She has the honor of being the council
liaison to the DEIA Commission and has met both commissioners who will be fantastic. She realized the
council did not make the headway that was hoped tonight. The council has to determine what revenue
opportunities can be implemented, because the council cannot cut their way out of this.
11. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
Mayor Rosen commented every decision being made here tonight will affect every individual in the City.
Everyone is either facing challenges or knows someone facing challenges. This week is Thanksgiving and
he encouraged everyone to reflect on the things they are thankful for and move forward with empathy and
grace.
ADJOURNMENT
With no further business, the council meeting was adjourned at 10:23 pm.
8.4.a
Packet Pg. 107
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
0
2
4
-
1
1
-
2
6
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
6
,
2
0
2
4
)
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 01/14/2025
Approval of payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments.
Staff Lead: Kimberly Dunscombe
Department: Administrative Services
Preparer: Lori Palmer
Background/History
Approval of payroll check #66153 dated January 3, 2025 for $4,402.19, direct deposit for $887,939.95,
benefit checks #66154 through #66159 and wire payments for $795,822.27 for the pay period of
December 16, 2024 through December 31, 2024.
Staff Recommendation
Approval of payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments.
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 payments.
Attachments:
12-16-2024 to 12-31-2024 benefit checks summary
12-16-2024 to 12-31-2024 payroll earnings summary
8.5
Packet Pg. 108
Benefit Checks Summary Report
City of Edmonds
Pay Period: 1,163 - 12/16/2024 to 12/31/2024
Bank: usbank - US Bank
Direct DepositCheck AmtNamePayee #DateCheck #
66154 01/03/2025 bpas BPAS 8,790.81 0.00
66155 01/03/2025 icma MISSIONSQUARE PLAN SERVICES 6,237.01 0.00
66156 01/03/2025 flex NAVIA BENEFIT SOLUTIONS 6,144.48 0.00
66157 01/03/2025 tx TEXAS CHILD SUPPORT SDU 166.50 0.00
66158 01/03/2025 rwt WASHINGTON TEAMSTERS 284.55 0.00
66159 01/03/2025 afscme WSCCCE, AFSCME AFL-CIO 3,130.28 0.00
24,753.63 0.00
Bank: wire - US BANK
Direct DepositCheck AmtNamePayee #DateCheck #
3776 01/03/2025 pens DEPT OF RETIREMENT SYSTEMS 377,412.93 0.00
3778 01/03/2025 aflac AFLAC 2,946.70 0.00
3782 01/03/2025 us US BANK 177,274.56 0.00
3783 01/03/2025 mebt WTRISC FBO #N3177B1 161,489.77 0.00
3784 01/03/2025 pb NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTION 9,401.25 0.00
3785 01/03/2025 wadc WASHINGTON STATE TREASURER 41,453.43 0.00
3786 01/03/2025 oe OFFICE OF SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT 1,090.00 0.00
771,068.64 0.00
795,822.27 0.00Grand Totals:
Page 1 of 11/5/2025
8.5.a
Packet Pg. 109
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
1
2
-
1
6
-
2
0
2
4
t
o
1
2
-
3
1
-
2
0
2
4
b
e
n
e
f
i
t
c
h
e
c
k
s
s
u
m
m
a
r
y
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
p
a
y
r
o
l
l
a
n
d
b
e
n
e
f
i
t
c
h
e
c
k
s
,
Payroll Earnings Summary Report
City of Edmonds
Pay Period: 1,163 (12/16/2024 to 12/31/2024)
Hours AmountHour Type Hour Class Description
NO PAY LEAVEABSENT111 42.00 0.00
NO PAY NON HIREDABSENT112 16.00 0.00
Unpaid ADA hoursABSENT113 185.00 0.00
SICK LEAVESICK121 877.00 41,561.30
VACATIONVACATION122 2,509.00 126,908.45
HOLIDAY HOURSHOLIDAY123 540.50 28,222.49
FLOATER HOLIDAYHOLIDAY124 182.90 7,811.11
COMPENSATORY TIMECOMP HOURS125 387.10 19,922.89
Holiday Bank WWTPHOLIDAY128 262.00 11,864.16
JURY DUTYJURY DUTY132 8.00 385.58
WASHINGTON STATE SICK LEAVESICK135 4.00 83.40
Commanders Leave UsageREGULAR HOURS138 10.00 953.00
Kelly Day UsedREGULAR HOURS150 183.50 10,005.68
COMPTIME BUY BACKCOMP HOURS152 12.50 590.23
HOLIDAY BUY BACKHOLIDAY153 100.00 10,426.88
FLOATER HOLIDAY BUY BACKHOLIDAY154 32.00 1,372.02
COMPTIME AUTO PAYCOMP HOURS155 28.00 2,000.31
SICK LEAVE PAYOFFSICK157 527.54 21,505.70
VACATION PAYOFFVACATION158 787.76 34,572.72
MANAGEMENT LEAVEVACATION160 250.00 17,383.22
VACATION PREMIUM PAYOFFVACATION161 26.12 1,189.52
REGULAR HOURSREGULAR HOURS190 15,159.25 751,205.11
Emergency Sick LeaveSICK194 24.00 990.24
ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVEREGULAR HOURS195 77.00 3,777.19
OVERTIME-STRAIGHTOVERTIME HOURS210 160.50 9,497.74
WATER WATCH STANDBYOVERTIME HOURS215 54.00 4,003.39
STANDBY TREATMENT PLANTMISCELLANEOUS216 4.00 505.97
OVERTIME 1.5OVERTIME HOURS220 266.00 23,570.95
OVERTIME-DOUBLEOVERTIME HOURS225 22.00 2,360.80
MISC PAYMISCELLANEOUS400 0.00 100.00
WORKING OUT OF CLASSMISCELLANEOUS410 0.00 1,083.82
SHIFT DIFFERENTIALSHIFT DIFFERENTIAL411 0.00 2,197.03
RETROACTIVE PAYRETROACTIVE PAY600 0.00 293.92
ACCRUED COMP 1.0COMP HOURS602 55.50 0.00
01/05/2025 Page 1 of 3
8.5.b
Packet Pg. 110
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
1
2
-
1
6
-
2
0
2
4
t
o
1
2
-
3
1
-
2
0
2
4
p
a
y
r
o
l
l
e
a
r
n
i
n
g
s
s
u
m
m
a
r
y
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
p
a
y
r
o
l
l
a
n
d
b
e
n
e
f
i
t
c
h
e
c
k
s
,
Payroll Earnings Summary Report
City of Edmonds
Pay Period: 1,163 (12/16/2024 to 12/31/2024)
Hours AmountHour Type Hour Class Description
ACCRUED COMP TIME 1.5COMP HOURS604 77.50 0.00
ACCREDITATION PAYMISCELLANEOUSacc 0.00 322.98
ACCRED/POLICE SUPPORTMISCELLANEOUSacs 0.00 261.56
Ancilary Duty PayREGULAR HOURSanc 0.00 264.19
Ancilary Duty PayREGULAR HOURSanc2 0.00 1,494.73
Ancilary Duty PayREGULAR HOURSanc3 0.00 1,774.84
BOC II CertificationMISCELLANEOUSboc 0.00 237.66
TRAINING CORPORALMISCELLANEOUScpl 0.00 226.78
CERTIFICATION III PAYMISCELLANEOUScrt 0.00 118.83
Detective 4%MISCELLANEOUSdet4 0.00 1,301.62
EDUCATION PAY 2%EDUCATION PAYed1 0.00 928.36
EDUCATION PAY 4%EDUCATION PAYed2 0.00 849.10
EDUCATION PAY 6%EDUCATION PAYed3 0.00 12,125.26
Exempt Vacation PremiumVACATIONevap 11.00 626.18
Family Medical Leave HolidayHOLIDAYfmlb 30.00 1,192.34
FAMILY MEDICAL/SICKSICKfmls 96.00 5,161.34
Family Medical Leave VacationVACATIONfmlv 40.00 1,589.80
HOLIDAYHOLIDAYhol 2,789.12 135,151.08
K-9 AssignmentMISCELLANEOUSk9 0.00 414.20
LANGUAGE PAYMISCELLANEOUSlan 0.00 600.00
LONGEVITY PAY 2%LONGEVITYlg1 0.00 1,126.37
LONGEVITY PAY 2.5%LONGEVITYlg11 0.00 1,059.11
Longevity 9%LONGEVITYlg12 0.00 3,750.14
Longevity 7%LONGEVITYlg13 0.00 1,210.41
Longevity 5%LONGEVITYlg14 0.00 1,158.46
LONGEVITY PAY 4%LONGEVITY PAYlg2 0.00 166.92
LONGEVITY 6%LONGEVITY PAYlg3 0.00 289.83
Longevity 1%LONGEVITYlg4 0.00 1,141.32
Longevity 3%LONGEVITYlg5 0.00 3,918.37
Longevity .5%LONGEVITYlg6 0.00 28.35
Longevity 1.5%LONGEVITYlg7 0.00 696.13
Paid Family Medical Unpaid/SupABSENTpfmp 171.25 0.00
Paid FAMILY MEDICAL/SICKSICKpfms 40.75 1,765.77
Paid Family Medical VacationVACATIONpfmv 28.00 1,233.69
01/05/2025 Page 2 of 3
8.5.b
Packet Pg. 111
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
1
2
-
1
6
-
2
0
2
4
t
o
1
2
-
3
1
-
2
0
2
4
p
a
y
r
o
l
l
e
a
r
n
i
n
g
s
s
u
m
m
a
r
y
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
p
a
y
r
o
l
l
a
n
d
b
e
n
e
f
i
t
c
h
e
c
k
s
,
Payroll Earnings Summary Report
City of Edmonds
Pay Period: 1,163 (12/16/2024 to 12/31/2024)
Hours AmountHour Type Hour Class Description
PHYSICAL FITNESS PAYMISCELLANEOUSphy 0.00 2,904.56
PSET SergeantMISCELLANEOUSstr 0.00 246.44
TAC OfficerMISCELLANEOUStac 0.00 207.10
Training OfficerMISCELLANEOUSto 0.00 207.10
Traffic Officer - CarMISCELLANEOUStraf 0.00 414.20
Vacation PremiumVACATIONvap 16.00 708.89
Total Net Pay:$892,342.14
$1,323,218.83 26,092.79
01/05/2025 Page 3 of 3
8.5.b
Packet Pg. 112
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
1
2
-
1
6
-
2
0
2
4
t
o
1
2
-
3
1
-
2
0
2
4
p
a
y
r
o
l
l
e
a
r
n
i
n
g
s
s
u
m
m
a
r
y
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
p
a
y
r
o
l
l
a
n
d
b
e
n
e
f
i
t
c
h
e
c
k
s
,
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 01/14/2025
Approval of claim checks and wire payment.
Staff Lead: Kimberly Dunscombe
Department: Administrative Services
Preparer: Nori Jacobson
Background/History
Approval of claim checks #265675 through #265784 dated January 8, 2025 for $3,133,428.33 and wire
payment of $440.00.
Staff Recommendation
Approval of claim checks and wire payment.
Narrative
The Council President shall be designated as the auditing committee for the city council. The council
president shall review the documentation supporting claims paid and review for approval by the city
council at its next regular public meeting all checks or warrants issued in payment of any claim, demand
or voucher. A list of each claim, demand or voucher approved and each check or warrant issued
indicating the check or warrant number, the amount paid and the vendor or payee shall be filed in the
city council office for review by individual councilmembers prior to each regularly scheduled public
meeting.
Attachments:
Claim cks 01-08-25 Agenda copy
8.6
Packet Pg. 113
1/8/2025 11:33:30AM
Positive Pay Listing
City of Edmonds
apPosPay Page: 1
Document group:jacobson
Vendor Code & Name Check #Check Date Amount
065052 AARD PEST CONTROL 265675 245.321/8/2025
079673 ACCORD CONTRACTORS LLC 265676 28,195.441/8/2025
078938 ALLOY ARTS LLC 265677 456.371/8/2025
074488 ALPHA COURIER INC 265678 141.681/8/2025
001528 AM TEST INC 265679 105.001/8/2025
079537 AMERICAN TRAFFIC SOLUTIONS INC 265680 23,750.001/8/2025
074306 AMWINS GROUP BENEFITS INC 265681 9,019.531/8/2025
071377 ARGUELLES, ERIN 265682 132.001/8/2025
078237 ARIAS, ADRIAN 265683 130.001/8/2025
064341 AT&T MOBILITY 265684 43.351/8/2025
070305 AUTOMATIC FUNDS TRANSFER 265685 1,459.401/8/2025
076685 BAILEY, MICHAEL E 265686 90.001/8/2025
075217 BASLER, ANTHONY C 265687 211.251/8/2025
069226 BHC CONSULTANTS LLC 265688 837.901/8/2025
074307 BLUE STAR GAS 265689 899.911/8/2025
075342 BORUCHOWITZ, ROBERT 265690 2,855.001/8/2025
079788 BRADLEY LANGUAGE SERVICES 265691 260.001/8/2025
002800 BRAKE & CLUTCH SUPPLY 265692 65.591/8/2025
072005 BROCKMANN, KERRY 265693 1,004.251/8/2025
079792 BUSBY, LUKE 265694 400.001/8/2025
077166 CADENA, MICHAEL 265695 260.001/8/2025
079349 CAMPBELL, SHANNON 265696 18.761/8/2025
073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 265697 1,565.801/8/2025
069813 CDW GOVERNMENT INC 265698 65,776.141/8/2025
003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY 265699 511.731/8/2025
063902 CITY OF EVERETT 265700 931.501/8/2025
070323 COMCAST BUSINESS 265701 351.951/8/2025
072746 CONSOR NORTH AMERICA INC 265702 997.751/8/2025
079077 D & D CARPET CLEANING LLC 265703 5,933.851/8/2025
073823 DAVID EVANS & ASSOC INC 265704 634.391/8/2025
047450 DEPT OF INFORMATION SERVICES 265705 285.001/8/2025
064531 DINES, JEANNIE 265706 3,848.001/8/2025
079739 DK BOOS GLASS INC 265707 6,897.061/8/2025
076172 DK SYSTEMS 265708 873.511/8/2025
061384 DRIFTWOOD PLAYERS 265709 4,700.001/8/2025
074674 ECOLUBE RECOVERY LLC 265710 87.501/8/2025
071969 EDMONDS CENTER FOR THE ARTS 265711 500.001/8/2025
076610 EDMONDS HERO HARDWARE 265712 28.711/8/2025
038500 EDMONDS SENIOR CENTER 265713 30,000.001/8/2025
008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 265714 293.351/8/2025
075200 EDUARDO ZALDIBAR 265715 130.001/8/2025
008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES 265716 1,043.161/8/2025
066004 ESRI 265717 20,872.351/8/2025
009350 EVERETT DAILY HERALD 265718 39.561/8/2025
075673 FARMER, MARIA 265719 284.791/8/2025
075871 FLOW TECHNOLOGIES INC 265720 20,000.501/8/2025
072138 FUELCARE INC 265721 538.501/8/2025
072634 GCP WW HOLDCO LLC 265722 347.701/8/2025
078371 GENERAL MECHANICAL INC 265723 62,322.001/8/2025
069571 GOBLE SAMPSON ASSOCIATES INC 265724 1,326.831/8/2025
075517 GOVERNMENTJOBS.COM INC 265725 24,385.751/8/2025
012199 GRAINGER 265726 1,673.431/8/2025
076542 GRANICUS 265727 54,907.621/8/2025
Page: 1
8.6.a
Packet Pg. 114
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
l
a
i
m
c
k
s
0
1
-
0
8
-
2
5
A
g
e
n
d
a
c
o
p
y
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
c
l
a
i
m
c
h
e
c
k
s
a
n
d
w
i
r
e
p
a
y
m
e
n
t
.
)
1/8/2025 11:33:30AM
Positive Pay Listing
City of Edmonds
apPosPay Page: 2
Document group:jacobson
Vendor Code & Name Check #Check Date Amount
072647 HERRERA ENVIRONMENTAL 265728 31,194.181/8/2025
013338 HICKOK, ROBIN 265729 2,700.001/8/2025
013500 HINGSON, ROBERT 265730 3,567.671/8/2025
076488 HULBERT, MATTHEW STIEG 265731 500.001/8/2025
072528 INTERCOM LANGUAGE SERVICES 265732 130.001/8/2025
014940 INTERSTATE BATTERY SYSTEMS 265733 575.091/8/2025
076917 JACOBS ENGINEERING GROUP INC 265734 2,409.001/8/2025
078794 JR SMOOTS CONSULTING LLC 265735 1,600.001/8/2025
079524 KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC 265736 9,449.501/8/2025
079069 KISHA POST 265737 1,155.001/8/2025
067568 KPG PSOMAS INC 265738 9,629.501/8/2025
078471 LEMM, KEVIN 265739 513.501/8/2025
075149 LIM, VANNARA 265740 130.001/8/2025
079732 LIZ LOOMIS PUBLIC AFFAIRS 265741 8,000.001/8/2025
079481 MALAKOOTI TRANSLATING 265742 130.001/8/2025
020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENT ALL INC 265743 97.161/8/2025
079529 MOLDOVAN DO AMARAL, CRISTINA 265744 130.001/8/2025
018950 NAPA AUTO PARTS 265745 131.321/8/2025
070855 NAVIA BENEFIT SOLUTIONS 265746 315.001/8/2025
072739 O'REILLY AUTO PARTS 265751 107.571/8/2025
076902 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH CTR OF WA 265747 123.001/8/2025
074148 OLSON, VIVIAN 265748 35.001/8/2025
077389 OLYMPIC ELEVATOR COMPANY 265749 808.861/8/2025
026200 OLYMPIC VIEW WATER DISTRICT 265750 600.881/8/2025
078895 PADILLA, TRACIE 265752 64.321/8/2025
065051 PARAMETRIX INC 265753 8,035.001/8/2025
071488 PARENTMAP 265754 450.001/8/2025
007800 PETTY CASH 265755 254.861/8/2025
008350 PETTY CASH 265756 51.231/8/2025
028860 PLATT ELECTRIC SUPPLY 265757 385.211/8/2025
073231 POLYDYNE INC 265758 46,255.301/8/2025
079020 PRECISION LANGUAGE SERVICES 265759 390.001/8/2025
062657 REGIONAL DISPOSAL COMPANY 265760 1,097.601/8/2025
075737 ROBINSON, HUA 265761 130.001/8/2025
064769 ROMAINE ELECTRIC 265762 477.461/8/2025
079019 ROOT AND LIMB YOGA 265763 342.001/8/2025
079763 SANDAG SOLUTIONS 265764 130.001/8/2025
066964 SEATTLE AUTOMOTIVE DIST INC 265765 241.361/8/2025
066918 SEDOR, NORMAN 265766 7,000.001/8/2025
075590 SMARSH INC 265767 152.551/8/2025
075543 SNO CO PUBLIC DEFENDER ASSOC 265768 52,271.001/8/2025
037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 265770 23,818.391/8/2025
038300 SOUND DISPOSAL CO 265771 5,166.071/8/2025
038410 SOUND SAFETY PRODUCTS 265772 146.501/8/2025
076114 SOUND SALMON SOLUTIONS 265773 4,000.001/8/2025
079185 SYSTEMS FOR PUBLIC SAFETY INC 265774 80,072.271/8/2025
079359 THE WALLS LAW FIRM INC 265775 25,000.001/8/2025
078203 TOTAL TESTING 265776 100.001/8/2025
067865 VERIZON WIRELESS 265777 13,744.331/8/2025
069751 VESTIS 265778 214.811/8/2025
079791 WALLAIA, MAZEN 265779 350.001/8/2025
047665 WATER ENVIRONMENT FEDERATION 265780 126.001/8/2025
026510 WCIA 265781 2,404,172.001/8/2025
069691 WESTERN SYSTEMS 265782 1,425.781/8/2025
Page: 2
8.6.a
Packet Pg. 115
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
l
a
i
m
c
k
s
0
1
-
0
8
-
2
5
A
g
e
n
d
a
c
o
p
y
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
c
l
a
i
m
c
h
e
c
k
s
a
n
d
w
i
r
e
p
a
y
m
e
n
t
.
)
1/8/2025 11:33:30AM
Positive Pay Listing
City of Edmonds
apPosPay Page: 3
Document group:jacobson
Vendor Code & Name Check #Check Date Amount
063008 WSDOT 265783 402.881/8/2025
079705 ZUBELLI, CHRISTINA 265784 260.001/8/2025
Total count: 109
GrandTotal: 3,133,428.33
Page: 3
8.6.a
Packet Pg. 116
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
l
a
i
m
c
k
s
0
1
-
0
8
-
2
5
A
g
e
n
d
a
c
o
p
y
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
c
l
a
i
m
c
h
e
c
k
s
a
n
d
w
i
r
e
p
a
y
m
e
n
t
.
)
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 01/14/2025
Resolution of Appreciation for Service as Council President - VIvian Olson
Staff Lead: Council
Department: City Council
Preparer: Beckie Peterson
Background/History
It has been customary to adopt a resolution thanking the outgoing Council President for their service at
the end of their term.
Staff Recommendation
Adopt a resolution thanking Councilmember Olson for her dedication and service.
Narrative
Councilmember Vivian Olson served as Council President from January to December 2024.
Attachments:
Resolution Thanking Council President Vivian Olson January 2025
8.7
Packet Pg. 117
RESOLUTION NO. _____
A RESOLUTION OF THE EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL
THANKING COUNCIL PRESIDENT VIVIAN OLSON FOR HER
SERVICE TO THE EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL
WHEREAS, Vivian Olson served as Council President from January to December 2024, while
also serving as the liaison to Snohomish County Tomorrow, and member of the City of Edmonds
Boards and Commission Task Force, the City of Edmonds Future of Fire, and the Anway Park
public art selection committee; and
WHEREAS, Council President Olson exhibited leadership with prompt response and respectful
consideration to differing views of Council peers, city staff, and members of the Edmonds
community; and
WHEREAS, Council President Olson shepherded the development and adoption of the city’s
first Council Rules of Procedure, providing documented guidance for Council processes; and
WHEREAS, she served with tenacious dedication to accuracy, precision, and detail of the
process considering the city’s future of Fire and Emergency Medical Services; and
WHEREAS, Ms. Olson managed a challenging Council workload year, including the adoption of
the 2025-2026 biennial budget with inaugural community prioritization methods, the update to
our city’s Comprehensive Plan, and financial policies and revenue initiatives related to the city’s
fiscal challenges;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Vivian Olson be commended and thanked
for serving as Council President.
RESOLVED this 14th day of January 2024.
CITY OF EDMONDS
______________________________
MAYOR, MIKE ROSEN
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY
8.7.a
Packet Pg. 118
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
T
h
a
n
k
i
n
g
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
P
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
V
i
v
i
a
n
O
l
s
o
n
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
2
5
(
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
o
f
A
p
p
r
e
c
i
a
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
a
s
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
P
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
)
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK:
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
RESOLUTION NO.
8.7.a
Packet Pg. 119
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
T
h
a
n
k
i
n
g
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
P
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
V
i
v
i
a
n
O
l
s
o
n
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
2
5
(
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
o
f
A
p
p
r
e
c
i
a
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
a
s
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
P
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
)
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 01/14/2025
Adoption of Interim Ordinance for Neighborhood Centers and Hubs
Staff Lead: Shane Hope
Department: Planning & Development
Preparer: Heather Lakefish
Background/History
In 2021, the state legislature passed House Bill 1220 (later codified as RCW 36.70A.070(2)(a) and
36.70.070(2)(b), which included a requirement for cities and counties to plan for and accommodate the
number of housing units needed for very low to moderate income households, consistent with analysis
and guidance from the state Department of Commerce (“Commerce”). For Edmonds, about 2400 more
housing units, especially multifamily housing, would be needed beyond the existing capacity. To
accommodate this number, the City’s strategy was to designate neighborhood centers and hubs that
could accommodate new multifamily housing and commercial uses. At the same time, such
neighborhood places could provide additional commercial uses and amenities that would help the
neighborhoods be more vibrant and walkable.
Edmonds adopted its Comprehensive Plan update on December 17, 2024, including to designate
neighborhood centers and hubs to accommodate multifamily housing and commercial uses. Now the
development code needs to be updated to match.
The development code for accommodating the additional housing was actually due by the end of 2024,
but because it could not feasibly be done before the Comprehensive Plan update, an interim (temporary)
ordinance is proposed for City Council action at the first subsequent meeting available. While slightly
later than the due date, prompt Council action on January 14 will hopefully keep the City from being
considered non-compliant and ineligible for grants and loans, especially given that a major document--
the Comprehensive Plan--was adopted on time.
At the Council meeting on January 7, the Council voted to place the interim ordinance, with one
amendment, on the consent agenda for Jan.uary 14. The amendment was to add a sentence to the
Height subsection of 16.120.050.A.2 at the end of subsections a, b, and c to read as follows:
"However, for any lot abutting or immediately across the street from a single family zone, the height
of any development that is within 20 feet of the property line shall be no greater than 30 feet."
The intent behind the amendment was to provide a transition area for reduced heights. See the
attached draft code, which has been amended to reflect this requested change in all three places.
Staff Recommendation
Adopt the Interim Ordinance for Neighborhood Centers and Hubs as part of the Consent
Agenda.
8.8
Packet Pg. 120
Narrative
To implement the Comprehensive Plan’s provisions for Neighborhood Centers and Neighborhood Hubs, a
new development code chapter is proposed: Chapter 16.120 ECDC.
What are the purposes of this code update?
· Comply with state requirements for accommodating the number of housing units needed for
very low- to moderate-income levels;
· Provide more multifamily housing choices for people; and
· Increase opportunities for neighborhood commercial.
Why update the code now?
· For our region, accommodating needed housing units is required by state law in both
comprehensive plans and development regulations by December 31, 2024.
· Edmonds updated its comprehensive plan for the additional housing units by the due date but
now it needs to adopt a cope update to implement the plan as close as possible to December 31, 2024;
· January 14 is only about one week behind the due date so adopting at least a temporary
(interim) ordinance will help Edmonds quickly get back in GMA compliance and be eligible for a variety
of grants and loans.
What is an interim ordinance and why do it?
· An interim ordinance is a temporary way to adopt regulations to meet a time-sensitive goal. In
this case, it is the quickest way to comply with state requirements for accommodating needed housing.
· An interim ordinance may be in effect no more than six months unless the City Council adopts an
extension.
· Within 60 days of adopting an interim ordinance, the City Council must hold a public hearing for
comments on the ordinance.
· At the end of six months (or sooner, depending on Council action), the interim ordinance
expires.
· The Council may adopt a more permanent ordinance (with any changes from the interim
version) prior to the date the interim ordinance expires.
What about public input?
· Public input does not need to be considered before adopting an interim ordinance because, per
state law, it is just meant to be temporary to address a time-sensitive situation while more consideration
is given to a longer-term solution.
· Public input will be considered as part of the next process to consider a more permanent action-
including through:
o A public hearing within 60 days of adopting the interim ordinance;
o Planning Board recommendation during the interim period;
o Community input and public hearing before the adoption of a final ordinance to replace the
interim ordinance.
Is the proposed code update consistent with the Comprehensive Plan?
· Yes, the interim ordinance is consistent with and implements the Comprehensive Plan, especially
through:
8.8
Packet Pg. 121
o Goal LU-3. a longer-term replacement ordinance for Council consideration before interim
ordinance expires.
Attachments:
Centers and Hubs Maps
2024-12-30 interim ordinance for centers and hubs
16.120.ECDC.Draft-12-21-24.bs_sh.Rvsd.Fnl.3
8.8
Packet Pg. 122