Loading...
2024-11-21 Council Special MinutesEDMONDS CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING APPROVED 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 1. CALL TO ORDER 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 The Edmonds City Council special meeting was called to order at 6 pm by Mayor Rosen in the Council Chambers, 250 5t' 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. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 21, 2024 Page 1 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 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 21, 2024 Page 2 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. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 21, 2024 Page 3 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 $1 M 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 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 21, 2024 Page 4 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 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 21, 2024 Page 5 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 #C 17 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 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 21, 2024 Page 6 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 staffs 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. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 21, 2024 Page 7 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 #C 18 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; Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 21, 2024 Page 8 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 mceting was adjourned at 7:06 pm. CS: SCOTT PASSE , CLERK Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 21, 2024 Page 9